Paper detail

Branching ratios of $B_c \to A P $ decays in the perturbative QCD approach

In this paper we calculate the branching ratios (BRs) of the 32 charmless hadronic $B_c \to A P$ decays ($A=a_1(1260),b_1(1235),K_1(1270),K_1(1400), f_1(1285),f_1(1420),h_1(1170),h_1(1380)$) by employing the perturbative QCD(pQCD) factorization approach. These considered decay channels can only occur via annihilation type diagrams in the standard model. From the numerical calculations and phenomenological analysis, we found the following results: (a) the pQCD predictions for the BRs of the considered $B_c$ decays are in the range of $10^{-6}$ to $10^{-8}$, while the CP-violating asymmetries are absent because only one type tree operator is involved here; (b) the BRs of $ΔS= 0$ processes are generally much larger than those of $ΔS =1$ ones due to the large CKM factor of $|V_{ud}/V_{us}|^2\sim 19$; (c) since the behavior for $^1P_1$ meson is much different from that of $^3P_1$ meson, the BRs of $B_c \to A(^1P_1) P$ decays are generally larger than that of $B_c \to A(^3P_1) P$ decays; (d) the pQCD predictions for the BRs of $B_c \to (K_1(1270), K_1(1400)) \etap $ and $(K_1(1270), K_1(1400)) K$ decays are rather sensitive to the value of the mixing angle $θ_K$.

preprint2010arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.