arxiv: 2605.06567 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-07 · ✦ hep-ph · hep-ex

Recognition: unknown

Probing unknown nonperturbative effects in b to s ellell with inclusive and exclusive observables

B. Capdevila, E. Lunghi, J. Matias, P. Alvarez-Cartelle

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 08:19 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph hep-ex

keywords b to s ll transitionsnonperturbative hadronic effectsnew physics in flavorinclusive versus exclusive decaysLHCb observablescharming penguins

0 comments

The pith

Ratios of exclusive to inclusive b to s lepton-pair decays distinguish new physics from constant hadronic effects.

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

The paper examines whether the deficits observed in b to s muon-pair branching ratios stem from new physics or from an unknown constant hadronic contribution that mimics it. The key distinction arises because non-factorizable charming-penguin effects from c c-bar loops enter inclusive B to X_s ell ell decays through well-constrained data on e+ e- to hadrons, while in exclusive modes they can appear as an overall shift. By forming ratios of exclusive to inclusive observables, the two scenarios produce different patterns. These ratios can be measured directly at LHCb without external normalization. Present data give a mild preference for the new-physics interpretation.

Core claim

Non-perturbative contributions associated with c c-bar loops affect inclusive B to X_s ell ell and exclusive B to K(*) ell ell modes differently. In inclusive decays factorizable pieces are fixed by e+ e- to hadrons data and non-factorizable pieces are described by resolved-photon or local power corrections, whereas in exclusive decays hypothetical charming-penguin effects beyond current estimates can manifest as a constant universal contribution. Ratios built from exclusive over inclusive branching fractions therefore respond differently to new physics versus such a constant shift, and can be extracted at LHCb without reference to J/psi K(*) modes. A preliminary comparison with existing LHC

What carries the argument

Ratios of exclusive B to K(*) ell ell to inclusive B to X_s ell ell branching fractions in selected q2 bins, which respond differently to a constant hadronic shift than to new-physics Wilson-coefficient shifts.

If this is right

LHCb can extract the ratios directly from its own data without B-factory normalization.
Current data show a mild preference for the new-physics pattern over a constant hadronic shift.
A sum of exclusive modes versus inclusive measurements at high q2 also disfavors a constant hadronic explanation.
Projected precision from LHCb and Belle II will sharpen the discrimination.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Confirmation would resolve whether the b to s muon anomalies are genuine new physics or an artifact of unaccounted hadronics.
The method could be extended to other lepton-flavor modes or to angular observables to further constrain the origin of any deviation.
It highlights the value of combining inclusive and exclusive measurements in future flavor-physics programs.

Load-bearing premise

Any unknown hadronic effects beyond those already included in uncertainty estimates would appear as a constant, universal contribution rather than a kinematics-dependent one.

What would settle it

A measurement of the proposed ratios at the few-percent level that matches the pattern expected for a constant hadronic addition instead of the pattern expected for new-physics shifts in C9 and C10.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.06567 by B. Capdevila, E. Lunghi, J. Matias, P. Alvarez-Cartelle.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: Global fit taken from Ref. [9], 1σ (dark-shaded) and 2σ (light-shaded) confidence regions for (C NP 9µ , C NP 10µ ) scenarios. Distinct fits are performed separating each of the b → sℓ+ℓ − by modes (short-dashed contours), the LFUV observables and the combined b → sµ+µ − modes (long-dashed contours), and the global fit (solid contours). corrections are commonly referred to as resolved photon contributions … view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Result of the profile log-likelihood fit following the strategy presented in Ref. [ view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Current status of experimental and theoretical determinations of the observables view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: B → Xsµµ branching ratio for q 2 > 15 GeV2 calculated using the OPE (R × Buℓν) or as a sum of exclusive and comparison with the experimental determination. We now turn to the comparison of the C9 dependencies of the inclusive mode and the sum of exclusive modes. Part of the remaining difference between the inclusive and the sum of exclusive modes arises from small differences in the input parameters used i… view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: A more detailed comparison of the C9-dependence of the inclusive and exclusive modes under different hypotheses. Green corresponds to the experimental result, Rexp, the red line corresponds to the absence of NP with only hadronic contributions, i.e, R Pexc(C NP 9 = 0, C9,extra), and the blue, yellow and magenta curves correspond to R Pexc(C NP 9 , C9,extra = 0) and R Pexc(C NP 9 , C9,extra = ∓1) respective… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

In this paper we revisit, from a different perspective, a long-standing question: ``Is the systematic deficit observed in all branching ratios mediated by a $b\to s \mu\mu$ transition due to New Physics, or to a hypothetical constant unknown universal hadronic contribution that mimics New Physics?'' The key observation that allows us to distinguish between these two possibilities is that non-perturbative contributions associated with $c\bar c$ loops affect inclusive $B\to X_s \ell\ell$ and exclusive $B\to K^{(*)}\ell\ell$ modes differently. In inclusive decays, factorizable contributions are exactly determined from data on $e^+e^-\to \mathrm{hadrons}$, while non-factorizable corrections are described by resolved-photon contributions at low $q^2$ and by local power corrections at high $q^2$. In exclusive decays, by contrast, hypothetical charming-penguin effects, beyond those already included in current uncertainty estimates, could appear, in a worst-case scenario, as a constant, universal contribution that it seems, in principle, indistinguishable from genuine New Physics. We identify two observables, constructed from ratios of exclusive to inclusive modes, that can discriminate between a New Physics contribution and a constant hadronic contribution. Moreover, these ratios can be measured directly by LHCb, as they do not require any normalisation to $J/\psi K^{(*)}$ branching fractions from B factories. A preliminary evaluation of these observables with present data shows some preference for the New Physics interpretation. In a complementary test, a comparison between inclusive measurements and the corresponding sum of exclusive modes at high $q^2$ similarly disfavours an explanation based on a constant hadronic contribution. Finally, we provide projections for the new observables based on expected LHCb and Belle II measurements in the near future.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This paper gives a practical, normalization-free way for LHCb to test whether the b to s ll deficit is new physics or a constant hadronic term by using exclusive-to-inclusive ratios.

read the letter

The main takeaway is that these two ratio observables can separate a uniform new-physics shift in the Wilson coefficients from a worst-case constant charming-penguin contribution that only hits the exclusive modes. The inclusive rates are anchored to e+e- data plus known power corrections, while the exclusive ones can absorb an extra flat term. That distinction is the core idea, and the paper spells out how to turn it into measurable quantities without relying on B-factory J/psi normalizations. LHCb can run these ratios directly, which is a real practical plus. The preliminary numbers with existing data tilt mildly toward new physics, and the high-q2 inclusive-versus-sum-of-exclusives check points the same way. Projections for near-term LHCb and Belle II data are also given, so the proposal is forward-looking rather than purely theoretical. The argument rests on established QCD treatments for the inclusive side and a conservative worst-case assumption for the exclusive side, which keeps it grounded. The only soft spot is that the current-data preference is still preliminary and will need the full error budgets and correlations worked out in the published version. Nothing in the logic looks circular or self-referential. This is aimed at people already working on the b to s ll anomalies and at the experimental teams who can actually measure the ratios. A flavor physicist or LHCb analyst would get immediate value from the concrete observables and the clear separation of hypotheses. It deserves a serious referee because the central distinction is testable and the observables are new in this framing. I would send it to peer review.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes two observables constructed as ratios of exclusive B→K(*)ℓℓ branching fractions to the inclusive B→Xsℓℓ rate. These ratios are designed to discriminate between New Physics (which rescales Wilson coefficients uniformly across inclusive and exclusive modes) and a hypothetical constant universal hadronic contribution from charming-penguin effects (which would affect only exclusive modes). Inclusive rates are fixed using e⁺e⁻→hadrons data plus resolved-photon and power corrections; exclusive modes may receive an extra constant term. The ratios are normalization-free for direct LHCb measurement, a preliminary data evaluation shows mild preference for the NP hypothesis, a complementary high-q² inclusive-vs-sum-of-exclusives test is presented, and future projections are given.

Significance. If the central distinction holds, the work provides a practical, data-driven method to test the origin of b→sℓℓ deficits without B-factory normalizations, exploiting the different non-perturbative treatments in inclusive versus exclusive decays. Credit is due for the normalization-free construction and the use of established QCD constraints on inclusive modes. This could help resolve whether current anomalies are due to NP or unknown hadronics, with clear implications for future LHCb and Belle II analyses.

major comments (2)

[§4] §4 (preliminary evaluation): the reported mild preference for the New Physics interpretation relies on a comparison of the proposed ratios to existing data, but the manuscript does not provide a quantitative measure (e.g., Δχ² or p-value) of this preference nor a full breakdown of correlated systematics between inclusive and exclusive inputs; this weakens the strength of the data-driven claim even though the method itself is independent of it.
[§3.1] §3.1 (definition of the ratios): the assumption that the hypothetical constant hadronic term is strictly q²-independent and universal across K and K* modes is presented as a worst-case scenario, but the paper does not explore how even mild q² dependence or mode-specific variations in charming-penguin contributions would degrade the discriminating power of the ratios; this is load-bearing for the claim that the observables cleanly separate the two hypotheses.

minor comments (3)

[Introduction] The notation for the two proposed ratios (e.g., R_K and R_{K*}) should be introduced with explicit equations in the introduction or §3 to improve readability before the data comparison.
Figure 2 (or equivalent projection plot): the error bands on future LHCb/Belle II points should be labeled with the assumed integrated luminosities to allow readers to assess the projected sensitivity.
[§2] A reference to the specific e⁺e⁻→hadrons data sets used for the inclusive normalization (e.g., the precise references for the charm-loop contributions) is missing in §2.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading, the positive assessment of the proposed observables, and the recommendation for minor revision. We address each major comment below, indicating revisions where appropriate.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [§4] §4 (preliminary evaluation): the reported mild preference for the New Physics interpretation relies on a comparison of the proposed ratios to existing data, but the manuscript does not provide a quantitative measure (e.g., Δχ² or p-value) of this preference nor a full breakdown of correlated systematics between inclusive and exclusive inputs; this weakens the strength of the data-driven claim even though the method itself is independent of it.

Authors: We agree that the evaluation in §4 is preliminary and that a full quantitative statistical analysis (including Δχ² and a complete covariance matrix) would strengthen the data-driven claim. Such an analysis is limited by the current size of experimental and theoretical uncertainties on both inclusive and exclusive inputs. In the revised manuscript we have added an explicit discussion of the dominant correlated systematics—primarily the inclusive rate normalization from e⁺e⁻ data and shared non-perturbative inputs—and we now state more clearly that the observed preference remains qualitative. We view this as a partial revision that addresses the referee’s concern without overclaiming statistical significance. revision: partial
Referee: [§3.1] §3.1 (definition of the ratios): the assumption that the hypothetical constant hadronic term is strictly q²-independent and universal across K and K* modes is presented as a worst-case scenario, but the paper does not explore how even mild q² dependence or mode-specific variations in charming-penguin contributions would degrade the discriminating power of the ratios; this is load-bearing for the claim that the observables cleanly separate the two hypotheses.

Authors: The constant, universal term is presented precisely because it constitutes the worst-case scenario that most closely mimics a uniform New Physics rescaling. Any mild q² dependence in the hadronic contribution would cause the ratios to acquire a non-flat q² dependence, in contrast to the strictly flat prediction from New Physics. Likewise, non-universality between the K and K* modes would produce differing numerical values for the two ratios. Both effects would therefore make the hadronic hypothesis easier to distinguish from New Physics rather than harder. We have added a short clarifying paragraph in §3.1 making this analytic point explicit; no additional numerical scan is required because the argument follows directly from the construction of the observables. revision: no

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation is self-contained

full rationale

The paper constructs two ratios of exclusive to inclusive b→sℓℓ rates as observables. Inclusive rates are fixed by external e⁺e⁻→hadrons data plus resolved-photon and power corrections; the hypothetical constant charming-penguin term is introduced only as a worst-case addition to exclusive modes. Discrimination follows directly from this differential sensitivity without any fitted parameter being renamed as a prediction, without load-bearing self-citations, and without any ansatz or uniqueness theorem imported from prior work by the same authors. The central claim therefore does not reduce to its inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the differential impact of non-perturbative c cbar loop contributions on inclusive versus exclusive decays, using standard methods for inclusive and a hypothetical extension for exclusive.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Factorizable contributions in inclusive B to X_s ll decays are exactly determined from data on e+e- to hadrons, with non-factorizable corrections described by resolved-photon contributions at low q^2 and local power corrections at high q^2.
Standard approach in inclusive B decays as stated in the abstract.
ad hoc to paper Hypothetical charming-penguin effects in exclusive decays could appear as a constant universal contribution indistinguishable from new physics.
Worst-case scenario introduced to contrast with new physics interpretation.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5653 in / 1525 out tokens · 89689 ms · 2026-05-08T08:19:14.341640+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

Khodjamirian, T

A. Khodjamirian, T. Mannel, A.A. Pivovarov and Y.M. Wang,Charm-loop effect in B→K (∗)ℓ+ℓ− andB→K ∗γ,JHEP09(2010) 089 [1006.4945]

work page arXiv 2010
[2]

Gubernari, A

N. Gubernari, A. Kokulu and D. van Dyk,B→PandB→VForm Factors fromB-Meson Light-Cone Sum Rules beyond Leading Twist,JHEP01(2019) 150 [1811.00983]

work page arXiv 2019
[3]

Bharucha, D.M

A. Bharucha, D.M. Straub and R. Zwicky,B→V ℓ +ℓ− in the Standard Model from light-cone sum rules,JHEP08(2016) 098 [1503.05534]

work page arXiv 2016
[4]

Horgan, Z

R.R. Horgan, Z. Liu, S. Meinel and M. Wingate,RareBdecays using lattice QCD form factors, PoSLA TTICE2014(2015) 372 [1501.00367]. [7]HPQCDcollaboration,B→K and D→K form factors from fully relativistic lattice QCD,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 014510 [2207.12468]

work page arXiv 2015
[5]

Ciuchini, M

M. Ciuchini, M. Fedele, E. Franco, A. Paul, L. Silvestrini and M. Valli,Constraints on lepton universality violation from rare B decays,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 055036 [2212.10516]

work page arXiv 2023
[6]

Alguer´ o, A

M. Alguer´ o, A. Biswas, B. Capdevila, S. Descotes-Genon, J. Matias and M. Novoa-Brunet,To (b)e or not to (b)e: no electrons at LHCb,Eur. Phys. J. C83(2023) 648 [2304.07330]

work page arXiv 2023
[7]

Hurth, F

T. Hurth, F. Mahmoudi, Y. Monceaux and S. Neshatpour,Data-driven analyses and model-independent fits for present b→sℓℓresults,Phys. Rev. D112(2025) 113003 [2508.09986]

work page arXiv 2025
[8]

Gubernari, M

N. Gubernari, M. Reboud, D. van Dyk and J. Virto,Improved theory predictions and global analysis of exclusiveb→sµ +µ− processes,JHEP09(2022) 133 [2206.03797]

work page arXiv 2022
[9]

Gubernari, M

N. Gubernari, M. Reboud, D. van Dyk and J. Virto,Dispersive analysis ofB→K (∗) and Bs →ϕform factors,JHEP12(2023) 153 [2305.06301]

work page arXiv 2023
[10]

Matias, F

J. Matias, F. Mescia, M. Ramon and J. Virto,Complete Anatomy of ¯Bd → ¯K ∗0(→Kπ)l +l− and its angular distribution,JHEP04(2012) 104 [1202.4266]

work page arXiv 2012
[11]

Descotes-Genon, T

S. Descotes-Genon, T. Hurth, J. Matias and J. Virto,Optimizing the basis ofB→K ∗ll observables in the full kinematic range,JHEP05(2013) 137 [1303.5794]. [15]HPQCDcollaboration,Standard Model predictions forB→Kℓ +ℓ−,B→Kℓ − 1 ℓ+ 2 and B→Kν¯νusing form factors from Nf=2+1+1 lattice QCD,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 014511 [2207.13371]. 21

work page arXiv 2013
[12]

Isidori, Z

G. Isidori, Z. Polonsky and A. Tinari,Explicit estimate of charm rescattering in B0→K0ℓ¯ℓ, Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 093007 [2405.17551]

work page arXiv 2025
[13]

Isidori, Z

G. Isidori, Z. Polonsky and A. Tinari,Charm rescattering inB 0 →K 0¯ℓℓ: an improved analysis, Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) 1221 [2507.17824]

work page arXiv 2025
[14]

Asatrian, C

H.M. Asatrian, C. Greub and J. Virto,Exact NLO matching and analyticity inb→sℓℓ,JHEP 04(2020) 012 [1912.09099]

work page arXiv 2020
[15]

Beylich, G

M. Beylich, G. Buchalla and T. Feldmann,Theory ofB→K (∗)ℓ+ℓ− decays at highq 2: OPE and quark-hadron duality,Eur. Phys. J. C71(2011) 1635 [1101.5118]

work page arXiv 2011
[16]

Bordone, G

M. Bordone, G. Isidori, S. M¨ achler and A. Tinari,Short- vs. long-distance physics in B→K (∗)ℓ+ℓ−: a data-driven analysis,Eur. Phys. J. C84(2024) 547 [2401.18007]

work page arXiv 2024
[17]

Hoferichter, B

M. Hoferichter, B. Kubis and S. Mutke,Reconciling hadronic and partonic analyticity inb→sℓℓ transitions,2604.01284

work page arXiv
[18]

Weak decays beyond leading logarithms,

G. Buchalla, A.J. Buras and M.E. Lautenbacher,Weak Decays beyond Leading Logarithms,Rev. Mod. Phys.68(1996) 1125 [hep-ph/9512380]

work page arXiv 1996
[19]

Grinstein, R.P

B. Grinstein, R.P. Springer and M.B. Wise,Effective Hamiltonian for Weak Radiative B Meson Decay,Phys. Lett. B202(1988) 138

1988
[20]

Capdevila, A

B. Capdevila, A. Crivellin, S. Descotes-Genon, J. Matias and J. Virto,Patterns of New Physics inb→sℓ +ℓ− transitions in the light of recent data,JHEP01(2018) 093 [1704.05340]

work page arXiv 2018
[21]

Hardmeier, E

A. Hardmeier, E. Lunghi, D. Pirjol and D. Wyler,Subleading collinear operators and their matrix elements,Nucl. Phys. B682(2004) 150 [hep-ph/0307171]

work page arXiv 2004
[22]

Becher, R.J

T. Becher, R.J. Hill and M. Neubert,Soft collinear messengers: A New mode in soft collinear effective theory,Phys. Rev. D69(2004) 054017 [hep-ph/0308122]

work page arXiv 2004
[23]

Descotes-Genon, L

S. Descotes-Genon, L. Hofer, J. Matias and J. Virto,Global analysis ofb→sℓℓanomalies, JHEP06(2016) 092 [1510.04239]

work page arXiv 2016
[24]

Alguer´ o, B

M. Alguer´ o, B. Capdevila, A. Crivellin, S. Descotes-Genon, P. Masjuan, J. Matias et al., Emerging patterns of New Physics with and without Lepton Flavour Universal contributions, Eur. Phys. J. C79(2019) 714 [1903.09578]

work page arXiv 2019
[25]

Beneke, T

M. Beneke, T. Feldmann and D. Seidel,Systematic approach to exclusiveB→V l +l−,V γ decays,Nucl. Phys. B612(2001) 25 [hep-ph/0106067]

work page arXiv 2001
[26]

Bobeth, M

C. Bobeth, M. Chrzaszcz, D. van Dyk and J. Virto,Long-distance effects inB→K ∗ℓℓfrom analyticity,Eur. Phys. J. C78(2018) 451 [1707.07305]

work page arXiv 2018
[27]

Gubernari, D

N. Gubernari, D. van Dyk and J. Virto,Non-local matrix elements inB (s) → {K (∗), ϕ}ℓ+ℓ−, JHEP02(2021) 088 [2011.09813]

work page arXiv 2021
[28]

Grinstein and D

B. Grinstein and D. Pirjol,Exclusive rareB→K ∗ℓ+ℓ− decays at low recoil: Controlling the long-distance effects,Phys. Rev. D70(2004) 114005 [hep-ph/0404250]

work page arXiv 2004
[29]

Kruger and L.M

F. Kruger and L.M. Sehgal,Lepton polarization in the decaysb→X dµ+µ− andB→X sτ +τ −, Phys. Lett. B380(1996) 199 [hep-ph/9603237]

work page arXiv 1996
[30]

Bobeth, G

C. Bobeth, G. Hiller and D. van Dyk,The Benefits of ¯B→ ¯K ∗l+l− Decays at Low Recoil,JHEP 07(2010) 098 [1006.5013]

work page arXiv 2010
[31]

Beneke, G

M. Beneke, G. Buchalla, M. Neubert and C.T. Sachrajda,Penguins with Charm and Quark-Hadron Duality,Eur. Phys. J. C61(2009) 439 [0902.4446]

work page arXiv 2009
[32]

Huber, T

T. Huber, T. Hurth, J. Jenkins, E. Lunghi, Q. Qin and K.K. Vos,Phenomenology of inclusive B→X sℓ+ℓ− for the Belle II era,JHEP10(2020) 088 [2007.04191]. 22

work page arXiv 2020
[33]

Buchalla, G

G. Buchalla, G. Isidori and S.J. Rey,Corrections of orderΛ 2 QCD /m2 c to inclusive rare B decays, Nucl. Phys. B511(1998) 594 [hep-ph/9705253]

work page arXiv 1998
[34]

Hurth, M

T. Hurth, M. Fickinger, S. Turczyk and M. Benzke,Resolved Power Corrections to the Inclusive Decay ¯B→X sℓ+ℓ−,Nucl. Part. Phys. Proc.285-286(2017) 57 [1711.01162]

work page arXiv 2017
[35]

Benzke, T

M. Benzke, T. Hurth and S. Turczyk,Subleading power factorization in ¯B→X sℓ+ℓ−,JHEP10 (2017) 031 [1705.10366]

work page arXiv 2017
[36]

Benzke and T

M. Benzke and T. Hurth,Resolved1/m b contributions to ¯B→X s,dℓ+ℓ− and ¯B→X sγ,Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 114024 [2006.00624]

work page arXiv 2020
[37]

Ligeti and F.J

Z. Ligeti and F.J. Tackmann,Precise predictions forB→X sl+l− in the largeq 2 region,Phys. Lett. B653(2007) 404 [0707.1694]

work page arXiv 2007
[38]

Huber, T

T. Huber, T. Hurth, J. Jenkins, E. Lunghi, Q. Qin and K.K. Vos,Inclusive B→X sℓ+ℓ− at the LHC: theory predictions and new-physics reach,JHEP11(2024) 130 [2404.03517]. [43]Bellecollaboration,Measurement of Differential Branching Fractions of Inclusive B→X u ℓ+ νℓ Decays,Phys. Rev. Lett.127(2021) 261801 [2107.13855]. [44]Particle Data Groupcollaboration,Rev...

work page arXiv 2024
[39]

Bernlochner, M

F. Bernlochner, M. Jung, M. Khan, G. Landsberg and Z. Ligeti,Novel approaches to determine B±and B0 meson production fractions,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 014007 [2306.04686]

work page arXiv 2024
[40]

$\bar B\to D^{(*)}\ell\bar \nu$ Branching Ratios and Evidence for Isospin Breaking in $\Upsilon(4S)$ Decays

M. Jung and S. Schacht, ¯B→D (∗)ℓ¯νBranching Ratios and Evidence for Isospin Breaking in Υ(4S)Decays,2604.08391. [48]Bellecollaboration,Measurement of the B+/B0 production ratio in e+e- collisions at the Υ(4S)resonance usingB→J/ψ(ℓℓ)Kdecays at Belle,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) L031102 [2207.01194]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023
[41]

Fleischer and T

R. Fleischer and T. Mannel,General analysis of new physics inB→J/ψK,Phys. Lett. B506 (2001) 311 [hep-ph/0101276]. [50]LHCbcollaboration,Differential branching fractions and isospin asymmetries of B→K (∗)µ+µ− decays,JHEP06(2014) 133 [1403.8044]. [51]LHCbcollaboration,Measurements of the S-wave fraction inB 0 →K +π−µ+µ− decays and the B0 →K ∗(892)0µ+µ− diff...

work page arXiv 2001
[42]

Broggio, B

A. Broggio, B. Capdevila, A. Ferroglia and P. Gambino,Structure functions for the inclusive semileptonicb-quark decay at NNLO: a semi-analytic calculation,2601.15447

work page arXiv
[43]

L. Chen, X. Chen, X. Guan and Y.-Q. Ma,Triple Differential Heavy-to-light Semi-leptonic Decays at Next-to-Next-to-Next-to-Leading Order in QCD,2602.11537

work page arXiv
[44]

Black, R

M. Black, R.V. Harlander, J.T. Kohnen, F. Lange, A. Rago, A. Shindler et al.,Bag Parameters for Heavy Meson Lifetimes,2603.28516

work page arXiv
[45]

Black, R

M. Black, R.V. Harlander, J.T. Kohnen, F. Lange, A. Rago, A. Shindler et al.,Heavy-Meson Bag Parameters using Gradient Flow,2603.28517. 24

work page arXiv