Paper detail

A 1996 Analysis of the CP Violating Ratio epsilon'/epsilon

We update our 1993 analysis of the CP violating ratio $\epe$ in view of the changes in several input parameters, in particular the improved value of the top quark mass. We also investigate the strange quark mass $m_s$ dependence of $\epe$ in view of rather low values found in the most recent lattice calculations. A simple scanning of the input parameters within one standard deviation gives the ranges: $-1.2 \cdot 10^{-4} \le \epe \le 16.0 \cdot 10^{-4}$ and $0 \le \epe \le 43.0 \cdot 10^{-4}$ for $\ms(\mc)=150\pm20~ \mev$ and $\ms(\mc)=100\pm20~ \mev$ respectively. If the experimentally measured numbers and the theoretical input parameters are used with Gaussian errors, we find $\epe= ( 3.6\pm 3.4) \cdot 10^{-4}$ and $\epe= ( 10.4\pm 8.3) \cdot 10^{-4}$ respectively. We also give results for ${\rm Im} V_{ts}^*V_{td}$. Analyzing the dependence of $\epe$ on various parameters we find that only for $\ms(\mc)\le 100\,\mev$ and a conspiration of other input parameters, values for $\epe$ as large as $(2-4) \cdot 10^{-3}$ and consistent with the NA31 result can be obtained.

preprint1996arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.