1: \documentclass{PoS}
2: \PoS{PoS(HEP2005)287}
3: \usepackage{color}
4: \def\red{\color{red}}
5: \title{KLOE extraction of Vus from kaon decays and lifetimes}
6:
7: \ShortTitle{$V_{us}$ from kaon decays with KLOE}
8: %\ShortTitle{KLOE extraction of Vus from kaon decays and lifetimes}
9:
10: %\author{\speaker{Barbara Sciascia}\thanks{A footnote may follow.}\\
11: \author{KLOE collaboration
12: %\thanks{Complete author list available at http://www.lnf.infn.it/kloe/kloe.authors.ps}\\
13: \thanks{
14: F.~Ambrosino, A.~Antonelli, M.~Antonelli, C.~Bacci, P.~Beltrame, G.~Bencivenni,
15: S.~Bertolucci, C.~Bini, C.~Bloise, V.~Bocci, F.~Bossi, D.~Bowring, P.~Branchini,
16: R.~Caloi, P.~Campana, G.~Capon, T.~Capussela, F.~Ceradini, S.~Chi,
17: G.~Chiefari, P.~Ciambrone, S.~Conetti, E.~De~Lucia, A.~De~Santis,
18: P.~De~Simone, G.~De~Zorzi, S.~Dell'Agnello, A.~Denig, A.~Di~Domenico, C.~Di~Donato,
19: S.~Di~Falco, B.~Di~Micco, A.~Doria, M.~Dreucci, G.~Felici,
20: A.~Ferrari, M.~L.~Ferrer, G.~Finocchiaro, C.~Forti, P.~Franzini, C.~Gatti,
21: P.~Gauzzi, S.~Giovannella, E.~Gorini, E.~Graziani, M.~Incagli, W.~Kluge, V.~Kulikov,
22: F.~Lacava, G.~Lanfranchi, J.~Lee-Franzini, D.~Leone, M.~Martini, P.~Massarotti,
23: W.~Mei, L.~Meola, S.~Miscetti, M.~Moulson, S.~M\"uller, F.~Murtas, M.~Napolitano,
24: F.~Nguyen, M.~Palutan, E.~Pasqualucci, A.~Passeri, V.~Patera,
25: F.~Perfetto, L.~Pontecorvo, M.~Primavera, P.~Santangelo, E.~Santovetti,
26: G.~Saracino, B.~Sciascia,
27: A.~Sciubba, F.~Scuri, I.~Sfiligoi, A.~Sibidanov, T.~Spadaro, M.~Testa,
28: L.~Tortora, P.~Valente, B.~Valeriani, G.~Venanzoni, S.~Veneziano, A.~Ventura,
29: R.~Versaci, G.~Xu.}\\
30: \speaker{presented by Barbara Sciascia}\\
31: INFN Frascati, Italy\\
32: E-mail: \email{barbara.sciascia@lnf.infn.it}}
33: %\author{Another Author\\
34:
35: % Affiliation\\
36:
37: % E-mail: \email{...}}
38:
39: %- Abstract by PF -%
40: \abstract{The most precise determinations of \Vus\ comes from
41: semileptonic kaon decays. The KLOE experiment at \DAF\
42: the Frascati \phif, has measured all the experimental inputs to \Vus\
43: for both neutral and charged kaons. Preliminary results for
44: \Bketre{\pm} and \Bkmutre{\pm}, and for \lifet{\pm} are presented,
45: together with measurements of the \kneu{L}$e3$ and \kneu{L}$\mu3$ decay BR,
46: the \kneu{S}$e3$ decay BR and the \kl\ lifetime \lifet{L}. From our
47: results for the 5 branching ratios and \lifet{L} we find
48: \Vus=0.2258\plm0.0022. We have also measured the fully inclusive
49: $K^+_{\mu2}(\gamma)$ absolute branching ratio for which we obtain
50: BR($K^+\to\mu\nu(\gamma)$)=0.6366\plm0.0017. Combining this value with
51: recent lattice results for $f_K/f_\pi$ gives \Vus=0.2223\plm0.0026. }
52:
53: \FullConference{International Europhysics Conference on High Energy Physics\\
54: July 21st - 27th 2005\\
55: Lisboa, Portugal}
56: %- Paolo Franzini -%
57: \def\DAF{DA$\Phi$NE} \let\cl=\centerline%%
58: \def\ifm#1{\relax\ifmmode#1\else$#1$\fi}
59: \def\ks{\ifm{K_S}} \def\kl{\ifm{K_L}} \def\plm{\ifm{\pm}}
60: \def\ab{\ifm{\sim}} \def\x{\ifm{\times}} \def\to{\ifm{\rightarrow}}
61: \def\po{\ifm{\pi^0}} \def\ppm{\ifm{\pi^\pm}} \def\kpm{\ifm{K^\pm}}
62: \def\pic{\ifm{\pi^+\pi^-}}
63: \def\red{\color{red}} \def\blue{\color{blue}}
64: \def\figbox#1;#2;{\parbox{#2cm}{\epsfig{file=#1.eps,width=#2cm}}}
65: %- General
66: \newcommand{\eV}{{e\kern-.07em V}}
67: \newcommand{\keV} {{\rm k\eV}}
68: \newcommand{\MeV} {{\rm M\eV}}
69: \newcommand{\MeQ} {\ensuremath{{\rm M\eV^{2}}}}
70: \newcommand{\GeV} {{\rm G\eV}}
71: \newcommand{\s} {{\rm s}}
72: \newcommand{\ns} {{\rm ns}}
73: \newcommand{\nb} {{\rm nb}}
74: \newcommand{\ps} {{\rm ps}}
75: \newcommand{\mm} {{\rm mm}}
76: \newcommand{\cm} {{\rm cm}}
77: \newcommand{\mt} {{\rm m}}
78: \newcommand{\pb} {\ensuremath{{\rm pb^{-1}}}}
79: \newcommand{\fb} {\ensuremath{{\rm fb^{-1}}}}
80: \newcommand{\mdue} {\ensuremath{m^{2}_{lept}}}
81: %-wait-%\newcommand{\Dafne}{DA\char8NE}
82: \newcommand{\Dafne}{\ensuremath{DA\Phi NE}}
83: \newcommand{\phif}{$ \phi$~{\em factory\/} }
84: \newcommand{\etal}{{\em et al.\/}}
85: %-- Vus and around
86: \newcommand{\Vusfo} {\ensuremath{|V_{\rm us} f_{\rm +}(0)|}}
87: \newcommand{\fo} {\ensuremath{f_{\rm +}(0)}}
88: \newcommand{\Vus} {\ensuremath{V_{\rm us}}}
89: \newcommand{\Vud} {\ensuremath{V_{\rm ud}}}
90: \newcommand{\Vub} {\ensuremath{V_{\rm ub}}}
91: %-- Singole particelle
92: \newcommand{\g}{\ensuremath{\gamma}}
93: \newcommand{\ele}[1]{\ensuremath{e^{{#1}}}}
94: \newcommand{\muo}[1]{\ensuremath{\mu^{{#1}}}}
95: \newcommand{\pai}[1]{\ensuremath{\pi^{{#1}}}}
96: \newcommand{\kao}[1]{\ensuremath{K^{{#1}}}}
97: \newcommand{\kneu}[1]{\ensuremath{K_{{#1}}}}
98: %-- Sigle
99: \newcommand{\kmudue}[1]{\ensuremath{K^{{#1}}_{\mu2}}}
100: \newcommand{\kpidue}[1]{\ensuremath{K^{{#1}}_{\pi2}}}
101: \newcommand{\ketre}[1] {\ensuremath{K^{{#1}}_{e3}}}
102: \newcommand{\kmutre}[1]{\ensuremath{K^{{#1}}_{\mu3}}}
103: \newcommand{\ktaup}[1] {\ensuremath{K^{{#1}}_{\tau '}}}
