
DOI: 10.22661/AAPPSBL.2018.28.2.02
Violation of Lepton Flavor Universality and New Physics
HYUN MIN LEE*
DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS, CHUNGANG UNIVERSITY, SEOUL
ABSTRACT
We review the status of probing new physics beyond the Standard Model of particle physics through violation of lepton flavor universality. We focus on the measurements of semileptonic Bmeson decays, recently reported by LHCb, BaBar and Belle experiments.
* hminlee@cau.ac.kr
INTRODUCTION
The Standard Model (SM) of particle physics has been well established, reaching a culmination with the passing of sanity checks after the discovery of the Higgs boson at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). We have confirmed that the Higgs mechanism works for the spontaneous breaking of electroweak symmetry and that it generates masses of elementary particles such as quarks and leptons through the couplings to the Higgs field as predicted in the SM. The larger the Higgs couplings, the heavier the particle masses. However, the hierarchy of fermion masses and the mixing patterns of quarks and leptons, the socalled flavor structure, cannot be understood within the SM, and baryon asymmetry, dark matter and dark energy in the Universe are not explained.
One of the successes of the SM consists in the precision tests of charged and neutral current interactions. Flavor violating charged currents in the SM are induced at the tree level by the charged current W^{+}interactions due to the CabibboKobayashiMaskawa (CKM) matrix V_{CKM} [1], given by

(1) 
with

(2) 
On the other hand, flavorchanging neutral currents (FCNCs) are suppressed by loop diagrams due to the GlashowIliopoulosMaiani (GIM) mechanism. Thus, FCNC processes are sensitive probes to the violation of flavor universality due to the new physics beyond the SM.
ANOMALIES IN BMESON DECAYS
Recently, there have been interesting hints for the violation of lepton flavor universality at LHCb, which is one of main detectors running at the LHC. The semileptonic decays of Bmesons, such as B^{+}→K^{+}𝑙^{+}𝑙^{} and B^{0}→K^{*0}𝑙^{+}𝑙^{} with 𝑙 being muon( μ) or electron(e), have been measured and the results are presented in terms of the ratios of decay branching ratios, R_{K﹙*﹚}≡(B → K^{﹙*﹚}μ^{+}μ^{})/(B → K^{﹙*﹚}e^{+}e^{}) [2, 3], in Fig. 1, as follows,

(3) 
and

(4) 
in the energy bins, 0.045 GeV^{2 }< q^{2 }< 1.1 GeV^{2}, and 1.1 GeV^{2 }< q^{2 }< 6.0 GeV^{2}, respectively. Thus, while R_{K﹙*﹚ }is predicted to be almost equal to 1 in the SM due to lepton flavor universality, the individual measurements at LHCb show more than 2σ deviations from the SM predictions, hinting at the violation of lepton flavor universality.
Fig. 1: Measured values for R_{K} and R_{K*} at LHCb, taken from Ref. [2, 3].
The deviations in R_{K﹙*﹚} are supported by the reduction in the angular distribution of B → K^{*}μ^{+}μ^{}, the so called P'_{5} variable [4]. As B and Kmesons are bound states of quarks, both semileptonic decays of Bmesons are due to bottom to strange quark transitions as b → sμ^{+}μ^{} at the quark level. Taking into account hadronic uncertainties in the Bmeson decays [5], the combined significance from R_{K﹙*﹚} becomes about 4σ.
There is another longstanding puzzle in different semileptonic decays of Bmesons from BaBar [6], Belle [7] and LHCb [8]. Taking into account the measured values for R_{D}=(B → Dτν)/(B → D𝑙ν) and R_{D*}=(B → D^{*}τν)/(B → D^{*}lν) with 𝑙=e, μ for BaBar and Belle and 𝑙=μ for LHCb, the Heavy Flavor Averaging Group [9] reported the experimental world averages in Fig. 2, as follows,

(5) 

(6) 
These measurements would tell us again the violation of lepton flavor universality between tau and the other leptons. The above semileptonic decays of Bmesons are due to bottom to charm quark transitions as b → cτv̄_{τ} at the quark level.
Fig. 2: World averaged values for R_{D} and R_{D*} at BaBar, Belle and LHCb, taken from Ref. [9].
Taking into account the lattice calculation of R_{D}, which is R_{D }= 0.299±0.011 [10], and the uncertainties in R_{D*} in various groups [11, 12], we quote the SM predictions for these ratios as follows,

(7) 

(8) 
Therefore, the best fit values for R_{D} and R_{D*} including the new physics contributions [13] become

(9) 
Then, the combined derivation between the measurements and the SM predictions for R_{D﹙*﹚} is about 4.1σ, similar to the case with R_{K﹙*﹚}.
BMESON DECAYS IN THE SM AND BEYOND
The effective Hamiltonian for b → sμ^{+}μ^{} in the SM is given by

(10) 
where [14], and , and α_{em} is the electromagnetic coupling. Both penguin and box diagrams contribute to the bottom to strange quark transition process in the SM, as shown in Fig. 3.
New physics contributions can modify the Wilson coefficients by and , etc. As to the new physics contribution to R_{K﹙*﹚}, for = 0, the bestfit value required for Bmeson anomalies is given by
Fig. 3: Feynman diagrams for b → sμ^{+}μ^{} decay.
Fig. 4: Feynman diagram for b → cτv̄_{τ} decay.
= 1.10 [15], (while taking [1.27, 0.92] and [1.43, 0.74] within 1σ and 2σ errors), to explain the R_{K﹙*﹚} anomalies. On the other hand, for =  and others being zero, the bestfit value for new physics contribution is given by = 0.61 [15], (while taking [0.73,0.48] and [0.87,0.36] within 1σ and 2σ errors).
There have been many attempts to derive the modified Wilson coefficients for R_{K﹙*﹚} beyond the SM, such as extra U(1) gauge bosons or leptoquark scalars with specific couplings to bottom quark and muon [16, 17]. However, there is the need to explain the origin of new flavordependent couplings specific to bottom quark and muon; in contrast, other meson decays and mixings lead to stringent constraints on the couplings to light quarks and electrons. Given that the corrections to the Wilson coefficients are just about 14 percent of the SM values, we also need to suppress bottom and/or lepton couplings to new particles with weakscale masses or consider new charged particles to enter only in the loop processes [16].
The effective Hamiltonian for b → cτv̄_{τ} in the SM is given by

(11) 
where C_{cb}=1 in the SM. The charged current W^{+}interactions contribute to the bottom to charge transition at the tree level as shown in Fig. 4. The new physics contribution involves modified charged currents, described by the dimension6 fourfermion vector operators, and/or scalar operators, . Then, in order to explain the R_{D﹙*﹚}
Fig. 5: Projected sensitivity for the measurements of R_{K*} at Belle II, taken from Ref. [19].
Fig. 6: Projected sensitivity for the measurements of R_{D} and R_{D*} at Belle II and LHCb, taken from Ref. [20].
anomalies in eq. (9), the Wilson coefficient for the new physics contribution should be ΔC_{cb} = 0.1 from eq. (11), while taking [0.072,0.127] and [0.044,0.153] within 1σ and 2σ errors.
Unlike the case of R_{K﹙*﹚}, the R_{D﹙*﹚} anomalies require sizable Wilson coefficients from new physics, so extra charged gauge bosons or leptoquark scalars/vectors with weakscale masses have order one couplings to bottom quark and tau lepton [18].
It is anticipated, as in Figs. 5 and 6, that the ongoing and future LHCb with Run 2 and HLLHC data will measure the rates of semileptonic Bmeson decays with better precision and that the forthcoming Belle II experiment can eventually test the lepton flavor universality in Bmeson decays up to a few percent level at least with data of 5 ab^{1} [19, 20].
SUMMARY
We have provided a brief summary of recent measurements of semileptonic Bmeson decays at LHCb, BaBar and Belle experiments and their implications for new physics. There are 2σ deviations from the SM values in individual channels, but combined significances for R_{K﹙*﹚} or R_{D﹙*﹚} are about 4σ, respectively. If those Bmeson anomalies are confirmed by LHCb and Belle II experiments with more data, they would become a strong hint for new physics violating the lepton flavor universality and help unravel the origin of the flavor structure in the SM.
Acknowledgments: The work is supported in part by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (NRF2016 R1A2B4008759).
References
[1] C. Patrignani et al. [Particle Data Group], Chin. Phys. C 40 (2016) no.10, 100001. doi:10.1088/16741137/40/10/100001
[2] R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 113 (2014) 151601 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.151601 [arXiv:1406.6482 [hepex]].
[3] S. Bifani (2017), Seminar at CERN, URL: https://indico.cern.ch/event/580620/; S. Bifani [LHCb Collaboration], arXiv:1705.02693 [hepex]; R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], JHEP 1708 (2017) 055 doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2017)055 [arXiv:1705.05802 [hepex]].
[4] R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 111 (2013) 191801 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.191801 [arXiv:1308.1707 [hepex]]; R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], JHEP 1602 (2016) 104 doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2016)104 [arXiv:1512.04442 [hepex]].
[5] A. Bharucha, D. M. Straub and R. Zwicky, JHEP 1608 (2016) 098 doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2016)098 [arXiv:1503.05534 [hepph]]; M. Ciuchini, M. Fedele, E. Franco, S. Mishima, A. Paul, L. Silvestrini and M. Valli, JHEP 1606 (2016) 116 doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2016)116 [arXiv:1512.07157 [hepph]]; S. Neshatpour, V. G. Chobanova, T. Hurth, F. Mahmoudi and D. Martinez Santos, arXiv:1705.10730 [hepph].
[6] J. P. Lees et al. [BaBar Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 109 (2012) 101802 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.101802 [arXiv:1205.5442 [hepex]]; J. P. Lees et al. [BaBar Collaboration], Phys. Rev. D 88 (2013) no.7, 072012 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.88.072012 [arXiv:1303.0571 [hepex]].
[7] M. Huschle et al. [Belle Collaboration], Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) no.7, 072014 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.072014 [arXiv:1507.03233 [hepex]]; A. Abdesselam et al. [Belle Collaboration], arXiv:1603.06711 [hepex].
[8] R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2015) no.11, 111803 Erratum: [Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2015) no.15, 159901] doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.159901, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.111803 [arXiv:1506.08614 [hepex]].
[9] Y. Amhis et al. [HFLAV Collaboration], Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) no.12, 895 doi:10.1140/epjc/s1005201750584 [arXiv:1612.07233 [hepex]].
[10] H. Na et al. [HPQCD Collaboration], Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) no.5, 054510 Erratum: [Phys. Rev. D 93 (2016) no.11, 119906] doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.119906, 10.1103/PhysRevD.92.054510 [arXiv:1505.03925 [heplat]].
[11] S. Fajfer, J. F. Kamenik and I. Nisandzic, Phys. Rev. D 85 (2012) 094025 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.094025 [arXiv:1203.2654 [hepph]]; F. U. Bernlochner, Z. Ligeti, M. Papucci and D. J. Robinson, Phys. Rev. D 95 (2017) no.11, 115008 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.95.115008 [arXiv:1703.05330 [hepph]].
[12] D. Bigi and P. Gambino, Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) no.9, 094008 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.094008 [arXiv:1606.08030 [hepph]]; J. A. Bailey et al. [MILC Collaboration], Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) no.3, 034506 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.034506 [arXiv:1503.07237 [heplat]]; D. Bigi, P. Gambino and S. Schacht, JHEP 1711 (2017) 061 doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2017)061 [arXiv:1707.09509 [hepph]]; S. Jaiswal, S. Nandi and S. K. Patra, JHEP 1712 (2017) 060 doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2017)060 [arXiv:1707.09977 [hepph]].
[13] W. Altmannshofer, P. S. Bhupal Dev and A. Soni, Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017) no.9, 095010 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.095010 [arXiv:1704.06659 [hepph]].
[14] L. S. Geng, B. Grinstein, S. Jger, J. Martin Camalich, X. L. Ren and R. X. Shi, Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017) no.9, 093006 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.093006 [arXiv:1704.05446 [hepph]].
[15] B. Capdevila, A. Crivellin, S. DescotesGenon, J. Matias and J. Virto, JHEP 1801 (2018) 093 doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2018)093 [arXiv:1704.05340 [hepph]].
[16] G. D'Amico, M. Nardecchia, P. Panci, F. Sannino, A. Strumia, R. Torre and A. Urbano, JHEP 1709 (2017) 010 doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2017)010 [arXiv:1704.05438 [hepph]].
[17] L. Bian, S. M. Choi, Y. J. Kang and H. M. Lee, Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017) no.7, 075038 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.075038 [arXiv:1707.04811 [hepph]]; L. Bian, H. M. Lee and C. B. Park, arXiv:1711.08930 [hepph].
[18] D. Buttazzo, A. Greljo, G. Isidori and D. Marzocca, JHEP 1711 (2017) 044 doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2017)044 [arXiv:1706.07808 [hepph]].
[19] Philip Urquijo, Plenary talk at SUSY 2017 Conference.
[20] J. Albrecht, F. Bernlochner, M. Kenzie, S. Reichert, D. Straub and A. Tully, arXiv:1709.10308 [hepph].

Hyun Min Lee is an associate professor at Department of Physics in ChungAng University in Korea. After receiving a PhD from Seoul National University he worked at Bonn University, Germany; DESY (Deutsches ElektronenSynchrotron), Germany; Carnegie Mellon University, USA; McMaster University, Canada; CERN (European Organization for Nuclear Research), Switzerland; and KIAS (Korea Institute for Advanced Study), Korea; before joining ChungAng University in 2013. His research field is theoretical particle physics and cosmology beyond the Standard Model. 
