Pavel Krokovny Heidelberg University on behalf of LHCb collaboration Introduction LHCb experiment Physics results  S measurements  prospects Conclusion.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Measurement of  David Hutchcroft, University of Liverpool BEACH’06      
Advertisements

Measurements of the angle  : ,  (BaBar & Belle results) Georges Vasseur WIN`05, Delphi June 8, 2005.
Measurements of the angles of the Unitarity Triangle at B A B AR Measurements of the angles of the Unitarity Triangle at B A B AR PHENO06 Madison,15-18.
Charm results overview1 Charm...the issues Lifetime Rare decays Mixing Semileptonic sector Hadronic decays (Dalitz plot) Leptonic decays Multi-body channels.
Title Gabriella Sciolla Massachusetts Institute of Technology Representing the BaBar Collaboration Beauty Assisi, June 20-24, 2005 Searching for.
ICFP 2005, Taiwan Colin Gay, Yale University B Mixing and Lifetimes from CDF Colin Gay, Yale University for the CDF II Collaboration.
   Abi Soffer Colorado State University Super B Workshop, UH, Jan 19, 2004.
A. BondarModel-independent φ 3 measurement August 6, 2007Charm 2007, Cornell University1/15 γ/φ 3 model-independent Dalitz analysis (Dalitz+CP tagged Dalitz.
Pakhlov Pavel (ITEP, Moscow) Why B physics is still interesting Belle detector Measurement of sin2  Rare B decays Future plans University of Lausanne.
Polarization fraction & time-dependent CP analysis of measured at Belle. March 2008 – Geneva Swiss Physical Society – Annual meeting Kim Vervink.
Recent Charm Results From CLEO Searches for D 0 -D 0 mixing D 0 -> K 0 s  +  - D 0 ->K *+ l - Conclusions Alex Smith University of Minnesota.
Advanced topics in Particle Physics: LHC physics, 2011 Jeroen van Tilburg 1/38 Recent CP violation measurements.
1 B Physics at CDF Junji Naganoma University of Tsukuba “New Developments of Flavor Physics“ Workshop Tennomaru, Aichi, Japan.
Measurements of  and future projections Fabrizio Bianchi University of Torino and INFN-Torino Beauty 2006 The XI International Conference on B-Physics.
Beauty 06, Oxford, 27 Sept Marco Zito1 Measurements of gamma using ADS, GLW and other methods & future projections Marco Zito CEA-Saclay, Dapnia-SPP.
LHCb Strategies for  from B→DK Yuehong Xie University of Edinburgh for the LHCb Collaboration ADS with B + →DK + and B 0 → DK* 0 Dalitz with B + →DK +
Sin2  1 /sin2  via penguin processes Beauty 2006 Sep.25-29, Univ. of Oxford Yutaka Ushiroda (KEK)
B Decays to Open Charm (an experimental overview) Yury Kolomensky LBNL/UC Berkeley Flavor Physics and CP Violation Philadelphia, May 18, 2002.
1. 2 July 2004 Liliana Teodorescu 2 Introduction  Introduction  Analysis method  B u and B d decays to mesonic final states (results and discussions)
Φ 3 measurements at B factories Yasuyuki Horii Kobayashi-Maskawa Institute, Nagoya University, Japan Epiphany Conference, Cracow, 9th Jan
Ulrich Uwer University of Heidelberg On behalf of the LHCb collaboration Beauty 2003, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA Physics Performance.
Beauty 2006 R. Muresan – Charm 1 Charm LHCb Raluca Mureşan Oxford University On behalf of LHCb collaboration.
DPF 2009 Richard Kass 1 Search for b → u transitions in the decays B → D (*) K - using the ADS method at BaBar Outline of Talk *Introduction/ADS method.
CP Violation and CKM Angles Status and Prospects Klaus Honscheid Ohio State University C2CR 2007.
Max Baak1 Impact of Tag-side Interference on Measurement of sin(2  +  ) with Fully Reconstructed B 0  D (*)  Decays Max Baak NIKHEF, Amsterdam For.
M. Adinolfi - University of Bristol1/19 Valencia, 15 December 2008 High precision probes for new physics through CP-violating measurements at LHCb M. Adinolfi.
1 Performance Studies for the LHCb Experiment Performance Studies for the LHCb Experiment Marcel Merk NIKHEF Representing the LHCb collaboration 19 th.
25/9/2007 LHCb UK meeting 1 ADS determination of γ with B→(Kπ) D K, B→(hh) D K and B→(K3π) D K Jim Libby (University of Oxford)
CP violation measurements with the ATLAS detector E. Kneringer – University of Innsbruck on behalf of the ATLAS collaboration BEACH2012, Wichita, USA “Determination.
1 Multi-body B-decays studies in BaBar Ben Lau (Princeton University) On behalf of the B A B AR collaboration The XLIrst Rencontres de Moriond QCD and.
1 ICHEP’04, Beijing, Aug 16-22, 2004 A. Höcker – sin2  in Loop-Dominated Decays with B A B AR The Measurement of sin2β (eff) in Loop-Dominated B Decays.
LHCb status of CKM  from tree-level decays Stefania Ricciardi, STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory On behalf of the LHCb Collaboration Stefania Ricciardi,
Pavel Krokovny, KEK Measurement of      1 Measurements of  3  Introduction Search for B +  D (*)0 CP K +  3 and r B from B +  D 0 K + Dalitz.
 3 measurements by Belle Pavel Krokovny KEK Introduction Introduction Apparatus Apparatus Method Method Results Results Summary Summary.
CP violation at B-factoris Introduction  1 /   2 /   3 /  Vub, D mixing, Bs Conclusion Pavel Krokovny KEK, Tsukuba, Japan KEK.
1 Highlights from Belle Jolanta Brodzicka (NO1, Department of Leptonic Interactions) SAB 2009.
11 th July 2003Daniel Bowerman1 2-Body Charmless B-Decays at B A B AR and BELLE Physics at LHC Prague Daniel Bowerman Imperial College 11 th July 2003.
D 0 - D 0 Mixing at B A B AR Amir Rahimi The Ohio State University For B A B AR Collaboration.
High precision and new CP violation measurements with LHCb Michael Koratzinos, CERN EPS HEP 99 Tampere,15 July 1999.
Study of exclusive radiative B decays with LHCb Galina Pakhlova, (ITEP, Moscow) for LHCb collaboration Advanced Study Institute “Physics at LHC”, LHC Praha-2003,
Prospects for B  hh at LHCb Eduardo Rodrigues On behalf of the LHCb Collaboration CKM2008 Workshop, Rome, 9-13 September 2008 LHCb.
1 Trees, penguins and boxes at LHCb Prospects for CP violation measurements at LHCb Tristan du Pree (Nikhef) On behalf of the LHCb collaboration 14 th.
M.N MinardAspen Winter Meeting LHCb Physics Program On behalf of LHCb collaboration M.N Minard (LAPP) Status LHCb ( R.Jacobson) Single arm spectrometer.
CP Violation Studies in B 0  D (*)  in B A B A R and BELLE Dominique Boutigny LAPP-CNRS/IN2P3 HEP2003 Europhysics Conference in Aachen, Germany July.
1 EPS03, July 17-23, 2003Lorenzo Vitale Time dependent CP violation studies in D(*)D(*) and J/ψ K* Lorenzo Vitale INFN Trieste On behalf of BaBar and Belle.
Maria Różańska, INP Kraków HEP2003 Europhysics Conference –Aachen, July 18th 1 CPV in B → D (*) K (*) (and B → D K  ) in BaBar and Belle Outline: CPV.
Hadronic B→DX Decays at LHCb and CDF Laurence Carson, Imperial College on behalf of the LHCb Collaboration CIPANP 2012, St. Petersburg,FL.
Beauty Baryon LHCb Steven Blusk Beauty 2014, Edinburgh, Scotland, July 14-18, 2014 On behalf of the LHCb collaboration Syracuse University.
Review ADS+GLW P. Krokovny CKM 2006, Nagoya Experimental review of ADS and GLW methods Pavel Krokovny KEK Introduction Introduction Apparatus Apparatus.
Update on Measurement of the angles and sides of the Unitarity Triangle at BaBar Martin Simard Université de Montréal For the B A B AR Collaboration 12/20/2008.
Prospects for  at LHCb Val Gibson (University of Cambridge) On behalf of the LHCb collaboration Physics at the LHC Split, October 3 rd 2008.
1 G. Sciolla – M.I.T. Beauty in the Standard Model and Beyond Palm tree and CKM Beauty in the Standard Model and Beyond Gabriella Sciolla (MIT) CIPANP.
Direct CP violation in D  hh World measurements of In New Physics: CPV up to ~1%; If CPV ~1% were observed, is it NP or hadronic enhancement of SM? Strategy:
Jeroen van Hunen (for the LHCb collaboration) The sensitivity to  s and  Γ s at LHCb.
Measurements of  at LHCb Mitesh Patel (CERN) (on behalf of the LHCb Collaboration) 14th December 2006.
Measurements of   Denis Derkach Laboratoire de l’Accélérateur Linéaire – ORSAY CNRS/IN2P3 FPCP-2010 Turin, 25 th May, 2010.
Measurements of  1 /  Flavor Physics and CP Violation 2010, May 25, 2010, Torino, Italy, K. Sumisawa (KEK)
V.Tisserand, LAPP-Annecy (IN 2 P 3 /France), on behalf of the B A B AR collaboration. Aachen (Germany), July 17 th -23 rd Charmed B hadrons with.
1 outline ● Part I: some issues in experimental b physics ● why study b quarks? ● what does it take? ● Part II: LHCb experiment ● Part III: LHCb first.
CP violation and D Physics
Measurement of the phase of Bs mixing with Bs ϕϕ
Martin Heck, for the CDF II collaboration
γ determination from tree decays (B→DK) with LHCb
Max Baak, NIKHEF on behalf of the BABAR and BELLE Collaborations
Measurements of g and sin(2b+g ) in BaBar
CP violation in the charm and beauty systems at LHCb
CP violation in Bs→ff and Bs → K*0K*0
f3 measurements by Belle
The Measurement of sin2β(eff) in Loop-Dominated B Decays with BABAR
Study of the suppressed decay B-DK- and B-D(*)CPK- decays at Belle
Presentation transcript:

Pavel Krokovny Heidelberg University on behalf of LHCb collaboration Introduction LHCb experiment Physics results  S measurements  prospects Conclusion Search for New Physics in CP violating measurements at LHCb

Why CP violation? CP violating parameters are well predicted by the Standard Model Good sensitivity to New Physics Huge statistics allows to perform a precise measurements

LHCb features Large bb cross section & acceptance: huge statistics Efficient trigger: reducing very high background Excellent vertexing: resolving fast Bs oscillation Good tracking & PID: signal reconstruction & background suppression

 S measurement in B S mixing Bs->J/  is dominated by tree diagram. (penguin contribution is in order of ) Interference between direct & mixing decays gives a CP violating phase  S =  M -2  D.  S in SM is small and well predicted:  S =  Good sensitivity for New Physics:  S =  S SM +  S NP

Angular analysis

Flavor tagging Need to determine B S flavor at production time. Two methods: Same Side (Kaon flavor) and Opposite Side (other B flavor) Two key parameters: efficiency (  ) and dilution factor D=(1-2  ) Effective tagging power proportional to  D 2 OST is calibrated on data using self-tagged B decays: B +  D* + , J/  K + SST calibration: using double tag method

Flavor tagging performance Flavor tagger was tuned using 48K B 0 ->D* -  + events Then we check performance on 6K B 0 ->D -  + events  eff (SS+OS) = 4.3  1.0 % compatible with MC expectation  m d =   ps -1 world average:  ps -1 Mixing in B 0  D -  + LHCb-Conf

B S  J/  signal LHCb-Conf  28 events Bs mass Lifetime

 S result Feldman-Cousins method used to get CL contours in  S -  plane Statistical errors only (systematic effects found to small in comparison with statistical uncertainty) LHCb-Conf

 S prospects Expectation!

Additional channels for  s Bs  J/  f 0 J/  f 0 is CP even eigenstate: angular analysis not needed. Measurement of  S to come soon. (error ~1.5 of J/  ) First observation! Phys.Let.B698:115, 2011

 measurements Two set of methods to measure  : loop diagram: B  hh (possible NP contribution) tree diagram: B  DK (theoretically clean) Difference in results will indicate for New Physics.

 from B  hh Large penguins contributions in both decays B d/s  /K B d/s Method: Measure time-dependent CP asymmetry for B      and B s  K  K  and exploit U-spin flavor symmetry for P/T ratio (R. Fleischer). Take  s,  d from J/ ,J/  K s  can resolve 

Direct CPV in B  hh K+-K+- K-+K-+ A CP (B d  K  )=   (world average:  0.12) A CP (B S  K  )=0.27  0.08  0.02 CDF: 0.39  0.17 K+-K+- K-+K-+ LHCb-Conf pb -1

 from B  DK Interference between tree-level decays; theoretically clean Parameters: , r B, δ Three methods for exploiting interference (choice of D 0 decay modes): Gronau, London, Wyler (GLW): Use CP eigenstates, e.g. D 0  h + h - Atwood, Dunietz, Soni (ADS): Use doubly Cabibbo-suppressed decays, e.g. D 0  K + π - Dalitz plot analysis of 3-body D 0 decays, e.g. K s π + π - V cs * V ub : suppressed Favored: V cb V us * b u s uu b u c D0D0 K-K- B-B- B-B- u s u c D0D0 f Common final state K-K-

ADS method D. Atwood, I. Dunietz and A. Soni, PRL 78, 3357 (1997); PRD 63, (2001) Enhancement of СР-violation due to use of Cabibbo-suppressed D decays B –  D 0 K – - color allowed, D 0  K + π – - doubly Cabibbo-suppressed B –  D 0 K – - color suppressed, D 0  K + π – - Cabibbo-allowed Interfering amplitudes are comparable Measured quantities:

ADS analysis at LHCb 4.0  significance R ADS =(1.66  0.39  0.24) World average:  0.21 A ADS =-0.39  0.17  0.02 World average: 1.6  0.3 (w/o LHCb) LHCb-Conf

Conclusion LHCb shown a good performance in B & charm physics. B-factories & Tevatron sensitivity overtaken or matched on many topics using 2010 data only. No sign of New Physics yet . Great potential to search for New Physics in next years!

Backup

Control Channels B +  J/  K + B 0  J/  K* 0 Tagging calibration (opposite side) Kinematically similar to B s  J/  Angular acceptance checks: Polarization amplitudes Check of tagging performance

J/  amplitudes

LHCb data taking LHCb collected 37 pb -1 in 2010, and 670 pb -1 in 2011 One day of operation now corresponds to whole 2010 statistics!

B mixing d b b d W t t W BdBd BdBd Due to the different values of CKM couplings the B s mixes faster then the B d s b b s W t t W BsBs BsBs B d → B d B d mixing B s mixing B s → B s B s mixing Both the B d and B s mixing have been precisely measured in experiments 5.1 x Hz1.8 x Hz

B S mixing formalism

Additional channels for  s Pure penguin decays First observation! LHCb-Conf Br(Bs  K*K*)=(1.95  0.47  0.51  0.29)10 -5

Lifetime measurement for Bs  K + K -

CPV in charm Indirect CPV: mixing rate of D 0  D 0 and D 0  D 0 differ Direct CPV: amplitudes for D 0 /D 0 differ, mixture of mixing and decay diagram. The SM predicts very small CPV in charm: O (10 -4 ). Can be up to O (10 -2 ) in some NP models. Good prospects to search NP in charm! Promising modes: CS modes with penguin contribution:

Charge asymmetry in D 0  h + h - Production and soft pion asymmetry cancel in A RAW (f)  A RAW (g) There is no detection asymmetry in D 0  h + h -

D 0  h + h - A CP results Fit the mass difference: M(D*)-M(D 0 ) Result: A CP (KK)  A CP (  )= (  0.28  0.70  0.25) % Belle: (  0.86  0.60  0.07)% BaBar: (  0.24  0.62)% naïve difference CDF: (  0.46  0.33)%w/o systematic LHCb-Conf