semileptonic & rare charm decays
DESCRIPTION
Semileptonic & Rare Charm Decays. Will E. Johns Vanderbilt University FPCP 2003, June 4. Rare Charm Decays. Box and Penguin Diagrams are Smallish for Charm. Potential FCNC Decays are Suppressed. No Top Quuark in the loop. Short Distance. 10 -19. 10 -16. 10 -8. Rare Charm Decays. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Semileptonic & Rare Charm Decays
Will E. Johns
Vanderbilt University
FPCP 2003, June 4
Rare Charm Decays Potential FCNC Decays are Suppressed
10-19
10-16 γγ)( oDBR
)( oDBR
10-8 )( DBR
Short Distance
Rare Charm Decays
10-13
10-8 γγ)( oDBR
)( oDBR
10-6 )( DBR
Long Distance
Enhancement from Long Distance Effects
Even More room for decays:
X eX
New Result from CDF oD
Use D* tagged Do’s
Use Similar Normalization Mode Very Similar Kinematics Keep cuts “same”
Need Anyway: - Background from Normalization ~(MISID)2 = (0.013)2 or (1/5 ev.)
The “MISID ZONE”
Back of the Envelope:
1.5E-3 (2.2/1371) = 2.4E-6
)()( 00 DBReff
eff
N
NDBR
RARE
NORM
NORM
RARE
)5.1/( BS Optimal:
)5.2cut( M
KSideband + (MISID)2
•Expected background– events•Fake: •Combinatorial:
• 0 events in window
•New best limitBr < 2.4 x 10-6 at 90% CLBr < 3.1 x 10-6 at 95% CL
New Result from CDF oD
Background Sideband(Combinatorial Estimate)
Previous Bests: 4.1 x 10-6 at 90% CL (BEATRICE)4.2 x 10-6 at 90% CL (E771)
7.07.1 2.022.0
7.05.1
New Result from CLEO oD
13.8 fb-1
Form D0 mass from 2 photons
(Cuts optimized on )oooD
MoM 3)(
Mass must be within of M(D0)M5.2
Veto candidate when extra photons form mass:
(reduces bkgnd from 4 to 1)oo
Find soft pion consistent with D momentum cuts and Particle ID
Form )()*( oDMDMQ
Fit data to Gaussian and threshold function
Gaussian width and center fixed from Monte Carlo
)(8.310.628 eventsoooD
)(3.92.19 eventsoD
0094.00194.0)(
)(0
0
RARE
NORM
NORM
RARE
eff
eff
N
NooDBR
DBR
New Result from CLEO oD
Systematic error 13.1% from finding efficiencies, fits, MC stats, D selection, Event selection (added in quadrature with stat error for upper limit estimate)
90% ofProbability is above 0.0194
0.033
0.0194
(stat)
Sigma is total error
My toyexplanation
..%[email protected])(
)(0
0
LCooDBR
DBR
40 10)2.24.8()( Using ooDBR
..%[email protected])( 50 LCDBR
Phys. Rev. Lett. 90:101801, 2003hep-ex/0212045
Final Results from FOCUS ),()( KD S
Look for 3 bodies with 2 muonsCut Grid, based on vertexing, Particle ID
L/ – vary from >5-21 Lp
s
ISO1 – CL DK’s in prim (vary <0.1 –0.001)
DCL – CL of DK vertex (>1 -- 4%)MuCL – CL for Muon ID (>1 – 10%)
Cuts on P( for ’s, Cerenkov for ’s and K’s
Loosest Cuts
Tightest cuts
Final Results from FOCUS ),()( KD S
Systematic Check uses a single cut
(makes better plots!)
- First Bootstrap sets cuts for optimal Sensitivity (Blind)
- Second Bootstrap calculates quoted Sensitivity and Branching Ratio
Signal Excluded
D SD
Final Results from FOCUS
Decay
Mode
Dual
Bootstrap
Sensitivity Sys.
Error
Result
W/sys
Single
Cut(w/sys)
Previous
(E791)
D+ ++- 9.1x10-6 7.5x10-6 7.5% 9.2x10-6 12x10-6 44x10-6
D+ -++ 13x10-6 4.8x10-6 7.5% 13x10-6 12x10-6 120x10-6
D+ ++- 8.8x10-6 7.6x10-6 7.5% 8.8x10-6 7.4x10-6 15x10-6
D+ -++ 4.9x10-6 5.6x10-6 7.5% 4.8x10-6 5.2x10-6 17x10-6
Ds+ ++- 3.3x10-5 3.3x10-5 27.5% 3.6x10-5 3.8x10-5 1.4x10-4
Ds+ -++ 1.3x10-5 2.1x10-5 27.5% 1.3x10-5 2.0x10-5 1.8x10-4
Ds+ ++- 2.4x10-5 3.1x10-5 27.5% 2.6x10-5 1.8x10-5 1.4x10-4
Ds+ -++ 2.6x10-5 2.3x10-5 27.5% 2.9x10-5 2.2x10-5 0.8x10-4
(E687)Dominated by PDG rate to normalizing mode
Final Results from FOCUS ),()( KD S
Rare Decay Round-Up
OD
Closing in on Long rangeSM predictions
Sets MSSM constraint
Close to Long Distance Predictions
A 1st !
Lots of RoomAt the bottom!
Semileptonic Charm Decays
022222
2
cossin4sin})cos1()cos1{(coscos
VVVdd
d
(D decay, No form factors, V decays to spin 0 particles)
Neutrino is left handed
Prefers W spin along muon,e
V products spinless
Prefer LZ=0
Form FactorsBaryons (spin ½)Scalar Resonance?
CP?
More than just CKM measurement tools…
)Asymmetry CP(
)M Factors, Form(
Factors) Form(
)(
)(,
)(
)(
ce)Interferen()(
0
Pole0
0*
0*
e
e
KD
D
D
KD
KD
KD
C
C
S
S
FOCUS saw discrepancies in the data
2
20
2
2
2
5
0*
)(sincos2
)()cos1(sin
)()cos1(sin
coscos
obey) NOT Did(
0*
0*
0*
qHB
qHBe
qHBe
ddddqdm
d
KD
KV
K
iV
K
iV
Vk
Phys.Lett.B535:43-51, 2002hep-ex/0203031
FOCUS added a term, things got better
2
20
2
2
2
5
)()(cossin2
)(sin)cos1(
)(sin)cos1(
coscos
0*
0*
0*
qHAeB
qHBe
qHBe
ddddqdm
d
i
KV
K
iV
K
iV
Vk
L=0 ansatz
Clean
The data(error bars)preferred theL=0 ansatz(solid) overno extra term(dashed)
Bkgnd
FOCUS BR MeasurementsCuts similar to rare search:
even
ts /
5 M
eV/c
2
ISO1 ISO2 – No unused tracks consistent with charm vertex (CL < 0.1%)OoM – Charm vertex outside of target and silicon by Vertex3
)(
)(,
)(
)(0*
S
S
D
D
KD
KD
) cuts(/18.0}){(}){( 0*2 DDcGeVKMKM
KD 0*KD
SDSD
0*KD Includes S-wave interference
)(048.0)(033.054.0
)(
)(
sysstat
D
D
S
S
(1.5) 2.2,e)(quadratur Total
(0.94) 1.57, ff) (Bk,fit Vary
(1.12) 1.57, Samples Splitting
(1.06) 0.71, CutsVary
:)( for
offraction a as expressed
:errors Systematic
stat
SDD
(add in if > 1)
Phys.Lett.B540:25-32, 2002hep-ex/0206013
)(021.0)(010.0602.0
)(
)(0*
sysstat
KD
KD
FOCUS Form Factors
and ,parameters waveS and)0(
)0(
)0(
)0( Fit to
)/1.2(,/1
)0()()/5.2(,
/1
)0()(
)(4)())((2
1)(
0set factor, has )()(2)()()(
1
22
1
222
2222
2
22
222
1222
2
20
22221
2
AA
Ar
A
Vr
cGeVMMq
VqVcGeVM
Mq
AqA
qAmM
KMqAmMqmM
qmqH
mqHqVmM
KMqAmMqH
v
VV
AA
ii
KD
DKDKD
K
tKD
DKD
Tried in fit,no sensitivity (E791?)
(common – vary generated parameters in Montecarloby using agreement with reconstructed distributions and data)
Pioneered by D.M. Schmidt for E691 K*ev analysis: NIM A 328 (1993)
0*KD
2max
2V /in 3 and in 3 ,cosin 5 ,cosin bins 5 qq
Kmin 4 and in 3 ,cosin 3 ,cosin bins 3 V
S-wave termBreaks symmetry
S-wave term andr’s essentially decouple
FOCUS Form Factors 0*KD
Cuts similar to previous, some change to get uniform acceptance, one extra
OoM – Charm vertex outside of target and silicon by Vertex1Cut on q2 < 0.2 GeV2/c2 r’s are flat, feeling mμ? Goodness of fit issue
Right sign – Wrong sign
Charm Background
Systematic ChecksS-wave – varied cuts35 fits – Sample VarianceForm Factor (3 sources)1) Varied Cuts2) Split sample
3) Vary MC input Charm Backgrounds
)/9.0(2,, cGeVKD mDDP
2)0(
)0(2
1
3 A
A 064.0049.0875.02
039.0057.0504.1
)()(
05.007.068.0
015.0022.0330.0
r
r
sysstat
A
V
Phys.Lett.B544:89-96, 2002hep-ex/0207049
CLEO Form Factors and CP eC0
Spin ½ Λ baryon adds a new wrinkle…
Körner and Krämer use supplementary definitions for X and the lepton angle
0,1,1,0,1,12
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
)}cos1(sinsincos)Re(
)cos1(sinsincos)Re(
)cos1(sin||
)cos1(sin||
)cos1()cos1((||
)cos1()cos1((|{|
coscos
22
3*
22
3*
24
32
24
32
28
32
28
32
2
4
12
102
1
12
102
1
02
1
02
1
12
1
12
1
WW
WW
W
W
W
W
W
HH
HH
H
H
H
H
ddddq
d
eC0
One pole mass describes the decay222
22
22 )/1(
/1
)()( PoleMax
Pole
Max MqMq
qfqf
Helicty H’s made from 2 form factors:
)0,( isspin
|)(||)(|expect
2
22
21
fsticky
qfqf
CBIntegrate over variables and look at asymmetries:
)cos1(cos2
2
Cddq
d(other choices possible)
(no sign change for particle and anti-particle)
CLEO Form Factors and CP eC0
2
12
/)(10.0)(07.013.2
)(04.0)(05.031.0/
cGeVsysstatM
sysstatffR
pole
(To be sent to PRL)
Systematics: -Background Normalizations-Kinematic Closing-Fitting simulation-Efficiencies
KK
13.4 fb-1 from CLEO II and II.5
Look for Λe+ pairs where Λ→p π –
directionPFindP C )(?)( - Event thrust axis for direction- Try to close kinematics:
22
)( PPPP eC
(use fragmentation to break ambg)
(again the Schmidt meth)
CLEO Form Factors and CP eC0
Semileptonic Round-up
(From K. Stenson’s APS review)
0*KD
Interference effectsNeed other experiments to look Probably more in there…
Lowers by 5.5%
Semileptonic Round-up
We all seem to agree!)(
)(
S
S
D
D eC0
No CP violation
expected toclose/ 12 ff
C Expect ~-1 from HQET
Good agreementin the Distributions
I didn’t miss ‘em!
y)prelininar (Too CLEO
y)preliminar (Too CLEO
y)prelininar (Too CLEO *
py)Spectroscoin cover willChistov(Ruslan BELLE
0
0
0
S
eC
C
D
e
eKD
Would be nice to measure:
BARBARandBELLECDFfromDecaysRare
VDPD
KD
eKDeD ee
,
/
confirmed effects ceInterferen
,0*
00