Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Updates on the determination of $$\vert V_{cb} \vert ,$$ $$R(D^{*})$$ and $$\vert V_{ub} \vert /\vert V_{cb} \vert $$
View through CrossRef
AbstractWe present an updated determination of the values of $$\vert V_{cb} \vert ,$$
|
V
cb
|
,
$$R(D^*)$$
R
(
D
∗
)
and $$\vert V_{ub} \vert /\vert V_{cb} \vert $$
|
V
ub
|
/
|
V
cb
|
based on the new data on semileptonic $$B \rightarrow D^* \ell \nu _\ell $$
B
→
D
∗
ℓ
ν
ℓ
decays by the Belle and Belle-II Collaborations and on the recent theoretical progress in the calculation of the form factors relevant for semileptonic $$B \rightarrow D^* \ell \nu _\ell $$
B
→
D
∗
ℓ
ν
ℓ
and $$B_s \rightarrow K \ell \nu _\ell $$
B
s
→
K
ℓ
ν
ℓ
decays. In particular we present results derived by applying either the Dispersive Matrix (DM) method of Di Carlo et al. (Phys Rev D 104:054502, 2021), Martinelli et al. (Phys Rev D 104:094512, 2021), Martinelli et al. (Phys Rev D 105:034503, 2022), Martinelli et al. (Eur Phys J C 82:1083, 2022), Martinelli et al. (JHEP 08:022, 2022) and Martinelli et al. (Phys Rev D 106:093002, 2022) or the more standard Boyd–Grinstein–Lebed (BGL) (Boyd et al. in Phys Rev D 56:6895, 1997) approach to the most recent values of the form factors determined in lattice QCD. Using all the available lattice results for the form factors from the DM method we get the theoretical value $$R^{\textrm{th}}(D^*) = 0.262 \pm 0.009$$
R
th
(
D
∗
)
=
0.262
±
0.009
and we extract from a bin-per-bin analysis of the experimental data the value $$\vert V_{cb} \vert = (39.92 \pm 0.64) \cdot 10^{-3}.$$
|
V
cb
|
=
(
39.92
±
0.64
)
·
10
-
3
.
Our result for $$R(D^*)$$
R
(
D
∗
)
is consistent with the latest experimental world average $$R^{\textrm{exp}}(D^*) = 0.284 \pm 0.012$$
R
exp
(
D
∗
)
=
0.284
±
0.012
(HFLAV Collaboration in Preliminary average of R(D) and $$R(D^*)$$
R
(
D
∗
)
as for Summer 2023. See https://hflav-eos.web.cern.ch/hflav-eos/semi/summer23/html/RDsDsstar/RDRDs.html) at the $$\simeq 1.5\,\sigma $$
≃
1.5
σ
level. Our value for $$\vert V_{cb} \vert $$
|
V
cb
|
is compatible with the latest inclusive determinations $$\vert V_{cb} \vert ^{\textrm{incl}} = (41.97 \pm 0.48) \cdot 10^{-3}$$
|
V
cb
|
incl
=
(
41.97
±
0.48
)
·
10
-
3
(Finauri and Gambino in The $$q^2$$
q
2
moments in inclusive semileptonic B decays. arXiv:2310.20324) and $$\vert V_{cb} \vert ^{\textrm{incl}} = (41.69\pm 0.63) \cdot 10^{-3}$$
|
V
cb
|
incl
=
(
41.69
±
0.63
)
·
10
-
3
(Bernlochner et al. in JHEP 10:068, 2022) within $$\simeq 2.6$$
≃
2.6
and $$\simeq 2.0$$
≃
2.0
standard deviations, respectively. From a reappraisal of the calculations of $$\vert V_{ub} \vert / \vert V_{cb} \vert ,$$
|
V
ub
|
/
|
V
cb
|
,
we also obtain $$\vert V_{ub} \vert / \vert V_{cb} \vert = 0.087\pm 0.009$$
|
V
ub
|
/
|
V
cb
|
=
0.087
±
0.009
in good agreement with the result $$\vert V_{ub} \vert / \vert V_{cb} \vert = 0.0844\pm 0.0056$$
|
V
ub
|
/
|
V
cb
|
=
0.0844
±
0.0056
from the latest FLAG review (Flavour Lattice Averaging Group (FLAG) Collaboration in Phys J C 82:869, 2022).
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Title: Updates on the determination of $$\vert V_{cb} \vert ,$$ $$R(D^{*})$$ and $$\vert V_{ub} \vert /\vert V_{cb} \vert $$
Description:
AbstractWe present an updated determination of the values of $$\vert V_{cb} \vert ,$$
|
V
cb
|
,
$$R(D^*)$$
R
(
D
∗
)
and $$\vert V_{ub} \vert /\vert V_{cb} \vert $$
|
V
ub
|
/
|
V
cb
|
based on the new data on semileptonic $$B \rightarrow D^* \ell \nu _\ell $$
B
→
D
∗
ℓ
ν
ℓ
decays by the Belle and Belle-II Collaborations and on the recent theoretical progress in the calculation of the form factors relevant for semileptonic $$B \rightarrow D^* \ell \nu _\ell $$
B
→
D
∗
ℓ
ν
ℓ
and $$B_s \rightarrow K \ell \nu _\ell $$
B
s
→
K
ℓ
ν
ℓ
decays.
In particular we present results derived by applying either the Dispersive Matrix (DM) method of Di Carlo et al.
(Phys Rev D 104:054502, 2021), Martinelli et al.
(Phys Rev D 104:094512, 2021), Martinelli et al.
(Phys Rev D 105:034503, 2022), Martinelli et al.
(Eur Phys J C 82:1083, 2022), Martinelli et al.
(JHEP 08:022, 2022) and Martinelli et al.
(Phys Rev D 106:093002, 2022) or the more standard Boyd–Grinstein–Lebed (BGL) (Boyd et al.
in Phys Rev D 56:6895, 1997) approach to the most recent values of the form factors determined in lattice QCD.
Using all the available lattice results for the form factors from the DM method we get the theoretical value $$R^{\textrm{th}}(D^*) = 0.
262 \pm 0.
009$$
R
th
(
D
∗
)
=
0.
262
±
0.
009
and we extract from a bin-per-bin analysis of the experimental data the value $$\vert V_{cb} \vert = (39.
92 \pm 0.
64) \cdot 10^{-3}.
$$
|
V
cb
|
=
(
39.
92
±
0.
64
)
·
10
-
3
.
Our result for $$R(D^*)$$
R
(
D
∗
)
is consistent with the latest experimental world average $$R^{\textrm{exp}}(D^*) = 0.
284 \pm 0.
012$$
R
exp
(
D
∗
)
=
0.
284
±
0.
012
(HFLAV Collaboration in Preliminary average of R(D) and $$R(D^*)$$
R
(
D
∗
)
as for Summer 2023.
See https://hflav-eos.
web.
cern.
ch/hflav-eos/semi/summer23/html/RDsDsstar/RDRDs.
html) at the $$\simeq 1.
5\,\sigma $$
≃
1.
5
σ
level.
Our value for $$\vert V_{cb} \vert $$
|
V
cb
|
is compatible with the latest inclusive determinations $$\vert V_{cb} \vert ^{\textrm{incl}} = (41.
97 \pm 0.
48) \cdot 10^{-3}$$
|
V
cb
|
incl
=
(
41.
97
±
0.
48
)
·
10
-
3
(Finauri and Gambino in The $$q^2$$
q
2
moments in inclusive semileptonic B decays.
arXiv:2310.
20324) and $$\vert V_{cb} \vert ^{\textrm{incl}} = (41.
69\pm 0.
63) \cdot 10^{-3}$$
|
V
cb
|
incl
=
(
41.
69
±
0.
63
)
·
10
-
3
(Bernlochner et al.
in JHEP 10:068, 2022) within $$\simeq 2.
6$$
≃
2.
6
and $$\simeq 2.
0$$
≃
2.
0
standard deviations, respectively.
From a reappraisal of the calculations of $$\vert V_{ub} \vert / \vert V_{cb} \vert ,$$
|
V
ub
|
/
|
V
cb
|
,
we also obtain $$\vert V_{ub} \vert / \vert V_{cb} \vert = 0.
087\pm 0.
009$$
|
V
ub
|
/
|
V
cb
|
=
0.
087
±
0.
009
in good agreement with the result $$\vert V_{ub} \vert / \vert V_{cb} \vert = 0.
0844\pm 0.
0056$$
|
V
ub
|
/
|
V
cb
|
=
0.
0844
±
0.
0056
from the latest FLAG review (Flavour Lattice Averaging Group (FLAG) Collaboration in Phys J C 82:869, 2022).
Related Results
On Schwarz type inequalities
On Schwarz type inequalities
We show Schwarz type inequalities and consider their converses. A continuous function
...
Authentication and Integrity of UEFI Capsule Updates
Authentication and Integrity of UEFI Capsule Updates
The security of firmware updates is a fundamental aspect of protecting modern computing systems from vulnerabilities and malicious threats. UEFI (Unified Extensible Firmware Interf...
Measures for Symmetric Rank-One Updates
Measures for Symmetric Rank-One Updates
Measures of deviation of a symmetric positive definite matrix from the identity are derived. They give rise to symmetric rank-one, SR1, type updates. The measures are motivated by ...
Évaluation des performances agronomiques de douze (12) variétés de niébé vert [Vigna unguiculata (L.) walp.] au Burkina Faso.
Évaluation des performances agronomiques de douze (12) variétés de niébé vert [Vigna unguiculata (L.) walp.] au Burkina Faso.
Objectif : La présente étude vise à une meilleure connaissance du niébé vert par l’évaluation des performances agronomiques de douze (12) variétés. Méthodologie et résultats : Les ...
On a problem of Ivi\'c.
On a problem of Ivi\'c.
Let $\gamma$ denote the imaginary parts of the nontrivial zeros of the Riemann zeta-function $\zeta(s)$. For sufficiently large $T$ and $\varepsilon>0$, Ivi\'c proved that $\sum...
Hodge–Dirac, Hodge-Laplacian and Hodge–Stokes operators in $L^p$ spaces on Lipschitz domains
Hodge–Dirac, Hodge-Laplacian and Hodge–Stokes operators in $L^p$ spaces on Lipschitz domains
This paper concerns Hodge–Dirac operators
D_{{}^\Vert}=d+\underline{\delta}
acting in
...
A note on the unique solvability condition for generalized absolute value matrix equation
A note on the unique solvability condition for generalized absolute value matrix equation
The spectral radius condition \[\rho (\vert A^{-1} \vert\cdot \vert B \vert)<1\]for the unique solvability of generalized absolute value matrix equation (GAVME) \[AX + B \vert X...
Interpolation in self-adjoint settings
Interpolation in self-adjoint settings
We study the operator equation
A
...

