# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

In reactions between particles which lead to multi-hadronic final states the constructive interference between two identical bosons, the so called Bose-Einstein Correlation (BEC), is well known. These correlations lead to an enhancement of the number of identical bosons over that of non-identical bosons when the two particles are close to each other in phase space. Experimentally this effect, also known as the GGLP effect, was for the first time observed in particle physics by Goldhaber et al.  in like-sign charged pions produced in $`\overline{p}p`$ annihilations at $`\sqrt{s}`$ = 2.1 GeV. In addition to the quantum mechanical aspect of the BEC, these correlations are also used to estimate the dimension of the emitting source of the identical bosons . Recently the interest in the BEC of identical charged pions has been extended to their possible effect on the mass measurements of the $`W`$ gauge bosons in the the reaction $`e^{}e^+W^+W^{}`$ which has been dealt with theoretically  and experimentally . Finally in high energy reactions the BEC of charged pions may influence the properties of the multi-hadron final states. Therefore more efforts are now devoted to estimate these effects by incorporating BEC in the various model based Monte Carlo programs that are confronted with the data.   

The relation to the size of the emission region, which is often assumed to be spherical with a Gaussian distribution, is given by the well known formula for the correlation function $`C_2`$ of two identical particles with four momenta $`q_i(i=1,2)`$ and $`Q=\sqrt{(q_1q_2)^2}`$ namely,

$$\sigma _{tot}\frac{d^2\sigma _{12}}{d\sigma _1d\sigma _2}C_2(Q)=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}1}+\lambda e^{r^2Q^2},$$
(1)   
where $`\lambda `$, the chaoticity parameter which can vary between 0 and +1, measures the strength of the effect. The term $`e^{r^2Q^2}`$ is the normalised Fourier transform of $`\rho `$, the source density. Some recent reviews which summarize the underlying BEC theoretical aspects and the experimental results are given, for example, in references .   

It has further been shown, that under certain conditions, a Bose-Einstein like enhancement can also be expected in a boson-antiboson system like the $`K^o\overline{K}^o`$ pair  if the $`\lambda `$ parameter is larger than zero. In fact, in a sample of spinless boson-antiboson system, which is a mixture of C = +1 and C = –1 states, the C = +1 part behaves like identical bosons, that is, it produces a BEC like low mass enhancement whereas the C = –1 part decreases to zero as $`Q_{K,\overline{K}}0`$. This has been experimentally demonstrated by the OPAL collaboration  in their study of the $`K_S^oK_S^o`$ system and was later confirmed by the DELPHI  and ALEPH  groups at LEP. This GGLP low mass enhancement is the result of the spatial symmetric state which is always the case for identical Bosons and is also true for the C = +1 part of the Boson-Antiboson system.   

Recently it has been pointed out  that a pair of identical fermions, $`ff`$, having a total spin of $`S`$ = 1, will have an $`Q_{ff}`$ dependence near threshold similar to that of a Boson-Antiboson pair with the eigenvalue of C = –1. This follows from the Pauli exclusion principle and the expectation that in the absence of low mass p-wave resonances the relative contribution of the $`\mathrm{}=0`$ state increases as $`Q_{ff}`$ decreases due to the angular momentum barrier. The measurement of this behavior allowed to estimate for the first time the dimension $`r`$ of the identical fermions $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }(\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$ emitter  in a similar way as it has been done in the past for identical bosons emitter.   

In the same way that the Pauli principle can be used to treat particles in the same spin multiplet to show BEC-like effects, and is generalised to treat particles in the same isospin multiplet one can also consider using the generalised Bose statistics to treat hadrons in the same isospin multiplets as being identical.   

Bose statistics allows only even partial waves for states of two identical spinless bosons. Similarly generalized Bose statistics allows only even partial waves for states of two spinless bosons in the same isospin multiplet if they are in an isospin eigenstate which is symmetric under isospin permutations; e.g. I=1 for two kaons or I=0 or 2 for two pions. Thus pairs of bosons which are in these symmetric isospin eigenstates can be expected to show the analogue of Bose enhancement. These effects should be easily observable in cases where kaon or pion pairs are produced inclusively from a initial isoscalar state. In this case we shall see that the s-wave amplitudes for $`K^+K^o`$ and $`\pi ^+\pi ^o`$ states should be exactly the same as those for the corresponding identical boson states $`K^+K^+`$ and $`\pi ^+\pi ^+`$ produced in the same experiment<sup>3</sup><sup>3</sup>3Whenever we refer to a specific two-boson state we also mean its charge conjugate one..   

Here we discuss the consequences of a generalised Bose statistics and isospin invariance to the properties of two-boson systems belonging to the same isospin multiplet which emerge from an I=0 state. As an example we address our study to the $`K^+K^o`$ and $`\pi ^+\pi ^o`$ pairs present in the hadronic $`Z^o`$ decays. In Section 2 we we present the basic relations between pairs of kaons obtained from the generalised Bose statistics. Section 3 deals specifically with question concerning the interpretation of the observed $`K_S^oK_S^o`$ low mass enhancement in multi-hadronic final states. In Section 4 we deal with the two-pion system and in Section 5 we discuss the possible deviations from an isoscalar dominance. Finally a summary and conclusions are presented in Section 6.

## 2 Isospin Invariance applied to hadrons produced from an I=0 state

In many cases boson pairs, like the $`KK`$ and $`\pi \pi `$ systems, are produced from an initial state which is isoscalar to a very good approximation. Among them are pairs produced from an initial multi-gluon state as in the central region of a high energy collision, pairs from hadronic decays of isoscalar heavy quarkonium resonances; e.g. $`J/\psi `$ or $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$, or pairs produced by $`Z^o`$ decays. In some of these cases the initial state is however not pure I=0 but has also some contamination of an I=1 component which is mixed in like in those processes where the $`J/\psi `$ and $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$ decay to hadrons via one photon annihilation. According to the specific case methods can be applied to reduce, or even to eliminate, this contamination. For example, the subsample of the C = –1 quarkonia which decay into an odd number of pions assure, due to G-parity, that the hadronic final state is in an I=0 state. This method is not useful for the BEC measurements of the hadronic $`Z^o`$ decays. Multi-hadron final states however which originate from the $`Z^o`$ decay to the heavy quarks, $`s\overline{s},c\overline{c}`$ and $`b\overline{b}`$, are in an I=0 state. An efficient signature for a $`Z^os\overline{s}`$ decay produced in $`e^+e^{}`$ collisions is for example given by the hadronic final states which contain a high momentum $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ . In fact for $`Z^0`$ decay events with a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ momentum $`P_\mathrm{\Lambda }/P_{beam}>0.4`$ the fraction of I=0 may amount to more than 70$`\%`$.   

In the following we restrict our study to the three di-kaon systems with strangeness +2 namely, $`K^+K^+`$, $`K^oK^o`$ and $`K^+K^o`$ pairs, which are part of a multi-particle final state produced from an isoscalar state. We note that $`K^+K^+`$ and $`K^oK^o`$ are pure I=1 isospin states, while the $`K^+K^o`$ is a mixture of two isospin states, I=1 and I=0. Bose statistics further tells us that in the KK center-of-mass system the $`K^+K^+`$ and $`K^oK^o`$ are built of two identical particles and therefore have only even partial waves. The $`K^+K^o`$ has both even and odd partial waves, because these two kaons are not identical. The generalised Bose statistics however tells us that the I=1 state of this system has only even partial waves while the I=0 state has only odd partial waves.   

Since the $`K^+K^+`$ state has isospin quantum numbers $`(I,I_z)=(1,+1)`$ the accompanying multi-particle state is required by isospin invariance to be an isospin eigenstate with the isospin quantum numbers $`(I,I_z)=(1,1)`$ which we denote as $`X_{1,1}`$. Isospin invariance further requires that the other multi-particle states in the same isospin multiplet denoted by $`X_{1,I_z}`$ be equally produced together with the two-kaon multiplet carrying the quantum numbers $`(1,I_z)`$. We can therefore write the following relation between the amplitudes for production of these states from an initial isoscalar state, denoted by $`i_o`$,

$$\sqrt{2}A[i_oK^+(\stackrel{}{p})K^+(\stackrel{}{p})X_{1,1}]=\sqrt{2}A[i_oK^o(\stackrel{}{p})K^o(\stackrel{}{p})X_{1,+1}]=$$

$$=A[i_oK^+(\stackrel{}{p})K^o(\stackrel{}{p})X_{1,0}]A[i_oK^o(\stackrel{}{p})K^+(\stackrel{}{p})X_{1,0}],$$
$`(2)`$   
where $`\stackrel{}{p}`$ denotes the momentum of the kaon in the centre of mass system of the two kaons.   

There is an additional isospin-zero amplitude for the $`K^+K^o`$ final state which can be produced together with an isoscalar multi-particle state which we denote by $`X_{0,0}`$. Since the generalized Bose statistics requires the isoscalar state to be antisymmetric in space, the amplitude for the production of this state satisfies the relation:

$$A[i_oK^+(\stackrel{}{p})K^o(\stackrel{}{p})X_{0,0}]=A[i_oK^o(\stackrel{}{p})K^+(\stackrel{}{p})X_{0,0}].$$
$`(3)`$   
This isoscalar contribution clearly vanishes in the limit $`\stackrel{}{p}0`$ which is relevant for the BEC. Since the multi-particle states $`X_{1,0}`$ and $`X_{0,0}`$ accompanying the kaon pair have different isospin, they are orthogonal and all interference terms between the two isospin amplitudes must cancel if there is no measurement on the accompanying multi-particle state. Plots of the number of pairs versus Q should be identical for $`K^oK^+`$, $`K^oK^o`$ and $`K^+K^+`$ in the low Q region where only s-waves contribute. This means that if a BEC enhancement is seen in the $`K^+K^+`$ it should also be present in the $`K^oK^+`$ and the $`K^oK^o`$ systems. At higher energy, as soon as p-waves can contribute to $`K^oK^+`$ but not of course to $`K^+K^+`$ nor $`K^oK^o`$, there should be an excess of events for $`K^oK^+`$.   

We now note that the $`K^o`$ states are in general not detected as such but rather as $`K_S^o`$ and $`K_L^o`$, which are mixtures of $`K^o`$ and $`\overline{K}^o`$. The contribution from the $`K^o`$ component is well defined and satisfies the isospin predictions. However, the contribution from the $`\overline{K}^o`$ component is completely unrelated except for the fact that it is positive definite and thus the isospin relations provide lower bounds. A detailed analysis is given below for the $`K_S^oK_S^o`$ system where the simplifications from the Bose symmetry of the identical particles allow the testing of reasonable assumptions for the additional $`K^o\overline{K}^o`$. contribution. The $`K^+K_S^o`$ system is more complicated because of the additional unknown contributions from odd partial waves, and is not treated further here.

## 3 The $`K_S^oK_S^o`$ system

The $`K_S^oK_S^o`$ system has only even partial waves and is a linear combination of $`K^oK^o`$ and $`K^o\overline{K}^o`$. The $`K^oK^o`$ component is related to the $`K^+K^+`$ component by the isospin relation (2). We can thus write the following relations for the probabilities, denoted by P, for the detection of these states.

$$P[i_oK^o(\stackrel{}{p})K^o(\stackrel{}{p})X_{1,+1}K_S^o(\stackrel{}{p})K_S^o(\stackrel{}{p})X_{1,+1}]=$$

$$(1/2)P[i_oK^o(\stackrel{}{p})K^o(\stackrel{}{p})X_{1,+1}]=(1/2)P[i_oK^+(\stackrel{}{p})K^+(\stackrel{}{p})X_{1,1}],$$
$`(4)`$   
where the factor(1/2) arises from the division of $`K^oK^o`$ into $`K_L^oK_L^o`$ and $`K_S^oK_S^o`$.   

In a realistic experiment the final $`K_S^oK_S^o`$ is identified but the specific multi-particle state $`X_{I,I_z}`$ is not and the result is obtained by summing over all possible multi-particle final states here denoted simply by $`X`$. Since these states include both states of strangeness $`\pm 2`$ and strangeness 0, the final $`K_S^oK_S^o`$ pairs included in the sum may come not only from $`K^oK^o`$ and $`\overline{K}^o\overline{K}^o`$ states but also the even parity $`\overline{K}^oK^o`$ and $`K^o\overline{K}^o`$. Thus we can write

$$\underset{X}{}P[i_oK_S^o(\stackrel{}{p})K_S^o(\stackrel{}{p})X]=$$

$$(1/4)\underset{X}{}P[i_oK^+(\stackrel{}{p})K^+(\stackrel{}{p})X]+(1/4)\underset{X}{}P[i_oK^{}(\stackrel{}{p})K^{}(\stackrel{}{p})X]$$

$$+\underset{X}{}P[i_oK^o\overline{K}^oXK_S^o(\stackrel{}{p})K_S^o(\stackrel{}{p})X],$$
$`(5a)`$   
where $`P[i_oK^o\overline{K}^oXK_S^o(\stackrel{}{p})K_S^o(\stackrel{}{p})X]`$ denotes the sum of the probabilities of all transitions from the initial state $`i_o`$ to the final state $`K_S^o(\stackrel{}{p})K_S^o(\stackrel{}{p})X`$ via any $`K^o\overline{K}^oX`$ state. This can be conveniently rewritten

$$\frac{\underset{X}{}P[i_oK_S^o(\stackrel{}{p})K_S^o(\stackrel{}{p})X]}{_XP[i_oK^+(\stackrel{}{p})K^+(\stackrel{}{p})X]+_XP[i_oK^{}(\stackrel{}{p})K^{}(\stackrel{}{p})X]}=$$

$$=\frac{1}{4}+\frac{\underset{X}{}P[i_oK^o\overline{K}^oXK_S^o(\stackrel{}{p})K_S^o(\stackrel{}{p})X]}{_XP[i_oK^+(\stackrel{}{p})K^+(\stackrel{}{p})X]+_XP[i_oK^{}(\stackrel{}{p})K^{}(\stackrel{}{p})X]}.$$
$`(5b)`$   
This last relation has a bearing on the analysis of the enigmatic $`f_o(980)`$ scalar resonance which has a long history regarding its nature and decay modes . Its existence is well established by its decay into a pair of pions. As for its decay into the $`K\overline{K}`$ final states the situation is more complicated. The $`f_o(980)`$ central mass value lies below the $`K\overline{K}`$ threshold however the upper part of its width is above it. At the same time the $`f_o(980)K\overline{K}`$ decay branching is a major tool in nailing down the nature of this resonance and its total width. Since the analyses of the final $`K^+K^{}`$ state are handicapped by the strong presence of the $`\varphi (1020)K^+K^{}`$ decay many of the analyses utilised instead the $`K_S^oK_S^o`$ final state system. The origin of the excess of $`K_S^oK_S^o`$ near threshold however could a priori have two sources, the decay product of the $`f_o(980)`$ resonance and the BEC enhancement.   

Since the denominators of Eq. (5b) come from exotic kaon pair states which have no resonances, the presence of resonances in the numerator of the second term on the right hand side of (5b) will show up as energy-dependent enhancements over the background which is expected to be similar to that of the first term, namely $`1/4`$. Note that the observed number of counts for decays into the $`K_S^oK_S^o`$ mode is reduced by an additional factor of (4/9) because in general only the $`\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ decay mode of each $`K_S^o`$ is detected. Thus the statistical errors in the denominators of Eq. (5b) are expected to be much lower than those of the numerators.   

Eqs. (5) relate the BEC excess of the $`K_S^oK_S^o`$ to that of the $`K^+K^{}`$ system which, for example, was measured and found to exist in the hadronic $`Z^o`$ decay events . The experimental results of the low mass enhancement seen in the the $`K^+K^{}`$ and $`K_S^oK_S^o`$ systems determine the contribution from the $`K^o\overline{K}^o`$ states which may be taken as the upper limit of the $`f_o(980)K^o\overline{K}^o`$ decay rate.

## 4 The generalised Bose statistics applied to pion pairs

As in the case of the kaon pairs, the production of $`\pi ^+\pi ^+`$ and $`\pi ^+\pi ^o`$ pairs in a multi-particle final state can be related if produced from an initial isoscalar state. Here $`\pi ^+\pi ^+`$ is a pure isospin state with I=2, while $`\pi ^+\pi ^o`$ is a mixture of two isospin states with I=2 and I=1. Bose statistics tells us that in the $`\pi \pi `$ centre-of-mass system the $`\pi ^+\pi ^+`$ system has two identical particles and therefore has only even partial waves. The $`\pi ^+\pi ^o`$ has both even and odd partial waves, because these two pions are not identical. But the generalized Bose statistics tells us that the I=2 state of this system has only even partial waves and the I=1 state has only odd partial waves.   

Since the $`\pi ^+\pi ^+`$ state has isospin quantum numbers $`(I,I_z)=(2,+2)`$ the remaining multi-particle state which we denote by $`X_{2,2}`$ is required by isospin invariance to be an isospin eigenstate with the isospin quantum numbers $`(I,I_z)=(2,2)`$. Isospin invariance further requires that the other multi-particle states in the same isospin multiplet denoted by $`X_{2,I_z}`$ be equally produced together with the two-pion multiplet carrying the quantum numbers $`(2,I_z)`$ We can therefore write the following relation between the amplitudes for production of these states from an initial isoscalar state, denoted by $`i_o`$

$$\sqrt{2}A[i_o\pi ^+(\stackrel{}{p})\pi ^+(\stackrel{}{p})X_{2,2}]=A[i_o\pi ^+(\stackrel{}{p})\pi ^o(\stackrel{}{p})X_{2,1}]$$

$$A[i_o\pi ^o(\stackrel{}{p})\pi ^+(\stackrel{}{p})X_{2,1}],$$
$`(6)`$   
where $`\stackrel{}{p}`$ is the momentum of the pion in the centre of mass system of the two pions.   

There is an additional isospin-one amplitude for the $`\pi ^+\pi ^o`$ final state which can be produced together with an I=1 multi-particle state which we denote by $`X_{1,1}`$. Since the generalized Bose statistics requires the I=1 state to be antisymmetric in space, the amplitude for the production of this state satisfies the relation:

$$A[i_o\pi ^+(\stackrel{}{p})\pi ^o(\stackrel{}{p})X_{1,1}]=A[i_o\pi ^o(\stackrel{}{p})\pi ^+(\stackrel{}{p})X_{1,1}].$$
$`(7)`$   
This I=1 contribution clearly vanishes in the limit $`\stackrel{}{p}0`$ which is relevant for BEC. The I=2 and I=1 amplitudes have opposite parity. Again the interference terms between the two isospin amplitudes cancel out if there is no measurement on the accompanying multi-particle state. Plots of the number of events versus Q should be identical for $`\pi ^o\pi ^+`$ and $`\pi ^+\pi ^+`$ in the low Q region where only s-waves contribute. As soon as p-waves can contribute to $`\pi ^o\pi ^+`$ but not of course to $`\pi ^+\pi ^+`$ there should be an excess of events for $`\pi ^o\pi ^+`$. One can expect a large p-wave contribution because of the presence of the $`\rho `$ resonance, and the tail of the $`\rho `$ may still be appreciable at the $`\pi \pi `$ threshold.   

In the $`\pi \pi `$ system there are more states and more isospin amplitudes than in the KK system. There are also the $`\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ and $`\pi ^o\pi ^o`$ states and an additional I=0 amplitude. The $`\pi ^o\pi ^o`$ state has two identical particles and only even partial waves in the $`\pi \pi `$ center of mass system. But it is a linear combination of two isospin states, I=0 and I=2, and therefore is not related directly to the even partial waves of the I=2 system. The $`\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ state has all three isospin eigenvalues, 0, 1 and 2, and both even and odd partial waves. The odd partial wave amplitudes have I=1 and are directly related to the odd partial waves of the $`\pi ^o\pi ^+`$ system. The even partial waves have both I=0 and I=2 components and can be related to the other I=2 and I=0 amplitudes by a a full amplitude analysis. In the low Q region where only s-waves contribute the $`\pi ^+\pi ^+`$, $`\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ and $`\pi ^o\pi ^o`$ amplitude depend upon only two isospin amplitudes, I=0 and I=2. Their intensities in this region satisfy a triangular inequality

$$\underset{X}{}\left|\sqrt{(2/3)P[i_o(\pi ^o\pi ^o)X]}\sqrt{(1/3)P[i_o(\pi ^+\pi ^{})_eX]}\right|$$

$$\underset{X}{}\sqrt{P[i_o(\pi ^\pm \pi ^\pm )X]}=\underset{X}{}\sqrt{P[i_o(\pi ^\pm \pi ^o)_eX]}$$

$$\underset{X}{}\left|\sqrt{(2/3)P[i_o(\pi ^o\pi ^o)X]}+\sqrt{(1/3)P[i_o(\pi ^+\pi ^{})_eX]}\right|,$$
$`(8)`$   
where the notation $`(\pi \pi )_e`$ is used to indicate that only even partial waves for the $`(\pi \pi )`$ final state are included in the sum.

## 5 Possible deviations from isoscalar dominance

Precise calculations of the errors in the predictions based on an assumed charge-symmetric or isoscalar final state are difficult. We present here some arguments supporting the neglect of deviations from symmetry. But rather than trying to improve these arguments it seems more profitable to test these predictions by experiment. Since the isospin predictions are energy independent, they can be tested over an energy range which includes not only the Bose-Einstein and resonance regions but also higher relative momenta where both these effects should be absent.   

In processes leading to multi-particle states, nearly all of the final quarks and antiquarks are produced by isoscalar gluons and this should enhance isoscalar dominance. For example, the charge asymmetry in a fragmentation process initiated by a $`u\overline{u}`$ pair produced in a $`Z^o`$ decay can easily be washed out quickly in a fragmentation process dominated by isoscalar gluons. We present two examples of how this can occur.   

When a leading u-quark in the final stage of the fragmentation process picks up a strange antiquark, the spins of the quark and antiquark are expected to be uncorrelated. This gives a 3:1 ratio favoring $`K^+`$ production over $`K^+`$. The final states $`K^+`$, $`K^+\pi ^o`$ and $`K^o\pi ^+`$ are then produced with the ratio 1:1:2 giving equal probabilities of producing a $`K^+`$ and a $`K^o`$ in the final state. The charge asymmetry is completely lost in this approximation where effects of the $`KK^{}`$ mass difference are neglected.   

If the leading u-quark in the final stage of the fragmentation process picks up a nonstrange antiquark from a $`(u\overline{u})`$ or $`(d\overline{d})`$ pair created with equal probability by gluons, the leading u-quark will combine with the $`\overline{u}`$ or $`\overline{d}`$ to make a final nonstrange meson, leaving the remaining $`u`$ or $`d`$ to continue the fragmentation process with equal probabilities.

$$u+(u\overline{u})M^o(u\overline{u})+u$$
$`(9a)`$   
$$u+(d\overline{d})M^+(u\overline{d})+d$$
$`(9b)`$   
where $`M^o`$ and $`M^+`$ denote neutral and positive final meson states. Thus the initial charge asymmetry leaves the process as a charge asymmetry between the $`M^o`$ and $`M^+`$ mesons and the remaining quark which continues the fragmentation process is charge symmetric.   

These two mechanisms for washing out the charge asymmetry by gluons assume mass degeneracies whose breaking can introduce charge asymmetry. The $`KK^{}`$ mass difference suppresses $`K^{}`$ production and the $`d`$ quark production in the final state. But the $`\eta \eta ^{}\pi `$ mass differences suppress the reaction (9a) while leaving (9b) unaffected and thus suppress $`u`$ quark production. Thus these two symmetry-breaking mechanisms work in opposite directions and the violations of charge symmetry observed in the total final state are expected to be small.   

We also note that in $`Z^o`$ decay one can expect that the isoscalar final states arising from initially produced $`s\overline{s}`$, $`c\overline{c}`$ and $`b\overline{b}`$ pairs will occur at least equally with the production of $`u\overline{u}`$ and $`d\overline{d}`$ pairs, This gives an additional factor of two favoring isoscalar states over those discussed above.

## 6 Summary and conclusions

From the generalised Bose statistics and isospin invariance follows that also boson pairs with different charges which belong to the same isospin multiplet may show low mass BEC enhancement. In the case that these pairs, together with their accompanying hadrons, are produced from a pure I=0 state, relations can be derived between their low energy production amplitudes and those of two identical bosons in the same isospin multiplet. In verifying this effect experimentally, e.g. in the hadronic $`Z^o`$ decays, one should however remember that the condition for a pure I=0 state is not 100$`\%`$ satisfied. Furthermore, pions originating from weak or electro-magnetic decays, such as the $`\eta `$ decay or from unresolved $`K_S^o`$ decays, may also affect slightly the relation given in Eq. (6).   

In as much that BEC effects of identical boson are relevant for the description of the data in terms of model dependent Monte Carlo program, one should also consider these effects in the $`\pi ^\pm \pi ^o`$ and $`K^+K^o(K^{}\overline{K}^o)`$ systems. In the experimental studies of the BEC the choice of the reference sample against which the effect is measured is crucial. Ideal reference samples are those which retain all the features and correlations of the data apart from the one due to the BEC. The relations given by the generalised Bose statistics restrict the choice of these reference samples. For example, for the study of the BEC of the $`\pi ^\pm \pi ^\pm `$ pairs a data reference sample constructed out of $`\pi ^\pm \pi ^o`$ is forbidden. Due to the triangle inequality given by Eq. (8), it may be wise even to avoid the use of $`\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ data pairs as a reference sample and to use instead a Monte Carlo generated sample. Finally it is worthwhile to point out that in trying to associate the observed $`K_S^oK_S^o`$ low mass enhancement, seen in multi-hadron final states, to the $`f_o(980)K_S^oK_S^o`$ decay channel one should also examine the possible contribution from the BEC to this final state.