Constraints on exclusive branching fractions $${\mathcal {B}}_i(B^+\rightarrow X_c^il^+\nu )$$ B i ( B + → X c i l + ν ) from moment measurements in inclusive $$B\rightarrow X_cl\nu $$ B → X c l ν decays
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As an alternative to direct measurements, we extract the branching fractions $${\mathcal {B}}_i(B^+\rightarrow X_c^il^+\nu )$$ 1 with $$X_c^i=D,D^*,D_0,D'_1,D_1,D_2,D',D'^{*}$$ and non-resonant final states $$(D^{(*)}\pi )_{nr}$$ , from a fit to electron energy, hadronic mass and combined hadronic mass–energy moments measured in inclusive $$B\rightarrow X_cl\nu $$ decays. The fit is performed by constraining the sum of exclusive branching fractions to the measured $${\mathcal {B}} (B^+\rightarrow X_c l^+\nu )$$ value, and with different sets of additional constraints for the directly measured branching fractions. There is no fit scenario in which a single branching fraction can close the gap between $${\mathcal {B}} (B^+\rightarrow X_c l^+\nu )$$ and the sum of known branching fractions $${\mathcal {B}}_i(B^+\rightarrow X_c^il^+\nu )$$ . The fitted $${\mathcal {B}}(B^+\rightarrow \overline{D}^{*0}l^+\nu )$$ is found to be significantly larger than its direct measurement. $${\mathcal {B}}(B^+\rightarrow \overline{D}^0l^+\nu )$$ is in good agreement with the direct measurement; when $${\mathcal {B}}(B^+\rightarrow \overline{D}^{*0} l^+\nu )$$ is constrained the fitted $${\mathcal {B}}(B^+\rightarrow \overline{D}^0l^+\nu )$$ increases. Within large uncertainties, $${\mathcal {B}}(B^+\rightarrow \overline{D}'^0_1l^+\nu )$$ agrees with direct measurements. Depending on the fit scenario, $${\mathcal {B}}(B^+\rightarrow \overline{D}^0_0l^+\nu )$$ is consistent with or larger than its direct measurement. The fit is not able to easily disentangle $$B^+\rightarrow \overline{D}^0_1l^+\nu $$ and $$B^+\rightarrow \overline{D}^0_2l^+\nu $$ , and tends to increase the sum of these two branching fractions. $${\mathcal {B}} (B^+\rightarrow (D^{(*)}\pi )_{nr}l^+\nu )$$ with non-resonant $$(D^{(*)}\pi )_{nr}$$ final states is found to be of the order $$0.3~\%$$ . No indication is found for significant contributions from so far unmeasured $$B^+\rightarrow \overline{D}'^{(*)0}l^+\nu $$ decays.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".