1: %
2: %
3: %
4: %
5: %
6: %
7: %
8: %
9: \section{Introduction}
10:
11: %
12: \begin{table}[p]
13: \begin{center}
14: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
15: \hline
16: Year & Nominal Energy & Actual Energy & Luminosity \\
17: & $\GeV$ & $\GeV$ & pb$^{-1}$ \\
18: \hline
19: \hline
20: 1995 & 130 & 130.2 & $\sim 3 $ \\
21: & 136 & 136.2 & $\sim 3 $ \\
22: \cline{2-4}
23: & $133^{\ast}$ & 133.2 & $\sim 6 $ \\
24: \hline
25: 1996 & 161 & 161.3 & $\sim 10 $ \\
26: & 172 & 172.1 & $\sim 10 $ \\
27: \cline{2-4}
28: & $167^{\ast}$ & 166.6 & $\sim 20 $ \\
29: \hline
30: 1997 & 130 & 130.2 & $\sim 2 $ \\
31: & 136 & 136.2 & $\sim 2 $ \\
32: & 183 & 182.7 & $\sim 50 $ \\
33: \hline
34: 1998 & 189 & 188.6 & $\sim 170$ \\
35: \hline
36: 1999 & 192 & 191.6 & $\sim 30 $ \\
37: & 196 & 195.5 & $\sim 80 $ \\
38: & 200 & 199.5 & $\sim 80 $ \\
39: & 202 & 201.6 & $\sim 40 $ \\
40: \hline
41: 2000 & 205 & 204.9 & $\sim 80 $ \\
42: & 207 & 206.7 & $\sim140 $ \\
43: \hline
44: \end{tabular}
45: \end{center}
46: \caption{The nominal and actual centre-of-mass energies for data
47: collected during $\LEPII$ operation in each year. The approximate
48: average luminosity analysed per experiment at each energy is also
49: shown. Values marked with
50: a $^{\ast}$ are average energies for 1995 and 1996 used
51: for heavy flavour results. The data taken at nominal energies of
52: 130 GeV and 136 GeV in 1995 and 1997 are combined by most
53: experiments.}
54: \label{ff:tab:ecms}
55: \end{table}
56: %
57:
58: During the $\LEPII$ program LEP delivered collisions
59: at energies from $\sim 130$ $\GeV$ to $\sim 209$ $\GeV$. The 4 LEP experiments
60: have made measurements on the $\eeff$ process over this range of energies,
61: and a preliminary combination of these data is discussed in this note.
62:
63: In the years 1995 through 1999 LEP delivered luminosity at a number of
64: distinct centre-of-mass energy points. In 2000 most of the luminosity
65: was delivered close to 2 distinct energies, but there was also
66: a significant fraction of the luminosity delivered in, more-or-less, a
67: continuum of energies. To facilitate the combination of the data,
68: the 4 LEP experiments all divided the data they collected in 2000
69: into two energy bins: from 202.5 to 205.5 $\GeV$; and 205.5 $\GeV$ and above.
70: The nominal and actual centre-of-mass energies to which the LEP data are
71: averaged for each year are given in Table~\ref{ff:tab:ecms}.
72:
73: A number of measurements on the process $\eeff$ exist and are combined.
74: The preliminary averages of cross-section and forward-backward asymmetry
75: measurements are discussed in Section \ref{ff:sec-ave-xsc-afb}.
76: The results presented in this section update those presented
77: in~\cite{bib-EWEP-02}.
78: Complete results of the combinations are available on the
79: web page~\cite{ff:ref:ffbar_web}.
80: In Section~\ref{ff:sec-dsdc} a preliminary average of the differential
81: cross-sections measurements, $\dsdc$, for the channels $\eeee$,
82: $\eemumu$ and $\eetautau$ is presented.
83: In Section~\ref{ff:sec-hvflv} a preliminary combination of the
84: heavy flavour results $\Rb$, $\Rc$, $\Abb$ and $\Acc$ from $\LEPII$ is
85: presented. In Section~\ref{ff:sec-interp} the combined results are interpreted
86: in terms of contact interactions and the exchange of $\Zprime$ bosons, the
87: exchange of leptoquarks or squarks and the exchange of gravitons in large
88: extra dimensions. The results are summarised in section~\ref{ff:sec-conc}.
89:
90: %
91: %
92: %
93: %
94: %
95: %
96: %
97: %
98: %
99: %
100: %
101: %
102: %
103: %
104: %
105: %
106: %
107: %
108: %
109: %
110: %
111: %
112: %
113: %
114: %
115: %
116: %
117: %
118:
119: %
120: %
121: %
122: %
123: %
124: %
125: %
126: %
127: \section{Averages for Cross-sections and Asymmetries}
128: \label{ff:sec-ave-xsc-afb}
129:
130:
131: In this section the results of the preliminary combination of
132: cross-sections and asymmetries are given.
133: The individual experiments' analyses of cross-sections and forward-backward
134: asymmetries are discussed in~\cite{ff:ref:expts}.
135:
136: Cross-section results are combined for the $\eeqq$, $\eemumu$ and $\eetautau$
137: channels, forward-backward asymmetry measurements are combined for
138: the $\mumu$ and $\tautau$ final states. The averages are made for the
139: samples of events with high effective centre-of-mass energies, $\sqrt{\spr}$.
140: %
141: \begin{figure}[tp]
142: \begin{center}
143: \mbox{\epsfig{file=ff_pairs_isns_photon.eps,width=14cm}}
144: \end{center}
145: \caption{Diagrams leading to the the production of initial state non-singlet
146: electron-positron pairs in $\eemumu$, which are considered as signal
147: in the common signal definition.}
148: \label{ff:fig:isnspairs}
149: \end{figure}
150: %
151: Individual experiments have their own \ff\ signal definitions; corrections are
152: applied to bring the measurements to a common signal definitions:
153: %
154: \begin{itemize}
155: \item $\sqrt{\spr}$ is taken to be the mass of the
156: $s$-channel propagator, with the $\ff$ signal being defined by the cut
157: $\sqrt{\spr/s} > 0.85$.
158:
159: \item ISR-FSR photon interference is subtracted to
160: render the propagator mass unambiguous.
161:
162: \item Results are given for the full $4\pi$ angular acceptance.
163:
164: \item Initial state non-singlet diagrams \cite{ff:ref:lepffwrkshp},
165: see for example Figure~\ref{ff:fig:isnspairs},
166: which lead to events containing additional fermions pairs are considered
167: as part of the two fermion signal. In such events, the additional
168: fermion pairs are typically lost down the beampipe of the experiments,
169: such that the visible event topologies are usually similar to a
170: difermion events with photons radiated from the initial state.
171: \end{itemize}
172: %
173: The corrected measurement of a cross-section or a forward backward asymmetry,
174: $\mathrm{M_{LEP}}$, corresponding to the
175: common signal definition, is computed from the
176: experimental measurement $\mathrm{M_{exp}}$,
177: %
178: \begin{eqnarray}
179: {\mathrm{M_{LEP}}} = {\mathrm{M_{exp}}} + ({\mathrm{P_{LEP}}} -
180: {\mathrm{P_{exp}}}),
181: \end{eqnarray}
182: %
183: \noindent
184: where $\mathrm{P_{exp}}$ is the prediction for the measurement obtained
185: for the experiments signal definition and $\mathrm{P_{LEP}}$ is the
186: prediction for the common signal definition. The predictions are computed with
187: ZFITTER~\cite{ff:ref:ZFITTER}.
188:
189:
190: In choosing a common signal definition there is a tension between the need to
191: have a definition which is practical to implement in event generators and
192: semi-analytical calculations, one which comes close to describing the
193: underlying hard processes and one which most closely matches what is actually
194: measured in experiments. Different signal definitions represent different
195: balances between these needs. To illustrate how different choices
196: would effect the quoted results a second signal definition is
197: studied by calculating different predictions using ZFITTER:
198: %
199: \begin{itemize}
200: \item For dilepton events, $\sqrt{\spr}$ is taken to be
201: the bare invariant mass of the outgoing difermion pair (\ie,
202: the invariant mass excluding all radiated photons).
203:
204: \item For hadronic events, it is taken to be the mass of the $s$-channel
205: propagator.
206:
207: \item In both cases, ISR-FSR photon interference is included and the signal
208: is defined by the cut $\sqrt{\spr/s} > 0.85$. When calculating the
209: contribution to the hadronic cross-section due to ISR-FSR interference,
210: since the propagator mass is ill-defined, it is replaced by the bare
211: $\qq$ mass.
212: \end{itemize}
213: %
214: The definition of the hadronic cross-section is close to that used to
215: define the signal for the heavy quark measurements given in
216: Section~\ref{ff:sec-hvflv}.
217:
218: Theoretical uncertainties associated with the Standard Model predictions
219: for each of the measurements are not included during the averaging procedure,
220: but must be included when assessing the compatibility of the data with
221: theoretical predictions.
222: The theoretical uncertainties on the Standard Model predictions amount to
223: $0.26\%$ on $\sigma(\qq)$, $0.4\%$ on $\sigma(\mumu)$ and
224: $\sigma(\tautau)$, $2\%$ on $\sigma(\ee)$,
225: and 0.004 on the leptonic forward-backward
226: asymmetries~\cite{ff:ref:lepffwrkshp}.
227:
228: The average is performed using the best linear unbiased estimator
229: technique (BLUE)~\cite{common_bib:BLUE}, which is equivalent to a $\chi^{2}$
230: minimisation. All data from nominal centre-of-mass
231: energies of 130--207 GeV are averaged at the same time.
232:
233:
234: Particular care is taken to ensure that the correlations between the
235: hadronic cross-sections are reasonably estimated.
236: The errors are broken down into 5
237: categories, with the ensuing correlations accounted for in the combinations:
238: %
239: \begin{itemize}
240:
241: \item[1)] The statistical uncertainty plus uncorrelated systematic
242: uncertainties, combined in quadrature.
243:
244: \item[2)] The systematic uncertainty for the final state X which is
245: fully correlated between energy points for that experiment.
246:
247: \item[3)] The systematic uncertainty for experiment Y which is fully
248: correlated between different final states for this energy point.
249:
250: \item[4)] The systematic uncertainty for the final state X which is
251: fully correlated between energy points and between different experiments.
252:
253: \item[5)] The systematic uncertainty which is fully correlated between
254: energy points and between different experiments for all final states.
255: \end{itemize}
256: %
257: Uncertainties in the hadronic cross-sections arising from fragmentation
258: models and modelling of ISR are treated as fully correlated between
259: experiments. Despite some differences between the models used and the
260: methods of evaluating the errors in the different experiments,
261: there are significant common elements in the estimation of these sources
262: of uncertainty.
263:
264: New, preliminary, results from ALEPH are included in the average. The
265: updated ALEPH measurements use a lower cut on the effective
266: centre-of-mass energy, which makes the signal definition of
267: ALEPH closer to the combined LEP signal definition.
268:
269:
270: Table~\ref{ff:tab:xsafbres} gives the averaged cross-sections
271: and forward-backward asymmetries for all energies.
272: The differences in the results obtained when using predictions
273: of ZFITTER for the second signal definition are also given.
274: The differences are significant when compared to the precision obtained
275: from averaging together the measurements at all energies.
276: The $\chi^{2}$ per degree of freedom for the average of the $\LEPII$ $\ff$
277: data is $160/180$. Most correlations are rather small, with the largest
278: components at any given pair of energies being between the hadronic
279: cross-sections. The other off-diagonal terms in the correlation
280: matrix are smaller than $10\%$. The correlation matrix between the
281: averaged hadronic cross-sections at different centre-of-mass energies
282: is given in Table~\ref{ff:tab:hadcorrel}.
283: %
284: %
285: %
286: %
287:
288:
289:
290: Figures~\ref{ff:fig-xs_lep} and~\ref{ff:fig-afb_lep} show the LEP
291: averaged cross-sections and asymmetries, respectively, as a
292: function of the centre-of-mass energy, together with the SM predictions.
293: There is good agreement between the SM expectations and the measurements of the
294: individual experiments and the combined averages.
295: The cross-sections for hadronic final states at most of the energy points
296: are somewhat above the SM expectations. Taking into account the correlations
297: between the data points and also taking into account the theoretical error
298: on the SM predictions,
299: the ratio of the measured cross-sections to the SM expectations, averaged over
300: all energies, is approximately a $1.7$ standard deviation excess.
301: %
302: %
303: %
304: %
305: %
306: It is concluded that there is no significant evidence in the results of the
307: combinations for physics beyond the SM in the process $\eeff$.
308:
309:
310: %
311: \begin{table}[p]
312: \begin{center}
313: \begin{turn}{90}
314: \begin{tabular}{cc}
315: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|r@{$\pm$}l|c|c|}
316: \hline
317: $\sqrt{s}$ & &
318: \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Average} &
319: &
320: \\
321: ($\GeV$) & Quantity &
322: \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{value} &
323: \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{SM} &
324: \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{$\Delta$} \\
325: \hline\hline
326: 130 & $\sigma(q\overline{q})$ & 82.1 & 2.2 & 82.8 & -0.3 \\
327: 130 & $\sigma(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ & 8.62 & 0.68 & 8.44 & -0.33 \\
328: 130 & $\sigma(\tau^{+}\tau^{-})$ & 9.02 & 0.93 & 8.44 & -0.11 \\
329: 130 & $\mathrm{A_{FB}}(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ & 0.694 & 0.060 & 0.705 & 0.012 \\
330: 130 & $\mathrm{A_{FB}}(\tau^{+}\tau^{-})$ & 0.663 & 0.076 & 0.704 & 0.012 \\
331: \hline
332: 136 & $\sigma(q\overline{q})$ & 66.7 & 2.0 & 66.6 & -0.2 \\
333: 136 & $\sigma(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ & 8.27 & 0.67 & 7.28 & -0.28 \\
334: 136 & $\sigma(\tau^{+}\tau^{-})$ & 7.078 & 0.820 & 7.279 & -0.091 \\
335: 136 & $\mathrm{A_{FB}}(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ & 0.708 & 0.060 & 0.684 & 0.013 \\
336: 136 & $\mathrm{A_{FB}}(\tau^{+}\tau^{-})$ & 0.753 & 0.088 & 0.683 & 0.014 \\
337: \hline
338: 161 & $\sigma(q\overline{q})$ & 37.0 & 1.1 & 35.2 & -0.1 \\
339: 161 & $\sigma(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ & 4.61 & 0.36 & 4.61 & -0.18 \\
340: 161 & $\sigma(\tau^{+}\tau^{-})$ & 5.67 & 0.54 & 4.61 & -0.06 \\
341: 161 & $\mathrm{A_{FB}}(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ & 0.538 & 0.067 & 0.609 & 0.017 \\
342: 161 & $\mathrm{A_{FB}}(\tau^{+}\tau^{-})$ & 0.646 & 0.077 & 0.609 & 0.016 \\
343: \hline
344: 172 & $\sigma(q\overline{q})$ & 29.23 & 0.99 & 28.74 & -0.12 \\
345: 172 & $\sigma(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ & 3.57 & 0.32 & 3.95 & -0.16 \\
346: 172 & $\sigma(\tau^{+}\tau^{-})$ & 4.01 & 0.45 & 3.95 & -0.05 \\
347: 172 & $\mathrm{A_{FB}}(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ & 0.675 & 0.077 & 0.591 & 0.018 \\
348: 172 & $\mathrm{A_{FB}}(\tau^{+}\tau^{-})$ & 0.342 & 0.094 & 0.591 & 0.017 \\
349: \hline
350: 183 & $\sigma(q\overline{q})$ & 24.59 & 0.42 & 24.20 & -0.11 \\
351: 183 & $\sigma(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ & 3.49 & 0.15 & 3.45 & -0.14 \\
352: 183 & $\sigma(\tau^{+}\tau^{-})$ & 3.37 & 0.17 & 3.45 & -0.05 \\
353: 183 & $\mathrm{A_{FB}}(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ & 0.559 & 0.035 & 0.576 & 0.018 \\
354: 183 & $\mathrm{A_{FB}}(\tau^{+}\tau^{-})$ & 0.608 & 0.045 & 0.576 & 0.018 \\
355: \hline
356: 189 & $\sigma(q\overline{q})$ & 22.47 & 0.24 & 22.156 & -0.101 \\
357: 189 & $\sigma(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ & 3.123 & 0.076 & 3.207 & -0.131 \\
358: 189 & $\sigma(\tau^{+}\tau^{-})$ & 3.20 & 0.10 & 3.20 & -0.048 \\
359: 189 & $\mathrm{A_{FB}}(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ & 0.569 & 0.021 & 0.569 & 0.019 \\
360: 189 & $\mathrm{A_{FB}}(\tau^{+}\tau^{-})$ & 0.596 & 0.026 & 0.569 & 0.018 \\
361: \hline
362: \end{tabular}
363: &
364: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|r@{$\pm$}l|c|c|}
365: \hline
366: $\sqrt{s}$ & &
367: \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Average} &
368: &
369: \\
370: ($\GeV$) & Quantity &
371: \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{value} &
372: \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{SM} &
373: \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{$\Delta$} \\
374: \hline\hline
375: 192 & $\sigma(q\overline{q})$ & 22.05 & 0.53 & 21.24 & -0.10 \\
376: 192 & $\sigma(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ & 2.92 & 0.18 & 3.10 & -0.13 \\
377: 192 & $\sigma(\tau^{+}\tau^{-})$ & 2.81 & 0.23 & 3.10 & -0.05 \\
378: 192 & $\mathrm{A_{FB}}(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ & 0.553 & 0.051 & 0.566 & 0.019 \\
379: 192 & $\mathrm{A_{FB}}(\tau^{+}\tau^{-})$ & 0.615 & 0.069 & 0.566 & 0.019 \\
380: \hline
381: 196 & $\sigma(q\overline{q})$ & 20.53 & 0.34 & 20.13 & -0.09 \\
382: 196 & $\sigma(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ & 2.94 & 0.11 & 2.96 & -0.12 \\
383: 196 & $\sigma(\tau^{+}\tau^{-})$ & 2.94 & 0.14 & 2.96 & -0.05 \\
384: 196 & $\mathrm{A_{FB}}(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ & 0.581 & 0.031 & 0.562 & 0.019 \\
385: 196 & $\mathrm{A_{FB}}(\tau^{+}\tau^{-})$ & 0.505 & 0.044 & 0.562 & 0.019 \\
386: \hline
387: 200 & $\sigma(q\overline{q})$ & 19.25 & 0.32 & 19.09 & -0.09 \\
388: 200 & $\sigma(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ & 3.02 & 0.11 & 2.83 & -0.12 \\
389: 200 & $\sigma(\tau^{+}\tau^{-})$ & 2.90 & 0.14 & 2.83 & -0.04 \\
390: 200 & $\mathrm{A_{FB}}(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ & 0.524 & 0.031 & 0.558 & 0.019 \\
391: 200 & $\mathrm{A_{FB}}(\tau^{+}\tau^{-})$ & 0.539 & 0.042 & 0.558 & 0.019 \\
392: \hline
393: 202 & $\sigma(q\overline{q})$ & 19.07 & 0.44 & 18.57 & -0.09 \\
394: 202 & $\sigma(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ & 2.58 & 0.14 & 2.77 & -0.12 \\
395: 202 & $\sigma(\tau^{+}\tau^{-})$ & 2.79 & 0.20 & 2.77 & -0.04 \\
396: 202 & $\mathrm{A_{FB}}(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ & 0.547 & 0.047 & 0.556 & 0.020 \\
397: 202 & $\mathrm{A_{FB}}(\tau^{+}\tau^{-})$ & 0.589 & 0.059 & 0.556 & 0.019 \\
398: \hline
399: 205 & $\sigma(q\overline{q})$ & 18.17 & 0.31 & 17.81 & -0.09 \\
400: 205 & $\sigma(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ & 2.45 & 0.10 & 2.67 & -0.11 \\
401: 205 & $\sigma(\tau^{+}\tau^{-})$ & 2.78 & 0.14 & 2.67 & -0.042 \\
402: 205 & $\mathrm{A_{FB}}(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ & 0.565 & 0.035 & 0.553 & 0.020 \\
403: 205 & $\mathrm{A_{FB}}(\tau^{+}\tau^{-})$ & 0.571 & 0.042 & 0.553 & 0.019 \\
404: \hline
405: 207 & $\sigma(q\overline{q})$ & 17.49 & 0.26 & 17.42 & -0.08 \\
406: 207 & $\sigma(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ & 2.595 & 0.088 & 2.623 & -0.111 \\
407: 207 & $\sigma(\tau^{+}\tau^{-})$ & 2.53 & 0.11 & 2.62 & -0.04 \\
408: 207 & $\mathrm{A_{FB}}(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$ & 0.542 & 0.027 & 0.552 & 0.020 \\
409: 207 & $\mathrm{A_{FB}}(\tau^{+}\tau^{-})$ & 0.564 & 0.037 & 0.551 & 0.019 \\
410: \hline
411: \end{tabular}
412: \end{tabular}
413: \end{turn}
414: \end{center}
415: \caption{Preliminary combined LEP results for $\eeff$, with cross
416: section quoted in units of picobarn.
417: All the results correspond to the first signal definition. The Standard Model
418: predictions are from ZFITTER \capcite{ff:ref:ZFITTER}.
419: The difference, $\Delta$, in the predictions of ZFITTER for
420: second definition relative to the first are given in the final column.
421: The quoted uncertainties do not include the theoretical
422: uncertainties on the corrections discussed in the text.}
423: \label{ff:tab:xsafbres}
424: \end{table}
425: %
426:
427: %
428: \begin{table}[p]
429: \vskip 3cm
430: \begin{center}
431: \begin{turn}{90}
432: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
433: \hline
434: $\begin{array}[b]{c}\roots \\ (\GeV) \end{array}$
435: & 130 & 136 & 161 & 172 & 183 & 189 & 192 & 196 & 200 & 202 & 205 & 207 \\
436: \hline\hline
437: 130 & 1.000 & 0.071 & 0.080 & 0.072 & 0.114 & 0.146 & 0.077 & 0.105 & 0.120 & 0.086 & 0.117 & 0.138 \\
438: 136 & 0.071 & 1.000 & 0.075 & 0.067 & 0.106 & 0.135 & 0.071 & 0.097 & 0.110 & 0.079 & 0.109 & 0.128 \\
439: 161 & 0.080 & 0.075 & 1.000 & 0.077 & 0.120 & 0.153 & 0.080 & 0.110 & 0.125 & 0.090 & 0.124 & 0.145 \\
440: 172 & 0.072 & 0.067 & 0.077 & 1.000 & 0.108 & 0.137 & 0.072 & 0.099 & 0.112 & 0.081 & 0.111 & 0.130 \\
441: 183 & 0.114 & 0.106 & 0.120 & 0.108 & 1.000 & 0.223 & 0.117 & 0.158 & 0.182 & 0.129 & 0.176 & 0.208 \\
442: 189 & 0.146 & 0.135 & 0.153 & 0.137 & 0.223 & 1.000 & 0.151 & 0.206 & 0.235 & 0.168 & 0.226 & 0.268 \\
443: 192 & 0.077 & 0.071 & 0.080 & 0.072 & 0.117 & 0.151 & 1.000 & 0.109 & 0.126 & 0.090 & 0.118 & 0.138 \\
444: 196 & 0.105 & 0.097 & 0.110 & 0.099 & 0.158 & 0.206 & 0.109 & 1.000 & 0.169 & 0.122 & 0.162 & 0.190 \\
445: 200 & 0.120 & 0.110 & 0.125 & 0.112 & 0.182 & 0.235 & 0.126 & 0.169 & 1.000 & 0.140 & 0.184 & 0.215 \\
446: 202 & 0.086 & 0.079 & 0.090 & 0.081 & 0.129 & 0.168 & 0.090 & 0.122 & 0.140 & 1.000 & 0.132 & 0.153 \\
447: 205 & 0.117 & 0.109 & 0.124 & 0.111 & 0.176 & 0.226 & 0.118 & 0.162 & 0.184 & 0.132 & 1.000 & 0.213 \\
448: 207 & 0.138 & 0.128 & 0.145 & 0.130 & 0.208 & 0.268 & 0.138 & 0.190 & 0.215 & 0.153 & 0.213 & 1.000 \\
449: \hline
450: \end{tabular}
451: \end{turn}
452: \end{center}
453: \caption{The correlation coefficients between averaged hadronic cross-sections
454: at different energies.}
455: \label{ff:tab:hadcorrel}
456: \vskip 5cm
457: \end{table}
458: %
459:
460: %
461: \begin{figure}[p]
462: \begin{center}
463: \mbox{\epsfig{file=ff_xs_lep_130-207_summer2002_sw.eps,width=15cm}}
464: \end{center}
465: \caption{Preliminary combined LEP results on the cross-sections for
466: $\qq$, $\mumu$ and $\tautau$ final states, as a function of
467: centre-of-mass energy. The expectations of the SM,
468: computed with ZFITTER~\capcite{ff:ref:ZFITTER}, are shown as curves.
469: The lower plot shows the ratio of the data divided by the SM.}
470: \label{ff:fig-xs_lep}
471: \end{figure}
472: %
473:
474: %
475: \begin{figure}[p]
476: \begin{center}
477: \mbox{\epsfig{file=ff_afb_lep_130-207_summer2002_sw.eps,width=15cm}}
478: \end{center}
479: \caption{Preliminary combined LEP results on the forward-backward
480: asymmetry for $\mumu$ and $\tautau$ final states as a function of
481: centre-of-mass energy. The expectations of the SM
482: computed with ZFITTER~\capcite{ff:ref:ZFITTER}, are shown as
483: curves. The lower plot shows differences between the data
484: and the SM.}
485: \label{ff:fig-afb_lep}
486: \end{figure}
487: %
488:
489:
490:
491: \clearpage
492:
493: %
494: %
495: %
496: \section{Averages for Differential Cross-sections}
497: \label{ff:sec-dsdc}
498:
499:
500: %
501: %
502: %
503: \subsection{{\boldmath{\ee}} final state}
504: \label{ff:sec-dsdc-ee}
505: %
506: %
507: %
508: %
509: %
510:
511:
512:
513:
514: The LEP experiments have measured the differential cross-section, $\dsdc$,
515: for the $\eeee$ channel.%
516: A preliminary combination of these results is made by performing
517: a $\chi^{2}$ fit to the measured differential cross-sections,
518: using the statistical errors as given by the experiments. In contrast
519: to the muon and tau channels (Section~\ref{ff:sec-dsdc-mm-tt})
520: the higher statistics makes the use of expected statistical errors unnecessary.
521: The combination includes data from 189 $\GeV$ to 207 $\GeV$ from
522: all experiments but DELPHI.
523: The data used in the
524: combination are summarised in Table~\ref{ff:tab:ee_inputs}.
525:
526: Each experiment's data are binned according to an agreed common definition,
527: which takes into account the large forward peak of Bhabha scattering:
528: \begin{itemize}
529: \item 10 bins for $\cos\theta$ between $0.0$ and $0.90$ and
530: \item 5 bins for $\cos\theta$ between $-0.90$ and $0.0$
531: \end{itemize}
532: at each energy. The scattering angle, $\theta$, is
533: the angle of the negative lepton with respect to the incoming electron
534: direction in the lab coordinate system.
535: The outer acceptances of the most
536: forward and most backward bins for which the experiments present
537: their data are different. The ranges in $\cos\theta$ of
538: the individual experiments and the average are given in
539: Table~\ref{ff:tab:acptee}. Except for the binning, each experiment uses their
540: own signal definition, for example different experiments have different
541: acollinearity cuts to select events.
542: The signal definition used for the LEP average
543: corresponds to an acollinearity cut of $\rm 10^{\circ}$. The experimental
544: measurements are corrected to the common signal definition following the
545: procedure described in Section~\ref{ff:sec-ave-xsc-afb}. The theoretical
546: predictions are taken from the Monte Carlo event generator
547: BHWIDE~\cite{ff:ref:BHWIDE}.
548:
549: Correlated systematic errors between different experiments, energies and bins
550: at the same energy, arising from uncertainties on the overall normalisation,
551: and from migration of events between forward and backward bins with the same
552: absolute value of $\cos\theta$ due to uncertainties in the corrections for
553: charge confusion, were considered in the averaging procedure.
554:
555: An average for all energies between 189--207 $\GeV$ is performed.
556: The results of the averages are shown in Figure~\ref{ff:fig:dsdc-res-ee}.
557: The $\chi^{2}$ per degree of freedom for the average is $190.8/189$.
558:
559: The correlations between bins in the average are well below $5\%$ of the total
560: error on the averages in each bin for most of the cases, and exceed $10\%$ for
561: the most forward bin for the energy points with the highest accumulated
562: statistics.
563: The agreement between the averaged data and the predictions from the Monte
564: Carlo generator BHWIDE is good.
565: %
566:
567: %
568: %
569: %
570: %
571: %
572: %
573: %
574: %
575: \subsection{{\boldmath{\mumu}}and {\boldmath{\tautau}} final states}
576: \label{ff:sec-dsdc-mm-tt}
577:
578: The LEP experiments have measured the differential cross-section, $\dsdc$,
579: for the $\eemumu$ and $\eetautau$ channels for samples of events
580: with high effective centre-of-mass energy, $\sqrt{s'/s}>0.85$.
581: A preliminary combination of these results is
582: made using the BLUE technique. The statistical error associated with
583: each measurement is taken as the expected statistical error on the
584: differential cross-section, computed from the expected number of events
585: in each bin for each experiment. Using a Monte Carlo simulation it has
586: been shown that this method provides a good approximation to the exact
587: likelihood method based on Poisson statistics~\cite{ff:ref:lepff-osaka}.
588:
589: The combination includes data from 183 $\GeV$ to 207 $\GeV$, but not all
590: experiments
591: provided data at all energies.
592: %
593: %
594: %
595: The data used in the combination are summarised in
596: Table~\ref{ff:tab:inputs}.
597:
598: Each experiment's data are binned in 10 bins of $\cos\theta$ at each
599: energy, using their own signal definition. The scattering angle, $\theta$, is
600: the angle of the negative lepton with respect to the incoming electron
601: direction in the lab coordinate system. The outer acceptances of the most
602: forward and most backward bins for which the four experiments present
603: their data are different. This was accounted for as part of the correction to
604: a common signal definition. The ranges in $\cos\theta$ for the measurements of
605: the individual experiments and the average are given in
606: Table~\ref{ff:tab:acpt}. The signal definition used corresponded
607: to the first definition given in Section~\ref{ff:sec-ave-xsc-afb}.
608:
609: Correlated systematic errors between different experiments, channels and
610: energies, arising from uncertainties on the overall normalisation are
611: considered in the averaging procedure.
612: %
613: %
614: %
615: %
616: %
617: %
618: %
619: All data from all energies are combined in a single fit to obtain
620: averages at each centre-of-mass energy yielding the full covariance matrix
621: between the different measurements at all energies.
622:
623: The results of the averages are shown in Figures~\ref{ff:fig:dsdc-res-mm}
624: and~\ref{ff:fig:dsdc-res-tt}.
625: %
626: The correlations between bins in the average are less that
627: $2\%$ of the total error on the averages in each bin.
628: Overall the agreement between the averaged data and the predictions
629: is reasonable, with a $\chi^{2}$ of $200$ for $160$ degrees of freedom.
630: At 202 $\GeV$ the measured differential cross-sections in the most backward
631: bins, $-1.00 < \cos\theta < 0.8$, for both muon and tau final states are
632: above the predictions. The data at 202 $\GeV$ suffer
633: from rather low delivered luminosity, with less than 4 events
634: expected in each experiment in each channel in this backward
635: $\cos\theta$ bin. The agreement between the data
636: and the predictions in the same $\cos\theta$ bin is more consistent at
637: higher energies.
638:
639: %
640: \begin{table}[htbp]
641: \begin{center}
642: \begin{tabular}{|l|cccc|}
643: \hline
644: & \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{$\eeee$} \\
645: \cline{2-5}
646: $\sqrt{s}$($\GeV$) & A & D & L & O \\
647: \hline
648: %
649: %
650: %
651: 189 & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{F}} \\
652: \hline
653: 192--202 & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{P}} \\
654: \hline
655: 205--207 & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{P}} \\
656: \hline
657: \end{tabular}
658: \end{center}
659: \caption{Differential cross-section data provided by the LEP
660: collaborations (ALEPH, DELPHI, L3 and OPAL) for $\eeee$.
661: Data indicated with {\sc{F}} are final, published data.
662: Data marked with {\sc{P}} are preliminary.
663: Data marked with a {\sc{-}} were not available for combination.}
664: \label{ff:tab:ee_inputs}
665: \end{table}
666: %
667:
668: %
669: \begin{table}[htbp]
670: \begin{center}
671: \begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|}
672: \hline
673: Experiment & $\cos\theta_{min}$ & $\cos\theta_{max}$ \\
674: \hline
675: \hline
676: ALEPH ($\sqrt{s'/s}>0.85$) & $-0.90$ & $0.90$ \\
677: L3 (acol. $<\ 25^{\circ}$) & $-0.72$ & $0.72$ \\
678: OPAL (acol. $<\ 10^{\circ}$) & $-0.90$ & $0.90$ \\
679: \hline
680: \hline
681: Average (acol. $<\ 10^{\circ}$) & $-0.90$ & $0.90$ \\
682: \hline
683: \end{tabular}
684: \end{center}
685: \caption{The acceptances for which experimental data are presented
686: for the $\eeee$ channel
687: and the acceptance for the LEP average.}
688: \label{ff:tab:acptee}
689: \end{table}
690: %
691:
692: %
693: \begin{table}[htbp]
694: \begin{center}
695: \begin{tabular}{|l|cccc|cccc|}
696: \hline
697: & \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{$\eemumu$}
698: & \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{$\eetautau$} \\
699: \cline{2-9}
700: $\sqrt{s}$($\GeV$) & A & D & L & O
701: & A & D & L & O \\
702: \hline
703: \hline
704: 183 & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{F}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{F}}
705: & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{F}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{F}} \\
706: \hline
707: 189 & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{F}} & {\sc{F}} & {\sc{F}}
708: & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{F}} & {\sc{F}} & {\sc{F}} \\
709: \hline
710: 192--202 & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{P}}
711: & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{P}} \\
712: \hline
713: 205--207 & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{P}}
714: & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{P}} \\
715: \hline
716: \end{tabular}
717: \end{center}
718: \caption{Differential cross-section data provided by the LEP
719: collaborations (ALEPH, DELPHI, L3 and OPAL) for $\eemumu$ and
720: $\eetautau$ combination at different centre-of-mass energies.
721: Data indicated with {\sc{F}} are final, published data.
722: Data marked with {\sc{P}} are preliminary.
723: Data marked with a {\sc{-}} were not available for combination.}
724: \label{ff:tab:inputs}
725: \end{table}
726: %
727:
728: %
729: \begin{table}[htbp]
730: \begin{center}
731: \begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|}
732: \hline
733: Experiment & $\cos\theta_{min}$ & $\cos\theta_{max}$ \\
734: \hline
735: \hline
736: ALEPH & $-0.95$ & $0.95$ \\
737: DELPHI ($\eemumu$ 183) & $-0.94$ & $0.94$ \\
738: DELPHI ($\eemumu$ 189--207) & $-0.97$ & $0.97$ \\
739: DELPHI ($\eetautau$) & $-0.96$ & $0.96$ \\
740: L3 & $-0.90$ & $0.90$ \\
741: OPAL & $-1.00$ & $1.00$ \\
742: \hline
743: \hline
744: Average & $-1.00$ & $1.00$ \\
745: \hline
746: \end{tabular}
747: \end{center}
748: \caption{The acceptances for which experimental data are presented
749: and the acceptance for the LEP average.
750: For DELPHI the acceptance is shown for the different channels and
751: for the muons for different centre of mass energies. For all other
752: experiments the acceptance is the same for muon and tau-lepton
753: channels and for all energies provided.}
754: \label{ff:tab:acpt}
755: \end{table}
756: %
757:
758: %
759: \begin{figure}[p]
760: \begin{center}
761: \epsfig{file=ff_dsdc_ee_189-207_summer2002.eps,width=0.98\textwidth}
762: \end{center}
763: \caption{LEP averaged differential cross-sections for $\eeee$ at
764: energies of 189--207 $\GeV$. The SM
765: predictions, shown as solid histograms, are computed with
766: BHWIDE~\capcite{ff:ref:BHWIDE}.}
767: \label{ff:fig:dsdc-res-ee}
768: \vskip 2cm
769: \end{figure}
770: %
771:
772: %
773: \begin{figure}[p]
774: \begin{center}
775: \epsfig{file=ff_dsdc_mm_183-207_summer2002.eps,width=0.98\textwidth}
776: \end{center}
777: \caption{LEP averaged differential cross-sections for $\eemumu$ at
778: energies of 183--207 $\GeV$. The SM
779: predictions, shown as solid histograms, are computed with
780: ZFITTER~\capcite{ff:ref:ZFITTER}.}
781: \label{ff:fig:dsdc-res-mm}
782: \vskip 2cm
783: \end{figure}
784: %
785:
786: %
787: \begin{figure}[p]
788: \begin{center}
789: \epsfig{file=ff_dsdc_tt_183-207_summer2002.eps,width=0.98\textwidth}
790: \end{center}
791: \caption{LEP averaged differential cross-sections for $\eetautau$ at
792: energies of 183--207 $\GeV$. The SM
793: predictions, shown as solid histograms, are computed with
794: ZFITTER~\capcite{ff:ref:ZFITTER}.}
795: \label{ff:fig:dsdc-res-tt}
796: \vskip 2cm
797: \end{figure}
798: %
799:
800:
801: \clearpage
802:
803: %
804: %
805: %
806: %
807: %
808: %
809: %
810: %
811: \section{Averages for Heavy Flavour Measurements}
812: \label{ff:sec-hvflv}
813:
814:
815: %
816: %
817: %
818: %
819: %
820:
821: This section presents a preliminary combination of both
822: published~\cite{ff:ref:hfpublished}
823: and preliminary~\cite{ff:ref:hfpreliminary} measurements of the
824: ratios cross section ratios $R_{\mathrm{q}}$ defined as
825: ${\mathrm{\frac{\sigma_{q \overline {q} } }{\sigma_{had}}}}$
826: for b and c production, $\Rb$ and $\Rc$,
827: and the forward-backward asymmetries, $\Abb$ and
828: $\Acc$, from the LEP collaborations at centre-of-mass
829: energies in the range of 130 $\GeV$ to 207 $\GeV$.
830: %
831: %
832: %
833: %
834: %
835: %
836: %
837: Table~\ref{ff:tab:hfinput} summarises all the inputs that have been combined so far.
838:
839: A common signal definition is defined for all the measurements, requiring:
840: \begin{list}{$\bullet$}{\setlength{\itemsep}{0ex}
841: \setlength{\parsep}{0ex}
842: \setlength{\topsep}{0ex}}
843: \item{an effective centre-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s^{\prime}} > 0.85 \sqrt{s}$}
844: \item{no subtraction of ISR and FSR photon interference contribution and}
845: \item{extrapolation to full angular acceptance.}
846: \end{list}
847: Systematic errors are divided into three categories: uncorrelated errors,
848: errors correlated between the measurements of each experiment, and
849: errors common to all experiments.
850: %
851: %
852:
853: Due to the fact that $\Rc$ measurements are only provided by a single
854: experiment and are strongly correlated with $\Rb$ measurements,
855: it was decided to fit the b sector and c sector separately,
856: the other flavour's measurements being fixed to their Standard Model
857: predictions.
858: In addition, these fitted values are used to set limits upon physics beyond
859: the Standard Model, such as contact term interactions, in which only one
860: quark flavour is assumed to be effected by the new physics during each fit,
861: therefore this averaging method is consistent with the interpretations.
862:
863: Full details concerning the combination procedure
864: can be found in~\cite{ff:ref:hfconfnote}.
865:
866: The results of the combination are presented in Table~\ref{ff:tab:hfbresults}
867: and Table~\ref{ff:tab:hfcresults}
868: and in Figures~\ref{ff:fig:hfbres} and~\ref{ff:fig:hfcres}.
869: The results for both b and c sector are in agreement with the Standard
870: Model predictions of ZFITTER.
871: The averaged discrepancies with respect to the Standard Model predictions
872: is -2.08 $\sigma$ for $\Rb$, +0.30 $\sigma$ for $\Rc$, -1.56 $\sigma$ for $\Abb$ and -0.24 $\sigma $ for $\Acc$.
873: A list of the error contributions from the combination at 189~$\GeV$ is shown
874: in Table~\ref{ff:tab:hferror}.
875:
876:
877: %
878: \begin{table}[htbp]
879: \begin{center}
880: \begin{tabular}{|l|cccc|cccc|cccc|cccc|}
881: \hline
882: $\sqrt{s}$ ($\GeV$)
883: & \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{$\Rb$}
884: & \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{$\Rc$}
885: & \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{$\Abb$}
886: & \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{$\Acc$} \\
887: \cline{2-17}
888: & A & D & L & O & A & D & L & O & A & D & L & O & A & D & L & O \\
889: \hline\hline
890: 133 & {\sc{F}} & {\sc{F}} & {\sc{F}} & {\sc{F}}
891: & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}}
892: & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{F}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{F}}
893: & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{F}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{F}} \\
894: \hline
895: 167 & {\sc{F}} & {\sc{F}} & {\sc{F}} & {\sc{F}}
896: & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}}
897: & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{F}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{F}}
898: & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{F}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{F}} \\
899: \hline
900: 183 & {\sc{F}} & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{F}} & {\sc{F}}
901: & {\sc{F}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}}
902: & {\sc{F}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{F}}
903: & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{F}} \\
904: \hline
905: 189 & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{F}} & {\sc{F}}
906: & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}}
907: & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{F}} & {\sc{F}}
908: & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{F}} \\
909: \hline
910: 192 to 202 & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{-}}
911: & {\sc{P*}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}}
912: & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}}
913: & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}} \\
914: \hline
915: 205 and 207 & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{-}}
916: & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}}
917: & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{P}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}}
918: & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}} & {\sc{-}} \\
919: \hline
920: \end{tabular}
921: \end{center}
922: \caption{Data provided by the ALEPH, DELPHI, L3, OPAL collaborations
923: for combination at different centre-of-mass energies.
924: Data indicated with {\sc{F}} are final, published data.
925: Data marked with {\sc{P}} are preliminary and for data marked
926: with {\sc{P*}}, not all energies are supplied.
927: Data marked with a {\sc{-}} were not supplied for combination.}
928: \label{ff:tab:hfinput}
929: \end{table}
930: %
931: %
932: \begin{table}[htbp]
933: \begin{center}
934: \begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|}
935: \hline
936: $\sqrt{s}$ ($\GeV$) & $\Rb$
937: & $\Abb$ \\
938: \hline\hline
939: 133 & 0.1822 $\pm$ 0.0132 & 0.367 $\pm$ 0.251 \\
940: & (0.1867) & (0.504) \\
941: \hline
942: 167 & 0.1494 $\pm$ 0.0127 & 0.624 $\pm$ 0.254 \\
943: & (0.1727) & (0.572) \\
944: \hline
945: 183 & 0.1646 $\pm$ 0.0094 & 0.515 $\pm$ 0.149 \\
946: & (0.1692) & (0.588) \\
947: \hline
948: 189 & 0.1565 $\pm$ 0.0061 & 0.529 $\pm$ 0.089 \\
949: & (0.1681) & (0.593) \\
950: \hline
951: 192 & 0.1551 $\pm$ 0.0149 & 0.424 $\pm$ 0.267 \\
952: & (0.1676) & (0.595) \\
953: \hline
954: 196 & 0.1556 $\pm$ 0.0097 & 0.535 $\pm$ 0.151 \\
955: & (0.1670) & (0.598) \\
956: \hline
957: 200 & 0.1683 $\pm$ 0.0099 & 0.596 $\pm$ 0.149 \\
958: & (0.1664) & (0.600) \\
959: \hline
960: 202 & 0.1646 $\pm$ 0.0144 & 0.607 $\pm$ 0.241 \\
961: & (0.1661) & (0.601) \\
962: \hline
963: 205 & 0.1606 $\pm$ 0.0126 & 0.715 $\pm$ 0.214 \\
964: & (0.1657) & (0.603) \\
965: \hline
966: 207 & 0.1694 $\pm$ 0.0107 & 0.175 $\pm$ 0.156 \\
967: & (0.1654) & (0.604) \\
968: \hline
969: \end{tabular}
970: \end{center}
971: \caption[]{Combined results on $\Rb $ and $\Abb$. Quoted errors
972: represent the statistical and systematic errors added in quadrature.
973: For comparison, the Standard Model predictions computed with
974: ZFITTER~\capcite{ff:ref:hfzfit} are given in parentheses. }
975: \label{ff:tab:hfbresults}
976: \end{table}
977: %
978: %
979: \begin{table}[htbp]
980: \begin{center}
981: \begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|}
982: \hline
983: $\sqrt{s}$ ($\GeV$) & $\Rc$
984: & $\Acc$ \\
985: \hline\hline
986: 133 & - & 0.630 $\pm$ 0.313 \\
987: & & (0.684) \\
988: \hline
989: 167 & - & 0.980 $\pm$ 0.343 \\
990: & & (0.677) \\
991: \hline
992: 183 & 0.2628 $\pm$ 0.0397 & 0.717 $\pm$ 0.201 \\
993: & (0.2472) & (0.663) \\
994: \hline
995: 189 & 0.2298 $\pm$ 0.0213 & 0.542 $\pm$ 0.143 \\
996: & (0.2490) & (0.656) \\
997: \hline
998: 196 & 0.2734 $\pm$ 0.0387 & - \\
999: & (0.2508) & \\
1000: \hline
1001: 200 & 0.2535 $\pm$ 0.0360 & - \\
1002: & (0.2518) & \\
1003: \hline
1004: 205 & 0.2816 $\pm$ 0.0394 & - \\
1005: & (0.2530) & \\
1006: \hline
1007: 207 & 0.2890 $\pm$ 0.0350 & - \\
1008: & (0.2533) & \\
1009: \hline
1010: \end{tabular}
1011: \end{center}
1012: \caption{Combined results on $\Rc$ and $\Acc$. Quoted errors
1013: represent the statistical and systematic errors added in quadrature.
1014: For comparison, the Standard Model predictions computed with
1015: ZFITTER~\capcite{ff:ref:hfzfit} are given in parentheses. }
1016: \label{ff:tab:hfcresults}
1017: \end{table}
1018: %
1019: %
1020: \begin{table}[htbp]
1021: \begin{center}
1022: \begin{tabular}{|l|c|c||c|c|}
1023: \hline
1024: Error list & $\Rb$ (189 $\GeV$)
1025: & $\Abb$ (189 $\GeV$)
1026: & $\Rc$ (189 $\GeV$)
1027: & $\Acc$ (189 $\GeV$) \\
1028:
1029: \hline\hline
1030: statistics & 0.0057 & 0.084 & 0.0169 & 0.119 \\
1031: \hline
1032: internal syst & 0.0020 & 0.025 & 0.0109 & 0.042 \\
1033: common syst & 0.0007 & 0.011 & 0.0072 & 0.069 \\
1034: total syst & 0.0021 & 0.027 & 0.0130 & 0.081 \\
1035: \hline
1036: total error & 0.0061 & 0.089 & 0.0213 & 0.143 \\
1037: \hline
1038: \end{tabular}
1039: \end{center}
1040: \caption{Error breakdown at 189 $\GeV$.}
1041: \label{ff:tab:hferror}
1042: \end{table}
1043: %
1044:
1045: %
1046: \begin{figure}[p]
1047: \begin{center}
1048: \mbox{\epsfig{file=ff_bb_combined_fix_summer2002.eps,height=20cm}}
1049: \end{center}
1050: \caption{Preliminary combined LEP measurements of $\Rb$ and $\Abb$.
1051: Solid lines represent the Standard Model prediction for the high
1052: $\sqrt{s'}$ selection used at $\LEPII$ and dotted lines the inclusive
1053: prediction used at $\LEPI$. Both are computed with
1054: ZFITTER\capcite{ff:ref:hfzfit}. The $\LEPI$ measurements have been
1055: taken from \capcite{ff:ref:hflep1-99}.}
1056: \label{ff:fig:hfbres}
1057: \end{figure}
1058: %
1059:
1060: %
1061: \begin{figure}[p]
1062: \begin{center}
1063: \mbox{\epsfig{file=ff_cc_combined_fix_summer2002.eps,height=20cm}}
1064: \end{center}
1065: \caption{Preliminary combined LEP measurements of $\Rc$ and $\Acc$.
1066: Solid lines represent the Standard Model prediction for the high
1067: $\sqrt{s'}$ selection used at $\LEPII$ and dotted lines the
1068: inclusive prediction used at $\LEPI$. Both are computed with
1069: ZFITTER~\capcite{ff:ref:hfzfit}. The $\LEPI$ measurements have been
1070: taken from~\capcite{ff:ref:hflep1-99}.}
1071: \label{ff:fig:hfcres}
1072: \end{figure}
1073: %
1074:
1075: %
1076: %
1077: %
1078: %
1079: %
1080: %
1081: %
1082: %
1083: \section{Interpretation}
1084: \label{ff:sec-interp}
1085:
1086: The combined measurements presented above are interpreted in a variety
1087: of models.
1088: The cross-section and asymmetry results are used to place limits
1089: on contact interactions between leptons and quarks and, using
1090: the results on heavy flavour production, on contact interaction between
1091: electrons and $b$ and $c$ quarks specifically.
1092: Limits on the mass of a possible additional heavy neutral boson, $\Zprime$,
1093: are obtained for a variety of models.
1094: %
1095: %
1096: Using the combined differential cross-sections for \ee\ final states,
1097: limits on contact interactions in the $\eeee$ channel and limits on the
1098: scale of gravity in models with large extra-dimensions are presented.
1099: Limits are also derived on the masses of leptoquarks - assuming
1100: a coupling of electromagnetic strength.
1101: In all cases the Born level predictions for the physics beyond the Standard
1102: Model have been corrected to take into account QED radiation.
1103:
1104: %
1105: %
1106: %
1107: \subsection{Contact Interactions}
1108: \label{ff:sec-cntc}
1109: %
1110: %
1111: %
1112: %
1113: %
1114:
1115: The averages of cross-sections and forward-backward asymmetries for
1116: muon-pair and tau-lepton pair and the cross-sections for $\qq$
1117: final states are used to search for
1118: contact interactions between fermions.
1119: %
1120: %
1121: %
1122: %
1123:
1124:
1125: Following~\cite{ff:ref:ELPthr}, contact interactions are parameterised
1126: by an effective Lagrangian, $\cal{L}_{\mathrm{eff}}$, which is added to the
1127: Standard Model Lagrangian and has the form:
1128: %
1129: \begin{eqnarray}
1130: \mbox{$\cal{L}$}_{\mathrm{eff}} =
1131: \frac{g^{2}}{(1+\delta)\Lambda^{2}}
1132: \sum_{i,j=L,R} \eta_{ij}
1133: \overline{e}_{i} \gamma_{\mu} e_{i}
1134: \overline{f}_{j} \gamma^{\mu} f_{j},
1135: \end{eqnarray}
1136: %
1137: where $g^{2}/{4\pi}$ is taken to be 1 by convention, $\delta=1 (0)$ for
1138: $f=e ~(f \neq e)$, $\eta_{ij}=\pm 1$ or $0$ for different interaction types,
1139: $\Lambda$ is the scale of the contact interactions,
1140: $e_{i}$ and $f_{j}$ are left or right-handed spinors.
1141: By assuming different helicity coupling between the initial
1142: state and final state currents, a set of different models can be defined
1143: from this Lagrangian~\cite{ff:ref:Kroha}, with either
1144: constructive ($+$) or destructive ($-$) interference between the
1145: Standard Model process and the contact interactions. The models and
1146: corresponding choices of $\eta_{ij}$ are given in Table~\ref{ff:tab:cntcdef}.
1147: The models LL$^{\pm}$, RR$^{\pm}$, VV$^{\pm}$, AA$^{\pm}$, LR$^{\pm}$,
1148: RL$^{\pm}$, V0$^{\pm}$, A0$^{\pm}$ are considered here since
1149: these models lead to large deviations in $\eeff$ at LEP II.
1150: The corresponding energies scales for the models with constructive
1151: or destructive interference are denoted by $\Lambda^{+}$ and $\Lambda^{-}$
1152: respectively.
1153:
1154: For leptonic final states 4 different fits are made
1155: \begin{itemize}
1156: \item individual fits to contact interactions in $\eemumu$ and $\eetautau$
1157: using the measured cross-sections and asymmetries,
1158: \item fits to $\eell$ (simultaneous fits to $\eemumu$ and $\eetautau$)
1159: again using the measured cross-sections and asymmetries,
1160: \item fits to $\eeee$, using the measured differential cross-sections.
1161: \end{itemize}
1162: For the inclusive hadronic final states three different model
1163: assumptions are used to fit the total hadronic cross-section
1164: \begin{itemize}
1165: \item the contact interactions affect only one quark flavour of up-type
1166: using the measured hadronic cross-sections,
1167: \item the contact interactions affect only one quark flavour of down-type
1168: using the measured hadronic cross-sections,
1169: \item the contact interactions contribute to all quark final states with
1170: the same strength.
1171: \end{itemize}
1172:
1173: Limits on contact interactions between electrons and $b$ and $c$ quarks
1174: are obtained using all the heavy flavour $\LEPII$ combined results
1175: from 133 $\GeV$ to 207 $\GeV$ given in Tables~\ref{ff:tab:hfbresults}
1176: and~\ref{ff:tab:hfcresults}.
1177: For the purpose of fitting contact interaction models to the data,
1178: $\Rb$ and $\Rc$ are converted to cross-sections
1179: $\sigma_{\bb}$ and $\sigma_{\cc}$ using the averaged ${\qq}$ cross-section of
1180: section \ref{ff:sec-ave-xsc-afb} corresponding to the second signal
1181: definition.
1182: In the calculation of errors, the correlations between $\Rb$, $\Rc$ and
1183: $\sigma_{\qq}$ are assumed to be negligible.
1184: These results are of particular interest since they are inaccessible
1185: to ${\mathrm{p\bar{p}}}$ or ep colliders.
1186:
1187:
1188: For the purpose of fitting contact interaction models to the data,
1189: the parameter $\epsilon=1/\Lambda^{2}$ is used, with
1190: $\epsilon=0$ in the limit that there are no contact interactions.
1191: This parameter is allowed to take both positive and negative values in
1192: the fits.
1193: Theoretical uncertainties on the Standard Model predictions are taken
1194: from~\cite{ff:ref:lepffwrkshp}.
1195:
1196: The values of $\epsilon$ extracted for each model are all compatible
1197: with the Standard Model expectation $\epsilon=0$, at the two standard
1198: deviation level. As expected,
1199: the errors on $\epsilon$ are typically a factor of two
1200: smaller than those obtained from a single LEP experiment with the same data
1201: set. The fitted values of $\epsilon$ are converted into
1202: $95\%$ confidence level lower limits on $\Lambda$.
1203: The limits are obtained by integrating the likelihood function in
1204: $\epsilon$ over the physically allowed values\footnote{To be able to obtain
1205: confidence limits from the likelihood function in $\epsilon$
1206: it is necessary to convert the likelihood to a probability density function
1207: for $\epsilon$; this is done by
1208: multiplying by a prior probability function. Simply integrating the
1209: likelihood over $\epsilon$ is equivalent to multiplying by a uniform
1210: prior probability function in $\epsilon$.},
1211: $\epsilon \ge 0$ for each $\Lambda^{+}$ limit and $\epsilon \le 0$ for
1212: $\Lambda^{-}$ limits.
1213:
1214:
1215: The fitted values of $\epsilon$ and their 68$\%$ confidence level
1216: uncertainties together with the 95$\%$ confidence level lower limit
1217: on ${\mathrm{\Lambda}}$ are shown in Table \ref{ff:tab:cntceps} for
1218: the fits to $\eell$ ($\ell \neq e$), $\eeee$ , inclusive $\eeqq$, $\eebb$
1219: and $\eecc$. Table \ref{ff:tab:cntclmb} shows only the limits
1220: obtained on the scale $\Lambda$ for other fits. The limits are shown
1221: graphically in Figure \ref{ff:fig:cntc}.
1222:
1223: For the VV model with positive interference and assuming
1224: electromagnetic coupling strength instead of $g^{2}/{4\pi} = 1$,
1225: the scale $\Lambda$ obtained in the $\eeee$ channel is converted to
1226: an upper limit on the electron size:
1227: %
1228: \begin{eqnarray}
1229: \mathrm{r_e < 1.4 \times 10^{-19} m}
1230: \end{eqnarray}
1231: %
1232: Models with stronger couplings will make this upper limit even tighter.
1233:
1234: %
1235: \begin{table}[tp]
1236: \begin{center}
1237: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
1238: \hline
1239: Model & $\eta_{LL}$ & $\eta_{RR}$ & $\eta_{LR}$ & $\eta_{RL}$ \\
1240: \hline\hline
1241: LL$^{\pm}$ & $\pm 1$ & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
1242: \hline
1243: RR$^{\pm}$ & 0 & $\pm 1$ & 0 & 0 \\
1244: \hline
1245: VV$^{\pm}$ & $\pm 1$ & $\pm 1$ & $\pm 1$ & $\pm 1$ \\
1246: \hline
1247: AA$^{\pm}$ & $\pm 1$ & $\pm 1$ & $\mp 1$ & $\mp 1$ \\
1248: \hline
1249: LR$^{\pm}$ & 0 & 0 & $\pm 1$ & 0 \\
1250: \hline
1251: RL$^{\pm}$ & 0 & 0 & 0 & $\pm 1$ \\
1252: \hline
1253: V0$^{\pm}$ & $\pm 1$ & $\pm 1$ & 0 & 0 \\
1254: \hline
1255: A0$^{\pm}$ & 0 & 0 & $\pm 1$ & $\pm 1$ \\
1256: \hline
1257: \end{tabular}
1258: \end{center}
1259: \caption{Choices of $\eta_{ij}$ for different contact interaction models}
1260: \label{ff:tab:cntcdef}.
1261: \end{table}
1262: %
1263:
1264:
1265: %
1266: \begin{figure}[p]
1267: \begin{center}
1268: \begin{tabular}{cc}
1269: \epsfig{file=ff_cntc_ll_lep_summer2002_pjh.eps,width=0.36\textwidth} &
1270: \epsfig{file=ff_cntc_ee_lep_summer2002_pjh.eps,width=0.36\textwidth} \\
1271: \multicolumn{2}{c}
1272: {\epsfig{file=ff_cntc_qq_lep_summer2002_pjh.eps,width=0.36\textwidth}} \\
1273: \epsfig{file=ff_cntc_bb_lep_summer2002_pjh.eps,width=0.36\textwidth} &
1274: \epsfig{file=ff_cntc_cc_lep_summer2002_pjh.eps,width=0.36\textwidth} \\
1275: \end{tabular}
1276: \end{center}
1277: \caption{The limits on $\Lambda$ for $\eell$ assuming
1278: universality in the contact interactions between
1279: $\eell$ ($\ell \neq e$), for $\eeee$, for $\eeqq$ assuming
1280: equal strength contact interactions for quarks and for
1281: $\eebb$ and $\eecc$.}
1282: \label{ff:fig:cntc}
1283: \end{figure}
1284: %
1285:
1286: %
1287: \begin{table}
1288: \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
1289: \begin{center}
1290: \begin{tabular}{cc}
1291:
1292: \begin{tabular}{|c||c|cc|}
1293: \hline
1294: \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{$\eell$} \\
1295: \hline
1296: \hline
1297: & $\epsilon$ & $\Lambda^{-}$ & $\Lambda^{+}$ \\
1298: Model & (TeV$^{-2}$) & (TeV) & (TeV) \\
1299: \hline
1300: \hline
1301: ~~~~LL~~~~ & -0.0044$^{+0.0035}_{-0.0035}$ & 9.8 & 13.3 \\
1302: \hline
1303: RR & -0.0049$^{+0.0039}_{-0.0039}$ & 9.3 & 12.7 \\
1304: \hline
1305: VV & -0.0016$^{+0.0013}_{-0.0014}$ & 16.0 & 21.7 \\
1306: \hline
1307: AA & -0.0013$^{+0.0017}_{-0.0017}$ & 15.1 & 17.2 \\
1308: \hline
1309: LR & -0.0036$^{+0.0052}_{-0.0054}$ & 8.6 & 10.2 \\
1310: \hline
1311: RL & -0.0036$^{+0.0052}_{-0.0054}$ & 8.6 & 10.2 \\
1312: \hline
1313: V0 & -0.0023$^{+0.0018}_{-0.0018}$ & 13.5 & 18.4 \\
1314: \hline
1315: A0 & -0.0018$^{+0.0026}_{-0.0026}$ & 12.4 & 14.3 \\
1316: \hline
1317: \end{tabular}
1318: &
1319: \begin{tabular}{|c||c|cc|}
1320: \hline
1321: \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{$\eeee$} \\
1322: \hline
1323: \hline
1324: & $\epsilon$ & $\Lambda^{-}$ & $\Lambda^{+}$ \\
1325: Model & (TeV$^{-2}$) & (TeV) & (TeV) \\
1326: \hline
1327: \hline
1328: ~~~~LL~~~~ & ~0.0049$^{+0.0084}_{-0.0084}$ & 9.0 & 7.1 \\
1329: \hline
1330: RR & ~0.0056$^{+0.0082}_{-0.0092}$ & 8.9 & 7.0 \\
1331: \hline
1332: VV & ~0.0004$^{+0.0022}_{-0.0016}$ &18.0 &15.9 \\
1333: \hline
1334: AA & ~0.0009$^{+0.0041}_{-0.0039}$ &11.5 &11.3 \\
1335: \hline
1336: LR & ~0.0008$^{+0.0064}_{-0.0052}$ &10.0 & 9.1 \\
1337: \hline
1338: RL & ~0.0008$^{+0.0064}_{-0.0052}$ &10.0 & 9.1 \\
1339: \hline
1340: V0 & ~0.0028$^{+0.0038}_{-0.0045}$ &12.5 &10.2 \\
1341: \hline
1342: A0 & -0.0008$^{+0.0028}_{-0.0030}$ &14.0 &13.0 \\
1343: \hline
1344: \end{tabular}
1345: \\
1346:
1347: \\
1348: \multicolumn{2}{c}{
1349: \begin{tabular}{|c||c|cc|}
1350: \hline
1351: \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{$\eeqq$} \\
1352: \hline
1353: \hline
1354: & $\epsilon$ & $\Lambda^{-}$ & $\Lambda^{+}$ \\
1355: Model & (TeV$^{-2}$) & (TeV) & (TeV) \\
1356: \hline
1357: \hline
1358: ~~~~LL~~~~ & ~0.0152$^{+0.0064}_{-0.0076}$ & 3.7 & 6.0 \\
1359: \hline
1360: RR & -0.0208$^{+0.0103}_{-0.0082}$ & 5.5 & 3.9 \\
1361: \hline
1362: VV & -0.0096$^{+0.0051}_{-0.0037}$ & 8.1 & 5.3 \\
1363: \hline
1364: AA & ~0.0068$^{+0.0033}_{-0.0034}$ & 5.1 & 8.8 \\
1365: \hline
1366: LR & -0.0308$^{+0.0172}_{-0.0055}$ & 5.1 & 4.3 \\
1367: \hline
1368: RL & -0.0108$^{+0.0057}_{-0.0054}$ & 7.2 & 9.3 \\
1369: \hline
1370: V0 & ~0.0174$^{+0.0057}_{-0.0074}$ & 5.1 & 6.0 \\
1371: \hline
1372: A0 & -0.0092$^{+0.0049}_{-0.0041}$ & 8.0 & 3.9 \\
1373: \hline
1374: \end{tabular}
1375: }
1376: \\
1377:
1378: \\
1379: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|cc|}
1380: \hline
1381: \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{$\eebb$} \\
1382: \hline
1383: \hline
1384: & $\epsilon$ & $\Lambda^{-}$ & $\Lambda^{+}$ \\
1385: Model & (TeV$^{-2}$) & (TeV) & (TeV) \\
1386: \hline
1387: \hline
1388: ~~~~LL~~~~ & -0.0038$^{+ 0.0044}_{- 0.0047}$ & 9.1 & 12.3 \\
1389: \hline
1390: RR & -0.1729$^{+ 0.1584}_{- 0.0162}$ & 2.2 & 8.1 \\
1391: \hline
1392: VV & -0.0040$^{+ 0.0039}_{- 0.0041}$ & 9.4 & 14.1 \\
1393: \hline
1394: AA & -0.0022$^{+ 0.0029}_{- 0.0031}$ & 11.5 & 15.3 \\
1395: \hline
1396: LR & -0.0620$^{+ 0.0692}_{- 0.0313}$ & 3.1 & 5.5 \\
1397: \hline
1398: RL & 0.0180$^{+ 0.1442}_{- 0.0249}$ & 7.0 & 2.4 \\
1399: \hline
1400: V0 & -0.0028$^{+ 0.0032}_{- 0.0033}$ & 10.8 & 14.5 \\
1401: \hline
1402: A0 & 0.0375$^{+ 0.0193}_{- 0.0379}$ & 6.3 & 3.9 \\
1403: \hline
1404: \end{tabular}
1405: &
1406: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|cc|}
1407: \hline
1408: \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{$\eecc$} \\
1409: \hline
1410: \hline
1411: & $\epsilon$ & $\Lambda^{-}$ & $\Lambda^{+}$ \\
1412: Model & (TeV$^{-2}$) & (TeV) & (TeV) \\
1413: \hline
1414: \hline
1415: ~~~~LL~~~~ & -0.0091$^{+ 0.0126}_{- 0.0126}$ & 5.7 & 6.6 \\
1416: \hline
1417: RR & 0.3544$^{+ 0.0476}_{- 0.3746}$ & 4.9 & 1.5 \\
1418: \hline
1419: VV & -0.0047$^{+ 0.0057}_{- 0.0060}$ & 8.2 & 10.3 \\
1420: \hline
1421: AA & -0.0059$^{+ 0.0095}_{- 0.0090}$ & 6.9 & 7.6 \\
1422: \hline
1423: LR & 0.1386$^{+ 0.0555}_{- 0.1649}$ & 3.9 & 2.1 \\
1424: \hline
1425: RL & 0.0106$^{+ 0.0848}_{- 0.0757}$ & 3.1 & 2.8 \\
1426: \hline
1427: V0 & -0.0058$^{+ 0.0075}_{- 0.0071}$ & 7.4 & 9.2 \\
1428: \hline
1429: A0 & 0.0662$^{+ 0.0564}_{- 0.0905}$ & 4.5 & 2.7 \\
1430: \hline
1431: \end{tabular}
1432:
1433: \end{tabular}
1434: \caption{The fitted values of $\epsilon$ and the derived 95\% confidence
1435: level lower limits on the parameter $\Lambda$
1436: of contact interaction derived from fits to lepton-pair
1437: cross-sections and asymmetries and from fits to hadronic
1438: cross-sections. The limits $\Lambda_+$ and $\Lambda_-$
1439: given in TeV correspond to the upper and lower signs of the
1440: parameters $\eta_{ij}$ in Table \ref{ff:tab:cntcdef}.
1441: For $\leptlept$ ($\ell \neq e$) the couplings to $\mumu$ and
1442: $\tautau$ are a assumed to be universal and for inclusive
1443: $\qq$ final states
1444: all quarks are assumed to experience contact interactions
1445: with the same strength.}
1446: \label{ff:tab:cntceps}
1447: \end{center}
1448: \end{table}
1449: %
1450:
1451: %
1452: \begin{table}[tp]
1453: \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.1}
1454: \begin{center}
1455: \begin{tabular}{c}
1456: \begin{tabular}{|c||cc|cc|}
1457: \hline
1458: \multicolumn{5}{|c|}{leptons} \\
1459: \hline
1460: \hline
1461: &\multicolumn{2}{|c|}{$\mu^+\mu^-$}
1462: &\multicolumn{2}{|c|}{$\tau^+ \tau^-$} \\
1463: Model &~~$\Lambda_-$~~
1464: &~~$\Lambda_+$~~
1465: &~~$\Lambda_-$~~
1466: &~~$\Lambda_+$~~ \\
1467: \hline \hline
1468: ~~~~LL~~~~ & 8.5 & 12.5 & 9.1 & 8.6 \\
1469: RR & 8.1 & 11.9 & 8.7 & 8.2 \\
1470: \hline
1471: VV & 14.3 & 19.7 & 14.2 & 14.5 \\
1472: AA & 12.7 & 16.4 & 14.0 & 11.3 \\
1473: \hline
1474: LR & 7.9 & 8.9 & 2.2 & 7.9 \\
1475: RL & 7.9 & 8.9 & 2.2 & 7.9 \\
1476: \hline
1477: V0 & 11.7 & 17.2 & 12.7 & 11.8 \\
1478: A0 & 11.5 & 12.4 & 9.8 & 10.8 \\
1479: \hline
1480: \end{tabular}
1481: \\
1482:
1483: \\
1484: \begin{tabular}{|c||cc|cc|}
1485: \hline
1486: \multicolumn{5}{|c|}{hadrons} \\
1487: \hline
1488: \hline
1489: &\multicolumn{2}{|c|}{up-type}
1490: &\multicolumn{2}{|c|}{down-type} \\
1491: Model &~~$\Lambda_-$~~
1492: &~~$\Lambda_+$~~
1493: &~~$\Lambda_-$~~
1494: &~~$\Lambda_+$~~ \\
1495: \hline \hline
1496: ~~~~LL~~~~ & 6.7 & 10.2 & 10.6 & 6.0 \\
1497: RR & 5.7 & 8.3 & 2.2 & 4.3 \\
1498: \hline
1499: VV & 9.6 & 14.3 & 11.4 & 7.0 \\
1500: AA & 8.0 & 11.5 & 13.3 & 7.7 \\
1501: \hline
1502: LR & 4.2 & 2.3 & 2.7 & 3.5 \\
1503: RL & 3.5 & 2.8 & 4.2 & 2.4 \\
1504: \hline
1505: V0 & 8.7 & 13.4 & 12.5 & 7.1 \\
1506: A0 & 4.9 & 2.8 & 4.2 & 3.3 \\
1507: \hline
1508: \end{tabular}
1509: \end{tabular}
1510: \caption{The 95\% confidence level lower limits on the parameter
1511: $\Lambda$
1512: of contact interaction derived from fits to lepton-pair
1513: cross-sections and asymmetries and from fits to hadronic
1514: cross-sections. The limits $\Lambda_+$ and $\Lambda_-$
1515: given in TeV correspond to the upper and lower signs of the
1516: parameters $\eta_{ij}$ in Table \ref{ff:tab:cntcdef}.
1517: For hadrons the limits for up-type and down-type quarks
1518: are derived assuming a single up or down type quark undergoes
1519: contact interactions.}
1520: \label{ff:tab:cntclmb}
1521: \end{center}
1522: \end{table}
1523: %
1524:
1525:
1526: %
1527: %
1528: %
1529: %
1530: %
1531: %
1532: %
1533: %
1534: \subsection{Models with $\mathbf{\Zprime}$ Bosons}
1535: \label{ff:sec-zprime}
1536:
1537: The combined hadronic and leptonic cross-sections and the leptonic
1538: forward-backward asymmetries are used to fit the data to models including
1539: an additional, heavy, neutral boson, $\Zprime$.
1540: %
1541: %
1542: %
1543: %
1544:
1545: Fits are made to $\MZp$, the mass of a $\Zprime$ for models
1546: resulting from an E$_6$ GUT and L-R symmetric models~\cite{ff:ref:zprime-thry}
1547: and for the Sequential Standard Model (SSM)~\cite{ff:ref:sqsm}, which proposes the
1548: existence of a $\Zprime$ with exactly the same coupling to fermions as
1549: the standard Z. $\LEPII$ data alone does not significantly constrain
1550: the mixing angle between the Z and $\Zprime$ fields, $\thtzzp$.
1551: However results from a single experiment, in which $\LEPI$ data is used in the
1552: fit, show that the mixing is consistent with zero (see for
1553: example~\cite{ff:ref:lep1zprime}). So for these fits $\thtzzp$ was fixed to
1554: zero.
1555:
1556: No significant evidence is found for the existence of a $\Zprime$ boson
1557: in any of the models.
1558: The procedure to find limits on the Z$'$ mass corresponds to that in case
1559: of contact interactions: for large masses the exchange of a Z$'$ can be
1560: approximated by contact terms, $\Lambda \propto \MZp$.
1561: The lower limits on the Z$'$ mass are shown in Figure \ref{ff:fig:zp_e6-lr}
1562: varying the parameters $\theta_6$ for the E$_6$ models and
1563: $\alpha_{\mathrm{LR}}$ for the left-right models.
1564: The results for the specific models
1565: $\chi,~\psi~,\eta$ ($\theta_6=0,~\pi/2,~- \arctan \sqrt{5/3}$),
1566: L-R ($\alpha_{\mathrm{LR}}$=1.53) and SSM are shown in
1567: Table~\ref{ff:tab:zprime_mass_lim}.
1568:
1569:
1570: %
1571: \begin{figure}[tp]
1572: \begin{flushleft}
1573: \begin{tabular}{ll}
1574: \mbox{\epsfig{file=ff_zp_e6all_lep_summer2002.eps,width=0.50\textwidth}}
1575: \mbox{\epsfig{file=ff_zp_lrall_lep_summer2002.eps,width=0.50\textwidth}}
1576: \end{tabular}
1577: \caption{The 95\% confidence level limits on $\MZp$ as a function of
1578: the model parameter $\theta_6$ for E$_6$ models and
1579: $\alpha_{\mathrm{LR}}$ for left-right models.
1580: The Z-$\Zprime$ mixing is fixed, $\thtzzp=0$.}
1581: \label{ff:fig:zp_e6-lr}
1582: \end{flushleft}
1583: \end{figure}
1584: %
1585:
1586: %
1587: \begin{table}[tp]
1588: \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.15}
1589: \begin{center}
1590: \begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|c|c|}
1591: \hline
1592: Z$'$ model & $\chi$ & $\psi$ & $\eta$ & L-R & SSM \\
1593: \hline \hline
1594: M$_{Z'}^{limit}$ (GeV/c$^2$) & 673 & 481 & 434 & 804 & 1787 \\
1595: \hline
1596: \end{tabular}
1597: \caption{The 95\% confidence level lower limits on the $\Zprime$ mass for
1598: $\chi,~\psi,~\eta$, L-R and SSM models.}
1599: \label{ff:tab:zprime_mass_lim}
1600: \end{center}
1601: \end{table}
1602: %
1603:
1604:
1605: %
1606: %
1607: %
1608: %
1609: %
1610: %
1611: %
1612: %
1613: \subsection{Leptoquarks and R-parity violating squarks }
1614: \label{ff:sec-lq-sq}
1615:
1616: Leptoquarks (LQ) would mediate quark-lepton transitions.
1617: Following the notations in Reference~\cite{ff:ref:lq-thry,ff:ref:lq-squ},
1618: scalar leptoquarks, $S_I$, and vector leptoquarks,$V_I$ are indicated
1619: based on spin and isospin $I$. Leptoquarks with the same Isospin but
1620: with different hypercharges are distinguished by an additional tilde.
1621: See Reference~\citen{ff:ref:lq-squ} for further details.
1622: They carry fermion numbers, $F=L+3B$.
1623: It is assumed that leptoquark couplings to quark-lepton
1624: pairs preserve baryon- and lepton-number.
1625: The couplings $g_L,~g_R$, are labelled according to the chirality
1626: of the lepton.
1627:
1628: \SBL{1/2} and \SL{0} leptoquarks are equivalent to up-type anti-squarks and
1629: down-type squarks, respectively. Limits in terms of the leptoquark coupling
1630: are then exactly equivalent to limits on $\mathrm \lambda_{1jk}$ in the
1631: Lagrangian ${\mathrm \lambda_{1jk}L_{1}Q_{j}\bar D_{k}}$.
1632:
1633: At LEP, the exchange of a leptoquark can modify the hadronic
1634: cross-sections and asymmetries, as described at the Born level by the equations
1635: given in Reference~\citen{ff:ref:lq-squ}. Using the LEP combined measurements
1636: of hadronic cross-sections, and the measurements of heavy quark production,
1637: $\Rb$, $\Rc$, $\Abb$ and $\Acc$, upper limits can be set on the leptoquark's
1638: coupling $g$ as a function of its mass \MLQ\ for leptoquarks coupling electrons to first, second and third generation quarks.
1639: For convenience, one type of leptoquark is assumed to be much lighter than
1640: the others. Furthermore, experimental constraints on the product $g_L g_R$
1641: allow the study leptoquarks assuming either only $g_L \neq 0$
1642: or $g_R \neq 0$. Limits are then denoted by either (L) for leptoquarks coupling
1643: to left handed leptons or (R) for leptoquarks coupling to right handed leptons.
1644:
1645: In the processes $\eeuu$ and $\eedd$ first generation leptoquarks could be
1646: exchanged in $u$- or $t$-channel (F=2 or F=0) which would lead to a change
1647: of the hadronic cross-section.
1648: In the processes $\eecc$ and $\eebb$ the exchange of leptoquarks with
1649: cross-generational couplings can alter the \qq\ angular distribution,
1650: especially at low polar angle.
1651: The reported measurements on heavy quark production have been extrapolated
1652: to $4\pi$ acceptance, using SM predictions, from the measurements performed
1653: in restricted angular ranges, corresponding to the acceptance of the
1654: vertex-detector in each experiment.
1655: Therefore, when fitting limits on leptoquarks' coupling to the 2nd or 3rd
1656: generation of quarks, the LEP combined results for b and c sector are
1657: extrapolated back to an angular range of $\left| \cos \theta \right| < 0.85$
1658: using ZFITTER predictions.
1659:
1660: The following measurements are used to constrain different types of leptoquarks
1661: \begin{itemize}
1662: \item For leptoquarks coupling electrons to 1$^{\mathrm{st}}$ generation
1663: quarks, all LEP combined hadronic cross-sections at centre-of-mass
1664: energies from 130 GeV to 207 GeV are used
1665:
1666: \item For leptoquarks coupling electrons to 2$^{\mathrm{nd}}$ generation
1667: quarks, $\sigma_{\cc}$ is calculated from $\Rc$ and the hadronic
1668: cross-section at the energy points where $\Rc$ is
1669: measured. The measurements of $\sigma_{\cc}$ and $\Acc$ are then
1670: extrapolated back to $\left| \cos \theta \right| < 0.85$.
1671: Since measurements in the c-sector are scarce and originate from,
1672: at most, 2 experiments, hadronic cross-sections, extrapolated down to
1673: $\left| \cos \theta \right| < 0.85$ are also used in the fit, with an
1674: average $10\%$ correlated errors.
1675:
1676: \item For leptoquarks coupling electrons to 3$^{\mathrm{rd}}$ generation
1677: quarks, only ${\mathrm \sigma_{b\bar b}}$ and \Abb, extrapolated
1678: back to a $\left| \cos \theta \right| < 0.85$ are used.
1679: \end{itemize}
1680:
1681:
1682: The 95$\%$ confidence level lower limits on masses $\MLQ$ are derived
1683: assuming a coupling of electromagnetic strength,
1684: $g = \sqrt{4\pi \alpha_{em}}$, where $\alpha_{em}$ is the fine structure
1685: constant. The results are summarised in
1686: Table~\ref{ff:tab:lq-mass}. These results complement the leptoquark searches
1687: at HERA~\cite{ff:ref:lq-h1,ff:ref:lq-zeus} and the
1688: Tevatron~\cite{ff:ref:lq-tevatron}.
1689: Figures~\ref{ff:fig:lq-2nd} and \ref{ff:fig:lq-3rd} give the 95\% confidence
1690: level limits on the
1691: coupling as a function of the leptoquark mass for leptoquarks coupling
1692: electrons to the second and third generations of quarks.
1693:
1694:
1695: %
1696: \begin{table}[tp]
1697: \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.35}
1698: \begin{center}
1699: \begin{tabular}{|c|c c|c|c c|c|c|}
1700: \hline
1701: \multicolumn{8}{|c|}{Limit on scalar LQ mass (GeV/$c^{2}$)} \\
1702: \hline\hline
1703: & \SL{0} & \SR{0} & \SBR{0} & \SL{\lqhalf} & \SR{\lqhalf} & \SBL{\lqhalf} & \SL{1} \\
1704: \hline\hline
1705: $LQ_{1st}$ & 655 & 520 & 202 & 178 & 232 & - & 361 \\
1706: \hline
1707: $LQ_{2nd}$ & 539 & 430 & 285 & 269 & 309 & - & 478 \\
1708: \hline
1709: $LQ_{3rd}$ & NA & NA & 465 & NA & 389 & 107 & 1050 \\
1710: \hline
1711: \multicolumn{8}{c}{\null}\\
1712:
1713: \hline
1714: \multicolumn{8}{|c|}{Limit on vector LQ mass (GeV/$c^{2}$)} \\
1715: \hline\hline
1716: & \VL{0} & \VR{0} & \VBR{0} & \VL{\lqhalf} & \VR{\lqhalf} & \VBL{\lqhalf} & \VL{1} \\
1717: \hline\hline
1718: $ LQ_{1st}$ & 917 & 165 & 489 & 303 & 227 & 176 & 659 \\
1719: \hline
1720: $ LQ_{2nd}$ & 692 & 183 & 630 & 357 & 256 & 187 & 873 \\
1721: \hline
1722: $ LQ_{3rd}$ & 829 & 170 & NA & 451 & 183 & NA & 829
1723:
1724: \\
1725: \hline
1726: \end{tabular}
1727: \caption{$95\%$ confidence level lower limits on the LQ mass for leptoquarks
1728: coupling between electrons and
1729: the first, second and third generation of quarks.
1730: A dash indicates that no limit can be set and N.A denotes
1731: leptoquarks coupling only to top quarks and hence not visible at LEP.}
1732: \label{ff:tab:lq-mass}
1733: \end{center}
1734: \end{table}
1735: %
1736:
1737: %
1738: \begin{figure}[tp]
1739: \begin{center}
1740: %
1741: \mbox{\epsfig{file=ff_lq_2g_lep_summer2003.eps,width=15cm}}
1742: \caption{95\% confidence level limit on the coupling
1743: of leptoquarks to 2nd generation of quarks.}
1744: \label{ff:fig:lq-2nd}
1745: \end{center}
1746: \end{figure}
1747: %
1748:
1749:
1750: %
1751: \begin{figure}[tp]
1752: \begin{center}
1753: \begin{tabular}{c}
1754: %
1755: \mbox{\epsfig{file=ff_lq_3g_lep_summer2003.eps,width=15cm}}
1756: \end{tabular}
1757: \caption{95\% confidence level limit on the coupling
1758: of leptoquarks to 3rd generation of quarks.}
1759: \label{ff:fig:lq-3rd}
1760: \end{center}
1761: \end{figure}
1762: %
1763:
1764:
1765:
1766:
1767: %
1768: %
1769: %
1770: %
1771: %
1772: %
1773: %
1774: %
1775: \subsection{Low Scale Gravity in Large Extra Dimensions}
1776: \label{ff:sec-grav}
1777:
1778: The averaged differential cross-sections for $\eeee$ are used to search for
1779: the effects of graviton exchange in large extra dimensions.
1780:
1781: A new approach to the solution of the hierarchy problem has
1782: been proposed in~\cite{ff:ref:ADD,ff:ref:ADD2,ff:ref:ADD3}, which brings close
1783: the electroweak scale $\rm m_{EW} \sim 1\; TeV$ and the
1784: Planck scale $\rm M_{Pl} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{G_N}} \sim 10^{15}\; TeV$.
1785: In this framework the effective 4 dimensional $\rm M_{Pl}$ is
1786: connected to a new $\rm M_{Pl(4+n)}$ scale in a (4+n) dimensional
1787: theory:
1788: \begin{eqnarray}
1789: \mathrm{M_{Pl}^2 \sim M_{Pl(4+n)}^{2+n} R^n},
1790: \end{eqnarray}
1791: where there are n extra compact spatial dimensions of radius
1792: $\rm \sim R$.
1793:
1794: In the production of fermion- or boson-pairs in $\ee$ collisions this class of
1795: models can be manifested through virtual effects due to the exchange of
1796: gravitons (Kaluza-Klein excitations). As discussed in~\cite{ff:ref:Hewett,ff:ref:Rizzo,ff:ref:Giudice,ff:ref:Lykken,ff:ref:Shrock},
1797: the exchange of spin-2 gravitons modifies in a unique way the differential
1798: cross-sections for fermion pairs, providing clear signatures. These models
1799: introduce an effective scale (ultraviolet cut-off).
1800: Adopting the notation from~\cite{ff:ref:Hewett}
1801: the gravitational mass scale is called $\mathrm{M_H}$.
1802: The cut-off scale is supposed to be of the order of the
1803: fundamental gravity scale in 4+n dimensions.
1804:
1805: The parameter $\varepsilon_{H}$ is defined as
1806: \begin{eqnarray}
1807: \varepsilon_{H} = \frac{\lambda}{\mathrm{M_H^4}},
1808: \end{eqnarray}
1809: where the coefficient $\rm \lambda$ is of $\rm \mathcal{O}(1)$ and can not be
1810: calculated explicitly without knowledge of the full quantum gravity
1811: theory. In the following analysis we will assume that
1812: $\rm \lambda = \pm 1$ in order to study both the cases of positive
1813: and negative interference.
1814: To compute the deviations from the Standard Model due to virtual graviton
1815: exchange the calculations~\cite{ff:ref:Giudice,ff:ref:Rizzo} were used.
1816:
1817: Theoretical uncertainties on the Standard Model predictions are taken
1818: from~\cite{ff:ref:lepffwrkshp}. The full correlation matrix of the
1819: differential cross-sections, obtained in our averaging procedure, is
1820: used in the fits. This is an improvement compared to previous combined analyses
1821: of published or preliminary LEP data on Bhabha scattering, performed before
1822: this detailed information was available (see
1823: e.g.~\cite{ff:ref:Bourilkov:1999,ff:ref:Bourilkov:2000,ff:ref:Bourilkov:2001}).
1824:
1825: The extracted value of $\varepsilon_{H}$ is compatible
1826: with the Standard Model expectation $\varepsilon_{H}=0$.
1827: The errors on $\varepsilon_{H}$ are $\sim 1.5$
1828: smaller than those obtained from a single LEP experiment with the same data
1829: set. The fitted value of $\varepsilon_{H}$ is converted into
1830: $95\%$ confidence level lower limits on $\mathrm{M_H}$
1831: by integrating the likelihood function over the
1832: physically allowed values, $\varepsilon_{H} \ge 0$ for $\lambda = +1$ and
1833: $\varepsilon_{H} \le 0$ for $\lambda = -1$ giving:
1834: \begin{eqnarray}
1835: \mathrm{M_H} & > & 1.20~\TeV\qquad\mathrm{for}~\lambda = +1\,, \\
1836: \mathrm{M_H} & > & 1.09~\TeV\qquad\mathrm{for}~\lambda = -1\,.
1837: \end{eqnarray}
1838: An example of our analysis for the highest energy point is
1839: shown in Figure~\ref{ff:fig:dsdc-ee-207-lsg}.
1840:
1841: %
1842: \begin{figure}[p]
1843: \begin{center}
1844: \epsfig{file=ff_ee_lep_ratio_extrd_207.eps,width=0.8\textwidth}
1845: \end{center}
1846: \caption{Ratio of the LEP averaged differential cross-section for $\eeee$
1847: at energy of 207 $\GeV$ compared to the SM prediction. The effects
1848: expected from virtual graviton exchange are also shown.}
1849: \label{ff:fig:dsdc-ee-207-lsg}
1850: \vskip 2cm
1851: \end{figure}
1852: %
1853:
1854: The interference of virtual graviton exchange amplitudes with both
1855: t-channel and s-channel Bhabha scattering amplitudes makes this the
1856: most sensitive search channel at LEP. The results obtained here would not
1857: be strictly valid if the luminosity measurements of the LEP experiments,
1858: based on the very same process, are also significantly affected by graviton
1859: exchange.
1860: As shown in~\cite{ff:ref:Bourilkov:1999}, the effect on the cross-section
1861: in the luminosity angular range is so small that it can safely be neglected
1862: in this analysis.
1863:
1864:
1865: %
1866: %
1867: %
1868: %
1869: %
1870: %
1871: %
1872: %
1873: \section{Summary}
1874: \label{ff:sec-conc}
1875:
1876: A preliminary combination of the $\LEPII$ $\eeff$ cross-sections (for hadron,
1877: muon and tau-lepton final states) and
1878: forward-backward asymmetries (for muon and tau final states)
1879: from LEP running at energies from 130~$\GeV$ to 207~$\GeV$ has been made.
1880: The results from the four LEP experiments are in good
1881: agreement with each other.
1882: The averages for all energies are shown given in Table~\ref{ff:tab:xsafbres}.
1883: Overall the data agree
1884: with the Standard Model predictions of ZFITTER, although the combined hadronic
1885: cross-sections are on average $1.7$ standard deviations above the predictions.
1886: Further information is available at~\cite{ff:ref:ffbar_web}.
1887:
1888: Preliminary differential cross-sections, $\dsdc$, for $\eeee$, $\eemumu$ and
1889: $\eetautau$ were combined. Results are shown in
1890: Figures~\ref{ff:fig:dsdc-res-ee}, \ref{ff:fig:dsdc-res-mm}
1891: and~\ref{ff:fig:dsdc-res-tt}.
1892:
1893: A preliminary average of results on heavy flavour production at $\LEPII$
1894: has also been made for measurements of $\Rb$, $\Rc$, $\Abb$
1895: and $\Acc$, using results from LEP centre-of-mass energies
1896: from 130 to 207 $\GeV$. Results are given in Tables~\ref{ff:tab:hfbresults}
1897: and~\ref{ff:tab:hfcresults} and
1898: shown graphically in Figures~\ref{ff:fig:hfbres} and~\ref{ff:fig:hfcres}.
1899: The results are in good agreement with the predictions of the SM.
1900:
1901: The preliminary averaged cross-section and forward-backward asymmetry results
1902: together with the combined results on heavy flavour production have been
1903: interpreted in a variety of models.
1904: Limits on the scale of contact interactions between leptons and quarks
1905: and in $\eeee$ and also
1906: between electrons and specifically $\bb$ and $\cc$ final states have been
1907: determined.
1908: A full set of limits are given in Tables~\ref{ff:tab:cntceps} and
1909: \ref{ff:tab:cntclmb}.
1910: The $\LEPII$ averaged cross-sections have been used to obtain lower limits
1911: on the mass of a possible $\Zprime$ boson
1912: in different models. Limits range from $340$ to $1787$ $\GeV/c^2$ depending
1913: on the model.
1914: Limits on the masses of leptoquarks have been derived from the hadronic
1915: cross-sections. The limits range from $101$ to $1036$ $\GeV/c^2$ depending on
1916: the type of leptoquark.
1917: Limits on the scale of gravity in models with large extra dimensions have been
1918: obtained from combined differential cross-sections for $\eeee$; for
1919: positive interference between the new physics and the Standard model the limit
1920: is $1.20$ TeV and for negative interference $1.09$ TeV.
1921:
1922:
1923: %
1924: %
1925: %
1926: %
1927: %
1928: %
1929: %
1930: %
1931: %
1932: %
1933: %
1934:
1935:
1936:
1937:
1938:
1939:
1940:
1941:
1942:
1943: