Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

use beta gamma CKM scheme as default #252

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

peterstangl
Copy link
Collaborator

This PR changes the default CKM scheme to the beta gamma scheme, which, compared to the Tree scheme, uses the UT angle $\beta$ instead of $|V_{ub}|$. The advantage is that this input scheme is unaffected by the tension between inclusive and exclusive $|V_{ub}|$ determinations (and the tensions between different exclusive determinations). Furthermore, with the most recent determination of $\beta$, the precision of the CKM elements is increased. The predicted value of $|V_{ub}|$ in this scheme with the current flavio inputs is
$$|V_{ub}|=(3.72\pm0.09)\times 10^{-3}\,,$$
which has an error nearly two times smaller than the exclusive $V_{ub}$ determined from $B\to\pi\ell\nu$.

@DavidMStraub
Copy link
Contributor

Is that beta from B to psi KS or something else?

@peterstangl
Copy link
Collaborator Author

It's mostly $B\to\psi K_S$ but also some other charmonium channels listed here: https://hflav-eos.web.cern.ch/hflav-eos/triangle/latest/#sin2b

@DavidMStraub
Copy link
Contributor

But then it's no longer a tree-level determination, so not appropriate to use it in presence of dim-6 NP, or not?

@peterstangl
Copy link
Collaborator Author

But shouldn't the question be whether there might be a potential dim-6 NP contribution affecting the extraction of the CKM parameter, rather than whether the process is tree or loop level? Of course, in general, loop-level processes might be more affected by dim-6 NP than tree-level ones, but there is no real guarantee of that, right? And at the moment there are tensions in tree-level $b\to u\ell\nu$ data that could be interpreted in terms of dim-6 NP (e.g. https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.05268).

So, in the end, don't we always have to choose which dim-6 NP contributions we assume to be absent when extracting the CKM elements as used in the current implementation in flavio? And I'm not sure the absence of NP in tree-level $b\to u\ell\nu$ is necessarily better motivated than its absence in loop-level $B$ mixing.

In the end, could it make sense to implement the CKM extraction in the presence of dim-6 NP that we have in smelli in flavio to avoid this problem no matter whether tree or loop level observables are used?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants