1: \documentclass[preprint,floats,aps,epsfig,nofootinbib,amssymb]{revtex4}
2: \usepackage{graphicx}% Include figure files
3: \usepackage{epsfig}
4: \usepackage{subfigure}
5: \usepackage{dcolumn}% Align table columns on decimal point
6: \usepackage{bm}% bold math
7: %
8: \def\gsim{\lower0.5ex\hbox{$\:\buildrel >\over\sim\:$}}
9: \def\lsim{\lower0.5ex\hbox{$\:\buildrel <\over\sim\:$}}
10: \def \rp{{R\hspace{-0.22cm}/}_P}
11: \def \lp{{L\!\!\!/}}
12: \def \n{\noindent}
13: \def \kslash {k\!\!\!/}
14: \def \Dslash {D\!\!\!\!/}
15:
16: \begin{document}
17:
18:
19: %\vspace*{1cm}
20:
21: \title{The Muon Magnetic Moment in the TeV Scale Seesaw Models}
22:
23: \author{\bf Wei Chao}
24: \email{chaowei@ihep.ac.cn}
25:
26:
27: \affiliation{ Institute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy of
28: Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
29: \vspace{2.5cm} }
30:
31:
32: \begin{abstract}
33: The reported discrepancy of the muon abnormal magnetic moment
34: $a_\mu^{}$ has impacts on the low energy phenomenology. In this
35: paper we calculate the corrections to $a_\mu^{}$ in the standard
36: model extended by the TeV scale seesaw models. We show that the
37: correction induced by the type-I seesaw model is negative and of the
38: order ${\cal O} (10^{-11})$, which can be neglected compared with
39: $a_\mu^{\rm SM}$. The correction induced by the type-II seesaw
40: model, which depends on the mass of the Higgs triplet $m_\Delta^{}$
41: and the Yukawa coupling $Y_\Delta^{}$, can be of the order ${\cal
42: O}( 10^{-10})$ and compensate for the discrepancy between
43: $a_\mu^{\rm SM}$ and $a_{\mu}^{\rm exp}$. The correction induced by
44: the type-III seesaw model is also negative and can be of the order
45: ${\cal O}(10^{-10})$.
46: \end{abstract}
47: \maketitle
48:
49: \section{Introduction}
50: For a spin $1/2$ particle, the relation between its magnetic moment
51: and its spin reads $\vec{\mu}=g(e/2m)\vec{s}$. The Dirac equation
52: predicts for the gyromagnetic factor $g=2$, but radiative
53: corrections to the lepton-photon-lepton vertex in quantum field
54: theory may switch the value slightly. The abnormal magnetic moment
55: is then defined as $a=(g-2)/2$.
56:
57: There has been a long history in measuring and calculating the muon
58: abnormal magnetic moment $a_\mu^{}$. In particular the steadily
59: improving precision of both the measurements and the predictions of
60: $a_\mu$ and the disagreement observed between the two have made the
61: study of $a_\mu$ one of the most active research fields in particle
62: physics in recent years. The final result of the ``Muon g-2
63: Experiment"(E821) for $a_\mu^{}$ reads \cite{g-2}
64: \begin{eqnarray}
65: a_\mu^{\rm exp}=(11659208\pm6)\times10^{-10} \ ,
66: \end{eqnarray}
67: which deviates from the standard model (SM) prediction:
68: \begin{eqnarray}
69: \Delta a_\mu^{}=a_\mu^{\rm exp}-a_\mu^{\rm SM}=22(10) \times
70: 10^{-10}\ .
71: \end{eqnarray}
72: Many new physics scenarios have been proposed to interpret the
73: non-vanishing and positive value of $\Delta a_\mu^{}$\cite{mg-22}.
74: Meanwhile new physics proposed to solve some other problems may
75: potentially contribute to $\Delta a_\mu^{}$.
76:
77: On the neutrino sector, the discovery of neutrino oscillations has
78: confirmed the theoretical expectation that neutrinos are massive and
79: lepton flavors are mixed, providing the first evidence for physics
80: beyond the SM in particle physics. The most appealing and natural
81: idea for generating small neutrino masses is the seesaw mechanisms
82: \cite{Seesaw1, typeII, typeiii}, which rely on the existence of
83: heavy particles such as right-handed Majorana neutrinos, triplet
84: scalar or triplet fermions. A salient feature of the seesaw
85: mechanisms is that the thermal leptogenesis mechanism \cite{FY} can
86: work well to account for the cosmological baryon number asymmetry. A
87: direct test of the seesaw mechanisms would involve the detection of
88: those heavy particles at a collider and the measurement of their
89: Yukawa couplings with the electroweak doublets. If such Yukawa
90: couplings are similar to the other fermion Yukawa couplings, the
91: masses of those heavy particles turn out to be too high to be
92: experimentally accessible.
93:
94: To submit to the experiment, some kinds of TeV scale seesaw models
95: \cite{Pilaftsis, early, smirnov, Han, tev type-II} were proposed, in
96: which the masses of the heavy particles are set at the electroweak
97: scale. The key point of such seesaw scenarios is to adjust the
98: structures of heavy particles' Yukawa couplings to guarantee that
99: $M_\nu^{}$ (i.e., the mass matrix of light Majorana neutrinos)
100: equals to zero at the tree level. Then tiny but non-vanishing
101: neutrino masses can be ascribed to slight perturbations or radiative
102: corrections to $M_\nu^{}$ in the next-to-leading order
103: approximation. A prominent feature of such kinds of seesaw scenarios
104: is that the interactions of heavy particles with the SM gauge
105: bosons\footnote{In the type-I seesaw mechanism, $N$ can interact
106: with the SM gauge bosons and Higgs through its mixing with the light
107: SM SU(2) $\nu_{\rm L}^{}$.} and Higgs are not necessary suppressed,
108: leading to very interesting lepton-number-violating phenomenology
109: mediated by heavy particles at high-energy colliders such as the
110: Tevatron, the LHC and the ILC.
111:
112: TeV scale seesaw scenarios may lead to large unitarity violation of
113: the lepton mixing matrix (MNS). However, a global analysis of
114: current neutrino oscillation data and precision electroweak data
115: yields very stringent constraints on the non-unitarity of the MNS
116: matrix. Therefore a systematic investigation of the low energy
117: phenomenology induced by such seesaw scenarios is necessary and
118: important.
119:
120: In this paper, we will calculate the corrections to $a_\mu^{}$
121: induced by the TeV scale heavy particles. We show that the
122: correction to $a_\mu^{}$ induced by heavy Majorana neutrinos is of
123: the order $-{\cal O}(10^{-11})$ in the type-I seesaw model.
124: Corrections induced by the doubly charged Higgs boson and singly
125: charged Higgs boson can be of the order ${\cal O}(10^{-10})$ in the
126: type-II seesaw model. Therefore $\Delta a_\mu^{}$ can be completely
127: saturated by $\Delta a_\mu^{\rm II}$. Whereas, the correction
128: induced by triplet fermions is of the order $-{\cal O}(10^{-10})$ in
129: the type-III seesaw model.
130:
131: The outline of the paper is as follows. In section II we describe
132: some basics of the TeV scale seesaw scenarios. Section III is
133: devoted to the calculation of corrections to $a_\mu^{}$ induced by
134: various seesaw models. Some conclusions are drawn in section IV.
135:
136:
137: \section{Some basics of the TeV scale seesaw models}
138: We regularize our notations and conventions in this section by
139: reviewing some basics of the TeV seesaw scenario. After gauge
140: symmetry spontaneous breaking, the neutrino mass terms turn out to
141: be
142: \begin{eqnarray}
143: -{\cal L}_{\rm mass} = \frac{1}{2} \overline{\left( \nu^{}_{\rm L}
144: ~N^c_{\rm R}\right)} \left( \matrix{ M^{}_{\rm L} & M^{}_{\rm D} \cr
145: M^T_{\rm D} & M^{}_{\rm R}}\right) \left( \matrix{ \nu^c_{\rm L} \cr
146: N^{}_{\rm R}}\right) + {\rm h.c.} \; ,
147: % (2)
148: \end{eqnarray}
149: where $\nu^c_{\rm L} \equiv C \overline{\nu^{}_{\rm L}}^T$ with $C$
150: being the charge conjugation matrix, likewise for $N^c_{\rm R}$. The
151: overall $6\times 6$ neutrino mass matrix in ${\cal L}^{}_{\rm
152: mass}$, denoted as ${\cal M}$, can be diagonalized by the unitary
153: transformation ${\cal U}^\dagger {\cal M} {\cal U}^* = \widehat{\cal
154: M}$; or explicitly,
155: \begin{eqnarray}
156: \left(\matrix{V & R \cr S & U}\right)^\dagger \left( \matrix{
157: M^{}_{\rm L} & M^{}_{\rm D} \cr M^T_{\rm D} & M^{}_{\rm R}}\right)
158: \left(\matrix{V & R \cr S & U}\right)^* = \left( \matrix{
159: \widehat{M}^{}_\nu & {\bf 0} \cr {\bf 0} & \widehat{M}^{}_{\rm
160: N}}\right) \; ,
161: % (3)
162: \end{eqnarray}
163: where $\widehat{M}^{}_\nu = {\rm Diag}\{m^{}_1, m^{}_2, m^{}_3\}$
164: and $\widehat{M}^{}_{\rm N} = {\rm Diag}\{M^{}_1, M^{}_2, M^{}_3\}$
165: with $m^{}_i$ and $M^{}_i$ (for $i=1, 2, 3$) being the light and
166: heavy Majorana neutrino masses, respectively. Note that the $3\times
167: 3$ rotation matrices $V$, $U$, $R$ and $S$ are non-unitary, but they
168: are correlated with one another due to the unitarity of $\cal U$.
169:
170: In the basis where the flavor eigenstates of three charged leptons
171: are identified with their mass eigenstates, the standard
172: charged-current interactions between $\nu^{}_\alpha$ and $l_L^{}$
173: (for $l = e, \mu, \tau$) can be written as
174: \begin{eqnarray}
175: -{\cal L}^{}_{\rm cc} = \frac{g}{\sqrt{2}} \left[
176: \overline{l^{}_{\rm L}} V \gamma^\mu \nu^{}_{ i} W^-_{\mu} +
177: \overline{l^{}_{\rm L}} R \gamma^\mu N^{}_{ i} W^-_\mu \right] +
178: {\rm h.c.} \; .
179: % (5)
180: \end{eqnarray}
181: It becomes clear that $V$ describes the charged-current interactions
182: of three light Majorana neutrinos, while $R$ is relevant to the
183: charged-current interactions of three heavy Majorana neutrinos. One
184: can similarly write out the interactions between the Majorana
185: neutrinos and the neutral gauge boson (or Higgs) in the chosen
186: flavor basis \cite{Pilaftsis}:
187: \begin{eqnarray}
188: {\cal L}_{\rm Z} &=& -\frac{g}{2 c_{\rm W}} \overline{\nu_{\rm
189: L}^{}} R
190: \gamma^\mu P_L^{} N_{i}^{} Z_\mu^{} + {\rm h.c.} ~, \\
191: {\cal L}_{\rm H} &=& -\frac{g}{2} \frac{M_{i}^{}}{M_{\rm W}^{}}
192: \overline{\nu_{\rm L}}^{} R P_R^{} N_i^{} h^0 +{\rm h.c.} ~.
193: \end{eqnarray}
194:
195: There are constraints on the non-unitarity of $VV^\dagger$ from
196: electroweak decays. Ratios of $\mu$, $\tau$, $W$ and $\pi$ decays,
197: used often in order to test universality, can be interpreted as
198: tests of lepton mixing unitarity. They result in constraints for the
199: diagonal elements of $VV^\dagger$. The lepton-flavor-violating
200: processes, which occur at the one-loop level, constrain the
201: off-diagonal elements of $VV^\dagger$. A global fit to the
202: constraints listed above results in \cite{unitary}
203: \begin{eqnarray}
204: VV^\dagger\approx\left(\matrix{0.994\pm 0.005&<7.0\cdot 10^{-3}
205: &<1.6\cdot10^{-2}\cr <7.0\cdot 10^{-5}&0.995\pm
206: 0.005&<1.0\cdot10^{-2}\cr <1.6\cdot 10^{-2}&<1.0\cdot
207: 10^{-2}&0.995\pm0.005}\right)\ ,
208: \end{eqnarray}
209: at the $90\%$ confidence level. It is clear that the deviation of
210: $VV^\dagger$ from the identity matrix can be as large as a few
211: percents. Therefore the low energy phenomenology induced by heavy
212: neutrinos is not negligible.
213:
214: \section{$a_\mu^{}$ in various seesaw models}
215: The most general form for the photon-muon vertex function
216: $\Gamma^\mu$, which is consistent with Lorentz covariance, can be
217: written as \cite{mg-22, form factor}
218: \begin{eqnarray}
219: \bar{u}(p_2^{})\Gamma^\mu
220: u(p_1^{})&=&\bar{u}(p_2^{})\left[F_1^{}(q^2)\gamma^\mu-{i\over
221: 2m_{\mu}^{}} F_2^{}(q^2)\sigma^{\mu\nu}q_\nu^{}+{1\over m_\mu^{}}
222: F_3^{}(q^2)q^\mu + \right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\gamma_5^{}(G_1^{}
223: (q^2)\gamma^\mu-{i\over
224: 2m_\mu^{}}G_2^{}(q^2)\sigma^{\mu\nu}q_\nu^{}+{1\over
225: m_\mu^{}}G_3^{}(q^2)q^\mu)\right] u(p_1^{})\ ,
226: \end{eqnarray}
227: where $q=p_2^{}-p_1^{}$ and $m_\mu^{}$ is the mass of muon. The
228: anomalous magnetic moment of the muon is related to $\Gamma^\mu$ as
229: follows: $a_\mu^{}= F_2^{}(0)$.
230:
231: The SM prediction of $a_\mu^{}$ is generally divided into three
232: parts: $a_\mu^{\rm SM}=a_\mu^{\rm QED}+a_\mu^{\rm EW} + a_\mu^{\rm
233: Had}$. The QED part includes all photonic and leptonic ($e, \mu,
234: \tau$) loops starting with the classic $\alpha/2\pi$ Schwinger
235: contribution. Loop contributions involving $W^\pm,~ Z$ or Higgs
236: particles are collectively labeled as $a_\mu^{\rm EW}$. The hadronic
237: part includes the contributions from the quark and gluon loops.
238: There are contributions induced by various heavy particle loops,
239: which are contained in TeV scale seesaw models. We will calculate
240: them in the following.
241:
242: \subsection{$a_\mu^{}$ in the type-I seesaw scenario}
243: Assuming that light but non-zero neutrino masses are generated by
244: the type-I seesaw mechanism, we need to extend the SM with three
245: right-handed Majorana neutrinos. The relevant Lagrangian can be
246: written as
247: \begin{eqnarray}
248: {\cal L}^{}_{\rm I} &=&{\cal L}_{\rm SM}^{}-\overline{l^{}_{\rm L}}
249: Y^{}_\nu \tilde{H} N^{}_{\rm R} - \frac{1}{2} \overline{N^{c}_{\rm
250: R}} M^{}_{\rm R} N^{}_{\rm R} + {\rm h.c.} \; ,
251: % (1)
252: \end{eqnarray}
253: where $M_{\rm R}^{}$ is masses of the right-handed neutrinos.
254: Integrating out right-handed Majorana neutrinos results in a light
255: neutrino Majorana mass matrix of the form: $M_\nu^{}=-v^2 Y_\nu^{}
256: M_{\rm R}^{-1}Y_\nu^T$. In this model the MNS matrix is non-unitary
257: and the heavy Majorana neutrinos interact with charged leptons
258: through their mixing with light neutrinos, which was already shown
259: in Eq. (5). As a result, the muon abnormal magnetic moment receives
260: contribution from the heavy Majorana neutrino and $W$ boson loop.
261: The relevant diagram is shown in Fig. 1 (a), which gives the
262: following correction to $a_\mu^{}$:
263:
264: \begin{eqnarray}
265: \Delta a_\mu^{\rm I}={G_{\rm F}^{}m_{\rm \mu}^2\over 8\sqrt{2}
266: \pi^2}\left(R R^\dagger\right)_{\mu\mu}^{}\left[I\left(M_{\rm W}^2,
267: M_{ i}^{2}\right)-{10\over 3 }\right]\ ,
268: \end{eqnarray}
269: where $I( M_{\rm W}^{2}, M_{ i}^{2})$ can be written as
270: \begin{eqnarray}
271: I(M_{\rm W}^2, M_{ i}^2)=M_{\rm W}^2\int dx {4x^2(x+1)\over m_\mu^2
272: x^2+x( M_{\rm W}^2-M_{ i}^2-m_\mu^2)+M_{ i}^2}\ .
273: \end{eqnarray}
274: Suppose that masses of the right-handed Majorana neutrinos are
275: degenerate. We plot $\Delta{a}_\mu^{\rm I}$ in Fig. 2 by assumming
276: that $RR^\dagger\sim 1\%$ and the masses of heavy neutrinos lie in
277: the range $200 {\rm GeV}\leq M_{1}^{} \leq ~ 500 {\rm GeV}$, which
278: are potentially accessible at the LHC. We can find from the figure
279: that $\Delta{a}_\mu^{\rm I}$ is negative and not sensitive to
280: $M_1^{}$. Besides, $\Delta a_\mu^{\rm I}$ is too small to change the
281: SM prediction significantly.
282:
283:
284:
285: \subsection{$\Delta a_\mu^{}$ in the type-II seesaw scenario }
286:
287: We now proceed to the TeV scale type-II seesaw scenario \cite{tev
288: type-II}. In this scenario an extra scalar triplet ($Y=2$) together
289: with some heavy Majorana neutrinos is added to the SM. The most
290: general Lagrangian for this model is
291: \begin{eqnarray}
292: {\cal L}_{\rm II}={\rm Tr}\left[(D^\mu \Delta)^\dagger D_\mu^{}
293: \Delta\right]-m_\Delta^2{\rm Tr}\left(\Delta^\dagger\Delta\right)-
294: \frac{1}{2} \overline{l^{}_{\rm L}} Y^{}_\Delta \Delta i\sigma^{}_2
295: l^c_{\rm L} -\overline{l^{}_{\rm L}} Y^{}_\nu \tilde{H} N^{}_{\rm R}
296: - \frac{1}{2} \overline{N^{c}_{\rm R}} M^{}_{\rm R} N^{}_{\rm R} +
297: {\rm h.c.} \
298: \end{eqnarray}
299: where $\Delta$ represents the Higgs triplet. After integrating out
300: heavy fields and the spontaneous gauge symmetry breaking, one
301: obtains the effective mass matrix for three light neutrinos:
302: $M_\nu^{}\approx v_\Delta^{} Y_\Delta^{}-v^2 Y_\nu^{} M_{\rm R}^{-1}
303: Y_\nu^T $, with $v$ and $v_\Delta^{}$ being the vacuum expectation
304: values (vev's) of the neutral components of $H$ and $\Delta$,
305: respectively. The smallness of $M_\nu^{}$ is ascribed to a
306: significant but incomplete cancellation between $v_\Delta^{}
307: Y_\Delta^{}$ and $v^2 Y_\nu^{} M_{\rm R}^{-1} Y_\nu^T$ terms. There
308: are totally seven physical Higgs bosons in this model:
309: doubly-charged $ \Delta^{++}$ and $\Delta^{--}$, singly-charged
310: $\delta^+$ and $\delta^-$, neutral $A^0$ (CP-odd), and neutral $h^0$
311: and $H^0$ (CP-even), where $h^0$ is the SM-like Higgs boson. Doubly
312: charged Higgs boson and charged lepton loops together with singly
313: charged Higgs boson and neutrino ($W$ boson) loops may contribute to
314: $a_\mu^{}$. The relevant diagrams are shown in Fig. 1 (b) $-$(f).
315: Direct calculation results in
316: \begin{eqnarray}
317: a _\mu^\Delta&=&{1\over 16\pi^2}\sum_{\alpha=e, \mu, \tau}^{}
318: |(Y_\Delta^{})_{\mu \alpha}|^2\left[I_1^{} (m_\alpha^2, m_\Delta^2
319: )+I_2^{}
320: (m_\alpha^2, m_\Delta^2)\right]\ ,\\
321: a^\delta_\mu&=&{1\over 16\pi^2}\sum_\alpha^{} |(Y_\Delta^{})_{\mu
322: \alpha}^{}|^2 (VV^\dagger)_{\alpha\alpha}^{} I_3^{}( m_\alpha^2,
323: m_\delta^2)\ ,
324: \end{eqnarray}
325: with
326: \begin{eqnarray}
327: I_1^{}(m_\alpha^2, m_\Delta^2)&=& m_\mu^2\int dx {x(1-x^2)\over x
328: m_\Delta^2+(1-x) m_\alpha^2+(x^2-x)m_\mu^2}\ ,\nonumber\\
329: I_2^{}(m_\alpha^2, m_\Delta^2)&=& m_\mu^2 \int dx
330: {2x(1-x)^2\over(1-x)
331: m_\Delta^2+x m_\alpha^2+(x^2-x) m_\mu^2}\nonumber\ ,\\
332: I_3^{}(m_\alpha^2, m_\delta^2)&=& m_\mu^2\int dx {x(1-x)^2\over(1-x)
333: m_\delta^2+(x^2-x) m_\mu^2 }\ ,
334: \end{eqnarray}
335: where $m_\alpha^{}$ $(\alpha=e, \mu, \tau)$ reads as the mass of the
336: charged lepton. When writing down Eq. (15), we have ignored the
337: contributions of diagrams (e) and (f) in Fig. 1, which are
338: suppressed by the masses of light Majorana neutrinos.The total
339: corrections to $a_\mu^{}$ motivated by the type-II seesaw scenario
340: is defined by the sum of Eqs. (11), (14) and (15):
341: $\Delta{a}_{\mu}^{\rm II}= {a}_\mu^{\Delta}+{a}_\mu^{\delta}+\Delta
342: a_\mu^{\rm I}$.
343:
344: Notice that $M_{\rm L}^{}$ can be reconstructed via $M^{}_{\rm L} =
345: V \widehat{M}^{}_\nu V^T + R \widehat{M}^{}_{\rm N} R^T \approx R
346: \widehat{M}^{}_{\rm N} R^T$ \cite{tev type-II}, which must be a good
347: approximation. The element of the Yukawa coupling matrix
348: $(Y_\Delta^{})$ turns out to be
349: \begin{eqnarray}
350: (Y_\Delta^{})^{}_{\alpha \beta} = \frac{\left(M^{}_{\rm
351: L}\right)^{}_{\alpha \beta}}{v^{}_\Delta} \approx \sum^3_{i=1}
352: \frac{R^{}_{\alpha i} R^{}_{\beta i} M^{}_i}{v^{}_\Delta} \; ,
353: % (6)
354: \end{eqnarray}
355: where the subscripts $\alpha$ and $\beta$ run over $e$, $\mu$ and
356: $\tau$. This result implies that the muon magnetic moment depends on
357: both $R$ and $M^{}_i$. $v^{}_\Delta$ may affect the gauge boson
358: masses in such a way that $\rho \equiv M^2_W/(M^2_Z \cos^2
359: \theta^{}_{\rm W}) = (v^2 + 2v^2_\Delta)/(v^2 + 4v^2_\Delta)$ holds.
360: By using experimental constraint on the $\rho$-parameter \cite{PDG},
361: one gets $\kappa \equiv \sqrt{2} ~v^{}_\Delta /v < 0.01$ and
362: $v^{}_\Delta < 2.5~{\rm GeV}$. We work in the minimal type-II seesaw
363: scenario \cite{minimalII} and set $v_\Delta^{}=1 {\rm GeV}$ in our
364: numerical analysis. Let us parametrize the $3\times 1$ complex
365: matrix $R$ in terms of three rotation angles and three phase angles
366: \cite{Xing}: $R = (\hat{s}^*_{14}, c^{}_{14} \hat{s}^*_{24},
367: c^{}_{14} c^{}_{24} \hat{s}^*_{34})^T$, where $c^{}_{ij} \equiv \cos
368: \theta^{}_{ij}$ and $\hat{s}^{}_{ij} \equiv e^{i\delta^{}_{ij}}
369: s^{}_{ij}$ with $s^{}_{ij} \equiv \sin \theta^{}_{ij}$ (for $ij =
370: 14, 24, 34$). Combining all electroweak precision constraints, we
371: may choose a self-consistent parameter space of three mixing angles:
372: $s^{}_{14} \approx 0$, $s^{}_{24} \in [0, 0.1]$ and $s^{}_{34} \in
373: [0, 0.1]$. In Fig. 3 we plot $\Delta{a}^{\rm II}_\mu$ as a function
374: of $m_\Delta^{}$, setting $R$ to its largest allowed values. The
375: solid, dotted and dashed lines correspond to $M_1^{}=50, 200, 500~
376: {\rm GeV}$, separately. The short dotted line corresponds to $\Delta
377: a_\mu^{}$. It is clear that $\Delta{a}^{\rm II}_\mu$ is proportional
378: to $M_1^{}$ and the deviation of $a_\mu^{}$ from the SM prediction
379: may be fully saturated by $\Delta{a}^{\rm II}_\mu$. Suppose that
380: $m_\Delta^{}$ lies in the range $200~ {\rm GeV}\leq m_\Delta^{}\leq
381: 500~ {\rm GeV}$. The experimental result of $a_\mu^{}$ constrains
382: the mass of the heavy Majorana neutrino to lie below $310.5$ ${\rm
383: GeV}$.
384:
385: \subsection{$a_\mu^{}$ in the type-III seesaw scenario}
386:
387: Let us calculate $a_ \mu^{}$ in the type-III seesaw scenario
388: \cite{typeiii}, which extends the SM with $SU(2)_{\rm L}^{}$ triplet
389: of fermions with zero hypercharge. In this model at least two such
390: triplets (or one triplet plus one singlet) are necessary in order to
391: genereate non-vanishing light neutrino masses. The relevant
392: Lagrangian can be written as
393: \begin{eqnarray}
394: {\cal L}_{\rm III}={\rm Tr} [\overline{ \Psi} i\Dslash
395: \Psi]-{1\over 2} {\rm Tr}[\overline{ \Psi} m_{\Psi}^{} \Psi^C ]-
396: \sqrt{2} \overline{\ell_L^{}} \tilde{\phi} Y_{\Psi}^{}\Psi +{\rm
397: h.c.}\ ,
398: \end{eqnarray}
399: where $m_ \Psi^{}$ is the mass of triplet fermion and $\Psi$ can be
400: written as
401: \begin{eqnarray}
402: \Psi=\left(\matrix{\Psi^0_{}/ \sqrt{2}&\Psi^+ \cr \Psi^- &
403: -\Psi^0/\sqrt{2}}\right)\ .
404: \end{eqnarray}
405: Integrating out triplet fermions at the tree level results in a
406: dimension five effective operator which leads to a light neutrino
407: Majorana mass matrix of the form: $M_\nu^{\rm III}=-{v^2\over 2}
408: Y_\Psi^{} m_\Psi^{-1} Y_\Psi^T$. The possibility of testing type-III
409: seesaw at the LHC is discussed in many articles \cite{iii lhc}, in
410: which lepton-number-violating and (or) lepton-flavor-violating
411: signals induced by the triplet fermions are discussed. Singly
412: charged heavy field $\Psi^-$ may contribute to $a_\mu^{}$. The
413: relevant diagram is shown in Fig. 1 (g). Direct calculation results
414: in
415: \begin{eqnarray}
416: \Delta a^{\rm III}_\mu= {1\over 8\pi^2}(Y_{\Psi}^{}
417: Y_\Psi^{\dagger})_{\mu\mu}^{}I_4^{} (m_{\rm H}^{2}, m_\Psi^2)\ ,
418: \end{eqnarray}
419: where
420: \begin{eqnarray}
421: I_4^{} (m_{\rm H}^{2}, m_\Psi^2)=m_\mu^2\int dx
422: {{x(1-x)^2}\over(x-x^2) m_\mu^2+(x-1) m_\Psi^2- x m_{\rm H}^2}\ .
423: \end{eqnarray}
424: It is clear that $I_4^{} <0$, which means $\Delta{a}^{\rm
425: III}_\mu<0$. Suppose that there is structure cancelation in
426: $M_\nu^{\rm III}$, just like what happens in TeV scale type-I and
427: type-II seesaw models. Then $Y_\Psi^{} \thicksim 1$ and
428: $\Delta{a}^{\rm III}_\mu \thicksim -{\cal O}( 10^{-10})$, which is
429: not negligible but theoretically unfavorable.
430:
431: In summary, we have evaluated the corrections to $a_\mu^{}$ induced
432: by heavy Majorana neutrinos, triplet scalar and triplet fermions. To
433: definitely illustrate the effect of different seesaw scenarios, we
434: summarize our results in table I.
435: \begin{table}[htbp]
436: \centering
437: \begin{tabular}{|c|l|r|}
438: \hline TeV scale seesaw models & extra heavy particles &~ ~$\Delta a_\mu^{}$~\\
439: \hline Type-I seesaw & right-handed neutrinos & $-{\cal O
440: }(10^{-11})$ \\ \hline Type-II seesaw & right-handed neutrinos+Higgs
441: triplet & ${\cal O}(10^{-10})$ \\ \hline Type-III seesaw & triplet
442: fermions & $-{\cal O}(10^{-10})$ \\ \hline
443: \end{tabular}
444: \caption{ The corrections to $a_\mu^{}$ induced by TeV scale heavy
445: particles, which are contained in various seesaw models. }
446: \end{table}
447:
448:
449: \section{Conclusion}
450: Motivated by the conjecture that new physics at the TeV scale is
451: responsible for the electroweak symmetry breaking and origin of
452: neutrino masses, a series of TeV seesaw models were proposed. These
453: TeV scale seesaw scenarios, in which sufficient lepton number
454: (flavor) violation signals are induced, are testable at the LHC and
455: (or) ILC. Meanwhile extra heavy particles in these models may induce
456: interesting low energy phenomena. In this article, we have evaluated
457: the corrections to $a_\mu^{}$ induced by heavy Majorana neutrinos,
458: triplet scalar and triplet fermions, which are separately included
459: in type-I, II and III seesaw models. Our results show that the
460: correction induced by the heavy neutrinos is ignorable compared with
461: $a_\mu^{\rm SM}$. Corrections induced by the doubly charged Higgs
462: boson and singly charged Higgs boson may be of the order ${\cal
463: O}(10^{-10})$ and $\Delta a_\mu^{}$ can be completely saturated by
464: $\Delta a_\mu^{\rm II}$. Whereas the correction induced by triplet
465: fermions can be of the order $-{\cal O} (10^{-10})$, which is
466: theoretically unfavorable. In conclusion, TeV scale type-II and
467: type-III seesaw scenarios can significantly contribute to $
468: a_\mu^{}$. The running of the LHC may potentially verify which
469: mechanism is responsible for $\Delta a_\mu^{}$ and the origin of
470: neutrino masses.
471: \begin{acknowledgments}
472: The author is indebted to Prof. Z.Z. Xing for polishing up the
473: manuscript with many suggestions and corrections. This work was
474: supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of
475: China.
476: \end{acknowledgments}
477:
478:
479:
480:
481:
482:
483:
484:
485:
486:
487:
488:
489:
490: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
491: \bibitem{g-2}
492: G.W. Bennett {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 92}, 161802 (2004);
493: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 73}, 072003 (2006).
494:
495: \bibitem{mg-22}
496: A. Czarnecki and W.J. Marciano, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 64}, 013014
497: (2001); M. Knecht and A. Nyffeler, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 65}, 073034
498: (2002); S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, and G. Weiglein, Phys. Reports
499: {\bf 425}, 265 (2006).
500:
501: \bibitem{Seesaw1} P. Minkowski, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 67}, 421 (1977);
502: T. Yanagida, in {\it Proceedings of the Workshop on Unified Theory
503: and the Baryon Number of the Universe}, edited by O. Sawada and A.
504: Sugamoto (KEK, Tsukuba, 1979); M. Gell-Mann, P. Ramond, and R.
505: Slansky, in {\it Supergravity}, edited by P. van Nieuwenhuizen and
506: D. Freedman (North Holland, Amsterdam, 1979); S.L. Glashow, in {\it
507: Quarks and Leptons}, edited by M. L$\acute{\rm e}$vy {\it et al.}
508: (Plenum, New York, 1980); R.N. Mohapatra and G. Senjanovic, Phys.
509: Rev. Lett. {\bf 44}, 912 (1980).
510:
511: \bibitem{typeII} M. Magg and C. Wetterich, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 94},
512: 61 (1980); J. Schechter and J.W.F. Valle, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 22},
513: 2227 (1980); T.P. Cheng and L.F. Li, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 22}, 2860
514: (1980); G. Lazarides, Q. Shafi, and C. Wetterich, Nucl. Phys. B {\bf
515: 181}, 287 (1981).
516:
517: \bibitem{typeiii}
518: R. Foot, H. Lew, X.G. He, and G.C. Joshi, Z. Phys. C {\bf 44}, 441
519: (1989).
520:
521: \bibitem{FY} M. Fukugita and T. Yanagida, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 174},
522: 45 (1986).
523:
524: \bibitem{Pilaftsis} A. Pilaftsis, Z. Phys. C {\bf 55}, 275 (1992).
525:
526: \bibitem{early} J. Bernabeu, A. Santamaria, J. Vidal, A. Mendez, and
527: J.W.F. Valle, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 187}, 303 (1987); W. Buchmuller and
528: D. Wyler, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 249}, 458 (1990); W. Buchmuller and C.
529: Greub, Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 363}, 345 (1991); A. Datta and A.
530: Pilaftsis, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 278}, 162 (1992); G. Ingelman and J.
531: Rathsman, Z. Phys. C {\bf 60}, 243 (1993); C.A. Heusch and P.
532: Minkowski, Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 416}, 3 (1994); D. Tommasini, G.
533: Barenboim, J. Bernabeu, and C. Jarlskog, Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 444},
534: 451 (1995).
535:
536: \bibitem{smirnov}
537: J. Kersten and A.Yu Smirnov, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 76}, 073005 (2007).
538:
539: \bibitem{Han} T. Han and B. Zhang, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 97}, 171804
540: (2006).
541:
542: \bibitem{tev type-II}
543: W. Chao, S. Luo, Z.Z. Xing, and S. Zhou, Phys. Rev. D {\rm 77},
544: 016001 (2008); W. Chao, Z. Si, Z.Z. Xing, and S. Zhou,
545: arXiv:0804.1265 [hep-ph]; P.F. Perez, T. Han, G. Huang, T. Li, and
546: K. Wang, arXiv:0803.3450 [hep-ph]; arXiv:0805.3536 [hep-ph].
547:
548: \bibitem{unitary}
549: S. Antusch, C. Biggo, E. Fernandez-Martinez, M.B. Gavela, and J.
550: Lopez-Pavon, JHEP {\bf 0610}, 084 (2006).
551:
552: \bibitem{form factor}
553: A. Czarnecki and B. Krause, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. C {\bf 51}, 148
554: (1996).
555:
556: \bibitem{PDG}
557: W.M. Yao {\it et al.}, J. Phys. G {\bf 33}, 1 (2006).
558:
559: \bibitem{minimalII} P.H. Gu, H. Zhang, and S. Zhou, Phys. Rev. D {\bf
560: 74}, 076002 (2006); A.H. Chan, H. Fritzsch, S. Luo, and Z.Z. Xing,
561: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 76}, 073009 (2007).
562:
563: \bibitem{Xing}
564: Z.Z. Xing, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 660}, 515 (2008).
565:
566:
567: \bibitem{iii lhc}
568: B. Bajc and G. Senjanovic, JHEP {\bf0708}, 014 (2006); B. Bajc, M.
569: Nemevsek, and G. senjanovic, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 76}, 055011 (2007);
570: R. Franceschini, T. Hambye, and A. Strumia, arXiv:0805.1613
571: [hep-ph]; I. Gogoladze, N. Okada, and Q. Shafi, arXiv: 0805.2129
572: [hep-ph].
573:
574: \end{thebibliography}
575:
576: \newpage
577:
578:
579:
580: \begin{figure}[t]
581: \subfigure[]{\epsfig{file=nfeyn.eps,height=4cm,width=5.1cm,angle=0}}
582: \vspace{0.6cm}
583: \subfigure[]{\epsfig{file=21.eps,height=4cm,width=5.1cm,angle=0}}
584: \subfigure[]{\epsfig{file=22.eps,height=4cm,width=5.1cm,angle=0}}
585: \vspace{0.6cm}
586: \subfigure[]{\epsfig{file=23.eps,height=4cm,width=5.1cm,angle=0}}
587: \subfigure[]{\epsfig{file=24.eps,height=4cm,width=5.1cm,angle=0}}
588: \subfigure[]{\epsfig{file=25.eps,height=4cm,width=5.1cm,angle=0}}
589: \subfigure[]{\epsfig{file=typeiii.eps,height=4cm,width=5.1cm,angle=0}}
590: \caption{One-loop Feynman diagrams contributing to $a_\mu^{}$.
591: Diagram (a) comes from the heavy neutrino and $W$ boson loop.
592: Diagrams (b) and (c) come from doubly charged Higgs and charged
593: lepton loops. Diagrams (d), (e), (f) come from singly charged Higgs
594: and neutrino ($W$ boson) loops. Diagram (g) comes from the triplet
595: fermion and SM-like Higgs boson loop.}
596: \end{figure}
597:
598: \begin{figure}[t]
599: \epsfig{file=an.eps,height=9cm,width=10cm,angle=0} \vspace{0cm}
600: \caption{$\Delta{a}_\mu^{\rm I}$ as a function of $M_{\rm 1}^{}$,
601: with $RR^\dagger\sim0.01$ and $200 {\rm GeV}\leq M_{\rm 1}^{} \leq ~
602: 500 {\rm GeV}$. }
603: \end{figure}
604:
605: \begin{figure}[t]
606: \epsfig{file=delta.eps,height=9cm,width=10cm,angle=0}
607: \caption{$\Delta{a}_\mu^{\rm II}$ as a function of $m_\Delta^{}$.
608: The solid, dotted and dashed lines correspond to $M_{\rm 1}^{}=50,~
609: 200,~ 500~ {\rm GeV}$, separately. The short dotted line corresponds
610: to $\Delta a_\mu^{}$.}
611: \end{figure}
612:
613: \end{document}
614: