1: %%% Source directory for the figs: /users/spdas/pythiaPIBONN/paw/cpv_SameFig_kumac/final_SUSY08/*eps and *pdf
2: %%%
3: %%
4: %% This is file `template-8d.tex',
5: %% generated with the docstrip utility.
6: %%
7: %% The original source files were:
8: %%
9: %% template.raw (with options: `8d')
10: %%
11: %% Template for the LaTeX class aipproc.
12: %%
13: %% (C) 1998,2000,2001 American Institute of Physics and Frank Mittelbach
14: %% All rights reserved
15: %%
16: %%
17: %% $Id: template.raw,v 1.12 2005/07/06 19:22:14 frank Exp $
18: %%
19:
20: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
21: %% Please remove the next line of code if you
22: %% are satisfied that your installation is
23: %% complete and working.
24: %%
25: %% It is only there to help you in detecting
26: %% potential problems.
27: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
28:
29: %\input{aipcheck}
30:
31: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
32: %% SELECT THE LAYOUT
33: %%
34: %% The class supports further options.
35: %% See aipguide.pdf for details.
36: %%
37: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
38:
39: \documentclass[
40: ,final % use final for the camera ready runs
41: %% ,draft % use draft while you are working on the paper
42: %% ,numberedheadings % uncomment this option for numbered sections
43: %% , % add further options here if necessary
44: ]
45: {aipproc}
46:
47: \layoutstyle{8x11double}
48:
49: \usepackage{color}
50:
51: \def\lsim{\:\raisebox{-0.5ex}{$\stackrel{\textstyle<}{\sim}$}\:}
52: \def\gsim{\:\raisebox{-0.5ex}{$\stackrel{\textstyle>}{\sim}$}\:}
53:
54: \newcommand{\imag}{\Im {\rm m}}
55: \newcommand{\real}{\Re {\rm e}}
56:
57:
58: \newcommand{\ul} {\tilde u_L}
59: \newcommand{\ur} {\tilde u_R}
60: \newcommand{\dl} {\tilde d_L}
61: \newcommand{\dr} {\tilde d_R}
62: \newcommand{\ulb} {\bar{\tilde u}_L}
63: \newcommand{\urb} {\bar{\tilde u}_R}
64: \newcommand{\dlb} {\bar{\tilde d}_L}
65: \newcommand{\drb} {\bar{\tilde d}_R}
66:
67: \newcommand{\tanb} {\tan\beta}
68: \newcommand{\mhpm} {m_{H^{\pm}}}
69: \newcommand{\mhone} {m_{h_{1}}}
70: \newcommand{\hone} {h_{1}}
71: \newcommand{\htwo} {h_{2}}
72: \newcommand{\mhtwo} {m_{h_{2}}}
73: \newcommand{\hthree} {h_{3}}
74: \newcommand{\mhthree} {m_{h_{3}}}
75: \newcommand{\ra} {\rightarrow}
76: \newcommand{\nbtag} {N_{btag}}
77: \def\met {E\!\!\!\!/_T}
78:
79: \newcommand{\beq} {\begin{equation}}
80: \newcommand{\eeq} {\end{equation}}
81: \newcommand{\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}}
82: \newcommand{\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}
83: \newcommand{\nn}{\nonumber}
84:
85: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
86: %% FRONTMATTER
87: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
88:
89: \begin{document}
90:
91: \title{CP-violating Higgs at Tevatron}
92:
93: \classification{14.80.Cp, 11.30.Er, 12.60.Jv}
94: % 14.80.Cp Non-standard-model Higgs bosons
95: % 11.30.Er Charge conjugation, parity, time reversal,
96: % and other discrete symmetries
97: % 12.60.Jv Supersymmetric models
98: \keywords {Higgs, CP, SUSY}
99:
100: \author{Siba Prasad Das}{
101: address={Physikalisches Institut der Universit\"at Bonn,
102: Nu\ss allee 12, D-53115 Bonn, Germany }
103: }
104:
105: \author{Amitava Datta}{
106: address={Indian Institutes of Science Education and Research,
107: % Block-HC, Sector-III,
108: Salt Lake City, Kolkata - 700106, India }
109: }
110:
111: \author{Manuel Drees}{
112: address={Physikalisches Institut der Universit\"at Bonn,
113: Nu\ss allee 12, D-53115 Bonn, Germany }
114: % ,altaddress={<author1 address>} % additional visiting address
115: }
116:
117: \begin{abstract}
118:
119: We analyze the prospect for observing the intermediate neutral Higgs
120: ($h_2$) boson in its decay to two lighter Higgs bosons ($h_1$) at the
121: Tevatron in the framework of the CP violating MSSM using the PYTHIA event
122: generator. We consider the lepton+ 4-jets+ $\met$ channel from $p \bar p \ra
123: W h_2 \ra W h_1 h_1 \ra l \nu_l b \bar b b\bar b$, with two or three tagged
124: $b$ jets. We found that it is very hard to observe this signature in the
125: LEP-allowed region of parameter space, due to the small signal efficiency.
126:
127: \end{abstract}
128:
129: \maketitle
130:
131: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
132: %% MAINMATTER
133: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
134:
135: \section{Introduction}
136:
137: The Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM) requires two Higgs doublets,
138: leading to a total of five physical Higgs bosons, two neutral CP-even, one
139: neutral CP-odd and two charged. In the presence of CP violation, the two
140: CP-even ($\phi_1$ and $\phi_2$) and one CP-odd ($a$) eigenstates can mix
141: radiatively \cite{CPmixing0,Lee:2003nt}. The mass eigenstates $h_1$, $h_2$ and
142: $h_3$ with $m_{h_1} < m_{h_2} < m_{h_3}$ can be obtained from the interaction
143: eigenstates $\phi_1$, $\phi_2$ and $a$ with the help of the orthogonal matrix
144: $O_{\alpha i}$, $(\phi_1,\phi_2,a)^T_\alpha= {O_{\alpha i}}(h_1,h_2,h_3)^T_i
145: \, ,$ which diagonalizes the Higgs boson mass matrix. $O$ depends on various
146: parameters of the SUSY Lagrangian.
147:
148: Due to this mixing, the Higgs mass eigenstates no longer are CP eigenstates.
149: Moreover, the masses of the Higgs bosons, their couplings to SM and MSSM
150: particles, and their decays are significantly modified \cite{Lee:2003nt}. For
151: example, the Higgs boson couplings to pairs of gauge bosons is scaled by
152: $g_{_{h_iVV}}$ relative to the SM. These couplings can be expressed as
153: ${{g_{_{h_iVV}} }} = \cos\beta\, O_{\phi_1 i}\: +\: \sin\beta\, O_{\phi_2 i}
154: \, ,$ where $\tan\beta$ is the ratio of Higgs VEVs. The magnitude of
155: $g_{_{h_2 W W}}$ is directly related to the production process
156: studied in this paper.
157:
158: In our numerical analysis, we chose the $CPX_{0.5}$
159: scenario with maximal CP violation~\cite{Carena:2000ks},
160: %
161: \begin{eqnarray}
162: \widetilde{M}_Q &=& \widetilde{M}_t =
163: \widetilde{M}_b = 500 \ {\rm GeV},\qquad
164: \mu = 4 \widetilde{M}_Q \,,\nonumber\\
165: |A_t| &=& |A_b| = 2 \widetilde{M}_Q,\qquad
166: {\rm arg}(A_t) = {arg}(A_b) = 90^\circ\,, \nonumber\\
167: |m_{\tilde{g}}| &=& 1~{\rm TeV}\,,\qquad
168: {\rm arg}(m_{\tilde{g}})\ =\ 90^\circ\, .
169: \label{eq:CPX}
170: \end{eqnarray}
171: %
172: The remaining two input parameters are the charged Higgs boson mass $\mhpm$
173: and $\tanb$. We calculated the spectrum and the couplings using {\tt
174: CPsuperH}~\cite{Lee:2003nt}.
175:
176: It is quite well known that the LEP experiment were not able to exclude
177: certain regions in the $\mhone-\tan\beta$ plane, where $h_1$ is dominantly a
178: CP-odd state with almost vanishing coupling to the gauge bosons while $h_2$ is
179: just too heavy to be produced. One region has $M_{h_1}\lsim 10$ GeV, so that
180: $\hone \ra \tau^+ \tau^-$ is dominant; in the other, $M_{h_1} \sim 30 - 50$
181: GeV so that $\hone \ra b \bar b$ is dominant. These occur for $\tan\beta$ in
182: between 3-10~\cite{LEP_allow}. We analyze the prospect for observing the
183: intermediate neutral Higgs ($\htwo$) in the second of these LEP allowed
184: regions.
185:
186: \smallskip
187:
188: \section{Numerical Analysis}
189:
190: In our simulation we used the {\tt PYTHIA v6.408 } \cite{Sjostrand:2006za}
191: event generator with the {\tt SLHA} \cite{Skands:2003cj} input at Tevatron
192: Run-II with $\sqrt s =1.96$ TeV. We used {\tt MadGraph/MadEvent v4.2.8}
193: \cite{Maltoni:2002qb} for generating parton level SM backgrounds which were
194: fed to PYTHIA for showering. We set the renormalization and factorization
195: scale to $Q= \sqrt {\hat s}$ and used CTEQ5L for the parton distribution
196: functions (PDF).
197:
198: The signal arises from $p \bar p \rightarrow W \htwo \rightarrow \ell
199: \nu_{\ell} \hone\hone \rightarrow \ell \nu_{\ell} b \bar b b \bar b$, leading
200: to $\ell jjjj \met$ events, where $\ell = e$ or $\mu$. The effective
201: cross section for this signal topology can be expressed as,
202: %
203: \bea \label{effcross}
204: C_{211_{4b}} & = & \sigma_{SM}(p \bar p \rightarrow W \htwo) {g^2_{_{h_2 W W}}}
205: Br(\htwo \rightarrow \hone\hone) \nonumber \\ &&
206: \times {Br(\hone \rightarrow b \bar b)}^2 2{Br(W \rightarrow e \nu_{e})}\,,
207: \eea
208: %
209: where $W$ stands for $W^{\pm}$ and the factor 2 is for $\rm \ell = e ~and
210: ~\mu$.
211:
212: We have used the toy calorimeter simulation ({\tt PYCELL}) provided in {\tt
213: PYTHIA} with the following criteria: calorimeter coverage is $\rm |\eta| <
214: 3.6$; the segmentation is given by $\Delta \eta \times \Delta \phi$=$0.16
215: \times 0.098$ which resembles the CDF detector; Gaussian smearing of the total
216: energy of jets and leptons; a cone algorithm with $\rm\Delta R(j,j)=0.4$ has
217: been used for jet finding; $\rm E_{T,min}^{cell} \ge 1.5$ GeV is considered to
218: be a potential candidate for jet initiator; minimum summed $\rm
219: E_{T,min}^{jet} \ge 7.0$ GeV is accepted as a jet and the jets are ordered in
220: $E_{T}$; leptons ($\rm \ell = e, ~\mu$) are selected with $\rm E_T \ge 15.0$
221: GeV and $\rm |\eta| \le 2.0$ and no jet should match with a hard lepton in the
222: event.
223:
224: A jet with $\rm |\eta| \le 1.2$ matched with a $b-$flavored hadron $B$, i.e.
225: with $\Delta R(j, B) < 0.2$, is considered to be {\em taggable}. We have
226: treated $b$ tagging in these taggable jets taking into account the $E_T$
227: dependent tagging probability, following Fig.6 (top) of \cite{Hanagaki:2005fz}.
228: We find that our tagging algorithm agrees well with the $t \bar t$
229: analysis of CDF \cite{cdfttbar}.
230:
231: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
232: %% SAMPLE TABLE
233: %%
234: %% Shows the use of \tablehead and \tablenote
235: %% macros
236: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
237:
238: We chose $\mhpm$= 132 GeV and $\tanb= 4.0$ with $CPX_{0.5}$ as a benchmark
239: point denoted by CPX-1, for which the effective cross-section
240: (Eq.\ref{effcross}) is maximal. The masses of the Higgs bosons, $\mhone$ and
241: $\mhtwo$, are 36.0 GeV and 101.6 GeV respectively. $\sigma_{SM}$ and
242: $C_{211_{4b}}$ are 217 fb and 21.6 fb respectively.
243:
244: We have applied the following selection cuts:
245: \begin{itemize}
246: \item S1: $N_{\rm jet} \ge 4$ ;
247: \item S2: $E_{T}^{j1,j2,j3,j4} > 10.0$ GeV and $ |\eta^{j1,j2,j3,j4}| < 3.0$;
248: \item S3: $N_{\rm lepton} \ge 1$, $E_{T}^{l} > 15.0$ GeV and $|\eta^{l}| <
249: 2.0$;
250: \item S4: $\met > 15$ GeV where $\met$ is calculated from all visible
251: particles;
252: \item {S5a(b): $\nbtag \ge 2~(3)$}; $|\eta^{b-jet}| < 1.2$, $\Delta R(j,B)\le
253: 0.2$;
254: \item S6($6'$): $H_{T} = \met + \sum_{\rm obj} E_{T} \le 300~(250) \ {\rm
255: GeV}$;
256: \item S7($7'$): $\Delta \phi(b1,b2) \le 2.09 (1.57) $;
257: \item S8($8'$): $N_{\rm obj}= N_{\rm lepton} + N_{\rm jet} \le 6~(5)$.
258: \end{itemize}
259: \begin{table}
260: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%\scalebox{0.69}{
261: \begin{tabular}{lrrrrrr}
262: \hline
263: & \tablehead{1}{r}{b}{C1-4 }
264: & \tablehead{1}{r}{b}{I5a}
265: & \tablehead{1}{r}{b}{I5b}
266: & \tablehead{1}{r}{b}{I6}
267: & \tablehead{1}{r}{b}{I7} \\
268: \hline
269: CPX-1 & .155 & .102 &.009 & .937 &.810 \\
270: \hline
271: $t \bar t$ & .511 & .108 & .00021 & .462 & .481 \\
272: $W b \bar b$ &.014 & .015 & .00002 & .986 & .502 \\
273: ZZ & .026 & .118 & .01735 & .945 & .434 \\
274: $WZ$ & .054 & .048 & .00008 & .968 & .432 \\
275: $W t \bar t$ &.619 & .127 & .00062 & .102 & .530 \\
276: \end{tabular}
277: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%} % scalebox
278: \caption{Individual selection efficiencies for signal and major backgrounds at
279: Tevatron Run-II. C1-4 stands for the combined efficiencies due to S1, S2, S3
280: and S4 selections. Mistagging has not been included here.}
281: \label{tab:EffTeV}
282: \end{table}
283:
284: We have displayed the cumulative (C) and individual (I) selection efficiencies
285: for the signal and the major backgrounds in Table.~\ref{tab:EffTeV}. Not
286: surprisingly, $t \bar t$ is the main source of background after applying the
287: basic cuts S1 to S4. The $\nbtag$ distribution is shown in
288: Fig.~\ref{fig:nbtagTeV}. The individual $\nbtag \geq 2$ efficiencies (I5a) are
289: almost the same for signal and $t \bar t$, see Table~\ref{tab:EffTeV}. The
290: signal contains more $b$ quarks, but the $t \bar t$ background has much harder
291: $b$ jets, leading to larger tagging probabilities. However, this background
292: can contain a third $b$ jet only due to showering. Hence requiring $\nbtag
293: \geq 3$ reduces the individual signal ($t \bar t$) efficiency by
294: $\mathcal{O}(10^{-1(-3)})$; we thus expected that requiring $\nbtag \geq 3$
295: might be useful. In order to check this, we have to allow for mis-tagging
296: non-$b$ jets as $b$ jets. We assumed a mis-tagging probability of 1\% for
297: $u,d,s$ and gluon jets, and 10\% for $c$ jets \cite{Hanagaki:2005fz,
298: Bowen:2004my}. We then re-evaluated I5a (I5b) only for $t \bar t$ and the
299: efficiency increases from 10.8\% to 12.5\% (0.02\% to 0.5\%).
300:
301: We also found that the azimuthal angle of the first two $b$-tagged jets,
302: $\Delta\phi(b1,b2)$, for the signal (dominant backgrounds) has its maximum
303: around 0.7 (2.8) (see Fig.\ref{fig:deltaphi}). Clearly proper choices of
304: $\nbtag$ and $\Delta\phi(b1,b2)$ could be potential discriminators to isolate
305: the signal from backgrounds. We have also checked that upper cuts (vetos) on
306: $H_{T}$ and $N_{\rm obj}$ suppress the higher mass and higher multiplicity,
307: for example, $W t \bar t$ and $t \bar t$ events.
308:
309: Furthermore, the veto on $N_{\rm obj}$ facilitates reconstructing the mass of
310: the Higgs bosons, $\mhone$ and $\mhtwo$, by reducing the combinatorics. To
311: that end, we calculated all possible di-jet invariant masses ($M_{jj}$) for
312: events with $N_{jet} \ge 4$; pairs of jets for reconstructing each $\mhone$
313: were selected by minimizing $|M_{{j_{1}}{j_{2}}} - M_{{j_{3}}{j_{4}}}|$, with
314: $M_{{j_{1}}{j_{2}}} + M_{{j_{3}}{j_{4}}} \geq 20$ GeV. The reconstruction of
315: $\mhtwo$ is then straightforward, {\it i.e.}, $m_{h_2} = M_{j_1j_2j_3j_4}$,
316: see Fig.\ref{fig:hmass}.
317:
318: We find that for our benchmark point the number of signal ($t \bar t$ with
319: $\sigma_{t \bar t}= 5$ pb) events surviving after the cumulative selections
320: (C1-8) is 3 (135) for 10 fb$^{-1}$ of integrated luminosity ($\int{\cal L} dt$)
321: with double $b$ tagging; the total number of background events is
322: approximately 165. Thus the significance ($ S \over \sqrt(B)$) is $\approx $
323: 0.23. Requiring at least three $b$ tags leaves only about 1 signal event, even
324: before applying the remaining cuts. Similarly, requiring only two $b$ tags but
325: applying the more stringent cuts $6'+7'+8'$, the number of surviving signal
326: ($t \bar t$) events $\approx$ 1 (12). We conclude that this signal is
327: impossible to observe at Tevatron Run-II.
328:
329:
330: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
331: % This is the standard one
332: %%%%%%%% \includegraphics[height=.3\textheight]{}
333: %%%%%%% \includegraphics[height=.3\textheight,width=0.48\textwidth]{cpv_nbtag}
334: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
335: %
336:
337: \begin{figure}
338: \includegraphics[height=.24\textheight,width=0.48\textwidth]{cpv_nbtag}
339: \caption{{\small Normalized distribution of the number of $b$ tags at Tevatron
340: Run-II for the signal and the backgrounds without inclusion of
341: mis-tagging.}}
342: \label{fig:nbtagTeV}
343: \end{figure}
344: %
345:
346: \begin{figure}
347: \includegraphics[height=.24\textheight,width=0.48\textwidth]{cpv_phi}
348: \caption{{\small Normalized distribution of the azimuthal angle between the
349: first two $b$-tagged jets at Tevatron Run-II for the signal and the
350: backgrounds without inclusion of mis-tagging.}}
351: \label{fig:deltaphi}
352: \end{figure}
353: %
354: \begin{figure}
355: \includegraphics[height=.24\textheight,width=0.48\textwidth]{cpv_h1h2}
356: \caption{{\small Normalized distributions for $M_{j_1j_2}$ $\approx$ $M_{j_3j_4}$ (top)
357: and $M_{j_1j_2j_3j_4}$ (bottom) at Tevatron Run-II for the signal
358: and the backgrounds. }}
359: \label{fig:hmass}
360: \end{figure}
361: %
362:
363: We have extended this study to the LHC \cite{atlas} with the following
364: pre-selection cuts: $E_{T}^{j} > 25$ GeV, $|\eta^{j}| < 3.0$; $E_{T}^{l} > 20$
365: GeV and $ |\eta^{l}| < 2.5 $; taggable $b$ jets require $|\eta^{b-{\rm jet}}|
366: < 2.5$, $\Delta R(j,B) \le 0.2$ with $\epsilon_b=50$\%. We assumed the same
367: mis-tagging probability as at the Tevatron \cite{Hanagaki:2005fz,
368: Bowen:2004my}. The effective cross-section ($C_{211_{4b}}$) for the Signal
369: at LHC is 390.1 fb. Keeping the Tevatron selection criteria, we find that the
370: individual signal efficiency for $\nbtag \gsim $ 2 (3) is 15.0\% (1.76\%). The
371: corresponding efficiency for $t \bar t$ is 18.6\% (1.0\%). The number of
372: surviving signal ($t \bar t$ with $\sigma_{t \bar t}$= 5$\times 10^5$ fb)
373: events with triple $b$ tag after the cumulative cuts C1-8, is $\approx$ 10
374: (3088) for $\int{\cal L} dt$=100 $fb^{-1}$; using instead the more stringent
375: cuts $6'+7'+8'$, these numbers reduce to $\approx$ 1 (687). Although these
376: cuts have not yet been optimized for the LHC, these results are not very
377: promising, either.
378:
379:
380: \section{conclusions}
381:
382: We analyzed the possibility of observing neutral Higgs bosons at the Tevatron
383: in the framework of the CP-violating MSSM. We explored the $\ell jjjj \met$
384: channel with double or triple $b$ tag, focusing on the region of parameter
385: space not excluded by LEP searches. We used the PYTHIA event generator and
386: implemented $E_T$ dependent $b$ tagging and light-flavor mis-tagging on a
387: jet-by-jet basis. We found that this signal is impossible to observe at the
388: Tevatron, since it features quite soft $b$ jets, which have poor tagging
389: efficiencies. A preliminary study for the LHC shows survival of a few signal
390: events over a much larger background. We are extending this study without
391: employing $b$ tagging \cite{mdadmmspd} and also by using other Higgs decay
392: modes.
393:
394:
395: %% BACKMATTER
396: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
397:
398: \begin{theacknowledgments}
399:
400: SPD acknowledges financial support from the Bundesministerium f\"ur Bildung
401: und Forschung (BMBF) Projekt under Contract No. 05HT6PDA.
402:
403: \end{theacknowledgments}
404:
405: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
406: %% The bibliography can be prepared using the BibTeX program or
407: %% manually.
408: %%
409: %% The code below assumes that BibTeX is used. If the bibliography is
410: %% produced without BibTeX comment out the following lines and see the
411: %% aipguide.pdf for further information.
412: %%
413: %% For your convenience a manually coded example is appended
414: %% after the \end{document}
415: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
416:
417: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
418: %% You may have to change the BibTeX style below, depending on your
419: %% setup or preferences.
420: %%
421: %%
422: %% For The AIP proceedings layouts use either
423: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
424:
425: %\bibliographystyle{aipproc} % if natbib is available
426: %\bibliographystyle{aipprocl} % if natbib is missing
427:
428: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
429: %% You probably want to use your own bibtex database here
430: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
431: %\bibliography{sample}
432:
433: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
434: %% Just a reminder that you may have to run bibtex
435: %% All of it up to \end{document} can be removed
436: %% if you don't like the warning.
437: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
438: %\IfFileExists{\jobname.bbl}{}
439: % {\typeout{}
440: % \typeout{******************************************}
441: % \typeout{** Please run "bibtex \jobname" to optain}
442: % \typeout{** the bibliography and then re-run LaTeX}
443: % \typeout{** twice to fix the references!}
444: % \typeout{******************************************}
445: % \typeout{}
446: % }
447: %
448: %\end{document}
449:
450: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
451: %% The following lines show an example how to produce a bibliography
452: %% without the help of the BibTeX program. This could be used instead
453: %% of the above.
454: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
455:
456: \begin{thebibliography}{9}
457:
458: \bibitem{CPmixing0}
459: A. Pilaftsis, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 58} (1998) 096010;
460: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 435} (1998) 88.
461: For a recent review, see E.~Accomando {\it et al.}, arXiv:hep-ph/0608079.
462:
463: \bibitem{Lee:2003nt}
464: J.S.~Lee, A.~Pilaftsis, M.~Carena, S.Y.~Choi, M.~Drees, J.R.~Ellis and
465: C.E.M.~Wagner, Comput. Phys. Commun. {\bf 156} (2004) 283
466: [arXiv:hep-ph/0307377];
467: J.S.~Lee, M.~Carena, J.~Ellis, A.~Pilaftsis and C.E.M.~Wagner,
468: arXiv:0712.2360 [hep-ph]; and references therein.
469:
470: \bibitem{Carena:2000ks}
471: M.~Carena, J.R.~Ellis, A.~Pilaftsis and C.E.M.~Wagner, Phys. Lett. B
472: {\bf 495} (2000) 155 [arXiv:hep-ph/0009212].
473:
474: \bibitem{LEP_allow}
475: S.~Schael {\it et al.} (ALEPH, DELPHI L3 and OPAL Collaborations)
476: Eur. Phys. J. C {\bf 47} (2006) 547 [arXiv:hep-ex/0602042];
477: P.~Bechtle [LEP Collaborations], PoS {\bf HEP2005}, 325 (2006)
478: [arXiv:hep-ex/0602046].
479:
480: \bibitem{Sjostrand:2006za}
481: T.~Sjostrand, S.~Mrenna and P.~Skands, JHEP {\bf 0605}, 026 (2006).
482: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0603175].
483:
484: \bibitem{Skands:2003cj}
485: P.~Skands {\it et al.}, JHEP {\bf 0407}, 036 (2004).%, [arXiv:hep-ph/0311123].
486:
487: \bibitem{Maltoni:2002qb}
488: F.~Maltoni and T.~Stelzer, JHEP {\bf 0302}, 027 (2003).
489: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0208156].
490:
491: \bibitem{Hanagaki:2005fz}
492: K.~Hanagaki [D0 Collab.], FERMILAB-CONF-05-647-E;
493: C.~Neu [CDF Collab.], FERMILAB-CONF-06-162-E;
494: T.~Wright [CDF and D0 Collabs.], arXiv:0707.1712 [hep-ex].
495:
496: \bibitem{cdfttbar}
497: D. Acosta {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 71} (2005) 052003.
498:
499: \bibitem{Bowen:2004my}
500: M.T.~Bowen, S.D.~Ellis and M.J.~Strassler, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 72}, 074016 (2005)
501: [arXiv:hep-ph/0412223] gives an approximate analytical form
502: for the tagging and mis-tagging probability at the Tevatron;
503: E. Alagoez {\it et al.}, Particle Physics with CMS for the LHC,
504: http://unizh.web.cern.ch/unizh/Activities/cms.htm.
505:
506: \bibitem{atlas}
507: The Atlas Collab., CERN-LHCC-99-15, ATLAS-TDR-15 (1999).
508:
509: \bibitem{mdadmmspd} Work in progress with M. Maity.
510:
511: \end{thebibliography}
512: %\endinput
513: %%
514: %% End of file `template-8d.tex'.
515:
516: \end{document}
517:
518: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
519:
520: