1 / 17

Roberto Covarelli (Università degli Studi di Perugia & INFN Frascati)

PARTIAL RECONSTRUCTION OF B 0 D*D s ( * ) AND EXTRACTION OF BR(D s  fp ) AT THE BaBar EXPERIMENT. Roberto Covarelli (Università degli Studi di Perugia & INFN Frascati) Frascati Spring School, 22/5/2003. Physical motivations …. …for measuring BR(B 0  D*D s ( * ) )

ovid
Télécharger la présentation

Roberto Covarelli (Università degli Studi di Perugia & INFN Frascati)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. PARTIAL RECONSTRUCTION OF B0D*Ds(*) AND EXTRACTION OF BR(Ds  fp) AT THE BaBar EXPERIMENT Roberto Covarelli (Universitàdegli Studi di Perugia & INFN Frascati) Frascati Spring School, 22/5/2003 ROBERTO COVARELLI

  2. Physical motivations … • …for measuring BR(B0  D*Ds(*)) • They provide a test of factorization at high q2 values (q2 = MDs(*)2) • They are quite poorly known: BR(B0  D*-Ds+) = (1.11±0.33)% (PDG 2002) BR(B0  D*-Ds*+) = (1.8±0.6)% • …for measuring BR(Ds  fp) • All Ds branching fractions are measured as relative toBR(Ds  fp) • Latest measurement (CLEO, 1995) shows a 25% relative uncertainty: BR(Ds+ fp+) = (3.6±0.9)% • Most b- or c-physics analyses where a Ds or a Ds* are reconstructed rely on this uncertain value ROBERTO COVARELLI

  3. Partial reconstruction • We refer to partial reconstruction of a B candidate when all but one of its decay products (the “missing” candidate) are fully reconstructed. For instance: • Disadvantage: no constraints can be applied on MB or EB in signal extraction  worse signal purity • Advantage: you don’t need to take into account the missing candidate reconstruction efficiency  statistics increased by a large factor (often ≈10) B0 D* + p The fast and slow pion are reconstructed (blue circle), while no attempt is made to reconstruct the D0 (red box). D0p ROBERTO COVARELLI

  4. The B0  D*Ds(*) decay • Partial reconstruction technique can be exploited in two ways: • Fully reconstructed Ds(*) • Slow pion from D* •  missing candidate = D0 • or • Fully reconstructed D* • Soft photon from Ds* •  missing candidate = Ds B0 D* + Ds(*) D0p (Dsg) B0 D* + Ds* D0p Dsg ROBERTO COVARELLI

  5. Signal extraction variable:the missing mass • Assume that the reconstructed candidates come from a B0  D*Ds(*) decay, the mass of the missing candidate, or missing mass, can be evaluated: • Signal extraction is achieved by requiring it to stay inside a M(D0) (or M(Ds)) mass window. Method I: Ds(*) – p Method II: D*– g ROBERTO COVARELLI

  6. Extraction of BR(B0  D*Ds(*)) • Let ND0 (NDs) be the signal yield from the missing mass calculation. BR(B0  D*Ds(*)) can be promptly extracted: • If we use Method II, BR(B0  D*Ds(*)) will no longer depend on Ds branching fractions, but on D0 ones, which are known with smaller uncertainties.  reduced systematics from BR’s Method I: Ds(*) – p Method II: D*– g ROBERTO COVARELLI

  7. Extraction of BR(Ds  fp) • Let’s now consider both partial reco methods applied on the same data sample. Two independent estimates of BR(B0  D*Ds*) are obtained, one assuming D0 decay BR’s, the other assuming Ds BR’s. • Dividing (2) by (1), BR(Ds  fp) can be extracted: (1) (2) Ri = BRi / BR(D0 Kp) ROBERTO COVARELLI

  8. 1. Ds(*) – p reconstruction: candidate selection 20.8 fb-1 data • Dsselection: • Ds  fp, f  KK • Ds  K0K, K0s  pp • Ds  K*0K, K*0 Kp • Cuts on kaon ID, invariant mass of intermediate states, helicity angles • M(Ds) is required to be within 3sof the signal distribution peak Mpeak (Ds) seen in the data • For Ds* candidates only: • Photon selection : cuts on Eg and Eg*, p0 veto • |DM – DMpeak| < 2.5sDM M(Ds) peak M(Ds) DM ROBERTO COVARELLI

  9. 1. Ds(*) – p reconstruction: signal extraction • Observe the missing mass distributions • The Mmiss distribution is fitted with a Gaussian + a threshold background function • fB= f (Mmiss – M0). The yield in 20.8 fb-1 data (≈22.7 x 106 BB pairs) is shown in figure 20.8 fb-1 data Dsp ND0 = 3700 ± 230 Ds* p ND0 = 1493 ± 95 Kinematical end point M0 = MD* - Mp ROBERTO COVARELLI

  10. 1. Ds(*) – p reconstruction: final results • Branching fractions: BR(B0  D*-Ds+) = (1.03±0.14stat.±0.13syst.±0.26)% BR(B0  D*-Ds*+) = (1.97±0.15stat.±0.30syst.±0.49)% • The longitudinal polarization fraction in B0  D*Ds* (pseudoscalar  vector + vector decay) can also be measured: GL/G = (51.9 ± 5.0stat.±2.8syst.)% 25% systematics from the uncertainty on BR(Ds  fp) ROBERTO COVARELLI

  11. 2. D* – g reconstruction: D* candidate selection • 4 D0 decay modes: • D0  Kp • D0  Kpp0 • D0  Kppp • D0  K0spp, K0s  pp • Cuts on: • vertex fit probabilities • |Q(D*) – Qpeak(D*)| < 2 MeV/c2 (Q(D*) = M(D*) – M(D0) – M(p)) • |M(D0) – Mpeak(D0)| < 2.5sM(D0) Q(D*) in MC M(D0) in MC ROBERTO COVARELLI

  12. 2. D* – g reconstruction: g candidate selection • Kinematic cuts and p0 veto are not enough to reject the substantial background from low energy particles. More stringent requirements needed: • cuts on shower shape variables • best photon to be chosen on the basis of a likelihood ratio that combines both kinematical and cluster shape variables Eg* in MC Signal (dashed) Bkgd (solid) ROBERTO COVARELLI

  13. 2. D* – g reconstruction: signal extraction (MonteCarlo) • Fit the missing mass distribution with a Gaussian + ARGUSbackground function (fit yields in MC shown in the figure) BR(B0  D*-Ds*+) = (1.5±0.1)% (in MC)  No bias (1.4% in MC Production) ROBERTO COVARELLI

  14. 2. D* – g reconstruction: signal extraction (data) • The Mmiss plot on data (20.25 fb-1) is shown • The background shape and signal resolution are well reproduced by MonteCarlo but • Before we apply the fitting procedure, we need • cross-checks in order to validate this result ROBERTO COVARELLI

  15. 2. D* – g reconstruction: cross - checks M(D0) MC (B0) MC (B±) MC (qq) data • Data/MC agreement  Kolmogorov test for binned distributions • Other cross-checks: “flipped” sample (the reconstructed D* flight direction is inverted to obtain a pure combinatoric background sample) Missing mass normal flipped • Peaking backgrounds, systematics from detector • inefficiency and other sources still under evaluation ROBERTO COVARELLI

  16. Expected error on BR(Ds  fp) • Let’s put ourselves in the most favourable conditions (full BaBar statistics, just one D0 and Ds reconstruction mode, so that the systematics from branching fractions totally cancel) • The relative uncertainty on BR(B0  D*-Ds*+) (Method I) is: 6.6%stat. 9.4%syst. = 11.5% • and on BR(B0  D*-Ds*+) (Method II): 6.7%stat. 10%syst. = 11.6% • we estimate a 16% maximum uncertainty on BR(Dsfp) (was 25% in the most recently published measurement) Statistics from MonteCarlo Rough estimate ROBERTO COVARELLI

  17. Summary • The branching fractions BR(B0  D*-Ds+) and BR(B0  D*-Ds*+), as well as the fraction of longitudinal polarization in B0  D*-Ds*+, have been measured using a Ds(*) – ppartial reco technique. The results are: BR(B0  D*-Ds+) = (1.03±0.14stat.±0.13syst.±0.26Ds  fp)% BR(B0  D*-Ds*+) = (1.97±0.15stat.±0.30syst.±0.49Ds  fp)% GL/G = (51.9±5.0stat.±2.8syst.)% • The complementary reconstruction, D* - g, is being performed, in order to obtain a second, independent measurement of BR(B0  D*-Ds*+) and extract BR(Dsfp) ROBERTO COVARELLI

More Related