More Like this

1. A case study of SMEFT $$ \mathcal{O}\left(1/{\Lambda}^4\right) $$ effects in diboson processes: pp → W±(ℓ±ν)γ

   https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP05(2024)223  

   Martin, Adam (May 2024, Journal of High Energy Physics)

   A<sc>bstract</sc> In this paper we explorepp→W^±(ℓ^±ν)γto$$ \mathcal{O}\left(1/{\Lambda}^4\right) $$ $O\left(1/{\Lambda }^4\right)$in the SMEFT expansion. Calculations to this order are necessary to properly capture SMEFT contributions that grow with energy, as the interference between energy-enhanced SMEFT effects at$$ \mathcal{O}\left(1/{\Lambda}^2\right) $$ $O\left(1/{\Lambda }^2\right)$and the Standard Model is suppressed. We find that there are several dimension eight operators that interfere with the Standard Model and lead to the same energy growth, ~$$ \mathcal{O}\left({E}^4/{\Lambda}^4\right) $$ $O\left(E^4/{\Lambda }^4\right)$, as dimension six squared. While energy-enhanced SMEFT contributions are a main focus, our calculation includes the complete set of$$ \mathcal{O}\left(1/{\Lambda}^4\right) $$ $O\left(1/{\Lambda }^4\right)$SMEFT effects consistent with U(3)⁵flavor symmetry. Additionally, we include the decay of theW^±→ ℓ^±ν, making the calculation actually$$ \overline{q}{q}^{\prime}\to {\ell}^{\pm}\nu \gamma $$ $\overline{q}{q}^{\prime }\to {\ell }^{\pm }\mathrm{\nu \gamma }$. As such, we are able to study the impact of non-resonant SMEFT operators, such as$$ \left({L}^{\dagger }{\overline{\sigma}}^{\mu }{\tau}^IL\right)\left({Q}^{\dagger }{\overline{\sigma}}^{\nu }{\tau}^IQ\right) $$ $\left(L^{†}{\overline{\sigma }}^{\mu }{\tau }^{I}L\right)\left(Q^{†}{\overline{\sigma }}^{\nu }{\tau }^{I}Q\right)$B_μν, which contribute to$$ \overline{q}{q}^{\prime}\to {\ell}^{\pm}\nu \gamma $$ $\overline{q}{q}^{\prime }\to {\ell }^{\pm }\mathrm{\nu \gamma }$directly and not to$$ \overline{q}{q}^{\prime}\to {W}^{\pm}\gamma $$ $\overline{q}{q}^{\prime }\to W^{\pm }\gamma$. We show several distributions to illustrate the shape differences of the different contributions. 

   more » « less
2. More accurate $$ \sigma \left(\mathcal{GG}\to h\right),\Gamma \left(h\to \mathcal{GG},\mathcal{AA},\overline{\Psi}\Psi \right) $$ and Higgs width results via the geoSMEFT

   https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2024)170  

   Martin, Adam; Trott, Michael (January 2024, Journal of High Energy Physics)

   A<sc>bstract</sc> We develop Standard Model Effective Field Theory (SMEFT) predictions ofσ($$ \mathcal{GG} $$ $\mathrm{GG}$→h), Γ(h→$$ \mathcal{GG} $$ $\mathrm{GG}$), Γ(h→$$ \mathcal{AA} $$ $\mathrm{AA}$) to incorporate full two loop Standard Model results at the amplitude level, in conjunction with dimension eight SMEFT corrections. We simultaneously report consistent Γ(h→$$ \overline{\Psi}\Psi $$ $\overline{\Psi }\Psi$) results including leading QCD corrections and dimension eight SMEFT corrections. This extends the predictions of the former processes Γ, σto a full set of corrections at$$ \mathcal{O}\left({\overline{v}}_T^2/{\varLambda}^2{\left(16{\pi}^2\right)}^2\right) $$ $O\left({\overline{v}}_T^2/{\Lambda }^2{\left(16{\pi }^2\right)}^2\right)$and$$ \mathcal{O}\left({\overline{v}}_T^4/{\Lambda}^4\right) $$ $O\left({\overline{v}}_T^4/{\Lambda }^4\right)$, where$$ {\overline{v}}_T $$ ${\overline{v}}_T$is the electroweak scale vacuum expectation value and Λ is the cut off scale of the SMEFT. Throughout, cross consistency between the operator and loop expansions is maintained by the use of the geometric SMEFT formalism. For Γ(h→$$ \overline{\Psi}\Psi $$ $\overline{\Psi }\Psi$), we include results at$$ \mathcal{O}\left({\overline{v}}_T^2/{\Lambda}^2\left(16{\pi}^2\right)\right) $$ $O\left({\overline{v}}_T^2/{\Lambda }^2\left(16{\pi }^2\right)\right)$in the limit where subleadingm_Ψ→ 0 corrections are neglected. We clarify how gauge invariant SMEFT renormalization counterterms combine with the Standard Model counter terms in higher order SMEFT calculations when the Background Field Method is used. We also update the prediction of the total Higgs width in the SMEFT to consistently include some of these higher order perturbative effects. 

   more » « less
3. Measurements of the branching fractions of $$ {\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0{\pi}^0 $$, $$ {\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0\eta $$, and $$ {\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0{\eta}^{\prime } $$ and asymmetry parameter of $$ {\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0{\pi}^0 $$

   https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP10(2024)045  

   Adachi, I; Aggarwal, L; Aihara, H; Akopov, N; Aloisio, A; Althubiti, N; Anh_Ky, N; Asner, D M; Atmacan, H; Aushev, T; et al (October 2024, Journal of High Energy Physics)

   A<sc>bstract</sc> We present a study of$$ {\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0{\pi}^0 $$ ${\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^0{\pi }^0$,$$ {\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0\eta $$ ${\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^0\eta$, and$$ {\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0{\eta}^{\prime } $$ ${\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^0{\eta }^{\prime }$decays using the Belle and Belle II data samples, which have integrated luminosities of 980 fb⁻¹and 426 fb⁻¹, respectively. We measure the following relative branching fractions$$ {\displaystyle \begin{array}{c}\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0{\pi}^0\right)/\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^{-}{\pi}^{+}\right)=0.48\pm 0.02\left(\textrm{stat}\right)\pm 0.03\left(\textrm{syst}\right),\\ {}\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0\eta \right)/\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^{-}{\pi}^{+}\right)=0.11\pm 0.01\left(\textrm{stat}\right)\pm 0.01\left(\textrm{syst}\right),\\ {}\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0{\eta}^{\prime}\right)/\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^{-}{\pi}^{+}\right)=0.08\pm 0.02\left(\textrm{stat}\right)\pm 0.01\left(\textrm{syst}\right)\end{array}} $$ $\begin{array}{c}B\left({\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^0{\pi }^0\right)/B\left({\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^{-}{\pi }^{+}\right)=0.48\pm 0.02\left(\text{stat}\right)\pm 0.03\left(\text{syst}\right),\\ B\left({\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^0\eta \right)/B\left({\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^{-}{\pi }^{+}\right)=0.11\pm 0.01\left(\text{stat}\right)\pm 0.01\left(\text{syst}\right),\\ B\left({\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^0{\eta }^{\prime }\right)/B\left({\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^{-}{\pi }^{+}\right)=0.08\pm 0.02\left(\text{stat}\right)\pm 0.01\left(\text{syst}\right)\end{array}$ for the first time, where the uncertainties are statistical (stat) and systematic (syst). By multiplying by the branching fraction of the normalization mode,$$ \mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^{-}{\pi}^{+}\right) $$ $B\left({\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^{-}{\pi }^{+}\right)$, we obtain the following absolute branching fraction results$$ {\displaystyle \begin{array}{c}\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0{\pi}^0\right)=\left(6.9\pm 0.3\left(\textrm{stat}\right)\pm 0.5\left(\textrm{syst}\right)\pm 1.3\left(\operatorname{norm}\right)\right)\times {10}^{-3},\\ {}\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0\eta \right)=\left(1.6\pm 0.2\left(\textrm{stat}\right)\pm 0.2\left(\textrm{syst}\right)\pm 0.3\left(\operatorname{norm}\right)\right)\times {10}^{-3},\\ {}\mathcal{B}\left({\varXi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0{\eta}^{\prime}\right)=\left(1.2\pm 0.3\left(\textrm{stat}\right)\pm 0.1\left(\textrm{syst}\right)\pm 0.2\left(\operatorname{norm}\right)\right)\times {10}^{-3},\end{array}} $$ $\begin{array}{c}B\left({\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^0{\pi }^0\right)=\left(6.9\pm 0.3\left(\text{stat}\right)\pm 0.5\left(\text{syst}\right)\pm 1.3\left(norm\right)\right)\times {10}^{-3},\\ B\left({\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^0\eta \right)=\left(1.6\pm 0.2\left(\text{stat}\right)\pm 0.2\left(\text{syst}\right)\pm 0.3\left(norm\right)\right)\times {10}^{-3},\\ B\left({\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^0{\eta }^{\prime }\right)=\left(1.2\pm 0.3\left(\text{stat}\right)\pm 0.1\left(\text{syst}\right)\pm 0.2\left(norm\right)\right)\times {10}^{-3},\end{array}$ where the third uncertainties are from$$ \mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^{-}{\pi}^{+}\right) $$ $B\left({\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^{-}{\pi }^{+}\right)$. The asymmetry parameter for$$ {\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0{\pi}^0 $$ ${\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^0{\pi }^0$is measured to be$$ \alpha \left({\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0{\pi}^0\right)=-0.90\pm 0.15\left(\textrm{stat}\right)\pm 0.23\left(\textrm{syst}\right) $$ $\alpha \left({\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^0{\pi }^0\right)=-0.90\pm 0.15\left(\text{stat}\right)\pm 0.23\left(\text{syst}\right)$. 

   more » « less
4. Observations of the singly Cabibbo-suppressed decays $$ {\Xi}_c^{+}\to p{K}_S^0 $$, $$ {\Xi}_c^{+}\to \Lambda {\pi}^{+} $$, and $$ {\Xi}_c^{+}\to {\Sigma}^0{\pi}^{+} $$ at Belle and Belle II

   https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2025)061  

   Adachi, I; Aggarwal, L; Akopov, N; Alhakami, M; Aloisio, A; Althubiti, N; Anh_Ky, N; Asner, D M; Atmacan, H; Aushev, T; et al (March 2025, Journal of High Energy Physics)

   A<sc>bstract</sc> Using data samples of 983.0 fb⁻¹and 427.9 fb⁻¹accumulated with the Belle and Belle II detectors operating at the KEKB and SuperKEKB asymmetric-energye⁺e⁻colliders, singly Cabibbo-suppressed decays$$ {\Xi}_c^{+}\to p{K}_S^0 $$ ${\Xi }_c^{+}\to p{K}_S^0$,$$ {\Xi}_c^{+}\to \Lambda {\pi}^{+} $$ ${\Xi }_c^{+}\to \Lambda {\pi }^{+}$, and$$ {\Xi}_c^{+}\to {\Sigma}^0{\pi}^{+} $$ ${\Xi }_c^{+}\to {\Sigma }^0{\pi }^{+}$are observed for the first time. The ratios of branching fractions of$$ {\Xi}_c^{+}\to p{K}_S^0 $$ ${\Xi }_c^{+}\to p{K}_S^0$,$$ {\Xi}_c^{+}\to \Lambda {\pi}^{+} $$ ${\Xi }_c^{+}\to \Lambda {\pi }^{+}$, and$$ {\Xi}_c^{+}\to {\Sigma}^0{\pi}^{+} $$ ${\Xi }_c^{+}\to {\Sigma }^0{\pi }^{+}$relative to that of$$ {\Xi}_c^{+}\to {\Xi}^{-}{\pi}^{+}{\pi}^{+} $$ ${\Xi }_c^{+}\to {\Xi }^{-}{\pi }^{+}{\pi }^{+}$are measured to be$$ {\displaystyle \begin{array}{c}\frac{\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^{+}\to p{K}_S^0\right)}{\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^{+}\to {\Xi}^{-}{\pi}^{+}{\pi}^{+}\right)}=\left(2.47\pm 0.16\pm 0.07\right)\%,\\ {}\frac{\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^{+}\to \Lambda {\pi}^{+}\right)}{\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^{+}\to {\Xi}^{-}{\pi}^{+}{\pi}^{+}\right)}=\left(1.56\pm 0.14\pm 0.09\right)\%,\\ {}\frac{\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^{+}\to {\Sigma}^0{\pi}^{+}\right)}{\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^{+}\to {\Xi}^{-}{\pi}^{+}{\pi}^{+}\right)}=\left(4.13\pm 0.26\pm 0.22\right)\%.\end{array}} $$ $\begin{array}{c}\frac{B\left({\Xi }_c^{+}\to p{K}_S^0\right)}{B\left({\Xi }_c^{+}\to {\Xi }^{-}{\pi }^{+}{\pi }^{+}\right)}=\left(2.47\pm 0.16\pm 0.07\right)\%,\\ \frac{B\left({\Xi }_c^{+}\to \Lambda {\pi }^{+}\right)}{B\left({\Xi }_c^{+}\to {\Xi }^{-}{\pi }^{+}{\pi }^{+}\right)}=\left(1.56\pm 0.14\pm 0.09\right)\%,\\ \frac{B\left({\Xi }_c^{+}\to {\Sigma }^0{\pi }^{+}\right)}{B\left({\Xi }_c^{+}\to {\Xi }^{-}{\pi }^{+}{\pi }^{+}\right)}=\left(4.13\pm 0.26\pm 0.22\right)\%.\end{array}$ Multiplying these values by the branching fraction of the normalization channel,$$ \mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^{+}\to {\Xi}^{-}{\pi}^{+}{\pi}^{+}\right)=\left(2.9\pm 1.3\right)\% $$ $B\left({\Xi }_c^{+}\to {\Xi }^{-}{\pi }^{+}{\pi }^{+}\right)=\left(2.9\pm 1.3\right)\%$, the absolute branching fractions are determined to be$$ {\displaystyle \begin{array}{c}\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^{+}\to p{K}_S^0\right)=\left(7.16\pm 0.46\pm 0.20\pm 3.21\right)\times {10}^{-4},\\ {}\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^{+}\to \Lambda {\pi}^{+}\right)=\left(4.52\pm 0.41\pm 0.26\pm 2.03\right)\times {10}^{-4},\\ {}\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^{+}\to {\Sigma}^0{\pi}^{+}\right)=\left(1.20\pm 0.08\pm 0.07\pm 0.54\right)\times {10}^{-3}.\end{array}} $$ $\begin{array}{c}B\left({\Xi }_c^{+}\to p{K}_S^0\right)=\left(7.16\pm 0.46\pm 0.20\pm 3.21\right)\times {10}^{-4},\\ B\left({\Xi }_c^{+}\to \Lambda {\pi }^{+}\right)=\left(4.52\pm 0.41\pm 0.26\pm 2.03\right)\times {10}^{-4},\\ B\left({\Xi }_c^{+}\to {\Sigma }^0{\pi }^{+}\right)=\left(1.20\pm 0.08\pm 0.07\pm 0.54\right)\times {10}^{-3}.\end{array}$ The first and second uncertainties above are statistical and systematic, respectively, while the third ones arise from the uncertainty in$$ \mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^{+}\to {\Xi}^{-}{\pi}^{+}{\pi}^{+}\right) $$ $B\left({\Xi }_c^{+}\to {\Xi }^{-}{\pi }^{+}{\pi }^{+}\right)$. 

   more » « less
5. Search for the $$ {B}_s^0 $$ → μ+μ−γ decay

   https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2024)101  

   Aaij, R; Abdelmotteleb, A_S W; Abellan_Beteta, C; Abudinén, F; Ackernley, T; Adefisoye, A A; Adeva, B; Adinolfi, M; Adlarson, P; Agapopoulou, C; et al (July 2024, Journal of High Energy Physics)

   A<sc>bstract</sc> A search for the fully reconstructed$$ {B}_s^0 $$ $B_s^0$→ μ⁺μ⁻γdecay is performed at the LHCb experiment using proton-proton collisions at$$ \sqrt{s} $$ $\sqrt{s}$= 13 TeV corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 5.4 fb⁻¹. No significant signal is found and upper limits on the branching fraction in intervals of the dimuon mass are set$$ {\displaystyle \begin{array}{cc}\mathcal{B}\left({B}_s^0\to {\mu}^{+}{\mu}^{-}\gamma \right)<4.2\times {10}^{-8},& m\left({\mu}^{+}{\mu}^{-}\right)\in \left[2{m}_{\mu },1.70\right]\textrm{GeV}/{c}^2,\\ {}\mathcal{B}\left({B}_s^0\to {\mu}^{+}{\mu}^{-}\gamma \right)<7.7\times {10}^{-8},&\ m\left({\mu}^{+}{\mu}^{-}\right)\in \left[\textrm{1.70,2.88}\right]\textrm{GeV}/{c}^2,\\ {}\mathcal{B}\left({B}_s^0\to {\mu}^{+}{\mu}^{-}\gamma \right)<4.2\times {10}^{-8},& m\left({\mu}^{+}{\mu}^{-}\right)\in \left[3.92,{m}_{B_s^0}\right]\textrm{GeV}/{c}^2,\end{array}} $$ $\begin{array}{cc}B\left(B_s^0\to {\mu }^{+}{\mu }^{-}\gamma \right)<4.2\times {10}^{-8},& m\left({\mu }^{+}{\mu }^{-}\right)\in \left(2m_{\mu },1.70\right)\mathrm{GeV}/c^2,\\ B\left(B_s^0\to {\mu }^{+}{\mu }^{-}\gamma \right)<7.7\times {10}^{-8},& m\left({\mu }^{+}{\mu }^{-}\right)\in \left(\mathrm{1.70,\; 2.88}\right)\mathrm{GeV}/c^2,\\ B\left(B_s^0\to {\mu }^{+}{\mu }^{-}\gamma \right)<4.2\times {10}^{-8},& m\left({\mu }^{+}{\mu }^{-}\right)\in \left(3.92,m_{B_s^0}\right)\mathrm{GeV}/c^2,\end{array}$ at 95% confidence level. Additionally, upper limits are set on the branching fraction in the [2m_μ,1.70] GeV/c²dimuon mass region excluding the contribution from the intermediateϕ(1020) meson, and in the region combining all dimuon-mass intervals. 

   more » « less