1: \chapter{Top Quark Physics}
2: \fancyhead[RO]{Top Quark Physics}
3:
4:
5: \section{Introduction}
6:
7: The linear collider, operating near the $t\bar t$ production threshold
8: and at higher energies, can carry out a comprehensive program of top
9: quark physics. Measurements at the threshold include the determination
10: of the top quark mass, $m_t$, and width, $\Gamma_t$, as well as the top
11: quark Yukawa coupling, $g_{tth}$. The quantities
12: $m_t$ and $g_{tth}$ can also be
13: measured at higher energies,
14: together with the couplings of the top quark to the
15: electroweak gauge bosons. In this chapter we present a brief summary of
16: our current understanding of top quark physics at a linear collider.
17:
18: The top is unique among the quarks
19: in that it decays before nonperturbative
20: strong interaction effects can influence it.
21: Its large mass gives it stronger coupling to many proposed new
22: physics effects that try to explain electroweak symmetry breaking and/or
23: the origin of particle masses. Thus, precise measurement of
24: the parameters of the top quark would provide important insights into
25: physics beyond the Standard Model.
26:
27: \section{Physics in the threshold region}
28: %{\sl D.~Cinabro (Wayne State), I.~Stewart (San Diego) and O.~Yakovlev
29: %(Michigan)}
30:
31: \subsection{Introduction}
32: \label{sec:yak}
33:
34: One of the primary goals of a high-energy $e^+e^-$ linear collider
35: is the study of sharp features in the cross section for $e^+e^-$
36: annihilation to hadrons. The \ttb\ threshold is an excellent example of such a structure.
37: The cross section for $e^+e^- \to t \bar t$ is expected to rise by an order of
38: magnitude with only a 5 GeV change in center-of-mass energy around 350 GeV.
39: Careful study of this \ttb\ threshold structure can precisely measure many
40: parameters of the top quark, including its mass and
41: width, and the top quark Yukawa coupling.
42: In this section we briefly summarize the current status of
43: $t\bar t$ threshold studies. More comprehensive discussions can be
44: found in \cite{Review,Matsui,Frey}.
45:
46: \subsection{QCD dynamics and cross section}
47: It is well known that, because of the large top quark width ($\Gamma_t
48: \approx 1.4\GeV \gg \Lambda_{QCD}$),
49: a top-antitop pair cannot form narrow toponium resonances.
50: Instead, the
51: cross section is expected to have a smooth
52: line-shape showing only a moderate $1S$ peak. The dynamics of the top
53: quark in the threshold region is described by perturbative QCD. The
54: top quark width serves as an infrared cutoff. As a result,
55: nonperturbative QCD effects (as measured, for example, by the influence
56: of the gluon condensate) are
57: small~\cite{FadinYakovlev}, allowing us, in principle at least,
58: to calculate the cross
59: section from QCD with high accuracy.
60:
61: The convergence of QCD perturbation theory in the threshold region depends
62: on the quark mass definition used. The simplest definition of $m_t$ is
63: the position of the pole in the top quark propagator. This `pole mass' is
64: similar to the kinematic mass observed in top quark pair production above
65: threshold, and similar to the mass definition used by the CDF and D\O\
66: experiments in the original papers on the top quark
67: discovery \cite{top-CDF,top-DO}. Unfortunately, with this choice of the
68: mass definition, the NNLO corrections are
69: uncomfortably large~\cite{Review} and shift the $1S$ peak by about
70: $0.5\GeV$, spoiling the possibility to extract the
71: top quark mass with high accuracy. The threshold cross sections
72: computed at successive order in QCD are shown in the left-hand
73: graph in Fig.~\ref{bfig1}.
74: The instability of this perturbation series is caused by the
75: fact that the pole mass has a renormalon ambiguity, that is, it obtains
76: an additive correction from nonperturbative QCD effects.
77:
78:
79: \begin{figure}
80: \centerline{\resizebox{0.47\textwidth}{!}{\includegraphics{top/oleg_orange2.epsi}}
81: \hfill%
82: %\resizebox{0.49\textwidth}{!}{\includegraphics{top/oleg_orange1.epsi}}}
83: \resizebox{0.47\textwidth}{!}{\includegraphics{top/iain.ps}}}
84: \caption[*]{\label{bfig1}
85: The normalized cross section $R_t = \sigma(e^+e^-\to t\bar t)/\sigma(e^+e^-
86: \to\mu^+\mu^-)$ as a function of $\sqrt{s}$, computed in QCD perturbation
87: theory at various levels. These are theoretical curves that do not include
88: initial state radiation, beamstrahlung, or beam energy spread.
89: ({\bf Left:}) The normalized cross section
90: computed with the pole mass $m^{\rm pole}_t =175$~GeV, at LO (dashed-dotted lines),
91: NLO (dashed lines), and NNLO (solid lines).
92: Each pair of the curves corresponds to the two different
93: soft normalization scales $\mu=30$~GeV (upper curve) and
94: $\mu=60$~GeV (lower curve). ({\bf Right:}) The normalized cross section
95: computed with the $1S$ mass $m_t^{1S}=175$~GeV,
96: at LL order (dotted), NLL order (dashed) and NNLL order in QCD (solid).
97: The calculation includes the summation of logarithms
98: of the top quark velocity, and at each order curves are shown for
99: $\nu=0.15, 0.2, 0.4$, where $\nu$ is the so-called subtraction velocity.}
100: \end{figure}
101:
102: To remove this difficulty, one can use a different mass definition that
103: refers only to short-distance QCD physics. For example, a possible definition
104: of the mass, called the $1S$ mass,
105: is one-half of the mass of the lowest toponium
106: bound state computed in the hypothetical
107: limit of zero top quark width~\cite{ht}. Three other mass
108: definitions have been
109: considered in the literature.
110: The $\overline{\rm PS}$ mass~\cite{YakovlevGroote} is defined via the
111: top quark self-energy. The $LS$ (`low scale') mass is given
112: in terms of perturbative evaluations of matrix elements of operators in
113: the heavy quark effective theory that describe the difference between
114: the pole mass and a fictitious $T$ meson mass~\cite{bigi}.
115: Finally, the PS (`potential-subtracted') mass is defined by
116: %
117: \begin{eqnarray}
118: m_t^{PS}(\mu)=m_t^{\rm pole}+\frac{1}{2}\int\limits_{|k|<\mu}\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi)^3}
119: V_C(k)=m_t^{\rm pole}-\frac{4}{3}\frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}\mu+...
120: \end{eqnarray}
121: %
122: where $\mu$ is the soft renormalization scale. All of these mass
123: definitions, collectively called `threshold masses' have the property
124: that they are free of the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{QCD})$ renormalon
125: ambiguity~\cite{Beneke,Scot}. These masses also have the property
126: that they are connected to the $\bar {MS}$ top quark mass by a
127: convergent QCD perturbation series.
128:
129: The position of the $1S$ peak becomes
130: much more stable at higher orders of QCD if threshold masses are used.
131: The shifts from order
132: to order are less than 100 MeV. However, a large
133: theoretical normalization uncertainty of about 10\% remains. The
134: normalization uncertainty can be reduced to a few percent by
135: resumming terms logarithmic in the top velocity. The convergence for
136: the $1S$ mass definition is shown in the right-hand graph of
137: Fig.~\ref{bfig1}~\cite{Stewart}. Simultaneous
138: accurate measurements of the top mass and other quantities thus appear
139: feasible, as discussed further below.
140:
141: \subsection{Top width}
142: The scan of the $t\bar t$ threshold will allow a direct
143: measurement of the top quark width, $\Gamma_t$.
144: The cross section at the $1S$ quarkonium bound state
145: energy is proportional to $1/\Gamma_t$.
146: Realistic studies, which include initial state radiation and other
147: effects, show that $\Gamma_t$ can be measured with an experimental
148: precision of
149: a few percent~\cite{Matsui}, now that higher-order QCD corrections
150: appear to be under control~\cite{Stewart}.
151:
152: $\Gamma_t$ can also be measured using the
153: forward-backward asymmetry~\cite{Murayama}.
154: The $t\bar t$ vector coupling to $\gamma$ and $Z$ produces mainly S-wave
155: states, while the axial-vector coupling from the $Zt\bar t$ vertex
156: produces $t\bar t$ in a P state. The top quark width causes the S and
157: P states to overlap and allows these states to interfere in the final
158: angular distribution. This produces a forward-backward asymmetry.
159: Since the top quark width controls the amount of S-P overlap, the
160: asymmetry is sensitive to $\Gamma_t$. Realistic studies
161: are needed to better quantify the experimental sensitivity.
162:
163: \subsection{Top quark Yukawa coupling}
164: In addition to the QCD potential, the $t\bar t$ pair interacts via a
165: Yukawa potential associated with Higgs boson exchange
166: \begin{eqnarray}
167: V_{tth}= - \frac{g_{tth}^2}{4\pi}~\frac{e^{-m_hr}}{r},
168: \end{eqnarray}
169: where $m_h$ is the Higgs boson mass and $g_{tth}$ is the Yukawa coupling.
170: Therefore, top threshold measurements can also
171: be used to determine $g_{tth}$ if the Higgs boson is light.
172: A SM Higgs boson with a mass of
173: 115~GeV enhances the normalization of the cross section by 5--8\%
174: at energies near the threshold. The theoretical
175: uncertainty of the cross section in this region is 2--3\% when the
176: summation of logarithms of the top quark velocity is taken into
177: account~\cite{Stewart}.
178: A precision measurement of the \ttb\ threshold cross
179: section thus will be sensitive to the top Yukawa coupling. If we fix all
180: other parameters and assume $m_h=115\,{\rm GeV}$,
181: then varying the SM Yukawa coupling by $\pm 14\%$ gives a $\pm 2\%$
182: variation in the normalization of the cross section near the $1S$
183: peak~\cite{iain}. For larger values of $m_h$, the sensitivity to
184: $g_{tth}$ is expected to decrease. Again, realistic
185: experimental studies that make use of recent theoretical advances
186: in understanding the threshold cross section are needed.
187:
188: \subsection{Experimental issues}
189:
190: The experimental situation of the \ttb\ threshold is
191: fairly well understood, and there has not been much progress since the
192: experimental methods were reviewed at the 1999
193: Sitges meeting~\cite{sitgese}.
194: It is expected that the top mass can be measured
195: with a statistical uncertainty of 40 MeV in a modest scan of 10 fb$^{-1}$,
196: a small fraction of a year at typical design luminosities. A longer
197: scan of about 100 fb$^{-1}$ can determine the top width to 2\%.
198: A key experimental issue for the threshold study is the measurement of the
199: \dlde\ spectrum, but many complementary methods have been proposed. The
200: issues are similar to and less severe than the measurement of the
201: \dlde\ spectrum needed for a precision $W$ mass measurement from the
202: $W^+W^-$ threshold, discussed in Chapter 8, Section 2. The
203: limitations are likely to come from the uncertainty in
204: machine-generated backgrounds and from the theoretical understanding of the Bhabha
205: cross section. The impact of a precision top quark mass
206: measurement can be seen
207: in~\cite{peskin} and~\cite{sumino}, which show how the current
208: knowledge of the top mass and precision electroweak measurements
209: limit the range of the Higgs mass and anomalous $W$ and $Z$ couplings
210: caused by new physics.
211:
212:
213: \section{Physics above the top threshold}
214:
215: \subsection{Determination of the top quark--Higgs Yukawa coupling}
216: %{\sl S.~Dawson (BNL) and A.~Juste (FNAL)}
217:
218: \subsubsection{Introduction}
219: If there is a light Higgs boson, this particle is likely to be discovered
220: at the Tevatron or the LHC. The role of
221: a high-energy $e^+e^-$ linear collider is then to test the connection
222: of this particle to the physics of mass generation by
223: accurately
224: measuring its mass, width, and couplings to bosons and fermions.
225: The top quark provides a unique opportunity to measure
226: the Higgs Yukawa coupling to fermions through the process $e^+e^- \to
227: t\bar{t}h$. For a light Higgs boson, the Higgs decays dominantly to $b\bar{b}$.
228: Assuming BR($t\to W b) = 100\%$, this
229: leads to multi-jet event topologies involving 4 $b$-jets in the final state.
230: Therefore, one of the crucial experimental aspects will be flavor
231: tagging.
232:
233: \subsubsection{Basic scenario}
234:
235: The rate for $e^+e^- \to t\bar{t}h$ has been calculated to
236: ${\cal O}(\alpha_s)$ and is less than 1 fb at $\sqrt{s}=500$~GeV.
237: The total cross section decreases at low $\sqrt{s}$ because of limited phase space and
238: approaches a constant at high $\sqrt{s}$. The maximum of the
239: cross section (for a 100--150~GeV Higgs boson) occurs
240: around $\sqrt{s} \simeq 700$--800~GeV.
241:
242: Since the Yukawa coupling is determined from the cross section measurement,
243: it is straightforward to estimate the statistical and some systematic
244: uncertainties on $g_{tth}$ for a selection with efficiency $\epsilon$
245: and purity $\rho$, with an integrated luminosity $L$:
246: \begin{eqnarray}
247: \biggl (\frac{\Delta g_{tth}}{g_{tth}} \biggr)_{\rm stat}
248: & =&
249: \frac{1}{S_{\rm stat}(g_{tth}^2)\sqrt{\epsilon \rho L}}
250: , \\
251: \biggl (\frac{\Delta g_{tth}}{g_{tth}} \biggr)_{\rm syst}
252: & = &
253: \frac{1}{S_{\rm syst}(g_{tth}^2)} \left [
254: \frac{1-\rho}{\rho}\frac{\Delta \sigma_B^{\rm eff}}{\sigma_B^{\rm eff}} \oplus
255: \frac{1}{\rho} \frac{\Delta L}{L} \oplus \frac{\Delta
256: \epsilon}{\epsilon}\right ] ,
257: \label{gttherrors}
258: \end{eqnarray}
259: \noindent where $(\Delta g_{tth}/g_{tth})_{\rm syst}$ accounts for the
260: uncertainties in the effective background cross-section (after
261: selection), the integrated luminosity
262: and the selection signal efficiency. $S_{\rm stat}(g_{tth}^2)$ and
263: $S_{\rm syst}(g_{tth}^2)$ are defined as:
264: \begin{equation}
265: S_{\rm stat}(g_{tth}^2) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{\sigma_{tth}}}\,
266: \Bigg\vert \frac{d\sigma_{tth}}{dg_{tth}^2} \Bigg\vert, \quad
267: S_{\rm syst}(g_{tth}^2) = \frac{1}{\sigma_{tth}}\,
268: \Bigg\vert \frac{d\sigma_{tth}}{dg_{tth}^2} \Bigg\vert.
269: \end{equation}
270:
271: $S_{\rm stat}$ reaches a `plateau' for
272: $\sqrt{s} \geq 700$ GeV, whereas $S_{\rm syst}$ is essentially independent
273: of $\sqrt{s}$. At $\sqrt{s}=800$ GeV,
274: $S_{\rm stat}\simeq 3.09$ fb$^{1/2}$ and $S_{\rm syst}\simeq 1.92$.
275: Therefore, assuming $\epsilon=5\%$ and $\rho=50\%$, a statistical
276: precision of around 6.5\% could be achieved in $g_{tth}$
277: for $\sqrt{s} \geq 700$ GeV and $L = 1000$ fb$^{-1}$.
278: The case is considerably worse at $\sqrt{s}=500$~GeV where
279: $S_{\rm stat}=0.9$~fb$^{1/2}$, leading to a statistical uncertainty
280: of $22\%$ on the Yukawa coupling measurement (with $\epsilon=5\%$
281: and $\rho=50\%$). The systematic uncertainty is
282: dominated by the uncertainty in the background normalization,
283: if one assumes that both the
284: signal selection efficiency and integrated luminosity can
285: be known at the 1\% level or better~\cite{jm}.
286:
287: \subsubsection{Analysis}
288:
289:
290: We consider the process $e^+e^-\rightarrow t {\overline t} h \rightarrow
291: W^+W^- b {\overline b} b {\overline b}$ in both semileptonic and
292: fully hadronic $W$ decay channels.
293: In spite of the apparently clean signature of both channels ($\geq 6$ jets
294: in the final state, with $\geq 4$ $b$-jets and multi-jet invariant
295: mass constraints), the measurement has many difficulties. Among these
296: are the tiny signal with backgrounds about 3 orders of magnitude larger, the
297: limitations of jet-clustering algorithms in properly reconstructing
298: multi-jets in the final state, and the degradation of $b$-tagging performance
299: due to hard gluon radiation and jet mixing.
300:
301: The dominant electroweak background to the semi-leptonic decay
302: is~\cite{jm,recent,more}:
303: \begin{eqnarray}
304: e^+e^- &\rightarrow t {\overline t} Z \rightarrow
305: Z W^+W^- b {\overline b} \rightarrow
306: b {\overline b} b {\overline b}
307: \ell^\pm \nu q {\overline q}^\prime\nonumber.
308: \end{eqnarray}
309: The largest background is from radiative top quark decays:
310: \begin{eqnarray}
311: e^+e^- \rightarrow t {\overline t} \rightarrow
312: g W^+W^- b {\overline b} \rightarrow
313: b {\overline b} b {\overline b}
314: \ell^\pm \nu q {\overline q}^\prime\nonumber.
315: \end{eqnarray}
316: This background has been calculated at the parton level~\cite{more}
317: and is shown in Fig.~\ref{bkgds}. Since the $b$ jets resulting from
318: the gluon splitting are logarithmically enhanced at low energy, cuts on
319: the jet energy are effective at eliminating this background.
320: A preliminary study of $e^+e^-\rightarrow t {\overline t}h$ at
321: $\sqrt{s}=500$~GeV included statistical, but not systematic errors
322: and found that the top quark-Higgs Yukawa coupling could be measured
323: with $\sim 21\%$ accuracy with perfect $b$-tagging and
324: $L=1000$~fb$^{-1}$~\cite{recent}.
325: \begin{figure}[t]
326: \centering
327: %\vskip -1in
328: \epsfysize=2.6in
329: \leavevmode\epsffile{top/sally_eetth_bkgd.eps}
330: \caption[]{\label{bkgds}
331: Parton level signal and backgrounds to
332: $e^+e^-\rightarrow t {\overline t}h$ at $\sqrt{s}=500$~GeV.}
333: \end{figure}
334:
335: The case for a 120~GeV Higgs boson and $\sqrt{s}=800$~GeV with
336: $L=1000$~fb$^{-1}$ has been considered in \cite{jm}, with
337: events processed through a simulation of a detector for TESLA.
338: In this analysis, the $b$ jets are defined as those four jets
339: with the lowest probability to originate from the primary vertex.
340: The analysis applies
341: a standard preselection in order to remove as much background
342: as possible while keeping a high efficiency for the signal.
343: Then, in order to improve
344: the statistical sensitivity further, a multivariate analysis using a
345: Neural Network (NN) is performed.
346: After preselection, the overall effective cross section
347: for the background is 17.60 fb, while for the signal it is only 0.61 fb.
348: This translates into such a poor sample purity ($\rho \sim 3.3\%$),
349: that any uncertainty in the background normalization completely erases
350: the significance in the signal. After the NN analysis~\cite{jm},
351: the statistical error is reduced to $5.1\%$,
352: and the systematic error to $3.8\%$, leading to an overall uncertainty
353: of $6.3\%$ for the Yukawa coupling measurement in the semi-leptonic
354: channel.
355: Combining this with the analysis for the hadronic channel gives a total uncertainty
356: of $5.5\%$.
357:
358:
359: \subsubsection{Conclusion}
360: The reaction $e^+e^- \to t\bar{t}h$ allows a direct determination of
361: the top quark-Higgs Yukawa coupling.
362: For $m_h=120$~GeV and ${\cal L}=1000$~fb$^{-1}$, a total uncertainty of
363: roughly $5.5\%$ on the top-Higgs Yukawa coupling at $\sqrt{s}=800$~GeV
364: can be obtained. Preliminary studies show that the anticipated
365: precision is about a factor of $4$ worse at $\sqrt{s}=500$~GeV.
366: The dominant systematic uncertainty is
367: from the overall background normalization, pointing to the
368: importance of a complete $2\rightarrow 8$ background calculation.
369:
370: \subsection{Top mass reconstruction}
371: %{\sl G.~Corcella (Rochester)\\}
372:
373: The top quark mass in $e^+e^-$ collisions can not only be measured in
374: a threshold scan, but also at
375: center-of-mass energies above the $t\bar t$ threshold. A recent
376: study~\cite{yeh} has shown that a statistical precision of 200~MeV or better
377: may be reached for the top mass from a full
378: kinematical reconstruction of $e^+e^-\to t \bar t\to W^+bW^-\bar
379: b\to\ell^+\nu b\ell^-\bar\nu\bar b$ events.
380: It should be noted that the mass measured from final-state shape variables is
381: the pole mass, which is subject to a theoretical uncertainty of ${\cal
382: O}(\Lambda_{QCD})$; this point was explained in Section 2.2.
383: Here we give a brief status
384: report of a new
385: study that focuses on extracting the top quark mass from the the $b$-$\ell$
386: invariant mass distribution $d\sigma/dm_{b\ell}$, where $\ell$ is the
387: lepton from the $W$ decay, and the $b$-quark energy spectrum,
388: $d\sigma/dE_b$.
389:
390: The extraction of the top mass from final-state shape variables is best
391: done using templates, using a method similar to that described in
392: \cite{elinor}. It depends crucially on the modeling of the
393: multiparton radiation that is associated with the top production and decay
394: stages.
395: Standard Monte Carlo event generators simulate multiple emission in
396: the soft or collinear approximation and leave empty
397: regions of the phase space corresponding to
398: hard and large-angle gluon radiation (``dead zones''), which can be
399: populated using the exact matrix element (``matrix-element corrections'').
400: Matrix-element corrections to top decays $t\to bW(g)$ \cite{mike} have
401: been implemented in the most recent version of the HERWIG event generator,
402: HERWIG~6.2~\cite{herwig}, which is used in the following. These
403: corrections were found to
404: have a significant effect on jet observables and on the top mass
405: measurement at lepton and hadron colliders~\cite{mike,mlm}.
406:
407: \begin{figure}
408: %\begin{center}
409: %\epsfig{file=gennaro_mblep.ps,height=2.2in}
410: \centerline{\resizebox{0.49\textwidth}{!}{\includegraphics{top/mblep.ps}}%
411: \hfill%
412: \resizebox{0.49\textwidth}{!}{\includegraphics{top/enb.ps}}}
413: \caption{\label{fig:mbl}
414: a) Invariant mass
415: $m_{b\ell}$ distributions for $m_t=171$~GeV (dotted line) and
416: $m_t=179$~GeV (solid line). b) $b$-quark
417: energy distribution at $\sqrt{s}=370$~GeV,
418: for $m_t=179$~GeV (solid), 175~GeV (dashed) and 171~GeV
419: (dotted). }
420: %\end{center}
421: \end{figure}
422:
423: The $m_{b\ell}$ distribution, within the precision of the Monte Carlo
424: integration, is independent of the hard-scattering process and of the
425: center-of-mass energy.
426: $m_{b\ell}$ is a Lorentz-invariant observable and is therefore
427: insensitive to the boost from the top quark rest frame to the laboratory frame.
428: In Fig.~\ref{fig:mbl}a we plot the $m_{b\ell}$
429: distribution for $m_t=171$ GeV and 179 GeV. As $m_t$ increases, the peak
430: position of the $m_{b\ell}$ distribution is shifted towards larger
431: values. The average value $\langle m_{b\ell}\rangle$ is proportional to
432: the top quark mass. The best fit is:
433: \begin{equation}
434: \langle m_{b\ell}\rangle \ = \ 0.756\ m_t-37.761\ {\mathrm{GeV}},\
435: \eps=0.002\ {\mathrm{GeV}},
436: \label{eq:mbl} \end{equation}
437: where $\eps$ is the mean square deviation in the fit.
438: Solving Eq.~(\ref{eq:mbl}), one finds
439: $\Delta m_t\approx 1.32\ \Delta \langle m_{b\ell}\rangle$, where
440: $\Delta\langle m_{b\ell}\rangle$ is the uncertainty on the measurement
441: of $\langle m_{b\ell}\rangle$. No detailed study of the precision that
442: can be achieved with this method has been carried out yet.
443:
444: In contrast to $m_{b\ell}$, the $b$-quark energy $E_b$ is not a
445: Lorentz-invariant observable. One therefore expects that the $E_b$
446: distribution does depend on the boost from the top rest frame
447: to the laboratory frame, and hence on the center-of-mass energy.
448: Since the $t\bar t$ pair is produced almost at rest at the $t \bar t$
449: threshold, the dependence of $E_b$ on the top mass is maximized in this
450: region. The $E_b$ distribution for $\sqrt{s}=370$~GeV and several values
451: of $m_t$ is shown in
452: Fig.~\ref{fig:mbl}b. For $m_t$ approaching the threshold value of
453: $\sqrt{s}/2$, the $E_b$ distribution becomes very narrow.
454: The half-maximum width $\sigma_b$ therefore shows a strong dependence on
455: the top mass.
456: The best polynomial
457: fit to express $\sigma_b$ in terms of $m_t$ for $\sqrt{s}=370$~GeV
458: is found to be:
459: \begin{equation}
460: \sigma_b = \ -0.081\ m_t^2+26.137\ m_t-2048.968\ {\mathrm{GeV}},\
461: \eps=0.393\ {\mathrm{GeV}}.
462: \label{eq:sigmab}
463: \end{equation}
464: For a top quark mass in the range 171~GeV~$\lsim m_t\lsim$~179~GeV,
465: the induced uncertainty on $m_t$ is $\Delta m_t\approx 0.35-0.65\ \Delta
466: \sigma_b$, where $\Delta \sigma_b$ is the uncertainty on the
467: half-maximum width. $E_b$ thus may be an interesting observable to
468: reconstruct the top mass at energies slightly above the $t \bar t$
469: threshold. It is probably less useful at higher energies.
470:
471: \subsection{Anomalous couplings}
472: %{\sl D.~Gerdes and C.~Ferretti (Michigan), R. Frey, M. Iwasaki (Oregon)\\}
473:
474: At present, the couplings of the top quark to gluons and the electroweak
475: gauge bosons are largely untested. A linear collider provides an ideal tool
476: to probe the couplings of the top quark to the electroweak gauge
477: bosons.
478: It is important to note that the neutral electroweak couplings are
479: accessible only at lepton colliders, because top quarks at
480: hadron colliders are pair-produced via gluon exchange.
481: Since the charged electroweak current is involved in the
482: top decay, $t \bar t$ production in $e^+e^-$ collisions is sensitive to
483: both the neutral and charged gauge boson couplings of the top quark.
484: Because the top quark width,
485: $\Gamma_t$, is much larger than $\Lambda_{\rm QCD}$, the decay process is
486: not influenced by fragmentation effects and decay products will provide
487: useful information.
488:
489: The most general $(\gamma,\,Z)t\bar t$ couplings can be written
490: as~\cite{Stefano,hioki}
491: \begin{equation}
492: \Gamma^\mu_{t\overline t \; \gamma,Z} =
493: i \, e \;
494: \left\{ \gamma^\mu \;
495: \left[ F^{\gamma,Z}_{1V} \; + F^{\gamma,Z}_{1A} \, \gamma^5 \right] +
496: {(\;p_t^{}-p_{\overline t}^{})^\mu \over 2 \; m_t^{} } \;
497: \left[ F^{\gamma,Z}_{2V} \; + F^{\gamma,Z}_{2A} \, \gamma^5 \right] \,
498: \right \} \ ,
499: \end{equation}
500: where the only form factors different from zero in the SM are
501: \begin{equation}
502: F^\gamma_{1V}={2\over 3} \ , \ F^Z_{1V}={1\over 4\sin\theta_W\cos\theta_W} \,
503: \left(1-{8\over 3} \sin^2\theta_W^{} \right) \ ,\
504: F^Z_{1A} = -{1 \over 4\sin\theta_W\cos\theta_W }.
505: \end{equation}
506: $ \left({e/m_t}\right) \cdot F^\gamma_{2A} $
507: is the CP-violating electric dipole moment (EDM) form factor of the top
508: quark and
509: $ \left({e/m_t}\right) \cdot F^Z_{2A} $ is the weak electric dipole moment
510: (WDM). $ \left({e/m_t}\right) \cdot F^{\gamma,Z}_{2V} $ are the
511: electric and weak magnetic dipole moments (MDM).
512:
513: In the SM, the EDM and WDM terms violate CP and receive contributions only at
514: the three-loop level and beyond. The CP-conserving form factors are zero
515: at tree level but receive non-zero ${\cal O}(\alpha_s)$ QCD
516: corrections.
517:
518: The most general $Wtb$ couplings can be parametrized in the form~\cite{hioki}
519: \begin{equation}
520: \Gamma^\mu_{tbW} =
521: - {g\over \sqrt 2 } \, V_{tb}^{} \,
522: % \overline u(p_b^{})
523: \left\{ \gamma^\mu \;
524: \left[ f^{L}_{1} \, P_L^{} +
525: f^{R}_{1} \, P_R^{} \right] -
526: { i \, \sigma^{\mu\nu }\over M_W^{} } \, (p_t^{}-p_b)_\nu^{} \,
527: \left[ f^{L}_{2} \, P_L^{} +
528: f^{R}_{2} \, P_R^{} \right] \,
529: \right\} \ ,
530: %u(p_t^{})
531: \end{equation}
532: where $P_{R,L}^{} = (1\pm\gamma_5^{})/2$. In the limit $m_b\to 0$,
533: $f_1^R$ and $f_2^L$ vanish. In the SM, at tree level,
534: $f_1^L=1$, and all other form factors are zero. Similarly, the
535: $W\bar t\bar b$ vertex function can be parametrized in terms of form
536: factors $\bar f_{1,2}^{L,R}$. If CP is conserved, $\bar f_{1,2}^{L,R}=
537: f_{1,2}^{L,R}$.
538:
539: In Table~\ref{tab:topone}, we present the
540: $1\sigma$ sensitivity limits for the real parts of the $(\gamma,\,Z)t \bar t$
541: form factors obtained from a recent analysis of the process
542: $e^+e^-\to t \bar t\to\ell^\pm +$~jets at $\sqrt{s}=500$~GeV.
543: Only one coupling at a time
544: is varied. Top quarks are selected and reconstructed, and $b$
545: quarks are tagged using the LCD fast simulation package for the L
546: detector configuration. The combined efficiency is 20\%, and the purity after
547: selection is 88\%. To extract limits on
548: $F_{1V}^{\gamma,Z}$ and $F_{1A}^{\gamma,Z}$, the angular distribution of
549: the reconstructed top quark is used. $F_{1V}^{\gamma,Z}$ and
550: $F_{2V}^{\gamma,Z}$ are derived from the left-right polarization
551: asymmetry, and $F_{2A}^{\gamma,Z}$ from the angular distribution of
552: the reconstructed top quark and the decay angles of the $t$ and $\bar
553: t$.
554:
555: %
556: \begin{table}
557: %\setlength{\tabcolsep}{15pt}
558: \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.1}
559: \begin{center}
560: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline\hline
561: Coupling & LO SM Value & ${\cal P}(e^-)$ & $\int\!{\cal L} dt$ (fb$^{-1}$) &
562: $1\sigma$ sensitivity \\ \hline
563: $F_{1A}^\gamma$ & 0 & $\pm 0.8$ & 100 & 0.011 \\
564: $F_{1A}^Z$ & $-0.6$ & $-0.8$ & 100 & 0.013 \\
565: $F_{1V}^\gamma$ & $2/3$ & $\pm 0.8$ & 200 & 0.047 \\
566: $F_{1V}^Z$ & $0.2$ & $\pm 0.8$ & 200 & 0.012 \\
567: $F_{2A}^\gamma$ & 0 & $+0.8$ & 100 & 0.014 \\
568: $F_{2A}^Z$ & 0 & $+0.8$ & 100 & 0.052 \\
569: $F_{2V}^\gamma$ & 0 & $\pm 0.8$ & 200 & 0.038 \\
570: $F_{2V}^Z$ & 0 & $\pm 0.8$ & 200 & 0.009 \\
571: \hline\hline
572: \end{tabular}
573: \end{center}
574: \caption{\label{tab:topone}
575: The $1\sigma$ statistical uncertainties for the real
576: parts of the $(\gamma,\,Z)t \bar t$ form factors obtained from an
577: analysis of the process $e^+e^-\to t \bar t\to\ell^\pm +$~jets for
578: $\sqrt{s}=500$~GeV. Only one coupling at a time is varied. }
579: \end{table}
580:
581: The limits shown in Table~\ref{tab:topone} could be strengthened if
582: positron beam polarization becomes available, mostly from the increased
583: $t \bar t$ cross section. If ${\cal P}(e^+)=0.5$, the $t \bar t$ cross
584: section is about a factor 1.45 larger than that obtained with ${\cal
585: P}(e^+)=0$. This improves the bounds by up to $25\%$.
586: Increasing the CM energy to
587: $\sqrt{s}=800$~GeV improves the limits by a factor 1.3--1.5~\cite{breuther}.
588:
589: The decay form factor
590: $f_2^R$, corresponding to a $(V+A)$ top decay,
591: can be measured with a precision of about 0.01 for
592: $\sqrt{s}=500$~GeV and $\int\!{\cal L}dt=500~{\rm fb}^{-1}$ if electron and
593: positron beam polarization are available~\cite{hioki}. This quantity can
594: also be measured at the LHC, though the expected limit is a factor three to
595: eight weaker than the limit we project for a linear collider~\cite{toplhc}.
596:
597: Many models predict anomalous top quark couplings.
598: In technicolor models and other models with a strongly-coupled Higgs
599: sector, the CP-conserving couplings may be induced
600: at the 5--10\% level~\cite{top-TC1,top-TC2,top-TC3}. In supersymmetric
601: and multi-Higgs models, the CP-violating
602: couplings $F_{2V,A}^{\gamma,Z}$ may be induced at the one-loop level,
603: with predictions in the range
604: $F_{2V,A}^{\gamma,Z}={\cal O}(10^{-3}-10^{-2})$~\cite{sumino}. A
605: measurement of the $(\gamma,Z)t \bar t$ couplings at a linear collider will
606: thus be sensitive to interesting sources of non-SM physics.
607:
608:
609:
610:
611:
612:
613: \subsection{QCD and electroweak radiative corrections}
614: %{\sl C.~Macesanu, L.~Orr and D.~Wackeroth (Rochester)\\}
615:
616: For $\sqrt{s}=500$~GeV and an integrated luminosity of 500~fb$^{-1}$,
617: the statistical error of the $e^+e^-\to t \bar t\to\ell\nu jj\bar bb$
618: cross section is well below 1\%. In order to match this experimental
619: accuracy with robust theoretical predictions, precision calculations
620: beyond tree level are required. Such theoretical accuracy is needed both
621: when top itself is
622: the subject of study and when top is a background to other physics of
623: interest.
624:
625: QCD corrections can have important effects in top events.
626: Jets from radiated gluons can be indistinguishable from quark jets,
627: complicating identification of top quark events from the reconstruction of
628: the top decay products. In addition, real
629: emission may occur either in the top production or decay
630: processes, so that radiated gluons may or may not themselves be
631: products of the decay. Subsequent mass measurements can
632: be degraded, not only from misidentification of jets but also
633: from subtle effects such as jet broadening when gluons are
634: emitted near other partons. Virtual corrections must also be included
635: to predict correct overall rates.
636:
637:
638: Most calculations of QCD corrections in $e^+e^-\to t \bar t$ to date have
639: been performed for on-shell top quarks.
640: In this approximation, corrections to the production and decay processes
641: can be computed separately. A calculation of the QCD corrections to
642: the production process $e^+e^- \to t \bar t$,
643: which includes real gluon emission from the $t$ and $\bar t$ and virtual
644: gluon exchange between the $t$ and $\bar t$
645: has been presented in~\cite{prod}. A discussion of the QCD corrections
646: to the decay $t\to Wb$ can be found in \cite{decay}; QCD corrections are
647: found to reduce the tree-level
648: width of 1.55 GeV to $\Gamma_t^{{\cal O}(\alpha_s)}=1.42\ {\rm GeV}$
649: after all the known QCD and EW corrections are taken into account.
650:
651: Because of the large width of the top quark and the fact that it does not
652: hadronize before decaying \cite{lifetime}, it is necessary to compute
653: corrections to the entire production and decay process, including
654: off-shell effects.
655: In the soft gluon approximation, real gluon corrections for the process
656: $e^+e^- \to t \bar t \to WWbb$
657: with the top allowed to be off-shell were calculated in \cite{soft}.
658: Interference effects of gluons radiated in
659: the production and decay stages were found to be sensitive to the top
660: width $\Gamma_t$,
661: with the effects being largest for gluon energies comparable to
662: $\Gamma_t$.
663: Similarly, real gluon radiation in top production and decay is
664: sensitive to top width effects~\cite{hardglu}.
665:
666:
667: Since the process observed experimentally is
668: \begin{equation} \label{proc1}
669: e^+ e^- \rightarrow\ b\ W^+\ \bar{b}\ W^-\, ,
670: \end{equation}
671: it is desirable to take into account all Feynman diagrams that
672: contribute to~(\ref{proc1}). This has not been done yet. At
673: next-to-leading order,
674: it is sufficient to take into account only the QCD corrections to the
675: diagrams containing an intermediate top and antitop quark, as
676: has been done in the computations discussed here.
677: This approach uses the
678: double pole approximation (DPA), in which only the double resonant
679: terms (due to top and antitop propagators) are kept.
680: Work done in this area follows closely the treatment of the
681: $W$ pair production process at LEP II \cite{WW}.
682:
683: Radiative corrections to
684: $e^+ e^- \rightarrow\ t\bar{t}\rightarrow b W^+\bar{b}W^-$ are
685: usually split into two classes: corrections to particular subprocesses
686: (production and decay), also called factorizable corrections, and
687: corrections involving interference between these subprocesses (non-factorizable
688: corrections). In most approaches, the factorizable corrections are computed
689: using the on-shell approximation for the top quarks; either using
690: the on-shell phase space, or making an on-shell projection from
691: the exact phase space \cite{top-MY1996,BBC_top}. In the latter the on-shell
692: projection restricts the effect of the
693: off-shell particles to the interference terms.
694: These interference terms are computed in DPA, for virtual as well
695: as for real gluons. As a consequence, interference terms do not
696: contribute to the total cross section.
697:
698: In \cite{mcos}, a different approach is used. Instead of starting with the
699: on-shell computation and adding the nonfactorizable corrections, the
700: starting point is the exact amplitudes for the off-shell process from
701: which terms that are not
702: doubly resonant are dropped. Also, the real gluon contributions are
703: treated exactly (as in \cite{hardglu});
704: as a consequence, the cancellation between virtual
705: gluon and real gluon interference is no longer complete.
706: Table~\ref{Tcr_sec} summarizes the total cross section results. The
707: QCD corrections
708: are found to increase the $t \bar t$ production cross section by
709: up to a factor two near the threshold, and by about 11--13\% in the
710: continuum.
711:
712: \begin{table}[t]
713: \begin{center}
714: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
715: \hline\hline
716: $2E_{beam}$ & 360 GeV & 500 GeV & 1000 GeV \\
717: \hline
718: $\sigma_0 $ & 0.386 pb & 0.565 pb& 0.172 pb\\
719: $\sigma_1^{on-shell}$ & 0.737 pb& 0.666 pb& 0.186 pb \\
720: $\sigma_1^{DPA}$ & 0.644 pb& 0.652 pb& 0.191 pb \\
721: \hline\hline
722: \end{tabular}
723: \end{center}
724: \caption{\label{Tcr_sec}
725: Cross sections (tree level, on-shell NLO and DPA NLO)
726: for top production and decay at a linear collider~\cite{mcos};
727: results do not include ISR, beamstrahlung or beam energy spread. }
728: \end{table}
729:
730: Electroweak ${\cal O}(\alpha)$ corrections for top processes at
731: linear colliders have also been computed so far
732: only to on-shell $t \bar t$ production and top decay.
733: The electroweak ${\cal O}(\alpha)$ corrections can be naturally subdivided
734: into two gauge-invariant subclasses, QED and weak corrections. The QED
735: corrections depend on the cuts imposed
736: on the photon phase space and thus on the experimental setup.
737: As discussed in \cite{Beenakker:1991ca}, initial-state ${\cal
738: O}(\alpha)$ QED corrections can significantly reduce the cross
739: section because of large logarithms of the form $\alpha/
740: \pi \ln(s/m_e^2)$ with $s \gg m_e^2$. These terms arise when photons are
741: radiated off in the direction of the incoming electrons. Thus, the
742: inclusion of higher-order initial-state radiation (ISR) has to be
743: considered. The leading-log initial-state QED corrections are
744: universal and can be calculated using the so-called structure function
745: approach~\cite{Beenakker:1996kt}.
746:
747: The model-dependent contributions to corrections to top pair
748: production are contained in the weak corrections. The numerical
749: impact of the weak one-loop corrections is discussed in detail in
750: \cite{Beenakker:1991ca}. Close to the $t\bar t$ threshold,
751: the weak corrections to $\sigma_{t \bar t}$ are found to
752: be quite sensitive to the Higgs boson mass.
753: An updated analysis of the weak corrections
754: to $\sigma_{t\bar t}$, using the current value of the top-quark mass, is
755: presented in~\cite{Hollik:1999md}. The weak corrections are found
756: to reduce the Born cross section (expressed in terms of
757: $G_\mu$) near threshold by about $7 \%$, which is mainly
758: due to the box diagrams.
759:
760:
761: The complete electroweak ${\cal O}(\alpha)$ corrections to $\Gamma_t$
762: are calculated in~\cite{Denner:1991ns}. When using $G_{\mu}$ and
763: $M_W$ to parametrize
764: the lowest-order top decay width, the electroweak corrections
765: amount to typically 1-2 \% with no significant dependence on $m_h$.
766:
767: Ultimately it will be necessary to combine the QCD and electroweak
768: corrections to
769: top processes. This has been done for $e^+e^-\to t \bar t$
770: in \cite{combine}, and work is in progress to combine both types
771: of correction for the entire production and decay process \cite{mow}.
772:
773: \section{Conclusions}
774:
775: %
776: \begin{table}[t]
777: \vskip 2.mm
778: %\setlength{\tabcolsep}{15pt}
779: %\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.1}
780: \begin{center}{\small
781: \begin{tabular}{ccccc}
782: \hline\hline \\[-3.mm]
783: Observable & Precision & $\int\!{\cal L}dt$ (fb$^{-1}$) & $\sqrt{s}$
784: (GeV) & Comment \\[1.mm] \hline
785: $m_t$ & $<100$~MeV & 10 & $350$ & theory dominated \\[1.mm]
786: $m_t$ & 200~MeV & 50 & 500 & not fully explored \\[1.mm]
787: $\Gamma_t$ & ${\cal O}(30$~MeV) & 100 & $350$ & not fully explored
788: \\[1.mm]
789: $g_{tth}$ & ${\cal O}(10\%)$ & 100 & $350$ & need realistic study
790: \\[1.mm]
791: $g_{tth}$ & $21\%$ & 1000 & 500 & stat. uncert. only \\[1.mm]
792: $g_{tth}$ & 5.5\% & 1000 & 800 & need improved bgd. estimate \\[1.mm]
793: $F_{iV,A}^{\gamma,Z}$, $f_2^R$ & $0.01 - 0.2$ & 500 &
794: 500 & polarized beams essential \\[1.mm]
795: \hline\hline
796: \end{tabular}
797: }
798: \end{center}
799: \caption{\label{toptab:three}
800: Summary of top quark-related measurements at a linear $e^+e^-$
801: collider.}
802: \end{table}
803: %
804:
805: Remarkable progress has been made in the last two years in our
806: theoretical understanding of $t \bar t$ production in $e^+e^-$ collisions
807: at the
808: threshold. Problems associated with defining the top quark mass in a way
809: that removes QCD ambiguities have been solved. The remaining
810: theoretical uncertainties are sufficiently small to allow a
811: simultaneous measurement of $m_t$ (to 100~MeV),
812: $\Gamma_t$ (to a few percent) and $g_{tth}$. The top
813: quark mass can also be measured with a precision of 200~MeV or better
814: at higher energies, using a variety of kinematic variables. Not all
815: interesting variables have been fully explored yet. An ideal process to
816: determine the top quark Yukawa
817: coupling at energies above the $t \bar t$ threshold is $t \bar
818: th$ production in $e^+e^-$ collisions. However, to fully exploit
819: this process, energies
820: significantly larger than $\sqrt{s}=500$~GeV are necessary. On the other
821: hand, a center-of-mass energy of 500~GeV is sufficient to measure
822: the top quark couplings to the electroweak gauge bosons with a
823: precision of ${\cal O}(1-10\%)$.
824: Polarized electron and positron beams are essential to
825: disentangle the various couplings. We have summarized
826: the estimated precision on the
827: various quantities in Table~\ref{toptab:three}.
828: Finally, we have given a brief overview of
829: the status of calculations of the QCD and electroweak corrections to
830: $e^+e^-\to t \bar t$. The potential for precision studies of top quark
831: physics at a linear collider requires a detailed understanding of these
832: corrections.
833:
834: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
835: \setlength{\itemsep}{-0.04in}
836:
837: \newcommand{\pr}{Phys. Rev.}
838:
839: \bibitem{Review}A. H.~Hoang {\it et al.},
840: Eur.~Phys.~J. direct\ {\bf C3}, 1 (2000).
841:
842: \bibitem{Matsui} K.~Fujii, T.~Matsui and Y.~Sumino,
843: %``Physics at t anti-t threshold in e+ e- collisions,''
844: Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf D50}, 4341 (1994).
845: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D50,4341;%%
846: \bibitem{Frey}
847: S.~Kuhlman {\it et al.},
848: %[NLC ZDR Design Group and NLC Physics Working Group Collaboration],
849: hep-ex/9605011;
850: J.~Bagger {\it et al.}, hep-ex/0007022;
851: E. Accomando {\it et al.}, Phys. Rep. {\bf 299}, 1 (1998).
852:
853: \bibitem{FadinYakovlev}
854: V. S.~Fadin and O.~Yakovlev,
855: Sov.~J.~Nucl.~Phys. {\bf 53}, 688 (1991); Sov.~J.~Nucl.~Phys. {\bf
856: 53}, 1053 (1991);
857: M. J.~Strassler and M. E.~Peskin,
858: %``The Heavy top quark threshold: QCD and the Higgs,''
859: Phys.~Rev.\ {\bf D43}, 1500 (1991).
860:
861: \bibitem{top-CDF}
862: F.~Abe {\it et al.} [CDF Collaboration],
863: %``Observation of top quark production in anti-p p collisions,''
864: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 74}, 2626 (1995)
865: [hep-ex/9503002].
866: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 9503002;%%
867:
868: \bibitem{top-DO}
869: S.~Abachi {\it et al.} [D\O\ Collaboration],
870: %``Observation of the top quark,''
871: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 74}, 2632 (1995)
872: [hep-ex/9503003].
873: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 9503003;%%
874:
875: \bibitem{ht}
876: A.~Hoang and T.~Teubner, Phys.~Rev. {\bf D60}, 114027 (1999).
877:
878: \bibitem{YakovlevGroote}
879: O.~Yakovlev and S.~Groote,
880: %``Top quark mass definition and t anti-t
881: %production near threshold at the NLC,''
882: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 63}, 074012 (2001)
883: [hep-ph/0008156].
884: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0008156;%%
885:
886:
887: \bibitem{bigi}
888: I. I.~Bigi {\it et al.}, Phys.~Rev. {\bf D56}, 4017 (1997).
889:
890: \bibitem{Beneke} M.~Beneke,
891: Phys.~Lett.\ {\bf B434}, 115 (1998).
892:
893: \bibitem{Scot}
894: A. H.~Hoang {\it et al.},
895: %``Quarkonia and the pole mass'',
896: Phys.~Rev.\ {\bf D59}, 114014 (1999);
897: N.~Uraltsev,
898: %``Heavy-quark expansion in beauty and its decays'',
899: %talk given at the International School of Physics,
900: %``Enrico Fermi: Heavy Flavor Physics -- A Probe of
901: %Nature's Grand Design'', Varenna, Italy, July 8--18, 1997,
902: in ``Varenna 1997, Heavy flavor physics'', hep-ph/9804275.
903:
904: \bibitem{Stewart}
905: A.~Hoang {\it et al.}, Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 86}, 1951 (2001).
906:
907: \bibitem{Murayama} H. Murayama and Y. Sumino, Phys. Rev. {\bf D47}, 82
908: (1993).
909:
910: \bibitem{iain}
911: A.~Hoang, A.~Manohar, I.~Stewart, and T.~Teubner, in preparation.
912:
913: \bibitem{sitgese} M. Martinez in {\em Physics and Experiments with Future
914: Linear $e^+e^-$ Colliders}, eds. E. Fernandez and A. Pacheco
915: (1999) Barcelona and references therein.
916:
917: \bibitem{peskin} M. E.~Peskin and J. D.~Wells, hep-ph/0101342.
918:
919: \bibitem{sumino}
920: M.~Je\.zabek, T.~Nagano, and Y.~Sumino, Phys. Rev. {\bf D62}, 014034
921: (2000) and references therein.
922:
923: \bibitem{jm} A. Juste and G. Merino, hep-ph/9910301.
924:
925: \bibitem{recent} H. Baer, S. Dawson and L. Reina, \pr\ {\bf D61}, 013002
926: (2000).
927:
928: \bibitem{more} S. Moretti, hep-ph/9911501.
929:
930: \bibitem{yeh} J. Ant\~{o}s and G.P. Yeh, FERMILAB-Conf-99/260.
931:
932: \bibitem{elinor}
933: G. Corcella, E. K. Irish and M. H. Seymour, hep-ph/0012319.
934:
935: \bibitem{mike}
936: G. Corcella and M. H. Seymour, Phys. Lett. {\bf B442}, 417 (1998).
937:
938: \bibitem{herwig}
939: G. Corcella {\it et al.}, JHEP {\bf 01}, 010 (2000).
940:
941: \bibitem{mlm}
942: G. Corcella, M. L. Mangano and M. H. Seymour, JHEP {\bf 07}, 004 (2000).
943:
944: \bibitem{Stefano} W.~Hollik {\it et al.}, Nucl.\ Phys. {\bf B551}, 3
945: (1999).
946:
947: \bibitem{hioki}
948: B.~Grzadkowski and Z.~Hioki,
949: %``Optimal-observable analysis of the angular and energy distributions for
950: % top quark decay products at polarized linear colliders,''
951: Nucl.\ Phys. {\bf B585}, 3 (2000).
952:
953: \bibitem{breuther}
954: W.~Bernreuther, talk given at the ECFA/DESY Linear Collider Workshop,
955: Oxford, UK, March~1999.
956:
957:
958: \bibitem{toplhc}
959: M.~Beneke {\it et al.},
960: %``Top quark physics,''
961: hep-ph/0003033, {\it Proceedings of the Workshop on Standard Model Physics
962: (and more) at the LHC}, CERN 2000-004, p.~419.
963:
964: \bibitem{top-TC1}
965: R.~S.~Chivukula, S.~B.~Selipsky and E.~H.~Simmons,
966: %``Nonoblique effects in the Z b anti-b vertex from ETC dynamics,''
967: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 69}, 575 (1992),
968: hep-ph/9204214;
969: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9204214;%%
970: %\href{\wwwspires?eprint=HEP-PH/9204214}{SPIRES}
971: R.~S.~Chivukula, E.~H.~Simmons and J.~Terning,
972: %``A Heavy top quark and the Z b anti-b vertex in noncommuting
973: %extended technicolor,''
974: Phys.\ Lett.\ {\bf B331}, 383 (1994),
975: hep-ph/9404209.
976: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9404209;%%
977: %\href{\wwwspires?eprint=HEP-PH/9404209}{SPIRES}
978:
979:
980:
981: \bibitem{top-TC2}
982: K.~Hagiwara and N.~Kitazawa,
983: %``Extended technicolor contribution to the Z b b vertex,''
984: Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf D52}, 5374 (1995),
985: hep-ph/9504332.
986: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9504332;%%
987: %\href{\wwwspires?eprint=HEP-PH/9504332}{SPIRES}
988:
989:
990: \bibitem{top-TC3}
991: U.~Mahanta,
992: %``Non-commuting ETC corrections to Z t anti-t vertex,''
993: Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf D55}, 5848 (1997),
994: hep-ph/9611289;
995: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9611289;%%
996: %\href{\wwwspires?eprint=HEP-PH/9611289}{SPIRES}
997: %``Probing noncommuting ETC effects by e+ e- $\to$ t anti-t at NLC,''
998: Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf D56}, 402 (1997).
999: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D56,402;%%
1000: %\href{\wwwspires?j=PHRVA\%2cD56\%2c402}{SPIRES}
1001:
1002:
1003:
1004:
1005: \bibitem{prod}
1006: J.~Jersak, E.~Laerman, and P.~Zerwas, Phys.\ Rev.\
1007: {\bf D25}, 1218 (1982);
1008: Yu. L.~Dokshitzer, V. A.~Khoze, and W. J.~Stirling,
1009: Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B428}, 3 (1994);
1010: A.~Brandenburg, Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ {\bf C11}, 127 (1999).
1011:
1012: \bibitem{decay}
1013: M.~Je\.zabek and J.~H.~K\"uhn, Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B314}, 1 (1989);
1014: A.~Czarnecki, Phys.\ Lett.\ {\bf B252}, 467 (1990);
1015: C.~S.~Li {\it et al.}, Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf D43}, 3759 (1991).
1016:
1017: \bibitem{lifetime}
1018: Y. L.~Dokshitzer {\it et al.},
1019: Phys.\ Lett.\ {\bf B181}, 157 (1986); L. H.~Orr and J. L.~Rosner,
1020: Phys.\ Lett.\ {\bf B246}, 221 (1990), {\bf B248},
1021: 474(E) (1990).
1022:
1023:
1024: %\bibitem{schmidt}
1025: %C. R. Schmidt, Phys. Rev. {\bf D54}, 3250 (1996).
1026:
1027: \bibitem{soft}
1028: G.~Jikia, Phys.\ Lett.\ {\bf B257}, 196 (1991);
1029: V. A.~Khoze {\it et al.}, Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B378}, 413 (1992);
1030: Y.~L.~Dokshitzer {\it et al.},
1031: %``Properties of soft radiation near t anti-t and W- W- threshold,''
1032: Nucl.\ Phys. {\bf B403}, 65 (1993).
1033:
1034: \bibitem{hardglu}
1035: C.~Macesanu and L. H.~Orr, hep-ph/0012177.
1036:
1037: %\bibitem{siopsis}
1038: %G.~Siopsis, Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf D58}, 014009 (1998).
1039:
1040: \bibitem{WW}
1041: A.~Denner {\it et al.}, Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B587}, 67 (2000).
1042:
1043:
1044:
1045: \bibitem{top-MY1996}
1046: K.~Melnikov and O.~Yakovlev,
1047: %``Final state interaction in the production of heavy unstable particles,''
1048: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 471}, 90 (1996)
1049: [hep-ph/9501358].
1050: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9501358;%%
1051:
1052: \bibitem{BBC_top}
1053: W. Beenakker {\it et al.},
1054: Phys. Lett. {\bf B454}, 129 (1999).
1055:
1056: \bibitem{mcos}
1057: C. Macesanu, in
1058: {\it Physics and Experiments with Future Linear
1059: $e^+e^-$ Colliders (LCWS 2000)}, ed. A. Para.
1060: (AIP Conference Proceedings, 2001).
1061:
1062:
1063: \bibitem{Beenakker:1991ca}
1064: W.~Beenakker, S.~C.~van der Marck and W.~Hollik,
1065: %``e+ e- annihilation into heavy fermion pairs at high-energy colliders,''
1066: Nucl.\ Phys. {\bf B365}, 24 (1991).
1067:
1068: \bibitem{Beenakker:1996kt}
1069: W.~Beenakker {\it et al.},
1070: %``WW Cross-sections and Distributions,''
1071: hep-ph/9602351.
1072:
1073: \bibitem{Hollik:1999md}
1074: W.~Hollik and C.~Schappacher,
1075: %``Supersymmetric one loop-corrections to the process e+ e- --> f anti-f,''
1076: Nucl.\ Phys. {\bf B545}, 98 (1999).
1077:
1078: \bibitem{Denner:1991ns}
1079: A.~Denner and T.~Sack,
1080: %``The Top width,''
1081: Nucl.\ Phys. {\bf B358}, 46 (1991).
1082:
1083: \bibitem{combine}
1084: J.~K\"uhn, T.~Hahn and R.~Harlander,
1085: %``Top production above threshold: Electroweak and QCD corrections combined,''
1086: hep-ph/9912262.
1087: \bibitem{mow}
1088: C.~Macesanu, L.H.~Orr, and D.~Wackeroth, in progress.
1089:
1090:
1091: \end{thebibliography}
1092: