[go: up one dir, main page]

Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Account
Menu
Find a journal Publish with us Track your research
Search
Cart
  1. Home
  2. Journal of High Energy Physics
  3. Article

More synergies from beauty, top, Z and Drell-Yan measurements in SMEFT

  • Regular Article - Theoretical Physics
  • Open access
  • Published: 17 November 2023
  • Volume 2023, article number 110, (2023)
  • Cite this article
Download PDF

You have full access to this open access article

Journal of High Energy Physics Aims and scope Submit manuscript
More synergies from beauty, top, Z and Drell-Yan measurements in SMEFT
Download PDF
  • Cornelius Grunwald1,
  • Gudrun Hiller  ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4419-36121,2,
  • Kevin Kröninger1 &
  • …
  • Lara Nollen1 
  • 437 Accesses

  • 26 Citations

  • 1 Altmetric

  • Explore all metrics

A preprint version of the article is available at arXiv.

Abstract

We perform a global analysis of Beauty, Top, Z and Drell-Yan measurements in the framework of the Standard Model effective theory (SMEFT). We work within the minimal flavor violation (MFV) hypothesis, which relates different sectors and generations beyond the SU(2)L-link between left-handed top and beauty quarks. We find that the constraints on the SMEFT Wilson coefficients from the combined analysis are stronger than the constraints from a fit to the individual sectors, highlighting synergies in the global approach. We also show that constraints within MFV are strengthened compared to single-generation fits. The strongest bounds are obtained for the semileptonic four-fermion triplet operator \( {C}_{lq}^{(3)} \), probing scales as high as 18 TeV, followed by the gluon dipole operator CuG with 7 TeV, and other four-fermion and penguin operators in the multi-TeV range. Operators with left-handed quark bilinears receive order one contributions from higher orders in the MFV expansion induced by the top Yukawa coupling as a result of the FCNC b → sμμ anomalies combined with the other sectors. We predict the 68% credible intervals of the dineutrino branching ratios within MFV as \( 4.25\cdot {10}^{-6}\le \mathcal{B}\left({B}^0\to {K}^{\ast 0}\nu \overline{\nu}\right)\le 11.13\cdot {10}^{-6} \) and \( 2.26\cdot {10}^{-6}\le \mathcal{B}\left({B}^{+}\to {K}^{+}\nu \overline{\nu}\right)\le 5.78\cdot {10}^{-6} \), which include the respective Standard Model predictions, and are in reach of the Belle II experiment. We show how future measurements of the dineutrino branching ratios can provide insights into the structure of new physics in the global fit.

Article PDF

Download to read the full article text

Similar content being viewed by others

Yukawa enhancement of Z-mediated new physics in ∆S = 2 and ∆B = 2 processes

Article Open access 26 July 2017

Aligned yet large dipoles: a SMEFT study

Article Open access 07 November 2024

Charming new B-physics

Article Open access 23 March 2020

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, books and news in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.
  • Cleft lip and palate
  • Feminism and Feminist Theory
  • Particle Physics
  • Quantum Physics
  • Theoretical Nuclear Physics
  • Theoretical Particle Physics
Use our pre-submission checklist

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

References

  1. J. Drobnak, S. Fajfer and J.F. Kamenik, Interplay of t → bW Decay and Bq Meson Mixing in Minimal Flavor Violating Models, Phys. Lett. B 701 (2011) 234 [arXiv:1102.4347] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  2. J. Drobnak, S. Fajfer and J.F. Kamenik, Probing anomalous tWb interactions with rare B decays, Nucl. Phys. B 855 (2012) 82 [arXiv:1109.2357] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  3. H. Gong, Y.-D. Yang and X.-B. Yuan, Constraints on anomalous tcZ coupling from \( \overline{B}\to {\overline{K}}^{\ast }{\mu}^{+}{\mu}^{-} \) and Bs → μ+μ− decays, JHEP 05 (2013) 062 [arXiv:1301.7535] [INSPIRE].

  4. S. Bißmann et al., Constraining top-quark couplings combining top-quark and B decay observables, Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (2020) 136 [arXiv:1909.13632] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  5. X.-Q. Li, Y.-D. Yang and X.-B. Yuan, Anomalous tqZ Coupling Effects in Rare B- and K-Meson Decays, JHEP 03 (2012) 018 [arXiv:1112.2674] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  6. J. Brod, A. Greljo, E. Stamou and P. Uttayarat, Probing anomalous \( t\overline{t}Z \) interactions with rare meson decays, JHEP 02 (2015) 141 [arXiv:1408.0792] [INSPIRE].

  7. R. Bause, H. Gisbert, M. Golz and G. Hiller, Lepton universality and lepton flavor conservation tests with dineutrino modes, Eur. Phys. J. C 82 (2022) 164 [arXiv:2007.05001] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  8. B. Grzadkowski, M. Iskrzynski, M. Misiak and J. Rosiek, Dimension-Six Terms in the Standard Model Lagrangian, JHEP 10 (2010) 085 [arXiv:1008.4884] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  9. G. D’Ambrosio, G.F. Giudice, G. Isidori and A. Strumia, Minimal flavor violation: An effective field theory approach, Nucl. Phys. B 645 (2002) 155 [hep-ph/0207036] [INSPIRE].

  10. S. Bruggisser, R. Schäfer, D. van Dyk and S. Westhoff, The Flavor of UV Physics, JHEP 05 (2021) 257 [arXiv:2101.07273] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  11. R. Aoude, T. Hurth, S. Renner and W. Shepherd, The impact of flavour data on global fits of the MFV SMEFT, JHEP 12 (2020) 113 [arXiv:2003.05432] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  12. S. Bruggisser, D. van Dyk and S. Westhoff, Resolving the flavor structure in the MFV-SMEFT, JHEP 02 (2023) 225 [arXiv:2212.02532] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. S. Bißmann, C. Grunwald, G. Hiller and K. Kröninger, Top and Beauty synergies in SMEFT-fits at present and future colliders, JHEP 06 (2021) 010 [arXiv:2012.10456] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  14. D. Barducci et al., Interpreting top-quark LHC measurements in the standard-model effective field theory, arXiv:1802.07237 [INSPIRE].

  15. R. Barbieri, D. Buttazzo, F. Sala and D.M. Straub, Flavour physics from an approximate U(2)3 symmetry, JHEP 07 (2012) 181 [arXiv:1203.4218] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  16. D.A. Faroughy, G. Isidori, F. Wilsch and K. Yamamoto, Flavour symmetries in the SMEFT, JHEP 08 (2020) 166 [arXiv:2005.05366] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. A. Greljo, A. Palavrić and A.E. Thomsen, Adding Flavor to the SMEFT, JHEP 10 (2022) 010 [arXiv:2203.09561] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  18. A. Efrati, A. Falkowski and Y. Soreq, Electroweak constraints on flavorful effective theories, JHEP 07 (2015) 018 [arXiv:1503.07872] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  19. A. Greljo and D. Marzocca, High-pT dilepton tails and flavor physics, Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) 548 [arXiv:1704.09015] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  20. J. Fuentes-Martin, A. Greljo, J. Martin Camalich and J.D. Ruiz-Alvarez, Charm physics confronts high-pT lepton tails, JHEP 11 (2020) 080 [arXiv:2003.12421] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  21. A. Angelescu, D.A. Faroughy and O. Sumensari, Lepton Flavor Violation and Dilepton Tails at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (2020) 641 [arXiv:2002.05684] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  22. L. Allwicher et al., Drell-Yan tails beyond the Standard Model, JHEP 03 (2023) 064 [arXiv:2207.10714] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  23. W. Buchmuller and D. Wyler, Effective Lagrangian Analysis of New Interactions and Flavor Conservation, Nucl. Phys. B 268 (1986) 621 [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  24. A. Kobach, Baryon Number, Lepton Number, and Operator Dimension in the Standard Model, Phys. Lett. B 758 (2016) 455 [arXiv:1604.05726] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  25. I. Brivio, SMEFTsim 3.0 — a practical guide, JHEP 04 (2021) 073 [arXiv:2012.11343] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. E.E. Jenkins, A.V. Manohar and M. Trott, Renormalization Group Evolution of the Standard Model Dimension Six Operators I: Formalism and lambda Dependence, JHEP 10 (2013) 087 [arXiv:1308.2627] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  27. E.E. Jenkins, A.V. Manohar and M. Trott, Renormalization Group Evolution of the Standard Model Dimension Six Operators II: Yukawa Dependence, JHEP 01 (2014) 035 [arXiv:1310.4838] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  28. R. Alonso, E.E. Jenkins, A.V. Manohar and M. Trott, Renormalization Group Evolution of the Standard Model Dimension Six Operators III: Gauge Coupling Dependence and Phenomenology, JHEP 04 (2014) 159 [arXiv:1312.2014] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  29. J. Aebischer, J. Kumar and D.M. Straub, Wilson: a Python package for the running and matching of Wilson coefficients above and below the electroweak scale, Eur. Phys. J. C 78 (2018) 1026 [arXiv:1804.05033] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  30. P. Paradisi, M. Ratz, R. Schieren and C. Simonetto, Running minimal flavor violation, Phys. Lett. B 668 (2008) 202 [arXiv:0805.3989] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  31. W. Dekens and P. Stoffer, Low-energy effective field theory below the electroweak scale: matching at one loop, JHEP 10 (2019) 197 [Erratum ibid. 11 (2022) 148] [arXiv:1908.05295] [INSPIRE].

  32. G. Colangelo, E. Nikolidakis and C. Smith, Supersymmetric models with minimal flavour violation and their running, Eur. Phys. J. C 59 (2009) 75 [arXiv:0807.0801] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  33. C. Hays, A. Martin, V. Sanz and J. Setford, On the impact of dimension-eight SMEFT operators on Higgs measurements, JHEP 02 (2019) 123 [arXiv:1808.00442] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  34. S. Dawson, S. Homiller and M. Sullivan, Impact of dimension-eight SMEFT contributions: A case study, Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 115013 [arXiv:2110.06929] [INSPIRE].

  35. T. Corbett, A. Helset, A. Martin and M. Trott, EWPD in the SMEFT to dimension eight, JHEP 06 (2021) 076 [arXiv:2102.02819] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  36. R. Boughezal, E. Mereghetti and F. Petriello, Dilepton production in the SMEFT at O(1/Λ4), Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 095022 [arXiv:2106.05337] [INSPIRE].

  37. R. Boughezal, Y. Huang and F. Petriello, Exploring the SMEFT at dimension eight with Drell-Yan transverse momentum measurements, Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022) 036020 [arXiv:2207.01703] [INSPIRE].

  38. S. Bißmann et al., Correlating uncertainties in global analyses within SMEFT matters, Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020) 115019 [arXiv:1912.06090] [INSPIRE].

  39. J. Alwall et al., The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations, JHEP 07 (2014) 079 [arXiv:1405.0301] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  40. R. Frederix et al., The automation of next-to-leading order electroweak calculations, JHEP 07 (2018) 185 [Erratum ibid. 11 (2021) 085] [arXiv:1804.10017] [INSPIRE].

  41. R.D. Ball et al., Parton distributions with LHC data, Nucl. Phys. B 867 (2013) 244 [arXiv:1207.1303] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  42. A. Buckley et al., LHAPDF6: parton density access in the LHC precision era, Eur. Phys. J. C 75 (2015) 132 [arXiv:1412.7420] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  43. I. Brivio, Y. Jiang and M. Trott, The SMEFTsim package, theory and tools, JHEP 12 (2017) 070 [arXiv:1709.06492] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  44. CMS collaboration, Measurement of differential \( t\overline{t} \) production cross sections in the full kinematic range using lepton+jets events from proton-proton collisions at \( \sqrt{s} \) = 13 TeV, Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 092013 [arXiv:2108.02803] [INSPIRE].

  45. A. Kulesza et al., Associated production of a top quark pair with a heavy electroweak gauge boson at NLO+NNLL accuracy, Eur. Phys. J. C 79 (2019) 249 [arXiv:1812.08622] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  46. G. Bevilacqua et al., Hard Photons in Hadroproduction of Top Quarks with Realistic Final States, JHEP 10 (2018) 158 [arXiv:1803.09916] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  47. A. Kulesza et al., Associated top quark pair production with a heavy boson: differential cross sections at NLO+NNLL accuracy, Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (2020) 428 [arXiv:2001.03031] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  48. ATLAS collaboration, Measurement of Higgs boson production in association with a \( t\overline{t} \) pair in the diphoton decay channel using 139 fb−1 of LHC data collected at \( \sqrt{s} \) = 13 TeV by the ATLAS experiment, ATLAS-CONF-2019-004, CERN, Geneva (2019).

  49. A. Czarnecki, J.G. Korner and J.H. Piclum, Helicity fractions of W bosons from top quark decays at NNLO in QCD, Phys. Rev. D 81 (2010) 111503 [arXiv:1005.2625] [INSPIRE].

  50. CMS collaboration, Search for resonant and nonresonant new phenomena in high-mass dilepton final states at \( \sqrt{s} \) = 13 TeV, JHEP 07 (2021) 208 [arXiv:2103.02708] [INSPIRE].

  51. ATLAS collaboration, Search for heavy Higgs bosons decaying into two tau leptons with the ATLAS detector using pp collisions at \( \sqrt{s} \) = 13 TeV, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125 (2020) 051801 [arXiv:2002.12223] [INSPIRE].

  52. ATLAS collaboration, Search for a heavy charged boson in events with a charged lepton and missing transverse momentum from pp collisions at \( \sqrt{s} \) = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D 100 (2019) 052013 [arXiv:1906.05609] [INSPIRE].

  53. ATLAS collaboration, Search for high-mass resonances in final states with a tau lepton and missing transverse momentum with the ATLAS detector, ATLAS-CONF-2021-025, CERN, Geneva (2021).

  54. C. Zhang, Effective field theory approach to top-quark decay at next-to-leading order in QCD, Phys. Rev. D 90 (2014) 014008 [arXiv:1404.1264] [INSPIRE].

  55. E. Conte, B. Fuks and G. Serret, MadAnalysis 5, A User-Friendly Framework for Collider Phenomenology, Comput. Phys. Commun. 184 (2013) 222 [arXiv:1206.1599] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  56. ATLAS collaboration, Measurements of the inclusive and differential production cross sections of a top-quark-antiquark pair in association with a Z boson at \( \sqrt{s} \) = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (2021) 737 [arXiv:2103.12603] [INSPIRE].

  57. ATLAS collaboration, Measurements of inclusive and differential cross-sections of combined \( t\overline{t}\gamma \) and tWγ production in the eμ channel at 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 09 (2020) 049 [arXiv:2007.06946] [INSPIRE].

  58. CMS collaboration, Measurement of the cross section of top quark-antiquark pair production in association with a W boson in proton-proton collisions at \( \sqrt{s} \) = 13 TeV, JHEP 07 (2023) 219 [arXiv:2208.06485] [INSPIRE].

  59. ATLAS collaboration, Measurement of the polarisation of W bosons produced in top-quark decays using dilepton events at s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS experiment, Phys. Lett. B 843 (2023) 137829 [arXiv:2209.14903] [INSPIRE].

  60. C. Bierlich et al., A comprehensive guide to the physics and usage of PYTHIA 8.3, arXiv:2203.11601 [https://doi.org/10.21468/SciPostPhysCodeb.8] [INSPIRE].

  61. DELPHES 3 collaboration, DELPHES 3, A modular framework for fast simulation of a generic collider experiment, JHEP 02 (2014) 057 [arXiv:1307.6346] [INSPIRE].

  62. I. Antcheva et al., ROOT: A C++ framework for petabyte data storage, statistical analysis and visualization, Comput. Phys. Commun. 180 (2009) 2499 [arXiv:1508.07749] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  63. F. Krauss, S. Kuttimalai and T. Plehn, LHC multijet events as a probe for anomalous dimension-six gluon interactions, Phys. Rev. D 95 (2017) 035024 [arXiv:1611.00767] [INSPIRE].

  64. D.M. Straub, flavio: a Python package for flavour and precision phenomenology in the Standard Model and beyond, arXiv:1810.08132 [INSPIRE].

  65. ALEPH et al. collaborations, Precision electroweak measurements on the Z resonance, Phys. Rept. 427 (2006) 257 [hep-ex/0509008] [INSPIRE].

  66. N. Gubernari, A. Kokulu and D. van Dyk, B → P and B → V Form Factors from B-Meson Light-Cone Sum Rules beyond Leading Twist, JHEP 01 (2019) 150 [arXiv:1811.00983] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  67. R.R. Horgan, Z. Liu, S. Meinel and M. Wingate, Rare B decays using lattice QCD form factors, PoS LATTICE2014 (2015) 372 [arXiv:1501.00367] [INSPIRE].

  68. CMS collaboration, Measurement of the \( {B}_S^0 \) → μ+μ− decay properties and search for the B0 → μ+μ− S decay in proton-proton collisions at \( \sqrt{s} \) = 13 TeV, Phys. Lett. B 842 (2023) 137955 [arXiv:2212.10311] [INSPIRE].

  69. M. Beneke, C. Bobeth and R. Szafron, Power-enhanced leading-logarithmic QED corrections to Bq → μ+μ−, JHEP 10 (2019) 232 [Erratum ibid. 11 (2022) 099] [arXiv:1908.07011] [INSPIRE].

  70. LHCb collaboration, Measurement of the \( {B}_S^0 \) → μ+μ− decay properties and search for the B0 → μ+μ− and \( {B}_s^0 \) → μ+μ−γ decays, Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022) 012010 [arXiv:2108.09283] [INSPIRE].

  71. HFLAV collaboration, Averages of b-hadron, c-hadron, and τ-lepton properties as of 2021, Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) 052008 [arXiv:2206.07501] [INSPIRE].

  72. M. Misiak et al., Updated NNLO QCD predictions for the weak radiative B-meson decays, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 (2015) 221801 [arXiv:1503.01789] [INSPIRE].

  73. BaBar collaboration, Measurement of the B → Xsl+l− branching fraction and search for direct CP violation from a sum of exclusive final states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112 (2014) 211802 [arXiv:1312.5364] [INSPIRE].

  74. Belle collaboration, Measurement of the lepton forward-backward asymmetry in B → Xsℓ+ℓ− decays with a sum of exclusive modes, Phys. Rev. D 93 (2016) 032008 [Addendum ibid. 93 (2016) 059901] [arXiv:1402.7134] [INSPIRE].

  75. T. Huber, T. Hurth and E. Lunghi, Inclusive \( \overline{B} \) → Xsℓ+ℓ−: complete angular analysis and a thorough study of collinear photons, JHEP 06 (2015) 176 [arXiv:1503.04849] [INSPIRE].

  76. LHCb collaboration, Measurement of CP-Averaged Observables in the B0 → K*0μ+μ− Decay, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125 (2020) 011802 [arXiv:2003.04831] [INSPIRE].

  77. LHCb collaboration, Differential branching fractions and isospin asymmetries of B → K(*)μ+μ− decays, JHEP 06 (2014) 133 [arXiv:1403.8044] [INSPIRE].

  78. LHCb collaboration, Angular analysis of the rare decay \( {B}_s^0 \) → ϕμ+μ−, JHEP 11 (2021) 043 [arXiv:2107.13428] [INSPIRE].

  79. LHCb collaboration, Differential branching fraction and angular analysis of \( {\Lambda}_b^0 \) → Λμ+μ− decays, JHEP 06 (2015) 115 [Erratum ibid. 09 (2018) 145] [arXiv:1503.07138] [INSPIRE].

  80. L. Di Luzio, M. Kirk, A. Lenz and T. Rauh, ∆Ms theory precision confronts flavour anomalies, JHEP 12 (2019) 009 [arXiv:1909.11087] [INSPIRE].

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. BaBar collaboration, Search for B → K(*)\( \nu \overline{\nu} \) and invisible quarkonium decays, Phys. Rev. D 87 (2013) 112005 [arXiv:1303.7465] [INSPIRE].

  82. Belle collaboration, Search for B → \( \boldsymbol{h}\boldsymbol{\nu } \overline{\boldsymbol{\nu}} \) decays with semileptonic tagging at Belle, Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017) 091101 [Addendum ibid. 97 (2018) 099902] [arXiv:1702.03224] [INSPIRE].

  83. G. Buchalla, G. Hiller and G. Isidori, Phenomenology of nonstandard Z couplings in exclusive semileptonic b → s transitions, Phys. Rev. D 63 (2000) 014015 [hep-ph/0006136] [INSPIRE].

  84. Flavour Lattice Averaging Group collaboration, FLAG Review 2019: Flavour Lattice Averaging Group (FLAG), Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (2020) 113 [arXiv:1902.08191] [INSPIRE].

  85. J. Brod, M. Gorbahn and E. Stamou, Updated Standard Model Prediction for K → \( \pi \nu \overline{\nu} \) and ϵK, PoS BEAUTY2020 (2021) 056 [arXiv:2105.02868] [INSPIRE].

  86. J.F. Kamenik and C. Smith, Tree-level contributions to the rare decays B+ → π+\( \nu \overline{\nu} \), B+ → K+\( \nu \overline{\nu} \), and B+ → K*+ \( \nu \overline{\nu} \) in the Standard Model, Phys. Lett. B 680 (2009) 471 [arXiv:0908.1174] [INSPIRE].

  87. Belle-II collaboration, The Belle II Physics Book, PTEP 2019 (2019) 123C01 [Erratum ibid. 2020 (2020) 029201] [arXiv:1808.10567] [INSPIRE].

  88. N. Castro et al., EFTfitter — A tool for interpreting measurements in the context of effective field theories, Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016) 432 [arXiv:1605.05585] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  89. O. Schulz et al., BAT.jl: A Julia-Based Tool for Bayesian Inference, SN Comput. Sci. 2 (2021) 1 [arXiv:2008.03132] [INSPIRE].

  90. A. Greljo, J. Salko, A. Smolkovič and P. Stangl, Rare b decays meet high-mass Drell-Yan, JHEP 05 (2023) 087 [arXiv:2212.10497] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  91. B. Yan and C.-P. Yuan, Anomalous \( Zb\overline{b} \) Couplings: From LEP to LHC, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127 (2021) 051801 [arXiv:2101.06261] [INSPIRE].

  92. R. Bause, H. Gisbert, M. Golz and G. Hiller, Interplay of dineutrino modes with semileptonic rare B-decays, JHEP 12 (2021) 061 [arXiv:2109.01675] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  93. ATLAS collaboration, Observation of Single-Top-Quark Production in Association with a Photon Using the ATLAS Detector, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131 (2023) 181901 [arXiv:2302.01283] [INSPIRE].

  94. CMS collaboration, Search for new physics in top quark production with additional leptons in proton-proton collisions at \( \sqrt{s} \) = 13 TeV using effective field theory, JHEP 03 (2021) 095 [arXiv:2012.04120] [INSPIRE].

  95. CMS collaboration, Search for new physics in top quark production with additional leptons in the context of effective field theory using 138fb−1 of proton-proton collisions at \( \sqrt{s} \) = 13 TeV, CMS-PAS-TOP-22-006, CERN, Geneva (2023).

  96. FCC collaboration, FCC-ee: The Lepton Collider: Future Circular Collider Conceptual Design Report Volume 2, Eur. Phys. J. ST 228 (2019) 261 [INSPIRE].

  97. K. Long et al., Muon colliders to expand frontiers of particle physics, Nature Phys. 17 (2021) 289 [arXiv:2007.15684] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  98. C. Aime et al., Muon Collider Physics Summary, arXiv:2203.07256 [INSPIRE].

  99. R. Bause, H. Gisbert, M. Golz and G. Hiller, Model-independent analysis of b → d processes, Eur. Phys. J. C 83 (2023) 419 [arXiv:2209.04457] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  100. S. Glazov, Belle II Physics highlights, Talk given at EPS-HEP, Hamburg, Germany, August 24, (2023).

  101. J. Aebischer, A. Crivellin, M. Fael and C. Greub, Matching of gauge invariant dimension-six operators for b → s and b → c transitions, JHEP 05 (2016) 037 [arXiv:1512.02830] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  102. C. Bobeth, A.J. Buras, A. Celis and M. Jung, Yukawa enhancement of Z-mediated new physics in ∆S = 2 and ∆B = 2 processes, JHEP 07 (2017) 124 [arXiv:1703.04753] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  103. T. Hurth, S. Renner and W. Shepherd, Matching for FCNC effects in the flavour-symmetric SMEFT, JHEP 06 (2019) 029 [arXiv:1903.00500] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  104. A. Bharucha, D.M. Straub and R. Zwicky, B → Vℓ+ℓ− in the Standard Model from light-cone sum rules, JHEP 08 (2016) 098 [arXiv:1503.05534] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  105. Particle Data Group collaboration, Review of Particle Physics, PTEP 2022 (2022) 083C01 [INSPIRE].

  106. C.B. Lang, D. Mohler, S. Prelovsek and R.M. Woloshyn, Predicting positive parity Bs mesons from lattice QCD, Phys. Lett. B 750 (2015) 17 [arXiv:1501.01646] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  107. (HPQCD collaboration)§ and HPQCD collaborations, B→K and D→K form factors from fully relativistic lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) 014510 [arXiv:2207.12468] [INSPIRE].

  108. D. Bečirević, G. Piazza and O. Sumensari, Revisiting B → K(*)\( \nu \overline{\nu} \) decays in the Standard Model and beyond, Eur. Phys. J. C 83 (2023) 252 [arXiv:2301.06990] [INSPIRE].

  109. HPQCD collaboration, Rare decay B → Kℓ+ℓ− form factors from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D 88 (2013) 054509 [Erratum ibid. 88 (2013) 079901] [arXiv:1306.2384] [INSPIRE].

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are happy to thank Rigo Bause and Hector Gisbert for useful discussions. LN is supported by the doctoral scholarship program of the Studienstiftung des Deutschen Volkes. GH gratefully acknowledges an IPPP DIVA fellowship. This work was supported in part by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) through the PUNCH4NFDI consortium supported by the DFG fund NFDI 39/1.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Physics, TU Dortmund University, Otto-Hahn-Str.4, D-44221, Dortmund, Germany

    Cornelius Grunwald, Gudrun Hiller, Kevin Kröninger & Lara Nollen

  2. Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, BN1 9QH, United Kingdom

    Gudrun Hiller

Authors
  1. Cornelius Grunwald
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gudrun Hiller
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kevin Kröninger
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lara Nollen
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lara Nollen.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

ArXiv ePrint: 2304.12837

Rights and permissions

Open Access . This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits any use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Grunwald, C., Hiller, G., Kröninger, K. et al. More synergies from beauty, top, Z and Drell-Yan measurements in SMEFT. J. High Energ. Phys. 2023, 110 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2023)110

Download citation

  • Received: 22 June 2023

  • Revised: 25 September 2023

  • Accepted: 25 October 2023

  • Published: 17 November 2023

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2023)110

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Keywords

  • SMEFT
  • Flavour Symmetries
  • Rare Decays
Use our pre-submission checklist

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Advertisement

Search

Navigation

  • Find a journal
  • Publish with us
  • Track your research

Discover content

  • Journals A-Z
  • Books A-Z

Publish with us

  • Journal finder
  • Publish your research
  • Language editing
  • Open access publishing

Products and services

  • Our products
  • Librarians
  • Societies
  • Partners and advertisers

Our brands

  • Springer
  • Nature Portfolio
  • BMC
  • Palgrave Macmillan
  • Apress
  • Discover
  • Your US state privacy rights
  • Accessibility statement
  • Terms and conditions
  • Privacy policy
  • Help and support
  • Legal notice
  • Cancel contracts here

Not affiliated

Springer Nature

© 2025 Springer Nature