The CKM angle $\gamma$ is measured for the first time from mixinginduced $CP$ violation between $B^0_s \rightarrow D_s^\mp K^\pm \pi^\pm \pi^\mp$ and $\bar{B}^0_s \rightarrow D_s^\pm K^\mp \pi^\mp \pi^\pm$ decays reconstructed in protonproton collision data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 9 ${\rm fb}^{1}$ recorded with the LHCb detector. A timedependent amplitude analysis is performed to extract the $CP$violating weak phase $\gamma2\beta_s$ and, subsequently, $\gamma$ by taking the $B^0_s$$\bar{B}^0_s$ mixing phase $\beta_{s}$ as an external input. The measurement yields $\gamma = (44 \pm 12)^\circ$ modulo $180^\circ$, where statistical and systematic uncertainties are combined. An alternative modelindependent measurement, integrating over the fivedimensional phase space of the decay, yields $\gamma = (44^{ + 20}_{  13})^\circ$ modulo $180^\circ$. Moreover, the $B^0_s$$\bar{B}^0_s$ oscillation frequency is measured from the flavourspecific control channel $B^0_s \rightarrow D_s^ \pi^+ \pi^+ \pi^$ to be $\Delta m_s = (17.757 \pm 0.007 ({\rm stat.}) \pm 0.008 ({\rm syst.})) \text{ps}^{1}$, consistent with and more precise than the current worldaverage value.
Leadingorder Feynman diagrams for (left) $ B ^0_ s $ and (right) $\overline{ B } {}^0_ s $ decays to the $D_s^ K^+ \pi ^+ \pi ^ $ final state, where the $\pi ^+ \pi ^ $ subsystem is generically drawn in conjunction with the kaon. 
Fig_1.pdf [55 KiB] HiDef png [17 KiB] Thumbnail [8 KiB] *.C file tex code 

Invariant mass distribution of selected (left) $ B ^0_ s \rightarrow D ^_ s \pi ^+ \pi ^+ \pi ^ $ and (right) $ B ^0_ s \rightarrow D ^{\mp}_ s K ^\pm \pi ^\pm \pi ^\mp $ candidates with fit projections overlaid. 
Fig2a.pdf [36 KiB] HiDef png [347 KiB] Thumbnail [246 KiB] *.C file 

Fig2b.pdf [41 KiB] HiDef png [499 KiB] Thumbnail [331 KiB] *.C file 

Backgroundsubtracted decaytime distribution of (top) all and (bottom left) tagged $ B ^0_ s \rightarrow D ^_ s \pi ^+ \pi ^+ \pi ^ $ candidates as well as (bottom right) the dilutionweighted mixing asymmetry folded into one oscillation period along with the fit projections (solid lines). The decaytime acceptance (top) is overlaid in an arbitrary scale (dashed line). 
Fig3a.pdf [15 KiB] HiDef png [164 KiB] Thumbnail [151 KiB] *.C file 

Fig3b.pdf [32 KiB] HiDef png [283 KiB] Thumbnail [198 KiB] *.C file 

Fig3c.pdf [13 KiB] HiDef png [155 KiB] Thumbnail [157 KiB] *.C file 

Decaytime distribution of (left) backgroundsubtracted $ B ^0_ s \rightarrow D ^{\mp}_ s K ^\pm \pi ^\pm \pi ^\mp $ candidates and (right) dilutionweighted mixing asymmetry along with the modelindependent fit projections (solid lines). The decaytime acceptance (left) is overlaid in an arbitrary scale (dashed line). 
Fig4a.pdf [14 KiB] HiDef png [170 KiB] Thumbnail [156 KiB] *.C file 

Fig4b.pdf [13 KiB] HiDef png [220 KiB] Thumbnail [201 KiB] *.C file 

Decaytime distribution of (left) backgroundsubtracted $ B ^0_ s \rightarrow D ^{\mp}_ s K ^\pm \pi ^\pm \pi ^\mp $ candidates and (right) dilutionweighted mixing asymmetry along with the modeldependent fit projections (solid lines). The decaytime acceptance (left) is overlaid in an arbitrary scale (dashed line). 
Fig5a.pdf [14 KiB] HiDef png [170 KiB] Thumbnail [156 KiB] *.C file 

Fig5b.pdf [13 KiB] HiDef png [218 KiB] Thumbnail [199 KiB] *.C file 

Invariantmass distribution of backgroundsubtracted $ B ^0_ s \rightarrow D ^{\mp}_ s K ^\pm \pi ^\pm \pi ^\mp $ candidates (data points) and fit projections (blue solid line). Contributions from $b\rightarrow c$ and $b\rightarrow u$ decay amplitudes are overlaid. 
Fig6a.pdf [7 KiB] HiDef png [168 KiB] Thumbnail [101 KiB] *.C file 

Fig6b.pdf [26 KiB] HiDef png [406 KiB] Thumbnail [285 KiB] *.C file 

Fig6c.pdf [20 KiB] HiDef png [252 KiB] Thumbnail [176 KiB] *.C file 

Fig6d.pdf [24 KiB] HiDef png [369 KiB] Thumbnail [263 KiB] *.C file 

Fig6e.pdf [20 KiB] HiDef png [318 KiB] Thumbnail [219 KiB] *.C file 

Fig6f.pdf [22 KiB] HiDef png [403 KiB] Thumbnail [271 KiB] *.C file 

Invariantmass distribution of backgroundsubtracted $ B ^0_ s \rightarrow D ^{\mp}_ s K ^\pm \pi ^\pm \pi ^\mp $ candidates (data points) and fit projections (blue solid line). Incoherent contributions from intermediatestate components are overlaid. 
Fig7a.pdf [9 KiB] HiDef png [312 KiB] Thumbnail [205 KiB] *.C file 

Fig7b.pdf [35 KiB] HiDef png [680 KiB] Thumbnail [371 KiB] *.C file 

Fig7c.pdf [25 KiB] HiDef png [337 KiB] Thumbnail [194 KiB] *.C file 

Fig7d.pdf [30 KiB] HiDef png [568 KiB] Thumbnail [317 KiB] *.C file 

Fig7e.pdf [26 KiB] HiDef png [462 KiB] Thumbnail [253 KiB] *.C file 

Fig7f.pdf [28 KiB] HiDef png [663 KiB] Thumbnail [350 KiB] *.C file 

The 1$$CL contours for the physical observables $r,\kappa,\delta$ and $\gamma2\beta_s$ obtained with the modelindependent fit. 
Fig8a.pdf [8 KiB] HiDef png [157 KiB] Thumbnail [127 KiB] *.C file 

Fig8b.pdf [8 KiB] HiDef png [163 KiB] Thumbnail [126 KiB] *.C file 

Fig8c.pdf [8 KiB] HiDef png [148 KiB] Thumbnail [116 KiB] *.C file 

Fig8d.pdf [9 KiB] HiDef png [162 KiB] Thumbnail [129 KiB] *.C file 

Running width distributions of the threebody resonances included in the baseline model for $ B ^0_ s \rightarrow D ^{\mp}_ s K ^\pm \pi ^\pm \pi ^\mp $ decays: (top left) $K_1(1270)^+$, (top right) $K_1(1400)^+$, (bottom left) $K^*(1410)^+$ and (bottom right) $K(1460)^+$. 
Fig9a.pdf [10 KiB] HiDef png [130 KiB] Thumbnail [122 KiB] *.C file 

Fig9b.pdf [10 KiB] HiDef png [127 KiB] Thumbnail [115 KiB] *.C file 

Fig9c.pdf [10 KiB] HiDef png [127 KiB] Thumbnail [115 KiB] *.C file 

Fig9d.pdf [10 KiB] HiDef png [124 KiB] Thumbnail [111 KiB] *.C file 

Invariantmass and angular distributions of backgroundsubtracted $ B ^0_ s \rightarrow D ^{\mp}_ s K ^\pm \pi ^\pm \pi ^\mp $ candidates (data points) and fit projections (blue solid line). Contributions from $b\rightarrow c$ and $b\rightarrow u$ decay amplitudes are overlaid, colour coded as in Fig. ???. 
Fig10a.pdf [22 KiB] HiDef png [376 KiB] Thumbnail [255 KiB] *.C file 

Fig10b.pdf [24 KiB] HiDef png [382 KiB] Thumbnail [267 KiB] *.C file 

Fig10c.pdf [23 KiB] HiDef png [426 KiB] Thumbnail [279 KiB] *.C file 

Fig10d.pdf [21 KiB] HiDef png [447 KiB] Thumbnail [297 KiB] *.C file 

Fig10e.pdf [15 KiB] HiDef png [302 KiB] Thumbnail [211 KiB] *.C file 

Fig10f.pdf [24 KiB] HiDef png [463 KiB] Thumbnail [302 KiB] *.C file 

Invariantmass and angular distributions of backgroundsubtracted $ B ^0_ s \rightarrow D ^{\mp}_ s K ^\pm \pi ^\pm \pi ^\mp $ candidates (data points) and fit projections (blue solid line). Incoherent contributions from intermediatestate components are overlaid, colour coded as in Fig. ???. 
Fig11a.pdf [27 KiB] HiDef png [601 KiB] Thumbnail [324 KiB] *.C file 

Fig11b.pdf [29 KiB] HiDef png [593 KiB] Thumbnail [319 KiB] *.C file 

Fig11c.pdf [27 KiB] HiDef png [761 KiB] Thumbnail [383 KiB] *.C file 

Fig11d.pdf [26 KiB] HiDef png [773 KiB] Thumbnail [399 KiB] *.C file 

Fig11e.pdf [23 KiB] HiDef png [458 KiB] Thumbnail [257 KiB] *.C file 

Fig11f.pdf [31 KiB] HiDef png [839 KiB] Thumbnail [421 KiB] *.C file 

Visualisation of how the $ C P$ coefficients contribute towards the overall constraint on the weak phase, $\gamma  2\beta_s$. The difference between the phase of $(A_f^{\Delta\Gamma},S_f)$ and $(A_{\bar{f}}^{\Delta\Gamma},S_{\bar{f}})$ is proportional to the strong phase $\delta$, which is close to $0 ^{\circ} $ and thus not indicated in the figure. 
Fig12.pdf [28 KiB] HiDef png [371 KiB] Thumbnail [227 KiB] *.C file 

Animated gif made out of all figures. 
PAPER2020030.gif Thumbnail 
The flavourtagging performance for only OStagged, only SStagged and both OS and SStagged $ B ^0_ s \rightarrow D ^_ s \pi ^+ \pi ^+ \pi ^ $ signal candidates. 
Table_1.pdf [54 KiB] HiDef png [31 KiB] Thumbnail [11 KiB] tex code 

$ C P$ coefficients determined from the phasespace fit to the $ B ^0_ s \rightarrow D ^{\mp}_ s K ^\pm \pi ^\pm \pi ^\mp $ decaytime distribution. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic (discussed in Sec. ???). 
Table_2.pdf [59 KiB] HiDef png [78 KiB] Thumbnail [38 KiB] tex code 

Decay fractions of the intermediatestate amplitudes contributing to decays via $b \rightarrow c$ and $b \rightarrow u$ quarklevel transitions. The uncertainties are statistical, systematic and due to alternative amplitude models considered. 
Table_3.pdf [70 KiB] HiDef png [105 KiB] Thumbnail [52 KiB] tex code 

Systematic uncertainties on the $ B ^0_ s $ mixing frequency determined from the fit to $ B ^0_ s \rightarrow D ^_ s \pi ^+ \pi ^+ \pi ^ $ signal candidates and on the fit parameters of the phasespace integrated fit to $ B ^0_ s \rightarrow D ^{\mp}_ s K ^\pm \pi ^\pm \pi ^\mp $ signal candidates in units of the statistical standard deviations. 
Table_4.pdf [58 KiB] HiDef png [115 KiB] Thumbnail [54 KiB] tex code 

Systematic uncertainties on the physical observables and resonance parameters determined from the full timedependent amplitude fit to $ B ^0_ s \rightarrow D ^{\mp}_ s K ^\pm \pi ^\pm \pi ^\mp $ data in units of the statistical standard deviations. The systematic uncertainties for the amplitude coefficients are given in Table ???. 
Table_5.pdf [80 KiB] HiDef png [122 KiB] Thumbnail [53 KiB] tex code 

Parameters determined from the modelindependent and modeldependent fits to the $ B ^0_ s \rightarrow D ^{\mp}_ s K ^\pm \pi ^\pm \pi ^\mp $ signal candidates. The uncertainties are statistical, systematic and (if applicable) due to alternative amplitude models considered. The angles are given modulo $180 ^{\circ} $. 
Table_6.pdf [69 KiB] HiDef png [53 KiB] Thumbnail [26 KiB] tex code 

Parameters of the resonances included in the $ B ^0_ s \rightarrow D ^{\mp}_ s K ^\pm \pi ^\pm \pi ^\mp $ baseline model. 
Table_7.pdf [77 KiB] HiDef png [68 KiB] Thumbnail [33 KiB] tex code 

Intermediatestate components considered for the $ B ^0_ s \rightarrow D ^{\mp}_ s K ^\pm \pi ^\pm \pi ^\mp $ LASSO model building procedure. The letters in square brackets and subscripts refer to the relative orbital angular momentum of the decay products in spectroscopic notation. If no angular momentum is specified, the lowest angular momentum state compatible with angular momentum conservation and, where appropriate, parity conservation, is used. 
Table_8.pdf [66 KiB] HiDef png [321 KiB] Thumbnail [153 KiB] tex code 

Moduli and phases of the amplitude coefficients for decays via $b \rightarrow c$ and $b \rightarrow u$ quarklevel transitions. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic. 
Table_9.pdf [77 KiB] HiDef png [60 KiB] Thumbnail [27 KiB] tex code 

Moduli and phases of the amplitude coefficients for cascade decays. The amplitude coefficients are defined relative to the respective threebody production amplitude coefficients in Table ??? and are shared among $b \rightarrow c$ and $b \rightarrow u$ transitions. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic. 
Table_10.pdf [68 KiB] HiDef png [64 KiB] Thumbnail [33 KiB] tex code 

Systematic uncertainties on the fit parameters of the full timedependent amplitude fit to $ B ^0_ s \rightarrow D ^{\mp}_ s K ^\pm \pi ^\pm \pi ^\mp $ data in units of the statistical standard deviations. The different contributions are: 1) fit bias, 2) background subtraction, 3) correlation of observables, 4) time acceptance, 5) resolution, 6) decaytime bias, 7) nuisance asymmetries, 8) $\Delta m_s$, 9) phasespace acceptance, 10) acceptance factorisation, 11) lineshape models, 12) masses and widths of resonances, 13) form factor. 
Table_11.pdf [70 KiB] HiDef png [211 KiB] Thumbnail [82 KiB] tex code 

Amplitude ratio and strongphase difference for a given decay channel. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic. 
Table_12.pdf [68 KiB] HiDef png [54 KiB] Thumbnail [28 KiB] tex code 

Interference fractions (ordered by magnitude) of the $b\rightarrow c$ intermediatestate amplitudes included in the baseline model. Only the statistical uncertainties are given. 
Table_13.pdf [47 KiB] HiDef png [240 KiB] Thumbnail [117 KiB] tex code 

Interference fractions (ordered by magnitude) of the $b\rightarrow u$ intermediatestate amplitudes included in the baseline model. Only the statistical uncertainties are given. 
Table_14.pdf [47 KiB] HiDef png [250 KiB] Thumbnail [121 KiB] tex code 

Decay fractions in percent for several alternative amplitude models (Alt. 1  Alt. 6). Resonance parameters and the observables $r, \kappa, \delta, \gamma  2 \beta_s$ are also given. 
Table_15.pdf [85 KiB] HiDef png [276 KiB] Thumbnail [131 KiB] tex code 

Decay fractions in percent for several alternative amplitude models (Alt. 7  Alt. 12). Resonance parameters and the observables $r, \kappa, \delta, \gamma  2 \beta_s$ are also given. 
Table_16.pdf [85 KiB] HiDef png [262 KiB] Thumbnail [121 KiB] tex code 

Statistical correlation of the $ C P$ coefficients. 
Table_17.pdf [57 KiB] HiDef png [41 KiB] Thumbnail [18 KiB] tex code 
Supplementary material full pdf 
supple[..].pdf [121 KiB] 

This ZIP file contains supplemetary material for the publication LHCbPAPER2020030. The files are: Supplementary.pdf : An overview of the extra figures *.pdf, *.png, *.eps, *.C : The figures in variuous formats 
Fig13a.pdf [9 KiB] HiDef png [102 KiB] Thumbnail [92 KiB] *C file 

Fig13b.pdf [9 KiB] HiDef png [105 KiB] Thumbnail [95 KiB] *C file 

Fig14.pdf [28 KiB] HiDef png [142 KiB] Thumbnail [134 KiB] *C file 
Created on 05 March 2021.