(ICHEP 12 conference)
Menu:
The results of the global CKM analysis include:

Numerical Results 
The global CKM fit in the large (ρbar,ηbar) plane:
Constraints in the (ρbar,ηbar) plane. The red hashed region of the global combination corresponds to 68% CL. 


Constraints in the (ρbar,ηbar) plane. The V_{ub} constraint has been split in the two contributions: V_{ub} from inclusive and exclusive semileptonic decays (plain dark green) and V_{ub} from B^{+}→τ^{+} ν (hashed green). The red hashed region of the global combination corresponds to 68% CL. 


One notices that the ring coming from the combined constraint
from Δ m_{d} and Δ m_{s} is cut for
values of ρ
close to 2. This can be understood by the fact that
the two constraints provide ranges respectively on
V_{td}^{2}=A^{2} λ^{6}
[(1ρ)^{2}+η^{2}+O(λ^{4})]
V_{ts}^{2}=A^{2} λ^{4} [1λ^{2}(12 ρ)+O(λ^{4})] The 68% and 95% CL constraints on ρ from Δ m_{s} are indicated in the two shades of red, together with the (circular) constraint from Δ m_{d} and the mended ring once the two constraints are combined. 

Constraint from the B^{+}→τ^{+} ν branching ratio:
A new value of BR(B→τν) from Belle has led to a decrease of the world average. The discrepancy in the CKM global fit between the world averages for sin2β and BR(B→τν) has thus been eased significantly.  
There is a specific correlation between the two quantities in the global fit, which is best viewed in the (sin2β,BR(B→τν)) plane, regarding the prediction from the global fit without using these measurements. The cross corresponds to the experimental value with 1 sigma errors.  
The shape of the correlation can be understood by considering the ratio BR(B→τν)/Δm_{d}, where the decay constant f_{Bd} cancels, leaving limited theoretical uncertainties (the ratio depends only on the bag parameter B_{Bd}). Thus from the observables BR(B→τν) and Δm_{d} one gets an interesting constraint in the (ρbar,ηbar) plane. 


To have a closer look, one can write the full formula for the ratio
where one explicitly sees that the correlation between BR(B→τν) and the angle β is controlled by the values of B_{Bd}, and the angles α and γ. This can be checked explicitly by comparing the above analytical formula with the colored region in the (sin2β,BR(B→τν)) plane.  
To quantify the discrepancy one can compare the indirect fit prediction for BR(B→τν) with the measurement. The deviation here is 1.6 sigmas.  
A simpler test is the comparison of the prediction of B_{Bd} from the above
analytical formula B_{Bd} = 0.80^{+0.23}_{0.16}
(having only BR(B→τν), Δm_{d}, α, β, γ and
V_{ud} as inputs, that is an almost completely theoryfree determination of
B_{Bd}),
with the current lattice determination
B_{Bd} = 1.29 ^{+0.08}_{0.08}.
For this test the deviation is 1.4 sigmas.

New physics in neutralmeson Mixing:
Individual constraints correspond to 68% CL
(see: arXiv:1008.1593 [hepph] and
arXiv:1203.0238. [hepph] for a detailed
explanation of the hypotheses). These plots have been obtained with the following updates:

In scenario I we have introduced NP in
M_{12}^{q} = M_{12}^{SM,q}Δ_{q} independently for B_{d}, B_{s} and K, corresponding to NP with arbitrary flavour structure. Constraints on New Physics in the (ReΔ_{d},ImΔ_{d}) plane. A 1.6 σ deviation is obtained for the 2dimensional SM hypothesis Δ_{d} = 1 (Re(Δ_{d})=1, Im(Δ_{d})=0). 

Constraints on New Physics in the (ReΔ_{s},ImΔ_{s}) plane.
A 0.2 σ deviation is obtained for the 2dimensional SM hypothesis Δ_{s} = 1
(Re(Δ_{s})=1, Im(Δ_{s})=0).
The pulls for the relevant observables are 0.1 σ for B>τν, 2.8 σ for φ_{s}^{J/Ψ Φ} and 3.3 σ for A_{SL}, illustrating the difficulty to accomodate the last two results in this scenario. 

Indirect constraint on the asymmetry A_{SL}=(7.5^{+5.0}_{6.3})x10^{4} or (44.7^{+9.7}_{7.1})x10^{4}, compared with the direct measurements of CDF and D0. A second solution is now allowed due to the update of the input for a_{SL}^{d}. 


Indirect constraint on the CP phase φ_{s}^{J/Ψ Φ}=61.8^{+10.5}_{7.1} degrees, compared with the direct measurements of CDF, D0 and LHCb. 

Branching ratio of B_{s}→μ^{+} μ^{}
Prediction for Br(B_{s}→μ^{+} μ^{})=(3.63^{+0.21}_{0.34})x10^{9}. The blue (respectively red) curve represents the prediction removing the input from Δ m_{s} (respectively f_{Bs}). The red curve is actually identical to the green one, indicating that the prediction is dominated by the indirect determination of f_{Bs} through the global fit (more specifically Δm_{s}), and not by its direct input. 
The global CKM fit in the small (ρbar,ηbar) plane (zoom):
Zoomed constraints in the (ρbar,ηbar) plane.The red hashed region of the global combination corresponds to 68% CL. 


Zoomed constraints in the (ρbar,ηbar) plane. The V_{ub} constraint has been split in the two contributions: V_{ub} from inclusive and exclusive semileptonic decays (plain dark green) and V_{ub} from B^{+}→τ^{+} ν (hashed green). The red hashed region of the global combination corresponds to 68% CL. 


Zoomed constraints in the (ρbar,ηbar) plane not including the angle measurements in the global fit. 


Constraints in the (ρbar,ηbar) plane including only the angle measurements. 


Constraints from CP conserving quantities (V_{ub} / V_{cb}, Δm_{d}, (Δm_{d} and Δm_{s}) and B^{+} →τ^{+} ν) in the (ρbar,ηbar) plane. 


Constraints from CP violating quantities (sin(2β), α, γ and ε_{k}) in the (ρbar,ηbar) plane. 


Constraints from "Tree" quantities in the (ρbar,ηbar) plane (γ(DK) and α from the isospin analysis with the help of sin2β (charmonium), which gives another tree only γ measurement (the only assumption is that the ΔI=3/2 b>d EW penguin amplitude is negligible)). 


Constraints from "Loop" quantities in the (ρbar,ηbar) plane. 


Constraints in the (ρbar,ηbar) plane, not including the braching ratio of B^{+} → τ^{+}ν in the global fit. 


Constraints in the (ρbar,ηbar) plane not including the measurement of sin2β in the global fit. 

The global CKM fit in the (V_{ud},V_{us}) plane:
Constraints in the (V_{ud},V_{us}) plane. The indirect constraints (coming from b transitions) are related to V_{ud} and V_{us} through unitarity. 
The global CKM fit in the (V_{cd},V_{cs}) plane:
Constraints in the (V_{cd},V_{cs}) plane. The indirect constraints (coming from b and s transitions) are related to V_{cd} and V_{cs} through unitarity. The direct constraints combine leptonic and semileptonic D and D_{s} decays as well as information from neutrinonucleon scattering and W → cs decays. The following plots correspond to different subsets of these constraints.  
Constraints in the (V_{cd},V_{cs}) plane where direct constraints involve only leptonic D and D_{s} decays with our inputs for lattice averages f_{Ds}/f_{D}=1.185 ± 0.005 ± 0.010 and f_{Ds}=249.2 ± 1.2 ± 4.5 MeV.  
Constraints in the (V_{cd},V_{cs}) plane where direct constraints involve only semileptonic D and D_{s} decays with our inputs for lattice averages F_{D → π}(0)=0.666 ± 0.017 ± 0.048 and F_{D → K }(0)=0.747 ± 0.010 ± 0.034.  
Constraints in the (V_{cd},V_{cs}) plane where direct constraints involve only information from neutrinonucleon scattering and W→ cs decays (no lattice input). 
Constraints on the angle α/ϕ_{2} from charmless B decays:
No update  See Winter 12 results (here). 
Constraints on the angle γ/ϕ_{3} from B decays to charm :
No update  See Winter 12 results (here). 
No update  See Winter 12 results (here). 