The B+ K+ ν ν decay as a QCD axion search: comparing reinterpretation approaches

Abstract

Two recent independent analyses of Belle II B+ \! \! K+νν data yield limits on B(B+ \! \! K+ a) -- the two-body mode to a light invisible particle such as the QCD axion -- differing by a factor of roughly four; we trace this to the choice of kinematic variable space. The central figure of merit is the resolution in the reconstructed di-neutrino invariant mass q2 rec: fine-grained binning resolves the narrow axion signal, while coarse binning dilutes it into a background-dominated range. A BDT axis trained on B+ \! \! K+νν adds little discriminating power for B+ \! \! K+ a, as this axis is largely uncorrelated with q2. These expectations are confirmed by a set of numerical tests. The subleading shape systematics omitted from our q2 rec-based approach lower, not raise, the B+ \! \! K+ a limit: by better accommodating the B+ \! \! K+νν shape, they leave less room for the axion signal, making our q2 rec-based bound conservative, if anything. A dedicated reanalysis confirms that the kinematic-axes choice alone accounts for the factor-of-four sensitivity difference, and that the B+ \! \! K+ a bound varies sizeably within the q2 rec×η( BDT2) space, depending on the SM-likeness of B+ \! \! K+νν, thus losing the dual-probe feature of our q2 rec-based approach. These results point to a broader consideration: likelihoods dominated by BDT variables are of limited use for reinterpretations when the signal shape differs appreciably from the BDT's training signal. We therefore advocate that experimental collaborations publish likelihood projections in physical variable spaces alongside BDT-based likelihoods, to maximise the reinterpretability of their measurements.

0

Turn this paper into a lesson

ArcXiv compiles a structured reading guide from this paper's metadata: plain-English importance, contributions, prerequisite concepts, which sections to read first, flashcards, and a quiz. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion.

Loading comments…