Difference: ResultsSummer2010PreICHEP (1 vs. 9)

Revision 9
11 Dec 2013 - Main.MarcoCiuchini
Line: 1 to 1
 

Fit results: Summer 2010 (pre-ICHEP)

%TWISTY{
Deleted:
<
<
mode="div"
  showlink="Standard Model Fit" hidelink="Standard Model Fit" showimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleopen.png" hideimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleclose.png"
Changed:
<
<
start="hide"
>
>
firststart="hide"
  }%
Deleted:
<
<
 
Parameter Input value Full fit SM Prediction
\bar{\rho} - 0.132 \pm 0.02 -
\bar{\eta} - 0.358 \pm 0.012 -
\rho - 0.135 \pm 0.021 -
\eta - 0.367 \pm 0.013 -
A - 0.8095 \pm 0.0095 -
\lambda 0.2253 \pm 0.0011 0.22545 \pm 0.00065 -
|V_{ub}| 0.00376 \pm 0.0002 0.00364 \pm 0.00011 0.00355 \pm 0.00014
|V_{cb}| 0.04083 \pm 0.00045 0.04117 \pm 0.00043 0.04269 \pm 0.00099
\sin\theta_{12} - 0.22545 \pm 0.00065 -
\sin\theta_{23} - 0.04117 \pm 0.00043 -
\sin\theta_{13} - 0.00364 \pm 0.00011 -
\delta - 69.7 \pm 2.9 -
m_{b},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}} 4.21 \pm 0.08 - -
m_{c},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}} 1.3 \pm 0.1 - -
m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}} 163.4 \pm 1.2 163.4 \pm 1.2 163.5 \pm 9.5
\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}} 17.77 \pm 0.12 17.77 \pm 0.12 18.3 \pm 1.3
\Delta m_{d},{\rm ps^{-1}} 0.507 \pm 0.005 - -
\Delta m_{K},10^{-15}{\rm ps^{-1}} 1.8 \pm 1.8 - -
f_{B_{s}} 0.239 \pm 0.01 0.2359 \pm 0.0056 0.2349 \pm 0.0067
f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}} 1.23 \pm 0.03 1.225 \pm 0.025 1.213 \pm 0.044
B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}} 1.06 \pm 0.04 1.069 \pm 0.036 1.113 \pm 0.085
B_{B_{s}} 0.87 \pm 0.04 0.845 \pm 0.036 0.769 \pm 0.065
\alpha, [^{\circ}] 91.4 \pm 6.1 87.8 \pm 3.0 85.4 \pm 3.7
\beta, [^{\circ}] - 22.42 \pm 0.74 25.2 \pm 1.6
\sin(2\beta) 0.654 \pm 0.026 0.705 \pm 0.018 0.771 \pm 0.036
\cos(2\beta) 0.87 \pm 0.13 0.71 \pm 0.018 0.639 \pm 0.043
2\beta+\gamma, [^{\circ}] -90 \pm 56 \text{ and } 94 \pm 52 114.7 \pm 3.1 114.9 \pm 3.1
\gamma, [^{\circ}] -106 \pm 11 \text{ and } 74 \pm 11 69.8 \pm 3.0 69.6 \pm 3.1
|\varepsilon_{K}| 0.00222994 \pm 1.04974 \times 10^{-5} 0.00222854 \pm 9.98004 \times 10^{-06} 0.00192 \pm 0.00018
B(B\rightarrow\tau\nu),10^{-4} 1.72 \pm 0.28 0.867 \pm 0.078 0.805 \pm 0.071
J_{cp}\times 10^{5} - 3.09 \pm 0.11 -

The fit results for all the nine CKM elements are
{\small V_{CKM}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc} 0.97425 \pm 0.00015 & 0.22549 \pm 0.00064 & (0.00364 \pm 0.00011)e^{i(-69.7 \pm 2.9)^\circ}\\ -(0.2253 \pm 0.00064)e^{i( 0.0348 \pm 0.0012)^\circ} & 0.97341 \pm 0.00015 & 0.04117 \pm 0.00043 \\ (0.00871 \pm 0.00019)e^{i(-22.46 \pm 0.73)^\circ} & -(0.04039 \pm 0.00043)e^{i( 1.089 \pm 0.038)^\circ} & 0.999145 \pm 1.8\times 10^{-5}\end{array}\right)}




Full fit result for \,\bar{\rho}
0.132 \pm 0.02
95% prob:[0.092, 0.171]
99% prob:[0.074, 0.190]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full fit result for \,\bar{\eta}
0.358 \pm 0.012
95% prob:[0.332, 0.383]
99% prob:[0.321, 0.396]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full fit result for \,\bar{\rho} - \bar{\eta}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\rho
0.135 \pm 0.021
95% prob:[0.095, 0.175]
99% prob:[0.076, 0.195]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full fit result for \,\eta
0.367 \pm 0.013
95% prob:[0.341, 0.393]
99% prob:[0.329, 0.406]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,A
0.8095 \pm 0.0095
95% prob:[0.791, 0.83]
99% prob:[0.782, 0.839]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\lambda
0.2253 \pm 0.0011
95% prob:[0.2231, 0.2275]
99% prob:[0.2218, 0.2285]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\lambda
0.22545 \pm 0.00065
95% prob:[0.2242, 0.2268]
99% prob:[0.2236, 0.2274]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,|V_{ub}|
0.00376 \pm 0.0002
95% prob:[0.00340, 0.00428]
99% prob:[0.00327, 0.00463]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,|V_{ub}|
0.00364 \pm 0.00011
95% prob:[0.00342, 0.00386]
99% prob:[0.00332, 0.00399]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,|V_{ub}|
0.00355 \pm 0.00014
95% prob:[0.00327, 0.00385]
99% prob:[0.00313, 0.00401]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,|V_{ub}|



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,|V_{cb}|
0.04083 \pm 0.00045
95% prob:[0.03995, 0.04177]
99% prob:[0.03955, 0.04217] U [0.04219, 0.04233]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,|V_{cb}|
0.04117 \pm 0.00043
95% prob:[0.04037, 0.04209]
99% prob:[0.03995, 0.04247]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,|V_{cb}|
0.04269 \pm 0.00099
95% prob:[0.04069, 0.0447]
99% prob:[0.03971, 0.04563]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,|V_{cb}|



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\sin\theta_{12}
0.22545 \pm 0.00065
95% prob:[0.2242, 0.2268]
99% prob:[0.2236, 0.2274]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\sin\theta_{23}
0.04117 \pm 0.00043
95% prob:[0.04033, 0.04209]
99% prob:[0.03993, 0.04251]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\sin\theta_{13}
0.00364 \pm 0.00011
95% prob:[0.00342,0.003867]
99% prob:[0.00332,0.00399]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\delta
69.7 \pm 2.9
95% prob:[63.9, 75.7]
99% prob:[61.1, 78.6]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}}
Gaussian likelihood used
163.4 \pm 1.2
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}}
163.4 \pm 1.2
95% prob:[161, 165.7]
99% prob:[159.9, 166.9]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}}
163.5 \pm 9.5
95% prob:[144.7, 183.1]
99% prob:[137.6, 194.2]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}}
Gaussian likelihood used
17.77 \pm 0.12
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}}
17.77 \pm 0.12
95% prob:[17.5, 18.0]
99% prob:[17.4, 18.1]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}}
18.3 \pm 1.3
95% prob:[15.9, 20.9]
99% prob:[14.8, 22.3]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,f_{B_{s}}
Gaussian likelihood used
0.239 \pm 0.01
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,f_{B_{s}}
0.2359 \pm 0.0056
95% prob:[0.2252, 0.2477]
99% prob:[0.22, 0.2537]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,f_{B_{s}}
0.2349 \pm 0.0067
95% prob:[0.2221, 0.2491]
99% prob:[0.217, 0.2571]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,f_{B_{s}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}}
Gaussian likelihood used
1.23 \pm 0.03
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}}
1.225 \pm 0.025
95% prob:[1.175, 1.275]
99% prob:[1.151, 1.299]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}}
1.213 \pm 0.044
95% prob:[1.13, 1.303]
99% prob:[1.083, 1.085] U [1.093, 1.352]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}}
Gaussian likelihood used
1.06 \pm 0.04
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}}
1.069 \pm 0.036
95% prob:[0.997, 1.141]
99% prob:[0.963, 1.179]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}}
1.113 \pm 0.085
95% prob:[0.96, 1.279]
99% prob:[0.893, 1.3]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,B_{B_{s}}
Gaussian likelihood used
0.87 \pm 0.04
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,B_{B_{s}}
0.845 \pm 0.036
95% prob:[0.775, 0.919]
99% prob:[0.738, 0.954]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,B_{B_{s}}
0.769 \pm 0.065
95% prob:[0.648, 0.915]
99% prob:[0.608, 0.999]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,B_{B_{s}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\alpha, [^{\circ}]
91.4 \pm 6.1
95% prob:[81, 102.] U [161., 169]
99% prob:[76.8, 108.] U [157., 171.]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\alpha, [^{\circ}]
87.8 \pm 3.0
95% prob:[82.1, 93.8]
99% prob:[79.2, 96.2]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\alpha, [^{\circ}]
85.4 \pm 3.7
95% prob:[78.3, 93.2]
99% prob:[74.5, 96.2]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,\alpha, [^{\circ}]



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full Fit result for \,\beta, [^{\circ}]
22.42 \pm 0.74
95% prob:[20.9, 23.9]
99% prob:[20.2, 24.7]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\beta, [^{\circ}]
25.2 \pm 1.6
95% prob:[22.3, 28.6]
99% prob:[21.3, 30.2]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\sin(2\beta)
0.654 \pm 0.026
95% prob:[0.601, 0.708]
99% prob:[0.574, 0.735]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\sin(2\beta)
0.705 \pm 0.018
95% prob:[0.669, 0.742]
99% prob:[0.651, 0.762]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\sin(2\beta)
0.771 \pm 0.036
95% prob:[0.706, 0.844]
99% prob:[0.68, 0.872] U [0.875, 0.878]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,\sin(2\beta)



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\cos(2\beta)
0.87 \pm 0.13
95% prob:[0.44, 0.99]
99% prob:[0.12, 0.99]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\cos(2\beta)
0.71 \pm 0.018
95% prob:[0.672, 0.745]
99% prob:[0.649, 0.76]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\cos(2\beta)
0.639 \pm 0.043
95% prob:[0.544, 0.712]
99% prob:[0.507, 0.731]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,\cos(2\beta)



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,2\beta+\gamma, [^{\circ}]
-90 \pm 56 \text{ and } 94 \pm 52
95% prob:[-166, 166.]
99% prob:[-179, 179]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,2\beta+\gamma, [^{\circ}]
114.7 \pm 3.1
95% prob:[108.3, 120.7]
99% prob:[105.6, 123.4]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,2\beta+\gamma, [^{\circ}]
114.9 \pm 3.1
95% prob:[108.6, 120.9]
99% prob:[105.8, 123.6]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,2\beta+\gamma, [^{\circ}]



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\gamma, [^{\circ}]
-106 \pm 11 \text{ and } 74 \pm 11
95% prob:[-128, -85.] U [52.1, 94.4]
99% prob:[-139, -75.] U [41.4, 104.]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\gamma, [^{\circ}]
69.8 \pm 3.0
95% prob:[63.9, 75.7]
99% prob:[61, 78.5]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\gamma, [^{\circ}]
69.6 \pm 3.1
95% prob:[63.4, 75.6]
99% prob:[60.5, 78.8]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,\gamma, [^{\circ}]



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,|\varepsilon_{K}|
0.00222994 \pm 1.04974\times 10^{-5}
95% prob:[0.00220745, 0.00224944]
99% prob:[0.00219845, 0.00225644]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,|\varepsilon_{K}|
0.00222854 \pm 9.98004\times 10^{-06}
95% prob:[0.00220858, 0.0022485]
99% prob:[0.0021986, 0.00225848]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,|\varepsilon_{K}|
0.00192 \pm 0.00018
95% prob:[0.00157, 0.00230]
99% prob:[0.00141, 0.00252]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,|\varepsilon_{K}|



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,B(B\rightarrow\tau
u),10^{-4}
Gaussian likelihood used
1.72 \pm 0.28
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,B(B\rightarrow\tau
u),10^{-4}
0.867 \pm 0.078
95% prob:[0.721, 1.031]
99% prob:[0.661, 1.127]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,B(B\rightarrow\tau
u),10^{-4}
0.805 \pm 0.071
95% prob:[0.674, 0.958]
99% prob:[0.619, 1.051]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,B(B\rightarrow\tau
u),10^{-4}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,J_{cp}\times 10^{-5}
3.09 \pm 0.11
95% prob:[2.87, 3.30]
99% prob:[2.77, 3.42]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF

woops, ordering error: got an ENDTWISTY before seeing a TWISTY
Line: 20 to 18
  hidelink="Tree Level Fit" showimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleopen.png" hideimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleclose.png"
Changed:
<
<
start="hide"
>
>
firststart="hide"
  }%

In principle, the presence of New Physics might affect the result of the UT analysis, changing the functional dependencies of the experimental quantities upon ρ and η. On the contrary, two constraints now available, are almost unchanged by the presence of NP: |Vub/Vcb| from semileptonic B decays and the UT angle γ from B → D(*)K decays. As usual from this fit one can gets predictions for each observable related to the Unitarity Triangle. This set of values is the minimal requirement that each model describing New Physics has to satisfy in order to be taken as a realistic description of physics beyond the Standard Model.
Line: 34 to 32
  hidelink="Universal Unitarity Triangle (UUT) Fit" showimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleopen.png" hideimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleclose.png"
Changed:
<
<
start="hide"
>
>
firststart="hide"
  }%

It is possible to generalize the full UTfit beyond the Standard Model to all those NP models characterized by Minimal Flavour Violation, i.e. having quark mixing ruled only by the Standard Model CKM couplings (http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0007085). In fact, in this case no additional weak phases are generated and several observables entering into the Standard Model fit (the tree-level processes and the measurement of angles through the use of time dependent CP asymmetries) are not affected by the presence of New Physics. The only sizable effect we are sensitive to is a shift of the Inami-Lim function of the top contribution in meson mixing. This means that in general εK and Δmd cannot be used in a common SM and MFV framework. Also the ratio Δmd/Δms cannot be used in general, as Δms can get additional NP contributions at large tanβ. So, simply removing the information related to εK, Δmd and Δms from the full UTfit, one can obtain a more precise determination of the Universal Unitarity Triangle, which is a common starting point for the Standard Model and any MFV model.
Line: 48 to 46
  hidelink="New Physics Fit" showimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleopen.png" hideimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleclose.png"
Changed:
<
<
start="hide"
>
>
firststart="hide"
  }%

The fit presented here is meant to constrain the NP contributions to |Δ F|=2 transitions by using the available experimental information on loop-mediated processes In general, NP models introduce a large number of new parameters: flavour changing couplings, short distance coefficients and matrix elements of new local operators. The specific list and the actual values of these parameters can only be determined within a given model. Nevertheless mixing processes are described by a single amplitude and can be parameterized, without loss of generality, in terms of two parameters, which quantify the difference of the complex amplitude with respect to the SM one. Thus, for instance, in the case of B^0_q-\bar{B}^0_q mixing we define
C_{B_q} \, e^{2 i \phi_{B_q}} = \frac{\langle B^0_q|H_\mathrm{eff}^\mathrm{full}|\bar{B}^0_q\rangle} {\langle
Line: 90 to 88
  hidelink="Explanation of the page content" showimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleopen.png" hideimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleclose.png"
Changed:
<
<
start="hide"
>
>
firststart="hide"
  }%

In this page we present the results obtained for a set of interesting UT parameters in the framework of the Standard Model and some New Physics Models using all the available experimental and theoretical inputs which are available. Inputs to this analysis consist of a large body of both experimental measurements and theoretically determined parameters. All the analyses presented here rely on the several measurements: |Vub/Vcb|, Δmd, Δms, and the measurements of CP-violating quantities in the kaon (εK) and in the B sectors with the measurements of α (using ππ, ρρ and πρ modes), γ (using D K, DK*, D*K modes), 2β + γ (using Dπ(ρ) modes), and sin2β and cos 2β from B0 → J/ψKS and B0 → J/ψK* respectively. Among the theoretical parameters, Lattice QCD calculations play a central role.
Revision 8
04 Dec 2011 - Main.DenisDerkach
Line: 1 to 1
Added:
>
>
 

Fit results: Summer 2010 (pre-ICHEP)

%TWISTY{
Revision 7
24 Jun 2011 - Main.MarcoCiuchini
Line: 1 to 1
 

Fit results: Summer 2010 (pre-ICHEP)

%TWISTY{
Line: 7 to 7
  hidelink="Standard Model Fit" showimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleopen.png" hideimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleclose.png"
Changed:
<
<
remember="on" firststart="show"
>
>
start="hide"
  }%

Parameter Input value Full fit SM Prediction
\bar{\rho} - 0.132 \pm 0.02 -
\bar{\eta} - 0.358 \pm 0.012 -
\rho - 0.135 \pm 0.021 -
\eta - 0.367 \pm 0.013 -
A - 0.8095 \pm 0.0095 -
\lambda 0.2253 \pm 0.0011 0.22545 \pm 0.00065 -
|V_{ub}| 0.00376 \pm 0.0002 0.00364 \pm 0.00011 0.00355 \pm 0.00014
|V_{cb}| 0.04083 \pm 0.00045 0.04117 \pm 0.00043 0.04269 \pm 0.00099
\sin\theta_{12} - 0.22545 \pm 0.00065 -
\sin\theta_{23} - 0.04117 \pm 0.00043 -
\sin\theta_{13} - 0.00364 \pm 0.00011 -
\delta - 69.7 \pm 2.9 -
m_{b},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}} 4.21 \pm 0.08 - -
m_{c},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}} 1.3 \pm 0.1 - -
m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}} 163.4 \pm 1.2 163.4 \pm 1.2 163.5 \pm 9.5
\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}} 17.77 \pm 0.12 17.77 \pm 0.12 18.3 \pm 1.3
\Delta m_{d},{\rm ps^{-1}} 0.507 \pm 0.005 - -
\Delta m_{K},10^{-15}{\rm ps^{-1}} 1.8 \pm 1.8 - -
f_{B_{s}} 0.239 \pm 0.01 0.2359 \pm 0.0056 0.2349 \pm 0.0067
f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}} 1.23 \pm 0.03 1.225 \pm 0.025 1.213 \pm 0.044
B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}} 1.06 \pm 0.04 1.069 \pm 0.036 1.113 \pm 0.085
B_{B_{s}} 0.87 \pm 0.04 0.845 \pm 0.036 0.769 \pm 0.065
\alpha, [^{\circ}] 91.4 \pm 6.1 87.8 \pm 3.0 85.4 \pm 3.7
\beta, [^{\circ}] - 22.42 \pm 0.74 25.2 \pm 1.6
\sin(2\beta) 0.654 \pm 0.026 0.705 \pm 0.018 0.771 \pm 0.036
\cos(2\beta) 0.87 \pm 0.13 0.71 \pm 0.018 0.639 \pm 0.043
2\beta+\gamma, [^{\circ}] -90 \pm 56 \text{ and } 94 \pm 52 114.7 \pm 3.1 114.9 \pm 3.1
\gamma, [^{\circ}] -106 \pm 11 \text{ and } 74 \pm 11 69.8 \pm 3.0 69.6 \pm 3.1
|\varepsilon_{K}| 0.00222994 \pm 1.04974 \times 10^{-5} 0.00222854 \pm 9.98004 \times 10^{-06} 0.00192 \pm 0.00018
B(B\rightarrow\tau\nu),10^{-4} 1.72 \pm 0.28 0.867 \pm 0.078 0.805 \pm 0.071
J_{cp}\times 10^{5} - 3.09 \pm 0.11 -

The fit results for all the nine CKM elements are
{\small V_{CKM}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc} 0.97425 \pm 0.00015 & 0.22549 \pm 0.00064 & (0.00364 \pm 0.00011)e^{i(-69.7 \pm 2.9)^\circ}\\ -(0.2253 \pm 0.00064)e^{i( 0.0348 \pm 0.0012)^\circ} & 0.97341 \pm 0.00015 & 0.04117 \pm 0.00043 \\ (0.00871 \pm 0.00019)e^{i(-22.46 \pm 0.73)^\circ} & -(0.04039 \pm 0.00043)e^{i( 1.089 \pm 0.038)^\circ} & 0.999145 \pm 1.8\times 10^{-5}\end{array}\right)}




Full fit result for \,\bar{\rho}
0.132 \pm 0.02
95% prob:[0.092, 0.171]
99% prob:[0.074, 0.190]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full fit result for \,\bar{\eta}
0.358 \pm 0.012
95% prob:[0.332, 0.383]
99% prob:[0.321, 0.396]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full fit result for \,\bar{\rho} - \bar{\eta}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\rho
0.135 \pm 0.021
95% prob:[0.095, 0.175]
99% prob:[0.076, 0.195]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full fit result for \,\eta
0.367 \pm 0.013
95% prob:[0.341, 0.393]
99% prob:[0.329, 0.406]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,A
0.8095 \pm 0.0095
95% prob:[0.791, 0.83]
99% prob:[0.782, 0.839]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\lambda
0.2253 \pm 0.0011
95% prob:[0.2231, 0.2275]
99% prob:[0.2218, 0.2285]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\lambda
0.22545 \pm 0.00065
95% prob:[0.2242, 0.2268]
99% prob:[0.2236, 0.2274]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,|V_{ub}|
0.00376 \pm 0.0002
95% prob:[0.00340, 0.00428]
99% prob:[0.00327, 0.00463]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,|V_{ub}|
0.00364 \pm 0.00011
95% prob:[0.00342, 0.00386]
99% prob:[0.00332, 0.00399]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,|V_{ub}|
0.00355 \pm 0.00014
95% prob:[0.00327, 0.00385]
99% prob:[0.00313, 0.00401]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,|V_{ub}|



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,|V_{cb}|
0.04083 \pm 0.00045
95% prob:[0.03995, 0.04177]
99% prob:[0.03955, 0.04217] U [0.04219, 0.04233]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,|V_{cb}|
0.04117 \pm 0.00043
95% prob:[0.04037, 0.04209]
99% prob:[0.03995, 0.04247]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,|V_{cb}|
0.04269 \pm 0.00099
95% prob:[0.04069, 0.0447]
99% prob:[0.03971, 0.04563]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,|V_{cb}|



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\sin\theta_{12}
0.22545 \pm 0.00065
95% prob:[0.2242, 0.2268]
99% prob:[0.2236, 0.2274]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\sin\theta_{23}
0.04117 \pm 0.00043
95% prob:[0.04033, 0.04209]
99% prob:[0.03993, 0.04251]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\sin\theta_{13}
0.00364 \pm 0.00011
95% prob:[0.00342,0.003867]
99% prob:[0.00332,0.00399]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\delta
69.7 \pm 2.9
95% prob:[63.9, 75.7]
99% prob:[61.1, 78.6]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}}
Gaussian likelihood used
163.4 \pm 1.2
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}}
163.4 \pm 1.2
95% prob:[161, 165.7]
99% prob:[159.9, 166.9]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}}
163.5 \pm 9.5
95% prob:[144.7, 183.1]
99% prob:[137.6, 194.2]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}}
Gaussian likelihood used
17.77 \pm 0.12
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}}
17.77 \pm 0.12
95% prob:[17.5, 18.0]
99% prob:[17.4, 18.1]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}}
18.3 \pm 1.3
95% prob:[15.9, 20.9]
99% prob:[14.8, 22.3]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,f_{B_{s}}
Gaussian likelihood used
0.239 \pm 0.01
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,f_{B_{s}}
0.2359 \pm 0.0056
95% prob:[0.2252, 0.2477]
99% prob:[0.22, 0.2537]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,f_{B_{s}}
0.2349 \pm 0.0067
95% prob:[0.2221, 0.2491]
99% prob:[0.217, 0.2571]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,f_{B_{s}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}}
Gaussian likelihood used
1.23 \pm 0.03
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}}
1.225 \pm 0.025
95% prob:[1.175, 1.275]
99% prob:[1.151, 1.299]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}}
1.213 \pm 0.044
95% prob:[1.13, 1.303]
99% prob:[1.083, 1.085] U [1.093, 1.352]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}}
Gaussian likelihood used
1.06 \pm 0.04
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}}
1.069 \pm 0.036
95% prob:[0.997, 1.141]
99% prob:[0.963, 1.179]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}}
1.113 \pm 0.085
95% prob:[0.96, 1.279]
99% prob:[0.893, 1.3]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,B_{B_{s}}
Gaussian likelihood used
0.87 \pm 0.04
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,B_{B_{s}}
0.845 \pm 0.036
95% prob:[0.775, 0.919]
99% prob:[0.738, 0.954]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,B_{B_{s}}
0.769 \pm 0.065
95% prob:[0.648, 0.915]
99% prob:[0.608, 0.999]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,B_{B_{s}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\alpha, [^{\circ}]
91.4 \pm 6.1
95% prob:[81, 102.] U [161., 169]
99% prob:[76.8, 108.] U [157., 171.]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\alpha, [^{\circ}]
87.8 \pm 3.0
95% prob:[82.1, 93.8]
99% prob:[79.2, 96.2]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\alpha, [^{\circ}]
85.4 \pm 3.7
95% prob:[78.3, 93.2]
99% prob:[74.5, 96.2]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,\alpha, [^{\circ}]



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full Fit result for \,\beta, [^{\circ}]
22.42 \pm 0.74
95% prob:[20.9, 23.9]
99% prob:[20.2, 24.7]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\beta, [^{\circ}]
25.2 \pm 1.6
95% prob:[22.3, 28.6]
99% prob:[21.3, 30.2]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\sin(2\beta)
0.654 \pm 0.026
95% prob:[0.601, 0.708]
99% prob:[0.574, 0.735]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\sin(2\beta)
0.705 \pm 0.018
95% prob:[0.669, 0.742]
99% prob:[0.651, 0.762]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\sin(2\beta)
0.771 \pm 0.036
95% prob:[0.706, 0.844]
99% prob:[0.68, 0.872] U [0.875, 0.878]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,\sin(2\beta)



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\cos(2\beta)
0.87 \pm 0.13
95% prob:[0.44, 0.99]
99% prob:[0.12, 0.99]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\cos(2\beta)
0.71 \pm 0.018
95% prob:[0.672, 0.745]
99% prob:[0.649, 0.76]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\cos(2\beta)
0.639 \pm 0.043
95% prob:[0.544, 0.712]
99% prob:[0.507, 0.731]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,\cos(2\beta)



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,2\beta+\gamma, [^{\circ}]
-90 \pm 56 \text{ and } 94 \pm 52
95% prob:[-166, 166.]
99% prob:[-179, 179]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,2\beta+\gamma, [^{\circ}]
114.7 \pm 3.1
95% prob:[108.3, 120.7]
99% prob:[105.6, 123.4]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,2\beta+\gamma, [^{\circ}]
114.9 \pm 3.1
95% prob:[108.6, 120.9]
99% prob:[105.8, 123.6]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,2\beta+\gamma, [^{\circ}]



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\gamma, [^{\circ}]
-106 \pm 11 \text{ and } 74 \pm 11
95% prob:[-128, -85.] U [52.1, 94.4]
99% prob:[-139, -75.] U [41.4, 104.]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\gamma, [^{\circ}]
69.8 \pm 3.0
95% prob:[63.9, 75.7]
99% prob:[61, 78.5]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\gamma, [^{\circ}]
69.6 \pm 3.1
95% prob:[63.4, 75.6]
99% prob:[60.5, 78.8]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,\gamma, [^{\circ}]



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,|\varepsilon_{K}|
0.00222994 \pm 1.04974\times 10^{-5}
95% prob:[0.00220745, 0.00224944]
99% prob:[0.00219845, 0.00225644]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,|\varepsilon_{K}|
0.00222854 \pm 9.98004\times 10^{-06}
95% prob:[0.00220858, 0.0022485]
99% prob:[0.0021986, 0.00225848]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,|\varepsilon_{K}|
0.00192 \pm 0.00018
95% prob:[0.00157, 0.00230]
99% prob:[0.00141, 0.00252]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,|\varepsilon_{K}|



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,B(B\rightarrow\tau
u),10^{-4}
Gaussian likelihood used
1.72 \pm 0.28
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,B(B\rightarrow\tau
u),10^{-4}
0.867 \pm 0.078
95% prob:[0.721, 1.031]
99% prob:[0.661, 1.127]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,B(B\rightarrow\tau
u),10^{-4}
0.805 \pm 0.071
95% prob:[0.674, 0.958]
99% prob:[0.619, 1.051]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,B(B\rightarrow\tau
u),10^{-4}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,J_{cp}\times 10^{-5}
3.09 \pm 0.11
95% prob:[2.87, 3.30]
99% prob:[2.77, 3.42]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF

Line: 20 to 19
  hidelink="Tree Level Fit" showimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleopen.png" hideimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleclose.png"
Changed:
<
<
remember="on" firststart="show"
>
>
start="hide"
  }%

In principle, the presence of New Physics might affect the result of the UT analysis, changing the functional dependencies of the experimental quantities upon ρ and η. On the contrary, two constraints now available, are almost unchanged by the presence of NP: |Vub/Vcb| from semileptonic B decays and the UT angle γ from B → D(*)K decays. As usual from this fit one can gets predictions for each observable related to the Unitarity Triangle. This set of values is the minimal requirement that each model describing New Physics has to satisfy in order to be taken as a realistic description of physics beyond the Standard Model.
Line: 35 to 33
  hidelink="Universal Unitarity Triangle (UUT) Fit" showimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleopen.png" hideimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleclose.png"
Changed:
<
<
remember="on" firststart="show"
>
>
start="hide"
  }%

It is possible to generalize the full UTfit beyond the Standard Model to all those NP models characterized by Minimal Flavour Violation, i.e. having quark mixing ruled only by the Standard Model CKM couplings (http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0007085). In fact, in this case no additional weak phases are generated and several observables entering into the Standard Model fit (the tree-level processes and the measurement of angles through the use of time dependent CP asymmetries) are not affected by the presence of New Physics. The only sizable effect we are sensitive to is a shift of the Inami-Lim function of the top contribution in meson mixing. This means that in general εK and Δmd cannot be used in a common SM and MFV framework. Also the ratio Δmd/Δms cannot be used in general, as Δms can get additional NP contributions at large tanβ. So, simply removing the information related to εK, Δmd and Δms from the full UTfit, one can obtain a more precise determination of the Universal Unitarity Triangle, which is a common starting point for the Standard Model and any MFV model.
Line: 50 to 47
  hidelink="New Physics Fit" showimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleopen.png" hideimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleclose.png"
Changed:
<
<
remember="on" firststart="show"
>
>
start="hide"
  }%

The fit presented here is meant to constrain the NP contributions to |Δ F|=2 transitions by using the available experimental information on loop-mediated processes In general, NP models introduce a large number of new parameters: flavour changing couplings, short distance coefficients and matrix elements of new local operators. The specific list and the actual values of these parameters can only be determined within a given model. Nevertheless mixing processes are described by a single amplitude and can be parameterized, without loss of generality, in terms of two parameters, which quantify the difference of the complex amplitude with respect to the SM one. Thus, for instance, in the case of B^0_q-\bar{B}^0_q mixing we define
C_{B_q} \, e^{2 i \phi_{B_q}} = \frac{\langle B^0_q|H_\mathrm{eff}^\mathrm{full}|\bar{B}^0_q\rangle} {\langle
Line: 93 to 89
  hidelink="Explanation of the page content" showimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleopen.png" hideimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleclose.png"
Changed:
<
<
remember="on" firststart="show"
>
>
start="hide"
  }%

In this page we present the results obtained for a set of interesting UT parameters in the framework of the Standard Model and some New Physics Models using all the available experimental and theoretical inputs which are available. Inputs to this analysis consist of a large body of both experimental measurements and theoretically determined parameters. All the analyses presented here rely on the several measurements: |Vub/Vcb|, Δmd, Δms, and the measurements of CP-violating quantities in the kaon (εK) and in the B sectors with the measurements of α (using ππ, ρρ and πρ modes), γ (using D K, DK*, D*K modes), 2β + γ (using Dπ(ρ) modes), and sin2β and cos 2β from B0 → J/ψKS and B0 → J/ψK* respectively. Among the theoretical parameters, Lattice QCD calculations play a central role.
Revision 6
24 Jun 2011 - Main.MarcoCiuchini
Line: 1 to 1
 

Fit results: Summer 2010 (pre-ICHEP)

%TWISTY{
Line: 7 to 7
  hidelink="Standard Model Fit" showimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleopen.png" hideimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleclose.png"
Deleted:
<
<
suffix=""
  remember="on"
Changed:
<
<
start="show"
>
>
firststart="show"
  }%

Parameter Input value Full fit SM Prediction
\bar{\rho} - 0.132 \pm 0.02 -
\bar{\eta} - 0.358 \pm 0.012 -
\rho - 0.135 \pm 0.021 -
\eta - 0.367 \pm 0.013 -
A - 0.8095 \pm 0.0095 -
\lambda 0.2253 \pm 0.0011 0.22545 \pm 0.00065 -
|V_{ub}| 0.00376 \pm 0.0002 0.00364 \pm 0.00011 0.00355 \pm 0.00014
|V_{cb}| 0.04083 \pm 0.00045 0.04117 \pm 0.00043 0.04269 \pm 0.00099
\sin\theta_{12} - 0.22545 \pm 0.00065 -
\sin\theta_{23} - 0.04117 \pm 0.00043 -
\sin\theta_{13} - 0.00364 \pm 0.00011 -
\delta - 69.7 \pm 2.9 -
m_{b},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}} 4.21 \pm 0.08 - -
m_{c},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}} 1.3 \pm 0.1 - -
m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}} 163.4 \pm 1.2 163.4 \pm 1.2 163.5 \pm 9.5
\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}} 17.77 \pm 0.12 17.77 \pm 0.12 18.3 \pm 1.3
\Delta m_{d},{\rm ps^{-1}} 0.507 \pm 0.005 - -
\Delta m_{K},10^{-15}{\rm ps^{-1}} 1.8 \pm 1.8 - -
f_{B_{s}} 0.239 \pm 0.01 0.2359 \pm 0.0056 0.2349 \pm 0.0067
f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}} 1.23 \pm 0.03 1.225 \pm 0.025 1.213 \pm 0.044
B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}} 1.06 \pm 0.04 1.069 \pm 0.036 1.113 \pm 0.085
B_{B_{s}} 0.87 \pm 0.04 0.845 \pm 0.036 0.769 \pm 0.065
\alpha, [^{\circ}] 91.4 \pm 6.1 87.8 \pm 3.0 85.4 \pm 3.7
\beta, [^{\circ}] - 22.42 \pm 0.74 25.2 \pm 1.6
\sin(2\beta) 0.654 \pm 0.026 0.705 \pm 0.018 0.771 \pm 0.036
\cos(2\beta) 0.87 \pm 0.13 0.71 \pm 0.018 0.639 \pm 0.043
2\beta+\gamma, [^{\circ}] -90 \pm 56 \text{ and } 94 \pm 52 114.7 \pm 3.1 114.9 \pm 3.1
\gamma, [^{\circ}] -106 \pm 11 \text{ and } 74 \pm 11 69.8 \pm 3.0 69.6 \pm 3.1
|\varepsilon_{K}| 0.00222994 \pm 1.04974 \times 10^{-5} 0.00222854 \pm 9.98004 \times 10^{-06} 0.00192 \pm 0.00018
B(B\rightarrow\tau\nu),10^{-4} 1.72 \pm 0.28 0.867 \pm 0.078 0.805 \pm 0.071
J_{cp}\times 10^{5} - 3.09 \pm 0.11 -

The fit results for all the nine CKM elements are
{\small V_{CKM}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc} 0.97425 \pm 0.00015 & 0.22549 \pm 0.00064 & (0.00364 \pm 0.00011)e^{i(-69.7 \pm 2.9)^\circ}\\ -(0.2253 \pm 0.00064)e^{i( 0.0348 \pm 0.0012)^\circ} & 0.97341 \pm 0.00015 & 0.04117 \pm 0.00043 \\ (0.00871 \pm 0.00019)e^{i(-22.46 \pm 0.73)^\circ} & -(0.04039 \pm 0.00043)e^{i( 1.089 \pm 0.038)^\circ} & 0.999145 \pm 1.8\times 10^{-5}\end{array}\right)}




Full fit result for \,\bar{\rho}
0.132 \pm 0.02
95% prob:[0.092, 0.171]
99% prob:[0.074, 0.190]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full fit result for \,\bar{\eta}
0.358 \pm 0.012
95% prob:[0.332, 0.383]
99% prob:[0.321, 0.396]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full fit result for \,\bar{\rho} - \bar{\eta}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\rho
0.135 \pm 0.021
95% prob:[0.095, 0.175]
99% prob:[0.076, 0.195]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full fit result for \,\eta
0.367 \pm 0.013
95% prob:[0.341, 0.393]
99% prob:[0.329, 0.406]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,A
0.8095 \pm 0.0095
95% prob:[0.791, 0.83]
99% prob:[0.782, 0.839]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\lambda
0.2253 \pm 0.0011
95% prob:[0.2231, 0.2275]
99% prob:[0.2218, 0.2285]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\lambda
0.22545 \pm 0.00065
95% prob:[0.2242, 0.2268]
99% prob:[0.2236, 0.2274]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,|V_{ub}|
0.00376 \pm 0.0002
95% prob:[0.00340, 0.00428]
99% prob:[0.00327, 0.00463]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,|V_{ub}|
0.00364 \pm 0.00011
95% prob:[0.00342, 0.00386]
99% prob:[0.00332, 0.00399]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,|V_{ub}|
0.00355 \pm 0.00014
95% prob:[0.00327, 0.00385]
99% prob:[0.00313, 0.00401]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,|V_{ub}|



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,|V_{cb}|
0.04083 \pm 0.00045
95% prob:[0.03995, 0.04177]
99% prob:[0.03955, 0.04217] U [0.04219, 0.04233]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,|V_{cb}|
0.04117 \pm 0.00043
95% prob:[0.04037, 0.04209]
99% prob:[0.03995, 0.04247]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,|V_{cb}|
0.04269 \pm 0.00099
95% prob:[0.04069, 0.0447]
99% prob:[0.03971, 0.04563]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,|V_{cb}|



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\sin\theta_{12}
0.22545 \pm 0.00065
95% prob:[0.2242, 0.2268]
99% prob:[0.2236, 0.2274]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\sin\theta_{23}
0.04117 \pm 0.00043
95% prob:[0.04033, 0.04209]
99% prob:[0.03993, 0.04251]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\sin\theta_{13}
0.00364 \pm 0.00011
95% prob:[0.00342,0.003867]
99% prob:[0.00332,0.00399]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\delta
69.7 \pm 2.9
95% prob:[63.9, 75.7]
99% prob:[61.1, 78.6]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}}
Gaussian likelihood used
163.4 \pm 1.2
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}}
163.4 \pm 1.2
95% prob:[161, 165.7]
99% prob:[159.9, 166.9]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}}
163.5 \pm 9.5
95% prob:[144.7, 183.1]
99% prob:[137.6, 194.2]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}}
Gaussian likelihood used
17.77 \pm 0.12
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}}
17.77 \pm 0.12
95% prob:[17.5, 18.0]
99% prob:[17.4, 18.1]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}}
18.3 \pm 1.3
95% prob:[15.9, 20.9]
99% prob:[14.8, 22.3]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,f_{B_{s}}
Gaussian likelihood used
0.239 \pm 0.01
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,f_{B_{s}}
0.2359 \pm 0.0056
95% prob:[0.2252, 0.2477]
99% prob:[0.22, 0.2537]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,f_{B_{s}}
0.2349 \pm 0.0067
95% prob:[0.2221, 0.2491]
99% prob:[0.217, 0.2571]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,f_{B_{s}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}}
Gaussian likelihood used
1.23 \pm 0.03
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}}
1.225 \pm 0.025
95% prob:[1.175, 1.275]
99% prob:[1.151, 1.299]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}}
1.213 \pm 0.044
95% prob:[1.13, 1.303]
99% prob:[1.083, 1.085] U [1.093, 1.352]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}}
Gaussian likelihood used
1.06 \pm 0.04
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}}
1.069 \pm 0.036
95% prob:[0.997, 1.141]
99% prob:[0.963, 1.179]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}}
1.113 \pm 0.085
95% prob:[0.96, 1.279]
99% prob:[0.893, 1.3]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,B_{B_{s}}
Gaussian likelihood used
0.87 \pm 0.04
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,B_{B_{s}}
0.845 \pm 0.036
95% prob:[0.775, 0.919]
99% prob:[0.738, 0.954]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,B_{B_{s}}
0.769 \pm 0.065
95% prob:[0.648, 0.915]
99% prob:[0.608, 0.999]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,B_{B_{s}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\alpha, [^{\circ}]
91.4 \pm 6.1
95% prob:[81, 102.] U [161., 169]
99% prob:[76.8, 108.] U [157., 171.]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\alpha, [^{\circ}]
87.8 \pm 3.0
95% prob:[82.1, 93.8]
99% prob:[79.2, 96.2]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\alpha, [^{\circ}]
85.4 \pm 3.7
95% prob:[78.3, 93.2]
99% prob:[74.5, 96.2]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,\alpha, [^{\circ}]



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full Fit result for \,\beta, [^{\circ}]
22.42 \pm 0.74
95% prob:[20.9, 23.9]
99% prob:[20.2, 24.7]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\beta, [^{\circ}]
25.2 \pm 1.6
95% prob:[22.3, 28.6]
99% prob:[21.3, 30.2]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\sin(2\beta)
0.654 \pm 0.026
95% prob:[0.601, 0.708]
99% prob:[0.574, 0.735]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\sin(2\beta)
0.705 \pm 0.018
95% prob:[0.669, 0.742]
99% prob:[0.651, 0.762]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\sin(2\beta)
0.771 \pm 0.036
95% prob:[0.706, 0.844]
99% prob:[0.68, 0.872] U [0.875, 0.878]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,\sin(2\beta)



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\cos(2\beta)
0.87 \pm 0.13
95% prob:[0.44, 0.99]
99% prob:[0.12, 0.99]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\cos(2\beta)
0.71 \pm 0.018
95% prob:[0.672, 0.745]
99% prob:[0.649, 0.76]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\cos(2\beta)
0.639 \pm 0.043
95% prob:[0.544, 0.712]
99% prob:[0.507, 0.731]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,\cos(2\beta)



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,2\beta+\gamma, [^{\circ}]
-90 \pm 56 \text{ and } 94 \pm 52
95% prob:[-166, 166.]
99% prob:[-179, 179]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,2\beta+\gamma, [^{\circ}]
114.7 \pm 3.1
95% prob:[108.3, 120.7]
99% prob:[105.6, 123.4]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,2\beta+\gamma, [^{\circ}]
114.9 \pm 3.1
95% prob:[108.6, 120.9]
99% prob:[105.8, 123.6]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,2\beta+\gamma, [^{\circ}]



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\gamma, [^{\circ}]
-106 \pm 11 \text{ and } 74 \pm 11
95% prob:[-128, -85.] U [52.1, 94.4]
99% prob:[-139, -75.] U [41.4, 104.]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\gamma, [^{\circ}]
69.8 \pm 3.0
95% prob:[63.9, 75.7]
99% prob:[61, 78.5]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\gamma, [^{\circ}]
69.6 \pm 3.1
95% prob:[63.4, 75.6]
99% prob:[60.5, 78.8]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,\gamma, [^{\circ}]



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,|\varepsilon_{K}|
0.00222994 \pm 1.04974\times 10^{-5}
95% prob:[0.00220745, 0.00224944]
99% prob:[0.00219845, 0.00225644]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,|\varepsilon_{K}|
0.00222854 \pm 9.98004\times 10^{-06}
95% prob:[0.00220858, 0.0022485]
99% prob:[0.0021986, 0.00225848]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,|\varepsilon_{K}|
0.00192 \pm 0.00018
95% prob:[0.00157, 0.00230]
99% prob:[0.00141, 0.00252]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,|\varepsilon_{K}|



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,B(B\rightarrow\tau
u),10^{-4}
Gaussian likelihood used
1.72 \pm 0.28
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,B(B\rightarrow\tau
u),10^{-4}
0.867 \pm 0.078
95% prob:[0.721, 1.031]
99% prob:[0.661, 1.127]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,B(B\rightarrow\tau
u),10^{-4}
0.805 \pm 0.071
95% prob:[0.674, 0.958]
99% prob:[0.619, 1.051]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,B(B\rightarrow\tau
u),10^{-4}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,J_{cp}\times 10^{-5}
3.09 \pm 0.11
95% prob:[2.87, 3.30]
99% prob:[2.77, 3.42]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF

Line: 21 to 20
  hidelink="Tree Level Fit" showimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleopen.png" hideimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleclose.png"
Deleted:
<
<
suffix=""
  remember="on"
Changed:
<
<
start="show"
>
>
firststart="show"
  }%

In principle, the presence of New Physics might affect the result of the UT analysis, changing the functional dependencies of the experimental quantities upon ρ and η. On the contrary, two constraints now available, are almost unchanged by the presence of NP: |Vub/Vcb| from semileptonic B decays and the UT angle γ from B → D(*)K decays. As usual from this fit one can gets predictions for each observable related to the Unitarity Triangle. This set of values is the minimal requirement that each model describing New Physics has to satisfy in order to be taken as a realistic description of physics beyond the Standard Model.
Line: 37 to 35
  hidelink="Universal Unitarity Triangle (UUT) Fit" showimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleopen.png" hideimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleclose.png"
Deleted:
<
<
suffix=""
  remember="on"
Changed:
<
<
start="show"
>
>
firststart="show"
  }%

It is possible to generalize the full UTfit beyond the Standard Model to all those NP models characterized by Minimal Flavour Violation, i.e. having quark mixing ruled only by the Standard Model CKM couplings (http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0007085). In fact, in this case no additional weak phases are generated and several observables entering into the Standard Model fit (the tree-level processes and the measurement of angles through the use of time dependent CP asymmetries) are not affected by the presence of New Physics. The only sizable effect we are sensitive to is a shift of the Inami-Lim function of the top contribution in meson mixing. This means that in general εK and Δmd cannot be used in a common SM and MFV framework. Also the ratio Δmd/Δms cannot be used in general, as Δms can get additional NP contributions at large tanβ. So, simply removing the information related to εK, Δmd and Δms from the full UTfit, one can obtain a more precise determination of the Universal Unitarity Triangle, which is a common starting point for the Standard Model and any MFV model.
Line: 53 to 50
  hidelink="New Physics Fit" showimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleopen.png" hideimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleclose.png"
Deleted:
<
<
suffix=""
  remember="on"
Changed:
<
<
start="show"
>
>
firststart="show"
  }%

The fit presented here is meant to constrain the NP contributions to |Δ F|=2 transitions by using the available experimental information on loop-mediated processes In general, NP models introduce a large number of new parameters: flavour changing couplings, short distance coefficients and matrix elements of new local operators. The specific list and the actual values of these parameters can only be determined within a given model. Nevertheless mixing processes are described by a single amplitude and can be parameterized, without loss of generality, in terms of two parameters, which quantify the difference of the complex amplitude with respect to the SM one. Thus, for instance, in the case of B^0_q-\bar{B}^0_q mixing we define
C_{B_q} \, e^{2 i \phi_{B_q}} = \frac{\langle B^0_q|H_\mathrm{eff}^\mathrm{full}|\bar{B}^0_q\rangle} {\langle
Line: 97 to 93
  hidelink="Explanation of the page content" showimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleopen.png" hideimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleclose.png"
Deleted:
<
<
suffix=""
  remember="on"
Changed:
<
<
start="show"
>
>
firststart="show"
  }%

In this page we present the results obtained for a set of interesting UT parameters in the framework of the Standard Model and some New Physics Models using all the available experimental and theoretical inputs which are available. Inputs to this analysis consist of a large body of both experimental measurements and theoretically determined parameters. All the analyses presented here rely on the several measurements: |Vub/Vcb|, Δmd, Δms, and the measurements of CP-violating quantities in the kaon (εK) and in the B sectors with the measurements of α (using ππ, ρρ and πρ modes), γ (using D K, DK*, D*K modes), 2β + γ (using Dπ(ρ) modes), and sin2β and cos 2β from B0 → J/ψKS and B0 → J/ψK* respectively. Among the theoretical parameters, Lattice QCD calculations play a central role.
Revision 5
23 Jun 2011 - Main.MarcoCiuchini
Line: 1 to 1
 

Fit results: Summer 2010 (pre-ICHEP)

%TWISTY{
Deleted:
<
<
id="s2010t1"
  mode="div" showlink="Standard Model Fit" hidelink="Standard Model Fit"
Line: 10 to 9
  hideimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleclose.png" suffix="" remember="on"
Changed:
<
<
firststart="show"
>
>
start="show"
  }%

Parameter Input value Full fit SM Prediction
\bar{\rho} - 0.132 \pm 0.02 -
\bar{\eta} - 0.358 \pm 0.012 -
\rho - 0.135 \pm 0.021 -
\eta - 0.367 \pm 0.013 -
A - 0.8095 \pm 0.0095 -
\lambda 0.2253 \pm 0.0011 0.22545 \pm 0.00065 -
|V_{ub}| 0.00376 \pm 0.0002 0.00364 \pm 0.00011 0.00355 \pm 0.00014
|V_{cb}| 0.04083 \pm 0.00045 0.04117 \pm 0.00043 0.04269 \pm 0.00099
\sin\theta_{12} - 0.22545 \pm 0.00065 -
\sin\theta_{23} - 0.04117 \pm 0.00043 -
\sin\theta_{13} - 0.00364 \pm 0.00011 -
\delta - 69.7 \pm 2.9 -
m_{b},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}} 4.21 \pm 0.08 - -
m_{c},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}} 1.3 \pm 0.1 - -
m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}} 163.4 \pm 1.2 163.4 \pm 1.2 163.5 \pm 9.5
\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}} 17.77 \pm 0.12 17.77 \pm 0.12 18.3 \pm 1.3
\Delta m_{d},{\rm ps^{-1}} 0.507 \pm 0.005 - -
\Delta m_{K},10^{-15}{\rm ps^{-1}} 1.8 \pm 1.8 - -
f_{B_{s}} 0.239 \pm 0.01 0.2359 \pm 0.0056 0.2349 \pm 0.0067
f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}} 1.23 \pm 0.03 1.225 \pm 0.025 1.213 \pm 0.044
B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}} 1.06 \pm 0.04 1.069 \pm 0.036 1.113 \pm 0.085
B_{B_{s}} 0.87 \pm 0.04 0.845 \pm 0.036 0.769 \pm 0.065
\alpha, [^{\circ}] 91.4 \pm 6.1 87.8 \pm 3.0 85.4 \pm 3.7
\beta, [^{\circ}] - 22.42 \pm 0.74 25.2 \pm 1.6
\sin(2\beta) 0.654 \pm 0.026 0.705 \pm 0.018 0.771 \pm 0.036
\cos(2\beta) 0.87 \pm 0.13 0.71 \pm 0.018 0.639 \pm 0.043
2\beta+\gamma, [^{\circ}] -90 \pm 56 \text{ and } 94 \pm 52 114.7 \pm 3.1 114.9 \pm 3.1
\gamma, [^{\circ}] -106 \pm 11 \text{ and } 74 \pm 11 69.8 \pm 3.0 69.6 \pm 3.1
|\varepsilon_{K}| 0.00222994 \pm 1.04974 \times 10^{-5} 0.00222854 \pm 9.98004 \times 10^{-06} 0.00192 \pm 0.00018
B(B\rightarrow\tau\nu),10^{-4} 1.72 \pm 0.28 0.867 \pm 0.078 0.805 \pm 0.071
J_{cp}\times 10^{5} - 3.09 \pm 0.11 -

The fit results for all the nine CKM elements are
{\small V_{CKM}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc} 0.97425 \pm 0.00015 & 0.22549 \pm 0.00064 & (0.00364 \pm 0.00011)e^{i(-69.7 \pm 2.9)^\circ}\\ -(0.2253 \pm 0.00064)e^{i( 0.0348 \pm 0.0012)^\circ} & 0.97341 \pm 0.00015 & 0.04117 \pm 0.00043 \\ (0.00871 \pm 0.00019)e^{i(-22.46 \pm 0.73)^\circ} & -(0.04039 \pm 0.00043)e^{i( 1.089 \pm 0.038)^\circ} & 0.999145 \pm 1.8\times 10^{-5}\end{array}\right)}




Full fit result for \,\bar{\rho}
0.132 \pm 0.02
95% prob:[0.092, 0.171]
99% prob:[0.074, 0.190]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full fit result for \,\bar{\eta}
0.358 \pm 0.012
95% prob:[0.332, 0.383]
99% prob:[0.321, 0.396]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full fit result for \,\bar{\rho} - \bar{\eta}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\rho
0.135 \pm 0.021
95% prob:[0.095, 0.175]
99% prob:[0.076, 0.195]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full fit result for \,\eta
0.367 \pm 0.013
95% prob:[0.341, 0.393]
99% prob:[0.329, 0.406]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,A
0.8095 \pm 0.0095
95% prob:[0.791, 0.83]
99% prob:[0.782, 0.839]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\lambda
0.2253 \pm 0.0011
95% prob:[0.2231, 0.2275]
99% prob:[0.2218, 0.2285]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\lambda
0.22545 \pm 0.00065
95% prob:[0.2242, 0.2268]
99% prob:[0.2236, 0.2274]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,|V_{ub}|
0.00376 \pm 0.0002
95% prob:[0.00340, 0.00428]
99% prob:[0.00327, 0.00463]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,|V_{ub}|
0.00364 \pm 0.00011
95% prob:[0.00342, 0.00386]
99% prob:[0.00332, 0.00399]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,|V_{ub}|
0.00355 \pm 0.00014
95% prob:[0.00327, 0.00385]
99% prob:[0.00313, 0.00401]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,|V_{ub}|



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,|V_{cb}|
0.04083 \pm 0.00045
95% prob:[0.03995, 0.04177]
99% prob:[0.03955, 0.04217] U [0.04219, 0.04233]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,|V_{cb}|
0.04117 \pm 0.00043
95% prob:[0.04037, 0.04209]
99% prob:[0.03995, 0.04247]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,|V_{cb}|
0.04269 \pm 0.00099
95% prob:[0.04069, 0.0447]
99% prob:[0.03971, 0.04563]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,|V_{cb}|



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\sin\theta_{12}
0.22545 \pm 0.00065
95% prob:[0.2242, 0.2268]
99% prob:[0.2236, 0.2274]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\sin\theta_{23}
0.04117 \pm 0.00043
95% prob:[0.04033, 0.04209]
99% prob:[0.03993, 0.04251]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\sin\theta_{13}
0.00364 \pm 0.00011
95% prob:[0.00342,0.003867]
99% prob:[0.00332,0.00399]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\delta
69.7 \pm 2.9
95% prob:[63.9, 75.7]
99% prob:[61.1, 78.6]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}}
Gaussian likelihood used
163.4 \pm 1.2
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}}
163.4 \pm 1.2
95% prob:[161, 165.7]
99% prob:[159.9, 166.9]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}}
163.5 \pm 9.5
95% prob:[144.7, 183.1]
99% prob:[137.6, 194.2]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}}
Gaussian likelihood used
17.77 \pm 0.12
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}}
17.77 \pm 0.12
95% prob:[17.5, 18.0]
99% prob:[17.4, 18.1]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}}
18.3 \pm 1.3
95% prob:[15.9, 20.9]
99% prob:[14.8, 22.3]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,f_{B_{s}}
Gaussian likelihood used
0.239 \pm 0.01
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,f_{B_{s}}
0.2359 \pm 0.0056
95% prob:[0.2252, 0.2477]
99% prob:[0.22, 0.2537]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,f_{B_{s}}
0.2349 \pm 0.0067
95% prob:[0.2221, 0.2491]
99% prob:[0.217, 0.2571]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,f_{B_{s}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}}
Gaussian likelihood used
1.23 \pm 0.03
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}}
1.225 \pm 0.025
95% prob:[1.175, 1.275]
99% prob:[1.151, 1.299]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}}
1.213 \pm 0.044
95% prob:[1.13, 1.303]
99% prob:[1.083, 1.085] U [1.093, 1.352]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}}
Gaussian likelihood used
1.06 \pm 0.04
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}}
1.069 \pm 0.036
95% prob:[0.997, 1.141]
99% prob:[0.963, 1.179]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}}
1.113 \pm 0.085
95% prob:[0.96, 1.279]
99% prob:[0.893, 1.3]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,B_{B_{s}}
Gaussian likelihood used
0.87 \pm 0.04
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,B_{B_{s}}
0.845 \pm 0.036
95% prob:[0.775, 0.919]
99% prob:[0.738, 0.954]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,B_{B_{s}}
0.769 \pm 0.065
95% prob:[0.648, 0.915]
99% prob:[0.608, 0.999]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,B_{B_{s}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\alpha, [^{\circ}]
91.4 \pm 6.1
95% prob:[81, 102.] U [161., 169]
99% prob:[76.8, 108.] U [157., 171.]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\alpha, [^{\circ}]
87.8 \pm 3.0
95% prob:[82.1, 93.8]
99% prob:[79.2, 96.2]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\alpha, [^{\circ}]
85.4 \pm 3.7
95% prob:[78.3, 93.2]
99% prob:[74.5, 96.2]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,\alpha, [^{\circ}]



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full Fit result for \,\beta, [^{\circ}]
22.42 \pm 0.74
95% prob:[20.9, 23.9]
99% prob:[20.2, 24.7]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\beta, [^{\circ}]
25.2 \pm 1.6
95% prob:[22.3, 28.6]
99% prob:[21.3, 30.2]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\sin(2\beta)
0.654 \pm 0.026
95% prob:[0.601, 0.708]
99% prob:[0.574, 0.735]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\sin(2\beta)
0.705 \pm 0.018
95% prob:[0.669, 0.742]
99% prob:[0.651, 0.762]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\sin(2\beta)
0.771 \pm 0.036
95% prob:[0.706, 0.844]
99% prob:[0.68, 0.872] U [0.875, 0.878]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,\sin(2\beta)



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\cos(2\beta)
0.87 \pm 0.13
95% prob:[0.44, 0.99]
99% prob:[0.12, 0.99]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\cos(2\beta)
0.71 \pm 0.018
95% prob:[0.672, 0.745]
99% prob:[0.649, 0.76]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\cos(2\beta)
0.639 \pm 0.043
95% prob:[0.544, 0.712]
99% prob:[0.507, 0.731]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,\cos(2\beta)



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,2\beta+\gamma, [^{\circ}]
-90 \pm 56 \text{ and } 94 \pm 52
95% prob:[-166, 166.]
99% prob:[-179, 179]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,2\beta+\gamma, [^{\circ}]
114.7 \pm 3.1
95% prob:[108.3, 120.7]
99% prob:[105.6, 123.4]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,2\beta+\gamma, [^{\circ}]
114.9 \pm 3.1
95% prob:[108.6, 120.9]
99% prob:[105.8, 123.6]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,2\beta+\gamma, [^{\circ}]



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\gamma, [^{\circ}]
-106 \pm 11 \text{ and } 74 \pm 11
95% prob:[-128, -85.] U [52.1, 94.4]
99% prob:[-139, -75.] U [41.4, 104.]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\gamma, [^{\circ}]
69.8 \pm 3.0
95% prob:[63.9, 75.7]
99% prob:[61, 78.5]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\gamma, [^{\circ}]
69.6 \pm 3.1
95% prob:[63.4, 75.6]
99% prob:[60.5, 78.8]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,\gamma, [^{\circ}]



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,|\varepsilon_{K}|
0.00222994 \pm 1.04974\times 10^{-5}
95% prob:[0.00220745, 0.00224944]
99% prob:[0.00219845, 0.00225644]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,|\varepsilon_{K}|
0.00222854 \pm 9.98004\times 10^{-06}
95% prob:[0.00220858, 0.0022485]
99% prob:[0.0021986, 0.00225848]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,|\varepsilon_{K}|
0.00192 \pm 0.00018
95% prob:[0.00157, 0.00230]
99% prob:[0.00141, 0.00252]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,|\varepsilon_{K}|



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,B(B\rightarrow\tau
u),10^{-4}
Gaussian likelihood used
1.72 \pm 0.28
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,B(B\rightarrow\tau
u),10^{-4}
0.867 \pm 0.078
95% prob:[0.721, 1.031]
99% prob:[0.661, 1.127]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,B(B\rightarrow\tau
u),10^{-4}
0.805 \pm 0.071
95% prob:[0.674, 0.958]
99% prob:[0.619, 1.051]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,B(B\rightarrow\tau
u),10^{-4}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,J_{cp}\times 10^{-5}
3.09 \pm 0.11
95% prob:[2.87, 3.30]
99% prob:[2.77, 3.42]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF

woops, ordering error: got an ENDTWISTY before seeing a TWISTY

%TWISTY{
Deleted:
<
<
id="s2010t2"
  mode="div" showlink="Tree level Fit" hidelink="Tree Level Fit"
Line: 25 to 23
  hideimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleclose.png" suffix="" remember="on"
Changed:
<
<
firststart="show"
>
>
start="show"
  }%

In principle, the presence of New Physics might affect the result of the UT analysis, changing the functional dependencies of the experimental quantities upon ρ and η. On the contrary, two constraints now available, are almost unchanged by the presence of NP: |Vub/Vcb| from semileptonic B decays and the UT angle γ from B → D(*)K decays. As usual from this fit one can gets predictions for each observable related to the Unitarity Triangle. This set of values is the minimal requirement that each model describing New Physics has to satisfy in order to be taken as a realistic description of physics beyond the Standard Model.
Line: 34 to 32
 
woops, ordering error: got an ENDTWISTY before seeing a TWISTY

%TWISTY{
Deleted:
<
<
id="s2010t3"
  mode="div" showlink="Universal Unitarity Triangle (UUT) Fit" hidelink="Universal Unitarity Triangle (UUT) Fit"
Line: 42 to 39
  hideimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleclose.png" suffix="" remember="on"
Changed:
<
<
firststart="show"
>
>
start="show"
  }%

It is possible to generalize the full UTfit beyond the Standard Model to all those NP models characterized by Minimal Flavour Violation, i.e. having quark mixing ruled only by the Standard Model CKM couplings (http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0007085). In fact, in this case no additional weak phases are generated and several observables entering into the Standard Model fit (the tree-level processes and the measurement of angles through the use of time dependent CP asymmetries) are not affected by the presence of New Physics. The only sizable effect we are sensitive to is a shift of the Inami-Lim function of the top contribution in meson mixing. This means that in general εK and Δmd cannot be used in a common SM and MFV framework. Also the ratio Δmd/Δms cannot be used in general, as Δms can get additional NP contributions at large tanβ. So, simply removing the information related to εK, Δmd and Δms from the full UTfit, one can obtain a more precise determination of the Universal Unitarity Triangle, which is a common starting point for the Standard Model and any MFV model.
Line: 51 to 48
 
woops, ordering error: got an ENDTWISTY before seeing a TWISTY

%TWISTY{
Deleted:
<
<
id="s2010t4"
  mode="div" showlink="New Physics Fit" hidelink="New Physics Fit"
Line: 59 to 55
  hideimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleclose.png" suffix="" remember="on"
Changed:
<
<
firststart="show"
>
>
start="show"
  }%

The fit presented here is meant to constrain the NP contributions to |Δ F|=2 transitions by using the available experimental information on loop-mediated processes In general, NP models introduce a large number of new parameters: flavour changing couplings, short distance coefficients and matrix elements of new local operators. The specific list and the actual values of these parameters can only be determined within a given model. Nevertheless mixing processes are described by a single amplitude and can be parameterized, without loss of generality, in terms of two parameters, which quantify the difference of the complex amplitude with respect to the SM one. Thus, for instance, in the case of B^0_q-\bar{B}^0_q mixing we define
C_{B_q} \, e^{2 i \phi_{B_q}} = \frac{\langle B^0_q|H_\mathrm{eff}^\mathrm{full}|\bar{B}^0_q\rangle} {\langle
Line: 96 to 92
 
woops, ordering error: got an ENDTWISTY before seeing a TWISTY

%TWISTY{
Deleted:
<
<
id="s2010t5"
  mode="div" showlink="Explanation of the page content" hidelink="Explanation of the page content"
Line: 104 to 99
  hideimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleclose.png" suffix="" remember="on"
Changed:
<
<
firststart="show"
>
>
start="show"
  }%

In this page we present the results obtained for a set of interesting UT parameters in the framework of the Standard Model and some New Physics Models using all the available experimental and theoretical inputs which are available. Inputs to this analysis consist of a large body of both experimental measurements and theoretically determined parameters. All the analyses presented here rely on the several measurements: |Vub/Vcb|, Δmd, Δms, and the measurements of CP-violating quantities in the kaon (εK) and in the B sectors with the measurements of α (using ππ, ρρ and πρ modes), γ (using D K, DK*, D*K modes), 2β + γ (using Dπ(ρ) modes), and sin2β and cos 2β from B0 → J/ψKS and B0 → J/ψK* respectively. Among the theoretical parameters, Lattice QCD calculations play a central role.
Revision 4
23 Jun 2011 - Main.MarcoCiuchini
Line: 1 to 1
 

Fit results: Summer 2010 (pre-ICHEP)

%TWISTY{
Added:
>
>
id="s2010t1"
  mode="div" showlink="Standard Model Fit" hidelink="Standard Model Fit"
Line: 16 to 17
 
woops, ordering error: got an ENDTWISTY before seeing a TWISTY

%TWISTY{
Added:
>
>
id="s2010t2"
  mode="div" showlink="Tree level Fit" hidelink="Tree Level Fit"
Line: 32 to 34
 
woops, ordering error: got an ENDTWISTY before seeing a TWISTY

%TWISTY{
Added:
>
>
id="s2010t3"
  mode="div" showlink="Universal Unitarity Triangle (UUT) Fit" hidelink="Universal Unitarity Triangle (UUT) Fit"
Line: 48 to 51
 
woops, ordering error: got an ENDTWISTY before seeing a TWISTY

%TWISTY{
Added:
>
>
id="s2010t4"
  mode="div" showlink="New Physics Fit" hidelink="New Physics Fit"
Line: 92 to 96
 
woops, ordering error: got an ENDTWISTY before seeing a TWISTY

%TWISTY{
Added:
>
>
id="s2010t5"
  mode="div" showlink="Explanation of the page content" hidelink="Explanation of the page content"
Revision 3
23 Jun 2011 - Main.MarcoCiuchini
Line: 1 to 1
 

Fit results: Summer 2010 (pre-ICHEP)

%TWISTY{
Line: 9 to 9
  hideimgleft="/foswiki/pub/System/DocumentGraphics/toggleclose.png" suffix="" remember="on"
Changed:
<
<
firststart="hide"
>
>
firststart="show"
  }%

Parameter Input value Full fit SM Prediction
\bar{\rho} - 0.132 \pm 0.02 -
\bar{\eta} - 0.358 \pm 0.012 -
\rho - 0.135 \pm 0.021 -
\eta - 0.367 \pm 0.013 -
A - 0.8095 \pm 0.0095 -
\lambda 0.2253 \pm 0.0011 0.22545 \pm 0.00065 -
|V_{ub}| 0.00376 \pm 0.0002 0.00364 \pm 0.00011 0.00355 \pm 0.00014
|V_{cb}| 0.04083 \pm 0.00045 0.04117 \pm 0.00043 0.04269 \pm 0.00099
\sin\theta_{12} - 0.22545 \pm 0.00065 -
\sin\theta_{23} - 0.04117 \pm 0.00043 -
\sin\theta_{13} - 0.00364 \pm 0.00011 -
\delta - 69.7 \pm 2.9 -
m_{b},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}} 4.21 \pm 0.08 - -
m_{c},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}} 1.3 \pm 0.1 - -
m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}} 163.4 \pm 1.2 163.4 \pm 1.2 163.5 \pm 9.5
\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}} 17.77 \pm 0.12 17.77 \pm 0.12 18.3 \pm 1.3
\Delta m_{d},{\rm ps^{-1}} 0.507 \pm 0.005 - -
\Delta m_{K},10^{-15}{\rm ps^{-1}} 1.8 \pm 1.8 - -
f_{B_{s}} 0.239 \pm 0.01 0.2359 \pm 0.0056 0.2349 \pm 0.0067
f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}} 1.23 \pm 0.03 1.225 \pm 0.025 1.213 \pm 0.044
B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}} 1.06 \pm 0.04 1.069 \pm 0.036 1.113 \pm 0.085
B_{B_{s}} 0.87 \pm 0.04 0.845 \pm 0.036 0.769 \pm 0.065
\alpha, [^{\circ}] 91.4 \pm 6.1 87.8 \pm 3.0 85.4 \pm 3.7
\beta, [^{\circ}] - 22.42 \pm 0.74 25.2 \pm 1.6
\sin(2\beta) 0.654 \pm 0.026 0.705 \pm 0.018 0.771 \pm 0.036
\cos(2\beta) 0.87 \pm 0.13 0.71 \pm 0.018 0.639 \pm 0.043
2\beta+\gamma, [^{\circ}] -90 \pm 56 \text{ and } 94 \pm 52 114.7 \pm 3.1 114.9 \pm 3.1
\gamma, [^{\circ}] -106 \pm 11 \text{ and } 74 \pm 11 69.8 \pm 3.0 69.6 \pm 3.1
|\varepsilon_{K}| 0.00222994 \pm 1.04974 \times 10^{-5} 0.00222854 \pm 9.98004 \times 10^{-06} 0.00192 \pm 0.00018
B(B\rightarrow\tau\nu),10^{-4} 1.72 \pm 0.28 0.867 \pm 0.078 0.805 \pm 0.071
J_{cp}\times 10^{5} - 3.09 \pm 0.11 -

The fit results for all the nine CKM elements are
{\small V_{CKM}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc} 0.97425 \pm 0.00015 & 0.22549 \pm 0.00064 & (0.00364 \pm 0.00011)e^{i(-69.7 \pm 2.9)^\circ}\\ -(0.2253 \pm 0.00064)e^{i( 0.0348 \pm 0.0012)^\circ} & 0.97341 \pm 0.00015 & 0.04117 \pm 0.00043 \\ (0.00871 \pm 0.00019)e^{i(-22.46 \pm 0.73)^\circ} & -(0.04039 \pm 0.00043)e^{i( 1.089 \pm 0.038)^\circ} & 0.999145 \pm 1.8\times 10^{-5}\end{array}\right)}




Full fit result for \,\bar{\rho}
0.132 \pm 0.02
95% prob:[0.092, 0.171]
99% prob:[0.074, 0.190]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full fit result for \,\bar{\eta}
0.358 \pm 0.012
95% prob:[0.332, 0.383]
99% prob:[0.321, 0.396]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full fit result for \,\bar{\rho} - \bar{\eta}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\rho
0.135 \pm 0.021
95% prob:[0.095, 0.175]
99% prob:[0.076, 0.195]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full fit result for \,\eta
0.367 \pm 0.013
95% prob:[0.341, 0.393]
99% prob:[0.329, 0.406]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,A
0.8095 \pm 0.0095
95% prob:[0.791, 0.83]
99% prob:[0.782, 0.839]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\lambda
0.2253 \pm 0.0011
95% prob:[0.2231, 0.2275]
99% prob:[0.2218, 0.2285]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\lambda
0.22545 \pm 0.00065
95% prob:[0.2242, 0.2268]
99% prob:[0.2236, 0.2274]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,|V_{ub}|
0.00376 \pm 0.0002
95% prob:[0.00340, 0.00428]
99% prob:[0.00327, 0.00463]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,|V_{ub}|
0.00364 \pm 0.00011
95% prob:[0.00342, 0.00386]
99% prob:[0.00332, 0.00399]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,|V_{ub}|
0.00355 \pm 0.00014
95% prob:[0.00327, 0.00385]
99% prob:[0.00313, 0.00401]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,|V_{ub}|



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,|V_{cb}|
0.04083 \pm 0.00045
95% prob:[0.03995, 0.04177]
99% prob:[0.03955, 0.04217] U [0.04219, 0.04233]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,|V_{cb}|
0.04117 \pm 0.00043
95% prob:[0.04037, 0.04209]
99% prob:[0.03995, 0.04247]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,|V_{cb}|
0.04269 \pm 0.00099
95% prob:[0.04069, 0.0447]
99% prob:[0.03971, 0.04563]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,|V_{cb}|



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\sin\theta_{12}
0.22545 \pm 0.00065
95% prob:[0.2242, 0.2268]
99% prob:[0.2236, 0.2274]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\sin\theta_{23}
0.04117 \pm 0.00043
95% prob:[0.04033, 0.04209]
99% prob:[0.03993, 0.04251]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\sin\theta_{13}
0.00364 \pm 0.00011
95% prob:[0.00342,0.003867]
99% prob:[0.00332,0.00399]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full fit result for \,\delta
69.7 \pm 2.9
95% prob:[63.9, 75.7]
99% prob:[61.1, 78.6]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}}
Gaussian likelihood used
163.4 \pm 1.2
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}}
163.4 \pm 1.2
95% prob:[161, 165.7]
99% prob:[159.9, 166.9]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}}
163.5 \pm 9.5
95% prob:[144.7, 183.1]
99% prob:[137.6, 194.2]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,m_{t},{\rm {GeV}/c^{2}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}}
Gaussian likelihood used
17.77 \pm 0.12
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}}
17.77 \pm 0.12
95% prob:[17.5, 18.0]
99% prob:[17.4, 18.1]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}}
18.3 \pm 1.3
95% prob:[15.9, 20.9]
99% prob:[14.8, 22.3]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,\Delta m_{s},{\rm ps^{-1}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,f_{B_{s}}
Gaussian likelihood used
0.239 \pm 0.01
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,f_{B_{s}}
0.2359 \pm 0.0056
95% prob:[0.2252, 0.2477]
99% prob:[0.22, 0.2537]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,f_{B_{s}}
0.2349 \pm 0.0067
95% prob:[0.2221, 0.2491]
99% prob:[0.217, 0.2571]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,f_{B_{s}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}}
Gaussian likelihood used
1.23 \pm 0.03
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}}
1.225 \pm 0.025
95% prob:[1.175, 1.275]
99% prob:[1.151, 1.299]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}}
1.213 \pm 0.044
95% prob:[1.13, 1.303]
99% prob:[1.083, 1.085] U [1.093, 1.352]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,f_{B_{s}}/f_{B_{d}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}}
Gaussian likelihood used
1.06 \pm 0.04
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}}
1.069 \pm 0.036
95% prob:[0.997, 1.141]
99% prob:[0.963, 1.179]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}}
1.113 \pm 0.085
95% prob:[0.96, 1.279]
99% prob:[0.893, 1.3]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,B_{B_{s}}/B_{B_{d}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,B_{B_{s}}
Gaussian likelihood used
0.87 \pm 0.04
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,B_{B_{s}}
0.845 \pm 0.036
95% prob:[0.775, 0.919]
99% prob:[0.738, 0.954]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,B_{B_{s}}
0.769 \pm 0.065
95% prob:[0.648, 0.915]
99% prob:[0.608, 0.999]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,B_{B_{s}}



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\alpha, [^{\circ}]
91.4 \pm 6.1
95% prob:[81, 102.] U [161., 169]
99% prob:[76.8, 108.] U [157., 171.]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\alpha, [^{\circ}]
87.8 \pm 3.0
95% prob:[82.1, 93.8]
99% prob:[79.2, 96.2]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\alpha, [^{\circ}]
85.4 \pm 3.7
95% prob:[78.3, 93.2]
99% prob:[74.5, 96.2]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Compatibility Plot for \,\alpha, [^{\circ}]



EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Full Fit result for \,\beta, [^{\circ}]
22.42 \pm 0.74
95% prob:[20.9, 23.9]
99% prob:[20.2, 24.7]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\beta, [^{\circ}]
25.2 \pm 1.6
95% prob:[22.3, 28.6]
99% prob:[21.3, 30.2]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF




Fit Input for \,\sin(2\beta)
0.654 \pm 0.026
95% prob:[0.601, 0.708]
99% prob:[0.574, 0.735]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



Full Fit result for \,\sin(2\beta)
0.705 \pm 0.018
95% prob:[0.669, 0.742]
99% prob:[0.651, 0.762]
EPS - PDF - PNG - JPG - GIF



SM Fit prediction for \,\sin(2\beta)
0.771 \pm 0.036
95% prob:[0.706, 0.844]
99% prob:[0.68, 0.872] U [0.875, 0.878]
EPS - PDF - PNG -