1: %%%%%%%%%% espcrc2.tex %%%%%%%%%%
2: %
3: % $Id: espcrc2.tex,v 1.2 2004/02/24 11:22:11 spepping Exp $
4: %
5: \documentclass[fleqn,twoside]{article}
6: % \usepackage{espcrc2}
7: % Use the option 'headings' if you want running headings
8: \usepackage[headings]{espcrc2}
9:
10: % identification
11: \readRCS
12: $Id: espcrc2.tex,v 1.2 2004/02/24 11:22:11 spepping Exp $
13: \ProvidesFile{espcrc2.tex}[\filedate \space v\fileversion
14: \space Elsevier 2-column CRC Author Instructions]
15:
16: % change this to the following line for use with LaTeX2.09
17: % \documentstyle[twoside,fleqn,espcrc2]{article}
18:
19: % if you want to include PostScript figures
20: \usepackage{graphicx}
21: % if you have landscape tables
22: \usepackage[figuresright]{rotating}
23:
24:
25: % put your own definitions here:
26: % \newcommand{\cZ}{\cal{Z}}
27: % \newtheorem{def}{Definition}[section]
28: % ...
29: \newcommand{\ttbs}{\char'134}
30: \newcommand{\AmS}{{\protect\the\textfont2
31: A\kern-.1667em\lower.5ex\hbox{M}\kern-.125emS}}
32:
33: \newcommand{\ipb}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{pb^{-1}}}}
34: \newcommand{\ifb}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{fb^{-1}}}}
35: \newcommand{\TeV}{\ensuremath{\matqq hrm{Te\kern -0.1em V}}}
36: \newcommand{\TeVc}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Te\kern -0.1em V\!/}c}}
37: \newcommand{\TeVcc}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Te\kern -0.1em V\!/}c^2}}
38: \newcommand{\GeV}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Ge\kern -0.1em V}}}
39: \newcommand{\GeVc}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Ge\kern -0.1em V\!/}c}}
40: \newcommand{\GeVcc}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Ge\kern -0.1em V\!/}c^2}}
41: \newcommand{\MeV}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Me\kern -0.1em V}}}
42: \newcommand{\MeVc}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Me\kern -0.1em V\!/}c}}
43: \newcommand{\MeVcc}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Me\kern -0.1em V\!/}c^2}}
44: \newcommand{\Tesla}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{T}}}
45: \newcommand{\cm}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{cm}}}
46: \newcommand{\um}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{\mu m}}}
47: \newcommand{\ps}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{ps}}}
48: \newcommand{\psinv}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{ps^{-1}}}}
49: \newcommand{\cdfii}{CDF\,II~}
50: \newcommand{\ppbar}{p\overline{p}}
51: \newcommand{\at}{\symbol{64}}
52: \newcommand{\sye}[1]{\ensuremath{~\pm #1}}
53: \newcommand{\ase}[2]{\ensuremath{^{~+ #1}_{~- #2}}}
54: \newcommand{\asi}[2]{\ensuremath{^{~- #1}_{~+ #2}}}
55:
56: \newcommand{\myto}{\kern -0.3em\to\kern -0.2em}
57: \newcommand{\Lxy}{L_{\rm xy}}
58: \newcommand{\BR}{{\mathrm {BR}}}
59:
60: \newcommand{\ACP}{\ensuremath{A_{CP}}}
61: \newcommand{\DGs}{\ensuremath{\Delta \Gamma_s}}
62: \newcommand{\Dms}{\ensuremath{\Delta m_s}}
63: \newcommand{\Dmd}{\ensuremath{\Delta m_d}}
64:
65: \newcommand{\phikpm}{\ensuremath{B^{\pm} \myto \phi K^{\pm}}}
66: \newcommand{\psikpm}{\ensuremath{{B^{\pm} \myto J/\psi K^{\pm}}}}
67: \newcommand{\phik}{\ensuremath{B^+ \myto \phi K^+}}
68: \newcommand{\psik}{\ensuremath{{B^+ \myto J/\psi K^+}}}
69: \newcommand{\psikst}{\ensuremath{B^0 \myto J/\psi K^{\ast 0}}}
70: \newcommand{\kstar}{\ensuremath{K^{\ast 0} }}
71: \newcommand{\epem}{\ensuremath{e^+e^-}}
72: \newcommand{\mpmm}{\ensuremath{\mu^+\mu^-}}
73: \newcommand{\KKpm}{\ensuremath{K^+K^-}}
74:
75: \newcommand{\Bs}{\ensuremath{B_s^0}}
76: \newcommand{\Bd}{\ensuremath{B_d^0}}
77: \newcommand{\BsDspi}{\ensuremath{\bar{B_s^0} \myto D_s^+ \pi^-}}
78: \newcommand{\BslDs}{\ensuremath{\bar{B_s^0} \myto D_s^+ l^- X}}
79: \newcommand{\BsDsTrepi}{\ensuremath{\bar{B_s^0} \myto D_s^+ \pi^-\pi^+\pi^-}}
80: \newcommand{\DsPhipi}{\ensuremath{D_s^+ \myto \phi \pi^+}}
81: %\newcommand{\DsKstarK}{\ensuremath{D_s^+ \myto \bar{\kstar} K^+}}
82: \newcommand{\DsKstarK}{\ensuremath{D_s^+ \myto \bar{K}^{\ast 0} K^+}}
83: \newcommand{\DsTrepi}{\ensuremath{D_s^+ \myto \pi^+ \pi^- \pi^+}}
84: \newcommand{\Phipi}{\ensuremath{\phi \pi^+}}
85: %\newcommand{\KstarK}{\ensuremath{\bar{\kstar} K^+}}
86: \newcommand{\KstarK}{\ensuremath{\bar{K}^{\ast 0} K^+}}
87: \newcommand{\Trepi}{\ensuremath{\pi^+ \pi^- \pi^+}}
88:
89: % add words to TeX's hyphenation exception list
90: \hyphenation{author another created financial paper re-commend-ed Post-Script}
91:
92: % set the starting page if not 1
93: % \setcounter{page}{17}
94:
95: % declarations for front matter
96: \title{B meson mixing at \cdfii}
97:
98: \author{M. Rescigno (for the CDF Collaboration)\address[Roma]{Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Sezione di Roma, P.le Aldo Moro 2, 00185 Roma, Italy}}
99:
100: % If you use the option headings,
101: % the title is also used as the running title,
102: % and the authors are also used as the running authors.
103: % You can change that by using \runtitle and \runauthor.
104:
105: \begin{document}
106:
107: \begin{abstract}
108: We present the first limit on \Bs\ mixing frequency obtained using
109: 360 \ipb\ of Tevatron Run II data with the \cdfii detector.
110: We derive $\Dms > 7.9\ \psinv @\ 95\%$ C.L. with a sensitivity
111: of 8.4\psinv.
112: \vspace{1pc}
113: \end{abstract}
114:
115: % typeset front matter (including abstract)
116: \maketitle
117:
118: \section{Introduction}
119:
120: In the Standard Model (SM) flavor mixing of neutral mesons
121: is induced by second-order charged weak interactions
122: through box diagrams. For \Bd\
123: the mixing frequency, \Dmd, is $\propto f^2_{B_d}B_{B_d}|V_{td}|^2$
124: and thus provides a constraint on the usual unitarity triangle
125: whereas for \Bs\ $\Dms\propto f^2_{B_s}B_{B_s}|V_{ts}|^2$
126: and is much higher since $|V_{ts}| >> |V_{td}|$.
127: Theoretical uncertainty on the hadronic parameters make the constraint
128: from the precise \Dmd\ measurement weak.
129: On the other end a measurement of the mixing frequency ratio
130: $\Dms/\Dmd$ would fix the ratio of
131: hadronic parameters thus allowing a much tighter constraint on
132: % the position of the apex of
133: the unitarity triangle. The expected range for \Dms\ from the
134: analysis of all available B and Kaon physics data within the SM
135: is getting narrower and narrower
136: ($\Dms \in [15.6, 23.1]\ \at\ 95\% {\rm C.L.}$~\cite{UTFIT}).
137: Observing \Bs\ mixing outside the SM favored range
138: would be a signal for new physics. Experiments at LEP and SLD
139: as well CDF in Run I have only provided a lower limit
140: $\Dms > 14.5 \at 95\%$ C.L.~\cite{pdg2004}.
141: The high frequency expected for \Bs\ flavor oscillations
142: poses formidable experimental challenges related to the need for
143: extremely accurate proper time resolution in order
144: to resolve the oscillation pattern. This is clearly reflected
145: in the approximate expression for the significance of the
146: mixing amplitude measurement~\cite{Moser}
147: \begin{equation}
148: \label{eq:significance}
149: {\cal S}= \frac{A}{\sigma_A} \simeq
150: \frac{S}{\sqrt{S+B}}\sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon D^2}{2}}
151: e^{-\frac{1}{2}(\sigma_{c\tau}\Dms)^2}
152: \end{equation}
153: %\noindent
154: where $S$ is the signal sample size, $B$ is the background,
155: $\varepsilon$ is the efficiency for flavor tagging and $D$
156: is the tagging dilution defined as $\frac{N_R-N_W}{N_R+N_W}=1-2w$,
157: where the mistag rate $w=N_W/(N_R+N_W)$ is the fraction
158: of B candidates with an incorrectly assigned flavor.
159: The effect of finite resolution
160: on proper time ($\sigma_{c\tau}$) reduces the statistical
161: significance of the measurement, especially at high values of
162: \Dms. A key point of the CDF upgrade for Run II has been the
163: capability of triggering on hadronic decays of $B$ mesons
164: allowing the collection of fully reconstructed \Bs\ decays.
165: Despite the limited statistics
166: available in these modes the excellent proper time
167: resolution significantly helps the current sensitivity
168: of CDF and will offer the unique chance of a determination
169: of \Dms\ from CDF data alone.
170: We describe here the first search for \Bs\ mixing using
171: 360 \ipb\ of Run II data.
172:
173: \section{\cdfii Detector and Trigger}
174:
175: The upgraded CDF detector for Run II~\cite{CDFII}
176: has been designed to enhance the sensitivity
177: to \Bs\ mixing, in particular with the L00~\cite{L00} layer
178: of silicon detector very close to the beam pipe,
179: the TOF system~\cite{TOF} and the Silicon Vertex Tracker
180: (SVT)~\cite{SVT}. This latter device, reconstructing on-line tracks
181: in the silicon tracker, enabled triggering on
182: $B$-decay vertices, for the first time at a hadron collider.
183: The current CDF $b-$physics related trigger menu is based on
184: the following selections:
185: \begin{itemize}
186: \item Di-muons with muon transverse momenta $P_T > 1.5\ \GeVc$
187: to select $b\rightarrow J/\psi X$ decays.
188: \item Single muon or electron with $P_T>4$ associated with
189: a displaced trigger track with impact parameter greater than 120 \um\
190: (lepton+SVT).
191: %This trigger is complemented by a $P_t>8$ version without
192: %the displaced track trigger requirement.
193: \item A Two Track Trigger (TTT) requiring two displaced SVT
194: tracks with impact parameters greater than 120 \um, consistent with
195: originating at a vertex 200 \um\ away from the beam axis.
196: \end{itemize}
197: These different triggers provide large samples of, respectively,
198: $B_{d,u}\myto J/\psi K^{(*)}$,
199: $B_{d,u}\myto l D^{(*)}X$ and $B_{d,u}\myto D^{(*)}\pi$
200: used to calibrate the vertex resolution function,
201: the flavor-tagging dilution and to extract the impact parameter
202: trigger bias.
203: These measurements are an essential part of the $B_s$ mixing study
204: making the latter really the ``ultimate'' $b$-physics analysis
205: at CDF.
206:
207: \section{Signal samples}
208:
209: \begin{figure}[t]
210: \vspace{9pt}
211: %\framebox[55mm]{\rule[-21mm]{0mm}{43mm}}
212: \includegraphics[width=0.87\linewidth]{./wideMass_PhiPi.eps}
213: \vspace{-27pt}
214: \caption{\BsDspi,\DsPhipi signal.}
215: \label{fig:Bshadronic}
216: \end{figure}
217:
218: \begin{figure}[t]
219: \vspace{9pt}
220: %\framebox[55mm]{\rule[-21mm]{0mm}{43mm}}
221: \includegraphics[width=.98\linewidth]{./Bs-lnuDs-PhiPi-Yield.eps}
222: \vspace{-20pt}
223: \caption{\BslDs,\DsPhipi signal.}
224: \label{fig:BsSemil}
225: \end{figure}
226:
227: Currently we reconstruct $\BsDspi$ (hadronic analysis)
228: and $\BslDs$ channels (semileptonic analysis). In both cases
229: the $\DsPhipi$,$\DsKstarK$ and $\DsTrepi$ decay modes
230: are used, where the light meson resonances are detected
231: in the $\phi\myto K^+K^-$ and $\kstar\myto K^+\pi^-$ channels only.
232: These modes combined correspond to 4.9\% of the total $D_s$ decay rate.
233: %Only $D_s$ and $B^0_s$ decays to all charged particle final states
234: %are reconstructed in the \cdfii detector.
235: %On the other end the trigger efficiency and the need to
236: %fight combinatoric background
237: %strongly favour low multiplicity final states.
238:
239: \Bs\ meson signals are identified as sharp peaks
240: either in the reconstructed \Bs\ mass for hadronic decays
241: or in the $D_s$ mass for opposite sign combinations of a
242: lepton ($\mu$ or $e$) and a $D_s^\pm$ meson candidate.
243:
244: $B$ meson candidates are reconstructed starting from
245: charged tracks and leptons matched to trigger objects satisfying
246: on-line trigger selections, in order to accurately model
247: trigger biases to the signal proper time
248: distribution through Monte Carlo (MC) simulations.
249: To ensure optimal vertexing and momentum resolution
250: only tracks reconstructed both in the central drift chamber and in the
251: silicon vertex detector with a minimum transverse momentum of 400 \MeVc\
252: are used. A secondary/tertiary vertex fit is performed on all
253: possible track combinations using a mass constraint on
254: $D_s$ mesons involved in hadronic decays. Further selection criteria
255: have been designed to optimize $S/\sqrt(S+B)$,
256: using MC simulations for signal and sideband data
257: for background.
258:
259: Hadronic decays are selected requiring a significantly
260: displaced secondary vertex and a tertiary vertex consistent with a downstream
261: decay of a charmed meson. Selecting high probability vertex fit reduces
262: combinatorial background
263: and a minimum $P_T$ on the pion from \Bs\ decay
264: is required
265: %while the \Bs\ decay pion $P_t$ is required to
266: %be greater than 1.2 \GeVc\
267: to reduce background from $D_s$ production in $\ppbar \myto c X$
268: events combined with a fragmentation track.
269: Remaining background sources are combinatorics and
270: partially reconstructed $B$ decays.
271: The former is modeled by exponential functions and fixed by fits
272: to the high mass \Bs\ sideband while the latter
273: appear as a well separated bump to the low mass side of the signal peak.
274: %thanks to the excellent invariant mass resolution of the
275: %CDF tracker.
276: From MC simulation we derive shapes for the
277: contributions from decays like $\Bs\myto D_s^\ast \pi
278: \myto D_s (\gamma,\pi^0)\pi^+$ or $\Bs\myto D_s \rho^+
279: \myto D_s \pi^+ (\pi^0)$ where the $\gamma$ or $\pi^0$ escape
280: undetected. Other backgrounds considered
281: are Cabibbo-suppressed $\Bs\myto D_s K$
282: decays (whose contribution is fixed to the
283: analogous \Bd\ decay rate) and reflections
284: from b-baryon and \Bd\ decays whose shapes and relative
285: contributions are fixed to those expected from simulation.
286:
287: \begin{table}[t]
288: \caption{\Bs\ yield and S/B in 360 \ipb\ of \cdfii\ data.}
289: \label{table:sample}
290: \newcommand{\m}{\hphantom{$-$}}
291: \newcommand{\cc}[1]{\multicolumn{1}{c}{#1}}
292: %\renewcommand{\tabcolsep}{2pc} % enlarge column spacing
293: \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2} % enlarge line spacing
294: \begin{tabular}{@{}lll}
295: \hline
296: Decay Channel & Yield & S/B \\
297: \hline
298: $\BsDspi$,$(\Phipi)$ & $526\pm33$ & 1.8 \\
299: $\BsDspi$,$(\KstarK)$ & $254\pm21$ & 1.7 \\
300: $\BsDspi$,$(\Trepi)$ & $116\pm18$ & 1.0 \\
301: \hline
302: $\BslDs$,$(\Phipi)$ & $4355\pm94$ & 3.1 \\
303: $\BslDs$,$(\KstarK)$ & $1750\pm83$ & 0.4 \\
304: $\BslDs$,$(\Trepi)$ & $1573\pm88$ & 0.3 \\
305: \hline
306: \end{tabular}\\[2pt]
307: \end{table}
308:
309: Similar selection criteria are used to isolate semileptonic decays.
310: Further requests on the $K^\ast$ and $\phi$ helicity angle and on the
311: the lepton + $D_s$ invariant mass ($2.3 < m_{lD_s} <5\ \GeVcc$)
312: reduce combinatorial and $c\bar{c}$ background. An important
313: background (of order 20\% of the signal sample) arises from
314: $B\myto D_s^{(\ast)} D_{(s)}^{(\ast)} X$ with $D_{(s)}^{(\ast)}\myto l\nu X$
315: decays.
316: The expected contribution is determined from MC using
317: world average branching ratios and considered in the mixing
318: analysis with proper lifetime and mixing probabilities.
319: The background from real prompt $D_s^{(\ast)}$
320: paired with a random track faking a lepton (prompt background)
321: is estimated from wrong sign, $l^\pm D_s^\pm$, signal.
322: Its contribution is about 4\% of the right sign sample.
323:
324: An example of the clean signals observed in hadronic and semileptonic
325: decays is shown in Figs.~\ref{fig:Bshadronic} and \ref{fig:BsSemil}.
326: Number of events and $S/B$ values extracted from fits to the
327: \Bs\ or $D_s$ invariant mass are displayed in Table~\ref{table:sample}.
328: %
329: \section{Proper Time Reconstruction and Resolution}
330: %
331: %
332: \begin{table*}[htb]
333: \caption{Tagging dilution, efficiency and
334: calibrated $\varepsilon D^2$ (\%) with statistical and systematic uncertainty.}
335: \label{tab:ed2}
336: \newcommand{\m}{\hphantom{$-$}}
337: \newcommand{\cc}[1]{\multicolumn{1}{c}{#1}}
338: \renewcommand{\tabcolsep}{2pc} % enlarge column spacing
339: \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2} % enlarge line spacing
340: \begin{tabular}{@{}lllll}
341: \hline
342: Tagger & $\sqrt{<D^2>}$ & $\varepsilon$
343: & $\varepsilon (DS_D)^2 {\mathrm(semil.)}$
344: & $\varepsilon (DS_D)^2 {\mathrm(had.)}$ \\
345: \hline
346: SMT & 35.9 & 5.0 & $0.557\pm0.047\pm0.034$ & $0.46\pm0.11\pm0.03$ \\
347: SET & 29.4 & 3.5 & $0.293\pm0.033\pm0.017$ & $0.18\pm0.06\pm0.02$ \\
348: JVX & 16.9 & 9.8 & $0.263\pm0.035\pm0.021$ & $0.14\pm0.07\pm0.01$ \\
349: JJP & 11.5 & 14.0 & $0.150\pm0.026\pm0.015$ & $0.11\pm0.06\pm0.01$ \\
350: JPT & 5.0 & 52.0 & $0.157\pm0.027\pm0.025$ & $0.24\pm0.09\pm0.01$ \\
351: \hline
352: Total & 35.9 & 5.0 & $1.429\pm0.093$ & $1.12\pm0.18\pm0.04$ \\
353: \end{tabular}\\[2pt]
354: \end{table*}
355: %
356: %\begin{figure}[t]
357: %\vspace{9pt}
358: %\includegraphics[width=0.90\linewidth]{./ctres-BsDsPi_PhiPi_better.eps}
359: %\vspace{-20pt}
360: %\caption{$c\tau(\Bs)$ error for \BsDspi\ signal and background}
361: %\label{fig:ctau_err}
362: %\end{figure}
363: %
364: The proper decay time of \Bs\ mesons is reconstructed
365: using the distance in the transverse plane from the beam axis
366: to the decay vertex ($L_{xy}$) and the transverse momentum of the candidates:
367: $c\tau_{B_s} = L_{xy} \cdot m_{B_s}/P_T$.
368: %\begin{equation}
369: %$c\tau(\Bs)=L_{xy} \cdot m(\Bs)/P_T$.
370: %\end{equation}
371: For semileptonic decays a K factor is needed to compensate
372: for missing momentum carried by neutrinos $ c\tau_{B_s}= K \cdot
373: c\tau_{B_s}^\ast$ where $c\tau_{B_s}^\ast$ is reconstructed from
374: the lepton + $D_s$ transverse momentum. The K factor distribution
375: is derived from MC simulation of inclusive semileptonic decays.
376: % and its distribution is used in the fit.
377: %In the case of $\DsPhipi$ the K factor
378: %distribution is calculated in 5 bins of $m_{lD_s}$
379: %in order to take in to account that the higher its value
380: %the smaller is the missing momentum carried by the neutrino
381: %and hence a better overall resolution on $c\tau_{\Bs}$ is obtained.
382:
383: The time dependent mixing probability is convoluted with
384: a Gaussian resolution function using the event-by-event expected
385: error on $c\tau_{B_s}$. The latter includes a scale factor
386: derived studying the proper time resolution function on a
387: sample of pseudo-$\Bs$ candidates constructed from a prompt $D_s$ meson
388: paired with a fragmentation track. This sample exhibits characteristics
389: very similar to those of the signal and allows the parameterization of the
390: scale factor as a function of several kinematic variables.
391: The average $c\tau$ uncertainty for the golden
392: $\BsDspi$,$\DsPhipi$ mode
393: %, displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig:ctau_err},
394: is $\approx 100\ {\rm fs}$ corresponding to 60-70 \um\ resolution on the
395: \Bs\ decay length.
396: %
397: Note that the exponential term in eq.~\ref{eq:significance} implies
398: a 60\% loss of statistical power for 100 $fs$ resolution
399: at $\Dms = 15$.
400: %compared to $\Dmd = 0.5$ as in the case of \Bd\ mixing.
401: Improving the proper time measurement
402: accuracy, e.g. by using an event-by-event primary vertex,
403: will certainly help in a future updated analysis.
404:
405: \section{Lifetime Measurement}
406:
407: Determinations of $B$-meson lifetimes in several exclusive
408: $B^+$ and \Bd\ decay channels provide an important check on the
409: accuracy of proper time measurement.
410: This has been successfully performed~\cite{lifetimes}
411: using $B\myto J/\psi K^{(\ast)}$ and semileptonic decays collected
412: with a version of the trigger with no
413: impact parameter requirement on tracks. For the present mixing analysis
414: an additional crucial point has been the removal of the bias introduced
415: by the trigger and offline selection criteria. A detailed Monte Carlo
416: simulation of the trigger, including the effects of the variations
417: with time of the beam axis position with respect to the detector and
418: of trigger algorithms, has been used to derive the efficiency as a function
419: of proper time for each of the decay modes analyzed. This method
420: has been validated measuring $B^+$ and $\Bd$ lifetime in $D\pi$ modes
421: collected by the same trigger used for the mixing analysis. The results
422: ($\tau(B^+)({\rm ps})=1.661\pm0.025\pm0.013$,
423: $\tau(\Bd)({\rm ps})=1.511\pm0.023\pm0.013$,
424: $\tau(\Bs)({\rm ps})=1.598\pm0.097\pm0.017$)
425: are consistent with world averages. The systematics are at the level of
426: 1\% and demonstrate that the the trigger bias is well under control.
427: A similar analysis is currently under way
428: using the same semileptonic \Bs\ sample
429: used here. When completed, it will give the best measurement
430: of $\Bs$ lifetime in a flavor specific decay.
431: For the time being a result consistent with the world average
432: with a statistical uncertainty of 2\% has been reported by CDF.
433:
434: \section{Flavor Tagging}
435:
436: Identifying the initial flavor of the $B$ mesons at hadron colliders
437: has always been a critical task due to the busy
438: environment of $b$ events in $\ppbar$ collisions.
439: To determine the \Bs\ flavor algorithms have been developed
440: relying either on the other $b$-hadron in the event,
441: Opposite Side (OS) taggers, or on the expected charge correlation
442: ($\Bs - K^+$) between the \Bs\ flavor and the kaons emerging close to the
443: \Bs\ flight direction from the fragmentation and hadronization process,
444: Same Side Kaon (SSK) tagger. Five different OS taggers are used here:
445: %
446: \begin{itemize}
447: %
448: \item A Soft Muon Tagger (SMT), based on the detection of
449: muons, with $P_T>1.5\ \GeVc$ and pseudorapidity $|\eta| < 1.5$
450: from $b\myto \mu^-X $ decays.
451: The dilution is parameterized as a function of a muon
452: likelihood and muon momentum relative to the jet axis, $P^{rel}_T$, to
453: account for the higher dilution expected at higher $P^{rel}_T$ due
454: to lower $b \myto c \myto l^+$ sequential background.
455: %
456: \item A similar algorithm, Soft Electron Tagger (SET),
457: uses $b$ decays to electrons with $P_T>2.0\ \GeVc$
458: detected in the central electromagnetic calorimeter.
459: %
460: \item Three different Jet Charge Taggers,
461: where a weighted sum of track charges in opposite side
462: jets is correlated with the initial $b$-quark charge sign.
463: The three algorithms differ on the choice of the tagging jet:
464: jet containing an identified
465: secondary vertex (JVX), jet characterized by at least one displaced track
466: (JJP) or the highest $P_T$ jet in the event (JPT).
467: %
468: \end{itemize}
469: All the taggers have been tuned on an inclusive and almost pure sample
470: of $\approx 10^6$ semileptonic $b$ decays from the lepton + SVT trigger.
471: %where the lepton and a track are required to be consistent with being
472: %the trigger objects and coming from $b$-hadron decays. An almost pure
473: %sample of more that $1\cdot 10^6$ $b$ events is collected.
474: The dilution of each different algorithm is determined,
475: as a function of several variables, from the
476: the trigger lepton charge after correction for mixing and
477: $b \myto c \myto l^+$ background. Taggers are ranked in
478: order of their expected dilutions and only the decision from the
479: highest dilution tagger available in any single event is used.
480:
481: Since the calibration sample for the dilution may be different
482: in certain aspects (e.g. $P_T$ spectra) from the signal sample
483: a scale factor ($S_D$) is allowed for each of the 5 tagging algorithms.
484: The $S_D$ factors for the semileptonic and hadronic analysis are
485: fixed by measuring the \Bd\ oscillation frequency and its amplitude
486: using respectively the high statistics $B_{d,u}\myto l D \nu X$ and
487: $B_{d,u}\myto J/\psi K^{(\ast)}/B_{d,u}\myto D^{(\ast)}\pi$ samples.
488: A summary of the tagging figure of merit $\varepsilon D^2$ is reported
489: in Tab.~\ref{tab:ed2}. The scale factors are consistent
490: with 1 within the precision allowed by the present statistics.
491:
492: \section{Results and Perspectives}
493:
494: Following~\cite{Moser} an amplitude scan is performed,
495: where, at each value of the mixing frequency, an amplitude $A$
496: is fitted from the data. The amplitude $A$ should be consistent
497: with 0 for mixing
498: frequencies far from the true value of \Dms\ and with 1 in its vicinity.
499: This method allows for a straightforward
500: way to combine several measurement (semileptonic and hadronic) as well
501: as results from different experiments.
502:
503: %follow~\cite{Moser} to
504: We determined systematic
505: uncertainties on the amplitude $A$
506: using large toy MC experiments to minimize the effect
507: of the limited statistics. The biggest effects on systematic
508: uncertainties at high value of \Dms\ come from the level and
509: the dilution parameterization of the prompt background
510: for the semileptonic analysis (contributing
511: $\sigma_A\simeq0.15\ @\ \Dms=20 \psinv$) and the dilution scale factor for
512: the hadronic analysis ($\sigma_A\simeq0.3\ @\ \Dms=20 \psinv$).
513: It should be noticed that the latter will certainly
514: be reduced with more data since it is limited by the
515: available number of $B_{d,u}$ hadronic decays. In any case
516: the combined systematic
517: uncertainties are much smaller than the statistical uncertainties
518: on the present measurements, for any value of the mixing frequency.
519: %has little impact compared to the statistical uncertainty of
520: %the present measurement.
521:
522: \begin{figure}[t]
523: %\vspace{9pt}
524: %\framebox[55mm]{\rule[-21mm]{0mm}{43mm}}
525: \includegraphics[width=0.98\linewidth]{./semihad_combined.eps}
526: \vspace{-45pt}
527: \caption{Amplitude scan for the combined \BslDs\ and \BsDspi\ analysis.}
528: \label{fig:AmpScans}
529: \end{figure}
530:
531: %\begin{figure*} [htb]
532: %\vspace{9pt}
533: %%\framebox[55mm]{\rule[-21mm]{0mm}{43mm}}
534: %%\hfill
535: %%\framebox[55mm]{\rule[-21mm]{0mm}{43mm}}
536: %\includegraphics[width=0.42\linewidth]{./AmpScanSemil.eps}
537: %\includegraphics[width=0.42\linewidth]{./AmpScanHadr.eps}
538: %\caption{Amplitude scan for the combined \BslDs\ sample (left) and
539: %hadronic sample (right)}
540: %\label{fig:AmpScans}
541: %\end{figure*}
542:
543: The present CDF sensitivity is dominated by the semileptonic
544: result: $\Dms > 7.7\ \psinv @\ 95\%$ C.L. with a sensitivity of 7.4 \psinv.
545: The combined semileptonic and hadronic analysis limit is
546: $\Dms > 7.9\ \psinv @\ 95\%$ C.L. while the combined sensitivity
547: increases to 8.4\psinv.
548:
549: Combining the CDF mesaurement with previously available
550: results does not change the actual limit
551: %$\Dms > 14.5\ \psinv$
552: and only marginally improves the sensitivity (from 18.2 to 18.6).
553: It can be noticed, however, that the current sensitivity of \cdfii\ data is
554: relatively better behaved at higher \Dms\ than most of
555: previous experiments due to the valuable hadronic
556: sample that will dominate the sensitivity in future higher
557: statistics searches for \Bs\ oscillations.
558:
559: \begin{thebibliography}{9}
560: %\bibitem{Tarantino} C.Tarantino, ``B-Meson Mixing and Lifetimes'',
561: %these proceedings.
562: \bibitem{UTFIT}
563: M.~Bona {\it et al.} [UTfit Collaboration],
564: % %``The 2004 UTfit collaboration report on the status of the
565: % unitarity triangle in the standard model,''
566: JHEP {\bf 0507}, 028 (2005) [arXiv:hep-ph/0501199].
567: %\bibitem{HFAG} Heavy Flavor Ageraging Group. hep-ex:XXXXXXX, and http://HFAG
568: \bibitem{pdg2004}
569: S.\,Eidelman {\it et al.} [Particle Data Group],
570: %``Review of particle physics,''
571: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 592}, 1 (2004).
572: %
573: \bibitem{Moser} H.G.Moser and A.Roussarie,
574: Nucl.\ Instrum.\ Meth.\ A {\bf 384} (1977)
575: %
576: \bibitem{CDFII}
577: % New CDF reference from J/psi cross section paper
578: D. Acosta et al., Phys. Rev. D71, 032001 (2005).
579: % old CDF reference
580: %CDF Collaboration, FERMILAB-PUB-96/390-E (1996).
581: \bibitem{L00}
582: C.S.~ Hill {\it et al.}, Nucl.\ Instrum.\ Meth.\ A {\bf 530},1 (2004).
583: \bibitem{TOF}
584: D. Acosta {\it et al.}, Nucl.\ Instrum.\ Meth.\ A {\bf 518},605 (2004).
585: \bibitem{SVT}
586: W.\,Ashmanskas {\it et al.},
587: %``The CDF silicon vertex trigger,''
588: Nucl.\ Instrum.\ Meth.\ A {\bf 518}, 532 (2004).
589: %
590: \bibitem{lifetimes} Additional details can be found at:\\
591: http://www-cdf.fnal.gov/physics/new/bottom
592: %
593: \end{thebibliography}
594:
595: \end{document}
596: