On the non-perturbative corrections for Λb → Λcℓν̄ℓ in

Heavy Quark Effective Theory *

Frédéric Jugeau
TPCSF, Institute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
jugeau@ihep.ac.cn
arXiv:1202.4630v1 [hep-ph] 21 Feb 2012

Abstract We study consequences of the non-forward amplitude for the baryon decay Λb → Λc ℓν̄ℓ which will
be measured in detail at LHCb. We obtain a sum rule for the subleading elastic Isgur-Wise (IW) function A(w)
that originates from the kinetic part of the O(1/mQ ) effective Lagrangian perturbation. In the sum rule appear
+
only the intermediate states JjP = 12 0 , the same that contribute to the O(1/m2Q ) correction to the axial-vector
form factor G1 (w) involved in the differential decay rate at zero recoil w = 1. This allows us to obtain a lower
(G1)
bound on the correction −δ1/m2 in terms of A(w) and the shape of the leading elastic IW function ξΛ (w).
Q
Another theoretical implication is that A′ (1) must vanish in the limit where the slope ρΛ of ξΛ (w) saturates
its lower bound. A strong correlation between the leading IW function ξΛ (w) and the subleading one A(w) is
thus established in the case of the baryons.
Key words HQET, Isgur-Wise functions, baryon spectroscopy
PACS 12.39.Hg, 13.30.Ce

1 Introduction presented in this letter consist of a set of constraints

that the differential decay rate of Λb → Λc ℓν̄ℓ - which
We aim at investigating within the Heavy Quark will be accurately measured at LHCb - must fulfill.
Effective Theory formalism (HQET) the O(1/m2Q ) Data has already been obtained for this mode at the
subleading corrections to the baryonic semileptonic Tevatron giving a large branching ratio of about 5%
decay Λb → Λc ℓν̄ℓ [1] . An important ingredient is the and a large fraction of the inclusive semileptonic de-
consideration of the non-forward amplitude Λb (vi ) → cay BR(Λb → Λc ℓν̄ℓ + anything) ≃ 10%.
Λc (v ′ ) → Λb (vf ) allowing for general velocities vi , vf The proceeding is organized as follows. We first
and v ′ . At leading order, the HQET sum rule method introduce the leading and subleading IW functions
has been applied to the case of the baryonic leading ξΛ (w) and A(w) relevant for the O(1/m2Q ) non-
σ2 (G1 )
elastic IW function ξΛ (w) = 1−ρ2Λ (w−1)+ 2Λ (w−1)2 + perturbative correction δ1/m 2 to the axial-vector form
Q
. . ., giving the following lower bounds for its slope[2] factor G1 (1) at zero recoil which enters into the ex-
and its curvature[3] : pression of the differential rate of the semileptonic
X (n) decay Λb → Λc ℓν̄ℓ . In Sections 3 and 4, we derive
ρ2Λ = [τ1 (1)]2 ≥ 0 , (1)
n≥0
sum rules respectively for the subleading elastic IW
(G1 )
! function A(w) and for the correction δ1/m . Section
3 X (n)′ 3 2  Q
2
σ =
Λ
2 2 2
ρ + (ρ ) +
Λ Λ [ξ
Λ (1)] 2
≥ ρΛ + (ρ2Λ )2 5 presents a bound for the latter and, in Section 6,
5 n6=0
5 we discuss the strong correlation between leading and
(2) subleading baryonic quantities in HQET.

where τ1(n) (1) denote the IW functions of transition

j P = 0+ → 1− at zero recoil (j P is the spin-parity
of the so-called brown muck, namely, all the light de-
grees of freedom within the heavy-light baryon, and
n is a radial quantum number).
This leading as well as the new subleading results
2 Leading and subleading baryonic
IW functions
Of particular interest for us will be the form factor
G1 (w) which enters into the parametrization of the

∗ Invited talk at the 5th High-Energy Physics International Conference HEP-MAD 11, Antananarivo, Madagascar, 25-31th
August 2011.
In collaboration with Luis Oliver (LPT Orsay, France) and Jia Yu (IHEP Beijing, China).
 F. Jugeau: On the non-perturbative corrections for Λb → Λc ℓν̄ℓ in Heavy Quark Effective Theory 2
[4]
baryonic matrix element of the axial-vector current :
Z
hΛc (v ′ , s′ ) | c̄γ µ γ5 b | Λb (v, s)i = hΛc (v ′ , s′ ) | i (Q)
d4 xT {J(0), Okin (x)} | Λb (v, s)i =
h i
ūΛc (v ′ , s′ ) G1 (w)γ µ+G2 (w)v µ+G3 (w)v ′µ γ5 uΛb (v, s) A(w) ŪΛc Γ UΛb . (9)
(3)
It is worth pointing out that, contrary to the case
−
′
where w ≡ v · v is the recoil and uΛQ (v, s) is of the meson ground-state doublet j P = 12 where the
the spinor of the heavy baryon physical state such transition matrix element of B → D(∗) ℓν̄ℓ gets two
that 6 vuΛQ (v, s) = uΛQ (v, s) and ūΛQ (v, s)uΛQ (v, r) = Current -type and three Lagrangian-type O(1/mQ )
2mΛQ δrs (pµΛQ = mΛQ v µ with mΛQ the physical mass corrections (the latter coming both from Lkin and
of the heavy-light baryon ΛQ ). Lmag )[5–7] , in the case of the baryon ground-state
Indeed, in the neighborhood of the zero recoil singlet j P = 0+ considered here, G1 gets only one
w = 1 kinematic point, the differential rate of the Current -type corrections (in terms of Λ̄ξΛ ) and only
transition Λb → Λc ℓν̄ℓ depends only on G1 (1): one Lagrangian-type correction (in terms of A(w)) as
(Q)
the magnetic part Omag,v of the O(1/mQ ) Lagrangian
1 dΓ G2F | Vcb |2 3 perturbation doesn’t contribute to A(w)[8] .
√ ≃ mΛc (mΛb−mΛc )2 | G1 (1) |2 .
w2 − 1 dw w≃1 4π 3 Furthermore, due to the vector current conserva-
(4)
tion, we have the condition A(1) = 0 at zero recoil[4] .
In the heavy quark expansion, the form factor G1 (w)
Consequently, according to (5), the form factor G1 (1)
is expressed, at the order O(1/mQ ) (Q = b or c quark),
in (4) has, at zero recoil, only O(1/m2Q ) corrections
in terms of two IW functions ξΛ (w) and A(w):
which we will denote as follows:
 h
1 1 w−1 i
(G1 )
G1 (w) = ξΛ (w)+ + Λ̄ξΛ (w)+A(w) . G1 (1) = 1 + δ1/m 2 . (10)
2mb 2mc w+1 Q

(5)
The leading elastic IW function ξΛ (w) is defined by The main goal of the present letter is to study these
the matrix element of the lowest-order heavy-heavy corrections[1] .
′
current J = h̄v(Q′ ) Γh(Q)
v in HQET (Γ is any combina-
tion of gamma matrices): 3 HQET sum rule for the subleading
IW function A(w)
hΛc (v ′ , s′ ) | h̄(c) (b)
v ′ Γhv | Λb (v, s)i =
(Q)
ξΛ (w) ŪΛc (v ′ , s′ )Γ UΛb (v, s) (6) Since only the kinetic perturbation Okin of the ef-
fective Lagrangian contributes to the definition (9) of

−1/2
where UΛQ (v, s) = 1 + O(1/m2Q ) uΛQ (v, s) is the A(w), only the radially excited intermediate states
+
spinor of the effective heavy baryon state in HQET Λ(n)
c with the same spin-parity JjP = 12 0 as the
normalized such that ŪΛQ (v, s)UΛQ (v, r) = 2MΛQ δsr . ground-state Λc are relevant and give us the following
The effective mass of the HQET state MΛQ = mQ + Λ̄ sum rule:
is given in terms of the energy Λ̄ of the brown muck. X ξ (n) (w) hΛ(n) (c)
imQ v·x 1+6v Λ c (v, s) | Okin,v (0) | Λc (v, s)i


h(Q)
v (x) = e 2
Q(x) is the effective heavy A(w) =
∆E (n)
q q
quark field which appears when building the effective n6=0 4mΛc(n) mΛc v 0 (n) vΛ0
Λc c

Lagrangian as a power series expansion in 1/mQ : (11)

where ∆E (n) ≡ mΛc(n) − mΛc . Especially, we recover
L(Q) (Q) (Q) (Q)
ef f = LHQET,v + Lkin,v + Lmag,v (7) A(1) = 0 since ξΛ(n) (1) = δn,0 .
with∗
 4 HQET sum rule for the correction
(Q) (Q) (Q) (G )
 LHQET = h̄v (iv · D)hv , δ1/m1 2 to the form factor G1 (1)


(Q) 1 (Q) (Q) Q
Lkin,v = 2mQ Okin,v ; Okin,v = h̄(Q) 2 (Q)
v (iD⊥ ) hv ,

 L(Q) = 1 O(Q) ; O(Q) = − gs h̄(Q) σ Gµν h(Q) .

mag 2mQ mag,v mag,v 2 v µν v Analogously to the sum rule formulated in the
(8) mesonic case for the axial-vector current (Eqns (114)
As for A(w), it stems from the kinetic part of the and (5.6) of [9] and [10] respectively), we have for the
O(1/mQ ) effective Lagrangian: form factor G1 at the order O(1/m2Q ):

∗ The perpendicular component of the covariant derivative D is defined by D

µ⊥ = Dµ −(v ·D)vµ . Also, [Dµ , Dν ] = igs Gµν and
σµν = 2i [γµ , γν ].
 F. Jugeau: On the non-perturbative corrections for Λb → Λc ℓν̄ℓ in Heavy Quark Effective Theory 3

1 X X | hΛ(n) + + ′ ~ + 2 h 1 2
c (0 , 1 )(v, s ) | A | Λb (0 )(v, s)i | 1 8 1 1 i
| G1 (1) |2 + = 1+ − + λ (12)
2 s,s′ n6=0 4mΛc(n) mΛ 2mc 2mb 3 2mc 2mb
b

1
where the hard radiative corrections have been neglected and where −λ = 2MΛ
hΛb (v) | h̄(b) 2 (b)
v (iD⊥ ) hv | Λb (v)i
b
is the mean kinetic energy value. The O(1/m2Q ) correction to G1 takes then the following expression:
 2
(G1 ) 1h 1 1 8 1 1 i
−δ 1/m2
=− − + λ
Q 2 2mc 2mb 3 2mc 2mb
1 X X | hΛ(n) + ′ ~ 2
1 X X | hΛ(n) + ′ ~ 2
c (0 )(v, s ) | A | Λb (v, s)i | c (1 )(v, s ) | A | Λb (v)i |
+ + . (13)
4 s,s′ n6=0 4mΛc(n) mΛ 4 s,s′ n6=0 4mΛc(n) mΛ
b b

The matrix elements implicitly contain the double in- survives in the heavy quark limit mQ → ∞. In (13),
1+ 1+ 3+
sertion (on the initial b- and final c-legs) of the ki- the final states Λ(n) P (n) P
c (Jj = 2 0 ) and Λc (Jj = 2 1 , 2 1 )
netic and magnetic parts of the O(1/mQ ) effective are attained respectively by Lkin and Lmag . For the
Lagrangian to the HQET axial-vector current Aµ = sake of argument, we have:
→
−
h̄(c) µ (b)
v γ γ5 h v for which only the spatial component A

1
Z
(c) ~ (b) (c) ~ (b)
hΛ(n) ′
c (v, s ) | h̄v Ahv (0) | Λb (v, s)i = hΛ(n) (v, s ′
) | i d4 xT {Okin,v (x), h̄(c)
v Ahv (0)} | Λb (v, s)i (14)
2mc c
1
Z
+ hΛ (v, s ) | i d4 xT {Okin,v
(n) ′ (b)
(x), h̄(c) ~ (b)
v Ahv (0)} | Λb (v, s)i (15)
2mb c
which, by inserting the intermediate states and using the flavor-spin heavy quark symmetry, finally gives:
(c)
hΛ(n)
c (v, s) | Okin,v (0) | Λc (v, s)i †
 
(n) ′ (c)~ (b) −1 1 1 ~ Λ (v, s)
hΛ c (v, s ) | h̄ Ah
v v (0) | Λb (v, s)i = − q UΛc (v, s′ )ΣU
O(1/mQ ) ∆E (n) 2mc 2mb b
q
4mΛc(n) mΛc v 0 (n) vΛ0
Λc c

(16)
→
−
where Σ = diag(− →
σ ,−
→
σ ) is the double Pauli matrix.
+
A similar evaluation of the second matrix element in (13) between the ground-state singlet Λb ( 21 0 ) and the
(n) 1 + 3 +
excited states Λc ( 2 1 , 2 1 ) gives a positive semi-definite contribution and, in particular, a term proportional
to 1/(4mc mb ) reminiscent of the one found in[4] :
 2  2
1h 1 1 8 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1
G1 (1) = 1 + − + λ+ − [−D1 (1) + 3D2 (1)] + 4D2 (1) (17)
2 2mc 2mb 3 2mc 2mb 2 2mc 2mb 2mc 2mb
(Q) (Q)
where the functions Di (i = 1, 2) correspond to the double insertion of the operators Okin,v and Omag,v on the
initial and final heavy quark legs (Q = b, c).

(G )
5 Bound on the corrections δ1/m1 2
Q

The preceding analysis allows us to write a bound for the O(1/m2Q ) corrections to G1 (1). Eqn. (13) implies
indeed that
 2
" 2 # 2 X (c)
(n)
 1 hΛc (v, s) | Okin,v (0) | Λc (v, s)i 

(G1 ) 1 1 1 8 1 1 1 1 1
−δ1/m 2 ≥− − + λ+ − q  .
2 2mc 2mb 3 2mc 2mb 2 2mc 2mb n6=0 ∆E (n)
 q
Q
4mΛc(n) mΛc v 0 (n) vΛ0
Λc c

(18)
 F. Jugeau: On the non-perturbative corrections for Λb → Λc ℓν̄ℓ in Heavy Quark Effective Theory 4

The crucial point here is that the intermediate states entering into (18) are the same that the ones contributing
to the sum rule (11) for A(w). Using the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality | n An Bn |2 ≤ ( n | An |2 ) ( n | Bn |2 ),
P P P

the latter gives:   2

(c)
2
X h (n) i2 X 1 hΛ(n)
c (v, s) | Okin,v (0) | Λc (v, s)i 
[A(w)] ≤ ξΛ (w) (19)

q
∆E (n)
 q 
n6=0 n6=0 4m (n) m
Λc Λc
v 0 (n) v 0
Λc
Λc

such that
" 2 # 2
[A(w)]2

(G1 ) 1 1 1 8 1 1 1 1 1
−δ 1/m2
≥− − + λ+ − i2 . (20)
2 2mc 2mb 3 2mc 2mb 2 2mc 2mb
h
Q P (n)
n6=0
ξΛ (w)

Since this inequality is valid for any value of w, we can consider its limit w → 1, taking into account that
A(1) = 0 and ξΛ(n) (1) = δn,0 :
" 2 # 2
[A′ (1)]2

(G1 ) 1 1 1 8 1 1 1 1 1
− δ1/m2 ≥ − − + λ+ − i2 (21)
2 2mc 2mb 3 2mc 2mb 2 2mc 2mb
h
Q P (n) ′
n6=0
ξ Λ (1)

X (n)′ 5
and from (2), [ξΛ (1)]2 = σΛ2 − ρ2Λ − (ρ2Λ )2 , one finally gets:
n6=0
3
" 2 # 2
[A′ (1)]2

(G1 ) 1 1 1 8 1 1 3 1 1
−δ 1/m2
≥− − + λ+ − (22)
Q 2 2mc 2mb 3 2mc 2mb 10 2mc 2mb σΛ − 35 [ρ2Λ + (ρ2Λ )2 ]
2

which is the main result of the proceeding. From Eqns
(4) and (10), we see that the O(1/m2Q ) correction at
(G1 )
zero recoil −δ1/m 2 is pivotal in the extrapolation of
Q
the semileptonic differential decay rate Λb → Λc ℓν̄ℓ
near zero recoil. In particular, this is needed to check
that the value of | Vcb | that would fit exclusive baryon
semileptonic data is indeed consistent with what we
presently know on this parameter from the meson ex-
clusive and inclusive determinations. It is in this re-
spect that the bound (22) is important.
6 Correlation between A′ (1) and the
shape of the leading elastic IW func-
tion ξΛ (w)
Since the inequality (22) holds for any values of ρ
and σΛ2 satisfying the constraints (1) and (2), it should
hold for their lowest values. However, if the curva-
ture attains its lowest value σΛ2 → 53 (ρ2Λ + (ρ2Λ )2 ), the
second term on the r.h.s. of (22) would diverge. Be-
cause this behavior is unphysical, we predict instead a
strong correlation between A′ (1) and the shape of the
leading elastic IW function ξΛ (w). Eqn. (22) implies
the correlation:
3 2
if σΛ2 ⇒ (ρ + (ρ2Λ )2 ) then A′ (1) ⇒ 0 .
(23)
5 Λ
As a matter of fact, a group theory-based method
(equivalent to the HQET sum rule approach)
has been developed to study the baryonic IW
functions[11] . It turns out that if the slope of ξΛ (w)
attains its lowest possible value ρ2Λ = 0, then all the
higher-order derivatives ξΛ(n) (1) (n ≥ 2) vanish at zero
recoil. Especially, that implies σΛ2 = 0. In view of
(23), we have then:
if ρ2Λ ⇒ 0 then A′ (1) ⇒ 0 . (24)
The non-trivial results (23) and (24) relate the be-
2
Λ havior of the leading elastic IW function ξΛ (w) to the
subleading effective form factor A(w).
I am grateful to the organizers of MAD-HEP 11, and
especially to its Chairman S. Narison, who gave me
the opportunity to present my research activities on
the Effective Theories of QCD during this conference.
 F. Jugeau: On the non-perturbative corrections for Λb → Λc ℓν̄ℓ in Heavy Quark Effective Theory
References
1 F. Jugeau, Y. Jia, L. Oliver, New results on the baryon
decay Λb → Λc ℓν̄ℓ in Heavy Quark Effective Theory
[arXiv:hep-ph/1202.4100].
2 N. Isgur, M.B. Wise, M. Youssefmir, Excited charm
baryons in semileptonic Λb decay and their contribution to
a Bjorken sum rule, Phys. Lett. B254 (1991) 215-219.
3 A. Le Yaouanc, L. Oliver, J.-C. Raynal, Bound on the cur-
vature of the Isgur-Wise function of the baryon semilep-
tonic decay Λb → Λc ℓν̄ℓ , Phys. Rev. D79 (2009) 014023
[arXiv:hep-ph/0808.2983].
4 A.F. Falk, M. Neubert, Second order power corrections in
the heavy quark effective theory. 2. Baryon form-factors,
Phys. Rev. D47 (1993) 2982-2990 [arXiv:hep-ph/9209269].
5 A.F. Falk, M. Neubert, Second order power corrections
in the heavy quark effective theory. 1. Formalism and
meson form-factors, Phys. Rev. D47 (1993) 2965-2981
[arXiv:hep-ph/9209268].
5
6 F. Jugeau, A. Le Yaouanc, L. Oliver, J.-C. Raynal, Sub-
leading form-factors at order 1/mQ in terms of leading
quantities using the non-forward amplitude in HQET,
Phys. Rev. D71 (2005) 054031 [arXiv:hep-ph/0407176].
7 F. Jugeau, A. Le Yaouanc, L. Oliver, J.-C. Raynal, La-
grangian perturbations at order 1/mQ and the non-forward
amplitude in heavy quark effective theory, Phys. Rev. D73
(2006) 074003 [arXiv:hep-ph/0510178].
8 H. Georgi, B. Grinstein, M.B. Wise, Λb semileptonic decay
form-factors for mc does not equal infinity, Phys. Lett.
B252 (1990) 456-460.
9 I.I.Y. Bigi, M.A. Shifman, N.G. Uraltsev, A.I. Vainshtein,
Sum rules for heavy flavor transitions in the SV limit,
Phys. Rev. D52 (1995) 196-235 [arXiv:hep-ph/9405410].
10 A.K. Leibovich, Z. Ligeti, I.W. Stewart, M.B. Wise,
Semileptonic B decays to excited charmed mesons, Phys.
Rev. D57 (1998) 308-330 [arxivhep-ph/9705467].
11 A. Le Yaouanc, L. Oliver, J.-C. Raynal, Isgur-Wise func-
tions and unitary representations of the Lorentz group:
the baryon case j = 0, Phys. Rev. D80 (2009) 054006
[arXiv:hep-ph/0904.1942].