hep-ph0112285/text
1: \documentclass[aps,prd,preprint,superscriptaddress]{revtex4}
2: \usepackage{graphicx}
3: 
4: %CWC's macros:
5: \def\NCA{Nuovo Cimento }
6: \def\NIM{Nucl. Instrum. Methods }
7: \def\NIMA{Nucl. Instrum. Methods A }
8: \def\NPB{Nucl. Phys. B }
9: \def\PLB{Phys. Lett. B }
10: \def\PRL{Phys. Rev. Lett. }
11: \def\PRD{Phys. Rev. D }
12: \def\ZPC{Z. Phys. C }
13: 
14: \def\etal{{\it et.~al.}}
15: \def\ie{{\it i.e.}}
16: \def\eg{{\it e.g.}}
17: 
18: \def\st{\scriptstyle}
19: \def\sst{\scriptscriptstyle}
20: \def\mco{\multicolumn}
21: \def\epp{\epsilon^{\prime}}
22: \def\vep{\varepsilon}
23: \def\ra{\rightarrow}
24: \def\vp{{\bf p}}
25: \def\as{\alpha_S}
26: \def\Ld{\Lambda}
27: \def\ld{\lambda}
28: 
29: \def\be{\begin{equation}}
30: \def\ee{\end{equation}}
31: \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}}
32: \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}}
33: \def\bean{\begin{eqnarray*}}
34: \def\eean{\end{eqnarray*}}
35: \def\bary{\begin{array}}
36: \def\eary{\end{array}}
37: \def\bi{\bibitem}
38: \def\bit{\begin{itemize}}
39: \def\eit{\end{itemize}}
40: 
41: \def\lan{\langle}
42: \def\ran{\rangle}
43: \def\lra{\leftrightarrow}
44: \def\la{\leftarrow}
45: \def\ra{\rightarrow}
46: \def\dash{\mbox{-}}
47: \def\ol{\overline}
48: 
49: \def\re{\rm Re}
50: \def\im{\rm Im}
51: \def\ne{\nu_e}
52: \def\nm{\nu_{\mu}}
53: \def\nt{\nu_{\tau}}
54: \def\nebar{{\bar \nu}_e}
55: \def\nmbar{{\bar \nu}_{\mu}}
56: \def\ntbar{{\bar \nu}_{\tau}}
57: \def\eps{\epsilon}
58: \def\vareps{\var\epsilon}
59: \def\Ld{\Lambda}
60: \def\Ldbar{\bar\Lambda}
61: \def\Ldqcd{\Lambda_{QCD}}
62: \def\ld{\lambda}
63: \def\Dt{\Delta}
64: \def\dt{\delta}
65: \def\cB{{\cal{B}}}
66: 
67: \def\vud{V_{ud}}
68: \def\vus{V_{us}}
69: \def\vub{V_{ub}}
70: \def\vcd{V_{cd}}
71: \def\vcs{V_{cs}}
72: \def\vcb{V_{cb}}
73: \def\vtd{V_{td}}
74: \def\vts{V_{ts}}
75: \def\vtb{V_{tb}}
76: \def\ub{{\bar u}}
77: \def\cb{{\bar c}}
78: \def\tb{{\bar t}}
79: \def\db{{\bar d}}
80: \def\sb{{\bar s}}
81: \def\bb{{\bar b}}
82: 
83: \begin{document}
84: 
85: \preprint{ANL-HEP-PR-01-119, EFI-01-56, hep-ph/0112285}
86: \preprint{December 2001}
87: \bigskip
88: 
89: \title{UPDATED ANALYSIS OF SOME TWO-BODY CHARMLESS $B$ DECAYS}
90: 
91: \author{Cheng-Wei Chiang}
92: \email[e-mail: ]{chengwei@hep.uchicago.edu}
93: \affiliation{HEP Division, Argonne National Laboratory
94: 9700 S. Cass Avenue, Argonne, IL 60439}
95: \affiliation{Enrico Fermi Institute and Department of Physics,
96: University of Chicago, 5640 S. Ellis Avenue, Chicago, IL 60637}
97: \author{Jonathan L. Rosner}
98: \email[e-mail: ]{rosner@hep.uchicago.edu}
99: \affiliation{Enrico Fermi Institute and Department of Physics, 
100: University of Chicago, 5640 S. Ellis Avenue, Chicago, IL 60637}
101: 
102: \date{\today}
103: 
104: \begin{abstract}
105:   New data from the BaBar, Belle, and CLEO Collaborations on $B$ decays to
106:   two-body charmless final states are analyzed, with the following
107:   consequences: (1) The penguin amplitude which dominates the decay $B^+ \to
108:   \pi^+ K^{*0}$ has a magnitude similar to that dominating $B^+ \to \pi^+ K^0$.
109:   (2) The decay $B^+ \to \pi^+ \eta$, a good candidate for observing direct
110:   $CP$ violation, should be detectable at present levels of sensitivity. (3)
111:   The decays $B^+ \to \eta' K^+$ and $B^+ \to \eta K^{*+}$ are sufficiently
112:   similar in rate to the corresponding decays $B^0 \to \eta' K^0$ and $B^0 \to
113:   \eta K^{*0}$, respectively, that one cannot yet infer the need for ``tree''
114:   amplitudes $t'$ contributing to the $B^+$ but not the $B^0$ decays.
115:   Statistical requirements for observing this and other examples of
116:   tree-penguin interference are given. (4) Whereas the $B^+ \to \eta' K^+$ and
117:   $B^0 \to \eta' K^0$ rates cannot be accounted for by the penguin amplitude
118:   $p'$ alone but require an additional flavor-singlet penguin contribution
119:   $s'$, no such flavor-singlet penguin contribution is yet called for in the
120:   decays $B^+ \to \eta K^{*+}$ or $B^0 \to \eta K^{*0}$.  Predictions for the
121:   rates for $B^+ \to \eta' K^{*+}$ and $B^0 \to \eta' K^{*0}$ are given which
122:   would allow one to gauge the importance of these flavor-singlet penguin
123:   amplitudes.
124: \end{abstract}
125: 
126: \pacs{13.25.Hw, 14.40.Nd, 11.30.Er, 11.30.Hv}
127: 
128: \maketitle
129: 
130: \section{INTRODUCTION \label{sec:int}}
131: 
132: The decays of $B$ mesons are rich sources of information on fundamental aspects
133: of weak couplings as described by the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa (CKM) matrix,
134: and on potential effects of physics beyond the Standard Model.  Especially
135: useful information can be obtained from $B$ decays to pairs of light charmless
136: mesons, both pseudoscalar ($P$) and vector ($V$).  A number of questions can
137: now be addressed more incisively in the light of recent data from the CLEO,
138: BaBar, and Belle detectors.  In the present paper we shall discuss several of
139: these, showing that progress is being made and setting goals of data samples
140: for more definitive answers.  We limit our discussion to a few topics.
141: 
142: (1) Recent measurements of the branching ratio for $B^+ \to \pi^+ K^{*0}$
143: indicate that the penguin amplitude dominating this decay has a magnitude not
144: too much smaller than that of the penguin amplitude dominating $B^+ \to \pi^+
145: K^0$.  We use this information, as well as new information on the decays $B \to
146: K (\rho,\omega,\phi)$, to discuss several open questions associated with penguin
147: contributions to $B \to PV$ decays. These include a conjectured relation
148: between two types of penguin amplitudes called $p'_P$ and $p'_V$ in Ref.\ 
149: \cite{VPUP} in which the spectator quark is incorporated into a pseudoscalar or
150: a vector meson, respectively.  Arguments first proposed by Lipkin \cite{HJLP}
151: suggest that such amplitudes would be equal and opposite.  The contribution of
152: electroweak penguin diagrams in suppressing the decays $B \to K (\omega,\phi)$
153: is also noted.
154: 
155: (2) In Refs.\ \cite{BSR} and \cite{Dighe:1995gq}, the decays $B^+ \to \pi^+
156: (\eta,\eta')$ were proposed as good candidates for detecting direct $CP$
157: violation.  Present data samples are approaching the sensitivity for observing
158: these modes, whose branching ratios are expected to be a few parts in $10^6$.
159: We update estimates for the branching ratio for these decays and indicate the
160: possible range of likely direct $CP$ asymmetries.
161: 
162: (3) It has been suggested by several sets of authors (see, e.g., Refs.\
163: \cite{VPUP,HHY,HSW,HY}) that the decays $B^+ \to \eta' K^+$ and $B^+ \to \eta
164: K^{*+}$ might be enhanced with respect to the corresponding decays $B^0 \to
165: \eta' K^0$ and $B^0 \to \eta K^{*0}$, respectively, as a consequence of
166: constructive interference between tree and penguin amplitudes.  We review this
167: suggestion in the light of the latest data and find that this conclusion is not
168: yet warranted.  We indicate the statistical precision that is likely to be
169: needed in order to establish tree-penguin interference in this and other
170: processes reliably.  For $B^{+,0}$ decays to charmless nonstrange final
171: states such interference involves the product $\cos \alpha \cos \delta$,
172: while for decays to charmless non-strange final states it involves
173: $\cos \gamma \cos \delta$, where $\alpha$ and $\gamma$ are weak phases of the
174: unitarity triangle, while $\delta$ is a relative strong phase between tree
175: and penguin amplitudes.
176: 
177: (4) Lipkin \cite{HJLP} has argued for the enhancement of the decays $B \to
178: \eta' K$ and $B \to \eta K^*$ as a result of constructive interference between
179: nonstrange and strange quark components of the $\eta'$ or $\eta$, and for the
180: suppression of the decays $B \to \eta K$ and $B \to \eta' K^*$ because of
181: correspondingly destructive interference.  However, an additional amplitude
182: associated with the flavor-singlet part of the $\eta$ and $\eta'$ is both
183: allowed \cite{Dighe:1995gq} and required for the proper description of the $B
184: \to \eta' K$ decay rates \cite{DGReta}.  The status of this amplitude, called
185: $s'$, is reviewed.  It is pointed out that it does not need to be as large as
186: the penguin amplitude $p'$ in order to explain the data if it interferes
187: constructively with $p'$.  At present, while no such singlet contribution is
188: needed to explain the data on $B \to \eta K^*$, the flavor-singlet component of
189: $\eta$ is small.  A much more incisive test would be available once the decays
190: $B \to \eta' K^*$ (both charged and neutral) are available, since the penguin
191: contributions of nonstrange and strange quarks in the $\eta'$ partially cancel
192: one another, while the flavor-singlet component of the $\eta'$ is dominant.
193: Predictions for these rates are given.
194: 
195: We discuss our notation in Section II.  Experimental data, their averages, and
196: the corresponding inputs to our determination of amplitudes are treated in
197: Section III.  We then discuss the above four questions in turn: penguin
198: contributions in $B \to PV$ decays (Section IV), direct $CP$ violation in $B \to
199: \pi^+ (\eta,\eta')$ (Section V), tree-penguin interference (Section VI), and
200: the role of the flavor-singlet amplitude (Section VII). We summarize in Section
201: VIII.  An Appendix contains details of decay constant calculations.
202: 
203: \section{NOTATION \label{sec:not}}
204: 
205: We use the following quark content and phase conventions:
206: %
207: \begin{itemize}
208: \item{ {\it Bottom mesons}: $B^0=d\bb$, ${\ol B}^0=b\db$, $B^+=u\bb$,
209:     $B^-=-b\ub$, $B_s=s\bb$, ${\ol B}_s=b\sb$;}
210: \item{ {\it Charmed mesons}: $D^0=-c\ub$, ${\ol D}^0=u\cb$, $D^+=c\db$,
211:     $D^-=d\cb$, $D_s^+=c\sb$, $D_s^-=s\cb$;}
212: \item{ {\it Pseudoscalar mesons}: $\pi^+=u\db$, $\pi^0=(d\db-u\ub)/\sqrt{2}$,
213:     $\pi^-=-d\ub$, $K^+=u\sb$, $K^0=d\sb$, ${\ol K}^0=s\db$, $K^-=-s\ub$,
214:     $\eta=(s\sb-u\ub-d\db)/\sqrt{3}$,
215:     $\eta^{\prime}=(u\ub+d\db+2s\sb)/\sqrt{6}$;}
216: \item{ {\it Vector mesons}: $\rho^+=u\db$, $\rho^0=(d\db-u\ub)/\sqrt{2}$,
217:     $\rho^-=-d\ub$, $\omega=(u\ub+d\db)/\sqrt{2}$, $K^{*+}=u\sb$,
218:     $K^{*0}=d\sb$, ${\ol K}^{*0}=s\db$, $K^{*-}=-s\ub$, $\phi=s\sb$.}
219: \end{itemize}
220: %
221: 
222: In the present approximation there are seven types of independent amplitudes: a
223: ``tree'' contribution $t$; a ``color-suppressed'' contribution $c$; a
224: ``penguin'' contribution $p$; a ``singlet penguin'' contribution $s$, in which
225: a color-singlet $q \bar q$ pair produced by two or more gluons or by a $Z$ or
226: $\gamma$ forms an SU(3) singlet state; an ``exchange'' contribution $e$, an
227: ``annihilation'' contribution $a$, and a ``penguin annihilation'' contribution
228: $pa$.  These amplitudes contain both the leading-order and electroweak penguin
229: contributions:
230: %
231: \be\bary{lll}
232: \label{eqn:dict}
233: t \equiv T + P_{EW}^C ~, &\quad& c \equiv C + P_{EW} ~, \\
234: p \equiv P - \frac{1}{3} P_{EW}^C ~, &\quad&
235: s \equiv S - \frac{1}{3} P_{EW} ~, \\
236: a \equiv A ~, &\quad& e + pa \equiv E + PA ~,
237: \eary\ee
238: %
239: where the capital letters denote the leading-order contributions
240: (\cite{Dighe:1995gq,Gronau:1994rj,Gronau:1995hn}) while $P_{EW}$ and $P_{EW}^c$
241: are respectively color-favored and color-suppressed electroweak penguin
242: amplitudes \cite{Gronau:1995hn}.  We shall neglect smaller terms
243: \cite{EWVP,GR2001} $P^E_{EW}$ and $P^A_{EW}$ [$(\gamma,Z)$-exchange and
244: $(\gamma,Z)$-direct-channel electroweak penguin amplitudes].  We shall denote
245: $\Delta S = 0$ transitions by unprimed quantities and $|\Delta S| = 1$
246: transitions by primed quantities.  For $PV$ decay modes, the subscript $P$ or
247: $V$ denotes the final-state meson (pseudoscalar or vector) incorporating the
248: spectator quark.  Although one $B \to VV$ decay ($B^0 \to \phi K^{*0}$) has
249: been seen, we shall not discuss such processes further here.
250: 
251: For the ${\ol b} \to {\ol d}$ and ${\ol b} \to {\ol u} u {\ol d}$ transitions,
252: an educated guess of the hierarchies among the amplitudes \cite{Gronau:1995hn}
253: is given in Table \ref{tab:hier}.  One notices that for $|\Delta S| = 1$
254: transitions, $c'$ contains an electroweak penguin amplitude at the next order.
255: Therefore, we put $c'$ together with $t'$ at the same order.  Similarly, since
256: part of the singlet amplitude is the electroweak penguin, $s'$ is at least of
257: order $P'_{EW}$.
258: 
259: %
260: % This is Table I
261: \begin{table}[t]
262: \caption{Hierarchies among magnitudes of flavor-$SU(3)$ amplitudes in powers of
263:  a parameter $\lambda \equiv |\vus| \simeq 0.22$.
264: \label{tab:hier}}
265: \begin{center}
266: \begin{tabular}{cccccc}
267: \hline\hline
268:   & $O(1)$ & $O(\lambda)$ & $O(\lambda^2)$ 
269:        & $O(\lambda^3)$ & $O(\lambda^4)$ \\
270: \hline
271: $\Delta S=0$
272:   & $T$ & $C,P$ & $E,A,P_{EW}$ 
273:        & $PA,P_{EW}^C$ & ~$PA_{EW}$~ \\
274:   & $t$ & $c,p$ & $e,a,s$ & $pa$ & \\
275: \hline
276: $|\Delta S|=1$
277:   & $P'$ & ~$T',P'_{EW}$~ & $C',PA',P_{EW}^{\prime C}$ 
278:        & ~$E',A',PA'_{EW}$~ & \\
279:   & $p'$ & $t',c',s'$ & $pa'$ & $e',a'$ & \\
280: \hline\hline
281: 
282: \end{tabular}
283: \end{center}
284: \vspace{0.5cm}
285: \end{table}
286: %
287: 
288: \section{AMPLITUDE DECOMPOSITIONS AND EXPERIMENTAL RATES \label{sec:amp}}
289: 
290: We list theoretical predictions and averaged experimental data for interesting
291: charmless $B$ decays involving $\Delta S = 0$ transitions in Table
292: \ref{tab:dS0} and those involving $|\Delta S| = 1$ transitions in Table
293: \ref{tab:dS1}.  Amplitudes of order $\lambda^2$ and smaller in Table
294: \ref{tab:hier} are omitted unless dominant.  Detailed experimental values are
295: listed in Tables \ref{tab:dS0data} and \ref{tab:dS1data}.  We will assume
296: \cite{VPUP} $p_V = - p_P$ and $p'_V = - p'_P$.  The averaged rates are obtained
297: by combining the data recently reported from CLEO, BaBar, and Belle groups
298: \cite{Jessop:1999cv,Cronin-Hennessy:kg,Richichi:1999kj,Jessop:2000bv,%
299: Briere:2001ue,Asner:2001eh,Gao:2001ce,Aubert:2000vr,Aubert:2001zd,%
300: Aubert:2001hs,Aubert:2001ye,Aubert:2001zf,Aubert:2001ap,Dallapiccola,%
301: Abe:2001nq,Bozek:2001xd,Abe:2001pf,Tajima:2001qp,belle0115,belle0137}.  In this
302: section we shall comment on some of the methods used to determine the invariant
303: amplitudes, deferring discussions of others to subsequent sections.
304: 
305: %
306: % This is Table II
307: \begin{table}[t]
308: \caption{Summary of predicted contributions to selected $\Delta S = 0$
309: decays of $B$ mesons.  Branching ratios ($\cB$) are quoted in units of
310: $10^{-6}$.  Numbers in italics are assumed inputs.  Experimental values
311: are averaged over results in Refs.\
312: \cite{Jessop:1999cv,Cronin-Hennessy:kg,Richichi:1999kj,Jessop:2000bv,%
313: Briere:2001ue,Asner:2001eh,Gao:2001ce,Aubert:2000vr,Aubert:2001zd,%
314: Aubert:2001hs,Aubert:2001ye,Aubert:2001zf,Aubert:2001ap,Dallapiccola,%
315: Abe:2001nq,Bozek:2001xd,Abe:2001pf,Tajima:2001qp,belle0115,belle0137}.
316: \label{tab:dS0}}
317: \begin{center}
318: \begin{tabular}{llcccccc}
319: \hline\hline
320:  & Mode & Amplitudes & $|t(+c)|^2$ & $|p|^2$ 
321:  & $|s|^2$ (a) & $|s|^2$ (b) & Expt. \\ 
322: \hline
323: $B^+ \to$
324:     & $\pi^+\pi^0$ & $-\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(t+c)$
325:         & 4.7 & 0 & 0 & 0 & $5.7 \pm 1.5$ \\
326:     & $K^+\ol{K}^0$ & $p$
327:         & 0 & 0.55 & 0 & 0 & $<2.4$ \\
328:     & $\pi^+\eta$ & $-\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(t+c+2p+s)$ 
329:         & 3.1 & 0.73 & 0.04 & 0.18 & $ < 5.7$ \\
330:     & $\pi^+\eta'$ & $\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}(t+c+2p+4s)$ 
331:         & 1.6 & 0.37 & 0.35 & 1.4 & $<7$ \\
332:     & $\pi^+\rho^0$ 
333:         & $-\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(t_V+c_P+p_V-p_P)$
334:         & 7.9 & 0.78 & 0 & 0 & $12.8 \pm 3.6$ \\
335: %    & $\pi^0\rho^+$ & $-\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(t_P+c_V+p_P-p_V)$
336: %        & - & - & - & - & - \\
337:     & $\pi^+\omega$ 
338:         & $\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(t_V+c_P+p_P+p_V+2s_P)$
339:         & \textit{7.9} (c) & $\simeq 0$ & $\sim 0.01$ (d) 
340:         & - & $7.9 \pm 1.8$ \\
341:     & $\pi^+ \phi$
342:         & $s_P$ & 0 & 0 & 0.02 & - & $<1.4$ \\
343: \hline
344: $B^0 \to$
345:     & $\pi^+\pi^-$ & $-(t+p)$ 
346:         & {\it 7.3} &  0.51 & 0 & 0 & $4.4 \pm 0.9$ \\
347:     & $\pi^0\pi^0$ & $-\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(c-p)$ 
348:         & 0.04 & 0.26 & 0 & 0 & $<5.7$ \\
349:     & $K^+K^-$ & $-(e+pa)$ 
350:         & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & $<1.9$ \\
351:     & $\pi^{\pm}\rho^{\mp}$ 
352:         & $-(t_{(V,P)}+p_{(V,P)})$ 
353:         & 14.7 (e) & 0.36 (f) & 0 & 0 & $25.8 \pm 4.5$ (g) \\
354:     & $\pi^0\omega$ 
355:         & $\frac{1}{2}(c_P-c_V+p_P+p_V+2s_P)$
356:         & - & $\simeq 0$ & $ <   0.01$ (d) & - & $<3$ \\
357: \hline\hline
358: \end{tabular}
359: \end{center}
360: \leftline{(a) Assuming constructive interference between $s'$ and $p'$
361: in $B \to \eta' K$ (Table III).}
362: \leftline{(b) Assuming no interference between $s'$ and $p'$
363: in $B \to \eta' K$ (Table III).}
364: \leftline{(c) Neglecting other contributions to decay rate.}
365: \leftline{(d) $(c_P + 2 s_P)/\sqrt{2}$ contributes a term $\frac{1}{3}
366:   P_{EWP}/\sqrt{2}$ to amplitude.}
367: \leftline{(e) $|t_V|^2 = 14.7 \pm 3.3$ contribution to $\cB(B^0 \to \pi^+
368: \rho^-)$ estimated from $B^+ \to \pi^+ \omega$, neglecting}
369: \leftline{\qquad $c_P$ and $s_P$, leaving $|t_P|^2 = 11.1 \pm 5.6$ contributing
370:   to $\cB(B^0 \to \pi^- \rho^+)$.}
371: \leftline{(f) $|p_P|^2$ contribution to $\cB(B^0 \to \pi^- \rho^+)$ and
372: $|p_V|^2$ contribution to $\cB(B^0 \to \pi^+ \rho^-)$.}
373: \leftline{(g) Combined branching ratio for $\pi^+ \rho^-$ and $\pi^- \rho^+$.}
374: \end{table}
375: %
376: 
377: %
378: % This is Table III.
379: \begin{table}[t]
380: \caption{Same as Table II for $|\Delta S| = 1$ decays of $B$ mesons.
381: \label{tab:dS1}}
382: \begin{center}
383: \begin{tabular}{llccccccc}
384: \hline\hline
385:  & Mode & Amplitudes & $|t'|^2$ & $|p'|^2$ 
386:  & $|s'|^2$ (a) & $|s'|^2$ (b) & Expt. \\ 
387: \hline
388: $B^+ \to$
389:     & $\pi^+K^0$ & $p'$ 
390:         & 0 & {\it 17.2} & 0 & 0 & $17.2\pm2.6$ \\
391:     & $\pi^0K^+$ & $-\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(p'+t'+c')$ 
392:         & $0.30$ & 8.6 & 0 & 0 & $12.0\pm1.6$ \\
393:     & $\eta K^+$ & $-\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(t'+c'+s')$ 
394:         & $0.20$ & 0 & 1.4 & 5.6 & $<6.9$ \\
395:     & $\eta'K^+$ & $\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}(3p'+t'+c'+4s')$ 
396:         & $0.10$ & 25.9 & 10.9 & 44.4 & $75\pm7$ \\
397:     & $\pi^+K^{*0}$ & $p'_P$
398:         & 0 & {\it 12.2} & 0 & 0 & $12.2\pm2.4$ \\
399:     & $\eta K^{*+}$ 
400:         & $-\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(p'_P-p'_V+t'_P+c'_V+s'_V)$
401:         & 0.22 & 16.2 & - & - & $24.5\pm7.1$ \\
402:     & $\eta'K^{*+}$ 
403:         & $\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}(p'_P+2p'_V+t'_P+c'_V+4s'_V)$
404:         & 0.11 & 2.0 & - & - & $<35$ \\
405:     & $K^+ \omega$ 
406:         & $\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(p'_V+t'_V+c'_P+2s'_P)$ 
407:         & 0.60 & 6.1 & 0.24 (c) & - & $<4$ \\
408:     & $K^+ \phi$ & $p'_P+s'_P$ 
409:         & 0 & 12.2 & 0.48 & - & $7.7\pm1.2$ \\
410: \hline
411: $B^0 \to$
412:     & $\pi^-K^+$ & $-(p'+t')$ 
413:         & $0.56$ & 16.1 & 0 & 0 & $17.3\pm1.5$ \\
414:     & $\pi^0K^0$ & $\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(p'-c')$ 
415:         & 0 & 8.1 & 0 & 0 & $10.4\pm2.6$ \\
416:     & $\eta K^0$ & $-\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(c'+s')$ 
417:         & 0 & 0 & 1.3 & 5.2 & $<9.3$ \\
418:     & $\eta'K^0$ & $\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}(3p'+c'+4s')$ 
419:         & 0 & 24.2 & 10.2 & 41.6 & $56\pm9$ \\
420:     & $\pi^-K^{*+}$ & $-(p'_P+t'_P)$ 
421:         & 0.62 & 11.4 & 0 & 0 & $23.8\pm6.1$ \\
422:     & $\eta K^{*0}$ & $-\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(p'_P-p'_V+c'_V+s'_V)$
423:         & 0 & 15.2 & - & - & $18.0\pm3.2$ \\
424:     & $\eta'K^{*0}$ & $\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}(p'_P+2p'_V+c'_V+4s'_V)$ 
425:         & 0 & 1.9 & - & - & $<24$ \\
426:     & $K^+ \rho^-$ & $-(p'_V+t'_V)$
427:         & 1.13 & 11.4 & 0 & 0 & $15.9\pm4.4$ \\
428:     & $K^0 \omega$ & $\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(p'_V+c'_P+2s'_P)$
429:         & 0 & 5.7 & 0.23 (c) & - & $<13$ \\
430:     & $K^0 \phi$ & $p'_P+s'_P$ 
431:         & 0 & 11.4 & 0.45 & - & $7.5\pm1.8$ \\
432: \hline\hline
433: \end{tabular}
434: \end{center}
435: \leftline{(a): Maximal interference between $p'$ and $s'$ amplitudes assumed:
436:   constructive for $\eta K$ and $\eta' K$;}
437: \leftline{\qquad destructive for $K \phi$.}
438: \leftline{(b): No interference between $p'$ and $s'$ amplitudes assumed.}
439: \leftline{(c): $(c'_P+2s'_P)/\sqrt{2}$ contributes a term
440: $\frac{1}{3}P'_{EWP}/\sqrt{2} \simeq - 0.20 p'_V/\sqrt{2}$ to amplitude.}
441: \end{table}
442: %
443: 
444: % This is Table IV.
445: \begin{table}[t]
446: \caption{Experimental branching ratios of selected $\Delta S = 0$
447: decays of $B$ mesons.  Branching ratios are quoted in units of
448: $10^{-6}$.  Numbers in parentheses are upper bounds at 90 \% c.l.
449: References are given in square brackets.
450: \label{tab:dS0data}}
451: \begin{center}
452: \begin{tabular}{lllll}
453: \hline\hline
454:  & Mode & CLEO & BaBar & Belle \\ 
455: \hline
456: $B^+ \to$
457:     & $\pi^+\pi^0$ 
458:         & $5.6^{+2.6}_{-2.3}\pm1.7 \; (<12.7)$ \cite{Cronin-Hennessy:kg}
459:         & $5.1^{+2.0}_{-1.8}\pm0.8 \; (<9.6)$ \cite{Aubert:2001hs}
460:         & $7.8^{+3.8+0.8}_{-3.2-1.2} \; (<13.4)$ \cite{Abe:2001nq} \\
461:     & $K^+\ol{K}^0$ 
462:         & $<5.1$ \cite{Cronin-Hennessy:kg}
463:         & $-1.3^{+1.4}_{-1.0}\pm0.7 \; (<2.4)$ \cite{Aubert:2001hs}
464:         & $<5.0$ \cite{Abe:2001nq} \\
465:     & $\pi^+\eta$ 
466:         & $1.2^{+2.8}_{-1.2} \; (<5.7)$ \cite{Richichi:1999kj}
467:         & - & - \\
468:     & $\pi^+\eta'$ 
469:         & $1.0^{+5.8}_{-1.0} \; (<12)$ \cite{Richichi:1999kj}
470:         & $5.4^{+3.5}_{-2.6}\pm0.8 \; (<12)$ \cite{Aubert:2001zf}
471:         & $<7$ \cite{Abe:2001pf} \\
472:     & $\pi^+\rho^0$ 
473:         & $10.4^{+3.3}_{-3.4}\pm2.1$ \cite{Jessop:2000bv}
474:         & $24\pm8\pm3$ \cite{Aubert:2000vr}
475:         & $<14.5$ \cite{belle0115} \\
476:     & $\pi^+\omega$ 
477:         & $11.3^{+3.3}_{-2.9}\pm1.4$ \cite{Jessop:2000bv}
478:         & $6.6^{+2.1}_{-1.8}\pm0.7$ \cite{Aubert:2001zf}
479:         & $<9.4$ \cite{Bozek:2001xd} \\
480:     & $\pi^+ \phi$ 
481:         & - 
482:         & $0.21^{+0.49}_{-0.21}\pm0.05 \; (<1.4)$ \cite{Aubert:2001zd}
483:         & - \\
484: \hline
485: $B^0 \to$
486:     & $\pi^+\pi^-$ 
487:         & $4.3^{+1.6}_{-1.4}\pm0.5$ \cite{Cronin-Hennessy:kg}
488:         & $4.1\pm1.0\pm0.7$ \cite{Aubert:2001hs}
489:         & $5.6^{+2.3+0.4}_{-2.0-0.5}$ \cite{Abe:2001nq} \\
490:     & $\pi^0\pi^0$ 
491:         & $2.2^{+1.7+0.7}_{-1.3-0.7} \; (<5.7)$ \cite{Asner:2001eh} 
492:         & - & - \\
493:     & $K^+K^-$ 
494:         & $<1.9$ \cite{Cronin-Hennessy:kg}
495:         & $0.85^{+0.81}_{-0.66}\pm0.37 \; (<2.5)$ \cite{Aubert:2001hs}
496:         & $<2.7$ \cite{Abe:2001nq} \\
497:     & $\pi^{\pm}\rho^{\mp}$ 
498:         & $27.6^{+8.4}_{-7.4}\pm4.2$ \cite{Jessop:2000bv}
499:         & $28.9 \pm 5.4 \pm 4.3$ \cite{Dallapiccola}
500:         & $20.2^{+8.3}_{-6.6}\pm3.3 \; (<35.7)$ \cite{Bozek:2001xd} \\
501:     & $\pi^0\omega$ 
502:         & $0.8^{+1.9+1.0}_{-0.8-0.8} \; (<5.5)$ \cite{Jessop:2000bv} 
503:         & $-0.3\pm1.1\pm0.3 \; (<3)$ \cite{Aubert:2001zf}
504:         & - \\
505: \hline\hline
506: \end{tabular}
507: \end{center}
508: \vspace{0.5cm}
509: \end{table}
510: %
511: 
512: % This is Table V.
513: \begin{table}[t]
514: \caption{Same as Table IV for $|\Delta S| = 1$ decays of $B$ mesons.
515: \label{tab:dS1data}}
516: \begin{center}
517: \begin{tabular}{lllll}
518: \hline\hline
519:  & Mode & CLEO & BaBar & Belle \\ 
520: \hline
521: $B^+ \to$
522:     & $\pi^+K^0$ 
523:         & $18.2^{+4.6}_{-4.0}\pm1.6$ \cite{Cronin-Hennessy:kg}
524:         & $18.2^{+3.3}_{-3.0}\pm2.0$ \cite{Aubert:2001hs}
525:         & $13.7^{+5.7+1.9}_{-4.8-1.8}$ \cite{Abe:2001nq} \\
526:     & $\pi^0K^+$ 
527:         & $11.6^{+3.0+1.4}_{-2.7-1.3}$ \cite{Cronin-Hennessy:kg}
528:         & $10.8^{+2.1}_{-1.9}\pm1.0$ \cite{Aubert:2001hs}
529:         & $16.3^{+3.5+1.6}_{-3.3-1.8}$ \cite{Abe:2001nq} \\
530:     & $\eta K^+$ 
531:         & $2.2^{+2.8}_{-2.2} \; (<6.9)$ \cite{Richichi:1999kj}
532:         & - & - \\
533:     & $\eta'K^+$ 
534:         & $80^{+10}_{-9}\pm7$ \cite{Richichi:1999kj}
535:         & $70\pm8\pm5$ \cite{Aubert:2001zf}
536:         & $79^{+12}_{-11}\pm9$ \cite{Abe:2001pf} \\
537:     & $\pi^+K^{*0}$ 
538:         & $7.6^{+3.5}_{-3.0}\pm1.6 \; (<16)$ \cite{Jessop:2000bv}
539:         & $15.5 \pm 3.4 \pm 1.8$ \cite{Aubert:2001ap} 
540:         & $16.7^{+3.7+2.1+3.0}_{-3.4-2.1-5.9}$ \cite{belle0115} \\
541:     & $\eta K^{*+}$ 
542:         & $26.4^{+9.6}_{-8.2}\pm3.3$ \cite{Richichi:1999kj}
543:         & $22.1^{+11.1}_{-9.2}\pm3.3 \; (<33.9)$ \cite{Aubert:2001ye}
544:         & $<49.9$ \cite{belle0137} \\
545:     & $\eta'K^{*+}$ 
546:         & $11.1^{+12.7}_{-8.0} \; (<35)$ \cite{Richichi:1999kj} 
547:         & - & - \\
548:     & $K^+ \omega$ 
549:         & $3.2^{+2.4}_{-1.9}\pm0.8 \; (<7.9)$  \cite{Jessop:2000bv}
550:         & $1.4^{+1.3}_{-1.0}\pm0.3 \; (<4)$ \cite{Aubert:2001zf}
551:         & $<10.5$ \cite{Bozek:2001xd} \\
552:     & $K^+ \phi$ 
553:         & $5.5^{+2.1}_{-1.8}\pm0.6$ \cite{Briere:2001ue}
554:         & $7.7^{+1.6}_{-1.4}\pm0.8$ \cite{Aubert:2001zd}
555:         & $11.2^{+2.2}_{-2.0}\pm1.4$ \cite{Tajima:2001qp} \\
556: \hline
557: $B^0 \to$
558:     & $\pi^-K^+$ 
559:         & $17.2^{+2.5}_{-2.4}\pm1.2$ \cite{Cronin-Hennessy:kg}
560:         & $16.7\pm1.6\pm1.3$ \cite{Aubert:2001hs}
561:         & $19.3^{+3.4+1.5}_{-3.2-0.6}$ \cite{Abe:2001nq} \\
562:     & $\pi^0K^0$ 
563:         & $14.6^{+5.9+2.4}_{-5.1-3.3}$ \cite{Cronin-Hennessy:kg}
564:         & $8.2^{+3.1}_{-2.7}\pm1.2$ \cite{Aubert:2001hs}
565:         & $16.0^{+7.2+2.5}_{-5.9-2.7}$ \cite{Abe:2001nq} \\
566:     & $\eta K^0$ 
567:         & $0.0^{+3.2}_{-0.0} \; (<9.3)$ \cite{Richichi:1999kj}
568:         & - & - \\
569:     & $\eta' K^0$ 
570:         & $89^{+18}_{-16}\pm9$ \cite{Richichi:1999kj}
571:         & $42^{+13}_{-11}\pm4$ \cite{Aubert:2001zf}
572:         & $55^{+19}_{-16}\pm8$ \cite{Abe:2001pf} \\
573:     & $\pi^-K^{*+}$ 
574:         & $22^{+8+4}_{-6-5}$ \cite{Jessop:1999cv} 
575:         & - 
576:         & $26.0\pm8.3\pm3.5$ \cite{belle0115} \\
577:     & $\eta K^{*0}$ 
578:         & $13.8^{+5.5}_{-4.6}\pm1.6$ \cite{Richichi:1999kj}
579:         & $19.8^{+6.5}_{-5.6}\pm1.7$ \cite{Aubert:2001ye}
580:         & $21.2^{+5.4}_{-4.7}\pm2.0$ \cite{Tajima:2001qp,belle0137} \\
581:     & $\eta' K^{*0}$ 
582:         & $7.8^{+7.7}_{-5.7} \; (<24)$ \cite{Richichi:1999kj} 
583:         & - & - \\
584:     & $K^+ \rho^-$ 
585:         & $16.0^{+7.6}_{-6.4}\pm2.8 \; (<32)$ \cite{Jessop:2000bv} 
586:         & - 
587:         & $15.8^{+5.1+1.7}_{-4.6-3.0}$ \cite{belle0115} \\
588:     & $K^0 \omega$ 
589:         & $10.0^{+5.4}_{-4.2}\pm1.4 \; (<21)$ \cite{Jessop:2000bv}
590:         & $6.4^{+3.6}_{-2.8}\pm0.8 \; (<13)$ \cite{Aubert:2001zf}
591:         & - \\
592:     & $K^0 \phi$
593:         & $5.4^{+3.7}_{-2.7}\pm0.7 \; (<12.3)$ \cite{Briere:2001ue}
594:         & $8.1^{+3.1}_{-2.5}\pm0.8$ \cite{Aubert:2001zd}
595:         & $8.9^{+3.4}_{-2.7}\pm1.0$ \cite{Tajima:2001qp} \\
596: \hline\hline
597: \end{tabular}
598: \end{center}
599: \vspace{0.5cm}
600: \end{table}
601: %
602: 
603: In Table \ref{tab:dS0}, the values of $|t| \simeq |T| = 2.7 \pm 0.6$ and $|p|
604: \simeq |P| = 0.72 \pm 0.14$ for the $\pi^+\pi^-$ decay mode are based on the
605: detailed analysis in Ref.\ \cite{Luo:2001ek}.  Here amplitudes are defined such
606: that their squares give $B^0$ branching ratios in units of $10^{-6}$.  In
607: estimating $\cB (B^+ \to \pi^+ \pi^0)$ from $T$, we take into account the
608: lifetime difference between $B^+$ and $B^0$, $\tau_{B^+}/\tau_{B^0} = 1.068 \pm
609: 0.016$ \cite{lifetime} and assume a constructively interfering amplitude $c
610: \simeq 0.1t$.  The branching ratio thus computed is $\simeq 4.7 \times
611: 10^{-6}$, consistent with the averaged data.  The penguin contribution to $\cB
612: (B^+ \to K^+ {\ol K}^0)$ is then about $0.55 \times 10^{-6}$.
613:  
614: The magnitude of $|p'|^2$ can be directly obtained from the $\pi^+ K^0$ decay
615: mode to have a central value $\sim 17.2$.  This result is used to compute
616: $|p|^2$ using the relation $|p/p'|^2 = |\vtd / \vts|^2 \simeq 0.032$, giving
617: the number quoted above from Ref.\ \cite{Luo:2001ek}.  Here the bounds $0.66
618: \le |\vtd /\lambda \vts| = |1 - \rho - i \eta| \le 0.96$ on parameters of the
619: CKM matrix are taken from the analysis of Ref.\ \cite{StA}.
620: 
621: The contributions of $|t'|^2$ are estimated using the relation $|t'/t|^2 =
622: |\vus / \vud|^2 |f_K/f_\pi|^2 \simeq 0.076$.  We use \cite{PDG} $f_\pi = 130.7$
623: MeV, $f_K = 159.8$ MeV, $\vus = 0.2205$, and $\vud \simeq 1 - \vus^2/2$.  It
624: should be noted that the lifetime difference has to be taken into account when
625: going from $B^0$ to $B^+$ decays.  For $|\Delta S|=1$ decays, the presence of a
626: substantial electroweak penguin contribution in $c'$ means that one cannot
627: simply take $c'/t' = 0.1$ as in the $\Delta S = 0$ decays, but must consider
628: the relative magnitude and weak phase of the electroweak penguin and tree
629: terms, as in Refs.\ \cite{GR2001,NR}.  Predictions of the branching ratios for
630: $\pi K$ modes other than $\pi^+ K^0$ depend on both CKM phases and on
631: final-state phases, which are not yet measured but are likely to be small
632: \cite{BBNS}.  Extraction of CKM phases from the $\pi K$ modes is a rich area
633: which we do not address in the present paper.
634: 
635: Two new measurements of the $\pi^+ \rho^0$ and $\pi^{\pm} \rho^{\mp}$ decay
636: modes are reported in Ref.\ \cite{Gao:2001ce}.  The measurement in the latter
637: mode does not distinguish between the two final states, while the former
638: contains a possible penguin contribution.  If we assume $p_V = - p_P$, then
639: $A(B^+ \to \pi^+ \rho^0) \simeq -\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(t_V+c_P-2p_P)$, while
640: $A(B^+ \to \pi^+ \omega) \simeq \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(t_V+c_P+2s_P)$.  Thus,
641: neglecting the $s_P$ and $c_P$ contributions as in Ref.\ \cite{VPUP}, we may
642: use $\cB(B^+ \to \pi^+ \omega)$ to estimate the $|t_V|^2$ contribution,
643: obtaining $(7.9 \pm 1.8) \times 10^{-6}$.  (If we had neglected the penguin
644: contribution in $B^+ \to \pi^+ \rho^0$ and averaged its branching ratio with
645: that of $B^+ \to \pi^+ \omega$ we would have obtained instead $(8.8 \pm 1.6)
646: \times 10^{-6}$, not very different.)  We shall return to the possibility of a
647: measurable difference between the $\pi^+ \rho^0$ and $\pi^+ \omega$ modes in
648: Sec.\ \ref{sec:tpi}.
649: 
650: The inferred $|t_V|^2$ contribution to $\cB(B^0 \to \pi^+ \rho^-)$ (neglecting
651: $c_P$) is $(14.7 \pm 3.3) \times 10^{-6}$, or approximately half of $\cB(B^0
652: \to \pi^{\pm} \rho^{\mp}) = (25.8 \pm 4.5) \times 10^{-6}$.  This leaves a
653: contribution of $\cB(B^0 \to \pi^- \rho^+) = (11.1 \pm 5.6) \times 10^{-6}$ to
654: be supplied by $|t_P|^2$, if we neglect penguin contributions.  A value of
655: $|t_P|^2$ comparable to $|t_V|^2$, but with large errors, thus is allowed by
656: present data.  A better measurement of $\cB(B^0 \to \pi^{\pm} \rho^{\mp})$ is
657: needed to reduce the uncertainty.  The magnitude of $t_P$ is of particular
658: interest because of the possibility that the smaller $|\Delta S| = 1$ amplitude
659: $t'_P$, related to $t_P$ by flavor SU(3), could contribute to a rate difference
660: between $B^+ \to \eta K^{*+}$ and $B^0 \to \eta K^{*0}$ (Sec.\ VI).
661: 
662: We take into account SU(3) breaking in estimating $t'_{V,P}$ by noting the
663: meson to which the current gives rise: pseudoscalar in $t'_V$ and vector in
664: $t'_P$.  Thus, we have $|t'_V/t_V|^2 = |\vus/\vud|^2 |f_K/f_\pi|^2$ and
665: $|t'_P/t_P|^2 = |\vus/\vud|^2 |f_{K^*}/f_\rho|^2$.  We estimate $f_{K^*}/
666: f_\rho = 1.04 \pm 0.02$ using standard kinematic factors (see Appendix) and
667: branching ratios for $\tau \to \rho \nu_\tau$ and $\tau \to K^* \nu_\tau$
668: quoted in Ref.\ \cite{PDG}.
669: 
670: \section{Penguin and electroweak penguin amplitudes \label{sec:pen}}
671: 
672: \subsection{$B \to \eta' K$ decays}
673: 
674: The decays $B^+ \to \eta' K^+$ and $B^0 \to \eta' K^0$ have quite large
675: branching ratios.  A large fraction of the amplitudes are contributed by
676: penguin ($p'$) terms, but these are not sufficient.  One must include also
677: singlet penguin contributions, as introduced in Refs.\ \cite{Dighe:1995gq} and
678: \cite{DGReta}.
679: 
680: Neglecting $t'$ contributions (to be discussed below), the branching ratios of
681: $\eta' K^+$ and $\eta' K^0$ modes should have a ratio roughly equal to the
682: lifetime ratio.  Averaging these two sets of data, we obtain $\cB (B^0 \to
683: \eta' K^0) \simeq (65.8 \pm 5.2) \times 10^{-6}$, whose central value implies
684: $(8/3) |s'|^2 \simeq 10.2$ for constructive interference and $41.6$ for no
685: interference between $p'$ and $s'$.  The corresponding average numbers for $B^+
686: \to \eta' K^+$ can thus be obtained by the lifetime ratio: \eg, $\cB (B^+ \to
687: \eta' K^+) \simeq (70.3 \pm 5.5) \times 10^{-6}$.  When $s'$ and $p'$ interfere
688: constructively, one needs a relatively small value of $s' \simeq 0.49 p'$ to
689: obtain the observed branching ratios.
690: 
691: \subsection{$B \to K \phi$ decays}
692: 
693: The branching ratios $\cB(B^+ \to K^+ \phi)$ and $\cB(B^0 \to K^0 \phi)$, when
694: compared with the $p'_P$ contributions, suggest a destructively interfering
695: $s'_P$.  We associate its contribution with the electroweak penguin component
696: rather than the $S'_P$ amplitude, which would involve a violation of the
697: Okubo-Iizuka-Zweig rule unusual for $\omega$ and $\phi$ mesons.
698: 
699: The average of the charged and neutral $B \to K \phi$ modes $\cB (B^+ \to K^+
700: \phi) = (7.8\pm1.0) \times 10^{-6}$ and $\cB (B^0 \to K^0 \phi) = (7.3 \pm 0.9)
701: \times 10^{-6}$ are used to extract $s'_P$.  The result is $s'_P/p'_P =
702: -0.20\pm0.11$, consistent with the result found in Ref.\ \cite{VPUP} (see Table
703: III there) and with the predictions of Ref.\ \cite{EWPp}.  However, better
704: measurements of these decay modes and of the mode $B^+ \to \pi^+ K^{*0}$
705: providing $|p'_P|$ would be worthwhile to confirm the result.
706: 
707: \subsection{$B \to K \omega$ decays}
708: 
709: Electroweak penguin terms arise in $B \to K \omega$ from $c'_P$ and $s'_P$
710: amplitudes, leading to an overall contribution $+ \frac{1}{3}P'_{EWP}/\sqrt{2}
711: \simeq -0.20 p'_V/\sqrt{2}$ to each amplitude.  Thus, as in $B \to K \phi$
712: decays, the electroweak penguin amplitude reduces the contribution of the
713: dominant penguin amplitude to the rate by about 30\%, and one has the
714: predictions
715: \begin{equation}
716: \cB(B^+ \to K^+ \omega) \simeq \frac{1}{2} \cB(B^+ \to K^+ \phi)
717: = (3.9 \pm 0.5) \times 10^{-6}~,
718: \end{equation}
719: \begin{equation}
720: \cB(B^0 \to K^0 \omega) = \frac{1}{2} \cB(B^0 \to K^0 \phi) =
721: (3.7 \pm 0.5) \times 10^{-6}~.
722: \end{equation}
723: The former result could be significantly modified by tree-penguin interference,
724: as noted in Ref.\ \cite{VPUP} and as we shall see in Sec.\ VI.
725: 
726: \section{Rates and $CP$ asymmetries in $B^+ \to \pi^+ (\eta,\eta')$
727:  \label{sec:pie}}
728: 
729: The decays $B^+ \to \pi^+ \eta$ and $B^+ \to \pi^+ \eta'$ could be detectable
730: at present levels of sensitivity.  Measurements of the branching ratios and
731: $CP$ asymmetries of these modes can provide information on strong and weak
732: phases and on the relative importance of singlet amplitude contributions, which
733: are estimated using $s'$ in the $\eta' K^+$ mode as discussed above.
734: 
735: We shall give an illustrative example of the possibilities for large rates and
736: $CP$ asymmetries in $B^+ \to \pi^+ \eta$ and $B^+ \to \pi^+ \eta'$ decays.  We
737: shall assume that the singlet amplitude $s$ interferes constructively with $p$.
738: Their electroweak phases are likely to be the same, and a quite modest $s'$
739: interfering constructively with $p'$ in the decays $B \to \eta' K$ can account
740: for the observed rate.  We thus take $s/p = s'/p' = 0.49$, leading to the
741: entries on column (a) of Table II.
742: 
743: Using flavor SU(3) to estimate $p$ from the dominant amplitude $p'$ in $B^+ \to
744: \pi^+ K^0$ and $t+c$ as mentioned earlier, we then reconstruct the $B^+ \to
745: \pi^+ (\eta,\eta')$ amplitudes as follows:
746: %
747: \bea
748: A(B^+ \to \pi^+ \eta) &=&
749:   -\left( 1.77 e^{i \gamma} + 1.06 e^{-i \beta} e^{i \delta} \right)
750:   ~, \nonumber \\
751: A(B^- \to \pi^- \eta) &=&
752:   -\left( 1.77 e^{-i \gamma} + 1.06 e^{i \beta} e^{i \delta} \right)
753:   ~, \nonumber \\
754: A(B^+ \to \pi^+ \eta') &=&
755:   1.25 e^{i \gamma} + 1.19 e^{-i \beta} e^{i \delta} ~, \nonumber \\
756: A(B^- \to \pi^- \eta') &=&
757:   1.25 e^{-i \gamma} + 1.19 e^{i \beta} e^{i \delta} ~,
758: \eea
759: %
760: where $\beta$ and $\gamma$ are CKM phases, $\delta$ is a relative strong phase
761: between the penguin and tree amplitudes, and amplitudes are defined such that
762: their squares give branching ratios in units of $10^{-6}$.
763: 
764: The $CP$ rate asymmetries
765: \begin{equation}
766: A(f) \equiv \frac{\cB(B^- \to \bar f) - \cB(B^+ \to f)}
767: {\cB(B^- \to \bar f) + \cB(B^+ \to f)}
768: \end{equation}
769: and the $CP$-averaged branching ratios
770: \begin{equation}
771: \overline{\cB}(f) \equiv \frac{\cB(B^- \to \bar f) + \cB(B^+ \to f)}{2}
772: \end{equation}
773: then are found to be
774: \begin{equation}
775: A(\pi^+ \eta) = \frac{- 0.88 \sin \delta \sin \alpha}{1 - 0.88 \sin \delta \sin
776: \alpha}~~,~~~
777: A(\pi^+ \eta') = \frac{- \sin \delta \sin \alpha}{1 - \sin \delta \sin
778: \alpha},
779: \end{equation}
780: \begin{equation}
781: \overline{\cB}(\pi^+ \eta) = (4.3 \times 10^{-6})(1 - 0.88 \cos \delta
782: \cos \alpha)~~,~~~
783: \overline{\cB}(\pi^+ \eta')=(3.0 \times 10^{-6})(1 - \cos \delta \cos \alpha).
784: \end{equation}
785: Measurement of both $CP$ asymmetries and branching ratios would allow one to
786: obtain values of $\delta$ and $\alpha = \pi - \beta - \gamma$, given our
787: assumption about $s/p$.
788: 
789: \section{Tree-penguin interference \label{sec:tpi}}
790: 
791: \subsection{$B \to \eta' K$ decays}
792: 
793: The central values of the measured rates for $B^+ \to \eta' K^+$ and $B^0 \to
794: \eta' K^0$ are roughly $1.5 \sigma$ away from each other.  One can attribute
795: part of this difference to a contribution the tree amplitude in the former
796: mode, if the tree and penguin amplitudes happen to interfere constructively.
797: We estimate the $|t'|^2$ term to contribute an amount $0.10 \times 10^{-6}$ to
798: the branching ratio (see Table III), which by itself would be insignificant.
799: However, with fully constructive interference with the $p'$ and $s' \simeq 0.49
800: p'$ terms, we would have
801: \begin{equation}
802: \cB(B^+ \to \eta' K^+) = \left( 70.2 + 0.10 + 2 \sqrt{(70.2)(0.10)} \right)
803: \times 10^{-6} = 75.7 \times 10^{-6}~.
804: \end{equation}
805: Thus, in order to demonstrate such interference, one has to conclusively
806: establish the $B^+ \to \eta' K^+)$ branching ratio with an error of less than a
807: couple of parts in $10^6$.  At present the errors on the branching ratios are
808: still too large to give a conclusive answer to whether $t'$ plays an important
809: role here.
810: 
811: \subsection{$B \to \eta K^*$ decays}
812: 
813: The results for $\cB (B^+ \to \pi^+ K^{*0})$ give $|p'_P|^2 \simeq 12.2 \times
814: 10^{-6}$, implying $\cB (B^+ \to \eta K^{*+}) = 16.2 \times 10^{-6}$ and $\cB(
815: B^0 \to \eta K^{*0}) = 15.2 \times 10^{-6}$.  Both experimental values are a
816: bit more than $1 \sigma$ above these predictions.  The question was raised in
817: Ref.\ \cite{VPUP} whether tree-penguin interference could be responsible for
818: the slightly higher $\eta K^{*+}$ branching ratio.  The $t'_P$ contribution
819: here is related to $t_P$ inferred from $B^0 \to \pi^- \rho^+$ by the ratio
820: $|\vus / \vud|^2 |f_{K^*}/f_{\rho}|^2 \tau_{B^+}/\tau_{B^0} \simeq 0.059$.
821: With maximal constructive interference we could have a modest enhancement:
822: \begin{equation}
823: \cB(B^+ \to \eta K^{*+}) = \left( 16.2 + 0.22 + 2 \sqrt{(16.2)(0.22)}
824: \right) \times 10^{-6} = 20.2 \times 10^{-6}~,
825: \end{equation}
826: To see such an effect, as for $B \to \eta' K$ decays, it would be necessary to
827: achieve an error on branching ratios of a couple of parts in $10^6$.
828: 
829: Ignoring the contribution from $t'_P$, charged and neutral modes are predicted
830: to have the same rates.  Taking the average of the current data, we obtain $\cB
831: (B^+ \to \eta K^{*+}) \simeq (20.3 \pm 3.1) \times 10^{-6}$ and $\cB (B^0 \to
832: \eta K^{*0}) \simeq (19.0 \pm 2.9) \times 10^{-6}$.  Therefore, at the present
833: level of sensitivity there is no indication of significant effects due to the
834: interference of the $t'_P$ amplitude with the dominant penguin contribution.
835: These data would favor a slightly larger penguin contribution than extracted
836: from the $\pi^+ K^{*0}$ mode.
837: 
838: \subsection{$B \to \omega K$ decays}
839: 
840: We mentioned above the possibility of tree-penguin interference in $B^+ \to
841: \omega K^+$.  To give one example of such effects, let us recall the assumption
842: $p'_V = - p'_P$ but assume the signs of $t'_P$ and $t'_V$ are the same.  Then
843: if one has constructive interference in $B^+ \to \eta K^{*+}$ as suggested
844: above, one would have \textit{destructive} interference in $B^+ \to \omega
845: K^+$.  The $t'_V$ contribution here is related to $t_V$ in $B^+ \to \omega
846: \pi^+$ by $|t'_V/t_V|^2 = |\vus / \vud|^2 |f_K / f_{\pi}|^2 \simeq 0.076$.  In
847: the case of maximal destructive interference one would have
848: \begin{equation}
849: \cB(B^+ \to \omega K^+) = \left( 3.9 + 0.6 - 2 \sqrt{(3.9)(0.6)} \right)
850: \times 10^{-6} = 1.4 \times 10^{-6},
851: \end{equation}
852: a significant effect.
853: 
854: \subsection{$B^0 \to \pi^- K^{*+}$ and $B^0 \to K^+ \rho^-$ decays}
855: 
856: The signs of tree-penguin interference terms in the decays $B^0 \to \pi^-
857: K^{*+}$ and $B^0 \to K^+ \rho^-$ are correlated with those in $B^+ \to K^+
858: \omega$.  If the interference is destructive in $B^+ \to K^+ \omega$, it will
859: also be destructive in $B^0 \to K^+ \rho^-$, since both processes involve the
860: combination $p'_V + t'_V$.  If $t'_P$ and $t'_V$ have the same sign (as is
861: likely), but if $p'_P$ and $p'_V$ are equal and opposite (as has been
862: proposed), one then expects constructive tree-penguin interference in $B^0 \to
863: \pi^- K^{*+}$.  This pattern was noted in Refs.\ \cite{VPUP} and \cite{B2K}.
864: 
865: In the cases of maximal interference in the directions suggested, one would
866: then have
867: \begin{equation}
868: \cB(B^0 \to \pi^- K^{*+}) = \left( 11.4 + 0.6 + 2 \sqrt{(11.4)(0.6)} \right)
869: \times 10^{-6} = 17.3 \times 10^{-6},
870: \end{equation}
871: consistent with the experimental branching ratio of $(23.8 \pm 6.1)
872: \times 10^{-6}$, but also
873: \begin{equation}
874: \cB(B^0 \to K^+ \rho^-) = \left( 11.4 + 1.1 - 2 \sqrt{(11.4)(1.1)} \right)
875: \times 10^{-6} = 5.4 \times 10^{-6},
876: \end{equation}
877: which is well below the experimental branching ratio of $(15.9 \pm 4.4)
878: \times 10^{-6}$.  In each case the deviation from pure penguin dominance
879: amounts to $6 \times 10^{-6}$, so measurement of each of these branching
880: ratios with an error of no more than $2 \times 10^{-6}$ should be enough
881: to see whether the interference terms form a consistent pattern, or indeed
882: are present at all.
883: 
884: \subsection{$B^+ \to \pi^+ \rho^0$ and $B^+ \to \pi^+ \omega$ decays}
885: 
886: More precise measurements for the $B^+ \to \pi^+ \rho^0$ and $B^+ \to \pi^+
887: \omega$ modes could help to determine whether there is a difference between
888: their branching ratios, which would be ascribed to contributions of the $p_P$
889: and/or $s_P$ amplitudes.  The chance of a detectable $s_P$ contribution to $B^+
890: \to \pi^+ \phi$, for which BaBar has presented an upper bound
891: \cite{Aubert:2001zd}, is remote, as one sees from the predicted branching ratio
892: of about $2 \times 10^{-8}$ in Table II.  Consequently, one would most likely
893: ascribe a difference to constructive tree-penguin interference, which would be
894: consistent with the pattern mentioned earlier \cite{VPUP,B2K}, leading to a
895: prediction
896: \begin{equation}
897: \cB(B^+ \to \pi^+ \rho^0) = \left( 7.9 + 0.8 + 2 \sqrt{(7.9)(0.8)} \right)
898: \times 10^{-6} = 13.6 \times 10^{-6}
899: \end{equation}
900: As in previous cases, the effects of maximal interference amount to a change
901: in the predicted branching ratio of a few parts in $10^6$.
902: 
903: \section{Further singlet amplitude contributions \label{sec:sin}}
904: 
905: We have already noted in Sec.\ IV the importance of the singlet contribution
906: $s'$ in the decays $B \to \eta' K$.  However, no such contribution is yet
907: called for in $B \to PV$ decays.  Here we show how to demonstrate its presence.
908: 
909: % This is Figure 1
910: \begin{figure}[ht]
911: \vspace{0.5cm}
912: \centerline{\includegraphics[height=4in]{plot1.eps}}
913: \vspace{0.5cm}
914: \tighten{
915: \caption[]{\it The branching ratios of $B \to \eta' K^*$ for varying
916:   $s'_V$ related to $p'_P$ by the parameter $-1 \leq r \leq 1.5$.}
917: \label{fig:plot1}}
918: \end{figure}
919: %
920: 
921: A contribution from the singlet amplitude $s'_V$ has to come from the
922: comparison between the $\eta K^*$ and $\eta' K^*$ modes.  If we neglect $t'_P$,
923: as suggested from the above analysis, and $c'_V$, as suggested by the hierarchy
924: in the amplitudes, we can assume $s'_V = r p'_P$ and get
925: %
926: \be
927: \cB (B^+ \to \eta' K^{*+}) 
928:      \simeq \cB (B^0 \to \eta' K^{*0}) \frac{\tau_{B^0}}{\tau_{B^+}}
929:      = \frac16 (1 - 4r)^2 p'^2_P ~,
930: \ee
931: %
932: where $p'_P$ is the penguin amplitude for the charged modes.  Fig.\ 
933: \ref{fig:plot1} shows the branching ratio of $B \to \eta' K^{*}$ as a parabolic
934: function of $r$ with a minimum at $r=1/4$.  To avoid confusion, we only plot
935: the one for $B \to \eta' K^{*+}$ as the difference is tiny in the range of the
936: plot.  The dashed and dash-dotted lines give the current upper bounds on the
937: branching ratios of the $\eta' K^{*+}$ and $\eta' K^{*0}$ modes, respectively.
938: Observation of these modes with branching ratios significantly different from
939: $\sim 2 \times 10^{-6}$ would provide conclusive evidence for the singlet
940: contribution $s'_V$.  We note that $\cB (B^+ \to \eta' K^{*+})$ by itself is
941: unable to distinguish between $r$ and $r' \equiv \frac{1}{2} - r$, so if this
942: branching ratio is consistent with $\sim 2 \times 10^{-6}$, that does not yet
943: rule out the possibility of a singlet term with $s'_V/p'_P \simeq 1/2$.  This
944: is just the value of $s'/p'$ which would accommodate the decays $B \to \eta'
945: K$.
946: 
947: \section{Summary \label{sec:sum}}
948: 
949: New data on $B$ decays to pairs of light mesons are shedding light on a number
950: of interesting questions.  We have shown that the penguin contribution in the
951: decay $B^+ \to \pi^+ K^{*0}$ is only a bit smaller than that contributing to $B
952: \to \pi K$ decays.  Although a similar penguin contribution occurs in $B \to K
953: \phi$ decays, it is partially cancelled by an electroweak penguin contribution,
954: leading to a 30\% reduction in rate in accord with predictions \cite{EWPp}.  A
955: similar cancellation is expected in the decays $B \to K \omega$.
956: 
957: The prospects for observing $B^+ \to \pi^+ \eta$ and $B^+ \to \pi^+ \eta'$,
958: suggested as promising modes for direct $CP$ rate asymmetries
959: \cite{BSR,Dighe:1995gq}, are excellent.  Branching ratios of a few parts in
960: $10^6$ are expected.  By studying both rates and $CP$ asymmetries, one can
961: determine both the relative strong phases of penguin and tree amplitudes and
962: the weak phase $\alpha$.
963: 
964: Tree-penguin interference can be studied by comparing $B^+$ and $B^0$ branching
965: ratios for processes such as $B \to \eta' K$, $B \to \eta K^*$, and $B \to K
966: \omega$.  Anticipated differences in branching ratios in these three cases
967: could be as large as several parts in $10^6$, but are unlikely to be more.
968: Other processes which can be examined for this interference include the decays
969: $B^0 \to \pi^- K^{*+}$, $B^0 \to K^+ \rho^-$, and a comparison of $B^+ \to
970: \pi^+ \omega$ and $B^+ \to \pi^+ \rho^0$.  Present data are not yet at the
971: required level of accuracy, but will be so soon, providing valuable information
972: on the products $\cos \gamma \cos \delta$ ($|\Delta S| = 1$ decays) and
973: $\cos \alpha \cos \delta$ ($\Delta S = 0$ decays).
974: 
975: Although a flavor-singlet penguin contribution is needed in describing $B \to
976: \eta' K$, no such amplitude is called for yet in $B \to \eta' K^*$.  We have
977: shown that significant deviations of the branching ratio for this process (for
978: both charged and neutral $B$'s) from $2 \times 10^{-6}$ would provide evidence
979: for such a term.  However, a branching ratio equal to this value does not yet
980: rule out a singlet term.
981: 
982: \begin{acknowledgments}
983: We thank H. J. Lipkin for helpful discussions, and D. Hitlin and M. Nakao for
984: guidance with respect to data.  This work was supported in part by the
985: U. S. Department of Energy through Grant Nos.\ DE-FG02-90ER-40560
986: and W-31109-ENG-38.
987: \end{acknowledgments}
988: 
989: \appendix*
990: \section{Decay constant calculations}
991: 
992: We define the decay constant of a vector meson $V (=u {\ol q})$ through the
993: matrix element between one particle and vacuum of the vector current $V_\mu$:
994: $\langle 0 |V_\mu| V(p) \rangle = m_V f_V \epsilon_\mu(p)$.  The partial width
995: of the $\tau$ lepton into $V \nu_\tau$ is then
996: \begin{equation}
997: \Gamma(\tau \to V \nu_\tau) = \frac{(G_F f_V p^* |V_{uq}|)^2}{4 \pi}
998: m_\tau \left( 1 + \frac{2 m_V^2}{m_\tau^2} \right) ~,
999: \end{equation}
1000: where $p^* = (m_{\tau}^2 - m_V^2)/(2 m_{\tau})$ is the magnitude of the c.\ m.\ 
1001: three-momentum of either final particle, and $|V_{uq}| = |\vud|$ for $\rho
1002: \nu_{\tau}$ or $|\vus|$ for $K^* \nu_{\tau}$.  Using \cite{PDG} $\tau_\tau =
1003: (290.6 \pm 1.1)$ fs, $\cB (\tau \to \rho \nu_\tau) = (25.1 \pm 0.3)\%$, and
1004: $\cB (\tau \to K^* \nu_\tau) = (1.29 \pm 0.05)\%$,
1005: we find $f_\rho = 208$ MeV, $f_{K^*} = 217$ MeV, and $f_{K^*}/ f_\rho = 1.04
1006: \pm 0.02$.
1007: 
1008: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1009: 
1010: \bibitem{VPUP}
1011: M.~Gronau and J.~L.~Rosner,
1012: %``New information on B decays to charmless V P final states,''
1013: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 61}, 073008 (2000) [hep-ph/9909478].
1014: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9909478;%%
1015: 
1016: \bibitem{HJLP}
1017: H.~J.~Lipkin,
1018: %``The Importance Of The K Eta And K Eta-Prime Decay Modes In Understanding
1019: %Charmed And Other Meson Decays,''
1020: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 46}, 1307 (1981);
1021: %%CITATION = PRLTA,46,1307;%%
1022: %``Interference Effects In K Eta And K Eta-Prime Decay Modes Of Heavy Mesons:
1023: %Clues To Understanding Weak Transitions And $CP$ Violation,''
1024: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 254}, 247 (1991);
1025: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B254,247;%%
1026: %``Penguins, trees and final state interactions in B decays in broken SU(3),''
1027: \textit{ibid.} B {\bf 415}, 186 (1997) [hep-ph/9710342];
1028: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9710342;%%
1029: %H.~J.~Lipkin,
1030: %``Fsi Rescattering In B+- Decays Via States With Eta, Eta' Omega And Phi,''
1031: \textit{ibid.} B {\bf 433}, 117 (1998).
1032: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B433,117;%%
1033: 
1034: \bibitem{BSR}
1035: S.~Barshay, D.~Rein and L.~M.~Sehgal,
1036: %``$CP$ Violating Partial Rate Asymmetries In The Decays B+- $\to$ Eta Pi+-,
1037: %Eta-Prime Pi+-, Eta(C) Pi+-: A K Matrix Analysis,''
1038: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 259}, 475 (1991).
1039: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B259,475;%%
1040: 
1041: \bibitem{Dighe:1995gq}
1042: A.~S.~Dighe, M.~Gronau and J.~L.~Rosner,
1043: %``Amplitude relations for $B$ decays involving $\eta$ and $\eta'$,''
1044: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 367}, 357 (1996) [hep-ph/9509428]; {\it Erratum-ibid.} B
1045: {\bf 377}, 325 (1996).
1046: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9509428;%%
1047: 
1048: \bibitem{HHY}
1049: X.-G. He, W.-S. Hou, and K.-C. Yang,
1050: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 83}, 1100 (1999).
1051: 
1052: \bibitem{HSW} W.-S. Hou, J. G. Smith, and F. W\"urthwein, National Taiwan
1053: University report NTU-HEP-99-25, hep-ex/9910014, submitted to Phys.~Rev.~Lett.
1054: 
1055: \bibitem{HY}
1056: W.-S. Hou and K.-C. Yang,
1057: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 61}, 073014 (20000 [hep-ph/9908202].
1058: 
1059: \bibitem{DGReta}
1060: A.~S.~Dighe, M.~Gronau and J.~L.~Rosner,
1061: %``B decays involving eta and eta' in light of the B $\to$ K eta' process,''
1062: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 79}, 4333 (1997) [hep-ph/9707521].
1063: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9707521;%%
1064:  
1065: \bibitem{Gronau:1994rj}
1066: M.~Gronau, O.~F.~Hernandez, D.~London and J.~L.~Rosner,
1067: %``Decays of B mesons to two light pseudoscalars,''
1068: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 50}, 4529 (1994) [hep-ph/9404283].
1069: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9404283;%%
1070: 
1071: \bibitem{Gronau:1995hn}
1072: M.~Gronau, O.~F.~Hernandez, D.~London and J.~L.~Rosner,
1073: %``Electroweak penguins and two body B decays,''
1074: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 52}, 6374 (1995) [hep-ph/9504327].
1075: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9504327;%%
1076: 
1077: \bibitem{EWVP}
1078: M.~Gronau,
1079: %``Electroweak Penguin Amplitudes And Constraints On Gamma In Charmless B $\to$
1080: %Vp Decays,''
1081: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 62}, 014031 (2000).
1082: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D62,014031;%%
1083: 
1084: \bibitem{GR2001}
1085: M.~Gronau and J.~L.~Rosner,
1086: %``Implications of $CP$ asymmetry limits for B $\to$ K pi and B $\to$ pi pi,''
1087: Phys.\ Rev. D {\bf 65}, 013004 (2002), [hep-ph/0109238].
1088: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0109238;%%
1089: 
1090: \bibitem{Jessop:1999cv}
1091: C.~P.~Jessop {\it et al.}  [CLEO Collaboration],
1092: %``Two-Body B Meson Decays to $\eta$ and $\eta^{'}$-Observation of $B\to \eta
1093: %K^{*}$,'' 
1094: CLEO Report No.\ CLEO-CONF 99-13, hep-ex/9908018.
1095: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 9908018;%%
1096: 
1097: \bibitem{Cronin-Hennessy:kg}
1098: D.~Cronin-Hennessy {\it et al.}  [CLEO Collaboration],
1099: %``Observation Of B $\to$ K+- Pi0 And B $\to$ K0 Pi0, And Evidence For
1100: %B $\to$ Pi+ Pi-,''
1101: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 85}, 515 (2000).
1102: %%CITATION = PRLTA,85,515;%%
1103: 
1104: \bibitem{Richichi:1999kj}
1105: S.~J.~Richichi {\it et al.}  [CLEO Collaboration],
1106: %``Two-body B meson decays to eta and eta': Observation of B $\to$ eta K*,''
1107: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 85}, 520 (2000) [hep-ex/9912059].
1108: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 9912059;%%
1109: 
1110: \bibitem{Jessop:2000bv}
1111: C.~P.~Jessop {\it et al.}  [CLEO Collaboration],
1112: %``Study of charmless hadronic B meson decays to pseudoscalar vector
1113: %final states,''
1114: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 85}, 2881 (2000) [hep-ex/0006008].
1115: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0006008;%%
1116: 
1117: \bibitem{Briere:2001ue}
1118: R.~A.~Briere {\it et al.}  [CLEO Collaboration],
1119: %``Observation of B $\to$ Phi K and B $\to$ Phi K*,''
1120: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 86}, 3718 (2001) [hep-ex/0101032].
1121: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0101032;%%
1122: 
1123: \bibitem{Asner:2001eh}
1124: D.~M.~Asner {\it et al.}  [CLEO Collaboration],
1125: %``Search for B0 $\to$ pi0 pi0 decay,''
1126: Cornell University Report No.\ CLNS-01/1718, hep-ex/0103040.
1127: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0103040;%%
1128: 
1129: \bibitem{Gao:2001ce}
1130: Y.~s.~Gao [CLEO Collaboration],
1131: %``Recent results from CLEO collaboration,''
1132: Southern Methodist University Report No.\ SMU-HEP-01-09, hep-ex/0108005, to
1133: appear in proceeding of the International Conference on Flavor Physics
1134: (ICFP2001).
1135: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0108005;%%
1136: 
1137: \bibitem{Aubert:2000vr}
1138: B.~Aubert {\it et al.}  [BaBar Collaboration],
1139: %``Measurements of charmless three-body and quasi-two-body B decays,''
1140: SLAC Report No.\ SLAC-PUB-8537, hep-ex/0008058, submitted to the XXX
1141: International Conference on High Energy Physics, Osaka, Japan, July 27 --
1142: August 2, 2000.
1143: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0008058;%%
1144: 
1145: \bibitem{Aubert:2001zd}
1146: B.~Aubert {\it et al.}  [BaBar Collaboration],
1147: %``Measurement of the decays B $\to$ Phi K and B $\to$ Phi K*,''
1148: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 87}, 151801 (2001) [hep-ex/0105001].
1149: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0105001;%%
1150: 
1151: \bibitem{Aubert:2001hs}
1152: B.~Aubert {\it et al.}  [BaBar Collaboration],
1153: %``Measurement of branching fractions and search for CP-violating charge
1154: %asymmetries in charmless two-body B decays into pions and kaons,''
1155: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 87}, 151802 (2001) [hep-ex/0105061].
1156: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0105061;%%
1157: 
1158: \bibitem{Aubert:2001ye}
1159: B.~Aubert {\it et al.}  [BaBar Collaboration],
1160: %``Measurement of the exclusive branching fractions $B^0 \to \eta
1161: %K^{*0}$ and $B^+ \to \eta K^{*+}$,''
1162: SLAC Report No.\ SLAC-PUB-8914, hep-ex/0107037.  Submitted to the International
1163: Europhysics Conference on High Energy Physics, 12--18 July 2001, Budapest,
1164: Hungary.
1165: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0107037;%%
1166: 
1167: \bibitem{Aubert:2001zf}
1168: B.~Aubert {\it et al.}  [BaBar Collaboration],
1169: %``Measurements of the branching fractions of exclusive charmless $B$
1170: %meson decays with $\eta^\prime$ or $\omega$ mesons,''
1171: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 87}, 221802 (2001) [hep-ex/0108017].
1172: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0108017;%%
1173: 
1174: \bibitem{Aubert:2001ap}
1175: B.~Aubert {\it et al.}  [BaBar Collaboration],
1176: %``Measurement of the branching fraction for B+ $\to$ K*0 pi+,''
1177: SLAC Report No.\ SLAC-PUB-8981, hep-ex/0109007, submitted to the 9th
1178: International Symposium on Heavy Flavor Physics, Pasadena, California, 10--13
1179: September 2001.
1180: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0109007;%%
1181: 
1182: \bibitem{Dallapiccola}
1183: C.~Dallapiccola [BaBar Collaboration], talk presented at the 9th International
1184: Symposium on Heavy Flavor Physics, Pasadena, California, 10--13 September 2001.
1185: 
1186: \bibitem{Abe:2001nq}
1187: K.~Abe {\it et al.}  [Belle Collaboration],
1188: %``Measurement of branching fractions for B $\to$ pi pi, K pi and K K
1189: %decays,''
1190: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 87}, 101801 (2001) [hep-ex/0104030].
1191: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0104030;%%
1192: 
1193: \bibitem{Bozek:2001xd}
1194: A.~Bo\.{z}ek  [Belle Collaboration],
1195: %``Charmless B decays involving vector mesons in Belle,''
1196: hep-ex/0104041; in \textit{BCP4:  International Workshop on B Physics and
1197: CP Violation}, Ise-Shima, Japan, 19--23 February 2001, edited by T. Ohshima
1198: and A. I. Sanda (World Scientific, River Edge, NJ, 2001), p.\ 81.
1199: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0104041;%%
1200: 
1201: \bibitem{Abe:2001pf}
1202: K.~Abe {\it et al.}  [Belle Collaboration],
1203: %``Measurement of the branching fraction for B $\to$ eta' K and search
1204: %for B $\to$ eta' pi+,''
1205: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 517}, 309 (2001) [hep-ex/0108010].
1206: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0108010;%%
1207: 
1208: \bibitem{Tajima:2001qp}
1209: H.~Tajima  [Belle Collaboration],
1210: %``Belle B physics results,''
1211: KEK Preprint 2001-136, hep-ex/0111037,
1212: contributed to the Proceedings of the XX International Symposium on Lepton and
1213: Photon Interactions at High Energies, July 23--28, 2001, Rome, Italy.
1214: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0111037;%%
1215: 
1216: \bibitem{belle0115}
1217: K.~Abe {\it et al.}  [Belle Collaboration],
1218: BELLE-CONF-0115 (2001), contributed to the Proceedings of the XX International
1219: Symposium on Lepton and Photon Interactions at High Energies, July 23--28,
1220: 2001, Rome, Italy.
1221: 
1222: \bibitem{belle0137} 
1223: K.~Abe {\it et al.} [Belle Collaboration], 
1224: BELLE-CONF-0137 (2001), submitted to the 9th International Symposium on Heavy
1225: Flavor Physics, Pasadena, California, 10--13 September 2001.
1226: 
1227: \bibitem{Luo:2001ek}
1228: Z.~Luo and J.~L.~Rosner,
1229: %``Information on B $\to$ pi pi provided by the semileptonic process B
1230: %$\to$ p l nu,''
1231: Enrico Fermi Institute Report No.\ EFI 01-28,hep-ph/0108024, to appear in
1232: Phys.\ Rev.\ D.
1233: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0108024;%%
1234: 
1235: \bibitem{lifetime}
1236: K.~Osterberg, talk presented at the International European Conference on
1237: High-Energy Physics, Budapest, Hungary, 12--18 July 2001, to appear in the
1238: Proceedings.
1239: 
1240: \bibitem{StA} 
1241: J.~L.~Rosner,
1242: %``The standard model in 2001,''
1243: Enrico Fermi Institute Report No.\ EFI 01-34, hep-ph/0108195; based on five
1244: lectures at the 55th Scottish Universities' Summer School in Particle Physics,
1245: St.\ Andrews, Scotland, August 7--23, 2001, to be published in the Proceedings
1246: by the Institute of Physics (U.K.).
1247: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0108195;%%
1248: 
1249: \bibitem{PDG}
1250: D.~E.~Groom \textit{et al.} [Particle Data Group], Eur.\ Phys.\ J. C {\bf 15},
1251: 1 (2000).
1252: %%CITATION = EPHJA,C15,1;%%
1253: 
1254: \bibitem{NR}
1255: M.~Neubert and J.~L.~Rosner,
1256: %``New bound on gamma from B+- $\to$ pi K decays,''
1257: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 441}, 403 (1998) [hep-ph/9808493];
1258: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9808493;%%
1259: %``Determination of the weak phase gamma from rate measurements in  B+- $\to$
1260: %pi K, pi pi decays,''
1261: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 81}, 5076 (1998) [hep-ph/9809311];
1262: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9809311;%%
1263: M.~Neubert,
1264: %``Model-independent analysis of B $\to$ pi K decays and bounds on the weak
1265: %phase gamma,''
1266: JHEP {\bf 9902}, 014 (1999) [hep-ph/9812396];
1267: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9812396;%%
1268: M.~Gronau, D.~Pirjol and T.~M.~Yan,
1269: %``Model-independent electroweak penguins in B decays to two  pseudoscalars,''
1270: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 60}, 034021 (1999) [hep-ph/9810482].
1271: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9810482;%%
1272: 
1273: \bibitem{BBNS}
1274: M.~Beneke, G.~Buchalla, M.~Neubert and C.~T.~Sachrajda,
1275: %``QCD factorization in B $\to$ pi K, pi pi decays and extraction of
1276: %Wolfenstein parameters,''
1277: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 606}, 245 (2001) [hep-ph/0104110].
1278: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0104110;%%
1279: 
1280: \bibitem{EWPp}
1281: R.~Fleischer,
1282: %``Electroweak Penguin effects beyond leading logarithms in the B
1283: %meson decays B- $\to$ K- Phi and B- $\to$ pi- anti-K0,''
1284: Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 62}, 81 (1994);
1285: %%CITATION = ZEPYA,C62,81;%%
1286: N.~G.~Deshpande and X.~G.~He,
1287: %``Gluonic penguin B decays in Standard and two Higgs doublet Models,''
1288: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 336}, 471 (1994) [hep-ph/9403266].
1289: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9403266;%%
1290: 
1291: \bibitem{B2K}
1292: J.~L.~Rosner, in Proceedings of Beauty 2000, Kibbutz Maagan,
1293: Israel, September 13--18, 2000, edited by S.~Erhan, Y.~Rozen, and P.~E.~
1294: Schlein, Nucl.\ Inst.\ Meth.\ A {\bf 462}, 44--51 (2001).
1295: %CITATION = HEP-PH 0011184;%%
1296: 
1297: \end{thebibliography}
1298: 
1299: \end{document}
1300: #!/bin/csh -f
1301: # this uuencoded Z-compressed  file created by csh script  uufiles
1302: # for more information, see e.g. http://xxx.lanl.gov/faq/uufaq.html
1303: # if you are on a unix machine this file will unpack itself:
1304: # strip off any mail header and call resulting file, e.g., plot1.uu
1305: # (uudecode ignores these header lines and starts at begin line below)
1306: # then say        csh plot1.uu
1307: # or explicitly execute the commands (generally more secure):
1308: #    uudecode plot1.uu ;   uncompress plot1.eps.Z ;
1309: # on some non-unix (e.g. VAX/VMS), first use an editor to change the
1310: # filename in "begin" line below to plot1.eps_Z , then execute
1311: #    uudecode plot1.uu
1312: #    compress -d plot1.eps_Z
1313: #
1314: uudecode $0
1315: chmod 644 plot1.eps.Z
1316: uncompress plot1.eps.Z
1317: rm $0
1318: exit
1319: 
1320: