Measurement of CP observables in B± → DK± and B± → Dπ± with D → K0SK±π∓ decays

University of Groningen

Measurement of CP observables in B± → DK± and B± → Dπ± with D → K0SK±π∓ decays

Onderwater, C. J. G.; LHCb Collaboration

Published in:

Journal of High Energy Physics DOI:

10.1007/JHEP06(2020)058

IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document version below.

Document Version

Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record

Publication date: 2020

Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database

Citation for published version (APA):

Onderwater, C. J. G., & LHCb Collaboration (2020). Measurement of CP observables in B± → DK± and B± → Dπ± with D → K0SK±π∓ decays. Journal of High Energy Physics, 2020(6), [58].

https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2020)058

Copyright

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).

Take-down policy

If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum.

JHEP06(2020)058

Published for SISSA by Springer

Received: February 21, 2020 Revised: April 16, 2020 Accepted: May 18, 2020 Published: June 8, 2020

Measurement of CP observables in B

±

→ DK

±

and

B

±

→ Dπ

±

with D → K

_S0

K

±

π

∓

decays

The LHCb collaboration

E-mail: donal.hill@cern.ch

Abstract: Measurements of CP observables in B± → DK± and B± → Dπ± decays are presented, where D represents a superposition of D0 and ¯D0 states. The D meson is reconstructed in the three-body final states K_S0K±π∓ and K_S0K∓π±. The analysis uses samples of B mesons produced in proton-proton collisions, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 1.0, 2.0, and 6.0 fb−1 collected with the LHCb detector at centre-of-mass energies of √s = 7, 8, and 13 TeV, respectively. These measurements are the most precise to date, and provide important input for the determination of the CKM angle γ.

Keywords: B physics, CKM angle gamma, CP violation, Flavor physics, Hadron-Hadron scattering (experiments)

JHEP06(2020)058

Contents

1 Introduction 1

2 Formalism 2

3 Detector and simulation 3

4 Offline selection 4 5 Invariant-mass fit 6 6 Systematic uncertainties 9 7 Results 13 8 Conclusion 15 A Correlation matrices 16 The LHCb collaboration 19 1 Introduction

In the Standard Model (SM), CP violation in the hadronic sector is described by the irreducible complex phase of the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa (CKM) quark mixing ma-trix [1,2]. This matrix is unitary, which leads to the condition VudVub∗ + VcdVcb∗+ VtdVtb∗ = 0, where Vij is the CKM matrix element relating quark i to quark j. This condition can be represented by a triangle in the complex plane with internal angles α, β, and γ. The angle γ is defined as γ _{≡ arg (−Vud}V_ub∗/VcdVcb∗), which is equal to arg (−VusVub∗/VcsVcb∗) up to O(λ4_{) ∼ 10}−3 _{in the Wolfenstein parameterisation [3], where λ is the sine of the Cabibbo} angle [1]. Improving knowledge of γ can be achieved in a theoretically clean manner by studying the interference of b_{→ u and b → c transition amplitudes in tree-level b-hadron} decays. Such a measurement provides a benchmark against which other flavour observables that are more susceptible to the influence of physics beyond the SM can be compared [4]. A combination of measurements from LHCb currently yields γ = (74.0+5.0_−5.8)◦ [5, 6], which is the most precise determination of γ from a single experiment. The precision is dominated by measurements exploiting the B+ _{→ DK}+ decay,1 where D indicates a superposition of D0 and D0 mesons reconstructed in a final state common to both. To continue improving the precision on γ, independent measurements can be performed

JHEP06(2020)058

using all suitable D meson final states. Several different final states have thus far been analysed at LHCb, including a previous measurement of the singly Cabibbo-suppressed D _{→ KS}0K−π+ and D _{→ KS}0K+π− modes [7]. These decays are reconstructed in two categories by comparing the charge of the pion produced in the D decay with the charge of the B meson; B+ → [K0

SK+π

−_]Dh+ _{decays are thus labelled “Same Sign” (SS), and} B+_{→ [KS}0K−π+]Dh+ decays are labelled “Opposite Sign” (OS), where h∈ {π, K}. This paper reports an update to ref. [7], measuring CP observables in B+ → DK+ _{and B}+ _→ Dπ+decays using the D_{→ KS}0K+π−and D_{→ KS}0K−π+final states. Data corresponding to 6.0 fb−1 of integrated luminosity collected between 2015 and 2018 (Run 2) of data taking is used. The Run 1 dataset collected during 2011 and 2012 and corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 3.0 fb−1 is also reprocessed, to benefit from an improved selection as well as a reappraisal of the backgrounds.

In order to interpret interference effects involving multi-body D-decays, it is necessary to account for the amplitude structure of the Dalitz plot. Instead of employing an ampli-tude model to describe the contributing partial waves, the CLEO collaboration have made measurements of the effective amplitude and phase variation using a sample of quantum-correlated D decays collected by the CLEO-c experiment [8]. Due to limited sample size, those measurements were performed averaging over large regions of the Dalitz plot, notably defining one of two regions to contain the D → K∗₍₈₉₂₎+_K− _{mode. In the present work,} results are reported for both the K∗+ and non-K∗+ regions of the Dalitz plot, respecting the boundary defined by CLEO-c. The use of external CLEO-c results, which were per-formed across the full Dalitz plot and within the K∗+ region, avoids the need to introduce a systematic uncertainty resulting from an amplitude model description.

The paper is organised as follows: section2presents the observables to be measured and their relationships to the physics parameters of interest; section 3 discusses the aspects of the detector, trigger, and simulation that are relevant for the measurement; sections 4,5, and 6 describe the candidate selection, the fit to the invariant mass spectra, and the assignment of systematic uncertainties; the observable results are presented in section 7.

2 Formalism

The SS B+ _{→ [KS}0K+π−]DK+ decay can proceed via the D0 or D0 states. As such, the total decay amplitude is given by the sum of two interfering amplitudes,

A_K0

SK+π−(x) = AD0(x) +rBe

i(δB+γ)_A

D0(x), (2.1)

where x represents the Dalitz plot coordinates (m2_K0 SK

, m2_K0 Sπ

), A_{D0_,D0_}(x) are the D0 and D0 decay amplitudes at a specific point in the K_S0K+π− Dalitz plot [9]. The OS B+ _→ [K0

SK−π+]DK+ decay also proceeds via both D0 and D0, with a total decay amplitude given by

A_K0

SK−π+(x) = AD0(x) +rBe

i(δB+γ)_A

D0(x) . (2.2)

The amplitude ratio rB =

|A(B+_→D0_K+_)|

|A(B+_→D0_K+_)| ∼ 0.1 [5,6], and δB = arg

_A(B+_→D0_K+₎ A(B+_→D0_K+₎ 

is the strong-phase difference between the B decay amplitudes. To calculate the decay rate in a

JHEP06(2020)058

finite region of the Dalitz plot, the integral of the interference term over that region must be known. In ref. [8], measurements of quantum-correlated D decays have been used to determine the amplitude ratio, rD =

|A(D0_→K0 sK+π−)| |A(D0_→K0

sK+π−)|

, and the integral of the interference term directly in the form of a coherence factor, κD, and an average strong phase difference, δD [10]. The coherence factor is defined as

κDe−iδD ₌ R A∗ K0 SK−π+ (x) A_K0 SK+π−(x) dx q R |AK0 SK−π+(x)| 2_dxq_{R |AK0} SK+π−(x)| 2_dx. (2.3)

A similar notation also holds for SS and OS B+ _{→ Dπ}+ _{decays with the replacements} rB → rπ

B and δB→ δBπ, where rπB∼ 0.015.

In each Dalitz region, four decay rates are considered in this analysis [11]: N_SSDK± ∝ 1 + r2 Br2D+ 2rBrDκDcos(δB± γ − δD) , N_OSDK± _{∝ rB}2 + r_D2 + 2rBrDκDcos(δB± γ + δD) , N_SSDπ± ∝ 1 + (rπ B)2rD2 + 2rπBrDκDcos(δπB± γ − δD) , N_OSDπ± _{∝ (r}π_B)2+ r_D2 + 2r_BπrDκDcos(δBπ ± γ + δD) . (2.4)

Observables constructed from eq. 2.4 have sensitivity to γ that depends upon the value of the coherence factor, with a higher coherence corresponding to greater sensitivity. The CLEO-c results [8] show high coherence within the K∗+ region, defined as _{±100 MeV/c}2 around the K∗+ mass; κD = 0.94± 0.12 and δD = (−16.6 ± 18.4)◦ are reported. With rD ≈ 0.6 [8], the maximal CP asymmetry that can be expected is 35% in B+ → DK+ decays, but only 2% in B+_{→ Dπ}+decays due to the dissimilarity of rD and rπB. Dedicated measurements in the non-K∗+region have not yet been made. Eight yields are measured in this analysis, from which seven ratios are constructed as CP observables; each observable can be related to γ through the decay rates in eq.2.4. The charge asymmetry is measured in four decay modes,

ADh_m = N Dh− m − NDh + m NDh− m + NDh + m ,

where m ∈ {SS,OS} and h ∈ {π, K}. The ratios of B+ _{→ DK}+ _{and B}+ _{→ Dπ}+ _yields, RmDK/Dπ, are determined, and the ratio of SS to OS B+ → Dπ+ yields, RSS/OS, is also measured. The measurements are reported for the K∗+ region of the D Dalitz plot as defined above, and outside it; they are not interpreted in terms of γ in this work, as constraints on the B decay hadronic parameters which come from measurements using other D decay modes are necessary at the current level of statistical precision.

3 Detector and simulation

The LHCb detector [12, 13] is a single-arm forward spectrometer covering the pseudorapidity range 2 < η < 5, designed for the study of particles containing b or c quarks. The detector includes a high-precision tracking system consisting of a silicon-strip

JHEP06(2020)058

vertex detector surrounding the pp interaction region, a silicon-strip detector located up-stream of a dipole magnet with a bending power of about 4 Tm, and three stations of silicon-strip detectors and straw drift tubes placed downstream of the magnet. The track-ing system provides a measurement of the momentum, p, of charged particles with relative uncertainty that varies from 0.5% at low momentum to 1.0% at 200 GeV/c. The minimum distance of a track to a primary vertex (PV), the impact parameter (IP), is measured with a resolution of (15 + 29/pT) µm, where pTis the component of the momentum transverse to the beam, in GeV/c. Different types of charged hadrons are distinguished using information from two ring-imaging Cherenkov (RICH) detectors. Photons, electrons and hadrons are identified by a calorimeter system consisting of scintillating-pad and preshower detectors, an electromagnetic and a hadronic calorimeter. Muons are identified by a system composed of alternating layers of iron and multiwire proportional chambers.

The online event selection is performed by a trigger, which consists of a hardware stage, based on information from the calorimeter and muon systems, followed by a software stage, which applies a full event reconstruction. The events considered in the analysis are triggered at the hardware level when either one of the final-state tracks of the signal decay deposits enough energy in the calorimeter system, or when one of the other particles in the event, not reconstructed as part of the signal candidate, fulfils any trigger requirement. At the software stage, it is required that at least one particle should have high pT and high χ2IP, where χ2_IPis defined as the difference in the PV fit χ2 with and without the inclusion of that particle. A multivariate algorithm [14] is used to identify secondary vertices consistent with being a two-, three-, or four-track b-hadron decay. The PVs are fitted with and without the B candidate tracks, and the PV that gives the smallest χ2_IP is associated with the B candidate.

Simulated events are used to describe the signal mass shapes and compute efficiencies. In the simulation, pp collisions are generated using Pythia [15] with a specific LHCb configuration [16]. Decays of hadronic particles are described by EvtGen [17], in which final-state radiation is generated using Photos [18]. The interaction of the generated particles with the detector, and its response, are implemented using the Geant4 toolkit [19, 20] as described in ref. [21].

4 Offline selection

Decays of K0

S mesons to the π+π− final state are reconstructed in two categories, the first containing K_S0 mesons that decay early enough for the pions to be reconstructed in the vertex detector, and the second containing K_S0 mesons that decay later such that track segments of the pions cannot be formed in the vertex detector. These categories are referred to as long and downstream, respectively. The candidates in the long category have better mass, momentum, and vertex resolution than those in the downstream category, but the downstream category contains more candidates and thus both are used. Herein, B+ candidates are denoted long or downstream depending on which category of K_S0 candidate is used.

JHEP06(2020)058

The D (K_S0) candidates are required to be within _{±25 MeV/c}2 (_{±15 MeV/c}2) of the known mass [22], and B+ meson candidates with invariant masses in the interval 5080–5700 MeV/c2 are retained. The kaons and pions originating from both the B+ and D decays are required to have pT in the range 0.5–10 GeV/c and p in the range 5–100 GeV/c. These requirements ensure that the tracks are within the kinematic coverage of the RICH detectors, which are used to provide particle identification (PID) information.

A boosted decision tree (BDT) classifier [23] implementing the gradient boost algo-rithm is employed to achieve further combinatorial background suppression. The BDT is trained using simulated B+ _{→ Dh}+ decays as a proxy for signal and a background sample of candidates in data with invariant masses in the range 5900–7200 MeV/c2 which are not used in the invariant-mass fit (see section 5). The input to the BDT is a set of features that characterise the signal decay. These features can be divided into two categories: (1) properties of any particle, and (2) properties of composite particles only (the D and B+ candidates). Specifically:

1. p, pT, and χ2_IP;

2. decay time, flight distance between production and decay vertex, decay vertex qual-ity, radial distance between the decay vertex and the PV, and the angle between the particle’s momentum vector and the line connecting the production and decay vertices.

In addition, a feature that estimates the imbalance of pT around the B+ candidate mo-mentum vector is also used in the BDT. It is defined as

IpT =

pT(B+)− ΣpT

pT(B+_{) + ΣpT}, (4.1)

where the sum is taken over tracks inconsistent with originating from the PV that lie within a cone around the B+ candidate, excluding tracks used to make the signal candidate. The cone is defined by a circle with a radius of 1.5 units in the plane of pseudorapidity and azimuthal angle expressed in radians. Including the IpT feature in the BDT training gives preference to B+ candidates that are isolated from the rest of the event.

Since no PID information is used in the BDT classifier, the efficiency for B+_{→ DK}+ and B+ _{→ Dπ}+ _{decays is similar, with insignificant variations arising from small} differ-ences in the decay kinematics. The selection requirement applied to the BDT response is optimised by minimising the relative statistical uncertainty on the R_SS/OS observable, as measured using the fit described in section 5. PID information from the RICH detectors is used to improve the purity of the B+ _{→ DK}+ samples. A strict PID requirement is applied to the companion kaon in B+_{→ DK}+to suppress contamination from B+_{→ Dπ}+ decays where the companion pion is misidentified as a kaon. The requirement is around 70% efficient, and genuine B+_{→ DK}+ decays failing the requirement are placed into the B+ _{→ Dπ}+ sample. Less than 0.5% of genuine B+ _{→ Dπ}+ decays pass the kaon PID requirement, and are placed into the B+ → DK+ _{sample. This results in a B}+ _{→ Dπ}+ background of around 5% relative to the correctly identified B+ _{→ DK}+ signal. Back-ground from the B+ _{→ [KS}0π+π−]Dh+ decay, which has a branching fraction around ten

JHEP06(2020)058

times larger than the signal, is suppressed by placing PID requirements on both the kaon and pion produced in the D decay.

For long K_S0 candidates, the square of the flight distance significance with re-spect to the PV is required to be greater than 100 to suppress background from B+ _{→ [K}+_π−_π+_π−_]

Dh+ decays. Background from charmless B decays such as B+ → K_s0K−K+π+, which peaks at the same invariant mass as the signal, is suppressed by re-quiring that the flight distance of the D candidate divided by its uncertainty is greater than 2. Where multiple candidates are found in the same event, one candidate is chosen at random, leading to a reduction in the sample size of approximately 2%.

For several quantities used in the selection and analysis of the data, a kinematic fit [24] is imposed on the full B+ decay chain. Depending on the quantity being calculated, the D and K_S0 candidates may be constrained to have their known masses [22]. The fit also constrains the B+candidate momentum vector to point towards the associated PV, defined as the PV for which the candidate has the smallest χ2_IP. These constraints improve the resolution of the calculated quantities, and thus help enhance the separation between signal and background decays. Furthermore, they improve the mass-squared resolution, which is important for identifying the Dalitz region assignment.

The Dalitz plots for selected candidates in the signal region _{±25 MeV/c}2 _{around the} B+ mass are shown in figure 1; within this region, background from decays involving no charm meson constitute less than 5% of the total sample. The Dalitz coordinates are calculated from the kinematic fit with all mass constraints applied. A band corresponding to the intermediate state, D_{→ K}∗(892)−K+ is visible in each plot.

5 Invariant-mass fit

In order to measure the CP observables introduced in section 2, an extended binned maximum-likelihood fit to the invariant-mass distributions of the B meson candidates in the range between 5080 MeV/c2 and 5700 MeV/c2 is performed. The fit is performed si-multaneously to all decay categories, in order to enable sharing of common parameters. A total of 16 categories are included in the fit: (DK, Dπ)_{× (SS, OS) × (long, downstream)} × (B+_{, B}−_{). The fit range is between 5080 MeV/c}2 _{and 5700 MeV/c}2 _{in the B}± _candidate invariant mass. The fit is performed separately for candidates within the K∗+ region and those outside.

To model the invariant-mass distribution, a total fit probability density function (PDF) is created from several signal and background components. Most of these are modelled using simulated signal and background samples reconstructed as the signal decay and passing all selection requirements. The components are:

1. Signal B+ _{→ DK}+ and B+ _{→ Dπ}+ decays, described by the sum of two Crystal Ball functions [25] with a freely varying common mean and width, and tail parame-ters fixed from simulation. A single freely varying parameter relates all B+→ DK+ widths to their B+_{→ Dπ}+counterparts. SS and OS decays share all shape parame-ters, but long and downstream decays have separate freely varying widths due to the

JHEP06(2020)058

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 m2_(K±_π∓_{) [GeV}2_/c4_] 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 m 2 (K 0 sπ ∓ ) [GeV 2 /c 4 ] LHCb B±_{→ [K}0 sK±π∓]DK± 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 m2_(K±_π∓_{) [GeV}2_/c4_] 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 m 2 (K 0 sπ ∓ ) [GeV 2 /c 4 ] LHCb B±_{→ [K}0 sK∓π±]DK± 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 m2(K±π∓) [GeV2/c4] 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 m 2 (K 0 sπ ∓ ) [GeV 2 /c 4 ] LHCb B±_{→ [K}0 sK±π∓]Dπ± 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 m2(K±π∓) [GeV2/c4] 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 m 2 (K 0 sπ ∓ ) [GeV 2 /c 4 ] LHCb B±_{→ [K}0 sK∓π±]Dπ± Figure 1. D_{→ K}0 SK

+_π− _{Dalitz plots from the SS (left) and OS (right) data samples, for B}+

→ DK+ _{(top) and B}+

→ Dπ+ _{(bottom). Both long and downstream K}0

S decays are included. The

purple lines indicate the kinematic boundary.

differences in invariant-mass resolution. All shape parameters are identical for B+ and B− decays.

2. Combinatorial background, described by an exponential function with a freely vary-ing exponent in each (SS, OS) _{× (long, downstream) category. The combinatorial} background yield freely varies in each (DK, Dπ)_{× (SS, OS) × (long, downstream)} category, but is required to be the same in B+ and B−.

3. Partially reconstructed background from the B+ → (D∗0 _{→ D{π}0_/γ})h+_{, B}+ _→ Dh+ _{π0_{}, and B}0 _{→ (D}∗− _{→ D{π}−_})h+ decays, where the particle in braces is not reconstructed. These components sit at lower invariant-mass values than the signal, and are described by PDFs constructed from a parabolic function to describe the decay kinematics. This function is convolved with the sum of two Gaussian functions with a common mean in order to describe the detector resolution, as further

JHEP06(2020)058

described in ref. [26]. All shape parameters are fixed from simulation. All partially reconstructed background yields vary freely, but the B0 → D∗−_h+ _{component yields} are required to be equal in the B− and B+ samples; the fast B0 oscillation renders CP violation effects negligible in this time-integrated measurement.

4. Partially reconstructed background from B_s0 → DK+_{π−_{} decays, where the pion} produced in the B_s0 decay is not reconstructed, contributes in the B+ _{→ DK}+ samples. These decays are modelled using a PDF with fixed shape parameters based on the m(DK) distribution observed in ref. [27]. The yield of this component freely varies in the SS and OS samples, but the yields are required to be equal in the B− and B+ samples as the fast B_s0 oscillation renders CP violation effects negligible. 5. Charmless background contributions remain in the B+→ DK+ _{samples after}

appli-cation of the D-meson flight requirement described in section4. They are estimated using fits to the B+ candidate invariant-mass distributions in data, where candidates falling in the lower sidebands of the D candidate invariant-mass spectra are consid-ered. The charmless contributions are included as fixed-shape Gaussian functions from simulation, with fixed yields as determined by the sideband fits.

6. Backgrounds from particle misidentification, which arise due to the imperfect effi-ciency of RICH PID requirements applied to companion hadrons in order to separate B+ _{→ DK}+ and B+ _{→ Dπ}+ decays. The efficiencies of the PID requirements are determined using calibration samples of high-purity decays that can be identified without the use of RICH information [28]. Given a PID efficiency K_{PID ∼ 0.7 for} B+_{→ DK}+ decays, a fixed fraction (1_{− }K_PID) of the total B+_{→ DK}+ signal yield is assigned to a PDF in the corresponding B+ → Dπ+ _{sample. This component is} described by a Crystal Ball function with all shape parameters fixed to those found in simulation; due to the companion hadron misidentification, this component falls below the nominal B+ mass. In the same fashion, a small component is included in the B+ _{→ DK}+ sample to model misidentified B+ _{→ Dπ}+ decays, with a yield that freely varies to _{∼ 0.4% of the total B}+ _{→ Dπ}+ _{yield. This component is also} described by a Crystal Ball function, with all shape parameters fixed to the values found in simulation.

In order to measure CP asymmetries, the detection asymmetries for K±and π±mesons must be taken into account. In the fit, a detection asymmetry of (_{−0.51±0.28)% is assigned} for each kaon in the final state, primarily due to the fact that the nuclear interaction length of K−mesons is shorter than that of K+mesons. The value used is computed by comparing the charge asymmetries in D+_{→ K}−π+π+and D+ _{→ KS}0π+calibration samples, weighted to match the kinematics of the signal kaons [29]. The equivalent asymmetry for pions is smaller, (_{−0.06 ± 0.04)% [}30]. All measured CP asymmetries are also corrected in the fit for the asymmetry in B± production, which has a value (+0.14_{± 0.07)% based on} measurements of this quantity made in refs. [26] and [30].

To measure the RDK/Dπ_SS and R_OSDK/Dπ observables, the raw signal yields are corrected for small differences in the total efficiency for selecting B+ _{→ DK}+ and B+ _{→ Dπ}+

JHEP06(2020)058

non-K∗+ _{region K}∗+ _region

N_SSDK± 266_{± 27} 715_{± 37} NDK± OS 336± 27 217± 22 NDπ± SS 3304± 73 8977± 106 N_OSDπ± 4686_{± 76} 3471_{± 66}

Table 1. Signal yields summed over charge, as measured in each Dalitz region.

decays. The efficiency ratio is found to be (DK)_(Dπ) = 1.012± 0.016, which is employed as a fixed correction term in the fit. A similar correction is applied to the R_SS/OS observable, to account for differences in selection efficiency for SS and OS decays caused by efficiency variation across the Dalitz plot. The correction is determined using simulated B+_{→ Dπ}+ decays and the D _{→ KS}0K+π− and D _{→ KS}0K−π+ amplitudes measured by LHCb in ref. [31]. The correction is determined in bins across the Dalitz plot, and an average value is calculated to be η = 1.090_{± 0.008 (1.007 ± 0.013) within (outside) the K}∗+ region.

Figures2–5show the B meson invariant-mass distributions for all selected candidates, with the results of the fit overlaid; the long and downstream K_s0 categories are shown together. In table1, the measured signal yields for each D final state are provided for both the K∗+ and the non-K∗+ regions. The fit strategy is validated using pseudoexperiments, and is found to be unbiased for all parameters.

6 Systematic uncertainties

All of the CP observables measured in this work are constructed as ratios of topologically identical final states. As such, the majority of potential systematic uncertainties cancel with the residual systematic uncertainties detailed here. Small differences in efficiency be-tween B+→ DK+ _{and B}+_{→ Dπ}+ _{decays are corrected using simulation as described in} section 5, where the uncertainty on the correction arises due to the finite size of the simu-lated samples. The correction is varied within its uncertainty to determine the systematic uncertainty. The variation in efficiency across the Dalitz plot causes a difference in the total efficiency of SS and OS decays. An appropriate correction is applied to the R_SS/OS observable, with an uncertainty arising from the use of a binned procedure to calculate the average correction.

Several fixed shape parameters are used in the fit, including the signal tail parameters and background PDFs. All fixed shape parameters are determined from fits to simulated samples, and are varied to calculate the propagated systematic uncertainty. Charmless backgrounds are modelled as fixed yield components in the invariant-mass fit. The yields are varied within their respective uncertainties to determine the systematic uncertainty. Each charmless component has a fixed CP asymmetry of zero in the fit; their asymmetries are independently varied according to a Gaussian of width 0.1 to determine the systematic uncertainty. This width chosen to align with the degree of CP asymmetry observed in the charmless background present in measurements of B+→ [h+_h−_]Dh+ _{decays. [26,32].}

JHEP06(2020)058

5200 5400 5600 m([K0 SK−π+]DK−) [MeV/c2] 0 25 50 75 100 125 Candidates / (15 MeV/ c 2) LHCb Data Total B±_{→ Dπ}± B±_{→ DK}± Combinatorial Part. reco. Charmless B0 s→ DK±π∓ 5200 5400 5600 m([K0 SK+π−]DK+) [MeV/c2] 0 25 50 75 100 125 Candidates / (15 MeV/ c 2 ) LHCb 5200 5400 5600 m([K0 SK−π+]Dπ−) [MeV/c2] 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Candidates / (15 MeV/ c 2) LHCb 5200 5400 5600 m([K0 SK+π−]Dπ+) [MeV/c2] 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Candidates / (15 MeV/ c 2) LHCb

Figure 2. Invariant mass of SS B± _{→ [K}0

SK

±_π∓_]

Dh± candidates within the K∗+ region;

candi-dates containing both long and downstream K0

s mesons are shown.

All measured CP asymmetries are corrected for the B± production asymmetry as well as for the kaon and pion detection asymmetries where relevant. These corrections are applied as fixed terms in the invariant-mass fit, and are varied within their associated uncertainties to determine the systematic uncertainty. A fixed PID efficiency is used to determine the fraction of B+_{→ DK}+ signal decays that are misidentified as B+_{→ Dπ}+. This efficiency is known within 1% relative uncertainty, and is varied within this range to determine the systematic uncertainty.

The systematic uncertainties for each CP observable, quoted as a percentage of the statistical uncertainty, are listed in tables 2 and 3. The category Eff relates to efficiency corrections, PDF to fixed shape parameters, Cls to charmless background yields and asym-metries, Asym to asymmetry corrections, and PID to the PID efficiency. The total sys-tematic uncertainties are given by the sum in quadrature of each contributing syssys-tematic.

JHEP06(2020)058

5200 5400 5600 m([K0 SK+π−]DK−) [MeV/c2] 0 10 20 30 40 50 Candidates / (15 MeV/ c 2 ) LHCb Data Total B±_{→ Dπ}± B±_{→ DK}± Combinatorial Part. reco. Charmless B0 s→ DK±π∓ 5200 5400 5600 m([K0 SK−π+]DK+) [MeV/c2] 0 10 20 30 40 50 Candidates / (15 MeV/ c 2 ) LHCb 5200 5400 5600 m([K0 SK+π−]Dπ−) [MeV/c2] 0 200 400 600 800 Candidates / (15 MeV/ c 2) LHCb 5200 5400 5600 m([K0 SK−π+]Dπ+) [MeV/c2] 0 200 400 600 800 Candidates / (15 MeV/ c 2 ) LHCb

Figure 3. Invariant mass of OS B±_{→ [K}0

SK∓π±]Dh± candidates within the K∗+ region. The fit

components are detailed in the legend of figure2.

Observable Eff PDF Cls Asym PID Total

ADπ SS 0.0 0.5 0.4 25.6 0.8 25.6 ADπ OS 0.0 0.4 0.7 16.9 0.9 16.9 ADK_SS 0.0 1.7 10.1 11.9 6.3 16.9 ADK OS 0.0 0.3 16.7 1.3 5.5 17.7 RSS/OS 33.6 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.5 33.6 R_SSDK/Dπ 29.2 3.2 31.3 0.1 8.1 43.7 R_OSDK/Dπ 15.5 2.7 40.9 0.1 4.9 44.1

Table 2. Systematic uncertainties for the K∗+region fit. Uncertainties are quoted as a percentage of the statistical uncertainty for a given observable, and the total uncertainty is given by the sum in quadrature of each contribution.

JHEP06(2020)058

5200 5400 5600 m([K0 SK−π+]DK−) [MeV/c2] 0 20 40 60 Candidates / (15 MeV/ c 2 ) LHCb Data Total B±_{→ Dπ}± B±_{→ DK}± Combinatorial Part. reco. Charmless B0 s→ DK±π∓ 5200 5400 5600 m([K0 SK+π−]DK+) [MeV/c2] 0 20 40 60 Candidates / (15 MeV/ c 2 ) LHCb 5200 5400 5600 m([K0 SK−π+]Dπ−) [MeV/c2] 0 200 400 600 800 Candidates / (15 MeV/ c 2) LHCb 5200 5400 5600 m([K0 SK+π−]Dπ+) [MeV/c2] 0 200 400 600 800 Candidates / (15 MeV/ c 2 ) LHCb

Figure 4. Invariant mass of SS B±_{→ [K}0

SK±π∓]Dh± candidates in the non-K∗+ region. The fit

components are detailed in the legend of figure2.

Observable Eff PDF Cls Asym PID Total

ADπ SS 0.0 0.4 0.6 14.3 1.0 14.4 ADπ OS 0.0 0.7 0.5 18.4 1.7 18.5 ADK_SS 0.1 0.5 17.8 7.1 5.8 20.0 ADK OS 0.0 1.5 10.9 1.3 9.4 14.5 RSS/OS 48.6 0.6 0.5 0.1 0.4 48.6 R_SSDK/Dπ 14.8 3.0 44.4 0.1 4.4 47.1 R_OSDK/Dπ 18.6 4.0 32.7 0.1 7.3 38.5

Table 3. Systematic uncertainties for the non-K∗+ region fit. Uncertainties are quoted as a percentage of the statistical uncertainty for a given observable, and the total uncertainty is given by the sum in quadrature of each contribution.

JHEP06(2020)058

5200 5400 5600 m([K0 SK+π−]DK−) [MeV/c2] 0 20 40 60 Candidates / (15 MeV/ c 2 ) LHCb Data Total B±_{→ Dπ}± B±_{→ DK}± Combinatorial Part. reco. Charmless B0 s→ DK±π∓ 5200 5400 5600 m([K0 SK−π+]DK+) [MeV/c2] 0 20 40 60 Candidates / (15 MeV/ c 2 ) LHCb 5200 5400 5600 m([K0 SK+π−]Dπ−) [MeV/c2] 0 200 400 600 800 1000 Candidates / (15 MeV/ c 2) LHCb 5200 5400 5600 m([K0 SK−π+]Dπ+) [MeV/c2] 0 200 400 600 800 1000 Candidates / (15 MeV/ c 2) LHCb

Figure 5. Invariant mass of OS B±_{→ [K}0

SK

∓_π±_]

Dh± candidates in the non-K∗+ region. The fit

components are detailed in the legend of figure2.

7 Results

The results for the K∗+ region of the Dalitz plot are

ADπ_SS =_{−0.020 ± 0.011 ± 0.003 ,} ADπ_OS = 0.007_{± 0.017 ± 0.003 ,} ADK_SS = 0.084± 0.049 ± 0.008 , ADK_OS = 0.021± 0.094 ± 0.017 , R_SS/OS = 2.585_{± 0.057 ± 0.019 ,} RDK/Dπ_SS = 0.079± 0.004 ± 0.002 , RDK/Dπ_OS = 0.062_{± 0.006 ± 0.003 ,} and the results for the non-K∗+ region are

ADπ_SS =_{−0.034 ± 0.020 ± 0.003 ,} ADπ_OS = 0.003_{± 0.015 ± 0.003 ,}

JHEP06(2020)058

−0.10 −0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 ADπSS LHCb _Expected ±1σ ±2σ −0.10 −0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 ADπOS −0.4 −0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 ADK SS −0.4 −0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 ADK OS 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.10 R_SSDK/Dπ 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.10 RDK/Dπ_OS 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00 3.25 3.50 RSS/OSπ

Figure 6. Comparison with SM expectations for results within the K∗+ region, using current world-average parameter values. The dashed blue line indicates the expected SM value, and the shaded dark (light) blue regions indicate the 68% (95%) confidence-level intervals. The results are shown as black points with black (red) error bars indicating the statistical (total) uncertainty.

ADK_SS = 0.095_{± 0.089 ± 0.018 ,} ADK_OS =_{−0.038 ± 0.075 ± 0.011 ,} R_SS/OS = 0.706_{± 0.019 ± 0.009 ,} RDK/Dπ_SS = 0.081_{± 0.008 ± 0.004 ,} RDK/Dπ_OS = 0.073± 0.006 ± 0.002 .

The results are in agreement with ref. [7], and all statistical uncertainties are reduced in accordance with the increased signal yields. The systematic uncertainties on each asymme-try are reduced considerably due to improved knowledge of the B± production asymmetry and the kaon detection asymmetry. The systematic uncertainties on RDK/Dπ_SS , RDK/Dπ_OS , and R_SS/OS are also reduced, due to the use of larger simulated samples. All observables are statistically limited with the current data set. The statistical and systematic correlation matrices for the CP observables are given in appendixA.

A comparison of the K∗+region results with the SM expectation is made by calculating the CP observables from the current best-fit values of γ = (74.0+5.0_−5.8)◦, δB = (131.2+5.1_−5.9)◦, and rB = (9.89+0.51−0.50)% for B+ → DK+ decays [5]; no comparison is made using the non-K∗+ results, since the required charm hadronic parameters have not yet been measured.

JHEP06(2020)058

For B+ _{→ Dπ}+ decays, where no independent information on r_Bπ and δπ_B is available, the uniform PDFs 180◦ < δπ_B < 360◦ and rπ_B < 0.02 are used. The D-decay parameters are taken from the literature: r2_D = 0.655_{± 0.007 and δD} = (_{−16.6 ± 18.4)}◦ [31]; κ = 0.94_{± 0.12 [}8]. The small corrections due to D mixing are not considered.

For these inputs, the 68% and 95% confidence-level expectation intervals are displayed in figure 6, together with the results presented herein. The dominant uncertainty con-tribution to the expectation intervals comes from the D-decay parameter inputs. The measurements are found to be compatible with the SM expectation, where the χ2 per de-gree of freedom is found to be 1.56 taking into account the uncertainties and correlations of both the measurements and the expected values; the corresponding p-value for rejection of the SM hypothesis is 0.14.

8 Conclusion

Measurements of CP observables in B+ → DK+ _{and B}+ _{→ Dπ}+ _{decays with the D} meson decaying to K_S0K+π− and K_S0K−π+ are performed using LHCb data collected in Run 1 and Run 2. The results are in agreement with the SM, and supersede those of the previous study [7], benefiting from the increased data sample and improved analysis methods. The measurements presented in this paper improve the precision of several of the CP observables used in global fits for γ, which will contribute to improved precision on γ and on the hadronic parameters rB and δB for these decays. Improved measurements of charm hadronic parameters in both the K∗+ and non-K∗+ regions would also benefit the interpretation of these results and the constraints on γ that can be obtained from them. Acknowledgments

We express our gratitude to our colleagues in the CERN accelerator departments for the excellent performance of the LHC. We thank the technical and administrative staff at the LHCb institutes. We acknowledge support from CERN and from the national agencies: CAPES, CNPq, FAPERJ and FINEP (Brazil); MOST and NSFC (China); CNRS/IN2P3 (France); BMBF, DFG and MPG (Germany); INFN (Italy); NWO (Netherlands); MNiSW and NCN (Poland); MEN/IFA (Romania); MSHE (Russia); MinECo (Spain); SNSF and SER (Switzerland); NASU (Ukraine); STFC (United Kingdom); DOE NP and NSF (U.S.A.). We acknowledge the computing resources that are provided by CERN, IN2P3 (France), KIT and DESY (Germany), INFN (Italy), SURF (Netherlands), PIC (Spain), GridPP (United Kingdom), RRCKI and Yandex LLC (Russia), CSCS (Switzerland), IFIN-HH (Romania), CBPF (Brazil), PL-GRID (Poland) and OSC (U.S.A.). We are indebted to the communities behind the multiple open-source software packages on which we depend. Individual groups or members have received support from AvH Foundation (Germany); EPLANET, Marie Sk lodowska-Curie Actions and ERC (European Union); ANR, Labex P2IO and OCEVU, and R´egion Auvergne-Rhˆone-Alpes (France); Key Research Program of Frontier Sciences of CAS, CAS PIFI, and the Thousand Talents Program (China); RFBR, RSF and Yandex LLC (Russia); GVA, XuntaGal and GENCAT (Spain); the Royal Society and the Leverhulme Trust (United Kingdom).

JHEP06(2020)058

A Correlation matrices

Statistical and systematic correlation matrices for the seven CP observables are given in tables4₋7, for both the K∗(892)± region and non-K∗(892)± region results.

ADπ SS ADπOS ADKSS ADKOS RSS/OS R DK/Dπ SS R DK/Dπ OS ADπ SS 1 0.00 −0.05 0.00 0.00 −0.01 0.00 ADπ_OS 0.00 1 0.00 _−0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 ADK SS −0.05 0.00 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ADK OS 0.00 −0.05 0.00 1 0.00 0.00 −0.02 RSS/OS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 −0.11 0.15 RDK/Dπ_{SS −0.01} 0.00 0.00 0.00 _−0.11 1 0.06 RDK/Dπ_OS 0.00 0.00 0.00 _−0.02 0.15 0.06 1

Table 4. Statistical correlation matrix for the restricted K∗(892)± region fit.

ADπ_SS ADπ_OS ADK_SS ADK_OS RSS/OS R DK/Dπ SS R DK/Dπ OS ADπ SS 1 −0.88 0.74 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 ADπ_{OS −0.88} 1 _{−0.73 −0.08} 0.00 0.00 0.00 ADK SS 0.74 −0.73 1 0.63 0.00 −0.17 0.00 ADK OS 0.05 −0.08 0.63 1 0.00 0.00 −0.10 RSS/OS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 0.00 RDK/Dπ_SS 0.00 0.00 _−0.17 0.00 0.00 1 0.25 RDK/Dπ_OS 0.00 0.00 0.00 _−0.10 0.00 0.25 1

Table 5. Systematic correlation matrix for the K∗₍₈₉₂₎± _{region fit.}

ADπ_SS ADπ_OS ADK_SS ADK_OS RSS/OS R DK/Dπ SS R DK/Dπ OS ADπ SS 1 0.00 −0.03 0.00 0.01 −0.01 0.00 ADπ_OS 0.00 1 0.00 _−0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 ADK SS −0.03 0.00 1 0.00 0.00 −0.03 0.00 ADK_OS 0.00 _−0.05 0.00 1 0.00 _{−0.01 −0.01} RSS/OS 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 −0.16 0.11 RDK/Dπ_{SS −0.01} 0.00 _{−0.03 −0.01 −0.16} 1 0.09 RDK/Dπ_OS 0.00 0.00 0.00 _−0.01 0.11 0.09 1

JHEP06(2020)058

ADπ SS A Dπ OS A DK SS A DK OS RSS/OS R DK/Dπ SS R DK/Dπ OS ADπ_SS 1 _−0.84 0.31 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 ADπ OS −0.84 1 −0.35 −0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 ADK SS 0.31 −0.35 1 0.81 0.00 −0.28 0.00 ADK_OS 0.05 _−0.06 0.81 1 0.00 0.00 0.03 RSS/OS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 0.00 RDK/Dπ_SS 0.00 0.00 _−0.28 0.00 0.00 1 0.02 RDK/Dπ_OS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.02 1

Table 7. Systematic correlation matrix for the non_−K∗(892)± region fit.

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.

References

[1] N. Cabibbo, Unitary symmetry and leptonic decays,Phys. Rev. Lett. 10 (1963) 531[INSPIRE]. [2] M. Kobayashi and T. Maskawa, CP violation in the renormalizable theory of weak

interaction,Prog. Theor. Phys. 49 (1973) 652 [INSPIRE].

[3] L. Wolfenstein, Parametrization of the Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix,Phys. Rev. Lett. 51 (1983) 1945[INSPIRE].

[4] D. King, M. Kirk, A. Lenz and T. Rauh,_|Vcb| and γ from B-mixing — Addendum to “Bs

mixing observables and_|Vtd/Vts| from sum rules”, JHEP 03 (2020) 112[arXiv:1911.07856]

[INSPIRE].

[5] LHCb Collaboration, Update of the LHCb combination of the CKM angle γ, LHCb-CONF-2018-002(2018).

[6] LHCb collaboration, Measurement of the CKM angle γ from a combination of LHCb results, JHEP 12 (2016) 087[arXiv:1611.03076] [INSPIRE].

[7] LHCb collaboration, A study of CP-violation in B±_{→ DK}± and B± _{→ Dπ}± decays with D_{→ K}0

SK±π∓ final states, Phys. Lett. B 733 (2014) 36[arXiv:1402.2982] [INSPIRE].

[8] CLEO collaboration, Studies of the decays D0

→ K0

SK−π+ and D0→ KS0K+π−,Phys.

Rev. D 85 (2012) 092016[Erratum ibid. D 94 (2016) 099905] [arXiv:1203.3804] [INSPIRE]. [9] Y. Grossman, Z. Ligeti and A. Soffer, Measuring gamma in B±_{→ K}±(KK∗)D decays,Phys.

Rev. D 67 (2003) 071301[hep-ph/0210433] [INSPIRE].

[10] D. Atwood and A. Soni, Role of charm factory in extracting CKM phase information via B_{→ DK,}Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 033003[hep-ph/0304085] [INSPIRE].

[11] D. Atwood, I. Dunietz and A. Soni, Enhanced CP-violation with B_{→ KD}0_{( ¯D}0_{) modes and}

extraction of the CKM angle gamma,Phys. Rev. Lett. 78 (1997) 3257 [hep-ph/9612433] [INSPIRE].

JHEP06(2020)058

[13] LHCb collaboration, LHCb detector performance, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 30 (2015) 1530022

[arXiv:1412.6352] [INSPIRE].

[14] V.V. Gligorov and M. Williams, Efficient, reliable and fast high-level triggering using a bonsai boosted decision tree,2013 JINST 8 P02013[arXiv:1210.6861] [INSPIRE]. [15] T. Sj¨ostrand, S. Mrenna and P.Z. Skands, A brief introduction to PYTHIA 8.1,Comput.

Phys. Commun. 178 (2008) 852[arXiv:0710.3820] [INSPIRE].

[16] LHCb collaboration, Handling of the generation of primary events in Gauss, the LHCb simulation framework,J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 331 (2011) 032047[INSPIRE].

[17] D.J. Lange, The EvtGen particle decay simulation package, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 462 (2001) 152[INSPIRE].

[18] P. Golonka and Z. Was, PHOTOS Monte Carlo: a precision tool for QED corrections in Z and W decays,Eur. Phys. J. C 45 (2006) 97[hep-ph/0506026] [INSPIRE].

[19] GEANT4 collaboration, GEANT4 developments and applications,IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 53 (2006) 270.

[20] GEANT4 collaboration, GEANT4 — A simulation toolkit,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 506 (2003) 250[INSPIRE].

[21] LHCb collaboration, The LHCb simulation application, Gauss: design, evolution and experience,J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 331 (2011) 032023 [INSPIRE].

[22] Particle Data Group collaboration, Review of particle physics, Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018) 030001[INSPIRE].

[23] L. Breiman, J.H. Friedman, R.A. Olshen and C.J. Stone, Classification and regression trees, Wadsworth international group, Belmont U.S.A. (1984).

[24] W.D. Hulsbergen, Decay chain fitting with a Kalman filter,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 552 (2005) 566[physics/0503191] [INSPIRE].

[25] T. Skwarnicki, A study of the radiative CASCADE transitions between the Υ0 _{and Υ}

resonances, Ph.D. thesis, Cracow University of Technology, Cracow, Poland (1986). [26] LHCb collaboration, Measurement of CP observables in B±_{→ D}(∗)_K± _{and B}±

→ D(∗)_π±

decays,Phys. Lett. B 777 (2018) 16[arXiv:1708.06370] [INSPIRE]. [27] LHCb collaboration, Dalitz plot analysis of B0

s → ¯D0K−π+ decays,Phys. Rev. D 90 (2014)

072003[arXiv:1407.7712] [INSPIRE].

[28] R. Aaij et al., Selection and processing of calibration samples to measure the particle

identification performance of the LHCb experiment in Run 2,EPJ Tech. Instrum. 6 (2019) 1 [arXiv:1803.00824] [INSPIRE].

[29] A. Davis et al., Measurement of the instrumental asymmetry for K−π+_{-pairs at LHCb in}

Run 2,LHCb-PUB-2018-004(2018).

[30] LHCb collaboration, Measurement of the B± production asymmetry and the CP asymmetry in B±_{→ J/ψK}± decays,Phys. Rev. D 95 (2017) 052005[arXiv:1701.05501] [INSPIRE]. [31] LHCb collaboration, Studies of the resonance structure in D0_{→ KS}0K±π∓ decays,Phys.

Rev. D 93 (2016) 052018[arXiv:1509.06628] [INSPIRE].

[32] LHCb collaboration, Measurement of CP observables in B±_{→ DK}± and B±_{→ Dπ}± with two- and four-body D decays,Phys. Lett. B 760 (2016) 117[arXiv:1603.08993] [INSPIRE].

JHEP06(2020)058

The LHCb collaboration

R. Aaij31, C. Abell´an Beteta49, T. Ackernley59, B. Adeva45, M. Adinolfi53, H. Afsharnia9, C.A. Aidala80_{, S. Aiola}25_{, Z. Ajaltouni}9_{, S. Akar}66_{, P. Albicocco}22_{, J. Albrecht}14_{, F. Alessio}47_,

M. Alexander58_{, A. Alfonso Albero}44_{, G. Alkhazov}37_{, P. Alvarez Cartelle}60_{, A.A. Alves Jr}45_,

S. Amato2_{, Y. Amhis}11_{, L. An}21_{, L. Anderlini}21_{, G. Andreassi}48_{, M. Andreotti}20_{, F. Archilli}16_,

A. Artamonov43, M. Artuso67, K. Arzymatov41, E. Aslanides10, M. Atzeni49, B. Audurier11, S. Bachmann16_{, J.J. Back}55_{, S. Baker}60_{, V. Balagura}11,b_{, W. Baldini}20,47_{, A. Baranov}41_,

R.J. Barlow61_{, S. Barsuk}11_{, W. Barter}60_{, M. Bartolini}23,47,h_{, F. Baryshnikov}77_{, J.M. Basels}13_,

G. Bassi28, V. Batozskaya35, B. Batsukh67, A. Battig14, A. Bay48, M. Becker14, F. Bedeschi28, I. Bediaga1_{, A. Beiter}67_{, L.J. Bel}31_{, V. Belavin}41_{, S. Belin}26_{, V. Bellee}48_{, K. Belous}43_,

I. Belyaev38_{, G. Bencivenni}22_{, E. Ben-Haim}12_{, S. Benson}31_{, S. Beranek}13_{, A. Berezhnoy}39_,

R. Bernet49_{, D. Berninghoff}16_{, H.C. Bernstein}67_{, C. Bertella}47_{, E. Bertholet}12_{, A. Bertolin}27_,

C. Betancourt49, F. Betti19,e, M.O. Bettler54, Ia. Bezshyiko49, S. Bhasin53, J. Bhom33, M.S. Bieker14_{, S. Bifani}52_{, P. Billoir}12_{, A. Bizzeti}21,u_{, M. Bjørn}62_{, M.P. Blago}47_{, T. Blake}55_,

F. Blanc48_{, S. Blusk}67_{, D. Bobulska}58_{, V. Bocci}30_{, O. Boente Garcia}45_{, T. Boettcher}63_,

A. Boldyrev78_{, A. Bondar}42,x_{, N. Bondar}37_{, S. Borghi}61,47_{, M. Borisyak}41_{, M. Borsato}16_,

J.T. Borsuk33, T.J.V. Bowcock59, C. Bozzi20, M.J. Bradley60, S. Braun16, A. Brea Rodriguez45, M. Brodski47_{, J. Brodzicka}33_{, A. Brossa Gonzalo}55_{, D. Brundu}26_{, E. Buchanan}53_,

A. B¨uchler-Germann49_{, A. Buonaura}49_{, C. Burr}47_{, A. Bursche}26_{, A. Butkevich}40_{, J.S. Butter}31_,

J. Buytaert47, W. Byczynski47, S. Cadeddu26, H. Cai72, R. Calabrese20,g, L. Calero Diaz22, S. Cali22_{, R. Calladine}52_{, M. Calvi}24,i_{, M. Calvo Gomez}44,m_{, P. Camargo Magalhaes}53_,

A. Camboni44,m_{, P. Campana}22_{, D.H. Campora Perez}31_{, A.F. Campoverde Quezada}5_,

L. Capriotti19,e_{, A. Carbone}19,e_{, G. Carboni}29_{, R. Cardinale}23,h_{, A. Cardini}26_{, I. Carli}6_,

P. Carniti24,i, K. Carvalho Akiba31, A. Casais Vidal45, G. Casse59, M. Cattaneo47, G. Cavallero47, S. Celani48_{, R. Cenci}28,p_{, J. Cerasoli}10_{, M.G. Chapman}53_{, M. Charles}12,47_{, Ph. Charpentier}47_,

G. Chatzikonstantinidis52_{, M. Chefdeville}8_{, V. Chekalina}41_{, C. Chen}3_{, S. Chen}26_{, A. Chernov}33_,

S.-G. Chitic47, V. Chobanova45, S. Cholak48, M. Chrzaszcz33, A. Chubykin37, P. Ciambrone22, M.F. Cicala55, X. Cid Vidal45, G. Ciezarek47, F. Cindolo19, P.E.L. Clarke57, M. Clemencic47, H.V. Cliff54_{, J. Closier}47_{, J.L. Cobbledick}61_{, V. Coco}47_{, J.A.B. Coelho}11_{, J. Cogan}10_,

E. Cogneras9_{, L. Cojocariu}36_{, P. Collins}47_{, T. Colombo}47_{, A. Comerma-Montells}16_{, A. Contu}26_,

N. Cooke52, G. Coombs58, S. Coquereau44, G. Corti47, C.M. Costa Sobral55, B. Couturier47, D.C. Craik63_{, J. Crkovsk´a}66_{, A. Crocombe}55_{, M. Cruz Torres}1,ab_{, R. Currie}57_{, C.L. Da Silva}66_,

E. Dall’Occo14_{, J. Dalseno}45,53_{, C. D’Ambrosio}47_{, A. Danilina}38_{, P. d’Argent}47_{, A. Davis}61_,

O. De Aguiar Francisco47_{, K. De Bruyn}47_{, S. De Capua}61_{, M. De Cian}48_{, J.M. De Miranda}1_,

L. De Paula2, M. De Serio18,d, P. De Simone22, J.A. de Vries31, C.T. Dean66, W. Dean80, D. Decamp8_{, L. Del Buono}12_{, B. Delaney}54_{, H.-P. Dembinski}15_{, A. Dendek}34_{, V. Denysenko}49_,

D. Derkach78_{, O. Deschamps}9_{, F. Desse}11_{, F. Dettori}26,f_{, B. Dey}7_{, A. Di Canto}47_{, P. Di Nezza}22_,

S. Didenko77, H. Dijkstra47, V. Dobishuk51, F. Dordei26, M. Dorigo28,y, A.C. dos Reis1, L. Douglas58, A. Dovbnya50, K. Dreimanis59, M.W. Dudek33, L. Dufour47, G. Dujany12, P. Durante47_{, J.M. Durham}66_{, D. Dutta}61_{, M. Dziewiecki}16_{, A. Dziurda}33_{, A. Dzyuba}37_,

S. Easo56_{, U. Egede}69_{, V. Egorychev}38_{, S. Eidelman}42,x_{, S. Eisenhardt}57_{, R. Ekelhof}14_{, S. Ek-In}48_,

L. Eklund58, S. Ely67, A. Ene36, E. Epple66, S. Escher13, S. Esen31, T. Evans47, A. Falabella19, J. Fan3_{, N. Farley}52_{, S. Farry}59_{, D. Fazzini}11_{, P. Fedin}38_{, M. F´eo}47_{, P. Fernandez Declara}47_,

A. Fernandez Prieto45_{, F. Ferrari}19,e_{, L. Ferreira Lopes}48_{, F. Ferreira Rodrigues}2_,

S. Ferreres Sole31_{, M. Ferrillo}49_{, M. Ferro-Luzzi}47_{, S. Filippov}40_{, R.A. Fini}18_{, M. Fiorini}20,g_,

M. Firlej34, K.M. Fischer62, C. Fitzpatrick47, T. Fiutowski34, F. Fleuret11,b, M. Fontana47, F. Fontanelli23,h_{, R. Forty}47_{, V. Franco Lima}59_{, M. Franco Sevilla}65_{, M. Frank}47_{, C. Frei}47_,

JHEP06(2020)058

D.A. Friday58_{, J. Fu}25,q_{, Q. Fuehring}14_{, W. Funk}47_{, E. Gabriel}57_{, A. Gallas Torreira}45_,

D. Galli19,e_{, S. Gallorini}27_{, S. Gambetta}57_{, Y. Gan}3_{, M. Gandelman}2_{, P. Gandini}25_{, Y. Gao}4_,

L.M. Garcia Martin46, J. Garc´ıa Pardi˜nas49, B. Garcia Plana45, F.A. Garcia Rosales11, L. Garrido44, D. Gascon44, C. Gaspar47, D. Gerick16, E. Gersabeck61, M. Gersabeck61, T. Gershon55_{, D. Gerstel}10_{, Ph. Ghez}8_{, V. Gibson}54_{, A. Giovent`u}45_{, O.G. Girard}48_,

P. Gironella Gironell44_{, L. Giubega}36_{, C. Giugliano}20,g_{, K. Gizdov}57_{, V.V. Gligorov}12_{, C. G¨obel}70_,

E. Golobardes44,m, D. Golubkov38, A. Golutvin60,77, A. Gomes1,a, P. Gorbounov38,6, I.V. Gorelov39_{, C. Gotti}24,i_{, E. Govorkova}31_{, J.P. Grabowski}16_{, R. Graciani Diaz}44_,

T. Grammatico12_{, L.A. Granado Cardoso}47_{, E. Graug´es}44_{, E. Graverini}48_{, G. Graziani}21_,

A. Grecu36_{, R. Greim}31_{, P. Griffith}20,g_{, L. Grillo}61_{, L. Gruber}47_{, B.R. Gruberg Cazon}62_{, C. Gu}3_,

P. A. G¨unther16, E. Gushchin40, A. Guth13, Yu. Guz43,47, T. Gys47, T. Hadavizadeh62, G. Haefeli48_{, C. Haen}47_{, S.C. Haines}54_{, P.M. Hamilton}65_{, Q. Han}7_{, X. Han}16_{, T.H. Hancock}62_,

S. Hansmann-Menzemer16_{, N. Harnew}62_{, T. Harrison}59_{, R. Hart}31_{, C. Hasse}14_{, M. Hatch}47_,

J. He5, M. Hecker60, K. Heijhoff31, K. Heinicke14, A.M. Hennequin47, K. Hennessy59, L. Henry46, J. Heuel13, A. Hicheur68, D. Hill62, M. Hilton61, P.H. Hopchev48, J. Hu16, W. Hu7, W. Huang5, W. Hulsbergen31_{, T. Humair}60_{, R.J. Hunter}55_{, M. Hushchyn}78_{, D. Hutchcroft}59_{, D. Hynds}31_,

P. Ibis14_{, M. Idzik}34_{, P. Ilten}52_{, A. Inglessi}37_{, K. Ivshin}37_{, R. Jacobsson}47_{, S. Jakobsen}47_,

E. Jans31, B.K. Jashal46, A. Jawahery65, V. Jevtic14, F. Jiang3, M. John62, D. Johnson47, C.R. Jones54_{, B. Jost}47_{, N. Jurik}62_{, S. Kandybei}50_{, M. Karacson}47_{, J.M. Kariuki}53_{, N. Kazeev}78_,

M. Kecke16_{, F. Keizer}54,47_{, M. Kelsey}67_{, M. Kenzie}55_{, T. Ketel}32_{, B. Khanji}47_{, A. Kharisova}79_,

K.E. Kim67_{, T. Kirn}13_{, V.S. Kirsebom}48_{, S. Klaver}22_{, K. Klimaszewski}35_{, S. Koliiev}51_,

A. Kondybayeva77, A. Konoplyannikov38, P. Kopciewicz34, R. Kopecna16, P. Koppenburg31, M. Korolev39_{, I. Kostiuk}31,51_{, O. Kot}51_{, S. Kotriakhova}37_{, L. Kravchuk}40_{, R.D. Krawczyk}47_,

M. Kreps55_{, F. Kress}60_{, S. Kretzschmar}13_{, P. Krokovny}42,x_{, W. Krupa}34_{, W. Krzemien}35_,

W. Kucewicz33,l, M. Kucharczyk33, V. Kudryavtsev42,x, H.S. Kuindersma31, G.J. Kunde66, T. Kvaratskheliya38, D. Lacarrere47, G. Lafferty61, A. Lai26, D. Lancierini49, J.J. Lane61, G. Lanfranchi22_{, C. Langenbruch}13_{, O. Lantwin}49_{, T. Latham}55_{, F. Lazzari}28,v_{, C. Lazzeroni}52_,

R. Le Gac10_{, R. Lef`evre}9_{, A. Leflat}39_{, O. Leroy}10_{, T. Lesiak}33_{, B. Leverington}16_{, H. Li}71_{, L. Li}62_,

X. Li66, Y. Li6, Z. Li67, X. Liang67, R. Lindner47, V. Lisovskyi14, G. Liu71, X. Liu3, D. Loh55, A. Loi26_{, J. Lomba Castro}45_{, I. Longstaff}58_{, J.H. Lopes}2_{, G. Loustau}49_{, G.H. Lovell}54_{, Y. Lu}6_,

D. Lucchesi27,o_{, M. Lucio Martinez}31_{, Y. Luo}3_{, A. Lupato}27_{, E. Luppi}20,g_{, O. Lupton}55_,

A. Lusiani28,t_{, X. Lyu}5_{, S. Maccolini}19,e_{, F. Machefert}11_{, F. Maciuc}36_{, V. Macko}48_,

P. Mackowiak14, S. Maddrell-Mander53, L.R. Madhan Mohan53, O. Maev37,47, A. Maevskiy78, D. Maisuzenko37_{, M.W. Majewski}34_{, S. Malde}62_{, B. Malecki}47_{, A. Malinin}76_{, T. Maltsev}42,x_,

H. Malygina16_{, G. Manca}26,f_{, G. Mancinelli}10_{, R. Manera Escalero}44_{, D. Manuzzi}19,e_,

D. Marangotto25,q, J. Maratas9,w, J.F. Marchand8, U. Marconi19, S. Mariani21,

C. Marin Benito11, M. Marinangeli48, P. Marino48, J. Marks16, P.J. Marshall59, G. Martellotti30, L. Martinazzoli47_{, M. Martinelli}24,i_{, D. Martinez Santos}45_{, F. Martinez Vidal}46_{, A. Massafferri}1_,

M. Materok13_{, R. Matev}47_{, A. Mathad}49_{, Z. Mathe}47_{, V. Matiunin}38_{, C. Matteuzzi}24_,

K.R. Mattioli80, A. Mauri49, E. Maurice11,b, M. McCann60, L. Mcconnell17, A. McNab61, R. McNulty17_{, J.V. Mead}59_{, B. Meadows}64_{, C. Meaux}10_{, G. Meier}14_{, N. Meinert}74_,

D. Melnychuk35_{, S. Meloni}24,i_{, M. Merk}31_{, A. Merli}25_{, M. Mikhasenko}47_{, D.A. Milanes}73_,

E. Millard55_{, M.-N. Minard}8_{, O. Mineev}38_{, L. Minzoni}20,g_{, S.E. Mitchell}57_{, B. Mitreska}61_,

D.S. Mitzel47, A. M¨odden14, A. Mogini12, R.D. Moise60, T. Momb¨acher14, I.A. Monroy73, S. Monteil9_{, M. Morandin}27_{, G. Morello}22_{, M.J. Morello}28,t_{, J. Moron}34_{, A.B. Morris}10_,

A.G. Morris55_{, R. Mountain}67_{, H. Mu}3_{, F. Muheim}57_{, M. Mukherjee}7_{, M. Mulder}47_{, D. M¨uller}47_,

K. M¨uller49, C.H. Murphy62, D. Murray61, P. Muzzetto26, P. Naik53, T. Nakada48, R. Nandakumar56_{, T. Nanut}48_{, I. Nasteva}2_{, M. Needham}57_{, N. Neri}25,q_{, S. Neubert}16_,

JHEP06(2020)058

N. Neufeld47_{, R. Newcombe}60_{, T.D. Nguyen}48_{, C. Nguyen-Mau}48,n_{, E.M. Niel}11_{, S. Nieswand}13_,

N. Nikitin39_{, N.S. Nolte}47_{, C. Nunez}80_{, A. Oblakowska-Mucha}34_{, V. Obraztsov}43_{, S. Ogilvy}58_,

D.P. O’Hanlon53, R. Oldeman26,f, C.J.G. Onderwater75, J. D. Osborn80, A. Ossowska33, J.M. Otalora Goicochea2, T. Ovsiannikova38, P. Owen49, A. Oyanguren46, P.R. Pais48, T. Pajero28,t_{, A. Palano}18_{, M. Palutan}22_{, G. Panshin}79_{, A. Papanestis}56_{, M. Pappagallo}57_,

L.L. Pappalardo20,g_{, C. Pappenheimer}64_{, W. Parker}65_{, C. Parkes}61_{, G. Passaleva}21,47_,

A. Pastore18, M. Patel60, C. Patrignani19,e, A. Pearce47, A. Pellegrino31, M. Pepe Altarelli47, S. Perazzini19_{, D. Pereima}38_{, P. Perret}9_{, L. Pescatore}48_{, K. Petridis}53_{, A. Petrolini}23,h_,

A. Petrov76_{, S. Petrucci}57_{, M. Petruzzo}25,q_{, B. Pietrzyk}8_{, G. Pietrzyk}48_{, M. Pili}62_{, D. Pinci}30_,

J. Pinzino47_{, F. Pisani}19_{, A. Piucci}16_{, V. Placinta}36_{, S. Playfer}57_{, J. Plews}52_{, M. Plo Casasus}45_,

F. Polci12, M. Poli Lener22, M. Poliakova67, A. Poluektov10, N. Polukhina77,c, I. Polyakov67, E. Polycarpo2_{, G.J. Pomery}53_{, S. Ponce}47_{, A. Popov}43_{, D. Popov}52_{, S. Poslavskii}43_,

K. Prasanth33_{, L. Promberger}47_{, C. Prouve}45_{, V. Pugatch}51_{, A. Puig Navarro}49_{, H. Pullen}62_,

G. Punzi28,p, W. Qian5, J. Qin5, R. Quagliani12, B. Quintana8, N.V. Raab17,

R.I. Rabadan Trejo10, B. Rachwal34, J.H. Rademacker53, M. Rama28, M. Ramos Pernas45, M.S. Rangel2_{, F. Ratnikov}41,78_{, G. Raven}32_{, M. Reboud}8_{, F. Redi}48_{, F. Reiss}12_,

C. Remon Alepuz46_{, Z. Ren}3_{, V. Renaudin}62_{, S. Ricciardi}56_{, D.S. Richards}56_{, S. Richards}53_,

K. Rinnert59, P. Robbe11, A. Robert12, A.B. Rodrigues48, E. Rodrigues64,

J.A. Rodriguez Lopez73_{, M. Roehrken}47_{, S. Roiser}47_{, A. Rollings}62_{, V. Romanovskiy}43_,

M. Romero Lamas45_{, A. Romero Vidal}45_{, J.D. Roth}80_{, M. Rotondo}22_{, M.S. Rudolph}67_{, T. Ruf}47_,

J. Ruiz Vidal46_{, A. Ryzhikov}78_{, J. Ryzka}34_{, J.J. Saborido Silva}45_{, N. Sagidova}37_{, N. Sahoo}55_,

B. Saitta26,f, C. Sanchez Gras31, C. Sanchez Mayordomo46, R. Santacesaria30,

C. Santamarina Rios45_{, M. Santimaria}22_{, E. Santovetti}29,j_{, G. Sarpis}61_{, A. Sarti}30_{, C. Satriano}30,s_,

A. Satta29_{, M. Saur}5_{, D. Savrina}38,39_{, L.G. Scantlebury Smead}62_{, S. Schael}13_{, M. Schellenberg}14_,

M. Schiller58, H. Schindler47, M. Schmelling15, T. Schmelzer14, B. Schmidt47, O. Schneider48, A. Schopper47, H.F. Schreiner64, M. Schubiger31, S. Schulte48, M.H. Schune11, R. Schwemmer47, B. Sciascia22_{, A. Sciubba}30,k_{, S. Sellam}68_{, A. Semennikov}38_{, A. Sergi}52,47_{, N. Serra}49_{, J. Serrano}10_,

L. Sestini27_{, A. Seuthe}14_{, P. Seyfert}47_{, D.M. Shangase}80_{, M. Shapkin}43_{, L. Shchutska}48_,

T. Shears59, L. Shekhtman42,x, V. Shevchenko76,77, E. Shmanin77, J.D. Shupperd67, B.G. Siddi20, R. Silva Coutinho49_{, L. Silva de Oliveira}2_{, G. Simi}27,o_{, S. Simone}18,d_{, I. Skiba}20,g_{, N. Skidmore}16_,

T. Skwarnicki67_{, M.W. Slater}52_{, J.G. Smeaton}54_{, A. Smetkina}38_{, E. Smith}13_{, I.T. Smith}57_,

M. Smith60_{, A. Snoch}31_{, M. Soares}19_{, L. Soares Lavra}9_{, M.D. Sokoloff}64_{, F.J.P. Soler}58_,

B. Souza De Paula2, B. Spaan14, E. Spadaro Norella25,q, P. Spradlin58, F. Stagni47, M. Stahl64, S. Stahl47_{, P. Stefko}48_{, O. Steinkamp}49_{, S. Stemmle}16_{, O. Stenyakin}43_{, M. Stepanova}37_,

H. Stevens14_{, S. Stone}67_{, S. Stracka}28_{, M.E. Stramaglia}48_{, M. Straticiuc}36_{, S. Strokov}79_{, J. Sun}26_,

L. Sun72, Y. Sun65, P. Svihra61, K. Swientek34, A. Szabelski35, T. Szumlak34, M. Szymanski47, S. Taneja61, Z. Tang3, T. Tekampe14, F. Teubert47, E. Thomas47, K.A. Thomson59, M.J. Tilley60, V. Tisserand9_{, S. T’Jampens}8_{, M. Tobin}6_{, S. Tolk}47_{, L. Tomassetti}20,g_{, D. Tonelli}28_,

D. Torres Machado1_{, D.Y. Tou}12_{, E. Tournefier}8_{, M. Traill}58_{, M.T. Tran}48_{, E. Trifonova}77_,

C. Trippl48, A. Trisovic54, A. Tsaregorodtsev10, G. Tuci28,47,p, A. Tully48, N. Tuning31, A. Ukleja35_{, A. Usachov}31_{, A. Ustyuzhanin}41,78_{, U. Uwer}16_{, A. Vagner}79_{, V. Vagnoni}19_,

A. Valassi47_{, G. Valenti}19_{, M. van Beuzekom}31_{, H. Van Hecke}66_{, E. van Herwijnen}47_,

C.B. Van Hulse17_{, M. van Veghel}75_{, R. Vazquez Gomez}44,22_{, P. Vazquez Regueiro}45_,

C. V´azquez Sierra31, S. Vecchi20, J.J. Velthuis53, M. Veltri21,r, A. Venkateswaran67, M. Vernet9, M. Veronesi31_{, M. Vesterinen}55_{, J.V. Viana Barbosa}47_{, D. Vieira}64_{, M. Vieites Diaz}48_,

H. Viemann74_{, X. Vilasis-Cardona}44,m_{, A. Vitkovskiy}31_{, A. Vollhardt}49_{, D. Vom Bruch}12_,

A. Vorobyev37, V. Vorobyev42,x, N. Voropaev37, R. Waldi74, J. Walsh28, J. Wang3, J. Wang72, J. Wang6_{, M. Wang}3_{, Y. Wang}7_{, Z. Wang}49_{, D.R. Ward}54_{, H.M. Wark}59_{, N.K. Watson}52_,

JHEP06(2020)058

D. Websdale60_{, A. Weiden}49_{, C. Weisser}63_{, B.D.C. Westhenry}53_{, D.J. White}61_{, M. Whitehead}13_,

D. Wiedner14_{, G. Wilkinson}62_{, M. Wilkinson}67_{, I. Williams}54_{, M. Williams}63_{, M.R.J. Williams}61_,

T. Williams52, F.F. Wilson56, W. Wislicki35, M. Witek33, L. Witola16, G. Wormser11,

S.A. Wotton54, H. Wu67, K. Wyllie47, Z. Xiang5, D. Xiao7, Y. Xie7, H. Xing71, A. Xu4, L. Xu3, M. Xu7_{, Q. Xu}5_{, Z. Xu}4_{, Z. Yang}3_{, Z. Yang}65_{, Y. Yao}67_{, L.E. Yeomans}59_{, H. Yin}7_{, J. Yu}7,aa_,

X. Yuan67_{, O. Yushchenko}43_{, K.A. Zarebski}52_{, M. Zavertyaev}15,c_{, M. Zdybal}33_{, M. Zeng}3_,

D. Zhang7, L. Zhang3, S. Zhang4, W.C. Zhang3,z, Y. Zhang47, A. Zhelezov16, Y. Zheng5, X. Zhou5_{, Y. Zhou}5_{, X. Zhu}3_{, V. Zhukov}13,39_{, J.B. Zonneveld}57_{, S. Zucchelli}19,e

1

Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas F´ısicas (CBPF), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

2

Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

3

Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China

4 _{School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University,}

Beijing, China

5 _{University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China} 6 _{Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China}

7 _{Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China} 8

Univ. Grenoble Alpes, Univ. Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS, IN2P3-LAPP, Annecy, France

9

Universit´e Clermont Auvergne, CNRS/IN2P3, LPC, Clermont-Ferrand, France

10

Aix Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, CPPM, Marseille, France

11

Universit´e Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, Orsay, France

12

LPNHE, Sorbonne Universit´e, Paris Diderot Sorbonne Paris Cit´e, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France

13

I. Physikalisches Institut, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany

14

Fakult¨at Physik, Technische Universit¨at Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany

15 _{Max-Planck-Institut f¨ur Kernphysik (MPIK), Heidelberg, Germany}

16 _{Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universit¨at Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany} 17 _{School of Physics, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland}

18 _{INFN Sezione di Bari, Bari, Italy} 19 _{INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy} 20

INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy

21

INFN Sezione di Firenze, Firenze, Italy

22

INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy

23

INFN Sezione di Genova, Genova, Italy

24

INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy

25

INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy

26

INFN Sezione di Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy

27 _{INFN Sezione di Padova, Padova, Italy} 28 _{INFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy}

29 _{INFN Sezione di Roma Tor Vergata, Roma, Italy} 30 _{INFN Sezione di Roma La Sapienza, Roma, Italy}

31 _{Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands} 32

Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics and VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands

33

Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Krak´ow, Poland

34

AGH — University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, Krak´ow, Poland

35

National Center for Nuclear Research (NCBJ), Warsaw, Poland

36

Horia Hulubei National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest-Magurele, Romania

37 _{Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute NRC Kurchatov Institute (PNPI NRC KI), Gatchina, Russia} 38 _{Institute of Theoretical and Experimental Physics NRC Kurchatov Institute (ITEP NRC KI),}