New Physics Indications viewed by UTfit Denis Derkach IN2P3/LAL-Orsay On behalf of the UTfit collaboration http://www.utfit.org

Input values and predictions Outline SM UT analysis Input values and predictions New physics model independent UT analysis

Constraints used (angles) h r a Bpp, BKp, BKK BJ/Yp, BJ/YK sin(2b) cos(2b) BDK, BDp 2b+g BDK, BDp g = 0.140 ± 0.029  = 0.340 ± 0.015 BDK

Constraints used (sides and others) exclusive BDln (Bp(r)ln) determination inclusive bc (bu) determination |Vub/Vcb| indirect CP violation in KL decays eK Dmd Bd mixing Bd,s mixing Dmd/Dms = 0.126 ± 0.027  = 0.380 ± 0.021

The value of each constraint can be SM fit All the constraints are compatible showing another success of the Standard Model The value of each constraint can be “predicted” from the SM description using all other inputs and compared to the experimental measurement of this constraint. = 0.132 ± 0.020  = 0.358 ± 0.012

g inputs and |Vub/ Vcb| constraints are “orthogonal”. Well compatible with the prediction from SM Color code: agreement between the predicted values and the measurements at better than 1, 2, ...n sigmas They are derived from tree-level process  Select r-h values valid in most of the New Physics extensions.

Vub and Vcb measurements Exclusive Bp(r)ln  |Vub|= (35.0±4.0)10-4 Inclusive buln  |Vub|= (39.9±1.5±4.0)10-4 SM prediction |Vub|= (35.5±1.4)10-4 Vcb Exclusive BDln  |Vcb|= (39.0±0.9)10-4 Inclusive bcln  |Vcb|= (41.54±0.44±0.58)10-4 SM prediction |Vcb|= (42.7±1.0)10-3 Exclusive measurements are using LQCD form factors. Flat error for “model spread” for inclusive determination

a measurements SM predictions measurements a=91.4±6.1 a=85.4±3.7

Dms, Dmd measurements Dmd=(0.507±0.005) ps-1 |Vtd|/|Vcb|~Rt from Bd and Bs mixing (which are loop mediated) measurement SM predictions Dms=(17.77±0.12) ps-1 Dms=(18.3±1.3) ps-1

eK measurements measurement eK=(2.22±0.01)·10-3 SM prediction eK=(1.92±0.18)·10-3

Sin(2b) and BR(Btn) measurements SM predictions sin(2b)=0.771±0.036 SM predictions BR(Btn)=(0.805±0.071) ·10-4 To accommodate Br(Btn) we need large value of Vub To accommodate sin2 we need lower value of Vub

Summary Table of the SM pulls Prediction Measurement Pull a, º (85.4±3.7) (91.4±6.1) -0.4 sin(2b) (0.771±0.036) (0.654±0.026) -0.8 g , º (69.6±3.1) (74±11) +2.2 Vub, 103 (3.55±0.14) (3.76±0.2) -0.9 Vcb, 103 (42.69±0.99) (40.83±0.45) +1.6 eK (1.92±0.18) (2.23±0.010) -1.7 BR(Btn), 104 (0.805±0.071) (1.72±0.28) -3.2 Dms, ps-1 (17.77±0.12) (18.3±1.3)

Generic NP parameterization Since the fit is over constrained, we can introduce new parameters added in order to parameterize generic NP DF=2 processes in all sectors In case of absence of NP effects, Ci=1, fi=0 SM NP DF=2 = 0.132 ± 0.020  = 0.358 ± 0.012 = 0.135 ± 0.040  = 0.374 ± 0.026 and h generic NP fit are not different for SM ones and the error are twice larger

NP parameters fit result, Bd and K sectors For K mixing, the NP parameters are found in agreement with the SM expectations CeK=1.05±0.12 For Bd mixing, the phase fBd is found 1.8s away from the SM expectation reflecting tensions in sin2b CBd=0.95±0.14 fBd=(-3.1±1.7)º ~1.8s away from SM

NP parameters fit result, Bs sector ~3.1s away from SM CBs=0.94±0.19 [0.78,1.16]@95% fBd=(-19.8±8)ºU(-69±7)º [-38,-6] U [-81,-51] @95% prob. Possible hint to some effects of NP? But CDF new measurements reduces the significance of the disagreement

NP parameters fit result ANP/ASM ~0-30% @95% prob. ANP/ASM still can be as big as 2

Conclusion CKM matrix is the dominant source of flavour mixing and CP violation s(r)~15% s(h) ~4% General UTA provides precise determinations of CKM parameters and NP contributions to DF=2 amplitudes. Nevertheless there are tensions here and there that should be continuously and quantitatively monitored : sin2b (2.2s), eK (1.7s) , Br(Btn) (3.2s). To render these tests more effective we need to improved the single implied measurements but also the predictions. Model Independent fit show some discrepancy on the NP phase parameters Bd = -(3.1 ± 1.7)o Bs = (-20 ± 8)oU(-68 ± 8)o Effect in CPV in Bs mixing: it would require new sources of flavour & CPV, natural in many extensions of SM