An angular analysis of the B0 → K*0(→ K+π−)μ+μ− decay is presented. The dataset corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 3.0 fb−1 of pp collision data collected at the LHCb experiment. The complete angular information from the decay is used to determine CP-averaged observables and CP asymmetries, taking account of possible contamination from decays with the K+π− system in an S-wave configuration. The angular observables and their correlations are reported in bins of q2, the invariant mass squared of the dimuon system. The observables are determined both from an unbinned maximum likelihood fit and by using the principal moments of the angular distribution. In addition, by fitting for q2-dependent decay amplitudes in the region 1.1 < q2 < 6.0 GeV2/c4, the zero-crossing points of several angular observables are computed. A global fit is performed to the complete set of CP-averaged observables obtained from the maximum likelihood fit. This fit indicates differences with predictions based on the Standard Model at the level of 3.4 standard deviations. These differences could be explained by contributions from physics beyond the Standard Model, or by an unexpectedly large hadronic effect that is not accounted for in the Standard Model predictions.
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits any use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
References
[1]
LHCb collaboration, Differential branching fraction and angular analysis of the decay B0 → K∗0μ+μ−, JHEP08 (2013) 131 [arXiv:1304.6325] [INSPIRE].
[2]
BaBar collaboration, B. Aubert et al., Measurements of branching fractions, rate asymmetries and angular distributions in the rare decays B → Kℓ+ℓ−and B → K*ℓ+ℓ−, Phys. Rev.D 73 (2006) 092001 [hep-ex/0604007] [INSPIRE].
[3]
BaBar collaboration, J.P. Lees et al., Measurement of angular asymmetries in the decays B → K*ℓ+ℓ−, arXiv:1508.07960 [INSPIRE].
[4]
Belle collaboration, J.T. Wei et al., Measurement of the differential branching fraction and forward-backword asymmetry for B → K(*)ℓ+ℓ−, Phys. Rev. Lett.103 (2009) 171801 [arXiv:0904.0770] [INSPIRE].
[5]
CDF collaboration, T. Aaltonen et al., Measurements of the angular distributions in the decays B → K(*)μ+μ−at CDF, Phys. Rev. Lett.108 (2012) 081807 [arXiv:1108.0695] [INSPIRE].
[6]
CMS collaboration, Angular analysis and branching fraction measurement of the decay B0 → K∗0μ+μ−, Phys. Lett.B 727 (2013) 77 [arXiv:1308.3409] [INSPIRE].
F. Beaujean, C. Bobeth and D. van Dyk, Comprehensive bayesian analysis of rare (semi)leptonic and radiative B decays, Eur. Phys. J.C 74 (2014) 2897 [Erratum ibid.C 74 (2014) 3179] [arXiv:1310.2478] [INSPIRE].
S. Jäger and J. Martin Camalich, On B → Vℓℓ at small dilepton invariant mass, power corrections and new physics, JHEP05 (2013) 043 [arXiv:1212.2263] [INSPIRE].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14]
S. Descotes-Genon, L. Hofer, J. Matias and J. Virto, On the impact of power corrections in the prediction of B → K*μ+μ−observables, JHEP12 (2014) 125 [arXiv:1407.8526] [INSPIRE].CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
[15]
J. Lyon and R. Zwicky, Resonances gone topsy turvy — The charm of QCD or new physics in b → sℓ+ℓ−?, arXiv:1406.0566 [INSPIRE].
[16]
W. Altmannshofer, S. Gori, M. Pospelov and I. Yavin, Quark flavor transitions in Lμ − Lτmodels, Phys. Rev.D 89 (2014) 095033 [arXiv:1403.1269] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
[17]
A. Crivellin, G. D’Ambrosio and J. Heeck, Explaining h → μ±τ∓, B → K*μ+μ−and B → Kμ+μ−/B → Ke+e−in a two-Higgs-doublet model with gauged Lμ −Lτ, Phys. Rev. Lett.114 (2015) 151801 [arXiv:1501.00993] [INSPIRE].CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
A. Datta, M. Duraisamy and D. Ghosh, Explaining the B → K*μ+μ−data with scalar interactions, Phys. Rev.D 89 (2014) 071501 [arXiv:1310.1937] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
[22]
W. Altmannshofer, P. Ball, A. Bharucha, A.J. Buras, D.M. Straub and M. Wick, Symmetries and asymmetries of B → K*μ+μ−decays in the Standard Model and beyond, JHEP01 (2009) 019 [arXiv:0811.1214] [INSPIRE].CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
[23]
F. Krüger and J. Matias, Probing new physics via the transverse amplitudes of B0 → K*0(→ K−π+)ℓ+ℓ−at large recoil, Phys. Rev.D 71 (2005) 094009 [hep-ph/0502060] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
[24]
S. Descotes-Genon, J. Matias, M. Ramon and J. Virto, Implications from clean observables for the binned analysis of B → K*μ+μ−at large recoil, JHEP01 (2013) 048 [arXiv:1207.2753] [INSPIRE].CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
[25]
F. Beaujean, M. Chrzaszcz, N. Serra and D. van Dyk, Extracting angular observables without a likelihood and applications to rare decays, Phys. Rev.D 91 (2015) 114012 [arXiv:1503.04100] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
[26]
A. Ali, P. Ball, L.T. Handoko and G. Hiller, A comparative study of the decays B → (K, K*)ℓ+ℓ−in standard model and supersymmetric theories, Phys. Rev.D 61 (2000) 074024 [hep-ph/9910221] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
[27]
G. Kumar and N. Mahajan, B → K*l+l−: zeroes of angular observables as test of standard model, arXiv:1412.2955 [INSPIRE].
[28]
LHCb collaboration, The LHCb detector at the LHC, 2008 JINST3 S08005 [INSPIRE].
I. Belyaev et al., Handling of the generation of primary events in Gauss, the LHCb simulation framework, J. Phys. Conf. Ser.331 (2011) 032047 [INSPIRE].CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
Geant4 collaboration, J. Allison et al., GEANT4 developments and applications, IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci.53 (2006) 270.Google Scholar
[37]
GEANT4 collaboration, S. Agostinelli et al., GEANT4: a simulation toolkit, Nucl. Instrum. Meth.A 506 (2003) 250 [INSPIRE].
[38]
M. Clemencic et al., The LHCb simulation application, Gauss: design, evolution and experience, J. Phys. Conf. Ser.331 (2011) 032023 [INSPIRE].CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
[39]
L. Breiman, J.H. Friedman, R.A. Olshen and C.J. Stone, Classification and regression trees, Wadsworth international group, Belmont, California U.S.A. (1984).Google Scholar
[40]
R.E. Schapire and Y. Freund, A decision-theoretic generalization of on-line learning and an application to boosting, J.. Comp. Syst. Sc.55 (1997) 119.Google Scholar
[41]
LHCb collaboration, Search for the rare decays Bs0 → μ+μ−and B0 → μ+μ−, Phys. Lett.B 699 (2011) 330 [arXiv:1103.2465] [INSPIRE].
[42]
A. Blum, A. Kalai and J. Langford, Beating the hold-out: bounds for k-fold and progressive cross-validation, in the proceedings of the Twelfth annual conference on Computational Learning Theory (COLT ’99), July 6–9, Santa Cruz, U.S.A. (1999).Google Scholar
[43]
BaBar collaboration, B. Aubert et al., Measurement of decay amplitudes of B → J/ψK*, ψ(2S)K*and χc1K∗with an angular analysis, Phys. Rev.D 76 (2007) 031102 [arXiv:0704.0522] [INSPIRE].
[44]
Belle collaboration, K. Chilikin et al., Observation of a new charged charmoniumlike state in\( {\overline{B}}^0\to J/\psi {K}^{-}{\pi}^{+} \)decays, Phys. Rev.D 90 (2014) 112009 [arXiv:1408.6457] [INSPIRE].
[45]
LHCb collaboration, Measurement of the polarization amplitudes in B0 → J/ψK*(892)0decays, Phys. Rev.D 88 (2013) 052002 [arXiv:1307.2782] [INSPIRE].
D. Aston et al., A study of K−π+scattering in the reaction K−p → K−π+n at 11 GeV/c, Nucl. Phys.B 296 (1988) 493.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
[48]
G.J. Feldman and R.D. Cousins, A Unified approach to the classical statistical analysis of small signals, Phys. Rev.D 57 (1998) 3873 [physics/9711021] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
[49]
B. Sen, M. Walker and M. Woodroofe, On the unified method with nuisance parameters, Stat. Sinica19 (2009) 301.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
[50]
J. Gratrex, M. Hopfer and R. Zwicky, Generalised helicity formalism, higher moments and the\( B\to {K}_{J_K}\left(\to K\pi \right){\overline{\ell}}_1{\ell}_2 \)angular distributions, arXiv:1506.03970 [INSPIRE].
F. Beaujean, C. Bobeth and S. Jahn, Constraints on tensor and scalar couplings from\( B\to K\overline{\mu}\mu \)and\( {B}_s\to \overline{\mu}\mu \), Eur. Phys. J.C 75 (2015) 456 [arXiv:1508.01526] [INSPIRE].CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
[53]
U. Egede, T. Hurth, J. Matias, M. Ramon and W. Reece, New physics reach of the decay mode\( \overline{B}\to {\overline{K}}^{\ast 0}{\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-} \), JHEP10 (2010) 056 [arXiv:1005.0571] [INSPIRE].CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
[54]
U. Egede, M. Patel and K.A. Petridis, Method for an unbinned measurement of the q2dependent decay amplitudes of\( {\overline{B}}^0\to {K}^{\ast 0}{\mu}^{+}{\mu}^{-} \)decays, JHEP06 (2015) 084 [arXiv:1504.00574] [INSPIRE].CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
[55]
C.-D. Lu and W. Wang, Analysis of B → KJ*(→Kπ)μ+μ−in the higher kaon resonance region, Phys. Rev.D 85 (2012) 034014 [arXiv:1111.1513] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
LHCb collaboration, Measurement of the semileptonic CP asymmetry in\( {B}^0-{\overline{B}}^0 \)mixing, Phys. Rev. Lett.114 (2015) 041601 [arXiv:1409.8586] [INSPIRE].
[58]
LHCb collaboration, Measurement of CP asymmetry in D0 → K−K+and D0 → π−π+decays, JHEP07 (2014) 041 [arXiv:1405.2797] [INSPIRE].
[59]
C. Bobeth, G. Hiller and D. van Dyk, The benefits of\( B\to {\overline{K}}^{\ast }{l}^{+}{l}^{-} \)decays at low recoil, JHEP07 (2010) 098 [arXiv:1006.5013] [INSPIRE].CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
[60]
S. Jäger and J. Martin Camalich, Reassessing the discovery potential of the B → K*ℓ+ℓ−decays in the large-recoil region: SM challenges and BSM opportunities, Phys. Rev.D 93 (2016) 014028 [arXiv:1412.3183] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
[61]
D. Das and R. Sinha, New physics effects and hadronic form factor uncertainties in B → K*ℓ+ℓ−, Phys. Rev.D 86 (2012) 056006 [arXiv:1205.1438] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
[62]
R.R. Horgan, Z. Liu, S. Meinel and M. Wingate, Calculation of B0 → K*0μ+μ−and Bs0 → ϕμ+μ−observables using form factors from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett.112 (2014) 212003 [arXiv:1310.3887] [INSPIRE].CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
[63]
C. Hambrock, G. Hiller, S. Schacht and R. Zwicky, B → K*form factors from flavor data to QCD and back, Phys. Rev.D 89 (2014) 074014 [arXiv:1308.4379] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
P. Ball and R. Zwicky, Bd,s → ρ, ω, K*, ϕ decay form-factors from light-cone sum rules revisited, Phys. Rev.D 71 (2005) 014029 [hep-ph/0412079] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
[66]
A. Bharucha, D.M. Straub and R. Zwicky, B → Vℓ+ℓ−in the standard model from light-cone sum rules, arXiv:1503.05534 [INSPIRE].
[67]
R.R. Horgan, Z. Liu, S. Meinel and M. Wingate, Lattice QCD calculation of form factors describing the rare decays B → K*ℓ+ℓ−and Bs → ϕℓ+ℓ−, Phys. Rev.D 89 (2014) 094501 [arXiv:1310.3722] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
S. Descotes-Genon, T. Hurth, J. Matias and J. Virto, Optimizing the basis of B → K*ℓℓ observables in the full kinematic range, JHEP05 (2013) 137 [arXiv:1303.5794] [INSPIRE].CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
[71]
C. Bobeth, G. Hiller, D. van Dyk and C. Wacker, The Decay B → Kℓ+ℓ−at Low Hadronic Recoil and Model-Independent ΔB = 1 Constraints, JHEP01 (2012) 107 [arXiv:1111.2558] [INSPIRE].CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
[72]
M. Beneke, T. Feldmann and D. Seidel, Exclusive radiative and electroweak b → d and b → s penguin decays at NLO, Eur. Phys. J.C 41 (2005) 173 [hep-ph/0412400] [INSPIRE].CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
[73]
A. Ali, G. Kramer and G.-h. Zhu, B → K+ℓ+ℓ−decay in soft-collinear effective theory, Eur. Phys. J.C 47 (2006) 625 [hep-ph/0601034] [INSPIRE].
[74]
LHCb, CMS collaboration, Observation of the rare Bs0 → μ+μ−decay from the combined analysis of CMS and LHCb data, Nature522 (2015) 68 [arXiv:1411.4413] [INSPIRE].
