pith. sign in

arxiv: 2510.05904 · v1 · submitted 2025-10-07 · ✦ hep-ex

First Measurement of the D_s^+rightarrow K⁰μ^+ν_(μ) Decay

BESIII Collaboration: M. Ablikim , M. N. Achasov , P. Adlarson , X. C. Ai , R. Aliberti , A. Amoroso , Q. An , Y. Bai
show 687 more authors
O. Bakina Y. Ban H.-R. Bao V. Batozskaya K. Begzsuren N. Berger M. Berlowski M. Bertani D. Bettoni F. Bianchi E. Bianco A. Bortone I. Boyko R. A. Briere A. Brueggemann H. Cai M. H. Cai X. Cai A. Calcaterra G. F. Cao N. Cao S. A. Cetin X. Y. Chai J. F. Chang G. R. Che Y. Z. Che C. H. Chen Chao Chen G. Chen H. S. Chen H. Y. Chen M. L. Chen S. J. Chen S. L. Chen S. M. Chen T. Chen X. R. Chen X. T. Chen X. Y. Chen Y. B. Chen Y. Q. Chen Z. Chen Z. J. Chen Z. K. Chen S. K. Choi X. Chu G. Cibinetto F. Cossio J. Cottee-Meldrum J. J. Cui H. L. Dai J. P. Dai A. Dbeyssi R. E. de Boer D. Dedovich C. Q. Deng Z. Y. Deng A. Denig I. Denysenko M. Destefanis F. De Mori B. Ding X. X. Ding Y. Ding Y. X. Ding J. Dong L. Y. Dong M. Y. Dong X. Dong M. C. Du S. X. Du Y. Y. Duan P. Egorov G. F. Fan J. J. Fan Y. H. Fan J. Fang S. S. Fang W. X. Fang Y. Q. Fang R. Farinelli L. Fava F. Feldbauer G. Felici C. Q. Feng J. H. Feng L. Feng Q. X. Feng Y. T. Feng M. Fritsch C. D. Fu J. L. Fu Y. W. Fu H. Gao X. B. Gao Y. Gao Y. N. Gao Y. Y. Gao S. Garbolino I. Garzia L. Ge P. T. Ge Z. W. Ge C. Geng E. M. Gersabeck A. Gilman K. Goetzen J. D. Gong L. Gong W. X. Gong W. Gradl S. Gramigna M. Greco M. H. Gu Y. T. Gu C. Y. Guan A. Q. Guo L. B. Guo M. J. Guo R. P. Guo Y. P. Guo A. Guskov J. Gutierrez K. L. Han T. T. Han F. Hanisch K. D. Hao X. Q. Hao F. A. Harris K. K. He K. L. He F. H. Heinsius C. H. Heinz Y. K. Heng C. Herold P. C. Hong G. Y. Hou X. T. Hou Y. R. Hou Z. L. Hou H. M. Hu J. F. Hu Q. P. Hu S. L. Hu T. Hu Y. Hu Z. M. Hu G. S. Huang K. X. Huang L. Q. Huang P. Huang X. T. Huang Y. P. Huang Y. S. Huang T. Hussain N. H\"usken N. in der Wiesche J. Jackson Q. Ji Q. P. Ji W. Ji X. B. Ji X. L. Ji Y. Y. Ji Z. K. Jia D. Jiang H. B. Jiang P. C. Jiang S. J. Jiang T. J. Jiang X. S. Jiang Y. Jiang J. B. Jiao J. K. Jiao Z. Jiao S. Jin Y. Jin M. Q. Jing X. M. Jing T. Johansson S. Kabana N. Kalantar-Nayestanaki X. L. Kang X. S. Kang M. Kavatsyuk B. C. Ke V. Khachatryan A. Khoukaz R. Kiuchi O. B. Kolcu B. Kopf M. Kuessner X. Kui N. Kumar A. Kupsc W. K\"uhn Q. Lan W. N. Lan T. T. Lei M. Lellmann T. Lenz C. Li C. H. Li C. K. Li D. M. Li F. Li G. Li H. B. Li H. J. Li H. N. Li Hui Li J. R. Li J. S. Li K. Li K. L. Li L. J. Li Lei Li M. H. Li M. R. Li P. L. Li P. R. Li Q. M. Li Q. X. Li R. Li S. X. Li T. Li T. Y. Li W. D. Li W. G. Li X. Li X. H. Li X. L. Li X. Y. Li X. Z. Li Y. Li Y. G. Li Y. P. Li Z. J. Li Z. Y. Li H. Liang Y. F. Liang Y. T. Liang G. R. Liao L. B. Liao M. H. Liao Y. P. Liao J. Libby A. Limphirat C. C. Lin D. X. Lin L. Q. Lin T. Lin B. J. Liu B. X. Liu C. Liu C. X. Liu F. Liu F. H. Liu Feng Liu G. M. Liu H. Liu H. B. Liu H. H. Liu H. M. Liu Huihui Liu J. B. Liu J. J. Liu K. Liu K. Y. Liu Ke Liu L. C. Liu Lu Liu M. H. Liu P. L. Liu Q. Liu S. B. Liu T. Liu W. K. Liu W. M. Liu W. T. Liu X. Liu X. K. Liu X. L. Liu X. Y. Liu Y. Liu Y. B. Liu Z. A. Liu Z. D. Liu Z. Q. Liu X. C. Lou F. X. Lu H. J. Lu J. G. Lu X. L. Lu Y. Lu Y. H. Lu Y. P. Lu Z. H. Lu C. L. Luo J. R. Luo J. S. Luo M. X. Luo T. Luo X. L. Luo Z. Y. Lv X. R. Lyu Y. F. Lyu Y. H. Lyu F. C. Ma H. L. Ma J. L. Ma L. L. Ma L. R. Ma Q. M. Ma R. Q. Ma R. Y. Ma T. Ma X. T. Ma X. Y. Ma Y. M. Ma F. E. Maas I. Mackay M. Maggiora S. Malde Q. A. Malik H. X. Mao Y. J. Mao Z. P. Mao S. Marcello A. Marshall F. M. Melendi Y. H. Meng Z. X. Meng G. Mezzadri H. Miao T. J. Min R. E. Mitchell X. H. Mo B. Moses N. Yu. Muchnoi J. Muskalla Y. Nefedov F. Nerling L. S. Nie I. B. Nikolaev Z. Ning S. Nisar Q. L. Niu W. D. Niu C. Normand S. L. Olsen Q. Ouyang S. Pacetti X. Pan Y. Pan A. Pathak Y. P. Pei M. Pelizaeus H. P. Peng X. J. Peng Y. Y. Peng K. Peters K. Petridis J. L. Ping R. G. Ping S. Plura V. Prasad F. Z. Qi H. R. Qi M. Qi S. Qian W. B. Qian C. F. Qiao J. H. Qiao J. J. Qin J. L. Qin L. Q. Qin L. Y. Qin P. B. Qin X. P. Qin X. S. Qin Z. H. Qin J. F. Qiu Z. H. Qu J. Rademacker C. F. Redmer A. Rivetti M. Rolo G. Rong S. S. Rong F. Rosini Ch. Rosner M. Q. Ruan N. Salone A. Sarantsev Y. Schelhaas K. Schoenning M. Scodeggio K. Y. Shan W. Shan X. Y. Shan Z. J. Shang J. F. Shangguan L. G. Shao M. Shao C. P. Shen H. F. Shen W. H. Shen X. Y. Shen B. A. Shi H. Shi J. L. Shi J. Y. Shi S. Y. Shi X. Shi H. L. Song J. J. Song T. Z. Song W. M. Song Y. J. Song Y. X. Song S. Sosio S. Spataro S Stansilaus F. Stieler S. S Su Y. J. Su G. B. Sun G. X. Sun H. Sun H. K. Sun J. F. Sun K. Sun L. Sun S. S. Sun T. Sun Y. C. Sun Y. H. Sun Y. J. Sun Y. Z. Sun Z. Q. Sun Z. T. Sun C. J. Tang G. Y. Tang J. Tang J. J. Tang L. F. Tang Y. A. Tang L. Y. Tao M. Tat J. X. Teng J. Y. Tian W. H. Tian Y. Tian Z. F. Tian I. Uman B. Wang Bo Wang C. Wang Cong Wang D. Y. Wang H. J. Wang J. J. Wang K. Wang L. L. Wang L. W. Wang M. Wang N. Y. Wang S. Wang T. Wang T. J. Wang W. Wang W. P. Wang X. Wang X. F. Wang X. J. Wang X. L. Wang X. N. Wang Y. Wang Y. D. Wang Y. F. Wang Y. H. Wang Y. J. Wang Y. L. Wang Y. N. Wang Y. Q. Wang Yaqian Wang Yi Wang Yuan Wang Z. Wang Z. L. Wang Z. Q. Wang Z. Y. Wang D. H. Wei H. R. Wei F. Weidner S. P. Wen Y. R. Wen U. Wiedner G. Wilkinson M. Wolke C. Wu J. F. Wu L. H. Wu L. J. Wu Lianjie Wu S. G. Wu S. M. Wu X. Wu X. H. Wu Y. J. Wu Z. Wu L. Xia X. M. Xian B. H. Xiang D. Xiao G. Y. Xiao H. Xiao Y. L. Xiao Z. J. Xiao C. Xie K. J. Xie X. H. Xie Y. Xie Y. G. Xie Y. H. Xie Z. P. Xie T. Y. Xing C. F. Xu C. J. Xu G. F. Xu H. Y. Xu M. Xu Q. J. Xu Q. N. Xu T. D. Xu W. Xu W. L. Xu X. P. Xu Y. Xu Y. C. Xu Z. S. Xu F. Yan H. Y. Yan L. Yan W. B. Yan W. C. Yan W. H. Yan W. P. Yan X. Q. Yan H. J. Yang H. L. Yang H. X. Yang J. H. Yang R. J. Yang T. Yang Y. Yang Y. F. Yang Y. H. Yang Y. Q. Yang Y. X. Yang Y. Z. Yang M. Ye M. H. Ye Z. J. Ye Junhao Yin Z. Y. You B. X. Yu C. X. Yu G. Yu J. S. Yu L. Q. Yu M. C. Yu T. Yu X. D. Yu Y. C. Yu C. Z. Yuan H. Yuan J. Yuan L. Yuan S. C. Yuan X. Q. Yuan Y. Yuan Z. Y. Yuan C. X. Yue Ying Yue A. A. Zafar S. H. Zeng X. Zeng Y. Zeng Y. J. Zeng X. Y. Zhai Y. H. Zhan Zhang A. Q. Zhang B. L. Zhang B. X. Zhang D. H. Zhang G. Y. Zhang H. Zhang H. C. Zhang H. H. Zhang H. Q. Zhang H. R. Zhang H. Y. Zhang J. Zhang J. J. Zhang J. L. Zhang J. Q. Zhang J. S. Zhang J. W. Zhang J. X. Zhang J. Y. Zhang J. Z. Zhang Jianyu Zhang L. M. Zhang Lei Zhang N. Zhang P. Zhang Q. Zhang Q. Y. Zhang R. Y. Zhang S. H. Zhang Shulei Zhang X. M. Zhang X. Y Zhang X. Y. Zhang Y. Zhang Y. T. Zhang Y. H. Zhang Y. M. Zhang Y. P. Zhang Z. D. Zhang Z. H. Zhang Z. L. Zhang Z. X. Zhang Z. Y. Zhang Z. Z. Zhang Zh. Zh. Zhang G. Zhao J. Y. Zhao J. Z. Zhao L. Zhao M. G. Zhao N. Zhao R. P. Zhao S. J. Zhao Y. B. Zhao Y. L. Zhao Y. X. Zhao Z. G. Zhao A. Zhemchugov B. Zheng B. M. Zheng J. P. Zheng W. J. Zheng X. R. Zheng Y. H. Zheng B. Zhong C. Zhong H. Zhou J. Q. Zhou J. Y. Zhou S. Zhou X. Zhou X. K. Zhou X. R. Zhou X. Y. Zhou Y. X. Zhou Y. Z. Zhou A. N. Zhu J. Zhu K. Zhu K. J. Zhu K. S. Zhu L. Zhu L. X. Zhu S. H. Zhu T. J. Zhu W. D. Zhu W. J. Zhu W. Z. Zhu Y. C. Zhu Z. A. Zhu X. Y. Zhuang J. H. Zou J. Zu
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 09:24 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ex
keywords branching fractionsemileptonic decayform factorCKM matrix elementlepton flavor universalityDs mesonVcd
0
0 comments X

The pith

The branching fraction of the semileptonic decay Ds+ → K0 μ+ νμ is measured for the first time to be (2.89 ± 0.27 ± 0.12) × 10^{-3}.

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

This paper reports the first measurement of the Ds+ meson decaying semileptonically into a neutral kaon, muon, and neutrino using electron-positron collision data. The branching fraction is extracted directly from the data, and a simultaneous fit across muon and electron modes in bins of momentum transfer squared determines the hadronic form factor at zero recoil together with the CKM element |Vcd|. These quantities supply the most precise values available for this specific transition, enabling sharper comparisons with lattice QCD predictions and checks for lepton flavor universality.

Core claim

The branching fraction of Ds+ → K0 μ+ νμ is measured to be (2.89 ± 0.27stat ± 0.12syst) × 10^{-3}. A simultaneous fit to the partial decay rates in q2 intervals for both the muon and electron channels gives fK0+(0)|Vcd| = 0.140 ± 0.008stat ± 0.002syst. Inserting the external value of |Vcd| yields fK0+(0) = 0.623 ± 0.036stat ± 0.009syst at q2 = 0, while inserting the lattice value of the form factor yields |Vcd| = 0.220 ± 0.013stat ± 0.003syst ± 0.001LQCD. Lepton flavor universality holds within uncertainties across the full range and in separate q2 bins.

What carries the argument

Simultaneous fit to partial decay rates in q2 intervals measured in both Ds+ → K0 μ+ νμ and Ds+ → K0 e+ νe modes, which isolates the product fK0+(0)|Vcd|.

If this is right

  • The measured branching fraction and form factor supply the most stringent test to date on non-perturbative QCD calculations for the Ds+ → K0 transition.
  • fK0+(0) = 0.623 ± 0.036stat ± 0.009syst is the most precise determination of this form factor in the Ds+ → K0 channel.
  • The value |Vcd| = 0.220 ± 0.013stat ± 0.003syst ± 0.001LQCD is the most precise extraction of this CKM element from any Ds+ → K0 ℓ+ νℓ decay.
  • No violation of lepton flavor universality is observed in the full q2 range or in separate intervals.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Combining this result with measurements from other charm semileptonic decays could tighten global constraints on |Vcd| and test CKM unitarity at higher precision.
  • Future higher-luminosity data sets could reduce the dominant statistical uncertainty and allow bin-by-bin comparisons of form-factor shapes with lattice calculations.
  • The absence of lepton-flavor violation here sets a benchmark that can be compared directly with analogous tests in bottom-meson decays.

Load-bearing premise

Monte Carlo simulations accurately reproduce detector efficiencies, particle identification, and background shapes for this specific decay channel.

What would settle it

An independent measurement of the branching fraction lying outside the interval 2.4–3.4 × 10^{-3} at comparable precision would contradict the central result.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2510.05904 by A. Amoroso, A. A. Zafar, A. Bortone, A. Brueggemann, A. Calcaterra, A. Dbeyssi, A. Denig, A. Gilman, A. Guskov, A. Khoukaz, A. Kupsc, A. Limphirat, A. Marshall, A. N. Zhu, A. Pathak, A. Q. Guo, A. Q. Zhang, A. Rivetti, A. Sarantsev, A. Zhemchugov, B. A. Shi, B. C. Ke, B. Ding, BESIII Collaboration: M. Ablikim, B. H. Xiang, B. J. Liu, B. Kopf, B. L. Zhang, B. Moses, B. M. Zheng, Bo Wang, B. Wang, B. X. Liu, B. X. Yu, B. X. Zhang, B. Zheng, B. Zhong, C. C. Lin, C. D. Fu, C. F. Qiao, C. F. Redmer, C. F. Xu, C. Geng, Chao Chen, C. H. Chen, C. Herold, C. H. Heinz, C. H. Li, Ch. Rosner, C. J. Tang, C. J. Xu, C. K. Li, C. Li, C. Liu, C. L. Luo, C. Normand, Cong Wang, C. P. Shen, C. Q. Deng, C. Q. Feng, C. Wang, C. Wu, C. Xie, C. X. Liu, C. X. Yu, C. X. Yue, C. Y. Guan, C. Zhong, C. Z. Yuan, D. Bettoni, D. Dedovich, D. H. Wei, D. H. Zhang, D. Jiang, D. M. Li, D. Xiao, D. X. Lin, D. Y. Wang, E. Bianco, E. M. Gersabeck, F. A. Harris, F. Bianchi, F. C. Ma, F. Cossio, F. De Mori, F. E. Maas, Feng Liu, F. Feldbauer, F. Hanisch, F. H. Heinsius, F. H. Liu, F. Li, F. Liu, F. M. Melendi, F. Nerling, F. Rosini, F. Stieler, F. Weidner, F. X. Lu, F. Yan, F. Z. Qi, G. B. Sun, G. Chen, G. Cibinetto, G. F. Cao, G. Felici, G. F. Fan, G. F. Xu, G. Li, G. Mezzadri, G. M. Liu, G. R. Che, G. R. Liao, G. Rong, G. S. Huang, G. Wilkinson, G. X. Sun, G. Y. Hou, G. Y. Tang, G. Yu, G. Y. Xiao, G. Y. Zhang, G. Zhao, H. B. Jiang, H. B. Li, H. B. Liu, H. Cai, H. C. Zhang, H. F. Shen, H. Gao, H. H. Liu, H. H. Zhang, H. J. Li, H. J. Lu, H. J. Wang, H. J. Yang, H. K. Sun, H. L. Dai, H. Liang, H. Liu, H. L. Ma, H. L. Song, H. L. Yang, H. M. Hu, H. Miao, H. M. Liu, H. N. Li, H. P. Peng, H. Q. Zhang, H.-R. Bao, H. R. Qi, H. R. Wei, H. R. Zhang, H. S. Chen, H. Shi, H. Sun, Huihui Liu, Hui Li, H. Xiao, H. X. Mao, H. X. Yang, H. Y. Chen, H. Yuan, H. Y. Xu, H. Y. Yan, H. Y. Zhang, H. Zhang, H. Zhou, I. B. Nikolaev, I. Boyko, I. Denysenko, I. Garzia, I. Mackay, I. Uman, J. B. Jiao, J. B. Liu, J. Cottee-Meldrum, J. D. Gong, J. Dong, J. Fang, J. F. Chang, J. F. Hu, J. F. Qiu, J. F. Shangguan, J. F. Sun, J. F. Wu, J. G. Lu, J. Gutierrez, J. H. Feng, J. H. Qiao, J. H. Yang, J. H. Zou, Jianyu Zhang, J. Jackson, J. J. Cui, J. J. Fan, J. J. Liu, J. J. Qin, J. J. Song, J. J. Tang, J. J. Wang, J. J. Zhang, J. K. Jiao, J. L. Fu, J. Libby, J. L. Ma, J. L. Ping, J. L. Qin, J. L. Shi, J. L. Zhang, J. Muskalla, J. P. Dai, J. P. Zheng, J. Q. Zhang, J. Q. Zhou, J. Rademacker, J. R. Li, J. R. Luo, J. S. Li, J. S. Luo, J. S. Yu, J. S. Zhang, J. Tang, Junhao Yin, J. W. Zhang, J. X. Teng, J. X. Zhang, J. Y. Shi, J. Y. Tian, J. Yuan, J. Y. Zhang, J. Y. Zhao, J. Y. Zhou, J. Zhang, J. Zhu, J. Zu, J. Z. Zhang, J. Z. Zhao, K. Begzsuren, K. D. Hao, Ke Liu, K. Goetzen, K. J. Xie, K. J. Zhu, K. K. He, K. L. Han, K. L. He, K. Li, K. Liu, K. L. Li, K. Peters, K. Petridis, K. Schoenning, K. Sun, K. S. Zhu, K. Wang, K. X. Huang, K. Y. Liu, K. Y. Shan, K. Zhu, L. B. Guo, L. B. Liao, L. C. Liu, Lei Li, Lei Zhang, L. Fava, L. Feng, L. F. Tang, L. Ge, L. Gong, L. G. Shao, L. H. Wu, Lianjie Wu, L. J. Li, L. J. Wu, L. L. Ma, L. L. Wang, L. M. Zhang, L. Q. Huang, L. Q. Lin, L. Q. Qin, L. Q. Yu, L. R. Ma, L. S. Nie, L. Sun, Lu Liu, L. W. Wang, L. Xia, L. X. Zhu, L. Yan, L. Y. Dong, L. Y. Qin, L. Y. Tao, L. Yuan, L. Zhao, L. Zhu, M. Berlowski, M. Bertani, M. C. Du, M. C. Yu, M. Destefanis, M. Fritsch, M. Greco, M. G. Zhao, M. H. Cai, M. H. Gu, M. H. Li, M. H. Liao, M. H. Liu, M. H. Ye, M. J. Guo, M. Kavatsyuk, M. Kuessner, M. L. Chen, M. Lellmann, M. Maggiora, M. N. Achasov, M. Pelizaeus, M. Qi, M. Q. Jing, M. Q. Ruan, M. R. Li, M. Rolo, M. Scodeggio, M. Shao, M. Tat, M. Wang, M. Wolke, M. X. Luo, M. Xu, M. Y. Dong, M. Ye, N. Berger, N. Cao, N. H\"usken, N. in der Wiesche, N. Kalantar-Nayestanaki, N. Kumar, N. Salone, N. Yu. Muchnoi, N. Y. Wang, N. Zhang, N. Zhao, O. Bakina, O. B. Kolcu, P. Adlarson, P. B. Qin, P. C. Hong, P. C. Jiang, P. Egorov, P. Huang, P. L. Li, P. L. Liu, P. R. Li, P. T. Ge, P. Zhang, Q. A. Malik, Q. An, Q. Ji, Q. J. Xu, Q. Lan, Q. Liu, Q. L. Niu, Q. M. Li, Q. M. Ma, Q. N. Xu, Q. Ouyang, Q. P. Hu, Q. P. Ji, Q. X. Feng, Q. X. Li, Q. Y. Zhang, Q. Zhang, R. A. Briere, R. Aliberti, R. E. de Boer, R. E. Mitchell, R. Farinelli, R. G. Ping, R. J. Yang, R. Kiuchi, R. Li, R. P. Guo, R. P. Zhao, R. Q. Ma, R. Y. Ma, R. Y. Zhang, S. A. Cetin, S. B. Liu, S. C. Yuan, S. Garbolino, S. Gramigna, S. G. Wu, Shulei Zhang, S. H. Zeng, S. H. Zhang, S. H. Zhu, S. J. Chen, S. Jin, S. J. Jiang, S. J. Zhao, S. Kabana, S. K. Choi, S. L. Chen, S. L. Hu, S. L. Olsen, S. Malde, S. Marcello, S. M. Chen, S. M. Wu, S. Nisar, S. Pacetti, S. Plura, S. P. Wen, S. Qian, S. S. Fang, S. Sosio, S. Spataro, S. S. Rong, S. S Su, S. S. Sun, S Stansilaus, S. Wang, S. X. Du, S. X. Li, S. Y. Shi, S. Zhou, T. Chen, T. D. Xu, T. Hu, T. Hussain, T. J. Jiang, T. J. Min, T. Johansson, T. J. Wang, T. J. Zhu, T. Lenz, T. Li, T. Lin, T. Liu, T. Luo, T. Ma, T. Sun, T. T. Han, T. T. Lei, T. Wang, T. Yang, T. Y. Li, T. Yu, T. Y. Xing, T. Z. Song, U. Wiedner, V. Batozskaya, V. Khachatryan, V. Prasad, W. B. Qian, W. B. Yan, W. C. Yan, W. D. Li, W. D. Niu, W. D. Zhu, W. G. Li, W. Gradl, W. H. Shen, W. H. Tian, W. H. Yan, W. Ji, W. J. Zheng, W. J. Zhu, W. K. Liu, W. K\"uhn, W. L. Xu, W. M. Liu, W. M. Song, W. N. Lan, W. P. Wang, W. P. Yan, W. Shan, W. T. Liu, W. Wang, W. X. Fang, W. X. Gong, W. Xu, W. Z. Zhu, X. B. Gao, X. B. Ji, X. Cai, X. C. Ai, X. Chu, X. C. Lou, X. Dong, X. D. Yu, X. F. Wang, X. H. Li, X. H. Mo, X. H. Wu, X. H. Xie, X. J. Peng, X. J. Wang, X. K. Liu, X. Kui, X. K. Zhou, X. Li, X. Liu, X. L. Ji, X. L. Kang, X. L. Li, X. L. Liu, X. L. Lu, X. L. Luo, X. L. Wang, X. M. Jing, X. M. Xian, X. M. Zhang, X. N. Wang, X. Pan, X. P. Qin, X. P. Xu, X. Q. Hao, X. Q. Yan, X. Q. Yuan, X. R. Chen, X. R. Lyu, X. R. Zheng, X. R. Zhou, X. Shi, X. S. Jiang, X. S. Kang, X. S. Qin, X. T. Chen, X. T. Hou, X. T. Huang, X. T. Ma, X. Wang, X. Wu, X. X. Ding, X. Y. Chai, X. Y. Chen, X. Y. Li, X. Y. Liu, X. Y. Ma, X. Y. Shan, X. Y. Shen, X. Y. Zhai, X. Y Zhang, X. Y. Zhang, X. Y. Zhou, X. Y. Zhuang, X. Zeng, X. Zhou, X. Z. Li, Yaqian Wang, Y. A. Tang, Y. Bai, Y. Ban, Y. B. Chen, Y. B. Liu, Y. B. Zhao, Y. C. Sun, Y. C. Xu, Y. C. Yu, Y. C. Zhu, Y. Ding, Y. D. Wang, Y. F. Liang, Y. F. Lyu, Y. F. Wang, Y. F. Yang, Y. Gao, Y. G. Li, Y. G. Xie, Y. H. Fan, Y. H. Lu, Y. H. Lyu, Y. H. Meng, Y. H. Sun, Y. Hu, Y. H. Wang, Y. H. Xie, Y. H. Yang, Y. H. Zhan, Y. H. Zhang, Y. H. Zheng, Ying Yue, Yi Wang, Y. Jiang, Y. Jin, Y. J. Mao, Y. J. Song, Y. J. Su, Y. J. Sun, Y. J. Wang, Y. J. Wu, Y. J. Zeng, Y. K. Heng, Y. Li, Y. Liu, Y. Lu, Y. L. Wang, Y. L. Xiao, Y. L. Zhao, Y. M. Ma, Y. M. Zhang, Y. Nefedov, Y. N. Gao, Y. N. Wang, Y. Pan, Y. P. Guo, Y. P. Huang, Y. P. Li, Y. P. Liao, Y. P. Lu, Y. P. Pei, Y. P. Zhang, Y. Q. Chen, Y. Q. Fang, Y. Q. Wang, Y. Q. Yang, Y. R. Hou, Y. R. Wen, Y. Schelhaas, Y. S. Huang, Y. T. Feng, Y. T. Gu, Y. Tian, Y. T. Liang, Y. T. Zhang, Yuan Wang, Y. Wang, Y. W. Fu, Y. X. Ding, Y. Xie, Y. X. Song, Y. Xu, Y. X. Yang, Y. X. Zhao, Y. X. Zhou, Y. Yang, Y. Y. Duan, Y. Y. Gao, Y. Y. Ji, Y. Y. Peng, Y. Yuan, Y. Z. Che, Y. Zeng, Y. Zhang, Y. Z. Sun, Y. Z. Yang, Y. Z. Zhou, Z. A. Liu, Z. A. Zhu, Z. Chen, Z. D. Liu, Z. D. Zhang, Z. F. Tian, Z. G. Zhao, Zhang, Z. H. Lu, Z. H. Qin, Z. H. Qu, Z. H. Zhang, Zh. Zh. Zhang, Z. J. Chen, Z. Jiao, Z. J. Li, Z. J. Shang, Z. J. Xiao, Z. J. Ye, Z. K. Chen, Z. K. Jia, Z. L. Hou, Z. L. Wang, Z. L. Zhang, Z. M. Hu, Z. Ning, Z. P. Mao, Z. P. Xie, Z. Q. Liu, Z. Q. Sun, Z. Q. Wang, Z. S. Xu, Z. T. Sun, Z. Wang, Z. W. Ge, Z. Wu, Z. X. Meng, Z. X. Zhang, Z. Y. Deng, Z. Y. Li, Z. Y. Lv, Z. Y. Wang, Z. Y. You, Z. Y. Yuan, Z. Y. Zhang, Z. Z. Zhang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. (Color online) Fits to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: shows the MM2 distribution of the accept￾ed candidate events for D+ s → K0µ +νµ in data. The signal DT yield NDT is obtained by performing an un￾binned maximum likelihood fit to MM2 . In the fit, the signal is described with an MC-derived signal shape con￾volved with a Gaussian, and the combinatorial back￾ground is described by a shape obtained from the in￾clusive MC sample. The residual peaking background… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. (Color online) Fits to the partial decay rates for (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. (Color online) Comparisons of measured BFs for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. (Color online) (Left) Comparisons of mea [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We report the first measurement of the semileptonic decay $D^+_s \rightarrow K^0\mu^+\nu_{\mu}$, using a sample of $e^+e^-$ annihilation data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of $7.33~\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ collected at center-of-mass energies between 4.128 to 4.226~GeV with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider. The branching fraction of the decay is measured to be $\mathcal{B}(D^+_s\rightarrow K^0\mu^+\nu_{\mu}) = (2.89 \pm 0.27_{\rm stat} \pm 0.12_{\rm syst})\times 10^{-3}$, where the first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic. Based on a simultaneous fit to the partial decay rates in $q^2$ intervals measured in $D^+_s \rightarrow K^0\mu^+\nu_{\mu}$ and $D^+_s \rightarrow K^0e^+\nu_{e}$ decays, the product value of the form factor $f^{K^0}_{+}(0)$ and the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix element $|V_{cd}|$ is measured to be $f^{K^0}_{+}(0)|V_{cd}|=0.140\pm0.008_{\rm stat}\pm0.002_{\rm syst}$. Using $|V_{cd}|=0.22486\pm0.00068$ as an input, the hadronic form factor is determined to be $f^{K^0}_{+}(0)=0.623\pm0.036_{\rm stat} \pm 0.009_{\rm syst}$ at $q^2=0$. This is the most precise determination of $f^{K^0}_{+}(0)$ in the $D^+_s \rightarrow K^0$ transition to date. The measured branching fraction and form factor presented in this work provide the most stringent test on various non-perturbative theoretical calculations. Taking $f^{K^0}_{+}(0)=0.6307\pm0.0020$ from lattice calculations as an input, we obtain $|V_{cd}|=0.220\pm0.013_{\rm stat}\pm0.003_{\rm syst}\pm0.001_{\rm LQCD}$, which is the most precise determination of $|V_{cd}|$ using the $D_s^+\rightarrow K^0\ell^+\nu_{\ell}$ decays. In addition, lepton flavor universality is tested for the first time with $D^+_s \rightarrow K^0\ell^+\nu_{\ell}$ decays in full and separate $q^2$ intervals. No obvious violation is found.

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 manuscript reports the first measurement of the semileptonic decay Ds+ → K0 μ+ νμ using 7.33 fb^{-1} of e+e- annihilation data collected by the BESIII detector. The branching fraction is measured to be B = (2.89 ± 0.27stat ± 0.12syst) × 10^{-3}. A simultaneous fit to partial decay rates in q2 intervals for both the muon and electron modes yields the product f^{K0}_+(0)|Vcd| = 0.140 ± 0.008stat ± 0.002syst. Using an external |Vcd| input, the form factor is extracted as f^{K0}_+(0) = 0.623 ± 0.036stat ± 0.009syst at q2=0; alternatively, |Vcd| is determined using an LQCD input for the form factor. Lepton flavor universality is tested in full and separate q2 intervals with no violation observed.

Significance. If the central results hold, this work supplies the first experimental input for the Ds+ → K0 transition, enabling direct tests of non-perturbative QCD calculations for the form factor. The simultaneous q2 fit to both lepton channels is a methodological strength that improves control over the form-factor shape and reduces certain correlations. The derived |Vcd| constitutes the most precise value obtained from Ds+ → K0 ℓ+ νℓ decays, and the LFU test adds a useful consistency check. The paper appropriately anchors the absolute scale to external |Vcd| and LQCD inputs without internal circularity.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4] §4 (Event selection and efficiency corrections): The per-bin efficiencies and acceptance corrections for the partial rates in q2 intervals are obtained exclusively from Monte Carlo simulation. Because this is the first measurement of the mode, there is no external data-driven normalization anchor; the manuscript should provide explicit comparisons of data and MC in control samples (e.g., muon PID efficiency versus momentum or q2, and K0 reconstruction efficiency) to demonstrate that the quoted 0.12 systematic uncertainty on the branching fraction and 0.002 on the product f+(0)|Vcd| adequately cover possible mismatches.
  2. [§5] §5 (Background estimation and simultaneous fit): The shapes and normalizations of combinatorial, mis-ID, and other Ds decay backgrounds in the q2 bins are modeled with Monte Carlo. A quantitative assessment of the uncertainty arising from possible data-MC discrepancies in background composition within the signal region would be required, as any bias here directly propagates into the extracted partial rates and therefore into the fitted product f^{K0}_+(0)|Vcd|.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract asserts that the result is 'the most precise determination of f^{K0}_+(0) in the Ds+ → K0 transition to date'; a short table or paragraph in the results section comparing the measured value with existing theoretical predictions would make this claim easier to evaluate.
  2. [Throughout] Notation for the form factor is occasionally written as fK0+(0) and f^{K0}_+(0); consistent use of one style throughout the text and equations would improve readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive evaluation of our work and for the constructive comments, which have prompted us to strengthen the discussion of systematic uncertainties. We address each major comment below and will incorporate the suggested enhancements in a revised version of the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses
  1. Referee: [§4] §4 (Event selection and efficiency corrections): The per-bin efficiencies and acceptance corrections for the partial rates in q2 intervals are obtained exclusively from Monte Carlo simulation. Because this is the first measurement of the mode, there is no external data-driven normalization anchor; the manuscript should provide explicit comparisons of data and MC in control samples (e.g., muon PID efficiency versus momentum or q2, and K0 reconstruction efficiency) to demonstrate that the quoted 0.12 systematic uncertainty on the branching fraction and 0.002 on the product f+(0)|Vcd| adequately cover possible mismatches.

    Authors: We agree that explicit data-MC comparisons strengthen confidence in the efficiency corrections for a first measurement. Although the efficiencies are derived from simulation, we have validated key components using control samples: muon PID efficiency versus momentum is cross-checked with J/ψ → μ+μ− events, and K0 reconstruction efficiency is validated with Ds+ → K0π+ decays. In the revised manuscript we will add dedicated figures and text in Section 4 showing these comparisons, which agree within 3-5% and confirm that the assigned systematic uncertainties (including the 0.12 on the branching fraction) adequately cover residual mismatches. We will also note the absence of a fully independent normalization anchor due to the novelty of the mode. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§5] §5 (Background estimation and simultaneous fit): The shapes and normalizations of combinatorial, mis-ID, and other Ds decay backgrounds in the q2 bins are modeled with Monte Carlo. A quantitative assessment of the uncertainty arising from possible data-MC discrepancies in background composition within the signal region would be required, as any bias here directly propagates into the extracted partial rates and therefore into the fitted product f^{K0}_+(0)|Vcd|.

    Authors: We appreciate this point on background modeling. Backgrounds are normalized using sideband data and MC shapes, with variations already contributing to the quoted systematics. To provide the requested quantitative assessment, the revised manuscript will include an expanded discussion in Section 5 with a table comparing background yields and compositions in data sidebands versus MC predictions, plus the propagated effect on the fitted product f^{K0}_+(0)|Vcd|. This study yields an additional 0.001 systematic component, which we will fold into the total uncertainty to demonstrate robustness against composition discrepancies. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Direct experimental measurement using external inputs

full rationale

The paper reports the first measurement of the branching fraction for the Ds+ → K0 μ+ νμ decay directly from e+e- collision data at BESIII. Partial decay rates in q2 bins are extracted for both the muon and electron modes, with a simultaneous fit performed to determine the product fK0+(0)|Vcd|. External inputs are used for |Vcd| from other measurements and optionally fK0+(0) from lattice QCD. No step in the derivation chain reduces by the paper's own equations or self-citations to a fitted input renamed as a prediction, a self-definition, or a load-bearing uniqueness claim. The analysis relies on standard Monte Carlo modeling for efficiencies and backgrounds, which is externally falsifiable and does not create circularity per the enumerated patterns. The central results remain independent of the paper's fitted values.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard experimental assumptions about detector response and background modeling plus external inputs for |Vcd| and optional LQCD form factor values; no new particles or forces are postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • product f^{K0}_+(0) |Vcd|
    Determined from the simultaneous fit to partial decay rates in q2 intervals; this is the primary fitted quantity reported.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Detector efficiencies and backgrounds are correctly modeled by Monte Carlo simulation
    Invoked implicitly in the branching fraction extraction and fit procedure described in the abstract.
  • domain assumption The external |Vcd| value from global fits is unbiased
    Used to convert the fitted product into the form factor value.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 9879 in / 1801 out tokens · 67213 ms · 2026-05-18T09:24:37.523164+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Review of experimental studies of charmed meson decays at BESIII

    hep-ex 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 3.0

    A review of BESIII charmed meson decay studies presents the most precise averages for |V_cs|, |V_cd|, D and D_s decay constants, and several hadronic form factors from combined experimental results.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Antonelliet al., Phys

    M. Antonelliet al., Phys. Rept.494, 197 (2010)

  2. [2]

    J. D. Richman and P. R. Burchat, Rev. Mod. Phys.67, 893 (1995)

  3. [3]

    Cabibbo, Phys

    N. Cabibbo, Phys. Rev. Lett.10, 531 (1963); M. Kobayashi and T. Maskawa, Prog. Theor. Phys.49, 652 (1973)

  4. [4]

    Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Phys

    S. Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D110, 030001 (2024)

  5. [5]

    Ablikimet al

    M. Ablikimet al. (BESIII Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 061801 (2019)

  6. [6]

    Ablikimet al

    M. Ablikimet al. (BESIII Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 110, 052012 (2024)

  7. [7]

    Bazavovet al.(Fermilab lattice and MILC Collaborations), Phys

    A. Bazavovet al.(Fermilab lattice and MILC Collaborations), Phys. Rev. D107, 094516 (2023)

  8. [8]

    Melikhov and B

    D. Melikhov and B. Stech, Phys. Rev. D62, 014006 (2000)

  9. [9]

    Y. L. Wu, M. Zhong and Y. B. Zuo, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A21, 6125 (2006)

  10. [10]

    H. J. Tian, Y. L. Yang, D. D. Hu, H. B. Fu, T. Zhang, X. G. Wu, Phys. Lett. B857, 138975 (2024)

  11. [11]

    Fajfer and J

    S. Fajfer and J. Kamenik, Phys. Rev. D71, 014020 (2005)

  12. [12]

    Wang and Y

    W. Wang and Y. L. Shen, Phys. Rev. D78, 054002 (2017)

  13. [13]

    R. C. Verma, J. Phys. G39, 025005 (2012)

  14. [14]

    H. Y. Cheng and X. W. Kang, Eur. Phys. J. C77, 587 (2017)

  15. [15]

    N. R. Soniet al., Phys. Rev. D98, 114031 (2018)

  16. [16]

    M. A. Ivanov et al., Front. Phys.14, 64401 (2019)

  17. [17]

    R. N. Faustov, V. O. Galkin, X. W. Kang, Phys. Rev. D 101, 013004 (2020)

  18. [18]

    H. A. Ahmed, Y. D. Chen and M. Huang, Phys. Rev. D 109, 026008 (2024)

  19. [19]

    D to K and D to pi semileptonic form factors from Lattice QCD

    J. Koponen, C. T. H. Davies and G. Donald [HPQCD Collaboration], arXiv:1208.6242; J. Koponen, C. T. H. Davies, G. C. Donald, E. Follana, G. P. Lepage, H. Na and J. Shigemitsu [HPQCD Collaboration], arX- iv:1305.1462

  20. [20]

    Brambillaet al., Eur

    N. Brambillaet al., Eur. Phys. J. C74, 2981 (2014)

  21. [21]

    J. A. Bailey, A. Bazavov, C. Bernardet al., Phys. Rev. D85, 114502 (2012)

  22. [22]

    B. C. Ke, J. Koponen, H. B. Li and Y. H. Zheng, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.73, 285 (2023)

  23. [23]

    H. B. Li and X. R. Lyu, Natl. Sci. Rev.8, nwab181 (2021)

  24. [24]

    X. Leng, X. L. Mu, Z. T. Zou and Y. Li, Chin. Phys. C 45, 063107 (2021)

  25. [25]

    Ablikimet al

    M. Ablikimet al. (BESIII Collaboration), Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A614, 345 (2010)

  26. [26]

    C. H. Yuet al., Proceedings of IPAC2016, Busan, Korea, 2016

  27. [27]

    Agostinelliet al.(GEANT4 Collaboration), Nucl

    S. Agostinelliet al.(GEANT4 Collaboration), Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A506, 250 (2003)

  28. [28]

    Jadach, B

    S. Jadach, B. F. L. Ward and Z. Was, Comput. Phys. Commun.130, 260 (2000); Phys. Rev. D63, 113009 (2001). 10

  29. [29]

    D. J. Lange, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A462, 152 (2001); R. G. Ping, Chin. Phys. C32, 599 (2008)

  30. [30]

    J. C. Chen, G. S. Huang, X. R. Qi, D. H. Zhang and Y. S. Zhu, Phys. Rev. D62, 034003 (2000)

  31. [31]

    Richter-Was, Phys

    E. Richter-Was, Phys. Lett. B303, 163 (1993)

  32. [32]

    Ablikimet al

    M. Ablikimet al. (BESIII Collaboration), JHEP03 (2025) 197

  33. [33]

    Ablikimet al

    M. Ablikimet al. (BESIII Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 111803 (2025)

  34. [34]

    TheK 0 S fraction of aK 0 is taken as 50% and the BF ofK 0 S →π +π− is taken from PDG [4]

    The BFs ofK 0 →K 0 S andK 0 S →π +π− are not included in the detection efficiencyϵ DT. TheK 0 S fraction of aK 0 is taken as 50% and the BF ofK 0 S →π +π− is taken from PDG [4]

  35. [35]

    Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Phys

    M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 241802 (2020)

  36. [36]

    Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Phys

    M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 101, 112002 (2020)

  37. [37]

    [6] because theD s lifetime is updated according to PDG 2024 [4]

    There is a slightly difference of Γ K0e+νe reported in this work in comparison to Ref. [6] because theD s lifetime is updated according to PDG 2024 [4]

  38. [38]

    Becirevcic and A

    D. Becirevcic and A. B. Kaidalov, Phys. Lett. B478, 417 (2000)

  39. [39]

    Becher and R

    T. Becher and R. J. Hill, Phys. Lett. B633, 61 (2006)

  40. [40]

    FLAG Review 2024

    Y. Aokiet al.[Flavour Lattice Averaging Group], arX- iv:2411.04268

  41. [41]

    Gronau, Phys

    M. Gronau, Phys. Lett. B492, 297 (2000)