English

Simultaneous Explanation of the $R_K$ and $R_{D^{(*)}}$ Puzzles: a Model Analysis

High Energy Physics - Phenomenology 2017-01-10 v3 High Energy Physics - Experiment

Abstract

RKR_K and RD()R_{D^{(*)}} are two BB-decay measurements that presently exhibit discrepancies with the SM. Recently, using an effective field theory approach, it was demonstrated that a new-physics model can simultaneously explain both the RKR_K and RD()R_{D^{(*)}} puzzles. There are two UV completions that can give rise to the effective Lagrangian: (i) VBVB: a vector boson that transforms as an SU(2)LSU(2)_L triplet, as in the SM, (ii) U1U_1: an SU(2)LSU(2)_L-singlet vector leptoquark. In this paper, we examine these models individually. A key point is that VBVB contributes to Bs0B^0_s-Bˉs0{\bar B}^0_s mixing and τ3μ\tau \to 3\mu, while U1U_1 does not. We show that, when constraints from these processes are taken into account, the VBVB model is just barely viable. It predicts B(τμμ+μ)2.1×108{\cal B} (\tau^-\to\mu^-\mu^+\mu^-) \simeq 2.1 \times 10^{-8}. This is measurable at Belle II and LHCb, and therefore constitutes a smoking-gun signal of VBVB. For U1U_1, there are several observables that may point to this model. Perhaps the most interesting is the lepton-flavor-violating decay Υ(3S)μτ\Upsilon(3S) \to \mu \tau, which has previously been overlooked in the literature. U1U_1 predicts B(Υ(3S)μτ)max=8.0×107{\cal B}(\Upsilon(3S) \to \mu \tau)|_{\rm max} = 8.0 \times 10^{-7}. Thus, if a large value of B(Υ(3S)μτ){\cal B}(\Upsilon(3S) \to \mu \tau) is observed -- and this should be measurable at Belle II -- the U1U_1 model would be indicated.

Keywords

Cite

@article{arxiv.1609.09078,
  title  = {Simultaneous Explanation of the $R_K$ and $R_{D^{(*)}}$ Puzzles: a Model Analysis},
  author = {Bhubanjyoti Bhattacharya and Alakabha Datta and Jean-Pascal Guévin and David London and Ryoutaro Watanabe},
  journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:1609.09078},
  year   = {2017}
}

Comments

33 pages, 4 figures; Version 3: Mistakes in code corrected, leading to modified results: VB model now just barely viable. Still, principal conclusions of the paper remain largely unchanged