Flavour Physics in the LHC Era - University of Edinburgh · zHow to probe New Physics with Flavour...

PPE seminar, 16 Nov 2005 Franz Muheim 1

CP violation in the Standard Model

Measurements today (mainly B-factories)

How to probe New Physics with Flavour Physics

What will we learn at LHCb/LHC

Conclusions

Flavour Physics in the LHC Era

Flavour Physics Flavour Physics in the LHC Erain the LHC Era


bb

ConvenersWerner Porod, Tomaso Lari, Gerhard Buchalla, Luca Silvestrini, Takeshi Komatsubara, Franz Muheim,Andries van der Schaaf, Martti Raidal


Flavour in the Era of the LHC Flavour in the Era of the LHC

Workshop Aims – outline and document a programme for flavour physics for the

next decade– addressing in particular the complementarity and synergy

between the LHC and the flavour factories with respect to the discovery and exploration potential for new physics.

Workshop Format– 3 Working Groups (WG1, WG2 & WG3)– Opening meeting in Nov 2005 with plenary sessions and with

the start of the WG activities– 2-3 meetings of the WG's to take place during the following

year– Final plenary meeting at the end– Yellow Report


CP Violation in Standard ModelCP Violation in Standard Model

1973 Kobayashi & Maskawa introduced 3rd generation of quarks to explain CP violation in kaons – before discovery of b (and c) quark Couplings between different quark generationsWeak and mass eigenstates of quarks not identical

Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa Mechanism


CKM MechanismCKM Mechanism

Properties of quark flavour changing CKM Matrix– Complex → 2n2 parameters for n generations – Unitary V†V = 1 → n2 conditions, Phases → 2n-1 unobservable – # of independent parameters – n = 3 generations → 3 Euler angles, 1 complex phase

CPV in the Standard model ⇔ η ≠ 0

( ) ( )222 1122 −=−−− nnnn

( ) ( ) ⎟⎟⎟

⎠

⎞

⎜⎜⎜

⎝

⎛

−−+−=∂

0212/00000

45

52

ηρληρληλ

iAiAiAVCKM

( )

( )CKM

tbtstd

cbcscd

ubusud

VAiA

A

iA

VVVVVVVVV

∂+

⎟⎟⎟⎟⎟

⎠

⎞

⎜⎜⎜⎜⎜

⎝

⎛

−−−

−−

−−

=⎟⎟⎟

⎠

⎞

⎜⎜⎜

⎝

⎛

1121

21

23

22

32

ληρλλλλ

ηρλλλ

Important in LHC era


CKM CKM UnitarityUnitarity TrianglesTriangles

The CKM Matrix is complex and unitary

Vud

Vcd

Vtd

Vus

Vcs

Vts

Vub

Vcb

Vtb

=100

010

001

Vud

Vus

Vub

Vcd

Vcs

Vcb

Vtd

Vts

Vtb

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

Vud

Vus

Vub

Vcd

Vcs

Vcb

Vtd

Vts

Vtb

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

Vud

Vcd

Vtd

Vus

Vcs

Vts

Vub

Vcb

Vtb

=100

010

001

9 unitarityrelations

⇒ Vud Vub + Vcd Vcb + Vtd Vtb = 0***

The Unitarity Triangle

Experimentally measure lengths - CKM matrix elements –and angles - CPV asymmetries –Constrains apex of rescaled UT

The Rescaled Unitarity Triangle (UT)


CKM Unitarity TrianglesCKM Unitarity Triangles

VtdVud∗ + VtsVus

∗ + VtbVub∗ = 0VtdVtb

∗ + VcdVcb∗ + VudVub

∗ = 0

ρ = (1−λ2/2)ρ

γ−δγ

∝ Vub∗

∝ Vtd

γ

α

β

∝ Vub∗ ∝ Vtd

∝ Vcb ∝ Vts

δγ

η

ρ

η = (1−λ2/2)η

arg Vcb = 0, arg Vub = − γ, arg Vtd = − β, arg Vts = π + δγ

( )526 10−== OAJCP ηλin SM is small


UT measurements UT measurements

2( )α φ

1( )β φ

( )0 0 0( ) SB B cc K→0 0

0 0

0

( / ) ( / ) (GLW )

(ADS) ( ) (Dalitz plot)

CP

S

B D D KD D K

K KK K

π

π π

± ±

±

+ − ±

+ − ±

→

→

→

→

0 0 + -( ) , , B B ρ ρ ρπ π π+ −→

( )0 0 0( ) SB B ss K→0 0( ) ( )B B ccdd→

*ud ubV V

uB X ν→ l

B π ν→ l 0 0 oscillation rateB B

0 0B ρ γ→

0 0 oscillation rates sB B

3( )γ φ

*td tbV V

*cd cbV V−

cB X ν→ l*B D ν→ l

Bτ


UnitarityUnitarity TrianglesTriangles( ) ( )( )ηρληρ ,21, 2−≡

cb

ub

VV

BfM Bˆ,, 2ξ∆

η

ρ0 1

Im

β

α

γReη

ρ0

γ−χ

Im

Re2

2

21 ρλλ

+−

χ2ηλ

2β: Bd mixing phase-2χ: Bs mixing phaseγ: weak decay phase

( )( )βγπ

χγ

2

2 ,

*

*

+→

−→

→

DB

KDBDKDKB

d

ss

d

00 KccB →

ψφ/0 JBs →

,.....,,0 ρπρρππ→B

Wolfenstein: Vub= e−iγ


( ) ( )( ) ( )

0 0

0 0

( ) ( )( )

( ) ( )CP

CP CPf

CP CP

B t f B t fA t

B t f B t fΓ → − Γ →

=Γ → + Γ →

2

2 2

12 Im( ) 1 1

S Cλλ

λ λ−⋅

= =+ +

( ) sin( ) - cos( )CPfA t S m t C m t= ⋅ ∆ ⋅ ⋅ ∆ ⋅

0B

0B

CPfm

ixing

decay

CPfA

CPfA

decay

in Interference between Mixing and Decayin Interference between Mixing and Decay

0* *212 12

0212 12

iCP f

ifCP

f H B AM qM p Af H B

λ − Γ= ⋅ = ⋅

− ΓIf there is New Physicsit could be in the decay amplitude or the mixingamplitude( )1 Im , 0S Cλ λ= ⇒ = =

( ) Im( ) sin( ) CPfA t m tλ= ⋅ ∆ ⋅

For a single decay amplitude: |q/p|=1


BBdd Mixing Phase 2Mixing Phase 2ββ

0B 0 0 0,S LK K K→

1/ , (2 ), , c cJ Sy y c h

*0 0 0SK K π→

Belle

sin2 = +0.722 ± 0.040 ± 0.023β

368M pairsBB227M pairsBB

1sin2 = +0.652 ± 0.039 ± 0.020φ


SM test SM test -- sin2sin2ββ vsvs VubVubStocchi

sin2β =0.791±0.034from indirect determination sin2β =0.791±0.034

from indirect determination

sin2β=0.687±0.032From direct measurementsin2β=0.687±0.032

From direct measurementweak disagreement

3WAvg

(4.38 0.19 0.27) 10ubV −= ± ± ×expt mb, theory

13

γ from direct CP violation Cavoto

Interference when D final state common to both D0 and D0Interference when D final state common to both D0 and D0

Bi ie eδ γ−

( )( )B

A b urA b c

→=

→Relative size (rB) of B decay amplitudes

Larger rB, larger interference, better γ experimental precision

Br

( )σ γ(degrees)

0.1 0.2


γγ from Bfrom B-->DK >DK DalitzDalitz analysisanalysis

γ=75,δ=180,rB=0.125

Sensitivity to γ

DCS K*(892)

ρ(770)

Belle

γ=[67°±28°(stat.) ±13°(syst. exp.) ± 11°(Dalitz model*) ]BaBar CavotoGershon

Belle


Projected Projected γγ Precision from BPrecision from B-->DK >DK

Projected syserror due to D0 Dalitz plot Candidate for LHCb’s statistically

most precise determination of γσ(γ) ~ 5° in one year ? To be studied during this workshop …


cos2βUT with angles only

β

sin(2β)

γ

α

sin(β+γ)

η = 0.321 ± 0.027[0.266, 0.376] @ 95% Prob.

η = 0.321 ± 0.027[0.266, 0.376] @ 95% Prob.

ρ = 0.193 ± 0.057[0.083, 0.321] @ 95% Prob.

ρ = 0.193 ± 0.057[0.083, 0.321] @ 95% Prob.

η = 0.381 ± 0.030 [0.,320, 0.437] @ 95% Prob.

η = 0.381 ± 0.030 [0.,320, 0.437] @ 95% Prob.

ρ = 0.224 ± 0.042 [0.136, 0.306] @ 95% Prob.

ρ = 0.224 ± 0.042 [0.136, 0.306] @ 95% Prob.

Sides + εKUT FitUT Fit


CKM mechanism dominatesCKM mechanism dominatesNir

We are very likely beyond the era of « alternatives» to the CKM picture.NP would appear as «corrections» to the CKM picture

Is there still room for new physics ?


NP in Bd-Bd mixing (I)

Assumption no NP in tree-mediated decay amplitudes:– |Vub|/|Vcb| and γ are the main inputs constraining the CKM

Introduce NP in ∆B=2 transitions– accounted for model-independently through two additional parameters

)22cos()22sin(

,2

d

d

dd

cbub

mr

VV

θβθβ

+→+→

∆→

→

• The SM value on 2θd=0 is at theborder of the CLMax region.

• Shows slight disagreementbetween Vub and sin(2β).

• Any region with 2θd > π/2 and rd2 > 3

is discarded.

00

0022

BSMeffHB

BfulleffHB

diedr =

θ

Robert


NP in Bd-Bd mixing (II)

)()22cos()22sin(

/2

GGSZGLWADS

mr

VV

d

d

dd

cbub

++→+→+→

∆→

→

γθβθβ

• Two solutions for NP parametersemerge.

• Vub and γ constrain theCKM parameters.

Adding γ measurements. Robert


NP in Bd-Bd mixing (III)

Adding α measurements.

)222sin()22cos()22sin(

/2

γθβθβθβ

++→+→+→

∆→

→

d

d

d

dd

cbub

mr

VV

Reinforce the SM regionbut the preferred NP regionis not the one defined by γ.

The α constraint (w/o γ) displays also four solutions.

Robert


NP in Bd-Bd mixing (IV)

Robert

)222sin()(

)22cos()22sin(

/2

γθβγ

θβθβ

++→++→

+→+→

∆→

→

d

d

d

dd

cbub

GGSZGLWADS

mr

VV

γ and α are of major importance in constraining the NP parameters.

NB: sin(2β+2θd+γ) is not included.(almost no influence.)


NP in Bd-Bd mixing aSL in the gameRobert

212

12212

12SL

2cosIm2sinRed

dSM

d

dSM

rMrMa θθ

⎟⎟⎠

⎞⎜⎜⎝

⎛ Γ+⎟⎟

⎠

⎞⎜⎜⎝

⎛ Γ−= (Γ12/M12 is considered here

at Leading Order)

Though the experimental precision is far from the prediction, aSL is a crucial input for constraining NP parameters. Only observable dependingon both rd

2 and 2θd. aSL= -0.0026 ± 0.0067(HFAG 2005)


NP parameters extraction

⎪⎩

⎪⎨⎧

−=

=+−

+−

deg3.52

92.02.38.8

73.023.0

2

d

dr

θ

SL

)(

2

)222sin(

)22cos()22sin(

/

a

mr

VV

d

GGSZGLWADSd

d

dd

cbub

→++→

→

+→+→

∆→

→

++

γθβαγ

θβθβ

(Uncertainties are given at 1σ)

Robert

The NP solution at π/2 has 1-CL < 3%.


Influence of non-pert. hadronic parameters in ∆md

2/BdBd ff σσ → 10/

BdBd ff σσ →

10/dd BB σσ →

2*222

2

)(6

dtbtdtWdBBBF

d rVVxSmBfmGmdd

ηπ

=∆

• As far as the lattice uncertainties are considered, fBd is therelevant parameter to improve.

• A factor 2 has important impact. A factor 10 is not decisivewith the current experimental uncertainties of the observables.

2/dd BB σσ →

10/dd BB σσ →

Robert


Motivation for continuing Motivation for continuing SM cannot be the ultimate theory– must be a low-energy effective theory of a more fundamental theory at a

higher energy scale, expected to be in the TeV region (accessible at LHC !)How can New Physics (NP) be discovered and studied ?– NP models introduce new particles, dynamics and/or symmetries at the

higher scale. These new particles could• be produced and discovered as real particles at energy frontier (LHC)• appear as virtual particles in loop processes, leading to observable deviations from

the pure SM expectations in flavour physics and CP violation

Standard Model

bB0

⎧ ⎨ ⎪

⎩ ⎪ d

t ss } φ

ds } K0

B0 → φK0 decay: “Penguin”diagram

W+

W Wb

Bs0

⎧ ⎨ ⎪

⎩ ⎪ s b

s ⎫ ⎬ ⎪

⎭ ⎪ B s

0t

t

Bs–Bs oscillations: “Box”diagram

–

∆msSM ∝ |Vts

2|,φs

SM = –arg(Vts2) = –

2λη2

New Physics

? ???

∆ms ≠φs ≠

??


New Physics in BNew Physics in Bss MixingMixing

Alternative NP parameterisation


Is there New Physics in mixing? Is there New Physics in mixing?

Agashe, Papucci, Perez, Pirjol

0 0s sB B

Current ( ) -1If 18 3 0 3 pssm . .D = ±


New Physics in BNew Physics in Bss oscillationsoscillations

Heavy Z' with FCNC.

bsZ'

b s Barger, Chiang, Jiang, Langacker Phys.Lett.B596:229-239,2004

phas

e

LLsb

Z

Z Bmm

'∝magnitude


LHCbLHCb (BTEV) or why yet another (BTEV) or why yet another BB--Physics Experiment?Physics Experiment? FM

B-Factories and Tevatronare doing great physics!

βρ

ηγ range

now

2007

1 yr L

HCb

Bd→J/ψKS Bd→ππ

Bs→J/ψφ Bs →DsK

2003

2007

|Vub/Vcb|

|Vtd/Vts|

Statistics# of reconstructedevents

Not enough!

γ and δγ poorly known


An Endangered Species Act for heavy An Endangered Species Act for heavy quarks in the US?quarks in the US? Hitlin

2003 2005 2005 2005

X X X X2006-2008


LHCbLHCb

Precision measurements of CKM angle γ

Bs mixing

Rare Hadronic decays


γγ from Bfrom Bss →→ DDssmmKK±±

Two tree decays (b→c and b→u) of O(λ3)– Interference via Bs mixing– Weak phase of Vub = e-iγ for b→u diagram– theoretically clean– insensitive to New Physics

Large Background ~20– from CKM allowed decay– need RICH, residual background ~10%

Expect 5.4 k events in 1 year – S/Bbb > 1 at 90% CL

πSs DB →0

]2

mass [GeV/csB5.3 5.35 5.4 5.45 5.5

0

500

1000

1500

2000Ds KDs π

With RICH


γγ from Bfrom Bss →→ DDssKK

Fit the 4 tagged time-dependent rates:– Extract φs + γ, strong phase

difference ∆, amplitude ratio– Bs→ Dsπ also used in the fit

to constrain other parameters (mistag rate, ∆ms, ∆Γs …)

σ(γ) ~ 14° in one year (if ∆ms = 20 ps–1)– expected to be statistically

limited– 8-fold ambiguity can

be resolved (→ 2-fold) if ∆Γs large enough, or using B0 → Dπ together with U-spin symmetry (Fleischer)

−0.5

−0.25

0

0.25

0.5

Asy

m (

Ds −

K+)

t [ps]

Asy

m (

Ds +

K− )

−0.5

−0.25

0

0.25

0.5

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

Both DsK asymmetries (after 5 years, ∆ms = 20 ps

Ds–K+: info on ∆ + (γ + φs)

Ds+K–: info on ∆ – (γ + φs)


γγ from Bfrom B00 →→ DD00KK**00

Dunietz variant of Gronau-Wyler method– Two colour-suppressed diagrams with

|A2|/|A1| ~ 0.4 interfering via D0 mixing

Measure 6 decay rates (self-tagged + time-integrated):– LHCb expectations for 2 fb–1 (γ=65°, ∆=0)

A1 = A1

A2

A2 = A2 e−2iγA3

A4

γ∆

γ

Mode (+ cc) Yield S/Bbb(90%CL)

B0 → D0 (K+π−) K*0 3.4k

0.5k

0.6k

B0 → D0 (K−π+) K*0

> 2

> 0.3

B0 → D0CP (K+K−) K*0 > 0.3

→ σ(γ) ~ 8° in one year

A1 = A(B0 → D0K*0): b→c transition, phase 0A2 = A(B0 → D0K*0): b→u transition, phase ∆+γ

A3 = √2 A(B0 → DCPK*0) = A1+A2, because DCP=(D0+D0)/√2

d

b

ds uc

B0⎧ ⎨ ⎩

}D 0

}K*0

}D0

d

b

ds cu

B0⎧ ⎨ ⎩ }K*0


γγ from Bfrom B±± →→ DKDK±±

u u b c

u s

B–{ }D0}K–

colour-allowedu

b

u sc u

B–⎧ ⎨ ⎩

}D 0

}K–

colour-

Weak phase difference = γMagnitude ratio = rB ~ 0.15

New ADS (Atwood, Dunietz, Soni) method:– Clean measurement of γ for LHCb– Measure the relative rates of B– → DK– and B+ → DK+ decays with neutral

D’s observed in final states such as:• K–π+ and K+π–, K–π+π–π+ and K+π–π+π–, K+K–

– These depend on:• Relative magnitude, weak and strong phase between B– → D0K– and B– → D0K–

• Relative magnitudes and strong phases between D0 → K–π+ and DCS D0 → K–π+,and between D0 → K–π+π–π+ and D0 → K–π+π–π+

– Can solve for all unknowns, including the weak phase γCandidate for LHCb’s statistically most precise determination of γ– σ(γ) ~ 5° in one year ? To be studied during this workshop …

suppressed

[ also B →D0K, with D0→KSππ Dalitz analysis ]


γγ from Bfrom B00→π→π++ππ−− and Band Bss→→KK++KK−−

γ (°)

d

Bs → K+K−

(95% CL)

B0 → π+π−

(95% CL)

For each mode, measure time-dependent CP asymmetry:

– Adir and Amix depend on mixing phase, angle γ, and ratio of penguin to tree amplitudes = d eiθ

Exploit U-spin symmetry (Fleischer):– Assume dππ=dKK and θππ=θKK– 4 measurements and 3 unknowns

(taking mixing phases from other modes)→ can solve for γ

LHCb expectations (one year):– 26k B0→π+π−

– 37k Bs→K+K−

• Uncertainty from U-spin assumption• Sensitive to new physics in penguins

ACP(t) = Adir cos(∆mt) + Amix sin(∆mt)

→ σ(γ) ~ 5°


New Bs mixing results New Bs mixing results -- TevatronTevatronAyOldeman

D0 CDF

εD2=1.55±0.09% ∆ms >8.6ps-1,sensitivity 13.0ps-1

Nov 8, 2005Rolf Oldeman (University of Liverpool) Flavour studies and BSM searches at the Tevatron 38

New world averagelimit 14.5 → 16.6 ps-1

sensitivity 18.3 → 20.0 ps-1

Further improvements from•more data•more decay channels (e.g. Bs→Ds*π)•Same-side and opposite-side kaon tags


BBss oscillationsoscillations

Proper time (ps)

Eve

nts

1000

800

600

400

200

0 1 2 3 4 5

Perfect reconstruction

0

Proper time (ps)

Eve

nts

1000

800

600

400

200

0 1 2 3 4 5

Perfect reconstruction+ flavour tagging

0

Proper time (ps)

Eve

nts

1000

800

600

400

200

0 1 2 3 4 5

Perfect reconstruction+ flavour tagging+ proper time resolution

0

Proper time (ps)

Eve

nts

1000

800

600

400

200

0 1 2 3 4 5

Perfect reconstruction+ flavour tagging+ proper time resolution+ background

0

Proper time (ps)

Eve

nts

1000

800

600

400

200

0 1 2 3 4 5

Perfect reconstruction+ flavour tagging+ proper time resolution+ background+ acceptance

0

Measurement of ∆ms is one of the first LHCb physics goals– Expect 80k Bs → Ds

−π+ events per year (2 fb–1), average σt ~ 40 fs– S/B ~ 3 (derived from 107 fully simulated inclusive bb events)

Distribution of unmixed sample after 1 year (2 fb–1) assuming ∆ms = 20 ps-1

≥ 5σ observation of Bs oscillationsfor ∆ms < 68 ps–1

with 2 fb–1

]−1

[pssm∆40 60 80 100 120

Ασ

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9 = 1.0 ± 0.1simulatedτ∆/τ∆LHCb


BBss oscillationsoscillations

Current SM expectation of ∆ms (UTFit collab.):

LHC reach for 5σ observation:

ATLAS/CMS 30 fb–1 3 years

LHCb 0.25 fb–1 1/8 year


LHCbLHCb ∆∆mmss sensitivitysensitivity Fernandez


LHCbLHCb φφss sensitivitysensitivity


NP in b NP in b →→ s Transitionss TransitionsIn the Standard Model we expect the same value for “sin2β ” in

modes, but different SUSY models can produce different asymmetriesSince the penguin modes have branching fractions one or two orders of magnitude less than tree modes, need large luminosity (Super-B factory) or large cross section (LHCb)

0 0/ SB J Ky®

, , ,b ccs b ccd b sss b dds® ® ® ®

* *2

* * ( 1) itb td cb cstree

tb td cb cs

q A V V V V ep A V V V V

bl h -= = = -* *

2* * ( 1) itb td tb ts

penguintb td tb ts

q A V V V V ep A V V V V

bl h -= = = -

0 0SB Kf®

In general SJ/ψKs ≠ SφKs ; CJ/ψKs ≠ CφKs


~tb tsV V 2λ∗∝

b

d

t

d

ss

s0', fη

0K

iub us uV V R e4 γλ∗ −∝ ~

W −bd

d

uu

0', fη

s 0K

0K

b

d

t

d

ss

s

~tb tsV V 2λ∗∝

φ b

dgu

d

ss

W −

4~ iub us uV V R e γλ∗ −∝

0Ksφ

0 0SB Kf®

0 0SB Kh¢®

b sss , sdd®

4400 0SB J/ Ky®

b sss , sdd®

5

29

4

B x10-6

mode

Penguin and Trees in . Penguin and Trees in .

φφ→0sB b

d

t

d

ss

s

~tb tsV V 2λ∗∝

φ

ss

φ

Issues: triggering, charged/neutral vertexing, ….


sin2sin2ββ from from HadronicHadronic PenguinsPenguins


How good are the SM predictions?How good are the SM predictions?Two body:

Beneke, PLB 620 (2005) 143

-sin2penguinS β∆ =

Three body:Cheng, Chua & Soni,

hep-ph/0506268

Calculations within framework of QCD

factorization

greblu

y =e = 1

fulls

ig ae

mrang

±


squarksquark mass matrix (mass matrix (dd sector)sector)Flavour structure:SuperB, LHCb

Mass spectrum: LHC, LC

Flavour mixing parametrizationb s (23), b d (13)

( ) ( )2

dijd AB

ij AB m

Dd =

%

d d

s

s Ks

η’

B0 g

g~b s

+(δ 23

dRR)b

~R

s~R

f

0SK

0B

b

s

s

d ds

Off diagonal terms can provide unique information on CP phases


sin2sin2ββ from from HadronicHadronic PenguinsPenguins

Limits on SUSY mass insertion parameters


LHCbLHCb BBss →→ φφKKS S

Most recent study by YuehongAll together 1595 events out of 476K events generated in acceptance pass L0*L1 and final selection cuts without considering HLT and taggingNominal annual untagged events

– Compared with ~800 events/year in lhcb-note 2004-001Further reduced by HLT inefficiency: factor of XX?

[ ] [ ] [ ]1270

476000/15953471.0104.11078.0

2

/

612

=×××××=

××⋅=−

∏ EfficiencytotalBrN

yearN

Bd

selected

Yuehong


Work by YuehongUse signal sampleFit B [mass constrain B] Choose PV with smallest IP significanceDirection fitSet direction fit χ2 cut to for 90% signal eff.Check bg rejectionOnly half bg. Left with mass constraintno bias for mass or life time is induced by the B mass constraintAlternative method: use direction fit to improve B massPlan

– Study Bs→φφ reconstruction and sensitivity (Judith, Yuehong, FM)

Association inefficiency

All Bg. –Rejected –Retained –

B mass

No B mass

LHCbLHCb BBss →→ φφφφYuehong


Rare Rare KaonKaon DecaysDecaysBuras


KK++ →→ ππ++νννν at CERN/SPSat CERN/SPS

100 eventsMean: SM

100 eventsMean: E787/949

Present (E787/949): BR(K+→π+νν) = 1.47 ×10−10 +1.30‐0.89

Current constraint on

ρ,η plane

P326 at SPS CERN80 events

Ruggiero


KK00LL →→ ππ00νννν at JPARCat JPARC

Komatsubara


b b →→ d gammad gamma Playfer

FPCP2004 55

-40

-20

0

20

40

-40 -20 0 20 40A9/A7

A10

/A7

(a) negative A7

A9/A7

A10

/A7B->K*l+l- F-B asymmetry

357fb-1 (386M BB)N(K*ll)=114+-14 (purity 44%)Unbinned M.L. fit to dΓ2/dsd(cosθ)– 8 event categories

• Signal + 3 cross-feed + 4 bkg.– Ali et al’s form factor– Fix |A7| to SM– Float A9/A7 and A10/A7

Results;

w/negative A7 (SM like)

w/positive A7

��A9/A7

A10/A7

Sign of A9A10 is negative !See Hep-ex/0508009 &A.Ishikawa’s talk at EPS05

Belle, 2005 Iijima


KoppenburgIijimaPlayferAFB in B AFB in B →→ K*K*llll

@ 5ab-1 @ 50ab-1δC9 ~ 11%δC10 ~14%δ q0

2/q02 ~11% ~5%

Expected precision

Super B-factoryLHCb

Nov 8, 2005Rolf Oldeman (University of Liverpool) Flavour studies and BSM searches at the Tevatron 57

Bs→µ+µ- at Tevatron

Combined limit:•Bs→µ+µ- <1.5×10-7

hep-ex/0508058

CDF 360 pb-1

300pb-1

Bs→µ+µ-

<2.0×10-7

Bs→µ+µ-

<3.9×10-7

Excluded!

CDF & D0


BBss →→ µµ++µµ–– at LHCat LHCSchneiderSpeerNikitine

Very rare decay, sensitive to new physics:– BR ~ 3.5 × 10–9 in SM, can be strongly enhanced in SUSY– Current limit from Tevatron (CDF+D0): 1.5 × 10–7 at 95% CL

Bs →µ+ µ–

signal (SM)b →µ, b →µbackground

Single event sensit. [10-10]

1 yr - 2 fb–1 < 100~ 20~ 60

< 1< 6.4

10 fb–1

30 fb–1

2.70.9

10 fb–1

100 fb–1

Inclusive bb background

LHCb 17 < 7500721

726

ATLAS

CMS


RK = Γ(B→Kµµ)/ Γ(B→Kee)


SummarySummaryTable from G. Isidori

Still a lot of room for B physics contributions from LHC !


Pattern of Deviation from SMPattern of Deviation from SMTable from M. HazumiUnitarity triangle Rare decays

Bd-unitarity

ε ∆m(Bs) B->φKS B->Xsγindirect CP

b->sγdirect CP

mSUGRA - - - - - +SU(5)SUSY GUT + nR(degenerate)

- + + - + -

SU(5)SUSY GUT + nR(non-degenerate)

- - + ++ +++

U(2) Flavor symmetry + + + ++ ++ ++

++: Large, +: sizable, -: small“DNA Identification” of New Physics from Flavor Structure

T.Goto, Y.Okada, Y.Shimizu,T.Shindou, M.Tanaka (2002, 2004) + SuperKEKB LoI


ConclusionsConclusionsCKM mechanism is very likely dominant source for CPV in quark sector

– B-factories (BaBar and BELLE) have succeeded beyond their own expectations– Complete alternatives ruled out, e.g. superweak– Size and phase of NP contributions in Bd mixing (b → d) severely constrained– Large corrections in b → s transitions still possible, e.g. Bs mixing

The hadronic flavour sector will contribute significantly to the overall LHCeffort to find and study New Physics beyond the SM

– New Physics will be probed at LHC in B meson loop decays• Unique access to excellent b→s observables

Bs mixing magnitude and phase, exclusive b→sµµ, B→µµ• Large phase space can already be covered with the first 107 s of data

– LHCb will improve precision on CKM angles• Several γ measurements from tree decays: σstat(γ) ~2.5° in 5 years• May reveal inconsistencies with other/indirect measurements after several years

– Looking forward to start of LHC machinecommissioning and first collisions in 2007

• LHCb aiming for complete detector in early 2007, ready to exploit nominal luminosity from day 1

• Possible competition ATLAS/CMS in specific areas

• Any evidence of NP from B factories?

LHC tunnel

Flavour Physics in the LHC Era - University of Edinburgh · zHow to probe New Physics with Flavour...

Documents

Transcript of Flavour Physics in the LHC Era - University of Edinburgh · zHow to probe New Physics with Flavour...