Experimental Status Flavour and CP
andFuture with SuperB
Achille StocchiLAL Orsay
Université Paris-SudIN2P3-CNRS
SuperB: Flavour Physics 2011, Jan 18 - Jan 21
2
Short Introduction – Main motivations
Actual Situation (CKM – CP)
What we learned sofar(using selected topics)
Future : SuperB for CP and FlavourSome comparison with LHCb and SLHCb
Flavour Physics in the Standard Model (SM) in the quark sector:
10 free parameters
6 quarks masses 4 CKM parameters
~ h
alf o
f the
S
tand
ard
Mod
el
In the Standard Model, charged weak interactions among quarks are codified in a 3 X 3 unitarity matrix : the CKM Matrix.
The existence of this matrix conveys the fact that the quarks which participate to weak processes are a linear combination of mass eigenstates
The fermion sector is poorly constrained by SM + Higgs Mechanism
mass hierarchy and CKM parameters
Wolfenstein parametrization : l ,A, r, hh responsible of CP violation in SM
B pp, rp, rr...
+other charmonium
radiative decays Xsg,Xdg, Xsll
B DK
+from Penguins
The Unitarity Triangle:
Charm Physics(Dalitz)
?
theo. clean
B tn
Beyond the Standard Model with flavour physics
The indirect searches look for “New Physics” through virtual effects from new particles in loop corrections
~1970 charm quark from FCNC and GIM-mechanism K0 mm
~1973 3rd generation from CP violation in kaon (eK) KM-mechanism
~1990 heavy top from B oscillations DmB
~2000 success of the description of FCNC and CPV in SM
SM FCNCs and CP-violating (CPV) processes occur at the loop level
SM quark Flavour Violation (FV) and CPV are governed by weak interactionsand are suppressed by mixing angles.
SM quark CPV comes from a single sources ( if we neglect q QCD )
New Physics does not necessarily share the SM behaviour of FV and CPV
321
4
“Discoveries” and construction of the SM Lagrangian
f
bq
e f
5
More saidin Marco Ciuchini
talk
6
From Childhood
In ~2000 the first fundamental test of agreement between
direct and indirect measurements of sin2bTo precision era
Dominated by Dmd, Vub,Vcb, eK, limit on Dms and Lattice
7
sin(2b)
ga sin(b+g)
BtnBK*(r)g
the sides...
Dms Dmd Vub/Vcb
…
Many new (or more precise) measurements to constraint UT parameters and test New Physics
bs
CP asymmetries in radiative decays
the angles..
Rare decays...sensitive to NP
What happened since….
What happened since….
Improved measurement of Vub, Vcb (6-7)%, 1.5% (B factories) (improved theory, moment analyses…)
Measurement of the Bs oscillation Dms (Tevatron)
Improvement of the b angle measurement 4% (B factories)
Surpise.. B-factory also measured quite precisely the other angles(mainly B-factories, Tevatron also performed some measurement) a ~7% ; g ~15%
First measurement of the leptonic decay B t n (B factories)
Measurement of the CP violation in the Bs sector (Tevatron)
Measurement of Penguins diagram b from Penguins (B factories)
Measurement of the direct CP violation in charmless decays (B factories)
Measurement of Br and CP asymmetries in radiative and di-lepton (B factories)
Global Fit within the SMConsistence on anover constrained fit
of the CKM parameters
h = 0.358 ± 0.012
r = 0.132 ± 0.020
With a precision of s(r) ~15% and s(h) ~4% !
Coherent picture of FCNC and CPV processes in SM
Discovery : absence of New Particles up to the ~2×Electroweak Scale !
CKM matrix is the dominant source of flavour mixing and CP violation
10
Is the present picture showing a Model Standardissimo ?
I’ll try to answer this question looking
at the different measurements (separately) and their agreement with the SM predictions.
One of the mail goal of this exercise for this talk is also to show if the measurements (or the theory) have to be improved
11
SM expectationΔms = (18.3 ± 1.3 ) ps-1
agreement between the predicted values and the measurements at better than :
6s
5s 3s
4s
1s
2s
Legenda
SM predictions of Dms Dms
10
Prediction “era” Monitoring “era”
12Message : very stringent test of the SM, perfect compatibility. Improving Lattice calculations would have important impact.
Dms Dmd
2
22 2
2
22 2
2
~
~ ~
( ) ~ ~
s s
d d
d d s s
s s
d
d s
s
s B B
B Bd B B B B
B B
BB B
B
m f B
f Bm f B f B
f B
fBr B f f
ftn
D
D
Dominated by theo.error
b from bccs transitions
+2.2s deviation*
*The theoretical error on the sin2b is considered as in CPS the disagreement decreases If FFJM approach is used 1.6s)
sin2b=0.654 ± 0.026 From direct measurement
sin2b =0.771 ± 0.036 from indirect determination
The precision era :b=(21.1 ± 0.9)o (~4%)
Message : “old” tension between sin2b measured and predicted (know as Vub-sin2b tension). Improvement in predictions and measurements are of the outmost importance.
14
d d
sbW-
B0d
t ss
f
K0
g
sb b s
~
~ ~
New Physics contribution (2-3 families)
( )LRd
23
sin2b from “s Penguins” (bqqs )…a lot of progress..
Message :After a long story of disagreement… Today there is a rather good agreement between sin2b from
bccs 0.672 ± 0.023 (0.028 with theo. error) bqqs 0.64 ± 0.04
15
ausing Bpp (rp)
rr
g, a, Dm
s deviations within 1s
Direct measurement SM prediction (74 ± 11)o (69.6 ± 3.1)o
Direct measurement SM prediction (91.4 ± 6.1)o (85.4 ± 3.7)o Message : precision on a should be improved by factor two to have stringent test of SM
gtree level B DK
Message : precision on g should be improved by factor at least four to have stringent test of SM
Measurements of g, a were not really expected at B factories (at least at this
precision)
ACP in charmless B decays ACP in radiative and Leptonic
ACP in radiative and leptonic decays expected to be almost zero in the SM.
Null Test for new physics search. Crucial to improve the precision
Many other CP asymmetry measurements are performed in different decay modes (with corresponding measurments of branching fractions)
Direct CP violation in
B decays
Diff
icul
t to
use
thes
e m
easu
rem
ents
to
con
stra
in U
T pa
ram
eter
sor
look
ing
for N
P
ACP all compatible with zero
Sho
wn
here
onl
y th
e m
ost p
reci
se
Br(Btn)
-3.2s deviation
Nota Bene To accommodate Br(Btn) we need larger value of Vub
To accommodate sin2b we need lower value of Vub
Br(Btn) =(1.72± 0.28)10-4 From direct measurement
Br(Btn) =(0.805± 0.071)10-4 SM prediction
Message : we need to measure more precisely this branching fraction !Precise determination of fB is also important
First leptonic decay seen on B meson
eK
-1.7s devation
Very old measurement (not from B physics..)But three “news” ingredients
(6)12Imsin i
K
Mem
e
e
fe f b
+ D
K
1) Buras&Guadagnoli BG&Isidori corrections
Decrease the SM prediction by 6%
2) Improved value for BK BK=0.731±0.07±0.35
3) Brod&Gorbhan charm-top contribution at NNLO
enanchement of 3% (not included yet in this analysis)
Prediction Measurement Pullg (69.6 ±3.1)° (74 ±11)° -0.4a (85.4 ±3.7)° (91.4 ±6.1)° -0.8
sin2b 0.771±0.036 0.654±0.026 +2.2Vub [103] 3.55 ±0.14 3.76 ±0.20 * -0.9Vcb [103] 42.69 ±0.99 40.83 ±0.45 * +1.6eK [103] 1.92 ±0.18 2.23 ±0.010 -1.7
Br(Bt n) 0.805±0071 1.72±0.28 -3.2Dms (ps-1) 17.77±0.12 18.3±1.3 -0.4
Summary Table of the Some Pulls
• Both in Vcb and Vub there is some tensions between Inclusive and Exclusive determinations. The measurements shown is the average of the two determinations
Message/conclusion. Overall good agreement with the SM. There are “interesting” tensions here and there. Many measurements (and often theory related to) have to
be improved to transform these measurements in stringent tests.
r , h Cd jd Cs js CeK
g (DK) X
Vub/Vcb X
Dmd X X
ACP (J/Y K) X
X
ACP (Dp(r),DKp) X
X
ASL X X
a (rr,rp,pp) X X
ACH X X X X
t(Bs), DGs/Gs X X
Dms X
ASL(Bs) X X
ACP (J/Y f) ~X X
eK X X
Treeprocesses
13 family
23 family
12 familiy
0
( , , , ..)
( / , ) sin(2 2 ) ( , , )
( , , )
| | | |
d d
d d
d d
EXP SMd B d B
CP B B
EXP SMB B
EXP SMK K
m C m f C QCD
A J K f
f
Ce
r h
b f r h f
a a f r h f
e e
D D
Y +
-
( , , , ..)
( , , , ..)
( / , ) sin(2 2 ) ( , , )
...
s
s s
EXP SMs B s Bs
CP s B B
f C QCD
m C m f C QCD
A J f
er h
r h
f b f r h f
D D
Y -
DF=2NP model independent Fit
Parametrizing NP physics in DF=2 processes
2 2 2
2
NP SMi B B
SMB
A AeA
D D
D
+qC dφ
More details in Marco Ciuchini
talk
21
h = 0.358 ± 0.012
r = 0.132 ± 0.020
h = 0.374 ± 0.026
r = 0.135 ± 0.040
SM analysis NP-DF=2 analysis
r,h fit quite precisely in NP-DF=2 analysis and consistent with the one obtained on the SM analysis
[error double](main contributors tree-level g and Vub)
5 new free parameters Cs,js Bs mixing
Cd,jd Bd mixing
CeK K mixing
Today : fit is overcontrained
Possible to fit 7 free parameters (r, h, Cd,jd ,Cs,js, CeK)
Please consider these numbers when you want to get CKM parametersin presence of NP in DF=2 amplitudes (all sectors 1-2,1-3,2-3)
22
With present data ANP/ASM=0 @ 1.5s
ANP/ASM ~0-30% @95% prob.
CBd = 0.95± 0.14[0.70,1.27]@95%
fBd = -(3.1 ± 1.7)o
[-7.0,0.1]o @95%
1.8s deviation
Bd
1.8s agreement takes into account the theoretical error on sin2b
CBs = 0.95± 0.10[0.78,1.16]@95%
2 2 ( )2
2
NPs s s
Bs
s
i ii SM NP
Bs iSM
A e A eC eA e
b j bj
b
- - -
-
+
Bs
New : CDF new measurement reduces the significance of the disagreement. Likelihood not available yet for us.New : amm from D0 points to large bs, but also large DGs not standard G12 ?? ( NP in G12 / bad failure of OPE in G12.. Consider that it seems to work on G11 (lifetime)
fBs = (-20 ± 8)o U (-68 ± 8) o [-38,-6] U [-81,-51] 95% prob.
New results tends toreduce the deviation (see next talk)
3.1s deviation
CKM matrix is the dominant source of flavour mixing and CP violation s( r)~15% s(h) ~4%
Nevertheless there are tensions here and there that should be continuously and quantitatively monitored :
sin2b (+2.2s), eK (-1.7s) , Br(Bt n) -(3.2s)[CP asymmetry in Bs sector (3.1s)]
Other way of looking at : Model Independent fit show some discrepancy on the NP phase
parametersfBd = -(3.1 ± 1.7)o ; fBs = (-20 ± 8)o U (-68 ± 8) o
To render these tests more effective we need to improve the measurements but also (in same case) the predictions
Other measurements are interesting, not yet stringent tests :a,g, b from Penguins, ACP (and Br) in radiative and dileptonic
decays…
B factories have shown that a variety of measurements can be performed in the clean
environment.
The systematic errors are very rarely irreducible and can almost on all cases be controlled with control samples. (up to..50-100ab-1)
Asymmetric B factory
High luminosity
Many and interesting measurements at different energies (charm/t threshold, U(5S), other Upsilons.. ) and with polarised beam
Flavour factories
L= 1034 cm-2 s-1 150 fb-1 1.5 × 108 (4s) produced by year
L= 1036 cm-2 s-1 15 ab-1 1.5 × 1010 (4s) produced by year
SuperB factory potential discovery evaluated with 75ab-1
Next : a SuperB Factory. See Alberto Luisiani talk
Definition of a SuperB factory/minimal requirements
26
B physics @ Y(4S)
Possible also at LHCbSimilar precision at LHCb
Example of « SuperB specifics » inclusive in addition to exclusive analyses channels with p0, g’s, n, many Ks…
Variety of measurements for any observable
27
t physics (polarized beams)
Bs at Y(5S)
Charm at Y(4S) and threshold
To be evaluated
at LHCb
Bs : Definitively better at LHCb
See Alberto Maria Jose Herrero andJorge Vidal talks S
ee Alberto N
icola Neri talk
28
X
XX- CKM
X
X
X
X The GOLDEN channel for the given scenario
Not the GOLDEN channel for the given scenario,
but can show experimentally measurable deviations from SM.
X- CKM
Let’s consider (reductively) the GOLDEN MATRIX for B physics
X
In the following some examples of
« SuperB specifics » inclusive analyses channels with p0, g, n, many Ks…
29
Future (SuperB) + Lattice improvements
Determination of CKM parameters and New Physics
Today
r = ± 0.0028h = ± 0.0024
r = 0.163 ± 0.028h = 0.344± 0.016
Improving CKM iscrucial to look for NP
1Th
is s
ituat
ion
will
be
diff
eren
t @
2015
than
ks to
LH
Cb
g,a,b..,Vub
and Lattice !
players are :
Important also in K physics :K p n n , CKM errors dominated
the error budget
3030
Hadronic matrix
element
Lattice error in 2006
Lattice error in 2009
6 TFlop Year
60 TFlop Year
1-10 PFlop Year
0.9% 0.5% 0.7% 0.4% 0.1%
11% 5% 5% 3% 1%fB 14% 5% 3.5 - 4.5% 2.5 - 4.0% 1 – 1.5%
13% 5% 4 - 5% 3 - 4% 1 – 1.5%
ξ 5% 2% 3% 1.5 - 2 % 0.5 – 0.8 %
B → D/D*lν 4% 2% 2% 1.2% 0.5%11% 11% 5.5 - 6.5% 4 - 5% 2 – 3%
13% 13% ---- ---- 3 – 4%
KB̂
Kπ+f (0)
1/2Bs Bsf B
Bπ+f ,...B K*/ρ
1T
The expected accuracy has been reached! (except for Vub)
[2011 LHCb]
[2015 SuperB]
[2009]
Shown by Vittorio Lubicz at the SuperB Workshop LNF Dec2009
Part of the program could be accomplished if SM theoretical predictions are @ 1%
30
See Federico Mescia talk
31
Leptonic decay B l n
SuperB
2HDM-II MSSM75ab-1
2ab-1
LEP mH>79.3 GeV
SuperB exc
ludes
SuperB exc
ludes
B-factories exclude
B-factories exclude
222
21 tan BH
H
mrm
b
-
222
20
0
tan11 tan
0.01
BH
H
mrm
be b
e
- +
ATLAS 30fb−1
ATLAS 30fb−1
ATLAS 30fb−1
2SuperB
SuperB -75ab-1
MH~1.2-2.5 TeVfor tanb~30-60
32
g
sb b s
~
~ ~
New Physics contribution (2-3 families)
( )LRd
23
MSSM+generic soft SUSY breaking terms
Flavour-changing NP effects in the squark propagator NP scale SUSY mass
flavour-violating coupling
23| |LR
Arg(23)LR=(44.5± 2.6)o
= (0.026 ± 0.005)
1 10
1
10-1
10-2
(TeV)gluinom
In the red regions the are measured with a
significance >3s away from zero
1 TeV
3
23| |LR
• (BXs g)• (BXs l+l-) • ACP(BXs g)
Here the players are :
33
Br(B K n n) – Z penguins and Right-Handed currents
nn++ KB
)(,* ++++ pnn SKKKB
h
e
~[20-40] ab-1 are needed for observation>>50ab-1 for precise measurement
SM
today
If these quantities are measured @ <~10% deviations from the SM can be observed
Only theo. errors
4
Observable Babar/Belle
LHCb (10fb-1)
SLHCb (100fb-1)
SuperB (75ab-1)
Some Comment Theo
g
Vub/Vcb Excl. needs Lattice & Inclusive @ 2% ?
b Theo. error to be controlled on data (ex: J/yp0)
S(J/yf) At 1o theo error controlled with data ?
B t n, mn Very precise if detector is improved
S-Penguins SLHCb (very) precise for BfK, BsffNot possible for Ksp0,ksksks,hks, wKs..
ACP(B Xsg) Control syst. Is an issue
Br (B Xsg) Syst. Controlled with data ?
Br (B Xs l l)Angular var.
Br(BK*l l ), Angular var.
Could theory control @20%? Angular analysis are clean ?
Br (B K(*)n n) Stat. limited. With more stat. angular analyses also possible
Br (BKsp0g)
Br(Bsfg) As precise as Br Ksp0g) ?
Br (Bsmm)
tmg profit of polarized beams
CPV charm CPV in SM negligible. So clean NP probe
No result Moderate Precise Very Precise
Moderately Clean
CleanNeed Lattice
Clean
THEORY
Some Golden Modes
34
Conclusions and perspectivesFlavour Physics with FCNC and CPV processes has played in the past
a crucial role in constructing and testing the SMSome observable are already precise.
….B-Factories today
LHCb (MEG, NA62..) tomorrowAnd the day after tomorrow..?
Flavour Phyiscs is a major actor in NP search @ few-TeV range and a unique player in the reconstruction of the NP Lagrangian Part of the program could be accomplished if SM theoretical predictions are @ 1%.
SLHCb could improve some LHCb golden measurements g, Bsmm, Bsfg
SuperB factories have a much wider Physics Case, which can naturally follow the B-factory+LHCb era.
35
36
BACKUPMATERIAL
Many channels can be measured with DS~(0.01-0.04)
d d
sbW-
B0d
t ss
f
K0
g
sb b s
~
~ ~
( )LRd
23
SuperB
(*) theoretical limited
Another example of sensitivity to NP : sin2b from “s Penguins”…
38
Hadronic matrix
element
Lattice error in 2006
Lattice error in 2009
6 TFlop Year
60 TFlop Year
1-10 PFlop Year
0.9% 0.5% 0.7% 0.4% 0.1%
11% 5% 5% 3% 1%fB 14% 5% 3.5 - 4.5% 2.5 - 4.0% 1 – 1.5%
13% 5% 4 - 5% 3 - 4% 1 – 1.5%
ξ 5% 2% 3% 1.5 - 2 % 0.5 – 0.8 %
B → D/D*lν 4% 2% 2% 1.2% 0.5%11% 11% 5.5 - 6.5% 4 - 5% 2 – 3%
13% 13% ---- ---- 3 – 4%
KB̂
Kπ+f (0)
1/2Bs Bsf B
Bπ+f ,...B K*/ρ
1T
The expected accuracy has been reached! (except for Vub)
[2011 LHCb]
[2015 SuperB]
[2009]
Shown by Vittorio Lubicz at the SuperB Workshop LNF Dec2009
Part of the program could be accomplished if SM theoretical predictions are @ 1%
38
Observable Babar/Belle
LHCb (10fb-1)
SLHCb (100fb-1)
SuperB (75ab-1)
Some Comment Theo
g
Vub/Vcb Excl. needs Lattice & Inclusive @ 2% ?
b Theo. error to be controlled on data (ex: J/yp0)
S(J/yf) At 1o theo error controlled with data ?
B t n, mn Very precise if detector is improved
S-Penguins SLHCb (very) precise for BfK, BsffNot possible for Ksp0,ksksks,hks, wKs..
ACP(B Xsg) Control syst. Is an issue
Br (B Xsg) Syst. Controlled with data ?
Br (B Xs l l)Angular var.
Br(BK*l l ), Angular var.
Could theory control @20%? Angular analysis are clean ?
Br (B K(*)n n) Stat. limited. With more stat. angular analyses also possible
Br (BKsp0g)
Br(Bsfg) As precise as Br Ksp0g) ?
Br (Bsmm)
tmg profit of polarized beams
CPV charm CPV in SM negligible. So clean NP probe
No result Moderate Precise Very Precise
Moderately Clean
CleanNeed Lattice
Clean
THEORY
Some Golden Modes
39