Paper detail

Escaping from controversies in $CP$ violation measurements in charm decays

The breaking of the $CP$ symmetry in $D^0$ meson decays has been awaited for a long time. After a set of measurements provided by the LHCb, CDF, and Belle Collaborations leading in march 2012 to combined results that were consistent with no $CP$ violation at a CL of $0.006\%$ suggesting $CP$ violation at $\sim1\%$ level. Such a potentially large value of $CP$ violation in charm decays has triggered widespread interest from the whole particle physics community to evaluate the implications of such an interesting unexpected results. However, a more recent combination of more up-to-date results in March 2013, has slightly changed the situation, showing that data are consistent with the $CP$ conserving hypothesis at $2.1\%$ CL. I briefly review the method used by the various Collaborations when extracting the quantity $ΔA_{CP}$ and the relative results. Finally I discuss the need for additional measurements, and present the potential of a time-dependent analysis when looking for $CP$ violation in $D^0$ decays and how this can be used to largely improve the current sensitivity on the mixing phase $ϕ_{MIX}$.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author2 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.