arxiv: 2605.03021 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-04 · ✦ hep-ph · hep-ex

Recognition: 3 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Closing the knowledge gap in semileptonic Brightarrow X_cellν decays

Florian Herren , Raynette van Tonder

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 17:45 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph hep-ex

keywords semileptonic B decaysexclusive branching fractionsinclusive rateDs mesonsbaryonic final statescharm transitionsB to Xc l nu

0 comments

The pith

The unmeasured part of the semileptonic B to charm decay rate is dominated by final states that contain no D mesons.

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

The paper compiles all available exclusive measurements of semileptonic B decays that produce charm mesons and compares their sum to the well-measured inclusive rate. By folding in experimental ratios of branching fractions relative to the semi-inclusive B to D X lepton neutrino modes, the authors show that the remaining gap is carried almost entirely by decays that produce no D meson at all. This points to large contributions from baryonic final states and from Ds mesons as the most plausible way to close the difference. The work also supplies simplified models for two marginal channels, B to D eta lepton neutrino and B to Ds K lepton neutrino, and lists specific final states that future searches could target.

Core claim

When the measured exclusive semileptonic branching fractions are supplemented by the available ratios to semi-inclusive B to D X lepton neutrino decays, the unmeasured fraction of the total inclusive B to Xc lepton neutrino rate is shown to arise predominantly from final states that contain no D meson, indicating substantial roles for baryonic modes and Ds mesons.

What carries the argument

Branching-fraction ratios measured relative to the semi-inclusive B to D X lepton neutrino final states, used to infer the composition of the unmeasured exclusive components.

Load-bearing premise

The published measurements of branching fractions relative to semi-inclusive D-containing modes give an unbiased picture of what the unmeasured exclusive decays actually contain.

What would settle it

A new measurement that finds the unmeasured components are instead dominated by additional D-meson final states would directly contradict the claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.03021 by Florian Herren, Raynette van Tonder.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: FIG. 1. The size of the separate semileptonic gap components view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2. Fit of the measured view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3. Predicted lineshapes of the view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. Spectrum of non-strange charm mesons relative view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5 view at source ↗

read the original abstract

In this work we summarize the current status of measured exclusive semileptonic branching fractions containing charm mesons. We use the available experimental data to evaluate the difference between the sum of exclusive measurements and the inclusive determination. By including experimental results of branching fractions relative to semi-inclusive $B\rightarrow D X\ell\nu$ decays, we demonstrate that the unmeasured components of the total branching fraction are dominated by final states devoid of $D$ mesons, hinting towards sizeable contributions from baryonic final states and $D_s$ mesons. Based on the obtained fractions, we discuss candidates that could potentially close the remaining difference and propose searches for promising final states. Furthermore, we provide simplified models for S-wave $B\rightarrow D\eta\ell\nu$ and $B\rightarrow D_s K\ell\nu$ decays that contribute marginally to the unmeasured components of the total inclusive rate.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper synthesizes existing data to argue that non-D final states dominate the unmeasured part of inclusive B semileptonic decays, which narrows the search space but rests on the untested reliability of relative branching fraction measurements.

read the letter

The main thing to know is that the authors take published relative branching fractions to semi-inclusive B to D X l nu modes and use them to show the gap between summed exclusive charm modes and the inclusive rate is mostly from final states without D mesons. This leads them to flag baryonic decays and Ds contributions as the likely missing pieces, along with some simple models for a couple of S-wave channels like B to D eta l nu and B to Ds K l nu that add only small amounts.

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript summarizes the current status of measured exclusive semileptonic B→Xcℓν branching fractions involving charm mesons. It evaluates the difference between the sum of these exclusive measurements and the inclusive rate. By incorporating experimental results on branching fractions relative to semi-inclusive B→DXℓν decays, the authors conclude that the unmeasured components are dominated by final states without D mesons, suggesting sizeable contributions from baryonic final states and Ds mesons. The paper discusses candidate modes to close the gap, proposes searches for promising final states, and provides simplified models for S-wave B→Dηℓν and B→DsKℓν decays.

Significance. If the central inference holds after addressing the data-handling details, the work is useful for the field as it identifies likely sources for the inclusive-exclusive discrepancy in semileptonic B decays and directs attention to baryonic and Ds channels that have received less experimental focus. The provision of simplified models for marginal S-wave contributions is a constructive addition for phenomenology. The approach of leveraging existing relative branching-fraction data is a strength when the inputs are robustly treated.

major comments (1)

[section discussing inclusion of relative branching fractions to semi-inclusive B→DXℓν] The demonstration that unmeasured components are dominated by final states devoid of D mesons (and the subsequent hint at baryonic and Ds contributions) rests on the use of experimental branching fractions relative to semi-inclusive B→DXℓν decays. The manuscript provides no details on data selection criteria, systematic uncertainty treatment, potential reconstruction biases, or a quantitative breakdown of the dominance calculation, which is load-bearing for the subtraction that isolates the non-D fraction.

minor comments (1)

The abstract states that the models 'contribute marginally'; a short quantitative estimate of their size relative to the gap would improve clarity for readers.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of the manuscript and the constructive assessment of its significance. We address the major comment below and outline the revisions we will make to strengthen the presentation of the analysis.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [section discussing inclusion of relative branching fractions to semi-inclusive B→DXℓν] The demonstration that unmeasured components are dominated by final states devoid of D mesons (and the subsequent hint at baryonic and Ds contributions) rests on the use of experimental branching fractions relative to semi-inclusive B→DXℓν decays. The manuscript provides no details on data selection criteria, systematic uncertainty treatment, potential reconstruction biases, or a quantitative breakdown of the dominance calculation, which is load-bearing for the subtraction that isolates the non-D fraction.

Authors: We agree that the manuscript would benefit from greater transparency on the treatment of the relative branching-fraction inputs. These measurements originate from published BaBar and Belle analyses that employ inclusive reconstruction of the D meson to define the semi-inclusive B→DXℓν reference sample, thereby minimizing certain reconstruction biases. In the revised manuscript we will insert a dedicated paragraph (or short subsection) that summarizes the principal data-selection criteria, the dominant systematic uncertainties, and the approach to bias control as reported in the original experimental papers, with explicit citations. We will also provide an explicit quantitative breakdown of the subtraction procedure, including the numerical values of the measured relative fractions, the resulting non-D component, and the propagated uncertainties. These additions will render the isolation of the non-D fraction fully reproducible without changing the central conclusions. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: central inference uses external experimental branching-fraction data without self-referential reduction

full rationale

The paper's derivation consists of summing published exclusive B→Xcℓν branching fractions, subtracting from the inclusive rate, and incorporating independent experimental measurements of branching fractions relative to the semi-inclusive B→DXℓν normalization to isolate the non-D fraction. This subtraction and inference step draws directly on external data rather than any internal fit, self-defined quantity, or prior self-citation that would force the result by construction. No equations reduce the claimed non-D dominance to a fitted parameter or ansatz introduced within the paper itself, and no uniqueness theorem or renaming of known results is invoked to close the argument. The analysis therefore remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis is data-driven from published experimental results; the abstract introduces no new free parameters, axioms, or invented entities. The simplified models for S-wave decays may rest on standard assumptions but are not detailed here.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5448 in / 1184 out tokens · 29113 ms · 2026-05-08T17:45:36.801371+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

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

Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean (J = ½(x+x⁻¹)−1) washburn_uniqueness_aczel — the paper's z-expansion is a phenomenological parameterization unrelated to the RS reciprocal cost J. unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

P(q^2) = 1/B_f(q^2) Σ a_i z^i (z-expansion for the S-wave form factor)

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.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

75 extracted references · 67 canonical work pages · 4 internal anchors

[1]

cocktail

Sequential decays of the form D∗∗→D′∗∗(→ D(∗)π)π. This case also includes a component from theD∗tail, a fraction of which will contribute to the Dππchannel due to the D∗πmodes. Furthermore, Belle reported a preference for a dominant S-wave Dπcomponent in D1(2420)→Dππdecays [34]. In this case, the measured D(∗)π+π−modes account for 4/9 of the totalD (∗)ππc...
[2]

Charleset al., C P violation and the CKM matrix: Assessing the impact of the asymmetric B factories, Eur

J. Charles, A. Hocker, H. Lacker, S. Laplace, F. R. Le Diberder, J. Malcles, J. Ocariz, M. Pivk, and L. Roos (CKMfitter Group), Eur. Phys. J. C41, 1 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0406184

work page arXiv 2005
[3]

Banerjeeet al.(Heavy Flavor Averaging Group (HFLAV)), Phys

S. Banerjeeet al.(Heavy Flavor Averaging Group (HFLAV)), Phys. Rev. D113, 012008 (2026), arXiv:2411.18639 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2026
[4]

Bonaet al.,New UTfit analysis of the unitarity triangle in the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa scheme, Rend

M. Bonaet al.(UTfit), Rend. Lincei Sci. Fis. Nat.34, 37 (2023), arXiv:2212.03894 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2023
[5]

Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Phys

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

2024
[6]

van Tonderet al.(Belle), Phys

R. van Tonderet al.(Belle), Phys. Rev. D104, 112011 (2021), arXiv:2109.01685 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2021
[7]

Caoet al.(Belle), Phys

L. Caoet al.(Belle), Phys. Rev. D104, 012008 (2021), arXiv:2102.00020 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2021
[8]

Abumusabhet al.(Belle-II), Phys

M. Abumusabhet al.(Belle-II), Phys. Rev. D113, 032004 (2026), arXiv:2512.08056 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2026
[9]

Aaijet al.[LHCb], Phys

R. Aaijet al.(LHCb), Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 111802 (2023), arXiv:2302.02886 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2023
[10]

Aaijet al.[LHCb], Phys

R. Aaijet al.(LHCb), Phys. Rev. D108, 012018 (2023), arXiv:2305.01463 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2023
[11]

Adachiet al.(Belle-II), Phys

I. Adachiet al.(Belle-II), Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 211804 (2024), arXiv:2311.07248 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2024
[12]

Adachiet al.[Belle-II], Phys

I. Adachiet al.(Belle-II), Phys. Rev. D110, 072020 (2024), arXiv:2401.02840 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2024
[13]

Adachiet al.(Belle-II), Phys

I. Adachiet al.(Belle-II), Phys. Rev. D112, 032010 (2025), arXiv:2504.11220 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2025
[14]

Aaijet al.(LHCb), Phys

R. Aaijet al.(LHCb), Phys. Rev. D85, 032008 (2012), arXiv:1111.2357 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2012
[15]

Aaijet al.(LHCb Collaboration), Phys

R. Aaijet al.(LHCb), Phys. Rev. D100, 031102 (2019), arXiv:1902.06794 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2019
[16]

Extracting production fractions of $b$ hadrons from exclusive semi-leptonic decays

C. Bolognani, M. Jung, M. Reboud, and K. Keri Vos, (2026), arXiv:2605.00181 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026
[17]

E. J. Gustafson, F. Herren, R. S. Van de Water, R. van Tonder, and M. L. Wagman, Phys. Rev. D110, L091502 (2024), arXiv:2311.00864 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2024
[18]

M.-L. Du, M. Albaladejo, P. Fern´ andez-Soler, F.-K. Guo, C. Hanhart, U.-G. Meißner, J. Nieves, and D.-L. Yao, Phys. Rev. D98, 094018 (2018), arXiv:1712.07957 [hep- ph]

work page arXiv 2018
[19]

F. U. Bernlochner, Z. Ligeti, and S. Turczyk, Phys. Rev. D85, 094033 (2012), arXiv:1202.1834 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2012
[20]

Becirevic, A

D. Becirevic, A. Le Yaouanc, L. Oliver, J.-C. Raynal, P. Roudeau, and J. Serrano, Phys. Rev. D87, 054007 (2013), arXiv:1206.5869 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2013
[21]

Meieret al.(Belle), Phys

F. Meieret al.(Belle), Phys. Rev. D107, 092003 (2023), arXiv:2211.09833 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2023
[22]

J. P. Leeset al.(BaBar), Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 041801 (2016), arXiv:1507.08303 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2016
[23]

Le Yaouanc, J.-P

A. Le Yaouanc, J.-P. Leroy, and P. Roudeau, Phys. Rev. D99, 073010 (2019), arXiv:1806.09853 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2019
[24]

Le Yaouanc, J.-P

A. Le Yaouanc, J.-P. Leroy, and P. Roudeau, Phys. Rev. D105, 013004 (2022), arXiv:2102.11608 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2022
[25]

M. L. Du, F. K. Guo, C. Hanhart, F. Herren, B. Kubis, and R. van Tonder, Eur. Phys. J. C85, 1289 (2025), arXiv:2509.12133 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[26]

Aubertet al.(BaBar), Phys

B. Aubertet al.(BaBar), Phys. Rev. Lett.100, 151802 (2008), arXiv:0712.3503 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2008
[27]

del Amo Sanchezet al.(BaBar), Phys

P. del Amo Sanchezet al.(BaBar), Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 041804 (2011), arXiv:1012.4158 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2011
[28]

Stypulaet al.(Belle), Phys

J. Stypulaet al.(Belle), Phys. Rev. D86, 072007 (2012), arXiv:1207.6244 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2012
[29]

Aubertet al.(BaBar), Phys

B. Aubertet al.(BaBar), Phys. Rev. D76, 051101 (2007), arXiv:hep-ex/0703027

work page arXiv 2007
[30]

Aaijet al.(LHCb), Phys

R. Aaijet al.(LHCb), Phys. Rev. D99, 092009 (2019), arXiv:1807.10722 [hep-ex]. 14

work page arXiv 2019
[31]

The𝑞2 moments in inclusive semileptonic𝑏decays, 2024

G. Finauri and P. Gambino, JHEP02, 206 (2024), arXiv:2310.20324 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2024
[32]

L¨ uck,Determination of the CKM-matrix element|Vub| from the electron energy spectrum measured in inclu- sive B→Xueνdecay with the BABAR detector, Ph.D

T. L¨ uck,Determination of the CKM-matrix element|Vub| from the electron energy spectrum measured in inclu- sive B→Xueνdecay with the BABAR detector, Ph.D. thesis, Humboldt-Universit¨ at zu Berlin, Mathematisch- Naturwissenschaftliche Fakult¨ at I (2013)

2013
[33]

F. U. Bernlochner and Z. Ligeti, Phys. Rev. D95, 014022 (2017), arXiv:1606.09300 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2017
[34]

Rudolph, Int

M. Rudolph, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A33, 1850176 (2018), arXiv:1805.05659 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2018
[35]

Abeet al.(Belle), Phys

K. Abeet al.(Belle), Phys. Rev. Lett.94, 221805 (2005), arXiv:hep-ex/0410091

work page arXiv 2005
[36]

arXiv:1704.03459

E. Higson, W. Handley, M. Hobson, and A. Lasenby, Stat. Comput.29, 891 (2018), arXiv:1704.03459 [stat.CO]

work page arXiv 2018
[37]

J. S. Speagle, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.493, 3132 (2020), arXiv:1904.02180 [astro-ph.IM]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2020
[38]

van Dyket al.(EOS Authors), Eur

D. van Dyket al.(EOS Authors), Eur. Phys. J. C82, 569 (2022), arXiv:2111.15428 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2022
[39]

EOS version 1.10.19,

D. van Dyket al.(EOS Authors), “EOS version 1.10.19,” (2025)

2025
[40]

Albrechtet al.(ARGUS), Z

H. Albrechtet al.(ARGUS), Z. Phys. C60, 11 (1993)

1993
[41]

J. P. Leeset al.(BaBar), Phys. Rev. D85, 011102 (2012), arXiv:1110.6005 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2012
[42]

Herren, B

F. Herren, B. Kubis, and R. van Tonder, Phys. Rev. D 112, 014037 (2025), arXiv:2502.20960 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[43]

L. Liu, K. Orginos, F.-K. Guo, C. Hanhart, and U.-G. Meißner, Phys. Rev. D87, 014508 (2013), arXiv:1208.4535 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2013
[44]

Von Hippel and C

F. Von Hippel and C. Quigg, Phys. Rev. D5, 624 (1972)

1972
[45]

G. P. Lepage, B. Clark, C. T. H. Davies, K. Horn- bostel, P. B. Mackenzie, C. Morningstar, and H. Trottier (HPQCD), Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl.106, 12 (2002), arXiv:hep-lat/0110175

work page arXiv 2002
[46]

Hornbostel, G

K. Hornbostel, G. P. Lepage, C. T. H. Davies, R. J. Dowdall, H. Na, and J. Shigemitsu, Phys. Rev. D85, 031504 (2012), arXiv:1111.1363 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2012
[47]

Bazavovet al.(Fermilab Lattice, MILC, Fermilab Lat- tice, MILC), Eur

A. Bazavovet al.(Fermilab Lattice, MILC, Fermilab Lat- tice, MILC), Eur. Phys. J. C82, 1141 (2022), [Erratum: Eur. Phys. J. C83, 21 (2023)], arXiv:2105.14019 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2022
[48]

Liventsevet al.(Belle), Phys

D. Liventsevet al.(Belle), Phys. Rev. D77, 091503 (2008), arXiv:0711.3252 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2008
[49]

Albaladejo, P

M. Albaladejo, P. Fernandez-Soler, F.-K. Guo, and J. Nieves, Phys. Lett. B767, 465 (2017), arXiv:1610.06727 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2017
[50]

Meißner, Symmetry12, 981 (2020), arXiv:2005.06909 [hep-ph]

U.-G. Meißner, Symmetry12, 981 (2020), arXiv:2005.06909 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2020
[51]

Aaijet al.(LHCb), JHEP03, 146 (2020), arXiv:1911.08187 [hep-ex]

R. Aaijet al.(LHCb), JHEP03, 146 (2020), arXiv:1911.08187 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2020
[52]

Gabyshevet al.(Belle), Phys

N. Gabyshevet al.(Belle), Phys. Rev. Lett.97, 242001 (2006), arXiv:hep-ex/0409005

work page arXiv 2006
[53]

Aubertet al.(BaBar), Phys

B. Aubertet al.(BaBar), Phys. Rev. D78, 112003 (2008), arXiv:0807.4974 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2008
[54]

Aaijet al.(LHCb), JHEP08, 132 (2024), arXiv:2405.12688 [hep-ex]

R. Aaijet al.(LHCb), JHEP08, 132 (2024), arXiv:2405.12688 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2024
[55]

Aaijet al.(LHCb), Phys

R. Aaijet al.(LHCb), Phys. Rev. D94, 072001 (2016), arXiv:1608.01289 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2016
[56]

Aaijet al.(LHCb), Phys

R. Aaijet al.(LHCb), Phys. Rev. D101, 032005 (2020), arXiv:1911.05957 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2020
[57]

Godfrey and K

S. Godfrey and K. Moats, Phys. Rev. D93, 034035 (2016), arXiv:1510.08305 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2016
[58]

Aubertet al.(BaBar), Phys

B. Aubertet al.(BaBar), Phys. Rev. Lett.100, 231803 (2008), arXiv:0712.3493 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2008
[59]

Aubertet al.(BaBar), Phys

B. Aubertet al.(BaBar), Phys. Rev. D77, 032002 (2008), arXiv:0705.4008 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2008
[60]

Waheedet al.(Belle), Phys

E. Waheedet al.(Belle), Phys. Rev. D100, 052007 (2019), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 103, 079901 (2021)], arXiv:1809.03290 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2019
[61]

M. T. Primet al.(Belle), Phys. Rev. D108, 012002 (2023), arXiv:2301.07529 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2023
[62]

Adachiet al.(Belle-II), Phys

I. Adachiet al.(Belle-II), Phys. Rev. D108, 092013 (2023), arXiv:2310.01170 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2023
[63]

A. F. Falk and M. E. Luke, Phys. Lett. B292, 119 (1992), arXiv:hep-ph/9206241

work page arXiv 1992
[64]

Adlarsonet al.(WASA-at-COSY), Phys

P. Adlarsonet al.(WASA-at-COSY), Phys. Lett. B770, 418 (2017), arXiv:1610.02187 [nucl-ex]

work page arXiv 2017
[65]

Jamin, J

M. Jamin, J. A. Oller, and A. Pich, Nucl. Phys. B622, 279 (2002), arXiv:hep-ph/0110193

work page arXiv 2002
[66]

K. J. Tienet al.(Belle), Phys. Rev. D89, 011101 (2014), arXiv:1306.3353 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2014
[67]

Bonviciniet al.(CLEO), Phys

G. Bonviciniet al.(CLEO), Phys. Rev. D57, 6604 (1998), arXiv:hep-ex/9712008

work page arXiv 1998
[68]

D. J. Lange, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A462, 152 (2001)

2001
[69]

On the simulated kinematic distributions of heavy meson decays

F. Herren and R. van Tonder, (2026), arXiv:2602.18378 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026
[70]

Abumusabh et al.arXiv:2510.27174, 2025

M. Abumusabhet al.(Belle-II), (2025), arXiv:2510.27174 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2025
[71]

Averyet al.(CLEO), Phys

P. Averyet al.(CLEO), Phys. Lett. B331, 236 (1994), [Erratum: Phys.Lett.B 342, 453–453 (1995)], arXiv:hep- ph/9403359

work page arXiv 1994
[72]

F. U. Bernlochner, D. Biedermann, H. Lacker, and T. L¨ uck, Eur. Phys. J. C74, 2914 (2014), arXiv:1402.2849 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2014
[73]

$\bar B\to D^{(*)}\ell\bar \nu$ Branching Ratios and Evidence for Isospin Breaking in $\Upsilon(4S)$ Decays

M. Jung and S. Schacht, (2026), arXiv:2604.08391 [hep- ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026
[74]

D’Agostini, Nucl

G. D’Agostini, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A346, 306 (1994)

1994
[75]

De Cian, N

M. De Cian, N. Feliks, M. Rotondo, and K. Keri Vos, JHEP06, 158 (2024), arXiv:2312.05147 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2024