104: \newcommand{\ketreg}[1] {\ensuremath{K^{{#1}}_{e3\gamma}}}
105: \newcommand{\kmutreg}[1]{\ensuremath{K^{{#1}}_{\mu3\gamma}}}
106: \newcommand{\kltre}[1] {\ensuremath{K^{{#1}}_{{\rm l}3}}}
107: %-- Decadimenti
108: \newcommand{\Dkmudue}[1]{\ensuremath{K^{{#1}} \to \mu^{{#1}}\nu}}
109: \newcommand{\Dkpidue}[1]{\ensuremath{K^{{#1}} \to \pi^{{#1}}\pi^{0}}}
110: \newcommand{\Dketre}[1] {\ensuremath{K^{{#1}} \to \pi^0e^{{#1}}\nu}}
111: \newcommand{\Dkmutre}[1]{\ensuremath{K^{{#1}} \to \pi^0\mu^{{#1}}\nu}}
112: \newcommand{\Dktau}[1] {\ensuremath{K^{{#1}} \to \pi^{#1}\pi^{+}\pi^{-}}}
113: \newcommand{\Dktaup}[1]{\ensuremath{K^{{#1}} \to \pi^{#1}\pi^0\pi^0}}
114: %
115: \newcommand{\Dpimu}[1]{\ensuremath{\pi^{{#1}} \to \mu^{{#1}}\nu}}
116: \newcommand{\DKSpippim}{\mbox{$K_S\rightarrow\pi^+\pi^-$}}
117: %
118: \newcommand{\kspipi} {\ensuremath{K_S\rightarrow\pi^{+}\pi^{-}}}
119: %-- Decadimenti radiativi
120: \newcommand{\Dketreg}[1] {\ensuremath{K^{{#1}} \to \pi^0e^{{#1}}\nu\gamma}}
121: \newcommand{\Dkmutreg}[1]{\ensuremath{K^{{#1}} \to \pi^0\mu^{{#1}}\nu\gamma}}
122: %-- Branching ratios long form
123: \newcommand{\Bkmudue}[1]{\ensuremath{BR(K^{{#1}} \to \mu^{{#1}}\nu)}}
124: \newcommand{\Bkmudueg}[1]{\ensuremath{BR(K^{{#1}} \to \mu^{{#1}}\nu(\gamma))}}
125: \newcommand{\Bkpidue}[1]{\ensuremath{BR(K^{{#1}} \to \pi^{{#1}}\pi^{0})}}
126: \newcommand{\Bketre}[1] {\ensuremath{BR(K^{{#1}} \to \pi^0e^{{#1}}\nu)}}
127: \newcommand{\Bkmutre}[1]{\ensuremath{BR(K^{{#1}} \to \pi^0\mu^{{#1}}\nu)}}
128: %-- Branching ratios short form
129: \newcommand{\bkmudue}[1]{\ensuremath{BR(K^{{#1}}_{\mu2})}}
130: \newcommand{\bkpidue}[1]{\ensuremath{BR(K^{{#1}}_{\pi2})}}
131: \newcommand{\bketre}[1] {\ensuremath{BR(K^{{#1}}_{e3})}}
132: \newcommand{\bkmutre}[1]{\ensuremath{BR(K^{{#1}}_{\mu3})}}
133: %-- Lifetime
134: \newcommand{\lifet}[1]{\ensuremath{{\tau}_{#1}}}
135: %-- Form factors
136: \newcommand{\ff}[1]{\ensuremath{{\lambda}_{#1}}}
137: \newcommand{\fkfp} {\ensuremath{f_{K}/f_{\pi}}}
138: %-- Kmu3/Ke3 ratio
139: \newcommand{\rappo}[1]{\ensuremath{\Gamma(K^{{#1}}_{\mu3})/\Gamma(K^{{#1}}_{e3})}}
140: %
141: \begin{document}
142: \noindent
143: The most precise verification of the unitarity of the CKM mixing
144: matrix is obtained today from the \Vus\ and \Vud\ values, neglecting
145: $|\Vub|^2$\ab0.00002. With the KLOE detector we can measure all
146: experimental inputs to \Vus: branching ratios, lifetimes, and form
147: factors.
148:
149: \section{{\bf \DAF}\ and KLOE}
150: In the \DAF\ \ele{+}\ele{-} collider, beams collide at a center-of-mass
151: energy $W\ab M(\phi)$. %close to the $\phi$ mass.
152: Since 2001, KLOE has collected an
153: integrated luminosity of \ab2 \fb. %Controllare
154: Results presented below are based on 2001-02 data for \ab450 \pb.
155:
156: The KLOE detector consists of a large cylindrical drift chamber surrounded by a
157: lead/scin\-til\-la\-ting-fiber electromagnetic calorimeter. A superconducting coil around
158: the calorimeter provides a 0.52~T field. The drift chamber, Ref.~\cite{DC},
159: is 4~\mt\ in diameter and 3.3~\mt\ long.
160: The momentum resolution is $\sigma(p_{T})/p_{T} \sim 0.4\%$. Two track vertices
161: are reconstructed with a spatial resolution of $\sim$ 3~\mm. The calorimeter,
162: Ref.~\cite{EMC}, composed of a barrel and two endcaps, covers 98\% of the solid angle.
163: Energy and time resolution are $\sigma(E)/E = 5.7\%/\sqrt{E(\GeV)}$ and
164: $\sigma(t) = 54~\ps/\sqrt{E(\GeV)} \oplus 50~\ps$.
165: The KLOE trigger, Ref.~\cite{TRG}, uses calorimeter and drift chamber information.
166: For the present analysis only the calorimeter signals are used. Two energy deposits
167: above threshold, $E>50$~\MeV\ for the barrel and $E>150$~\MeV\ for the endcaps, are required.
168:
169: \section{Kaon tagging}
170:
171: The $\phi$ meson decays mainly into kaons: 49\% to \kao{+}\kao{-} and 34\% to \kneu{L}-\kneu{S} pairs.
172: We can thus tag \kneu{L}, \kneu{S}, \kao{+}, and \kao{-} beams by detecting respectively
173: \kneu{S}, \kneu{L}, \kao{-}, and \kao{+} decays.
174: Tagging allows measurements of absolute branching ratios. A \kneu{S} beam is tagged using events with a \kneu{L} interaction in the
175: calorimeter. KLOE results on \kneu{S} decays are given in these proceedings~\cite{MattPos}.
176: \kl-mesons are tagged detecting \kspipi\ decays. Charged kaons are tagged using two-body decays, \Dkmudue{\pm} and \Dkpidue{\pm}.
177: Perfect tagging requires that the detection efficiency of the tagging mode be independent of the decay mode of the tagged kaon.
178: In reality, some dependency of the tagging efficiency on the decay mode of the signal kaon exists.
179: This dependence must be carefully measured using Monte Carlo (MC) and
180: data control samples for each BR measurement.
181:
182: \section{Semileptonic \kao{\pm} decays}
183:
184: The measurement of the branching ratios for the \kao{\pm} semileptonic decays
185: is performed using four samples defined by different decay modes for the
186: tagging kaon: \kmudue{+}, \kpidue{+}, \kmudue{-}, and \kpidue{-}.
187: This redundancy allows the systematic effects due to the tag selection
188: to be kept under control.
189: Kaons are identified as a tracks with momentum $70<p<130$ \MeV,
190: originating from the collision point. The kaon decay vertex must be
191: within a fiducial volume (FV) defined as
192: a cylinder of radius $40<r<150$ cm, centered at the collision
193: point, coaxial with the beams. The decay track, extrapolated to the
194: calorimeter, must overlap an appropriate energy deposit.
195: \kmudue{} and \kpidue{} decays are selected by applying a 3$\sigma$ cuts around
196: the kaon rest-frame momentum distribution calculated in the relevant mass
197: hypothesis.
198: For the \kpidue{\pm} tag, identification of the \pai{0} from the vertex is also required. Finally,
199: to reduce the dependency of the tag selection efficiency on the decay mode
200: of the signal kaon, the tagging decay is required to satisfy the calorimeter
201: trigger. %These criteria are further discussed in~\cite{kl3note}.
202: In the analyzed data set about 60 million tag decays were identified and
203: divided into the four tag samples.
204: %21\,699\,562, 8\,466\,737, 22\,655\,426 and, 8\,233\,472 respectively.
205: To select a semileptonic decay on the signal side, a one-prong kaon decay
206: vertex must be present in the FV.
207: The daughter track has to reach the calorimeter and to overlap an energy deposit.
208: Two-body decays are rejected by requiring that the decay momentum in the kaon
209: frame, computed assuming the pion mass, is < 195 \MeV.
210: The lepton mass is obtained from the velocity of the lepton computed from the time of flight.
211: The number of \ketre{} and \kmutre{} decays is then obtained by
212: fitting the \mdue\ distribution to a sum of MC distributions for
213: the signals and various background sources, each multiplied by a free
214: scale factor.
215: An example of the lepton mass distribution is shown in fig.~\ref{spectra}, left.
216: \begin{figure}[ht]
217: \begin{center}
218: \includegraphics[width=.205\textheight]{kchl3.eps}
219: %-Non-funziona-% \includegraphics[width=.2\textheight]{kl-l3.eps}
220: \includegraphics[width=.2\textheight]{spectra.eps}
221: \caption{Left. Lepton mass distribution. Right. $\Delta_{\mu\pi}$ distribution.}
222: \label{spectra}
223: \end{center}
224: \end{figure}
225: The BR is evaluated separately for each tag sample, dividing by the number of tag counts and correcting for acceptances.
226: The latter are obtained from MC simulations. Corrections are applied to account for data-MC differences in tracking
227: and cluster.
228: About 190\,000 \ketre{\pm} and 100\,000 \kmutre{\pm} decays are selected. The resulting BR's are:
229: $$
230: %-MyOld-%BR(\ketre{\pm}) = (5.047 \pm 0.046 \pm Sys Sig)\% \hspace{1cm}
231: %-MyOld-%BR(\kmutre{\pm}) = (3.310 \pm 0.040 \pm Sys Sig)\%{\mbox .}
232: BR(\ketre{\pm}) = (5.047 \pm 0.046_{Stat+Tag} \pm 0.080_{Syst})\% \hspace{0.2cm} % Deve avere errore frac. di 1.8\% dal plot di P.F.
233: $$
234: $$
235: BR(\kmutre{\pm}) = (3.310 \pm 0.040_{Stat+Tag} \pm 0.070_{Syst})\%{\mbox .} % Deve avere errore frac. di 3.3\% dal plot di P.F.
236: $$
237: These values are averages over the four different tag samples for each channel,
238: and have been calculated with correlations carefully taken into account.
239: The error is dominated by the error on data/MC efficiency corrections and the
240: systematic error from the signal selection efficiency is still preliminary.
241: %(details of the analysis can be found in~\cite{kl3note}).
242:
243: \section{\kao{\pm} lifetime}
244:
245: The \kao{\pm} lifetime is an experimental input to the determination of \Vus.
246: The present fractional uncertainty is about 0.2\%, corresponding to an uncertainty of 0.1\% for \Vus.
247: However, see Ref.~\cite{PDG}, there are large discrepancies between results of different experiments.
248: The value of \lifet{\pm} also affects the geometrical acceptance in BR measurements.
249: KLOE is nearing completion of a new, high-statistics \lifet{\pm} measurement
250: using two different methods: one based on the measurement of the decay length
251: and the other on the decay time of the kaons. Both methods have
252: fractional errors at the few per mil level;
253: comparison between the methods allows part of the systematic error to be assessed.
254:
255: \section{Semileptonic \kneu{L} decays and the \kneu{L} lifetime}
256:
257: KLOE has also measured the dominant \kneu{L} branching ratios using the \kneu{L} beam tagged by
258: \DKSpippim\ decays~\cite{BrKl}.
259: About 13$\times 10^6$ tagged \kneu{L} decays are used for the measurement, and $\sim$4$\times 10^6$ to evaluate efficiencies.
260: For \ketre{}, \kmutre{}, and $\pi^+\pi^-\pi^0$ decays we compute smallest of the two
261: values of $\Delta=E_{\rm miss}-p_{\rm miss}$ assuming each charged
262: particle to be pion and muon (muon and pion). The distribution in this
263: variable shows three well separated peaks corresponding to the three
264: modes mentioned, see Fig.~\ref{spectra}, right. Fitting the distribution with MC obtained shapes for
265: each mode, gives the number of events in each channel.
266: To select \kneu{L}$\to$3\pai{0} events, at least three photons are required
267: from the \kneu{L}
268: decay vertex. The reconstruction efficiency and purity of the selected sample are both about 99\%.
269:
270: The resulting BR's are:
271: BR$(K_{L} \to \pi e\nu(\gamma)) = 0.4007 \pm 0.0006 \pm 0.0014_{Tag+Trk}$,
272: BR$(K_{L} \to \pi \mu\nu(\gamma)) = 0.2698 \pm 0.0006 \pm 0.0014_{Tag+Trk}$,
273: BR$(K_{L} \to 3\pi^0) = 0.1997 \pm 0.0005 \pm 0.0019_{Tag+\gamma count}$ and,
274: BR$(K_{L} \to \pi^{+}\pi^{-}\pi^{0}(\gamma)) = 0.1263 \pm 0.0005 \pm 0.0011_{Tag+Trk}$,
275: after imposing the
276: constraint $\sum {\rm BR}(\kneu{L}) = 1$. This corresponds to also
277: measuring the lifetime by counting the number of decays in a time
278: interval for a beam of known intensity.
279:
280: The \kneu{L} lifetime has been also measured directly~\cite{TauKl},
281: employing 10$^7$ $K_{L} \to 3\pi^0$ events.
282: The result is \lifet{L} $= (50.92 \pm 0.17 \pm 0.25)$~\ns, which together with that from the
283: \kneu{L} BR measurements gives the KLOE average: \lifet{L} $= (50.84 \pm 0.23)$ \ns
284:
285: \section{Determination of \Vus}
286: The BR's of the semileptonic \kneu{L} decays, together with the result
287: $BR(K_{S} \to \pi e\nu(\gamma)) = (7.09 \pm 0.09)\times 10^{-4}$ and the preliminary results
288: on the semileptonic \kao{\pm} decays, allow five independent determinations of the
289: observable \Vusfo, as shown in Fig.~\ref{vusfzero}, in which the new KLOE value of \lifet{L}
290: has been used to covert \kneu{L} BR's to partial widths.
291: Averaging the five KLOE values %%determinations of \Vusfo\ to a single value
292: gives \Vusfo\ = 0.2170 $\pm$ 0.0005, with $\chi^2$/DoF = 1.7/4.
293: \begin{figure}[ht]
294: \begin{center}
295: %% \includegraphics[width=.6\textwidth]{vus_HEP_SCIASCIA_2.eps}
296: \includegraphics[width=.3\textheight]{allKloe.eps}
297: \caption{\Vusfo\ measurements. For \kneu{L} BR the KLOE \lifet{L} has been used.}
298: \label{vusfzero}
299: \end{center}
300: \end{figure}
301: The fractional uncertainty is about 0.25\%.
302:
303: A precise estimate of \fo, 0.961 $\pm$ 0.008, was first given in 1984~\cite{Leut}.
304: Recent lattice calculations~\cite{Mescia} give \fo\ =0.960 $\pm$ 0.009, in agreement with
305: Ref.~\cite{Leut}. Using the value from~\cite{Leut} and the average of our results for \Vusfo\
306: we find \Vus\ = 0.2258 $\pm$ 0.0022.
307:
308: \section{\Vus\ from \Bkmudueg{+}}
309: %
310: KLOE has also measured the fully inclusive, absolute \kmudue{+} branching ratio.
311: From about 9$\times 10^5$ \kmudue{+} decays obtained from a sample of about 250\pb\
312: KLOE obtains \Bkmudueg{+}=0.6366$\pm$0.0009$_{Stat}$ $\pm$0.0015$_{Syst}$~\cite{kmu2},
313: for an overall fractional error of 0.27\%. Using recent lattice results on the decay constants of
314: pseudoscalar mesons~\cite{kmu2_theo}, we find
315: \Vus = 0.2223$\pm$0.0026. The fractional error of about 1\% is dominated by %the theoretical uncertainty.
316: the uncertainty in the $f_K/f_\pi$ computation.
317:
318: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
319: %-eg-%% Articoli
320: %-eg-% \bibitem{Uno} F.~Baggins, \emph{Quantum effects of the One Ring},
321: %-eg-% \emph{JHEP} {\bf 01} {3021} 006 [{\tt hep-th/2001033}]
322: %-eg-%% Libri
323: %-eg-% \bibitem{Due} B.~Baggins, \emph{There and back again},
324: %-eg-% Imladris Editions, Rivendell 3018.
325: %-eg-%% Contributi in volumi collettivi
326: %-eg-% \bibitem{Tre} S.~Gamgee, \emph{Photons, neutrinos, and the Phial of Galadriel},
327: %-eg-%in proceedings of \emph{27th Middle Earth Workshop}, PoS{MEW3 024}012.
328: %---
329: \bibitem{DC} M.~Adinolfi \etal, [KLOE Collaboration], \emph{The tracking detector of the KLOE experiment},\\
330: \emph{Nucl. Instrum. Meth} {\bf A 488} {2002} 51
331: \bibitem{EMC} M.~Adinolfi \etal, [KLOE Collaboration], \emph{The KLOE electomagnetic calorimeter},\\
332: \emph{Nucl. Instrum. Meth} {\bf A 482} {2002} 364
333: \bibitem{TRG} M.~Adinolfi \etal, [KLOE Collaboration], \emph{The trigger system of the KLOE experiment},\\
334: \emph{Nucl. Instrum. Meth} {\bf A 492} {2002} 134
335: \bibitem{MattPos} M.~Moulson, \emph{KLOE results on neutral kaon decays and searches}, these proceedings
336: %-Not-approved-% \bibitem{kl3note} B.~Sciascia, \emph{Measurement of the absolute branching ratio of the \kao{\pm} semileptonic decays},
337: %-Not-approved-% available at http://www.lnf.infn.it/kloe/pub/knote/kn206.ps
338: \bibitem{kmu2_theo} C.~Aubin \etal, MILC Collaboration, \emph{Phys. Rev.} {\bf D 70} {2004} 114501\\
339: W.J.~Marciano, \emph{Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 93} {2004} 231803
340: %-AGGIORNA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
341: \bibitem{BrKl} F.~Ambrosino \etal, [KLOE Collaboration], \emph{Phys. Lett.} {\bf B}, in print,
342: hep-ex/0508027
343: \bibitem{PDG} S.~Eidelman \etal, Particle Data Group, \emph{Phys. Lett.} {\bf B 592} {2004} 1
344: \bibitem{TauKl} F.~Ambrosino \etal, [KLOE Collaboration], \emph{Phys. Lett.} {\bf B 626} {2005} 15-23
345: \bibitem{Leut} H.~Leutwyler and M.~Roos, \emph{Z. Phys.} {\bf C25} {1984} 91
346: \bibitem{Mescia} D.~Becirevic \etal, \emph{Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B 705} {2005} 339
347: \bibitem{kmu2} F. Ambrosino \etal, [KLOE Collaboration], \emph{Phys. Lett.} {\bf B}, in print,
348: hep-ex/0509045
349: \end{thebibliography}
350:
351: \end{document}
352: