1 / 26

Extraction

4. Extraction. of the. Unitarity triangle parameters. Search for New Physics. sin( b+g ). How measurements constraint UT parameters. a. g. the angles. sin( 2b). D m s. D m d. V ub /V cb. the sides. CP asymmetries in charmless. B  K * (r)g. B  tn. …. Rare decays...

marnie
Download Presentation

Extraction

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 4 Extraction of the Unitarity triangle parameters Search for New Physics

  2. sin(b+g) How measurements constraint UT parameters a g the angles.. sin(2b) Dms Dmd Vub/Vcb the sides... CP asymmetries in charmless BK*(r)g Btn … Rare decays... sensitive to NP

  3. Bccs : 1 /b K : CPV in K decays bcℓ and buℓ Bd and Bs mixing B// : 2/ BDK : 3/ An example on how to fit the UT parameters and fit new physics

  4. From Childhood In ~2000 the first fundamental test of agreement between direct and indirect sin2b To precision era WE HAVE TO GO ON…

  5. Crucial Test of the SM in the quarks sector (historical..) DONE!! determination of CP violating parameters measuring CP-conserving observables CP-violating observables was/is the strong motivation of the B-Factories sin2b = 0.726 ± 0.037 B  J/y K0 Coherent picture of CP Violation in SM from sides-only We are probably beyond the era of « alternatives» to the CKM picture. NP should appear as «corrections» to the CKM picture

  6. TODAY SITUATION Total Fit Dmd,Dms,Vub,Vcb,ek+ cos2b + b +a +g + 2b+g r = 0.164± 0.029 h = 0.340 ± 0.017

  7. Comparison measurements “with angles” wrt “with sides”

  8. SM Fit Are there evidence of disagreement in the actual fit ? agreement between the predicted values and the measurements at better than : 1s 3s 5s 2s 4s 6s No disagreement for g et Dms

  9. Some discrepencies observed between Vub and sin2b sin2b=0.675±0.026 From direct measurement We should keep an eyes on these kinds of disagreements. Could be NP sin2b =0.764± 0.039 from indirect determination (all included by sin2b)

  10. The problem of particle physics today is : where is the NP scale L ~ 0.5, 1…1016 TeV The quantum stabilization of the Electroweak Scale suggest that L ~ 1 TeV LHC will search on this range What happens if the NP scale is at 2-3..10 TeV …naturalness is not at loss yet… Flavour Physics explore also this range We want to perform flavour measurements such that : - if NP particles are discovered at LHC we able study the flavour structure of the NP - we can explore NP scale beyond the LHC reach If there is NP at scale L, it will generate new operator of dimension D with coefficents proportional to L4-D You could demonstrate that only operator of D=6 contribute So that in fact you have a dependence on 1/ L2

  11. (MFV), no new sources of flavour and CP violation NP contributions governed by SM Yukawa couplings. To help with a more specific example : Example for B oscillations (FCNC-DB=2) : dbd prupper limit of the relative contribution of NP dbdNP physics coupling LeffNP scale (masses of new particles) Minimal Flavour Violation If couplings ~ 1 all possible intermediate possibilities dbq ~ 1 Leff ~ 10/pr TeV (couplings small as CKM elements) Leff ~ 2/pr TeV dbs ~1 dbq ~ 0.1 Leff ~ 1/pr TeV Leff ~ 0.08/pr TeV Leff ~ 0.2/pr TeV dbs ~0.1

  12. NP physics could be always arround the corner WHAT IS REALLY STRANGE IS THAT WE DID NOT SEE ANYTHING…. With masses of New Particles at few hundred GeV effects on measurable quantities should be important Problem known as the FLAVOUR PROBLEM Leff <~ 1TeV + flavour-mixing protected by additional symmetries (as MFV) Couplings can be still large if Leff > 1..10..TeV

  13. Fit in a NP model independent approach DF=2 Parametrizing NP physics in DF=2 processes Tree processes 5 new free parameters Cs,js Bs mixing Cd,jd Bd mixing CeK K mixing 13 family Constraints 23 family Today : fit possible with 10 contraints and 7 free parameters (r, h, Cd,jd ,Cs,js, CeK) 12 familiy

  14. φBd = (-3.0 ± 2.0)o CBd = 1.24 ± 0.43 ANP/ASM vs fNP With present data ANP/ASM=0 @ 2s ANP/ASM ~1 only if fNP~0 ANP/ASM ~0-40% @95% prob.

  15. Complementarity LHC/precise measurments today r = 20%  Leff ~ 180 GeV tomorrow Leff ~ 0.08/rTeV r = 10%  Leff ~ 250 GeV after tomorrow electroweak scale r = 1%  Leff ~ 800 GeV You need to improve 20 times your precision if you want to span the region from the EW scale to the TeV scale. As could be obtained at a superB ~100 times present B-factory luminosity NP scale ~200GeV with MFV couplings NP~800 GeV This is really the most costly way of reaching high NP scale….

  16. Adjusting the central values so that they are all compatible Keeping the central values as measured today with errors at the SuperB

  17. Higgs-mediated NP in MFV at large tanb Similar formula in MSSM. Excl. 2s Bln MH (TeV) tanb 2ab-1 MH~0.4-0.8 TeV for tanb~30-60 SuperB MH~1.2-2.5 TeV for tanb~30-60

  18. W- s b f t s B0d s K0 d d Constraints on b -> s transitions: ~ g ~ ~ s b s b New Physics contribution (2-3 families)

  19. Example on how precise measurements could allow o explore NP scale beyond the TeV scale ~ g MSSM ~ ~ New Physics contribution (2-3 families) s b s b 1 10-1 10-2 In the red regions the d are measured with a significance >3s away from zero 1 10 ACP(bsg) With the today precision we do not have 3s exclusion for any set of parameters

  20. APPENDIX Part IV 1) More details on MFV

  21. The previous fits MFV ? j(Bd) ~0 MFV = CKM is the only source of CP violation Fit without eKandDmd valid in SM and MFV eKandDmd are sensitive to NP UniversalUTfit Buras et al. hep-ph/0007085 Almost as good as the SM !! Very tiny space for see effects beyond the SM Starting point for studies of rare decays see for instance : Bobeth et al. hep-ph/0505110

  22. RARE DECAYS in the framework of MFV Upper limits : K physics B physics Very interesting the AFB asymmetry of BK*ll

  23. MFV In models with one Higgs doublet or low/moderate tanb (D’Ambrosio et al. hep-ph/0207036) NP enters as additional contribution in top box diagram L0 is the equivalent SM scale dS0 = -0.03 ± 0.54 [-0.90, 1.79] @95% Prob. To be compared with tested scale using for instance b->sg (9-12Tev) D’Ambrosio et al. hep-ph/0207036

  24. L > 2.6 TeV @ 95% for dS0(xt) > 0 L > 3.2 TeV @ 95% for dS0(xt) > 0 L > 4.9 TeV @ 95% for dS0(xt) < 0 L > 4.9 TeV @ 95% for dS0(xt) < 0 MFV 2Higgs + large tanb also bottom Yukawa coupling must be considered dS0B≠dS0K dS0B dS0K Could give infomation on the tanb regime …not yet at the present Correlation coefficient =0.52

  25. Two crucial questions : Can NP be flavour blind ? No : NP couples to SM which violates flavour Can we define a “worst case” scenario Yes : the class of model with Minimal Flavour Violation (MFV), namely : no new sources of flavour and CP violation and so : NP contributions governed by SM Yukawa couplings. Today L(MFV) > 2.3L0 @95C.L. NP masses >200GeV SuperB L(MFV) >~6L0 @95C.L. NP masses >600GeV

  26. In Bs sector we are not yet at the same level of precision as in Bd sector

More Related