# A Critical Look at 𝜸 Determinations from 𝑩→𝝅⁢𝑲 Decays

## 1 Setting the Scene

In order to obtain direct information on the angle $`𝜸`$ of the unitarity triangle of the CKM matrix in an experimentally feasible way, $`𝑩\mathbf{}𝝅𝑲`$ decays appear very promising. Fortunately, experimental data on these modes are now starting to become available. In 1997, the CLEO collaboration reported the first results on the decays $`𝑩^\mathbf{\pm }\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathbf{\pm }𝑲`$ and $`𝑩_𝒅\mathbf{}𝝅^{\mathbf{}}𝑲^\mathbf{\pm }`$; last year, the first observation of $`𝑩^\mathbf{\pm }\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathrm{𝟎}𝑲^\mathbf{\pm }`$ was announced. So far, only results for CP-averaged branching ratios have been reported, with values at the $`\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}^\mathbf{}\mathrm{𝟓}`$ level and large experimental uncertainties. However, already such CP-averaged branching ratios may lead to highly non-trivial constraints on $`𝜸`$. The following three combinations of $`𝑩\mathbf{}𝝅𝑲`$ decays were considered in the literature: $`𝑩^\mathbf{\pm }\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathbf{\pm }𝑲`$ and $`𝑩_𝒅\mathbf{}𝝅^{\mathbf{}}𝑲^\mathbf{\pm }`$,$`^\text{-}`$ $`𝑩^\mathbf{\pm }\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathbf{\pm }𝑲`$ and $`𝑩^\mathbf{\pm }\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathrm{𝟎}𝑲^\mathbf{\pm }`$,$`^\text{-}`$ as well as the combination of the neutral decays $`𝑩_𝒅\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathrm{𝟎}𝑲`$ and $`𝑩_𝒅\mathbf{}𝝅^{\mathbf{}}𝑲^\mathbf{\pm }`$.

## 2 Probing $`𝜸`$ with $`𝑩^\mathbf{\pm }\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathbf{\pm }𝑲`$ and $`𝑩_𝒅\mathbf{}𝝅^{\mathbf{}}𝑲^\mathbf{\pm }`$

Within the framework of the Standard Model, the most important contributions to these decays originate from QCD penguin topologies. Making use of the $`𝑺𝑼\mathbf{(}\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{)}`$ isospin symmetry of strong interactions, we obtain

$$𝑨\mathbf{(}𝑩^\mathbf{+}\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathbf{+}𝑲^\mathrm{𝟎}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{}𝑷\mathbf{,}𝑨\mathbf{(}𝑩_𝒅^\mathrm{𝟎}\mathbf{}𝝅^{\mathbf{}}𝑲^\mathbf{+}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{=}\mathbf{}\mathbf{\left[}𝑷\mathbf{+}𝑻\mathbf{+}𝑷_{\mathrm{𝐞𝐰}}^𝐂\mathbf{\right]}\mathbf{,}$$
(1)   
where

$$𝑻\mathbf{}\mathbf{|}𝑻\mathbf{|}𝒆^{𝒊𝜹_𝑻}𝒆^{𝒊𝜸}\text{and}𝑷_{\mathrm{𝐞𝐰}}^𝐂\mathbf{}\mathbf{}\mathbf{\left|}𝑷_{\mathrm{𝐞𝐰}}^𝐂\mathbf{\right|}𝒆^{𝒊𝜹_{\mathrm{𝐞𝐰}}^𝐂}$$
(2)   
are due to tree-diagram-like topologies and electroweak (EW) penguins, respectively. The label “C” reminds us that only “colour-suppressed” EW penguin topologies contribute to $`𝑷_{\mathrm{𝐞𝐰}}^𝐂`$. Making use of the unitarity of the CKM matrix and applying the Wolfenstein parametrization yields

$$𝑷\mathbf{}𝑨\mathbf{(}𝑩^\mathbf{+}\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathbf{+}𝑲^\mathrm{𝟎}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{=}\mathbf{}\mathbf{\left(}\mathrm{𝟏}\mathbf{}\frac{𝝀^\mathrm{𝟐}}{\mathrm{𝟐}}\mathbf{\right)}𝝀^\mathrm{𝟐}𝑨\mathbf{\left[}\mathrm{𝟏}\mathbf{+}𝝆𝒆^{𝒊𝜽}𝒆^{𝒊𝜸}\mathbf{\right]}𝓟_{𝒕𝒄}\mathbf{,}$$
(3)   
where

$$𝝆𝒆^{𝒊𝜽}\mathbf{=}\frac{𝝀^\mathrm{𝟐}𝑹_𝒃}{\mathrm{𝟏}\mathbf{}𝝀^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{/}\mathrm{𝟐}}\mathbf{\left[}\mathrm{𝟏}\mathbf{}\mathbf{\left(}\frac{𝓟_{𝒖𝒄}\mathbf{+}𝓐}{𝓟_{𝒕𝒄}}\mathbf{\right)}\mathbf{\right]}\mathbf{,}$$
(4)   
and $`𝝀\mathbf{}\mathbf{|}𝑽_{𝒖𝒔}\mathbf{|}`$, $`𝑨\mathbf{}\mathbf{|}𝑽_{𝒄𝒃}\mathbf{|}\mathbf{/}𝝀^\mathrm{𝟐}`$, $`𝑹_𝒃\mathbf{}\mathbf{|}𝑽_{𝒖𝒃}\mathbf{/}\mathbf{(}𝝀𝑽_{𝒄𝒃}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{|}`$. Note that $`𝝆`$ is strongly CKM-suppressed by $`𝝀^\mathrm{𝟐}𝑹_𝒃\mathbf{}\mathbf{0.02}`$. In the parametrization of the $`𝑩^\mathbf{\pm }\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathbf{\pm }𝑲`$ and $`𝑩_𝒅\mathbf{}𝝅^{\mathbf{}}𝑲^\mathbf{\pm }`$ observables, it turns out to be very useful to introduce

$$𝒓\mathbf{}\frac{\mathbf{|}𝑻\mathbf{|}}{\sqrt{\mathbf{}\mathbf{|}𝑷\mathbf{|}^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{}}}\mathbf{,}\mathit{ϵ}_𝐂\mathbf{}\frac{\mathbf{|}𝑷_{\mathrm{𝐞𝐰}}^𝐂\mathbf{|}}{\sqrt{\mathbf{}\mathbf{|}𝑷\mathbf{|}^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{}}}\mathbf{,}$$
(5)   
with $`\mathbf{}\mathbf{|}𝑷\mathbf{|}^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{}\mathbf{}\mathbf{(}\mathbf{|}𝑷\mathbf{|}^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{+}\mathbf{|}\overline{𝑷}\mathbf{|}^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{/}\mathrm{𝟐}`$, as well as the strong phase differences

$$𝜹\mathbf{}𝜹_𝑻\mathbf{}𝜹_{𝒕𝒄}\mathbf{,}𝚫_𝐂\mathbf{}𝜹_{\mathrm{𝐞𝐰}}^𝐂\mathbf{}𝜹_{𝒕𝒄}\mathbf{.}$$
(6)   
In addition to the ratio

$$𝑹\mathbf{}\frac{\text{BR}\mathbf{(}𝑩_𝒅\mathbf{}𝝅^{\mathbf{}}𝑲^\mathbf{\pm }\mathbf{)}}{\text{BR}\mathbf{(}𝑩^\mathbf{\pm }\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathbf{\pm }𝑲\mathbf{)}}$$
(7)   
of CP-averaged $`𝑩\mathbf{}𝝅𝑲`$ branching ratios, also the “pseudo-asymmetry”

$$𝑨_\mathrm{𝟎}\mathbf{}\frac{\text{BR}\mathbf{(}𝑩_𝒅^\mathrm{𝟎}\mathbf{}𝝅^{\mathbf{}}𝑲^\mathbf{+}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{}\text{BR}\mathbf{(}\overline{𝑩_𝒅^\mathrm{𝟎}}\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathbf{+}𝑲^{\mathbf{}}\mathbf{)}}{\text{BR}\mathbf{(}𝑩^\mathbf{+}\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathbf{+}𝑲^\mathrm{𝟎}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{+}\text{BR}\mathbf{(}𝑩^{\mathbf{}}\mathbf{}𝝅^{\mathbf{}}\overline{𝑲^\mathrm{𝟎}}\mathbf{)}}$$
(8)   
plays an important role to probe $`𝜸`$. Explicit expressions for $`𝑹`$ and $`𝑨_\mathrm{𝟎}`$ in terms of the parameters specified above are given in Ref. 8. So far, the only available experimental result from the CLEO collaboration is for $`𝑹`$:

$$𝑹\mathbf{=}\mathbf{0.9}\mathbf{\pm }\mathbf{0.4}\mathbf{\pm }\mathbf{0.2}\mathbf{\pm }\mathbf{0.2}\mathbf{,}$$
(9)   
and no CP-violating effects have been reported. However, if in addition to $`𝑹`$ also the pseudo-asymmetry $`𝑨_\mathrm{𝟎}`$ can be measured, it is possible to eliminate the strong phase $`𝜹`$ in the expression for $`𝑹`$, and to fix contours in the $`𝜸`$$`𝒓`$ plane, which correspond to the mathematical implementation of a simple triangle construction. In order to determine $`𝜸`$, the quantity $`𝒓`$, i.e. the magnitude of the “tree” amplitude $`𝑻`$, has to be fixed. At this step, a certain model dependence enters. Since the properly defined amplitude $`𝑻`$ does not receive contributions only from colour-allowed “tree” topologies, but also from penguin and annihilation processes, it may be shifted sizeably from its “factorized” value. Consequently, estimates of the uncertainty of $`𝒓`$ using the factorization hypothesis, yielding typically $`𝚫𝒓\mathbf{=}𝓞\mathbf{(}\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}\mathbf{\%}\mathbf{)}`$, may be too optimistic.

Interestingly, it is possible to derive bounds on $`𝜸`$ that do not depend on $`𝒓`$ at all. To this end, we eliminate again $`𝜹`$ in $`𝑹`$ through $`𝑨_\mathrm{𝟎}`$. If we now treat $`𝒓`$ as a “free” variable, we find that $`𝑹`$ takes the following minimal value:

$$𝑹_{\mathrm{𝐦𝐢𝐧}}\mathbf{=}𝜿\mathrm{𝐬𝐢𝐧}^\mathrm{𝟐}𝜸\mathbf{+}\frac{\mathrm{𝟏}}{𝜿}\mathbf{\left(}\frac{𝑨_\mathrm{𝟎}}{\mathrm{𝟐}\mathrm{𝐬𝐢𝐧}𝜸}\mathbf{\right)}^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{}𝜿\mathrm{𝐬𝐢𝐧}^\mathrm{𝟐}𝜸\mathbf{.}$$
(10)   
Here, the quantity

$$𝜿\mathbf{=}\frac{\mathrm{𝟏}}{𝒘^\mathrm{𝟐}}\mathbf{\left[}\mathbf{\hspace{0.17em}1}\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{(}\mathit{ϵ}_𝐂𝒘\mathbf{)}\mathrm{𝐜𝐨𝐬}𝚫\mathbf{+}\mathbf{(}\mathit{ϵ}_𝐂𝒘\mathbf{)}^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{\right]}\mathbf{,}$$
(11)   
with $`𝒘\mathbf{=}\sqrt{\mathrm{𝟏}\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟐}𝝆\mathrm{𝐜𝐨𝐬}𝜽\mathrm{𝐜𝐨𝐬}𝜸\mathbf{+}𝝆^\mathrm{𝟐}}`$, describes rescattering and EW penguin effects. An allowed range for $`𝜸`$ is related to $`𝑹_{\mathrm{𝐦𝐢𝐧}}`$, since values of $`𝜸`$ implying $`𝑹_{\mathrm{𝐞𝐱𝐩}}\mathbf{<}𝑹_{\mathrm{𝐦𝐢𝐧}}`$ are excluded. In particular, $`𝑨_\mathrm{𝟎}\mathbf{}\mathrm{𝟎}`$ would allow us to exclude a certain range of $`𝜸`$ around $`\mathrm{𝟎}^{\mathbf{}}`$ or $`\mathrm{𝟏𝟖𝟎}^{\mathbf{}}`$, whereas a measured value of $`𝑹\mathbf{<}\mathrm{𝟏}`$ would exclude a certain range around $`\mathrm{𝟗𝟎}^{\mathbf{}}`$, which would be of great phenomenological importance. The first results reported by CLEO in 1997 gave $`𝑹\mathbf{=}\mathbf{0.65}\mathbf{\pm }\mathbf{0.40}`$, whereas the most recent update is that given in (9).

The theoretical accuracy of these constraints on $`𝜸`$ is limited both by rescattering processes of the kind $`𝑩^\mathbf{+}\mathbf{}\mathbf{\{}𝝅^\mathrm{𝟎}𝑲^\mathbf{+}\mathbf{,}𝝅^\mathrm{𝟎}𝑲^\mathbf{}\mathbf{+}\mathbf{,}\mathbf{}\mathbf{\}}`$, and by EW penguin effects. The rescattering effects, which may lead to values of $`𝝆\mathbf{=}𝓞\mathbf{(}\mathbf{0.1}\mathbf{)}`$, can be controlled in the contours in the $`𝜸`$$`𝒓`$ plane and the associated constraints on $`𝜸`$ through experimental data on $`𝑩^\mathbf{\pm }\mathbf{}𝑲^\mathbf{\pm }𝑲`$ decays, the $`𝑼`$-spin counterparts of $`𝑩^\mathbf{\pm }\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathbf{\pm }𝑲`$. Another important indicator for large rescattering effects is provided by $`𝑩_𝒅\mathbf{}𝑲^\mathbf{+}𝑲^{\mathbf{}}`$ modes, for which there already exist stronger experimental constraints.

An improved description of the EW penguins is possible if we use the general expressions for the corresponding four-quark operators, and perform appropriate Fierz transformations. Following these lines,  we arrive at

$$\frac{\mathit{ϵ}_𝐂}{𝒓}𝒆^{𝒊\mathbf{(}𝚫_𝐂\mathbf{}𝜹\mathbf{)}}\mathbf{=}\mathbf{0.66}\mathbf{\times }\mathbf{\left[}\frac{\mathbf{0.41}}{𝑹_𝒃}\mathbf{\right]}\mathbf{\times }𝒂_𝐂𝒆^{𝒊𝝎_𝐂}\mathbf{,}$$
(12)   
where $`𝒂_𝐂𝒆^{𝒊𝝎_𝐂}\mathbf{=}𝒂_\mathrm{𝟐}^{\mathrm{𝐞𝐟𝐟}}\mathbf{/}𝒂_\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathrm{𝐞𝐟𝐟}}`$ is the ratio of certain generalized “colour factors”. Experimental data on $`𝑩\mathbf{}𝑫^{\mathbf{(}\mathbf{}\mathbf{)}}𝝅`$ decays imply $`𝒂_\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{/}𝒂_\mathrm{𝟏}\mathbf{=}𝓞\mathbf{(}\mathbf{0.25}\mathbf{)}`$. However, “colour suppression” in $`𝑩\mathbf{}𝝅𝑲`$ modes may in principle be different from that in $`𝑩\mathbf{}𝑫^{\mathbf{(}\mathbf{}\mathbf{)}}𝝅`$ decays, in particular in the presence of large rescattering effects. A first step to fix the hadronic parameter $`𝒂_𝐂𝒆^{𝒊𝝎_𝐂}`$ experimentally is provided by the mode $`𝑩^\mathbf{+}\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathbf{+}𝝅^\mathrm{𝟎}`$. Detailed discussions of the impact of rescattering and EW penguin effects on the strategies to probe $`𝜸`$ with $`𝑩^\mathbf{\pm }\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathbf{\pm }𝑲`$ and $`𝑩_𝒅\mathbf{}𝝅^{\mathbf{}}𝑲^\mathbf{\pm }`$ decays can be found in Refs. 7, 8 and 12.

## 3 Probing $`𝜸`$ with $`𝑩^\mathbf{\pm }\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathbf{\pm }𝑲`$ and $`𝑩^\mathbf{\pm }\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathrm{𝟎}𝑲^\mathbf{\pm }`$

Several years ago, Gronau, Rosner and London proposed an interesting $`𝑺𝑼\mathbf{(}\mathrm{𝟑}\mathbf{)}`$ strategy to determine $`𝜸`$ with the help of $`𝑩^\mathbf{\pm }\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathbf{\pm }𝑲`$, $`𝝅^\mathrm{𝟎}𝑲^\mathbf{\pm }`$, $`𝝅^\mathrm{𝟎}𝝅^\mathbf{\pm }`$ decays. However, as was pointed out by Deshpande and He, this elegant approach is unfortunately spoiled by EW penguins, which play an important role in several non-leptonic $`𝑩`$-meson decays because of the large top-quark mass. Recently, this approach was resurrected by Neubert and Rosner, who pointed out that the EW penguin contributions can be controlled in this case by using only the general expressions for the corresponding four-quark operators, appropriate Fierz transformations, and the $`𝑺𝑼\mathbf{(}\mathrm{𝟑}\mathbf{)}`$ flavour symmetry (see also Ref. 3). Since a detailed presentation of these strategies can be found in Ref. 16, we will just have a brief look at their most interesting features.

In the case of $`𝑩^\mathbf{+}\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathbf{+}𝑲^\mathrm{𝟎}`$, $`𝝅^\mathrm{𝟎}𝑲^\mathbf{+}`$, the $`𝑺𝑼\mathbf{(}\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{)}`$ isospin symmetry implies

$$𝑨\mathbf{(}𝑩^\mathbf{+}\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathbf{+}𝑲^\mathrm{𝟎}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{+}\sqrt{\mathrm{𝟐}}𝑨\mathbf{(}𝑩^\mathbf{+}\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathrm{𝟎}𝑲^\mathbf{+}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{=}\mathbf{}\mathbf{\left[}\mathbf{(}𝑻\mathbf{+}𝑪\mathbf{)}\mathbf{+}𝑷_{\mathrm{𝐞𝐰}}\mathbf{\right]}\mathbf{.}$$
(13)   
The phase stucture of this relation, which has no $`𝑰\mathbf{=}\mathrm{𝟏}\mathbf{/}\mathrm{𝟐}`$ piece, is completely analogous to the $`𝑩^\mathbf{+}\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathbf{+}𝑲^\mathrm{𝟎}`$, $`𝑩_𝒅^\mathrm{𝟎}\mathbf{}𝝅^{\mathbf{}}𝑲^\mathbf{+}`$ case (see (1)):

$$𝑻\mathbf{+}𝑪\mathbf{=}\mathbf{|}𝑻\mathbf{+}𝑪\mathbf{|}𝒆^{𝒊𝜹_{𝑻\mathbf{+}𝑪}}𝒆^{𝒊𝜸}\mathbf{,}𝑷_{\mathrm{𝐞𝐰}}\mathbf{=}\mathbf{}\mathbf{|}𝑷_{\mathrm{𝐞𝐰}}\mathbf{|}𝒆^{𝒊𝜹_{\mathrm{𝐞𝐰}}}\mathbf{.}$$
(14)   
In order to probe $`𝜸`$, it is useful to introduce observables $`𝑹_𝐜`$ and $`𝑨_\mathrm{𝟎}^𝐜`$ corresponding to $`𝑹`$ and $`𝑨_\mathrm{𝟎}`$; their general expressions can be otained from those for $`𝑹`$ and $`𝑨_\mathrm{𝟎}`$ by making the following replacements:

$$𝒓\mathbf{}𝒓_𝐜\mathbf{}\frac{\mathbf{|}𝑻\mathbf{+}𝑪\mathbf{|}}{\sqrt{\mathbf{}\mathbf{|}𝑷\mathbf{|}^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{}}}\mathbf{,}𝜹\mathbf{}𝜹_𝐜\mathbf{}𝜹_{𝑻\mathbf{+}𝑪}\mathbf{}𝜹_{𝒕𝒄}\mathbf{,}𝑷_{\mathrm{𝐞𝐰}}^𝐂\mathbf{}𝑷_{\mathrm{𝐞𝐰}}\mathbf{.}$$
(15)   
The measurement of $`𝑹_𝐜`$ and $`𝑨_\mathrm{𝟎}^𝐜`$ allows us to fix contours in the $`𝜸`$$`𝒓_𝒄`$ plane in complete analogy to the $`𝑩^\mathbf{\pm }\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathbf{\pm }𝑲`$, $`𝑩_𝒅\mathbf{}𝝅^{\mathbf{}}𝑲^\mathbf{\pm }`$ strategy. There are, however, important differences from the theoretical point of view. First, the $`𝑺𝑼\mathbf{(}\mathrm{𝟑}\mathbf{)}`$ symmetry allows us to fix $`𝒓_𝒄\mathbf{}\mathbf{|}𝑻\mathbf{+}𝑪\mathbf{|}`$:

$$𝑻\mathbf{+}𝑪\mathbf{}\mathbf{}\sqrt{\mathrm{𝟐}}\frac{𝑽_{𝒖𝒔}}{𝑽_{𝒖𝒅}}\frac{𝒇_𝑲}{𝒇_𝝅}𝑨\mathbf{(}𝑩^\mathbf{+}\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathbf{+}𝝅^\mathrm{𝟎}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{,}$$
(16)   
where $`𝒓_𝒄`$ thus determined is – in contrast to $`𝒓`$ – not affected by rescattering effects. Second, in the strict $`𝑺𝑼\mathbf{(}\mathrm{𝟑}\mathbf{)}`$ limit, we have

$$\mathbf{\left|}\frac{𝑷_{\mathrm{𝐞𝐰}}}{𝑻\mathbf{+}𝑪}\mathbf{\right|}𝒆^{𝒊\mathbf{(}𝜹_{\mathrm{𝐞𝐰}}\mathbf{}𝜹_{𝑻\mathbf{+}𝑪}\mathbf{)}}\mathbf{=}\mathbf{0.66}\mathbf{\times }\mathbf{\left[}\frac{\mathbf{0.41}}{𝑹_𝒃}\mathbf{\right]}\mathbf{.}$$
(17)   
In contrast to (12), this expression does not involve a hadronic parameter.

The contours in the $`𝜸`$$`𝒓_𝒄`$ plane may be affected – in analogy to the $`𝑩^\mathbf{\pm }\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathbf{\pm }𝑲`$, $`𝑩_𝒅\mathbf{}𝝅^{\mathbf{}}𝑲^\mathbf{\pm }`$ case – by rescattering effects. They can be taken into account with the help of additional data. The major theoretical advantage of the $`𝑩^\mathbf{+}\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathbf{+}𝑲^\mathrm{𝟎}`$, $`𝝅^\mathrm{𝟎}𝑲^\mathbf{+}`$ strategy with respect to $`𝑩^\mathbf{\pm }\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathbf{\pm }𝑲`$, $`𝑩_𝒅\mathbf{}𝝅^{\mathbf{}}𝑲^\mathbf{\pm }`$ is that $`𝒓_𝒄`$ and $`𝑷_{\mathrm{𝐞𝐰}}\mathbf{/}\mathbf{(}𝑻\mathbf{+}𝑪\mathbf{)}`$ can be fixed by using only $`𝑺𝑼\mathbf{(}\mathrm{𝟑}\mathbf{)}`$ arguments. Consequently, the theoretical accuracy is mainly limited by non-factorizable $`𝑺𝑼\mathbf{(}\mathrm{𝟑}\mathbf{)}`$-breaking effects.

## 4 Probing $`𝜸`$ with $`𝑩_𝒅\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathrm{𝟎}𝑲`$ and $`𝑩_𝒅\mathbf{}𝝅^{\mathbf{}}𝑲^\mathbf{\pm }`$

The strategies to probe $`𝜸`$ that are allowed by the observables of $`𝑩_𝒅\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathrm{𝟎}𝑲`$, $`𝝅^{\mathbf{}}𝑲^\mathbf{\pm }`$ are completely analogous to the $`𝑩^\mathbf{\pm }\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathbf{\pm }𝑲`$, $`𝝅^\mathrm{𝟎}𝑲^\mathbf{\pm }`$ case. However, if we require that the neutral kaon be observed as a $`𝑲_𝐒`$, we have an additional observable at our disposal, which is provided by “mixing-induced” CP violation in $`𝑩_𝒅\mathbf{}𝝅^\mathrm{𝟎}𝑲_𝐒`$ and allows us to take into account the rescattering effects in the extraction of $`𝜸`$. To this end, time-dependent measurements are required. The theoretical accuracy of the neutral strategy is only limited by non-factorizable $`𝑺𝑼\mathbf{(}\mathrm{𝟑}\mathbf{)}`$-breaking corrections, which affect $`\mathbf{|}𝑻\mathbf{+}𝑪\mathbf{|}`$ and $`𝑷_{\mathrm{𝐞𝐰}}`$.