pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.17138 · v1 · pith:3NJZSBUKnew · submitted 2026-06-15 · ✦ hep-ph

|V_(cb)| determinations from bar{B} to D^((*)) ell barν decays within the SM and beyond

Wen-Sheng Fang , Syuhei Iguro , Xin-Qiang Li , Ria Sain , Ryoutaro Watanabe , Ben-Liang Zhang This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 03:07 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph
keywords V_cbB to D l nuform factorsnew physicsCKM matrixsemi-leptonic decaysBGL parameterizationHQET
0
0 comments X

The pith

BGL parameterization reproduces the PDG average for |V_cb| from B to D(*) decays while HQET gives smaller values and non-zero new physics remains allowed.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper examines determinations of the CKM element |V_cb| from exclusive semi-leptonic B-bar to D(*) lepton neutrino decays, incorporating recent experimental data and theoretical form-factor evaluations. Fits are performed under multiple scenarios using the BSZ, BGL, and HQET parameterizations of the transition form factors. The BGL parameterization is shown to match the official PDG average of |V_cb|, whereas the HQET parameterization produces a lower value. The analysis further tests for new-physics contributions to the decays and finds that current data still permits non-zero effects beyond the standard model. This highlights how the extracted value of |V_cb| depends on the choice of form-factor model.

Core claim

Fits to recent experimental distributions for B-bar to D(*) l nu decays using the BGL form-factor parameterization reproduce the PDG average value of |V_cb|, while the HQET parameterization tends to give a smaller value; non-zero new-physics contributions to these decays are still allowed by the present data.

What carries the argument

The BSZ, BGL and HQET parameterizations of the B to D(*) transition form factors, used to model decay distributions and extract |V_cb| in global fits to data.

Load-bearing premise

The chosen form-factor parameterizations capture the relevant QCD dynamics sufficiently well that differences in fitted |V_cb| reflect genuine parameterization dependence rather than unmodeled higher-order effects or data systematics.

What would settle it

A lattice QCD calculation of the B to D(*) form factors at several q^2 points that produces |V_cb| values inconsistent with the BGL fit while agreeing with data would falsify the claim that BGL reproduces the PDG average due to parameterization choice.

read the original abstract

We investigate the $|V_{cb}|$ determinations from exclusive semi-leptonic $\bar{B} \to D^{(*)}\ell\bar\nu$ decays, together with comprehensive fit analyses of the $\bar{B} \to D^{(*)}$ transition form-factors, by taking into account recent updates of experimental distribution data and theoretical evaluations. Several commonly adopted form-factor parameterizations, including BSZ, BGL and HQET, have been considered under different fit scenarios. We compare the fitted values and study how the $|V_{cb}|$ determinations depend on the form-factor parameterizations and on the treatment of the experimental inputs. In particular, we reproduce the official PDG average of $|V_{cb}|$ with the BGL parameterization, while the HQET parameterization tends to give a smaller value of $|V_{cb}|$. We also consider new-physics effects that can contribute to $\bar{B} \to D^{(*)}\ell\bar\nu$, and examine whether non-zero new-physics contributions are still allowed by the current data.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper performs fits of form-factor parameterizations (BSZ, BGL, HQET) to updated experimental distributions for exclusive ar{B} o D^{(*)}\ell\bar{\nu} decays, extracts |V_{cb}| under multiple scenarios, reports that BGL reproduces the PDG average while HQET yields smaller values, and tests whether current data still permits non-zero new-physics contributions to the decays.

Significance. If the parameterization comparisons are shown to be on equal footing, the work would usefully quantify how functional-form choice propagates into |V_{cb}| and the exclusive-inclusive tension; the NP section adds modest value by updating the allowed region with recent data.

major comments (2)
  1. [fits and |V_cb| extraction sections] The central claim that |V_{cb}| differences arise from parameterization choice (rather than unequal truncation or data handling) is load-bearing for the main result. The manuscript must demonstrate that the BGL series (truncated at a given order) and HQET expansion (truncated at 1/m_b^n) capture the relevant kinematic features to comparable accuracy; without explicit truncation-error estimates or cross-validation against the same lattice inputs in the relevant fit sections, the reported spread cannot be attributed solely to functional form.
  2. [data selection and fit methodology] Experimental input treatment: the abstract states that dependence on 'treatment of the experimental inputs' is studied, yet no explicit statement appears on whether binned distributions, correlation matrices, or efficiency corrections are applied identically across the three parameterizations. If the inputs differ, the |V_cb| comparison is not controlled.
minor comments (2)
  1. Notation for the form-factor coefficients in the BSZ, BGL, and HQET expansions should be unified in a single table for direct comparison.
  2. The NP analysis would benefit from a brief statement of the operator basis and Wilson-coefficient priors used.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and the constructive comments. We address the two major comments point by point below, indicating where revisions will be made to improve clarity and strengthen the analysis.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [fits and |V_cb| extraction sections] The central claim that |V_cb| differences arise from parameterization choice (rather than unequal truncation or data handling) is load-bearing for the main result. The manuscript must demonstrate that the BGL series (truncated at a given order) and HQET expansion (truncated at 1/m_b^n) capture the relevant kinematic features to comparable accuracy; without explicit truncation-error estimates or cross-validation against the same lattice inputs in the relevant fit sections, the reported spread cannot be attributed solely to functional form.

    Authors: We agree that demonstrating comparable accuracy between the truncations is necessary to attribute the |V_cb| spread primarily to functional form. Our analysis follows the truncation orders standard in the literature (BGL typically to z^3, HQET to O(1/m_b^2)), but we acknowledge the manuscript lacks explicit truncation-error estimates and cross-validation against identical lattice inputs in the fit sections. In the revised version we will add a new subsection with (i) truncation-uncertainty estimates obtained from the magnitude of the highest-order term retained and (ii) additional cross-check fits that enforce the same lattice-QCD constraints for both BGL and HQET. This will make the comparison more robust. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [data selection and fit methodology] Experimental input treatment: the abstract states that dependence on 'treatment of the experimental inputs' is studied, yet no explicit statement appears on whether binned distributions, correlation matrices, or efficiency corrections are applied identically across the three parameterizations. If the inputs differ, the |V_cb| comparison is not controlled.

    Authors: The experimental inputs (binned distributions, correlation matrices, and efficiency corrections) are in fact applied identically for BSZ, BGL, and HQET; the variations explored concern only the choice of which subsets or re-binning options are used, not the underlying data treatment itself. We will insert an explicit clarifying paragraph in the fit-methodology section of the revised manuscript stating that the base experimental inputs and corrections are held fixed across all three parameterizations, thereby confirming that the |V_cb| comparison is controlled. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: |V_cb| extracted from external data fits; parameterization dependence studied explicitly

full rationale

The paper fits BSZ, BGL and HQET form-factor parameterizations directly to experimental decay distributions and lattice inputs to extract |V_cb|. The central results (BGL reproducing PDG average, HQET giving smaller value) are outputs of these fits rather than self-definitions, renamed known results, or load-bearing self-citations. No quoted step reduces the claimed |V_cb| values or NP bounds to the inputs by construction. The analysis remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central results rest on fitted coefficients within the chosen form-factor expansions and the assumption that these expansions adequately represent the underlying QCD matrix elements across the kinematic range.

free parameters (1)
  • form-factor expansion coefficients (BSZ, BGL, HQET)
    Multiple coefficients in each parameterization are fitted to data to determine |V_cb|.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The selected form-factor parameterizations accurately describe the B to D(*) transition matrix elements in the relevant q^2 range.
    Invoked when comparing fitted |V_cb| values across parameterizations.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5746 in / 1297 out tokens · 69364 ms · 2026-06-27T03:07:04.690941+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Angular Analysis of $B \to D^{*}\ell \bar{\nu}_{\ell}$ from Lattice and Experiment: $|V_{cb}|$ and New Physics Constraints

    hep-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Joint Bayesian fit of lattice form factors and Belle angular data gives |V_cb| = 0.03997(71) in the SM with no resolution of the exclusive-inclusive puzzle and excludes scalar leptoquark NP at 1.0 TeV and vector lepto...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 2 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Bernlochner, M.T

    F.U. Bernlochner, M.T. Prim and K.K. Vos,|Vub|and|V cb|from exclusive semileptonic decays,Eur. Phys. J. ST233(2024) 347

    2024

  2. [2]

    Bernlochner, M.F

    F.U. Bernlochner, M.F. Sevilla, D.J. Robinson and G. Wormser,Semitauonic b-hadron decays: A lepton flavor universality laboratory,Rev. Mod. Phys.94(2022) 015003 [2101.08326]

    arXiv 2022

  3. [3]

    Gambino et al.,Challenges in semileptonicBdecays,Eur

    P. Gambino et al.,Challenges in semileptonicBdecays,Eur. Phys. J. C80(2020) 966 [2006.07287]

    arXiv 2020

  4. [4]

    Klaver and M

    S. Klaver and M. Rotondo,Lepton Flavor Universality Tests in Semileptonicb→cDecays, Symmetry16(2024) 964

    2024

  5. [5]

    Albrecht, F

    J. Albrecht, F. Bernlochner, M. Colonna, L. Gärtner, A. Mathad, B. Mitreska et al.,Joint LHCb–Belle II Prospects to Constrain New Physics inB→D(∗)τ ν, 4, 2026 [2604.00735]

    arXiv 2026

  6. [6]

    Bernard et al.,The ¯B→D ∗ℓ¯νform factor at zero recoil from three-flavor lattice QCD: A model independent determination of|Vcb|,Phys

    C. Bernard et al.,The ¯B→D ∗ℓ¯νform factor at zero recoil from three-flavor lattice QCD: A model independent determination of|Vcb|,Phys. Rev. D79(2009) 014506 [0808.2519]. [10]Fermilab Lattice, MILCcollaboration,Update of|V cb|from the ¯B→D ∗ℓ¯νForm Factor at Zero Recoil with Three-Flavor Lattice QCD,Phys. Rev. D89(2014) 114504 [1403.0635]. [11]HPQCDcolla...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  7. [7]

    Khodjamirian, B

    A. Khodjamirian, B. Melić and Y.-M. Wang,A guide to the QCD light-cone sum rules for b-quark decays,Eur. Phys. J. ST233(2024) 271 [2311.08700]

    arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    Colangelo and A

    P. Colangelo and A. Khodjamirian,QCD sum rules, a modern perspective,hep-ph/0010175

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  9. [9]

    Khodjamirian,Hadron Form Factors, CRC Press (4, 2020), 10.1201/9781315142005

    A. Khodjamirian,Hadron Form Factors, CRC Press (4, 2020), 10.1201/9781315142005

    work page doi:10.1201/9781315142005 2020

  10. [10]

    Wang, Y.-B

    Y.-M. Wang, Y.-B. Wei, Y.-L. Shen and C.-D. Lü,Perturbative corrections toB→Dform factors in QCD,JHEP06(2017) 062 [1701.06810]. – 48 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  11. [11]

    Gubernari, A

    N. Gubernari, A. Kokulu and D. van Dyk,B→PandB→VForm Factors fromB-Meson Light-Cone Sum Rules beyond Leading Twist,JHEP01(2019) 150 [1811.00983]

    arXiv 2019

  12. [12]

    J. Gao, T. Huber, Y. Ji, C. Wang, Y.-M. Wang and Y.-B. Wei,B→Dℓνℓ form factors beyond leading power and extraction of|Vcb|andR(D),JHEP05(2022) 024 [2112.12674]

    arXiv 2022

  13. [13]

    Cui, Y.-K

    B.-Y. Cui, Y.-K. Huang, Y.-M. Wang and X.-C. Zhao,Shedding new light onR(D(∗) (s))and |Vcb|from semileptonic ¯B(s) →D (∗) (s) ℓ¯νℓ decays,Phys. Rev. D108(2023) L071504 [2301.12391]

    arXiv 2023

  14. [14]

    Faller, A

    S. Faller, A. Khodjamirian, C. Klein and T. Mannel,B→D(∗) Form Factors from QCD Light-Cone Sum Rules,Eur. Phys. J. C60(2009) 603 [0809.0222]. [25]Bellecollaboration,Measurement of the decayB→Dℓν ℓ in fully reconstructed events and determination of the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix element|Vcb|,Phys. Rev. D93 (2016) 032006 [1510.03657]. [26]Belle-IIcoll...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  15. [15]

    C.G. Boyd, B. Grinstein and R.F. Lebed,Precision corrections to dispersive bounds on form-factors,Phys. Rev. D56(1997) 6895 [hep-ph/9705252]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  16. [16]

    C.G. Boyd, B. Grinstein and R.F. Lebed,Model independent determinations of¯B→Dl¯ν, D∗l¯νform-factors,Nucl. Phys. B461(1996) 493 [hep-ph/9508211]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  17. [17]

    C.G. Boyd, B. Grinstein and R.F. Lebed,Model independent extraction of|Vcb|using dispersion relations,Phys. Lett. B353(1995) 306 [hep-ph/9504235]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  18. [18]

    C.G. Boyd, B. Grinstein and R.F. Lebed,Constraints on form-factors for exclusive semileptonic heavy to light meson decays,Phys. Rev. Lett.74(1995) 4603 [hep-ph/9412324]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  19. [19]

    Bourrely, I

    C. Bourrely, I. Caprini and L. Lellouch,Model-independent description ofB→πlνdecays and a determination of|Vub|,Phys. Rev. D79(2009) 013008 [0807.2722]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  20. [20]

    Caprini, L

    I. Caprini, L. Lellouch and M. Neubert,Dispersive bounds on the shape of¯B→D (∗)ℓ¯ν form-factors,Nucl. Phys. B530(1998) 153 [hep-ph/9712417]. – 49 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  21. [21]

    Bernlochner, Z

    F.U. Bernlochner, Z. Ligeti, M. Papucci and D.J. Robinson,Combined analysis of semileptonicBdecays toDandD ∗:R(D (∗)),|V cb|, and new physics,Phys. Rev. D95 (2017) 115008 [1703.05330]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  22. [22]

    Bordone, M

    M. Bordone, M. Jung and D. van Dyk,Theory determination of¯B→D (∗)ℓ−¯νform factors atO(1/m 2 c),Eur. Phys. J. C80(2020) 74 [1908.09398]

    arXiv 2020

  23. [23]

    Bernlochner, Z

    F.U. Bernlochner, Z. Ligeti, M. Papucci, M.T. Prim, D.J. Robinson and C. Xiong, Constrained second-order power corrections in HQET:R(D(∗)),|V cb|, and new physics,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 096015 [2206.11281]

    arXiv 2022

  24. [24]

    Bordone, N

    M. Bordone, N. Gubernari, M. Jung and D. van Dyk,ChallengingB(s) →D (∗) (s) form factors with the heavy quark expansion,JHEP11(2025) 051 [2507.03569]

    arXiv 2025

  25. [25]

    D. Bigi, P. Gambino and S. Schacht,R(D∗),|V cb|, and the Heavy Quark Symmetry relations between form factors,JHEP11(2017) 061 [1707.09509]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  26. [26]

    Jaiswal, S

    S. Jaiswal, S. Nandi and S.K. Patra,Extraction of|Vcb|fromB→D (∗)ℓνℓ and the Standard Model predictions ofR(D(∗)),JHEP12(2017) 060 [1707.09977]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  27. [27]

    Jung and D.M

    M. Jung and D.M. Straub,Constraining new physics inb→cℓνtransitions,JHEP01 (2019) 009 [1801.01112]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  28. [28]

    Bordone, N

    M. Bordone, N. Gubernari, D. van Dyk and M. Jung,Heavy-Quark expansion for¯Bs →D (∗) s form factors and unitarity bounds beyond theSU(3)F limit,Eur. Phys. J. C80(2020) 347 [1912.09335]

    arXiv 2020

  29. [29]

    S.-Y. Li, J. Xu, R.-X. Shi, L.-S. Geng, Y.-J. Zhang and Y. Zhang,Vcb puzzle in semi-leptonic B→D ∗ decays revisited,Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) 880 [2412.05989]

    arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    Bharucha, D.M

    A. Bharucha, D.M. Straub and R. Zwicky,B→V ℓ+ℓ− in the Standard Model from light-cone sum rules,JHEP08(2016) 098 [1503.05534]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  31. [31]

    Iguro and R

    S. Iguro and R. Watanabe,Bayesian fit analysis to full distribution data ofB→D (∗)ℓν:|V cb| determination and new physics constraints,JHEP08(2020) 006 [2004.10208]

    arXiv 2020

  32. [32]

    Gratrex, M

    J. Gratrex, M. Hopfer and R. Zwicky,Generalised helicity formalism, higher moments and theB→K JK(→Kπ) ¯ℓ1ℓ2 angular distributions,Phys. Rev. D93(2016) 054008 [1506.03970]

    arXiv 2016

  33. [33]

    Jacob and G.C

    M. Jacob and G.C. Wick,On the General Theory of Collisions for Particles with Spin, Annals Phys.7(1959) 404

    1959

  34. [34]

    H.E. Haber,Spin formalism and applications to new physics searches, in21st Annual SLAC Summer Institute on Particle Physics: Spin Structure in High-energy Processes (School: 26 Jul - 3 Aug, Topical Conference: 4-6 Aug) (SSI 93), pp. 231–272, 4, 1994 [hep-ph/9405376]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  35. [35]

    Korner and G.A

    J.G. Korner and G.A. Schuler,Exclusive Semileptonic Heavy Meson Decays Including Lepton Mass Effects,Z. Phys. C46(1990) 93

    1990

  36. [36]

    Tanaka and R

    M. Tanaka and R. Watanabe,New physics in the weak interaction of¯B→D (∗)τ¯ν,Phys. Rev. D87(2013) 034028 [1212.1878]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  37. [37]

    W.-F. Duan, S. Iguro, X.-Q. Li, R. Watanabe and Y.-D. Yang,On sum rules for semi-leptonicb→candb→udecays,JHEP07(2025) 166 [2410.21384]

    arXiv 2025

  38. [38]

    Sirlin,Largem W,m Z Behavior of theO(α)Corrections to Semileptonic Processes Mediated byW,Nucl

    A. Sirlin,Largem W,m Z Behavior of theO(α)Corrections to Semileptonic Processes Mediated byW,Nucl. Phys. B196(1982) 83. – 50 –

    1982

  39. [39]

    Atwood and W.J

    D. Atwood and W.J. Marciano,Radiative Corrections and SemileptonicBDecays,Phys. Rev. D41(1990) 1736

    1990

  40. [40]

    Ginsberg,Radiative corrections toK 0 e3 decays and the∆ = 1/2rule,Phys

    E.S. Ginsberg,Radiative corrections toK 0 e3 decays and the∆ = 1/2rule,Phys. Rev.171 (1968) 1675

    1968

  41. [41]

    Bigi and P

    D. Bigi and P. Gambino,RevisitingB→Dℓν,Phys. Rev. D94(2016) 094008 [1606.08030]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  42. [42]

    D. Bigi, P. Gambino and S. Schacht,A fresh look at the determination of|Vcb|from B→D ∗ℓν,Phys. Lett. B769(2017) 441 [1703.06124]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  43. [43]

    Gubernari,Unitarity bounds and form-factor predictions forB-meson decays, 2605.26213

    N. Gubernari,Unitarity bounds and form-factor predictions forB-meson decays, 2605.26213

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  44. [44]

    Simula and L

    S. Simula and L. Vittorio,Multiple dispersive bounds. I. The z expansion,Phys. Rev. D113 (2026) 074017 [2509.00411]

    arXiv 2026

  45. [45]

    Simula and L

    S. Simula and L. Vittorio,Multiple dispersive bounds. II. Subthreshold branch cuts,Phys. Rev. D113(2026) 074018 [2509.00412]

    arXiv 2026

  46. [46]

    Gopal and N

    A. Gopal and N. Gubernari,Unitarity bounds with subthreshold and anomalous cuts for b-hadron decays,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) L031501 [2412.04388]

    arXiv 2025

  47. [47]

    Manohar and M.B

    A.V. Manohar and M.B. Wise,Heavy quark physics, vol. 10, Cambridge University Press (2000), 10.1017/9781009402125

    work page doi:10.1017/9781009402125 2000

  48. [48]

    Neubert,Heavy quark symmetry,Phys

    M. Neubert,Heavy quark symmetry,Phys. Rept.245(1994) 259 [hep-ph/9306320]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  49. [49]

    Sakaki, M

    Y. Sakaki, M. Tanaka, A. Tayduganov and R. Watanabe,Testing leptoquark models in ¯B→D (∗)τ¯ν,Phys. Rev. D88(2013) 094012 [1309.0301]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  50. [50]

    Isgur and M.B

    N. Isgur and M.B. Wise,Weak Decays of Heavy Mesons in the Static Quark Approximation, Phys. Lett. B232(1989) 113

    1989

  51. [51]

    Falk and M

    A.F. Falk and M. Neubert,Second order power corrections in the heavy quark effective theory

  52. [52]

    Formalism and meson form-factors,Phys. Rev. D47(1993) 2965 [hep-ph/9209268]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1993

  53. [53]

    A.F. Falk, H. Georgi, B. Grinstein and M.B. Wise,Heavy Meson Form-factors From QCD, Nucl. Phys. B343(1990) 1

    1990

  54. [54]

    Falk and B

    A.F. Falk and B. Grinstein,Heavy meson pair production ine+e− annihilation from the static quark effective theory,Phys. Lett. B249(1990) 314

    1990

  55. [55]

    Neubert,Renormalization of heavy quark currents,Nucl

    M. Neubert,Renormalization of heavy quark currents,Nucl. Phys. B371(1992) 149

    1992

  56. [56]

    Luke,Effects of subleading operators in the heavy quark effective theory,Phys

    M.E. Luke,Effects of subleading operators in the heavy quark effective theory,Phys. Lett. B 252(1990) 447

    1990

  57. [57]

    Hiller and R

    G. Hiller and R. Zwicky,(A)symmetries of weak decays at and near the kinematic endpoint, JHEP03(2014) 042 [1312.1923]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  58. [58]

    Jung and S

    M. Jung and S. Schacht,¯B→D (∗)ℓ¯νBranching Ratios and Evidence for Isospin Breaking in Υ(4S)Decays,2604.08391

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  59. [59]

    de Rafael and J

    E. de Rafael and J. Taron,Constraints on heavy meson form-factors,Phys. Lett. B282 (1992) 215

    1992

  60. [60]

    de Rafael and J

    E. de Rafael and J. Taron,Analyticity properties and unitarity constraints of heavy meson form-factors,Phys. Rev. D50(1994) 373 [hep-ph/9306214]. – 51 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  61. [61]

    Gambino, M

    P. Gambino, M. Jung and S. Schacht,TheVcb puzzle: An update,Phys. Lett. B795(2019) 386 [1905.08209]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  62. [62]

    Bernlochner and P

    F. Bernlochner and P. Gambino,Talk at 2023 belle ii physics week, in2023 Belle II Physics Week, 2023, https://indico.belle2.org/event/9402/contributions/68788/

    2023

  63. [63]

    Carpenter et al.,Stan: A probabilistic programming language,J

    B. Carpenter et al.,Stan: A probabilistic programming language,J. Stat. Softw.76(2017)

    2017

  64. [64]

    Neubert, Z

    M. Neubert, Z. Ligeti and Y. Nir,QCD sum rule analysis of the subleading Isgur-Wise form-factorχ 2(v·v ′),Phys. Lett. B301(1993) 101 [hep-ph/9209271]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1993

  65. [65]

    Neubert, Z

    M. Neubert, Z. Ligeti and Y. Nir,The Subleading Isgur-Wise form-factorξ3(v·v ′)to order αs in QCD sum rules,Phys. Rev. D47(1993) 5060 [hep-ph/9212266]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1993

  66. [66]

    Ligeti, Y

    Z. Ligeti, Y. Nir and M. Neubert,The Subleading Isgur-Wise form-factorξ3(v·v ′)and its implications for the decays¯B→D (∗)ℓ¯ν,Phys. Rev. D49(1994) 1302 [hep-ph/9305304]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  67. [67]

    D’Agostini,On the use of the covariance matrix to fit correlated data,Nucl

    G. D’Agostini,On the use of the covariance matrix to fit correlated data,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A346(1994) 306. [86]NNPDFcollaboration,Precision determination of electroweak parameters and the strange content of the proton from neutrino deep-inelastic scattering,Nucl. Phys. B823(2009) 195 [0906.1958]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  68. [68]

    Martinelli, S

    G. Martinelli, S. Simula and L. Vittorio,Updates on the determination of|Vcb|, R(D∗)and |Vub|/|Vcb|,Eur. Phys. J. C84(2024) 400 [2310.03680]

    arXiv 2024

  69. [69]

    Martinelli, S

    G. Martinelli, S. Simula and L. Vittorio,SemileptonicB→D ∗ decays from light toτleptons: the extraction of the form factorF2 from data,Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) 242 [2410.17974]

    arXiv 2025

  70. [70]

    Carvunis, G

    A. Carvunis, G. Finauri, P. Gambino, M. Jung and S. Mächler,New Physics in inclusive semileptonic B decays,JHEP01(2026) 037 [2507.22123]

    arXiv 2026

  71. [71]

    Iguro, M

    S. Iguro, M. Takeuchi and R. Watanabe,Testing leptoquark/EFT in¯B→D (∗)l¯νat the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) 406 [2011.02486]

    arXiv 2021

  72. [72]

    Allwicher, D.A

    L. Allwicher, D.A. Faroughy, F. Jaffredo, O. Sumensari and F. Wilsch,Drell-Yan tails beyond the Standard Model,JHEP03(2023) 064 [2207.10714]

    arXiv 2023

  73. [73]

    Average ofR(D)andR(D ∗)for CKM 2025

    L. Allwicher, D.A. Faroughy, F. Jaffredo, O. Sumensari and F. Wilsch,HighPT: A tool for high-pT Drell-Yan tails beyond the standard model,Comput. Phys. Commun.289(2023) 108749 [2207.10756]. [93]BaBarcollaboration,Evidence for an excess of ¯B→D (∗)τ −¯ντ decays,Phys. Rev. Lett.109 (2012) 101802 [1205.5442]. [94]BaBarcollaboration,Measurement of an Excess o...

    arXiv 2023