pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 1407.1320 · v2 · submitted 2014-07-04 · ✦ hep-ph · hep-ex

Recognition: unknown

Can the differences in the determinations of V_{ub} and V_{cb} be explained by New Physics?

Authors on Pith no claims yet
classification ✦ hep-ph hep-ex
keywords determinationinclusivephysicsexclusiveanalysiscouplingdeterminationsthere
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

The precise determination of the CKM elements $V_{cb}$ and $V_{ub}$ is crucial for any new physics analysis in the flavour sector. Their values can be determined from several tree-level decays: $V_{cb}$ can be extracted from $B\to D\ell\nu$ and $B\to D^*\ell\nu$ while $V_{ub}$ can be obtained from $B\to \pi\ell\nu$, $B\to \rho\ell\nu$ and $B\to\tau\nu$. In addition, for both $V_{cb }$ and $V_{ub}$ an inclusive determination is available. There is a long lasting discrepancy between the inclusive and exclusive determinations which recently even increased for $V_{cb}$ above the $3\;\sigma$ level. In this article we study the possible effect of new physics on the inclusive and exclusive determination of $V_{cb}$ and $V_{ub}$ in a model independent way. We find that there is only one operator corresponding to a modified $W$ coupling which can achieve this. However, respecting $SU(2)$ gauge invariance at the high scale this would lead to very large violations of the $Z$ to $b\bar b$ coupling not compatible with experiment. Therefore, we conclude that a new physics explanation of the difference between the inclusive and exclusive determination of $V_{cb}$ and $V_{ub}$ is currently ruled out. Therefore, the discrepancies must be due underestimated uncertainties in the theoretical and/or the experimental analysis.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.