170 likes | 266 Vues
This study at Harvard University focuses on determining |Vub| in exclusive B→pℓn decays to refine the Unitarity Triangle and constrain uncertainties. By utilizing diverse measurement methods and theoretical calculations, the aim is to reduce theory errors and predict signal spectra accurately. The analysis involves different types of calculations, form factor predictions, and extraction techniques to enhance the precision of |Vub|.
E N D
Measurement of |Vub|with B→ pℓn Masahiro Morii Harvard University Laboratory for Particle Physics and Cosmology
Motivation • |Vub| determines the left side of the UT • Precise |Vub| and sin2b strong constraint on the UT • Uncertainty on |Vub| is dominated by theory errors • Measurements with different methods important • InclusiveB→ Xuℓn • Use difference in kinematics to separate uℓnfrom cℓn • Theory (OPE, SCET) must predict signal spectra • Current theory error ~5% of |Vub| • ExclusiveB→ pℓn,rℓn, wℓn, … • Better S/B, esp. if we’ve tagged one B • Theory (LCSR, LQCD, etc.) must predict form factors • Theory error hard to quantify M. Morii, Harvard
B → pℓn Form Factors • Two (among many) types of calculations • Light-Cone Sum Rules • Latest Ball/Zwicky (PRD71:014015) quote 10-13% error at q2 = 0 • Not valid above q2 ~ 14 GeV2 • Lattice QCD • Older calculations were “quenched” extra 15% error • Unquenched calculations from HPQCD (PRD73:074502) and Fermilab (hep-lat/0409116) quote ~11% systematic error at high q2 • Not valid below q2 ~ 15 GeV2 • Theory errors on |Vub| comparable to the inclusive approach • We must measure partial rates in q2 bins M. Morii, Harvard
Previous Measurements • Untagged measurements have better statistics • Background and cross-feed (from rℓn) higher • Tagged-B measurements have better S/B • Statistics limited Binning in q2 requires large statistics • Semileptonic recoil Balance between efficiency and purity M. Morii, Harvard
Analysis Flow a.k.a. Y Data sample contains232 M BB events Event preselection ℓ D(*) v Find D(*)ℓv tag(s) Reconstruct D and D*Combine with lepton Find pℓv candidate(s) Recoil of the tag containsp + ℓand little else tag B Pick the best candidate signal B Allow one candidate/event Extract signal yield Fit cos2fB distirubtion v Divide by efficiency p ℓ Double-tag sample determines edata/eMC Branching fraction M. Morii, Harvard
D(*)Reconstrction • Reconstruct D mesons • Reconstruct D*+ mesons We use mD sidebands to subtract combinatoric background, assuming linear distribution Twice as wide as the other channels Little statistics in this channel M. Morii, Harvard
B→ D(*)ℓn Tag • Combine a D(*) candidate with a lepton candidate with p* > 0.8 GeV in the CMS • Calculate • For correct tags, qBY = anglebetween B and D(*)ℓ momenta • Signal should peak in−1 < cosqBY< +1 • Background is broad on-peak datab → uℓv MCB0B0 MCB+B− MCoff-peak data M. Morii, Harvard
B→ pℓnSignal • Look for a lepton and a pion in the recoil side • Lepton p* > 0.8 GeV • Pion with opposite charge • Nothing else left in the event • No tracks in the drift chamber • No cluster in the calorimeter • Calculate • Signal between ±1 on-peak datasignal MCb → uℓv MCB0B0 MCB+B− MCoff-peak data M. Morii, Harvard
Signal Kinematics • Tag B and recoil B are back-to-back • Combine kinematical information into a single variable • cos2fB < 1 for correctly-reconstructed signal events Angle between the B momentum and the plane defined by the D(*)ℓ and pℓ momenta M. Morii, Harvard
on-peak datasignal MCBB-bar MCcombinatoric background cos2fB • Use cos2fB distribution to distinguish signal from background • Background distributions are nearly flat • Tested using sideband control samples • Perform unbinned maximum likelihood fitto extract signal yields in 3 bins of q2 q2 < 8 GeV2 8 < q2 < 16 GeV2 q2 > 16 GeV2 M. Morii, Harvard
Double-Tag Sample • Events with two non-overlapping tags • Number of double-tags (Tag efficiency)2 • Selection of double-tag events reproducethe signal selection as closely as possible • Not perfect – e.g., the number of remainingneutral clusters depend on both sides • Compare data and MC • Error includes statistics, backgroundnormalization, Ncluster cut dependence, etc. on-peak datasignalincorrect tagsbackground M. Morii, Harvard
B(B0→ p–ℓ+n) • We measure the partial and total BFs (in 10-4) M. Morii, Harvard
Systematic Errors • Main systematics are: • Tagging efficiency • cos2fB distribution of BB background • → rℓn and other Xuℓn background in high-q2 bin • Monte Carlo statistics • Still small comparedwith the stat. error • Some of the errors are intentionally conservative M. Morii, Harvard
Combining Analyses • We combine results of the analyses by 3 groups B0 semileptonic tag B+ semileptonic tag B0 hadronic tag B+ hadronic tag M. Morii, Harvard
How We Compare • Competitive and statistics-limited result • Paper has been submitted to Phys. Rev. Lett. • Next steps: • Update with 211 400 fb-1 data • Include other light hadrons (′) M. Morii, Harvard
Extraction of |Vub| • We use four calculations of the FF and find • c.f. HFAG average of inclusive measurements is where PRD71:014015 PRD73:074502 hep-lat/0409116 NPB619:565 M. Morii, Harvard
Summary • |Vub| is a critical piece of the CKM “puzzle” • Harvard group makes strong contribution in this area • We pursue two analyses based on complementary theoretical approaches • We measured B(B0→ p–ℓ+n) in the recoil of B0 → D(*)+ℓ–n and extracted |Vub| • Result (hep-ex/0607089) has been presented at ICHEP 2006 and submitted to Phys. Rev. Lett. using FF from a LQCD calculation M. Morii, Harvard