(EPSHEP and LeptonPhoton conferences)
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 Vub constraint has been splitted in the two contributions: Vub from inclusive and exclusive semileptonic decays (plain dark green) and Vub from B^{+}→τ^{+} ν (hashed green). The red hashed region of the global combination corresponds to 68% CL. 

The global CKM fit in the large (ρ_{s}bar,η_{s}bar) plane:
Constraints in the (ρ_{s}bar,η_{s}bar) plane. The red hashed region of the global combination corresponds to 68% CL. 

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 splitted 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 are related to V_{ud} and V_{us} through unitarity. 
Constraint from the B^{+}→τ^{+} ν branching ratio:
There is a discrepancy in the CKM global fit between the world averages for sin2β and BR(B→τν).  
There is a specific correlation between the two quantities in the global fit that is a bit at odds with the direct experimental determination. This 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, which does not match perfectly with the global fit output. 


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. In other words the discrepancy is not driven by the value of semileptonic V_{ub}, nor by the decay constant f_{Bd}.  
To quantify the discrepancy one can compare the indirect fit prediction for BR(B→τν) with the measurement. The deviation here is 2.8 sigmas.  
A simpler test is the comparison of the prediction of B_{Bd} from the above
analytical formula (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} = 1.262 ^{+0.083}_{0.081}.
For this test the deviation is 2.8 sigmas, dominated by the error on BR(B→τν), α, γ and B_{Bd}. 
Branching ratio of B_{s}→μ^{+} μ^{}
Prediction for Br(B_{s}→μ^{+} μ^{})=(3.64^{+0.18}_{0.32})x10^{9}, to be compared with the upper bounds presented at EPSHEP by LHCb and CMS [<11x10^{9} at 95% CL] and CDF [<5.0x10^{9} at 90% CL]. 
Constraint from B → V γ decays:
No update  See Summer 08 results (here). 
Constraints on the angle α/ϕ_{2} from charmless B decays:
No update  See Moriond 09 results (here). 
Constraints on the angle γ/ϕ_{3} from B decays to charm :
Constraints on γ/ϕ_{3} from world average D(*)K(*) decays (GLW+ADS) and Dalitz analyses (GGSZ) γ[combined] = 68^{+10}_{11}°, compared to the prediction from the global CKM fit (not including these measurements): γ[fit] = 67.1^{+4.6}_{3.7}°.  
Constraint on the ratio of interfering amplitudes r_{B} of the decay B → DK from world average D(*)K(*) decays (GLW+ADS) and Dalitz analyses (GGSZ): r_{B}(DK) = 0.107^{+0.010}_{0.010}.  
Constraint on the ratio of amplitudes r_{B} of the decay B → D^{*}K: r_{B}(D^{*}K) =0.119^{+0.018}_{0.019}.  
Constraint on the ratio of amplitudes r_{B} of the decay B → DK^{*}: r_{B}(DK^{*}) = 0.116^{+0.045}_{0.044}.  
Constraint on the strong phase between the interfering amplitudes of the decay B → DK from world average D(*)K(*) decays (GLW+ADS) and Dalitz analyses (GGSZ): δ_{B}(DK) = 112^{+12}_{13}°.  
Constraint on the strong phase between the interfering amplitudes of the decay B → D^{*}K: δ_{B}(D^{*}K) = 55^{+14}_{16}°.  
Constraint on the strong phase between the interfering amplitudes of the decay B → DK^{*}: δ_{B}(DK^{*}) = 117^{+30}_{40}°. 
Constraints on sin(2β+γ) from the measurement of timedependent CP asymmetries in D(*) π(ρ); Winter 11 HFAG average. The extraction of the UTangle combination relies on SU(3) symmetry for the estimates of the suppressedtoleading amplitude ratios. We use for r^{(*)} the values of the branching fractions for D(*) π(ρ) and D_{s}(*) π(ρ) as averaged by the PDG group (2011 online update), including Babar 2008 and Belle 2010 results. We use our own average for the ratio f_{Ds}/f_{D} equal to 1.185 ± 0.005 ± 0.010. According to arXiv:1109.0460 and in lack of unquenched N_{f}=2+1 computations, we use a conservative value of 1.1 ± 1.1 for the ratios of the decay constants for D_{(s)}*^{+}π^{}. We treat the uncertainty on SU(3)flavour breaking through the method described in Max Baak's thesis (here) with a 10.5% statistic and a 5% systematic uncertainties. 


Translation of this result into γ (using sin(2β) as additional input and choosing among the four solutions to the SM one). γ[GLW+ADS+GGSZ+sin(2β+γ)] = (69.1 ^{+9.4}_{9.9})°. 


Constraints from sin(2β+γ) in the (ρbar,ηbar) plane. 

New physics in neutralmeson Mixing:
See the specific studies performed for Lepton Photon 2011 (here). 