Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 77 references

Unravelling theoretical challenges in understanding $B_c$ meson decay

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper predicts four B_c decay ratios—0.146 and 0.140 for semileptonic modes, 246.77 and 0.883 for leptonic modes—using a parameter-free relativistic independent quark model, offering testable LFU observables for future colliders.

desk verdict The B_c review is serviceable, but the central new ratios are unsubstantiated and one is inconsistent with the paper's own formula; desk reject unless revised. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.11413 v1 pith:TWOGAQKI submitted 2024-11-18 hep-ph

Sonali Patnaik This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ph
keywords B_cmesonsemileptonicdecaysleptonicformfactorsrelativisticindependentquarkmodelleptonflavoruniversalityCPviolationheavyquarkonium
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper argues that the B_c meson, the only bound state of two different heavy quarks, is a powerful testbed for Standard Model predictions, and it contributes new numerical predictions for four ratios of B_c decay rates. In semileptonic decays it predicts $R_{D/D^*} = 0.146$ and $R_{\eta_c/J/\psi} = 0.140$; in leptonic decays it predicts $(R_\tau^\mu)^{B_c} = 246.77$ and $(R_\tau^\mu)^{B_c^*} = 0.883$. Because the CKM matrix elements cancel in these ratios, the predictions isolate hadronic dynamics and are directly testable at LHCb and future $e^+e^-$ colliders. The paper also reviews production mechanisms, CP violation, and the status of lattice QCD form factors for B_c decays. The central claim is that the relativistic independent quark model, with no free parameters, yields reliable predictions across the full kinematic range.

What carries the argument

The central object is the relativistic independent quark (RIQ) model, a potential-model framework in which a meson's wave function is obtained by confining its constituent quark and antiquark with an interaction potential of specified Lorentz structure, and the weak transition form factors are computed as overlap integrals of initial and final meson wave functions over the entire accessible $q^2$ range. The potential parameters $(a, V_0)$, quark masses, and binding energies were fixed once by hadron spectroscopy in earlier work, so the model is presented as parameter-free. The same machinery yields the decay constants $f_{B_c}$ and $f_{B_c^*}$ used in the leptonic ratios. The newly constructed ratios are the paper's key observables, chosen because CKM uncertainties cancel and because comparing pseudoscalar and vector final states probes spin and angular-momentum dynamics.

What would settle it

Measure $B(B_c \to \tau\nu)/B(B_c \to \mu\nu)$ at LHCb or a future $Z$-factory: if the result is incompatible with 246.77 while the muon mode is observed, the leptonic prediction fails. A purely internal check is to re-derive $(R_\tau^\mu)^{B_c^*}$ from the paper's Eq. (5) with its stated decay constants; the standard helicity-suppressed formula with $f_{B_c^*} \approx f_{B_c}$ gives a value of order 239, so 0.883 requires an explicit derivation that the paper does not supply.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that newly constructed ratios of B_c branching fractions are computable and predictive. Using the RIQ model, in which transition form factors are overlap integrals of quark-model wave functions, the paper obtains $R_{D/D^*} = B(B_c \to D \mu \nu)/B(B_c \to D^* \mu \nu) = 0.146$ and $R_{\eta_c/J/\psi} = B(B_c \to \eta_c \mu \nu)/B(B_c \to J/\psi \mu \nu) = 0.140$, with the pseudoscalar-to-vector ratio larger because the $D/D^*$ system has more phase space. For leptonic decays it predicts $(R_\tau^\mu)^{B_c} = 246.77$ and $(R_\tau^\mu)^{B_c^*} = 0.883$. The paper stresses that the model has no adjustable parameters, with quark masses, potential parameters, and binding energies fixed by hadron spectroscopy, so the only input uncertainties are CKM elements that cancel in the ratios. It presents these as novel findings that future LHCb, CMS, and FCC-ee data can test.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the RIQ model's overlap-integral form factors and decay constants, with parameters fixed only by hadron spectroscopy, are quantitatively reliable across the full $q^2$ range; for the $B_c^*$ leptonic ratio there is the additional unstated assumption that the formula behind 0.883 is the correct one.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the predicted semileptonic ratios survive comparison with data, they will provide a CKM-free test of the RIQ model's form factors over the full $q^2$ range, complementing lattice QCD results.
  • A measurement of $(R_\tau^\mu)^{B_c} \approx 247$ at LHCb or a future $Z$-factory would confirm the Standard Model's helicity-suppression picture for $B_c \to \tau\nu$ versus $B_c \to \mu\nu$; any significant deviation would flag new physics.
  • The new semileptonic ratios $R_{D/D^*}$ and $R_{\eta_c/J/\psi}$ give a direct comparison of pseudoscalar versus vector final states, testing how phase space and spin dynamics shape $B_c$ decays.
  • The excited-state LFU observables $R_{D(2S)}$, $R^*_{D(2S)}$, and related quantities provide additional targets with the same machinery, extending the testable set beyond ground-state ratios.
  • The predicted leptonic ratio $(R_\tau^\mu)^{B_c^*} = 0.883$, if correct, would make $B_c^* \to \tau\nu$ strongly suppressed relative to $B_c \to \tau\nu$, a testable signature at high-luminosity colliders.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Inference: the 0.883 value for $(R_\tau^\mu)^{B_c^*}$ is not derivable from the displayed Eq. (5) unless an unstated $f_{B_c^*}$ relation is used; the paper should show that derivation before this number is adopted.
  • Inference: a cross-check in $B_s \to D_s/D_s^*$ decays, where LHCb has published a related ratio, would test whether the RIQ model's form factors transfer across heavy-flavor systems.
  • Inference: once the $B_c^*$ leptonic ratio is clarified, it may serve as a sensitive probe of the vector decay constant $f_{B_c^*}$, which lattice QCD has not yet determined.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript reviews the production and decay properties of the B_c meson, including semileptonic, leptonic, and non-leptonic modes, and presents several new predictions for ratios of branching fractions using the relativistic independent quark (RIQ) model. The claimed new results are R_{D/D*} = 0.146 and R_{η_c/J/ψ} = 0.140 for semileptonic decays, and (R_τ/μ)^{B_c} = 246.77 and (R_τ/μ)^{B_c*} = 0.883 for leptonic decays. The paper gives no derivations for these numbers, relying instead on self-cited earlier RIQ model papers, and it contains no uncertainty estimates for the new predictions.

Significance. If the predictions were established, they would be of interest as potential lepton-flavor-universality observables for future LHCb and FCC-ee studies, and the ratio construction is a reasonable way to cancel some hadronic uncertainties. However, the manuscript does not provide enough information to verify any of the central predictions: the semileptonic ratios are asserted without the underlying form-factor calculation, and the leptonic ratio (R_τ/μ)^{B_c} is inconsistent with the formula quoted in the same paper. The paper also conflates a parameter-free kinematic prediction with a model-dependent result. For these reasons, the significance of the contribution is not currently established.

major comments (4)
  1. [§2.2, Eq. (7)] The quoted value (R_τ/μ)^{B_c} = 246.77 does not follow from Eq. (5). In the ratio, the decay constant f_{B_c} and the CKM factor cancel, so the result is purely kinematic. Using the PDG masses M_{B_c}=6.2749 GeV, m_τ=1.77686 GeV, and m_μ=0.10566 GeV, Eq. (5) gives R ≈ 239.4, not 246.77. No source of a 3% correction (such as QED effects) is mentioned. Since this is one of the two central leptonic predictions, the discrepancy is a load-bearing error that must be corrected or explained.
  2. [§2.2, Eq. (8)] The value (R_τ/μ)^{B_c*} = 0.883 is presented without any formula for the leptonic decay of a vector meson. While this value is compatible with the standard vector-meson formula Γ(V → lν) ∝ M^3 f_V^2 (1 - m_l^2/M^2)^2 (1 + m_l^2/2M^2) if the decay constant cancels, the manuscript neither states nor derives that formula. As a result, the reader cannot determine whether this number is a genuine RIQ model prediction or simply a kinematic consequence, and the paper needs to specify the vector-meson decay formalism explicitly.
  3. [§2.1, after Eq. (2)] The semileptonic ratios R_{D/D*} = 0.146 and R_{η_c/J/ψ} = 0.140 are quoted as RIQ model predictions with no derivation. No form factors, no q^2 integration, no input masses, and no uncertainty estimates are given, nor is a specific equation or table in the cited references [38–41,52] identified. Since these ratios are the paper's central new semileptonic results, the absence of any calculational detail makes them impossible to verify or reproduce. The authors must present the calculation or at least spell out exactly how the numbers are obtained from the RIQ model.
  4. [§2.1, 'no adjustable free parameters'] The paper claims the RIQ model uses no adjustable free parameters because the potential parameters and quark masses were fixed in earlier spectroscopy papers. However, the parameter values and the model Hamiltonian are not summarized here. The manuscript needs to state the model inputs or give an explicit reference to the equations in the earlier papers where they are defined, so that the predictions can be checked independently. As written, the central numerical claims rest on unspecified self-cited work.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract] The acronyms 'ND-SM' and 'UP' are used without definition; they should be defined at first use or replaced with standard terms such as 'beyond the Standard Model'.
  2. [§2.2, Eq. (6)] The definition of the decay constant is incomplete: after writing the matrix element ⟨0|bγ^μγ_5 c|B_c(p)⟩, the equality to i f_{B_c} p^μ should be stated explicitly.
  3. [§2.3, Eqs. (9)–(10)] The effective Hamiltonian notation is inconsistent: Eq. (9) uses λ_c but Eq. (10) uses |V_cb||V_cq|†, and the operator sum indices are not defined. This section should be clarified.
  4. [References] Several references, including [55], [58], [59], [60], and [61], lack article titles and some author lists are incomplete; these should be brought to the journal's reference style.
  5. [Section 4] There is a typo: 'pehnomenological' should be 'phenomenological'. Also, the sentence beginning 'With upcoming LHCb and Super-B experiments expected...' is grammatically incomplete.
  6. [§4] The paper states 'we do not claim high quantitative precision' but then quotes predictions to four significant digits, e.g., 246.77 and 0.146. The authors should either provide realistic error bars or present the numbers to a precision consistent with the claimed qualitative nature of the predictions.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the new ratios are predictions from a fixed-parameter model, not fits to the target observables.

full rationale

The paper's central new results—RD/D* = 0.146, Rηc/J/ψ = 0.140, and the leptonic ratios—are presented as outputs of the RIQ model, whose potential parameters and quark masses were fixed by hadron spectroscopy in earlier work by the same group ([36-41,52]) and are not adjusted to the decay observables being predicted. The text states explicitly: 'our RIQ model does not utilize any adjustable free parameters... fixed based on hadron spectroscopy... consistently employed across a wide range of hadronic phenomena.' Thus the semileptonic ratios are genuine model predictions rather than fitted inputs renamed as predictions. The reliance on self-cited prior work for the form factors is a verifiability/reproducibility concern, but it is not circular: the model's assumptions do not include the target ratios, and there is no Eq(X)=Eq(Y) by construction. The leptonic ratio (Rτ/μ)^Bc = 246.77 is not derived in the paper; moreover it is numerically inconsistent with the paper's own Eq (5), which (with PDG masses) gives approximately 239. That is an internal-consistency/correctness problem, not a circularity, because the quoted value does not reduce to the stated formula. No circular step meeting the required quote-and-reduction standard was found.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new particles or forces. The central predictions rest on the RIQ model, whose parameters were fitted to spectroscopy in earlier papers, and on the unstated formula for the B_c* leptonic ratio.

free parameters (2)
  • RIQ potential parameters (a, V0) = Not quoted in the paper; fixed in earlier spectroscopy fits [36,37,38,39,40,41,52]
    These parameters define the confining potential in the RIQ model and are fixed by reproducing hyperfine splittings of baryons and mesons in previous works; the ratios computed in this paper depend on the resulting wave functions and form factors.
  • Constituent quark masses (m_q) and binding energies (E_q) = Not quoted; fixed from hadron spectroscopy in earlier application of the model
    Used to construct the meson wave functions whose overlap integrals yield the transition form factors. The paper claims no new free parameters for this work, but these were originally fitted to data.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The RIQ model describes B_c and final-state mesons via constituent quark wave functions obtained from a confining potential.
    Invoked in Sections 2.1 and 2.2; central to all ratio predictions, and justified only by references to prior self-cited work.
  • standard math The leptonic decay rate for B_c -> l nu is given by Eq (5) with a single decay constant f_Bc.
    Eq (5) in Section 2.2; the (R_tau/mu)^Bc value is consistent with this formula.
  • ad hoc to paper For B_c* -> l nu, the ratio (R_tau/mu)^Bc* is computed under some model assumptions that produce 0.883.
    No equation is given for B_c*; the result contradicts the standard helicity suppression expectation if the decay constant is flavor independent, so an unstated assumption is needed.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Unravelling theoretical challenges in understanding $B_c$ meson decay." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TWOGAQKI

@misc{pith2026241111413,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Unravelling theoretical challenges in understanding $B_c$ meson decay},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TWOGAQKI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.11413}
}
abstract

The $B_c$ meson, a unique bound state comprising of two open heavy flavors, charm and bottom, offers a rich avenue for probing the predictions of the Next Decade - Standard Model (ND-SM) physics properties due to its heavy mass. With recent observations of its excited states, interest in understanding $B_c$ production mechanisms and decay modes has surged. This article presents the current state of art on $B_c$ mesons, encompassing production mechanisms, properties of different decay modes, and theoretical modeling. We present novel findings on the newly constructed ratios $(\mathcal{R}_{\eta_c/J/\psi}$, $\mathcal{R}_{D/D^*})$ in semileptonic and ($\mathcal{R}_\mu^\tau)^{B_c}$ , ($\mathcal{R}_\mu^\tau)^{B_c^*}$ in leptonic decays, respectively. These results emphasize the importance of $B_c$ studies in the future collider experiments. The article further explores CP effects in $B_c$ meson decays refining our understanding of heavy flavor properties. Finally, potential avenues for future research, and leveraging upcoming collider experiments are outlined.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

77 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Observation of the Bc meson in p ¯p collisions at √s = 1.8 TeV,

    CDF Collaboration, F. Abe et al., “Observation of the Bc meson in p ¯p collisions at √s = 1.8 TeV,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 81 (1998) 2432–2437 , arXiv:hep-ex/9805034

    arXiv 1998

  2. [2]

    Bc at the Tevatron,

    CDF, D0 Collaboration, W. C. Wester, III, “ Bc at the Tevatron,” Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl. 156 (2006) 240–243

    work page 2006

  3. [3]

    $B_c$ meson production at the Tevatron Revisited

    K.-m. Cheung, “ Bc meson production at the Tevatron revisited,” Phys. Lett. B 472 (2000) 408–411 , arXiv:hep-ph/9908405

    work page Pith review arXiv 2000

  4. [4]

    Observation of the Bc Meson in the Exclusive Decay Bc → J/ψπ,

    D0 Collaboration, V . M. Abazovet al., “Observation of the Bc Meson in the Exclusive Decay Bc → J/ψπ,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 101 (2008) 012001, arXiv:0802.4258 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2008

  5. [5]

    Measurement of the lifetime of the B± c meson in the semileptonic decay channel,

    D0 Collaboration, V . M. Abazovet al., “Measurement of the lifetime of the B± c meson in the semileptonic decay channel,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 102 (2009) 092001, arXiv:0805.2614 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2009

  6. [6]

    Measurement of the B(c) + meson lifetime using B(c) + — > J/psi e+ nu(e),

    CDF Collaboration, A. Abulencia et al., “Measurement of the B(c) + meson lifetime using B(c) + — > J/psi e+ nu(e),” Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 (2006) 012002, arXiv:hep-ex/0603027

    arXiv 2006

  7. [7]

    Observation of the Decay $B_c^{\pm} \to J/\psi \pi^{\pm}$ and Measurement of the $B_c^{\pm}$ Mass

    CDF Collaboration, T. Aaltonen et al., “Observation of the Decay B+ -(c) → J/ψπ± and Measurement of the B+ -(c) Mass,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 100 (2008) 182002, arXiv:0712.1506 [hep-ex]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2008

  8. [8]

    Measurement of the B+ c meson lifetime using B+ c → J/ψµ+νµX decays,

    LHCb Collaboration, R. Aaij et al., “Measurement of the B+ c meson lifetime using B+ c → J/ψµ+νµX decays,” Eur. Phys. J. C 74 no. 5, (2014) 2839 , arXiv:1401.6932 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2014

Show all 77 references
  1. [9]

    Prospects for the Bc studies at LHCb,

    I. P . Gouz, V . V . Kiselev, A. K. Likhoded, V . I. Romanovsky, and O. P . Y ushchenko, “Prospects for the Bc studies at LHCb,” Phys. Atom. Nucl. 67 (2004) 1559–1570 , arXiv:hep-ph/0211432

    2004 arXiv

  2. [10]

    The hadronic production of the B(c) meson at Tevatron, CERN LHC and SSC,

    C.-H. Chang and Y .-Q. Chen, “The hadronic production of the B(c) meson at Tevatron, CERN LHC and SSC,” Phys. Rev. D 48 (1993) 4086–4091

    1993

  3. [11]

    Hadronic produc tion of the P-wave excited Bc -states B*(cJ, L=1),

    C.-H. Chang, J.-X. Wang, and X.-G. Wu, “Hadronic produc tion of the P-wave excited Bc -states B*(cJ, L=1),” Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 114019, arXiv:hep-ph/0409280

    2004 arXiv

  4. [12]

    The Decays of B(c) meson,

    C.-H. Chang and Y .-Q. Chen, “The Decays of B(c) meson,” Phys. Rev. D 49 (1994) 3399–3411

    1994

  5. [13]

    Hadr onic production of Bc(B∗ c) meson induced by the heavy quarks inside the collision hadrons,

    C.-H. Chang, C.-F. Qiao, J.-X. Wang, and X.-G. Wu, “Hadr onic production of Bc(B∗ c) meson induced by the heavy quarks inside the collision hadrons,” Phys. Rev. D 72 (2005) 114009, arXiv:hep-ph/0509040

    2005 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Bc(B∗ c) meson production via the proton-nucleus and the nucleus-nucleus collision modes at the colliders RHIC and LHC,

    G. Chen, C.-H. Chang, and X.-G. Wu, “ Bc(B∗ c) meson production via the proton-nucleus and the nucleus-nucleus collision modes at the colliders RHIC and LHC,” Phys. Rev. D 97 no. 11, (2018) 114022 , arXiv:1803.11447 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Observation of Bc mesons in p ¯p collisions at √s = 1.8 TeV,

    CDF Collaboration, F. Abe et al., “Observation of Bc mesons in p ¯p collisions at √s = 1.8 TeV,” Phys. Rev. D 58 (1998) 112004, arXiv:hep-ex/9804014

    1998 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Measurement of the B− c Meson Lifetime in the Decay B− c → J/ψπ −,

    CDF Collaboration, T. Aaltonen et al., “Measurement of the B− c Meson Lifetime in the Decay B− c → J/ψπ −,” Phys. Rev. D 87 no. 1, (2013) 011101 , arXiv:1210.2366 [hep-ex]

    2013 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Measurements of B+ c production and mass with the B+ c → J/ψπ+ decay,

    LHCb Collaboration, R. Aaij et al., “Measurements of B+ c production and mass with the B+ c → J/ψπ+ decay,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 109 (2012) 232001, arXiv:1209.5634 [hep-ex]

    2012 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Observation of B+ c → D0K+ decays,

    LHCb Collaboration, R. Aaij et al., “Observation of B+ c → D0K+ decays,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 118 no. 11, (2017) 111803 , arXiv:1701.01856 [hep-ex]

    2017 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Observation of an excited B+ c state,

    LHCb Collaboration, R. Aaij et al., “Observation of an excited B+ c state,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 no. 23, (2019) 232001 , arXiv:1904.00081 [hep-ex]

    2019 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Observation of Two Excited B+ c States and Measurement of the B + c (2S) Mass in pp Collisions at√ s = 13 TeV,

    CMS Collaboration, A. M. Sirunyan et al., “Observation of Two Excited B+ c States and Measurement of the B + c (2S) Mass in pp Collisions at√ s = 13 TeV,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 no. 13, (2019) 132001 , arXiv:1902.00571 [hep-ex]

    2019 arXiv

  13. [21]

    NLO QCD correction s to Bc-pair production in photon-photon collision,

    Z.-Q. Chen, H. Y ang, and C.-F. Qiao, “NLO QCD correction s to Bc-pair production in photon-photon collision,” Phys. Rev. D 102 no. 1, (2020) 016011 , arXiv:2005.07317 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  14. [22]

    A proposal on complementary determination of the e ffective electro-weak mixing angles via doubly heavy-flavored hadron production at a supe r Z-factory,

    X.-C. Zheng, C.-H. Chang, and T.-F. Feng, “A proposal on complementary determination of the e ffective electro-weak mixing angles via doubly heavy-flavored hadron production at a supe r Z-factory,” Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. 63 no. 8, (2020) 281011 , arXiv:1810.09393 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Observation of the top quark,

    D0 Collaboration, S. Abachi et al., “Observation of the top quark,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 74 (1995) 2632–2637 , arXiv:hep-ex/9503003

    1995 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Rigorous QCD analysis of inclusive annihilation and production of heavy quarkonium ,

    G. T. Bodwin, E. Braaten, and G. P . Lepage, “Rigorous QCD analysis of inclusive annihilation and production of heavy quarkonium ,” Phys. Rev. D 51 (1995) 1125–1171 , arXiv:hep-ph/9407339. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 55, 5853 (1997)]

    1995 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Heavy Quarkonium: Progress, Puzzles, and Opportunities,

    N. Brambilla et al., “Heavy Quarkonium: Progress, Puzzles, and Opportunities,” Eur. Phys. J. C 71 (2011) 1534, arXiv:1010.5827 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Heavy-flavour and quarkonium production in the LHC era: from proton–proton to heavy-ion collisions,

    A. Andronic et al., “Heavy-flavour and quarkonium production in the LHC era: from proton–proton to heavy-ion collisions,” Eur. Phys. J. C 76 no. 3, (2016) 107 , arXiv:1506.03981 [nucl-ex]

    2016 arXiv

  19. [27]

    New Observables in Inclusive Product ion of Quarkonia,

    J.-P . Lansberg, “New Observables in Inclusive Product ion of Quarkonia,” Phys. Rept. 889 (2020) 1–106 , arXiv:1903.09185 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Measurement of the ratio of branching fractions B(B+ c → J/ψτ+ντ)/B(B+ c → J/ψµ+νµ),

    LHCb Collaboration, R. Aaij et al., “Measurement of the ratio of branching fractions B(B+ c → J/ψτ+ντ)/B(B+ c → J/ψµ+νµ),” Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 no. 12, (2018) 121801 , arXiv:1711.05623 [hep-ex]

    2018 arXiv

  21. [29]

    R(J/ψ) and B− c → J/ψℓ− ¯νℓ Lepton Flavor Universality Violating Observables from Lattice QCD,

    LATTICE-HPQCD Collaboration, J. Harrison, C. T. H. Davies, and A. Lytle, “ R(J/ψ) and B− c → J/ψℓ− ¯νℓ Lepton Flavor Universality Violating Observables from Lattice QCD,” 6 Phys. Rev. Lett. 125 no. 22, (2020) 222003 , arXiv:2007.06956 [hep-lat]

    2020 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Recent CMS results on flavor anomalies and lepton flavor violation,

    CMS Collaboration, “Recent CMS results on flavor anomalies and lepton flavor violation,”. https://indico.desy.de/event/34916/contributions/146862/

  23. [31]

    Bc → J/ψ form factors for the full q2 range from lattice QCD,

    HPQCD Collaboration, J. Harrison, C. T. H. Davies, and A. Lytle, “ Bc → J/ψ form factors for the full q2 range from lattice QCD,” Phys. Rev. D 102 no. 9, (2020) 094518 , arXiv:2007.06957 [hep-lat]

    2020 arXiv

  24. [32]

    New results on B →π, K,η decay formfactors from light-cone sum rules,

    P . Ball and R. Zwicky, “New results on B →π, K,η decay formfactors from light-cone sum rules,” Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) 014015, arXiv:hep-ph/0406232

    2005 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Weak tran sition form factors of heavy-light pseudoscalar mesons for space- and t imelike momentum transfers,

    O. Heger, M. G´ omez-Rocha, and W. Schweiger, “Weak tran sition form factors of heavy-light pseudoscalar mesons for space- and t imelike momentum transfers,” Phys. Rev. D 104 no. 11, (2021) 116005 , arXiv:2109.07849 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Relativistic c orrections to the form factors of Bc into S -wave Charmonium,

    R. Zhu, Y . Ma, X.-L. Han, and Z.-J. Xiao, “Relativistic c orrections to the form factors of Bc into S -wave Charmonium,” Phys. Rev. D 95 no. 9, (2017) 094012 , arXiv:1703.03875 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  27. [35]

    NLO QCD Corrections to Bc-to-Charmonium Form Factors,

    C.-F. Qiao and P . Sun, “NLO QCD Corrections to Bc-to-Charmonium Form Factors,” JHEP 08 (2012) 087, arXiv:1103.2025 [hep-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Ma gnetic dipole transitions of Bc and B∗ c mesons in the relativistic independent quark model,

    S. Patnaik, P . C. Dash, S. Kar, S. Patra, and N. Barik, “Ma gnetic dipole transitions of Bc and B∗ c mesons in the relativistic independent quark model,” Phys. Rev. D 96 no. 11, (2017) 116010 , arXiv:1710.08242 [hep-ph] . [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 99, 019901 (2019)]

    2017 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Electromag netic transitions of (b¯c) bound system,

    S. Patnaik, P . C. Dash, S. Kar, and N. Barik, “Electromag netic transitions of (b¯c) bound system,” Phys. Rev. D 97 no. 5, (2018) 056025 , arXiv:1801.10503 [hep-ph] . [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 99, 019902 (2019)]

    2018 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Se mileptonic Bc meson decays to S-wave charmonium states,

    S. Patnaik, L. Nayak, P . C. Dash, S. Kar, and N. Barik, “Se mileptonic Bc meson decays to S-wave charmonium states,” Eur. Phys. J. Plus 135 no. 11, (2020) 936 , arXiv:1910.13206 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  31. [39]

    A Light Shed on Lepton Flavor Un iversality in B Decays,

    S. Patnaik and R. Singh, “A Light Shed on Lepton Flavor Un iversality in B Decays,” Universe 9 no. 3, (2023) 129 , arXiv:2211.04348 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Study of angular observables in exclusive semileptonic Bc decays,

    S. Patnaik, L. Nayak, P . Sadangi, S. Swain, and R. Singh, “Study of angular observables in exclusive semileptonic Bc decays,” Phys. Rev. D 110 no. 5, (2024) 055028 , arXiv:2312.17114 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Assessing Lepton Fl avor Universality Violations in Semileptonic Decays,

    S. Patnaik, L. Nayak, and R. Singh, “Assessing Lepton Fl avor Universality Violations in Semileptonic Decays,” arXiv:2308.05677 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  34. [42]

    Semileptoni c and nonleptonic B(c) decays,

    A. Abd El-Hady, J. H. Munoz, and J. P . V ary, “Semileptoni c and nonleptonic B(c) decays,” Phys. Rev. D 62 (2000) 014019, arXiv:hep-ph/9909406

    2000 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Bc meson weak decays and CP violation,

    J.-F. Liu and K.-T. Chao, “ Bc meson weak decays and CP violation,” Phys. Rev. D 56 (1997) 4133–4145

    1997

  36. [44]

    Exclusive and inclusive decays of the Bc meson in the light front ISGW model,

    A. Y . Anisimov, P . Y . Kulikov, I. M. Narodetsky, and K. A. Ter-Martirosian, “Exclusive and inclusive decays of the Bc meson in the light front ISGW model,” Phys. Atom. Nucl. 62 (1999) 1739–1753, arXiv:hep-ph/9809249

    1999 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Covariant Light-Fro nt Approach for B(c) transition form factors,

    W. Wang, Y .-L. Shen, and C.-D. Lu, “Covariant Light-Fro nt Approach for B(c) transition form factors,” Phys. Rev. D 79 (2009) 054012, arXiv:0811.3748 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Exclusive decays and lifetime of Bc meson in QCD sum rules,

    V . V . Kiselev, “Exclusive decays and lifetime of Bc meson in QCD sum rules,” arXiv:hep-ph/0211021

    arXiv

  39. [47]

    Weak decays of the Bc meson to charmonium and D mesons in the relativistic quark model,

    D. Ebert, R. N. Faustov, and V . O. Galkin, “Weak decays of the Bc meson to charmonium and D mesons in the relativistic quark model,” Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 094020, arXiv:hep-ph/0306306

    2003 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Bc Meson Form-factors and Bc → PV Decays Involving Flavor Dependence of Transverse Quark Momentum,

    R. Dhir and R. C. V erma, “ Bc Meson Form-factors and Bc → PV Decays Involving Flavor Dependence of Transverse Quark Momentum,” Phys. Rev. D 79 (2009) 034004, arXiv:0810.4284 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Semileptonic decays Bc → (ηc, J/Ψ)lν in the perturbative QCD approach,

    W.-F. Wang, Y .-Y . Fan, and Z.-J. Xiao, “Semileptonic decays Bc → (ηc, J/Ψ)lν in the perturbative QCD approach,” Chin. Phys. C 37 (2013) 093102, arXiv:1212.5903 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Semileptonic dec ays of Bc meson to S-wave charmonium states in the perturbative QCD ap proach,

    Z. Rui, H. Li, G.-x. Wang, and Y . Xiao, “Semileptonic dec ays of Bc meson to S-wave charmonium states in the perturbative QCD ap proach,” Eur. Phys. J. C 76 no. 10, (2016) 564 , arXiv:1602.08918 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Semileptonic Bc decays from full lattice QCD,

    A. Lytle, B. Colquhoun, C. Davies, J. Koponen, and C. McN eile, “Semileptonic Bc decays from full lattice QCD,” PoS BEAUTY2016 (2016) 069, arXiv:1605.05645 [hep-lat]

    2016 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Le pton mass effects in exclusive semileptonic Bc-meson decays,

    L. Nayak, S. Patnaik, P . C. Dash, S. Kar, and N. Barik, “Le pton mass effects in exclusive semileptonic Bc-meson decays,” Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 036012, arXiv:2106.09463 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Measurement of |Vcb| with B0 s → D(∗)− s µ+νµ decays,

    LHCb Collaboration, R. Aaij et al., “Measurement of |Vcb| with B0 s → D(∗)− s µ+νµ decays,” Phys. Rev. D 101 no. 7, (2020) 072004 , arXiv:2001.03225 [hep-ex]

    2020

  46. [54]

    A search for rare B → Dµ+µ− decays,

    LHCb Collaboration, R. Aaij et al., “A search for rare B → Dµ+µ− decays,” JHEP 02 (2024) 032, arXiv:2308.06162 [hep-ex]

    2024

  47. [55]

    Dong, L.-L

    X.-K. Dong, L.-L. Wang, and C.-Z. Y uan Chinese Physics C 42 no. 4, (2018) 043002

    2018

  48. [56]

    Abada, M

    A. Abada, M. Abbrescia, S. S. AbdusSalam, I. Abdyukhano v, J. A. Fernandez, A. Abramov, M. Aburaia, A. Acar, P . Adzic, P . Agrawal, et al. The European Physical Journal C 79 no. 6, (2019) 1–161

    2019

  49. [57]

    Review of particle physics,

    Particle Data Group Collaboration, S. Navas et al., “Review of particle physics,” Phys. Rev. D 110 no. 3, (2024) 030001

    2024

  50. [58]

    Boroun, S

    G. Boroun, S. Zarrin, and S. Dadfar Nuclear Physics A 953 (2016) 21–31

    2016

  51. [59]

    Y ang and W

    D. Y ang and W. Zhang Chinese Physics C 43 no. 8, (2019) 083101

    2019

  52. [60]

    Zheng, C.-H

    X.-C. Zheng, C.-H. Chang, T.-F. Feng, and X.-G. Wu Physical Review D 100 no. 3, (2019) 034004

    2019

  53. [61]

    Chen, C.-H

    G. Chen, C.-H. Chang, and X.-G. Wu Physical Review D 97 no. 11, (2018) 114022

    2018

  54. [62]

    Pur ely leptonic decays of heavy-flavored charged mesons,

    K. Dash, P . C. Dash, R. N. Panda, S. Kar, and N. Barik, “Pur ely leptonic decays of heavy-flavored charged mesons,” Phys. Rev. D 110 no. 5, (2024) 053004 , arXiv:2312.06130 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Lifet ime of B− c Constrains Explanations for Anomalies in B → D(∗)τν,

    R. Alonso, B. Grinstein, and J. Martin Camalich, “Lifet ime of B− c Constrains Explanations for Anomalies in B → D(∗)τν,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 118 no. 8, (2017) 081802 , arXiv:1611.06676 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  56. [64]

    The L ifetime of Bc meson and some relevant problems,

    C.-H. Chang, S.-L. Chen, T.-F. Feng, and X.-Q. Li, “The L ifetime of Bc meson and some relevant problems,” Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001) 014003, arXiv:hep-ph/0007162

    2001 arXiv

  57. [65]

    The Bc Meson Lifetime,

    M. Beneke and G. Buchalla, “The Bc Meson Lifetime,” Phys. Rev. D 53 (1996) 4991–5000 , arXiv:hep-ph/9601249

    1996 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Review of Particle Physics,

    Particle Data Group Collaboration, R. L. Workman et al., “Review of Particle Physics,” PTEP 2022 (2022) 083C01

    2022

  59. [67]

    QCD factors a1 and a2 beyond leading logari thms versus factorization in nonleptonic heavy meson decays,

    A. J. Buras, “QCD factors a1 and a2 beyond leading logari thms versus factorization in nonleptonic heavy meson decays,” Nucl. Phys. B 434 (1995) 606–618 , arXiv:hep-ph/9409309

    1995 arXiv

  60. [68]

    The nonleptonic decays of b-flavored mesons to S-wave charmoniu m and charm meson states,

    K. Dash, P . C. Dash, R. Panda, L. Nayak, S. Kar, and N. Bari k, “The nonleptonic decays of b-flavored mesons to S-wave charmoniu m and charm meson states,” Eur. Phys. J. C 83 no. 12, (2023) 1163 , arXiv:2302.02142 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Evidence for the 2π Decay of the K0 2 Meson,

    J. H. Christenson, J. W. Cronin, V . L. Fitch, and R. Turla y, “Evidence for the 2π Decay of the K0 2 Meson,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 13 (1964) 138–140

    1964

  62. [70]

    CP violation in B(s) decays,

    R. Fleischer, “CP violation in B(s) decays,” in 2nd International Conference on B Physics and CP Violation ( BCONF 97), pp. 469–475. 3, 1997. arXiv:hep-ph/9705404

    1997 arXiv

  63. [71]

    CP violation in B(c) decays,

    M. Masetti, “CP violation in B(c) decays,” Phys. Lett. B 286 (1992) 160–164

    1992

  64. [72]

    Unitary Symmetry and Leptonic Decays,

    N. Cabibbo, “Unitary Symmetry and Leptonic Decays,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 10 (1963) 531–533

    1963

  65. [73]

    Challenges for precision lattice flavou r physics

    C.Sachrajda, “Challenges for precision lattice flavou r physics.”. https://indico.cern.ch/event/694666/contributions/2916436/attachm

  66. [74]

    The More mini mal supersymmetric standard model,

    A. G. Cohen, D. B. Kaplan, and A. E. Nelson, “The More mini mal supersymmetric standard model,” Phys. Lett. B 388 (1996) 588–598 , arXiv:hep-ph/9607394

    1996 arXiv

  67. [75]

    Flavour Physics at LHCb – 50 years of the KM paradigm,

    P . Koppenburg, “Flavour Physics at LHCb – 50 years of the KM paradigm,” 10, 2023. arXiv:2310.10504 [hep-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Physics case for an LHCb Upgrade II - Opportunities in flavour physics, and beyond, in the HL-L HC era,

    LHCb Collaboration, R. Aaij et al., “Physics case for an LHCb Upgrade II - Opportunities in flavour physics, and beyond, in the HL-L HC era,” arXiv:1808.08865 [hep-ex]

    arXiv

  69. [77]

    The Belle II Physics Book,

    Belle-II Collaboration, W. Altmannshofer et al., “The Belle II Physics Book,” PTEP 2019 no. 12, (2019) 123C01 , arXiv:1808.10567 [hep-ex] . [Erratum: PTEP 2020, 029201 (2020)]. 7

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.