Holographic QCD predictions for rare B decays

Mohammad Ahmady; Ruben Sandapen

arxiv: 1906.09348 · v3 · pith:EWU2NHX2new · submitted 2019-06-21 · ✦ hep-ph

Holographic QCD predictions for rare B decays

Mohammad Ahmady , Ruben Sandapen This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 18:28 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph

keywords holographic QCDlight-front wavefunctionsdistribution amplitudesrare B decaysK* mesontransition form factorsB to K* mu mu

0 comments

The pith

Holographic light-front wavefunctions for the K* meson produce alternate predictions for the form factors governing rare B decays.

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

The paper derives distribution amplitudes for the K* vector meson directly from holographic light-front QCD wavefunctions. These amplitudes are inserted into calculations of the B to K* transition form factors that control rare decays such as those involving muons or photons. A reader would care because the approach supplies an independent non-perturbative input that can be compared side-by-side with QCD sum-rule results and with measured branching ratios. The resulting numbers differ in detail from sum-rule values and are offered as testable alternatives for several decay channels.

Core claim

Light-front wavefunctions obtained from holographic light-front QCD are used to obtain the distribution amplitudes for K* vector meson. Consequently, alternate predictions for rare B transitions to K* form factors are presented.

What carries the argument

Holographic light-front wavefunctions of the K* meson, which fix its distribution amplitudes and thereby determine the B to K* transition form factors.

If this is right

Numerical values for the form factors in B to K* gamma and B to K* mu+ mu- differ from those obtained via QCD sum rules.
These values enter branching-ratio and angular-distribution predictions for the listed rare decays.
Direct comparison with existing experimental data becomes possible for each channel.
The method supplies a ready template for computing additional observables once more data arrive.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The same wavefunctions could be reused for B decays involving other light vector mesons such as the rho.
Success here would encourage applying the holographic construction to form factors in related heavy-to-light transitions.
Persistent mismatch with data might indicate the need for higher Fock components or next-to-leading-order corrections inside the model.

Load-bearing premise

The holographic light-front wavefunctions, with parameters fixed in earlier work, accurately describe the non-perturbative quark structure inside the K* that enters the B transition.

What would settle it

A high-precision measurement of the B to K* form factors at low recoil that deviates substantially from the holographic predictions while agreeing with QCD sum rules would falsify the claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1906.09348 by Mohammad Ahmady, Ruben Sandapen.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2: The differential branching ratio and isospin asymmetry for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3: The hQCD (Solid line) and QCDSR (Dashed line) predictions for the differential Branching Ratio for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Light-front wavefunctions obtained from holographic light-front QCD are used to obtain the distributions amplitudes for $K^*$ vector meson. Consequently, alternate predictions for rare B transitions to $K^*$ form factors are presented. In this talk, I compare our results for some rare B decay channels to those obtained from QCD sum rules and available experimental 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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

Applies prior holographic LFWFs to generate K* DAs and B to K* form factors, then compares the numbers to sum rules and data.

read the letter

The core move is straightforward: take light-front wavefunctions already fixed in earlier holographic QCD work, turn them into distribution amplitudes for the K* , and feed those into the form-factor expressions for rare B decays. The talk then lines up the resulting predictions against QCD sum-rule results and whatever experimental points exist for those channels. That is the new concrete step; the underlying holographic setup is not reinvented here. The calculation itself follows the standard light-front machinery without visible internal contradictions or mismatched assumptions in the stated procedure. It supplies one more set of numbers that can be checked directly against data, which is the useful part for anyone tracking model comparisons in this corner of flavor physics. The obvious soft spot is the parameter dependence. The wavefunctions carry fits from previous observables, so the B-decay results are not independent tests of the holographic framework; they inherit whatever tuning was done earlier. That circularity is real and should be stated plainly when the numbers are presented. The abstract claims a comparison to data, but the talk format leaves error treatment and full numerical tables implicit, which limits how much weight one can put on the agreement or disagreement. This is the sort of paper that people already working with holographic light-front methods or running B-physics phenomenology will want to see for the alternate numbers. It is not a foundational advance, but the application is clean enough and the outputs are falsifiable. A serious editor should send it to referees rather than desk-reject; the method is reproducible from the cited literature and the results can be scrutinized on their own terms.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript uses light-front wavefunctions from holographic light-front QCD (with parameters fixed in prior work) to derive distribution amplitudes for the K* vector meson. These are then employed to compute alternate predictions for the transition form factors in rare B → K* decays, which are compared to results from QCD sum rules and to available experimental data for selected channels.

Significance. If the holographic inputs are shown to be robust, the work supplies an independent non-perturbative route to B → K* form factors that are central to precision tests of the Standard Model in rare decays. The approach leverages an established holographic framework rather than introducing new parameters, which could strengthen cross-checks against QCD sum-rule determinations.

major comments (2)

[Abstract / main text] Abstract and main text: the claim that the holographic predictions constitute an 'alternate' determination rests on the assumption that the K* distribution amplitudes extracted from the LFWFs are not already fixed by the same observables used to tune the holographic model; the manuscript does not demonstrate this independence explicitly (e.g., by varying the holographic parameters within their prior uncertainties and showing the resulting spread in the B → K* form factors).
[Results section (comparison to data)] The comparison to experimental data is stated but the manuscript provides neither the numerical values of the predicted form factors at the relevant q² points nor an uncertainty budget (statistical or systematic) arising from the holographic input; without these, the degree of agreement cannot be quantified.

minor comments (1)

The manuscript is presented as a talk; the written version would benefit from a short methods subsection that reproduces the key steps linking the holographic LFWF to the K* DA (even if previously published) so that the form-factor calculation is self-contained.

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 each of the major comments below.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract / main text] Abstract and main text: the claim that the holographic predictions constitute an 'alternate' determination rests on the assumption that the K* distribution amplitudes extracted from the LFWFs are not already fixed by the same observables used to tune the holographic model; the manuscript does not demonstrate this independence explicitly (e.g., by varying the holographic parameters within their prior uncertainties and showing the resulting spread in the B → K* form factors).

Authors: The holographic light-front QCD parameters were fixed from the meson spectrum and other observables in earlier works, which are distinct from the B → K* transition form factors. To make this independence more explicit, we will revise the manuscript to include a short analysis varying the key holographic parameters within their uncertainties and displaying the resulting variation in the form factors. revision: partial
Referee: [Results section (comparison to data)] The comparison to experimental data is stated but the manuscript provides neither the numerical values of the predicted form factors at the relevant q² points nor an uncertainty budget (statistical or systematic) arising from the holographic input; without these, the degree of agreement cannot be quantified.

Authors: We acknowledge that the manuscript would benefit from explicit numerical values and uncertainties. We will update the results section to provide the predicted form factor values at the relevant q² points and include an uncertainty budget based on the holographic model inputs. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity identified

full rationale

The paper applies light-front wavefunctions from holographic light-front QCD (parameters fixed in prior external work) to derive K* distribution amplitudes and then B→K* form factors. This constitutes a direct model application to a new observable. No step reduces by construction to fitted inputs, no self-definitional loop exists in the equations, and no load-bearing self-citation chain is required for the central claim. The derivation remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated in the provided text.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5563 in / 1037 out tokens · 22260 ms · 2026-05-25T18:28:28.001909+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.

IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/AlexanderDuality.lean alexander_duality_circle_linking unclear

?

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

holographic Schrödinger Equation ... Ueff(ζ)=κ⁴ζ² + 2κ²(J−1) ... φn,L(ζ)=κ^{1+L}√(2n!/(n+L)!) ζ^{1/2+L} exp(−κ²ζ²/2) L_n^L(z²ζ²)
IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear

?

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

twist-2 holographic DAs ... φ∥_{K*}(z,μ) = Nc/π f_{K*} M_{K*} ∫ r μ J1(μ r) [M_{K*}^2 z(1−z)+m_qbar m_s −∇_r²] φ_L ...

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

8 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages · 8 internal anchors

[1]

Probing transition form factors in the rare $B\to K^*\nu\bar\nu$ decay

M. Ahmady, A. Leger, Z. Mcintyre, A. Morrison and R. Sandapen, Phys. Rev. D 98, no. 5, 053002 (2018) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.053002 [arXiv:1805.02940 [hep-ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.98.053002 2018
[2]

Effect of $c\overline{c}$ resonances in the branching ratio and forward-backward asymmetry of the decay $B \to K^{*} \mu^+ \mu^-$

M. Ahmady, D. Hatﬁeld, S. Lord and R. Sandapen, Phys. Rev. D 92, no. 11, 114028 (2015) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.114028 [arXiv:1508.02327 [hep-ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.92.114028 2015
[3]

M. R. Ahmady, S. Lord and R. Sandapen, Phys. Rev. D 90, no. 7, 074010 (2014) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.074010 [arXiv:1407.6700 [hep-ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.90.074010 2014
[4]

Predicting B->K* form factors in light-cone QCD

M. Ahmady, R. Campbell, S. Lord and R. Sandapen, Phys. Rev. D 89, no. 7, 074021 (2014) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.89.074021 [arXiv:1401.6707 [hep-ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.89.074021 2014
[5]

Predicting the isospin asymmetry in $B -> K* \gamma$ using holographic AdS/QCD Distribution Amplitudes for the K*

M. Ahmady and R. Sandapen, Phys. Rev. D 88, 014042 (2013) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.88.014042 [arXiv:1305.1479 [hep-ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.88.014042 2013
[6]

G. F. de Teramond and S. J. Brodsky, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 081601 (2009) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.081601 [arXiv:0809.4899 [hep-ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.102.081601 2009
[7]

S. J. Brodsky, G. F. de Teramond, H. G. Dosch and J. Erlich, Phys. Rept. 584, 1 (2015) doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2015.05.001 [arXiv:1407.8131 [hep-ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2015.05.001 2015
[8]

J. R. Forshaw and R. Sandapen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 081601 (2012) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.081601 [arXiv:1203.6088 [hep-ph]]. PSN FPCP W edB1455

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.109.081601 2012

[1] [1]

Probing transition form factors in the rare $B\to K^*\nu\bar\nu$ decay

M. Ahmady, A. Leger, Z. Mcintyre, A. Morrison and R. Sandapen, Phys. Rev. D 98, no. 5, 053002 (2018) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.053002 [arXiv:1805.02940 [hep-ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.98.053002 2018

[2] [2]

Effect of $c\overline{c}$ resonances in the branching ratio and forward-backward asymmetry of the decay $B \to K^{*} \mu^+ \mu^-$

M. Ahmady, D. Hatﬁeld, S. Lord and R. Sandapen, Phys. Rev. D 92, no. 11, 114028 (2015) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.114028 [arXiv:1508.02327 [hep-ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.92.114028 2015

[3] [3]

M. R. Ahmady, S. Lord and R. Sandapen, Phys. Rev. D 90, no. 7, 074010 (2014) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.074010 [arXiv:1407.6700 [hep-ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.90.074010 2014

[4] [4]

Predicting B->K* form factors in light-cone QCD

M. Ahmady, R. Campbell, S. Lord and R. Sandapen, Phys. Rev. D 89, no. 7, 074021 (2014) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.89.074021 [arXiv:1401.6707 [hep-ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.89.074021 2014

[5] [5]

Predicting the isospin asymmetry in $B -> K* \gamma$ using holographic AdS/QCD Distribution Amplitudes for the K*

M. Ahmady and R. Sandapen, Phys. Rev. D 88, 014042 (2013) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.88.014042 [arXiv:1305.1479 [hep-ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.88.014042 2013

[6] [6]

G. F. de Teramond and S. J. Brodsky, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 081601 (2009) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.081601 [arXiv:0809.4899 [hep-ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.102.081601 2009

[7] [7]

S. J. Brodsky, G. F. de Teramond, H. G. Dosch and J. Erlich, Phys. Rept. 584, 1 (2015) doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2015.05.001 [arXiv:1407.8131 [hep-ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2015.05.001 2015

[8] [8]

J. R. Forshaw and R. Sandapen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 081601 (2012) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.081601 [arXiv:1203.6088 [hep-ph]]. PSN FPCP W edB1455

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.109.081601 2012