1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2: % template.tex: template for camera.cls/camera.sty:
3: % camera-ready papers (Societ\`a Italiana di Fisica)
4: % 1997/03/18
5: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
6: % If you have LaTeX2e, replace the line below with:
7: % \documentclass{camera}
8: % If you don't know which version of LaTeX you have,
9: % leave it as it is and try it out; if it doesn't work,
10: % try with \documentclass.
11: % If you really want to know which version of LaTeX
12: % you have, just
13: % 1. typeset this (or any other file) with the command
14: % latex camera
15: % 2. ignore the errors
16: % 3. search among the first lines of output for
17: % a line such as
18: % LaTeX2e <1996/06/01>
19: % or
20: % LaTeX Version 2.09 <25 March 1992>
21:
22: %
23: \documentclass{camera}
24: \usepackage{epsfig}
25: %\documentstyle[epsfig]{camera}
26:
27: \begin{document}
28: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\fnsymbol{footnote}}
29:
30: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
31: % The title, all uppercase; if you want to split it in
32: % two or more lines, put a \\ macro at each line break
33: % example:
34: % \title{TITLE: FIRST LINE\\ SECOND LINE}
35: %
36: \title{$\sigma( e^+ e^- \to hadrons)$ AT LOW ENERGY: EXPERIMENTAL STATUS
37: AND PROSPECTS FOR THE FUTURE. \\ ITS INFLUENCE ON $\alpha_{QED}(M^2_{Z})$ AND
38: $(g-2)_{\mu}^{\,\,\,^*}$}
39: %~\footnote{Invited talk given at the XIII italian meeting on
40: % high energy physics ``LEPTRE'', Rome, April 18-20 2001, to appear in the
41: % proceedings.}
42:
43: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
44: % The author(s), separated by commas; do not put a
45: % comma before the last author, use instead the \And
46: % macro which produces a normal ``and'' in the
47: % caps/small caps context
48: %
49: \author{Graziano Venanzoni}
50:
51: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
52: %
53: \organization{Universit\`a and Sezione INFN, Pisa, Italy \\
54: e-mail:Graziano.Venanzoni@pi.infn.it}
55:
56: \maketitle
57:
58:
59: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
60: % Write the text starting from here and using the usual
61: % LaTeX commands.
62: %
63: \begin{abstract}
64: In this talk I will review the recent experimental status of $\sigma(
65: e^+ e^- \to hadrons)$ at $\sqrt{s}<10 GeV$ and the prospects for the future.
66: The influence on $\alpha_{QED}(M^2_{Z})$ and $(g-2)_{\mu}$ is also discussed.
67: %A precision measurement in this range it's mandatory to reduce the
68: %theoretical error on the hadronic contribution ({\it via} vacuum
69: %polarization diagram) to $\alpha_{QED}(M^2_{Z})$ and $(g-2)_{\mu}$.
70: %These errors are by now the limiting factors for a precision test of the
71: %Standard Model, in particular, after the new experimental result on
72: %$(g-2)_{\mu}$ at Brookhaven.
73: \end{abstract}
74: \footnotetext[1]{Invited talk given at the XIII italian meeting on
75: high energy physics ``LEPTRE'', Rome, April 18-20 2001, to appear in the
76: proceedings.}
77:
78: \section{Why $\sigma(e^+ e^- \to hadrons)$ at low energy is still interesting?}
79: An undeniable trend of the high energy physics community is the
80: exploration of high energy ranges by constructing more and more powerful
81: machines and detectors. However, beside that, there is still a considerable
82: effort on precise physics at low energies, which uses $e^+e^-$
83: annihilation in the region below 10 GeV: DA$\Phi$NE and VEPP-2M
84: at $\sqrt{s} <1.4 \,GeV$; BEPC at $2<\sqrt{s} <5 \,GeV$
85: and CSR, KEKB, and PEP-II colliders at $\sqrt{s}=10 \,GeV$.
86: Though the main motivation for $\phi$ and $B$
87: factories concerns the CP violation
88: studies, R-measurement at low energy ($R=\frac{\sigma(e^+ e^- \to hadrons)}{\sigma(e^+ e^-
89: \to \mu^+ \mu^-)}$) is renewing its interest due to the precision
90: reached to test the Standard Model at LEP and SLC and also to the
91: new experimental result of $(g-2)_{\mu}$ at Brookhaven. The experimental
92: accuracy reached so far asks for a precise determination of the theoretical
93: estimation of both $\alpha_{QED} (M^2_{Z})$ and $(g-2)_{\mu}$, whose main
94: error comes from the non-perturbative computation of the hadronic
95: contributions, which can be computed by using $e^+ e^-$ data at low energy.
96: A precise measurement of R in this region is therefore mandatory, and
97: is also one of the main reason for new projects:
98: VEPP2000 ($\sqrt{s} <2 \,GeV$), PEP-N ($1.4<\sqrt{s} <2.5 \,GeV$),
99: BEPCII ($2<\sqrt{s} <5 \,GeV$) , CLEO-C($3<\sqrt{s} <5 \,GeV$).
100: %The integral of R measurement in particular is
101: % related to fundamental physical
102: % quantities like $\alpha_{QED} (M^2_{Z})$ and $(g-2)_{\mu}$,
103: % with weight function which enhances the role of low energy, as it will be
104: % shown in the following.
105:
106: %A part of the test of the Standard
107: %Model in its more cryptic part, {\it i.e.} the $CP-violation$, which is
108: %the main reason for the construction of the
109: % $\phi$ and $B$-factories, the $e^+e^-$ annihilation at low
110: % energy cover a wide physics range, which goes from
111:
112: %\begin{itemize}
113: %\item Light quarks spectroscopy: How do light quarks (u,d,s) interact? Low
114: % energy $e^+ e^-$ annihilation into hadrons at $\sqrt{s}<J/\psi$ provides
115: % a lot of experimental information on $J^{PC}=1^{--}$ states (How good is
116: % V.M.D.? How many exotic (4 quarks, glueball, etc...) states there are?)
117: %\item R-measurement ($R=\frac{\sigma(e^+ e^- \to hadrons)}{\sigma(e^+ e^-
118: % \to \mu^+ \mu^-)}$) is related to fundamental physical quantities, the
119: % weight function typically enhances the role of low energy:
120: %\begin{itemize}
121: % \item Running $\alpha_{QED}$, particularly the calculation of
122: % $\alpha_{QED} (M^2_{Z})$;
123: % \item hadronic contribution to
124: %$(g-2)_{\mu}$;
125: %\item test of CVC in $\tau$ decays;
126: %\item QCD sum rules and determination of $\alpha_{S}$ quark masses, quark
127: % and gluon condensates;
128: %\end{itemize}
129: %\end{itemize}
130: \begin{table}
131: \begin{center}
132: \noindent
133: \begin{tabular}[h]{|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
134: \hline\hline
135: Place & Ring & Detector & $\sqrt{s} (GeV)$ & pts & Year \\
136: \hline
137: Novosibirsk & VEPP-2M & CMD2, SND & 0.28-1.4 & 128 & '97-'99 \\
138: & VEPP-2 & OLYA, ND, CMD & 0.28-1.4 & - & '78-'87 \\
139: \hline
140: Frascati & Adone & $\gamma\gamma$2, MEA, BOSON, BCF & 1.42-3.09 & 31 &
141: '78-'82\\
142: \hline
143: Orsay & DCI & M3N,DM1,DM2 & 1.35-2.13 & 33 & 1978 \\
144: \hline
145: Beijing &BEPC& BESII & 2-5 & 85 & 1998-99 \\
146: \hline
147: SLAC & Spear & MARKI & 2.8-7.8 & 78 & 1982 \\
148: \hline
149: Hamburg & DORIS & DASP &3.1-5.2 & 64 & 1979 \\
150: & & PLUTO & 3.6-4.8,9.46 & 27 & 1977 \\
151: & & C.BALL & 5.0-7.4 & 11 & 1990 \\
152: & & LENA & 7.4-9.4 & 95 & 1982 \\
153: \hline
154: Novosibirsk & VEPP-4 & MD-1 & 7.23-10.34 & 30 & 1991 \\
155: \hline
156: \end{tabular}
157: \caption{Overview of R measurements.}
158: \label{tab1}
159: \end{center}
160: \end{table}
161:
162: \begin{figure}[h]
163: \begin{tabular}{cc}
164: \epsfig{file=piform.eps,width=8cm,height=8cm} &
165: \epsfig{file=aqed01_fig1.eps,width=8cm,height=8cm} \\
166: \end{tabular}
167: \caption{{\it Left}: measurement of the pion form factor from CMD-2. {\it
168: Right}: an updated compilation of R-measurement from H. Burkhardt and B.
169: Pietrzyk~\cite{bp}.}
170: \label{fig1}
171: \end{figure}
172:
173: R has been measured by many laboratories in the last 20
174: years, as shown in Tab.~\ref{tab1}.
175: Fig.~\ref{fig1}(b) shows
176: an up-date compilation of these data done by Burkhart and Pietrzyk~\cite{bp}.
177: The main improvements come in the region below 5 GeV, in particular
178: between $2-5\,GeV$ where the BESII coll. has reduced the error
179: to $\sim 7\%$ (before was $\sim 15\%$),
180: and in the region below 1 GeV, where the CMD2 coll. has measured
181: the pion form factor with a systematical error of $1.4\%$
182: (see Fig.~\ref{fig1}(a)). Both these new results have significant impact on
183: the updated calculation of $\alpha_{QED} (M^2_{Z})$ and $(g-2)_{\mu}$.
184: While the data between 2-5 GeV are now closer to perturbative QCD,
185: the error in the 1-2 GeV region is still 15\%:
186: a reduction of this error to few {\it percent} will be very important
187: both for $\alpha_{QED} (M^2_{Z})$ and $(g-2)_{\mu}$ calculations.
188: \section{Effective $\alpha_{QED}$ and precision test of the Standard Model}
189: The precision reached for the measurements performed at LEP and SLC allows
190: a stringent test of the Standard Model and to predict the
191: Higgs mass.
192: %However, the Higgs mass enters in the fit through radiative
193: %correction, {\it i. e.} the leading dependence is logarithmic, and therefore
194: %the constaint on $m_{H}$ is not so strong.
195: As discussed many times in this conference, the QED coupling
196: constant at $\sqrt{s}=M_{Z}$, $\alpha_{QED}(M^2_{Z})$, is now the
197: limiting factor for the fit of the SM. The uncertainity of
198: $\alpha_{QED}(M^2_{Z})$ arises from the low energy contribution of the five
199: quarks, $\Delta\alpha^{(5)}_{had}(M^2_{Z})$,
200: which cannot be reliably calculated using perturbative QCD:
201: \[
202: \alpha(M^2_{Z}) =\frac{\alpha(0)}{1-\Delta\alpha_l(M^2_{Z})-
203: \Delta\alpha^{(5)}_{had}(M^2_{Z})-\Delta\alpha_{top}(M^2_{Z})}
204: \]
205: The leptonic contribution is computed to the third order, while
206: the top contribution depends on the mass of the top quark, which is a
207: parameter of the fit.
208:
209: The hadronic contribution $\Delta\alpha^{(5)}_{had}(M^2_{Z})$ can be however
210: evaluated by using $e^+ e^-$ data, {\it via} a dispersion integral:
211: \begin{eqnarray}
212: \Delta\alpha^{(5)}_{had}(M^2_{Z}) &=& -\frac{\alpha M^2_{Z}}{3\pi} Re
213: \int_{4 m^2_{\pi}}^{\infty} ds\frac{R(s)}{s(s-M^2_{Z} -i\epsilon)} = \\
214: & = & -\frac{\alpha M^2_{Z}}{3\pi} \Big(
215: Re \int_{4 m^2_{\pi}}^{E_{cut}^2} ds\frac{R^{data}(s)}{s(s-M^2_{Z} -i\epsilon)}
216: + Re \int_{E_{cut}^2}^{\infty} ds\frac{R^{pQCD}(s)}{s(s-M^2_{Z} -i\epsilon)}
217: \Big)
218: \end{eqnarray}
219: The above integral has been intentionally split into two parts to
220: emphasize the role of the
221: energy cut above which perturbative QCD (pQCD) is used:
222: theoretical computation of
223: $\Delta\alpha^{(5)}_{had}(M^2_{Z})$
224: depends not only on
225: the experimental precision on $R^{data}(s)$, but also on the choice of the
226: energy cut, leading to different predictions~\cite{fj}.
227: %A recent determination~\cite{} which uses new data from BES and CMD2 and
228: %$E_{cut}=12 GeV$, gives $\Delta\alpha^(5)_{had}(M^2_{Z})=0.02761 \pm
229: %0.00036$; a different evaluation using the same data and a similar energy
230: %cut
231: %gives~\cite{fj} $\Delta\alpha^(5)_{had}(M^2_{Z})=0.027896 \pm
232: %0.000395$
233: \section{Hadronic contribution to the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon}
234: In February 2001, Farley and colleagues~\cite{far}, reported a new
235: experimental value of the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon
236: $a_{\mu}= (g-2)/2 = (11 659 202\pm14\pm6)\times 10^{-10}$ using
237: a positive muon beam, which is $2.6\sigma$ away from what is expected from
238: SM~\cite{mar}. Also in this case the main contribution to the theoretical
239: error is given by the low energy hadronic contribution to the
240: vacuum polarization, which again can be computed using
241: experimental $e^+ e^-$ data:
242: \[
243: a_{\mu}^{had}=(\frac{\alpha m_{\mu}}{3\pi})^2
244: \Big(
245: \int_{4 m^2_{\pi}}^{E_{cut}^2} ds\frac{R^{data}(s)\hat K(s)}{s^2}
246: + \int_{E_{cut}^2}^{\infty} ds\frac{R^{pQCD}(s)\hat K(s)}{s^2}
247: \Big)
248: \]
249: The kernel $\hat K(s)$ is a smooth bounded function; the $1/s^2$
250: dependence in the above integral
251: enhances low energy contributions, {\it i.e.} mainly
252: $\sqrt{s}< 1 \,GeV$ (the $\rho$ contributes for 62\%
253: of $a_{\mu}^{had}$).
254: Recent evaluations have been computed using different
255: approaches; a conservative data based approach using new data from BESII
256: and CMD-2 found $a_{\mu}^{had}=(698.75 \pm 11.11)\times 10^{-10}$~\cite{fj}
257: with an error still dominated by the $\sqrt{s}< 1.4 \,GeV$ region.
258:
259:
260: \section{Comments on the recents experimental results}
261: %In the last years a better precision has been achieved on the
262: %$e^+ e^-\to hadrons$ cross section at low energy, in particular
263: %from the CMD2 and SND collaborations in the range $\sqrt{s}<1.4 GeV$
264: % and from BESII in the range $2<\sqrt{s}<5 GeV$.
265: %We will now review these results.
266: \subsubsection*{Recent results from VEPP-2M}
267: Many hadronic channel were measured at VEPP-2M by CMD2 and SND
268: collaborations in the region 0.4-1.4 GeV, as shown Tab.~\ref{tab2}.
269: \begin{table}
270: \begin{center}
271: \noindent
272: \begin{tabular}[h]{|c|c|c|c|}
273: \hline\hline
274: Channel & Energy range & Syst. Error & Experiment \\
275: \hline
276: $e^+ e^-\to\pi^+\pi^-$ & 0.61-0.96 & 1.4\% & CMD-2 \\
277: \hline
278: $e^+ e^-\to\pi^+\pi^-\pi^0$ & 0.76-0.81 & 1.3\% & CMD-2 \\
279: \hline
280: $e^+ e^-\to\pi^+\pi^-\pi^0$ & 0.98-1.06 & 3-5\% &
281: SND, CMD2 \\
282: \hline
283: $e^+ e^-\to\pi^+\pi^-\pi^0$ & 1.04-1.38 & ~12\% &
284: SND \\
285: \hline
286: $e^+ e^-\to\pi^+\pi^-\pi^+\pi^-$ & 0.67-0.97 & ~12\% &
287: CMD-2 \\
288: \hline
289: $e^+ e^-\to 2\pi^+ 2\pi^-,\pi^+\pi^- 2\pi^0$& 1.05-1.38 & ~15\% &
290: CMD-2, SND \\
291: \hline
292: $e^+ e^-\to\pi^+\pi^-\pi^+\pi^-\pi^0$ & 1.28-1.38 &~15\% &
293: CMD-2 \\
294: \hline
295: $e^+ e^-\to K^+ K^-, K_S K_L$& 0.98-1.06 &
296: 3-5\% & SND, CMD2 \\
297: $e^+ e^-\to K_S K_L$ & 1-1.4 & $\sim 15\%$ & SND \\
298: \hline\hline
299: \end{tabular}
300: \caption{Recent results on multi hadronic channels at VEPP-2M.}
301: \label{tab2}
302: \end{center}
303: \end{table}
304: As said before, the main contribution for $a_{\mu}$ comes from the
305: region below 1.4 GeV, in particular from the $e^+ e^-\to\pi^+\pi^-$
306: channel;
307: the systematical error is 1.4\%, and it's expected to go down to 0.6\%
308: in the near future.
309: In order to achieve such a precision the systematics were carefully
310: checked, for example the error coming from the
311: energy beam is reduced by the resonance depolarisation
312: technique.
313: The main contribution to the systematic error comes now from the theoretical
314: uncertainty to the radiative corrections: keeping the error below 1\% is a
315: challenging task.
316:
317: \subsubsection*{Recent results from BESII at BEPC}
318: The BESII collaboration has recently published a new measurement of R in
319: the region 2-5 GeV, based on 85 points taken between February and June 99,
320: with an average precision of 6.6\%, a factor 2 better of the previous
321: results~\cite{bes}. R was determined inclusively, from the number of observed hadronic
322: events, $N_{had}^{obs}$:
323: \[
324: R=\frac{N_{had}^{obs}-N_{bckg}-\sum_l N_{ll}-N_{\gamma\gamma}}
325: {\sigma^0_{\mu \mu}\cdot L \cdot \epsilon_{had}\cdot (1+\delta)}
326: \]
327: where $N_{bckg}$ is the number of beam-associated background events;
328: $\sum_l N_{ll}$ and $N_{\gamma\gamma}$ are respectively
329: the background coming from misidentified events in one and two photons
330: processes; $L$ is the integrated luminosity; $\delta$ is the radiative
331: correction and $\epsilon_{had}$ is the overall detector efficiency.
332: In order to keep the error to $\sim 7\%$ a big effort was done
333: on: (a) Monte Carlo simulation to better understand detector efficiency;
334: (b) estimation of $N_{bckg}$ by means of separated beam and single beam
335: operation; (c) radiative correction by comparing different schemes.
336:
337: %As we discussed before this reduction of a factor two on the error in the
338: %2-5 GeV region has a significant impact of the calculaltion of $\alpha$ and
339: %on the prediction of higgs mass.
340:
341:
342: \section{Conclusion: what we expect from the future?}
343: We will now conclude by showing what we expect in the next years on
344: hadronic cross section measurements at low energy:
345:
346: \underline {0.4-1.4 GeV region}
347:
348: \begin{itemize}
349: \item {\bf DA$\Phi$NE - LNF-Frascati (KLOE)}:
350:
351: - Measurement of $|F_{\pi}|^2$ at $\sqrt{s}< 1 \,GeV$ {\it via}
352: radiative return~\cite{cat};
353: %Differently from the energy scan,
354: % this method has the advantages that luminosity and absolute normalization
355: % enters only ones for each point of the energy spectrum.
356: %KLOE has already started the
357: %analysis of the data up to now collected ($\sim 30 pb^{-1}$):
358: % preliminary results are expected within this year.
359: %O($100 pb^{-1}$) should be enough to reduce the experimental error on
360: % $|F_{\pi}|$ at 1\% level (even better): a that level an accurate
361: % calculation of radiative correction to ISR events is a challening job for
362: % theorists. Another approach under consideration is to identify
363: %the pions without tagging the photon. This ``inclusive'' approach has
364: %the benefit to not distinguish between Initial and Final state radiation,
365: %and therefore the theoretical accuracy is much better;
366:
367: - upgrade for energy scan (2004?).
368: %: it would be very useful if KLOE can
369: % perform an energy scan, in order to cross check with the radiative return
370: % approach; however, unfortunately, such a possibility is not foreseen at
371: % short term;
372:
373: \item {\bf VEPP2M -Novosibirsk (CMD2, SND)}:
374:
375: - Measurement of $|F_{\pi}|^2$ with 0.6\% of systematic error
376: and refined results on other channels;
377: % of systematic error expected to be
378: %published soon;
379: %
380: %- Results on other channels refined and to be published soon;
381:
382: - new collider proposed VEPP-2000 (2003?) with $\sqrt{s}$ up to 2 GeV and
383: expected luminosity of $10^{31}-10^{32} cm^{-2} sec^{-1}$;
384: \end{itemize}
385: \underline {1.4 - 2.5 GeV region}
386:
387: {\bf PEP-N: new asymmetric $e^+ e^-$ collider proposed at SLAC (2005?)}
388:
389: (http://www.slac.stanford.edu/grp/rd/epac/LOI/): expected
390: $\delta_R/R\sim 2.5\%$;
391:
392: %
393: %- $0.5 \times 3.1$ GeV energy beams
394: %
395: %- New $e^-$ ring with 150<E<500 MeV;
396: %
397: %- $L=10^{30}-10^{31} cm^{-2} sec^{-1}$;
398: %
399: %- $\delta_R/R\sim 2.5\%$ in this region ($\sim 200 pb^{-1}$ in 5 years of
400: % data taking);
401: \vspace{.5cm}
402: \underline {2 - 5 GeV}:
403:
404: \begin{itemize}
405: \item {\bf BEPC and BES upgraded (BEPCII and BESIII)}:
406: expected $\delta_R/R \leq 3\%$;
407: %- Peak luminosity $ \sim 5 \cdot 10^{31} cm^{-2} sec^{-1}$;
408: %
409: %-$\delta_R/R\sim (1-3)\%$ in this region;
410:
411: \item {\bf CLEO-C}: Modify CESR for high L in 3-5 GeV region (2003?)
412:
413: (http://www.lns.cornell.edu/public/CLEO/CLEO-C/index.html)
414: %with $L \sim 1-4 \cdot 10^{32} cm^{-2} sec^{-1}$
415:
416: \end{itemize}
417:
418: \underline {below 10 GeV}:
419:
420: Use ISR at {\bf B-factories} to scan the region below
421: $\Upsilon(4s)$~\cite{sol}
422:
423: \vspace{.3cm}
424: All the future results (within the existing or with the new detectors)
425: will contribute to determine an new exciting era
426: for the hadronic cross section measurement.
427:
428: \vspace{.5cm}
429: {\bf Acknowledgement}: I wish to thank
430: Fred Jegerlehner, Wolfgang Kluge and
431: Achim Denig for very useful discussions.
432:
433: \vspace{-.5cm}
434: \begin{thebibliography}{11}
435:
436: \bibitem{bp}
437: H. Burkhardt, B. Pietrzyk, LAPP-EXP-2001-03, (2001);
438: %UPDATE OF THE HADRONIC CONTRIBUTION TO THE QED VACUUM
439: %POLARIZATION.
440: %By H. Burkhardt (CERN), B. Pietrzyk (Annecy, LAPP). LAPP-EXP-2001-03, Feb 2001. 11pp.
441: \bibitem{fj}
442: F. Jegerlehner, hep-ph/0104304;
443: \bibitem{far}
444: H.N. Brown {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 86}, 2227 (2001);
445: \bibitem{mar}
446: A. Czarnecki and W. J. Marciano, hep-ph/0102122;
447: \bibitem{bes}
448: J.Z. Bai {\it et al.}, hep-ex/0102003
449:
450: \bibitem{cat} G. Cataldi {\it et al.},
451: Physics and detectors for DAPHNE, 569-578 (1999);
452: S. Binner {\it et al.} Phys. Lett. {\bf B459}, 279 (1999)
453:
454:
455: \bibitem{sol} M. Benayoun {\it et al.},
456: Mod. Phys. Lett. {\bf A14}, 2605 (1999)
457:
458: \end{thebibliography}
459:
460: \end{document}
461:
462:
463:
464:
465:
466:
467:
468:
469:
470:
471:
472:
473:
474:
475:
476:
477:
478:
479: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
480: % End of the paper
481: %
482: \end{document}
483: