\(\overline{B}^0\to D^{*+}\pi^-\pi^0\) with a spin-1 daughter#
This report implements \(\overline{B}^0\to D^{*+}\pi^-\pi^0\) with a stable spin-1 \(D^{*+}\) in AmpForm-DPD, and the four-body decay \(\overline{B}^0\to D^0\pi^+\pi^-\pi^0\) through \(D^{*+}\to D^0\pi^+\) in AmpForm. Both models use decay chains from QRules and are evaluated with TensorWaves.
The comparisons below use illustrative couplings to check mass projections and helicity correlations.
qrules: 0.10.13
ampform: 0.16.1
ampform-dpd: 0.2.4
tensorwaves: 0.4.17
phasespace: 1.10.4
Narrow-width approximation#
The three-body model holds the \(D^{*+}\) at its pole mass. Its width-to-mass ratio is much smaller than those of the other resonances:
resonance |
\(m\) [GeV] |
\(\Gamma\) [GeV] |
\(\Gamma/m\) |
|---|---|---|---|
\(D^{*}(2010)^{+}\) |
2.0103 |
8.34e-05 |
4.1e-05 |
\(D_1(2420)\) |
2.4221 |
0.0313 |
1.3e-02 |
\(D_2^{*}(2460)\) |
2.4611 |
0.0473 |
1.9e-02 |
\(\rho(770)\) |
0.77511 |
0.1491 |
1.9e-01 |
The measured \(D^{*+}\) width is \(83.4\pm1.8\;\mathrm{keV}\) [BaBar Collaboration, 2013]. The three-body model sums over its helicity, while the four-body model retains its decay angles.
Decay chains for the three-body model#
Label \(\overline{B}^0\) by 0 and \((D^{*+},\pi^-,\pi^0)\) by \((1,2,3)\), so that the Dalitz-plot decomposition variables are
The model includes \(\rho(770)^-\) in \(\sigma_1\), the charged \(D^{**+}\) states in \(\sigma_2\), and the neutral \(D^{**0}\) states in \(\sigma_3\). It retains the two narrow \(P\)-wave charm states, \(D_1(2420)\) and \(D_2^*(2460)\), in both charge configurations. The broad \(D_1(2430)\) is left out because QRules only carries its neutral charge state, which would break the isospin symmetry of the model. Unlike TR-036, there are no identical particles here, so no Bose symmetrization is needed.
The particle database lacks parity for \(D_1(2420)^\pm\); load_particles() assigns \(J^P=1^+\) from the neutral partners. QRules allows strong and weak interactions to accommodate the weak \(\overline{B}^0\) vertex. The filter then selects \(P\)-wave \(\rho(770)^-\to\pi^-\pi^0\) and \(D\)-wave \(D^{**}\to D^{*+}\pi\) decays.
resonance |
\(J^P\) |
mass (MeV) |
width (MeV) |
\(L_\mathrm{dec}^\mathrm{min}\) |
\(L_\mathrm{prod}^\mathrm{min}\) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
\(D_{1}(2420)^{+} \to D^{*}(2010)^{+} \pi^{0}\) |
\(1^+\) |
2,422 |
31 |
2 |
1 |
\(D_{1}(2420)^{0} \to D^{*}(2010)^{+} \pi^{-}\) |
\(1^+\) |
2,422 |
31 |
2 |
1 |
\(D_{2}^{*}(2460)^{+} \to D^{*}(2010)^{+} \pi^{0}\) |
\(2^+\) |
2,461 |
47 |
2 |
2 |
\(D_{2}^{*}(2460)^{0} \to D^{*}(2010)^{+} \pi^{-}\) |
\(2^+\) |
2,461 |
47 |
2 |
2 |
\(\rho(770)^{-} \to \pi^{-} \pi^{0}\) |
\(1^-\) |
775 |
149 |
1 |
0 |
flowchart LR
T0_N0["$$\overline{B}^{0}$$"]
T0_1["$$1: D^{*}(2010)^{+}$$"]
T0_2["$$2: \pi^{-}$$"]
T0_3["$$3: \pi^{0}$$"]
T0_N1@{ shape: text, label: " " }
T0_4("$$\begin{gathered} D_{1}(2420)^{0} \\\ D_{2}^{*}(2460)^{0} \end{gathered}$$")
T0_N0 --- T0_4
T0_4 --- T0_N1
T0_N0 --- T0_3
T0_N1 --- T0_1
T0_N1 --- T0_2
T1_N0["$$\overline{B}^{0}$$"]
T1_1["$$1: D^{*}(2010)^{+}$$"]
T1_2["$$2: \pi^{-}$$"]
T1_3["$$3: \pi^{0}$$"]
T1_N1@{ shape: text, label: " " }
T1_4("$$\begin{gathered} D_{1}(2420)^{+} \\\ D_{2}^{*}(2460)^{+} \end{gathered}$$")
T1_N0 --- T1_4
T1_4 --- T1_N1
T1_N0 --- T1_2
T1_N1 --- T1_1
T1_N1 --- T1_3
T2_N0["$$\overline{B}^{0}$$"]
T2_1["$$1: D^{*}(2010)^{+}$$"]
T2_2["$$2: \pi^{-}$$"]
T2_3["$$3: \pi^{0}$$"]
T2_N1@{ shape: text, label: " " }
T2_4("$$\rho(770)^{-}$$")
T2_N0 --- T2_4
T2_4 --- T2_N1
T2_N0 --- T2_1
T2_N1 --- T2_2
T2_N1 --- T2_3
Three-body amplitude with AmpForm-DPD#
The Dalitz-plot decomposition [Mikhasenko et al., 2020] rotates each decay chain into a common frame. The spin-1 \(D^{*+}\) requires the alignment angles \(\zeta^1_{k(1)}\) shown below.
Each resonance uses a Breit-Wigner dynamics builder. AmpForm-DPD v0.2.4 passes \(\sigma_k^2\) to the decay form factor and the pole mass \(m_R\) as the production daughter mass. The correction below replaces these with \(\sigma_k\) and \(\sqrt{\sigma_k}\) for the resonance’s subsystem.
The nine amplitude components correspond to three \(D^{*+}\) helicities per subsystem. The scattering and alignment angles are:
Helicity couplings of a spin-1 daughter#
With a spin-1 daughter, one complex coupling per decay chain is no longer enough: each chain comes with a coupling \(\mathcal{H}^R_\lambda\) for every \(D^{*+}\) helicity \(\lambda\in\{-1,0,+1\}\), fifteen in total. They are not independent. The \(\overline{B}^0\) vertex is weak, so parity constrains nothing there, but the resonance decays are strong, and the single decay wave selected above fixes the helicity pattern up to one overall coupling per resonance.
For \(R\to D^{*+}\pi\) in a \(D\) wave, the pattern is the Clebsch-Gordan coefficient \(\langle L\,0;S\,\lambda\mid J_R\,\lambda\rangle\) with \(L=2\) and \(S=1\):
For \(J_R=1\) this is even in \(\lambda\); for \(J_R=2\) it is odd, and \(\langle2\,0;1\,0\mid2\,0\rangle=0\) makes the \(D_2^*(2460)\) longitudinal coupling vanish outright. The same conclusion follows from the parity relation \(\mathcal{H}_{-\lambda}=P_R(-1)^{J_R-1}\mathcal{H}_{\lambda}\). For \(\overline{B}^0\to D^{*+}\rho^-\), on the other hand, all three couplings are free: this is the vector-vector configuration whose longitudinal fraction \(f_L\) is the quantity experiments quote. We take \(f_L=0.885\) and split the transverse strength equally.
That leaves seven free complex numbers, one per resonance plus two extra for the \(\rho^-\) polarization, which is exactly the number of independent \(LS\) couplings in the canonical basis.
resonance |
\(\lambda=-1\) |
\(\lambda=0\) |
\(\lambda=+1\) |
|---|---|---|---|
\(\rho(770)^{-}\) |
+0.2549 |
+1.0000 |
+0.2549 |
\(D_{1}(2420)^{0}\) |
+0.3162 |
-0.6325 |
+0.3162 |
\(D_{1}(2420)^{+}\) |
+0.3162 |
-0.6325 |
+0.3162 |
\(D_{2}^{*}(2460)^{0}\) |
+0.7071 |
+0.0000 |
-0.7071 |
\(D_{2}^{*}(2460)^{+}\) |
+0.7071 |
+0.0000 |
-0.7071 |
The couplings themselves are set from illustrative component fractions. As in TR-036 the fractions are defined through the diagonal integrals \(N_R=\int_\mathcal{D}I_R\,\mathrm{d}\sigma_3\,\mathrm{d}\sigma_1\) of each component evaluated on its own, so that the numbers mean the same thing for every lineshape. Three-body phase space is flat in \(\mathrm{d}\sigma_3\,\mathrm{d}\sigma_1\) for a scalar parent, so no extra momentum weight is needed.
Physical region and the Dalitz plot#
The physical region follows from the Kibble function \(\phi<0\) [Byckling and Kajantie, 1973], evaluated on a regular grid in \(\left(\sigma_3,\sigma_1\right)\).
resonance |
subsystem |
input fraction [%] |
phase [deg] |
model fraction [%] |
|---|---|---|---|---|
\(\rho(770)^{-}\) |
\(\sigma_1\) |
45 |
0 |
44.26 |
\(D_{2}^{*}(2460)^{0}\) |
\(\sigma_3\) |
20 |
120 |
19.67 |
\(D_{1}(2420)^{0}\) |
\(\sigma_3\) |
15 |
-60 |
14.75 |
\(D_{2}^{*}(2460)^{+}\) |
\(\sigma_2\) |
12 |
150 |
11.80 |
\(D_{1}(2420)^{+}\) |
\(\sigma_2\) |
8 |
-30 |
7.87 |
Largest change in component integrals on grid refinement: 0.51%.
The model fractions differ from the input fractions only through interference, which is why they do not sum to 100%. The Dalitz plot below shows the coherent intensity relative to its maximum.
The three subsystems are cleanly separated: the \(D^{**0}\) states form the vertical band near \(\sigma_3\approx6\;\mathrm{GeV}^2\), the \(\rho(770)^-\) the horizontal band at \(\sigma_1\approx0.6\;\mathrm{GeV}^2\), and the \(D^{**+}\) states the diagonal band of constant \(\sigma_2\).
One-dimensional AmpForm-DPD projections#
The three pair-mass projections integrate the coherent intensity over the physical Dalitz grid. Each has unit area in \(\sigma_k\); the phase-space measure is constant in \(d\sigma_3\,d\sigma_1\).
Helicity sums and interference#
The three-body intensity sums incoherently over the \(D^{*+}\) helicity, \(I=\sum_\lambda\left|\sum_R\mathcal{A}^R_\lambda\right|^2\). The check below evaluates \(I_{ab}-I_a-I_b\) for each pair of components at random physical points. With the selected decay waves, opposite helicity-parity patterns cancel pointwise in this sum.
A second check compares longitudinal and transverse \(\rho^-\) couplings. Equal and opposite transverse signs give identical Dalitz densities; longitudinal and transverse configurations give different densities.
| pair | same \(\lambda\)-parity | \(\left\langle\left|I_{ab}-I_a-I_b\right|\right\rangle/\sqrt{I_aI_b}\) | |—|:-:|—:| | \(\rho(770)^{-}\), \(D_{1}(2420)^{0}\) | yes | 8.1e-01 | | \(\rho(770)^{-}\), \(D_{1}(2420)^{+}\) | yes | 8.3e-01 | | \(\rho(770)^{-}\), \(D_{2}^{*}(2460)^{0}\) | no | 2.2e-14 | | \(\rho(770)^{-}\), \(D_{2}^{*}(2460)^{+}\) | no | 4.9e-15 | | \(D_{1}(2420)^{0}\), \(D_{1}(2420)^{+}\) | yes | 1.1e+00 | | \(D_{1}(2420)^{0}\), \(D_{2}^{*}(2460)^{0}\) | no | 6.7e-15 | | \(D_{1}(2420)^{0}\), \(D_{2}^{*}(2460)^{+}\) | no | 4.0e-15 | | \(D_{1}(2420)^{+}\), \(D_{2}^{*}(2460)^{0}\) | no | 5.3e-15 | | \(D_{1}(2420)^{+}\), \(D_{2}^{*}(2460)^{+}\) | no | 5.6e-16 | | \(D_{2}^{*}(2460)^{0}\), \(D_{2}^{*}(2460)^{+}\) | yes | 1.7e+00 |
Relative difference between the two transverse sign conventions: 0e+00. Between longitudinal and transverse: 99%.
Four-body model with AmpForm#
StateTransitionManager.add_final_state_grouping requires \(D^0\) and \(\pi^+\) to share a decay node. Since allowed_intermediate_particles applies to every intermediate edge, keeps_pinned_chain() additionally requires a \(D^{*+}\) and selects the same resonance decay waves as the three-body model, plus a \(P\) wave for \(D^{*+}\to D^0\pi^+\).
All four final-state particles are spinless, so no spin alignment amplitudes are needed.
The pinned reaction has 18 transitions over three topologies, with intermediate states \(D_{1}(2420)^{+}\), \(D_{1}(2420)^{0}\), \(D_{2}^{*}(2460)^{+}\), \(D_{2}^{*}(2460)^{0}\), \(D^{*}(2010)^{+}\), \(\rho(770)^{-}\).
flowchart LR
T0_0["$$0: D^{0}$$"]
T0_1["$$1: \pi^{+}$$"]
T0_2["$$2: \pi^{-}$$"]
T0_3["$$3: \pi^{0}$$"]
T0_N0["$$\overline{B}^{0}$$"]
T0_N1@{ shape: text, label: " " }
T0_N2@{ shape: text, label: " " }
T0_4("$$\begin{gathered} D_{1}(2420)^{0} \\\ D_{2}^{*}(2460)^{0} \end{gathered}$$")
T0_5("$$D^{*}(2010)^{+}$$")
T0_N0 --- T0_4
T0_4 --- T0_N1
T0_N0 --- T0_3
T0_N1 --- T0_5
T0_5 --- T0_N2
T0_N1 --- T0_2
T0_N2 --- T0_0
T0_N2 --- T0_1
T1_0["$$0: D^{0}$$"]
T1_1["$$1: \pi^{+}$$"]
T1_2["$$2: \pi^{-}$$"]
T1_3["$$3: \pi^{0}$$"]
T1_N0["$$\overline{B}^{0}$$"]
T1_N1@{ shape: text, label: " " }
T1_N2@{ shape: text, label: " " }
T1_4("$$\begin{gathered} D_{1}(2420)^{+} \\\ D_{2}^{*}(2460)^{+} \end{gathered}$$")
T1_5("$$D^{*}(2010)^{+}$$")
T1_N0 --- T1_4
T1_4 --- T1_N1
T1_N0 --- T1_2
T1_N1 --- T1_5
T1_5 --- T1_N2
T1_N1 --- T1_3
T1_N2 --- T1_0
T1_N2 --- T1_1
T2_0["$$0: D^{0}$$"]
T2_1["$$1: \pi^{+}$$"]
T2_2["$$2: \pi^{-}$$"]
T2_3["$$3: \pi^{0}$$"]
T2_N0["$$\overline{B}^{0}$$"]
T2_N1@{ shape: text, label: " " }
T2_N2@{ shape: text, label: " " }
T2_4("$$D^{*}(2010)^{+}$$")
T2_5("$$\rho(770)^{-}$$")
T2_N0 --- T2_4
T2_4 --- T2_N1
T2_N0 --- T2_5
T2_5 --- T2_N2
T2_N1 --- T2_0
T2_N1 --- T2_1
T2_N2 --- T2_2
T2_N2 --- T2_3
AmpForm formulates the reaction in the helicity basis with a coupling per vertex and helicity configuration. Couplings excluded by the canonical solutions, such as longitudinal \(D_2^*(2460)\to D^{*+}\pi\), are absent.
The phase-space generator fixes the \(D^{*+}\) at its pole mass in \(\overline{B}^0\to D^{*+}\pi^-\pi^0\), then generates an isotropic \(D^{*+}\to D^0\pi^+\) decay. This samples the narrow-width limit without resolving the 83 keV lineshape.
Component projections#
Each resonance is evaluated separately with the same helicity pattern in both models. Histograms weighted by \(wI_4\) integrate over the \(D^{*+}\) decay angles and are compared with normalized \(wI_3\) histograms from the same phase-space events.
Deviation between the normalized projections, relative to each peak: 0.7% on average and 7.0% at worst, consistent with the Monte Carlo statistics of 500,000 events.
AmpForm Dalitz plot from phase space#
The four-body Dalitz projection uses the existing phasespace sample with the \(D^{*+}\) fixed at its pole mass. Each component is normalized by \(\langle wI_R\rangle\) to give the same input fraction as in the DPD model. The illustrative phases are applied in AmpForm’s helicity convention; no phase conversion between the two implementations is imposed.
The histogram weights are \(wI_4\), with all components evaluated coherently. Binning in \((\sigma_3,\sigma_1)\) integrates over the \(D^{*+}\) decay angles. The color scale matches the DPD plot, with each bin divided by the largest bin content.
The comparison checks individual components. A coherent comparison also requires matching the helicity-coupling conventions of AmpForm and AmpForm-DPD.
The angular projections below use the \(D^0\) direction in the \(D^{*+}\) rest frame relative to the \(D^{*+}\) flight direction, and the angle \(\varphi\) between the \(D^{*+}\) and \(\rho^-\) decay planes. The polar distribution separates longitudinal and transverse couplings; the decay-plane distribution distinguishes the two transverse sign choices.