More Like this

1. Search for the $$ {B}_c^{+} $$ → χc1(3872)π+ decay

   https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2025)013  

   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 (June 2025, Journal of High Energy Physics)

   A<sc>bstract</sc> A search for the decay$$ {B}_c^{+} $$ $B_c^{+}$→ χ_c1(3872)π⁺is reported using proton-proton collision data collected with the LHCb detector between 2011 and 2018 at centre-of-mass energies of 7, 8, and 13 TeV, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 9 fb⁻¹. No significant signal is observed. Using the decay$$ {B}_c^{+} $$ $B_c^{+}$→ψ(2S)π⁺as a normalisation channel, an upper limit for the ratio of branching fractions$$ {\mathcal{R}}_{\psi (2S)}^{\chi_{c1}(3872)}=\frac{{\mathcal{B}}_{B_c^{+}\to {\chi}_{c1}(3872){\pi}^{+}}}{{\mathcal{B}}_{B_c^{+}\to \psi (2S){\pi}^{+}}}\times \frac{{\mathcal{B}}_{\chi_{c1}(3872)\to J/\psi {\pi}^{+}{\pi}^{-}}}{{\mathcal{B}}_{\psi (2S)\to J/\psi {\pi}^{+}{\pi}^{-}}}<0.05(0.06), $$ $R_{\psi \left(2S\right)}^{{\chi }_{c1}\left(3872\right)}=\frac{B_{B_c^{+}\to {\chi }_{c1}\left(3872\right){\pi }^{+}}}{B_{B_c^{+}\to \psi \left(2S\right){\pi }^{+}}}\times \frac{B_{{\chi }_{c1}\left(3872\right)\to J/\psi {\pi }^{+}{\pi }^{-}}}{B_{\psi \left(2S\right)\to J/\psi {\pi }^{+}{\pi }^{-}}}<0.05\left(0.06\right),$ is set at the 90 (95)% confidence level. 

   more » « less
2. 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
3. On a Traveling Salesman Problem for Points in the Unit Cube

   https://doi.org/10.1007/s00453-024-01257-w  

   Balogh, József; Clemen, Felix Christian; Dumitrescu, Adrian (September 2024, Algorithmica)

   Abstract LetXbe ann-element point set in thek-dimensional unit cube$$[0,1]^k$$ ${[0,1]}^k$where$$k \ge 2$$ $k\ge 2$. According to an old result of Bollobás and Meir (Oper Res Lett 11:19–21, 1992) , there exists a cycle (tour)$$x_1, x_2, \ldots , x_n$$ $x_1,x_2,\dots ,x_n$through thenpoints, such that$$\left( \sum _{i=1}^n |x_i - x_{i+1}|^k \right) ^{1/k} \le c_k$$ ${\left({\sum }_{i=1}^n,{|x_i-x_{i+1}|}^k\right)}^{1/k}\le c_k$, where$$|x-y|$$ $|x-y|$is the Euclidean distance betweenxandy, and$$c_k$$ $c_k$is an absolute constant that depends only onk, where$$x_{n+1} \equiv x_1$$ $x_{n+1}\equiv x_1$. From the other direction, for every$$k \ge 2$$ $k\ge 2$and$$n \ge 2$$ $n\ge 2$, there existnpoints in$$[0,1]^k$$ ${[0,1]}^k$, such that their shortest tour satisfies$$\left( \sum _{i=1}^n |x_i - x_{i+1}|^k \right) ^{1/k} = 2^{1/k} \cdot \sqrt{k}$$ ${\left({\sum }_{i=1}^n,{|x_i-x_{i+1}|}^k\right)}^{1/k}=2^{1/k}·\sqrt{k}$. For the plane, the best constant is$$c_2=2$$ $c_2=2$and this is the only exact value known. Bollobás and Meir showed that one can take$$c_k = 9 \left( \frac{2}{3} \right) ^{1/k} \cdot \sqrt{k}$$ $c_k=9{\left(\frac{2}{3}\right)}^{1/k}·\sqrt{k}$for every$$k \ge 3$$ $k\ge 3$and conjectured that the best constant is$$c_k = 2^{1/k} \cdot \sqrt{k}$$ $c_k=2^{1/k}·\sqrt{k}$, for every$$k \ge 2$$ $k\ge 2$. Here we significantly improve the upper bound and show that one can take$$c_k = 3 \sqrt{5} \left( \frac{2}{3} \right) ^{1/k} \cdot \sqrt{k}$$ $c_k=3\sqrt{5}{\left(\frac{2}{3}\right)}^{1/k}·\sqrt{k}$or$$c_k = 2.91 \sqrt{k} \ (1+o_k(1))$$ $c_k=2.91\sqrt{k}(1+o_k\left(1\right))$. Our bounds are constructive. We also show that$$c_3 \ge 2^{7/6}$$ $c_3\ge 2^{7/6}$, which disproves the conjecture for$$k=3$$ $k=3$. Connections to matching problems, power assignment problems, related problems, including algorithms, are discussed in this context. A slightly revised version of the Bollobás–Meir conjecture is proposed. 

   more » « less
4. 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
5. Instanton contributions to the ABJM free energy from quantum M2 branes

   https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP10(2023)029  

   Beccaria, M; Giombi, S; Tseytlin, A A (October 2023, Journal of High Energy Physics)

   A<sc>bstract</sc> We present a quantum M2 brane computation of the instanton prefactor in the leading non-perturbative contribution to the ABJM 3-sphere free energy at largeNand fixed levelk. Using supersymmetric localization, such instanton contribution was found earlier to take the form$$ {F}^{inst}\left(N,k\right)=-{\left({\sin}^2\frac{2\pi }{k}\right)}^{-1}\exp \left(-2\pi \sqrt{\frac{2N}{k}}\right)+.\dots $$ $F^{\text{inst}}\left(N,k\right)=-{\left({sin}^2\frac{2\pi }{k}\right)}^{-1}exp\left(-2\pi \sqrt{\frac{2N}{k}}\right)+.\dots$The exponent comes from the action of an M2 brane instanton wrapped onS³/ℤ_k, which represents the M-theory uplift of the ℂP¹instanton in type IIA string theory on AdS₄× ℂP³. The IIA string computation of the leading largekterm in the instanton prefactor was recently performed in arXiv:2304.12340. Here we find that the exact value of the prefactor$$ {\left({\sin}^2\frac{2\pi }{k}\right)}^{-1} $$ ${\left({sin}^2\frac{2\pi }{k}\right)}^{-1}$is reproduced by the 1-loop term in the M2 brane partition function expanded near theS³/ℤ_kinstanton configuration. As in the Wilson loop example in arXiv:2303.15207, the quantum M2 brane computation is well defined and produces a finite result in exact agreement with localization. 

   more » « less