Experimental Status of Flavor Physics:Snapshot From CKM2005 (March 05)

Vivek Sharma

University of California, San Diego

Special Thanks : Andreas Hocker, Kevin Pitts, Ben Grinstein,

Zoltan Ligeti, Bob Kowelewski, and Daniele del Re

What This Talk Won’t Cover

• Flavor physics is a vast subject with many subtleties • For a snapshot of this field, see the presentations,

discussion and roundtable during CKM2005 workshop(s) at UCSD in March 2005– http://ckm2005.ucsd.edu/

• In this review I will not cover – Light quark results (Focus of this workshop)– Impressive strides made in (Heavy) flavor theory– “Grade” the “utility” of Lattice results on HF

Parameters• http://ckm2005.ucsd.edu/agenda/wed1/bernard.pdf

– Important experimental tests of theory of flavors– Discussion of future (super) facilities

Measurements related to Overconstraining the “db’ Unitarity triangle• Facilities for Heavy Flavor Studies : status • Measurements of sides of the Unitarity Triangle

– Vcb– Vub– Vtd & Vts : Electroweak penguin and BS Mixing

• CP Violation in B Decays and measurements of CKM angles– Direct CPV in B Decays– Gold plated measurement of with B J/ K0

– Penguin Nuisance in measurement of = --– Quest for the angle in B DK Direct CPV

• Profile of the Unitarity Triangle Circa CKM2005• Penguin Lust : CP Asymmetries in s-Penguin B Decays and

searches for new physics

Outline of This Talk

Semileptonic B Decays

The Cabibbo Kobayashi Maskawa Matrix VCKM

=

2 31-λ /2 λ Aλ (ρ- )V V Vud us ub2 2 4V= V V V -λ 1-λ /2 Aλ +O(λ )cd cs cb

3 2V V V Aλ (1-ρ- ) -Aλ 1td ts tb

iη

iη

Experimental goal is precise measurements of magnitudes and phases

= 0.226 ± 0.002A= 0.85 ± 0.05É= 0.22 ± 0.09¿= 0.33 ± 0.05

• In the SM, the CKM matrix elements Vij describe the electroweak coupling strength of the W to quarks

– CKM mechanism introduces quark flavor mixing

– Complex phases in Vij are the origin of SM CP violation

• In the Wolfenstein parametrization

Mixes the left-handed charge –1/3 quark mass eigenstates d,s,b to give the weak

eigenstates d’,s,b’.

Triangles, Triangles, Triangles

Triangles, Triangles, Triangles

Unitarity orthonormality of rows 2 *V =1, & colu V V =0

iα iαmns

iβi i

Unitarity Triangles: The “db” triangle For Bu/d System

2

1

3

*V Vtd tbarg *V Vud ub

*V Vcd cbarg *V Vtd tb

*V Vud ubarg*V Vcd cb

Angles of Unitarity Triangle

*ub

† * *ud tc cb tbddV V=1 V +V VV + VV =0

*V Vts tbNote: For B meson: arg ,

S S *V Vcs cb

*V Vcs cdFor K meson:

Both angles are tiny in comparis

argK *V V

us ud

on

Facilities for Heavy Flavor Physics

BaBar@PEP-II

Belle @KEK-b

D0 & CDF @ TeVatron CLEO-c @ CESR

Era of The Factories: Unprecedented Luminosities !

BELLE

CDF & D0

Ldt >800pb-1

Ldt >450 fb-1

Ldt >250 fb-1

Beam Energy (GeV)

CLEO-c Ldt>60pb-1

(3770)

’

Ebeam

Cleo-C Detector Taking Data at e+e-(3770)DD

K-

-

e+

K+

-1

-1s s

-1 (3770)

Year 1 goal: 3 fb @ (3770) ( ) ( 10increase)

Year 2 goal: 3 fb

Accu

@ ~ 41

mulated ~60pb @

3 year CL

40 MeV D D threshold

EO-c program starts April 2005

( 130 BES)

Year 3 goal: 1 billion J/ ( 20 BES

DD

)

Complete Survey of Charm Meson Decays

See D. Asner’s talk on Cleo-c results and prospects

• Absolute Charm Branching fractions

• Charm decay constants fD

• Rates and FF in Semileptonic decays• Strong phases in hadronic D decays

critical for CPV measurement in B decays

• DD Mixing and CP violation

CDF& D0 Equipped with Silicon Inner TrackingIntermediate Silicon Layers of CDF

CDF

D0

Heavy Flavor Physics at CDF& D0

• Silicon gives the “lifetime optic” to CDF & D0, enables lifetime based analyses and trigger…..now proven to work !

• All species of heavy mesons and baryons are produced

• Goals

– Map out weak decay of all b hadrons, including b and Bc

– Exploration of the Bs meson system• Width difference • Bs Oscillations (take over from LEP/SLD)

• CPV studies (Bs mixing and luminosity willing)

– Searches for rare decays enhanced by NP• B + -

• Electoweak penguin etc

Belle and Babar: Dominating B Physics Since ‘99

e

e

b

b

(4 )S

0B0B

Enough energy to barely produce 2 B mesons, nothing else!

B mesons are entangled Need for Asymm energy collisions

Excellent

Tracking, PID

Radiative Penguin Decays: Window to NP

See Hitoshi Yamamoto’s talk for Details

b sb s l+l

FCNC Via Electroweak Loops & New Physics

10*

i

7 7 9

eff1

Information about heavy particles and new physics encoded in

short distanc

4Effective Interaction

e (Wilson) coeff C

C most important fo

Hamiltonian: ( ) ( ) (

r b s ; C , C

2

(Z)

)tb ts i ii

GH V V C O

i

+

QCD b

10

Hadronic matrix elements of operators O contain all long-distance

QCD interaction effects

Long-distance expansion in powers of ( /m ), Hea

, C important for

vy Quark

Effective

(W

Theory

s

Q

b

,

)

CD-factorization, Lattice...etc

Experimentally probed via measurements of decay Rate and Asymmetry

? ? ?

Measurement of Inclusive b s Decay Rate

BaBar sum of exclusiveBaBar Inclusive, E > 1.9 GeV

Theory uncertainty could improve to ~5% (NNLO) ??

Belle Inclusive, E > 1.8 GeVCLEO Inclusive, E > 2.0 GeV

Experimental precision will keep pace (500 fb-1)

Belle

?E> 1.8 GeV

SM

Data agrees with SM (10%)

Rate of b d• Decay CKM-suppressed (|Vtd /Vts| ) w.r.t. b s; sensitive to |Vtd|• Inclusive b d measurements background challenged !

– b s 20 background ! Needs K+,KS and KL veto

• Exclusive processes are current exptal target: B ()– Theor. estimate imprecise B(B () ) [0.5-2.0]10-6 : Ali, Buchalla etal

– Ratio R(/K*) reduces theory error, estimates |Vtd /Vts|

BaBar Belle

6Br(B ( , ) ) 1.2 10 @90%CL 6Br(B ( , ) ) 1.4 10 @90%CL

“ At the verge of observation, Central Values in SM range”

Constraint On |Vtd /Vts| Compete with Bs Mixing

Inclusive Rate Of b s l+l

AFB sensitive to relative signs ofWilson coefficients : measurably large

Ali et al. PRD 66,034002(2002)

NP

)90()90(

)90()90()ˆ(

2

2

NN

NN

m

qsA

bFB

FB Asymmetry in b sl+l As Future Probe of New Physics

B

forwardbackward

Lepton pair CM

Forward–backward asymmetry (AFB)

2 3( ) 10 in SMFB FBCPFB

FB FB

A B A BA q

A B A B

AFB AFB under CP: Sensitive to New Physics through Non-SM CPV phases

BaBar ACP=0.22 0.26(stat) 0.02(syst) Consistent with SM theory but Data limited Potential to rule out some NP scenarios (where AFB is of opposite sign w.r.t SM) with 500 fb-1

scenarios consistent with measured rate

First Investigations of Bs Oscillations at Tevatron (Following LEP &SLD Searches)

td

ts

VV

LEP-SLD Limit On Bs Oscillation

Amplitude scan MethodFit Mixing Prob D*A*cos(m t) at fixed mExpect A=1 for real m, 0 otherwiseSensitivity: m such that 1.645A =1

95% CL: m such that A+1.645A = 1

1Sensitivity : m 18.2 pss

195% CL Limit: m 18.2 pss

Using inclusive Bs Samples

Critical Requirements for Bs Oscillation Measurement

1. Large reconstructed B sampless

(a) B D X (large samples but missing neutrino energy)s s

(b) B D ( small sample but has best propertime info)s sboth decay modes provide decay time fla

2. Flavor tag at production time (B or B )s s Often the "other B " is not within acceptence ! + So far CDF &D0 use only "Opposite-side" B flavor tag

2 (Ineffi

vor t

cient, Q= D 1.4% compat

g

i

a

ed w

s

th BaBelle)

m p

3. Precise proper time measurementL mxy B ct= Lxy pT

....not great for SL sample ( )

crucial for fast oscillations

B T ctct Lp pxyT10

T( m )

Bs Samples at Tevatron

Ds+ D++

1.420 0.043 0.057psBs

900 Bs Ds

with impact parameter trigger

5153 signal

This is the future

Tevatron Limits On Bs Oscillation

m > 7.9ps-1 @95% CL Sensitivity : m =8.4ps-1

CDF

Good first attempt to get in the game (Bs mixing is difficult!!)

But must improve not just in dataset but also tagging and propertime resolution

World limit (LEP/SLD) unchanged

Measurement of |Vcb| & |Vub| from Inclusive Semileptonic B Meson Decays

Vcd

*Vcb

Vud

*Vub

See Hitoshi Yamamoto’s talk for Details

Inclusive Semileptonic Decays: The Big Picture

*D

,...,

,,22G

cb mm

|| cbV

|| ubV

Shape

Rate

Inclusive El spectrum

2|| cbV

2|| ubV

2|| cbV

El[GeV]

Shape

Rate for Mx<1.55

Inclusive Mx spectrum

(log-scale)

B

X

|Vxb|2

Inclusive Approach Using OPE• Intimate knowledge of QCD is required to go from partonic

process to the hadronic states

• Given mb >> QCD , OPE used to describe inclusive rates in terms of |Vcb|, mb and a few nonperturbative matrix elements that enter at the order of (QCD/mb)2 and higher orders

• One extracts these parameters from a global fit to

– Inclusive rate, lepton energy (Eℓ) & hadron mass (mX) moments

0B

dM

1

E dM

d

1( 2,3)

i

i

E M dM i

d

( 1,2,3,4)iXX

i

m dM i

d

Partial branching fraction

Lepton energymoments

Hadron massmoments

experimentalobservables

Integrations are done for Eℓ > Ecut, with Ecut varied in 0.6–1.5 GeV

Fit Parameters in OPE Expansion

Calculation by Gambino & Uraltsev (hep-ph/0401063 & 0403166) Kinetic mass scheme to Eℓ moments

mX moments

8 fit parameters

8 moments available with several Ecut

Sufficient degrees of freedom to determineall parameters without external inputs

Fit quality tells us how well OPE works

cbV bm cm 2

2G

3D

3LS( )cB X B

kinetic

chromomagnetic

Darwin

spin-orbit

2(1/ )bmO

3(1/ )bmO

3(1/ )bmO2( )sO

( )sO

BABAR PRL 93:011803

Example OPE Fit To BaBar Semileptonic Spectra

mX moments

Eℓ moments

● = used, ○ = unusedin the nominal fit

Red line: OPE fitYellow band: theory errors

BABAR

2/ndf = 20/15

BABAR PRL 93:011803

Remarkable agreement between data and theory !

OPE Fits to BaBar Inclusive SL Data

and consistent with B-B* mass splitting and QCD sum rules and the scale of consistent with theoretical expectations

Remarkable agreement between data and theory

s

s

s

3exp HQE th

exp HQE

exp HQE

exp HQE

2 2exp HQE

2exp HQE

(41.4 0.4 0.4 0.6 ) 10

(10.61 0.16 0.06 )%

(4.61 0.05 0.04 0.02 )GeV

(1.18 0.07 0.06 0.02 )GeV

(0.45 0.04 0.04 0.01 )GeV

(0.27 0.06 0.03 0.0

cb

c

b

c

G

V

m

m

B

s

s

s

2

3 3exp HQE

3 3exp HQE

2 )GeV

(0.20 0.02 0.02 0.00 )GeV

( 0.09 0.04 0.07 0.01 )GeV

D

LS

2

3LS

kinetic mass scheme with = 1 GeV

Uncalculatedcorrections to

2 2G 3

D

PRL 93:011803

|Vub| From Inclusive bu l Spectrum

|Vub| can be measured from

The problem: b → cℓv decay

2

2

( ) 1

( ) 50ub

cb

Vb u

b c V

E

b c

b u

22 5

2( )

192F

u ub b

Gb u V m

Must suppress 50× larger background e.g. using kinematic differences (mu << mc) or particle identification (D*, Kaon content)

No perfect observable, All must deal with theory imprecision

Vub From Inclusive Measurements • Experimental requirements in bul signal extraction severely

“chops” and reduces the phase space in SL decay

• OPE does not provide predictions of differential rates: poor convergence in regions where bcl decays are kinematically forbidden

– Non-perturbative shape functions (SF) needed to calculate the extrapolate to full bul spectrum (rate)

• Theoretically, only rough features (mean, rms) of the shape functions are known but detailed shape not constrained

Belle E

1st and 2nd moment of SF determined

Use correspondence betweenPhoton spectrum in bs and Lepton energy spectrum in bul

Limited by experimental imprecion in Knowledge of the full photon spectrum

|Vub| From Inclusive b u l Observables

Example: BaBar Results at CKM2005

See Hitoshi Yamamoto’s Talk For Details & BaBar+Belle Averages

Bottomline: Vub measurements approaching 10% precision

BABARexcl(untagged)

Snapshot of measurements (’04)

CP Violation in B DecaysMeasurements of Angles of UT Triangle

Observation of Direct CPV in B0K- +

2 iSM amplitude e T P

sinKA

• Loop diagrams from New Physics (e.g. SUSY) can modify SM asymmetry

• Clean B mode with “large” rate :• CP Asymmetry measurement is a « Counting Experiment »

0 618.2 0.8 10 BF B K

T P

BaBar & Belle : Observation of Direct CPV in B DecayBaBar & Belle : Observation of Direct CPV in B Decay

0.133 0.030 0.009 AK

BABAR

0

0

910

696

n B

n K

K

B

AK = -0.101 0.025 0.005

Signal=2139 53

Combined BaBar & Belle significance = 5.7

Establishes CPV not just due to phase of B Mixing (M12)

Theoretical (npQCD) uncertainties insufficient to prove or rule out NP

Belle

CPV In Interference Between Mixing and Decay

0 0Neutral B Decays into CP final state accesible by both & decays

Interference described by CP

CP CP

CP

f

f ff

CP

q A

p

f B

A

B

+

2

+

2

B0

B0

B0

fcpB0

fcpB0

B0

fcpfcp

CP asymm. can be very large and “cleanly” related to CKM angles

0B

fiCPA e

CPf

0B

12

2 Mi

M

ie

fiCPA e

Requires time dependent measurement of CP Asymm.

Cartoon of (4S)B0 B0 Evolution & Decay

Time-dependent CP Asymmetry Due to Interference in Mixing and Decay

0 0

00

cos( ) sin( )

CP

P

CP

C

phys CP phys CP

f

physphys CP

ff

CP

B t f B t fA t

B t f B

C mt S

t f

mt Phase of mixing

CP

CP

CP

ff

f

Aqλ

p A

2 ie

Amplitude ratio

2

2

1 | |0

1 | |

CP

CP

CP

ff

f

C 2

2ImIm

1 | |

CP

CP CP

CP

ff f

f

S

(for single weak decay amplitude)

CPV In Interference Between Mixing and Decay: B0 J/K0

S

S

S

*cb cs*cb c

*cs c

* *ψKB tb cb cd

ψK *B ψ

d*tb td td

* *tK tb cb t

*cs b cd dd ts cd

q A V V Vλ = =- =-

p A

V V

V V V

V V

V

V V V

V V V VV V 1λ

β)sin(2)Im(λ

S

S

ψK

ψK

L SψK ψKλ λ

CP = -1 (+1)

for J/K0S(L)

2ie

0 /,/ 1 sin 2 sin( )t

S L CPB J K e mt

0 /,/ 1 sin 2 sin( )t

S L CPB J K e mt

0B

fiCPA e

CPf

0B

12

2 Mi

M

ie

fiCPA e

B Charmonium Data Samples

CP sample NTAGpurity ηCP

J/ψ KS (KS→π+π-) 2751 96%

J/ψ KS (KS→π0π0) 653 88%

ψ(2S) KS (KS→π+π-) 485 87%

χc1 KS (KS→π+π-) 194 85%

ηc KS (KS→π+π-) 287 74%

Total for ηCP=-1 4370 92%

J/ψ K*0(K*0→ KSπ0) 572 77%

J/ψ KL2788 56%

Total 7730 78%

MES [GeV]MES [GeV]

ΔE [MeV]

J/ψ KL signalJ/ψ X backgroundNon-J/ψ background

BABAR

(227 ) M BB(227 ) M BB

(ηCP = +1)

Sin(2 Result From B Charmonium K0 Modes

sin2β = 0.722 0.040 (stat) 0.023 (syst)

(cc) KS modes (CP = 1)

(PRL 89, 201802 (2002): sin(2β) = 0.741 ± 0.067 ± 0.034)

J/ψ KL mode (CP = +1)

(227 ) M BB(227 ) M BB

hep-ex/0408127

background

Sin(2 Result From B Charmonium K0 Modes

sin2β = 0.728 0.056 (stat) 0.023 (syst) (152 ) M BB(152 ) M BB

WA: sin2β = 0.726 0.037 (5% Measurement)

Belle

Measurement of Angle :

Dodging Penguins !

[ =-(+) ]

CPV in b u u d Process : B0 +-

* *

* *sin(2 )tb td ud ub

tb td ud ub

V V V VB

V V V V

Im

Neglecting Penguin diagram

*

(Penguins are large!) and

Weak Phase in Penguin t

depending on its rel

erm is arg( ) different from Tree so it wi

ative strength w.r.t

ll modify

Tree. td tbV V

Im

Reality in B0 +-, + -

Gronau& London: Estimate peng = eff - using isospin relations

Tree

,

,

Penguin,

,

Ratio of amplitudes |P/T| and strong phase difference

can not be reliably calculated!

If no penguins S ~ -0.34

Estimating Penguin Pollution in B0 +-, + -

A2

1

A2

1

00 AA

00A

00A

peng2

0

0

0 0

00 0 0 0

00 0

0

0

0

0

( )

( )

( )

( )

(

( )

)

A A B

A

A A B

A A B

A A B

A

B

A B

A

0 0 0 +- +0 0

0

0

B states can have I=0 or

B , and related by SU(

2; Gluonic Penguins co

2) Isospin relation between amplitudes A ,

ntribute only to I=0 ( I=1/2 ru

A an

B has only tree ampl

A

le

i

)

d

+0 -0tude | A | = | A |

00 0penguin

+0 000

0

+- 0

A and A to be very smalTo constrain by isospin analysis requires !

Go measure and constrain C , C , A A

l

,

Similarly for B system

Rates and Asymmetries in B0 0, B+ -

0 0 0BF(B ) is large

Isospin analysis not effective

Weak constraint on [67o -131o] with current statistics

openg 35 at 90% CL

B0 + - System As Probe of Has Nature’s “Blessing”

0 6

0

Br(B ) (30 4 5) 10 !!

Six times larger than Br(B )

Blessing # 1 Likelihood projection

Although 2 0’s make efficiency small

B0 + - System As Probe of

• Blessing # 2

• Blessing # 3

0

peng

oeff

0 0 0 6

Substantially smaller than B !

Much more amen

much better constraint on

| | 11 @68% C

able to Isospin ana

L

Br(B ) 1.1 10 @ 90%

l s

L

s

C

y i

0.021L 0.0

0

28f 0.97

Angular analysis shows that B

is almost 100% longitudinally polarized !

Pure CP-even final state

This greatly simplifies TD CPV analysis

8 0.014

bkgd

total

Helicity angle

eff|<11o @ 68%C.L.

TD CPV Measurement in B0 + -

Shown here are events from the Lepton and Kaon1 tagging categories only

0.080.14

0.0200.028

0.33 0.24

0.03 0.18 0.09

0.978 0.014

Long

Long

L

S

C

f

total likelihood

total background

617 52 signal events

Discerning

o o

100 13

[79 123 ] @ 90% CL

Br() (30±6) 10-6

Br() (26±6) 10-6

Br() <1.1 10-6

0.080.14

0.0200.028

0.33 0.24

0.03 0.18 0.09

0.978 0.014

Long

Long

L

S

C

f

16 o9

Putting it all togather

(101 )

B0 + -

Measurement of Angle

Requires Direct CPV in B Decays

See talk by Fernando Martinez-Vidal for Details

CP Asymmetry In BDK Decay

0K

Look for B decays with 2 amplitudes with relative weak phase

iV eub

Relative strength of the two B decay amplitudes matters for interference

Want rb to be large to get more interference Large CP asymmetry

0.1-0.3

from B±D0 K±: D0 KS + - Dalitz Analysis

2 2 2 ( ) 2 2 2 For : | | | ( , ) ( , )| i

bB A f m m r e f m m

2 2 2 ( ) 2 2 2 For : | | | ( , ) ( , )| ibB A f m m r e f m m

2 0 2 2 0 2 Defining ( ) ; ( ) S Sm M K m M K

2

( )ibr e

2

sKm

2

sKm

2

SKm

2

sKm

0 D 0 D

2A

Schematic view of the interference

0S

+ -B

Simultaneous fit to D K Dalitz distribution of

B info on and B r , data giv and ste rong phase s

B Samples : Belle (~250 fb-1)

Likelihood fits to the B->D(*)0 K(*) Dalitz Distributions

Combined

Analysesstatistics starved !

All CKM Angle Measurements On The - Plane

16 o9

15 o1

o

3

(23.2 1

(63

(101 )

.5)

)

and

187.2!

Putting All Observables On The - Plane

Beautifully consistentoverlap !

BUT !

Searching For New Physics In Penguin Decays of B Meson

<< Testing Vs “” >>

Compare sin2 with “sin2” from CPV in Penguin decays of B0

Both decays dominated by single weak phaseBoth decays dominated by single weak phase

b s

, ,u c t, ,g Z

tb tsV V

Penguin:

s

dd

s

Tree:

b

dd

W cbV

csV

0K

c /J

s0K

New Physics? 3

0 0 0, , ,

2

/ / /S L S L S L

icb csJ K J K J K

cb csB K

V Vq qe

p V V p

c

0 0 0, , ,

2~S L S L S L

itb tsK K K

tb tsB K

V Vq qe

p V V p

b ccs

b sss

?[charmonium]sin2 [ -penguin]sin2 s

0

-i2

In SM, interference between B mixing and dominant b sss (b suu)

[penguin amplitudes have no CKM phase]

Loop di

gives t

agrams s

he same CPV (due

ensitive to high

to e )

vi

as in b c

rtual mass scale

cs

s

NP coupling can bring in new phases that may cause deviation

sensitive to ne

s from expected

w physi

"si

cs

n2 "

Must be if one amplitude dominates

Ranking Penguin Modes by SM “pollution”B

ron

zeS

emiG

old

Go

ld

b

dg

t0B

d

ss

s

W 2~tb tsV V

0K

0', f

0K

b

dg

t

d

ss

s

W

0B

2~tb tsV V

b

dg

t0B

d

ds

d

W

2~tb tsV V 0 0, ,

0K

2( )

~ 5%

~ 5 10%

2( / )

~ 20%

2( (1 / ))qqf

b

dg

u0B

d

ss

W 4~ i

ub us uV V R e

4~ iub us uV V R e

W b

d

0B

d

uu

0', f

s 0K

0Ks

4~ iub us uV V R e

W b

d

0B

d

uu 0 0, ,

s 0K

Decay amplitude of interest SM PollutionNaive (dimensional) uncertainties on sin2

Note that within QCD Factorization these uncertainties turn out to be much smaller !

The « Golden » Penguin mode B0 K0

• Modes with KS and KL

are both reconstructed

0 0LB K0 0

SB K K K

114 ± 12 signal events 98 ± 18 signal events

full backgroundcontinuum bkg

(Opposite CP)

Plots shown are ‘signal enhanced’ through a cut on the likelihood on thedimensions that are not shown, and have a lower signal event count

0K

b

dg

t

d

ss

s

W

[ ],

CPK K

hep-ex/0502019 BaBar

CP analysis of ‘golden penguin mode’ B0 K0

0tagB

0tagB

0tagB

0tagB

S(KS) = +0.29 ± 0.31(stat) S(KL) = -1.05 ± 0.51(stat)

0

0

0.07 0.040.50 0.25

0.00 0.23 0.05

K

K

S

C

Combined fit result(assuming KL and KS have opposite CP)

Standard Model Prediction

S(K0) = sin2 = 0.72 ± 0.05

C(K0) = 1-|| = 0

0.9

0 0LB K0 0

SB K K K (Opposite CP)

K0

BaBar

The Semi-Gold penguin modes: B0 ’KS

• Large statistics mode

• Reconstruct many modes ’ + –, 0 , + –0

– KS + – ,00

B0 ’KS

819 ± 38 signal events

0 0 6BR( ) ~ 65.2 10B K

0 0 6recBR( ) ~ 14.9 10SB K

hep-ex/0502017

B0 ’KS

0

0

0.10.27 0.034

0.100.21 0.03S

S

K

K

S

C

sin2 [cc] @ 3.0

K0BaBar

Sin2b from bs penguins – Summary of All MeasurementsDiscrepancy in sin2 from charmonium and penguin is 3.7

All measurement

luminosity limited

SLAC/INT Workshop, Seattle 2005 A. Höcker – sin2eff with s-penguin decays

Summary of Experimental Program for sin 2eff

Mode CPTot. error

BelleL ~ 253 fb–1

Tot. error BABAR

L ~ 195-212 fb–1

Δ(SM) [in ]

Error estimate at 2 ab–1

Syste-matics

Max. central

value for 5 deviation at

2 ab–1

Quality[naïve

theoretical cleanliness]

K0 –1 0.34 0.26 – 1.9 0.10 small 0.22 ☻☻☻

’K0 –1 0.18 0.14 – 2.6 < 0.05 small 0.45 ☻☻(☻)

f0(980)K0 +1 0.42 0.29 – 1.3 < 0.12 Q2B 0.12 ☻☻

KSKSK0 ±1 0.71 0.36 – 1.4 < 0.16 vertex – 0.08 ☻☻☻

K+K–K0 ~+1 0.25 0.25 – 1.1 < 0.08 CP 0.31 ☻(☻)

0KS –1 0.60 0.32 – 1.4 0.13 vertex 0.07 ☻

K0 –1 0.66 0.36 – 0.6 < 0.15 small – 0.03 (☻)

0K0 –1 - - ? ? Q2B ? (☻)

KS +1 - - ? ? vertex ? -

Average - 0.39 ± 0.11 0.45 ± 0.09 – 3.7 < 0.034 ok 0.53 ☻☻

Summary Of Highlights in (Heavy Flavor) Physics

• Radiative Penguin decay rates conform to SM expectations (~10%). No sign of NP in rates and asymmetries

• Measurement of |Vcb| approaching 1% precision, |Vub| precision 10%

• Tevatron Bs Oscillation limits ms 7.9 ps-1 , expect rapid progress

• Precise measurement of CPV (sin2) in B K0 decay confirms the KM conjecture for CP violation CP Violation is not a tiny, it’s O(1) effect

• Direct CP Violation seen in B Kpi (rules out superweak in B sector)

• Direct measurements of UT angles :

• All CKM observables (sides and angles) give consistent picture

• The major surprise is possible discrepancy in sin2 measured in B Charmonium and B s-penguin decay modes

– The largest single discrepency is about 3 but the inconsistency when adding (?) all modes is about 3.7

– This could be a significant fluctuation !

– Or Penguins are hinting at Beyond SM physics• ONLY MORE DATA (being accumulated as we speak) WILL CLARIFY

• Check back in a few years!

16 o o 15 o(101 ) ; (23.2 1.5) ; (63 )9 13

Inclusive Semileptonic decays

*D

,...,

,,22G

cb mm

shape

|| cbV

uc ,

)( e

,eW

...,,,,,, (*)*** DDDDB

K

|Vcb|2, |Vub|2

|| ubV

Shape

Rate

Inclusive El spectrum

Semileptonic B decay

2|| cbV

2|| ubV

2|| cbV

HXbq

El[GeV]

Shape

Rate for Mx<1.55

Inclusive Mx spectrum

(log-scale)

Fit Consistency

OPE describes BABAR data very well 2/ndf = 20/15 Separate fit of Eℓ and mX moments agree

BABAR

BABAR PRL 93:011803

Radiative and Electroweak Penguin Decays of B Mesons

• FCNC process forbidden at Tree level, occur only thru induced loop effects

• Probe the underlying fundamental theory at quantum level sensitive to masses much higher than b quark (e.g. t quark)– Enable measurement of CKM elements Vtb, Vtd and Vts

• In Beyond SM scenarios, FCNC processes sensitive to loop effects of new particles such as Higgs, Chargino, Squarks and Neutralinos– NP contribution to rate or CP asymm. comparable or much larger than SM

• Provide ideal situation to develop and test theoretical tools for HF– Provide insight into non-trivial aspects of effective theory for heavy-light hadronic

transitions (factorization, ….shape function etc)

b s

*

bs : Signal and Backgrounds

signal

Proverbial Needle in a Hay Stack ! Hadronic BDecays

Initial StateRadiation

Continuume+ e- udsc jet

Bac

kgro

und

s

Inclusive b s Decay Rate

• Touted as “standard Candle of flavor physics” since theory robust

Not so rare, but important test of SM, Constrains parameters of beyond SM phenomena

B(B Xs) = (3.60 0.30) 104 [SM, (NLO )] Misiak and GambinoNucl. Phys B611,338(2001)

• Sensitive to Re(C7), New Physics can modify sign/phase of C7 leading to measurable rate enhancement, CPV and Isospin breaking effects

?• Experimental challenge is to sample as much of the photon spectrum as possible and understand background sources and rates

A bs Event In BaBar

Searches For Exclusive Final States in b d

central value 90% C.L. upper limit

2.6

5 observation expected for 1 ab-1/experiment

Rate of b d

• Decay CKM-suppressed (|Vtd /Vts| ) w.r.t. b s; sensitive to |Vtd|

• Inclusive b d measurements background challenged ! – b s 20 background ! Needs K+,KS and KL veto

• Exclusive processes are current exptal target: B ()– Theor. estimate imprecise B(B () ) (0.5-2.0)10-6

– Ratio R(/K*) reduces theory error, estimates |Vtd /Vts|

)1()0(

)0(

)(

)(2

*

2

*R

V

V

KBB

BBK

ts

td

Long distancecorrections ?

Form factor at q2=0SU(3) breaking corrections ?

The Decay Rate of b s l+l

• More complex than b s - W-box and Z-penguin amplitudes important - cc resonances in dilepton spectrum (removed by cuts on Mll)

• More observables - dilepton mass spectrum ( ) - forward–backward asymmetry (AFB)

• BR expectation in NNLO SM:

- B(B XS e+e) = (6.9 1.0) 106

- B(B XS +) = (4.2 0.7) 106

[Ali et al., Phys. Rev D66,034002(2002)]

q2 = M2ll

cd cs

ud u

td t

s b

b

s

c

tb

u

V VV

V

VV V

VV

Vcd

*Vcb

Vud

*Vub

*V Vtd tb

B Flavor Tagging By examining decay product in recoiling Btag

Category (%) w(%) Q(%)

Lepton 8.6 ±0.1 3.2 ±0.4 7.5 ±0.2

Kaon I 10.9 ±0.1 4.6 ±0.5 9.0 ±0.2

Kaon II 17.1 ±0.1 15.6 ±0.5 8.1 ±0.2

K- 13.7 ±0.1 23.7 ±0.6 3.8 ±0.2

Pion 14.5 ±0.1 33.9 ±0.6 1.7 ±0.1

Other 10.0 ±0.1 41.1 ±0.8 0.3 ±0.1

Total 74.9 ±0.2 30.5 ±0.4

(sin 2) 1Q

21 2Q w

Tagging performance

Effect of Measurement Imprecision on t Distribution

00tag BB 0 0

tagB B00tag BB 0 0

tagB B

Determine flavor mis- tag rates w and t resolution function R from large control samples of B0 D(*)//a1,J/K*

BB Mixing PDF

CP PDF

perfect flavor tagging & time

resolution

realistic mis-tagging & finite time

resolution

| t|/

CP, CPef ( t) 1 sin2 sin(1 2 ) m t

4

| t|/

mixing,ef ( t) 1 cos m t

4(1 2 )

~ 1 ps 170 m

~ 6 ps 1000 m2

t

mixt

sin2 From CPV in “Golden Mode”: B0 J/K0

S

S

S

*cb cs*cb c

*cs c

* *ψKB tb cb cd

ψK *B ψ

d*tb td td

* *tK tb cb t

*cs b cd dd ts cd

q A V V Vλ = =- =-

p A

V V

V V V

V V

V

V V V

V V V VV VS

S

ψK

ψK

Im(λ ) sin(2β)

λ 1

L SψK ψKλ λ

CP = -1 (+1)

for J/K0S(L)

2ie

0 t /S,L CPB J / K e 1 sin 2 sin( mt)

0 /,/ 1 sin 2 sin( )t

S L CPB J K e mt

0B

fiCPA e

CPf

0B

12

2 Mi

M

ie

fiCPA e

from B±D0 K±: D0 KS + - Dalitz Analysis

KS+ -

0SNote that D K decay dominated by quasi-2body amplitudes

0S

+ -B

Simultaneous fit to D K Dalitz distribution of

B info on and B r , data giv and ste rong phase s

Likelihood fits to the B->D(*)0 K(*) Dalitz Distributions

Combined

AnalysisStatistics Starved !

Kevin Pitts Heavy Flavors at the Tevatron slide 91

Measuring Bs Mixing Bs or Bs at the time of production?

Initial state flavor tagging Tagging “dilution”: D=1-2w, w=mistag rate Tagging power proportional to: D2

Bs or Bs at the time of decay? Final state flavor tagging Can tell from decay products (e.g. )

Yields Need lots of decays (because flavor tagging imperfect)

Proper decay time

Need decay length (Lxy) and time dilation factor ( =pT/mB)

Crucial for fast oscillations (i.e. Bs)

s sB D

T

xy

pBct

xy xy B

TL

T T

L L mct

m

p ppct

uncertainty

Typical tagging power:

D2 = (1%) at Tevatron

D2 = (30%) at BaBelle

Kevin Pitts Heavy Flavors at the Tevatron slide 92

Large semileptonic yields & good proper time resolution shown in new DØ Bs lifetime measurement BsDs X with Ds+ and KK+

5153265(stat.)450(syst.) signal events

(Bs) = 1.420 0.043(stat.) 0.057(syst.) ps World’s most precise measurement. Expect semileptonic mode to be 50/50 CP even/odd.

Bs Lifetime in Semileptonic Mode

Ds+ D++

Kevin Pitts Heavy Flavors at the Tevatron slide 93

,K+

Same side tagging Exploits fragmentation

Doesn’t require 2nd B hadron within acceptance

Correlations different for Bs, B+, B0

Cannot directly calibrate using B0 mixing

Flavor Tagging Opposite side tagging (lepton, jet charge)

Requires 2nd B hadron in detector acceptance Expect same performance same for B0, B+, Bs calibrate with B0 mixing

Opposite side

B

Lepton, jet charge

K

K

Lxy

same side K/ Signal B

Kevin Pitts Heavy Flavors at the Tevatron slide 94

Flavor Tagging Set a limit on ms: must know tagging dilution

Same as with CP violation measurments

Observe an oscillation: extract dilution from data For opposite side taggers, use B0 mixing for calibration.

Mixing in B0-D*+x

Mixing in fully reconstructed modes

Kevin Pitts Heavy Flavors at the Tevatron slide 95

DØ Bs Mixing in Semileptonics

Limit: ms > 5.0ps–1 @95% CLSensitivity: 4.6 ps–1

BsDs X (460 pb–1)

Ds Enhanced opposite

side tag 7037 events (376

tags) D2=(1.170.04)%

Raw asymmetry vs. visible proper decay length.

Kevin Pitts Heavy Flavors at the Tevatron slide 96

CDF Bs Mixing in Semileptonics BsDs + lepton (e/)

Ds , K*K, 4355 events Trigger: 4GeV e/ +

displaced track Opposite side flavor tags

- e,, jet charge D2=(1.430.09)%

Limit: ms > 7.7ps–1 @95% CLSensitivity: 7.3 ps–1

Rates and Asymmetries in B+ 0 , B0 0

0 0 0BF(B ) is large and does not satisfy

requirement for an effective Isospin analysis

Very weak constraint on [67o -131o]Not useful with current statistics

All Penguin Measurements Are Luminosity Limited

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40Ja

n-03

Jul-

03

Jan-

04

Jul-

04

Jan-

05

Jul-

05

Jan-

06

Jul-

06

Jan-

07

Jul-

07

Jan-

08

Jul-

08

Jan-

09

Jul-

09

Err

or

on

sin

e am

pli

tud

e

K*

5 discovery region if non-SM physics is a 30% effect

2004: 246 fb-1

2006: ~500 fb-1

Expect double BABAR luminosity by end 2006:

20062004

0Kσ(S )=0.30

f0KS

KS0

KS

KKKS ’KS

Belle may get there earlier !