2019
DOI: 10.1142/s0217751x19501951
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Model-independent investigation of the RJ/ψ,ηc and ratios of decay widths of semileptonic Bc decays into a P-wave charmonium

Abstract: Experimental measurements of decay branching fractions of semitaunic and semimuonic Bc into J/ψ has challenged the lepton flavor universality in standard model with about two standard deviations. In this paper, we first investigate the unitary constraint on form factors of Bc meson into S-wave and P -wave charmonium. Such constraint leads to the exploration of the R J/ψ and other ratios Rη c , R hc , and Rχ cJ in a model-independent way. These results together with future experimental measurements can be used … Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
19
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 98 publications
0
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Apart from R D and R D Ã measurements, the ratio R J=ψ has also been measured by LHCb [13] R J=ψ ¼ BðB c → J=ψτν τ Þ BðB c → J=ψlν l Þ ¼ 0.71 AE 0.17 AE 0.18; ð4Þ which central value prediction of the SM is in the range 0.25 ∼ 0.28 and the experimental result has about 2σ tension with its SM prediction [14,15]. The uncertainties arise from the choice of the approach for the B c → J=ψ from factors [15][16][17][18]. These deviations between the experimental measurements and their SM predictions are perhaps from the uncertainties of hadronic transition form factors.…”
Section: R Bellementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Apart from R D and R D Ã measurements, the ratio R J=ψ has also been measured by LHCb [13] R J=ψ ¼ BðB c → J=ψτν τ Þ BðB c → J=ψlν l Þ ¼ 0.71 AE 0.17 AE 0.18; ð4Þ which central value prediction of the SM is in the range 0.25 ∼ 0.28 and the experimental result has about 2σ tension with its SM prediction [14,15]. The uncertainties arise from the choice of the approach for the B c → J=ψ from factors [15][16][17][18]. These deviations between the experimental measurements and their SM predictions are perhaps from the uncertainties of hadronic transition form factors.…”
Section: R Bellementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Using the model-dependent calculations of B c → (J/ψ, η c ) transition form factors [106][107][108][109][110][111][112][113][114][115][116][117][118] [120][121][122] and R(η c ) [121][122][123] are also obtained by constraining the transition form factors through a combination of dispersive relations, heavy-quark relations at zero-recoil, and the limited existing form-factor determinations from lattice QCD [124,125], resulting in 0.20 ≤ R(J/ψ) ≤ 0.39 [120] and 0.24 ≤ R(η c ) ≤ 0.34 [123], both of which agree with the weighted averages of previous model predictions.…”
Section: B C → (J/ψ η C )τ νmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The ratio R J/ψ has been recently measured by the LHCb collaboration [19] and it shows a 1.8 σ discrepancy with SM results, which are in the range R SM J/ψ ∼ 0.25 − 0.28 [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32].B c decays induced by the c → s, d transition at the quark level are also being investigated as a possible source of information on NP [33], taking advantage of the recent results of ref. [34].…”
Section: Jhep06(2021)118mentioning
confidence: 99%