1: \subsection{Selection of \BtoDs\ decays}
2:
3: We select events that have more than four charged tracks.
4: We reduce the contamination from light-quark production in continuum events by
5: requiring the normalized Fox-Wolfram second moment~\cite{ref:FW} to be less than 0.5.
6: We select \BtoDs\ events with partial reconstruction of the decay $\dsp \ra \psoft \Dz$,
7: using only the charged lepton and the soft pion (\psoft) from the \dsp .
8: The \Dz\ is not reconstructed, resulting in high reconstruction efficiency.
9: \babar\ has already published two measurements of $\tBz$ \cite{ref:t1,ref:t2} and a measurement of
10: $\sin(2\beta + \gamma)$~\cite{ref:sin2bg} based on partial
11: reconstruction. This technique
12: was originally applied to \BtoDs\ decays by ARGUS \cite{ref:ARGUS}, and then used
13: by CLEO \cite{ref:CLEO}, DELPHI \cite{ref:DELPHI}, and OPAL \cite{ref:OPAL}. This is, however, the
14: first simultaneous measurement of $\tBz$ and \deltamd\ based on partial reconstruction.
15: \par
16: To suppress leptons from several background sources, we use only high momentum
17: leptons, in the range $ 1.3 < p < 2.4 $ GeV/$c$.\footnote{The lepton and pion momenta, the \psoft direction, and $\tilde{E}_\dsp$ (see below) are always computed in the \FourS\ rest frame.}
18: The \psoft\ candidates have momenta
19: between 60 and 200 \mevc. Due to the limited phase space available in the \dsp\ decay,
20: the \psoft\ is emitted within approximately a one-radian full opening angle
21: cone centered about the \dsp\ flight direction (in
22: the \FourS\ frame). Therefore, we approximate the direction of the \dsp\ to be that of the \psoft
23: and estimate the energy $\tilde{E}_{D^{*+}}$ of the \dsp\
24: as a function of the energy of the \psoft\
25: using a third order polynomial, with parameters taken from the simulation.
26: We define the square of the missing neutrino mass as
27: \ba
28: \nonumber \mnusq = ( \frac{\sqrt{s}}{2} - \tilde{E}_{\dsp} - E_\ell )^2 -
29: (\tilde{\bf{p}}_{\dsp} + {\bf{p}}_\ell )^2 ,
30: \ea
31: where we neglect the momentum of the \Bzb\ in the \FourS\ frame (on average, 0.34 GeV/$c$),
32: and identify its energy with the beam energy $\sqrt{s}/2$ in the \epem\ center-of-mass frame.
33: $E_\ell$ and ${\bf{p}}_\ell$ are the energy and momentum vector of the lepton and
34: $\tilde{\bf{p}}_{\dsp}$ is the estimated momentum vector of the \dsp.
35: The distribution of $\mnusq$ peaks at zero for signal events, while it is spread over a
36: wide range for background events (see Fig.~\ref{f:mnu}).\par
37: We determine the \Bzb\ decay point from a vertex fit of the $\ell$ and \psoft\ tracks,
38: constrained to the beam spot position in the plane perpendicular to the beam axis
39: (the $x-y$ plane). The beam spot position and size are determined on a run-by-run basis using two-prong events
40: \cite{ref:babar}. Its size in the horizontal ($x$) direction is 120 $\mu$m. Although the beam
41: spot size in the vertical ($y$) direction is only 5.6 $\mu$m, we use a constraint of 50 $\mu$m in the vertex fit
42: to account for the flight distance of the \Bzb\ in the $x-y$ plane. We reject events
43: for which the $\chi^2$ probability of the vertex fit, ${\cal P}_V$, does not exceed $0.1\%$.\par
44: We then apply a selection criterion to a combined signal likelihood, calculated from $p_\ell$,
45: $p_\psoft$, and
46: ${\cal P}_V$, which results in a signal-to-background ratio of about one-to-one in the
47: signal region defined as $\mnusq > -2.5$ GeV$^2/c^4$. Figure \ref{f:mnu} shows the distribution
48: of $\mnusq$ for the events selected at this stage of the analysis. The plot on the
49: top is obtained from the events in which the $\ell$ and the $\pi_s$ have opposite
50: charges (``right-charge''), the plot at the bottom from events where $\ell$ and the $\pi_s$ have
51: equal charges (``wrong-charge''). We use wrong-charge events as a background control sample,
52: to verify that the \BB\ combinatorial background is described well by the simulation. To do this,
53: we add the off-peak events, scaled by the ratio of the on-peak to the off-peak luminosities,
54: to the \BB\ Monte Carlo
55: scaled to match the data in the
56: region $\mnusq < -4.5$ GeV$^2/c^4$.
57: We then compare the expected number of events to the number of data events in the signal region.
58: This ratio is $0.996 \pm 0.002$, consistent with unity.
59: For the rest of the analysis we only consider right-charge events.
60:
61: \begin{figure}[!htb]
62: \begin{center}
63: \includegraphics[width=12cm,height=14cm]{try.eps}
64: \end{center}
65: \caption{$\mnusq$ distribution for the right-charge (top) and wrong-charge (bottom) events.
66: The points correspond to on resonance data. The distributions of continuum events
67: (dark histogram), obtained from rescaled off-peak events, and \BB\ combinatorial events (hatched area),
68: obtained from the simulation, are overlaid.}
69: \label{f:mnu}
70: \end{figure}
71:
72: \subsection{Tag Vertex and B Flavor Tagging}
73:
74: We restrict the analysis to events in which another charged lepton (``tagging lepton'') is found.
75: To reduce contamination from fake leptons and leptons originating from charm decays, we require that
76: the momentum of the lepton exceeds 1.0 GeV/$c$ for electrons, 1.1 GeV/$c$ for muons.
77: The tagging lepton is used to tag the flavor of the other (``tag'') $B$. The decay point of the tag $B$
78: is computed
79: from the intersection of the tagging lepton track with a beam-spot ellipse
80: centered on the position of the reconstructed $B$.
81: The beam spot constraint is applied only in the transverse plane, and the width in the vertical
82: direction is inflated to 50$\mu$m. We compute the proper time difference \deltat\ between the two
83: vertices from their projected distance along the beam direction ($z$-axis), $\deltaz$,
84: neglecting the \Bzb\ motion in the \FourS\ rest frame (boost approximation).
85: We obtain $\deltat = \frac{\deltaz} { c \beta\gamma}$,
86: where the boost factor $\beta\gamma$ is determined from the continuously measured
87: beam energies.
88: To remove badly reconstructed vertices we reject all events with either $|\deltaz|>3$ mm
89: or $\sigma(\deltaz) >0.5$ mm, where $\sigma(\deltaz)$ is the uncertainty on $\deltaz$,
90: computed for each event.
91: The simulation shows that the rms of the difference between the true and measured $\deltat$
92: is 0.64~ps for 70$\%$ of the events, and about 1.7~ps for the rest.
93: We then select only one right-charge candidate per event according to the following procedure:
94: if there is more than one candidate in the event, we choose the one lying in the region
95: $\mnusq > -2.5~$GeV$^2/c^4$. We reject the event if there is more than one candidate
96: (either right or wrong charge) in this region.
97: This criterion reduces by about $20\%$ the number of signal events.
98: For background studies, we select events in the region $\mnusq < -2.5~$GeV$^2/c^4$
99: if there is no candidate in the region $\mnusq > -2.5~$GeV$^2/c^4$.
100: We find about 50000 signal events over a background of about 27000 events in the data sample.
101:
102: \subsection{Sample Composition}
103: \label{s:sample}
104: Our data sample consists of the following event types, categorized according to their origin and
105: to whether or not they exhibit a peak in the $\mnusq$ distribution.
106: We consider signal to be any combination of a lepton and a charged $D^*$ produced in the decay of the same
107: \Bzb\ meson. Signal consists mainly of \BtoDs\ decays, with
108: minor contributions from $\Bzb \ra \dsp \pi^0 \ellm \nulb $,
109: $\Bzb \ra \dsp \tau^- \nub_\tau $, $\Bzb \ra \dsp D_s^- $, $\Bzb \ra \dsp \overline{D} X$ with $\tau$,
110: ${D_s}^-$, or $\overline{D}$
111: decaying to an $\ellm$, and $\Bzb \ra \dsp h$, with the hadron $h$ misidentified as a muon.
112: A peaking \Bub\ background is due to the process $\Bub \ra \dsp \pi^- \ellm \nulb $. Non-peaking
113: contributions are due to random combinations of a charged lepton candidate and a low-momentum pion candidate,
114: produced either in \BB\ events (\BB\ combinatorial) or in $e^+e^- \ra q\overline{q}$ interactions
115: with $q=u,~d,~s$ or $c$
116: (continuum). We compute the sample composition separately for mixed and unmixed
117: events by fitting the corresponding $\mnusq$ distribution to the sum of four components: continuum, \BB\
118: combinatorial, \BtoDs\ decays, and \BtoDss\ decays. Due to the production
119: of one or more additional pions, these latter events have a different \mnusq\ spectrum from that of the direct process \BtoDs.
120: We measure the continuum contribution from the off-resonance sample,
121: scaled to the luminosity of the on-resonance sample.
122: We determine the $\mnusq$ distributions for the other event types from the simulation, and determine
123: their relative abundance in the selected sample from a fit to the $\mnusq$ distribution for the data.
124: Assuming isospin conservation, we assign two thirds of \BtoDss\ decays to peaking \Bub\ background and
125: the rest to
126: $\Bzb \ra D^* \pi \ellm \nulb $
127: , which we add to the signal.
128: We vary this fraction in the study of systematic uncertainties.
129: We assume $50\%$ error on the isospin hypothesis that allows
130: us to determine the peaking \Bub\ contribution.
131: \par
132: A possible bias in the $\mnusq$ distribution comes
133: from the decay chain \mbox{$\overline{B} \ra \ellm \nulb D(X)$},~\mbox{$D\ra Y\pi^+$},
134: where the state Y is so heavy that the charged pion is emitted at low momentum, behaving like a \psoft.
135: This possibility has been extensively studied by the CLEO collaboration in Ref.~\cite{CLEODtokpi},
136: where the
137: three $D^+$ decay modes most likely to cause this bias
138: have been identified: \mbox{$\overline{K}^{*0}\omega\pi^+$}, \mbox{$K^{*-}\rho^+\pi^+$} and \mbox{$\overline{K}^{*0}\rho^0\pi^+$}. They quote a systematic error of
139: $\pm 2.3 \%$ on the background rate as a result of that analysis.
140: Based on their result, we attribute the same systematic error to the number
141: of combinatorial
142: events below the signal mass peak.\par
143: Figure \ref{f:fitmnu} shows the fit results for unmixed (left) and mixed (right) events.
144: We use the results of this study to determine the
145: fraction of continuum ($f_{qq}^{\pm}$), \BB\ combinatorial ($f_{\BB}^{\pm}$), and peaking \Bub\ background ($f_{\Bub}^{\pm}$)
146: as a function of $\mnusq$, separately for mixed ($f^-$) and unmixed ($f^+$) events. We parameterize
147: these fractions with polynomial functions, as shown in Fig.~\ref{f:frac}.
148:
149: \begin{figure}[!htb]
150: \begin{center}
151: \begin{tabular}{cc}
152: \hs{-1.5cm}\includegraphics[width=10cm,height=13cm]{fit_90-1-99_all.eps} &
153: \hs{-1.5cm} \includegraphics[width=10cm,height=13cm]{fit_90-2-99_all.eps}
154: \end{tabular}
155: \end{center}
156: \caption{Fit to the $\mnusq$ distribution for the unmixed events
157: (left) and mixed events (right).
158: ``$\Bz$'' includes $\BtoDs$, $\Bzb \ra \dsp \pi^0 \ell \nul$,
159: $\Bzb \ra \dsp \nu_\tau \tau^- $ ($\tau \ra \ell$),
160: $\Bzb \ra \dsp D_s^- $ ($D_s \ra \ell$), and
161: $\Bzb \ra \dsp h$ with the hadron $h$ misidentified as a muon.
162: ``$B^+$'' includes $B^+ \ra D^{*-} \pi^+ \ell \nul$ and $B^+ \ra D^{*-} \pi^+ X$ with the $\pi^+$ misidentified as a muon. ``Other'' includes $B \ra D^* \pi \nu_\tau \tau$ ($\tau \ra \ell$), $B \ra D^* \overline{D} X $
163: ($\overline{D} \ra \ell Y$), and $B \ra D^* \pi h$ with the hadron $h$ misidentified as a muon.
164: }
165: \label{f:fitmnu}
166: \end{figure}
167: \begin{figure}[!htb]
168: \begin{center}
169: \begin{tabular}{cc}
170: \hs{-1cm}\includegraphics[width=9cm,height=13.5cm]{fbad1.eps} &
171: \hs{-1cm}\includegraphics[width=9cm,height=13.5cm]{fbad2.eps}
172: \end{tabular}
173: \end{center}
174: \caption{Fraction of continuum events, peaking $\Bub$, and \BB\ combinatorial background
175: in the unmixed (left) and mixed (right) lepton-tagged samples.
176: The fraction of continuum events, $f_{qq}^{\pm}$, is parameterized only in the
177: region $\mnusq>-4.5$~GeV$^2/c^4$. For $\mnusq<-4.5$~GeV$^2/c^4$, where just continuum and combinatorial
178: backgrounds are present, we assume that $f_{\Bub}^{\pm}=0$, and we compute
179: $f_{qq}^{\pm}=1-f_{\BB}^{\pm}$.
180: }
181: \label{f:frac}
182: \end{figure}
183:
184: \subsection{\tBz and \deltamd Determination}
185: We fit data and Monte Carlo events with a binned maximum-likelihood method. We divide our events into one hundred
186: \deltat\ bins, spanning the range $-18$~ps $< \deltat < 18$~ps, and twenty \st\ bins between 0 and 3 ps.
187: We assign to all events in each bin the values of \deltat\ and \st\ corresponding to the
188: center of the bin. We fit simultaneously the mixed and unmixed events. We do not use an extended likelihood,
189: but instead apply a constraint on the fraction of mixed events,
190: which, for a sample of events with dilution ${\cal D}$, reads
191: \ba
192: \frac{{\cal N}_{mix}}{{\cal N}_{mix}+{{\cal N}_{unmix}}} = \chid \cdot {\cal D} + \frac{1-{\cal D}}{2},
193: \ea
194: where, neglecting the difference $\Delta \Gamma_d$ between the two mass eigenstates,
195: the integrated mixing rate \chid\ is related to the product $x = \dmd \cdot \tBz$ by the relation
196: \ba
197: \chid = \frac{x^2}{2(1+x^2)}.
198: \ea
199: We describe the \deltat\ distribution as the sum of the decay probabilities for signal and background events:
200: \ba
201: \label{e:SumPdf}
202: {\cal F}^{\pm}(\deltat,\sigma_{\deltat},\mnusq | \tBz,\deltamd) &=&
203: f^\pm_{qq}(\mnusq) \cdot {\cal F}^{\pm}_{qq}(\deltat,\sigma_{\deltat}) \\ \nonumber &+&
204: f^\pm_{\BB}(\mnusq) \cdot {\cal F}^{\pm}_{\BB}(\deltat,\sigma_{\deltat}) \\ \nonumber &+&
205: {\cal S}_{\Bub}f^\pm_{\Bub}(\mnusq) \cdot {\cal F}^{\pm}_{\Bub}(\deltat,\sigma_{\deltat}) \\ \nonumber &+&
206: [1-{\cal S}_{\Bub}f^\pm_{\Bub}(\mnusq)-f^\pm_{\BB}(\mnusq)-f^\pm_{qq}(\mnusq)] \\ \nonumber &\cdot&
207: {\cal F}^{\pm}_{\Bzb}(\deltat,\sigma_{\deltat}|\tBz,\deltamd),
208: \ea
209: where the functions ${{\cal F}_i^{\pm}}$ represent the probability density functions
210: (PDF) for signal ($i=\Bzb$),
211: peaking \Bub ($i =\Bub $), \BB\ combinatorial ($i=\BB $), and continuum ($i=q\overline{q}$) events, and the
212: superscript +($-$) applies to unmixed (mixed) events.
213: To account for the $\pm 50\%$ uncertainty on the isospin
214: assumption (see Section \ref{s:sample}),
215: we introduce in the PDF a global scale factor ${\cal S}_{\Bub}$ multiplying the fractions
216: $f^{\pm}_{\Bub}$,
217: equal for mixed and unmixed events, which we float in the fit but constrained to unity
218: with 0.5 error.
219: \par
220: The signal PDF is obtained from Eq.~\ref{eq:pdf} modified to account for the finite
221: resolution of the detector. The resolution function is expressed as the sum of three Gaussian
222: functions, defined
223: as ``narrow'', ``wide'' and ``outlier'':
224: \ba
225: {\cal R}(\delta\deltat,\sigma_{\deltat}) &=&
226: \frac{(1-f_w-f_o)}{\sqrt{2\pi} S_{n} \sigma_{\deltat}} ~
227: e^{-\frac{(\delta\deltat - o_{n})^2}{2 S_{n}^2 \sigma_{\deltat}^2}} +
228: \frac{f_w }{\sqrt{2\pi} S_{w} \sigma_{\deltat}} ~
229: e^{-\frac{(\delta\deltat - o_{w})^2}{2 S_{w}^2 \sigma_{\deltat}^2}} +
230: \frac{f_o}{\sqrt{2\pi} S_o} ~
231: e^{-\frac{(\delta\deltat - o_{o})^2}{2 S_{o}^2 }} ,
232: \ea
233: where $\delta\deltat$
234: is the difference between the measured and the true value of \deltat , $o_{n}$ and $o_{w}$
235: are offsets, the factors $S_{n}$ and $S_{w}$
236: account for possible misestimation of $\sigma_{\deltat}$. The outlier term, described by
237: a Gaussian function of fixed width $S_{o}$ and offset $o_{o}$, is introduced to
238: describe events with badly measured $\Delta t$, and accounts for less than 1$\%$ of the events.\par
239: We divide signal events according to the origin of the tag lepton into primary, cascade,
240: and decay-side tags.
241: A primary tag is produced in the direct decay $\Bz \ra \ell^+ \nu_{\ell} X$. These events are described by
242: Eq.~\ref{eq:pdf}, with ${\cal D}$ close to one (a small deviation from unity is expected due to hadron misidentification,
243: leptons from $J/\psi$, etc.). We expect small values of $o_n$ and $o_w$ for primary tags,
244: because the lepton originates from the \Bz\ decay point.\par
245: Cascade tags, produced in the process $\Bz \ra D X, D \ra \ell Y$, are suppressed by the cut on the
246: lepton momentum but still exist at a level of $9\%$ as we obtain by floating their relative abundance as
247: an additional parameter in the \deltamd\ fit on data.
248: The lepton production point is displaced from the
249: \Bz\ decay point due to the finite lifetime of
250: charm mesons and the \epem\ energy asymmetry. This results in a significant positive value of the offsets
251: for this category.
252: Compared with the primary tag, the cascade lepton usually has the opposite charge correlation with the \Bz\
253: flavor. The same charge correlation is obtained when the charm
254: meson is produced from the hadronization of the virtual $W$ from \Bz\ decay, usually referred to as
255: ``Upper Vertex'', which
256: results in the production of two opposite-flavor charm mesons. We account
257: for these facts by applying Eq.~\ref{eq:pdf} to the cascade tag events with negative
258: dilution ${\cal D_{\ctl}} = -(1-2f_{UV}) = -0.65 \pm 0.08$, where we take from the PDG \cite{ref:PDG}
259: the ratio of the inclusive semileptonic branching ratios of the $b$ quark
260: $f_{UV} = \frac{BR(\overline{b}\ra c\ra \ell^+)}{BR(\overline{b}\ra c\ra \ell^+)+BR(\overline{b}\ra \overline{c}\ra \ell^-)}= 0.17\pm0.04$ (the contribution to the dilution from other sources associated with the
261: $\psoft \ell$ candidate, such as fake hadrons, is
262: negligible).\par
263: Decay-side tags are produced by the semileptonic decay of the unreconstructed \Dz . Therefore
264: they do not carry any information about $\tBz$ or \deltamd. The PDF for both mixed and unmixed contributions
265: is a purely exponential function, with an effective lifetime representing the displacement of
266: the lepton production point from the \Bzb\ decay point due to the finite lifetime of the \Dz .
267: We determine the fraction of these events by fitting
268: the $\cos\theta_{\psoft \ell}$ distribution (see Fig.~\ref{f:costh}),
269: where $\theta_{\psoft \ell}$ is the angle between the soft pion and the tag lepton.
270: Using the results of the $\cos\theta_{\psoft \ell}$ fit we parameterize the probability for each event to have a decay-side tag as a third order polynomial
271: function of $\cos\theta_{\psoft \ell}$~(see Fig.~\ref{f:costh}).
272: \begin{figure}[!htb]
273: \begin{center}
274: \begin{tabular}{ccc}
275: \hs{-1.5cm}\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=9cm]{unmix_mass.eps}&
276: \hs{-2.7cm}\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=9cm]{mix_mass.eps}&
277: \hs{-2.7cm}\includegraphics[width=6cm,height=9cm]{alpha.eps}
278: \end{tabular}
279: \end{center}
280: \caption{ Distribution of $\cos\theta_{\psoft \ell}$ for unmixed (left)
281: and mixed (center) events. The points with error bars are the data, the shaded histograms
282: show the various sample components after the fit.
283: Right plot shows the fraction of tags from \Dz\ decay as a function
284: of $\cos\theta_{\psoft \ell}$ for signal events. The points with error bars are the data,
285: the solid line is the resulting fitted function and the dashed line is the simulation prediction.
286: }
287: \label{f:costh}
288: \end{figure}
289: \par The signal PDF for both mixed and unmixed events consists of the sum of
290: primary, cascade, and decay-side tags,
291: each convoluted with its own resolution function. The parameters $S_n,~S_w,~S_o,~f_w$, and
292: $f_o$ are common to the three terms, while each tag type has different offsets ($o_n,o_w$).
293: To reduce the systematic error, some
294: other parameters, in addition to $\tBz$ and \deltamd\ are free in the fit, namely,
295: all the parameters of the resolution functions, the dilution of the primary tags,
296: the fraction of cascade tags, and the effective lifetime of the decay-side tags. We fix the
297: other parameters (dilution of cascade tags, fraction of decay-side tags) to their values, obtained
298: as described above, and then vary
299: them within their error ranges to assess the corresponding systematic error, as we have described above.
300: \par
301: We adopt a similar PDF for peaking \Bub\ background, accounting for primary, cascade, and decay terms.
302: Because \Bub\ mesons do not oscillate, we use a pure exponential PDF for the primary and cascade tags
303: with lifetime $\tBu = 1.671\pm0.018$~ps \cite{ref:HFAG}. We force the parameters of the resolution function
304: to equal those for the corresponding signal term.
305: \par
306: We describe continuum events with an exponential function convoluted with a three-Gaussian resolution
307: function. The mixed and
308: unmixed terms have separate effective lifetime parameters. All the parameters of the continuum resolution function
309: are set equal to those of the signal, except for the offsets, which are free in the fit.
310: \par
311: The PDF for combinatorial \BB\ background accounts for oscillating and non-oscillating terms.
312: It has the same functional form as the PDF for peaking events, but with
313: independent parameters for the oscillation frequency and the lifetimes, which we interpret as
314: effective parameters that do not necessarily have a precise physical interpretation.
315: The parameters $S_n,~S_w,\mathrm{and} ~f_w$ are set to the same values as those in the signal.
316: \par
317: