1 Charm Mixing and Strong Phases Using Quantum Correlations at CLEO-c Werner Sun, Cornell University 5-8 August 2007, Charm07 Workshop, Ithaca, NY Motivation.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Sharpening the Physics case for Charm at SuperB D. Asner, G. Batignani, I. Bigi, F. Martinez-Vidal, N. Neri, A. Oyanguren, A. Palano, G. Simi Charm AWG.
Advertisements

Electroweak b physics at LEP V. Ciulli INFN Firenze.
Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar Bryan Fulsom SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory 35 th International Conference on High Energy Physics Paris, France.
Charm results overview1 Charm...the issues Lifetime Rare decays Mixing Semileptonic sector Hadronic decays (Dalitz plot) Leptonic decays Multi-body channels.
Bo XinRare D Semileptonic Decays 14/23/2006 Studies of Rare Semileptonic D Meson Decays  Introduction  Analysis Technique  Testing the procedure  Results.
1 Review of Charm Hadronic Decays and Lifetimes Werner Sun, Cornell University (and CLEO-c) 7 th International Conference on Hyperons, Charm, and Beauty.
Determination of and related results from B A B AR Masahiro Morii, Harvard University on behalf of the B A B AR Collaboration |V cb | MESON 2004, Krakow,
Title Gabriella Sciolla Massachusetts Institute of Technology Representing the BaBar Collaboration Beauty Assisi, June 20-24, 2005 Searching for.
CHARM-2007, Ithaca, NY Alexey Petrov (WSU) Alexey A. Petrov Wayne State University Table of Contents: Introduction CP-violation in charmed mesons Observables.
Sep. 29, 2006 Henry Band - U. of Wisconsin 1 Hadronic Charm Decays From B Factories Henry Band University of Wisconsin 11th International Conference on.
A. BondarModel-independent φ 3 measurement August 6, 2007Charm 2007, Cornell University1/15 γ/φ 3 model-independent Dalitz analysis (Dalitz+CP tagged Dalitz.
16 May 2002Paul Dauncey - BaBar1 Measurements of CP asymmetries and branching fractions in B 0   +  ,  K +  ,  K + K  Paul Dauncey Imperial College,
Marina Artuso 1 Beyond the Standard Model: the clue from charm Marina Artuso, Syracuse University  D o D o, D o  K -  + K-K- K+K+ ++  K-K-
DPF Victor Pavlunin on behalf of the CLEO Collaboration DPF-2006 Results from four CLEO Y (5S) analyses:  Exclusive B s and B Reconstruction at.
Measurements of Radiative Penguin B Decays at BaBar Jeffrey Berryhill University of California, Santa Barbara For the BaBar Collaboration 32 nd International.
Aug 6, Charm γ/φ 3 Impact from CLEO-c Using CP-Tagged D→K S,L ππ Decays Eric White - University of Illinois Qing He - University of Rochester for.
1 B s  J/  update Lifetime Difference & Mixing phase Avdhesh Chandra for the CDF and DØ collaborations Beauty 2006 University of Oxford, UK.
Recent Charm Results From CLEO Searches for D 0 -D 0 mixing D 0 -> K 0 s  +  - D 0 ->K *+ l - Conclusions Alex Smith University of Minnesota.
CHARM 2007, Cornell University, Aug. 5-8, 20071Steven Blusk, Syracuse University D Leptonic Decays near Production Threshold Steven Blusk Syracuse University.
1 Charm Decays at Threshold Sheldon Stone, Syracuse University.
1 Absolute Hadronic D 0 and D + Branching Fractions at CLEO-c Werner Sun, Cornell University for the CLEO-c Collaboration CKM 2005 Workshop on the Unitarity.
1 D 0 D 0 Quantum Correlations, Mixing, and Strong Phases Werner Sun, Cornell University for the CLEO-c Collaboration Particles and Nuclei International.
Charmonium Decays in CLEO Tomasz Skwarnicki Syracuse University I will concentrate on the recent results. Separate talk covering Y(4260).
Sin2  1 /sin2  via penguin processes Beauty 2006 Sep.25-29, Univ. of Oxford Yutaka Ushiroda (KEK)
B Decays to Open Charm (an experimental overview) Yury Kolomensky LBNL/UC Berkeley Flavor Physics and CP Violation Philadelphia, May 18, 2002.
7/4/08 Flavour physics at CLEO-c - Jim Libby 1 Jim Libby (University of Oxford) On behalf of the CLEO-c collaboration  Introduction to CLEO-c  Measurements.
1 Charm Mixing and Strong Phases Using Quantum Correlations at CLEO-c Werner Sun, Cornell University 5-8 August 2007, Charm07 Workshop, Ithaca, NY (Revised.
8th December 2007CLEO physics fest1 Coherence factor analyses Jim Libby, Andrew Powell and Guy Wilkinson (University of Oxford)
CP violation at Belle Kenkichi Miyabayashi for Belle collaboration (Nara Women’s University) 2003/Oct./14th BEAUTY2003.
Strong Phase Measurements – Towards g at CLEO-c Andrew Powell (University of Oxford) On behalf of the CLEO-c collaboration D measurements relevant to determining.
Measurement of B (D + →μ + ν μ ) and the Pseudoscalar Decay Constant f D at CLEO István Dankó Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute representing the CLEO Collaboration.
Donatella Lucchesi1 B Physics Review: Part II Donatella Lucchesi INFN and University of Padova RTN Workshop The 3 rd generation as a probe for new physics.
D 0 D 0 bar Mixing and CP Violation at BESIII Kanglin He June 2006, Beijing.
Max Baak1 Impact of Tag-side Interference on Measurement of sin(2  +  ) with Fully Reconstructed B 0  D (*)  Decays Max Baak NIKHEF, Amsterdam For.
 Candidate events are selected by reconstructing a D, called a tag, in several hadronic modes  Then we reconstruct the semileptonic decay in the system.
Legacy Book Meeting, KEK, Japan, 5/17/2010 Brian Meadows D 0 D 0 Mixing and CP Violation Results from the B Factories Bostjan Golob, Brian Meadows, Ikaros.
Rare B  baryon decays Jana Thayer University of Rochester CLEO Collaboration EPS 2003 July 19, 2003 Motivation Baryon production in B decays Semileptonic.
M. Adinolfi - University of Bristol1/19 Valencia, 15 December 2008 High precision probes for new physics through CP-violating measurements at LHCb M. Adinolfi.
25/9/2007 LHCb UK meeting 1 ADS determination of γ with B→(Kπ) D K, B→(hh) D K and B→(K3π) D K Jim Libby (University of Oxford)
CP violation measurements with the ATLAS detector E. Kneringer – University of Innsbruck on behalf of the ATLAS collaboration BEACH2012, Wichita, USA “Determination.
Gavril Giurgiu, Carnegie Mellon, FCP Nashville B s Mixing at CDF Frontiers in Contemporary Physics Nashville, May Gavril Giurgiu – for CDF.
Physical Program of Tau-charm Factory V.P.Druzhinin, Budker INP, Novosibirsk.
1 D 0 D 0 Quantum Correlations, Mixing, and Strong Phases David Asner, Carleton University for the CLEO-c Collaboration Discoveries in Flavour Physics.
Pavel Krokovny Heidelberg University on behalf of LHCb collaboration Introduction LHCb experiment Physics results  S measurements  prospects Conclusion.
Pavel Krokovny, KEK Measurement of      1 Measurements of  3  Introduction Search for B +  D (*)0 CP K +  3 and r B from B +  D 0 K + Dalitz.
 3 measurements by Belle Pavel Krokovny KEK Introduction Introduction Apparatus Apparatus Method Method Results Results Summary Summary.
The Collaboration Univ. of California-Davis, CBPF-Rio de Janeiro, CINVESTAV-Mexico City, Univ. Colorado-Boulder, FERMILAB, Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati,
D 0 - D 0 Mixing at B A B AR Amir Rahimi The Ohio State University For B A B AR Collaboration.
Charm Physics Potential at BESIII Kanglin He Jan. 2004, Beijing
CHARM MIXING and lifetimes on behalf of the BaBar Collaboration XXXVIIth Rencontres de Moriond  March 11th, 2002 at Search for lifetime differences in.
Scalar and pseudoscalar mesons at BESII Xiaoyan SHEN (Representing BES Collaboration) Institute of High Energy Physics, CAS, China Charm06, June 5-7, 2006,
Semileptonic D Decays from CLEO and BELLE Yongsheng Gao Southern Methodist University (CLEO Collaboration) ICHEP04, Beijing, Aug. 16 ─ 23, 2004.
CP Violation Studies in B 0  D (*)  in B A B A R and BELLE Dominique Boutigny LAPP-CNRS/IN2P3 HEP2003 Europhysics Conference in Aachen, Germany July.
1 EPS03, July 17-23, 2003Lorenzo Vitale Time dependent CP violation studies in D(*)D(*) and J/ψ K* Lorenzo Vitale INFN Trieste On behalf of BaBar and Belle.
Sandra Malvezzi - Charm Meson Results in Focus 1 Sandra Malvezzi I.N.F.N. Milano Meson Lifetimes, Decays, Mixing and CPV in FOCUS.
1 Koji Hara (KEK) For the Belle Collaboration Time Dependent CP Violation in B 0 →  +  - Decays [hep-ex/ ]
Measurements of sin2  1 in processes at Belle CKM workshop at Nagoya 2006/12/13 Yu Nakahama (University of Tokyo) for the Belle Collaboration Analysis.
Measurement of  2 /  using B   Decays at Belle and BaBar Alexander Somov CKM 06, Nagoya 2006 Introduction (CP violation in B 0   +   decays) Measurements.
1 Absolute Hadronic D 0 and D + Branching Fractions at CLEO-c Werner Sun, Cornell University for the CLEO-c Collaboration Particles and Nuclei International.
Andrzej Bożek for Belle Coll. I NSTITUTE OF N UCLEAR P HYSICS, K RAKOW ICHEP Beijing 2004  3 and sin(2  1 +  3 ) at Belle  3 and sin(2  1 +  3 )
New Results in Charmless B Meson Decays at New Results in Charmless B Meson Decays at Justin Albert Univ. of Victoria 20 July, 2013 Representing the BaBar.
Cabibbo-Allowed and Doubly-Cabibbo Suppressed D  K  Decays Steven Blusk Syracuse University on behalf of the CLEO Collaboration XXXIII International.
Charm Mixing and D Dalitz analysis at BESIII SUN Shengsen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing (for BESIII Collaboration) 37 th International Conference.
CLEO-c Workshop 1 Data Assumptions Tagging Rare decays D mixing CP violation Off The Wall Beyond SM Physics at a CLEO Charm Factory (some food for thought)
Mats Selen, HEP Measuring Strong Phases, Charm Mixing, and DCSD at CLEO-c Mats Selen, University of Illinois HEP 2005, July 22, Lisboa, Portugal.
Measurements of  1 /  Flavor Physics and CP Violation 2010, May 25, 2010, Torino, Italy, K. Sumisawa (KEK)
Present status of Charm Measurements
Time-dependent analyses at D0-D0 threshold
CP violation in the charm and beauty systems at LHCb
B  at B-factories Guglielmo De Nardo Universita’ and INFN Napoli
Presentation transcript:

1 Charm Mixing and Strong Phases Using Quantum Correlations at CLEO-c Werner Sun, Cornell University 5-8 August 2007, Charm07 Workshop, Ithaca, NY Motivation Technique Results

5-8 August 2007, Charm07 Workshop, Ithaca, NYWerner Sun, Cornell University 2 Charm Mixing So Far  H 12,H 21  0  flavor eigenstates  mass eigenstates.  Previous studies:  Direct lifetime measurements:  Compare K  K  and     with K   .  Time-dependent Dalitz analysis of K 0 S     :  Intermediate CP-eigenstates give y.  Interference between CP+ and CP  gives x.  Time-dependent wrong-sign rate D 0  K    :  Interfering DCS and mixing amplitudes modulate exponential decay time.  Ambiguity from strong phase: y’ = y cos  x sin   Time-dependence gives 1 st -order x/y sensitivity:  Need boosted D mesons to resolve decay time. / =  re  i  Pre-winter 2007

5-8 August 2007, Charm07 Workshop, Ithaca, NYWerner Sun, Cornell University 3 Quantum Correlations at CLEO-c  At CLEO-c, interference comes for free.  Appears in time-integrated yields.  1 st -order sensitivity to y:  Reconstruct K  K  (CP+) decay  other side must be D 1 (CP  )  Inclusive K  K  rate probes y.  First measurement of cos  :  Reconstruct K  K  with K     K    must come from D 1 (CP  ). e  e    *  D 0 D 0 C =  1 Forbidden by CP conservation CP+ CP  Maximal enhancement CP+ CP  Forbidden if no mixing KK KK Interference of CF with DCS KK CP± KK Unaffected X K  l  Effective B at  (3770)  (3770)

5-8 August 2007, Charm07 Workshop, Ithaca, NYWerner Sun, Cornell University 4 Coherent vs. Incoherent Decay  We use yields for  single tags (one D reconstructed)  double tags (D and D reconstructed)  Compare QC effective B with incoherent B to give y and cos .  Sources of incoherent B :  Externally measured B s.  Semileptonic tags at  (3770) (immune to QC).  CP violation neglected. DT KK e+e+ CP+ CP  KK R M /r 2 KK 1+2r 2 (1  2cos 2  ) ee 11 CP rcos  + r 2 10 CP  1  2rcos  + r ST 1 + 2yrcos  + r  y 1 + y quantum-correlated rate incoherent rate DD Xi DD ji Yield / No-QC prediction 012 Quantum correlations are seen in data! ST DT

5-8 August 2007, Charm07 Workshop, Ithaca, NYWerner Sun, Cornell University 5 Analysis Overview  Dataset: 281 pb -1 = 10 6 C-odd D 0 D 0.  Combine inputs + error matrix in a  2 fit.  ST and DT yields  Efficiencies (signal and background)  Crossfeed/background estimates  Systematic errors (small compared to stat.)  External B and y (‘) measurements  Single tag yields (8):  Fully-reconstructed DT yields (24):  Inclusive e  or e  vs. hadronic (14):  K 0 L  0 (=CP+) vs. hadronic (5): KK 1 + 2yrcos  + r 2 KK KKKK 1  y  K0S00K0S00 K0S0K0S0 1  y K0SK0S K0SK0S KK KK (1) 1+2r 2 (1-2cos 2  )+r 4 KK KK (1)(x 2 + y 2 )/2 KK KK (1)(x 2 + y 2 )/2 KK CP+(3) 1 + 2rcos  + r 2 KK CP  (3) 1  2rcos  + r 2 CP+ CP  (9)2 ee KK (1)1 ee KK 1 e  /e  CP+(6)1 e  /e  CP  (6)1 K0L0K0L0 KK (2) 1 + 2rcos  + r 2 K0L0K0L0 CP  (3)2 CP+ CP 

5-8 August 2007, Charm07 Workshop, Ithaca, NYWerner Sun, Cornell University 6 Yield Measurements  Fully-reconstructed single tags:  Fit beam-constrained mass distribution.  Fully-reconstructed double tags:  Two fully-reconstructed STs  Count events in 2D M BC plane.  Inclusive semileptonic DTs:  One fully-reconstructed ST  Plus one electron candidate  Fit e ± momentum spectrum  K 0 L  0 double tags:  One fully-reconstructed ST  Plus one  0 candidate  Compute missing mass-squared  Signal peaks at M 2 (K 0 ).

5-8 August 2007, Charm07 Workshop, Ithaca, NYWerner Sun, Cornell University 7 External Measurements  External inputs dramatically improve y and cos  precision.  All correlations among measurements included in fit.  Standard fit includes:  Info on r needed to obtain cos  :  R WS = r 2 + ry’ + R M  R M = (x 2 + y 2 )/2  Assume xsin  = 0  y’~= ycos   CP-eigenstate B s:  Also K  because correlated in PDG  Extended fit averages y and y’:  CP+ lifetimes (y)  K 0 S     Dalitz analysis (x, y)  K  CP-conserving fits (y’, r 2, R M )  Includes covariance matrices from Belle, BABAR, CLEO (thanks!)

5-8 August 2007, Charm07 Workshop, Ithaca, NYWerner Sun, Cornell University 8 Fit Results  Likelihood curves +95% CL ULs  Standard fit: cos  > 0.54 |sin  | < 0.72  Extended fit: cos  > 0.38 |sin  | < 0.84 ParameterStandard FitExtended Fit N D  D   10 6  1.046±0.019± ±0.019±0.012 y (10 -3 )  33 ± 16 ± 10 [4.3 ± 1.3 ± 0.7] r 2 (10 -3 )[6.6 ± 1.9 ± 0.8][3.39 ± 0.08 ± 0.00] cos  1.03 ± 0.19 ± ± 0.32 ± 0.04 x 2 (10 -3 ) [  0.6 ± 1.3 ± 0.7] [0.05 ± 0.05 ± 0.00] B (K    ) (%) [3.77 ± 0.07 ± 0.03] B (K  K  ) (10 -3 )[3.81 ± 0.09 ± 0.03][3.88 ± 0.08 ± 0.03] B (     ) (10 -3 ) [1.35 ± 0.03 ± 0.01][1.36 ± 0.03 ± 0.01] B (K 0 S  0  0 )(10 -3 ) 8.08 ± 0.34 ± ± 0.32 ± 0.52 B (K 0 S  0 ) (%) [1.18 ± 0.03 ± 0.03][1.14 ± 0.03 ± 0.03] B (K 0 S  ) (10 -3 ) [4.56 ± 0.21 ± 0.25][4.41 ± 0.19 ± 0.25] B (K 0 S  ) (%) [1.16 ± 0.04 ± 0.06][1.11 ± 0.03 ± 0.05] B (X  e  ) (%) 6.55 ± 0.16 ± ± 0.16 ± 0.17 B (K 0 L  0 ) (%) [0.98 ± 0.03 ± 0.02][1.02 ± 0.03 ± 0.02]  2 /ndof 27.8/4658.1/58 B measurements do not supersede other CLEO-c results! [ ] = with external input CLEO PRELIMINARY

5-8 August 2007, Charm07 Workshop, Ithaca, NYWerner Sun, Cornell University 9 Comments on Results  Information in inputs: observe change in parameter errors when removed from fit.  y: [Info: 50% KK ST+ B ext, 20%  ST+ B ext, 15% e ± /CP DTs]  2.1  discrepancy between CLEO-c and world average.  Checked extensively for bias; none found  statistical fluctuation.  cos  : [Info: 45% K  /CP+ DTs, 45% K  /CP  DTs]  Strong nonlinearity introduced by R WS ~= r 2 + 2yrcos  : 1-  likelihood contours in y vs. cos  (excludes xsin  error) Extended fit Error on cos  depends on value of y Standard fit y’ not incl. Standard fit

5-8 August 2007, Charm07 Workshop, Ithaca, NYWerner Sun, Cornell University 10 Other Systematic Effects (I)  C+ contamination of initial state (not expected, cf. A. Petrov):  e  e    D 0 D 0 is C+, but photon must be radiated from D 0 or D 0, or from  (3770) itself.  ISR, FSR, bremsstrahlung photons do not flip C eigenvalue.  Allow fit to determine C+ fraction.  Include same-CP double tags (CP±/CP±).  Allowed decay only for C+.  All yields consistent with zero.  Fit each yield to sum of C  and C+ contributions.  Results: C+/C  =  ±  No evidence for C+.  Other results unchanged.

5-8 August 2007, Charm07 Workshop, Ithaca, NYWerner Sun, Cornell University 11 Other Systematic Effects (II)  Standard fit, for  (xsin  ) = ±0.0034:  cos  = 1.03 ± 0.19 (stat) ± 0.08 (syst) ± 0.02 (xsin  )  y =  ± (stat) ± 0.10 (syst) ± 0.00 (xsin  )  Extended fit,  (xsin  ) still under investigation:  cos  = 0.93 ± 0.32 (stat) ± 0.04 (syst) ± 0.?? (xsin  )  y = ± (stat) ± (syst) ± 0.00?? (xsin  )  Alternative: fit for xsin  by sacrificing improvement in y precision.  Variation of cos  and y with xsin  —include additional systematic error: CLEO PRELIMINARY Standard fit Extended fit

5-8 August 2007, Charm07 Workshop, Ithaca, NYWerner Sun, Cornell University 12 Summary  First measurement of cos   (needed to interpret other D mixing results).  Allows y’ to be added to world-average y, but with the assumption xsin  = 0.  Can measure xsin  using C+ D 0 D 0 pairs from e  e    D 0 D 0 at E cm = 4170 MeV.  Demonstrated new technique for charm mixing studies.  Time-independent 1 st -order sensitivity to mixing parameters and phases.  Different systematics from other experiments.  With full CLEO-c dataset (E cm = 3770 & 4170 MeV) expect:  (cos  )~±0.1—0.2  (y)~±0.01  (xsin  )~±0.03  Extended fit:  cos  = 0.93 ± 0.32 (stat) ± 0.04 (syst) ± 0.?? (xsin  )  y = ± (stat) ± (syst) ± 0.00?? (xsin  )  Standard fit:  cos  = 1.03 ± 0.19 (stat) ± 0.08 (syst) ± 0.02 (xsin  )  y =  ± (stat) ± 0.10 (syst) ± 0.00 (xsin  ) CLEO PRELIMINARY

5-8 August 2007, Charm07 Workshop, Ithaca, NYWerner Sun, Cornell University 13 BACKUP SLIDES

5-8 August 2007, Charm07 Workshop, Ithaca, NYWerner Sun, Cornell University 14 Previous Results (Oct 2005)  PANIC’05 prelim. results:  281 pb -1.  No systematics.  Only one CP  mode.  With r 2 constrained to world average, cos  = 1.08 ±  No other external measurements.  Now:  Added 70% more CP   K 0 S  K 0 S   Added K 0 L  0. Param.ValuePDG04 or CLEO-c NDDNDD (1.09 ± 0.04)x10 6 (1.01 ± 0.02)x10 6 y ± ± r2r ± (3.74 ± 0.18)x10 -3 PDG + Belle + FOCUS rz0.130 ± RMRM (1.74 ± 1.47)x10 -3 < ~1x10 -3 B (K    ) (3.80 ± 0.29)%(3.91 ± 0.12)% B(KK)B(KK)(0.357 ± 0.029)%(0.389 ± 0.012)% B()B() (0.125 ± 0.011)%(0.138 ± 0.005)% B(K0S00)B(K0S00) (0.932 ± 0.087)%(0.89 ± 0.41)% B(K0S0)B(K0S0) (1.27 ± 0.09)%(1.55 ± 0.12)% B (X  e  ) (6.21 ± 0.42)%(6.87 ± 0.28)%

5-8 August 2007, Charm07 Workshop, Ithaca, NYWerner Sun, Cornell University 15  Mode-dependent correlated uncertainties cancel in y and cos , but only if external measurements are not included.  Tracking,  0, , K 0 S, PID, EID efficiency, FSR systematics: use DHad.   E cut,  mass cut, K 0 S mass cut, K 0 S flight significance cut, K 0 S PID.  Peaking background BFs: values and errors from PDG.  Multiple candidates, SL form factor.  Event selection variations:  dominates y and cosd syst error.  Uncorrelated uncertainties:  Fit function variations. Systematic Uncertainties