application/xmlStudy of [formula omitted] decaysBelle CollaborationA SatpathyK AbeR AbeT AbeI AdachiH AiharaM AkatsuY AsanoT AsoT AushevA.M BakichY BanA BayI BednyP.K BeheraA BondarA BozekM BračkoT.E BrowderB.C.K CaseyP ChangY ChaoK.-F ChenB.G CheonR ChistovS.-K ChoiY ChoiY ChoiM DanilovL.Y DongS EidelmanV EigesC FukunagaN GabyshevA GarmashT GershonB GolobJ HabaT HaraN.C HastingsH HayashiiM HazumiI HiguchiL HinzT HokuueW.-S HouH.-C HuangT IgakiY IgarashiT IijimaK InamiA IshikawaR ItohH IwasakiY IwasakiH.K JangJ.H KangP KapustaS.U KataokaN KatayamaH KawaiY KawakamiN KawamuraT KawasakiH KichimiD.W KimH.J KimHyunwoo KimS.K KimK KinoshitaS KobayashiP KrokovnyR KulasiriS KumarA KuzminY.-J KwonS.H LeeJ LiD LiventsevR.-S LuJ MacNaughtonG MajumderF MandlS MatsumotoT MatsumotoW MitaroffK MiyabayashiH MiyakeH MiyataT MoriT NagamineY NagasakaT NakadairaE NakanoM NakaoH NakazawaJ.W NamZ NatkaniecS NishidaO NitohS NoguchiS OgawaT OhshimaT OkabeS OkunoS.L OlsenY OnukiW OstrowiczH OzakiP PakhlovH PalkaC.W ParkK.S ParkJ.-P PerroudM PetersL.E PiilonenK RybickiH SagawaS SaitohY SakaiM SatapathyO SchneiderS SchrenkC SchwandaS SemenovK SenyoR SeusterH ShibuyaV SidorovJ.B SinghN SoniS StaničM StaričA SugiK SumisawaT SumiyoshiS SuzukiS.Y SuzukiS.K SwainT TakahashiF TakasakiK TamaiN TamuraJ TanakaM TanakaG.N TaylorY TeramotoT TomuraK TrabelsiT TsuboyamaT TsukamotoS UeharaK UenoS UnoG VarnerC.H WangJ.G WangM.-Z WangE WonB.D YabsleyY YamadaA YamaguchiY YamashitaM YamauchiH YanaiY YuanC.C ZhangZ.P ZhangV ZhilichColor-suppressed B decaysFactorizationBranching fractionPhysics Letters B 553 (2003) 159-166. doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(02)03198-2journalPhysics Letters BCopyright © 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.Elsevier B.V.0370-26935533-46 February 20032003-02-06159-16615916610.1016/S0370-2693(02)03198-2http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0370-2693(02)03198-2doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(02)03198-2http://vtw.elsevier.com/data/voc/oa/OpenAccessStatus#Full2014-01-01T00:14:32ZSCOAP3 - Sponsoring Consortium for Open Access Publishing in Particle Physicshttp://vtw.elsevier.com/data/voc/oa/SponsorType#FundingBodyhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/JournalsS300.3PLB19473S0370-2693(02)03198-210.1016/S0370-2693(02)03198-2Elsevier Science B.V.ExperimentsFig. 1Decay diagrams for B0→D0ρ0,D0ω.Fig. 2Dalitz plot for B0→D0π+π− events with |ΔE|<0.03 GeV, showing the regions (a)–(f) used in the efficiency measurement. Events in the dashed box are used for the branching fraction measurement of B0→D0ρ0 as explained in the text.Fig. 3(a) ΔE distribution for B0→D0π+π− events satisfying MD0π+2>4.62 GeV2/c4. (b) ΔE distribution for B0→D∗0π+π− candidates with no requirement on MD∗0π+2.Fig. 4Mπ+π− distribution from (a) B0→D0π+π− and (b) B0→D∗0π+π− final states. The histogram represents the data from the ΔE sideband and the fit to the histogram is parameterized as described in the text.Table 1Summary of branching fraction results for B0→D0π+π− in different regions of the Dalitz plot. The last row gives the sums of the signal yields and branching fractionsRegionEfficiency (%)Signal yieldBranching fraction (×10−4)(a)1.87±0.0998±151.7±0.3(b)1.66±0.1170±181.3±0.3(c)1.88±0.0817±50.3±0.1(d)1.94±0.0757±150.9±0.2(e)2.10±0.1776±191.2±0.3(f)1.85±0.12150±162.6±0.3Total469±388.0±0.6Table 2Summary of branching fraction results for B0→D(∗)0π+π− and B0→D(∗)0ρ0aModeEfficiency (%)Branching fraction (×10−4)Significance (σ)B0→D0π+π−1.868.0±0.6±1.518.3B0→D∗0π+π−0.326.2±1.2±1.86.5B0→D0ρ00.942.9±1.0±0.46.1B0→D∗0ρ00.24<5.1–aThe significance for B0→D0π+π− is estimated by adding in quadrature the significances measured in each of the six Dalitz regions.Study of B0→D(∗)0π+π− decaysBelle CollaborationASatpathyheKAbehRAbeaaTAbeamIAdachihHAiharaanMAkatsuuYAsanoarTAsoaqTAushevlA.MBakichajYBanaeABayqIBednybP.KBeheraasABondarbABozekyMBračkosmT.EBrowdergB.C.KCaseygPChangxYChaoxK.-FChenxB.GCheonaiRChistovlS.-KChoifYChoiaiYChoiaiMDanilovlL.YDongjSEidelmanbVEigeslCFukunagaaoNGabyshevhAGarmashbhTGershonhBGolobrmJHabahTHaraacN.CHastingstHHayashiivMHazumihIHiguchiamLHinzqTHokuueuW.-SHouxH.-CHuangxTIgakiuYIgarashihTIijimauKInamiuAIshikawauRItohhHIwasakihYIwasakihH.KJangahJ.HKangavPKapustayS.UKataokavNKatayamahHKawaicYKawakamiuNKawamuraaTKawasakiaaHKichimihD.WKimaiH.JKimavHyunwooKimoS.KKimahKKinoshitaeSKobayashiafPKrokovnybRKulasirieSKumaradAKuzminbY.-JKwonavS.HLeeahJLiagDLiventsevlR.-SLuxJMacNaughtonkGMajumderakFMandlkSMatsumotodTMatsumotoaoWMitaroffkKMiyabayashivHMiyakeacHMiyataaaTMoridTNagamineamYNagasakaiTNakadairaanENakanoabMNakaohHNakazawahJ.WNamaiZNatkaniecySNishidapONitohapSNoguchivSOgawaalTOhshimauTOkabeuSOkunonS.LOlsengYOnukiaaWOstrowiczyHOzakihPPakhlovlHPalkayC.WParkoK.SParkaiJ.-PPerroudqMPetersgL.EPiilonenatKRybickiyHSagawahSSaitohhYSakaihMSatapathyasasish@physics.uc.eduOSchneiderqSSchrenkeCSchwandahkSSemenovlKSenyouRSeustergHShibuyaalVSidorovbJ.BSinghadNSoniadSStaničar1MStaričmASugiuKSumisawahTSumiyoshiaoSSuzukiauS.YSuzukihS.KSwaingTTakahashiabFTakasakihKTamaihNTamuraaaJTanakaanMTanakahG.NTaylortYTeramotoabTTomuraanKTrabelsigTTsuboyamahTTsukamotohSUeharahKUenoxSUnohGVarnergC.HWangwJ.GWangatM.-ZWangxEWonoB.DYabsleyatYYamadahAYamaguchiamYYamashitazMYamauchihHYanaiaaYYuanjC.CZhangjZ.PZhangagVZhilichbaAomori University, Aomori, JapanbBudker Institute of Nuclear Physics, Novosibirsk, RussiacChiba University, Chiba, JapandChuo University, Tokyo, JapaneUniversity of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, USAfGyeongsang National University, Chinju, South KoreagUniversity of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI, USAhHigh Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK), Tsukuba, JapaniHiroshima Institute of Technology, Hiroshima, JapanjInstitute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, PR ChinakInstitute of High Energy Physics, Vienna, AustrialInstitute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, RussiamJ. Stefan Institute, Ljubljana, SlovenianKanagawa University, Yokohama, JapanoKorea University, Seoul, South KoreapKyoto University, Kyoto, JapanqInstitut de Physique des Hautes Énergies, Université de Lausanne, Lausanne, SwitzerlandrUniversity of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, SloveniasUniversity of Maribor, Maribor, SloveniatUniversity of Melbourne, Victoria, AustraliauNagoya University, Nagoya, JapanvNara Women's University, Nara, JapanwNational Lien-Ho Institute of Technology, Miao Li, TaiwanxNational Taiwan University, Taipei, TaiwanyH. Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Krakow, PolandzNihon Dental College, Niigata, JapanaaNiigata University, Niigata, JapanabOsaka City University, Osaka, JapanacOsaka University, Osaka, JapanadPanjab University, Chandigarh, IndiaaePeking University, Beijing, PR ChinaafSaga University, Saga, JapanagUniversity of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, PR ChinaahSeoul National University, Seoul, South KoreaaiSungkyunkwan University, Suwon, South KoreaajUniversity of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, AustraliaakTata Institute of Fundamental Research, Bombay, IndiaalToho University, Funabashi, JapanamTohoku University, Sendai, JapananUniversity of Tokyo, Tokyo, JapanaoTokyo Metropolitan University, Tokyo, JapanapTokyo University of Agriculture and Technology, Tokyo, JapanaqToyama National College of Maritime Technology, Toyama, JapanarUniversity of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, JapanasUtkal University, Bhubaneswer, IndiaatVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, USAauYokkaichi University, Yokkaichi, JapanavYonsei University, Seoul, South Korea1On leave from Nova Gorica Polytechnic, Nova Gorica, Slovenia.Editor: L. RolandiAbstractWe report on a study of B0→D(∗)0π+π− decays using 29.1 fb−1 of e+e− annihilation data recorded at the ϒ(4S) resonance with the Belle detector at the KEKB storage ring. Making no assumptions about the intermediate mechanism, the branching fractions for B0→D0π+π− and B0→D∗0π+π− are determined to be (8.0±0.6±1.5)×10−4 and (6.2±1.2±1.8)×10−4, respectively. An analysis of B0→D0π+π− candidates yields to the first observation of the color-suppressed hadronic decay B0→D0ρ0 with the branching fraction (2.9±1.0±0.4)×10−4. We measure the ratio of branching fractions B(B0→D0ρ0)/B(B0→D0ω)=1.6±0.8.PACS13.25.Hw14.40.NdKeywordsColor-suppressed B decaysFactorizationBranching fraction1IntroductionExclusive hadronic decay rates provide important tests of models for B meson decay [1]. B decays to final states that include a D0 or a D∗0 accompanied by two charged pions are interesting, because such decays provide a precision testing ground for factorization [2], and because one can search for resonant substructure in the final state. At present, only an upper limit B(B0→D0π+π−)<1.6×10−3[3], has been measured. The D(∗)0π+π− final state includes the B0→D(∗)0ρ0 decay which has not yet been observed [4]. As shown in Fig. 1(a) this decay proceeds via an internal spectator diagram, and is “color-suppressed” since the color of the quarks produced by the weak current must correspond to the color of the c-quark and the spectator quark. Recent measurements [5] of the branching fractions for the color-suppressed decays B0→D0X0, where X0=π0,η or ω, are all higher than theoretical predictions [6] providing evidence for failure of the naı̈ve factorization model and suggesting sizable final state interactions (FSI). In the heavy quark limit, the QCD factorization model works effectively for color-allowed decays, while color-suppressed decays require substantial correction [7]. Assuming SU(3) symmetry for the FSI rescattering phase, the observed discrepancy can be accommodated and branching fractions, such as B(B0→D0ρ0), can be predicted [8]. It is important to test whether B0→D0ρ0, once observed, supports the current pattern of QCD effects in color-suppressed B decays.The dominant diagrams for such neutral B meson decays preserve the spectator d-quark and therefore require that the final state neutral light meson be produced via its d–d̄ component (Fig. 1(a)). These diagrams predict equal branching fractions for D0ρ0 and D0ω and for D∗0ρ0 and D∗0ω. Other diagrams, such as W-exchange (Fig. 1(b)) or final state interactions can produce the u−ū state and therefore give different branching fractions. This equality is therefore a very sensitive test for small amplitudes in which the spectator d-quark does not appear in the final state and the ρ or ω are produced via their u−ū components [8,9].In this Letter, we will report on the study of B0 decays that have one D0 or D∗0 and two oppositely charged pions in the final state. Inclusion of charge conjugate modes is implied throughout this Letter.2Data sample and selection criteriaThe data sample used in this Letter was collected with the Belle detector at KEKB [10]. It is based on an integrated luminosity of 29.1 fb−1 at the ϒ(4S) resonance, corresponding to 31.3 million BB events.The Belle detector [11] is a large-solid-angle magnetic spectrometer that consists of a three-layer silicon vertex detector, a 50-layer central drift chamber (CDC), an array of aerogel threshold Čerenkov counters (ACC), a barrel-like arrangement of time-of-flight scintillation counters (TOF), and an electromagnetic calorimeter comprised of CsI(Tl) crystals (ECL) located inside a super-conducting solenoid coil that provides a 1.5 T magnetic field. An iron flux-return located outside of the coil is instrumented to detect KL0 mesons and to identify muons (KLM).Hadronic event selection is described elsewhere [12]. π0 candidates are formed by combining two photons detected in the ECL, whose invariant mass is within a ±16 MeV/c2 mass window around the π0 peak. The π0 daughter photons are required to have energies greater than 20 MeV. We require the point of closest approach to the origin of each track to be within ±5 mm from the beam axis and ±3 cm along the beam axis from the interaction point to remove background. Tracks identified as electrons (from the responses of the CDC and ECL) or muons (from the response of the KLM) are removed. Kaon and pion candidates are distinguished by combining the dE/dx information from the CDC, time of flight information from the TOF and hit information from the ACC.D0 candidates are reconstructed in the decay modes K−π+, K−π+π0, and K−π+π−π+. For D0→K−π+π0, the π0 daughter photons are required to have energies greater than 50 MeV and we select regions of the Dalitz plot with large decay amplitudes to further suppress the combinatorial background [13]. The invariant masses of D0 candidates are required to be within 2.5σ of the nominal mass. The selected π0s and D0s are then kinematically fit with their masses constrained to their nominal values [14]. D∗0 candidates are formed by combining D0 and π0 candidates and selecting those with mass difference δm=MD∗0−MD0 in the range 0.1400 GeV/c2<δm<0.1445 GeV/c2.3B meson reconstructionAfter selecting D0 and D∗0 candidates, we combine them with two oppositely charged pions to form B candidates. The two oppositely charged candidate pions from the B decay are required to come from a single vertex. To remove K0S candidates from the sample, the distance of the π+π− vertex from the beam interaction point in the r–φ plane is required to be less than 0.8 cm. Two kinematic variables are used to identify signal candidates, the beam constrained mass, Mbc=(ECMbeam)2−(PCMB)2, and the energy difference ΔE=ECMB−ECMbeam, where ECMB and PCMB are the center of mass (CM) energy and momentum of the B0 candidate, and ECMbeam=s/2=5.29 GeV. We select events with |ΔE|<0.2 GeV and 5.272 GeV/c2<Mbc<5.288 GeV/c2 (5.271 GeV/c2<Mbc<5.289 GeV/c2) for D0π+π− (D∗0π+π−) final states. Further, if there are multiple B candidates in an event, we choose the candidate with the smallest χ2 combination, (1)χ2=χ2D0+χ2π+π−+χ2δm, where, χ2D0 and χ2π+π− are obtained from D0 and π+π− vertex fitting, respectively. For decay modes containing D∗0, χ2δm—defined as the square of the difference of δm from its nominal value, in units of its resolution, (Δ(δm)/σ(δm))2—is additionally included in the best candidate selection requirement.4Background suppressionSince the continuum background (arising from e+e−→qq̄ (q=u,d,c,s) transitions) has a different event topology, shape variables are very effective at improving the signal to noise ratio. Events are required to satisfy R2<0.5, where R2 is the ratio of the second Fox–Wolfram moment to the zeroth moment determined using charged tracks and unmatched neutral showers [15]. The angle between the B candidate direction and the thrust axis [16] of the rest of the event (θT) is required to satisfy |cos(θT)|<0.7.For the B0→D(∗)0π+π− branching fraction measurements, we make no assumptions about the intermediate mechanism, except that we reject the large contribution from the well-established decay B0→D∗+π− to the D0π+π− final state. These events are rejected by requiring M2D0π+>4.62 GeV2/c4 (Fig. 2), which removes 1% of the phase space for B0→D0π+π−. As the decay B0→D2∗(2460)+π− is not well established [14], no attempt is made to reject it and this mode is thus included in our branching fraction measurement.Color-favored decays can also cause a background when a final state pion is replaced by a pion from the decay of the other B (for example, B−→D(∗)0ρ− may be reconstructed as B0→D(∗)0π+π−). To reduce this background we veto events which can also be reconstructed in a color-favored mode. This requirement removes 1% of the signal candidates. Using a sample of 44 million generic b→c decays generated via Monte Carlo (MC) simulation, the small remaining background is studied and found not to peak in Mbc or ΔE.5Branching fractions for D0π+π− and D∗0π+π− final statesThe distribution in ΔE for the surviving candidates for B0→D0π+π− is shown in Fig. 3(a). Since intermediate resonances dominate the decay rate we obtain a non-uniform distribution of events on the Dalitz plot. In addition, the efficiency varies across the Dalitz plot due to momentum dependences of the reconstruction and particle identification efficiencies. We divide the Dalitz plot into six different regions expected to be dominated by different intermediate processes as shown in Fig. 2 and determine the efficiency [17] and signal yield (from ΔE fit) for each. Table 1 summarizes our results.For each Dalitz plot region we model the signal in ΔE with a Gaussian function where both the mean and width are fixed from MC studies. The background shape in this fit is modeled by two components: (1) a linear shape for continuum background obtained from the sideband data (5.20 GeV/c2<Mbc<5.26 GeV/c2); (2) a smooth histogram shape for B0→D∗0π+π− feed-down obtained from MC. The normalizations of the signal and background components are free parameters in the fit. We obtain the branching fraction for B0→D0π+π− by taking the sum of the branching fractions in the six regions of the Dalitz plot and making a correction of 1% for the unobserved region where MD0π+2<4.62 GeV2/c4. In all branching fraction calculations we assume equal production of B0B0 and B+B− pairs from the ϒ(4S).To estimate the branching fraction for B0→D∗0π+π− decays, we make no restriction on MD∗0π+2. Due to limited statistics, we do not estimate the branching fraction region by region. Instead, we use the yield from the ΔE fit (Fig. 3(b)) and include a model dependent systematic error (19%) that arises from the difference between the detection efficiency when the signal MC events are B0→D∗0π+π− and B0→D∗0ρ0. The two detection efficiencies are 0.26% and 0.32%, respectively, where the B0→D∗0ρ0 decay is generated with equal rates to each helicity state.The background near the lower side of the ΔE distribution is modeled by B+→D∗0a1+ feed-down measured using MC. The yield from the fit is 62 ± 12 events. We measure the branching fraction for B0→D∗0π+π− using the phase-space MC efficiency. The results are summarized in Table 2.6Search for color-suppressed B0→D(∗)0ρ0 decaysMulti-body decays of B mesons can occur through various strong resonances that can interfere with each other. We search for color-suppressed B0→D(∗)0ρ0 decays in the D(∗)0π+π− final state. We study the π+π− invariant mass of the events in the signal region (|ΔE|<0.030 GeV for D0π+π− and |ΔE|<0.035 GeV for D∗0π+π−) and fit the ρ0 yield with a relativistic Breit–Wigner function whose mean and width are fixed to the PDG values [14] to estimate the branching fraction.To study the color-suppressed decay mode B0→D0ρ0, we require M2D0π+>14.0 GeV2/c4 to remove backgrounds from D∗+π−, D2∗+π− decays and other D resonances. After this requirement, we clearly see an excess at the ρ0 mass in the π+π− invariant mass distribution (Fig. 4(a)). The excess around 1.45 GeV/c2 can be modeled by either a ρ(1450) or an f0(1370) resonance; we cannot discriminate between these states, or alternative models of the excess, based on the fit. Events near 0.5 GeV/c2 may come from the σ [18] resonance. We extract the ρ0 yield using a one-dimensional likelihood fit. We use a model which includes one low mass and one high mass wide resonance. The masses and widths are fixed, and the amplitudes and phases are free parameters in the fit. The error from the fit therefore incorporates the error from the relative phases of the interfering terms: this tends to increase the error on the yield. The background under the signal events is described reasonably well by data from the ΔE sideband (0.06 GeV<ΔE<0.20 GeV) shown as the hatched histogram in Fig. 4(a). We model this shape with a combination of phase-space, a polynomial and a Breit–Wigner function, where the third term takes into account the possible contribution of true ρ0 in the background. From the fit, we obtain 86 ± 30 signal events corresponding to a branching fraction of B(B0→D0ρ0)=(2.9±1.0±0.4)×10−4. The statistical significance of the signal, calculated as −2ln(L0/Lmax), where Lmax is the likelihood with the nominal yield and L0 is the likelihood with the signal constrained to be zero, is 6.1σ. We find a strong correlation between the amplitude of the ρ0 component and its relative phase with respect to the higher mass resonance; if the amplitudes and phases of the high and low mass resonances are fixed at their obtained values, and the fit is repeated, a ρ0 yield of 86±24 events is obtained. We have repeated the fit with a number of different models including vector and scalar resonances at different masses and with different widths; the variation in the central value of the ρ0 yield is negligible compared to the error from our default fit. As a further cross-check, we examine the helicity angle (Θρ), defined as the angle in the ρ0 rest frame between the direction of the π+ and the ρ0 direction in the B rest frame, and find it to be consistent with the expected shape.22Since B0 and D0 mesons are pseudoscalars, the ρ0 mesons from B0→D0ρ0 decays will be longitudinally polarized giving a cos2(Θρ) distribution.To extract the branching fraction of B0→D∗0ρ0 we require M2D∗0π+>6.3 GeV2/c4, which removes backgrounds coming from B0→D2∗(2460)+π−. We fit the π+π− mass distribution using a relativistic Breit–Wigner function after fixing the background shape from the ΔE sideband (Fig. 4(b)). The ρ0 event yield is 29±8, however, since the limited statistics prevent us from studying possible interferences with other resonances, we cannot interpret this as evidence for D∗0ρ0 and we set an upper limit of the branching fraction. Assuming Gaussian statistics, we find B(B0→D∗0ρ0)<5.1×10−4 at the 90% confidence level. We summarize our results in Table 2.The following sources of systematic error are considered in our measurements: (1) tracking efficiency (2.0% per track—measured by comparing the yield of the decay modes (i) η→π0π+π− and (ii) η→γγ); (2) particle identification efficiency for π (4.3%); (3) D0 reconstruction efficiency and decay branching fractions (12.7%—measured by comparing the observed yield of B−→D0π− events with the expected yield using known branching fractions [14]); (4) slow π0 efficiency (10.7%—measured from the ratio of branching fractions of B−→D0π− and B−→D∗0π−); (5) ΔE signal parameterization (typically 8%); (6) number of BB events (1.0%) and (7) MC statistics (3–5%). As described previously, an additional systematic error due to model dependence of the efficiency calculation is added for B0→D(∗)0π+π−. The total systematic error is obtained by combining the different contributions in quadrature.7SummaryIn summary, we report the first observation of the color-suppressed B0→D0ρ0 decays and measure the branching fraction for B0→D(∗)0π+π−. Our measurement of B(B0→D0ρ0) is higher than the factorization prediction of 0.7×10−4 [6], thus continuing the trend mentioned in the introduction. When we compare the branching fraction of B0→D0ρ0 to our previous measurement of the branching fraction of B0→D0ω [5], we obtain the ratio B(B0→D0ρ0)/B(B0→D0ω)=1.6±0.8. The error includes both statistical and systematic errors where the correlation of the systematic errors has been taken into account. Future measurements with more statistics will allow precise tests of the mechanisms involved in color-suppressed B decays.AcknowledgementsWe wish to thank the KEKB accelerator group for the excellent operation of the KEKB accelerator. We acknowledge support from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan and the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science; the Australian Research Council and the Australian Department of Industry, Science and Resources; the National Science Foundation of China under contract No. 10175071; the Department of Science and Technology of India; the BK21 program of the Ministry of Education of Korea and the CHEP SRC program of the Korea Science and Engineering Foundation; the Polish State Committee for Scientific Research under contract No. 2P03B 17017; the Ministry of Science and Technology of the Russian Federation; the Ministry of Education, Science and Sport of the Republic of Slovenia; the National Science Council and the Ministry of Education of Taiwan; and the US Department of Energy.References[1]D.FakirovB.StechNucl. Phys. B1331978315[2]C.ReaderN.IsgurPhys. Rev. D4719931007[3]M.S.AlamCLEO CollaborationPhys. Rev. D50199443[4]B.NematiCLEO CollaborationPhys. Rev. D5719985363[5]K.AbeBelle CollaborationPhys. Rev. Lett.882002052002T.E.CoanCLEO CollaborationPhys. Rev. Lett.882002062001[6]See, for example,M.Neubertin: A.J. Buras, M. Lindner (Eds.), Heavy Flavors, 2nd Edition, World Scientific, Singapore,[7]M.NeubertA.A.PetrovPhys. Lett. B519200150[8]C.-K.ChuaW.-S.HouK.-C.YangPhys. Rev. D652002096007[9]H.J. Lipkin, private communication[10]E. Kikutani (Ed.), KEK Preprint 2001-157 (2001), Nucl. Instrum. Methods A, in press[11]A.AbashianBelle CollaborationNucl. Instrum. Methods A4792002117[12]K.AbeBelle CollaborationPhys. Rev. D642001072001[13]S.KoppCLEO CollaborationPhys. Rev. D631998092001[14]K.HagiwaraParticle Data GroupPhys. Rev. D662002010001[15]The Fox–Wolfram moments were introduced in:G.C.FoxS.WolframPhys. Rev. Lett.4119781581[16]E.FarhiPhys. Rev. Lett.3919771587[17]We generated 45 000 signal Monte Carlo events with a flat distribution in phase space to calculate efficiency in different regions of the Dalitz plot. We use the CLEO QQ generatorThe detector response is simulated with GEANT, R. Brun, et al., GEANT 3.2.1, CERN Report DD/EE/84-1 (1984)[18]E.M.AitalaE791 CollaborationPhys. Rev. Lett.862001770