pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.23410 · v1 · pith:PDYPHMSXnew · submitted 2026-06-22 · ✦ hep-ph · hep-ex· hep-lat

Angular Analysis of B to D^(*)ell bar{ν}_(ell) from Lattice and Experiment: |V_(cb)| and New Physics Constraints

Marzia Bordone , Ollie Heald , Andreas J\"uttner This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 08:15 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph hep-exhep-lat
keywords V_cbB to D* lepton neutrinoangular coefficientslattice QCDnew physicsWilson coefficientsleptoquarksform factor parameterization
0
0 comments X

The pith

Combined lattice and experimental analysis determines |V_cb| = 0.03997(71) and excludes new physics mediated by scalar leptoquarks below 1 TeV.

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

The paper carries out a joint analysis of lattice QCD calculations of the B to D* transition form factors and experimental measurements of the angular coefficients in the decay B to D* lepton anti-neutrino. Using the Boyd-Grinstein-Lebed parameterization with unitarity constraints imposed via Bayesian priors, they extract the CKM matrix element |V_cb| in the standard model and find a value that does not resolve the known discrepancy between exclusive and inclusive determinations. Extending the analysis to include possible new physics contributions from scalar, vector, and tensor currents, the authors perform a Bayesian fit that constrains the associated Wilson coefficients and translates these into bounds on the effective scales of heavy new physics particles such as leptoquarks.

Core claim

The authors determine |V_cb| = 0.03997(71) in the massless lepton approximation using a joint fit to lattice form-factor data and experimental angular coefficients. They find no resolution of the exclusive-inclusive puzzle. At the 68% confidence level, new physics mediated by a scalar leptoquark is excluded at effective scales below 1.0 TeV and new physics mediated by a vector leptoquark or colourless scalar boson is excluded below 2.5 TeV.

What carries the argument

The Boyd-Grinstein-Lebed (BGL) ansatz for form-factor parameterization, with unitarity constraints as Bayesian priors, enabling a joint Bayesian fit of lattice data and experimental angular coefficients to extract |V_cb| and constrain Wilson coefficients.

If this is right

  • The extracted |V_cb| value of 0.03997(71) does not resolve the exclusive-inclusive |V_cb| puzzle.
  • Wilson coefficients for scalar and tensor currents are constrained by the joint fit.
  • Scalar leptoquark new physics is excluded below an effective scale of 1.0 TeV at 68% CL.
  • Vector leptoquark or colourless scalar boson new physics is excluded below 2.5 TeV at 68% CL.
  • Renormalisation group evolution in SMEFT is used to connect the constraints to TeV-scale new physics.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The method of joint lattice-experiment fits with BGL priors could be extended to other semileptonic B decays to further test new physics scenarios.
  • If future lattice calculations reduce uncertainties in form factors, the bounds on new physics scales could be strengthened.
  • The lack of resolution in the |V_cb| puzzle suggests that either new physics affects both exclusive and inclusive channels similarly or the discrepancy arises from other sources.
  • These constraints assume the validity of the SMEFT framework for running the Wilson coefficients down to low energies.

Load-bearing premise

The Boyd-Grinstein-Lebed ansatz with unitarity constraints imposed as Bayesian priors provides an accurate parameterization of the lattice form factors without residual systematic effects that bias the fit to the angular coefficients.

What would settle it

A new high-precision measurement of the angular coefficients in B to D* lepton neutrino that deviates from the predictions of the fitted form factors and |V_cb| value by more than the reported uncertainties.

read the original abstract

We present a combined angular analysis within and beyond the Standard Model (SM) of experimental measurements for the $B \to D^{*}\ell \bar{\nu}_{\ell}$ angular coefficients provided by the Belle collaboration, together with lattice-calculated hadronic form-factor data from the HPQCD, JLQCD, and FNAL/MILC collaborations. We focus on determining the CKM matrix element $|V_{cb}|$ and constraining a set of Wilson coefficients associated with new physics (NP) mediated by scalar and tensor currents. SM predictions for the angular coefficients are obtained using form-factor parameterisations based on the Boyd-Grinstein-Lebed (BGL) ansatz, with unitarity constraints imposed as Bayesian priors. Experimental and theoretical data are analysed jointly by considering the cases $\ell = e, \mu$ separately and comparing with the massless approximation. For the latter, we determine $|V_{cb}| = 0.03997(71)$, with no resolution of the exclusive-inclusive puzzle. Using the full expressions for the angular coefficients in the presence of scalar, vector, and tensor currents, the corresponding Wilson coefficients are constrained through a joint Bayesian fit to lattice and experimental data. By including the renormalisation group evolution of the Wilson coefficients in the SM effective field theory (SMEFT), these constraints translate into bounds on the effective scale of potential heavy NP at the TeV scale. We find, at the $68\%$ confidence level, that NP mediated by a scalar leptoquark and a vector leptoquark/colourless scalar boson are excluded at the effective scales 1.0 and 2.5 TeV, respectively.

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

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript performs a joint Bayesian fit of lattice QCD form-factor data (HPQCD, JLQCD, FNAL/MILC) for B→D* transitions with Belle experimental angular coefficients in B→D*ℓνℓ, employing the BGL parameterization with unitarity constraints imposed as priors. In the SM it extracts |V_cb|=0.03997(71) (no resolution of the exclusive-inclusive tension) and, allowing scalar/vector/tensor NP operators, constrains the associated Wilson coefficients; after SMEFT RGE evolution these translate into 68% CL lower bounds of 1.0 TeV and 2.5 TeV on the effective scales of scalar-leptoquark and vector-leptoquark/colourless-scalar models, respectively.

Significance. If the BGL representation is shown to be free of appreciable residual truncation bias, the work supplies a statistically coherent extraction of |V_cb| from angular observables together with TeV-scale NP limits that incorporate full RGE running. The explicit use of unitarity as Bayesian priors and the separate treatment of e/μ channels are methodological strengths that improve upon purely phenomenological fits.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and the description of the form-factor parameterization: the central |V_cb| value and the derived NP scale bounds both rest on the assumption that the BGL series (truncated at a finite order) with unitarity priors supplies an unbiased representation of the lattice data over the full kinematic range. No numerical estimate of the residual truncation error after the priors are applied, nor a cross-check against an independent parameterization (BCL or z-expansion without unitarity priors), is reported; such a quantification is required to confirm that shape distortions do not shift the joint posterior for |V_cb| and the scalar/tensor Wilson coefficients.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states that ℓ=e and ℓ=μ are analysed separately and compared with the massless limit, but the numerical impact of the lepton-mass terms on the extracted |V_cb| and Wilson-coefficient bounds is not quantified in the provided summary; a short table or sentence would clarify whether the difference is negligible.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for highlighting this important methodological point. We address the comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and the description of the form-factor parameterization: the central |V_cb| value and the derived NP scale bounds both rest on the assumption that the BGL series (truncated at a finite order) with unitarity priors supplies an unbiased representation of the lattice data over the full kinematic range. No numerical estimate of the residual truncation error after the priors are applied, nor a cross-check against an independent parameterization (BCL or z-expansion without unitarity priors), is reported; such a quantification is required to confirm that shape distortions do not shift the joint posterior for |V_cb| and the scalar/tensor Wilson coefficients.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit quantification of residual truncation effects would strengthen the robustness of the results. Although the unitarity priors are intended to regularize the series and penalize unphysical coefficient values, we did not report a dedicated numerical estimate of the remaining bias or a cross-validation against the BCL parameterization. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated subsection that (i) compares posterior results obtained with successive truncation orders of the BGL series and (ii) repeats the joint fit using the BCL z-expansion without unitarity priors, thereby providing a direct estimate of any truncation-induced shift in |V_cb| and the Wilson coefficients. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in joint lattice-experiment fit for |V_cb| and Wilson coefficients

full rationale

The paper performs a joint Bayesian fit of lattice form-factor data (from HPQCD, JLQCD, FNAL/MILC) and Belle experimental angular coefficients, using the external BGL parameterization with unitarity imposed only as priors. The reported |V_cb| = 0.03997(71) and NP scale bounds are explicitly presented as outputs of this fit to external datasets, not as independent predictions or derivations. No self-definitional steps, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, load-bearing self-citations, or ansatzes smuggled via author citations appear in the abstract or described method. The analysis is self-contained against the cited external lattice and experimental inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 3 axioms · 2 invented entities

The analysis rests on the BGL parameterization and lattice inputs as external data, with |V_cb| and Wilson coefficients determined by the fit; leptoquarks appear only as interpretive labels for the derived scale bounds.

free parameters (2)
  • |V_cb| = 0.03997(71)
    Central parameter extracted from the joint Bayesian fit to lattice form factors and Belle angular coefficients.
  • Wilson coefficients (scalar, vector, tensor)
    Fitted simultaneously with |V_cb| in the extended model.
axioms (3)
  • domain assumption Boyd-Grinstein-Lebed (BGL) ansatz for form factor parameterization
    Used to represent the hadronic form factors computed on the lattice.
  • domain assumption Unitarity constraints imposed as Bayesian priors
    Applied to the BGL parameters during the fit.
  • standard math SMEFT renormalization group evolution
    Used to translate low-energy Wilson coefficient bounds into effective NP mass scales.
invented entities (2)
  • scalar leptoquark no independent evidence
    purpose: Interpretive label for the 1.0 TeV exclusion scale derived from the Wilson coefficient bounds
    The paper does not postulate the existence of the particle but reports an exclusion scale for it.
  • vector leptoquark / colourless scalar boson no independent evidence
    purpose: Interpretive label for the 2.5 TeV exclusion scale
    Same as above; used to contextualize the NP constraints.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5859 in / 2009 out tokens · 26851 ms · 2026-06-26T08:15:08.749376+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

106 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Cabibbo,Unitary Symmetry and Leptonic Decays,Phys

    N. Cabibbo,Unitary Symmetry and Leptonic Decays,Phys. Rev. Lett.10(1963) 531

    1963

  2. [2]

    Kobayashi and T

    M. Kobayashi and T. Maskawa,CP Violation in the Renormalizable Theory of Weak Interaction,Prog. Theor. Phys.49(1973) 652. [3]Flavour Lattice A veraging Group (FLAG)collaboration,FLAG review 2024,Phys. Rev. D113(2026) 014508 [2411.04268]. – 43 – [4]Particle Data Groupcollaboration,Review of particle physics,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 030001. [5]Heavy Flavor A v...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1973

  3. [3]

    de Blas et al.,Physics Briefing Book: Input for the 2026 update of the European Strategy for Particle Physics,2511.03883

    J. de Blas et al.,Physics Briefing Book: Input for the 2026 update of the European Strategy for Particle Physics,2511.03883. [8]BaBarcollaboration,Evidence for an excess of ¯B→D (∗)τ −¯ντ decays,Phys. Rev. Lett. 109(2012) 101802 [1205.5442]. [9]BaBarcollaboration,Measurement of an Excess of ¯B→D (∗)τ −¯ντ Decays and Implications for Charged Higgs Bosons,P...

    arXiv 2026

  4. [4]

    Fajfer, J.F

    S. Fajfer, J.F. Kamenik and I. Nisandzic,On theB→D ∗τ¯ντ Sensitivity to New Physics, Phys. Rev. D85(2012) 094025 [1203.2654]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  5. [5]

    Duraisamy and A

    M. Duraisamy and A. Datta,The FullB→D ∗τ −¯ντ Angular Distribution and CP violating Triple Products,JHEP09(2013) 059 [1302.7031]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  6. [6]

    Ivanov, J.G

    M.A. Ivanov, J.G. K¨ orner and C.-T. Tran,Analyzing new physics in the decays ¯B0 →D (∗)τ −¯ντ with form factors obtained from the covariant quark model,Phys. Rev. D 94(2016) 094028 [1607.02932]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  7. [7]

    Colangelo and F

    P. Colangelo and F. De Fazio,Scrutinizing B→D ∗ (Dπ)ℓ −νℓ and B→D ∗ (Dγ)ℓ −νℓ in search of new physics footprints,JHEP06(2018) 082 [1801.10468]. – 44 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  8. [8]

    Jung and D.M

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  9. [9]

    Blanke, A

    M. Blanke, A. Crivellin, S. de Boer, T. Kitahara, M. Moscati, U. Nierste et al.,Impact of polarization observables andB c →τ νon new physics explanations of theb→cτ νanomaly, Phys. Rev. D99(2019) 075006 [1811.09603]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  10. [10]

    Impact of polarization observables andB c →τ νon new physics explanations of the b→cτ νanomaly

    M. Blanke, A. Crivellin, T. Kitahara, M. Moscati, U. Nierste and I. Niˇ sandˇ zi´ c,Addendum to “Impact of polarization observables andB c →τ νon new physics explanations of the b→cτ νanomaly”,1905.08253

    arXiv 1905

  11. [11]

    Mandal, C

    R. Mandal, C. Murgui, A. Pe˜ nuelas and A. Pich,The role of right-handed neutrinos in b→cτ¯νanomalies,JHEP08(2020) 022 [2004.06726]

    arXiv 2020

  12. [12]

    Fedele, M

    M. Fedele, M. Blanke, A. Crivellin, S. Iguro, T. Kitahara, U. Nierste et al.,Impact of Λb →Λ cτ νmeasurement on New Physics inb→clνtransitions,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 055005 [2211.14172]

    arXiv 2023

  13. [13]

    Datta, H

    A. Datta, H. Liu and D. Marfatia,B − →D (∗)ℓX − decays in effective field theory with massive right-handed neutrinos,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) L011702 [2204.01818]

    arXiv 2022

  14. [14]

    Ray and S

    I. Ray and S. Nandi,Test of new physics effects in B→ D(∗), π ℓ−νℓ decays with heavy and light leptons,JHEP01(2024) 022 [2305.11855]

    arXiv 2024

  15. [15]

    Bhattacharya, T.E

    B. Bhattacharya, T.E. Browder, A. Datta, T. Kapoor, E. Kou and L. Mukherjee,New physics searches via angular distributions of B→D ∗ (→Dπ)τ(→ℓν τ νℓ) ντ decays,JHEP 04(2025) 135 [2411.09414]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  16. [16]

    Huang, F.M

    Z.-R. Huang, F.M. Bhutta, N. Farooq, M.A. Paracha and Y. Li,Reinvestigating the semileptonicB→D (∗)τ¯ντ decays in the model independent scenarios and leptoquark models,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 115035 [2501.03734]. [32]Bellecollaboration,Measurement of the CKM matrix element|V cb|fromB 0 →D ∗−ℓ+νℓ at Belle,Phys. Rev. D100(2019) 052007 [1809.03290]. [33]Bellec...

    arXiv 2025

  17. [17]

    Bazavov, C.E

    A. Bazavov, C.E. DeTar, D. Du, A.X. El-Khadra, E. G´ amiz, Z. Gelzer et al.,Semileptonic form factors forB→D ∗ℓνat nonzero recoil from2 + 1-flavor lattice QCD: Fermilab Lattice and MILC Collaborations,The European Physical Journal C82(2022) [2105.14019]

    arXiv 2022

  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]

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  20. [20]

    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

  21. [21]

    C.G. Boyd, B. Grinstein and R.F. Lebed,Precision corrections to dispersive bounds on form factors,Physical Review D56(1997) 6895–6911

    1997

  22. [22]

    Gubernari, D

    N. Gubernari, D. van Dyk and J. Virto,Non-local matrix elements in B(s) → {K (∗), ϕ}ℓ+ℓ−,JHEP02(2021) 088 [2011.09813]

    arXiv 2021

  23. [23]

    Di Carlo, G

    M. Di Carlo, G. Martinelli, M. Naviglio, F. Sanfilippo, S. Simula and L. Vittorio,Unitarity bounds for semileptonic decays in lattice QCD,Phys. Rev. D104(2021) 054502 [2105.02497]

    arXiv 2021

  24. [24]

    Flynn, A

    J. Flynn, A. J¨ uttner and J.T. Tsang,Bayesian inference for form-factor fits regulated by unitarity and analyticity,JHEP12(2023) 175 [2303.11285]

    arXiv 2023

  25. [25]

    Simula and L

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

    arXiv 2026

  26. [26]

    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

  27. [27]

    Martinelli, S

    G. Martinelli, S. Simula and L. Vittorio,|V cb|andR(D (∗))using lattice QCD and unitarity, Phys. Rev. D105(2022) 034503 [2105.08674]

    arXiv 2022

  28. [28]

    Martinelli, S

    G. Martinelli, S. Simula and L. Vittorio,Exclusive determinations of|V cb|andR(D ∗) through unitarity,Eur. Phys. J. C82(2022) 1083 [2109.15248]

    arXiv 2022

  29. [29]

    Martinelli, M

    G. Martinelli, M. Naviglio, S. Simula and L. Vittorio,|V cb|, lepton flavor universality and SU(3) F symmetry breaking inB s →D (∗) s ℓνdecays through unitarity and lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 093002 [2204.05925]

    arXiv 2022

  30. [30]

    Fedele, M

    M. Fedele, M. Blanke, A. Crivellin, S. Iguro, U. Nierste, S. Simula et al.,Discriminating B→D ∗ℓνform factors via polarization observables and asymmetries,Phys. Rev. D108 (2023) 055037 [2305.15457]

    arXiv 2023

  31. [31]

    Martinelli, S

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

    arXiv 2024

  32. [32]

    Martinelli, S

    G. Martinelli, S. Simula and L. Vittorio,SemileptonicB→D ∗ decays from light toτ leptons: the extraction of the form factorF 2 from data,Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) 242 [2410.17974]

    arXiv 2025

  33. [34]

    Jaiswal, S

    S. Jaiswal, S. Nandi and S.K. Patra,Updates on extraction of|V cb|and SM prediction of R(D∗)inB→D ∗ℓνℓ decays,JHEP06(2020) 165 [2002.05726]

    arXiv 2020

  34. [35]

    Iguro and R

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

    arXiv 2020

  35. [36]

    Bordone and A

    M. Bordone and A. J¨ uttner,New strategies for probingB→D ∗ℓ¯νℓ lattice and experimental data,Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) 129 [2406.10074]

    arXiv 2025

  36. [37]

    Measurement of Angular Coefficients of ¯B→D ∗ℓ¯νℓ: Implications for |Vcb|and Tests of Lepton Flavor Universality

    W.-S. Fang, S. Iguro, X.-Q. Li, R. Sain, R. Watanabe and B.-L. Zhang,|V cb|determinations from ¯B→D (∗)ℓ¯νdecays within the SM and beyond,2606.17138. [62]Bellecollaboration, “Measurement of Angular Coefficients of ¯B→D ∗ℓ¯νℓ: Implications for |Vcb|and Tests of Lepton Flavor Universality.” HEPData (collection), 2024

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  37. [38]

    Bobeth, M

    C. Bobeth, M. Bordone, N. Gubernari, M. Jung and D. van Dyk,Lepton-flavour non-universality of ¯B→D ∗ℓ¯νangular distributions in and beyond the Standard Model, Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) 984 [2104.02094]

    arXiv 2021

  38. [39]

    Huang, E

    Z.-R. Huang, E. Kou, C.-D. L¨ u and R.-Y. Tang,Un-binned Angular Analysis ofB→D ∗ℓνℓ and the Right-handed Current,Phys. Rev. D105(2022) 013010 [2106.13855]

    arXiv 2022

  39. [40]

    Bernlochner, M

    F.U. Bernlochner, M. Fedele, T. Kretz, U. Nierste and M.T. Prim,Model independent bounds on heavy sterile neutrinos from the angular distribution of B→D ∗ℓνdecays,JHEP 01(2025) 040 [2410.11945]

    arXiv 2025

  40. [41]

    Colangelo, F

    P. Colangelo, F. De Fazio, F. Loparco and N. Losacco,New physics couplings from angular coefficient functions of ¯B→D ∗(Dπ)ℓ¯νℓ,Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 075047 [2401.12304]

    arXiv 2024

  41. [42]

    Measurement of Differential Distributions ofB→D ∗ℓ¯νℓ and Implications on|V cb|

    Belle Collaboration, “Measurement of Differential Distributions ofB→D ∗ℓ¯νℓ and Implications on|V cb|.” HEPData (collection), 2023

    2023

  42. [43]

    Determination of|V cb|using B 0 →D ∗+ℓ−¯νℓ decays with Belle II

    Belle-II Collaboration, “Determination of|V cb|using B 0 →D ∗+ℓ−¯νℓ decays with Belle II.” HEPData (collection), 2023

    2023

  43. [44]

    K¨ orner, J. G. and Schuler, G. A.,Exclusive semileptonic heavy meson decays including lepton mass effects,Z. Phys. C46(1990) 93

    1990

  44. [45]

    K¨ orner, J. G. and Schuler, G. A.,Lepton Mass Effects in SemileptonicBMeson Decays, Phys. Lett. B231(1989) 306

    1989

  45. [46]

    Gilman and R.L

    F.J. Gilman and R.L. Singleton,Analysis of Semileptonic Decays of Mesons Containing Heavy Quarks,Phys. Rev. D41(1990) 142

    1990

  46. [47]

    Tanaka,Charged Higgs effects on exclusive semitauonicBdecays,Z

    M. Tanaka,Charged Higgs effects on exclusive semitauonicBdecays,Z. Phys. C67(1995) 321 [hep-ph/9411405]. [73]BaBarcollaboration,Measurements of theB→D ∗ form-factors using the decay ¯B0 →D ∗+e−νe,Phys. Rev. D74(2006) 092004 [hep-ex/0602023]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  47. [48]

    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

  48. [49]

    Biancofiore, P

    P. Biancofiore, P. Colangelo and F. De Fazio,On the anomalous enhancement observed in B→D (∗)τ¯ντ decays,Phys. Rev. D87(2013) 074010 [1302.1042]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  49. [50]

    Duraisamy, P

    M. Duraisamy, P. Sharma and A. Datta,AzimuthalB→D ∗τ −¯ντ angular distribution with tensor operators,Phys. Rev. D90(2014) 074013 [1405.3719]. – 47 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  50. [51]

    Martinelli, S

    G. Martinelli, S. Simula and L. Vittorio,What we can learn from the angular differential rates from semileptonicB→D ∗ℓνℓ decays,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 013005 [2409.10492]

    arXiv 2025

  51. [52]

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

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

    1982

  52. [53]

    Hagiwara, A.D

    K. Hagiwara, A.D. Martin and M.F. Wade,Helicity Amplitude Analysis ofB→D ∗ℓν Decays,Phys. Lett. B228(1989) 144

    1989

  53. [54]

    Bayesian Form factor Fit (BFF) library

    A. J¨ uttner, “Bayesian Form factor Fit (BFF) library.” Available at: https://github.com/andreasjuettner/BFF,https://zenodo.org/records/7799543

    arXiv

  54. [55]

    Buchner, A

    J. Buchner, A. Georgakakis, K. Nandra, L. Hsu, C. Rangel, M. Brightman et al.,X-ray spectral modelling of the AGN obscuring region in the CDFS: Bayesian model selection and catalogue,Astronomy & Astrophysics564(2014) A125

    2014

  55. [56]

    Skilling,Nested Sampling,AIP Conf

    J. Skilling,Nested Sampling,AIP Conf. Proc.735(2004) 395

    2004

  56. [57]

    Feroz and M.P

    F. Feroz and M.P. Hobson,Multimodal nested sampling: an efficient and robust alternative to Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods for astronomical data analyses: Multimodal nested sampling,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society384(2008) 449–463

    2008

  57. [58]

    Feroz, M.P

    F. Feroz, M.P. Hobson and M. Bridges,MultiNest: an efficient and robust Bayesian inference tool for cosmology and particle physics,Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society398(2009) 1601–1614

    2009

  58. [59]

    Feroz, M.P

    F. Feroz, M.P. Hobson, E. Cameron and A.N. Pettitt,Importance Nested Sampling and the MultiNest Algorithm,The Open Journal of Astrophysics2(2019)

    2019

  59. [60]

    Flynn, A

    J. Flynn, A. J¨ uttner and T. Tsang,Extrapolating semileptonic form factors using Bayesian-inference fits regulated by unitarity and analyticity,PoSLATTICE2023(2024) 239 [2312.14631]

    arXiv 2024

  60. [61]

    Jeffreys,The Theory of Probability, Oxford University Press (1998)

    H. Jeffreys,The Theory of Probability, Oxford University Press (1998)

    1998

  61. [62]

    Akaike,A new look at the statistical model identification,IEEE Trans

    H. Akaike,A new look at the statistical model identification,IEEE Trans. Automatic Control19(1974) 716

    1974

  62. [63]

    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

    1994

  63. [64]

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

    M. Jung and S. Schacht, ¯B→D (∗)ℓ¯νBranching Ratios and Evidence for Isospin Breaking inΥ(4S)Decays,2604.08391. [91]Heavy Flavor A veraging Group (HFLA V)collaboration,Average of exclusive B→D ∗ℓν, July, 2024.doi:10.5281/zenodo.12696548

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.5281/zenodo.12696548 2024

  64. [65]

    Christ, X

    N.H. Christ, X. Feng, L. Jin, C.T. Sachrajda and T. Wang,Lattice Calculation of Electromagnetic Corrections to Kl3 decay,PoSLATTICE2023(2024) 266 [2402.08915]

    arXiv 2024

  65. [66]

    Bailas, S

    G. Bailas, S. Hashimoto and T. Ishikawa,Reconstruction of smeared spectral function from Euclidean correlation functions,PTEP2020(2020) 043B07 [2001.11779]

    arXiv 2020

  66. [67]

    Gambino and S

    P. Gambino and S. Hashimoto,Inclusive Semileptonic Decays from Lattice QCD,Phys. Rev. Lett.125(2020) 032001 [2005.13730]

    arXiv 2020

  67. [68]

    Barone, S

    A. Barone, S. Hashimoto, A. J¨ uttner, T. Kaneko and R. Kellermann,Approaches to inclusive semileptonic B (s)-meson decays from Lattice QCD,JHEP07(2023) 145 [2305.14092]. – 48 –

    arXiv 2023

  68. [69]

    Kellermann, Z

    R. Kellermann, Z. Hu, A. Barone, A. Elgaziari, S. Hashimoto, T. Kaneko et al.,Inclusive semileptonic decays from lattice QCD: Analysis of systematic effects,Phys. Rev. D112 (2025) 014501 [2504.03358]

    arXiv 2025

  69. [70]

    De Santis et al.,Inclusive semileptonic decays of theD s meson: A first-principles lattice QCD calculation,Phys

    A. De Santis et al.,Inclusive semileptonic decays of theD s meson: A first-principles lattice QCD calculation,Phys. Rev. D112(2025) 054503 [2504.06063]

    arXiv 2025

  70. [71]

    De Santis et al.,Inclusive Semileptonic Decays of theD s Meson: Lattice QCD Confronts Experiments,Phys

    A. De Santis et al.,Inclusive Semileptonic Decays of theD s Meson: Lattice QCD Confronts Experiments,Phys. Rev. Lett.135(2025) 121901 [2504.06064]

    arXiv 2025

  71. [72]

    Tsang and M

    J.T. Tsang and M. Della Morte,B-physics from lattice gauge theory,Eur. Phys. J. ST233 (2024) 253 [2310.02705]

    arXiv 2024

  72. [73]

    Buchmuller and D

    W. Buchmuller and D. Wyler,Effective Lagrangian Analysis of New Interactions and Flavor Conservation,Nucl. Phys. B268(1986) 621

    1986

  73. [74]

    Jenkins, A.V

    E.E. Jenkins, A.V. Manohar and P. Stoffer,Low-Energy Effective Field Theory below the Electroweak Scale: Operators and Matching,JHEP03(2018) 016 [1709.04486]

    arXiv 2018

  74. [75]

    Grzadkowski, M

    B. Grzadkowski, M. Iskrzynski, M. Misiak and J. Rosiek,Dimension-Six Terms in the Standard Model Lagrangian,JHEP10(2010) 085 [1008.4884]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  75. [76]

    Brivio and M

    I. Brivio and M. Trott,The Standard Model as an Effective Field Theory,Phys. Rept.793 (2019) 1 [1706.08945]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  76. [77]

    Altmannshofer, P

    W. Altmannshofer, P. Ball, A. Bharucha, A.J. Buras, D.M. Straub and M. Wick, Symmetries and Asymmetries ofB→K ∗µ+µ− Decays in the Standard Model and Beyond, JHEP01(2009) 019 [0811.1214]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  77. [78]

    Bhattacharya, A

    B. Bhattacharya, A. Datta, S. Kamali and D. London,CP Violation in ¯B0 →D ∗+µ−¯νµ, JHEP05(2019) 191 [1903.02567]

    arXiv 2019

  78. [79]

    Kapoor, Z.-R

    T. Kapoor, Z.-R. Huang and E. Kou,New physics search via angular distribution of B→D ∗ℓνℓ decay in the light of the new lattice data,JHEP02(2025) 053 [2401.11636]

    arXiv 2025

  79. [80]

    Bordone, N

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

    arXiv 2025

  80. [81]

    Cat` a and M

    O. Cat` a and M. Jung,Signatures of a nonstandard Higgs boson from flavor physics,Phys. Rev. D92(2015) 055018 [1505.05804]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

Showing first 80 references.