On the impact of power corrections in the prediction of B → K*μ+μ− observables

By S. Descotes-Genon, Lars Hofer, J. Matias, J. Virto. 2014

252 citations recorded by the source corpus.

A bstractThe recent LHCb angular analysis of the exclusive decay B → K*μ+μ− has indicated significant deviations from the Standard Model expectations. Accurate predictions can be achieved at large K*-meson recoil for an optimised set of observables designed to have no sensitivity to hadronic input in the heavy-quark limit at leading order in αs. However, hadronic uncertainties reappear through non-perturbative ΛQCD/mb power corrections, which must be assessed precisely. In the framework of QCD factorisation we present a systematic method to include factorisable power corrections and point out that their impact on angular observables depends on the scheme chosen to define the soft form factors. Associated uncertainties are found to be under control, contrary to earlier claims in the literature. We also discuss the impact of possible non-factorisable power corrections, including an estimate of charm-loop effects. We provide results for angular observables at large recoil for two different sets of inputs for the form factors, spelling out the different sources of theoretical uncertainties. Finally, we comment on a recent proposal to explain the anomaly in B → K*μ+μ− observables through charm-resonance effects, and we propose strategies to test this proposal identifying observables and kinematic regions where either the charm-loop model can be disentangled from New Physics effects or the two options leave different imprints.

Subfields: Nuclear and High Energy Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7b63dad5c5ebf7db612e497bf7801db985be3f47

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Nuclear and High Energy Physics

Citations in the corpus

Measurement of CP-Averaged Observables in the B (2020, methodology): “[69] are shown using form factors from Ref.”
Flavour anomalies after the RK∗ measurement (2017, unknown): “5, 4], [4, 6], [15, 17], [17, 19] 〈S4〉(B → K∗μμ) [1.”
Rare $B$ Decays as Tests of the Standard Model (2016, methodology): “stly appears in an operator that couples vectorially to leptons and involves left-handed quarks implies that it could also be caused by an unexpectedly large non-factorisable hadronic eect (see also [138,331,332,249]). More precise measurements of the q2 dependence of the deviation could allow to di”
Angular analysis of B d 0 → K∗μ+μ− decays in pp collisions at s√=8 TeV with the ATLAS detector (2018, result): “(DHMV) [32], and Jäger and Camalich (JC) [33, 34] are shown in Figure 10 for the S parameters, and in Figure 11 for the P ((cid:48)) With the exception of the P and P measurements in q ∈ [ 4 .”
Opportunities in Flavour Physics at the HL-LHC and HE-LHC (2018, background): “Alongside theory predictions (CFFMPSV [1120], DHMV [1121], JC [843]) are also shown.”
Patterns of New Physics in b → sℓ+ℓ− transitions in the light of recent data (2017, background): “[12, 22], which take into account the theoretical updates for the branching ratios of B → Xsγ , B → Xsμμ and Bs → μμ in Refs.”
On the anomalies in the latest LHCb data (2016, methodology): “[18], the central value of factorisable power corrections is determined by fitting the soft form factors to the”
Phenomenology of an SU(2) × SU(2) × U(1) model with lepton-flavour non-universality (2016, unknown): “[19] for B → V form factors, and take into account the lifetime effect for Bs measurements at hadronic machines [115] for Bs → μμ [116] and Bs → φμμ [117] decays.”
B → K∗ℓ+ℓ− decays at large recoil in the Standard Model: a theoretical reappraisal (2015, background): “[25–30, 34, 35, 48, 49].”