1: \documentclass{ws-ijmpa}

2: 

3: %

4: \usepackage[tableposition=top]{caption}

5: 

6: %

7: 

8: %

9: \usepackage{cite}

10: %

11: 

12: %

13: \usepackage{hyperref}

14: 

15: %

16: \usepackage{afterpage}

17: %

18: \usepackage{epsfig}

19: %

20: \usepackage{subfigure}

21: %

22: 

23: %

24: \usepackage{amssymb,amsmath}

25: %

26: \newcommand{\ttbar}     {$t\overline{t}$~}

27: \newcommand{\ppbar}     {$p\overline{p}$~}

28: \newcommand{\qqbar}     {$q\overline{q}$~}

29: \newcommand{\MET}       {\mbox{$\not\!p_T$}~}

30: \newcommand{\METns}     {\mbox{$\not\!p_T$}}

31: \newcommand{\pt}        {$p_T$~}

32: \newcommand{\ptns}        {$p_T$}

33: \newcommand{\lsim}{\mathrel{\hbox{\rlap{\lower.55ex\hbox{$\sim$}} \kern-.3em \raise.4ex \hbox{$<$}}}}

34: \newcommand{\gsim}{\mathrel{\hbox{\rlap{\lower.55ex\hbox{$\sim$}} \kern-.3em \raise.4ex \hbox{$>$}}}}

35: \newcommand{\approxle}{\stackrel{<}{\scriptstyle\sim}}

36: 

37: %

38: \newcommand{\ststbar}{\tilde{t}_{1}\bar{\tilde{t}}_{1}}

39: \newcommand{\stopone}{\tilde{t}_{1}}

40: \newcommand{\chargino}{\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}}

41: \newcommand{\charginoplus}{\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}}

42: \newcommand{\neutralino}{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}

43: 

44: %

45: \newcommand{\comphep}   {{\sc CompHEP}}

46: \newcommand{\singletop} {{\sc SingleTop}}

47: \newcommand{\pythia}    {{\sc pythia}}

48: \newcommand{\herwig}    {{\sc herwig}}

49: \newcommand{\alpgen}    {{\sc alpgen}}

50: \newcommand{\helas}     {{\sc helas}}

51: \newcommand{\madevent}  {{\sc MadEvent}}

52: \newcommand{\madgraph}  {{\sc MadGraph}}

53: \newcommand{\mcatnlo}   {{\sc MC@NLO}}

54: \newcommand{\tauola}    {{\sc TAUOLA}}

55: \newcommand{\evtgen}    {{\sc EvtGen}}

56: \newcommand{\qqgen}     {{\sc QQ}}

57: \newcommand{\geant}     {{\sc geant}}

58: \newcommand{\toprex}    {{\sc TopReX}}

59: \newcommand{\cpsuperh}  {{\sc CPsuperH}}

60: \newcommand{\vecbos}    {{\sc VECBOS}}

61: 

62: %

63: \newcommand{\mtopwa}    {172.4  $\pm$ 1.2 GeV/c$^2$~\cite{TEWWG:2008}}

64: 

65: %

66: 

67: %

68: \renewcommand\labelenumi{\bf(\roman{enumi})}

69: 

70: %

71: \usepackage{multirow}

72: 

73: %

74: \def\today{\number\day\space\ifcase\month\or January\or February\or March\or April\or May\or June\or July\or August\or September\or October\or November\or December\fi \space\number\year}

75: 

76: %

77: \makeatletter

78: %

79: \def\leaderfill{\leaders\hbox to 1em{\hss.\hss}\hfill}

80: \newcommand\@pnumwidth{2.55em}

81: \newcommand\@tocrmarg{2.55em} 

82: \newcommand\@dotsep{4.5}

83: \setcounter{tocdepth}{2} 

84: \newcommand\tableofcontents{%

85: {\global

86: \@topnum\z@ 

87: \@afterindentfalse 

88: \if@twocolumn

89: \@restonecoltrue

90: \onecolumn 

91: \else 

92: \@restonecolfalse 

93: \fi 

94: \vspace*{10pt}

95: \noindent 

96: {\bf Contents}\par 

97: \vskip1em 

98: \nobreak} 

99: {\small

100: \@starttoc{toc}%

101: }\if@restonecol

102: \twocolumn

103: \fi}

104: \newcommand*\l@section[2]{%

105: \ifnum \c@tocdepth >\z@

106: \addpenalty\@secpenalty 

107: \setlength\@tempdima{1.4em}%

108: %

109: \begingroup 

110: \parindent \z@ 

111: \rightskip

112: \@pnumwidth \parfillskip -\@pnumwidth 

113: \leavevmode 

114: \advance\leftskip\@tempdima 

115: \hskip -\leftskip 

116: #1\nobreak\leaderfill\nobreak

117: \hb@xt@\@pnumwidth{\hss #2}\par 

118: \endgroup 

119: \fi}

120: \newcommand*\l@subsection{\@dottedtocline{2}{1.4em}{2.2em}}%

121: \newcommand*\l@subsubsection{\@dottedtocline{2}{3.6em}{3em}}%

122: %

123: 

124: %

125: \newcommand*\l@appendix{\@dottedtocline{2}{0em}{6.2em}}

126: \def\numberline#1{\hb@xt@\@tempdima{#1.\hfil}}

127: \makeatother

128: %

129: 

130: \begin{document}

131: \markboth{Marc-Andr\'e Pleier}

132: {Top Quark Measurements at the Tevatron}

133: 

134: %

135: \catchline{}{}{}{}{}

136: %

137: 

138: \title{REVIEW OF PROPERTIES OF THE TOP QUARK FROM MEASUREMENTS AT THE TEVATRON}

139: 

140: \author{MARC-ANDR\'E PLEIER}

141: \address{Physikalisches Institut, Universit{\"a}t Bonn\\

142:     Nussallee 12, 53115 Bonn, Germany\\

143:   pleier@fnal.gov}

144: 

145: \maketitle

146: 

147: \begin{history}

148: %\received{\today}

149: %\revised{Day Month Year}

150: \end{history}

151: 

152: \begin{abstract}

153:   This review summarizes the program in the physics of the top quark

154:   being pursued at Fermilab's Tevatron proton-antiproton collider at a

155:   center of mass energy of 1.96 TeV. More than a decade after the

156:   discovery of the top quark at the two collider detectors CDF and D0,

157:   the Tevatron has been the only accelerator to produce top quarks and

158:   to study them directly. 

159:   %

160: 

161:   The Tevatron's increased luminosity and center of mass energy offer

162:   the possibility to scrutinize the properties of this heaviest

163:   fundamental particle through new measurements that were not feasible

164:   before, such as the first evidence for electroweak production of top

165:   quarks and the resulting direct constraints on the involved

166:   couplings. Better measurements of top quark properties provide more

167:   stringent tests of predictions from the

168:   standard model of elementary particle physics. In particular, the

169:   improvement in measurements of

170:   the mass of the top quark, with the latest uncertainty of 0.7\% marking the

171:   most precisely measured quark mass to date, further constrains the

172:   prediction of the mass of the still to be discovered Higgs boson.

173: 

174:   \keywords{Top Quark; Experimental Tests of the Standard Model;

175:   Hadron-induced High-energy Interactions}

176:  \end{abstract}

177: 

178: \ccode{PACS numbers: 14.65.Ha, 12.38.Qk, 13.85.-t, 13.85.Rm, 13.38.Be, 12.60.-i}

179: %

180: 

181: \newpage

182: 

183: %

184: \setcounter{tocdepth}{1}

185: \tableofcontents

186: %

187: 

188: \section{Introduction}

189: The existence of a third and most massive generation of fundamental

190: fermions was unveiled in 1975 with the discovery of the $\tau$ 

191: lepton at SLAC-LBL~\cite{Perl:1975bf}. In 1977, the discovery of the 

192: bottom quark \cite{Herb:1977ek} at Fermilab extended the knowledge

193: of a third generation into the quark sector and immediately raised

194: the question of the existence of the top quark as the weak

195: isospin partner of the bottom quark. 

196: 

197: To remain self consistent, the standard model (SM) of elementary

198: particle physics required the existence of the top quark, and

199: electroweak precision measurements offered increasingly precise

200: predictions of properties such as its mass. The top quark's large mass

201: prevented its discovery for almost two decades, but by 1994 it was

202: indirectly constrained to be \mbox{178 $\pm$ 11 $^{+18}_{-19}$

203: GeV/c$^2$}~\cite{EWWG:1994}. After mounting experimental evidence

204: \cite{Abachi:1994je,Abe:1994st,Abe:1994xt,Abachi:1994td,Abe:1994eh,

205: Abachi:1995ms}, the top quark ($t$) was finally discovered in 1995 at

206: Fermilab by the CDF and D0 collaborations \cite{Abe:1995hr,

207: Abachi:1995iq} in the mass range predicted by the standard model.

208: The completion of the quark sector once again demonstrated the

209: enormous predictive power of the SM.

210: 

211: By now, the mass of the top quark is measured to be \mtopwa, marking

212: the most precisely measured quark mass and the most massive

213: fundamental particle known to date. The consequent lifetime of the top

214: quark in the SM of $\approx 5\cdot 10^{-25}$~s is

215: extremely short, suggesting that it decays before hadronizing. This

216: makes it the only quark that does not form bound states, allowing the

217: study of an essentially bare quark with properties such as spin

218: undisturbed by hadronization~\cite{Bigi:1986jk}.

219: 

220: The measurement of top quark pair (\ttbar) production probes our

221: understanding of the strong interaction and predictions from

222: perturbative QCD, while the decay of top quarks and the production of

223: single top quarks reflect the electroweak interaction. Measuring other

224: properties of the top quark, such as its electric charge, the helicity

225: of the $W$ boson in $t\to Wb$ decay, the branching fraction ${\cal

226: B}(t \rightarrow Wb)$, {\it etc.}, and comparing these with

227: predictions of the SM is a very powerful tool in searching

228: for new physics beyond the standard model.

229: 

230: The top quark can also be used to constrain the mass range of the last

231: yet to be observed particle of the standard model, the Higgs boson,

232: because their masses and the mass of the $W$ boson are linked through

233: radiative corrections~\cite{EWWG:2008}. The Higgs boson is a

234: manifestation of the Higgs mechanism~\cite{Higgs:1964ia,Higgs:1964pj,

235: Higgs:1966ev,Englert:1964et,Guralnik:1964eu,Kibble:1967sv},

236: implemented in the standard model to provide the needed breaking of

237: the electroweak symmetry to which the top quark may be intimately

238: connected because of its large mass.

239: 

240: %

241: Because of its fairly recent discovery, the top quark's properties

242: have not yet been explored with the same scrutiny as those of the lighter

243: quarks. However, in the ongoing data taking at Fermilab's Tevatron

244: proton-antiproton collider, an integrated luminosity of more than

245: 4~fb$^{-1}$ has already been recorded by each of the collider experiments

246: CDF and D0, corresponding to an increase of about a factor seventy

247: relative to the data that was available for the discovery of the top quark.

248: The new data can be used to refine previous measurements to higher

249: precision that starts to become limited by systematic rather than

250: statistical uncertainties. In addition, measurements that have never

251: been performed become feasible, such as the first evidence for

252: electroweak production of single top quarks and the consequent first

253: direct measurement of the CKM matrix element $|V_{tb}|$, recently

254: published by D0 \cite{Abazov:2006gd,Abazov:2008kt} and CDF~\cite{Aaltonen:2008sy}.

255: %

256: 

257: This article is intended to provide an overview of the current status of

258: the top quark physics program pursued at the Tevatron.

259: %

260: Results available until the LHC startup in September 2008 have been

261: included, utilizing samples of data of up to 2.8~fb$^{-1}$ in

262: integrated luminosity. Previous reviews of the top quark

263: %

264: are available in Refs.\ 

265: \cite{Chakraborty:2003iw,Mangano:2004fq,Wagner:2005jh,Quadt:2006jk,Kehoe:2007px}.

266: The outline of this article is as follows: The second chapter provides

267: a brief introduction to the standard model, with emphasis on the

268: special role played by the top quark. Chapter 3 describes production

269: and decay modes for top quarks in the framework of the standard model.

270: Chapter 4 outlines the experimental setup used for the measurements

271: described in the following sections. Chapter 5 presents studies of the

272: production of top quarks, including measurements of cross section that

273: form the basis for other measurements of top quark characteristics.

274: Chapter 6 elaborates on the different results for top quark decay

275: properties, followed in Chapter~7 by a discussion of measurements of

276: fundamental attributes of the top quark, such as its charge and mass.

277: The final chapter (8) contains a brief summary of the achievements to

278: date.

279: 

280: %

281: 

282: \section{The Standard Model and the Top Quark}

283: \subsection{A brief overview of the standard model}

284: \label{sec:SMoverview}

285: The standard model of elementary particle physics describes very

286: successfully the interactions of the known fundamental spin

287: $J=\frac{1}{2}$ fermion constituents of matter through the exchange of

288: spin $J=1$ gauge bosons.%

289: \begin{table}[t]

290:   %

291:   \caption[The known fundamental fermions]{The known fundamental

292:     fermions and their masses~\cite{PDG2008,TEWWG:2008}.}

293:   \addtolength{\tabcolsep}{-2pt}

294:   \begin{center}

295:     \begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}|c|c|c|c|c|}

296:     %

297:       \hline

298: 

299:       fermion & \multirow{2}{*}{} electric & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{generation}\\

300:        \cline{3-5} type & charge [$e$]& 1. & 2. & 3.\\ \hline\hline

301: 

302:       \multirow{4}{*}{quarks}& \multirow{2}{*}{$+\frac{2}{3}$} & up

303:       ($u$) & charm ($c$) & top ($t$)\\

304:       & & 1.5 - 3.3 MeV/c$^2$ & 1.27 $^{+0.07}_{-0.11}$ GeV/c$^2$ & 172.4  $\pm$ 1.2 GeV/c$^2$ \\

305: 

306:       \cline{2-5}& \multirow{2}{*}{$-\frac{1}{3}$}& down ($d$) & strange ($s$)& bottom ($b$)\\

307:       & & 3.5 - 6.0 MeV/c$^2$ & 104 $^{+26}_{-34}$ MeV/c$^2$ & 4.20 $^{+0.17}_{-0.07}$ GeV/c$^2$ \\\hline\hline

308: 

309:       \multirow{5}{*}{leptons} &\multirow{3}{*}{0}& $\nu_{e}$ &  $\nu_{\mu}$ &  $\nu_{\tau}$ \\

310:       & & $<$ 2 eV/c$^2$ & $<$ 0.19 MeV/c$^2$ & $<$ 18.2 MeV/c$^2$ \\

311:       & & {\tiny(95\% C.L.)} & {\tiny(90\% C.L.)} & {\tiny(95\% C.L.)}\\

312: 

313:       \cline{2-5}& \multirow{2}{*}{-1}&$e$ & $\mu$ & $\tau$ \\

314:       & & 0.511 MeV/c$^2$ & 105.658 MeV/c$^2$ & 1777 MeV/c$^2$ \\\hline

315:     %

316:     \end{tabular*}

317:   \end{center}

318:   \label{fermions}

319: \end{table}

320: %

321: 

322: As shown in Table \ref{fermions}, both quarks and leptons occur in

323: pairs, differing by one unit of electric charge $e$, and are

324: replicated in three generations that have a strong hierarchy in mass.

325: The fermion masses span at least 11 orders of magnitude, with the top

326: quark being by far the heaviest fundamental particle, which may

327: therefore provide further insights into the process of mass

328: generation. The origin of this breaking of the flavor symmetry and the

329: consequent mass hierarchy is still not understood but can be

330: accommodated in the standard model as shown below.

331: 

332: The forces among the fundamental fermions are mediated by the exchange

333: of the gauge bosons of the corresponding quantized gauge fields, as

334: listed in Table \ref{bosons}. The gravitational force is not included

335: in the framework of the standard model, and will not be considered, as

336: its strength is small compared to that of the other interactions among

337: the fundamental fermions at energy scales considered in this article.

338: 

339: \begin{table}[b!]

340:   \caption[The known fundamental interactions and their

341:   properties.]{The known fundamental interactions and their

342:     properties~\cite{PDG2008}. Gravitation is shown separately as it is

343:     not included in the SM of elementary particles.}

344:   \addtolength{\tabcolsep}{-2pt}

345:   \begin{center}

346:     \begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}

347:     %

348:       \hline

349:       interaction & couples & affected & exchange &

350:       mass & charge & \multirow{2}{*}{spin} \\

351:       type & to & particles & boson & [GeV/c$^2$] & [$e$]&  \\ \hline\hline

352:       \multirow{2}{*}{strong} & color & quarks, & \multirow{2}{*}{gluon (g)} &

353:       \multirow{2}{*}{0} & \multirow{2}{*}{0} & \multirow{2}{*}{1} \\

354:       & charge & gluons & & & & \\ \hline

355:       \multirow{2}{*}{weak} & weak & quarks, $W^\pm$, & $W^+$, $W^-$ &

356:       80.4 & +1, -1 & 1 \\

357:       & charge & leptons, $Z^0$ & $Z^0$ &  91.2 & 0 & 1 \\ \hline

358:       electro- & electric & electrically & \multirow{2}{*}{photon ($\gamma$)} &

359:       \multirow{2}{*}{0} & \multirow{2}{*}{0} & \multirow{2}{*}{1} \\

360:       magnetic & charge & charged & & & & \\ \hline\hline

361:       \multirow{2}{*}{gravitation} & mass, & \multirow{2}{*}{all} & graviton &

362:       \multirow{2}{*}{0} & \multirow{2}{*}{0} & \multirow{2}{*}{2} \\

363:        & energy & & (unobserved) & & & \\ \hline

364:     %

365:     \end{tabular*}

366:   \end{center}

367:   \label{bosons}

368: \end{table}

369: %

370: 

371: The standard model is a quantum field theory based on the local gauge

372: symmetries $SU(3)_{QCD}\times SU(2)_{L}\times U(1)_{Y}$. The theory of

373: the strong interaction, coupling three different color charges

374: (``red'', ``green'' and ``blue'') carried by the quarks and the eight

375: massless gauge bosons (gluons), is called Quantum Chromodynamics

376: (QCD), and is based on the gauge group $SU(3)_{QCD}$

377: \cite{Fritzsch:1973pi,Gross:1973ju,Weinberg:1973un,

378:   Weinberg:1973av,Gross:1973id,Politzer:1973fx}. This symmetry is

379: exact, and the gluons carry both a color and an anticolor charge. At

380: increasingly short distances (or large relative momenta), the

381: interaction gets arbitrarily weak (asymptotically free), thereby

382: making a perturbative treatment viable. Via the strong interaction,

383: quarks can form bound color-singlet states called hadrons, consisting

384: of either a quark and an antiquark (mesons) or three quarks

385: respectively antiquarks (baryons). The fact that only color-neutral

386: states and no free quarks are observed is referred to as the

387: confinement of quarks in hadrons. Due to its large mass, the top quark

388: decays faster than the typical hadronization time of QCD

389: ($\Gamma_{top} \gg \Lambda_{QCD}$), and it is therefore the only quark

390: that does not form bound states. Its decay hence offers the unique

391: possibility to study the properties of essentially a bare quark.

392: 

393: The theory of electroweak interactions developed by Glashow

394: \cite{Glashow:1961tr}, Salam \cite{Salam:1964ry} and Weinberg

395: \cite{Weinberg:1967tq} is based on the $SU(2)_{L}\times U(1)_{Y}$

396: gauge group of the weak left-handed isospin~$T$ and hypercharge~$Y$.

397: Since the weak ($V-A$) interaction only couples to left-handed

398: particles, the fermion fields $\Psi$ are split up into left-handed and

399: right-handed fields $\Psi_{L,R} = \frac{1}{2}(1\mp\gamma_{5})\Psi$

400: that are arranged in weak isospin $T=\frac{1}{2}$ doublets and $T=0$

401: singlets:

402: \begin{equation*}

403: \begin{array}{ccccccc}

404: \left( \begin{array}{c} u \\ d\end{array} \right)_L&

405: \left( \begin{array}{c} c \\ s\end{array} \right)_L&

406: \left( \begin{array}{c} t \\ b\end{array} \right)_L&

407: \hspace{2cm}&

408: \begin{array}{c} u_R \\ d_R\end{array} &

409: \begin{array}{c} c_R \\ s_R\end{array} &

410: \begin{array}{c} t_R \\ b_R\end{array}\\

411: &&&&&&\\

412: \left( \begin{array}{c} \nu_e \\ e\end{array} \right)_L &

413: \left( \begin{array}{c} \nu_\mu \\ \mu\end{array} \right)_L &

414: \left( \begin{array}{c} \nu_\tau \\ \tau\end{array} \right)_L &

415: \hspace{2cm}&

416: \begin{array}{c} {\nu_e}_R \\ e_R\end{array} &

417: \begin{array}{c} {\nu_\mu}_R \\ \mu_R\end{array} &

418: \begin{array}{c} {\nu_\tau}_R \\ \tau_R\end{array} 

419: \end{array}

420: \end{equation*}

421: In the doublets, neutrinos and the up-type quarks ($u,c,t$) have the

422: weak isospin $T_3=+\frac{1}{2}$, while the charged leptons and

423: down-type quarks ($d,s,b$) carry the weak isospin $T_3=-\frac{1}{2}$.

424: The weak hypercharge Y is then defined via electric charge and weak

425: isospin to be $Y=2Q-2T_3$. Consequently, members within a doublet

426: carry the same hypercharge: $Y=-1$ for leptons and $Y=\frac{1}{3}$ for

427: quarks, as implied by the product of the two symmetry groups.

428: 

429: The $SU(2)_{L}\times U(1)_{Y}$ gauge group does not 

430: accommodate mass terms for the gauge bosons or fermions without

431: violating gauge invariance. A minimal way to incorporate these

432: observed masses is to implement spontaneous electroweak symmetry

433: breaking (EWSB) at energies around the mass scale of the $W$ and $Z$

434: boson, often referred to as the ``Higgs

435: mechanism''\cite{Higgs:1964ia,Higgs:1964pj,Higgs:1966ev,Englert:1964et,Guralnik:1964eu,Kibble:1967sv},

436: by introducing an SU(2) doublet of complex scalar fields $\Phi =

437: (\Phi^+, \Phi^0)^T$. When the neutral component obtains a non-zero

438: vacuum expectation value $v/\sqrt{2} \neq 0$, the $SU(2)_{L}\times

439: U(1)_{Y}$ symmetry is broken to $U(1)_{QED}$, giving mass to the three

440: electroweak gauge bosons $W^\pm, Z^0$ while keeping the photon

441: massless, and thereby leaving the electromagnetic symmetry $U(1)_{QED}$

442: unbroken. From the remaining degree of freedom of the scalar doublet,

443: we obtain an additional scalar particle, the Higgs boson. %

444: 

445: %

446: The Higgs mechanism also provides fermion masses through fermion

447: Yukawa couplings to the scalar field, with masses given by

448: $m_f=\lambda_f v/\sqrt{2}$, for a Yukawa coupling constant $\lambda_f$

449: for each massive fermion in the standard model. With a Yukawa coupling

450: close to unity, the top quark may play a special role in the process

451: of mass generation.

452: 

453: The mixing of flavor eigenstates in weak charged-current interactions

454: of quarks is described by the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa (CKM) matrix

455: \cite{Cabibbo:1963yz,Kobayashi:1973fv}. By convention, this is a 3 x 3

456: unitary matrix $V_{CKM}$ that operates on the negatively-charged

457: flavor states $d, s$ and $b$:

458: \begin{equation}

459:   \left( \begin{array}{c} d' \\ s' \\ b' \end{array} \right)_L

460:   =

461:   \left( \begin{array}{ccc}

462:       V_{ud} & V_{us} & V_{ub}\\

463:       V_{cd} & V_{cs} & V_{cb}\\

464:       V_{td} & V_{ts} & V_{tb}

465:     \end{array} \right)

466:   \left( \begin{array}{c} d \\ s \\ b \end{array} \right)_L

467:     \equiv

468:     \mathbf{V_{CKM}}

469:     \left( \begin{array}{c} d \\ s \\ b \end{array} \right)_L .

470: \end{equation}

471: This complex matrix can have 18 independent parameters. However, to

472: conserve the probability, this matrix has to be unitary, which means

473: that there are only nine free parameters. An additional five out of

474: the nine can be absorbed as phases in the quark wave functions. This

475: results in four independent parameters in total -- three real Euler

476: angles and one complex phase, the latter implementing CP violation in

477: the standard model. Since the CKM matrix is not diagonal, charged

478: current weak interactions can have transitions between quark

479: generations (``generation mixing'') with coupling strengths of the

480: $W^{\pm}$ boson to the physical up and down type quarks given by the

481: above matrix elements.

482: 

483: From experimental evidence

484: \cite{Davis:1968cp,Cleveland:1998nv,Fukuda:1998mi,Ahmad:2001an,

485:   Fukuda:2002pe,Ahn:2002up,Yao:2006px}, neutrinos also have mass,

486: which has led, among other things, to the introduction of an analogue

487: leptonic mixing matrix, the Pontecorvo-Maki-Nakagawa-Sakata (PMNS)

488: matrix \cite{Pontecorvo:1967fh, Maki:1962mu}. It contains four

489: independent parameters as well if one assumes that neutrinos are not

490: Majorana particles.

491: 

492: In summary, the standard model of elementary particle physics is a

493: unitary, renormalizable theory \cite{Hooft:1971fh,Hooft:1971rn}, that

494: can be used to perturbatively calculate processes at high energies. It

495: incorporates 25 parameters that have to be provided through

496: measurement:

497: \begin{itemlist}

498: \item 12 Yukawa couplings for the fermion masses

499: \item 8 parameters for the CKM and PMNS mixing matrices

500: \item 3 coupling constants $\alpha_s, g, g'$ of $SU(3)_{QCD},

501:       SU(2)_{L}$ and $U(1)_{Y}$, respectively

502: \item 2 parameters from EWSB: $v, m_{H}$.

503: \end{itemlist}

504: At currently accessible energy scales, the standard model describes

505: successfully the interactions of fundamental fermions and gauge

506: bosons, with only the Higgs boson remaining to be observed. For a more

507: detailed introduction to the standard model, the reader is referred to

508: corresponding textbooks, Refs.\ 

509: \cite{Halzen:1984mc,HoKim:1998gr,Treichel:2000nj} on elementary

510: particle physics and topical reviews such as Ref.\  \cite{Djouadi:2005gi}.

511: %

512: 

513: \subsection{The need for the top quark in the standard model}

514: \label{sec:SMneedsTop}

515: The existence of the top quark was postulated well before its discovery

516: mainly for three reasons.

517: %

518: The first argument reflects the desire to have the standard model

519: correspond to a renormalizable theory. When expressed via a

520: perturbation series -- usually depicted in Feynman diagrams with first

521: order ``tree'' diagrams and higher order ``loop'' terms -- certain

522: loop diagrams cause divergences that have to cancel exactly to ensure

523: that the theory is renormalizable. One example is the fermion triangle

524: diagram, as shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:ftriangle}.

525: %

526: \begin{figure}[t]

527:   \centering

528:   \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth,clip=]{plots/Fermiontrianglefixed.eps}

529:   \caption{A ``problematic'' fermion triangle diagram that could

530:   introduce an anomaly.}

531:   \label{fig:ftriangle}

532: \end{figure}

533: The contribution for each such diagram is proportional to

534: $c_A^fQ_f^2$, with $c_A^f$ being the weak neutral current axial

535: coupling strength, and $Q_f$ the electric charge for the respective

536: fermion in the loop. Since $c_A^f=T_3$ and neutrinos do not

537: contribute, for the total strength of the anomaly to be cancelled, an

538: equal number of lepton flavors and quark-doublets $N_{families}$, and

539: quarks in three colors ($N_c=3$) are required~\cite{Halzen:1984mc}:

540: \begin{equation}

541: \sum_{i=1}^{N_{families}}\left(-\frac{1}{2}(-1)^2

542: +\frac{1}{2}N_c\left(+\frac{2}{3}\right)^2

543: -\frac{1}{2}N_c\left(-\frac{1}{3}\right)^2\right)

544: \overset{!}{=} 0.

545: \end{equation}

546: Consequently, the discovery of the $\tau$ lepton already called for an

547: additional quark doublet to be present to keep the standard model

548: renormalizable.

549: 

550: The second argument results from the fact that transitions that change

551: the flavor but not the charge of a fermion ($u\leftrightarrow c

552: \leftrightarrow t$ or $d\leftrightarrow s\leftrightarrow b$) are

553: observed to be strongly suppressed. The absence of

554: such flavor-changing neutral currents (FCNC) for two quark

555: generations could be accommodated through the GIM mechanism

556: \cite{Glashow:1970gm} by postulating the existence of the charm quark

557: -- and thereby completion of the second quark doublet -- years before its

558: discovery. This mechanism can be applied in a similar way for three

559: quark generations, requiring a sixth quark as a partner of the $b$ quark

560: to complete the doublet.

561: 

562: The third argument comes from the experimental confirmation that the $b$

563: quark is not a weak isospin singlet but is part of an isospin doublet

564: carrying the weak isospin $T_3=-\frac{1}{2}$ and electric charge

565: $Q_b=-\frac{1}{3}e$. 

566: The electric charge of the $b$ quark was measured first at the

567: electron-positron storage ring DORIS at DESY operating at the

568: $\Upsilon$ and $\Upsilon '$ resonances through a measurement of the cross

569: section for resonant hadron production $\sigma_h$

570: \cite{Berger:1978dm,Darden:1978dk,Bienlein:1978bg}. The integral over

571: $\sigma_h$ is related to the electronic partial width $\Gamma_{ee}$,

572: the hadronic partial width $\Gamma_{h}$, the total width

573: $\Gamma_{tot}$ and the resonance mass $M_R$ via $\int \sigma_h~dM =

574: 6\pi^2 \Gamma_{ee} \Gamma_{h}/(M_R^2 \Gamma_{tot})$. Assuming that the

575: total width is dominated by the hadronic partial width

576: ($\Gamma_{h}\approx\Gamma_{tot}$), a measurement of the integrated

577: cross section and the resonance mass provides the electronic

578: partial width $\Gamma_{ee}$ of the $\Upsilon$ and of the $\Upsilon '$. In

579: the framework of non-relativistic quarkonium potential models

580: \cite{Gottfried:1977wi,Rosner:1978cj}, this partial width can then be

581: related with the bound quark's charge.

582: 

583: The weak isospin of the $b$ quark was measured via the

584: forward-backward asymmetry $A_{FB}$ in the process $e^+e^-\to

585: b\bar{b}\to\mu^\pm+$~hadrons with the JADE detector at PETRA

586: \cite{Bartel:1984rg}. The asymmetry originates from electroweak

587: interference effects and is defined as the difference between the number of

588: fermions produced in the forward direction (with polar angle $\theta <

589: 90^\circ$) and the number of fermions produced backward

590: ($\theta > 90^\circ$), divided by their sum. $A_{FB}$

591: is proportional to the ratio of the weak axial to the electric charge and

592: vanishes for a weak isospin singlet. For a $T_3=-\frac{1}{2},

593: Q=-\frac{1}{3}e$ $b$-quark, the predicted asymmetry is $-25.2\%$, in

594: good agreement with the measurement of $-22.8 \pm$ 6.0 (stat.) $\pm$

595: 2.5 (syst.)\%.

596: 

597: As a result of these measurements, the top quark's weak isospin and

598: electric charge within the standard model were assigned to be

599: $T_{3}=+\frac{1}{2}$, $Q_t=+\frac{2}{3}e$, well before its discovery.

600: The mass of the top quark, being a free parameter in the standard

601: model, could not be predicted. Nevertheless, the mass of the top quark

602: can indirectly be constrained by precision electroweak measurements.

603: 

604: \subsection{Top quark mass from precision electroweak measurements}

605: \label{sec:topmassewprecision}

606: As discussed above, the standard model comprises a set of free

607: parameters that are a priori unknown. However, once these

608: are measured, all physical observables can be expressed in terms

609: of those parameters. To make optimal use of the predictive power of

610: the theory, it is therefore crucial to measure its input parameters

611: with highest possible precision, and thereby probe

612: the self-consistency of the SM and any contributions

613: beyond its scope. Being a renormalizable theory,

614: predictions for any observable can be calculated to any order 

615: and checked with experiment.

616: 

617: %

618: Electroweak processes depend mainly on three parameters: the coupling

619: constants $g {\rm~and~} g'$ of $SU(2)_{L} {\rm~and~} U(1)_{Y}$,

620: respectively, and the Higgs vacuum expectation value $v$. Since these

621: input parameters have to be obtained from experiment, it is best to

622: substitute them with the most precisely measured quantities of the

623: electromagnetic fine structure constant $\alpha$ (using

624: electron-positron annihilations into hadrons at low center of mass

625: energies to measure hadronic vacuum polarization corrections

626: \cite{Bai:2001ct,Akhmetshin:2003zn,Aloisio:2004bu}), the Fermi

627: constant $G_F$ (from the muon lifetime

628: \cite{vanRitbergen:1999fi,Barczyk:2007hp}) and the mass of the $Z$

629: boson $m_Z$ (from electron-positron annihilations around the $Z$ pole

630: \cite{Z-Pole}).

631: 

632: With these input values, the theoretical framework can be used to

633: predict other quantities such as the $W$ boson mass. Given precision

634: measurements, the $W$ boson mass is sensitive to the mass of the top

635: quark and the mass of the Higgs boson through higher order 

636: radiative quantum corrections

637: \cite{Langacker:1989sm,Hollik:1988ii,Burgers:1989bh}.

638: 

639: The most precise electroweak measurements to date have been performed

640: at the Large Electron-Positron (LEP) Collider

641: \cite{Myers:1990sk,Brandt:2000xk} at CERN by the four experiments

642: ALEPH \cite{Decamp:1990jra,Buskulic:1994wz}, DELPHI

643: \cite{Aarnio:1990vx,Abreu:1995uz}, L3 \cite{Adeva:1989kxa,Adam:1996fj}

644: and OPAL \cite{Ahmet:1990eg,Allport:1994ec}, and at the Stanford Linear

645: Collider (SLC) \cite{:1980qx,Richter:1989eu} by the SLD experiment

646: \cite{Ash:1984rp,Abe:1997bu}. The LEP experiments have

647: analyzed $\approx$17 million $Z$ decays, and  a sample of $\approx$600

648: thousand $Z$ bosons produced with longitudinally polarized electron

649: beams was analyzed by SLD.

650: 

651: \begin{figure}[t]

652:   \centering

653:    \subfigure[]{\epsfig{figure = plots/topquarkloopfixed.eps, width = 0.65 \textwidth}}

654:    \subfigure[]{\epsfig{figure = plots/Higgsbosonloopsfixed.eps, width = 0.75 \textwidth}}

655: %

656:   \caption{(a) Radiative contributions to the $W$ and $Z$ propagators

657:    from the top quark. (b) Radiative corrections to the $W$ and $Z$

658:    propagators from the Higgs boson.}

659:   \label{fig:radcorr}

660: \end{figure}

661: 

662: Defining the electroweak mixing angle $\theta_W$ via the vector boson

663: masses:

664: \begin{equation}

665: \frac{m_W^2}{m_Z^2} = 1 - \sin^2\theta_W ,

666: \end{equation}

667: the $W$ boson mass can be expressed as~\cite{Hollik:1988ii}:

668: %

669: \begin{equation}

670: m_W^2 = \frac{\pi\alpha}{\sqrt{2}G_F}\cdot\frac{1}{\sin^2\theta_W(1-\Delta r)} ,

671: \end{equation}

672: where the radiative correction $\Delta r$ is a directly observable quantum

673: effect of electroweak theory that depends on $\alpha, m_W, m_Z,

674: m_{H}$ and $m_t$. The contributions from single-loop insertions

675: containing the top quark and the Higgs boson, as depicted in Fig.\ 

676: \ref{fig:radcorr}, are~\cite{Grunewald:1999wn}:

677: %

678: \begin{eqnarray}

679: \Delta r^{\rm top} &=& -\frac{3\sqrt{2}G_F\cot^2\theta_W}{16\pi^2}\cdot

680: m_t^2  \hspace{1.5cm}({\rm for~} m_t \gg m_b)\\ 

681: \Delta r^{\rm Higgs} &=& \frac{3\sqrt{2}G_Fm_W^2}{16\pi^2}\cdot 

682: \left(\ln\frac{m_H^2}{m_W^2}-\frac{5}{6}\right)  \hspace{.5cm}({\rm for~} m_H \gg m_W) .

683: \end{eqnarray}

684: Thus, a precise measurement of $W$ and $Z$ boson masses provides

685: access to the mass of the top quark and the Higgs boson. The top quark

686: contribution to radiative corrections is large, primarily because of

687: the large mass difference relative to its weak isospin partner, the

688: $b$ quark. While the leading top quark contribution to $\Delta r$ is

689: quadratic, it is only logarithmic in mass for the Higgs boson.

690: Consequently, the constraints that can be derived on the mass of the

691: top quark are much stronger than for the Higgs boson mass.

692: 

693: In 1994, the most stringent constraints on $m_t$ were

694: based on preliminary LEP and SLD data, combined with measurements 

695: of $m_W$ in proton-antiproton experiments, and neutral to

696: charged-current ratios obtained from neutrino experiments, yielding

697: \mbox{178 $\pm$ 11 $^{+18}_{-19}$ GeV/c$^2$} \cite{EWWG:1994}. 

698: \begin{figure}[t]

699:   \centering

700:   \subfigure[]{\label{fig:mt1994} \epsfig{figure = plots/ppe-94-187.fig6.eps, width = 0.48 \textwidth}}

701:   \subfigure[]{\label{fig:mthist} \epsfig{figure = plots/history_mt.eps, width = 0.48 \textwidth}}

702:   \caption{(a) $\chi ^2$ distributions of the standard model fit to

703:   precision electroweak data versus top quark mass for various Higgs boson

704:   masses \cite{EWWG:1994}. (b) Comparison of the indirect top quark

705:   mass measurements via radiative corrections (shaded area) with the

706:   direct measurements from the Tevatron (points) versus time

707:   \cite{Z-Pole}.}

708: \end{figure}

709: As illustrated in Fig.\ \ref{fig:mt1994}, the central value and the

710: first set of uncertainties are from a $\chi ^2$ fit of the SM to

711: precision electroweak data, assuming $m_H = 300$~GeV/c$^2$. The second

712: set of uncertainties stems from the impact of varying $m_H$ between 60

713: and 1000 GeV/c$^2$.

714: %

715: 

716: The good agreement between predicted and observed values of $m_t$,

717: shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:mthist} as a function of time~\cite{Z-Pole},

718: is one of the great successes of the SM. The latest prediction from

719: precision electroweak data yields $m_t = 179^{+12}_{-9}$ GeV/c$^2$

720: without imposing constraints on $m_H$~\cite{EWWG:2008}, and is in

721: excellent agreement with the current world average of $m_t =$ \mtopwa.

722: 

723: This success of the SM also gives greater confidence in the

724: predictions for $m_H$. Since the precision of the prediction depends

725: crucially on the accuracy of $m_W$ and $m_t$, it provides a strong

726: motivation for improving the corresponding measurements. The current

727: constraints on the mass of the Higgs boson will be discussed in

728: Section~\ref{sec:topmassaverage}.

729: 

730: More details on precision electroweak measurements can be found in

731: topical reviews such as given in

732: Refs.~\cite{Quast:1999sh,Grunewald:1999wn}.

733: 

734: \section{Production and Decay of Top Quarks}

735: %

736: The production of top quarks is only possible at highest center of

737: mass energies $\sqrt{s}$, set by the scale of $m_t$. The energies

738: needed for production of top quarks in the SM are currently (and will

739: be at least for the next decade) only accessible at hadron colliders.

740: The Tevatron proton-antiproton collider started operation at

741: $\sqrt{s}=1.8$~TeV in 1987 for a first period of data taking (``Run

742: 0'') that lasted until 1989, with the CDF experiment recording about

743: 4~pb$^{-1}$ of integrated luminosity. The next data taking period from

744: 1992 until 1996 at $\sqrt{s}=1.8$~TeV (the so-called Run~I) was

745: utilized by both the CDF and D0 experiments and facilitated the

746: discovery of the top quark. For the currently ongoing data taking that

747: started in 2001 (Run~II), the center of mass energy has increased to

748: $\sqrt{s}=1.96$~TeV. The Tevatron will lose its monopoly for top quark

749: production only with the turning-on of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC)

750: that will provide proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=14$~TeV.

751: %

752: 

753: In the framework of the standard model, top quarks can be produced in

754: pairs ($t\bar{t}$) predominantly via the strong interaction and singly

755: via the electroweak interaction.

756: 

757: \subsection{Top quark pair production}

758: \label{sec:ttbarprod}

759: While hadron colliders provide the highest center of mass energies,

760: the collision of hadrons complicates the theoretical description and

761: prediction for processes such as $t\bar{t}$ production because of the

762: composite nature of the colliding particles. These difficulties can be

763: handled through the QCD factorization theorem

764: \cite{Collins:1985gm,Collins:1987pm} that provides a way to separate

765: hadron collisions into universal long-distance (small momentum

766: transfer) phenomena and perturbatively calculable short-distance

767: phenomena. The latter processes involve therefore large square of

768: momentum transfers $Q^2$, and consequently the production of particles

769: with large transverse momenta or large mass. The two components are

770: set apart by introducing a factorization scale $\mu^2_F$ in the

771: calculation.

772: 

773: Using this approach, the proton can be described by a collection of

774: partons (quarks, antiquarks, gluons) that interact at a low energy

775: scale $\Lambda_{QCD} < 1$~GeV, whereas the elementary collisions

776: between partons of the proton (or antiproton) occur on a ``hard''

777: energy scale characterized by large transverse momenta $\geq{\cal

778: O}$(100~GeV).

779: 

780: Consequently, the partons participating in any hard process ($a,b$) can

781: be considered quasi-free, and the partonic cross section of interest

782: %

783: $\hat{\sigma}_{a+b\to X}(\hat{s}, \alpha_s(\mu^2_R), \mu^2_R)$ can be

784: calculated using perturbative QCD, independent of the type of hadrons

785: containing the partons. (The hatted variables denote parton

786: quantities.) The regularization of divergences in higher order

787: calculations (such as ultraviolet divergences from loop insertions,

788: where the infinite range of four-momentum in the loop causes

789: infinities in the integration from high momentum contributions)

790: requires the introduction of a renormalization scale $\mu^2_R$,

791: %

792: along with the corresponding running coupling constant

793: $\alpha_s(\mu^2_R)$.

794: %

795: The leading order Feynman diagrams for \ttbar production are shown in

796: Fig.~\ref{fig:ttbar-feynman}.

797: \begin{figure}[h]

798:   \centering

799:     \subfigure[]{\epsfig{figure = plots/ttbar-qqfixed.eps, width = 0.25 \textwidth}}\hspace{1cm}

800:     \subfigure[]{\epsfig{figure = plots/ttbar-ggfixed.eps, width = 0.65

801:         \textwidth}}

802:   \caption{Leading order Feynman diagrams for top quark pair

803:     production: (a) quark-antiquark annihilation and (b) gluon-gluon

804:     fusion.}

805:   \label{fig:ttbar-feynman}

806: \end{figure}

807: 

808: The partons within the incoming proton (or antiproton) cannot be

809: described by perturbative QCD, as the soft energy scale corresponding

810: to small inherent momentum transfers implies large $\alpha_s(Q^2)$

811: couplings. The distribution of the longitudinal momentum of the hadron

812: among the partons is described by Parton Distribution Functions

813: (PDFs): $f_{a/A}(x,\mu^2_F)$, corresponding to the probability to find

814: a given parton $a$ inside hadron $A$ with momentum fraction $x$ when

815: probed at an energy scale $\mu^2_F$. Collinear and soft (infrared)

816: singularities that arise in the perturbative calculation of the

817: partonic cross section discussed above are absorbed in these PDFs.

818: %

819: 

820: The factorization theorem is used to describe the $t\bar{t}$

821: production cross section via an integral over the corresponding hard

822: scattering parton cross section, folded with the parton distribution

823: functions of the incident hadrons as follows:

824: \begin{eqnarray}

825:   \sigma_{A+B\to t\bar{t}}(\sqrt{s},m_t) =

826:   \sum_{a,b=g,q,\bar{q}} \int 

827: \hat{\sigma}_{a+b\to t\bar{t}}(\hat{s},\alpha_s(\mu^2_R),\mu^2_R,\mu^2_F, m_t)\notag\\

828: \times  f_{a/A}(x_a,\mu^2_F) f_{b/B}(x_b,\mu^2_F) dx_a dx_b .

829: \end{eqnarray}

830: The hadrons $A$ and $B$ correspond to proton and antiproton in case of the 

831: Tevatron and to protons in case of the LHC.

832: 

833: The physical cross section $\sigma_{A+B\to t\bar{t}}(\sqrt{s},m_t)$

834: that would emerge from the evaluation of the full perturbation series

835: does not depend on either of the two arbitrary scales for

836: factorization and renormalization $\mu^2_F, \mu^2_R$ that had to be

837: introduced for the calculation. However, the parton distribution

838: functions and the partonic cross section do depend on these scales,

839: and hence the result of any finite order calculation will as well.

840: This dependence gets weaker with the inclusion of higher order terms

841: in the calculation. In practical application, both scales are usually

842: set to the

843: %

844: typical momentum scale $Q^2$ of the hard scattering process, such as

845: the transverse momenta of the produced particles or the mass of the

846: produced particle, so that for $t\bar{t}$ production, typically

847: $\mu_F=\mu_R=\mu=m_t$. The scale dependence of the result is then

848: usually tested by varying the central scale by a factor of two; the

849: resulting variations are interpreted as systematic uncertainties that

850: should not be mistaken as Gaussian in nature.

851: 

852: The PDFs have to be determined experimentally, for example via deeply

853: inelastic lepton scattering on nucleons, so that they can be extracted 

854: from the measured cross sections using perturbative calculations

855: of the (hard) partonic cross sections. 

856: %

857: Once the parton densities $f_{a/A}(x_a,Q^2)$ have been measured as a

858: function of momentum fraction $x_a$ at a scale $Q^2$, their value at a

859: different scale can be predicted perturbatively using the DGLAP

860: evolution equation

861: \cite{Gribov:1972ri,Altarelli:1977zs,Dokshitzer:1977sg}. Since PDFs

862: are universal and do not depend on the process they were derived from,

863: they can be used to predict cross sections in other hard scattering

864: processes.

865: %

866: For consistent application, it is important that the PDFs are derived

867: to same perturbative order and with the same renormalization scheme as

868: the calculation of any prediction.

869: %

870: \begin{figure}[t]

871:   \centering

872:   \includegraphics[width=1.\textwidth,clip=]{plots/pdf_map_vert.eps}

873:   \caption{(a) CTEQ61~\cite{Stump:2003yu} parton distribution

874:     functions with their uncertainty bands, for the $m_t$ mass scale

875:     ($Q^2=(170{\rm~GeV})^2$) for (anti-) up quarks, (anti-) down

876:     quarks and gluons in the proton. (b) Relative uncertainties on the

877:     PDFs shown in (a).}

878:   \label{fig:CTEQPDF}

879: \end{figure}

880: %

881: 

882: The PDFs are extracted from global fits to the available data, as is

883: done, for example, by the CTEQ \cite{Pumplin:2002vw}, MRST

884: \cite{Martin:2002aw}, GRV \cite{Gluck:1998xa}, Alekhin

885: \cite{Alekhin:2002fv}, H1 \cite{Adloff:2000qk} and ZEUS

886: \cite{Chekanov:2002pv} groups. Different PDFs are based on different

887: data, different orders of perturbation theory, renormalization schemes

888: and fitting techniques -- see, for example, the overview given in

889: Ref.~\cite{Thorne:2006wq}. One commonly used set of PDFs derived at

890: NLO, using the $\overline{MS}$ renormalization scheme

891: \cite{Bardeen:1978yd}, is CTEQ61~\cite{Stump:2003yu}, which

892: incorporates the Tevatron Run~I data on jet production, especially

893: important for the gluon distribution.

894: %

895: CTEQ61 also includes an error analysis based on different sets of PDFs

896: that describe the behavior of a global $\chi^2$ function for the fit

897: around its minimum. The resulting error on the PDF ($\Delta f$) can be

898: obtained by summing over the variations $f_i^\pm$ along/against each

899: PDF ``eigenvector'' for every free parameter in the global fit:

900: $\Delta f = \pm \frac{1}{2} ( \Sigma_{i=1}^{N_{par}}

901: (f_i^+-f_i^-)^2)^\frac{1}{2}$.

902: %

903: 

904: %

905: 

906: Figure \ref{fig:CTEQPDF} shows the most important parton distributions

907: within protons for \ttbar production at the Tevatron or LHC, and their

908: corresponding uncertainties. (For antiprotons, quarks and antiquarks

909: have to be interchanged in Fig.\ \ref{fig:CTEQPDF}.) All PDFs vanish

910: at large momentum fractions $x$, and the gluon density starts to

911: dominate over the valence-quark densities near $x=0.13$. There is no

912: flavor symmetry between the up and down quark distributions, neither

913: on the valence nor the sea quark level (the latter is best seen at low

914: $Q^2$). At $x$-values below 0.1, typical relative uncertainties on the

915: PDFs of valence quarks and gluons are $\approx$5\%. At larger

916: $x$-values, these uncertainties increase drastically, especially for

917: gluons.

918: 

919: To produce a top quark pair, the squared center of mass energy at the

920: parton level $\hat{s}=x_ax_bs$ must at least equal $(2m_t)^2$.

921: Assuming \mbox{$x_a\approx x_b = x$}

922: %

923: yields as threshold for \ttbar production:

924: \begin{equation}

925: \langle x\rangle = \sqrt{\frac{\hat{s}}{s}}=\frac{2m_t}{\sqrt{s}} \approx

926: \left\{\begin{array}{cl} 0.192 & @~\mbox{Tevatron Run I,

927: $\sqrt{s}=1.8$~TeV}\\ 0.176 & @~\mbox{Tevatron Run II,

928: $\sqrt{s}=1.96$~TeV}\\ 0.025& @~\mbox{LHC, $\sqrt{s}=14$~TeV}

929: \end{array} \right.

930: \end{equation}

931: Since large momentum fractions are required for \ttbar production

932: %

933: at the Tevatron, the process is dominated by quark-antiquark

934: annihilation (Fig.\ \ref{fig:ttbar-feynman} (a)) of the valence

935: quarks. For Run~I energies, quark-antiquark annihilation contributes

936: roughly 90\% of the total \ttbar production rate, and for Run~II

937: energies this fraction is $\approx$85\% \cite{Mangano:2004fq}.

938: 

939: At the LHC, gluon-gluon fusion dominates (Fig.~\ref{fig:ttbar-feynman}

940: (b)) with a contribution of about 90\% \cite{Kidonakis:2001nj},

941: because a small momentum fraction suffices for \ttbar production. This

942: means that proton-proton collisions at the LHC have production cross

943: sections comparable to $p\bar{p}$ rates, thereby obviating the need

944: for the major technical challenge of producing an intense antiproton

945: beam.

946: 

947: The increase in the center of mass energy by $\approx$10\% between

948: Run~I and Run~II at the Tevatron and the correspondingly smaller

949: minimum momentum fraction provide an increase in the \ttbar production

950: rate of 30\%. At the LHC, the rate increases by roughly a factor of

951: 100 compared to that of the Tevatron.

952: 

953: The highest-order complete perturbative calculations for heavy quark

954: pair production have been available at next-to-leading order (NLO) --

955: to order $\alpha_{s}^{3}$ -- since the late 1980s from Nason {\it et

956: al.}~\cite{Nason:1987xz} and Beenakker {\it et

957: al.}~\cite{Beenakker:1988bq,Beenakker:1990maa}. These calculations can

958: be refined by the inclusion of large logarithmic corrections

959: \cite{Sterman:1986aj, Catani:1989ne, Catani:1990rp} from soft-gluon

960: emission that are particularly important for the production of heavy

961: quarks close to the kinematic threshold ($\hat{s}\approx 4m^2,~x\to

962: 1$).

963: %

964: The contributions of these logarithms are positive at all orders when

965: evaluated at the heavy quark mass scale and their inclusion therefore

966: increases the production cross section above the NLO level.

967: 

968: The impact of soft-gluon resummation on the \ttbar production cross

969: section has been studied by Berger and Contopanagos

970: \cite{Berger:1995xz,Berger:1996ad,Berger:1997gz}, Laenen, Smith and

971: van Neerven \cite{Laenen:1991af,Laenen:1993xr} and Catani, Mangano,

972: Nason and Trentadue \cite{Catani:1996dj,Catani:1996yz} at the leading

973: logarithmic (LL) level. Studies including even higher level

974: corrections as carried out by Cacciari {\it et al.}~\cite{Cacciari:2003fi},

975: based on work by Bonciani {\it et al.}~(BCMN) \cite{Bonciani:1998vc}, and

976: Kidonakis and Vogt \cite{Kidonakis:2003qe,Kidonakis:2003vs} are

977: summarized in Table~\ref{theory-ttbar-xsecs}.

978: 

979: \begin{table}[t]

980:   \caption[\ttbar cross section predictions]{NLO cross section

981:     predictions including soft-gluon resummations beyond LL for 

982:     \ttbar production at the Tevatron and the LHC for a top quark 

983:     mass of 175 GeV/c$^2$. For the different sources of the quoted

984:     uncertainties please refer to the text.}

985:   \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}

986:   \begin{center}

987:     \begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}lllr}\hline

988:     %

989:       Hadron Collider &Processes& $\sigma_{t\bar{t}}$ [pb] & Group\\

990:       \hline\hline

991:       Tevatron Run~I &90\% $q\bar{q}\to t\bar{t}$&5.19$^{+0.52}_{-0.68}$& Cacciari {\it et al.}~\cite{Cacciari:2003fi}\\

992:       \cline{3-4}

993:       ($p\bar{p},~\sqrt{s}=1.8$~TeV) &10\% $gg\to t\bar{t}$&$5.24\pm0.31$& Kidonakis {\it et al.}~\cite{Kidonakis:2003vs}\\

994: 

995:       \hline\hline

996:       Tevatron Run~II &85\% $q\bar{q}\to t\bar{t}$&6.70$^{+0.71}_{-0.88}$& Cacciari {\it et al.}~\cite{Cacciari:2003fi}\\

997:       \cline{3-4}

998:       ($p\bar{p},~\sqrt{s}=1.96$~TeV) &15\% $gg\to t\bar{t}$&$6.77\pm0.42$& Kidonakis {\it et al.}~\cite{Kidonakis:2003vs}\\

999:       \hline\hline

1000:       LHC &10\% $q\bar{q}\to t\bar{t}$&833$^{+52}_{-39}$&Bonciani {\it et al.}~\cite{Bonciani:1998vc}\\

1001:       \cline{3-4}

1002:       ($pp,~\sqrt{s}=14$~TeV) &90\% $gg\to t\bar{t}$& 873$^{+2}_{-28}$ &Kidonakis {\it et al.}~\cite{Kidonakis:2003qe}\\

1003:       \hline\hline

1004:      %

1005:      \end{tabular*}

1006:    \end{center}

1007: \label{theory-ttbar-xsecs}

1008: \end{table}

1009: 

1010: In the case of \ttbar production at the Tevatron, the inclusion of

1011: leading and next-to-leading logarithmic (NLL) soft-gluon resummation

1012: affects the cross sections only mildly by $\mathcal{O}(5\%)$

1013: (indicating production occurs not too close to the threshold), while

1014: significantly reducing the scale dependence of the predictions by

1015: roughly a factor of two to a level of $\approx$5\%

1016: \cite{Bonciani:1998vc}. At the LHC, \ttbar production takes place even

1017: further away from the kinematic threshold, but since gluon fusion

1018: dominates there, the enhancement of the total production rate from

1019: soft-gluon resummation and the reduction of scale dependence stay at

1020: the same level as at the Tevatron.

1021: %

1022: 

1023: The results of Cacciari {\it et al.}~\cite{Cacciari:2003fi} for the Tevatron

1024: use the NLO calculation with LL and NLL resummation at all orders of

1025: perturbation theory as carried out by Bonciani {\it et al.}~(BCMN)

1026: \cite{Bonciani:1998vc}, but are based on the more recent PDF sets with

1027: error analysis CTEQ6 \cite{Pumplin:2002vw} and MRST2001E

1028: \cite{Martin:2002aw} and also MRST2001 \cite{Martin:2001es}, which

1029: includes varied $\alpha_{s}$ values in the PDF fit. The updated PDFs

1030: cause an increase in the central values of about 3\% relative to Ref.

1031: \cite{Bonciani:1998vc}. While the central values are very similar for

1032: the MRST2001E and CTEQ6 PDFs, the uncertainties for CTEQ6 are almost

1033: twice as large as for MRST2001E, unless the variations in

1034: $\alpha_{s}$ in MRST2001 are also included. For the

1035: determination of the uncertainty on the cross section, Cacciari {\it et al.}~combine 

1036: linearly the uncertainty due to scale variation by a factor of

1037: two with the PDF uncertainty evaluated at that scale. As central

1038: values, the CTEQ6M results are chosen, and the maximum lower (upper) uncertainties

1039: given stem from the CTEQ6 PDF variation 

1040: (the $\alpha_{s}$ variation in MRST2001).

1041: The PDF uncertainties and $\alpha_{s}$ variation

1042: contribute about 45\% and 80\% respectively to the total quoted

1043: uncertainty, including the scale variations, which emphasizes the

1044: importance of considering $\alpha_{s}$ uncertainties in PDF fits. The

1045: PDF uncertainties are in turn dominated by the uncertainty of the

1046: gluon PDF at large $x$ values, causing, for example, the gluon fusion

1047: contribution to the total production rate to fluctuate between 11\%

1048: and 21\% for $\sqrt{s}=1.96$~TeV. Despite the large uncertainties on

1049: the \ttbar production rate, the ratio of

1050: production cross sections for the two center of mass

1051: energies at the Tevatron is very stable and predicted with high

1052: precision: $\sigma(1.96~\mbox{TeV})/\sigma(1.8~\mbox{TeV}) = 1.295 \pm

1053: 0.015$ for top quark masses between 170 and 180~GeV/c$^{2}$~\cite{Cacciari:2003fi}.

1054: 

1055: A prediction for the \ttbar production rate at the LHC applying the

1056: same level of soft-gluon resummation is given by Bonciani {\it et al.}

1057: \cite{Bonciani:1998vc} using the MRS(R$_2$) PDF

1058: \cite{Martin:1996as}. Since no PDF uncertainties were available for

1059: Ref. \cite{Bonciani:1998vc}, the quoted uncertainty in Table~\ref{theory-ttbar-xsecs}

1060: comes from changing the  scale by factors of two alone. Since gluon

1061: fusion is the dominant contribution to the total rate,

1062: uncertainties on the gluon PDFs alone lead to an uncertainty of

1063: $\approx 10\%$ on the total production cross section

1064: \cite{Catani:2000xk}.

1065: %

1066: 

1067: The studies performed by Kidonakis and Vogt

1068: \cite{Kidonakis:2003qe,Kidonakis:2003vs} consider soft-gluon

1069: corrections up to next-to-next-to-next-to leading logarithmic (NNNLL)

1070: terms at NNLO in a truncated resummation, resulting in a reduced

1071: sensitivity of $\approx$3\% to scale variations.

1072: For the Tevatron, the \ttbar production cross section is evaluated

1073: using MRST2002 NNLO \cite {Martin:2002aw} and CTEQ6M NLO

1074: \cite{Pumplin:2002vw} parton densities. Two different parton-level

1075: conditions are considered for the scattering process: (i) one-particle

1076: inclusive (1PI) and (ii) pair-invariant mass (PIM) kinematics

1077: ~\cite{Kidonakis:2001nj}. While both sets of PDFs give very similar

1078: results, the variations from the difference in kinematics are significant.

1079: Consequently, the average of 1PI and PIM kinematics for both PDFs is

1080: used as the central value in Table~\ref{theory-ttbar-xsecs}, while the

1081: separate averages over the PDFs for 1PI and PIM are

1082: quoted as uncertainties. For the predicted LHC rate, which is dominated

1083: by gluon fusion, the 1PI kinematics is considered more

1084: appropriate, and the value in Table~\ref{theory-ttbar-xsecs} gives the

1085: corresponding result based on MRST2002 NNLO PDFs, using scale changes

1086: by factors of two for estimating the uncertainties.

1087: %

1088: 

1089: %

1090: 

1091: %

1092: 

1093: All results in Table~\ref{theory-ttbar-xsecs} are evaluated for a top

1094: quark mass of 175~GeV/c$^2$, and the Run~II values serve as

1095: the main predictions for CDF and D0. To improve comparability of 

1096: the uncertainties on the different predictions, the calculation by Kidonakis

1097: and Vogt has an additional uncertainty obtained from the maximum

1098: simultaneous changes in scale and PDFs\footnote{The PDF uncertainties

1099: in this case stem from CTEQ6 sets ``129'' and ``130'' alone.} added in

1100: quadrature with the uncertainty due to the dependence on

1101: kinematics~\cite{Kidonakis:2006}.

1102: %

1103: 

1104: In spring 2008, Cacciari {\it et al.}~\cite{Cacciari:2008zb} and Kidonakis

1105: {\it et al.}~\cite{Kidonakis:2008mu} updated their predictions using more

1106: recent PDFs such as CTEQ6.6M~\cite{Nadolsky:2008zw}, which had only

1107: little impact on the results.

1108: %

1109: In addition, Moch and Uwer~\cite{Moch:2008qy} have now performed a

1110: complete NNLL soft-gluon resummation and provide an approximation of

1111: the NNLO cross section also based on CTEQ6.6M. To illustrate the

1112: dependence of the predictions on the top quark mass,

1113: Fig.\ \ref{fig:xsecvsmass} shows the central values and uncertainties

1114: from References~\cite{Cacciari:2008zb,Kidonakis:2008mu,Moch:2008qy} for

1115: Tevatron Run~II versus $m_t$. 

1116: An exponential form, as suggested in Ref. \cite{Catani:1996dj}, is applied in a

1117: fit to the central values and uncertainties for Kidonakis {\it et al.},

1118: while third-order polynomials, as provided by the authors, are used for

1119: the other references. The total uncertainties are obtained by linearly

1120: combining the provided uncertainties.

1121: \begin{figure}[t]

1122:   \centering

1123:   \includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth,clip=]{plots/xsecvsmass_2008.eps}

1124:   \caption{Dependence of the \ttbar production cross section on $m_t$

1125:     in Run~II of the Tevatron. The current world-averaged top quark mass and

1126:     the resulting expected \ttbar production cross section are

1127:     indicated by the vertical and horizontal lines, respectively. The

1128:     predictions are based on the CTEQ6.6M

1129:     PDFs~\cite{Nadolsky:2008zw}.}

1130:   \label{fig:xsecvsmass}

1131: \end{figure}

1132: 

1133: %

1134: For the current world-averaged top quark mass of \mtopwa, the predicted

1135: \ttbar production cross section is $7.2 ^{+ 0.8}_{- 0.9}$~pb for

1136: Cacciari {\it et al.}, $7.3 ^{+ 0.8}_{- 0.9}$~pb for Kidonakis {\it et al.}, and

1137: $7.5 ^{+ 0.5}_{- 0.7}$~pb for Moch {\it et al.}. An additional uncertainty

1138: of $\pm 0.3$~pb arises from the uncertainty on the top quark mass 

1139: for all three predictions. It should be noted that these predictions

1140: based on MRST 2006 NNLO PDFs~\cite{Martin:2007bv} yield about 6\%

1141: higher central values and exhibit smaller uncertainties from PDFs.

1142: %

1143: 

1144: %

1145: 

1146: %

1147: 

1148: \begin{figure}[t]

1149:   \centering

1150:   %

1151:   \includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth,clip=]{plots/catani-xsecs.eps}

1152:   \caption{Cross sections for various processes at hadron colliders

1153:     as a function of center of mass energy \cite{Catani:2000xk}. $\sigma_{\rm top pairs}$ 

1154:     denotes the \ttbar production cross section.}

1155:   \label{fig:catani-xsecs}

1156: \end{figure}

1157: A precise measurement of the \ttbar production cross section provides a

1158: test of the predictions for physics beyond the SM.

1159: Together with a precise mass measurement, the self-consistency of the

1160: predictions can also be examined. Because \ttbar production is a major

1161: source of background for single top production (to be discussed in the next

1162: section), standard model Higgs boson production and many other phenomena

1163: beyond the SM, its accurate understanding is crucial for such studies. 

1164: 

1165: Figure~\ref{fig:catani-xsecs} illustrates the production rates of

1166: various processes versus center of mass energy for proton-antiproton

1167: collisions below $\sqrt{s}= 4$~TeV and for proton-proton collisions

1168: above $\sqrt{s}= 4$~TeV. As can be appreciated from the plot, \ttbar

1169: production is suppressed by ten orders of magnitude relative to the total

1170: interaction rate at the Tevatron and eight orders of magnitude at the

1171: LHC. While the LHC is often referred to as a ``top-factory'' because of the

1172: increased production cross section by two orders of magnitude, extraction of the

1173: signal from the large background is a 

1174: challenge at both hadron colliders, requiring efficient triggers and

1175: selection methods. The \ttbar cross section measurements performed

1176: in Run~II of the Tevatron will be described in Section~\ref{sec:ttbarxsecmeas}.

1177: 

1178: %

1179: 

1180: \subsection{Single top quark production}

1181: \label{sec:singletopprod}

1182: \begin{figure}[h]

1183:   \centering

1184:   %

1185:   \subfigure[]{\label{fig:singlet-feynman-s}\epsfig{figure = plots/STschannelfixed.eps, width = 0.25 \textwidth}}\\

1186:   %

1187:   \subfigure[]{\label{fig:singlet-feynman-t}\epsfig{figure = plots/STtchannelfixed.eps, width =

1188:       0.35 \textwidth}}\hspace{1cm}

1189:   \subfigure[]{\label{fig:singlet-feynman-tb}\epsfig{figure = plots/STtchannelbfixed.eps, width = 0.3 \textwidth}}\\

1190:   %

1191:   \hspace{1cm}\subfigure[]{\label{fig:singlet-feynman-tW}\epsfig{figure = plots/STassoc-sfixed.eps, width =

1192:       0.25 \textwidth}}\hspace{1.5cm} 

1193:   \subfigure[]{\label{fig:singlet-feynman-tW2}\epsfig{figure = plots/STassoc-tfixed.eps, width = 0.3 \textwidth}}

1194:   \caption{Representative Feynman diagrams for electroweak single top

1195:     quark production: (a) $s$-channel, (b,c) $t$-channel and (d,e)

1196:     associated production.}

1197:   \label{fig:singlet-feynman}

1198: \end{figure}

1199: In addition to the strong pair production discussed in the previous

1200: section, top quarks can also be produced singly via the electroweak

1201: interaction through a $Wtb$ vertex (see

1202: Fig.\ \ref{fig:singlet-feynman}). $Wts$ and $Wtd$ vertices are

1203: strongly CKM suppressed (see Section~\ref{sec:topCKM}). There are

1204: three different production modes, classified via the virtuality

1205: (negative of the square of the four-momentum $q$) of the participating $W$ boson

1206: $(Q^2_W = -q^2)$:

1207: %

1208: \begin{itemlist}

1209: 

1210: %

1211: \item The Drell-Yan-like {\em $s$-channel} production proceeds via

1212: quark-antiquark annihilation into a time-like virtual $W$ boson ($q^2

1213: \geq (m_t+m_b)^2 > 0$), as illustrated in

1214: Fig.\ \ref{fig:singlet-feynman-s}: $q\bar{q}'\rightarrow t\bar{b}$

1215: \cite{Cortese:1991fw,Stelzer:1995mi}.

1216: %

1217: 

1218: \item In the {\em $t$-channel} ``flavor excitation'' process, a

1219: space-like virtual $W$ boson ($q^2 < 0$) couples to a $b$ quark from the

1220: nucleon's sea to produce a top quark, as shown in

1221: Fig.\ \ref{fig:singlet-feynman-t} for $qb \rightarrow q't$. A higher

1222: order contribution of $\mathcal{O}(\alpha_s)$ comes from gluon

1223: splitting, as depicted in Fig.\ \ref{fig:singlet-feynman-tb}, which is

1224: also referred to as W-gluon fusion for $qg \rightarrow tq'\bar{b}$

1225: \cite{Dawson:1984gx,Willenbrock:1986cr,Yuan:1989tc,Ellis:1992yw}.

1226: %

1227: 

1228: \item In {\em associated production}, an on-shell $W$ boson ($q^2 =

1229: m_W^2 $) is produced together with a top quark from a $b$ quark and a

1230: gluon, as illustrated in Figs.\ \ref{fig:singlet-feynman-tW} and \ref{fig:singlet-feynman-tW2} for $gb

1231: \rightarrow tW$

1232: \cite{Ladinsky:1990ut,Moretti:1997ng,Heinson:1996zm,Belyaev:1998dn,Tait:1999cf,Belyaev:2000me}.

1233: %

1234: \end{itemlist}

1235: 

1236: In the above discussion, charge conjugate processes are implied for each

1237: production mode, and $q$ represents a light-flavor

1238: quark. All three modes differ in both their initial

1239: and final states, and the processes are simply denoted as 

1240: $s$-channel ($tb$), $t$-channel ($tq, ~tqb$) and associated ($tW$)

1241: production. The corresponding signatures can be used to discriminate

1242: between the production modes: The $s$-channel is characterized by an

1243: additional $b$ quark accompanying the top quark, the $t$-channel by a

1244: forward light quark, and associated production by the decay products of

1245: the $W$ boson in addition to those of the top quark.

1246: Due to the incoming $b$ quark and gluon, the $t$-channel and $tW$-channel

1247: rates are especially sensitive to the corresponding PDFs, which are known with

1248: less precision than the PDFs for the valence quarks of the proton. The 

1249: measured cross sections will therefore provide further constraints on the $b$

1250: quark and gluon PDFs.

1251: 

1252: The cross sections for all three modes have been evaluated at NLO,

1253: including radiative corrections of $\mathcal{O}(\alpha_s)$:

1254: s-channel~\cite{Smith:1996ij,Mrenna:1997wp,Harris:2002md},

1255: t-channel~\cite{Bordes:1994ki,Stelzer:1997ns,Harris:2002md}, and

1256: $tW$-channel~\cite{Zhu:2002uj,Zhu:2002er}. (The most recent 

1257: references provide differential distributions.)

1258: %

1259: Subsequent calculations also include top quark decay at NLO for s-channel

1260: \cite{Campbell:2004ch, Cao:2004ap, Cao:2004ky}, $t$-channel

1261: \cite{Campbell:2004ch, Cao:2004ky, Cao:2005pq}, and $tW$-channel

1262: \cite{Campbell:2005bb}, and latest NLO calculations include

1263: higher-order soft-gluon corrections up to NNNLO at NLL accuracy

1264: \cite{Kidonakis:2007wg,Kidonakis:2007ej,Kidonakis:2006bu}.

1265: 

1266: %

1267: \begin{table}[t]

1268:   \caption[single-top cross section predictions]{Cross sections

1269:     for $s$-channel ($tb$), $t$-channel ($tq$) and associated

1270:     ($tW$) single-top production at NLO (Sullivan), and NLO, including

1271:     soft-gluon resummations (Kidonakis), expected at the Tevatron and at the LHC,

1272:     for a top quark mass of 175 GeV/c$^2$. (For sources

1273:     of the quoted uncertainties see the text.)}

1274:   \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}

1275:   \addtolength{\tabcolsep}{-4pt}

1276:   \begin{center}

1277:     \begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}lllllr}\hline

1278:     %

1279:       Hadron Collider &$t/\bar{t}$&$\sigma_{tb}$ [pb]& $\sigma_{tq}$ [pb] & $\sigma_{tW}$ [pb] & Group\\

1280:       \hline\hline

1281:       Tevatron Run~I & \multirow{2}{*}{$t,\bar{t}$}& \multirow{2}{*}{$0.75^{+0.10}_{-0.09}$}&\multirow{2}{*}{$1.46^{+0.20}_{-0.16}$}&\multirow{2}{*}{~~~---}&\multirow{2}{*}{Sullivan~\cite{Sullivan:2004ie}}\\

1282:       ($p\bar{p},~\sqrt{s}=1.8$~TeV) &&&&\\

1283:       \hline\hline

1284:       Tevatron Run~II &\multirow{2}{*}{$t,\bar{t}$}&$0.88^{+0.12}_{-0.11}$&$1.98^{+0.28}_{-0.22}$&~~~---&Sullivan~\cite{Sullivan:2004ie}\\

1285:       \cline{3-6}

1286:       ($p\bar{p},~\sqrt{s}=1.96$~TeV) &&$0.98\pm 0.04$&$2.16\pm 0.12$&$0.26\pm 0.06$&Kidonakis~\cite{Kidonakis:2007wg}\\

1287:       \hline\hline

1288:       &$t$&$6.56^{+0.69}_{-0.63}$&$155.9^{+7.5}_{-7.7}$&~~~---&\multirow{2}{*}{Sullivan~\cite{Sullivan:2004ie}}\\

1289:       LHC &$\bar{t}$&$4.09^{+0.43}_{-0.39}$&$90.7^{+4.3}_{-4.5}$&~~~---&\\

1290:       \cline{3-6}

1291:       ($pp,~\sqrt{s}=14$~TeV) &$t$&$7.2^{+0.6}_{-0.5}$&$146\pm 5$&$41\pm 4$&\multirow{2}{*}{Kidonakis~\cite{Kidonakis:2007wg}}\\

1292:       &$\bar{t}$&$4.0\pm 0.2$&$89\pm 4$&$41\pm 4$&\\

1293:       \hline\hline

1294:      %

1295:      \end{tabular*}

1296:    \end{center}

1297: \label{theory-singlet-xsecs}

1298: \end{table}

1299: 

1300: Table~\ref{theory-singlet-xsecs} summarizes the expected single-top

1301: production cross sections at the Tevatron and the LHC for the NLO

1302: calculations by Sullivan~\cite{Sullivan:2004ie} (based on the work of

1303: Harris {\it et al.}~in~\cite{Harris:2002md}) and NLO results including

1304: soft-gluon resummations by Kidonakis~\cite{Kidonakis:2007wg} (based on

1305: his work in Refs. \cite{Kidonakis:2007ej,Kidonakis:2006bu} and matching to

1306: the exact NLO results of Harris {\it et al.}~\cite{Harris:2002md} and

1307: Zhu~\cite{Zhu:2002uj,Zhu:2002er}). Both results use current PDFs and

1308: include corresponding uncertainties. 

1309: 

1310: While top and antitop production are identical at the Tevatron for all

1311: production modes, at the LHC this is only the case for associated

1312: production. Consequently, the results given for the Tevatron include

1313: both top and antitop production but are given separately for the LHC.

1314: 

1315: %

1316: The NLO results of Sullivan are based on CTEQ5M1

1317: PDFs~\cite{Lai:1999wy} for their central values. The uncertainties

1318: for PDFs are derived from CTEQ6M~\cite{Pumplin:2002vw}, and added in

1319: quadrature with uncertainties from changes in scale by the usual factors of

1320: two, changes in top quark mass by 4.3 GeV/c$^2$ (using an older

1321: world-averaged $m_t = 178 \pm 4.3$~GeV/c$^2$~\cite{Azzi:2004rc}), and

1322: uncertainties in $b$ quark mass and $\alpha_s$, the latter two being

1323: negligible. The rate dependence on the top

1324: quark mass is approximated as linear and is especially important

1325: for the $s$-channel, since a change from 175~GeV/c$^2$ to the current

1326: world-averaged

1327: %

1328: $m_t = 172.4$~GeV/c$^2$ raises the rates at the Tevatron by

1329: 7\% for the $s$-channel and 5\% for the $t$-channel. The observed 

1330: uncertainties in scale are reduced relative to LO results, and amount to 4-6\% at the

1331: Tevatron and 2-3\% at the LHC.

1332: 

1333: The NLO calculations of Kidonakis that include higher order soft-gluon

1334: corrections provide single-top production cross sections based on

1335: MRST2004 NNLO PDFs \cite{Martin:2004ir}. The quoted values are

1336: obtained by matching the NLO cross section to the results of Harris

1337: {\it et al.}~\cite{Harris:2002md} and Zhu~\cite{Zhu:2002uj,Zhu:2002er}, and

1338: including the additional soft-gluon corrections up to NNNLO.

1339: Exceptions are the $tW$ rate at the Tevatron, where no corresponding

1340: NLO result is available, and the given value is therefore not matched, and

1341: the $t$-channel rate at the LHC, where no soft-gluon corrections are

1342: considered and an updated NLO result with the quoted PDFs is given

1343: instead. The uncertainties given are derived from varying the scale by

1344: a factor of two, and adding in quadrature PDF uncertainties derived

1345: using the MRST2001E NLO PDFs~\cite{Martin:2002aw}. No uncertainty in $m_t$

1346: is included. At the Tevatron, the $t$-channel uncertainty is dominated

1347: by the uncertainty in PDFs, and corrections from soft-gluon resummations

1348: relative to LO are small ($\approx$5\%). In contrast, the soft-gluon

1349: corrections have a large effect ($>$60\%) for the $s$-channel at the

1350: Tevatron and scale uncertainties dominate over those from PDFs.

1351: 

1352: %

1353: At the Tevatron, $t$-channel production dominates the total rate of

1354: single top quark production with a contribution of $\approx$65\%, followed

1355: by $s$-channel production at $\approx$30\%. Associated ($tW$)

1356: production at the Tevatron contributes only $\approx$5\% to the total

1357: rate, and is usually neglected.

1358: %

1359: At the LHC, $t$-channel production again dominates at $\approx$74\%,

1360: followed now by associated production at $\approx$23\%, while $s$-channel

1361: production contributes only $\approx$3\% because of the missing contribution from

1362: valence antiquarks in the collisions, which will make it difficult to

1363: discriminate this channel from background.

1364: %

1365: Despite being an electroweak process, single top production has a

1366: cross section of the same order of magnitude as \ttbar production

1367: (of $\mathcal{O}(40\%)$ of the \ttbar rate at both the Tevatron and

1368: the LHC). With only one heavy top quark to be produced, single top production is accessible at

1369: smaller and therefore better-populated momentum fractions of the partons.

1370: Furthermore, no color matching is required for the production.

1371: %

1372: The fact that the observed yields of single-top and $t\bar{t}$-pairs

1373: are consistent with theory is a major triumph of the SM.

1374: 

1375: The measurement of single top production offers a check of the top

1376: quark's weak interaction, and direct access to the CKM matrix

1377: element $|V_{tb}|$, as the cross sections in all three production

1378: modes are proportional to $|V_{tb}|^2$. The polarization of the top

1379: quark at production is preserved due to its short lifetime and 

1380: provides a test of the $V-A$ structure of the weak interaction via angular

1381: correlations among the decay products~\cite{Carlson:1993dt,

1382: Mahlon:1996pn,Stelzer:1998ni,Mahlon:1999gz}. All three production

1383: modes provide different sensitivity to various aspects of physics beyond the

1384: standard model (BSM)~\cite{Tait:2000sh}, which makes their independent

1385: reconstruction a desirable goal. The $s$-channel is sensitive to the existence

1386: of new charged bosons (such as $W'$ or charged Higgs) that couple to

1387: the top-bottom weak-isospin doublet, an effect that could be detectable through

1388: an enhancement of the observed cross section. Such effects would not

1389: be observed in the $tW$ mode, where the $W$ boson is on-shell, or in the

1390: t-channel, where the virtual $W$ boson is space-like and cannot go

1391: on-shell as in the $s$-channel. The $t$-channel production rate could be

1392: enhanced via FCNC processes involving new couplings between the

1393: up-type quarks and a boson (Higgs, gluon, photon, $Z$). This would be

1394: hard to observe in the $s$-channel, since there is no 

1395: $b$ quark in the final state, which is essential for discrimination of the signal

1396: in that production mode.

1397: %

1398: Finally, the $tW$ channel is the only mode that provides a more direct test of

1399: the $Wtb$ vertex since the $W$ boson appears in the final state.

1400: %

1401: 

1402: A thorough understanding of single top quark production will also

1403: facilitate the study of processes exhibiting a similar signature such as 

1404: SM $W$-Higgs production or BSM signals to which single top

1405: production is a background process.

1406: %

1407: Despite a production rate similar to that of $t\overline{t}$, the

1408: signature for single top quark production is much harder to separate

1409: from background, which has delayed first measurements until

1410: very recently. The current analyses at the Tevatron provide first

1411: evidence for production of single top quarks, and this will be described

1412: in Section~\ref{sec:ST}.

1413: 

1414: \subsection{Top quark decay}

1415: \subsubsection{Top quark CKM matrix elements}

1416: \label{sec:topCKM}

1417: Since the mass of the top quark is larger than that of the $W$ boson,

1418: decays $t\to Wq$, with $q$ being one of the down-type quarks $d, s, b$, 

1419: are dominant. The contribution of each

1420: quark flavor to the total decay width is proportional to the square

1421: of the respective CKM matrix element $V_{tq}$. Utilizing the

1422: unitarity of the CKM matrix and assuming three quark generations, the

1423: corresponding matrix elements can be constrained indirectly at 90\%

1424: confidence level to~\cite{Eidelman:2004wy}:

1425: \begin{eqnarray}

1426: |V_{td}|~ =& 0.0048 &- ~~0.014 \\

1427: |V_{ts}|~ =& 0.037  &- ~~0.043  \\

1428: |V_{tb}|~ =& 0.9990 &- ~~0.9992 . 

1429: \end{eqnarray}

1430: Consequently, the decay $t\to Wb$ is absolutely dominant and will be

1431: considered exclusively throughout this article, unless noted to the contrary.

1432: Potential deviations from the SM decay will be

1433: discussed in Section~\ref{sec:BSMdecay}.

1434: 

1435: It should be noted that the above constraints on the CKM

1436: matrix elements would change dramatically (especially $V_{tb}$)

1437: if there were more than three quark generations. Assuming the

1438: unitarity of the expanded matrix, the limits become \cite{Eidelman:2004wy}:

1439: \begin{eqnarray}

1440: |V_{td}|~ =& 0    &- ~~0.08      \\

1441: |V_{ts}|~ =& 0    &- ~~0.11      \\

1442: |V_{tb}|~ =& 0.07 &- ~~0.9993 .

1443: \end{eqnarray}

1444: It is therefore important to constrain these matrix elements through

1445: direct measurements, as outlined below.

1446: 

1447: The $V_{td}$ and $V_{ts}$ matrix elements cannot be extracted from lowest-order

1448: (tree level) top decays in the framework of the standard model, but can

1449: be inferred from B-meson mixing, as shown in

1450: Fig.\ \ref{fig:bmesonmixing}. While all up-type quarks can contribute

1451: in the depicted box diagrams, the contribution from the top quark is

1452: %

1453: dominant~\cite{Buras:1984pq}. The oscillation frequency given by the

1454: mass difference between heavy and light mass eigenstates, 

1455: $\Delta m_d$ for $B^0_d-\overline{B^0_d}$ and $\Delta m_s$ for

1456: $B^0_s-\overline{B^0_s}$ oscillations, is proportional to the

1457: combination of CKM matrix elements $|V_{tb}^*V_{td}|^2$ and

1458: $|V_{tb}^*V_{ts}|^2$, respectively.

1459: \begin{figure}[t]

1460:   \centering

1461:   \includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth,clip=]{plots/bmesonmixfixed.eps}

1462:   \caption{Feynman ``box'' diagrams for $B^0_d-\overline{B^0_d}$ and $B^0_s-\overline{B^0_s}$ mixing.}

1463:   \label{fig:bmesonmixing}

1464: \end{figure}

1465: The mass difference for the $B^0_d-\overline{B^0_d}$ system is

1466: $\Delta m_d = 0.507\pm 0.004 {\rm~ps}^{-1}$~\cite{Barberio:2006bi}. 

1467: Using CKM unitarity and assuming

1468: three generations, yielding $|V_{tb}| \approx 1$, translates

1469: into $V_{td} = (7.4\pm 0.8)\cdot 10^{-3}$~\cite{Okamoto:2005zg},

1470: %

1471: where the uncertainty arises primarily from the theoretical

1472: uncertainty on the hadronic matrix element, which is obtained from

1473: lattice QCD calculations. To reduce these theoretical

1474: uncertainties, a measurement of the ratio, in which some

1475: uncertainties cancel, is more desirable ($\Delta m_d/\Delta m_s \propto

1476: |V_{td}|^2/|V_{ts}|^2$). With the recent first measurement of $\Delta m_s$

1477: in $B^0_s$-oscillations by D0 and CDF at the

1478: Tevatron~\cite{Abazov:2006dm,Abulencia:2006mq}, yielding 17~ps$^{-1} <

1479: \Delta m_s < 21$~ps$^{-1}$ at 90\% C.L.\ and $\Delta m_s =

1480: (17.31^{+0.33}_{-0.18} {\rm (stat.)} \pm 0.07 {\rm (syst.))\ ps}^{-1}$,

1481: this ratio has now been measured for the first time as $|V_{td}/V_{ts}| =

1482: 0.208^{+0.001}_{-0.002} {\rm (expt.)} ^{+0.008}_{-0.006} {\rm

1483: (theor.)}$. These results are in good agreement with SM

1484: expectations.

1485: %

1486: 

1487: The direct measurement of the $V_{tb}$ matrix element without assuming

1488: three quark generations and unitarity of the CKM matrix is only

1489: possible via single top quark production (described in

1490: Section~\ref{sec:singletopprod}), because the production rate in each

1491: channel is proportional to $|V_{tb}|^2$.

1492: %

1493: One way to assess the {\em relative} size of $|V_{tb}|$ compared

1494: to $|V_{td}|$ and $|V_{ts}|$ is to measure the ratio $R$ 

1495: of the top quark branching fractions, which 

1496: can be expressed via CKM matrix elements as 

1497: \begin{eqnarray}

1498: R = \frac{{ \cal B}(t \rightarrow Wb)}{{ \cal B}(t \rightarrow Wq)} & = &

1499: \frac{\mid V_{tb}\mid^2}{\mid V_{tb}\mid^2 + \mid V_{ts}\mid^2 + \mid V_{td}\mid^2}  \;.

1500: \end{eqnarray}

1501: Assuming three generation unitarity, the denominator in the above expression

1502: equals one, and constraints on $|V_{tb}|$ can be inferred. The current status

1503: of these measurements is discussed in Section~\ref{sec:Rmeasurement}.

1504: 

1505: The most precise extraction of the top quark CKM matrix elements 

1506: proceeds via global fits to all available

1507: measurements, imposing the SM constraints of three

1508: generation unitarity, as done by the CKMfitter~\cite{Charles:2004jd}

1509: or UTfit~\cite{Bona:2006ah} groups.

1510: %

1511: The CKMfitter update for summer 2008 yields~\cite{Charles:2004jd}:

1512: \begin{eqnarray}

1513: |V_{td}|~ &=& 0.00853 ^{+0.00034} _{-0.00027}     \\

1514: |V_{ts}|~ &=& 0.04043 ^{+0.00038} _{-0.00116}     \\

1515: |V_{tb}|~ &=& 0.999146 ^{+0.000047} _{-0.000016} .

1516: \end{eqnarray}

1517: 

1518: \subsubsection{Decay width of the top quark}

1519: \label{sec:tdecaywidth}

1520: The decay width of the top quark in the SM, including first-order QCD

1521: corrections, can be expressed as

1522: follows~\cite{Jezabek:1988iv,Kuhn:1996ug}:

1523: \begin{equation}

1524: \Gamma_t = \lvert V_{tb} \rvert^2~{G_F~m_t^3\over 8\pi \sqrt{2}} 

1525: \left(1-{m_W^2\over m_t^2}\right)^2

1526: \left(1+2{m_W^2\over m_t^2}\right)

1527: \left[ 1 - \frac{2\alpha _s}{3\pi}  \left({2\pi^2\over3}-{5\over2} \right) \right],

1528: \label{eq:topdecaywidth}

1529: \end{equation}

1530: %

1531: where the above formula assumes $m_b^2/m_t^2\to 0$, $m_t^2 \gg m_W^2$ and

1532: ignores corrections of $\mathcal{O}({\alpha_s~m_W^2\over\pi~m_t^2})$

1533: and $\mathcal{O}(\alpha_s^2)$. While the above QCD corrections lower the

1534: width by $\approx$10\%, first-order electroweak corrections increase

1535: the width by 1.7\%~\cite{Denner:1990ns,Eilam:1991iz}. However, the

1536: electroweak correction is almost cancelled when the

1537: finite width of the $W$ boson is taken into account, thereby decreasing

1538: the width again by 1.5\%~\cite{Jezabek:1993wk,Jezabek:1994}.

1539: Corrections to the top quark width of $\mathcal{O}(\alpha_s^2)$ have

1540: also been evaluated~\cite{Czarnecki:1998qc, Chetyrkin:1999ju} and

1541: reduce the width by 2\%. Including all these effects, the

1542: decay width is predicted to a

1543: precision of $\approx$1\%. The other SM decays, $t\to Wd$ and

1544: $t\to Ws$, contribute negligibly to the total decay width

1545: $\Gamma_t = \Sigma_q \Gamma_{tq}$ because of proportionality to $|V_{td}|^2$ and

1546: $|V_{ts}|^2$.

1547: 

1548: %

1549: 

1550: %

1551: 

1552: Equation~\ref{eq:topdecaywidth} yields the top width to better than 2\% 

1553: accuracy, and the width increases with $m_t$.

1554: For $\alpha_s(m_Z)=0.1176$ and $G_F=1.16637\cdot 10^{-5} {({\rm

1555: GeV/c}^2)}^{-2}$~\cite{Yao:2006px}, $\Gamma_t$ is

1556: 1.02/1.26/1.54~GeV for top quark masses of

1557: 160/170/180~GeV/c$^2$.

1558: 

1559: %

1560: 

1561: The resulting lifetime of the top quark $\tau_t =\hbar\, \Gamma_t^{-1}

1562: \approx  \hbar\,(1.3{\rm~GeV})^{-1}$ is approximately \mbox{$5\cdot

1563: 10^{-25}$~s}, and significantly shorter than the

1564: %

1565: hadronization time $\tau_{\rm had} \approx \hbar\,\Lambda_{\rm QCD}^{-1} 

1566: \approx \hbar\,(0.2~{\rm

1567: GeV})^{-1} \approx$ \mbox{$ 3\cdot 10^{-24}$~s}. As a consequence, the

1568: top quark decays before it can form hadrons, and in particular there

1569: can be no \ttbar bound states (toponium), as was already pointed out

1570: in the 1980s~\cite{Kuhn:1980gw,Kuhn:1982ua,Bigi:1986jk}.

1571: Nevertheless, although the top quark can generally be considered as

1572: a free quark, residual non-perturbative effects

1573: associated with hadronization should still be present in top quark

1574: events, and the fragmentation and hadronization processes will be

1575: influenced by the color structure of the hard interaction. 

1576: 

1577: In electron-positron annihilation, top quark pairs are produced in 

1578: color singlet states, so that hadronization before

1579: decay depends mainly on the mass of the top quark and collision energy. In

1580: hadronic \ttbar production, $t$ and $\bar{t}$ are usually produced in

1581: color octet states and form color singlets with the proton and

1582: antiproton remnants. The energy in the color field (or in

1583: the string when using the picture of string fragmentation) is

1584: proportional to the distance between top quark and the remnant. If a

1585: characteristic length of about 1~fm is reached before the top quark

1586: decays, light hadrons can materialize out of the string's energy. The

1587: possibility for such string fragmentation depends

1588: strongly on the center of mass energy in the hadron collisions. For

1589: Tevatron energies, this can be neglected~\cite{Orr:1990nh}, while it may

1590: be more important at LHC energies, where top quarks are produced with

1591: sizeable Lorentz boosts. Since heavy quarks have hard fragmentation

1592: functions and the fractional energy loss of the top quarks is therefore

1593: expected to be small, it will be difficult to experimentally establish

1594: these effects directly, even at the LHC. In case no string

1595: fragmentation takes place before the top quark decays, long-distance QCD

1596: effects will still connect the decay products of the top quark.

1597: %

1598: 

1599: With top quark mass measurements aiming at uncertainties of $\leq 1$

1600: GeV/c$^2$, it becomes more and more important to assess the

1601: impact of such non-perturbative effects on the measurements. One

1602: example that may play an important role in this context is the

1603: possibility of color reconnections before hadronization, and the

1604: corresponding modeling of the underlying event (beam-remnant

1605: interactions)~\cite{Skands:2007zg,Wicke:2008iz}.

1606: %

1607: 

1608: \subsubsection{Helicity of the $W$ boson}

1609: \label{sec:Wheltheory}

1610: Top quark decay in the framework of the standard model proceeds

1611: via the left-handed charged current weak interaction, exhibiting a

1612: %

1613: vector minus axial vector ($V-A$) structure. This is reflected in the

1614: observed helicity states of the $W$ boson, which can be exploited to

1615: examine the couplings at the $Wtb$ vertex

1616: \cite{Kane:1991bg,Dalitz:1991wa,Nelson:1997xd}.

1617: %

1618: 

1619: The emitted $b$ quark can be regarded as massless compared to the top

1620: quark, and hence expected to be predominantly of negative helicity (left-handed), meaning

1621: that its spin points opposite to its line of flight.

1622: %

1623: The emitted $W$ boson, being a massive spin-1 particle, can assume any of

1624: three helicities: one longitudinal ($W_0$) and two transverse states

1625: ($W_-$, left-handed and $W_+$, right-handed). To

1626: conserve angular momentum in the $t\to Wb$ decay, the spin projection of the $W$

1627: boson onto its momentum must vanish if the $b$ quark's spin points

1628: along the spin of the top quark, while a left-handed $W$ boson is

1629: needed if the $b$ quark's spin points opposite to the spin of the top

1630: quark. In the limit of a massless $b$ quark, a right-handed $W$ boson

1631: cannot contribute to the decay, as illustrated in

1632: Fig.\ \ref{fig:Whelsketch}. For the decay of an antitop quark,

1633: a left-handed $W$ boson is forbidden.

1634: \begin{figure}[t]

1635:   \centering

1636:   \includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth,clip=]{plots/angular_momentum_upd.eps}

1637:   \caption{Angular momentum conservation in top quark decay does not

1638:   allow right-handed $W$ bosons when $b$ quarks are assumed massless.}

1639:   \label{fig:Whelsketch}

1640: \end{figure}

1641: 

1642: At lowest ``Born''-level, the expected fractions of decays with different $W$

1643: boson helicities, taking the finite $b$ quark mass into account, are

1644: given by \cite{Fischer:2000kx}:

1645: %

1646: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:WHel-Born}

1647:   f_0 &=& \Gamma_0/\Gamma_t=\frac{(1-y^2)^2-x^2(1+y^2)}

1648:   {(1-y^2)^2+x^2(1-2x^2+y^2)}\approx\frac1{1+2x^2}\\ 

1649:   f_- &=& \Gamma_-/\Gamma_t=\frac{x^2(1-x^2+y^2+\sqrt\lambda)}

1650:   {(1-y^2)^2+x^2(1-2x^2+y^2)}\approx\frac{2x^2}{1+2x^2}\\

1651:   f_+ &=& \Gamma_+/\Gamma_t=\frac{x^2(1-x^2+y^2-\sqrt\lambda)}

1652:   {(1-y^2)^2+x^2(1-2x^2+y^2)} \approx y^2\frac{2x^2}{(1-x^2)^2(1+2x^2)}

1653: \end{eqnarray}

1654: %

1655: where the scaled masses $x=m_W/m_t$, $y=m_b/m_t$ and the

1656: ``K\"all\'en''-type function $\lambda=1+x^4+y^4-2x^2y^2-2x^2-2y^2$ were

1657: used. Inserting $m_t=175$~GeV/c$^2$, $m_W=80.419$~GeV/c$^2$, and a

1658: pole mass of $m_b=4.8$~GeV/c$^2$, the partial helicity rates are found

1659: to be \cite{Fischer:2000kx}:

1660: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:WHel-SMvalues}

1661:  f_0 = 0.703,\,\, f_- = 0.297,\,\, f_+ = 0.00036.

1662: \end{eqnarray}

1663: $m_b\ne0$ results in a reduction of $f_0$ and $f_-$ at the

1664: per mill level. Including one-loop QCD corrections

1665: \cite{Fischer:2000kx}, electroweak one-loop corrections and finite

1666: width corrections \cite{Do:2002ky} leads basically to a cancellation

1667: of the last two corrections, as was already mentioned in

1668: Section~\ref{sec:tdecaywidth}, and a change in partial helicity rates

1669: $f_0$ and $f_-$ at the 1-2\% level. The right-handed

1670: helicity fraction $f_+$ remains at the per mill level with these

1671: corrections included. Consequently, any observation of $f_+$ at the

1672: percent level would signal the presence of physics beyond the standard model.

1673: 

1674: Using a more general extension to the standard model

1675: $Wtb$ interaction Lagrangian, assuming that both the $W$ boson and $b$ quark are

1676: on-shell, leads to \cite{Kane:1991bg}:

1677: %

1678: \begin{eqnarray}

1679: \mathcal{L}\!=\! \frac{g}{\sqrt 2}\left[ W^-_\mu \bar b

1680: \gamma^\mu \left( f_1^L P_L \!+\! f_1^R P_R \right) t \!-\! \frac{1}{m_W}

1681: \partial_\nu W^-_\mu \bar b \sigma^{\mu\nu} \left( f_2^L P_L \!+\! f_2^R

1682: P_R \right) t \right]\!+\! h.c.

1683: \label{Wtbvertex} 

1684: \end{eqnarray}

1685: %

1686: where $P_{R(L)}$ are the right- and left-handed chiral projectors

1687: $P_{R(L)} = \frac{1}{2} (1\pm \gamma^5)$ and $i\sigma^{\mu\nu} =

1688: -\frac{1}{2}[\gamma^\mu,\gamma^\nu]$.

1689: %

1690: This model-independent extension has four form factors

1691: $f_{1/2}^{R/L}$, and includes the standard model as a special case,

1692: with $f_1^L=1$ (left-handed vector coupling) and the other form

1693: factors (right-handed vector, and left- and right-handed

1694: tensor couplings) vanishing. These four general couplings for the $Wtb$

1695: vertex can be determined by measuring four

1696: observables sensitive to this interaction: the $W$ helicity fractions

1697: $f_0$ and $f_+$ in \ttbar events, and the single-top production cross sections in the $s$-

1698: and $t$-channel. This model-independent determination of the parameters of the

1699: $Wtb$ vertex can in turn be used to distinguish between

1700: different models proposed for EWSB \cite{Chen:2005vr}.

1701: 

1702: %

1703: \section{Experimental Setup}

1704: This section describes the experimental ingredients that are needed

1705: to study top quarks. Since this review focusses mainly on results

1706: obtained at Run~II of the Tevatron, only the corresponding accelerator

1707: and detector setups are discussed. The experimental setup for Run~I 

1708: can be found, for example, in Ref.~\cite{Bhat:1998cd}.

1709: 

1710: The Tevatron collider is discussed in the first part of this chapter,

1711: followed by a description of the two general-purpose detectors CDF and

1712: D0 surrounding the two interaction points where protons and

1713: antiprotons are brought to collision. Subsequently, the

1714: reconstruction and identification of particles produced in the

1715: collisions are briefly reviewed before the resulting experimental

1716: signatures of top quark events are described. Finally, the Monte Carlo

1717: (MC) simulation tools needed to model interactions in the detectors are

1718: considered.

1719: 

1720: \subsection{The Tevatron collider}

1721: \label{sec:Tevatron}

1722: The Tevatron collider is part of the Fermi National Accelerator

1723: Laboratory (Fermilab, FNAL) in Batavia, Illinois, close to Chicago.

1724: Until the Large Hadron Collider at CERN starts operation, the Tevatron

1725: remains the particle accelerator with the highest center of mass

1726: energy worldwide. Here, 36 bunches of protons and antiprotons with a spacing

1727: of 396~ns are brought to collision at $\sqrt{s}= 1.96$~TeV at

1728: the two interaction points where the multi-purpose detectors CDF and

1729: D0 reside. As illustrated in Fig.\ \ref{fig:Tevatron}, the Tevatron

1730: is the final stage in a chain of eight pre-accelerators and

1731: storage rings~\cite{McGinnis:2005nu,Tan:2005dw,Moore:2007zza,

1732: wwwbeamsdivision}.

1733: \begin{figure}[t]

1734:   \centering

1735:   \includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth,clip=]{plots/tev_RunII_accel.eps}  

1736:   \caption{The Fermilab Run~II accelerator complex consisting of the Tevatron

1737:   $p\bar{p}$ collider and its pre-accelerators~\cite{McGinnis:2005nu,

1738:   wwwbeamsdivision}.}

1739:   \label{fig:Tevatron}

1740: \end{figure}

1741: 

1742: Beam protons are generated using a magnetron surface plasma

1743: source that produces H$^-$ ions from hydrogen gas~\cite{Moehs:2005ca}. The

1744: H$^-$ ions are then accelerated to 750~keV in a Cockcroft-Walton

1745: electrostatic accelerator, followed by a linear accelerator, bringing

1746: the ions to 400~MeV. Using a carbon stripping foil, both electrons are

1747: removed from the H$^-$ ions, and the resulting protons are then

1748: accelerated to 8~GeV within 33~ms in the first of five synchrotrons,

1749: called the ``Booster'', which has a ring circumference of 475~m. All these

1750: components are often referred to as the ``Proton Source''.

1751: %

1752: 

1753: Acceleration continues in the oval Main Injector synchrotron that has a

1754: circumference of 3.3~km. Depending on their ultimate use, protons are

1755: either brought from 8~GeV to 120~GeV within 2~s for fixed-target operation

1756: (including the production of antiprotons) or to 150~GeV within 3~s for

1757: injection into the Tevatron. With a ring radius of 1~km, the Tevatron

1758: is the final and largest synchrotron at Fermilab. It accelerates

1759: protons and antiprotons in a single beam pipe from 150~GeV to 980~GeV

1760: in about 85~s.

1761: %

1762: 

1763: For the production of antiprotons, 120~GeV protons from the Main

1764: Injector are directed every two seconds at a Nickel target, producing

1765: one 8~GeV antiproton for every $\mathcal{O}(50,000)$ incident protons,

1766: in total $\mathcal{O}(10^8)$ per pulse. These antiprotons are focused

1767: into a beamline using a Lithium lens %

1768: and separated from the other produced particles with a pulsed

1769: dipole magnet used as a charge-mass spectrometer. Once transferred to the

1770: ``Debuncher'' ring, the large momentum spread of the antiprotons is

1771: reduced using radio-frequency bunch rotation~\cite{Griffin:1984yf} and

1772: stochastic cooling~\cite{Mohl:1980jb}, before the beam is passed to

1773: the ``Accumulator'' ring, where the antiprotons are collected (``stacked'')

1774: and cooled further. For collider operation, approximately

1775: 30,000 such cycles are needed. The Debuncher and Accumulator are both 8~GeV

1776: rounded, triangle-shaped, concentric synchrotrons with circumferences of

1777: 505~m and 474~m, respectively, and together with the target station

1778: are referred to as the ``Antiproton Source''.

1779: %

1780: 

1781: To operate at optimal stacking rates, antiprotons are transferred 

1782: every few hours from the Accumulator to the ``Recycler'' (an 8~GeV storage

1783: ring housed in the Main Injector tunnel), providing both stochastic and

1784: electron cooling~\cite{Budker:1967sd} and thereby improved beam quality.

1785: As the name implies, the Recycler was originally planned to

1786: reuse antiprotons from the Tevatron, but this was abandoned

1787: in favor of large stashes ($6\cdot 10^{12}$) of

1788: antiprotons of high beam quality~\cite{Derwent:2007zz}. The 8~GeV

1789: antiprotons from either Accumulator or Recycler are accelerated in the

1790: Main Injector to 150~GeV for injection into the Tevatron, where they

1791: together with the protons are ramped up to 980~GeV for collisions. The

1792: bunch spacing of 396~ns corresponds to a collision rate of 2.5~MHz.

1793: With 36 out of 53 bunches being filled, the average rate is

1794: reduced to 1.7~MHz.

1795: %

1796: 

1797: A typical store at the Tevatron contains about $9\cdot

1798: 10^{10}$ antiprotons and $26\cdot 10^{10}$ protons per bunch.

1799: Characteristic r.m.s.\ bunch dimensions are 45~cm (50~cm) in the

1800: longitudinal and 16~$\mu$m (28~$\mu$m) in the transverse

1801: direction for antiprotons (protons)~\cite{PDG2008}, respectively. 

1802: A store lasts typically 16 to 24 hours for data taking 

1803: (governed by the remaining instantaneous

1804: luminosity versus the one achievable with a new store) before

1805: the beam is dumped and the Tevatron refilled (within two to three

1806: hours). The increased antiproton stacking rates achieved recently provide

1807: shorter overall turnaround times and store durations while raising

1808: initial luminosities, thereby enabling the maximization of the delivered

1809: luminosity per time period.

1810: 

1811: %

1812: 

1813: The Tevatron is performing well and keeps setting new world

1814: records on peak luminosity at a hadron collider. As of July

1815: 2008, the record is $3.2\cdot

1816: 10^{32}$~cm$^{-2}$s$^{-1}$~\cite{wwwbeamsdivision}.

1817: %

1818: \begin{figure}[t]

1819:   \centering

1820:   \includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,clip=]{plots/peaklumi.eps}

1821:   \includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,clip=]{plots/D0lumi.eps}

1822:   \caption{Left: Peak luminosities achieved at Run~II Tevatron

1823:     versus time~\cite{wwwpeaklumi}. Right: Integrated

1824:     luminosity delivered by the Tevatron and recorded by the D0

1825:     experiment in Run~II versus time~\cite{wwwdellumi}.}

1826:   \label{fig:TevLumi}

1827: \end{figure}

1828: For comparison, during Run~I, from 1992 to 1996

1829: at a center of mass energy of 1.8~TeV, the record peak luminosity was

1830: $0.2\cdot 10^{32}$~cm$^{-2}$s$^{-1}$, and both experiments recorded an

1831: integrated luminosity of $\approx$0.1~fb$^{-1}$, respectively. As illustrated in

1832: Fig.\ \ref{fig:TevLumi}, since the beginning of Run~II in 2001, 

1833: each experiment has recorded more than 4~fb$^{-1}$,

1834: and up to half of the total Run~I luminosity is now collected by

1835: the experiments in one single week.

1836: %

1837: The analyses discussed in this review utilize datasets up to an

1838: integrated luminosity of 2.8~fb$^{-1}$.

1839: 

1840: Until the currently scheduled end of Run~II in October 2009, the Tevatron is

1841: expected to deliver more than 6~fb$^{-1}$ to each experiment,

1842: with possible improvements on that value crucially dependent on the

1843: achievable antiproton stacking rates~\cite{Moore:2007zza}. An

1844: extension of Tevatron running into 2010 is currently being

1845: discussed and could increase the integrated luminosity by an additional 2~fb$^{-1}$.

1846: 

1847: %

1848: 

1849: \subsection{The collider experiments}

1850:  \label{sec:Detectors}

1851: Both general-purpose detectors CDF and D0 follow the generic layout of

1852: a collider detector in having their subdetectors arranged

1853: symmetrically in layers around the interaction point and beam pipe (see

1854: Fig.\ \ref{fig:Detectors}). The inner detectors are arranged in

1855: concentric cylindrical layers, with charged-particle tracking systems

1856: of low mass surrounded by solenoidal magnets defining the core. These

1857: are enclosed by electromagnetic and hadronic calorimeters that provide

1858: energy measurements and identification of electrons, photons and

1859: hadrons. The outer systems are dedicated to muon detection,

1860: relying on the penetration capabilities of muons past all inner detectors.

1861: 

1862: \begin{figure}[t!]

1863:   \centering

1864: %

1865:   \includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{plots/CDF-detector-sm.eps}\\

1866:   \vspace{.5cm}

1867:   \includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth]{plots/D0-detector.eps}

1868:   \caption{Cross section views of the CDF detector (top,

1869:   \cite{Abulencia:2005ix}) and the D0 detector (bottom,

1870:   \cite{Abazov:2005pn}).}

1871:   \label{fig:Detectors}

1872: \end{figure}

1873: %

1874: Both detectors use a right-handed coordinate system with the origin at the

1875: center of the detector and the

1876: $z$-axis pointing along the direction of the proton beam. The

1877: transverse plane is spanned by the $y$-axis, which points vertically

1878: upwards, and the $x$-axis that points away from the center of the

1879: Tevatron. Positions in the transverse plane are frequently described

1880: using the azimuthal angle $\phi$ with respect to the $x$-axis, $\phi =

1881: \arctan \frac{y}{x}$, and radius $r = \sqrt{x^2+y^2}$. Based on the

1882: polar angle $\theta$ relative to the $z$-axis, the pseudo-rapidity

1883: $\eta$ is defined as $\eta = -\ln (\tan \frac{\theta}{2})$. For

1884: massless particles (or in the ultra-relativistic case where masses can

1885: be neglected), the pseudo-rapidity is equivalent to the rapidity $y =

1886: \frac{1}{2} \ln [(E+p_z)/(E-p_z)]$, which is additive under

1887: parallel Lorentz transformations, resulting in Lorentz-invariant

1888: rapidity differences $\Delta y$. The distance of two objects in the

1889: $\eta-\phi$ plane is usually denoted as $\Delta R =

1890: \sqrt{\Delta\eta^2 + \Delta\phi^2}$. To

1891: differentiate between variables calculated with respect to

1892: $p\bar{p}$ collision point and the center of the

1893: detector, the latter

1894: is often denoted with a subscript ``det'' to indicate origin of the detector

1895: coordinate system. In this review, unless indicated to the contrary, $\eta$

1896: is used to refer to $\eta_{\rm det}$.

1897: 

1898: %

1899: Enclosing the luminous region which exhibits a Gaussian width of

1900: approximately 25~cm, both CDF and D0 have their innermost

1901: silicon microstrip trackers. These provide vertexing and tracking

1902: capabilities extending to pseudo-rapidities of $|\eta| \le 2$

1903: and $|\eta| \le 3$ for CDF and D0, respectively. CDF complements its tracking system with

1904: a cylindrical open-cell drift chamber that provides 96 track measurements

1905: for $|\eta| \le 1$, while D0 utilizes a scintillating-fiber tracker

1906: consisting of eight cylindrical layers with two overlapping 835~$\mu$m diameter

1907: fiber doublets each, providing coverage for $|\eta| \lsim 1.7$.

1908: Both tracking systems are enclosed by superconducting solenoidal

1909: magnets that provide magnetic fields of 1.4~T (CDF) and 1.9~T

1910: (D0) along the beamline for measuring transverse momenta ($p_T$)

1911: of charged particles.

1912: %

1913: 

1914: Supplemental particle identification systems are placed inside

1915: and also outside of the magnet for the CDF and D0 detectors.

1916: Within the magnet, CDF employs a Time-of-Flight detector based on

1917: plastic scintillator panels covering $|\eta| \lsim 1$, mainly to

1918: discriminate low-energetic ($p < 1.6$~GeV/c) charged pions from

1919: kaons (for tagging heavy-flavor). Outside of the magnet, CDF

1920: uses scintillator tiles for early sampling of electromagnetic showers

1921: to improve electron and photon identification in the central detector.

1922: D0 uses central ($|\eta| \le 1.3$) and forward ($1.5 \le |\eta| \le

1923: 2.5$) preshower detectors consisting of several layers of plastic scintillator

1924: strips to enhance electron and photon identification.

1925: 

1926: Sampling calorimeters with an inner electromagnetic and an outer

1927: hadronic section enclose all inner subdetectors, providing

1928: energy measurement and identification capabilities for photons,

1929: charged leptons and hadrons. CDF uses lead/iron-scintillator sampling

1930: devices covering pseudo-rapidities $|\eta| \lsim 3.6$, while D0 uses

1931: mainly depleted uranium (U$^{238}$) as absorber material and liquid argon as

1932: active medium for nearly compensating calorimetry within $|\eta| \lsim

1933: 4.2$. Between the central and endcap calorimeter-cryostats \mbox{($1.1

1934: \le |\eta| \le 1.4$)}, layers of scintillating tiles provide additional

1935: sampling of showers for D0.

1936: 

1937: The outermost subdetectors serve to identify muons. These devices are based on

1938: the fact that muons rarely interact or radiate, but rather

1939: traverse the calorimeter as minimum ionizing

1940: particles that rarely generate electromagnetic or hadronic showers.

1941: CDF and D0 employ scintillators and drift tubes for muon detection

1942: within $|\eta| \le 1.5$ and $|\eta| \le 2$, respectively. D0

1943: has in addition 1.8~T solid-iron toroidal magnets between the detection layers

1944: to provide stand-alone measurements of muon momentum that are

1945: independent of the central tracking system.

1946: 

1947: The luminosity for CDF and D0 is measured, respectively, using Cherenkov and

1948: plastic scintillation counters covering $3.6 \le |\eta| \le 4.6$

1949: and \mbox{$2.7 \le |\eta| \le 4.4$}, respectively. To select events of

1950: interest from the effective 1.7~MHz bunch-crossing rate, both

1951: experiments employ three-level trigger systems of dedicated hardware

1952: at the initial levels and commercial processor farms at the later (higher) levels.

1953: Based on information from tracking, calorimetry and muon systems,

1954: events are recorded at a rate of approximately 100~Hz for storage and

1955: further processing.

1956: 

1957: More detailed descriptions of the CDF and D0 detectors can be found in

1958: Refs. \cite{Blair:1996kx,Acosta:2004hw,Abulencia:2005ix}

1959: and~\cite{Abazov:2005pn}, respectively.

1960: %

1961: 

1962: \subsection{Object reconstruction}

1963: \label{sec:objreco}

1964: To analyze top quark events and to study properties of the top quark,

1965: the fundamental objects resulting from top quark decays must first be

1966: reconstructed. This section gives a brief overview of the objects to

1967: be considered, and how they can be reconstructed in the detectors.

1968: More information on such reconstruction, specific to the CDF and D0

1969: experiments, can be found, for example, in

1970: Refs.~\cite{Abulencia:2006kv, Abazov:2008kt}. As will become clear,

1971: analyses of the top quark utilize all detector components and

1972: therefore need a thorough understanding of their performance and

1973: calibration.

1974: 

1975: \subsubsection{Primary vertices}

1976: %

1977: The point of the primary hard scatter is referred to as the primary

1978: vertex and is determined through a fit of well-measured emerging

1979: tracks and beamline constraints to a common origin. With increasing

1980: luminosity, the average number of interactions per bunch crossing

1981: increases as well, leading to the reconstruction of multiple

1982: primary-vertex candidates, only one of which will generally be

1983: compatible with the hard interaction of interest. The selection of the

1984: primary vertex can be based, for example, on the presence of an

1985: energetic lepton, the (maximal) scalar sum of $p_T$ of associated

1986: tracks, or the (lowest) compatibility with being a ``minimum-bias''

1987: interaction, based on track $p_T$

1988: templates~\cite{Acosta:2004hw,Abazov:2008kt}.

1989: 

1990: The primary vertex is the origin of all objects produced in the

1991: interaction, including those from top quark and their subsequent $W$

1992: boson decays, both of which cannot be separated from the primary

1993: vertex within the detector resolution due to the extremely short

1994: lifetimes (see also Section~\ref{sec:toplifetime}). The primary vertex

1995: is also used as the origin of coordinates for evaluating kinematic

1996: variables of the $p\bar{p}$ collision.

1997: 

1998: \subsubsection{Charged leptons}

1999: Leptonically decaying $W$ bosons are a source of isolated energetic

2000: charged leptons that can be measured well with the tracking,

2001: calorimeter and muon systems described in the previous section. Such

2002: leptons are part of the event signatures for several top quark decay

2003: modes (see Section~\ref{sec:topsignatures}) and key in selecting these

2004: events at the trigger stage. However, $\tau$ leptons play a special

2005: role due to their decay characteristics. They decay leptonically 35\%

2006: of the time, yielding electrons or muons (and two neutrinos) that on

2007: average have far lower momenta than $e$ or $\mu$ from direct

2008: $W\to\ell\nu$ decay, but are otherwise hard to distinguish due to the

2009: relatively short $\tau$ lifetime. Consequently, such decays are

2010: usually included in the event selections for electrons and muons which

2011: are then referred to as ``leptonic'' final states of the $W$ boson.

2012: Decays of $\tau$ into hadrons (and a neutrino) are treated separately

2013: and are discussed further below.

2014: 

2015: In the context of this review, the term ``leptons'' refers only to

2016: electrons and muons, unless specified to the contrary. Their

2017: reconstruction proceeds as follows:

2018: \begin{itemlist}

2019: \item {\bf Electrons} leave a track in the inner tracking system and

2020:   form showers, mainly in the electromagnetic part of the calorimeter.

2021:   These are reconstructed as clusters of energy deposition in the

2022:   electromagnetic calorimeter and matched to reconstructed tracks.

2023:   Further requirements include selections based on the fraction of

2024:   energy deposited in the electromagnetic calorimeter, isolation from

2025:   other energy depositions in a cone defined by the electron

2026:   candidate, the transverse and longitudinal distribution of the

2027:   shower, and the $E/p$ ratio of cluster energy and the reconstructed

2028:   track momentum.

2029: \item{\bf Muons} are identified via their characteristic penetration

2030:   and minimum ionization along their path in the calorimeter. They are

2031:   reconstructed by matching central tracks to track segments in the

2032:   outer muon system and must be consistent with originating from a

2033:   primary vertex. Cosmic-ray muons are suppressed via timing

2034:   requirements. Isolation of muon trajectories can be imposed both on

2035:   the charged-track candidate and within the calorimeter.

2036: \end{itemlist}

2037: The misidentification of isolated leptons has different origins for

2038: electrons and muons. Assuming contributions from hadrons ``punching

2039: through'' the calorimeter are negligible, false isolated muons arise

2040: mainly from muons emitted in semileptonic decays of heavy quarks where

2041: an associated jet (see below) is not reconstructed or the muon emerges

2042: outside of the cone of the jet. While such semileptonic heavy-flavor

2043: decays also contribute false isolated electrons, significant

2044: contributions arise here as well, for example, from jets with large

2045: electromagnetic fractions that can mimic electrons, photon conversions

2046: to $e^{+}e^{-}$, or photons that overlap a random track. Such

2047: instrumental background processes are usually estimated from data, as

2048: realistic simulation of these effects is quite difficult.

2049: %

2050: 

2051: The energy scale and resolution for leptons can be assessed by

2052: studying the reconstructed mass of the $Z$ boson in $Z\to\ell\ell$

2053: events.

2054: %

2055: $Z$ boson decays are also useful for studying lepton identification

2056: efficiencies with the ``tag and probe'' method in which one lepton is

2057: required to be well-identified (the ``tag''), thereby providing a

2058: reasonably pure sample of $Z$ bosons, while the second lepton serves

2059: as a probe for the efficiency being studied.

2060: 

2061: \subsubsection{Quark and gluon jets}

2062: \label{sec:qgjets-JES}

2063: %

2064: The hadronization of quarks and gluons leads to collimated showers of

2065: hadrons, referred to as ``jets''. The jet axis is highly correlated

2066: with the original parton's direction. While it is not possible to

2067: differentiate between quark and gluon jets on a per-object basis, they

2068: can be distinguished on a statistical basis because of small

2069: differences in shower shape (gluon jets tend to be wider and contain

2070: more ``soft'' particles).

2071: 

2072: \begin{figure}[!t]

2073:   \begin{center} 

2074:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/jes.eps}

2075:     \caption{Illustration of the evolution of a calorimeter jet from

2076:       an initial parton~\cite{wwwd0jes}. The dashed lines represent

2077:       the jet cone.}

2078:       \label{fig:JES}

2079:   \end{center}

2080: \end{figure}

2081: Jets are reconstructed from their energy depositions in the cells of

2082: the calorimeter using cone algorithms~\cite{Abe:1991ui,Blazey:2000qt}

2083: that combine cell energies within a cone of fixed radius $\Delta R$

2084: (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:JES}). The size of the cone radius is a compromise

2085: between collecting a high fraction of the original parton's energy and

2086: resolving the energy depositions of close-by partons, especially in

2087: busy \ttbar events. D0 uses a cone size of $\Delta R = 0.5$, while CDF

2088: uses $\Delta R = 0.4$.

2089: %

2090: 

2091: %

2092: The measured jet energies are converted into particle-level energies

2093: through jet energy scale (JES)

2094: corrections~\cite{Bhatti:2005ai,Hegeman:2008} that take into account

2095: effects such as the presence of energy depositions not originating

2096: from the hard scattering process (noise in the calorimeter, multiple

2097: interactions, \dots), particles within the jet cone that deposit

2098: energy in the calorimeter but outside of the cone or vice versa, due

2099: to their curved trajectories in magnetic fields and showering effects,

2100: and the calorimeter response accounting, for example, for

2101: nonlinearities or energy loss in uninstrumented regions of the

2102: detector.

2103: 

2104: The electromagnetic calorimeter scale determined from resonances such

2105: as $Z\to ee$, as described above, can be transferred to the full

2106: calorimeter by requiring a balance in $p_T$ in photon + jet events.

2107: The intercalibration of the calorimeter is then complemented with

2108: dijet events. A precise JES calibration is a challenging task

2109: involving highly complex procedures to ensure understanding of all

2110: contributions and their systematic uncertainties. D0 has achieved a

2111: JES precision at the 1-2\% level over a wide kinematic

2112: range~\cite{Hegeman:2008}. For this level of precision, strictly

2113: speaking, the JES is only applicable to photon + jet samples, and

2114: additional uncertainties need to be taken into account when

2115: transferring the JES, for example, to top quark

2116: samples~\cite{Harel:2008fp}. The first direct measurement of the JES

2117: for $b$ quarks at the Tevatron based on $Z\to bb$ events has recently

2118: been performed by CDF, reaching a precision of better than

2119: 2\%~\cite{Donini:2008nt}.

2120: %

2121: 

2122: \subsubsection{$\tau$ jets}

2123: %

2124: $\tau$ leptons decay into hadrons (and a neutrino) 65\% of the time,

2125: with $\approx$77.5\% of these decays yielding a single charged

2126: particle (``1-prong decays'') and $\approx$22.5\% three charged

2127: particles (``3-prong decays'')~\cite{PDG2008}. These ``hadronic''

2128: $\tau$ decays are reconstructed as jets (that often also contain

2129: $\pi^{0}$ mesons) and can be discriminated statistically from quark

2130: and gluon jets via their narrow shower shape and low track

2131: multiplicity within the jet cone \cite{Abulencia:2005et,D05484}.

2132: %

2133: 

2134: \subsubsection{$b$ jets}

2135: The identification (``tagging'') of $b$ jets is a very powerful tool

2136: for separating the top quark signal from its background processes,

2137: which typically exhibit little heavy-flavor content. Also, the

2138: combinatorics for reconstructing top quark events from their

2139: final-state objects can be reduced using this additional information.

2140: There are in general two different approaches to identifying $B$

2141: hadrons formed from $b$ quarks:

2142: \begin{itemlist}

2143: \item {\bf Lifetime Tagging:} Due to their lifetime of about 1.5~ps

2144:   and the boost from top quark decay, B hadrons can travel several

2145:   millimeters before they decay. The resulting charged particle tracks

2146:   therefore originate from (point to) a vertex different than the

2147:   primary one. This can be exploited by searching for secondary

2148:   vertices significantly displaced relative to the primary event

2149:   vertex ({\em secondary-vertex tagging}) or by requiring significant

2150:   impact parameters relative to the primary vertex for tracks, without

2151:   reconstructing a secondary vertex ({\em impact-parameter tagging}).

2152:   A probability can also be calculated for a jet to come from the

2153:   primary vertex based on the impact parameters of all its associated

2154:   tracks ({\em jet-probability tagging}), or a combination of all

2155:   information from the above tagging algorithms into a neural network

2156:   response can be used ({\em NN tagging}). The two latter methods

2157:   yield continuous output variables that can be used as input for

2158:   further multivariate analysis or for selecting analysis-specific

2159:   values as compromises between $b$-tagging efficiency and the

2160:   fraction of light-quark jets that are misidentified as $b$ jets.

2161: %

2162: \item {\bf Soft-Lepton Tagging:} This tagging is based on semileptonic

2163:   decays of $b$ and $c$ hadrons with branching fractions of

2164:   $\approx$11\% and 10\%, respectively. With two $b$ quarks and two

2165:   $W$ bosons per \ttbar decay, and the fact that about one third of

2166:   the $W$ boson decays yield charm quarks ($c\bar{s}$), the fraction of

2167:   events containing a soft (low $p_{T}$) lepton in a jet is about 40\%

2168:   per lepton flavor ($e,\mu$). The isolation criteria used for

2169:   leptonic $W$ boson decays do not work for these leptons, and their

2170:   reconstruction within jets is quite challenging, especially for

2171:   electrons.

2172: %

2173: \end{itemlist}

2174: %

2175: Although the mistag rate for lifetime-tagging is

2176: usually very small for light-quark ($u,d,s$) and gluon jets, this is

2177: not the case for charm jets. For example, a typical operating point

2178: for D0's NN tagger yields a $b$-tag efficiency of $\approx$50\% and a

2179: mistag rate for light jets of $\approx$0.5\%, while it

2180: is $\approx$10\% for $c$ jets~\cite{Harel:2008fp}. More information

2181: on $b$-tagging algorithms and their application in top quark analyses,

2182: including the performance for $b$ jets, $c$ jets and light-quark or

2183: gluon jets, can be found

2184: in Refs.~\cite{Acosta:2004hw,Abulencia:2006kv,CDF9371} for CDF

2185: and~\cite{Abazov:2006ka,Abazov:2008kt,Harel:2008fp} for D0.

2186: %

2187: 

2188: \subsubsection{Neutrinos}

2189: Neutrinos are not detected directly because of their negligible

2190: interaction cross section. Since the energy component along the beam

2191: axis at a hadron collider is unknown, only the transverse momentum

2192: carried away by neutrinos (or any other ``invisible'' particles) can

2193: be inferred from momentum conservation in the transverse plane. This

2194: ``missing'' transverse momentum (\METns) is calculated from the vector

2195: sum of transverse energy depositions in the calorimeter, corrected for

2196: the energy scale of reconstructed electrons and jets and for the

2197: momenta of reconstructed muons (corrected for energy loss in the

2198: calorimeter). The \MET resolution therefore depends strongly on the

2199: other objects present in the event. Taking this into account, for

2200: example, through selections on the significance of \MET rather than its

2201: absolute value, improves performance.

2202: 

2203: \subsection{Top quark event signatures in the standard model}

2204: \label{sec:topsignatures}

2205: Having discussed the reconstruction of the fundamental objects from

2206: the initially occurring particles, the experimental signatures of top

2207: quark events can be examined. As noted in Section~\ref{sec:topCKM}, in

2208: the framework of the standard model the top quark decays dominantly

2209: into a $W$ boson and a $b$ quark. Consequently, the observed final

2210: states are defined by the decay modes of the $W$ boson.

2211: 

2212: $W$ bosons decay into two fermions, either leptons (a charged

2213: lepton-neutrino pair $\ell\bar{\nu}_\ell, \ell = e,\mu,\tau$), with

2214: equal probability per lepton flavor at lowest order in perturbation

2215: theory, or into quark-antiquark pairs $q\bar{q}'$ with $q=u,c$ and

2216: $\bar{q}'=\bar{d},\bar{s},\bar{b}$. At Born level, the ``hadronic''

2217: decay widths are enhanced over the leptonic modes by a color factor of

2218: three (taking the three possible quark colors into account), and

2219: scaled by the appropriate squared CKM matrix element $|V_{qq'}|^2$.

2220: Similar to top quark decay, the off-diagonal CKM matrix elements are

2221: greatly suppressed, and therefore only the $u\bar{d}$ and $c\bar{s}$

2222: decay modes are considered in the following, contributing

2223: approximately 95\% of the hadronic decay width~\cite{PDG2008}.

2224: 

2225: In summary, $W$ bosons decay leptonically with a branching fraction of

2226: $\approx$1/9 per lepton flavor and $\approx$1/3 for each of the

2227: hadronic decays ($u\bar{d}$ and $c\bar{s}$). The resulting

2228: possibilities for \ttbar decays are illustrated in Fig.\

2229: \ref{fig:ttbardecays}, where also the nomenclature for the different

2230: decay modes is introduced. These branching fractions do not yet take

2231: account of the leptonic decays of $\tau$ leptons and their

2232: contributions to final states involving electrons and muons, as

2233: discussed in Section~\ref{sec:objreco}. This is considered in the

2234: following description of the four basic \ttbar event classes:

2235: \begin{figure}[t]

2236:   \centering

2237:   \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth,clip=]{plots/Wdecays.eps}

2238:   \caption{Illustration of the SM \ttbar decay modes and their

2239:     branching fractions via the possible $W$ boson decays. For each

2240:     decay mode, a $b\bar{b}$ quark pair from \ttbar decay is also

2241:     present.}

2242:   \label{fig:ttbardecays}

2243: \end{figure}

2244: \begin{romanlist}[(ii)]

2245: \item {\bf Dilepton channels:} Both $W$ bosons decay leptonically

2246:   ($\ell\bar{\nu}_\ell, \ell = e,\mu$), resulting in a final state

2247:   comprised of two isolated high-\pt leptons, \MET corresponding to

2248:   the two neutrinos, and two $b$ jets. Including leptonic $\tau$

2249:   decays, this channel has a branching fraction of approximately

2250:   6.5\%, shared $\approx$1:1:2 by the $ee$, $\mu\mu$ and $e\mu$ final

2251:   states. While these channels give samples of highest \ttbar signal

2252:   purity, they suffer from limited statistics due to the small

2253:   branching fractions.

2254: \item {\bf Lepton + jets channels:} One $W$ boson decays leptonically

2255:   and the other one hadronically, yielding a final state containing

2256:   one isolated high-\pt lepton, \METns, and four jets. Including

2257:   leptonic $\tau$ decays, these channels exhibit a branching fraction

2258:   of approximately 34.3\%, shared about equally by the $e$ + jets and

2259:   $\mu$ + jets final states. These channels represent the best

2260:   compromise between purity of sample and available statistics.

2261: \item {\bf All-hadronic channel:} Both $W$ bosons decay to

2262:   $q\overline{q}'$ pairs, resulting in a six-jet final state. With a

2263:   branching fraction of $\approx$45.7\%, this channel yields the

2264:   highest statistics of \ttbar events but also suffers from large

2265:   background from multijet production.

2266: \item {\bf Hadronic $\mathbf {\tau}$ channels:} Final states where at

2267:   least one $W$ boson yields a charged $\tau$ lepton that in turn

2268:   decays into hadrons (and a neutrino) are called hadronic $\tau$

2269:   channels, and together comprise a branching fraction of

2270:   $\approx$13.5\%. The nature of the decay of the second $W$ boson is

2271:   used to differentiate between the $\tau$ + jets, $\tau$ + lepton,

2272:   and $\tau\tau$ final states, which contribute with 9.5\%, 3.6\% and

2273:   0.5\% branching fractions, respectively. The corresponding

2274:   experimental signature has four/two/two jets, \METns, one/one/two

2275:   hadronic $\tau$ final states, and no/one/no isolated high-\pt

2276:   lepton. The identification of $\tau\to$ hadrons makes these final

2277:   states especially challenging to reconstruct. More inclusive sample

2278:   selections, requiring, for example, leptons and isolated tracks or

2279:   \MET and ($b$-tagged) jets provide significant fractions of

2280:   $\tau\to$ hadrons events, without their explicit reconstruction.

2281: \end{romanlist}

2282: 

2283: %

2284: 	

2285: %

2286: 

2287: %

2288: In all of the above final states, two of the jets are $b$ jets from

2289: \ttbar decay. The $\tau\tau$ final state of \ttbar production remains

2290: the only channel that has not yet been explicitly analyzed. All others

2291: are discussed in Section~\ref{sec:ttbarxsecmeas}. Properties of top

2292: quarks have been extracted mainly from the first three of the above

2293: channels, and especially from the lepton + jets channel.

2294: 

2295: Full kinematic reconstruction of \ttbar events is possible in the

2296: all-hadronic final state since there are no high-\pt neutrinos

2297: present. In the lepton + jets channel, a twofold ambiguity arises from

2298: the determination of the neutrino $p_z$ when constraining the

2299: invariant mass of the lepton and missing neutrino to $m_W$, while the

2300: dilepton channel is kinematically underconstrained because two

2301: neutrinos contribute to \METns. The unknown assignment between partons

2302: and reconstructed objects in \ttbar events leads to various possible

2303: combinations. The combinatorics can be reduced through identification

2304: of $b$ jets. In particular, when both $b$ jets are identified, only

2305: four combinations remain to be considered in the lepton + jets channel

2306: (including the neutrino $p_z$ ambiguity), and six combinations in the

2307: all-hadronic channel.

2308: 

2309: The experimental signature for single top quark production is

2310: based on the top quark decay mode and the production channel: in

2311: the $s$- ($tb$-) channel, the top quark is produced with an additional

2312: $b$ jet, while in the $t$- ($tqb$-) channel a forward light-quark jet

2313: accompanies top quark production, sometimes along with another

2314: $b$ jet from the gluon splitting into $b\bar{b}$ (see

2315: Fig.\ \ref{fig:singlet-feynman}). The $W$ boson from top quark

2316: decay is usually required to decay leptonically ($\ell\bar{\nu}_\ell,

2317: \ell = e,\mu$) so as to suppress multijet background. Consequently, the

2318: final state signature of single top quark production contains an

2319: energetic isolated electron or muon, \MET and at least two jets, with

2320: at least one of them being a $b$ jet.

2321: 

2322: The large mass of the top quark makes it less likely that it is

2323: produced with large kinetic energy at the Tevatron. Its decay products

2324: therefore tend to be emitted at central rapidities, non-planar with

2325: good angular separation, and are characterized by a large sum of

2326: transverse energies $H_T$. Event selections usually require the

2327: channel-characteristic objects (leptons, \METns, and ($b$ tagged)

2328: jets) to be present with energies typically greater than 15 to 20 GeV.

2329: Apart from selections on data quality to ensure a well-performing

2330: detector and specific trigger selections, a well-reconstructed primary

2331: vertex in the central detector region is also required. Variations in

2332: observed jet multiplicities are possible as well due to, for example, jet

2333: reconstruction thresholds, jet splitting and merging during

2334: reconstruction, and additional gluon jets (from initial- and

2335: final-state radiation).

2336: 

2337: More details on event selection, contributions from background, and

2338: sample compositions in different analyses (including those concerned

2339: with non-standard-model signatures), are given in the following

2340: chapters.

2341: 

2342: \subsection{Monte Carlo generation}

2343: A reliable and well-understood Monte Carlo (MC) simulation of signal

2344: and background processes is a crucial ingredient for any top quark

2345: analysis. MC samples are needed to understand detector response and

2346: acceptance, selection efficiencies and kinematic distributions of

2347: physical variables and their normalizations. This requires both good

2348: modeling of the production process from the parton to the hadron

2349: level, and an accurate simulation of detector response to signatures

2350: of interest.

2351: 

2352: MC simulations of hadron interactions are based on the factorization

2353: theorem discussed in Section~\ref{sec:ttbarprod}, splitting up hadron

2354: collisions into universal long distance (small $Q^2$) phenomena and

2355: perturbatively calculable short distance phenomena. A generic example

2356: of steps in the simulation of a hadron collision is illustrated in

2357: Fig.\ \ref{fig:hadroncollision}, and described below.

2358: 

2359: %

2360: The non-perturbative Parton Distribution Functions (PDFs) describe the

2361: distribution of the proton (or antiproton) momentum among its partons.

2362: The interaction of the incoming partons in the hard process of

2363: interest is then evaluated based on fixed-order (usually LO) matrix

2364: elements, yielding the outgoing partons and their characteristics,

2365: such as their momenta and colors. The ensuing parton showering adds

2366: higher-order effects through parton splitting into pairs of softer

2367: partons (gluon radiation, gluon-splitting, photon radiation,\dots),

2368: until non-perturbative hadronization sets in at low $Q^2$, forming

2369: color-neutral hadrons from the colored partons, which is based on

2370: phenomenological models. Unstable particles and resonances are then

2371: made to decay into the final remnants.

2372: 

2373: The colored beam-remnants of the proton and antiproton, other soft

2374: multi-parton interactions, and color connections to the hard process

2375: are added, and all form the ``underlying event''. Additional soft

2376: proton-antiproton collisions from the same colliding bunch

2377: (minimum-bias events) have to be superimposed in the MC, and depend on

2378: the instantaneous luminosity. Finally, any overlapping interactions

2379: from consecutive bunch crossings ``leaking'' into the current event

2380: (pile up) must also be considered.

2381: %

2382: \begin{figure}[t]

2383:   \centering

2384:   \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth,clip=]{plots/collisionevent.eps}

2385:   \caption{Illustration of a hadron collision~\cite{Dobbs:2001ck},

2386:     indicating some of the steps involved in MC simulation.}

2387:   \label{fig:hadroncollision}

2388: \end{figure}

2389: 

2390: In principle, different programs and models can be used for every

2391: stage in the above process, and the best choice may depend on the

2392: process to be studied, which illustrates the complexity of these MC

2393: simulations. Also, the parameters in some models have to be tuned to

2394: distributions in data before they can provide adequate descriptions of

2395: interactions~\cite{Ellis:1999ec}. General purpose, complete event

2396: generators such as \herwig~\cite{Marchesini:1991ch} and

2397: \pythia~\cite{Sjostrand:2000wi} include LO matrix elements for a

2398: variety of processes, as well as models for showering and

2399: hadronization of partons. They are widely used, either stand-alone or

2400: in combination with other generators that simulate the hard process

2401: and pass on the information to implement showering and hadronization.

2402: An introduction and overview of available MC generators can be found

2403: in Ref.~\cite{Dobbs:2004qw}, and specific simulation tools for top

2404: quark production and decay are reviewed in

2405: Ref.~\cite{Slabospitsky:2006gy}.

2406: %

2407: 

2408: %

2409: CDF and D0 have implemented different simulation chains for their top

2410: quark analyses, and certain analyses use variants on what is described

2411: here. CDF uses CTEQ5L~\cite{Lai:1999wy} PDFs for its generators, while

2412: D0 employs CTEQ6L1~\cite{Pumplin:2002vw} PDFs. The \ttbar signal is

2413: generated either with \pythia~v6.2 \cite{Sjostrand:2001yu} (CDF) or

2414: \alpgen~v2.1 \cite{Mangano:2002ea} interfaced with \pythia~v6.3

2415: \cite{Sjostrand:2003wg} for parton showering (D0). The latter employs

2416: a jet-parton matching algorithm to avoid double counting of final

2417: states that could otherwise be populated from both the hard process

2418: and parton showering~\cite{Hoche:2006ph,Mangano:2006rw}. CDF also uses

2419: \herwig~v6.4 \cite{Corcella:2000bw} for systematic cross checks of

2420: modeling of signal. For single top MC, D0 uses

2421: \singletop~\cite{Boos:2006af} based on \comphep~\cite{Boos:2004kh},

2422: interfaced with \pythia, while CDF utilizes

2423: \madevent~\cite{Maltoni:2002qb} and \madgraph~\cite{Stelzer:1994ta},

2424: also interfaced with \pythia. Both experiments approximate $t$-channel

2425: production at NLO through a combination of contributing $2\to2$ and

2426: $2\to3$ processes. Any signal cross sections obtained at LO are scaled

2427: up to match higher-order theoretical prescriptions (see

2428: Sections~\ref{sec:ttbarprod} and~\ref{sec:singletopprod}). Most

2429: analyses use a top quark mass of 175~GeV/c$^2$.

2430: %

2431: 

2432: %

2433: 

2434: %

2435: For simulation of $W$+jets and $Z$+jets background processes, both

2436: collaborations utilize \alpgen, interfaced with \herwig~(CDF) or

2437: \pythia~(D0) for parton showering, and both apply the above-mentioned

2438: jet-parton matching technique. \alpgen~generates higher final-state

2439: parton multiplicities from $2\to n$ processes, and therefore large jet

2440: multiplicities, based on exact LO matrix elements, including the

2441: production of heavy-flavors, which is especially important for

2442: analyses using $b$ tagging. For the decays of $\tau$ leptons, both

2443: collaborations use \tauola~\cite{Jadach:1990mz,Was:2004dg}. For $b$

2444: and $c$ hadron decays \evtgen~\cite{Lange:2001uf} and

2445: \qqgen~\cite{QQgen} are used, the latter only by CDF. Effects of

2446: additional minimum-bias events and pile up are based on \pythia~at

2447: CDF, and D0 uses zero-bias collider data taken by randomly sampling

2448: filled bunch crossings, overlaid with the simulated events.

2449: %

2450: 

2451: The generated events are propagated through detector simulation based

2452: on \geant~\cite{geant-cern}, which contains a full description of

2453: positions, geometrical shapes, and types and amounts of material

2454: comprising the detectors. The particles in an event are tracked

2455: through the detector volume, where they encounter energy loss and

2456: multiple scattering that depend on particle type, the traversed

2457: material and the particle momenta, and undergo decay corresponding to

2458: their lifetimes. The response of the detector's readout electronics to

2459: these interactions, including noise and inefficiencies, is then

2460: obtained in a digitization step that yields initial simulated event

2461: characteristics that are processed with the same reconstruction chain

2462: as collider data.

2463: 

2464: It is not easy to obtain good agreement between any simulation and

2465: experimental data. For example, object reconstruction, identification

2466: and selection efficiencies tend to be higher in MC compared to data,

2467: and must be corrected via scale factors. Such scale factors are

2468: usually derived from comparison of efficiencies in control samples of

2469: simulations and data in final states such as $Z\to\ell\ell$ for

2470: leptons, and $\gamma$+jets for jets. Scale factors can be parametrized

2471: in terms of variables sensitive to these corrections. Also, energy

2472: scales and resolutions for reconstructed objects must generally be

2473: adjusted. Certain effects are hard to simulate, so that at times only

2474: data can be used to provide rates for, e.g. jets to mimic lepton

2475: signatures.

2476: 

2477: Before searching for any signal, the background model must be verified

2478: using data in control samples that are sufficiently depleted from

2479: possible signal, as, for example, by requiring a reduced jet

2480: multiplicity or no $b$ jets to be present. Sometimes the shape or

2481: normalization of differential distributions has to be corrected, which

2482: usually reflects not optimally tuned MC or insufficient precision in

2483: the model.

2484: 

2485: With increasing Tevatron luminosity, data-based constraints can

2486: improve the understanding of dominant background processes such as

2487: vector boson + (heavy-flavor) jet production, both in terms of shapes

2488: and normalization. This can benefit MC simulations and the precision

2489: of measurements. For example, the production of $W$ bosons has been

2490: investigated in terms of associated jet

2491: production~\cite{Aaltonen:2007ip} and compared with LO and NLO

2492: predictions, or associated heavy-flavor production was compared with

2493: standard model expectations and found to be in

2494: agreement~\cite{Abazov:2004bv, Abulencia:2005qa}. Nevertheless,

2495: dedicated studies of $W$ boson + $c$

2496: \cite{Aaltonen:2007dm,Abazov:2008qz} or $b$

2497: jet~\cite{Abazov:2004jy,CDF9321} production have been performed as

2498: well, with the most recent results indicating that the production

2499: rates for these processes are currently underestimated by \alpgen.

2500: %

2501: 

2502: A more detailed overview of MC simulations used in top quark analyses

2503: at the Tevatron, both for signal and background processes, and the

2504: remaining challenges can be found in

2505: Refs.~\cite{Husemann:2008ad,Harel:2008px}.

2506: 

2507: \section{Measurements of Top Quark Production}

2508: In this chapter, measurements of top quark production both via the

2509: strong and electroweak interactions are described. Observed rates and

2510: mechanisms of production are compared with the standard model

2511: expectations and used to derive constraints on specific extensions

2512: of the standard model impacting the properties under consideration.

2513: 

2514: \subsection{Top quark pair production cross section}

2515: \label{sec:ttbarxsecmeas}

2516: Measurements of the \ttbar production cross section are important for

2517: several reasons. They provide a powerful test of the predictions of

2518: perturbative QCD calculations at high transverse momenta. As shown

2519: in Section~\ref{sec:ttbarprod}, the uncertainties on the \ttbar rate

2520: predictions have reached the level of $\approx$10\%, a precision which has already

2521: been matched by the measurements performed at the Tevatron.

2522: 

2523: Deviations from the standard model prediction could arise, for example, from novel

2524: production mechanisms such as a new resonant production mode in addition

2525: to the standard model one as discussed in Section~\ref{sec:BSMprod}.

2526: New physics contributing to the electroweak symmetry breaking will

2527: probably couple to particles proportional to their mass, making the

2528: top quark and its strong coupling reflected in its production rate a

2529: highly interesting probe for such effects. Different top quark decay

2530: modes, such as the decay via a charged Higgs boson competing with SM

2531: decay, as examined in Section~\ref{sec:H+topdecay}, could

2532: cause apparent different production rates amongst the various decay

2533: channels via modified branching fractions. Contributions of new

2534: physics to the background samples in the various channels could have

2535: similar effects. Analyzing different decay channels consequently helps not only

2536: to improve statistics and studies of properties of top events, but is

2537: also a sensitive probe for physics beyond the standard model.

2538: 

2539: To extract a cross section requires good understanding of the

2540: reconstruction and identification of the involved objects and of the

2541: modeling of the contributing background processes. By providing

2542: selections for samples enriched in top quark signal and of well

2543: characterized composition, cross section analyses form the foundation

2544: of all further top quark property analyses.

2545: %

2546: 

2547: Top quark pair production has been studied by now in all possible

2548: decay modes -- the dilepton, lepton + jets, all-hadronic and hadronic

2549: $\tau$ channels as defined in Section~\ref{sec:topsignatures}, with

2550: the $\tau\tau$ decay mode being the only exception due to marginal

2551: branching fraction and challenging separation from background processes. As

2552: mentioned before, in the context of this review the term leptons

2553: refers to electrons and muons alone unless indicated to the contrary.

2554: 

2555: The event selections usually require the presence of characteristic objects from

2556: the top quark decay, namely, leptons, \METns, (heavy-flavor) jets, or

2557: hadronically decaying $\tau$, with energies typically exceeding

2558: 15 to 20 GeV. Further kinematic characteristics can be

2559: exploited to separate the top quark signal from the various background

2560: processes. Due to the large mass of the top quark, its decay products

2561: tend to be very energetic, emitted at central rapidities and

2562: non-planar with good angular separation. In contrast to this, the jet

2563: energy spectrum for background processes with jets from gluon

2564: radiation is steeply falling. The observed objects are emitted less

2565: isotropically but more back to back, and mismeasured objects giving

2566: rise to \MET tend to exhibit characteristic angular correlations with

2567: the reconstructed \METns.

2568: 

2569: Consequently, additional variables available for top quark signal

2570: selection are based on the energy present in the event, such as the

2571: sum of transverse energies ($H_T$), or the invariant mass of a combination

2572: of reconstructed objects. Event shape variables such as sphericity and

2573: aplanarity, derived from the eigenvalues of the normalized momentum

2574: tensor of the objects considered~\cite{Barger:1993ww}, or centrality,

2575: defined as the ratio of $H_T$ and the sum of the objects' energies,

2576: provide additional discrimination. Furthermore, angular relations between

2577: reconstructed objects (for example $\Delta\phi(\not\!\!E_T,\ell)$) and

2578: single-object kinematic quantities (such as the jet of highest (leading) transverse momentum) are

2579: frequently used as well.

2580: 

2581: Depending on the \ttbar decay mode considered, the use of $b$ tagging

2582: in its different forms (see Section~\ref{sec:objreco}) is optional for

2583: the event selection. In the dilepton and lepton + jets channels

2584: selections based purely on topological and kinematic characteristics

2585: suffice for a good signal to background ratio (S/B). Adding $b$

2586: tagging improves sample purities but also implies a stronger model

2587: dependence by relying on $b$ quarks to be present in the final state.

2588: The

2589: %

2590: actual extraction of the signal fraction proceeds either in a counting

2591: experiment or via template fits using the full shape information of

2592: the sensitive variable under consideration. While the latter is

2593: usually more sensitive, it also exhibits a stronger dependence on the

2594: MC modeling. Using different methods with different systematic

2595: uncertainties to measure the same quantity provides a way to assess the model

2596: assumptions from different perspectives

2597: and to check internal consistency, and is beneficial for combinations of

2598: increased precision. Non-overlapping (orthogonal) sample selections

2599: facilitate later combinations of results as independent measurements

2600: by removing the need to evaluate the correlation amongst the

2601: measurements from ensemble tests.

2602: 

2603: Once the sample composition is measured, the \ttbar production

2604: cross section is calculated as follows:

2605: \begin{equation}

2606: \sigma_{t\bar{t}} = \frac{N_{\rm observed}-N_{\rm

2607: background}}{\varepsilon~{\cal B}~\int{\cal L}dt},

2608: \end{equation}

2609: where $N_{\rm observed}$ ($N_{\rm background}$) is the 

2610: total (background) number of events,

2611: $\varepsilon$ is the \ttbar selection efficiency, including detector

2612: acceptance, ${\cal B}$ is the branching fraction for the 

2613: \ttbar decay mode in question and $\int{\cal L}dt$ is the integrated luminosity of

2614: the used dataset.

2615: 

2616: As illustrated in Section~\ref{sec:ttbarprod}, the \ttbar cross

2617: section depends on the top quark mass, decreasing by about 0.2~pb for

2618: each GeV/c$^2$ increase in the $m_t$ mass range from 170~GeV/c$^2$ to

2619: 180~GeV/c$^2$. The \ttbar cross section results given in the following

2620: sections generally refer to a top quark mass of 175~GeV/c$^2$; the few

2621: cases where a top quark mass of 178~GeV/c$^2$ was assumed will be

2622: pointed out explicitly. Especially for the recent measurements, a

2623: parametrization of the obtained result versus top quark mass is

2624: provided to allow easy projection to the current world-averaged

2625: top quark mass. The cross section dependence on the mass can

2626: also be turned around to provide a measurement of the top quark mass

2627: from the cross section, which will be discussed further in

2628: Section~\ref{sec:massfromxsec}.

2629: 

2630: In the following subsections the published and latest preliminary

2631: Run~II results will be referenced for the different \ttbar decay modes.

2632: Some analyses will be highlighted in more detail. The agreement

2633: with theoretical predictions is illustrated in the summary

2634: section, where results of combinations across channels are also given.

2635: 

2636: %

2637: 

2638: %

2639: 

2640: \subsubsection{Dilepton final state}

2641: \label{sec:ttbarxsecmeasdil}

2642: 

2643: A typical \ttbar dilepton event selection requires two isolated

2644: high-\pt leptons of opposite charge, \MET and at least two central

2645: energetic jets. The dominant physics background processes exhibiting both real

2646: leptons and \MET arise from diboson ($WW,ZZ,WZ$) production and from

2647: $Z/\gamma^{*}$+jets processes, with $Z/\gamma^{*}\to\tau^{+} \tau^{-},

2648: \tau\to e,\mu$. Misreconstructed \MET caused by experimental resolution in

2649: $Z/\gamma^{*}$+jets events (with $Z/\gamma^{*}\to e^{+}e^{-}/

2650: \mu^{+}\mu^{-}$) contributes to the instrumental background, as does

2651: $W$+jets and multijet production (often called QCD), where one or more jets mimic the

2652: isolated-lepton signature. The physics background processes are usually

2653: modeled using Monte Carlo simulation, while instrumental background processes (especially

2654: those involving false isolated-lepton signatures) typically are

2655: estimated from data.

2656: %

2657: The signal purities of the resulting samples are usually quite good, with a

2658: signal to background ratio (S/B) typically better than two.

2659: 

2660: The sample purity can be further enhanced by means of additional

2661: kinematic requirements such as $H_{T}$

2662: to be above a certain threshold, or by selecting events with at least

2663: one identified $b$ jet. However, this reduces the already limited

2664: statistics in this channel. To increase the signal

2665: acceptance, the reconstruction and isolation requirements on the

2666: second lepton can be relaxed. If the second lepton is only required to

2667: be reconstructed as an isolated track (termed lepton + track

2668: selection), especially 1-prong hadronic $\tau$ decays can then also contribute

2669: to the signal.

2670: 

2671: In a recent preliminary analysis, CDF determines the \ttbar cross

2672: section from a 2.8~fb$^{-1}$ dataset by requiring two oppositely

2673: charged reconstructed isolated leptons with $E_T \geq 20$~GeV, \MET

2674: $\geq 25$~GeV and at least two jets within $|\eta|<2.5$ and $E_T \geq

2675: 15$~GeV, with the leading jet fulfilling $E_T \geq 30$~GeV. The \ttbar

2676: cross section is extracted from the resulting sample once without any

2677: additional cuts and once after increasing the purity by requiring at

2678: least one of the jets to be $b$ tagged. The background from

2679: $Z/\gamma^{*}$ and diboson $WW,ZZ,WZ$ events is derived from MC, while

2680: false isolated-lepton signatures are estimated from a dilepton dataset

2681: where both leptons have the same charge (same sign, ``SS''), assuming

2682: their contribution is identical in the opposite sign (``OS'') signal

2683: selection~\cite{CDF9399}.

2684: 

2685: \begin{figure}[t]

2686:   \begin{center} 

2687:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/CDF9399-njet_lin.eps}\hspace*{1mm}

2688:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/CDF9399-ntag_lin.eps} 

2689:     \caption{Distributions in jet multiplicity (left) and number of $b$ tags (right)

2690:       in \ttbar dilepton candidate events, respectively, for $\geq 1$

2691:       and $\geq 2$ jets in 2.8~fb$^{-1}$ of data analyzed by

2692:       CDF~\cite{CDF9399}.}

2693:       \label{fig:cdfdileptonxsec}

2694:   \end{center}

2695: \end{figure}

2696: \begin{table}[p]

2697: \caption{Event yields and sample composition after \ttbar preselections in CDF's 2.8~fb$^{-1}$

2698: dilepton dataset before and after requiring at least one $b$ tagged

2699: jet~\cite{CDF9399}.}

2700: \addtolength{\tabcolsep}{-2pt}

2701: \begin{center}

2702: \begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}|l|cccc|c|} \hline

2703: %

2704: \multirow{2}{*}{Process} &\multicolumn{4}{c|}{before tagging}&$b$ tagged\\

2705: & $e^+e^-$ & $\mu^+\mu^-$ & $e^\pm\mu^\mp$ & $\ell^+\ell^-$ &$\ell^+\ell^-$\\\hline\hline

2706: $t\bar{t},\ \sigma=$~6.7 pb& 29.2 & 21.5 & 59.9 & 110.6                  &65.2         \\

2707: $Z/\gamma^*\to\ell^+\ell^-$ & 9.25 & 4.79 & 0.52 & 14.6                  &0.78         \\

2708: $Z/\gamma^*\to\tau^+\tau^-$ & 2.84 & 2.55 & 6.62 & 12.0                  &0.60         \\

2709: $WW\to\ell^+\ell^-$ & 3.05 & 2.03 & 5.07 & 10.2                          &0.44         \\

2710: $WZ\to\ell^+\ell^-$ & 1.52 & 0.72 & 0.67 & 2.91                          &0.09         \\

2711: $ZZ\to\ell^+\ell^-$ & 0.80 & 0.40 & 0.26 & 1.46                          &0.10         \\\hline

2712: Totals (MC) & 46.7 & 32.0 & 73.0 & 151.7                                 &67.2         \\\hline

2713: $\pm\pm$ (SS) Data & 3.81 & 0.00 & 6.96 & 10.8                                      &2.00         \\\hline\hline

2714: Sum Expected & 50.5 $\pm$ 1.7 & 32.0 $\pm$ 1.3 & 80.0 $\pm$ 2.5 & 162.5 $\pm$ 4.5 &69.2 $\pm$1.7\\

2715: $+-$ (OS) Data & 54 & 33 & 75 & 162                                             &80           \\\hline

2716: %

2717: \end{tabular*}

2718: \end{center}

2719: \label{tab:CDFdileptonxsec}

2720: \end{table}

2721: The untagged sample yields 162 events with a total background

2722: contribution of $51.9 \pm 4.5$, where the dominant uncertainties

2723: arise from the estimate of false leptons and the uncertainty

2724: on the jet multiplicity correction factors applied in the MC.

2725: Requiring at least one $b$ tagged jet, 80 events remain, with an

2726: expected total background of $4.0 \pm 1.7$, with the dominant

2727: uncertainties arising again from the estimates of false leptons

2728: and also from uncertainties on the $b$ tag modeling. The sample

2729: composition is illustrated in Fig.\ \ref{fig:cdfdileptonxsec}, and

2730: detailed in Table~\ref{tab:CDFdileptonxsec}. The extracted cross

2731: sections are given in Table~\ref{tab:dilepxsecs}, together with the

2732: other dilepton channel results obtained thus far in Run~II.

2733: \begin{table}[p]

2734:   \caption{\ttbar cross section measurements in dilepton final states performed thus

2735:     far at the Run~II Tevatron with their integrated luminosities,

2736:     data selections ($\ell\ell$ = dilepton, $\ell$+trk =

2737:     lepton + track) and analysis methods used. The first three

2738:     results have been published; the others are preliminary. The

2739:     measurement marked with an asterisk refers to $m_{t}$ of

2740:     178~GeV/c$^2$ rather than 175~GeV/c$^2$, and, unlike the other results,

2741:     incorporates the luminosity uncertainty within the first given uncertainty.}

2742:   \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}

2743:   \begin{center}

2744:     %

2745: %

2746:     %

2747:     \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|l|c|}

2748:       \hline 

2749:       $\int{\cal L}dt$&\multirow{2}{*}{Sel.}&\multirow{2}{*}{$b$ tag}&$\sigma_{t\bar{t}}${\footnotesize $\pm$(stat.)$\pm$(syst.)$\pm$(lumi.)}&\multirow{2}{*}{Ref.}\\ 

2750:       ~[fb$^{-1}$] &  &  & {\hspace{1.5cm} [pb]} & \tabularnewline

2751:       \hline

2752:       \hline 

2753: 0.2& $\ell\ell$,$\ell$+trk& no   & $7.0^{+2.4}_{-2.1}\,^{+1.6}_{-1.1}\pm 0.4$  & \cite{Acosta:2004uw}\\

2754: 0.2& $\ell\ell$           & no   & $8.6^{+3.2}_{-2.7} \pm 1.1\pm 0.6$        & \cite{Abazov:2005yt}\\

2755: 0.4& $\ell\ell$,$\ell$+trk&no,yes& $7.4 \pm  1.4\pm  0.9\pm 0.5$             & \cite{Abazov:2007bu}\\\hline

2756: 0.4& $\ell\ell$           & no   & $8.5^{+2.6}_{-2.2}\,^{+0.7}_{-0.3}~(*)$     & \cite{Abulencia:2006mf}\\ %

2757: 1.0& $\ell\ell$           & no   & $6.8^{+1.2}_{-1.1}\,^{+0.9}_{-0.8}\pm0.4$   & \cite{D05371}\\

2758: 1.0& $\ell\ell$           & no   & $7.0^{+1.1}_{-1.0}\,^{+0.8}_{-0.6}\pm0.4$   & \cite{D05715}\\

2759: 1.0& $\ell$+trk           & yes  & $5.0^{+1.6}_{-1.4}\,^{+0.9}_{-0.8}\pm0.3$   & \cite{D05465}\\

2760: 1.0& $\ell\ell$,$\ell$+trk&no,yes& $6.2\pm 0.9^{+0.8}_{-0.7}\pm 0.4$         & \cite{D05477}\\

2761: 1.0& $\ell$+trk           & yes  & $10.1 \pm 1.8 \pm 1.1 \pm 0.6$            & \cite{CDF8912}\\

2762: 1.1& $\ell$+trk           & no   & $8.3 \pm 1.3 \pm 0.7 \pm 0.5$             & \cite{CDF8770}\\ %

2763: 2.8& $\ell\ell$           & yes  & $7.8 \pm 0.9\pm 0.7 \pm 0.4$              & \cite{CDF9399}\\ %

2764: 2.8& $\ell\ell$           & no   & $6.7 \pm 0.8 \pm 0.4 \pm 0.4$             & \cite{CDF9399}\\ %

2765:       \hline 

2766:     \end{tabular}

2767:     %

2768:     \label{tab:dilepxsecs}

2769:     %

2770:   \end{center}

2771: \end{table}

2772: %

2773: 

2774: \afterpage{\clearpage}

2775: 

2776: \subsubsection{Lepton + jets final state}

2777: \label{sec:ttbarxsecmeaslj}

2778: A typical \ttbar lepton + jets event selection requires exactly one

2779: isolated high-\pt lepton, \MET and at least three central energetic

2780: jets, allowing both lepton + jets and lepton + hadronic $\tau$

2781: signatures to contribute. The dominant physics background in this

2782: final state arises from $W$ boson + jets production, and the main

2783: instrumental background comes from QCD multijet production with a jet

2784: mimicking the isolated-lepton signature. Additional smaller background

2785: contributions arise from $Z/\gamma^{*}$ + jets, diboson and single

2786: top production. While for these smaller background processes shape and

2787: normalization are determined commonly from simulation and NLO cross

2788: sections, $W$ + jets events are usually normalized to data, and their

2789: differential distributions derived from Monte Carlo. The QCD multijet background's shape

2790: and normalization are typically derived from data, using, for example,

2791: datasets fulfilling the complete event selection, except the tight

2792: lepton isolation, for the background shape, and the rate for jets to

2793: mimic leptons is derived from data for the normalization.

2794: 

2795: %

2796: Samples selected with such a basic preselection exhibit S/B ratios below

2797: unity, around 1/4. Signal purity can be improved significantly via

2798: additional topological selections or by using

2799: $b$ tagging. When no $b$ tagging is used in an analysis, then

2800: multiple topological and kinematic event properties are usually combined in a

2801: multivariate discriminant to yield good signal to background

2802: separation without relying on the presence of $b$ jets in the events,

2803: therefore being less model dependent. The sample composition can then be

2804: determined from a template fit in that sensitive variable, providing a

2805: higher sensitivity than a plain cut.

2806: 

2807: Requiring identified $b$ jets to be present in an event is a 

2808: powerful tool to reject the background processes which exhibit little

2809: heavy-flavor content. $b$ tagging algorithms based on the long

2810: lifetime of $B$ hadrons or reconstruction of soft leptons within jets

2811: that originate from semileptonic $B$ decays, as discussed in

2812: Section~\ref{sec:objreco}, have been deployed for that purpose.

2813: Using $b$ tagging, very pure \ttbar samples can be selected

2814: that have S/B $>$ 10, if at least four jets and at least

2815: two identified $b$ jets are required in each event.

2816: 

2817: The most precise \ttbar cross section measurement published thus far has

2818: been performed by D0 on a 0.9~fb$^{-1}$ lepton + jets

2819: dataset~\cite{Abazov:2008gc}. Events are selected by requiring exactly

2820: one isolated electron or muon with $E_T > 20$~GeV, \MET $> 20$~GeV for

2821: $e$ + jets and $> 25$~GeV for $\mu$ + jets, at least

2822: three jets with $|\eta| < 2.5$ and $E_T > 20$~GeV, and leading-jet 

2823: $E_T > 40$~GeV. Cuts on the azimuthal separation between lepton

2824: and \MET are applied to suppress background from misreconstructed

2825: objects. After these selections, the \ttbar signal contributes only about

2826: 20\% of the total sample. The \ttbar cross section is measured using

2827: two complementary analyses.

2828: 

2829: One approach is based on lifetime $b$ tagging, requiring at least one

2830: jet in the event to be tagged and determining the \ttbar production

2831: rate through a maximum likelihood fit to the observed event yields in the

2832: different subchannels defined by lepton flavor, jet multiplicity and $b$

2833: tag multiplicity. The dominant systematic uncertainties arise

2834: from uncertainties on tagging efficiencies for $b, c, q$ and gluon

2835: jets and the jet energy calibration. The second analysis utilizes

2836: topological likelihood discriminants for the different subchannels based

2837: on lepton flavor and jet multiplicity. After applying an additional

2838: cut on jets of $H_T > 120$~GeV for three-jet events, five or six

2839: different variables such as angular object separation, sphericity and

2840: aplanarity (which provide good discrimination power and are well

2841: modeled in MC) are combined into discriminants for each subchannel.

2842: The sample composition is then determined in a maximum likelihood fit

2843: of templates of signal and background contributions to the

2844: observed discriminant distributions. The dominant systematic

2845: uncertainties in this method arise from uncertainties on the selection

2846: efficiencies and the likelihood fit uncertainty derived using

2847: statistical fluctuations in the likelihood discriminant template

2848: shapes. The sample compositions for both analyses are illustrated in

2849: Fig.\ \ref{fig:D0ljetsxsec}, and detailed in

2850: Table~\ref{tab:D0ljetsxsec}.

2851: 

2852: \begin{figure}[!t]

2853:   \begin{center} 

2854:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/D0-ljetsxsec-topo3jets-T08CF2a.eps}\hspace*{1mm}

2855:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/D0-ljetsxsec-doubletag-T08CF1b.eps} 

2856:     \caption{Topological likelihood distribution for $\ell$ + jets

2857:       \ttbar candidate events when three jets are required (left), and

2858:       jet multiplicity distribution when at least two $b$ tagged jets

2859:       are required (right) in D0's 0.9~fb$^{-1}$ lepton + jets

2860:       dataset~\cite{Abazov:2008gc}.}

2861:       \label{fig:D0ljetsxsec}

2862:   \end{center}

2863: \end{figure}

2864: 

2865: \begin{table}

2866: \caption{Event yields and sample composition in D0's 0.9~fb$^{-1}$ lepton + jets

2867:   dataset for both the topological and the $b$ tagging analysis. The

2868:   \ttbar contribution is based on the measured cross section in the

2869:   respective analysis~\cite{Abazov:2008gc}.}

2870: \begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}} l|r@{}lr@{}lr@{}lr@{}lr@{}lr@{}l}

2871: \hline

2872: ~& \multicolumn{2}{c}{3~jets,} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{3~jets,} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$\geq$4~jets,} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$\geq$4~jets,} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{3~jets,} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$\geq$4~jets,} \tabularnewline

2873: ~& \multicolumn{2}{c}{1~tag} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$\geq$2~tags} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{1~tag} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$\geq$2~tags} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{topo} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{topo} \tabularnewline

2874: \hline\hline

2875: N$_{t\bar{t}}$   & 147&$\pm$12 & 57&$\pm$6 &130&$\pm$10  & 66&$\pm$7 & 245&$\pm$20 & 233&$\pm$19\\	

2876: N$_{W+{\rm jets}}$   & 105&$\pm$5  & 10&$\pm$1 &  16&$\pm$2  &  2&$\pm$1 &\multirow{2}{*}{1294}&\multirow{2}{*}{$\pm$48}&\multirow{2}{*}{321}&\multirow{2}{*}{$\pm$30}\\	

2877: N$_{\rm other}$   &  27&$\pm$2  &  5&$\pm$1 &   8&$\pm$1  &  2&$\pm$1 &&&&\\	

2878: N$_{\rm multijet}$   &  27&$\pm$6  &  3&$\pm$2 &   6&$\pm$3  &  0&$\pm$2 &227&$\pm$28  &  70&$\pm$12\\

2879: \hline

2880: total  & 306&$\pm$14 & 74&$\pm$6 &159&$\pm$11 & 69&$\pm$7 &1766&$\pm$59&624&$\pm$37\\

2881: N$_{\rm data}$ &\multicolumn{2}{c}{294}&\multicolumn{2}{c}{76}&\multicolumn{2}{c}{179}&\multicolumn{2}{c}{58}&\multicolumn{2}{c}{1760}&\multicolumn{2}{c}{626}\\	

2882: \hline

2883: \end{tabular*}

2884: \label{tab:D0ljetsxsec}

2885: \end{table}

2886: 

2887: \begin{table}[t!]

2888:   \caption{\ttbar lepton + jets cross section measurements

2889:     performed thus far at the Run~II Tevatron with their integrated

2890:     luminosities, data selections and analysis methods

2891:     used. The first eleven results have been published; the others

2892:     are preliminary. The measurements marked with asterisks $(*)$ refer to 

2893:     $m_{t}$ of 178~GeV/c$^2$ rather than the standard 175~GeV/c$^2$.

2894:     Measurements marked with a double cross $(\ddagger)$ include the

2895:     luminosity uncertainty in the systematic uncertainty,

2896:     while measurements marked with a cross $(\dagger)$ have the first

2897:     uncertainty represent the statistical and systematic uncertainties

2898:     combined in quadrature and the

2899:     second representing the luminosity.}

2900:   \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}

2901:   \begin{center}

2902:     %

2903:     \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|l|c|}

2904:       \hline 

2905:       $\int{\cal L}dt$&\multirow{2}{*}{Sel.}&\multirow{2}{*}{$b$ tag}&$\sigma_{t\bar{t}}${\footnotesize $\pm$(stat.)$\pm$(syst.)$\pm$(lumi.)}&\multirow{2}{*}{Ref.}\\ 

2906:       ~[fb$^{-1}$] &  &  & {\hspace{1.5cm} [pb]} & \tabularnewline

2907:       \hline

2908:       \hline 

2909: 0.2 & $\ell$+jets & yes &$ 5.6^{+1.2}_{-1.1}\,^{+0.9}_{-0.6}~(\ddagger)     $& \cite{Acosta:2004hw}\\

2910: 0.2 & $\ell$+jets & yes &$ 6.0^{+1.5}_{-1.6}\,^{+1.2}_{-1.3}~(\ddagger)     $& \cite{Acosta:2004be}\\%

2911: 0.2 & $\ell$+jets &yes, soft-$\mu$ &$ 5.3 \pm 3.3^{+1.3}_{-1.0}~(\ddagger)$& \cite{Acosta:2005zd}\\

2912: 0.2 & $\ell$+jets & no &$ 6.6 \pm 1.1 \pm 1.5~(\ddagger)                  $& \cite{Acosta:2005am}\\

2913: 0.2 & $\ell$+jets & no &$ 6.7^{+1.4}_{-1.3}\,^{+1.6}_{-1.1}\pm 0.4          $& \cite{Abazov:2005ex}\\

2914: 0.2 & $\ell$+jets & yes &$ 8.6^{+1.6}_{-1.5}\pm 0.6~(\dagger)             $& \cite{Abazov:2005ey}\\

2915: 0.3 & $\ell$+jets & yes &$ 8.7 \pm 0.9^{+1.1}_{-0.9}~(*,\ddagger)         $& \cite{Abulencia:2006in}\\ %

2916: 0.3 & $\ell$+jets & yes &$ 8.9 \pm 1.0^{+1.1}_{-1.0}~(*,\ddagger)         $& \cite{Abulencia:2006kv}\\%

2917: 0.4 & $\ell$+jets & yes &$ 6.6 \pm  0.9\pm 0.4~(\dagger)                  $& \cite{Abazov:2006ka}\\

2918: 0.4 & $\ell$+jets & no &$ 6.4^{+1.3}_{-1.2}\pm  0.7\pm  0.4               $& \cite{Abazov:2007kg}\\

2919: 0.9 & $\ell$+jets &no, yes&$ 7.4 \pm 0.5 \pm 0.5\pm  0.5                  $& \cite{Abazov:2008gc}\\\hline

2920: 0.4 & $\ell$+jets &yes, soft-$\mu$ &$ 7.3^{+2.0}_{-1.8}\pm 0.4~(\dagger)  $& \cite{D05257}\\

2921: 0.7 & $\ell$+jets & yes &$ 8.5 \pm 0.6 \pm 1.0~(\ddagger)                 $& \cite{CDF8272}\\%

2922: 1.0 & $\ell$+jets & yes &$8.2 \pm0.5^{+0.8}_{-0.7}\pm0.5                  $& \cite{D05715}\\%

2923: 1.7 & $\ell$+jets &yes, soft-$e$&$ 7.8 \pm 2.4 \pm 1.5 \pm 0.5            $& \cite{CDF9348}\\ %

2924: 2.0 & $\ell$+jets &yes, soft-$\mu$&$ 8.7 \pm 1.1^{+0.9}_{-0.8} \pm 0.6    $& \cite{CDF9304}\\ %

2925: 2.7 & $\ell$+jets & yes &$ 7.2 \pm 0.4 \pm 0.5 \pm 0.4                    $& \cite{CDF9462}\\ %

2926: 2.8 & $\ell$+jets & no &$ 6.8 \pm 0.4 \pm 0.6 \pm 0.4                     $& \cite{CDF9474}\\ %

2927:       \hline 

2928: %

2929:     \end{tabular}

2930:     \label{tab:ljetsxsecs}

2931:     %

2932:   \end{center}

2933: \end{table}

2934: %

2935: 

2936: Both analyses exhibit a statistical correlation of 0.31, as determined

2937: from ensemble studies and are combined using the best linear unbiased

2938: estimate (BLUE) approach~\cite{Lyons:1988rp,Valassi:2003mu}. The

2939: resulting cross section is given in Table~\ref{tab:ljetsxsecs},

2940: together with the other lepton + jets channel results obtained thus

2941: far in Run~II.

2942: 

2943: \subsubsection{All-hadronic final state}

2944: \label{sec:ttbarxsecmeasallh}

2945: To select all-hadronic \ttbar decays typically requires at least

2946: six central energetic jets per event, and no

2947: isolated energetic leptons or significant \MET to be present. The

2948: overwhelming background process here is QCD multijet production,

2949: dominating over the signal by three orders of magnitude after

2950: online selection of events using triggers on multiple jets and $H_{T}$

2951: in the event above a certain threshold. This background is usually

2952: modeled from the data, as the theoretical description of

2953: final states with such high jet multiplicities has large

2954: uncertainties and datasets even more depleted from signal can be

2955: easily obtained, for example, by selecting a lower jet multiplicity.

2956: 

2957: After preselection, signal and background are separated further by

2958: applying $b$ jet identification and using multivariate discriminants

2959: based on topological and kinematic event properties.

2960: 

2961: CDF has published the most precise cross section analysis in the

2962: all-hadronic final state to date, based on 1~fb$^{-1}$ of

2963: data~\cite{Aaltonen:2007qf}. Events are required to have at least six

2964: and at most eight jets with $E_{T} \geq 15$~GeV, $\Delta R \geq 0.5$

2965: from each other and $|\eta| \leq 2$, no isolated energetic electrons

2966: or muons as used in the leptonic \ttbar analyses, and \MET divided by

2967: $\sqrt{H_{T}}$ of the selected jets has to be $< 3~\sqrt{\rm GeV}$.

2968: This yields S/B of $\approx$1/370. The signal purity is then

2969: increased using a neural network discriminant based on variables such as

2970: $H_T$, centrality, aplanarity and minimal/maximal invariant dijet or

2971: trijet mass values of all jet permutations. The signal is modeled using MC,

2972: and the selected data are used directly for the background, as the

2973: expected signal contribution in these events is very small.

2974: 

2975: At least one of the jets in each event is required to be $b$ tagged,

2976: and the sample composition is then determined in terms of the number of

2977: tags rather than events. The average number of tags per signal event

2978: for a given neural network cut is determined from MC, and is used to

2979: derive the \ttbar cross section from the observed excess in $b$ tags beyond

2980: the background expectation obtained from data. The tagging efficiencies

2981: of the simulation are corrected for differences relative to data. The cut

2982: on the neural network discriminant ($N_{\rm out}$) is optimized for the

2983: highest expected signal significance after $b$ tagging, taking both

2984: statistical and systematical uncertainties of signal and background

2985: into account, yielding $N_{\rm out} > 0.94$. This cut yields S/B

2986: of $\approx$1/12 before $b$ tagging, and 1/2 after tagging.

2987: 

2988: \begin{figure}[t!]

2989:   \begin{center} 

2990:     \includegraphics[width=.4\textwidth]{plots/CDFallhadxsec-nnAllTags.eps}\hspace*{1mm}

2991:     \includegraphics[width=.4\textwidth]{plots/CDFallhadxsec-nnTagsVsNjet.eps} 

2992:     \caption{Left: Number of $b$ tags in 1~fb$^{-1}$ of all-hadronic

2993:       candidate events selected by CDF versus neural network

2994:       discriminant ($N_{\rm out}$). Right: Number of tags versus jet

2995:       multiplicity after requiring $N_{\rm out} > 0.94$. The \ttbar

2996:       contributions are normalized to the measured cross section of

2997:       8.3~pb~\cite{Aaltonen:2007qf}.}

2998:       \label{fig:CDFalljetsxsec}

2999:   \end{center}

3000: \end{figure}

3001: \begin{table}[t]

3002:   \caption{Expected and observed yields of tags after requiring

3003:     $N_{\rm out} > 0.94$, with uncertainties corresponding

3004:     to statistical and systematic contributions added in quadrature.

3005:     The corrected background (BG) contribution accounts for the

3006:     signal contamination in the dataset used for its estimate. After

3007:     tagging, 1020 events remain in the signal sample with 1233 tags

3008:     and an expected background of $846 \pm 37$ tags. The average

3009:     number of tags in \ttbar events is $0.95 \pm

3010:     0.07$~\cite{Aaltonen:2007qf}.}

3011:   \addtolength{\tabcolsep}{-2pt}

3012:   \begin{center}

3013:     \begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}lcc|ccc}

3014:       \hline

3015:        & 4~jets & 5~jets & 6~jets & 7~jets & 8~jets \\

3016:       \hline\hline

3017:       BG & $16060\pm 575$ & $2750\pm 92$& $536\pm 17$& $255\pm 8$ & $146\pm 5$ \\

3018:       BG (corrected)  & $15961\pm 677$ & $2653\pm 112$& $481\pm 20$ & $223\pm 10$ & $142\pm 7$\\

3019:       \ttbar ($\sigma_{t \bar t}=8.3$~pb) & $120\pm 20$ & $266\pm 45$& $242\pm 41$& $101\pm 17$&$38\pm 7$\\

3020:       \hline

3021:       BG + $t \bar t$ & $16081\pm 677$ & $2919\pm 121$& $723\pm 46$ & $324\pm 20$ & $180\pm 10$\\

3022:       Data & 16555 & 3139 & 725 & 349 & 159\\

3023:       \hline

3024:     \end{tabular*}

3025:     \label{tab:CDFalljetsxsec}

3026:   \end{center}

3027: \end{table}

3028: 

3029: The dominant systematical uncertainty in the measurement arises from

3030: the uncertainty in jet energy scale, strongly impacting both the preselection of

3031: events and the input variables for the further neural network

3032: selection. The sample composition of candidate tags in data is

3033: illustrated in Fig.\ \ref{fig:CDFalljetsxsec}, and is detailed in

3034: Table~\ref{tab:CDFalljetsxsec}. The resulting cross section is given

3035: in Table~\ref{tab:alljetsxsecs}, together with the other all-hadronic

3036: channel results obtained thus far in Run~II.

3037: 

3038: %

3039: 

3040: \begin{table}[t]

3041:   \caption{\ttbar all-hadronic cross section measurements performed thus

3042:     far at the Run~II Tevatron with their integrated luminosities,

3043:     data selections and analysis methods used. All three

3044:     results have been published. The measurement marked with an asterisk

3045:     refers to $m_{t}$ of 178~GeV/c$^2$ rather than the standard

3046:     175~GeV/c$^2$.}

3047:   \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}

3048:   \begin{center}

3049:     %

3050:     \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|l|c|}

3051:       \hline 

3052:       $\int{\cal L}dt$&\multirow{2}{*}{Sel.}&\multirow{2}{*}{$b$ tag}&$\sigma_{t\bar{t}}${\footnotesize $\pm$(stat.)$\pm$(syst.)$\pm$(lumi.)}&\multirow{2}{*}{Ref.}\\ 

3053:       ~[fb$^{-1}$] &  &  & {\hspace{1.5cm} [pb]} & \tabularnewline

3054:       \hline

3055:       \hline 

3056: 0.3 & jets only & yes &$7.5\pm2.1^{+3.3}_{-2.2}\,^{+0.5}_{-0.4}~(*)$ & \cite{Abulencia:2006se}\\%

3057: 0.4 & jets only & yes &$4.5^{+2.0}_{-1.9}\,^{+1.4}_{-1.1}\pm  0.3$ & \cite{Abazov:2006yb}\\

3058: 1.0 & jets only & yes &$8.3\pm1.0^{+2.0}_{-1.5}\pm0.5$ & \cite{Aaltonen:2007qf}\\

3059:       \hline 

3060:     \end{tabular}

3061:     \label{tab:alljetsxsecs}

3062:     %

3063:   \end{center}

3064: \end{table}

3065: 

3066: %

3067: 

3068: \subsubsection{Hadronic $\tau$ channels}

3069: \label{sec:ttbarxsecmeashadtau}

3070: By choosing a more inclusive \ttbar event selection, hadronic $\tau$

3071: decays can be included as already mentioned in the discussion of lepton +

3072: jets and dilepton channels for the $\tau$ + lepton case. A first

3073: measurement without any explicit lepton identification has been

3074: published by CDF, selecting events with at least four jets, with at

3075: least one being $b$ tagged, and significant \MET not aligned

3076: with any jet. Since events with isolated energetic electrons or muons

3077: are rejected, the resulting sample is enriched in $\tau$

3078: + jets events~\cite{Abulencia:2006yk}.

3079: 

3080: Explicit reconstruction of hadronic $\tau$ decays is far more

3081: demanding and usually relies on multivariate discriminants. Based on

3082: the decay mode (1-prong or 3-prong, with or without associated

3083: electromagnetic subclusters from neutral pions), different

3084: discriminants can be deployed, exploiting differences between

3085: hadronic $\tau$ decays and jets. For example, isolation in the tracking system and

3086: calorimetry, shower shape, track multiplicity or correlations between

3087: tracks and clusters in the calorimeter can be applied. Using such discriminants, the

3088: $\tau$ + jets and $\tau$ + lepton \ttbar decay modes have been

3089: studied based on their experimental signature of \METns, at least one

3090: hadronic $\tau$ candidate, and at least four or two jets, and no

3091: or one isolated energetic electron or muon for the two channels, respectively. $b$ jet

3092: identification is crucial to improve sample purity in such analyses.

3093: 

3094: A first $\tau$ + jets cross section analysis has been performed by

3095: D0 on 0.3~fb$^{-1}$ of data, deploying a preselection and $\tau$

3096: identification as outlined above. $b$ jet identification and neural

3097: networks based on event topology and kinematics provide further separation

3098: of \ttbar signal and background that is mainly due to QCD multijet

3099: production, where jets mimic $\tau$ decays~\cite{D05234}. While the measurement suffers

3100: from large statistical uncertainties, it is a proof of principle that

3101: will benefit greatly from the tenfold increased dataset already in

3102: hand.

3103: 

3104: \begin{figure}

3105:   \begin{center} 

3106:     \includegraphics[width=.49\textwidth]{plots/D05451-ltauxsec-Fig04_b.eps}\hspace*{1mm}

3107:     \includegraphics[width=.49\textwidth]{plots/D05451-ltauxsec-Fig05_b.eps} 

3108:     \caption{Hadronic-$\tau$ $E_T$ spectrum before (left) and after

3109:       (right) $b$ tagging is applied in the preselected 1~fb$^{-1}$

3110:       $\ell + \tau$ sample analyzed by D0. The \ttbar signal is

3111:       normalized to the SM expectation. The highest $E_T$ bin

3112:       contains all overflows~\cite{D05451}.}

3113:       \label{fig:D0ltauxsec}

3114:   \end{center}

3115: \end{figure}

3116: D0 has also performed a first measurement of the \ttbar production

3117: rate in the $\tau$ + lepton final state based on 1~fb$^{-1}$ of

3118: data~\cite{D05451}. Events are required to have exactly one isolated

3119: electron or muon with $E_T > 15$~GeV and $|\eta| < 1.1$ or $E_T

3120: > 20$~GeV and $|\eta| < 2$, respectively, at least one $\tau$ candidate of opposite

3121: charge within $|\eta| < 1$, \MET between 15 and 200~GeV, at least two

3122: jets within $|\eta| < 2.5$ with $E_T > 20$~GeV and the leading

3123: jet above 30~GeV, and at least one of these jets identified as $b$ jet.

3124: Additional channel-specific background rejection is achieved by vetoing

3125: events collected in the $\mu\tau$ analysis with invariant mass of the

3126: isolated muon and a second non-isolated muon between 70 and

3127: 100~GeV/c$^2$. In the $e\tau$ channel, events are rejected where

3128: electron and \MET are aligned in azimuthal angle $\phi$ by requiring

3129: $\cos(\Delta\phi(e,\not\!\!E_T)) < 0.9$.

3130: The resulting sample composition is illustrated in

3131: Fig.\ \ref{fig:D0ltauxsec}, and detailed in

3132: Table~\ref{tab:D0ltauxsec} -- there are significant contributions to signal

3133: from the lepton + jets and dilepton channels. 

3134: 

3135: Background contributions arise from $W$ boson + jets production,

3136: $Z/\gamma^{*}$ + jets events with $Z/\gamma^{*}\to \ell^{+}\ell^{-}

3137: / \tau^{+}\tau^{-}$, and diboson production, as described by MC. The

3138: $W$ boson + jets contribution is normalized to data. Background from QCD

3139: multijet production is estimated from data where the lepton and $\tau$

3140: are of same charge, corrected for significant contributions from $W$ boson

3141: + jets and \ttbar production. The

3142: dominant systematic uncertainties in this analysis arise from limited

3143: background/MC statistics, the rate for jets or leptons to mimic $\tau$ decays,

3144: modeling of $b$ tagging uncertainties, and jet energy calibration.

3145: \begin{table}[t!]

3146:   \caption{Event yields and sample composition before and after $b$ tagging

3147:     in the preselected 1~fb$^{-1}$ $\ell + \tau$ sample

3148:     analyzed by D0. The \ttbar signal is normalized to the SM

3149:     expectation. The uncertainties are purely

3150:     statistical~\cite{D05451}.}

3151:   \begin{center}

3152:     %

3153:     \begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l|rr|rr}

3154:       \hline 

3155: & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{before $b$ tagging} &\multicolumn{2}{c}{after $b$ tagging}\\

3156: &$\mu\tau~~~~$&$e\tau~~~~$&$\mu\tau~~~~~$&$e\tau~~~~~$\\\hline\hline

3157: $W + $jets 					&$38.0  \pm 1.7 $&$	34.1  \pm 3.5 $&$	2.31  \pm 0.22 $&$	2.13  \pm 0.27  $\\	 

3158: $Z/\gamma^* \to ee, \mu\mu$ 		&$20.7  \pm 1.1 $&$	5.8  \pm 0.6  $&$	1.09  \pm 0.11 $&$	0.38  \pm 0.05  $\\

3159: $Z/\gamma^* \to \tau\tau$ 		&$19.6  \pm 1.2 $&$	7.5  \pm 0.6  $&$	1.02  \pm 0.10 $&$	0.54  \pm 0.06 	$\\ 

3160: Diboson 				&$2.8  \pm 0.1 	$&$	5.1  \pm 0.6  $&$	0.21  \pm 0.01 $&$	0.34  \pm 0.07 	$\\ 

3161: Multijet 				&$10.6  \pm 6.3 $&$	12.7  \pm 6.6 $&$	4.52  \pm 3.01 $&$	-1.27  \pm 1.77 $\\	 

3162: $t\bar{t} \to \ell + \tau $ 	        &$7.8  \pm 0.1 	$&$	6.67  \pm 0.1 $&$	5.64  \pm 0.04 $&$	4.70  \pm 0.05 	$\\ 

3163: $t\bar{t} \to \ell\ell$ 		&$4.3  \pm 0.1 	$&$	0.73  \pm 0.1 $&$	3.14  \pm 0.03 $&$	0.47  \pm 0.07 	$\\ 

3164: $t\bar{t} \to \ell +$ jets 		&$12.7  \pm 0.1 $&$	12.41  \pm 0.2$&$ 	8.40  \pm 0.11 $&$	7.88  \pm 0.12 	$\\ \hline

3165: Total Expected 				&$116.6  \pm 6.8$&$ 	85.0  \pm 7.7 $&$	26.33 \pm 3.02 $&$	15.17  \pm 1.97 	$\\ 

3166: Data 					&$104~~~~ 	 	$&$	69~~~~ 	      $&$	29~~~~~  	       $&$     18~~~~~                    $\\

3167: 

3168:       \hline 

3169:     \end{tabular*}

3170:     \label{tab:D0ltauxsec}

3171:     %

3172:   \end{center}

3173: \end{table}

3174: 

3175: %

3176: 

3177: \begin{table}[t!]

3178:   \caption{\ttbar cross section measurements using hadronic $\tau$ decays

3179:     performed thus far at the Run~II Tevatron, with their integrated

3180:     luminosities, data selections and analysis methods

3181:     used. The first two results have been published; the others are

3182:     preliminary. The measurement marked with a double cross $(\ddagger)$ includes

3183:     the luminosity uncertainty in the systematic uncertainty.}

3184:   \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}

3185:   \begin{center}

3186:     %

3187:     \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|l|c|}

3188:       \hline 

3189:       $\int{\cal L}dt$&\multirow{2}{*}{Sel.}&\multirow{2}{*}{$b$ tag}&$\sigma_{t\bar{t}}${\footnotesize $\pm$(stat.)$\pm$(syst.)$\pm$(lumi.)}&\multirow{2}{*}{Ref.}\\ 

3190:       ~[fb$^{-1}$] &  &  & {\hspace{1.5cm} [pb]} & \tabularnewline

3191:       \hline

3192:       \hline 

3193: 0.2  & $\ell+\tau$ & no &$< 5.2 \cdot\sigma_{\rm SM}$ (95\% C.L.)& \cite{Abulencia:2005et}\\

3194: 0.3  & \MET + jets & yes&$6.0\pm1.2^{+0.9}_{-0.7}~(\ddagger) $& \cite{Abulencia:2006yk}\\\hline%

3195: 0.3  & $\tau$+jets & yes&$ 5.1^{+4.3}_{-3.5} \pm 0.7 \pm 0.3 $& \cite{D05234}\\

3196: 0.4  & $\ell+\tau$ & no & significance at $\approx 1$ sd& \cite{CDF8376}\\ %

3197: 1.0  & $\ell+\tau$ & yes&$ 8.3^{+2.0}_{-1.8}\,^{+1.4}_{-1.2}\pm 0.5  $& \cite{D05451}\\

3198: 1.2  & $\ell+\tau$ & yes&$6.4^{+1.8}_{-1.6}\,^{+1.4}_{-1.3}\pm 0.4$& \cite{D05607}\\

3199: 2.2  & $\ell+\tau$ & yes&$7.3^{+1.3}_{-1.2}\,^{+1.2}_{-1.1}\pm 0.5 $& \cite{D05607}\\

3200:       \hline 

3201:     \end{tabular}

3202:     \label{tab:hadtauxsecs}

3203:     %

3204:   \end{center}

3205: \end{table}

3206: 

3207: %

3208: 

3209: The corresponding cross section is given

3210: in Table~\ref{tab:hadtauxsecs}, together with an update from an

3211: additional 1.2~fb$^{-1}$ of D0 data, as well as other results

3212: involving hadronic $\tau$ final states obtained thus far in Run~II.

3213: 

3214: \subsubsection{Summary}

3215: \label{sec:ttbarxsecmeassummary}

3216: %

3217: An overview of the current status of \ttbar cross section measurements

3218: performed in different decay channels is given in

3219: Fig.\ \ref{fig:ttbarxsecsummary} for CDF and D0, showing good

3220: agreement among channels, analysis methods and

3221: experiments. The theoretical predictions discussed in

3222: Section~\ref{sec:ttbarprod} are also shown for comparison as

3223: shaded/hatched bands, and also show very good agreement with the

3224: measurements.

3225: 

3226: CDF combines the results obtained in the lepton + jets and dilepton

3227: channels using 1.7 $-$ 2.8~fb$^{-1}$ samples of data, achieving a

3228: relative uncertainty on the result of 9\%~\cite{CDF9448}. The most

3229: precise single measurement is obtained in the lepton + jets channel

3230: using secondary-vertex $b$ tagging on 2.7~fb$^{-1}$ of data, yielding a

3231: relative uncertainty of about 10\%~\cite{CDF9462}. D0 combines the

3232: results from lepton + jets, dilepton and $\tau$ + lepton

3233: channels obtained from approximately 1.0~fb$^{-1}$ of data, yielding a

3234: relative uncertainty of about 11\%~\cite{D05715}. The most precise

3235: single D0 measurement, with a precision of 11\%, has been published in

3236: the lepton + jets channel, using both secondary-vertex $b$ tagging

3237: and kinematic information in 0.9~fb$^{-1}$ of

3238: data in a combined result~\cite{Abazov:2008gc}. For comparison, the final Run~I combined

3239: cross section from CDF~\cite{Affolder:2001wd,Affolder:2001wderr}

3240: and D0~\cite{Abazov:2002gy} had a precision of $\approx$25\%.

3241: Unfortunately, no combined cross section measurement from both

3242: experiments exists to date, unlike for top quark mass measurements

3243: (see Section~\ref{sec:topmassaverage}). However, such

3244: combination for the \ttbar production rate is planned in the future.

3245: %

3246: \begin{figure}[p]

3247:   \centering

3248:   \includegraphics[width=0.54\textwidth]{plots/topxsection_cdf0708.eps}

3249:   \includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{plots/dzero_ttbar_xsec_summary_august08.eps}

3250:   \caption{Current status of the \ttbar production cross section

3251:     measurements by CDF (top,~\cite{wwwtopcdf}) and D0

3252:     (bottom,~\cite{wwwtopd0}) compared with SM predictions

3253:     (shown as shaded/hatched bands). The channels contributing to the

3254:     combined results are highlighted

3255:     \cite{CDF9448,D05715}.} %

3256:   \label{fig:ttbarxsecsummary}

3257: \end{figure}

3258: 

3259: With increasing integrated luminosity, the statistical uncertainties

3260: are becoming less important and precision is starting to be limited by

3261: systematic uncertainties, which in turn can also be further

3262: constrained with more data. One of the main challenges for

3263: future measurements will be to study 

3264: systematic uncertainties in greater detail rather than use ``conservative'' estimates. The

3265: most precise single \ttbar production cross section measurement at the

3266: Run~II Tevatron with the anticipated total of 8~fb$^{-1}$ of data can be expected in the lepton

3267: + jets channel -- probably using both kinematical and $b$ tagging

3268: information -- at a relative precision of $\approx$8\%. This will be dominated by

3269: uncertainties on luminosity and systematic effects. For combination of results, the

3270: precision may ultimately be driven by the current luminosity uncertainty of

3271: 6\% for both experiments. The luminosity uncertainty could

3272: be avoided by measuring cross section ratios, for example, relative to $Z$

3273: boson production\footnote{After completion of this review, first such measurements became available from

3274: CDF~\cite{CDF9474v2,CDF9616}.}. Also, with large datasets, a ratio of \ttbar

3275: cross sections measured in different channels (such as

3276: the lepton + jets and the dilepton channels) could be obtained with good

3277: statistical precision while benefiting from cancellations of common

3278: systematic uncertainties.

3279: %

3280: 

3281: The precision of the measured \ttbar cross section now matches that

3282: of the theoretical predictions, which provides stringent tests of 

3283: perturbative QCD calculations. This furthers our

3284: understanding of the standard model, which still provides an excellent

3285: description of all current measurements. Based on the

3286: observed production rate alone, severe constraints on phenomena beyond the SM

3287: become feasible~\cite{Guchait:2007ux}. More detailed tests of the

3288: standard model predictions for \ttbar production will be described in

3289: the following sections. Via its mass dependence, the \ttbar production

3290: rate can also be used to test consistency of the SM with the top quark mass

3291: measurements performed at the Tevatron (with the benefit of easier

3292: theoretical interpretation of the mass parameter as discussed in

3293: Section~\ref{sec:massfromxsec}). Studying and comparing all available \ttbar

3294: final states, including those with hadronic $\tau$ decays,

3295: provides a probe for novel contributions that can affect the

3296: observed final states in different ways. For example, searches for

3297: charged Higgs bosons in top quark decays are discussed in

3298: Section~\ref{sec:H+topdecay}.

3299: %

3300: 

3301: %

3302: 

3303: \subsection{Top quark pair production mechanism}

3304: \label{sec:ttggprod}

3305: Top quark pair production at the Tevatron proceeds predominantly via

3306: $q\bar{q}$ annihilation, as described in Section~\ref{sec:ttbarprod}.

3307: The remaining fraction from gluon-gluon fusion ($f_{gg}$)

3308: is $15 \pm 5 \%$, with the uncertainty mainly reflecting that

3309: of the corresponding PDFs~\cite{Cacciari:2003fi}.

3310: 

3311: While the total \ttbar production rate has been studied extensively

3312: (see Section~\ref{sec:ttbarxsecmeas}) and has been found to be in agreement

3313: with the SM expectation, the production mechanism

3314: has not yet been subject to such scrutiny. A measurement of the fraction of

3315: \ttbar events produced via gluon-gluon fusion $f_{gg} = \sigma(gg \to

3316: t\bar{t})/\sigma(p\bar{p} \to t\bar{t})$ provides a test of QCD,

3317: and can contribute to a reduction in the uncertainties of

3318: the corresponding PDFs. In addition, contributions from extensions of

3319: the SM to \ttbar production could be

3320: unveiled~\cite{Zhang:1999qy}, some of which may have remained undetected

3321: because of the presence of new compensating decay mechanisms~\cite{Kane:1996ny}.

3322: %

3323: 

3324: \begin{figure}[!t]

3325:   \begin{center} 

3326:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/ttbarggprod-ng.eps}\hspace*{1mm}

3327:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/ttbarggproduction-trackpt.eps} 

3328:     \caption{Left: Correlation between the soft-track multiplicity

3329:     observed in collider data and the average number of gluons

3330:     in the corresponding Monte Carlo samples. Right: Fit result of the

3331:     soft-track multiplicity distribution observed in $b$-tagged lepton

3332:     $+$$\geq$4 jets \ttbar candidate events with a gluon-poor

3333:     and a gluon-rich template~\cite{CDF:2007kq}.}

3334:       \label{fig:ttggprod}

3335:   \end{center}

3336: \end{figure}

3337: %

3338: CDF performs a first measurement of $f_{gg}$ in a 1 fb$^{-1}$ $b$

3339: tagged lepton + jets dataset~\cite{CDF:2007kq}. The analysis is

3340: based on the fact that soft gluons are emitted with a higher

3341: probability from gluons than from quarks

3342: \cite{Gribov:1972ri,Lipatov:1974qm,Altarelli:1977zs,Dokshitzer:1977sg},

3343: %

3344: and the average number of charged particles (tracks) with low

3345: transverse momentum should therefore be higher in $gg\to t\bar{t}$

3346: events than in $q\bar{q}\to t\bar{t}$ events.

3347: 

3348: To avoid the large theoretical uncertainties on soft-gluon radiation

3349: in the Monte Carlo modeling of the multiplicity of soft tracks, $W$ +

3350: jets and dijet collider data, with well understood production mechanisms,

3351: are used to relate the observed soft-track multiplicity to

3352: the gluon content of a sample (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:ttggprod}). 

3353: Templates for the soft-track multiplicity distribution in gluon-poor

3354: and gluon-enriched events are obtained, respectively, from $W$ boson events

3355: without jets and dijet events with a leading-jet $E_T$ of 80$-$100 GeV.

3356: The observed soft-track multiplicity distribution in \ttbar candidate events is fitted with these

3357: templates. From the fit result, $f_{gg}$ is extracted and found to be

3358: $7 \pm 14\%\rm{(stat.)} \pm 7\%\rm{(syst.)}$, corresponding to a

3359: 95\% C.L.\ upper limit of 33\%.

3360: 

3361: %

3362: CDF uses a complementary second method to extract $f_{gg}$ from the

3363: same dataset, based on templates from a neural network using kinematic event

3364: properties to separate $gg\to t\bar{t}$, $q\bar{q}\to t\bar{t}$ and

3365: the dominant $W$ + jets background~\cite{Abulencia:2008su}, yielding a 95\%

3366: C.L.\ upper limit for $f_{gg}$ of $61\%$. Combining both results yields

3367: $f_{gg} = 7 ^{+15}_{-~7}\%\rm{(stat.+syst.)}$, in

3368: good agreement with the SM expectation.

3369: 

3370: CDF has also performed a first measurement of $f_{gg}$ in 

3371: 2~fb$^{-1}$ of dilepton data, based on the variation of the azimuthal

3372: correlation of the charged leptons for the different \ttbar

3373: production modes~\cite{CDF9432}. This difference arises from the fact

3374: that, close to threshold, top quark pairs are produced in a $^3S_1$

3375: state via $q\bar{q}$ annihilation and in a $^1S_0$ state via

3376: gluon-gluon fusion (see Section~\ref{sec:spincor}). Consequently,

3377: the top quark spins tend to be antiparallel for \ttbar production via

3378: gluon-gluon fusion and aligned for production via $q\bar{q}$

3379: annihilation, which is reflected in the azimuthal correlation of the

3380: charged leptons. The relative fraction of \ttbar production via gluon

3381: fusion is determined in a fit of the observed $\Delta\phi$

3382: distribution in data, with templates for $gg\to t\bar{t}$, $q\bar{q}\to

3383: t\bar{t}$ and background arising from diboson, $Z/\gamma^{*}$ +

3384: jets and $W$ boson + jets production, yielding $f_{gg} = 53

3385: ^{+35}_{-37}\% {\rm (stat.)}^{+7}_{-8}\% {\rm (syst.)}$,

3386: consistent with the SM.

3387: 

3388: \subsection{Top quark charge asymmetry}

3389: \label{sec:Afb}

3390: %

3391: The strong production of top quark pairs is symmetric under charge

3392: conjugation at leading order, implying it does not discriminate

3393: between top and antitop quarks. Considering that the initial proton-antiproton

3394: state at the Tevatron is not an eigenstate of charge conjugation, this symmetry

3395: is a coincidence. At higher orders, a charge

3396: asymmetry arises from interference between amplitudes that are

3397: symmetric and antisymmetric under the exchange of top and antitop

3398: quarks~\cite{Kuhn:1998jr,Kuhn:1998kw}, leading to an excess of top over

3399: antitop quarks in specific kinematic regions. 

3400: %

3401: One resultant observable is the 

3402: integrated forward-backward production asymmetry for inclusive \ttbar

3403: production at the Tevatron. This is predicted to be $5-10\%$ at

3404: NLO~\cite{Kuhn:1998jr,Kuhn:1998kw,Bowen:2005ap,Antunano:2007da,Almeida:2008ug}, implying that top quarks

3405: are preferentially emitted in the direction of the incoming protons.

3406: The asymmetry depends strongly on the region of phase space being probed, and

3407: particularly on the production of additional jets: While the

3408: asymmetry for exclusive \ttbar production without additional jets is

3409: predicted to be 6.4\%~\cite{Bowen:2005ap}, the inclusive \ttbar

3410: production with one additional jet exhibits an asymmetry of about $-7\%$

3411: at LO~\cite{Bowen:2005ap,Dittmaier:2007wz}, which is reduced drastically

3412: to $(-1.5 \pm 1.5)\%$ at NLO~\cite{Dittmaier:2007wz}.

3413: 

3414: The size of higher order corrections for the \ttbar + jet

3415: subprocess illustrates that higher-order evaluations of the whole

3416: process are still necessary for the total asymmetry prediction to

3417: converge and correctly describe the partial cancellations of the

3418: various interference contributions. It should also be noted that in the

3419: above theoretical predictions, the top quark decay and possible effects

3420: on the asymmetry from reconstruction of the final-state objects

3421: are not considered. The top quark charge asymmetry is also sensitive

3422: to extensions of the standard model in \ttbar production involving, e.g.,

3423: axigluons~\cite{Antunano:2007da}, technicolor~\cite{Hill:1994hp} or

3424: additional neutral $Z'$ gauge bosons~\cite{Carena:2004xs}.

3425: Consequently, a measurement of the asymmetry can be used to set limits

3426: on such processes, particularly for extending the sensitivity of searches

3427: for \ttbar production via heavy resonances (see

3428: Section~\ref{sec:BSMprod-reso}) to include not only those of narrow

3429: width but also wide resonances.

3430: 

3431: D0 has published the first measurement of the integrated

3432: forward-backward charge asymmetry in \ttbar production, based on a 0.9

3433: fb$^{-1}$ $b$ tagged lepton + jets dataset~\cite{Abazov:2007qb}.

3434: The \ttbar system is reconstructed using a constrained kinematic fit,

3435: where the charged lepton is used to differentiate between the top and the

3436: antitop quark. The signed rapidity difference of the top and the antitop

3437: quark $\Delta y = y_t - y_{\bar{t}}$ is used as an observable from which

3438: the charge asymmetry is obtained as $A_{fb} = (N_f-N_b)/(N_f+N_b)$,

3439: with $N_f$ ($N_b$) being the event yields with positive (negative)

3440: $\Delta y$. The sample composition is determined in a template fit

3441: based on a multivariate kinematic likelihood discriminant for both

3442: signs of the reconstructed $\Delta y$ simultaneously as shown in

3443: Fig.\ \ref{fig:Afb}.

3444: \begin{figure}[!t]

3445:   \begin{center} 

3446:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/Afb-LHfwd.eps}\hspace*{1mm}

3447:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/Afb-LHbwd.eps} 

3448:     \caption{Likelihood-discriminant output distribution for data with

3449:     $\geq$4 jets, overlaid with the result of a template fit

3450:     determining the sample composition for events with $\Delta y > 0$

3451:     (left) and $\Delta y < 0$ (right)~\cite{Abazov:2007qb}.}

3452:       \label{fig:Afb}

3453:   \end{center}

3454: \end{figure}

3455: 

3456: The resulting measurement is not corrected for reconstruction and

3457: acceptance due to the limited theoretical knowledge of the

3458: shape of the asymmetry. Instead, a prescription is provided to model

3459: the detector acceptance at the particle level, for ease of comparison of any

3460: model with the measurement. For comparison with the

3461: standard model, a slightly more detailed prescription than the one

3462: provided in Ref.~\cite{Abazov:2007qb} is applied to the prediction from the

3463: \mcatnlo~\cite{Frixione:2002ik,Frixione:2003ei} generator, and found to be in

3464: agreement with the measurement for different jet

3465: multiplicities, including a change in the sign of the asymmetry, as

3466: shown in Table~\ref{tab:Afb}. The dominant systematic uncertainty for

3467: the $\geq$4 jet sample arises from the relative jet energy

3468: calibration between simulation and data, and for its

3469: subsamples from event migration between the subsamples when splitting

3470: the sample up into one with exactly four and one with at least five

3471: jets. However, these systematics are negligible compared to the statistical

3472: uncertainties. The measurement is also used to derive 95\% C.L.\ limits on the

3473: fraction of \ttbar events that are produced via a specific $Z'$

3474: resonance model~\cite{Hill:1994hp,Harris:1999ya} with parity-violating

3475: couplings as a function of the resonance mass.

3476: %

3477: \begin{table}[!t]

3478:   \caption{$A_{\text {fb}}^{\text {pred}}$: \mcatnlo\  SM

3479:     prediction for the observed \ttbar charge asymmetry in the

3480:     D0 detector, including uncertainties from acceptance and dilution

3481:     (misreconstruction of sign in $\Delta y$). $A_{\text

3482:       {fb}}^{\text {obs}}$: Uncorrected \ttbar charge asymmetry observed

3483:     by D0~\cite{Abazov:2007qb}.}

3484:   \begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}r@{\,$\pm$\,\extracolsep{0pt}}l@{(stat.)\,$\pm$}l@{(acc.)\,$\pm$\,}l@{(dil.)\extracolsep{\fill}}r@{}}

3485:     \hline

3486:     $N_{jet}$ & \multicolumn{4}{c}{$A_{\text {fb}}^{\text {pred}}$~[\%]} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$A_{\text {fb}}^{\text {obs}}$~[\%]} \\

3487:     \hline

3488:     \hline	

3489:     $\geq 4$ &   0.8  & 0.2 & 1.0 & 0.0 & $12 \pm 8\,\rm{(stat.)} \pm 1\,\rm{(syst.)}$\\

3490:     $=4$     &   2.3  & 0.2 & 1.0 & 0.1 & $19 \pm 9\,\rm{(stat.)} \pm  2\,\rm{(syst.)}$\\

3491:     $\geq 5$ & $-4.9$ & 0.4 & 1.0 & 0.2 & $-16 ^{+15}_{-17}\,\rm{(stat.)} \pm  3\,\rm{(syst.)}$\\

3492:     \hline

3493:   \end{tabular*}

3494:   \label{tab:Afb}

3495: \end{table}

3496: 

3497: %

3498: CDF has obtained two measurements of $A_{\text {fb}}$

3499: based on 1.9~fb$^{-1}$ $b$-tagged lepton + jets data, using

3500: different observables after reconstruction of the \ttbar kinematics in

3501: a constrained fit~\cite{CDF9156,CDF9169,Aaltonen:2008hc}. CDF

3502: chooses a different approach for the measurements than D0

3503: by providing results both

3504: before and after background subtraction {\em and} correction for acceptance

3505: and reconstruction effects.

3506: 

3507: The first analysis uses as observable the rapidity difference between the

3508: hadronically and semileptonically decaying (anti-) top quark multiplied by

3509: the lepton charge~\cite{CDF9156,Aaltonen:2008hc}. This is equivalent to $\Delta y$

3510: in the measurement reported by D0. After background subtraction, asymmetries of $0.119

3511: \pm 0.064, 0.132 \pm 0.075$ and $0.079\pm0.123$ are observed 

3512: for jet multiplicities $\geq4, =4$ and $\geq5$, respectively,

3513: which is consistent with the measurement by D0, and which

3514: correspond to \mcatnlo\  predictions of $0.017\pm0.007, 0.038\pm0.008$ and

3515: $-0.033\pm0.012$ (errors are statistical). The result for the

3516: inclusive sample with at least four jets is then corrected for

3517: reconstruction and acceptance effects, yielding $A_{\text {fb}}^{\text

3518: {corr}} = 24 \pm 13\,\rm{(stat.)} \pm 4\,\rm{(syst.)\%}$. The

3519: dominant systematic uncertainty comes from the shape uncertainty of

3520: the $\Delta y$-distribution. The result is bigger than expected from

3521: %

3522: NLO predictions, but consistent within errors.

3523: 

3524: The second analysis measures the charge asymmetry using the product of

3525: inverse lepton charge and $\cos\theta_{t_{\rm{had}}}$ as observable,

3526: where $\theta_{t_{\rm{had}}}$ is the angle of the top quark with the

3527: hadronic decay chain relative to the proton beam~\cite{CDF9169,Aaltonen:2008hc}.

3528: Since this measurement is performed in the laboratory frame rather

3529: than the parton rest frame, the asymmetry is reduced by about 30\%~\cite{Antunano:2007da}.

3530: For $\geq4$ jets, the corrected asymmetry is 

3531: $A_{\text {fb}}^{\text {corr}} = 17 \pm 7\,\rm{(stat.)} \pm

3532: 4\,\rm{(syst.)\%}$, with the dominant systematic uncertainty arising

3533: from background shape and its normalization. This result is consistent

3534: %

3535: with the theoretical prediction at the level of two standard deviations (sd) for a Gaussian distribution.

3536: 

3537: It should be noted that the forward-backward asymmetry in the

3538: laboratory frame vanishes at the LHC due to the symmetric initial

3539: state, in contrast to the Tevatron $p\bar{p}$ collider. The

3540: dominance of \ttbar production via the charge symmetric gluon fusion reaction at $\sqrt{s}= 14$~TeV

3541: reduces the observable charge asymmetry at the LHC.

3542: %

3543: 

3544: \subsection{Top quark pair production kinematics}

3545: \label{sec:topkinematics}

3546: New contributions to \ttbar production can alter the observed

3547: event kinematics, which can be exploited in searches for such processes, as

3548: described in Section~\ref{sec:BSMprod}. The basic kinematic properties

3549: of leptons, jets, \MET and corresponding angular distributions are

3550: continuously compared to the SM expectation, both in

3551: signal-enriched datasets and signal-depleted control samples

3552: exhibiting features similar to the signal, in all studies of top quark

3553: properties and especially in the cross section analyses. Thus far, no

3554: significant deviation from the SM expectation has been found

3555: that would be indicative of new physics contributions to top quark

3556: samples.

3557: %

3558: 

3559: %

3560: In Run~I, CDF and D0 observed a slight excess of the \ttbar production

3561: rate over the SM prediction in the dilepton channel,

3562: especially in the $e\mu$ final state~\cite{Abe:1997iz,Abachi:1997re}.

3563: Since some of these events had rather large \MET and lepton-$p_T$,

3564: their consistency with the SM was questioned and, for example, the

3565: kinematic compatibility of these events with cascade decays of

3566: heavy supersymmetric quarks was pointed out~\cite{Barnett:1996hw}.

3567: Triggered by this, CDF performed a search for anomalous \ttbar

3568: kinematics in Run~II, based on 0.2 fb$^{-1}$ dilepton data

3569: yielding 13 candidate events~\cite{Acosta:2004av}. 

3570: 

3571: A priori four

3572: kinematic event variables, including \MET and leading-lepton $p_T$, were

3573: chosen to quantify any possible deviations of the observed distributions from

3574: SM predictions. Using a shape comparison based on the

3575: Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistic, no significant discrepancy was found, and

3576: the probability of observing a sample less consistent with the SM

3577: was determined to be 1.6\%. Including systematic uncertainties,

3578: the $p$-value was 1.0-4.5\%, where the lowest value was obtained

3579: by lowering the background expectation by one standard

3580: deviation. Consequently, presence of processes beyond the SM,

3581: with high \MET and high lepton-$p_T$, are not favored by these data.

3582: 

3583: It is also of great interest to study the kinematic

3584: properties of the top quark itself and to compare these with the

3585: SM expectation. In Run~I, D0 performed such an analysis

3586: and found good agreement with the SM~\cite{Abbott:1998dc,

3587: Abachi:1997jv}, which was then also confirmed through a dedi\-cated study of

3588: the $p_T$ spectrum of the top quark by CDF~\cite{Affolder:2000dt}. A

3589: corresponding analysis has not yet been published in Run~II. However,

3590: a measurement of the differential \ttbar production cross section

3591: $d\sigma/dM_{t\bar{t}}$ has been performed by CDF using 1.9~fb$^{-1}$

3592: of Run~II data, as described in Section~\ref{sec:dsigma}, and also shows

3593: good agreement with the SM~\cite{CDF9157}.

3594: 

3595: \subsection{Spin correlations in \ttbar production}

3596: \label{sec:spincor}

3597: Top quark pairs are expected to be produced essentially unpolarized in

3598: hadron collisions when the incident particles are unpolarized. A small

3599: polarization at the percent level is induced by QCD

3600: processes~\cite{Dharmaratna:1989jr,Bernreuther:1995cx,Dharmaratna:1996xd},

3601: and is perpendicular to the production plane, as strong

3602: interactions conserve parity. A measurement of this effect will be

3603: very difficult both at the Tevatron and the LHC, which in return suggests

3604: to use a corresponding analysis to probe for non-standard

3605: contributions in \ttbar production~\cite{Bernreuther:2003ga}. An even

3606: smaller additional polarization in the production plane arises

3607: from mixed strong and weak contributions to \ttbar production at order

3608: $\alpha_s^2\alpha$~\cite{Bernreuther:2005is}.

3609: %

3610: 

3611: While no observable spin

3612: polarization in \ttbar production is predicted in the framework of the standard model, the spins of the top

3613: and the antitop quark are expected to be correlated~\cite{Kuhn:1983ix}.

3614: This correlation depends both on the production mode of the \ttbar pair and the

3615: production energy. Close to threshold, the top quark pair is

3616: produced in a $^3S_1$ state via $q\bar{q}$ annihilation and in a

3617: $^1S_0$ state via gluon-gluon fusion

3618: %

3619: ~\cite{Hara:1989yqa,Arens:1992fg}. Consequently, the top quark spins

3620: are (anti-) parallel and the top quarks have opposite (same)

3621: helicities for \ttbar production via $q\bar{q}$ annihilation

3622: (gluon-gluon fusion). Above threshold, this simple picture becomes

3623: more complicated, as effects of orbital angular momentum must be

3624: taken into account. In the high-energy limit, where the top quark mass

3625: can be neglected, the conservation of chirality dictates that

3626: top and antitop quarks be produced with opposite helicities. Since

3627: \ttbar production at the Tevatron proceeds mainly via $q\bar{q}$ annihilation,

3628: as opposed to the LHC where the main contribution comes from

3629: gluon-gluon fusion, the observable correlation will have opposite

3630: signs at the two colliders~\cite{Bernreuther:2004jv}.

3631: %

3632: 

3633: The short lifetime of the top quark (see

3634: Section~\ref{sec:tdecaywidth}) assures that its spin information is passed on to

3635: its decay products, and is reflected in their corresponding angular

3636: distributions. This provides experimental access to spin correlations,

3637: and a way to check whether the top quark can indeed be considered as a free

3638: quark. The resulting indirect limits on the top quark lifetime 

3639: (see Section~\ref{sec:toplifetime}) can provide

3640: limits on the CKM matrix element $|V_{tb}|$, free from the assumption

3641: of three quark families~\cite{Stelzer:1995gc} together with the

3642: measurement of the top quark branching fractions

3643: (Section~\ref{sec:Rmeasurement}). In addition,

3644: spin correlations probe the dynamics of top quark

3645: production and decay for possible contributions from physics beyond the SM.

3646: 

3647: %

3648: The down-type ($T_3 = -\frac{1}{2}$) decay products of the $W$ boson

3649: from top quark decay are most sensitive to the original top quark

3650: spin. Their angular distribution in the top-quark rest frame is

3651: described by $1+\cos\theta$, with $\theta$ being the angle between the

3652: line of flight of the down-type fermion and the top spin

3653: direction. The experimental difficulties of distinguishing between

3654: jets from up-type and down-type quarks (charm tagging would help only

3655: in 50\% of the cases) can be avoided by focusing on the dilepton

3656: final state, where the charged (down-type) leptons are clearly identified.

3657: 

3658: At the Tevatron, an optimal spin-quantization basis is provided by the

3659: ``off-diagonal'' basis~\cite{Parke:1996pr,Mahlon:1997uc}, where the

3660: spins of top and antitop quarks produced by $q\bar{q}$ annihilation

3661: are fully aligned for all energies, and only the contribution of top

3662: quark pairs from gluon-gluon fusion leads to a reduction of

3663: the correlation. The off-diagonal basis is defined via the top quark's

3664: velocity $\beta^\ast$ and scattering angle $\theta^\ast$ in

3665: the collision rest frame of the incoming partons. The quantization

3666: axis then forms an angle $\psi$ with the proton-antiproton beam axis,

3667: defined by $\tan\psi = \beta^{\ast 2} \sin\theta^\ast \cos\theta^\ast /

3668: (1-\beta^{\ast 2}\sin^2\theta^\ast)$. Consequently, in the limit of

3669: $\beta^\ast\to0$ (top quark production at rest), the spins of top and

3670: antitop quarks point along the beam axis in the same direction. At

3671: very high energies, the spins are aligned with respect to the

3672: direction of the \ttbar momenta.

3673: 

3674: Using as observables the angles $\theta_+$ and $\theta_-$ of the

3675: down-type fermions relative to the quantization axis in the rest

3676: frame of their respective parent (anti-) top quark, the spin

3677: correlation is given by~\cite{Mahlon:1995zn}:

3678: \begin{eqnarray}

3679: {1\over \sigma}{d^2\sigma\over d(\cos \theta_+)d(\cos \theta_-)}&=&

3680: {1+\kappa \cdot \cos \theta_+ \cdot \cos \theta_-\over 4},

3681: \end{eqnarray}

3682: where the correlation coefficient $\kappa$ is predicted to be +0.88 at

3683: Run~I of the Tevatron when using the off-diagonal basis. Since the

3684: distribution is symmetric under exchange of the two angles, an

3685: electric charge measurement of the top decay products is not

3686: necessary.

3687: %

3688: 

3689: D0 performed a first search for evidence of spin correlations in

3690: \ttbar production in Run~I, using a 0.1 fb$^{-1}$ dilepton data sample

3691: containing six candidate events~\cite{Abbott:2000dt}. From the

3692: dependence of a likelihood function on $\kappa$, at 68\% C.L.\ a lower

3693: limit on $\kappa$ of $-0.25$ was extracted. This is in

3694: agreement with the standard model expectation and disfavors

3695: anti-correlation of spins ($\kappa = -1$) that would arise from \ttbar

3696: production via a scalar particle. While this limit is rather

3697: weak, it is a proof of principle that the analysis can be performed.

3698: Unfortunately, there has been no result as yet from Run~II, although it

3699: would greatly benefit from the increase in data already available.

3700: \\

3701: 

3702: \subsection{Search for associated Higgs boson production}

3703: \label{sec:ttH}

3704: D0 performs a first search for associated \ttbar and standard model

3705: Higgs boson production in the $t\bar{t}b\bar{b}$ final state in

3706: 2.1~fb$^{-1}$ of $b$ tagged lepton + jet data~\cite{D05739}. While

3707: the observation of a significant signal in this channel is beyond the

3708: reach of the Tevatron, this analysis can nevertheless

3709: contribute to future combinations of the Tevatron searches for

3710: Higgs bosons at low masses, as favored by the standard model (see

3711: Section~\ref{sec:topmassaverage}). The investigated events exhibit

3712: high jet and $b$ tag multiplicities that were not studied separately

3713: before. It is therefore interesting to search for deviations from the

3714: SM predictions that could arise, e.g., from

3715: %

3716: anomalous top-Higgs couplings~\cite{Feng:2003uv} or from a new quark singlet of

3717: charge $\frac{2}{3} e$~\cite{AguilarSaavedra:2006gw}.

3718: %

3719: \begin{figure}[!t]

3720:   \begin{center} 

3721:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth, height = 50 mm]{plots/D0ttH-H58F3e.eps}\hspace*{1mm}

3722:     \includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{plots/D0ttH-H58F6.eps} 

3723:     \caption{Left: $H_T$ distribution observed in D0's 2.1~fb$^{-1}$

3724:       lepton + jets data with four jets and at least three $b$

3725:       tags, compared with expected standard model background processes and

3726:       $t\bar{t}H$ signal scaled up by a factor of 100. Right: Event

3727:       display ($xy$-view along the proton beam direction) for the

3728:       triple $b$ tagged event of highest $H_T$ (444~GeV). The first

3729:       three jets have $b$ tags~\cite{D05739}.}

3730: %

3731:       \label{fig:D0ttH}

3732:   \end{center}

3733: \end{figure}

3734: 

3735: The signal signature has the \ttbar lepton + jets event

3736: characteristics, but with two additional $b$ jets from the Higgs boson

3737: decay. The main background arises from \ttbar with additional

3738: heavy-flavor jet production, but also $W$ boson + jets and QCD

3739: multijet production contribute to the background. For signal

3740: discrimination, the shape of the $H_T$ distribution of the selected

3741: jets is used in events with four or at least five jets and one, two or

3742: at least three $b$ tags. The observed events in all these

3743: distributions are consistent with background expectation, which is

3744: especially interesting for the events with at least three $b$ tags

3745: that were studied separately for the first time.

3746: Figure~\ref{fig:D0ttH} shows the observed $H_T$ distribution for

3747: events with four jets and at least three $b$ tags, and an event display

3748: for the triple $b$ tagged event of highest $H_T$.

3749: 

3750: Since no signal is observed, 95\% C.L.\ limits on $t\bar{t}H$

3751: production multiplied by ${\cal B}(H\to b\bar{b})$ 

3752: are derived for Higgs boson masses between 105

3753: and 155 GeV/c$^2$. For a Higgs boson mass of 115~GeV/c$^2$, the

3754: expected limit is a factor of 45 larger than the SM production rate, while

3755: the observed limit is a factor of 64 above the SM

3756: expectation. Optimization of the preselection (currently

3757: corresponding to the standard \ttbar selection) for the $t\bar{t}H$

3758: signal, and of the signal discrimination using additional kinematic variables, is underway.

3759: %

3760: 

3761: \subsection{Search for top quark pair production beyond the standard model}

3762: \label{sec:BSMprod}

3763: \subsubsection{Search for a narrow-width resonance decaying into $t\bar{t}$}

3764: \label{sec:BSMprod-reso}

3765: The existence of yet undiscovered heavy resonances could be revealed

3766: through their decays into top quark pairs, which would add a resonant

3767: contribution to the standard model process. Theories beyond the

3768: standard model predict the existence of massive $Z$-like

3769: bosons, for example, such as Kaluza-Klein excitations of the

3770: gluon~\cite{Lillie:2007yh} or of $\gamma$ and $Z$

3771: bosons~\cite{Rizzo:1999en}, extended gauge

3772: theories~\cite{Rosner:1996eb,Leike:1998wr}, massive axigluons with

3773: axial vector couplings~\cite{Sehgal:1987wi} or

3774: topcolor~\cite{Hill:1991at,Hill:1993hs}. 

3775: 

3776: The wealth of such models demonstrates the importance of

3777: model-independent searches. One general way an additional

3778: production mode can be observed -- provided the resonance $X$ decaying

3779: to \ttbar is sufficiently heavy and narrow -- is to analyze the \ttbar

3780: invariant mass distribution for an excess over 

3781: expectation. In the corresponding analyses performed at the Tevatron,

3782: no significant deviations from the SM expectation have thus far

3783: been observed, resulting in 95\% C.L.\ upper limits on

3784: $\sigma_X\cdot{\cal B}(X\to t\bar{t})$ as a function of resonance

3785: mass $M_X$.

3786: 

3787: These results can be used to set lower mass limits for specific

3788: benchmark models that provide easy comparison. For example,

3789: topcolor~\cite{Hill:1991at,Hill:1993hs} provides a

3790: dynamic electroweak symmetry breaking mechanism via a top quark pair

3791: condensate~\cite{Cvetic:1997eb} $Z'$, formed by a new strong gauge

3792: force, that couples preferentially to the third fermion generation.

3793: Particularly, a topcolor-assisted technicolor

3794: model~\cite{Hill:1994hp,Harris:1999ya} predicts this $Z'$ boson to

3795: couple strongly only to the first and third generation of quarks, while

3796: exhibiting no significant coupling to leptons. This leptophobic and

3797: topophyllic $Z'$ boson has a significant cross section

3798: $\sigma(p\bar{p}\to Z'\to t\bar{t})$ that is observable at the Tevatron for a

3799: variety of masses and widths, and is used as a reference model.

3800: 

3801: CDF and D0 performed model-independent searches for narrow massive

3802: vector bosons decaying into \ttbar already in Run~I in lepton +

3803: jets datasets of 106~pb$^{-1}$ and 130~pb$^{-1}$, respectively. Using

3804: the best kinematic fit to the \ttbar hypothesis in each event, the

3805: \ttbar invariant mass distribution was reconstructed and no excess

3806: observed above expectation. The resulting upper

3807: limits on $\sigma_X\cdot{\cal B}(X\to t\bar{t})$ are turned into

3808: 95\% C.L.\ mass limits of $M_{Z'} > 480$~GeV/c$^2$ for

3809: CDF~\cite{Affolder:2000eu} and $M_{Z'} > 560$~GeV/c$^2$ for

3810: D0~\cite{Abazov:2003aw}. For these results, a width of the $Z'$

3811: (or $X$) of 1.2\% of its mass is assumed, which is well below the

3812: detector mass resolutions for \ttbar systems. Consequently, the

3813: results are dominated by detector resolution and

3814: independent of $\Gamma_{Z'}$ for values below the mass resolution of a

3815: few percent ($\approx 0.04 M_{Z'}$ for D0 in

3816: Run~I~\cite{Jain:2003bm}). This kind of resonance width is also used in

3817: %

3818: the Run~II measurements described below.

3819: 

3820: \begin{figure}[!t]

3821:   \begin{center} 

3822:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/Zprimemass.eps}\hspace*{1mm}

3823:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/Zprimelimit.eps} 

3824:     \caption{Left: Expected and observed $t\bar{t}$ invariant mass

3825:     distribution in lepton + jets events with four or more jets. Right:

3826:     Expected and observed 95\% C.L.\ upper limits on

3827:     $\sigma_X\cdot{\cal B}(X\to t\bar{t})$~\cite{D05600}.}

3828:       \label{fig:ttresonance}

3829:   \end{center}

3830: \end{figure}

3831: In Run~II, both CDF and D0 search for a generic heavy

3832: resonance $X$ of narrow width ($\Gamma_X=0.012M_X$) compared to the

3833: detector mass resolution in $b$ tagged lepton + jets datasets. The

3834: \ttbar invariant mass spectrum is reconstructed using either the best

3835: kinematic fit to the \ttbar production hypothesis (CDF) or directly

3836: from the four-momenta of the up to four leading jets, the lepton and

3837: the neutrino momentum (D0). The latter approach was shown to provide

3838: greater sensitivity for large resonance masses than the previously used

3839: constrained kinematic fit, and also allows for the inclusion of data with

3840: fewer than four jets in case jets merged. As both experiments

3841: observe no significant deviation from SM expectation, 95\% C.L.

3842: upper limits on $\sigma_X\cdot{\cal B}(X\to t\bar{t})$ are given for

3843: values of $M_X$ between 450 and 900 GeV/c$^2$ (CDF) and $M_X$ between 350

3844: and 1000 GeV/c$^2$ (D0, see Fig.\ \ref{fig:ttresonance}) in

3845: increments of 50~GeV/c$^2$.

3846: 

3847: Both experiments provide 95\% C.L.\ mass limits for the leptophobic

3848: top\-color-assisted technicolor $Z'$ boson as a benchmark model.

3849: With 1~fb$^{-1}$, CDF finds $M_{Z'}>$~720 GeV/c$^2$ (expected limit =

3850: 710 GeV/c$^2$)~\cite{CDFres:2007dia}, while D0 finds $M_{Z'}>$~760

3851: GeV/c$^2$ (expected limit = 795 GeV/c$^2$)~\cite{D05600} using 2.1

3852: fb$^{-1}$ of data, which supersedes a previous result on

3853: 0.9~fb$^{-1}$ of data~\cite{Abazov:2008ny}. CDF also obtains a result

3854: on a subset of 0.7~fb$^{-1}$ of the data analyzed above, using an

3855: untagged lepton + jets sample where $b$ tag information only

3856: contributes as a way to reduce jet combinatorics in a standard model \ttbar

3857: matrix element based reconstruction of $M_{t\bar{t}}$. This  yields a

3858: slightly better limit than the analysis on the full 1~fb$^{-1}$ of $M_{Z'} >

3859: 725$~GeV/c$^2$~\cite{CDFres:2007dz}.

3860: %

3861: 

3862: For future studies, it would be interesting to see how sensitive the

3863: observed limits are to the assumption of $Z$ boson-like couplings used

3864: in the analyses. The limits obtained apply to resonances of narrow

3865: width only. Wider resonances could be detected by studying the \ttbar

3866: differential cross section (see Section~\ref{sec:dsigma}) or the

3867: forward-backward charge asymmetry in \ttbar production (see

3868: Section~\ref{sec:Afb}).

3869: 

3870: \subsubsection{Search for $t\bar{t}$ production via a massive gluon}

3871: Instead of a new color singlet particle decaying into \ttbar, as

3872: described in the previous subsection, there could also be a new

3873: massive color octet particle $G$ contributing to \ttbar

3874: production~\cite{Hill:1993hs}. Such a ``massive gluon'' production

3875: mode would interfere with the corresponding standard model production

3876: process.

3877: Assuming SM top decay, CDF has performed a search for a

3878: corresponding contribution by comparing the \ttbar invariant mass

3879: distribution in a 1.9~fb$^{-1}$ $b$ tagged lepton + jets dataset

3880: with the standard model expectation. As the largest discrepancy 

3881: relative to the standard model is found to be 1.7 sd for 

3882: masses and widths of 400 GeV/c$^2$ $\leq M_{G} \leq$ 800 GeV/c$^2$ and

3883: 0.05 $\leq \Gamma_{G}/M_{G} \leq $ 0.5, respectively, 95\% C.L.\ upper and lower

3884: limits are extracted on the corresponding coupling strengths of such

3885: massive gluons~\cite{CDF9164}.

3886: 

3887: \subsubsection{Measurement of the $t\bar{t}$ differential cross section

3888:   $(d\sigma/dM_{t\bar{t}})$}

3889: \label{sec:dsigma}

3890: \begin{figure}[!t]

3891:   \begin{center} 

3892:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth, height=45mm]{plots/recomtt.eps}\hspace*{1mm}

3893: %

3894:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth, height=45mm]{plots/unfoldedmtt.eps} 

3895: %

3896:     \caption{Left: Expected and observed reconstructed \ttbar invariant mass

3897:       distribution in $b$ tagged lepton + jets events with at least four jets. Right:

3898:       Corresponding \ttbar differential cross section after

3899:       background subtraction and unfolding,

3900:       compared to the SM expectation~\cite{CDF9157}.}

3901:       \label{fig:diffxsec}

3902:   \end{center}

3903: \end{figure}

3904: Since new production mechanisms for top quark pairs could manifest

3905: themselves in the \ttbar invariant mass distribution as resonances of

3906: different widths or, more generally, as shape

3907: distortions~\cite{Frederix:2007gi}, one approach for

3908: detecting such contributions is to compare the shape of the observed

3909: differential \ttbar production cross section $d\sigma/dM_{t\bar{t}}$

3910: with the SM expectation.

3911: 

3912: CDF reconstructs the \ttbar invariant mass spectrum in a 1.9~fb$^{-1}$

3913: $b$ tagged lepton + jets data sample (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:diffxsec}) by

3914: combining the four-vectors of the four leading jets, lepton and

3915: \METns. After subtracting the background processes,

3916: the distortions in the reconstructed distribution due to detector

3917: effects, object resolutions and geometric/kinematic

3918: acceptance are corrected for through a regularized

3919: unfolding technique~\cite{Hocker:1995kb}. From the unfolded distribution, the \ttbar

3920: differential cross section $d\sigma/dM_{t\bar{t}}$ is extracted and

3921: its shape compared with the SM expectation. The

3922: comparison shows good agreement with the standard model, yielding an

3923: Anderson-Darling $p$-value of 0.45~\cite{CDF9157}.

3924: 

3925: \subsubsection{Search for new heavy top-like quark pair production}

3926: \label{sec:tprime}

3927: %

3928: The number of light neutrino species (for $m_\nu < m_Z / 2$) has been

3929: determined to be $N_\nu = 2.9840 \pm 0.0082$ based on the

3930: invisible $Z$ boson decay width in precision electroweak

3931: measurements~\cite{Z-Pole}. This rules out a fourth generation of

3932: fermions with a light neutrino $\nu_4$. However, the existence of a

3933: fourth generation is consistent with precision electroweak data for a

3934: fermion mass range $m_Z/2 \lesssim m_{f4} \lesssim {\cal O}

3935: (174~{\rm GeV/c}^2)$, even without introducing new

3936: physics~\cite{He:2001tp,Novikov:2001md}.

3937: %

3938: Fourth-generation quark masses up to 400 GeV/c$^2$ are compatible with

3939: current measurements, and are constrained to exhibit small mass

3940: splitting, so that decays of an up-type fourth-generation quark into

3941: $Wq$ ($q=d,s,b$) are preferred~\cite{Kribs:2007nz}. Such an additional

3942: generation would have a drastic impact on the phenomenology of the

3943: Higgs boson, thereby relaxing the mass bounds obtained from the SM

3944: up to 750 GeV/c$^2$ at 95\% C.L., and altering expected

3945: kinematics and production rates.

3946: 

3947: The existence of a fourth chiral-fermion generation is predicted by

3948: various extensions of the standard model, for example, in an SO(1,13)

3949: framework unifying charges and spins~\cite{Borstnik:2006wt}, or in

3950: models with flavor democracy~\cite{SilvaMarcos:2002bz,Arik:2005ed}.

3951: Other models that add more exotic additional heavy quarks that can

3952: decay via $Wq$ have been brought up as well~\cite{Frampton:1999xi}.

3953: For example, the ``beautiful mirrors'' model~\cite{Choudhury:2001hs}

3954: introduces mirror quark-doublets with the same quantum numbers as

3955: their SM counterparts, but with vector couplings to the

3956: $W$ boson. This addition helps to improve the fit of electroweak

3957: observables by removing the observed discrepancy in the

3958: forward-backward asymmetry of the $b$ quark.

3959: 

3960: %

3961: CDF performs a search for pair production of heavy top-like quarks

3962: ($t'\bar{t}'$) that do not necessarily exhibit

3963: SM-like up-type fourth-generation properties in terms of

3964: charge or spin. The analysis is based on the assumptions that the $t'$

3965: is pair-produced via the strong interaction, has a mass larger than

3966: that of the top quark, and decays promptly into a $W$ boson and a

3967: down-type $d,s,b$ quark with 100\% branching ratio. As a consequence,

3968: the $t'$ decay chain is identical to that of the top quark, and

3969: $t'\bar{t}'$ production can be sought in a lepton + jets sample

3970: selected solely based on event kinematics to not restrict the search

3971: to $Wb$ final states by using $b$ tagging.

3972: 

3973: \begin{figure}[!t]

3974:   \begin{center} 

3975:     \includegraphics[width=.495\textwidth,

3976:       height=55mm]{plots/tprime3fbsearch-2ddots.eps}\hspace*{1mm}

3977:     \includegraphics[width=.495\textwidth]{plots/tprimelimit3fb.eps}

3978:     \caption{Left: $H_T$ versus $M_{\rm{reco}}$ distribution observed

3979:       in data (black points) overlaid with the fitted number of

3980:       standard model background events from \ttbar, $W$+jets

3981:       and QCD. Right: Expected and observed 95\% C.L.

3982:       upper limits on the $t'\bar{t}'$ production cross section,

3983:       assuming 100\% ${\cal B}(t' \to Wq)$. The dark/light regions

3984:       represent the 1/2 sd bands on the expected

3985:       limit~\cite{CDF9446}.}

3986:     \label{fig:tprimesearch}

3987:   \end{center}

3988: \end{figure}

3989: The $t'$ signal can be distinguished from SM

3990: background using, e.g., the observed distributions of total

3991: transverse energy $H_T$ in the event based on lepton, jets and \METns,

3992: and the reconstructed $t'$ mass ($M_{\rm{reco}}$) from the best

3993: kinematic fit to the $t'\bar{t}'$ hypothesis in each event (see

3994: Fig.\ \ref{fig:tprimesearch}). Superseding a previously published

3995: result based on 0.8~fb$^{-1}$~\cite{CDFtprime:2008nf}, CDF uses a

3996: two-dimensional binned likelihood fit in $H_T$ and $M_{\rm{reco}}$ to

3997: separate SM background and $t'$ signal in 2.8~fb$^{-1}$

3998: of data~\cite{CDF9446}.

3999: 

4000: Since no evidence for $t'$ production is found, 95\% C.L.\ upper limits

4001: on the $t'\bar{t}'$ production cross section (assuming ${\cal B}(t' \to

4002: Wq) = 100\%$) are derived for 180~GeV/c$^2$ $\leq m_{t'} \leq$

4003: 500~GeV/c$^2$. Assuming SM couplings, a 95\% C.L.\ lower

4004: limit on the fourth-generation $t'$ mass of 311~GeV/c$^2$, based on the

4005: calculations in Refs.~\cite{Cacciari:2003fi,Bonciani:1998vc}, is obtained, where

4006: the largest systematic uncertainty 

4007: arises from the jet energy scale. The deviation of the observed

4008: limit from its expected value above $\approx$400~GeV/c$^2$

4009: is being investigated. Using {\em a priori} defined groups of bins in $H_T$ and

4010: $M_{\rm{reco}}$, the $p$-values to observe at least the number of events

4011: found in data, given the SM expectation, are evaluated.

4012: With the smallest $p$-value being 0.01, the excess in the data tails

4013: is concluded to be not statistically significant.

4014: 

4015: %

4016: 

4017: \subsubsection{Search for scalar top quark production}

4018: Many processes beyond the standard model exhibit signatures similar

4019: to \ttbar events. Consequently, \ttbar data 

4020: samples can, in principle, contain admixtures of such contributions.

4021: 

4022: For example, the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model

4023: (MSSM)~\cite{Martin:1997ns} predicts that supersymmetric partners of

4024: %

4025: the top quarks, scalar top or ``stop'' quarks, are

4026: predominantly produced in pairs via the strong interaction just like

4027: SM top quarks. The stop-quark pair-production cross

4028: section has been calculated at NLO supersymmetric-QCD and depends

4029: mainly on the stop quark mass and very little on other supersymmetric

4030: parameters~\cite{Beenakker:1997ut}. At a center of mass energy of

4031: 1.96~TeV, the pair production cross section for the lightest stop

4032: quarks ($\tilde{t}_{1}\bar{\tilde{t}}_{1}$) of 175 GeV/c$^2$ mass is

4033: 0.58 pb~\cite{Beenakker:1996ed}, or roughly 10\% of the SM

4034: \ttbar production rate (see Section~\ref{sec:ttbarprod}). The

4035: observable final states from stop decays depend strongly on

4036: supersymmetric parameters, especially the masses of

4037: supersymmetric particles in the decay chain. In Run~II, the decay mode

4038: $\stopone \to b \ell^+ \tilde{\nu}_\ell$ has been studied by

4039: D0~\cite{Abazov:2007im} in 0.4 fb$^{-1}$ of data. The decay channel

4040: $\stopone \to c \neutralino$, where the lightest neutralino

4041: $\neutralino$ is the lightest supersymmetric particle (LSP), was

4042: studied by CDF~\cite{Aaltonen:2007sw} in 0.3 fb$^{-1}$ and by

4043: D0 in 0.4 and 1 fb$^{-1}$

4044: of data~\cite{Abazov:2006wb,Abazov:2008rc}. 95\% C.L.\ mass-exclusion limits on the involved

4045: supersymmetric particles were provided for both decay channels.

4046: %

4047: 

4048: \begin{figure}[!t]

4049:   \begin{center} 

4050:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth,height=45mm]{plots/stop-lhood.eps}\hspace*{1mm}

4051:       %

4052:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth,height=45mm]{plots/stop-limits.eps}

4053:       %

4054:     \caption{Left: Multivariate kinematic discriminant distribution for

4055:     electron $+$$\geq$4 jets events in 0.9~fb$^{-1}$ of D0

4056:     data and simulated signal and background. The dashed black line

4057:     shows the expected signal shape for a $\stopone~(\chargino)$ mass of

4058:     175 (135) GeV/c$^2$, enhanced by a factor of ten. Right: Expected

4059:     and observed 95\% C.L.\ limits on the

4060:     $\tilde{t}_{1}\bar{\tilde{t}}_{1}$ production cross section,

4061:     together with the prediction for different stop and

4062:     chargino mass combinations~\cite{D05438}.}

4063:     \label{fig:D0stopsearch}

4064:   \end{center}

4065: \end{figure}

4066: Another important decay mode for stop is $\stopone \to \charginoplus

4067: b$, where the lightest chargino $\charginoplus$ decays to

4068: $W^+\neutralino$, resulting in final states identical to those from

4069: \ttbar decays, but with two additional neutralinos (LSPs) that

4070: contribute to \METns. First limits for this channel were

4071: provided by CDF in Run~I on 0.1~fb$^{-1}$ of lepton + jets

4072: data~\cite{Affolder:1999cz}.

4073: 

4074: D0 performs the first study of this channel in Run~II in 0.9~fb$^{-1}$

4075: $b$ tagged lepton + jets data~\cite{D05438}\footnote{An updated

4076: version of the result has been published after completion of this

4077: review, see Ref.~\cite{Abazov:2009ps}.}, assuming a neutralino

4078: mass of 50~GeV/c$^2$ (slightly above the limit set by LEP~\cite{LEPSUSY})

4079: %

4080: while varying the stop and chargino masses between 145 and 175

4081: GeV/c$^2$, and 105 and 135 GeV/c$^2$, respectively.

4082: 

4083: A possible stop admixture in the sample is searched for by employing a

4084: multivariate discriminant based on kinematic event properties (see

4085: Fig.\ \ref{fig:D0stopsearch}), with the main challenge being to separate the

4086: topologically similar \ttbar background from

4087: $\tilde{t}_{1}\bar{\tilde{t}}_{1}$ signal. Counterintuitively, the

4088: additional neutralinos do not provide large differences in \MET that can be

4089: exploited, but the larger chargino mass compared to that of the $W$

4090: boson reduces the phase space for $b$ jets in

4091: the event. 

4092: 

4093: Since no significant signal admixture in the lepton +

4094: jets dataset is observed, 95\% C.L.\ upper limits on the

4095: $\tilde{t}_{1}\bar{\tilde{t}}_{1}$ production rate 

4096: %

4097: are set that are a factor of $\approx7-12$ above

4098: the prediction, as illustrated in

4099: Fig.\ \ref{fig:D0stopsearch}. Consequently, the stop quark masses

4100: considered cannot yet be excluded, and this analysis

4101: should greatly benefit from the increased datasets already in hand.

4102: The weaker observed limits relative to their expected values are driven 

4103: by the muon + jets channel. The corresponding excess in data

4104: was tested with pseudo-datasets to be statistically consistent

4105: with the standard model expectation.

4106: 

4107: \begin{figure}[!t]

4108:   \begin{center} 

4109:     \includegraphics[width=.495\textwidth]{plots/CDF9439-2dLimits_cm110_27InFb_jul16.eps}\hspace*{1mm}

4110:     \includegraphics[width=.495\textwidth]{plots/CDF9439-2dLimits_cm130_27InFb_jul16.eps} 

4111:     \caption{Excluded areas observed at 95\% C.L.\ in the neutralino

4112:       versus stop mass plane for various assumed dilepton branching

4113:       fractions and two different chargino masses (left:

4114:       105.8~GeV/c$^2$, right: 125.8~GeV/c$^2$), obtained by CDF in

4115:       2.7~fb$^{-1}$ of dilepton data. The contributions of

4116:       $e,\mu,\tau$ to the final state are assumed to be

4117:       equal~\cite{CDF9439}.}

4118:       \label{fig:CDFstopsearch}

4119:   \end{center}

4120: \end{figure}

4121: CDF searches for a stop admixture in the \ttbar dilepton channel using

4122: a 2.7~fb$^{-1}$ dilepton dataset of both $b$ tagged and untagged

4123: events~\cite{CDF9439}. Assuming $\neutralino$ to be the LSP, heavy

4124: sfermions, the stop mass below the top mass, and the chargino mass

4125: smaller than the mass difference between stop and $b$ quark, the decay

4126: $\stopone \to \charginoplus b$ obtains 100\% branching fraction. The

4127: dilepton final state resulting from $\chargino \to \neutralino

4128: \ell^\pm \nu$ decays is then identical to the \ttbar final state, but with

4129: two additional neutralinos contributing to \METns. It can be reached

4130: through a variety of chargino decay channels, resulting in variations

4131: of the branching fraction depending on SUSY parameters.

4132: 

4133: The stop quark signal is discriminated from standard model

4134: background using a single quantity, the reconstructed stop mass, in a

4135: fit to the observed data distribution. The mass is reconstructed from

4136: this underconstrained system by treating the neutralino and neutrino from

4137: each stop decay as one massive pseudo-particle, and then applying a

4138: standard top mass reconstruction technique in the dilepton channel,

4139: neutrino weighting (see Section~\ref{sec:dilepmassmeasurements}).

4140: Since the observed distributions are consistent with standard

4141: model processes, 95\% C.L.\ limits are extracted on the

4142: dilepton branching ratio in $\tilde{t}_{1}\bar{\tilde{t}}_{1}$

4143: production for stop masses 115 $-$ 185~GeV/c$^2$, neutralino

4144: masses 43.9 $-$ 88.5~GeV/c$^2$, and chargino masses

4145: 105.8 $-$ 125.8~GeV/c$^2$, as illustrated in

4146: Fig.\ \ref{fig:CDFstopsearch}. A 100\% branching fraction for

4147: $\stopone \to \charginoplus b$, and equal contributions from

4148: $e,\mu$ and $\tau$ to the final state are assumed throughout.

4149: %

4150: 

4151: Model-independent searches for novel admixtures in top quark samples,

4152: via the search for anomalous event kinematics, were discussed in

4153: Section~\ref{sec:topkinematics}.

4154: 

4155: \subsection{Single top quark production}

4156: \label{sec:ST}

4157: Electroweak production of top quarks without their antiparticles

4158: can provide a direct measure of the $|V_{tb}|$ CKM matrix element, test

4159: the $Wtb$ vertex structure, and probe for physics beyond the

4160: standard model, such as flavor changing neutral currents or new heavy

4161: gauge bosons $W'$ (see Section~\ref{sec:singletopprod}). A thorough

4162: understanding of single top quark production is also important for

4163: studies of processes with similar signatures, such as standard model

4164: $W$-Higgs associated production, for which this process constitutes a major background. While the

4165: single-top production rate is $\approx$40\% of the strong \ttbar

4166: production, the signal extraction from background is very

4167: challenging because only one top quark signature is present in the final

4168: state. Simple kinematic selections are insufficient for such an

4169: analysis, and sophisticated multivariate techniques have to be

4170: deployed.

4171: 

4172: For single top quark production at the Tevatron, only $s$- and

4173: $t$-channel production are relevant, contributing, respectively,

4174: $0.88^{+0.12}_{-0.11}$~pb and $1.98^{+0.28}_{-0.22}$~pb to

4175: the total rate at NLO~\cite{Sullivan:2004ie}. The experimental

4176: signature comprises a $b$ jet and the $W$ boson decay products from

4177: the top quark decay. In the $s$- ($tb$-) channel, one additional $b$

4178: jet arises from the $b$ quark produced together with the top quark. In

4179: the $t$- ($tqb$-) channel, a forward light-quark jet accompanies the production of the top 

4180: quark, sometimes along with another $b$ jet from the 

4181: gluon splitting into $b\bar{b}$ (see

4182: Fig.\ \ref{fig:singlet-feynman}). In order to suppress multijet

4183: background, the $W$ boson is usually required to decay leptonically

4184: into an electron or muon and corresponding neutrino. Consequently, the

4185: final state signature of single top quark production contains an

4186: energetic isolated electron or muon, \MET and two or three jets, with

4187: at least one of them being a $b$ jet. As usual, additional jets can arise from

4188: initial- or final-state radiation.

4189: 

4190: \subsubsection{Production cross section and $V_{tb}$}

4191: \label{sec:STxsec}

4192: Searches for single top quark production were already performed in

4193: Run~I using 0.1 fb$^{-1}$ of data by

4194: D0~\cite{Abbott:2000pa,Abazov:2001ns} and by

4195: CDF~\cite{Acosta:2001un, Acosta:2004er}, yielding upper limits on the

4196: production rate that were at least a factor of six larger than the SM

4197: expectation. In Run~II, first results were published using 0.2

4198: fb$^{-1}$ of data by CDF~\cite{Acosta:2004bs} and

4199: D0~\cite{Abazov:2005zz,Abazov:2006uq}, where the best observed limit

4200: was less than a factor of three greater than the SM prediction.

4201: Finally, D0 published first evidence for single top quark production

4202: using 0.9 fb$^{-1}$ of data~\cite{Abazov:2006gd,Abazov:2008kt},

4203: observing a signal of 3.6 standard deviations significance.

4204: Preliminary results from CDF based on 2.2 fb$^{-1}$ confirmed evidence for

4205: single top quark production~\cite{CDF9217,CDF9221,CDF9223,CDF9313}

4206: with an observed signal significance of 3.7 standard deviations

4207: obtained by combining three of these

4208: analyses~\cite{CDF9251}\footnote{A slightly updated version

4209: of the result was published by CDF~\cite{Aaltonen:2008sy}

4210: after completion of this review.}.

4211: %

4212: 

4213: \begin{table}[!t]

4214: \caption{Expected and observed event yields of the single top

4215: selections for $e$ and $\mu$, single and double $b$ tagged channels

4216: combined (left for D0 based on 0.9~fb$^{-1}$~\cite{Abazov:2006gd}, and

4217: right for CDF based on 2.2~fb$^{-1}$~\cite{CDF9223}). For the D0

4218: result, the overall $W$ + jets background includes $Z$ + jets and diboson

4219: events.}

4220: %

4221: \begin{minipage}[!t]{0.49\linewidth}

4222: \centering

4223: \vspace{-1.cm}

4224: \begin{tabular}{l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}r@{\extracolsep{0pt}$\pm$}l@{}%

4225:                  @{\extracolsep{\fill}}r@{\extracolsep{0pt}$\pm$}l@{}%

4226:                  @{\extracolsep{\fill}}r@{\extracolsep{0pt}$\pm$}l@{}}

4227: \hline

4228: Source           & \multicolumn{2}{c}{2 jets}

4229:                  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{3 jets}

4230:                  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{4 jets}\\

4231: \hline\hline	     

4232: $tb$                 &  16  &   3  &   8  &  2  &   2  &  1  \\

4233: $tqb$               &  20  &   4  &  12  &  3  &   4  &  1  \\

4234: \hline                                                              

4235: \ttbar               &  59  &   10  &  135  &  26  &  154  &  33  \\

4236: $Wb\bar{b}$  & 261  &  55~  & 120  & 24~  &  35  &  7  \\

4237: $Wc\bar{c}$,$Wcj~$  & 151  &  31  &  85  & 17  &  23  &  5  \\

4238: $Wjj$              & 119  &  25  &  43  &  9  &  12  &  2  \\

4239: Multijets         &  95  &  19  &  77  & 15  &  29  &  6  \\

4240: \hline                                                              

4241: BG Sum & 686  &  41  & 460  & 39  & 253  & 38  \\

4242: Data             & \multicolumn{2}{c}{697}

4243:                     & \multicolumn{2}{c}{455}

4244:                     & \multicolumn{2}{c}{246}\\

4245: \hline

4246: \end{tabular}

4247: \end{minipage}

4248: %

4249: \begin{minipage}[t]{0.49\linewidth}

4250: \centering

4251: %

4252: 

4253: \begin{tabular}{l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}r@{\extracolsep{0pt}$\pm$}l@{}%

4254:                  @{\extracolsep{\fill}}r@{\extracolsep{0pt}$\pm$}l@{}}

4255: \hline

4256: Source           & \multicolumn{2}{c}{2 jets}

4257:                  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{3 jets}\\

4258: \hline\hline	     

4259: $tb$                 &  41.2  &   5.9  &   13.5  &  1.9  \\

4260: $tqb$               &  62.1  &   9.1  &   18.3  &  2.7  \\

4261: \hline                                                              

4262: \ttbar               &  146.0  &   20.9  &  338.7  &  48.2  \\

4263: $Wb\bar{b}$  & 461.6  &  139.7  & ~~141.1  & 42.6   \\

4264: $Wc\bar{c}$,$Wcj$  & 395.0  &  121.8  &~~  108.8  & 33.5   \\

4265: $Wjj$              & 339.8  &  56.1  &  101.8  &  16.9    \\

4266: Multijets         &  59.5  &  23.8  &  21.3  & 8.5   \\

4267: Dibosons         & 63.2   &  6.3  &  21.5  & 2.2   \\

4268: $Z$+jets         & 26.7   & 3.9   & 11.0   & 1.6   \\

4269: \hline                                                              

4270: BG Sum  & 1491.8  &  268.6  &~~ 754.8  & 91.3   \\

4271: Data             & \multicolumn{2}{c}{1535}

4272:                     & \multicolumn{2}{c}{712}\\

4273: \hline

4274: \end{tabular}

4275: \end{minipage}

4276: \label{tab:ST-evtyields}

4277: \end{table}

4278: The analyses yielding first evidence for electroweak top quark

4279: production apply event selections requiring one energetic isolated

4280: electron or muon and \METns. CDF uses events with two or three jets

4281: and one or two $b$ tags, while D0 includes additionally events with

4282: four jets, where the extra jet arises from initial- or final-state

4283: radiation. The signal acceptances for the $s$- and $t$-channel are

4284: 2.8\% and 1.8\% (CDF), and 3.2\% and 2.1\% (D0).

4285: The expected and observed event yields are shown in

4286: Table~\ref{tab:ST-evtyields}. The dominant background contributions

4287: come from $W$+jets production, \ttbar production in the lepton +

4288: jets or dilepton final states, where one jet or lepton is not

4289: reconstructed, and from multijet production. The main sources of systematic

4290: uncertainty are background normalization, jet energy scale, and the

4291: modeling of the $b$ tagging and triggers. As can be appreciated

4292: from the table, the uncertainty on the background is larger than the

4293: expected signal, which makes advanced analysis techniques necessary.

4294: 

4295: D0 applies three different multivariate analysis techniques to the

4296: preselected data sample: boosted decision trees (BDT), Bayesian neural

4297: networks (BNN) and matrix elements (ME), where the latter two reflect

4298: reoptimized studies~\cite{Abazov:2008kt} of previous work~\cite{Abazov:2006gd}.

4299: Being based on leading-order matrix elements for the description of

4300: signal and background processes, the ME analysis does not use four-jet events. For each analysis, the combined $s$-

4301: and $t$-channel cross sections are extracted from the peak of the

4302: Bayesian posterior probability density derived from a binned

4303: likelihood of the respective discriminants. The results are then

4304: combined, yielding:

4305: %

4306: \begin{equation}

4307: \begin{array}{lllll}

4308:  \sigma^{\rm obs} (p\bar{p}\to tb+X,~tqb+X )

4309:  & = & 4.9 ^{+1.4}_{-1.4}~{\rm pb} & ({\rm BDT,}&3.4 {\rm~sd}) \\

4310:  & = & 4.4 ^{+1.6}_{-1.4}~{\rm pb} & ({\rm BNN,}&3.1 {\rm~sd}) \\

4311:  & = & 4.8 ^{+1.6}_{-1.4}~{\rm pb} & ({\rm ME,}&3.2 {\rm~sd}) \\

4312:  & = & 4.7 ^{+1.3}_{-1.3}~{\rm pb} & ({\rm Combined,}&3.6 {\rm~sd}),

4313: \end{array}

4314: \end{equation}

4315: where the uncertainties correspond to the combination of statistical

4316: and systematic sources. The observed production rates are in agreement

4317: with SM expectation and with each other. The significances in the parentheses

4318: are obtained from studies of large ensembles of pseudo-experiments. The expected

4319: sensitivity of the combined result is 2.3 standard deviations,

4320: indicating that the measurement benefited from a statistical upward

4321: fluctuation. Separate measurements of the $s$- and $t$-channel cross

4322: sections are also performed with the BDT analysis. The results are

4323: $\sigma_s=1.0\pm0.9$~pb and $\sigma_t=4.2^{+1.8}_{-1.4}$~pb, where

4324: the other channel (not measured) is set to its SM expectation

4325: ($\sigma_s=0.88^{+0.12}_{-0.11}$~pb and $\sigma_t=1.98^{+0.28}_{-0.22}$~pb~\cite{Sullivan:2004ie}).

4326: The observed enhancement in the $t$-channel with respect

4327: to the standard model prediction is not statistically significant.

4328: 

4329: CDF uses the following multivariate analysis techniques on their

4330: preselected dataset: neural networks (NN~\cite{CDF9217}), a likelihood

4331: function (LHF~\cite{CDF9221}), a matrix element discriminant

4332: (ME~\cite{CDF9223}) and boosted decision trees (BDT \cite{CDF9313}).

4333: The results are:

4334: \begin{equation}

4335: \begin{array}{lllll}

4336:  \sigma^{\rm obs} (p\bar{p}\to tb+X,~tqb+X )

4337: %

4338:  & = & 2.0 ^{+0.9}_{-0.8}~{\rm pb} & ({\rm NN,}&3.2 {\rm~sd}) \\

4339:  & = & 1.8 ^{+0.9}_{-0.8}~{\rm pb} & ({\rm LHF,}&2.0 {\rm~sd}) \\

4340:  & = & 2.2 ^{+0.8}_{-0.7}~{\rm pb} & ({\rm ME,}&3.4 {\rm~sd}) \\

4341:  & = & 2.2 ^{+0.7}_{-0.7}~{\rm pb} & ({\rm Combined,}&3.7 {\rm~sd})\\

4342:  & = & 1.9 ^{+0.8}_{-0.7}~{\rm pb} & ({\rm BDT,}&2.8 {\rm~sd}),

4343: \end{array}

4344: \end{equation}

4345: where the uncertainties given are both statistical and systematic. The

4346: BDT analysis became available after the combination of

4347: results~\cite{CDF9251}, and was therefore not included in that

4348: compilation. The observed results agree with each other and with the

4349: standard model. The expected sensitivity of the

4350: combination is 5.1 standard deviations, pointing to a statistical

4351: downward fluctuation in the data.

4352: 

4353: Figure~\ref{fig:STdiscriminants} shows the discriminant outputs of the

4354: two most significant single measurements from CDF (ME) and D0 (BDT). A

4355: graphical summary of the measurements and a comparison with the

4356: standard model expectation is given in Fig.\ \ref{fig:STxsecs}. All

4357: analyses assume a top quark mass of 175~GeV/c$^{2}$, ${\cal B}(t

4358: \rightarrow Wb) = 100\%$, and the SM ratio for $s$- to

4359: $t$-channel cross sections.

4360: \begin{figure}[!t]

4361:   \begin{center} 

4362:     \includegraphics[width=.52\textwidth

4363:       ]{plots/CDF-ST-MEoutput.eps}\hspace*{1mm}

4364:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth

4365:       ]{plots/D0-ST-BDToutputzoomPRD.eps}

4366:       \caption{Multivariate discriminant outputs observed in single-top

4367:         candidate events compared to contributions from signal and

4368:         background processes. Left: CDF matrix element discriminant,

4369:         with yields normalized to their SM

4370:         predictions~\cite{CDF9223}. Right: D0 BDT

4371:         output in the single-top signal region, with signal normalized to the

4372:         measured cross section~\cite{Abazov:2006gd}.}

4373:     %

4374:     \label{fig:STdiscriminants}

4375:   \end{center}

4376: \end{figure}

4377: \begin{figure}[!h]

4378:   \begin{center} 

4379:     %

4380:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/DZero_CDF_singletop_xsec_summary.eps}

4381:     \caption{Cross section measurements of first evidence for

4382:       single top production, and the combined results from CDF and

4383:       D0 compared to the SM prediction.}

4384:     \label{fig:STxsecs}

4385:   \end{center}

4386: \end{figure}

4387: %

4388: 

4389: %

4390: In a recent update, CDF has added 0.5~fb$^{-1}$ of data to its single

4391: top sample, and thereby increased the observed significance for all

4392: previous analysis techniques. The matrix element analysis yields again

4393: the most significant single result, exceeding four standard

4394: deviations. A combination of the measurements has not yet become

4395: available. The results for 2.7~fb$^{-1}$, with combined statistical and

4396: systematic uncertainties, are~\cite{CDF9479,CDF9451,CDF9464,CDF9445}:

4397: \begin{equation}

4398: \begin{array}{lllll}

4399:  \sigma^{\rm obs} (p\bar{p}\to tb+X,~tqb+X )

4400:  & = & 2.1 ^{+0.7}_{-0.6}~{\rm pb} & ({\rm NN,} &3.7 {\rm~sd})\\

4401:  & = & 2.0 ^{+0.9}_{-0.8}~{\rm pb} & ({\rm LHF,}&2.6 {\rm~sd})\\

4402:  & = & 2.7 ^{+0.8}_{-0.7}~{\rm pb} & ({\rm ME,} &4.2 {\rm~sd})\\

4403:  & = & 2.4 ^{+0.8}_{-0.7}~{\rm pb} & ({\rm BDT,}&3.6 {\rm~sd}).

4404: \end{array}

4405: \end{equation}

4406: 

4407: Since the single top quark production rate is proportional to

4408: $|V_{tb}|^{2}$, the observed cross sections can be turned into

4409: measurements of $|V_{tb}|$ under the following assumptions: (i) there are

4410: no single top quark production modes beyond the SM, (ii) single top

4411: quark production and decay are dominated by the $Wtb$ interaction

4412: ($|V_{tb}| \gg |V_{td}|, |V_{ts}|$, as indicated by measurements of $R$

4413: described in Section~\ref{sec:Rmeasurement}), and (iii) the $Wtb$ interaction

4414: exhibits a $V-A$ structure and is CP conserving. The latter premise

4415: allows for anomalous left-handed vector couplings $f_{1}^{L}$ (see

4416: Section~\ref{sec:Wheltheory}), but not for right-handed vector or

4417: tensor couplings. Anomalous $f_{1}^{L}$ values ($\neq 1$) do not

4418: affect the \ttbar production rate or kinematics, nor $tb$ or

4419: $tqb$ kinematics, but simply rescale the single-top production rate.

4420: Consequently, $|V_{tb}f_{1}^{L}|$ extracted from single-top

4421: production can be $>1$, and constraining the measurement

4422: to lie between $0-1$ implies that $f_{1}^{L}=1$, as predicted by the standard model.

4423: The measurements of $|V_{tb}f_{1}^{L}|$ and $|V_{tb}|$ are

4424: independent from the number of fermion generations and 

4425: unitarity of the CKM matrix.

4426: 

4427: Using the result of the BDT analysis and a positive

4428: flat prior for $|V_{tb}|^{2}$, D0 obtains

4429: $|V_{tb}f_{1}^{L}|=1.31^{+0.25}_{-0.21}$. Restricting the prior to

4430: $[0,1]$ yields $|V_{tb}|=1.00^{+0.00}_{-0.12}$, with a corresponding

4431: 95\% C.L.\ lower limit of \mbox{$|V_{tb}|>0.68$}~\cite{Abazov:2008kt}.

4432: CDF uses its combined measurement in the same way to obtain a 95\%

4433: C.L.\ lower limit of \mbox{$|V_{tb}|>0.66$}~\cite{CDF9251}. The

4434: matrix element analysis based on 2.7~fb$^{-1}$ yields

4435: \mbox{$|V_{tb}|>0.71$}~\cite{CDF9464}.

4436: 

4437: With most of the current measurements giving evidence of $>3$ sd

4438: for single top quark production, the observation at the five

4439: standard deviation level seems imminent at the Run~II Tevatron.

4440: Extrapolating from the 2.2~fb$^{-1}$ result, as illustrated in

4441: Fig.\ \ref{fig:STprojection}, CDF estimates that a $>5$ sd

4442: significance should be reached by adding one more fb$^{-1}$ of data to

4443: the analyses. D0 could reach that level in the 2.3

4444: fb$^{-1}$ dataset that is currently being analyzed\footnote{After 

4445: submission of this review, both collaborations announced 5~sd 

4446: observations of single top quark production,

4447: see Refs.~\cite{Abazov:2009ii,Aaltonen:2009jj}.}.

4448: \begin{figure}[!t]

4449:   \begin{center} 

4450:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/CDF_singletop_projection_orig.eps}

4451:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/D0-STprojection95CL.eps}

4452:     \caption{Left: Extrapolation of the single-top signal significance

4453:       as a function of integrated luminosity from the 2.2~fb$^{-1}$ CDF analysis

4454:       result. Right: Expected 95\% C.L.\ contours for a simultaneous

4455:       measurement of the $s$- and $t$-channel single-top production

4456:       rate by D0 for different integrated luminosities. The standard

4457:       model expectation is shown together with various other models.}

4458:     \label{fig:STprojection}

4459:   \end{center}

4460: \end{figure}

4461: %

4462: 

4463: As discussed in Section~\ref{sec:singletopprod}, $s$- and $t$-channel

4464: production exhibit different sensitivity to physics beyond the

4465: standard model. Measuring both rates separately provides a

4466: valuable tool to check for various exotic model contributions to single top

4467: quark production. Figure~\ref{fig:STprojection} shows D0's

4468: expected sensitivity to physics beyond the standard

4469: model~\cite{Tait:2000sh} for the already analyzed data and for the

4470: anticipated accumulation of 6.8~fb$^{-1}$ of Run~II data. With this increase in

4471: integrated luminosity, the exclusion of certain models at 95\%

4472: C.L.\ should be feasible. With more than 6~fb$^{-1}$, a measurement of

4473: $|V_{tb}|$ with an absolute uncertainty below 0.07 per experiment

4474: should be achievable as well. In addition, further refinements of the

4475: analysis techniques should facilitate improvements in precision

4476: beyond that expected just from the accumulation of more data.

4477: 

4478: \subsubsection{Polarization of the spin of the top quark}

4479: \label{sec:STspin}

4480: %

4481: As opposed to top quark pair production via the strong interaction,

4482: where the top quarks are produced essentially unpolarized (see

4483: Section~\ref{sec:spincor}), top quarks produced singly via the

4484: electroweak interaction are expected to be highly

4485: %

4486: left-handedly polarized~\cite{Carlson:1993dt}. The polarization of the

4487: top quark is reflected in the kinematic distributions of its decay

4488: products, providing a test of the $V-A$ structure of the $Wtb$

4489: coupling~\cite{Jezabek:1994zv,Heinson:1996zm}. An observation of this

4490: polarization would also provide limits on the top-quark decay

4491: width and $|V_{tb}|$, since this would confirm that top

4492: quarks decay before depolarizing through QCD interactions.

4493: %

4494: 

4495: Both relevant single top quark production mechanisms at the Tevatron

4496: ($s$- and $t$-channel) exhibit up-type--down-type and $tb$ quark lines

4497: interconnected by a $W$ boson. Since the $W$ boson couples solely to

4498: fermions of left-handed chirality, in their rest frame single top

4499: quarks are highly polarized along the direction of the down-type

4500: quark~\cite{Mahlon:1996pn,Mahlon:1998uv, Mahlon:2000ze}.

4501: (For the contributing $2\to2$ processes this polarization is

4502: 100\%. These diagrams are related to the top decay with hadronic $W$

4503: boson decay via crossing symmetry, where the down-type decay products

4504: of the $W$ boson exhibit optimal analyzing power.) The optimal spin

4505: basis for studying the single-top spin polarization therefore will use the

4506: direction of the down-type quark.

4507: %

4508: 

4509: For $s$-channel production, predominantly proceeding via

4510: $u\bar{d}\to t\bar{b}$, the antiproton beam is expected to provide the

4511: down-type quark most of the time. Indeed, measuring the top quark spin

4512: along the direction of the antiproton beam (``antiproton basis'')

4513: results in 98\% of the top quark spins aligned in that direction. For

4514: the $t$-channel, the situation is slightly more complicated, since the

4515: down-type quark is contained in either the spectator jet or in one of

4516: the beams. With the largest contribution to the total production rate

4517: arising from $ug \to t\bar{b}d$, where the down-type quark produces the

4518: (light quark) spectator jet, a reasonable choice for the spin basis is

4519: the spectator jet direction (``spectator basis''). Since the spectator

4520: jet is emitted in the forward direction, this basis is also still

4521: compatible with the cases where the down-type quark is in the initial

4522: state, resulting in 96\% of the top quarks having their spins

4523: polarized along the light-quark jet direction.

4524: 

4525: With the top quark decaying before it hadronizes, its spin information

4526: is passed on to its decay products. A straightforward observable is

4527: the angular distribution of the top quark decay product $i$ in the top

4528: quark rest-frame:

4529: \begin{equation}

4530: {1\over\Gamma}\thinspace { {d\,\Gamma}\over{d\,\cos\theta^t_i} } =

4531: {1\over2} \Bigl( 1+{\cal A}_{\uparrow\downarrow}\alpha_i\cos\theta^t_i

4532: \Bigr),

4533: \end{equation}

4534: where $\theta^t_i$ is the angle between the decay product and

4535: spin-quantization axis, $\alpha_i$ is the analyzing power describing the

4536: correlation between top quark spin and decay product and ${\cal

4537: A}_{\uparrow\downarrow} = { (N_\uparrow - N_\downarrow) / (N_\uparrow

4538: + N_\downarrow) }$ is the spin asymmetry determining the magnitude of the

4539: observable angular correlations. The analyzing power is maximal ($+1$)

4540: for the down-type ($T_3 = -\frac{1}{2}$) decay products of the $W$

4541: boson (charged lepton, $d$- or $s$-quark), making the

4542: charged lepton the most sensitive and easily accessible spin analyzer.

4543: Using the spin quantization axes described above, the expected spin asymmetry

4544: is 0.96 for the $s$-channel and 0.93 for the

4545: $t$-channel~\cite{Mahlon:1996pn,Mahlon:1998uv, Mahlon:2000ze}.

4546: %

4547: 

4548: To perform a spin polarization measurement at the Tevatron, single top

4549: quark production in the $t$-channel is most promising due to its

4550: higher rate relative to the $s$-channel. The required integrated

4551: luminosity to observe spin polarization in the $t$-channel at the

4552: Tevatron was determined in a study, including effects of jet

4553: resolution and acceptance~\cite{Stelzer:1998ni}. To establish the

4554: polarization at a level of five sd, 

4555: $\approx$5~fb$^{-1}$ of data will be needed, which should be available very

4556: soon.

4557: %

4558: 

4559: At the LHC, measurements of single-top spin polarization will benefit

4560: from the expected high-statistics single-top datasets, and optimal spin bases

4561: have already been explored for the two dominant production modes

4562: ($t$-channel~\cite{Mahlon:1999gz}, associated $tW$

4563: production~\cite{Boos:2002xw}). Already with the first 2~fb$^{-1}$, a

4564: polarization measurement with an uncertainty of 4\% should be

4565: achievable based on the $t$-channel production

4566: alone~\cite{Beneke:2000hk}.

4567: %

4568: 

4569: \subsubsection{Search for $W'$ bosons}

4570: \label{sec:STWprime}

4571: %

4572: Electrically charged gauge bosons that are not part of the standard

4573: model are usually denoted as $W'$. Such bosons are predicted in a

4574: variety of extensions of the standard model, incorporating larger gauge

4575: groups that reduce to the standard model at

4576: sufficiently low energies~\cite{Tait:2000sh, Boos:2006xe}.

4577: 

4578: The most stringent limit to date in a direct search on the mass of

4579: such a $W'$ boson has been set by D0 in the leptonic final state

4580: ($W'\to\ell\nu$) using 1~fb$^{-1}$ of Run~II data~\cite{Abazov:2007bs}.

4581: Assuming the $W'$ boson exhibits standard model $W$ boson couplings

4582: to fermions, this search excludes the mass range below 1~TeV/c$^2$ at

4583: 95\% C.L.\ by studying the tail of the transverse mass~\cite{Smith:1983aa} spectrum

4584: calculated from lepton transverse energy and \METns.

4585: Indirect $W'$ mass constraints are strongly

4586: model-dependent and range between lower limits of 549~GeV/c$^2$ and

4587: 23~TeV/c$^2$, being derived from (semi-) leptonic processes as well as

4588: from astrophysical and cosmological constraints~\cite{Yao:2006px}.

4589: 

4590: A direct search for $W'$ bosons in the hadronic final state ($W'\to

4591: q\bar{q}'$) provides a less model-dependent measurement since both

4592: left-handed and right-handed $W'$ bosons can be observed in this final

4593: state, independent of any assumption about the mass of a right-handed

4594: neutrino $m_{\nu_R}$ in the latter case. In contrast to this, the

4595: leptonic final state is only accessible for a right-handed $W'$ boson

4596: if the corresponding right-handed neutrino is not too massive

4597: ($m_{\nu_R} < m_{W'}$). Searches for $W'$ bosons as resonant

4598: structures in the dijet invariant mass spectrum have been carried out

4599: by UA2~\cite{Alitti:1993pn} and at the Run~I Tevatron by

4600: CDF~\cite{Abe:1997hm} and D0~\cite{Abazov:2003tj}.

4601: %

4602: 

4603: Focusing on ``hadronic'' $W'$ searches using third generation quarks in

4604: the final state, reduces the QCD multijet background compared to the (light)

4605: dijet final state searches. Such measurements are only sensitive to

4606: $W'$ bosons with masses above the $tb$ threshold of 

4607: $\approx$200~GeV/c$^2$, but the low-mass range is excluded already by the

4608: current limits on single top quark production~\cite{Abazov:2006aj}. A

4609: $W'$ signal would be observed as peak in the invariant mass

4610: distribution of its $tb$ decay products (as usual, $tb$ includes both $t\bar{b}$

4611: and its charge-conjugate $\bar{t}b$).

4612: 

4613: Since the $W'\to tb$ decay mode contributes to $s$-channel single top

4614: production (see Section~\ref{sec:singletopprod}), these searches are

4615: based on the single-top production cross section analyses (see

4616: Section~\ref{sec:STxsec}). For left-handed $W'$ bosons, interference

4617: occurs with SM single top production, which is not the

4618: case for right-handed $W'$ bosons due to the different (right-handed)

4619: final state particles. Considering a right-handed $W'$ boson, the

4620: decay width depends on the mass of the right-handed accompanying neutrino

4621: in leptonic decays. If $m_{\nu_R} > m_{W'}$, only $q\bar{q}'$ final

4622: states are accessible, resulting in a width reduced by about 25\%.

4623: This scenario generally results in a more stringent mass limit due

4624: to the enhanced $tb$ branching fraction. A contribution of the $W'$

4625: boson to top quark decay is usually not considered due to its

4626: large mass.

4627: 

4628: A first search for $W'\to tb$ was performed by CDF in Run~I, based on

4629: 0.1~fb$^{-1}$ of lepton + jets data. At 95\% C.L., lower limits on

4630: the mass of a right-handed $W'$ boson were obtained, yielding

4631: 536~GeV/c$^2$ for $m_{\nu_R} \ll m_{W'}$ and 566~GeV/c$^2$ for

4632: $m_{\nu_R} > m_{W'}$~\cite{Acosta:2002nu}.

4633: 

4634: D0 published a first search for $W'\to tb$ in Run~II, based on

4635: 0.2~fb$^{-1}$ of lepton + jets data and the corresponding single

4636: top cross section result~\cite{Abazov:2005zz}. For a right-handed $W'$

4637: boson with CKM mixing equal to that of the SM, 95\% C.L.\ lower

4638: mass limits of 630~GeV/c$^2$ (670~GeV/c$^2$) are obtained for

4639: $m_{\nu_R} < m_{W'}$ ($m_{\nu_R} > m_{W'}$). In addition, a first

4640: corresponding lower mass limit for a left-handed $W'$ boson is

4641: derived, taking the interference with SM

4642: production into account, yielding 610~GeV/c$^2$~\cite{Abazov:2006aj}.

4643: 

4644: %

4645: \begin{figure}[!t]

4646:   \begin{center} 

4647:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/ST-WprimeLH-T08DF2a.eps}

4648:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/ST-WprimeRH-T08DF2b.eps}

4649:     \caption{Theoretical prediction at NLO and 95\% C.L.\ limits for

4650:       $\sigma(p\bar{p}\to W') \times {\cal{B}}(W'\to tb)$

4651:       versus mass of the $W'$ boson. Left: Left-handed $W'$ boson.

4652:       Right: Right-handed $W'$ boson~\cite{Abazov:2008vj}. 

4653:     Results are from the D0 experiment.}

4654:     \label{fig:STWprimeD0}

4655:   \end{center}

4656: \end{figure}

4657: 

4658: Based on the 0.9~fb$^{-1}$ lepton + jets dataset and the analysis

4659: from which the first evidence for single top production was

4660: obtained~\cite{Abazov:2006gd,Abazov:2008kt}, D0 obtains further

4661: improved $W'$ mass limits~\cite{Abazov:2008vj}. Using the invariant

4662: mass of charged lepton, leading two jets and neutrino as a sensitive

4663: variable for separating signal and background, the 95\% C.L.\ lower

4664: mass limit for a left-handed $W'$ boson interfering with SM

4665: single-top production increases to 731~GeV/c$^2$. For a

4666: right-handed $W'$ boson, the 95\% C.L.\ lower mass limits are

4667: 739~GeV/c$^2$ (768~GeV/c$^2$) for $m_{\nu_R} < m_{W'}$ ($m_{\nu_R} >

4668: m_{W'}$), as illustrated in Fig.\ \ref{fig:STWprimeD0}. The latter

4669: two cross section limits correspond to upper limits on the $W'$ gauge

4670: coupling in units of the SM weak coupling of 0.72 (0.68)

4671: for a $W'$ boson mass of 600 GeV/c$^2$. The dominant systematic

4672: uncertainties included in these limits are the theoretical cross

4673: sections (affecting the background normalization) and uncertainties on

4674: jet energy calibration and $b$ jet simulation (affecting

4675: background normalization and distribution in the sensitive variable).

4676: 

4677: CDF has obtained a preliminary result for their $W'\to tb$ search, based

4678: on 1.9~fb$^{-1}$ lepton + jets Run~II data, using the invariant mass

4679: of the reconstructed $W$ boson and the two leading jets as sensitive

4680: variable. 95\% C.L.\ lower limits on the mass of a right-handed $W'$

4681: boson are found to be 800~GeV/c$^2$ for $m_{\nu_R} < m_{W'}$ and

4682: 825~GeV/c$^2$ for $m_{\nu_R} > m_{W'}$. Neglecting interference

4683: effects the former limit is considered to apply for a left-handed $W'$

4684: boson as well. The corresponding $W'$ gauge coupling in units of the

4685: SM weak coupling is found to be $<$0.68 and $<$0.63,

4686: respectively, for a $W'$ boson mass of 600 GeV/c$^2$~\cite{CDF9150}.

4687: %

4688: 

4689: The more general case of a $W'$ boson with an admixture of left- and

4690: right-handed couplings to SM fermions has not been

4691: studied thus far.

4692: 

4693: \subsubsection{Search for single top production via charged Higgs bosons}

4694: \label{sec:STchargedH}

4695: The standard model Higgs sector, with its single Higgs doublet of

4696: complex scalar fields to break electroweak symmetry and generate

4697: masses of weak gauge bosons and fermions (see

4698: Section~\ref{sec:SMoverview}) can be easily extended to include a

4699: second Higgs doublet, resulting in ``Two Higgs Doublet Models''

4700: (THDM or 2HDM)~\cite{Gunion:1989we,Gunion:1992hs}. In contrast to the

4701: single neutral scalar CP-even Higgs boson predicted by the SM, 

4702: THDM give rise to five physical scalar Higgs bosons after

4703: electroweak symmetry breaking. Two of these are charged bosons ($H^\pm$),

4704: providing a unique signature for physics beyond the standard model.

4705: Three different Higgs-fermion couplings are discerned in THDM. Type-I

4706: models provide coupling of only one of the Higgs doublets to fermions.

4707: In Type-II models, each of the doublets couples solely to up-type

4708: fermions and down-type fermions, respectively, while in Type-III models

4709: general couplings of both Higgs doublets to fermions are allowed. In

4710: the latter case, Higgs-mediated flavor-changing neutral currents at

4711: tree level must be sufficiently suppressed to be compatible with

4712: experimental limits. This can be achieved through an appropriate choice of the Higgs

4713: parameters~\cite{He:1998ie}.

4714: 

4715: If the charged Higgs boson is heavier than the top quark ($m_{H^\pm} >

4716: m_t$), its production via quark fusion can contribute to single top

4717: quark production through the decay into third-generation quarks:

4718: $q\bar{q}'\to H^\pm\to tb$. Due to mass dependent couplings of the

4719: charged Higgs boson, this decay is dominant in many models. The

4720: signature of this process is identical to that of $s$-channel single

4721: top-quark production, and the search for charged Higgs bosons can be

4722: performed similar to that for $W'$ bosons, with the simplification

4723: that interference with the SM production process can be

4724: neglected.

4725: %

4726: 

4727: \begin{figure}[!t]

4728:   \begin{center} 

4729:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth, height = 50mm]{plots/ST-chargedH-massdist.eps}

4730:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth, height = 53mm]{plots/ST-chargedH-typeIlimit.eps}

4731:     \caption{ Left: Distribution of the invariant mass of

4732:       reconstructed $W$ boson and two jets in 0.9~fb$^{-1}$ lepton + jets data,

4733:       SM background processes, and charged Higgs boson

4734:       signal in a Type-III THDM for several $m_{H^\pm}$, with the expected rate enhanced by a

4735:       factor of 50. Right: 95\% C.L.\ exclusion region in the

4736:       ($m_{H^\pm},\tan\beta$) plane for a Type-I THDM. If

4737:       $\Gamma_{H^\pm}$ exceeds 50~GeV/c$^2$, the analysis is no longer

4738:       valid, and no limits can be derived as illustrated by the darker

4739:       area~\cite{Abazov:2008rn}.}

4740:     \label{fig:STchargedHD0}

4741:   \end{center}

4742: \end{figure}

4743: D0 performs a first direct search for the process $q\bar{q}'\to

4744: H^\pm\to tb \to \ell\nu b\bar{b}$~\cite{Abazov:2008rn}, based on the

4745: analysis providing first evidence for single top

4746: production~\cite{Abazov:2006gd,Abazov:2008kt} in a 0.9~fb$^{-1}$

4747: lepton + jets dataset. Restricting the jet multiplicity in the

4748: events to exactly two jets, corresponding to the $s$-channel final state, charged Higgs bosons are sought

4749: in the mass range 180~GeV/c$^2$ $\leq m_{H^\pm} \leq$

4750: 300~GeV/c$^2$ for all three types of THDM. The sensitive variable

4751: used to discriminate the charged Higgs boson signal from SM

4752: background processes is the invariant mass of the reconstructed

4753: $W$ boson and the two jets, as illustrated in

4754: Fig.\ \ref{fig:STchargedHD0}. Since no evidence for signal is

4755: observed in the data, 95\% C.L.\ upper limits on the charged Higgs

4756: boson production cross section multiplied by branching fraction into third

4757: generation quarks are provided for all three types of THDM.

4758: The dominant systematic

4759: uncertainties result from the jet energy scale calibration, modeling

4760: of the $b$ jet identification and theoretical uncertainties in

4761: modeling and normalizing the signal. For the Type-I THDM, the

4762: limits are translated into a 95\% C.L.\ exclusion region in

4763: ($m_{H^\pm},\tan\beta$) parameter space (see

4764: Fig.\ \ref{fig:STchargedHD0}), where $\tan\beta$ is the ratio of the

4765: vacuum expectation values for the two Higgs doublets.

4766: 

4767: More searches for charged Higgs bosons, especially those in top quark

4768: decays (for $m_{H^\pm} < m_t$), are described in

4769: Section~\ref{sec:H+topdecay}.

4770: 

4771: \subsubsection{Search for single top production through neutral currents}

4772: \label{sec:STFCNC}

4773: Single top quark production via flavor changing neutral interactions

4774: of light $u, c$ quarks and the $Z,\gamma, g$ gauge bosons is

4775: possible in the standard model through higher-order radiative

4776: corrections, but so strongly suppressed that it cannot be observed.

4777: Consequently, searches for these production mechanisms at tree level

4778: probe for corresponding anomalous coupling strengths

4779: $\kappa$~\cite{Han:1998tp, Tait:2000sh} that are predicted by various

4780: extensions of the standard model~\cite{AguilarSaavedra:2004wm}.

4781: 

4782: The processes involving photon or $Z$ boson exchange have been

4783: extensively studied at LEP and HERA. At both accelerators top quarks

4784: can only be produced singly at the available center of mass energies

4785: due to the large top quark mass. 

4786: 

4787: At LEP, single top quark production proceeds via the SM

4788: process $e^+e^-\to e^-\bar{\nu_e}t\bar{b}$, which can be ignored

4789: in the available datasets due to its tiny production rate. All four

4790: LEP experiments searched for single top production via $e^+e^-\to

4791: t\bar{c}/t\bar{u}$ in both hadronic and semileptonic final states,

4792: resulting from the different $W$ boson decay modes from the top quark

4793: decay. While only the SM decay $t\to Wb$ is considered, a

4794: possible reduction of its branching ratio due to possible FCNC decays is

4795: accounted for when deriving the results. Since no evidence for single

4796: top quark production is observed, 95\% C.L.\ upper limits on the cross

4797: section are extracted, and corresponding model-dependent upper limits on

4798: the anomalous coupling parameters $\kappa_\gamma$ and $\kappa_Z$ are

4799: determined

4800: \cite{Heister:2002xv,Abdallah:2003wf,Achard:2002vv,Abbiendi:2001wk}.

4801: %

4802: \begin{figure}[!t]

4803:   \begin{center} 

4804:     \includegraphics[width=.46\textwidth]{plots/ST-FCNC-HERA.eps}

4805:     \caption{95\% C.L.\ upper limits on the top quark anomalous

4806: couplings to photons and $Z$ bosons $\kappa_{tu\gamma}$ and

4807: $v_{tuZ}$~\cite{South:2008km}. Depicted are the limits from

4808: CDF~\cite{Abe:1997fz,Obraztsov:1997if}, L3~\cite{Achard:2002vv},

4809: H1~\cite{South:2008km} and ZEUS~\cite{Chekanov:2003yt}.}

4810:     \label{fig:STFCNCgamZ}

4811:   \end{center}

4812: \end{figure}

4813: 

4814: Single top quark production at HERA is possible via the charged

4815: current SM process $ep\to \nu t\bar{b}X$ that has a

4816: negligible production rate here as well. Both H1 and ZEUS have

4817: searched for the inclusive neutral current production of top quarks in $ep\to etX$.

4818: Because of the large $Z$ boson mass, this reaction is most sensitive

4819: to couplings involving photons. Due to the large proton momentum

4820: fractions needed for single top production, the $u$ quark contribution

4821: will dominate over that from the $c$ quark (see

4822: Fig.\ \ref{fig:CTEQPDF}), resulting therefore in highest sensitivity to

4823: $tu\gamma$ couplings at HERA.

4824: 

4825: Using 0.1~fb$^{-1}$ of integrated luminosity, and

4826: assuming the SM top quark decay $t\to Wb$, H1 and ZEUS

4827: search for single top production both in the leptonic and hadronic

4828: $W$ boson decay channel. ZEUS observes good agreement with the

4829: SM prediction, and sets 95\% C.L.\ upper limits on single-top

4830: production rate and on the FCNC magnetic coupling $\kappa_{tu\gamma}$

4831: and vector coupling $v_{tuZ}$, neglecting charm

4832: contributions~\cite{Chekanov:2003yt}. H1 observes five events in the

4833: leptonic channel, with an expected SM background

4834: contribution of $1.31\pm0.22$ events, while the hadronic channel

4835: exhibits no excess over the standard model prediction. These two

4836: channels are compatible at the 1.1~sd level, and both a combined

4837: single-top cross section with about 2~sd significance and 95\%

4838: C.L.\ upper limits on the cross section and on $\kappa_{tu\gamma}$ (assuming a

4839: statistical fluctuation in the data) are provided~\cite{Aktas:2003yd}. In a recent

4840: preliminary update of the measurement in the leptonic channel by H1,

4841: using an integrated luminosity of 0.5~fb$^{-1}$, good agreement with

4842: the standard model expectation is observed and improved limits on

4843: the single-top cross section and $\kappa_{tu\gamma}$ are

4844: obtained~\cite{South:2008km}.

4845: 

4846: Further limits on the anomalous couplings $\kappa_\gamma$ and

4847: $\kappa_Z$ (inclusive for $u,c$ contributions) have been measured at the Tevatron by CDF via a search

4848: for neutral-current top quark decays $t\to \gamma q$ and $t\to Zq$ as

4849: will be discussed in Section~\ref{sec:FCNCdecay}. The most stringent

4850: results on anomalous top quark couplings involving photons and $Z$

4851: bosons obtained at LEP, HERA and the Tevatron are summarized in

4852: Fig.\ \ref{fig:STFCNCgamZ}, with the exception of the latest CDF limit

4853: on $t\to Zq$ decays~\cite{Aaltonen:2008aaa} that constrains $\kappa_Z$

4854: better than the limit from L3.

4855: %

4856: 

4857: Flavor changing neutral-current (FCNC) couplings of top quarks and gluons

4858: have not been studied as extensively. A constraint on the anomalous

4859: gluon coupling $\kappa_{tqg}/\Lambda$ of $< 0.52$~TeV$^{-1}$, where $\Lambda$ gives the scale

4860: for new physics, was extracted from the observed \ttbar pair

4861: production cross section at the Run~I Tevatron and a possible new

4862: physics contribution that could be still accommodated within two

4863: sd of combined experimental and theoretical uncertainties~\cite{Gouz:1998rk}.

4864: %

4865: Another limit on the anomalous gluon coupling was obtained using

4866: the single-top production cross section limit measured by

4867: ZEUS~\cite{Chekanov:2003yt}. Neglecting any effects that arise from the

4868: different final states obtained in the gluon channel compared to the

4869: original search (one additional light jet is present in the

4870: gluon case), at 95\% C.L.\ $\kappa_{tqg}/\Lambda < 0.4$~TeV$^{-1}$ is

4871: obtained~\cite{Ashimova:2006zc}.

4872: 

4873: \begin{figure}[!t]

4874:   \begin{center} 

4875:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/ST-FCNC-D0data.eps}

4876:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/ST-FCNC-D0.eps}

4877:     \caption{Left: Neural Network (NN) discriminant distribution in

4878: 0.2~fb$^{-1}$ lepton + jets data, with simulated FCNC signal increased by a factor of ten, and

4879: SM background. The signal distribution represents the sum

4880: of $tug$ and $tcg$ processes, evaluated for $\kappa_{tqg}/\Lambda =

4881: 0.03$~TeV$^{-1}$. Right: Exclusion contours for anomalous top-gluon

4882: couplings for different levels of confidence~\cite{Abazov:2007ev}.}

4883:     \label{fig:STFCNCgluon}

4884:   \end{center}

4885: \end{figure}

4886: D0 has performed a first search for single top production via flavor

4887: changing neutral-current couplings to gluons at a hadron collider,

4888: using 0.2~fb$^{-1}$ lepton + jets data~\cite{Abazov:2007ev}. The

4889: analysis is based on the corresponding search for SM

4890: single-top production~\cite{Abazov:2005zz,Abazov:2006uq}, but is

4891: restricted to events with only one $b$ tagged jet, and treats $s$- and

4892: $t$-channel SM single-top production as background. Since

4893: the neutral current decays $t\to gu/gc$ exhibit a negligible

4894: branching fraction for $\kappa_{tqg}/\Lambda \lsim

4895: 0.2$~TeV$^{-1}$~\cite{Hosch:1997gz}, exclusively the standard model top quark

4896: decay can be considered.

4897: 

4898: To separate the FCNC signal from the overwhelming SM

4899: background, a neural network  is deployed, with ten input variables based

4900: on global event kinematics, angular correlations and kinematics of the

4901: individual reconstructed objects. The resulting data

4902: distribution is shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:STFCNCgluon}, and exhibits

4903: good agreement with the SM prediction, which provides

4904: limits on the FCNC couplings $\kappa_{tug}/\Lambda$ and

4905: $\kappa_{tcg}/\Lambda$.

4906: 

4907: Systematic uncertainties affecting either the normalization or both

4908: normalization and shape of the distributions are taken into account

4909: when calculating the two-dimensional Bayesian posterior probability

4910: density, resulting in the exclusion contours for the two couplings for

4911: different confidence levels shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:STFCNCgluon}. The

4912: largest normalization uncertainties arise from the background cross

4913: section uncertainties, which includes the uncertainty on the top quark mass

4914: for \ttbar and single top samples. The largest uncertainties affecting

4915: the shape as well arise from jet energy scale calibration and $b$ tag

4916: modeling. 95\% C.L.\ upper limits on $\kappa_{tug}/\Lambda$ and

4917: $\kappa_{tcg}/\Lambda$ are obtained by integrating over the other

4918: variable, and yield 0.037~TeV$^{-1}$ and 0.15~TeV$^{-1}$ for $tug$ and $tcg$ couplings, respectively.

4919: These limits represent a significant improvement over previous

4920: values by up to an order of magnitude.

4921: 

4922: \begin{figure}[!t]

4923:   \begin{center} 

4924:     \includegraphics[width=.52\textwidth]{plots/CDF9440-NNFitwsignal.eps}\hspace*{1mm}

4925:     \includegraphics[width=.44\textwidth]{plots/CDF9440-STFCNC-WQ-Kappatug.eps} 

4926:     \caption{Left: Neural network discriminant output in $W$ + one

4927:       $b$ jet events observed in 2.2~fb$^{-1}$ of CDF data (black

4928:       points) and standard model background processes. A FCNC single

4929:       top signal with the observed 95\% C.L.\ {\em excluded} production

4930:       rate is added in red. Right: Extraction of the

4931:       $\kappa_{tug}/\Lambda$ limit from the intersection of the observed

4932:       cross section limit and theoretical rate prediction, assuming

4933:       $\kappa_{tcg} = 0$~\cite{CDF9440}.}

4934:       \label{fig:CDFSTFCNC}

4935:   \end{center}

4936: \end{figure}

4937: 

4938: CDF also reports a recent preliminary search for FCNC single top 

4939: production, based on 2.2~fb$^{-1}$ of data~\cite{CDF9440}\footnote{An updated

4940: version of the result has been published after completion of this

4941: review, see Ref.~\cite{Aaltonen:2008qr}.}. In distinction to

4942: the D0 analysis, where $2\to2$ $tcg$ and $tug$ signal processes

4943: are considered, CDF investigates the $2\to1$ processes $u(c)+g\to t$.

4944: Since also in this analysis only SM top quark decay is

4945: considered, events with one isolated energetic lepton, \MET and

4946: one $b$ tagged jet are selected.

4947: 

4948: Signal and SM background processes are separated using a

4949: Bayesian neural network based on 14 input variables containing

4950: information from the reconstructed objects and event kinematics.

4951: %

4952: In a template fit to the observed distribution in data good agreement

4953: is found with the SM background, as illustrated in

4954: Fig.\ \ref{fig:CDFSTFCNC}, and a 95\% C.L.\ upper limit on FCNC single

4955: top production via $u(c)+g\to t$ of 1.8~pb is obtained in accordance

4956: with the expected sensitivity.

4957: 

4958: Based on LO predictions for the FCNC signal process from

4959: \toprex~\cite{Slabospitsky:2002ag}, and using NLO

4960: $k$-factors~\cite{Liu:2005dp,Yang:2006gs,Zhang:2008yn}, the obtained cross section

4961: limit can be converted into limits on anomalous gluon couplings.

4962: No two-dimensional information is used in this analysis for

4963: contributions of $tcg$ relative to $tug$ signal processes, and

4964: one coupling is assumed to vanish in deriving the limit for the other coupling.

4965: The resulting 95\% C.L.\ upper limits are

4966: $\kappa_{tug}/\Lambda <$ 0.025~TeV$^{-1}$ (see

4967: Fig.\ \ref{fig:CDFSTFCNC}) and $\kappa_{tcg}/\Lambda <$

4968: 0.105~TeV$^{-1}$ (not shown).

4969: 

4970: \subsubsection{Anomalous $Wtb$ couplings in single top production}

4971: The couplings between quarks and electroweak gauge bosons were

4972: directly scrutinized at LEP~\cite{EWWG:2007}, with the exception of the

4973: top quark. 

4974: At the Tevatron, the couplings of the top quark and the

4975: $W$ boson can be studied in measurements of top quark decay properties

4976: in \ttbar production (see for example

4977: Section~\ref{sec:Whelmeasurements}) and via single top quark

4978: production. Physics beyond the standard model could

4979: modify the Lorentz structure of the $Wtb$ vertex. Considering

4980: a more general extension of the standard model $Wtb$ interaction

4981: Lagrangian,

4982: %

4983: as discussed in Section~\ref{sec:Wheltheory}, new physics could

4984: introduce contributions from right-handed vector ($f_1^R$)

4985: and left- and right-handed tensor couplings ($f_2^L, f_2^R$),

4986: in addition to the pure left-handed vector coupling ($f_1^L$) of the

4987: standard model.

4988: 

4989: %

4990: D0 has published constraints on such

4991: extended $Wtb$ interactions, including the first direct limits on the

4992: left- and right-handed tensor couplings~\cite{Abazov:2008sz},

4993: based on the analysis that provided first evidence for single top

4994: production in 0.9~fb$^{-1}$ of lepton + jets

4995: data~\cite{Abazov:2006gd,Abazov:2008kt}. In the analysis, single top

4996: quark production and decay are considered to take place only via $W$ bosons,

4997: with the dominant contribution arising from the $Wtb$

4998: interaction, which is assumed to be $CP$ conserving. Anomalous

4999: couplings at the $Wtb$ vertex can modify both the total single-top

5000: production rate and the observed kinematics in the events relative

5001: to SM expectation~\cite{Carlson:1994bg, Malkawi:1994tg,

5002: Heinson:1996zm, Boos:1999dd}. The latter effect is illustrated in

5003: Fig.\ \ref{fig:ST-Wtbcoupling} for the charged-lepton transverse

5004: momentum distribution.

5005: \begin{figure}[!t]

5006:   \begin{center} 

5007:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/ST-Wtb-leptonpt.eps}

5008:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/ST-Wtb-L1R2.eps}

5009:     \caption{Left: Charged-lepton \pt distribution in

5010:     0.9~fb$^{-1}$ lepton + jets data (two jets and one $b$ tag)

5011:     and the corresponding SM single-top signal and

5012:     background contributions. The effect of each of the four different $Wtb$

5013:     couplings on the signal is also shown (calculated with the other

5014:     couplings set to zero), with the normalization enhanced by

5015:     a factor of ten. Right: Boosted decision tree output for the same

5016:     data, signal and background contributions, with the ($L_1,R_2$)

5017:     scenario couplings overlaid (normalization increased by a

5018:     factor of five)~\cite{Abazov:2008sz}.}

5019:     \label{fig:ST-Wtbcoupling}

5020:   \end{center}

5021: \end{figure}

5022: 

5023: Since a simultaneous fit of all four couplings to data is not feasible with

5024: the available statistics, the SM coupling and 

5025: one additional anomalous coupling contribution at a time is considered

5026: in varying proportions (with the remaining two other anomalous

5027: couplings set to zero). The resulting scenarios are denoted as

5028: ($L_1,R_1$), ($L_1,R_2$) and ($L_1,L_2$). Non-negligible interference

5029: effects in the last case are also taken into account. For signal

5030: discrimination from SM background, boosted decision

5031: trees are used that are based on the same variables as used

5032: in Refs.~\cite{Abazov:2006gd,Abazov:2008kt}, but with the lepton \pt

5033: distribution added. One example distribution for the

5034: ($L_1,R_2$) case is shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:ST-Wtbcoupling}.

5035: 

5036: The decision tree output in data is compared with the various

5037: single-top signal models in the twelve subchannels defined by lepton

5038: flavor ($e,\mu$), jet multiplicity (two, three, four) and $b$ tag

5039: multiplicity (one, two). This yields a two-dimensional Bayesian

5040: posterior probability density, depending on $|f_1^L|^2$ and the

5041: anomalous coupling $|f_{\rm ano}|^2$ considered in the respective scenarios.

5042: Systematic uncertainties are taken into account, with dominant

5043: contributions arising from background normalization, modeling of $b$

5044: tagging and jet energy scale calibration. The latter two affect

5045: both normalization and shape of the simulated spectra. The maxima of

5046: the likelihoods in all three considered scenarios yield zero for

5047: $|f_{\rm ano}|^2$, and 95\% C.L.\ upper limits on these anomalous couplings

5048: are provided from the one-dimensional likelihood projections. These

5049: results are summarized together with the measured single-top production rates

5050: and $|f_1^L|^2$ values obtained from one-dimensional likelihood projections

5051: in Table~\ref{tab:ST-Wtblimits}. The SM $Wtb$ interaction

5052: is favored over any anomalous alternative studied. This analysis will

5053: greatly benefit from the increased statistics already in hand and from more

5054: expected until the end of Run~II.

5055: %

5056: \begin{table}[!t]

5057: \caption{Total single-top production rates obtained in three

5058: anomalous coupling scenarios, together with the corresponding

5059: one-dimensional measurements and limits for the selected

5060: couplings~\cite{Abazov:2008sz}.}

5061: \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}

5062: \centering

5063: \begin{tabular}{lcl}

5064: \hline

5065: Scenario  & Cross Section ($tb+tqb$)  &  \multicolumn{1}{c}{Considered Couplings}   \\

5066: \hline\hline

5067: \multirow{2}{*}{$(L_1,R_1)$}  & \multirow{2}{*}{$5.2^{+2.6}_{-3.5}$~pb} & $|f^{L}_{1}|^2=1.8 ^{+1.0}_{-1.3}$\\&&$|f^{R}_{1}|^2<2.5$ (95\% C.L.)  \\

5068: \hline

5069: \multirow{2}{*}{$(L_1,R_2)$}  & \multirow{2}{*}{$4.5^{+2.2}_{-2.2}$~pb} & $|f^{L}_{1}|^2=1.4 ^{+0.9}_{-0.8}$ \\&&$|f^{R}_{2}|^2<0.3$ (95\% C.L.)   \\

5070: \hline

5071: \multirow{2}{*}{$(L_1,L_2)$}  & \multirow{2}{*}{$4.4^{+2.3}_{-2.5}$~pb} & $|f^{L}_{1}|^2=1.4 ^{+0.6}_{-0.5}$ \\&&$|f^{L}_{2}|^2<0.5$ (95\% C.L.)   \\

5072: \hline

5073: \end{tabular}

5074: \label{tab:ST-Wtblimits}

5075: %

5076: \end{table}

5077: %

5078: 

5079: \section{Decay Properties of the Top Quark}

5080: \label{sec:BSMdecay}

5081: The previous chapter demonstrated that no significant

5082: deviations from the standard model expectations for top quark

5083: production via the strong or electroweak interaction have thus far been

5084: observed. In this chapter, decay properties of the top quark

5085: will be investigated based on \ttbar data, generally assuming that top quark production proceeds

5086: according to the standard model. %

5087: %

5088: 

5089: \subsection{Measurement of the $\mathbf {W}$ boson helicity in $\mathbf {t\bar{t}}$ decays}

5090: \label{sec:Whelmeasurements}

5091: The helicity of the $W$ boson in top quark decays can be used to test

5092: the $V-A$ Lorentz structure of the $Wtb$ interaction (see Section

5093: \ref{sec:Wheltheory}). According to the expectation from the standard

5094: model, $W$ bosons from top quark decays should be longitudinally

5095: polarized with a fraction $f_0 \approx 70\%$ and left-handed with a

5096: fraction $f_- \approx 30\%$. The right-handed fraction $f_+$ is

5097: strongly suppressed, and below the per mill level~\cite{Fischer:2000kx}.

5098: For the decay of antitop quarks, the $CP$ conjugate statement is

5099: implied, resulting in $W^-$ bosons from $\bar{t}$ decays with either longitudinal or right-handed polarization.

5100: 

5101: A pure $V+A$ structure of the $Wtb$ interaction would result in an

5102: observation of a right-handed fraction $f_+ = 30\%$, with negligible

5103: left-handed contribution. Small \mbox{$V+A$} admixtures to the SM

5104: left-handed charged-current weak interaction are

5105: predicted, for instance, within $SU(2)_{R}\times SU(2)_{L}\times U(1)_{Y}$ extensions

5106: of the SM~\cite{Bernreuther:2003xj,Beg:1977ti,

5107: Beg:1977tierr, Nam:2002rq}. Such contributions would result in an

5108: enhancement of $f_+$ while not significantly affecting $f_0$. Since

5109: the decay amplitude for longitudinally polarized $W$ bosons is

5110: proportional to the top quark's Yukawa coupling \cite{Kuhn:1996ug},

5111: %

5112: $f_0$ is sensitive to the mechanism of EWSB, and would be altered, for

5113: example, in topcolor-assisted technicolor models~\cite{Chen:2005vr,

5114: Wang:2005ra}.

5115: %

5116: 

5117: The radiative decay rate $b\to s \gamma$ can be used to set indirect

5118: limits on the $V+A$ admixture in top quark decays to below a few

5119: percent~\cite{Fujikawa:1993zu, Cho:1993zb, Hosch:1996wu,

5120: Jessop:2002ha}, assuming there are no contributions from gluonic

5121: penguin diagrams in addition to the electroweak ones. This section

5122: will discuss the direct measurements of the $W$ boson helicity

5123: performed at the Tevatron using lepton + jets and dilepton

5124: datasets. 

5125: 

5126: Thus far, four analysis techniques have been deployed to 

5127: extract the $W$ boson helicity fractions, based on:

5128: \begin{romanlist}[(ii)]

5129: \item {\em helicity angle ($\cos\theta^{\ast}$)}: The helicity of the

5130: $W$ boson is reflected in the angular distribution $\cos\theta^{\ast}$

5131: of its decay products, with $\theta^{\ast}$ being the angle of the

5132: down-type ($T_3 = -\frac{1}{2}$) decay products of the $W$ boson

5133: (charged lepton, $d$ or $s$ quark) in the $W$ boson rest

5134: frame relative to the top quark direction

5135: \cite{Kane:1991bg,Dalitz:1991wa,Nelson:1997xd,Fischer:2000kx}:

5136: \begin{eqnarray}

5137: \frac{dN}{d\cos\theta^*} = 

5138: f_-\cdot\frac{3}{8}(1-\cos\theta^*)^2 +

5139: f_0\cdot\frac{3}{4}(1-\cos^2\theta^*) +

5140: f_+\cdot\frac{3}{8}(1+\cos\theta^*)^2,

5141: \end{eqnarray}

5142: where $f_-$ can be replaced by $(1-f_+-f_0)$. The resulting

5143: distributions for each helicity fraction and the superposition

5144: expected from the standard model are shown in

5145: Fig.\ \ref{fig:Whelcosdist}. A measurement of $\cos\theta^{\ast}$

5146: provides the most direct measurement of the $W$ boson helicity, but

5147: it requires the reconstruction of the momenta of the top quark and $W$ boson,

5148: which is challenging and involves using \METns,

5149: which has a rather poor resolution.

5150: \begin{figure}[!t]

5151:   \begin{center} 

5152:     \includegraphics[height = 60mm]{plots/Whelcosdist.eps}

5153:     \caption{Helicity angle $\cos\theta^{\ast}$ distributions for

5154:     left-handed, longitudinal and right-handed 

5155:     $W$ bosons. The superposition expected from the

5156:     standard model is shown as well.}

5157:       \label{fig:Whelcosdist}

5158:   \end{center}

5159: \end{figure}

5160: \item {\em charged-lepton \pt spectrum ($p_{T}^{\ell}$)}: The helicity

5161: of the $W$ boson is correlated with the charged-lepton momentum

5162: distribution: Since the $\nu_\ell$ from $W^+$ decays are

5163: left-handed, while the $\ell^+$ are right-handed, in case of a

5164: left-handed $W^+$ decay the $\ell^+$ are preferentially emitted

5165: opposite to the momentum vector of the $W^+$. This leads to

5166: a softer $p_{T}^{\ell}$ spectrum in the laboratory frame. Conversely,

5167: the $\ell^+$ are preferentially emitted along the direction of the $W^+$

5168: momentum in case of a right-handed $W^+$ decay, leading to a harder

5169: $p_{T}^{\ell}$ spectrum. The $\ell^+$ from longitudinal $W^+$ decay

5170: represent an intermediate case (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:Whel-lpt}).

5171: \item {\em squared invariant mass of $b$ quark and charged lepton ($M_{\ell

5172: b}^{2}$)}: In the limit of $m_{b}=0$, the helicity angle distribution $\cos\theta^{\ast}$ can be

5173: approximated using the squared invariant mass of the system composed of the

5174: $b$ quark and the charged lepton $M_{\ell b}^{2}$:

5175: \begin{equation}

5176: \cos\theta^{\ast} = \frac{p_\ell\cdot p_b - E_\ell

5177: E_b}{|\mathbf{p}_\ell||\mathbf{p}_b|}

5178: \simeq\frac{2M_{\ell b}^{2}}{m_t^2-M_W^2}-1.

5179: %

5180: \label{eq:Mlb2}

5181: \end{equation}

5182: This way one avoids the challenge of kinematic

5183: reconstruction of the top quark and the application of \MET by using only

5184: momenta measured in the laboratory frame. 

5185: \item {\em Matrix Element method (ME)}: The Matrix Element method was

5186: originally developed by D0~\cite{Abazov:2004cs}, yielding a very

5187: precise mass measurement given the limited Run~I data sample (see also

5188: Section~\ref{sec:ljmassmeasurements}). Using all the available kinematic

5189: information in each event, a probability for the event to

5190: correspond to a \ttbar final state as a function of the helicity of the

5191: $W$ boson can be calculated, based on the LO matrix element.

5192: \end{romanlist}

5193: The following subsections will give brief examples for each method,

5194: followed by a summary of the current status of the measurements.

5195: 

5196: \subsubsection{$p_{T}^{\ell}$ and $M_{\ell b}^{2}$}

5197: CDF has measured the $W$ boson helicity in a 0.2 fb$^{-1}$ Run~II

5198: dataset using the charged-lepton \pt ($p_{T}^{\ell}$) and the squared

5199: invariant mass of the $b$ quark and charged lepton ($M_{\ell b}^{2}$) to

5200: approximate $\cos\theta^{\ast}$~\cite{Abulencia:2005xf}. The

5201: dependence of these observables on the $W$ boson helicity for a top

5202: quark mass of 175 GeV/c$^2$ after event selection and reconstruction

5203: is shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:Whel-lpt}. Since the world-averaged top and

5204: $W$ boson masses are used for calculating $\cos\theta^{\ast}$,

5205: rather than the corresponding event-by-event reconstructed masses that

5206: would smear out the distribution due to the larger inherent

5207: uncertainties, values are observed outside of the physical range $-1 \leq

5208: \cos\theta^{\ast} \leq 1$.

5209: \begin{figure}[!t]

5210:   \centering

5211:   \includegraphics[width = 0.48 \textwidth, height=40mm]{plots/pt_templates_new6.eps}

5212:   \includegraphics[width = 0.48 \textwidth, height=40mm]{plots/cos_templates_new3.eps}

5213:   %

5214:   \caption{Distributions of reconstructed charged-lepton \pt and

5215:     $\cos\theta^{\ast}$ (based on Eq.~\ref{eq:Mlb2})

5216:     for top quark decays involving left-handed, right-handed and

5217:     longitudinally polarized $W$ bosons~\cite{Abulencia:2005xf}.}

5218:   \label{fig:Whel-lpt}

5219: \end{figure}

5220: 

5221: For the $p_{T}^{\ell}$ analysis, a $b$ tagged lepton + jets sample

5222: is used requiring at least three jets, and yielding 57 events of which

5223: approximately 2/3 are \ttbar signal. In addition a dilepton sample,

5224: with a minimum value for the scalar sum of the transverse energy of jets, leptons

5225: and \MET is analyzed, yielding 13 events with a signal fraction of

5226: $\approx$0.79. The analysis based on $M_{\ell b}^{2}$ uses the lepton +

5227: jets sample alone, requiring a fourth jet and a good

5228: kinematic fit to the \ttbar hypothesis for a top mass of 175

5229: GeV/c$^2$. This provides the lepton and appropriate

5230: jet to form $M_{\ell b}^{2}$, and leaves 31 events for this analysis

5231: with a signal fraction of $\approx$0.78.

5232: 

5233: For both analyses, the data distributions are fitted separately to

5234: $p_{T}^{\ell}$ and $\cos\theta^{\ast}$ templates of signal

5235: with the different $W$ boson helicities and background. Because of

5236: limited statistics, the helicity fractions $f_0$ and $f_+$ cannot be

5237: fitted simultaneously. Consequently, $f_0$ or $f_+$ are

5238: constrained to their standard model values when fitting for $f_+$

5239: or $f_0$, respectively. Both analyses are finally combined, taking

5240: statistical and systematic correlations into account, and yield results

5241: consistent with the standard model expectation, as shown in

5242: Table~\ref{tab:Whel-lpttable}. The dominant systematic uncertainties come

5243: from uncertainties on the top quark mass, background shape and

5244: normalization, effects of initial- and final-state radiation (ISR/FSR)

5245: and the PDFs.

5246: \begin{table}

5247:   \caption{Results of individual and combined measurements of $f_0$

5248:     and $f_+$ using $M_{\ell b}^{2}$ and $p_{T}^{\ell}$. $N$ indicates

5249:     the number of events or leptons used. If two uncertainties are

5250:     given, the first is statistical and the second systematic. For the

5251:     combined results, the statistical and systematic combined uncertainty

5252:     is given. For the $p_{T}^{\ell}$($\ell\ell$) result, an

5253:     observation of $\leq-0.54$ is expected 0.5\% of the time for 

5254:     the SM $f_0$ value of 0.7~~\cite{Abulencia:2005xf}.}

5255: \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}

5256:   \begin{center}

5257:     \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|}

5258:       \hline

5259:       Analysis &$N$& $f_0$ & $f_+$  \\ \hline\hline

5260:       $M_{\ell b}^{2}$ & 31& $0.99^{+0.29}_{-0.35}\pm0.19$  & $0.23\pm0.16\pm0.08$  \\  

5261:       $p_{T}^{\ell}$($\ell\ell$) & 26& $-0.54^{+0.35}_{-0.25}\pm 0.16$ & $-0.47\pm0.10\pm0.09$ \\

5262:       $p_{T}^{\ell}$($\ell j$) & 57& $0.95^{+0.35}_{-0.42}\pm0.17$  & $0.11^{+0.21}_{-0.19}\pm0.10$ \\

5263:       $p_{T}^{\ell}$($\ell\ell,\ell j$) & 83& $0.31^{+0.37}_{-0.23}\pm0.17$  & $-0.18^{+0.14}_{-0.12}\pm0.12$ \\ \hline

5264:       Combined & & $0.74^{+0.22}_{-0.34}$ &  $0.00^{+0.20}_{-0.19}$ \\

5265:       95\% C.L.\ limit & & {$<0.95$},{$>0.18$} & $<0.27$ \\

5266:       \hline

5267:     \end{tabular}

5268:   \end{center}

5269:   \label{tab:Whel-lpttable}

5270: \end{table}

5271: 

5272: CDF has also measured the fraction of right-handed $W$ bosons assuming

5273: $f_0$ to be 0.7, using the $M_{\ell b}^{2}$ method on a 0.7

5274: fb$^{-1}$ Run~II dataset~\cite{Abulencia:2006iy}. Using a single and

5275: double $b$ tagged lepton + jets in addition to a dilepton dataset,

5276: $f_+$ is extracted via maximum likelihood fits of the $M_{\ell b}^{2}$

5277: distributions in data to $V+A$ and $V-A$ \ttbar signal Monte

5278: Carlo and background contributions. Including uncertainties on the

5279: \ttbar signal and background cross sections, the

5280: %

5281: lepton + jets sample yields \mbox{$f_+ =0.06 \pm 0.08$}, while the

5282: dilepton sample gives \mbox{$f_+ = -0.19 \pm 0.11$}, corresponding to

5283: a compatibility of the measurements at the level of 2.3~sd. A

5284: combination of these measurements, including all systematic

5285: uncertainties, yields \mbox{$f_+ = -0.02 \pm 0.07 \rm{(stat + syst)}$},

5286: corresponding to $f_+ < 0.09$ at 95\% C.L. The main contributions to

5287: the systematic uncertainty come from the jet energy scale, background

5288: shape and normalization and limited Monte Carlo statistics.

5289: 

5290: \subsubsection{Matrix element method}

5291: 

5292: D0 has used the matrix element method that was originally employed to

5293: measure the top quark mass~\cite{Abazov:2004cs} to extract the

5294: longitudinal $W$ boson helicity fraction from 0.1 fb$^{-1}$ of Run~I

5295: data~\cite{Abazov:2004ym}. The selected lepton + jets event sample

5296: corresponds to that of the preceding mass

5297: analysis~\cite{Abbott:1998dc} and comprises both soft muon $b$ tagged

5298: events and untagged events, which have additional kinematic requirements,

5299: yielding a total of 91 events.

5300: 

5301: By comparing the measured set of four-vectors in each event with the

5302: differential cross section for \ttbar signal and the dominant $W +

5303: \rm{jets}$ background, $f_0$ can be extracted by fixing $f_+$ to its

5304: SM value, allowing the ratio $f_0/f_-$ to vary. The

5305: use of both $W$ boson decays per signal event increases the

5306: statistical sensitivity of the method. Since the calculation of signal

5307: and background probabilities is based on leading-order matrix

5308: elements, only events with exactly four jets are accepted, reducing

5309: the sample to 71 events. In order to increase signal purity, a cut

5310: on the background probability is applied, leaving 22 events to be

5311: analyzed (as in the corresponding matrix-element mass

5312: analysis~\cite{Abazov:2004cs}), with a signal to background ratio of

5313: 12/10.

5314: 

5315: To take the dependence of the $f_0$ measurement on the top quark mass

5316: into account, a two-dimensional likelihood, depending on $f_0$ and

5317: $m_{t}$, is calculated and corrected for response deviations from unity

5318: for different $f_0$ input values (see Fig.~\ref{fig:Whel-ME}). Since

5319: statistics are insufficient, a simultaneous optimization for both

5320: observables is not feasible; instead $f_0$ is evaluated by integrating

5321: over the top quark mass, for a range between 165 and 190 GeV/$c^2$. The

5322: maximum in the probability yields the central value of the

5323: measurement, with the 1~sd uncertainty band corresponding to a

5324: convolution of statistical and top quark mass uncertainties. Other

5325: systematic uncertainties from acceptance and linearity of response or

5326: jet energy scale are small compared to this, yielding the final result:

5327: \begin{eqnarray}

5328: f_0=0.56\pm0.31({\rm{stat}\oplus m_t})\pm0.07({\rm syst}).

5329: \end{eqnarray}

5330: \begin{figure}[!t]

5331:   \centering

5332:   %

5333:   \includegraphics[width = 0.68 \textwidth]{plots/mt_f0.eps}

5334:   %

5335:   \caption{Two-dimensional probability density observed in 0.1 fb$^{-1}$ lepton +

5336:   jets Run~I data as a function of $f_0$ and top quark mass

5337:   $m_t$~\cite{Abazov:2004ym}.}

5338:   \label{fig:Whel-ME}

5339: \end{figure}

5340: 

5341: CDF has obtained a preliminary result for $f_0$ using the same

5342: method on 1.9 fb$^{-1}$ of Run~II data, assuming a fixed top quark mass

5343: of 175 GeV/c$^2$~\cite{CDF9144}. 468 events are selected in a $b$

5344: tagged lepton + jets sample with at least four jets (only the

5345: leading four are used in the analysis) and a minimum value for $H_{T}$,

5346: yielding a signal fraction of

5347: about 0.84. Fixing $f_+$ to its SM value, the longitudinal

5348: $W$ boson helicity fraction is found to be

5349: $f_0=0.64\pm0.08({\rm{stat.}})\pm0.07({\rm syst.})$, with the

5350: dominant systematic uncertainty coming from the Monte Carlo generator

5351: used (\pythia\ versus \herwig) for the calibration of the measurement.

5352: $f_0$ is found to change by $\mp 0.035$ for a $\pm 2.5$ GeV/c$^2$

5353: variation in the top quark mass. Thus far, the analysis has not yet been

5354: extended to measure $f_0$ and $f_+$ or $f_0$ and $m_t$ simultaneously.

5355: 

5356: \subsubsection{Helicity angle $\cos\theta^\ast$}

5357: D0 has published a first model-independent measurement of the $W$

5358: boson helicity fractions by comparing the

5359: $\cos\theta^\ast$ distribution in data to templates of background and

5360: right-handed, left-handed or longitudinal $W$ bosons in \ttbar signal,

5361: using $f_+$ and $f_0$ as freely floating parameters and \mbox{$f_- = 1

5362: - f_+ -f_0$} \cite{Abazov:2007ve}. In a 1~fb$^{-1}$ dataset, lepton

5363: $+\geq 4$ jets and dilepton events are selected. The signal

5364: purity is increased in each subsample by a cut on an individually

5365: optimized multivariate likelihood discriminant based on event

5366: kinematics and the output of a neural network $b$-tagging

5367: discriminant. The cut values are chosen in each subsample to yield

5368: the best expected precision for the helicity measurement.

5369: 

5370: The statistical sensitivity of the analysis is further improved by

5371: about 20\% by including the $W\to q\bar{q}'$ decays in the lepton

5372: + jets sample in the measurement. This is accomplished through

5373: picking one of the $W$ boson daughter jets

5374: at random for the calculation of $\cos\theta^{\ast}$, which

5375: introduces a sign ambiguity. Consequently, only

5376: $|\cos\theta^{\ast}|$ is considered which does not permit to

5377: discriminate left- from right-handed $W$ bosons, but still adds

5378: information on $f_0$.

5379: 

5380: The four-momenta of the top quarks and $W$ bosons in the lepton +

5381: jets sample are reconstructed based on the best kinematic fit to a top

5382: quark event hypothesis for $m_t = 172.5$ GeV/c$^2$, using the leading

5383: four jets to obtain $\cos\theta^{\ast}$ and

5384: $|\cos\theta^{\ast}|$. For the kinematically less constrained dilepton

5385: events, a top quark mass of $m_t = 172.5$ GeV/c$^2$ is assumed and the

5386: kinematics solved up to a four-fold ambiguity in addition to the

5387: two-fold ambiguity from the lepton-jet pairing (only the leading two

5388: jets are used). Jet and lepton energies in each event are smeared

5389: within their resolutions to explore the phase space

5390: consistent with the observed values. The average of the obtained

5391: $\cos\theta^{\ast}$ values is then used for each charged lepton,

5392: providing two measurements per event. The resulting distributions are

5393: shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:D0-Whel-1fb-costs-dists}. 

5394: \begin{figure}[!t]

5395:   \begin{center} 

5396:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/T07EF2a.eps}

5397:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/T07EF2b.eps}

5398:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/T07EF2c.eps}

5399:     \caption{Helicity angle distributions in lepton + jets (a,b)

5400:       and dilepton events (c). Points with error bars represent 1~fb$^{-1}$ of D0 data.

5401:       The solid open histograms show the result of the

5402:       model independent fit described in the text, while the dashed open histograms show the

5403:       standard model expectation. The filled histograms represent

5404:       the background contribution~\cite{Abazov:2007ve}.}

5405:     \label{fig:D0-Whel-1fb-costs-dists}

5406:   \end{center}

5407: \end{figure}

5408: Note that due to reconstruction effects the shape of the standard

5409: model expectation differs from the theoretical prediction in

5410: Fig.\ \ref{fig:Whelcosdist}.

5411: 

5412: A template fit of these distributions yields

5413: $f_0=0.425\pm0.166\rm{(stat.)}\pm0.102\rm{(syst.)}$ and

5414: $f_+=0.119\pm0.090\rm{(stat.)}\pm0.053\rm{ (syst.)}$. The result is

5415: compatible with the standard model expectation at 30\% C.L. 

5416: It should be noted that the

5417: individual measurements in the lepton + jets and dilepton channels

5418: differ by about 2.1~sd~\cite{priv:2008a}.

5419: %

5420: The major systematic uncertainties on the measurement are summarized

5421: in Table~\ref{tab:D0Whelsyst}, with the largest uncertainty arising from

5422: \ttbar signal modeling, evaluated through varying the Monte Carlo

5423: generators used (\pythia\ versus \alpgen), from changing underlying event

5424: models to estimate the effects of gluon radiation, and restricting the

5425: samples to contain only one primary vertex to study the sensitivity of

5426: the measurement to variations in instantaneous luminosity.

5427: \begin{table}[!t]

5428:   \caption{Major systematic uncertainties on the simultaneous 

5429:     measurement of $f_0$ and $f_{+}$ by D0 in 1~fb$^{-1}$ of data~\cite{Abazov:2007ve}.}

5430:   \begin{center}

5431:   \begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|}

5432:     \hline

5433:     Source & Uncertainty ($f_0$) & Uncertainty ($f_+$)  \\ \hline\hline

5434:     Top mass               & 0.009 & 0.018 \\

5435:     Jet reconstruction eff.                & 0.021 & 0.010 \\

5436:     Jet energy calibration       & 0.012  &  0.019\\

5437:     $b$ fragmentation      & 0.016 &  0.010 \\ 

5438:     \ttbar ~model          & 0.068 & 0.032 \\

5439:     Background model       & 0.049   & 0.016  \\

5440:     Template statistics   & 0.049 & 0.025 \\ \hline

5441:     Total                  & 0.102  &   0.053 \\ \hline

5442:   \end{tabular}

5443:   \label{tab:D0Whelsyst}

5444:  \end{center}

5445: \end{table}

5446: \begin{figure}[h!]

5447:   \begin{center} 

5448:     \includegraphics[ height=56mm]{plots/D0Whel-2.7fb-costs.eps}

5449:     \includegraphics[ height=51mm]{plots/2d_limit.eps}

5450:     \caption{Left: Result of the model-independent $W$ boson helicity

5451:       fit by D0 \cite{D05722}. The ellipses show the 68\% and

5452:       95\% C.L.\ contours around the measured data point. The star

5453:       shows the SM expectation, and the triangle denotes the physically

5454:       allowed region where $f_0$ and $f_+$ sum to $\leq 1$. Right:

5455:       Two-dimensional 95\% C.L.\ exclusion area in the $(f_+, f_0)$

5456:       plane measured by CDF~\cite{CDF9215}.}

5457:     \label{fig:Whel-costs}

5458:   \end{center}

5459: \end{figure}

5460: Constraining $f_{0}$ or

5461: $f_{+}$ to their SM values, when fitting for $f_{+}$ or for $f_{0}$, respectively,

5462: yields $f_{0} = 0.619 \pm 0.090\:{\rm(stat.)} \pm

5463: 0.052\:{\rm(syst.)}$ and $f_{+} = -0.002 \pm 0.047\:{\rm(stat.)} \pm 0.047

5464: \:{\rm(syst.)}$, in agreement with expectations from the SM.

5465: 

5466: In a recent preliminary update, D0 has added 1.2~fb$^{-1}$ lepton +

5467: jets and 1.7~fb$^{-1}$ dilepton ($e\mu$ only) data~\cite{D05722}

5468: to the above analysis. The model-independent fit for the combined data

5469: yields $f_0=0.490\pm0.106\rm{(stat.)}\pm0.085\rm{(syst.)}$ and

5470: $f_+=0.110\pm0.059\rm{(stat.)}\pm0.052\rm{ (syst.)}$, consistent at

5471: 23\% C.L.\ with the standard model (see

5472: Fig.\ \ref{fig:Whel-costs}). The results from the lepton + jets

5473: and dilepton channels remain marginally consistent with a $p$-value of

5474: 1.6\%.

5475: 

5476: CDF has obtained two preliminary results for a model-independent extraction of $W$

5477: boson helicity in 1.9 fb$^{-1}$ of data. These are based on using only the charged

5478: lepton in $b$ tagged lepton $+\geq 4$ jets events to obtain

5479: $\cos\theta^{\ast}$~\cite{CDF9114, CDF9215}. A combination of both

5480: results also has become available~\cite{CDF9431}\footnote{This result has been published after completion of this

5481: review, see Ref.~\cite{Aaltonen:2008ei}.}. The measurements are

5482: compatible with the standard model expectation, with each other, and with the D0

5483: measurements presented above and are summarized together with other

5484: results in Table~\ref{tab:Whelsummary}. The two-dimensional 95\%

5485: C.L.\ exclusion area in the $(f_+, f_0)$ plane measured by

5486: CDF~\cite{CDF9215} is shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:Whel-costs}.

5487: %

5488: 

5489: \begin{table}[t!]

5490:     \caption{$W$ boson helicity measurements in \ttbar events performed thus far at the

5491: Tevatron, with their integrated luminosities, data selections

5492: ($\ell j$ = lepton + jets, $\ell\ell$ = dilepton) and

5493: analysis methods used. Model independent results are indicated by a yes in

5494: the ``Ind. fit'' column. The three analyses using 0.1 fb$^{-1}$ are from

5495: Run~I; the analyses using more than 1~fb$^{-1}$ are preliminary.

5496: Ref. \cite{CDF9431} provides a combination of the results from Refs.~\cite{CDF9114,CDF9215}.}

5497: \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}

5498: \addtolength{\tabcolsep}{-4pt}

5499:   \begin{center}

5500:     %

5501:     \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}

5502:       \hline 

5503:        $\int{\cal L}dt$  &\multirow{2}{*}{Sel.}  & \multirow{2}{*}{$f_{0}$} & \multirow{2}{*}{$f_{+}$} & Ind. & $f_{+}<$ & \multirow{2}{*}{Method} & \multirow{2}{*}{Ref.}\\ 

5504:       ~[fb$^{-1}$] &  &  &  & fit & {\tiny (95\% C.L.)} &  & \tabularnewline

5505:       \hline

5506:       \hline 

5507:       0.1 & $\ell j,\ell\ell$ & $0.91\pm0.37\pm0.13$ & $0.11\pm0.15$ & no & 0.28 & $p_{T}^{\ell}$  & \cite{Affolder:1999mp}\tabularnewline

5508:       \hline 

5509:       0.1 & $\ell j,\ell\ell$ & --- & $-0.02\pm0.11$ & no & 0.18 & $M_{\ell b}^{2}$, $p_{T}^{\ell}$ & \cite{Acosta:2004mb}\tabularnewline

5510:       \hline 

5511:       0.1 & $\ell j$ & $0.56\pm0.31$ & --- & no & --- & ME & \cite{Abazov:2004ym}\tabularnewline

5512:       \hline 

5513:       0.2 & $\ell j,\ell\ell$ & $0.74_{-0.34}^{+0.22}$ & $0.00_{-0.19}^{+0.20}$ & no & 0.27 & $M_{\ell b}^{2}$, $p_{T}^{\ell}$ & \cite{Abulencia:2005xf}\tabularnewline

5514:       \hline 

5515:       0.2 & $\ell j$ & --- & $0.00\pm0.13\pm0.07$ & no & 0.25 & $\cos\theta^{\ast}$ & \cite{Abazov:2005fk}\tabularnewline

5516:       \hline 

5517:       0.3 & $\ell j$ & $0.85_{-0.22}^{+0.15}\pm0.06$ & $0.05_{-0.05}^{+0.11}\pm0.03$ & no & 0.26 & $\cos\theta^{\ast}$ & \cite{Abulencia:2006ei}\tabularnewline

5518:       \hline 

5519:       0.4 & $\ell j,\ell\ell$ & --- & $0.06\pm0.08\pm0.06$ & no & 0.23 & $\cos\theta^{\ast}$ & \cite{Abazov:2006hb}\tabularnewline %

5520:       \hline 

5521:       0.7 & $\ell j,\ell\ell$ & --- & $-0.02\pm0.07$ & no & 0.09 & $M_{\ell b}^{2}$ & \cite{Abulencia:2006iy}\tabularnewline

5522:       \hline 

5523:       \multirow{2}{*}{1.0}  &\multirow{2}{*}{$\ell j,\ell\ell$}  & $0.62\pm0.09\pm0.05$ &  $0.00\pm0.05\pm0.05$ & no &\multirow{2}{*}{---} & \multirow{2}{*}{$\cos \theta^\ast$} & \multirow{2}{*}{\cite{Abazov:2007ve}}\\%

5524:       &&$0.43\pm0.17\pm0.10$&$0.12\pm0.09\pm0.05$&yes&&&\tabularnewline

5525:       \hline 

5526:         1.9  & $\ell j$ & $0.64\pm0.08\pm0.07$  & ---  & no & --- & ME& \cite{CDF9144}\tabularnewline%

5527:       \hline

5528:       \multirow{2}{*}{1.9}  &\multirow{2}{*}{$\ell j$}  &$0.59\pm0.11\pm0.04$  &  $-0.04\pm0.04\pm0.03$ & no & 0.07 & \multirow{2}{*}{$\cos \theta^\ast$} & \multirow{2}{*}{\cite{CDF9215}}\\

5529:       &&$0.65\pm0.19\pm0.03$&$-0.03\pm0.07\pm0.03$&yes&---&&\tabularnewline

5530:       \hline 

5531:       \multirow{2}{*}{1.9}  &\multirow{2}{*}{$\ell j$}  &$0.66\pm0.10\pm0.06$  &  $0.01\pm0.05\pm0.03$ & no & 0.12 & \multirow{2}{*}{$\cos \theta^\ast$} & \multirow{2}{*}{\cite{CDF9114}}\\

5532:       &&$0.38\pm0.21\pm0.07$&$0.15\pm0.10\pm0.05$&yes&---&&\tabularnewline

5533:       \hline 

5534:       \multirow{2}{*}{1.9}  &\multirow{2}{*}{$\ell j$}  &$0.62\pm0.11$  &  $-0.04\pm0.05$ & no &\multirow{2}{*}{---}  & \multirow{2}{*}{$\cos \theta^\ast$} & \multirow{2}{*}{\cite{CDF9431}}\\

5535:       &&$0.66\pm0.16$&$-0.03\pm0.07$&yes&&&\tabularnewline

5536:       \hline 

5537:       2.7 & $\ell j,\ell\ell$ & $0.49\pm0.11\pm0.09$ & $0.11\pm0.06\pm0.05$ & yes & --- & $\cos\theta^{\ast}$ & \cite{D05722}\tabularnewline

5538:       \hline 

5539:     \end{tabular}

5540:     \label{tab:Whelsummary}

5541:     %

5542:   \end{center}

5543: \end{table}

5544: 

5545: \subsubsection{Summary}

5546: All available measurements of the $W$ boson helicity performed thus far in \ttbar events at the

5547: Tevatron are compatible with the standard model expectation, and are summarized

5548: in Table~\ref{tab:Whelsummary}. 

5549: 

5550: The sensitivity of the measurements in Run~I and initial studies in Run~II only

5551: allowed model-dependent measurements of any single

5552: helicity fraction to be performed at a time, while fixing the other fraction to its

5553: standard model value. However, with the large amount of data available by now,

5554: a simultaneous extraction of  $f_{+}$ and $f_{0}$ 

5555: for $W$ bosons is possible without constraint, except for unitarity ($f_{+}+f_{0}+f_{-}=1$).

5556: Such measurements will also clearly

5557: benefit from increased luminosity. A combination with

5558: the measurement of the single-top production cross section in the $s$-

5559: and $t$-channel will help to fully specify the $tWb$

5560: coupling~\cite{Chen:2005vr} (see Section~\ref{sec:Wheltheory})\footnote{A first such measurement was published by

5561:   D0~\cite{Abazov:2009ky} after completion of this review.}.

5562: 

5563: The model-dependent measurements, where one of the helicity fractions

5564: is fixed to its standard model value, have reached a considerable

5565: precision with statistical approaching systematic

5566: uncertainties.

5567: 

5568: It is interesting to note that discrepancies of $>2$~sd

5569: between results from the dilepton and lepton + jets samples have

5570: been observed both at CDF and D0 using different analysis techniques.

5571: This deserves further scrutiny in future analyses.

5572: 

5573: %

5574: 

5575: \subsection{Measurement of \boldmath{${\cal B}(t \rightarrow Wb) / {\cal B}(t \rightarrow Wq)$}}

5576: \label{sec:Rmeasurement}

5577: As described in Section~\ref{sec:topCKM}, in the standard model

5578: framework the top quark decays almost exclusively into a $W$ boson

5579: and a $b$ quark due to the dominant corresponding CKM matrix element

5580: $V_{tb}$. The ratio $R$ of the top quark branching fractions can be

5581: expressed via the CKM matrix elements as:

5582: \begin{eqnarray}

5583: R = \frac{{ \cal B}(t \rightarrow Wb)}{\displaystyle\sum_{q=d,s,b} {\cal{B}}(t

5584: \rightarrow Wq)} & = &

5585: \frac{\mid V_{tb}\mid^2}{\mid V_{tb}\mid^2 + \mid V_{ts}\mid^2 + \mid V_{td}\mid^2}  \;.

5586: \label{eq:Rdefinition}

5587: \end{eqnarray}

5588: Measuring $R$ provides therefore the relative size of $|V_{tb}|$

5589: compared to $|V_{td}|$ and $|V_{ts}|$, with the current measurements

5590: indicating $|V_{tb}| \gg |V_{td}|, |V_{ts}|$. While a direct

5591: measurement of the $V_{tb}$ matrix element is only possible through single

5592: top quark production, as described in Section~\ref{sec:singletopprod},

5593: model-dependent constraints on $V_{tb}$ can also be inferred from a

5594: measurement of $R$: Assuming the validity of the standard model,

5595: specifically the existence of three fermion generations, unitarity of

5596: the CKM matrix and insignificance of non-$W$ boson decays of the top

5597: quark (see Sections~\ref{sec:FCNCdecay}-\ref{sec:H+topdecay}), the denominator in 

5598: Eq.~\ref{eq:Rdefinition} equals one. $R$ then simplifies to $|V_{tb}|^{2}$, and is therefore

5599: strongly constrained to $0.9980 < R < 0.9984$ at 90\%

5600: C.L.\ by global CKM fits~\cite{Eidelman:2004wy}.

5601: 

5602: %

5603: Deviations of $R$ from unity could, for example, be caused by the

5604: existence of a fourth heavy quark generation, non standard model top

5605: quark decays, or non standard model background processes.

5606: Consequently, precise measurements of R probe for physics

5607: beyond the standard model, and provide a required ingredient for the

5608: model-independent direct determination of the $|V_{tq}|$ CKM matrix

5609: elements from electroweak single top production~\cite{Alwall:2006bx}.

5610: %

5611: 

5612: \begin{figure}[!t]

5613:   \begin{center} 

5614:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/D0Rvstags.eps}\hspace*{1mm}

5615:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/D0-R-1fb-contour_plot_prl.eps} 

5616:     \caption{Left: Fractions of events with 0, 1 and $\geq 2$ $b$ tags

5617:       for \ttbar events with $\geq$4 jets as a function of $R$.

5618:       Right: 68\% and 95\% C.L.\ statistical uncertainty contours in

5619:       the R vs. $\sigma_{t\bar{t}}$ plane around the measured point 

5620:       in 0.9~fb$^{-1}$ of D0 data~\cite{Abazov:2008yn}.}

5621:       \label{fig:D0Rmeas}

5622:   \end{center}

5623: \end{figure}

5624: %

5625: The most precise measurement of $R$ thus far has been performed by D0

5626: in the lepton + jets channel using data corresponding to an integrated

5627: luminosity of 0.9~fb$^{-1}$~\cite{Abazov:2008yn}, superseding the

5628: previously published measurement based on

5629: 0.2~fb$^{-1}$~\cite{Abazov:2006bh}. The \ttbar signal sample

5630: composition depends on $R$ in terms of the number of $b$ jets present

5631: in the sample, as illustrated in Fig.\ \ref{fig:D0Rmeas}. By comparing

5632: the event yields with zero, one and two or more $b$ tagged jets, and

5633: using a topological discriminant to separate \ttbar signal from

5634: background in events without $b$ tags, $R$ can be extracted simultaneously

5635: with the \ttbar production cross section $\sigma_{t\bar{t}}$.

5636: This approach yields a measurement of

5637: $\sigma_{t\bar{t}}$ without assuming ${\cal B}(t\to Wb)= 100\%$, and

5638: exploits the different sensitivity of the two measured quantities to systematic

5639: uncertainties, thereby improving overall precision.

5640: 

5641: A maximum likelihood fit to the sample composition observed in data

5642: gives

5643: \begin{eqnarray}

5644: R &=& 0.97^{+0.09}_{-0.08}~\rm{(stat.+syst.)~and}\\ \sigma_{t\bar{t}}

5645: &=& 8.18^{+0.90}_{-0.84}~\rm{(stat.+syst.)}~\pm 0.50~\rm{(lumi)~pb}

5646: \end{eqnarray}

5647: (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:D0Rmeas}) with a correlation of $-58\%$ for a top

5648: quark mass of $175$~GeV/c$^{2}$, in agreement with the standard model

5649: prediction. From the measurement 95\% C.L.\ limits are extracted, yielding

5650: $R > 0.79$ and $|V_{tb}| > 0.89$, the latter being model-dependent as

5651: mentioned above. $R$ exhibits no significant dependence

5652: on the top quark mass within $\pm10$~GeV/c$^{2}$, while

5653: $\sigma_{t\bar{t}}$ varies by $\mp 0.09$~pb per $\pm1$~GeV/c$^{2}$ in

5654: the same mass range. The total uncertainty on $R$ in this measurement

5655: is 9\%, dominated by the statistical uncertainty of

5656: $^{+0.067}_{-0.065}$ and the largest systematic uncertainty from the

5657: $b$ tagging efficiency estimation of $^{+0.059}_{-0.047}$. The cross

5658: section measurement yields a result similar but not identical to the

5659: measurement on the same dataset~\cite{Abazov:2008gc}, presented in

5660: Section~\ref{sec:ttbarxsecmeaslj}. This is due to the assumption of $R=1$, and

5661: slightly different event selection in the latter analysis.

5662: %

5663: \begin{figure}[!t]

5664:   \begin{center} 

5665:     \includegraphics[ height=65mm]{plots/rsummary30_1.eps}

5666:     \caption{Summary of the branching ratio $R$ measurements and their

5667:       total uncertainties obtained at the Tevatron by

5668:       CDF~\cite{Affolder:2000xb,Acosta:2005hr} and

5669:       D0~\cite{Abazov:2008yn,Abazov:2006bh}.}

5670:     \label{fig:Rsummary}

5671:   \end{center}

5672: \end{figure}

5673: 

5674: CDF performed the first measurement of $R$ in Run~I using both

5675: dilepton and lepton + jets events on 0.1~fb$^{-1}$ of

5676: data~\cite{Affolder:2000xb}, and repeated the analysis in Run~II on

5677: 0.2~fb$^{-1}$ of data~\cite{Acosta:2005hr}, also finding good agreement

5678: with the standard model expectation.

5679: 

5680: All measurements of $R$ performed thus far at the Tevatron are

5681: summarized in Fig.\ \ref{fig:Rsummary}.

5682: 

5683: \subsection{Search for neutral-current top decays}

5684: \label{sec:FCNCdecay}

5685: %

5686: Flavor changing neutral interactions of the top quark with a light

5687: quark $q = u, c$ through gauge ($Z,\gamma, g$) or Higgs ($H^0$) bosons are

5688: forbidden at lowest order and are suppressed by the GIM mechanism

5689: \cite{Glashow:1970gm} at higher orders in the standard model framework.

5690: Consequently, the corresponding FCNC top quark decays are expected to

5691: occur, at most, with branching ratios at ${\cal O}(10^{-12})$

5692: \cite{AguilarSaavedra:2004wm}, well out of reach of sensitivity of the

5693: Tevatron or the LHC. Any observation of such FCNC decays would therefore signal

5694: physics beyond the standard model.

5695: 

5696: Many extensions of the standard model predict the occurrence of FCNC

5697: interactions, affecting both electroweak single top production

5698: (see Section~\ref{sec:STFCNC}) and top quark decay. The branching

5699: fractions of FCNC top decays can increase by many orders of magnitude

5700: in such models, as for example in Supersymmetry

5701: \cite{deDivitiis:1997sh, Lopez:1997xv,Eilam:2001dh},

5702: %

5703: additional broken symmetries~\cite{Fritzsch:1999rd},

5704: %

5705: dynamical EWSB~\cite{Peccei:1989kr,Arbuzov:1998th} including

5706: %

5707: topcolor-assisted technicolor~\cite{Yue:2001cy} or extended Higgs

5708: models such as Two Higgs Doublet Models~\cite{Eilam:1990zc,Eilam:1999zc,

5709: Hou:1991un,Atwood:1995ud}. 

5710: %

5711: Overviews of such models and their impact on top couplings

5712: are given in Refs.~\cite{Han:1996ce,Han:1998yr,delAguila:1998tp,AguilarSaavedra:2004wm}.

5713: %

5714: 

5715: \begin{figure}[!t]

5716:   \begin{center} 

5717: \subfigure[]{\epsfig{figure = plots/FCNC_decayfixed.eps, height=40mm}}\hspace{1cm}

5718: \subfigure[]{\epsfig{figure = plots/tt_production_z_four_jetsfixed.eps, width = 0.45 \textwidth}}

5719:     %

5720:     \caption{(a) Feynman ``penguin'' diagram for the FCNC decay $t\to

5721:       Zc$ with $Z\to \ell^+\ell^-$. Including the corresponding diagrams

5722:       with a $d$ and $s$ quark in the loop, the process is nearly

5723:       cancelled in the standard model. (b) Event signature for top

5724:       quark pairs containing one FCNC $t\to Zq$ decay and one

5725:       $W\to q\bar{q}'$ decay from $t\to Wb$, resulting in a final

5726:       state that contains a $Z$ boson and four jets.}

5727:       \label{fig:ttbarFCNCdecay}

5728:   \end{center}

5729: \end{figure}

5730: A search for the top quark FCNC decay $t\to Zq$ at the Tevatron is

5731: considered especially interesting due the large top quark mass and

5732: very distinct experimental signature (see

5733: Fig.\ \ref{fig:ttbarFCNCdecay}). It was already suggested in

5734: 1989~\cite{Fritzsch:1989qd}, well before the discovery of the top

5735: quark. The expected sensitivity for such a branching ratio measurement

5736: is ${\cal O}(10^{-2})$ at the Run~II Tevatron and ${\cal O}(10^{-4})$

5737: at the LHC \cite{Han:1995pk}, while the largest expected branching

5738: fractions from SM extensions reach up to ${\cal

5739: O}(10^{-2})$~\cite{Arbuzov:1998th} and ${\cal

5740: O}(10^{-4})$~\cite{AguilarSaavedra:2004wm}, respectively. The best published

5741: limit before Run~II on ${\cal B}(t\to Zq)$ was obtained at LEP by the L3

5742: Collaboration via a search for single top quark production, where no

5743: significant deviation from the SM background expectation

5744: was observed, yielding ${\cal B}(t\to Zq) < 13.7 \%$ at 95\%

5745: C.L.~\cite{Achard:2002vv}.

5746: 

5747: In Run~I, the CDF Collaboration performed a search for the FCNC decays

5748: $t\to Zq$ and $t\to \gamma q$ on a dataset with an integrated

5749: luminosity of 0.1 fb$^{-1}$~\cite{Abe:1997fz}. For the $t\to \gamma q$

5750: search, a photon is reconstructed as an energy cluster in the

5751: electromagnetic calorimeter, either without an associated track or with a single soft

5752: track (presumably a random overlap) carrying less than 10\% of the

5753: photon energy pointing to the cluster. Two event signatures are

5754: considered, where the $W$ boson from the standard-model-like second top

5755: decay branches either leptonically into $e\nu_e\ \rm{or}\ \mu\nu_\mu$, or

5756: hadronically into $\bar{q}q'$ quarks. Consequently, these samples are

5757: selected by requiring either a charged lepton ($e\ \rm{or}\ \mu$),

5758: \METns, at least two jets and a photon, or by requiring at least four

5759: jets and a photon. In both samples, a photon-jet combination must

5760: yield a mass between 140 and 210 GeV/c$^2$ and the SM-like

5761: top decay must contain one $b$ tag. 40\% of the $t\to \gamma q$

5762: acceptance comes from the photon + multijet selection, while the

5763: lepton + photon mode contributes 60\%. After all selections,

5764: one event remains in the leptonic channel and none in the photon +

5765: multijet channel, with an expected background of about 0.5 events

5766: mainly from $W\gamma$ production with additional jets in each channel.

5767: This translates into a 95\% C.L.\ upper limit on the branching fraction

5768: of ${\cal B}(t\to c \gamma) + {\cal B}(t\to u \gamma) < 3.2\%$.

5769: 

5770: In the $t\to Zq$ search, $W\to q\bar{q}'$ decays from the

5771: SM-like second top decay are considered together with a

5772: leptonically decaying $Z$ boson into $e^+e^-$ or $\mu^+\mu^-$. Using

5773: the leptonic $W$ boson decay as well does not substantially increase

5774: the acceptance and consequently does not improve the limit. The

5775: resulting event signature therefore contains four jets and two leptons with an

5776: invariant mass consistent with that of a $Z$ boson, as illustrated in Fig.\

5777: \ref{fig:ttbarFCNCdecay}. Since the branching ratio of $Z \to

5778: \ell^+\ell^-$ is small, this search is less sensitive than the

5779: $t\to \gamma q$ one. One $Z \to \mu^+\mu^-$ event passes the

5780: selection, with an expected background of $\approx$0.6 events from $Z + $

5781: multijet and \ttbar production. This corresponds to a 95\% C.L.\ upper

5782: limit on the branching fraction of ${\cal B}(t\to c Z) + {\cal B}(t\to

5783: u Z) < 33\%$. These measurements can be translated into limits on the

5784: FCNC couplings $\kappa_\gamma$ and $\kappa_Z$ at 95\%

5785: C.L.~\cite{Obraztsov:1997if}, which are $\kappa_\gamma^2 < 0.176\ \rm{and}\

5786: \kappa_Z^2 < 0.533$ (see Section~\ref{sec:STFCNC} and Fig.\

5787: \ref{fig:STFCNCgamZ}).

5788: %

5789: 

5790: %

5791: \begin{figure}[!t]

5792:   \begin{center} 

5793:     \includegraphics[height = 50mm]{plots/cdf-fcnc.eps}

5794:     \caption{Expected and observed mass $\chi^{2}$ distributions in

5795:       $Z+\geq4$ jets events in signal samples with and without $b$

5796:       tags and in a background-enriched sample used to ascertain uncertainties

5797:       in the background shape and normalization in 1.9~fb$^{-1}$ of CDF

5798:       data~\cite{Aaltonen:2008aaa}. The expected FCNC $t\to Zq$

5799:       signal with the observed 95\% C.L.\ upper limit on the branching

5800:       fraction is shown as well.}

5801:       \label{fig:CDFFCNC}

5802:   \end{center}

5803: \end{figure}

5804: In Run~II, the CDF Collaboration has performed a search for the FCNC

5805: decay $t\to Zq$ on a dataset with an integrated luminosity of 1.9

5806: fb$^{-1}$~\cite{Aaltonen:2008aaa}. Events consistent with a

5807: leptonically decaying $Z$ boson to $e^+e^-$ or $\mu^+\mu^-$ are

5808: selected together with at least four jets, one of which can be $b$

5809: tagged (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:ttbarFCNCdecay}). The event selection was

5810: optimized in a preceding version of this analysis with 1.1 fb$^{-1}$ of

5811: data~\cite{CDF8888}, which was a ``blind'' cut-based counting experiment. By

5812: requiring only one well-identified lepton for $Z$ reconstruction,

5813: while the second lepton can be formed from an isolated track, the

5814: acceptance is doubled compared to using only fully identified leptons.

5815: The sensitivity of the search is further increased by dividing the

5816: data into two subsamples, one $b$ tagged and one not tagged. The

5817: best discriminant found to separate signal from background

5818: is a mass $\chi^{2}$ variable that combines the kinematic constraints

5819: present in FCNC decays: Two jets in the event have to form a $W$ boson,

5820: and together with a third jet a top quark, while the $Z$ boson has to

5821: form a top quark with the fourth jet. Because the event signature does

5822: not contain neutrinos, the events can be fully reconstructed. The

5823: signal fraction in the selected dataset is determined via a template

5824: fit in signal samples with or without $b$ tags, and a

5825: background-enriched control sample is used to constrain uncertainties on the

5826: background shape and normalization (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:CDFFCNC}).

5827: 

5828: Since the observed distributions are consistent with the standard

5829: model background processes, a 95\% C.L.\ upper limit is extracted on the branching

5830: fraction ${\cal B}(t\to c Z) + {\cal B}(t\to u Z)$ of $<

5831: 3.7\%$. The expected limit in absence of signal is 5\%. This is the

5832: best limit on ${\cal B}(t\to Zq)$ to date, starting to constrain

5833: predictions from a dynamic EWSB model~\cite{Arbuzov:1998th}.

5834: %

5835: 

5836: \subsection{Search for invisible top decays}

5837: \label{sec:invisibletopdecay}

5838: Apart from the direct search for $t\to (Z/\gamma)~q$ decays, as described

5839: in the previous section, one can also perform an indirect search for

5840: ``invisible'' top quark decays by comparing the predicted \ttbar

5841: production cross section with the observed yield in data. In order to

5842: be sensitive to novel top decay modes with this method, these decays

5843: must exhibit a significantly different acceptance from the standard

5844: model top quark decay.

5845: 

5846: Based on a 1.9~fb$^{-1}$ doubly $b$ tagged lepton + jets dataset,

5847: CDF searches for deviations of the observed \ttbar production rate

5848: from the theoretical prediction~\cite{Cacciari:2008zb} due to the

5849: decays $t\to Zc$, $t\to g c$, $t\to \gamma c$ and $t\to$

5850: ``invisible'' states~\cite{CDF9496}. These decays exhibit a relative

5851: acceptance ${\mathcal R}_\textrm{WX/WW}$, where one novel and one

5852: SM top quark decay occur, normalized to the standard model

5853: \ttbar decay acceptance, from 32\% down to no acceptance (for decays to invisible states).

5854: 

5855: With an observed \ttbar production cross section of 8.8~pb, and a

5856: prediction of 6.7~pb for a top quark mass of 175 GeV/c$^2$, the

5857: obtained limits on the novel top quark decay modes are all lower than

5858: expected, but statistically consistent with expectation. The

5859: results are summarized in Table~\ref{tab:CDFinvisibletop} for

5860: top quark masses of 170, 172.5 and 175 GeV/c$^2$.

5861: 

5862: \begin{table}[!t]

5863:   \caption{Relative signal acceptances and observed 95\% C.L.\ upper

5864:     limits on the branching fractions for several non-SM

5865:     top quark decay modes as a function of assumed top quark mass in a

5866:     1.9~fb$^{-1}$ doubly $b$ tagged lepton + jets

5867:     dataset~\cite{CDF9496}.}

5868:   \begin{center}

5869:     \addtolength{\tabcolsep}{-2pt}

5870:     \begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}lrrrr} 

5871:       \hline

5872:       \multirow{2}{*}{Decay} &\multirow{2}{*}{${\mathcal R}_\textrm{WX/WW}$~[\%]}&Limit~[\%] &Limit~[\%] &Limit~[\%] \\ 

5873:       & & {\footnotesize (175 GeV/c$^2$)}&{\footnotesize (172.5 GeV/c$^2$)}&{\footnotesize (170 GeV/c$^2$)}\\

5874:       \hline\hline

5875:       ${\mathcal B}(t\to Zc)$                 &  32 & 13 & 15 & 18 \\

5876:       ${\mathcal B}(t\to g c)$                &  27 & 12 & 14 & 17 \\

5877:       ${\mathcal B}(t\to \gamma c)$          &  18 & 11 & 12 & 15 \\

5878:       ${\mathcal B}(t\to \textrm{invisible})$      &   0 &  9 & 10 & 12 \\ 

5879:       \hline

5880:     \end{tabular*}

5881:     \label{tab:CDFinvisibletop}

5882:   \end{center}

5883: \end{table}

5884: 

5885: \subsection{Search for top decays to charged Higgs bosons}

5886: \label{sec:H+topdecay}

5887: %

5888: As indicated previously, the standard model incorporates one Higgs doublet of

5889: complex scalar fields to break electroweak symmetry and to generate

5890: masses of weak gauge bosons and fermions (see

5891: Section~\ref{sec:SMoverview}). As a consequence, one obtains a single

5892: neutral scalar CP-even particle that still remains to be discovered,

5893: the Higgs boson $H$. An extension of the

5894: standard model Higgs sector introduces a second Higgs

5895: doublet, referred to in Section~\ref{sec:STchargedH} as Two Higgs Doublet Models

5896: (THDM or 2HDM)~\cite{Gunion:1989we,Gunion:1992hs}. These models provide

5897: five physical scalar Higgs bosons after electroweak symmetry breaking, namely

5898: %

5899: two neutral CP-even Higgs bosons $H^0$ and $h^0$, one neutral

5900: pseudoscalar CP-odd Higgs particle $A^0$, and two charged Higgs bosons

5901: $H^\pm$. The observation of charged Higgs bosons would therefore offer clear

5902: evidence for physics beyond the standard model.

5903: 

5904: Three choices of Higgs-fermion couplings are

5905: differentiated in THDM. In Type-I models only one of the two Higgs

5906: doublets couples to fermions, while in Type-II models one doublet

5907: couples to up-type fermions and the other doublet to down-type

5908: fermions. Type-III models have general Higgs-fermion Yukawa

5909: couplings of both Higgs doublets, leading to Higgs-mediated FCNC at

5910: tree level, which requires tuning of the Higgs parameters to ensure

5911: sufficient suppression of FCNC to be compatible with current experimental limits.

5912: %

5913: One example of a Type-II THDM is the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard

5914: Model (MSSM)~\cite{Martin:1997ns} which is frequently used as reference in the

5915: analyses described below. The relevant model parameters

5916: in searches for charged Higgs bosons are the ratio of the 

5917: vacuum expectation values of the two Higgs doublets ($\tan\beta$)

5918: %

5919: and the mass of the charged Higgs boson $m_{H^\pm}$.

5920: 

5921: %

5922: The inclusive single charged Higgs boson production rate

5923: $\sigma(p\bar{p}\to tH^-X)$ reaches a maximum of

5924: $\mathcal{O}(\rm{1~pb})$ at the Tevatron where the charged Higgs boson

5925: can be produced via the decay of a top quark. The corresponding

5926: inclusive cross section for pair production of charged

5927: Higgs bosons $\sigma(p\bar{p}\to H^+H^-X)$ is below

5928: $\mathcal{O}(\rm{0.1~pb})$~\cite{Borzumati:1999th,Carena:2002es}.

5929: 

5930: The decay mode $t\to Hb$ is kinematically accessible if the mass of

5931: the charged Higgs boson is less than the difference between top and $b$

5932: quark masses $m_{H^\pm} < (m_t - m_b)$, and will then compete with the

5933: standard model decay $t\to Wb$. The distinct top quark decay signature

5934: provides an additional handle for background suppression compared to

5935: direct production of charged Higgs bosons. The branching fraction of

5936: $t\to Hb$ depends on $\tan\beta$ and $m_{H^\pm}$. As illustrated in

5937: Fig.\ \ref{fig:MSSMBrH+} for the MSSM, the branching ratio of $t\to

5938: Hb$ increases significantly both for small $\tan\beta\lsim 1$ and large

5939: $\tan\beta\gsim 40$, for a given $m_{H^\pm}$. The standard model decay

5940: is assumed to account for the difference of ${\cal B}(t\to H b)$ from unity. For a given

5941: $\tan\beta$, the branching ratio of $t\to Hb$ decreases with increasing

5942: $m_{H^\pm}$. The decay of $H^\pm$ is dominated by $H^\pm\to\tau\nu$

5943: for large $\tan\beta$, independent of $m_{H^\pm}$, which would result in

5944: an excess of \ttbar events in the $\tau$ decay channel relative to

5945: standard model expectation. At small $\tan\beta$, the decay $H^\pm\to cs$

5946: is enhanced for small $m_{H^\pm}$, while $H^\pm\to t^\ast b$ dominates for

5947: $m_{H^\pm}$ close to the top quark mass.

5948: \begin{figure}[!t]

5949:   \begin{center} 

5950:     \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth,height = 50mm]{plots/MSSMParametrizations_100_bm4.root.eps}

5951:     \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth,height = 50mm]{plots/MSSMParametrizations_150_bm4.root.eps}

5952:     \caption{Branching ratios for top quark and charged Higgs boson

5953:       decays versus $\tan\beta$ in the MSSM framework as simulated

5954:       with \cpsuperh~\cite{Lee:2003nta} for $m_{H^\pm} = 100$~GeV/c$^2$

5955:       (left) and $m_{H^\pm} = 150$~GeV/c$^2$ (right).}

5956:       \label{fig:MSSMBrH+}

5957:   \end{center}

5958: \end{figure}

5959: Consequently, searches for charged Higgs bosons focus on these three

5960: fermionic decay modes.

5961: 

5962: In the early 1990s (before the discovery of the top quark) first

5963: searches for $t\to Hb$ in the $H^\pm\to\tau\nu$ decay mode

5964: assuming specific branching fractions were performed, and limits derived in the

5965: $m_{t}$ versus $m_{H^\pm}$ parameter space by the UA1 and UA2

5966: experiments~\cite{Albajar:1990zs,Alitti:1992hv} at the CERN

5967: $Sp\bar{p}S$ collider, and by CDF at the Run~I Tevatron 

5968: \cite{Abe:1993mr,Abe:1994ng}. All four LEP experiments searched

5969: for pair-production of charged Higgs bosons in $e^+e^-\to H^+H^-$,

5970: assuming that only the decays $H^\pm\to\tau\nu$ and $H^\pm\to cs$ can occur

5971: \cite{Heister:2002ev,Abdallah:2003wd,Achard:2003gt,Abbiendi:1998rd}, as

5972: favored by Type-II THDM. The dominant background in the resulting

5973: three decay modes is pair production of $W$ bosons, yielding similar

5974: final states. 95\% C.L.\ lower mass limits, independent of the $H^\pm$

5975: decay mode, yielded $m_{H^\pm} >$~78.6~GeV/c$^2$ in a preliminary

5976: combination of all four experiments~\cite{LEP:2001xy}. This was superseded

5977: by a more stringent limit obtained by ALEPH of

5978: 79.3~GeV/c$^2$~\cite{Heister:2002ev}. 

5979: 

5980: Indirect limits on the mass of the charged Higgs boson can be obtained

5981: from measurements of the $b\to s\gamma$ FCNC process at $B$ factories,

5982: since the involved loop diagrams are sensitive to contributions from

5983: new particles such as $H^\pm$. For a Type-II THDM scenario, a 95\% C.L.

5984: lower limit of $m_{H^\pm} >$~295~GeV/c$^2$ can be

5985: derived~\cite{Misiak:2006zs} if the used theoretical description is

5986: assumed to be complete. Direct searches are less model dependent, and

5987: therefore serve as important tools to scan for new physics beyond the regions

5988: of parameter space excluded by the corresponding direct analyses

5989: described above. The direct searches for $t\to Hb$ performed at the

5990: Tevatron are based on Type-II THDM scenarios.

5991: %

5992: 

5993: After the discovery of the top quark, the first searches for $H^\pm$

5994: in top decays $t\bar{t}\to H^\pm W^\mp b\bar{b}, H^\pm H^\mp b\bar{b}$

5995: focused on the decay $H^\pm\to\tau\nu$, which corresponds to large

5996: $\tan\beta$. CDF published an analysis superseding and extending a

5997: previous result~\cite{Abe:1995pj}, requiring inclusive final states

5998: with \METns, a hadronically decaying tau lepton ($\tau_h$), and (i) two

5999: jets and at least one additional either lepton or jet, or (ii) a second

6000: energetic $\tau_h$~\cite{Abe:1997rk}. Another search investigated the

6001: dilepton channels $e\tau_h, \mu\tau_h$, with accompanying \MET and at least two

6002: jets~\cite{Affolder:1999au}. D0 performed a first $H^\pm$ analysis in

6003: Run~I based on a ``disappearance'' search in the lepton + jets channel,

6004: sensitive to $H^\pm$ fermionic decay modes, by looking for a

6005: discrepancy in the event yields relative to the standard model

6006: predictions~\cite{Abbott:1999eca}. This analysis was complemented

6007: through a direct search for $H^\pm\to\tau\nu$ with a hadronically decaying

6008: $\tau$ reconstructed as narrow jet in a dataset with events containing

6009: \MET and at least four, but no more than eight,

6010: jets~\cite{Abazov:2001md}. All analyses observe good agreement with

6011: SM expectation, and provide limits in the $\tan\beta ,

6012: m_{H^\pm}$ plane.

6013: 

6014: It should be noted that the above limits are based on tree level MSSM

6015: calculations of branching fractions depending on

6016: $\tan\beta$. By now, it has become clear that higher-order radiative

6017: corrections, which strongly depend on model parameters, modify

6018: these predictions significantly~\cite{Coarasa:1999da,Carena:1999py}.

6019: Also, non-fermionic (bosonic) $H^\pm$ decay modes can have non-negligible

6020: contributions at small $\tan\beta$, as illustrated in

6021: Fig.\ \ref{fig:MSSMBrH+}, affecting the limits derived in that area

6022: without taking this into account. Independent of these issues, one can

6023: still provide upper limits on ${\cal B}(t\to H b)$ %

6024: based on the observed production rate for any specified $H^\pm$

6025: branching ratio. For example, for a purely tauonically decaying charged

6026: Higgs boson, 95\% C.L.\ upper limits on ${\cal B}(t\to H b)$ are found by CDF

6027: to lie between 0.5 and 0.6 for 60~GeV/c$^2$ $\leq m_{H^\pm} \leq$

6028: 160~GeV/c$^2$~\cite{Affolder:1999au}. The combined D0 result

6029: corresponds to ${\cal B}(t\to H b) < 0.36$ at 95\% C.L.\ for $m_{H^\pm}

6030: <$ 160~GeV/c$^2$ and $0.3<\tan\beta<150$, which is the full range where the

6031: leading-order MSSM calculation is valid~\cite{Abazov:2001md}.

6032: 

6033: CDF published a first search for $t\to Hb$ in Run~II using

6034: 0.2~fb$^{-1}$ of integrated luminosity~\cite{Abulencia:2005jd}. The

6035: search is based on the corresponding \ttbar cross section

6036: analyses~\cite{Acosta:2004hw,Acosta:2004uw,Abulencia:2005et}

6037: in the topology \MET + jets + $\ell$ + X, where $\ell$

6038: corresponds to an electron or muon and X to either $\ell$ (dilepton

6039: channel), $\tau_h$ (lepton + $\tau$ channel) or one or more $b$ tagged

6040: jets (lepton + jets channels). Dropping the assumption of ${\cal

6041: B}(t\to H b) = 0$, and avoiding overlaps of the channels,

6042: the observed yields can be compared with the expected deficits or

6043: excesses in the channels relative to the standard model prediction,

6044: depending on the top quark and $H^\pm$ branching fractions. Apart from

6045: the standard model top quark decays, $t\to Hb$ is considered with

6046: $H^\pm$ decaying to $\tau\nu$, $cs$, $t^\ast b$ or $Wh^0$, with $h^0

6047: \to b\bar{b}$. The \ttbar production rate is assumed to be not

6048: affected by the extension of the Higgs sector. Since no $H^\pm$ signal

6049: is observed, 95\% C.L.\ upper limits on ${\cal B}(t\to H b)$ are

6050: obtained, for example, for a tauonic Higgs model (${\cal B}(H^\pm\to

6051: \tau\nu) = 1)$ to be 0.4 for 80~GeV/c$^2$ $\leq m_{H^\pm} \leq$

6052: 160~GeV/c$^2$. 95\% C.L.\ limits are also obtained in the ($m_{H^\pm},

6053: \tan\beta$) parameter space in the framework of the MSSM for certain

6054: benchmark settings of parameters~\cite{Abulencia:2005jd}, taking radiative corrections into

6055: account. While the excluded area for large $\tan\beta$ strongly

6056: depends on the different benchmarks investigated, this is not the case

6057: for small $\tan\beta$. An example result is shown in

6058: Fig.\ \ref{fig:H+MSSMntauonic}.

6059: %

6060: \begin{figure}[!t]

6061:   \begin{center} 

6062:     \includegraphics[width=0.495\textwidth,height = 50mm]{plots/HplusCDFMSSM.eps}

6063:     \includegraphics[width=0.495\textwidth,height = 50mm]{plots/D05715-chargedHiggs-tauoniclimits.eps}

6064:     \caption{Left: Expected and observed 95\% C.L.\ exclusion limits

6065:     for charged Higgs bosons in the ($m_{H^\pm}, \tan\beta$) plane

6066:     obtained by CDF for the MSSM benchmark scenario discussed

6067:     in Ref.~\cite{Abulencia:2005jd}. Right: Expected and observed 95\% C.L.

6068:     limits on ${\cal B}(t\to H b)$ versus $m_{H^\pm}$ found by D0

6069:     for a tauonic charged Higgs model using a simultaneous fit of

6070:     ${\cal B}(t\to H b)$ and the \ttbar production cross

6071:     section~\cite{D05715}. MSSM tree-level predictions for several

6072:     $\tan\beta$ values are shown as well.}

6073:   %

6074:       \label{fig:H+MSSMntauonic}

6075:   \end{center}

6076: \end{figure}

6077: 

6078: D0 performs a similar analysis based on the

6079: same \ttbar final states in 1~fb$^{-1}$ of integrated

6080: luminosity~\cite{D05715}. Two models for the decay mode of

6081: the charged Higgs boson are studied: (i) a ``tauonic'' Higgs model with ${\cal

6082: B}(H^\pm\to \tau\nu) = 1$ that would give an enhancement of the

6083: lepton + $\tau$ channels and a deficit in the lepton + jets and

6084: dilepton channels, and (ii) a ``leptophobic'' model with ${\cal B}(H^\pm\to cs) =

6085: 1$ that would yield an enhancement of the all-hadronic channel and

6086: a deficit in all channels considered in this analysis. For both model

6087: assumptions, good agreement with the standard model prediction is

6088: observed, and 95\% C.L.\ upper limits on ${\cal B}(t\to H b)$ are

6089: provided for 80~GeV/c$^2$ $\leq m_{H^\pm} \leq$ 155~GeV/c$^2$,

6090: yielding 0.16 - 0.20 for the tauonic and 0.2 for the leptophobic

6091: model. The dominant systematic uncertainties arise here from

6092: uncertainties on the \ttbar cross section and the luminosity.

6093: 

6094: For the tauonic model, an improvement of the obtained limits by about

6095: 30\% in the low $m_{H^\pm}$ range ($\lesssim$ 100~GeV/c$^2$) is possible when the \ttbar cross

6096: section is allowed to float in the fit rather than be fixed to the

6097: SM value. The resulting limits are displayed in

6098: Fig.\ \ref{fig:H+MSSMntauonic}, and range from 0.12 to 0.26 in the

6099: indicated $ m_{H^\pm}$ range. Assuming the standard model scenario of

6100: ${\cal B}(t\to H b) = 0$, a combination of the \ttbar cross sections

6101: from the analyzed final states is also obtained, as was discussed in

6102: Section~\ref{sec:ttbarxsecmeassummary}.

6103: %

6104: 

6105: As illustrated in Fig.\ \ref{fig:H+MSSMntauonic}, the results

6106: obtained in Ref.~\cite{Abulencia:2005jd} leave room for improvement,

6107: particularly close to $\tan\beta\approx 1$ and $m_{H^\pm}$ above

6108: the $W$ boson mass. For this range of parameters, the MSSM predicts

6109: a significant branching fraction for the decay $H^\pm\to cs$.

6110: CDF has searched for $t\to H b$ in this decay channel in

6111: 2.2~fb$^{-1}$ double $b$ tagged lepton + jets data~\cite{CDF9322}.

6112: Both standard model and exotic decay exhibit the same final state, but

6113: can be distinguished via the dijet invariant mass, where the two untagged

6114: leading jets are assigned to $W^\pm/H^\pm$ decay products.

6115: %

6116: A binned likelihood fit using $W^\pm/H^\pm$ dijet mass templates yields

6117: no significant excess over the SM prediction, and 95\% C.L.

6118: upper limits on ${\cal B}(t\to H b)$ are provided for 90~GeV/c$^2$

6119: $\leq m_{H^\pm} \leq$ 150~GeV/c$^2$, assuming a leptophobic Higgs

6120: model. The limits range from 8\% for $m_{H^\pm} = 130$~GeV/c$^2$

6121: to 32\% for $m_{H^\pm} = 90$~GeV/c$^2$, complementing the analysis

6122: by D0 described above for the mass range above 100~GeV/c$^2$.

6123: %

6124: 

6125: %

6126: 

6127: A first direct search for charged Higgs boson production in the mass

6128: range beyond $m_{t}$ via the process $q\bar{q}'\to H^\pm\to

6129: tb$ has been performed by D0, as was discussed previously in

6130: Section~\ref{sec:STchargedH}.

6131: 

6132: \section{Top Quark Properties}

6133: In the past two chapters, it was demonstrated that both top quark production and

6134: decay thus far have been found to be consistent with the standard model

6135: expectations. No new particles or anomalous couplings have been observed

6136: yet. To actually confirm the top quark's standard model identity, its

6137: fundamental quantum numbers need to be measured and their

6138: self-consistency in the standard model framework needs to be confirmed as well.

6139: 

6140: In this chapter, measurements of the top quark's electric charge, lifetime and mass

6141: performed thus far at the Tevatron are described.

6142: Again, top quark pair events are used for this, because these events provide

6143: higher statistics and favorable sample purities compared to single

6144: top events. First direct measurements of the $V_{tb}$ matrix element

6145: in electroweak single top quark production have already been discussed

6146: in Section~\ref{sec:STxsec}.

6147: \subsection{Top quark electric charge}

6148: \label{sec:topcharge}

6149: %

6150: The electric charge of quarks can be determined, for example, in

6151: electron-positron collisions via the ratio of the hadronic cross

6152: section to the muon cross section $R = \sigma(e^+e^-\to \rm{hadrons})

6153: / \sigma(e^+e^-\to\mu^+\mu^-)$, which is proportional to the sum of the

6154: squared electric charges of the quark flavors accessible at the chosen

6155: center of mass energy. Due to the large top quark mass,

6156: such a direct measurement could not yet be performed at past and

6157: present electron-positron colliders. Also, a direct measurement of

6158: photon radiation in \ttbar events at hadron colliders, which would give

6159: access to the top quark's charge and its electromagnetic coupling, is

6160: unrealistic due to limited statistics at the

6161: Tevatron~\cite{Baur:2001si}. Consequently, the top quark is the only

6162: quark whose fundamental quantum numbers of weak isospin and electric

6163: charge could thus far be determined only indirectly in the framework of

6164: the standard model from measurements of its weak isospin partner, the

6165: $b$ quark, to be $T_{3}=+\frac{1}{2}$, $Q_t=+\frac{2}{3}e$ (see

6166: Section~\ref{sec:SMneedsTop}).

6167: 

6168: Information on the electric charge of the top quark can also be

6169: inferred from the electric charges of its decay products. However,

6170: there is an inherent ambiguity in $p\bar{p}\to

6171: t\bar{t}\to W^+W^-b\bar{b}$ events when pairing $W$ bosons and $b$ jets,

6172: resulting in possible charges of $|Q|$= 2$e$/3 or 4$e$/3 for the top quark.

6173: An exotic quark with charge $-4$$e$/3 being the discovered particle at

6174: the Tevatron instead of the standard model top quark would be

6175: compatible with precision electroweak measurements if the right-handed

6176: $b$ quark were to mix with the $-1$$e$/3 charged exotic doublet partner of

6177: such an exotic top quark. The standard model top quark with charge

6178: 2$e$/3 would yet have to be discovered in this scenario, due to its

6179: large mass of

6180: $271^{+33}_{-38}$~GeV/c$^2$~\cite{Chang:1998pt,Chang:1999zc,Choudhury:2001hs}.

6181: 

6182: D0 has published a first measurement discriminating between the 2$e$/3

6183: and 4$e$/3 top quark charge scenarios in a 0.4 fb$^{-1}$ lepton +

6184: jets dataset with $\geq 2~b$ tagged jets~\cite{Abazov:2006vd}.

6185: %

6186: The sample exhibits high signal purity, with the two

6187: dominant background processes of $Wb\bar{b}$ and single top production

6188: contributing only 5\% and 1\% to the selected events, respectively. Each \ttbar

6189: event provides two measurements of the absolute value of the top quark

6190: charge, one from the leptonic and one from the hadronic decay of the

6191: $W$ boson in $t\to Wb$.

6192: The charge of the $W$ boson is determined from the

6193: (inverse) lepton charge for the leptonic (hadronic) $W$ boson decay.

6194: The $b$ jet charge, discriminating between $b$ and $\bar{b}$ jets, is

6195: determined using a jet charge algorithm, based on the $p_T$ weighted

6196: average of the charges of the tracks associated with the $b$ tagged

6197: jet. The corresponding distributions are derived from dijet collider

6198: data~\cite{Abazov:2006vd} (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:topcharge}). The top quark charge observable

6199: is then defined as the absolute value of the sum of the $W$ boson- and associated

6200: $b$ jet charge, where the right pairing is determined through a

6201: constrained kinematic fit. By comparing the distribution in

6202: data with the expected shape from the standard model and

6203: exotic model (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:topcharge}), respectively, D0 excludes the

6204: hypothesis of only exotic quarks of charge $|Q|$= 4$e$/3 being produced

6205: at up to 92\% C.L.\ and limits an exotic quark admixture in the sample to

6206: at most 80\% at the 90\% C.L.

6207: %

6208: \begin{figure}[!t]

6209:   \begin{center} 

6210:     \includegraphics[width = 0.49\textwidth]{plots/jetchargeplot.eps}

6211:     \includegraphics[width = 0.49\textwidth]{plots/topchargeplot.eps}

6212:     \caption{Left: $b/\bar{b}$ jet charge distributions obtained in

6213:     dijet data. Right: Distribution of the top quark charge obtained

6214:     in data, overlaid with the expectations from standard model and

6215:     exotic model~\cite{Abazov:2006vd}.}

6216:       \label{fig:topcharge}

6217:   \end{center}

6218: \end{figure}

6219: 

6220: Using a similar analysis approach, CDF obtains a preliminary result on

6221: the top quark charge using double $b$ tagged lepton + jets and $b$

6222: tagged dilepton events in a 1.5~fb$^{-1}$ dataset ~\cite{CDF8967}. The

6223: observed $2\ln$(Bayes Factor) is 12, meaning that the data favor very

6224: strongly the SM top quark hypothesis over the exotic

6225: model.

6226: %

6227: 

6228: While the results from CDF and D0 are not directly comparable because of

6229: different statistical approaches in the interpretation of their

6230: results, both agree to favor the SM top quark charge

6231: hypothesis. This is supported by the searches for new heavy top-like

6232: quark pair production (see Section~\ref{sec:tprime}), which are starting to

6233: exclude additional quark production in the mass range predicted by the

6234: alternative model. A top quark charge measurement determining the $b$ jet

6235: charge in soft-lepton tagged events from the soft-lepton charge rather

6236: than the current track-based approach has not been performed

6237: yet.

6238: 

6239: The measurement of the top quark charge in $t\bar{t}\gamma$ events will

6240: be possible at the LHC because of the increased production rate and

6241: the reduction of irreducible background from photons radiated

6242: off the incoming quarks in \ttbar production via $q\bar{q}$

6243: annihilation. Consequently, top quark charge measurements via photon

6244: radiation in \ttbar events are predicted to achieve a precision of

6245: 10\%~\cite{Baur:2001si}. Using the top quark decay products to provide

6246: an additional charge measurement will help to disentangle the

6247: measurements of top quark electromagnetic coupling strength from the

6248: top quark charge in the $t\bar{t}\gamma$ events. This will help to

6249: rule out possible anomalous admixtures in the electromagnetic

6250: interaction of the top quark.

6251: 

6252: \subsection{Top quark lifetime}

6253: \label{sec:toplifetime}

6254: %

6255: The lifetime of the top quark $\tau_t =\hbar\, \Gamma_t^{-1} \approx

6256: \hbar\,(1.3{\rm~GeV})^{-1}$ is approximately \mbox{$5\cdot

6257:   10^{-25}$~s} in the framework of the standard model, as discussed in

6258: Section~\ref{sec:tdecaywidth}. Consequently, the production and decay

6259: vertices of the top quark are separated by ${\cal O}(10^{-16})$m,

6260: which is orders

6261: %

6262: of magnitude below the spatial resolution of any detector. Also, the

6263: top quark width is narrower than the experimental resolution at both

6264: the Tevatron and the LHC. Consequently, a direct measurement of the

6265: top quark lifetime or its width will be limited by

6266: detector resolution. A measurement of the top quark lifetime is still

6267: useful to confirm the standard model nature of the top quark, and

6268: exclude new top quark production channels through long-lived particles. A

6269: measurable lifetime of the top quark itself would imply a

6270: correspondingly small $V_{tb}$ matrix element and render single top

6271: quark production at the Tevatron undetectable, in contradiction with

6272: the observed evidence described in Section~\ref{sec:ST}.

6273: 

6274: CDF has set limits on the top quark lifetime and width using

6275: two approaches. One analysis uses a $b$ tagged lepton +

6276: jets dataset of 0.3 fb$^{-1}$~\cite{CDF8104} to measure the impact

6277: parameter (smallest distance) between the top quark production vertex

6278: and the lepton track from the leptonic $W$ boson decay in the plane

6279: orthogonal to the beam direction. Fitting the obtained distribution

6280: with signal Monte Carlo templates for $c\tau_t$ between 0 and 500

6281: $\mu$m and a background template, the template for 0 $\mu$m describes the

6282: data best, which translates into a 95\% C.L.\ limit on $c\tau_t$ of $< 52.5\

6283: \mu$m.

6284: 

6285: The second analysis uses a $b$ tagged lepton + jets dataset of 1

6286: fb$^{-1}$\cite{Aaltonen:2008ir} to reconstruct the top quark mass in each

6287: event using a kinematic fit. The observed distribution is compared in

6288: a fit to \ttbar signal Monte Carlo templates of different widths for a

6289: top quark mass of 175 GeV/c$^2$ and background templates. From the fit

6290: result, at 95\% C.L.\ the top quark width is found to be smaller than

6291: 13.1 GeV, corresponding to a lower limit on the top quark

6292: lifetime of $5\cdot10^{-26}$ s.

6293: 

6294: \subsection{Top quark mass}

6295: \label{sec:topmass}

6296: The top quark is set apart from all other known fundamental particles

6297: by its large mass. Being the only particle with its Yukawa coupling

6298: close to unity also raises the question whether it plays a special role in

6299: the process of mass generation. Since the lifetime of the top quark is

6300: so short (see Sections~\ref{sec:tdecaywidth} and

6301: \ref{sec:toplifetime}), unlike the other quarks, it does not hadronize 

6302: and properties like its mass can be determined directly without

6303: the complication of having a quark embedded in a hadron. Being a

6304: sensitive probe for physics beyond the standard model, it is also important

6305: to measure its mass in different decay modes that could be

6306: affected differently by novel physics contributions.

6307: 

6308: In the framework of the standard model, the top quark mass is a free

6309: parameter. As discussed in Section~\ref{sec:topmassewprecision}, its

6310: precise determination together with a precise $W$ boson mass

6311: measurement provides a test of the self-consistency of the

6312: framework and constrains the mass of the yet

6313: undiscovered Higgs boson (or other new

6314: particles~\cite{Heinemeyer:2003ud,Heinemeyer:2007bw}) via electroweak

6315: radiative corrections. 

6316: 

6317: Measurements of the top quark mass have been performed thus far only in

6318: \ttbar events, and mainly in the dilepton, lepton + jets and

6319: all-hadronic final states. A complete kinematic reconstruction of the

6320: \ttbar pair from the observed objects in the event can be performed

6321: in the all-hadronic final state where no neutrinos are present.

6322: Assuming \MET arises solely from the escaping neutrino in the lepton + jets

6323: channel, a kinematic fit can be performed here constraining the

6324: invariant mass of the charged lepton and neutrino to that of the $W$

6325: boson, yielding a twofold ambiguity for the neutrino's longitudinal

6326: momentum solution. Because of the two neutrinos contributing

6327: to \MET in the dilepton final state, a direct kinematic

6328: reconstruction of the \ttbar event is not possible without adding more information

6329: or making other assumptions about the kinematics of the

6330: objects in the event. 

6331: 

6332: Since the assignment of partons to reconstructed objects in an

6333: event is not definite, combinatorial ambiguities arise in all

6334: channels. Depending on the analysis technique, either all

6335: combinations are used to extract the top quark mass, or the best

6336: combinations are selected based on, for example, the lowest $\chi^2$ in a kinematic fit

6337: to the \ttbar event hypothesis.

6338: Identification of $b$ jets can be used to reduce the number

6339: of combinations to consider in the lepton + jets and the

6340: all-hadronic channels.

6341: %

6342: Even if both $b$ jets from the \ttbar decay are identified, 

6343: four combinations remain in the lepton + jets channel

6344: (including the neutrino $p_z$ ambiguity) and six in the all-hadronic

6345: channel. In these channels, usually at least one $b$ tagged jet is

6346: required to increase sample purity, or the data can be split on the

6347: basis of $b$ tag multiplicity, and therefore purity, to optimize

6348: overall sensitivity.

6349: 

6350: The techniques used in top quark mass analyses can be divided into

6351: three categories:

6352: \begin{romanlist}[(ii)]

6353: \item {\bf Template Method (TM):} Observables sensitive to

6354: the mass of the top quark such as the reconstructed top quark mass

6355: $m_{\rm reco}$ or $H_T$ are evaluated in the dataset under

6356: consideration. The resulting distribution is then compared in a fit

6357: with expected contributions from \ttbar signal

6358: (with varying top quark masses) and background processes.

6359: %

6360: \item {\bf Matrix Element Method (ME):} Based on the leading-order 

6361: matrix elements of contributing signal and background

6362: processes, the four-vectors of the

6363: reconstructed objects in each event define a probability density

6364: as a function of the top quark mass.

6365: The total likelihood for the event sample is given as the

6366: product of the individual event likelihoods. This method is also

6367: referred to as the Dynamical Likelihood Method (DLM).

6368: \item {\bf Ideogram Method (ID):} An event-by-event likelihood

6369: depending on the assumed top quark mass is formed based on a

6370: constrained fit of the event kinematics, taking all object

6371: permutations and possible background contributions into account. As

6372: mentioned above, this kind of constrained fit is only possible in the

6373: all-hadronic and lepton + jets channels.

6374: \end{romanlist}

6375: Naturally, the analyses most sensitive to the top quark mass are also

6376: very sensitive to the jet energy scale (JES) calibration. The

6377: systematic uncertainty due to the external jet energy calibration (see

6378: Section~\ref{sec:qgjets-JES}) then is usually the dominant

6379: systematic uncertainty in such analyses. This can be reduced in

6380: decay channels where at least one $W$ boson decays ``hadronically'' by

6381: using the well-measured $W$ boson mass to constrain {\it in-situ} the

6382: jet energy calibration in top quark events~\cite{Abulencia:2005ak,Abulencia:2005aj}.

6383: Determining such an overall scale factor for jet energies, absorbs a large

6384: part of this uncertainty into an uncertainty scaling with \ttbar sample

6385: statistics, while residual uncertainties, for example, due to $\eta$ and

6386: \pt dependence of JES corrections or differences between light-quark

6387: and $b$-quark JES still remain. By performing an analysis simultaneously in

6388: the dilepton and all-hadronic and/or lepton + jets channels, the

6389: {\it in-situ} JES calibration can also be transferred to the dilepton

6390: channel~\cite{CDF9206,Aaltonen:2008gj}.

6391: 

6392: Another approach to reduce the dependence of top quark mass

6393: measurements on JES is to utilize observables with minimal JES

6394: dependence that are still correlated with the top quark mass, such as the

6395: mean \pt of the charged lepton from the $W$ boson decay ($p_T^\ell$) or

6396: the mean transverse decay length of $b$ jets $L_{xy}$ in \ttbar

6397: events~\cite{CDF9414}. While such measurements are statistically

6398: limited at the Tevatron, their uncertainties are basically

6399: uncorrelated with those of other statistically more sensitive

6400: analyses. This helps to reduce the overall uncertainty on $m_t$

6401: when all measurements are combined. Also, the observed signal event yield can 

6402: provide an additional constraint on $m_t$ via the mass dependence of 

6403: the \ttbar production cross section~\cite{Aaltonen:2007jw}.

6404: 

6405: Performance, calibration and statistical uncertainty derivation of

6406: each mass analysis are checked using sets of simulated pseudo-experiments

6407: (ensemble tests), based on mean and rms of the extracted mass and pull

6408: distributions.

6409: 

6410: Measurements of $m_t$ were pioneered in Run~I, based on

6411: 0.1~fb$^{-1}$ of data in the

6412: dilepton~\cite{Abe:1997iz,Abe:1998bf,Abe:1998bferr,Abbott:1997fv,Abbott:1998dn},

6413: lepton +

6414: jets~\cite{Abe:1997vq,Affolder:2000vy,Abachi:1997jv,Abbott:1998dc,Abazov:2004cs}

6415: and all-hadronic~\cite{Abe:1997rh,Abazov:2004ng} channels. A

6416: combination of the Run~I results yields $m_t = 178.0 \pm 2.7

6417: {\rm(stat.)} \pm 3.3 {\rm (syst.)}$~GeV/c$^2$~\cite{Azzi:2004rc}. Also

6418: in Run~II, results come mainly from the dilepton, lepton +

6419: jets and all-hadronic channels, with the most precise measurements being

6420: from lepton + jets samples. One analysis uses an inclusive \MET

6421: + jets signature, vetoing energetic isolated leptons and thereby

6422: enhancing the $\tau$ + jets signal contribution to

6423: 44\%~\cite{Aaltonen:2007xx}. This result is listed together with

6424: measurements in the all-hadronic channel in

6425: Section~\ref{sec:allhadmassmeasurements}, and is consistent with the

6426: world-averaged top quark mass. A top quark mass measurement with

6427: explicit hadronic $\tau$ reconstruction has not been performed thus far,

6428: but given the recent progress in the corresponding cross section

6429: analyses discussed in Section~\ref{sec:ttbarxsecmeashadtau}, this

6430: could still be feasible at the Tevatron.

6431: 

6432: In the following sections, the latest (final) Run~I results are

6433: given, along with the current preliminary and published Run~II

6434: top quark mass measurements using various analysis techniques for each

6435: of the three main decay channels. Some of the most precise analyses

6436: entering the world-averaged top quark mass will be

6437: highlighted. A more detailed review of top quark mass analysis

6438: techniques pursued at the Tevatron can be found

6439: in Ref.~\cite{Fiedler:2007}. The final section presents the current world

6440: average and some of its implications.

6441: 

6442: \subsubsection{Dilepton final state}

6443: \label{sec:dilepmassmeasurements}

6444: Analyses in the dilepton final state are performed either based on the

6445: matrix element or the template method. For the template approach,

6446: additional assumptions on the kinematics of the involved objects are

6447: made in order to solve the otherwise underconstrained

6448: system kinematics. Assuming several top quark masses, the consistency

6449: of the observed event kinematics can be used to obtain weights for

6450: each event as a function of $m_t$, based on input parton distribution

6451: functions and the observed charged lepton energies (``matrix

6452: weighting'' ${\cal M}$), or using simulated neutrino pseudo-rapidity

6453: or azimuthal angle (``neutrino weighting'': $\nu_\eta$,

6454: $\nu_\phi$), or \ttbar longitudinal momentum ($p_z^{t\bar{t}}$)

6455: distributions~\cite{Abbott:1997fv,Abulencia:2006js}.

6456: %

6457: Top quark mass estimators are derived from the obtained weight

6458: distributions, such as the peak mass position, or mean and rms of the

6459: distributions. These values are then used in a template fit to data

6460: to obtain the most likely $m_t$ from the sample.

6461: 

6462: The most precise top quark mass result in the dilepton channel

6463: entering the world average is from D0, and has a precision of

6464: 2.2\%~\cite{D05743}. It combines results from neutrino weighting

6465: ($\nu_\eta$) obtained on 1~fb$^{-1}$ in the dielectron, dimuon and

6466: lepton + track channels~\cite{D05746} with a measurement in the

6467: $e\mu$ channel using 2.8~fb$^{-1}$ of data and the matrix element

6468: method~\cite{D05743}.

6469: 

6470: \begin{table}[t!]

6471:   \caption{Top quark mass measurements performed thus far at the

6472:     Tevatron in the dilepton channel with their integrated

6473:     luminosities, data selections ($\ell\ell$ = dilepton,

6474:     $\ell$+trk = lepton + track, NN = neural network) and

6475:     analysis methods used. The two analyses using 0.1 fb$^{-1}$ are

6476:     from Run~I, and the references marked with an asterisk correspond to

6477:     preliminary results.}

6478:   \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}

6479:   \addtolength{\tabcolsep}{-1pt}

6480:   \begin{center}

6481:     %

6482:     \begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}|c|l|l|l|l|}

6483:       \hline 

6484:       $\int{\cal L}dt$   & \multirow{2}{*}{Selection} & \multirow{2}{*}{Method} & $m_t\pm({\rm stat.})\pm({\rm syst.})$  & \multirow{2}{*}{Ref.}\\ 

6485:       ~[fb$^{-1}$] &&&[GeV/c$^2$]&\tabularnewline

6486:       \hline

6487:       \hline 

6488: 0.1 & $\ell\ell$ & TM:$\nu_\eta$ & $167.4 \pm 10.3  \pm 4.8 $ & \cite{Abe:1998bf,Abe:1998bferr}\\%

6489: 0.1 & $\ell\ell$ & TM:${\cal M}, \nu_\eta$ & $168.4 \pm 12.3  \pm 3.7 $ & \cite{Abbott:1998dn}\\

6490: 0.3 & $\ell\ell$ & ME & $165.2 \pm 6.1  \pm  3.4 $ & \cite{Abulencia:2006mi,Abulencia:2005uq}\\ %

6491: 0.4 & $\ell\ell$,$\ell$+trk & TM:$\nu_\eta, \nu_\phi, p_z^{t\bar{t}}$ & $170.1  \pm 6.0  \pm 4.1 $ & \cite{Abulencia:2006js}\\%

6492: 0.4 & $\ell\ell$,$\ell$+trk & TM:${\cal M}, \nu_\eta$ & $178.1 \pm 6.7  \pm 4.8 $ & \cite{Abazov:2006bg}\\ %

6493: 1.0 & $\ell\ell$ & ME & $164.5 \pm 3.9  \pm 3.9 $ & \cite{Abulencia:2006ry}\\

6494: 1.0 & $\ell\ell$ & TM:${\cal M}$ & $175.2 \pm 6.1  \pm 3.4 $ & \cite{D05463}*\\%

6495: 1.0 & $\ell\ell$,$\ell$+trk & TM:$\nu_\eta$ & $176.0 \pm 5.3  \pm 2.0 $ & \cite{D05746}*\\

6496: 1.2 & $\ell\ell$ & TM:$p_z^{t\bar{t}}$ & $169.7^{+5.2}_{-4.9} \pm 3.1 $ & \cite{Aaltonen:2007jw}\\

6497: 1.2 & $\ell\ell$ & TM:$p_z^{t\bar{t}}\oplus\sigma_{t\bar{t}}$ & $170.7^{+4.2}_{-3.9} \pm 2.6 \pm 2.4({\rm th.})$ & \cite{Aaltonen:2007jw}\\

6498: 1.8 & $\ell\ell$ & TM:$p_T^\ell$ & $156^{+22}_{-19} \pm 4.6$ & \cite{CDF8959}*\\

6499: 1.8 & $\ell\ell$ & TM:$\nu_\eta$ & $172.0 ^{+5.0}_{-4.9} \pm 3.6$ & \cite{CDF8955}*\\%

6500: 1.8 & $\ell\ell$ & ME & $170.4 \pm 3.1  \pm 3.0  $ & \cite{CDF8951}*\\

6501: 2.0 & $\ell\ell$ $\oplus$ NN & ME & $171.2 \pm 2.7  \pm 2.9 $ & \cite{Aaltonen:2008bd}\\%

6502: 2.8 & $\ell$+trk & TM:$\nu_\phi$ & $165.1^{+3.3}_{-3.2} \pm 3.1 $ & \cite{CDF9456}*\\%

6503: 2.8 & $e\mu$ & ME & $172.9 \pm 3.6  \pm 2.3 $ & \cite{D05743}*\\%

6504: 2.8 & $e\mu$/$\ell\ell$,$\ell$+trk & ME/TM:$\nu_\eta$ & $174.4 \pm 3.2  \pm 2.1 $ & \cite{D05743}*\\%

6505:       \hline 

6506:     \end{tabular*}

6507:     \label{tab:mtopdil}

6508:     %

6509:   \end{center}

6510: \end{table}

6511: The matrix element method evaluates the probability density for each

6512: event ($P_{\rm evt}$) with measured object four-vectors $x$ to originate

6513: from \ttbar production, depending on the top quark mass, or from the

6514: dominant background arising from $Z\to\tau\tau$ + jets production

6515: in the following linear combination, based on the known expected

6516: signal fraction in the sample $f$:

6517: \begin{equation}

6518: P_{\rm evt}(x;m_t) = f \cdot P_{\rm sig}(x;m_t) + (1-f) \cdot P_{\rm bkg}(x).

6519: \end{equation}

6520: $P_{\rm sig}$ and $P_{\rm bkg}$ are the signal and background

6521: probability densities for \ttbar and $Z\to\tau\tau$ + jets

6522: production, based on the leading order matrix element for $q\bar{q}\to

6523: t\bar{t}$ and the \vecbos~\cite{Berends:1990ax}

6524: parametrization of the $Z$-production matrix element, respectively. The probability densities are

6525: calculated by integrating over all unknown quantities, such as the

6526: unmeasured neutrino energies and all parton states that can lead

6527: to the $x$ objects observed in the detector:

6528: \begin{equation}

6529: P_{\rm sig}(x;m_t) = 1/\sigma_{\rm obs}(m_t) \int_{q_1,q_2,y} \sum_{\rm flavors} dq_1dq_2f(q_1)f(q_2)

6530: \frac{(2\pi)^4|{\cal M}|^2}{q_1q_2 s}d\Phi_6W(x,y),

6531: \end{equation}

6532: where $q_1$ and $q_2$ are the momentum fractions of the colliding

6533: partons from the proton and antiproton, $f(q_i)$ the corresponding PDFs,

6534: ${\cal M}$ is the matrix element for the signal process yielding the

6535: partonic final state $y$, $s$ is the squared center-of-mass energy and

6536: $d\Phi_6$ a six-body phase space element. The transfer function

6537: $W(x,y)$, which incorporates the detector resolution, describes the

6538: probability for a final state $x$ in the detector to be reconstructed

6539: from the partonic state $y$. The two possible permutations from the

6540: unknown jet-parton assignment are summed over, and the probability is

6541: normalized to the expected observable production rate $\sigma_{\rm

6542: obs}(m_t)$. The calculation of $P_{\rm bkg}(x)$ proceeds in an

6543: analogous way, except that there is no dependence on $m_t$.

6544: %

6545: 

6546: The top quark mass of an event sample can be obtained by

6547: maximizing the total likelihood function, which is the product of the

6548: individual event probabilities, with respect to $m_t$. In this way,

6549: each event contributes according to its quality and inherent

6550: resolution. While the ME technique exploits the full kinematic

6551: information available, and usually yields the statistically most

6552: sensitive measurements, it is also computationally intensive because of

6553: the involved multidimensional integrations. The result of the 2.8~fb$^{-1}$

6554: $e\mu$ analysis is given together with other mass

6555: measurements performed in the dilepton channel at the Tevatron in

6556: Table~\ref{tab:mtopdil}. The dominant systematic uncertainty in this

6557: analysis arises, as expected, from systematic uncertainties on the

6558: JES calibration, and response differences between light quarks and $b$

6559: quarks.

6560: %

6561: 

6562: %

6563: 

6564: \subsubsection{Lepton + jets final state}

6565: \label{sec:ljmassmeasurements}

6566: The precision of the world-averaged top quark mass is driven by

6567: measurements in the lepton + jets channel that provides the best

6568: compromise between sample purity and signal statistics. In this

6569: channel, all three analysis methods (TM, ME, ID) have been deployed,

6570: with the most precise results consistently coming from matrix element

6571: analyses, starting with its first application at D0 in

6572: Run~I~\cite{Abazov:2004cs}.

6573: 

6574: For the current world-averaged mass, CDF and D0 contribute measurements

6575: in the lepton + jets channel based on the matrix element method, as

6576: discussed in the previous section, simultaneously fitting the top quark mass

6577: and an overall {\it in-situ} JES scale factor to the data. Events with one

6578: energetic isolated lepton, large \MET and exactly four jets are

6579: selected so as to best comply with the leading order matrix element used in the

6580: calculations. Also, at least one of the jets is required to be $b$ tagged. Using

6581: datasets of 2.7 and 2.2~fb$^{-1}$, for CDF~\cite{CDF9427} and

6582: D0~\cite{D05750}, respectively, both measure the top quark mass with a precision

6583: of 1.0\%, incidentally even yielding the same mass value of

6584: 172.2~GeV/c$^2$.

6585: \begin{figure}[!t]

6586:   \begin{center} 

6587:     \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{plots/D0-mtop-ljets1fb-invarmass.eps}

6588:     \caption{Dijet (left) and three-jet (right) invariant mass

6589:       distributions in 1~fb$^{-1}$ of D0 data compared with simulated \ttbar signal (for $m_t = 170$~GeV/c$^2$) and

6590:       background contributions~\cite{Abazov:2008ds}. 

6591:       The results are for jet permutations of largest weight using the ME method.}

6592:       \label{fig:mtopljets}

6593:   \end{center}

6594: \end{figure}

6595: \begin{table}[h!]

6596:   \caption{Top quark mass measurements performed thus far at the

6597:     Tevatron in the lepton + jets channel with their integrated

6598:     luminosities, data selections ($\ell$+jets = lepton

6599:     + jets, $\ell\ell$ = dilepton) and analysis methods used. The

6600:     two analyses using 0.1 fb$^{-1}$ are from Run~I, and the references

6601:     marked with an asterisk correspond to preliminary results. Measurements

6602:     marked with a cross contain the uncertainty from the

6603:     {\it in-situ} JES calibration within the quoted statistical uncertainty.}

6604:   \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}

6605:   \addtolength{\tabcolsep}{-1pt}

6606:   \begin{center}

6607:     \begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}|c|l|l|l|l|}

6608:       \hline 

6609:       $\int{\cal L}dt$   & \multirow{2}{*}{Selection} & \multirow{2}{*}{Method} & $m_t\pm({\rm stat.})\pm({\rm syst.})$  & \multirow{2}{*}{Ref.}\\ 

6610:       ~[fb$^{-1}$] &&&[GeV/c$^2$]&\tabularnewline

6611:       \hline

6612:       \hline 

6613: 0.1 & $\ell$+jets & TM:$m_{\rm reco}$ & $176.1 \pm 5.1 \pm 5.3$ & \cite{Affolder:2000vy}\\

6614: 0.1 & $\ell$+jets & ME  & $180.1 \pm 3.6  \pm 3.9 $ & \cite{Abazov:2004cs}\\

6615: 0.3 & $\ell$+jets & DLM & $173.2^{+2.6}_{-2.4} \pm 3.2$ & \cite{Abulencia:2005pe,Abulencia:2005ak}\\%

6616: 0.3 & $\ell$+jets & TM:$m_{\rm reco}$ $\oplus$ JES & $173.5^{+3.7}_{-3.6} \pm 1.3^\dagger$ & \cite{Abulencia:2005ak,Abulencia:2005aj}\\%

6617: 0.4 & $\ell$+jets & ME $\oplus$ JES & $170.3^{+4.1}_{-4.5}\,^{+1.2}_{-1.8}\, ^\dagger$ & \cite{Abazov:2006bd}\\%

6618: 0.4 & $\ell$+jets & ME $\oplus$ JES & $169.2^{+5.0}_{-7.4}\,^{+1.5}_{-1.4}\, ^\dagger$ & \cite{Abazov:2006bd}\\%

6619: 0.4 & $\ell$+jets & ID $\oplus$ JES & $173.7 \pm 4.4^{+2.1}_{-2.0}\, ^\dagger$ & \cite{Abazov:2007rk}\\

6620: 0.7 & $\ell$+jets & TM:$L_{xy}$ & $180.7^{+15.5}_{-13.4} \pm 8.6$ & \cite{Abulencia:2006rz}\\

6621: 1.0 & $\ell$+jets & ME $\oplus$ JES & $171.5 \pm 1.8  \pm 1.1 ^\dagger$ & \cite{Abazov:2008ds}\\%

6622: 1.0 & $\ell$+jets & ME $\oplus$ JES  & $170.8 \pm 2.2  \pm 1.4 ^\dagger$ & \cite{Abulencia:2007br}\\

6623: 1.0 & $\ell$+jets & TM:$m_{\rm reco}$ & $168.9 \pm 2.2 \pm 4.2$ & \cite{CDF8669}*\\%

6624: 1.2 & $\ell$+jets & ME $\oplus$ JES & $173.0 \pm 1.9  \pm 1.0 ^\dagger$ & \cite{D05750}*\\%

6625: 1.7 & $\ell$+jets & DLM $\oplus$ JES & $171.6 \pm 2.0  \pm 1.3 ^\dagger$ & \cite{CDF9135}*\\

6626: 1.9 & $\ell$+jets & TM:$L_{xy},p_T^\ell$ & $175.3 \pm 6.2\pm 3.0$ & \cite{CDF9414}*\\

6627: %

6628: \multirow{2}{*}{1.9} & $\ell$+jets& TM:$m_{\rm reco}$ $\oplus$ JES & \multirow{2}{*}{$171.9 \pm 1.7 \pm 1.1^\dagger$} &\multirow{2}{*}{\cite{CDF9206,Aaltonen:2008gj}}\\%

6629: &$\ell\ell$ &TM:$\nu_\eta,H_T$&&\\

6630: 1.9 & $\ell$+jets & ME $\oplus$ JES  & $172.7 \pm 1.8  \pm 1.2 ^\dagger$ & \cite{Aaltonen:2008mx}\\

6631: 2.2 & $\ell$+jets & ME $\oplus$ JES & $172.2 \pm 1.0  \pm 1.4 $ & \cite{D05750}*\\%

6632: 2.7 & $\ell$+jets & ME $\oplus$ JES  & $172.2 \pm 1.3  \pm 1.0 ^\dagger$ & \cite{CDF9427}*\\

6633:       \hline 

6634:     \end{tabular*}

6635:     \label{tab:mtopljet}

6636:   \end{center}

6637: \end{table}

6638: A comparison of the invariant dijet and three-jet mass distributions

6639: based on the permutation of largest weight in data and

6640: simulation is shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:mtopljets} for a 1~fb$^{-1}$

6641: subset~\cite{Abazov:2008ds} of D0's 2.2~fb$^{-1}$ ME analysis.

6642: 

6643: The largest systematic uncertainties on the measurement by CDF arise

6644: from the \ttbar MC generator used to calibrate the result (\pythia\

6645: versus \herwig) and the residual JES uncertainty. For D0, the dominant

6646: uncertainty comes from the $b$-jet over light-jet calorimeter-response ratio and

6647: the signal modeling uncertainty, taking the impact of

6648: extra jets into account based on the observed four to at least five

6649: jet event ratio in data. Both experiments are in the process of

6650: streamlining their methods used to assess systematic uncertainties as

6651: well as exploring new sources of uncertainties that start to become

6652: important at the current level of precision~\cite{wwwtopsyst}.

6653: Examples for the latter are differences arising from using NLO rather

6654: than LO MC generators, or non-perturbative QCD effects such as color

6655: reconnection~\cite{Skands:2007zg,Wicke:2008iz}.

6656: 

6657: Table~\ref{tab:mtopljet} summarizes the latest (final) Run~I

6658: results and the current preliminary or published Run~II top

6659: quark mass measurements in the lepton + jets channel.

6660: 

6661: %

6662: 

6663: \subsubsection{All-hadronic final state}

6664: \label{sec:allhadmassmeasurements}

6665: %

6666: Analyses in the all-hadronic channel have been performed so far using

6667: template and ideogram methods, and exhibit comparable sensitivity. The

6668: precision in this channel by now is similar to that in the dilepton

6669: final state, mainly as a result of using {\it in-situ} JES calibration, thereby

6670: reducing the otherwise overwhelming systematic uncertainty from the

6671: external JES.

6672: 

6673: CDF's best measurement in the all-hadronic channel entering the world

6674: average has been performed using a template method on 2.1~fb$^{-1}$ of

6675: data, yielding a precision of 2.4\%~\cite{CDF9165}. Similar to the

6676: analysis~\cite{Aaltonen:2007qf} described in

6677: Section~\ref{sec:ttbarxsecmeasallh}, events are required to have

6678: between six and eight energetic central jets, no isolated energetic

6679: lepton or significant \METns, and have to pass a selection based on the

6680: output of a neural network discriminant. The dataset is split into

6681: subsamples with exactly one and exactly two $b$ tagged jets.

6682: 

6683: The leading six jets in each event define the \ttbar signal and

6684: multijet background templates for the reconstructed mass of the top

6685: quark and of the $W$ boson, with assignments based on a kinematic fit, where the permutation

6686: with lowest $\chi^2$ is selected for further study. While the signal

6687: templates depend on both $m_t$ and the JES scale factor, the

6688: background templates are assumed to not depend on the top quark mass, and no JES

6689: dependence is considered either. The measurement is then performed in

6690: a two-dimensional fit to $m_t$ and {\it in-situ} JES scale factor,

6691: using these templates and the observed distribution in data in both

6692: subsamples, and applying a Gaussian constraint from the external JES

6693: calibration. The reconstructed mass distributions obtained in data

6694: with two $b$ tags, overlaid with templates for expected background and \ttbar signal

6695: (for $m_t = 177$~GeV/c$^2$ and unchanged JES

6696: with respect to the external calibration, as obtained from the fit) are

6697: shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:mtopalljet}.

6698: \begin{figure}[!t]

6699:   \begin{center} 

6700:     \includegraphics[width=.42\textwidth]{plots/CDF9165-MwFittedHistoVSData_2tagevent_80BINS_P12_ALL.eps}\hspace*{5mm} 

6701:     \includegraphics[width=.42\textwidth]{plots/CDF9165-MtopFittedHistoVSData_2tagevent_80BINS_P12_ALL.eps}

6702:     \caption{Reconstructed mass of the $W$ boson (left) and top quark (right)

6703:       obtained in 2.1~fb$^{-1}$ of double $b$ tagged CDF

6704:       data compared to the expected contributions from multijet

6705:       background and 177 GeV/c$^2$ \ttbar signal, using the JES

6706:       corresponding to the best fit~\cite{CDF9165}.}

6707:       \label{fig:mtopalljet}

6708:   \end{center}

6709: \end{figure}

6710: 

6711: The result of this analysis is given in Table~\ref{tab:mtopalljet}, together with other top quark mass

6712: measurements performed in the all-hadronic channel at the Tevatron.

6713: The dominant systematic uncertainties in

6714: this analysis arise from uncertainties on shape and normalization of

6715: the background templates and residual JES uncertainties. The

6716: compatibility of this measurement with that using the ideogram

6717: method~\cite{CDF9265} on an overlapping dataset of almost the same

6718: size, which yields a central value $\approx$12 GeV/c$^2$ lower, is currently

6719: being investigated.

6720: 

6721: \begin{table}

6722:   \caption{Top quark mass measurements performed thus far at the

6723:     Tevatron in the all-hadronic channel with their integrated

6724:     luminosities, data selections and analysis methods

6725:     used. The two analyses using 0.1 fb$^{-1}$ are from Run~I, and the

6726:     references marked with an asterisk correspond to preliminary measurements.

6727:     Results marked with a cross contain the uncertainty from

6728:     the {\it in-situ} JES calibration within the quoted statistical uncertainty.}

6729:   %

6730:   \begin{center}

6731:     \begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}|c|l|l|l|l|}

6732:       \hline 

6733:       $\int{\cal L}dt$   & \multirow{2}{*}{Selection} & \multirow{2}{*}{Method} & $m_t\pm({\rm stat.})\pm({\rm syst.})$  & \multirow{2}{*}{Ref.}\\ 

6734:       ~[fb$^{-1}$] &&&[GeV/c$^2$]&\tabularnewline

6735:       \hline

6736:       \hline 

6737: 0.1 & jets only & TM:$m_{\rm reco}$ & $178.5 \pm 13.7  \pm  7.7 $ & \cite{Abazov:2004ng}\\%

6738: 0.1 & jets only & TM:$m_{\rm reco}$ & $186 \pm 10  \pm  5.7 $ & \cite{Abe:1997rh,Affolder:2000vy}\\%

6739: 0.3 & \METns+jets & TM:$H_T$ & $172.3^{+10.8}_{-9.6}  \pm 10.8 $ & \cite{Aaltonen:2007xx}\\%

6740: 0.3 & jets only & ID & $177.1 \pm 4.9  \pm  4.7 $ & \cite{Aaltonen:2006xc}\\%

6741: 0.9 & jets only & TM:ME $\oplus$ JES & $171.1 \pm 3.7  \pm 2.1^\dagger $ & \cite{CDF8709,Aaltonen:2008bg}\\%

6742: 1.0 & jets only & TM:$m_{\rm reco}$ & $174.0 \pm 2.2  \pm 4.8 $ & \cite{Aaltonen:2007qf}\\

6743: 1.9 & jets only & ID $\oplus$ JES & $165.2 \pm 4.4  \pm 1.9^\dagger $ &  \cite{CDF9265}*\\%

6744: 2.1 & jets only & TM:$m_{\rm reco}$ $\oplus$ JES& $176.9 \pm 3.8  \pm 1.7^\dagger$ & \cite{CDF9165}*\\%

6745:       \hline 

6746:     \end{tabular*}

6747:     \label{tab:mtopalljet}

6748:   \end{center}

6749: \end{table}

6750: %

6751: 

6752: \subsubsection{World-averaged top quark mass}

6753: \label{sec:topmassaverage}

6754: \label{sec:massfromxsec}

6755: %

6756: The top quark mass has been measured at the Tevatron in the three main

6757: decay channels using various methods, as described in the past sections.

6758: In the lepton + jets channel, precisions of 1\% are achieved in

6759: single measurements, while in the dilepton and all-hadronic channels

6760: the precision is $\approx$2\%. The different methods assume standard

6761: model \ttbar production and decay, but still exhibit differences in

6762: the strength of their model dependence. While ME methods provide the

6763: best sensitivity, they also are strongly model dependent through their

6764: implemented matrix elements. Template methods purely relying on the

6765: measured event kinematics are more robust with respect to possible

6766: deviations from the standard model, but in general exhibit lower

6767: sensitivity.

6768: 

6769: Pursuing mass measurements in all \ttbar decay channels with different

6770: methods is a valuable test of the self-consistency of the standard

6771: model assumptions, and can also be used to probe for new phenomena 

6772: \cite{Kane:1996ny}. While no top quark mass measurement

6773: has been performed thus far in \ttbar decay modes involving hadronic $\tau$ decays,

6774: the progress in the corresponding cross section analyses discussed in

6775: Section~\ref{sec:ttbarxsecmeashadtau} indicates this could still be

6776: possible at the Tevatron, completing the \ttbar decay channels for

6777: measuring $m_{t}$.

6778: 

6779: CDF and D0 have combined their recent preliminary Run~II results with

6780: their measurements obtained in Run~I, respectively. Based on the results of highest sensitivity in the

6781: dilepton, lepton + jets and all-hadronic channels (CDF), and

6782: in the dilepton and lepton + jets channels (D0), both

6783: experiments attain a total precision of 0.9\% on their combined

6784: measurements, respectively. Based on analyses using up to 2.7~fb$^{-1}$, CDF gets

6785: $172.4 \pm 1.0 {\rm (stat.)} \pm 1.3 {\rm (syst.)}$ GeV/c$^2$

6786: \cite{CDF9450}, while D0 obtains $172.8 \pm 0.9 {\rm (stat.)} \pm 1.3

6787: {\rm (syst.)}$ GeV/c$^2$ \cite{D05747} using analyses on up to

6788: 2.8~fb$^{-1}$ of data.

6789: 

6790: The results of both experiments are in very good agreement, and their overall

6791: combination yields $172.4 \pm 0.7 {\rm (stat.)} \pm 1.0 {\rm (syst.)}$

6792: GeV/c$^2$ \cite{TEWWG:2008}, corresponding to an overall precision of

6793: 0.7\%, as illustrated in Fig.\ \ref{fig:topmass}. Combining the separate

6794: results from the all-hadronic, the lepton + jets and the dilepton channels,

6795: yields 177.5 $\pm$ 4.0~GeV/c$^2$, 172.2 $\pm$ 1.2~GeV/c$^2$

6796: and 171.5 $\pm$ 2.6~GeV/c$^2$, respectively. These results are

6797: consistent with each other, and have $\chi^2$ probabilities of at

6798: least 17\% between any two of the channels.

6799: \begin{figure}[t]

6800:   \centering

6801:   \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth,clip=]{plots/topmass_tev0708.eps}

6802:   \caption{Measurements of the mass of the top quark used as input to the current

6803:     preliminary world average~\cite{TEWWG:2008}.}

6804:   \label{fig:topmass}

6805: \end{figure}

6806: 

6807: All these combinations are calculated using the BLUE

6808: method~\cite{Lyons:1988rp,Valassi:2003mu} and assume Gaussian

6809: systematic uncertainties, with their correlations properly accounted

6810: for. The different sources of systematic uncertainties are broken down

6811: into twelve orthogonal categories. Six of them deal with uncertainties

6812: related to the JES, while others address signal and background

6813: modeling, fitting procedures, specifics of MC generation and lepton

6814: energy scale. The main contributions to the 1.0~GeV/c$^2$ systematic

6815: error on the world average of $m_{t}$ are (in units of GeV/c$^2$):

6816: total JES ($\pm 0.8$), signal, background and MC model ($\pm 0.3$

6817: each) and lepton scale and fitting procedure ($\pm 0.1$ each).

6818: 

6819: Having reached a precision of 0.7\%, the world-averaged top quark mass

6820: is now limited by the systematic uncertainties that in turn are

6821: dominated by JES-related uncertainties. Further improvements on the

6822: JES can be expected since the increasing integrated luminosity will help

6823: constrain the corresponding uncertainties better, especially the

6824: significant contribution from {\it in-situ} JES calibration. While a final

6825: absolute top quark mass uncertainty of $\Delta m_{t}\lesssim 1$~GeV/c$^2$

6826: should be achievable by the end of Run~II, it will

6827: still require a significant effort to determine the contributing

6828: systematic uncertainties consistently among the experiments, and

6829: evaluate any new contributions that should be considered at this 

6830: level of precision.

6831: 

6832: This measurement marks the most precise determination of a quark mass

6833: and will certainly provide a legacy well into the LHC era, where it will

6834: serve as an important calibration signal until large datasets can produce

6835: more refined measurements. However, improving the

6836: precision by another order of magnitude can only be expected

6837: from a threshold scan of \ttbar production at a future linear $e^+e^-$

6838: collider~\cite{Brau:2007zza,Brau:2007sg,Behnke:2007gj}.

6839: 

6840: Before the impact of the current top quark mass measurement is

6841: discussed, it should be noted that the value of this SM

6842: parameter depends on the defining convention. For instance, the

6843: $\overline{\sc MS}$ calculation gives a value lower than the pole mass of the top quark propagator

6844: by $\approx$10~GeV/c$^2$ at ${\cal O} (\alpha_s^3)$. The pole mass itself exhibits an intrinsic

6845: ambiguity of ${\cal O} (\Lambda_{\rm QCD}) \approx 0.2$~GeV (see for

6846: example Ref.~\cite{Bernreuther:2008ju} and references therein).

6847: 

6848: The top quark mass measurements described in this review are usually interpreted

6849: as representing the pole mass. However, they are calibrated using LO

6850: MC simulations with higher orders approximated by parton showers, where

6851: the top mass parameter does not follow a theoretically well-defined

6852: convention. Hence, calculations and predictions using the measured

6853: mass as the pole mass should be taken with a grain of

6854: salt.

6855: 

6856: %

6857: 

6858: D0 has conducted consistency checks of the compatibility of

6859: the direct top quark mass measurements at the

6860: Tevatron with the pole mass extracted from the \ttbar production

6861: rate~\cite{Abazov:2008gc,D05742}. Comparing the measured \ttbar

6862: production cross section with SM predictions

6863: derived at NLO, including soft-gluon resummations that are performed in

6864: a well-defined renormalization scheme using the top quark pole mass,

6865: constrains the mass of the top quark. The cross section

6866: measurements depend less on MC modeling of signal kinematics

6867: than direct mass measurements do. For cross sections, the MC is mainly needed for determining the signal

6868: acceptance, which is expected to be rather insensitive to

6869: higher order corrections: A comparison of NLO and LO predictions

6870: shows that higher order corrections affect more the normalization than

6871: the shape of the relevant kinematic distributions~\cite{Frixione:1995fj}.

6872: \begin{figure}[!t]

6873:   \begin{center} 

6874:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/D05742-mtop-fromxsec-T72F2c.eps}\hspace*{1mm}

6875:     \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{plots/D05742-mtop-fromxsec-T72F2d.eps} 

6876:     \caption{Mass dependences of the \ttbar production cross sections

6877:       measured by D0 in the lepton + jets channel (left,

6878:       \cite{Abazov:2008gc}), and in a combination of lepton

6879:       + jets, dilepton and $\tau$ + lepton channels (right,

6880:       \cite{D05715}), compared with the theoretical prediction by Moch and

6881:       Uwer~\cite{Moch:2008qy}, based on CTEQ6.6M~\cite{Nadolsky:2008zw}

6882:       PDFs. The previous world-averaged $m_{t} = 172.6 \pm

6883:       1.4$~GeV/c$^2$ \cite{TEWWG:2008spring}, as well as the

6884:       68\% C.L.\ contours of the joint likelihoods resulting from the

6885:       convolutions of measurement and prediction~\cite{D05742}, are also shown.}

6886:       \label{fig:mtopfromxsec}

6887:   \end{center}

6888: \end{figure}

6889: 

6890: In a recent analysis, D0 uses two \ttbar cross section measurements to

6891: extract constraints on the top quark mass by comparing measurement with

6892: theoretical predictions~\cite{D05742}. One result is obtained in the

6893: lepton + jets channel based on the combination of a counting

6894: experiment using $b$ tagging and an analysis utilizing a topological

6895: multivariate discriminant for 0.9~fb$^{-1}$ of

6896: data~\cite{Abazov:2008gc}, as discussed in

6897: Section~\ref{sec:ttbarxsecmeaslj}. The second result combines

6898: measurements in the lepton + jets, dilepton and $\tau$ + lepton

6899: channels obtained from approximately 1.0~fb$^{-1}$ of

6900: data~\cite{D05715} (see Section~\ref{sec:ttbarxsecmeassummary}). Being

6901: based on different analysis techniques and different final states, both results exhibit a

6902: different dependence on the top quark mass, as illustrated in

6903: Fig.\ \ref{fig:mtopfromxsec}.

6904: 

6905: One theoretical prediction used for the comparison is that of Moch and

6906: Uwer~\cite{Moch:2008qy}, and is based on CTEQ6.6M~\cite{Nadolsky:2008zw} PDFs (see Section~\ref{sec:ttbarprod}).

6907: A joint likelihood depending on $m_{t}$ and $\sigma_{t\bar{t}}$

6908: is obtained as the product of the likelihood functions of the

6909: measurement, including its total experimental uncertainty, and the

6910: theoretical prediction, including scale and PDF uncertainties. The

6911: contour of the joint likelihood's smallest region containing 68\% of

6912: its integral is also shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:mtopfromxsec} for

6913: both measurements. By integrating over the \ttbar production rate, the

6914: top quark mass can be extracted. For the lepton + jets channel

6915: measurement a top quark mass of $171.2 ^{+6.5}_{-6.2}$~GeV/c$^2$ is

6916: obtained. The combined lepton + jets, dilepton and $\tau$ +

6917: lepton measurement yields $169.6 ^{+5.4}_{-5.5}$~GeV/c$^2$, which includes

6918: an additional systematic uncertainty of 1~GeV/c$^2$ due to a smaller

6919: mass dependence range available from this measurement. Both

6920: results are in good agreement with the world-averaged $m_{t}$

6921: obtained from the complementary direct measurements.

6922: 

6923: The current world-averaged $m_{t}$ of \mtopwa\ is also in good

6924: agreement with its predicted value of 179$^{+12}_{-9}$ GeV/c$^2$~\cite{EWWG:2008} in the framework of the standard

6925: model, based on precision electroweak data, as discussed in

6926: Section~\ref{sec:topmassewprecision}. The top quark mass

6927: measurement together with that of the $W$ boson mass

6928: ($80.398 \pm 0.025$~GeV/c$^2$ \cite{PDG2008}) can be used to obtain limits on the

6929: Higgs boson mass via the radiative corrections on the $W$ boson mass

6930: in a global electroweak fit. This yields $m_H = 84^{+34}_{-26} $

6931: GeV/c$^2$~\cite{EWWG:2008}, as illustrated in Fig.\ \ref{fig:mtvsmh},

6932: where the uncertainties are only from experiment. To demonstrate the

6933: impact of the improvements in precision for the measurements of

6934: both $m_{t}$ and $m_{W}$ since the beginning of Run~II,

6935: the corresponding fit results in spring 2004~\cite{EWWG:2004} are also shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:mtvsmh}.

6936: The current resulting 95\% C.L.\ upper limit on

6937: the Higgs boson mass is 154~GeV/c$^2$, which includes both experimental and

6938: theoretical uncertainties.

6939: 

6940: The direct searches for the standard model Higgs boson

6941: at LEP provide a 95\% C.L.\ lower bound of

6942: 114.4~GeV/c$^2$~\cite{Barate:2003sz}, as also illustrated in

6943: Fig.\ \ref{fig:mtvsmh}. CDF and D0 have recently excluded a

6944: SM Higgs boson of 170~GeV/c$^2$ mass at 95\% C.L., and a

6945: mass range of about 165 to 175~GeV/c$^2$ at 90\% C.L.~\cite{D05754}

6946: based on 3~fb$^{-1}$ of data. This is not reflected in

6947: Fig.\ \ref{fig:mtvsmh}.

6948: 

6949: \begin{figure}[t!]

6950:   \centering

6951:   \includegraphics[width=0.495\textwidth]{plots/s04_blueband.eps}

6952:   \includegraphics[width=0.495\textwidth]{plots/s04_mt_mw_contours.eps}\\

6953:   \includegraphics[width=0.495\textwidth]{plots/s08_blueband.eps}

6954:   \includegraphics[width=0.495\textwidth]{plots/s08_mt_mw_contours.eps}

6955:   \caption{Mass constraints on the Higgs boson in 2004 (top, \cite{EWWG:2004}),

6956:     using the Tevatron Run~I mass combination of $m_t = 178.0 \pm

6957:     4.3$~GeV/c$^2$~\cite{Azzi:2004rc}, and now (bottom,

6958:     \cite{EWWG:2008}), using the current preliminary world-averaged

6959:     result $m_t = $\mtopwa.}

6960:   \label{fig:mtvsmh}

6961: \end{figure}

6962: 

6963: %

6964: \section{Summary}

6965: More than thirteen years after its discovery, the properties of the

6966: top quark are being studied at the Tevatron with unprecedented

6967: precision by the CDF and D0 collaborations. The Tevatron is operating

6968: very smoothly, and has already delivered more than 4~fb$^{-1}$ of

6969: integrated luminosity to each experiment. Before the end of Run~II,

6970: it is expected to deliver 2~fb$^{-1}$ per year. CDF

6971: and D0 have exploited these increasing luminosities together with novel

6972: advanced analysis techniques to improve upon previous

6973: measurements, but also to explore top quark properties that were not

6974: accessible before such as its electroweak production, which provides first

6975: direct measurements of the $|V_{tb}|$ CKM matrix element. Thus far all

6976: results are consistent with standard model expectations and

6977: between the experiments, which constrains specific extensions

6978: of the standard model impacting the properties under consideration.

6979: 

6980: Top quark pair production is well established in the lepton + jets,

6981: dilepton and all-hadronic final states, and these channels are also

6982: used to study further properties of the top quark, such as its mass. The

6983: top quark signal is also being established in final states involving

6984: hadronically decaying $\tau$ leptons.

6985: The observed production rates in all

6986: final states are consistent with each other and with the standard

6987: model expectation. No novel contributions to \ttbar production and

6988: signal samples have yet been observed, and corresponding constraints are derived

6989: on \ttbar production via resonances or massive gluons, and possible

6990: contributions of a fourth fermion generation or scalar top quarks to

6991: the selected signal samples. The kinematics of the observed events

6992: also agree with the SM prediction. Since

6993: contributions from physics beyond the standard model could affect the

6994: observed \ttbar final states differently also via the top quark decay, for

6995: example, as a result of top quark decays into charged Higgs bosons,

6996: corresponding limits are derived as well.

6997: 

6998: The \ttbar production cross section has been measured to be $\approx$7.3~pb

6999: for $m_{t} = 175$~GeV/c$^{2}$ with a precision of 10\%,

7000: matching the uncertainties of the theoretical predictions. This provides

7001: stringent tests of the corresponding perturbative QCD calculations.

7002: Ultimately, the precision of the cross section at the

7003: Tevatron might reach the 6\% level, dominated by the uncertainty on

7004: the integrated luminosity. First measurements have been performed to

7005: determine contributions of $q\bar{q}$ annihilation and gluon-gluon

7006: fusion to \ttbar production, and are found to be consistent with

7007: QCD predictions. Also, higher order effects such as the top quark charge

7008: asymmetry, measured for the first time, agree with

7009: SM expectation within statistical precision.

7010: 

7011: First evidence for electroweak single top quark production has been

7012: found by both experiments, and observation at the five standard

7013: deviation level appears imminent. The observed production rates are

7014: consistent with the standard model expectation of $\approx$3~pb and provide

7015: first direct measurements of the CKM matrix element $|V_{tb}|$. The

7016: most stringent 95\% C.L.\ lower limit is found to be

7017: \mbox{$|V_{tb}|>0.71$}. Searches for contributions to single top production via

7018: mechanisms beyond the SM, e.g., mediated by

7019: $W'$ or charged Higgs bosons, or flavor changing neutral interactions

7020: with gluons, are also performed. The lack of any significant deviations

7021: from the standard model has been used to set corresponding stringent limits

7022: on such processes. Sensitivity of single top production to the

7023: $Wtb$ vertex structure has provided constraints on more general $Wtb$

7024: interactions, including first limits on left-

7025: and right-handed tensor couplings.

7026: 

7027: The decay properties of top quarks have been studied using \ttbar samples

7028: providing both sufficient statistics and sample purity. The $W$ boson

7029: helicity in \ttbar decays can now be measured in a model independent

7030: way by extracting the fractions of left-handed and longitudinally

7031: polarized $W$ bosons simultaneously. This provides additional

7032: information about the $Wtb$ vertex structure that can be used together

7033: with constraints from single top quark production to fully specify

7034: $Wtb$ couplings. The $W$ boson helicity measurements are found to be consistent

7035: with SM expectation, and further studies in the lepton

7036: + jets and dilepton final states will scrutinize the observed $>2$~sd

7037: discrepancies between the two channels.

7038: The ratio of decays of $t$ to $b$ quarks versus any quarks, i.e., $R =

7039: {\cal B}(t \rightarrow Wb) / {\cal B}(t \rightarrow Wq) = 0.97^{+0.09}_{-0.08}$, has

7040: reached a precision of 9\%,

7041: confirming the expectation of dominant $t \rightarrow Wb$ decay

7042: assumed in most analyses. Top quark decays beyond the

7043: standard model, mediated through neutral currents, invisible

7044: decay modes, or decays to charged Higgs bosons have been sought,

7045: but have yielded only upper limits on such processes.

7046: 

7047: Measurements of fundamental top quark properties such as its charge, lifetime and

7048: mass based on \ttbar final states

7049: thus far confirm the standard model nature of the top quark. First

7050: measurements of charge and lifetime are consistent with

7051: expectation, and help to constrain ideas beyond the SM. The top quark mass

7052: has been measured in lepton + jets, dilepton and

7053: all-hadronic final states, yielding consistent results among the

7054: channels and between the CDF and D0 experiments. Combining

7055: the results yields $m_{t} = 172.4 \pm 1.2$~GeV/c$^{2}$, which marks the

7056: most precise measurement of the mass of any quark with a precision of 0.7\%. By

7057: the end of Run~II, a measurement with an absolute precision of

7058: $\lesssim 1$~GeV/c$^2$ should be achievable. This result

7059: will provide an important calibration 

7060: at the LHC, until there is sufficient

7061: luminosity for further refined measurements.

7062: 

7063: While these mass measurements are usually interpreted as

7064: representing the pole mass of the top quark, it should be recognized that their calibration through current

7065: Monte Carlo simulations raises certain ambiguities of interpretation.

7066: Nevertheless, indirect mass

7067: measurements utilizing the mass dependence of \ttbar production

7068: based on the pole mass are consistent with the direct measurements.

7069: 

7070: Utilizing radiative corrections to the $W$ boson mass in a global

7071: electroweak fit to data that includes the world-averaged top quark and $W$

7072: boson masses as inputs, the mass of the yet to be observed standard model

7073: Higgs boson can be constrained. This provides a 95\% C.L.\ upper

7074: limit on the Higgs boson mass of 154~GeV/c$^2$.

7075: 

7076: The large mass of the top quark does not only render it an ideal

7077: window to new physics, but this most massive known fundamental object

7078: also has a lifetime that is short compared to hadronization

7079: times. Consequently, observables sensitive to the top quark spin

7080: can be accessed undisturbed by hadronization processes. Spin-related

7081: measurements have not as yet been performed in Run~II, but

7082: it was shown in Run~I that a measurement of \ttbar spin

7083: correlations is feasible, and this measurement will greatly benefit

7084: from the increased statistics.

7085: The observation of single top quark production in addition should 

7086: enable first studies of the polarization of top quarks when produced

7087: via the electroweak interaction.

7088: 

7089: For precision measurements such as those of top quark mass and pair

7090: production cross section, the study of systematic uncertainties

7091: (consistently across experiments) and evaluation of any possible new or smaller

7092: contributions not considered in the past become a high priority. Other

7093: measurements, particularly involving single top quark production,

7094: will remain statistically limited throughout Run~II. The LHC will

7095: be a ``top factory'', producing millions of top quarks per year thanks

7096: to the two orders of magnitude increased production cross sections 

7097: and enhanced luminosity relative to the Tevatron. A broad top quark

7098: physics program is in preparation at the LHC \cite{Beneke:2000hk,

7099: Bernreuther:2008ju} that will complement and further expand that of

7100: the Tevatron.

7101: 

7102: A great many analyses are being pursued at the Tevatron, characterizing

7103: top quark data samples both as signal and as background contributions for other possible processes

7104: of similar signature that still remain to be studied. The top quark

7105: serves as a probe into new physics, both in production and decay,

7106: that could appear in the form of new particles or as modified

7107: couplings relative to the standard model. While thus far

7108: all measurements are in agreement with the standard model, there is

7109: still much room for new physics to be explored both at the

7110: Tevatron and the LHC.

7111: 

7112: %

7113: \section*{Acknowledgements}

7114: The author would like to thank all his colleagues working on the CDF

7115: and D0 experiments and at the Fermilab accelerator complex who made this

7116: review possible through their dedicated work and excellent results.

7117: Support from the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation,

7118: the University of Rochester and the University of Bonn is also gratefully

7119: acknowledged.

7120: 

7121: The author is indebted to Tom Ferbel and Regina Demina at the

7122: University of Rochester for introducing him to the world of top quark

7123: physics and for their continued encouragement. Norbert Wermes and

7124: Eckhard von T\"orne at the University of Bonn are gratefully

7125: acknowledged for their support of the author's research and writing

7126: process. Special thanks go to all the group members at the

7127: Universities of Rochester and Bonn for their contribution to making

7128: this work such a fruitful and inspiring experience for the author.

7129: 

7130: The author is grateful in particular to Florencia Canelli, Fr\'ed\'eric

7131: D\'eliot, Tom Ferbel, Amnon Harel, Ann Heinson, Ulrich Heintz, Ulrich Husemann,

7132: Michelangelo Mangano, Heather Pleier, Iris

7133: Rottl\"ander, Christian Schwanenberger, Lisa Shabalina, Kirsten

7134: Tollefson, Eckhard von T\"orne and Norbert Wermes for helpful

7135: discussions and comments on the manuscript. {\it SDG}.

7136: %

7137: 

7138: %

7139: \bibliographystyle{h-physrev3.bst}

7140: %

7141: \addcontentsline{toc}{section}{References}

7142: %

7143: \bibliography{literature}

7144: 

7145: \end{document}

7146: