BELLE
LATEST RESULTS FROM BELLE
AND PLANS FOR A SUPER B FACTORY
Tim GershonUniversity of Warwick
March 30, 2006
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Contents
• KEK-B and Belle
• Summer 2005 highlights(http://belle.kek.jp/conferences/CONF2005/)
– direct CP violation
– measurements of UT angles
– penguin dominated processes
• Super B Factory
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Belle Collaboration
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE KEK
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Integrated Luminosity
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Luminosity Trends
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
2000 2002 2004 2006Year
Pea
k lu
min
osit
y (1
033 c
m-2
s-1 )
Increase of Peak Luminosity
1.0025 1034/cm2/s on 2005/10/9 (PEP-II)
1.627 1034/cm2/s on 2005/12/19 (KEKB)
10 29
10 30
10 31
10 32
10 33
10 34
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Peak Luminosity trends in last 30 years
YearP
eak
lum
inos
ity
(cm
-2s-1
)
DORISHERA
PETRA
ISR
LEP1
LEP2
SppS
CESR
TEVATRON
SPEAR
PEP
PEP II
TRISTAN
KEKB
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Belle Detector
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Inner Detector Upgrade - Summer 2003
Number of silicon DSSDs3 layers → 4 layers
Radius of beam piper = 2.0 cm → r = 1.5 cm
Radiation hardness1 MRad → > 20 MRad
Laboratory polar angle coverage23◦ < θ < 139◦ → 17◦ < θ < 150◦
IMPROVED RESOLUTION!
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Search for Θ(1540)+ Using Kaon Interactions397
fb−1
PLB
632,173
(2006)
. . . no pentaquarks found
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE CKM Phenomenology
VCKM =
Vud Vus VubVcd Vcs VcbVtd Vts Vtb
∼
1 − λ2/2 λ Aλ3(ρ− iη)
−λ 1 − λ2/2 Aλ2
Aλ3(1 − ρ− iη) −Aλ2 1
where A, λ, ρ, η are Wolfenstein parameters
From unitarity (V ∗CKMVCKM = 1):
VudV∗ub + VcdV
∗cb + VtdV
∗tb = 0
The Unitarity Triangle
φ1 ↔ β
φ2 ↔ α
φ3 ↔ γ
(0,0) (1,0)
(ρ,η)
φ1
φ2φ3
VudVub*
VcdVcb*
VtdVtb*
VcdVcb*
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE The Purpose of the B Factory
• Within the Standard Model, only B system has large CP violation
• Hadronic parameters (τB, ∆md) ⇒ CP effects accessible
• e+e− collisions at high luminosity– large data sample– clean environment
reconstruct almost any decay mode (even with neutrinos)
• Precise test of quark mixing & CP violation within SM
• Search for new physics
• Copious samples of τ pairs, D mesons and other particles also produced⇒ broad physics program
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Categories of CP Violation
• Usually discussed in the context of neutral B decays
• Consider B0/B0 decaying to a CP eigenstate
• Define λCP = qpAA
– p, q from B0 − B0 mixing– Standard Model : qp ∼ e−2φ1
(usual phase convention)
• Three categories of CP violation
1 |q/p| 6= 1 CPV in mixing2
∣
∣A/A∣
∣ 6= 1 CPV in decay (direct CPV )3 Im(λCP ) 6= 0 CPV in mixing—decay interference
• With amplitude analysis can also consider
2′ Im(A/A) 6= 0 CPV in decay amplitude to Q2B state
B0
B– 0
fCP∆m
A
A–
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Experimental Technique
• For most modes, use two kinematic variables to identify signal∆E = EB −Ebeam Mbc =
√
E2beam − p2B
• Put event-shape variables into likelihood ratio to reject background
• Particle ID from ACC, TOF & CDC used to separate K/π
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE
Direct CP Violation
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Direct CPV in B0 → K+π−357
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0523
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
5.2 5.25 5.3Mbc (GeV/c2)
Ent
ries/
2MeV
/c2
K−π+
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
5.2 5.25 5.3Mbc (GeV/c2)
Ent
ries/
2MeV
/c2
K+π−
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 0.5∆E (GeV)
Ent
ries/
20M
eV
K−π+
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 0.5∆E (GeV)
Ent
ries/
20M
eV
K+π−
ACP(
K+π−)
= −0.113 ± 0.022(stat) ± 0.008(syst)
Significance: 4.97σ
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Direct CPV in B+ → K+π0357
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0523
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
5.2 5.25 5.3
Mbc (GeV/c2)
Ent
ries/
2MeV
/c2
K-π0
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
5.2 5.25 5.3
Mbc (GeV/c2)
Ent
ries/
2MeV
/c2
K+π0
0
20
40
60
80
100
-0.25 0 0.25
∆E (GeV)
Ent
ries/
15M
eV K-π0
0
20
40
60
80
100
-0.25 0 0.25
∆E (GeV)
Ent
ries/
15M
eV K+π0
ACP(
K+π0)
= 0.04 ± 0.04(stat) ± 0.02(syst)
ACP
(
K+π0)
−ACP
(
K+π−)
3.1σ from zero
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Direct CPV in B+ → K+π+π−357
fb−1
Belle-Preprint-2005-36
• Veto major charm(onium) contributionsto K+π+π− final state
• 4286 ± 99 signal events
• Parametrize each contributing resonant term asaje
iδj(
1 + ηbjeiφj
)
Aj
– ajeiδj = CP conservating complex amplitude
– bjeiφj = CP violating part
– η = +1(−1) for B+ (B−)– Aj = Breit-Wigner (etc.) dependence
• Can translate to usual CP asymmetry
ACPj = −2bj cosφj
1+b2j
(δ=0) φA+
A−
a
ab
0
400
800
1200
1600
2000
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5∆E (GeV)
Eve
nts
/(1
0 M
eV
)
- data
- total background
- continuum
- BB total
- BB charmless
B±→K±π+π-
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
M2(K+π-) (GeV2/c4)M2(
π+π-) (GeV2/c4)
(b)
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Direct CPV in B+ → K+π+π−357
fb−1
Belle-Preprint-2005-36
Fit first without CP terms to establish model (bj = 0)
0
100
200
300
400
1 2 3 4 5
M(K+π-) (GeV/c2)
Events/(50 MeV/c2)
(a)
0
50
100
150
200
0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6
0
100
200
300
400
0 1 2 3 4 5
M(π+π-) (GeV/c2)
Events/(50 MeV/c2)
(b)
0
10
20
30
40
3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5
Contributions from K∗(892)0π+, K∗0(1430)
0π+, ρ0K+, ωK+, f0K+,f2(1275)K
+, fX(1300)K+, χc0K+ & non-resonant terms
f0(980) parametrized by Flatte lineshape, fX(1300) assumed scalar (f0(1370)?)
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Direct CPV in B+ → K+π+π−357
fb−1
Belle-Preprint-2005-36
First evidence for direct CPV in charged B decays
• Statistical significance calculated as√
−2 ln(L0/Lmax)
• Largest systematics from model uncertainty
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Direct CPV in B+ → K+π+π−357
fb−1
Belle-Preprint-2005-36
Asymmetry in the ρ region clearly visible in the data
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2M(π+π-) (GeV/c2)
Events/(0.02 GeV/c2) B-→ K-π-π+ (a)
0
20
40
60
80
100
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2M(π+π-) (GeV/c2)
Events/(0.05 GeV/c2) B-→ K-π-π+ (c)
cos(θππhel )<0
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2M(π+π-) (GeV/c2)
Events/(0.05 GeV/c2) B-→ K-π-π+ (e)
cos(θππhel )>0
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2M(π+π-) (GeV/c2)
Events/(0.02 GeV/c2) B+→K+π+π- (b)
0
20
40
60
80
100
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2M(π+π-) (GeV/c2)
Events/(0.05 GeV/c2) B+→K+π+π- (d)
cos(θππhel )<0
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2M(π+π-) (GeV/c2)
Events/(0.05 GeV/c2) B+→K+π+π- (f)
cos(θππhel )>0
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Direct CP Violation — Summary
Direct CP violation seen by Belle:
• B0 → K+π− (∼ 10% ∼ 5σ)
• B0 → π+π− (∼ 50% ∼ 4σ)
• B+ → ρ0K+ (∼ 30% ∼ 4σ)
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE
Measurements of UT Angles
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Key: Redundancy
(0,0) (1,0)
(ρ,η)
φ1
φ2φ3
VudVub*
VcdVcb*
VtdVtb*
VcdVcb*
φ1 φ2 φ3
b→ ccs (J/ψKS) b→ uud (π+π−, ρ+ρ−) b→ cus/ucs (DK−)b→ cud (Dπ0) b→ uus vs. b→ uud (Kπ vs. ππ)
b→ ccd (J/ψπ0, D+D−) 2φ1 + φ3
b→ sqq (φKS) b→ cud/ucd (D+π−)
. . . and many others!Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE φ3 from B → DK
• Can access φ3 via interference between B− → D0K− & B− → D0K−
Bigi & Sanda; Gronau, London & Wyler
• Reconstruct D in final states accessible to both D0 and D0
B− → D0K− ∼ VusV ∗cb B− → D0K− ∼ VcsV ∗
ubs
b
u
c
uW
u u
u
c
s
b
u
W
COLOUR ALLOWED COLOUR SUPPRESSED
K−)
D0K−)
0
φφ
δ
δ3
3
(B− DCP2A
(B−
(B− D K−)
A
AA — amplituderB = ASUPPRESSED/AFAVOURED
∼ 0.1 − 0.2
δB — strong phase difference
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE φ3 from B → DK: Final States
• Ultimately aim to use many states and combine results
• Inclusive analyses can be performed but sensitivity is diluted Reconstruct modes exclusively, where possible Use amplitude analysis (not, eg., Q2B analysis) where possible
• To extract φ3, need D decay “model” crucial role of charm factory
• Modes used so far1. CP even (mainly K+K−)
2. CP odd (mainly KSπ0)
3. Doubly Cabibbo suppressed states (Kπ)
4. Multibody final states (KSππ)
• Modes that may be used in future∗ KSK
+K−, π+π−π0, KSπ±K∓, K±π∓π0, KSπ
+π−π0, . . .
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Parameters
• CP violation effects depend onφ3 : weak phase difference between B decay amplitudesδB : strong phase difference between B decay amplitudesrB : relative magnitude of B decay amplitudesδD : (strong phase difference of D decay amplitudes)rD : (relative magnitude of D decay amplitudes)
• For multibody D decays, last two described by decay model
• D decay model also includes assumptions of– no mixing– no CP violation
. . . well motivated and tested (effects can be included)
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Principle of the Multi-Body Analysis
A. Giri, Y. Grossman, A. Soffer & J. Zupan, PRD 68, 054018 (2003)A. Poluektov et al. (Belle Collaboration), PRD 70, 072003 (2004)
• Consider D0 → KSπ+π−
→ define amplitude at each Dalitz plot point as f(m2+,m
2−)
where m+ = mKSπ+, m− = mKSπ
−
• Consider D0 → KSπ+π−
→ amplitude at each Dalitz plot point is f(m2−,m
2+)
•∣
∣
∣f(m2+,m
2−)
∣
∣
∣ can be measured using flavour tagged D mesons
• Consider B+ →(
KSπ+π−
)
DK+
→ amplitude is f(m2+,m
2−) + rBe
i(δB+φ3)f(m2−,m
2+)
• Consider B− →(
KSπ+π−
)
DK−
→ amplitude is f(m2−,m
2+) + rBe
i(δB−φ3)f(m2+,m
2−)
• Can extract (rB, δB, φ3) from B+ & B− data
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE B± → D(∗)K(∗)± Selection357
fb−1
INPREPARATION
B± → DK± B± → D∗K± B± → DK∗±
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
−0.2 −0.1 0 0.1 0.2∆E (GeV)
Signal
Continuum+BB
K/π misID
(a)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
−0.2 −0.1 0 0.1 0.2∆E (GeV)
Signal
Continuum+BB
K/π misID
(a)
0
5
10
15
20
25
−0.2 −0.1 0 0.1 0.2∆E (GeV)
Signal
Continuum+BB (a)
01020304050607080
5.2 5.22 5.24 5.26 5.28 5.3
Signal
Continuum+BB
K/π misID
Mbc (GeV/c2)
(b)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
5.2 5.22 5.24 5.26 5.28 5.3Mbc (GeV/c2)
Signal
Continuum+BB
K/π misID
(b)
0
5
10
15
20
25
5.2 5.22 5.24 5.26 5.28 5.3Mbc (GeV/c2)
Signal
Continuum+BB (b)
470 candidate events 111 candidate events 78 candidate events(331 ± 17 signal) (81 ± 8 signal) (54 ± 8 signal)
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE B± → DK(∗)±, D → KSπ+π− Dalitz Plot Distributions
357
fb−1
INPREPARATION
B± → DK± B± → D∗K± B± → DK∗±
f(m
2 +,m
2 −)+
r Bei
(δ B
+φ
3)f(m
2 −,m
2 +)
f(m
2 −,m
2 +)+
r Bei
(δ B
−φ
3)f(m
2 +,m
2 −)
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Extraction of f(m2+,m
2−)
357
fb−1
INPREPARATION
• Fit Dalitz plot distribution of tagged D mesons from e+e− continuum
• Tag using charge of πs in D∗+ → D0π+s
• Used model defines phase variation of f(m2+,m
2−)
0
1
2
3
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3m2
- (GeV2/c4)
Ent
ries/
0.02
GeV
2 /c4 ×
103
0
1
2
3
4
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3m2
ππ (GeV2/c4)
Ent
ries/
0.02
GeV
2 /c4 ×
103
0
5
10
15
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3m2
+ (GeV2/c4)
Ent
ries/
0.02
GeV
2 /c4 ×
103
χ2/ndf = 2.72
(ndf = 1081)
Fine tuning of model little effect on φ3
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Dalitz Plot Fits357
fb−1
INPREPARATION
Fit B± samples separately, float (x±, y±) = (rB cos (δB ± φ3) , rB sin (δB ± φ3))
B± → DK± B± → D∗K± B± → DK∗±
470 candidate events 111 candidate events 78 candidate events(331 ± 17 signal) (81 ± 8 signal) (54 ± 8 signal)
x+ = −0.135+0.069−0.070 x+ = 0.032+0.120
−0.116 x+ = −0.105+0.177−0.167
y+ = −0.085+0.090−0.086 y+ = 0.008+0.137
−0.136 y+ = −0.004+0.164−0.156
x− = 0.025 +0.072−0.080 x− = −0.128+0.167
−0.146 x− = −0.784+0.249−0.295
y− = 0.170 +0.093−0.117 y− = −0.339+0.172
−0.158 y− = −0.281+0.440−0.335
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Extraction of φ3357
fb−1
INPREPARATION
Use frequentist approach to obtain confidence regions(recall rB and δB different for each mode)
STATISTICAL ERRORS ONLY
Combine B± → DK±, B± → D∗K± & B± → DK∗±
φ3 = 53◦ +15◦
−18◦ (stat) ± 3◦(syst) ± 9◦(model)
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Time-Dependent CP Violation Phenomenology
• Interference between different paths to a final state ⇒ time-dependent CP violation
• Consider B0/B0 decaying to a CP eigenstate
• Define λCP = qpAA
– p, q from B0 − B0 mixing– Standard Model : qp ∼ e−2φ1
• Simplest scenario:
–∣
∣
∣
qp
∣
∣
∣ = 1,∣
∣
∣
AA
∣
∣
∣ = 1 ⇒ SCP = Im(λCP )
• At B factories, measure ∆t from decay time of other B(tagged as B0 (q = +1) or B0 (q = −1))
PqCP (∆t) = e
−|∆t|/τB0
4τB0
[1 + q {SCP sin(∆m∆t)}]
B0
B– 0
fCP∆m
A
A–
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE How To Measure Time-Dependent CP Violation
Illustrated using B0 → J/ψKS, B0 → D∗−µ+νµ
electron
(8GeV)
positron
(3.5GeV)
�²(4S)resonance
J/�µ
Ks
µ+
µ−
µ+
K+
π−
π−
νµ
π+
π−
∆Z~200µm
B2
t=0
B1
D0
B0
B0
t=t
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE B0 → J/ψK0 Selection357
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0569
B0 → J/ψKS B0 → J/ψKL
M (GeV/c )bc2
5.2 5.22 5.24 5.26 5.3
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
J/ψ K (π π ) S+ -
386 M BB
Eve
nts
/2M
eV
/c2
5.28
0
(GeV/c)cmsBp
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2N
umbe
r of
eve
nts
/ (0.
05 G
eV/c
)0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500 data
LKΨJ/
detectedLX BG, KLKΨJ/
X BG, otherΨJ/
combinatorial BG
5264 ± 73 signal events 4792 ± 105 signal events
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE B0 → J/ψK0 — ∆t Dependence357
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0569
B0 → J/ψKS B0 → J/ψKL
t (ps)∆-8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
Eve
nts
/ ps
(goo
d ta
gs)
50
100
150
200
250
300q = +1
q = -1
t (ps)∆-8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
Raw
asy
mm
etry
(go
od ta
gs)
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
t (ps)∆-8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
Eve
nts
/ ps
(goo
d ta
gs)
100
200
300
400q = +1
q = -1
t (ps)∆-8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
Raw
asy
mm
etry
(go
od ta
gs)
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
S = +0.668 ± 0.047(stat) S = −0.619 ± 0.069(stat)A = −0.021 ± 0.034(stat) A = +0.049 ± 0.039(stat)
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE B0 → J/ψK0 — World Average357
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0569
Belle: sin(2φ1) = +0.652 ± 0.039 ± 0.020
sin(2β)/sin(2φ1)
-2 -1 0 1 2 3
BaBarPRL 94, 161803 (2005)
0.72 ± 0.04 ± 0.02
BelleBELLE-CONF-0569
0.65 ± 0.04 ± 0.02
ALEPHPLB 492, 259-274 (2000)
0.84 +-01
.
.80
24 ± 0.16
OPALEPJ C5, 379-388 (1998)
3.20 +-12
.
.80
00 ± 0.50
CDFPRD 61, 072005 (2000)
0.79 +-00
.
.44
14
AverageHFAG
0.69 ± 0.03
H F A GH F A GHEP 2005
PRELIMINARY
World Average: sin(2φ1) = +0.687 ± 0.032
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE sin(2φ1) — Constraint
β/φ1
ρ–
η–
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
β/φ1 = (21.7 +
-1
1.
.3
2)˚β/φ
1 = (68.3 +- 11 .. 23 )˚
H F A GH F A GHEP 2005
PRELIMINARY
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE UT angles — Summary
(0,0) (1,0)
(ρ,η)
φ1
φ2φ3
VudVub*
VcdVcb*
VtdVtb*
VcdVcb*
φ1 φ2 φ3
B0 → J/ψK0 B0 → π+π− & ρ+ρ− B± → DK±
sin(2φ1) = +0.652 ± 0.039 ± 0.020 φ2 = 93+12−11
◦
φ3 = 53◦ +15◦
−18◦ (stat) ± 3◦(syst) ± 9◦(model)
Ambiguities reduced byJ/ψK∗ & D(∗)h0 π+π−π0 D.P. (BaBar) D → KSπ
+π− D.P.
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE UT angles — Summary
Plots from UTFit Collaboration
ρ-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
η
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
βsin2
0π0D
βcos2α
γ+β2
γ
ρ-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
η
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
ρ-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
η
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
βsin2
dm∆ sm∆dm∆
Kε
cbVubV
ρ-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
η
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
ρ-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
η
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
βsin2
0π0D
βcos2α
γ+β2
γ
dm∆ sm∆dm∆
Kε
cbVubV
ρ-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
η
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Penguins
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Why Hunt Penguins?
b s,d
gγZ
u,c,t
W
q,l q,l
• loop diagrams ⇒ virtual particles ⇒ high masses
• expect new physics at TeV scale
• NP particles should appear in loops
• no reason for NP phases to be aligned
• many possible manifestations of NP– b→ s vs. b→ d
– gluonic vs. radiative vs. electroweak– ∆B = 2 (mixing) processes
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE B0 → φK0357
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0569
φKS φKL
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
-0.2-0.15-0.1-0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2∆E(GeV)
Ent
ries
/ 0.0
1 G
eV
Likelihood ratio0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 1
Eve
nts
/ 0.0
2
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140 data
LKφ
BG from B mesons
BG from continuum
180 ± 16 78 ± 13
∆t(ps)
Raw
Asy
mm
etry
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1 B0 → φKS0
0.0 < r ≤ 0.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-7.5 -5 -2.5 0 2.5 5 7.5
0.5 < r ≤ 1.0
∆t(ps)
Raw
Asy
mm
etry
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1 B0 → φKL0
0.0 < r ≤ 0.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-7.5 -5 -2.5 0 2.5 5 7.5
0.5 < r ≤ 1.0
sin(2φ1eff) = +0.44 ± 0.27 ± 0.05 A = +0.14 ± 0.17 ± 0.07
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE B0 → η′K0357
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0569
η′KS η′KL
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
225
250
-0.2-0.15-0.1-0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2∆E(GeV)
Ent
ries
/ 0.0
1 G
eV
Likelihood ratio0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 1
Eve
nts
/ 0.0
1
0
20
40
60
80
100data
L’Kη
BG from B mesons
BG from continuum
830 ± 35 187 ± 18
∆t(ps)
Raw
Asy
mm
etry
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1 B0 → η′KS0
0.0 < r ≤ 0.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-7.5 -5 -2.5 0 2.5 5 7.5
0.5 < r ≤ 1.0
∆t(ps)
Raw
Asy
mm
etry
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1 B0 → η′KL0
0.0 < r ≤ 0.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-7.5 -5 -2.5 0 2.5 5 7.5
0.5 < r ≤ 1.0
sin(2φ1eff) = +0.62 ± 0.12 ± 0.04 A = −0.04 ± 0.08 ± 0.06
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE b→ qqs357
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0569
KSKSKS K+K−KS f0KS ωKS KSπ0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
-0.2 0 0.2∆E (GeV)
Eve
nts/
0.02
GeV
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
225
-0.2-0.15-0.1-0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2∆E(GeV)
Ent
ries
/ 0.0
1 G
eV
E (GeV)∆-0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Eve
nts
/ ( 0
.010
5 G
eV )
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
E (GeV)∆-0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Eve
nts
/ ( 0
.010
5 G
eV )
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0
5
10
15
20
25
-0.2-0.15-0.1-0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2∆E(GeV)
Ent
ries
/ 0.0
1 G
eV
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
-0.2-0.15-0.1-0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2∆E (GeV)
Ent
ries
/ 0.0
1 G
eV
105 ± 12 536 ± 29 145 ± 16 68 ± 13 344 ± 30
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
0.0 < r ≤ 0.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-7.5 -5 -2.5 0 2.5 5 7.5∆t (ps)
0.5 < r ≤ 1.0
Raw
Asy
mm
etry
/2.5
ps
∆t(ps)
Raw
Asy
mm
etry
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1 B0 → K+K-K0S
0.0 < r ≤ 0.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-7.5 -5 -2.5 0 2.5 5 7.5
0.5 < r ≤ 1.0
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
0.0 < r ≤ 0.5
B0 → f0 KS0
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-7.5 -5 -2.5 0 2.5 5 7.5
0.5 < r ≤ 1.0
∆t (ps)
Raw
Asy
mm
etry
∆t(ps)
Raw
Asy
mm
etry
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1 B0 → ωKS0
0.0 < r ≤ 0.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-7.5 -5 -2.5 0 2.5 5 7.5
0.5 < r ≤ 1.0
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
0.0 < r ≤ 0.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-7.5 -5 -2.5 0 2.5 5 7.5∆t (ps)
0.5 < r ≤ 1.0
Raw
Asy
mm
etry
/2.5
ps
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE b→ qqs357
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0569
sin(2βeff)/sin(2φe1ff)
HF
AG
HE
P 2
005
HF
AG
HE
P 2
005
HF
AG
HE
P 2
005
HF
AG
HE
P 2
005
HF
AG
HE
P 2
005
HF
AG
HE
P 2
005
HF
AG
HE
P 2
005
HF
AG
HE
P 2
005
b→ccs
φ K
0η′
K0
f 0 K
S
π0 KS
ω K
S
K+ K
- K0
KS K
S K
S
-1 0 1 2
World Average 0.69 ± 0.03BaBar 0.50 ± 0.25 +-
00
.
.00
74
Belle 0.44 ± 0.27 ± 0.05Average 0.47 ± 0.19BaBar 0.36 ± 0.13 ± 0.03Belle 0.62 ± 0.12 ± 0.04Average 0.50 ± 0.09BaBar 0.95 +-
00
.
.23
32 ± 0.10
Belle 0.47 ± 0.36 ± 0.08Average 0.75 ± 0.24BaBar 0.35 +-
00
.
.33
03 ± 0.04
Belle 0.22 ± 0.47 ± 0.08Average 0.31 ± 0.26BaBar 0.50 +-
00
.
.33
48 ± 0.02
Belle 0.95 ± 0.53 +-00
.
.11
25
Average 0.63 ± 0.30BaBar 0.41 ± 0.18 ± 0.07 ± 0.11Belle 0.60 ± 0.18 ± 0.04 +-
00
.
.11
92
Average 0.51 ± 0.14 +-00
.
.10
18
BaBar 0.63 +-00
.
.23
82 ± 0.04
Belle 0.58 ± 0.36 ± 0.08Average 0.61 ± 0.23
H F A GH F A GHEP 2005
PRELIMINARY
Cf = -Af
HF
AG
HE
P 2
005
HF
AG
HE
P 2
005
HF
AG
HE
P 2
005
HF
AG
HE
P 2
005
HF
AG
HE
P 2
005
HF
AG
HE
P 2
005
HF
AG
HE
P 2
005
φ K
0
η′ K
0f 0
KS
π0 KS
ω K
S
K+ K
- K0
KS K
S K
S
-1.6 -1.4 -1.2 -1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
BaBar 0.00 ± 0.23 ± 0.05
Belle -0.14 ± 0.17 ± 0.07
Average -0.09 ± 0.14
BaBar -0.16 ± 0.09 ± 0.02
Belle 0.04 ± 0.08 ± 0.06
Average -0.07 ± 0.07
BaBar -0.24 ± 0.31 ± 0.15
Belle 0.23 ± 0.23 ± 0.13
Average 0.06 ± 0.21
BaBar 0.06 ± 0.18 ± 0.03
Belle -0.11 ± 0.18 ± 0.08
Average -0.02 ± 0.13
BaBar -0.56 +-00
.
.22
97 ± 0.03
Belle -0.19 ± 0.39 ± 0.13
Average -0.44 ± 0.23
BaBar 0.23 ± 0.12 ± 0.07
Belle 0.06 ± 0.11 ± 0.07
Average 0.14 ± 0.10
BaBar -0.10 ± 0.25 ± 0.05
Belle -0.50 ± 0.23 ± 0.06
Average -0.31 ± 0.17
H F A GH F A GHEP 2005
PRELIMINARY
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE B0 → KSπ0γ — Time-Dependent CP Violation
386
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0570
Time-dependence probes γ polarization
∆t (ps)
Raw
asy
mm
etry
/(2.
5 ps
)
-1
-0.75
-0.5
-0.25
0
0.25
0.5
0.75
1
-7.5 -5 -2.5 0 2.5 5 7.5
Invariant mass region: 0.8 GeV/c2 < mKSπ0 < 1.8 GeV/c2
70 ± 11 signal events
SKSπ0γ = +0.08 ± 0.41(stat) ± 0.10(stat)
CKSπ0γ = −0.12 ± 0.27(stat) ± 0.10(stat)
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Belle: B → K∗l+l− — F-B asymmetry357
fb−1
Belle-Preprint-2006-9
Measure Wilson coefficients (A7, A9, A10); find AFB = 0 point
0
10
20
30 (a) K+ e+e-
Eve
nts
/ 2.0
MeV
/c2
(b) K* e+e-
0
10
20
30(c) K+ µ+µ- (d) K* µ+µ-
0
20
40
60
5.2 5.225 5.25 5.275
(e) K+ l+l-
5.2 5.225 5.25 5.275 5.3
(f) K* l+l-
Mbc (GeV/c2)
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5 15 17.5 20 22.5 25q2 GeV2/c2
AF
B (
bkg-
sub)
(a) K+ l+ l-
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20q2 GeV2/c2
AF
B (
bkg-
sub)
K* l+ l-negative A7
A9A10 > 0 excluded at 95% CL
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE b→ dγ357
fb−1
Belle-Preprint-2006-5
E (GeV)∆-0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4
Ent
ries/
(50
MeV
)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12 γ-ρ → -B
)2 (GeV/cbcM5.2 5.22 5.24 5.26 5.28 5.3
)2E
ntrie
s/(4
MeV
/c
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
γ-ρ → -B
E (GeV)∆-0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4
Ent
ries/
(50
MeV
)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
γ0ρ → 0
B
)2 (GeV/cbcM5.2 5.22 5.24 5.26 5.28 5.3
)2E
ntrie
s/(4
MeV
/c
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14 γ0ρ → 0
B
E (GeV)∆-0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4
Ent
ries/
(50
MeV
)
0
1
2
3
4
5γω →
0B
)2 (GeV/cbcM5.2 5.22 5.24 5.26 5.28 5.3
)2E
ntrie
s/(4
MeV
/c
0
1
2
3
4
5γω →
0B
Assuming isospin relation:
B (B → (ρ, ω)γ) =(
1.32+0.34−0.31
+0.10−0.09
)
× 10−6
Significance: 5.1σ
|Vtd/Vts| = 0.199+0.026−0.025(exp)+0.018
−0.015(theo)
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Super B Factory
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Super B Factory
• Luminosity frontier probes new physics . . . complementary to energy frontier
• eg. When LHC discovers SUSY, Super B can help identify SUSY breakingmechanism
• Argument for B physics (& flavour physics) well established. . . important relation to baryon asymmetry of the Universe
• Complementarity between LHCb and Super B becoming clearer– Super B only: modes with neutrals, neutrinos, difficult topologies
– LHCb only: modes with Bs, other heavy B hadrons
– Overlap: eg. Bd → π+π−, DK∗0 to keep us honest
– ATLAS/CMS: very rare modes (eg. Bd,s → µ+µ−)
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Fundamental Questions
• What: Origin of flavour mixing and CP violation
• Why: Matter dominated universe
• How: Flavour structure in and beyond Standard Model
• Are there new CP violating phases?b→ s TDCPV; UT from tree vs loops; ∆B = 2 & ∆B = 1
• Are there new right-handed currents?b→ sγ TDCPV etc.; B → V V polarization
• Are there new operators enhanced by new physics?B → K∗l+l− AFB; B → Kπ, ππ rates & asymmetries
• Are there new FCNCs? (b,c or τ )b→ sνν; τ → µγ etc.; DD mixing, CPV, etc.
Data sample of ∼ 50 ab−1 @ Υ(4S) needed to address these questions
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Super B Factory Parameters
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Super B Factory Upgrade
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Crab Cavities
• Head-on collision with finitecrossing angle
• Superconducting crab cavitiesunder development
• Will be tested in early 2006
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Super B Factory Detector
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Super B Factory Detector
• Issues– Higher background– Higher event rate– Special features:
low p µ-ID; hermiticity ⇒ ν reconstruction; KS vertexing
• Possible solutions (nothing is fixed)– Inner SVD ⇒ striplets– Inner tracker ⇒ silicon– Outer tracker ⇒ fast gas– PID ⇒ “TOP”; RICH; FDIRC . . .– Endcap calorimeter ⇒ pure CsI– KLM ⇒ tile scintillator– Fast trigger & read out; improved DAQ & computing
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Super B Factory Luminosity
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Summary
• KEKB is running well, Belle has more and more data to analyze
• Many new and improved results, and more coming soon . . .
• Significant CPV effects appearing in many modes
• Amplitude analyses opening new vistas for B physics
• What I have shown is only a fraction
http://belle.kek.jp/conferences/CONF2005/
• All results shown here are preliminary
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Back Up
Back Up
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Υ(5S) Data Taking
Short engineering run has been performed (∼ 2 fb−1 on Υ(5S))
bwy5sd.f
N hadron (R2<0.2) / N BhabhaM = 10868 ± 16 MeV/c2
Γ = 110 MeV/c2
(Γ = 105 ± 29 MeV/c2)Const = 35.1 ± 1.9
χ2 = 5.8 / 2
f(M) = BW + Const
M, (GeV/c2)
Rat
io, %
38
40
42
44
46
48
50
10.8 10.82 10.84 10.86 10.88 10.9 10.92 10.94
Υ(5S) data taking at high luminosity is possible
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Identifying SUSY Breaking
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Crab Cavities
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Search for Θ(1540)+ Using Kaon Interactions397
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0518
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
1.4 1.45 1.5 1.55 1.6 1.65 1.7
Λ(1520) clearly seen in pK−
No signal for Θ(1540)+ in pKSTim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Not covered
• D physics
• τ physics
• ISR physics
• γγ physics
• spectroscopy & exotics
• Rare (& not-so-rare) b→ c decays
• Many other rare decays
• b→ ulν
• b→ clν
• . . .
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE CP Violation — Summary
Direct CP violation seen by Belle:
• B0 → K+π− (∼ 10% ∼ 5σ)
• B0 → π+π− (∼ 50% ∼ 4σ)
• B+ → ρ0K+ (∼ 30% ∼ 4σ)
Time-dependent CP violation seen by Belle:• B0 → J/ψK0 (∼ 65% >> 5σ)
• B0 → π+π− (∼ 65% > 5σ)
• B0 → η′K0 (∼ 60% ∼ 5σ)
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE B+ → D(∗)K+ DP Analysis History
• First results shown at Lepton-Photon 2003– B− → DK− & B− → D∗K−, D∗ → Dπ0
– 140 fb−1
– Published in PRD 70, 072003 (2004)
• Update with 250 fb−1 at FPCP 2004– hep-ex/0411049
• First results with B− → DK∗− at Moriond QCD 2005 / CKM2005– Not included in combined average yet– hep-ex/0504013
• Only D → KSπ+π− used so far
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Measurement of f(m2+,m
2−) - Results
Resonance Amplitude Phase (◦) FractionKSσ1 1.57 ± 0.10 214 ± 4 9.8%KSρ
0 1.0 (fixed) 0 (fixed) 21.6%KSω 0.0310 ± 0.0010 113.4 ± 1.9 0.4%KSf0(980) 0.394 ± 0.006 207 ± 3 4.9%KSσ2 0.23 ± 0.03 210 ± 13 0.6%KSf2(1270) 1.32 ± 0.04 348 ± 2 1.5%KSf0(1370) 1.25 ± 0.10 69 ± 8 1.1%KSρ
0(1450) 0.89 ± 0.07 1 ± 6 0.4%K∗(892)+π− 1.621 ± 0.010 131.7 ± 0.5 61.2%K∗(892)−π+ 0.154 ± 0.005 317.7 ± 1.6 0.55%K∗(1410)+π− 0.22 ± 0.04 120 ± 14 0.05%K∗(1410)−π+ 0.35 ± 0.04 253 ± 6 0.14%K∗
0(1430)+π− 2.15 ± 0.04 348.7 ± 1.1 7.4%
K∗0(1430)
−π+ 0.52 ± 0.04 89 ± 4 0.43%K∗
2(1430)+π− 1.11 ± 0.03 320.5 ± 1.8 2.2%
K∗2(1430)
−π+ 0.23 ± 0.02 263 ± 7 0.09%K∗(1680)+π− 2.34 ± 0.26 110 ± 5 0.36%K∗(1680)−π+ 1.3 ± 0.2 87 ± 11 0.11%nonresonant 3.8 ± 0.3 157 ± 4 9.7%
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Systematic Errors
B± → DK± B± → D∗K±
Source ∆rB ∆φ3 ∆δB ∆rB ∆φ3 ∆δBBackground shape 0.027 5.7◦ 4.1◦ 0.014 3.1◦ 5.3◦
Background fraction 0.006 0.2◦ 1.0◦ 0.005 0.7◦ 1.4◦
Efficiency shape 0.012 4.9◦ 2.4◦ 0.002 3.5◦ 1.0◦
Momentum resolution 0.002 0.3◦ 0.3◦ 0.002 1.7◦ 1.4◦
Control sample bias 0.004 10.2◦ 10.2◦ 0.004 9.9◦ 9.9◦
Total 0.030 12.7◦ 11.3◦ 0.016 11.1◦ 11.4◦
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Model Uncertainty
f(m2+,m
2−) =
∣
∣
∣f(m2+,m
2−)
∣
∣
∣ eiφ(m2
+,m2−)
• Fit to flavour tagged D sample measures∣
∣
∣f(m2+,m
2−)
∣
∣
∣
BUT φ(m2+,m
2−) model-dependent
• Estimate model uncertainty by varying model
Fit model (∆rB)max (∆φ3)max (∆δB)max
Meson formfactors Fr = FD = 1 0.01 3.1◦ 3.3◦
Constant BW width Γ(q2) 0.02 4.7◦ 9.0◦
Only K∗, ρ, ω, f0 non-resonant 0.03 9.9◦ 18.2◦
Total 0.04 11◦ 21◦
• Consider CP -tagged D mesons decaying to KSπ+π−
→ amplitude is f(m2+,m
2−) ± f(m2
−,m2+)
• FUTURE: use CP tagged D mesons from cτ factory (ψ′′ → DD)→ measure φ(m2
+,m2−) ⇒ remove model uncertainty
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Test Samples357
fb−1
INPREPARATION
Fit B, B samples separately, float rB±eiθ±, where θ± = δB ± φ3
B± →(
KSπ+π−
)
Dπ±
(r ∼ 0.01)
-0.15
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
-0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15Re(r e iθ)
Im(r
eiθ)
B+
B-
3425 events
rB− = 0.047 ± 0.018
θ− = 193◦ ± 24◦
rB+ = 0.039 ± 0.021
θ− = 240◦ ± 28◦
B± →((
KSπ+π−
)
Dπ0
)
D∗π±
(rB ∼ 0.01)
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3Re(r e iθ)
Im(r
eiθ)
B+
B-
641 events
rB− = 0.086 ± 0.049
θ− = 280◦ ± 30◦
rB+ = 0.015 ± 0.042
θ− = 170◦ ± 186◦
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE B− → D(∗)CPK
− — Observables
• Reconstruct D(∗) mesons in CP even (D(∗)1 ), CP odd (D(∗)
2 )
and flavour-specific favoured (D(∗)fav) decay modes
• CP asymmetries
AD
(∗)1,2K
−=
Γ(
B−→D(∗)1,2K
−)
−Γ(
B+→D(∗)1,2K
+)
Γ(
B−→D(∗)1,2K
−)
+Γ(
B+→D(∗)1,2K
+)
AD
(∗)1 K−
=2rB sin(δB) sin(φ3)
1+rB2+2rB cos(δB) cos(φ3)
AD
(∗)2 K−
=−2rB sin(δB) sin(φ3)
1+rB2−2rB cos(δB) cos(φ3)
• Charge averaged rates, normalized to B− → Dπ−
R1,2 =
Γ(
B−→D(∗)1,2K
−)
+Γ(
B+→D(∗)1,2K
+)
Γ(
B−→D(∗)favK
−)
+Γ(
B+→D(∗)favK
+)
/
Γ(
B−→D(∗)1,2π
−)
+Γ(
B+→D(∗)1,2π
+)
Γ(
B−→D(∗)favπ
−)
+Γ(
B+→D(∗)favπ
+)
R1 = 1 + rB2 + 2rB cos(δB) cos(φ3) R2 = 1 + rB
2 − 2rB cos(δB) cos(φ3)
• Four observables, three unknowns . . .( rB, δB ) different for B∓ → DK∓, B∓ → D∗K∓
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE B− → D(∗)CPK
− — Summary253
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0443
• Extract CP asymmetries by fitting B− and B+ yields separately
PRELIMINARY
B∓ → DK∓ B∓ → D∗K∓
A1 0.07 ± 0.14(stat) ± 0.06(syst) −0.27 ± 0.25(stat) ± 0.04(syst)A2 −0.11 ± 0.14(stat) ± 0.05(syst) 0.26 ± 0.26(stat) ± 0.03(syst)R1 0.98 ± 0.18(stat) ± 0.10(syst) 1.43 ± 0.28(stat) ± 0.06(syst)R2 1.29 ± 0.16(stat) ± 0.08(syst) 0.94 ± 0.28(stat) ± 0.06(syst)
• First observations of B∓ → D∗1,2K
∓ . . .and first measurements of A1,2 in D∗
CPK∓ system
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE World Averages
RCP Averages
HF
AG
LP 2
005
HF
AG
LP 2
005
HF
AG
LP 2
005
HF
AG
LP 2
005
HF
AG
LP 2
005
HF
AG
LP 2
005
DC
P K
RC
P+
DC
P K
RC
P-
D* C
P K
RC
P+
D* C
P K
RC
P-
DC
P K
* R
CP
+
DC
P K
* R
CP
-
-1 0 1 2 3
BaBar 0.87 ± 0.14 ± 0.06
Belle 0.98 ± 0.18 ± 0.10
Average 0.91 ± 0.12
BaBar 0.80 ± 0.14 ± 0.08
Belle 1.29 ± 0.16 ± 0.08
Average 1.02 ± 0.12
BaBar 1.06 ± 0.26 +-00
.
.10
09
Belle 1.43 ± 0.28 ± 0.06
Average 1.24 ± 0.20
Belle 0.94 ± 0.28 ± 0.06
Average 0.94 ± 0.29
BaBar 1.96 ± 0.40 ± 0.11
Average 1.96 ± 0.41
BaBar 0.65 ± 0.26 ± 0.08
Average 0.65 ± 0.27
H F A GH F A GLP 2005
PRELIMINARY
ACP Averages
HF
AG
LP 2
005
HF
AG
LP 2
005
HF
AG
LP 2
005
HF
AG
LP 2
005
HF
AG
LP 2
005
HF
AG
LP 2
005
DC
P K
AC
P+
DC
P K
AC
P-
D* C
P K
AC
P+
D* C
P K
AC
P-
DC
P K
* A
CP
+
DC
P K
* A
CP
-
-1.4 -1.2 -1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
BaBar 0.40 ± 0.15 ± 0.08
Belle 0.07 ± 0.14 ± 0.06
Average 0.22 ± 0.11
BaBar 0.21 ± 0.17 ± 0.07
Belle -0.11 ± 0.14 ± 0.05
Average 0.02 ± 0.12
BaBar -0.10 ± 0.23 +-00
.
.00
34
Belle -0.27 ± 0.25 ± 0.04
Average -0.18 ± 0.17
Belle 0.26 ± 0.26 ± 0.03
Average 0.26 ± 0.26
BaBar -0.08 ± 0.19 ± 0.08
Belle -0.02 ± 0.33 ± 0.07
Average -0.06 ± 0.18
BaBar -0.26 ± 0.40 ± 0.12
Belle 0.19 ± 0.50 ± 0.04
Average -0.08 ± 0.32
H F A GH F A GLP 2005
PRELIMINARY
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE New B− →[
K+π−]
DK− Analysis
PRELIMINARY
• Use 386 million BB pairs
• Use improved continuum suppression
• Other minor changes from PRL 94, 091601 (2005)
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE New ADS Analysis — B∓ → Dπ∓357
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0552
B∓ →[
K∓π±]
Dπ∓ B∓ →
[
K±π∓]
Dπ∓
−0.20 −0.10 0.00 0.10 0.20∆E(GeV)
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
Eve
nts/
10M
eV
−0.20 −0.10 0.00 0.10 0.20∆E(GeV)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Eve
nts/
10M
eV14518 ± 125 signal events 50+11
−10 signal events
RDπ = (3.5+0.8−0.7 (stat) ± 0.3 (syst)) × 10−3
Consistent with previous Belle result
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE B0 → J/ψK0 — ∆t Dependence (Poor quality tags)357
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0569
B0 → J/ψKS B0 → J/ψKL
t (ps)∆-8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
Eve
nts
/ ps
(poo
r ta
gs)
50
100
150
200
250
300
350q = +1
q = -1
t (ps)∆-8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
Raw
asy
mm
etry
(po
or ta
gs)
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
t (ps)∆-8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
Eve
nts
/ ps
(poo
r ta
gs)
100
200
300
400
500 q = +1
q = -1
t (ps)∆-8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
Raw
asy
mm
etry
(po
or ta
gs)
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
S = +0.668 ± 0.047(stat) S = −0.619 ± 0.069(stat)A = −0.021 ± 0.034(stat) A = +0.049 ± 0.039(stat)
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Resolving the sin(2φ1) Ambiguity357
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0546
• Utilize interference between CP -even & CP -odd final stateseg. B0 → J/ψK∗0 → J/ψKSπ
0 angular analysis
• New method uses analysis of (eg.) D → KSπ+π− Dalitz plot in
B0 → Dh0 decays (h0 = π0, η, . . .)
• Similar to B+ → DK+ analysis for φ3
• Test SM prediction: Sb→ccs ≃ Sb→cud
Dπ0 Dη Dω D∗π0&D∗η
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3
∆E, GeV
Eve
nts/
10
MeV
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3
∆E, GeV
Eve
nts/
10
MeV
0
2.5
5
7.5
10
12.5
15
17.5
20
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3
∆E, GeV
Eve
nts/
10
MeV
0
2.5
5
7.5
10
12.5
15
17.5
20
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3
∆E, GeV
Eve
nts/
10
MeV
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Description of the Method (Pictures)A. Bondar, T.G., P. Krokovny, PLB 624, 1 (2005)
(Terms of e−|∆t|/τB0 have been dropped)
ΓB0(∆t) ∝
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
cos
(
∆m∆t
2
)
− iΦ∗ sin
(
∆m∆t
2
)
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
2
ΓB0(∆t) ∝
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
cos
(
∆m∆t
2
)
− iΦ sin
(
∆m∆t
2
)
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
2
Φ∗ = e−i2φ1ηh0(−1)l Φ = e+i2φ1ηh0(−1)l
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE sin(2φ1) — Constraint357
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0546
φ1 = (16 ± 21 ± 11)◦
β/φ1
ρ–
η–
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
β/φ1 = (21.7 +
-1
1.
.3
2 )˚β/φ
1 = (68.3 +- 11 .. 23 )˚
DIS
FA
VO
UR
ED
BY
J/ψK
* & D
h0
H F A GH F A GHEP 2005
PRELIMINARY
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE B0 → ρ+ρ−253
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0545
Initial attempts to extract φ2 have focussed on B0 → π+π−.However,• penguin pollution found to be large• B
(
B0 → π0π0)
≈ 1.5 × 10−6 (HFAG2005)• large direct CP violation:A
(
B0 → π+π−)
= 0.56 ± 0.12 ± 0.06 (Belle; PRL 95, 101801 (2005))
Isospin analysis possible; large statistical error & ambiguities
Recently,B0 → ρ+ρ− found to be powerful for measurement of φ2 because• small penguin pollution (B
(
B0 → ρ0ρ0)
< 1.1 × 10−6 (BaBar))
• surprisingly (?) little nonresonant contribution
• B0 → ρ+ρ− almost 100% longitudinally polarized(almost pure CP state . . . downside is cannot access interference)
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE B0 → ρ+ρ−253
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0545
0102030405060708090
100
5.22 5.24 5.26 5.28 Mbc (GeV/c2)
Eve
nts
/ 2 M
eV
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
−0.2 −0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3∆E (GeV)
Eve
nts
/ 20
MeV
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
Mππ (GeV/c2)
Eve
nts
/ (60
MeV
)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8cos θ
Eve
nts
/ (0.
089)
142 ± 13 signal events flong = 0.951+0.033−0.039
+0.029−0.031
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE B0 → ρ+ρ− — CP Fit253
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0545
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
-5 0 5∆t (ps)
Eve
nts
/ (1.
25 p
s)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
-5 0 5∆t (ps)∆t (ps)
Eve
nts
/ (1.
25 p
s)
-1
-0.75
-0.5
-0.25
0
0.25
0.5
0.75
1
-5 0 5∆t (ps)
Raw
Asy
mm
etry
/ (2
.5 p
s)
-1
-0.75
-0.5
-0.25
0
0.25
0.5
0.75
1
-5 0 5∆t (ps)
Raw
Asy
mm
etry
/ (2
.5 p
s)
S = 0.09 ± 0.41 ± 0.08 A = 0.00 ± 0.039+0.10−0.09
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Constraint on φ2253
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0501,BELLE-CONF-0545
ρρ only ππ & ρρ
φ2 = 87 ± 17◦ φ2 = 93+12−11
◦
(cf. φ2 = 87 ± 12◦ from naıve S = − sin(2φ2) neglecting penguins)
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Description of the Method (Equations)
A. Bondar et al., hep-ph/0503174, to appear PLB• Assume CPT , take ∆Γ = 0, |q/p| = 1, arg(q/p) = 2φ1
• Neglect Cabibbo-suppressed contribution (for now)
• Ignore mixing, CP violation in D system
• Amplitude description (terms of e−|∆t|/2τB0 dropped)
∣
∣B0(∆t)⟩
=∣
∣B0⟩
cos(∆m∆t/2) − ie−i2φ1
∣
∣B0⟩
sin(∆m∆t/2)
∣
∣DB0(∆t)⟩
=∣
∣D0⟩
cos(∆m∆t/2) − ie−i2φ1ηh0(−1)l∣
∣D0⟩
sin(∆m∆t/2)
MB0(∆t) = f(m2−,m
2+)cos(∆m∆t/2) − ie−i2φ1ηh0(−1)lf(m2
+,m2−)sin(∆m∆t/2)
∣
∣B0(∆t)⟩
=∣
∣B0⟩
cos(∆m∆t/2) − ie+i2φ1
∣
∣B0⟩
sin(∆m∆t/2)
∣
∣DB0(∆t)⟩
=∣
∣D0⟩
cos(∆m∆t/2) − ie+i2φ1ηh0(−1)l∣
∣D0⟩
sin(∆m∆t/2)
MB0(∆t) = f(m2+,m
2−)cos(∆m∆t/2) − ie+i2φ1ηh0(−1)lf(m2
−,m2+)sin(∆m∆t/2)
ηh0 = CP eigenvalue of h0 l = angular momentum
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE B0 → D(∗)h0 Analysis357
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0546
Process Ntot Efficiency (%) Nsig PurityDπ0 265 8.7 157 ± 24 59%Dω 78 4.1 67 ± 10 86%Dη 97 3.9 58 ± 13 60%D∗π0,D∗η 52 27 ± 11 52%Sum 492 309 ± 31 63%
Data fit results. Statistical errors from toy MC.Final state φ1 fit result, ◦
Dπ0 11 ± 26Dω, Dη 28 ± 32
D∗π0,D∗η 25 ± 35
Simultaneous fit 16 ± 21
Raw asymmetry.[
KSρ0]
Dh0 candidates.
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-7.5 -5 -2.5 0 2.5 5 7.5
∆t, ps
Raw
Asy
mm
etry
/ 2.5
ps
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE B → π+π− Candidates253
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0501
Categorize candidates based on level of qq background
High quality
0
50
100
150
200
250
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4∆E (GeV)
Eve
nts/
(0.0
2GeV
)
(a)Totalπ+π-
KπcontinuumThree-body
Low quality
050
100150200250300350400
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4∆E (GeV)
Eve
nts/
(0.0
2GeV
)
(b)
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE B → π+π− Analysis253
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0501
Contributions from tree and penguin amplitudes
tree contains Vub
b u
uW
dd
d
penguin contains Vtd
b W
t u
u
dd
g
d
• Small branching fraction (∼ 4 × 10−6)
• Large background from e+e− → qq (q = u, d, s, c)
• Background from B → K+π−
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE B → π+π− Fit Result253
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0501
∗ 2820 candidates ∗ ∗ 666 ± 43 π+π− signal events ∗
Sπ+π− = −0.67 ± 0.16 ± 0.06 Aπ+π− = +0.56 ± 0.12 ± 0.06
Plots for high quality events only
0
100
200
Eve
nts/
(1.2
5ps)
Totalπ+π-
Kπcontinuum
(a) q = +1
0
100
200
-5 0 5
Eve
nts/
(1.2
5ps)
∆t (ps)
Totalπ+π-
Kπcontinuum
(b) q = -1
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1(c) 0.0<r≤0.5
Raw
Asy
mm
etry
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-5 0 5
(d) 0.5<r≤1.0
∆t (ps)
Raw
Asy
mm
etry
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE B → π+π−253
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0501
Yields from Mbc—∆E fits in bins of (q,∆t)
0
100
200
No.
of
π+ π- eve
nts
tagged as a B 0
tagged as a B– 0
-1
0
1
-5 0 5∆t (ps)
π+ π- asy
mm
etry
-1
-0.75
-0.5
-0.25
0
0.25
0.5
0.75
1
-1 -0.75 -0.5 -0.25 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
1-C.L. at (-0.62,0) = 5.13×10-5
1-C.L. at (0,0) = 5.62×10-8
SππA
ππ
• CP violation significance > 5σ (still)
• DIRECT CPV significance : 4σ
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE B → π+π− : Extraction of φ2253
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0501
• Due to large penguin contribution need isospin analysis to extract φ2
• Such analyses are underway . . .
• Current limitation from knowledge of B0 → π0π0
– branching fraction– direct CP asymmetry
• Other avenues for φ2 (ρ±π∓, ρ±ρ∓, etc.) being explored
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE B0 → ρ0π0357
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-05
• Dalitz plot analysis of B0 → π+π−π0 can measure φ2 & resolve ambiguities
• Main contributions from ρ±π∓, other contributions complicate the analysis
(a) (b)
∆E (GeV)
Eve
nts
/ 20
MeV
Mbc (GeV/c2)
Eve
nts
/ 2.3
MeV
/c2
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
-0.2 0 0.2 0.40
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
5.24 5.26 5.28 5.3
Significance: 4.2σ
B(
B0 → ρ0π0)
=(
3.12+0.88−0.82
+0.60−0.76
)
× 10−6
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE B0 → ρ0π0357
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-05
(c) (d)
mπ+π− (GeV/c2)
Yie
lds
/ 250
MeV
/c2
cos θρhel
Yie
lds
/ 0.4
0
10
20
30
40
50
0.5 1 1.50
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006
BELLE Belle: B → K∗l+l− — F-B asymmetry386
fb−1
BELLE-CONF-0521
-40
-20
0
20
40
-40 -20 0 20 40A9/A7
A10
/A7
(a) negative A7
-40
-20
0
20
40
-40 -20 0 20 40A9/A7
A10
/A7
(b) positive A7
A9/A7 = −15.3+3.4−4.8 ± 1.1 A9/A7 = −16.3+3.7
−5.7 ± 1.4
A10/A7 = 10.3+5.2−3.8 ± 1.8 A10/A7 = 11.1+6.0
−3.9 ± 2.4
Tim Gershon University of Edinburgh Seminar March 30, 2006