1: % ****** Start of file apssamp.tex ******
2: %
3: % This file is part of the APS files in the REVTeX 4 distribution.
4: % Version 4.0 of REVTeX, August 2001
5: %
6: % Copyright (c) 2001 The American Physical Society.
7: %
8: % See the REVTeX 4 README file for restrictions and more information.
9: %
10: % TeX'ing this file requires that you have AMS-LaTeX 2.0 installed
11: % as well as the rest of the prerequisites for REVTeX 4.0
12: %
13: % See the REVTeX 4 README file
14: % It also requires running BibTeX. The commands are as follows:
15: %
16: % 1) latex apssamp.tex
17: % 2) bibtex apssamp
18: % 3) latex apssamp.tex
19: % 4) latex apssamp.tex
20: %
21: \documentclass[twocolumn,showpacs,preprintnumbers,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4}
22: %\documentclass[preprint,showpacs,preprintnumbers,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4}
23:
24: % Some other (several out of many) possibilities
25: %\documentclass[preprint,aps]{revtex4}
26: %\documentclass[preprint,aps,draft]{revtex4}
27: %\documentclass[prb]{revtex4}% Physical Review B
28:
29: \usepackage{graphicx}% Include figure files
30: \usepackage{dcolumn}% Align table columns on decimal point
31: \usepackage{bm}% bold math
32: \usepackage{wrapfig}
33: %\nofiles
34:
35: \begin{document}
36:
37: %\preprint{APS/123-QED}
38:
39: \title{A Study of $e^+e^- \to H^0A^0$ Production \\
40: and the Constraint on Dark Matter Density}
41:
42: \author{Marco Battaglia}
43: \email{MBattaglia@lbl.gov}
44: \affiliation{University of California at Berkeley, Department of Physics and\\
45: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA - USA}%
46: \author{Benjamin Hooberman}%
47: \email{benhooberman@berkeley.edu}
48: \affiliation{University of California at Berkeley, Department of Physics and\\
49: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA - USA}%
50: \author{Nicole Kelley}%
51: \email{kelley@berkeley.edu}
52: \affiliation{University of California at Berkeley, Department of Physics and\\
53: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA - USA}%
54:
55: \date{\today}% It is always \today, today,
56: % but any date may be explicitly specified
57:
58: \begin{abstract}
59: This paper reports the results of a study of the $e^+e^- \to H^0A^0$
60: process at $\sqrt{s}$ = 1~TeV performed on fully simulated and reconstructed
61: events. The estimated accuracies on the heavy Higgs boson masses, widths and
62: decay branching fractions are discussed in relation to the study of
63: Supersymmetric Dark Matter.
64: \end{abstract}
65:
66: \pacs{13.66.Fg, 14.80.Cp}% PACS, the Physics and Astronomy
67: % Classification Scheme.
68: %\keywords{Suggested keywords}%Use showkeys class option if keyword
69: %display desired
70: \maketitle
71:
72: \section{Introduction}
73:
74: The connections between cosmology and particle physics through dark datter
75: (DM) have recently received special attention for defining the physics
76: program at the TeV frontier. We foresee that the combination of data from
77: satellites, direct DM searches, hadron and lepton colliders will provide a
78: major breakthrough in our understanding of the nature of dark matter and
79: its interactions in the early Universe. These expectations are supported by
80: the fact that there are several extensions of the Standard Model (SM), which
81: include a new, stable, weakly-interacting massive particle, which may be
82: responsible for the observed relic DM in the Universe. This particle should
83: become accessible to particle colliders operating at the TeV energy frontier,
84: as well as to the next generations of direct DM search experiments.
85: The LHC collider will be first in providing data to address the
86: question of whether one of these scenarios is indeed realised in nature.
87: If this is the case, it will also gather some quantitative information to be
88: related to the relic DM density measured from the cosmic microwave background
89: (CMB) spectra~\cite{Battaglia:2004mp}. However, it is understood that the LHC
90: data will not be exhaustive in this respect. First, it will not be possible to infer,
91: in a model independent way, the relic density to an accuracy close to that already
92: achieved by CMB observations. Furthermore, there exist classes of models of new
93: physics which the LHC may not be able to disentangle and probe in sufficient details.
94: It is only with the measurements becoming available at an electron positron collider,
95: operating at centre-of-mass energies of order of 1~TeV, that we shall be able to
96: determine the properties of the DM candidate particle and of the other particles
97: participating in its interactions in the early Universe, with sufficient accuracy to
98: predict the DM relic density precisely. With these results in hand, the comparison
99: of the data from CMB experiments, direct DM searches and collider experiments
100: would have striking consequences on our quantitative understanding of the
101: nature and distribution of dark matter in the Universe.
102:
103: In these years preceding LHC operation, Supersymmetry has emerged as the best
104: motivated theory of new physics beyond the SM. It solves a number of open problems
105: intrinsic to the SM and, most important to our discussion, the conservation of
106: R-parity introduces the lightest neutralino, $\chi^0_1$, as a new stable, weakly
107: interacting particle. CMB data from the WMAP satellite, and other astrophysical data,
108: already set rather stringent bounds
109: on the parameters of Supersymmetry, if the lightest neutralino is responsible for
110: saturating the amount of DM observed in the Universe. The recently released,
111: five-year WMAP data provide a determination of the dark matter density as
112: $\Omega_{\mathrm{CDM}} h^2$ = 0.110$\pm$0.006~\cite{wmap}.
113:
114: The potential of the LHC and of an $e^+e^-$ linear collider operating at
115: 0.5~TeV and 1.0~TeV, such as the International Linear Collider (ILC),
116: for determining the neutralino relic density, $\Omega_{\chi}$, in
117: Supersymmetry has been investigated in detail in~\cite{Baltz:2006fm}.
118: That study selected a set of benchmark points, the so-called LCC points,
119: representative of various Supersymmetric scenarios and determined the $\Omega_{\chi}$
120: probability density function by a scan of the full parameter space of the
121: Minimal Supersymmetric extension of the SM (MSSM), by retaining those points
122: compatible with the measurements available at the LHC and ILC, within their
123: experimental accuracy.
124:
125: In this paper we consider one of the Supersymmetric scenarios defined
126: in~\cite{Baltz:2006fm}, for which the neutralino relic density is controlled
127: by its annihilation rate through the CP-even heavy Higgs pole $\chi \chi \to A^0$,
128: which in turn crucially depends on the value of the mass of the boson, $M_{A^0}$.
129: We study the accuracy of the measurement of the relevant properties of the neutral
130: heavy Higgs boson $A^0$: its mass, $M_{A^0}$, width, $\Gamma_{A^0}$ and decay
131: branching fractions as can be obtained from data collected in high luminosity
132: $e^+e^-$ collisions at centre-of-mass energy of 1~TeV, using full simulation of
133: the response of a realistic detector model and detailed event reconstruction.
134:
135: \section{$e^+e^- \to H^0A^0$ at LCC-4 with Full Simulation}
136:
137: We adopt the LCC-4 benchmark point of~\cite{Baltz:2006fm}, which is defined in
138: the reduced paramater space of the constrained MSSM by $m_0$=380~GeV,
139: $m_{1/2}$=420~GeV, $\tan \beta$=53, $A$=0, $Sgn(\mu)$=+1 and $M_{top}$=178~GeV.
140: We use {\tt Isasugra 7.69}~\cite{Paige:2003mg} to compute the physical particle
141: spectrum and we get $M_{A^0}$=419.4~GeV, $M_{\chi^0_1}$=169.1~GeV and
142: $M_{\tilde{\tau_1}}$=195.5~GeV. These parameters correspond to a neutralino
143: relic density of $\Omega_{\chi} h^2$ = 0.108, as obtained by using the
144: {\tt microMEGAS 2.0} program~\cite{Belanger:2006is}.
145: The $e^+e^- \to H^0A^0 \to b \bar b b \bar b$ process at $\sqrt{s}$ = 1~TeV
146: has already been studied for LCC-4 using a parametric
147: simulation~\cite{Battaglia:2004gk}. We now perform a detailed study using
148: {\tt Geant-4}-based full simulation~\cite{Agostinelli:2002hh} of the detector
149: response and reconstruct the physics objects using processors developed in
150: the {\tt Marlin} framework~\cite{Gaede:2006pj} and extend the analysis to
151: both the $b \bar b b \bar b$ and $b \bar b \tau^+ \tau^-$ final states.
152: This study adopts the LDC
153: detector concept, which is based on a large continuous gaseous tracker, a Time
154: Projection Chamber, surrounded by a highly granular SiW calorimeter and
155: complemented by a high resolution Si Vertex Tracker. The LDC detector concept
156: is discussed in detail elsewhere\cite{ldc}, the design is optimised for
157: achieving excellent parton energy measurements through the
158: particle flow algorithm, and precise extrapolation of particle tracks to their
159: production point. Both of these features are important to this analysis, which
160: aims at suppressing backgrounds by exploiting the signature 4-$b$ and 2-$b$ +
161: 2-$\tau$ final states of the signal, and requires good determinaton of energy
162: and direction of hadronic jets to attain an optimal resolution on di-jet
163: invariant mass.
164:
165: \begin{figure}
166: \centerline{\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{fig1.eps}}
167: \caption{Tranverse energy and thrust distributions for signal and background.
168: Generator level distributions are plotted as histograms, results of {\tt Mokka +
169: Marlin} simulation and reconstruction are given for the signal process as points with
170: error bars. All histograms are normalized to unit area.}
171: \label{fig:cuts}
172: \end{figure}
173: %\end{wrapfigure}
174:
175: Signal events have been generated with {\tt Pythia 6.205}~\cite{Sjostrand:2000wi}
176: + {\tt Isasugra 7.69}, including beamstrahlung effects~\cite{Ohl:1996fi}.
177: At $\sqrt{s}$ = 1~TeV, the effective $e^+e^- \to H^0 A^0$ production cross section,
178: accounting for beamstrahlung and initial state radiation, is 1.4~fb,
179: BR($A^0 \to b \bar b$) = BR($H^0 \to b \bar b$) = 0.87 and
180: BR($A^0 \to \tau^+ \tau^-$) = BR($H^0 \to \tau^+ \tau^-$) = 0.13.
181: The main particle pair production backgrounds, $Z^0 Z^0$, $W^+ W^-$ and $t \bar t$,
182: have been generated using {\tt Pythia}. Their cross sections, computed using
183: {\tt CompHep 4.4.0}~\cite{Boos:2004kh}, are 0.17~pb, 3.0~pb and 0.19~pb respectively.
184: The inclusive $b \bar b b \bar b$ and $b \bar b \tau^+ \tau^-$ production, after
185: subtracting the contribution of the $Z^0Z^0$ channel and requiring 200~GeV $< M_{bb} <$
186: 600~GeV, have cross sections of 0.63~fb and 0.28~fb respectively. These processes have been
187: generated at parton level using {\tt CompHep} and then hadronised with {\tt Pythia}.
188: We assume to operate the linear collider at $\sqrt{s}$=1~TeV for a total integrated
189: luminosity of 2~ab$^{-1}$, which corresponds to 5~years (1~yr = 10$^7$~s) of operation
190: for a nominal luminosity of $4 \times 10^{34}$~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$.
191:
192: A loose event preselection based on event variables has been applied after
193: generation. Selected signal and background events have been passed through the
194: full LDC simulation using the {\tt Mokka 06-03} program~\cite{Musat:2004sp},
195: an ILC-specific implementation of {\tt Geant-4}. Data are persisted using
196: {\tt lcio}~\cite{Gaede:2003ip} collections and used as input for the subsequent
197: reconstruction in {\tt Marlin}.
198:
199: Pattern recognition and track fit are performed first using Monte Carlo truth information
200: (``MC truth patrec'') and, for signal events, also genuine full pattern recognition
201: (``full patrec''),
202: using the {\tt FullLDCTracking} package based on DELPHI experiment software~\cite{Aarnio:1990vx}.
203: The performances of these two approaches are compared. The {\tt Pandora v02-00} package
204: is used for particle flow~\cite{Thomson:2007zz}. Jet clustering is performed using the DURHAM
205: algorithm~\cite{Catani:1991hj}. The jet energy resolution has been studied using a
206: simulated sample of single $b$ jets in the energy range from 10~GeV to 210~GeV over a
207: polar angle, $0.4<\theta<\pi/2 $. We get
208: $\delta E/E = {\mathrm{(0.34\pm0.02)}}/\sqrt{E} \oplus {\mathrm{(0.015\pm0.005)}}$,
209: which is consistent with the LDC particle flow performance specifications.
210: Jet flavour tagging is performed using the {\tt LCFIVertex} package, which
211: developed the original {\tt ZVTOP} tagger~\cite{lcfi} and feeds track and vertex
212: topological information into a neural network to distinguish between $b$, $c$
213: and light quark jets. The di-jet mass resolution in the $b \bar b b \bar b$
214: has been improved by performing a constrained kinematic fit. We have ported
215: the {\tt PUFITC} algorithm~\cite{Abreu:1997ic}, developed for the DELPHI
216: experiment at LEP2, into a dedicated {\tt Marlin} processor.
217: The algorithm adjusts the momenta of the jets given by
218: $\vec{p}_{F} =e^{a}\vec{p}_{M}+b\vec{p}_{B}+c\vec{p}_{C}$ where $\vec{p}_{F}$
219: is the fitted momentum, $\vec{p}_{M}$ is the measured momentum, $\vec{p}_{B}$
220: and $\vec{p}_{C}$ are unit vectors transverse to $\vec{p}_{M}$ and to each
221: other, and $a$, $b$ and $c$ are free parameters in the fit.
222: The adjusted momenta satisfy a set of constraints while minimising the fit
223: $\chi^2$, given by
224: $\Sigma_i$~$(a_i-a_0)^2/\sigma_a^2 + b_i^2/\sigma_b^2 + c_i^2/\sigma_c^2$,
225: where $a_0$ is the expected energy loss parameter, $\sigma_a$ is the energy
226: spread parameter and $\sigma_b$, $\sigma_c$ are the transverse momentum spread
227: parameters. In this analysis, we impose the following constraints: $p_x=p_y=0$
228: and $E\pm|p_z|=\sqrt{s}$, where the last condition accounts for beamstrahlung
229: along the beam axis, $z$.
230:
231: \subsection{The $e^+e^- \to H^0A^0 \to b \bar b b \bar b$ Channel}
232:
233: First we analyse the fully hadronic final state. This provides with
234: characteristics four $b$ jet, symmetric events. The backgrounds can be
235: significantly suppressed using $b$-tagging, event-shape and kinematic variables.
236: We require selected events to fulfill the following criteria: total
237: recorded energy in the event $E_{{\mathrm{tot}}}>$ 700~GeV, total transverse energy
238: $E_{T}>$350~GeV, total number of reconstructed particles $N_{{\mathrm{tot}}}>$80, number
239: of charged particles $N_{{\mathrm{cha}}}>$30, event thrust $<$0.9 and $Y_{34}>$0.002, where
240: $Y_{34}$ is the 3 to 4 jet cross-over value of the jet clustering algorithm. The
241: distributions of some of these variables are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:cuts} for
242: backgrounds and signal, for which a comparison of the generator-level and reconstructed
243: values is also given. After event selection, particles are forced into four jets, which are
244: arranged into two di-jet pairs, using the pairing which minimises the difference between the
245: di-jet masses, $M_{jj}$. The kinematic fit is performed and a cut applied on the resulting
246: di-jet mass difference $|M_{jj1}-M_{jj2}|<$50~GeV to eliminate poorly reconstructed events.
247: Both di-jet masses are required to satisfy $M_{jj}>$200~GeV.
248: The event is required to have four $b$ jets, where a $b$ jet is determined by the following
249: criteria: total jet multiplicity $N_{{\mathrm{tot}}}>$10, charged jet multiplicity $N_{cha}>$5,
250: and b jet probability, $P_b$, larger than 0.5.
251: At the chosen working point, an efficiency for $b$ jets of 0.79 is obtained, using
252: ``MC truth patrec'', with sufficient rejection of lighter quarks to effectively suppress
253: the remaining non-$b$ backgrounds. By using ``full patrec'' without retraining the
254: neural net, we measure a tagging efficiency of 0.72 per jet.
255:
256: \begin{figure}[hb!]%{c}{0.6\columnwidth}
257: \centerline{\includegraphics[width=1.\columnwidth]{fig2.eps}}
258: \caption{Di-jet invariant mass distribution for signal and background events selected by the
259: analysis cuts. Kinematic fit and jet flavour tagging have been applied. $H^0 A^0$
260: events, in which the incorrect jet pairing (IJP) is chosen, are considered as background.}
261: \label{fig:jjmass}
262: \end{figure}
263:
264: The di-jet mass for signal $H^0A^0$ events fulfilling the selection cuts has a Gaussian
265: resolution of 23~GeV using tracks reconstructed with ``MC truth patrec'' and
266: 27~GeV using tracks from ``full patrec'' before the kinematic fit. After applying the
267: kinematic fit the di-jet mass resolutions become 13.7~GeV and 13.8~GeV, respectively
268:
269: After final selection, the sample of events with di-jet
270: masses in the region 200~GeV~$< M_{jj} <$~550~GeV gives a selection efficiency for signal
271: $b \bar{b} b \bar{b}$ decays of 0.24$\pm$0.01 using tracks reconstructed with ``MC truth patrec''
272: and 0.17$\pm$0.01 using ``full patrec''. The difference is mostly caused by the observed drop in
273: b-tagging efficiency. The corresponding acceptance for
274: $Z^0 Z^0$, $W^+ W^-$, $t \bar t$ and inclusive $b \bar b b \bar b$ background events is
275: $7 \times 10^{-5}$, $7 \times 10^{-6}$, $8 \times 10^{-4}$ and $4 \times 10^{-3}$, respectively.
276: The resulting mass distribution is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:jjmass}, which has two entries per event.
277: The signal is described by the convolution of two Breit-Wigner functions with a mass splitting of
278: 1.4~GeV, as predicted for the LCC-4 parameters, convoluted with a double Gaussian resolution
279: function. The background is described by a third-order polynomial with coefficients determined
280: on background only events.
281: The final fit function consists of a linear combination of the signal and background functions
282: with four free parameters: $M_A$, $\Gamma_A$, and the weights of the signal and background
283: functions. We get $M_A$ = (419.7$\pm$1.0)~GeV and $\Gamma_A$ =
284: (14.9$\pm$2.9)~GeV, where the quoted uncertainties are statistical only. This result is
285: remarkably close to that obtained in the earlier analysis, based on parametric detector simulation.
286: Using ``full patrec'' the uncertainties on the $A^0$ boson mass and width increase to 1.3~GeV and
287: 3.4~GeV, respectively.
288:
289: \subsection{The $e^+e^- \to H^0A^0 \to b \bar b \tau^+ \tau^-$ Channel}
290:
291: The mixed decay mode $b \bar b \tau^+ \tau^-$ can be isolated by tagging a $b \bar b$ di-jet,
292: consistent with originating from either a $H^0$ or a $A^0$ decay and analysing the remaining
293: particles in the event.
294: We require the events to fullfill the following criteria: $E_{tot}>$400~GeV, 200~GeV$<E_T<$900~GeV,
295: 40$<N_{tot}<$180, 15$<N_{cha}<$100, event thrust$<$0.8, event sphericity $>$0.1 and $Y_{34}>$0.005.
296: The event is forced to four jets of which two must be tagged as $b$ jets using the same criteria as
297: above but the tighter requirement $P_b >$ 0.9.
298: The invariant mass of the $bb$ di-jet must satisfy 300~GeV$<M_{bb}<$600~GeV, and that of the two
299: remaining jets 250~GeV$<M_{jj}<$600~GeV. The angle between the two $b$ jets and the angle between
300: the two un-tagged jets must satisfy -0.8$<\cos{\theta}<$0. The number of charged particles with
301: energy greater than 5~GeV which are not associated to either of the $b$ jets must not exceed six.
302: Finally, $\tau$ tagging is performed. We have developed an algorithm
303: which outputs a linear discriminant variable $P_{\tau}$ based on the jet mass, the impact parameter
304: of the leading track, and a variable, $P_{ISOL}$, which measures the jet energy
305: deposited in an annulus around the jet direction. At least one of the two non-$b$ jets must be
306: tagged as a $\tau$ jet, where a $\tau$ jet must have less than four energetic charged particles
307: and must satisfy $P_{\tau}>$0.8. To distinguish between signal $ b \bar b b \bar b$ and
308: $b \bar b \tau^+ \tau^-$ decays, a discriminant variable $P_{DISC}$ is calculated based on the
309: un-tagged dijet energy, the number of energetic charged particles not associated to either of the
310: two $b$ jets, and $P_{\tau}^{MAX}$, the larger of the two tau jet probabilities (see Figure~\ref{fig:pdisc}).
311: The event must satisfy $P_{DISC}>$0.9.
312: \begin{figure}[ht!]%{c}{0.6\columnwidth}
313: \centerline{\includegraphics[width=1.\columnwidth]{fig3.eps}}
314: \caption{Distribution of the discriminating variable adopted
315: for separating $b \bar b \tau^+ \tau^-$ events.}
316: \label{fig:pdisc}
317: \end{figure}
318: After applying these cuts, the efficiency for signal $b \bar b \tau^+ \tau^-$ decays is 0.14$\pm$0.02,
319: that for the $t \bar t$ background is $2\times10^{-4}$, for $Z^0 Z^0$ and $W^+W^-$ is $3\times10^{-8}$
320: while for $b \bar b b \bar b$ events is $2\times10^{-6}$.
321: The selection criteria yield 87 events of signal with 89 of background, corresponding to a
322: relative statistical uncertainty of 0.15 on the determination of BR($H^0$, $A^0 \to \tau^+ \tau^- $).
323:
324: \section{Further Constraints on $\Omega_{\chi}$}
325:
326: The constraints on LCC-4 derived from this determination of the $A^0$ mass and width and
327: other supersymmetric particle mass measurements at the LHC and a 1~TeV linear collider,
328: provide a prediction of the neutralino relic density with a relative accuracy of
329: 0.18, within the general MSSM~\cite{Baltz:2006fm}.
330: The main contribution to the remaining uncertainty comes from the weak
331: constraint which data provide to MSSM solutions where $\Omega_{\chi}$ is
332: significantly lower than its reference value for LCC-4. A detailed study shows
333: that these solutions are all characterised by large values of the stau trilinear
334: coupling, $A_{\tau}$.
335: In the MSSM the $\tilde \tau$ coupling to the $H^0$ and $A^0$ bosons scales as
336: $A_{\tau} \frac{\cos \alpha}{\cos \beta} + \mu \frac{\sin \alpha}{\cos \beta}$
337: and $A_{\tau} \tan \beta + \mu$, respectively.
338: It has been proposed to determine $A_{\tau}$ through a measurement of the
339: branching fraction of $A^0$, $H^0 \to \tilde \tau_1 \tilde \tau_2$~\cite{Choi:2005du}.
340: In the funnel region the main neutralino annihilation mechanism is
341: $\tilde \chi^0 \tilde \chi^0 \to A^0 \to b \bar b$ and
342: $M_A < M_{\tilde \tau_1}+M_{\tilde \tau_2}$. The only $A^0$ decay into
343: $\tilde \tau$s allowed by CP symmetry is $A^0 \to \tilde \tau_1 \tilde \tau_2$
344: which is kinematically forbidden for the LCC-4 parameters.
345: \begin{figure}[ht!]
346: \centerline{\includegraphics[width=1.\columnwidth]{fig4.eps}}
347: \caption{$H^0$ and $A^0$ decay branching fractions as a function of the
348: stau trilinear coupling $A_{\tau}$ as predicted by {\tt HDECAY}. All the other
349: MSSM parameters have been kept fixed to those of the LCC-4 point.}
350: \label{fig:hdecay}
351: \end{figure}
352: However, at large values of $|A_{\tau}|$, the
353: $H^0 \to \tilde \tau_1 \tilde \tau_1$ decay gets a sizeable enhancement of
354: its branching fraction. In this regime, this channel also contributes to the
355: neutralino annihilation rate through the
356: $\tilde \chi^0 \tilde \chi^0 \to H^0 \to \tilde \tau_1 \tilde \tau_1$
357: process, thus lowering the corresponding relic density, as observed in the
358: MSSM scans. At the same time, a determination of the branching fraction
359: of the decay $H^0 \to \tilde \tau_1 \tilde \tau_1$, allows us to constrain
360: the stau trilinear coupling. Figure~\ref{fig:hdecay} shows the decay branching
361: fractions of the $A^0$ and $H^0$ bosons computed using the {\tt HDECAY 2.0}
362: program~\cite{Djouadi:1997yw} as a function of the $A_{\tau}$ parameter.
363: Now, due to the same final state, a large
364: $H^0 \to \tilde \tau_1 \tilde \tau_1 \to \tau \tilde \chi^0 \tau \tilde \chi^0$
365: yield can be detected by a standard $b \bar b \tau \tau$ analysis, such as that
366: discussed in the previous section
367: The present study shows that the branching fraction for $H^0$, $A^0 \to \tau \tau$
368: can be determined to $\pm$ 0.15 and that for $A^0$, $H^0 \to b \bar b$ to
369: $\pm$ 0.07, from which a limit $|A_{\tau}| < $ 250~GeV can be derived.
370: This constraint suppresses the tail at low values of $\Omega_{\chi}$ bringing
371: the prediction for the neutralino relic density to a relative accuracy of
372: 0.08, which is comparable to the current accuracy from the WMAP data.
373:
374: \section{Conclusions}
375:
376: We have studied the $e^+e^- \to H^0A^0$ process at $\sqrt{s}$ = 1~TeV using
377: on fully simulated and reconstructed events for a Supersymmetric benchmark
378: point where the mass of the $A^0$ boson is 419~GeV and the relic Dark Matter
379: density in the Universe crucially depends on its mass and width. We find
380: that the analysis of 2~ab$^{-1}$ of data should probide with relative
381: accuracies of 1.0~GeV and 2.9~GeV in the heavy boson masses and widths,
382: respectively. The branching fractions of the $\tau^+\tau^-$ decay can
383: be determined with a 0.15 relative accuracy. These data, in combination with
384: other measurements available at the LHC and a $e^+e^-$ linear collider,
385: allows to infer the neutralino relic density in the Universe with a relative
386: accuracy of 0.08.
387:
388: \begin{acknowledgments}
389: We are grateful to Abdel Djouadi for pointing out the sensitivity of the $H$
390: decay branching fractions to the stau trilinear coupling and to
391: Michael Peskin for discussion.
392: This work was supported by the Director, Office of Science, of the
393: U.S. Department of Energy under Contract No.DE-AC02-05CH11231 and
394: used resources of the National Energy Research Scientific
395: Computing Center, supported under Contract No.DE-AC03-76SF00098.
396: \end{acknowledgments}
397:
398: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
399:
400: \bibitem{Battaglia:2004mp}
401: M.~Battaglia, I.~Hinchliffe and D.~Tovey,
402: %``Cold dark matter and the LHC,''
403: J.\ Phys.\ G {\bf 30}, R217 (2004)
404: [arXiv:hep-ph/0406147].
405: %%CITATION = JPHGB,G30,R217;%%
406:
407: \bibitem{wmap}
408: J.~Dunkley {\it et al.} [WMAP Collaboration], arXiv:0803.0586 [astro-ph].
409:
410: \bibitem{Baltz:2006fm}
411: E.~A.~Baltz, M.~Battaglia, M.~E.~Peskin and T.~Wizansky,
412: %``Determination of dark matter properties at high-energy colliders,''
413: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 74} 103521 (2006)
414: [arXiv:hep-ph/0602187].
415: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D74,103521;%%
416:
417: \bibitem{Paige:2003mg}
418: F.~E.~Paige, S.~D.~Protopopescu, H.~Baer and X.~Tata,
419: %``ISAJET 7.69: A Monte Carlo event generator for p p, anti-p p, and e+ e-
420: %reactions,''
421: arXiv:hep-ph/0312045.
422: %%CITATION = HEP-PH/0312045;%%
423:
424: \bibitem{Belanger:2006is}
425: G.~Belanger, F.~Boudjema, A.~Pukhov and A.~Semenov,
426: %``micrOMEGAs2.0: A program to calculate the relic density of dark matter in
427: %a generic model,''
428: Comput.\ Phys.\ Commun.\ {\bf 176}, 367 (2007)
429: [arXiv:hep-ph/0607059].
430: %%CITATION = CPHCB,176,367;%%
431:
432: \bibitem{Battaglia:2004gk}
433: M.~Battaglia,
434: %``Study of dark matter inspired cMSSM scenarios at a TeV-class linear
435: %collider,''
436: in the Proc.\ of Int.\ Conf.\ on Linear Colliders (LCWS 04), Paris, 2004,
437: vol. 2, 951 [arXiv:hep-ph/0410123].
438: %%CITATION = HEP-PH/0410123;%%
439:
440: \bibitem{Agostinelli:2002hh}
441: S.~Agostinelli {\it et al.},
442: %``GEANT4: A simulation toolkit,''
443: Nucl.\ Instrum.\ Meth.\ A {\bf 506} 250 (2003).
444: %%CITATION = NUIMA,A506,250;%%
445:
446: \bibitem{Gaede:2006pj}
447: F.~Gaede,
448: %``Marlin and LCCD: Software tools for the ILC,''
449: Nucl.\ Instrum.\ Meth.\ A {\bf 559} 177 (2006).
450: %%CITATION = NUIMA,A559,177;%%
451:
452: \bibitem{ldc}
453: T.~Behnke, Pramana {\bf 69}, 697 (2007).
454:
455: \bibitem{Musat:2004sp}
456: G.~Musat,
457: in the Proc.\ of Int.\ Conf.\ on Linear Colliders (LCWS 04), Paris, 2004,
458: vol. 1, 437.
459:
460: \bibitem{Gaede:2003ip}
461: F.~Gaede, T.~Behnke, N.~Graf and T.~Johnson,
462: %``LCIO: A persistency framework for linear collider simulation studies,''
463: {\it In the Proceedings of 2003 Conference for Computing in High-Energy and
464: Nuclear Physics (CHEP 03), La Jolla, California, 24-28 Mar 2003, pp TUKT001}
465: [arXiv:physics/0306114].
466:
467: \bibitem{Aarnio:1990vx}
468: P.~A.~Aarnio {\it et al.} [DELPHI Collaboration],
469: %``The DELPHI detector at LEP,''
470: Nucl.\ Instrum.\ Meth.\ A {\bf 303} 233 (1991).
471: %%CITATION = NUIMA,A303,233;%%
472:
473: \bibitem{Thomson:2007zz}
474: M.~A.~Thomson,
475: %``Particle flow calorimetry at the ILC,''
476: AIP Conf.\ Proc.\ {\bf 896} 215 (2007).
477: %%CITATION = APCPC,896,215;%%
478:
479: \bibitem{Catani:1991hj}
480: S.~Catani, Y.~L.~Dokshitzer, M.~Olsson, G.~Turnock and B.~R.~Webber,
481: %``New clustering algorithm for multi - jet cross-sections in e+ e-
482: %annihilation,''
483: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 269}, 432 (1991).
484: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B269,432;%%
485:
486: \bibitem{lcfi}
487: D.~J.~Jackson,
488: Nucl.\ Instrum.\ Meth.\ A {\bf 388} 247 (1997).
489:
490: \bibitem{Abreu:1997ic}
491: P.~Abreu {\it et al.} [DELPHI Collaboration],
492: %``Measurement of the W pair cross-section and of the W mass in e+ e-
493: %interactions at 172-GeV,''
494: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 2}, 581 (1998).
495: %%CITATION = EPHJA,C2,581;%%
496:
497: \bibitem{Sjostrand:2000wi}
498: T.~Sjostrand, P.~Eden, C.~Friberg, L.~Lonnblad, G.~Miu, S.~Mrenna and E.~Norrbin,
499: %``High-energy-physics event generation with PYTHIA 6.1,''
500: Comput.\ Phys.\ Commun.\ {\bf 135}, 238 (2001)
501: [arXiv:hep-ph/0010017].
502: %%CITATION = CPHCB,135,238;%%
503:
504: \bibitem{Ohl:1996fi}
505: T.~Ohl,
506: %``CIRCE version 1.0: Beam spectra for simulating linear collider physics,''
507: Comput.\ Phys.\ Commun.\ {\bf 101}, 269 (1997)
508: [arXiv:hep-ph/9607454].
509: %%CITATION = CPHCB,101,269;%%
510:
511: \bibitem{Boos:2004kh}
512: E.~Boos {\it et al.} [CompHEP Collaboration],
513: %``CompHEP 4.4: Automatic computations from Lagrangians to events,''
514: Nucl.\ Instrum.\ Meth.\ A {\bf 534}, 250 (2004)
515: [arXiv:hep-ph/0403113].
516: %%CITATION = NUIMA,A534,250;%%
517:
518: \bibitem{Choi:2005du}
519: S.~Y.~Choi, H.~U.~Martyn and P.~M.~Zerwas,
520: %``Determining the stau trilinear coupling A(tau) in supersymmetric Higgs
521: %decays,''
522: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 44}, 175 (2005)
523: [arXiv:hep-ph/0508021].
524: %%CITATION = EPHJA,C44,175;%%
525:
526: \bibitem{Djouadi:1997yw}
527: A.~Djouadi, J.~Kalinowski and M.~Spira,
528: %``HDECAY: A program for Higgs boson decays in the standard model and its
529: %supersymmetric extension,''
530: Comput.\ Phys.\ Commun.\ {\bf 108} 56 (1998)
531: [arXiv:hep-ph/9704448].
532: %%CITATION = CPHCB,108,56;%%
533:
534: \end{thebibliography}
535: \end{document}
536: %
537:
538: