1: \section{Kinetic Scheme Analysis}
2:
3: \subsection{Theoretical input}
4:
5: Spectral moments of $B\to X_c\ell\nu$~decays have been derived up to
6: $\mathcal{O}(1/m^3_b)$ in the kinetic
7: scheme~\cite{Gambino:2004qm}. Compared to the original paper, the
8: theoretical expressions used in the fit contain an improved
9: calculation of the perturbative corrections to the lepton energy
10: moments~\cite{ref:2} and account for the $E_\mathrm{min}$~dependence
11: of the perturbative corrections to the hadronic mass
12: moments~\cite{Uraltsev:2004in}. For the $B\to X_s\gamma$~moments, the
13: (biased) OPE prediction and the bias correction have been
14: calculated~\cite{Benson:2004sg}.
15:
16: All these expressions depend on the $b$- and $c$-quark masses
17: $m_b(\mu)$ and $m_c(\mu)$, the non-perturbative
18: parameters $\mu^2_\pi(\mu)$ and $\mu^2_G(\mu)$ ($\mathcal{O}(1/m^2_b)$),
19: $\tilde\rho^3_D(\mu)$ and $\rho^3_{LS}(\mu)$ ($\mathcal{O}(1/m^3_b)$),
20: and $\alpha_s$~\cite{ref:3}. The theoretical uncertainties can be
21: separated into two categories: non-perturbative (related to the
22: expansion in $1/m_b$) and perturbative (related to the expansion in
23: $\alpha_s$).
24:
25: Following the recipe in Ref.~\cite{Gambino:2004qm}, the
26: non-perturbative uncertainties are evaluated by varying $\mu^2_\pi$ and
27: $\mu^2_G$ ($\tilde\rho^3_D$ and $\rho^3_{LS}$) by $\pm 20\%$ ($\pm 30\%$)
28: around their ``nominal'' values $m_b=4.6$~GeV, $m_c=1.18$~GeV,
29: $\mu^2_\pi=0.4$~GeV$^2$, $\tilde\rho^3_D=0.1$~GeV$^3$,
30: $\mu^2_G=0.35$~GeV$^2$ and $\rho^3_{LS}=-0.15$~GeV$^3$, corresponding
31: to the uncertainty of the respective Wilson coefficient. All these
32: variations are considered uncorrelated for a given moment. The
33: theoretical covariance matrix is then constructed by treating these
34: errors as fully correlated for a given moment with different
35: $E_\mathrm{min}$ while they are treated as uncorrelated between
36: moments of different order.
37:
38: For the moments of the photon energy spectrum, we take 30\% of the
39: absolute value of the bias correction as its uncertainty. This
40: additional theoretical error is considered uncorrelated for moments
41: with different $E_\mathrm{min}$ and different order.
42:
43: The theoretical uncertainties mentioned so far (non-perturbative, bias
44: correction) are used to construct a theoretical covariance matrix for
45: the measurements and are thus included in the fit. The perturbative
46: uncertainties are estimated by repeating the fit, setting $\alpha_s$
47: to a different value. For lepton and photon energy (hadronic mass)
48: moments, we vary $\alpha_s$ within $\pm 0.04$ ($\pm 0.1$) around the
49: central value 0.22 (0.3). These ranges of variation follow the recommendations in Ref.~\cite{Gambino:2004qm}. The
50: different treatment of the hadron mass moments is due to the fact
51: that the calculation of the perturbative corrections to these
52: moments is less complete.
53:
54: \subsection{\boldmath The $\chi^2$~function}
55:
56: We use a $\chi^2$~function with seven free parameters: the
57: semileptonic $b\to c$ branching fraction $\mathcal{B}(B\to
58: X_c\ell\nu)$, $m_b$, $m_c$, $\mu^2_\pi$, $\tilde\rho^3_D$, $\mu^2_G$
59: and $\rho^3_{LS}$,
60: \begin{equation}
61: \chi^2 = \sum_{i,j} (\langle X\rangle_i^\mathrm{meas.}-\langle
62: X\rangle_i^\mathrm{kin})\mathrm{cov}^{-1}_{ij}(\langle
63: X\rangle_j^\mathrm{meas.}-\langle X\rangle_j^\mathrm{kin})~.
64: \end{equation}
65: Here, $\langle X\rangle^\mathrm{meas.}_i$ are the measured moments. $\langle X\rangle^\mathrm{kin}_i$ are the corresponding kinetic scheme predictions that depend on these free
66: parameters. The covariance matrix is the sum of the experimental and
67: theoretical error matrices.
68:
69: We determine the CKM element $|V_{cb}|$ by treating it as an eighth
70: free parameter in the fit. $|V_{cb}|$ is related to the semileptonic
71: width $\Gamma(B\to X_c\ell\nu)$ by~\cite{Benson:2003kp}
72: \begin{eqnarray}
73: \frac{|V_{cb}|}{0.0417} & = & \left(\Gamma(B\to
74: X_c\ell\nu)\frac{1.55~\mathrm{ps}}{0.105}\right)^{1/2}\times
75: (1-0.0018)\times (1+0.30(\alpha_s-0.22)) \label{eq10}\\
76: \lefteqn{\times
77: (1-0.66(m_b-4.6~\mathrm{GeV})+0.39(m_c-1.15~\mathrm{GeV})} \nonumber\\
78: \lefteqn{+0.013(\mu^2_\pi-0.4~\mathrm{GeV}^2)+0.09(\tilde\rho^3_D-0.1~\mathrm{GeV}^3)}
79: \nonumber \\
80: \lefteqn{+0.05(\mu^2_G-0.35~\mathrm{GeV}^2)-0.01(\rho^3_{LS}+0.15~\mathrm{GeV}^3)~.}
81: \nonumber
82: \end{eqnarray}
83: Using this expression, we calculate $\Gamma(B\to X_c\ell\nu)$ from
84: $|V_{cb}|$ and add the following term to the $\chi^2$~function,
85: \begin{equation}
86: {\chi'}^2=\chi^2+(\frac{\mathcal{B}_{X_c\ell\nu}}{\Gamma(B\to
87: X_c\ell\nu)}-\tau_B)^2/\sigma^2_{\tau_B}~.
88: \end{equation}
89: %Here, $\tau_B$ is the average of the $B^+$ and $B^0$~lifetimes, which
90: %we take to be $(1.585\pm 0.006)$~ps, as mentioned above.
91:
92: As $\mu^2_G$ and $\tilde\rho^3_{LS}$ are determined from $B^*-B$~mass
93: splitting and heavy quark sum rules and because the expressions depend only
94: weakly on these parameters, we fix $\mu^2_G$ and $\rho^3_{LS}$ to
95: $0.35\pm 0.07$~GeV$^2$ and $-0.15\pm 0.1$~GeV$^3$, respectively, by
96: adding the following terms to the $\chi^2$~function,
97: \begin{equation}
98: {\chi''^2}={\chi'^2}+(\mu^2_G-0.35~\mathrm{GeV}^2)^2/(0.07~\mathrm{GeV}^2)^2+(\rho^3_{LS}+0.15~\mathrm{GeV}^3)^2/(0.1~\mathrm{GeV}^3)^2~.
99: \end{equation}
100: The minimization of the $\chi^{\prime \prime 2}$ is performed using
101: MINUIT~\cite{James:1975dr}.
102:
103: \subsection{Fit results and discussion}
104:
105: The result of the kinetic scheme analysis is shown in Table~\ref{tab:4}
106: and in Figs.~\ref{fig:4} and \ref{fig:5}. The value of the
107: $\chi^2$~function at the minimum is 17.76, compared to $(31-7)$
108: degrees of freedom. All results are preliminary.
109: \begin{table}
110: \begin{center}
111: {\small \begin{tabular}{c@{\extracolsep{.1cm}}ccccccc}
112: \hline \hline
113: \rule[-1.3ex]{0pt}{4ex} & $\mathcal{B}_{X_c\ell\nu}$ (\%) &
114: $m_b$ (GeV) & $m_c$ (GeV) & $\mu^2_\pi$ (GeV$^2$) &
115: $\tilde\rho^3_D$ (GeV$^3$) & $\mu^2_G$ (GeV$^2$) &
116: $\rho^3_{LS}$ (GeV$^3$)\\
117: \hline
118: \rule{0pt}{2.7ex}value & 10.590 & 4.564 & 1.105 & 0.557 & 0.162
119: & 0.358 & -0.174\\
120: $\sigma$(fit) & 0.164 & 0.076 & 0.116 & 0.091 & 0.053 & 0.060 &
121: 0.098\\
122: \rule[-1.3ex]{0pt}{1.3ex}$\sigma(\alpha_s)$ & 0.006 & 0.003 &
123: 0.005 & 0.013 & 0.008 & 0.003 & 0.003\\
124: \hline
125: \rule{0pt}{2.7ex}$\mathcal{B}_{X_c\ell\nu}$ & 1.000 & $-0.023$ &
126: 0.003 & 0.229 & 0.192 & $-0.147$ & $-0.024$\\
127: $m_b$ & & 1.000 & 0.983 & $-0.729$ & $-0.623$ & $-0.024$ &
128: $-0.111$\\
129: $m_c$ & & & 1.000 & $-0.716$ & $-0.633$ & $-0.124$ & $-0.033$\\
130: $\mu^2_\pi$ & & & & 1.000 & 0.851 & 0.005 & 0.052\\
131: $\tilde\rho^3_D$ & & & & & 1.000 & $-0.046$ & $-0.156$\\
132: $\mu^2_G$ & & & & & & 1.000 & $-0.071$\\
133: \rule[-1.3ex]{0pt}{1.3ex}$\rho^3_{LS}$ & & & & & & & 1.000\\
134: \hline \hline
135: \end{tabular} }
136: \end{center}
137: \caption{Results of the kinetic scheme fit. The error from the fit
138: contains the uncertainties related to the experiment, the
139: non-perturbative corrections and the bias
140: correction. $\sigma(\alpha_s)$ is the uncertainty related to the
141: perturbative corrections. In the lower part of the table, the
142: correlation matrix of the parameters is shown.} \label{tab:4}
143: \end{table}
144: \begin{figure}
145: \begin{center}
146: \includegraphics{fig4.eps}
147: \end{center}
148: \caption{Partial branching fractions and lepton energy moments,
149: compared to the kinetic scheme fit result. The yellow bands show
150: the theoretical uncertainty included in the fit (non-perturbative
151: corrections, bias correction). The open symbols correspond to
152: measurements not used in the fit.} \label{fig:4}
153: \end{figure}
154: \begin{figure}
155: \begin{center}
156: \includegraphics{fig5.eps}
157: \end{center}
158: \caption{Same as Fig.~\ref{fig:4} for the hadron mass and photon
159: energy moments.} \label{fig:5}
160: \end{figure}
161:
162: To assess the stability of the fit, we have repeated the analysis
163: using lepton energy moments only, hadron mass moments only and photon
164: energy moments only. The result is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:6}. In
165: general, changes are well covered by the fit uncertainty though the
166: $B\to X_s\gamma$~data seems to prefer lower values of $m_b$.
167: \begin{figure}
168: \begin{center}
169: \includegraphics{fig6.eps}
170: \end{center}
171: \caption{Stability of the kinetic scheme fit. The fit is repeated
172: using lepton energy moments only, hadron mass moments only and
173: photon energy moments only. The ellipses are $\Delta\chi^2=1$.}
174: \label{fig:6}
175: \end{figure}
176:
177: Finally, the result for $|V_{cb}|$ reads
178: \begin{displaymath}
179: |V_{cb}|=(41.93\pm 0.65(\mathrm{fit})\pm 0.07(\alpha_s)\pm
180: 0.63(\mathrm{th}))\times 10^{-3}~.
181: \end{displaymath}
182: The first error is due to all uncertainties taken into account in the fit
183: (experimental error in the moment measurements, non-perturbative
184: corrections and bias correction to the moments, uncertainty in
185: $\tau_B$). The second error is obtained by varying $\alpha_s$ in the
186: expressions for the moments and in Eq.~\ref{eq10}. In Eq.~\ref{eq10},
187: we vary $\alpha_s$ by $\pm$0.008 around the central value of
188: 0.22~\cite{ref:4}. The last error is a 1.5\% uncertainty due to the
189: limited accuracy of the theoretical expression for the semileptonic
190: width, assessed in Ref.~\cite{Benson:2003kp}.
191: