1: %&LaTeX
2: \documentclass[twocolumn,prl]{revtex4}
3:
4: \usepackage{graphicx}
5:
6: \newcommand{\nn}{\nonumber}
7:
8: \begin{document}
9: \title{Direct CP Violation in $B\to \phi K_{s}$ and New Physics}
10:
11: \author{Marco Ciuchini}
12: \affiliation{%
13: I.N.F.N. Sezione di Roma III and Dip. di Fisica, Universit\`a di Roma Tre\\
14: Via della Vasca Navale 84, I-00146 Rome, Italy
15: }%
16:
17: \author{Luca Silvestrini}
18: \affiliation{
19: I.N.F.N. Sezione di Roma and Dip. di Fisica, Universit\`a di Roma
20: ``La Sapienza''\\
21: P.le A. Moro 2, I-00185 Rome, Italy
22: }%
23:
24: \begin{abstract}
25: In the presence of large New Physics contributions to loop-induced
26: $b\to s$ transitions, sizable direct CP violation in $B\to \phi K$
27: decays is expected on general grounds. We compute explicitly
28: CP-violating effects using QCD factorization and find that, even in
29: the restricted case in which New Physics has the same penguin
30: structure as the Standard Model, the rate asymmetry can be of order
31: one. We briefly discuss a more general scenario and comment on the
32: inclusion of power-suppressed corrections to factorization.
33: \end{abstract}
34:
35: \pacs{13.25.Hw, 11.30.Er, 12.15.Ji, 12.60.Jv}
36:
37: \maketitle
38:
39: With the advent of $B$ factories, the measurement of CP asymmetries in
40: non-leptonic $B$ decays has emerged as a very powerful probe of New
41: Physics (NP) beyond the Standard Model (SM). It was pointed out a few
42: years ago that the comparison of time-dependent CP asymmetries in
43: different decay channels measuring the same weak phase in the SM could
44: provide evidence of NP in $B$ decay
45: amplitudes~\cite{Grossman:1996ke}. In particular, $a_{CP}(B\to J/\Psi
46: K_{s})$ and $a_{CP}(B\to \phi K_{s})$ both measure $\sin2\beta$ with
47: negligible hadronic uncertainties in the
48: SM~\cite{Grossman:1997gr}. However, $B\to \phi K_{s}$, being a pure
49: penguin process, is expected to be much more sensitive to NP than the
50: tree-level dominated $B\to J/\Psi K_{s}$ decay. In many explicit
51: examples of NP, it has been shown that sizable differences in these
52: two asymmetries can be
53: generated~\cite{Ciuchini:1997zp}--\cite{Datta:2002nr}. The first
54: measurements of $a_{CP}(B\to \phi K_{s})$ by the BaBar and Belle
55: collaborations display a $2.7 \sigma$ deviation from the observed
56: value of $a_{CP}(B\to J/\Psi K_{s})$~\cite{Aubert:2002nx,Abe:2002bx},
57: leaving open the possibility of a NP effect in $B\to \phi K_{s}$
58: \cite{nir:ichep}.
59:
60: In this letter, we focus on the possibility of having direct CP
61: violation in $B\to \phi K_{s}$ in the presence of generic NP
62: contributions to the $b\to s\bar s s$ transition at the loop level.
63: For simplicity, we first illustrate our argument using QCD
64: factorization in the limit $m_b\to\infty$~\cite{Beneke:1999br},
65: neglecting electroweak corrections. Then, we briefly discuss possible
66: effects of power-suppressed terms.
67:
68: We write the decay amplitude as
69: \begin{eqnarray}
70: \mathcal{A}(B\to \phi K_s)&=&-\frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}} F_0^{B\to K} f_\phi
71: \sum_{i=3}^5 \left[ \lambda_u \tilde a^u_i +\lambda_c \tilde
72: a^c_i+\right.\nn\\
73: &&\left.\lambda_t \left(\tilde a^t_i+\tilde
74: a^\mathrm{NP}_i\right)\right]\,,
75: \label{eq:amp}
76: \end{eqnarray}
77: where $\lambda_q=V_{qb}^*V_{qs}$, $F_0^{B\to K}$ is the semileptonic
78: $B\to K$ form factor evaluated at the $\phi$ mass and $f_\phi$ is the
79: $\phi$ decay constant. The coefficients $\tilde a^q_i$ are defined in
80: terms of the usual $a^q_{i,\mathrm{I}}$ and $a^q_{i,\mathrm{II}}$,
81: introduced in QCD
82: factorization~\cite{Yang:2000xn,Beneke:2001ev}, as follows:
83: \begin{eqnarray}
84: && \tilde a^u_{(3,5)}=0\,,~\tilde a^c_{(3,5)}=0\,,~\tilde
85: a^t_{(3,5)}=a_{(3,5),\mathrm{I}}+a_{(3,5),\mathrm{II}}\,,\nn\\
86: && \tilde a^{(u,c)}_{4}=a^{(u,c)}_{4,\mathrm{I}}\,(C_{3,\dots,6}\to
87: 0)\,,\nn\\
88: &&\tilde a^t_{4}=a^u_{4,\mathrm{I}}\,(C_{1,2}\to
89: 0)+a_{4,\mathrm{II}}\,.
90: \end{eqnarray}
91: The notation $a^u_{4,\mathrm{I}}\,(C_{1,2}\to 0)$ means that one has
92: to take the expression for $a^u_{4,\mathrm{I}}$ given in
93: ref.~\cite{Beneke:2001ev} neglecting terms proportional to $C_1$ and
94: $C_2$. Furthermore, the coefficients $\tilde a^\mathrm{NP}_i$ in
95: eq.~(\ref{eq:amp}) account for the NP contributions and are defined as
96: $\tilde a^\mathrm{NP}_i=\tilde a^t_i\,(C_{3,\dots,6}\to
97: C^\mathrm{NP}_{3,\dots,6}/\lambda_t)$. For discussing NP
98: effects, it is useful to distinguish the different $\lambda_q$ contributions,
99: without using the unitarity of the CKM matrix. In fact, terms
100: proportional to $\lambda_u$ and $\lambda_c$ are not modified by NP
101: loop effects. Since $\lambda_u$ is doubly Cabibbo suppressed with
102: respect to $\lambda_{c,t}$, we neglect it in the following discussion.
103:
104:
105: In Table~\ref{tab:atilde}, we report the values of the coefficients
106: $\tilde a^q_i$. It is remarkable that $\tilde a^c_4$ has comparable
107: real and imaginary parts and, correspondingly, a large strong phase
108: even in the infinite mass limit. However, $a^c_4=\tilde
109: a^c_4-\tilde a^t_4$, which enters the SM decay amplitude, has a smaller
110: strong phase, due to the constructive (destructive) interference in
111: the real (imaginary) parts. In other words, the strong phase of the SM
112: amplitude is accidentally smaller than its natural value
113: within QCD factorization. Notice, in addition, that $\vert\tilde
114: a^c_4\vert$ and $\vert\tilde a^t_4\vert$ are comparable in size.
115:
116: \begin{table}
117: \caption{\label{tab:atilde} Numerical values of the coefficients
118: $\tilde a^q_i$ relevant to our discussion obtained for $\mu=m_b=4.2$
119: GeV, $\alpha_s(M_Z)=0.119$, $m_c(m_b)=1.3$ GeV. }
120: \begin{ruledtabular}
121: \begin{tabular}{lrr}
122: & Re & Im \\
123: \hline
124: $\tilde a^c_3$ & $0$ & $0$\\
125: $\tilde a^c_4$ & $-1.4\times 10^{-2}$ & $-1.1\times 10^{-2}$\\
126: $\tilde a^c_5$ & $0$ & $0$ \\
127: $\tilde a^t_3$ & $-4.3\times 10^{-3}$ & $-2.7\times 10^{-3}$ \\
128: $\tilde a^t_4$ & $1.9\times 10^{-2}$ & $-3.4\times 10^{-3}$ \\
129: $\tilde a^t_5$ & $4.1\times 10^{-3}$ & $3.1\times 10^{-3}$ \\
130: \end{tabular}
131: \end{ruledtabular}
132: \end{table}
133:
134: Assuming that NP effects affect $C_{3,\dots,6}$, we can consider two
135: different scenarios: \textit{i)} a universal penguin-like contribution
136: parametrized as $C^\mathrm{NP}_{3,\dots,6}=\lambda_t r^\mathrm{NP}
137: e^{i\phi^\mathrm{NP}} C_{3,\dots,6}$; \textit{ii)} a general NP
138: contribution affecting $C_{3,\dots,6}$ in a non universal way. This
139: is the case, for example, of general $R_P$-conserving SUSY models
140: where, in addition to penguins, there is also a box
141: contribution~\cite{Gabbiani:1996hi}.
142:
143: It is easy to see that, in both scenarios, there is more than one
144: contribution to the amplitude carrying different strong and weak
145: phases. Since the strong phases are not negligible,
146: one expects sizable direct CP violation if the NP
147: contribution is large enough. Indeed, in the first scenario, we have
148: \begin{eqnarray}
149: \mathcal{A}(B\to \phi K_s)&\simeq &-\frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}} F_0^{B\to K}
150: f_\phi \sum_{i=3}^5 \left[ \lambda_c \tilde a^c_i+\right.\nn\\
151: &&\left.\lambda_t \left(1+r^\mathrm{NP}\,e^{i
152: \phi^\mathrm{NP}}\right)\tilde a^t_i\right]\,.
153: \end{eqnarray}
154: Using the values in Table~\ref{tab:atilde}, we get
155: \begin{eqnarray}
156: \mathcal{A}(B\to \phi K_s)&\propto &\lambda_c (1.4+1.1\, i)+\nn\\
157: &&\lambda_t \left(1+r^\mathrm{NP}\,e^{i \phi^\mathrm{NP}}\right)
158: (-1.9+0.3\, i)\,.
159: \label{eq:acp1}
160: \end{eqnarray}
161: It is apparent that, for $r^\mathrm{NP}$ of $\mathcal{O}(1)$, a large
162: rate asymmetry is generated, namely $\vert\bar
163: \mathcal{A}/\mathcal{A}\vert\equiv \vert \mathcal{A}(\bar B^0\to \phi K_s)\vert
164: / \vert \mathcal{A}(B^0\to \phi K_s)\vert\neq 1$ (see fig.~\ref{fig:acp}).
165: Correspondingly, the full
166: expression for the time-dependent asymmetry, including the $\cos\Delta
167: M_B t$ term, should be used and hadronic uncertainties are expected in
168: the extraction of the weak phases from the data.
169:
170: \begin{figure}
171: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{acp}% Here is how to import EPS art
172: \caption{\label{fig:acp} The direct CP asymmetry in $B^0\to \phi K_s$
173: from eq.~\ref{eq:acp1}, for $r^\mathrm{NP}=1$, as a function of
174: $\phi^\mathrm{NP}$.}
175: \end{figure}
176:
177: In the more general scenario \textit{ii)}, there are even more terms
178: in the amplitude with different strong and weak phases. In this case,
179: $a^\mathrm{NP}_i$ contain an admixture of strong and weak
180: phases. Therefore, it is no longer useful to use the notation of
181: eq.~(\ref{eq:amp}). As an example, we give the coefficients $C_{\phi
182: K}$ and $S_{\phi K}$ of the time-dependent CP asymmetry computed in a
183: SUSY model with $\mathcal{O}(1)$ $\tilde s-\tilde b$ mixing, for an
184: average squark and gluino mass of 250 GeV (see
185: refs.~\cite{Silvestrini:ichep,Ciuchini:fut} for a detailed
186: analysis). For central values of the parameters in QCD factorization
187: and the extreme value $(\delta^d_{23})_{LL}=e^{3 \pi i/2}$
188: (for the definition, see ref.~\cite{Gabbiani:1996hi}), we get
189: \begin{equation}
190: C_{\phi K}=-0.24\,,\qquad S_{\phi K}=-0.13\,.
191: \end{equation}
192:
193: To conclude our discussion, we notice that, as suggested by $B\to
194: K\pi$ decays, large corrections to QCD factorization in the infinite
195: $b$-mass limit are expected in penguin-dominated $b\to s$
196: decays~\cite{Ciuchini:2001gv}. However, the inclusion of power
197: corrections following any of the available
198: approaches~\cite{Beneke:2001ev},~\cite{Ciuchini:2001gv}--\cite{Ciuchini:2002}
199: can only
200: strengthen our conclusion, since in general subleading terms produce
201: additional strong phases (barring accidental cancellations).
202: Furthermore, given the dependence of
203: hadronic matrix elements on the final state, no simple relation among
204: the time-dependent CP asymmetries in $B\to \phi K_{s}$, $B\to
205: \eta^\prime K_{s}$, and other penguin-dominated $b\to s$ transitions
206: can be established. Therefore, it is quite possible that, in the
207: presence of NP, $a_{CP}(B\to \phi
208: K_{s}) \neq a_{CP}(B\to \eta^\prime K_{s})$, contrary to what very recently
209: suggested in ref.~\cite{nir:ichep}.
210: If the present $2.7\sigma$ discrepancy between
211: $S_{J/\Psi K}$ and $S_{\phi K}$ will be confirmed, pointing to a large
212: NP contribution in the $B\to \phi K_{s}$ decay amplitude, a
213: non-vanishing $C_{\phi K}$ is expected on general grounds, as well as
214: CP violation in the decay $B^+\to \phi K^+$.
215:
216: We thank F. Zwirner for carefully reading the manuscript.
217:
218: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
219:
220: \bibitem{Grossman:1996ke}
221: Y.~Grossman and M.~P.~Worah,
222: %``CP asymmetries in B decays with new physics in decay amplitudes,''
223: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 395} (1997) 241
224: [arXiv:hep-ph/9612269].
225: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9612269;%%
226:
227: \bibitem{Grossman:1997gr}
228: Y.~Grossman, G.~Isidori and M.~P.~Worah,
229: %``CP asymmetry in B/d $\to$ Phi K(S): Standard model pollution,''
230: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 58} (1998) 057504
231: [arXiv:hep-ph/9708305].
232: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9708305;%%
233:
234: \bibitem{Ciuchini:1997zp}
235: M.~Ciuchini, E.~Franco, G.~Martinelli, A.~Masiero and L.~Silvestrini,
236: %``CP violating B decays in the standard model and supersymmetry,''
237: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 79} (1997) 978
238: [arXiv:hep-ph/9704274].
239: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9704274;%%
240:
241: \bibitem{Barbieri:1997kq}
242: R.~Barbieri and A.~Strumia,
243: %``CP violation in B decays and supersymmetry,''
244: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 508} (1997) 3
245: [arXiv:hep-ph/9704402].
246: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9704402;%%
247:
248: \bibitem{Abel:1998iu}
249: S.~A.~Abel, W.~N.~Cottingham and I.~B.~Whittingham,
250: %``Gluon and gluino penguins and the charmless decays of the b quark,''
251: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 58} (1998) 073006
252: [arXiv:hep-ph/9803401].
253: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9803401;%%
254:
255: \bibitem{Moroi:2000tk}
256: T.~Moroi,
257: %``CP violation in B/d $\to$ Phi K(S) in SUSY GUT with right-handed neutrinos,''
258: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 493} (2000) 366 [arXiv:hep-ph/0007328].
259: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0007328;%%
260:
261: \bibitem{Fleischer:2001pc}
262: R.~Fleischer and T.~Mannel,
263: %``Exploring new physics in the B $\to$ Phi K system,''
264: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 511} (2001) 240
265: [arXiv:hep-ph/0103121].
266: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0103121;%%
267:
268: \bibitem{Lunghi:2001af}
269: E.~Lunghi and D.~Wyler,
270: %``Complex flavour couplings in supersymmetry and unexpected CP violation in the decay B $\to$ Phi K,''
271: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 521} (2001) 320 [arXiv:hep-ph/0109149].
272: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0109149;%%
273:
274: \bibitem{Chang:2002mq}
275: D.~Chang, A.~Masiero and H.~Murayama,
276: %``Neutrino mixing and large CP violation in B physics,''
277: arXiv:hep-ph/0205111.
278: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0205111;%%
279:
280: \bibitem{Causse:2002mu}
281: M.~B.~Causse,
282: %``Supersymmetric penguin contributions to the process B/d $\to$ Phi K(S) in SUSY GUT with right-handed neutrino,''
283: arXiv:hep-ph/0207070.
284: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0207070;%%
285:
286: \bibitem{Hiller:2002ci}
287: G.~Hiller,
288: %``First hint of non-stqandard CP violation from B $\to$ Phi K(S) decay,''
289: arXiv:hep-ph/0207356.
290: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0207356;%%
291:
292: \bibitem{Datta:2002nr}
293: A.~Datta,
294: %``R-parity-violating SUSY and CP violation in $B \to \phi K_S$,''
295: arXiv:hep-ph/0208016.
296: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0208016;%%
297:
298: \bibitem{Aubert:2002nx}
299: B.~Aubert {\it et al.} [BABAR Collaboration],
300: %``Measurement of sin(2beta) in B0 $\to$ Phi K0(S),''
301: arXiv:hep-ex/0207070.
302: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0207070;%%
303:
304: \bibitem{Abe:2002bx}
305: K.~Abe [Belle Collaboration],
306: %``An improved measurement of mixing-induced CP violation in the neutral B meson system,''
307: arXiv:hep-ex/0207098.
308: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0207098;%%
309:
310: \bibitem{nir:ichep}
311: Y. Nir, arXiv:hep-ph/0208080.
312: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0208080;%%
313:
314: \bibitem{Beneke:1999br}
315: M.~Beneke, G.~Buchalla, M.~Neubert and C.~T.~Sachrajda,
316: %``{QCD} factorization for B $\to$ pi pi decays: Strong phases and CP violation in the heavy quark limit,''
317: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 83}, 1914 (1999)
318: [arXiv:hep-ph/9905312].
319: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9905312;%%
320:
321: \bibitem{Yang:2000xn}
322: M.~Z.~Yang and Y.~D.~Yang,
323: %``B $\to$ P V decays in QCD improved factorization approach,''
324: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 62} (2000) 114019
325: [arXiv:hep-ph/0007038].
326: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0007038;%%
327:
328: \bibitem{Beneke:2001ev}
329: M.~Beneke, G.~Buchalla, M.~Neubert and C.~T.~Sachrajda,
330: %``QCD factorization in B $\to$ pi K, pi pi decays and extraction of Wolfenstein parameters,''
331: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 606} (2001) 245
332: [arXiv:hep-ph/0104110].
333: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0104110;%%
334:
335: \bibitem{Gabbiani:1996hi}
336: F.~Gabbiani, E.~Gabrielli, A.~Masiero and L.~Silvestrini,
337: %``A complete analysis of FCNC and CP constraints in general SUSY extensions of the standard model,''
338: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 477} (1996) 321
339: [arXiv:hep-ph/9604387].
340: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9604387;%%
341:
342: \bibitem{Silvestrini:ichep}
343: L.~Silvestrini, talk given at ICHEP02,\\
344: http://www.ichep02.nl/Transparencies/BSM/BSM-6/BSM-6-1.silvestrini.pdf.
345:
346: \bibitem{Ciuchini:fut}
347: M.~Ciuchini \textit{et al.}, in preparation.
348:
349: \bibitem{Ciuchini:2001gv}
350: M.~Ciuchini, E.~Franco, G.~Martinelli, M.~Pierini and L.~Silvestrini,
351: %``Charming penguins strike back,''
352: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 515}, 33 (2001)
353: [arXiv:hep-ph/0104126].
354: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0104126;%%
355:
356: \bibitem{Chen:2001pr}
357: C.~H.~Chen, Y.~Y.~Keum and H.~n.~Li,
358: %``Perturbative QCD analysis of B $\to$ Phi K decays,''
359: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 64} (2001) 112002
360: [arXiv:hep-ph/0107165].
361: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0107165;%%
362:
363: \bibitem{Isola:2001bn}
364: C.~Isola, M.~Ladisa, G.~Nardulli, T.~N.~Pham and P.~Santorelli,
365: %``Charming penguin contributions to charmless B decays into two pseudoscalar mesons,''
366: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 65}, 094005 (2002)
367: [arXiv:hep-ph/0110411].
368: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0110411;%%
369:
370: \bibitem{Ciuchini:2002}
371: M.~Ciuchini, E.~Franco, G.~Martinelli, M.~Pierini and L.~Silvestrini,
372: arXiv:hep-ph/0208048.
373: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0208048;%%
374:
375: \end{thebibliography}
376:
377: \end{document}
378: