Anatomy of a new anomaly in non-leptonic B decays
Extracted source text · arXiv 2105.11837
%====================================================================%
% MORIOND.TEX %
%====================================================================%
\documentclass{moriond}
\bibliographystyle{unsrt}
% for BibTeX - sorted numerical labels by order of
% first citation.
% A useful Journal macro
\def\Journal#1#2#3#4{{#1} {\bf #2}, #3 (#4)}
% Some useful journal names
\def\NCA{\em Nuovo Cimento}
\def\NIM{\em Nucl. Instrum. Methods}
\def\NIMA{{\em Nucl. Instrum. Methods} A}
\def\NPB{{\em Nucl. Phys.} B}
\def\PLB{{\em Phys. Lett.} B}
\def\PRL{\em Phys. Rev. Lett.}
\def\PRD{{\em Phys. Rev.} D}
\def\ZPC{{\em Z. Phys.} C}
% Some other macros used in the sample text
\def\st{\scriptstyle}
\def\sst{\scriptscriptstyle}
\def\mco{\multicolumn}
\def\epp{\epsilon^{\prime}}
\def\vep{\varepsilon}
\def\ra{\rightarrow}
\def\ppg{\pi^+\pi^-\gamma}
\def\vp{{\bf p}}
\def\ko{K^0}
\def\kb{\bar{K^0}}
\def\al{\alpha}
\def\ab{\bar{\alpha}}
\def\be{\begin{equation}}
\def\ee{\end{equation}}
\def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}}
\def\eea{\end{eqnarray}}
\def\CPbar{\hbox{{\rm CP}\hskip-1.80em{/}}}
%temp replacement due to no font
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
% %
% BEGINNING OF TEXT %
% %
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\newcommand{\Photo}%{\includegraphics[height=35mm]{mypicture}}
%\newcommand{\Photo}{}
\begin{document}
\vspace*{4cm}
\title{Anatomy of a new anomaly in non-leptonic B decays}
\author{ M. Alguer\'o$^a$, A. Crivellin$^{(b,c,d)}$, S. Descotes-Genon$^e$, {\bf J. Matias}$^*\,$\footnote{*speaker}, M. Novoa-Brunet$^e$}
\address{(a) Universitat Aut\`onoma de Barcelona and IFAE, 08193 Bellaterra, Barcelona,\\
%Institut de F\'{i}sica d'Altes Energies (IFAE), The Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology, Campus UAB, 08193 Bellaterra (Barcelona),
(b) CERN Theory Division, CH--1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland,
(c) Physik-Institut, Universit\"at Z\"urich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, CH--8057 Z\"urich, Switzerland,
(d) Paul Scherrer Institut, CH--5232 Villigen PSI, Switzerland,
(e) Universit\'e Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, 91405 Orsay, France \medskip}
%\address{Department of Physics, Theoretical Physics, 1 Keble Road,\\
%Oxford OX1 3NP, England}
\maketitle\abstracts{We discuss the anatomy of the $L_{VV}$ observable designed as a ratio of the longitudinal components of $B_s \to VV$ versus $B_d \to VV$ decays. We focus on the particular case of $B_{d,s} \to K^{*0} {\bar K^{*0}}$ where we find for the SM prediction $L_{K^* \bar{K}^*}=19.5^{+9.3}_{-6.8}$ implying a 2.6$\sigma$ tension with respect to data. The interpretation of this tension in a model independent way identifies two Wilson coefficients ${\cal C}_{4}$ and ${\cal C}_{8g}$ as possible sources. The example of one simplified model including a Kaluza-Klein (KK) gluon is discussed. This KK gluon embedded inside a composite/extra dimensional model combined with a $Z^\prime$ can explain also the $b\to s\ell\ell$ anomalies albeit with a significant amount of fine-tuning.
}
\section{Motivation}
Besides the flavour anomalies in semileptonic B decays, where different New Physics (NP) hypotheses exhibit pulls above 7$\sigma$ w.r.t. the SM~\cite{global-fit}, it is natural to expect other possible signals of NP in other observables governed by the $b \to s$ transition. A natural place to look at are non-leptonic B decays. However, these decays suffer from large uncertainties compared to semileptonic B decays and traditional observables like branching ratios or polarization fractions are very difficult to predict with accuracy.
In Ref.~\cite{non-leptonic} looking for cleaner observables, we draw a parallel between Lepton Flavour Universality Violating (LFUV) ratios and U-spin ratios of optimized observables in non-leptonic B decays constructed upon longitudinal amplitudes of $B \to VV$ decays. While the former consists of ratios of decays to 2nd generation leptons ($b \to s \mu^+\mu^-$) versus 1st generation ($b \to s e^+e^-$), the latter are
U-spin ratios to 2nd generation quarks ($b \to s$) versus 1st generation ($b \to d$). This parallelism has two evident limitations: a) the breaking of LFUV can be more accurately computed than the breaking of U-spin that requires hadronic contributions to be estimated and b) the remanent long distance sensitivity to weak annihilation (WA) and infrared divergent hard spectator scattering (HSS) in the non-leptonic case.
Our goal in Ref.~\cite{non-leptonic} was to build cleaner observables for non-leptonic modes exhibiting deviations with respect to the SM, reconsider the SM estimates and discuss potential NP sources.
\section{Theoretical Framework and hadronic uncertainties}
The theoretical description of $B_Q \to VV$ with $Q=d,s$ follows NLO QCD-Factorization (QCDF)~\cite{yang} including the modeling of the $1/m_b$ suppressed IR divergences coming from WA and HSS.
We start by decomposing the $\bar B_Q$ decay amplitude through a $b \to q$ transition into a $V_1V_2$ state with the same definite polarisation for both vector mesons:
\begin{equation}
\bar{A}_f\equiv A(\bar{B}_Q\to V_1 V_2)
=\lambda_u^{(q)} T_q + \lambda_c^{(q)} P_q\,.
\label{dec}
\end{equation}
There are three possible helicity amplitude states for the outgoing $V V$ pair.
The naive hierarchy~\cite{Kagan} among the helicity amplitudes shows that transverse amplitudes are power suppressed w.r.t the longitudinal (the electromagnetic effects known to violate this hierarchy~\cite{yang} have no impact on the following argument). The central point here is that the dangerous IR divergences enter at leading order in the transverse amplitudes but are power-suppressed for the longitudinal one. This suggested the idea of constructing an observable only sensitive to the longitudinal amplitudes.
We then decided to focus on decays purely mediated through penguin diagrams (i.e. no tree contributions). Indeed the theoretical uncertainties on the hadronic contributions can be reduced in these cases due to the fact that the difference of hadronic $\Delta_q=T_q-P_q$~\cite{old,delta} is free from $1/m_b$-suppressed long-distance divergences.
\subsection{The L-observable: SM prediction and comparison with data}
We define an observable that will be sensitive to the information on the polarization fraction but with a cleaner theoretical prediction~\cite{non-leptonic}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:LKstKst0}
L_{V_1V_2}=\frac{{\cal B}_{b \to s}}{{\cal B}_{b \to d}}\frac{g_{b \to d} f_L^{b \to s}}{g_{b \to s} f_L^{b \to d}}=\frac{|A_0^s|^2+ |\bar A_0^s|^2}{|A_0^d|^2+ |\bar A_0^d|^2}\,,
\end{equation}
where
${\cal B}_{b \to q}$ ($f_L^{b \to q}$) refers to the branching ratio (longitudinal polarisation) of the $\bar{B}_Q \to V_1V_2$ decay governed by a $b \to q$ transition. $\bar{A}_0^q$ and ${A}_0^q$ are the
amplitudes for the $\bar{B}_Q$ and ${B}_Q$ decays governed by $b \to q$ with final vector mesons longitudinally polarised and $g_{b \to q}$ stands for the phase space factor (see Ref.~\cite{non-leptonic} for definition).
In the particular case of the penguin-mediated decays
$B_{d,s} \to K^{*0} {\bar K^{*0}}$ taking experimental data from LHCb~\cite{exp1} and Babar~\cite{exp2} we find:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:expL}
{\rm Exp}:\qquad L_{K^*\bar{K}^*}=4.43\pm 0.92,
\end{equation}
where we included
the effect of $B_s$ meson mixing in the measurement of the branching ratio (leading to a correction of at most 7$\%$).
Concerning the SM prediction, we found in Ref.~\cite{non-leptonic}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:LKstKstDeltaP}
\!\! L_{K^*\bar{K}^*}= \kappa \left|\frac{P_s}{P_d}\right|^2
\left[\frac{1+\left|\alpha^s\right|^2\left|\frac{\Delta_s}{P_s}\right|^2
+ 2 {\rm Re} \left( \frac{ \Delta_s}{P_s}\right) {\rm Re}(\alpha^s)
}{1+\left|\alpha^d\right|^2\left|\frac{\Delta_d}{P_d}\right|^2
+ 2 {\rm Re} \left( \frac{ \Delta_d}{P_d}\right) {\rm Re}(\alpha^d)} \right]\,.
\end{equation}
See Ref.~\cite{non-leptonic} for explicit definitions of $\kappa$ and $\alpha^{d,s}$.
We obtain in the NLO-QCDF case \cite{non-leptonic}:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:tension1}
{\rm QCD\ fact}: L_{K^*\bar{K}^*}=& 19.5^{+9.3}_{-6.8} \qquad 2.6 \sigma\,. %% Updated by MN 06/10/2020
\label{eq:tension3}
\end{eqnarray}
In Table\ref{tab:confidence} the 1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$ confidence intervals are provided using the whole distribution for $L$.
The $1/m_b$ suppressed contributions entering $L_{K^*\bar{K}^*}$ are parametrised in the same manner as in Ref.~\cite{yang}, involving two regulators $X_H$ and $X_A$ treated as universal
% It is important to remark the treatment of the divergences that arise in soft-gluon interactions with the spectator quark, $X_H$, and in weak annihilation kernels, $X_A$. In this work we model them in the same manner as in Ref.~\ref{Beneke}. We take the following parameterisation, assuming $X_{H,A}$ to be universal
for all channels:
\begin{equation}
X_{H,A}=(1+\rho_{H,A}e^{i\varphi_{H,A}})\ln{\left(\frac{m_B}{\Lambda_{h}}\right)}\,.
\end{equation}
The comparison between theory and experiment points to a possible deficit in the $b \to s$ transition
(reminiscent of the deficit for muons in $b\to s\ell\ell$ decays). Finally, a detailed analysis of the error budget points
to the amount of SU(3) breaking in the form factors as the main source of uncertainty in the ratio $L_{K^*\bar{K}^*}$ (around 30$\%$) and a much lower impact of IR divergences in the ratio than in the individual penguin amplitudes. This means that improving on form factors and their correlation can substantially help in reducing the theory uncertainty on the SM prediction.
\begin{table}[h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
Observable & 1$\sigma$ & 2$\sigma$ \\
\hline
$L_{K^*\bar{K}^*}$ & $[12.7, 28.8]$ & $[7.5, 43]$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$ confidence intervals for the SM prediction of $L_{K^*\bar{K}^*}$ within QCD factorisation.}
\label{tab:confidence}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\section{Model independent interpretation and simplified models}
A model independent analysis %of this discrepancy with the SM
in terms of NP contributions to the Wilson coefficients of the operators of the ${\cal H}^{\rm eff}$ (governing the $b \to s$ transition~\cite{non-leptonic}) identified three possible relevant coefficients: a) the coefficient ${\cal C}_{1s}^{ c}$ of the operator $Q_{1s}^p = (\bar p b)_{V-A} (\bar s p)_{V-A}$
that however requires too large a NP contribution ($\sim$60$\%$) in conflict with recent analyses on non-leptonic constraints~\cite{Lenz:2019lvd} and dijet angular distribution bounds~\cite{dijet} b) the penguin coefficient ${\cal C}_{4s}$ of the operator $Q_{4s} = (\bar s_i b_j)_{V-A} \sum_q\,(\bar q_j q_i)_{V-A}$ that requires a NP contribution of order 25\% (incidentally of similar size as the semileptonic NP contribution to $C_9^{\rm eff}$) and c) the chromomagnetic coefficient ${\cal C}_{8gs}^{\rm eff}$ of the operator $Q_{8gs} = \frac{-g_s}{8\pi^2}\,m_b\, \bar s\sigma_{\mu\nu}(1+\gamma_5) G^{\mu\nu} b$
that would require a contribution of the same order of the SM, also allowed due to the very weak constraints on this coefficient.
Concerning specific models to explain this tension,
the possibility of a tree-level NP contribution entering
$C_{4s}$ via a massive $SU(3)_c$ Kaluza-Klein gluon (axi-gluon) was discussed.
We parametrise its couplings to down quarks as
%
\begin{equation} \label{lagrangian}
{\cal L} = \Delta _{sb}^L\bar s{\gamma ^\mu }{P_L}{T^a}bG_\mu ^a + \Delta _{sb}^R\bar s{\gamma ^\mu }{P_R}{T^a}bG_\mu^a\,,
\end{equation}
with $\Delta_{sb}^{L,R}$ assumed real. We also define from Eq. (\ref{lagrangian}) analogous flavour diagonal couplings which we will denote as $\Delta_{qq}^{L,R}$. We assume these universal flavour-diagonal couplings for the KK gluon to the first two generations of quarks to avoid large effects in K and D mixing. Taking maximal coupling for $\Delta^L_{qq}$ (with R partner to zero) still a significant fine-tuning is required between $\Delta^L_{sb}$ vs $\Delta^R_{sb}$ to account for the constraint from B-meson mixing.
An alternative possibility through a loop-generated contribution to $C_{8gs}$ is discussed in Ref.~\cite{non-leptonic}.
Finally a possible model-dependent way to establish a link with $b \to s \ell\ell$ anomalies in the former model is to embed the KK gluon as part of the particle spectrum of a composite/extra-dimensional model including a $Z^\prime$ boson. While the KK gluon would explain the $L_{K^*K^*}$ tension the $Z^\prime$ due to the large $sb$ coupling could explain the $b\to s\ell^+\ell^-$ anomalies without violating LHC di-lepton bounds~\cite{Aad:2020otl}.
\begin{figure}[b]
% \includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth,height=0.35\textwidth]{Plots/Plot_C1sNP_Final.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Plots/Plot_C4sNP_Final.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Plots/Plot_C8gseffNP_Final.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:C1sC4sC8gs} The tension between the theoretical prediction (blue) and the experimental value (orange) is reduced below $1\sigma$ for ${\cal C}^{\rm NP}_{4s}\simeq 0.25{\cal C}^{\rm SM}_{4s}$ (upper plot) or ${\cal C}^{\rm eff,NP}_{8gs}\simeq -{\cal C}^{\rm eff,SM}_{8gs}$ (lower plot). The predictions are given for ${\cal C}^{\rm NP}_{4s}$ and ${\cal C}^{\rm eff,NP}_{8gs}$ for a range corresponding to 100\% of their respective SM values. }
\end{figure}
In summary, in this article we introduced the $L$-observable as a ratio of longitudinal amplitudes of two non-leptonic related decays governed by a $b \to s$ versus a $b\to d$ transition. This quantity offers the possibility to analyze, in particular, the striking difference in longitudinal polarization fractions between
the two penguin-mediated U-spin partners
$B_{d,s} \to K^{*0} {\bar K^{*0}}$ in a better control way than using the polarization fractions itself.
We identify the (ratio of) form factors as the main source
of theoretical uncertainty for the SM prediction while
WA and HSS infrared divergences entering in a power suppressed way, play a secondary role. We find a tension of 2.6$\sigma$ between our SM prediction and data. Moreover, we identify the main
coefficients that can play a role in explaining this anomaly, namely, $C_{4s}$ and $C_{8gs}$ and we discussed a simplified model based on an axi-gluon as a possible explanation (see \cite{non-leptonic} for another example), but requiring a significant amount of fine-tuning
to satisfy $B_s$ mixing.
%given that they enter in a power suppressed way it offers a better theoretical control than polarization fractions that suffer from these divergences already at LO via their dependence on the transverse amplitudes. This allow us to analyze the striking difference in longitudinal polarization fractions between the two U-spin related modes $B_s \to K^{*0} {\bar K^{*0}}$
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Plots/KKgluon.pdf}
\caption{\label{KKgluon}
Preferred regions for the KK-gluon left- and right-handed couplings to s-b quarks from
$B_s-\bar B_s$ mixing (red) and $L_{K^*\bar{K}^*}$ (blue) compatible with LHC searches assuming real couplings. Note that explaining $L_{K^*\bar{K}^*}$ requires fine-tuning in $\Delta^L_{sb}$ vs $\Delta^R_{sb}$.}
\end{figure}
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This work received financial support from the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities (FPA2017-86989-P) and the Research Grant Agency of the Government of Catalonia (SGR 1069). JM acknowledges the financial support by ICREA under the ICREA Academia programme. This project has received support from EU Horizon 2020 programme (Grant No 860881-HIDDeN).
\section*{References}
\begin{thebibliography}{99}
\bibitem{global-fit}
M.~Alguer\'o, B.~Capdevila, S.~Descotes-Genon, J.~Matias and M.~Novoa-Brunet,
%``$\boldsymbol{b\to s\ell\ell}$ global fits after Moriond 2021 results,''
arXiv:2104.08921 [hep-ph].
%%CITATION = ARXIV:2104.08921;%%
%1 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 27 Apr 2021
\bibitem{non-leptonic}
M.~Alguer\'o, A.~Crivellin, S.~Descotes-Genon, J.~Matias and M.~Novoa-Brunet,
%``A new $B$-flavour anomaly in $B_{d,s}\to K^{*0}\bar{K}^{*0}$: anatomy and interpretation,''
JHEP {\bf 2104} (2021) 066
%doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2021)066
%[arXiv:2011.07867 [hep-ph]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2021)066;%%
%1 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 27 Apr 2021
\bibitem{yang}
M.~Beneke, J.~Rohrer and D.~Yang,
%``Branching fractions, polarisation and asymmetries of B ---> VV decays,''
Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 774} (2007) 64
%doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2007.03.020
%[hep-ph/0612290].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2007.03.020;%%
%273 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 27 Apr 2021
\bibitem{Kagan}
A.~L.~Kagan,
%``Polarization in B ---> VV decays,''
Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 601} (2004) 151
% doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2004.09.030
%[hep-ph/0405134].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2004.09.030;%%
%229 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 27 Apr 2021
\bibitem{old}
S.~Descotes-Genon, J.~Matias and J.~Virto,
%``An analysis of $B_{d,s}$ mixing angles in presence of New Physics and an update of $B_s \to\bar{K}^{0*} anti-K^{0*}$,''
Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 85} (2012) 034010
%doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.034010
%[arXiv:1111.4882 [hep-ph]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.034010;%%
%62 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 27 Apr 2021
\bibitem{delta}
S.~Descotes-Genon, J.~Matias and J.~Virto,
%``Exploring B(d,s) ---> KK decays through flavour symmetries and QCD-factorisation,''
Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 97} (2006) 061801
%doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.061801
%[hep-ph/0603239].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.061801;%%
%62 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 27 Apr 2021
\bibitem{exp1}
R.~Aaij {\it et al.} [LHCb Collaboration],
%``Amplitude analysis of the $B^0_{(s)} \to K^{*0} \overline{K}^{*0}$ decays and measurement of the branching fraction of the $B^0 \to K^{*0} \overline{K}^{*0}$ decay,''
JHEP {\bf 1907} (2019) 032
% doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2019)032
% [arXiv:1905.06662 [hep-ex]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2019)032;%%
%7 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 27 Apr 2021
\bibitem{exp2}
B.~Aubert {\it et al.} [BaBar Collaboration],
%``Observation of $B^0 \to$ K*0 $\bar{K}$* 0 and search for $B^0 \to$ K*0 K*0,''
Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 100} (2008) 081801
%doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.081801
%[arXiv:0708.2248 [hep-ex]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.081801;%%
%53 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 27 Apr 2021
\bibitem{Lenz:2019lvd}
A.~Lenz and G.~Tetlalmatzi-Xolocotzi,
%``Model-independent bounds on new physics effects in non-leptonic tree-level decays of B-mesons,''
JHEP {\bf 2007} (2020) 177
%doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2020)177
%[arXiv:1912.07621 [hep-ph]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2020)177;%%
%17 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 27 Apr 2021
\bibitem{dijet}
A.~M.~Sirunyan {\it et al.} [CMS Collaboration],
%``Search for new physics in dijet angular distributions using proton–proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=$ 13 TeV and constraints on dark matter and other models,''
Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 78} (2018) no.9, 789
%doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-6242-x
%[arXiv:1803.08030 [hep-ex]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-6242-x;%%
%46 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 27 Apr 2021
\bibitem{Aad:2020otl}
G.~Aad {\it et al.} [ATLAS Collaboration],
%``Search for new non-resonant phenomena in high-mass dilepton final states with the ATLAS detector,''
JHEP {\bf 2011} (2020) 005
%doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2021)142, 10.1007/JHEP11(2020)005
%[arXiv:2006.12946 [hep-ex]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2021)142, 10.1007/JHEP11(2020)005;%%
%12 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 27 Apr 2021
\end{thebibliography}
\end{document}
\section{Guidelines}
The Moriond proceedings are printed from camera-ready manuscripts.
The following guidelines are intended to get a uniform rending of the
proceedings. Authors with no connection to \LaTeX{} should use this
sample text as a guide for their presentation using their favorite
text editor (see section~\ref{subsec:final})
\subsection{Producing the Hard Copy}\label{subsec:prod}
The hard copy may be printed using the procedure given below.
You should use
two files: \footnote{You can get these files from
our site at \url{http://moriond.in2p3.fr/proceedings.php}.}
\begin{description}
\item[\texttt{moriond.cls}] the style file that provides the higher
level \LaTeX{} commands for the proceedings. Don't change these parameters.
\item[\texttt{moriond.tex}] the main text. You can delete our sample
text and replace it with your own contribution to the volume, however we
recommend keeping an initial version of the file for reference.
\end{description}
The command for (pdf)\LaTeX ing is \texttt{pdflatex moriond}: do this twice to
sort out the cross-referencing.
%If there is an abbreviation
%defined in the new definitions at the top of the file {\em moriond.tex} that
%conflicts with one of your own macros, then
%delete the appropriate command and revert to longhand. Failing that, please
%consult your local texpert to check for other conflicting macros that may
%be unique to your computer system.
{\bf Page numbers should not appear.}
\subsection{Headings and Text and Equations}
Please preserve the style of the
headings, text fonts and line spacing to provide a
uniform style for the proceedings volume.
Equations should be centered and numbered consecutively, as in
Eq.~\ref{eq:murnf}, and the {\em eqnarray} environment may be used to
split equations into several lines, for example in Eq.~\ref{eq:sp},
or to align several equations.
An alternative method is given in Eq.~\ref{eq:spa} for long sets of
equations where only one referencing equation number is wanted.
In \LaTeX, it is simplest to give the equation a label, as in
Eq.~\ref{eq:murnf}
where we have used \verb^\label{eq:murnf}^ to identify the
equation. You can then use the reference \verb^\ref{eq:murnf}^
when citing the equation in the
text which will avoid the need to manually renumber equations due to
later changes. (Look at
the source file for some examples of this.)
The same method can be used for referring to sections and subsections.
\subsection{Tables}
The tables are designed to have a uniform style throughout the proceedings
volume. It doesn't matter how you choose to place the inner
lines of the table, but we would prefer the border lines to be of the style
shown in Table~\ref{tab:exp}.
The top and bottom horizontal
lines should be single (using \verb^\hline^), and
there should be single vertical lines on the perimeter,
(using \verb^\begin{tabular}{|...|}^).
For the inner lines of the table, it looks better if they are
kept to a minimum. We've chosen a more complicated example purely as
an illustration of what is possible.
The caption heading for a table should be placed at the top of the table.
\begin{table}[t]
\caption[]{Experimental Data bearing on $\Gamma(K \ra \pi \pi \gamma)$
for the $\ko_S, \ko_L$ and $K^-$ mesons.}
\label{tab:exp}
\vspace{0.4cm}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|l|}
\hline
& & & \\
&
$\Gamma(\pi^- \pi^0)\; s^{-1}$ &
$\Gamma(\pi^- \pi^0 \gamma)\; s^{-1}$ &
\\ \hline
\mco{2}{|c|}{Process for Decay} & & \\
\cline{1-2}
$K^-$ &
$1.711 \times 10^7$ &
\begin{minipage}{1in}
$2.22 \times 10^4$ \\ (DE $ 1.46 \times 10^3)$
\end{minipage} &
\begin{minipage}{1.5in}
No (IB)-E1 interference seen but data shows excess events relative to IB over
$E^{\ast}_{\gamma} = 80$ to $100MeV$
\end{minipage} \\
& & & \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsection{Figures}\label{subsec:fig}
If you wish to `embed' an image or photo in the file, you can use
the present template as an example. The command
\verb^\includegraphics^ can take several options, like
\verb^draft^ (just for testing the positioning of the figure)
or \verb^angle^ to rotate a figure by a given angle.
The caption heading for a figure should be placed below the figure.
\subsection{Limitations on the Placement of Tables,
Equations and Figures}\label{sec:plac}
Very large figures and tables should be placed on a page by themselves. One
can use the instruction \verb^\begin{figure}[p]^ or
\verb^\begin{table}[p]^
to position these, and they will appear on a separate page devoted to
figures and tables. We would recommend making any necessary
adjustments to the layout of the figures and tables
only in the final draft. It is also simplest to sort out line and
page breaks in the last stages.
\subsection{Acknowledgments, Appendices, Footnotes and the Bibliography}
If you wish to have
acknowledgments to funding bodies etc., these may be placed in a separate
section at the end of the text, before the Appendices. This should not
be numbered so use \verb^\section*{Acknowledgments}^.
It's preferable to have no appendices in a brief article, but if more
than one is necessary then simply copy the
\verb^\section*{Appendix}^
heading and type in Appendix A, Appendix B etc. between the brackets.
Footnotes are denoted by a letter superscript
in the text,\footnote{Just like this one.} and references
are denoted by a number superscript.
Bibliography can be generated either manually or through the BibTeX
package (which is recommanded). In this sample we
have used \verb^\bibitem^ to produce the bibliography.
Citations in the text use the labels defined in the bibitem declaration,
for example, the first paper by Jarlskog~\cite{ja} is cited using the command
\verb^\cite{ja}^.
%If you more commonly use the method of square brackets in the line of text
%for citation than the superscript method,
%please note that you need to adjust the punctuation
%so that the citation command appears after the punctuation mark.
\subsection{Photograph}
You may want to include a photograph of yourself below the title
of your talk. A scanned photo can be
directly included using the default command\\
\verb^\newcommand{\Photo}{\includegraphics[height=35mm]{mypicture}}^\\
just before the
\verb^\begin{document}^
line. If you don't want to include your photo, just comment this line
by adding the \verb^%^ sign at the beginning of
the line and uncomment the next one
\verb^%\newcommand{\Photo}{}^ by removing its \verb^%^ sign.
\subsection{Final Manuscript}\label{subsec:final}
All files (.tex, figures and .pdf) should be sent by the {\bf 15th of May 2017}
by e-mail
to \\
{\bf moriond@in2p3.fr}.\\
\section{Sample Text }
The following may be (and has been) described as `dangerously irrelevant'
physics. The Lorentz-invariant phase space integral for
a general n-body decay from a particle with momentum $P$
and mass $M$ is given by:
\begin{equation}
I((P - k_i)^2, m^2_i, M) = \frac{1}{(2 \pi)^5}\!
\int\!\frac{d^3 k_i}{2 \omega_i} \! \delta^4(P - k_i).
\label{eq:murnf}
\end{equation}
The only experiment on $K^{\pm} \ra \pi^{\pm} \pi^0 \gamma$ since 1976
is that of Bolotov {\it et al}.~\cite{bu}
There are two
necessary conditions required for any acceptable
parametrization of the
quark mixing matrix. The first is that the matrix must be unitary, and the
second is that it should contain a CP violating phase $\delta$.
In Sec.~\ref{subsec:fig} the connection between invariants (of
form similar to J) and unitarity relations
will be examined further for the more general $ n \times n $ case.
The reason is that such a matrix is not a faithful representation of the group,
i.e. it does not cover all of the parameter space available.
\begin{equation}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\begin{array}{rc@{\,}c@{\,}l}
%\begin{array}{>{\displaystyle}r>{\displaystyle}c>{\displaystyle}c>{\displaystyle}l}
%\begin{eqnarray}
\bf{K} & = && Im[V_{j, \alpha} {V_{j,\alpha + 1}}^*
{V_{j + 1,\alpha }}^* V_{j + 1, \alpha + 1} ] \\
& & + & Im[V_{k, \alpha + 2} {V_{k,\alpha + 3}}^*
{V_{k + 1,\alpha + 2 }}^* V_{k + 1, \alpha + 3} ] \\
& & + & Im[V_{j + 2, \beta} {V_{j + 2,\beta + 1}}^*
{V_{j + 3,\beta }}^* V_{j + 3, \beta + 1} ] \\
& & + & Im[V_{k + 2, \beta + 2} {V_{k + 2,\beta + 3}}^*
{V_{k + 3,\beta + 2 }}^* V_{k + 3, \beta + 3}] \\
& & \\
\bf{M} & = && Im[{V_{j, \alpha}}^* V_{j,\alpha + 1}
V_{j + 1,\alpha } {V_{j + 1, \alpha + 1}}^* ] \\
& & + & Im[V_{k, \alpha + 2} {V_{k,\alpha + 3}}^*
{V_{k + 1,\alpha + 2 }}^* V_{k + 1, \alpha + 3} ] \\
& & + & Im[{V_{j + 2, \beta}}^* V_{j + 2,\beta + 1}
V_{j + 3,\beta } {V_{j + 3, \beta + 1}}^* ] \\
& & + & Im[V_{k + 2, \beta + 2} {V_{k + 2,\beta + 3}}^*
{V_{k + 3,\beta + 2 }}^* V_{k + 3, \beta + 3}],
\\ & &
\end{array}
%\end{eqnarray}
\label{eq:spa}
\end{equation}
where $ k = j$ or $j+1$ and $\beta = \alpha$ or $\alpha+1$, but if
$k = j + 1$, then $\beta \neq \alpha + 1$ and similarly, if
$\beta = \alpha + 1$ then $ k \neq j + 1$.\footnote{An example of a
matrix which has elements
containing the phase variable $e^{i \delta}$ to second order, i.e.
elements with a
phase variable $e^{2i \delta}$ is given at the end of this section.}
There are only 162 quark mixing matrices using these parameters
which are
to first order in the phase variable $e^{i \delta}$ as is the case for
the Jarlskog parametrizations, and for which J is not identically
zero.
It should be noted that these are physically identical and
form just one true parametrization.
\bea
T & = & Im[V_{11} {V_{12}}^* {V_{21}}^* V_{22}] \nonumber \\
& & + Im[V_{12} {V_{13}}^* {V_{22}}^* V_{23}] \nonumber \\
& & - Im[V_{33} {V_{31}}^* {V_{13}}^* V_{11}].
\label{eq:sp}
\eea
\begin{figure}
\begin{minipage}{0.33\linewidth}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth,draft=true]{figexamp}}
\end{minipage}
\hfill
\begin{minipage}{0.32\linewidth}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth]{figexamp}}
\end{minipage}
\hfill
\begin{minipage}{0.32\linewidth}
\centerline{\includegraphics[angle=-45,width=0.7\linewidth]{figexamp}}
\end{minipage}
\caption[]{same figure with draft option (left), normal (center) and rotated (right)}
\label{fig:radish}
\end{figure}
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This is where one places acknowledgments for funding bodies etc.
Note that there are no section numbers for the Acknowledgments, Appendix
or References.
\section*{Appendix}
We can insert an appendix here and place equations so that they are
given numbers such as Eq.~\ref{eq:app}.
\be
x = y.
\label{eq:app}
\ee
\section*{References}
\begin{thebibliography}{99}
\bibitem{ja}C Jarlskog in {\em CP Violation}, ed. C Jarlskog
(World Scientific, Singapore, 1988).
\bibitem{ma}L. Maiani, \Journal{\PLB}{62}{183}{1976}.
\bibitem{bu}J.D. Bjorken and I. Dunietz, \Journal{\PRD}{36}{2109}{1987}.
\bibitem{bd}C.D. Buchanan {\it et al}, \Journal{\PRD}{45}{4088}{1992}.
\end{thebibliography}
\end{document}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
% End of moriond.tex %
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%% Local Variables:
%%% mode: latex
%%% TeX-master: t
%%% End:
%%% Local Variables:
%%% mode: latex
%%% TeX-master: t
%%% End:
%%% Local Variables:
%%% mode: latex
%%% TeX-master: t
%%% End: