1: \documentstyle[12pt,epsfig]{article}
2:
3: \voffset0cm
4: \hoffset0cm
5: \oddsidemargin0cm
6: \evensidemargin0cm
7: \topmargin0cm
8: \textwidth16.cm
9: \textheight22.cm
10: \setlength{\arraycolsep}{0.5mm}
11:
12: \newcommand{\re}{\mathop{\mathrm{Re}}\nolimits}
13: \newcommand{\im}{\mathop{\mathrm{Im}}\nolimits}
14: \newcommand{\arsinh}{\mathop{\mathrm{arsinh}}\nolimits}
15: \newcommand{\arcosh}{\mathop{\mathrm{arcosh}}\nolimits}
16:
17: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
18: %The following macro is from world_sci.sty, originally written for DPF91
19:
20: \catcode`@=11
21: % Collapse citation numbers to ranges. Non-numeric and undefined labels
22: % are handled. No sorting is done. E.g., 1,3,2,3,4,5,foo,1,2,3,?,4,5
23: % gives 1,3,2-5,foo,1-3,?,4,5
24: \newcount\@tempcntc
25: \def\@citex[#1]#2{\if@filesw\immediate\write\@auxout{\string\citation{#2}}\fi
26: \@tempcnta\z@\@tempcntb\m@ne\def\@citea{}\@cite{\@for\@citeb:=#2\do
27: {\@ifundefined
28: {b@\@citeb}{\@citeo\@tempcntb\m@ne\@citea\def\@citea{,}{\bf
29: ?}\@warning
30: {Citation `\@citeb' on page \thepage \space undefined}}%
31: {\setbox\z@\hbox{\global\@tempcntc0\csname b@\@citeb\endcsname\relax}%
32: \ifnum\@tempcntc=\z@ \@citeo\@tempcntb\m@ne
33: \@citea\def\@citea{,}\hbox{\csname b@\@citeb\endcsname}%
34: \else
35: \advance\@tempcntb\@ne
36: \ifnum\@tempcntb=\@tempcntc
37: \else\advance\@tempcntb\m@ne\@citeo
38: \@tempcnta\@tempcntc\@tempcntb\@tempcntc\fi\fi}}\@citeo}{#1}}
39: \def\@citeo{\ifnum\@tempcnta>\@tempcntb\else\@citea\def\@citea{,}%
40: \ifnum\@tempcnta=\@tempcntb\the\@tempcnta\else
41: {\advance\@tempcnta\@ne\ifnum\@tempcnta=\@tempcntb \else
42: \def\@citea{--}\fi
43: \advance\@tempcnta\m@ne\the\@tempcnta\@citea\the\@tempcntb}\fi\fi}
44: \catcode`@=12
45: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
46:
47: \begin{document}
48: \title{\vskip-3cm{\baselineskip14pt
49: \centerline{\normalsize CERN-TH/2002-113\hfill ISSN 0418-9833}
50: \centerline{\normalsize DESY 02-073\hfill}
51: \centerline{\normalsize hep-ph/0205304\hfill}
52: \centerline{\normalsize May 2002\hfill}}
53: \vskip1.5cm
54: Elimination of Threshold Singularities in the Relation Between On-Shell and
55: Pole Widths}
56: \author{{\sc Bernd A. Kniehl,$^1$\thanks{Permanent address: II. Institut f\"ur
57: Theoretische Physik, Universit\"at Hamburg, Luruper Chaussee 149, 22761
58: Hamburg, Germany.} Caesar P. Palisoc,$^2$\thanks{Permanent address: National
59: Institute of Physics, University of the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon City
60: 1101, Philippines.} Alberto Sirlin$^3$}\\
61: {\normalsize $^1$ CERN, Theoretical Physics Division, 1211 Geneva 23,
62: Switzerland}\\
63: {\normalsize $^2$ II. Institut f\"ur Theoretische Physik, Universit\"at
64: Hamburg,}\\
65: {\normalsize Luruper Chaussee 149, 22761 Hamburg, Germany}\\
66: {\normalsize $^3$ Department of Physics, New York University,}\\
67: {\normalsize 4 Washington Place, New York, New York 10003, USA}}
68:
69: \date{}
70:
71: \maketitle
72:
73: \thispagestyle{empty}
74:
75: \begin{abstract}
76: In a previous communication by two of us, Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf81}, 1373
77: (1998), the gauge-dependent deviations of the on-shell mass and total decay
78: width from their gauge-independent pole counterparts were investigated at
79: leading order for the Higgs boson of the Standard Model.
80: In the case of the widths, the deviation was found to diverge at unphysical
81: thresholds, $m_H=2\sqrt{\xi_V}m_V$ ($V=W,Z$), in the $R_\xi$ gauge.
82: In this Brief Report, we demonstrate that these unphysical threshold
83: singularities are properly eliminated if a recently proposed definition of
84: wave-function renormalization for unstable particles is invoked.
85:
86: \medskip
87:
88: \noindent
89: PACS numbers: 11.15.Bt, 12.15.Lk, 14.80.Bn
90: \end{abstract}
91:
92: \newpage
93:
94: The unrenormalized propagator of a scalar boson, with four-momentum $q$, is of
95: the form
96: \begin{equation}
97: {\cal D}^{(u)}(s)=\frac{i}{s-M_0^2-A(s)},
98: \label{eq:unr}
99: \end{equation}
100: where $s=q^2$, $M_0$ is the bare mass, and $A(s)$ is the unrenormalized
101: self-energy.
102: In the case of the transverse propagator of a vector boson, there is an
103: additional factor $-(g^{\mu\nu}-q^\mu q^\nu/s)$ on the right-hand side of
104: Eq.~(\ref{eq:unr}).
105:
106: In the conventional on-shell formulation, which most analyses in electroweak
107: perturbation theory are based on, the mass $M$ and total decay width $\Gamma$
108: of an unstable boson are defined as
109: \begin{eqnarray}
110: M^2&=&M_0^2+\re A(M^2),
111: \label{eq:mos}\\
112: M\Gamma&=&-\frac{\im A(M^2)}{1-\re A^\prime(M^2)},
113: \label{eq:gos}
114: \end{eqnarray}
115: respectively.
116: However, in gauge theories, Eqs.~(\ref{eq:mos}) and (\ref{eq:gos}) are known
117: to become gauge dependent at the next-to-next-to-leading order, {\it i.e.}, in
118: ${\cal O}(g^4)$ and ${\cal O}(g^6)$, respectively, where $g$ is a generic
119: gauge coupling
120: \cite{sir,pa1,kn1,kn2}.
121: This problem can be solved by defining the mass and width in terms of the
122: complex-valued position of the propagator's pole,
123: \begin{equation}
124: \overline{s}=M_0^2+A(\overline{s}),
125: \label{eq:sba}
126: \end{equation}
127: which is gauge independent to all orders in perturbation theory
128: \cite{sir,wil,gam,gra}.
129: Fixing the pole mass $m_2$ and width $\Gamma_2$ through the parameterization
130: \cite{sir}
131: \begin{equation}
132: \overline{s}=m_2^2-im_2\Gamma_2,
133: \end{equation}
134: we have
135: \begin{eqnarray}
136: m_2^2&=&M_0^2+\re A(\overline{s}),
137: \label{eq:mpo}\\
138: m_2\Gamma_2&=&-\im A(\overline{s}).
139: \label{eq:gpo}
140: \end{eqnarray}
141: Alternative, gauge-independent definitions of mass and width based on
142: $\overline{s}$, with particular merits, were discussed in the literature
143: \cite{sir,wil}.
144: Recently, also gauge-independent definitions of partial decay widths that
145: properly add up to $\Gamma_2$ were introduced \cite{gra}.
146:
147: Equation~(\ref{eq:mpo}) implies that the mass counterterm in the pole scheme
148: is given by $\delta m_2^2=m_2^2-M_0^2=\re A(\overline{s})$.
149: In order to complete the renormalization of Eq.~(\ref{eq:unr}), we also need
150: to specify an appropriate wave-function renormalization constant,
151: $Z=1-\delta Z$, so that the renormalized propagator,
152: \begin{eqnarray}
153: {\cal D}^{(r)}(s)&=&\frac{{\cal D}^{(u)}(s)}{Z}
154: \nonumber\\
155: &=&\frac{i}{s-m_2^2-{\cal S}^{(r)}(s)},
156: \label{eq:ren}
157: \end{eqnarray}
158: is ultraviolet (UV) finite.
159: An appropriate definition is \cite{pal}
160: \begin{equation}
161: Z=\frac{1}
162: {1+\left[\im A\left(\overline{s}\right)-\im A\left(m_2^2\right)\right]/
163: (m_2\Gamma_2)},
164: \label{eq:z}
165: \end{equation}
166: which allows us to rewrite Eq.~(\ref{eq:gpo}) as
167: \begin{equation}
168: m_2\Gamma_2=-Z\im A\left(m_2^2\right).
169: \label{eq:mg}
170: \end{equation}
171: In fact, $\delta m_2^2$ and $\delta Z$ thus defined are real and guarantee
172: that the renormalized self-energy,
173: \begin{equation}
174: {\cal S}^{(r)}(s)
175: =Z\left[A(s)-\delta m_2^2\right]+\delta Z\left(s-m_2^2\right),
176: \end{equation}
177: is UV finite to all orders \cite{pal,kn3,nek}.
178: Equation~(\ref{eq:z}) possesses a number of desirable properties.
179: On the one hand, it avoids threshold singularities that, in the conventional
180: on-shell scheme, appear in the radiatively corrected production and decay
181: rates of the Higgs boson as its mass approaches from below the pair-production
182: threshold of a vector boson \cite{pal}.
183: On the other hand, it precludes the occurrence of power-like infrared
184: divergences in the renormalized propagators of unstable particles that couple
185: to massless quanta, like the $W$ bosons and the quarks of the second and third
186: generations \cite{kn3,pa2}.
187: Finally, it allows one to systematically organize the order-by-order removal
188: of UV divergences in ${\cal S}^{(r)}(s)$ \cite{nek}.
189: In this Brief Report, we elaborate yet another virtue of Eq.~(\ref{eq:z}).
190:
191: Expanding Eqs.~(\ref{eq:mos}), (\ref{eq:gos}), (\ref{eq:mpo}), and
192: (\ref{eq:gpo}) about $s=m_2^2$ and combining the results, one obtains
193: \cite{kn1}
194: \begin{eqnarray}
195: \frac{M-m_2}{m_2}&=&-\frac{\Gamma_2}{2m_2}\im A^\prime\left(m_2^2\right)
196: +{\cal O}(g^6),
197: \label{eq:mdi}\\
198: \frac{\Gamma-\Gamma_2}{\Gamma_2}&=&
199: \im A^\prime\left(m_2^2\right)\left[\frac{\Gamma_2}{2m_2}
200: +\im A^\prime\left(m_2^2\right)\right]
201: -\frac{m_2\Gamma_2}{2}\im A^{\prime\prime}\left(m_2^2\right)+{\cal O}(g^6).
202: \label{eq:gdi}
203: \end{eqnarray}
204: In Ref.~\cite{kn1}, the gauge dependence of Eqs.~(\ref{eq:mdi}) and
205: (\ref{eq:gdi}) was analyzed for the Higgs boson in the Standard Model adopting
206: the $R_\xi$ gauge \cite{fuj}.
207: In the case of Eq.~(\ref{eq:gdi}), it was found that, for an arbitrary value
208: of $m_2$, unphysical threshold singularities, proportional to
209: $\left(m_2-2\sqrt{\xi_V}m_V\right)^{-1/2}$, occur as $\xi_V$ approaches from
210: below the point $m_2^2/\left(4m_V^2\right)$ ($V=W,Z$).
211: Here and in the following, $m_2$ and $\Gamma_2$ refer to the Higgs boson,
212: while $m_V$ denotes the pole mass of the intermediate boson $V$.
213: The purpose of this Brief Report is to demonstrate that the unphysical
214: threshold singularities encountered in Ref.~\cite{kn1} are eliminated if
215: Eq.~(\ref{eq:z}) is employed in a judicious manner.
216: For the time being, we disregard physical threshold singularities, which occur
217: independently of the choice of gauge if the Higgs-boson mass happens to have
218: the specific values $m_2=2m_V$ \cite{pal,bha} or $m_2=2m_f$, where $m_f$ is a
219: generic fermion mass, and we assume that the value of $m_2$ is sufficiently
220: far away from the points $2m_V$ and $2m_f$.
221: We shall return to the issue of physical threshold singularities in
222: Eqs.~(\ref{eq:mdi}) and (\ref{eq:gdi}) at the end of this Brief Report.
223:
224: A one-loop expression for the unrenormalized Higgs-boson self-energy $A(s)$ in
225: the $R_\xi$ gauge may be found in Eq.~(8) of Ref.~\cite{pal}.
226: Detailed inspection reveals that the unphysical threshold singularity in
227: Eq.~(\ref{eq:gdi}) originates in $\im A^{\prime\prime}\left(m_2^2\right)$,
228: which contains the term $G_\mu m_2^2/\left(2\pi^2\sqrt2\right)
229: B_0^\prime\left(m_2^2,\xi_Vm_V^2,\xi_Vm_V^2\right)$, where $G_\mu$ is Fermi's
230: constant, $B_0$ is the scalar one-loop two-point integral in $D=4-2\epsilon$
231: space-time dimensions as given, {\it e.g.}, in Eq.~(9) of Ref.~\cite{pal}, and
232: the prime indicates differentiation with respect to the first argument.
233: In fact,
234: \begin{equation}
235: \im B_0^\prime\left(m_2^2,\xi_Vm_V^2,\xi_Vm_V^2\right)
236: =\frac{\pi a}{2m_2^2\sqrt{1-a}}\theta(1-a)+{\cal O}(\epsilon),
237: \label{eq:cul}
238: \end{equation}
239: where $a=4\xi_Vm_V^2/m_2^2$, exhibits the type of singularity mentioned above.
240:
241: We now illustrate how this singularity is eliminated by consistently working
242: in the pole scheme \cite{pal,kn3}.
243: We start by observing that Eq.~(\ref{eq:gdi}) is based on the expansion
244: \cite{kn1}
245: \begin{eqnarray}
246: m_2\Gamma_2&=&-\im A\left(m_2^2\right)\left\{1+\re A^\prime\left(m_2^2\right)
247: +\left[\re A^\prime\left(m_2^2\right)\right]^2
248: -\frac{1}{2}\im A\left(m_2^2\right)\im A^{\prime\prime}\left(m_2^2\right)
249: \right.
250: \nonumber\\
251: &&{}+\left.{\cal O}(g^6)\right\}.
252: \label{eq:exp}
253: \end{eqnarray}
254: Here, it is tacitly assumed that $A(s)$ is analytic near $s=m_2^2$, so that
255: the Taylor expansion can be performed.
256: In most cases, this assumption is valid.
257: However, $A(s)$ possesses a branch point if $s$ is at a threshold.
258: As a consequence, at a given two-particle threshold $m_2=m_A+m_B$, the
259: derivatives $A^{(n)}\left(m_2^2\right)$ ($n=1,2,\ldots$) develop threshold
260: singularities proportional to $|m_2-m_A-m_B|^{-1/2}$ or worse.
261: The latter appear in $\re A^{(n)}\left(m_2^2\right)$
262: [$\im A^{(n)}\left(m_2^2\right)$] as $m_2$ approaches the threshold from below
263: (above).
264: In the case of the Higgs boson, the problems start at $n=1$ for $m_2=2m_V$
265: \cite{pal,bha} and at $n=2$ for the residual two-particle thresholds,
266: $m_2=2\xi_Vm_V$ \cite{kn1} and $m_2=2m_f$.
267: The solutions to all these problems emerge by undoing the Taylor expansions.
268: In Ref.~\cite{pal}, this was illustrated for $\re A^\prime\left(m_2^2\right)$
269: at $m_2=2m_V$.
270: Here, we consider $\im A^{\prime\prime}\left(m_2^2\right)$ at $m_2=2\xi_Vm_V$,
271: which is relevant for the investigation of the gauge dependence of
272: Eq.~(\ref{eq:gdi}) \cite{kn1}.
273:
274: Inserting Eq.~(\ref{eq:z}) in Eq.~(\ref{eq:mg}) and expanding in powers of
275: $\left[\im A(\overline{s})-\im A\left(m_2^2\right)\right]/(m_2\Gamma_2)$, we
276: obtain
277: \begin{equation}
278: m_2\Gamma_2=-\im A\left(m_2^2\right)\left\{
279: 1-\frac{\im A(\overline{s})-\im A\left(m_2^2\right)}{m_2\Gamma_2}
280: +\left[\frac{\im A(\overline{s})-\im A\left(m_2^2\right)}{m_2\Gamma_2}
281: \right]^2+{\cal O}(g^6)\right\}.
282: \label{eq:exz}
283: \end{equation}
284: It is important to note that
285: $\left[\im A(\overline{s})-\im A\left(m_2^2\right)\right]/(m_2\Gamma_2)$
286: involves a finite difference, rather than a derivative.
287: Due to this fact, and as we shall explicitly show later, it is free from
288: threshold singularities.
289: Comparison of Eqs.~(\ref{eq:exp}) and (\ref{eq:exz}) shows then that the
290: threshold singularities emerging from $\im A^{\prime\prime}\left(m_2^2\right)$
291: are avoided if this amplitude is replaced according to the substitution rule
292: \begin{equation}
293: \im A^{\prime\prime}\left(m_2^2\right)=-\frac{2}{m_2\Gamma_2}
294: \left[\frac{\im A(\overline{s})-\im A\left(m_2^2\right)}{m_2\Gamma_2}
295: +\re A^\prime\left(m_2^2\right)\right]+{\cal O}(g^4).
296: \label{eq:app}
297: \end{equation}
298: Away from thresholds, the expansion of $A(\overline{s})$ about $m_2^2$ is
299: valid, and both sides of Eq.~(\ref{eq:app}) are well defined.
300: However, at the unphysical threshold $m_2=2\xi_Vm_V$, such an expansion breaks
301: down, $\im A^{\prime\prime}\left(m_2^2\right)$ diverges, and only the
302: right-hand side of Eq.~(\ref{eq:app}) remains well defined.
303: The substitution in Eq.~(\ref{eq:app}) is equivalent to replacing
304: Eq.~(\ref{eq:cul}) by
305: \begin{equation}
306: \im B_0^\prime\left(m_2^2,\xi_Vm_V^2,\xi_Vm_V^2\right)
307: =\frac{\re B_0\left(\overline{s},\xi_Vm_V^2,\xi_Vm_V^2\right)
308: -\re B_0\left(m_2^2,\xi_Vm_V^2,\xi_Vm_V^2\right)}{m_2\Gamma_2}+{\cal O}(g^2).
309: \label{eq:sub}
310: \end{equation}
311: Using the expression for $B_0\left(s,m_V^2,m_V^2\right)$ given in Eq.~(13) of
312: Ref.~\cite{pal} and introducing the auxiliary function
313: \begin{equation}
314: f(z)=-2\sqrt{1-z}\arsinh\sqrt{-\frac{1}{z}},
315: \end{equation}
316: we can rewrite Eq.~(\ref{eq:sub}) as
317: \begin{equation}
318: \im B_0^\prime\left(m_2^2,\xi_Vm_V^2,\xi_Vm_V^2\right)
319: =\frac{\re f\left(4\xi_Vm_V^2/\overline{s}\right)-\re f(a-i\varepsilon)}
320: {m_2\Gamma_2}
321: +{\cal O}(\epsilon)+{\cal O}(g^2),
322: \label{eq:su1}
323: \end{equation}
324: where $a$ is defined below Eq.~(\ref{eq:cul}).
325: We have
326: \begin{eqnarray}
327: \re f\left(\frac{4\xi_Vm_V^2}{\overline{s}}\right)
328: &=&-\frac{\sqrt2}{b}\left\{\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{b(c+b)-a}\right.
329: \nonumber\\
330: &&{}\times\ln\left[\frac{1}{a}\left(b+c+\sqrt{(b-1)(c+a-1)}
331: +\sqrt{(b+1)(c-a+1)}\right)\right]
332: \nonumber\\
333: &&{}+\left.\sqrt{b(c-b)+a}
334: \arctan\frac{\sqrt{b+1}+\sqrt{c-a+1}}{\sqrt{b-1}+\sqrt{c+a-1}}\right\},
335: \\
336: \re f(a-i\varepsilon)&=&-2\sqrt{1-a}\arcosh\sqrt\frac{1}{a}\theta(1-a)
337: -2\sqrt{a-1}\arcsin\sqrt\frac{1}{a}\theta(a-1),
338: \end{eqnarray}
339: where $b=\sqrt{1+\gamma^2}$ and $c=\sqrt{(a-1)^2+\gamma^2}$, with
340: $\gamma=\Gamma_2/m_2$.
341: We note that the discontinuity
342: $f(a+i\varepsilon)-f(a-i\varepsilon)=-2\pi i\sqrt{1-a}\theta(1-a)$ is purely
343: imaginary, so that $\re f(a+i\varepsilon)=\re f(a-i\varepsilon)$.
344: At $m_2=2\sqrt{\xi_V}m_V$, Eq.~(\ref{eq:su1}) becomes
345: \begin{equation}
346: \im B_0^\prime\left(m_2^2,\xi_Vm_V^2,\xi_Vm_V^2\right)
347: =-\frac{1}{m_2^2}\left[\frac{\pi}{\sqrt{2\gamma}}\left(1-\frac{\gamma}{2}
348: -\frac{3}{8}\gamma^2\right)+\frac{4}{3}\gamma
349: +{\cal O}\left(\gamma^{5/2}\right)\right]+{\cal O}(\epsilon)+O(g^2),
350: \end{equation}
351: {\it i.e.}, the unphysical threshold singularity is automatically regularized
352: in the pole scheme by the width $\Gamma_2$ of the primary particle.
353:
354: In our numerical analysis, we use the pole-mass values $m_W=80.391$~GeV and
355: $m_Z=91.154$~GeV, which are extracted from the measured values \cite{pdg} as
356: described in Ref.~\cite{pal}, and adopt the residual input parameters from
357: Ref.~\cite{pdg}.
358: For definiteness, we choose $m_2=200$~GeV and evaluate $\Gamma_2$ in the Born
359: approximation.
360: For simplicity, we set $\xi=\xi_W=\xi_Z$.
361: In Fig.~\ref{fig:one}, we show the $\xi$ dependence of
362: $(\Gamma-\Gamma_2)/\Gamma_2$ given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:gdi}) in the vicinity of
363: the point $m_2^2/\left(4m_Z^2\right)$.
364: The dotted and solid lines are evaluated using Eqs.~(\ref{eq:cul}) and
365: (\ref{eq:su1}), respectively.
366: The dotted line corresponds to the solid line in Fig.~1(a) of Ref.~\cite{kn1}
367: and exhibits the familiar abyss at $\xi=m_2^2/\left(4m_Z^2\right)$.
368: Obviously, this unphysical threshold singularity is absent in the solid line,
369: which smoothly interpolates across the threshold region and merges with the
370: dotted line sufficiently far away from the threshold.
371: A similar discussion applies to the second abyss, at
372: $\xi=m_2^2/\left(4m_W^2\right)$, which is not visible in Fig.~\ref{fig:one}.
373:
374: Finally, we return to the physical threshold singularities.
375: From the discussion below Eq.~(\ref{eq:exp}) it follows that threshold
376: singularities analogous to the one displayed in Eq.~(\ref{eq:cul}) also affect
377: Eq.~(\ref{eq:mdi}) for $m_2=2m_V$ and Eq.~(\ref{eq:gdi}) for $m_2=2m_V$ and
378: $m_2=2m_f$.
379: They may be eliminated in a very similar way, by applying the substitution
380: rule of Eq.~(\ref{eq:su1}), with $\xi_Vm_V^2$ replaced by $m_V^2$ or $m_f^2$.
381:
382: \smallskip
383:
384: B.A.K. and C.P.P. are grateful to the CERN Theoretical Physics Division and
385: the Second Institute for Theoretical Physics of Hamburg University,
386: respectively, for their hospitality during visits when this Brief Report was
387: finalized.
388: The work of B.A.K. was supported in part by the Deutsche
389: Forschungsgemeinschaft through Grant No.\ KN~365/1-1 and by the
390: Bundesministerium f\"ur Bildung und Forschung through Grant No.\
391: \break 05~HT1GUA/4.
392: The work of C.P.P. was supported by the Office of the Vice President for
393: Academic Affairs of the University of the Philippines.
394: The work of A.S. was supported in part by the Alexander von Humboldt
395: Foundation through Research Award No.\ IV~USA~1051120~USS and by the
396: National Science Foundation through Grant No.\ PHY-0070787.
397:
398: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
399:
400: \bibitem{sir} A. Sirlin,
401: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf67}, 2127 (1991);
402: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf267}, 240 (1991).
403:
404: \bibitem{pa1} M. Passera and A. Sirlin,
405: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf77}, 4146 (1996).
406:
407: \bibitem{kn1} B. A. Kniehl and A. Sirlin,
408: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf81}, 1373 (1998).
409:
410: \bibitem{kn2} B. A. Kniehl and A. Sirlin,
411: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf440}, 136 (1998).
412:
413: \bibitem{wil} M. Consoli and A. Sirlin,
414: in {\it Physics at LEP}, CERN Yellow Report No.~86-02, 1986, Vol.~1, p.~63;
415: S. Willenbrock and G. Valencia,
416: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf259}, 373 (1991);
417: R. G. Stuart,
418: {\it ibid.}\ {\bf262}, 113 (1991); {\bf272}, 353 (1991);
419: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf70}, 3193 (1993);
420: Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B498}, 28 (1997);
421: H. Veltman,
422: Z. Phys.\ C {\bf62}, 35 (1994);
423: A. R. Bohm and N. L. Harshman,
424: Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B581}, 581 (2000).
425:
426: \bibitem{gam} P. Gambino and P. A. Grassi,
427: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf62}, 076002 (2000).
428:
429: \bibitem{gra} P. A. Grassi, B. A. Kniehl, and A. Sirlin,
430: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf86}, 389 (2001);
431: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf65}, 085001 (2002).
432:
433: \bibitem{pal} B. A. Kniehl, C. P. Palisoc, and A. Sirlin,
434: Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B591}, 269 (2000).
435:
436: \bibitem{kn3} B. A. Kniehl and A. Sirlin,
437: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf530}, 129 (2002).
438:
439: \bibitem{nek} M. L. Nekrasov,
440: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf531}, 225 (2002).
441:
442: \bibitem{pa2} M. Passera and A. Sirlin,
443: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf58}, 113010 (1998).
444:
445: \bibitem{fuj} K. Fujikawa, B. W. Lee, and A. I. Sanda,
446: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf6}, 2923 (1972).
447:
448: \bibitem{bha} B. A. Kniehl,
449: Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B357}, 439 (1991);
450: T. Bhattacharya and S. Willenbrock,
451: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf47}, 4022 (1993).
452:
453: \bibitem{pdg} Particle Data Group, D. E. Groom {\it et al.},
454: Eur.\ Phys.\ J. C {\bf15}, 1 (2000).
455:
456: \end{thebibliography}
457:
458: \newpage
459: \begin{figure}[ht]
460: \begin{center}
461: \centerline{\epsfig{figure=plrdgh.eps,width=16cm}}
462: \caption{Relative deviation of the on-shell width $\Gamma$ from the pole
463: width $\Gamma_2$ for a Higgs boson with pole mass $m_2=200$~GeV as a function
464: of the gauge parameter $\xi$ in the vicinity of the point $m_2^2/(4m_Z^2)$.
465: The unphysical threshold singularity originating in Eq.~(\ref{eq:cul}) (dotted
466: line) is eliminated by applying the substitution rule of Eq.~(\ref{eq:su1})
467: (solid line), which is a consequence of invoking Eq.~(\ref{eq:z}).}
468: \label{fig:one}
469: \end{center}
470: \end{figure}
471:
472: \end{document}
473: