∆Ms theory precision confronts flavour anomalies

Abstract

Based on recent HQET sum rule and lattice calculations we present updated Standard Model predictions for the mass differences of neutral B mesons: ∆M SM s = 18.4 +0.7 −1.2 ps −1 and ∆M SM d = 0.533 +0.022 −0.036 ps −1 and study their impact on new physics models that address the present hints of anomalous data in b → s transitions. We also examine future prospects of further reducing the theory uncertainties and discuss the implications of a 2025 scenario with ∆M SM 2025 s = (18.4 ± 0.5) ps −1 . In particular, the latter yields upper bounds M Z 9 TeV and M S 3 30 TeV for the minimal Z and S 3 lepto-quark explanations of the b → s anomalies, respectively.

Implications for new physics from a novel puzzle in B¯(s)0→Iguro1, Kitahara2 2020Phys. Rev. D311240View full textAdd to dashboardCite

“…We also have the same shift in B d -meson mixing, but it is less constrained because of its large theoretical uncertainty. By imposing that the new physics contribution is within 2σ uncertainty of ΔM SM s [39,40], we obtain ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ffi…”

Anomalies in B -meson decays and the muon g−2 from dark loops

“…(27) that there is a little tension between experimental measurements and the SM prediction as pointed out in Refs. [104,105]. However, we did not try to solve this tension in the present paper.…”

B-meson anomalies and Higgs physics in flavored $$U(1)'$$ U ( 1 ) ′ model

“…Then, taking into account the SM uncertainties, we obtain the bounds on M B s as 16(13) ps −1 < M B s < 21 (23) ps −1 or ( M B s ) BSM < 3.0 (5.6) ps −1 at 1σ (2σ )level for new physics. We also note that the most recent lattice calculations show considerably large values for the bag parameters, leading to ( M B s ) SM = (20.01 ± 1.25) ps −1[46]. It needs an independent confirmation, but if it is true, the new physics contributions coming from the heavy Higgs bosons and Z would be constrained more tightly.Takingthe SM prediction as ( M B s ) SM = (17.4 ± 2.6) ps −1 [44], from Eq.…”