Paper detail

Standard Model Predictions for Rare K and B Decays without New Physics Infection

The Standard Model (SM) does not contain by definition any new physics (NP) contributions to any observable but contains four CKM parameters which are not predicted by this model. We point out that if these four parameters are determined in a global fit that includes processes which are infected by NP, the resulting SM contributions to rare decay branching ratios cannot be considered as true SM contributions to the latter. On the other hand true SM predictions, that are free from the CKM dependence, can be obtained for suitable ratios of the $K$ and $B$ rare decay branching ratios to $ΔM_s$, $ΔM_d$ and $|\varepsilon_K|$, all calculated within the SM. These three observables contain by now only small hadronic uncertainties and are already well measured so that rather precise true SM predictions for the ratios in question can be obtained. In this context the rapid test of NP infection in the $ΔF=2$ sector is provided by a $|V_{cb}|-γ$ plot that involves $ΔM_s$, $ΔM_d$, $|\varepsilon_K|$, and the mixing induced CP-asymmetry $S_{ψK_S}$. As with the present hadronic matrix elements this test turns out to be negative, assuming negligible NP infection in the $ΔF=2$ sector and setting the values of these four observables to the experimental ones, allows to obtain SM predictions for all $K$ and $B$ rare decay branching ratios that are most accurate to date and as a byproduct to obtain the full CKM matrix on the basis of $ΔF=2$ transitions alone. Using this strategy we obtain SM predictions for 26 branching ratios for rare semileptonic and leptonic $K$ and $B$ decays with the $μ^+μ^-$ pair or the $ν\barν$ pair in the final state. Most interesting turn out to be the anomalies in the low $q^2$ bin in $B^+\to K^+μ^+μ^-$ ($4.4σ$) and $B_s\to ϕμ^+μ^-$ ($4.8σ$).

preprint2024arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.