Discussion on: Flavour Physics, CP violation and related matters - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

FCC kick-off meeting - Geneva - February 2014 Discussion on: Flavour Physics, CP violation and related matters Working Group 6. S. Monteil, LPC – Université Blaise Pascal – IN2P3-CNRS, S.Monteil Flavours 1

FCC kick-off meeting - Geneva - February 2014 Outline of the presentation 1. CKM, CPV, KM paradigm, NP signatures: a state of the art. 2. Foreseeable experimental landscape at horizon 2030. 3. Scope of the WG - some words on a possible method. 4. Conclusion. S.Monteil Flavours 2

FCC kick-off meeting - Geneva - February 2014 Disclaimers 1. The WG will be installed a bit later than the others, at the end of this Spring. 2. Not much time to prepare this talk but it was thought useful however to be part of the discussion already now. 3. The scope of this talk is very modest, certainly not aiming at a review of the subject or the observables of interest. Sharing few ideas instead to trigger discussion. 4. Full bias towards beautiful laboratories for today. 5. Disclaimers are richer than the actual outline. S.Monteil Flavours 3

1. Flavour Physics and CP violation: a (rapid) state of the art. • This is a tremendous success of the Standard Model (SM) and especially the Kobayashi-Maskawa (KM) mechanism. This is simultaneously an outstanding experimental achievement by the B- factories experiments. • CKM is at work in weak charged current transitions. • The KM phase IS the dominant source of CP violation in K and B system. • The second pillar of the SM. • Experimental landscape so far dominated by B -factories inputs. S.Monteil Flavours 4

1. Flavour Physics and CP violation: a (rapid) state of the art. • Since the SM hypothesis passes the global consistency test, metrology of its free parameters is possible and predictions can be made → null tests of the SM hypothesis. • A selection of two of the most remarkable achievements at LHC experiments are given in the following. Starting with a Δ B = 2 process. — 1 + CDF 9.6 fb — 1 — 1 — 1 LHCb 1.0 fb + D 8 fb + ATLAS 4.9 fb 0.25 HFAG D β s = − arg( − V cs V ∗ PDG 2013 0.20 cb ) . 68% CL contours V ts V ∗ ( ) tb 0.15 LHCb sin 2 β s = 0 . 0367 ± 0 . 0014 . 0.10 Combined CDF 0.05 SM ATLAS 0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 S.Monteil Flavours 5

1. Flavour Physics and CP violation: a (rapid) state of the art. • Since the SM hypothesis passes the global consistency test, metrology of its free parameters is possible and predictions can be made → Null tests of the SM hypothesis. • Continuing with a Δ B = 1 process measured at CMS and LHCb. Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, B ( B 0 s → µ + µ − ) (2 . 9 +1 . 1 − 1 . 0 ) × 10 − 9 , = 7 . 4 × 10 − 10 @ 95% CL . B ( B 0 → µ + µ − ) < S.Monteil Flavours 6

1. Flavour Physics and CP violation: a (rapid) state of the art. • The flavour sector of the SM is so far successful. • Flavour transitions and in particular Flavour Changing Neutral Currents such as the two former illustrations are nicely accounted for in the SM while they are probing short distances physics sensitive to high mass scale. • The flavour sector of the SM is too successful for the NP to be of generic flavour structure. • That, in turn, constrains the flavour structure of models beyond SM. • Flavour is then part of our problem and maybe Flavour Physics is part of the solution. • Definitely interesting to scrutinize in the FCC context. S.Monteil Flavours 7

2. Foreseeable experimental landscape at horizon 2030. • Initial question addressed to the WG: is there a Physics case for flavour Physics with O (10 12 ) Z bosons, at the horizon of 2030? • There are two experimental programs on track for flavour Physics starting in a very near future: the LHCb upgrade and the Belle II project. • The interest of O (10 12 ) Z bosons for FP must be studied with respect to the foreseeable legacy of those two programs. • Some predictions of observables are currently limited by the theoretical uncertainty on hadronic parameters. The progresses of LQCD in particular should be another dimension of the thinking. S.Monteil Flavours 8

2. Foreseeable experimental landscape at horizon 2030. precision measurement 2013 • LHCb: this experiment has proven that candidates / (0.1 ps) Tagged mixed precision Flavour Physics can be Tagged unmixed 400 Fit mixed undergone at a proton collider machine, Fit unmixed despite the a priori harsh experimental environment. A solid ground to think that 200 LHCb its upgrade must be successful. 0 • 0 1 2 3 4 The LHCb upgrade Physics case is decay time [ps] defined and expected performance are New J. Phys. 15 (2013) 053021 (1 fb − 1 ) evaluated. Legacy statistics expected to be O (50) /fb. An exemple of precision physics. Can • All species of heavy flavour particles are be directly included in produced with very large statistics. any HEP textbook. S.Monteil Flavours 9

2. Foreseeable experimental landscape at horizon 2030. • The LHCb upgrade Physics case is defined and expected performance are evaluated. Legacy statistics expected to be O (50) /fb. Type Observable Current LHCb Theory Upgrade (50 fb − 1 ) precision 2018 uncertainty B 0 2 β s ( B 0 s mixing s → J/ ψ φ ) 0 . 10 [30] 0 . 025 0 . 008 ∼ 0 . 003 2 β s ( B 0 s → J/ ψ f 0 (980)) 0 . 17 [32] 0 . 045 0 . 014 ∼ 0 . 01 6 . 4 × 10 − 3 [63] a s 0 . 6 × 10 − 3 0 . 2 × 10 − 3 0 . 03 × 10 − 3 sl 2 β e ff s ( B 0 Gluonic s → φφ ) – 0 . 17 0 . 03 0 . 02 s → K ∗ 0 ¯ 2 β e ff s ( B 0 K ∗ 0 ) penguins – 0 . 13 0 . 02 < 0 . 02 2 β e ff ( B 0 → φ K 0 S ) 0 . 17 [63] 0 . 30 0 . 05 0 . 02 2 β e ff s ( B 0 Right-handed s → φγ ) – 0 . 09 0 . 02 < 0 . 01 τ e ff ( B 0 currents s → φγ ) / τ B 0 – 5 % 1 % 0 . 2 % S 3 ( B 0 → K ∗ 0 µ + µ − ; 1 < q 2 < 6 GeV 2 /c 4 ) s Electroweak 0 . 08 [64] 0 . 025 0 . 008 0 . 02 s 0 A FB ( B 0 → K ∗ 0 µ + µ − ) penguins 25 % [64] 6 % 2 % 7 % A I ( Kµ + µ − ; 1 < q 2 < 6 GeV 2 /c 4 ) 0 . 25 [9] 0 . 08 0 . 025 ∼ 0 . 02 B ( B + → π + µ + µ − ) / B ( B + → K + µ + µ − ) 25 % [29] 8 % 2 . 5 % ∼ 10 % 1 . 5 × 10 − 9 [4] B ( B 0 s → µ + µ − ) 0 . 5 × 10 − 9 0 . 15 × 10 − 9 0 . 3 × 10 − 9 Higgs B ( B 0 → µ + µ − ) / B ( B 0 s → µ + µ − ) penguins – ∼ 100 % ∼ 35 % ∼ 5 % ∼ 10–12 ◦ [40,41] γ ( B → D ( ∗ ) K ( ∗ ) ) Unitarity 4 ◦ 0 . 9 ◦ negligible γ ( B 0 triangle s → D s K ) – 11 ◦ 2 . 0 ◦ negligible 0 . 8 ◦ [63] β ( B 0 → J/ ψ K 0 angles S ) 0 . 6 ◦ 0 . 2 ◦ negligible 2 . 3 × 10 − 3 [63] 0 . 40 × 10 − 3 0 . 07 × 10 − 3 Charm A Γ – 2 . 1 × 10 − 3 [8] 0 . 65 × 10 − 3 0 . 12 × 10 − 3 CP violation ∆ A CP – Table 1: Statistical sensitivities of the LHCb upgrade to key observables. For each observable the current sensitivity is compared to that which will be achieved by LHCb before the upgrade, and that which will be achieved with 50 fb − 1 by the upgraded experiment. Systematic uncertainties are expected to be non-negligible for the most precisely measured quantities. Note that the current sensitivities do not include new results presented at ICHEP 2012. Eur.Phys.J. C73 (2013) 2373 S.Monteil Flavours 10

2. Foreseeable experimental landscape at horizon 2030. • Belle II @ SUPERKEKB: will increase the B -factories statistics from O (1) to O (50) /ab. • The Belle II Physics case is defined and expected performance are evaluated (arXiv 1002.5012). Coherent B 0 mesons production at Υ (4s). A Lepton Flavour Violation and a B s program. B → Leptonic/semileptonic B decays Observable Belle 2006 SuperKEKB B ( B + → τ + ν ) 3.5 σ 10% 3% ( ∼ 0.5 ab − 1 ) (5 ab − 1 ) (50 ab − 1 ) ( †† < 2 . 4 B SM 4.3 ab − 1 for 5 σ discovery B ( B + → µ + ν ) Hadronic b → s transitions B ( B + → D τν ) - 8% 3% ∆ S φ K 0 0.22 0.073 0.029 B ( B 0 → D τν ) - 30% 10% ∆ S η � K 0 0.11 0.038 0.020 LFV in τ decays (U.L. at 90% C.L.) ∆ S K 0 0.33 0.105 0.037 B ( τ → µ γ ) [10 − 9 ] S K 0 S K 0 45 10 5 S ∆ A π 0 K 0 0.15 0.072 0.042 B ( τ → µ η ) [10 − 9 ] 65 5 2 S B ( τ → µµµ ) [10 − 9 ] A φφ K + 0.17 0.05 0.014 21 3 1 φ eff Unitarity triangle parameters ( φ K S ) Dalitz 3.3 ◦ 1.5 ◦ 1 sin 2 φ 1 0.026 0.016 0.012 Radiative/electroweak b → s transitions φ 2 ( ππ ) 11 ◦ 10 ◦ 3 ◦ S K 0 0.32 0.10 0.03 68 ◦ < φ 2 < 95 ◦ S π 0 γ φ 2 ( ρπ ) 3 ◦ 1.5 ◦ B ( B → X s γ ) 13% 7% 6% 62 ◦ < φ 2 < 107 ◦ φ 2 ( ρρ ) 3 ◦ 1.5 ◦ A CP ( B → X s γ ) 0.058 0.01 0.005 φ 2 (combined) 2 ◦ � 1 ◦ C 9 from A FB ( B → K ∗ � + � − ) - 11% 4% φ 3 ( D ( ∗ ) K ( ∗ ) ) (Dalitz mod. ind.) 20 ◦ 7 ◦ 2 ◦ C 10 from A FB ( B → K ∗ � + � − ) - 13% 4% φ 3 ( DK ( ∗ ) ) (ADS+GLW) - 16 ◦ 5 ◦ C 7 /C 9 from A FB ( B → K ∗ � + � − ) φ 3 ( D ( ∗ ) π ) - 5% - 18 ◦ 6 ◦ φ 3 (combined) 6 ◦ 1.5 ◦ R K 0.07 0.02 †† < 3 B SM | V ub | (inclusive) 6% 5% 3% B ( B + → K + νν ) 30% †† < 40 B SM | V ub | (exclusive) 15% 12% (LQCD) 5% (LQCD) B ( B 0 → K ∗ 0 ν ¯ ν ) 35% ††† ¯ ρ 20.0% 3.4% S.Monteil Flavours 11