Hot Topics from the Belle Experiment14/15 layer RPC+Fe Electromagnetic Calorimeter CsI(Tl) 16X0...
Transcript of Hot Topics from the Belle Experiment14/15 layer RPC+Fe Electromagnetic Calorimeter CsI(Tl) 16X0...
Oct 14, 2003;Pittsburgh, PA
Takeo Higuchi, KEKBEAUTY2003
Takeo HiguchiInstitute of Particle and Nuclear Studies, KEK
for the Belle collaboration
Hot Topicsfrom the Belle Exper iment
Hot Topicsfrom the Belle Exper iment
• Introduction to the Belle exper iment
• CP violation in B0 →→→→ φφφφKS
• Evidence of B0 →→→→ ππππ 0ππππ 0
• New resonance X(3872)• Summary
ContentsContents
Introduction to the Belle Exper iment
Introduction to the Belle Exper iment
e+e−
3km circumferenceL = (1.06 ×××× 1034)/cm2/sec���� L dt = 158 fb−−−−1
On-resonance 140 fb−−−−1
L = (1.06 ×××× 1034)/cm2/sec���� L dt = 158 fb−−−−1
On-resonance 140 fb−−−−1
World Records
HistoryHistory
1999 Jun 2003 Jul
• 3.5 GeV e+ ×××× 8.0 GeV e−
– e+e− → ϒ(4S) with βγ = 0.425.
– Crossing angle = ±11 mrad.
KEKB Accelerator KEKB Accelerator
Belle DetectorBelle Detector
KL µµµµ detector14/15 layer RPC+Fe
Electromagnetic Calor imeterCsI(Tl) 16X0
Aerogel Cherenkov Countern = 1.015~1.030
Si Vertex Detector3 layer DSSD
TOF counter
8.0 GeV e−−−−
3.5 GeV e+
Central Dr ift ChamberTracking + dE/dx50-layers + He/C2H5
PeoplePeople
274 authors, 45 institutionsmany nations
274 274 authors, 45 institutionsauthors, 45 institutionsmany nationsmany nations
CP Violation in B0 →→→→ φφφφKSCP Violation in B0 →→→→ φφφφKS
CP Violation by Kobayashi-MaskawaCP Violation by Kobayashi-Maskawa
���
�
�
���
�
�
1−−−−1−
−−1=���
�
�
���
�
�
3
2
32
2
2
)1(
2/
)(2/
ληρλλλλ
ηρλλλ
AiA
A
iA
VVV
VVV
VVV
tbtstd
cbcscd
ubusud
KM ansatz: CP violation is due tocomplex phase in quark mixing matrix
KM ansatz: CP violation is due tocomplex phase in quark mixing matrix
unitarity triangle
CP violation parameters(φ1, φ2, φ3) = (β, α, γ)
CP violation parameters(φ1, φ2, φ3) = (β, α, γ)
O ρ
η
Time-Dependent CP AsymmetryTime-Dependent CP Asymmetry
0 0
0 0
0 0
( ) ( )( ) sin cos
( ) ( )
d CP d CPB B
d CP d CP
B f B fA t m At m
B f fS t
B
Γ → − Γ →= = − ⋅ ∆ + ⋅ ∆Γ → + Γ →
Inputs: ξf = −1, S = 0.6A = 0.0
0d CPB f→0
d CPB f→
2
2 2
: eigenvalue
2Im( ) | | 1,
| | 1 | | 1
f
AS
CPξ
λ λλ λ
−= =+ +
A = 0 or |λ| = 1 → No direct CPV
S = −ξfsin2φ1: SM prediction
New Physics Hunting in b →→→→ sqqNew Physics Hunting in b →→→→ sqq
b
d
s
d
s
s
φ
Ks
B0
W
gt
d d
s
s Ks
η’
B0 g
g~b s
+(δ 23
dRR)b~R
s~R
φ+
New process w/ different CP phase
New process w/ different CP phaseSM penguinSM penguin
Deviation from b →→→→ ccs Hint of new physics
SM predicts same CPV in b →→→→ ccs and sqq.
SM predicts same CPV in b →→→→ ccs and sqq.
e.g.) squark penguin
New physics may deviate CPV in b →→→→ ccs from sqqNew physics may deviate CPV in b →→→→ ccs from sqq
b →→→→ ccs Reconstructionb →→→→ ccs Reconstruction
5417 events are used in the fit.
140 fb−1, 152M BB pairs
J/ψ KL signal
B 0 →→→→ J/ψψψψKL
b →→→→ ccs w/o J/ψψψψKL
pB* (cms)
Beam-energy constrained mass (GeV/c2)
Detail by K.MiyabayashiDetail by K.Miyabayashi
CP Violation in b →→→→ ccsCP Violation in b →→→→ ccs
5417 events @ 152M BB
1sin2
0.733 0.057 0.028
φ =± ±
1.007 0.041 (stat)ccsλ = ±consistent with no direct CPV
poor flavor tag
fine flavor tag
Small systematic uncertainty↓
Well controlled analysis technique
Small systematic uncertainty↓
Well controlled analysis technique
Detail by K.MiyabayashiDetail by K.Miyabayashi
K. Abe et al. [Belle collaboration], BELLE-CONF-0353.
b →→→→ sqq Reconstructionsb →→→→ sqq Reconstructions
• B0 →→→→ φφφφKS: φφφφ →→→→K+K−−−−, KS →→→→ ππππ++++ππππ−−−−
– Minimal kaon-identification requirements.– Belle standard KS selection.– | M(KK) − M(φ) | < 10MeV/c2
(mass resolution = 3.6 MeV/c2).– | pφ | in CMS > 2.0 GeV/c.– Belle standard continuum suppression (given later.)– | ∆E | < 60MeV, 5.27 < Mbc < 5.29 GeV/c2. M(KK) [GeV/c2]
• Background is dominated by continuum• CP in the background:
– K+K−KS: (7.2±1.7)%– f 0(980)KS:– These effects are included in the systematic error.
• Background is dominated by continuum• CP in the background:
– K+K−KS: (7.2±1.7)%– f 0(980)KS:– These effects are included in the systematic error.
1.91.5(1.6 )%+
−
b →→→→ sqq Reconstructions −−−− Cont’db →→→→ sqq Reconstructions −−−− Cont’d
• B0 →→→→ ΚΚΚΚ++++ΚΚΚΚ−−−−KS– More stringent kaon-identification requirements.– Particle veto for φ, D0, χc0, and J/ψ → K+K− and D+ → K+KS.– Belle standard continuum suppression.– | ∆E | < 40 MeV, 5.27 < Mbc < 5.29 GeV/c2.
• B0 →→→→ ηηηη´KS: 1) ηηηη´ →→→→ ργργργργ, ρρρρ →→→→ ππππ+ππππ−−−−
2) ηηηη´ →→→→ ηπηπηπηπ+ππππ−−−−, ηηηη →→→→ γγγγγγγγ– Belle standard continuum suppression.– |∆E| < 60MeV (η´ → ργ); −100 < ∆E < +80 MeV (η´ → ηπ+π−)
5.27 < Mbc < 5.29 GeV/c2
0
10
20
30
5.2 5.22 5.24 5.26 5.28 5.3
a) B0 → φK0s
0
50
100
5.2 5.22 5.24 5.26 5.28 5.3
b) B0 → K+K−K0s
Ent
ries
/ 0.0
025
GeV
/c2
0
50
100
150
5.2 5.22 5.24 5.26 5.28 5.3Mbc (GeV/c2)Mbc (GeV/c2)Mbc (GeV/c2)
c) B0 → η’K0s
B0 →→→→ φφφφKS
B0 →→→→ K++++K−−−−KS
B0 →→→→ ηηηη′′′′KS
2 cms 2 cms 2bc beam(GeV/ ) ( ) ( )BM c E p≡ −
Beam-Energy Constrained MassBeam-Energy Constrained Mass
68±11 signals106 candidates for Sand A fitpurity = 0.64±0.10efficiency = 27.3%
244±21 signals421 candidates for Sand A fitpurity = 0.58±0.05efficiency = 17.7% (η´→ ηπ+π−)
15.7% (η´→ ργ )
199±18 signals361 candidates for Sand A fitpurity = 0.55±0.05efficiency = 15.7%
Unbinned Maximum Likelihood FitUnbinned Maximum Likelihood Fit
1. fsig: Event by event signal probability
( )0 01 (1 2 ) sin( ) cos( )4
Bt
B BB
eq w m t m tS A
τ
τ
− ∆− − ∆ ∆ + ∆ ∆2. �sig:
3. R: ∆t resolution function
4. Pbkg: Background ∆t distribution
signal background
cand 2maximize
1
( , ) ( ; , ) 0N
ii
LL PA A
AtS S
S=
∂= ∆ → =∂ ∂∏
sig sig sig bkg( ; , ) P ( ; , ) (1 ) ( )i S SP t f t f P tA A R∆ = ⋅ ∆ ⊗ + − ⋅ ∆
CP Violation in b →→→→ sqqCP Violation in b →→→→ sqq
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-7.5 -5 -2.5 0 2.5 5 7.5
Raw
Asy
mm
etry
0.0 < r ≤ 0.5
f) B0 → η’K0s
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-7.5 -5 -2.5 0 2.5 5 7.5∆t (ps)∆t (ps)∆t (ps)
0.5 < r ≤ 1.0
g)
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-7.5 -5 -2.5 0 2.5 5 7.5
Raw
Asy
mm
etry
0.0 < r ≤ 0.5
d) B0 → K+K−K0s
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-7.5 -5 -2.5 0 2.5 5 7.5∆t (ps)∆t (ps)∆t (ps)
0.5 < r ≤ 1.0
e)
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-7.5 -5 -2.5 0 2.5 5 7.5
Raw
Asy
mm
etry
0.0 < r ≤ 0.5
b) B0 → φK0s
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-7.5 -5 -2.5 0 2.5 5 7.5∆t (ps)∆t (ps)∆t (ps)
0.5 < r ≤ 1.0
c)
B0 →→→→ φφφφKS B0 →→→→ K+K−KS B0 →→→→ ηηηη’KS
A
−−−−ξξξξfS09.011.050.096.0 +
−±−
07.029.015.0 ±±−
18.000.005.026.051.0 +
−±±+
04.016.017.0 ±±−
05.027.043.0 ±±+
04.016.001.0 ±±−
B → fCP(sqq) decay vertices are reconstructed using K- or π-track pair.
Fitsin2φφφφ1@ 152M BB
Consistency ChecksConsistency Checks
• CP violation parameters with A = 0– B0 → φKS: −ξfS = −0.99 ± 0.50
– B0 → K+K−KS: −ξfS= +0.54 ± 0.24
– B0 → η′KS: −ξfS= +0.43 ± 0.27
• Null asymmetry tests for S term– B+ → φK+: −ξfS= −0.09 ± 0.26
– B+ → η′K+: −ξfS= +0.10 ± 0.14
Less correlationbtw Sand A
Less correlationbtw Sand A
26.009.0 ±−=S
Consistent with S = 0Consistent with S = 0
Statistical SignificanceStatistical Significance
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
-2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
-2ln
(L/L
max
)
S(φK0s)
a)
sin2φ1
Hint of new physics?Need more data to establish conclusion.
Hint of new physics?Need more data to establish conclusion.
• B0 →→→→ K++++K−−−−KS, ηηηη KS
– Consistent with sin2φ1.
• B0 →→→→ φφφφKS
– 3.5σσσσ deviation (Feldman-Cousins).
– S(φKS) = sin2φ1: 0.05% probability.
0( )SS Kφ
K. Abe et al. [Belle collaboration], hep-ex/0308035, submitted to Phys. Rev. Lett.
Evidence of B0 →→→→ ππππ0ππππ0Evidence of B0 →→→→ ππππ0ππππ0
Two possible diagrams require measured φφφφ2 disentangledTwo possible diagrams require measured φφφφ2 disentangled
Disentangling φφφφ2Disentangling φφφφ2
b u
d
u
W
W
d
u
u
bt
B0 →→→→ ππππ ++++ππππ −−−− is one of promising decays to measure φφφφ2B0 →→→→ ππππ ++++ππππ −−−− is one of promising decays to measure φφφφ2
TT PP
22, 1 sin2( )A S Aππ ππ ππ φ θ= − +
Penguin-polluted CP violation
Br(B0 →→→→ ππππ 0ππππ 0) measurement gives constraint on θθθθ.
eff2φ
B0 →→→→ ππππ0ππππ0 ReconstructionB0 →→→→ ππππ0ππππ0 Reconstruction
• B0 reconstruction– 2 π 0’s with 115 < M(γγ) < 152 MeV/c2.
– Efficiency = 9.90 ± 0.03%.
– Those MC-determined distributions are used in extraction of signal yield with calibration using B+ → D0π+ decays in data.
Signal MC Signal MC
∆E [GeV]Mbc [GeV/c2]
Continuum SuppressionContinuum Suppression
Fisher
|cosθB|
|r|
Multi-dimensionallikelihood ratio
Continuum
Signal MC
e+e− → BB e+e− → qq
• 1−cos2θ for BB
• flat for qq
Construct likelihood
• r = high → well tagged→ originated from B decay
• r = low → poorly tagged→ originated from qq
Flavor tag quality
B flight direction
Fisher
sig
sig
MDLH 0.95qq
L
L L≡ >
+
B++++ →→→→ ρρρρ++++ππππ0 ContaminationB++++ →→→→ ρρρρ++++ππππ0 Contamination
• ∆E-Mbc shape: MC-determined 2-dimensional distribution.
• Yield: Recent Br measurement with MC-determined efficiency.
According to MC study, other charmless decays than B+ → ρ+π0 are negligible.
According to MC study, other charmless decays than B+ → ρ+π0 are negligible.
Br(B+ → ρ+π0) measurement: B. Aubert et al. [BaBar collaboration], hep-ex/0307087, submitted to PRL.
B+ → ρ+π0
π+π0
B+ → ρ+π0
∆E [GeV] Mbc [GeV/c2]
charmless background incl. ρ+π0
Signal ExtractionSignal Extraction
Mbc [GeV/c2] ∆E [GeV]
@ 152 M BB
B++++ →→→→ ρρρρ++++π π π π 0 (modeled by MC)
Signal
Continuum
Signal yield: Signal yield: 9.78.425.6SN +
−=Unbinned maximum likelihood fit
Branching fractionBranching fraction0 0 0
6
( )
(1.7 0.6 0.2) 10
Br B π π−
→
= ± ± ×
Signal shape is modeled by MC, and is calibrated using B+ → D0π+ decays in data.
Significance incl. systematic er ror = 3.4σσσσS.H.Lee, K.Suzuki et al. [Belle collaboration], hep-ex/0308040, submitted to Phys. Rev. Lett.
New Resonance X(3872)New Resonance X(3872)
New Narrow Resonance: X →→→→ ππππ++++ππππ−−−−J/ψψψψNew Narrow Resonance: X →→→→ ππππ++++ππππ−−−−J/ψψψψ
• Mass distr ibution:
Data MC
( / ) ( / )M J M Jπ π ψ ψ+ − −
ψψψψ(2S) ψψψψ(2S)
X
New resonance X is found.
[GeV/c2][GeV/c2]
Eve
nts
/ 0.0
10 G
eV/c
2
•
• γ conversion elimination
2
( ) ( / )
20MeV/
M M J
c
ψ+ − −
<
� �
2( ) 400MeV/M cπ π+ − >
B+ →→→→ K+XB+ →→→→ K+X
• B+ →→→→ K+X reconstruction– Add loosely identified kaon to X.
5.20 5.25 5.30 3.84 3.88 3.92 0.0 0.2[GeV/c2] [GeV/c2] [GeV]
Mbc MππJ/ψ ∆E
3-dim. unbinnedlikelihood fit.3-dim. unbinnedlikelihood fit.
meas meas PDG 2(2 ) (2 ) 3872.0 0.6 0.5 MeV/X X S SM M M M cψ ψ= − + = ± ±
2
( / )2.3 MeV/
M Jc
π π ψ+ −Γ <
sig 35.7 6.8N = ±
( ) ( / )0.063 0.012 0.007
( (2 )) ( (2 ) / )
Br B K X Br X J
Br B K S Br S J
π π ψψ ψ π π ψ
+ + + −
+ + + −→ × → = ± ±
→ × →
@ 152M BB
What is X?What is X?
• Hypothesis I : 13D2
– M(X) = 3872 MeV/c2 differs fromprediction: M(13D2) = 3810 MeV/c2.
– Γ(13D2 → γχc1)/Γ(13D2 → ππJ/ψ) ~ 5,while Γ(X → γχc1)/Γ(X → ππJ/ψ) < 1
Mbc
M(γχc1)
No clear signal
1( ) / ( / ) 0.89 @ 90% CLcX X Jγχ ππ ψΓ → Γ → <
E.Eichten et al., Phys. Rev. D21, 203 (1980);W.Buchmüller and S.-H.H.Tye, Phys. Rev. D24, 132 (1981).
What is X? −−−− Cont’dWhat is X? −−−− Cont’d
• Hypothesis I I : “ molecular” charmonium– M(X) = 3872 ± 0.6 ± 0.5 MeV.
– M(D0) + M(D0*) = 3871.2 ± 1.0 MeV.
– Do above facts suggest loosely bound D0-D0* state?
– Need more data to conclude.
QQ q q D0-D0* “molecule”
S.-K.Choi, S.L.Olsen et al. [Belle collaboration], hep-ex/0309032, submitted to Phys. Rev. Lett.
SummarySummary
SummarySummary
• 3.5σ deviation is observed with Feldman-Cousins in CP violation in B0 → φKS from the SM.� Hint of new physics?
• Br(B0 → π 0π 0) = (1.7±0.6±0.2)×106 is measured, which gives constraint on penguin uncertainty in φ2.
• New resonance of X → π+π−J/ψ is observed at M(X) = 3872.0±0.6±0.5 MeV/c2 that does not look like ccstate.
Backup SlidesBackup Slides
Mixing-Induced CP ViolationMixing-Induced CP Violation
B0
B0 B0
VtbV*
V*Vtb
φφφφ
KS++++td
td
Sanda, Bigi & Car ter
1
2
2
( )td
i
V
e φ
∗
−
∝
∝b
d
b
d
t
t
W W
b
d
φφφφ
KS
W
W
t
tg
g
d
s
s
s
d
s
s
s
Vtb Vts
Vtb Vts
How to Measure CP Violation?How to Measure CP Violation?
• Find B fCP decay• Identify (= “ tag” ) flavor of B fCP
• Measure decay-time difference: ∆∆∆∆t• Determine asymmetry in ∆∆∆∆t distr ibutions
e−−−− e+e−−−−: 8.0 GeVe++++: 3.5 GeV
BCP
∆∆∆∆z
Btag
ϒϒϒϒ(4S)βγβγβγβγ ~ 0.425
fCPfCP
( )
z
ct
βγ ϒ
∆ ∆�
∆∆∆∆z cβγτβγτβγτβγτB ~ 200 µµµµm
flavor tagflavor tag
Detail by K.MiyabayashiDetail by K.Miyabayashi
Systematic Error of CPV in b →→→→ ccsSystematic Error of CPV in b →→→→ ccs
< 0.005∆t background distribution
< 0.005∆mB, τB
0.028Total
0.008Btag decay interference
0.008Fit bias
0.008∆t resolution function
0.007Signal fraction (other)
0.012Signal fraction (J/ψKL)
0.013Vertex reconstruction
0.014Flavor tag
ErrorSources
Small uncer tainty inanalysis procedure
Small uncer tainty inanalysis procedure
stat err. = 0.057
B0 →→→→ K++++K−−−−KS: CP = ±±±±1 MixtureB0 →→→→ K++++K−−−−KS: CP = ±±±±1 Mixture
K-
KSB0
J=0 J=0J=0
J=0
�������� CP = (−−−−1)����CP = (−−−−1)����
decay
CP = +1 CP = +1
K+
CP = ±±±±1 fraction is equal to that of ���� =even/oddCP = ±±±±1 fraction is equal to that of ���� =even/odd
Since B0 → K+K−KS is 3-body decay,the final state is a mixture of CP = ±1.
How can we determine the mixing fraction?
�-even fraction in |K0K0> can be determined by |KSKS> system
��
Using isospin symmetry,
CP evenCP even%015
100+−
B0 →→→→ K++++K−−−−KS: CP = ±±±±1 Mixture −−−− Cont’dB0 →→→→ K++++K−−−−KS: CP = ±±±±1 Mixture −−−− Cont’d
∆∆∆∆t Distr ibutions∆∆∆∆t Distr ibutions
∆t [ps] ∆t [ps]∆t [ps]
B0 →→→→ φφφφKSB0 →→→→ φφφφKS B0 →→→→ K+K−KSB0 →→→→ K+K−KS B0 →→→→ ηηηη’KSB0 →→→→ ηηηη’KS
qξf = −1
qξf = +1
qξf = −1
qξf = +1
qξf = −1
qξf = +1
Systematic Errors of CPV in b →→→→ sqqSystematic Errors of CPV in b →→→→ sqq
S A S A S AWtag fractions
�� ��
0.018
�� ��
0.007
�� ��
0.005�� ��
0.006
�� ��
0.005
�� ��
0.007Physics parameters
�� ��
0.033
�� ��
0.002
�� ��
0.006�� ��
0.002
�� ��
0.003
�� ��
0.003Ver texing
�� ��
0.022
�� ��
0.046
�� ��
0.016�� ��
0.027
�� ��
0.044
�� ��
0.024Background fraction
�� ��
0.053
�� ��
0.035�� ��
0.045
�� ��
0.026
�� ��
0.029
�� ��
0.036Background ∆∆∆∆t
�� ��
0.015
�� ��
0.008�� ��
0.003
�� ��
0.003
�� ��
0.010
�� ��
0.006Resolution function
�� ��
0.013
�� ��
0.005�� ��
0.004
�� ��
0.003
�� ��
0.007
�� ��
0.004KKKs + f0Ks bkg. +0.001
�� ��
0.039-0.084
Sum +0.09 0.07 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.04-0.11
φφφφKS ηηηη'KS KKKS
Systematics are small and well understood from b → ccs studies.
Systematic Uncer taintySystematic Uncer tainty
+2.0%−2.0%MDLR selection
++++Eff−−−−EffSources
++++3.43−−−−3.34Total
−−−−9.09.09.09.0%
−0.5%
−7.0%
−5.3%
−0.99
−0.69
−0.04
−0.62
−0.03
−−−−∆∆∆∆NS
+0.5%Luminosity
++++9.5%Total
+7.0%π0 efficiency
+6.1%Fitting
+1.33Rare B (ρ+π0)
+0.67Mbc width
+0.04Mbc peak position
+0.45∆E width
+0.04∆E peak position
++++∆∆∆∆NSSources
M(ππππ++++ππππ−−−−) Distr ibutionM(ππππ++++ππππ−−−−) Distr ibution
M(π+π−) [GeV/c2]
Fit to ρρρρ-mass is pretty good
– M(π+π−) can be fitted by ρ-mass distribution well.
– 13D2 → ρJ/ψ is forbidden by isospin conservation rule.
Constraint on θθθθConstraint on θθθθ
0 0A A+ −= �
00A
1
2A+−
1
2A+−�
00A�2θ
Amp(B0 → π0π0)
Amp(B0 → π0π0)
Amp(B− → π−π0)
Amp(B+ → π+π0)
Amp(B0 → π+π−)
Amp(B0 → π+π−)
A+−�
A+−
0A−�
0A+
00A�
00A
0 00 2 012
0 2
( )cos2
1
B B B B B
B B Aππ
θ+− + +− +
+− +
+ + −≥
−
( )ij i jB Br B π π≡ →
• B++++0/B++++−−−− = 1.04• B00/B++++−−−− = 0.39• Aππππππππ = 0.57
Using Our Results
eff2 2| | | | 44.0 (90%C.L.)θ φ φ= − < �
Belle PreliminaryBelle Preliminary
M.Gronau et al., Phys. Lett. B 514, 315 (2001).