MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

$${b\rightarrow c\tau \nu }$$ b → c τ ν transitions in the standard model effective field theory

2019· article· en· W2896244303 on OpenAlexaff
Quan-Yi Hu, Xin-Qiang Li, Ya-Dong Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueThe European Physical Journal C · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Particle Physics
FundersCentral China Normal UniversityMinistry of Education, IndiaChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPhysicsParticle physicsLambdaDimension (graph theory)Standard Model (mathematical formulation)Effective field theoryCombinatoricsQuantum mechanicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.222
Threshold uncertainty score0.316

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations46
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe European Physical Journal CSame topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesFrench-language works237,207