Highlights: from BABAR to the FUTURE!

ERICE 1 September 2006Marcello A. Giorgi

1

Highlights: from BABAR to the FUTURE!Highlights: from BABAR to the FUTURE!

Marcello A. GiorgiMarcello A. Giorgi

44th Course International School of Subnuclear Physics 2006

“ETTORE MAJORANA” Foundation and Centre for Scientific Culture


2

1)Search for CP violation in B meson decays largely predicted by the Standard Model

2)Test extensively at this low energy scale the Standard Model by measuring precisely enough quantities to impose constraints on the Standard Model parameters

CP in b sector has been established by BaBar and Belle (2001)

TRY to open windows on new Physics beyond Standard Model

More precise CKM measurements, Rare B decays, Charm study, Tau rare decays .

BaBar Physics GOALS


3

3 ways to CP violation

1ff AACPV in decay: 1

12

2

/,

ff

ffffCP AA

AAfifififi

CPV in mixing:1pq

4

4

00

00

1

1

pq

pq

XlPdtdXlPdtd

XlPdtdXlPdtdt

physphys

physphysSL

CPV in the interference decay-mixing:

f

ff

f

A

A

p

q

0m

CPphysCPphys

CPphysCPphysf fPdtdfPdtd

fPdtdfPdtdt

CP

00

00

For example: decays to CP eigenstatesCPf

fifi

fifif/f,CP


4

Observables: “direct” CP asymmetry

i f i fCP

A1 = |A1|

A2 = |A2| ei ei

A1 = |A1|

A2 = |A2| ei ei

(CP-conserving) (CP-violating)

A = A1+ A2

Time-integrated “direct” CP asymmetry requires two amplitudes and :

sinδsinΦfifi

fififfCP

/,

A = A1+ A2 A

+ -

ACP


5

Observables time-dependent CP asymmetry

CPphysCPphys ftBftB 00

CPpq

B0 fCP

Af

AfB0

B0 fCP

B0

Af

Af

qp

Interference between mixing and decay to a CP eigenstate.Flavor-tagged time-dependent decay rates are different! they are governed by the “CP parameter”:

CP eigenvalue

Amplituderatio

ei2

from mixing

CP

CP

CPCP

f

fff A

A

p

q

2

2

1 | |

1 | |CP

CP

CP

ff

f

C

2

2Im

1 | |CP

CP

CP

ff

f

S

0

I mCPf

For singledecay

amplitude

( ) cos( ) sin( )CP CP CPf f d f dA t C m t S m t

Asymmetry


6

CP in Standard Model

CKM quark mixing matrix

2

2 4

3

23

2

( )

(

11

21

1 ( )2

11 )

ud us ub

cd cs cb

td ts tb

A iV V V

V V V V A O

V V VAA i

bulB() l

CP Violating phase

BD(*)lbcl

B() B0 Mixing

Unitarity

d•s* = 0

s•b* = 0

d•b* = 0

(K system)

(Bs system)

(Bd system)


7

PEP-II & BaBar

• Lmax = 1.12 X 1033 cm–2s–1

Ldt = 371 fb–1@{Υ(4S)+off(~10%)}

• (>3.7x108 B events)

Charged tracking/vertexingCharged tracking/vertexing• • 5-layer DSSD Si µstrip5-layer DSSD Si µstrip• • 40 layers (He-isobutane)40 layers (He-isobutane)Hadron identificationHadron identification• • tracker: dE/dxtracker: dE/dx• • DIRC imaging Cerenkov DIRC imaging Cerenkov Electron/photonElectron/photon• • CsI calorimeterCsI calorimeterMuon/KMuon/KLL• • Instrumented flux returnInstrumented flux return

11 Countries, 80 Institutions, 623 Physicists


8

e+ source

Ares RF cavity

Belle detectorSCC RF(HER)

ARES(LER)

KEKB & Belle 8 x 3.5 GeV 22 mrad crossing angle

since 1999

13 countries, 57 institutes, ~400 collaborators

8GeV (e) 3.5GeV (e+) peak luminosity:

1.651034cm2s1


9

Integrated Luminosity

PEP-IIfor BaBar

As of July 24, 2006

KEKBfor Belle

KEKB + PEP-II

~ 1 Billion BB pairs


10

No evidence so far of CPV in Bd mixing

0017.00007.01

Re

0034.00026.0

0067.00013.1

B

B

SL

pq

Experimental status: from measurements at LEP, CLEO, BaBar and Belle:

Not easy to improve: systematics! For example, the most recent paper: BELLE, hep-ex/0505017:

HFAG, Winter’05 average

BELLE 2005 (78 + 9) fb-1

< 1/5 of the available data !


11

ICHEP2006 Time Dep. CPV: sin2 in b ccs

M.Hazumi

B0Dh0 (h0 = 0 etc.)Time-dependent Dalitz analysis cos2 > 0Belle: 98.3%CL(hep-ex/0605023, accepted by PRL)BaBar 87% CL (BABAR-CONF06/017)

K.GeorgeK.George


12

Extraction of CKM angle

cbV

*usV

ubV

*csV

Color suppressed

*ub csA V V

*cb usA V V 3

3 2 2 ie

is phase between ( ) and ( ) amplitudes ub cbb u V b c V

Basic Idea0 0

0 0 Use interference between and decays

where the ( ) decay to a common final state B D K B D K

D D f

(*)0

(*)(*)0

Size of CP asymmetry depends on | ( ) |

~ 0.1 0.3| ( ) |B

A B D Kr

A B D K

D0 Dalitz plot method(*)0 0Use decaysSB D K K

m.a.g.& n.neri


13

Combined Results including GLW and

ADS

Combined for 3 modes: φ3=53°+15 3° (syst)9° (model)

(Dalitz,GLWandADS ) 8°<φ3<111° (2σ interval)

rDK =0.159+0.054 0.012(syst)0.049(model)

CPV significance: 74% rD*K=0.175+0.108 0.013(syst)0.049(model)

rDK*=0.564+0.216 0.041(syst)0.084(model)

Updated! G.Marchiori

ICHEP06


14

Global results on CKM angle


15

Vub and Vcb Sides determination from semileptonic decays bc(u) l

Vub Vcb and are correlated.

Semileptonic decays allow the determination of the sides

Inclusive and exclusive modes are used to mesaure Vub and Vcb

V*ub /V*cb


16

Contribution of , |Vub |, |Vcb | to UT

Inclusiv

e!

|Vcb |= 42.0±0.7 INCLUSIVE

is not yet constraining !

|Vub |/ |Vcb | compatible with the other CKM measurements including


17

2.3 difference.

(C = A)

EXTRACTION of Still discrepancies between Babar and Belle on B

M.Hazumi ICHEP06


18

from B0→− full analysis

inputsB(+0) = (5.75 0.42)B(+-) = (5.20 0.25) 10-6

B(00) = (1.30 0.21) A(00) = +0.35 0.33S(+-) = 0.59 0.09A(+-) = +0.39 0.07

inputsB(+0) = (5.75 0.42)B(+-) = (5.20 0.25) 10-6

B(00) = (1.30 0.21) A(00) = +0.35 0.33S(+-) = 0.59 0.09A(+-) = +0.39 0.07

No stringent constraintobtained with system alone need and


19

constraints from B0→− decay

Isospin triangle now closed!

(New from BABAR)

Long.Polarized


20

ICHEP06 from all modes: BaBar(//) + Belle(/)

Global Fit = [ 98 ] º +5-19/2 = [93 ]+11

9

consistent with a global fit w/o /2


21

sin2 and loops

b ss

sd

dg

, ,u c t

0SK

0B

b sd

dd

d

W

g

, ,u c t0SK

0

0B

0B

b

s

s

sd d

, , ( )CPKK

0SK

0B

b

d

s

dd d

0SK

0

New phases from SUSY?

, , ( )CPKK

W

In SM interference between B mixing, K mixing and Penguin bsss or bsdd gives the same e as in tree process bccs. However loops can also be sensitive to New Physics!

2( )

~ 5%

2( / )

~ 20%

Purely dimensional estimate


22

Winter vs. Summer 05

Deviation from SM: No theory error: 3.7 sNaïve theory errors: 2.9 s

Lp05


23

ICHEP06: from b s Penguins

Smaller than bccs in all of 9 modes

Smaller than bccs in all of 9 modes

Theory tends to predictpositive shifts(originating from phasein Vts)

Naïve average of all b s modes

sin2eff = 0.52 ± 0.052.6 deviation betweenpenguin and tree (b s) (b c)

Naïve average of all b s modes

sin2eff = 0.52 ± 0.052.6 deviation betweenpenguin and tree (b s) (b c)

More statistics crucial for mode-by-mode studies!


24

Comment on averagingOn purely dimensional considerations the corrections to

the bs penguins are ranging between 5% and 20% , on the other hand the sign of the corrections is far from been the same for different channels.

As I mentioned at ICHEP averaging the results on penguins is something adventurous and not simply legitimate.

The averaged value can be diluted and non reflecting the real amount of the difference from sin2 value of charmonium.

CP asymmetries in bs penguins will show perhaps the first indications of new physics. But HIGHER STATISTICS needed!


25

On Rare Decays

Chance to see themwhen the Standard

Model amplitudes are

Small : Rare decaysu

bH+ +

WHY?

If new particles are to appear on-shell at high energy colliders, they must appear in virtual

loops and affect amplitudes


26

Continuum suppression

from combined information from shape variables

Limits from N= S + b

N small

Uncertainties on , b

Experimental techniques

_

b_

b

And other diagrams

Proceeds through one or two weak bosons with strong CKM suppression Space open to NP quanta to contribute.

Free of hadronic uncertainties in final state

uH+ +

_

b +

-d,s

~_

b

uW+ +

_

b

d,su,c,t

-

+_

bW+

W-

efficiency is ~0.4-0.7% ( bbar pair)


27

B ICHEP06 Browder (Belle)Sekula (BaBar)Important as W

(suppressed by Vub) can be replaced by charged

Higgs, etc

Difficult due to neutrinos in the final state

SM prediction (1.59 0.40) x 10-4 (depends on fB and Vub)

439.056.046.049.0 10)79.1()(BF

B

(revised). 3.5 significancetag with fully reconstructed B mesons (180 channels)

Tag with BD(*)l4680

670 10110880BF

)..()B( ..

(new)

BF<1.80@90%CL

Averaged (1.36 0.48)x10-4


28

Impact

Limits on e.g. 2 Higgs doublet model: W.S.Hou, PRD 48, 2342 (1993)

SM prediction enhanced/reduced by factor rH

ICHEP06 Barlow

Or: Within the SM, use the value of BF(B++) to give a

measurement of fB


29

Kl+l- for NP

K*ll Asymmetry as a function of q2

Angular variables e.g.*: angle of l l pair in their rest frame. C10 interferes with C7/C9 to

give asymmetry

ICHEP06Kovalskyi


30

Search for New Physics (Lepton Flavour Violation)

The B factories are also factories(+ -) = 0.89 nb at s = M() Total sample of ~1.5 billion taus

426

TeV160

tan100.3)(

SUSYM

Br

Belle result

BaBar result

Excluded re

gion

90% CL limits

Br ( - e- ) < 12 x 10-8

Br ( - ) < 4.1 x 10-8

Br ( - e- ) < 11 x 10-8

Br ( - ) < 6.7 x 10-8

R.Barlow ICHEP06


31

BUT also SpectroscopyRare states are accessible to Babar thanks to the

very high statistics that can be collected with a luminosity of 10 34 cm -2 s -1 .

BABAR has first observed Ds(2317) and BELLE the X(3872) and Y(3940) , then :

MANY OTHER STATES

Methods:Selection on Charm decay……Initial State Radiation ISR….


32

DsJ and many other new particles……

Daniele Del Re ICHEP06

DsJ*(2317)+

DsJ(2460)+

Evident new resonance at 2.86GeV/c2 Hints of a broad state at 2.69GeV/c2

No possible reflection foundRadial excitations???

2

2( (2573)) (2572.2 0.3 1.0) /s

m D MeV c 2( (2860)) (2856.6 1.5 5.0) /m X MeV c

2( (2690)) (2688 4 3) /m X MeV c

22( (2573) ) (27.1 0.6 5.6) /sD MeV c

2( (2860) ) (47 7 10) /X MeV c 2( (2690) ) (112 7 36) /X MeV c

Hot topic two years ago:Mass and width are far from predicted

New DK state(s) at 2.86GeV/c2

Ds2(2573)+

??

M(DK) GeV/c2

Bg subtracted

Ds0

Ds1~100 MeV/c2


33

Charm baryons

c(2880)+

c(2940)+

D0 mass sidebands

Wrong sign D0p

N_sig = 2280 ± 310

c(2880)+ A New Decay Mode

New Charm Baryon: c(2940)+

c(2940) or c(2940)? No isospin partner found in D+p

hep-ex/0603052

Peter Kim , Session 9-1

M(Σc(2455)0,++π±)

N /

2.5

MeV

Λc(2880)

Λc(2940)

Λc(2765)

New baryon in D0p Belle confirms in c

Roman Mizuk, Session 9-1

BR(D0p)/ BR( Σcπ)=? Need to measure both channels in one expt.

No identification yet for this state


34

XYZ

Y(3940)J/

eeJ/ X(3940)

c2’(2S)

eeY(4260) eeY(4350)

X(3872)J/

Many new charmonium states: 6 above DD threshold+ 2 below (c(2S) and hc) for last 4 yearsMost of heavy charmonium like stares are not explained by theory


35

What in future?

PEPII and Babar will end operations in 2008 (Tevatron will end in 2009 ).

What Bfactories at very hign lumi can add to the exploration beyond the SM in the era of LHC ?

Can the achievable experimental sensitivity and the theoretical uncertainties allow the opening of a window on NP in the flavour sector?


36

Estimate of some Theoretical Uncertainties

Ligeti, ICHEP 2004


37

UNIVERSAL UT fit with 50 ab-1

Universal fit makes only use of quantities independent of NP contributions within MFV


38

Extrapolation at high Lumi


39

CAVEAT on PENGUINSSome effects seen in by Belle/BABAR could appear intriguing, but …

– Belle /BABAR results on specific modes are not in detailed agreement– There are non-negligible SM theory uncertainties in many modes– Vulnerability will remain even if results in the next few years reach 4+

Better look to some clean mode. Example:

•

b sss

Ciuchini, Franco, Martinelli, Masiero, & Silvestrini

KS 30 ab-1

13 mass insertion

ACP (J/ KS-0KS)

KS (as now)

23 mass insertion

ACP (J/ KS-KS)


40

bsl+l- precision measurementsNew Physics – K(*) l+l-, sl+l- e+e- Precision

Measurement Goal 3/ab 10/ab 50/ab 100/ab

(BK/(BKe+e-) SM: 1 ~8% ~4% ~2% ~1.5%

ACP(BK* l+l-) (all) (high mass)

SM: < 0.05%

~6%~12%

~3%~6%

~1.5%~3%

~1.1%~2%

AFB(BK*l+l-) : ŝ0SM: ±5%

~20% ~9% 9%

AFB(Bsl+l-) : ŝ0 27% 15% 6.7% 5.0%

AFB (Bsl+l-) : C9 , C10 36-55% 20-30% 9-13% 7-10%


41

Rare DecaysMEASUREMENT Goal 3/ab 10/ab 50/ab 100/ab

BD*) SM: : 8x10-3 10.2% 5.6% 2.5%

Bs)K,K* SM:Theory ~5%1 excl: 4x10-

6

~1 >3 >4 >5

Binvisible) <2x10-

6

<1x10-6 <4x10-

7

<2.5x10-7

Bd ) ~8x10-11 <3x10-

8

<1.6x10-8

<7x10-

9

<5x10-9

Bd ) ~1x10-8 <1x10-

3

O(10-4) ? ?

) now< 4.2 10-8 <3.4 10-9

Ks) now < 4.910-8 <1.25 10-

10

Ldt 1


42

PHYSICS CASE for Super Flavour Factory

The physics case for a Super Flavour Factory is solid if : The sample of data available in a few years of running would be bigger than 50 ab -1 and approaching 100 ab -1 (10 11 B Bbar, tau and charm pairs) .L between 1036 and 1037 cm-2 s-1

Possibility of running at lower CM Energy still with L >1035 for special runs on Charm and .

Possibility of one polarized beam for Tviolation studies in The running period is overlapped to LHC. (Results from Super

Flavour Factory and LHC are largely complementary).

See for example:Report from Roadmap committee (Slac.BABAR Analysis Doc#828 26July2004)The Discovery Potential of a Super B Factory (Slac-R-709)Letter of Intent for KEK Super B Factory ( KEK Report 2004-4 )Physics at Super B Factory ( hep-ex/0406071 )Many documents available at the URL :www.pi.infn.it/SuperB


43

Summary from Oide’s talk at 2005 2nd Hawaii SuperBF Workshop

• Present design of SuperKEKB (SAME

CONSIDERATIONS FOR PEPII) hits fundamental limits in the beam-beam effect and the bunch length (HOM & CSR) Higher current is the only way to increase the luminosity .

• Many technical and cost issues are expected with a new RF system

We need a completely different collider scheme.....


44

Issues

• HIGH CURRENT and HIGH BACKGROUND IS AN ISSUE FOR :

• DETECTOR DESIGN• WALL POWER NEEDED

(even >>100MW)


45

ILC rings & ILC FF

SuperB new approach based on ILC FF and

DR Crossing angle = 2*15 mrad

SuperB Contributors (Accelerator):BINP: Koop, Levichev, ShatilovKEKB: Ohmi

LNF: Biagini, Raimondi, Zobov

Pisa: M.A.G., PaoloniSLAC: Novokhatski, Seeman, Seryi, Sullivan, Wienands


46

High luminosity requires: - short bunches

- small vertical emittance - large horizontal size and emittance to mimimize

beam-beam

For a ring:- easy to achieve small horizontal emittance and

horizontal size- Hard to make short bunchesCrossing angle swaps X with Z, so the high luminosity

requirements are naturally met: Luminosity goes with 1/x and is weakly dependent by z

REQUIREMENTS


47

Vertical waist has to be a function of x: Z=0 for particles at –x (- x/2 at low current)

Z= x/ for particles at +x (x/2 at low current)

Crabbed waist realized with a sextupole in phase with the IP in X and at /2 in Y

“Crab waist” removes beam-beam betratron couplingIntroduced by the crossing angle

“Crab waist” (P. Raimondi)

2z

x

2x

2x/

2z*

Y

z

e-e+

For a fixed longitudinal position, y does not depend on the horizontal motion anymore ! No vertical modulation due to the horizontal oscillations !


48

Collisions with uncompressed beamsCrossing angle = 2*15 mrad

Relative Emittance growth per collision: yout/yin=1. 5x10-3

Horizontal Plane Vertical Plane

BB simulations with ILC code

Crab waist scheme is planned to be tested in 2007 in DANE


49

Present parameter set based on ILCDR-like parameters 3.0 Km long rings studied with ILC OCS (Baseline) lattice scaled to 4 and 7 GeV :

• Same DR emittances

• Same DR bunch length

• 1.5 times DR bunch charges

• Same ILC-IP betas

• Crossing angle and “crab waist” to minimize bb blowup

•PEP-KEK DR damping time 17ms•Fewer and lower field wigglers used (pm )•Final Focus (ILC-like) included•Design based on recycling all PEP hardware, Bends, Quads and Sexts, and RF system•Maximize Luminosity keeping low E and wall power.

Machine parameters


50

Ring Parameter

s

Energy (GeV) 4 7

C (m) 2762 2762Bw (T) 1.4 1.05

Lbend(m) 2.1 10.8

N. bends 96 96Bbend (T) 0.439 0.144

Uo (MeV/turn) 2.3 4.1Wiggler sections 4 4z (mm) 7.0 7.0

s (ms) 17 17

x (nm) 0.79 0.71

Emittance ratio 0.25% 0.25%

1.0x10-3 1.1x10-3

Momentum compaction 1.85x10-4 3.90x10-4

s 0.012 0.026

Vrf (MV) 5.5 19

Npart (x1010) 3.31 1.89

Ibeam (A) 2.5 1.44

Tousheck lifetime (min) 95 1100Pbeam(MW) 5.7 5.9

Frf (MHz) 476Nbunches 4167

Gap 5%Pwall (MW) (50% eff) 2 rings 23.2

x 20mm

x 4m

xp 200rad

y 200m

y 20nm

yp 100rad

z 7mm

2* 30mrad

IP Parameters

L1036 cm-2 s-

1


51

0

5 1036

1 1037

1,5 1037

2 1037

2,5 1037

0 2,5 1010 5 1010 7,5 1010 1 1011 1,25 1011 1,5 1011

Luminosity [cm-2 s-1]

N

M. Zobov, D. Shatilov

1036

Upgradeable !

But more stringent requirement to go down with Wall Power!


52

SuperB EFFORT

International Study Group is in place on Physics case, Detector and Machine design.

A Steering Committee (led by m.a.g.) whose members are from :

Canada,France,Germany,Italy,Russia,UK and US is coordinating the effort.

Member from Japan (KEK) is to join soon.CDR is to be delivered at beginning 2007

to the INFN President and to be internationally reviewed.


53

O 1.0Km O 0.7Km

Possible Site: Tor Vergata campus

Ring circumference: 3. to 2.2 Km


54

BACKUP!


55

K.GeorgeK.George

A = 0.07 0.028 0.018

BaBar2006: sin2 in b ccs

BB00 J/ J/(2S)(2S)KKSS, , ccKKSS, , c1c1KKSS, , J/J/

ICHEP 06


56

Time Dep.CPV measures Sin2from B0 J/ K0

previous measurementsin2= 0.652 0.044

(386 M BB pairs)

B0 tag_B

0 tag

532 M BB pairs

_

BELLE-CONF-0647BELLE-CONF-0647

O. TajimaO. Tajima

ICHEP 06

Sin()= 0.642 ±0.031 (stat) ±0.017 (syst) A = 0.018 ±0.021 (stat) ±0.014 (syst)


57

Updated! G.Marchiori

ICHEP06


58

BaBar2006: B Dalitz analysis

Preliminary result in 2004 (16 parameters ignoring ) is superseded.

Interferenceinfo. onstrong phasedifference

B0

B0


59

Direct CP in K Competing amplitudes with different strong and weak phasesACP should be the same for K+-

and K+0 (Gronau: hep-ph 0508047)

Current averages (HFAG)ACP (K+-)=-0.093 0.015ACP (K+0)=+0.047 0.026Difference 0.14 0.03 – a long way from zero

Maybe colour-suppressed trees are responsible Maybe New Physics Based on isospin one can produce several ratios that should agree

(A Buras, R Fleischer et al, Phys J C 45 (701-710) 2006)

Rn=(K+ -) Rc=2 (K+ 0) 2 (K00) (K0+)Obtain (HFAG averages)Rn=0.99 0.07Rc=1.11 0.07

Agree with each other

And with SM predictions

The “K puzzle” is no more


60

New mesons&BaryonsTwo new DsJ mesons found in DK mass distributions in e+e- continuum

New DsJ mesons in D0K+ mass distributions in BD0(D0K+) the same?

Two new baryons in c+K-+ mass distributions in e+e- continuum

One new baryon in c+KS- mass distributions in e+e- continuum

isopartner

One new baryon in D0p mass distributions in ee continuum

Baryon number and charm are carried out by different particles

Baryon number and strangeness are carried out by different particles

New decay mechanism for charmed baryons:

First observatin of c*

N o

I

n t

e r

p r

e t

a t

I o

n

y e

t

Highlights: from BABAR to the FUTURE!

Documents

Transcript of Highlights: from BABAR to the FUTURE!