1 / 31

Charm physics at BaBar

Charm physics at BaBar. Mat Charles (The University of Iowa). Outline. Overview of what charm physics do we do The detector & data sample Some physics analyses Summary & thoughts for LHCb. so data sample contains ~ 700M events. The BaBar experiment. Operating energy: √s ~10.6 GeV

melina
Download Presentation

Charm physics at BaBar

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Charm physics at BaBar • Mat Charles • (The University of Iowa)

  2. Outline • Overview of what charm physics do we do • The detector & data sample • Some physics analyses • Summary & thoughts for LHCb

  3. so data sample contains ~ 700M events The BaBar experiment Operating energy: √s ~10.6 GeV (... plus data at Y(3S), Y(2S) -- not discussed here.) 531.4/fb recorded

  4. Charm physics at BaBar • D0 mixing and time-dependent (indirect) CP violation • Time-integrated CP violation in D0, D+ • Rare charm decays • Spectroscopy • Charm mesons (Ds, D0, D+) • Charm baryons (Λc, Σc, Ξc, Ωc and searches for Ξcc) • Dalitz plot analysis of charm decays • (D Dbar) production -- e.g. from charmonium-like states • Charm production in B decays • Semi-leptonic charm decays

  5. D0 mixing & indirect CPV • Flagship analysis area for BaBar • Several different ways to measure D0 mixing in an inclusive environment like BaBar (or LHCb) • Details of methods & results later in the talk • Mixing parameters are unlikely to establish New Physics, but are important to measure to constrain models. • Indirect CPV is tiny in SM & would be a clear signal of NP • CPV search is nearly free -- just need to remeasure mixing parameters with D0 and D0bar separately. Normalization drops out.

  6. Time-integrated CPV • Direct CPV depends on final state • In SM: Expected rate typically < 10−3 • Much smaller for some final states • With NP, rate can naturally be much larger • Depends on model & final state • Singly-Cabibbo-suppressed modes especially sensitive -- O(10−3), perhaps O(10−2) • Experimentally tricky: • Rate measurements depend on knowing production & detector asymmetries. (Not easy at per-mille level!) • Can also look for distribution asymmetries in multi-body decays(e.g. helicity moments, Dalitz plot asymmetries) • Examples from BaBar coming up Grossman, Kagan & Nir, PRD 75, 036008 (2007)

  7. Rare charm decays • Searches for decay modes that are very suppressed in SM but can be enhanced by NP. • Classic modes: D0 → l+l− (very clean) • BaBar also looks for suite of 3-body modes(e.g. D → l+l− π, Λc → l+l− p) • Expands search horizon a lot... • ... but need to watch out for SM contributions like D → ϕπ, ϕ → l+l−

  8. Spectroscopy • Searches for new states & measurements of quantum numbers, properties, cross-sections of existing states • Several discoveries & first measurements made at BaBar • Some expected -- e.g. first observation of Ωc*, spin of Ω− from Ξc decays • Some very unexpected -- e.g. Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) • Why should LHCb care about charm spectroscopy? • Better understanding of final state • Better understanding of QCD & its limitations • LHCb will be an interesting place for spectroscopy too • Huge production rates, if the background doesn’t kill you • You can see things we didn’t have the energy/luminosity/environment for before, e.g. Ξcc/Ωcc/Ωccc, new b-baryons (maybe even pentaquarks!) • Exclusive B → charm is a great place to pin down quantum numbers when you have huge statistics

  9. Charm Dalitz plot analysis • Long-standing interest in Dalitz plot structure, partial waves • Good tool to probe properties of broad light-quark resonances (a0, f0, etc) • Theory interest for finding/excluding candidates for glueballs, hybrid mesons, etc. • Don’t mention the κ. • Recent attention for use in ADS method (γ measurements) and in charm mixing measurements.

  10. D0 Mixing • Formalism & implications • New results from BaBar, Belle, CDF

  11. Standard mixing formalism Mixing occurs for neutral mesons M0 = K0, D0, B0, Bs0 General time evolution:

  12. Cartoon of mixing For convenience, define: and

  13. Mixing in charmed mesons Charm mixing small compared to other mesons in SM: Mixing via box diagram (short-range) Mixing via hadronic intermediate states (long-range) K+K− π+π−π0 π+π− K+π− etc Contributes mainly to x Non-perturbative; hard to predict SM contribution. Most predictions give x,y ~ (0.001–0.01) and |x|<|y| Intermediate b: CKM-suppressed Intermediate d,s: GIM-suppressed Recent calculation: |x|≤0.01, |y|≤0.01 – less tiny! PRD 69,114021 (Falk, Grossman, Ligeti, Nir & Petrov) Tiny!

  14. Example NP contributions to mixing: Supersymmetry Leptoquarks Extended Higgs New physics? • Theoretical uncertainty in SM mixing rate => can’t really observe NP by looking at mixing. • (... though x≫y would be a hint...) • Future theory input might change things. • In the meantime, can bound NP from above • e.g. Golowich, Hewett, Pakvasa & Petrov (PRD76:095009,2007) • CPV has more potential to provide a “smoking gun” -- indirect CPV expected to be very small (10−5 ×10−3) in SM but can be larger with NP. Grossman, Kagan & Nir, PRD 75, 036008 (2007)

  15. D0 mixing results • Broadly, four types of measurement: • Lifetime difference between states of different CP • Time-dependence of wrong-sign hadronic decays • Wrong-sign semi-leptonic decays, e.g. D0 → K+ l− νl • Coherent D0D0 production at psi(3770) -- CLEO-c (not covered in this talk)

  16. Define Lifetime ratios: Introduction D0 → K− π+: Mixture of CP states D0 → K− K+: CP-even eigenstate (also D0 → π− π+) yCP related to y and CP parameters by: Falk et al, PRD65,054034 AM≠0: CPV in mixing (asymmetry in RM between D0 and D0) cosφ≠1: CPV in interference between mixing and decay CP observables (AΓ or ΔY) defined as: Non-zero value of yCP implies mixing. If no CP violation, yCP = y.

  17. Belle: D0/D0 → K−K+ Lifetime ratios: Method • Belle & BaBar methods very similar: • Require D*+ → D0 π+ tag • ID flavour of D0 at production for CPV measurement • Suppresses background • Modest improvement to lifetime resolution • Use D0 → K−K+, π−π+ as signal and K−π+ as control • Many measurement systematics cancel in the ratio • Get as clean a sample as possible • Background model systematics don’tcancel well between modes BaBar: D0 → K−K+ Diagram shows another D0 decay mode

  18. Sample Sample yCP yCP ΔY AΓ K+ K− K+ K− (1.25 ± 0.39 ± 0.28)% (1.60 ± 0.46 ± 0.17)% (0.15 ± 0.34 ± 0.16)% (−0.40 ± 0.44 ± 0.12)% π+ π− π+ π− (1.44 ± 0.57 ± 0.42)% (0.46 ± 0.65 ± 0.25)% (0.05 ± 0.64 ± 0.32)% (−0.28 ± 0.52 ± 0.30)% Combined Combined (1.31 ± 0.32 ± 0.25)% (1.24 ± 0.39 ± 0.13)% (−0.26 ± 0.36 ± 0.08)% (0.01 ± 0.30 ± 0.15)% Lifetime ratios: Results BaBar preliminary Belle arXiv:0712.2249 PRL 98:211803,2007 Yellow band: D0 → K− π+ control mode No evidence for CP violation 3.0σ evidence for mixing 3.2σ evidence for mixing BaBar result can be combined with statistically independentuntagged sample (PRL 91, 162001(2002),91 fb−1) to obtainyCP = (1.03 ± 0.33 ± 0.19)%

  19. DCS MIX K+π− CF Wrong-sign hadronic decays Look for wrong-sign decays, e.g. D*+ → D0 π+, D0 → K+ π− Two main contributions: Doubly-Cabibbo-suppressed (DCS) decay Mixing & Cabibbo-favoured (CF) decay Distinguish them by their time dependence: [Limit of |x| ≪ 1, |y| ≪ 1, and no CPV.] Why x′ and y′ instead of x and y? x′ = x cosδ + y sinδ y′ = y cosδ − x sinδ where δ is the phase difference between DCS and CF decays and depends on the final state. Note: (x′2 + y′2)/2 = (x2 + y2)/2 ≡ RM

  20. x′,y′ highly correlated Wrong-sign D0 → K+ π− Belle: 400 fb−1 PRL 96,151801 (2006) CDF: 1.5 fb−1 arXiv:0712.1567 (preliminary) BaBar: 384 fb−1 PRL 98,211802 (2007) 3.8σ evidence for mixing 3.9σ evidence for mixing 2.0σ evidence for mixing BaBar: AD = (−2.1 ± 5.2 ± 1.5)% Belle: AD = (2.3 ± 4.7)% Belle: AM = 0.67 ± 1.2 Clear evidence for mixing! But no evidence for CP violation found.

  21. Time-integrated WS data Time-integrated RS data Wrong-sign D0 → K+ π− π0 • DCS and CF components each have a Dalitz plot. • Get CF Dalitz model from time-independent fit to RS data • Get DCS Dalitz model & mixing params from time-dependent fit to WS data Contours: 68.3%, 95%, 99%, 99.9% Consistent with no mixing at 0.8% Mixing results: BaBar preliminary384 fb-1 [x′′, y′′ since phase is in general different from D0 → K+ π−]

  22. D0 → KS π+ π− • Another time-dependent Dalitz plotanalysis -- but this time have: • CF contributions (e.g. D0 → K*− π+) • DCS contributions (e.g. D0 → K*+ π−) • CP-even contribution (e.g. D0 → KS ρ0) • CP-odd contribution (e.g. D0 → KS f0) • ... all in the same Dalitz plot, interfering. • ⇒ Can measure relative phases -- and hence x, y -- directly! Belle Mixing results assuming no CPV: Belle No evidence for CPV found: 95% CL contours Belle, 540 fb-1 PRL 99, 131803 (2007)

  23. Look for D0 → K(*)+ l− νl Pro: No DCS contribution! Theoretically clean Con: Missing ν makes reconstruction/selection harder Semi-leptonic decays • Belle • arXiv:0802.2952, 492 fb-1 (preliminary) • Electron & muon modes • Kinematic constraints (Ecm, mD, mν) improve ν reconstruction • D0 proper lifetime cut • BaBar • PRD 76:014018 (2007), 344 fb-1 • Electron mode only • Use double-tag to suppress background Data (passing all cuts) Data (recoil cut sideband) No evidence for mixing. 90% CL: RM in (−13, +12) ×10−4 No evidence for mixing. 90% CL: RM < 6.1 ×10−4

  24. HFAG Combined results arXiv:0803.0082 Mixing Indirect CP violation No-mixing point excluded at 6.7σ No-CPV point still allowed at 1σ World average: World average:

  25. Time-integrated CPV results • Recent results: • D0 → K+K−, π+π− • D0 → K+K−π0, π+π−π0 • Older result (not covered here): • D0 → K+K−π+ -- PRD 71, 091101 (2005)

  26. CPV in D0 → K+K−/π+π− CP asymmetry: Experimentally tricky to measure with per-mille systematics: • Tagging efficiency asymmetry for soft pion in D*+ → D0 π+ studied with control sample of D0 → K−π+ events. • Crucial to get this from data, not MC! • Control sample corrected for K+/K− and π+/π− efficiency asymmetry as function of polar angle and momentum. MC simulation • Forward-backward production asymmetry • From Z/γ interference & higher-order QED diagrams • These effects are odd in cos(θ*) • CP asymmetry is even in cos(θ*) • ... so measure aCP in bins of |cos(θ*)| & odd terms vanish 385/fb, PRL 100,061803 (2008)

  27. CPV in D0 → K+K−/π+π− Plotting CP asymmetry in bins of |cos(θ*)|: Systematics Last bin excluded (due to acceptance) Results are consistent with zero CP asymmetry: 385/fb, PRL 100,061803 (2008)

  28. CPV in D0 → K+K−π0/π+π−π0 • Move to three-body mode -- we now have more tools: • Look for rate asymmetry in bins of |cos(θ*)| as before • Look for asymmetry in distribution. • Second point is crucial -- CP asymmetry may pop up in one corner of phase space or in one intermediate resonance. • Remember: Direct CPV is not universal. • Localized asymmetry may be washed out -- or even cancelled -- when looking at integral over whole phase space. • Several ways used to check for distribution asymmetry: • Bin-by-bin difference in normalized Dalitz plot (model-independent) • Difference in angular moments (model-independent) • Differences in amplitudes & phases of components in Dalitz plot fit

  29. CPV in D0 → K+K−π0/π+π−π0 Angular distribution asymmetry(first three Legendre polynomial moments only shown here): Look for distribution asymmetry in normalized Dalitz plots: Efficiency-corrected Dalitz plots P(χ2) = 32.8% P(χ2) = 16.6% 385/fb, arXiv:0802.4035 accepted by PRD-RC Normalized residuals No evidence of CP violation found No evidence of CP violation found

  30. c.f. Belle: [arXiv:0801.2439, 532/fb] CPV in D0 → K+K−π0/π+π−π0 Asymmetries in phase-space-integrated rates? Asymmetries in Dalitz plot fits? 385/fb, arXiv:0802.4035 accepted by PRD-RC D0 → π+π−π0 D0 → K+K−π0 No evidence of CP violation found Thus, no evidence for CP violation found in any of the four tests. No evidence of CP violation found

  31. Summary • BaBar has done a lot of interesting charm physics • ... and so can you! • Hopefully both results & methods will be helpful for LHCb. • D0 mixing now established (world avg: 6.7σ level) • Still large uncertainties on parameters -- more work to do • Observed mixing rate consistent with SM prediction... • ... within large theory uncertainty... • ... and at upper end of expected range. • No sign of CP violation (direct or indirect) in charm yet • Limits still well above SM expectations -- room for NP. • Lots of other BaBar charm results I glossed over...

More Related