Transcript Document

Experimental Results
on Heavy Quark Hadrons
ALEPH, DELPHI,L3,OPAL,SLD ,CDF,CLEO,
BELLE ,BABAR,FOCUS,SELEX
Achille Stocchi
(LAL-Orsay / CERN )
31th ICHEP02 - Amsterdam
29th July 2002
B Physics
Charm Physics
ALEPH,DELPHI,L3,OPAL
SLD
CDF
CLEO
BELLE
BABAR
FOCUS
SELEX
at LEP
Z0
at SLD
Z0
at TeVatron I
pp 1.8TeV
at CERS
Y(4S) symmetric
at KEK
Y(4S) asymmetric
at PEP
Y(4S) asymmetric
E831 Fermilab
g < 300 GeV
E781 Fermilab p–p-S- 600GeV
Introduction. Main motivations of studying Heavy Hadrons
B Spectroscopy / D Spectroscopy
Beauty and Charm Lifetimes
Rare B decays
Measurement of CKM matrix elements : Vub and Vcb . The B semileptonic decays
Measurement of CKM matrix elements : Vtd and Vts . The B0 - B0 oscillations
What we have learnt about the Unitarity Triangle
Welcome to the world of charm and beauty
H. Bosch (1504)
The garden of Earthly Delights
~ half of the
Standard Model
Flavour Physics in the Standard Model (SM) in the quark sector:
10 free parameters
6 quarks masses
4 CKM parameters
In the Standard Model, charged weak interactions among quarks
are codified in a 3 X 3 unitarity matrix :
the CKM Matrix.
The existence of this matrix conveys the fact that the quarks
which participate to weak processes are a linear combination
of mass eigenstates
The fermion sector is poorly constrained by SM + Higgs Mechanism
mass hierarchy and CKM parameters
The CKM Matrix
u
d
s
1-l2/2
l
Wolfenstein parametrization
4 parameters : l ,A, r, h
b
A l3(r-ih)
b
c,u
Vub,Vcb
c
-l
1-l2/2
Al2
t
A l3(1-r-ih)
-Al2
1
B decays
Vtb
B Oscillations
b
d, s
d, s
b
Vtd ,Vts
The b-Physics plays a very
important role in the determination
of those parameters
Visualization of the unitarity of the CKM matrix
Unitarity Triangle in the (r-h) plane
B pp, rp,...
B DK
+other charmonium
MORE GENERALLY
We observe hadrons and not quarks !
theory gives us the link from quarks to hadrons
OPE /HQET/Lattice QCD …. Need to be tested !
To access the parameters of the Standard Model we
need to control the effects induced by strong interactions
Many measurements ( with different weights ) are essential
Decay properties and production characteristics
Lifetimes
Branching ratios
beauty an charm physics
are equally important
Form factors
Masses (spectroscopy)
An impressive amount of results :
more than 100 papers !
and more than 10 years of results behind
The Land of Cockaigne
Difficult to digest !
P.Brueguel The Elder (1567)
The Land of Cockaigne
B Spectroscopy
M(B0) =5279.3 ±0.7 MeV
M(B0)-M (B+) =0.34 ±0.32 MeV
+
M(B ) =5279.1 ±0.5 MeV
CLEO
HQET
B0
CLEO
B0y’ Ks0
C
D
F
Bs** B(*) K (if above thresold)
B+y’ K+
CDF
Bs0
Bs0Jy f
M(Bs0) = 5369.6±2.4 MeV
( Bs(*)p isospin forbidden)
Strongly decaying
B+
L B0
L B 0 J y L
M(LB0) = 5624±9 MeV
New results on L=1 meson and excited baryon
DELPHI
(Prel.)
Narrow states
C. Weiser (LEP/SLD)
Q= 298 ± 4 ± 12 MeV
s= 47 ± 3 ± 5 MeV
s(**(u+d)) (narrow)/ s (b) = (9.8 ± 0.7 ± 1.2 ) %
Evidence of broad states at
+ 100MeV and G ~ 250 MeV
-> Spin-Orbit Inversion
Q = M(B(*)p)-M(B (*))-m(p)
DELPHI(prel.) had a ~3s evidence of SB(*)
with s(SB(*) ) / s (b) ~ 5%
DELPHI(prel.)/OPAL had ~2.5s evidence of Bs**
with s(Bs** ) / s (b) ~ 2%
NEW result from DELPHI
s(B s**) / s (b) < 1.5% @95%CL
NEW result from DELPHI
s(SB(*) ) / s (b) < 1.5% @95%CL
Old signals from
Bs** and SB(*)
NOT CONFIRMED
?
Charmed Baryon Spectroscopy
C. Riccardi(FOCUS)
R. Chistov (Belle)
J. Russ (SELEX)
Rich(est) spectroscopy – so far 22 charmed baryons found (some need confirmation)
4 weakly decaying : (1/2+) LC(cud),
XC0 , XC+(cqq),
WC(css)
(3/2+) XC 0, XC+ , (1/2+) XC ‘0, XC’+
(1/2 ) SC0, SC+ , SC++ ; (3/2 ) SC0*, SC+* , SC++*
(1/2-) LC (2593) ; (3/2-) LC (2625) + two (3/2-) narrow states (L=1) (~2815) Xpp mass
+
two
(1/2-) broad states + ? (1/2-) narrow LC0
Most of the discoveries made by CLEO
+
+
-
FOCUS W p + and XKpp
-
Xcc++ (ccu)  LC K -p + p +
WC (css)
p – p-S- beams
M =2693.7± 1.3 ± 1.1 MeV/c2
M ~ 3460MeV/c2
M ~ 3520MeV/c2
First Observation of double charm baryons?
M=2697± 2.2 MeV/c2
BELLE W p+
Xcc+ (ccd)  LC K -p +
CLEO 4 modes M=2694.6± 2.6 ± 1.9 MeV/c2
~20 semilept. events seen in BELLE
SELEX
Not confirmed by FOCUS
Interest of measuring the Lifetimes
G(H) = Gspect + O(1/mb2) + G(P.I.,W.A,W.S) + O(1/mb4)
f B2
 (P .I., W.A,W.S)

 ( spect)
mb2
Spectator effects are at order O(1/ mb3)
but phase space enhanced (16p2)
X
-
-
b
W
B-
c
B
D
q
d
u
W
b
Pauli
Interference
c
u
u
b
c
P.I.
q
If this were the only diagram
all the B/D hadron lifetimes
would be the same.
Important test of
B decay dynamics (OPE)
B0
b
-
W
d( s )
d(s)
b
c
u
s
u
d
W
W.S.
BW.A.
-
Weak
annihilation
c
d
d
Results on B Lifetimes
(B0d)
(B+)
(B0s)
(LB)
Averages from
LEP/SLD/Tevatron
=
=
=
=
1.540
1.656
1.461
1.208
±
±
±
±
New result from Babar (B0) / DELPHI (B0,B+)
0.014 ps ( 0.9%)
0.014 ps ( 0.8%)
0.057 ps ( 3.9%)
0.051 ps ( 4.2%)
+ B-Factories
(b) = 1.573 ± 0.007 ps ( 0.4%)
-
u
W
b
1.073 ± 0.014
c
B-
u
u
0.949 ± 0.038
(B+)/ (B0)
about 5s effect
in agreement with theory
LB Lifetime shorter
Because of W.A.
?
0.784 ± 0.034
But the experimental
result says the effect is
more important
Is there a problem for LB ?
0.797 ± 0.052
LIFETIME Working Group
RECENT lattice QCD calculations
are able to explain lower values
Franco,Lubicz,Mescia,Tarantino
Sandra Malvezzi(FOCUS)
Cristina Riccardi(FOCUS)
effects are larger
Results on D Lifetimes
 (P .I.,W.A,W.S)
 (spect)
charm

(D0)
f D2 mb2  (P .I.,W.A,W.S)
 10
 (spect)
f B2 mc2
beauty
( D+ )
NEW since PDG 2002
NEW since PDG 2002
~6‰!
~3‰ !
A.S. averages
WATCH B-factories /with 60fb-1 BaBar (D0)~1.3fs stat.
FOCUS
c
d
+
W
s
+
D
d
d
New results on charmed baryons
X
0
X 0c  X- p + and W -K+
c
FOCUS
2 very old results
1995
1990
2 very old results
Wc
1995
1990
A.S. averages
FOCUS produced new lifetimes results with precision better than previous world average
( D0)
411.3 ± 1.3 fs
NEW / including new FOCUS/CLEO
( D+)
1039.4 ± 6.3 fs
NEW / including new FOCUS/CLEO
(Ds)
490± 9 fs
PDG 2002 / not including FOCUS (506 ± 8 fs (stat only))
( L c)
200 ± 6 fs
PDG 2002 / including recent FOCUS(204.6 ± 3.4 ± 2.5 fs)
( X+c)
422 ± 26 fs
PDG 2002 / including recent CLEO–FOCUS (439 ± 22 ± 9 fs)
( X0c)
109(+12)(-10) fs
NEW / including recent FOCUS
( Wc)
79 ± 12 fs
NEW / including recent FOCUS
(D+) /( D0) = 2.53 ± 0.02
(Ds )/( D0) = 1.19 ± 0.02
(L c)/( D0) = 0.49 ± 0.01
A.S. averages
(X+c)/(L c) = 2.11 ± 0.14
NEW
(Wc)/(X0c) = 0.72 ± 0.13
In Baryon sector the expected hierarchy:
G(Xc+) < G(Lc+) < G(Xc0)
P.I(+-)
W.S.+P.I.(-) W.S.+P.I.(+)
~ G(Wc0)
(10/3)P.I.(+)
Very Precise measurements. The agreement with theory is still “qualitative”
Rare B decays
…was the realm of CLEO (9M B)  B-factories are taking over (~90M B)
Domain of BR ~ 10-5
~ 10-6
Radiative B decays (bsg)
+
B hadronic decays
Rare leptonic (BXs l l )
Treated by
PLENARY
B charmonium
M. Yamauchi (Belle)
Y. Karyotakis (Babar)
D. Wright(BaBar)/T.Aushev(Belle)/Y.Watanabe(Belle)
B Open Charm (DX,DD,…)
B charmless B decays
Bpp,Kp,…
Partially treated by M. Yamauchi (Belle)
PLENARY
Y. Karyotakis (Babar)
J.Olsen(BaBar)\R.Itoh(Belle)
Impressive experimental work from
the B-factories
fKS
BABAR
BELLE
BABAR 88MB
B→K+p+ -
Xs l l
BELLE
BELLE
D S +p B0  D(*) D(*)K
BELLE
BABAR
How do I feel in front of them ? …same as yesterday…
B → K*(K+ p -) g
Radiative B decays
predicted by
Hyeronimus Bosch
Final Judgement 1508
W
-
b
K+
g
s
u,c,t
p-
q
q
b sg
Inclusive decays are cleaner
(excl. depends upon not very well known form factors)
Loops sensitive to New Physics (heavy “objects” in the loop)
Photon energy spectrum depends on the quark mass and Fermi movement
 important for addressing theoretical error for Vcb (see later)
if b dg is also measured : Br(b dg )/ Br(b sg ) |Vtd/Vts |2
same constraint as Dmd/ Dms
g
C. Jessop(Babar)/S.Nishida(Belle)
K*g
Br
Acp
Two measurements
<0.5% in SM – Sensitive to non-SM CP-violation
_
_
B K* g
(10-6)
45.57.03.4
37.6 8.62.8
Acp = -0.08  0.13  0.03
BaBar
22.7 MB
42.34.02.2
38.3 6.22.2
Acp = -0.044  0.076  0.012
Belle
65.4 MB
39.12.32.5
42.1 3.53.1
Acp = -0.022  0.048  0.017
rg
BELLE 65.4 MB
Br(B K* g) (70-80)10-6 with 50% theory error
B 0 K*0 g
(10-6)
CLEO
Exclusive radiative decays
Br (10-6
B0K2*0 (1430)g
(10-6)
16.6 5.61.3
15(+6)(-5)1
(only ~30 MB)
90% C.L)
B(B0 → r0g) < 1.4 Babar
< 2.6 Belle
B(B+ → r+g) < 2.3 Babar
< 4.9 Belle
B(B0 → wg) < 1.2 Babar
< 3.1 Belle
SM 0.49 0.21
SM 0.85 0.40
B ( B  rg )
 0.036
B( B  K * g )
 |Vtd/Vts |2
A.S. estimation
Not yet useful for constraining (1-r)2+h 2
MAINLY because 50% theo. error
Inclusive radiative decays
BABAR 61MB
qq
qq
→XXsgsg
BB→
BB
BB
BABAR inclusive
BABAR 22MB summing 12 states
B(B → Xsg) = 3.88±0.36(stat.)±0.37(sys.)+0.43/-0.28 (theory)
K.N.
Experimental precision is
approaching theoretical errors
BR x 10-4
J. Richmann (BABAR)
S. Nishida (BELLE)
+
Leptonic B rare decays : BXs l l
Sensitive to new physics
g
+ -
First Observation of Xs l l
BELLE 65.4 MB
ee
mm
inclusive
K*ll
ll
em
Kll
l
l
-
l
l
BABAR 84.4 M B
EXCLUSIVE K l l / K* l l
To combine the K*ll modes,
assume K*ee/K*mm=1.2 (Ali et al.).
Theory
[2-5] 10-7
Br( K l + l - ) = (7.8+-22..40+-11..18 ) 10-7
Br( K *l + l - ) = (16.8+-56..88  2.8) 10-7
T.Moore (Babar)
New limit from Babar ~50MB
4.4 s (syst. included)
2.8 s
 3010-7 @ 90%C.L.
B(B+K+)  9410-6 @90CL
VERY CLEAN MODE
Still far : SM ~ 3.8 10-6
Exclusive hadronic B rare decays
Gold mine of weak and hadronic physics(very rich B decay dynamics)
The rare B decays are described by various tree (T) and penguin diagrams (P)
for b
Goal : to use it for the extraction of the UT angles.
Dream channel BJ/yK0
For g and a the life is more difficult
Example : Kp
s
T
b
Vub phase  g
u
B pp, rp,...
P
u
b
s,d
But important contribution
from penguins
Many and important progress in the last years
with the calculations of amplitudes at m  limit
Still controversy on corrections to it
Unitarity triangle from rare decays
at the B-factories
 determination of angles
B DK
B pp,Kp,...
BJ/yK0
(other B charmonium)
BD(*) D(*)
B h’ Ks
many different measurements are performed
to constrain hadronic ampl. and strong phases
measurement of CP asymmetries
ACP =
Branching ratios
Br ( B  f ) - Br ( B  f )
Br ( B  f ) + Br ( B  f )
Measurement of time dependent CP asymmetries
C≠0 direct CPV
e-|Dt|/
1  S f sin ( Dmd Dt ) C f cos ( Dmd Dt )
f  ( Dt ) =
4
Mixing for neutral B
Time dependent analyses for the extraction of the angles a and g
given in the Babar and Belle talks
B  OPEN CHARM ( DX)
1) Test
Bd0
E. Varnes (Babar)
P. Krokovny(Belle)
of the B dynamics . Example the Colour-Suppressed Open Charm
p+
b
c
d
d
c
0
b
D
u
Bd0
d
p0
d
d
Color – suppressed ( Class II )
D-
Color – allowed ( Class I )
2
2
A ~ (mB
- mD
) fp F BD (mp2 )a1 ( Dp )
2
2
A ~ (mB
- mp2 ) f D F Bp (mD
)a2 ( Dp )
(a1 and a2 from data à la Neubert-Stech)
CLEO and BELLE(NEW ANALYSIS)
DX(light)
Isospin relations
I strong phase angle difference
between A1/2 and A3/2
D 0 p0
3.2s  1  sizable final-states
cos I = 0.866+-00..042
036 rescattering effects in Dp decyas
Many new results from B-factories
BELLE(~29MB)
BABAR(~50MB)
D0p0
3.1 ± 0.4 ± 0.5
2.9 ± 0.3 ± 0.4
D0h0
1.4(+0.5)(-0.4) ± 0.3
2.4 ± 0.4 ± 0.3
D0w0
1.8 ± 0.5 (+0.4)(-0.3)
2.5 ± 0.4 ± 0.3
D0r0
3.0 ± 1..3 ± 0. 4 (60MB)
CLEO
2.7(+0.36)(-0.32) ± 0.55
Rates are more than twice the naïve factorization prediction
D0h
D0w
Ds+,Ds(*)+…
B0  Ds(*)+ p - Extraction of Vub ?
Dominated by b u transition with no penguin contribution
Possible way of determining Vub
Bd
0
b
form factors and difficult to normalise ( ?Ds(*)+ D(*) - ) d
Difficult to get better than 20% theo. Error (I’m optimistic!)
..Many
Belle
85M B
BaBar
D S +p -
u
Vub
p -, r -…
d
84M fb-1
DS*+p-
Br(B0  DS*+p-) < 4.1  10-5 @90% C.L.
Significance 3.6s
Br( B 0  Ds+p - ) = (2.4+-10..08  0.7) 10-5
Significance 3.3s
Br( B 0  Ds+p - ) = (3.2  0.9  1.0) 10-5
= (2.5  0.7  0.6( Ds  fp )) 10-5
Syst. dominated by the 25% uncertainty on Br(Dsfp)
Need of absolute Br.
CLEO-C
Mode
B0→K+pB+→K+p0
B+→p+p0
B0→K0p0
B0→K+KB+→p+pB+→p0p0
B+→K+-anti K0
B+→K0p+
B0→K0anti-K0
B+→rp
B0→rp 
B0→r0p 0
B0→ap 
B+→rK
B+→h’K+
B0→h’K0
B+→h’p+
B0→h’K*0/K*+/r0
B+→hK*+
B0→hK*0
B→hK
B→hp
B→hr0 / hr+
B0→wp±
B ± →wp±
B ± →wK±
B0→wK0
B0→wp0
B± →fK±
Branching ratio (10-6) Belle
~31 MB / ~45MB/~86MB
ACP Belle
~31 MB / ~45MB
Branching ratio (10-6) BaBAr
~88 MB / ~60MB /~23MB
ACP BaBAr
~88 MB / ~60MB / ~23MB
22.5 ± 1.9 ± 0.8
13.0 (+2.5)(-2.4) ± 1.3
7.4 (+2.3)(-2.2) ± 0.9
8.0 (+3.3)(-3.1) ± 1.6
Branching ratio (10-6) CLE0
-0.06 0.09 +0.01(-0.02)
(17.90.9 0.6)
-0.102 0.050 0.016
17.2 (+2.5)(-2.4)1.2
-0.02 0.19 0.02
0.30 0.030 +0.06(-0.04)
(12.8 1.2 1.0)
(5.5 1.0 0.6)
(10.4 1.5 0.8)
-0.09 0.09 0.01
-0.03 0.18 0.02
0.03 0.36 0.09
11.6(+3.0)(-2.7(+1.4)(-1.3)
5.4)+2.1)(-2.0) ±1.5
14.6(+5.9)(-5.1)(+2.4)(-3.3)
<0.9(@90%CL)
<0.6 (90% C.L.)
-
<1.9
5.4 ± 1.2 ± 0.5
(4.6 0.6 0.2)
4.3(+1.6)(-1.4) ±0.5
<5.1
18.2(+4.6)(-4.0) ±1.6
< 6.4 (@90%CL)
<3.6(90%CL)
C=-0.30  0.25  0.03
S=0.02  0.34  0.03
-
< 2.0(@90%CL)
19.4(+3.1)(-3.0) ± 1.6
<1.3 (90% C.L.)
-
(17.5 1.8 1.3)
-0.17 0.10 0.02
0.46 ± 0.15 ± 0.02
< 4.1(@90%CL)
<7.3
<5.2
<13
-0.22 0.08 0.07
C = 0.45+0.18(-0.19)  0.09
S = 0.16  0.25  0.07
8.0(2.3)(-2.0) ± 0.7
10.4(+3.3)(-3.4) ±2.1
10.4(+3.3)(-3.4) ± 2.1
20.8(+6.0)(-6.3)(+2.8)(-3.1)
<5..3(90%CL)
28.9 ±5.4 ±4.3
<10.6
6.2(+3.0)(-2.5) ±1.1
77.9 (+6.2)(-5.9) (+9.3)(-8.7)
68.0 (+10.4)(-9.6)(8.8)(-8.2)
<20/90/14 @90%CL
-0.015 ± 0.070 ± 0.009
67±5 ±5
0.13 ± 0.32 (+0.09)(-0.06)
46±6 ±4
S=0.28 ± 0.55 (+0.07)(-0.08) 10.7 ± 1.0 (+0.9)(-1.6)
5.4 (+3.5)(-2.6) ± 0.8
<13 (90% C.L.)
26.5 (+7.8)(-7.0) ± 3.0
16.5 (+4.6)(-4.2) ± 1.2
<7.7
22.1(+11.1)(-9.2)
19.8(+6.5)(-5.6) ±3.3
<6.4
26.4 (+9.6)(-8.2) ± 3.3
13.8(+5.4)(-4.6) ± 1.6
<6.9
<8.2
<2.7/6.2
<5.2
<5.7
<15/10
4.3 (+2.0)(-1.8) ± 0.5
6.6(+2.1)(-1.8) ± 0.5
27.6(+8.4)(-7.4) ± 4.2
<5.5
0.19 0.14 0.11
-0.11  0.11  0.02
80 (+10)(-9) ± 7
89(+18)(-16) ± 9
<12
<24/35/12 @95%CL
6.6+2.1(-1.8) ± 0.7
9.9 (+2.7)(-2.4) ± 1.0
-0.21 ± 0.28 ± 0.03
-0.01 +0.29(-0.31) 0.0.3
<4
11.3(+3.3)(-2.9) ± 1.5
<7.9
(5.9 +1.7(-1.5) 0.9
<21
< 3.3
10.7 ± 1.0 (+0.9)(-1.6)
11.2 (+3.3)(-2.6)(+1.3)(-1.7)
(9.2 1.0 0.8)
(9.7 +4.2(-3.4) 1.7)
-0.05 0.20 0.03
-0.43 +0.36-(0.30) 0.06
<5.5
5.5(+2.1)(-1.8) ± 0.6
<22.5
B0 →fK*0
8.0 (+2.0)(-1.8)(+0.8)(-1.1)
8.6 +2.8(-2.4) 1.1)
0.00 0.27 0.23
11.5(+4.5)(-3.7) (+1.8(-1.7)
B0 →fK0
10.0(+1.9)(-1.7)(+0.9)(-1.3)
8.7 +(1.7)(-1.5)  0.9
B ± →fp±
B+r+r
“
<0.56 (90% C.L.)
B± →fK*±
38.5 ±10.9(+5.9-5.4)(+2.5(-7.5)
<12.3
ACP
Was 0.46±0.15
BR
K.Suzuki(Belle)
A.Bevan(Babar)
A. Gordon(Belle)
No direct CPV signal yet
Are we about observing the p0p0 mode ( with Br~ 3 10-6 ) ?
Belle
Belle
Curiosity…
First BVV charmless bu
Also multibody are coming
Need to put some
order out of it
P. Chang(Belle)
Experimentalists at work…
Theorists at work…
be patient !!
be predictive !!
J. Vermeer (1669-70)
The Lacemaker
J. Vermeer (1668)
The Astronomer
Visualization of the unitarity of the CKM matrix
Unitarity Triangle in the (r-h) plane
B pp, rp,...
B DK
+other charmonium
N. Uraltsev
M. Battaglia(LEP)
V.Luth (BaBar)
D. Cronin-Hennessy (CLEO)
M. Calvi (LEP)
A.Tricomi (LEP)
Determination of Vcb
Inclusive Method

l
c
b
Vcb
-
Gsl (b  cl  )
2
theo.
=
Vcb
exp .
F
=
Brsl
b
f(m2p , mb , as , rD(or 1/mb3)
mb
( also named L)
m2p
(l1 Fermi movement)
Based on OPE
Gsl = (0.431± 0.008 ± 0.007) 10-10 MeV Y(4S)
Gsl = (0.439 ± 0.010 ± 0.007) 10-10 MeV LEP
Gsl = (0.434  (1 ± 0.018)) 10-10 MeV
at 2% precision
Determination of Vcb limited by theoretical uncertainties …..
Measurement of the moments of the distributions of the
HADRONIC mass (CLEO/DELPHI)
LEPTON Momentum (CLEO/ DELPHI/BABAR (55MB)))
Photon energy b s g (CLEO)
Vcb(inclusive)= ( 40.7 ± 0.6 ± 0.8(theo.) ) 10-3
Caveat : control of power corrections 1/mb3
Vcb Working Group
Exclusive method
dG
dw
=
GF2
48p 2
w = vB .vD(*)
w=
mD2 *
+ mB2
-q
2
Based on HQET
| Vcb |2 | F ( w) |2 G ( w)
F(w) is the form factor
describing the B D* transition
2mD*mB
At zero recoil (w=1),
as MQ 
F(1)  1

Strategy :
Measure dG/dw
extrapolate to w=1 to extract F(1) |Vcb |
BELLE
(1  w 0 q2 )
q2
38.1 ± 1.0
r2
F(1) |Vcb |
F(1) = 0.91 ± 0.04
Laurent Lellouch (plenary)
Vcb(exclusive)= ( 41.9 ± 1.1 ± 1.9 ) 10-3
Vcb(inclusive)= ( 40.7 ± 0.6 ± 0.8 ) 10-3
James Simone
Vcb = ( 40.9 ± 0.8) 10-3
A.S. average
T.Mannel
N. Uraltev
M.Battaglia(LEP)
V.Luth (BaBar)
D. Cronin-Hennessy (CLEO)
Determination of Vub
B  Xu l+ 
Inclusive methods
(End Point)
NEW
3-D Fit : q2 and MX El
CLEO
Backgr.
b u u
b
 cc
\\\\ bb 
BABAR
Backg.
substructed
DELPHI
bc
b
b
 cu
bu
Y. Kwon(Belle)
L.Wilden(Babar)
Exclusive methods B  (p,r,w) l 
MAIN problem : large error from models
Results from BELLE/CLEO/BABAR
Analyses vs q2 to distinguish between model
-- BALL 01
-- ISGW II
-SPD
Prob(ISGW-II) ~ 1%
(corrected dist.)
BELLE
Preliminary
-- Kodjamiriam
-- UKQCD
B pl 
Vub Summary
M.Battaglia
~(60MB)
~(60MB)
At the CKM Workshop (LEP+End-Point CLEO)
-3
Vub(inclusive) = (4.09 ± 0.46 ± 0.36) 10
+ CLEO Exclusive results
Vub =
For expert !!
Vub Working Group
0
B /D
0
In SM :DF=2 process
B0d,s
oscillations
GIM mechanism (Rate ~ m12- m22)
W-
b
d,s
W+
t,c,u
Dominated by t exchange
B0d,s
t,c,u
d, s
b
y = DG/2G  x = D m /G
(due to the large phase phase in B decays)
-
D
0
W
c
b,s,d
W+
u
D
b,s,d
u
c
y ~ x  10 -3
0
Rate LARGE
Vtd
Vts
Allow to access fundamental parameters
of the Standard Model
b contribution ~ Vub m2b
Rate ~ 0 at SU(3)F limit
Sensitive to long-distance QCD
….and New Physics ?
x >> y
Oscillations in B system
The probability that the meson B0 produced (by strong interaction) at t = 0
transforms (weak interaction) into B0 (or stays as a B0 ) at time t is given by :
1 -t / q
=
e
(1  cos Dmqt )
2
P
Bq0 Bq0 ( Bq0 )
Dmq can be seen as an oscillation frequency : 1 ps-1 = 6.58 10-4 eV
f B2d BBd Vcb l2 Vtd
2
Dmd

Dms

f B2s BBs Vtd
2
2


f B2d BBd Vcb l2 ((1 - r ) 2 + h 2 )
2
f B2s BBs Vcb
2
Dms  20 Dmd
Dms oscillations fast
Dmd
Dms

x2
f B2d BBd
f B2s
BBs
l
2
((1 - r ) + h )
2
2
Excellent time resolution required
x better know than fB BB
Dmd/ Dms performant contraint for r and h
C. Voena(BaBar)
F. Ronga (Belle)
Dmd
Many new measurements : 4 from Belle
and
3 from Babar
D*l Dmd=0.492±0.018±0.013ps-1
Hadronic Dmd= 0.516±0.016±0.010 ps-
Dileptons Dmd= 0.493±0.012±0.009 ps-
LEP/SLD/CDF measured precisely the Dmd frequency
Dmd = 0.498 ± 0.013 ps-1 LEP/SLD/CDF (2.6 %)
Before
B-Factories
B-factories confirmed the value improving the precision by a factor 2
Dmd = 0.503 ± 0.006 ps-1 LEP/SLD/CDF/B-factories (1.2%)
Dms
S. Willocq(SLD/LEP)
Combine many different analyses which give limits
Combination using the amplitude method
Measurement of A at
each Dms
Combination using A and sA
Dm
At given
s
A = 0 no oscillation
A = 1 oscillation
Dms excluded at 95% CL
A + 1.645sA < 1
Sensitivity same relation with A = 0
1.645sA < 1
P
0
Bs0 Bs0 ( B s )
1 -t / s
=
e
(1  A cos Dms t )
2
“Hint of signal”
at Dms ~ 17.5 ps-1
with significance at 2.3 s
Dms > 14.4 ps-1 at 95% CL
Sensitivity at 19.2 ps-1
Dms SAGA
Expectation in
The Standard Model
Dms 17.5 ± 3.3 ps-1
<24.4 @ 95% CL
Including Dms
Dms 17.6 +(2.0)(-1.3) ps-1
<20.9 @ 95% CL
The CKM people at work……
H.Bosch Players of GO
F. Parodi
Fit Comparison
Frequentist(A. Hocker et al.)/ Bayesian(M.Ciuchini et al).
95% CL
99% CL
SCAN(G. Dubois-Felsmann et al.)
Quantitative differences
in the selected (r,h) regions
between Bayesian and Frequentist
are small
Both qualitatively comparable with scan
Constraints :Vub , Vcb , eK , Dmd , Dmd , sin2b
Vcb = (40.4 ± 0.8)10-3
r = 0.203 ± 0.040
h = 0.335 ± 0.027
sin2b = 0.734+-00..045
034
g = (59.5+-65..55 ) 
sin 2a = -0.20+-00..23
20
Dms = 17.6+-12..30 ps-1
Small effect
L.Lellouch(PLENARY)
Effect of the “chiral logs” in fB and x
D. Becirevic
h = 0.365 ± 0.028
r = 0.177+-00..047
044
No change
-0.5s shift +15% error
(+0.7s for g )
CP Violation
Very important in reducing the
allowed region
sin2b = 0.762 ± 0.064 direct from B  J/y K0s
sin2b = 0.734+-00..055
045
“indirect”
Coherent picture of CP Violation in SM
There is more to come……
…but I think is time to conclude
P.Brueguel The Elder (1567)
The Peasent Wedding
15 Years of B Physics behind,
old actors are still quite active (LEP/SLD/CLEO)
B-factories have already produced a lot and interesting results
Many measurements are already very precise
Lifetimes
B decays
B0-B+ 1% Bs -LB ~ 4%
D0 3‰ ,D+ 3‰ ,Ds 2% ,LC 3% ,X+C 6% , X 0C 10% , WC 15%
Many new results from B-factories
Radiative/Leptonic/Open Charm/Charmonium/Charmless…..
Vcb enters in a mature age. It is a precise measurement ~ (2-3)%
Vub many different methods are on the market ( ~ 10%)
if we were really able to exploit all of them …!
Often the limitation are from theory. It is very important to define extra measurements to address
those uncertainties ( ex: moments analysis)
Need close contact with theorists, new ideas, some fanstasy !
Oscillations
Dmd at 1% fantastic experimental effort
The Dms saga. Dms > 14.4 ps-1 at 95% CL
(Bs oscillates 30 times faster than Bd)
Tevatron we tell us if we were close to the signal
D0 . A window for new physics. New results are about to come.
Important improvements on Lattice QCD / OPE / HQET
Charm physics play a role in understanding the QCD in a non-perturbative regime.
(crucial the impact of CLEO-C)
So far the Standard Model is Standardissimo
Sad !
It is a question of scale …
now we have to look
to effects below 10% !
K. Harder (LEP/SLD)
B Fragmentation
New method
Observation of the hC(2S) in exclusive B decays
hC = JPC = 0 -+
hC(1S)= hC : singlet S charmonium state
hC(2S) : n=2 singlet S charmonium state
Y.Watanabe(Belle)
Heavy Quark Potential Model
+ / B+ J/y K+ ~ 0.6
B+yJ/(2S)y(2S)K
DM(J/
hC(2S))<
DM(J/y -hC)
3625 MeVhC(2S)<3645MeV
B  K(KSK -p +) BELLE
Why in exclusive B decays ?
Radial excitations (n=2) are expected to be
copiously produced in B exclusive decays
(6s significance)
hC(2S)
M (hC(2S)) = 3654± 6 ± 8 MeV
G (hC(2S)) < 50 MeV
The evidence from Crystall Ball(1982) M = 3594 ± 5MeV
Y Spectroscopy Discovery of Y(1D) states
g
g
Last stable quarkonium state discovered :
cb(2PJ), cb(1PJ) in 1982/1983
g
No stable L=2 meson observed ever
g
CLEO-III 4.7 106 Y(3S)
gggge+e- + ggggm+m- events
l +l 9.6s significance from the compatibilty with the
wonderful decay cascade through the Y(1D)
BR(gggg l+ l-) = 3.3 ± 0.6 ± 0.5 10-5
Predicted by Godfrey&Rosner 3.5 10-5
M( Y(13D2) ) = 10161.2 ± 0.7 ± 1.0 MeV
More likely hypothesis,but 11D2 not completely ruled out
?
MORE data are being accumulated
B Hadron Lifetimes History
Expected Improvements
(B+)/ (B0)
Already very precise !
improvements from B-factories
But more important
(B0s) and ( LB ) …. and XB Bc,
Wc
from Tevatron
B OPEN CHARM ( DK) and (DCP K)
K+
B+ b
u
c
u
0
D
c
s K+
u
b
B+
0
D
u
u
POSSIBLE WAY OF DETERMINING THE ANGLE g
D± are CP eigenstates
As previously , need to deal with strong interactions :
Possibility to determine
g through amplitude relations
verify
Interesting Alternative
B D0 p-/ B D0 K- =(8.31 0.35  0.13)% BABAR (81MB)
Direct CP Asymmetry in B DCPK
(D1) CP = +1 D0 K+K -,p + p -
; (D2) CP = - 1 D0 Ksp0,Kssh,Ksh’,Ksf,Ks, w
r=
ACP =
B D0 K*- = (5.4  0.6  0.8)10-4 BELLE
0
0
BR( B -  DCP
K - ) - BR( B +  DCP
K+)
0
0
BR( B -  DCP
K - ) + BR( B +  DCP
K+)
A( B -  D 0 K - )
A( B -  D 0 K - )
 0.1
29MB
 r sin D S sing
ACP(B  D1 K ) = 0.29  0.26  0.05 (Belle)
= 0.17  0.23 + 0.09(-0.08) (Babar)
ACP( B  D2 K  ) = -0.22  0.24  0.04 (Belle)
B  D1 K 
D1
81MB
Charm multiplicity : nc vs BRl
BRl is on the low side of the theo. expectation
mc/mb ~ 0.3
Possible explanation : effective c mass low  large bccs(d)
m ~ 0.35
low scale ?
nc = nc + nc is NEGATIVELY CORRELATED to BRl
10 Years of exper. and theo. efforts
BaBAR
B Decays to D(*) D(*)K in 22 decay modes (82MBB)
B0  D(*) D(*)K
B+  D(*) D(*)K
NEXT to DO
Precision dominated by the poor knowledge of
Charm Branching ratio CLEO-C mandatory
B decays in charmed baryons from B-Factories
B0  D(*) D(*)K = 4.3 ± 0.3 ± 0.6 %
B+  D(*) D(*)K = 3.5 ± 0.3 ± 0.5 %
measure exclusively the number of charm in decays
(other contributions than ccs and charmonium ?)
B Baryons
R. Chistov(Belle)
Stringent limit on B baryon antibaryon Br(B pp, LL, pL <(1.2,1.0,2.2) 10-6
Dominanace of multi-body final states
B0D*-ppp +
,D
*-pn
(CLEO)
Br(B±ppK±)=4.3+1.1(-0.9) ± 0.5) 10-6
Also three-body signals with Lc
B0D(*)pp
(color suppressed)
Sizeable as suggested by
observation
B0 D0p0, D0h , D0w
Br(B0D0pp) = (1.18 ± 0.15 ± 0.16 )10-4
Br(B0D*0pp) = (1.20 +0.33(-0.29) ± 0.21 )10-4
( no signal with D+)
Also first signa on Charmless decays with hyperion in final states
BELLE
B0  Ds(*)+ K Can proceed only via exchange diagram
or final state interaction
b
W
B
B0  Ds(*)+ K - / B0  Ds(*)+ p Only exch.
-
0
d
c
s
s
u
Ds(*)+
(exch + spect.)
Information on the importance of the exchange mechanism ?
Important
Time-dependent asymmetry in B  D(*)p
: Amplitude  sin(2b+g)
Cleaness of the method if some SU(3) relation holds only if W-exchange is small
~85MBB
Significance 3.5s
Br( B 0  Ds+ K - ) = (3.2  1.0  1.0) 10-5
Significance 6.4s
Br( B 0  Ds+ K - ) = (4.6+-11..12  1.3) 10-5
= (3.8  0.9  1.0( Ds  fp )) 10-5
K-
NEW Results on D** from exclusive B decays
B D**p
BELLE
Dpp
Contribution from
0+,2+
B
D*pp
Contribution from
1B+, 1+, 2+
M(0+)=2290 ± 22 ± 30 MeV
M(1B+)= 2400 ± 30 ± 20 MeV
M(1+)= 2424 ± 2 MeV
M(2+)= 2461 ± 2 ± 3 MeV
G(0+) = 300 ± 30 ± 30 MeV
G(1B+) = 380 ± 100 ± 100 MeV
G(1+) =26.7 ± 3.1 ± 2.2 MeV
G(2+) = 46.4 ± 4.4 ± 3.1 MeV
Dr vs Dw D(*) KK(*)
Br(B ll)
T.Moore(BaBar)
SM : Br(B0  e+e- ( 10-15 Br(B0  m+m- ) 10-10
Br(B0  em ) forbidden
Sensitive to New Physics (ex :H± )
So far (BELLE)
e+e- ( m+m- ) [em] 6.3 (2.8) [9.4] 10-7 (90% CL)
B(B  e+e-)  3.3  10-7
B(B  m+m-)  2.0  10-7
B(B  e+m-)  2.1  10-7
Babar 55MB
Dms Analyses
B/B at the decay time
Purity of tagging at
decay time :
ed
b/b at the production time
Purity of tagging at
production time:
ep
Measurement of the decay time
s (Dm) 
N=
1
1
1
1
N Ps (2e d - 1) (2e p - 1) e -(s t Dms )
2
number of events ; Ps = Bs purity
st is the time resolution.
As soon as Dms becomes larger,
the precision on the time measurement becomes crucial
Use D0 from D* to tag
the flavour of D0
D*+ D0 +
Dm
,
G
x =
1)
RWS (t )
=
-
Oscillations in
p

+
0
 K p / D (t ) >
 K -p + / D 0 (t ) >
y =
x'
y'
DG
2G
=
RDCS
+
RDCS
+
RDCS y '
x’, y’ < RDCS ~ l2 ~ 0.05
Measurement of the WS total rate
Constraint in (RDCS , y’) plane
or (y’,x’2)
'



y
0 
  (D ) 
t
Interference
Just a note : with 90fb-1 B-factories
has 222000D* tagged D0 decays ~ X 2 wrt FOCUS
 RDCS
S. Malvezzi(FOCUS)
D.Williams(BaBar)
system
= x cos + y sin
= - x sin + y cos
2
DCS
decays
RWS
D0
+
x '2 + y '2
2
 t 


  (D0 ) 


Wrong sign : WS
D0
2
D0
Oscillations
(1 ± cosDm t) ~ x2/2
idem for DG ~ y2/2
K- p+
 strong phase CF/DCS ampl.
rotation (x,y)(x’,y’)
Belle
New results are coming from B-factories
with huge statistics
148.5 evts
44.8 evts
207 evts.
450 evts
A.S. average
Not yet the time Fit.
2)
New method using Dalitz ex : D0 K0S p - p +
RS and WS occupy the same Dalitz plot
Measurement of strong phase 
Constraint on x,y2
( also sensitive to sign of x)
CLEO 5s
WS D0 K*p
First measurment of  CF/DCS
(K*p) = (-3 ±14) °
R(WS) = (0.6 ± 0.3 ± 0.3)%
Time Fit expected soon
( and also Dalitz from KsK+K - and p +p -p0 )
3)
Semileptonic decay D0 K*+ l- 
RMIX (t ) =
*+ -
0
 K l  / D (t ) >
2
 K *-l +  / D 0 (t ) >
x + y  t 
=
2   ( D 0 ) 
2
2
CLEO
2
No interference with DCS/Mixed
Constraint on x2,y2
RMIX = (0.00 ± 0.31 ± 0.32)% or < 0.87% @ 95 C.L. (Prel.)
FOCUS at the last minute RMIX <0.12% @ 95 C.L. (STAT ONLY)
Soon analysis with Ke
4)
CP eingenstate lifetimes
DG
 ( K -p + )
=
2G
 ( K - K + )or (p +p - )
- 1
K-K+ (or p -p +) pure CP D10
K-p+
50% D10 + D20
Constraint on y
A.S. average
New Results on D decays from BaBar
D.Williams(BaBar)
CP Violation in D decays
Measure of direct CP violation:
asymmetrys in decay rates of DKK p
S. Malvezzi(FOCUS)
D+/D- split sample analysis
Coefficients: D±, D+, D-
Phases: D±, D+, D-
Preliminary!
No evidence of CPV
K-matrix approach to improve the quality of the analysis
New FOCUS semileptonic BRs
& Form Factors
G( D  K m  )
= 0.602  0.01(stat )  0.021(sys)
+
- + +
G( D  K p p )
+
*0
+
Our number is 1.59
standard deviation
below CLEO and 2.1
standard deviation
above E691
All values consistent with their average value with a CL of 19%
G( D+  K *0 m + )
Form Factors
The vector and axial form factors are generally parametrized by a pole dominance form
Ai (0)
V (0)
2
Ai (q 2 ) =
V
(
q
)
=
1 - q 2 M 2V
1 - q2 M 2 A
Decay intensity (including s-wave amplitude) parametrized by
r2  A2 (0) A1 (0)
rv  V (0) A1 (0)
M A = 2.5
MV = 2.1 GeV / c 2
Nominal spectroscopic
pole masses
r3  A3 (0) A1 (0)
Group
rv
r2
FOCUS
BEATRICE
E 791(e)
E 791( m )
E 687
E 653
E 691
1.504  0.057  0.039
1.45  0.23  0.07
1.90  0.11  0.09
1.84  0.11  0.09
1.74  0.27  0.28
2.00  0.33  0.16
2.0  0.6  0.3
0.875  0.049  0.064
1.00  0.15  0.03
0.71  0.08  0.09
0.75  0.08  0.09
0.78  0.18  0.11
0.82  0.22  0.11
0.0  0.5  0.2
A = 0.330  0.022  0.015
 = 0.68  0.07  0.05 rad
GeV -1
GeV / c 2
Form Factor Ratios