K. Honscheid Ohio State University Aspen 2006 Beyond the Standard Model Searches for New Physics at...
-
Upload
lawrence-greene -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
3
Transcript of K. Honscheid Ohio State University Aspen 2006 Beyond the Standard Model Searches for New Physics at...
K. HonscheidOhio State University
Aspen 2006
Beyond the Standard Model
Searches for New Physics at the
B-Factories
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Where to look for New Physics?
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Experimental Strategies
B,D →,
B→
b→sg penguinsb
d
s f
0K
s
sd
b,c
d
u
b
W+,H+
b→s penguins Z,h0
b s ,,s,ub,c
B,D →Xus,Xus
W+,H+
W+,H+
→ll
~
~LFV
From Hitlin, LHC Lavor Workshop
W+,H+
Surprises
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Experimental Landscape (ca 2006)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004
Mill
ion B
Meso
ns
Mill
ion D
Meso
ns
Mill
ion
Lepto
ns
CLEO II CLEO II.5
BaBar
BelleIntegrated Luminosity
550 fb-1
320 fb-1
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Search for Lepton Flavor Violation in Decays• Lepton flavor is conserved in the Standard Model
– not protected by an underlyingconserved current symmetry
– Neutrino Masses
• Many SM extensions include LF violation
• Observation of LF violation would be a clear signature for new physics
l
~
~
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Search for → e PRL 96, 041801 (2006)
signal
tag
e
Positrons Electrons
• 207106 e+e- → +- events• Observe 1 event in a 22 signal box on 1.9±0.4 expected background
Previous limits (all @ 90% CL): Br(- → -) < 0.68 10-7 (BaBar, PRL 95 041802) Br(- → -) < 3.1 10-7 (Belle, PRL 92 171802)Br(- → e-) < 3.8 10-7 (Belle, PLB 613 22)
Br(→ e) < 1.1 10-7 at 90% C.L.
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Limits on New Physics – An Example
Just an example with tan=55 Trilinear coupling A0=0 Inverted m hierarchy …
s- i
s LS
P
allo
wed
Br(e)<1x10-8
2x10-85x10-811x10-8
Current BaBar limit
O. Igonkina, SUSY 2005
l and mSUGRAEx
clud
ed b
y LE
P
Exclud
ed b
y CDM
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Search for New Physics in the Charm Sector
• D0 MixingFlavor eigenstates are not mass eigenstates with M1,2 and 1,2
• D0 Mixing is small in the SM box diagram: x,y, < few x 10-5
long distance: x ~ 10-3, y ~ 10-2
• Strong phase in hadronic decaysx’ = x cos + y siny’ = y cos – x sin
• Proper Time Fit
Wrong sign
Using D0 K+-, 400 fb-1
hep-ex/0601029
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Experimental Limits on D0 mixing
World 95% CL in (x,y)
World 95% CL in y
G. Burdman and I. Shipsey, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 53, 431 (2003)
[arXiv:hep-ph/030076]
(assuming = 0, CPV = 0)
hep-ex/0601029
95% CL Limits (assuming CP) x’2 < 0.72 x 10-3
-9.9 x 10-3 < y’ < 6.8 x 10-3
Note: No-Mixing (0,0) has only 3.9% CL
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Rare Charm Decays and CP Violation
Experiment Decay mode ACP (%) Notes
BaBar D+K-K++ 1.41.0 0.8BaBar D+ ++ 0.21.50.6 Res. Substr.
Of D+K-K++
BaBar D+ 0.91.70.7
CLEO II.V D0 + - 0 1 8 Dalitz plot analysis
CDF D0 K+K- 2.0 1.2 0.6 Direct CPV
CDF D0 + - 1.0 1.3 0.6 Direct CPV
FOCUS D0 K+K-+ - 1.0 5.73.7 T violation through triple product correlations
FOCUS D+ KoK++- 2.3 6.22.2
FOCUS DS KoK++ -3.6 6.72.3from S. Stone
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Experimental Aside: Single B Meson Beams
Lots of interesting modes include one or more neutrinos.
“Beams” with a single, monochromatic B and without c, QED etc would be very useful for : B, B, BK,…
Fully reconstruct one of the Bs and study the remaining of the event closed kinematics, missing energy reconstruction
Semileptonic D(*)l()5K/fb-1
Hadronic D(*) X3K/fb-1 efficiency purity
Tag types
X=n+m0+pK+qKs
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Search for B hep-ex/0507069
SM decay proceeds via W-annihilation diagram
Sensitive to new physics charged current
Analysis:
Undetected neutrinos result in large missing energy and few kinematic constraints – high background.
Reduce the background by reconstructing the second B (“tag B”) in the event in the copious decay mode B→D*0ll
Reconstruct B→ with →lbar or →h, where h = , , or a1
Require no additional charged tracks in the event
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Energy in addition to signal candidate (GeV)
+e+e
BaBar SL tags230M BB
Current BaBar 90% C.L.
Expectations from U.T. fit
MC Signal for Br=10-3
Results for B
No signal in 230 M BB events90% CL Upper Limit (Combined with hadronic tags)
Br(B+→) < 2.6 10
Close to the discovery of this mode or NP
…even closer hep-ex/0507034
New Belle analysis using 250 fb-1
4( ) 1.8 10BF B
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Higgs sensitivity
mH(G
eV
)
tan
Bbs
both
2HDMGambino, Misiak Nucl. Phys. B611 338Hou Phys.Rev.D48:2342-2344,1993 Limits on 2-Higgs Models from
B
Current limits
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Search for Bs +- at the Tevatron
Standard model prediction: Br(Bs +-)= (3.50.9) 10-9
CDF 360 pb-1
300pb-1
No Signal found
Bs+- < 2.010-7 CDFBs+- < 3.910-7 D0
Combined (90% CL)
Bs+- < 1.510-
7
hep-ex/0508058
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Affects
EW Penguins: BKl+l-, BK*l+l-, and BXsl+l-
BABAR hep-ex/0507005 (229M BB) Belle prelim. hep-ex/0410006, 0508009
B K *B K
• With l+l- pair, can produce both pseudoscalar and vector mesons• SM: Br(B →Kl+l-) ~ 4 10-7 (± 30% theory) ~3 times that for K*
• Rates• Asymmetries (AFB, CP)• /ee ratio
New Physics affects
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
BKl+l- and BK*l+l- : branching fractions
Theory errorsmainly due to form factors.
(rarest observed B decay) 6 (10 )
6( ) (0.45 0.05) 10WAB B K
* 6( ) (1.18 0.17) 10WAB B K
pole at low q2
2q 2q
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
BK*l+l-: Lepton F-B Asymmetry
Bl
l
s
q*K
l
Lepton angular distribution in l+ l- rest frame
2q
386 M BB
SM
NP scenarios
constraints on Wilson coeffs describing short-distance physics
hep-ex/0508009
FBA
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Little Higgs wMFV UV fix
Extra dim wSM on brane
SupersoftSUSY breakingDirac gauginos
SM-like B physics New Physics in B data
Generic Little Higgs
Generic extra dim w SM in bulk
SUSY GUTs
Effective SUSY
after G. Hiller
MSSMMFV
large tan
MSSMMFV
small tan
Getting Lost?
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
BaBar
BELLE
2003 2004 2005
DsJ(2317)
DsJ(2458)
X(3872)Y(3940)
Y(4260)
Z(3930)
continuum
ISR
B decays
B decays
Be ready for surprises
Several new particles have been observed by the B Factories
Different production mechanism Different JPC
For a nice review by Swanson see hep-ph/0601110
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
CP Violation in the B System
Present CKM
fit
Present WA
BABAR 0.722±0.040±0.023Belle 0.652±0.039±0.020
0B
fiCPA e
CPf
0B2iq
ep
fi
CPA e
See talk by Aihara for more on CPV
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Bounds on new physics from UT fitsCKM Model confirmed by many measurementsNow look for New Physics as correction to CKM Model
The fit to the unitarity triangle constraints:
b
d
b=
W NP+
=
W
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Bounds on new physics from UT fits
Constraints: |Vub|, md, SK add:
Ligeti,Silvestrini,Agashe et al
First constraints on d, CBd
In terms of probed new physics mass scale (=m(NP); gNP=coupling)(now)~5gNP TeV
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
The next few years (2006 – 2008)
• Belle and BaBar• 1 ab-1 (2006)• 2 ab-1 (2008)
• Tevatron• 2 fb-1 (2006)• 8 fb-1 (2009)
• LHCb is nearing completion
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Jul-99
Jul-00
Jul-01
Jul-02
Jul-03
Jul-04
Jul-05
Jul-06
Jul-07
Jul-08
ICHEP08
See talk by S. Stone on Thursday
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Super B-Factory Plans at KEK and Frascati
Interaction RegionCrab crossing
=30mrad.y*=3mm
New QCS
Linac upgrade
More RF power
Damping ring
New Beam pipe
L = 41035/cm2 /sec
Design Luminosity ~ 1 x 1036
/cm2/secSynergy with ILCLots of R&D needed
Next Super B Workshop in Frascati, March 16-18, 2006KEK Frascati
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Have Ideas – Need Statistics
Mode BRSM Notes on New Physics
bs ~3 10-4 BF, ACP, and AFB important
bsg ~10-5 each BF not critical. Need events to measure SCP
BXll ~10-6 each BF, ACP, and AFB important
BX ~10-6 each Up to 10-5 each
DXll ~10-6 each Up to 10-5 each
B ~10-4 Experiments close to SM sensitivity
l ~10-40 Up to 10-8
Bll <10-11 Up to 10-5
Dll <10-9 Up to 10-6
K. HonscheidOhio State University
Aspen 2006
Additional Transparencies
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Let’s rule out at least one NP model
0.133 0.030 0.009 CPA BaBar 2004 New Belle Result:
-0.113+/- 0.022+/- 0.008
232x106 BB’s
Superweak Model (Wolfenstein) is really out
Observation of direct CP violation in
B0K+-
B0K+
B0K+
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Implications of Bs +-<1.510-7
Excluded!
M0 [
GeV
]
mSUGRA prediction:Dedes, Dreiner, Nierste PRL87:251804,2001
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Search for LFV in → lhh’ PRL 95, 191801 (2005)
hep-ex/0509016
→ eK+K eK+ e+K e+ e+KK e+K e+
UL(107) 1.4 1.7 3.2 1.2 1.5 1.8 2.7
→ K+K K+ +K + +KK +K +
UL(107) 2.5 3.2 2.6 2.9 4.8 2.2 0.7
Br(→ eKs) < 5.6 10-8 at 90% C.L.Br(→ Ks) < 4.9 10-8 at 90% C.L.
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
First Search for B→
SM expectation ~ 107
(Compare: 10 for , 10 for e+e)
Helicity (ml/mB)2 and Cabibbo (VtbVtd*) suppressed
Very clean theoretically
Small SM Sensitive to new physics in the loops
hep-ex/0501115
Analysis
Reconstruct the tag B in decays to D(*) and up to 5 kaons and pions
Reconstruct the signal decayB→with →1-prong decaysRequire no additional charged tracks in the event
Require little remaining energy: Eextra < 0.11 GeV
Use correlations between Eextra and the momenta of the reconstructed daughters in a neural net to further reduce the background
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Yields a constraint on leptoquark parameter. For example
RH coupling to generations i,j Leptoquark doublet mass
22BtagbeamES pEm
Br(B→) < 3.2 103 at 90% C.L. GeV
B0→ Results hep-ex/0501115
Using 232 106 Y(4S)→BB events we observe263 ± 19 events with 281 ± 40 expected background.
First limit on this mode
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Measurement of B(BXsl+l-)
AnalysisSemi-inclusive techniqueXs is reconstructed from K+ or Ks + 0-4 (at most one 0 is allowed)
MXs < 2.0 GeVElectron or muon pair
Mll>0.2GeVCharmonium veto
140 fb-1 used
Theoretical prediction by Ali et al.
Wrong flavor
MXs q2
hep-ex/0503044
eff eff eff eff eff *9 10 7 7 9
22 5 *22
3
2 2 2
ˆ1ˆ 4 48
2ˆ1 2 4 1 12Re
ˆ
F b ts tbem
C
d b s G m V Vs
ds
s C C Cs
C
Decay width for bsll (s=q2/mb2 )
SM
Sign of C7 flipped
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Constraints on Ci from B(BXsl+l-)
Clean prediction for B(BXsll) with 1<q2<6GeV2 is available.Combine Belle and Babar resultsSign of C7 flipped case with SM C9 and C10 values is unlikely.
P.Gambino, U.Haisch and M.Misiak PRL 94 061803 (2005)
BF Belle Babar WA SM C7 = -C7SM
q2>(2m)2 4.11±1.1 5.6±2.0 4.5±1.0 4.4±0.7 8.8±0.7
1<q2<6GeV2 1.5±0.6 1.8±0.9 1.60±0.5 1.57±0.16 3.30±0.25
C7SM C7 = -C7
SMC10NP C10
NP
C9NP
Donut : 90% CL allowed region
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
2005: Sample used for AFB(BK*ll)(q2)
Sample for BK* l l events 113±13
BK l l control sample 96±12
Treat q2, cos(θ) dependence of bkgs.
Consistent with flat
2001: Belle 1st observed
hep-ex/0503044
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
New Measurement of AFB(q2) in K*ll
Forward-backward asymmetry is induced by interference btw virtual photon and Z0 contributions.Relative signs and magnitudes of C7 to C10 and C9 to C10 can be determined from AFB(BK*ll)!!
We do not use Ci but Ai which is leading coefficients.
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Fit results for ratios of Wilson coefficients
Null test with K+ll
Projection to AFB
SM
Best fit for negative A7 (SM like) J/ ’
Best fit for positive A7 (non-SM like)
(This solution is also allowed)
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
Confidence Level Contours
For any allowed A7, we obtain 95% CL
Sign of A9A10 is negative!!
Sign of A9A10 flipped case is excluded
The first and third quadrants
Sign of A7A10 is not determined yet.
The second and fourth quadrants
Best fit
SM
fit resultA7A10 sign flipped (to SM)
A9A10 sign flippedBoth A7A10 and A9A10 signs flipped
SMA9/A7
A10/A7
SM
K. Honscheid, Ohio State University, Aspen 2006
What is the ultimate possible UT precision?
Theoretical limits (continuum methods)Many measurements will not be theory-limited for quite some time
Ligeti: