2021
DOI: 10.1007/jhep07(2021)099
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Addressing the CKM unitarity problem with a vector-like up quark

Abstract: We point out that hints of deviations from unitarity in the first row of the CKM matrix may be explained by the presence of a single vector-like top. We study how the stringent experimental constraints arising from CP Violation in the kaon sector and from meson mixing such as $$ {D}^0\hbox{-} {\overline{D}}^0,{K}^0\hbox{-} {\overline{K}}^0 $$ D 0 ‐ D … Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

3
34
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(37 citation statements)
references
References 72 publications
(70 reference statements)
3
34
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We first note that only the three representations U , D, or Q 1 (with couplings to both up and down quarks) can explain the CAA [1,[63][64][65] due to their mixing with the SM quarks, while, on the other hand, T 1 or T 2 worsen the CAA. EWPO places multi-TeV mass limits on the VLQs U , D, and Q 1 (for couplings fixed to unity), which come close to ruling out the best-fit regions from the CAA for U and D, while there is actually a small (1σ) preference for the other representations (Q 5,7 and T 1,2 ) driven by R 0 e and R 0 µ .…”
Section: Vector-like Quarksmentioning
confidence: 96%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We first note that only the three representations U , D, or Q 1 (with couplings to both up and down quarks) can explain the CAA [1,[63][64][65] due to their mixing with the SM quarks, while, on the other hand, T 1 or T 2 worsen the CAA. EWPO places multi-TeV mass limits on the VLQs U , D, and Q 1 (for couplings fixed to unity), which come close to ruling out the best-fit regions from the CAA for U and D, while there is actually a small (1σ) preference for the other representations (Q 5,7 and T 1,2 ) driven by R 0 e and R 0 µ .…”
Section: Vector-like Quarksmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…While the anomalies in semi-leptonic B decays and the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon point towards NP related to second-and third-generation fermions, the CAA and the CMS di-lepton excess can be related to first-generation quarks and leptons, with simultaneous explanations possible in terms of the effective dimension-6 operator Q (3) q [62]. Similarly, explanations of the CAA via modified W -u-d couplings also require NP related to first generation-quarks [1,[63][64][65]. In this paper, we take the large array of complementary measurements sensitive to first-generation NP, together with hints for potential NP effects, as motivation to perform a combined analysis, concentrating on possible correlations among the processes listed above.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Following [9], we propose here a solution for CKM unitary problem where it is assumed that s 14 = O(λ 2 ), with λ = |V us |.…”
Section: Salient Features Of S 14 − Dominancementioning
confidence: 99%
“…It has been pointed out that one of the simplest extensions of the SM which can account for this NP, consists of the addition of either one down-type [8] or one up-type [9] vector-like quark (VLQ). In the case of a down-type VLQ the CKM matrix consists of the first 3 rows of a unitary 4 × 4 matrix, while in the case of an up-type VLQ, it consists of the first 3 columns of a 4 × 4 unitary matrix.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The hypothetical VLQs could explain this misalignment between the SM predictions and observed data; this note will address this Beyond Standard Model (BSM) scenario. This class of models can indeed naturally lead to deviations from the CKM unitarity capable of accommodating the recent measurements of |V us | and |V ud | [1,3]. Vector-like quarks (VLQs) are spin 1/2 particles characterised by having the left-and right-handed components defined by the same colour and electroweak quantum numbers.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 96%