Cargando…

Can the differences in the determinations of $V_{ub}$ and $V_{cb}$ be explained by New Physics?

The precise determination of the CKM elements $V_{cb}$ and $V_{ub}$ is crucial for any new physics analysis in the flavour sector. Their values can be determined from several tree-level decays: $V_{cb}$ can be extracted from $B\to D\ell\nu$ and $B\to D^*\ell\nu$ while $V_{ub}$ can be obtained from $...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Crivellin, Andreas, Pokorski, Stefan
Lenguaje:eng
Publicado: 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.011802
http://cds.cern.ch/record/1741325
_version_ 1780942657989640192
author Crivellin, Andreas
Pokorski, Stefan
author_facet Crivellin, Andreas
Pokorski, Stefan
author_sort Crivellin, Andreas
collection CERN
description The precise determination of the CKM elements $V_{cb}$ and $V_{ub}$ is crucial for any new physics analysis in the flavour sector. Their values can be determined from several tree-level decays: $V_{cb}$ can be extracted from $B\to D\ell\nu$ and $B\to D^*\ell\nu$ while $V_{ub}$ can be obtained from $B\to \pi\ell\nu$, $B\to \rho\ell\nu$ and $B\to\tau\nu$. In addition, for both $V_{cb }$ and $V_{ub}$ an inclusive determination is available. There is a long lasting discrepancy between the inclusive and exclusive determinations which recently even increased for $V_{cb}$ above the $3\;\sigma$ level. In this article we study the possible effect of new physics on the inclusive and exclusive determination of $V_{cb}$ and $V_{ub}$ in a model independent way. We find that there is only one operator corresponding to a modified $W$ coupling which can achieve this. However, respecting $SU(2)$ gauge invariance at the high scale this would lead to very large violations of the $Z$ to $b\bar b$ coupling not compatible with experiment. Therefore, we conclude that a new physics explanation of the difference between the inclusive and exclusive determination of $V_{cb}$ and $V_{ub}$ is currently ruled out. Therefore, the discrepancies must be due underestimated uncertainties in the theoretical and/or the experimental analysis.
id cern-1741325
institution Organización Europea para la Investigación Nuclear
language eng
publishDate 2014
record_format invenio
spelling cern-17413252023-03-12T04:18:56Zdoi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.011802http://cds.cern.ch/record/1741325engCrivellin, AndreasPokorski, StefanCan the differences in the determinations of $V_{ub}$ and $V_{cb}$ be explained by New Physics?Particle Physics - PhenomenologyThe precise determination of the CKM elements $V_{cb}$ and $V_{ub}$ is crucial for any new physics analysis in the flavour sector. Their values can be determined from several tree-level decays: $V_{cb}$ can be extracted from $B\to D\ell\nu$ and $B\to D^*\ell\nu$ while $V_{ub}$ can be obtained from $B\to \pi\ell\nu$, $B\to \rho\ell\nu$ and $B\to\tau\nu$. In addition, for both $V_{cb }$ and $V_{ub}$ an inclusive determination is available. There is a long lasting discrepancy between the inclusive and exclusive determinations which recently even increased for $V_{cb}$ above the $3\;\sigma$ level. In this article we study the possible effect of new physics on the inclusive and exclusive determination of $V_{cb}$ and $V_{ub}$ in a model independent way. We find that there is only one operator corresponding to a modified $W$ coupling which can achieve this. However, respecting $SU(2)$ gauge invariance at the high scale this would lead to very large violations of the $Z$ to $b\bar b$ coupling not compatible with experiment. Therefore, we conclude that a new physics explanation of the difference between the inclusive and exclusive determination of $V_{cb}$ and $V_{ub}$ is currently ruled out. Therefore, the discrepancies must be due underestimated uncertainties in the theoretical and/or the experimental analysis.<p>The precise determination of the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa elements <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is crucial for any new physics analysis in the flavor sector. Their values can be determined from several tree-level decays: <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> can be extracted from <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">→</mml:mo><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mo>ℓ</mml:mo><mml:mi>ν</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">→</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>ℓ</mml:mo><mml:mi>ν</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> while <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> can be obtained from <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">→</mml:mo><mml:mi>π</mml:mi><mml:mo>ℓ</mml:mo><mml:mi>ν</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">→</mml:mo><mml:mi>ρ</mml:mi><mml:mo>ℓ</mml:mo><mml:mi>ν</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">→</mml:mo><mml:mi>τ</mml:mi><mml:mi>ν</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>. In addition, for both <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> an inclusive determination is available. There is a long lasting discrepancy between the inclusive and exclusive determinations which recently even increased for <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> above the <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mn>3</mml:mn><mml:mi>σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> level. In this Letter we study the possible effect of new physics on the inclusive and exclusive determination of <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in a model independent way. We find that there is only one operator corresponding to a modified <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>W</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> coupling which can achieve this. However, respecting <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mn>2</mml:mn><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> gauge invariance at the high scale this would lead to very large violations of the <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">¯</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:math></inline-formula> coupling not compatible with experiment. Therefore, we conclude that a new physics explanation of the difference between the inclusive and exclusive determination of <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is currently ruled out. Therefore, the discrepancies must be due to underestimated uncertainties in the theoretical and/or the experimental analysis.</p>The precise determination of the CKM elements $V_{cb}$ and $V_{ub}$ is crucial for any new physics analysis in the flavour sector. Their values can be determined from several tree-level decays: $V_{cb}$ can be extracted from $B\to D\ell\nu$ and $B\to D^*\ell\nu$ while $V_{ub}$ can be obtained from $B\to \pi\ell\nu$, $B\to \rho\ell\nu$ and $B\to\tau\nu$. In addition, for both $V_{cb }$ and $V_{ub}$ an inclusive determination is available. There is a long lasting discrepancy between the inclusive and exclusive determinations which recently even increased for $V_{cb}$ above the $3\;\sigma$ level. In this article we study the possible effect of new physics on the inclusive and exclusive determination of $V_{cb}$ and $V_{ub}$ in a model independent way. We find that there is only one operator corresponding to a modified $W$ coupling which can achieve this. However, respecting $SU(2)$ gauge invariance at the high scale this would lead to very large violations of the $Z$ to $b\bar b$ coupling not compatible with experiment. Therefore, we conclude that a new physics explanation of the difference between the inclusive and exclusive determination of $V_{cb}$ and $V_{ub}$ is currently ruled out. Therefore, the discrepancies must be due underestimated uncertainties in the theoretical and/or the experimental analysis.arXiv:1407.1320CERN-PH-TH-2014-124CERN-PH-TH-2014-124oai:cds.cern.ch:17413252014-07-04
spellingShingle Particle Physics - Phenomenology
Crivellin, Andreas
Pokorski, Stefan
Can the differences in the determinations of $V_{ub}$ and $V_{cb}$ be explained by New Physics?
title Can the differences in the determinations of $V_{ub}$ and $V_{cb}$ be explained by New Physics?
title_full Can the differences in the determinations of $V_{ub}$ and $V_{cb}$ be explained by New Physics?
title_fullStr Can the differences in the determinations of $V_{ub}$ and $V_{cb}$ be explained by New Physics?
title_full_unstemmed Can the differences in the determinations of $V_{ub}$ and $V_{cb}$ be explained by New Physics?
title_short Can the differences in the determinations of $V_{ub}$ and $V_{cb}$ be explained by New Physics?
title_sort can the differences in the determinations of $v_{ub}$ and $v_{cb}$ be explained by new physics?
topic Particle Physics - Phenomenology
url https://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.011802
http://cds.cern.ch/record/1741325
work_keys_str_mv AT crivellinandreas canthedifferencesinthedeterminationsofvubandvcbbeexplainedbynewphysics
AT pokorskistefan canthedifferencesinthedeterminationsofvubandvcbbeexplainedbynewphysics