1: %% ****** Start of file slactemplate.tex ****** %
2: %%
3: %%
4: %% This file is part of the APS files in the REVTeX 4 distribution.
5: %% Version 4.0 of REVTeX, August 2001
6: %%
7: %%
8: %% Copyright (c) 2001 The American Physical Society.
9: %%
10: %% See the REVTeX 4 README file for restrictions and more information.
11: %%
12: %
13: % This is a template for producing manuscripts for use with REVTEX 4.0
14: % Copy this file to another name and then work on that file.
15: % That way, you always have this original template file to use.
16: %
17: \documentclass[slac_one]{revtex4}
18: \usepackage{graphicx}
19: \usepackage{fancyhdr}
20: \pagestyle{fancy}
21: \fancyhead{} % clear all fields
22: \fancyfoot{} % clear all fields
23: %\fancyfoot[LE,LO]{Insert PSN Here}
24: \renewcommand{\headrulewidth}{0pt}
25: \renewcommand{\footrulewidth}{0pt}
26: \renewcommand{\sfdefault}{phv}
27: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.2}
28: \setlength{\textheight}{235mm}
29: \setlength{\textwidth}{178mm}%{170mm}
30: \setlength{\topmargin}{-20mm}
31:
32: \begin{document}
33:
34: %Title of paper
35: \title{{\small{Hadron Collider Physics Symposium (HCP2008),
36: Galena, Illinois, USA}}\\ %% Please keep this conference title here
37: \vspace{12pt}
38: Top Quark Properties} %% Paper title goes here
39:
40:
41: % Repeat the \author .. \affiliation etc. as needed
42: %
43: % \affiliation command applies to all authors since the last
44: % \affiliation command. The \affiliation command should follow the
45: % other information
46:
47: \author{Catalin I. Ciobanu \\ For the CDF and D\O ~Collaborations}
48: \affiliation{{\it IN2P3-CNRS LPNHE Laboratory and Pierre \& Marie Curie University\\
49: 4 Place Jussieu, 75252 Paris Cedex 05 France}}
50:
51:
52: \begin{abstract}
53: In this document we present several recent (July 2008) results from studies of the
54: top quark properties at the CDF and D\O~ experiments at the Tevatron. Measurements
55: of several top quark properties, as well as tests of new physics in the top quark production
56: and decay sectors are presented. In the latter case, no significant evidence for physics
57: beyond the Standard Model is uncovered, and the tightest constraints to date are placed on
58: most of the new physics scenarios investigated.
59: \end{abstract}
60:
61: %\maketitle must follow title, authors, abstract
62: \maketitle
63:
64: \thispagestyle{fancy}
65:
66: % body of paper here - Use proper section commands
67: % References should be done using the \cite, \ref, and \label commands
68: % Put \label in argument of \section for cross-referencing
69: %\section{\label{}}
70:
71: \section{Introduction} % Section title should be in all capitals.
72: According to the Standard Model (SM), in $p\bar{p}$ collisions at the Tevatron top
73: quarks can be created in pairs via the strong force, or singly via the
74: electroweak interaction. Due to its higher cross-section and
75: smaller associated backgrounds, the strong production ($t\bar{t}$) represents the main
76: channel used for performing detailed measurements of the properties of the top quark.
77: In terms of its decay, a top quark is expected to disintegrate into a $W$ boson and
78: a $b$-quark almost 100\% of the time. Thus, the top candidate events can be classified
79: based on the subsequent decays of the $W$ daughter into: a) ``dilepton'' events if both $W$
80: bosons decay leptonically, b) ``lepton+jets'' events if one $W$ decays leptonically and the
81: other one hadronically, and c) ``all hadronic'' events if both $W$'s decay hadronically.
82: The last category of top candidates (all hadronic) are typically dominated by
83: multijet background contributions, and will not be used in the results described here.
84: In the following sections, we will present the results from top charge measurement,
85: as well as measurements related to the production and the decay of top quarks.
86:
87:
88: \section{Top Properties: Charge}
89: While the top charge is expected to be $+\frac{2}{3}e$, there are models
90: which include an exotic $-\frac{4}{3}e$ top quark that couples to a
91: right-handed $b$ quark \cite{chgtheo} and decays into a negative $W$ boson and
92: a $b$ quark.
93: Both the CDF and D\O~ experiments have performed measurements to test if the top
94: charge is $\frac{2}{3}e$ or $-\frac{4}{3}e$.
95: The challenge is therefore to reconstruct the charges of the $W$ bosons and the $b$ quarks
96: in the event, and subsequently pair the $W$ and the $b$'s to reconstruct the top
97: decay chain. In the CDF analysis, dilepton and lepton+jets top candidate events are
98: selected by first requiring evidence for the leptonic decay of a $W$: an electron (muon)
99: with large transverse energy $E_{T}$($p_{T}$)$>$20 GeV and large transverse missing
100: energy from the undetected neutrino: ${E_T\!\!\!\!\!\!\!/ \quad}>$20 GeV. For the
101: lepton+jets subsample, three jets with $E_{T}>$20 GeV and a fourth jet with
102: $E_{T}>$12 GeV are required. To further reduce background contamination, at least
103: two of these jets are required to be identified (tagged) as $b$-jets using displaced
104: vertex information as measured by the CDF silicon vertex detector. In the case of the
105: dilepton subsample, the presence of another high transverse momentum, opposite-sign
106: lepton is demanded, along with the presence of at least two jets with $E_{T}>$15 GeV.
107: Of the two jets, one or both should have been tagged as $b$-jets by the silicon
108: detector. A minimum threshold of 200 GeV on the total transverse energy in the event
109: (scalar-sum including $E_T\!\!\!\!\!\!\!/ \quad$) is also imposed.
110:
111:
112: The charge of the $b$-jets is determined by performing a $p_{J}$-weighted
113: \footnote{ $p_{J}$ is the projection of track's momentum along the jet axis.}
114: sum of the charges of the tracks found within a cone of radius
115: $\Delta R=\sqrt{\Delta \Phi ^{2} + \Delta \eta ^{2}}=$0.4 around the jet axis.
116: A negative (positive) weighted sum indicates a $b$ ($\bar{b}$) quark. For real $b$-jets
117: present in CDF data this method have been shown to determine the correct charge
118: roughly 60\% of the time.
119:
120: Finally, the pairing of $W$ and $b$ in dilepton events is performed by computing the
121: invariant mass of the lepton and $b$-jet ($M_{\ell b}$). This mass can be abnormally high for
122: the wrong combinations; the CDF pairing exploits this fact, first by requiring one
123: combination over a certain threshold and then choosing the opposite $\ell-b$ pairing.
124: This procedure was estimated to have a 95\% success rate, with an efficiency of 39\%.
125: In lepton+jets events, a kinematic fitter $\chi^{2}$ using reconstructed top and
126: $W$ mass constraints is calculated and the lowest $\chi^{2}$ combination is retained.
127: The correct pairing is found 86\% of the time, with an efficiency of 53\%.
128:
129: The results of this analysis are presented in Figure \ref{chgplot}. These results favour
130: the SM hypothesis over the $-\frac{4}{3}e$ top charge hypothesis. The latter hypothesis is
131: rejected at 87\% confidence level (C.L.). We note that a top charge measurement has previously
132: been performed by the D\O~ Collaboration \cite{dcharge} with similar conclusions.
133:
134:
135: \begin{figure*}[tbh]
136: \centering
137: \includegraphics[width=100mm]{em.eps}
138: \caption{CDF: The distribution of the product between the $W$ (lepton) charge and the jet charge. The
139: histograms show the Standard Model expectation, while the points represent the CDF data.} \label{chgplot}
140: \end{figure*}
141:
142: \section{Top Quark Production}
143: \subsection{Top Quark Production Mechanism: $q\bar{q}$ versus $gg$ initial state}
144: At the Fermilab Tevatron, the top pairs are expected to originate
145: predominantly from a
146: $q\bar{q}$ initial state: $\sigma(gg\rightarrow t\bar{t} X) /
147: \sigma(q\bar{q}\rightarrow t\bar{t} X)\approx 15$\% $/$ 85\%, with somewhat
148: large (${\cal{O}}(10$\%))uncertainties.
149:
150: Two CDF measurements \cite{gg} attempt to measure the production cross section ratio. The first
151: measurement takes advantage of the large correlation between the average number of gluons and
152: the average number of low $p_{T}$ charged particles present in a given sample.
153: The $W$+0jet sample and the dijet (80-100GeV) sample are then used to extract the distributions
154: of the low-$p_{T}$ track multiplicity in the ``no-gluon" case, and the "gluon-rich" case,
155: respectively (Figure \ref{combo}).
156: These two templates are used in a simple maximum likelihood fit to derive the fractions of
157: the no-gluon and the gluon-rich events present in the CDF data. After background subtraction
158: is performed, it is found that
159: $\sigma(gg\rightarrow t\bar{t} X) / \sigma(q\bar{q}\rightarrow t\bar{t} X) =
160: 0.07\pm 0.14$(stat)$\pm 0.07$(syst).
161:
162: The other CDF measurement of the production mechanism relies on an Artificial Neural Network (ANN) designed to
163: separate events originating from $q\bar{q}$ and $gg$ initial state. The ANN uses eight variables, of which two
164: (six) variables characterize the production (decay) of the top pair. A maximum likelihood fit yields
165: $\sigma(gg\rightarrow t\bar{t} X) / [\sigma(q\bar{q}\rightarrow t\bar{t} X)+\sigma(gg\rightarrow t\bar{t} X)] =
166: -0.075$, or
167: $\sigma(gg\rightarrow t\bar{t} X) / [\sigma(q\bar{q}\rightarrow t\bar{t} X)+\sigma(gg\rightarrow t\bar{t} X)] <0.61$
168: at 95\% C.L. The two measurements are combined to obtain
169: $\sigma(gg\rightarrow t\bar{t} X) / [\sigma(q\bar{q}\rightarrow t\bar{t} X)+\sigma(gg\rightarrow t\bar{t} X)]
170: = 0.07^{+0.15}_{-0.07}$ (stat+syst) (see Figure \ref{combo}).
171:
172: \begin{figure*}[tbh]
173: \centering
174: \includegraphics[height=60mm,width=80mm]{shab.eps}
175: \includegraphics[height=60mm,width=80mm]{jared.eps}\caption{Left plot: CDF:
176: The distributions of the low-$p_{T}$ track multiplicity in the no-gluon and the gluon-rich cases.
177: Right plot: CDF top production mechanism combination: Feldman-Cousins
178: $\sigma(gg\rightarrow t\bar{t} X) / [\sigma(q\bar{q}\rightarrow t\bar{t} X)+\sigma(gg\rightarrow t\bar{t} X)]$
179: plot showing the central value and the 68\% and 95\% C.L. intervals.
180: } \label{combo}
181: \end{figure*}
182:
183: \subsection{Forward-Backward Asymmetry in Top Production}
184: The D\O~Collaboration has recently published the first measurement of the
185: forward-backward asymmetry in top production \cite{d_afb}. While a small
186: asymmetry of the order of 5\% is expected to arise from QCD calculations
187: \cite{afb_SM}, several new physics phenomena could drastically increase
188: this asymmetry \cite{afb_BSM}. The asymmetry $A_{FB}$ is defined as
189: the count ratio $(N_{F}-N_{B})/(N_{F}+N_{B})$, where an event is counted as
190: forward (backward) if the rapidity difference $\Delta y = y_{t}-y_{\bar{t}}$
191: is positive (negative). This measurement is performed in the reconstructed
192: $t\bar{t}$ rest frame. The results are shown in Table \ref{dtab}.
193: While the values of the asymmetry are
194: somewhat higher than their expected values (a few percent, depending on jet channel)
195: they also have sizable uncertainties, and are therefore in statistical agreement
196: with these expectations.
197:
198:
199: \begin{table}[tbh]
200: \begin{center}
201: \caption{D\O: Number of selected events and fit results in the data.}
202: \begin{tabular}{lccc}
203: \hline \hline
204: \hspace{1cm} & $\geq4$ jets \hspace{1cm} & 4 jets \hspace{1cm} & $\geq5$ jets \\
205: \hline
206: No. Events \hspace{1cm} & 376 \hspace{1cm} & 308 \hspace{1cm} & 68 \\
207: \hline
208: $t\bar{t}+X$ \hspace{1cm}& 266$^{+23}_{-22}$ \hspace{1cm} & 214$\pm$20 \hspace{1cm} & 54$^{+10}_{-12}$ \\
209: $W$+jets \hspace{1cm} & 70$\pm$21 \hspace{1cm} & 61$^{+19}_{-18}$ \hspace{1cm} & 7$^{+11}_{-5}$ \\
210: Multijets \hspace{1cm} & 40$\pm$4 \hspace{1cm} & 32.7$^{+3.5}_{-3.3}$ \hspace{1cm} & 7.1$^{+1.6}_{-1.5}$ \\
211: $A_{FB}$ \hspace{1cm} & (12$\pm$8)\% \hspace{1cm} & (19$\pm$9)\% \hspace{1cm} & (-16$^{+15}_{-17}$)\% \\
212: \hline \hline
213: \end{tabular}
214: \label{dtab}
215: \end{center}
216: \end{table}
217:
218: A similar search has recently been performed by the CDF Collaboration \cite{jeanny}. The $A_{FB}$ was
219: measured in both the reconstructed rest frame of the $t\bar{t}$ system and in the
220: laboratory frame, and corrected to the intrinsic parton-level value to allow an
221: easy comparison between the experimental $A_{FB}$ result and the
222: theoretical predictions.
223: The results \footnote{The expected relationship between the laboratory frame and
224: the $t\bar{t}$ frame asymmetries is: $A_{FB}^{t\bar{t}}\sim 1.3\cdot A_{FB}^{p\bar{p}}$.}
225: $A_{FB}^{t\bar{t}}=0.24\pm0.13$(stat)$\pm0.04$(syst) and
226: $A_{FB}^{p\bar{p}}=0.17\pm0.07$(stat)$\pm0.04$(syst)
227: are higher than, but consistent with the theoretical SM calculation.
228:
229: \subsection{Resonance Searches}
230:
231: \subsubsection{$t\bar{t}$ Resonance Searches}
232: The D\O~and CDF Collaborations have performed searches for narrow-width, high-mass particles X decaying to
233: top quark pairs. Such particles are predicted in many extensions of the SM, such as extended gauge
234: theories \cite{E6}, Kaluza-Klein excited states of gluons or $Z$ bosons \cite{KK}, and topcolor \cite{topcolor}
235: to name a few.
236:
237: The D\O~search uses the lepton+jets subsample. At least three high-$E_{T}$ jets are required to be
238: present in every event; at least one of these jets should be identified as a $b$-jet using
239: a neural networks tagging algorithm \cite{d_nnb}. The four momenta of the jets, lepton, and
240: neutrino \footnote{The longitudinal, or $z$-component of the neutrino momentum is obtained
241: from the $W$ mass constraint $M_{\ell \nu}=M_W$. This condition yields a quadratic equation
242: in $p_{z}^{\nu}$; if there are two real solutions, the smaller $|p_{z}|$ one is chosen. If there
243: are no real solutions, then $p_{z}$ is set to zero.} are used
244: to reconstruct the invariant mass of the $t\bar{t}$ system.
245:
246: The left plot of Figure \ref{d_restt} shows the distribution of the reconstructed top pair
247: mass $M_{t\bar{t}}$ in the lepton+$\geq$4 jets channel for data (points) and SM expectation
248: (colored histograms). A 650 GeV top-color-assisted signal \cite{topcolor} is shown
249: by the white contribution stacked on top of the SM expectation (open histogram). The data
250: are found to agree well with the SM expectation. 95 \% C.L. limits are set on
251: $\sigma_X \cdot BR(X\rightarrow t\bar{t})$ for different $M_X$ values, as shown in
252: the right plot of Figure \ref{d_restt}.
253: One can see that a leptophobic $Z^{\prime}$ with a width
254: $\Gamma_{Z^{\prime}}=1.2$\%$M_{Z^{\prime}}$ is excluded (95\% C.L.) up to a mass of 760 GeV.
255:
256:
257: \begin{figure*}[tbh]
258: \centering
259: \includegraphics[width=80mm]{d_4jets.eps}
260: \includegraphics[width=80mm]{d_reslim.eps}
261: \caption{Left plot: D\O: The reconstructed $M_{t\bar{t}}$ spectrum in the $\geq$4 jets channel, showing the data (points) and the
262: SM contributions (color histograms). A 650 GeV top-color-assisted model is shown by the white (open)
263: contributions. Right plot: D\O: 95\% C.L. exclusion limits on $\sigma_X \cdot BR(X\rightarrow t\bar{t})$. } \label{d_restt}
264: \end{figure*}
265:
266: A similar search at CDF observes no significant evidence for new particles decaying to $t\bar{t}$. Using the
267: lepton+$\geq 4$ jets sample, the CDF Collaboration
268: has also measured the differential top pair production cross-section in bins of $M_{t\bar{t}}$. The result is shown
269: in Figure \ref{alis} where a good agreement between CDF data (points) and expected distribution (histogram) is
270: apparent. To quantify this agreement, a ``p-value", defined as the fraction of SM simulated experiments which
271: look as discrepant as the data or worse, is calculated; the result of 0.45 confirms no excess over SM prediction
272: is observed.
273:
274: \begin{figure*}[t]
275: \centering
276: \includegraphics[width=100mm]{alice.eps}
277: \caption{ CDF: The differential top pair cross section in bins of $M_{t\bar{t}}$.
278: The circles represent CDF data, while the histogram represents the expected
279: SM contribution with uncertainties (luminosity uncertainty is not included).}
280: \label{alis}
281: \end{figure*}
282:
283: \subsubsection{Other Resonance Searches}
284:
285: Other resonance searches in the top sector at the Tevatron include $t^{\prime}$ searches
286: and scalar top searches. The CDF Collaboration has performed a search for a hypothetical new quark,
287: $t^{\prime}$, whose decay features the same final state particles as the SM top.
288: The $t^{\prime}$ particle could belong to a fourth quark generation in which the mass of the $b^{\prime}$
289: partner is large enough to satify: $M_{b^{\prime}} > M_{t^{\prime}} - M_{W}$; in this case,
290: $t^{\prime}$ would decay predominantly into $Wq$ ($q=d,s,b$).
291: The variables used to discriminate the $t^{\prime}$ signal from the associated
292: background (which includes SM $t\bar{t}$ production) are the $t^{\prime}$
293: reconstructed mass $M_{reco}$ and the total transverse energy in the event $H_{T}$.
294: A simultaneous analysis of these variables excludes the presence of a
295: $t^{\prime}$ signal up to a mass of 284 GeV (at 95\% C.L.).
296:
297: Searches for scalar top quarks (stop) have been performed by both the CDF and D\O~Collaborations.
