1:
2:
3: %====================================================================%
4: % MORIOND.TEX 2-Feb-1995 %
5: % This latex file rewritten from various sources for use in the %
6: % preparation of the standard proceedings Volume, latest version %
7: % for the Neutrino'96 Helsinki conference proceedings %
8: % by Susan Hezlet with acknowledgments to Lukas Nellen. %
9: % Some changes are due to David Cassel. %
10: % %
11: % Updated to LaTeX2e and adapted to Moriond 2001 conditions %
12: % by F.Montanet 24/04/2001 %
13: %====================================================================%
14:
15: \documentclass[11pt]{article}
16: \usepackage{moriond,epsfig}
17: %\documentstyle[11pt,moriond,epsfig]{article}
18:
19: \newcommand{\jp}{J/\psi}
20: \newcommand{\etal}{\it et al.\rm}
21: \newcommand{\rt}{\rightarrow}
22:
23: \bibliographystyle{unsrt}
24: % for BibTeX - sorted numerical labels by order of
25: % first citation.
26:
27: % A useful Journal macro
28: \def\Journal#1#2#3#4{{#1} {\bf #2}, #3 (#4)}
29:
30: % Some useful journal names
31: \def\NCA{\em Nuovo Cimento}
32: \def\NIM{\em Nucl. Instrum. Methods}
33: \def\NIMA{{\em Nucl. Instrum. Methods} A}
34: \def\NPB{{\em Nucl. Phys.} B}
35: \def\PLB{{\em Phys. Lett.} B}
36: \def\PRL{\em Phys. Rev. Lett.}
37: \def\PRD{{\em Phys. Rev.} D}
38: \def\ZPC{{\em Z. Phys.} C}
39: \def\NPA{{\em Nucl. Phys.} A}
40:
41: % Some other macros used in the sample text
42: \def\st{\scriptstyle}
43: \def\sst{\scriptscriptstyle}
44: \def\mco{\multicolumn}
45: \def\epp{\epsilon^{\prime}}
46: \def\vep{\varepsilon}
47: \def\ra{\rightarrow}
48: \def\ppg{\pi^+\pi^-\gamma}
49: \def\vp{{\bf p}}
50: \def\ko{K^0}
51: \def\kb{\bar{K^0}}
52: \def\al{\alpha}
53: \def\ab{\bar{\alpha}}
54: \def\be{\begin{equation}}
55: \def\ee{\end{equation}}
56: \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}}
57: \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}}
58: \def\CPbar{\hbox{{\rm CP}\hskip-1.80em{/}}}
59: %temp replacement due to no font
60: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
61: % %
62: % BEGINNING OF TEXT %
63: % %
64: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
65: \begin{document}
66: \vspace*{4cm}
67: \title{NEW $R$ VALUES IN 2-5 GeV FROM THE BEIJING SPECTROMETER}
68: \author{ G. S. HUANG representing the BES Collaboration }
69: \address{Institute of High Energy Physics, 19 Yuquan Road, Beijing 100039,
70: China\\E-mail: huanggs@pony1.ihep.ac.cn}
71:
72: \maketitle\abstracts{
73: The values of $R = \sigma(e^+e^-\rightarrow
74: \mbox{hadrons})/\sigma(e^+e^-\rightarrow\mu^+\mu^-)$ for 85
75: center-of-mass energies between 2 and 5 GeV were measured
76: with the upgraded Beijing Spectrometer at the Beijing
77: Electron-Positron Collider, with an average uncertainty of $\sim7\%$.}
78:
79: \section{Introduction}
80: The QED running coupling constant evaluated at the $Z$ pole,
81: $\alpha(M^2_{Z})$, and the anomalous
82: magnetic moment of the muon, $a_{\mu}=(g-2)/2$, are two fundamental
83: quantities that are used to test the Standard Model (SM)~\cite{rlowe}.
84: %Among the three input parameters generally used in global fits
85: %to electroweak data, $\alpha(M^2_{Z})$ has the largest
86: %experimental uncertainty and is the primary limit on the precision of
87: %SM calculations of the mass of the Higgs particle.
88: %The value of $a_{\mu}$ is of interest because of its
89: %sensitivity to large energy scales and very high order radiative
90: %corrections.
91: %Any deviation between the SM predicted value for
92: %$a_{\mu}^{SM}$ and its experimentally
93: %measured value, $a_{\mu}^{Exp}$, would be an indication of new physics.
94: The dominant uncertainties in both $\alpha(M^2_{Z})$ and $a_{\mu}^{SM}$ are
95: due to the effects of hadronic vacuum polarization, which cannot be
96: reliably calculated. Instead, with the application of dispersion relations,
97: experimentally measured $R$ values are used to determine the vacuum
98: polarization~\cite{rlowe}, where $R$ is the lowest order cross section
99: for $e^+e^-\rightarrow\gamma^*\rightarrow \mbox{hadrons}$
100: in units of the lowest-order QED cross section for
101: $e^+e^- \rightarrow \mu^+\mu^-$, namely
102: $R=\sigma(e^+e^- \rightarrow \mbox{hadrons})/\sigma(e^+e^-\rightarrow
103: \mu^+\mu^-)$, where
104: $\sigma (e^+e^- \rightarrow \mu^+\mu^-) = \sigma^0_{\mu \mu}=
105: 4\pi \alpha^2(0) / 3s$.
106:
107: The uncertainties in $\alpha(M^2_{Z})$ and
108: $a^{SM}_{\mu}$ are dominated by the errors in the
109: values of $R$ in the center of mass (cm) energy range below 5 GeV. These were
110: measured about 20 years ago with a precision of about $15\sim 20\%$.
111: %~\cite{mark1,gamma2,pluto}.
112: Thus, new measurements of $R$ in the energy region between 2 and 5 GeV
113: with significantly improved precision are very important~\cite{rlowe}.
114: In this paper, we report measurements of $R$ at 85
115: cm energies between 2 and 5 GeV, with an average precision
116: of $6.6\%$.
117:
118: \section{$R$ scan with BESII at BEPC}
119: The measurements were carried out using the upgraded Beijing
120: Spectrometer (BESII)~\cite{bes} at the Beijing Electron
121: Positron Collider (BEPC).
122: %Currently BEPC is the only $e^+e^-$ machine operating
123: %in the 2 to 5 GeV cm energy region; its peak luminosity at the
124: %$J/\psi$ resonance is about $5 \times 10^{30}/$cm$^{2} \cdot$ s.
125: BESII is a conventional collider detector based on
126: a large solenoid magnet with a central field of 0.4~T.
127:
128: Following a preliminary scan that measured $R$ at six energy points
129: between 2.6 and 5 GeV~\cite{besr_1}, we performed a finer
130: $R$ scan with 85 energy points covering
131: the energy region between 2 and 4.8 GeV~\cite{rscan2}.
132: In order to understand beam-associated backgrounds,
133: separated beam data were accumulated at 24 different energies and single
134: beam runs for both $e^-$ and $e^+$ were done at 7 energies
135: interspersed throughout the entire energy range. Special runs
136: were taken at the $J/\psi$ resonance to determine the trigger efficiency.
137: The $J/\psi$ and $\psi(2S)$ resonances were scanned at the beginning and
138: end of the $R$ scan to calibrate the cm energy.
139:
140: \section{Data Analysis}
141: Experimentally, the value of $R$ is determined from the number of
142: observed hadronic events, $N^{obs}_{had}$, by the relation
143: \begin{equation}
144: R=\frac{ N^{obs}_{had} - N_{bg} - \sum_{l}N_{ll} - N_{\gamma\gamma} }
145: { \sigma^0_{\mu\mu} \cdot L \cdot \epsilon_{had} \cdot \epsilon_{trg}
146: \cdot (1+\delta)},
147: \end{equation}
148: where $N_{bg}$ is the number of beam-associated background events;
149: $\sum_{l}N_{ll},~(l=e,\mu,\tau)$ are the numbers
150: of lepton-pair events from one-photon processes and $N_{\gamma\gamma}$
151: the number of two-photon process
152: events that are misidentified as hadronic events;
153: $L$ is the integrated luminosity; $\delta$ is
154: the radiative correction; $\epsilon_{had}$ is the detection efficiency
155: for hadronic events; and $\epsilon_{trg}$ is the trigger efficiency.
156:
157: The trigger efficiencies, measured by comparing the
158: responses to different trigger requirements
159: in special runs taken at the $J/\psi$ resonance,
160: are determined to be 99.96\%, 99.33\% and 99.76\%
161: for Bhabha, dimuon and hadronic events, respectively, with
162: an error of 0.5\%~\cite{besr_1}.
163:
164: We developed a set of
165: requirements on fiducial regions, vertex positions, track fit
166: quality, maximum and minimum BSC energy deposition, track momenta and
167: time-of-flight hits that preferentially distinguish one-photon
168: multi-hadron production from all possible contamination
169: mechanisms.
170: Residual background contributions are due
171: to cosmic rays, lepton pair production, two-photon
172: interactions and single-beam-related processes. Additional
173: requirements are imposed on two-prong events, for which
174: cosmic ray and lepton pair backgrounds are especially
175: severe~\cite{besr_1}.
176:
177: %An acceptable charged track must be in the
178: %polar angle region $|\cos(\theta)|< 0.84$, have a good helix
179: %fit, and not be clearly identified as an electron or muon.
180: %The distance of closest approach to the beam axis must
181: %be less than 2 cm in the transverse plane, and must occur
182: %at a point for which $|z|<18$ cm. In addition, the following
183: %criteria must be satisfied: (i) $p < p_{beam} + 5 \times \sigma_p$,
184: %where $p$ and $p_{beam}$ are the track and incident beam
185: %momenta, respectively, and $\sigma_p$ is the momentum
186: %uncertainty for a charged track for which $p = p_{beam}$;
187: %(ii) $E < 0.6 E_{beam}$, where $E$ is the BSC energy associated
188: %with the track, and $E_{beam}$ is the beam energy; (iii)
189: %$2 < t < t_p + 5 \times \sigma_t$ (in ns.), where $t$ is the
190: %measured time-of-flight for the track, and $t_p$ is the
191: %time-of-flight calculated assigning the proton mass to
192: %the track; $\sigma_t$ is the resolution of the BTOF system.
193:
194: %After track selection, event selection requires
195: %the presence of at least two charged tracks, of which
196: %at least one satisfies all of the criteria listed above.
197: %In addition, the total energy deposited in the BSC must
198: %be greater than $0.28 E_{beam}$, and the selected tracks
199: %must not all point into the forward ($cos\theta > 0$)
200: %or the backward ($cos\theta < 0$) hemisphere.
201:
202: %For two-prong events, residual cosmic ray and
203: %lepton pair background is removed by requiring that the
204: %tracks not be back-to-back, and that there be at least
205: %two isolated energy clusters in the BSC with $E>100$~MeV
206: %that are at least 15$^{\circ}$ in azimuth from the closest
207: %charged track. This last requirement rejects radiative
208: %Bhabha events.
209:
210: %These requirements eliminate virtually all cosmic
211: %rays and most of the lepton pair events. The remaining
212: %background contributions due to lepton pairs ($N_{ll}$)
213: %and two-photon events ($N_{\gamma \gamma}$) are estimated
214: %from Monte Carlo simulation and subtracted as indicated
215: %in Eq. (1).
216:
217: The number of hadronic events and the beam-associated background level
218: are determined by fitting the distribution of event vertices along the
219: beam direction with a Gaussian for real hadronic events and a
220: polynomial of degree two for the background, which
221: can also be subtracted by applying the
222: same hadronic event selection criteria to separated-beam data~\cite{besr_1}.
223: The differences in $R$ values with these two methods
224: range between 0.3 and 2.3\%,
225: depending on the energy.
226:
227: The integrated luminosity is determined
228: from the number of large-angle Bhabha events selected
229: using only the BSC energy deposition.
230: %We require two BSC energy clusters, the one with the larger
231: %deposited energy being in the polar angle region
232: %$|\cos(\theta)| <0.70$. In addition, each cluster must
233: %have energy $> 1.0 ~{\rm GeV} \times (E_{cm}/3.55~{\rm
234: %GeV})$, and the pair must satisfy
235: %$2^{\circ} < | |\phi_{1} - \phi_{2}| - 180^{\circ} | <16^{\circ}$,
236: %where $\phi_1$ and $\phi_2$
237: %are the respective azimuthal angles.
238: %The $\Delta\phi > 2^{\circ}$ requirement separates
239: %$e^+e^-\rt e^+e^-$ events, which are not exactly back-to-back because
240: %of the magnetic field, from $e^+ e^- \rt \gamma\gamma$ events.
241:
242: JETSET, the commonly used event generator
243: for $e^+e^-\rt \mbox{hadrons}$, was not
244: intended to be applicable to the low
245: energy region, especially that below 3 GeV.
246: A new generator, LUARLW, was developed by the Lund
247: group and the BES collaboration.
248: The generator uses a formalism based on the
249: Lund Model Area Law, but without the extreme-high-energy
250: approximations used in JETSET's string fragmentation algorithm~\cite{bo}.
251: The final states simulated in LUARLW are exclusive
252: in contrast to JETSET, where they are inclusive.
253: Above 3.77 GeV, the production of charmed mesons
254: is included in the generator according to the Eichten
255: Model~\cite{eichiten,chenjc}.
256:
257: The parameters in LUARLW are tuned to reproduce
258: the observed multiplicity, sphericity, angular and momentum
259: distributions, etc., over the entire energy region covered by the scan.
260: %We find that one set of parameter values is required for the cm energy
261: %region below open charm threshold, and that a second set
262: %is required for higher energies.
263: %In an alternative approach, the parameter values
264: %were tuned point-by-point throughout the
265: %entire energy range. We find that the detection efficiencies determined using
266: %individually tuned parameters are consistent with those
267: %determined with globally tuned parameters to within 2\%.
268: %This difference is included in the systematic errors.
269: The uncertainty of detection efficiency is 2\%, estimated by varying the
270: parameters in LUARLW.
271: The detection efficiencies were also determined using JETSET74 for
272: the energies above 3 GeV.
273: The difference between the JETSET74 and LUARLW results is about 1\%,
274: and is also taken into account in estimating the systematic uncertainty.
275:
276: Different schemes for the radiative corrections were compared
277: \cite{berends,fmartin,fadin,crystalball}.
278: %As reported in Ref. 3, below charm threshold the four different
279: %schemes agree with each other to within 1\%.
280: %Above charm threshold, where resonances are
281: %important, the agreement is within 1 to 3\%. However,
282: The schemes of Refs.~\cite{fadin} and \cite{crystalball} take into
283: account vacuum polarization not only for electrons and muons, but also
284: taus and hadrons. The correction factors calculated with these two
285: approaches are consistent within 0.5\% in the continuum and
286: differ by less than 1\% in the charm resonance region.
287: The formalism of Ref. \cite{crystalball} is used in our calculation, and
288: differences with the schemes described in Ref. \cite{fadin} are
289: included in the systematic errors. In the calculation of the
290: radiative correction above charm threshold,
291: where the resonances are broad and where the total width of the resonance
292: is energy-dependent, we take the interference between resonances into
293: account.
294:
295: \section{The Results}
296: Table~\ref{tab:rvalue} lists the $R$ values measured
297: by BES in this experiment. They are displayed in
298: Fig.~\ref{fig:besr}, together with BESII values from Ref.~\cite{besr_1} and
299: those measured by MarkI,
300: $\gamma\gamma 2$, and Pluto~\cite{mark1,gamma2,pluto}.
301: The $R$ values from BESII have an average uncertainty of
302: about 6.6\%, which represents
303: a factor of two to three improvement in precision
304: in the 2 to 5 GeV
305: energy region. These improved measurements should have a significant impact on the
306: global fit to the electroweak data and
307: the determination of the SM prediction for the mass
308: of the Higgs particle. In addition, they
309: are expected to provide an
310: improvement in the precision of the calculated value of
311: $a_{\mu}^{SM}$~\cite{ichep2k,martin}.
312:
313: \begin{table*}[htbp]
314: \begin{center}
315: \caption{The measured $R$ values obtained in this
316: experiment; the first error is statistical, the second systematic.}
317: \begin{scriptsize}
318: \begin{tabular}{cccccccc} \hline
319: $E_{cm}$ & $R$ & $E_{cm}$ & $R$ & $E_{cm}$ & $R$ &
320: $E_{cm}$ & $R$ \\
321: (GeV)& & (GeV)& & (GeV)& & (GeV)& \\ \hline
322: 2.000& $2.18\pm0.07\pm0.18$ &3.890& $2.64\pm0.11\pm0.15$ &4.120
323: & $4.11\pm0.24\pm0.23$ &4.340& $3.27\pm0.15\pm0.18$ \\
324: 2.200& $2.38\pm0.07\pm0.17$ &3.930& $3.18\pm0.14\pm0.17$ &4.130
325: & $3.99\pm0.15\pm0.17$ &4.350& $3.49\pm0.14\pm0.14$ \\
326: 2.400& $2.38\pm0.07\pm0.14$ &3.940& $2.94\pm0.13\pm0.19$ &4.140
327: & $3.83\pm0.15\pm0.18$ &4.360& $3.47\pm0.13\pm0.18$ \\
328: 2.500& $2.39\pm0.08\pm0.15$ &3.950& $2.97\pm0.13\pm0.17$ &4.150
329: & $4.21\pm0.18\pm0.19$ &4.380& $3.50\pm0.15\pm0.17$ \\
330: 2.600& $2.38\pm0.06\pm0.15$ &3.960& $2.79\pm0.12\pm0.17$ &4.160
331: & $4.12\pm0.15\pm0.16$ &4.390& $3.48\pm0.16\pm0.16$ \\
332: 2.700& $2.30\pm0.07\pm0.13$ &3.970& $3.29\pm0.13\pm0.13$ &4.170
333: & $4.12\pm0.15\pm0.19$ &4.400& $3.91\pm0.16\pm0.19$ \\
334: 2.800& $2.17\pm0.06\pm0.14$ &3.980& $3.13\pm0.14\pm0.16$ &4.180
335: & $4.18\pm0.17\pm0.18$ &4.410& $3.79\pm0.15\pm0.20$ \\
336: 2.900& $2.22\pm0.07\pm0.13$ &3.990& $3.06\pm0.15\pm0.18$ &4.190
337: & $4.01\pm0.14\pm0.14$ &4.420& $3.68\pm0.14\pm0.17$ \\
338: 3.000& $2.21\pm0.05\pm0.11$ &4.000& $3.16\pm0.14\pm0.15$ &4.200
339: & $3.87\pm0.16\pm0.16$ &4.430& $4.02\pm0.16\pm0.20$ \\
340: 3.700& $2.23\pm0.08\pm0.08$ &4.010& $3.53\pm0.16\pm0.20$ &4.210
341: & $3.20\pm0.16\pm0.17$ &4.440& $3.85\pm0.17\pm0.17$ \\
342: 3.730& $2.10\pm0.08\pm0.14$ &4.020& $4.43\pm0.16\pm0.21$ &4.220
343: & $3.62\pm0.15\pm0.20$ &4.450& $3.75\pm0.15\pm0.17$ \\
344: 3.750& $2.47\pm0.09\pm0.12$ &4.027& $4.58\pm0.18\pm0.21$ &4.230
345: & $3.21\pm0.13\pm0.15$ &4.460& $3.66\pm0.17\pm0.16$ \\
346: 3.760& $2.77\pm0.11\pm0.13$ &4.030& $4.58\pm0.20\pm0.23$ &4.240
347: & $3.24\pm0.12\pm0.15$ &4.480& $3.54\pm0.17\pm0.18$ \\
348: 3.764& $3.29\pm0.27\pm0.29$ &4.033& $4.32\pm0.17\pm0.22$ &4.245
349: & $2.97\pm0.11\pm0.14$ &4.500& $3.49\pm0.14\pm0.15$ \\
350: 3.768& $3.80\pm0.33\pm0.25$ &4.040& $4.40\pm0.17\pm0.19$ &4.250
351: & $2.71\pm0.12\pm0.13$ &4.520& $3.25\pm0.13\pm0.15$ \\
352: 3.770& $3.55\pm0.14\pm0.19$ &4.050& $4.23\pm0.17\pm0.22$ &4.255
353: & $2.88\pm0.11\pm0.14$ &4.540& $3.23\pm0.14\pm0.18$ \\
354: 3.772& $3.12\pm0.24\pm0.23$ &4.060& $4.65\pm0.19\pm0.19$ &4.260
355: & $2.97\pm0.11\pm0.14$ &4.560& $3.62\pm0.13\pm0.16$ \\
356: 3.776& $3.26\pm0.26\pm0.19$ &4.070& $4.14\pm0.20\pm0.19$ &4.265
357: & $3.04\pm0.13\pm0.14$ &4.600& $3.31\pm0.11\pm0.16$ \\
358: 3.780& $3.28\pm0.12\pm0.12$ &4.080& $4.24\pm0.21\pm0.18$ &4.270
359: & $3.26\pm0.12\pm0.16$ &4.800& $3.66\pm0.14\pm0.19$ \\
360: 3.790& $2.62\pm0.11\pm0.10$ &4.090& $4.06\pm0.17\pm0.18$ &4.280
361: & $3.08\pm0.12\pm0.15$ & & \\
362: 3.810& $2.38\pm0.10\pm0.12$ &4.100& $3.97\pm0.16\pm0.18$ &4.300
363: & $3.11\pm0.12\pm0.12$ & & \\
364: 3.850& $2.47\pm0.11\pm0.13$ &4.110& $3.92\pm0.16\pm0.19$ &4.320
365: & $2.96\pm0.12\pm0.14$ & & \\ \hline
366: \end{tabular}
367: \end{scriptsize}
368: \label{tab:rvalue}
369: \end{center}
370: \end{table*}
371:
372: Further improvements in the accuracy of $R$ measurements
373: at BEPC will require higher machine luminosity, especially
374: for energies below 3.0 GeV, and better detector performance,
375: particularly in the area of calorimetry.
376: Increased precision in the areas of
377: hadronic event simulation and the calculation
378: of the radiative correction are also required.
379:
380: \begin{figure}[htb]
381: \epsfysize=3.9in
382: \centerline{\epsfbox{besrnew.eps}}
383: \caption{(a) A compilation of measurements of $R$ in the cm
384: energy range from 1.4 to 5 GeV. (b) $R$ values from this experiment
385: in the resonance region between 3.75 and 4.6 GeV.}
386: \label{fig:besr}
387: \end{figure}
388:
389: \section*{Acknowledgments}
390: We would like to thank the staff of the BEPC Accelerator Center
391: and IHEP Computing Center for their efforts.
392: We thank B. Andersson for helping in the development of the LUARLW generator.
393: We also wish to acknowledge useful discussions with M. Davier,
394: B. Pietrzyk, T. Sj\"{o}strand, A. D. Martin and M. L. Swartz.
395: We especially thank M. Tigner for major contributions not only to
396: BES but also to the operation of the BEPC during the $R$ scan.
397:
398: This work is supported in part by the National Natural
399: Science Foundation of China under Contract Nos. 19991480,
400: 19805009 and 19825116; the Chinese
401: Academy of Sciences under contract Nos. KJ95T-03, and E-01 (IHEP);
402: and by the Department of
403: Energy under Contract Nos.
404: DE-FG03-93ER40788 (Colorado State University),
405: DE-AC03-76SF00515 (SLAC),
406: DE-FG03-94ER40833 (U Hawaii), DE-FG03-95ER40925 (UT Dallas),
407: and by the Ministry of Science and Technology of Korea under Contract
408: KISTEP I-03-037(Korea).
409:
410: \section*{References}
411: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
412: \bibitem{rlowe} Z.G. Zhao, International Journal of Modern Physics A15
413: (2000)3739.
414: \bibitem{bes}J.Z. Bai {\it et al.}, (BES Collab.),
415: \Journal{\NIM}{\bf458}{627}{2001}.
416: \bibitem{besr_1} J. Z. Bai {\it et al.}, (BES Collab.),
417: \Journal{\PRL}{84}{594}{2000}.
418: \bibitem{rscan2} Z.G. Zhao, \Journal{\NPA}{675}{13c}{2000}.
419: \bibitem{bo} B. Andersson and Haiming Hu, ``Few-body States in Lund String
420: Fragmentation Model'' hep-ph/9910285.
421: \bibitem{eichiten}E. Eichten {\it et al.}, \Journal{\PRD}{21}{203}{1980}.
422: \bibitem{chenjc}J.C. Chen {\it et al.}, \Journal{\PRD}{62}{034003}{2000}.
423: \bibitem{berends}F.A. Berends and R. Kleiss, \Journal{\NPB}{178}{141}{1981}.
424: \bibitem{fmartin}G. Bonneau and F. Martin, \Journal{\NPB}{27}{387}{1971}.
425: \bibitem{fadin}E. A. Kuraev and V.S. Fadin, {\em Sov. J. Nucl.
426: Phys.} {\bf41}, 3(1985).
427: \bibitem{crystalball}C. Edwards {\it et al.}, SLAC-PUB-5160, 1990. (T/E)
428: \bibitem{mark1} J. L. Siegrist {\it et al.}, (Mark I Collab.), \Journal
429: {\PLB}{26}{969}{1982}.
430: \bibitem{gamma2} C. Bacci {\it et al.}, ($\gamma \gamma2$ Collab.),
431: \Journal{\PLB}{86}{234}{1979}.
432: \bibitem{pluto} L. Criegee and G. Knies, (Pluto Collab.),
433: {\em Phys. Rep.} {\bf 83}, 151 (1982);\\
434: Ch. Berger {\it et al.}, \Journal {\PLB}{81}{410}{1979}.
435: \bibitem{ichep2k} B. Pietrzyk, Robert Carey, Atul Gurtu,
436: talks at ICHEP2000, Osaka, Japan, July 2000.
437: \bibitem{martin} A. Martin {\it et al.}, \Journal{\PLB}{492}{69}{2000}.
438:
439: \end{thebibliography}
440:
441: \end{document}
442:
443: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
444: % End of moriond.tex %
445: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
446: