-titleHadron Collider Physics Symposium 2011, November 14-18, Paris, France 11institutetext: European Organisation for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland.
Rare Decays in LHCb
Abstract
The rare decays , and are studied using up to of collisions at = 7 TeV collected by the LHCb experiment in 2010 and 2011. A search for the decays is performed with . The absence of significant signal leads to and at 95 % confidence level. The forward-backward asymmetry, fraction of longitudinal polarization and differential branching fraction of , as a function of dimuon invariant mass, are measured in . The ratio of branching ratios of the radiative decays and has been measured using . The obtained value for the ratio is . Using the HFAG value for , has been found to be .
1 Introduction
The LHCb experiment lhcb has provided preliminary results in the measurement of the forward-backward asymmetry, fraction of longitudinal polarization and differential branching fraction of kstmm and the measurement of the phiG . LHCb has also provided upper limits in and bsmm . Sect. 2 sumarizes the analysis and results obtained by LHCb in the study of . Sect. 3 sumarizes the measurement of and Sect. 4 sumarizes the analysis and results of .
2
The rare decay is a , flavour changing neutral current decay, mediated by electroweak box and penguin diagrams in the Standard Model (SM). In models beyond the SM, new particles can enter in competing loop-order diagrams resulting in large deviations from SM predictions (see for example Refs. Ali:1991is ; Altmannshofer:2008dz ).
candidates are selected by first applying a loose pre-selection based on the lifetime, daughter impact parameters and a requirement that the points back to one of the primary vertices in the event. A tighter multivariate selection, based on a boosted decision tree (BDT), is then applied to select a clean sample of candidates, with a signal-to-background ratio in a 100 window around the reconstructed mass of about three-to-one. The BDT is based on the kinematics, vertex quality, daughter track quality, impact parameter and kaon, pion and muon particle identification. The offline selection criteria are explicitly chosen to minimise angular acceptance effects. The multivariate selection was trained using candidates from the 2010 data as a proxy for the signal and candidates from the upper mass sideband of the 2010 data for the background. Specific vetoes are used in order to eliminate non combinatorial background.
The trigger, reconstruction and offline selection can all bias the measured angular distribution of candidates. The detection acceptance is accounted for by weighting events when fitting for , and (where is the di-muon mass squared). Event weights are calculated on a per-event basis in a small phase space window around each candidate, using fully simulated Monte Carlo (MC) simulation events. Simulated events are re-weighted to account for known data-MC differences in PID performance, impact parameter resolution, tracking efficiency and track multiplicity.
The fit results for , and , and their comparison with theoretical predictions Bobeth:2011gi , are shown in Fig. 1.
The systematic error on , and is typically of the statistical error. In the high- region, the dominant contribution to the systematic uncertainty comes from the overall uncertainty on the acceptance correction which is dictated by the limited simulation statistics. This can clearly be improved for future analyses. Throughout, a sub-dominant contribution comes from the data-derived performance corrections. In particular, from knowledge of the PID performance and tracking efficiency in data. This is again statistically limited and can also be improved with larger datasets. When fitting for and the signal and background mass model and the angular model for the background have been varied and yield corrections at the level of 10-20% of the statistical uncertainty. The uncertainty on the differential branching fraction includes the uncertainty coming from the measured and branching fractions PDG . These measurements are current world best, and don’t confirm previous hints of a non-SM value of at low .
3
In the SM, the amplitude of these penguin transitions is dominated by a virtual intermediate top quark coupling to a boson. Extensions of the SM predict new heavy particles that may propagate virtually within the loop and modify the dynamics of the transition. Therefore, these radiative modes are promising laboratories that could reveal the presence of new phenomena beyond the SM with the precise measurement of the branching ratios, asymmetries or angular distributions. The offline selection of both the and decays is performed with the strategy of maximizing the cancellation of systematic uncertainties when performing the ratio. The analysis of of LHCb data gives:
(1) |
Where () are the probabilities of the quark to hadronize into ().
This results is compatible within 1.6 standard deviations with the theory prediction.
4
The SM predictions for the branching fractions of the FCNC decays and are = and = Buras2010 . However, contributions from new processes or new heavy particles can significantly enhance these values. For example, within Minimal Supersymmetric extensions of the SM (MSSM), in the large regime, receives contributions proportional to MSSM , where is the ratio of the vacuum expectation values of the two neutral -even Higgs fields, and can differ significantly from the SM prediction. The LHCb analysis is done by clasifying candidates in bins of a 2D parameter space made by the invariant mass and a multivariate clasifier which condensates geometrical and kinematical information of the event. The signal expectation in each bin is calculated using data from control channels such as and . The background expectation is calculated by interpolating from mass sidebands. The peaking background yield is calculated using and misidentification probabilities obtained from data using decays such as and . The signal and background expectations are compared with the distribution of observed events, and the limits are set using the method Junk_99 ; Read_02 . The and upper limits obtained are:
Fig. 2 shows the luminosity needed to impose stronger limits or to achieve a 3 evidence of .
5 Conclusions
As can be seen in Fig. 1, there is good agreement between recent SM predictions and LHCb’s measurement of , and in the six bins. In a bin, LHCb measures , and , to be compared with theoretical predictions of , and respectively. The experimental uncertainties are presently statistically dominated, and will improve with a larger data set. Such a data set would also enable LHCb to explore a wide range of new observables Egede:2008uy .
In 340 pb-1 of collisions at a centre of mass energy of TeV the most precise measurement of has been performed, giving:
(3) |
The and upper limits obtained by LHCb are:
In Fig. 2 the luminosity needed for a 3 evidence as a function of is shown. Approximately are needed in the case that the value is equal to the SM prediction, but statistical fluctuations can make it possible with . Fig. 2 also shows that exclusions of down to the ( SM level would impose important constraints in region around the current NUHM1 best fit point MC7 . All the results presented here are current world best.






References
- (1) LHCb collaboration, A. A. Alves et al., “The LHCb detector at the LHC”, JINST 3 (2008) S08005, and references therein.
- (2) LHCb collaboration, R. Aaij et al., “Angular analysis of ”, LHCb-CONF-2011-038 (2011).
- (3) LHCb collaboration, R. Aaij et al., “Measurement of the ratio of branching fractions /with the LHCb experiment at TeV”, LHCb-CONF-2011-055 (2011).
- (4) R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], “Search for the rare decays and ” arXiv:1112.1600 [hep-ex].
- (5) A. Ali, T. Mannel and T. Morozumi, “Forward backward asymmetry of dilepton angular distribution in the decay ” Phys. Lett. B 273 (1991) 505.
- (6) W. Altmannshofer, P. Ball, A. Bharucha, A. J. Buras, D. M. Straub and M. Wick, “Symmetries and Asymmetries of Decays in the Standard Model and Beyond,” JHEP 0901 (2009) 019 [arXiv:0811.1214 [hep-ph]].
- (7) C. Bobeth, G. Hiller and D. van Dyk, “More Benefits of Semileptonic Rare B Decays at Low Recoil: CP Violation,” JHEP 1107 (2011) 067 [arXiv:1105.0376 [hep-ph]].
- (8) K. Nakamura et al. [Particle Data Group Collaboration], J. Phys. G G 37 (2010) 075021.
- (9) The Heavy Flavor Averaging Group, D. Asner, “Averages of -hadron, -hadron, and -lepton Properties”, arXiv:1010.1589 [hep-ex]. Updates available at http://www.slac.stanford.edu/xorg/hfag/osc/end_2009.
- (10) A.J. Buras, G. Isidori and P. Paradisi, “EDMs versus CPV in mixing in two Higgs doublet models with MFV”, Phys. Lett. B 694 (2011) 402–409, [http://arxiv.org/abs/1007.5291 arXiv:1007.5291]; A. J. Buras, “Minimal flavour violation and beyond: towards a flavour code for short distance dynamics”, Acta Phys. Polon B 41 (2010) 2487, [http://arxiv.org/abs/1012.1447 arXiv:1012.1447].
-
(11)
L. J. Hall, R. Rattazzi and U. Sarid, “The top quark mass in supersymmetric SO(10) unification”
Phys. Rev. D 50 (1994) 7048;
C. Hamzaoui, M. Pospelov and M. Toharia, “Higgs-mediated FCNC in supersymmetric models with large ”, Phys. Rev. D 59 (1999) 095005;
K.S. Babu and C.F. Kolda, “Higgs-mediated in minimal supersymmetry”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84 (2000) 228. - (12) T. Junk, “Confidence Level Computation for Combining Searches with Small Statistics”, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A434 (1999) 435, hep-ex/9902006.
- (13) A. Read, “Presentation of Search Results: The Technique”, J. Phys. G28 (2002) 2693.
- (14) U. Egede, T. Hurth, J. Matias, M. Ramon and W. Reece, “New observables in the decay mode ” JHEP 0811, 032 (2008) [arXiv:0807.2589 [hep-ph]].
- (15) O. Buchmueller et al., “Supersymmetry in Light of 1/fb of LHC Data,” arXiv:1110.3568 [hep-ph].