298: Because of the large top mass, the mixing between the stop eigenstates can be substantial, and the
299: lighter stop $\tilde{t_{1}}$ could be lighter than the top quark \cite{marcela}.
300: The D\O~search focuses on this scenario in which $\tilde{t_{1}} \bar{\tilde{t_{1}}}$
301: pairs are produced and subsequently decay as
302: $\tilde{t_{1}}\rightarrow \tilde{\chi_{1}}^{+} b \rightarrow W^{+} \tilde{\chi_{1}}^{0} b$.
303: The final state therefore resembles that of $t\bar{t}$ production, with some additional
304: missing energy from the neutralinos. Multivariate likelihood discriminants are built
305: for six models, defined by $M_{\tilde{t_{1}}}$ and $M_{\tilde{\chi_{1}}^{\pm}}$.
306: In all cases, no significant evidence of a signal is found, and upper limits are set on
307: the cross section of these models, ranging from 7-12 times the theoretical calculations
308: (at 95\% C.L.). The CDF analysis \cite{andrew} draws similar conclusions.
309:
310: \section{Top Quark Decay}
311: \subsection{$W$ helicity in Top Decay}
312: The V$-$A structure of the weak current $t\rightarrow Wb$ requires the following
313: helicity fractions $F_{0}=0.7$, $F_{-}=0.3$, and $F_{+}=0.0$ for the longitudinal,
314: left-handed, and right-handed $W$ contributions, respectively. An $F_{+}$ value
315: significantly different from zero would indicate the presence of physics beyond the SM.
316: The D\O~Collaboration has recently published \cite{d_heli} results from the measurement
317: of the fractions of $W$ helicity contributions using the $\cos \theta$* variable.
318: \footnote{ $\theta$* is the angle between the top quark and the lepton
319: from $W$ decay, measured in the $W$ boson rest frame.}
320: Both the dilepton and the lepton+jets subsamples are used for this measurement. The
321: $F_{0}$ and $F_{+}$ fractions are fitted simultaneously, while $F_{-}$ is constrained
322: to $1-F_{0}-F_{+}$. The result of the fit is shown in Figure \ref{heli}:
323: $F_{0} = 0.425 \pm 0.166$(stat)$\pm 0.102$(syst) and
324: $F_{+} = 0.119 \pm 0.090$(stat)$\pm 0.053$(syst)
325:
326: The CDF Collaboration has employed a three-prong approach for performing this
327: measurement. The first two methods rely on the cosine of the decay angle $\theta$* of
328: the charged lepton in the $W$ rest frame measured with respect to the direction of
329: motion of the $W$ boson in the top-quark rest-frame. Fitting for both
330: $F_{0}$ and $F_{+}$ fractions simultaneously and combining the two analyses,
331: CDF obtains $F_{0}=0.66 \pm 0.16$(stat+syst) and $F_{+}=-0.03\pm 0.07$(stat+syst).
332: The third method relies on the matrix element technique previously developed in
333: Run I \cite{flo}. In this measurement the $F_{+}$ and $F_{-}$ fractions are
334: fixed to zero and 1-$F_{0}$, respectively. The method yields
335: $F_{0}=0.637\pm 0.084$(stat)$\pm 0.069$(syst). The results from the three CDF
336: methods are summarized in Figure \ref{heli}.
337:
338: To summarize, the D\O~and CDF results are compatible with each other and with the SM
339: expectations. More data will be needed for a conclusive determination of the three
340: polarization fractions.
341:
342: \begin{figure*}[tbh]
343: \centering
344: \includegraphics[width=80mm]{d_heli.eps}
345: \includegraphics[height=80mm]{c_heli.eps}
346: \caption{Left plot: D\O: The simultaneous fit for the fractions of longitudinal and
347: right-handed $W$ bosons from top decays. The
348: ellipses are the 68\% and 95\% C.L. contours, the triangle borders the
349: physically allowed region where $F_{0}$ and $F_{+}$ sum to one or less, and
350: the star denotes the SM values. Right plot: CDF results from the three
351: individual $W$ helicity analyses.}
352: \label{heli}
353: \end{figure*}
354:
355: \subsection{Suppressed Top Decays: $t\rightarrow Zq$}
356: In the SM, the flavor changing neutral current (FCNC) $t\rightarrow Zq$ is
357: predicted to occur at a tiny rate ${\cal O}(10^{-14})$; however, several scenarios involving
358: physics beyond the SM could enhance this branching ratio up to values of the order ${\cal O}(10^{-4})$.
359: Thus, any sign of this rare decay at the Tevatron would be an indication of new physics.
360:
361: A CDF search for $t\rightarrow Zq$ decays is based on a template fit to a $\chi ^{2}$ variable using kinematic
362: constraints present in the top FCNC events; one of these constraints is that the reconstructed mass of the
363: $Zq$ system approach the top mass, within a small window. The subsample used for this study is the
364: $Z+\geq$4 jets, where the $Z$ decayed to a pair of oppositely-charged electrons or muons.
365: The analysis of the kinematic $\chi ^{2}$ reveals no significant evidence for a signal beyond the SM.
366: A Feldman-Cousins approach yields the tightest constraint to date in this top decay channel:
367: $BR(t\rightarrow Zq)<3.7$\% at 95\% C.L.
368:
369: \subsection{Exotic Top Decays: $t\rightarrow H^{+}b$}
370: Charged Higgs bosons are predicted in many extensions of the SM, such as supersymmetry or grand unified symmetries
371: If these bosons have massed below that of the top quark, the process $t\rightarrow H^{+}b$ would lead to a
372: decrease in the SM branching ratio BR($t\rightarrow W^{+}b$) assumed to be very close to unity within
373: the SM.
374:
375: The D\O~Collaboration has considered a purely leptophobic model in which
376: BR($H^{+}\rightarrow c\bar{s})$=100\%, and the mass of the charged Higgs is close to the
377: $W$ boson mass. Such a model would decrease the measured $t\bar{t}$ cross-section in the
378: lepton+jets channel, while leaving the dilepton $t\bar{t}$ cross section unchanged.
379: Using the ratio between the top pair cross section measured in the dilepton and
380: the lepton+jets subsamples, one can then
381: derive upper bounds on BR($t\rightarrow H^{+}b)$. At 95\% C.L. this upper limit is
382: BR($t\rightarrow H^{+}b\rightarrow c\bar{s}b)<$0.35.
383:
384: The CDF Collaboration has also search for charged Higgs bosons from top decays.
385: As opposed to the D\O~approach, the CDF analysis seeks to exploit the difference between
386: the dijet mass spectra from the regular $W$ decays $W\rightarrow c\bar{s}$ and the charged Higgs decays
387: $H^{+}\rightarrow c\bar{s}$. Invariant dijet mass templates are built for Higgs masses ranging between
388: 90 and 150 GeV. No significant deviation from the SM is observed, and limits are set for the
389: BR($t\rightarrow H^{+}b\rightarrow c\bar{s}b)$ as function of the charged Higgs mass. The 95\% C.L. limits
390: on this branching ratio vary between 0.32 ($M_{H^{+}}=90$ GeV) and 0.08 ($M_{H^{+}}=130$ GeV).
391:
392: \section{Conclusions}
393: We presented selected results from the studies of the properties of the top quarks at the Tevatron.
394: Both the D\O~and the CDF Collaborations have very mature and diversified top physics programs.
395: The large amounts of data accumulated by the two experiments allow an unprecedented
396: precision for most SM and beyond the SM measurements in the top sector.
397: For updates of these results and numerous other top-quark-related measurements, we invite the reader to
398: consult the D\O~and CDF top group webpages \cite{webpages}.
399:
400: % If you have acknowledgments, this puts in the proper section head.
401: \begin{acknowledgments}
402: We thank our D\O~and CDF colleagues for helping us prepare this presentation, and
403: to the HCP organizers and participants for providing a very stimulating atmosphere
404: throughout the conference.
405: \end{acknowledgments}
406:
407: \begin{thebibliography}{9} % Use for 10-99 references
408:
409: \bibitem{chgtheo} D.~Chang, W.~Chang, E.~Ma, Phys. Rev. D 59, 091503 (1999).
410: \bibitem{dcharge} V.~M. Abazov $et$ $al.$ (The D\O~Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 041801 (2007).
411: \bibitem{gg} T.~Aaltonen $et$ $al.$ (The CDF Collaboration), arXiv:0807.4262v1 (2008).
412: \bibitem{d_afb} V.~M.~Abazov $et$ $al.$ (The D\O~Collaboration),
413: Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 142002 (2008).
414: \bibitem{afb_SM}
415: J.~H.~Kuhn and G.~Rodrigo, Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 81}, 49 (1998);
416: J.~H.~Kuhn and G.~Rodrigo, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 59}, 054017 (1999);
417: M.~T.~Bowen, S.~Ellis, and D.~Rainwater, Phys. Rev. D 73, 014008 (2006);
418: S.~Dittmaier, P.~Uwer, and S.~Weinzierl, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 262002 (2007);
419: L.~G.~Almeida, G.~Sterman and W.~Vogelsang, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 78},
420: 014008 (2008).
421: \bibitem{afb_BSM}
422: O.~Antunano, J.~H.~Kuhn and G.~Rodrigo, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 77}, 014003 (2008);
423: J.~Rosner, Phys. Lett. B 387, 113 (1996);
424: P.~Frampton and S.~Glashow, Phys. Lett. B 190, 157 (1987);
425: L.~Sehgal and M.~Wanninger, Phys. Lett. B 200, 211 (1988).
426: \bibitem{jeanny} T.~Aaltonen $et$ $al.$ (The CDF Collaboration), arXiv:0806.2472v2 (2008).
427: \bibitem{E6} A.~Leike, Phys. Rept. 317, 143 (1999).
428: \bibitem{KK} B.~Lillie, L.~Randall, and L.-T.~Wang, JHEP 09, 074 (2007).
429: T.~G.~Rizzo, Phys. Rev. D 61, 055005 (2000).
430: \bibitem{topcolor} C.~T.~Hill and S.~Parke, Phys. Rev. D 49, 4454 (1994).
431: \bibitem{d_nnb} T. Scanlon, FERMILAB-THESIS-2006-43.
432: \bibitem{marcela} C.~Balazs, M.~Carena, and C.~Wagner, Phys. Rev. D 70, 015007 (2004).
433: W.~Beenakker $et$ $al.$, Nucl. Phys. B, 515, 3 (1998).
434: \bibitem{andrew} R.~Erbacher, A.~Ivanov, W.~Johnson, Public CDF note 9343 available at:\\
435: {\texttt{http://www-cdf.fnal.gov/physics/new/top/2008/tprop/Stop/stopDilCdfNote.pdf}}
436: \bibitem{d_heli} V.~M. Abazov $et$ $al.$ (The D\O~Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 100 , 062004 (2008).
437: \bibitem{flo} V.~M. Abazov $et$ $al.$ (The D\O~Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B617, 1 (2005); M.~F.~Canelli, FERMILAB-THESIS-2003-22.
438: \bibitem{webpages} D\O~ top quark public webpage:
439: {\texttt{http://www-d0.fnal.gov/Run2Physics/top/index.html}}; CDF top quark public webpage:
440: {\texttt{http://www-cdf.fnal.gov/physics/new/top/top.html}}.
441: \end{thebibliography}
442:
443:
444: \end{document}
445: