1: \documentclass[preprint,prd,aps,amsmath,nofootinbib,superscriptaddress,tightenlines]{revtex4}
2:
3:
4: \usepackage[dvips,bookmarks=false]{hyperref}
5: \usepackage{graphicx}
6: \usepackage{bm}
7: \usepackage{xspace}
8: \usepackage{slashed}
9: %\usepackage{showlabels}
10: %\usepackage{showkeys}
11:
12: %\documentstyle[preprint,floats,tighten,aps,graphicx]{revtex}
13:
14: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
15: %%%%% Add code to put the time in our tex file %%%%%%%%%%%%
16: \newcount\hour \newcount\minute
17: \hour=\time \divide \hour by 60
18: \minute=\time
19: \count99=\hour \multiply \count99 by -60 \advance \minute by \count99
20: \newcommand{\mydate}{\ \today \ - \number\hour :\ifnum \minute<10 0\fi
21: \number\minute}
22: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
23:
24:
25: %Put your definitions here
26:
27: \newcommand{\usn}{us/n}
28: \newcommand{\usbn}{us/\bn}
29: \newcommand{\usnp}{us/n'}
30: \def\Slash#1{{#1\!\!\!\slash}}
31: \def\Aslash{A\!\!\!\!\slash}
32: \def\Bslash{B\!\!\!\!\slash}
33: \def\Dslash{D\!\!\!\!\slash}
34: \def\Eslash{E\!\!\!\slash}
35: \def\Mslash{M\!\!\!\!\!\slash}
36: \def\SppP{{\cal {P\!\!\!\!\hspace{0.04cm}\slash}}_\perp}
37: \def\ppslash{p^{\,\prime}\!\!\!\!\!\slash}
38: %\def\nslash{n\!\!\!\slash}
39: %\def\bnslash{\bar n\!\!\!\slash}
40: \def\pslash{p\!\!\!\slash}
41: \def\qslash{q\!\!\!\slash}
42: \def\ellslash{\ell\!\!\!\slash}
43: \def\lslash{l\!\!\!\slash}
44: \def\dslash{\partial\!\!\!\slash}
45: \def\Aslash{A\!\!\!\slash}
46: \def\epslash{\epsilon\!\!\!\slash}
47: \def\vslash{v\!\!\!\slash}
48: \def\OMIT#1{}
49:
50: \newcommand{\nslash}{\slashed{n}}
51: \newcommand{\bnslash}{\slashed{\bar n}}
52: \newcommand{\hc}{hc}
53:
54: \newcommand{\CH}[2]{\chi_{#1,#2}}
55: \newcommand{\CHp}[3]{\chi_{#1,#2}^{#3}}
56: \newcommand{\bCH}[2]{\overline\chi_{#1,#2}}
57: \newcommand{\bCHp}[3]{\overline\chi_{#1,#2}^{#3}}
58:
59: \newcommand{\nn}{\nonumber}
60: \newcommand{\lc}{\lowercase}
61: \newcommand{\bn}{{\bar n}}
62: \newcommand{\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}}
63: \newcommand{\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}
64: \newcommand{\bnp}{\bar n \!\cdot\! p}
65: \newcommand{\bnP}{\bar {\cal P}}
66: \newcommand{\ppP}{{\cal P}_\perp}
67: \newcommand{\bnPd}{\bar {\cal P}^{\raisebox{0.8mm}{\scriptsize$\dagger$}} }
68: \newcommand{\cP}{{\cal P}}
69: \newcommand{\cPslash}{ {\cal P}\!\!\!\!\slash}
70: \newcommand{\bs}{\!\hspace{0.05cm}}
71: \newcommand{\mcdot}{\!\cdot\!}
72: \newcommand{\Ub}{{\cal U}}
73: \newcommand{\cD}{{\cal D}}
74: \newcommand{\LQCD}{{\Lambda}}
75: \newcommand{\np}{n \!\cdot\! p}
76:
77: \def\lqcd{\Lambda_{\rm QCD}}
78:
79: \newcommand{\DgppPl}{\,\overleftarrow D{}_{\!c\,\alpha}^{\perp}}
80: \newcommand{\DgppPr}{\,\overrightarrow D{}_{\!c\,\alpha}^{\perp}}
81:
82: \newcommand{\SCETa}{\ensuremath{{\rm SCET}_{\rm I}}\xspace}
83: \newcommand{\SCETb}{\ensuremath{{\rm SCET}_{\rm II}}\xspace}
84: \newcommand{\muplus}{\mu_+}
85: \newcommand{\muminus}{\mu_-}
86:
87: \arraycolsep 2pt
88: \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.35}
89:
90: \begin{document}
91: \setlength\baselineskip{17pt}
92:
93: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
94: %Define Title, Author, Address, Preprint#
95:
96:
97: \preprint{ \vbox{ \hbox{MIT-CTP 3790} \hbox{CMU-HEP-06-09}
98: \hbox{hep-ph/0611356} }
99: }
100:
101: \title{\boldmath
102: Three-Parton Contributions to $B\to M_1 M_2$ Annihilation at Leading Order}
103:
104: \vspace*{1cm}
105:
106: \author{Christian M.\ Arnesen}
107: \affiliation{Center for Theoretical Physics, Laboratory
108: for Nuclear Science, Massachusetts \\
109: Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139}
110:
111: \author{Ira Z.\ Rothstein}
112: \affiliation{Department of Physics, Carnegie Mellon University,
113: Pittsburgh, PA 15213\vspace*{0.5cm}}
114:
115: \author{Iain W.\ Stewart\vspace{0.4cm}}
116: \affiliation{Center for Theoretical Physics, Laboratory
117: for Nuclear Science, Massachusetts \\
118: Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139}
119:
120:
121:
122: \begin{abstract}\vspace*{0.2cm}
123:
124: We compute annihilation amplitudes for charmless $B$ decays that are
125: proportional to the three-parton twist-3 light meson distribution
126: amplitude $\phi_{3M}(x_1,x_2)$ with an active gluon. Due to an
127: enhancement from a quark propagator at the scale $p^2\sim
128: m_b\Lambda_{\text{QCD}}$ these terms occur at the same parametric order in
129: $\alpha_s(m_b)$ and $1/m_b$ as the known leading order annihilation
130: involving $f_B$ and twist-2 meson distributions. With our
131: calculation the leading order annihilation amplitude is now
132: complete. At lowest order in $\alpha_s$ the new amplitudes are real and only $O_{5-8}$
133: contribute. Using simple models we find that the three-parton and
134: two-parton terms are of comparable size.
135:
136: \end{abstract}
137:
138: \maketitle
139:
140: The nonleptonic charmless decay channels \(B \to M_1 M_2\) provide a wealth of
141: information about the standard model, including the study of \(CP\) violation
142: and the strong interactions. Since many amplitudes for these decays are loop
143: dominated, it is possible for new physics to give a significant contribution.
144: However, except for the simplest observables, testing for new physics requires
145: an understanding of the standard model background. Predicting standard model
146: decay rates and $CP$ asymmetries with quantum chromodynamics (QCD) is difficult,
147: but the task is simplified by the use of the soft-collinear effective theory
148: (SCET)~\cite{Bauer:2000ew,Bauer:2000yr,Bauer:2001ct,Bauer:2001yt} and
149: factorization
150: theorems~\cite{Beneke:2000ry,Keum:2000ph,Chay:2003zp,Bauer:2004tj}.
151:
152: An interesting experimental observable is the relative ``strong''
153: phase between standard model amplitudes multiplying the CKM factors
154: $V_{ub}V_{uf}^*$ and $V_{cb}V_{cf}^*$ ($f=d,s$), since these phases
155: are measured to be large in the $B\to \pi\pi$ and $B\to K\pi$
156: channels~\cite{CKMfitter}. There are two competing standard model
157: explanations for these phases, sizeable charm penguin
158: loops~\cite{Ciuchini:1997hb,Colangelo:1989gi,Bauer:2004tj,Williamson:2006hb}
159: or sizeable annihilation
160: amplitudes~\cite{Keum:2000ph,Lu:2000em,Beneke:2001ev,Kagan:2004uw,Khodjamirian:2005wn}
161: in which the initial state ``spectator'' quark is Wick-contracted with
162: a quark field in the effective Hamiltonian. In this paper we report
163: on a new contribution to the leading annihilation amplitudes.
164:
165: Our notation follows that of Ref.~\cite{Bauer:2004tj} where factorization
166: theorems for the leading order $B\to M_1M_2$ amplitudes were derived with an
167: expansion in $\Lambda/Q$ where $\Lambda$ is a hadronic scale and $Q\sim m_b \sim
168: m_c \sim E_M$. We restrict our discussion to non-isosinglet mesons ($M_i=$
169: $\pi$, $K$, $\rho$, $\ldots$) which can not be produced solely by gluons,
170: for which the annihilation amplitudes are power suppressed by \(\sim\Lambda/Q\).
171: Recently these power corrections were classified according to their perturbative
172: order and source for strong phases~\cite{Arnesen:2006vb}. The annihilation
173: ampltude is
174: \begin{align}\label{annexpansion}
175: A^{ann}&=A^{(1ann)}_{\rm hard}+A^{(1ann)}_{\rm hard-col}+A^{(2ann)}_{\rm
176: hard}+\ldots \,,
177: \end{align}
178: where the superscript denotes the order in $\Lambda/Q$. A subscript ``hard''
179: denotes annihilation amplitudes generated by propagators offshell by $p^2\sim
180: m_b^2$. At lowest order in $\alpha_s$ these include the standard leading order
181: amplitudes $A^{(1ann)}_{\rm hard}\sim \big[ \alpha_s(m_b) f_B f_{M_1} f_{M_2}
182: \phi_{M_1} \phi_{M_2}\big]$ as well as the chirally enhanced amplitudes
183: $A^{(2ann)}_{\rm hard}\sim \big[ \alpha_s(m_b) f_B f_{M_1} f_{M_2} \phi_{M_1}
184: \phi_{M_2}^{pp}\mu_{M_2}/m_b\big]$. These have been studied in earlier
185: analyses~\cite{Keum:2000ph,Lu:2000em,Beneke:2001ev,Kagan:2004uw}, and at this
186: order, factorization in rapidity~\cite{Manohar:2006nz} reveals that they are
187: real~\cite{Arnesen:2006vb}. Here the $f$'s are decay constants, and the chiral
188: enhancement factors are $\mu_\pi = m_\pi^2/(m_u + m_d)$ and $\mu_K = m_K^2/(m_u
189: + m_s)$. $\phi_{M_i}$ are twist-2 distribution functions, and $\phi_{M}^{pp}$ is
190: a two-parton twist-3 distribution. In Eq.~(\ref{annexpansion}) the amplitudes
191: $A_{\rm hard-col}^{(1ann)}$ have hard-collinear propagators, which are offshell
192: by an amount $\mu_i^2\sim m_b\Lambda$. A non-perturbative phase is first
193: generated by soft exchange between the two mesons as an order
194: $\alpha_s^2(\mu_i)/\pi$ suppressed term in $A_{\rm hard-col}^{(1ann)}$. The
195: ellipsis in Eq.~(\ref{annexpansion}) denotes the fact that the full set of
196: $A^{(2ann)}$ amplitudes have not yet been classified.
197:
198: In this paper we compute the leading term in the perturbative expansion of $A_{\rm
199: hard-col}^{(1ann)}$, which has the form
200: \begin{align} \label{Anew}
201: A_{\rm hard-col}^{(1ann)}\sim
202: \alpha_s(m_b) \frac{H(x_1,y_1,y_2)}{k}\otimes f_B \phi_B^+(k) \: f_{M_1}
203: \phi_{M_1}(x_1) \:
204: f_{3M_2} \phi_{3M_2}(y_1,y_2) \,.
205: \end{align}
206: Here $H$ is a calculable hard-scattering kernel, $\phi_{3M}$ is a
207: three-parton twist-3 distribution, and $f_{3M}$ is the corresponding
208: decay constant. The amplitude in Eq.~(\ref{Anew}) occurs at the same
209: order in $1/m_b$ and $\alpha_s(m_b)$ as $A_{\rm hard}^{(1ann)}$ and
210: should be included for a complete leading order annihilation
211: amplitude. Unlike $A_{\rm hard}^{(1ann)}$ its convolution integrals
212: converge without using rapidity factorization. Furthermore, the LO annihilation involves \(B\)-meson information beyond \(f_B\), thus demonstrating that
213: annihilation is more complicated than the short distance picture leading to a scaling $\sim
214: f_B/m_b$
215: that is often used in parametric estimates~\cite{Blok:1997yj}.
216:
217: In QCD at the scale \(m_b\), flavor changes are mediated by the weak effective Hamiltonian. For $B\to M_1M_2$ with $\Delta S=0$,
218: \begin{equation} \label{Hw}
219: H_W = \frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}} \sum_{p=u,c} V_{pb} V^*_{pd}\,
220: \Big( C_1 O_1^p + C_2 O_2^p
221: + \!\sum_{i=3}^{10,7\gamma,8g}\! C_i O_i \Big).
222: \end{equation}
223: Most of these operators have spin $(V\!-\!A)\otimes(V\!-\!A)$, such as $O_1^u = (\bar u
224: b)_{V\!-\!A}\,(\bar d u)_{V\!-\!A}$. We will prove below that all such operators give vanishing contribution to Eq.~(\ref{Anew}), so that only
225: \begin{align}\label{fullops}
226: % O_1^u &= (\bar u b)_{V\!-\!A}\,
227: % (\bar d u)_{V\!-\!A},
228: % & O_2^u &= (\bar u_{\beta} b_{\alpha})_{V\!-\!A}\,
229: % (\bar d_{\alpha} u_{\beta})_{V\!-\!A} \,, \nn \\
230: % O_1^c &= (\bar c b)_{V\!-\!A}\,
231: % (\bar d c)_{V\!-\!A},
232: % & O_2^c &= (\bar c_{\beta} b_{\alpha})_{V\!-\!A}\,
233: % (\bar d_{\alpha} c_{\beta})_{V\!-\!A} \,, \nn\\
234: % O_{3} &= {\textstyle \sum}_{q'} (\bar d b)_{V\!-\!A}\,
235: % (\bar q' q')_{V\! - \!A} \,,
236: % & O_{4} & = {\textstyle \sum}_{q'} (\bar d_{\beta} b_{\alpha})_{V\!-\!A}\,
237: % (\bar q'_{\alpha} q'_{\beta})_{V\! - \!A} \,, \nn \\
238: O_{5} &= {\textstyle \sum}_{q'} (\bar d b)_{V\!-\!A}\,
239: (\bar q' q')_{V\! + \!A} \,,
240: & O_6 &= {\textstyle \sum}_{q'} (\bar d_{\beta} b_{\alpha})_{V\!-\!A}\,
241: (\bar q'_{\alpha} q'_{\beta})_{V\! + \!A} \,, \nn \\
242: O_{7} &= {\textstyle \sum}_{q'} \frac{3e_{q'}}{2}\, (\bar d b)_{V\!-\!A}\,
243: (\bar q' q')_{V\! + \!A}\,,
244: & O_8 & = {\textstyle \sum}_{q'} \frac{3e_{q'}}{2}\,
245: (\bar d_{\beta} b_{\alpha})_{V\!-\!A}\,
246: (\bar q'_{\alpha} q'_{\beta})_{V\! + \!A} \,,
247: % \nn \\
248: % O_{9} &= {\textstyle \sum}_{q'} \frac{3e_{q'}}{2}\,
249: % (\bar d b)_{V\!-\!A}\, (\bar q' q')_{V\! - \!A}\,,
250: % & O_{10} & = {\textstyle \sum}_{q'} \frac{3e_{q'}}{2}\,
251: % (\bar d_{\beta} b_{\alpha})_{V\!-\!A}\,
252: % (\bar q'_{\alpha} q'_{\beta})_{V\!-\!A}
253: % \,.
254: %\,, \nn \\
255: % O_{7\gamma} &= -\frac{e}{8\pi^2}\, m_b\, \bar d\, \sigma^{\mu\nu}
256: % F_{\mu\nu} (1\!+\! \gamma_5) b \,,
257: % & O_{8g} &= -\frac{g}{8\pi^2}\, m_b\, \bar d\, \sigma^{\mu\nu}
258: % G_{\mu\nu}^a T^a (1\!+\!\gamma_5) b \,.
259: \end{align}
260: are relevant for our analysis. Here $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are color indices, $e_{q'}$ are electric charges, and the sum
261: is over flavors $q'=u,d,s,c,b$. Results for $\Delta
262: S=1$ transitions are obtained by replacing $d\to s$ in Eqs.~(\ref{Hw}) and
263: (\ref{fullops}), and likewise in the equations below. The coefficients in
264: Eq.~(\ref{Hw}) are known at next-to-leading-log order~\cite{Buchalla:1995vs}. (We have
265: $O^p_{1}\leftrightarrow O^p_{2}$ relative to~\cite{Buchalla:1995vs}). In the NDR
266: scheme with $m_b=4.8\,{\rm GeV}$, the coefficients are
267: %\begin{eqnarray} \label{Ci}
268: %&&
269: $C_{5-8}(m_b) = \big\{
270: % 1.080\,,\
271: % -0.177\,,\
272: % 0.011\,,\
273: %-0.033\,,\
274: 0.010,
275: -0.040 ,
276: % \nn\\
277: %&& \hspace{2.5cm}
278: 4.9 \!\times\! 10^{-4} ,
279: 4.6 \!\times\! 10^{-4}
280: \big\}, $
281: % -9.8 \!\times\! 10^{-3} \,,\
282: % 1.9 \!\times\! 10^{-3} \big\} \,.
283: %\end{eqnarray}
284: They are considerably smaller than $C_1(m_b)=1.08$ and $C_2(m_b)=-0.18$, but can give important contributions in penguin observables because $C_{1,2}$ only contribute through loops~\cite{Beneke:2001ev}.
285:
286: To separate the mass scales below $m_b$ we match $H_W$ onto operators
287: in SCET. The amplitude for \(B \to M_1 M_2\) is most easily calculated in the
288: \(B\) rest frame where soft fields with typical momenta \(\sim\Lambda\) interpolate for the initial state \(B\).
289: The final state hadrons $M_1$ and \(M_2\) are back-to-back energetic charmless
290: pseudoscalar or vector mesons. Collinear fields in the light-like direction
291: \(n\) interpolate for one light meson, and collinear fields in the direction
292: \(\bar n\) interpolate for the other. These fields have typical momenta
293: \((n\cdot p,\bar n \cdot p, p_\bot)\sim Q(\eta^2,1,\eta) \) and
294: \(Q(1,\eta^2,\eta)\), respectively, in terms of the power counting parameter
295: $\eta\sim \Lambda/Q$. The vectors \(n\) and \(\bar n\) satisfy \(n\cdot \bar
296: n=2\), and we work in a frame where the $B$-meson four-velocity \(v\) has
297: \(n\cdot v=\bn \cdot v=1\). To calculate the amplitude in Eq.~(\ref{Anew}) we
298: first match QCD onto operators in \SCETa where the hard-collinear modes with
299: $p^2\sim m_b\Lambda$ are still propagating and then match these onto operators
300: in \SCETb which has only non-perturbative modes with $p^2\sim \Lambda^2$~\cite{Bauer:2002aj}.
301:
302: Before presenting the details of the calculation of Eq.~(\ref{Anew})
303: we complete our review of Ref.~\cite{Arnesen:2006vb} with a discussion
304: of the required ingredients and an overview of the matching
305: procedure. Let $Q^{(0)}$ denote the leading \SCETa weak operators.
306: Annihilation contributions require either (a) an $n$-quark
307: \(\bn\)-antiquark pair produced by hard interactions giving a
308: $Q^{(k\ge 2)}$ six-quark operator, or (b) a time-ordered product of
309: two mixed Lagrangians ${\cal L}_{\xi_n q}^{(k)}{\cal L}_{\xi_{\bn}
310: q}^{(k)}$ to produce the $n$-$\bn$ pair by soft exchange. Annihilation
311: also requires a mechanism for connecting the ``spectator'' to the weak
312: operator, either by (i) having a soft field directly in the weak
313: operator, or (ii) having a time-ordered product with an ${\cal L}_{\xi
314: q}^{(k)}$. Case (a,i) gives operators $Q^{(4)}$ which contribute only
315: to $A_{\rm hard}^{(1ann)}$. Case (b,i) vanishes at this order. Case
316: (b,ii) involves three hard-collinear gluons and is $\sim
317: \alpha_s^2(\mu_i)$. This leaves case (a,ii). Here $Q^{(2)} {\cal
318: L}_{\xi q}^{(1)}$ can contribute at ${\cal O}(\alpha_s(m_b))$ if the
319: gluon from ${\cal L}_{\xi q}^{(1)}$ is uncontracted. Since the
320: uncontracted gluon costs an extra power when matched onto \SCETb, it
321: is only this class of operators that contributes with an external
322: gluon, not $Q^{(3)}{\cal L}_{\xi q}^{(1)}$, $Q^{(2)} {\cal L}_{\xi
323: q}^{(2)}$, etc.
324: \begin{figure}
325: \centerline{
326: \includegraphics[width=7cm]{Ann_FACTg}
327: }
328: \vskip-0.2cm
329: \caption{Picture for $Q_i^{(2)}{\cal L}^{(1)}_{\xi q}$,
330: which generates an annihilation amplitude that is sensitive to the
331: intermediate scale $p^2 \sim m_b\Lambda$. The filled circle at the
332: center represents a \SCETa six-quark operator \(Q^{(2)}\) arising
333: from the full-theory diagrams in Fig.~(\ref{fig:Ann}) at the hard
334: scale \(p^2\sim m_b^2\). \label{fig:AnnFACT}}
335: \end{figure}
336: Thus the calculation of \(A^{(1ann)}_{hard-col}\) involves finding
337: \SCETa operators of the form
338: \begin{equation} \label{Q2early}
339: Q_{id}^{(2)}\propto \big[ \bar q'_{n',\omega_5}\Theta_{us} b_v \big]
340: \big[ \bar d_{\bar n,\omega_2} \Theta _{\bar n} q_{\bar n,\omega_3} \big]
341: \big[ \bar q_{ n,\omega_1} \Theta _{n} q'_{ n,\omega_4} \big]\,,
342: \end{equation}
343: where $\Theta_{us}\otimes \Theta_\bn \otimes \Theta_n$ are color and
344: spin structures, $q$ and $q'$ are flavors, and the collinear direction
345: \(n'=n\) or
346: \(\bar n\). The fermion fields are gauge invariant with large label momenta specified by the subscripts \(\omega\), for example $q_{n,\omega_1}=\delta(\omega_1-\bn\mcdot\cP)W^\dagger_n
347: \xi_n^{(q)}$ where $W_n$ is a Wilson line. At tree level these operators arise
348: from the full-theory diagrams in Fig. \ref{fig:Ann} with three light
349: \(n'\)-collinear quarks and two collinear in the other direction,
350: \(\bn'\). They have Wilson coefficients of \(\mathcal
351: O(\alpha_s(m_b))\). We identify \(n\) as the collinear direction of
352: the pair-produced quark of flavor $q$ and sum over all \(n\) in the
353: \SCETa weak Hamiltonian. We will see shortly that the flavor
354: structure is as in Eq.~(\ref{Q2early}), and that the matching requires
355: $T^A$ color structures for two of the $\Theta$'s.
356:
357: \begin{figure}[t]
358: \includegraphics[width=16cm]{Ann_g}
359: \vskip-0.4cm
360: \caption{Tree-level annihilation graphs for $B\to M_1 M_2$ decays. The gluon and the fermion propagator connecting it to the weak vertex are both offshell by \(p^2\sim m_b\). Matching on to \SCETa, these graphs give rise to the six-quark operators \(Q^{(2)}\), the filled circle at the center of Fig.~\ref{fig:AnnFACT}.
361: \label{fig:Ann}}
362: \end{figure}
363:
364: To finalize our description of the calculation we consider matching the
365: time-ordered product \(T[Q^{(2)} \mathcal L_{\xi q}^{(1)}]\) onto
366: \SCETb with diagrams as shown in Figure \ref{fig:AnnFACT}. \(Q^{(2)}\) has an excess of \(n'\)-collinear fermions since only two
367: are needed to interpolate for a collinear meson. The
368: subleading Lagrangian~\cite{Beneke:2002ni}
369: $\mathcal L^{(1)} _{\xi q}
370: = \bar q'_{us} ig \slashed {\mathcal B} _{n'}^\perp q'_{n'}$
371: removes an \(n'\)-collinear fermion and provides the soft field that
372: interpolates for the light anti-quark in the \(B\) meson. Here
373: $ig\,{\cal B}^{\perp\,\mu}_{n',\omega} = \big[ 1/(\bn^\prime \mcdot \cP)\, W^\dagger_{n'}
374: [ i\bn\cdot D_{n'} , i D^\mu_{n',\perp} ] W_{n'} \delta(\omega-\bn'\mcdot \cP^\dagger) \big]$, and the form of the \SCETb operators is
375: \begin{equation} \label{O1Tearly}
376: O_{id}^{(1T)} \propto \frac{1}{n'\!\cdot\! k} \:
377: \big[ \bar q'_{s,n'\!\cdot k} \Gamma_s b_v \big]
378: \big[ \bar d_{\bn} \Gamma_{\bn} q_{\bn} \big]
379: \big[ \bar q_n \Gamma_n q'_n \big] ig\mathcal B_{n'}^{\perp\beta} \,,
380: \end{equation}
381: with $\Gamma_s\otimes \Gamma_{\bn}\otimes\Gamma_n$ containing spin and color
382: structures. The collinear gluon field strength \(ig\mathcal B_{n'}^{\perp}\sim\eta\),
383: interpolates for gluons in a final state meson, so there is no perturbative
384: suppression from the factor of $g$.
385: At tree level, integrating out the hard-collinear quark propagator
386: in Fig.~\ref{fig:AnnFACT} induces an inverse factor $1/(n'\cdot k)$ of the soft
387: momentum which will be convoluted with the $B$-distribution, $\phi_B^+(n'\cdot
388: k)$. In Eq.~(\ref{O1Tearly}) this compensates the \(\eta\) suppression from
389: \(ig\mathcal B_{n'}^{\perp}\) to make $O^{(1T)}$ the same order as the six-quark
390: operators for the hard annihilation, which is ${\cal O}(\eta^7)$. We
391: have checked that operators with more
392: \(ig\mathcal B_{n'}^{\perp}\)'s or with soft gluon field strengths do not occur
393: at this order in $1/m_b$ and $\alpha_s(m_b)$.
394:
395: Note that \SCETb time-ordered products (T-products) do not contribute
396: at ${\cal O}(\eta^7)$. To see this, recall that our process has a soft
397: initial state and $n$ and $\bn$-collinear final states. An example of
398: an \SCETb Lagrangian that connects these sectors~\cite{Hill:2002vw}
399: has two-collinear quarks and two-soft quarks~\cite{Mantry:2003uz},
400: $\bar q_s q_s \bar \xi_n \xi_n\sim \eta$.
401: In these operators the two $n$-collinear
402: particles conserve the large $p^-\sim \eta^0$ momenta, and the two
403: soft particles conserve the $p^+\sim \eta$ momenta. Thus this
404: operator, as well as analogous operators with gluons, only support
405: scattering, $ns \to ns$, and not annhilation such as $nn\to ss$ or
406: $ss\to nn$. Another example is ${\cal L}_{\rm II}\sim \bar \xi_n A_n A_\bn
407: \xi_\bn\sim\eta^2$, where analogous statements hold for $n$ and
408: $\bn$. Weak operators, like $O_{id}^{(1T)}$, that have the same
409: $n$-$\bn$-$s$ structure as the initial and final states are already
410: ${\cal O}(\eta^7)$, so T-products with them are power suppressed.
411: The above considerations rule out the
412: majority of T-products. An example of an annihilation T-product in
413: \SCETb that survives these criteria is ${\cal L}_{\rm II}$, with a
414: weak operator with fields $(\bar q_s h_v \bar\xi_n \xi_\bn)\sim
415: \eta^5$. These T-products involve at least one loop momentum
416: $\ell^\mu$ where, due to the double multipole expansion, $\ell^\pm$
417: must be smaller than the conserved $p^-$ and $p^+$, see
418: Eq.(25) of Ref.~\cite{Stewart:2003gt}. As a contour integral in $\ell^+$ or
419: $\ell^-$ we have $\ge 2$ poles that are all on the same side of the
420: axis, and therefore the loop gives zero. At ${\cal O}(\eta^7)$ this is
421: sufficient to rule out possible annihilation T-products, including
422: those with more than one \SCETb Lagrangian. Note that in
423: Ref.~\cite{Mantry:2003uz} a T-product contribution was identified
424: for $\bar B^0\to D^0\pi^0$, however in that scattering process the
425: integral did not satisfy the same pole criteria as we find here.
426:
427:
428:
429:
430:
431: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
432: \vskip0.2cm
433: \noindent {\bf Constructing the Operator Bases}
434: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
435:
436: Next we construct a full basis for the operators \(Q^{(2)}\) and \(O^{(1T)}\) in the
437: \SCETa and \SCETb weak effective Hamiltonians, respectively. (The
438: matching calculations beginning on page 7 can be understood without
439: the details of this somewhat technical construction, the results of
440: which are Eqs.~(\ref{Q2})~and~(\ref{O1T}).) General symmetry arguments
441: allow us to reduce the operator bases to the small subset relevant to
442: our calculation of
443: \(A^{(1ann)}_{\rm hard-col}\), and for this reason it is convenient to
444: construct the bases for \SCETa and \SCETb simultaneously. First consider spin in
445: \SCETa. For light fermion fields of definite handedness, a
446: complete basis of Dirac structures for the individual bilinears in
447: Eq.~(\ref{Q2early}) is
448: \begin{equation} \label{basis}
449: \Theta_{\usnp} =\{1,\gamma_\bot^\alpha\}\,, \qquad
450: \Theta_\bn = \{ \nslash, \nslash\gamma_\perp^\mu \} \,, \qquad
451: \Theta_n = \{ \bnslash, \bnslash\gamma_\perp^\mu \} \,.
452: \end{equation}
453: Using these bases, we must construct a complete set of \(Q^{(2)}\)
454: spin structures with chiralities inherited in perturbative matching
455: from the full-theory fields in
456: \(O_{1-10}\) and the produced \(q\bar q\) pair. To make a Lorentz scalar, the spin structure must have zero \(\gamma_\bot\)'s or two \(\gamma_\bot\)'s contracted with \(g_\bot^{\alpha\beta}=g^{\alpha\beta}-n^\alpha\bn^\beta/2-n^\beta\bn^\alpha/2\). Note that contracting with \(\epsilon_\bot^{\alpha\beta}=\bn^\rho n^\sigma\epsilon^{\alpha\beta\rho\sigma}/2\) does not yield an independent operator since for
457: example $i\epsilon_\perp^{\mu\nu} \bar \xi_n^L \bnslash \gamma^\perp_\nu \xi_n^R
458: = \bar \xi_n^L \bnslash \gamma_\perp^\mu\gamma_5 \xi_n^R = \bar \xi_n^L \bnslash
459: \gamma_\perp^\mu \xi_n^R$. For
460: $O_{1-4,9,10}$ the only allowed chiral structure is $(LH)(LL)(LL)$
461: where $L$ and $R$ refer to the handedness for the light quarks in the
462: bilinears in the order shown in Eq.~(\ref{Q2early}). We cannot assign
463: a handedness to the heavy quark denoted here by $H$. This chiral
464: structure is realized as the spin structures
465: \begin{align}\label{Thetanogps}
466: \Theta_{\usn}\otimes\Theta_\bn\otimes\Theta_n
467: &=1\otimes\nslash\otimes\bnslash\,,
468: &
469: \Theta_{\usbn}\otimes\Theta_\bn\otimes\Theta_n
470: &=1\otimes\nslash\otimes\bnslash\,.
471: \end{align}
472: We have ruled out the chirality \((LH)(LR)(RL)\) corresponding to a
473: spin structure \(1\otimes \nslash \gamma_\bot^\alpha\otimes
474: \bnslash\gamma^\bot_\alpha\) by using
475: $P_R\bnslash'\gamma_\perp^\alpha\otimes P_L\nslash'\gamma^\perp_\alpha
476: = 0$. This equation encodes the helicity flip argument of
477: Ref.~\cite{Kagan:2004uw}. Similarly, for $O_{5-8}$ the chirality
478: $(LH)(RR)(RR)$ is also realized as the spin structures
479: Eq.~(\ref{Thetanogps}), whereas \((LH)(RL)(LR)\) is not allowed since
480: \(P_L\bnslash\gamma_\perp^\alpha\otimes P_R\nslash\gamma^\perp_\alpha
481: =0\). We will show momentarily, however, that using \SCETb the terms
482: in Eq.~(\ref{Thetanogps}) are not needed to compute
483: \(A^{(1ann)}_{hard-col}\). For $O_{5-8}$ we can also have
484: \begin{align}\label{Thetatwogps}
485: \Theta_{\usn}\otimes\Theta_\bn\otimes\Theta_n
486: &=\gamma_\perp^\alpha \otimes \nslash \otimes \bnslash \gamma^\perp_\alpha\,,
487: &
488: \Theta_{\usbn}\otimes\Theta_\bn\otimes\Theta_n
489: &=\gamma_\perp^\alpha \otimes \nslash \gamma^\perp_\alpha \otimes \bnslash\,,
490: \end{align}
491: corresponding to chiralities $(RH)(LL)(LR)$ and $(RH)(LR)(RR)$,
492: respectively, and thus the flavor structure shown in
493: Eq.~(\ref{Q2early}), namely $(\bar q' b)(\bar d q)(\bar q q')$. The
494: second structure in Eq.~(\ref{Thetanogps}) is related to the second
495: structure in Eq.~(\ref{Thetatwogps}) by a Fierz transformation
496: swapping $\bar d_\bn$ and $\bar q'_\bn$ quarks and we will choose the
497: latter for our operator basis. The complete set of spin structures in
498: Eqs.~(\ref{Thetanogps})~and~(\ref{Thetatwogps}) contains neither
499: \(\Theta_{\usn}\otimes\Theta_{\bn}\otimes\Theta_{n}=\gamma_\bot^\alpha
500: \otimes \nslash \gamma^\bot_\alpha \otimes \bnslash\) nor
501: \(\Theta_{\usbn}\otimes\Theta_{\bn}\otimes\Theta_{n}=\gamma_\bot^\alpha
502: \otimes \nslash \otimes \bnslash\gamma^\bot_\alpha\). These
503: possibilities are excluded by the projection relation
504: \(\Theta_{\usnp}\doteq\bnslash'\nslash'\Theta_{\usnp}\slashed{v}/4\)
505: and the helicity flip equation.
506:
507: Now consider spin and chirality in \SCETb. The allowed \(O^{(1T)}\)
508: spin structures must respect the handedness inherited from the \SCETa
509: fields in the perturbative matching of \(T [Q^{(2)} \mathcal L _{\xi
510: q}^{(1)}]\). For \(n'=\bn\) in \(Q^{(2)}\), taking either one of
511: the \(\bn\)-collinear anti-quark fields soft yields an annihilation
512: operator. For \(n'=n\), however, the field \(\bar q_n\) in the third
513: bilinear was pair produced and does not contribute to the annihilation
514: amplitude when made soft by \( \mathcal L _{\xi q}^{(1)}\). So given
515: the \SCETa spin structures
516: Eqs.~(\ref{Thetanogps})~and~(\ref{Thetatwogps}) corresponding to
517: chiralities described in the text, we need to consider \(O^{(1T)}\)
518: chiralities \((LH)(LL)(LL),\, (LH)(RR)(RR),\, (RH)(LL)(LR),\) and
519: \((RH)(LR)(RR)\) with bilinears in the order shown in
520: Eq.~(\ref{O1Tearly}), \(i.e.\ \text{soft}-\bn-n\). With the first
521: bilinear purely soft, a complete basis of Dirac structures for the
522: individual bilinears is
523: \begin{equation} \label{Gammabasis}
524: \Gamma_{s} =\{\nslash,\bnslash,\gamma_\bot^\alpha\}\,, \qquad
525: \Gamma_\bn = \{ \nslash, \nslash\gamma_\perp^\mu \} \,, \qquad
526: \Gamma_n = \{ \bnslash, \bnslash\gamma_\perp^\mu \} \,.
527: \end{equation}
528: A Lorentz scalar \(O ^{(1T)}\) has an odd number of \(\gamma_\bot\)'s since one must be contracted into the \(n-\) or \(\bn-\)collinear field strength \(\mathcal B^\beta_\bot\). For chiralities \((LH)(LL)(LL)\) and \((LH)(RR)(RR)\) the allowed Dirac structure is
529: \begin{align} \label{gamma3b}
530: (\Gamma_s \otimes \Gamma_\bn \otimes \Gamma_n) \mathcal
531: B^\beta_{n',\perp} &= (\gamma^\perp_\beta \otimes \nslash \otimes
532: \bnslash )\mathcal B^\beta_{n',\perp} \end{align} with \(n'=n\) or
533: \(\bn\), but the corresponding operators \(O^{(1T)}\) have $\bar q_s
534: \gamma_\perp^\mu b_v$ and do not contribute for $B$ decays. Since
535: \((LH)(LL)(LL)\) is the only \(O^{(1T)}\) chirality corresponding to
536: the \((V\!-\!A)(V\!-\!A)\) operators \(O_{1-4,9,10}\), this proves
537: that only $O_{5-8}$ can contribute to Eq.~(\ref{Anew}). Furthermore
538: since all $(LH)$ terms are ruled out, the soft quark can only be $q'$,
539: and not a $d$-quark.
540:
541: This leaves the $(RH)(LL)(LR)$ and $(RH)(LR)(RR)$ structures from $O_{5-8}$ with
542: soft quark flavor $q'$, for which we have the additional spin structures,
543: \begin{align} \label{gamma2b}
544: n' =n: & & \Gamma_s \otimes \Gamma_\bn \otimes \Gamma_n \mathcal B^\beta_{n,\perp}
545: = \big\{ \nslash \otimes \nslash \otimes \bnslash\:
546: \slash\!\!\!\!\mathcal B_{n,\perp} ,\
547: \nslash \otimes \nslash\gamma^\perp_\beta \otimes \bnslash
548: \mathcal B_{n,\perp}^\beta \big\}
549: \,,\nn\\
550: n'=\bn: & & \Gamma_s \otimes \Gamma_\bn \mathcal B^\beta_{\bar n ,\perp} \otimes
551: \Gamma_n
552: = \big\{
553: \bnslash \otimes \nslash\: \slash\!\!\!\!\mathcal B_{\bar n ,\perp}\otimes
554: \bnslash ,\ \bnslash \otimes \nslash \mathcal B_{\bar n ,\perp}^\beta
555: \otimes \bnslash\gamma^\perp_\beta \big\}
556: \,,
557: \end{align}
558: plus those with \(\nslash\leftrightarrow\bnslash\) in
559: \(\Gamma_s\). While these eight are all allowed by chirality and
560: Lorentz invariance, six can be ruled out by considering the spin and
561: factorization properties of our time-ordered product. The matching
562: from \SCETa to \SCETb does not affect the spin and color structure of
563: the $\bn' $-collinear bilinear at this order in the power expansion,
564: since once a jet direction is chosen the collinear fields in the
565: opposite direction are decoupled. Here $\bn'$ is the opposite of $n'$. From
566: Eqs.~(\ref{Thetanogps})~and~(\ref{Thetatwogps}) the allowed
567: \(\Theta_{\bn'}\) structures have no
568: \(\gamma_\perp\)'s, and therefore the second structure on each line of
569: Eq.~(\ref{gamma2b}) does not appear at any order in the perturbative matching.
570: Also, the allowed structures Eqs.~(\ref{Thetanogps})~and~(\ref{Thetatwogps}) are invariant under
571: \(\Theta_{us}\to\Theta_{us}\bnslash'/2 \) and only power-suppressed interactions
572: couple the \(b-\)quark to the \(n'\) sector. Therefore, \(\Gamma_s\) should not
573: vanish under \(\Gamma_{s}\to\Gamma_{s}\bnslash'/2 \), and the operators with
574: \(\nslash\leftrightarrow\bnslash\) mentioned below Eq.~(\ref{gamma2b}) are
575: ruled out. In perturbation theory this just corresponds to the appearance of an
576: $\nslash'$ from the $n'$-collinear propagator next to the $b$-quark. This leaves
577: only the operators with a $ \slash\!\!\!\!\mathcal B_{\perp}$ in
578: Eq.~(\ref{gamma2b}).
579:
580: Finally consider color. In \SCETa the operators \(Q^{(2)}\) are color singlets, but
581: each bilinear on its own could be singlet or octet. A complete set of color
582: structures includes
583: \begin{align}\label{color}
584: \Theta_{\usnp}\otimes\Theta_\bn\otimes\Theta_n
585: =\big\{&T^a \otimes 1 \otimes T^a ,
586: \ T^a \otimes T^a \otimes 1,\
587: 1 \otimes 1 \otimes 1,
588: \nn\\
589: & 1 \otimes T^a \otimes T^a,\
590: T^a\otimes T^b\otimes T^c f^{abc},\
591: T^a\otimes T^b\otimes T^c d^{abc}
592: \big\}\,.
593: \end{align}
594: Once again we can reduce this set using the factorization properties of \SCETa.
595: As argued for spin, an \SCETa operator with color structure \(\Theta_{\bn'}\)
596: matches onto a \SCETb operator with the same structure \(\Gamma_{\bn'}\) in its
597: \(\bn'\) bilinear. So \(\Theta_{\bn'}\) cannot be a color octet, and the allowed
598: structures are
599: \begin{align}\label{Thetacolor}
600: \Theta_{\usn}\otimes\Theta_\bn\otimes\Theta_n
601: &=\{1\otimes1\otimes1,\, T^a \otimes 1 \otimes T^a \}
602: \nn\\
603: \Theta_{\usbn}\otimes\Theta_\bn\otimes\Theta_n
604: &=\{1\otimes1\otimes1,\, T^a \otimes T^a \otimes 1\}\,.
605: \end{align}
606: In \SCETb each of the three bilinears
607: interpolates for a color singlet meson and therefore each bilinear must
608: seperately be a color singlet, $\Gamma_s \otimes \Gamma_\bn \otimes \Gamma_n=1\otimes1\otimes1$.
609:
610: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
611: \vskip0.2cm
612: \noindent {\bf Matching onto \SCETa and \SCETb}
613: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
614:
615: We now present the matching from $H_W$ in Eq.~(\ref{Hw}) onto the \SCETa operators \(Q^{(2)}\) and then the matching of the \SCETa time-ordered product \(T[Q^{(2)} \mathcal L_{\xi q}^{(1)}]\) onto \SCETb operators $O_{id}^{(1T)}$. The hadronic matrix elements of $O_{id}^{(1T)}$ will give the factorization formula for \(A^{(1ann)}_{\rm hard-col}\). From the arguments presented above, the complete basis of \SCETa operators \(Q^{(2)}\) is
616: \begin{align} \label{Q2}
617: Q_{1d}^{(2)} &= \frac{2}{m_b^3}\, {\textstyle \sum}_{q,q'} \,
618: \big[ \bar q'_{n,\omega_5}P_L \gamma^\alpha_\bot T^a {b}_{v} \big]
619: \big[ \bar d_{\bn,\omega_2} \nslash P_L\, q_{\bn,\omega_3} \big]
620: \big[ \bar q_{n,\omega_1} \bnslash\: \gamma_\alpha^\bot T^a\! P_R\,
621: q'_{n,\omega_4} \big]
622: \,, \nn \\
623: Q_{2d}^{(2)} &= \frac{2}{m_b^3}\, {\textstyle \sum}_{q,q'} \,
624: \big[ \bar q'_{\bn,\omega_5}P_L \gamma_\bot^\alpha T^a {b}_{v} \big]
625: \big[ \bar d_{\bn,\omega_2} \nslash \gamma^\bot_\alpha T^a\: P_R\,
626: q_{\bn,\omega_3} \big]
627: \big[ \bar q_{n,\omega_1} \bnslash P_R\, q'_{n,\omega_4} \big]
628: \,, \nn \\[5pt]
629: %
630: Q_{3d,4d}^{(2)} &= Q_{1d,2d}^{(2)}\,\, \frac{3e_{q'}}{2} \,,
631: \end{align}
632: with sums over $q,q'=u,d,s$, plus analogous operators $Q_{5d-8d}^{(2)}$ which
633: have color structure \(1\otimes1\otimes1\). The electroweak penguin
634: operators $O_{7,8}$ induce the two operators $Q_{3d,4d}^{(2)}$, which have the
635: same spin and flavor structures as $O_{1d,2d}^{(2)}$, but with a factor of the quark electric charge $e_{q'}$ included under the summation.
636: Combining the pieces in \SCETb, a complete basis for the ${\cal O}(\eta^7)$
637: operators with one $i g \mathcal B_\perp^\beta$ that contribute to \(B\) decays
638: is
639: \begin{align} \label{O1T}
640: O_{1d}^{(1T)} &= \frac{1}{m_b^3\, k^+}\, {\textstyle \sum}_{q,q'} \,
641: \big[ \bar q'_{s,-k^+}P_L \nslash\, S_n^\dagger {b}_{v} \big]
642: \big[ \bar d_{\bn,\omega_2} \nslash P_L\, q_{\bn,\omega_3} \big]
643: \big[ \bar q_{n,\omega_1} \bnslash\: (ig\slashed{\mathcal B}_\perp)_{n,\omega_5}
644: P_R\, q'_{n,\omega_4} \big]
645: \,, \nn \\
646: O_{2d}^{(1T)} &= \frac{1}{m_b^3\, k^-}\, {\textstyle \sum}_{q,q'} \,
647: \big[ \bar q'_{s,-k^-}P_L \bnslash\, S_\bn^\dagger {b}_{v} \big]
648: \big[ \bar d_{\bn,\omega_2} \nslash\: (ig\slashed{\mathcal
649: B}_\perp)_{\bn,\omega_5} P_R\,
650: q_{\bn,\omega_3} \big]
651: \big[ \bar q_{n,\omega_1} \bnslash P_R\, q'_{n,\omega_4} \big]
652: \,, \nn \\[5pt]
653: %
654: O_{3-4d}^{(1T)} &= O_{1-2d}^{(1T)} \ \frac{3e_{q'}}{2} \,.
655: \end{align}
656: Here \(\bar q'_{s,-k^+}=(\bar q'_{s} S_n )\delta(k^++n\cdot \mathcal
657: P^\dagger)\) and \(\bar q'_{s,-k^-}=(\bar q'_{s} S_\bn ) \delta(k^- + \bn\cdot
658: \mathcal P^\dagger)\) and the direction for the soft Wilson lines $S_n$ and
659: $S_\bn$ are determined by the matching from \SCETa. Just like the local
660: annihilation operators, we see that the \(O_i^{(1T)}\)'s can not create
661: transversly polarized vector mesons. The basis for $\Delta S=1$ decays,
662: $O_{is}^{(1T)}$ switches $\bar d_\bn \to \bar s_\bn$.
663:
664: Next, we carry out the perturbative matching onto the bases in
665: Eqs.~(\ref{Q2}) and (\ref{O1T}), and derive the factorization theorem.
666: The \SCETa weak Hamiltonian with Wilson coefficients \(a_{i}^{hc}\)
667: for the operators $Q_{id}^{(2)}$ is
668: \begin{equation} \label{matchQ2}
669: H_W = \frac{4G_F}{\sqrt2}\, (\lambda^{(d)}_u + \lambda^{(d)}_c) \sum_{n,\bn}
670: \int [d\omega_{1}d\omega_{2}d\omega_{3} d\omega_{4}d\omega_{5}]\,
671: \sum_{i=1-8} a_i^{hc}(\omega_j)\, Q_{id}^{(2)}(\omega_j) \,.
672: \end{equation}
673: Since only the penguin operators $O_{5-8}$ contribute, we pulled out
674: the common CKM factor with \(\lambda^{(d)}_u = V_{ub}V_{ud}^*\) and
675: \(\lambda^{(d)}_c = V_{cb}V_{cd}^*\). The analogous result for $\Delta
676: S=1$ has the same $a_i^{hc}$ coefficients. To match onto the
677: $a_i^{hc}$ at tree level we first do a spin Fierz on the full theory
678: $O_{5-8}$ operators to obtain spin structures $P_L\otimes P_R$, and
679: then compute the graphs in Fig.~\ref{fig:Ann}. Only graphs c) and d)
680: are nonzero and we find [at $\mu=m_b$]
681: \begin{align}\label{a1a2}
682: a_1^{hc}(x, y,\bar y)
683: &=\frac{\pi\alpha_s(m_b)}{N_C}\bigg\{\frac{2C_F\,C_5+C_6}{y[x(1-y)-1]}
684: +\frac{(2C_F-C_A)C_5+C_6}{(1- x )y(1-\bar y)}\bigg\} \,,
685: \nn\\
686: a_2^{hc}(x,\bar x, y)
687: &=\frac{\pi\alpha_s(m_b)}{N_C}\bigg\{-\frac{(2C_F-C_A)C_5+C_6}
688: {\bar x[(1-\bar x)(1-y)-1]}
689: -\frac{2C_F\,C_5+C_6}{\bar x y(1 - x)}\bigg\} \,.
690: \end{align}
691: The coefficients \(a_{3,4}^{hc}\) are identical to \(a_{1,2}^{hc}\)
692: respectively with the replacements \(C_{5,6}\to
693: C_{7,8}\). $a_{5-8}^{hc}$ also begin at \(\mathcal{O}(\alpha_s(m_b))\)
694: but give \(\alpha_s(\mu_i)\)-suppressed contributions when matched
695: onto \SCETb, so we do not list their values. These coefficients are
696: ``polluted'' in that one-loop \(\mathcal O(\alpha_s(m_b)^2)\)
697: contributions proportional to \(C_{1,2}\) could compete numerically
698: with the results in Eq.~(\ref{a1a2}). Here $x,\bar x,y,$ and $\bar y$
699: are defined in Fig.~\ref{fig:Ann}, namely $y=\omega_1/m_b$, $\bar
700: y=-\omega_4/m_b$, $x=\omega_2/m_b$, $\bar x=-\omega_3/m_b$. For
701: $n'=n$ as in \(a_{1,3}\), we have $\bar x=1-x$, but \(\bar
702: y\equiv\!\!\!\!\!\!\slash \:\, 1-y\) since the momentum is shared
703: between three \(n-\)collinear partons. Likewise, for $n'=\bn$ as in
704: $a_{2,4}^{hc}$ we have $\bar y=1-y$ but $\bar
705: x\equiv\!\!\!\!\!\!\slash\:\, 1-x$.
706:
707: Having constructed the operators \(Q^{(2)}\) and determined their Wilson
708: coefficients, it is straightforward to match the time-ordered products
709: \(T[Q^{(2)} \mathcal L_{\xi q}^{(1)}]\) onto the \SCETb operators \(O_i^{1T}\).
710: For odd indices $i$ and even indices $i'$ we find that integrating out the hard-collinear quark propagator, shown as the
711: dashed line inside the gray region in Fig.~\ref{fig:AnnFACT}, gives
712: \begin{align} \label{matchO1T}
713: i \int\!\! d^4x \: T [Q_{id}^{(2)}(\omega_j)](0) \mathcal L_{\xi q}^{(1)}(x) =
714: & \frac{-1}{N_c}
715: \int dk^+ \,
716: O_{id}^{(1T)}(k^+,\omega_{j}) \,,
717: \nn\\
718: i \int\!\! d^4x \: T [Q_{i'd}^{(2)}(\omega_j)](0) \mathcal L_{\xi q}^{(1)}(x) =
719: & \frac{-1}{N_c}
720: \int dk^- \,
721: O_{i'd}^{(1T)}(k^-,\omega_{j}) \,.
722: \end{align}
723: At ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2)$ in perturbation theory this matching would
724: include non-trivial jet functions. For example, in the first line a
725: $\int d\omega_{1,4}' J(k^+,\omega_{1,4}',\omega_{1,4})$ with
726: $\omega_{1,4}'$ taking the place of $\omega_{1,4}$ in $O_{id}^{(1T)}$.
727: However at this order additional time-ordered products and
728: non-perturbative functions become relevant so we stick to ${\cal
729: O}(\alpha_s)$ in our analysis. Together
730: Eqs.\,(\ref{a1a2},\ref{matchO1T}) complete the tree-level matching.
731: Now take the matrix element of $O_{id}^{(1T)}$ using
732: \begin{align} \label{lcdistn}
733: \langle \pi^+_{n_1}(p) | \bar u_{n,\omega_1}\, \bnslash P_{L,R}\,
734: d_{n,\omega_4} | 0 \rangle
735: &= \frac{\pm i\, f_P }{2}\,
736: \delta_{nn_1}\,
737: \delta(\bn\mcdot p \!-\! \omega_1\!+\!
738: \omega_4)\, \phi_P(y) \,, \\
739: %
740: \langle \rho^+_{n_1}(p,\varepsilon) |
741: \bar u_{n,\omega_1}\, \bnslash P_{L,R}\,
742: d_{n,\omega_4} | 0 \rangle &= \frac{i f_V m_V {\bn\mcdot
743: \varepsilon}}{2\,\bn\mcdot p}\,
744: \delta_{nn_1}\,
745: \delta(\bn\mcdot p \!-\! \omega_1\!+\! \omega_4)\, \phi_{V_\parallel}(y)
746: \,, \nn
747: \end{align}
748: and the three-body distributions
749: \begin{align}
750: \langle \pi^+_{n_1}(p) |\, \bar u_{n,\omega_1}\, \bnslash\,
751: (i g \slashed{\mathcal B}_\perp)_{n,\omega_5} P_{R}\, d_{n,\omega_4}\,
752: | 0 \rangle
753: & = \frac{i f_{3P}}{\omega_5}\,
754: \delta_{nn_1}\,
755: \delta(\bn\mcdot p \!-\! \omega_1 \!-\! \omega_5 \!+\! \omega_4)\,
756: \phi_{3P}(y,\bar y) ,
757: \\
758: \langle \rho^+_{n_1}(p,\varepsilon) |\, \bar u_{n,\omega_1}\, \bnslash\,
759: (i g \slashed{\mathcal B}_\perp)_{n,\omega_5} P_{R}\, d_{n,\omega_4}\,
760: | 0 \rangle
761: & = \frac{i f_{3V} m_V \bar n \cdot \varepsilon}{\omega_5\: \bar n \cdot p}\,
762: \delta_{nn_1}\,
763: \delta(\bn\mcdot p \!-\! \omega_1 \!-\! \omega_5 \!+\! \omega_4)\,
764: \phi_{3V}(y,\bar y) \,.\nn
765: \end{align}
766: Our convention for the vector meson matrix element has been chosen to simplify
767: the final result for the amplitude and is related to that
768: of~\cite{Hardmeier:2003ig} by \(f_{3V} = m_V f_V^T\) and
769: \(\phi_{3V}=-\mathcal{T}/2\). Permutations in the flavors give the definitions for other meson channels, and we use the phase convention in~\cite{Gronau:1994rj}. The soft matrix element is
770: \begin{align}
771: %
772: \langle 0 | \bar q_{s,- n'\cdot k}^{(f)} P_L\, {\slash\!\!\! n' }\,S_{n^\prime}^\dagger b_v | \bar B \rangle
773: &= i \frac{f_B\, m_B\, }{2} \phi_B^+(n'\mcdot k)\,.
774: %
775: \end{align}
776: \begin{table}[t]
777: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
778: \hline\hline
779: $B\to M_1 M_2$ & $H_{hc 1} $ & $H_{hc 2} $
780: \\ \hline\hline
781: %
782: $\pi^0 \pi^-$, $\rho^0\pi^-$ $\pi^0 \rho^-$ &
783: $-\frac{1}{\sqrt2}\, a^{hc}_1 -\frac{1}{\sqrt2}\, a^{hc}_3 $
784: & $\frac{1}{\sqrt2}\, a^{hc}_2 +\frac{1}{\sqrt2}\, a^{hc}_4 $ \\
785: %
786: $\pi^- \pi^0$, $\rho^-\pi^0$ $\pi^- \rho^0$
787: & $\frac{1}{\sqrt2}\, a^{hc}_1 +\frac{1}{\sqrt2}\, a^{hc}_3 $ &
788: $-\frac{1}{\sqrt2}\, a^{hc}_2 -\frac{1}{\sqrt2}\, a^{hc}_4 $ \\
789: %
790: $\pi^+ \pi^-$, $\pi^+\rho^-$, $\rho^+\pi^-$
791: & $- a^{hc}_1 +\frac{1}{2} a^{hc}_3 $
792: & $a^{hc}_2 -\frac{1}{2} a^{hc}_4 $
793: \\
794: $\pi^0 \pi^0,$ $ \rho^0 \pi^0$
795: & $ a^{hc}_1 -\frac12\, a^{hc}_3 $
796: & $- a^{hc}_2 +\frac12\, a^{hc}_4 $
797: \\
798: % $K^{-} K^{(*)+}$, $K^{(*)-} K^{+}$ &
799: % {\bf ---} & {\bf ---}
800: % \\
801: $\bar K^{0} K^{(*)0}$, $\bar K^{(*)0} K^{0}$
802: & $a^{hc}_1 -\frac{1}{2} a^{hc}_3 $
803: & $-a^{hc}_2 +\frac{1}{2} a^{hc}_4 $
804: \\
805: $K^{-} K^{(*)0}$, $K^{(*)-} K^{0}$
806: & $a^{hc}_1 + a^{hc}_3 $
807: & $-a^{hc}_2 - a^{hc}_4 $
808: %
809: \\
810: \hline
811: $\pi^- \bar K^{(*)0}$, $\rho^- \bar{K}^{0}$
812: & $ a_1^{hc} +a_3^{hc} $ & $-a_2^{hc} -a_4^{hc} $
813: \\
814: $\pi^0 K^{(*)-},\rho^0 K^-$
815: & $-\frac{1}{\sqrt 2}\, a_1^{hc} -\frac{1}{\sqrt 2}\, a_3^{hc} $
816: & $\frac{1}{\sqrt 2}\, a^{hc}_2 + \frac{1}{\sqrt 2}\, a^{hc}_4 $
817: \\
818: $\pi^0 \bar K ^{(*)0},\rho^0 \bar K ^{0}$
819: & $ \frac{1}{\sqrt 2} \, a_1^{hc} -\frac{1}{2\sqrt 2} \, a_3^{hc} $
820: & $-\frac{1}{\sqrt 2} \, a^{hc}_2 +\frac{1}{2\sqrt 2} \, a^{hc}_4 $
821: \\
822: $\pi^+ K^{(*)-} ,\rho^+ K^{-}$
823: & $-a_1^{hc} +\frac{1}{2} a_3^{hc} $
824: & $a_2^{hc} -\frac{1}{2} a_4^{hc} $ \\
825: \hline\hline
826: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
827: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
828: $B_s \to M_1 M_2$ & $H_{{hc} 1} $ & $H_{{hc} 2} $
829: \\ \hline\hline
830: $ K^+\pi^-$, $K^{*+}\pi^- $, $K^+\rho^- $
831: & $- a^{hc}_1 +\frac{1}{2} a^{hc}_3 $
832: & $a^{hc}_2 -\frac{1}{2} a^{hc}_4 $
833: \\
834: %
835: $K^0\pi^0 $, $K^{*0}\pi^0 $, $K^0\rho^0 $
836: & $\frac{1}{\sqrt 2}\, a^{hc}_1 -\frac{1}{2\sqrt 2}\, a^{hc}_3 $ &
837: $-\frac{1}{\sqrt 2}\, a^{hc}_2 +\frac{1}{2\sqrt 2}\, a^{hc}_4 $
838: \\
839: \hline
840: $K^{+}K^{-} $, $ K^{*+}K^{-}$, $K^{+}K^{*-} $
841: & $- a^{hc}_1 +\frac{1}{2} a^{hc}_3 $ &
842: $a^{hc}_2 -\frac{1}{2} a^{hc}_4 $
843: \\
844: $K^{0}\bar K^{0} $, $K^{*0}\bar K^{0} $ , $ K^{0}\bar K^{*0}$
845: & $a^{hc}_1 -\frac{1}{2} a^{hc}_3 $
846: & $-a^{hc}_2 +\frac{1}{2} a^{hc}_4 $
847: \\
848: \hline\hline
849: \end{tabular}
850: \caption{Hard functions for the annihilation amplitude $A_{Tann}^{(1)}$ in
851: Eq.~(\ref{A1Tann}) for $\bar B^0$, $B^-$, and $\bar B_s$ decays. The
852: result for $B^- \to \pi^0\pi^-$ is obtained by adding the results
853: using the entries from the first two rows, and so vanishes in the
854: isospin limit.}
855: \label{tablehca}
856: \end{table}
857: Combining these pieces the factorization theorem with tree-level jet
858: functions is
859: \begin{align} \label{A1Tann}
860: A^{(1ann)}_{\rm hard-collin} =\:
861: & \frac{-G_F f_B m_B }{\sqrt{2}\, m_b N_c}\,
862: (\lambda^{(d)}_u \!+\! \lambda^{(d)}_c)\!\!
863: \int_0^\infty \!\!\!\!\!dk \: \frac{\mathcal \phi_B^+(k)}{k} \\
864: & \times \bigg\{f_{3M_1}f_{M_2} \!\! \int_0^1\!\!\! dx \! \int_0^1\!\!\! dy\! \int_0^{1-y}\!\!\!\!\! d\bar y \
865: \frac{H_{hc1}^{M_1M_2}(x,y,\bar y)}{1-y-\bar y }\
866: \phi_{3M_1}(y ,\bar y ) \phi_{M_2}(x )
867: \nn\\
868: &\quad\ \ +\eta_{M_1}f_{M_1}f_{3M_2}\int_0^1 \!\! dy \! \int_0^1\!\!\! dx \! \int_0^{1-x}\!\!\!\!\! d\bar x\
869: \frac{H_{hc2}^{M_1M_2}(x,\bar x,y)}{1-x -\bar x}\ \phi_{M_1}(y)
870: \phi_{3M_2}(x ,\bar x ) \bigg\}
871: \,, \nn
872: \end{align}
873: where \(\eta_{M}=-1\) or \(+1\) for a pseudoscalar or vector meson,
874: respectively. The hard coefficients $H_{hc1}^{M_1M_2}$ and
875: $H_{hc2}^{M_1M_2}$ for different $B\to M_1 M_2$ channels are listed in
876: Table~\ref{tablehca} in terms of coefficients in the \SCETa weak
877: Hamiltonian. The amplitude contains the three-body distribution
878: function as promised. The convolutions in Eq.~(\ref{A1Tann}) are real,
879: and assuming the standard endpoint behavior for the distribution
880: functions they converge without the rapidity factorization
881: of~\cite{Manohar:2006nz}.
882:
883: We conclude by comparing our result parametrically and numerically to
884: $A^{(1ann)}_{\rm hard}$ and $A^{(2ann)}_{\rm hard}$ as defined in
885: Ref.~\cite{Arnesen:2006vb}. For this comparison it is useful to define
886: moment parameters
887: \begin{align} \label{betahc}
888: \beta_{\hc 1}^{M_1 M_2} , \, \beta_{\hc 3}^{M_1 M_2} &= \int \!\! dx dy d\bar y\:
889: \frac{a_{1,3}^{\hc}(x,y,\bar y)}{1-y-\bar y}\, \phi_{3M_1}(y,\bar y)
890: \phi_{M_2}(x) \,,
891: \\
892: \beta_{\hc 2}^{M_1 M_2} ,\, \beta_{\hc 4}^{M_1 M_2} &= \int \!\! dy dx d\bar x \:
893: \frac{a_{2,4}^{\hc}(x,\bar x,y)}{1-x-\bar x}\, \phi_{M_1}(y) \phi_{3M_2}(x,\bar x) \,,
894: \qquad
895: \beta_B = \frac{1}{3} \int \frac{dk}{k} \phi_B^+(k) \nn \,,
896: \end{align}
897: where $\beta_B = \lambda_B^{-1}/3$ has mass dimension $-1$. First we
898: compare the leading-power annihilation amplitudes in \(\bar B\to\pi^+
899: K^-\). Dropping terms proportional to the tiny Wilson coefficients
900: \(C_{7-8}\), we have
901: \begin{align}\label{R1}
902: R_1({ \pi^+ K^-})\equiv\frac{ A_{\rm hard-col}^{(1ann)}(\pi^+ K^-) }
903: { A_{\rm hard}^{(1ann)}(\pi^+ K^-) }&=
904: \frac { \frac{G_F f_B m_B}{\sqrt{2} m_b N_c} (\lambda^{(s)}_u \!+\!\lambda^{(s)}_c)\: 3 \beta_B
905: \big[ {-} f_{3\pi} f_K \beta_{hc1}^{K \pi} +f_{3K} f_\pi \beta_{hc2}^{K \pi} \big] }
906: { \frac{G_F f_B }{\sqrt{2} } (\lambda^{(s)}_u\!+\!\lambda^{(s)}_c)
907: f_\pi f_K \big[ {-}\beta_{4u}^{K \pi} \big] }\,.
908: \end{align}
909: Parametrically, the moments in \(R_1\) have
910: \(\beta_{4u}\sim\beta_{hci}\sim\mathcal O(\alpha_s(m_b))\), and the
911: power counting of the prefactor is \(f_{3K}\beta_B/f_K\sim 1\). Also
912: there is no suppression from the hierarchy in the \(C_i\)'s since
913: \(\beta_{4u}\) involves \(C_3\), and \( C_3\approx C_5\approx C_6\).
914: Thus, we have shown that for consistency in the \(\alpha_s\) and
915: \(1/m_b\) expansion, the contributions \(A^{(1ann)}_{hard-col}\) need
916: to be included with the local contributions \(A^{(1ann)}_{hard}\) in
917: the leading annihilation amplitude. Similarly we can compare the new
918: hard-collinear annihilation amplitude to the chirally enhanced
919: annihilation contribution in $\bar B^0 \to
920: \pi^+K^-$. Isolating the terms proportional to the large coefficients
921: $C_5$ and $C_6$ we have
922: \begin{align}\label{R2}
923: R_2({\pi^+ K^-})\equiv\frac{ A_{\rm hard-col}^{(1ann)}(\pi^+K^-) }{ A_{\rm hard}^{(2ann)}(\pi^+K^-) }&=
924: \frac { \frac{G_F f_B m_B}{\sqrt{2} m_b N_c} (\lambda^{(s)}_u \!+\!\lambda^{(s)}_c)\: 3 \beta_B
925: \big[ {-} f_{3\pi} f_K \beta_{hc1}^{\pi K}- f_{\pi} f_{3K} \beta_{hc2}^{\pi K} \big] }
926: { \frac{G_F f_B }{\sqrt{2} m_b } (\lambda^{(s)}_u\!+\! \lambda^{(s)}_c)
927: f_\pi f_K
928: \big[ {-} \mu_\pi \beta_{\chi 1}^{\pi K}+\mu_K \beta_{\chi 2}^{\pi K} \big] }
929: .
930: \end{align}
931: Parametrically \(\beta_{\chi }\sim\beta_{hc }\sim \alpha_s(m_b)\), and
932: \(R(\pi^+K^-)\sim{m_B\beta_B f_{3\pi}}/({f_\pi\mu_\pi})\sim
933: m_b/\mu_\pi\sim m_b/\Lambda\) as expected.
934:
935: We conclude with a brief numerical analysis of the ratios \(R_1\) and
936: \(R_2\). The $C_i$'s are quoted below Eq.~(\ref{fullops}), and we use
937: \(\alpha_s(m_b) = 0.22,\, f_K = 0.16\,{\rm GeV},\,\) and
938: \( f_\pi =0.13\,{\rm GeV}\). $f_B=0.22\,{\rm GeV}$ is taken from a
939: recent lattice determination~\cite{Gray:2005ad}, the three-body decay
940: constants \(f_{3K} \simeq 4.5 \times 10^{-3}\, {\rm GeV}^2\) and \(
941: f_{3\pi} \simeq 4.5 \times 10^{-3}\, {\rm GeV}^2\) come from QCD sum
942: rules~\cite{Ball:2006wn} and $\beta_B \simeq 1/(.4\,{\rm GeV})$ was
943: determined in a fit to nonleptonic data~\cite{Bauer:2005kd}. To model
944: the nonperturbative meson distributions we truncate the conformal
945: partial wave expansions~\cite{Zhitnitsky:1985dd} as
946: \begin{align}\label{phimodels}
947: \phi^M(x) &= 6x(1-x) \big[1+ a_1^M (6x-3) + 6 a_2^M ( 1- 5 x+
948: 5x^2)\big] \,,\nn\\ \phi_{3M}(x,\bar x) &=360 x \bar x (1-x-\bar
949: x)^2 \big[1+\frac{w_{3M}}{2}\{7(1-x-\bar x)-3\}\big] \,.
950: \end{align}
951: Eq.~(\ref{betahc}) has convergent convolution integrals for these
952: distribution functions. To estimate the moments \(\beta\)
953: and the ratios \(R\) we vary the coefficients in Eq.~(\ref{phimodels})
954: in a conservative range inferred from recent lattice
955: results~\cite{Braun:2006dg} for the $a_i^M$'s and QCD sum
956: rules~\cite{Ball:2006wn} for the \(w_{3M}\)'s. Specifically we take
957: \(a_1^\pi=0,\, a_1^K=0.05\pm 0.02,\, a_2^{\pi,K}=0.2\pm 0.2,\) and
958: \(w_{3\pi,K}=-1\pm 1\). A Gaussian scan of the model parameters gives
959: \begin{align}\label{numbers}
960: \beta ^{\bar K K}_{hc 1}&=-1.4 \pm 0.4, & \beta^{\bar K K}_{hc2}&=0.3\pm 0.1, &
961: R_1(\pi^+ K^-)&= 0.3 \text{ to }\, 1.2 \,,
962: \nn\\
963: \beta ^{\pi K}_{hc 1}&=-1.4 \pm 0.5, & \beta^{\pi K}_{hc2}&=0.1\pm 0.1,
964: & R_2({\pi^+ K^-})&=-0.1 \text{ to } 0.1 \:.
965: \end{align}
966: The denominators of Eq.~(\ref{R1})~and~(\ref{R2}) can vanish, giving
967: large departures from Gaussian statistics. So for \(R_1\) and \(R_2\)
968: we quote the range that contains an equivalent number of points as one
969: standard deviation for a Gaussian distribution. Eq.~(\ref{numbers})
970: demonstrates that numerically the three-parton contributions to
971: \(A^{(1ann)}\) could be of the same size or larger than the local
972: piece
973: \(A^{(1ann)}_{hard}\). Numerically, ${m_B\beta_B
974: f_{3\pi}}/({f_\pi\mu_\pi})\sim 0.2$ causing some suppression in
975: $R_2(\pi^+K^-)$. It would be interesting to examine the size of these
976: three-parton contributions in the $k_T$-approach of Ref.~\cite{Keum:2000ph}.
977:
978: In this paper we computed the final missing term of the leading order
979: annihilation amplitude in \(B\to M_1 M_2\) decays. These terms involve
980: a three-parton distribution and need to be included for a complete
981: analysis of annihilation.
982:
983: \acknowledgments
984:
985: We thank Z.Ligeti for discussion. This work was supported in part by
986: the Office of Nuclear Physics of the U.S.\ Department of Energy under
987: the cooperative research agreement DOE-FC02-94ER40818 (C.A. and I.S.),
988: and DOE-ER-40682-143 and DEAC02-6CH03000 (I.R.). I.S.~was also
989: supported in part by the DOE OJI program and by the Sloan Foundation.
990:
991: \begin{thebibliography}{29}
992: \expandafter\ifx\csname natexlab\endcsname\relax\def\natexlab#1{#1}\fi
993: \expandafter\ifx\csname bibnamefont\endcsname\relax
994: \def\bibnamefont#1{#1}\fi
995: \expandafter\ifx\csname bibfnamefont\endcsname\relax
996: \def\bibfnamefont#1{#1}\fi
997: \expandafter\ifx\csname citenamefont\endcsname\relax
998: \def\citenamefont#1{#1}\fi
999: \expandafter\ifx\csname url\endcsname\relax
1000: \def\url#1{\texttt{#1}}\fi
1001: \expandafter\ifx\csname urlprefix\endcsname\relax\def\urlprefix{URL }\fi
1002: \providecommand{\bibinfo}[2]{#2}
1003: \providecommand{\eprint}[2][]{\url{#2}}
1004:
1005: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Bauer et~al.}(2001{\natexlab{a}})\citenamefont{Bauer,
1006: Fleming, and Luke}}]{Bauer:2000ew}
1007: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{C.~W.} \bibnamefont{Bauer}},
1008: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{S.}~\bibnamefont{Fleming}}, \bibnamefont{and}
1009: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.~E.} \bibnamefont{Luke}},
1010: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D63}},
1011: \bibinfo{pages}{014006} (\bibinfo{year}{2001}{\natexlab{a}}),
1012: \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0005275}{hep-ph/0005275}}.
1013:
1014: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Bauer et~al.}(2001{\natexlab{b}})\citenamefont{Bauer,
1015: Fleming, Pirjol, and Stewart}}]{Bauer:2000yr}
1016: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{C.~W.} \bibnamefont{Bauer}},
1017: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{S.}~\bibnamefont{Fleming}},
1018: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{D.}~\bibnamefont{Pirjol}}, \bibnamefont{and}
1019: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{I.~W.} \bibnamefont{Stewart}},
1020: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D63}},
1021: \bibinfo{pages}{114020} (\bibinfo{year}{2001}{\natexlab{b}}),
1022: \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0011336}{hep-ph/0011336}}.
1023:
1024: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Bauer and Stewart}(2001)}]{Bauer:2001ct}
1025: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{C.~W.} \bibnamefont{Bauer}} \bibnamefont{and}
1026: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{I.~W.} \bibnamefont{Stewart}},
1027: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Lett.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{B516}},
1028: \bibinfo{pages}{134} (\bibinfo{year}{2001}),
1029: \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0107001}{hep-ph/0107001}}.
1030:
1031: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Bauer et~al.}(2002)\citenamefont{Bauer, Pirjol, and
1032: Stewart}}]{Bauer:2001yt}
1033: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{C.~W.} \bibnamefont{Bauer}},
1034: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{D.}~\bibnamefont{Pirjol}}, \bibnamefont{and}
1035: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{I.~W.} \bibnamefont{Stewart}},
1036: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D65}},
1037: \bibinfo{pages}{054022} (\bibinfo{year}{2002}),
1038: \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0109045}{hep-ph/0109045}}.
1039:
1040: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Beneke et~al.}(2000)\citenamefont{Beneke, Buchalla,
1041: Neubert, and Sachrajda}}]{Beneke:2000ry}
1042: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.}~\bibnamefont{Beneke}},
1043: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{G.}~\bibnamefont{Buchalla}},
1044: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.}~\bibnamefont{Neubert}}, \bibnamefont{and}
1045: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{C.~T.} \bibnamefont{Sachrajda}},
1046: \bibinfo{journal}{Nucl. Phys.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{B591}},
1047: \bibinfo{pages}{313} (\bibinfo{year}{2000}),
1048: \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0006124}{hep-ph/0006124}}.
1049:
1050: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Keum et~al.}(2001)\citenamefont{Keum, Li, and
1051: Sanda}}]{Keum:2000ph}
1052: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{Y.-Y.} \bibnamefont{Keum}},
1053: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{H.-n.} \bibnamefont{Li}}, \bibnamefont{and}
1054: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.~I.} \bibnamefont{Sanda}},
1055: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Lett.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{B504}},
1056: \bibinfo{pages}{6} (\bibinfo{year}{2001}),
1057: \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0004004}{hep-ph/0004004}}.
1058:
1059: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Chay and Kim}(2003)}]{Chay:2003zp}
1060: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.-g.} \bibnamefont{Chay}} \bibnamefont{and}
1061: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{C.}~\bibnamefont{Kim}},
1062: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D68}},
1063: \bibinfo{pages}{071502} (\bibinfo{year}{2003}),
1064: \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0301055}{hep-ph/0301055}}.
1065:
1066: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Bauer et~al.}(2004)\citenamefont{Bauer, Pirjol,
1067: Rothstein, and Stewart}}]{Bauer:2004tj}
1068: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{C.~W.} \bibnamefont{Bauer}},
1069: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{D.}~\bibnamefont{Pirjol}},
1070: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{I.~Z.} \bibnamefont{Rothstein}},
1071: \bibnamefont{and} \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{I.~W.}
1072: \bibnamefont{Stewart}}, \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev.}
1073: \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D70}}, \bibinfo{pages}{054015}
1074: (\bibinfo{year}{2004}),
1075: \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0401188}{hep-ph/0401188}}.
1076:
1077: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Charles et~al.}(2005)}]{CKMfitter}
1078: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.}~\bibnamefont{Charles}} \bibnamefont{et~al.},
1079: \bibinfo{journal}{Eur. Phys. J.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{C41}},
1080: \bibinfo{pages}{1} (\bibinfo{year}{2005}),
1081: \urlprefix\url{http://ckmfitter.in2p3.fr/}.
1082:
1083: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Ciuchini et~al.}(1997)\citenamefont{Ciuchini, Franco,
1084: Martinelli, and Silvestrini}}]{Ciuchini:1997hb}
1085: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.}~\bibnamefont{Ciuchini}},
1086: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{E.}~\bibnamefont{Franco}},
1087: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{G.}~\bibnamefont{Martinelli}},
1088: \bibnamefont{and}
1089: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{L.}~\bibnamefont{Silvestrini}},
1090: \bibinfo{journal}{Nucl. Phys.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{B501}},
1091: \bibinfo{pages}{271} (\bibinfo{year}{1997}),
1092: \eprint{\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9703353}{hep-ph/9703353}}.
1093:
1094: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Colangelo et~al.}(1990)\citenamefont{Colangelo,
1095: Nardulli, Paver, and Riazuddin}}]{Colangelo:1989gi}
1096: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{P.}~\bibnamefont{Colangelo}},
1097: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{G.}~\bibnamefont{Nardulli}},
1098: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{N.}~\bibnamefont{Paver}}, \bibnamefont{and}
1099: \bibinfo{author}{\bibnamefont{Riazuddin}}, \bibinfo{journal}{Z. Phys.}
1100: \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{C45}}, \bibinfo{pages}{575} (\bibinfo{year}{1990}).
1101:
1102: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Williamson and Zupan}(2006)}]{Williamson:2006hb}
1103: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.~R.} \bibnamefont{Williamson}}
1104: \bibnamefont{and} \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.}~\bibnamefont{Zupan}}
1105: (\bibinfo{year}{2006}),
1106: \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0601214}{hep-ph/0601214}}.
1107:
1108: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Lu et~al.}(2001)\citenamefont{Lu, Ukai, and
1109: Yang}}]{Lu:2000em}
1110: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{C.-D.} \bibnamefont{Lu}},
1111: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{K.}~\bibnamefont{Ukai}}, \bibnamefont{and}
1112: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.-Z.} \bibnamefont{Yang}},
1113: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D63}},
1114: \bibinfo{pages}{074009} (\bibinfo{year}{2001}),
1115: \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0004213}{hep-ph/0004213}}.
1116:
1117: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Beneke et~al.}(2001)\citenamefont{Beneke, Buchalla,
1118: Neubert, and Sachrajda}}]{Beneke:2001ev}
1119: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.}~\bibnamefont{Beneke}},
1120: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{G.}~\bibnamefont{Buchalla}},
1121: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.}~\bibnamefont{Neubert}}, \bibnamefont{and}
1122: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{C.~T.} \bibnamefont{Sachrajda}},
1123: \bibinfo{journal}{Nucl. Phys.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{B606}},
1124: \bibinfo{pages}{245} (\bibinfo{year}{2001}),
1125: \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0104110}{hep-ph/0104110}}.
1126:
1127: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Kagan}(2004)}]{Kagan:2004uw}
1128: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.~L.} \bibnamefont{Kagan}},
1129: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Lett.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{B601}},
1130: \bibinfo{pages}{151} (\bibinfo{year}{2004}),
1131: \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0405134}{hep-ph/0405134}}.
1132:
1133: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Khodjamirian et~al.}(2005)\citenamefont{Khodjamirian,
1134: Mannel, Melcher, and Melic}}]{Khodjamirian:2005wn}
1135: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.}~\bibnamefont{Khodjamirian}},
1136: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{T.}~\bibnamefont{Mannel}},
1137: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.}~\bibnamefont{Melcher}}, \bibnamefont{and}
1138: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{B.}~\bibnamefont{Melic}},
1139: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D72}},
1140: \bibinfo{pages}{094012} (\bibinfo{year}{2005}).
1141: % \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0509049}{hep-ph/0509049}}.
1142:
1143: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Arnesen et~al.}(2006)\citenamefont{Arnesen, Ligeti,
1144: Rothstein, and Stewart}}]{Arnesen:2006vb}
1145: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{C.~M.} \bibnamefont{Arnesen}},
1146: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{Z.}~\bibnamefont{Ligeti}},
1147: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{I.~Z.} \bibnamefont{Rothstein}},
1148: \bibnamefont{and} \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{I.~W.}
1149: \bibnamefont{Stewart}} (\bibinfo{year}{2006}),
1150: \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0607001}{hep-ph/0607001}}.
1151:
1152: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Manohar and Stewart}(2006)}]{Manohar:2006nz}
1153: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.~V.} \bibnamefont{Manohar}} \bibnamefont{and}
1154: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{I.~W.} \bibnamefont{Stewart}}
1155: (\bibinfo{year}{2006}),
1156: \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0605001}{hep-ph/0605001}}.
1157:
1158: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Blok et~al.}(1997)\citenamefont{Blok, Gronau, and
1159: Rosner}}]{Blok:1997yj}
1160: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{B.}~\bibnamefont{Blok}},
1161: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.}~\bibnamefont{Gronau}}, \bibnamefont{and}
1162: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.~L.} \bibnamefont{Rosner}},
1163: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev. Lett.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{78}},
1164: \bibinfo{pages}{3999} (\bibinfo{year}{1997}),
1165: \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9701396}{hep-ph/9701396}}.
1166:
1167: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Buchalla et~al.}(1996)\citenamefont{Buchalla, Buras,
1168: and Lautenbacher}}]{Buchalla:1995vs}
1169: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{G.}~\bibnamefont{Buchalla}},
1170: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.~J.} \bibnamefont{Buras}}, \bibnamefont{and}
1171: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.~E.} \bibnamefont{Lautenbacher}},
1172: \bibinfo{journal}{Rev. Mod. Phys.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{68}},
1173: \bibinfo{pages}{1125} (\bibinfo{year}{1996}).
1174: % \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9512380}{hep-ph/9512380}}.
1175:
1176: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Bauer et~al.}(2003)\citenamefont{Bauer, Pirjol, and
1177: Stewart}}]{Bauer:2002aj}
1178: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{C.~W.} \bibnamefont{Bauer}},
1179: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{D.}~\bibnamefont{Pirjol}}, \bibnamefont{and}
1180: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{I.~W.} \bibnamefont{Stewart}},
1181: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D67}},
1182: \bibinfo{pages}{071502} (\bibinfo{year}{2003}),
1183: \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0211069}{hep-ph/0211069}}.
1184:
1185: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Beneke and Feldmann}(2003)}]{Beneke:2002ni}
1186: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.}~\bibnamefont{Beneke}} \bibnamefont{and}
1187: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{T.}~\bibnamefont{Feldmann}},
1188: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Lett.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{B553}},
1189: \bibinfo{pages}{267} (\bibinfo{year}{2003}),
1190: \eprint{\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0211358}{hep-ph/0211358}}.
1191:
1192: \bibitem{Hill:2002vw}
1193: R.~J.~Hill and M.~Neubert,
1194: %``Spectator interactions in soft-collinear effective theory. ((U)),''
1195: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 657}, 229 (2003),
1196: \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0211018}{hep-ph/0211018}}.
1197: % [arXiv:hep-ph/0211018].
1198: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0211018;%%
1199:
1200:
1201: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Mantry et~al.}(2004)\citenamefont{Mantry,
1202: Pirjol, Stewart}}]{Mantry:2003uz}
1203: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{S.}~\bibnamefont{Mantry}},
1204: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{D.}~\bibnamefont{Pirjol}}, \bibnamefont{and}
1205: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{I.~W.}~\bibnamefont{Stewart}},
1206: %``Strong phases and factorization for color suppressed decays,''
1207: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev. D} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{68}},
1208: \bibinfo{pages}{114009} (\bibinfo{year}{2003}),
1209: \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0306254}{hep-ph/0306254}}.
1210: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0306254;%%
1211:
1212: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Stewart}(2003)}]{Stewart:2003gt}
1213: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{I.~W.} \bibnamefont{Stewart}}
1214: (\bibinfo{year}{2003}),
1215: %``Theoretical introduction to B decays and the soft-collinear effective
1216: %theory,''
1217: \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0308185}{hep-ph/0308185}}.
1218: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0308185;%%
1219:
1220:
1221:
1222: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Hardmeier et~al.}(2004)\citenamefont{Hardmeier, Lunghi,
1223: Pirjol, and Wyler}}]{Hardmeier:2003ig}
1224: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.}~\bibnamefont{Hardmeier}},
1225: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{E.}~\bibnamefont{Lunghi}},
1226: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{D.}~\bibnamefont{Pirjol}}, \bibnamefont{and}
1227: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{D.}~\bibnamefont{Wyler}},
1228: \bibinfo{journal}{Nucl. Phys.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{B682}},
1229: \bibinfo{pages}{150} (\bibinfo{year}{2004}).
1230: % \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0307171}{hep-ph/0307171}}.
1231:
1232: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Gronau et~al.}(1994)\citenamefont{Gronau, Hernandez,
1233: London, and Rosner}}]{Gronau:1994rj}
1234: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.}~\bibnamefont{Gronau}},
1235: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{O.~F.} \bibnamefont{Hernandez}},
1236: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{D.}~\bibnamefont{London}}, \bibnamefont{and}
1237: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.~L.} \bibnamefont{Rosner}},
1238: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D50}},
1239: \bibinfo{pages}{4529} (\bibinfo{year}{1994}).
1240: % \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9404283}{hep-ph/9404283}}.
1241:
1242: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Gray et~al.}(2005)}]{Gray:2005ad}
1243: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.}~\bibnamefont{Gray}} \bibnamefont{et~al.},
1244: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev. Lett.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{95}},
1245: \bibinfo{pages}{212001} (\bibinfo{year}{2005}),
1246: \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/0507015}{hep-lat/0507015}}.
1247:
1248: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Ball et~al.}(2006)\citenamefont{Ball, Braun, and
1249: Lenz}}]{Ball:2006wn}
1250: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{P.}~\bibnamefont{Ball}},
1251: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{V.~M.} \bibnamefont{Braun}}, \bibnamefont{and}
1252: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.}~\bibnamefont{Lenz}},
1253: \bibinfo{journal}{JHEP} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{05}}, \bibinfo{pages}{004}
1254: (\bibinfo{year}{2006}),
1255: \eprint{\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0603063}{hep-ph/0603063}}.
1256:
1257: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Bauer et~al.}(2005)\citenamefont{Bauer, Rothstein, and
1258: Stewart}}]{Bauer:2005kd}
1259: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{C.~W.} \bibnamefont{Bauer}},
1260: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{I.~Z.} \bibnamefont{Rothstein}},
1261: \bibnamefont{and} \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{I.~W.}
1262: \bibnamefont{Stewart}} (\bibinfo{year}{2005}),
1263: \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0510241}{hep-ph/0510241}}.
1264:
1265: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Zhitnitsky et~al.}(1985)\citenamefont{Zhitnitsky,
1266: Zhitnitsky, and Chernyak}}]{Zhitnitsky:1985dd}
1267: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.~R.} \bibnamefont{Zhitnitsky}},
1268: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{I.~R.} \bibnamefont{Zhitnitsky}},
1269: \bibnamefont{and} \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{V.~L.}
1270: \bibnamefont{Chernyak}}, \bibinfo{journal}{Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.}
1271: \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{41}}, \bibinfo{pages}{284} (\bibinfo{year}{1985}).
1272:
1273: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Braun et~al.}(2006)}]{Braun:2006dg}
1274: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{V.~M.} \bibnamefont{Braun}} \bibnamefont{et~al.}
1275: (\bibinfo{year}{2006}),
1276: \eprint{\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/0606012}{hep-lat/0606012}}.
1277:
1278:
1279: \end{thebibliography}
1280:
1281:
1282: \end{document}
1283:
1284: