\documentclass[11 pt,xcolor={dvipsnames,svgnames,x11names,table}]{beamer}
 
\usepackage[english]{babel}
\usepackage{polski}
 
 
\usetheme[
	bullet=circle,		% Other option: square
	bigpagenumber,		% circled page number on lower right
	topline=true,			% colored bar at the top of the frame
	shadow=false,			% Shading for beamer blocks
	watermark=BG_lower,	% png file for the watermark
	]{Flip}
 
%\logo{\kern+1.em\includegraphics[height=1cm]{SHiP-3_LightCharcoal}}
 
 
\usepackage[lf]{berenis}
\usepackage[LY1]{fontenc}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
 
%\usepackage{emerald}
\usefonttheme{professionalfonts}
\usepackage[no-math]{fontspec}
\defaultfontfeatures{Mapping=tex-text}	% This seems to be important for mapping glyphs properly
 
\setmainfont{Gillius ADF}			% Beamer ignores "main font" in favor of sans font
\setsansfont{Gillius ADF}			% This is the font that beamer will use by default
% \setmainfont{Gill Sans Light}		% Prettier, but harder to read
 
\setbeamerfont{title}{family=\fontspec{Gillius ADF}}
 
\input t1augie.fd
 
%\newcommand{\handwriting}{\fontspec{augie}} % From Emerald City, free font
%\newcommand{\handwriting}{\usefont{T1}{fau}{m}{n}} % From Emerald City, free font
% \newcommand{\handwriting}{}	% If you prefer no special handwriting font or don't have augie
 
%% Gill Sans doesn't look very nice when boldfaced
%% This is a hack to use Helvetica instead
%% Usage: \textbf{\forbold some stuff}
%\newcommand{\forbold}{\fontspec{Arial}}
 
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage[export]{adjustbox}
 
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{bm}
\usepackage{colortbl}
\usepackage{mathrsfs} 			% For Weinberg-esque letters
\usepackage{cancel}				% For "SUSY-breaking" symbol
\usepackage{slashed}            % for slashed characters in math mode
\usepackage{bbm}                %for \mathbbm{1} (unit matrix)
\usepackage{amsthm}				% For theorem environment
\usepackage{multirow}			% For multi row cells in table
\usepackage{arydshln} 			% For dashed lines in arrays and tables
\usepackage{siunitx}
\usepackage{xhfill}
\usepackage{grffile}
\usepackage{textpos}
\usepackage{subfigure}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usepackage[normalem]{ulem}
 
%\usepackage{hepparticles}
%\usepackage[italic]{hepparticles}
 
\usepackage{hepnicenames}
\usepackage{hepparticles}
% Drawing a line
\tikzstyle{lw} = [line width=20pt]
\newcommand{\topline}{%
  \tikz[remember picture,overlay] {%
    \draw[crimsonred] ([yshift=-23.5pt]current page.north west)
             -- ([yshift=-23.5pt,xshift=\paperwidth]current page.north west);}}
 
 
 
% % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % %
\usepackage{tikzfeynman}		% For Feynman diagrams
\usetikzlibrary{arrows,shapes}
\usetikzlibrary{trees}
\usetikzlibrary{matrix,arrows} 				% For commutative diagram
% http://www.felixl.de/commu.pdf
\usetikzlibrary{positioning}				% For "above of=" commands
\usetikzlibrary{calc,through}				% For coordinates
\usetikzlibrary{decorations.pathreplacing}  % For curly braces
% http://www.math.ucla.edu/~getreuer/tikz.html
\usepackage{pgffor}							% For repeating patterns
 
\usetikzlibrary{decorations.pathmorphing}	% For Feynman Diagrams
\usetikzlibrary{decorations.markings}
\tikzset{
	% >=stealth', %%  Uncomment for more conventional arrows
	vector/.style={decorate, decoration={snake}, draw},
	provector/.style={decorate, decoration={snake,amplitude=2.5pt}, draw},
	antivector/.style={decorate, decoration={snake,amplitude=-2.5pt}, draw},
	fermion/.style={draw=gray, postaction={decorate},
		decoration={markings,mark=at position .55 with {\arrow[draw=gray]{>}}}},
	fermionbar/.style={draw=gray, postaction={decorate},
		decoration={markings,mark=at position .55 with {\arrow[draw=gray]{<}}}},
	fermionnoarrow/.style={draw=gray},
	gluon/.style={decorate, draw=black,
		decoration={coil,amplitude=4pt, segment length=5pt}},
	scalar/.style={dashed,draw=black, postaction={decorate},
		decoration={markings,mark=at position .55 with {\arrow[draw=black]{>}}}},
	scalarbar/.style={dashed,draw=black, postaction={decorate},
		decoration={markings,mark=at position .55 with {\arrow[draw=black]{<}}}},
	scalarnoarrow/.style={dashed,draw=black},
	electron/.style={draw=black, postaction={decorate},
		decoration={markings,mark=at position .55 with {\arrow[draw=black]{>}}}},
	bigvector/.style={decorate, decoration={snake,amplitude=4pt}, draw},
}
 
% TIKZ - for block diagrams,
% from http://www.texample.net/tikz/examples/control-system-principles/
% \usetikzlibrary{shapes,arrows}
\tikzstyle{block} = [draw, rectangle,
minimum height=3em, minimum width=6em]
 
 
 
 
\usetikzlibrary{backgrounds}
\usetikzlibrary{mindmap,trees}	% For mind map
\newcommand{\degree}{\ensuremath{^\circ}}
\newcommand{\E}{\mathrm{E}}
\newcommand{\Var}{\mathrm{Var}}
\newcommand{\Cov}{\mathrm{Cov}}
\newcommand\Ts{\rule{0pt}{2.6ex}}       % Top strut
\newcommand\Bs{\rule[-1.2ex]{0pt}{0pt}} % Bottom strut
 
\graphicspath{{images/}}	% Put all images in this directory. Avoids clutter.
 
% SOME COMMANDS THAT I FIND HANDY
% \renewcommand{\tilde}{\widetilde} % dinky tildes look silly, dosn't work with fontspec
\newcommand{\comment}[1]{\textcolor{comment}{\footnotesize{#1}\normalsize}} % comment mild
\newcommand{\Comment}[1]{\textcolor{Comment}{\footnotesize{#1}\normalsize}} % comment bold
\newcommand{\COMMENT}[1]{\textcolor{COMMENT}{\footnotesize{#1}\normalsize}} % comment crazy bold
\newcommand{\Alert}[1]{\textcolor{Alert}{#1}} % louder alert
\newcommand{\ALERT}[1]{\textcolor{ALERT}{#1}} % loudest alert
%% "\alert" is already a beamer pre-defined
\newcommand*{\Scale}[2][4]{\scalebox{#1}{$#2$}}%
 
\def\Put(#1,#2)#3{\leavevmode\makebox(0,0){\put(#1,#2){#3}}}
 
\usepackage{gmp}
\usepackage[final]{feynmp-auto}
 
\usepackage[backend=bibtex,style=numeric-comp,firstinits=true]{biblatex}
\bibliography{bib}
\setbeamertemplate{bibliography item}[text]
 
\makeatletter\let\frametextheight\beamer@frametextheight\makeatother
 
% suppress frame numbering for backup slides
% you always need the appendix for this!
\newcommand{\backupbegin}{
	\newcounter{framenumberappendix}
	\setcounter{framenumberappendix}{\value{framenumber}}
}
\newcommand{\backupend}{
	\addtocounter{framenumberappendix}{-\value{framenumber}}
	\addtocounter{framenumber}{\value{framenumberappendix}}
}
 
 
\definecolor{links}{HTML}{2A1B81}
%\hypersetup{colorlinks,linkcolor=,urlcolor=links}
 
% For shapo's formulas:
\def\lsi{\raise0.3ex\hbox{$<$\kern-0.75em\raise-1.1ex\hbox{$\sim$}}}
\def\gsi{\raise0.3ex\hbox{$>$\kern-0.75em\raise-1.1ex\hbox{$\sim$}}}
\newcommand{\lsim}{\mathop{\lsi}}
\newcommand{\gsim}{\mathop{\gsi}}
\newcommand{\wt}{\widetilde}
%\newcommand{\ol}{\overline}
\newcommand{\Tr}{\rm{Tr}}
\newcommand{\tr}{\rm{tr}}
\newcommand{\eqn}[1]{&\hspace{-0.7em}#1\hspace{-0.7em}&}
\newcommand{\vev}[1]{\rm{$\langle #1 \rangle$}}
\newcommand{\abs}[1]{\rm{$\left| #1 \right|$}}
\newcommand{\eV}{\rm{eV}}
\newcommand{\keV}{\rm{keV}}
\newcommand{\GeV}{\rm{GeV}}
\newcommand{\im}{\rm{Im}}
\newcommand{\disp}{\displaystyle}
\def\be{\begin{equation}}
\def\ee{\end{equation}}
\def\ba{\begin{eqnarray}}
\def\ea{\end{eqnarray}}
\def\d{\partial}
\def\l{\left(}
\def\r{\right)}
\def\la{\langle}
\def\ra{\rangle}
\def\e{{\rm e}}
\def\Br{{\rm Br}}
\def\P5prime{{{\rm P}^{\prime}_5}}
 
 
\def\ARROW{{\color{JungleGreen}{$\Rrightarrow$}}\xspace}
\def\ARROWR{{\color{WildStrawberry}{$\Rrightarrow$}}\xspace}
 
\author{ M.Chrzaszcz (UZH)}
\institute{UZH}
\title[Quo Vadis $P^{\prime}_5$~?]{Quo Vadis $P^{\prime}_5$~?}
\date{30 January 2017}
 
 
\begin{document}
\tikzstyle{every picture}+=[remember picture]
 
{
\setbeamertemplate{sidebar right}{\llap{\includegraphics[width=\paperwidth,height=\paperheight]{bubble2}}}
\begin{frame}[c]%{\phantom{title page}}
\begin{center}
\begin{center}
	\begin{columns}
		\begin{column}{0.75\textwidth}
			\flushright\bfseries \Huge {Quo Vadis $\P5prime$~?}
		\end{column}
                \begin{column}{0.02\textwidth}
                  {~}
                  \end{column}
                \begin{column}{0.23\textwidth}
                 % \hspace*{-1.cm}
                  \vspace*{-3mm}
                  \includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{lhcb-logo}
                  \end{column}
 
	\end{columns}
\end{center}
	\quad
	\vspace{3em}
	
	
\begin{columns}
\begin{column}{0.44\textwidth}
\flushright \vspace{-1.8em} { \Large Marcin Chrzaszcz\\\vspace{-0.1em}  \vspace{-0.1em}\small \href{mailto:mchrzasz@cern.ch}{mchrzasz@cern.ch}}
 
\end{column}
 
\begin{column}{0.53\textwidth}
\includegraphics[height=1.3cm]{uzh-transp}
 
\end{column}	
\end{columns}
 
\begin{center}
on behalf of the $\PB \to \PKstar \Pmu \Pmu$ team
\end{center}
 
\vspace{0.2em}
 
\vspace{1em}
 
\vspace{0.5em}
 
	\textcolor{normal text.fg!50!Comment}{Analysis and software week, CERN\\April 28, 2017}
\end{center}
\end{frame}
}
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
\begin{frame}\frametitle{The road (towards NP ?)}
 
\begin{columns}
\column{0.02\textwidth}
 
\column{0.6\textwidth}
\onslide<1,2,3>{
\ARROW Several theory authors proposed to measure a ''clean'' observable:
\begin{align*}
\P5prime= \frac{S_5}{\sqrt{F_L(1-F_L)}}
\end{align*}
\ARROW At leading order of $\alpha_s$ and $m_b$ expansion the form factors cancel \href{https://arxiv.org/abs/1207.2753}{arxiv::1207.2753}
 
}
 
 
\onslide<2,3>{
\ARROW  LHCb: \href{https://arxiv.org/pdf/1308.1707.pdf}{arXiv::1308.1707} ($1~\rm fb^{-1}$)
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{images/P5p1.png}
}
 
 
\column{0.4\textwidth}
\onslide<1,2,3>{
What we were promised:\\
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{images/path1.png}\\
}
\onslide<3>
{
What we got:\\\vspace{0.5em}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{images/path2.png}
}
\end{columns}
 
 
 
 
\end{frame}
 
 
\begin{frame}\frametitle{The history of $\P5prime$}
 
\begin{columns}
 
\column{0.4\textwidth}
\only<1>{{\color{black}{\ARROW 2013 LHCb: \href{https://arxiv.org/pdf/1308.1707.pdf}{arXiv::1308.1707}}}\\}
\only<2,3,4,5>{{\color{gray}{\ARROW 2013 LHCb: \href{https://arxiv.org/pdf/1308.1707.pdf}{arXiv::1308.1707}}}\\}
\only<2,3,4,5>{\ARROW 2015 LHCb: \href{https://arxiv.org/abs/1512.04442}{arXiv::1512.0444}\\}
\only<4,5>{{\color{red}{\ARROW 2016 Belle: \href{https://arxiv.org/abs/1604.04042}{arXiv::1604.04042}}}\\}
\only<5>{\ARROW 2017: {\color{blue}{\href{https://atlas.web.cern.ch/Atlas/GROUPS/PHYSICS/CONFNOTES/ATLAS-CONF-2017-023/}{ATLAS-CONF-2017-023}}} $(20.5~\rm fb^{-1})$ and {\color{OliveGreen}{\href{http://cds.cern.ch/record/2256738?ln=en}{CMS-PAS-BPH-15-008}}} $(20.8~\rm fb^{-1})$} 
 
 
 
\column{0.6\textwidth}
\only<2,4,5>{
\ARROW Theory: 
~~DHMV: \href{https://arxiv.org/abs/1407.8526}{arXiv::1407.8526}
~~ASZB: \href{https://arxiv.org/abs/1411.3161}{arXiv::1411.3161}
}
%\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{images/P5p1.png}
\only<1>{
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{images/P5p1.png}
}
\only<2>{
\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=0.9\textwidth]{images/P5p_LHCb.pdf}
}
\only<3>{
\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=0.9\textwidth]{images/P5p_LHCb.pdf}
}
\only<4>{
\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=0.9\textwidth]{images/P5p_LHCb_Belle.pdf}
}
\only<5>{
\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=0.9\textwidth]{images/P5p.pdf}
}
 
 
\end{columns}
\only<3>{
 
\begin{exampleblock}{}
\ARROWR We generated a lot of interest :) The paper has now 115 citations!\\
\ARROWR Two alliances were formed:~~~~~~~~~~\ARROWR We have QCD effects:\\
\begin{columns}
\column{0.45\textwidth}
\ARROWR We have new physics:
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{images/party.png}
\column{0.45\textwidth}
 
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{images/noNP.jpg}\\ \href{https://arxiv.org/pdf/1611.04338.pdf}{arXiv::1611.04338}~L.Silvestrini, et. al.
 
\end{columns}
\end{exampleblock}
}
 
\end{frame}
 
 
\begin{frame}\frametitle{Details about their ATLAS $\&$ CMS analysis 1/2}
 
\ARROW The results are based on Run1 data.\\
\ARROW The measurement of $\P5prime$ is possible knowing the $\PB$ flavour.\\
\ARROW In LHCb we have the RICH, but ATLAS and CMS don't, so the flavour is assigned by checking two possible mass hypothesis for $\PKstar$ and choosing the one closer to the SM value ($13\%$ for CMS and $11\%$ for ATLAS).\\
\ARROW The analysis follows our LHCb results from $1~\rm fb^{-1}$:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\color{red}{Not enough events to perform the full angular fit.}}
\item {\color{OliveGreen}{Fold the angles to reduce the number of observables}}
\item {\color{red}{In this procedure you lose correlations between the observables}}
\end{itemize}
\ARROW The acceptance corrections both in CMS and ATLAS parametrized as $\epsilon(\cos \theta_l, \cos \theta_k, \phi, m)$ in each of the $q^2$ bin.\\
%\ARROWR ATLAS uses the normal polynomial, while CMS uses KDE and histogram binning.
 
 
 
\end{frame}
 
\begin{frame}\frametitle{Details about their ATLAS $\&$ CMS analysis 2/2}
\begin{center}
 
 
\begin{columns}
\column{0.5\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{images/atlas.jpg}
\end{center}
\begin{small}
\ARROW Angular acceptance parametrized by polynomial functions.\\
\ARROW Determination of $F_L$, $P_1$, $P^{\prime}_4$, $P^{\prime}_5$, $P^{\prime}_6$, $P^{\prime}_8$ and/or $S_i$ $i=3,4,5,7,8$.\\
\ARROW Systematic for S-wave (small)\\
\ARROW Main systematics: background: charm, partRECO, fake $\PKstar$.\\
\ARROW $\PB \to \PKstar \PJpsi$  used ONLY for mass PDF.
 
\end{small}
 
\column{0.5\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{images/cms.jpg}
\end{center}
\begin{small}
\ARROW Angular acceptance parametrized by KDE and sampled histograms.\\
\ARROW Determination of only $P_1$ and $P^{\prime}_5$.\\
\ARROW Swave fraction inferred from previous measurement.\\
\ARROW Main systematics: Control channel differences.\\
\ARROW $\PB \to \PKstar \PJpsi$ used for systematics.
 
 
\end{small}
 
 
\end{columns}
\end{center}
 
 
\end{frame}
 
 
\begin{frame}\frametitle{Global analysis}
\ARROW Two main players on the market:
\begin{columns}
\column{0.5\textwidth}
\ARROWR J. Matias, et. al.\\
 
 
 
 
\column{0.5\textwidth}
\ARROWR D. Straub, et. al.\\
 
 
\end{columns}
{~}\\
\begin{columns}
\column{0.5\textwidth}
\ARROW Measurements taken into the analysis:
\begin{itemize}
\item Angular and Br of $\PB \to \PKstar \mu \mu$
\item Angular and Br of $\PBs \to \Pphi \mu \mu$
\item Angular and Br of $\PB \to \PK \mu \mu$
\item Br $\PB \to X_s \mu \mu$ and $\Pbeauty \to \Pstrange \gamma$
\item $\PBs \to \mu \mu$
\end{itemize}
 
 
\column{0.5\textwidth}
\ARROW Measurements taken into the analysis:
\begin{itemize}
\item Angular and Br of $\PB \to \PKstar \mu \mu$
\item Angular and Br of $\PBs \to \Pphi \mu \mu$
\item Angular and Br of $\PB \to \PK \mu \mu$
\item Br $\PB \to X_s \mu \mu$
\end{itemize}
 
 
\end{columns}
 
\ARROW There are also subtle difference in the theory treatment of form factors. 
 
 
\end{frame}
 
 
 
\begin{frame}\frametitle{So what is the significance? J. Matias, et. al.}
\only<1>{
\ARROW LHCb ($3\rm~fb^{-1}$):\\
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Coefficient & Best Fit & Pull$_{\rm SM}$  \\
\hline
$C_9$ & $-1.09$ & $4.5$ \\
$C_9=-C_{10}$ & $-0.68$ & $4.2$\\
$C_9=-C^{\prime}_9$ & $-1.06$ & $4.8$ \\
$C_9=-C_{10}$ and $C^{\prime}_9=-C^{\prime}_{10}$  & $-0.69$ & $4.1$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
}
\only<2>{
\ARROW LHCb ($3\rm~fb^{-1}$) + Belle:
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Coefficient & Best Fit & Pull$_{\rm SM}$ \\
\hline
$C_9$ & $-1.12$ & $5.0$ (!!!)\\
$C_9=-C_{10}$ & $-0.61$ & $4.4$\\
$C_9=-C^{\prime}_9$ & $-1.05$ & $4.5$\\
$C_9=-C_{10}$ and $C^{\prime}_9=-C^{\prime}_{10}$  & $-0.66$ & $4.6$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
}
\only<3>{
\ARROW LHCb ($3\rm~fb^{-1}$) + Belle + ATLAS:
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Coefficient & Best Fit & Pull$_{\rm SM}$ \\
\hline
$C_9$ & $-1.14$ & $5.2$ (!!!) \\
$C_9=-C_{10}$ & $-0.60$ & $4.4$\\
$C_9=-C^{\prime}_9$ & $-1.08$ & $4.9$\\
$C_9=-C_{10}$ and $C^{\prime}_9=-C^{\prime}_{10}$  & $-0.67$ & $4.6$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
}
\only<4>{
\ARROW LHCb ($3\rm~fb^{-1}$) + Belle + ATLAS + CMS:
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Coefficient & Best Fit & Pull$_{\rm SM}$ \\
\hline
$C_9$ & $-1.07$ & $4.9$  \\
$C_9=-C_{10}$ & $-0.58$ & $4.3$\\
$C_9=-C^{\prime}_9$ & $-1.01$ & $4.6$\\
$C_9=-C_{10}$ and $C^{\prime}_9=-C^{\prime}_{10}$  & $-0.61$ & $4.3$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}\\{~}\\
 
 
\end{center}
}
 
 
\only<5>
{
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{images/C9C10-Fit35-Plot.jpeg}
 
\end{center}
 
 
}
 
 
 
 
\end{frame}
 
 
 
\begin{frame}\frametitle{So what is the significance? D. Straub, et. al. \href{https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.09189}{[1703.09189]}}
\only<1>{
\ARROW LHCb ($3\rm~fb^{-1}$) + CDF + ATLAS + CMS:
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Coefficient & Best Fit & Pull$_{\rm SM}$ \\
\hline
$C_9$ & $-1.21$ & $4.9$  \\
$C_9=-C_{10}$ & $-0.62$ & $4.2$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{images/straub.png}
 
 
\end{center}
 
\ARROW Both groups came to a similar conclusion!
 
}
 
 
 
\end{frame}
 
 
\begin{frame}
\begin{center}
\begin{Huge}
\sout{Quo Vadis} $\P5prime$ ?
\end{Huge}\\
\begin{Huge}
Status Quo $\P5prime$ !
\end{Huge}
{~}\\{~}\\{~}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{images/Status Quo.jpg}
 
 
 
\end{center}
 
 
 
\end{frame}
 
 
 
 
 
\begin{frame}\frametitle{Comments about the CMS result 1/4}
\begin{columns}
\column{0.4\textwidth}
\begin{small}
\ARROW Both ATLAS and CMS use our folding technique that was used in the $1~\rm fb^{-1}$ analysis. %CMS does not cite us for the method...\\
\ARROW CMS when performing the angular fit fixes the $F_L$, $F_S$ and $A_s$ from the previous analysis on the same data!\\
\ARROWR They claim that they check with TOYMC that it is correct. However some doubts remain.\\
\ARROWR Feldman-Cousin procedure can underestimate the errors in this case.\\
\ARROW More details on toy validation and or bootstrapping the data would be nice!
\end{small}
 
 
\column{0.6\textwidth}
\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=0.95\textwidth]{images/P5p.pdf}
 
 
\end{columns}
 
 
 
\end{frame}
 
 
 
\begin{frame}\frametitle{Comments about the CMS result 2/4}
\begin{columns}
\column{0.4\textwidth}
\begin{small}
\ARROW There seems to be a structure in the $\cos \theta_l$ distribution.\\
\ARROWR A.Bevan suggested this might be due to a $\PB \to \PD(\PK \pi \pi) \pi$\\
\ARROW Can be easily checked with MC.
\end{small}
 
 
\column{0.6\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{costhetal1.png}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{costhetal2.png}
 
 
 
\end{columns}
 
 
 
\end{frame}
 
 
 
\begin{frame}\frametitle{Comments about the CMS result 3/4}
\begin{columns}
\column{0.4\textwidth}
\begin{small}
\ARROW In the decay of $\PB \to \PKstar \PJpsi$ they fail to reproduce the value of $F_L$.\\
\ARROW They assign the difference as a systematic uncertainty.\\
\ARROWR There is no guarantee that this has no $q^2$ dependence.\\
\ARROW They tag the $\PKstar$ via which of the configurations: $\PK^+ \pi^-$, $\PK^- \pi^+$ is closer to the nominal $\PKstar$ mass.\\
\ARROW They model the mis-tag fractions from MC.\\
\ARROWR The mis-tag is modelled by MC. Systematic assign from $\PB \to \PKstar \PJpsi$ (no $q^2$ dependence assumed).
\end{small}
\column{0.6\textwidth}
\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=0.95\textwidth]{images/jspi.pdf}
 
 
\end{columns}
 
 
 
\end{frame}
 
 
 
\begin{frame}\frametitle{Comments about the CMS result 4/4}
\begin{columns}
\column{0.4\textwidth}
\begin{small}
\ARROW CMS uses a long range mass window in the $m_{\PK \pi \mu \mu}$ fits.\\
\ARROW In LHCb we saw non negligible amount of PARTRECO events.\\
\ARROW In their fits they don't account for it.
 
 
 
\end{small}
\column{0.6\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{images/CMS.png}\\
\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=0.95\textwidth]{images/LHCb.pdf}
 
 
\end{columns}
 
 
 
\end{frame}
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
\begin{frame}\frametitle{Comments about the ATLAS result}
\begin{columns}
\column{0.4\textwidth}
\begin{small}
\ARROW ATLAS has much worse mass resolution compared to CMS and LHCb.\\
\ARROW They cut tight on the $m_{\PK \pi\mu\mu}$ as we did.\\
\ARROW How ever it is not obvious that they are not affected because of the resolution.
\end{small}
 
 
\column{0.6\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{images/ATLAS.png}\\
\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=0.95\textwidth]{images/LHCb.pdf}
 
\end{columns}
 
 
 
\end{frame}
 
 
 
\begin{frame}\frametitle{Conclusion}
 
\ARROW The anomaly is alive and well!\\
\ARROW Inclusion of new results increases the significance.\\
\ARROW Tension with SM seen in $\P5prime$ by Atlas, Belle and LHCb. CMS result in good agreement with SM, but consistent with our results.\\
\ARROW Some discussion on aspects of the CMS analysis ongoing.\\
\ARROW Run2 data will confirm or disprove the anomaly  (of course the nature of the anomaly is a different question).\\
\ARROW The corrected measurement of $Br(\PB \to \PKstar \Pmu \Pmu)$ \href{https://indico.cern.ch/event/627276/}{[see Kostas slides]} will increase the tension with SM further, will agree better with  $Br(\PBs \to \Pphi \Pmu \Pmu)$  and  $Br(\PB \to \PK \Pmu \Pmu)$ 
 
\end{frame}
 
 
 
 
 
\backupbegin
 
\begin{frame}\frametitle{Backup}
\topline
 
\end{frame}
 
\backupend
 
\end{document}