1: % LATEX (RevTex) template for submission of papers to EPS and LP 2001.
2:
3: \lefthyphenmin=2
4: \righthyphenmin=3
5: %\documentstyle[doublespace,preprint,epsfig,eqsecnum,aps,floats,tighten]{revtex}
6: \documentstyle[preprint,epsf,eqsecnum,aps,floats,tighten]{revtex}
7:
8: \def\Missing#1#2{{\mbox{$#1\kern-0.57em\raise0.19ex\hbox{/}_{#2}$}}}
9:
10: \def\vMissing#1#2{\ifmmode
11: \vec{#1}\kern-0.57em\raise.19ex\hbox{/}_{#2}
12: \else
13: {{\mbox{$\vec{#1}\kern-0.57em\raise.19ex\hbox{/}_{#2}$}}}
14: \fi}
15: \def\lsim{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
16: \raise1pt\hbox{$<$}}}
17: \def\gsim{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
18: \raise1pt\hbox{$>$}}}
19: \def\et{\mbox{$E_{T}$}}
20: \def\met{\mbox{$\Missing{E}{T}$}}
21: \def\vmet{\mbox{$\vMissing{E}{T}$}}
22: \def\mht{\mbox{$\Missing{H}{T}$}}
23: \def\pt{\mbox{$p_{T}$}}
24: \def\mpt{\mbox{$\Missing{p}{T}$}}
25: \def\D0{D\O }
26: \def\etal{\it et al}
27: \def\PBARP{\mbox{$p\overline{p}$}}
28: \def\pp{\mbox{$pp$}}
29: \def\qqbar{\mbox{$q\overline{q}$}}
30: \def\pbar{\mbox{$\overline{p}$}}
31: \def\px{\mbox{$p_{x}$}}
32: \def\py{\mbox{$p_{y}$}}
33: \def\pz{\mbox{$p_{z}$}}
34: \newcommand{\Et}{\mbox{$E_{\rm T}$}}
35: \newcommand{\Etu}[1]{\mbox{$E^{\rm jet#1}_{T}$}}
36: \newcommand{\Etmax}{\mbox{$E_{T}^{\rm max}$}}
37: \newcommand{\Etjet}{\mbox{$E_{T}^{\rm jet}$}}
38: \newcommand{\Etxxx}{\mbox{$E_{T}^{\rm xxx}$}}
39: \newcommand{\Rc}{\mbox{${\mathcal R}$}}
40: \newcommand{\Rsep}{\mbox{${\mathcal{R}}_{\rm sep}$}}
41: \newcommand{\Exi}{E_{x}^{i}}
42: \newcommand{\Eyi}{E_{y}^{i}}
43: \newcommand{\Ezi}{E_{z}^{i}}
44: \newcommand{\Ex}{E_{x}}
45: \newcommand{\Ey}{E_{y}}
46: \newcommand{\Ez}{E_{z}}
47: \newcommand{\ETi}{E_{T}^{i}}
48: \newcommand{\rstev}{\mbox{$\rs = \T{1.8}$}}
49: \newcommand{\rssps}{\mbox{$\rs = \T{0.63}$}}
50: \newcommand{\XX}{\mbox{$\, \times \,$}}
51: \newcommand{\AP}{\mbox{${\rm \bar{p}}$}}
52: \newcommand{\SU}{\mbox{$<\! |S|^2 \!>$}}
53: \newcommand{\HT}{\mbox{${S}_{T}$}}
54: \newcommand{\PT}{\mbox{$P_{T}$}}
55: \newcommand{\DP}{\mbox{$\Delta\phi$}}
56: \newcommand{\DR}{\mbox{$\Delta \Rc$}}
57: \newcommand{\DE}{\mbox{$\Delta\eta$}}
58: \newcommand{\DEP}{\mbox{$\Delta\eta_{\rm c}$}}
59: \newcommand{\PH}{\mbox{$\phi$}}
60: \newcommand{\EA}{\mbox{$\eta$} }
61: \newcommand{\EAJ}{\mbox{\EA(jet)}}
62: \newcommand{\AEA}{\mbox{$|\eta|$}}
63: \newcommand{\Ge}[1]{\mbox{#1 GeV}}
64: \newcommand{\T}[1]{\mbox{#1 TeV}}
65: \newcommand{\x}{\cdot}
66: \newcommand{\ra}{\rightarrow}
67: \newcommand{\mb}{\mbox{mb}}
68: \newcommand{\nb}{\mbox{nb}}
69: \newcommand{\ipb}{\mbox{pb$^{-1}$}}
70: \newcommand{\inb}{\mbox{nb$^{-1}$}}
71: \newcommand{\rs}{\mbox{$\sqrt{\rm s}$}}
72: \newcommand{\fdel}{\mbox{$f(\DEP)$}}
73: \newcommand{\fdele}{\mbox{$f(\DEP)^{exp}$}}
74: \newcommand{\fgap}{\mbox{$f(\DEP\! \geq \!3)$}}
75: \newcommand{\fgape}{\mbox{$f(\DEP\! \geq \!3)^{exp}$}}
76: \newcommand{\fpyt}{\mbox{$f(\DEP\!>\!2)$}}
77: \newcommand{\delth}{\mbox{$\DEP\! \geq \!3$}}
78: \newcommand{\uplim}{\mbox{$1.1\!\times\!10^{-2}$}}
79: \def\simge{\mathrel{\rlap{\raise 0.53ex \hbox{$>$}}%
80: {\lower 0.53ex \hbox{$\sim$}}}}
81: \def\simle{\mathrel{\rlap{\raise 0.53ex \hbox{$<$}}%
82: {\lower 0.53ex \hbox{$\sim$}}}}
83:
84:
85: \def\inb{nb$^{-1}$} %inverse nanobarns
86: \newcommand{\jjmass}{\mbox{$M$}}
87: \newcommand{\cteqthreem}{\mbox{CTEQ3M}}
88: \newcommand{\cteqfourm}{\mbox{CTEQ4M}}
89: \newcommand{\cteqfourhj}{\mbox{CTEQ4HJ}}
90: \newcommand{\cteqfoura}{\mbox{CTEQ4A}}
91: \newcommand{\mrsap}{\mbox{MRS{(A$^\prime$)}}}
92: \newcommand{\mrst}{\mbox{MRST}}
93: \newcommand{\mrstgu}{\mbox{MRST($g\!\uparrow$)}}
94: \newcommand{\mrstgd}{\mbox{MRST($g\!\downarrow$)}}
95: \newcommand{\modeta}{\mbox{$\mid \! \eta \! \mid$}}
96: \newcommand{\modetaonetwo}{\mbox{$\mid \! \eta_{1,2} \! \mid$}}
97: \newcommand{\modetastar}{\mbox{$\mid \! \eta^{\star} \! \mid$}}
98: \newcommand{\modetajet}{\mbox{$\mid \! \eta^{\rm jet} \! \mid$}}
99: \newcommand{\modetajetu}[1]{\mbox{$\mid \! \eta^{\rm jet#1} \! \mid$}}
100: \newcommand{\chisq}{\mbox{$\chi^{2}$}}
101: \newcommand{\als}{\mbox{${\alpha_{{\scriptscriptstyle S}}}$}}
102: \newcommand{\wprime}{\mbox{$W^{\prime}$}}
103: \newcommand{\zprime}{\mbox{$Z^{\prime}$}}
104: \newcommand{\hprime}{\mbox{$\mbox{H0}^{\prime}$}}
105: \newcommand{\trho}{\mbox{$\rho_{T}$}}
106: \newcommand{\mt}{\mbox{$m_t$}}
107: \newcommand{\qbar}{\mbox{$\overline{q}$}}
108: \newcommand{\dbar}{\mbox{$\overline{d}$}}
109: \newcommand{\ubar}{\mbox{$\overline{u}$}}
110: \newcommand{\sbar}{\mbox{$\overline{s}$}}
111: \newcommand{\cbar}{\mbox{$\overline{c}$}}
112: \newcommand{\bbar}{\mbox{$\overline{b}$}}
113: \newcommand{\tbar}{\mbox{$\overline{t}$}}
114: \newcommand{\zptodd}{\mbox{$Z^{\prime} \rightarrow d \dbar$}}
115: \newcommand{\zptouu}{\mbox{$Z^{\prime} \rightarrow u \ubar$}}
116: \newcommand{\zptoss}{\mbox{$Z^{\prime} \rightarrow s \sbar$}}
117: \newcommand{\zptocc}{\mbox{$Z^{\prime} \rightarrow c \cbar$}}
118: \newcommand{\zptobb}{\mbox{$Z^{\prime} \rightarrow b \bbar$}}
119: \newcommand{\zptott}{\mbox{$Z^{\prime} \rightarrow t \tbar$}}
120: \newcommand{\wptoud}{\mbox{$W^{\prime} \rightarrow u \dbar$}}
121: \newcommand{\wptocs}{\mbox{$W^{\prime} \rightarrow c \sbar$}}
122: \newcommand{\wptotb}{\mbox{$W^{\prime} \rightarrow t \bbar$}}
123: \def\ETmiss{\mbox{${\hbox{$E$\kern-0.5em\lower-.1ex\hbox{/}\kern+0.15em}}_T$ }}
124: \newcommand{\qstar}{\mbox{$q^{\ast}$}}
125: \newcommand{\pbarp}{\mbox{$p\overline{p}$}}
126: \newcommand{\Emeas}{\mbox{$E_{\rm jet}^{\rm meas}$}}
127: \newcommand{\Eptcl}{\mbox{$E_{\rm jet}^{\rm ptcl}$}}
128: \newcommand{\gev}{\mbox{\rm GeV}}
129:
130: \newcommand{\NC}{{\em Nuovo Cimento\/} }
131: \newcommand{\NIM}{{\em Nucl. Instr. Meth.} }
132: \newcommand{\NP}{{\em Nucl. Phys.} }
133: \newcommand{\PL}{{\em Phys. Lett.} }
134: \newcommand{\PR}{{\em Phys. Rev.} }
135: \newcommand{\PRL}{{\em Phys. Rev. Lett.} }
136: \newcommand{\RMP}{{\em Rev. Mod. Phys.} }
137: \newcommand{\ZP}{{\em Zeit. Phys.} }
138: \def\err#1#2#3 {{\it Erratum} {\bf#1},{\ #2} (19#3)}
139: \def\ib#1#2#3 {{\it ibid.} {\bf#1},{\ #2} (19#3)}
140: \def\nc#1#2#3 {Nuovo Cim. {\bf#1} ,#2(19#3)}
141: \def\nim#1#2#3 {Nucl. Instr. Meth. {\bf#1},{\ #2} (19#3)}
142: \def\np#1#2#3 {Nucl. Phys. {\bf#1},{\ #2} (19#3)}
143: \def\pl#1#2#3 {Phys. Lett. {\bf#1},{\ #2} (19#3)}
144: \def\prev#1#2#3 {Phys. Rev. {\bf#1},{\ #2} (19#3)}
145: \def\prl#1#2#3 {Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf#1},{\ #2} (19#3)}
146: \def\rmp#1#2#3 {Rev. Mod. Phys. {\bf#1},{\ #2} (19#3)}
147: \def\zp#1#2#3 {Zeit. Phys. {\bf#1},{\ #2} (19#3)}
148: \def\inb{nb$^{-1}$} %inverse nanobarns
149: \newcommand{\gevcc}{\mbox{GeV/$c^2$}} %GeV/c^2
150: \def\gevc{GeV/$c$} %GeV/c
151: \def\tevcc{TeV/$c^2$} %TeV/c^2
152:
153: \begin{document}
154:
155: %\preprint{FERMILAB-Pub-97/109-E}
156: %
157: % ======> Title of the paper goes here <====================
158: %
159: \title{Search for Leptoquark Pairs Decaying to $\nu\nu ~+~jets$ in $p{\bar p}$
160: Collisions at $\sqrt{s}$=1.8 TeV
161: }
162: % ====> Use the following for ICHEP98, Vancouver <=====
163: \author{\centerline{The D\O\ Collaboration
164: \thanks{Submitted to the {\it International Europhysics Conference
165: on High Energy Physics},
166: \hfill\break
167: July 12-18, 2001, Budapest, Hungary,
168: \hfill\break
169: and {\it XX International Symposium on Lepton and Photon Interactions at High Energies}
170: \hfill\break
171: July 23 -- 28, 2001, Rome, Italy.
172: }}}
173: %
174: %
175: \address{
176: \centerline{Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, Illinois 60510}
177: }
178: %
179: % Indicate today's date
180: %
181: \date{\today}
182:
183: \maketitle
184:
185: %
186: % ==============> Text of the abstract goes here <=====================
187: %
188: \begin{abstract}
189: \input abstract
190: %We present the preliminary results of a search for leptoquark ($LQ$) pairs
191: %using (85.2 $\pm$ 3.7) pb$^{-1}$ of $p{\bar p}$ collider data collected by
192: %the D\O\ experiment at the Fermilab Tevatron from 1994-1996. We observe no
193: %evidence for leptoquark production and set a limit on $\sigma (p{\bar p}
194: %\rightarrow LQ\overline{LQ} \rightarrow \nu\nu~+~jets)$ as a function of the
195: %mass of the leptoquark ($M_{LQ}$), assuming BR($LQ \rightarrow \nu
196: %q$)=100\%. At the 95\% confidence level, we exclude scalar leptoquarks for
197: %$M_{LQ} <$ 99 GeV/c$^2$, and vector leptoquarks for $M_{LQ} <$ 178 GeV/c$^2$.
198: \end{abstract}
199: %\pacs{PACS numbers 14.65.Ha, 13.85.Qk, 13.85.Ni}
200:
201: %\vskip 1cm
202: \newpage
203: \begin{center}
204: \input{list_of_authors_1_june_2001}
205: \end{center}
206:
207: \normalsize
208:
209: \vfill\eject
210:
211: \input body
212:
213: %\section{Introduction}
214: %\label{sec:intro}
215: %The observed symmetry between the lepton ($l$) and quark ($q$) sectors
216: %suggests the existence of a force connecting the two that is mediated by
217: %particles
218: %which couple directly to both leptons and quarks, and are therefore
219: %known as leptoquarks ($LQ$). Leptoquarks arise naturally as the vector bosons
220: %\cite{lq} or Higgs particles \cite{lqhiggs} of a Grand Unified Theory
221: %\cite{lq}; composite particles \cite{lqcomp}; techniparticles \cite{lqtechni};
222: %R-parity violating supersymmetric particles \cite{rpvio}; or the particles of
223: %a hitherto unproposed theory.
224: %\par
225: %Leptoquarks carry both color and fractional electric charge. The Fermilab
226: %Tevatron can produce pairs of leptoquarks through the strong process
227: %$p{\bar p} \rightarrow g \rightarrow LQ\overline{LQ} + X$ with a production
228: %cross section that is independent of the coupling for scalar leptoquarks, but
229: %not for vector leptoquarks. For these particles, we study the specific cases
230: %of Yang-Mills coupling (YM), Minimal Coupling (MC), and the coupling resulting
231: %in the minimal cross section ($\sigma _{min}$) \cite{mc}.
232: %\par
233: %While intergenerational decay is theoretically possible, limits from
234: %flavor-changing neutral currents require low mass (${\cal O}$(Tev))
235: %leptoquarks to couple only within a single generation
236: %\cite{generation}. Decays of leptoquark pairs result in one of three possible
237: %final states: $l^{\pm}l^{\mp} qq$; $l^{\pm}\nu qq$; and $\nu\nu qq$. This
238: %analysis \cite{thesis} studies the $\nu\nu qq$ final state, and assumes
239: %BR($LQ \rightarrow \nu q$)=100\%. Using this branching ratio, D\O\ has used
240: %data taken during the 1992-1993 collider run to set limits of $M_{LQ} >$ 79
241: %GeV/c$^2$ for scalar leptoquarks, and $M_{LQ} >$ 145 GeV/c$^2$, 160 GeV/c$^2$,
242: %and 205 GeV/c$^2$, for $\sigma _{min}$, MC, and YM vector leptoquarks,
243: %respectively \cite{d01a}. The CDF collaboration has conducted a search for
244: %second and third generation leptoquarks with BR($LQ \rightarrow \nu q$)=100\%
245: %and set mass limits of 123 (148) GeV/c$^2$ for second (third) generation
246: %scalar leptoquarks and 171 (199) GeV/c$^2$ and 222 (250) GeV/c$^2$ for second
247: %(third) generation vector leptoquarks with MC and YM couplings, respectively
248: %\cite{cdfg23}.
249: %\par
250: %The D\O\ detector \cite{detector} consists of three major subsystems: An
251: %inner detector for tracking charged particles; a uranium-liquid argon
252: %calorimeter for measuring electromagnetic and hadronic showers, and a muon
253: %spectrometer. The jets measured with the calorimeter have an energy
254: %resolution of approximately $\sigma(E)$=0.8$\sqrt{E}$ ($E$ in GeV). We
255: %measure \met\ by summing the calorimeter energy in the direction transverse to
256: %the beam. The measurement has a resolution of $\sigma$=1.08 GeV +
257: %0.019($\Sigma |E_T|$) ($E_T$ in GeV).
258: %\par
259: %We obtain the event sample from a trigger requiring 2 high $p_T$ jets, \met,
260: %and a minimum azimuthal angle between any jet and \met. The integrated
261: %luminosity after removing events corrupted by accelerator and detector
262: %malfunctions is 85.2 $\pm$ 3.7 pb$^{-1}$. We select events with a high
263: %trigger efficiency: 2 jets with $E_T >$ 50 GeV; \met $>$ 40 GeV; $\Delta\phi
264: %(jet,~$\met$) >$ 30$^{\circ}$; and $\Delta {\cal R} (jet,~jet) >$ 1.5, where
265: %${\Delta \cal R}=\sqrt{(\Delta\eta)^2 + (\Delta\phi)^2}$, $\eta$ is the jet
266: %pseudo-rapidity, and $\phi$ is the jet azimuthal angle. We reduce backgrounds
267: %originating from $W$ or $Z$ production by rejecting events with isolated muons
268: %or highly electromagnetic jets. We reduce cosmic ray backgrounds by rejecting
269: %events with jets containing little electromagnetic activity.
270: %\par
271: %The backgrounds to the sample consist of jets produced in association with a
272: %$W$ or a $Z$; top quark production; and multijet production. The $W$ and $Z$
273: %backgrounds consist of processes with only neutrinos and hadronic jets ($W
274: %\rightarrow \tau _h\nu +jet,~Z \rightarrow \nu\nu ~+~2~jets$), processes with
275: %unobserved charged leptons ($W \rightarrow l^{\pm} \nu ~+~2~jets,~Z
276: %\rightarrow \mu\mu ~+~2~jets, ~Z \rightarrow \tau _h \tau _l ~+~jet$), and
277: %processes with an electron appearing as a jet ($W \rightarrow e\nu ~+~jet,
278: %~W \rightarrow \tau _e \nu ~+~jet$). We use the \small PYTHIA \normalsize
279: %Monte Carlo generator \cite{pythia} to predict the acceptances of the $W/Z$ +
280: %jet processes, and the \small VECBOS \normalsize Monte Carlo generator
281: %\cite{vecbos} to predict the acceptances of the $W/Z$ + 2 jets processes. We
282: %normalize the generator cross sections to the cross sections measured using
283: %the $W$ and $Z$ electronic decays.
284: %\par
285: %The top background consists of $t{\bar t}$, $t{\bar b}$, and ${\bar t}b$
286: %production, where the top quark decays to an unobserved charged lepton, a
287: %neutrino, and a jet. We use the D\O\ measured cross section for $t{\bar t}$
288: %production \cite{ttbar} and the next-to-leading order theoretical cross
289: %section for the other processes \cite{singlet}. We use the
290: %\small HERWIG \normalsize generator \cite{herwig} to predict the acceptance of
291: %the $t{\bar t}$ process, and \small CompHEP \normalsize \cite{comphep} to
292: %predict the acceptances of the $t{\bar b}$ and ${\bar t}b$ processes.
293: %\par
294: %The multijet background arises primarily from 2 sources: Vertex measurement
295: %error; and jet energy loss. To reduce the number of events with vertex
296: %measurement error, we use the central detector chamber (CDC) to associate
297: %charged tracks with each central high $p_T$ jet. We use the tracks to
298: %determine the jet vertex position and require this position to be no further
299: %than 15 cm from the event vertex position. The event vertex position is
300: %determined using all of the tracks in the event. We reduce the number of
301: %events with significant jet energy loss by requiring that the angle between
302: %the \met\ and the jet with the second highest measured $p_T$ be greater than
303: %60$^{\circ}$.
304: %\par
305: %To predict the multijet background remaining in our sample, we use the sample
306: %of events with the jet vertex position deviating by 15 cm to 50 cm from the
307: %event vertex position. We normalize this sample to the event sample using
308: %events with $\Delta\phi (jet~2,~$\met$) < 60 ^{\circ}$. We choose the 50 cm
309: %value to provide the best agreement between the background prediction and the
310: %data for the \met\ region of 30 GeV to 40 GeV, which is dominated by multijet
311: %events (Table \ref{tbl:qcd3040}). Changing this value to 100 cm increases the
312: %multijet prediction by 22\% in this region; we take this to be the systematic
313: %error of the method. Table \ref{tbl:datbd} shows the total expected
314: %background and the observed number of events for the 2 jets + \met\ data
315: %sample.
316: %\par
317: %To model the characteristics of leptoquark production, we use scalar
318: %leptoquark events generated with \small PYTHIA \normalsize and vector
319: %leptoquark events generated with \small CompHEP\normalsize . The cross
320: %sections for scalar leptoquark production have been calculated at
321: %next-to-leading order \cite{kraemer}, while those for vector leptoquark
322: %production have been calculated at leading order \cite{vlqxsec}. The
323: %calculations use a mass scale of $\mu$=M$_{LQ}$, with theoretical
324: %uncertainties estimated by changing the scale to $\mu$=M$_{LQ}$/2 and
325: %$\mu$=2M$_{LQ}$. We use the minimum cross section ($\mu$=2M$_{LQ}$) in our
326: %optimization and in determining our mass limits.
327: %\par
328: %We optimize for the production of 100 GeV/c$^2$ scalar leptoquarks and 200
329: %GeV/c$^2$ vector leptoquarks, since leptoquarks with either of these masses
330: %give a $\sim$2$\sigma$ excess if they exist. We use the
331: %\small JETNET \normalsize \cite{jetnet} neural network, with the \met\ and
332: %$\Delta\phi (jet,~jet)$ distributions as inputs for scalar leptoquarks, and
333: %the \met\ and second jet $p_T$ distributions as inputs for vector
334: %leptoquarks. We show the neural network outputs and the chosen cuts for both
335: %of these masses in Fig. \ref{fig:nnout}. The cuts are chosen to maximize the
336: %number of $\sigma$ excess we would observe if leptoquark events were in our
337: %sample:
338:
339: %\begin{center}
340: %$n_{\sigma}=\frac{N_{lq}}{\sqrt{N_{lq}+N_{background}+\Delta N_{lq}^2+\Delta N_{background}^2}}$
341: %\end{center}
342:
343: %\noindent
344: %We show the numbers of events after these cuts in Table \ref{tbl:nn}.
345:
346: %\begin{table}[hptb]
347: %\begin{center}
348: %\begin{tabular}{|cc|}
349: %Event Sample & Number of Events \\
350: %\hline
351: %\hline Multijet & 162.8 $\pm$ 23.7\\
352: %\hline W, Z, and top & 51.9 $\pm$ 7.0 \\
353: %\hline Total background & 214.7 $\pm$ 24.7 \\
354: %\hline
355: %\hline Data & 224 \\
356: %\end{tabular}
357: %\end{center}
358: %\vskip -0.1in
359: %\caption{The expected and observed numbers of events in the multijet
360: %dominated sample of \met\ between 30 GeV and 40 GeV.}
361: %\label{tbl:qcd3040}
362: %\end{table}
363:
364: %\begin{table}[hptb]
365: %\begin{center}
366: %\begin{tabular}{|cc|}
367: %Background & Number of Events \\
368: %\hline
369: %\hline Multijet & 58.8 $\pm$ 14.1 $\pm$ 12.9\\
370: %\hline ($W \rightarrow e\nu )~+~jet$ & 51.9 $\pm$ 7.0 $^{+13.7} \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! _{-8.9}$ \\
371: %\hline ($W \rightarrow \tau\nu )~+~jet$ & 46.3 $\pm$ 5.0 $^{+8.9} \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! _{-7.7}$ \\
372: %\hline ($Z \rightarrow \nu\nu )~+~2~jets$ & 36.1 $\pm$ 7.7 $^{+9.0} \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! _{-5.5}$ \\
373: %\hline ($W \rightarrow \mu\nu )~+~2~jets$ & 18.7 $\pm$ 3.5 $^{+4.2} \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! _{-3.7}$ \\
374: %\hline $t{\bar t} \rightarrow$ $l^{\pm}\nu ~+~4~jets$ & 10.6 $\pm$ 2.0 $\pm$ 2.3 \\
375: %\hline ($W \rightarrow e\nu )~+~2~jets$ & 8.3 $\pm$ 2.5 $^{+2.0} \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! _{-2.5}$ \\
376: %\hline ($W \rightarrow \tau\nu )~+~2~jets$ & 5.6 $\pm$ 1.7 $^{+1.4} \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! _{-0.8}$ \\
377: %\hline $tb \rightarrow$ $l^{\pm}\nu ~+~2~jets$ & 2.0 $\pm$ 0.3 $\pm$ 0.2 \\
378: %\hline ($Z \rightarrow \tau\tau )~+~jet$ & 2.0 $\pm$ 0.4 $^{+0.6} \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! _{-0.3}$ \\
379: %\hline ($Z \rightarrow \mu\mu )~+~2~jets$ & 1.7 $\pm$ 0.4 $^{+0.4} \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! _{-0.3}$ \\
380: %\hline Total background & 242.0 $\pm$ 18.9 $^{+23.3} \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! _{-19.0}$ \\
381: %\hline
382: %\hline Data & 231 \\
383: %\end{tabular}
384: %\end{center}
385: %\vskip -0.1in
386: %\caption{The expected and observed numbers of events in the 2 jets + \met\
387: %sample.}
388: %\label{tbl:datbd}
389: %\end{table}
390:
391: %\begin{figure}[!htbp]
392: %\begin{minipage}[htb]{8.0cm}
393: %\epsfysize = 8.0cm
394: %\epsffile{slqnnout.eps}
395: %\end{minipage}
396: %\begin{minipage}[htb]{8.0cm}
397: %\epsfysize = 8.0cm
398: %\epsffile{vlqnnout.eps}
399: %\end{minipage}
400: %\caption{The neural network output for the data, for background (solid), and
401: %for leptoquarks (dashed). We show the optimization for 100 GeV/c$^2$ scalar
402: %leptoquarks (left) and 200 GeV/c$^2$ vector leptoquarks (right). We mark the
403: %chosen cuts with arrows.}
404: %\label{fig:nnout}
405: %\end{figure}
406:
407: %\begin{table}[hptb]
408: %\begin{center}
409: %\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
410: %Leptoquark & $N_{data}$ & $N_{background}$ & $n_{\sigma}$ & $\sigma ^{95\%}$ (pb)\\
411: %\hline 100 GeV/c$^2$ Scalar & 58 & 56.0 $^{+8.1} \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! _{-8.2}$ & +2.1 & 10.8 \\
412: %\hline 200 GeV/c$^2$ Vector (MC) & 10 & 13.3 $^{+2.8} \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! \! _{-2.6}$ & +2.6 & 0.60 \\
413: %\end{tabular}
414: %\end{center}
415: %\vskip -0.1in
416: %\caption{The data, the expected background, the number of $\sigma$ excess that
417: %would be observed in the presence of a signal, and the 95\% confidence level
418: %cross section limit.}
419: %\label{tbl:nn}
420: %\end{table}
421:
422: %After optimization, the observed number of events is consistent with the
423: %expected background. We show the corresponding 95\% confidence level cross
424: %section limit as a function of leptoquark mass in Fig. \ref{fig:lqlim}. We
425: %calculate the limit using a Bayesian method with a flat prior for the signal
426: %and Gaussian priors for background and acceptance uncertainties. The
427: %corresponding mass limits are 99 GeV/c$^2$ for scalar leptoquarks, and 178
428: %GeV/c$^2$, 222 GeV/c$^2$, and 282 GeV/c$^2$ for $\sigma _{min}$, MC, and YM
429: %vector leptoquarks, respectively. We show the combined D\O\ mass limits as a
430: %function of BR($LQ \rightarrow l^{\pm}q$) for first generation scalar
431: %leptoquarks in Fig. \ref{fig:slqbr} and for second generation MC and YM vector
432: %leptoquarks in Fig. \ref{fig:vlqbr}.
433:
434: %\begin{figure}[htb]
435: %\begin{minipage}[htb]{8.0cm}
436: %\epsfysize = 8.0cm
437: %\epsffile{slqlim.eps}
438: %\end{minipage}
439: %\begin{minipage}[htb]{8.0cm}
440: %\epsfysize = 8.0cm
441: %\epsffile{vlqlim.eps}
442: %\end{minipage}
443: %\caption{The 95\% confidence level cross section limits as a function of
444: %leptoquark mass. We show the mass limits for scalar (left) and vector (right)
445: %leptoquarks.}
446: %\label{fig:lqlim}
447: %\end{figure}
448:
449: %\begin{figure}[htb]
450: %\epsfxsize = 9.5cm
451: %\centerline{\epsffile{mbeta_prl.eps}}
452: %\vskip -0.1in
453: %\caption{The D\O\ excluded mass vs. BR($LQ \rightarrow eq$) region for first
454: %generation scalar leptoquarks. The dark region is excluded by this analysis.}
455: %\label{fig:slqbr}
456: %\end{figure}
457:
458: %\begin{figure}[htb]
459: %\begin{minipage}[htb]{8.0cm}
460: %\epsfysize = 8.0cm
461: %\epsffile{mvexcluded.eps}
462: %\end{minipage}
463: %\begin{minipage}[htb]{8.0cm}
464: %\epsfysize = 8.0cm
465: %\epsffile{ymexcluded.eps}
466: %\end{minipage}
467: %\caption{The D\O\ excluded mass vs. BR($LQ \rightarrow \mu q$) region for second
468: %generation MC (left) and YM (right) vector leptoquarks. The dark regions are
469: %excluded by this analysis.}
470: %\label{fig:vlqbr}
471: %\end{figure}
472:
473:
474: \section*{Acknowledgements}
475: \label{sec:ack}
476: %
477: % Acknowledgement_paragraph.tex
478: %
479: We thank the staffs at Fermilab and collaborating institutions, and
480: acknowledge support from the Department of Energy and National Science
481: Foundation (USA), Commissariat \` a L'Energie Atomique and
482: CNRS/Institut National de Physique Nucl\'eaire et de Physique des
483: Particules (France), Ministry for Science and Technology and Ministry
484: for Atomic Energy (Russia), CAPES and CNPq (Brazil), Departments of
485: Atomic Energy and Science and Education (India), Colciencias
486: (Colombia), CONACyT (Mexico), Ministry of Education and KOSEF (Korea),
487: CONICET and UBACyT (Argentina), The Foundation for Fundamental
488: Research on Matter (The Netherlands), PPARC (United Kingdom), Ministry
489: of Education (Czech Republic), and the A.P.~Sloan Foundation.
490: %
491: % =========> Choose the second acknowledgements paragraph <==========
492: % =========> if you are writing an upgrade paper. <===================
493:
494: \input references
495:
496: %\begin{references}
497: %\input{list_of_visitor_addresses_1_june_2001}
498:
499: %\bibitem{lq}
500: %H. Georgi and S. Glashow, Phys. Rev.
501: %Lett. \bf 32\rm , 438 (1974); J.C. Pati and
502: %A. Salam, Phys. Rev. D \bf 10\rm , 275 (1974).
503: %
504: %\bibitem{lqhiggs}
505: %P.H. Frampton, Mod. Phys. Lett. \bf A7\rm,
506: %\rm 559 (1992).
507: %
508: %\bibitem{lqcomp}
509: %J. L. Hewett and T. G. Rizzo, Phys. Rep. \bf 183\rm,
510: %193 (1989); E. Accomando \em et al.\rm , Phys. Rep.
511: %\bf 299\rm, 1 (1998).
512: %
513: %\bibitem{lqtechni}
514: %E. Eichten and K. Lane, \em hep-ph/9609297 \rm (1996);
515: %\em hep-ph/9609298 \rm (1996).
516: %
517: %\bibitem{rpvio}
518: %D. Choudhury and S. Raychaudhuri, Phys. Lett. B\bf 401\rm ,
519: %367 (1997); G. Altarelli \em et al.\rm , Nucl. Phys. B\bf 506\rm,
520: %3 (1997).
521: %
522: %\bibitem{mc}
523: %\rm J. Bl$\rm\ddot{u}$mlein, E. Boos, and A. Kryukov,
524: %Z. Phys. C \bf 76\rm, 137 (1997).
525: %
526: %\bibitem{generation}
527: %H.-U. Bengtsson {\it et al.},
528: %Phys. Rev. Lett. \bf 55\rm , 2762 (1985).
529: %
530: %\bibitem{thesis}
531: %C. Hays, Ph.D. thesis, Columbia University,
532: %2001 (unpublished).
533: %
534: %\bibitem{d01a}
535: %D. Acosta and S. Blessing, Ann. Rev.
536: %Nucl. Part. Sci. \bf 49\rm , 389 (1999).
537: %
538: %\bibitem{cdfg23}
539: %T. Affolder {\it el al.}, Phys.
540: %Rev. Lett. \bf 85\rm , 2056 (2000).
541: %
542: %\bibitem{detector}
543: %D\O\ Collaboration, B. Abbott
544: %{\it et al.}, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res.
545: %A \bf 338\rm , 185 (1994).
546: %
547: %\bibitem{pythia}
548: %T. Sj$\rm\ddot{o}$strand, Comp. Phys. Comm.
549: %\bf 82\rm , 74 (1994); v. 6.127.
550: %
551: %\bibitem{vecbos}
552: %F.A. Berends {\it et al.}, Nucl.
553: %Phys. \bf B357\rm , 32 (1991).
554: %
555: %\bibitem{ttbar}
556: %D\O\ Collaboration, B. Abbott {\it et al.},
557: %Phys. Rev. D \bf 60\rm , 012001 (1999).
558: %
559: %\bibitem{singlet}
560: %M.C. Smith and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Rev.
561: %D\bf 54\rm , 6696 (1996); T. Stelzer, Z. Sullivan, and
562: %S. Willenbrock, Phys. Rev. D \bf 56\rm , 5919 (1997); \bf 58\rm ,
563: %094021 (1998).
564: %
565: %\bibitem{herwig}
566: %G.~Marchesini {\it et al.}, Comput. Phys. Commun. {\bf 67}, 465
567: %(1992).
568: %
569: %\bibitem{comphep}
570: %A. Pukhov {\it et al.}, hep-ph/9908288; v. 3.0.
571: %
572: %\bibitem{jetnet}
573: %C. Peterson, T. R$\rm\ddot{o}$gnvaldsson, and L.
574: %L$\rm\ddot{o}$nnblad, CERN-TH.7135/94 (1993); v. 3.4.
575: %
576: %\bibitem{kraemer}
577: %\rm M. Kr$\rm\ddot{a}$mer {\it et al.},
578: %Phys. Rev. Lett. \bf 79\rm,
579: %\rm 341 (1997).
580: %
581: %\bibitem{vlqxsec}
582: %\rm J. Bl$\rm\ddot{u}$mlein, E. Boos, and A. Kryukov,
583: %hep-ph/9811271.
584: %
585: %
586: %\end{references}
587:
588: \end{document}
589: