 |
 |
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 >