EUROPEAN ORGANIZATION FOR NUCLEAR RESEARCH (CERN)

 CERN-EP-2021-056 LHCb-PAPER-2021-006

Template for writing LHCb papers

LHCb collaboration†††Authors are listed at the end of this paper.

The first full angular analysis of the $B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{*+}$
decay is performed using 6 fb-1 of $pp$ collision data collected with the LHCb
experiment at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV. The $D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow
D_{s}^{+}\gamma$ and $D^{*-}\rightarrow{{\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern
0.0pt\mathrm{D}}}{}^{0}}\pi^{-}$ vector meson decays are used with the
subsequent $D_{s}^{+}\rightarrow K^{+}K^{-}\pi^{+}$ and ${{\kern
0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{D}}}{}^{0}}\rightarrow K^{+}\pi^{-}$ decays.
All helicity amplitudes and phases are measured, and the longitudinal
polarisation fraction is determined to be $f_{\rm L}=\fLsyst$ with world-best
precision, where the first uncertainty is statistical and the second is
systematic. The pattern of helicity amplitude magnitudes is found to align
with expectations from quark-helicity conservation in $B$ decays. The ratio of
branching fractions $[\mathcal{B}(B^{0}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{*+})\times\mathcal{B}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow
D_{s}^{+}\gamma)]/\mathcal{B}(B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ is measured
to be $\BFratio$ with world-best precision. In addition, the first observation
of the Cabibbo-suppressed ${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$ decay is made with a significance of seven standard
deviations. The branching fraction ratio
$\mathcal{B}({{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})/\mathcal{B}(B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ is measured to
be $\BsBFratio$, where the third uncertainty is due to limited knowledge of
the ratio of fragmentation fractions.

Published in JHEP 06 (2021) 177.

© 2024 CERN for the benefit of the LHCb collaboration. CC BY 4.0 licence.

##  1 Introduction

The decay involves the production of two vector charm mesons from a
pseudoscalar ${\mathrm{B}}^{0}$ parent. This process exhibits a polarisation
structure, where three complex helicity amplitudes $H_{0}$, $H_{+}$, and
$H_{-}$ contribute to the total decay rate. These amplitudes correspond to the
relative orientation of the linear polarisation vectors of the two vector
mesons. Parity-even ($\parallel$) and parity-odd ($\perp$) transversity
amplitudes can also be defined in terms of $H_{+}$ and $H_{-}$, namely
$A_{\parallel,\perp}=(H_{+}\pm H_{-})/\sqrt{2}$. The helicity amplitudes can
interfere, with interference governed by the strong phases of the transverse
components, and , relative to the phase of the longitudinal component,
$\phi_{0}$, which is conventionally taken to be equal to zero. Therefore, five
parameters in total determine the decay rate:

  * •

, the magnitude of the longitudinal amplitude;

  * •

and , the magnitudes of the two transverse amplitudes;

  * •

and , the phases of the transverse amplitudes relative to $H_{0}$.

In order to normalise the total decay rate,
$|H_{0}|^{2}+|H_{+}|^{2}+|H_{-}|^{2}=f_{\rm L}+f_{\rm T}=1$ is required, where
$f_{\rm L}\equiv|H_{0}|^{2}$ is the longitudinal polarisation fraction and
$f_{\rm T}\equiv|H_{+}|^{2}+|H_{-}|^{2}$ is the transverse polarisation
fraction. The current world average for is $0.52\pm 0.05$ [Aubert:2003jj,
PDG2020], while theoretical predictions cover a similar range [Kramer_Palmer,
Ahmed:2000ad, PhysRevLett.76.3898, PhysRevD.64.094001]; the transverse
helicity amplitudes have not been measured previously. The normalisation
condition reduces the total number of independent observables to four, where
the additional observable is absorbed into the absolute branching fraction of
the decay which is not measured. Measuring the relative magnitudes of the
helicity amplitudes offers a test of quark-helicity conservation in this tree-
level decay involving a $b\rightarrow c$ quark transition. In such decays, a
$|H_{0}|>|H_{+}|>|H_{-}|$ hierarchy is expected [Suzuki:2001za], where the
$V-A$ nature of the weak interaction causes the longitudinal component to
dominate.

The decay has a large branching fraction, $\mathcal{B}(B^{0}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{*+})=(1.77\pm 0.14)\%$ [PDG2020], and is thus a prominent
background in analyses that exploit the hadronic three-prong mode in order to
measure the ratio $R(D^{*})\equiv\mathcal{B}(B^{0}\rightarrow
D^{*-}\tau^{+}\nu_{\tau})/\mathcal{B}(B^{0}\rightarrow
D^{*-}\ell^{+}\nu_{\ell})$ [LHCb-PAPER-2017-027] or the angular coefficients
of the decay [Hill:2019zja]. Such a background arises when the neutral
particle produced in the ${\mathrm{D}}^{*+}_{\mathrm{s}}$ decay is not
reconstructed, and the ${\mathrm{D}}^{+}_{\mathrm{s}}$ meson decays to three
pions plus additional non-reconstructed particles.

Using data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 6$\text{\,fb}^{-1}$
collected at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV with the LHCb experiment
between 2015 and 2018, with $D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow D_{s}^{+}\gamma$ decays are
reconstructed via the $D^{*-}\rightarrow({{\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern
0.0pt\mathrm{D}}}{}^{0}}\rightarrow{{\mathrm{K}}^{+}}{{\uppi}^{-}}){{\uppi}^{-}}$
and $D_{s}^{+}\rightarrow{{\mathrm{K}}^{+}}{{\mathrm{K}}^{-}}{{\uppi}^{+}}$
channels; the inclusion of charge-conjugate processes is implied throughout.
Partially reconstructed decays, where the photon is not considered in the
invariant-mass calculation, are used in a fit to the distribution to measure .
Fully reconstructed decays are then considered in a subsequent angular
analysis to measure the remaining helicity observables. Measurements are
performed under the assumption that both the ${{\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern
0.0pt\mathrm{D}}}{}^{0}}{{\uppi}^{-}}$ and $D_{s}^{+}\gamma$ systems are pure
vector, as no evidence for a scalar contribution is found in the $m({{\kern
0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{D}}}{}^{0}}{{\uppi}^{-}})$ distribution in
data and no scalar component is permitted in
$m({{\mathrm{D}}^{+}_{\mathrm{s}}}{\upgamma})$ due to the photon angular
momentum. The analysis includes an improved measurement of and first
measurements of the transverse helicity amplitude magnitudes and phases.

The data sample is also used to measure the ratio of branching fractions
$\mathcal{R}\equiv[\mathcal{B}(B^{0}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{*+})\times\mathcal{B}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow
D_{s}^{+}\gamma)]/\mathcal{B}(B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$, where the
current value of $\mathcal{R}=2.07\pm 0.33$ is calculated using world-average
branching fractions taken from Ref. [PDG2020]. In addition, a measurement of
the previously unobserved Cabibbo-suppressed
${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$ decay is
performed and the ratio of branching fractions
$\mathcal{B}({{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})/\mathcal{B}(B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ determined.

The formalism adopted is described in Sect. 2, essential details of the LHCb
detector and simulation are given in Sect. 3, and the event selection is
outlined in Sect. 4. The longitudinal polarisation fraction and ratios of
branching fractions are measured in Sect. 5, and the remaining helicity
observables are measured in Sects. 6–8. Systematic uncertainties are
determined in Sect. 9, and final results and conclusions are presented in
Sect. 10.

##  2 Angular decay rate formalism

The decay rate is a function of three decay angles, $\theta_{D}$,
$\theta_{X}$, and $\chi$, where $\theta_{D}$ is the angle between the ${\kern
0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{D}}}{}^{0}$ meson and the direction opposite
the ${\mathrm{B}}^{0}$ momentum vector in the ${\mathrm{D}}^{*-}$ rest frame,
$\theta_{X}$ is the angle between the ${\mathrm{D}}^{+}_{\mathrm{s}}$ meson
and the direction opposite the ${\mathrm{B}}^{0}$ momentum vector in the
${\mathrm{D}}^{*+}_{\mathrm{s}}$ rest frame, and $\chi$ is the angle between
the two decay planes as defined in the ${\mathrm{B}}^{0}$ rest frame. The
angles are illustrated in Fig. 1, and are explicitly defined as follows

$\displaystyle\cos\theta_{D}$
$\displaystyle=\Big{(}\hat{p}_{D^{0}}^{(D^{*-})}\Big{)}\cdot\Big{(}\hat{p}_{D^{*-}}^{(B^{0})}\Big{)}=\Big{(}\hat{p}_{D^{0}}^{(D^{*-})}\Big{)}\cdot\Big{(}-\hat{p}_{B^{0}}^{(D^{*-})}\Big{)}\,,$
$\displaystyle\cos\theta_{X}$
$\displaystyle=\Big{(}\hat{p}_{D_{s}^{+}}^{(D_{s}^{*+})}\Big{)}\cdot\Big{(}\hat{p}_{D_{s}^{*+}}^{(B^{0})}\Big{)}=\Big{(}\hat{p}_{D_{s}^{+}}^{(D_{s}^{*+})}\Big{)}\cdot\Big{(}-\hat{p}_{B^{0}}^{(D_{s}^{*+})}\Big{)}\,,$
$\displaystyle\cos\chi$
$\displaystyle=\Big{(}\hat{p}_{D_{s}^{+}}^{(B^{0})}\times\hat{p}_{\gamma}^{(B^{0})}\Big{)}\cdot\Big{(}\hat{p}_{D^{0}}^{(B^{0})}\times\hat{p}_{\pi^{-}}^{(B^{0})}\Big{)}\,,$
(1) $\displaystyle\sin\chi^{{{\mathrm{B}}^{0}}}$
$\displaystyle=-\Big{[}\Big{(}\hat{p}_{D_{s}^{+}}^{(B^{0})}\times\hat{p}_{\gamma}^{(B^{0})}\Big{)}\times\Big{(}\hat{p}_{{{\kern
0.0pt\overline{\kern
0.0pt\mathrm{D}}}{}^{0}}}^{(B^{0})}\times\hat{p}_{\pi^{-}}^{(B^{0})}\Big{)}\Big{]}\cdot\hat{p}_{D^{*-}}^{(B^{0})}\,,$
$\displaystyle\sin\chi^{{{\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern
0.0pt\mathrm{B}}}{}^{0}}}$
$\displaystyle=+\Big{[}\Big{(}\hat{p}_{D_{s}^{-}}^{({{\kern
0.0pt\overline{\kern
0.0pt\mathrm{B}}}{}^{0}})}\times\hat{p}_{\gamma}^{({{\kern
0.0pt\overline{\kern
0.0pt\mathrm{B}}}{}^{0}})}\Big{)}\times\Big{(}\hat{p}_{D^{0}}^{({{\kern
0.0pt\overline{\kern
0.0pt\mathrm{B}}}{}^{0}})}\times\hat{p}_{\pi^{-}}^{({{\kern
0.0pt\overline{\kern
0.0pt\mathrm{B}}}{}^{0}})}\Big{)}\Big{]}\cdot\hat{p}_{D^{*+}}^{({{\kern
0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{B}}}{}^{0}})}\,,$

where the $\hat{p}_{X}^{(Y)}$ are unit vectors describing the direction of a
particle $X$ in the rest frame of the system $Y$. In the $B^{0}$ rest frame,
the angular definition for the ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern
0.0pt\mathrm{B}}}{}^{0}$ decay is a charge-parity ($C\\!P$) transformation of
that for the ${\mathrm{B}}^{0}$ decay. The sign of $\sin\chi$ is negative for
${\mathrm{B}}^{0}$ candidates and positive for ${{\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern
0.0pt\mathrm{B}}}{}^{0}}$ candidates, where the $B$-meson flavour is tagged by
the ${\mathrm{D}}^{*}$-meson charge. This formalism is the same as that
adopted in other LHCb angular analyses such as that of $B\rightarrow
K^{*}\mu^{+}\mu^{-}$ decays [LHCb-PAPER-2015-051, LHCb-PAPER-2020-041].

Figure 1: Illustration of the decay angles.

The full three-dimensional differential decay rate expressed in terms of the
helicity amplitudes is given by [Kramer_Palmer]

$\displaystyle\frac{d^{3}\Gamma}{d\cos\theta_{D}d\cos\theta_{X}d\chi}\propto\frac{9}{8}\bigg{\\{}\cos^{2}\theta_{D}\sin^{2}\theta_{X}\left|H_{0}\right|^{2}+\frac{1}{4}\sin^{2}\theta_{D}\left(1+\cos^{2}\theta_{X}\right)\left(\left|H_{+}\right|^{2}+\left|H_{-}\right|^{2}\right)$
$\displaystyle-\frac{1}{2}\sin^{2}\theta_{D}\sin^{2}\theta_{X}\left[\cos
2\chi\operatorname{Re}\left(H_{+}H_{-}^{*}\right)-\sin
2\chi\operatorname{Im}\left(H_{+}H_{-}^{*}\right)\right]$ (2)
$\displaystyle-\frac{1}{4}\sin 2\theta_{D}\sin
2\theta_{X}\left[\cos\chi\operatorname{Re}\left(H_{+}H_{0}^{*}+H_{-}H_{0}^{*}\right)-\sin\chi\operatorname{Im}\left(H_{+}H_{0}^{*}-H_{-}H_{0}^{*}\right)\right]\bigg{\\}}\,.$

##  3 LHCb detector and simulation

The LHCb detector [LHCb-DP-2008-001, LHCb-DP-2014-002] is a single-arm forward
spectrometer covering the pseudorapidity range $2<\eta<5$, designed for the
study of particles containing $\mathrm{b}$\- or $\mathrm{c}$-quarks. The
detector includes a high-precision tracking system consisting of a silicon-
strip vertex detector surrounding the $pp$ interaction region, a large-area
silicon-strip detector located upstream of a dipole magnet with a bending
power of about $4{\mathrm{\,Tm}}$, and three stations of silicon-strip
detectors and straw drift tubes placed downstream of the magnet. The tracking
system provides a measurement of the momentum, $p$, of charged particles with
a relative uncertainty that varies from 0.5% at low momentum to 1.0% at
200$\text{\,Ge\kern-1.00006ptV\\!/}c$. The minimum distance of a track to a
primary $pp$ collision vertex (PV), the impact parameter (IP), is measured
with a resolution of $(15+29/p_{\mathrm{T}})\,\upmu\text{m}$, where
$p_{\mathrm{T}}$ is the component of the momentum transverse to the beam, in
$\text{\,Ge\kern-1.00006ptV\\!/}c$. Different types of charged hadrons are
distinguished using information from two ring-imaging Cherenkov detectors.
Photons, electrons and hadrons are identified by a calorimeter system
consisting of scintillating-pad and preshower detectors, an electromagnetic
and a hadronic calorimeter. Muons are identified by a system composed of
alternating layers of iron and multiwire proportional chambers.

The online event selection is performed by a trigger, which consists of a
hardware stage, based on information from the calorimeter and muon systems,
followed by a software stage, which applies a full event reconstruction. At
the hardware trigger stage, events are required to have a muon with high
$p_{\mathrm{T}}$ or a hadron, photon or electron with high transverse energy
in the calorimeters. For hadrons, the transverse energy threshold is 3.5 GeV.
The software trigger requires a two-, three- or four-track secondary vertex
with a significant displacement from any primary $pp$ interaction vertex. At
least one charged particle must have a transverse momentum
$p_{\mathrm{T}}>1.6\text{\,Ge\kern-1.00006ptV\\!/}c$ and be inconsistent with
originating from any PV. A multivariate algorithm is used for the
identification of secondary vertices consistent with the decay of a
$\mathrm{b}$ hadron. In the offline selection, trigger information is
associated with reconstructed particles. Selection requirements can therefore
be made on the trigger selection itself and on whether the decision was due to
the signal candidate, other particles produced in the $pp$ collision, or an
overlap of both.

Simulation is required to model the effects of the detector acceptance and the
imposed selection requirements. In the simulation, $pp$ collisions are
generated using Pythia [Sjostrand:2007gs, *Sjostrand:2006za] with a specific
LHCb configuration [LHCb-PROC-2010-056]. Decays of unstable particles are
described by EvtGen [Lange:2001uf], in which final-state radiation is
generated using Photos [davidson2015photos]. The interaction of the generated
particles with the detector, and its response, are implemented using the
Geant4 toolkit [Allison:2006ve, *Agostinelli:2002hh] as described in Ref.
[LHCb-PROC-2011-006]. The underlying $pp$ interaction is reused multiple
times, with an independently generated signal decay for each [LHCb-
DP-2018-004]. In addition, the distributions of pure longitudinal and
transverse polarised decays are studied using fast-simulated samples generated
with the RapidSim package [Cowan:2016tnm], where an LHCb momentum resolution
configuration is used to smear the generated four-momenta. The same tool is
used to study the distributions of various background contributions from
decays involving higher-excited charm mesons.

##  4 Event selection

Candidate decays are reconstructed through the $D^{*-}\rightarrow({{\kern
0.0pt\overline{\kern
0.0pt\mathrm{D}}}{}^{0}}\rightarrow{{\mathrm{K}}^{+}}{{\uppi}^{-}}){{\uppi}^{-}}$
and $D_{s}^{+}\rightarrow{{\mathrm{K}}^{+}}{{\mathrm{K}}^{-}}{{\uppi}^{+}}$
channels. The tracks of the final-state particles are required to have a good
quality, fulfil loose particle identification (PID) criteria, and have a high
$\chi^{2}_{\text{IP}}$ value with respect to any PV, where
$\chi^{2}_{\text{IP}}$ is defined as the difference in the vertex-fit
$\chi^{2}$ of a given PV reconstructed with and without the particle being
considered. The reconstructed masses of the ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern
0.0pt\mathrm{D}}}{}^{0}$ and $D_{s}^{+}$ candidates are required to lie inside
mass windows of $\pm 20$$\text{\,Me\kern-1.00006ptV\\!/}c^{2}$ around their
known values [PDG2020]. The $D^{*-}$ candidate mass is required to be within
$\pm 40$$\text{\,Me\kern-1.00006ptV\\!/}c^{2}$ of the known value [PDG2020],
while the difference in mass between the $D^{*-}$ and ${\kern
0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{D}}}{}^{0}$ candidates is required to be in
the range 140–150$\text{\,Me\kern-1.00006ptV\\!/}c^{2}$. In combination with
the track PID cuts, these narrow mass windows reduce potential backgrounds
from misidentified decays such as $B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D^{+}$ to negligible
levels.

The $B^{0}$ candidate is reconstructed by combining the $D^{*-}$ and
$D_{s}^{+}$ candidates to form a common vertex. If multiple PVs are
reconstructed in the same event, the PV for which the $B^{0}$ candidate has
the lowest $\chi^{2}_{\text{IP}}$ is assigned as the associated PV. The
$p_{\mathrm{T}}$ of the $B^{0}$ candidate is required to be larger than
5$\text{\,Ge\kern-1.00006ptV\\!/}c$, and the $\chi^{2}_{\text{IP}}$ of the
$B^{0}$ candidate for the associated PV is required to be small. To suppress
combinatorial background and background from decays involving the production
of a $D^{*-}$ and three prompt tracks, the flight distance of the $D_{s}^{+}$
candidate along the beam axis is required to be different from zero by more
than one standard deviation, considering both the origin and decay-vertex
uncertainties of the $D_{s}^{+}$ candidate. To suppress combinatorial
background from combinations of tracks originating from the PV, the decay time
of the $B^{0}$ candidate is required to be larger than 0.2 ps. To improve the
invariant-mass resolution, a kinematic fit is performed to the decay chain
[Hulsbergen:2005pu], the $B^{0}$ candidate is constrained to originate from
the PV and the $D_{s}^{+}$ and ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern
0.0pt\mathrm{D}}}{}^{0}$ masses are constrained to their known values.
Candidates are retained if the resulting invariant mass of the
$D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$ combination falls within the
4900–5500$\text{\,Me\kern-1.00006ptV\\!/}c^{2}$ range, which includes the
region occupied by partially reconstructed decays when the neutral particle
produced in the $D_{s}^{*+}$ decay is not reconstructed. This sample is
considered in Sect. 5, where a fit to the $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ distribution of
candidates is used to measure .

A subsample of fully reconstructed candidates is selected by combining
$D_{s}^{+}$ candidates from the above dataset with photons. The difference
between the $D_{s}^{*+}$ and $D_{s}^{+}$ candidate masses is required to be in
the range 120–180$\text{\,Me\kern-1.00006ptV\\!/}c^{2}$, and the photon is
required to have a $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ larger than
500$\text{\,Me\kern-1.00006ptV\\!/}c$. Each $D_{s}^{*+}$ candidate is then
recombined with the corresponding $D^{*-}$ candidate from the above dataset to
form a $B^{0}$ candidate, where candidates in the invariant-mass range
5150–5500$\text{\,Me\kern-1.00006ptV\\!/}c^{2}$ are retained. Fully
reconstructed candidates with $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ values greater than
5240$\text{\,Me\kern-1.00006ptV\\!/}c^{2}$ are vetoed to remove
$B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$ decays where a random photon is combined
with the $D_{s}^{+}$ candidate. This dataset is used in Sect. 8 to measure the
remaining helicity observables in an angular analysis.

##  5 Measurement of $f_{\rm L}$ and branching fraction ratios

The longitudinal polarisation fraction, $f_{\rm L}$, determines the fractional
contribution of the $H_{0}$ helicity amplitude to the total decay rate. The
longitudinal and transverse amplitudes contribute to the one-dimensional
differential decay rate in $\cos\theta_{X}$ as follows,

$\displaystyle\frac{d\Gamma}{d\cos\theta_{X}}$
$\displaystyle\propto\frac{3}{4}\bigg{[}|H_{0}|^{2}(1-\cos^{2}\theta_{X})+\frac{1}{2}(|H_{+}|^{2}+|H_{-}|^{2})(1+\cos^{2}\theta_{X})\bigg{]}$
$\displaystyle=\frac{3}{4}\bigg{[}f_{\rm
L}(1-\cos^{2}\theta_{X})+\frac{(1-f_{\rm
L})}{2}(1+\cos^{2}\theta_{X})\bigg{]}\,,$ (3)

which is obtained from Eq. (2) via a definite integral over $\cos\theta_{D}$
and $\chi$. Experimentally, the integral over $\cos\theta_{D}$ and $\chi$ must
also include the acceptance in these angles. However, the acceptance is
predominantly linear for both angles, as shown in Figs. 4 and 5, such that no
significant residual dependence remains after the integration. Due to a common
dependence on photon kinematics, the angle $\cos\theta_{X}$ and the invariant
mass of the $D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$ system are strongly negatively correlated, as
illustrated in Appendix LABEL:app:m_DstDs_costheta_X in Fig.
LABEL:fig:m_DstDs_vs_costheta_X. More positive values of $\cos\theta_{X}$
correspond to higher momentum photons and thus lower values of
$m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$. As a result, the different $\cos\theta_{X}$ shapes for
longitudinal and transverse polarised decays manifest in corresponding
$m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ distributions with different parabolic forms, as shown in
Appendix LABEL:app:m_DstDs_costheta_X in Fig. LABEL:fig:costheta_X_1D_plots.
This feature enables $f_{\rm L}$ to be measured using a binned maximum-
likelihood fit to the $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ distribution in data, where the
total contribution is modelled by the sum of probability density functions
(PDFs) for the longitudinal and transverse components with relative fractions
$f_{\rm L}$ and $1-f_{\rm L}$. Determining $f_{\rm L}$ via an
$m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ fit enables partially reconstructed decays to be used,
which increases the sample size by avoiding efficiency losses due to the
limited photon reconstruction efficiency of the LHCb detector.

Due to the presence of decays in the same sample, a measurement of the
branching fraction ratio

$\mathcal{R}\equiv\frac{\mathcal{B}(B^{0}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{*+})\times\mathcal{B}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow
D_{s}^{+}\gamma)}{\mathcal{B}(B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})}$ (4)

can also be made. Experimentally, this quantity is defined as

$\displaystyle\mathcal{R}$ $\displaystyle=\frac{\mathcal{N}(B^{0}\rightarrow
D^{*-}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow D_{s}^{+}\gamma))}{\mathcal{N}(B^{0}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})}\times\frac{\epsilon(B^{0}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})}{\epsilon(B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow
D_{s}^{+}\gamma))}$ $\displaystyle=\frac{\mathcal{N}(B^{0}\rightarrow
D^{*-}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow D_{s}^{+}\gamma))}{\mathcal{N}(B^{0}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})}\times\xi\,,$ (5)

where $\mathcal{N}$ denotes the yields for each decay mode, and $\xi$ is the
ratio of their total reconstruction and selection efficiencies. In the case of
decays, the yields and efficiencies correspond to those of partially
reconstructed signal. The efficiency ratio is determined using simulated
samples of and decays, and is found to be $\xi=\effratio$, where the
uncertainty quoted accounts only for the use of finite simulated samples and
potential variation in the efficiency across data-taking years. This
uncertainty is considered as a source of systematic uncertainty on
$\mathcal{R}$.

A contribution from Cabibbo-suppressed
${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$ decays is also
considered in the $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ fit, enabling a measurement of the
branching fraction ratio

$r({{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}})\equiv\frac{\mathcal{B}({{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})}{\mathcal{B}(B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})}$ (6)

to be made. Experimentally, $r({{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}})$ is defined as

$\displaystyle r({{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}})$
$\displaystyle=\frac{f_{d}}{f_{s}}\times\frac{\mathcal{N}({{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})}{\mathcal{N}(B^{0}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})}\times\frac{\epsilon(B^{0}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})}{\epsilon({{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})}$
$\displaystyle=\frac{f_{d}}{f_{s}}\times\frac{\mathcal{N}({{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})}{\mathcal{N}(B^{0}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})}\times\xi({{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}})\,,$ (7)

where $\mathcal{N}$ denotes the yields for each decay mode, and
$f_{s}/f_{d}=0.2539\pm 0.0079$ is the ratio of fragmentation fractions at
$\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV as measured inside the LHCb acceptance [LHCb-
PAPER-2020-046]. The relative efficiency
$\xi({{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}})$ is assumed to be unity, with a 5%
relative systematic uncertainty assigned to account for potential variation in
efficiency due to mass and lifetime differences.

###  5.1 Fit components

The $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ distribution of selected candidates is shown in Fig.
2, and is dominated by the narrow signal due to fully reconstructed decays and
a broad structure due to decays with missing a photon or ${\uppi}^{0}$ from
the ${\mathrm{D}}^{*+}_{\mathrm{s}}$ decay. The distribution is modelled as a
sum of several components which are described below.

Figure 2: (Top) Distribution of $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ for selected candidates
in data, with the fit overlaid. Where indicated, $L$ ($T$) represents
longitudinally (transverse) polarised decays. (Bottom) Restricted to region
for candidates with
$m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})>5325$$\text{\,Me\kern-1.00006ptV\\!/}c^{2}$, where the
Cabibbo-suppressed $B_{s}^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$ contribution is
visible.

####  $\boldsymbol{B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}}$ decays

Fully reconstructed decays are modelled using the sum of two Crystal Ball PDFs
[Skwarnicki:1986xj] with a freely varying common mean and width, and a
relative yield fraction that is Gaussian-constrained according to simulation.
The component PDF tails are modelled on opposite sides, and the tail
parameters are Gaussian-constrained from simulation. The branching fraction
ratio $\mathcal{R}$ is measured directly in the fit, such that the yield of
the $B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$ component is related to the yield of
the $B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow D_{s}^{+}\gamma)$ component
via a freely varying parameter $\mathcal{R}$ and the fixed relative efficiency
ratio $\xi$.

####  $\boldsymbol{B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow
D_{s}^{+}\gamma)}$ decays

The partially reconstructed $B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow
D_{s}^{+}\gamma)$ signal is modelled using the sum of a longitudinal component
and a transverse component, where a freely varying parameter determines the
relative proportion of the longitudinal component. To derive invariant-mass
PDFs for each component, fits are performed to simulated samples of pure
longitudinal and transverse polarised decays as shown in Appendix
LABEL:app:m_DstDs_costheta_X in Fig. LABEL:fig:RapidSim_fits. The
$m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ distributions are modelled with parabolas convolved with
Gaussian resolution functions, where the parabolas are based on the
$\cos\theta_{X}$ dependence in Eq. (3). This approach closely follows the
method used in Refs. [LHCb-PAPER-2017-021] and [LHCb-PAPER-2020-036] for
$C\\!P$ violation studies of partially reconstructed $B^{-}\rightarrow
D^{*0}h^{-}$ with $D^{*0}\rightarrow D\gamma/\pi^{0}$ decays, where $h^{-}$ is
a pion or a kaon and the neutral particle produced in the $D^{*0}$ decay is
not reconstructed. The total yield of the $B^{0}\rightarrow
D^{*-}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow D_{s}^{+}\gamma)$ component,
$\mathcal{N}(B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow D_{s}^{+}\gamma))$,
varies freely and is used along with $\mathcal{R}$ and $\xi$ to set the
$B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$ component yield. All PDF parameters for the
$B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow D_{s}^{+}\gamma)$ component are
fixed in the data fit, and are varied within their uncertainties to determine
the systematic uncertainties on , $\mathcal{R}$, and
$r({{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}})$.

####  $\boldsymbol{B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow
D_{s}^{+}{{\uppi}^{0}})}$ decays

A contribution from $B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow
D_{s}^{+}{{\uppi}^{0}})$ decays, where the neutral pion from the $D_{s}^{*+}$
decay is not reconstructed, is modelled in a similar manner to the
$B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow D_{s}^{+}\gamma)$ signal. The
contribution from this mode is small compared to the signal due to the lower
branching fraction of the $D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow D_{s}^{+}{{\uppi}^{0}}$ decay
[PDG2020]. To determine the invariant-mass PDF for this contribution, separate
simulated samples of pure longitudinal and transverse decays are fitted with
angular functions convolved with Gaussian resolution functions; all shape
parameters are fixed in the data fit. The relative proportion of longitudinal
and transverse decays is determined by , where is shared with the
$B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow D_{s}^{+}\gamma)$ signal decay.
The yield of this contribution is fixed relative to the component using PDG
$D_{s}^{*+}$ branching fractions [PDG2020]. Both the fixed PDF parameters and
branching fractions are varied within their uncertainties to determine the
systematic uncertainty on , $\mathcal{R}$, and
$r({{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}})$.

#### Background from higher-excited charm states

At low $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ values, decays involving higher-excited charm
states contribute when one or more particles are not reconstructed. To model
the effective contribution from this feed-down background, simulated samples
of $B^{0}\rightarrow(D_{1}(2420)^{-}\rightarrow
D^{*-}{{\uppi}^{0}})D_{s}^{+}$, $B^{0}\rightarrow
D^{*-}(D_{s1}(2460)^{+}\rightarrow D_{s}^{+}\gamma)$, $B^{0}\rightarrow
D^{*-}(D_{s1}(2460)^{+}\rightarrow(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow
D_{s}^{+}\gamma){{\uppi}^{0}})$, and
$B^{0}\rightarrow(D_{1}(2420)^{-}\rightarrow
D^{*-}{{\uppi}^{0}})(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow D_{s}^{+}\gamma)$ decays generated
using RapidSim are studied. The $D_{1}(2420)^{-}$ modes are taken as a proxy
to represent contributions from similar decays involving $D_{1}(2430)^{-}$ and
$D_{2}^{*}(2460)^{-}$ mesons, and decays involving two higher-excited charm
states are expected to be negligibly small. Invariant-mass fits to simulated
events in the 4900–5350$\text{\,Me\kern-1.00006ptV\\!/}c^{2}$ region are
performed using sums of several parabolas convolved with resolution functions,
where all shape parameters are subsequently fixed in the data fit and varied
within their uncertainties to determine the systematic uncertainty. Polarised
decays involving two vector mesons are generated using the world-average value
of in decays [PDG2020]. Alternative samples are generated with a $\pm 20\%$
variation in to evaluate the change in PDF shape parameters, and the
differences observed are assigned as a source of systematic uncertainty. The
degree of variation introduced in is motivated by comparing the polarisation
fractions measured in several ${{\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern
0.0pt\mathrm{B}}}{}^{0}}\rightarrow D\omega$ decays, where $D\in\\{D^{*0}$,
$D_{1}(2420)^{0}$, $D_{1}(2430)^{0}$, $D_{2}^{*}(2460)^{0}\\}$ [PDG2020]. The
yields of each feed-down contribution are Gaussian-constrained relative to the
yield using a product of PDG branching fractions [PDG2020], efficiencies for
the $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ mass window requirement taken from simulation, and a
factor of two to account for the similar expected contributions from $B^{\pm}$
decays. An additional factor of $0.20\pm 0.04$ is included for the
$D_{1}(2420)^{-}D_{s}^{(*)+}$ modes, in order to model the
$B\rightarrow(\bar{D}^{**}\rightarrow D^{*-}X)D_{s}^{(*)+}$ rate relative to
$B\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{(*)+}$. This factor is motivated by control mode
studies of the rate of $B^{+}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}\pi^{+}$ decays
relative to $B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$ decays.

#### Combinatorial background

Background from random track combinations is modelled using an exponential
function with a freely varying shape parameter and yield. Due to the
application of mass windows for the charm-meson candidates and a $D_{s}^{+}$
candidate flight requirement, the combinatorial background is found to be
small across the full $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ range considered.

#### Contributions from ${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}$ decays

The contribution from Cabibbo-suppressed
${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$ decays falls at
higher $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ values than the $B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$
decay due to the larger mass of the ${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}$ meson.
This decay is modelled using the same PDF parameterisation as the
$B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$ peak, but with independent and freely
varying mean and width parameters. The branching fraction ratio
$r({{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}})$ varies freely in the fit, such that the
${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$ yield is
determined by $r({{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}})$,
$\xi({{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}})$, and the external value of
$f_{s}/f_{d}$.

Partially reconstructed ${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{*+}$ decays are modelled using the same parameterisation as that
for $B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{*+}$ decays, but with an upward shift in
mass set using the known ${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}$–$B^{0}$ meson mass
difference. The rate of this contribution is determined relative to the
$B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{*+}$ component using the ratio of the
${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$ and
$B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$ component yields, with an additional
Gaussian-constrained factor of $1.00\pm 0.33$ included to allow for potential
differences between the ${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{*+}$ and ${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$ decay rates over a range 0–2. The longitudinal polarisation
fraction of the ${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{*+}$
component is Gaussian constrained to the value $0.52\pm 0.16$ based on the
world average value for $B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{*+}$ decays
[Aubert:2003jj, PDG2020], where the permitted variation allows for $\fL$
values in the range 0–1.

###  5.2 Results

The fit to the $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ distribution in data is shown in Fig. 2,
where candidates with
$m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})>5325$$\text{\,Me\kern-1.00006ptV\\!/}c^{2}$ are shown on a
separate $y$-axis scale in order to highlight the
${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$ peak. Yields of
$\mathcal{N}(B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow
D_{s}^{+}\gamma))=\ndstdsststat$, $\mathcal{N}(B^{0}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})=\ndstdsstat$, and
$\mathcal{N}({{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})=\nbstodstdsstat$ are obtained, where the uncertainties quoted
are statistical only. Studies with pseudoexperiments indicate that the central
values and uncertainties of the yields are unbiased. The ratio of branching
fractions of $B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow D_{s}^{+}\gamma)$
decays relative to $B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$ decays is measured to be

$\mathcal{R}=\BFratio,$

where the first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic. In
addition, the ratio of branching fractions of the Cabibbo-suppressed
$B_{s}^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$ decay relative to the $B^{0}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$ decay is measured to be

$r({{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}})=\BsBFratio,$

where the first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic, and the
third is due to the use of an external value of $f_{s}/f_{d}$ [LHCb-
PAPER-2020-046]. The systematic uncertainties on $\mathcal{R}$ and
$r({{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}})$ are due to the use of fixed PDF shape
parameters and branching fractions in the fit, as well as the use of the
relative efficiency corrections $\xi$ and
$\xi({{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}})$. The contributing systematic
uncertainties on both branching fraction ratios are summarised in Table 1 in
Sect. 9. The value of $\mathcal{R}$ is in agreement with the world average,
$\mathcal{R}=2.07\pm 0.33$, but has a considerably smaller uncertainty. The
measurement of $r({{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}})$ is a world first, and
constitutes the first observation of the Cabibbo-suppressed
${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$ decay with a
statistical significance of seven standard deviations. The significance is
calculated by determining the difference in
$r({{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}})$ from zero, where both the statistical and
systematic uncertainties are considered.

The longitudinal polarisation fraction in $B^{0}\rightarrow
D^{*-}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow D_{s}^{+}\gamma)$ decays is measured to be

$\fL=\fLsyst,$

where the first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic. The
systematic uncertainty quoted is due to the limited knowledge of the fixed
terms used in the fit. This result is in agreement with, but substantially
more precise than, the current world-average value. Pseudoexperiment studies
indicate that the fitted central value and uncertainty of are unbiased. In the
subsequent analysis of fully reconstructed decays presented herein, is fixed
to the value measured in the $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ fit. This enables the
angular acceptance functions for $\cos\theta_{D}$ and $\cos\theta_{X}$ to be
derived directly from data (see Sect. 7), rather than modelling such effects
using simulation. The $\cos\theta_{X}$ distribution in particular is sensitive
to mis-modelling in the simulation, due to its dependence on the soft photon
kinematics which can be distorted by the hardware trigger emulation in the
simulation.

##  6 Invariant-mass fit to $\boldsymbol{B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{*+}}$
decays

To derive signal weights for the angular analysis, a binned maximum-likelihood
fit to the $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{*+})$ distribution of fully reconstructed
candidates in data is performed using the sPlot method [Pivk:2004ty]. The
$m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{*+})$ distribution is shown in Fig. 3, where the fit is
overlaid. This fully reconstructed sample contains 17% of the candidates used
in the $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ fit in Sect. 5; the smaller sample size is
attributed to the limited soft photon reconstruction efficiency, and the
application of additional requirements on the photon and $D_{s}^{*+}$
candidate. Potential background contributions from decays with
$D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow D_{s}^{+}\pi^{0}$ are determined to be negligible
within the window of $D_{s}^{*+}$–$D_{s}^{+}$ mass difference considered.

The fit is performed using the sum of a $B^{0}\rightarrow
D^{*-}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow D_{s}^{+}\gamma)$ signal component, a
${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\rightarrow D^{*-}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow
D_{s}^{+}\gamma)$ background component, and a combinatorial background
component. The signal is described using the sum of two Crystal Ball PDFs
which share a common freely varying mean and width. The tail parameters and
relative fraction of the two Crystal Ball PDFs are constrained from fits to
simulation, where the component PDFs are required to have tails on opposite
sides. The yield of the signal component varies freely, and is found to be
$\ndstdsstfullreco$. The ${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\rightarrow
D^{*-}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow D_{s}^{+}\gamma)$ component is modelled using the
same PDF as the signal, but with a mean shifted upwards using the known
${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}$–$B^{0}$ meson mass difference. The rate of
this contribution is fixed relative to signal using the proportions determined
in the $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ fit. The combinatorial background is modelled
using a second-order Chebyshev polynomial, where the yield and shape
parameters of this contribution vary freely. As the background distribution is
not known a priori, an alternative parameterisation using a Gaussian function
is also used to model the combinatorial background. The signal weights derived
from this alternative model are used to determine the systematic uncertainty
on the helicity observables. A Gaussian function is used as it provides a
background description of equivalent quality to the second-order Chebyshev,
whereas linear and exponential background models do not describe the
background sufficiently well.

An underlying assumption of the sPlot method used to derive per-candidate
signal weights is that the discriminating variable, in this case
$m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{*+})$, is uncorrelated with the target distributions to be
studied with weights applied, in this instance the decay angles. Due to a
common underlying dependence on the decay product kinematics, the invariant
mass and decay angles do exhibit some degree of correlation. To assess the
potential bias from this, a combined four-dimensional simulated sample of
signal and background events is generated in $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{*+})$ and the
decay angles. The background sample is generated according to the
$m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{*+})$ background shape observed in data, and with a flat
distribution in each of the decay angles. The total simulated sample contains
the same number of signal and background events as measured in the
$m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{*+})$ data fit. A fit to the $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{*+})$
distribution of the simulated sample is performed to derive signal weights,
which are then applied when creating histograms in the decay angles. Using
$\chi^{2}$ tests, these histograms are compared to histograms of the decay
angles created using only the simulated signal sample. All of the signal-
weighted distributions are found to agree with the pure signal distributions,
indicating that no significant biases are incurred from the use of signal
weights.

Figure 3: Distribution of $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{*+})$ for selected candidates in
data, with the fit overlaid.

##  7 Angular acceptance functions

Due to experimental acceptance and resolution effects, the angular
distributions in data are distorted relative to the true distributions. As the
decay angles are measured with a relative resolution of 2–4% according to
simulation, the dominant effect on the experimental angular distributions is
due to the acceptance. This effect must be modelled in the angular fit in
order to derive unbiased measurements of the helicity observables, which is
achieved by multiplying the true differential decay rate PDF by acceptance
functions defined in each of the decay angles. This approach assumes that the
total angular acceptance can be factorised into a product of the individual
acceptance functions for each angle, which is validated using a simulated
sample of signal decays generated according to Eq. (2) with the world-average
value of $\fL=0.52$ [Aubert:2003jj, PDG2020],
$|H_{+}|=|H_{-}|=\sqrt{(1-\fL)/2}$, and all phases equal to zero. The
efficiency of a cut applied to all three decay angles together,
$\epsilon_{xyz}$, is compared with a product of the efficiencies for cuts
applied separately to each decay angle,
$\epsilon^{\prime}=\epsilon_{x}\times\epsilon_{y}\times\epsilon_{z}$; the
values of $\epsilon_{xyz}$ and $\epsilon^{\prime}$ are found to agree within
the uncertainties due to the use of finite simulated samples.

###  7.1 Acceptance functions for $\cos\theta_{D}$ and $\cos\theta_{X}$

The acceptance functions for $\cos\theta_{D}$ and $\cos\theta_{X}$ are derived
from data. Binned normalised distributions in each decay angle are produced by
creating histograms of the fully reconstructed candidates in data with signal
weights applied. The only physical observable that can alter the shape of the
one-dimensional $\cos\theta_{D}$ and $\cos\theta_{X}$ distributions is , which
is known from the $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ fit. The acceptance is thus determined
by comparing the data distributions with angular distributions generated with
RapidSim using the value of measured in Sect. 5. In the generated sample, no
detector acceptance or resolution effects are included. The signal-weighted
data and generated signal distributions in $\cos\theta_{D}$ and
$\cos\theta_{X}$ are compared in Fig. 4 (left column). The observed
differences between data and the generated sample are attributed to the
experimental acceptance and resolution, since both distributions share a
common value. The $\cos\theta_{X}$ distribution in particular exhibits
substantial acceptance effects, where candidates at low $\cos\theta_{X}$ are
preferentially removed. This warping is due to the application of photon
$p_{\mathrm{T}}$ requirements in the selection, which bias the sample to more
positive values of $\cos\theta_{X}$.

To determine acceptance functions for $\cos\theta_{D}$ and $\cos\theta_{X}$,
the binned ratios of data to the generated sample are fitted with sixth-order
polynomial functions. The fits are shown in Fig. 4 (right column), and the
polynomial coefficients are employed as fixed terms in the angular fit in
Sect. 8. To determine the systematic uncertainty on the helicity observables
due to the finite dataset used in the acceptance fits, the acceptance function
coefficients are varied within their uncertainties according to the acceptance
fit covariance matrices. When determining the systematic uncertainty due to
the use of a fixed value in the angular analysis, the acceptance fits are
performed many times with varied randomly within its total measured
uncertainty.

For values of $\cos\theta_{X}$ close to $-1$, which correspond to the smallest
photon momentum values, the acceptance function becomes slightly negative due
to limited data statistics in this region. A fiducial cut of
$\cos\theta_{X}>-0.9$ is applied to data in order to remove the region of
negative modelled acceptance; this requirement is found to have a negligible
impact on the measured helicity observables.

Figure 4: (Left) Comparison of signal-weighted data and generated (top)
$\cos\theta_{D}$ and (bottom) $\cos\theta_{X}$ distributions, where the
differences observed are due to the experimental acceptance and resolution.
(Right) Data to generated sample ratios, with the polynomial fits overlaid.

###  7.2 Acceptance function for $\chi$

In Eq. (2), all of the angular terms that are sensitive to the relative
magnitudes and phases of the transverse amplitudes have a dependence on the
angle $\chi$. As such, no information on the $\chi$ acceptance can be derived
from data. To determine the $\chi$ acceptance, the reconstructed $\chi$
distribution in a sample of fully-simulated decays passing all selection
requirements is compared to a generated $\chi$ distribution produced using
RapidSim with the same model parameters but no acceptance or resolution
effects. For this comparison, the simulated samples are generated with the
value measured in Sect. 5, with $|H_{-}|=|H_{+}|$ and $\phi_{+}=\phi_{-}=0$.
The binned $\chi$ distributions are shown in Fig. 5 (left), where good
agreement between the reconstructed and generated distributions is found. This
indicates that the reconstructed $\chi$ distribution is not strongly modified
by acceptance effects. To model residual acceptance effects, the reconstructed
to generated $\chi$ ratio is fitted with a second-order polynomial, as shown
in Fig. 5 (right). This function is employed as a fixed correction PDF in the
angular fit, and the polynomial coefficients are varied within their
uncertainties to determine the systematic uncertainties on the helicity
parameters. In this procedure, the correlations between the polynomial
coefficients are accounted for using the acceptance fit covariance matrix.

Figure 5: Comparison of reconstructed $\chi$ distribution in a fully-simulated
sample and the generated $\chi$ distribution in a RapidSim sample produced
with the same helicity amplitude model (left). The ratio is fitted with a
second-order polynomial to determine the acceptance function for use in the
data fit (right).

##  8 Angular fit to data

To measure $|H_{-}|$, $\phi_{-}$, and $\phi_{+}$, an unbinned maximum-
likelihood fit to the three-dimensional angular distribution of signal-
weighted data is performed using zfit [Eschle:2019jmu]. For the fit, the
$B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow D_{s}^{+}\gamma)$ candidates
from the $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{*+})$ fit in Sect. 6 are used with per-candidate
signal weights assigned. The longitudinal polarisation amplitude, $H_{0}$, is
assigned a fixed magnitude $|H_{0}|$ using the value of measured in Sect. 5,
and its phase is set to the arbitrary value $\phi_{0}=0$. The parameter
$|H_{+}|$ is fully determined by the normalisation of the helicity amplitudes
to unity. The signal density at each point in angular phase space is described
using Eq. (2) multiplied by acceptance functions in each of the decay angles.
To determine the statistical uncertainties of the observables, the fit applies
an asymptotic correction to the covariance matrix as detailed in Ref.
[Langenbruch:2019nwe], which correctly accounts for the use of signal-weighted
data. The distributions for each decay angle are shown in Fig. 6, with the
one-dimensional fit projections overlaid.

Studies with pseudoexperiments are performed to determine the level of bias
present in the results, where pull distributions of mean $\mu_{P}^{x}$ and
width $\sigma_{P}^{x}$ are constructed for each observable $x$. The pull
distributions for each helicity observable are found to follow Gaussian
distributions closely, where $\sigma_{P}^{|H_{-}|}$ is consistent with unity.
However, $\sigma_{P}^{\phi_{+}}=1.14\pm 0.02$ and
$\sigma_{P}^{\phi_{-}}=1.12\pm 0.02$, indicating that the default fit
uncertainties for these observables are underestimated. The mean values of the
pulls for the transverse phases are consistent with zero, but
$\mu_{P}^{|H_{-}|}=-0.14\pm 0.02$. These biases are traced to the finite size
of the fitted dataset, and are found to resolve when pseudoexperiment datasets
containing more events than are present in data are generated. The values of
$\mu_{P}^{x}$ and $\sigma_{P}^{x}$ are used to correct the default fit results
$x\pm\sigma_{x}$ as follows

$\displaystyle x^{c}$ $\displaystyle=x-\mu_{P}^{x}\times\sigma_{x}$ (8)
$\displaystyle\sigma_{x}^{c}$ $\displaystyle=\sigma_{P}^{x}\times\sigma_{x}$
(9)

where $x^{c}\pm\sigma_{x}^{c}$ are the corrected fit results. In Sect. 10, the
results for $|H_{-}|$, $\phi_{+}$, and $\phi_{-}$ are quoted after this
correction procedure.

Figure 6: Decay-angle distributions of signal-weighted candidates in data,
with the one-dimensional angular fit projections overlaid.

##  9 Systematic uncertainties

The values of $\mathcal{R}$, $r({{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}})$, and
measured in Sect. 5 are subject to systematic uncertainties due to limited
knowledge of the shape parameters, branching fractions, and relative
efficiency corrections used in the fit. To determine these systematic
uncertainties, the $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ fit to data is performed many times
with the parameters randomly varied within their prescribed uncertainties
according to Gaussian distributions. This procedure is performed separately
for the shape parameters, branching fractions, and efficiency corrections, and
the total systematic uncertainties calculated as the sum in quadrature of
these contributions. The systematic uncertainties are summarised in Table 1.

The observables $|H_{-}|$, $\phi_{+}$, and $\phi_{-}$ measured in the angular
fit are subject to several systematic uncertainties. Firstly, the angular
analysis is performed at a fixed value of , which is used as input in the
$\cos\theta_{D}$ and $\cos\theta_{X}$ acceptance fits and also to set the
value of $|H_{0}|$ in the angular fit. To determine the systematic
uncertainty, the angular analysis is repeated many times with varied within
its total uncertainty; the standard deviations of the helicity observable
results are taken as the systematic uncertainties. In this procedure, the
varied value used in the acceptance fits is shared with the angular fit to
ensure consistency. A small systematic uncertainty is also assigned for the
use of signal-weighted data, where the angular fit is run many times while
varying the signal weights within the signal yield uncertainties from the
$m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{*+})$ fit. To determine the systematic uncertainty from the
use of finite samples to obtain the acceptance functions, the acceptance
coefficients are varied within their uncertainties according to the acceptance
fit covariance matrices. Finally, the angular analysis is repeated with an
alternative background model in the $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{*+})$ fit, and the
differences in central value for each helicity observable are assigned as a
systematic uncertainty. The contributing systematic uncertainties are
summarised in Table 2.

Table 1: Systematic uncertainties on the branching fraction ratios and $f_{L}$ as measured in the $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ fit.  Systematic uncertainty | $\mathcal{R}$ | $\mathcal{R}(B_{s}^{0})$ | $f_{L}$
---|---|---|---
Fixed PDF shape parameters | 0.030 | 0.00197 | 0.0074
Fixed branching fractions | 0.016 | 0.00004 | 0.0080
Efficiency corrections | 0.062 | 0.00253 | 0.0001
Total | 0.071 | 0.00320 | 0.0109
|  |  |
Table 2: Systematic uncertainties on the helicity parameters measured in the unbinned angular fit.  Systematic uncertainty | $|H_{-}|$ | $\phi_{+}$ | $\phi_{-}$
---|---|---|---
Fixed $f_{L}$ in angular fit and $\cos(\theta_{X/D})$ acceptance | 0.0005 | 0.0007 | 0.005
Use of sWeighted data | 0.0003 | 0.0011 | 0.002
Statistical uncertainty of acceptance functions | 0.0034 | 0.0132 | 0.044
$m(D^{*}D_{s}^{*})$ fit background model | 0.0319 | 0.0156 | 0.025
Total | 0.0321 | 0.0205 | 0.051
|  |  |

##  10 Results and conclusion

Using a fit to the $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ distribution to determine the
properties of partially reconstructed $B^{0}\rightarrow
D^{*-}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow D_{s}^{+}\gamma)$ decays, the longitudinal
polarisation fraction is measured to be

$\fL=\fLsyst,$

where the first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic. The
corresponding magnitude of the longitudinal helicity amplitude, given by
$|H_{0}|=\sqrt{f_{\rm L}}$, is

$|H_{0}|=\Hzamp.$

This information is used to measure the remaining helicity observables in an
angular fit to fully reconstructed $B^{0}\rightarrow
D^{*-}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow D_{s}^{+}\gamma)$ decays, obtaining

$\displaystyle|H_{-}|$ $\displaystyle=\phantom{-}\Hmamp,$
$\displaystyle|H_{+}|$ $\displaystyle=\phantom{-}\Hpamp,$
$\displaystyle\phi_{+}$ $\displaystyle=\Hpphi,$ $\displaystyle\phi_{-}$
$\displaystyle=\phantom{-}\Hmphi,$

where the quoted value and uncertainties for $|H_{+}|$ are fully determined by
the normalisation of the three helicity amplitudes to unity. The measurement
of is consistent with and more precise than the current world average,
$\fL=0.52\pm 0.05$ [Aubert:2003jj, PDG2020]. The transverse amplitude
magnitudes and phases are measured for the first time, where both phases are
consistent with zero but the magnitudes differ from each other at the level of
nine standard deviations. It is noted that $|H_{0}|>|H_{+}|>|H_{-}|$, which is
expected from quark-helicity conservation in $B$ decays involving a
$b\rightarrow c$ quark transition. In such decays, the $V-A$ nature of the
weak interaction causes the longitudinal component to dominate. The inequality
is stronger for decays involving light vector mesons [Suzuki:2001za], but also
appears to be satisfied in $B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{*+}$ decays where
two vector charm mesons are produced. This helicity hierarchy is not observed
in decays dominated by penguin amplitudes such as $B^{0}\rightarrow\phi
K^{*0}$, where the longitudinal and transverse components are found to have
roughly equal amplitudes [LHCb-PAPER-2014-005, delAmoSanchez:2010mz,
Abe:2004mq, LHCb-PAPER-2011-012].

The branching fraction ratio of $B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}(D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow
D_{s}^{+}\gamma)$ decays relative to $B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$ decays
is measured to be

$\mathcal{R}=\BFratio,$

where the first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic. This
result is in agreement with, but considerably more precise than, the current
world-average value $\mathcal{R}=2.07\pm 0.33$ [PDG2020]. The branching
fraction ratio of the Cabibbo-suppressed $B_{s}^{0}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$ decay relative to the $B^{0}\rightarrow D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$
decay is measured to be

$r({{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}})=\BsBFratio,$

where the first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic, and the
third accounts for the use of an external value of $f_{s}/f_{d}$ [LHCb-
PAPER-2020-046]. This measurement constitutes the first observation of the
Cabibbo-suppressed ${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\rightarrow
D^{*-}D_{s}^{+}$ decay with a significance of seven standard deviations.

In conclusion, an angular analysis of with $D_{s}^{*+}\rightarrow
D_{s}^{+}\gamma$ decays is performed using 6$\text{\,fb}^{-1}$ of data
collected with the LHCb experiment at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV in order to measure a
complete set of helicity amplitude observables. Partially reconstructed
candidates are used in a fit to the $m(D^{*-}D_{s}^{+})$ distribution to
measure the longitudinal polarisation fraction $\fL=|H_{0}|^{2}$. This
knowledge is then used in a subsequent angular fit to fully reconstructed data
in order to measure the remaining helicity observables. The measurement of is
consistent with and more precise than the current world-average value, while
the magnitudes and phases of the transverse helicity amplitudes are measured
for the first time. The pattern of helicity amplitude magnitudes is found to
align with expectations from quark-helicity conservation for tree-level $B$
decays involving a $b\rightarrow c$ transition. The decay is a large
background in analyses, particularly when the $\tau^{+}$ decays hadronically.
Analyses aiming to measure angular observables in decays must control the
angular distributions of prominent hadronic backgrounds such as , and the
results presented herein will help to significantly reduce background model
uncertainties in future measurements.

##  11 Acknowledgements paragraph

Include the following text in the Acknowledgements section in all paper
drafts. It is not needed for analysis notes or conference reports.

The text below are the acknowledgements as approved by the collaboration
board. Extending the acknowledgements to include individuals from outside the
collaboration who have contributed to the analysis should be approved by the
EB. The extra acknowledgements are normally placed before the standard
acknowledgements, unless it matches better with the text of the standard
acknowledgements to put them elsewhere. They should be included in the draft
for the first circulation. Except in exceptional circumstances, to be approved
by the EB chair, authors of the paper should not be named in extended
acknowledgements.

## Acknowledgements

We express our gratitude to our colleagues in the CERN accelerator departments
for the excellent performance of the LHC. We thank the technical and
administrative staff at the LHCb institutes. We acknowledge support from CERN
and from the national agencies: CAPES, CNPq, FAPERJ and FINEP (Brazil); MOST
and NSFC (China); CNRS/IN2P3 (France); BMBF, DFG and MPG (Germany); INFN
(Italy); NWO (Netherlands); MNiSW and NCN (Poland); MEN/IFA (Romania); MSHE
(Russia); MICINN (Spain); SNSF and SER (Switzerland); NASU (Ukraine); STFC
(United Kingdom); DOE NP and NSF (USA). We acknowledge the computing resources
that are provided by CERN, IN2P3 (France), KIT and DESY (Germany), INFN
(Italy), SURF (Netherlands), PIC (Spain), GridPP (United Kingdom), RRCKI and
Yandex LLC (Russia), CSCS (Switzerland), IFIN-HH (Romania), CBPF (Brazil), PL-
GRID (Poland) and NERSC (USA). We are indebted to the communities behind the
multiple open-source software packages on which we depend. Individual groups
or members have received support from ARC and ARDC (Australia); AvH Foundation
(Germany); EPLANET, Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions and ERC (European Union);
A*MIDEX, ANR, IPhU and Labex P2IO, and Région Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes (France);
Key Research Program of Frontier Sciences of CAS, CAS PIFI, CAS CCEPP,
Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, and Sci. & Tech.
Program of Guangzhou (China); RFBR, RSF and Yandex LLC (Russia); GVA, XuntaGal
and GENCAT (Spain); the Leverhulme Trust, the Royal Society and UKRI (United
Kingdom).

##  12 Inclusion of supplementary material

Three types of supplementary material should be distinguished:

  * •

A regular appendix: lengthy equations or long tables are sometimes better put
in an appendix in order not to interrupt the main flow of a paper. Appendices
will appear in the final paper, on arXiv and on the CDS record and should be
considered integral part of a paper, and are thus to be reviewed like the rest
of the paper. An example of an LHCb paper with an appendix is Ref. [LHCb-
PAPER-2013-070].

  * •

Supplementary material for CDS: plots or tables that would make the paper
exceed the page limit or are not appropriate to include in the paper itself,
but are desirable to be shown in public should be added to the paper drafts in
an appendix, and removed from the paper before submitting to arXiv or the
journal. See Appendix D for further instructions. Examples are: comparison
plots of the new result with older results, plots that illustrate cross-
checks. An example of an LHCb paper with supplementary material for CDS is
Ref. [LHCb-PAPER-2013-035]. Supplementary material for CDS cannot be
referenced in the paper. Supplementary material should be included in the
draft paper to be reviewed by the collaboration.

  * •

Supplementary material for the paper. This is usually called “supplemental
material”, which distinguishes it from supplementary material for CDS only.
Most journals allow to submit files along with the paper that will not be part
of the text of the article, but will be stored on the journal server. Examples
are plain text files with numerical data corresponding to the plots in the
paper. The supplemental material should be cited in the paper by including a
reference which should say “See supplemental material at [link] for [give
brief description of material].” The journal will insert a specific link for
[link]. The arXiv version will usually include the supplemental material as
part of the paper and so should not contain the words “at [link]”.
Supplemental material should be included in the draft paper to be reviewed by
the collaboration. An example of an LHCb paper with supplemental material is
Ref. [LHCb-PAPER-2015-029]

## Appendices

##  Appendix A Standard References

Below is a list of common references, as well as a list of all LHCb
publications. As they are already in prepared bib files, they can be used as
simply as \cite{LHCb-DP-2008-001} to get the LHCb detector paper. The
references are defined in the files main.bib, LHCb-PAPER.bib, LHCb-CONF.bib,
LHCb-DP.bib LHCb-TDR.bib files, with obvious contents. Each of these have
their LHCb-ZZZ-20XX-0YY number as their cite code. If you believe there is a
problem with the formatting or content of one of the entries, then get in
contact with the Editorial Board rather than just editing it in your local
file, since you are likely to need the latest version just before submitting
the article.

Table 3: Standard references. Description |  Ref. cite code
---|---
Lee, Weinberg, Zumino |  [Lee:1967iu] Lee:1967iu
Cabibbo, Kobayashi, Maskawa |  [Cabibbo:1963yz, *Kobayashi:1973fv] Cabibbo:1963yz,*Kobayashi:1973fv
Gell-Mann, Zweig |  [GellMann:1964nj, *Zweig:352337] GellMann:1964nj,*Zweig:352337
Baryon asymmetry & SM $C\\!P$ |  [Gavela:1994dt] Gavela:1994dt
Baryon asymmetry & SM $C\\!P$ |  [Gavela:1993ts] Gavela:1993ts
EW Baryogenesis & $C\\!P$ |  [Huet:1994jb] Huet:1994jb
Dalitz Plot111Dalitz invented the method, Fabri added relativistic corrections. |  [Dalitz:1953cp, *Fabri:1954zz] Dalitz:1953cp,*Fabri:1954zz
PDG 2020 |  [PDG2020] PDG2020
PDG 2019 |  [PDG2019] PDG2019
PDG 2018 |  [PDG2018] PDG2018
PDG 2016 |  [PDG2016] PDG2016
PDG 2014 |  [PDG2014] PDG2014
HFlav 2018 |  [HFLAV18] HFLAV18
HFlav 2016 |  [HFLAV16] HFLAV16
HFlav (pre-2016) |  [Amhis:2014hma] Amhis:2014hma
CKMfitter group |  [CKMfitter2005] CKMfitter2005
CKMfitter group |  [CKMfitter2015] CKMfitter2015
UTfit (Standard Model/CKM) |  [UTfit-UT] UTfit-UT
UTfit (New Physics) |  [UTfit-NP] UTfit-NP
Pythia |  [Sjostrand:2007gs, *Sjostrand:2006za] Sjostrand:2007gs,*Sjostrand:2006za
LHCb Pythia tuning |  [LHCb-PROC-2010-056] LHCb-PROC-2010-056
EvtGen |  [Lange:2001uf] Lange:2001uf
Photos |  [Golonka:2005pn] Golonka:2005pn
Geant4 |  [Allison:2006ve, *Agostinelli:2002hh] Allison:2006ve, *Agostinelli:2002hh
LHCb simulation |  [LHCb-PROC-2011-006] LHCb-PROC-2011-006
RapidSim |  [Cowan:2016tnm] Cowan:2016tnm
Dirac |  [Tsaregorodtsev:2010zz, *BelleDIRAC] Tsaregorodtsev:2010zz,*BelleDIRAC
HLT2 topological trigger |  [BBDT] BBDT
Topological trigger reoptimization — Run 2 |  [LHCb-PROC-2015-018] LHCb-PROC-2015-018
Turbo and real-time alignment — Run 2 |  [LHCb-PROC-2015-011] LHCb-PROC-2015-011
TisTos method |  [LHCb-PUB-2014-039] LHCb-PUB-2014-039
Allen |  [Aaij:2019zbu] Aaij:2019zbu
PIDCalib (for Run 1) |  [LHCb-PUB-2016-021] LHCb-PUB-2016-021
Ghost probability |  [DeCian:2255039] DeCian:2255039
Primary vertex reconstruction |  [Kucharczyk:1756296] Kucharczyk:1756296
DecayTreeFitter |  [Hulsbergen:2005pu] Hulsbergen:2005pu
SMOG |  [FerroLuzzi:2005em] FerroLuzzi:2005em
Run-2 tagging |  [Fazzini:2018dyq] Fazzini:2018dyq
OS $\mathrm{K}$, $\upmu$, $\mathrm{e}$ and VS tagging |  [LHCb-PAPER-2011-027] LHCb-PAPER-2011-027
OS charm tagging |  [LHCb-PAPER-2015-027] LHCb-PAPER-2015-027
SS kaon tagging |  [LHCb-PAPER-2015-056] LHCb-PAPER-2015-056
SS proton and pion tagging |  [LHCb-PAPER-2016-039] LHCb-PAPER-2016-039
Reommendations for multiple candidates |  [Koppenburg:2017zsh] Koppenburg:2017zsh
See also Table LABEL:tab:LHCb-DPs for LHCb performance references.
sPlot |  [Pivk:2004ty] Pivk:2004ty
sFit |  [Xie:2009rka] Xie:2009rka
Punzi’s optimization |  [Punzi:2003bu] Punzi:2003bu
BDT |  [Breiman] Breiman
BDT training |  [AdaBoost] AdaBoost
TMVA222Do not cite this instead of the actual reference for the MVA being used. |  [Hocker:2007ht, *TMVA4] Hocker:2007ht,*TMVA4
RooUnfold |  [Adye:2011gm] Adye:2011gm
scikit-learn |  [Scikit-learn-paper] Scikit-learn-paper
Laura++ |  [Back:2017zqt] Back:2017zqt
hep_ml |  [Rogozhnikov:2016bdp] Rogozhnikov:2016bdp
root_numpy |  [root-numpy] root-numpy
GammaCombo333Always cite this along with Ref. [LHCb-PAPER-2016-032] as \cite{GammaCombo,*LHCb-PAPER-2016-032} (unless LHCb-PAPER-2016-032 is cited elsewhere). |  [GammaCombo] GammaCombo
Crystal Ball function444A valid alternative for most papers where the normalisation is not critical is to use the expression“Gaussian function with a low-mass power-law tail” or “Gaussian function with power-law tails”. In that case, no citation is needed |  [Skwarnicki:1986xj] Skwarnicki:1986xj
Hypatia function |  [Santos:2013gra] Santos:2013gra
Modified Novosibirsk function |  [Ikeda:1999aq] Ikeda:1999aq
Bukin function |  [Bukin:2007] Bukin:2007
Wilks’ theorem |  [Wilks:1938dza] Wilks:1938dza
CLs method |  [CLs] CLs
BLUE method |  [Nisius:2020jmf] Nisius:2020jmf
Bootstrapping |  [efron:1979] efron:1979
Blatt–Weisskopf barrier |  [Blatt:1952ije] Blatt:1952ije
$f_{s}/f_{d}$ at 7–8 TeV |  [fsfd] fsfd
LHC beam energy uncertainty |  [PhysRevAccelBeams.20.081003] PhysRevAccelBeams.20.081003
Table 4: LHCb detector performance papers. LHCb-DP number | Title
---|---
LHCb-DP-2019-004 [LHCb-DP-2019-004] | Diphoton discrimination
LHCb-DP-2019-003 [LHCb-DP-2019-003] | Electron reconstruction efficiency
LHCb-DP-2019-002 [LHCb-DP-2019-002] | Real-Time analysis
LHCb-DP-2019-001 [LHCb-DP-2019-001] | Run 2 trigger performance
LHCb-DP-2018-004 [LHCb-DP-2018-004] | ReDecay
LHCb-DP-2018-003 [LHCb-DP-2018-003] | Radiation damage in TT
LHCb-DP-2018-002 [LHCb-DP-2018-002] | VeLo material map using SMOG
LHCb-DP-2018-001 [LHCb-DP-2018-001] | PIDCalib for Run 2 (use Ref. [LHCb-PUB-2016-021] for Run 1)
LHCb-DP-2017-001 [LHCb-DP-2017-001] | Performance of the Outer Tracker — Run 2
LHCb-DP-2016-003 [LHCb-DP-2016-003] | HeRSCheL
LHCb-DP-2016-001 [LHCb-DP-2016-001] | TESLA project — Run 2
LHCb-DP-2014-002 [LHCb-DP-2014-002] | LHCb detector performance
LHCb-DP-2014-001 [LHCb-DP-2014-001] | Performance of the LHCb Vertex Locator
LHCb-DP-2013-003 [LHCb-DP-2013-003] | Performance of the LHCb Outer Tracker — Run 1
LHCb-DP-2013-002 [LHCb-DP-2013-002] | Measurement of the track reconstruction efficiency at LHCb
LHCb-DP-2013-001 [LHCb-DP-2013-001] | Performance of the muon identification at LHCb
LHCb-DP-2012-005 [LHCb-DP-2012-005] | Radiation damage in the LHCb Vertex Locator
LHCb-DP-2012-004 [LHCb-DP-2012-004] | The LHCb trigger and its performance in 2011
LHCb-DP-2012-003 [LHCb-DP-2012-003] | Performance of the LHCb RICH detector at the LHC
LHCb-DP-2012-002 [LHCb-DP-2012-002] | Performance of the LHCb muon system
LHCb-DP-2012-001 [LHCb-DP-2012-001] | Radiation hardness of the LHCb Outer Tracker
LHCb-DP-2011-002 [LHCb-DP-2011-002] | Simulation of machine induced background …
LHCb-DP-2011-001 [LHCb-DP-2011-001] | Performance of the LHCb muon system with cosmic rays
LHCb-DP-2010-001 [LHCb-DP-2010-001] | First spatial alignment of the LHCb VELO …
LHCb-DP-2008-001 [LHCb-DP-2008-001] |  LHCb detector
Table 5: LHCb TDRs. LHCb-TDR number | Title
---|---
LHCb-TDR-021 [LHCb-TDR-021] | Allen
LHCb-TDR-020 [LHCb-TDR-020] | SMOG Upgrade
LHCb-TDR-018 [LHCb-TDR-018] | Upgrade computing model
LHCb-PII-Physics [LHCb-PII-Physics] | Phase-II upgrade physics case
LHCb-PII-EoI [LHCb-PII-EoI] | Expression of interest for Phase-II upgrade
LHCb-TDR-017 [LHCb-TDR-017] | Upgrade software and computing
LHCb-TDR-016 [LHCb-TDR-016] | Trigger and online upgrade
LHCb-TDR-015 [LHCb-TDR-015] | Tracker upgrade
LHCb-TDR-014 [LHCb-TDR-014] | PID upgrade
LHCb-TDR-013 [LHCb-TDR-013] | VELO upgrade
LHCb-TDR-012 [LHCb-TDR-012] | Framework TDR for the upgrade
LHCb-TDR-011 [LHCb-TDR-011] | Computing
LHCb-TDR-010 [LHCb-TDR-010] | Trigger
LHCb-TDR-009 [LHCb-TDR-009] | Reoptimized detector
LHCb-TDR-008 [LHCb-TDR-008] | Inner Tracker
LHCb-TDR-007 [LHCb-TDR-007] | Online, DAQ, ECS
LHCb-TDR-006 [LHCb-TDR-006] | Outer Tracker
LHCb-TDR-005 [LHCb-TDR-005] | VELO
LHCb-TDR-004 [LHCb-TDR-004] | Muon system
LHCb-TDR-003 [LHCb-TDR-003] | RICH
LHCb-TDR-002 [LHCb-TDR-002] | Calorimeters
LHCb-TDR-001 [LHCb-TDR-001] | Magnet
Table 6: LHCb-PAPERs (which have their identifier as their cite code). DNE: Does not exist.  LHCb-PAPER-2020-045 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-045] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-044 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-044] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-043 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-043] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-042 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-042] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-041 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-041]
---|---|---|---|---
LHCb-PAPER-2020-040 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-040] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-039 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-039] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-038 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-038] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-037 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-037] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-036 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-036]
LHCb-PAPER-2020-035 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-035] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-034 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-034] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-033 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-033] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-032 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-032] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-031 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-031]
LHCb-PAPER-2020-030 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-030] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-029 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-029] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-028 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-028] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-027 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-027] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-026 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-026]
LHCb-PAPER-2020-025 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-025] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-024 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-024] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-023 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-023] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-022 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-022] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-021 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-021]
LHCb-PAPER-2020-020 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-020] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-019 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-019] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-018 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-018] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-017 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-017] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-016 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-016]
LHCb-PAPER-2020-015 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-015] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-014 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-014] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-013 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-013] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-012 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-012] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-011 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-011]
LHCb-PAPER-2020-010 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-010] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-009 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-009] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-008 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-008] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-007 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-007] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-006 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-006]
LHCb-PAPER-2020-005 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-005] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-004 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-004] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-003 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-003] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-002 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-002] |  LHCb-PAPER-2020-001 [LHCb-PAPER-2020-001]
LHCb-PAPER-2019-046 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-046] |  |  |  |
LHCb-PAPER-2019-045 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-045] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-044 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-044] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-043 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-043] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-042 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-042] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-041 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-041]
LHCb-PAPER-2019-040 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-040] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-039 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-039] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-038 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-038] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-037 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-037] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-036 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-036]
LHCb-PAPER-2019-035 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-035] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-034 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-034] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-033 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-033] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-032 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-032] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-031 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-031]
LHCb-PAPER-2019-030 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-030] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-029 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-029] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-028 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-028] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-027 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-027] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-026 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-026]
LHCb-PAPER-2019-025 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-025] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-024 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-024] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-023 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-023] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-022 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-022] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-021 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-021]
LHCb-PAPER-2019-020 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-020] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-019 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-019] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-018 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-018] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-017 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-017] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-016 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-016]
LHCb-PAPER-2019-015 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-015] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-014 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-014] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-013 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-013] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-012 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-012] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-011 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-011]
LHCb-PAPER-2019-010 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-010] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-009 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-009] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-008 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-008] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-007 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-007] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-006 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-006]
LHCb-PAPER-2019-005 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-005] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-004 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-004] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-003 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-003] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-002 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-002] |  LHCb-PAPER-2019-001 [LHCb-PAPER-2019-001]
LHCb-PAPER-2018-051 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-051] |  |  |  |
LHCb-PAPER-2018-050 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-050] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-049 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-049] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-048 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-048] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-047 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-047] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-046 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-046]
LHCb-PAPER-2018-045 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-045] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-044 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-044] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-043 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-043] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-042 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-042] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-041 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-041]
LHCb-PAPER-2018-040 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-040] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-039 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-039] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-038 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-038] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-037 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-037] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-036 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-036]
LHCb-PAPER-2018-035 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-035] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-034 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-034] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-033 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-033] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-032 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-032] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-031 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-031]
LHCb-PAPER-2018-030 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-030] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-029 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-029] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-028 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-028] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-027 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-027] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-026 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-026]
LHCb-PAPER-2018-025 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-025] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-024 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-024] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-023 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-023] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-022 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-022] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-021 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-021]
LHCb-PAPER-2018-020 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-020] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-019 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-019] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-018 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-018] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-017 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-017] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-016 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-016]
LHCb-PAPER-2018-015 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-015] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-014 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-014] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-013 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-013] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-012 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-012] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-011 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-011]
LHCb-PAPER-2018-010 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-010] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-009 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-009] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-008 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-008] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-007 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-007] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-006 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-006]
LHCb-PAPER-2018-005 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-005] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-004 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-004] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-003 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-003] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-002 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-002] |  LHCb-PAPER-2018-001 [LHCb-PAPER-2018-001]
LHCb-PAPER-2017-050 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-050] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-049 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-049] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-048 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-048] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-047 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-047] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-046 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-046]
LHCb-PAPER-2017-045 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-045] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-044 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-044] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-043 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-043] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-042 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-042] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-041 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-041]
LHCb-PAPER-2017-040 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-040] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-039 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-039] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-038 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-038] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-037 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-037] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-036 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-036]
LHCb-PAPER-2017-035 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-035] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-034 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-034] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-033 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-033] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-032 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-032] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-031 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-031]
LHCb-PAPER-2017-030 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-030] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-029 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-029] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-028 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-028] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-027 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-027] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-026 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-026]
LHCb-PAPER-2017-025 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-025] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-024 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-024] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-023 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-023] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-022 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-022] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-021 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-021]
LHCb-PAPER-2017-020 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-020] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-019 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-019] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-018 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-018] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-017 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-017] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-016 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-016]
LHCb-PAPER-2017-015 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-015] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-014 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-014] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-013 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-013] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-012 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-012] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-011 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-011]
LHCb-PAPER-2017-010 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-010] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-009 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-009] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-008 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-008] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-007 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-007] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-006 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-006]
LHCb-PAPER-2017-005 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-005] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-004 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-004] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-003 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-003] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-002 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-002] |  LHCb-PAPER-2017-001 [LHCb-PAPER-2017-001]
LHCb-PAPER-2016-065 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-065] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-064 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-064] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-063 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-063] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-062 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-062] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-061 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-061]
LHCb-PAPER-2016-060 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-060] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-059 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-059] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-058 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-058] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-057 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-057] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-056 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-056]
LHCb-PAPER-2016-055 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-055] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-054 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-054] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-053 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-053] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-052 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-052] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-051 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-051]
LHCb-PAPER-2016-050 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-050] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-049 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-049] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-048 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-048] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-047 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-047] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-046 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-046]
LHCb-PAPER-2016-045 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-045] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-044 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-044] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-043 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-043] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-042 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-042] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-041 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-041]
LHCb-PAPER-2016-040 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-040] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-039 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-039] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-038 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-038] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-037 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-037] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-036 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-036]
LHCb-PAPER-2016-035 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-035] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-034 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-034] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-033 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-033] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-032 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-032] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-031 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-031]
LHCb-PAPER-2016-030 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-030] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-029 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-029] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-028 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-028] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-027 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-027] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-026 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-026]
LHCb-PAPER-2016-025 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-025] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-024 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-024] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-023 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-023] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-022 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-022] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-021 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-021]
LHCb-PAPER-2016-020 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-020] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-019 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-019] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-018 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-018] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-017 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-017] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-016 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-016]
LHCb-PAPER-2016-015 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-015] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-014 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-014] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-013 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-013] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-012 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-012] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-011 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-011]
LHCb-PAPER-2016-010 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-010] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-009 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-009] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-008 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-008] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-007 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-007] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-006 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-006]
LHCb-PAPER-2016-005 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-005] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-004 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-004] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-003 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-003] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-002 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-002] |  LHCb-PAPER-2016-001 [LHCb-PAPER-2016-001]
LHCb-PAPER-2015-060 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-060] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-059 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-059] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-058 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-058] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-057 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-057] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-056 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-056]
LHCb-PAPER-2015-055 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-055] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-054 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-054] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-053 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-053] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-052 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-052] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-051 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-051]
LHCb-PAPER-2015-050 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-050] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-049 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-049] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-048 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-048] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-047 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-047] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-046 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-046]
LHCb-PAPER-2015-045 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-045] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-044 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-044] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-043 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-043] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-042 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-042] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-041 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-041]
LHCb-PAPER-2015-040 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-040] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-039 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-039] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-038 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-038] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-037 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-037] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-036 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-036]
LHCb-PAPER-2015-035 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-035] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-034 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-034] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-033 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-033] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-032 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-032] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-031 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-031]
LHCb-PAPER-2015-030 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-030] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-029 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-029] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-028 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-028] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-027 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-027] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-026 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-026]
LHCb-PAPER-2015-025 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-025] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-024 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-024] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-023 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-023] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-022 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-022] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-021 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-021]
LHCb-PAPER-2015-020 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-020] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-019 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-019] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-018 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-018] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-017 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-017] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-016 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-016]
LHCb-PAPER-2015-015 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-015] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-014 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-014] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-013 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-013] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-012 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-012] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-011 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-011]
LHCb-PAPER-2015-010 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-010] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-009 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-009] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-008 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-008] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-007 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-007] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-006 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-006]
LHCb-PAPER-2015-005 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-005] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-004 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-004] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-003 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-003] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-002 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-002] |  LHCb-PAPER-2015-001 [LHCb-PAPER-2015-001]
LHCb-PAPER-2014-070 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-070] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-069 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-069] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-068 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-068] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-067 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-067] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-066 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-066]
LHCb-PAPER-2014-065 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-065] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-064 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-064] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-063 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-063] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-062 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-062] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-061 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-061]
LHCb-PAPER-2014-060 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-060] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-059 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-059] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-058 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-058] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-057 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-057] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-056 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-056]
LHCb-PAPER-2014-055 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-055] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-054 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-054] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-053 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-053] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-052 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-052] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-051 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-051]
LHCb-PAPER-2014-050 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-050] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-049 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-049] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-048 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-048] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-047 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-047] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-046 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-046]
LHCb-PAPER-2014-045 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-045] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-044 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-044] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-043 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-043] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-042 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-042] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-041 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-041]
LHCb-PAPER-2014-040 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-040] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-039 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-039] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-038 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-038] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-037 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-037] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-036 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-036]
LHCb-PAPER-2014-035 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-035] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-034 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-034] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-033 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-033] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-032 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-032] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-031 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-031]
LHCb-PAPER-2014-030 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-030] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-029 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-029] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-028 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-028] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-027 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-027] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-026 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-026]
LHCb-PAPER-2014-025 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-025] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-024 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-024] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-023 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-023] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-022 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-022] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-021 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-021]
LHCb-PAPER-2014-020 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-020] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-019 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-019] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-018 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-018] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-017 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-017] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-016 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-016]
LHCb-PAPER-2014-015 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-015] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-014 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-014] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-013 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-013] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-012 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-012] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-011 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-011]
LHCb-PAPER-2014-010 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-010] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-009 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-009] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-008 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-008] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-007 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-007] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-006 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-006]
LHCb-PAPER-2014-005 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-005] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-004 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-004] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-003 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-003] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-002 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-002] |  LHCb-PAPER-2014-001 [LHCb-PAPER-2014-001]
LHCb-PAPER-2013-070 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-070] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-069 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-069] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-068 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-068] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-067 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-067] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-066 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-066]
LHCb-PAPER-2013-065 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-065] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-064 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-064] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-063 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-063] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-062 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-062] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-061 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-061]
LHCb-PAPER-2013-060 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-060] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-059 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-059] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-058 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-058] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-057 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-057] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-056 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-056]
LHCb-PAPER-2013-055 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-055] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-054 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-054] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-053 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-053] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-052 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-052] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-051 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-051]
LHCb-PAPER-2013-050 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-050] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-049 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-049] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-048 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-048] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-047 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-047] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-046 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-046]
LHCb-PAPER-2013-045 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-045] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-044 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-044] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-043 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-043] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-042 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-042] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-041 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-041]
LHCb-PAPER-2013-040 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-040] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-039 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-039] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-038 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-038] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-037 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-037] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-036 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-036]
LHCb-PAPER-2013-035 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-035] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-034 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-034] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-033 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-033] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-032 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-032] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-031 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-031]
LHCb-PAPER-2013-030 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-030] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-029 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-029] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-028 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-028] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-027 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-027] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-026 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-026]
LHCb-PAPER-2013-025 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-025] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-024 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-024] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-023 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-023] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-022 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-022] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-021 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-021]
LHCb-PAPER-2013-020 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-020] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-019 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-019] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-018 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-018] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-017 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-017] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-016 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-016]
LHCb-PAPER-2013-015 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-015] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-014 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-014] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-013 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-013] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-012 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-012] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-011 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-011]
LHCb-PAPER-2013-010 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-010] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-009 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-009] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-008 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-008] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-007 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-007] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-006 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-006]
LHCb-PAPER-2013-005 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-005] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-004 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-004] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-003 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-003] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-002 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-002] |  LHCb-PAPER-2013-001 [LHCb-PAPER-2013-001]
LHCb-PAPER-2012-057 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-057] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-056 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-056] |  |  |
LHCb-PAPER-2012-055 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-055] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-054 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-054] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-053 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-053] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-052 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-052] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-051 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-051]
LHCb-PAPER-2012-050 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-050] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-049 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-049] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-048 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-048] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-047 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-047] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-046 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-046]
LHCb-PAPER-2012-045 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-045] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-044 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-044] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-043 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-043] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-042 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-042] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-041 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-041]
LHCb-PAPER-2012-040 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-040] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-039 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-039] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-038 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-038] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-037 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-037] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-036 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-036]
LHCb-PAPER-2012-035 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-035] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-034 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-034] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-033 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-033] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-032 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-032] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-031 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-031]
LHCb-PAPER-2012-030 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-030] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-029 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-029] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-028 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-028] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-027 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-027] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-026 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-026]
LHCb-PAPER-2012-025 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-025] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-024 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-024] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-023 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-023] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-022 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-022] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-021 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-021]
LHCb-PAPER-2012-020 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-020] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-019 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-019] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-018 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-018] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-017 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-017] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-016 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-016]
LHCb-PAPER-2012-015 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-015] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-014 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-014] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-013 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-013] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-012 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-012] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-011 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-011]
LHCb-PAPER-2012-010 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-010] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-009 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-009] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-008 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-008] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-007 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-007] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-006 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-006]
LHCb-PAPER-2012-005 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-005] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-004 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-004] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-003 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-003] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-002 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-002] |  LHCb-PAPER-2012-001 [LHCb-PAPER-2012-001]
LHCb-PAPER-2011-045 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-045] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-044 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-044] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-043 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-043] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-042 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-042] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-041 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-041]
LHCb-PAPER-2011-040 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-040] | LHCb-PAPER-2011-039555LHCb-PAPER-2011-039 does not exist. |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-038 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-038] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-037 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-037] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-036 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-036]
LHCb-PAPER-2011-035 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-035] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-034 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-034] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-033 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-033] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-032 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-032] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-031 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-031]
LHCb-PAPER-2011-030 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-030] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-029 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-029] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-028 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-028] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-027 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-027] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-026 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-026]
LHCb-PAPER-2011-025 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-025] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-024 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-024] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-023 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-023] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-022 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-022] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-021 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-021]
LHCb-PAPER-2011-020 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-020] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-019 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-019] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-018 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-018] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-017 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-017] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-016 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-016]
LHCb-PAPER-2011-015 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-015] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-014 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-014] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-013 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-013] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-012 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-012] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-011 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-011]
LHCb-PAPER-2011-010 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-010] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-009 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-009] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-008 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-008] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-007 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-007] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-006 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-006]
LHCb-PAPER-2011-005 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-005] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-004 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-004] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-003 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-003] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-002 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-002] |  LHCb-PAPER-2011-001 [LHCb-PAPER-2011-001]
LHCb-PAPER-2010-002 [LHCb-PAPER-2010-002] |  LHCb-PAPER-2010-001 [LHCb-PAPER-2010-001] |  |  |
Table 7: LHCb-CONFs (which have their identifier as their cite code). Most CONF notes have been superseded by a paper and are thus retired. This is indicated in the bibtex entry. Do not cite retired CONF notes. DNE: Does not exist.  LHCb-CONF-2020-005 [LHCb-CONF-2020-005] |  LHCb-CONF-2020-004 [LHCb-CONF-2020-004] |  LHCb-CONF-2020-003 [LHCb-CONF-2020-003] |  LHCb-CONF-2020-002 [LHCb-CONF-2020-002] |  LHCb-CONF-2020-001 [LHCb-CONF-2020-001]
---|---|---|---|---
LHCb-CONF-2019-005 [LHCb-CONF-2019-005] |  LHCb-CONF-2019-004 [LHCb-CONF-2019-004] |  LHCb-CONF-2019-003 [LHCb-CONF-2019-003] |  LHCb-CONF-2019-002 [LHCb-CONF-2019-002] |  LHCb-CONF-2019-001 [LHCb-CONF-2019-001]
LHCb-CONF-2018-006 [LHCb-CONF-2018-006] |  |  |  |
LHCb-CONF-2018-005 [LHCb-CONF-2018-005] |  LHCb-CONF-2018-004 [LHCb-CONF-2018-004] |  LHCb-CONF-2018-003 [LHCb-CONF-2018-003] |  LHCb-CONF-2018-002 [LHCb-CONF-2018-002]666If you cite the gamma combination, always also cite the latest gamma paper as \cite{LHCb-PAPER-2013-020,*LHCb-CONF-2018-002} (unless you cite LHCb-PAPER-2013-020 separately too). |  LHCb-CONF-2018-001 [LHCb-CONF-2018-001]
LHCb-CONF-2017-005 [LHCb-CONF-2017-005] |  LHCb-CONF-2017-004 [LHCb-CONF-2017-004] |  LHCb-CONF-2017-003 [LHCb-CONF-2017-003] |  LHCb-CONF-2017-002 [LHCb-CONF-2017-002] |  LHCb-CONF-2017-001 [LHCb-CONF-2017-001]
LHCb-CONF-2016-018 [LHCb-CONF-2016-018] |  LHCb-CONF-2016-016 [LHCb-CONF-2016-016] |  |  |
LHCb-CONF-2016-015 [LHCb-CONF-2016-015] |  LHCb-CONF-2016-014 [LHCb-CONF-2016-014] |  LHCb-CONF-2016-013 [LHCb-CONF-2016-013] |  LHCb-CONF-2016-012 [LHCb-CONF-2016-012] |  LHCb-CONF-2016-011 [LHCb-CONF-2016-011]
LHCb-CONF-2016-010 [LHCb-CONF-2016-010] |  LHCb-CONF-2016-009 [LHCb-CONF-2016-009] |  LHCb-CONF-2016-008 [LHCb-CONF-2016-008] |  LHCb-CONF-2016-007 [LHCb-CONF-2016-007] |  LHCb-CONF-2016-006 [LHCb-CONF-2016-006]
LHCb-CONF-2016-005 [LHCb-CONF-2016-005] |  LHCb-CONF-2016-004 [LHCb-CONF-2016-004] |  LHCb-CONF-2016-003 [LHCb-CONF-2016-003] |  LHCb-CONF-2016-002 [LHCb-CONF-2016-002] |  LHCb-CONF-2016-001 [LHCb-CONF-2016-001]
LHCb-CONF-2015-005 [LHCb-CONF-2015-005] |  LHCb-CONF-2015-004 [LHCb-CONF-2015-004] |  LHCb-CONF-2015-003 [LHCb-CONF-2015-003] |  LHCb-CONF-2015-002 [LHCb-CONF-2015-002] |  LHCb-CONF-2015-001 [LHCb-CONF-2015-001]
LHCb-CONF-2014-004 [LHCb-CONF-2014-004] |  LHCb-CONF-2014-003 [LHCb-CONF-2014-003] |  LHCb-CONF-2014-002 [LHCb-CONF-2014-002] |  LHCb-CONF-2014-001 [LHCb-CONF-2014-001] |
LHCb-CONF-2013-013 [LHCb-CONF-2013-013] |  LHCb-CONF-2013-012 [LHCb-CONF-2013-012] |  LHCb-CONF-2013-011 [LHCb-CONF-2013-011] |  |
LHCb-CONF-2013-010 [LHCb-CONF-2013-010] |  LHCb-CONF-2013-009 [LHCb-CONF-2013-009] |  LHCb-CONF-2013-008 [LHCb-CONF-2013-008] |  LHCb-CONF-2013-007 [LHCb-CONF-2013-007] |  LHCb-CONF-2013-006 [LHCb-CONF-2013-006]
LHCb-CONF-2013-005 [LHCb-CONF-2013-005] |  LHCb-CONF-2013-004 [LHCb-CONF-2013-004] |  LHCb-CONF-2013-003 [LHCb-CONF-2013-003] |  LHCb-CONF-2013-002 [LHCb-CONF-2013-002] |  LHCb-CONF-2013-001 [LHCb-CONF-2013-001]
LHCb-CONF-2012-034 [LHCb-CONF-2012-034] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-033 [LHCb-CONF-2012-033] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-032 [LHCb-CONF-2012-032] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-031 [LHCb-CONF-2012-031] |
LHCb-CONF-2012-030 [LHCb-CONF-2012-030] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-029 [LHCb-CONF-2012-029] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-028 [LHCb-CONF-2012-028] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-027 [LHCb-CONF-2012-027] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-026 [LHCb-CONF-2012-026]
LHCb-CONF-2012-025 [LHCb-CONF-2012-025] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-024 [LHCb-CONF-2012-024] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-023 [LHCb-CONF-2012-023] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-022 [LHCb-CONF-2012-022] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-021 [LHCb-CONF-2012-021]
LHCb-CONF-2012-020 [LHCb-CONF-2012-020] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-019 [LHCb-CONF-2012-019] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-018 [LHCb-CONF-2012-018] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-017 [LHCb-CONF-2012-017] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-016 [LHCb-CONF-2012-016]
LHCb-CONF-2012-015 [LHCb-CONF-2012-015] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-014 [LHCb-CONF-2012-014] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-013 [LHCb-CONF-2012-013] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-012 [LHCb-CONF-2012-012] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-011 [LHCb-CONF-2012-011]
LHCb-CONF-2012-010 [LHCb-CONF-2012-010] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-009 [LHCb-CONF-2012-009] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-008 [LHCb-CONF-2012-008] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-007 [LHCb-CONF-2012-007] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-006 [LHCb-CONF-2012-006]
LHCb-CONF-2012-005 [LHCb-CONF-2012-005] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-004 [LHCb-CONF-2012-004] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-003 [LHCb-CONF-2012-003] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-002 [LHCb-CONF-2012-002] |  LHCb-CONF-2012-001 [LHCb-CONF-2012-001]
LHCb-CONF-2011-062 [LHCb-CONF-2011-062] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-061 [LHCb-CONF-2011-061] |  |  |
LHCb-CONF-2011-060 [LHCb-CONF-2011-060] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-059 [LHCb-CONF-2011-059] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-058 [LHCb-CONF-2011-058] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-057 [LHCb-CONF-2011-057] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-056 [LHCb-CONF-2011-056]
LHCb-CONF-2011-055 [LHCb-CONF-2011-055] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-054 [LHCb-CONF-2011-054] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-053 [LHCb-CONF-2011-053] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-052 [LHCb-CONF-2011-052] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-051 [LHCb-CONF-2011-051]
LHCb-CONF-2011-050 [LHCb-CONF-2011-050] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-049 [LHCb-CONF-2011-049] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-048 [LHCb-CONF-2011-048] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-047 [LHCb-CONF-2011-047] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-046 [LHCb-CONF-2011-046]
LHCb-CONF-2011-045 [LHCb-CONF-2011-045] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-044 [LHCb-CONF-2011-044] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-043 [LHCb-CONF-2011-043] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-042 [LHCb-CONF-2011-042] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-041 [LHCb-CONF-2011-041]
LHCb-CONF-2011-040 [LHCb-CONF-2011-040] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-039 [LHCb-CONF-2011-039] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-038 [LHCb-CONF-2011-038] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-037 [LHCb-CONF-2011-037] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-036 [LHCb-CONF-2011-036]
LHCb-CONF-2011-035 [LHCb-CONF-2011-035] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-034 [LHCb-CONF-2011-034] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-033 [LHCb-CONF-2011-033] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-032 DNE |  LHCb-CONF-2011-031 [LHCb-CONF-2011-031]
LHCb-CONF-2011-030 [LHCb-CONF-2011-030] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-029 [LHCb-CONF-2011-029] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-028 [LHCb-CONF-2011-028] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-027 [LHCb-CONF-2011-027] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-026 [LHCb-CONF-2011-026]
LHCb-CONF-2011-025 [LHCb-CONF-2011-025] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-024 [LHCb-CONF-2011-024] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-023 [LHCb-CONF-2011-023] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-022 [LHCb-CONF-2011-022] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-021 [LHCb-CONF-2011-021]
LHCb-CONF-2011-020 [LHCb-CONF-2011-020] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-019 [LHCb-CONF-2011-019] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-018 [LHCb-CONF-2011-018] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-017 [LHCb-CONF-2011-017] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-016 [LHCb-CONF-2011-016]
LHCb-CONF-2011-015 [LHCb-CONF-2011-015] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-014 [LHCb-CONF-2011-014] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-013 [LHCb-CONF-2011-013] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-012 [LHCb-CONF-2011-012] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-011 [LHCb-CONF-2011-011]
LHCb-CONF-2011-010 [LHCb-CONF-2011-010] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-009 [LHCb-CONF-2011-009] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-008 [LHCb-CONF-2011-008] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-007 [LHCb-CONF-2011-007] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-006 [LHCb-CONF-2011-006]
LHCb-CONF-2011-005 [LHCb-CONF-2011-005] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-004 [LHCb-CONF-2011-004] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-003 [LHCb-CONF-2011-003] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-002 [LHCb-CONF-2011-002] |  LHCb-CONF-2011-001 [LHCb-CONF-2011-001]
LHCb-CONF-2010-014 [LHCb-CONF-2010-014] |  LHCb-CONF-2010-013 [LHCb-CONF-2010-013] |  LHCb-CONF-2010-012 [LHCb-CONF-2010-012] |  LHCb-CONF-2010-011 [LHCb-CONF-2010-011] |
LHCb-CONF-2010-010 [LHCb-CONF-2010-010] |  LHCb-CONF-2010-009 [LHCb-CONF-2010-009] |  LHCb-CONF-2010-008 [LHCb-CONF-2010-008] |  |
Earlier documents in LHCb-CONF series are actually proceedings.

##  Appendix B Standard symbols

As explained in Sect. LABEL:sec:typography this appendix contains standard
typesetting of symbols, particle names, units etc. in LHCb documents.

In the file lhcb-symbols-def.tex, which is included, a large number of symbols
is defined. While they can lead to quicker typing, the main reason is to
ensure a uniform notation within a document and between different LHCb
documents. If a symbol like \CP to typeset $C\\!P$ violation is available for
a unit, particle name, process or whatever, it should be used. If you do not
agree with the notation you should ask to get the definition in lhcb-symbols-
def.tex changed rather than just ignoring it.

All the main particles have been given symbols. The $\mathrm{B}$ mesons are
thus named ${{\mathrm{B}}^{+}}$, ${\mathrm{B}}^{0}$,
${\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}$, and ${\mathrm{B}}_{\mathrm{c}}^{+}$. There is
no need to go into math mode to use particle names, thus saving the typing of
many $ signs. By default particle names are typeset in italic type to agree
with the PDG preference. To get roman particle names you can just change
\setboolean{uprightparticles}{false} to true at the top of this template.

There is a large number of units typeset that ensures the correct use of
fonts, capitals and spacing. As an example we have
${m_{{{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}}}=5366.3\pm
0.6\text{\,Me\kern-1.00006ptV\\!/}c^{2}$. Note that $\,\upmu\text{m}$ is
typeset with an upright $\upmu$, even if the particle names have slanted Greek
letters.

A set of useful symbols are defined for working groups. More of these symbols
can be included later. As an example in the Rare Decay group we have several
different analyses looking for a measurement of
$\mathcal{C}_{7}^{{}^{\prime}\mathrm{(eff)}}$ and
$\mathcal{O}_{7.}^{{}^{\prime}}$

##  Appendix C List of all symbols

###  C.1 Experiments

\lhcb | LHCb | \atlas | ATLAS | \cms | CMS
---|---|---|---|---|---
\alice | ALICE | \babar | BaBar | \belle | Belle
\belletwo | Belle II | \besiii | BESIII | \cleo | CLEO
\cdf | CDF | \dzero | D0 | \aleph | ALEPH
\delphi | DELPHI | \opal | OPAL | \lthree | L3
\sld | SLD | \cern | CERN | \lhc | LHC
\lep | LEP | \tevatron | Tevatron | \bfactories | $\mathrm{B}$ Factories
\bfactory | $\mathrm{B}$ Factory | \upgradeone | Upgrade I | \upgradetwo | Upgrade II

####  C.1.1 LHCb sub-detectors and sub-systems

\velo | VELO | \rich | RICH | \richone | RICH1
---|---|---|---|---|---
\richtwo | RICH2 | \ttracker | TT | \intr | IT
\st | ST | \ot | OT | \herschel | HeRSCheL
\spd | SPD | \presh | PS | \ecal | ECAL
\hcal | HCAL | \MagUp | MagUp | \MagDown | MagDown
\ode | ODE | \daq | DAQ | \tfc | TFC
\ecs | ECS | \lone | L0 | \hlt | HLT
\hltone | HLT1 | \hlttwo | HLT2 |  |

###  C.2 Particles

####  C.2.1 Leptons

\electron | $\mathrm{e}$ | \en | $\mathrm{e}^{-}$ | \ep | $\mathrm{e}^{+}$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\epm | $\mathrm{e}^{\pm}$ | \emp | $\mathrm{e}^{\mp}$ | \epem | $\mathrm{e}^{+}\mathrm{e}^{-}$
\muon | $\upmu$ | \mup | $\upmu^{+}$ | \mun | $\upmu^{-}$
\mupm | $\upmu^{\pm}$ | \mump | $\upmu^{\mp}$ | \mumu | $\upmu^{+}\upmu^{-}$
\tauon | $\uptau$ | \taup | $\uptau^{+}$ | \taum | $\uptau^{-}$
\taupm | $\uptau^{\pm}$ | \taump | $\uptau^{\mp}$ | \tautau | $\uptau^{+}\uptau^{-}$
\lepton | $\ell$ | \ellm | $\ell^{-}$ | \ellp | $\ell^{+}$
\ellpm | $\ell^{\pm}$ | \ellmp | $\ell^{\mp}$ | \ellell | $\ell^{+}\ell^{-}$
\neu | $\upnu$ | \neub | $\overline{\upnu}$ | \neue | ${\upnu}_{e}$
\neueb | ${\overline{\upnu}}_{e}$ | \neum | ${\upnu}_{\mu}$ | \neumb | ${\overline{\upnu}}_{\mu}$
\neut | ${\upnu}_{\tau}$ | \neutb | ${\overline{\upnu}}_{\tau}$ | \neul | ${\upnu}_{\ell}$
\neulb | ${\overline{\upnu}}_{\ell}$ |  |  |  |

####  C.2.2 Gauge bosons and scalars

\g | $\upgamma$ | \H | $\mathrm{H}^{0}$ | \Hp | $\mathrm{H}^{+}$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\Hm | $\mathrm{H}^{-}$ | \Hpm | $\mathrm{H}^{\pm}$ | \W | $\mathrm{W}$
\Wp | $\mathrm{W}^{+}$ | \Wm | $\mathrm{W}^{-}$ | \Wpm | $\mathrm{W}^{\pm}$
\Z | $\mathrm{Z}$ |  |  |  |

####  C.2.3 Quarks

\quark | $\mathrm{q}$ | \quarkbar | $\overline{\mathrm{q}}$ | \qqbar | ${\mathrm{q}}{\overline{\mathrm{q}}}$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\uquark | $\mathrm{u}$ | \uquarkbar | $\overline{\mathrm{u}}$ | \uubar | ${\mathrm{u}}{\overline{\mathrm{u}}}$
\dquark | $\mathrm{d}$ | \dquarkbar | $\overline{\mathrm{d}}$ | \ddbar | ${\mathrm{d}}{\overline{\mathrm{d}}}$
\squark | $\mathrm{s}$ | \squarkbar | $\overline{\mathrm{s}}$ | \ssbar | ${\mathrm{s}}{\overline{\mathrm{s}}}$
\cquark | $\mathrm{c}$ | \cquarkbar | $\overline{\mathrm{c}}$ | \ccbar | ${\mathrm{c}}{\overline{\mathrm{c}}}$
\bquark | $\mathrm{b}$ | \bquarkbar | $\overline{\mathrm{b}}$ | \bbbar | ${\mathrm{b}}{\overline{\mathrm{b}}}$
\tquark | $\mathrm{t}$ | \tquarkbar | $\overline{\mathrm{t}}$ | \ttbar | ${\mathrm{t}}{\overline{\mathrm{t}}}$

####  C.2.4 Light mesons

\hadron | $\mathrm{h}$ | \pion | $\uppi$ | \piz | ${\uppi}^{0}$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\pip | ${\uppi}^{+}$ | \pim | ${\uppi}^{-}$ | \pipm | ${\uppi}^{\pm}$
\pimp | ${\uppi}^{\mp}$ | \rhomeson | $\uprho$ | \rhoz | ${\uprho}^{0}$
\rhop | ${\uprho}^{+}$ | \rhom | ${\uprho}^{-}$ | \rhopm | ${\uprho}^{\pm}$
\rhomp | ${\uprho}^{\mp}$ | \kaon | $\mathrm{K}$ | \Kbar | $\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{K}}$
\Kb | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{K}}}$ | \KorKbar |  ( ) [-.7ex] $\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{K}$ | \Kz | ${\mathrm{K}}^{0}$
\Kzb | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{K}}}{}^{0}$ | \Kp | ${\mathrm{K}}^{+}$ | \Km | ${\mathrm{K}}^{-}$
\Kpm | ${\mathrm{K}}^{\pm}$ | \Kmp | ${\mathrm{K}}^{\mp}$ | \KS | ${\mathrm{K}}^{0}_{\mathrm{S}}$
\Vzero | $V^{0}$ | \KL | ${\mathrm{K}}^{0}_{\mathrm{L}}$ | \Kstarz | ${\mathrm{K}}^{*0}$
\Kstarzb | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{K}}}{}^{*0}$ | \Kstar | ${\mathrm{K}}^{*}$ | \Kstarb | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{K}}}{}^{*}$
\Kstarp | ${\mathrm{K}}^{*+}$ | \Kstarm | ${\mathrm{K}}^{*-}$ | \Kstarpm | ${\mathrm{K}}^{*\pm}$
\Kstarmp | ${\mathrm{K}}^{*\mp}$ | \KorKbarz | $\kern 0.0pt\shortstack{{(\rule[2.15277pt]{12.50002pt}{0.51212pt})} \\\ [-.7ex] $\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{K}$}{}^{0}$ | \etaz | $\upeta$
\etapr | $\upeta^{\prime}$ | \phiz | $\upphi$ | \omegaz | $\upomega$

####  C.2.5 Charmed mesons

\Dbar | $\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{D}}$ | \D | $\mathrm{D}$ | \Db | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{D}}}$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\DorDbar |  ( ) [-.7ex] $\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{D}$ | \Dz | ${\mathrm{D}}^{0}$ | \Dzb | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{D}}}{}^{0}$
\Dp | ${\mathrm{D}}^{+}$ | \Dm | ${\mathrm{D}}^{-}$ | \Dpm | ${\mathrm{D}}^{\pm}$
\Dmp | ${\mathrm{D}}^{\mp}$ | \DpDm | ${{\mathrm{D}}^{+}}{\kern-1.60004pt{{\mathrm{D}}^{-}}}$ | \Dstar | ${\mathrm{D}}^{*}$
\Dstarb | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{D}}}{}^{*}$ | \Dstarz | ${\mathrm{D}}^{*0}$ | \Dstarzb | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{D}}}{}^{*0}$
\theDstarz | ${\mathrm{D}}^{*}(2007)^{0}$ | \theDstarzb | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{D}}}^{*}(2007)^{0}$ | \Dstarp | ${\mathrm{D}}^{*+}$
\Dstarm | ${\mathrm{D}}^{*-}$ | \Dstarpm | ${\mathrm{D}}^{*\pm}$ | \Dstarmp | ${\mathrm{D}}^{*\mp}$
\theDstarp | ${\mathrm{D}}^{*}(2010)^{+}$ | \theDstarm | ${\mathrm{D}}^{*}(2010)^{-}$ | \theDstarpm | ${\mathrm{D}}^{*}(2010)^{\pm}$
\theDstarmp | ${\mathrm{D}}^{*}(2010)^{\mp}$ | \Ds | ${\mathrm{D}}^{+}_{\mathrm{s}}$ | \Dsp | ${\mathrm{D}}^{+}_{\mathrm{s}}$
\Dsm | ${\mathrm{D}}^{-}_{\mathrm{s}}$ | \Dspm | ${\mathrm{D}}^{\pm}_{\mathrm{s}}$ | \Dsmp | ${\mathrm{D}}^{\mp}_{\mathrm{s}}$
\Dss | ${\mathrm{D}}^{*+}_{\mathrm{s}}$ | \Dssp | ${\mathrm{D}}^{*+}_{\mathrm{s}}$ | \Dssm | ${\mathrm{D}}^{*-}_{\mathrm{s}}$
\Dsspm | ${\mathrm{D}}^{*\pm}_{\mathrm{s}}$ | \Dssmp | ${\mathrm{D}}^{*\mp}_{\mathrm{s}}$ |  |

####  C.2.6 Beauty mesons

\B | $\mathrm{B}$ | \Bbar | $\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{B}}$ | \Bb | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{B}}}$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\BorBbar |  ( ) [-.7ex] $\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{B}$ | \Bz | ${\mathrm{B}}^{0}$ | \Bzb | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{B}}}{}^{0}$
\Bd | ${\mathrm{B}}^{0}$ | \Bdb | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{B}}}{}^{0}$ | \BdorBdbar |  ( ) [-.7ex] $\kern 0.0pt{{\mathrm{B}}^{0}}$
\Bu | ${\mathrm{B}}^{+}$ | \Bub | ${\mathrm{B}}^{-}$ | \Bp | ${{\mathrm{B}}^{+}}$
\Bm | ${{\mathrm{B}}^{-}}$ | \Bpm | ${\mathrm{B}}^{\pm}$ | \Bmp | ${\mathrm{B}}^{\mp}$
\Bs | ${\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}$ | \Bsb | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{B}}}{}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}$ | \BsorBsbar |  ( ) [-.7ex] $\kern 0.0pt{{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}$
\Bc | ${\mathrm{B}}_{\mathrm{c}}^{+}$ | \Bcp | ${\mathrm{B}}_{\mathrm{c}}^{+}$ | \Bcm | ${\mathrm{B}}_{\mathrm{c}}^{-}$
\Bcpm | ${\mathrm{B}}_{\mathrm{c}}^{\pm}$ | \Bds | ${\mathrm{B}}_{({\mathrm{s}})}^{0}$ | \Bdsb | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{B}}}{}_{({\mathrm{s}})}^{0}$
\BdorBs | ${\mathrm{B}}_{({\mathrm{s}})}^{0}$ | \BdorBsbar | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{B}}}{}_{({\mathrm{s}})}^{0}$ |  |

####  C.2.7 Onia

\jpsi | ${\mathrm{J}\mskip-3.0mu/\mskip-2.0mu\uppsi}$ | \psitwos | $\uppsi{(2S)}$ | \psiprpr | $\uppsi(3770)$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\etac | $\upeta_{\mathrm{c}}$ | \psires | $\uppsi$ | \chic | $\upchi_{\mathrm{c}}$
\chiczero | $\upchi_{{\mathrm{c}}0}$ | \chicone | $\upchi_{{\mathrm{c}}1}$ | \chictwo | $\upchi_{{\mathrm{c}}2}$
\chicJ | $\upchi_{{\mathrm{c}}J}$ | \Upsilonres | $\Upsilon$ | \OneS | $\Upsilon{(1S)}$
\TwoS | $\Upsilon{(2S)}$ | \ThreeS | $\Upsilon{(3S)}$ | \FourS | $\Upsilon{(4S)}$
\FiveS | $\Upsilon{(5S)}$ | \chib | $\upchi_{b}$ | \chibzero | $\upchi_{{\mathrm{b}}0}$
\chibone | $\upchi_{{\mathrm{b}}1}$ | \chibtwo | $\upchi_{{\mathrm{b}}2}$ | \chibJ | $\upchi_{{\mathrm{b}}J}$
\theX | $\upchi_{c1}(3872)$ |  |  |  |

####  C.2.8 Light Baryons

\proton | $\mathrm{p}$ | \antiproton | $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ | \neutron | $\mathrm{n}$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\antineutron | $\overline{\mathrm{n}}$ | \Deltares | $\Delta$ | \Deltaresbar | $\overline{\Delta}$
\Lz | $\Lambda$ | \Lbar | $\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\Lambda}$ | \LorLbar |  ( ) [-.7ex] $\kern 0.0pt\Lambda$
\Lambdares | $\Lambda$ | \Lambdaresbar | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\Lambda}}$ | \Sigmares | $\Sigma$
\Sigmaz | ${\Sigma}{}^{0}$ | \Sigmap | ${\Sigma}{}^{+}$ | \Sigmam | ${\Sigma}{}^{-}$
\Sigmaresbar | $\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt{\Sigma}}$ | \Sigmabarz | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt{\Sigma}}}{}^{0}$ | \Sigmabarp | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt{\Sigma}}}{}^{+}$
\Sigmabarm | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt{\Sigma}}}{}^{-}$ | \Xires | $\Xi$ | \Xiz | ${\Xi}^{0}$
\Xim | ${\Xi}^{-}$ | \Xiresbar | $\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt{\Xi}}$ | \Xibarz | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt{\Xi}}}^{0}$
\Xibarp | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt{\Xi}}}^{+}$ | \Omegares | $\Omega$ | \Omegaresbar | $\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\Omega}$
\Omegam | ${\Omega}^{-}$ | \Omegabarp | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\Omega}}^{+}$ |  |

####  C.2.9 Charmed Baryons

\Lc | ${\Lambda}^{+}_{\mathrm{c}}$ | \Lcbar | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\Lambda}}{}^{-}_{\mathrm{c}}$ | \Xic | ${\Xi}_{\mathrm{c}}$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\Xicz | ${\Xi}^{0}_{\mathrm{c}}$ | \Xicp | ${\Xi}^{+}_{\mathrm{c}}$ | \Xicbar | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt{\Xi}}}{}_{\mathrm{c}}$
\Xicbarz | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt{\Xi}}}{}_{\mathrm{c}}^{0}$ | \Xicbarm | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt{\Xi}}}{}_{\mathrm{c}}^{-}$ | \Omegac | ${\Omega}^{0}_{\mathrm{c}}$
\Omegacbar | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\Omega}}{}_{\mathrm{c}}^{0}$ | \Xicc | ${\Xi}_{{\mathrm{c}}{\mathrm{c}}}$ | \Xiccbar | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt{\Xi}}}{}_{{\mathrm{c}}{\mathrm{c}}}$
\Xiccp | ${\Xi}^{+}_{{\mathrm{c}}{\mathrm{c}}}$ | \Xiccpp | ${\Xi}^{++}_{{\mathrm{c}}{\mathrm{c}}}$ | \Xiccbarm | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt{\Xi}}}{}_{{\mathrm{c}}{\mathrm{c}}}^{-}$
\Xiccbarmm | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt{\Xi}}}{}_{{\mathrm{c}}{\mathrm{c}}}^{--}$ | \Omegacc | ${\Omega}^{+}_{{\mathrm{c}}{\mathrm{c}}}$ | \Omegaccbar | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\Omega}}{}_{{\mathrm{c}}{\mathrm{c}}}^{-}$
\Omegaccc | ${\Omega}^{++}_{{\mathrm{c}}{\mathrm{c}}{\mathrm{c}}}$ | \Omegacccbar | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\Omega}}{}_{{\mathrm{c}}{\mathrm{c}}{\mathrm{c}}}^{--}$ |  |

####  C.2.10 Beauty Baryons

\Lb | ${\Lambda}^{0}_{\mathrm{b}}$ | \Lbbar | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\Lambda}}{}^{0}_{\mathrm{b}}$ | \Sigmab | ${\Sigma}_{\mathrm{b}}$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\Sigmabp | ${\Sigma}_{\mathrm{b}}^{+}$ | \Sigmabz | ${\Sigma}_{\mathrm{b}}^{0}$ | \Sigmabm | ${\Sigma}_{\mathrm{b}}^{-}$
\Sigmabpm | ${\Sigma}_{\mathrm{b}}^{\pm}$ | \Sigmabbar | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt{\Sigma}}}_{\mathrm{b}}$ | \Sigmabbarp | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt{\Sigma}}}_{\mathrm{b}}^{+}$
\Sigmabbarz | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt{\Sigma}}}_{\mathrm{b}}^{0}$ | \Sigmabbarm | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt{\Sigma}}}_{\mathrm{b}}^{-}$ | \Sigmabbarpm | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt{\Sigma}}}_{\mathrm{b}}^{-}$
\Xib | ${\Xi}_{\mathrm{b}}$ | \Xibz | ${\Xi}^{0}_{\mathrm{b}}$ | \Xibm | ${\Xi}^{-}_{\mathrm{b}}$
\Xibbar | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt{\Xi}}}{}_{\mathrm{b}}$ | \Xibbarz | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt{\Xi}}}{}_{\mathrm{b}}^{0}$ | \Xibbarp | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt{\Xi}}}{}_{\mathrm{b}}^{+}$
\Omegab | ${\Omega}^{-}_{\mathrm{b}}$ | \Omegabbar | ${\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\Omega}}{}_{\mathrm{b}}^{+}$ |  |

###  C.3 Physics symbols

####  C.3.1 Decays

\BF | $\mathcal{B}$ | \BR | $\mathcal{B}$ | \BRvis | ${\mathcal{B}}_{\mathrm{{vis}}}$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\ra | $\rightarrow$ | \to | $\rightarrow$ |  |

####  C.3.2 Lifetimes

\tauBs | $\tau_{{{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}}$ | \tauBd | $\tau_{{{\mathrm{B}}^{0}}}$ | \tauBz | $\tau_{{{\mathrm{B}}^{0}}}$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\tauBu | $\tau_{{{{\mathrm{B}}^{+}}}}$ | \tauDp | $\tau_{{{\mathrm{D}}^{+}}}$ | \tauDz | $\tau_{{{\mathrm{D}}^{0}}}$
\tauL | $\tau_{\mathrm{L}}$ | \tauH | $\tau_{\mathrm{H}}$ |  |

####  C.3.3 Masses

\mBd | $m_{{{\mathrm{B}}^{0}}}$ | \mBp | $m_{{{{\mathrm{B}}^{+}}}}$ | \mBs | $m_{{{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}}$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\mBc | $m_{{{\mathrm{B}}_{\mathrm{c}}^{+}}}$ | \mLb | $m_{{{\Lambda}^{0}_{\mathrm{b}}}}$ |  |

####  C.3.4 EW theory, groups

\grpsuthree | $\mathrm{SU}(3)$ | \grpsutw | $\mathrm{SU}(2)$ | \grpuone | $\mathrm{U}(1)$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\ssqtw | $\sin^{2}\\!\theta_{\mathrm{W}}$ | \csqtw | $\cos^{2}\\!\theta_{\mathrm{W}}$ | \stw | $\sin\theta_{\mathrm{W}}$
\ctw | $\cos\theta_{\mathrm{W}}$ | \ssqtwef | ${\sin}^{2}\theta_{\mathrm{W}}^{\mathrm{eff}}$ | \csqtwef | ${\cos}^{2}\theta_{\mathrm{W}}^{\mathrm{eff}}$
\stwef | $\sin\theta_{\mathrm{W}}^{\mathrm{eff}}$ | \ctwef | $\cos\theta_{\mathrm{W}}^{\mathrm{eff}}$ | \gv | $g_{\mbox{\tiny V}}$
\ga | $g_{\mbox{\tiny A}}$ | \order | $\mathcal{O}$ | \ordalph | $\mathcal{O}(\alpha)$
\ordalsq | $\mathcal{O}(\alpha^{2})$ | \ordalcb | $\mathcal{O}(\alpha^{3})$ |  |

####  C.3.5 QCD parameters

\as | $\alpha_{s}$ | \MSb | $\overline{\mathrm{MS}}$ | \lqcd | $\Lambda_{\mathrm{QCD}}$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\qsq | $q^{2}$ |  |  |  |

####  C.3.6 CKM, $C\\!P$ violation

\eps | $\varepsilon$ | \epsK | $\varepsilon_{K}$ | \epsB | $\varepsilon_{B}$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\epsp | $\varepsilon^{\prime}_{K}$ | \CP | $C\\!P$ | \CPT | $C\\!PT$
\T | $T$ | \rhobar | $\overline{\rho}$ | \etabar | $\overline{\eta}$
\Vud | $V_{{\mathrm{u}}{\mathrm{d}}}^{\phantom{\ast}}$ | \Vcd | $V_{{\mathrm{c}}{\mathrm{d}}}^{\phantom{\ast}}$ | \Vtd | $V_{{\mathrm{t}}{\mathrm{d}}}^{\phantom{\ast}}$
\Vus | $V_{{\mathrm{u}}{\mathrm{s}}}^{\phantom{\ast}}$ | \Vcs | $V_{{\mathrm{c}}{\mathrm{s}}}^{\phantom{\ast}}$ | \Vts | $V_{{\mathrm{t}}{\mathrm{s}}}^{\phantom{\ast}}$
\Vub | $V_{{\mathrm{u}}{\mathrm{b}}}^{\phantom{\ast}}$ | \Vcb | $V_{{\mathrm{c}}{\mathrm{b}}}^{\phantom{\ast}}$ | \Vtb | $V_{{\mathrm{t}}{\mathrm{b}}}^{\phantom{\ast}}$
\Vuds | $V_{{\mathrm{u}}{\mathrm{d}}}^{\ast}$ | \Vcds | $V_{{\mathrm{c}}{\mathrm{d}}}^{\ast}$ | \Vtds | $V_{{\mathrm{t}}{\mathrm{d}}}^{\ast}$
\Vuss | $V_{{\mathrm{u}}{\mathrm{s}}}^{\ast}$ | \Vcss | $V_{{\mathrm{c}}{\mathrm{s}}}^{\ast}$ | \Vtss | $V_{{\mathrm{t}}{\mathrm{s}}}^{\ast}$
\Vubs | $V_{{\mathrm{u}}{\mathrm{b}}}^{\ast}$ | \Vcbs | $V_{{\mathrm{c}}{\mathrm{b}}}^{\ast}$ | \Vtbs | $V_{{\mathrm{t}}{\mathrm{b}}}^{\ast}$

####  C.3.7 Oscillations

\dm | $\Delta m$ | \dms | $\Delta m_{{\mathrm{s}}}$ | \dmd | $\Delta m_{{\mathrm{d}}}$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\DG | $\Delta\Gamma$ | \DGs | $\Delta\Gamma_{{\mathrm{s}}}$ | \DGd | $\Delta\Gamma_{{\mathrm{d}}}$
\Gs | $\Gamma_{{\mathrm{s}}}$ | \Gd | $\Gamma_{{\mathrm{d}}}$ | \MBq | $M_{{\mathrm{B}}_{\mathrm{q}}}$
\DGq | $\Delta\Gamma_{{\mathrm{q}}}$ | \Gq | $\Gamma_{{\mathrm{q}}}$ | \dmq | $\Delta m_{{\mathrm{q}}}$
\GL | $\Gamma_{\mathrm{L}}$ | \GH | $\Gamma_{\mathrm{H}}$ | \DGsGs | $\Delta\Gamma_{{\mathrm{s}}}/\Gamma_{{\mathrm{s}}}$
\Delm | $\Delta m$ | \ACP | ${\mathcal{A}}^{{C\\!P}}$ | \Adir | ${\mathcal{A}}^{\mathrm{dir}}$
\Amix | ${\mathcal{A}}^{\mathrm{mix}}$ | \ADelta | ${\mathcal{A}}^{\Delta}$ | \phid | $\phi_{{\mathrm{d}}}$
\sinphid | $\sin\\!{\phi_{{\mathrm{d}}}}$ | \phis | $\phi_{{\mathrm{s}}}$ | \betas | $\beta_{{\mathrm{s}}}$
\sbetas | $\sigma(\beta_{{\mathrm{s}}})$ | \stbetas | $\sigma(2\beta_{{\mathrm{s}}})$ | \stphis | $\sigma(\phi_{{\mathrm{s}}})$
\sinphis | $\sin\\!{\phi_{{\mathrm{s}}}}$ |  |  |  |

####  C.3.8 Tagging

\edet | $\varepsilon_{\mathrm{det}}$ | \erec | $\varepsilon_{\mathrm{rec/det}}$ | \esel | $\varepsilon_{\mathrm{sel/rec}}$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\etrg | $\varepsilon_{\mathrm{trg/sel}}$ | \etot | $\varepsilon_{\mathrm{tot}}$ | \mistag | $\omega$
\wcomb | $\omega^{\mathrm{comb}}$ | \etag | $\varepsilon_{\mathrm{tag}}$ | \etagcomb | $\varepsilon_{\mathrm{tag}}^{\mathrm{comb}}$
\effeff | $\varepsilon_{\mathrm{eff}}$ | \effeffcomb | $\varepsilon_{\mathrm{eff}}^{\mathrm{comb}}$ | \efftag | ${\varepsilon_{\mathrm{tag}}}(1-2\omega)^{2}$
\effD | ${\varepsilon_{\mathrm{tag}}}D^{2}$ | \etagprompt | $\varepsilon_{\mathrm{tag}}^{\mathrm{Pr}}$ | \etagLL | $\varepsilon_{\mathrm{tag}}^{\mathrm{LL}}$

####  C.3.9 Key decay channels

\BdToKstmm | ${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}}\\!\rightarrow{{\mathrm{K}}^{*0}}{\upmu^{+}}{\upmu^{-}}$ | \BdbToKstmm | ${{\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{B}}}{}^{0}}\\!\rightarrow{{\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{K}}}{}^{*0}}{\upmu^{+}}{\upmu^{-}}$ | \BsToJPsiPhi | ${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\\!\rightarrow{{\mathrm{J}\mskip-3.0mu/\mskip-2.0mu\uppsi}}\phi$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\BdToJPsiKst | ${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}}\\!\rightarrow{{\mathrm{J}\mskip-3.0mu/\mskip-2.0mu\uppsi}}{{\mathrm{K}}^{*0}}$ | \BdbToJPsiKst | ${{\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{B}}}{}^{0}}\\!\rightarrow{{\mathrm{J}\mskip-3.0mu/\mskip-2.0mu\uppsi}}{{\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{K}}}{}^{*0}}$ | \BsPhiGam | ${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\\!\rightarrow\phi{\upgamma}$
\BdKstGam | ${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}}\\!\rightarrow{{\mathrm{K}}^{*0}}{\upgamma}$ | \BTohh | ${\mathrm{B}}\\!\rightarrow\mathrm{h}^{+}\mathrm{h}^{\prime-}$ | \BdTopipi | ${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}}\\!\rightarrow{{\uppi}^{+}}{{\uppi}^{-}}$
\BdToKpi | ${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}}\\!\rightarrow{{\mathrm{K}}^{+}}{{\uppi}^{-}}$ | \BsToKK | ${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\\!\rightarrow{{\mathrm{K}}^{+}}{{\mathrm{K}}^{-}}$ | \BsTopiK | ${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\\!\rightarrow{{\uppi}^{+}}{{\mathrm{K}}^{-}}$
\Cpipi | $C_{{{\uppi}^{+}}{{\uppi}^{-}}}$ | \Spipi | $S_{{{\uppi}^{+}}{{\uppi}^{-}}}$ | \CKK | $C_{{{\mathrm{K}}^{+}}{{\mathrm{K}}^{-}}}$
\SKK | $S_{{{\mathrm{K}}^{+}}{{\mathrm{K}}^{-}}}$ | \ADGKK | $A^{{\Delta\Gamma}}_{{{\mathrm{K}}^{+}}{{\mathrm{K}}^{-}}}$ |  |

####  C.3.10 Rare decays

\BdKstee | ${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}}\\!\rightarrow{{\mathrm{K}}^{*0}}{\mathrm{e}^{+}\mathrm{e}^{-}}$ | \BdbKstee | ${{\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{B}}}{}^{0}}\\!\rightarrow{{\kern 0.0pt\overline{\kern 0.0pt\mathrm{K}}}{}^{*0}}{\mathrm{e}^{+}\mathrm{e}^{-}}$ | \bsll | ${\mathrm{b}}\\!\rightarrow{\mathrm{s}}\ell^{+}\ell^{-}$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\AFB | $A_{\mathrm{FB}}$ | \FL | $F_{\mathrm{L}}$ | \AT#1 \AT2 | $A_{\mathrm{T}}^{2}$
\btosgam | ${\mathrm{b}}\\!\rightarrow{\mathrm{s}}{\upgamma}$ | \btodgam | ${\mathrm{b}}\\!\rightarrow{\mathrm{d}}{\upgamma}$ | \Bsmm | ${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\\!\rightarrow{\upmu^{+}}{\upmu^{-}}$
\Bdmm | ${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}}\\!\rightarrow{\upmu^{+}}{\upmu^{-}}$ | \Bsee | ${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}_{\mathrm{s}}}\\!\rightarrow{\mathrm{e}^{+}\mathrm{e}^{-}}$ | \Bdee | ${{\mathrm{B}}^{0}}\\!\rightarrow{\mathrm{e}^{+}\mathrm{e}^{-}}$
\ctl | $\cos{\theta_{\ell}}$ | \ctk | $\cos{\theta_{K}}$ |  |

####  C.3.11 Wilson coefficients and operators

\C#1 \C9 | $\mathcal{C}_{9}$ | \Cp#1 \Cp7 | $\mathcal{C}_{7}^{{}^{\prime}}$ | \Ceff#1 \Ceff9 | $\mathcal{C}_{9}^{\mathrm{(eff)}}$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\Cpeff#1 \Cpeff7 | $\mathcal{C}_{7}^{{}^{\prime}\mathrm{(eff)}}$ | \Ope#1 \Ope2 | $\mathcal{O}_{2}$ | \Opep#1 \Opep7 | $\mathcal{O}_{7}^{{}^{\prime}}$

####  C.3.12 Charm

\xprime | $x^{\prime}$ | \yprime | $y^{\prime}$ | \ycp | $y_{{C\\!P}}$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\agamma | $A_{\Gamma}$ | \dkpicf | ${{\mathrm{D}}^{0}}\\!\rightarrow{{\mathrm{K}}^{-}}{{\uppi}^{+}}$ |  |

####  C.3.13 QM

\bra[1] \bra{a} | $\langle a|$ | \ket[1] \ket{b} | $|b\rangle$ | \braket[2] \braket{a}{b} | $\langle a|b\rangle$
---|---|---|---|---|---

###  C.4 Units (these macros add a small space in front)

\unit[1] \unit{kg} |  kg
---|---

####  C.4.1 Energy and momentum

\tev |  TeV | \gev |  GeV | \mev |  MeV
---|---|---|---|---|---
\kev |  keV | \ev |  eV | \gevgev | $\text{\,Ge\kern-1.00006ptV}^{2}$
\mevc | $\text{\,Me\kern-1.00006ptV\\!/}c$ | \gevc | $\text{\,Ge\kern-1.00006ptV\\!/}c$ | \mevcc | $\text{\,Me\kern-1.00006ptV\\!/}c^{2}$
\gevcc | $\text{\,Ge\kern-1.00006ptV\\!/}c^{2}$ | \gevgevcc | $\text{\,Ge\kern-1.00006ptV}^{2}\\!/c^{2}$ | \gevgevcccc | $\text{\,Ge\kern-1.00006ptV}^{2}\\!/c^{4}$

####  C.4.2 Distance and area (these macros add a small space)

\km |  km | \m |  m | \ma | $\text{\,m}^{2}$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\cm |  cm | \cma | $\text{\,cm}^{2}$ | \mm |  mm
\mma | $\text{\,mm}^{2}$ | \mum | $\,\upmu\text{m}$ | \muma | $\,\upmu\text{m}^{2}$
\nm |  nm | \fm |  fm | \barn |  b
\mbarn |  mb | \mub | $\,\upmu\text{b}$ | \nb |  nb
\invnb | $\text{\,nb}^{-1}$ | \pb |  pb | \invpb | $\text{\,pb}^{-1}$
\fb |  fb | \invfb | $\text{\,fb}^{-1}$ | \ab |  ab
\invab | $\text{\,ab}^{-1}$ |  |  |  |

####  C.4.3 Time

\sec |  s | \ms |  ms | \mus | $\,\upmu\text{s}$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\ns |  ns | \ps |  ps | \fs |  fs
\mhz |  MHz | \khz |  kHz | \hz |  Hz
\invps | $\text{\,ps}^{-1}$ | \invns | $\text{\,ns}^{-1}$ | \yr |  yr
\hr |  hr |  |  |  |

####  C.4.4 Temperature

\degc |  ∘C | \degk |  K
---|---|---|---

####  C.4.5 Material lengths, radiation

\Xrad | $X_{0}$ | \NIL | $\lambda_{\rm int}$ | \mip | MIP
---|---|---|---|---|---
\neutroneq | $n_{\text{eq}}$ | \neqcmcm | $n_{\text{eq}}/\text{cm}^{2}$ | \kRad |  kRad
\MRad |  MRad | \ci |  Ci | \mci |  mCi

####  C.4.6 Uncertainties

\sx | $\sigma_{x}$ | \sy | $\sigma_{y}$ | \sz | $\sigma_{z}$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\stat |  (stat) | \syst |  (syst) | \lumi |  (lumi)

####  C.4.7 Maths

\order | $\mathcal{O}$ | \chisq | $\chi^{2}$ | \chisqndf | $\chi^{2}/\mathrm{ndf}$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\chisqip | $\chi^{2}_{\text{IP}}$ | \chisqvs | $\chi^{2}_{\text{VS}}$ | \chisqvtx | $\chi^{2}_{\text{vtx}}$
\chisqvtxndf | $\chi^{2}_{\text{vtx}}/\mathrm{ndf}$ | \deriv | $\mathrm{d}$ | \gsim |  $>$$\sim$
\lsim |  $<$$\sim$ | \mean[1] \mean{x} | $\left\langle x\right\rangle$ | \abs[1] \abs{x} | $\left\|x\right\|$
\Real | $\mathcal{R}e$ | \Imag | $\mathcal{I}m$ | \PDF | PDF
\sPlot | sPlot | \sFit | sFit |  |

###  C.5 Kinematics

####  C.5.1 Energy, Momenta

\Ebeam | $E_{\mbox{\tiny BEAM}}$ | \sqs | $\sqrt{s}$ | \sqsnn | $\sqrt{s_{\scriptscriptstyle\text{NN}}}$
---|---|---|---|---|---
\pt | $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ | \ptsq | $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{2}$ | \ptot | $p$
\et | $E_{\mathrm{T}}$ | \mt | $M_{\mathrm{T}}$ | \dpp | $\Delta p/p$
\msq | $m^{2}$ | \dedx | $\mathrm{d}E/\mathrm{d}x$ |  |