Search for: All records

On August 13-14, 2025, the Jackson School of Geoscience hosted the inaugural North American Workshop on Critical Mineral Research, Development and Education, in the Thompson Conference Center on the campus of the University of Texas at Austin, USA. The workshop was funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and was attended by 230 participants. 176 participants attended the workshop in-person while another 54 participants attended online via Zoom. Twenty-two participants (including 10 students and 7 early career researchers) received travel support through the NSF grant to attend the workshop in Austin. Out of the 230 workshop participants, 134 participants were from academia (34 students), 66 from the private sector and 30 from federal- and state-level government agencies. The workshop was divided into four topical sessions that discussed current issues in critical minerals research, development, and education: (A) Conventional and Unconventional Sources of Critical Minerals. (B) How to grow the U.S. critical minerals workforce. (C) Innovations in Critical Mineral Extraction and Recycling. (D) Policy and Supply Chain Economics. The topical sessions were composed of two keynote lectures and complemented by oral and poster presentations by the workshop participants. A panel discussion and breakout session explored recent developments in critical minerals research, development and education in the U.S., with particular focus on the implications of recent Presidential Executive Orders. The discussions highlighted, for example, that: (i) The recent critical mineral-related Presidential Executive Orders by the Trump-Vance administration are encouraging steps towards fast-tracking US-based critical mineral production. (ii) Lengthy permitting timelines and limited transparency in the decision-making process – with often unpredictable outcomes – remain major barriers for mining and mineral processing operations in the U.S. Workshop participants suggested the development of policies specifically aimed at streamlining permitting processes. (iii) Funding initiatives are too often aimed at increasing short-to-mid-term critical mineral production while generation of ‘pre-competitive data’ to support and guide mineral exploration is largely neglected. Workshop participants recommended that future funding cycles place greater emphasis on generating fundamental geoscience data and insight that can be leveraged by the private sector for green and brownfield exploration. (iv) The persistent negative image of the mining and mineral processing sector remains a major obstacle to attracting and developing a skilled critical minerals workforce. As possible starting points for long-term solutions, workshop participants suggested launching a media campaign, implementing industry-led K-12 outreach programs, and stronger and closer collaborations between academia and the private sector through student-centered research projects. 

We present a measurement of the branching fraction and fraction of longitudinal polarization of $B^0\to {\rho }^{+}{\rho }^{-}$decays, which have two ${\pi }^0$’s in the final state. We also measure time-dependent $CP$violation parameters for decays into longitudinally polarized ${\rho }^{+}{\rho }^{-}$pairs. This analysis is based on a data sample containing $(387\pm 6)\times {10}^6$ $\mathrm{\Upsilon }\left(4S\right)$mesons collected with the Belle II detector at the SuperKEKB asymmetric-energy $e^{+}{e}^{-}$collider in 2019–2022. We obtain $\mathcal{B}(B^0\to {\rho }^{+}{\rho }^{-})=\left(2.89_{-0.22}^{+0.23}{}_{-0.27}^{+0.29}\right)\times {10}^{-5}$, $f_L=0.921_{-0.025}^{+0.024}{}_{-0.015}^{+0.017}$, $S=-0.26\pm 0.19\pm 0.08$, and $C=-0.02\pm 0.12_{-0.05}^{+0.06}$, where the first uncertainties are statistical and the second are systematic. We use these results to perform an isospin analysis to constrain the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa angle ${\varphi }_2$and obtain two solutions; the result consistent with other Standard Model constraints is ${\varphi }_2=\left({92.6}_{-4.7}^{+4.5}\right)°$. Published by the American Physical Society2025 

A<sc>bstract</sc> We perform the first search forCPviolation in$$ {D}_{(s)}^{+}\to {K}_S^0{K}^{-}{\pi}^{+}{\pi}^{+} $$ $D_{\left(s\right)}^{+}\to K_S^0{K}^{-}{\pi }^{+}{\pi }^{+}$decays. We use a combined data set from the Belle and Belle II experiments, which studye⁺e⁻collisions at center-of-mass energies at or near the Υ(4S) resonance. We use 980 fb⁻¹of data from Belle and 428 fb⁻¹of data from Belle II. We measure sixCP-violating asymmetries that are based on triple products and quadruple products of the momenta of final-state particles, and also the particles’ helicity angles. We obtain a precision at the level of 0.5% for$$ {D}^{+}\to {K}_S^0{K}^{-}{\pi}^{+}{\pi}^{+} $$ $D^{+}\to K_S^0{K}^{-}{\pi }^{+}{\pi }^{+}$decays, and better than 0.3% for$$ {D}_s^{+}\to {K}_S^0{K}^{-}{\pi}^{+}{\pi}^{+} $$ $D_s^{+}\to K_S^0{K}^{-}{\pi }^{+}{\pi }^{+}$decays. No evidence ofCPviolation is found. Our results for the triple-product asymmetries are the most precise to date for singly-Cabibbo-suppressedD⁺decays. Our results for the other asymmetries are the first such measurements performed for charm decays. 

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$$ \mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^{+}\to {\Xi}^{-}{\pi}^{+}{\pi}^{+}\right) $$ $B\left({\Xi }_c^{+}\to {\Xi }^{-}{\pi }^{+}{\pi }^{+}\right)$. 

We measure the branching fraction and $CP$-violating flavor-dependent rate asymmetry of $B^0\to {\pi }^0{\pi }^0$decays reconstructed using the Belle II detector in an electron-positron collision sample containing $387\times {10}^6\mathrm{\Upsilon }\left(4S\right)$mesons. Using an optimized event selection, we find $125\pm 20$signal decays in a fit to background-discriminating and flavor-sensitive distributions. The resulting branching fraction is $(1.25\pm 0.23)\times {10}^{-6}$and the $CP$-violating asymmetry is $0.03\pm 0.30$. Published by the American Physical Society2025 

A<sc>bstract</sc> We report measurements of the absolute branching fractions$$\mathcal{B}\left({B}_{s}^{0}\to {D}_{s}^{\pm }X\right)$$,$$\mathcal{B}\left({B}_{s}^{0}\to {D}^{0}/{\overline{D} }^{0}X\right)$$, and$$\mathcal{B}\left({B}_{s}^{0}\to {D}^{\pm }X\right)$$, where the latter is measured for the first time. The results are based on a 121.4 fb⁻¹data sample collected at the Υ(10860) resonance by the Belle detector at the KEKB asymmetric-energye⁺e⁻collider. We reconstruct one$${B}_{s}^{0}$$meson in$${e}^{+}{e}^{-}\to \Upsilon\left(10860\right)\to {B}_{s}^{*}{\overline{B} }_{s}^{*}$$events and measure yields of$${D}_{s}^{+}$$,D⁰, andD⁺mesons in the rest of the event. We obtain$$\mathcal{B}\left({B}_{s}^{0}\to {D}_{s}^{\pm }X\right)=\left(68.6\pm 7.2\pm 4.0\right)\%$$,$$\mathcal{B}\left({B}_{s}^{0}\to {D}^{0}/{\overline{D} }^{0}X\right)=\left(21.5\pm 6.1\pm 1.8\right)\%$$, and$$\mathcal{B}\left({B}_{s}^{0}\to {D}^{\pm }X\right)=\left(12.6\pm 4.6\pm 1.3\right)\%$$, where the first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic. Averaging with previous Belle measurements gives$$\mathcal{B}\left({B}_{s}^{0}\to {D}_{s}^{\pm }X\right)=\left(63.4\pm 4.5\pm 2.2\right)\%$$and$$\mathcal{B}\left({B}_{s}^{0}\to {D}^{0}/{\overline{D} }^{0}X\right)=\left(23.9\pm 4.1\pm 1.8\right)\%$$. For the$${B}_{s}^{0}$$production fraction at the Υ(10860), we find$${f}_{s}=\left({21.4}_{-1.7}^{+1.5}\right)\%$$.