1: \documentclass[12pt,a4paper,dvips]{article}
2: \usepackage{a4p}
3: % The default fonts are Computer Modern fonts.
4: % You can get Postscript fonts by uncommenting the line below.
5: % This means the font in the text and figures can be identical.
6: % You have to use dvips -Ppsmath ... if you want to use the psmath package.
7: %\usepackage{times,psmath}
8: \usepackage{cite,mcite}
9: \usepackage{graphicx}
10: \usepackage{rotating,a4p,here}
11: \usepackage{phy_susy, amssymb}
12: \usepackage{amsmath}
13: \usepackage{l3_titleppe,ifthen}
14: %
15: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
16: % Give the journal name
17: \journalname{To be submitted to Phys. Lett. B}
18: % Uncomment the relevant line
19: % \l3draft for drafts
20: %\preprint for CERN-PPE preprints
21: % \journal for journal version
22: % This also moves the figures to the end on separate
23: % pages.
24: % Use \journaln to avoid the figures moving macro.
25: %
26: % Draft version: uncomment the line below and give the version number
27: % CERN-EP preprint: uncomment the line below and give the preprint number.
28: \preprint{01-068}
29: \date{October 9, 2001}
30: % Journal: uncomment the line below.
31: %\journal
32: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
33: %
34: % Use \psdraft to avoid printing the figures in early drafts
35: % Use \psfull to turn printing back on, e.g. if you have one very big
36: % figure that you only want to print on stable versions.
37: %\psdraft
38: %
39: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
40: %
41: % List of directories containing figures.
42: % Each directory must have its own curly brackets {dir1}{dir2}
43: % Don't forget the / at the end of the name.
44: %
45: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
46: %
47: % Use \icaption instead of \caption in tables and figures to get a
48: % caption that is indented by 1cm.
49: % Note that the label should be included inside \icaption for it to
50: % work properly.
51: %
52: \newlength{\capindent}
53: \setlength{\capindent}{1.0cm}
54: \newlength{\capwidth}
55: \setlength{\capwidth}{\textwidth}
56: \addtolength{\capwidth}{-2\capindent}
57: \newlength{\figwidth}
58: \setlength{\figwidth}{\textwidth}
59: \addtolength{\figwidth}{-2.0cm}
60: \newcommand{\icaption}[2][!*!,!]{\hspace*{\capindent}%
61: \begin{minipage}{\capwidth}
62: \ifthenelse{\equal{#1}{!*!,!}}%
63: {\caption{#2}}%
64: {\caption[#1]{#2}}
65: \end{minipage}}
66: %
67: % Shorthand for \phantom to use in tables
68: \newcommand{\pho}{\phantom{0}}
69: \newcommand{\phopunto}{\phantom{.0}}
70: \newcommand{\phouno}{\phantom{1}}
71: \newcommand{\phoescl}{\phantom{!}}
72: \newcommand{\rpvpha}{\vphantom{$\overline{\slep_j}$}}
73: \newcommand{\rpvpham}{\vphantom{$\underline{\mchid}$}}
74: \newcommand{\bslash}{\ensuremath{\backslash}}
75: \newcommand{\BibTeX}{{\sc Bib\TeX}}
76: % Upsilion(1S)
77: \newcommand{\UoneS}{\ensuremath{\Upsilon(\mathrm{1S})}}
78: %
79: \newcommand{\stp}{\tilde{t}_1}
80: \newcommand{\stpbar}{\bar{\tilde{t}}_1}
81: %
82: %
83: \def\vctr#1{\hfil\vbox to-1em{\vss\hbox{#1}\vss}\hfil}%
84: \def\vdsp#1#2{\hfil\vbox to#2em{\vss\hbox{#1}\vss}\hfil}%
85: %
86: \def\lamdue{\ifmath{\lambda_{122}}}
87: \def\lamtre{\ifmath{\lambda_{133}}}
88: \def\lamuno{\ifmath{\lambda''_{212}}}
89: \def\ytq{\ifmath{y_{34}}}
90: \def\Ytq{\ifmath{Y_{34}}}
91: \def\yqc{\ifmath{y_{45}}}
92: \def\ycs{\ifmath{y_{56}}}
93: \def\ycut{\ifmath{y_{cut}}}
94: \def\ylm{\ifmath{y_{\it \ell m}}}
95: %\def\Emiss{\ifmath{\not\!\!{E}}}
96: \def\Emiss{\ensuremath{E\hspace{-.23cm}/\hspace{+.01cm}}}
97: \def\LLE{\ifmath{\mathrm{L}_{i}\mathrm{L}_{j}{\overline{\mathrm E}_{k}}}}
98: \def\LQD{\ifmath{\mathrm{L}_{i}\mathrm{Q}_{j}{\overline{\mathrm D}_{k}}}}
99: \def\UDD{\ifmath{{\overline{\mathrm U}_{i}}{\overline{\mathrm D}_{j}}{\overline{\mathrm D}_{k}}}}
100: %
101: \def\sq{\ifmath{\tilde{\rm q}}}
102: \def\sqr{\ifmath{\tilde{q}_R}}
103: %
104: \def\snu{\ifmath{\tilde{\nu}}}
105: \def\snue{\ifmath{\tilde{\nu}_e}}
106: \def\snum{\ifmath{\tilde{\nu}_{\mu}}}
107: \def\snut{\ifmath{\tilde{\nu}_{\tau}}}
108: \def\snumt{\ifmath{\tilde{\nu}_{\mu,\tau}}}
109: \def\slep{\ifmath{\tilde{\ell}}}
110: \def\slepp{\ifmath{\tilde{\ell}^+_R}}
111: \def\slepm{\ifmath{\tilde{\ell}^-_R}}
112: \def\slepr{\ifmath{\tilde{\ell}_R}}
113: %
114: \def\serr{\ifmath{\tilde{\rm e}_R}}
115: \def\serp{\ifmath{\tilde{\rm e}^+_R}}
116: \def\serm{\ifmath{\tilde{\rm e}^-_R}}
117: \def\smur{\ifmath{\tilde{\mu}_R}}
118: \def\smurp{\ifmath{\tilde{\mu}^+_R}}
119: \def\smurm{\ifmath{\tilde{\mu}^-_R}}
120: \def\staur{\ifmath{\tilde{\tau}_R}}
121: \def\staurp{\ifmath{\tilde{\tau}^+_R}}
122: \def\staurm{\ifmath{\tilde{\tau}^-_R}}
123: %
124: \def\qur{\ifmath{\tilde{\rm u}_R}}
125: \def\qul{\ifmath{\tilde{\rm u}_L}}
126: \def\qdr{\ifmath{\tilde{\rm d}_R}}
127: \def\qdl{\ifmath{\tilde{\rm d}_L}}
128: %
129: % SUSY particle symbols:
130: \def\susy#1{\ensuremath{\tilde{\mathrm{#1}}}}%
131: \def\slepton #1{\ensuremath{\susy{\ell}^{#1}}}
132: \def\neutralino#1{\ensuremath{\susy{\chi}_{#1}^0}}
133: %
134: \def\nn{\ensuremath{\tilde{\chi}_1^0~\tilde{\chi}_1^0~}}
135: \def\cc{\ensuremath{\tilde{\chi}_1^+~\tilde{\chi}_1^-~}}
136: \def\nei{\ensuremath{\tilde{\chi}_1^0~}}
137: \def\neii{\ensuremath{\tilde{\chi}_2^0~}}
138: \def\neiii{\ensuremath{\tilde{\chi}_3^0~}}
139: \def\neiiii{\ensuremath{\tilde{\chi}_4^0~}}
140: \def\mo{\ensuremath{m_0~}}
141: \def\md{\ensuremath{M_2~}}
142: \def\tb{\ensuremath{\tan\beta}}
143: \def\ch{\ensuremath{\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm~}}
144:
145: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
146: % This is where the document really begins
147: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
148: %
149: \begin{document}
150: %
151: \begin{titlepage}
152: %
153: \title{ \boldmath{Search for R-parity Violating Decays of Supersymmetric
154: Particles in $\mathrm{e^+e^-}$ Collisions at LEP}}
155: % $\sqrt{s}=$ 192-208~\GeV}}
156:
157: \author{The L3 Collaboration}
158: %
159: % The abstract
160: %
161: \begin{abstract}
162: A search, in $\mathrm \epem$ collisions,
163: for chargino, neutralino, scalar lepton and scalar quark
164: pair-production is performed, without assuming R-parity
165: conservation in decays, in the case that only one of the
166: coupling constants $\lambda_{ ijk}$ or $\lambda''_{ ijk}$
167: is non-negligible.
168: No signal is found in data up to a centre-of-mass energy
169: of 208 \GeV.
170: Limits on the production cross sections
171: and on the masses of supersymmetric particles
172: are derived.
173:
174:
175: \end{abstract}
176:
177:
178:
179: %
180: \submitted
181: \end{titlepage}
182:
183:
184: \section{Introduction}
185:
186: The most general superpotential of the
187: Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM) ~\cite{MSSM}, which describes
188: a supersymmetric, renormalizable
189: and gauge invariant theory, with minimal particle content, includes
190: the term $\mathrm{W_R}$~\cite{superp,superp2}:
191: %
192: %
193: \begin{equation} \mathrm{W_R} =
194: % \mathrm {\mu_{i}} \mathrm{L}_{i} \mathrm{H_2} \, +
195: \lambda_{ ijk} \mathrm L_i \mathrm L_j \overline{\mathrm E}_k \, +
196: \lambda'_{ ijk} \mathrm L_i \mathrm Q_j \overline{\mathrm D}_k \, +
197: \lambda''_{ ijk} \overline{\mathrm U}_i \overline{\mathrm D}_j
198: \overline{\mathrm D}_k\,,
199: % \epsilon_i \mathrm L_i \mathrm H_2 \,,
200: \label{eqn:wr}
201: \end{equation}
202: %
203: where $\lambda_{ ijk}$, $\lambda'_{ ijk}$ and $\lambda''_{ ijk}$
204: denote the Yukawa couplings
205: and {\it i, j} and {\it k} the generation indices;
206: $\mathrm L_i$ and $\mathrm Q_i$ are the left-handed lepton- and
207: quark-doublet superfields,
208: $\overline{\mathrm E}_i$, $\overline{\mathrm D}_i$ and $\overline{\mathrm U}_i$
209: are the right-handed singlet superfields for
210: charged leptons, down- and up-type quarks, respectively.
211: %
212: The $\LLE$ and $\LQD$ terms violate the leptonic quantum number L, while
213: the $\UDD$ terms violate the baryonic quantum number B.
214:
215:
216: R-parity is a multiplicative quantum number defined as:
217: %
218: \begin{equation} \mathrm
219: R = (-1)^{\mathrm {3B+L+2S}}\,,
220: \end{equation}
221: where~S~is~the~spin. For ordinary particles~R~ is $+1$,~while it
222: is~$-1$~for~their~supersymmetric partners.
223: R-parity conservation implies that supersymmetric particles can only be
224: produced in pairs and then decay in cascade to the lightest supersymmetric
225: particle (LSP), which is stable~\cite{rpc_susy1}.
226: This hypothesis is formulated in order to prevent a fast proton
227: decay~\cite{weinberg}, disfavoured by present limits~\cite{pdg2000}.
228: However, the absence of either the B- or the L-violating terms
229: is enough to prevent such a decay, and the hypothesis of
230: R-parity conservation can be relaxed.
231: As a consequence, two new kinds of processes are allowed:
232: single production of supersymmetric
233: particles~\cite{single_snu, rpv_publ1}, or LSP
234: decays into Standard Model particles
235: via scalar lepton or scalar quark exchange. For these decays, the MSSM
236: production mechanisms are unaltered by the operators in
237: Equation~\ref{eqn:wr}. In this letter, the cases in which either a
238: neutralino or a scalar lepton is the LSP are considered.
239:
240: In this paper, we describe the
241: search for pair-produced neutralinos
242: ($\mathrm \epem \ra \chim\chin$,
243: with $m = 1,2 \,$ and $n = 1,..,4$),
244: charginos ($\mathrm \epem \ra \chap\cham$),
245: scalar leptons ($\mathrm \epem \ra \slepp \slepm$, where
246: $\tilde{\ell}^\pm_R$ represents scalar electrons, muons or tau and
247: $\epem \ra \snu\snu$)
248: and scalar quarks ($\mathrm \epem \ra \sq\sq$)
249: with subsequent R-parity violating decays, assuming that only
250: one of the coupling constants $\lambda_{ ijk}$
251: or $\lambda''_{ ijk}$ is non-negligible.
252: Only the supersymmetric partners of the right-handed charged leptons,
253: $\slepr$, are considered, as they are expected to be lighter
254: than the corresponding left-handed ones.
255:
256: Supersymmetric particles can either decay directly into two or
257: three fermions according to the dominant interaction term,
258: or indirectly via the LSP. The different decay modes are detailed in
259: Table~\ref{tab:decays}.
260: Four-body decays of the lightest scalar lepton are also taken into
261: account in the case of $\lambda''_{ ijk}$.
262: In the present analysis, the dominant coupling is assumed to be greater than
263: $10^{-5}$~\cite{dawson}, which corresponds to decay lengths below 1 cm.
264:
265: Previous L3 results at centre-of-mass energies ($\sqrt s$)
266: up to 189 \GeV{}
267: are reported in References~\citen{rpv1_l3} and~\citen{rpv2_l3},
268: where also $\lambda'_{ijk}$ couplings are discussed.
269: Two new analyses are presented in this letter:
270: $\epem \ra \snu\snu$ and $\mathrm \epem \ra\sq\sq$ in the case of
271: $\lambda''_{ijk}$ couplings. New interpretations for scalar leptons and
272: scalar quarks in the MSSM framework are also performed.
273:
274: Searches for R-parity violating decays of supersymmetric particles
275: were also reported by other LEP experiments~\cite{rpv_publ1, rpv_publ2}.
276:
277:
278: \begin{table*} [htbp]
279: \begin{center}
280: \begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|c|c|} \hline
281:
282: \multicolumn{1}{|c|} {Particle}
283: &\multicolumn{2}{c|} {Direct decays }
284: &\multicolumn{2}{|c|} {Indirect decays } \\ \cline{2-5}
285:
286: %\vspace{+0.4 cm}
287: \multicolumn{1}{|c|} { }
288: &\multicolumn{1}{c|} {$\lambda_{ ijk}$}
289: % &\multicolumn{1}{c|} {$\lambda'_{ ijk}$}
290: &\multicolumn{1}{c|} {$\lambda''_{ ijk}$}
291: &\multicolumn{1}{|c|} { via $\neutralino{1}$}
292: &\multicolumn{1}{|c|} { via \vphantom{$\overline{\slep_j}$}
293: $\slep$} \\ \hline
294:
295: $\chio$ \vphantom{$\overline{\slep_j}$}
296: & $ \ell_i^- \nu_j \ell_k^+$, $\nu_i \ell^+_j \ell^-_k$
297: % & $ \ell_i^- {\mathrm u_j} \bar{\mathrm d}_k$, $\nu_i \, \mathrm d_j
298: % \bar{\mathrm d}_k$
299: & $ \bar{\mathrm u}_i \bar{\mathrm d}_j \bar{\mathrm d}_k$
300: & $-$
301: & $\ell\slep$ \\ \hline
302:
303: $\neutralino{n (n \ge 2)}$ \vphantom{$\overline{\slep_j}$}
304: & $ \ell_i^- \nu_j \ell_k^+$, $\nu_i \ell^+_j \ell^-_k$
305: % & $ \ell_i^- {\mathrm u_j} \bar{\mathrm d}_k$, $\nu_i \, \mathrm d_j
306: % \bar{\mathrm d}_k$
307: & $ \bar{\mathrm u}_i \bar{\mathrm d}_j \bar{\mathrm d}_k$
308: %% & $\Zstar\chio$, $\Zstar\chim_{(m < n)}$,
309: & $\Zstar\chim_{(m < n)}$,
310: & $\ell\slep$ \\
311:
312: { }
313: &
314: % &
315: &
316: & $\Wstar\cha$
317: & \\ \hline
318:
319: $\chap$ \vphantom{$\overline{\slep}_j$}
320: & $ \nu_i \nu_j \ell^+_k$, $\ell^+_i \ell^+_j \ell^-_k$
321: % & $\nu_i u_j \bar{\mathrm d}_k$, $\ell^+_i \bar{\mathrm d}_j
322: % \mathrm d_k$
323: & $\bar{\mathrm d}_i \bar{\mathrm d}_j \bar{\mathrm d}_k$,
324: $\mathrm u_i \mathrm u_j \mathrm d_k$,
325: & $\Wstar\chio$, $\Wstar\chid$
326: & \\
327:
328: { }
329: &
330: % &
331: & $\mathrm u_i \mathrm d_j \mathrm u_k$
332: &
333: & \\ \hline
334:
335:
336: $\slep^-_{kR}$ \vphantom{$\overline{\slep_j}$}
337: & $\nu_i \ell^-_j$, $\nu_j \ell^-_i$
338: % & $-$
339: & $-$
340: & $\ell^-_k \chio$
341: & $-$ \\ \hline
342:
343: $\snu_{i}$, $\snu_{j}$ \vphantom{$\overline{\slep_j}$}
344: & $\ell^-_j \ell^+_k$, $\ell^-_i \ell^+_k$
345: % & $-$
346: & $-$
347: & $\nu_i \chio$, $\nu_j \chio$
348: & \\ \hline
349:
350: %% squarks
351: $ \tilde{\mathrm u}_{iR}$ \vphantom{$\overline{\slep_j}$}
352: & $-$
353: % &
354: & $\bar{\mathrm d}_{j}\bar{\mathrm d}_{k}$
355: & $\mathrm u_i \chio$
356: & $-$ \\ \hline
357:
358: $ \tilde{\mathrm d}_{jR},
359: \tilde{\mathrm d}_{kR} $ \vphantom{$\overline{\slep_j}$}
360: & $-$
361: % &
362: & $\bar{\mathrm u}_{i}\bar{\mathrm d}_{k}$,
363: $\bar{\mathrm u}_{i}\bar{\mathrm d}_{j}$
364: & $\mathrm d_j \chio, \mathrm d_k \chio$
365: & $-$ \\ \hline
366:
367: \end{tabular}
368: \icaption{R-parity violating decays of the supersymmetric
369: particles considered in this analysis.
370: Charged conjugate states are implied. Indirect decays
371: via scalar leptons are relevant only for neutralinos when the scalar
372: lepton is the LSP. Only
373: supersymmetric partners of the right-handed charged leptons are taken
374: into account. Decays to more than three fermions are not listed.
375: $\Zstar$ and $\Wstar$ indicate virtual Z and W bosons.
376: \label{tab:decays}}
377: \end{center}
378: \end{table*}
379:
380:
381: \section{Data and Monte Carlo Samples}
382:
383: The data used correspond to an integrated luminosity of 450.6 \pbi{}
384: collected with the L3 detector~\cite{L3}
385: at $\sqrt s = 192-208$ \GeV{}.
386: For the search for scalar quarks and scalar neutrinos decaying
387: via $\lambda''_{ijk}$ couplings, also the data sample collected
388: at $\rts = 189$ \GeV{} is used. This corresponds to an additional integrated
389: luminosity of 176.4 \pbi.
390:
391: The signal events are generated with the program {\tt SUSYGEN}~\cite{susygen}
392: for different mass values and
393: for all possible choices of the generation indices.
394:
395:
396: The following Monte Carlo
397: generators are used to simulate Standard Model background processes:
398: {\tt PYTHIA}~\cite{pythia} for
399: $ \mathrm \epem \ra \mathrm Z \, \epem$ and $\mathrm \epem \ra$ ZZ,
400: {\tt BHWIDE}~\cite{bhwide} for $\mathrm \epem \ra \epem $,
401: {\tt KK2F}~\cite{kk2f} for $\mathrm \epem \ra \mpmm$,
402: $\mathrm \epem \ra \tautau$ and $\mathrm \epem \ra \qqbar$,
403: {\tt PHOJET}~\cite{phojet} and {\tt PYTHIA}
404: for $\mathrm \epem \ra \epem$ hadrons,
405: {\tt DIAG36}~\cite{diag36} for $\mathrm \epem \ra
406: \epem \ell^+ \ell^-$ ($\mathrm{\ell = e, \mu, \tau}$),
407: {\tt KORALW}~\cite{koralw} for $\mathrm \epem \ra \WpWm $ and
408: {\tt EXCALIBUR}~\cite{EXCALIBUR} for
409: $\ee \rightarrow \mathrm{\qqbar' \, \ell \nu}$ and
410: $\epem \ra \ell\nu\ell '\nu$.
411: The number of simulated events corresponds to
412: at least 50 times the luminosity of the data,
413: except for Bhabha and two-photon processes,
414: where the Monte Carlo samples correspond to
415: 2 to 10 times the luminosity.
416:
417: %
418: The detector response is simulated using the {\tt GEANT}
419: package~\cite{geant}. It takes into account effects of energy loss,
420: multiple scattering and showering in the detector materials. Hadronic
421: interactions are simulated with the
422: {\tt GHEISHA} program~\cite{gheisha}. Time dependent detector inefficiencies
423: are also taken into account in the simulation procedure.
424:
425: Data and Monte Carlo samples are reconstructed with the same program.
426: Isolated leptons ($\ell = $ e, $\mu, \tau$) are identified as
427: described in Reference~\citen{rpv2_l3}.
428: Remaining clusters and tracks are classified as hadrons. Jets are
429: reconstructed with the DURHAM algorithm~\cite{durham}.
430: The jet resolution parameter $y_{mn}$ is defined
431: as the $\ycut$ value at which the event configuration changes from $n$ to
432: $m$ jets.
433: At least one time of flight measurement
434: has to be consistent with the beam crossing to reject cosmic rays.
435:
436:
437:
438:
439:
440:
441: \section{\boldmath{$\lambda_{ ijk}$} Analysis}
442: \label{par:lambda_anal}
443:
444:
445: The different topologies arising when $\lambda_{ijk}$ couplings
446: dominate are shown in Table~\ref{tab:topologies} and
447: can be classified into four categories:
448: $2 \ell + \Emiss$, $4 \ell + \Emiss$, $6 \ell$,
449: $\ge 4 \, \ell$ plus possible jets and $\Emiss$.
450: The missing energy $\Emiss$
451: indicates final state neutrinos escaping detection.
452: After a common preselection~\cite{rpv2_l3}, based on the visible energy,
453: the event multiplicity and the number of identified leptons,
454: a dedicated selection is developed for each group, taking
455: into account lepton flavours, particle boosts and
456: virtual W and Z decay products.
457:
458: \begin{table*} [htbp]
459: \begin{center}
460: \begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|} \hline
461:
462: \multicolumn{1}{|l} {Direct decays}
463: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} { }
464: & Selections \\ \hline
465:
466:
467: % chi01 chi01
468: \multicolumn{1}{|l} {\epem\ra~$\chim\chin \ra$} \rpvpha
469: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} {\hspace{-0.3 cm}{\em $\ell\ell\ell\ell$}$\nu\nu$ }
470: & 4 $\mathrm{\ell}$
471: + $\Emiss$ \\ \hline
472:
473: % cha+ cha- direct Rp decays
474: \multicolumn{1}{|l} { \epem\ra~$\chap\cham \ra$} \rpvpha
475: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} {\em\hspace{-0.3 cm}$\ell\ell\ell\ell\ell\ell$}
476: & 6 $\mathrm{\ell}$ \\
477:
478: \multicolumn{1}{|l} {}
479: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} {{\em\hspace{-0.3 cm}$\ell\ell\ell\ell$}$\nu\nu$}
480: & 4 $\mathrm{\ell}$ + $ \Emiss$ \\
481:
482: \multicolumn{1}{|l} {}
483: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} {{\em\hspace{-0.3 cm}$\ell\ell$}$\nu\nu\nu\nu$ }
484: & 2 $\mathrm{\ell}$ + $ \Emiss$ \\ \hline
485:
486: % slepton direct decays
487: \multicolumn{1}{|l} { \epem\ra~$\slepp\slepm \;\ra$} \rpvpha
488: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} {\hspace{-0.3 cm}$\ell\nu\ell\nu$}
489: & 2 $\mathrm{\ell}$ + $ \Emiss$ \\ \hline
490:
491: % sneutrino direct decays
492: \multicolumn{1}{|l} { \epem\ra~$\snu\snu \hspace{0.5 cm}\ra$} \rpvpha
493: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} {\hspace{-0.3 cm}$\ell\ell\ell\ell$}
494: & 4 $\mathrm{\ell}$ + $ \Emiss$ \\ \hline
495:
496: %
497: %
498: \multicolumn{1}{|l} {Indirect decays}
499: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} { }
500: & \\ \hline
501:
502:
503: % chi0i chi01
504: \multicolumn{1}{|l} { \epem\ra~$\chim\chin_{(n\geq 2)}$} \rpvpha
505: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} {\hspace{-0.4 cm} \ra $\;$ cascades }
506: & $\ge 4 \, \mathrm{\ell}$ + (jets) + $ \Emiss$ \\ \hline
507:
508:
509: % cha+ cha-
510: \multicolumn{1}{|l} {\epem\ra~$\chap\cham \ra$ } \rpvpha
511: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} {\hspace{-0.5 cm}
512: $\tilde{\chi}_{1(2)}^0\tilde{\chi}_{1(2)}^0 \Wstar\Wstar$}
513: & $\ge 4 \, \mathrm{\ell}$ + (jets) + $ \Emiss$ \\ \hline
514:
515: % slepton indirect decays
516: \multicolumn{1}{|l} { \epem\ra~$\slepp\slepm \;\ra$} \rpvpha
517: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} {\hspace{-0.3 cm}$\ell\ell\ell\ell\ell\ell\nu\nu$}
518: & $\ge 4 \, \mathrm{\ell}$ + (jets) + $ \Emiss$ \\ \hline
519:
520: % sneutrino indirect decays
521: \multicolumn{1}{|l} { \epem\ra~$\snu\snu \hspace{0.5 cm}\ra$} \rpvpha
522: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} {\hspace{-0.3 cm}$\ell\ell\ell\ell\nu\nu\nu\nu$}
523: & 4 $\mathrm{\ell}$ + $\Emiss$ \\ \hline
524:
525:
526:
527: \end{tabular}
528: \icaption{Processes considered in the
529: $\mathrm \lambda_{ijk}$ analysis
530: and corresponding selections~\protect\cite{rpv2_l3}.
531: $\chim\chin$ indicates neutralino pair-production
532: with $m = 1,2 \,$ and $n = 1,..,4$. ``Cascades'' refers
533: to all possible final state combinations of Table~\ref{tab:decays}.
534: \label{tab:topologies}}
535: \end{center}
536: \end{table*}
537:
538:
539:
540: After the preselection is applied,
541: 2567 events are selected in the data sample and $2593 \pm 12$ events
542: are expected from Standard Model processes. The main contributions are:
543: 44.5\% from $\mathrm \WpWm$, 21.5\% from $\qqbar$,
544: 14.7\% from $\mathrm{\qqbar'\, e \nu}$, 6.6\% from
545: two-photon processes
546: (3.9\% from $\epem \ell^+ \ell^-$ and 2.7\% from $\epem$\,hadrons),
547: and 5.6\% from $\tautau$ events.
548:
549: Figure \ref{fig:ps_lambda} shows the distributions of the
550: number of leptons, thrust, normalised visible
551: energy and ln(${y_{34}}$) after the
552: preselection.
553: The data are in good agreement with the Monte Carlo expectations.
554:
555: The final selection criteria are discussed in
556: Reference~\citen{rpv2_l3} and yield
557: the efficiencies for direct and indirect decays of the supersymmetric
558: particles summarized in Tables~\ref{tab:efficiencies1}
559: and~\ref{tab:efficiencies2}, respectively.
560: Here and in the following sections we discuss only the results obtained
561: for those choices of the generation indices which give the
562: lowest selection efficiencies. The quoted results
563: will thus be conservatively valid for any ${ijk}$ combination.
564: In the case of direct R-parity violating decays, the efficiencies
565: are estimated for different mass values of the pair-produced
566: supersymmetric particles. In the case of indirect decays,
567: the efficiencies are estimated for different masses and $\DM$ ranges.
568: $\DM$ is defined as the mass difference $M_{susy} - \mchi$, where
569: $M_{susy}$ is the mass of the
570: supersymmetric particle under investigation.
571:
572: For direct neutralino or chargino decays,
573: as well as for all indirect decays studied,
574: the lowest efficiencies are found for $\lambda_{ijk} = \lamtre$,
575: due to the presence in the final state of taus, whose detection
576: is more difficult.
577:
578:
579:
580:
581: %\vspace{1 cm}
582: \begin{table*} [htbp]
583: \begin{center}
584: \begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
585: \multicolumn{11}{|c|} {Direct decays } \\ \hline
586: Coupling & Process & $M$ & 30 & 40 & 50 & 60 & 70 & 80 & 90 & 102 \\ \hline
587: $ \lambda_{133}$ & $\chim\chin$ \rpvpha
588: & $\epsilon$ & 15 & 24 & 32 & 37 & 40 & 42 & 45 & 46 \\ \cline{3-11}
589: & & $\sigma$ & 0.07 & 0.05 & 0.04 & 0.03 & 0.03 & 0.03 & 0.02 & 0.07 \\ \hline
590: $ \lambda_{133}$ & $\chap\cham$ \rpvpha
591: & $\epsilon$ & -- & -- & -- & -- & 38 & 40 & 43 & 43 \\ \cline{3-11}
592: & & $\sigma$ & -- & -- & -- & -- & 0.07 & 0.06 & 0.06 & 0.17 \\ \hline
593: $ \lambda_{12k} $ & $\slepp\slepm$ \rpvpha
594: & $\epsilon$ & -- & -- & -- & -- & 6 & 6 &8 & 6 \\ \cline{3-11}
595: & & $\sigma$ & -- & -- & -- & -- & 0.39 & 0.36 & 0.27 & 1.16 \\ \hline
596: $ \lambda_{121}$ & $\snu\snu$ \rpvpha
597: & $\epsilon$ & -- & -- & -- & -- & 6 & 8 & 7 & 5 \\ \cline{3-11}
598: & & $\sigma$ & -- & -- & -- & -- & 0.20 & 0.15 & 0.17 & 0.68 \\ \hline
599: $ \lambda''_{212}$ & $\chim\chin$, $\chap\cham$ \rpvpha
600: & $\epsilon$ & 39 & 49 & 40 & 44 &42 & 43 &46 & 56 \\ \cline{3-11}
601: & & $\sigma$ & 0.11 & 0.10 & 0.08 & 0.12 & 0.12 & 0.11 & 0.10 & 0.18 \\ \hline
602: $ \lambda''_{212}$ & $\serp\serm$ *, $\smurp\smurm$ * \rpvpha
603: & $\epsilon$ & 39 & 49 & 40 & 44 &42 & 43 &46 & 56 \\ \cline{3-11}
604: & & $\sigma$ & 0.11 & 0.10 & 0.08 & 0.12 & 0.12 & 0.11 & 0.10 & 0.18 \\ \hline
605: $ \lambda''_{212}$ & $\staurp\staurm\,$ * \rpvpha
606: & $\epsilon$ & 39 & 49 & 38 & 44 & 42 & 19 &14 & 13 \\ \cline{3-11}
607: & & $\sigma$ & 0.11 & 0.10 & 0.15 & 0.12 & 0.11 & 0.18 & 0.22 & 0.28 \\ \hline
608: $ \lambda''_{212}$ & $\snu\snu$ * \rpvpha
609: & $\epsilon$ & 7 & 14 & 29 & 21 & 21 & 22 &25 & 56 \\ \cline{3-11}
610: & & $\sigma$ & 0.66 & 0.16 & 0.13 & 0.18 & 0.18 & 0.17 & 0.15 & 0.18 \\ \hline
611: $ \lambda''_{212}$ & $\sq\sq$ \rpvpha
612: & $\epsilon$ & 27 & 26 & 22 & 32 & 31 & 34 &34 & 34 \\ \cline{3-11}
613: & & $\sigma$ & 0.10 & 0.13 & 0.07 & 0.05 & 0.28 & 0.27 & 0.16 & 0.13 \\ \hline
614:
615:
616: \end{tabular}
617: \icaption{Efficiency values ($\epsilon$, in \%) and 95\% C.L.
618: cross section upper limits ($\sigma$, in pb) for
619: direct decays of the supersymmetric particles, as a function of their
620: mass ($M$, in \gev). As an example the
621: efficiencies at $\rts = 206$ \GeV{} are shown, for the most conservative
622: choice of the couplings. At the other centre-of-mass
623: energies they are compatible within the uncertainties. Typical
624: relative errors on the signal efficiencies, due to Monte Carlo
625: statistics, are between 2\% and 5\%.
626: $\chim\chin$ indicates neutralino pair-production
627: with $m = 1,2 \,$ and $n = 1,..,4$.
628: For direct neutralino decays we quote the $\chio\chio$ efficiencies.
629: The upper limits on the pair-production cross sections are calculated
630: using the full data sample, with a total luminosity of 627 $\pbi$,
631: except for the last mass point, where only the data collected at
632: $\rts \ge 204$ \GeV{} are used, corresponding to a luminosity of 216 \pbi.
633: Chargino and scalar lepton pair-production via $\lambda_{ijk}$
634: couplings are not investigated for mass values
635: excluded in Reference~\citen{rpv2_l3}.
636: For the processes marked with~* we refer to four-body decays, as
637: described in Section~\ref{par:lambdasec_anal}.
638: \label{tab:efficiencies1}}
639: \end{center}
640: \end{table*}
641:
642: \begin{table*} [htbp]
643: \begin{center}
644: \begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
645: \multicolumn{13}{|c|} {Indirect decays }\\ \hline
646: Coupling & Process & $\DM$ & 10 & 20 & 30 & 40 & 50 & 60 & 70 & 80 & 90 & 100 \\ \hline
647: $ \lambda_{133}$ & $\chim\chin_{(n\geq 2)}$ \rpvpha
648: & $\epsilon$ & 49 & 48 & 48 & 47 & 45 & 43 & 41 & 38 &36 & 35\\ \cline{3-13}
649: & & $\sigma$ & 0.09 & 0.09 & 0.09 & 0.09 & 0.10 & 0.10 & 0.11 & 0.12 & 0.12 & 0.13 \\ \hline
650:
651: $ \lambda_{133}$ & $\chap\cham$ \rpvpha
652: & $\epsilon$ & 47 & 43 & 39 & 34 & 31 & 25 & 20 & -- & -- & -- \\ \cline{3-13}
653: & & $\sigma$ & 0.08 & 0.09 & 0.10 & 0.11 & 0.12 & 0.15 & 0.18 & -- & -- & -- \\ \hline
654: $ \lambda_{133}$ & $\serp\serm$ \rpvpha
655: & $\epsilon$ & 61 & 62 & 63 & 54 & 46 & 35 & 24 & -- & -- & -- \\ \cline{3-13}
656: & & $\sigma$ & 0.06 & 0.06 & 0.06 & 0.07 & 0.08 & 0.11 & 0.15 & -- & -- & -- \\ \hline
657: $ \lambda_{133}$ & $\smurp\smurm$ \rpvpha
658: & $\epsilon$ & 71 & 76 & 80 & 77 & 75 & 70 & 65 & -- & -- & -- \\ \cline{3-13}
659: & & $\sigma$ & 0.05 & 0.05 & 0.05 & 0.05 & 0.05 & 0.05 & 0.06 & -- & -- & -- \\ \hline
660: $ \lambda_{133}$ & $\staurp\staurm$ \rpvpha
661: & $\epsilon$ & 52 & 59 & 66 & 65 & 64 & 60 & 56 & -- & -- & -- \\ \cline{3-13}
662: & & $\sigma$ & 0.07 & 0.06 & 0.06 & 0.06 & 0.06 & 0.06 & 0.07 & -- & -- & -- \\ \hline
663: $ \lambda_{133}$ & $\snu\snu$ \rpvpha
664: & $\epsilon$ & 50 & 49 & 49 & 43 & 41 & 39 & 36 & -- & -- & -- \\ \cline{3-13}
665: & & $\sigma$ & 0.07 & 0.07 & 0.07 & 0.08 & 0.08 & 0.09 & 0.10 & -- & -- & -- \\ \hline
666: %
667: %
668: $ \lambda''_{212}$ & $\chim\chin_{(n\geq 2)}$ \rpvpha
669: & $\epsilon$ & 57 & 60 & 63 &68 & 66 & 64 & 62 & 58 & 54 & 46 \\ \cline{3-13}
670: & & $\sigma$ & 0.18 & 0.17 & 0.16& 0.15 & 0.15 &0.16 &0.17 & 0.18 & 0.20 & 0.23 \\ \hline
671: $ \lambda''_{212}$ & $\chap\cham$ \rpvpha
672: & $\epsilon$ & 65 & 70 & 69 & 73 & 72 & 70 & 71 & -- & -- & -- \\ \cline{3-13}
673: & & $\sigma$ & 0.16 & 0.15 & 0.15 & 0.14 & 0.15 & 0.15 & 0.15 & -- & -- & -- \\ \hline
674: $ \lambda''_{212}$ & $\serp\serm$ \rpvpha
675: & $\epsilon$ & 29 & 51 & 56 & 63 & 66 & 69 & 56 & 46 & 36 & -- \\ \cline{3-13}
676: & & $\sigma$ & 0.18 & 0.09 & 0.05 & 0.05 & 0.05 & 0.05 & 0.05 & 0.06 & 0.08 & -- \\ \hline
677: $ \lambda''_{212}$ & $\smurp\smurm$ \rpvpha
678: & $\epsilon$ & 20 & 28 & 41 & 49 & 52 & 55 & 52 & 42& 27 & -- \\ \cline{3-13}
679: & & $\sigma$ & 0.10 & 0.05 & 0.05 & 0.05 & 0.05 & 0.05 & 0.05 & 0.06 & 0.09 & -- \\ \hline
680: $ \lambda''_{212}$ & $\staurp\staurm$ \rpvpha
681: & $\epsilon$ & 53 & 57 & 63 & 56 & 46 & 40 & 29 & 17 & 13 & -- \\ \cline{3-13}
682: & & $\sigma$ & 0.15 & 0.13 & 0.13 & 0.13 & 0.15 & 0.16 & 0.22 & 0.23 & 0.24 & -- \\ \hline
683: $ \lambda''_{212}$ & $\snu\snu$ \rpvpha
684: & $\epsilon$ & 41 & 43 & 44 & 39 & 37 & 32 & 40 & 50 & 35 & -- \\ \cline{3-13}
685: & & $\sigma$ & 0.13 & 0.12 & 0.12 & 0.12 & 0.14 & 0.15 & 0.08 & 0.11 & 0.12 & -- \\ \hline
686: $ \lambda''_{212}$ & $\sq\sq$ \rpvpha
687: & $\epsilon$ & 55 & 59 & 64 & 65 & 63 & 58 & 47 & 45 & 43 & -- \\ \cline{3-13}
688: & & $\sigma$ & 0.18 & 0.16 & 0.15 & 0.15 & 0.16 & 0.17 & 0.22 & 0.22 & 0.23 & -- \\ \hline
689:
690: \end{tabular}
691: \icaption{Efficiency values ($\epsilon$, in \%) and 95\% C.L.
692: cross section upper limits ($\sigma$, in pb) for
693: indirect decays of the supersymmetric particles, as a function of
694: $\DM$ (in \gev). As an example the
695: efficiencies at $\rts = 206$ \GeV{} are shown, for the most conservative
696: choice of the couplings. At the other centre-of-mass
697: energies they are compatible within the uncertainties. Typical
698: relative errors on the signal efficiencies, due to Monte Carlo
699: statistics, are between 2\% and 5\%. $\chim\chin$
700: indicates neutralino pair-production
701: with $m = 1,2 \,$ and $n = 2,..,4$. The efficiencies correspond to
702: $ \mchim + \mchin = $ 206 \GeV.
703: For indirect decays of charginos, scalar leptons and scalar quarks,
704: the selection efficiencies correspond to a mass of 102 \GeV.
705: The upper limits on the pair-production cross sections are calculated
706: using the data at $\rts \ge 204 \GeV{}$, with an integrated luminosity
707: of 216 \pbi.
708: \label{tab:efficiencies2}}
709: \end{center}
710: \end{table*}
711:
712:
713:
714:
715:
716:
717:
718:
719:
720:
721:
722:
723: In the case of pair-production of scalar charged leptons, followed
724: by direct decays via $\lambda_{ijk}$, the final state contains
725: two leptons plus missing energy. The lepton flavours are given
726: by the indices $i$ and $j$, independently of the value of $k$.
727: The lowest selection efficiency is found for $\lambda_{ijk} = \lambda_{12k}$,
728: {\it i.e.} for events with electrons and muons in the final state,
729: since these low multiplicity events require a tight
730: selection to suppress the large background from
731: lepton pair-production.
732:
733: Direct decays of scalar neutrinos yield four leptons in the final state.
734: The $4 \ell + \Emiss$ selections are used as they provide
735: a good analysis sensitivity
736: comparable to that of the dedicated selections
737: for scalar electrons, muons and taus.
738: Scalar neutrino decays into electrons
739: and muons are selected with lower efficiency than decays
740: into taus, due to the missing energy requirements.
741: In particular, the lowest efficiency is obtained for
742: $\lambda_{121}$, which can give rise to the decays
743: $\mathrm{\snu_e \ra \mu^- e^+\,}$ and $\mathrm{\snu_\mu \ra e^- e^+}$.
744:
745:
746:
747:
748:
749:
750: \section{\boldmath{$\lambda''_{ ijk}$} Analysis}
751: \label{par:lambdasec_anal}
752:
753: When the $\lambda''_{ijk}$ couplings dominate,
754: the flavour composition depends on the generation indices.
755: In the case of neutralino and chargino pair-production,
756: the different topologies can be classified into two groups:
757: multijets and multijets with leptons and/or missing energy,
758: as shown in Table~\ref{tab:topologies_udd}.
759: After a common preselection~\cite{rpv2_l3}, dedicated selections are
760: developed for each group, depending on the particle boosts,
761: the $\DM$ values and the
762: virtual W decay products.
763:
764:
765: \begin{table*} [htbp]
766: \begin{center}
767: \begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|} \hline
768:
769: \multicolumn{1}{|l} {Direct decays}
770: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} { }
771: & Selections \\ \hline
772:
773: % chi01 chi01
774: \multicolumn{1}{|l} {\epem\ra~$\chim\chin \;\ra$} \rpvpha
775: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} {\hspace{-0.3 cm}{\rm qqqqqq}}
776: & multijets \\ \hline
777:
778: % cha+ cha- direct Rp decays
779: \multicolumn{1}{|l} { \epem\ra~$\chap\cham \ra$} \rpvpha
780: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} {\hspace{-0.3 cm}{\rm qqqqqq}}
781: & multijets \\ \hline
782:
783: %
784: %
785: \multicolumn{1}{|l} {Indirect decays}
786: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} { }
787: & \\ \hline
788:
789:
790: % chi0i chi01
791: \multicolumn{1}{|l} { \epem\ra~$\chim\chin_{(n\geq 2)} \ra$} \rpvpha
792: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} {\hspace{-0.3 cm}{\rm qqqqqq qq}}
793: & multijets \\
794:
795: \multicolumn{1}{|l} { }
796: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} {\hspace{-0.3 cm}{\rm qqqqqq $\ell\ell$}}
797: % & 6 jets + 2 $\ell$ \\
798: & multijets + lepton(s) \\
799:
800: \multicolumn{1}{|l} { }
801: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} {\hspace{-0.3 cm}{\rm qqqqqq $\nu\nu$}}
802: % & multijets + $ \Emiss$ \\ \hline
803: & multijets \\ \hline
804:
805: % cha+ cha-
806: \multicolumn{1}{|l} {\epem\ra~$\chap\cham \ra$ } \rpvpha
807: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} {\hspace{-0.5 cm}{qqqqqq qqqq}}
808: & multijets \\
809:
810: \multicolumn{1}{|l} { }
811: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} {\hspace{-0.5 cm}{qqqqqq qq $\ell\nu$}}
812: % & 8 jets + $\ell$ + $\Emiss$ \\
813: & multijets + lepton(s) \\
814:
815: \multicolumn{1}{|l} { }
816: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} {\hspace{-0.5 cm}{qqqqqq $\ell\ell\nu\nu$}}
817: % & 6 jets + 2 $\ell$ + $ \Emiss$ \\ \hline
818: & multijets + lepton(s) \\ \hline
819:
820: % slepton indirect decays
821: \multicolumn{1}{|l} { \epem\ra~$\slepp\slepm \;\ra$} \rpvpha
822: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} {\hspace{-0.6 cm} qqqqqq $\ell\ell $}
823: & 6 jets + 2 $\mathrm{\ell}$ \\ \hline
824:
825: % sneutrino indirect decays
826: \multicolumn{1}{|l} { \epem\ra~$\snu\snu \hspace{0.5 cm}\ra$} \rpvpha
827: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} {\hspace{-0.6 cm} qqqqqq $\nu\nu$}
828: & 6 jets + $\Emiss$ \\ \hline
829:
830: % sqark indirect decays
831: \multicolumn{1}{|l} { \epem\ra~$\sq\sq \hspace{0.5 cm}\ra$} \rpvpha
832: &\multicolumn{1}{l|} {\hspace{-0.6 cm} qqqqqq qq}
833: & multijets \\ \hline
834:
835:
836: \end{tabular}
837: \icaption{Processes considered in the
838: $\mathrm \lambda''_{ijk}$ analysis and corresponding
839: selections~\protect\cite{rpv2_l3}. For masses below 50~\gev{}
840: or small $\DM$ values not all jets in the event can be resolved.
841: $\chim\chin$ indicates neutralino pair-production
842: with $m = 1,2 \,$ and $n = 1,..,4$.
843: For final states with neutrinos we use selections with no explicit
844: missing energy requirement, because for those topologies $\Emiss$
845: is small, except for the scalar neutrino dacays.
846: \label{tab:topologies_udd}}
847: \end{center}
848: \end{table*}
849:
850:
851: In the case of neutralino, chargino, scalar charged lepton and
852: scalar quark pair-production, the preselection
853: aims at selecting well balanced hadronic events and yields
854: 11770 events in the data sample to be compared with $ 11719 \pm 31 $
855: expected from Standard Model processes,
856: of which 62.0\% are from $\mathrm \qqbar$ and 32.8\% $\mathrm \WpWm$.
857: Figure~\ref{fig:ps_lambdasec} shows the distributions of
858: thrust, ln($y_{34}$), ln($y_{45}$)
859: and width of the most energetic jet
860: after the preselection.
861: The width of a jet is defined as $ {p}_{T}^{jet} / {E^{jet}_{ }}$,
862: where the event is clustered into exactly two jets,
863: and ${p}_{T}^{jet}$ is the sum of the projections of the particle
864: momenta
865: on to a plane perpendicular to the jet axis, and ${E^{jet}_{ }}$
866: is the jet energy.
867: There is good agreement between data and Monte Carlo expectations.
868: The efficiencies for direct and indirect decays of the supersymmetric
869: particles after the selections discussed in Reference~\citen{rpv2_l3}
870: are summarized in Tables~\ref{tab:efficiencies1}
871: and~\ref{tab:efficiencies2}, respectively.
872:
873: Scalar quarks and scalar neutrinos,
874: not studied in our previous papers, are searched for as follows.
875: Scalar quark pairs can decay directly into 4 or indirectly into 8 quarks,
876: as shown in Table~\ref{tab:decays}.
877: In the first case, the main background
878: sources are $\qqbar$ events and $\WpWm$ decays. For low masses
879: of the primary scalar quarks, the signal configuration is more similar
880: to two back-to-back jets, due to the large jet boost. In this case
881: we use the least energetic jet width to reject the $\qqbar$ background,
882: which is the dominant one at low masses.
883: For larger scalar quark masses ($M_{\tilde{\mathrm q}} > 50$ \GeV),
884: the signal events are better described by a 4-jet configuration and
885: selection criteria are applied on $y_{34}$ and the
886: $\chi^2$ of a kinematical fit, which imposes four-momentum conservation
887: and equal mass constraints.
888: In the case of indirect decays into 8 quarks, the same selections
889: as for $\chio\chio$ decays into 6 quarks are used~\cite{rpv2_l3}.
890:
891:
892:
893: For scalar neutrino pair-production, a different preselection is
894: performed, to take into account the missing momentum in the
895: final state.
896: Low multiplicity events, such as leptonic Z and W decays, are
897: rejected by requiring at least 13 calorimetric clusters.
898: At least one charged track has to be present.
899: The visible energy has to be greater than $0.2\sqrt s$.
900: In order to remove background contributions from two-photon interactions,
901: the energy in a cone of $\mathrm 12^\circ$ half-opening angle around the
902: beam axis has to be below 20\% of the total visible energy.
903: Furthermore, the thrust axis is required to be well contained in the
904: detector. Unbalanced events
905: with an initial state radiation
906: photon in the beam pipe are removed.
907: Semileptonic $\WpWm$ decays are rejected by the requirement
908: that neither the di-jet invariant mass nor that of any identified
909: lepton and the missing four-momentum
910: should be in a 5 \GeV{} interval around the W mass.
911: This preselection yields 13950 events in the data at $\rts = 189-208$ \GeV{}
912: where $13662 \pm 45$ are expected from Standard Model processes and
913: the main contributions are 50.6\% from $\qqbar$,
914: 32.8\% from $\WpWm$, 9.2\% from $\epem\qqbar$ and
915: 4.0\% from $\qqbar'$e$\nu$.
916: The difference in the number of found and expected data
917: appears in the region where the
918: visible energy is below $0.5\sqrt s$, where an important contribution
919: from two-photon interactions and $\ell\nu\ell'\nu$ events is expected.
920: Such events are afterwards rejected by the optimization procedure,
921: which requires a high visible energy.
922:
923:
924:
925: In the case of indirect decays of scalar neutrinos,
926: the only visible decay products are the jets coming from neutralino decays.
927: Therefore we have derived five selections according to the
928: neutralino mass value,
929: reflecting the different boost and jet broadening configurations.
930: The final selection criteria are optimized~\cite{rpv2_l3} by
931: taking into account the
932: following variables: jet widths,
933: ln$(y_{34})$ and ln$(y_{45})$,
934: visible energy and polar angles of the missing
935: momentum vector and of the thrust axis.
936:
937:
938:
939:
940:
941: Supersymmetric partners of the right-handed leptons have no direct
942: two-body decays via $\lambda''_{ijk}$ couplings.
943: However, when scalar leptons are lighter than $\chio$,
944: the four-body decay $\slepr \ra \ell$qqq can occur~\cite{superp2} providing
945: the same final state as that resulting from indirect
946: decays, but with virtual $\chio$ production.
947: %
948: The non-resonant four-body decay is not implemented in the
949: generator.
950: For this reason, we use the
951: results of the indirect decay analysis, performing a scan
952: over all neutralino mass values up to
953: $M_{\slepr}$.
954: The resulting lowest efficiency is conservatively quoted
955: in the following for
956: four-body decays. It is found in most cases for $\mchi \simeq M_{\slepr}$,
957: as the resulting low energy lepton can not be resolved from the nearby
958: jet.
959: For scalar taus with masses above 70~\gev{},
960: the lowest efficiency is found for high $\DM$ values, as in the case
961: of indirect decays.
962:
963:
964:
965:
966:
967: \section{Model Independent Results}
968: \label{par:mod_ind_results}
969:
970:
971: Table~\ref{tab:tab8} shows the overall numbers of candidates and expected background
972: events for the different processes. No significant excess of events is
973: observed. Therefore upper limits are set on the neutralino, chargino and
974: scalar lepton pair-production cross sections assuming direct or indirect
975: R-parity violating decays.
976:
977: In the case of $\lambda_{ijk}$ couplings, upper limits are set for each
978: process, independently of the mass value of the supersymmetric particle
979: considered. For $\lambda''_{ijk}$ couplings, upper limits are derived for
980: each process depending on the mass range of the supersymmetric particles,
981: since this procedure improves the sensitivity of analyses with high
982: background level.
983:
984: These limits take into account the estimated
985: background contamination.
986: Systematic uncertainties on the signal efficiency
987: are dominated by Monte Carlo statistics.
988: The typical relative error is between 2\% and 5\%
989: and it is included in the
990: calculations of the signal upper limits~\cite{upperlimit}.
991:
992: Tables~\ref{tab:efficiencies1} and~\ref{tab:efficiencies2}
993: show the 95\% confidence level (C.L.) upper limits on
994: supersymmetric particle pair-production cross~sections.
995: For each mass point, all data collected at
996: centre-of-mass energies above the production threshold
997: are combined. For low mass values, the data
998: at $\rts =$ 189 \GeV{} are also used.
999: Therefore these upper limits
1000: should be interpreted as a limit on the luminosity-weighted average
1001: cross section.
1002:
1003:
1004: \begin{table*} [htbp]
1005: \begin{center}
1006: \begin{tabular}{|l|l|rcl|r|} \hline
1007: Coupling & Process & \multicolumn{3}{|c|} {$N_{back}$} & $N_{data}$ \\ \hline
1008: $ \lambda_{ijk}$ & $\chio\chio$ \rpvpha & \pho 4.9 &$\pm$& 0.5 \pho & 6 \\ \cline{2-6}
1009: & $\chim\chin$ \rpvpha & \pho 14.7 &$\pm$& 0.6 \pho & 15 \\ \cline{2-6}
1010: & $\chap\cham$ (indirect) \rpvpha & \pho10.1 &$\pm$& 0.3\pho & 10 \\ \cline{2-6}
1011: & $\chap\cham$ (direct) \rpvpha & \pho37\phopunto &$\pm$& 3 \pho& 40 \\ \cline{2-6}
1012: & $\slepp\slepm$ (indirect) \rpvpha & \pho10.1 &$\pm$& 0.3\pho & 10 \\ \cline{2-6}
1013: & $\slepp\slepm$ (direct) \rpvpha & \pho31\phopunto &$\pm$& 2 \pho & 34 \\ \cline{2-6}
1014: & $\snu\snu$ \rpvpha & \pho4.9 &$\pm$& 0.5 \pho & 6 \\ \hline
1015: $ \lambda''_{ijk}$ & $\chio\chio$ \rpvpha & \pho661 &$\pm$& \phouno4 \pho& 605 \\ \cline{2-6}
1016: & $\chap\cham$ \rpvpha & \pho446 &$\pm$& \phouno3 \pho& 404 \\ \cline{2-6}
1017: & $\slepp\slepm$\rpvpha& \pho413 &$\pm$& \phouno2 \pho& 361 \\ \cline{2-6}
1018: & $\snu\snu$ \rpvpha & \pho671 &$\pm$& \phouno6 \pho& 669 \\ \cline{2-6}
1019: & $\sq\sq$ \rpvpha & \pho3387 &$\pm$& 13 \pho& 3411 \\ \hline
1020: \end{tabular}
1021: \icaption{Number of observed data ($N_{data}$) and expected background
1022: ($N_{back}$) events for the different processes.
1023: The uncertainty on the
1024: expected background is due to Monte Carlo statistics. The deficit in the
1025: number of observed data in the neutralino, chargino and slepton analyses is
1026: correlated among the channels.
1027: \label{tab:tab8}}
1028: \end{center}
1029: \end{table*}
1030:
1031:
1032:
1033:
1034:
1035:
1036:
1037:
1038: \section{Interpretation in the MSSM}
1039: \label{par:MSSM}
1040:
1041: In the MSSM framework, neutralino and chargino masses, couplings and
1042: cross sections depend on the gaugino mass parameter, ${M_2}$,
1043: the higgsino mass mixing parameter, $\mu $, the ratio
1044: of the vacuum expectation values of the two Higgs doublets, $\tan\beta$, and
1045: the common mass of the scalar particles at the GUT scale, ${m_0}$.
1046: The results presented in this section are obtained by performing a scan
1047: in the ranges:
1048: $\,0 \leq M_2 \leq 1000$ \GeV,
1049: $- 500$ \GeV{} $\leq \mu \leq$ 500 \GeV, $0 \leq m_0 \leq 500$ \gev{}
1050: and $0.7 \leq \tan\beta \leq 40$.
1051: They do not depend on the value of the
1052: trilinear coupling in the Higgs sector, $A$.
1053:
1054: \subsection{Mass Limits from Scalar Lepton and Scalar Quark Searches }
1055: \label{par:mass_limits_2}
1056:
1057: For scalar lepton and scalar quark pair-production,
1058: mass limits are derived by direct comparison of
1059: the 95\% C.L. cross section upper limits
1060: with the scalar particle
1061: pair-production cross sections, which depend on the scalar
1062: particle mass.
1063:
1064: We assume no mixing in the scalar lepton sector.
1065: Scalar electron and scalar electron neutrino
1066: pair-production have an additional contribution from
1067: the $t$-channel exchange of a neutralino or
1068: chargino, whose mass spectrum depends on the MSSM parameters.
1069: In this case the mass limits are
1070: derived at a given value of \tb \, and $\mu$, here chosen
1071: to be $\tb = \sqrt{2}$ and $\mu = -200$ \GeV.
1072: For scalar quarks, mixing is taken into account for
1073: the third generation. The cross section depends on the
1074: scalar quark mass and on the mixing angle $\theta_{LR}$.
1075: For $\rts = 189-208$ \GeV{}
1076: the production cross section for scalar top pairs
1077: is minimal for $\cos\theta_{LR} \sim 0.51$ and for scalar
1078: bottom pairs for $\cos\theta_{LR} \sim 0.36$.
1079: These values are
1080: conservatively used in this analysis.
1081:
1082:
1083:
1084: Figures~\ref{fig:fig3} and~\ref{fig:fig4} show the excluded
1085: 95\% C.L. contour for different scalar lepton
1086: and scalar quark masses, as a function of the neutralino
1087: mass. Indirect decays of the scalar leptons dominate
1088: over direct ones in the region with $\DM > 2 \,$\gev{}.
1089: For $0 \le \DM < 2 \,$\gev, 100\% branching ratio
1090: either into direct or indirect decays is assumed
1091: and the worst result is shown.
1092: In the negative $\DM$ region only direct decays contribute.
1093: For $\lambda''_{ijk}$ direct decays of the scalar leptons
1094: we quote the results from four-body processes.
1095: %
1096: The 95\% C.L. lower mass limits are shown in
1097: Table~\ref{tab:limits_tot2}, for both direct and indirect decays.
1098:
1099: \begin{table*} [htbp]
1100: \begin{center}
1101: \begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
1102:
1103: Mass Limit (\gev)& $M_{\serr}$ & $M_{\smur}$ &
1104: $M_{\staur}$ & $M_{\snumt}$ & $M_{\snue}$ &
1105: $M_{\qur}$ & $M_{\qul}$ & $M_{\qdr}$ &
1106: $M_{\qdl}$ & $M_{\stop}$ & $M_{\sbottom}$
1107: \vphantom{ $M^2_{\qdl}$}\\ \hline
1108:
1109: $\lambda_{ijk}$ (direct) & 69 & 61 & 61 & 65 & 95 & -- & -- & -- & -- & --
1110: & -- \\ \hline
1111: $\lambda_{ijk}$ (indirect) & 79 & 87 & 86 & 78 & 99 & -- & -- & -- & -- & --
1112: & -- \\ \hline
1113:
1114: $\lambda''_{ijk}$ (direct) & 96 & 86 & 75 & 70 & 99 & 80 & 87 & 56 & 86 & 77 & 55
1115: \\ \hline
1116: $\lambda''_{ijk}$ (indirect) & 96 & 86 & 75 & 70 & 99 & 79 & 87 & 55 & 86 & 77 & 48
1117: \\ \hline
1118:
1119: \end{tabular}
1120: \icaption{Lower limits at 95\% C.L. on the masses of the scalar leptons
1121: and scalar quarks. The limits result from direct comparison of
1122: the 95\% C.L. cross section upper limits with the scalar particle
1123: pair-production cross sections. $\qur$, $\qul$, $\qdr$ and $\qdl$
1124: refer to any type of up and down supersymmetric partners
1125: of the right-handed and left-handed quarks. $\stop$ and $\sbottom$
1126: limits are quoted in the case of minimal production cross section.
1127: For $\lambda''_{ijk}$ direct decays of
1128: scalar leptons we refer to four-body processes.
1129: \label{tab:limits_tot2}}
1130: \end{center}
1131: \end{table*}
1132:
1133: \subsection{Mass Limits from Combined Analyses }
1134: \label{par:mass_limits_1}
1135:
1136:
1137: A point in the MSSM parameter space is excluded if the total number
1138: of expected events is greater than the combined upper limit at 95\% C.L.
1139: on the number of signal events. Neutralino, chargino, scalar
1140: lepton and scalar quark analyses are combined since several processes
1141: can occur at a given point. Gaugino and scalar mass unification at the
1142: GUT scale is assumed.
1143: The constraints from the L3 lineshape measurements at the Z
1144: pole~\cite{gammalim}
1145: are also taken into account~\cite{rpv2_l3}.
1146: We derive lower limits at 95\% C.L. on the
1147: neutralino, chargino and scalar lepton masses, as detailed
1148: in Table~\ref{tab:limits_tot}.
1149:
1150:
1151:
1152:
1153: \begin{table*} [htbp]
1154: \begin{center}
1155: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
1156:
1157: Mass Limit (\gev)& $\mchi$ & $\mchid$ & $\mchit$ & $\mcha$ &
1158: $M_{\slepr}$ & $M_{\snu}$ \\ \hline
1159:
1160: $\lambda_{ijk}$ & \phouno 40.2 & \phouno 84.0 & 107.2 &
1161: 103.0 &\phouno 82.7 & 152.7 \\ \hline
1162:
1163: $\lambda''_{ijk}$ & \phouno 39.9 & \phouno 80.0 & 107.2 &
1164: 102.7 & \phouno 88.7 & 149.0 \\ \hline
1165:
1166: \end{tabular}
1167: \icaption{Lower limits at 95\% C.L. on the masses of the supersymmetric
1168: particles considered in this analysis. The limits result from combined
1169: analysis at each MSSM point and from a global scan in the parameter
1170: space, as detailed in section~\ref{par:MSSM}.
1171: The limits on $M_{\slepr}$ hold
1172: for ${\serr}$, $\smur$ and $\staur$.
1173: \label{tab:limits_tot}}
1174: \end{center}
1175: \end{table*}
1176:
1177:
1178:
1179: Figure~\ref{fig:mlimit1} shows the 95\% C.L. lower limits on neutralino and
1180: scalar lepton masses as a function of \tb. The $\chio$ and $\chid$
1181: mass limits are shown for $m_0 = $ 500 \gev{} and the $\slepr$ ones for
1182: $m_0 =$ 0. These values of $m_0$ correspond to the absolute minima from
1183: the complete scan on $M_2$, $\mu$, ${m_0}$ and $\tan\beta$.
1184: The chargino mass limit is almost independent of $\tan\beta$,
1185: and is close to the kinematic limit for any value of $\tan\beta$ and $m_0$.
1186: For high \mo values, neutralino and scalar lepton pair-production
1187: contributions are suppressed and the mass limits
1188: are given mainly by the chargino exclusion.
1189:
1190: For 0 $\leq{m_0}<$ 50 \GeV{} and 1 $\leq \tan\beta< 2$, the lightest
1191: scalar lepton, the supersymmetric partner of the right-handed electron,
1192: can be the LSP. Therefore in this region only
1193: the scalar lepton analysis contributes to the limit on the scalar lepton
1194: mass. For higher values of \tb, $\chio$ is the LSP and the lower limit on the
1195: scalar lepton mass is mainly given by the $\chio\chio$
1196: exclusion contours.
1197: The absolute limit on $M_{\slepr}$ is found at $\tan\beta = 0.8$ in the
1198: case of $\lambda_{ijk}$ and at $\tan\beta = 0.7$ for
1199: $\lambda''_{ijk}$. The difference in the limits is due to the lower
1200: cross section upper limit
1201: of $\lambda''_{ijk}$ for scalar lepton direct decays, since
1202: the limit on $M_{\slepr}$ is found when the $\slepr$
1203: is the LSP.
1204: The same limits are obtained without the assumption of a
1205: common scalar mass at the GUT scale.
1206: For $\lambda_{ijk}$ the
1207: bounds on the scalar lepton masses are found in the case in which
1208: the $\slepr$ is the LSP. For $\lambda''_{ijk}$ the limits are found
1209: when the $\slepr$ and $\chio$ are nearly degenerate in mass. In both
1210: cases, the neutralino analyses give the main contribution to the exclusion
1211: in the regions of the parameter space around the limit.
1212: The remaining sensitivity is due to searches for direct slepton decays
1213: via $\lambda_{ijk}$. As these searches are equally sensitive to scalar
1214: electron, muon or tau signals, as shown in Table~\ref{tab:efficiencies1},
1215: the limits are unchanged.
1216: The scalar neutrino mass limit is also mainly due to neutralino
1217: exclusions, resulting in a 95\% C.L. lower limit on the scalar
1218: neutrino mass above the kinematic limit.
1219:
1220: The search for R-parity violating decays of supersymmetric particles
1221: reaches at least the same sensitivity as in the R-parity
1222: conserving case~\cite{rpc_susy2}.
1223: Therefore, the supersymmetry limits obtained at LEP are independent of
1224: R-parity conservation assumptions.
1225:
1226:
1227:
1228: % The author list
1229: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1230: %
1231: \newpage
1232: \input namelist244.tex
1233: \newpage
1234: %
1235:
1236:
1237:
1238: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1239: % Bibliography
1240: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1241: %
1242: % Style file to use with mcite.
1243: % Use l3style with just cite.
1244: %\bibliographystyle{/l3/paper/biblio/l3stylem}
1245: %\bibliography{%
1246: %/l3/paper/biblio/l3pubs,%
1247: %/l3/paper/biblio/aleph,%
1248: %/l3/paper/biblio/delphi,%
1249: %/l3/paper/biblio/opal,%
1250: %/l3/paper/biblio/markii,%
1251: %/l3/paper/biblio/otherstuff,%
1252: %l3paper}
1253:
1254: % Style file to use with mcite.
1255: % Use l3style with just cite.
1256:
1257: \bibliographystyle{l3stylem}
1258:
1259: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1260:
1261: \bibitem{MSSM} A review can be found for example in: \\
1262: H.E. Haber and G.L. Kane, Phys. Rep. {\bf 117} (1985) 75. % MSSM
1263:
1264: \bibitem{superp} C.S. Aulakh and R.N. Mohapatra, Phys. Lett. {\bf B 119} (1982) 136; \\
1265: F. Zwirner, Phys. Lett. {\bf B 132} (1983) 103; \\
1266: L.J. Hall and M. Suzuki, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B 231} (1984) 419. \\
1267: For a recent review and a reference to the literature: \\
1268: H. Dreiner, ``An introduction to explicit R-parity
1269: violation'', hep--ph/9707435, published in {\it
1270: Perspectives on Supersymmetry}, ed. G.L. Kane, World Scientific,
1271: Singapore (1998).
1272:
1273: \bibitem{superp2} R. Barbieri and A. Masiero, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B 267} (1986) 679.
1274:
1275: \bibitem{rpc_susy1}
1276: L3 Collab., M. Acciarri \etal, Phys. Lett. {\bf B 471} (1999) 280,
1277: Phys. Lett. {\bf B 471} (1999) 308, Phys. Lett. {\bf B 472} (2000) 420
1278: and references therein.
1279:
1280: \bibitem{weinberg} S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 26} (1982) 287; \\
1281: G. Bhattacharyya and P.B. Pal,
1282: % hep--ph/9809493,
1283: Phys. Rev. {\bf D 59} (1999) 097701.
1284:
1285: \bibitem{pdg2000} Particle Data Group, D.E. Groom \etal, Eur. Phys. J.
1286: {\bf C 15} (2000) 1.
1287:
1288:
1289: \bibitem{single_snu}
1290: ALEPH Collab., R. Barate \etal, Eur. Phys. J. {\bf C 12} (2000) 183; \\
1291: DELPHI Collab., P. Abreu \etal, Phys. Lett. {\bf B 485} (2000) 45; \\
1292: L3 Collab., M. Acciarri \etal, Phys. Lett. {\bf B 489} (2000) 81; \\
1293: OPAL Collab., G. Abbiendi \etal, Eur. Phys. J. {\bf C 6} (1999) 1.
1294:
1295: \bibitem{rpv_publ1}
1296: ALEPH Collab., R. Barate \etal, CERN-EP/2000-132, subm. to Eur. Phys. J. {\bf C}. % all 189-202
1297:
1298: \bibitem{dawson}
1299: S. Dawson, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B 261} (1985) 297.
1300:
1301: \bibitem{rpv1_l3}
1302: L3 Collab., M. Acciarri \etal, Phys. Lett. {\bf B 459} (1999) 354. % LLE, UDD 183
1303: \bibitem{rpv2_l3}
1304: L3 Collab., M. Acciarri \etal, Eur. Phys. J. {\bf C 19} (2001) 397. % 189 GeV
1305:
1306: \bibitem{rpv_publ2}
1307: ALEPH Collab., D. Buskulic \etal, Phys. Lett. {\bf B 349} (1995) 238; \\ %LLE Z
1308: ALEPH Collab., D. Buskulic \etal, Phys. Lett. {\bf B 384} (1996) 461; \\ %LLE 133
1309: ALEPH Collab., R. Barate \etal, Eur. Phys. J. {\bf C 4}
1310: (1998) 433; \\ % LLE 130-172 \GeV{}
1311: ALEPH Collab., R. Barate \etal, Eur. Phys. J. {\bf C 7} (1999) 383;
1312: \\ % LQD 130-172 \GeV{}
1313: ALEPH Collab., R. Barate \etal, Eur. Phys. J. {\bf C 13} (2000) 29; \\ % all 183
1314: DELPHI Collab., P. Abreu \etal, Eur. Phys. J. {\bf C 13} (2000) 591; \\ % LLE 183
1315: DELPHI Collab., P. Abreu \etal, Phys. Lett. {\bf B 487} (2000) 36; \\ % LLE 189
1316: DELPHI Collab., P. Abreu \etal, Phys. Lett. {\bf B 500} (2001) 22; \\ % UDD 189
1317: DELPHI Collab., P. Abreu \etal, Phys. Lett. {\bf B 502} (2001) 24; \\ % Spont. 183-189
1318: OPAL Collab., G. Abbiendi \etal, Eur. Phys. J. {\bf C 11} (1999) 619; \\ % gauginos 183
1319: OPAL Collab., G. Abbiendi \etal, Eur. Phys. J. {\bf C 12} (2000) 1. % sfermions 183
1320:
1321:
1322:
1323: \bibitem{L3} L3 Collab., B. Adeva \etal, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. {\bf A 289} (1990) 35; \\
1324: J.A. Bakken \etal, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. {\bf A 275 } (1989) 81; \\
1325: O. Adriani \etal, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. {\bf A 302} (1991) 53; \\
1326: B. Adeva \etal, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. {\bf A 323} (1992) 109; \\
1327: K. Deiters \etal, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. {\bf A 323} (1992) 162; \\
1328: F. Beissel \etal, Nucl.Instr. and Meth. {\bf A 332} (1993) 33;\\
1329: M. Chemarin \etal, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. {\bf A 349} (1994) 345; \\
1330: M. Acciarri \etal, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. {\bf A 351} (1994) 300; \\
1331: G. Basti \etal, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. {\bf A 374} (1996) 293; \\
1332: I.C. Brock \etal, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. {\bf A 381} (1996) 236; \\
1333: A. Adam \etal, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. {\bf A 383} (1996) 342.
1334:
1335:
1336: \bibitem{susygen} %{\tt SUSYGEN:} \\
1337: S. Katsanevas and S. Melachroinos, Proceedings of the Workshop
1338: ``Physics at LEP 2'', eds. G. Altarelli, T.~Sj{\"o}strand and
1339: F. Zwirner, CERN 96-01 (1996), vol. 2, p. 328. \\
1340: {\tt SUSYGEN 2.2}, S. Katsanevas and P. Morawitz, %hep--ph/9711417,
1341: Comp. Phys. Comm. {\bf 112} (1998) 227.
1342:
1343:
1344: \bibitem{pythia}
1345: T.~Sj{\"o}strand, preprint
1346: CERN-TH/7112/93 (1993), revised August 1995;
1347: Comp. Phys. Comm. {\bf 82} (1994) 74; preprint hep-ph/0001032 (2000).
1348:
1349: \bibitem{bhwide} %{\tt BHWIDE},
1350: S. Jadach \etal, Phys. Lett. {\bf B 390} (1997) 298.
1351:
1352:
1353: \bibitem{kk2f} {\tt KK2F} Version 4.12 is used. \\
1354: S.~Jadach, B.F.L.~Ward and Z.~W\c{a}s, Comp. Phys. Comm {\bf 130} (2000) 260.
1355:
1356:
1357: \bibitem{phojet} {\tt PHOJET} Version 1.05 is used. \\
1358: R. Engel, Z. Phys. {\bf C 66} (1995) 203; \\
1359: R. Engel and J. Ranft, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 54} (1996) 4244.
1360:
1361: \bibitem{diag36} %{\tt DIAG36:}
1362: F.A. Berends, P.H. Daverveldt and R. Kleiss, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B 253} (1985) 441.
1363:
1364: \bibitem{koralw} {\tt KORALW} Version 1.33 is used. \\
1365: M. Skrzypek \etal, Comp. Phys. Comm. {\bf 94} (1996) 216; \\
1366: M. Skrzypek \etal, Phys. Lett. {\bf B 372} (1996) 289.
1367:
1368: \bibitem{EXCALIBUR} %{\tt EXCALIBUR:}
1369: F.A.~Berends, R.~Kleiss and R.~Pittau,
1370: Comp. Phys. Comm. {\bf 85} (1995) 437.
1371:
1372: \bibitem{geant} {\tt GEANT} Version 3.15 is used. \\
1373: R. Brun \etal, preprint CERN DD/EE/84-1 (1984), revised 1987.
1374:
1375: \bibitem{gheisha} %{\tt GHEISHA:}\\
1376: H. Fesefeldt, RWTH Aachen Report PITHA 85/2 (1985).
1377:
1378: \bibitem{durham}
1379: S. Catani \etal, Phys. Lett. {\bf B 269} (1991) 432; \\
1380: S. Bethke \etal, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B 370} (1992) 310; \\
1381: N. Brown and W.J. Stirling, Z. Phys. {\bf C 53} (1992) 629.
1382:
1383: \bibitem {gammalim}
1384: L3 Collab., M. Acciarri \etal, Eur. Phys. J. {\bf C 16} (2000) 1.
1385:
1386: \bibitem{upperlimit}
1387: R.D. Cousins and V.L. Highland, Nucl. Instr. and. Meth. {\bf A 320} (1992) 331.
1388:
1389: \bibitem{rpc_susy2}
1390: B.~Clerbaux, P.~Azzurri, Proceedings of the {\it
1391: International Europhysics Conference on High
1392: Energy Physics}, July 12$-$18, 2001, Budapest, Hungary.
1393:
1394: \end{thebibliography}
1395:
1396:
1397: \begin{figure}[htbp]
1398: \begin{center}
1399: \includegraphics[width=17cm, height=18cm]{fig1.eps}
1400: \end{center}
1401: \vspace{-1.0truecm}
1402: \icaption{Data and Monte Carlo
1403: distributions of a) the number of leptons, b) thrust,
1404: c) the normalised visible
1405: energy and d) ln(${y_{34}}$) after the
1406: $\mathrm \lambda_{ijk}$ preselection.
1407: The solid histograms show the expectations for Standard Model
1408: processes.
1409: The dotted and dashed histograms
1410: show two examples of signal, with dominant coupling $\lambda_{133}$.
1411: The dotted histograms represent the process $\mathrm \epem \ra
1412: \chio\chio$, for $\mchi =42$ \GeV,
1413: corresponding to two hundred times the luminosity of the data.
1414: The dashed ones
1415: represent $\mathrm \epem \ra \chap\cham$, with $\mcha = 92$ \GeV{} and
1416: $\DM = \mcha - \mchi = 50$ \GeV{},
1417: corresponding to twenty times this luminosity.
1418: \label{fig:ps_lambda}}
1419: \end{figure}
1420:
1421: %%%
1422: %%% norm. con sigma_cha ~ 1 pb e sigma_neu ~ 0.1 pb
1423: %%%
1424:
1425:
1426: \begin{figure}[htbp]
1427: \begin{center}
1428: \includegraphics[width=17cm, height=18cm]{fig2.eps}
1429: \end{center}
1430: \icaption{Data and Monte Carlo
1431: distributions of a) thrust, b) ln(${y_{34}}$), c) ln(${y_{45}}$)
1432: and d) width of the most energetic jet after the
1433: $\lambda''_{ijk}$ preselection.
1434: The solid histograms show the expectations for Standard Model
1435: processes.
1436: % at $ \rts = 192-208$ \GeV.
1437: The dashed and dotted histograms show two examples of
1438: signal, with dominant coupling $ \lamuno$, corresponding to decays into
1439: c, d and s quarks.
1440: The dotted histograms represent the process
1441: $\mathrm \epem \ra \chio\chio$, with $ \mchi = 40$ \GeV{},
1442: corresponding to one hundred times the luminosity of the data.
1443: The dashed ones
1444: represent $\mathrm \epem \ra \chap\cham$, with $\mcha = 90$ \GeV{} and
1445: $\DM = \mcha - \mchi = 60$ \GeV{},
1446: corresponding to fifteen times this luminosity.
1447: \label{fig:ps_lambdasec}}
1448: \end{figure}
1449:
1450:
1451:
1452:
1453:
1454: \begin{figure*}[htbp]
1455: \begin{center}
1456: \includegraphics[width=\figwidth]{fig3.epsi}
1457: \end{center}
1458: \icaption{
1459: MSSM exclusion contours, at 95\% C.L., for the masses of a) $\serr$,
1460: b) $\smur$, c) $\staur$ and d) $\snumt$ as a function
1461: of the neutralino mass.
1462: The solid and dashed lines, show the $\lambda$ and $\lambda''$
1463: exclusion contours, respectively. The dotted line corresponds
1464: to $\DM = 0$.
1465: For $\DM < 0$, above this line, the exclusion contours from direct decays are shown.
1466: \label{fig:fig3}}
1467: \end{figure*}
1468:
1469:
1470:
1471: \begin{figure*}[htbp]
1472: \begin{center}
1473: \includegraphics[width=\figwidth]{fig4.epsi}
1474: \end{center}
1475: \icaption{
1476: MSSM exclusion contours, at 95\% C.L., for the masses of a) up-type
1477: b) down-type scalar quarks c) $\sbottom$ and d) $\stop$ as a function
1478: of the neutralino mass, for $\lambda''$ coupling.
1479: The solid and dashed lines show the exclusion contours
1480: for a) $\qul$, $\qur$ and b) $\qdl$, $\qdr$, respectively.
1481: For $\DM < 0$, above the dotted line, the exclusion contours from direct decays are shown.
1482: \label{fig:fig4}}
1483: \end{figure*}
1484:
1485:
1486: \begin{figure*}[htbp]
1487: \begin{center}
1488: \includegraphics[width=\figwidth]{fig5.epsi}
1489: \end{center}
1490: \icaption{
1491: MSSM mass limits from combined analyses.
1492: The solid and dashed lines, labelled with the corresponding
1493: coupling, show the
1494: 95\% C.L. lower limits on the masses of a) $\chio$, b) $\chid$ and
1495: c) $\slepr$, as a function of \tb, for
1496: $0 \leq M_2 \leq 1000$ \gev{} and $- 500$ \GeV{} $\leq \mu \leq$ 500 \GeV.
1497: $m_0 = $ 500 \gev{} in a) and b) and $m_0 = 0$ in c). For those
1498: values of $m_0$ the global minima on the mass limit are obtained.
1499: \label{fig:mlimit1}}
1500: \end{figure*}
1501:
1502:
1503:
1504:
1505: \end{document}
1506:
1507:
1508:
1509:
1510:
1511:
1512:
1513:
1514:
1515:
1516:
1517:
1518:
1519:
1520:
1521:
1522:
1523:
1524:
1525:
1526:
1527:
1528:
1529:
1530:
1531:
1532:
1533:
1534:
1535:
1536:
1537:
1538:
1539:
1540:
1541:
1542:
1543:
1544:
1545:
1546:
1547:
1548:
1549:
1550:
1551:
1552:
1553:
1554:
1555:
1556:
1557:
1558:
1559:
1560:
1561:
1562: