Chinese Physics C, Volume. 44, Issue 1, (2020)

The semileptonic decay within the LCSR approach under heavy quark effective field theory *

Rui-Yu Zhou1、*, Lei Guo1、*, Hai-Bing Fu1、*, Wei Cheng1、*, and Xing-Gang Wu1、*
Author Affiliations
  • 1Department of Physics, Chongqing University1Department of Physics, Chongqing University, Chongqing 401331, China
  • 1Department of Physics, Guizhou Minzu University2Department of Physics, Guizhou Minzu University, Guiyang 550025, China
  • show less
    Figures & Tables(9)
    (color online) The behavior of LCDA predicted by the BHL model, including the uncertainties of the input parameters. For comparison, we present the JLab fit [13], QCD SR [18], CZ form [46] and the asymptotic form [47].
    (color online) The extrapolated TFFs calculated using the two correlators LCSR-/(left/right plots). The shaded bands are the uncertainties from the error sources. As a comparison, the predictions of lattice QCD [7], LCSR [14, 15], pQCD [49] and HPQCD [50] are also shown.
    (color online) The differential branching fractions for the two correlators LCSR-/(left/right plots). As a comparison, the BABAR data [53, 55] and the Belle data [54, 56] are also shown.
    • Table 1. Parameters of twist-2 LCDA determined from [45].

      View table
      View in Article

      Table 1. Parameters of twist-2 LCDA determined from [45].

      AβB
      0.03923.500.610.075
      0.11224.630.590.010
      0.18523.500.630.141
    • Table 2. Uncertainties of TFFs at . The uncertainties of the total TFFs are summed up in quadrature.

      View table
      View in Article

      Table 2. Uncertainties of TFFs at . The uncertainties of the total TFFs are summed up in quadrature.

      Total
    • Table 3. Different twist terms in TFFs for large recoils

      View table
      View in Article

      Table 3. Different twist terms in TFFs for large recoils

      Twist-2Twist-3Twist-4Central
      0.284−0.0090.276
      0.1530.134−0.0040.282
    • Table 4. The fit parameters and quality of fit of LCSR- and LCSR- TFFs

      View table
      View in Article

      Table 4. The fit parameters and quality of fit of LCSR- and LCSR- TFFs

      −1.600−1.4530.03%
      −1.1552.075−3.3770.01%
      −1.309−1.7570.50%
      −1.1970.656−0.6110.06%
    • Table 5. A comparison of derived using various approaches.

      View table
      View in Article

      Table 5. A comparison of derived using various approaches.

      Exclusive decays
      LCSR- (This work)
      LCSR- (This work)
      RBC/UKQCD [7]
      Fermilab/MILC [8]
      pQCD [9]
      -meson LCSR [13]
      Imsong 2014 (LCSR) [15]
      BABAR 2012 [53]
      Belle 2013 [54]
      CKM fitter [57]
      UT fitter [58]
      FLAG 2016 [59]
      HFAG 2016 [60]
    • Table 6. A comparison of the branching fraction of with the experimental measurements. Both LCSR- and LCSR- predictions are consistent with the data.

      View table
      View in Article

      Table 6. A comparison of the branching fraction of with the experimental measurements. Both LCSR- and LCSR- predictions are consistent with the data.

      Exclusive decays
      LCSR- (This work)
      LCSR- (This work)
      PDG [40]
      BABAR 2012 [53]
      Belle 2013 [54]
      BABAR 2010 [55]
      Belle 2010 [56]
      CLEO [61]
      HFAG 2016 [60]
    Tools

    Get Citation

    Copy Citation Text

    Rui-Yu Zhou, Lei Guo, Hai-Bing Fu, Wei Cheng, Xing-Gang Wu. The semileptonic decay within the LCSR approach under heavy quark effective field theory *[J]. Chinese Physics C, 2020, 44(1):

    Download Citation

    EndNote(RIS)BibTexPlain Text
    Save article for my favorites
    Paper Information

    Category: Particles and fields

    Received: Oct. 8, 2019

    Accepted: --

    Published Online: Sep. 29, 2020

    The Author Email: Zhou Rui-Yu (zhoury@cqu.edu.cn), Guo Lei (guoleicqu@cqu.edu.cn), Fu Hai-Bing (fuhb@cqu.edu.cn), Cheng Wei (chengw@cqu.edu.cn), Wu Xing-Gang (wuxg@cqu.edu.cn)

    DOI:10.1088/1674-1137/44/1/013101

    Topics