1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}
2: \usepackage{epsf}
3: \setlength{\topmargin}{-1.5cm}
4: \setlength{\textheight}{23.5cm}
5: \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{0.cm}
6: \setlength{\textwidth}{17.cm}
7: \def\ds{\displaystyle}
8:
9: \title{ {\bf
10: Lepton flavor violating $Z\rightarrow l_1^+ l_2^-$ decay in the general two Higgs
11: Doublet model}}
12: \author{\vspace{1cm}\\
13: {\bf E. O. Iltan}
14: \thanks{E-mail address:
15: eiltan@heraklit.physics.metu.edu.tr}\,\,\, and
16: {\bf I. Turan}
17: \thanks{E-mail address:
18: ituran@.metu.edu.tr}
19: \\
20: Physics Department, Middle East Technical University \\
21: Ankara, Turkey\\}
22:
23: \date{}
24:
25: \begin{document}
26: \setlength{\baselineskip}{24pt}
27: \maketitle
28: \setlength{\baselineskip}{7mm}
29: \begin{abstract}
30: We calculate lepton flavor violating $Z\rightarrow l^+ l^-$ decay in the
31: framework of the general two Higgs Doublet model. In our calculations we
32: used the constraints for the Yukawa couplings $\bar{\xi}^{D}_{N,\tau e}$
33: and $\bar{\xi}^{D}_{N,\tau\mu}$ coming from the experimental result of muon
34: electric dipole moment and upper limit of the $BR(\mu\rightarrow e\gamma)$.
35: We observe that it is possible to reach the present experimental upper
36: limits for the branching ratios of such Z decays in the model III.
37: \end{abstract}
38: \thispagestyle{empty}
39: \newpage
40: \setcounter{page}{1}
41: %%%
42: %%%
43: \section{Introduction}
44: Lepton Flavor Violating (LFV) interactions reached great interest
45: since the related experimental measurements are improved at present. Among
46: them, the lepton flavor changes in Z decays, such as
47: $Z\rightarrow e \mu$, $Z\rightarrow e \tau$ and $Z\rightarrow \mu \tau$ are
48: important for the search of neutrinos, their mixing and possible masses, and
49: the physics beyond the Standard model (SM). With the Giga-Z option of the
50: Tesla project, the production of Z bosons at resonance is expected to
51: increase \cite{Hawkings} and this forces to study on such Z decays more
52: precisely.
53:
54: Since the lepton flavor is conserved in the SM, one needs an extended theory
55: to describe the lepton flavor violating Z decays. One of the possibility is
56: the extension of the SM, so called $\nu$SM, by taking neutrinos massive and
57: permitting the lepton mixing mechanism \cite{Pontecorvo}. In this case the
58: lepton sector is analogous to the quark sector. Considering the branching
59: ratio ($BR$)
60: %
61: \begin{eqnarray}
62: BR(Z\rightarrow l_1^{\pm} l_2^{\pm})=\frac{\Gamma (Z\rightarrow \bar{l}_1 l_2+
63: \bar{l}_2 l_1)}{\Gamma_Z} \, , \nonumber
64: \end{eqnarray}
65: %
66: the first predictions for such Z decays are given in \cite{Riemann,Ganapathi}.
67: The best experimental limits obtained at LEP 1 \cite{PartData} are
68: %
69: \begin{eqnarray}
70: BR(Z\rightarrow e^{\pm} \mu^{\pm}) &<& 1.7\times 10^{-6} \,\,\, \cite{Opal}
71: \nonumber \, , \\
72: BR(Z\rightarrow e^{\pm} \tau^{\pm}) &<& 9.8\times 10^{-6}\,\,\,
73: \cite{Opal,L3} \nonumber \, , \\
74: BR(Z\rightarrow \mu^{\pm} \tau^{\pm}) &<& 1.2\times 10^{-5} \,\,\,
75: \cite{Opal,Delphi}
76: \label{Expr1}
77: \end{eqnarray}
78: %
79: and with the improved sensitivities at Giga-Z \cite{Wilson} these numbers
80: could be pulled down to
81: %
82: \begin{eqnarray}
83: BR(Z\rightarrow e^{\pm} \mu^{\pm}) &<& 2\times 10^{-9} \nonumber \, , \\
84: BR(Z\rightarrow e^{\pm} \tau^{\pm}) &<& f\times 6.5\times 10^{-8}
85: \nonumber \, , \\
86: BR(Z\rightarrow \mu^{\pm} \tau^{\pm}) &<& f\times 2.2\times 10^{-8}
87: \label{Expr2}
88: \end{eqnarray}
89: %
90: with $f=0.2-1.0$.
91: In the framework of $\nu$SM with light neutrinos the theoretical prediction
92: is extremely small and far from these limits \cite{Riemann,Illana}
93: %
94: \begin{eqnarray}
95: BR(Z\rightarrow e^{\pm} \mu^{\pm})\sim BR(Z\rightarrow e^{\pm} \tau^{\pm})
96: &\sim& 10^{-54} \nonumber \, , \\
97: BR(Z\rightarrow \mu^{\pm} \tau^{\pm}) &<& 4\times 10^{-60}
98: \label{Theo1}
99: \end{eqnarray}
100: %
101: Another possiblity to increase the corresponding $BR$ is the extension
102: of the $\nu$SM with one heavy ordinary Dirac neutrino \cite{Illana}.
103: Heavy neutrinos are expected in string-inspired models \cite{Witten} and
104: some GUTs \cite{Langacker}. In the $\nu$SM with one heavy neutrino, it is
105: necessary to include a heavy charged lepton in the theory. In the famework
106: of this model, its is possible to observe their effects from Z decays if the
107: neutrinos with a mass of several hundered GeV exist. Further scenario to
108: increase the $BR$ is the $\nu$SM extended with two heavy right-handed singlet
109: Majorana neutrinos \cite{Illana}. In this case, it is possible to reach the
110: experimental upper limits in the large neutrino mass region. Lepton flavor
111: Violating Z decays are also studied in the framework of the Zee model
112: \cite{Ghosal}. According to this work, among all three lepton flavor violating
113: decay modes of Z, only $Z\rightarrow e\tau$ decay has the largest
114: contribution which is less than the present limits. Other two decays are small
115: to be observed in the next linear colliders.
116:
117: In our work, we study $Z\rightarrow e^{\pm} \mu^{\pm}$, $Z\rightarrow
118: e^{\pm} \tau^{\pm}$ and $Z\rightarrow \mu^{\pm} \tau^{\pm}$ decays in the
119: model III version of 2HDM, which is the minimal extension of the SM. Since
120: there is no CKM type matrix and therefore no charged FC interaction in the
121: leptonic sector according to our assumption, the source of lepton flavor
122: violating Z decays are the neutral Higgs bosons $h^0$ and $A^0$ with the
123: Yukawa couplings which allow tree level flavor changing neutral currents
124: (FCNC). The choice of complex Yukawa couplings brings the possibility of
125: non-zero electric dipole moments (EDM) of leptons and this ensures to
126: restrict the Yukawa couplings using the present experimental limits. Further
127: the lepton flavor violating interaction $\mu\rightarrow e \gamma$ is possible
128: in this model and can be used to predict the constraint for the Yukawa
129: couplings (see \cite{ErLFV}). Calculations are done in one loop level and
130: it is shown that the experimental upper limits for Z decays underconsideration
131: can be reached by playing with the free parameters of the model III respecting
132: the above restrictions.
133:
134: The paper is organized as follows:
135: In Section 2, we present the explicit expressions for the Branching ratios
136: of $Z\rightarrow e^- \mu^+$, $Z\rightarrow e^- \tau^+$ and
137: $Z\rightarrow \mu^- \tau^+$ in the framework of the model III. Section 3 is
138: devoted to discussion and our conclusions.
139: %%%
140: %%%
141: \section{$Z\rightarrow l_1^- l_2^+$ decay in the general two Higgs Doublet
142: model.}
143: %
144: In the SM and the model I and II version of 2HDM the FCNC at tree level is
145: forbidden. However model III version of 2HDM permits FCNC interactions at
146: tree level and makes flavor violating interactions possible. With the choice
147: of complex Yukawa couplings, the CP violation can also exist and this leads
148: to appearence of non-zero EDM of fermions. The Yukawa interaction for the
149: leptonic sector in the model III is
150: %
151: \begin{eqnarray}
152: {\cal{L}}_{Y}=
153: %\eta^{U}_{ij} \bar{l}_{i L} \tilde{\phi_{1}} U_{j R}+
154: \eta^{D}_{ij} \bar{l}_{i L} \phi_{1} E_{j R}+
155: %\xi^{U}_{ij} \bar{l}_{i L} \tilde{\phi_{2}} U_{j R}+
156: \xi^{D}_{ij} \bar{l}_{i L} \phi_{2} E_{j R} + h.c. \,\,\, ,
157: \label{lagrangian}
158: \end{eqnarray}
159: where $i,j$ are family indices of leptons, $L$ and $R$ denote chiral
160: projections $L(R)=1/2(1\mp \gamma_5)$, $\phi_{i}$ for $i=1,2$, are the
161: two scalar doublets, $l_{i L}$ and $E_{j R}$ are lepton doublets and
162: singlets respectively. Here $\phi_{1}$ and $\phi_{2}$ are chosen as
163: %
164: \begin{eqnarray}
165: \phi_{1}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left[\left(\begin{array}{c c}
166: 0\\v+H^{0}\end{array}\right)\; + \left(\begin{array}{c c}
167: \sqrt{2} \chi^{+}\\ i \chi^{0}\end{array}\right) \right]\, ;
168: \phi_{2}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\begin{array}{c c}
169: \sqrt{2} H^{+}\\ H_1+i H_2 \end{array}\right) \,\, ,
170: \label{choice}
171: \end{eqnarray}
172: %
173: and the vacuum expectation values are
174: %
175: \begin{eqnarray}
176: <\phi_{1}>=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\begin{array}{c c}
177: 0\\v\end{array}\right) \, \, ;
178: <\phi_{2}>=0 \,\, .
179: \label{choice2}
180: \end{eqnarray}
181: %
182: This choice ensures that the SM particles are collected in the first doublet
183: and the ones beyond in the second doublet. The part which produce FCNC at
184: tree level is
185: %
186: \begin{eqnarray}
187: {\cal{L}}_{Y,FC}=
188: %\xi^{U}_{ij} \bar{l}_{i L} \tilde{\phi_{2}} U_{j R}+
189: \xi^{D}_{ij} \bar{l}_{i L} \phi_{2} E_{j R} + h.c. \,\, .
190: \label{lagrangianFC}
191: \end{eqnarray}
192: %
193: Here the Yukawa matrices $\xi^{D}_{ij}$ have in general complex entries.
194: Note that in the following we replace $\xi^{D}$ with $\xi^{D}_{N}$ where
195: "N" denotes the word "neutral" and define $\bar{\xi}^{D}_N$ which satisfies
196: the equation $\xi^{D}_N=\sqrt{\frac{4\,G_F}{\sqrt{2}}}\, \bar{\xi}^{D}_N$.
197: In our analysis, we take $H_1$ and $H_{2}$ (see eq. (\ref{choice})) as the
198: mass eigenstates $h^0$ and $A^0$ respectively since no mixing between
199: CP-even neutral Higgs bosons $h^0$ and the SM one, $H^0$, occurs at tree
200: level.
201:
202: The general effective vertex for the interaction of on-shell Z-boson with a
203: fermionic current is given by
204: %
205: \begin{eqnarray}
206: \Gamma_{\mu}=\gamma_{\mu}(f_V-f_A\ \gamma_5)+ \frac{i}{m_W}\,(f_M+f_E\,
207: \gamma_5)\, \sigma_{\mu\,\nu}\, q^{\nu}
208: \label{vertex}
209: \end{eqnarray}
210: %
211: where $q$ is the momentum transfer, $q^2=(p-p')^2$, $f_V$ ($f_A$) is vector
212: (axial-vector) coupling, $f_M$ ($f_E$) magnetic (electric) transitions of
213: unlike fermions. Here $p$ ($-p^{\prime}$) is the four momentum vector of
214: lepton (anti-lepton). The necessary 1-loop diagrams due to neutral Higgs
215: particles are given in Fig. \ref{fig1ver}.
216:
217: Taking into account all the masses of internal leptons and external
218: lepton (anti-lepton), the explicit expressions for $f_V$, $f_A$, $f_M$ and
219: $f_E$ read as
220: %
221: \begin{eqnarray}
222: f_V&=& \frac{g}{64\,\pi^2\,cos\,\theta_W}
223: \int_0^1\, dx \, \frac{1}{m^2_{l_2^+}-m^2_{l_1^-}}
224: \Bigg \{ c_V \, (m_{l_2^+}+m_{l_1^-})
225: \nonumber \\
226: &\Bigg(&
227: (-m_i \, \eta^+_i + m_{l_1^-} (-1+x)\, \eta_i^V)\, ln \, \frac{L^{self}_
228: {1,\,h^0}}{\mu^2}+
229: (m_i \, \eta^+_i - m_{l_2^+} (-1+x)\, \eta_i^V)\, ln \, \frac{L^{self}_{2,\,
230: h^0}}{\mu^2}
231: \nonumber \\ &+&
232: (m_i \, \eta^+_i + m_{l_1^-} (-1+x)\, \eta_i^V)\, ln \, \frac{L^{self}_{1,\,
233: A^0}}{\mu^2}
234: - (m_i \, \eta^+_i + m_{l_2^+} (-1+x) \,\eta_i^V)\, ln \, \frac{L^{self}_{2,\,
235: A^0}}{\mu^2}
236: \Bigg)
237: \nonumber \\ &+&
238: c_A \, (m_{l_2^+}-m_{l_1^-}) \nonumber \\
239: &\Bigg ( &
240: (-m_i \, \eta^-_i + m_{l_1^-} (-1+x)\, \eta_i^A)\, ln \, \frac{L^{self}_{1,\,
241: h^0}}{\mu^2} +
242: (m_i \, \eta^-_i + m_{l_2^+} (-1+x)\, \eta_i^A)\, ln \, \frac{L^{self}_{2,\,
243: h^0}}{\mu^2}
244: \nonumber \\ &+&
245: (m_i \, \eta^-_i + m_{l_1^-} (-1+x)\, \eta_i^A)\, ln \, \frac{L^{self}_{1,\,
246: A^0}}{\mu^2} +
247: (-m_i \, \eta^-_i + m_{l_2^+} (-1+x)\, \eta_i^A)\, ln \, \frac{L^{self}_{2,\,
248: A^0}}{\mu^2}
249: \Bigg) \Bigg \}
250: \nonumber \\ &-&
251: \frac{g}{64\,\pi^2\,cos\,\theta_W}
252: \int_0^1\,dx\, \int_0^{1-x} \, dy \,
253: \Bigg \{
254: m_i^2 \,(c_A\, \eta_i^A-c_V\,\eta_i^V)\,(\frac{1}{L^{ver}_{A^0}}+
255: \frac{1}{L^{ver}_{h^0}})
256: \nonumber \\ &-&
257: (1-x-y)\,m_i\,
258: \Bigg(
259: c_A\, (m_{l_2^+}-m_{l_1^-})\, \eta_i^- \,(\frac{1}{L^{ver}_{h^0}}
260: - \frac{1}{L^{ver}_{A^0}})+
261: c_V\, (m_{l_2^+}+m_{l_1^-})\, \eta_i^+ \, (\frac{1}{L^{ver}_{h^0}}
262: + \frac{1}{L^{ver}_{A^0}}) \Bigg)
263: \nonumber \\ &-&
264: (c_A\, \eta_i^A+c_V\,\eta_i^V)
265: \Bigg (
266: -2+(q^2\,x\,y+m_{l_1^-}\,m_{l_2^+}\, (-1+x+y)^2)\, (\frac{1}{L^{ver}_{h^0}}
267: + \frac{1}{L^{ver}_{A^0}})-ln\,\frac{L^{ver}_{h^0}}{\mu^2}\,
268: \frac{L^{ver}_{A^0}}{\mu^2}
269: \Bigg )
270: \nonumber \\ &-&
271: (m_{l_2^+}+m_{l_1^-})\, (1-x-y)\,
272: \Bigg (
273: \frac{\eta_i^A\,(x\,m_{l_1^-} +y\,m_{l_2^+})+m_i\,\eta_i^-}
274: {2\,L^{ver}_{A^0\,h^0}}+\frac{\eta_i^A\,(x\,m_{l_1^-} +y\,m_{l_2^+})-
275: m_i\,\eta_i^-}{2\,L^{ver}_{h^0\,A^0}} \Bigg )
276: \nonumber \\ &+&
277: \frac{1}{2}\eta_i^A\, ln\,\frac{L^{ver}_{A^0\,h^0}}{\mu^2}\,
278: \frac{L^{ver}_{h^0\,A^0}}{\mu^2}
279: \Bigg \}\,, \nonumber \\
280: %
281: f_A&=& \frac{-g}{64\,\pi^2\,cos\,\theta_W}
282: \int_0^1\, dx \, \frac{1}{m^2_{l_2^+}-m^2_{l_1^-}}
283: \Bigg \{ c_V \, (m_{l_2^+}-m_{l_1^-})
284: \nonumber \\
285: &\Bigg(&
286: (m_i \, \eta^-_i + m_{l_1^-} (-1+x)\, \eta_i^A)\, ln \,
287: \frac{L^{self}_{1,\,A^0}}{\mu^2}
288: +
289: (-m_i \, \eta^-_i + m_{l_2^+} (-1+x)\, \eta_i^A)\, ln \, \frac{L^{self}_
290: {2,\,A^0}}{\mu^2}
291: \nonumber \\ &+&
292: (-m_i \, \eta^-_i + m_{l_1^-} (-1+x)\, \eta_i^A)\, ln \, \frac{L^{self}_{1,\,
293: h^0}}{\mu^2}+ (m_i \, \eta^-_i + m_{l_2^+} (-1+x)\, \eta_i^A)\,
294: ln \, \frac{L^{self}_{2,\,h^0}}{\mu^2} \Bigg)
295: \nonumber \\ &+&
296: c_A \, (m_{l_2^+}+m_{l_1^-}) \nonumber \\
297: &\Bigg(&
298: (m_i \, \eta^+_i + m_{l_1^-} (-1+x)\, \eta_i^V)\, ln \, \frac{L^{self}_{1,\,
299: A^0}}{\mu^2}- (m_i \, \eta^+_i + m_{l_2^+} (-1+x)\, \eta_i^V)\,
300: ln \, \frac{L^{self}_{2,\,A^0}}{\mu^2}
301: \nonumber \\ &+&
302: (-m_i \, \eta^+_i + m_{l_1^-} (-1+x)\, \eta_i^V)\, ln \, \frac{L^{self}_{1,\,
303: h^0}}{\mu^2} + (m_i \, \eta^+_i - m_{l_2^+} (-1+x)\, \eta_i^V)\,
304: \frac{ln \, L^{self}_{2,\,h^0}}{\mu^2}
305: \Bigg) \Bigg \}
306: \nonumber \\ &+&
307: \frac{g}{64\,\pi^2\,cos\,\theta_W}
308: \int_0^1\,dx\, \int_0^{1-x} \, dy \,
309: \Bigg \{
310: m_i^2 \,(c_V\, \eta_i^A-c_A\,\eta_i^V)\,(\frac{1}{L^{ver}_{A^0}}+
311: \frac{1}{L^{ver}_{h^0}})
312: \nonumber \\ &-&
313: m_i\, (1-x-y)\, \Bigg( c_V\, (m_{l_2^+}-m_{l_1^-})
314: \,\eta_i^- + c_A\, (m_{l_2^+}+m_{l_1^-})\, \eta_i^+ \Bigg) \,(\frac{1}
315: {L^{ver}_{h^0}} - \frac{1}{L^{ver}_{A^0}})
316: \nonumber \\ &+&
317: (c_V\, \eta_i^A+c_A\,\eta_i^V)
318: \Bigg(-2+(q^2\,x\,y-m_{l_1^-}\,m_{l_2^+}\, (-1+x+y)^2)
319: (\frac{1}{L^{ver}_{h^0}}+\frac{1}{L^{ver}_{A^0}})-
320: ln\,\frac{L^{ver}_{h^0}}{\mu^2}\,\frac{L^{ver}_{A^0}}{\mu^2}
321: \Bigg)
322: \nonumber \\ &-&
323: (m_{l_2^+}-m_{l_1^-})\, (1-x-y)\,
324: \Bigg( \frac{\eta_i^V\,(x\,m_{l_1^-} -y\,m_{l_2^+})+m_i\,\eta_i^+}
325: {2\,L^{ver}_{A^0\,h^0}}+ \frac{\eta_i^V\,(x\,m_{l_1^-} -y\,m_{l_2^+})-m_i\,
326: \eta_i^+}{2\,L^{ver}_{h^0\,A^0}}
327: \Bigg)\nonumber \\
328: &-& \frac{1}{2} \eta_i^V\, ln\,\frac{L^{ver}_{A^0\,h^0}}{\mu^2}\,
329: \frac{L^{ver}_{h^0\,A^0}}{\mu^2}
330: \Bigg \} \nonumber \,,\\
331: %
332: f_M&=&-\frac{g\, m_W}{64\,\pi^2\,cos\,\theta_W}
333: \int_0^1\,dx\, \int_0^{1-x} \, dy \,
334: \Bigg \{
335: \Bigg( (1-x-y)\,(c_V\, \eta_i^V+c_A\,\eta_i^A)\,
336: (x\,m_{l_1^-} +y\,m_{l_2^+})
337: \nonumber \\ &+& \, m_i\,(c_A\, (x-y)\,\eta_i^-+c_V\,\eta_i^+\,(x+y))\Bigg )
338: \,\frac{1}{L^{ver}_{h^0}}
339: \nonumber \\ &+&
340: \Bigg( (1-x-y)\,
341: (c_V\, \eta_i^V+c_A\,\eta_i^A)\, (x\,m_{l_1^-} +y\,m_{l_2^+})
342: -m_i\,(c_A\, (x-y)\,\eta_i^-+c_V\,\eta_i^+\,(x+y))\Bigg )
343: \,\frac{1}{L^{ver}_{A^0}}
344: \nonumber \\ &-&
345: (1-x-y) \Bigg (\frac{\eta_i^A\,(x\,m_{l_1^-} +y\,m_{l_2^+})}{2}\, \Big (
346: \frac{1}{L^{ver}_{A^0\,h^0}}+\frac{1}{L^{ver}_{h^0\,A^0}} \Big )
347: +\frac{m_i\,\eta_i^-} {2} \, \Big ( \frac{1}{L^{ver}_{h^0\,A^0}}-
348: \frac{1}{L^{ver}_{A^0\,h^0}} \Big ) \Bigg ) \Bigg \} \,,\nonumber \\
349: %
350: f_E&=&-\frac{g\, m_W}{64\,\pi^2\, cos\,\theta_W}
351: \int_0^1\,dx\, \int_0^{1-x} \, dy \,
352: \Bigg \{
353: \Bigg( (1-x-y)\,\Big ( -(c_V\, \eta_i^A+c_A\,\eta_i^V)\, (x\,m_{l_1^-} -y\,
354: m_{l_2^+}) \Big) \nonumber \\ &-&
355: m_i\, (c_A\, (x-y)\,\eta_i^++c_V\,\eta_i^-\,(x+y))\Bigg )\,
356: \frac{1}{L^{ver}_{h^0}}
357: \nonumber \\ &+&
358: \Bigg ( (1-x-y)\,\Big ( -(c_V\, \eta_i^A+c_A\,\eta_i^V)\, (x\,m_{l_1^-} -
359: y\, m_{l_2^+}) \Big ) + m_i\,(c_A\, (x-y)\,\eta_i^++c_V\,\eta_i^-\,(x+y))
360: \Bigg ) \,\frac{1}{L^{ver}_{A^0}}
361: \nonumber \\&+&
362: (1-x-y)\, \Bigg (
363: \frac{\eta_i^V}{2}\,(m_{l_1^-}\,x-m_{l_2^+}\, y)\, \, \Big (
364: \frac{1}{L^{ver}_{A^0\,h^0}}+\frac{1}{L^{ver}_{h^0\,A^0}} \Big )
365: +\frac{m_i\,\eta_i^+}{2}\, \Big (
366: \frac{1}{L^{ver}_{A^0\,h^0}}-\frac{1}{L^{ver}_{h^0\,A^0}} \Big )
367: \Bigg )
368: \Bigg \}\, ,
369: \label{fVAME}
370: %
371: \end{eqnarray}
372: %
373: where
374: %
375: \begin{eqnarray}
376: L^{self}_{1,\,h^0}&=&m_{h^0}^2\,(1-x)+(m_i^2-m^2_{l_1^-}\,(1-x))\,x
377: \nonumber \, , \\
378: L^{self}_{1,\,A^0}&=&L^{self}_{1,\,h^0}(m_{h^0}\rightarrow m_{A^0})
379: \nonumber \, , \\
380: L^{self}_{2,\,h^0}&=&L^{self}_{1,\,h^0}(m_{l_1^-}\rightarrow m_{l_2^+})
381: \nonumber \, , \\
382: L^{self}_{2,\,A^0}&=&L^{self}_{1,\,A^0}(m_{l_1^-}\rightarrow m_{l_2^+})
383: \nonumber \, , \\
384: L^{ver}_{h^0}&=&m_{h^0}^2\,(1-x-y)+m_i^2\,(x+y)-q^2\,x\,y
385: \nonumber \, , \\
386: L^{ver}_{h^0\,A^0}&=&m_{A^0}^2\,x+m_i^2\,(1-x-y)+(m_{h^0}^2-q^2\,x)\,y
387: \nonumber \, , \\
388: L^{ver}_{A^0}&=&L^{ver}_{h^0}(m_{h^0}\rightarrow m_{A^0})
389: \nonumber \, , \\
390: L^{ver}_{A^0\,h^0}&=&L^{ver}_{h^0\,A^0}(m_{h^0}\rightarrow m_{A^0}) \, ,
391: \label{Lh0A0}
392: \end{eqnarray}
393: %
394: and
395: %
396: \begin{eqnarray}
397: \eta_i^V&=&\xi^{D}_{N,l_1i}\xi^{D\,*}_{N,il_2}+
398: \xi^{D\,*}_{N,il_1} \xi^{D}_{N,l_2 i} \nonumber \, , \\
399: \eta_i^A&=&\xi^{D}_{N,l_1i}\xi^{D\,*}_{N,il_2}-
400: \xi^{D\,*}_{N,il_1} \xi^{D}_{N,l_2 i} \nonumber \, , \\
401: \eta_i^+&=&\xi^{D\,*}_{N,il_1}\xi^{D\,*}_{N,il_2}+
402: \xi^{D}_{N,l_1i} \xi^{D}_{N,l_2 i} \nonumber \, , \\
403: \eta_i^-&=&\xi^{D\,*}_{N,il_1}\xi^{D\,*}_{N,il_2}-
404: \xi^{D}_{N,l_1i} \xi^{D}_{N,l_2 i}\, .
405: \label{etaVA}
406: \end{eqnarray}
407: %
408: The parameters $c_V$ and $c_A$ are $c_A=-\frac{1}{4}$ and
409: $c_V=\frac{1}{4}-sin^2\,\theta_W$. In eq. (\ref{etaVA}) the flavor changing
410: couplings $\bar{\xi}^{D}_{N, l_ji}$ represent the effective interaction
411: between the internal lepton $i$, ($i=e,\mu,\tau$) and outgoing (incoming)
412: $j=1\,(j=2)$ one. Here we take $\bar{\xi}^{D}_{N, l_ji}$ complex in
413: general and use the parametrization
414: %
415: \begin{eqnarray}
416: \xi^{D}_{N,i l_j}=|\xi^{D}_{N,i l_j}|\, e^{i \theta_{ij}}
417: \,\, ,
418: \label{xi}
419: \end{eqnarray}
420: %
421: where $i,l_j$ denote the lepton flavors and $\theta_{ij}$ are CP violating
422: parameters which are the sources of the lepton EDM.
423:
424: Now, using the couplings $f_V$, $f_A$, $f_M$ and $f_E$
425: the BR for $Z\rightarrow l_1^-\, l_2^+$ can be written as
426: %
427: \begin{eqnarray}
428: BR (Z\rightarrow l_1^-\,l_2^+)=\frac{1}{48\,\pi}\,
429: \frac{m_Z}{\Gamma_Z}\, \{|f_V|^2+|f_A|^2+\frac{1}{2\,cos^2\,\theta_W}
430: (|f_M|^2+|f_E|^2) \}
431: \label{BR1}
432: \end{eqnarray}
433: %
434: where $\alpha_W=\frac{g^2}{4\,\pi}$ and $\Gamma_Z$ is the total decay width
435: of Z boson. Note that, in general, the production of sum of charged states
436: is considered with the corresponding BR
437: %
438: \begin{eqnarray}
439: BR (Z\rightarrow l_1^{\pm}\,l_2^{\pm})=
440: \frac{\Gamma(Z\rightarrow (\bar{l}_1\,l_2+\bar{l}_2\,l_1)}{\Gamma_Z} \, ,
441: \label{BR2}
442: \end{eqnarray}
443: %
444: and in our numerical analysis we use this branching ratio.
445: %%%
446: %%%
447: \section{Discussion}
448: In the model III, there are number of free parameters such as the masses of
449: charged and neutral Higgs bosons, complex Yukawa couplings. The Yukawa
450: couplings in the lepton sector are $\bar{\xi}^D_{N,ij}, i,j=e, \mu, \tau$
451: and they should be restricted by present and forthcoming experiments. The first assumption
452: is that $\bar{\xi}^{D}_{N,ij},\, i,j=e,\mu $, are small compared to
453: $\bar{\xi}^{D}_{N,\tau\, i}\, i=e,\mu,\tau$ since the strength of these
454: couplings are related with the masses of leptons denoted by the indices of
455: them, similar to the Cheng-Sher scenario \cite{Sher}. Second we assume that
456: $\bar{\xi}^{D}_{N,ij}$ is symmetric with respect to the indices $i$ and $j$.
457:
458: In our work we study on the decays $Z\rightarrow e^{\pm} \mu^{\pm}$,
459: $Z\rightarrow e^{\pm} \tau^{\pm}$ and $Z\rightarrow \mu^{\pm} \tau^{\pm}$.
460: In the case of $Z\rightarrow e^{\pm} \mu^{\pm}$ decay we need the couplings
461: $\bar{\xi}^D_{N,\mu i}$ and $\bar{\xi}^D_{N,e i}$ with $i=e,\mu,\tau$.
462: Here we use the first asssumption and neglect the contributions of
463: $\bar{\xi}^D_{N,i j}$ where $i,j=\mu,e$, by taking only the internal $\tau$
464: lepton into account. Now, we should restrict $\bar{\xi}^D_{N,i \tau}$,
465: $i=e,\mu$. For $\bar{\xi}^D_{N,\mu \tau}$ we use the constraint coming from
466: the experimental limits of $\mu$ lepton EDM \cite{Abdullah},
467: %
468: \begin{eqnarray}
469: 0.3\times 10^{-19}\, e-cm < d_{\mu} < 7.1\times 10^{-19}\, e-cm
470: \label{muedmex}
471: \end{eqnarray}
472: %
473: (see \cite{ErLFV} for details).
474:
475: For the restriction of the coupling $\bar{\xi}^D_{N,\mu \tau}$, the
476: deviation of the anomalous magnetic moment (AMM) of muon over its SM
477: prediction \cite{Czarnecki} due to the the recent experimental result
478: of muon AMM by g-2 Collaboration \cite{Brown}, can also be used. However,
479: AMM of muon is posssible in the model III even for vanishing complex Yukawa
480: couplings. In the LFV $Z\rightarrow l_1 l_2$ decay, the part which depends
481: on the couplings $\eta_i^A$ and $\eta_i^-$ (see eq. (\ref{etaVA}) ) is
482: non-vanishing when the complex Yukawa couplings are permitted in the model.
483: Here, we choose EDM of muon since the restriction is sensitive to complex
484: phases, existing also in the $Z\rightarrow l_1 l_2$ decay. The coupling
485: $\bar{\xi}^D_{N,e \tau}$ is restricted using the experimental upper limit
486: of the $BR$ of the process $\mu\rightarrow e\gamma$ and the above constraint
487: for $\bar{\xi}^D_{N,\mu \tau}$, since $\mu\rightarrow e\gamma$ decay can be
488: used to fix the Yukawa combination $\bar{\xi}^{D}_{N,\mu\tau}\,
489: \bar{\xi}^{D}_{N,e\tau}$ (see \cite{ErLFV}). This ensures us to determine
490: the upper and lower limits of the coupling $\bar{\xi}^D_{N,e \tau}$. The
491: maximum value of the BR($Z\rightarrow \mu \,e$) is calculated by taking
492: the combination $\bar{\xi}_{N,\mu\tau}^D \bar{\xi}_{N,e\tau}^D$, which
493: respects the upper bound of $\mu\rightarrow e\gamma$ decay. For the minimum
494: value of BR($Z\rightarrow \mu\, e$), we use the combination
495: $\bar{\xi}_{N,\mu\tau}^D \bar{\xi}_{N,e\tau}^D$ if each coupling is at its
496: minimum value. In fact, this minimum value is artificial. Note that,
497: $\bar{\xi}^D_{N,e \tau}$ can be restricted and the minimum value of
498: BR($Z\rightarrow \mu e$) can be obtained by using the experimental
499: result of the EDM of electron \cite{Commins}. However, we expect that the
500: experimental result of the EDM of electron is not more reliable than the
501: one of the process $\mu\rightarrow e\gamma$.
502:
503: This analysis shows that $|\bar{\xi}^{D}_{N,\mu\tau}|$,
504: ($|\bar{\xi}^{D}_{N,e\tau}|$) is at the order
505: of the magnitude of $10^3$ ($10^{-4}$) GeV. Note that these couplings are
506: chosen complex to be able to describe the EDM which is posssible in the
507: case of CP violating interactions. Throughout our calculations we use the
508: input values given in Table (\ref{input}).
509: %
510: \begin{table}[h]
511: \begin{center}
512: \begin{tabular}{|l|l|}
513: \hline
514: \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{Parameter} &
515: \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{Value} \\
516: \hline \hline
517: $m_{\mu}$ & $0.106$ (GeV) \\
518: $m_{\tau}$ & $1.78$ (GeV) \\
519: $m_{W}$ & $80.26$ (GeV) \\
520: $m_{Z}$ & $91.19$ (GeV) \\
521: $G_F$ & $1.16637 10^{-5} (GeV^{-2})$ \\
522: $\Gamma_Z$ & $2.490\, (GeV)$ \\
523: $sin\,\theta_W$ & $\sqrt{0.2325}$ \\
524: \hline
525: \end{tabular}
526: \end{center}
527: \caption{The values of the input parameters used in the numerical
528: calculations.}
529: \label{input}
530: \end{table}
531: %
532:
533: Fig. \ref{BrZemuMaxsintet} (\ref{BrZemuMinsintet}) represents
534: $sin\theta_{\tau e}$ dependence of the maximum (minimum) value of the
535: $BR\,(Z\rightarrow \mu^{\pm}\, e^{\pm})$ for $sin\,\theta_{\tau \mu}=0.5$,
536: $m_{h^0}=70\, GeV$ and $m_{A^0}=80\, GeV$. Here the maximum and minimum
537: values are predicted by taking upper and lower limits of $\mu$ lepton
538: EDM into account. The maximum (minimum) value of the BR is $7\times 10^{-11}$
539: ($10^{-13}$) for small values of $sin\theta_{\tau e}$ and its sensivity to
540: this parameter is weak. $BR$ decreases at the order of the magnitude $15 \% $
541: for $sin\theta_{\tau e} \ge 0.5$ and it becomes more sensitive to
542: $sin\theta_{\tau e}$. $sin\theta_{\tau \mu}$ dependence of the maximum
543: (minimum) value of the $BR\,(Z\rightarrow \mu^{\pm}\, e^{\pm})$ for
544: $sin\theta_{\tau e}=0.5$, $m_{h^0}=70\, GeV$ and $m_{A^0}=80\, GeV$ almost
545: the same as $sin\theta_{\tau e}$ dependence of the $BR$ under consideration.
546:
547: In Fig. \ref{BrZemuMinA0} we present $m_{A^0}$ dependence of the
548: minimum value of the $BR\,(Z\rightarrow \mu^{\pm}\, e^{\pm})$ for
549: $sin\theta_{\tau e}=0.5$, $sin\theta_{\tau \mu}=0.5$ and $m_{h^0}=70\, GeV$.
550: The $BR$ is strongly sensitive to $m_{A^0}$ and decreases with increasing
551: values of $m_{A^0}$. The same dependence appears for the maximum value of
552: the $BR$.
553:
554: In the $Z\rightarrow \tau^{\pm} e^{\pm}$ decay, the couplings
555: $\bar{\xi}^D_{N,\tau i}$ and $\bar{\xi}^D_{N,e i}$ with $i=e,\mu,\tau$ play
556: the main role, in the model III. Again the first assumption permits us
557: to neglect the contributions of the couplings $\bar{\xi}^D_{N,i j}$ where
558: $i,j=\mu,e$, by taking only the internal $\tau$ lepton into account. For the
559: coupling $\bar{\xi}^{D}_{N,e\tau}$ the same restriction is used, however for
560: $\bar{\xi}^{D}_{N,\tau\tau}$ we do not use any constraint.
561:
562: Fig. \ref{BrZetauMaxsintet} (\ref{BrZetauMinsintet}) shows
563: $sin\theta_{\tau e}$ and $sin\theta_{\tau \mu}$ dependence of the maximum
564: (minimum) value of the $BR\,(Z\rightarrow \tau^{\pm}\, e^{\pm})$ for
565: $sin\theta_{\tau \mu}=0.5$ and $sin\theta_{\tau e}=0.5$ respectively.
566: Here the coupling $\bar{\xi}^{D}_{N,\tau\tau}$ is taken as
567: $\bar{\xi}^{D}_{N,\tau\tau}=10^3\, GeV$. The maximum (minimum) value of the
568: $BR$ for this process is at the order of the magnitude of $10^{-11}$
569: $(10^{-12})$. $BR$ increases with increasing values $sin\theta_{\tau \mu}$,
570: however this behaviour appears in reverse for $sin\theta_{\tau e}$
571: dependence. The sensitivity of $BR\,(Z\rightarrow \tau^{\pm}\, e^{\pm})$ to
572: both CP violating parameters, $sin\theta_{\tau e}$ and $sin\theta_{\tau
573: \mu}$, is strong.
574:
575: We present the coupling $\bar{\xi}^{D}_{N,\tau\tau}$ dependence of
576: $BR\,(Z\rightarrow \tau^{\pm}\, e^{\pm})$ in Figs. \ref{BrZetauMaxksiDtautau}
577: and \ref{BrZetauMinksiDtautau}. These figures shows that the $BR$ enormously
578: increases with increasing values of the coupling
579: $\bar{\xi}^{D}_{N,\tau\tau}$. Note that we take the coupling
580: $\bar{\xi}^{D}_{N,\tau\tau}$ real in our calculations.
581:
582: Finally, we study the $Z\rightarrow \mu^{\pm} \tau^{\pm}$ decay by taking
583: $\tau$ lepton as an internal one similar to previous analysis. Here the
584: experimental upper limit for BR($Z\rightarrow \mu^{\pm} \tau^{\pm}$) can
585: be reached for the small values of $\bar{\xi}^{D}_{N,\tau\tau}$. Further,
586: the theoretical calculations are consistent with this upper limit for
587: the case where the mass differences of neutral Higgs bosons $h^0$ and $A^0$
588: are large, even for large values of the coupling $\bar{\xi}^{D}_{N,\tau
589: \tau}$.
590:
591: As a summary, we study the $BR$'s of the decays
592: $Z\rightarrow e^{\pm} \mu^{\pm}$, $Z\rightarrow e^{\pm} \tau^{\pm}$ and
593: $Z\rightarrow \mu^{\pm} \tau^{\pm}$ and observe that it is
594: possible to reach the present experimental upper limits in the model III,
595: playing with the model parameters in the restriction region. This result is
596: important since the theoretical work in the SM shows that the branching
597: rates are less than $10^{-54}$ and compared to this number large rates are
598: expected with massive and mixing neutrinos. In our analysis, we predict
599: that the $BR$ for the $Z\rightarrow e^{\pm} \mu^{\pm}$ decay can reach to
600: the values at the order of the magnitude $10^{-11}$. $BR$ for the process
601: $Z\rightarrow e^{\pm} \tau^{\pm}$ depends strongly on the Yukawa coupling
602: $\bar{\xi}^{D}_{N,\tau\tau}$ and for its large values, $10^3-10^4\, GeV$,
603: it can be in the range $10^{-10}-10^{-9}$. The process
604: $Z\rightarrow \mu^{\pm} \tau^{\pm}$ can have larger $BR$ compared to the
605: previous ones, since the Yukawa couplings entering in the expressions
606: are $\bar{\xi}^{D}_{N,\mu\tau}$ and $\bar{\xi}^{D}_{N,\tau\tau}$.
607: Furthermore, $BR$'s of the processes under consideration are sensitive to
608: the CP-violating parameters since the source of the parts which depend on
609: couplings $\eta_i^A$ and $\eta_i^-$ are the non-vanishing complex Yukawa
610: couplings, in the model III.
611:
612: In future, with the reliable experimental result of upper limits of the
613: $BR$'s of above processes it would be possible to test models beyond the
614: SM and free parameters of these models
615: %
616: \section{Acknowledgement} The work of E.O.I was supported by Turkish Academy
617: of Sciences (T\"UBA/GEBIP).
618: %
619: \begin{thebibliography}{1}
620: %
621: \bibitem{Hawkings}
622: R. Hawkings and K. M{\"o}nig, {\it Eur. Phys. J. direct} {\bf C8} (1999)
623: 1.
624: %
625: \bibitem{Pontecorvo}
626: B. Pontecorvo, {\it Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.} {\bf 33} (1957) 549, Z. Maki,
627: M. Nakagawa, and S. Sakata, {\it Prog. Theor. Phys.} {\bf 28} (1962) 870,
628: B. Pontecorvo, {\it Sov. Phys. JETP} {\bf 26} (1968) 984.
629: %
630: \bibitem{Riemann}
631: T. Riemann and G. Mann, ``Nondiagonal {$Z$} decay: ${Z} \to e \mu$'', in
632: {\it Proc. of the Int. Conf. Neutrino'82, 14-19 June 1982, Balatonf{\"u}red,
633: Hungary} (A. Frenkel and E. Jenik, eds.), vol. II, pp. 58-, Budapest, 1982,
634: scanned copy at http://www.ifh.de/$\sim$riemann, G. Mann and T. Riemann,
635: {\it Annalen Phys.} {\bf 40} (1984) 334.
636: %
637: \bibitem{Ganapathi}
638: V. Ganapathi, T. Weiler, E. Laermann, I. Schmitt, and P. Zerwas,
639: {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D27} (1983) 579, M. Clements, C. Footman,
640: A. Kronfeld, S. Narasimhan, and D. Photiadis, {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D27}
641: (1983) 570.
642: %
643: \bibitem{PartData}
644: {Particle Data Group} Collaboration, {C. Caso} {\it et al.},
645: {\it Eur. Phys. J.} {\bf C3} (1998) 1.
646: %
647: \bibitem{Opal}
648: {OPAL} Collaboration, R. Akers {\it et al.}, {\it Z. Phys.} {\bf C67} (1995)
649: 555.
650: %
651: \bibitem{L3}
652: {L3} Collaboration, O. Adriani {\it et al.}, {\it Phys. Lett.} {\bf B316}
653: (1993) 427.
654: %
655: \bibitem{Delphi}
656: {DELPHI} Collaboration, P. Abreu {\it et al.}, {\it Z. Phys.} {\bf C73} (1997)
657: 243.
658: %
659: \bibitem{Wilson}
660: G. Wilson, ``Neutrino oscillations: are lepton-flavor violating Z decays
661: observable with the CDR detector?'' and ``Update on experimental aspects of
662: lepton-flavour violation'', talks at DESY-ECFA LC Workshops held at Frascati,
663: Nov 1998 and at Oxford, March 1999, transparencies obtainable at \\
664: http://wwwsis.lnf.infn.it/talkshow/ and at \\
665: http://hepnts1.rl.ac.uk/ECFA\_DESY\_OXFORD/scans/0025\_wilson.pdf.
666: %
667: \bibitem{Illana}
668: J. I. Illana, M. Jack and T. Riemann, {\it hep-ph/0001273 } (2000),
669: J. I. Illana, and T. Riemann, {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D63 } 053004 (2001).
670: %
671: \bibitem{Witten}
672: E. Witten, {\it Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B268} (1986) 79, R. N. Mohapatra and
673: J. W. F. Valle, {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D34} (1986) 1642, J. L. Hewett and
674: T. G. Rizzo, {\it Phys. Rept.} {\bf 183} (1989) 193.
675: %
676: \bibitem{Langacker}
677: P. Langacker, {\it Phys. Rept.} {\bf 72} (1981) 185.
678: %
679: \bibitem{Ghosal} A. Ghosal, Y. Koide and H. Fusaoka, {\it hep-ph/0104104 }
680: (2001).
681: %
682: 7\bibitem{ErLFV}
683: E. Iltan, {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D64} 013013 (2001).
684: %
685: \bibitem{Sher} T. P. Cheng and M. Sher, {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D35},
686: (1987) 3383.
687: %
688: \bibitem{Abdullah} K. Abdullah et.al, {\it Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 65},
689: 2347 (1990).
690: %
691: \bibitem{Czarnecki} A. Czarnecki and W. J. Marciano, {\it Phys. Rev.}
692: {\bf D64}, 013014 (2001).
693: %
694: \bibitem{Brown} H. N. Brown et.al, Muon g-2 Collaboaration, {\it Phys. Rev.
695: Lett.} {\bf 86}, 2227 (2001).
696: %
697: \bibitem{Commins} E. D. Commins et.al, {\it Phys. Rev. A} {\bf 50},
698: (1994) 2960.
699: %
700: \end{thebibliography}
701: \newpage
702: \begin{figure}[htb]
703: \vskip 0.0truein
704: \centering
705: \epsfxsize=6.0in
706: \leavevmode\epsffile{fig1self.eps}
707: \vskip 0.5truein
708: \end{figure}
709: %
710: \begin{figure}[htb]
711: \vskip 0.0truein
712: \centering
713: \epsfxsize=6.0in
714: \leavevmode\epsffile{fig1ver.eps}
715: \vskip 0.5truein
716: \caption[]{One loop diagrams contribute to $Z\rightarrow k^+\,j^-$ decay
717: due to the neutral Higgs bosons $h_0$ and $A_0$ in the 2HDM. $i$ represents
718: the internal, $j$ ($k$) outgoing (incoming) lepton, dashed lines the vector
719: field Z, $h_0$ and $A_0$ fields.}
720: \label{fig1ver}
721: \end{figure}
722: %
723: \newpage
724: %
725: \begin{figure}[htb]
726: \vskip -3.0truein
727: \centering
728: \epsfxsize=6.8in
729: \leavevmode\epsffile{BrZemuMaxsintet.eps}
730: \vskip -3.0truein
731: \caption[]{The maximum value of $BR\,(Z\rightarrow \mu^{\pm}\, e^{\pm})$ as
732: a function of $sin\theta_{\tau e}$ for $sin\theta_{\tau \mu}=0.5$,
733: $m_{h^0}=70\, GeV$ and $m_{A^0}=80\, GeV$. }
734: \label{BrZemuMaxsintet}
735: \end{figure}
736: %
737: \begin{figure}[htb]
738: \vskip -3.0truein
739: \centering
740: \epsfxsize=6.8in
741: \leavevmode\epsffile{BrZemuMinsintet.eps}
742: \vskip -3.0truein
743: \caption[]{The same as Fig. \ref{BrZemuMaxsintet} but for
744: the minimum value of $BR\,(Z\rightarrow \mu^{\pm}\, e^{\pm})$ .}
745: \label{BrZemuMinsintet}
746: \end{figure}
747: %
748: \begin{figure}[htb]
749: \vskip -3.0truein
750: \centering
751: \epsfxsize=6.8in
752: \leavevmode\epsffile{BrZemuMinA0.eps}
753: \vskip -3.0truein
754: \caption[]{The minimum value of $BR\,(Z\rightarrow \mu^{\pm}\, e^{\pm})$
755: as a function of $m_{A^0}$ for $sin\theta_{\tau \mu}=0.5$, $sin\theta_
756: {\tau e}=0.5$ and $m_{h^0}=70\, GeV$. }
757: \label{BrZemuMinA0}
758: \end{figure}
759: %
760: \begin{figure}[htb]
761: \vskip -3.0truein
762: \centering
763: \epsfxsize=6.8in
764: \leavevmode\epsffile{BrZetauMaxsintet.eps}
765: \vskip -3.0truein
766: \caption[]{The maximum value of $BR\,(Z\rightarrow \tau^{\pm}\, e^{\pm})$
767: as a function of $sin\theta$ for $\bar{\xi}^{D}_{N,\tau\tau}=10^3\, GeV$,
768: $m_{h^0}=70\, GeV$ and $m_{A^0}=80\, GeV$. Here solid line represents the
769: dependence with respect to $sin\theta_{\tau \mu}$ for $sin\theta_{\tau e}
770: =0.5$ and dashed line to $sin\theta_{\tau e}$ for
771: $sin\theta_{\tau \mu}=0.5$.}
772: \label{BrZetauMaxsintet}
773: \end{figure}
774: %
775: \begin{figure}[htb]
776: \vskip -3.0truein
777: \centering
778: \epsfxsize=6.8in
779: \leavevmode\epsffile{BrZetauMinsintet.eps}
780: \vskip -3.0truein
781: \caption[]{The same as Fig. \ref{BrZetauMaxsintet} but for
782: the minimum value of $BR\,(Z\rightarrow \tau^{\pm}\, e^{\pm})$. }
783: \label{BrZetauMinsintet}
784: \end{figure}
785: %
786: \begin{figure}[htb]
787: \vskip -3.0truein
788: \centering
789: \epsfxsize=6.8in
790: \leavevmode\epsffile{BrZetauMaxksiDtautau.eps}
791: \vskip -3.0truein
792: \caption[]{The maximum value of $BR\,(Z\rightarrow \tau^{\pm}\, e^{\pm})$
793: as a function of $\bar{\xi}^D_{N,\tau\tau}$ for $sin\theta_{\tau \mu}=0.5$,
794: $sin\theta_{\tau e}=0.5$, $m_{h^0}=70\, GeV$ and $m_{A^0}=80\, GeV$. }
795: \label{BrZetauMaxksiDtautau}
796: \end{figure}
797: %
798: \begin{figure}[htb]
799: \vskip -3.0truein
800: \centering
801: \epsfxsize=6.8in
802: \leavevmode\epsffile{BrZetauMinksiDtautau.eps}
803: \vskip -3.0truein
804: \caption[]{The same as Fig. \ref{BrZetauMaxksiDtautau} but for
805: the minimum value of $BR\,(Z\rightarrow \tau^{\pm}\, e^{\pm})$. }
806: \label{BrZetauMinksiDtautau}
807: \end{figure}
808: %
809: \end{document}
810:
811:
812: