hep-ex0403037/hg.tex
1: \documentclass[12pt,a4paper,dvips]{article}
2: \usepackage{a4p}
3: \usepackage{cite,mcite}
4: \usepackage{graphicx}
5: \usepackage{physics}
6: \usepackage{amssymb}
7: \usepackage{l3_titlePH,ifthen}
8: 
9: \preprint{2004-002}
10: \date{January 30, 2004}
11: \journalname{Phys. Lett. B}
12: 
13: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
14: %
15: % Use \icaption instead of \caption in tables and figures to get a
16: % caption that is indented by 1cm.
17: % Note that the label should be included inside \icaption for it to
18: % work properly.
19: %
20: \newlength{\capindent}
21: \setlength{\capindent}{1.0cm}
22: \newlength{\capwidth}
23: \setlength{\capwidth}{\textwidth}
24: \addtolength{\capwidth}{-2\capindent}
25: \newlength{\figwidth}
26: \setlength{\figwidth}{\textwidth}
27: \addtolength{\figwidth}{-2.0cm}
28: \newcommand{\icaption}[2][!*!,!]{\hspace*{\capindent}%
29:   \begin{minipage}{\capwidth}
30:     \ifthenelse{\equal{#1}{!*!,!}}%
31:       {\caption{#2}}%
32:       {\caption[#1]{#2}}
33:   \end{minipage}}
34: %
35: %%  DEFINITIONS
36: %
37: % Constants
38: %
39: \def\sinw{\ensuremath{\sin\!\theta_{W}}}%
40: \def\cosw{\ensuremath{\cos\!\theta_{W}}}%
41: \def\tanw{\ensuremath{\tan\!\theta_{W}}}%
42: \def\sintw{\ensuremath{\sin^2\!\theta_{W}}}%
43: \def\costw{\ensuremath{\cos^2\!\theta_{W}}}%
44: \def\sinww{\ensuremath{\sin\!2\theta_{W}}}%
45: \def\cosww{\ensuremath{\cos\!2\theta_{W}}}%
46: \def\tantw{\ensuremath{\tan^2\!\theta_{W}}}%
47: \def\thw{\ensuremath{\theta_{W}}}%
48: %
49: % Particles
50: %
51: \def\WpWm{\ensuremath{\mathrm{W^+}\mathrm{W^-}}}%
52: \def\WW{\ensuremath{\mathrm{W}\mathrm{W}}}%
53: \def\WWstar{\ensuremath{\mathrm{W}\mathrm{W^{(\ast)}}}}%
54: \def\X{\ensuremath{\mathrm{X}}}%
55: \def\A{\ensuremath{\mathrm{A}}}%
56: \def\Ho{\ensuremath{\mathrm{H}}}%
57: \def\em{\ensuremath{\mathrm{e^-}}}%
58: \def\ep{\ensuremath{\mathrm{e^+}}}%
59: %
60: % Couplings
61: %
62: \def\fW{\ensuremath{f_\mathrm{W}}}%
63: \def\fB{\ensuremath{f_\mathrm{B}}}%
64: \def\fWW{\ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{W}\mathrm{W}}}}%
65: \def\fBB{\ensuremath{f_{\mathrm{B}\mathrm{B}}}}%
66: \def\dg1z{\ensuremath{\Delta g_1^{\Zo}}}%
67: \def\dkg{\ensuremath{\Delta \kappa_\gamma}}%
68: \def\Dkz{\ensuremath{\Delta \kappa_\Zo}}%
69: \def\d{\ensuremath{d}}%
70: \def\db{\ensuremath{d_B}}%
71: %
72: % Vertex
73: %
74: \def\WWV{\ensuremath{\mathrm{W}\mathrm{W}\mathrm{V}}}%
75: \def\WWZ{\ensuremath{\mathrm{W}\mathrm{W}\mathrm{Z}}}%
76: \def\WWG{\ensuremath{\mathrm{W}\mathrm{W}\gamma}}%
77: \def\HGG{\Ho\gamma\gamma}%
78: \def\HZG{\Ho\Zo\gamma}%
79: \def\HZZ{\Ho\Zo\Zo}%
80: \def\HWW{\Ho\W\W}%
81: %
82: % Production
83: %
84: \def\eehg{\ensuremath{\ee \ra \Ho\gamma}}%
85: \def\eehz{\ensuremath{\ee \ra \Ho\Zo}}%
86: \def\eehee{\ensuremath{\ee \ra \ee\Ho}}%
87: %
88: % Decay
89: %
90: \def\htogg{\Ho\ra\gamma\gamma}%
91: \def\htobb{\Ho\ra\bbbar}%
92: \def\htozg{\Ho\ra\Zo\gamma}%
93: \def\htoww{\Ho\ra\WWstar}%
94: \def\htoff{\Ho\ra\ffbar}
95: %
96: % Production + decay
97: %
98: \def\eeggg{\ensuremath{\ee \ra \Ho\gamma \ra \gamma\gamma\gamma}}%
99: \def\eebbg{\ensuremath{\ee \ra \Ho\gamma \ra \bbbar\gamma}}%
100: \def\eeeegg{\ensuremath{\ee \ra \ee\Ho \ra \ee\gamma\gamma}}%
101: \def\eeeebb{\ensuremath{\ee \ra \ee\Ho \ra \ee\bbbar}}%
102: \def\eezgg{\ensuremath{\ee \ra \Ho\gamma \ra \Zo\gamma\gamma}}%
103: \def\eeqqgg{\ensuremath{\ee \ra \Zo\Ho \ra \qqbar\gamma\gamma}}%
104: \def\eewwg{\ensuremath{\ee \ra \Ho\gamma \ra \WWstar\gamma}}%
105: %
106: % Physics channels
107: %
108: \def\eetoeegg{\ensuremath{\ee \ra \ee\gamma\gamma}}%
109: \def\eetoggg{\ensuremath{\ee \ra \gamma\gamma\gamma}}%
110: \def\eetozgg{\ensuremath{\ee \ra \Zo\gamma\gamma}}%
111: \def\eetowwg{\ensuremath{\ee \ra \WWstar\gamma}}%
112: %
113: %
114: %
115: % Branching ratios + Gammas
116: %
117: \def\Brhgg{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Br}(\Ho\ra\gamma\gamma)}}%
118: \def\Brhbb{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Br}(\Ho\ra\bbbar)}}%
119: \def\Brhff{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Br}(\Ho\ra\ffbar)}}%
120: \def\Brhzg{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Br}(\Ho\ra\Zo\gamma)}}%
121: \def\Brhww{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Br}(\Ho\ra\WWstar)}}%
122: %
123: \def\Ghgg{\ensuremath{\Gamma(\Ho\ra \gamma\gamma)}}%
124: \def\Ghzg{\ensuremath{\Gamma(\Ho\ra \Zo\gamma)}}%
125: %
126: %
127: %
128: \def\ggee{\ensuremath{g^{\gamma\ee}}}%
129: \def\gzee{\ensuremath{g^{\Zo\ee}}}%
130: 
131: %
132: \def\qqgg{\ensuremath{\qqbar\gamma\gamma}}%
133: \def\WWqq{\ensuremath{\mathrm{W}\mathrm{W} \ra \qqbar \qqbar}}%
134: \def\Wenu{\ensuremath{\mathrm{W}\mathrm{e}\nu}}%
135: \def\qqenu{\ensuremath{\mathrm{q}\mathrm{q}^\prime\mathrm{e}\nu}}%
136: \def\fpfpbar{\antibar{\mathrm{f^\prime}}}%
137: 
138: %
139: \begin{document}
140: %
141: \begin{titlepage}
142: %
143: \title{Search for Anomalous Couplings\\
144:  in the Higgs Sector at LEP}
145: \author{The L3 Collaboration}
146: %
147: % The abstract
148: %
149: 
150: \begin{abstract}
151: Anomalous couplings of the Higgs boson are searched for through
152: the processes $\eehg$, $\eehee$ and $\eehz$. The mass range $70 \GeV <
153: \MH < 190 \GeV$ is explored using 602\,$\pb$ of integrated luminosity
154: collected with the L3 detector at LEP at centre-of-mass energies
155: $\rts=189 -209 \GeV$.  The Higgs decay channels $\htoff$, $\htogg$,
156: $\htozg$ and $\htoww$ are considered and no evidence is found for
157: anomalous Higgs production or decay.  Limits on the anomalous
158: couplings $\d$, $\db$, $\dg1z$, $\dkg$ and $\xi^2$ are derived as well
159: as limits on the $\Ho\ra\gamma\gamma$ and $\Ho\ra\Zo\gamma$ decay
160: rates.
161: 
162: \end{abstract}
163: 
164: \submitted
165: 
166: 
167: \end{titlepage}
168: 
169: \section{Introduction}
170: 
171: The mechanism of spontaneous symmetry breaking is a cornerstone of the
172: Standard Model of the electroweak interactions~\cite{standard_model}.
173: It explains the observed masses of the elementary particles and
174: postulates an additional particle, the Higgs boson. Despite its
175: relevance, experimental information on the Higgs boson is scarce and
176: indirect. It leaves room for deviations from the Standard Model
177: expectations such as anomalous couplings of the Higgs boson.
178: 
179: The Standard Model can be extended, via a linear representation of the
180: $SU(2)_L \times U(1)_Y$ symmetry breaking
181: mechanism~\cite{linear_realization}, to higher orders where new
182: interactions between the Higgs boson and gauge bosons become
183: possible. These modify the production mechanisms and decay properties
184: of the Higgs boson. The relevant CP-invariant Lagrangian terms
185: are~\cite{eboli_concha}:
186: \begin{eqnarray}
187: {\cal L}_{\rm eff} = g_{\HGG}~\Ho \A_{\mu\nu} \A^{\mu\nu}
188:        ~+~g^{(1)}_{\HZG}~\A_{\mu\nu} \Zo^{\mu} \partial^{\nu} \Ho
189:        ~+~g^{(2)}_{\HZG}~\Ho \A_{\mu\nu} \Zo^{\mu\nu} \nonumber \\
190:        ~+~g^{(1)}_{\HZZ}~\Zo_{\mu\nu} \Zo^{\mu} \partial^{\nu} \Ho
191:        ~+~g^{(2)}_{\HZZ}~\Ho \Zo_{\mu\nu} \Zo^{\mu\nu}
192:        ~+~g^{(3)}_{\HZZ}~\Ho \Zo_\mu \Zo^\mu \nonumber \\
193:        ~+~g^{(1)}_{\HWW}~(\W^{+}_{\mu\nu} \W_{-}^\mu \partial^{\nu} \Ho
194:        ~+~ h.c.)
195:        ~+~g^{(2)}_{\HWW}~\Ho \W^{+}_{\mu\nu} \W_{-}^{\mu\nu},
196:        \label{eq:lagrangian}
197: \end{eqnarray}
198: 
199: \noindent
200: where $\A_\mu$, $\Zo_\mu$, $\W_\mu$ and $\Ho$ are the photon, $\Zo$,
201: $\W$ and Higgs fields, respectively, and $\X_{\mu\nu}= \partial_\mu
202: \X_\nu - \partial_\nu \X_\mu$. The couplings in this Lagrangian
203: are parametrized as~\cite{gounaris,hagiwara_ww,wudka}:
204: \begin{eqnarray}
205: g_{\HGG} & = & \frac{g}{2 \MW}~\left( \d\sintw + \db \costw \right)
206:               \label{eq:gg} \\
207: g^{(1)}_{\HZG} & = & \frac{g}{\MW}~\left(\dg1z \sinww -
208:                                            \dkg \tanw \right) \\
209: g^{(2)}_{\HZG} & = & \frac{g}{2 \MW}~\sinww~\left( \d - \db \right)
210:               \label{eq:zg} \\
211: g^{(1)}_{\HZZ} & = & \frac{g}{\MW}~\left(\dg1z \cosww +
212:                                            \dkg \tantw \right)  \\
213: g^{(2)}_{\HZZ} & = & \frac{g}{2 \MW}~\left( \d\costw + \db \sintw \right) \\
214: g^{(3)}_{\HZZ} & = & \frac{g~\MW}{2~\costw} \delta_\Zo \\
215: g^{(1)}_{\HWW} & = & \frac{g~\MW}{\MZ^2} \dg1z  \\
216: g^{(2)}_{\HWW} & = & \frac{g}{\MW} \frac{\d}{\cosww}, 
217: \end{eqnarray}
218: 
219: \noindent where $g$ is the $ SU(2)_L$ coupling constant, $\thw$ is
220: the weak mixing angle and $\MW$ and $\MZ$ represent the masses of
221: the $\W$ and $\Zo$ bosons, respectively. The five dimensionless
222: parameters $\d$, $\db$, $\dg1z$, $\dkg$ and $\delta_\Zo$
223: constitute a convenient set to describe deviations in the
224: interactions between the Higgs boson and gauge bosons. They are
225: not severely constrained by electroweak measurements at the Z pole
226: or at lower energies~\cite{eboli_concha,dawson}.
227: 
228: The couplings $\d$ and $\db$ were introduced in
229: Reference~\citen{gounaris}, while $\dg1z$ and $\dkg$ also describe
230: possible deviations in the couplings of W bosons with photons and Z
231: bosons~\cite{hagiwara_ww}.  A search for anomalous Higgs production
232: and decay with non-vanishing values of $\dg1z$ or $\dkg$ is a
233: complementary study to the analysis of triple-gauge-boson couplings in
234: the $\ee\ra\W^+\W^-$ process.  The parameter
235: $\xi^2=(1+\delta_\Zo)^2$ describes a global rescaling of all
236: Higgs couplings and affects the Higgs production cross section, but
237: not its branching fractions~\cite{wudka}.
238: 
239: We search for a Higgs particle produced in the $\eehg$ and $\eehee$
240: processes shown in Figures~\ref{figure:diagrams}a
241: and~\ref{figure:diagrams}b. Their rates would be enhanced in presence
242: of anomalous $\HGG$ and $\HZG$ couplings.  These processes probe Higgs
243: masses, $\MH$, up to the centre-of-mass energy of the collision, $\rts$.
244: For $\MH < \rts-\MZ$, this analysis is complemented by the
245: results from the L3 searches for the $\eehz$
246: process~\cite{l3sm_paper,l3aura_paper}, which are sensitive to
247: anomalous $\HZZ$ and $\HZG$ couplings, as shown in Figure
248: \ref{figure:diagrams}c.
249: 
250: The existence of $\HGG$ and $\HZG$ couplings would lead to large
251: $\htogg$ and $\htozg$ branching fractions, which at tree level are
252: zero in the Standard Model. These decay modes have complementary
253: sensitivities and allow to probe a large part of the parameter
254: space. In addition, the decay $\htoww$ would also be enhanced in the
255: presence of anomalous $\HWW$ couplings.
256: 
257: The data used in this analysis were collected with the L3
258: detector~\cite{L3DET} at LEP at $\rts=189- 209 \GeV$ and correspond to
259: an integrated luminosity of 602\,$\pb$. Searches for anomalous Higgs
260: production were previously performed, with data of lower energy and
261: integrated luminosity, by L3 and other
262: experiments~\cite{L3_anom,hg_delphi}. Other non-standard Higgs
263: searches performed at LEP are reported in~\cite{l3aura_paper,LEP_fermio}. The
264: results reported in this Letter include and supersede those of
265: Reference~\citen{L3_anom}.
266: 
267: \section {Analysis strategy}
268: 
269: Table \ref{tab:signatures} summarizes the experimental signatures
270: considered for the study of Higgs anomalous couplings according to the
271: different production mechanisms and decay channels.
272: 
273: For the $\eehg$ process, the decay channels $\htogg$, $\htozg$ and
274: $\htoww$ are investigated. Only hadronic decays of Z and W bosons
275: are considered.
276: 
277: For the $\eehee$ process, only the $\htogg$ decay is studied. The
278: $\htobb$ decay was considered in the study of the $\eehee$ and $\eehg$
279: processes for data collected at $\rts=189\GeV$~\cite{L3_anom}. This
280: decay is dominant for $\MH \lesssim \MZ$, where $\htogg$ is strongly
281: suppressed and $\htozg$ is kinematically forbidden. At the
282: centre-of-mass energies considered in this Letter, this region is
283: efficiently covered by an interpretation of the results of the search
284: for the $\eehz$ process~\cite{l3sm_paper} and the $\htobb$ decay is not considered here.
285: 
286: No dedicated selection is devised for the $\eehz$ process and the
287: limits obtained by L3 in the searches for the Standard Model Higgs
288: boson and for a fermiophobic Higgs boson are interpreted in terms
289: of anomalous Higgs couplings.
290: 
291: The analysis is performed as a function of $\MH$ in steps of $1
292: \GeV$. The $\htogg$, $\htozg$ and $\htoww$ decays probe the ranges $70
293: \GeV < \MH < 190 \GeV$, $95 \GeV < \MH < 190 \GeV$ and $130 \GeV < \MH
294: < 190 \GeV$, respectively.
295: 
296: After the event selections described below, variables which depend on
297: $\MH$ are built to discriminate signal and background.  Finally, the
298: number of events in a mass window around the $\MH$ value under study
299: is compared with the Standard Model expectation and interpreted in
300: terms of cross sections and anomalous couplings.
301: 
302: \section {Data and Monte Carlo samples}
303: 
304: Table \ref{tab:energies} lists the centre-of-mass energies and the
305: corresponding integrated luminosities used in this analysis.
306: The data at $\rts = 189 \GeV$ are re-analysed for the $\eeggg$ and
307: $\eeeegg$
308: channels and results for the full range $\rts = 189 - 209 \GeV$ are
309: reported here. All other analyses discussed in this Letter refer to
310: the $\rts = 192 - 209 \GeV$ range, and their results are then combined
311: with those obtained at $\rts = 189 \GeV$\cite{L3_anom}.
312: 
313: To describe the $\eehg$ process we wrote a Monte Carlo 
314: generator which assumes a $1+\cos^2\theta_\Ho$ dependence of the
315: differential cross section as a function of the cosine of the
316: Higgs production angle, $\theta_\Ho$. It includes effects of
317: initial-state~\cite{remt} and final-state~\cite{photos} radiation
318: as well as spin correlations and off-shell contributions in
319: cascade decays such as $\Ho\ra\Zo\gamma\ra\ffbar\gamma$.
320: 
321: The $\eehee$ process is interpreted as the production of a
322: narrow-width spin-zero resonance in two-photon collisions, and
323: modelled with the PC Monte Carlo generator \cite{frank_linde}.
324: 
325: The differential cross section of the process $\eehz$ in the
326: presence of anomalous couplings is taken from Reference
327: \citen{hagiwara_hz}. References \citen{partial_widths} and
328: \citen{romao} are used for the branching fractions and partial
329: widths of a Higgs boson with anomalous couplings. The interference
330: between the $\eehz$ process in the Standard Model and in presence of
331: anomalous couplings~\cite{hagiwara_hz} is taken into account in the
332: simulation. It is negligible for the $\eehg$ and
333: $\eehee$ cases.  
334: 
335: Signal events are generated for $70 \GeV < \MH < 190 \GeV$, in
336: steps of $20 \GeV$. More than 5000 signal events are generated for
337: each value of $\MH$ and for each process under study. For
338: intermediate values of the Higgs mass, the signal efficiency is
339: interpolated between the generated values.
340: 
341: Standard Model processes are modelled with the following Monte
342: Carlo generators: GGG~\cite{ggg} for $\ee\ra\gamma\gamma(\gamma)$,
343: KK2f \cite{kk2f} for $\ee\ra {\rm q}{\bar{\rm q}}(\gamma)$, PYTHIA
344: \cite{pythia} for $\ee\ra \Zo\Zo$ and $\ee\ra \Zo\ee$,
345: KORALW \cite{koralw_1} for $\ee\ra\W^+\W^-(\gamma)$ and EXCALIBUR
346: \cite{excalibur} for $\ee\ra {\rm We}\nu$ and other four-fermion
347: final states.
348: 
349: The L3 detector response is simulated using the GEANT
350: program~\cite{my_geant} which takes into account effects of energy
351: loss, multiple scattering and showering in the detector.
352: Time-dependent detector inefficiencies, as monitored during the data-taking
353: period, are included in the simulations.
354: 
355: \section{Event selection}
356: 
357: All analyses presented in this Letter rely on photon
358: identification. Photon candidates are defined as clusters in the
359: electromagnetic calorimeter with a shower profile consistent with that
360: of a photon and no associated track in the tracking chamber. To
361: reduce contributions from initial-state and final-state radiation,
362: photon candidates must satisfy $E_\gamma > 5 \GeV$ and
363: $\mid\cos\theta_\gamma\mid < 0.97$, where $E_\gamma$ is the photon
364: energy and $\theta_\gamma$ its polar angle.
365: 
366: Events with hadronic decays of the Z and W bosons in the $\htozg$
367: and $\htoww$ channels are pre-selected requiring high particle
368: multiplicity and a visible energy, ${E}_{vis}$, satisfying $0.8 <
369: {E}_{vis}/\rts < 1.2$.
370: 
371: \subsection{The \boldmath{$\eeggg$} analysis }
372: 
373: Events from the $\eeggg$ process are selected by requiring three
374: photon candidates in the central region of the detector,
375: $|\cos\theta_\gamma| < 0.8$, with a total electromagnetic energy
376: larger than $\rts/2$. Out of the three possible two-photon
377: combinations, the one with a mass, $m_{\gamma\gamma}$, closest to
378: the $\MH$ hypothesis under investigation is retained. As an
379: example, Figure \ref{fig:exp_plots}a presents the distribution of
380: $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ for $\MH=110 \GeV$.  The event is accepted as a
381: Higgs candidate if $\mid m_{\gamma\gamma}-\MH\mid < 0.05 \,\MH$.
382: 
383: The numbers of events observed and expected in the full data
384: sample at $\rts=189-209 \GeV$ are shown in Table \ref{tab:events}
385: for several $\MH$ hypotheses. The contamination from processes
386: other than $\ee\ra\gamma\gamma(\gamma)$, as estimated from Monte
387: Carlo simulations, is found to be negligible.  The signal
388: selection efficiency
389: is in the range $25\%-30\%$,
390: depending on $\MH$ and $\rts$.
391: 
392: \subsection{The \boldmath{$\eeeegg$} analysis}
393: 
394: In the process $\eehee$, the final state $\em$ and $\ep$ tend to escape
395: detection at low polar angles, originating events with missing
396: longitudinal momentum and missing mass. The selection requires two
397: photon candidates from the $\htogg$ decay in the central region of
398: the detector.  A kinematic fit is performed assuming the missing
399: momentum to point in the beam pipe and the visible mass of the
400: event to be consistent, within the experimental resolution, with
401: the $\MH$ hypothesis under investigation. The distribution of the
402: $\chi^2$ of the fit is shown in Figure \ref{fig:exp_plots}b for
403: $\MH = 130 \GeV$. Events are accepted as Higgs candidates if
404: $\chi^2 < 50 - 0.2 \GeV^{-1}\times\MH$.
405: The dependence of the cut on $\MH$ reflects the decrease of the background
406: contribution for increasing values of $\MH$.
407: 
408: The numbers of events observed and expected in the full data
409: sample at $\rts=189-209 \GeV$ are shown in Table \ref{tab:events}
410: for several $\MH$ hypotheses. The background comes from
411: $\ee\ra\gamma\gamma(\gamma)$ events.  The signal selection efficiency
412: varies from $20\%$ to $30\%$, with a smooth
413: dependence on $\MH$ and $\rts$.
414: 
415: 
416: \subsection{The \boldmath{$\eezgg$} analysis }
417: 
418: Pre-selected hadronic events with two isolated high energy photons
419: are considered for the $\eezgg$ analysis. Events are retained which have
420: a recoiling mass, $m_{rec}$, calculated from the four-momenta of the
421: two photons, compatible with $m_{\rm Z}$: $80 \GeV < m_{rec} < 110 \GeV$. 
422: The hadronic system
423: is clustered into two jets with the DURHAM~\cite{durham}
424: algorithm and a kinematic fit, in which the jet angles are fixed and
425: the jet energies can vary, is performed to improve the resolution
426: on the reconstructed Z-boson mass. Of the two possible combinations of
427: two jets and a photon, the one is retained with mass, $m_{\rm
428: qq\gamma}$, closer to the $\MH$ hypothesis under investigation.
429: The distribution of $m_{\rm qq\gamma}$ is shown in Figure
430: \ref{fig:exp_plots}c for $\MH = 150 \GeV$.  An event is considered
431: as a Higgs candidate if $|m_{\rm qq\gamma} - \MH| <15 \GeV$.
432: 
433: The numbers of events observed and expected in the data sample at
434: $\rts=192-209 \GeV$ are shown in Table \ref{tab:events} for several
435: $\MH$ hypotheses. The signal selection efficiency is
436: around $22\%$.  The background is dominated by resonant $\ee\ra
437: \Zo\gamma\gamma$ production (70\%) with contributions from the $\ee\ra {\rm
438: q}{\bar{\rm q}}(\gamma)$ process and four-fermion final states.
439: 
440: \subsection{The \boldmath{$\eewwg$} analysis}
441: 
442: The energy of the photon in the $\eewwg$ process depends on $\MH$
443: as $E^{rec}_\gamma (\MH) =(s - \MH^2)/2\rts$. Pre-selected hadronic events are
444: retained if they have a photon with energy compatible with the $\MH$ hypothesis
445: under investigation,
446: $E^{rec}_\gamma (\MH+20 \GeV) < E_\gamma < E^{rec}_\gamma (\MH-20 \GeV)$.
447: If multiple photon candidates are observed, the
448: photon is retained which has an energy closest to $E^{rec}_\gamma$($\MH$).
449: The rest of the event is clustered into four jets by means of the DURHAM
450: algorithm.
451: 
452: A kinematic fit, in which the jet angles are fixed and the jet
453: energies can vary, is performed to improve the resolution on the
454: reconstructed W-boson mass. For $\MH > 2\MW$ both W bosons are on-shell and
455: the constraint that both invariant jet-jet masses be compatible with
456: $\MW$ is included in the fit.  For $\MH < 2\MW$ one of the W bosons is
457: off-shell and only one of the invariant jet-jet masses is required to
458: be compatible with $\MW$. The fit is repeated for all possible jet
459: pairings and the pairing is chosen for which the $\chi^2$ of the fit
460: is minimal.  An event is considered as a Higgs candidate if $\chi^2 <
461: 6.0$ for the hypothesis $\MH < 2\MW$ or $\chi^2 < 15.0$ for $\MH >
462: 2\MW$.  The invariant mass of the four-jet system, $m_{\rm qqqq}$,
463: estimates $\MH$. Its distribution is presented in Figure
464: \ref{fig:exp_plots}d for $\MH = 170 \GeV$.
465: 
466: The numbers of events observed and expected in the data sample at
467: $\rts=192-209 \GeV$ are shown in Table \ref{tab:events} for several
468: $\MH$ hypotheses.  The signal selection efficiency is
469: around $25\%$, for $150 \GeV < \MH< 170 \GeV$, decreasing to
470: about 20\% for masses out of this range. A small dependence on
471: $\rts$ is observed.  The background is dominated by the processes
472: $\ee\ra {\rm q}{\bar{\rm q}}(\gamma)$ and
473: $\ee\ra\W^+\W^-(\gamma)$, which is above $65\%$ for $\MH >150 \GeV$.
474: 
475: 
476: \section{Cross sections limits}
477: 
478: The results of all the analyses agree with the Standard Model
479: predictions and show no evidence for a Higgs boson with anomalous
480: couplings in the $\MH$ mass range under study.  Upper limits on
481: the product of the production cross sections and the corresponding
482: decay branching fractions are derived~\cite{lephwg} at the 95\%
483: confidence level (CL).
484: The cross section of the $\eehee$ process is proportional to the
485: partial Higgs width into photons, $\Ghgg$, and limits
486: are quoted on $\Ghgg\times\Brhgg$.
487: 
488: In order to combine data sets at different $\rts$ values, a dependence
489: of the type $\sigma^{AC}(\rts) = \zeta \,\sigma^{SM}(\rts)$ is assumed
490: for the cross section of anomalous Higgs production,
491: $\sigma^{AC}$. The  $\eehg$ production cross section in the Standard
492: Model, $\sigma^{SM}$, accounts for the dominant dependence on $\rts$
493: while $\zeta$ is a parameter which does not depend on $\rts$. Limits
494: on $\zeta$ are derived and interpreted as cross section limits at the
495: luminosity-averaged centre-of-mass energy $<\rts> = 197.8 \GeV$.
496: 
497: The cross section limits for the investigated processes are given
498: in Figure~\ref{fig:xs_limits} together with the expectations for
499: non-zero values of the anomalous couplings.
500: 
501: \section{Limits on anomalous couplings}
502: 
503: \subsection{Results from \boldmath{$\eehz$} with  \boldmath{$\htoff$} or \boldmath{$\htogg$}}
504: 
505: The process $\eehz$, with $\htoff$, studied in
506: Reference~\citen{l3sm_paper}, is sensitive to anomalous HZZ and
507: HZ$\gamma$ couplings in the Higgs production vertex. In addition,
508: the process $\eehz$ with $\htogg$, object of the search for a
509: fermiophobic Higgs~\cite{l3aura_paper}, is sensitive to the $\HGG$
510: coupling in the decay vertex.
511: 
512: Limits on the coupling $\xi^2$ are derived from the results of our
513: search for the Standard Model Higgs boson~\cite{l3sm_paper}. They
514: are obtained by interpreting $\xi^2$ as a scale factor of the
515: Higgs production cross section and are shown in Figure
516: \ref{fig:xi_limit}. They include the systematic uncertainties on
517: the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson~\cite{l3sm_paper}.
518: 
519: The limits on the couplings $\d$, $\db$, $\dg1z$ and $\dkg$ are
520: extracted from the numbers of observed events, expected background and signal events
521: reported in References~\citen{l3sm_paper} and~\citen{l3aura_paper}.
522: These limits are
523: driven by the size of the deviations of the product $\sigma^{AC}\times\Br^{AC}$
524: with respect to $\sigma^{SM}\times\Br^{SM}$, where $\Br^{AC}$ and $\Br^{SM}$ denote the
525: Higgs branching ratios in the 
526: presence of anomalous couplings and in the Standard Model respectively.
527: The ratios $R = (\sigma^{AC}\times\Br^{AC})/(\sigma^{SM}\times\Br^{SM})$
528: are shown in Figure \ref{fig:ratios} for $\htoff$ and $\htogg$, for $\MH=100\GeV$.
529: 
530: The $\htoff$ and $\htogg$ channels have different behaviours with
531: respect to the parameters $\d$ and $\db$, as these describe the
532: $\HGG$ coupling. The parameters $\dg1z$ and $\dkg$ describe the
533: $\HZG$ and $\HZZ$ couplings and hence affect only the Higgs
534: production vertex in the $\eehz$ process. They give similar
535: deviations for both the $\htoff$ and $\htogg$ channels.
536: 
537: 
538: \subsection{One-dimensional limits}
539: 
540: Figure \ref{fig:ac_limits} presents the limits on $\d$, $\db$, $\dg1z$
541: and $\dkg$ as a function of $\MH$. A coupling at the time is
542: considered, fixing the others to zero. Limits from the most sensitive
543: channels are shown in addition to the combined results.
544: 
545: The region $\MH\lesssim\rts-\MZ$ is excluded by the $\eehz$ search
546: for any value of the four couplings.  The fermiophobic search
547: $\eehz$, with $\htogg$, is sensitive to large values of $\d$ and
548: $\db$, for which there is an enhancement of the $\htogg$ branching
549: fraction. The standard search $\eehz$, with $\htobb$ or $\tautau$, covers
550: the region $\d\approx\db\approx 0$. 
551: A region for $\MH \sim 97 \GeV$ in the $\d$ \textit{vs.} $\MH$ plane of Figure \ref{fig:ac_limits}a
552: is not excluded due to an excess of events observed in the
553: $\eehz$ search~\cite{l3sm_202}.
554: 
555: The $\eeggg$ and $\eeeegg$ channels have a large sensitivity if
556: the $\Ho\gamma\gamma$ coupling is large, {\it i.e.} when
557: $\d\sintw+\db\costw$ has a sizable value (Figures
558: \ref{fig:ac_limits}a and \ref{fig:ac_limits}b). On the other hand,
559: the $\eezgg$ process has a dominant role when the channel $\htogg$
560: is suppressed, which occurs for the couplings $\dg1z$ and $\dkg$
561: in the mass region $\MZ < \MH < 2\MW$ (Figures
562: \ref{fig:ac_limits}c and \ref{fig:ac_limits}d).
563: 
564: The contribution from the $\eewwg$ process to the limits presented
565: in Figures \ref{fig:ac_limits}a and \ref{fig:ac_limits}c is small
566: and restricted to $\MH \sim 160 \GeV$. This happens since a large
567: decay width for $\htoww$ corresponds to large values of $\d$ or
568: $\dg1z$ which also imply large widths for the competing modes
569: $\htogg$ and $\htozg$.
570: 
571: The sensitivity of the analysis degrades rapidly when $\MH$ approaches
572: the $2\MW$ threshold, where the $\htogg$ and $\htozg$ are no longer
573: dominant, even in the presence of relatively large anomalous
574: couplings.
575: 
576: Several sources of systematic uncertainties are investigated and their
577: impact on the signal efficiency and 
578: background level is evaluated. The limited Monte Carlo statistics
579: affects the signal by less than 2\% and the background by 8\% for the
580: photonic channels and less than 4\% for the hadronic channels.
581: The accuracy of the cross section calculation for background processes adds
582: less than 0.4\% to the uncertainty in the background normalisation.
583: The systematic uncertainty due to the selection procedure was estimated
584: by varying the most important selection criteria and was found to be less than 1\%.
585: In particular, the effect of the limited knowledge of the energy scale
586: of the electromagnetic calorimeter has a small impact
587: in the limits.
588: 
589: The combined effect of the systematic uncertainties is included in the limits shown
590: in Figure~\ref{fig:ac_limits}. It degrades the limits by at most 4\%, slightly depending on the
591: coupling and the Higgs mass hypothesis.
592: 
593: We verified that possible effects of angular dependence of the
594: efficiency on the value of the anomalous couplings is negligible for
595: the  $\eehz$ process. No such effects are expected for the $\eehee$
596: and $\eehg$ processes.
597: 
598: \subsection{Two-dimensional limits}
599: 
600: Assuming the absence of large anomalous $\WWZ$ and $\WWG$ couplings, \textit{i.e.}
601: $\dg1z=\dkg=0$~\cite{l3_tgc}, the $\Ho\gamma\gamma$ and
602: $\Ho\Zo\gamma$ couplings are parametrized via the following subset of
603: effective operators:
604: \begin{eqnarray}
605: {\cal L}_{\rm eff} = g_{\HGG}~\Ho \A_{\mu\nu} \A^{\mu\nu}
606:        ~+~g^{(2)}_{\HZG}~\Ho \A_{\mu\nu} \Zo^{\mu\nu}
607:        ~+~ h.c.
608:        \label{eq:lagrangian2}
609: \end{eqnarray}
610: 
611: \noindent where the dependence of $g_{\HGG}$ and $g^{(2)}_{\HZG}$
612:  on the $\d$ and $\db$ couplings is given by Equations~\ref{eq:gg}
613: and~\ref{eq:zg}. This Lagrangian is used to compute the maximal
614: partial widths and branching fractions of the decays
615: $\Ho\ra\Zo\gamma$ and $\Ho\ra \gamma\gamma$, allowed by the limits
616: on $\d$ and $\db$. The results are presented in Figure
617: \ref{fig:gg_zg} for two different Higgs masses, in the region of
618: interest for Higgs searches at future colliders. The results are consistent with the
619: tree level Standard Model expectations $\Gamma
620: (\Ho\ra\Zo\gamma)\approx\Gamma (\Ho\ra\gamma\gamma)\approx 0$.
621: 
622: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
623: \bibliographystyle{l3style}
624: 
625: \begin{thebibliography}{10}
626: 
627: \bibitem{standard_model}
628: S.L. Glashow, \NP {\bf 22} (1961) 579;\\ S. Weinberg, \PRL {\bf 19} (1967)
629:   1264;\\ A. Salam, ``Elementary Particle Theory'', Ed. N. Svartholm,
630:   Stockholm, Alm\-qvist and Wiksell (1968), 367;\\ P.W. Higgs, \PL {\bf 12}
631:   (1964) 132.
632: 
633: \bibitem{linear_realization}
634: W.~Buchm{\"u}ller and D.~Wyler, \NP {\bf B 268} (1986) 621; \\ C.J.C.~Burges
635:   and H.J.~Schnitzer, \NP {\bf B 228} (1983) 424; \\ C.N.~Leung, S.T.~Love and
636:   S.~Rao, \ZfP {\bf C 31} (1986) 433.
637: 
638: \bibitem{eboli_concha}
639: O.J.P.~\'Eboli \etal, \PL {\bf B 434} (1998) 340; \\
640:   M.C.~Gonz\'alez-Garc\'{\i}a, Int. J. Mod. Phys. {\bf A 14} (1999) 3121.
641: 
642: \bibitem{gounaris}
643: G.J. Gounaris, F.M. Renard and N.D. Vlachos,
644: \newblock  Nucl. Phys. {\bf B 459}  (1996) 51.
645: 
646: \bibitem{hagiwara_ww}
647: K.~Hagiwara \etal,
648: \newblock  Nucl. Phys. {\bf B 282}  (1987) 253.
649: 
650: \bibitem{wudka}
651: B. Grz\c{a}dkowski and J. Wudka, \PL {\bf B 364} (1995) 49.
652: 
653: \bibitem{dawson}
654: S.~Alam, S.~Dawson and R.~Szalapski,
655: \newblock  Phys. Rev. {\bf D 57}  (1998) 1577.
656: 
657: \bibitem{l3sm_paper}
658: L3 Collaboration, P.~Achard \etal, \PL {\bf B 517} (2001) 319.
659: 
660: \bibitem{l3aura_paper}
661: L3 Collaboration, P.~Achard \etal, \PL {\bf B 534} (2002) 28.
662: 
663: \bibitem{L3DET}
664: L3 Collaboration, B.~Adeva \etal, \NIM {\bf A 289} (1990) 35; \\ L3
665:   Collaboration, O. Adriani \etal, Phys. Rep. {\bf 236} (1993) 1; \\
666:   J.A.~Bakken \etal, \NIM {\bf A 275} (1989) 81;\\ O.~Adriani \etal, \NIM {\bf
667:   A 302} (1991) 53;\\ B.~Adeva \etal, \NIM {\bf A 323} (1992) 109;\\ K.~Deiters
668:   \etal, \NIM {\bf A 323} (1992) 162;\\ M.~Chemarin \etal, \NIM {\bf A 349}
669:   (1994) 345;\\ G.~Basti \etal, \NIM {\bf A 374} (1996) 293;\\ A.~Adam \etal,
670:   \NIM {\bf A 383} (1996) 342.
671: 
672: \bibitem{L3_anom}
673: L3 Collaboration, M.~Acciarri \etal,
674: \newblock  Phys. Lett. {\bf B 489}  (2000) 102.
675: 
676: \bibitem{hg_delphi}
677: DELPHI Collaboration, P.~Abreu \etal, \PL {\bf B 458} (1999) 431.
678: 
679: \bibitem{LEP_fermio}
680: ALEPH Collaboration, A.~Heister \etal, \PL {\bf B 544} (2002) 16;\\ DELPHI
681:   Collaboration, P.~Abreu \etal, \PL {\bf B 507} (2001) 89;\\ L3 Collaboration,
682:   P.~Achard \etal, \PL {\bf B 568} (2003) 191;\\ OPAL Collaboration,
683:   G.~Abbiendi \etal, \PL {\bf B 544} (2002) 44.
684: 
685: \bibitem{remt}
686: F.A.~Berends and R.~Kleiss,
687: \newblock  Nucl. Phys. {\bf B 260}  (1985) 32.
688: 
689: \bibitem{photos}
690: E.~Barberio and Z.~W\c{a}s,
691: \newblock  Comp. Phys. Comm. {\bf 79}  (1994) 291.
692: 
693: \bibitem{frank_linde}
694: F.L. Linde, ``Charm Production in Two-Photon Collisions'', Ph.D. Thesis,
695:   Rijksuniversiteit Leiden 1988.
696: 
697: \bibitem{hagiwara_hz}
698: K.~Hagiwara and M.L. Stong,
699: \newblock  Z. Phys. {\bf C 62}  (1994) 99.
700: 
701: \bibitem{partial_widths}
702: K.~Hagiwara, R.~Szalapski and D.~Zeppenfeld,
703: \newblock  Phys. Lett. {\bf B 318}  (1993) 155.
704: 
705: \bibitem{romao}
706: J.C. Romao and S. Andringa, Eur. Phys. J. {\bf C7} (1999) 631.
707: 
708: \bibitem{ggg}
709: GGG Monte Carlo; F.~A.~Berends and R.~Kleiss, \NP {\bf B 186} (1981) 22.
710: 
711: \bibitem{kk2f}
712: KK2f version 4.12; S. Jadach, B.F.L. Ward and Z. W\c{a}s,
713: \newblock  Comp. Phys. Comm. {\bf 130}  (2000) 260.
714: 
715: \bibitem{pythia}
716: PYTHIA version 5.722; T. Sj{\"o}strand, preprint CERN-TH/7112/93, (1993),
717:   revised 1995; \\ T. Sj{\"o}strand, Comp. Phys. Comm. {\bf 82} (1994) 74.
718: 
719: \bibitem{koralw_1}
720: KORALW version 1.33; M. Skrzypek \etal,
721: \newblock  Comp. Phys. Comm. {\bf 94}  (1996) 216.
722: 
723: \bibitem{excalibur}
724: EXCALIBUR version 1.11; F.A. Berends, R. Pittau and R. Kleiss,
725: \newblock  Comp. Phys. Comm. {\bf 85}  (1995) 437.
726: 
727: \bibitem{my_geant}
728: GEANT version 3.15 is used; R. Brun \etal, preprint CERN DD/EE/84-1 (1985),
729:   revised 1987. The GHEISHA program (H. Fesefeldt, RWTH Aachen Report PITHA
730:   85/02, 1985) is used to simulate hadronic interactions.
731: 
732: \bibitem{durham}
733: S.~Bethke \etal,
734: \newblock  Nucl. Phys. {\bf B 370}  (1992) 310.
735: 
736: \bibitem{lephwg}
737: ALEPH, DELPHI, L3 and OPAL Collaborations, The LEP Working group for the Higgs
738:   Boson Searches,
739: \newblock  Phys. Lett. {\bf B 565}  (2003) 61.
740: 
741: \bibitem{l3sm_202}
742: L3 Collaboration, M.~Acciarri \etal, \PL {\bf B 508} (2001) 225.
743: 
744: \bibitem{l3_tgc}
745: L3 Collaboration, P.~Achard {\it et al.}, preprint hep-ex/0402036  (2003), to appear in Physics Letters.
746: 
747: \end{thebibliography}
748: 
749: \newpage
750: 
751: \typeout{   }     
752: \typeout{Using author list for paper 281 -  }
753: \typeout{$Modified: Jul 15 2001 by smele $}
754: \typeout{!!!!  This should only be used with document option a4p!!!!}
755: \typeout{   }
756: %
757: %
758: %
759: %  L A T E X  version!!
760: %
761: %
762: % Make sure that the Lep package has been used!
763: %\input{Lep.sty}%
764: %
765: %\ifx\LepCalled\undefined%
766: %\typeout{     }%
767: %\typeout{!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!}%
768: %\typeout{Yikes.  You haven't used the Lep package!}%
769: %\typeout{Please put \protect\usepackage\protect{Lep\protect} in your preamble,
770: %         followed by}%
771: %\typeout{\protect\Lep\protect{1\protect} or \protect\Lep\protect{2\protect}}%
772: %\typeout{     }%
773: %\typeout{For now you will get a Lep phase 2 authorlist (may not be right!).}%
774: %\typeout{!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!}%
775: %\typeout{     }%
776: %\Lep{2}\fi%
777: 
778: \newcount\tutecount  \tutecount=0
779: \def\tutenum#1{\global\advance\tutecount by 1 \xdef#1{\the\tutecount}}
780: \def\tute#1{$^{#1}$}
781: \tutenum\aachen            % 1 
782: \tutenum\nikhef            % 2 
783: \tutenum\mich              % 3 
784: \tutenum\lapp              % 4 
785: \tutenum\basel             % 5 
786: \tutenum\lsu               % 6 
787: \tutenum\beijing           % 7 
788: \tutenum\bologna           % 8 
789: \tutenum\tata              % 9 
790: \tutenum\ne                % 10
791: \tutenum\bucharest         % 11
792: \tutenum\budapest          % 12
793: \tutenum\mit               % 13
794: \tutenum\panjab            % 14 
795: \tutenum\debrecen          % 15
796: \tutenum\dublin            % 16
797: \tutenum\florence          % 17
798: \tutenum\cern              % 18
799: \tutenum\wl                % 19
800: \tutenum\geneva            % 20
801: \tutenum\hamburg           % 21
802: \tutenum\hefei             % 22
803: \tutenum\lausanne          % 23
804: \tutenum\lyon              % 24
805: \tutenum\madrid            % 25
806: \tutenum\florida           % 26
807: \tutenum\milan             % 27
808: \tutenum\moscow            % 29
809: \tutenum\naples            % 30
810: \tutenum\cyprus            % 31
811: \tutenum\nymegen           % 32
812: \tutenum\caltech           % 33
813: \tutenum\perugia           % 34
814: \tutenum\peters            % 35
815: \tutenum\cmu               % 36
816: \tutenum\potenza           % 37
817: \tutenum\prince            % 38
818: \tutenum\riverside         % 39
819: \tutenum\rome              % 40
820: \tutenum\salerno           % 41
821: \tutenum\ucsd              % 42
822: \tutenum\sofia             % 43
823: \tutenum\korea             % 44
824: \tutenum\taiwan            % 45
825: \tutenum\tsinghua          % 46
826: \tutenum\purdue            % 47
827: \tutenum\psinst            % 48
828: \tutenum\zeuthen           % 49
829: \tutenum\eth               % 50
830: 
831: 
832: {
833: \parskip=0pt
834: %
835: \noindent
836: {\bf The L3 Collaboration:}
837: \ifx\selectfont\undefined%  old style font selection
838:  \baselineskip=10.8pt
839:  \baselineskip\baselinestretch\baselineskip
840:  \normalbaselineskip\baselineskip
841:  \ixpt
842: \else%                      new style font selection
843:  \fontsize{9}{10.8pt}\selectfont
844: \fi
845: %
846: \medskip
847: \tolerance=10000
848: \hbadness=5000
849: \raggedright
850: \hsize=162truemm\hoffset=0mm
851: %
852: \def\r{\rlap,}
853: \noindent
854: 
855: P.Achard\r\tute\geneva\ 
856: O.Adriani\r\tute{\florence}\ 
857: M.Aguilar-Benitez\r\tute\madrid\ 
858: J.Alcaraz\r\tute{\madrid}\ 
859: G.Alemanni\r\tute\lausanne\
860: J.Allaby\r\tute\cern\
861: A.Aloisio\r\tute\naples\ 
862: M.G.Alviggi\r\tute\naples\
863: H.Anderhub\r\tute\eth\ 
864: V.P.Andreev\r\tute{\lsu,\peters}\
865: F.Anselmo\r\tute\bologna\
866: A.Arefiev\r\tute\moscow\ 
867: T.Azemoon\r\tute\mich\ 
868: T.Aziz\r\tute{\tata}\ 
869: P.Bagnaia\r\tute{\rome}\
870: A.Bajo\r\tute\madrid\ 
871: G.Baksay\r\tute\florida\
872: L.Baksay\r\tute\florida\
873: S.V.Baldew\r\tute\nikhef\ 
874: S.Banerjee\r\tute{\tata}\ 
875: Sw.Banerjee\r\tute\lapp\ 
876: A.Barczyk\r\tute{\eth,\psinst}\ 
877: R.Barill\`ere\r\tute\cern\ 
878: P.Bartalini\r\tute\lausanne\ 
879: M.Basile\r\tute\bologna\
880: N.Batalova\r\tute\purdue\
881: R.Battiston\r\tute\perugia\
882: A.Bay\r\tute\lausanne\ 
883: F.Becattini\r\tute\florence\
884: U.Becker\r\tute{\mit}\
885: F.Behner\r\tute\eth\
886: L.Bellucci\r\tute\florence\ 
887: R.Berbeco\r\tute\mich\ 
888: J.Berdugo\r\tute\madrid\ 
889: P.Berges\r\tute\mit\ 
890: B.Bertucci\r\tute\perugia\
891: B.L.Betev\r\tute{\eth}\
892: M.Biasini\r\tute\perugia\
893: M.Biglietti\r\tute\naples\
894: A.Biland\r\tute\eth\ 
895: J.J.Blaising\r\tute{\lapp}\ 
896: S.C.Blyth\r\tute\cmu\ 
897: G.J.Bobbink\r\tute{\nikhef}\ 
898: A.B\"ohm\r\tute{\aachen}\
899: L.Boldizsar\r\tute\budapest\
900: B.Borgia\r\tute{\rome}\ 
901: S.Bottai\r\tute\florence\
902: D.Bourilkov\r\tute\eth\
903: M.Bourquin\r\tute\geneva\
904: S.Braccini\r\tute\geneva\
905: J.G.Branson\r\tute\ucsd\
906: F.Brochu\r\tute\lapp\ 
907: J.D.Burger\r\tute\mit\
908: W.J.Burger\r\tute\perugia\
909: X.D.Cai\r\tute\mit\ 
910: M.Capell\r\tute\mit\
911: G.Cara~Romeo\r\tute\bologna\
912: G.Carlino\r\tute\naples\
913: A.Cartacci\r\tute\florence\ 
914: J.Casaus\r\tute\madrid\
915: F.Cavallari\r\tute\rome\
916: N.Cavallo\r\tute\potenza\ 
917: C.Cecchi\r\tute\perugia\ 
918: M.Cerrada\r\tute\madrid\
919: M.Chamizo\r\tute\geneva\
920: Y.H.Chang\r\tute\taiwan\ 
921: M.Chemarin\r\tute\lyon\
922: A.Chen\r\tute\taiwan\ 
923: G.Chen\r\tute{\beijing}\ 
924: G.M.Chen\r\tute\beijing\ 
925: H.F.Chen\r\tute\hefei\ 
926: H.S.Chen\r\tute\beijing\
927: G.Chiefari\r\tute\naples\ 
928: L.Cifarelli\r\tute\salerno\
929: F.Cindolo\r\tute\bologna\
930: I.Clare\r\tute\mit\
931: R.Clare\r\tute\riverside\ 
932: G.Coignet\r\tute\lapp\ 
933: N.Colino\r\tute\madrid\ 
934: S.Costantini\r\tute\rome\ 
935: B.de~la~Cruz\r\tute\madrid\
936: S.Cucciarelli\r\tute\perugia\ 
937: J.A.van~Dalen\r\tute\nymegen\ 
938: R.de~Asmundis\r\tute\naples\
939: P.D\'eglon\r\tute\geneva\ 
940: J.Debreczeni\r\tute\budapest\
941: A.Degr\'e\r\tute{\lapp}\ 
942: K.Dehmelt\r\tute\florida\
943: K.Deiters\r\tute{\psinst}\ 
944: D.della~Volpe\r\tute\naples\ 
945: E.Delmeire\r\tute\geneva\ 
946: P.Denes\r\tute\prince\ 
947: F.DeNotaristefani\r\tute\rome\
948: A.De~Salvo\r\tute\eth\ 
949: M.Diemoz\r\tute\rome\ 
950: M.Dierckxsens\r\tute\nikhef\ 
951: C.Dionisi\r\tute{\rome}\ 
952: M.Dittmar\r\tute{\eth}\
953: A.Doria\r\tute\naples\
954: M.T.Dova\r\tute{\ne,\sharp}\
955: D.Duchesneau\r\tute\lapp\ 
956: M.Duda\r\tute\aachen\
957: B.Echenard\r\tute\geneva\
958: A.Eline\r\tute\cern\
959: A.El~Hage\r\tute\aachen\
960: H.El~Mamouni\r\tute\lyon\
961: A.Engler\r\tute\cmu\ 
962: F.J.Eppling\r\tute\mit\ 
963: P.Extermann\r\tute\geneva\ 
964: M.A.Falagan\r\tute\madrid\
965: S.Falciano\r\tute\rome\
966: A.Favara\r\tute\caltech\
967: J.Fay\r\tute\lyon\         
968: O.Fedin\r\tute\peters\
969: M.Felcini\r\tute\eth\
970: T.Ferguson\r\tute\cmu\ 
971: H.Fesefeldt\r\tute\aachen\ 
972: E.Fiandrini\r\tute\perugia\
973: J.H.Field\r\tute\geneva\ 
974: F.Filthaut\r\tute\nymegen\
975: P.H.Fisher\r\tute\mit\
976: W.Fisher\r\tute\prince\
977: I.Fisk\r\tute\ucsd\
978: G.Forconi\r\tute\mit\ 
979: K.Freudenreich\r\tute\eth\
980: C.Furetta\r\tute\milan\
981: Yu.Galaktionov\r\tute{\moscow,\mit}\
982: S.N.Ganguli\r\tute{\tata}\ 
983: P.Garcia-Abia\r\tute{\madrid}\
984: M.Gataullin\r\tute\caltech\
985: S.Gentile\r\tute\rome\
986: S.Giagu\r\tute\rome\
987: Z.F.Gong\r\tute{\hefei}\
988: G.Grenier\r\tute\lyon\ 
989: O.Grimm\r\tute\eth\ 
990: M.W.Gruenewald\r\tute{\dublin}\ 
991: M.Guida\r\tute\salerno\ 
992: R.van~Gulik\r\tute\nikhef\
993: V.K.Gupta\r\tute\prince\ 
994: A.Gurtu\r\tute{\tata}\
995: L.J.Gutay\r\tute\purdue\
996: D.Haas\r\tute\basel\
997: D.Hatzifotiadou\r\tute\bologna\
998: T.Hebbeker\r\tute{\aachen}\
999: A.Herv\'e\r\tute\cern\ 
1000: J.Hirschfelder\r\tute\cmu\
1001: H.Hofer\r\tute\eth\ 
1002: M.Hohlmann\r\tute\florida\
1003: G.Holzner\r\tute\eth\ 
1004: S.R.Hou\r\tute\taiwan\
1005: Y.Hu\r\tute\nymegen\ 
1006: B.N.Jin\r\tute\beijing\ 
1007: L.W.Jones\r\tute\mich\
1008: P.de~Jong\r\tute\nikhef\
1009: I.Josa-Mutuberr{\'\i}a\r\tute\madrid\
1010: M.Kaur\r\tute\panjab\
1011: M.N.Kienzle-Focacci\r\tute\geneva\
1012: J.K.Kim\r\tute\korea\
1013: J.Kirkby\r\tute\cern\
1014: W.Kittel\r\tute\nymegen\
1015: A.Klimentov\r\tute{\mit,\moscow}\ 
1016: A.C.K{\"o}nig\r\tute\nymegen\
1017: M.Kopal\r\tute\purdue\
1018: V.Koutsenko\r\tute{\mit,\moscow}\ 
1019: M.Kr{\"a}ber\r\tute\eth\ 
1020: R.W.Kraemer\r\tute\cmu\
1021: A.Kr{\"u}ger\r\tute\zeuthen\ 
1022: A.Kunin\r\tute\mit\ 
1023: P.Ladron~de~Guevara\r\tute{\madrid}\
1024: I.Laktineh\r\tute\lyon\
1025: G.Landi\r\tute\florence\
1026: M.Lebeau\r\tute\cern\
1027: A.Lebedev\r\tute\mit\
1028: P.Lebrun\r\tute\lyon\
1029: P.Lecomte\r\tute\eth\ 
1030: P.Lecoq\r\tute\cern\ 
1031: P.Le~Coultre\r\tute\eth\ 
1032: J.M.Le~Goff\r\tute\cern\
1033: R.Leiste\r\tute\zeuthen\ 
1034: M.Levtchenko\r\tute\milan\
1035: P.Levtchenko\r\tute\peters\
1036: C.Li\r\tute\hefei\ 
1037: S.Likhoded\r\tute\zeuthen\ 
1038: C.H.Lin\r\tute\taiwan\
1039: W.T.Lin\r\tute\taiwan\
1040: F.L.Linde\r\tute{\nikhef}\
1041: L.Lista\r\tute\naples\
1042: Z.A.Liu\r\tute\beijing\
1043: W.Lohmann\r\tute\zeuthen\
1044: E.Longo\r\tute\rome\ 
1045: Y.S.Lu\r\tute\beijing\ 
1046: C.Luci\r\tute\rome\ 
1047: L.Luminari\r\tute\rome\
1048: W.Lustermann\r\tute\eth\
1049: W.G.Ma\r\tute\hefei\ 
1050: L.Malgeri\r\tute\geneva\
1051: A.Malinin\r\tute\moscow\ 
1052: C.Ma\~na\r\tute\madrid\
1053: J.Mans\r\tute\prince\ 
1054: J.P.Martin\r\tute\lyon\ 
1055: F.Marzano\r\tute\rome\ 
1056: K.Mazumdar\r\tute\tata\
1057: R.R.McNeil\r\tute{\lsu}\ 
1058: S.Mele\r\tute{\cern,\naples}\
1059: L.Merola\r\tute\naples\ 
1060: M.Meschini\r\tute\florence\ 
1061: W.J.Metzger\r\tute\nymegen\
1062: A.Mihul\r\tute\bucharest\
1063: H.Milcent\r\tute\cern\
1064: G.Mirabelli\r\tute\rome\ 
1065: J.Mnich\r\tute\aachen\
1066: G.B.Mohanty\r\tute\tata\ 
1067: G.S.Muanza\r\tute\lyon\
1068: A.J.M.Muijs\r\tute\nikhef\
1069: B.Musicar\r\tute\ucsd\ 
1070: M.Musy\r\tute\rome\ 
1071: S.Nagy\r\tute\debrecen\
1072: S.Natale\r\tute\geneva\
1073: M.Napolitano\r\tute\naples\
1074: F.Nessi-Tedaldi\r\tute\eth\
1075: H.Newman\r\tute\caltech\ 
1076: A.Nisati\r\tute\rome\
1077: T.Novak\r\tute\nymegen\
1078: H.Nowak\r\tute\zeuthen\                    
1079: R.Ofierzynski\r\tute\eth\ 
1080: G.Organtini\r\tute\rome\
1081: I.Pal\r\tute\purdue
1082: C.Palomares\r\tute\madrid\
1083: P.Paolucci\r\tute\naples\
1084: R.Paramatti\r\tute\rome\ 
1085: G.Passaleva\r\tute{\florence}\
1086: S.Patricelli\r\tute\naples\ 
1087: T.Paul\r\tute\ne\
1088: M.Pauluzzi\r\tute\perugia\
1089: C.Paus\r\tute\mit\
1090: F.Pauss\r\tute\eth\
1091: M.Pedace\r\tute\rome\
1092: S.Pensotti\r\tute\milan\
1093: D.Perret-Gallix\r\tute\lapp\ 
1094: B.Petersen\r\tute\nymegen\
1095: D.Piccolo\r\tute\naples\ 
1096: F.Pierella\r\tute\bologna\ 
1097: M.Pioppi\r\tute\perugia\
1098: P.A.Pirou\'e\r\tute\prince\ 
1099: E.Pistolesi\r\tute\milan\
1100: V.Plyaskin\r\tute\moscow\ 
1101: M.Pohl\r\tute\geneva\ 
1102: V.Pojidaev\r\tute\florence\
1103: J.Pothier\r\tute\cern\
1104: D.Prokofiev\r\tute\peters\ 
1105: J.Quartieri\r\tute\salerno\
1106: G.Rahal-Callot\r\tute\eth\
1107: M.A.Rahaman\r\tute\tata\ 
1108: P.Raics\r\tute\debrecen\ 
1109: N.Raja\r\tute\tata\
1110: R.Ramelli\r\tute\eth\ 
1111: P.G.Rancoita\r\tute\milan\
1112: R.Ranieri\r\tute\florence\ 
1113: A.Raspereza\r\tute\zeuthen\ 
1114: P.Razis\r\tute\cyprus
1115: D.Ren\r\tute\eth\ 
1116: M.Rescigno\r\tute\rome\
1117: S.Reucroft\r\tute\ne\
1118: S.Riemann\r\tute\zeuthen\
1119: K.Riles\r\tute\mich\
1120: B.P.Roe\r\tute\mich\
1121: L.Romero\r\tute\madrid\ 
1122: A.Rosca\r\tute\zeuthen\ 
1123: C.Rosemann\r\tute\aachen\
1124: C.Rosenbleck\r\tute\aachen\
1125: S.Rosier-Lees\r\tute\lapp\
1126: S.Roth\r\tute\aachen\
1127: J.A.Rubio\r\tute{\cern}\ 
1128: G.Ruggiero\r\tute\florence\ 
1129: H.Rykaczewski\r\tute\eth\ 
1130: A.Sakharov\r\tute\eth\
1131: S.Saremi\r\tute\lsu\ 
1132: S.Sarkar\r\tute\rome\
1133: J.Salicio\r\tute{\cern}\ 
1134: E.Sanchez\r\tute\madrid\
1135: C.Sch{\"a}fer\r\tute\cern\
1136: V.Schegelsky\r\tute\peters\
1137: H.Schopper\r\tute\hamburg\
1138: D.J.Schotanus\r\tute\nymegen\
1139: C.Sciacca\r\tute\naples\
1140: L.Servoli\r\tute\perugia\
1141: S.Shevchenko\r\tute{\caltech}\
1142: N.Shivarov\r\tute\sofia\
1143: V.Shoutko\r\tute\mit\ 
1144: E.Shumilov\r\tute\moscow\ 
1145: A.Shvorob\r\tute\caltech\
1146: D.Son\r\tute\korea\
1147: C.Souga\r\tute\lyon\
1148: P.Spillantini\r\tute\florence\ 
1149: M.Steuer\r\tute{\mit}\
1150: D.P.Stickland\r\tute\prince\ 
1151: B.Stoyanov\r\tute\sofia\
1152: A.Straessner\r\tute\geneva\
1153: K.Sudhakar\r\tute{\tata}\
1154: G.Sultanov\r\tute\sofia\
1155: L.Z.Sun\r\tute{\hefei}\
1156: S.Sushkov\r\tute\aachen\
1157: H.Suter\r\tute\eth\ 
1158: J.D.Swain\r\tute\ne\
1159: Z.Szillasi\r\tute{\florida,\P}\
1160: X.W.Tang\r\tute\beijing\
1161: P.Tarjan\r\tute\debrecen\
1162: L.Tauscher\r\tute\basel\
1163: L.Taylor\r\tute\ne\
1164: B.Tellili\r\tute\lyon\ 
1165: D.Teyssier\r\tute\lyon\ 
1166: C.Timmermans\r\tute\nymegen\
1167: Samuel~C.C.Ting\r\tute\mit\ 
1168: S.M.Ting\r\tute\mit\ 
1169: S.C.Tonwar\r\tute{\tata} 
1170: J.T\'oth\r\tute{\budapest}\ 
1171: C.Tully\r\tute\prince\
1172: K.L.Tung\r\tute\beijing
1173: J.Ulbricht\r\tute\eth\ 
1174: E.Valente\r\tute\rome\ 
1175: R.T.Van de Walle\r\tute\nymegen\
1176: R.Vasquez\r\tute\purdue\
1177: V.Veszpremi\r\tute\florida\
1178: G.Vesztergombi\r\tute\budapest\
1179: I.Vetlitsky\r\tute\moscow\ 
1180: D.Vicinanza\r\tute\salerno\ 
1181: G.Viertel\r\tute\eth\ 
1182: S.Villa\r\tute\riverside\
1183: M.Vivargent\r\tute{\lapp}\ 
1184: S.Vlachos\r\tute\basel\
1185: I.Vodopianov\r\tute\florida\ 
1186: H.Vogel\r\tute\cmu\
1187: H.Vogt\r\tute\zeuthen\ 
1188: I.Vorobiev\r\tute{\cmu,\moscow}\ 
1189: A.A.Vorobyov\r\tute\peters\ 
1190: M.Wadhwa\r\tute\basel\
1191: Q.Wang\tute\nymegen\
1192: X.L.Wang\r\tute\hefei\ 
1193: Z.M.Wang\r\tute{\hefei}\
1194: M.Weber\r\tute\cern\
1195: H.Wilkens\r\tute\nymegen\
1196: S.Wynhoff\r\tute\prince\ 
1197: L.Xia\r\tute\caltech\ 
1198: Z.Z.Xu\r\tute\hefei\ 
1199: J.Yamamoto\r\tute\mich\ 
1200: B.Z.Yang\r\tute\hefei\ 
1201: C.G.Yang\r\tute\beijing\ 
1202: H.J.Yang\r\tute\mich\
1203: M.Yang\r\tute\beijing\
1204: S.C.Yeh\r\tute\tsinghua\ 
1205: An.Zalite\r\tute\peters\
1206: Yu.Zalite\r\tute\peters\
1207: Z.P.Zhang\r\tute{\hefei}\ 
1208: J.Zhao\r\tute\hefei\
1209: G.Y.Zhu\r\tute\beijing\
1210: R.Y.Zhu\r\tute\caltech\
1211: H.L.Zhuang\r\tute\beijing\
1212: A.Zichichi\r\tute{\bologna,\cern,\wl}\
1213: B.Zimmermann\r\tute\eth\ 
1214: M.Z{\"o}ller\rlap.\tute\aachen
1215: \newpage
1216: %\rule{\textwidth}{0.4pt}
1217: \begin{list}{A}{\itemsep=0pt plus 0pt minus 0pt\parsep=0pt plus 0pt minus 0pt
1218:                 \topsep=0pt plus 0pt minus 0pt}
1219: \item[\aachen]
1220:  III. Physikalisches Institut, RWTH, D-52056 Aachen, Germany$^{\S}$
1221: \item[\nikhef] National Institute for High Energy Physics, NIKHEF, 
1222:      and University of Amsterdam, NL-1009 DB Amsterdam, The Netherlands
1223: \item[\mich] University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
1224: \item[\lapp] Laboratoire d'Annecy-le-Vieux de Physique des Particules, 
1225:      LAPP,IN2P3-CNRS, BP 110, F-74941 Annecy-le-Vieux CEDEX, France
1226: \item[\basel] Institute of Physics, University of Basel, CH-4056 Basel,
1227:      Switzerland
1228: \item[\lsu] Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA
1229: \item[\beijing] Institute of High Energy Physics, IHEP, 
1230:   100039 Beijing, China$^{\triangle}$ 
1231: \item[\bologna] University of Bologna and INFN-Sezione di Bologna, 
1232:      I-40126 Bologna, Italy
1233: \item[\tata] Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Mumbai (Bombay) 400 005, India
1234: \item[\ne] Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA
1235: \item[\bucharest] Institute of Atomic Physics and University of Bucharest,
1236:      R-76900 Bucharest, Romania
1237: \item[\budapest] Central Research Institute for Physics of the 
1238:      Hungarian Academy of Sciences, H-1525 Budapest 114, Hungary$^{\ddag}$
1239: \item[\mit] Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA
1240: \item[\panjab] Panjab University, Chandigarh 160 014, India
1241: \item[\debrecen] KLTE-ATOMKI, H-4010 Debrecen, Hungary$^\P$
1242: \item[\dublin] Department of Experimental Physics,
1243:   University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland
1244: \item[\florence] INFN Sezione di Firenze and University of Florence, 
1245:      I-50125 Florence, Italy
1246: \item[\cern] European Laboratory for Particle Physics, CERN, 
1247:      CH-1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland
1248: \item[\wl] World Laboratory, FBLJA  Project, CH-1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland
1249: \item[\geneva] University of Geneva, CH-1211 Geneva 4, Switzerland
1250: \item[\hamburg] University of Hamburg, D-22761 Hamburg, Germany
1251: \item[\hefei] Chinese University of Science and Technology, USTC,
1252:       Hefei, Anhui 230 029, China$^{\triangle}$
1253: \item[\lausanne] University of Lausanne, CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland
1254: \item[\lyon] Institut de Physique Nucl\'eaire de Lyon, 
1255:      IN2P3-CNRS,Universit\'e Claude Bernard, 
1256:      F-69622 Villeurbanne, France
1257: \item[\madrid] Centro de Investigaciones Energ{\'e}ticas, 
1258:      Medioambientales y Tecnol\'ogicas, CIEMAT, E-28040 Madrid,
1259:      Spain${\flat}$ 
1260: \item[\florida] Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, FL 32901, USA
1261: \item[\milan] INFN-Sezione di Milano, I-20133 Milan, Italy
1262: \item[\moscow] Institute of Theoretical and Experimental Physics, ITEP, 
1263:      Moscow, Russia
1264: \item[\naples] INFN-Sezione di Napoli and University of Naples, 
1265:      I-80125 Naples, Italy
1266: \item[\cyprus] Department of Physics, University of Cyprus,
1267:      Nicosia, Cyprus
1268: \item[\nymegen] University of Nijmegen and NIKHEF, 
1269:      NL-6525 ED Nijmegen, The Netherlands
1270: \item[\caltech] California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA
1271: \item[\perugia] INFN-Sezione di Perugia and Universit\`a Degli 
1272:      Studi di Perugia, I-06100 Perugia, Italy   
1273: \item[\peters] Nuclear Physics Institute, St. Petersburg, Russia
1274: \item[\cmu] Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA
1275: \item[\potenza] INFN-Sezione di Napoli and University of Potenza, 
1276:      I-85100 Potenza, Italy
1277: \item[\prince] Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, USA
1278: \item[\riverside] University of Californa, Riverside, CA 92521, USA
1279: \item[\rome] INFN-Sezione di Roma and University of Rome, ``La Sapienza",
1280:      I-00185 Rome, Italy
1281: \item[\salerno] University and INFN, Salerno, I-84100 Salerno, Italy
1282: \item[\ucsd] University of California, San Diego, CA 92093, USA
1283: \item[\sofia] Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Central Lab.~of 
1284:      Mechatronics and Instrumentation, BU-1113 Sofia, Bulgaria
1285: \item[\korea]  The Center for High Energy Physics, 
1286:      Kyungpook National University, 702-701 Taegu, Republic of Korea
1287: \item[\taiwan] National Central University, Chung-Li, Taiwan, China
1288: \item[\tsinghua] Department of Physics, National Tsing Hua University,
1289:       Taiwan, China
1290: \item[\purdue] Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA
1291: \item[\psinst] Paul Scherrer Institut, PSI, CH-5232 Villigen, Switzerland
1292: \item[\zeuthen] DESY, D-15738 Zeuthen, Germany
1293: \item[\eth] Eidgen\"ossische Technische Hochschule, ETH Z\"urich,
1294:      CH-8093 Z\"urich, Switzerland
1295: \item[\S]  Supported by the German Bundesministerium 
1296:         f\"ur Bildung, Wissenschaft, Forschung und Technologie.
1297: \item[\ddag] Supported by the Hungarian OTKA fund under contract
1298: numbers T019181, F023259 and T037350.
1299: \item[\P] Also supported by the Hungarian OTKA fund under contract
1300:   number T026178.
1301: \item[$\flat$] Supported also by the Comisi\'on Interministerial de Ciencia y 
1302:         Tecnolog{\'\i}a.
1303: \item[$\sharp$] Also supported by CONICET and Universidad Nacional de La Plata,
1304:         CC 67, 1900 La Plata, Argentina.
1305: \item[$\triangle$] Supported by the National Natural Science
1306:   Foundation of China.
1307: \end{list}
1308: }
1309: \vfill
1310: 
1311: %%% Local Variables: 
1312: %%% mode: latex
1313: %%% TeX-master: t
1314: %%% End:
1315: 
1316: \newpage
1317: 
1318: \renewcommand\arraystretch{1.3}
1319: 
1320: \begin{table}[htbp]
1321:   \begin{center}
1322:     \begin{tabular}{|rcl|c|c|c|c|}
1323:       \hline
1324:       \multicolumn{3}{|c|}{Production}  & \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{Decay mode} \\ \cline{4-7}
1325:       \multicolumn{3}{|c|}{mechanism}   & $\htogg$ & $\htozg$ & $\htoww$ & $\htoff$ \\
1326:       \hline
1327: $\rm e^+e^-$ & $\rightarrow$ & $\rm H\gamma$
1328:  & 3 $\gamma$ & 2 $\gamma$ + 2 jets &  1 $\gamma$ + 4 jets & 1 $\gamma + \bbbar$ \cite{L3_anom}\\
1329: $\rm e^+e^-$ & $\rightarrow$ & $\rm He^+e^-$
1330: &  2 $\gamma$ + $p$\hspace{-.18cm}/\hspace{+.01cm} &   --     &  --   & $\bbbar$ + $p$\hspace{-.18cm}/\hspace{+.01cm} \cite{L3_anom} \\
1331: $\rm e^+e^-$ & $\rightarrow$ & $\rm HZ$
1332: & 2 $\gamma + \ffbar$ \cite{l3aura_paper}&   --     &  --   & $\ffbar\fpfpbar$ \cite{l3sm_paper} \\ \hline
1333:     \end{tabular}
1334:   \end{center}
1335:   \caption{Experimental signatures for the search for anomalous
1336:     couplings in the Higgs sector. The symbol
1337:     $p$\hspace{-.18cm}/\hspace{+.01cm} denotes missing energy and
1338:     momentum. Searches in the $\eebbg$ and
1339:     $\eeeebb$ channels are only performed at $\rts=189\GeV$~\protect\cite{L3_anom}.}
1340:   \label{tab:signatures}
1341: \end{table}
1342: 
1343: \renewcommand\arraystretch{1.0}
1344: 
1345: \begin{table}[htbp]
1346: \begin{center}
1347:  \begin{tabular}{|l|rrrrrrr|} \hline
1348:  $\rts$ (\GeV)              &  188.6 & 191.6 & 195.5 &199.5 &201.7 &204.8 & 206.6 \\
1349:  $\cal{L}$ ($\rm{pb^{-1}}$) &  176.8 &  28.8 &  82.4 & 67.6 & 36.1 & 74.7 & 135.6 \\ \hline
1350: \end{tabular}
1351: \end{center}
1352: \caption{Average centre-of-mass energy and integrated luminosity of the
1353:  data samples used for the search for anomalous
1354:     couplings in the Higgs sector.}
1355: \label{tab:energies}
1356: \end{table}
1357: 
1358: \begin{table}[htbp]
1359: \begin{center}
1360:  \begin{tabular}{|c|ccc|ccc|ccc|ccc|} \cline{2-13}
1361:              \multicolumn{1}{c|}{}
1362:            & \multicolumn{12}{|c|}{$\ee \ra$} \\ \hline
1363:            & \multicolumn{3}{|c|}{$\Ho\gamma \ra \gamma\gamma\gamma$}
1364:            & \multicolumn{3}{|c|}{$\ee\Ho    \ra \ee\gamma\gamma   $}
1365:            & \multicolumn{3}{|c|}{$\Ho\gamma \ra \Zo\gamma\gamma   $}
1366:            & \multicolumn{3}{|c|}{$\Ho\gamma \ra \WWstar\gamma     $} \\  \cline{2-13}
1367:        $\MH$  & $N_D$ & $N_B$ & $\epsilon (\%)$ &
1368:                 $N_D$ & $N_B$ & $\epsilon (\%)$ &
1369:                 $N_D$ & $N_B$ & $\epsilon (\%)$ &
1370:                 $N_D$ & $N_B$ & $\epsilon (\%)$ \\ \hline
1371:   70   & 1 & 3.5 & 23.4 & \phantom{0}0 & \phantom{0}0.0  & 19.5 &  --  &  --  & -- & -- &  --  & -- \\
1372:   90   & 2 & 2.7 & 25.8 & \phantom{0}6 & \phantom{0}1.7  & 24.2 &  --  &  --  & -- & -- &  --  & -- \\
1373:   110  & 3 & 3.1 & 26.9 & \phantom{0}9 & \phantom{0}4.9  & 28.5 &  68  & \phantom{0}72.8 & 22.7 & -- &  --  & -- \\
1374:   130  & 2 & 2.4 & 28.7 & 11 & 10.9 & 30.4 &  15  & \phantom{0}18.2 & 22.4 & \phantom{0}10 & \phantom{0}11.5 & 18.0 \\
1375:   150  & 4 & 4.0 & 28.8 & 19 & 19.9 & 31.9 &  \phantom{0}9  & \phantom{0}14.4 & 24.1 & \phantom{0}22 & \phantom{0}22.8 & 25.5   \\
1376:   170  & 9 & 9.3 & 28.2 & 38 & 49.7 & 32.4 &  31  & \phantom{0}41.0 & 25.6 & \phantom{0}72 & \phantom{0}74.7 & 26.8   \\
1377:   190  & 3 & 8.9 & 22.9 & 24 & 29.5 & 30.1 &  96  &101.0 & 22.5 &113 & 107.3 & 19.5  \\ \hline
1378: \end{tabular}
1379: \end{center}
1380: \caption{Numbers of observed, $N_D$, and expected, $N_B$, events and
1381: signal selection efficiencies, $\epsilon$, for different analysis
1382: channels and values of the Higgs mass.  Centre-of-mass energies in the
1383: range $189 \GeV < \rts < 209 \GeV$ are considered for the $\eeggg$
1384: and $\eeeegg$ channels, while the $\eezgg$ and $\eewwg$ channels
1385: are analysed in the $192 \GeV < \rts < 209 \GeV$ range.}
1386: \label{tab:events}
1387: \end{table}
1388: 
1389: \newpage
1390: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1391: 
1392: \begin{figure}[htbp]
1393: \begin{center}
1394:     \includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{fig1.eps}
1395: \end{center}
1396: \caption{
1397:     Relevant production processes in the search for
1398: anomalous couplings in the Higgs sector at LEP: a) $\eehg$, b) $\eehee$ and c) $\eehz$.}
1399: \label{figure:diagrams}
1400: \end{figure}
1401: 
1402: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1403: %%%% Experimental plots
1404: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1405: 
1406: \begin{figure}[htbp]
1407: \begin{center}
1408: 
1409: \begin{tabular}{cc}
1410:    \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig2a.eps} &
1411:     \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig2b.eps} \\
1412:     \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig2c.eps} &
1413:     \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig2d.eps}      \\
1414: \end{tabular}
1415: \end{center}
1416: \caption{Distributions of the final discriminant variables for
1417: a) the $\eetoggg$ channel: the mass, $m_{\gamma\gamma}$, of the two-photon system;
1418: b) the $\eetoeegg$ channel: the $\chi^2$ of the constrained fit;
1419: c) the $\eetozgg$  channel: the mass, $m_{\rm qq\gamma}$, of the system of the two-jets and
1420: a photon
1421: and d) the $\eetowwg$  channel: the mass, $m_{\rm qqqq}$, of the hadronic system. The
1422: points represent the data, the open histograms the background and the
1423: hatched histograms the Higgs signal with an arbitrary cross section of 0.1 pb.
1424: The Higgs mass hypotheses indicated
1425: in the figures are considered. The arrows indicate the
1426: values of the cuts.
1427: }
1428: \label{fig:exp_plots}
1429: \end{figure}
1430: 
1431: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1432: %%%%  Cross section limits
1433: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1434: 
1435: \begin{figure}[htbp]
1436: \begin{center}
1437: \begin{tabular}{cc}
1438:     \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig3a.eps} &
1439:     \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig3b.eps}  \\
1440:     \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig3c.eps} &
1441:     \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig3d.eps} \\
1442: \end{tabular}
1443: \end{center}
1444: \caption{Upper limits at 95\% CL as a function of the Higgs mass
1445: on:
1446: a) $\sigma(\eehg)\times\Brhgg$;
1447: b) $\Ghgg\times\Brhgg$;
1448: c) $\sigma(\eehg)\times\Brhzg$;
1449: d) $\sigma(\eehg)\times\Brhww$.
1450: The dashed line indicates the expected limit in the absence of a
1451: signal. 
1452: Predictions for non-zero values of the anomalous
1453: couplings are also shown.}
1454: \label{fig:xs_limits}
1455: \end{figure}
1456: 
1457: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1458: %%%%  Xi limit
1459: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1460: 
1461: \begin{figure}[htbp]
1462: \begin{center}
1463:     \includegraphics[width=12cm]{fig4.eps}
1464: \end{center}
1465: \caption{The 95\% CL upper bound on the
1466: anomalous coupling $\xi^2$ as
1467: a function of the Higgs mass, as obtained from the results of
1468: the search for the Standard Model Higgs
1469: boson\protect\cite{{l3sm_paper}}. 
1470: The dashed line indicates the expected limit in the absence of a
1471: signal. The dark and light shaded bands around the
1472: expected line correspond to the 68.3\% and 95.4\% probability bands,
1473: denoted by $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ respectively.
1474: }
1475: \label{fig:xi_limit}
1476: \end{figure}
1477: 
1478: 
1479: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1480: %%%%  Expected ratios for e+e- --> HZ
1481: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1482: 
1483: \begin{figure}[htbp]
1484: \begin{center}
1485: \begin{tabular}{cc}
1486:     \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig5a.eps} &
1487:     \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig5b.eps}  \\
1488:     \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig5c.eps} &
1489:     \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig5d.eps} \\
1490: \end{tabular}
1491: \end{center}
1492: \caption{
1493: The theoretical predictions for the
1494: ratios $R = (\sigma^{AC}\times\Br^{AC})/(\sigma^{SM}\times\Br^{SM})$ for the $\eehz$ channel
1495: for the couplings a) $\d$, b) $\db$, c) $\dg1z$ and d) $\dkg$.
1496: The solid line corresponds to the decay $\htoff$ and the dashed line to $\htogg$.
1497: The predictions refer to $\MH=100\GeV$.
1498: The ratios for the two decay modes coincide for $\dg1z$ and $\dkg$.}
1499: \label{fig:ratios}
1500: \end{figure}
1501: 
1502: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1503: %%%% One-dimensional limits
1504: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1505: 
1506: 
1507: \begin{figure}[htbp]
1508: \begin{center}
1509:     \includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{fig6.eps}
1510: \vspace*{-0.5cm}
1511: \begin{tabular}{cc}
1512:     \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig6a.eps} &
1513:    \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth] {fig6b.eps} \\
1514:     \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig6c.eps} &
1515:    \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth] {fig6d.eps} \\
1516: \end{tabular}
1517: \end{center}
1518: \caption{Regions excluded at 95\% CL as a function of the Higgs mass
1519: for the anomalous couplings: a) $\d$, b) $\db$, c) $\dg1z$ and
1520: d) $\dkg$.  The limits on each coupling are obtained under the assumption
1521: that the other three couplings are equal to zero.  
1522: The dashed line indicates the expected limit in the absence of a
1523: signal. The different
1524: hatched regions show the limits obtained by the most sensitive
1525: analyses: $\eeggg$, $\eeeegg$, $\eezgg$, $\eehz$ and $\eewwg$.
1526: }
1527: \label{fig:ac_limits}
1528: \end{figure}
1529: 
1530: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1531: %%%% Two-dimensional limits
1532: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1533: 
1534: \begin{figure}[htbp]
1535: \begin{center}
1536:     \includegraphics[width=10cm]{fig7a.eps}\\
1537:     \includegraphics[width=10cm]{fig7b.eps}
1538: \end{center}
1539: \caption{Regions excluded at 95\% CL for: a) the partial widths
1540: $\Gamma (\Ho\ra\Zo\gamma)$ {\it vs.}  $\Gamma (\Ho\ra\gamma\gamma)$
1541: and b) the branching fractions $\Brhzg$ {\it vs.} $\Brhgg$ in presence
1542: of the $\d$ and $\db$ anomalous couplings. Two values of the
1543: Higgs boson mass are considered. The results are consistent with the
1544: tree level Standard Model expectations $\Gamma
1545: (\Ho\ra\Zo\gamma)\approx\Gamma (\Ho\ra\gamma\gamma)\approx 0$.}
1546: \label{fig:gg_zg}
1547: \end{figure}
1548: 
1549: \end{document}
1550: