pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.26213 · v1 · pith:K5CAFX4Onew · submitted 2026-05-25 · ✦ hep-ph

Unitarity bounds and form-factor predictions for B-meson decays

Nico Gubernari This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-29 21:10 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph
keywords B-meson decaysform factorsunitarity boundsBGL parametrizationdispersive matrix methodsemileptonic decaysGG parametrization
0
0 comments X

The pith

Standard BGL and DM unitarity constructions for B-meson form factors are rigorous only when no subthreshold cuts are present, a condition met solely by B to pi decays.

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

The paper reviews unitarity bounds on form factors in B-meson decays and the parametrizations BGL, BCL, CLN, and DM that implement them. It demonstrates that BGL and DM are strictly valid only in the absence of subthreshold cuts, which for B decays occurs exclusively in the B to pi case. The GG parametrization is developed in full to handle the generic situation with cuts, and the same logic is extended to a DM-like approach. Three combined analyses are then performed to produce form-factor predictions over the entire semileptonic kinematic range for the channels B to pi with Bs to K(*), B to K(*) with Bs to phi, and B to D(*) with Bs to Ds(*). Readers care because these bounds and predictions directly affect the precision with which CKM elements can be extracted from semileptonic data.

Core claim

The paper shows that the standard BGL and DM constructions encode unitarity information from dispersion relations in a way that remains rigorous only when subthreshold cuts are absent, a requirement satisfied solely by the B to pi form factors. To treat the general case the GG parametrization is fully developed and shown to extend the same unitarity logic, allowing equivalent DM-like constructions. Three combined fits are carried out that yield concrete form-factor predictions across the full semileptonic region together with posterior samples.

What carries the argument

The GG parametrization, which incorporates unitarity bounds while properly accounting for subthreshold cuts in the analytic structure of the form factors.

If this is right

  • Form-factor predictions over the full semileptonic region are obtained for B to pi and Bs to K(*).
  • Form-factor predictions over the full semileptonic region are obtained for B to K(*) and Bs to phi.
  • Form-factor predictions over the full semileptonic region are obtained for B to D(*) and Bs to Ds(*).
  • All predictions come with posterior samples that can be used in further phenomenological studies.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Analyses that previously applied BGL or DM to channels with subthreshold cuts may need re-examination once the GG construction is adopted.
  • The demonstrated equivalence of BGL and DM suggests that apparent differences between those methods in the literature arise from cut handling rather than from distinct unitarity content.
  • The combined-fit approach could be repeated with updated lattice inputs to reduce uncertainties on extracted CKM matrix elements.

Load-bearing premise

The unitarity information encoded in the dispersion relations remains sufficient to constrain the form factors once subthreshold cuts are present and that the combined fits do not introduce uncontrolled systematic bias from the choice of parametrization or from the assumed analytic structure.

What would settle it

An independent lattice-QCD calculation of a form factor such as B to K at a point inside the semileptonic region that lies outside the uncertainty band obtained from the GG-based combined fit would directly test whether the extended bounds hold.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.26213 by Nico Gubernari.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Analytic structure of a generic B → M FF in the complex q 2 plane. The FF is analytic everywhere except for isolated poles (two are shown in this example), located at q 2 = (mJ Γ,i) 2 , and for branch cuts along the positive real axis. The first branch point occurs at the lowest multi-particle threshold sΓ, which can lie below the threshold s+ because of rescattering effects. The branch cut then extends to… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Representation of the domain of the correlator Π [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Illustration of the conformal transformation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Comparison between the DM band and the optimized finite-order BGL band for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Consequently, an expansion of GF in monomials of z does not directly lead to a diagonal bound, because the monomials are orthonormal on the full circle, not on the arc corresponding to s ≥ s+. Assuming for the moment that no poles are present in the interval [sΓ, s+], I introduce the positive quantity [7] ∆χ J Γ (Q 2 ; d − 1) := 1 π Z s+ sΓ ds WF (s) |F(s)| 2 . (4.3) 31 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Illustration of the conformal transformation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Illustration of the conformal transformation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Real part of the toy function F toy(z) := −z + 1 2 z 2 + 10−2 √ z + 0.33, together with its Taylor expansions around z = 0 truncated at orders N = 2, . . . , 10 (coloured curves). Although the non-analytic contribution is small, the interior singularity controls the Taylor coefficients, so higher-order truncations worsen the approximation outside the convergence disk. This illustrates why a subthreshold cu… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Dependence of the FF uncertainties on the subtraction point [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p038_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Dependence of the FF uncertainties on the number of additional subtractions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p039_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Dependence of the FF uncertainties on the normalization factor [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p040_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Dependence of the allowed GG interval for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p041_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Comparison between the GG and plain BGL intervals for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p042_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Posterior probability densities of the saturation observables entering the three combined [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p051_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Representative posterior FF results for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p052_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Representative posterior FF results for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p053_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Representative posterior FF results for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p054_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Comparison between posterior B → K FF results obtained with the GG and plain BGL parametrizations for f BK + (left) and f BK 0 (right). Both fits are performed at truncation order N = 4 and use only the lattice-QCD inputs of Refs. [125, 126]; the HPQCD 2022 dataset [76] is omitted so that the difference between the two parametrizations remains visible. The two fits agree very well in the vicinity of the h… view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Comparison of the present GG fit with the nominal HQET fit of Ref. [77] for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p055_18.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

This paper is organized around three main objectives. First, I review in a pedagogical way the unitarity bounds for form factors in $B$-meson decays, together with the parametrizations most commonly used in phenomenological analyses. These include BGL, BCL, CLN, and the Dispersive Matrix (DM) method. I also clarify the relation between BGL and DM, showing that they are two equivalent implementations of the same unitarity information. Second, I demonstrate that the standard BGL and DM constructions are strictly rigorous only when no subthreshold cuts are present. For $B$-meson decays, this requirement is fulfilled exclusively by the $B\to\pi$ FFs. To treat the generic case, I fully develop the GG parametrization introduced in previous work and show how the same logic extends to a DM-like construction. Third, I perform three combined analyses and obtain form-factor predictions over the full semileptonic region: one for $B\to\pi$ and $B_s\to K^{(*)}$, one for $B\to K^{(*)}$ and $B_s\to \phi$, and one for $B\to D^{(*)}$ and $B_s\to D_s^{(*)}$. All numerical results, posterior samples, analysis files, and plots are provided in the supplementary material (https://github.com/gubernari/suppl-unitb).

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.

Referee Report

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript reviews unitarity bounds and parametrizations (BGL, BCL, CLN, DM) for B-meson form factors, demonstrates BGL-DM equivalence under the no-subthreshold-cut condition, shows that this condition holds only for B→π among common channels, develops the GG parametrization (and DM-like extension) for the generic case with cuts, and reports three combined analyses yielding form-factor predictions over the full semileptonic region for (B→π, Bs→K(*)), (B→K(*), Bs→φ), and (B→D(*), Bs→Ds(*)), with all posterior samples, analysis files, and plots released publicly.

Significance. If the central construction holds, the work supplies a systematically extendable unitarity framework that removes an unphysical restriction present in prior BGL/DM implementations, directly enabling controlled analyses of additional channels. The public release of all numerical results and analysis files constitutes a clear strength, permitting independent verification of the combined fits and reducing the risk of hidden parametrization bias.

minor comments (3)
  1. [§2] §2 (review of BGL/DM equivalence): the statement that the two methods are 'two equivalent implementations of the same unitarity information' would be strengthened by an explicit side-by-side comparison of the resulting coefficient constraints or by reference to a specific equation showing the mapping.
  2. [§4] The three combined analyses are described only at the level of the channels involved; a brief statement of the number of data points, the kinematic ranges, and the treatment of experimental correlations would improve clarity without altering the central claims.
  3. [Figures in §4] Figure captions for the form-factor plots should explicitly note whether the bands include only statistical or also systematic uncertainties from the dispersion-relation truncation.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive and constructive report, which accurately summarizes the scope and contributions of the manuscript. We are pleased that the referee recognizes the systematic extension of the unitarity framework and the value of the public supplementary material.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity identified

full rationale

The derivation chain rests on external unitarity bounds and dispersion relations, with the paper internally demonstrating the BGL/DM equivalence and the no-subthreshold-cut restriction via its own analytic-structure analysis; the GG parametrization is extended here from prior introduction but is not load-bearing for the core claims. The three combined analyses are explicitly described as fits with public posteriors, so the resulting form-factor values are presented as constrained extrapolations rather than pure predictions that reduce to inputs by construction. No self-definitional loops, fitted quantities renamed as independent predictions, or unverified self-citation chains appear in the load-bearing steps.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work rests on the standard assumption that dispersion relations and unitarity provide useful bounds on form factors; no new free parameters or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Unitarity and analyticity of form factors imply dispersion relations that can be used to derive bounds.
    Invoked throughout the review of BGL, BCL, CLN, and DM methods.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5771 in / 1346 out tokens · 29598 ms · 2026-06-29T21:10:54.428323+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Decay constants of $B_c$-mesons with vector and tensor currents

    hep-ph 2026-06 conditional novelty 6.0

    QCD sum-rule computation of vector/axial-vector and tensor/axial-tensor decay constants for B_c, B_c*, B_c0*, B_c1 mesons, with refined power corrections and first tensor results.

  2. $|V_{cb}|$ determinations from $\bar{B} \to D^{(*)} \ell \bar\nu$ decays within the SM and beyond

    hep-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Fits to B to D(*) l nu form factors with BSZ, BGL and HQET yield |V_cb| matching PDG average for BGL but smaller for HQET, while data still allows non-zero new physics contributions.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

117 extracted references · 98 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers · 55 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Unitarity bounds and form-factor predictions forB-meson decays

    N. Gubernari,Supplementary material for the paper “Unitarity bounds and form-factor predictions forB-meson decays”, GitHub repository,github.com/gubernari/suppl-unitb, 2026

    2026

  2. [2]

    C.G. Boyd, B. Grinstein and R.F. Lebed,Precision corrections to dispersive bounds on form-factors,Phys. Rev. D56(1997) 6895 [hep-ph/9705252]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  3. [3]

    Model-independent description of $B\to \pi l\nu$ decays and a determination of $|V_{ub}|$

    C. Bourrely, I. Caprini and L. Lellouch,Model-independent description ofB→πℓνdecays and a determination of|V ub|,Phys. Rev. D79(2009) 013008 [0807.2722]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  4. [4]

    Dispersive Bounds on the Shape of B -> D^(*) l nu Form Factors

    I. Caprini, L. Lellouch and M. Neubert,Dispersive bounds on the shape of ¯B→D (∗)ℓ¯ν form-factors,Nucl. Phys. B530(1998) 153 [hep-ph/9712417]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  5. [5]

    Bourrely, B

    C. Bourrely, B. Machet and E. de Rafael,Semileptonic Decays of Pseudoscalar Particles (M→M ′ℓνℓ) and Short Distance Behavior of Quantum Chromodynamics,Nucl. Phys. B 189(1981) 157

    1981

  6. [6]

    Lattice-Constrained Unitarity Bounds for $\bar B^0 \to \pi^+ l^- \bar \nu_l$ Decays

    L. Lellouch,Lattice constrained unitarity bounds for ¯B0 →π +ℓ¯νdecays,Nucl. Phys. B479 (1996) 353 [hep-ph/9509358]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  7. [7]

    Gopal and N

    A. Gopal and N. Gubernari,Unitarity bounds with subthreshold and anomalous cuts for b-hadron decays,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) L031501 [2412.04388]

    work page arXiv 2025

  8. [8]

    Charm-loop effect in $B \to K^{(*)} \ell^{+} \ell^{-}$ and $B\to K^*\gamma$

    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 internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  9. [9]

    $B \to K \ell^{+}\ell^{-}$ decay at large hadronic recoil

    A. Khodjamirian, T. Mannel and Y.M. Wang,B→Kℓ +ℓ− decay at large hadronic recoil, JHEP02(2013) 010 [1211.0234]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  10. [10]

    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]. 63

    work page arXiv 2021

  11. [11]

    Feldmann and N

    T. Feldmann and N. Gubernari,Non-factorisable contributions of strong-penguin operators inΛ b →Λℓ +ℓ− decays,JHEP03(2024) 152 [2312.14146]

    work page arXiv 2024

  12. [12]

    Hurth, A

    T. Hurth, A. Khodjamirian, F. Mahmoudi, D. Mishra, Y. Monceaux and S. Neshatpour, Nonlocal form factor of chromomagnetic penguin inB→Kℓ +ℓ− from QCD light-cone sum rules,2512.10868

    work page arXiv

  13. [13]

    B_{d,s}->rho, omega, K*, phi Decay Form Factors from Light-Cone Sum Rules Revisited

    P. Ball and R. Zwicky,B d,s →ρ, ω, K ∗, ϕdecay form-factors from light-cone sum rules revisited,Phys. Rev. D71(2005) 014029 [hep-ph/0412079]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  14. [14]

    (A)symmetries of weak decays at and near the kinematic endpoint

    G. Hiller and R. Zwicky,(A)symmetries of weak decays at and near the kinematic endpoint, JHEP03(2014) 042 [1312.1923]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  15. [15]

    Ahlfors,Complex Analysis, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 2 ed

    L.V. Ahlfors,Complex Analysis, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 2 ed. (1966)

    1966

  16. [16]

    Caprini,Functional Analysis and Optimization Methods in Hadron Physics, SpringerBriefs in Physics, Springer (2019), 10.1007/978-3-030-18948-8

    I. Caprini,Functional Analysis and Optimization Methods in Hadron Physics, SpringerBriefs in Physics, Springer (2019), 10.1007/978-3-030-18948-8

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-030-18948-8 2019

  17. [17]

    Dispersion relations: foundations

    B. Kubis,Dispersion relations: foundations, 10, 2025 [2510.01962]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  18. [18]

    R. de L. Kronig,On the theory of dispersion of x-rays,Journal of the Optical Society of America12(1926) 547

    1926

  19. [19]

    Kramers,La diffusion de la lumi` ere par les atomes, inAtti del Congresso Internazionale dei Fisici, vol

    H.A. Kramers,La diffusion de la lumi` ere par les atomes, inAtti del Congresso Internazionale dei Fisici, vol. 2, (Como), p. 545, Zanichelli, 1927

    1927

  20. [20]

    QCD Sum Rules, a Modern Perspective

    P. Colangelo and A. Khodjamirian,QCD sum rules, a modern perspective,hep-ph/0010175

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  21. [21]

    Dispersion representations and anomalous singularities of the triangle diagram

    W. Lucha, D. Melikhov and S. Simula,Dispersion representations and anomalous singularities of the triangle diagram,Phys. Rev. D75(2007) 016001 [hep-ph/0610330]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  22. [22]

    Dispersion relation for hadronic light-by-light scattering: theoretical foundations

    G. Colangelo, M. Hoferichter, M. Procura and P. Stoffer,Dispersion relation for hadronic light-by-light scattering: theoretical foundations,JHEP09(2015) 074 [1506.01386]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  23. [23]

    Mutke, M

    S. Mutke, M. Hoferichter and B. Kubis,Anomalous thresholds inB→(P, V)γ ∗ form factors,JHEP07(2024) 276 [2406.14608]

    work page arXiv 2024

  24. [24]

    Meiman,Analytic expressions for upper limits of coupling constants in quantum field theory,Sov

    N.N. Meiman,Analytic expressions for upper limits of coupling constants in quantum field theory,Sov. Phys. JETP17(1963) 830

    1963

  25. [25]

    Geshkenbein and B.L

    B.V. Geshkenbein and B.L. Ioffe,Upper limits for coupling constants in quantum field theory,Phys. Rev. Lett.11(1963) 55

    1963

  26. [26]

    Okubo,Exact bounds forK l3 decay parameters,Phys

    S. Okubo,Exact bounds forK l3 decay parameters,Phys. Rev. D3(1971) 2807

    1971

  27. [27]

    Okubo and I.-F

    S. Okubo and I.-F. Shih,Exact inequality and test of chiralSW(3)theory inK l3 decay problem,Phys. Rev. D4(1971) 2020

    1971

  28. [28]

    de Rafael and J

    E. de Rafael and J. Taron,Constraints on heavy meson form-factors,Phys. Lett. B282 (1992) 215

    1992

  29. [29]

    Analyticity Properties and Unitarity Constraints of Heavy Meson Form Factors

    E. de Rafael and J. Taron,Analyticity properties and unitarity constraints of heavy meson form-factors,Phys. Rev. D50(1994) 373 [hep-ph/9306214]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  30. [30]

    C.G. Boyd, B. Grinstein and R.F. Lebed,Constraints on form-factors for exclusive semileptonic heavy to light meson decays,Phys. Rev. Lett.74(1995) 4603 [hep-ph/9412324]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  31. [31]

    C.G. Boyd, B. Grinstein and R.F. Lebed,Model independent extraction of|V cb|using dispersion relations,Phys. Lett. B353(1995) 306 [hep-ph/9504235]. 64

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  32. [32]

    Wilson,Nonlagrangian models of current algebra,Phys

    K.G. Wilson,Nonlagrangian models of current algebra,Phys. Rev.179(1969) 1499

    1969

  33. [33]

    Wilson,The Renormalization Group and Strong Interactions,Phys

    K.G. Wilson,The Renormalization Group and Strong Interactions,Phys. Rev. D3(1971) 1818

    1971

  34. [34]

    Wilson and J.B

    K.G. Wilson and J.B. Kogut,The Renormalization group and the epsilon expansion,Phys. Rept.12(1974) 75

    1974

  35. [35]

    Reinders, H

    L.J. Reinders, H. Rubinstein and S. Yazaki,Hadron Properties from QCD Sum Rules,Phys. Rept.127(1985) 1

    1985

  36. [36]

    Khodjamirian,Hadron Form Factors, CRC Press (4, 2020), 10.1201/9781315142005

    A. Khodjamirian,Hadron Form Factors, CRC Press (4, 2020), 10.1201/9781315142005. [37]Flavour Lattice A veraging Group (FLAG)collaboration,FLAG Review 2021,Eur. Phys. J. C82(2022) 869 [2111.09849]

    work page doi:10.1201/9781315142005 2020

  37. [37]

    Condensates in Quantum Chromodynamics

    B.L. Ioffe,Condensates in quantum chromodynamics,Phys. Atom. Nucl.66(2003) 30 [hep-ph/0207191]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  38. [38]

    Theoretical and Phenomenological Constraints on Form Factors for Radiative and Semi-Leptonic B-Meson Decays

    A. Bharucha, T. Feldmann and M. Wick,Theoretical and Phenomenological Constraints on Form Factors for Radiative and Semi-LeptonicB-Meson Decays,JHEP09(2010) 090 [1004.3249]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  39. [39]

    Electroweak gauge bosons self--energies: complete QCD corrections

    A. Djouadi and P. Gambino,Electroweak gauge bosons selfenergies: Complete QCD corrections,Phys. Rev. D49(1994) 3499 [hep-ph/9309298]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  40. [40]

    Generet, N

    T. Generet, N. Gubernari and E. Loisa,Correlator with tensor currents and two masses at two loops,Eur. Phys. J. C86(2026) 112 [2509.02776]

    work page arXiv 2026

  41. [41]

    Moments of heavy quark correlators with two masses: exact mass dependence to three loops

    J. Grigo, J. Hoff, P. Marquard and M. Steinhauser,Moments of heavy quark correlators with two masses: exact mass dependence to three loops,Nucl. Phys. B864(2012) 580 [1206.3418]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  42. [42]

    Martinelli, S

    G. Martinelli, S. Simula and L. Vittorio,Constraints for the semileptonic B→D(*) form factors from lattice QCD simulations of two-point correlation functions,Phys. Rev. D104 (2021) 094512 [2105.07851]

    work page arXiv 2021

  43. [43]

    Melis, F

    A. Melis, F. Sanfilippo and S. Simula,Hadronic susceptibilities for b to c transitions from two point correlation functions,PoSLATTICE2023(2024) 243 [2401.03920]

    work page arXiv 2024

  44. [44]

    Harrison, ¯bcsusceptibilities from fully relativistic lattice QCD,Phys

    J. Harrison, ¯bcsusceptibilities from fully relativistic lattice QCD,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 054506 [2405.01390]. [46]Particle Data Groupcollaboration,Review of particle physics,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 030001. [47]ETMcollaboration,Masses and decay constants ofD ∗ (s) andB ∗ (s) mesons with Nf = 2 + 1 + 1twisted mass fermions,Phys. Rev. D96(2017) 034524 [1707.04529]

    work page arXiv 2024

  45. [45]

    Blake, S

    T. Blake, S. Meinel, M. Rahimi and D. van Dyk,Dispersive bounds for local form factors in Λb →Λtransitions,Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 094509 [2205.06041]

    work page arXiv 2023

  46. [46]

    Amhis, M

    Y. Amhis, M. Bordone and M. Reboud,Dispersive analysis ofΛ b →Λ(1520)local form factors,JHEP02(2023) 010 [2208.08937]

    work page arXiv 2023

  47. [47]

    Herren, B

    F. Herren, B. Kubis and R. van Tonder,Model-independent parametrization ofB→ππℓ¯ν decays,Phys. Rev. D112(2025) 014037 [2502.20960]

    work page arXiv 2025

  48. [48]

    Comment on the heavy-->light form factors

    D. Becirevic and A.B. Kaidalov,Comment on the heavy→light form-factors,Phys. Lett. B 478(2000) 417 [hep-ph/9904490]. 65

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  49. [49]

    New Results on B->pi, K, eta Decay Formfactors from Light-Cone Sum Rules

    P. Ball and R. Zwicky,New results onB→π, K, ηdecay formfactors from light-cone sum rules,Phys. Rev. D71(2005) 014015 [hep-ph/0406232]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  50. [50]

    |V_ub| from UTangles and B->pi l nu

    P. Ball,|V ub|from UTangles andB→πℓν,Phys. Lett. B644(2007) 38 [hep-ph/0611108]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  51. [51]

    Extracting |V(ub)| from B->pi l nu Decays Using a Multiply-subtracted Omnes Dispersion Relation

    J.M. Flynn and J. Nieves,Extracting|V ub|fromB→πℓνdecays using a multiply-subtracted Omnes dispersion relation,Phys. Rev. D75(2007) 013008 [hep-ph/0607258]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  52. [52]

    Semileptonic $B\to \pi$ Decays from an Omn\`es Improved Nonrelativistic Constituent Quark Model

    C. Albertus, J.M. Flynn, E. Hernandez, J. Nieves and J.M. Verde-Velasco,Semileptonic B→πdecays from an Omnes improved nonrelativistic constituent quark model,Phys. Rev. D72(2005) 033002 [hep-ph/0506048]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  53. [53]

    The $V_{cb}$ puzzle: an update

    P. Gambino, M. Jung and S. Schacht,TheV cb puzzle: An update,Phys. Lett. B795(2019) 386 [1905.08209]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  54. [54]

    Bernlochner, Z

    F.U. Bernlochner, Z. Ligeti and D.J. Robinson,N= 5,6,7,8: Nested hypothesis tests and truncation dependence of|V cb|,Phys. Rev. D100(2019) 013005 [1902.09553]

    work page arXiv 2019

  55. [55]

    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

  56. [56]

    Simula and L

    S. Simula and L. Vittorio,Multiple dispersive bounds. II. Subthreshold branch cuts,Phys. Rev. D113(2026) 074018 [2509.00412]

    work page arXiv 2026

  57. [57]

    Bounds on the slope and the curvature of the scalar K\pi form factor at zero momentum transfer

    C. Bourrely and I. Caprini,Bounds on the slope and the curvature of the scalarKπ form-factor at zero momentum transfer,Nucl. Phys. B722(2005) 149 [hep-ph/0504016]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  58. [58]

    On B -> V l l at small dilepton invariant mass, power corrections, and new physics

    S. J¨ ager and J. Martin Camalich,OnB→V ℓℓat small dilepton invariant mass, power corrections, and new physics,JHEP05(2013) 043 [1212.2263]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  59. [59]

    $B\to K^* \ell^+ \ell^-$ decays at large recoil in the Standard Model: a theoretical reappraisal

    M. Ciuchini, M. Fedele, E. Franco, S. Mishima, A. Paul, L. Silvestrini et al.,B→K ∗ℓ+ℓ− decays at large recoil in the Standard Model: a theoretical reappraisal,JHEP06(2016) 116 [1512.07157]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  60. [60]

    $B\to V\ell^+\ell^-$ in the Standard Model from Light-Cone Sum Rules

    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 internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  61. [61]

    Model-Independent Extraction of $|V_{cb}|$ from $\bar{B}\rightarrow D^* \ell \overline{\nu}$

    B. Grinstein and A. Kobach,Model-Independent Extraction of|V cb|from ¯B→D ∗ℓ¯ν,Phys. Lett. B771(2017) 359 [1703.08170]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  62. [62]

    D. Bigi, P. Gambino and S. Schacht,A fresh look at the determination of|V cb|from B→D ∗ℓν,Phys. Lett. B769(2017) 441 [1703.06124]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  63. [63]

    Biswas, S

    A. Biswas, S. Nandi and I. Ray,Extractions of|V ub|/|Vcb|from a combined study of the exclusiveb→u(c)ℓ −¯νℓ decays,JHEP07(2023) 024 [2212.02528]. [67]Bellecollaboration,Measurement of the CKM matrix element|V cb|fromB 0 →D ∗−ℓ+νℓ at Belle,Phys. Rev. D100(2019) 052007 [1809.03290]. [68]LHCbcollaboration,Measurement of|V cb|withB 0 s →D (∗)− s µ+νµ decays,P...

    work page arXiv 2023

  64. [64]

    Di Carlo, G

    M. Di Carlo, G. Martinelli, M. Naviglio, F. Sanfilippo, S. Simula and L. Vittorio,Unitarity bounds for semileptonic decays in lattice QCD,Phys. Rev. D104(2021) 054502 [2105.02497]. 66

    work page arXiv 2021

  65. [65]

    Martinelli, S

    G. Martinelli, S. Simula and L. Vittorio,Exclusive determinations of|V cb|andR(D ∗) through unitarity,Eur. Phys. J. C82(2022) 1083 [2109.15248]

    work page arXiv 2022

  66. [66]

    Simula and L

    S. Simula and L. Vittorio,Dispersive analysis of the experimental data on the electromagnetic form factor of charged pions at spacelike momenta,Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 094013 [2309.02135]

    work page arXiv 2023

  67. [67]

    Fedele, M

    M. Fedele, M. Blanke, A. Crivellin, S. Iguro, U. Nierste, S. Simula et al.,Discriminating B→D*ℓνform factors via polarization observables and asymmetries,Phys. Rev. D108 (2023) 055037 [2305.15457]

    work page arXiv 2023

  68. [68]

    Martinelli, S

    G. Martinelli, S. Simula and L. Vittorio,Updates on the determination of|V cb|, R(D∗)and |Vub|/|Vcb|,Eur. Phys. J. C84(2024) 400 [2310.03680]

    work page arXiv 2024

  69. [69]

    Juettner and L

    A. Juettner and L. Vittorio,Differences and similarities in modellingb→cform factors, Contribution toBeyond the Flavour Anomalies 2025, agenda.infn.it/event/44057/contributions/257449, Apr., 2025. [76](HPQCD collaboration)§, HPQCDcollaboration,B→KandD→Kform factors from fully relativistic lattice QCD,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 014510 [2207.12468]

    work page arXiv 2025

  70. [70]

    Bordone, N

    M. Bordone, N. Gubernari, M. Jung and D. van Dyk,Challenging B(s) →D (∗) (s) form factors with the heavy quark expansion,JHEP11(2025) 051 [2507.03569]

    work page arXiv 2025

  71. [71]

    Simula and L

    S. Simula and L. Vittorio,Multiple dispersive bounds. I. Thezexpansion,Phys. Rev. D113 (2026) 074017 [2509.00411]

    work page arXiv 2026

  72. [72]

    Lepage and S.J

    G.P. Lepage and S.J. Brodsky,Exclusive Processes in Perturbative Quantum Chromodynamics,Phys. Rev. D22(1980) 2157

    1980

  73. [73]

    Akhoury, G.F

    R. Akhoury, G.F. Sterman and Y.P. Yao,Exclusive semileptonic decays of B mesons into light mesons,Phys. Rev. D50(1994) 358

    1994

  74. [74]

    Bordone, M

    M. Bordone, M. Jung and D. van Dyk,Theory determination of ¯B→D (∗)ℓ−¯νform factors atO(1/m 2 c),Eur. Phys. J. C80(2020) 74 [1908.09398]

    work page arXiv 2020

  75. [75]

    Bernlochner, Z

    F.U. Bernlochner, Z. Ligeti, M. Papucci, M.T. Prim, D.J. Robinson and C. Xiong, Constrained second-order power corrections in HQET:R(D (∗)),|V cb|, and new physics, Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 096015 [2206.11281]

    work page arXiv 2022

  76. [76]

    N.C. Balz, F. Herren, B. Kubis, S. Mutke and M. Reboud,Advanced parametrisations for hadronic form factors,JHEP01(2026) 158 [2510.25584]

    work page arXiv 2026

  77. [77]

    Hoferichter, B

    M. Hoferichter, B. Kubis and S. Mutke,Reconciling hadronic and partonic analyticity in b→sℓℓtransitions,2604.01284

    work page arXiv

  78. [78]

    RunDec: a Mathematica package for running and decoupling of the strong coupling and quark masses

    K.G. Chetyrkin, J.H. Kuhn and M. Steinhauser,RunDec: A Mathematica package for running and decoupling of the strong coupling and quark masses,Comput. Phys. Commun. 133(2000) 43 [hep-ph/0004189]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  79. [79]

    Version 3 of {\tt RunDec} and {\tt CRunDec}

    F. Herren and M. Steinhauser,Version 3 of RunDec and CRunDec,Comput. Phys. Commun.224(2018) 333 [1703.03751]. [87]HPQCDcollaboration,B-meson decay constants: a more complete picture from full lattice QCD,Phys. Rev. D91(2015) 114509 [1503.05762]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  80. [80]

    Pullin and R

    B. Pullin and R. Zwicky,Radiative decays of heavy-light mesons and thef (T) H,H ∗,H1 decay constants,JHEP09(2021) 023 [2106.13617]. 67 [89]Flavour Lattice A veraging Group (FLAG)collaboration,FLAG review 2024,Phys. Rev. D113(2026) 014508 [2411.04268]

    work page arXiv 2021

Showing first 80 references.