1:
2: \documentstyle [12pt]{article}
3: \textwidth 6.25in \hoffset -.375in
4: \voffset -0.7in
5: \textheight = 8.5in
6:
7: \begin{document}
8: \input epsf
9:
10: \hfill {WM-00-113}
11:
12: \hfill {\today}
13:
14: \vskip 1in \baselineskip 24pt
15:
16: {
17: \Large
18: \bigskip
19: \centerline{t-channel production of heavy charged leptons}
20: }
21:
22: \vskip .8in
23: \def\bar{\overline}
24:
25: \centerline{Shuquan Nie\footnote{Email: sxnie@physics.wm.edu} and Marc
26: Sher\footnote{Email: sher@physics.wm.edu} }
27: \bigskip
28: \centerline {\it Nuclear and Particle Theory Group}
29: \centerline {\it Physics Department}
30: \centerline {\it College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA 23187, USA}
31:
32: \vskip 1in
33:
34: {\narrower\narrower
35: We study the pair production of heavy charged exotic leptons at $e^{+}e^{-}$
36: colliders in the $SU(2)_L \times SU(2)_I \times U(1)_Y $ model. This gauge group is a
37: subgroup of the grand unification group $E_6$; $SU(2)_I$ commutes with the electric
38: charge operator, and the three corresponding gauge bosons are electrically neutral. In
39: addition to the standard
40: $\gamma$ and Z boson contributions, we also include the contributions from extra
41: neutral gauge bosons. A t-channel contribution due to $W_I$-boson exchange, which is
42: unsuppressed by mixing angles, is quite important. We calculate the left-right and
43: forward-backward asymmetries, and discuss how to differentiate different models. }
44:
45: \section{Introdution}
46:
47: Many extensions of the Standard Model (SM) contain exotic fermions. Strongly
48: interacting exotics, such as heavy quarks, can be produced in abundance at the Tevatron
49: or the LHC. However, particles which are not strongly interacting, such as heavy
50: charged leptons, can best be produced at an electron-positron collider. In general,
51: studies of heavy charged leptons at such colliders focus on s-channel production,
52: through a $\gamma$, $Z$, $Z'$, etc. The phenomenology of exotic particles has been
53: considered widely [1-8]. A good report can be found in Ref.
54: \cite{Hewett1}.
55:
56: In this paper, we note that a model which arises from superstring-inspired $E_6$ grand
57: unification models will allow pair production of heavy charged leptons in the t-channel. We
58: discuss this model, and study the forward-backward and left-right asymmetries at linear
59: colliders. For simplicity, we neglect mixing between extra
60: particles (bosons or fermions) and the normal particles of the SM, since such mixing
61: angles are generally small.
62:
63:
64: \section{The model} There are many phenomenologically acceptable low energy models
65: which arise from $E_6$.
66: \begin{eqnarray} (a) E_6 &\longrightarrow& SU(3)_C \times SU(2)_L \times U(1)_Y \times
67: U(1)_{Y^{\prime}} \nonumber \\ (b) E_6 &\longrightarrow& SO(10) \times U(1)_{\psi}
68: \longrightarrow SU(5) \times U(1)_{\chi}\times U(1)_{\psi} \nonumber \\ (c) E_6 &\longrightarrow& SU(3)_C
69: \times SU(2)_L \times SU(2)_R \times U(1)_L \times U(1)_R \nonumber \\ (c^{\prime}) E_6
70: &\longrightarrow& SU(3)_C \times SU(2)_L \times SU(2)_I \times U(1)_Y \times
71: U(1)_{Y^{\prime}} \nonumber
72: \end{eqnarray} where $U(1)_{\psi}$ and $U(1)_{\chi}$ can be combined into
73: $U(1)_{\theta}$ in model (b), reducing it to the effective rank-5 model
74: $SU(3)_C \times SU(2)_L \times U(1)_Y \times U(1)_{\theta}$, which is most often considered
75: in the literature. Models (c) and $(c^{\prime})$ come from the subgroup $SU(3)_C \times
76: SU(3)_L \times SU(3)_R$. The {\bf 27}-dimensional fundamental representation has the
77: branching rule
78: \begin{equation} {\bf 27}=\underbrace{({\bf 3}^c,{\bf 3},{\bf 1})}_{q}+\underbrace{
79: (\bar{{\bf 3}}^c, {\bf 1}, \bar{{\bf 3}})}_{\bar{q}} +\underbrace{({\bf 1}^c, \bar{{\bf
80: 3}}, {\bf 3})}_{l}
81: \end{equation} and the particles of the first family are assigned as
82: \[
83: \left( \begin{array}{c} u\\d\\h \end{array} \right)+
84: \left( \begin{array}{lcr} u^c & d^c & h^c \end{array} \right)+
85: \left( \begin{array}{ccc} E^c & \nu & N \\ N^c & e & E\\e^c & \nu^c & S^c
86: \end{array} \right) \] where $SU(3)_L$ operates vertically and $SU(3)_R$ operates
87: horizontally. (Different symbols for these particles may be used in the literature.)
88:
89: The most common method of breaking the $SU(3)_R$ factor is to break the {\bf 3} of
90: $SU(3)_R$ into {\bf 2}+{\bf 1}, so that $(u^c, d^c)$ forms an $SU(2)_R$ doublet with
91: $h^c$ as a $SU(2)_R$ singlet. This gives Model (c), the familiar left-right symmetric
92: model \cite{Candelas}. Model (c) can be reduced further to an effective rank-5 model
93: with $U(1)_{V=L+R}$. Another possibility, resulting in Model $(c^{\prime})$, is to
94: break the {\bf 3} of the $SU(3)_R$ into ${\bf 1} + {\bf 2}$ so that $(d^c, h^c)$ forms
95: an $SU(2)$ doublet with $u^c$ as a singlet. In this option, the $SU(2)$ doesn't
96: contribute to the electromagnetic charge operator and it is called $SU(2)_I$ (I stands
97: for Inert). Then the vector gauge bosons corresponding to $SU(2)_I$ are neutral.
98: Model $(c^{\prime})$ can be reduced to an effective rank-5 model $SU(3)_C \times
99: SU(2)_L \times U(1)_Y \times SU(2)_I$. Both of them will be considered in this paper.
100:
101: At the $SU(2)_L \times SU(2)_I \times U(1)_Y
102: \times U(1)_{Y^{\prime}}$ level, a single generation of fermions can be represented as
103: \[ \left( \begin{array}{cc} \nu & N\\ e^{-} & E^{-} \end{array} \right)_L, \hspace{2mm}
104: \left( \begin{array}{c} u \\ d \end{array} \right)_L, \hspace{2mm}
105: \left( \begin{array}{lr} d^c & h^c \end{array} \right)_L, \hspace{2mm}
106: \left( \begin{array}{c} E^c \\ N^c \end{array} \right)_L, \hspace{2mm}
107: \left( \begin{array}{lr} \nu^c & S^c \end{array} \right)_L, \hspace{2mm}
108: h_L, \hspace{2mm} e_L^c, \hspace{2mm} u^c_L
109: \] where $SU(2)_{L(I)}$ acts vertically (horizontally). Note that additional
110: heavy leptons $\left({N\atop E}\right)$ and its conjugate $\left({E^c\atop N^c}\right)$
111: form two new isodoublets under
112: $SU(2)_L$.
113:
114: \section{Cross Section Production and Asymmetries} The relevant interactions for the
115: process $e^+e^- \longrightarrow E^+E^-$ are
116: \begin{eqnarray} {\cal L} &=& \sum _{f=e,E} Q_f {\bar f}_{\alpha} \gamma ^{\mu} f_{\alpha} A_{\mu}
117: +\frac{g}{\cos{\theta_W}} \bar{e}_{\alpha} \gamma^{\mu}
118: (T^3_{e_{\alpha}}-Q_e \sin^2{\theta_W}) e_{\alpha} Z_{\mu} \nonumber \\
119: & & +\frac{g}{2 \cos{\theta_W}} \bar{E}_{\alpha} \gamma^{\mu} (1-2
120: \sin^2{\theta_W}) E_{\alpha} Z_{\mu} \nonumber \\
121: & & +\frac{g_I}{2 \sqrt{2}} \bar{e} \gamma^{\mu} (1- \gamma_5) E W_{I \mu}
122: +H.c. \nonumber \\
123: & & +\frac{g_I}{4} (\bar{E} \gamma^{\mu} (1-\gamma_5) E -\bar{e} \gamma^{\mu}
124: (1-\gamma_5) e) Z_{I \mu} \nonumber \\
125: & & + \sum_{f=e,E} g_{Y^{\prime}} \frac{Y^{\prime}_{f_{\alpha}}}{2}
126: \bar{f}_{\alpha} \gamma^{\mu} f_{\alpha} Z^{\prime}_{\mu}
127: \end{eqnarray} where $\alpha = L$ or $R$. $g$, $g_I$ and $g_{Y^{\prime}}$ are coupling constants
128: and $\theta_W$ is the electroweak mixing angle. For simplicity, we will assume that
129: $g_I=g$ and $g_{Y^{\prime}} =g_Y$ in our numerical results, it is straightforward to
130: relax this assumption. The first two lines are couplings between fermions and standard
131: $\gamma$ and Z. The rest are couplings with extra neutral gauge bosons. The
132: $e^+e^-\rightarrow E^+E^-$ process can proceed via s-channel exchange of a $\gamma, Z,
133: Z'$ or $Z_I$, and can also proceed via t-channel exchange of a $W_I$. Each amplitude can
134: be written as the form of
135: \begin{equation} C_i \bar{v}_e \gamma^{\mu} (1-a_i \gamma_5) u_e \bar{u}_E
136: \gamma_{\mu} (1-b_i \gamma_5) v_E.
137: \end{equation}
138:
139: Note that the $W_I$ leads to a t-channel process unsuppressed by small mixing angles.
140: This is unique to this model. Note that if one considered production of the heavy
141: charged leptons which form an $SU(2)_I$ doublet with the muon or the tau, then the
142: processes would be identical except that the t-channel process would be absent.
143:
144: The differential cross section for this process is given by
145: \begin{equation}
146: \frac{d \sigma}{d \cos{\theta}}= \frac{1}{8 \pi s } \sqrt{\frac{1}{4}-\frac{m_E^2 }{s}}
147: \{ D_1 (m_E^2 -u)^2+D_2 (m_E^2-t)^2 + 2 D_3 m_E^2 s \}
148: \end{equation} s, t and u are the Mandelstam variables, and with
149: \begin{eqnarray} D_1 &=& \sum_{i,j=1}^5 C_i C_j \{ (1+a_i a_j) (1+b_i
150: b_j)+(a_i+a_j)(b_i+b_j) \} \nonumber \\ D_2 &=& \sum_{i,j=1}^5 C_i C_j \{ (1+a_i a_j)
151: (1+b_i b_j)-(a_i+a_j)(b_i+b_j) \} \nonumber \\ D_3 &=& \sum_{i,j=1}^5 C_i C_j \{ (1+a_i
152: a_j) (1-b_i b_j) \}
153: \end{eqnarray} where the $C_i$, $a_i$ and $b_i$ are given in Table 1.
154: \begin{center}
155: Table 1 \hspace{0.4 cm} Coefficients appearing in Eq. (5) \\ \vspace{0.3 cm}
156: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
157: \hline \hline
158: i & $C_i$ & $a_i$ & $b_i$ \\ \hline
159: 1 &$\frac{e^2}{s}$&0 &0\\ \hline
160: 2 &$\frac{g^2(1-4\sin^2 \theta_W)(1-2 \sin^2 \theta_W)}{8 \cos^2 \theta_W(s-m^2_Z)}$ &$\frac{1}{1-4
161: \sin^2 \theta_W}$&0 \\ \hline
162: 3 &$\frac{-g_I^2}{16 (s-m^2_{Z_I})}$&1&1 \\ \hline
163: 4 &$\frac{-9g^2_{Y^{\prime}}}{144 (s-m^2_{Z^{\prime}})}$&$-\frac{1}{3}$&$-\frac{1}{5}$ \\ \hline
164: 5 &$\frac{g^2_I}{8 (t-m^2_{W_I})}$ &1&1 \\
165: \hline \hline
166: \end{tabular}
167: \end{center}
168:
169: The forward-back asymmetry is defined by
170: \begin{equation} A_{FB} =\frac{\int_0^1 \frac{d\sigma}{d\cos{\theta}}
171: d\cos{\theta}-\int_{-1}^0 \frac{d\sigma}{d\cos{\theta}} d\cos{\theta}}{\int_{-1}^1
172: \frac{d\sigma}{d\cos{\theta}} d\cos{\theta}}
173: \end{equation}
174: and the left-right asymmetry is defined by
175: \begin{equation} A_{LR}=\frac{\sigma_L-\sigma_R}{\sigma_L+\sigma_R},
176: \end{equation}
177: Note that the $C_i$, $a_i$ and $b_i$ will be somewhat different for $\sigma_L$ and
178: $\sigma_R$ due to the insertion of the projection operator in Eq. (3). Both
179: $A_{FB}$ and
180: $A_{LR}$ at
181: $e^+e^-$ colliders were studied in Ref.
182: \cite{Rizzo, Hewett2}, but only s-channel contributions were considered.
183:
184: \section{Results} The electroweak part $SU(2)_L \times U(1)_Y$ has
185: been measured precisely. Let us first consider the rank 5 case. Setting $g_{Y'}=0$, we have two gauge
186: boson mass parameters $m_{W_I}$ and $m_{Z_I}$. We
187: will assume that these masses are equal and thus there is only one mass
188: parameter remaining, which we choose to be near the experimental lower
189: bound for direct production\cite{abe}, $m_{Z_I}=650$ GeV. This is basically the same as
190: assuming that the gauge bosons do not substantially mix with each other. The numerical
191: results for cross section, forward-backward and left-right asymmetries are shown in
192: Figs. 1-3. We have plotted the results for $E^+E^-$ and $M^+M^-$ production, where
193: $M$ is the
194: $SU(2)_I$ partner of the muon or tau (the only difference will be due to the t-channel
195: process). For comparison, we also include the standard model results for both a
196: vectorlike heavy lepton and a chiral heavy lepton. Although we have assumed that the
197: $Z_I$ mass ($E,M$ mass) is $650$ GeV ($200$ GeV), it is easy to see how the figures will
198: be qualitatively modified if these assumptions are relaxed.
199:
200:
201: In the rank 6 model, one has an additional mass scale and additional coupling. If we
202: assume that the $g_{Y'}$ coupling is the same as $g_Y$, and that the mass of the $Z'$
203: is ${5 g_Y\over 3 g_I}M_{Z_I}$, then one can recalculate the cross section,
204: forward-backward and left-right asymmetries. We find that there is not a
205: substantial difference from the rank 5 case, except in the immediate vicinity of the $Z'$
206: mass.
207:
208: \section{Conclusions}
209:
210: How does one detect these leptons? The main decay modes depend sensitively on the masses
211: and mixing angles. Since the $E$ and its isodoublet partner $N$ are degenerate in the
212: limit of no mixing, one expects the $E\rightarrow NW^*$ to be into a virtual $W$, leading
213: to a three-body decay. Since the allowed three-body phase space is very small, this
214: decay will be negligible unless the mixing with the lighter generations is extremely
215: small. In the more natural case, in which such mixing is not very small, the two-body
216: decays
217: $E\rightarrow
218: \nu_eW$ and
219: $E\rightarrow eZ$ would dominate. A
220: detailed analysis of the lifetimes and the decay modes can be found in Ref.
221: \cite{frampton}. There, it was shown that the ratio of $\Gamma(E\rightarrow
222: e Z)$ to $\Gamma(E\rightarrow \nu_e W)$ is given by the ratio of $|U_{Ee}|^2$ to
223: $|U_{E\nu_e}|^2$. This is very model-dependent.
224:
225: Certainly, the signature for
226: $E\rightarrow eZ$ would be quite dramatic. Even if the $Z$ decays hadronically or
227: invisibly, the monochromatic electron, plus the invariant mass of the $Z$ decay
228: products, would allow for virtually background-free detection. The signature for
229: $E\rightarrow \nu_e W$ is less dramatic, but would lead to $W^+W^-$ plus missing
230: transverse momentum. As discussed in Ref. \cite{Montalvo}, requiring that the $W$'s
231: decay leptonically gives a signal of $l^+l^-$, where $l=(e,\mu)$. The backgrounds, due
232: to
233: $e^+e^-\rightarrow \tau^+\tau^-, W^+W^-$ and $ZZ$, can be eliminated by calculating the
234: invariant mass of the charged fermion pair. The signal would be striking since it would
235: consists of a pair of $l^+l^-$ with approximately the same invariant mass.
236:
237:
238: Suppose these leptons are found. One would first learn the cross section. Unless one is
239: in the vicinity of the $Z_I$ resonance, the cross section in this model would be somewhat
240: higher than the standard model. For example, at an NLC of $\sqrt{s}=500$ GeV and
241: luminosity of $6\times 10^4$ pb${}^{-1}$/yr and for a heavy lepton of $200$ GeV, one
242: expects approximately
243: $2\times 10^4$ SM vectorlike fermion pairs produced per year, whereas one has $3\times
244: 10^4$
245: $E^+E^-$ pairs and
246: $5\times 10^4$
247: $M^+M^-$ pairs (note that the t-channel process destructively interferes). In the
248: vicinity of the resonance, of course, the cross section can be much larger.
249: As discussed in the previous paragraph, if the main decay is into $\nu W$, then a very
250: clear signature arises if both $W$'s decay into $e\nu_e$ or $\mu\nu_\mu$. This will
251: occur approximately $5\%$ of the time, giving a few thousand such events per year.
252: Necessary cuts on the transverse missing energy will reduce the number of usable events,
253: but it should still be several hundred per year, with very low background. If the main
254: decay is into
255: $eZ$ or $\mu Z$, then the signature is even more dramatic.
256:
257: There is no forward-backward asymmetry for the pair production of SM vectorlike fermions,
258: while the polarization asymmetry for heavy SM chiral fermions is very small. Therefore,
259: combining $A_{FB}$ with $A_{LR}$ would make it very straightforward to distinguish
260: $E^+E^-$ and $M^+M^-$ pairs from SM fermions. The behavior of the asymmetries for each
261: of these is very different at high $\sqrt{s}$.
262:
263:
264: An important point is to note that the statistical uncertainty, $\left({1-A^2\over
265: N}\right)^{1/2}$, is very small for this model. With the approximate number of
266: reconstructed events being between several hundred and several thousand, this gives a
267: statistical uncertainty of between $1$ and $10$ percent. This will be even smaller in
268: the vicinity of the resonance. From the figures, it is clear that this uncertainty is
269: small enough that the various models can be distinguished, even off-resonance.
270:
271:
272: We thank JoAnne Hewett for a useful conversation. This work was supported by the National
273: Science Foundation grant NSF-PHY-9900657
274: \newpage
275:
276: \def\prd#1#2#3{{\rm Phys. ~Rev. ~}{\bf D#1}, #3 (19#2)}
277: \def\plb#1#2#3{{\rm Phys. ~Lett. ~}{\bf B#1}, #3 (19#2) }
278: \def\npb#1#2#3{{\rm Nucl. ~Phys. ~}{\bf B#1}, #3 (19#2) }
279: \def\prl#1#2#3{{\rm Phys. ~Rev. ~Lett. ~}{\bf #1}, #3 (19#2) }
280:
281: \bibliographystyle{unsrt}
282: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
283: \bibitem{Robinett} R. W. Robinett, Phys. Rev. {\bf D33}, 1908 (1986).
284: \bibitem{Barger} V. Barger, R. J. N. Phillips and K. Whisnant, Phys. Rev. {\bf D33},
285: 1912 (1986).
286: \bibitem{Rizzo1} T. G. Rizzo, Phys. Rev. {\bf D33}, 3329 (1986).
287: \bibitem{Rizzo2} T. G. Rizzo, Phys. Rev. {\bf D34}, 1438 (1986).
288: \bibitem{Godfrey} S. Godfrey, Phys. Lett. {\bf B195}, 78 (1987).
289: \bibitem{Langacker} P. Langacker and D. London, Phys. Rev. {\bf D38}, 886 (1988).
290: \bibitem{Boyce} M. M. Boyce, M. A. Doncheski and H. K\"onig, Phys. Rev. {\bf D55}, 68
291: (1997).
292: \bibitem{Montalvo} J. E. Cieza Montalvo, Phys. Rev. {\bf D59}, 095007 (1999); J. E.
293: Cieza Montalvo, Phys. Rev. {\bf D46}, 181 (1992); V. Barger, T. Han and J. Ohnemus, Phys.
294: Rev. {\bf D37}, 1174 (1988).
295: \bibitem{Hewett1} J. L. Hewett and T. G. Rizzo, Phys. Rep. {\bf 183}, 193 (1989).
296: \bibitem{Candelas} P. Candelas, G. Horowitz, A. Strominger and E. Witten, Nucl. Phys.
297: {\bf B258}, 46(1985); E. Witten, {\it ibid} {\bf B258}, 75 (1985).
298: \bibitem{Rizzo} T. G. Rizzo, Phys. Rev. {\bf D34}, 2699 (1986).
299: \bibitem{Hewett2} J. L. Hewett and T. G. Rizzo, Phys. Rev. {\bf D36}, 209 (1987).
300: \bibitem{abe} F. Abe, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett., {\bf 79}, 2192 (1997).
301: \bibitem{frampton} P. H. Frampton, P. Q. Hung and M. Sher, Phys. Rep. {\bf 330}, 263
302: (2000).
303:
304: \end{thebibliography}
305:
306:
307: \newpage
308:
309: \begin{figure}
310: \centerline{ \epsfysize 4in \epsfbox{fig1.eps} }
311: \caption{Total cross section for the process $e^+e^-\rightarrow L^+L^-$ as a function
312: of $\sqrt{s}$, for a heavy lepton of $200$ GeV. The solid and dotted lines correspond
313: to Standard Model production of chiral and vectorlike fermions, respectively. The
314: dashed and dot-dashed lines correspond to $L=E$ and $L=M$ in the $SU(2)_I$ model,
315: respectively, where
316: $E$ and $M$ are the $SU(2)_I$ partners of the electron and muon.}
317: \end{figure}
318:
319: \begin{figure}
320: \centerline{ \epsfysize 4in \epsfbox{fig2.eps} }
321: \caption{$A_{FB}$, the forward-backward asymmetry, for the
322: process
323: $e^+e^-\rightarrow L^+L^-$ as a function of $\sqrt{s}$, for a heavy lepton of $200$
324: GeV. The solid and dotted lines correspond to Standard Model production of chiral and
325: vectorlike fermions, respectively. The dashed and dot-dashed lines correspond to $L=E$
326: and $L=M$ in the
327: $SU(2)_I$ model, respectively, where
328: $E$ and $M$ are
329: the $SU(2)_I$ partners of the electron and muon.}
330: \end{figure}
331:
332: \begin{figure}
333: \centerline{ \epsfysize 4in \epsfbox{fig3.eps} }
334: \caption{$A_{LR}$, the left-right asymmetry, for the process
335: $e^+e^-\rightarrow L^+L^-$ as a function of $\sqrt{s}$, for a heavy lepton of $200$
336: GeV. The solid and dotted lines correspond to Standard Model production of chiral and
337: vectorlike fermions, respectively. The dashed and dot-dashed lines correspond to $L=E$
338: and $L=M$ in the
339: $SU(2)_I$ model, respectively, where
340: $E$ and $M$ are the $SU(2)_I$ partners of the electron and muon.}
341: \end{figure}
342: \end{document}
343:
344:
345:
346: %\begin{figure}
347:
348: %\centerline{ \epsfysize 4in \epsfbox{fig3.eps} }
349: %\caption{Perturbativity and stability bounds on the SM Higgs boson. $\Lambda$ denotes the energy
350: %scale where the particles become strongly interacting.}
351:
352: %\end{figure}
353:
354: