Two Important Experimental Novelties:

Two Important Experimental Novelties:

Dipartimento di Fisica di Roma La Sapienza Guido Martinelli Martina Franca 17/6/2007

Utfit & QCDin the Standard Model and beyond

sin 2 measured = 0.726 0.037 0.675 0.026

CDFΔms = (17.77 ± 0.10 ± 0.07) ps-1

BaBar: (0.88 ± 0.11) x 10-4 + 0.68- 0.67Belle: (1.79 ) x 10-4 + 0.56

- 0.49+ 0.39- 0.46

Average: (1.31 ± 0.48) x 10-4

STANDARD MODEL1)Generalities 2)Predictions vs Postdictions3) Lattice vs angles4) Vub inclusive, Vub exclusive vs sin 2

5) Experimental determination of lattice parameters

Flavor Physics Beyond the SM

N(N-1)/2 angles and (N-1)(N-2) /2 phases

N=3 3 angles + 1 phase KM the phase generates complex couplings i.e. CP violation; 6 masses +3 angles +1 phase = 10 parameters

Vud Vus Vub

Vcd Vcs Vcb

Vtb Vts Vtb

CP Violation is natural with three quark

generations (Kobayashi-Maskawa)With three generations all CP

phenomena are related to the sameunique parameter ( )

NO Flavour Changing Neutral Currents (FCNC) at Tree Level

(FCNC processes are good candidates for observing NEW PHYSICS)

Vud Vus Vub

Vcd Vcs Vcb

Vtd Vts Vtb

Quark masses &Generation Mixing

NeutronProton

e

e-

downup

W

| Vud |

| Vud | = 0.9735(8)| Vus | = 0.2196(23)| Vcd | = 0.224(16)| Vcs | = 0.970(9)(70)| Vcb | = 0.0406(8)| Vub | = 0.00409(25)| Vtb | = 0.99(29) (0.999)

-decays

1 - 1/2 λ2 λ A λ3(ρ - i η)

- λ 1 - 1/2 λ2 A λ2

A λ3 × (1- ρ - i η)

-A λ2 1

+ O(λ4)

The Wolfenstein Parametrization

λ ~ 0.2 A ~ 0.8 η ~ 0.2 ρ ~ 0.3

Sin 12 = λSin 23 = A λ2Sin 13 = A λ3(ρ-i η)

Vtd

Vub

a1

a2

a3

b1

b2

b3

d1

e1

c3

The Bjorken-Jarlskog Unitarity Triangle| Vij | is invariant under

phase rotationsa1 = V11 V12

* = Vud Vus*

a2 = V21 V22* a3

= V31 V32*

a1 + a2 + a3 = 0(b1 + b2 + b3 = 0 etc.)

a1

a2a3

Only the orientation dependson the phase convention

Physical quantities correspond to invariantsunder phase reparametrization i.e.|a1 |, |a2 |, … , |e3 | and the area of the Unitary Triangles

a precise knowledge of themoduli (angles) would fix J Vud

*Vub+ Vcd* Vcb+Vtd

* Vtb =

0

CP J

J = Im (a1 a2 * ) = |a1 a2 | Sin

Vud*Vub Vtd

*Vtb

Vcd*Vcb

= CKM

From A. StocchiICHEP 2002

For details see:UTfit Collaboration

hep-ph/0501199hep-ph/0509219hep-ph/0605213hep-ph/0606167

http://www.utfit.org

sin 2 is measured directly from B J/ Ks

decays at Babar & Belle

(Bd0 J/ Ks ,

t) - (Bd0 J/ Ks , t)

AJ/ Ks =

(Bd0 J/ Ks , t) + (Bd

0 J/ Ks , t)

AJ/ Ks = sin 2 sin (md t)

DIFFERENT LEVELS OF THEORETICAL UNCERTAINTIES (STRONG INTERACTIONS)

1)First class quantities, with reduced or negligible uncertainties

2) Second class quantities, with theoretical errors of O(10%) or less that can be

reliably estimated3) Third class quantities, for which

theoretical predictions are model dependent (BBNS, charming, etc.)

In case of discrepacies we cannot tell whether is new physics orwe must blame the model

Classical Quantities used in the Standard UT Analysis

NEW !! beforeOnly a lower bound

Inclusive vs ExclusiveOpportunity for lattice QCDsee later

Vub/Vcb K md md/ms

levels @68% (95%) CL

K0 - K0

mixing

UnitaryTriangle SM

B0d,s - B0

d,s mixing Bd Asymmetry

2005

semileptonic decays

New Quantities used in the UT Analysis

M.Bona, M.Ciuchini, E.Franco, V.Lubicz,

G.Martinelli, F.Parodi,M.Pierini,

P.Roudeau, C.Schiavi,L.Silvestrini,

V. Sordini, A.Stocchi, V.Vagnoni

Roma, Genova, Annecy, Orsay, Bologna

THE COLLABORATION

www.utfit.org

2006 ANALYSIS • New quantities e.g. B -> DK

included • Upgraded exp. numbers (after ICHEP)

• CDF & Belle new measurementsTHE CKM

contours @ 68% and 95% C.L.

ρ= 0.193 0.029 η = 0.355 0.019 at 95% C.L.

With the constraint fromms

Results for ρ and η & related quantities

ρ = 0.164 ± 0.029

η = 0.340 ± 0.017

= (92.7 4.2)0 sin 2 = 0.697 0.023

A closer look to the analysis:

1)Predictions vs Postdictions2) Lattice vs angles3) Vub inclusive, Vub exclusive vs sin 2


CKM origin of CP Violation in

K0 K0 Mixing

UTsites

εK

Ciuchini et al. (“pre-UTFit”),2000

sin 2 measured = 0.668 0.028

Comparison of sin 2 from direct measurements (Aleph, Opal, Babar, Belle and CDF) and UT analysis

sin 2 UTA = 0.759 ± 0.039

Very good agreement no much room for physics beyond the SM !!

sin 2 UTA = 0.698 ± 0.066 prediction from Ciuchini et al. (2000)

sin 2 tot = 0.701 0.022

correlation (tension) with Vub , see later

sin 2 UTA = 0.65 ± 0.12Prediction 1995 from Ciuchini,Franco,G.M.,Reina,Silvestrini

Theoretical predictions of Sin 2 in the years

predictions exist since '95

experiments

sin 2 UTA = 0.65 ± 0.12Prediction 1995 from Ciuchini,Franco,G.M.,Reina,Silvestrini

NEWS from NEWS(Standard Model)

ms Probability Density

CDF

Theoretical predictions of msin the years

predictions exist since '97

Vincenzo Vagnoni ICHEP 06, Moscow, 28th July 2006

The UT-angles fit does not depend on The UT-angles fit does not depend on theoretical calculations (treatement oftheoretical calculations (treatement of

errors is not an issue)errors is not an issue)

η = 0.325± 0.021

ρ = 0.188 ± 0.036

η = 0.373 ± 0.027

ANGLES VS LATTICE

UT-lattice

UT-angles

ρ = 0.139 ± 0.042

Still imperfect agreement in η due to sin2 and Vub tension

Comparable accuracy due to the precise sin2 value and substantial improvement due to the new ms measurement

Crucial to improve measurements of the angles, in particular (tree level NP-free determination)

sin 2 measured = 0.668 0.028

Correlation of sin 2 with Vub

Although compatible, these resultsshow that there is a ``tension” . This is due to the correlation of Vub with sin 2

sin 2 UTA = 0.759 ± 0.039

~2σ

VUB PUZZLE

Inclusive: uses non perturbative parameters most not from lattice QCD (fitted from the lepton spectrum)

Exclusive: uses non perturbative form factors from LQCD and QCDSR

S.Hashimoto@ICHEP’04

INCLUSIVE

EXCLUSIVE

INFN Roma I 11/06/2001

Belle: (1.79 ) x 10-4 + 0.56- 0.49

+ 0.39- 0.46

BaBar: (0.88 ± 0.11) x 10-4 + 0.68- 0.67

Average: (1.31 ± 0.48) x 10-4

4( ) (0.89 0.16) 10BR B ττ −→ = ×fB= (190 ± 14) MeV [UTA]

Vub = (36.7 ± 1.5) 10-4 [UTA]

4( ) (0.84 0.30) 10BR B ττ −→ = ×fB= (189 ± 27) MeV [LQCD]

Vub = (35.0 ± 4.0) 10-4 [Exclusive]

4( ) (1.39 0.44) 10BR B ττ −→ = ×fB= (189 ± 27) MeV [LQCD]

Vub = (44.9 ± 3.3) 10-4 [Inclusive]

B→τντ

Potentially large NP contributions (i.e. MSSM at large tanβ, Isidori & Paradisi)

(237 37) MeVBf = From BR(B→τντ) and Vub(UTA):

(Best SM prediction)

(Independent from other NP effects)


fk f e Vus


Using Vud = 0.97377(27)(marciano) and Vus/Vud = 0.2260(5)(31)From fk f we obtain Vus = 0.2200(5)(30)

From Kl3 = 0.2255(9)




Hadronic ParametersFrom UTfit

The new measurementsallow the analysis WITHOUT THE LATTICEHADRONIC PARAMETERS

(eventually only those entering Vub)

with VubWithout Vub

IMPACT of the NEW MEASUREMENTSon LATTICE HADRONIC PARAMETERS

BK = 0.79 0.04 0.08 Dawson

BK = 0.75 0.09

fBs √BBs=261 6 MeV UTA 2% ERROR !! = 1.24 0.08 UTA

fBs √BBs = 262 35 MeV lattice

= 1.23 0.06 lattice

fB = 186 0.11 MeV

fB = 189 27 MeV SPECTACULAR AGREEMENT (EVEN WITH QUENCHED LATTICE QCD)

Using the lattice determination of the B-parameters BBd = BBs = 1.28 0.05 0.09fB = 190 14 MeVfB = 189 27 MeV

fBs = 229 9 MeVfBs = 230 30 MeV

OLD

NEW

CP VIOLATION PROVEN IN THE SM !!

Only tree level processes

= 65 ± 20 U -115 ± 20 = 82 ± 19 U -98 ± 19

CP Violation beyond the Standard Model

very important to improve: Vub/Vcb from

semileptonic decays from tree level

processes

Only tree level processes

ρ = 0.00 ± 0.15

η = ± 0.41 ± 0.04 CP VIOLATION PROVEN IN THE SM !!

Even in the favourable case in which the theory above the cutoff is weakly coupled, such as in the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM), large contributions to FCNC and CP processes are expected contrary to the increasigly precise experimental measurements.

FLAVOUR PUZZLE

FLAVOUR PUZZLE

Model Independent Analysis of F = 2 transitions

Additional contraintsSemileptonic decay asymmetry

Sensitive to both CBd and phase shift Bd

SM prediction(-1.06±0.09)10-3

Direct measurement(-0.3±5.0)10-3

SM peak

NP contribution

Not precise enough to bound CKM in SM(experimental error too large)…

… but good for reducing NP allowedparameter space

Additional contraintsCP aymmetry in dimuon events

SM peak

NP contribution

fd~0.4, fs~0.1production fractions of Bd and Bs

Admixture of Bd and Bscharge asymmetries

Sensitive to CBd, Bd, CBs, Bs!

Additional contraints

s/s

The experimental measurement of s actually measures scos(s+Bs)(Dunietz et al., hep-ph/0012219) NP can only decrease the experimental result with respect to the SM valueSince all the other parameters are fixed by other constraints, this gives thefirst available bound on NP phase in Bs mixing!


Bounds on C and Bounds on C and parametersparameters

All C parameters compatible with 1 and with 0 SM works just fine

1.5 shift of Bd due to the Vub vs sin2 bare agreement

CK = 0.91 ± 0.15 CBd = 1.24 ± 0.43 Bd = -3.0 ± 2.0

CBs = 1.15 ± 0.36 Bs = (-3 ± 19)o U (94 ± 19)o

UPGRADED

ICHEP 06, Moscow, 28th July 2006

ObservableObservable ρρ, , ηη CCBdBd, , BdBd CCKK CCBsBs, , BsBs

VVubub/V/Vcbcb XX

(DK)(DK) XX

KK XX XX

sin2sin2 XX XX

mmdd XX XX

((ρρρρ, , ρρ, , )) XX XX

AASLSL B Bdd XX XX

dd//dd XX XX

mmss XX

AACHCH XX XX XX

ss//ss XX XX

ρ = 0.20 ± 0.07 (ρ = 0.166 ± 0.029 in SM)

η = 0.37 ± 0.04 (η = 0.340 ± 0.017 in SM)

Even including NP we are still on the SM solution

Using all available constraints in Using all available constraints in NP generalized analysisNP generalized analysis


MFV: Universal Unitarity Triangle MFV: Universal Unitarity Triangle FitFitJust using constraints

which are insensitive to NP in MFV scenarios

Output of UUT fit

In MFV extensions of the SM one can determine CKM parameters independently of NP constributions, but using angles, tree level processes and mixing amplitudes ratio

ρ = 0.153 ± 0.030 (ρ = 0.166 ± 0.029 in SM)

η = 0.347 ± 0.018 (η = 0.340 ± 0.017 in SM)


MFV scenario: translating into a testof the NP scale

NP enters the game as additional contributionto the top box diagram(D'Ambrosio et al. hep-ph/0207036)

0 = 2.4 TeV0 is the equivalent SM scale

a = 1 (as a reference)

Common shift S0 to Inami-Lim functionin B and K mixing in case of small tanwhile two dinstict shifts for large tan(bottom Yukawa coupling important)

> 5.4 TeV @ 95% for large tan

> 5.9 TeV @ 95% for small tan

Small tan S0

B = S0K

Large tan S0

B ≠ S0K

SM Predictions of Bayesian Analysis, using Lattice QCD confirmed by Experiments (sin 2 UTA and ms)

Extraordinary experimental progresses allow the extraction of several hadronic quantities from the data. It is very important to reduce the lattice errors particularly for BK

A special effort must be done for the semileptonic form factors necessary to the extraction of Vub

It is crucial to reduce the error on the direct determination of the angle from B -> DK, D*K and DK* decays

CONCLUSIONS

Two Important Experimental Novelties:

Documents

Transcript of Two Important Experimental Novelties: