Hi Jochen,
On Mon, 15 May 2006, Jochen Dingfelder wrote:
>
> Hi Kerstin,
>
> > in that case we should for the AWG page to be updated and than update VVF
> > accordingly I guess... otherwise we will just produce a lot of 3d
> > weights and not really use them anyway.
>
> You're right, that would probably be the best solution ...
>
> I would propose using the values from the winter 06 HFAG page
> (averages if available, otherwise best measurements):
>
> http://www.slac.stanford.edu/xorg/hfag/semi/winter06/winter06.shtml
>
> pilnu -> HFAG average
> rholnu -> BABAR Phys .Rev. D72, 051102 (2005)
Why only BABAR? (Well, I know the answer in part: Averaging the various
B-->rholnu measurements is quite painful and HFAG has not started to work
on it yet.)
In addition, there is also a B+-> rho0 l+ nu from Belle. In principle,
one should average them using isospin symmetry...
Cheers,
Heiko
> omega -> Belle Phys. Rev. Lett. 93:131803 (2004)
> eta -> CLEO Phys. Rev. D 68, 072003 (2003)
> eta' -> = eta (but 100% error)
> a,b,f,... -> 0
> non res -> incl. - excl.
>
> Does anybody have a different opinion?
>
> Ciao,
> Jochen
>
|