This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

12th Workshop on the CKM Unitarity Triangle
Santiago de Compostela, 18-22 September 2023
CPC\!P
violation in DD meson decays at Belle I/II

Michel Bertemes on behalf of the Belle I/II collaboration Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL), Upton, NY 11973-5000, USA
Abstract

We present recent measurements from the Belle and Belle II experiment related to CPCP violation in decays of charmed mesons via two complementary approaches. We also propose a new algorithm to determine the flavor of neutral charmed mesons.

1 SuperKEKB and Belle II

SuperKEKB is an asymmetric e+ee^{+}e^{-}-collider located in Tsukuba, Japan. The respective beam energies are 7 GeV (ee^{-}) and 4 GeV (e+e^{+}), resulting in a centre-of-mass energy tunable around the Υ(4S)\Upsilon(4S) mass. Thanks to the nano-beam collision scheme, a record instantaneous luminosity of 4.7×1034cm2s14.7\times 10^{34}\mathrm{cm}^{-2}\mathrm{s}^{-1} was achieved. Located at the interaction point of both beams is the Belle II experiment, a 4π4\pi spectrometer. Belle II is the successor to the Belle experiment with improved vertexing, tracking, calorimetry and particle identification capabilities. Belle II has been operated since 2019 and collected a dataset corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 424fb1\mathrm{fb}^{-1} (about half of what Belle collected from 1999-2010) at or above the Υ(4S)\Upsilon(4S) mass. After a shutdown in 2022 for detector and accelerator improvements, data taking resumed in 2024. Due to the large e+ecc¯e^{+}e^{-}\to c\bar{c} production cross-section, Belle II is recording approximately 1.3M charm events per 1fb1\mathrm{fb}^{-1} with a trigger efficiency uniform across decay time and kinematics. With an excellent reconstruction of final states with neutral particles, the charm physics program evolves around measurements of charge-conjugation and parity (CPC\!P) asymmetries and mixing of decays including D+π+π0D^{+}\to\pi^{+}\pi^{0} and D0π0π0,ρ0γ,KS0KS0,Kππ0,πππ0D^{0}\to\pi^{0}\pi^{0},\rho^{0}\gamma,K_{S}^{0}K_{S}^{0},K\pi\pi^{0},\pi\pi\pi^{0}.

2 Charm Flavor Tagger

The measurements outlined above usually require the identification of the flavor of the neutral charmed hadron at the time of production. One way to accomplish the flavor tagging is by selecting neutral D0D^{0} mesons that emerge from the strong decay D+D0π+D^{*+}\to D^{0}\pi^{+}, where the charge of the pion determines the flavor of the D0D^{0} meson. As the resulting number of D0D^{0} mesons is much smaller than the total amount of D0D^{0} mesons produced in e+ee^{+}e^{-} collisions, only a limited sample of D0D^{0} mesons is available for measurements.

The Charm Flavor Tagger (CFT) is a new algorithm to determine the production flavor of D0D^{0} mesons [1]. It exploits the correlation between the flavor of a reconstructed D0D^{0} meson and the electric charges, flavor and kinematic properties of particles reconstructed in the rest of the event. Included among the latter are particles from the decay of the other charmed hadron in the event and possibly also particles produced alongside the D0D^{0} meson. The CFT only considers the tracks most collinear with the reconstructed meson, as these are most likely to tag the correct flavor. A binary classification algorithm is used to make a prediction of qrqr, the product of the tagging decision qq (+1 for D0D^{0} mesons and -1 for D0¯\bar{D^{0}} mesons) and the dilution rr (r=1r=1 corresponding to a perfect prediction, r=0r=0 being equivalent to random guessing). Different quantities related to kinematics and particle identification probabilities are used as input to the algorithm.

The CFT is trained using simulation and calibrated with data collected by the Belle II experiment corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 362fb1\mathrm{fb}^{-1}. The tagging power, defined as ϵtageff=ϵeffr2\epsilon_{\mathrm{tag}}^{\mathrm{eff}}=\epsilon_{\mathrm{eff}}\langle r^{2}\rangle (ϵeff\epsilon_{\mathrm{eff}} being the tagging efficiency), represents the effective sample size when a tagging decision is needed. We obtain:

ϵtageff=[47.91±0.07(stat)±0.51(syst)]%\epsilon_{\mathrm{tag}}^{\mathrm{eff}}=[47.91\pm 0.07(\mathrm{stat})\pm 0.51(\mathrm{syst})]\% (2.1)

This value is found to be independent of the reconstructed D0D^{0} decay mode. The CFT is expected to double the effective sample size with respect to measurements that so far have relied exclusively on D+D^{*+}-tagged events. This increase also affects the amount of contributing background events (see Figure 1).

Refer to caption
Figure 1: Mass distribution for D0Kπ+D^{0}\to K^{-}\pi^{+} decays with different requirements on the predicted dilution in comparison with D+D^{*+}-tagged decays. [1]

3 CPC\!P violation measurements

Direct CPC\!P violation can be searched for in measurements of time-integrated asymmetries from differences in partial widths:

ACP=Γ(Df)Γ(D¯f¯)Γ(Df)+Γ(D¯f¯)A_{C\!P}=\frac{\Gamma(D\to f)-\Gamma(\bar{D}\to\bar{f})}{\Gamma(D\to f)+\Gamma(\bar{D}\to\bar{f})} (3.1)

where ff and f¯\bar{f} are CPC\!P-conjugate final states. The related experimental observable however also includes asymmetries in production and reconstruction which need to be subtracted with means of a control channel.

A complementary approach is based on the measurement of triple products CT=ν1(ν2×ν3)C_{T}=\vec{\nu_{1}}\cdot(\vec{\nu_{2}}\times\vec{\nu_{3}}), where νi\vec{\nu_{i}} represents the momentum of the final state particles. CTC_{T} changes sign under time-reversal TT and if it is found to be asymmetric around zero, this could indicate TT-violation. Under the CPTC\!P\!T symmetry, this could then constitute a CPC\!P violation signal. The corresponding asymmetries for DD and D¯\bar{D} are defined as:

AT=Γ(CT>0)Γ(CT<0)Γ(CT>0)+Γ(CT<0),AT¯=Γ(CT¯>0)Γ(CT¯<0)Γ(CT¯>0)+Γ(CT¯<0)A_{T}=\frac{\Gamma(C_{T}>0)-\Gamma(C_{T}<0)}{\Gamma(C_{T}>0)+\Gamma(C_{T}<0)},\quad\bar{A_{T}}=\frac{\Gamma(-\bar{C_{T}}>0)-\Gamma(-\bar{C_{T}}<0)}{\Gamma(-\bar{C_{T}}>0)+\Gamma(-\bar{C_{T}}<0)} (3.2)

where the minus sign corresponds to parity transformation which is required for AT¯\bar{A_{T}} to be the CP conjugate of ATA_{T}. Since AT0A_{T}\neq 0 can also arise from final-state interactions, TT-violation can be isolated by defining:

aCPTodd=12(ATAT¯)a_{CP}^{T-\mathrm{odd}}=\frac{1}{2}(A_{T}-\bar{A_{T}}) (3.3)

aCPTodda_{CP}^{T-\mathrm{odd}} is unaffected by production and reconstruction asymmetries. In charm, four-body decays are well suited to study these asymmetries as they have sizable branching fractions and give access to three non-trivial momentum values.

These two approaches differ in their dependence on the strong phase δ\delta: While the direct asymmetries require δ0\delta\neq 0 since ACPsin(ϕ)sin(δ)A_{CP}\propto\sin(\phi)\sin(\delta), this does not hold for measurements with triple products as aCPToddsin(ϕ)cos(δ)a_{CP}^{T-\mathrm{odd}}\propto\sin(\phi)\cos(\delta).

Three recent measurements are presented in the following, all based on the data set collected by the Belle experiment on or near the Υ(nS)\Upsilon(nS) (n=1,2,3,4,5n=1,2,3,4,5) resonances, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 1ab1\sim 1\mathrm{ab}^{-1}. KS0K_{S}^{0} candidates are identified with a neural network using kinematic features as input [2, 3]. Further background suppression is achieved by fitting the individual decay chains and applying a selection on the quality of the vertex fit as well as the flight-length significance of the DD meson.

  1. 1.

    Measurement of the branching fraction and search for CPC\!P violation in D0KS0KS0π+πD^{0}\to K^{0}_{S}K^{0}_{S}\pi^{+}\pi^{-} decays at Belle [4]

CPC\!P violation is searched for in the Cabibbo-suppressed (CS) decay D0KS0KS0π+πD^{0}\to K^{0}_{S}K^{0}_{S}\pi^{+}\pi^{-} with the two approaches outlined above and by determining the flavor of the D0D^{0} meson with a DD^{*}-tag. First, the branching fraction is measured relative to that of D0KS0π+πD^{0}\to K^{0}_{S}\pi^{+}\pi^{-}:

(D0KS0KS0π+π)=[4.79±0.08(stat)±0.10(syst)±0.31(norm)]×104\mathcal{B}(D^{0}\to K^{0}_{S}K^{0}_{S}\pi^{+}\pi^{-})=[4.79\pm 0.08(\mathrm{stat})\pm 0.10(\mathrm{syst})\pm 0.31(\mathrm{norm})]\times 10^{-4}

where the last uncertainty is due to (D0KS0π+π)\mathcal{B}(D^{0}\to K^{0}_{S}\pi^{+}\pi^{-}). The time-integrated CP asymmetry is measured to be:

ACP(D0KS0KS0π+π)=[2.51±1.44(stat)0.10+0.11(syst)]%A_{CP}(D^{0}\to K^{0}_{S}K^{0}_{S}\pi^{+}\pi^{-})=[-2.51\pm 1.44(\mathrm{stat})^{+0.11}_{-0.10}(\mathrm{syst})]\%

where the asymmetry related to the reconstruction of the soft pion πs+\pi_{s}^{+} has been determined from a study of flavor-tagged D+D0(Kπ+)πs+D^{*+}\to D^{0}(\to K^{-}\pi^{+})\pi_{s}^{+} and untagged D0Kπ+D^{0}\to K^{-}\pi^{+} decays.

aCPTodd(D0KS0KS0π+π)=[1.95±1.42(stat)0.12+0.14(syst)]%a_{CP}^{T-\mathrm{odd}}(D^{0}\to K^{0}_{S}K^{0}_{S}\pi^{+}\pi^{-})=[-1.95\pm 1.42(\mathrm{stat})^{+0.14}_{-0.12}(\mathrm{syst})]\%

The branching fraction measurement is the most precise to date. The CPC\!P measurements are the first ones for this decay. The largest systematic effect for all three measurements arises from background where the DD^{*} candidate is correctly reconstructed but a particle was missed in the reconstruction of the D0D^{0} candidate. The amount is estimated with simulation.

  1. 2.

    Search for CPC\!P violation in D(s)+K+KS0h+hD_{(s)}^{+}\to K^{+}K^{0}_{S}h^{+}h^{-} (h=K,πh=K,\pi) decays and observation of the Cabibbo-suppressed decay Ds+K+KKS0π+D_{s}^{+}\to K^{+}K^{-}K^{0}_{S}\pi^{+} [5]

We report the first observation of the CS suppressed decay Ds+K+KKS0π+D_{s}^{+}\to K^{+}K^{-}K^{0}_{S}\pi^{+} and measure its branching fraction to be:

(Ds+K+KKS0π+)=[1.29±0.14(stat)±0.04(syst)±0.11(norm)]×104\mathcal{B}(D_{s}^{+}\to K^{+}K^{-}K^{0}_{S}\pi^{+})=[1.29\pm 0.14(\mathrm{stat})\pm 0.04(\mathrm{syst})\pm 0.11(\mathrm{norm})]\times 10^{-4}

where the last uncertainty is due to the uncertainty of the normalization channel (Ds+K+KS0π+π)\mathcal{B}(D_{s}^{+}\to K^{+}K^{0}_{S}\pi^{+}\pi^{-}) and the largest systematic effect arises from the modeling of the signal shape. We measure aCPTodda_{CP}^{T-\mathrm{odd}} in the remaining channels:

aCPTodd(D+K+KS0π+π)\displaystyle a_{CP}^{T-\mathrm{odd}}(D^{+}\to K^{+}K^{0}_{S}\pi^{+}\pi^{-}) =\displaystyle= [0.34±0.87(stat)±0.32(syst)]%\displaystyle[0.34\pm 0.87(\mathrm{stat})\pm 0.32(\mathrm{syst})]\%
aCPTodd(Ds+K+KS0π+π)\displaystyle a_{CP}^{T-\mathrm{odd}}(D_{s}^{+}\to K^{+}K^{0}_{S}\pi^{+}\pi^{-}) =\displaystyle= [0.46±0.63(stat)±0.38(syst)]%\displaystyle[-0.46\pm 0.63(\mathrm{stat})\pm 0.38(\mathrm{syst})]\%
aCPTodd(D+K+KKS0π+)\displaystyle a_{CP}^{T-\mathrm{odd}}(D^{+}\to K^{+}K^{-}K^{0}_{S}\pi^{+}) =\displaystyle= [3.34±2.66(stat)±0.35(syst)]%\displaystyle[-3.34\pm 2.66(\mathrm{stat})\pm 0.35(\mathrm{syst})]\%

The results are the most precise to date and consistent with no CPC\!P violation. The biggest systematic uncertainty is related to a possible detector bias that we study with the Cabibbo-favored decay D+KS0π+π+πD^{+}\to K_{S}^{0}\pi^{+}\pi^{+}\pi^{-} where aCPTodda_{CP}^{T-\mathrm{odd}} is expected to be consistent with 0.

  1. 3.

    Search for CPC\!P violation using TT-odd correlations in D(s)+K+Kπ+π0D_{(s)}^{+}\to K^{+}K^{-}\pi^{+}\pi^{0} D(s)+K+ππ+π0D_{(s)}^{+}\to K^{+}\pi^{-}\pi^{+}\pi^{0} and D+Kπ+π+π0D^{+}\to K^{-}\pi^{+}\pi^{+}\pi^{0} decays [6]

A search for CPC\!P violation is performed in five D(s)+D^{+}_{(s)} decays:

aCPTodd(D+KK+π+π0)\displaystyle a_{CP}^{T-\mathrm{odd}}(D^{+}\to K^{-}K^{+}\pi^{+}\pi^{0}) =\displaystyle= [0.26±0.66(stat)±0.13(syst)]%\displaystyle[0.26\pm 0.66(\mathrm{stat})\pm 0.13(\mathrm{syst})]\%
aCPTodd(D+K+ππ+π0)\displaystyle a_{CP}^{T-\mathrm{odd}}(D^{+}\to K^{+}\pi^{-}\pi^{+}\pi^{0}) =\displaystyle= [1.30±4.20(stat)±0.10(syst)]%\displaystyle[-1.30\pm 4.20(\mathrm{stat})\pm 0.10(\mathrm{syst})]\%
aCPTodd(D+Kπ+π+π0)\displaystyle a_{CP}^{T-\mathrm{odd}}(D^{+}\to K^{-}\pi^{+}\pi^{+}\pi^{0}) =\displaystyle= [0.02±0.15(stat)±0.08(syst)]%\displaystyle[0.02\pm 0.15(\mathrm{stat})\pm 0.08(\mathrm{syst})]\%
aCPTodd(Ds+K+ππ+π0)\displaystyle a_{CP}^{T-\mathrm{odd}}(D_{s}^{+}\to K^{+}\pi^{-}\pi^{+}\pi^{0}) =\displaystyle= [1.10±2.20(stat)±0.10(syst)]%\displaystyle[-1.10\pm 2.20(\mathrm{stat})\pm 0.10(\mathrm{syst})]\%
aCPTodd(Ds+KK+π+π0)\displaystyle a_{CP}^{T-\mathrm{odd}}(D_{s}^{+}\to K^{-}K^{+}\pi^{+}\pi^{0}) =\displaystyle= [0.22±0.33(stat)±0.43(syst)]%\displaystyle[-0.22\pm 0.33(\mathrm{stat})\pm 0.43(\mathrm{syst})]\%

where the largest systematic effect is due to a possible CTC_{T}-dependence of the reconstruction efficiency, which is studied with signal simulation samples. The results are all consistent with zero and show no evidence of CPC\!P violation. These are the first such measurements for these decay modes and among the world’s most precise. aCPTodda_{CP}^{T-\mathrm{odd}} is also measured in sub-regions of phase space corresponding to the intermediate processes D+ϕρ+D^{+}\to\phi\rho^{+}, K¯0K+\bar{K}^{*0}K^{*+} and K¯0ρ+\bar{K}^{*0}\rho^{+} as well as Ds+K+ρ0D_{s}^{+}\to K^{*+}\rho^{0}, K0ρ+K^{*0}\rho^{+}, ϕρ+\phi\rho^{+} and K¯0K+\bar{K}^{*0}K^{*+}. All values are found to be consistent with zero.

A comprehensive overview of all the results including previous measurements is shown in Figure 2.

Refer to caption
Figure 2: Overview of recent measurement for aCPTodda_{CP}^{T-\mathrm{odd}} including the ones presented here. [6]

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank the Belle II Collaboration for the opportunity to present, and the organizers of the 12th Workshop on the CKM Unitarity Triangle for the successful conference. This work is supported by the Austrian Science Fund under award number J4625-N.

References

  • [1] I. Adachi et al. [Belle-II], Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) no.11, 112010
  • [2] N. Dash et al. [Belle], Phys. Rev. Lett. 119 (2017) no.17, 171801
  • [3] M. Feindt and U. Kerzel, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 559 (2006), 190-194
  • [4] A. Sangal et al. [Belle], Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) no.5, 052001
  • [5] H. K. Moon et al. [Belle], Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023) no.11, L111102
  • [6] L. K. Li et al. [Belle], [arXiv:2305.12806 [hep-ex]].