A Dalitz plot analysis of $B^0 \to \eta_c(1S) K^+\pi^$ decays is performed using data samples of $pp$ collisions collected with the LHCb detector at centreofmass energies of $\sqrt{s}=7, 8$ and $13$ TeV, corresponding to a total integrated luminosity of $4.7 \text{fb}^{1}$. A satisfactory description of the data is obtained when including a contribution representing an exotic $\eta_c(1S) \pi^$ resonant state. The significance of this exotic resonance is more than three standard deviations, while its mass and width are $4096 \pm 20 ^{+18}_{22}$ MeV and $152 \pm 58 ^{+60}_{35}$ MeV, respectively. The spinparity assignments $J^P=0^+$ and $J^{P}=1^$ are both consistent with the data. In addition, the first measurement of the $B^0 \to \eta_c(1S) K^+\pi^$ branching fraction is performed and gives $\displaystyle \mathcal{B}(B^0 \to \eta_c(1S) K^+\pi^) = (5.73 \pm 0.24 \pm 0.13 \pm 0.66) \times 10^{4}$, where the first uncertainty is statistical, the second systematic, and the third is due to limited knowledge of external branching fractions.
Feynman diagrams for \subref{B2etacKstar} $B^0 \rightarrow \eta_cK^{*0}$ and \subref{B2ZK} $B^0 \rightarrow Z_c^K^+$ decay sequences. 
Fig1a.pdf [24 KiB] HiDef png [41 KiB] Thumbnail [8 KiB] *.C file 

Fig1b.pdf [150 KiB] HiDef png [45 KiB] Thumbnail [9 KiB] *.C file 

Distribution of the $ p $ $\overline p $ $ K ^+$ $\pi ^$ invariant mass. The solid blue curve is the projection of the total fit result. The components are shown in the legend. 
Fig2.pdf [38 KiB] HiDef png [264 KiB] Thumbnail [88 KiB] *.C file 

Distribution of the $ p $ $\overline p $ invariant mass in (left) linear and (right) logarithmic verticalaxis scale for weighted $ B ^0 \!\rightarrow p \overline p K ^+ \pi ^ $ candidates obtained by using the sPlot technique. The solid blue curve is the projection of the total fit result. The full azure, tightcrosshatched red and dashedblack line areas show the $\eta _ c $ , $ { J \mskip 3mu/\mskip 2mu\psi \mskip 2mu}$ and NR $ p $ $\overline p $ contributions, respectively. 
Fig3a.pdf [22 KiB] HiDef png [288 KiB] Thumbnail [79 KiB] *.C file 

Fig3b.pdf [21 KiB] HiDef png [592 KiB] Thumbnail [98 KiB] *.C file 

Results of the 2D mass fit to the joint [$ m( p \overline p K ^+ \pi ^ )$, $ m( p \overline p )$] distribution for the (a) Run 1 $ m( p \overline p K ^+ \pi ^ )$ projection, (b) Run 1 $ m( p \overline p )$ projection, (c) Run 2 $ m( p \overline p K ^+ \pi ^ )$ projection, and (d) Run 2 $ m( p \overline p )$ projection. The legend is shown in the top left plot. 
Fig4a.pdf [21 KiB] HiDef png [298 KiB] Thumbnail [91 KiB] *.C file 

Fig4c.pdf [20 KiB] HiDef png [261 KiB] Thumbnail [78 KiB] *.C file 

Fig4b.pdf [21 KiB] HiDef png [264 KiB] Thumbnail [86 KiB] *.C file 

Fig4d.pdf [20 KiB] HiDef png [260 KiB] Thumbnail [80 KiB] *.C file 

SDP distributions used in the DP fit to the Run 2 subsample for (a) combinatorial background and (b) NR $ B ^0 \!\rightarrow p \overline p K ^+ \pi ^ $ background. 
Fig5a.pdf [20 KiB] HiDef png [162 KiB] Thumbnail [60 KiB] *.C file 

Fig5b.pdf [19 KiB] HiDef png [156 KiB] Thumbnail [59 KiB] *.C file 

Backgroundsubtracted (top) DP and (bottom) SDP distributions corresponding to the total data sample used in the analysis. The structure corresponding to the $K^*(892)^0$ resonance is evident. The veto of $ B ^0 \!\rightarrow \eta _ c K ^+ \pi ^ $ decays in the $\overline{ D }{} {}^0$ region is visible in the DP. 
Fig6a.pdf [17 KiB] HiDef png [253 KiB] Thumbnail [125 KiB] *.C file 

Fig6b.pdf [17 KiB] HiDef png [242 KiB] Thumbnail [122 KiB] *.C file 

$ B ^0 \!\rightarrow \eta _ c K ^+ \pi ^ $ signal efficiency across the SDP for the (a) Run 1 and (b) Run 2 samples. 
Fig7a.pdf [20 KiB] HiDef png [221 KiB] Thumbnail [67 KiB] *.C file 

Fig7b.pdf [20 KiB] HiDef png [220 KiB] Thumbnail [67 KiB] *.C file 

Projections of the data and amplitude fit using the baseline model onto (a) $ m( K ^+ \pi ^ )$, (c) $ m(\eta _ c \pi ^ )$ and (e) $ m(\eta _ c K ^+ )$, with the same projections shown in (b), (d) and (f) with a logarithmic verticalaxis scale. The veto of $ B ^0 \!\rightarrow p \overline p \overline{ D }{} {}^0 $ decays is visible in plot (b). The $ K ^+ \pi ^ $ Swave component comprises the LASS and $K^*_0(1950)^0$ meson contributions. The components are described in the legend at the bottom. 
Fig8a.pdf [23 KiB] HiDef png [182 KiB] Thumbnail [59 KiB] *.C file 

Fig8b.pdf [24 KiB] HiDef png [503 KiB] Thumbnail [96 KiB] *.C file 

Fig8c.pdf [24 KiB] HiDef png [334 KiB] Thumbnail [88 KiB] *.C file 

Fig8d.pdf [26 KiB] HiDef png [1 MiB] Thumbnail [131 KiB] *.C file 

Fig8e.pdf [24 KiB] HiDef png [327 KiB] Thumbnail [88 KiB] *.C file 

Fig8f.pdf [24 KiB] HiDef png [515 KiB] Thumbnail [95 KiB] *.C file 

Fig8g.pdf [13 KiB] HiDef png [140 KiB] Thumbnail [36 KiB] *.C file 

Projections of the data and amplitude fit using the nominal model onto (a) $ m( K ^+ \pi ^ )$, (c) $ m(\eta _ c \pi ^ )$ and (e) $ m(\eta _ c K ^+ )$, with the same projections shown in (b), (d) and (f) with a logarithmic verticalaxis scale. The veto of $ B ^0 \!\rightarrow p \overline p \overline{ D }{} {}^0 $ decays is visible in plot (b). The $ K ^+ \pi ^ $ Swave component comprises the LASS and $K^*_0(1950)^0$ meson contributions. The components are described in the legend at the bottom. 
Fig9a.pdf [23 KiB] HiDef png [178 KiB] Thumbnail [58 KiB] *.C file 

Fig9b.pdf [24 KiB] HiDef png [504 KiB] Thumbnail [96 KiB] *.C file 

Fig9c.pdf [24 KiB] HiDef png [315 KiB] Thumbnail [84 KiB] *.C file 

Fig9d.pdf [26 KiB] HiDef png [758 KiB] Thumbnail [112 KiB] *.C file 

Fig9e.pdf [24 KiB] HiDef png [309 KiB] Thumbnail [85 KiB] *.C file 

Fig9f.pdf [24 KiB] HiDef png [437 KiB] Thumbnail [91 KiB] *.C file 

Fig9g.pdf [13 KiB] HiDef png [133 KiB] Thumbnail [37 KiB] *.C file 

Comparison of the first four $ K ^+ \pi ^ $ Legendre moments determined from backgroundsubtracted data (black points) and from the results of the amplitude fit using the baseline model (red triangles) and nominal model (blue triangles) as a function of $ m( K ^+ \pi ^ )$. 
Fig10a.pdf [22 KiB] HiDef png [189 KiB] Thumbnail [58 KiB] *.C file 

Fig10b.pdf [23 KiB] HiDef png [199 KiB] Thumbnail [64 KiB] *.C file 

Fig10c.pdf [22 KiB] HiDef png [205 KiB] Thumbnail [67 KiB] *.C file 

Fig10d.pdf [22 KiB] HiDef png [207 KiB] Thumbnail [66 KiB] *.C file 

Comparison of the first four $\eta _ c \pi ^ $ Legendre moments determined from backgroundsubtracted data (black points) and from the results of the amplitude fit using the baseline model (red triangles) and nominal model (blue triangles) as a function of $ m(\eta _ c \pi ^ )$. 
Fig11a.pdf [23 KiB] HiDef png [218 KiB] Thumbnail [69 KiB] *.C file 

Fig11b.pdf [23 KiB] HiDef png [226 KiB] Thumbnail [75 KiB] *.C file 

Fig11c.pdf [23 KiB] HiDef png [218 KiB] Thumbnail [73 KiB] *.C file 

Fig11d.pdf [23 KiB] HiDef png [215 KiB] Thumbnail [70 KiB] *.C file 

Comparison of the first four $\eta _ c K ^+ $ Legendre moments determined from backgroundsubtracted data (black points) and from the results of the amplitude fit using the baseline model (red triangles) and nominal model (blue triangles) as a function of $ m(\eta _ c K ^+ )$. 
Fig12a.pdf [22 KiB] HiDef png [217 KiB] Thumbnail [69 KiB] *.C file 

Fig12b.pdf [23 KiB] HiDef png [225 KiB] Thumbnail [75 KiB] *.C file 

Fig12c.pdf [23 KiB] HiDef png [223 KiB] Thumbnail [74 KiB] *.C file 

Fig12d.pdf [22 KiB] HiDef png [221 KiB] Thumbnail [73 KiB] *.C file 

2D pull distribution for to the baseline model. 
Fig13.pdf [22 KiB] HiDef png [168 KiB] Thumbnail [59 KiB] *.C file 

2D pull distribution for to the nominal model. 
Fig14.pdf [22 KiB] HiDef png [169 KiB] Thumbnail [59 KiB] *.C file 

Animated gif made out of all figures. 
PAPER2018034.gif Thumbnail 
Relative systematic uncertainties on the ratio $R$ of Eq. \eqref{ratio}. The total systematic uncertainty is obtained from the quadratic sum of the individual sources. 
Table_1.pdf [24 KiB] HiDef png [56 KiB] Thumbnail [9 KiB] tex code 

Yields of the components in the 2D mass fit to the joint [$ m( p \overline p K ^+ \pi ^ )$, $ m( p \overline p )$] distribution for the Run 1 and 2 subsamples. 
Table_2.pdf [53 KiB] HiDef png [58 KiB] Thumbnail [10 KiB] tex code 

Resonances included in the baseline model, where parameters and uncertainties are taken from Ref. \cite{PDG2016}. The LASS lineshape also parametrise the $ K ^+ \pi ^ $ Swave in $ B ^0 \!\rightarrow \eta _ c K ^+ \pi ^ $ NR decays. 
Table_3.pdf [52 KiB] HiDef png [97 KiB] Thumbnail [16 KiB] tex code 

Complex coefficients and fit fractions determined from the DP fit using the nominal model. Uncertainties are statistical only. 
Table_4.pdf [55 KiB] HiDef png [108 KiB] Thumbnail [18 KiB] tex code 

Significance of the $Z_c(4100)^$ contribution for the systematic effects producing the largest variations in the parameters of the $Z_c(4100)^$ candidate. The values obtained in the nominal amplitude fit are shown in the first row. 
Table_5.pdf [54 KiB] HiDef png [76 KiB] Thumbnail [12 KiB] tex code 

Rejection level of the $J^P=0^+$ hypothesis with respect to the $J^P=1^$ hypothesis for the systematic variations producing the largest variations in the parameters of the $Z_c(4100)^$ candidate. The values obtained in the nominal amplitude fit are shown in the first row. 
Table_6.pdf [54 KiB] HiDef png [73 KiB] Thumbnail [11 KiB] tex code 

Fit fractions and their uncertainties. The quoted uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively. 
Table_7.pdf [54 KiB] HiDef png [144 KiB] Thumbnail [24 KiB] tex code 

Branching fraction results. The four quoted uncertainties are statistical, $ B ^0 \!\rightarrow \eta _ c K ^+ \pi ^ $ branching fraction systematic (not including the contribution from the uncertainty associated to the efficiency ratio, to avoid double counting the systematic uncertainty associated to the evaluation of the efficiencies), fit fraction systematic and external branching fractions uncertainties, respectively. 
Table_8.pdf [55 KiB] HiDef png [93 KiB] Thumbnail [15 KiB] tex code 
Created on 19 April 2019.Citation count from INSPIRE on 24 April 2019.