1:
2: %%version of 2001/3/16
3: \documentstyle[12pt]{article}
4: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
5: %TCIDATA{Created=Mon Dec 18 13:07:08 2000}
6: %TCIDATA{LastRevised=Fri Mar 16 18:10:56 2001}
7:
8: \textheight 240mm
9: \textwidth 165mm
10: \topmargin -1.cm
11: \oddsidemargin 0cm
12: \evensidemargin 0cm
13: \newcommand{\nn}{\nonumber}
14: \newcommand{\bd}{\begin{document}}
15: \newcommand{\ed}{\end{document}}
16: \newcommand{\bc}{\begin{center}}
17: \newcommand{\ec}{\end{center}}
18: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{eqnarray}}
19: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{eqnarray}}
20: \newcommand{\text}{\rm }
21: \newcommand{\func}{\rm }
22: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\alph{footnote}}
23: \newcommand{\se}{\section}
24: \newcommand{\sse}{\subsection}
25: \newcommand{\bi}{\bibitem}
26: \def\figcap{\section*{Figure Captions\markboth
27: {FIGURECAPTIONS}{FIGURECAPTIONS}}\list
28: {Figure \arabic{enumi}:\hfill}{\settowidth\labelwidth{Figure 999:}
29: \leftmargin\labelwidth
30: \advance\leftmargin\labelsep\usecounter{enumi}}}
31: \let\endfigcap\endlist \relax
32:
33: \begin{document}
34:
35:
36: \begin{titlepage}
37:
38: \vskip 0.5in
39: \null
40: \begin{center}
41: \vspace{.15in}
42: {\LARGE {\bf
43: Lepton Asymmetries in Heavy Baryon Decays of $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda l^+l^-$}
44: }\\
45: \vspace{1.0cm} \par
46: \vskip 2.1em
47: {\large
48: \begin{tabular}[t]{c}
49: {\bf Chuan-Hung Chen$^a$ and C.~Q.~Geng$^b$}
50: \\
51: \\
52: {\sl ${}^a$Department of Physics, National Cheng Kung University}
53: \\ {\sl $\ $Tainan, Taiwan, Republic of China }
54: \\
55: \\
56: {\sl ${}^b$Department of Physics, National Tsing Hua University}
57: \\ {\sl $\ $ Hsinchu, Taiwan, Republic of China }
58: \\
59: \end{tabular}}
60: \par \vskip 5.3em
61:
62: \date{\today}
63: {\Large\bf Abstract}
64: \end{center}
65:
66: We study the dilepton forward-backward and the longitudinal,
67: normal and transverse lepton polarization asymmetries in the
68: heavy baryon decays of $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda l^+l^-$. We show that
69: the asymmetries have a less dependence on the non-perturbative
70: QCD effects. In the standard model, we find that the integrated
71: forward-backward asymmetries (FBAs) and three components of the
72: polarizations in the QCD sum rule approach (pole model) are
73: $-0.13\ (-0.12)$ and $(58.3,-9.4,-0.07)\%$
74: ($(58.3,-12.6,-0.07)\%$) for $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda\mu^+\mu^-$ and
75: $-0.04\ (-0.03)$ and $(10.9,-10.0,-0.39)\%$
76: ($(10.9,-0.2,-0.34)\%$) for $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda\tau^+\tau^-$,
77: respectively.
78:
79: \end{titlepage}
80:
81: \section{ Introduction}
82:
83: It is known that the FBAs of the dileptons in the inclusive decays of $b\to
84: sl^+l^-$ provide us with information on the short-distance (SD)
85: contributions, which are dominated by the top quark loops in the standard
86: model \cite{AMM}. The longitudinal lepton polarizations in $b\to sl^+l^-$,
87: which are another parity violating observables, are also interesting
88: asymmetries. In particular, the tau polarization in $b\to s\tau^-\tau^-$
89: could be accessible to the B-Factories \cite{JLH,Sehgal}. It is noted that
90: the FBAs of the exclusive decays $B\to M l^+l^-$ are identically zero when $%
91: M $ are pseudoscalar mesons such as $\pi$ and $K$ but nonzero for $M$ being
92: vector mesons such as $\rho$ and $K^*$. However, the longitudinal lepton
93: polarizations \cite{geng1} as well as other components \cite{geng2} are
94: nonzero for both types of the exclusive B meson decay modes.
95:
96: In this paper, we study the dilepton forward-backward and various lepton
97: polarization asymmetries in the heavy baryon decays of $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda
98: l^+l^-$. To study these baryonic decays, one of the most difficulties is to
99: evaluate the hadronic matrix elements. It is known that there are many form
100: factors for the $\Lambda_b\to \Lambda$ transition, which are hard to be
101: calculated since they are related to the non-perturbative effect of QCD.
102: However, in heavy particle decays, the heavy quark effective theory (HQET)
103: could reduce the number of form factors and supply the information with
104: respect to their relative size \cite{Huang,chen1,chen2}. With the HQET, we
105: shall use the QCD sum rule approach \cite{Huang} and the pole model \cite{MR}
106: in our numerical calculations for the form factors.
107:
108: The paper is organized as follows. In Sec.~2, we study the effective
109: Hamiltonian for the decays of $\Lambda_b \to \Lambda l^+ l^- \
110: (l=e,\mu,\tau) $ and form factors in the $\Lambda_b \to \Lambda$ transition.
111: In Sec.~3, we derive the general forms of the lepton polarization and
112: dilepton forward-backward asymmetries in $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda l^+ l^-$. We
113: give our numerical analysis in Sec.~4. In Sec.~5, we present our conclusions.
114:
115: \section{Effective Hamiltonian and Form factors}
116:
117: To study the heavy baryon decays of $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda l^+l^-$ ($l=e$ or $%
118: \mu$ or $\tau$), we start with the effective Hamiltonian for the $b$-quark
119: decay of $b\to s l^{+}l^{-}$, given by
120:
121: \begin{equation}
122: {\cal H}=-4\frac{G_{F}}{\sqrt{2}}V_{tb}V_{ts}^{*}\sum_{i=1}^{10}C_{i}\left(
123: \mu \right) O_{i}\left( \mu \right) \, \label{Ham}
124: \end{equation}
125: where $G_{F}$ is the Fermi constant, $V_{ij}$ are the CKM matrix elements,
126: and $C_{i}(\mu )$ and $O_{i}(\mu )$ are the expressions for the renormalized
127: Wilson coefficients and operators, whose expressions can be found in Ref.
128: \cite{Buras}, respectively. In terms of the Hamiltonian in Eq. (\ref{Ham}),
129: the free quark decay amplitude is written as
130: \begin{eqnarray}
131: {\cal M}\left( b\rightarrow sl^{+}l^{-}\right) &=&\frac{G_{F}\alpha _{em}}{%
132: \sqrt{2}\pi }V_{tb}V_{ts}^{*}\left[ \bar{s}\left( C_{9}^{eff}\left( \mu
133: \right) \gamma _{\mu }P_{L}-\frac{2m_{b}}{q^{2}}C_{7}\left( \mu \right)
134: i\sigma _{\mu \nu }q^{\nu }P_{R}\right) b\;\bar{l}\gamma ^{\mu }l\right.
135: \nonumber \\
136: &&\left. +\bar{s}C_{10}\gamma _{\mu }P_{L}b\;\bar{l}\gamma ^{\mu }\gamma
137: _{5}l\right] \label{Am}
138: \end{eqnarray}
139: with $P_{L(R)}=(1\mp \gamma _{5})/2$. We note that in Eq. (\ref{Am}), only
140: the term associated with the Wilson coefficient $C_{10}$ is independent of
141: the $\mu $ scale. We also note that the dominant contribution to the decay
142: rate is from the long-distance (LD), such as that from the $c\bar{c}$
143: resonant states of $\Psi ,\Psi ^{\prime }...etc$. It is known that to find
144: out the LD effects for the B-meson decays, in the literature \cite
145: {AMM,Sehgal,geng1,DTP,LMS,OT}, both the factorization assumption (FA) and
146: the vector meson dominance (VMD) approximation have been used. For the LD
147: contributions in baryonic decays, we assume that the parametrization is the
148: same as that in the B meson decays. Hence, we may include the resonant
149: effect (RE) by absorbing it to the corresponding Wilson coefficients. The
150: effective Wilson coefficient of $C_{9}^{eff}$ has the standard form
151: \[
152: C_{9}^{eff}=C_{9}\left( \mu \right) +\left( 3C_{1}\left( \mu \right)
153: +C_{2}\left( \mu \right) \right) \left( h\left( x,s\right) +\frac{3}{\alpha
154: _{em}^{2}}\sum_{j=\Psi ,\Psi ^{\prime }}k_{j}\frac{\pi \Gamma \left(
155: j\rightarrow l^{+}l^{-}\right) M_{j}}{q^{2}-M_{j}^{2}+iM_{j}\Gamma _{j}}%
156: \right)
157: \]
158: where $h(x,s)$ describes the one-loop matrix elements of operators $O_{1}=%
159: \bar{s}_{\alpha }\gamma ^{\mu }P_{L}b_{\beta }\ \bar{c}_{\beta }\gamma _{\mu
160: }P_{L}c_{\alpha }$ and $O_{2}=\bar{s}\gamma ^{\mu }P_{L}b\ \bar{c}\gamma
161: _{\mu }P_{L}c$ as shown in Ref. \cite{Buras}, $M_{j}\ (\Gamma _{j})$ are the
162: masses (widths) of intermediate states, and the factors $k_{j}$ are
163: phenomenological parameters for compensating the approximations of FA and
164: VMD and reproducing the correct branching ratios of $B(B\to J/\Psi X\to
165: l^{+}l^{-}X)=B(B\to J/\Psi X)\times B(J/\Psi \to l^{+}l^{-})$. In this paper
166: we take the Wilson coefficients at the scale of $\mu \sim m_{b}\sim 5.0$ GeV
167: and their values are taking to be $C_{1}\left( m_{b}\right) =-0.226,$ $%
168: C_{2}\left( m_{b}\right) =1.096,$ $C_{7}\left( m_{b}\right) =-0.305,$ $%
169: C_{9}\left( m_{b}\right) =4.186,$ and $C_{10}\left( m_{b}\right) =-4.599$,
170: respectively.
171:
172: It is clear that one of the main theoretical uncertainties in studying
173: exclusive decays arises from the calculation of form factors.
174: %In general there are many form factors in exclusive baryon decays.
175: %However, the number of the form factors can be reduced by the heavy quark
176: %effective theory (HQET).
177: With the HQET, the hadronic matrix elements for the heavy baryon decays
178: could be parametrized as follows \cite{MR}
179: \begin{equation}
180: <\Lambda (p,s)\ |\ \bar{s}\ \Gamma \ b\ |\ \Lambda _{b}(v,s^{\prime })>=\bar{%
181: u}_{\Lambda }(p,s)\ \left\{ F_{1}(q^{2})+\not{v}\ F_{2}(q^{2})\right\} \
182: \Gamma \ u_{\Lambda _{b}}(v,s^{\prime }) \label{hq}
183: \end{equation}
184: where $v=p_{\Lambda _{b}}/M_{\Lambda _{b}}$ is the four-velocity of the
185: heavy baryon, $q^2=(p_{\Lambda_b}-p_{\Lambda})^2$ is the square of the
186: momentum transform, and $\Gamma $ denotes the possible Dirac matrix.
187: % we have used the particle name to denote its spinor state.
188: Note that in terms of the HQET there are only two independent form factors, $%
189: F_1$ and $F_2$, in Eq. (\ref{hq}) for each $\Gamma $. In the following, we
190: shall use $F_1$ and $R\equiv F_2/F_1$ as the two independent parameters and
191: adopt the HQET approximation to analyze the behavior of $\Lambda _{b}\to
192: \Lambda l^{+}l^{-}$.
193:
194: From Eqs. (\ref{Am}) and (\ref{hq}), the transition matrix element for $%
195: \Lambda _{b}\left( p_{\Lambda _{b}}\right) \rightarrow \Lambda \left(
196: p_{\Lambda }\right) l^{+}\left( p_{+}\right) l^{-}\left( p_{-}\right) $ can
197: be expressed as
198:
199: \begin{equation}
200: {\cal M}\left( \Lambda _{b}\rightarrow \Lambda l^{+}l^{-}\right) =\frac{%
201: G_{F}\alpha _{em}}{\sqrt{2}\pi }V_{tb}V_{ts}^{*}\left[ H_{1\mu }L_{V}^{\mu
202: }+H_{2\mu }L_{A}^{\mu }\right] \label{hamp}
203: \end{equation}
204: with
205: \begin{eqnarray}
206: L_{V} &=&\bar{l}\gamma ^{\mu }l\,, \nonumber \\
207: L_{A} &=&\bar{l}\gamma ^{\mu }\gamma _{5}l\,, \nonumber \\
208: H_{1\mu } &=&\bar{\Lambda}\gamma _{\mu }\left( A_{1}P_{R}+B_{1}P_{L}\right)
209: \Lambda _{b}+\bar{\Lambda}i\sigma _{\mu \nu }q^{\nu }\left(
210: A_{2}P_{R}+B_{2}P_{L}\right) \Lambda _{b}, \nonumber \\
211: H_{2\mu } &=&E_{1}\bar{\Lambda}\gamma _{\mu }P_{L}\Lambda _{b}+E_{2}\bar{%
212: \Lambda}i\sigma _{\mu \nu }q^{\nu }P_{L}\Lambda _{b}+E_{3}q_{\mu }\bar{%
213: \Lambda}( P_{L} \Lambda _{b}
214: \end{eqnarray}
215: where one has
216: \begin{eqnarray}
217: q &=&p_{\Lambda _{b}}-p_{\Lambda }=p_{+}+p_{-}\,, \nonumber \\
218: A_{i} &=&-\frac{2m_{b}}{q^{2}}C_{7}f_{i}^{T}{},\ B_{i}=C_{9}^{eff}f_{i},\
219: E_{i}=C_{10}f_{i}\,, \nonumber \\
220: f_{1} &=&f_{2}^{T}=F_{1}+\sqrt{r}RF_{1},\ f_{2}=f_{3}=\frac{RF_{1}}{%
221: M_{\Lambda _{b}}}.
222: \end{eqnarray}
223: %Note that $A_{2}$ and $B_{2}$ have no contributions to the dileptonic
224: %decay due to $q_{\mu }L_{V}^{\mu }=0$.
225:
226: \section{Lepton Asymmetries}
227:
228: In this section we present the formulas for the forward-backward and the
229: longitudinal, normal and transverse lepton polarization asymmetries in $%
230: \Lambda _{b}(p_{\Lambda _{b}})\to \Lambda (p_{\Lambda
231: })l^{+}(p_{+},s_{+})l^{-}(p_{-})$. We shall concentrate on the $l^{+}$ spin
232: for the polarizations. To do this, we write the $l^{+}$ four-spin vector in
233: terms of a unit vector, $\hat{\xi}$, along the $l^{+}$ spin in its rest
234: frame, as
235: \begin{eqnarray}
236: s_{+}^{0}\,=\,\frac{\vec{p}_{+}\cdot \hat{\xi}}{m_{l}},\qquad \vec{s}%
237: _{+}\,=\,\hat{\xi}+\frac{s_{+}^{0}\,}{E_{l^{+}}+m_{l}}\vec{p}_{+},
238: \end{eqnarray}
239: and choose the unit vectors along the longitudinal, normal, and transverse
240: components of the $l^{+}$ polarization to be
241: \begin{eqnarray}
242: \hat{e}_{L} &=&\frac{\vec{p}_{+}}{\left| \vec{p}_{+}\right| }, \nonumber \\
243: \hat{e}_{N} &=&\frac{\vec{p}_{+}\times \left( \vec{p}_{\Lambda }\times \vec{p%
244: }_{+}\right) }{\left| \vec{p}_{+}\times \left( \vec{p}_{\Lambda }\times \vec{%
245: p}_{+}\right) \right| }, \nonumber \\
246: \hat{e}_{T} &=&\frac{\vec{p}_{\Lambda }\times \vec{p}_{+}}{\left| \vec{p}%
247: _{\Lambda }\times \vec{p}_{+}\right| }\,, \label{uv}
248: \end{eqnarray}
249: respectively. The partial decay width for $\Lambda _{b}\rightarrow \Lambda \
250: l^{+}\ l^{-}$ is given by
251: \begin{eqnarray}
252: d\Gamma &=&\frac{1}{4M_{\Lambda _{b}}}\left| {\cal M}\right| ^{2}\left( 2\pi
253: \right) ^{4}\delta \left( p_{\Lambda _{b}}-p_{\Lambda
254: }-p_{l^{+}}-p_{l^{-}}\right) \nonumber \\
255: &&\times \frac{d\vec{p}_{\Lambda }}{\left( 2\pi \right) ^{3}2E_{\Lambda }}%
256: \frac{d\vec{p}_{l^{+}}}{\left( 2\pi \right) ^{3}2E_{1}}\frac{d\vec{p}_{l^{-}}%
257: }{\left( 2\pi \right) ^{3}2E_{2}} \label{Dr0}
258: \end{eqnarray}
259: with
260: \begin{equation}
261: |{\cal M}|^{2}=\frac{1}{2}\left| {\cal M}^{0}\right| ^{2}\left[ 1+\left( P_L%
262: \hat{e}_{L}+P_N\hat{e}_{N}+ P_T\hat{e}_{T}\right) \cdot \hat{\xi}\right] \,,
263: \label{M1}
264: \end{equation}
265: where $|{\cal M}^{0}|^{2}$ is related to the decay rate for the unpolarized $%
266: l^{+}$ and $P_i\ (i=L,N,T)$ are the longitudinal, normal and transverse
267: polarizations of $l^{+}$, respectively. Introducing dimensionless variables
268: of $\lambda _{t}=V_{tb}V_{ts}^{*}$, $r=M_{\Lambda }^{2}/M_{\Lambda _{b}}^{2}$%
269: , $\hat{m}_{l}=m_{l}/M_{\Lambda _{b}}$, $\hat{m}_{b}=m_{b}/M_{\Lambda _{b}}$%
270: , $\hat{s}=q^{2}/M_{\Lambda _{b}}^{2}$ and $\hat{t}=p_{\Lambda _{b}}\cdot
271: p_{\Lambda }/M_{\Lambda _{b}}^{2}=(1+r-\hat{s})/2$, using the transition
272: matrix element of Eq. (\ref{hamp}), and integrating the angle dependence of
273: the lepton, the differential decay width in Eq. (\ref{Dr0}) becomes
274: \begin{equation}
275: d\Gamma =\frac{1}{2}d\Gamma ^{0}\left[ 1+\vec{P}\cdot \vec{\xi}\right]
276: \label{diffrate}
277: \end{equation}
278: with
279: \begin{eqnarray}
280: d\Gamma^0 &=&\frac{G_{F}^{2}\alpha _{em}^{2}\lambda _{t}^{2}}{384\pi ^{5}}%
281: M_{\Lambda _{b}}^{5}\sqrt{\phi \left( \hat{s}\right) } \sqrt{1-\frac{4\hat{m}%
282: _l^2}{\hat{s}}}R_{\Lambda _{b}}\left( \hat{s}\right)\, d\hat{s} \label{rate}
283: \end{eqnarray}
284: and
285: \begin{eqnarray}
286: \vec{P} &=& P_{L}\hat{e}_{L}+P_{N}\hat{e}_{N}+P_{T}\hat{e}_{T},
287: \end{eqnarray}
288: where
289: \begin{eqnarray}
290: \phi \left( \hat{s}\right) =(1-r)^{2}-2\hat{s}(1+r)+\hat{s}^{2}
291: \end{eqnarray}
292: and
293: \begin{eqnarray}
294: R_{\Lambda_b}(\hat{s}) &=& 4\frac{\hat{m}_{b}^{2}}{\widehat{s}}%
295: |C_{7}|^{2}F_{1}^{2}\left\{ -\left( 1-R^{2}\right) \left[ \hat{s}\ \hat{t}%
296: -4\left( 1-\hat{t}\right) \left( \hat{t}-r\right) \right] \right. \nonumber
297: \\
298: && -2R\left( \sqrt{r}+R\hat{t}\right) \left( \hat{s}\ -4(1-\hat{t}%
299: )^{2}\right) +8\frac{\hat{m}_{l}^{2}}{\hat{s}}\left[ \left( 1-R^{2}\right)
300: \left( 1-\hat{t}\right) \left( \hat{t}-r\right)\right. \nonumber \\
301: && \left.\left. +2R\left( \sqrt{r}+R\hat{t}\right) \left( 1-\hat{t}\right)
302: ^{2}\right] -2\hat{m}_{l}^{2}\left( \left( 1+R^{2}\right) \ \hat{t}+2R\sqrt{r%
303: }\right) \right\} \nonumber \\
304: &&+12\hat{m}_{b}{Re}C_{9}^{eff}C_{7}^{*}\left( 1+2\frac{\hat{m}_{l}^{2}}{%
305: \hat{s}}\right) F_{1}^{2}\left[ \left( 1-R^{2}\right) \left( \hat{t}%
306: -r\right) +2R\left( \sqrt{r}+R\hat{t}\right) \left( 1-\hat{t}\right) \right]
307: \nonumber \\
308: &&+\left( |C_{9}^{eff}|^{2}+|C_{10}|^{2}\right) F_{1}^{2}\left\{ \left( 1-4%
309: \frac{\hat{m}_{l}^{2}}{\hat{s}}\right) \left[ \left( 1+R^{2}\right) \ \hat{t}%
310: +2R\sqrt{r}\right] \right. \nonumber \\
311: &&\left. +2\left( 1+2\frac{\hat{m}_{l}^{2}}{\hat{s}}\right) \left( 1-\hat{t}%
312: \right) \left[ \left( \hat{t}-r\right) \left( 1-R^{2}\right) +2R\left( \sqrt{%
313: r}+R\hat{t}\right) \left( 1-\hat{t}\right) \right] \right\} , \nonumber \\
314: &&+6\hat{m}_{l}^{2}\left( |C_{9}^{eff}|^{2}-|C_{10}|^{2}\right)
315: F_{1}^{2}\left[ \left( 1+R^{2}\right) \ \hat{t}+2R\sqrt{r}\right]\,.
316: \label{RLambdab}
317: \end{eqnarray}
318: In Eqs. (\ref{rate}) and (\ref{RLambdab}), the allowed range of $\hat{s}$ is
319: \begin{eqnarray}
320: 4\hat{m}_{l}^{2}\leq \hat{s}\leq \left( 1-\sqrt{r}\right) ^{2}\,.
321: \end{eqnarray}
322: %and $R=F_2(q^2)/F_1(q^2)$.
323:
324: Defining the longitudinal, normal and transverse $l^{+}$ polarization
325: asymmetries by
326: \begin{equation}
327: P_{i}\left( \hat{s}\right) =\frac{d\Gamma \left( \hat{e}_{i}\cdot \hat{\xi}%
328: =1\right) -d\Gamma \left( \hat{e}_{i}\cdot \hat{\xi}=-1\right) }{d\Gamma
329: \left( \hat{e}_{i}\cdot \hat{\xi}=1\right) +d\Gamma \left( \hat{e}_{i}\cdot
330: \hat{\xi}=-1\right) }\,, \label{pasy}
331: \end{equation}
332: from Eq. (\ref{diffrate}) we find that
333: \begin{eqnarray}
334: P_{L}\left( \hat{s}\right) &=&-\sqrt{1-\frac{4\hat{m}_{l}^{2}}{\hat{s}}}%
335: \frac{R_{L}\left( \hat{s}\right) }{R_{\Lambda _{b}}\left( \hat{s}\right) },
336: \label{pl} \\
337: P_{N}\left( \hat{s}\right) &=&\frac{3}{4}\pi \hat{m}_{l}\sqrt{\frac{\phi
338: \left( \hat{s}\right) }{\hat{s}}}\frac{R_{N}\left( \hat{s}\right) }{%
339: R_{\Lambda _{b}}\left( \hat{s}\right) }, \label{pn} \\
340: P_{T}\left( \hat{s}\right) &=&\frac{3}{4}\pi \hat{m}_{l}\sqrt{\hat{s}\ \phi
341: \left( \hat{s}\right) }\sqrt{1-\frac{4\hat{m}_{l}^{2}}{\hat{s}}}\frac{%
342: R_{T}\left( \hat{s}\right) }{R_{\Lambda _{b}}\left( \hat{s}\right) }\,,
343: \label{pt}
344: \end{eqnarray}
345: where
346: \begin{eqnarray}
347: R_{L}\left( \hat{s}\right) &=&F_{1}^{2}{Re}C_{9}^{eff}C_{10}^{*}\left[
348: \left( 1-R^{2}\right) \left( \left( 1-r\right) ^{2}+\hat{s}\left( 1+r\right)
349: -2\,\hat{s}^{2}\right) \right. \nonumber \\
350: &&\left. +2R\left( \sqrt{r}+R\hat{t}\right) \left( 2\,\hat{s}+\left( 1-r+%
351: \hat{s}\right) ^{2}\right) \right] \nonumber \\
352: &&+6F_{1}^{2}{Re}C_{10}C_{7}^{*}\hat{m}_{b}\left[ \left( 1-r-\hat{s}\right)
353: (1-R^{2})+2R(\sqrt{r}+R\hat{t})\left( 1-r+\hat{s}\right) \right] , \nonumber
354: \\
355: R_{N}\left( \hat{s}\right) &=&4F_{1}^{2}\frac{\hat{m}_{b}^{2}}{\hat{s}}%
356: |C_{7}|^{2}\left[ \left( 1-R^{2}\right) \left( 1-r\right) +2R(\sqrt{r}+R\hat{%
357: t})\left( 1-r+s\right) \right] \nonumber \\
358: &&+F_{1}^{2}\left( 1-R^{2}\right) |C_{9}^{eff}|^{2}\ \hat{s}+F_{1}^{2}{Re}%
359: C_{9}^{eff}C_{10}^{*}\left[ \left( 1-r\right) \left( 1-R^{2}\right) \right.
360: \nonumber \\
361: &&\left. +2\left( 1-r+\hat{s}\right) R(\sqrt{r}+R\hat{t})\right] \nonumber
362: \\
363: &&+2F_{1}^{2}\hat{m}_{b}\left( 2{Re}C_{9}^{eff}C_{7}^{*}+{Re}%
364: C_{10}C_{7}^{*}\right) \left( 1-R^{2}+2R(\sqrt{r}+R\hat{t})\right) ,
365: \nonumber \\
366: R_{T}\left( \hat{s}\right) &=&F_{1}^{2}\frac{2\hat{m}_{b}}{\hat{s}}{Im}%
367: C_{7}C_{10}^{*}\left( 1-R^{2}+2R\left( \sqrt{r}+R\hat{t}\right) \right)
368: +F_{1}^{2}{Im}C_{9}^{eff}C_{10}^{*}\left( 1-R^{2}\right) . \label{Rlnt}
369: \end{eqnarray}
370: %\end{eqnarray*}
371: We note that the transverse part of the lepton polarization in Eq. (\ref{pt}%
372: ) is a T-odd observable.
373:
374: The differential and normalized dilepton forward-backward asymmetries (FBAs)
375: for the decay of $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda l^+l^-$ as a function of $\hat{s}$ are
376: defined by
377: \begin{eqnarray}
378: \frac{dA_{FB}\left( \hat{s}\right) }{d\hat{s}} &=&\left[ \int_{0}^{1}d\cos
379: \theta \ \frac{d^{2}\Gamma \left( \hat{s}\right) }{d\hat{s}d\cos \theta }%
380: -\int_{-1}^{0}d\cos \theta \ \frac{d^{2}\Gamma \left( \hat{s}\right) }{d\hat{%
381: s}d\cos \theta }\right] \label{diffba1}
382: \end{eqnarray}
383: and
384: \begin{eqnarray}
385: {\cal A}_{FB}\left( \hat{s}\right) &=&\frac{1}{d\Gamma \left( \hat{s}\right)
386: /d\hat{s}}\left[ \int_{0}^{1}d\cos \theta \ \frac{d^{2}\Gamma \left( \hat{s}%
387: \right) }{d\hat{s}d\cos \theta }-\int_{-1}^{0}d\cos \theta \ \frac{%
388: d^{2}\Gamma \left( \hat{s}\right) }{d\hat{s}d\cos \theta }\right] \,,
389: \label{fba1}
390: \end{eqnarray}
391: respectively, where $\theta $ is the angle of $l^{+}$ with respect to $%
392: \Lambda_b$ in the rest frame of the lepton pair. Explicitly, we obtain
393: \begin{eqnarray}
394: \frac{dA_{FB}\left( \hat{s}\right) }{d\hat{s}} &=&\frac{G_{F}^{2}\alpha
395: _{em}^{2}\lambda _{t}^{2}}{2^{8}\pi ^{5}}M_{\Lambda _{b}}^{5}\phi \left(
396: \hat{s}\right) \left( 1-4\frac{\hat{m}_{l}^{2}}{\hat{s}}\right) R_{FB}\left(
397: \hat{s}\right) \label{diffba2}
398: \end{eqnarray}
399: and
400: \begin{eqnarray}
401: {\cal A}_{FB}\left( \hat{s}\right) &=& \frac{3}{2}\sqrt{\phi \left( \hat{s}%
402: \right) }\sqrt{1-\frac{4\hat{m}_{l}^{2}}{s}}\frac{R_{FB}\left( \hat{s}%
403: \right) }{R_{\Lambda _{b}}\left( \hat{s}\right) } \label{fba2}
404: \end{eqnarray}
405: where
406: \begin{eqnarray}
407: R_{FB}\left( \hat{s}\right) &=&F_{1}^{2}\left( 1-R^{2}\right) \left[ 2\hat{m}%
408: _{b}{Re}C_{10}C_{7}^{*}\left( 1+2\frac{R\sqrt{r}+R^{2}\hat{t}}{1-R^{2}}%
409: \right) +\hat{s}{Re}C_{9}^{eff}C_{10}^{*}\right]\,. \label{rfba}
410: \end{eqnarray}
411: From Eqs. (\ref{RLambdab}), (\ref{pl})-(\ref{Rlnt}), and
412: (\ref{fba2})-(\ref
413: {rfba}), we see that $P_i\ (i=L,N,T)$ and ${\cal A}_{FB}$ depend only on $R$
414: since the factor $F_1^2$ is canceled out. Thus, once one gets the value of $%
415: R $, the only uncertainty for the asymmetries is from the Wilson
416: coefficients. It is interesting to note that these asymmetries are sensitive
417: to the chiral structure of electroweak interactions since they are related
418: to the products of $C_9C_7^*$, $C_{10}C_{7}^{*}$ and $C_{9}C_{10}^{*}$.
419:
420: \section{Numerical Analysis}
421:
422: In our numerical calculations, the Wilson coefficients are evaluated at the
423: scale $\mu \simeq m_{b}$ and the other parameters are listed in Table 1 of
424: Ref. \cite{chen2}. For the form factors in the $\Lambda _{b}\rightarrow
425: \Lambda $ transition, we use the results from both the QCD sum rule approach
426: \cite{Huang} and the pole model \cite{MR}. In the QCD sum rule approach we
427: use the form
428: \begin{equation}
429: F_{i}(q^{2})=\frac{F_{i}(0)}{1+aq^{2}+bq^{4}}\,, \label{qcdff}
430: \end{equation}
431: where the parameters in Eq. (\ref{qcdff}) are shown in Table 1. From the
432: Table, we find that $R(0)=F_{2}(0)/F_{1}(0)=-0.17$ and $R(q_{\max
433: }^{2})=-0.44$
434: which are consistent with the CLEO result of
435: $R=-0.25\pm 0.14\pm 0.08$ \cite{CLEO}.
436: \begin{table}[h]
437: \caption{ Form Factors in the QCD sum rule approach.}
438: \begin{center}
439: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
440: \hline
441: & $F_{1}$ & $F_{2}$ \\ \hline
442: $q^2=0$ & $0.462$ & $-0.077$ \\ \hline\hline
443: $a$ & $-0.0182$ & $-0.0685$ \\ \hline
444: $b$ & $-0.000176$ & $0.00146$ \\ \hline
445: \end{tabular}
446: \end{center}
447: \end{table}
448: In the pole model, we adopt
449: \be
450: F_{i}(q^{2})=N_{i}\left( \frac{\Lambda _{QCD}}{\Lambda _{QCD}+z}\right) ^{2}
451: \ee
452: where $z=p_{\Lambda }\cdot p_{\Lambda _{b}}/M_{\Lambda
453: _{b}}=(1+r-q^{2}/M_{\Lambda _{b}}^{2})M_{\Lambda _{b}}/2$ and
454: $\Lambda_{QCD}$ is chosen around $200\ MeV$.
455: Assuming the form factors for the transition of
456: $\Lambda _{c}\rightarrow \Lambda $ are similar to that of
457: $\Lambda_{b}\rightarrow \Lambda$ and using $R=-0.25$ \cite{CLEO}
458: and the branching ratio of $\Lambda _{c}^{+}\rightarrow \Lambda e^{+}\nu
459: _{e}$, we obtain that $N_{1,2}$ are $(52.32,-13.08)$
460: \cite{chen2}.
461:
462: \subsection{Forward-backward Asymmetries}
463:
464: From Eqs. (\ref{diffba2}) and (\ref{fba2}), we see that the FBAs for the
465: light charged lepton modes of $\Lambda _{b}\rightarrow \Lambda l^{+}l^{-}$ ($%
466: l=e$ and $\mu $) are close to each other. As a result, we shall not mention
467: the electron mode of $\Lambda _{b}\to \Lambda e^{+}e^{-}$. In Figures 1 and
468: 2, we show ${\cal A}_{FB}(\Lambda _{b}\to \Lambda l^{+}l^{-})$ as a function
469: of dimensionless variable $\hat{s}$ for $l=\mu $ and $\tau $, respectively.
470: From Figure 1(a), we see that ${\cal A}_{FB}(\Lambda _{b}\to \Lambda \mu
471: ^{+}\mu ^{-})$ has a zero value at $\hat{s}_{0}$ which satisfies the
472: condition
473: \be
474: {Re}C_{9}^{eff}C_{10}^{*}&=&-\frac{2\hat{m}_{b}}{\hat{s}_{0}}{Re}%
475: C_{7}C_{10}^{*}\frac{1-R^{2}+2R\left( \sqrt{r}+R\ \hat{t}\right) }{\left(
476: 1-R^{2}\right) }.
477: \label{rec9c10}
478: \ee
479: Furthermore, we find
480: %If we use $R\sim -0.25$ and $\sqrt{r}\sim 0.20$,
481: that the contributions from the pole and QCD sum rule models to
482: FBAs overlap at the low $q^{2}$ region so that in both models Eq.
483: (\ref{rec9c10}) can be simplified to
484: \be
485: {Re}C_{9}^{eff}C_{10}^{*}&\simeq& -\frac{2\hat{m}_{b}}{\hat{s}_{0}}{Re}%
486: C_{7}C_{10}^{*}\,,
487: \label{mc9c10}
488: \ee
489: which is independent of the hadronic form factors.
490: Explicitly, from Figure 1(a),
491: in the standard model
492: we get that $\hat{s}_{0}$ is $0.109$ and $0.114$ with and without $R$
493: terms for excluding LD effects, and $0.098$ and $0.102$ for including
494: LD effects, respectively.
495: It is clear that the zero point of
496: ${\cal A}_{FB}(\Lambda _{b}\to \Lambda \mu ^{+}\mu ^{-})$ is
497: mainly affected by the weak Wilson coefficients of $C_{7}$ and $C_{9}$
498: that are sensitive to physics beyond the standard model.
499: For example, if one of $C_{7}$ and $C_{9}$ has an opposite sign to that in
500: the standard model, the condition for the zero point in Eq.
501: (\ref{mc9c10}) will not be satisfied. Therefore, measuring a
502: sizable value of the FBA around $\hat{s}_{0}$ is a clear
503: indication of new physics. This result is similar to
504: $B\rightarrow K^{*}l^{+}l^{-}$ decays mentioned by \cite{Ali}
505: with large energy effective theory (LEET) \cite {Charles}. We
506: note that the vanishing of the FBAs in the inclusive decays of
507: $b\to (s,d)l^{+}l^{-}$ and the exclusive ones of $B\to
508: (K^{*},\rho )l^{+}l^{-}$ were first studied by Burdman
509: \cite{Burdman}. Our conclusion for the baryonic decays coincides
510: with that in Ref. \cite{Burdman}.
511:
512: From the figures, we find that there is no much difference for the FBAs
513: between the QCD sum rule approach and the pole model at the lower values of $%
514: q^{2}$, especially for that in the muon mode. By taking $R$ to be zero, the
515: distributions for both models in Figures 1 and 2 should be identical. Thus,
516: the differences for the FBAs in the different QCD models actually reflect
517: the effects of the ratio $R$. The insensitivity to the form factors for the
518: FBAs provides us a candidate to test the standard model.
519:
520: In Figure 3, we show the differential FBA of $dA_{FB}(\hat{s})/d\hat{s}$
521: which, unlike ${\cal A}_{FB}$, is insensitive to R. This can be understood
522: that due to Eqs. (\ref{diffba2}) and (\ref{fba2}) it is proportional to $%
523: R_{FB}(\hat{s})$ in which the terms with $F_1^2$ are the dominant
524: contributions and those with $R$ are negligible since these terms are
525: related to either $R^2$ or $R\sqrt{r}$, which are small.
526:
527: We now define the integrated FBA to be
528: \begin{eqnarray}
529: \overline{{\cal A}}_{FB}=\int_{4\hat{m}_{l}^{2}}^{\hat{s}_{\max }}d\hat{s}%
530: {\cal A}_{FB}\left( \hat{s}\right)
531: \end{eqnarray}
532: where $\hat{s}_{\max }=\left( 1-\sqrt{r}\right) ^{2}$. Without LD
533: contributions, in the standard model we find that
534: \begin{eqnarray}
535: \overline{{\cal A}}_{FB}(\Lambda _{b}\to \Lambda \mu ^{+}\mu ^{-})=-0.13\
536: (-0.12)
537: \end{eqnarray}
538: and
539: \begin{eqnarray}
540: \overline{{\cal A}}_{FB}(\Lambda _{b}\to \Lambda \tau ^{+}\tau ^{-})=-0.04\
541: (-0.03)
542: \end{eqnarray}
543: for the QCD sum rule approach (pole model), respectively.
544:
545: \subsection{Polarization Asymmetries}
546:
547: We now discuss the longitudinal, normal and transverse polarization
548: asymmetries of the lepton and their implications. From Eqs. (\ref{pl})$-$(%
549: \ref{pt}), the distributions of $P_{L}$, $P_{N}$ and $P_{T}$ with respect to
550: the dimensionless kinematic variable $\hat{s}$ are shown in Figures $4-9$,
551: respectively. From the figures, we find that the results of the QCD sum rule
552: and pole models to various polarizations are as follows: (1) they overlap
553: fully for $P_{L}$; (2) $P_{N}$ is not sensitive to the models except for the
554: small $q^{2}$ region in $\Lambda_{b}\rightarrow \Lambda \mu ^{+}\mu ^{-}$;
555: and (3) the effects of the different QCD models to $P_{T}$ are significant
556: at the large $q^{2}$ region. Clearly, $P_L$ and $P_N$ for the most $q^2$
557: region in $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda l^+l^-$ are independent of the QCD models.
558:
559: It is easily seen that outside the resonant states, both polarizations of $%
560: P_{L}$ and $P_{N}$ are insensitive to the LD effects. We note that $P_L$ for
561: $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda\mu^+\mu^-$ is close to $1$, while that for the tau mode
562: is over 40\%, in the most values of $q^{2}$ except that around resonant
563: regions. The large asymmetries in $\Lambda_b\rightarrow \Lambda l^{+}l^{-}$
564: are good candidates to test the standard model. For $P_{T}$, since it is
565: proportional to the imaginary parts of the Wilson coefficient products, the
566: LD contributions are important. Note that in the standard model, the
567: effective Wilson coefficients of $C_{9}^{eff}$ contains absorptive parts,
568: while $C_{7}$ and $C_{10}$ have only real values. From Eq. (\ref{pt}), the
569: part of $Im(C_{9}^{eff}C_{10}^{*})$ yields a nonzero value of $P_{T}$, but
570: that of $Im(C_{7}C_{10}^{*})$ vanishes. However, due to the enhanced factor $%
571: 1/\hat{s}$ at small $\hat{s}$ for the term corresponding to $%
572: Im(C_{7}C_{10}^{*})$, one could search for these regions since the
573: contribution from some non-standard CP violation model may not be negligible.
574:
575: %For seeing the new physics effects, we choose $C_{7}$ and $C_{9}$ being
576: %opposite sign to the values of SM to contribute to longitudinal
577: %polarization asymmetries which have larger values among the lepton
578: %asymmetries of $\Lambda _{b}\rightarrow \Lambda l^{+}l^{-}$ decays. From
579: %figures 4 and 5, we clearly see that $P_{L}$ are dependent on sign$\left(
580: %C_{9}\right)$ strongly.
581:
582: Finally, in Table 2, we list the integrated lepton polarization asymmetries
583: in $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda l^+l^-$, defined by
584: \begin{eqnarray}
585: \bar{P}_{i}&=&\int_{4\hat{m}_{l}^{2}}^{\hat{s}_{\max }}d\hat{s}\ P_{i}\,.
586: \end{eqnarray}
587: In the table, the results are calculated in the standard model without LD
588: effects.
589:
590: \begin{table}[h]
591: \caption{ Integrated lepton polarization asymmetries in the standard model
592: without LD effects.}
593: \begin{center}
594: \begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|l|}
595: \hline
596: & & & & \\
597: Model & Mode & $10^2\bar{P}_L $ & $10^2\bar{P}_N $ & $10^2\bar{P}_T$ \\
598: \hline
599: QCD sum rule & $\Lambda _{b}\rightarrow \Lambda \mu ^{+}\mu ^{-}$ &
600: \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{$58.3$} & \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{$-9.4$} & $-0.07$ \\
601: \cline{2-5}
602: & $\Lambda _{b}\rightarrow \Lambda \tau ^{+}\tau ^{-}$ &
603: \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{$10.9$} & \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{$-10.0$} & $-0.39$ \\
604: \hline
605: pole model & $\Lambda _{b}\rightarrow \Lambda \mu ^{+}\mu ^{-}$ &
606: \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{$58.3$} & \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{$-12.6$} & $-0.07$ \\
607: \cline{2-5}
608: & $\Lambda _{b}\rightarrow \Lambda \tau ^{+}\tau ^{-}$ &
609: \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{$10.9$} & \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{$-9.2$} & $-0.34$ \\
610: \hline
611: \end{tabular}
612: \end{center}
613: \end{table}
614:
615: \section{Conclusions}
616:
617: We have given a detailed analysis on the dilepton forward-backward and the
618: longitudinal, normal and transverse lepton polarization asymmetries for the
619: decays of $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda l^+l^-$ ($l=e,\mu,\tau$) in the standard
620: model. Based on the HQET, there are only two independent form factors, $%
621: F_{1} $ and $F_{2}$ or $F_{1}$ and $R$, involved in the matrix element of $%
622: \Lambda_b\to\Lambda$.
623:
624: We have shown that all the asymmetries are related to $R$ and free of the
625: other form factor $F_1$. Moreover, we have found that $R$ is always
626: associated with $\sqrt{r}$ so that by neglecting their contributions, there
627: are only a few percentages lose in the asymmetries. Thus, the asymmetries in
628: the heavy baryonic dilepton decays have a less dependence on the
629: non-perturbative QCD effects . We have also demonstrated that $%
630: P_L(\Lambda_b\to\Lambda l^+l^-)$ are QCD model independent quantities. We
631: have pointed out that the FBA for the light lepton mode gets to zero at $%
632: \hat{s}_0$ which is only sensitive to the weak couplings. Finally, since the
633: absolute values of the integrated T-odd observables of the transverse lepton
634: polarizations in $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda l^+l^-$ are less than $10^{-2}$ in the
635: standard model, measuring $P_T$ such as in the tau model at a level of $%
636: 10^{-2}$ would be a clear signal for some new CP violation.\newline
637:
638: {\bf Acknowledgments}
639:
640: This work was supported in part by the National Science Council of the
641: Republic of China under contract numbers NSC-89-2112-M-007-054 and
642: NSC-89-2112-M-006-033.
643:
644: \newpage
645:
646: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
647: \bibitem{AMM} A. Ali, T. Mannel, and T. Morozumi, {\em Phys. Lett.} {\bf %
648: B273}, 505 (1991).
649:
650: \bibitem{JLH} J. L. Hewett, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D53}, 4964 (1996).
651:
652: \bibitem{Sehgal} F. Kr\"{u}ger and L.M. Sehgal, {\em Phys. Lett.} {\bf B380}%
653: , 199 (1996).
654:
655: \bibitem{geng1} C.Q. Geng and C. P. Kao, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D54}, 5636
656: (1996).
657:
658: \bibitem{geng2} C.Q. Geng and C. P. Kao, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D57}, 4479
659: (1998).
660:
661: \bibitem{Huang} Chao-Shang Huang and Hua-Gang Yan, {\em Phys Rev.} {\bf D59}%
662: , 114022 (1999).
663:
664: \bibitem{chen1} Chuan-Hung Chen and C. Q. Geng, hep-ph/0012003, to be
665: published in {\em Phys Rev.} {\bf D}.
666:
667: \bibitem{chen2} Chuan-Hung Chen and C. Q. Geng, hep-ph/0101171.
668:
669: \bibitem{MR} T. Mannel, W. Roberts and Z. Ryzak {\em Nucl. Phys}. {\bf B355}%
670: , 38 (1991); T. Mannel and S. Recksiegel {\em J. Phys.} {\bf G24}, 979
671: (1998).
672:
673: \bibitem{Buras} G. Buchalla, A. J. Buras and M. E. Lautenbacher, {\em Rev.
674: Mod. Phys.} {\bf 68}, 1230 (1996).
675:
676: \bibitem{DTP} N.G. Deshpande, J. Trampetic and K. Panose, {\em Phys. Rev.}
677: {\bf D39}, 1462 (1989).
678:
679: \bibitem{LMS} C.S. Lim, T. Morozumi, and A.T. Sanda, {\em Phys. Lett}. {\bf %
680: B218}, 343 (1989).
681:
682: %\bibitem{AMM} A. Ali, T. Mannel, and T. Morozumi, {\em Phys. Lett.} {\bf
683: %B273}, 505 (1991).
684:
685: \bibitem{OT} P.J. O'Donnell and K.K.K. Tung, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D43},
686: R2067 ( 1991).
687:
688: %\bibitem{KS} F. Kr\"{u}ger and L.M. Sehgal, {\em Phys. Lett.} {\bf
689: %B380}, 199 (1996).
690:
691: \bibitem{CLEO} CLEO Collaboration,G. Crawford {\it et al} {\em Phys. Rev.
692: Lett.} {\bf 75}, 624 (1995).
693:
694: \bibitem{Ali} A. Ali, P. Ball, L.T. Handoko, and G. Hiller, {\em Phys.
695: Rev. } {\bf D61}, 074024 (2000).
696:
697: \bibitem{Charles} J. Charles, A.L. Yaouanc, L. Oliver, O. P\`{e}ne, and
698: J.C. Raynal, Phys. Rev. D{\bf 60}, 014001 (1999).
699:
700: \bibitem{Burdman} G. Burdman, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D57}, 4254 (1998).
701: \end{thebibliography}
702:
703: \newpage
704: \begin{figcap}
705: \item
706: % Fig.1:
707: FBAs as a function of $q^2/M^2_{\Lambda_b}$
708: for (a) $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda\mu^+\mu^-$ and
709: (b) $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda\tau^+\tau^-$.
710: The curves with and without resonant shapes represent including and no
711: LD contributions, respectively.
712: The solid (dash-dotted) curves stand for the QCD sum rule approach and
713: the dashed (dotted) for the pole model
714: with (without) $R$, respectively.
715:
716: \item
717: % Fig.2:
718: The differential FBA of
719: $dA_{FB}/dq^2$ for $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda\mu^+\mu^-$
720: as a function of $q^2$.
721: Legend is the same as Figure 1.
722:
723: \item
724: % Fig.3:
725: Longitudinal polarization asymmetries.
726: Legend is the same as Figure 1.
727:
728: \item
729: % Fig.4:
730: Normal polarization asymmetries.
731: Legend is the same as Figure 1.
732: \item
733: % Fig.5:
734: Transverse polarization asymmetries.
735: Legend is the same as Figure 1.
736:
737: \end{figcap}
738:
739: \newpage
740: \begin{figure}[h]
741: \special{psfile=fig1a.ps voffset=-315 hoffset=40 hscale=60 vscale=50 angle=0}
742: \vskip 5.5cm
743: \end{figure}
744:
745: \vskip 2.cm
746: \begin{figure}[h]
747: \special{psfile=fig1b.ps voffset=-315 hoffset=40 hscale=60 vscale=50 angle=0}
748: \vskip 8.cm
749: \caption{ FBAs as a function of $q^2/M^2_{\Lambda_b}$ for (a) $%
750: \Lambda_b\to\Lambda\mu^+\mu^-$ and (b) $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda\tau^+\tau^-$.
751: The curves with and without resonant shapes represent including and no LD
752: contributions, respectively. The solid (dash-dotted) curves stand for the
753: QCD sum rule approach and the dashed (dotted) for the pole model with
754: (without) $R$, respectively. }
755: \end{figure}
756:
757: \newpage
758: \begin{figure}[h]
759: \special{psfile=fig2.ps voffset=-364 hoffset=40 hscale=60 vscale=60 angle=0} %
760: \vskip 13cm
761: \caption{ The differential FBA of $dA_{FB}/dq^2$ for $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda%
762: \mu^+\mu^-$ as a function of $q^2$. Legend is the same as Figure 1. }
763: \end{figure}
764:
765: \newpage
766: \begin{figure}[h]
767: \special{psfile=fig3a.ps voffset=-315 hoffset=40 hscale=60 vscale=50 angle=0}
768: \vskip 5.5cm
769: \end{figure}
770:
771: \vskip 2.cm
772: \begin{figure}[h]
773: \special{psfile=fig3b.ps voffset=-315 hoffset=40 hscale=60 vscale=50 angle=0}
774: \vskip 8.cm
775: \caption{ Longitudinal polarization asymmetries. Legend is the same as
776: Figure 1. }
777: \end{figure}
778:
779: \newpage
780: \begin{figure}[h]
781: \special{psfile=fig4a.ps voffset=-315 hoffset=40 hscale=60 vscale=50 angle=0}
782: \vskip 5.5cm
783: \end{figure}
784:
785: \vskip 2.cm
786: \begin{figure}[h]
787: \special{psfile=fig4b.ps voffset=-315 hoffset=40 hscale=60 vscale=50 angle=0}
788: \vskip 8.cm
789: \caption{ Normal polarization asymmetries. Legend is the same as Figure 1. }
790: \end{figure}
791:
792: \newpage
793: \begin{figure}[h]
794: \special{psfile=fig5a.ps voffset=-315 hoffset=40 hscale=60 vscale=50 angle=0}
795: \vskip 5.5cm
796: \end{figure}
797:
798: \vskip 2.cm
799: \begin{figure}[h]
800: \special{psfile=fig5b.ps voffset=-315 hoffset=40 hscale=60 vscale=50 angle=0}
801: \vskip 8.cm
802: \caption{ Transverse polarization asymmetries. Legend is the same as Figure
803: 1. }
804: \end{figure}
805:
806: \end{document}
807: