arxiv:hep-ph/ v1 1 Sep 2001

Transcription

1 hep-ph/191 DPNU-1-21 How well can we predict CP asymmetry in B ππ, Kπ decays? A. I. Sanda and Kazumasa Ukai Department of Physics, Nagoya University, Nagoya, , Japan arxiv:hep-ph/191v1 1 Sep 21 Abstract Using the perturbative QCD amplitudes for B ππ and B Kπ, we have performed an extensive study of the parameter space where the theoretical predictions for the branching ratios are consistent with recent experimental data. From this allowed range of parameter space, we predict the mixing induced CP asymmetry for B π + π with about 11% uncertainty and the other CP asymmetries for B ππ, Kπ with 4% 47% uncertainty. These errors are expected to be reduced as we restrict the parameter space by studying other decay modes and by further improvements in the experimental data. PACS index : Hw, 11.1.Hi, Bx I. INTRODUCTION The mixing induced CP asymmetry for B J/ψK S has been shown to depend on only the weak phase φ 1 and there is no uncertainty from hadronic matrix elements [1]. B factory is expected to yield information, not only on B J/ψK S asymmetry but also on various other B meson decays. It has been predicted that B Kπ, ππ decay modes may have large CP asymmetries [2,3]. While branching ratios for these modes are very sensitive to the input parameters, CP asymmetries are expected to be less sensitive. We report here the sensitivity of predicted CP asymmetries in the parameter region restricted by experimental values for the branching ratios. sanda@eken.phys.nagoya-u.ac.jp ukai@eken.phys.nagoya-u.ac.jp 1

2 Thetimedependent CPasymmetry forb (B ) f transition, wheref iscpeigenstate, is given by [4]: a f (t) = ( λ f 2 1)cos( Mt)+2Imλ f sin( Mt), (1) λ f 2 +1 where λ f = (q/p)ρ(f), and ρ(f) is defined by the ratio of the decay amplitudes, ρ(f) = A(B f)/a(b f). For the sake of convenience, we denote the direct CP asymmetry proportional to cos( Mt) by a dir (f) and the mixing induced CP asymmetry proportional to sin( Mt) by a mix (f), a dir (f) = λ f 2 1 λ f 2 +1, a mix(f) = 2Imλ f λ f (2) In general, a decay amplitude has two kinds of contributions: so-called tree amplitude; and penguin amplitude. The decay amplitude for B f can be written as A(B f) = ξ T T ξ P P, (3) where ξ T,P are Kobayashi-Maskawa(KM) matrix elements, and T,P are decay amplitudes with strong final state interaction phases for tree and penguin contributions, respectively. For example, ξ T = V ub V ud, ξ P = V tb V td for B π + π, and ξ T = V ub V us, ξ P = V tb V ts for B K + π. Defining CP transformation by CP B = B and CP f = η f f, the decay amplitude for the charge conjugated mode, B f, can be written as Thus the general expression for λ f is given as A(B f) = η f (ξt T ξ PP). (4) λ f = η f e i2φ 1 r ξr amp e iarg(ξ P/ξ T ) 1 r ξ r amp e iarg(ξ P/ξ T ), (5) where r ξ ξ P /ξ T, r amp P/T, and φ arg(vtb V tdξt ). In the above expression, φ and arg(ξ P /ξ T ) have to be invariant under any rotation of quark phases, q j e iα j q j. CP asymmetry is classified into the following four types depending on the relationship between tree and penguin contributions. case 1. If ξ P has the same weak phase as ξ T, arg(ξ P /ξ T ) =, the hadronic matrix elements are canceled in λ f. Then the direct CP asymmetry vanishes and the mixing induced CP asymmetry is strictly given by the weak phase φ, a dir (f) =, a mix (f) = η f sin(2φ). (6) In the B J/ψK S decay mode, this is the case [1]. The experimental data a mix (J/ψK S ) makes it possible to determine the weak phase φ 1 = π arg(v tb V tdv cb V cd ) [5,6]. 2

3 case 2. If the tree contribution is much larger than that of the penguin, ξ T T ξ P P, λ f is expressed only by KM matrix elements just like in the case 1., λ f = η f e i2φ. This leads to the same CP asymmetries as shown in eq.(6). When there is no interference between tree and penguin contribution, the direct CP asymmetry does vanish, and the mixing induced CP asymmetry is directly related to the weak phase φ. case 3. If the penguin contribution is much larger than that of the tree, ξ P P ξ T T, λ f is expressed only by the angle between V tb V td and ξ P, λ f = η f e i2arg(v tb V tdξ P ). (7) In this case, the direct CP asymmetry vanishes, and the mixing induced CP asymmetry is directly related to some weak phase likewise, a dir (f) =, a mix (f) = η f sin(2φ ), (8) where φ arg(v tb V tdξ P ). In the B φk S, K S π decay modes, this is the case. (1) B φk S decay mode: There is no tree contribution in this decay mode, T =. The weak phase φ for this decay mode is defined by ω ds tc in the ds triangle [7], φ = arg(v td V ts V cd V cs) ω ds tc. (9) The CP asymmetry is strictly given by the weak phase ω ds tc, a mix (φk S ) = sin(2ω ds tc). (1) This makes it possible to extract the weak phase ω ds tc from the measurement of the mixing induced CP asymmetry a mix (φk S ). Here ω ds tc is related to φ 1 as follows, ω ds tc = φ 1 +ω sb ct, (11) where ω sb ct arg(v cs V cb /V tsv tb ) = π +O(λ2 ). a mix (φk S ) sin2(φ 1 ω sb ct) implies the presence of new physics [8,9]. (2) B K S π decay mode: While we realize that it is difficult to measure the time dependence of a KS π at current B factories, we will show that B K S π decay mode satisfies ξ T T / ξ P P Here ξ T = V cd Vcs V ub V us, ξ P = V cd Vcs V tb V ts, where V cd Vcs factor comes from the K -K mixing. Then, the mixing induced CP asymmetry for B K S π decay mode is given by the weak phase ω ds tc, a mix (K S π ) = sin(2ωtc ds ). (12) 3

4 Eq.(12) has been obtained by Ref. [9]. But they have assumed that B π + π and B K + π decay modes are dominated by the tree and penguin contributions, respectively. These assumptions are inconsistent with experiment. Belle Collaboration has found the ratio of the branching ratios [1], BR(B K + π ) 2BR(B K π ) = (13) Neglecting the tree contribution, isospin analysis leads to a conclusion that the above ratio is equal to 1. The eq.(13) implies that the tree contribution can not be neglected in the B K + π decay mode. case 4. If the penguin contribution is comparable with that of the tree, the direct CP asymmetry does not necessarily vanish, and the mixing induced CP asymmetry has impurities from the penguin or tree contribution. B ππ and B K + π fall into this case. In B ππ decay mode, both KM factors, ξ T and ξ P, have the same order of magnitude, and the tree contribution can interfere with the penguin amplitude. The CP asymmetry is parameterized as 2rsinδsinφ 2 a dir (ππ) =, (14) 1+r 2 +2rcosδcosφ 2 ] a mix (ππ) = (1 a dir (ππ))im [e i(2φ 2) 1+rei(δ φ 2), (15) 1+re i(δ+φ 2) where r ξ = Vtb V td/vub V ud, r r ξ r amp, and δ arg(r amp ) is the relative strong phase. The weak phase φ 2 is defined as the angle between Vub V ud and Vtb V td, ( ) V φ 2 = arg tb V td Vub V. (16) ud Unless we know both the magnitude and phase of r amp, it is impossible to extract the weak phase φ 2 from the data a mix (ππ). In principle, isospin analysis makes it possible to overcome such a pollution without understanding the penguin contribution [11]. In order to perform the isospin analysis, all modes for B ππ have to be measured. However, it is difficult to measure the branching ratio of B (B ) π π, which has background problem as well as a tiny branching ratio of O(1 7 ) [3]. Therefore, in practice, it is hard to perform the isospin analysis. In the B K + π decay mode, ξ T = V ub V us is smaller than ξ P = V tb V ts by O(λ 2 ), and the tree contribution does interfere with penguin. For this mode, a mix (K + π ) = and the direct CP asymmetry is given by, a dir (K + π ) = Γ(B K π + ) Γ(B K + π ) Γ(B K π + )+Γ(B K + π ) 2rsinδsinωtu sb =, (17) 1+r 2 2rcosδcosωtu sb 4

5 where r ξ Vtb V ts/vub V us. The weak phase ωtu sb in the sb triangle is defined as ωsb arg(v ts V ) [7]. Note that the ωsb tu is related to the weak phase φ 3 as follows: tb /V usvub tu = ω sb tu = π φ 3 +ω sb ct ω ds uc, (18) where φ 3 arg( V ub V ud/v cb V cd), ω ds uc arg(v ud V usv cd V cs) = π +O(λ 4 ). We stress that, unless we know the ratio between tree and penguin contribution with the relative strong phase, we can predict neither the a dir nor a mix. Perturbative QCD(PQCD) approach has been developed to theoretically understand semi-leptonic and two-body hadronic B meson decays [12,2,3,13,14]. This approach enables us to calculate both the phase and magnitude of tree and penguin amplitudes. In this paper, applying PQCD approach to B ππ and B Kπ decay modes 1, we predict the ratios r amp between the tree and penguin amplitudes, and give CP asymmetries without relying on the isospin analysis. II. NUMERICAL RESULTS Applying PQCD approach, we take all twist-3 contributions into account, and use the wave functions for light mesons, which were decided from light-cone QCD sum rule, Φ π (x) = 1 2Nc γ 5 { P π φ A π(x)+m π φ P π(x)+m π ( v π n π 1)φ T π(x)}, (19) Φ K (x) = 1 γ 5 { P K φ A K (x)+m Kφ P K (x)+m K( v K n K 1)φ T K (x)}, (2) 2Nc where N c = 3 is color s degree of freedom, v µ π(k), nµ π(k) are normalized to dimensionless unit vectors, and v π(k) P π(k), n π(k) v π(k), v π(k) n π(k) = 1. x is momentum fraction of light quark s momentum in the meson to parent meson s one. m π(k) are defined by the quark condensate, m π = M 2 π m u +m d = 2 qq f 2 π, m K = M2 K qq +ss =, (21) m u +m s fk 2 where they are given as [16], m π = 1.6±.2 GeV, m K = 1.6±.2 GeV, (22) 1 InRef. [2,3], weused thewave functions for light meson which were obtained phenomenologically. In this paper, we consider all twist-3 contributions, and use the wave functions which were decided from light-cone QCD sum rule. The updated results hardly change the previous ones [15]. 5

6 without SU(3) flavour violation. Lorentz scalar wave functions for light mesons, φ A,P,T π(k), are expanded by Gegenbauer polynomials, 2 (1 5ξ2 )+a π 4 15 } 8 (1 14ξ2 +21ξ 4 ), (23) φ A K (x) = f { K 2 6x(1 x) 1 a K 1 2N 3ξ ak 2 3 } c 2 (1 5ξ2 ), (24) { 1 a K(π) p1 1 2 (1 3ξ2 )+a K(π) p2 1 } 8 (3 3ξ2 +35ξ 4 ), (25) φ T K(π)(x) = f { } K(π) 2 (1 2x) 1+a K(π) T 3( 3+5ξ 2 ), (26) 2N c φ A π (x) = f { π 2 6x(1 x) 1 a π 2 2N 3 c φ P K(π)(x) = f K(π) 2 2N c where ξ 2x 1. The coefficients a K(π) p1,p2,t are given as function of m K(π), a K(π) 2 and some input parameters, η 3, ω 3 in Ref. [16], where a K 1, ak(π) 2, a π 4, η 3, and ω 3 are calculated from QCD sum rule within 3% accuracy. B meson s wave function is parameterized by two Lorentz scalar wave functions, Φ B (x,b) = 1 2Nc ( P B +M B )γ 5 [φ B (x,b)+( n + n ) φ B (x,b)], (27) where n + = (1,, T ), n = (,1, T ), and b is the relative separation between b-quark and light quark in the B meson. According to Ref. [13], the contribution from φ B is found to be negligible, and we adopt as the wave function φ B at rest, φ B (x,b) = N B x 2 (1 x) 2 exp [ M2 B x2 2ω 2 B 1 2 (ω Bb) 2 ], (28) where the normalization constant N B is fixed by the decay constant f B, ω B parameterizes the extent of B meson, and ω B is order of the mass difference between B meson and b- quark, ω B O(Λ), Λ M B m b. Note that the decay rate is very sensitive to ω B. Now, the branching ratios [1,17,18] will be used to restrict the parameter space. The combined branching ratios are BR(B π + π ) = (.44±.9) 1 5, BR(B K + π ) = (1.73±.15) 1 5, BR(B + K + π ) = (1.25±.17) 1 5, BR(B + K π + ) = (1.75±.27) 1 5, BR(B K π ) = (1.14±.29) 1 5, (29) which are shown in Figure 1. The errors of the measured branching ratios are still large, and it is too early to put them together. Therefore, we obtain the range of allowed parameters so that the calculated branching ratios are consistent with the data, eq.(29), within 2σ, where 6

7 we scan the parameters in the wave function within.35 ω B.55 GeV, m π = 1.6±.2 GeV, m K = 1.6±.2, and a K 1, ak(π) 2, a π 4, η 3, ω 3 given in Ref. [16] within 3% ranges. The calculated r amp for each final state are shown at Figs.2, and summarized in Table I, where we do not take higher order corrections into account. They show the error for r amp, denoted as r amp / r amp, is 1 26%. In principle, a calculation to O(α 2 s) should be performed. Higher twist contributions should be studied. These will be done in the future. For now, we assume that these corrections will not exceed 3% in the amplitude. The error r amp / r amp is 3 4% with such higher order corrections. Because the factorizable tree amplitude has color suppression in B π π, K π decay modes, and the tree amplitude comes from only annihilation diagram in B + K π + decay mode, their decay modes have r amp O(1). Considering KM factor, r ξ 2.4 for B ππ and r ξ 5 for B Kπ, Table I shows that the penguin contribution is dominant in B K π +, K π decay modes andcomparable withthat oftree inb π π, K + π, andk + π decay modes. In PQCD, the decay amplitudes are given by integrating the convolution of wave functions, hard amplitude, and Wilson s coefficient, over loop momenta. Therefore, the dependence on the wave functions does not cancel completely in the ratio r amp. This leads to blobs shown in Figs.2. Uncertainty in KM factors, decay constants, and parameters in the wave functions exerts an influence on the branching ratios. We elect the central values for the KM factors [19,2] and B meson s decay constant f B = 2±3 MeV [21] in Figs.2. Figs.2 show the value of r amp for each set of parameters which predict the branching ratios to within 2σ of eq.(29). We prefer not to mix the error from the parameter space and the error from the higher order corrections. So, for now, we leave aside the error from the higher order corrections. Fromtheallowedrangeofr amp, wecomputethecpasymmetryusing eqs.(2),(5). Theresults are shown in Figs.3, 4. They are summarized in Table II. Now the higher order corrections are added to the result shown in Table II in quadrature. It results in 4 47% uncertainty for a dir. The measured CP asymmetries have been presented in Ref. [22,23], where Belle Collaboration gives.25 < A(K π ± )(= a dir (K + π )) <.37 at 9% confidence level, and BABAR Collaboration gives A Kπ (= a dir (K + π )) =.7 ±.8 ±.2. They are not inconsistent with our predictions. Although the relative error of r amp is 1 26% without higher order corrections, the mixing induced CP asymmetry for B π + π, a mix (π + π ), has small uncertainty, 6%. This is because the magnitude of r amp is small, r amp.1. Since a mix has zeroth order term in expansion of r amp, the error a mix /a mix is proportional to r: a mix (π + π ) = rsinφ 2 (sinδ cosδ cot2φ 2 sinδ) r amp +O( r amp 2 ). (3) a mix r amp The factor r = r ξ r amp.3 leads to small uncertainty for a mix. The error from the higher order corrections is also suppressed by the factor r, and the total error for a mix is estimated 7

8 at 11%. In contradistinction to a mix, the direct CP asymmetry has large uncertainty. Since a dir /a dir is not suppressed by r, a dir (π + π ) = r amp +O( r amp ), (31) a dir r amp the direct CP asymmetry is more sensitive to r amp compared to the mixing induced CP asymmetry. Similar errors are assigned to B K + π and K + π. The mixing induced CP asymmetry for B K S π, a mix (K S π ), has little uncertainty. Here the factorizable tree amplitude is subjected to color suppression, and the penguin amplitude without KM factor is comparable to that of the tree, r amp 1. However, KM factor, r ξ = V tb V ts/v ub V us 5, is very large and it makes the penguin contribution dominant. Since r ξ r amp 1, the first term in the numerator and denominator can be neglected in eq.(5), and r amp is canceled out as shown in section 1. This is the reason why a mix (K S π ) has little uncertainty. r ξ r amp 5 is classified into the case 3 in section 1, and a mix (K S π ) is given by, where its uncertainty from r amp is.3%. a mix (K S π ) = sin2(φ 1 ω sb ct), (32) III. CONCLUSION In order to extract the weak phase from the experimental data on CP asymmetries, we have to know the magnitude and strong phase of the penguin contribution. We have applied PQCD approach to B ππ and B Kπ decay modes, which allows us to compute both the strong phase and magnitude of these amplitudes. We have calculated the ratios r amp between the penguin and tree amplitude which are crucial in predicting CP asymmetries. For each decay mode, uncertainty of r amp is 3 4%. The direct CP asymmetry which is proportional to r amp suffers from uncertainty in r amp directly, and the error is estimated at 4% 47%. However, the mixing induced CP asymmetry for B π + π, which is not proportional to r amp, has small uncertainty, and the asymmetry has been predicted with 11% uncertainty. While it is difficult to measure the time dependence of a KS π at current B factories, we predicted r amp for B K π decay mode. This leads to the mixing induced CP asymmetry which is related to the weak phase φ 1 ω sb ct. There are other attempts to study CP violation in B ππ, Kπ decays [24]. In the analysis of Ref. [24], SU(3) F symmetry is parameterized and r amp is obtained from the analysis of Ref. [25]. Our value for r amp which corresponds to the penguin parameter de iθ = (.24.36)e i(11 13 ) in the notation of Ref. [24] seems to yield a better agreement with experiments. 8

9 Improvement in experimental data is expected in the near future. The uncertainty in r amp will be also expected to improve. The predicted CP asymmetries will make it possible to extract the weak phase from their experimental data. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We would like to thank PQCD group members: H.-W. Huang, Y.Y. Keum, E. Kou, T. Kurimoto, H.-n. Li, C.-D.Lü, S. Mishima, N.Sinha, R.Sinha, M.-Z.YangandT.Yoshikawa for fruitful discussions. We are grateful to Y. Okada and M. Hazumi for discussions. Research of K.U. is supported by the Japan Society for Promotion of Science under the Predoctoral Research Program. This work is supported by Grand-in Aid for Special Project Research (Physics of CP violation), by the Grant-in-Aid for Science Research, Ministry of Education, Science and Culture, Japan(No ). 9

10 REFERENCES [1] A.B. Carter and A.I. Sanda, Phys. Rev. D23 (1981) 1567; I.I. Bigi and A.I. Sanda, Nucl. Phys. B193 (1981) 85. [2] Y.Y. Keum, H.-n. Li and A.I. Sanda, Phys. Lett. B54 (21) 6; Y.Y. Keum, H.-n. Li and A.I. Sanda, Phys. Rev. D63 (21) 548. [3] C.-D. Lü, K. Ukai and M.-Z. Yang, Phys. Rev. D63 (21) 749. [4] H. Quinn and A.I. Sanda, Eur. Phys. J. C15 (2) 626. [5] BABAR Collaboration, B. Aubert et al., hep-ex/1713. [6] Belle Collaboration, K. Abe et al., hep-ex/1761. [7] R. Aleksan, B. Kayser and D. London, Phys. Rev. Lett. 73 (1994) 18. [8] D. London and R.D. Peccei, Phys. Lett. B223 (1989) 257. [9] D. London and A. Soni, Phys. Lett. B47 (1997) 61. [1] Belle Collaboration, K. Abe et al., hep-ex/143. [11] M. Gronau and D. London, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65 (199) [12] C.Y. Wu, T.W. Yeh and H.-n. Li, Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) 4982; T.W. Yeh and H.-n. Li, Phys. Rev. D56 (1997) [13] T. Kurimoto, H.-n. Li and A.I. Sanda, hep-ph/153(to appear in PRD). [14] C.-D. Lü and M.-Z. Yang, hep-ph/11238; E. Kou and A.I. Sanda, hep-ph/16159; C.H. Chen, Y.Y. Keum and H.-n. Li, hep-ph/17165; S. Mishima, hep-ph/1726. [15] PQCD group, in preparation. [16] P. Ball, JHEP 9 (1998) 5; JHEP 1 (1999) 1. [17] CLEO Collaboration, D. Cronin-Hennessy et al., hep-ex/11. [18] BABAR Collaboration, B. Aubert et al., hep-ex/1561. [19] Particle Data Group, D. E. Groom et al., Eur. Phys. J. C15 (2) 1. [2] M. Ciuchini et al., hep-ph/

11 [21] S. Aoki, talk presented at the 4th International Workshop on B Physics and CP Violation, Ise, Japan, Feb.19-23, 21. [22] Belle Collaboration, K. Abe et al., hep-ex/1695. [23] BABAR Collaboration, B. Aubert et al., hep-ex/1774. [24] R. Fleischer, Eur. Phys. J. C16 (2) 87. [25] M. Beneke, G. Buchalla, M. Neubert and C. T. Sachrajda, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83 (1999)

12 FIGURES BR(1 6 ) combined CLEO BELLE BABAR π + π K + π K + π K π + K π FIG. 1. The branching ratios for B π + π and B Kπ measured at CLEO, Belle, and BABAR. The combined data are also shown here. 12

13 .15 Im[ramp(π + π )].1.5 Im[ramp(π π )] Re[r amp (π + π )] Re[r amp (π π )].1 Im[ramp(K + π )].5 Im[ramp(K + π )] Re[r amp (K + π )] Re[r amp (K + π )] 3 Im[ramp(K π + )] 2 1 Im[ramp(K π )] Re[r amp (K π + )] Re[r amp (K π )] FIG. 2. Theratios r amp between the penguinand tree amplitude for B ππ, Kπ decay modes. We do not show here r amp for B + π + π because of r amp (π + π ). For r amp (π + π ), the value obtained here corresponds to de iθ = (.24.36)e i(11 13 ) in the notation of Ref. [24]. This should be compared with the value, de iθ =.9[.18]e i193[187], given in Ref. [25]. 13

14 1 adir(b π + π ) φ 2 (degree) adir(b K + π ) adir(b K + π ) φ 3 (degree) φ 3 (degree) FIG. 3. Direct CP asymmetry for B ππ, Kπ decay modes. The central value of KM factors [19,2] gives the darker shaded regions, and the lighter shaded regions include the error of KM factors. a dir (π + π ) is almost zero for any φ 2. a dir (K π + ) is almost zero for any φ 3. a dir (K π ) becomes maximum at φ 3 = 9, a dir (K π ) =.4. amix(b π + π ) φ 2 (degree) FIG. 4. Mixing induced CP asymmetry for B π + π. The difference from the dotted line(sin 2φ 2 ) shows sizeable penguin pollution. 14

15 TABLES final state r amp arg(r amp ) π + π π π π + π K + π K + π K π K π TABLE I. r amp for each final state calculated in PQCD. Uncertainty comes from parameters in the wave functions. final state φ i a dir a dir /a dir π + π ( ) 2% (36%) π + π any K + π ( ) 18% (26%) K + π ( ) 22% (32%) K π + any K π ( ) 25% (33%) φ 2 a mix a mix /a mix π + π ( ) 3.3% (6.2%) TABLE II. For illustration purposes, we show direct CP asymmetries and mixing induced CP asymmetry for B ππ, Kπ decay modes. We have chosen φ i (φ i = φ 2 for B ππ and φ i = φ 3 for B Kπ) which give the maximum asymmetries. The parenthesized values include errors of KM factors, while the unparenthesized values are obtained from the central values of KM factors [19,2]. The higher order corrections are not considered in the above errors. 15