Processing math: 100%
CMS logoCMS event Hgg
Compact Muon Solenoid
LHC, CERN

CMS-BPH-21-002 ; CERN-EP-2024-268
Angular analysis of the B0K(892)0μ+μ decay in proton-proton collisions at s= 13 TeV
Submitted to Phys. Lett. B
Abstract: A full set of optimized observables is measured in an angular analysis of the decay B0K(892)0μ+μ using a sample of proton-proton collisions at s= 13 TeV, collected with the CMS detector at the LHC, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 140 fb1. The analysis is performed in six bins of the squared invariant mass of the dimuon system, q2, over the range 1.1 <q2< 16 GeV2. The results are among the most precise experimental measurements of the angular observables for this decay and are compared to a variety of predictions based on the standard model.
Figures & Tables Summary Additional Figures & Tables References CMS Publications
Figures

png pdf
Figure 1:
Sketch representing the definition of the angles θl (left), θK (center), and ϕ (right).

png pdf
Figure 2:
Mass and angular distributions for (upper two rows) 2 <q2< 4.3 GeV2 and (lower two rows) 4.3 <q2< 6 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (blue solid line) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Figure 2-a:
Mass and angular distributions for (upper two rows) 2 <q2< 4.3 GeV2 and (lower two rows) 4.3 <q2< 6 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (blue solid line) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Figure 2-b:
Mass and angular distributions for (upper two rows) 2 <q2< 4.3 GeV2 and (lower two rows) 4.3 <q2< 6 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (blue solid line) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Figure 2-c:
Mass and angular distributions for (upper two rows) 2 <q2< 4.3 GeV2 and (lower two rows) 4.3 <q2< 6 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (blue solid line) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Figure 2-d:
Mass and angular distributions for (upper two rows) 2 <q2< 4.3 GeV2 and (lower two rows) 4.3 <q2< 6 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (blue solid line) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Figure 2-e:
Mass and angular distributions for (upper two rows) 2 <q2< 4.3 GeV2 and (lower two rows) 4.3 <q2< 6 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (blue solid line) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Figure 2-f:
Mass and angular distributions for (upper two rows) 2 <q2< 4.3 GeV2 and (lower two rows) 4.3 <q2< 6 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (blue solid line) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Figure 2-g:
Mass and angular distributions for (upper two rows) 2 <q2< 4.3 GeV2 and (lower two rows) 4.3 <q2< 6 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (blue solid line) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Figure 2-h:
Mass and angular distributions for (upper two rows) 2 <q2< 4.3 GeV2 and (lower two rows) 4.3 <q2< 6 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (blue solid line) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Figure 3:
Measurements of the angular observables versus q2. The inner vertical bars represent the statistical uncertainties, while the outer vertical bars give the total uncertainties. The horizontal bars show the bin widths. The vertical shaded regions correspond to the J/ψ and ψ(2S) resonances. Predictions are shown, averaged in each bin, from Ref. [18] (labeled ABCDMN), and the EOS [46], flavio [47], and HEPfit [51] libraries.

png pdf
Figure 3-a:
Measurements of the angular observables versus q2. The inner vertical bars represent the statistical uncertainties, while the outer vertical bars give the total uncertainties. The horizontal bars show the bin widths. The vertical shaded regions correspond to the J/ψ and ψ(2S) resonances. Predictions are shown, averaged in each bin, from Ref. [18] (labeled ABCDMN), and the EOS [46], flavio [47], and HEPfit [51] libraries.

png pdf
Figure 3-b:
Measurements of the angular observables versus q2. The inner vertical bars represent the statistical uncertainties, while the outer vertical bars give the total uncertainties. The horizontal bars show the bin widths. The vertical shaded regions correspond to the J/ψ and ψ(2S) resonances. Predictions are shown, averaged in each bin, from Ref. [18] (labeled ABCDMN), and the EOS [46], flavio [47], and HEPfit [51] libraries.

png pdf
Figure 3-c:
Measurements of the angular observables versus q2. The inner vertical bars represent the statistical uncertainties, while the outer vertical bars give the total uncertainties. The horizontal bars show the bin widths. The vertical shaded regions correspond to the J/ψ and ψ(2S) resonances. Predictions are shown, averaged in each bin, from Ref. [18] (labeled ABCDMN), and the EOS [46], flavio [47], and HEPfit [51] libraries.

png pdf
Figure 3-d:
Measurements of the angular observables versus q2. The inner vertical bars represent the statistical uncertainties, while the outer vertical bars give the total uncertainties. The horizontal bars show the bin widths. The vertical shaded regions correspond to the J/ψ and ψ(2S) resonances. Predictions are shown, averaged in each bin, from Ref. [18] (labeled ABCDMN), and the EOS [46], flavio [47], and HEPfit [51] libraries.

png pdf
Figure 3-e:
Measurements of the angular observables versus q2. The inner vertical bars represent the statistical uncertainties, while the outer vertical bars give the total uncertainties. The horizontal bars show the bin widths. The vertical shaded regions correspond to the J/ψ and ψ(2S) resonances. Predictions are shown, averaged in each bin, from Ref. [18] (labeled ABCDMN), and the EOS [46], flavio [47], and HEPfit [51] libraries.

png pdf
Figure 3-f:
Measurements of the angular observables versus q2. The inner vertical bars represent the statistical uncertainties, while the outer vertical bars give the total uncertainties. The horizontal bars show the bin widths. The vertical shaded regions correspond to the J/ψ and ψ(2S) resonances. Predictions are shown, averaged in each bin, from Ref. [18] (labeled ABCDMN), and the EOS [46], flavio [47], and HEPfit [51] libraries.

png pdf
Figure 3-g:
Measurements of the angular observables versus q2. The inner vertical bars represent the statistical uncertainties, while the outer vertical bars give the total uncertainties. The horizontal bars show the bin widths. The vertical shaded regions correspond to the J/ψ and ψ(2S) resonances. Predictions are shown, averaged in each bin, from Ref. [18] (labeled ABCDMN), and the EOS [46], flavio [47], and HEPfit [51] libraries.

png pdf
Figure 3-h:
Measurements of the angular observables versus q2. The inner vertical bars represent the statistical uncertainties, while the outer vertical bars give the total uncertainties. The horizontal bars show the bin widths. The vertical shaded regions correspond to the J/ψ and ψ(2S) resonances. Predictions are shown, averaged in each bin, from Ref. [18] (labeled ABCDMN), and the EOS [46], flavio [47], and HEPfit [51] libraries.

png pdf
Figure 4:
Comparison of current measurements of P2 and P5 to a previous P2 measurement by LHCb [16] and previous P5 results from ATLAS [15], Belle [7], CMS [14], and LHCb [16]. The inner vertical bars represent the statistical uncertainties, while the outer vertical bars give the total uncertainties. The horizontal bars show the bin widths.

png pdf
Figure 4-a:
Comparison of current measurements of P2 and P5 to a previous P2 measurement by LHCb [16] and previous P5 results from ATLAS [15], Belle [7], CMS [14], and LHCb [16]. The inner vertical bars represent the statistical uncertainties, while the outer vertical bars give the total uncertainties. The horizontal bars show the bin widths.

png pdf
Figure 4-b:
Comparison of current measurements of P2 and P5 to a previous P2 measurement by LHCb [16] and previous P5 results from ATLAS [15], Belle [7], CMS [14], and LHCb [16]. The inner vertical bars represent the statistical uncertainties, while the outer vertical bars give the total uncertainties. The horizontal bars show the bin widths.
Tables

png pdf
Table 1:
The uncertainties considered in the analysis on the various angular observables. For each source of uncertainty, the range covers the absolute variation observed across the q2 bins.

png pdf
Table 2:
The measured CP-averaged angular observables, in the corresponding q2 bins. The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic.
Summary
In summary, the study of the full angular distribution of the flavor-changing neutral-current B0K0μ+μ decay has been performed using 140 fb1 of proton-proton collision data recorded by the CMS detector at the LHC at s= 13 TeV. A complete set of observables has been measured via unbinned maximum likelihood fits to the B0 candidate mass and angular variables, in bins of the squared invariant mass of the dimuon system ranging from 1.1 to 16 GeV2. The measurements are compared to a variety of predictions based on the standard model, with tension in a few of the angular observables seen for some of the predictions, as is also reported by other experiments. These results are among the most precise experimental measurements of the angular observables of this decay, and provide a valuable contribution to the understanding of the bs+ processes.
Additional Figures

png pdf
Additional Figure 1:
Mass and angular distributions for 1.1 <q2< 2 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (in blue) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Additional Figure 1-a:
Mass and angular distributions for 1.1 <q2< 2 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (in blue) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Additional Figure 1-b:
Mass and angular distributions for 1.1 <q2< 2 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (in blue) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Additional Figure 1-c:
Mass and angular distributions for 1.1 <q2< 2 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (in blue) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Additional Figure 1-d:
Mass and angular distributions for 1.1 <q2< 2 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (in blue) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Additional Figure 2:
Mass and angular distributions for 6 <q2< 8.68 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (in blue) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Additional Figure 2-a:
Mass and angular distributions for 6 <q2< 8.68 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (in blue) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Additional Figure 2-b:
Mass and angular distributions for 6 <q2< 8.68 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (in blue) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Additional Figure 2-c:
Mass and angular distributions for 6 <q2< 8.68 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (in blue) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Additional Figure 2-d:
Mass and angular distributions for 6 <q2< 8.68 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (in blue) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Additional Figure 3:
Mass and angular distributions for 10.09 <q2< 12.86 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (in blue) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Additional Figure 3-a:
Mass and angular distributions for 10.09 <q2< 12.86 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (in blue) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Additional Figure 3-b:
Mass and angular distributions for 10.09 <q2< 12.86 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (in blue) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Additional Figure 3-c:
Mass and angular distributions for 10.09 <q2< 12.86 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (in blue) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Additional Figure 3-d:
Mass and angular distributions for 10.09 <q2< 12.86 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (in blue) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Additional Figure 4:
Mass and angular distributions for 14.18 <q2< 16 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (in blue) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Additional Figure 4-a:
Mass and angular distributions for 14.18 <q2< 16 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (in blue) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Additional Figure 4-b:
Mass and angular distributions for 14.18 <q2< 16 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (in blue) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Additional Figure 4-c:
Mass and angular distributions for 14.18 <q2< 16 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (in blue) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Additional Figure 4-d:
Mass and angular distributions for 14.18 <q2< 16 GeV2. The projections of the total fitted distribution (in blue) and its different components are overlaid. The signal is shown by the red dotted line, and the background by the orange dashed line.

png pdf
Additional Figure 5:
Comparison of current measurements of FL to previous results from ATLAS [15], CMS [13], and LHCb [16]. The inner vertical bars represent the statistical uncertainties, while the outer vertical bars give the total uncertainties. The horizontal bars show the bin widths.

png pdf
Additional Figure 6:
Comparison of current measurements of P1 to previous results from ATLAS [15], CMS [14], and LHCb [16]. The inner vertical bars represent the statistical uncertainties, while the outer vertical bars give the total uncertainties. The horizontal bars show the bin widths.

png pdf
Additional Figure 7:
Comparison of current measurements of P3 to previous results from LHCb [16]. The inner vertical bars represent the statistical uncertainties, while the outer vertical bars give the total uncertainties. The horizontal bars show the bin widths.

png pdf
Additional Figure 8:
Comparison of current measurements of P4 to previous results from ATLAS [15], Belle [7], and LHCb [16]. The inner vertical bars represent the statistical uncertainties, while the outer vertical bars give the total uncertainties. The horizontal bars show the bin widths. The definition of the P4 observable is the one presented in Ref. [22]: the results from ATLAS, Belle, and LHCb Collaborations are therefore scaled by a factor of two to superimpose them on the same plot.

png pdf
Additional Figure 9:
Comparison of current measurements of P6 to previous results from ATLAS [15] and LHCb [16]. The inner vertical bars represent the statistical uncertainties, while the outer vertical bars give the total uncertainties. The horizontal bars show the bin widths. The definition of the P6 observable is the one presented in Ref. [22]: the results from the LHCb Collaboration are therefore scaled by a factor of minus one to superimpose them on the same plot.

png pdf
Additional Figure 10:
Comparison of current measurements of P8 to previous results from ATLAS [15] and LHCb [16]. The inner vertical bars represent the statistical uncertainties, while the outer vertical bars give the total uncertainties. The horizontal bars show the bin widths. The definition of the P8 observable is the one presented in Ref. [22]: the results from LHCb and ATLAS Collaborations are therefore scaled by a factor of two to superimpose them on the same plot.

png pdf
Additional Figure 11:
The various sources of systematic uncertainty per each q2 bin, for the FL observable. In all cases where the statistical uncertainty is asymmetric, the maximum of the two uncertainties is represented. The total systematic uncertainty and the statistical uncertainty are shown by the dotted area and white bar, respectively.

png pdf
Additional Figure 12:
The various sources of systematic uncertainty per each q2 bin, for the P1 observable. In all cases where the statistical uncertainty is asymmetric, the maximum of the two uncertainties is represented. The total systematic uncertainty and the statistical uncertainty are shown by the dotted area and white bar, respectively.

png pdf
Additional Figure 13:
The various sources of systematic uncertainty per each q2 bin, for the P2 observable. In all cases where the statistical uncertainty is asymmetric, the maximum of the two uncertainties is represented. The total systematic uncertainty and the statistical uncertainty are shown by the dotted area and white bar, respectively.

png pdf
Additional Figure 14:
The various sources of systematic uncertainty per each q2 bin, for the P3 observable. In all cases where the statistical uncertainty is asymmetric, the maximum of the two uncertainties is represented. The total systematic uncertainty and the statistical uncertainty are shown by the dotted area and white bar, respectively.

png pdf
Additional Figure 15:
The various sources of systematic uncertainty per each q2 bin, for the P4 observable. In all cases where the statistical uncertainty is asymmetric, the maximum of the two uncertainties is represented. The total systematic uncertainty and the statistical uncertainty are shown by the dotted area and white bar, respectively.

png pdf
Additional Figure 16:
The various sources of systematic uncertainty per each q2 bin, for the P5 observable. In all cases where the statistical uncertainty is asymmetric, the maximum of the two uncertainties is represented. The total systematic uncertainty and the statistical uncertainty are shown by the dotted area and white bar, respectively.

png pdf
Additional Figure 17:
The various sources of systematic uncertainty per each q2 bin, for the P6 observable. In all cases where the statistical uncertainty is asymmetric, the maximum of the two uncertainties is represented. The total systematic uncertainty and the statistical uncertainty are shown by the dotted area and white bar, respectively.

png pdf
Additional Figure 18:
The various sources of systematic uncertainty per each q2 bin, for the P8 observable. In all cases where the statistical uncertainty is asymmetric, the maximum of the two uncertainties is represented. The total systematic uncertainty and the statistical uncertainty are shown by the dotted area and white bar, respectively.

png pdf
Additional Figure 19:
Projections on the angular variables of the three-dimensional efficiency functions for signal candidates with correct (blue line) and wrong (orange line) flavor assignment, for 1.1 <q2< 2 GeV2. These functions represent the combination of detector acceptance and efficiency for signal candidates, calculated on a sample of simulated B0 mesons with |η|< 3, with conditions corresponding to the data collected in 2018.

png pdf
Additional Figure 19-a:
Projections on the angular variables of the three-dimensional efficiency functions for signal candidates with correct (blue line) and wrong (orange line) flavor assignment, for 1.1 <q2< 2 GeV2. These functions represent the combination of detector acceptance and efficiency for signal candidates, calculated on a sample of simulated B0 mesons with |η|< 3, with conditions corresponding to the data collected in 2018.

png pdf
Additional Figure 19-b:
Projections on the angular variables of the three-dimensional efficiency functions for signal candidates with correct (blue line) and wrong (orange line) flavor assignment, for 1.1 <q2< 2 GeV2. These functions represent the combination of detector acceptance and efficiency for signal candidates, calculated on a sample of simulated B0 mesons with |η|< 3, with conditions corresponding to the data collected in 2018.

png pdf
Additional Figure 19-c:
Projections on the angular variables of the three-dimensional efficiency functions for signal candidates with correct (blue line) and wrong (orange line) flavor assignment, for 1.1 <q2< 2 GeV2. These functions represent the combination of detector acceptance and efficiency for signal candidates, calculated on a sample of simulated B0 mesons with |η|< 3, with conditions corresponding to the data collected in 2018.

png pdf
Additional Figure 20:
Projections on the angular variables of the three-dimensional efficiency functions for signal candidates with correct (blue line) and wrong (orange line) flavor assignment, for 2 <q2< 4.3 GeV2. These functions represent the combination of detector acceptance and efficiency for signal candidates, calculated on a sample of simulated B0 mesons with |η|< 3, with conditions corresponding to the data collected in 2018.

png pdf
Additional Figure 20-a:
Projections on the angular variables of the three-dimensional efficiency functions for signal candidates with correct (blue line) and wrong (orange line) flavor assignment, for 2 <q2< 4.3 GeV2. These functions represent the combination of detector acceptance and efficiency for signal candidates, calculated on a sample of simulated B0 mesons with |η|< 3, with conditions corresponding to the data collected in 2018.

png pdf
Additional Figure 20-b:
Projections on the angular variables of the three-dimensional efficiency functions for signal candidates with correct (blue line) and wrong (orange line) flavor assignment, for 2 <q2< 4.3 GeV2. These functions represent the combination of detector acceptance and efficiency for signal candidates, calculated on a sample of simulated B0 mesons with |η|< 3, with conditions corresponding to the data collected in 2018.

png pdf
Additional Figure 20-c:
Projections on the angular variables of the three-dimensional efficiency functions for signal candidates with correct (blue line) and wrong (orange line) flavor assignment, for 2 <q2< 4.3 GeV2. These functions represent the combination of detector acceptance and efficiency for signal candidates, calculated on a sample of simulated B0 mesons with |η|< 3, with conditions corresponding to the data collected in 2018.

png pdf
Additional Figure 21:
Projections on the angular variables of the three-dimensional efficiency functions for signal candidates with correct (blue line) and wrong (orange line) flavor assignment, for 4.3 <q2< 6 GeV2. These functions represent the combination of detector acceptance and efficiency for signal candidates, calculated on a sample of simulated B0 mesons with |η|< 3, with conditions corresponding to the data collected in 2018.

png pdf
Additional Figure 21-a:
Projections on the angular variables of the three-dimensional efficiency functions for signal candidates with correct (blue line) and wrong (orange line) flavor assignment, for 4.3 <q2< 6 GeV2. These functions represent the combination of detector acceptance and efficiency for signal candidates, calculated on a sample of simulated B0 mesons with |η|< 3, with conditions corresponding to the data collected in 2018.

png pdf
Additional Figure 21-b:
Projections on the angular variables of the three-dimensional efficiency functions for signal candidates with correct (blue line) and wrong (orange line) flavor assignment, for 4.3 <q2< 6 GeV2. These functions represent the combination of detector acceptance and efficiency for signal candidates, calculated on a sample of simulated B0 mesons with |η|< 3, with conditions corresponding to the data collected in 2018.

png pdf
Additional Figure 21-c:
Projections on the angular variables of the three-dimensional efficiency functions for signal candidates with correct (blue line) and wrong (orange line) flavor assignment, for 4.3 <q2< 6 GeV2. These functions represent the combination of detector acceptance and efficiency for signal candidates, calculated on a sample of simulated B0 mesons with |η|< 3, with conditions corresponding to the data collected in 2018.

png pdf
Additional Figure 22:
Projections on the angular variables of the three-dimensional efficiency functions for signal candidates with correct (blue line) and wrong (orange line) flavor assignment, for 6 <q2< 8.68 GeV2. These functions represent the combination of detector acceptance and efficiency for signal candidates, calculated on a sample of simulated B0 mesons with |η|< 3, with conditions corresponding to the data collected in 2018.

png pdf
Additional Figure 22-a:
Projections on the angular variables of the three-dimensional efficiency functions for signal candidates with correct (blue line) and wrong (orange line) flavor assignment, for 6 <q2< 8.68 GeV2. These functions represent the combination of detector acceptance and efficiency for signal candidates, calculated on a sample of simulated B0 mesons with |η|< 3, with conditions corresponding to the data collected in 2018.

png pdf
Additional Figure 22-b:
Projections on the angular variables of the three-dimensional efficiency functions for signal candidates with correct (blue line) and wrong (orange line) flavor assignment, for 6 <q2< 8.68 GeV2. These functions represent the combination of detector acceptance and efficiency for signal candidates, calculated on a sample of simulated B0 mesons with |η|< 3, with conditions corresponding to the data collected in 2018.

png pdf
Additional Figure 22-c:
Projections on the angular variables of the three-dimensional efficiency functions for signal candidates with correct (blue line) and wrong (orange line) flavor assignment, for 6 <q2< 8.68 GeV2. These functions represent the combination of detector acceptance and efficiency for signal candidates, calculated on a sample of simulated B0 mesons with |η|< 3, with conditions corresponding to the data collected in 2018.

png pdf
Additional Figure 23:
Projections on the angular variables of the three-dimensional efficiency functions for signal candidates with correct (blue line) and wrong (orange line) flavor assignment, for 10.09 <q2< 12.86 GeV2. These functions represent the combination of detector acceptance and efficiency for signal candidates, calculated on a sample of simulated B0 mesons with |η|< 3, with conditions corresponding to the data collected in 2018.

png pdf
Additional Figure 23-a:
Projections on the angular variables of the three-dimensional efficiency functions for signal candidates with correct (blue line) and wrong (orange line) flavor assignment, for 10.09 <q2< 12.86 GeV2. These functions represent the combination of detector acceptance and efficiency for signal candidates, calculated on a sample of simulated B0 mesons with |η|< 3, with conditions corresponding to the data collected in 2018.

png pdf
Additional Figure 23-b:
Projections on the angular variables of the three-dimensional efficiency functions for signal candidates with correct (blue line) and wrong (orange line) flavor assignment, for 10.09 <q2< 12.86 GeV2. These functions represent the combination of detector acceptance and efficiency for signal candidates, calculated on a sample of simulated B0 mesons with |η|< 3, with conditions corresponding to the data collected in 2018.

png pdf
Additional Figure 23-c:
Projections on the angular variables of the three-dimensional efficiency functions for signal candidates with correct (blue line) and wrong (orange line) flavor assignment, for 10.09 <q2< 12.86 GeV2. These functions represent the combination of detector acceptance and efficiency for signal candidates, calculated on a sample of simulated B0 mesons with |η|< 3, with conditions corresponding to the data collected in 2018.

png pdf
Additional Figure 24:
Projections on the angular variables of the three-dimensional efficiency functions for signal candidates with correct (blue line) and wrong (orange line) flavor assignment, for 14.18 <q2< 16 GeV2. These functions represent the combination of detector acceptance and efficiency for signal candidates, calculated on a sample of simulated B0 mesons with |η|< 3, with conditions corresponding to the data collected in 2018.

png pdf
Additional Figure 24-a:
Projections on the angular variables of the three-dimensional efficiency functions for signal candidates with correct (blue line) and wrong (orange line) flavor assignment, for 14.18 <q2< 16 GeV2. These functions represent the combination of detector acceptance and efficiency for signal candidates, calculated on a sample of simulated B0 mesons with |η|< 3, with conditions corresponding to the data collected in 2018.

png pdf
Additional Figure 24-b:
Projections on the angular variables of the three-dimensional efficiency functions for signal candidates with correct (blue line) and wrong (orange line) flavor assignment, for 14.18 <q2< 16 GeV2. These functions represent the combination of detector acceptance and efficiency for signal candidates, calculated on a sample of simulated B0 mesons with |η|< 3, with conditions corresponding to the data collected in 2018.

png pdf
Additional Figure 24-c:
Projections on the angular variables of the three-dimensional efficiency functions for signal candidates with correct (blue line) and wrong (orange line) flavor assignment, for 14.18 <q2< 16 GeV2. These functions represent the combination of detector acceptance and efficiency for signal candidates, calculated on a sample of simulated B0 mesons with |η|< 3, with conditions corresponding to the data collected in 2018.

png pdf
Additional Figure 25:
Invariant mass of the B0 meson candidates as a function of q2.
Additional Tables

png pdf
Additional Table 1:
Correlation matrix of angular observables, considering only the statistical uncertainties, from the maximum-likelihood fit in the region 1.1 <q2< 2 GeV2.

png pdf
Additional Table 2:
Correlation matrix of angular observables, considering only the statistical uncertainties, from the maximum-likelihood fit in the region 2 <q2< 4.3 GeV2.

png pdf
Additional Table 3:
Correlation matrix of angular observables, considering only the statistical uncertainties, from the maximum-likelihood fit in the region 4.3 <q2< 6 GeV2.

png pdf
Additional Table 4:
Correlation matrix of angular observables, considering only the statistical uncertainties, from the maximum-likelihood fit in the region 6 <q2< 8.68 GeV2.

png pdf
Additional Table 5:
Correlation matrix of angular observables, considering only the statistical uncertainties, from the maximum-likelihood fit in the region 10.09 <q2< 12.86 GeV2.

png pdf
Additional Table 6:
Correlation matrix of angular observables, considering only the statistical uncertainties, from the maximum-likelihood fit in the region 14.18 <q2< 16 GeV2.
References
1 ATLAS Collaboration Study of the rare decays of B0s and B0 mesons into muon pairs using data collected during 2015 and 2016 with the ATLAS detector JHEP 04 (2019) 098 1812.03017
2 LHCb Collaboration Measurement of the B0sμ+μ decay properties and search for the B0μ+μ and B0sμ+μγ decays PRD 105 (2022) 012010 2108.09283
3 LHCb Collaboration Analysis of neutral B-meson decays into two muons PRL 128 (2022) 041801 2108.09284
4 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the B0sμ+μ decay properties and search for the B0μ+μ decay in proton-proton collisions at s= 13 TeV PLB 842 (2023) 137955 CMS-BPH-21-006
2212.10311
5 BaBar Collaboration Angular distributions in the decays BK(892)+ PRD 79 (2009) 031102 0804.4412
6 Belle Collaboration Measurement of the differential branching fraction and forward-backward asymmetry for BK()+ PRL 103 (2009) 171801 0904.0770
7 Belle Collaboration Lepton-flavor-dependent angular analysis of BK(892)+ PRL 118 (2017) 111801 1612.05014
8 CDF Collaboration Measurements of the angular distributions in the decays BK()μ+μ at CDF PRL 108 (2012) 081807 1108.0695
9 LHCb Collaboration Differential branching fraction and angular analysis of the decay B0K0μ+μ JHEP 08 (2013) 131 1304.6325
10 LHCb Collaboration Measurement of form-factor-independent observables in the decay B0K0μ+μ PRL 111 (2013) 191801 1308.1707
11 LHCb Collaboration Angular analysis of the B0K0μ+μ decay using 3 fb1 of integrated luminosity JHEP 02 (2016) 104 1512.04442
12 CMS Collaboration Angular analysis and branching fraction measurement of the decay B0K0μ+μ PLB 727 (2013) 77 CMS-BPH-11-009
1308.3409
13 CMS Collaboration Angular analysis of the decay B0K0μ+μ from pp collisions at s= 8 TeV PLB 753 (2016) 424 CMS-BPH-13-010
1507.08126
14 CMS Collaboration Measurement of angular parameters from the decay B0K0μ+μ in proton-proton collisions at s= 8 TeV PLB 781 (2018) 517 CMS-BPH-15-008
1710.02846
15 ATLAS Collaboration Angular analysis of B0dK(892)μ+μ decays in pp collisions at s= 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector JHEP 10 (2018) 047 1805.04000
16 LHCb Collaboration Measurement of CP-averaged observables in the B0K0μ+μ decay PRL 125 (2020) 011802 2003.04831
17 M. Ciuchini et al. Charming penguins and lepton universality violation in bs+ decays EPJC 83 (2023) 64 2110.10126
18 M. Algueró et al. To (b)e or not to (b)e: no electrons at LHCb EPJC 83 (2023) 648 2304.07330
19 M. Bordone, G. Isidori, S. Mächler, and A. Tinari Short- vs. long-distance physics in BK()+: a data-driven analysis EPJC 84 (2024) 547 2401.18007
20 CMS Collaboration HEPData record for this analysis link
21 W. Altmannshofer et al. Symmetries and asymmetries of BK(892)μ+μ decays in the Standard Model and Beyond JHEP 01 (2009) 019 0811.1214
22 S. Descotes-Genon, J. Matias, M. Ramon, and J. Virto Implications from clean observables for the binned analysis of BK(892)μ+μ at large recoil JHEP 01 (2013) 048 1207.2753
23 S. Descotes-Genon, T. Hurth, J. Matias, and J. Virto Optimizing the basis of BK(892)+ observables in the full kinematic range JHEP 05 (2013) 137 1303.5794
24 CMS Collaboration Performance of the CMS muon detector and muon reconstruction with proton-proton collisions at s= 13 TeV JINST 13 (2018) P06015 CMS-MUO-16-001
1804.04528
25 CMS Collaboration Description and performance of track and primary-vertex reconstruction with the CMS tracker JINST 9 (2014) P10009 CMS-TRK-11-001
1405.6569
26 CMS Tracker Group The CMS Phase-1 pixel detector upgrade JINST 16 (2021) P02027 2012.14304
27 CMS Collaboration Track impact parameter resolution for the full pseudo rapidity coverage in the 2017 dataset with the CMS Phase-1 Pixel detector CMS Detector Performance Summary CMS-DP-2020-049, 2020
CDS
28 CMS Collaboration The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC JINST 3 (2008) S08004
29 CMS Collaboration Performance of the CMS Level-1 trigger in proton-proton collisions at s= 13 TeV JINST 15 (2020) P10017 CMS-TRG-17-001
2006.10165
30 CMS Collaboration The CMS trigger system JINST 12 (2017) P01020 CMS-TRG-12-001
1609.02366
31 T. Sjöstrand et al. An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2 Comput. Phys. Commun. 191 (2015) 159 1410.3012
32 D. J. Lange The EvtGen particle decay simulation package NIM A 462 (2001) 152
33 E. Barberio, B. van Eijk, and Z. Was PHOTOS --- a universal Monte Carlo for QED radiative corrections in decays Comput. Phys. Commun. 66 (1991) 115
34 E. Barberio and Z. Was PHOTOS---a universal Monte Carlo for QED radiative corrections: version 2.0 Comput. Phys. Commun. 79 (1994) 291
35 GEANT4 Collaboration GEANT 4---a simulation toolkit NIM A 506 (2003) 250
36 Particle Data Group Review of particle physics PRD 110 (2024) 030001
37 M. Pivk and F. R. Le Diberder sPlot: a statistical tool to unfold data distributions NIM A 555 (2005) 356 physics/0402083
38 M. J. Oreglia A study of the reactions ψγγψ PhD thesis, Stanford University, SLAC Report SLAC-R-236, 1980
link
39 J. E. Gaiser Charmonium spectroscopy from radiative decays of the J/ψ and ψ PhD thesis, Stanford University, SLAC Report SLAC-R-255, 1982
link
40 CMS Collaboration Precise determination of the mass of the Higgs boson and tests of compatibility of its couplings with the standard model predictions using proton collisions at 7 and 8 TeV EPJC 75 (2015) 212 CMS-HIG-14-009
1412.8662
41 R. R. Horgan, Z. Liu, S. Meinel, and M. Wingate Lattice QCD calculation of form factors describing the rare decays BK(892)+ and Bsϕ+ PRD 89 (2014) 094501 1310.3722
42 R. R. Horgan, Z. Liu, S. Meinel, and M. Wingate Rare B decays using lattice QCD form factors in Proceedings of the 32nd International Symposium on Lattice Field Theory -- PoS(LATTICE), 2014
Proceedings of The 3 (2014) 372
43 N. Gubernari, A. Kokulu, and D. van Dyk BP and BV form factors from B-meson light-cone sum rules beyond leading twist JHEP 01 (2019) 150 1811.00983
44 N. Gubernari, D. van Dyk, and J. Virto Non-local matrix elements in B(s){K(),ϕ}+ JHEP 02 (2021) 088 2011.09813
45 N. Gubernari, M. Reboud, D. van Dyk, and J. Virto Improved theory predictions and global analysis of exclusive bsμ+μ processes JHEP 09 (2022) 133 2206.03797
46 D. van Dyk et al. eos/eos: EOS Version 1.0.10 link
47 D. M. Straub flavio: a Python package for flavour and precision phenomenology in the Standard Model and beyond 1810.08132
48 A. Bharucha, D. M. Straub, and R. Zwicky BV+ in the Standard Model from light-cone sum rules JHEP 08 (2016) 098 1503.05534
49 M. Beneke, T. Feldmann, and D. Seidel Exclusive radiative and electroweak bd and bs penguin decays at NLO EPJC 41 (2005) 173 hep-ph/0412400
50 M. Beneke, T. Feldmann, and D. Seidel Systematic approach to exclusive BV+, Vγ decays NPB 612 (2001) 25 hep-ph/0106067
51 J. De Blas et al. HEPfit: a code for the combination of indirect and direct constraints on high energy physics models EPJC 80 (2020) 456 1910.14012
52 M. Ciuchini et al. BK(892)+ decays at large recoil in the Standard Model: a theoretical reappraisal JHEP 06 (2016) 116 1512.07157
Compact Muon Solenoid
LHC, CERN