1:
2:
3: %====================================================================%
4: % MORIOND.TEX 2-Feb-1995 %
5: % This latex file rewritten from various sources for use in the %
6: % preparation of the standard proceedings Volume, latest version %
7: % for the Neutrino'96 Helsinki conference proceedings %
8: % by Susan Hezlet with acknowledgments to Lukas Nellen. %
9: % Some changes are due to David Cassel. %
10: % %
11: % Updated to LaTeX2e and adapted to Moriond 2001 conditions %
12: % by F.Montanet 24/04/2001 %
13: %====================================================================%
14:
15: \documentclass[11pt]{article}
16: \usepackage{mymoriond1,epsfig}
17: %\documentstyle[11pt,moriond,epsfig]{article}
18:
19:
20: \bibliographystyle{unsrt}
21: % for BibTeX - sorted numerical labels by order of
22: % first citation.
23:
24: % A useful Journal macro
25: \def\Journal#1#2#3#4{{#1} {\bf #2}, #3 (#4)}
26:
27: % Some useful journal names
28: \def\NCA{\em Nuovo Cimento}
29: \def\NIM{\em Nucl. Instrum. Methods}
30: \def\NIMA{{\em Nucl. Instrum. Methods} A}
31: \def\NPB{{\em Nucl. Phys.} B}
32: \def\PLB{{\em Phys. Lett.} B}
33: \def\PRL{\em Phys. Rev. Lett.}
34: \def\PRD{{\em Phys. Rev.} D}
35: \def\ZPC{{\em Z. Phys.} C}
36:
37: % Some other macros used in the sample text
38: \def\st{\scriptstyle}
39: \def\sst{\scriptscriptstyle}
40: \def\mco{\multicolumn}
41: \def\epp{\epsilon^{\prime}}
42: \def\vep{\varepsilon}
43: \def\ra{\rightarrow}
44: \def\ppg{\pi^+\pi^-\gamma}
45: \def\vp{{\bf p}}
46: \def\ko{K^0}
47: \def\kb{\bar{K^0}}
48: \def\al{\alpha}
49: \def\ab{\bar{\alpha}}
50: \def\be{\begin{equation}}
51: \def\ee{\end{equation}}
52: \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}}
53: \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}}
54: \def\CPbar{\hbox{{\rm CP}\hskip-1.80em{/}}}
55: %temp replacement due to no font
56:
57: \newcommand{\lsim}{
58: \mathrel{\hbox{\rlap{\hbox{\lower4pt\hbox{$\sim$}}}\hbox{$<$}}}}
59:
60: \newcommand{\gsim}{
61: \mathrel{\hbox{\rlap{\hbox{\lower4pt\hbox{$\sim$}}}\hbox{$>$}}}}
62:
63: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
64: % %
65: % BEGINNING OF TEXT %
66: % %
67: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
68: \begin{document}
69: \begin{flushright}
70: \begin{tabular}{l}
71: IPPP/07/07\\
72: DCPT/07/14
73: \end{tabular}
74: \end{flushright}
75:
76: \vspace*{4cm}
77:
78: \title{\boldmath PROBING NEW PHYSICS THROUGH $B_s$ MIXING}
79:
80: \author{PATRICIA BALL}
81:
82: \address{IPPP, Department of Physics, University of Durham,\\
83: Durham DH1 3LE, England}
84:
85: \maketitle\abstracts{
86: I discuss the interpretation of the recent experimental
87: data on $B_s$ mixing in terms of model-independent new-physics
88: parameters.\\[2cm]
89: {\it Invited Talk given at XLIInd Rencontres de Moriond,
90: Electroweak Interactions and Unified Theories, La Thuile, Italy,
91: March 2007}}
92:
93: \newpage
94:
95: \section{Introduction}
96:
97: One of the most promising ways to detect the effects of new physics (NP) on
98: $B$ decays is to look for deviations of flavour-changing neutral-current
99: (FCNC) processes from their Standard Model (SM) predictions;
100: FCNC processes only occur at the loop-level in the SM and
101: hence are particularly sensitive to NP virtual particles and
102: interactions. A prominent example that has received extensive
103: experimental and theoretical attention is $B^0_q$--$\bar B^0_q$ mixing
104: ($q\in\{d,s\}$), which, in the SM, is due to box diagrams with $W$-boson
105: and up-type quark exchange. In the language of effective field theory,
106: these diagrams
107: induce an effective local Hamiltonian, which causes $B^0_q$ and $\bar B^0_q$
108: mesons to mix and generates a $\Delta B=2$ transition:
109: \begin{equation}\label{eq1}
110: \langle B_q^0| {\cal H}^{\Delta B=2}_{\rm eff} | \bar B_q^0\rangle = 2 M_{B_q}
111: M_{12}^q\,,
112: \end{equation}
113: where $M_{B_q}$ is the $B_q$-meson mass. Thanks to $B^0_q$--$\bar B^0_q$
114: mixing, an initially present $B^0_q$ state evolves into a time-dependent linear
115: combination of $B^0_q$ and $\bar B^0_q$ flavour states. The
116: oscillation frequency
117: of this phenomenon is characterized by the mass difference of the ``heavy"
118: and ``light" mass eigenstates,
119: \begin{equation}\label{DM-def}
120: \Delta M_q\equiv M_{\rm H}^{q}-M_{\rm L}^{q} = 2 |M_{12}^q|\,,
121: \end{equation}
122: and the CP-violating mixing phase
123: \begin{equation}\label{phiq-def}
124: \phi_q = \arg M_{12}^q\,,
125: \end{equation}
126: which enters mixing-induced CP violation. While the mass difference in
127: the $B_d$ system has been known for a long time, $\Delta M_s$ has only
128: been measured in 2006, by the CDF collaboration, with the result
129: \cite{CDFms}
130: \begin{equation}\label{4}
131: \Delta M_s = [17.77\pm 0.10({\rm stat})\pm 0.07({\rm syst})]{\rm
132: ps}^{-1}.
133: \end{equation}
134: In Ref.~\cite{PB4}, we have discussed the impact of this result on
135: a model-independent parametrisation of NP in the $B_q$
136: system. In the meantime, experimental information has become available
137: also for the mixing phase in the $B_s$ system
138: \cite{D01,D02,D03,D0talk}. In these proceedings, we update the
139: constraints obtained on NP in the $B_s$ system by including
140: this additional information.
141:
142: In the SM, $M_{12}^q$ is given by
143: \begin{equation}\label{5}
144: M_{12}^{q,{\rm SM}} = \frac{G_{\rm F}^2M_W^2}{12\pi^2}M_{B_q}\hat{\eta}^{B}
145: \hat B_{B_q}f_{B_q}^2(V_{tq}^\ast V_{tb})^2 S_0(x_t)\,,
146: \end{equation}
147: where $G_{\rm F}$ is Fermi's constant, $M_W$ the mass of the $W$ boson,
148: $\hat{\eta}^{B}=0.551$ a short-distance QCD correction (which is the same for
149: the $B^0_d$ and $B^0_s$ systems) \cite{jamin}, whereas
150: the bag parameter
151: $\hat B_{B_q}$ and the decay constant $f_{B_q}$ are non-perturbative
152: quantities.
153: $V_{tq}$ and $V_{tb}$ are elements of the
154: Cabibbo--Kobayashi--Maskawa (CKM) matrix, and
155: $S_0(x_t\equiv \overline{m}_t^2/M_W^2)=2.32\pm0.04$ with $\overline{m}_t(m_t) =
156: (163.4\pm 1.7)\,{\rm GeV}$, Ref.~\cite{top}, describes
157: the $t$-quark mass dependence of the box diagram with internal
158: $t$-quark exchange; the contributions of internal $c$ and $u$ quarks
159: are suppressed by $(m_{u,c}/M_W)^2$, by virtue of the GIM
160: mechanism. Thanks to the suppression of light-quark loops, $M_{12}^q$ is
161: dominated by short-distance processes and sensitive to NP.
162:
163: In the SM, the mixing phase in the $B_s$ system is given by
164: \begin{equation}
165: \phi_s^{\rm SM} = -2 \lambda^2 R_b\sin\gamma \approx -2^\circ\,,
166: \end{equation}
167: where $\gamma$ is one of the angles of the unitarity
168: triangle (UT), $\lambda$ is the Wolfenstein parameter and
169: \begin{equation}
170: R_b = \left( 1 - \frac{\lambda^2}{2}\right)
171: \frac{1}{\lambda}\,\left| \frac{V_{ub}}{V_{cb}}\right|.
172: \end{equation}
173: Up-to-date values of $\gamma$ from various sources can be found in
174: Ref.~\cite{gamma}, whereas $|V_{ub}|$ and $|V_{cb}|$ can be in found
175: Refs.~\cite{vub} and \cite{vcb}, respectively. The corresponding
176: results from global fits can be found in Ref.~\cite{global}.
177:
178: In the presence of NP, the matrix element $M_{12}^q$ can be
179: written, in a model-independent way, as
180: $$M_{12}^q = M_{12}^{q,{\rm SM}} \left(1 + \kappa_q e^{i\sigma_q}\right)\,,$$
181: where the real parameter $\kappa_q\geq 0$ measures the ``strength'' of
182: the NP contribution with respect to the SM, whereas
183: $\sigma_q$ is a new CP-violating
184: phase.
185: Relating $\kappa_s$ and $\sigma_s$ to $\Delta M_s$, one has
186: \begin{equation}
187: \rho_s\equiv \left|\frac{\Delta M_s}{\Delta M_s^{\rm SM}}\right| =
188: \sqrt{1+ 2 \kappa_s\cos \sigma_s + \kappa_s^2}\,.
189: \end{equation}
190: The lines of $\rho_s=\,$const.\ in the $\sigma_s$-$\kappa_s$ plane are
191: shown in Fig.~\ref{fig1}. The blue line $\rho_s=1$ illustrates that even if
192: the experimental value of $\Delta M_s$ {\em coincides} with the SM
193: expectation, it is wrong to conclude that there is no NP in
194: $B_s$ mixing -- in fact, in this case the NP amplitude can be larger
195: than the SM amplitude, i.e.\ $\kappa_s>1$, if SM and NP contributions
196: differ by a phase $\sigma_s$ between 120$^\circ$ and 240$^\circ$.
197: \begin{figure}
198: $$\epsfxsize=0.47\textwidth\epsffile{fig1mod.eps}\quad
199: \epsfxsize=0.47\textwidth\epsffile{fig3.eps}
200: $$
201: \vspace*{-1truecm}
202: \caption[]{\small Lines of constant $\rho_s$ (left) and constant
203: $\phi_s^{\rm NP}$ (right) in the $\sigma_s$-$\kappa_s$ plane. Blue
204: line: $\rho_s\equiv 1$.}\label{fig1}
205: \end{figure}
206:
207: In order to obtain $\rho_s$ from the experimental result (\ref{4}),
208: one has to determine $\Delta M_s^{\rm SM}$. In addition to the input
209: parameters listed after (\ref{5}), one also needs the CKM matrix
210: elements $|V_{ts}^* V_{tb}|$ and the hadronic matrix element $\hat
211: B_{B_s} f_{B_s}^2$. The former is accurately known in terms of
212: $|V_{cb}|$ and $\lambda$ and reads \cite{PB4}
213: \begin{equation}
214: |V_{ts}^* V_{tb}| = \left\{ 1 - \frac{1}{2}\,(1-2 R_b\cos\gamma)
215: \lambda^2 + {\cal O}(\lambda^4)\right\} |V_{cb}^* V_{tb}| = (41.3\pm
216: 0.7)\times 10^{-3}\,.
217: \end{equation}
218: The hadronic matrix element $\hat B_{B_s} f_{B_s}^2$ has
219: been the subject of numerous lattice calculations,
220: both quenched and unquenched, using various lattice actions and
221: implementations of both heavy and light quarks. The current front
222: runners are unquenched
223: calculations with 2 and 3 dynamical quarks, respectively, and Wilson
224: or staggered light quarks. Despite tremendous progress in recent
225: years, the results still suffer from a variety of uncertainties which
226: is important to keep in mind when interpreting and using lattice
227: results. The most recent (unquenched) simulation by the JLQCD collaboration
228: \cite{JLQCD}, with non-relativistic $b$ quarks and two flavours of
229: dynamical light (Wilson) quarks, yields
230: \begin{equation}\label{JLQCD}
231: \left.f_{B_s}\hat{B}_{B_s}^{1/2}\right|_{\rm JLQCD} = (0.245\pm
232: 0.021^{+0.003}_{-0.002})\,{\rm GeV}\,,
233: \end{equation}
234: where the first error includes uncertainties from statistics and
235: various systematics, where\-as the second, asymmetric error comes
236: from the chiral extrapolation from unphysically large light-quark
237: masses to the $s$-quark mass.
238:
239: More recently, (unquenched) simulations with three dynamical flavours
240: have become possible using staggered quark actions. The HPQCD
241: collaboration obtains \cite{HPQCD}
242: \begin{equation}\label{HPQCD}
243: \left.f_{B_s} \hat B_{B_s}^{1/2}\right|_{\rm HPQCD} = (0.281\pm
244: 0.021)\,{\rm GeV}\,.
245: \end{equation}
246: where all errors are added in quadrature.
247:
248: Although we shall use both (\ref{JLQCD}) and (\ref{HPQCD}) in our
249: analysis, we would like to stress that the
250: errors are likely to be optimistic. There is the question of
251: discretisation effects (JLQCD uses data obtained at only one lattice
252: spacing) and the renormalisation of matrix elements (for lattice
253: actions without chiral symmetry, the axial vector current is not
254: conserved and $f_{B_q}$ needs to be renormalised), which some argue should
255: be done in a non-perturbative way \cite{alpha}. Simulations with
256: staggered quarks also face potential problems with unitarity,
257: locality and an odd number of flavours (see, for instance,
258: Ref.~\cite{sharpe}). A confirmation of the HPQCD results by
259: simulations using the (theoretically better understood) Wilson action
260: with small quark masses will certainly be highly welcome.
261:
262: With the above input parameters, one finds
263: \begin{equation}
264: \begin{array}[b]{rl@{\quad}rl}
265: \left. \Delta M_s \right|_{\rm JLQCD} = & (16.1\pm 2.8)\,{\rm
266: ps}^{-1}, &
267: \left. \Delta M_s \right|_{\rm HPQCD} = & (21.3\pm 3.2)\,{\rm
268: ps}^{-1},\\[5pt]
269: \left.\rho_s\right|_{\rm JLQCD} = & 1.10\pm 0.19, &
270: \left.\rho_s\right|_{\rm HPQCD} = & 0.83\pm 0.13.
271: \end{array}
272: \end{equation}
273: The corresponding constraints in the $\sigma_s$-$\kappa_s$ plane are
274: shown in Fig.~\ref{fig2}.
275: \begin{figure}
276: $$\epsfxsize=0.47\textwidth\epsffile{JLQCD.eps}\quad
277: \epsfxsize=0.47\textwidth\epsffile{HPQCD.eps}
278: $$
279: \vspace*{-1truecm}
280: \caption[]{\small Allowed $1\sigma$ regions (green/grey) in the
281: $\sigma_s$--$\kappa_s$ plane.
282: Left panel: JLQCD lattice results, Eq.~(\ref{JLQCD}).
283: Right panel: HPQCD lattice
284: results, Eq.~(\ref{HPQCD}). The four allowed regions correspond to the
285: fourfold ambiguity in the determination of $\phi_s^{\rm NP}$ from
286: data.}\label{fig2}
287: \end{figure}
288:
289: In order to further constrain the NP parameter space, one needs to include
290: information on the NP CP-violating phase $\phi_s^{\rm NP}$. At the
291: time Ref.~\cite{PB4} was written, no such information was
292: available. In the meantime, $\phi_s^{\rm NP}$ has been constrained
293: from measurements by the D0 collaboration, of the CP-asymmetry in
294: flavour-specific (semileptonic) $B_s$ decays \cite{D01} and
295: the time-dependent angular analysis of untagged $B_s\to J/\psi\phi$
296: decays \cite{D02}. These measurements can be translated, using
297: supplementary information on the semileptonic asymmetry in $B_d$
298: decays, in the following results for $\Delta\Gamma_s$ and
299: $\phi_s$: \cite{D03,D0talk}
300: \begin{equation}\label{13}
301: \Delta\Gamma_s \equiv \Gamma_L - \Gamma_H = (0.13\pm 0.09)\,{\rm
302: ps}^{-1},\quad \phi_s = -0.70^{+0.47}_{-0.39}\,.
303: \end{equation}
304: These results actually are determined only up to a 4-fold ambiguity
305: for $\phi_s$ and the sign of $\Delta\Gamma_s$: $\phi_s\to \pm \phi_s$
306: for $\Delta\Gamma_s>0$ and $\phi_s\to\pm (\pi-\phi_s)$ for
307: $\Delta\Gamma_s<0$. As the SM prediction for $\phi_s$ is close to 0
308: \footnote{Which also implies that we do not have to distinguish our
309: definition of $\phi_s$ as ${\rm arg} M_{12}^s$ from the definition
310: used by the D0 collaboration, $\phi_s = {\rm
311: arg}(-M_{12}^s/\Gamma_{12}^s)$.}, we can identify this result with
312: $\phi_s^{\rm NP}$.
313: The combined constraints posed by $\Delta M_s$ and
314: $\phi_s^{\rm NP}$ on the new-physics parameters $\kappa_s$, $\sigma_s$ are
315: shown as green areas in Fig.~\ref{fig2}, including the 4-fold
316: ambiguity. It is evident that at present the experimental error of
317: $\phi_s^{\rm NP}$ is too large to considerably
318: reduce the area constrained by
319: $\Delta M_s$ alone. The ambiguity can be reduced to a 2-fold one if some
320: theory-input about the signs of $\cos\delta_{1,2}$ is used, where
321: $\delta_{1,2}$ are the strong phases involved in the angular analysis
322: of $B_s\to J/\psi \phi$, Ref.~\cite{dunietz}.
323: At LHCb, it will be possible to study the time-dependence of flavour-tagged
324: $B_s$ decays, which gives access to the mixing-induced asymmetry and
325: allows one to reduce the number of discrete ambiguities without input from
326: theory.
327:
328: The above results can be compared with the following recent
329: theory prediction for
330: $\Delta\Gamma_s$, which is based on an improved operator product
331: expansion of $\Gamma_{12}^s$, the off-diagonal element of the $B_s$
332: decay matrix: \cite{LN06}
333: \begin{equation}
334: \Delta\Gamma_s^{\rm th} = (0.096\pm 0.039)\,{\rm ps}^{-1},
335: \end{equation}
336: which agrees with the experimental result (\ref{13}) within errors.
337: Ref.~\cite{LN06} also
338: contains a detailed discussion of the theoretical predictions for
339: flavour-specific CP asymmetries both in the $B_d$ and $B_s$ system and
340: the constraints on NP in $B_s$ mixing
341: extrated from all available experimental data.
342:
343: Let us conclude with a few remarks concerning the prospects for the
344: search for NP through $B^0_s$--$\bar B^0_s$ mixing at the LHC. This
345: task will be very challenging if essentially no CP-violating effects
346: will be found in $B_s\to J/\psi \phi$ (and similar decays).
347: On the other hand, even a small phase
348: $\phi_s^{\rm NP}\approx-10^\circ$ would lead
349: to CP asymmetries at the $-20\%$ level, which could be unambiguously detected
350: after a few years of data taking, and would not be affected by
351: hadronic uncertainties. Ref.~\cite{hunen} quotes
352: a sensitivity to $\phi_s$ of $\sigma(\phi_s) = 1.2^\circ$ for an
353: integrated luminosity of 2fb$^{-1}$ at LHCb and a sensitivity
354: $\sigma(\Delta \Gamma_s/\Gamma_s)\sim 0.01$ for both LHCb and
355: Atlas/CMS (at 30fb$^{-1}$).
356: Conversely, the measurement of such an asymmetry would
357: allow one to establish a lower bound on the strength of the NP
358: contribution -- even if hadronic uncertainties still preclude a direct
359: extraction of this contribution from $\Delta M_s$ -- and to
360: dramatically reduce the allowed region in the NP parameter space.
361: In fact, the situation may be even more promising, as specific scenarios of NP
362: still allow large new phases in $B^0_s$--$\bar B^0_s$ mixing, also after the
363: measurement of $\Delta M_s$, see, for instance, Refs.~\cite{emi,JMF}.
364:
365: In essence, the lesson to be learnt from this discussion
366: is that NP may actually be hiding in $B^0_s$--$\bar B^0_s$
367: mixing, but is still obscured by parameter uncertainties, some of which will
368: be reduced by improved statistics at the LHC, whereas others require dedicated
369: work of, in particular, lattice theorists. The smoking gun for the
370: presence of NP in $B^0_s$--$\bar B^0_s$ mixing will be the detection
371: of a non-vanishing value of $\phi_s^{\rm NP}$ through CP violation in
372: $B_s\to J/\psi\phi$.
373: This example is yet another demonstration that flavour physics is
374: not an optional extra, but an indispensable
375: ingredient in the pursuit of NP, also and in particular in the era of the LHC.
376:
377: \section*{Acknowledgments}
378: It is a pleasure to thank R.~Fleischer for a very enjoyable collaboration on
379: the work presented here, and the organisers of the Moriond meetings
380: for the invitation. This work was supported in part by the EU networks
381: contract Nos.\ MRTN-CT-2006-035482, {\sc Flavianet}, and
382: MRTN-CT-2006-035505, {\sc Heptools}.
383:
384:
385: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
386:
387: \bibitem{CDFms}
388: A.~Abulencia {\it et al.} [CDF Collaboration],
389: %``Observation of $B^0_{s}$ - $\bar{B}^0$( $s^{)}$ Oscillations,''
390: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 97} (2006) 242003
391: [arXiv:hep-ex/0609040].
392: %%CITATION = PRLTA,97,242003;%%
393:
394: \bibitem{PB4}
395: P.~Ball and R.~Fleischer,
396: %``Probing new physics through B mixing: Status, benchmarks and prospects,''
397: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 48} (2006) 413
398: [arXiv:hep-ph/0604249].
399: %%CITATION = EPHJA,C48,413;%%
400:
401: \bibitem{D01}
402: V.~M.~Abazov {\it et al.} [D0 Collaboration],
403: %``Measurement of the charge asymmetry in semileptonic B/s decays,''
404: arXiv:hep-ex/0701007.
405: %%CITATION = HEP-EX/0701007;%%
406:
407: \bibitem{D02}
408: V.~M.~Abazov {\it et al.} [D0 Collaboration],
409: %``Lifetime difference and CP-violating phase in the B/s0 system,''
410: arXiv:hep-ex/0701012.
411: %%CITATION = HEP-EX/0701012;%%
412:
413: \bibitem{D03}
414: V.~M.~Abazov {\it et al.} [D0 Collaboration],
415: %``Combined D0 measurements constraining the CP-violating phase and width
416: %difference in the B/s0 system,''
417: arXiv:hep-ex/0702030.
418: %%CITATION = HEP-EX/0702030;%%
419:
420: \bibitem{D0talk}
421: A.~Heijboer, talk at this conference.
422:
423: \bibitem{jamin}
424: A.~J.~Buras, M.~Jamin and P.~H.~Weisz,
425: %``LEADING AND NEXT-TO-LEADING QCD CORRECTIONS TO epsilon PARAMETER AND B0 -
426: %anti-B0 MIXING IN THE PRESENCE OF A HEAVY TOP QUARK,''
427: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 347}, 491 (1990).
428: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B347,491;%%
429:
430: \bibitem{top}
431: Tevatron Electroweak Working Group,
432: %``A Combination of CDF and D0 Results on the Mass of the Top Quark,''
433: arXiv:hep-ex/0703034.
434: %%CITATION = HEP-EX/0703034;%%
435:
436: \bibitem{gamma}
437: B.~Aubert {\it et al.} [BABAR Collaboration],
438: %``Measurement of gamma in B-+ --> D(*) K-+ and B-+ --> D K*-+ decays with a
439: %Dalitz analysis of D --> K0(S) pi- pi+,''
440: arXiv:hep-ex/0507101;\\
441: %%CITATION = HEP-EX/0507101;%%
442: A.~Poluektov {\it et al.} [Belle Collaboration],
443: %``Measurement of phi(3) with Dalitz plot analysis of B+ --> D(*) K(*)+
444: %decay,''
445: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 73} (2006) 112009
446: [arXiv:hep-ex/0604054];\\
447: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D73,112009;%%
448: P.~Ball and R.~Zwicky,
449: %``|V(td)/V(ts)| from B --> V gamma,''
450: JHEP {\bf 0604} (2006) 046
451: [arXiv:hep-ph/0603232];\\
452: %%CITATION = JHEPA,0604,046;%%
453: P.~Ball, G.~W.~Jones and R.~Zwicky,
454: %``B --> V gamma beyond QCD factorisation,''
455: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 75} (2007) 054004
456: [arXiv:hep-ph/0612081];\\
457: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D75,054004;%%
458: R.~Fleischer, S.~Recksiegel and F.~Schwab,
459: %``On puzzles and non-puzzles in B --> pi pi, pi K decays,''
460: arXiv:hep-ph/0702275.
461: %%CITATION = HEP-PH/0702275;%%
462:
463: \bibitem{vub}
464: S.~W.~Bosch, B.~O.~Lange, M.~Neubert and G.~Paz,
465: %``Factorization and shape-function effects in inclusive B-meson decays,''
466: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 699} (2004) 335
467: [arXiv:hep-ph/0402094];\\
468: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B699,335;%%
469: B.~O.~Lange, M.~Neubert and G.~Paz,
470: %``Theory of charmless inclusive B decays and the extraction of V(ub),''
471: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 72} (2005) 073006
472: [arXiv:hep-ph/0504071];\\
473: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D72,073006;%%
474: P.~Ball and R.~Zwicky,
475: %``$|$V(ub)$|$ and constraints on the leading-twist pion distribution
476: %amplitude from B $\to$ pi l nu,''
477: Phys.\ Lett.\ {\bf B625} (2005) 225
478: [arXiv:hep-ph/0507076];\\
479: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B625,225;%%
480: J.~R.~Andersen and E.~Gardi,
481: %``Inclusive spectra in charmless semileptonic B decays by dressed gluon
482: %exponentiation,''
483: JHEP {\bf 0601} (2006) 097
484: [arXiv:hep-ph/0509360];\\
485: %%CITATION = JHEPA,0601,097;%%
486: P.~Ball,
487: %``|V(ub)| from UTangles and B --> pi l nu,''
488: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 644} (2007) 38
489: [arXiv:hep-ph/0611108];\\
490: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B644,38;%%
491: V.~B.~Golubev, Y.~I.~Skovpen and V.~G.~Luth,
492: %``Extraction of |V(ub)| with reduced dependence on shape functions,''
493: arXiv:hep-ph/0702072.
494: %%CITATION = HEP-PH/0702072;%%
495:
496: \bibitem{vcb}
497: O.~Buchmuller and H.~Flacher,
498: %``Fits to moment measurements from B --> X/c l nu and B --> X/s gamma decays
499: %using heavy quark expansions in the kinetic scheme,''
500: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 73} (2006) 073008
501: [arXiv:hep-ph/0507253].
502: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D73,073008;%%
503:
504: \bibitem{global}
505: J.~Charles {\it et al.} [CKMfitter group],
506: %``CP violation and the CKM matrix: Assessing the impact of the asymmetric B
507: %factories,''
508: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 41} (2005) 1
509: [arXiv:hep-ph/0406184];
510: %%CITATION = EPHJA,C41,1;%%
511: updated results and plots available at {\tt http://ckmfitter.in2p3.fr};\\
512: M.~Bona {\it et al.} [UTfit Collaboration],
513: %``The unitarity triangle fit in the standard model and hadronic parameters
514: %from lattice QCD: A reappraisal after the measurements of Delta(m(s)) and
515: %BR(B --> tau nu/tau),''
516: JHEP {\bf 0610} (2006) 081
517: [arXiv:hep-ph/0606167];
518: %%CITATION = JHEPA,0610,081;%%
519: updated results available at {\tt
520: http://www.utfit.org/}.
521:
522: \bibitem{JLQCD}
523: S.~Aoki {\it et al.} [JLQCD Collaboration],
524: %``B0 anti-B0 mixing in unquenched lattice QCD,''
525: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 91}, 212001 (2003)
526: [arXiv:hep-ph/0307039].
527: %%CITATION = PRLTA,91,212001;%%
528:
529: \bibitem{HPQCD}
530: E.~Dalgic {\it et al.}\ [HPQCD Collaboration],
531: %``B/s0 - anti-B/s0 mixing parameters from unquenched lattice QCD,''
532: arXiv:hep-lat/0610104.
533: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT/0610104;%%
534:
535: \bibitem{alpha}
536: F.~Palombi, M.~Papinutto, C.~Pena and H.~Wittig [ALPHA Collaboration],
537: %``B0 anti-B0 mixing in the static approximation from the Schroedinger
538: %functional and twisted mass QCD,''
539: PoS {\bf LAT2005} (2006) 214
540: [arXiv:hep-lat/0509008].
541: %%CITATION = POSCI,LAT2005,214;%%
542:
543: \bibitem{sharpe}
544: S.~R.~Sharpe,
545: %``Rooted staggered fermions: Good, bad or ugly?,''
546: PoS {\bf LAT2006} (2006) 022
547: [arXiv:hep-lat/0610094].
548: %%CITATION = POSCI,LAT2006,022;%%
549:
550: \bibitem{dunietz}
551: I.~Dunietz, R.~Fleischer and U.~Nierste,
552: %``In pursuit of new physics with B/s decays,''
553: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 63} (2001) 114015
554: [arXiv:hep-ph/0012219].
555: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D63,114015;%%
556:
557: \bibitem{LN06}
558: A.~Lenz and U.~Nierste,
559: %``Theoretical update of B/s - anti-B/s mixing,''
560: arXiv:hep-ph/0612167.
561: %%CITATION = HEP-PH/0612167;%%
562:
563: \bibitem{hunen}
564: J.~van Hunen (for LHCb), talk given at CKM06;\\
565: N.~Magini (for Atlas and CMS), talk given at CKM06.
566:
567: \bibitem{emi}
568: P.~Ball, S.~Khalil and E.~Kou,
569: %``B/s0-anti-B/s0 mixing and the B/s --> J/psi Phi asymmetry in
570: %supersymmetric models,''
571: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 69} (2004) 115011
572: [arXiv:hep-ph/0311361].
573: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D69,115011;%%
574:
575: \bibitem{JMF}
576: P.~Ball, J.~M.~Frere and J.~Matias,
577: %``Anatomy of mixing-induced CP asymmetries in left-right-symmetric models
578: %with spontaneous CP violation,''
579: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 572} (2000) 3
580: [arXiv:hep-ph/9910211];\\
581: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B572,3;%%
582: P.~Ball and R.~Fleischer,
583: %``An analysis of B/s decays in the left-right symmetric model with
584: %spontaneous CP violation,''
585: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 475} (2000) 111
586: [arXiv:hep-ph/9912319].
587: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B475,111;%%
588:
589: \end{thebibliography}
590:
591: \end{document}
592:
593:
594: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
595: % End of moriond.tex %
596: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
597: