Improved determination of the CKM angleαfromB→ππdecays

Citations Over TimeTop 10% of 2007 papers

Abstract

Motivated by a recent paper that compares the results of the analysis of the CKM angle $\ensuremath{\alpha}$ in the frequentist and in the Bayesian approaches, we have reconsidered the information on the hadronic amplitudes, which helps in constraining the value of $\ensuremath{\alpha}$ in the standard model. We find that the Bayesian method gives consistent results irrespective of the parametrization of the hadronic amplitudes and that the results of the frequentist and Bayesian approaches are equivalent when comparing meaningful probability ranges or confidence levels. We also find that from $B\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\ensuremath{\pi}\ensuremath{\pi}$ decays alone the 95% probability region for $\ensuremath{\alpha}$ is the interval [80\ifmmode^\circ\else\textdegree\fi{}, 170\ifmmode^\circ\else\textdegree\fi{}], well consistent with recent analyses of the unitarity triangle where, by using all the available experimental and theoretical information, one gets $\ensuremath{\alpha}=(93\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}4)\ifmmode^\circ\else\textdegree\fi{}$. Last but not least, by using simple arguments on the hadronic matrix elements, we show that the unphysical region $\ensuremath{\alpha}\ensuremath{\sim}0$, present in several experimental analyses, can be eliminated.

Related Papers

• → Direct Comparison between Bayesian and Frequentist Uncertainty Quantification for Nuclear Reactions(2019)76 cited
• → Comparison of Bayesian and frequentist group-sequential clinical trial designs(2020)65 cited
• → Comparison of Bayesian with group sequential methods for monitoring clinical trials(1989)127 cited
• → Two Papers on the Comparison of Bayesian and Frequentist Approaches to Statistical Problems of Prediction: Bayesian Tolerance Regions(1964)72 cited
• → Discussion of “Frequentist coverage of adaptive nonparametric Bayesian credible sets”(2015)1 cited