Paper detail

Constraints on hard spectator scattering and annihilation corrections in $B_{u,d}$ ${\to}$ $PV$ decays within QCD factorization

In this paper, we investigate the contributions of hard spectator scattering and annihilation in $B\to PV$ decays within the QCD factorization framework. With available experimental data on $B\to πK^{\ast}$, $ρK$, $πρ$ and $Kϕ$ decays, comprehensive $χ^2$ analyses of the parameters $X_{A,H}^{i,f}(ρ_{A,H}^{i,f},ϕ_{A,H}^{i,f})$ are performed, where $X_A^f$ ($X_A^i$) and $X_H$ are used to parameterize the endpoint divergences of the (non)factorizable annihilation and hard spectator scattering amplitudes, respectively. Based on $χ^2$ analyses, it is observed that (1) The topology-dependent parameterization scheme is feasible for $B\to PV$ decays; (2) At the current accuracy of experimental measurements and theoretical evaluations, $X_H=X_A^i$ is allowed by $B\to PV$ decays, but $X_{H}\neq X_A^f$ at $68%$ C. L.; (3) With the simplification $X_H=X_A^i$, parameters $X_A^f$ and $X_A^i$ should be treated individually. The above-described findings are very similar to those obtained from $B\to PP$ decays. Numerically, for $B\to PV$ decays, we obtain $(ρ_{A,H}^i,ϕ_{A,H}^i[^{\circ}]) =(2.87^{+0.66}_{-1.95}, -145^{+14}_{-21})$ and $(ρ_A^f,ϕ_A^f[^{\circ}]) = (0.91^{+0.12}_{-0.13}, -37^{+10}_{-9})$ at $68%$ C. L.. With the best-fit values, most of the theoretical results are in good agreement with the experimental data within errors. However, significant corrections to the color-suppressed tree amplitude $α_2$ related to a large $ρ_H$ result in the wrong sign for $A^{dir}_{CP}(B^- \to π^0 K^{{\ast}-})$ compared with the most recent BABAR data, which presents a new obstacle in solving "$ππ$" and "$πK$" puzzles through $α_2$. A crosscheck with measurements at Belle (or Belle II) and LHCb, which offer higher precision, is urgently expected to confirm or refute such possible mismatch.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors2 topics

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.