Experimental Status Flavour and CP

andFuture with SuperB

Achille StocchiLAL Orsay

Université Paris-SudIN2P3-CNRS

SuperB: Flavour Physics 2011, Jan 18 - Jan 21

2

Short Introduction – Main motivations

Actual Situation (CKM – CP)

What we learned sofar(using selected topics)

Future : SuperB for CP and FlavourSome comparison with LHCb and SLHCb

Flavour Physics in the Standard Model (SM) in the quark sector:

10 free parameters

6 quarks masses 4 CKM parameters

~ h

alf

of t

he

Sta

nd

ard

Mo

del

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

Wolfenstein parametrization : l ,A, , r h h responsible of CP violation in SM

B , , ...pp rp rr

+other charmonium

radiative decays Xsg,Xdg, Xsll

B DK

+from Penguins

The Unitarity Triangle:

Charm Physics(Dalitz)

?

theo. clean

B tn

Beyond the Standard Model with flavour physics

The indirect searches look for “New Physics” through virtual effects from new particles in loop corrections

~1970 charm quark from FCNC and GIM-mechanism K0 mm

~1973 3rd generation from CP violation in kaon (eK) KM-mechanism

~1990 heavy top from B oscillations DmB

~2000 success of the description of FCNC and CPV in SM

SM FCNCs and CP-violating (CPV) processes occur at the loop level

SM quark Flavour Violation (FV) and CPV are governed by weak interactionsand are suppressed by mixing angles.

SM quark CPV comes from a single sources ( if we neglect q QCD )

New Physics does not necessarily share the SM behaviour of FV and CPV

3

2

1

4

“Discoveries” and construction of the SM Lagrangian

f

bq

e f

5

More saidin Marco Ciuchini

talk

6

From Childhood

In ~2000 the first fundamental test of agreement between

direct and indirect measurements of sin2bTo precision era

Dominated by Dmd, Vub,Vcb, eK, limit on Dms and Lattice

7

sin(2 )b

ga sin( +b g)

BtnBK*( )r g

the sides...

Dms Dmd Vub/Vcb

…

Many new (or more precise) measurements to constraint UT parameters and test New Physics

bs

CP asymmetries in radiative decays

the angles..

Rare decays...sensitive to NP

What happened since….

What happened since….

Improved measurement of Vub, Vcb (6-7)%, 1.5% (B factories) (improved theory, moment analyses…)

Measurement of the Bs oscillation Dms (Tevatron)

Improvement of the b angle measurement 4% (B factories)

Surpise.. B-factory also measured quite precisely the other angles(mainly B-factories, Tevatron also performed some measurement) a ~7% ; g ~15%

First measurement of the leptonic decay B t n (B factories)

Measurement of the CP violation in the Bs sector (Tevatron)

Measurement of Penguins diagram b from Penguins (B factories)

Measurement of the direct CP violation in charmless decays (B factories)

Measurement of Br and CP asymmetries in radiative and di-lepton (B factories)

Global Fit within the SMConsistence on anover constrained fit

of the CKM parameters

h = 0.358 ± 0.012 h = 0.358 ± 0.012

r = 0.132 ± 0.020 r = 0.132 ± 0.020

With a precision of ( ) ~s r 15% and ( ) s h ~4% !

Coherent picture of FCNC and CPV processes in SM

Discovery : absence of New Particles up to the ~2×Electroweak Scale !

CKM matrix is the dominant source of flavour mixing and CP violation

10

Is the present picture showing a

Model Standardissimo ?

I’ll try to answer this question looking

at the different measurements (separately) and their agreement with the SM predictions.

One of the mail goal of this exercise for this talk is also to show if the measurements (or the theory) have to be improved

11

SM expectationΔms = (18.3 ± 1.3 ) ps-1

agreement between the predicted values and the measurements at better than :

6s

5s 3s

4s

1s

2s

Legenda

SM predictions of Dms Dms

10

Prediction “era” Monitoring “era”

12Message : very stringent test of the SM, perfect compatibility. Improving Lattice calculations would have important impact.

Dms Dmd

2

22 2

2

22 2

2

~

~ ~

( ) ~ ~

s s

d d

d d s s

s s

d

d s

s

s B B

B Bd B B B B

B B

BB B

B

m f B

f Bm f B f B

f B

fBr B f f

f

Dominated by theo.error

b from bccs

transitions

+2.2s deviation*

*The theoretical error on the sin2 b is considered as in CPS the disagreement decreases If FFJM approach is used 1.6 ) s

sin2b=0.654 ± 0.026 From direct measurement

sin2b =0.771 ± 0.036 from indirect determination

The precision era :b=(21.1 ± 0.9)o (~4%)

Message : “old” tension between sin2b measured and predicted (know as Vub-sin2b tension).

Improvement in predictions and measurements are of the outmost importance.

14

d d

sb

W-

B0d

t s

s

f

K0

g

sb b s

~

~ ~

New Physics contribution (2-3 families)

LRd

23

sin2b from “s Penguins” (bqqs )…a lot of progress..

Message :After a long story of disagreement… Today there is a rather good agreement between sin2b from

bccs 0.672 ± 0.023 (0.028 with theo. error) bqqs 0.64 ± 0.04

15

ausing B ( ) pp rp rr

, ,

ga

Dm

s deviations within 1s

Direct measurement SM prediction (74 ± 11)o (69.6 ± 3.1)o

Direct measurement SM prediction (91.4 ± 6.1)o (85.4 ± 3.7)o Message : precision on a should be improved by factor two to have stringent test of SM

gtree level B DK

Message : precision on g should be improved by factor at least four to have stringent test of SM

Measurements of , g a were not really expected at B factories (at least at this

precision)

ACP in charmless B decays ACP in radiative and Leptonic

ACP in radiative and leptonic decays expected to be almost zero in the SM.

Null Test for new physics search. Crucial to improve the precision

Many other CP asymmetry measurements are performed in different decay modes (with corresponding measurments of branching fractions)

Direct CP violation in

B decays

Diff

icul

t to

use

thes

e m

easu

rem

ents

to

con

stra

in U

T p

aram

eter

sor

look

ing

for

NP

ACP all compatible with zero

Sho

wn

here

onl

y th

e m

ost p

reci

se

Br(B )tn

-3.2s deviation

Nota Bene To accommodate Br(B ) tn we need larger value of Vub

To accommodate sin2b we need lower value of Vub

Br(Btn) =(1.72± 0.28)10-4 From direct measurement

Br(B )tn =(0.805± 0.071)10-4 SM prediction

Message : we need to measure more precisely this branching fraction !Precise determination of fB is also important

First leptonic decay seen on B meson

eK

-1.7s devation

Very old measurement (not from B physics..)But three “news” ingredients

(6)12Im

sini

K

Me

m

K

1) Buras&Guadagnoli BG&Isidori corrections

Decrease the SM prediction by 6%

2) Improved value for BK BK=0.731±0.07±0.35

3) Brod&Gorbhan charm-top contribution at NNLO

enanchement of 3% (not included yet in this analysis)

Prediction Measurement Pullg (69.6 ±3.1)° (74 ±11)° -0.4a (85.4 ±3.7)° (91.4 ±6.1)° -0.8

sin2b 0.771±0.036 0.654±0.026 +2.2

Vub [103] 3.55 ±0.14 3.76 ±0.20 * -0.9

Vcb [103] 42.69 ±0.99 40.83 ±0.45 * +1.6

eK [103] 1.92 ±0.18 2.23 ±0.010 -1.7

Br(B t n) 0.805±0071 1.72±0.28 -3.2

Dms (ps-1) 17.77±0.12 18.3±1.3 -0.4

Summary Table of the Some Pulls

• Both in Vcb and Vub there is some tensions between Inclusive and Exclusive determinations. The measurements shown is the average of the two determinations

Message/conclusion. Overall good agreement with the SM. There are “interesting” tensions here and there. Many measurements (and often theory related to) have to

be improved to transform these measurements in stringent tests.

, r h Cd jd Cs js CeK

(g D )K X

Vub/Vcb X

Dmd X X

ACP (J/ )Y K X

X

ACP (D (p r),DK )p X

X

ASL X X

( , , )a rr rp pp X X

ACH X X X X

(t Bs), DGs/Gs X X

Dms X

ASL(Bs) X X

ACP (J/ )Y f ~X X

eK X X

Treeprocesses

13 family

23 family

12 familiy

0

( , , , ..)

( / , ) sin(2 2 ) ( , , )

( , , )

| | | |

d d

d d

d d

EXP SMd B d B

CP B B

EXP SMB B

EXP SMK K

m C m f C QCD

A J K f

f

C

( , , , ..)

( , , , ..)

( / , ) sin(2 2 ) ( , , )

...

s

s s

EXP SMs B s Bs

CP s B B

f C QCD

m C m f C QCD

A J f

DF=2NP model independent Fit

Parametrizing NP physics in DF=2 processes

2 2 2

2

NP SMi B B

SMB

A Ae

A

qC dφ

More details in Marco Ciuchini

talk

21

h = 0.358 ± 0.012 h = 0.358 ± 0.012

r = 0.132 ± 0.020 r = 0.132 ± 0.020

h = 0.374 ± 0.026 h = 0.374 ± 0.026

r = 0.135 ± 0.040 r = 0.135 ± 0.040

SM analysis NP-DF=2 analysis

,r h fit quite precisely in NP-DF=2 analysis and consistent with the one obtained on the SM analysis

[error double](main contributors tree-level g and Vub)

5 new free parameters Cs,js Bs mixing

Cd,jd Bd mixing

CeK K mixing

Today : fit is overcontrained

Possible to fit 7 free parameters (r, , h Cd,jd ,Cs,js, CeK)

Please consider these numbers when you want to get CKM parametersin presence of NP in DF=2 amplitudes (all sectors 1-2,1-3,2-3)

22

With present data ANP/ASM=0 @ 1.5s

ANP/ASM ~0-30% @95% prob.

CBd = 0.95± 0.14[0.70,1.27]@95%

fBd = -(3.1 ± 1.7)o

[-7.0,0.1]o @95%

1.8 s deviation

Bd

1.8s agreement takes into account the theoretical error on sin2b

CBs = 0.95± 0.10[0.78,1.16]@95%

2 2 ( )2

2

NPs s s

Bs

s

i ii SM NP

Bs iSM

A e A eC e

A e

Bs

New : CDF new measurement reduces the significance of the disagreement. Likelihood not available yet for us.New : amm from D0 points to large bs, but also large DGs not standard G12 ?? ( NP in G12 / bad failure of OPE in G12.. Consider that it seems to work on G11 (lifetime)

fBs = (-20 ± 8)o U (-68 ± 8) o [-38,-6] U [-81,-51] 95% prob.

New results tends toreduce the deviation (see next talk)

3.1 s deviation

CKM matrix is the dominant source of flavour mixing and CP violation ( )~15% ( ) s r s h~4%

Nevertheless there are tensions here and there that should be continuously and quantitatively monitored :

sin2 (+2.2 )b s , eK (-1.7 ) s , Br(B t n) -(3.2 )s[CP asymmetry in Bs sector (3.1 )]s

Other way of looking at : Model Independent fit show some discrepancy on the NP phase

parametersfBd = -(3.1 ± 1.7)o ; fBs = (-20 ± 8)o U (-68 ± 8) o

To render these tests more effective we need to improve the measurements but also (in same case) the predictions

Other measurements are interesting, not yet stringent tests :, , a g b from Penguins, ACP (and Br) in radiative and dileptonic

decays…

B factories have shown that a variety of measurements can be performed in the clean

environment.

The systematic errors are very rarely irreducible and can almost on all cases be controlled with control samples. (up to..50-100ab-1)

Asymmetric B factory

High luminosity

Many and interesting measurements at different energies (charm/t threshold, U(5S), other Upsilons.. ) and with polarised beam

Flavour factories

L= 1034 cm-2 s-1 150 fb-1 1.5 × 108 (4s) produced by year

L= 1036 cm-2 s-1 15 ab-1 1.5 × 1010 (4s) produced by year

SuperB factory potential discovery evaluated with 75ab-1

Next : a SuperB Factory. See Alberto Luisiani talk

Definition of a SuperB factory/minimal requirements

26

B physics @ Y(4S)

Possible also at LHCb

Similar precision at LHCb

Example of « SuperB specifics » inclusive in addition to exclusive analyses channels with p0, g’s, , n many Ks…

Variety of measurements for any observable

27

t physics (polarized beams)

Bs at Y(5S)

Charm at Y(4S) and threshold

To be evaluated

at L

HCb

Bs : Definitively better at LHCb

See Alberto Maria Jose Herrero andJorge Vidal talks S

ee Alberto N

icola Neri talk

28

X

XX- CKM

X

X

X

X The GOLDEN channel for the given scenario

Not the GOLDEN channel for the given scenario,

but can show experimentally measurable deviations from SM.

X- CKM

Let’s consider (reductively) the GOLDEN MATRIX for B physics

X

In the following some examples of

« SuperB specifics » inclusive analyses channels with p0, , , g n many Ks…

29

Future (SuperB) + Lattice improvements

Determination of CKM parameters and New Physics

Today

r = ± 0.0028h = ± 0.0024

r = 0.163 ± 0.028h = 0.344± 0.016

Improving CKM iscrucial to look for NP

1T

his

sit

uat

ion

wil

l be

diff

eren

t @

2015

than

ks to

LH

Cb

, ,g a b..,Vub

and Lattice !

players are :

Important also in K physics :K p n n , CKM errors dominated

the error budget

3030

Hadronic matrix

element

Lattice error in 2006

Lattice error in 2009

6 TFlop Year

60 TFlop Year

1-10 PFlop Year

0.9% 0.5% 0.7% 0.4% 0.1%

11% 5% 5% 3% 1%

fB 14% 5% 3.5 - 4.5% 2.5 - 4.0% 1 – 1.5%

13% 5% 4 - 5% 3 - 4% 1 – 1.5%

ξ 5% 2% 3% 1.5 - 2 % 0.5 – 0.8 %

B → D/D*lν 4% 2% 2% 1.2% 0.5%

11% 11% 5.5 - 6.5% 4 - 5% 2 – 3%

13% 13% ---- ---- 3 – 4%

KB̂

Kπ+f (0)

1/2Bs Bsf B

Bπ+f ,...B K*/ρ

1T

The expected accuracy has been reached! (except for Vub)

[2011 LHCb]

[2015 SuperB]

[2009]

Shown by Vittorio Lubicz at the SuperB Workshop LNF Dec2009

Part of the program could be accomplished if SM theoretical predictions are @ 1%

30

See Federico Mescia talk

31

Leptonic decay B l n

SuperB

2HDM-II MSSM

75ab-1

2ab-1

LEP mH>79.3 GeV

SuperB exc

ludes

SuperB exc

ludes

B-factories exclude

B-factories exclude

222

21 tan B

HH

mr

m

222

20

0

tan1

1 tan

0.01

BH

H

mr

m

ATLAS 30fb−1

ATLAS 30fb−1

ATLAS 30fb−1

2SuperB

SuperB -75ab-1

MH~1.2-2.5 TeVfor tanb~30-60

32

g

sb b s

~

~ ~

New Physics contribution (2-3 families)

LRd

23

MSSM+generic soft SUSY breaking terms

Flavour-changing NP effects in the squark propagator NP scale SUSY mass

flavour-violating coupling

23| |LR

Arg(d23)LR=(44.5± 2.6)o

= (0.026 ± 0.005)

1 10

1

10-1

10-2

(TeV)gluinom

In the red regions the d are measured with a

significance >3s away from zero

1 TeV

3

23| |LR

• (BXs)• (BXsl+l) • ACP(BXs)

Here the players are :

33

Br(B K n n) – Z penguins and Right-Handed currents

KB

)(,* S

KKKB

h

e

~[20-40] ab-1 are needed for observation>>50ab-1 for precise measurement

SM

today

If these quantities are measured @ <~10% deviations from the SM can be observed

Only theo. errors

4

Observable Babar/Belle

LHCb (10fb-1)

SLHCb (100fb-1)

SuperB (75ab-1)

Some Comment Theo

g

Vub/VcbExcl. needs Lattice & Inclusive @ 2% ?

b Theo. error to be controlled on data (ex: J/yp0)

S(J/ )yf At 1o theo error controlled with data ?

B , t n mn Very precise if detector is improved

S-Penguins SLHCb (very) precise for BfK, BsffNot possible for Ksp0,ksksks,hks, wKs..

ACP(B Xsg) Control syst. Is an issue

Br (B Xsg) Syst. Controlled with data ?

Br (B Xs l l)Angular var.

Br(BK*l l ), Angular var.

Could theory control @20%? Angular analysis are clean ?

Br (B K(*) ) n n Stat. limited. With more stat. angular analyses also possible

Br (BKsp0g)

Br(Bsfg) As precise as Br Ksp0g) ?

Br (Bsmm)

tmg profit of polarized beams

CPV charm CPV in SM negligible. So clean NP probe

No result Moderate Precise Very Precise

Moderately Clean

CleanNeed Lattice

Clean

THEORY

Some Golden Modes

34

Conclusions and perspectives

Flavour Physics with FCNC and CPV processes has played in the past a crucial role in constructing and testing the SM

Some observable are already precise.

….B-Factories today

LHCb (MEG, NA62..) tomorrowAnd the day after tomorrow..?

Flavour Phyiscs is a major actor in NP search @ few-TeV range and a unique player in the reconstruction of the NP Lagrangian

Part of the program could be accomplished if SM theoretical predictions are @ 1%.

SLHCb could improve some LHCb golden measurements ,g Bsmm, Bsfg

SuperB factories have a much wider Physics Case, which can naturally follow the B-factory+LHCb era.

35

36

BACKUPMATERIAL

Many channels can be measured with DS~(0.01-0.04)

d d

sbW-

B0d

t s

s

f

K0

g

sb b s

~

~ ~

LRd

23

SuperB

(*) theoretical limited

Another example of sensitivity to NP : sin2b from “s Penguins”…

38

Hadronic matrix

element

Lattice error in 2006

Lattice error in 2009

6 TFlop Year

60 TFlop Year

1-10 PFlop Year

0.9% 0.5% 0.7% 0.4% 0.1%

11% 5% 5% 3% 1%

fB 14% 5% 3.5 - 4.5% 2.5 - 4.0% 1 – 1.5%

13% 5% 4 - 5% 3 - 4% 1 – 1.5%

ξ 5% 2% 3% 1.5 - 2 % 0.5 – 0.8 %

B → D/D*lν 4% 2% 2% 1.2% 0.5%

11% 11% 5.5 - 6.5% 4 - 5% 2 – 3%

13% 13% ---- ---- 3 – 4%

KB̂

Kπ+f (0)

1/2Bs Bsf B

Bπ+f ,...B K*/ρ

1T

The expected accuracy has been reached! (except for Vub)

[2011 LHCb]

[2015 SuperB]

[2009]

Shown by Vittorio Lubicz at the SuperB Workshop LNF Dec2009

Part of the program could be accomplished if SM theoretical predictions are @ 1%

38

Observable Babar/Belle

LHCb (10fb-1)

SLHCb (100fb-1)

SuperB (75ab-1)

Some Comment Theo

g

Vub/VcbExcl. needs Lattice & Inclusive @ 2% ?

b Theo. error to be controlled on data (ex: J/yp0)

S(J/ )yf At 1o theo error controlled with data ?

B , t n mn Very precise if detector is improved

S-Penguins SLHCb (very) precise for BfK, BsffNot possible for Ksp0,ksksks,hks, wKs..

ACP(B Xsg) Control syst. Is an issue

Br (B Xsg) Syst. Controlled with data ?

Br (B Xs l l)Angular var.

Br(BK*l l ), Angular var.

Could theory control @20%? Angular analysis are clean ?

Br (B K(*) ) n n Stat. limited. With more stat. angular analyses also possible

Br (BKsp0g)

Br(Bsfg) As precise as Br Ksp0g) ?

Br (Bsmm)

tmg profit of polarized beams

CPV charm CPV in SM negligible. So clean NP probe

No result Moderate Precise Very Precise

Moderately Clean

CleanNeed Lattice

Clean

THEORY

Some Golden Modes

39