1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}
2: \usepackage{graphicx}
3:
4: \begin{document}
5: \newcommand {\ba} {\begin{eqnarray}}
6: \newcommand {\be} {\begin{equation}}
7: \newcommand {\ea} {\end{eqnarray}}
8: \newcommand {\ee} {\end{equation}}
9:
10: \begin{flushright}
11: BIHEP-TH--2002-12
12: \end{flushright}
13: \vskip 3.0cm
14: \begin{center}
15: {\LARGE\bf CP Asymmetry in Tau Slepton Decay in The Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model}
16: \vskip 1.0cm
17: {\bf Wei Min Yang\footnote{Email: yangwm@mail.ihep.ac.cn}\hspace{1cm}Dong Sheng Du}\\
18: {\em CCAST(World Laboratory), P.O.Box 8730, Beijing 100080, China\\
19: Institute of High Energy Physics, P.O.Box 918(4), Beijing 100039, China}
20: \vskip 2.0cm
21: {\Large\bf Abstract}\\
22: \end{center}
23:
24: \hspace{20pt} We investigate CP violation asymmetry in the decay of tau slepton into a tau neutrino and a chargino
25: in the minimal supersymmetric standard model. The new source of CP violation is the complex mixing in the tau
26: slepton sector. The rate asymmetry between the decays of tau slepton and its CP conjugate process can be of order of
27: $10^{-3}$ in some region of the parameter space of the mSUGRA scenario, which will possibly be detectable in the
28: near-future collider experiments.
29:
30: \newpage
31:
32: \section*{I. Introduction}
33: \hspace{20pt}Supersymmetric(SUSY) model is now widely regarded to be the most plausible extension of the Standard
34: Model(SM)\cite{Nills}\cite{Drees}. It stabilizes the gauge hierarchy and allows for the grand unification of all
35: known gauge interactions\cite{Witten}. In the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model(MSSM) there are additional
36: complex couplings which may give rise to CP violation compared to the SM\cite{Dimopoulos}. These new sources of CP
37: violation contribute to CP violation in various processes\cite{Masier}, the neutron and electron electric dipole
38: moments, rare Kaon decays and B decays, etc. Although the CP-violating phases associated with sfermions of the first
39: and second generation are severely constrained by bounds on the electric dipole moments of the electron, neutron and
40: muon, but the CP violation phases in the mass matrices of the third generation sfermions might be large and can
41: induce sizable CP violation in the MSSM Higgs sector through loop corrections\cite{Nath}\cite{Pilaftsis},
42: furthermore, these phases also directly affect the couplings of Higgs bosons to third generation
43: sfermions\cite{Fred}. In the MSSM with the simple universal soft supersymmetry breaking\cite{Chamseddine}, the tau
44: slepton sector contains two new sources of CP violation in its couplings to Higgs particles. It can be defined to be
45: the complex phases of the $\mu$ term in the Higgs superpotential and soft-SUSY-breaking \textit{A} terms. These new
46: sources of CP violation are generic to all SUSY theories and provide non-SM sources of CP violation required for the
47: baryon asymmetry of the universe\cite{Cline}. On the other hand, the effects of these new CP violation are expected
48: to be probed in the near-future colliders\cite{Choi}, such as LHC and NLC, which could provide an opportunity of
49: detecting new CP violating phenomena. Therefore, it should be important and interesting to investigate mechanism and
50: consequence of this CP violating source in collider phenomenology.
51:
52: In this paper, we work in the framework of the MSSM with CP violation, and we focus on the CP asymmetry in tau
53: slepton decays. If a tau slepton is sufficiently heavy, its dominant decay modes are tree-level two-body decays
54: $\widetilde{\tau}^-\rightarrow\nu_{\tau}\widetilde{\chi}^-$ and
55: $\widetilde{\tau}^-\rightarrow\tau^-\widetilde{\chi}^0$, where $\widetilde{\chi}^-$ and $\widetilde{\chi}^0$ denote
56: a chargino and a neutralino, respectively. These final states are also produced at one-loop level by the final state
57: interactions. If the interactions of the tau slepton violate CP invariance, these decays are expected to have different
58: rates from their CP conjugate process, which are measured by the asymmetries:\\
59: \parbox{12.9cm}
60: {\begin{eqnarray*}
61: A_{cp}^{\nu_\tau} &=& \frac{\Gamma(\widetilde{\tau}^-\rightarrow\nu_{\tau}\widetilde{\chi}^-)-
62: \Gamma(\widetilde{\tau}^+\rightarrow\bar{\nu}_{\tau}\widetilde{\chi}^+)}
63: {\Gamma(\widetilde{\tau}^-\rightarrow\nu_{\tau}\widetilde{\chi}^-)+
64: \Gamma(\widetilde{\tau}^+\rightarrow\bar{\nu}_{\tau}\widetilde{\chi}^+)}\:,\\
65: A_{cp}^{\tau} &=& \frac{\Gamma(\widetilde{\tau}^-\rightarrow\tau^-\widetilde{\chi}^0)-
66: \Gamma(\widetilde{\tau}^+\rightarrow\tau^+\widetilde{\chi}^0)}
67: {\Gamma(\widetilde{\tau}^-\rightarrow\tau^-\widetilde{\chi}^0)+
68: \Gamma(\widetilde{\tau}^+\rightarrow\tau^+\widetilde{\chi}^0)}\:.
69: \end{eqnarray*}}
70: \parbox{0.1cm}{\ba\ea}\\
71: Assuming CPT invariance, the decay widths satisfy the relation:
72: \ba \Gamma(\widetilde{\tau}^-\rightarrow\nu_{\tau}\widetilde{\chi}^-)-
73: \Gamma(\widetilde{\tau}^+\rightarrow\bar{\nu}_{\tau}\widetilde{\chi}^+)
74: =-[\Gamma(\widetilde{\tau}^-\rightarrow\tau^-\widetilde{\chi}^0)-
75: \Gamma(\widetilde{\tau}^+\rightarrow\tau^+\widetilde{\chi}^0)] \ea
76: making the total width of the tau slepton the same as that of the anit-tau slepton. We will calculate and discuss the
77: asymmetries.
78:
79: The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section II is devoted to a brief review of the mass spectra
80: and mixing patters of the tau sleptons, charginos and neutralinos. In Sec.III we present a Lagrangian of the relevant
81: coupling and analytical expressions of the rate asymmetry. A detailed numerical analysis of the asymmetries for a
82: representative SUSY parameter set is given in Sec.IV. Final section is for summary and conclusions.
83:
84: \section*{II. SUSY particles masses and mixing}
85: \hspace{20pt}To fix our notation, we simply summarize in this section the masses and mixings of the tau slepton and
86: chargino, neutralino sectors of the MSSM, which will be needed later when evaluating the decay widths\cite{Gunion}.
87:
88: \subsection*{A. Tau slepton mass and mixing}
89: \hspace{20pt}The mass-squared matrix for the tau slepton in the left-right basis is given as
90: \ba M^2_{\widetilde{\tau}}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
91: M^2_L & m_\tau(A_\tau + \mu\tan\beta) \\
92: m_\tau(A^*_\tau + \mu^*\tan\beta) & M^2_R\end{array}\right)
93: \ea
94: with\\
95: \parbox{12.9cm}
96: {\begin{eqnarray*}
97: M^2_L &=& m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_L}+m^2_\tau+(\frac{1}{2}M^2_Z-M^2_W)\cos2\beta\:,\\
98: M^2_R &=& m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_R}+m^2_\tau+(M^2_Z-M^2_W)\cos2\beta\:,
99: \end{eqnarray*}}
100: \parbox{0.1cm}{\ba\ea}\\
101: where $m_{\widetilde{\tau}_{L,R}}$ are the left- and right-handed soft SUSY-breaking tau slepton masses, respectively.
102: The tau slepton soft breaking trilinear coupling $A_\tau$ and Higgs mass mixing parameter $\mu$ are complex,
103: \ba A_\tau=|A_\tau|e^{i\,\varphi}\:,\hspace{1cm}\mu_\tau=|\mu_\tau|e^{i\,\eta}\:. \ea
104: The complex phase $\varphi$ and $\eta$ are the source of CP violation, which can vary in the range
105: $0\leq\varphi,\eta\leq2\pi$. In the later context, we will take $\mu$ as real, i.e. only the phase $\varphi$ is left
106: so as to reduce the number of parameters and simplify the discussion. The tau slepton mass eigenstates can be
107: realized by a unitary transformation $U$ which diagonalizes the mass-squared matrix $M^2_{\widetilde{\tau}}$\,,
108: \ba U\,M^2_{\widetilde{\tau}}\,U^\dagger=Diag\,(m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_1}\,,\,m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_2})\,,\ea
109: where diagonalization matrix can be parameterized as
110: \ba U=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\cos\theta_\tau & \sin\theta_\tau e^{i\,\delta} \\
111: -\sin\theta_\tau e^{-i\,\delta} & \cos\theta_\tau\end{array}\right) \ea
112: with
113: \ba \delta=\arg\,(A_\tau+\mu\tan\beta)\,.\ea
114: The tau slepton mixing angles and mass eigenvalues are then given as\\
115: \parbox{12.9cm}
116: {\begin{eqnarray*}
117: \tan2\theta &=& \frac{2m_\tau|A_\tau+\mu\tan\beta|}{M^2_L-M^2_R}\,,\\
118: m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_{1,2}} &=&
119: \frac{1}{2}\left[M^2_L+M^2_R\mp\sqrt{(M^2_L-M^2_R)^2+4m^2_\tau|A_\tau+\mu\tan\beta|^2}\right]
120: \end{eqnarray*}}
121: \parbox{0.1cm}{\ba\ea}\\
122: with convention $0\leq\theta\leq\frac{\pi}{2},\,m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_1}\leq m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_2}$. For large
123: values of $\tan\beta$ and $\mu$, the mixing in the tau slepton sector can be very strong.
124:
125: \subsection*{B. The chargino and neutralino systems}
126: \hspace{20pt}The general chargino mass matrix is given by\cite{Djouadi}
127: \ba M_C=\left(\begin{array}{cc} M_2 & \sqrt{2}M_W s_\beta \\
128: \sqrt{2}M_W c_\beta & \mu\end{array}\right)\,, \ea
129: where $M_2$ is the wino mass parameter and we use $s_\beta=\sin\beta,\,c_\beta=\cos\beta$, etc. It can be
130: diagonalized by two real rotation matrices $C_L$ and $C_R$\,,
131: \ba C_L\,M_C\,C_R^{-1}=Diag\,(m_{\widetilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1}\,,\,m_{\widetilde{\chi}^{\pm}_2})\ea
132: with two rotation angles given by\\
133: \parbox{12.9cm}
134: {\begin{eqnarray*}
135: \tan2\theta_L &=& \frac{2\sqrt{2}M_W(M_2c_\beta+\mu s_\beta)}{M^2_2-\mu^2-2M_W^2c_\beta}\,,\\
136: \tan2\theta_R &=& \frac{2\sqrt{2}M_W(M_2s_\beta+\mu c_\beta)}{M^2_2-\mu^2+2M_W^2c_\beta}\,.
137: \end{eqnarray*}}
138: \parbox{0.1cm}{\ba\ea}\\
139: The two mass eigenvalues of the charginos, in the limit $|\mu|\gg M_2\,,M_W$\,, are reduced to\\
140: \parbox{12.9cm}
141: {\begin{eqnarray*}
142: m_{\widetilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1} & \simeq & M_2-\frac{M_W^2}{\mu^2}(M_2+\mu s_{2\beta})\,,\\
143: m_{\widetilde{\chi}^{\pm}_2} & \simeq & |\mu|+\frac{M_W^2}{\mu^2}\epsilon_\mu(M_2 s_{2\beta}+\mu)\,,
144: \end{eqnarray*}}
145: \parbox{0.1cm}{\ba\ea}\\
146: where $\epsilon_\mu$ is for the sign of $\mu$\,. For $|\mu|\rightarrow\infty$\,, the lighter chargino corresponds to
147: a pure wino state with mass $m_{\widetilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1}\simeq M_2$\,, while the heavier chargino corresponds to a
148: pure higgsino state with mass $m_{\widetilde{\chi}^{\pm}_2}\simeq |\mu|$\,.
149:
150: The neutralino mass matrix is
151: \ba M_N=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}
152: M_1 & 0 & -M_Z s_W c_\beta & M_Z s_W s_\beta \\
153: 0 & M_2 & M_Z c_W c_\beta & -M_Z c_W s_\beta \\
154: -M_Z s_W c_\beta & M_Z c_W c_\beta & 0 & -\mu\\
155: M_Z s_W s_\beta & -M_Z c_W s_\beta & -\mu & 0
156: \end{array}\right)\,,\ea
157: where $M_1$ is the Bino mass parameter and $s_W=\sin\theta_W,\,c_W=\cos\theta_W$, etc. are used. It can be
158: diagonalized by a single real orthogonal matrix $N$\,,
159: \ba N\,M_N\,N^{-1}=Diag\,
160: (m_{\widetilde{\chi}^0_1}\,,\,m_{\widetilde{\chi}^0_2}\,,\,m_{\widetilde{\chi}^0_3}\,,\,m_{\widetilde{\chi}^0_4})\,.
161: \ea
162: In the limit of large $|\mu|$ values, the mass eigenvalues of the neutralinos
163: $m_{\widetilde{\chi}^0_i}\,(i=1,2,3,4)$ are simplified to\\
164: \parbox{12.9cm}
165: {\begin{eqnarray*}
166: m_{\widetilde{\chi}^0_1} & \simeq & M_1-\frac{M_Z^2}{\mu^2}(M_1+\mu s_{2\beta})s_W^2\,,\\
167: m_{\widetilde{\chi}^0_2} & \simeq & M_2-\frac{M_Z^2}{\mu^2}(M_2+\mu s_{2\beta})c_W^2\,,\\
168: m_{\widetilde{\chi}^0_3} & \simeq &|\mu|+\frac{M_Z^2}{2\mu^2}\epsilon_\mu(1-s_{2\beta})(\mu+M_2 s_W^2+M_1 c_W^2)\,,\\
169: m_{\widetilde{\chi}^0_4} & \simeq &|\mu|+\frac{M_Z^2}{2\mu^2}\epsilon_\mu(1+s_{2\beta})(\mu-M_2 s_W^2-M_1 c_W^2)\,.
170: \end{eqnarray*}}
171: \parbox{0.1cm}{\ba\ea}\\
172: Again, for $|\mu|\rightarrow\infty$\,, two neutralinos are pure gaugino states with masses
173: $m_{\widetilde{\chi}^0_1}\simeq M_1\,,m_{\widetilde{\chi}^0_2}\simeq M_2$\,, while the two others are pure higgsino
174: states with masses $m_{\widetilde{\chi}^0_3}\simeq m_{\widetilde{\chi}^0_4}\simeq |\mu|$\,. The matrix elements of
175: the diagonalizing matrix, $N_{ij}$ with $i,j=1,\ldots,4$\,, are given by\\
176: \parbox{12.9cm}
177: {\begin{eqnarray*}
178: N_{i1} & = & (1+a_i^2+b_i^2+c_i^2)^{-\frac{1}{2}}\,,\\
179: N_{i2} & = & N_{i1}\,a_i\,,\\
180: N_{i3} & = & N_{i1}\,b_i\,,\\
181: N_{i4} & = & N_{i1}\,c_i
182: \end{eqnarray*}}
183: \parbox{0.1cm}{\ba\ea}\\
184: with\\
185: \parbox{12.9cm}
186: {\begin{eqnarray*}
187: a_i &=&-\frac{1}{\tan\theta_W}\frac{M_1-\epsilon_i\,m_{\widetilde{\chi}_i^0}}
188: {M_2-\epsilon_i\,m_{\widetilde{\chi}_i^0}}\,,\\
189: b_i &=&\left[\mu\,(M_1-\epsilon_i\,m_{\widetilde{\chi}_i^0})(M_2-\epsilon_i\,m_{\widetilde{\chi}_i^0})\right.\\
190: & &\left.-M_Z^2 s_\beta c_\beta [(M_1-M_2) c_W^2+M_2-\epsilon_i\,m_{\widetilde{\chi}_i^0}]\right]\\
191: & &\left/\left[M_Z s_W (M_2-\epsilon_i\,m_{\widetilde{\chi}_i^0})(\mu\,c_\beta+\epsilon_i\,m_{\widetilde{\chi}_i^0}\,s_\beta)\right]\right.\,,\\
192: c_i &=&\left[-\epsilon_i\,m_{\widetilde{\chi}_i^0}(M_1-\epsilon_i\,m_{\widetilde{\chi}_i^0})(M_2-\epsilon_i\,m_{\widetilde{\chi}_i^0})\right.\\
193: & &\left.-M_Z^2 c_\beta^2 [(M_1-M_2) c_W^2+M_2-\epsilon_i\,m_{\widetilde{\chi}_i^0}]\right]\\
194: & &\left/\left[M_Z s_W(M_2-\epsilon_i\,m_{\widetilde{\chi}_i^0})(\mu\,c_\beta+\epsilon_i\,m_{\widetilde{\chi}_i^0}\,s_\beta)\right]\right.\,,
195: \end{eqnarray*}}
196: \parbox{0.1cm}{\ba\ea}\\
197: where $\epsilon_1=\epsilon_2=1,-\epsilon_3=\epsilon_4=\epsilon_\mu$\,.
198:
199: \subsection*{C. Mass spectra in the mSUGRA scenario}
200: \hspace{20pt}To reduce the number of the parameters, we will adopt the mSUGRA scenario with universality hypothesis
201: to discuss the SUSY particle spectra, where the scalar fermion masses and the gaugino masses are respectively
202: unified as $m_0$ and $m_{1/2}$ at the GUT scale $M_{GUT}$\,. The relation between the SUSY particle masses at the
203: scale $M_{GUT}$ and
204: at the weak scale ${\cal O}(M_Z)$ are obtained by running renormalization group equations(RGE) as\cite{Boer}\\
205: \parbox{12.9cm}
206: {\begin{eqnarray*}
207: M_1 & \simeq & 0.4\, m_{1/2}\,,\hspace{0.5cm}M_2\,\simeq \,0.8\, m_{1/2}\,,\\
208: m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_R} & \simeq & m_0^2+0.15\, m_{1/2}^2-0.23 M_Z^2 \cos2\beta \,,\\
209: m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_L} & \simeq & m_0^2+0.52\, m_{1/2}^2-0.27 M_Z^2 \cos2\beta \,,\\
210: m^2_{\widetilde{\nu}_\tau} & \simeq & m_0^2+0.52\, m_{1/2}^2+0.5 M_Z^2 \cos2\beta \,,
211: \end{eqnarray*}}
212: \parbox{0.1cm}{\ba\ea}\\
213: where $m_{\widetilde{\nu}_\tau}$ is the left-handed soft-SUSY-breaking tau sneutrino mass. All of the free
214: parameters now include $|A|,\,\varphi,\,\mu,\,\tan\beta,\,m_0,\,m_{1/2}$\,. We will take them as input and use the
215: above-mentioned equations, all the mass spectra of the involved SUSY particles can then be worked out.
216:
217: \section*{III. Relevant couplings and decay rate asymmetry}
218: \hspace{20pt}A nonvanishing value for the asymmetry $A_{cp}^{\nu_\tau}$ in Eq.(1) is generated, if the decay
219: $\widetilde{\tau}^-\rightarrow\nu_\tau\widetilde{\chi}^-$, in addition to the decay
220: $\widetilde{\tau}^-\rightarrow\tau^-\widetilde{\chi}^0$, is allowed kinematically. The produced tau lepton and
221: neutralino can become a tau neutrino and a chargino by exchanging charged Higgs bosons $H^{\pm}$, $W^{\pm}$ bosons,
222: and tau sneutrino $\widetilde{\nu}_\tau$, as shown in Fig.~\ref{loop}. The interferences of these one-loop diagrams
223: with the tree diagram make the rate of the decay $\widetilde{\tau}^-\rightarrow\nu_\tau\widetilde{\chi}^-$ different
224: from that of the decay $\widetilde{\tau}^+\rightarrow\bar{\nu}_\tau\widetilde{\chi}^+$. The relevant interaction
225: Lagrangian for $\widetilde{\tau}$ and $\widetilde{\nu}_\tau$ as well as $H^{\pm}$ and $W^{\pm}$ is given by\cite{Gunion}\\
226: \begin{figure}[t]
227: \centering
228: \includegraphics{loopFig.eps} \caption{\it The one-loop diagrams for the decay of a tau slepton into a
229: tau neutrino and a chargino.\label{loop}}
230: \end{figure}
231:
232: \parbox{12.9cm}
233: {\begin{eqnarray*} {\cal L}
234: &=&\frac{g}{\sqrt{2}}\widetilde{\nu}_\tau\overline{\tau}(A_{Ll}\frac{1-\gamma^5}{2}+A_{Rl}\frac{1+\gamma^5}{2})\widetilde{\chi}_l^-
235: +\frac{g}{\sqrt{2}}\widetilde{\tau}_k\overline{\nu_\tau}(B_{kl}\frac{1+\gamma^5}{2})\widetilde{\chi}_l^+ \\
236: &&+\frac{g}{\sqrt{2}}\widetilde{\tau}_k\overline{\tau}(F_{Ljk}\frac{1-\gamma^5}{2}+F_{Rjk}\frac{1+\gamma^5}{2})\widetilde{\chi}_j^0
237: +\frac{g}{\sqrt{2}}\widetilde{\nu}_\tau\overline{\nu_\tau}(G_j\frac{1+\gamma^5}{2})\widetilde{\chi}_j^0 \\
238: &&-\frac{g}{\sqrt{2}}H^-\overline{\widetilde{\chi}_j^0}\gamma^\mu(I_{Ljl}\frac{1-\gamma^5}{2}+I_{Rjl}\frac{1+\gamma^5}{2})\widetilde{\chi}_l^+
239: -\frac{g}{\sqrt{2}}H^-\overline{\tau}(K\frac{1-\gamma^5}{2})\nu_\tau \\
240: &&-\frac{g}{\sqrt{2}}W_\mu^-\overline{\widetilde{\chi}_j^0}\gamma^\mu(H_{Ljl}\frac{1-\gamma^5}{2}+H_{Rjl}\frac{1+\gamma^5}{2})\widetilde{\chi}_l^+
241: -\frac{g}{\sqrt{2}}W_\mu^-\overline{\tau}\gamma^\mu\frac{1-\gamma^5}{2}\nu_\tau \\
242: &&+h.c.
243: \end{eqnarray*}}
244: \parbox{0.1cm}{\ba\ea}\\
245: with\\
246: \parbox{12.9cm}
247: {\begin{eqnarray*}
248: A_{Ll}&=&\frac{m_\tau}{M_W c_\beta}C_{Ll2}\,,\hspace{0.5cm} A_{Rl}=-\sqrt{2}C_{Rl1}\,,\\
249: B_{kl}&=&\frac{m_\tau}{M_W c_\beta}C_{Ll2}U_{k2}^*-\sqrt{2}C_{Ll1}U_{k1}^* \,,\\
250: F_{Ljk}&=&-\frac{m_\tau}{M_W c_\beta}N_{j3}U_{k1}^*-2\tan\theta_W N_{j1}U_{k2}^* \,,\\
251: F_{Rjk}&=&\frac{m_\tau}{M_W c_\beta}N_{j3}U_{k2}^*-(N_{j2}+\tan\theta_W N_{j1})U_{k1}^* \,,\\
252: G_j&=&N_{j2}-\tan\theta_W N_{j1}\,,\\
253: H_{Ljl}&=&-\sqrt{2}N_{j2}C_{Rl1}+N_{j4}C_{Rl2}\,,\\
254: H_{Rjl}&=&-\sqrt{2}N_{j2}C_{Ll1}-N_{j3}C_{Ll2}\,,\\
255: I_{Ljl}&=&\cos\beta[\sqrt{2}N_{j4}C_{Rl1}+(N_{j2}+\tan\theta_W N_{j1})C_{Rl2}]\,,\\
256: I_{Rjl}&=&\sin\beta[\sqrt{2}N_{j3}C_{Ll1}-(N_{j2}+\tan\theta_W N_{j1})C_{Ll2}]\,,\\
257: K&=&-\tan\beta\frac{m_\tau}{M_W}\,,
258: \end{eqnarray*}}
259: \parbox{0.1cm}{\ba\ea}\\
260: where $k,l=(1,2)$ and $j=(1,\ldots,4)$. We now consider the decay of the heavier tau slepton into the tau neutrino
261: and the lighter chargino $\widetilde{\tau}_2^-\rightarrow\nu_\tau\widetilde{\chi}_1^-$ and its CP conjugate process.
262: The decay rate asymmetry for the processes are obtained as
263: \ba A_{cp}^{\nu_\tau}=\frac{\alpha_2}{2}\frac{T^a+T^b+T^c}{(m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_2}-m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^-})^2|B_{21}|^2}\,,
264: \ea
265: where $\alpha_2=g^2/(4\pi)$. The contributions of the diagrams (a),(b), and (c) in Fig.1. are represented by $T^a$,
266: $T^b$, and $T^c$, respectively. these terms are written as\\
267: \parbox{12.9cm}
268: {\begin{eqnarray*}
269: T^a &=& \sum_j\sum_{n=1}^4 \mbox{Im}(X_j^n)J_n^a(m_{\widetilde{\tau}_2},m_{\widetilde{\chi}_j^0},m_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^-})\,,\\
270: T^b &=& \sum_j\sum_{n=1}^4 \mbox{Im}(Y_j^n)J_n^b(m_{\widetilde{\tau}_2},m_{\widetilde{\chi}_j^0},m_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^-})\,,\\
271: T^c &=& \sum_j\sum_{n=1}^4 \mbox{Im}(Z_j^n)J_n^c(m_{\widetilde{\tau}_2},m_{\widetilde{\chi}_j^0},m_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^-})
272: \end{eqnarray*}}
273: \parbox{0.1cm}{\ba\ea}\\
274: with \\
275: \parbox{12.9cm}
276: {\begin{eqnarray*}
277: & X_j^1=KB_{21}F_{Rj2}^*I_{Lj1},& X_j^2=KB_{21}F_{Lj2}^*I_{Lj1},\\
278: & X_j^3=KB_{21}F_{Lj2}^*I_{Rj1},& X_j^4=KB_{21}F_{Rj2}^*I_{Rj1};\\
279: & Y_j^1=B_{21}F_{Rj2}^*H_{Lj1}, & Y_j^2=B_{21}F_{Rj2}^*H_{Rj1},\\
280: & Y_j^3=B_{21}F_{Lj2}^*H_{Lj1}, & Y_j^4=B_{21}F_{Lj2}^*H_{Rj1};\\
281: & Z_j^1=A_{R1}B_{21}F_{Rj2}^*G_j, & Z_j^2=A_{R1}B_{21}F_{Lj2}^*G_j,\\
282: & Z_j^3=A_{L1}B_{21}F_{Lj2}^*G_j, & Z_j^4=A_{L1}B_{21}F_{Rj2}^*G_j
283: \end{eqnarray*}}
284: \parbox{0.1cm}{\ba\ea}\\
285: and\\
286: \parbox{12.9cm}
287: {\begin{eqnarray*}
288: J_1^a &=& \frac{1}{2} m_\tau m_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^-}
289: \left[T +(m^2_\tau+m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^-}-m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_2}-m^2_{H^{\pm}})
290: \ln \left|\frac{S+T}{S-T}\right|\right],\\
291: J_2^a &=& \frac{1}{2} m_{\widetilde{\chi}_j^0} m_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^-}
292: \left[T +(m^2_\tau-m^2_{H^{\pm}})\ln \left|\frac{S+T}{S-T}\right|\right],\\
293: J_3^a &=& \frac{1}{2}\left[m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_2} T
294: +(m^2_\tau m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^-}-m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_2} m^2_{H^{\pm}})
295: \ln \left|\frac{S+T}{S-T}\right|\right],\\
296: J_4^a &=& \frac{1}{2} m_\tau m_{\widetilde{\chi}_j^0}(m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^-}-m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_2})
297: \ln \left|\frac{S+T}{S-T}\right|,\\
298: J_1^b &=& \frac{1}{2} m_{\widetilde{\chi}_j^0} m_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^-}
299: \left[\frac{2M^2_W+m^2_\tau}{M^2_W}T +(m^2_\tau-2M^2_W+\frac{m^4_\tau}{M^2_W})
300: \ln \left|\frac{S^\prime+T}{S^\prime-T}\right|\right],\\
301: J_2^b &=& -\frac{m^2_\tau m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^-}}{2M^2_W}T +\left[\frac{1}{2}m^2_\tau m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^-}
302: +(m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^-}-m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_2})(m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_2}-m^2_\tau-m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_j^0})\right.\\
303: &&+\left.\frac{m^2_\tau m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^-}}{2M^2_W}(m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_j^0}-m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^-}-m^2_\tau)
304: +\frac{m^2_\tau m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_2}}{2M^2_W}(m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^-}-m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_j^0})\right]
305: \ln \left|\frac{S^\prime+T}{S^\prime-T}\right|,\\
306: J_3^b &=& \frac{1}{2} m_\tau m_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^-} \left\{\frac{2M^2_W-m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_2}+m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_j^0}}{M^2_W}T
307: +\left[ 2(m^2_\tau+m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^-}-M^2_W) \right.\right. \\
308: &&-\left.\left. m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_2}-m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_j^0}-\frac{m^2_\tau(m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^-}-m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_j^0})}{M^2_W}\right]
309: \ln \left|\frac{S^\prime+T}{S^\prime-T}\right|\right\},\\
310: J_4^b &=&\frac{m_\tau m_{\widetilde{\chi}_j^0}(m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_2}-m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^-})}{2M^2_W}
311: \left(T +3M^2_W \ln \left|\frac{S^\prime+T}{S^\prime-T}\right|\right),
312: \end{eqnarray*}}
313: \parbox{0.1cm}{\ba\ea}\\
314: where\\
315: \parbox{12.9cm}
316: {\begin{eqnarray*}
317: T &=& \frac{(m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_2}-m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^-})}{m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_2}}
318: \sqrt{m^4_{\widetilde{\tau}_2}+m^4_\tau+m^4_{\widetilde{\chi}_j^0}
319: -2m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_2}m^2_\tau-2m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_2}m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_j^0}-2m^2_\tau m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_j^0}}\,,\\
320: S &=& \frac{1}{m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_2}}(m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_2}+m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^-})(m^2_{\widetilde{\tau}_2}-m^2_\tau+m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_j^0})
321: -2(m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_j^0}+m^2_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^-}-m^2_{H^{\pm}})\,,
322: \end{eqnarray*}}
323: \parbox{0.1cm}{\ba\ea}\\
324: $S^\prime$ is derived from $S$ by changing $m_{H^{\pm}}$ to $M_W$. In addition, $J_n^c$ are also obtained from
325: $J_n^a$ by $m_{\widetilde{\nu}_\tau}$ replacing $m_{H^{\pm}}$. The sum for the intermediate neutralinos in the
326: formula (23) should be done for those which satisfy the kinematical condition
327: $m_{\widetilde{\tau}_2}>m_\tau+m_{\widetilde{\chi}_j^0}$ .
328:
329: \section*{IV. Numerical results}
330: \hspace{20pt}In this section, we will illustrate our numerical results of the CP asymmetry in the tau slepton decay
331: based on the mSUGRA scenario for the relevant SUSY parameters. Since we have assumed a universal mass $m_0$ for the
332: scalar fermions and a mass $m_{1/2}$ for the gauginos at the GUT scale, therefore, the parameters appearing in our
333: analyses are $|A|,\,\varphi,\,\mu,\,\tan\beta,\,m_0,\,m_{1/2},\,m_{H^{\pm}}$. For simplicity, although these
334: parameters are not all independent of each other, we assume them are independent and assume only rough constraints
335: coming from theoretical and experimental considerations. The simple expressions (19) will be used for the soft
336: SUSY-breaking Bino and Wino mass, as well as left- and right-handed slepton masses when performing the RGE evolution
337: to weak scale at one-loop order if the Yukawa couplings in the RGE's are neglected. We will choose two
338: representative values for $\tan\beta$: a low value ($\tan\beta=2.5$) and a large value ($\tan\beta=40$), as well as
339: two values for phase $\varphi$: $\pi/2$ and $\pi/4$, respectively. The other parameters are typically taken, for
340: example, as the followings
341: \ba \eta=0,\,|\mu|=2 \mbox{TeV},\,|A_\tau|=1.5 \mbox{TeV},\,m_{H^{\pm}}=1 \mbox{TeV},\,m_0=m_{1/2}=400 \mbox{GeV}\,.\ea
342: As a result, the masses of the relevant SUSY particles are immediately leaded to
343: \ba m_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^\pm}\simeq m_{\widetilde{\chi}_2^0}\simeq M_2\simeq 320\mbox{GeV},\,
344: m_{\widetilde{\chi}_1^0}\simeq M_1\simeq 160\mbox{GeV},\,m_{\widetilde{\nu}_\tau}\simeq 490\mbox{GeV}\,, \ea
345: which do not depend on the value of $\varphi$ and there is only a very small variation with the value of
346: $\tan\beta$. The masses of the tau sleptons , however, are more sensitive to $\tan\beta$, and there is a very small
347: change with the value of $\varphi$. For $\varphi=\pi/4$, the numerical results is given by\\
348: \parbox{12.9cm}
349: {\begin{eqnarray*}
350: m_{\widetilde{\tau}_1}\simeq 430\mbox{GeV}\,,& m_{\widetilde{\tau}_2}\simeq 498\mbox{GeV}\,,& (\tan\beta=2.5)\\
351: m_{\widetilde{\tau}_1}\simeq 266\mbox{GeV}\,,& m_{\widetilde{\tau}_2}\simeq 604\mbox{GeV}\,.& (\tan\beta=40)
352: \end{eqnarray*}}
353: \parbox{0.1cm}{\ba\ea}\\
354: Since for tau slepton, large enough off-diagonal elements of the mass matrices are obtained only for large $\mu$ and
355: $\tan\beta$ values and trilinear couplings $A_\tau$ play only a marginal role, we will fix the latter in the entire
356: analysis. The soft SUSY-breaking masses for the Higgs bosons are however disconnected from the sfermions, moreover,
357: our results are not sensitive to the charged Higgs bosons mass $m_{H^{\pm}}$, so it will also be fixed.
358:
359: In the Fig.~\ref{Acp1} and Fig.~\ref{Acp2}, the absolute values of $A_{cp}^{\nu_\tau}$ are shown as a function of
360: the unified gaugino mass $m_{1/2}$ for the low value ($\tan\beta=2.5$) and the large value ($\tan\beta=40$),
361: respectively. The other involved parameters are fixed to the same as Eq.(27). Two curves of each figure correspond
362: respectively to two value of the phase $\varphi=\pi/4$ and $\varphi=\pi/2$. The plots show that the rate asymmetries
363: $|A_{cp}^{\nu_\tau}|$ are very sensitive to the value of $\tan\beta$. They have approximately a magnitude of order
364: of $10^{-4}$ for $\tan\beta=2.5$ and of order of $10^{-6}$ for $\tan\beta=40$, respectively. The asymmetries are
365: enhanced with increasing value of $m_{1/2}$. In the case of $\tan\beta=2.5$ and $\varphi=\pi/2$, for large values of
366: $m_{1/2}$($m_{1/2}\approx 500\mbox{GeV}$), the asymmetry $A_{cp}^{\nu_\tau}$ can significantly reach the order of
367: $10^{-3}$. In addition, the parameters $\varphi,\,|A_\tau|,\,m_0$ do dot change the whole trends of the plots,
368: nevertheless, they can slightly shift the values of $A_{cp}^{\nu_\tau}$ in the same order of magnitude. The mass of
369: the charged Higgs boson does not however affect the asymmetries obviously.
370: \begin{figure}[t]
371: \centering
372: \includegraphics{Acp1.eps}
373: \caption{\it The decay rate asymmetry as a function of the gaugino mass $m_{1/2}$ for $\tan\beta=2.5$, and the other
374: parameter values in Eq.(27). The curve {\rm I} $\Rightarrow$ $\varphi=\pi/2$, {\rm II} $\Rightarrow$
375: $\varphi=\pi/4$.\label{Acp1}}
376: \vskip 3.5cm
377: \includegraphics{Acp2.eps}
378: \caption{\it The decay rate asymmetry as a function of the gaugino mass $m_{1/2}$ for $\tan\beta=40$, and the other
379: parameter values in Eq.(27). The curve {\rm I} $\Rightarrow$ $\varphi=\pi/2$, {\rm II} $\Rightarrow$
380: $\varphi=\pi/4$.\label{Acp2}}
381: \end{figure}
382:
383: In the Fig.~\ref{Acp3} and Fig.~\ref{Acp4}, the rate asymmetries $|A_{cp}^{\nu_\tau}|$ are shown as a function of
384: the Higgs mass parameter $|\mu|$ for $\tan\beta=2.5$ and $\tan\beta=40$, respectively. The unified gaugino mass and
385: the other parameters are still given by Eq.(27). Plots show that the magnitude of order of the asymmetries are
386: similar to that of the Fig.~\ref{Acp1} and Fig.~\ref{Acp2}, respectively. For a larger value of $|\mu|$, the
387: asymmetries are smaller. In the case of $\tan\beta=2.5$ and $\varphi=\pi/2$, the values of $|A_{cp}^{\nu_\tau}|$
388: also become of order of $10^{-3}$ for small values of $|\mu|$($|\mu|\approx 1\mbox{TeV}$).
389: \begin{figure}[t]
390: \centering
391: \includegraphics{Acp3.eps}
392: \caption{\it The decay rate asymmetry as a function of the parameter $|\mu|$ for $\tan\beta=2.5$, and the other
393: parameter values in Eq.(27). The curve {\rm I} $\Rightarrow$ $\varphi=\pi/2$, {\rm II} $\Rightarrow$
394: $\varphi=\pi/4$.\label{Acp3}}
395: \vskip 3.5cm
396: \includegraphics{Acp4.eps}
397: \caption{\it The decay rate asymmetry as a function of the parameter $|\mu|$ for $\tan\beta=40$, and the other
398: parameter values in Eq.(27). The curve {\rm I} $\Rightarrow$ $\varphi=\pi/2$, {\rm II} $\Rightarrow$
399: $\varphi=\pi/4$.\label{Acp4}}
400: \end{figure}
401: In most region of parameter space in Fig.~\ref{Acp1}--Fig.~\ref{Acp4}, $\widetilde{\tau_2}$ dominantly decays into
402: $\nu_\tau\widetilde{\chi}_1^-$, $\tau\widetilde{\chi}_1^0$ and $\tau\widetilde{\chi}_2^0$\,. In Fig.~\ref{Br1} and
403: Fig.~\ref{Br2}, the branching ratios of these decays are shown as a function of the gaugino mass $m_{1/2}$ for
404: $\tan\beta=2.5$ and $\tan\beta=40$, respectively. Where, the phase $\varphi$ is fixed to $\varphi=\pi/4$ and values
405: of the other parameters are the same as Eq.(27). The graphs show that the trends of plots obviously change with the
406: value of $\tan\beta$. For a smaller value of $m_{1/2}$,
407: $\mbox{Br}(\widetilde{\tau_2}\rightarrow\nu_\tau\widetilde{\chi}_1^-)$ is larger. The interactions which induce the
408: rate asymmetry between the decays $\widetilde{\tau}^-\rightarrow\nu_\tau\widetilde{\chi}^-$ and
409: $\widetilde{\tau}^+\rightarrow\bar{\nu}_\tau\widetilde{\chi}^+$ also yield a rate asymmetry between the decays
410: $\widetilde{\tau}^-\rightarrow\tau^-\widetilde{\chi}^0$ and $\widetilde{\tau}^+\rightarrow\tau^+\widetilde{\chi}^0$,
411: satisfying the relation in Eq.(3). As seen In Fig.~\ref{Br1} and Fig.~\ref{Br2}, the width of
412: $\widetilde{\tau}_2\rightarrow\nu_\tau\widetilde{\chi}_1^-$ is generally several times smaller than that of
413: $\widetilde{\tau}_2\rightarrow\tau\widetilde{\chi}_1^0$, and accordingly the former decay rate asymmetry becomes
414: larger than the latter by the same order of magnitude. For the detection of an asymmetry
415: $A_{cp}^{\nu_\tau}\sim10^{-3}$, a necessary number of pairs of $\widetilde{\tau}^+\widetilde{\tau}^-$ should be in
416: the order of $10^6$. This luminosity are expected to be produced at a future $\mu^+\mu^-$ linear collider with a
417: c.m. energy of 500GeV, where it will be possible to examine CP violation through the decay
418: $\widetilde{\tau}\rightarrow\nu_\tau\widetilde{\chi}^\pm$.
419: \begin{figure}[t]
420: \centering
421: \includegraphics{Br1.eps}
422: \caption{\it The branching ratios as a function of the gaugino mass $m_{1/2}$ for $\tan\beta=2.5$, $\varphi=\pi/4$,
423: and the other parameter values in Eq.(27). The curve {\rm I} $\Rightarrow$
424: $(\widetilde{\tau_2}\rightarrow\nu_\tau\widetilde{\chi}_1^-)$, {\rm II} $\Rightarrow$
425: $(\widetilde{\tau_2}\rightarrow\tau\widetilde{\chi}_1^0)$, {\rm III} $\Rightarrow$
426: $(\widetilde{\tau_2}\rightarrow\tau\widetilde{\chi}_2^0)$.\label{Br1}}
427: \vskip 3.5cm
428: \includegraphics{Br2.eps}
429: \caption{\it The branching ratios as a function of the gaugino mass $m_{1/2}$ for $\tan\beta=40$, $\varphi=\pi/4$,
430: and the other parameter values in Eq.(27). The curve {\rm I} $\Rightarrow$
431: $(\widetilde{\tau_2}\rightarrow\nu_\tau\widetilde{\chi}_1^-)$, {\rm II} $\Rightarrow$
432: $(\widetilde{\tau_2}\rightarrow\tau\widetilde{\chi}_1^0)$, {\rm III} $\Rightarrow$
433: $(\widetilde{\tau_2}\rightarrow\tau\widetilde{\chi}_2^0)$.\label{Br2}}
434: \end{figure}
435:
436: \section*{V. Conclusions}
437: \hspace{20pt}In summary, we have studied in detail the signal for CP violation in the tau slepton sector in the
438: MSSM. The relevant sources of CP violation come from the soft SUSY-breaking terms associated with third generation
439: slepton, as well as the Higgs mass parameter $\mu$. We presented a general formalism of the effect of the
440: CP-violating mixing in the tau slepton sector on their decays. A detailed analysis about that was focused on the
441: rate asymmetry of the decay of the heavier tau slepton into the lighter chargino and tau neutrino final states. In
442: the mSUGRA scenarios where the scalar fermion and gaugino masses are unified at the GUT scale, we illustrated this
443: asymmetry and branching ratios in the parameter space which are constrained by experiments. It was shown that a rate
444: asymmetry between the decays $\widetilde{\tau}_2^-\rightarrow\nu_\tau\widetilde{\chi}_1^-$ and
445: $\widetilde{\tau}_2^+\rightarrow\bar{\nu}_\tau\widetilde{\chi}_1^+$ can be induced at a magnitude of order of
446: $10^{-3}$ in a region of the parameter space where CP violation becomes maximal at lagrangian level. Even though
447: this CP-violating tau slepton mixing only proceeds through loop diagrams, it can give rise to order of $10^{-3}$
448: CP-violating asymmetry even in the absence of other CP phases. As a result, the intrinsic property of CP violation
449: in the MSSM can be expected to be detectable in the near-future collider experiments.
450:
451: \section*{Acknowledgments}
452: \hspace{20pt}W.M.Yang thanks M.Ablikim for helpful discussions. This work is in part supported by National Natural
453: Science Foundation of China.
454:
455: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
456: \bibitem{Nills}
457: H. P. Nilles, Phys. Rep. 110(1984)1; H. Haber and G. Kane, \textit{ibid}. 117(1985)75.
458: \bibitem{Drees}
459: M. Drees, Hep-ph/9611409; M. Peskin, Hep-ph/9705479; D. I. Kazakov, Hep-ph/0012288.
460: \bibitem{Witten}
461: E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B188(1981)513; P. Langacker and M. Luo, Phys. Rev. D44(1991)817.
462: \bibitem{Dimopoulos}
463: S. Dimopoulos and D. Sutter, Nucl. Phys. B452(1996)496.
464: \bibitem{Masier}
465: A. Masier and O. Vives, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.)101(2001)253, and references therein.
466: \bibitem{Nath}
467: T. Ibrahim and P. Nath, Phys. Lett. B418(1998)98, Phys. Rev. D61(2000)095008; W. Hollik, J.I. Illana, S. Rigolin,
468: C. Schappacher, and D. Stockinger, Nucl. Phys. B439(1999)3.
469: \bibitem{Pilaftsis}
470: A. Pilaftsis and C. E. M. Wagner, Nucl. Phys. B553(1999)3; S. Y. Choi, M. Drees, and J. S. lee, Phys. Lett.
471: B481(2000)57.
472: \bibitem{Fred}
473: F. Browning, D. Chang, W. Y. Keung, Phys. Rev. D64(2001)015010; S. Y. Choi, M. Drees, and J. S. lee, Phys. Rev.
474: D61(1999)015003
475: \bibitem{Chamseddine}
476: A. H. Chamseddine, R. Arnowitt, P. Nath, Phys. Rev. Lett.49(1982)970; L. Hall, J. Lykken, S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev.
477: D27(1983)2359.
478: \bibitem{Cline}
479: J. M. Cline, M.Joyce, K. Kainulainen, JHEP.07(2000)018.
480: \bibitem{Choi}
481: S. Y. Choi, M. Drees, B. Gaissmaier and J.S. lee, Phys. Rev. D64(2001)095009.
482: \bibitem{Gunion}
483: J. F. Gunion, H. E. Haber, Nucl. Phys. B272(1986)1.
484: \bibitem{Djouadi}
485: A. Djouadi, Y. Mambrini, M. M\"{u}hlleitner, Eur. Phys. J. C20(2001)563.
486: \bibitem{Boer}
487: W. de Boer, R. Ehret and D. Kazakov, Z. Phys. C67(1995)647, \textit{ibid}. 71(1996)415.
488:
489: \end{thebibliography}
490: \end{document}
491: