Analysis of new charmless strange B decay data leaves high B→Kη′ and B→Kη′X

Abstract

New data confirming the prediction BR(K ± ρ o ) = BR(K ± ω) support flavor-topology B → V P sum rules based on the OZI rule and emphasize the sharp contrast with the failure of the analogous B → P P sum rule due to the anomalously large BR(B → Kη ′ ). Confirmation of OZI validity in B-decay analyses for VP final states suggests improving data on the analogous neutral decay difference BR(which measures tree-penguin interference and possible direct CP violation.A successful approximate isospin sum rule is rearranged and reinterpreted to pinpoint tree-penguin interference in B → Kπ and B → Kρ transitions. The magnitude of the interference is shown to still be at the statistical noise level with present data. * e-mail: ftlipkin@weizmann.ac.il 1 I. TWO INTERESTING SUM RULES AND THEIR IMPLICATIONSA. An interesting flavor-topology sum ruleThe large branching ratio BR(B → Kη ′ ) ≈ 70 · 10 −6 still remains a problem [1], together with the large inclusive branching ratio for B → Kη ′ X (inclusive). The real problem here is that BR(B → Kη ′ ) ≫ BR(B → Kπ). In the standard description of the η and η ′ , their SU(3) octet components belong to the same pseudoscalar octet as the pions. Thus this large difference suggests a contribution to BR(B → Kη ′ ) via the SU(3) singlet component of the η and η ′ . The necessity for this extra contribution is seen in the gross violation of the sum rule [2] which was derived specifically to test for such contributions. We review here the derivation which exploits known [4] flavor-topology [5] characteristics of charmless strange B ± decays. Common calculations of weak decays are subject to uncertainties arising from unknown contributions of final state interactions. The flavortopology approach automatically includes the contributions to all orders from all final state interactions described by quark-gluon interactions which conserve flavor SU(3).The final states considered for B − decay all have the quark composition sūqq where qq denotes a pair of the same flavor which can be uū, dd or ss. Charm admixture in the final state is not considered.We first review the flavor-topology properties of all the diagrams that can lead to final statesKM, whereK denotes a K − orK o or any analogous pair of K * resonances and M denotes the members of any meson nonet, labeled M 1 for the unitary singlet state, M u , M d and M s respectively for the uū, dd and ss states and M − for the dū state. The qq pair observed in the final two-meson state may come from a very complicated diagram involving many quarks and gluons. Flavor topology avoids these complications by focusing on the vertex in the diagram which creates this qq pair. There are only two possible vertices describing this pair creation, one where the pair is created from a gluon and one in which it is created from a W boson. The diagrams illustrated in figs. 1-7 show all possible diagrams in which a bū initial state enters a black box and emerges as a state of a quark-antiquark pair and a boson, W or gluon, that hadronizes into the final state by QCD...

Bmeson decays to charmless meson pairs containingηorη′mesons

“…The measured 0 K branching fraction is found to be much larger than the K one [2,3]. Many suggestions have been proposed to explain such a difference, including flavor singlet enhancement [12], intrinsic charm [13], and constructively interfering internal penguin diagrams [14,15]. This last approach is supported by nextto-leading order QCD factorization calculations [6].…”

Rate andCP-asymmetry sum rules inB→Kπ

“…Note added: The rate sum rules are dominated by a common penguin contribution for which they are trivially satisfied. They may be rearranged so that each side is an interference term between the dominant penguin and subdominant color-favored or color-suppressed tree contributions [16]. They are, of course, still satisfied in this form, but present experimental errors are still too large to tell whether each side of the sum rule is nonzero with sufficient significance.…”