4.7 Article

Measurement of the anomalous like-sign dimuon charge asymmetry with 9 fb-1 of p(p)over-bar collisions

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW D
卷 84, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.84.052007

关键词

-

资金

  1. DOE (USA)
  2. NSF (USA)
  3. CEA (France)
  4. CNRS/IN2P3 (France)
  5. FASI (Russia)
  6. Rosatom (Russia)
  7. RFBR (Russia)
  8. CNPq (Brazil)
  9. FAPERJ (Brazil)
  10. FAPESP (Brazil)
  11. FUNDUNESP (Brazil)
  12. DAE (India)
  13. DST (India)
  14. Colciencias (Colombia)
  15. CONACyT (Mexico)
  16. KRF (Korea)
  17. KOSEF (Korea)
  18. CONICET (Argentina)
  19. UBACyT (Argentina)
  20. FOM (The Netherlands)
  21. STFC (United Kingdom)
  22. Royal Society (United Kingdom)
  23. MSMT (Czech Republic)
  24. GACR (Czech Republic)
  25. CRC (Canada)
  26. NSERC (Canada)
  27. BMBF (Germany)
  28. DFG (Germany)
  29. SFI (Ireland)
  30. Swedish Research Council (Sweden)
  31. CAS (China)
  32. CNSF (China)
  33. ICREA Funding Source: Custom
  34. STFC [PP/E000487/1, ST/F00754X/1, ST/F007418/1, ST/H00095X/1, ST/J501074/1, ST/H00095X/2, ST/I505756/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  35. Science and Technology Facilities Council [ST/H00095X/2, PP/E000487/1, ST/J501074/1, ST/H00095X/1, ST/F007418/1, ST/I505756/1, ST/F00754X/1, PP/D004284/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We present an updated measurement of the anomalous like-sign dimuon charge asymmetry A(sl)(b) for semileptonic b-hadron decays in 9.0 fb(-1) of p (p) over bar collisions recorded with the D0 detector at a center-of-mass energy of root s = 1.96 TeV at the Fermilab Tevatron collider. We obtain A(sl)(b) = (-0.787 +/- 0.172(stat) +/- 0.093(syst)%. This result differs by 3.9 standard deviations from the prediction of the standard model and provides evidence for anomalously large CP violation in semileptonic neutral B decay. The dependence of the asymmetry on the muon impact parameter is consistent with the hypothesis that it originates from semileptonic b-hadron decays.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据