1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}
2: \usepackage{graphicx,epsfig,cite,graphics}
3: \usepackage{amssymb}
4: \usepackage{mathrsfs}%for slanted letters
5: %\usepackage[pdftex]{hyperref}
6: \topmargin -0.5in
7: \textheight 9.4in
8: \textwidth 6.5in
9: \oddsidemargin -0.3in
10: \def\baselinestretch{1.5}
11:
12: \newcommand{\PRD}[3]{Phys. Rev. {\bf D#1}, #2 (#3)}
13: \newcommand{\PLB}[3]{Phys. Lett. {\bf B#1}, #2 (#3)}
14: \newcommand{\PRL}[3]{Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf#1}, #2 (#3)}
15: \newcommand{\NPB}[3]{Nucl. Phys. {\bf B#1}, #2 (#3)}
16: \newcommand{\beq}[1] {\begin{equation}\label{#1} }
17: \newcommand{\eeq} {\end{equation} }
18: \newcommand{\bea}[1]{\begin{eqnarray}\label{#1} }
19: \newcommand{\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}
20: \newcommand{\gev}{\,{\rm GeV}}
21: \newcommand{\vn}{{\vec{n}}}
22: \newcommand{\vm}{{\vec{m}}}
23: \newcommand{\si}{\sigma}
24: \newcommand{\hmu}{{\hat\mu}}
25: \newcommand{\hnu}{{\hat\nu}}
26: \newcommand{\hrho}{{\hat\rho}}
27: \newcommand{\hh}{{\hat{h}}}
28: \newcommand{\hg}{{\hat{g}}}
29: \newcommand{\hk}{{\hat\kappa}}
30: \def\l{\lambda}
31: \def\slash {\!\!\!\!/}
32:
33: \begin{document}
34:
35: \vspace*{-0.5cm}
36: \begin{flushright}
37: %\today \\
38: OSU-HEP-08-02 \\
39: HIP-2008-12/TH \\
40: HRI-RECAPP-08-03\\
41: NSF-KITP-08-50
42: \end{flushright}
43: \vspace{0.2cm}
44:
45: \begin{center}
46: {\Large Inverted neutrino mass hierarchy and new signals
47: of a chromophobic charged Higgs at the
48: Large Hadron Collider}
49:
50: \vspace*{1.0cm}S. Gabriel$^{(1)\ddagger}$, Biswarup
51: Mukhopadhyaya$^{(2)\dagger}$, S. Nandi$^{(1)\ast}$
52: and Santosh Kumar Rai$^{(3)\varepsilon}$
53:
54:
55: \vspace*{0.5cm}
56: {\sl
57: $^{(1)}$Department of Physics and Oklahoma Center for High Energy Physics,\\
58: Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Oklahoma, 74078\\
59: $^{(2)}$ Regional Centre for Accelerator-based Particle Physics,\\
60: Harish Chandra Research Institute, Jhusi, Allahabad 211019, India \\
61: $^{(3)}$Department of Physics, University
62: of Helsinki and Helsinki Institute of Physics,\\ P.O. Box 64,
63: FIN-00014 University of Helsinki, Finland\\ \rm}
64: \end{center}
65:
66: \vspace*{0.1cm}
67:
68: \begin{abstract}
69: We explore the signals of a charged Higgs arising in a two Higgs
70: doublet model respecting $SU(2)_L \times U(1) \times Z_2$ symmetry
71: with three singlet right handed neutrinos, $N_R$. The charged Higgs
72: in this model has negligible coupling with quarks, and has unsuppressed
73: coupling to leptons and neutrinos. This leads to
74: novel signatures of the charged Higgs at the LHC, especially
75: in the case of an inverted neutrino mass hierarchy, in the
76: form of electrons and muons with missing energy.
77: \end{abstract}
78:
79: \vfill
80:
81: \noindent $^{\dagger}$biswarup@hri.res.in
82:
83: \noindent $^{\ddagger}$svengab@msn.com
84:
85: \noindent $^{\ast}$snandi@okstate.edu
86:
87: \noindent $^{\varepsilon}$santosh.rai@helsinki.fi
88: \newpage
89:
90: \section{Introduction}
91:
92: Although the Higgs boson, the central pillar of the standard electroweak
93: model (SM) is yet to be observed, there are speculations
94: on the possibility of a
95: Higgs sector extending beyond the single Higgs doublet scenario postulated in
96: the SM. The motivations for such an extended Higgs sector, with masses of the
97: additional scalars within an experimentally accessible range, are of different
98: kinds, including the following:
99:
100: \begin{itemize}
101: \item Supersymmetry, a widely studied theory for stabilizing
102: the electroweak scale, which requires at least {\em two} Higgs
103: doublets \cite{higgshunter}.
104: %\textbf{[Ref. 1, Higgs Hunters Guide]}.
105:
106: \item Little Higgs theories \cite{littlehiggs},
107: which seek to stabilize the electroweak scale
108: by postulating a low-energy effective theory with several
109: pseudo-goldstone bosons including the SM-type Higgs.
110: % \textbf{[Ref. 2, a ref. for Little Higgs].}
111:
112: \item Higgs bosons coming as part of a SU(2) triplet (either as
113: consequences of a
114: broken left-right symmetry or introduced in a purely phenomenological
115: manner), which helps in the generation of neutrino masses in a type-II
116: seesaw mechanism \cite{triplethiggs}.
117: %\textbf{[Ref. 3, triplet Higgs]}.
118: \end{itemize}
119:
120: The above scenarios all imply the existence of
121: charged scalar physical states, the experimental signals
122: of which arise mostly through their coupling
123: with heavy fermions such as the top and bottom quarks
124: and the tau-lepton \cite{chh-searches}.
125: %and in some cases,
126: %interactions with gauge bosons constitute the search channels
127: %\cite{chh-searches}.
128: In some cases where the charged Higgs are `fermiophobic', interactions with
129: gauge bosons constitute the search channels \cite{fphobic}.
130: However, light fermions
131: like the electron and the muon are hardly considered relevant
132: at the primary level, as far as the usually adopted search strategies
133: for charged Higgs bosons
134: are concerned. In this note, we suggest the signatures of charged Higgs
135: in such an unusual channel at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC),
136: as the consequence of a recently proposed model aimed at explaining
137: the ultra-small neutrino masses.
138:
139:
140: The proposal is centred around two Higgs doublets, one of which
141: ($\chi$) couples to all fermions excepting the neutrinos which are
142: left out by virtue of a $Z_2$ symmetry. The other doublet ($\phi$)
143: couples only with the charged leptons and the corresponding neutrinos
144: which are Dirac fermions in this model \cite{gabriel:2006}. A tiny vacuum
145: expectation value (vev) of about $10^{-(1 - 2)}$ eV for $\phi$ is
146: responsible for the smallness of the neutrino masses\footnote
147: {Though this amounts to fine-tuning, the standard model itself, and
148: most type-II seesaw models, are finely tuned to at least the same
149: degree.}. The charged physical scalar which is constituted mostly out
150: of $\phi$ couples to a charged lepton and a neutrino with large
151: strength (proportional to the neutrino mass divided by a tiny vev of
152: the order of the neutrino mass). Importantly, it is `chromophobic' in
153: nature, in the sense that it has no coupling with quarks.
154:
155:
156: The available data on neutrino masses and mixing admit three mass
157: patterns, namely, normal hierarchy (NH), inverted hierarchy (IH)
158: and degenerate neutrinos (DN) \cite{numasharchy}. While the charged
159: Higgs in this model interacts dominantly with $\tau \nu_{3}$ in the
160: case of NH (where $m_3 >>m_2 \simeq m_1$), its dominant couplings in
161: an IH scenario (with $m_2 \simeq m_1 >>m_3$) are with $\mu \nu_{2}$
162: and $e \nu_{1}$ in an equitable fashion. As a result, the charged
163: Higgs scalar, produced, for example, through a Drell-Yan process at
164: the LHC, will decay into muons and electrons (together with
165: neutrinos) if one has IH in the neutrino mass patterns. Here we
166: discuss the detectability of such novel charged Higgs signals. Due
167: to the striking character of the signals, we mostly discuss the IH
168: scenario, although we mention the NH case briefly.
169:
170: We re-iterate the salient features of the model in section 2. Section
171: three contains a discussion on the proposed signal, the strategies
172: for eliminating backgrounds, and the predicted numerical results.
173: We conclude in section 4.
174:
175:
176: \section{The model and the formalism}
177:
178: Our proposed model \cite{gabriel:2006} is based on
179: the symmetry group $SU(3)_c \times SU(2)_L \times U(1) \times Z_2$.
180: In addition to the usual SM fermions, we have three $SU(2)$ singlet
181: right-handed neutrinos, $N_{Ri}, i=1-3$, one for each family of
182: fermions. The model has two Higgs doublets, $\chi$ and $\phi$. All
183: the SM fermions and the Higgs doublet $\chi$, are even under the
184: discrete symmetry, $Z_2$, while the RH neutrinos and the Higgs
185: doublet $\phi$ are odd under $Z_2$. Thus all the SM fermions, except
186: the left-handed neutrinos, couple only to $\chi$. The SM left-handed
187: neutrinos, together with the right-handed neutrinos, couple only to
188: the Higgs doublet $\phi$. The gauge symmetry $SU(2) \times U(1)$ is
189: broken spontaneously at the electroweak
190: scale by the vev of $\chi$, while the
191: discrete symmetry $Z_2$ is broken by a vev of $\phi$, and we take
192: $\langle\phi\rangle \sim 10^{-2}~eV$. Thus, in our model, the origin
193: of the neutrino masses is due to the spontaneous breaking of the
194: discrete symmetry $Z_2$. The neutrinos are massless in the limit of
195: exact $Z_2$ symmetry. Through their Yukawa interactions with the
196: Higgs field $\phi$, the neutrinos acquire masses much smaller than
197: those of the quarks and charged leptons due to the tiny vev of
198: $\phi$.
199:
200: The Yukawa interactions of the Higgs fields with the leptons are
201: \bea{fermion}
202: L_Y =y_{l}\overline{\Psi}^{l}_{L}l_{R}\chi+y_{\nu_{l}}
203: \overline{\Psi}^{l}_{L}N_{R}\widetilde{\phi}+h.c.,
204: \eea
205: where $\overline{\Psi}^{l}_{L} =
206: (\overline{\nu}_{l},~\overline{l})_L$ is the usual lepton doublet
207: and $l_R$ is the charged lepton singlet. The first term gives rise
208: to the mass of the charged leptons, while the second term gives a
209: tiny neutrino mass. The interactions with the quarks are the same
210: as in the Standard Model with $\chi$ playing the role of the SM
211: Higgs doublet. Note that in our model, a SM left-handed neutrino,
212: $\nu_L$ combines with a right handed neutrino, $N_R$, to make a
213: massive Dirac neutrino with a mass $\sim 10^{-2}$ eV, the scale of
214: $Z_2$ symmetry breaking.
215:
216: The most general Higgs potential consistent with the $SM \times
217: Z_2$ symmetry is
218: %
219: \bea{potential} \ V =
220: -\mu^2_1~\chi^{\dag}\chi-\mu^2_2~\phi^{\dag}\phi+\lambda_1(\chi^{\dag}\chi)^{2}+\lambda_2(\phi^{\dag}\phi)^{2}+\lambda_3(\chi^{\dag}\chi)(\phi^{\dag}\phi)-\lambda_4|\chi^{\dag}\phi|^{2}\nonumber\\-\frac{1}{2}\lambda_5[(\chi^{\dag}\phi)^{2}+(\phi^{\dag}\chi)^{2}].
221: \eea The physical Higgs fields are a charged field $H$, two neutral
222: scalar fields $h$ and $\sigma$, and a neutral pseudoscalar field
223: $\rho$. In the unitary gauge, the two doublets can be written as
224:
225: \bea{chi} \chi = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(
226: \begin{array}{c}
227: \sqrt{2} (V_\phi/V)H^{+} \\
228: h_0 + i (V_\phi/V)\rho
229: +V_\chi\\
230: \end{array}
231: \right),\nonumber
232: \eea
233: \bea{phi} \phi = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(
234: \begin{array}{c}
235: -\sqrt{2} (V_\chi/V)H^{+} \\
236: \sigma_0 - i (V_\chi/V)\rho
237: +V_\phi\\
238: \end{array}
239: \right),
240: \eea
241: where $V_\chi = \langle\chi\rangle$, $V_\phi = \langle\phi\rangle$,
242: and $V^{2} = V^{2}_\chi + V^{2}_\phi$. The particle masses are
243:
244: \bea{masses} m^2_{W} = \frac{1}{4}g^{2}V^{2},~ m^2_{H^\pm}
245: = \frac{1}{2}(\lambda_4 +\lambda_5)V^{2},~
246: m^{2}_\rho = \lambda_5 V^{2},\nonumber
247: \eea
248: \bea{more}m^{2}_{h,\sigma} = (\lambda_1
249: V^{2}_\chi +\lambda_2 V^{2}_\phi)\pm \sqrt{(\lambda_1
250: V^{2}_\chi -\lambda_2 V^{2}_\phi)^{2}
251: +(\lambda_3-\lambda_4-\lambda_5)^{2} V^{2}_\chi V^{2}_\phi}.
252: \eea
253: An immediate consequence of the scenario under consideration is a
254: very light scalar $\sigma$ with mass
255: %
256: \bea{light} m^{2}_\sigma = 2\lambda_2
257: V^{2}_\phi[1+O(V_\phi/V_\chi)]. \eea The mass eigenstates $h,
258: \sigma$ are related to the weak eigenstates $h_0, \sigma_0$ by
259: %
260: \bea{states}
261: h_0 = ch+s\sigma,~\sigma_0 = -sh+c\sigma,
262: \eea
263: where c and s denotes the cosine and sine of the mixing angles, and
264: are given by
265: %
266: \bea{co}
267: c = 1+O(V^{2}_\phi/V^{2}_\chi),\nonumber
268: \eea \bea{si} s =
269: -\frac{\lambda_3-\lambda_4-\lambda_5}{2\lambda_1}(V_\phi/V_\chi)+O(V^{2}_\phi/V^
270: {2}_\chi).
271: \eea Since $V_{\phi} \sim 10^{-2}$ eV and $V_{\chi} \sim 250$ GeV,
272: this mixing is extremely small, and can be neglected. Hence, we see
273: that $h$ behaves essentially like the SM Higgs (except of course in
274: interactions with the neutrinos).
275:
276:
277: It is true that this model requires considerable fine-tuning, in order
278: to maintain the hierarchy
279: $\langle V_{\phi}\rangle / \langle V_{\chi}\rangle \sim 10^{-13}$,
280: which is not naturally stable with respect to quantum corrections.
281: However, this is no worse than the case in the usual
282: non-supersymmetric grand unified theories, and also in the type II
283: seesaw models for neutrino masses involving Higgs triplets.
284: It will be interesting to see if the model can be supersymmetrized to
285: resolve this. In any case, since the scenario suggested here
286: has experimental signatures of a strikingly novel kind, we feel
287: that its consequences are certainly worth exploring, much in the
288: same way as the phenomenology of various other models have been
289: explored in recent times.
290:
291:
292: From Eq.(\ref{phi}), we see that the charged Higgs mainly resides
293: in the doublet $\phi$, with only a very tiny part, $V_{\phi}/V$ in
294: $\chi$. Thus the coupling of the charged Higgs with the quarks are
295: highly suppressed (hence the Chromophobic charged Higgs). However
296: its coupling with the neutrinos and the corresponding charged
297: leptons are not suppressed. Thus the charged Higgs will dominantly
298: decay to the neutrinos and the charged leptons, giving a totally
299: different signals from the usual generic two Higgs doublet models,
300: or the MSSM. The Yukawa couplings of the charged Higgs, H to the
301: leptons and quarks are given by
302: %%%
303: \bea{chc} L_Y = - \sqrt{2} \frac{m_{\nu}}{V_{\phi}} r_{\chi}
304: [\overline{l_L} \nu_R H + \overline \nu_L l_R H + h.c. ] \nonumber \\
305: + \sqrt{2} \frac{m_d}{V_{\chi}} r_{\phi}\overline{u_L} d_R H
306: - \sqrt{2} \frac{m_u}{V_{\chi}} r_{\phi}\overline {d_L} u_R H + h.c.
307: %r_{\chi}
308: % L_Y =y_{l}\overline{\Psi}^{l}_{L}l_{R}\chi+y_{\nu_{l}}\overline{\Psi}^{l}_{L}N_{R}\widetilde{\phi}+h.c.,
309: \eea
310: where $r_{\chi}=V_{\chi}/V$ and $r_\phi=V_{\phi}/V$.
311: The Feynman rules for the interaction of the charged Higgs with the
312: photon, $Z$ boson and the scalars $\sigma$ and $\rho$ are given by
313:
314: \begin{center}
315: \begin{tabular}{|l|l|} \hline
316: Fields & Couplings \\[2mm]\hline
317: ${A}_{\mu} (p_1)$ $H^+(p_2)$ $H^-(p_3)$ & $e\big(p_3-p_2\big)^\mu$\\[2mm]
318: ${Z}_{\mu} (p_1)$ $H^+(p_2)$ $H^-(p_3)$ & $\frac{(1-2s_W^2)e}{2s_W c_W}\big(p_3-p_2\big)^\mu$\\[2mm]
319: ${H}^+(p_1)$ $\sigma (p_2)$ $W^-_\mu(p_3)$ & $\frac{er_\chi}{2s_W}\big(p_2-p_1\big)^\mu
320: %\big(1 + \mathcal{O}(\frac{V_\phi^2}{V_\chi^2})\big)
321: $\\[2mm]
322: ${H}^-(p_1)$ $\rho (p_2)$ $W^+_\mu(p_3)$ & $\frac{ie}{2s_W}\big(p_2-p_1\big)^\mu $\\[2mm]\hline
323: \end{tabular}
324: \end{center}
325:
326: The following important features of this model become apparent
327: from the above description:
328: \begin{itemize}
329: \item The charged Higgs $H^\pm$ has
330: practically no coupling to a pair of quarks (that is to say, these are
331: `chromophobic' scalars).
332:
333: \item While $h,\rho$ and $H^\pm$ have masses in the electroweak
334: scale, $\sigma$ is an extremely light physical state whose mass is
335: controlled by the vev $V_\phi$. $\sigma$ has interesting
336: cosmological implications which was discussed in Ref.\cite{gabriel:2006}.
337:
338: \item The coupling of the charged scalar physical states $H^{\pm}$
339: to a lepton and the corresponding neutrino is large, proportional to
340: the mass of the neutrino in that family divided by a tiny vev of the
341: order of the corresponding neutrino mass.
342:
343: \item The main decays of $H^{\pm}$ are
344: $H^{\pm}\longrightarrow \ell\nu_\ell$($\ell = e/\mu/\tau$),
345: $H^{\pm}\longrightarrow \rho W^{\pm}$, and $H^{\pm} \longrightarrow
346: \sigma W^{\pm}$.
347: \end{itemize}
348:
349:
350: It is also to be noted that the absence of interaction with quarks
351: makes the charged Higgs in this scenario free from all constraints
352: arising from rare processes such as $b \longrightarrow s\gamma$.
353: Thus its mass can be anything above the limit from the search for
354: pair-production at the Large Electron Positron (LEP) collider.
355:
356: \section{LHC signals for the charged Higgs}
357:
358: The chromophobic property of $H^\pm$ makes its search channels at the
359: LHC quite different from the usual ones. The usual search strategies for
360: charged Higgs at hadron colliders rely on its associated production
361: with top quarks or from top quark decays. These production channels are denied
362: in our case due to the chromophobic property of the charged Higgs.
363: First of all, its production cannot take place through the process
364: $bg \longrightarrow t H^-$ \cite{bgthplus} or through top decays, $t\to b H^+$.
365: One has to depend on electroweak processes leading to its pair-production.
366: The pair productions of the charged Higgs in our model is via
367: Drell-Yan process with the exchange of the photon and the Z boson in
368: the s-channel. One could also have the charged Higgs boson pair produced at
369: LHC through scattering of two electroweak gauge bosons via
370: $qq \to qqV^*V^* \to qq H^+H^-$ where $V=\gamma,Z,W^\pm$ \cite{moretti}.
371: However we note that this cross section is suppressed compared to the Drell-Yan
372: process. The production cross section for the charged Higgs pair through the
373: Drell-Yan channel at the LHC energy are shown in Fig.\ref{fig:pairprod}.
374:
375: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
376: \begin{figure}[t]
377: \begin{center}
378: \includegraphics[height=3.5in,width=3.5in]{Hpair.eps}
379: %\vspace*{4pt}
380: \caption{\it Cross section for the pair production of
381: charged Higgs at LHC as
382: a function of the charged Higgs mass. We have used the leading order parton
383: density functions of CTEQ6L \cite{cteq} for the analysis.}
384: \label{fig:pairprod}
385: \end{center}
386: \end{figure}
387: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
388:
389: We can also produce the charged Higgs singly at LHC through the associated
390: production channel $qq' \to \rho H^\pm, \sigma H^\pm$. Both the production
391: modes would lead to a single charged Higgs in the final state in association
392: with large missing transverse energy as $\rho$ decays to a pair of neutrinos
393: with 100\% branching ratio while $\sigma$ passes through the detectors
394: undetected \cite{gabriel:2006}. For the single-$H^\pm$ production channel,
395: although the rates are of magnitude comparable to that of pair-production,
396: the single-W background turns out to be overwhelmingly large, the reason
397: being the substantial branching ratio of the W to either an
398: electron or a muon. Thus the search for the charged Higgs in
399: this scenario is best carried out via pair-production.
400:
401: Decay branching ratios of the charged Higgs are determined by a
402: competition between the neutrino - charged lepton and the $\sigma W$ and
403: $\rho W$ final states, the respective branching ratios being decided
404: by the vev $V_\phi$ which in turn determines neutrino masses. Plots
405: of the branching ratios are shown in Fig.\ref{fig:Hdk}, where one finds that
406: the fermionic decay modes are more favoured for (a) low charged
407: Higgs masses , and (b) relatively smaller values of $V_\phi$. The
408: dominant fermionic decay mode is in the channel $\tau\nu_\tau$ in
409: the case of normal hierarchy of neutrino masses. However, in the
410: inverted hierarchy scenario the dominant fermionic decay modes are
411: to $\mu\nu_\mu$,$e\nu_e$ . Therefore, in case the IH scenario is
412: preferred by nature, this model predicts the rather striking
413: signature for the charged Higgs, namely,
414:
415: $pp \longrightarrow H^+ H^- \longrightarrow \ell^+ \ell'^- + {E\slash_T}$ \\
416: (with $\ell,\ell' = e/\mu$).
417: %(l = e,\mu) $).
418:
419: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
420: \begin{figure}[t]
421: \begin{center}
422: \includegraphics[height=3.2in,width=3.2in]{hdk_phi-09.eps}
423: \includegraphics[height=3.2in,width=3.2in]{hdk_phi-11.eps}
424: %\vspace*{4pt}
425: \caption{\it We plot the branching ratio for the decay of charged Higgs boson
426: as a function of its mass. We also show, how the value of the vev for the
427: second doublet affects the branching ratios.}
428: \label{fig:Hdk}
429: \end{center}
430: \end{figure}
431: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
432:
433:
434: With the above final states in mind, we calculate the event rates
435: for the signal and compare them with the SM background.
436: We have chosen a sample (benchmark) point in the parameter space of the
437: model for our analysis. The choice for the free parameters of the theory are
438: \begin{itemize}
439: \item $\l_1=0.12,~\l_2=1.0, ~\l_3 = 2.0$
440: \item $M_\rho=100$ GeV, $M_\sigma\sim V_\phi=10^{-2}$ eV and $M_h=120$ GeV.
441: \item $\l_5=\frac{M_\rho^2}{V^2}$ and $\l_4=\frac{2m_{H^\pm}^2}{V^2}-\l_5$.
442: \end{itemize}
443: It is worth pointing out that the charged Higgs production rate is not affected
444: for other choices of the $\l_i's$ allowed by the model. However, as
445: Fig.\ref{fig:Hdk} reveals, the choice of $V_\phi$ plays a
446: crucial role in the decay properties of the
447: charged Higgs. Also, the mass of the pseudoscalar $\rho$
448: influences the branching ratios for $m_{H^+}\le m_W+M_\rho$ to
449: some extent.
450:
451: The SM background mainly comes from the process
452: $pp \to W^+W^-$ and $pp \to ZZ$. In the first case the $W$-bosons decay to
453: $e/\mu$ and a neutrino, while in the second, one of the $Z$
454: decays into neutrino and the other goes to an electron/muon pair.
455: The second channel can be suppressed by removing the $Z$-peak in the
456: invariant mass distribution of the charged lepton pair.
457: In addition, a strong $E\slash_T$ cut (which retains an appreciable
458: fraction of the signal due to the larger mass of the charged Higgs)
459: helps in reducing the SM background.
460: It is important to note that, although the $W$-pair production
461: cross section is quite large at LHC ($\sim 120~pb$)\cite{haywood}, the
462: small branching ratio to $\ell\nu_\ell$ reduces the effective background rate
463: as compared to the signal, for which the branching fraction is large when
464: the $V_\phi$ is small (but approximately in the right range to yield proper
465: neutrino masses with Yukawa couplings $O(1)$), and the charged Higgs mass is
466: $\le$ 300 GeV.
467:
468: However with additional jets coming from
469: initial and final state radiations off the colliding partons, one expects the
470: signal to be accompanied with jets. This leads to another major source for the
471: SM background coming from the $t\bar{t}$ production\footnote{We use the
472: available NNLO corrected cross-section $\sim 890~pb$ \cite{nnlottbar}.}.
473: At first thought, this should be reducible by tagging the $b$-jets with
474: large $E_T$ in the final state. Assuming an efficiency of 60\% for a
475: single $b$-jet identification, this should eliminate 84\% of the background
476: coming from the $t\bar{t}$ production.
477: However, this does not prove sufficient to completely reduce this background.
478: We note that this background can be effectively suppressed without
479: losing much of the signal if we put a selection criterion on the maximum
480: number of jets associated with the signal. Keeping this in mind we perform
481: our analysis.
482: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
483: \begin{figure}[htb]
484: \begin{center}
485: \includegraphics[height=3.5in,width=3.5in]{signal.eps}
486: %\vspace*{4pt}
487: \caption{\it We show the total cross section for the process
488: $pp\to \ell^+ \ell^- + E\slash_T$ as a function of the charged Higgs mass
489: at the LHC, where $\ell = e,\mu$.
490: The SM cross section is also shown in broken lines.}
491: \label{fig:twotau}
492: \end{center}
493: \end{figure}
494: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
495:
496: The SM background event generation has been done using
497: PYTHIA 6.410 \cite{pythia}. The signal events have been generated using the
498: CalcHEP 2.4.5 \cite{calchep} package and then interfaced with PYTHIA. To define
499: the associated jets we employ the jet cone algorithm implemented in PYTHIA
500: through the subroutine PYCELL. The minimum $E_T$ threshold for a cell to be
501: considered as a jet initiator has been chosen as 2 GeV, while we assumed the
502: minimum summed $E_T$ of the jet (consisting of all cells within the cone of
503: radius $R$ in the ($\eta,\phi$) plane) to be accepted as
504: a jet to be 20 GeV. The jet conical width is
505: $\Delta R_{jj}=\sqrt{\eta^2_{jj}+\phi^2_{jj}}\ge 0.7$. while $\eta$ coverage
506: range for jets is taken to be $|\eta|\le 3.0$. Using the above clustering
507: algorithm we find that if we restrict ourselves to $N_{jets} \le 2$
508: (where $N_{jets}$ is the total number of jets) and using
509: the $b$-jet identification efficiency, the background from the $t\bar{t}$
510: production is reduced to about $2-3~fb$ after implementing the selection cuts
511: listed below. The dominant background still remains the one arising from
512: the $W^+W^-$ production.
513:
514: Based on the above observations and restricting ourselves to $N_{jets} \le 2$,
515: we have imposed the following cuts on our final state events:
516: \begin{itemize}
517: \item The transverse momentum of the charged lepton should respect a minimum
518: cut $p_T^\ell > 25$ GeV.
519: \item The charged leptons should be in the rapidity interval
520: $|\eta_\ell| < 2.5$.
521: \item A missing transverse energy(momentum) cut given by
522: $E\slash_T > 100$ GeV.
523: \item The $e/\mu$
524: should be well separated in space to be resolved, thus justifying
525: $\Delta R_{\ell\ell} \ge 0.4$ where
526: $\Delta R = \sqrt{(\Delta \eta)^2 + (\Delta \phi)^2}$.
527: \item $M^{inv}_{\ell\ell} > 100$ GeV.
528: \end{itemize}
529: In Fig.\ref{fig:twotau} we show a plot of the signal rate against
530: the charged Higgs mass. The backgrounds are represented by the
531: horizontal line. We see from Fig.\ref{fig:twotau} that
532: for $m_H < 150$ GeV, the signal to background ratio is greater than 1/3, while
533: it falls to 1/6 for a 200 GeV charged Higgs. For $m_H \simeq 300$ GeV
534: this ratio falls to less than 1/30.
535: It is clear from the figure that, although the
536: background is sizable, such statistical significance as to set the
537: signal apart can be achieved with sufficient integrated luminosity
538: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
539: \begin{figure}[htb]
540: \begin{center}
541: \includegraphics[height=3.2in,width=3.2in]{DR.eps}
542: \includegraphics[height=3.2in,width=3.2in]{Minv.eps}
543: %\vspace*{4pt}
544: \caption{\it We show the binwise distributions in the $\Delta R_{\ell^+\ell^-}$
545: and the invariant mass $M_{\ell^+\ell^-}$ for the $\ell^+\ell^- + E\slash_T$
546: signal for three different choice of mass of the charged Higgs. The SM
547: expectation is also shown in the shaded region. The vertical blue bands over
548: the SM distribution represent the $3\sigma$ statistical fluctuations in the SM
549: background. The integrated luminosity is taken as $\mathcal{L}=100~fb^{-1}$.}
550: \label{fig:twotau1}
551: \end{center}
552: \end{figure}
553: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
554: at the LHC. For an integrated luminosity of 10 $fb^{-1}$, one
555: has a 5$\sigma$ significance for $m_{H^\pm}\le$ 140 GeV while,
556: if for example, one has $\int {\cal L}dt~=~100~fb^{-1}$ of
557: luminosity, then one has a $\sim$5$\sigma$ significance for $m_{H^\pm}\le$
558: 220 GeV. The search limit goes up to about 250 GeV with the same
559: statistical significance for $\int {\cal L}dt~=~300~fb^{-1}$. Since
560: the charged Higgs mass has little constraint on it other than that
561: from Drell-Yan pair-production at the LEP, the above result is quite
562: encouraging, as one is probing a substantial part of the parameter
563: space of a chromophobic charged Higgs answering to an inverted
564: hierarchy of neutrino masses.
565:
566: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
567: \begin{figure}[htb]
568: \begin{center}
569: \includegraphics[height=3.2in,width=3.2in]{pT_lept.eps}
570: \includegraphics[height=3.2in,width=3.2in]{ETmiss.eps}
571: %\vspace*{4pt}
572: \caption{\it We show the binwise distributions in the $p_T^{\ell}$
573: and the $E\slash_T$ for the $\ell^+\ell^- + E\slash_T$ signal for
574: three different choice of mass of the charged Higgs.
575: All conventions are the same as in Fig.\ref{fig:twotau1}.
576: The integrated luminosity is taken as $\mathcal{L}=100~fb^{-1}$.}
577: \label{fig:twotau2}
578: \end{center}
579: \end{figure}
580: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
581: We also present some kinematic plots of the signal in
582: Fig.\ref{fig:twotau1} and Fig.\ref{fig:twotau2} and compare it with
583: the SM background. The distributions show how the signal stands out
584: better with larger $m_{H^\pm}$ so long as the production rate due to
585: higher mass is not forbiddingly low.
586:
587:
588: In the case of a normal hierarchy of neutrino masses, the dominant
589: coupling of $H^\pm$ is to a $\tau-\nu_\tau$ pair. The corresponding
590: signal is $\tau^+ \tau^- + E\slash_T$, for which the rates without
591: any cuts is same as that for the $e/\mu + E\slash_T$ final state,
592: since the branching ratio for $H^\pm \longrightarrow \tau\nu_\tau$
593: in NH is the same as that for $H^\pm \longrightarrow (e \nu_e +
594: \mu\nu_\mu)$ in IH. The backgrounds, on the other hand, are
595: reduced by a factor of four due to the smaller branching ratio of
596: each W decaying into $\tau\nu_\tau$ only. Thus one expects {\it prima
597: facie} a better search limit for the $H^\pm$ in this case. However,
598: one has to study the effects of $\tau$-decays and the cuts
599: on the decay products more carefully. An available option is to
600: identify $\tau$-polarisation and thus separate the signals from
601: the W-backgrounds, for which the polarisation is of opposite type.
602: A detailed quantitative study of this signal pertaining to the
603: NH case will be reported in a subsequent paper \cite{inprep}.
604:
605: \section{Conclusions}
606:
607: In a model motivated to explain the tiny neutrino masses, we have
608: discussed a scenario in which the charged Higgs productions and
609: decays are completely different from the usual two Higgs doublet
610: models or MSSM. In this model, the dominant charged Higgs pair
611: productions are via the Drell-Yan processes, where its decays are
612: dominantly to the charged leptons and the corresponding neutrinos.
613: In the inverted neutrino mass hierarchy scenario, the dominant decay
614: modes are to the light leptons, electrons and muons. Such signals
615: can be detected at the LHC for a charged Higgs mass upto few hundred
616: GeV, and will provide a clue to the pattern of the neutrino masses.
617:
618: \vspace*{0.4in}
619: \textbf{Acknowledgement}
620:
621: We thank C. Csaki, A. Deroeck, D.K. Ghosh, K. Huitu, T. Han and S. Roy
622: for useful discussions. SN would like to thank the CERN Theory Division for
623: warm hospitality and support during his sabbatical there where part of this
624: work was done. BM and SN would like to thank the warm hospitality and
625: support of KITP, Santa Barbara, and the the organizers of the Workshop
626: "Physics of the Large Hadron Collider" during their participation
627: there when this work was completed. The work of SG and SN was
628: supported in part by the US Department of Energy, Grant Numbers
629: DE-FG02-04ER41306 and DE-FG02-ER46140. The work of BM was partially
630: supported by funding available from the Department of Atomic Energy,
631: Government of India, for the Regional Center for Accelerator-based
632: particle Physics, Harish-Chandra Research Institute. SKR gratefully
633: acknowledges support from the Academy of Finland (Project
634: No.115032). This research was supported in part by the National
635: Science Foundation under Grant Number PHY05-51164.
636:
637: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
638:
639: \bibitem{higgshunter}
640: See for example, \emph{Higgs Hunters Guide}, by J.F. Gunion, H. E.
641: Haber, G. L. Kane and S. Dawson, Addison-Wesley Publishing, NewYork, 1990.
642:
643: \bibitem{littlehiggs}
644: N.~Arkani-Hamed, A.~G.~Cohen and H.~Georgi,
645: %``Electroweak symmetry breaking from dimensional deconstruction,''
646: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 513}, 232 (2001)
647: [arXiv:hep-ph/0105239];
648: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B513,232;%%
649: %\cite{ArkaniHamed:2002pa}
650: %\bibitem{ArkaniHamed:2002pa}
651: N.~Arkani-Hamed, A.~G.~Cohen, T.~Gregoire and J.~G.~Wacker,
652: %``Phenomenology of electroweak symmetry breaking from theory space,''
653: JHEP {\bf 0208}, 020 (2002)
654: [arXiv:hep-ph/0202089];
655: %%CITATION = JHEPA,0208,020;%%
656: %\cite{ArkaniHamed:2002qy}
657: %\bibitem{ArkaniHamed:2002qy}
658: N.~Arkani-Hamed, A.~G.~Cohen, E.~Katz and A.~E.~Nelson,
659: %``The littlest Higgs,''
660: JHEP {\bf 0207}, 034 (2002)
661: [arXiv:hep-ph/0206021];
662: %%CITATION = JHEPA,0207,034;%%
663: %\cite{Schmaltz:2005ky}
664: %\bibitem{Schmaltz:2005ky}
665: M.~Schmaltz and D.~Tucker-Smith,
666: %``Little Higgs review,''
667: Ann.\ Rev.\ Nucl.\ Part.\ Sci.\ {\bf 55}, 229 (2005)
668: [arXiv:hep-ph/0502182];
669: %%CITATION = ARNUA,55,229;%%
670: %\cite{Perelstein:2005ka}
671: %\bibitem{Perelstein:2005ka}
672: M.~Perelstein,
673: %``Little Higgs models and their phenomenology,''
674: Prog.\ Part.\ Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf 58}, 247 (2007)
675: [arXiv:hep-ph/0512128].
676: %%CITATION = PPNPD,58,247;%%
677:
678: \bibitem{triplethiggs}
679: %\cite{Schechter:1980gr}
680: %\bibitem{Schechter:1980gr}
681: J.~Schechter and J.~W.~F.~Valle,
682: %``Neutrino Masses In SU(2) X U(1) Theories,''
683: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 22}, 2227 (1980);
684: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D22,2227;%%
685: %\cite{Gelmini:1980re}
686: %\bibitem{Gelmini:1980re}
687: G.~B.~Gelmini and M.~Roncadelli,
688: %``Left-Handed Neutrino Mass Scale And Spontaneously Broken Lepton Number,''
689: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 99}, 411 (1981);
690: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B99,411;%%
691: %\cite{Schechter:1981cv}
692: %\bibitem{Schechter:1981cv}
693: J.~Schechter and J.~W.~F.~Valle,
694: %``Neutrino Decay And Spontaneous Violation Of Lepton Number,''
695: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 25}, 774 (1982);
696: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D25,774;%%
697: %\cite{Georgi:1985nv}
698: %\bibitem{Georgi:1985nv}
699: H.~Georgi and M.~Machacek,
700: %``Doubly Charged Higgs Bosons,''
701: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 262}, 463 (1985);
702: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B262,463;%%
703: %\cite{Chanowitz:1985ug}
704: %\bibitem{Chanowitz:1985ug}
705: M.~S.~Chanowitz and M.~Golden,
706: %``Higgs Boson Triplets With M (W) = M (Z) Cos Theta Omega,''
707: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 165}, 105 (1985);
708: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B165,105;%%
709: %\cite{Gunion:1989in}
710: %\bibitem{Gunion:1989in}
711: J.~F.~Gunion, J.~Grifols, A.~Mendez, B.~Kayser and F.~I.~Olness,
712: %``Higgs Bosons In Left-Right Symmetric Models,''
713: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 40}, 1546 (1989);
714: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D40,1546;%%
715: %\cite{Gunion:1989ci}
716: %\bibitem{Gunion:1989ci}
717: J.~F.~Gunion, R.~Vega and J.~Wudka,
718: %``Higgs triplets in the standard model,''
719: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 42}, 1673 (1990).
720: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D42,1673;%%
721:
722: \bibitem{chh-searches}
723: %\cite{Gunion:1987ke}
724: %\bibitem{Gunion:1987ke}
725: J.~F.~Gunion, G.~L.~Kane and J.~Wudka,
726: %``Search Techniques for Charged and Neutral Intermediate Mass Higgs Bosons,''
727: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 299}, 231 (1988);
728: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B299,231;%%
729: %\cite{Dicus:1989vf}
730: %\bibitem{Dicus:1989vf}
731: D.~A.~Dicus, J.~L.~Hewett, C.~Kao and T.~G.~Rizzo,
732: %``W+- H-+ PRODUCTION AT HADRON COLLIDERS,''
733: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 40}, 787 (1989);
734: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D40,787;%%
735: %\cite{Bawa:1989pc}
736: %\bibitem{Bawa:1989pc}
737: A.~C.~Bawa, C.~S.~Kim and A.~D.~Martin,
738: %``CHARGED HIGGS PRODUCTION AT HADRON COLLIDERS,''
739: Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 47}, 75 (1990);
740: %%CITATION = ZEPYA,C47,75;%%
741: %\cite{Roy:2004az}
742: %\bibitem{Roy:2004az}
743: D.~P.~Roy,
744: %``Looking for the charged Higgs boson,''
745: Mod.\ Phys.\ Lett.\ A {\bf 19}, 1813 (2004)
746: [arXiv:hep-ph/0406102].
747: %%CITATION = MPLAE,A19,1813;%%
748:
749: \bibitem{fphobic}
750: %\cite{Haber:1978jt}
751: %\bibitem{Haber:1978jt}
752: H.~E.~Haber, G.~L.~Kane and T.~Sterling,
753: %``The Fermion Mass Scale And Possible Effects Of Higgs Bosons On Experimental
754: %Observables,''
755: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 161}, 493 (1979);
756: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B161,493;%%
757: %\cite{Pois:1993ay}
758: %\bibitem{Pois:1993ay}
759: H.~Pois, T.~J.~Weiler and T.~C.~Yuan,
760: %``Higgs boson decay to four fermions including a single top quark below t
761: %anti-t threshold,''
762: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 47}, 3886 (1993)
763: [arXiv:hep-ph/9303277];
764: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D47,3886;%%
765: %\cite{Akeroyd:1995hg}
766: %\bibitem{Akeroyd:1995hg}
767: A.~G.~Akeroyd,
768: %``Fermiophobic Higgs bosons at the Tevatron,''
769: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 368}, 89 (1996)
770: [arXiv:hep-ph/9511347];
771: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B368,89;%%
772: %\cite{Brucher:1999tx}
773: %\bibitem{Brucher:1999tx}
774: L.~Brucher and R.~Santos,
775: %``Experimental signatures of fermiophobic Higgs bosons,''
776: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 12}, 87 (2000)
777: [arXiv:hep-ph/9907434].
778: %%CITATION = EPHJA,C12,87;%%
779:
780: \bibitem{gabriel:2006}
781: S.~Gabriel and S.~Nandi,
782: %``A new two Higgs doublet model,''
783: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 655}, 141 (2007)
784: [arXiv:hep-ph/0610253].
785: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B655,141;%%
786:
787: \bibitem{numasharchy}
788: %\cite{Altarelli:2002hx}
789: %\bibitem{Altarelli:2002hx}
790: G.~Altarelli and F.~Feruglio,
791: %``Theoretical models of neutrino masses and mixings,''
792: Springer Tracts Mod.\ Phys.\ {\bf 190}, 169 (2003)
793: [arXiv:hep-ph/0206077].
794: %%CITATION = STPHB,190,169;%%
795:
796: \bibitem{bgthplus}
797: %\cite{Barger:1993th}
798: %\bibitem{Barger:1993th}
799: V.~D.~Barger, R.~J.~N.~Phillips and D.~P.~Roy,
800: %``Heavy charged Higgs signals at the LHC,''
801: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 324}, 236 (1994)
802: [arXiv:hep-ph/9311372];
803: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B324,236;%%
804: %\cite{Moretti:1996ra}
805: %\bibitem{Moretti:1996ra}
806: S.~Moretti and K.~Odagiri,
807: %``Production of charged Higgs bosons of the minimal supersymmetric standard
808: %model in b-quark initiated processes at the Large Hadron Collider,''
809: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 55}, 5627 (1997)
810: [arXiv:hep-ph/9611374].
811: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D55,5627;%%
812:
813: \bibitem{moretti}
814: %\cite{Moretti:2001pp}
815: %\bibitem{Moretti:2001pp}
816: S.~Moretti,
817: %``Pair production of charged Higgs scalars from electroweak gauge boson
818: %fusion,''
819: J.\ Phys.\ G {\bf 28}, 2567 (2002)
820: [arXiv:hep-ph/0102116].
821: %%CITATION = JPHGB,G28,2567;%%
822:
823: \bibitem{cteq}
824: %\cite{Stump:2003yu}
825: %\bibitem{Stump:2003yu}
826: D.~Stump, J.~Huston, J.~Pumplin, W.~K.~Tung, H.~L.~Lai, S.~Kuhlmann
827: and J.~F.~Owens,
828: %``Inclusive jet production, parton distributions, and the search for new
829: %physics,''
830: JHEP {\bf 0310}, 046 (2003)
831: [arXiv:hep-ph/0303013].
832: %%CITATION = JHEPA,0310,046;%%
833:
834: %\bibitem{madgraph}
835: %\cite{Maltoni:2002qb}
836: %\bibitem{Maltoni:2002qb}
837: % F.~Maltoni and T.~Stelzer,
838: % %``MadEvent: Automatic event generation with MadGraph,''
839: % JHEP {\bf 0302}, 027 (2003)
840: % [arXiv:hep-ph/0208156].
841: % %%CITATION = JHEPA,0302,027;%%
842:
843: \bibitem{haywood}
844: %\cite{Haywood:1999qg}
845: %\bibitem{Haywood:1999qg}
846: S.~Haywood {\it et al.},
847: %``Electroweak physics,''
848: arXiv:hep-ph/0003275.
849: %%CITATION = HEP-PH/0003275;%%
850:
851: \bibitem{nnlottbar}
852: %\cite{Cacciari:2008zb}
853: %\bibitem{Cacciari:2008zb}
854: M.~Cacciari, S.~Frixione, M.~M.~Mangano, P.~Nason and G.~Ridolfi,
855: %``Updated predictions for the total production cross sections of top and of
856: %heavier quark pairs at the Tevatron and at the LHC,''
857: arXiv:0804.2800 [hep-ph];
858: %%CITATION = ARXIV:0804.2800;%%
859: %\cite{Kidonakis:2008mu}
860: %\bibitem{Kidonakis:2008mu}
861: N.~Kidonakis and R.~Vogt,
862: %``The theoretical top quark cross section at the Tevatron and the LHC,''
863: arXiv:0805.3844 [hep-ph].
864: %%CITATION = ARXIV:0805.3844;%%
865:
866:
867: \bibitem{pythia}
868: %\cite{Sjostrand:2006za}
869: %\bibitem{Sjostrand:2006za}
870: T.~Sjostrand, S.~Mrenna and P.~Skands,
871: %``PYTHIA 6.4 physics and manual,''
872: JHEP {\bf 0605}, 026 (2006)
873: [arXiv:hep-ph/0603175].
874: %%CITATION = JHEPA,0605,026;%%
875:
876: \bibitem{calchep}
877: %\cite{Pukhov:2004ca}
878: %\bibitem{Pukhov:2004ca}
879: A.~Pukhov,
880: %``CalcHEP 3.2: MSSM, structure functions, event generation, batchs, and
881: %generation of matrix elements for other packages,''
882: arXiv:hep-ph/0412191.
883: %%CITATION = HEP-PH/0412191;%%
884:
885: \bibitem{inprep}
886: S.~Gabriel, B.~Mukhopadhyaya, S.~Nandi and S.K.~Rai,
887: In preparation.
888:
889: \end{thebibliography}
890: \end{document}
891: