Model-agnostic likelihood for the reinterpretation of the $B^+\to K^+\nu\bar{\nu}$ measurement at Belle II
Belle II Collaboration: M. Abumusabh, I. Adachi, L. Aggarwal, H. Ahmed, Y. Ahn, N. Akopov, S. Alghamdi, M. Alhakami, A. Aloisio, N. Althubiti, K. Amos, N. Anh Ky, D. M. Asner, H. Atmacan, R. Ayad, V. Babu, H. Bae, N. K. Baghel, P. Bambade, Sw. Banerjee, M. Barrett, M. Bartl

TL;DR
This paper presents a model-agnostic likelihood approach for the $B^+ o K^+ uar{ u}$ measurement at Belle II, enabling reinterpretation within the Weak Effective Theory and providing posterior distributions for Wilson coefficients.
Contribution
It introduces a publicly available likelihood framework for the $B^+ o K^+ uar{ u}$ measurement, facilitating reinterpretations under various theoretical models.
Findings
Derived posterior distributions for Wilson coefficients.
Constructed credible intervals for key Wilson coefficients.
Assessed goodness of fit to Belle II data.
Abstract
We recently measured the branching fraction of the decay using 362fb of on-resonance collision data under the assumption of Standard Model kinematics, providing the first evidence for this decay. To facilitate future reinterpretations and maximize the scientific impact of this measurement, we publicly release the full analysis likelihood along with all necessary material required for reinterpretation under arbitrary theoretical models sensitive to this measurement. In this work, we demonstrate how the measurement can be reinterpreted within the framework of the Weak Effective Theory. Using a kinematic reweighting technique in combination with the published likelihood, we derive marginal posterior distributions for the Wilson coefficients, construct credible intervals, and assess the goodness of fit to the Belle II data. For the Weak…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
