S-matrix equivalence restored

Fu, Chih-Hao; Fudger, Jonathan Paul; Mansfield, Paul; Morris, Tim R.; Xiao, Zhiguang

doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2009/06/035

Cited by 8 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…−20 [44] 272 +16 −16 [44] 137 +4 −5 [45] 109 +4 −5 [45] 227 +22 −19 [45] 77.3 +12.4 −9.8 [45] 0.23 [22] The lifetime τ B 0 s = 1.472× 10 −12 s [25] is taken in calculation. The Wilson coefficients are quoted from [41], and for µ ∼ m b , they are: Table 3.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimating form factors ofB_s→D_s^(*)and their applications to semi-leptonic and non-leptonic decays

Chen

Kim

et al. 2012

J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

B 0 s → D − s and B 0 s → D * − s weak transition form factors are estimated for the whole physical region with a method based on an instantaneous approximated Mandelstam formulation of transition matrix elements and the instantaneous Bethe-Salpeter equation. We apply the estimated form factors to branching ratios, CP asymmetries and polarization fractions of nonleptonic decays within the factorization approximation. And we study the non-factorizable effects and annihilation contributions with the perturbative QCD approach. The branching ratios of semi-leptonic B 0 s → D ( * )− s l + ν l decays are also evaluated. We show that the calculated decay rates agree well with the available experimental data. The longitudinal polarization fraction of B s → D * s V (A) decays are ∼ 0.8 when V (A) denotes a light meson, and are ∼ 0.5 when V (A) denotes a D q (q = d, s) 1 adopted QCDSR for the calculation. In [14], the form factors are estimated within the covariant light-front quark model (CLFQM). Authors of [15] used the so called light cone sum rules (LCSR) to investigate form factors at large recoil, and heavy quark effective theory (HQET) to describe them at small recoil region. Each of these methods sketches one or another profile of non-perturbative QCD, and each has advantages as well as shortcomings. So it is worthy to estimate the B s → D ( * ) s form factors in another method which is based on the B-S equation [16] and the Mandelstam formulation [17] of the transition matrix element. To make predictions on non-leptonic decays, there is another task, that is how to evaluate the decay amplitudes with form factors available. It is well known that factorization approximation (FA) [11] has been extensively applied in non-leptonic weak decays and has been justified to success in explaining the branching ratios of several color-allowed B q decays [18]. The works mentioned before all adopted the FA to evaluate non-leptonic decay amplitudes. However, estimations based on the FA still suffer uncertainties from the non-factorizable effects and annihilation diagrams contributions, especially for the CP asymmetries (CPAs). Thus approaches beyond the FA are in need. Till now several approaches which can cover the non-factorizable effects have been developed, such as the perturbative QCD (pQCD) approach [19], the QCD improved factorization (QCDF) approach [20] and SCET approach [21]. Studies on B s decays into charmed particles with the perturbative QCD approach have been carried out in [22]. In this work, we evaluate non-leptonic decay amplitudes under FA, as well as estimate non-factorizable and annihilation contributions in the pQCD approach. Besides these direct calculation in the FA or pQCD, the authors in [23] used SU(3) F symmetry to estimate the widths of a class of two-body B s decays with the help of experimental data of corresponding B decays. There have been some studies on semi-leptonic B 0 s → D ( * )− s l + ν l decays with the approaches such as QCDSR [13], LCSR [15], CLFQM [14] and constituent quark meson mod...

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimating form factors ofB_s→D_s^(*)and their applications to semi-leptonic and non-leptonic decays

Chen

Kim

et al. 2012

J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…245 +20 −20 [22] 272 +16 −16 [22] 137 +4 −5 [23] 109 +4 −5 [23] 227 +22 −19 [23] 77.3 +12.4 −9.8 [23] (BaBar), A CP = 0.91 ± 0.23 ± 0.06 (Belle). If the measurement of Belle is justified, it cannot be explained by either the FA or pQCD.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Semi-Leptonic and Non-LeptonicBMeson Decays to Charmed Mesons

Fu¹,

Wang²,

Wang³

et al. 2011

Chinese Phys. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We study the semi-leptonic and non-leptonic B weak decays which are governed by the B → D ( * ) transitions. The branching ratios, CP asymmetries (CPA) and polarization fractions (FA) of non-leptonic decays are investigated in the factorization approximation. The B → D ( * ) form factors are estimated in the Salpeter method. Our estimation on branching ratios generally agree with the existent experimental data. For CPA and polarizations, comparisons among the FA results, the perturbative QCD predictions and experimental data are made. FA has not been justified if it still works in the CP asymmetry. Besides, the non-factorizable contributions to CPA, calculated by some approaches beyond the FA, such as QCD factorization (QCDF) [10] and perturbative QCD (pQCD) [11,12], is still unclear. Actually the QCDF and the pQCD predictions on CPA are quite different even have opposite sign [13]. So, it seems important to make a comparison between the theoretical predictions and experimental data on CPA. The polarization of the decays to two (axial) vectors is another important observable which is also covered in this letter.The wave functions used here which have quantum numbers J P = 0 − (for B 0(±) and D 0(±) ) and 1 − (for D * 0(±) ) are written as [14] (q P ⊥ ) + P q P ⊥ M 2 b 4 (q P ⊥ ) + M ǫ λ b 5 (q P ⊥ ) + ǫ λ P b 6 (q P ⊥ ) + ( q P ⊥ ǫ λ − q P ⊥ · ǫ λ )b 7 (q P ⊥ ) + 1 M ( P ǫ λ q P ⊥ − P q P ⊥ · ǫ λ )b 8 (q P ⊥ ),

show abstract

“…Also, the geometric structure of the field transformations leading to the new action is incredibly rich and requires further investigation. Finally, a formulation at loop level seems feasible [5,[11][12][13][14][15] and is under development.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A new Wilson line-based classical action for gluodynamics

Kakkad¹,

Kotko

Staśto³

2022

SciPost Phys. Proc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We develop a new classical action that in addition to \mathrm{MHV}MHV vertices contains also \mathrm{N^kMHV}NkMHV vertices, where 1\leq k \leq n-41≤k≤n−4 with nn the number of external legs. The lowest order vertex is the four-point MHV vertex – there is no three point vertex and thus the amplitude calculation involves fewer vertices than in the CSW method. The action is obtained by a canonical transformation of the Yang-Mills action in the light-cone gauge, where the field transformations are based on Wilson line functionals.

show abstract

S-matrix equivalence restored

Cited by 8 publications

References 29 publications

Estimating form factors ofB_s→D_s^(*)and their applications to semi-leptonic and non-leptonic decays

Estimating form factors ofB_s→D_s^(*)and their applications to semi-leptonic and non-leptonic decays

Semi-Leptonic and Non-LeptonicBMeson Decays to Charmed Mesons

A new Wilson line-based classical action for gluodynamics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

S-matrix equivalence restored

Cited by 8 publications

References 29 publications

Estimating form factors ofBs→Ds(*)and their applications to semi-leptonic and non-leptonic decays

Estimating form factors ofBs→Ds(*)and their applications to semi-leptonic and non-leptonic decays

Semi-Leptonic and Non-LeptonicBMeson Decays to Charmed Mesons

A new Wilson line-based classical action for gluodynamics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Estimating form factors ofB_s→D_s^(*)and their applications to semi-leptonic and non-leptonic decays

Estimating form factors ofB_s→D_s^(*)and their applications to semi-leptonic and non-leptonic decays