Pith. sign in

REVIEW 6 minor 62 references

Summary of Working Group 5: Physics with Heavy Flavours

T0 review · 0 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper records a four-part snapshot of heavy-flavour physics at DIS2019, with B-decay anomalies and pentaquarks as its frontiers.

desk verdict A competent and well-organized conference summary with no new science; fine as a proceedings record, with a few attribution and conflict-of-interest wrinkles to iron out. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.07321 v1 pith:HZVBT6RB submitted 2019-08-20 hep-ex hep-ph

V. Bhardwaj , J. Libby , J. Virto This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-exhep-ph
keywords heavyflavourphysicsquarkoniumspectroscopypentaquarksBmesonanomaliesleptonuniversalityCPviolationincharmtopquarkquark-gluonplasma
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper is a conference summary, not a new measurement. It sets out to provide a faithful snapshot of heavy-flavour physics as it was presented to Working Group 5 at the DIS2019 workshop, organized into four areas: spectroscopy, $b$ and $c$ quark production, top-quark physics, and $b$ and $c$ quark decays. Within that frame, the authors highlight the results they regard as the current frontiers: narrow pentaquark states in $\Lambda_b$ decays, quarkonium suppression in heavy-ion collisions, direct top-width extraction, first CP violation in charm, and a set of $B$-decay anomalies that deviate from standard-model predictions. A sympathetic reader would take the document's purpose as orienting the community: recording what was reported in April 2019 in Torino and what those reports imply for QCD, electroweak physics, and the search for new physics.

What carries the argument

The argument has no single theorem; its load-bearing machinery is the survey structure itself. The authors partition the working-group presentations into spectroscopy, b/c production, top physics, and b/c decays, and within each block they let specific observables carry the physics: pentaquark masses relative to $\Sigma_c D^{(*)}$ thresholds, quarkonium suppression ratios across collision systems, the nonresonant $tW$ interference tail for the top width, $\Delta A_{CP}$ for charm CP violation, and the lepton-universality ratios $R_{K^{(*)}}$, $R(D^{(*)})$ together with the angular observable $P'_5$ for the B anomalies. The selection and grouping of these observables is what turns a list of talks into a status report.

What would settle it

Compare the numbers quoted here—$R_K=0.846$, $\Delta A_{CP}=(-15.4\pm 2.9)\times10^{-4}$, $\Gamma_t=1.28\pm 0.30$ GeV, and the $P_c$ masses—against the original collaboration papers; any mismatch, or a significant WG5 talk absent from the summary, would show the snapshot is not faithful.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the heavy-flavour results shown at DIS2019 can be captured in a compact four-part summary and that this summary identifies the live questions in the field. In spectroscopy, the discovery of the narrow $P_c(4312)^+$ state and the resolution of $P_c(4450)^+$ into two peaks place the pentaquark masses just below the $\Sigma_c D^{(*)}$ thresholds, favouring a molecular interpretation pending spin-parity and partner searches. In production, comparisons across $pp$, $p$Pb and PbPb collisions indicate that charmonium and bottomonium suppression is not primarily a cold-nuclear-matter effect and so remains a quark-gluon-plasma signature. In top physics, a direct measurement of the top width gives $1.28\pm 0.30$ GeV, consistent with the standard model, while measured $t\bar{t}$ spin correlations exceed NLO generator predictions. In flavour, the first observation of CP violation in charm ($\Delta A_{CP}=(-15.4\pm 2.9)\times10^{-4}$) and the persistent anomalies in $R_{K^{(*)}}$, $R(D^{(*)})$ and $P'_5$ are presented as the strongest current hints of physics beyond the standard model, with a combined global fit at about $7\sigma$.

Load-bearing premise

The whole document rests on the assumption that the plenary and parallel talks it was based on are an accurate and representative record of heavy-flavour physics at DIS2019, and that every quoted number was transcribed correctly from the underlying presentations and papers.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the summary reflects the field correctly, the flavour anomalies ($R_K$, $R_{K^*}$, $R(D^*)$, $P'_5$) form a coherent pattern: model-independent global fits over $b\to s\ell^+\ell^-$ and $b\to c\tau\bar{\nu}$ show evidence for beyond-standard-model physics at about $7\sigma$, so any complete theory of flavour must accommodate a lepton-universality-violating component.
  • The direct top-width value $1.28\pm 0.30$ GeV from nonresonant $tW$ interference agrees with the standard model and avoids the assumption that $B(t\to Wb)$ is 100%, making it a less model-dependent test of the top quark's decay.
  • The new pentaquark states sit just below $\Sigma_c D^{(*)}$ thresholds, so the most economical interpretation is molecular; confirming it requires a full partial-wave analysis and observation of isospin partners.
  • The first observation of CP violation in charm ($\Delta A_{CP}=(-15.4\pm 2.9)\times10^{-4}$, more than $5\sigma$) exceeds light-cone sum-rule expectations but remains compatible with SU(3)-flavour analyses, marking charm as a new CP-violation frontier.
  • Quarkonium suppression comparisons across $pp$, $p$Pb, and PbPb collisions indicate the suppression is not chiefly a cold-nuclear-matter effect, sharpening the quark-gluon-plasma interpretation.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper does not say this, but if the $7\sigma$ global pattern survives, it predicts correlated, lepton-universality-violating shifts in both $b\to s\ell^+\ell^-$ and $b\to c\tau\bar{\nu}$ channels; a single vector leptoquark, which the review names as the most promising explanation, would imprint a specific correlation that upcoming data can confirm or rule out.
  • The paper does not say this, but the tension between the large $\Delta A_{CP}$ and light-cone sum-rule bounds means the next discriminating measurement is the individual CP asymmetries of $D^0\to K^+K^-$ and $D^0\to \pi^+\pi^-$, rather than only their difference.
  • The paper does not say this, but the ZEUS $ep\to b\bar{b}X$ result suggests HERA data remain a useful cross-check for heavy-quark production models; a similar next-to-leading-order comparison using charm final states from the full HERA sample would test whether the pattern extends.
  • The paper does not say this, but if top spin correlations continue to sit above NLO parton-shower generators, higher-order QCD corrections are the likeliest explanation; comparing the $\Delta\phi$ distribution with an NNLO prediction would decide whether new physics is needed.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

0 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper is a proceedings summary of the heavy-flavour physics results presented to Working Group 5 of the DIS2019 workshop. It is organized into four thematic sections: spectroscopy of heavy-quark states (including LHCb pentaquark and BESIII XYZ results), production of b and c quarks and quarkonia at HERA/RHIC/LHC (with the ZEUS ep→bb̄X measurement as a featured DIS result), top-quark production and properties at the LHC (tt̄Z, tW, spin correlations, top width, and a proposed |Vcb| measurement from top decays), and weak decays of b and c quarks (CP violation in charm, RK(*), R(D(*)), and b→sℓℓ angular analyses). The authors state in the conclusion that they have selected only a handful of the many results presented in the working-group sessions.

Significance. The manuscript contains no original data, derivation, or new scientific claim; its value is as a compact, well-referenced record of the state of heavy-flavour physics at the time of DIS2019. The authors follow the appropriate convention for a proceedings report by attributing every quoted value to a named collaboration and primary reference, they explicitly disclose the selective nature of the summary, and several central numerical statements (ZEUS b-quark cross section, LHCb ΔACP, CMS tt̄Z cross section, LHCb RK, ATLAS top-width extraction) are internally consistent with the cited results. The paper does not derive or argue for the quoted 7σ BSM significance itself; it attributes that number to a specific global analysis, which is the correct epistemic stance for a workshop summary. The main limitations are editorial: a number of typos and one apparent state-naming inconsistency, none of which undermines the documentary purpose.

minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract/Introduction] The phrase 'at the the time of the DIS2019 conference' contains a duplicated article; please correct this typo in the abstract and in the opening sentence of Section 1.
  2. [Section 2] The text names the state observed by BESIII as 'Y(4220)' but reference [7] is titled 'Y(4260) as the first S-wave open charm vector molecular state?'; please check the nomenclature and align the state name with the cited paper and reference [6].
  3. [Figure 1 caption] The caption reads 'measured be LHCb'; this should be 'measured by LHCb'.
  4. [Section 5] There are two typos in the charm CP-violation paragraph: 'Howerver' should be 'However' and 'asymetry' should be 'asymmetry'.
  5. [Section 3] The section is titled 'b and c quark production' but most of its content concerns quarkonium production and a Λ-polarisation measurement; consider either broadening the heading or adding a sentence explaining that quarkonium production is used as the heavy-flavour production probe.
  6. [Section 5] The sentence reporting a 7σ indication of physics beyond the SM is explicitly attributed to reference [60], but the wording 'show evidence' could be read by a non-specialist as a direct measurement; consider phrasing such as 'a global fit to these anomalies finds 7σ' to signal the model-dependent nature of the significance.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper is a proceedings summary that reports external results and makes no derivation whose output is equivalent to its input.

full rationale

The paper's stated aim is to summarize talks at DIS2019. It contains no fitted parameters, no predictions derived from first principles, and no uniqueness theorem invoked to force a choice. Quoted values (ZEUS bb cross section, LHCb DeltaACP, CMS ttZ cross section, RK, R(D(*)), top width) are all attributed to external experimental papers and world averages. Theoretical statements cite published analyses (e.g., Refs. [46-48,60] for b->s anomalies) that include one author of the summary, but the summary does not use those citations to justify a new derivation; it reports their conclusions as part of the field's status. Because the manuscript is a descriptive record rather than a derivation, there is no circular step: outputs are transcriptions of inputs, not conclusions entailed by assumptions. The appropriate verification would be comparison of the quoted numbers with the cited sources, which is an accuracy check, not a circularity concern.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 0 assumptions · 0 invented entities

This is a conference proceedings summary with no mathematical model, no fitted parameters, no new theoretical constructs, and no derivation. Therefore the axiom ledger is empty.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Summary of Working Group 5: Physics with Heavy Flavours." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HZVBT6RB

@misc{pith2026190807321,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Summary of Working Group 5: Physics with Heavy Flavours},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HZVBT6RB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.07321}
}
read the original abstract

We present a summary of heavy-flavour physics at the the time of the DIS2019 conference. This summary is based upon the relevant plenary and parallel talks presented at the workshop. The summary is divided into four broad areas: (1) spectroscopy, (2) the production of b and c quarks in collisions, (3) top quark production and properties, and (4) b and c quark decay.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.07321 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Invariant mass spectrum of J/ψp from Λ 0 b → J/ψpK− decays measured be LHCb [12]. Fits to the three pentaquark states are shown along with the Σ + c D (∗)0 thresholds. determine whether the Z − c -like structures in the J/ψπ− invariant-mass spectrum are the result of high-mass K ∗ resonances; the K ∗ only hypothesis is excluded by more than 10σ [8], where σ is a standard deviation, and the exotic structures confirme… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Summary of top pair, single-top and four top production cross section measurements and limits presented by the CMS Collaboration. The measurements include those of top production associated with other particles. Standard model predictions are shown as grey bands for comparison. Z 0 → tt¯ coupling. These measurements use decays that have three or four charged leptons in the final state, which include an oppositely ch… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Relative deviation of ∆φ in tt¯ events measured by the ATLAS Collaboration [28] to the generator prediction from POWHEG + PYTHIA8. Several calculations, along with their uncertainties are shown, with only the fixed-order calculation shown in green giving reasonable agreement. other properties such as width, spin correlations and couplings. The differential tW cross section [23] already discussed has allowed a direct… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Comparison of individual measurements, world average values and the theoretical predictions of R(D) and R(D) [33]. recent results by the Belle Collaboration [43] are consistent with both LHCb and the SM, albeit with larger error bars. The second set of measurements rel…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison of the measured discrepancies ∆RK(∗) and ∆R(D (∗) ) with the SM and the predictions of a model of U(1) vector leptoquarks [61]. Until there is undeniable statistical evidence for these discrepancies, there will be continued debate about whether these measure…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

62 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages

  1. [60]

    Emerging patterns of New Physics with and without Lepton Flavour Universal contributions,

    M. Algueró, B. Capdevila, A. Crivellin, S. Descotes-Genon, P. Masjuan, J. Matias and J. Virto, “Emerging patterns of New Physics with and without Lepton Flavour Universal contributions,” arXiv:1903.09578 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 1903

  2. [26]

    Extracting the Top-Quark Width from Nonresonant Production,

    C. Herwig, T. Ježo and B. Nachman, “Extracting the Top-Quark Width from Nonresonant Production,” Phys. Rev. Lett.122 (2019) 231803

    work page 2019

  3. [1]

    ZEUS Collaboration, ZEUS-prel-18-006

    work page

  4. [2]

    The FMNR⊗ PYTHIA interface for Heavy Quark production at HERA,

    A. Geiser and A. E. Nuncio Quiroz, “The FMNR⊗ PYTHIA interface for Heavy Quark production at HERA,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser.110 (2008) 022036

    work page 2008

  5. [3]

    TheXY Z states: experimental and theoretical status and perspectives,

    N. Brambilla, S. Eidelman, C. Hanhart, A. Nefediev, C. P. Shen, C. E. Thomas, A. Vairo and C. Z. Yuan, “TheXY Z states: experimental and theoretical status and perspectives,” arXiv:1907.07583 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 1907

  6. [4]

    Observation of the decay X(3872)→ π0χc1(1P),

    M. Ablikim et al. [BESIII Collaboration], “Observation of the decay X(3872)→ π0χc1(1P),” Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (2019) 202001

    work page 2019

  7. [5]

    Study of e+e−→ γω J/ψ and Observation of X(3872)→ ωJ/ψ,

    M. Ablikim et al. [BESIII Collaboration], “Study of e+e−→ γω J/ψ and Observation of X(3872)→ ωJ/ψ,” Phys. Rev. Lett.122 (2019) 232002

    work page 2019

  8. [6]

    Evidence of a resonant structure in the e+e−→ π +D0D∗− cross section between 4.05 and 4.60 GeV ,

    M. Ablikim et al. [BESIII Collaboration], “Evidence of a resonant structure in the e+e−→ π +D0D∗− cross section between 4.05 and 4.60 GeV ,” Phys. Rev. Lett.122 (2019) 102002

    work page 2019

Show all 62 references
  1. [7]

    Y (4260) as the first S-wave open charm vector molecular state?,

    M. Cleven, Q. Wang, F. K. Guo, C. Hanhart, U. G. Meissner and Q. Zhao, “Y (4260) as the first S-wave open charm vector molecular state?,” Phys. Rev. D90 (2014) 074039

    2014

  2. [8]

    Model-Independent Observation of Exotic Contributions to B0→ J/ψK+π− Decays,

    R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], “Model-Independent Observation of Exotic Contributions to B0→ J/ψK+π− Decays,” Phys. Rev. Lett.122 (2019) 152002

    2019

  3. [9]

    Evidence for an ηc(1S)π− resonance in B0→ ηc(1S)K+π− decays,

    R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], “Evidence for an ηc(1S)π− resonance in B0→ ηc(1S)K+π− decays,” Eur. Phys. J. C78 (2018) 1019

    2018

  4. [10]

    The Belle II Physics Book,

    E. Kou et al. [Belle-II Collaboration], “The Belle II Physics Book,” arXiv:1808.10567 [hep-ex]

  5. [11]

    Observation of J/ψ p Resonances Consistent with Pentaquark States in Λ0 b→ J/ψK− p Decays,

    R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], “Observation of J/ψ p Resonances Consistent with Pentaquark States in Λ0 b→ J/ψK− p Decays,” Phys. Rev. Lett.115 (2015) 072001

    2015

  6. [12]

    Observation of a narrow pentaquark state, Pc(4312)+, and of two-peak structure of the Pc(4450)+,

    R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], “Observation of a narrow pentaquark state, Pc(4312)+, and of two-peak structure of the Pc(4450)+,” Phys. Rev. Lett.122 (2019) 222001

    2019

  7. [13]

    Polarization and Entanglement in Baryon-Antibaryon Pair Production in Electron-Positron Annihilation,

    M. Ablikim et al. [BESIII Collaboration], “Polarization and Entanglement in Baryon-Antibaryon Pair Production in Electron-Positron Annihilation,” Nature Phys. 15 (2019) 631

    2019

  8. [14]

    J/ψ Suppression by Quark-Gluon Plasma Formation,

    T. Matsui and H. Satz, “ J/ψ Suppression by Quark-Gluon Plasma Formation,” Phys. Lett. B 178 (1986) 416

    1986

  9. [15]

    Anomalous J / psi suppression in Pb - Pb interactions at 158 GeV/c per nucleon,

    M. C. Abreu et al. [NA50 Collaboration], “Anomalous J / psi suppression in Pb - Pb interactions at 158 GeV/c per nucleon,” Phys. Lett. B 410 (1997) 337

    1997

  10. [16]

    Prompt and non-promptJ/ψ and ψ(2S) suppression at high transverse momentum in 5.02 TeV Pb+Pb collisions with the ATLAS experiment,

    M. Aaboud et al. [ATLAS Collaboration], “Prompt and non-promptJ/ψ and ψ(2S) suppression at high transverse momentum in 5.02 TeV Pb+Pb collisions with the ATLAS experiment,” Eur. Phys. J. C 78 (2018) 762

    2018

  11. [17]

    Measurement of prompt and nonprompt charmonium suppression in PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV ,

    A. M. Sirunyan et al. [CMS Collaboration], “Measurement of prompt and nonprompt charmonium suppression in PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV ,” Eur. Phys. J. C78 (2018) 509

    2018

  12. [18]

    J/ψ suppression at forward rapidity in Pb-Pb collisions at√sNN = 5.02 TeV ,

    J. Adam et al. [ALICE Collaboration], “J/ψ suppression at forward rapidity in Pb-Pb collisions at√sNN = 5.02 TeV ,” Phys. Lett. B766 (2017) 212. 9 Summary of Working Group 5: Heavy Flavours

    2017

  13. [19]

    Quarkonium feed down and sequential suppression,

    S. Digal, P. Petreczky and H. Satz, “Quarkonium feed down and sequential suppression,” Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001) 094015

    2001

  14. [20]

    Measurement of top quark pair production in association with a Z boson in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV ,

    [CMS Collaboration], “Measurement of top quark pair production in association with a Z boson in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV ,” arXiv:1907.11270 [hep-ex]

    1907 arXiv

  15. [21]

    Dimension-Six Terms in the Standard Model Lagrangian,

    B. Grzadkowski, M. Iskrzynski, M. Misiak and J. Rosiek, “Dimension-Six Terms in the Standard Model Lagrangian,” JHEP 1010 (2010) 085

    2010

  16. [22]

    Interpreting top-quark LHC measurements in the standard-model effective field theory,

    J. A. Aguilar-Saavedra et al., “Interpreting top-quark LHC measurements in the standard-model effective field theory,” arXiv:1802.07237 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  17. [23]

    Probing the quantum interference between singly and doubly resonant top-quark production in pp collisions at√s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector,

    M. Aaboud et al. [ATLAS Collaboration], “Probing the quantum interference between singly and doubly resonant top-quark production in pp collisions at√s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 (2018) 152002

    2018

  18. [24]

    An NLO+PS generator for t¯t and W t production and decay including non-resonant and interference effects,

    T. Ježo, J. M. Lindert, P. Nason, C. Oleari and S. Pozzorini, “An NLO+PS generator for t¯t and W t production and decay including non-resonant and interference effects,” Eur. Phys. J. C76 (2016) 691

    2016

  19. [25]

    Review of Particle Physics,

    M. Tanabashi et al. [Particle Data Group], “Review of Particle Physics,” Phys. Rev. D98 (2018) 030001

    2018

  20. [27]

    Measurement of the ratio B(t→ W b)/B(t→ W q) in pp collisions at√s = 8 TeV ,

    V . Khachatryan et al. [CMS Collaboration], “Measurement of the ratio B(t→ W b)/B(t→ W q) in pp collisions at√s = 8 TeV ,” Phys. Lett. B736 (2014) 33

    2014

  21. [28]

    Measurements of top-quark pair spin correlations in the eµ channel at√s = 13 TeV using pp collisions in the ATLAS detector,

    M. Aaboud et al. [ATLAS Collaboration], “Measurements of top-quark pair spin correlations in the eµ channel at√s = 13 TeV using pp collisions in the ATLAS detector,” arXiv:1903.07570 [hep-ex]

    1903 arXiv

  22. [29]

    A set of top quark spin correlation and polarization observables for the LHC: Standard Model predictions and new physics contributions,

    W. Bernreuther, D. Heisler and Z. G. Si, “A set of top quark spin correlation and polarization observables for the LHC: Standard Model predictions and new physics contributions,” JHEP1512 (2015) 026

    2015

  23. [30]

    Distributions and correlations for top quark pair production and decay at the Tevatron and LHC,

    W. Bernreuther and Z. G. Si, “Distributions and correlations for top quark pair production and decay at the Tevatron and LHC,” Nucl. Phys. B837 (2010) 90

    2010

  24. [31]

    Top quark spin correlations and polarization at the LHC: standard model predictions and effects of anomalous top chromo moments,

    W. Bernreuther and Z. G. Si, “Top quark spin correlations and polarization at the LHC: standard model predictions and effects of anomalous top chromo moments,” Phys. Lett. B725 (2013) 115 Erratum: [Phys. Lett. B 744 (2015) 413]

    2013

  25. [32]

    A Method to Determine|Vcb| at the Weak Scale in Top Decays at the LHC,

    P. F. Harrison and V . E. Vladimirov, “A Method to Determine|Vcb| at the Weak Scale in Top Decays at the LHC,” JHEP 1901 (2019) 191

    2019

  26. [33]

    Averages ofb-hadron, c-hadron , and τ-lepton properties as of summer 2016,

    Y . Amhis et al. [Heavy Flavour Averaging Group], “Averages ofb-hadron, c-hadron , and τ-lepton properties as of summer 2016," Eur. Phys. J. C77 (2017) 895, updated results and plots available at https://hflav.web.cern.ch/

    2017

  27. [34]

    Standard Model Physics at the HL-LHC and HE-LHC,

    P. Azzi et al. [HL-LHC Collaboration and HE-LHC Working Group], “Standard Model Physics at the HL-LHC and HE-LHC,” arXiv:1902.04070 [hep-ph]

    1902 arXiv

  28. [35]

    CP Violation in the Renormalizable Theory of Weak Interaction,

    M. Kobayashi and T. Maskawa, “CP Violation in the Renormalizable Theory of Weak Interaction,” Prog. Theor. Phys. 49 (1973) 652

    1973

  29. [36]

    New physics and CP violation in singly Cabibbo suppressed D decays,

    Y . Grossman, A. L. Kagan and Y . Nir, “New physics and CP violation in singly Cabibbo suppressed D decays,” Phys. Rev. D75 (2007) 036008. 10 Summary of Working Group 5: Heavy Flavours

    2007

  30. [37]

    Observation of CP Violation in Charm Decays,

    R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], “Observation of CP Violation in Charm Decays,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (2019) 211803

    2019

  31. [38]

    Direct CP asymmetry in D→ π−π + and D→ K−K+ in QCD-based approach,

    A. Khodjamirian and A. A. Petrov, “Direct CP asymmetry in D→ π−π + and D→ K−K+ in QCD-based approach,” Phys. Lett. B 774 (2017) 235

    2017

  32. [39]

    Sum Rules of Charm CP Asymmetries beyond the SU(3) F Limit,

    S. Müller, U. Nierste and S. Schacht, “Sum Rules of Charm CP Asymmetries beyond the SU(3) F Limit,” Phys. Rev. Lett.115 (2015) 251802

    2015

  33. [40]

    Test of lepton universality usingB+→ K+𝓁+𝓁− decays,

    R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], “Test of lepton universality usingB+→ K+𝓁+𝓁− decays,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 113 (2014) 151601

    2014

  34. [41]

    Test of lepton universality withB0→ K∗0𝓁+𝓁− decays,

    R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], “Test of lepton universality withB0→ K∗0𝓁+𝓁− decays,” JHEP 1708 (2017) 055

    2017

  35. [42]

    Search for lepton-universality violation in B+→ K+𝓁+𝓁− decays,

    R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], “Search for lepton-universality violation in B+→ K+𝓁+𝓁− decays,” Phys. Rev. Lett.122 (2019) 191801

    2019

  36. [43]

    Test of lepton flavor universality inB→ K∗𝓁+𝓁− decays at Belle,

    A. Abdesselam et al. [Belle Collaboration], “Test of lepton flavor universality inB→ K∗𝓁+𝓁− decays at Belle,” arXiv:1904.02440 [hep-ex]

    1904 arXiv

  37. [44]

    Measurement of R(D) and R(D∗) with a semileptonic tagging method,

    A. Abdesselam et al. [Belle Collaboration], “Measurement of R(D) and R(D∗) with a semileptonic tagging method,” arXiv:1904.08794 [hep-ex]

    1904 arXiv

  38. [45]

    Angular analysis of the B0→ K∗0µ +µ− decay using 3 fb−1 of integrated luminosity,

    R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], “Angular analysis of the B0→ K∗0µ +µ− decay using 3 fb−1 of integrated luminosity,” JHEP1602 (2016) 104

    2016

  39. [46]

    Implications from clean observables for the binned analysis of B→ K∗µ +µ− at large recoil,

    S. Descotes-Genon, J. Matias, M. Ramon and J. Virto, “Implications from clean observables for the binned analysis of B→ K∗µ +µ− at large recoil,” JHEP 1301 (2013) 048

    2013

  40. [47]

    Understanding the B→ K∗µ +µ− Anomaly,

    S. Descotes-Genon, J. Matias and J. Virto, “Understanding the B→ K∗µ +µ− Anomaly,” Phys. Rev. D 88 (2013) 074002

    2013

  41. [48]

    Global analysis of b→ s𝓁𝓁 anomalies,

    S. Descotes-Genon, L. Hofer, J. Matias and J. Virto, “Global analysis of b→ s𝓁𝓁 anomalies,” JHEP 1606 (2016) 092

    2016

  42. [49]

    Lepton-Flavor-Dependent Angular Analysis of B→ K∗𝓁+𝓁−,

    S. Wehle et al. [Belle Collaboration], “Lepton-Flavor-Dependent Angular Analysis of B→ K∗𝓁+𝓁−,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 118 (2017) 111801

    2017

  43. [50]

    Angular analysis ofB0 d→ K∗µ +µ− decays in pp collisions at√s = 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector,

    M. Aaboud et al. [ATLAS Collaboration], “Angular analysis ofB0 d→ K∗µ +µ− decays in pp collisions at√s = 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector,” JHEP1810 (2018) 047

    2018

  44. [51]

    Measurement of angular parameters from the decay B0→ K∗0µ +µ− in proton-proton collisions at√s = 8 TeV ,

    A. M. Sirunyan et al. [CMS Collaboration], “Measurement of angular parameters from the decay B0→ K∗0µ +µ− in proton-proton collisions at√s = 8 TeV ,” Phys. Lett. B781 (2018) 517

    2018

  45. [52]

    Symmetries and Asymmetries of B→ K∗µ +µ− Decays in the Standard Model and Beyond,

    W. Altmannshofer, P. Ball, A. Bharucha, A. J. Buras, D. M. Straub and M. Wick, “Symmetries and Asymmetries of B→ K∗µ +µ− Decays in the Standard Model and Beyond,” JHEP 0901 (2009) 019

    2009

  46. [53]

    Long-distance effects in B→ K∗𝓁𝓁 from analyticity,

    C. Bobeth, M. Chrzaszcz, D. van Dyk and J. Virto, “Long-distance effects in B→ K∗𝓁𝓁 from analyticity,” Eur. Phys. J. C78 (2018) 451

    2018

  47. [54]

    Form-factors from light-cone sum rules with B-meson distribution amplitudes,

    A. Khodjamirian, T. Mannel and N. Offen, “Form-factors from light-cone sum rules with B-meson distribution amplitudes,” Phys. Rev. D75 (2007) 054013

    2007

  48. [55]

    Charm-loop effect inB→ K(∗)𝓁+𝓁− and B→ K∗γ,

    A. Khodjamirian, T. Mannel, A. A. Pivovarov and Y .-M. Wang, “Charm-loop effect inB→ K(∗)𝓁+𝓁− and B→ K∗γ,” JHEP 1009 (2010) 089

    2010

  49. [56]

    B→ P and B→ V Form Factors from B-Meson Light-Cone Sum Rules beyond Leading Twist,

    N. Gubernari, A. Kokulu and D. van Dyk, “ B→ P and B→ V Form Factors from B-Meson Light-Cone Sum Rules beyond Leading Twist,” JHEP1901 (2019) 150. 11 Summary of Working Group 5: Heavy Flavours

    2019

  50. [57]

    Light-Cone Sum Rules for B→ Kπ Form Factors and Applications to Rare Decays,

    S. Descotes-Genon, A. Khodjamirian and J. Virto, “Light-Cone Sum Rules for B→ Kπ Form Factors and Applications to Rare Decays,” arXiv:1908.02267 [hep-ph]

    1908 arXiv

  51. [58]

    Higher-twist B-meson Distribution Amplitudes in HQET,

    V . M. Braun, Y . Ji and A. N. Manashov, “Higher-twist B-meson Distribution Amplitudes in HQET,” JHEP 1705 (2017) 022

    2017

  52. [59]

    Radiative leptonic decayB→ γ𝓁ν𝓁 with subleading power corrections,

    M. Beneke, V . M. Braun, Y . Ji and Y . B. Wei, “Radiative leptonic decayB→ γ𝓁ν𝓁 with subleading power corrections,” JHEP1807 (2018) 154

    2018

  53. [61]

    Revisiting the vector leptoquark explanation of the B-physics anomalies,

    C. Cornella, J. Fuentes-Martin and G. Isidori, “Revisiting the vector leptoquark explanation of the B-physics anomalies,” JHEP 1907 (2019) 168

    2019

  54. [62]

    Framework TDR for the LHCb Upgrade: Technical Design Report,

    I. Bediaga et al. [LHCb Collaboration], “Framework TDR for the LHCb Upgrade: Technical Design Report,” CERN-LHCC-2012-007, LHCb-TDR-12. 12

    2012

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.