$${b\rightarrow c\tau \nu }$$ b → c τ ν transitions in the standard model effective field theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The $$R(D^{(*)})$$ anomalies observed in $$B\rightarrow D^{(*)}\tau \nu $$ decays have attracted much attention in recent years. In this paper, we study the $$B\rightarrow D^{(*)}\tau \nu $$ , $$\Lambda _b\rightarrow \Lambda _c\tau \nu $$ , $$B_c\rightarrow (J/\psi ,\,\eta _c)\tau \nu $$ , $$B\rightarrow X_c\tau \nu $$ , and $$B_c\rightarrow \tau \nu $$ decays, all being mediated by the same quark-level $$b\rightarrow c\tau \nu $$ transition, in the Standard Model Effective Field Theory. The most relevant dimension-six operators for these processes are $$Q_{lq}^{(3)}$$ , $$Q_{ledq}$$ , $$Q^{(1)}_{lequ}$$ , and $$Q^{(3)}_{lequ}$$ in the Warsaw basis. Evolution of the corresponding Wilson coefficients from the new physics scale $$\Lambda =1$$ TeV down to the characteristic scale $$\mu _b\simeq m_b$$ is performed at three-loop in QCD and one-loop in EW/QED. It is found that, after taking into account the constraint $${{\mathcal {B}}}(B_c\rightarrow \tau \nu )\lesssim 10\%$$ , a single $$\left[ C_{lq}^{(3)}\right] _{3323}(\Lambda )$$ or $$\left[ C^{(3)}_{lequ}\right] _{3332}(\Lambda )$$ can still be used to resolve the $$R(D^{(*)})$$ anomalies at $$1\sigma $$ , while a single $$\left[ C^{(1)}_{lequ}\right] _{3332}(\Lambda )$$ is already ruled out by the measured $$R(D^{(*)})$$ at more than $$3\sigma $$ . By minimizing the $$\chi ^2(C_i)$$ function constructed based on the current data on R(D), $$R(D^*)$$ , $$P_\tau (D^*)$$ , $$R(J/\psi )$$ , and $$R(X_c)$$ , we obtain eleven most trustworthy scenarios, each of which can provide a good explanation of the $$R(D^{(*)})$$ anomalies at $$1\sigma $$ . To further discriminate these different scenarios, we predict thirty-one observables associated with the processes considered under each NP scenario. It is found that most of the scenarios can be differentiated from each other by using these observables and their correlations.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".