1#

Flavor Physics Today Hassan Jawahery

University of Maryland December 12, 2014

Relevance of Flavor Physics today rests on New Physics reach of FCNC processes & its exclusive access to CPV

2#

Sundrum (CKM 2012) Isidori, Nir, Perez

According to famous theorists:

L = LSM +

ci

ΛNP2 O i + ....∑ No evidence

so far

!potential access to very high energy scales

!Search for deviations from SM

CKM Project Flavor NP project

1980-… today-…

Experimental Landscape:

" BaBar, Belle, Tevatron, BESS and CLEO data, LHCb, CMS, ATLAS (Current and next run)

" Plans for two Super Flavor experiments: " Belle-II at KEKB; peak luminosity 8x1035 cm2 s-1 ! 50 ab-1

" LHCb upgrade; peak luminosity ~1-2x1033 cm2 s-1 ! 50 fb-1

" Dedicated experiments searching for charge lepton violation µ#eγ (at ~10-13) with MEG, µΝ#eN (at 10-16 level) with Mu2e @FNAL and COMET@Jparc.

" Rare Kaon studies at NA62@CERN and Koto@Jparc

3#

4#

The CKM-project has been extremely successful Thanks to the B factories, Tevatron , LHC,

theory insights & LQCD

2001 1995

" The CKM picture of CPV in SM seems to be correct (Nobel 2008) " Flavor remains the only source of observed CP & T-violations " Precisions of rare FCNC processes have significantly improved

Severe constraints on possible scenarios of New Physics But still leaving plenty of room for NP

a

a

_

_

dm6K¡

K¡

sm6 & dm6

ubV

`sin 2

(excl. at CL > 0.95) < 0`sol. w/ cos 2

excluded at CL > 0.95

_

`a

l-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

d

-1.5

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5excluded area has CL > 0.95

Winter 14

CKMf i t t e r

2014

5#

•  Example: NP constraints from Meson Mixing How much NP is allowed?

" Current data: $ Bs is now on equal ground as Bd system (Thanks to LHCb results). $ Data allows NP at 20-30% SM

" Future: If consistency with SM persists- LHCb and Belle-II measurements-

combined with improved LQCD errors- will constrain the magnitude

of NP contribution to ~5% of SM

2003

50 fb-1 LHCb 50 ab-1 Belle-II

2013

Charles, Descotes-Genon, Ligeti, Monteil, Papucci,

Trabelsi (arXiv: 1309.2293).

7 fb-1 LHCb 5 ab-1 Belle-II

hs

hd

hs

hd hd

hd

6#

•  Example: NP constraints from Meson Mixing How much NP is allowed?

" Current data: $ Bs is now on equal ground as Bd system (Thanks to LHCb results). $ Data allows NP at 20-30% SM

" Future: If consistency with SM persists- LHCb and Belle-II measurements-

combined with improved LQCD errors- will constrain the magnitude

of NP contribution to ~5% of SM

2003

50 fb-1 LHCb 50 ab-1 Belle-II

2013

Charles, Descotes-Genon, Ligeti, Monteil, Papucci,

Trabelsi (arXiv: 1309.2293).

7 fb-1 LHCb 5 ab-1 Belle-II

hs

hd

hs

hd hd

hd 50 fb-1 LHCb

50 ab-1 Belle-II hd

7#

Stage II: ~2% Vub ~1% Vcb

Stage II: γ at 1o – & α at 1o

A closer look at the numbers reveals some of the challenges ahead

Stage II is counting on ~0.5% accuracy on lattice inputs

8#

%%% large effects %% visible but small effects % unobservable effects

Of course, Flavor-NP program is much broader than mixing: Example of theorist vision: “DNA of flavor physics effects” by W. Altmannshofer, A.J. Buras, S. Gori, P. Paradisi D.M. Straub,

Status of CKM

All is well with the CKM picture at O(10%) level:

9# 9

α = 88.8−4.3+4.5( )o

β = 21.5−0.7+0.8( )o

γ = 70−9.0+7.7( )o

−2βs = +0.00 ± 0.07

α + β + γ = (175.2 ± 9.3)o

93.6−2.9+3.2( )o

25.38−1.57+0.80( )o

66.4−3.3+1.2( )o

−0.0363−0.0012+0.0014

Direct CKM fit

Sin2β tension (driven by B#τν) eased

|Vub| and |Vcb| : Exclusive vs Inclusive results still don’t

agree (~3 σ effects)

sin2β = 0.682 ± 0.019(meas) 0.774−0.036+0.017 ( fit) (< 2.3σ )

a

a

_

_

dm6K¡

K¡

sm6 & dm6

ubV

`sin 2

(excl. at CL > 0.95) < 0`sol. w/ cos 2

excluded at CL > 0.95

_

`a

l-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

d

-1.5

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5excluded area has CL > 0.95

Winter 14

CKMf i t t e r

Status of CKM

All is well with the CKM picture at O(10%) level:

10# 10

α = 88.8−4.3+4.5( )o

β = 21.5−0.7+0.8( )o

γ = 70−9.0+7.7( )o

−2βs = +0.00 ± 0.07

α + β + γ = (175.2 ± 9.3)o

93.6−2.9+3.2( )o

25.38−1.57+0.80( )o

66.4−3.3+1.2( )o

−0.0363−0.0012+0.0014

Direct CKM fit

Sin2β tension (driven by B#τν) eased

|Vub| and |Vcb| : Exclusive vs Inclusive results still don’t

agree (~3 σ effects)

sin2β = 0.682 ± 0.019(meas) 0.774−0.036+0.017 ( fit) (< 2.3σ )

a

a

_

_

dm6K¡

K¡

sm6 & dm6

ubV

`sin 2

(excl. at CL > 0.95) < 0`sol. w/ cos 2

excluded at CL > 0.95

_

`a

l-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

d

-1.5

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5excluded area has CL > 0.95

Winter 14

CKMf i t t e r

Current focus

11#

With little theoretical pollution, the road is clear for 1-2 degree precision.

Aim of LHCb-Upgrade and Belle-II

LHCb measurement from B->DK (combined GLW, ADS, GGSZ) is

already as precise as BaBar/Belle

Status of CKM New results on gamma (from tree processes)

γ (combined) = 68.3 ± 7.5o UTFit

γ (combined) = 70.0−9.0+7.7o CKMfitter

B0s system is now an equal player on NP field

φs from a Bs#φφ (penguin decay)

φs=-0.17±0.19 ±0.03 (rad) λ=1.04±0.15±0.03

Consistent with no direct CPV & SM φs

Combined results: φs=0.010±0.0039 (rad) (FALL 2014) Γs=0.6564±0.0031 (ps-1) (SPRING 2014) ΔΓs=0.083 ±0.008 (ps-1)

LHCb upgrade aim: (50 fb-1) σ(φs)~ 0.008 (theory error ~0.003)

Tensions in decays with lepton Semileptonic asymmetry:

Anomalous D0 results persist LHCb consistent with SM

" Lepton Universality Test in radiative decays- 2-3 sigma effect Asl

b (D0)=Cdasld + Csasl

s + C ΔΓ

Γ

" Lepton Universality: B#τ X vs B#µ/e X Sensitive to charged Higgs contribution

Lepton Univsersality test via B#D(*)τν

14#

cb

τ +

H+/W+

ντ

B#D(*)τν

2HDM-II is challenged to fit in both R(D) and R(D*)

3.4σ from SM

bR

tL bL

WsL

γL

Rare and very Rare decays

Bs

Bo

B0s#µ+µ-

Long awaited- finally seen

• SM is triumphant -- Precision measurement is a goal of next run and LHC upgrade along with: (further in future) Bd#µµ/Bs#µµ (key to testing MFV) & Bs#ττ

LHCb & CMS results

50 fb-1

At LHCb upgrade

Serious impact on SUSY parameter space

Most constraining at large tanβ B(Bs,d → µ+µ− )∝ mµ

2 tan6 β

Not all of SUSY is excluded Only the left of green line (for this tanβ)

D. Straub

18#

Evolution of an old friend: b#sγ

Br(b→ sγ ) = (2.32 ± 0.57 ± 0.35) ×10−4 (Exp)

= (3.28 ± 0.33) ×10−4 (SM /Th)

Initial observation at CLEO- 1995

B(B→ Xsγ )NNLL[Eγ > 1.6GeV ) = (3.15 ± 0.23) ×10−4

B(B→ Xsγ )[Eγ > 1.6GeV ) = (3.52 ± 0.23 ± 0.09) ×10−4

2011: Measurements at the B factories

Helicity Flip Suppressed by

~ ms/mb mix

ing

K*(#KsγR)

K*(->KsγL)

First attempt at measuring photon polarization at BaBar & Belle:

via time-dependent CPV in B#K0sπ0 γ

(Gronau, Soni, Atwood)

SK*γ = −0.16 ± 0.22

SM: S <0.04 (probably not the final word) Major item on menu of Belle-II and LHCb-upgrade( Bs#φγ)

Very slow progress

Photon polarization results from LHCb

19#

5.2 σ in favor of Photon polarization– but this measurement doesn’t tell the sign and the magnitude of the polarization.

B#K+π+π-γ Up-Down Asymmetry related to polarization of FS photon

Data mostly Consistent with SM- with a few exceptions

b→sl+l- is providing many tests and some anomalies

Zero crossing point considered highly sensitive to NP effects

Bo→K(*ο)µ+µ- :New Variables less FF dependent

If taken seriously- Global fits to data favor modifying C9, C`9, Introducing a FC Z`

3.7 σ deviation but caution: there is

substantial room in theory predictions

bR

tL bL

WsL

γL

Rare and very Rare decays

Penguin dominated B0 decays measurements of “sin2β”, “φs

”

φs from a Bs#φφ (penguin dominated process)-Analog of B0#φKs

φs=-0.17±0.19 ±0.03 (rad) λ=1.04±0.15±0.03

Consistent with no CPV & SM φs

current results are consistent with SM. But theoretical uncertainties unknown (range of 0.02#0.1 was suggested in the past)

New B0s addition to this program

Non-leptonic charmless B decays Land of penguins & Puzzles

24#

" Direct CPV in B decays originally established by BaBar, Belle, CDF in B0

d#K-π+ :

" Large Direct CP observed in B0s (LHCB & CDF):

Consistent with expected value applying SU(3) to B0

d measurements (Fleischer)

" But the “Kπ puzzle” remains unresolved:

" Large (local) CPV in Dalitz Plane of B#hh’h” Source of these large strong phases?

Acp (Bs0 → K −π + ) = 0.27 ± 0.08 ± 0.02

-1.0 0.0 1.0

CP Asymmetry

ACP =K(b f) K(b f )K(b f)+ K(b f )

ACP (Bu+ → K +π 0 ) − ACP (Bd

0 → K +π− ) = 0.123 ± 0.020

Acp (B0 → K +π− ) = −0.085 ± 0.010

25#

" These effects seen in regions not associated to resonances " Ultimately, will need amplitude analysis "  final state re-scattering may have a role; how do we reconcile with 2-body decays (no evidence for large re-scattering)

Large (local) direct CPV in B#hh’h” decays

Mixing & CP Violation in the Charm System "  Mixing in D0 system is now firmly established via many observables: "  Time evolution of doubly-cabibbo-suppressed D0->K+π- "  Lifetime difference in CP-odd and CP-even modes "  Dalitz analysis ofD0->Ksπ+π- KsK+K- , K+π-π0, K+π-π+π-, … "  Simultaneously fit for CPV:

26#

x = ΔMΓ

= (0.43−0.15+0.14 )%

y = ΔΓ

2Γ= (0.60 ± 0.07)%

D0 mixing is now on firm ground Zero mixing is excluded at >10 σ

No evidence for CPV in the charm system

| qp|= 1.007−0.08

+0.09

ϕ(deg) = −8.7−9.1+8.7

SM : φ <0.6 (deg)

No Evidence for Direct CPV in the charm system

The most sensitive channels: Channel Acp (%) D0#π+π- +0.05 0.15

D0#Κ0sπ0 -0.27 0.21

D0#Κ+Κ- -0.16 0.12

D+#Κ0sπ+ -0.41 0.09

D+#Κ0sΚ+ -0.03 0.17

D+s#Κ0

sΚ+ +0.08 0.26

D+s#Κ0

sπ+ -0.63 0.47

27#

Acp =Γ(D→ f ) − Γ(D→ f )Γ(D→ f ) + Γ(D→ f )

±

±±

±

±

±±

>3σ Expect Acp~ -0.33% induced by indirect CPV in K0

No evidence found for Direct CPV in charm decays

Sensitivities in many channels approaching ~10-3

New results from LHCb

R. Zwicky

Future

28#

Experimental Landscape:

" BaBar, Belle, Tevatron, BESS and CLEO data, LHCb, CMS, ATLAS (Current and next run)

" Plans for two Super Flavor experiments: " Belle-II at KEKB; peak luminosity ~8x1035 cm2 s-1 , 50 ab-1

" LHCb upgrade; peak luminosity ~2x1035 cm2 s-1, 50 fb-1

" Dedicated experiments searching for charge lepton violation m#eg (at ~10-13) with ME, µΝ#eN (at 10-16 level) with Mu2e @FNAL and COMET@Jparc.

" Rare Kaon studies at NA62@CERN and Koto@Jparc

29#

Super Flavor Experiments

•  e+e- Super B factory •  Small x-section; its mostly about

luminosity (xsection ~1 nb) Asymmetric energy e+ + e- colliders to operate in the Υ(4S) region as well as in the charm threshold region. •  SuperB, Italy (originated the

concept – but failed to be funded)

•  Super KEKB in Japan- well underway

•  At L ~8x1035 /cm2/s

Aiming for a data settof ~ 50 /ab –  ~1011 B decays

–  ~1011 tau decays –  ~1011 charm decays

At LHC: Endowed with large production xsection: its mostly about trigger & pile-up

σcc~6 mb (7 TeV) στ~80 µb (7 TeV) σbb~280 µb(7 TeV) (~500 at 13 TeV)

LHCb at L~2-4x1032/cm2/s Expect ~8/fb by 2018 Bd, Bu, Bs, Bc, Λb,… LHCb upgrade aimed for 2018 To operate at L~2x1033/cm2/s expect ~5/fb/year (total of ~50/fb)

•  CMS and ATLAS major players in some key area

30#

The LHCb upgrade The upgrade is designed to run at luminosity

of (1-2)x1033 cm-2s-1 ; Aiming for 50 fb-1

•  Requires new approach to the LHCb trigger scheme to overcome L0 (1MHz) limitation.

31

! New Trigger Apporach: " Remove L0 (hardware) trigger

" Readout the detector at the 40 MHz LHC clock rate " Move to a fully flexible software trigger

=>>Major upgrade of LHCb detector required : to cope with increased occupancy, data rate

and radiation dose, & to preserve efficiency and low ghost rate: Replace all readout electronics, entire tracking system (Vertex locator, upstream & downstream tracking detectors) & upgrade

Particle ID system

32#

Belle-II at SuperKEKB

Accelerator Upgrade " low emittance electron injector

" New positron damping ring " New vacuum chambers

" New HER and LER lattice and long dipoles for low emittance

" New IR for low β* " Modified and additional RF for

higher currents

Asymmetric Energy e+e- collider at goal peak Luminosity 8x1035 /cm2/s aiming for 50 ab-1

Design based on Nano-beam scheme proposed by P. Raimondi (Frascati), tight

focusing, larger crossing angle & higher Ib

33#

& Flavor Physics is in excellent health "  Precision era is already here; findings are mostly

consistent with SM, but areas of tensions are growing.

"  Future looks great: Flavor physics remains one of the key drivers of the search for New Physics beyond SM. " The planned strong experimental program together with advances

on theory front will seriously challenge the SM.