Differences between soft collinear effective theory and QCD factorization fordecays
- 14 November 2005
- journal article
- Published by American Physical Society (APS) in Physical Review D
- Vol. 72 (9)
- https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevd.72.098502
Abstract
We give a detailed description of the differences between the factorization and results derived from SCET and QCDF for decays B -> M1 M2. This serves as a reply to a comment about our work "B-> M1 M2: Factorization, charming penguins, strong phases, and polarization" [1] made by the authors in [2]. We disagree with their criticismsKeywords
All Related Versions
This publication has 45 references indexed in Scilit:
- Comment on “: Factorization, charming penguins, strong phases, and polarization”Physical Review D, 2005
- : Factorization, charming penguins, strong phases, and polarizationPhysical Review D, 2004
- Soft-collinear factorization in effective field theoryPhysical Review D, 2002
- QCD factorization in B→πK, ππ decays and extraction of Wolfenstein parametersPublished by Elsevier ,2001
- Invariant operators in collinear effective theoryPhysics Letters B, 2001
- An effective field theory for collinear and soft gluons: Heavy to light decaysPhysical Review D, 2001
- Summing Sudakov logarithms inin effective field theoryPhysical Review D, 2000
- QCD Factorization forDecays: Strong Phases andViolation in the Heavy Quark LimitPhysical Review Letters, 1999
- QCD basis for factorization in decays of heavy mesonsPhysics Letters B, 1991
- Perturbative QCD effects in heavy meson decaysPhysics Letters B, 1990