1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}
2: %\documentstyle[12pt,epsfig,axodraw]{article}
3: \usepackage{axodraw,epsfig}
4: %--------------------START OF DATA FILE----------------------------------
5: \textwidth 6.5in
6: \textheight 8.7in
7: \hoffset -1.5 cm
8:
9: % \pagestyle{empty}
10: \topmargin -0.27truein
11: \oddsidemargin 0.3truein
12: \evensidemargin 0.3truein
13: \raggedbottom
14: \baselineskip=13pt
15: \begin{document}
16: %\renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\alph{footnote}}
17:
18:
19: \newcommand{\be}[1]{\begin{equation}\label{#1}}
20: \newcommand{\beq}{\begin{equation}}
21: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}}
22: \newcommand{\beqn}[1]{\begin{eqnarray}\label{#1}}
23: \newcommand{\eeqn}{\end{eqnarray}}
24: \newcommand{\bd}{\begin{displaymath}}
25: \newcommand{\ed}{\end{displaymath}}
26: \newcommand{\mat}[4]{\left(\begin{array}{cc}{#1}&{#2}\\{#3}&{#4}
27: \end{array}\right)}
28: \newcommand{\matr}[9]{\left(\begin{array}{ccc}{#1}&{#2}&{#3}\\
29: {#4}&{#5}&{#6}\\{#7}&{#8}&{#9}\end{array}\right)}
30: \newcommand{\matrr}[6]{\left(\begin{array}{cc}{#1}&{#2}\\
31: {#3}&{#4}\\{#5}&{#6}\end{array}\right)}
32: %
33: \def\lsim{\raise0.3ex\hbox{$\;<$\kern-0.75em\raise-1.1ex
34: \hbox{$\sim\;$}}}
35: \def\gsim{\raise0.3ex\hbox{$\;>$\kern-0.75em\raise-1.1ex
36: \hbox{$\sim\;$}}}
37: %
38: \def\abs#1{\left| #1\right|}
39: %
40: \def\simlt{\mathrel{\lower2.5pt\vbox{\lineskip=0pt\baselineskip=0pt
41: \hbox{$<$}\hbox{$\sim$}}}}
42: \def\simgt{\mathrel{\lower2.5pt\vbox{\lineskip=0pt\baselineskip=0pt
43: \hbox{$>$}\hbox{$\sim$}}}}
44: \def\unity{{\hbox{1\kern-.8mm l}}}
45: %
46: \def\epr{E^\prime}
47: \newcommand{\al}{\alpha}
48: %\def\ddt{\frac{\mbox{d}}{\mbox{dt}}}
49: \def\16p{16\pi^2}
50: \def\ga{\gamma}
51: \def\Ga{\Gamma}
52: \def\la{\lambda}
53: \def\La{\Lambda}
54: \def\al{\alpha}
55: \newcommand{\ov}{\overline}
56: \renewcommand{\to}{\rightarrow}
57: \renewcommand{\vec}[1]{\mbox{\boldmath$#1$}}
58: \def\mcirc{{\stackrel{o}{m}}}
59: \newcommand{\tanb}{\tan\beta}
60: %
61:
62: %
63: \def\dfrac#1#2{{\displaystyle\frac{#1}{#2}}}
64:
65: %
66:
67: \begin{titlepage}
68:
69: \begin{flushright}
70: {DFPD-03/TH/11} \\
71:
72: %\today
73: \end{flushright}
74:
75: \vspace{2.0cm}
76:
77:
78: \begin{center}
79:
80: {\Large \bf
81: Lepton Flavour Violating Decays \\
82: \vspace{0.4cm}
83: of Supersymmetric Higgs Bosons }
84:
85: \vspace{0.7cm}
86:
87: {\large Andrea Brignole\footnote{ E-mail address: andrea.brignole@pd.infn.it}
88: and Anna Rossi\footnote{ E-mail address: anna.rossi@pd.infn.it}}
89:
90: \vspace{10mm}
91:
92:
93: {\it Dipartimento di Fisica `G.~Galilei',
94: Universit\`a di Padova and \\
95: \vspace{0.1cm}
96: INFN, Sezione di Padova,
97: Via Marzolo 8, I-35131 Padua, Italy}
98:
99: \end{center}
100:
101: \vspace{8mm}
102:
103: \begin{abstract}
104: We compute the lepton flavour violating couplings of
105: Higgs bosons in the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model,
106: and show that they can induce the decays $(h^0,H^0,A^0) \to \mu \tau$
107: at non-negligible rates, for large $\tan\beta$ and sizeable
108: smuon-stau mixing.
109: We also discuss the prospects for detecting such decays
110: at LHC and other colliders, as well as the correlation
111: with other flavour violating processes, such as
112: $\tau \to \mu \gamma$ and $\tau \to 3 \mu$.
113: \end{abstract}
114:
115: \end{titlepage}
116:
117: \setcounter{footnote}{0}
118:
119: \section{Introduction}
120:
121: The recent important indications of neutrino oscillations \cite{nus}
122: reveal that flavour violation also occurs in the lepton sector and
123: further motivate the search for alternative signals of
124: lepton flavour violation (LFV).
125: The Minimal Supersymmetric extension of the Standard Model (MSSM) is a
126: natural framework where several such signals could be significant,
127: provided the mass matrices of the leptons and of the sleptons
128: are not aligned.
129: Well known examples are the LFV radiative decays of charged leptons,
130: $\mu\to e \ga, \tau \to \mu \ga, \tau \to e \ga $.
131: %
132: In this Letter we would like to explore another class of
133: such processes, namely the LFV decays
134: of the neutral Higgs bosons ($h^0, H^0, A^0$).
135: An important feature of these decays is that the corresponding
136: amplitudes do not vanish in the limit of very heavy superpartners,
137: since the leading contributions
138: are induced by dimension-four effective operators,
139: at variance with the case of radiative decays.
140:
141: Related investigations on flavour violating Higgs
142: couplings in the MSSM framework have mainly focused
143: on processes with {\it virtual} Higgs exchange
144: (see e.g. \cite{QFV,BK,sher1,DER}) and regard either quark or lepton
145: flavour violation.
146: The decays of {\it physical} Higgs bosons
147: into fermion pairs have been explored in the case of
148: quark flavour violation in the MSSM \cite{CHT,demir}, whereas in the case
149: of lepton flavour violation existing studies \cite{sher,gen} have mainly
150: used phenomenological parametrizations of the LFV couplings\footnote{
151: An attempt to study LFV Higgs decays in the MSSM can be found
152: in \cite{DC}. However, we believe that in this work the
153: Higgs couplings to the sleptons have not been properly identified.}.
154:
155:
156:
157: This Letter is organized as follows.
158: In Section 2 we present the effective LFV
159: Higgs couplings in the
160: MSSM framework, focusing on the second and third lepton generations.
161: We explicitly compute the one-loop contributions
162: to those couplings and the branching ratios
163: of the decays $(h^0, H^0, A^0) \to \mu \tau$. New results
164: on flavour conserving Higgs couplings are also presented.
165: In Section 3 we give a numerical discussion on the LFV Higgs
166: couplings and branching ratios, and also discuss the
167: prospects at future colliders. Finally in Section 4
168: we comment on the correlation of the LFV Higgs decays
169: with other LFV processes, such as $\tau\to \mu\ga$ and
170: $\tau \to 3 \mu$, and summarize our results.
171:
172: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
173: \section{Higgs-muon-tau effective interactions}
174:
175: The MSSM contains two Higgs doublets $H_1$ and $H_2$, with
176: opposite hypercharges. Down-type fermions, which only
177: couple to $H_1$ at the tree level, also couple to $H_2$
178: after the inclusion of radiative corrections \cite{bottom}.
179: In particular, for the charged leptons of second and third
180: generations the tree-level couplings read as
181: \be{Ltree}
182: {\cal L} = - Y_\mu H^0_1 \mu^c \mu -Y_\tau H^0_1 \tau^c \tau + {\rm h.c.} ,
183: \ee
184: where $H^0_1$ is the neutral component of $H_1$ and
185: $Y_\mu, Y_\tau$ are the Yukawa coupling constants\footnote{
186: We adopt two-component spinor notation, so
187: $\mu$ and $\tau$ ($\bar{\mu}^c$ and $\bar{\tau}^c$) are the left-handed
188: (right-handed) components of the muon and tau fields, respectively.
189: %
190: Throughout our discussion we assume CP conservation and therefore
191: all the dimensionless as well as dimensionful parameters are
192: taken to be real.}.
193: Also the leading effective interactions with $H_2$, which arise
194: once superpartners are integrated out, are described by
195: dimension-four operators. These can be either
196: flavour conserving (FC):
197: \be{lefffc}
198: \Delta{\cal L}_{FC} =
199: - (Y_\mu \Delta_{\mu} + Y_\tau \Delta'_\mu ) {H}^{0*}_2
200: \mu^c \mu
201: -Y_\tau \Delta_{\tau} {H}^{0*}_2 \tau^c \tau
202: +{\rm h.c.} ,
203: \ee
204: or flavour violating (FV):
205: \be{leff}
206: \Delta{\cal L}_{FV} =
207: -Y_\tau \Delta_{L} {H}^{0*}_2 \tau^c \mu
208: -Y_\tau \Delta_{R} {H}^{0*}_2 \mu^c \tau
209: +{\rm h.c.} ,
210: \ee
211: where $\Delta_\mu, \Delta'_\mu, \Delta_\tau$ and $\Delta_L, \Delta_R$
212: are dimensionless functions of
213: the MSSM mass parameters, to be described below.
214: In eqs.~(\ref{lefffc}) and (\ref{leff}) we have only retained
215: the dominant terms, proportional to $Y_\tau$, besides the first
216: term in $\Delta {\cal L}_{FC}$ proportional to $Y_\mu$.
217: In the following we are mostly interested in the effects induced
218: by the terms in (\ref{leff}).
219: %
220: In the mass-eigenstate basis for both leptons and Higgs bosons,
221: the FV couplings read as:
222: \be{LFV}
223: {\cal L}_{FV} = - \frac{Y_\tau}{\sqrt2 \cos\beta}
224: ( \Delta_L ~\tau^c \mu +\Delta_R~ \mu^c \tau )~
225: [ h^0 \cos(\beta -\alpha)
226: -H^0 \sin(\beta -\alpha) - {\rm i} A^0]
227: + {\rm h.c.} ,
228: \ee
229: where $\tan\beta\! = \!\langle H^0_2\rangle/\langle H^0_1\rangle$,
230: $\alpha$ is the mixing angle in the CP-even Higgs sector
231: [$\sqrt2 {\rm Re}(H^0_1 - \langle H^0_1\rangle) =
232: H^0 \cos\al - h^0 \sin\al$,
233: $ ~ \sqrt2 {\rm Re}(H^0_2 - \langle H^0_2\rangle)
234: = H^0\sin\al + h^0 \cos\al$] and $A^0$ is the physical CP-odd
235: Higgs field. The expression in (\ref{LFV}) holds up to
236: ${\cal O}(\Delta_\tau \tan\beta)$ corrections, which arise from
237: eq.~(\ref{lefffc}) and can be
238: ${\cal O}(10\%)$ for large $\tan\beta$. For our purposes it is not
239: compelling to include and resum such higher-order
240: ($\tan\beta$-enhanced) terms.
241:
242: The effective couplings (\ref{LFV}) contribute to LFV low-energy processes,
243: such as the decay $\tau\to 3 \mu$ and other ones, through
244: Higgs boson exchange \cite{BK,sher1,DER}.
245: We will comment later on $\tau\to 3 \mu$.
246: Here we are interested in a more direct implication of those LFV
247: couplings, i.e. the decays $\Phi^0\to \mu^{\pm}\tau^{\mp}$
248: where $\Phi^0= h^0, H^0, A^0$.
249: It is straightforward to compute the branching ratios
250: $BR(\Phi^0\to \mu^+\tau^-)= BR(\Phi^0\to \mu^-\tau^+)$,
251: and it is convenient
252: to relate them to those of the
253: flavour conserving decays $\Phi^0\to \tau^+ \tau^-$:
254: \be{rphi}
255: { BR(\Phi^0\to \mu^+\tau^-)}
256: = \tan^2\beta~ (|\Delta_L|^2 + |\Delta_R|^2)
257: ~ C_\Phi~ { BR(\Phi^0\to \tau^+\tau^-)} \, ,
258: \ee
259: where the $C_\Phi$ coefficients are:
260: \be{cphi}
261: C_h = \left[\frac{\cos(\beta - \al)}{\sin\al}\right]^2, ~~~~
262: C_H = \left[\frac{\sin(\beta - \al)}{\cos\al}\right]^2, ~~~~
263: C_A = 1 .
264: \ee
265: Since non-negligible effects can only arise in the
266: large $\tan\beta$ limit, in eq.~(\ref{rphi})
267: we have approximated $1/\cos^2\beta \simeq \tan^2\beta$.
268:
269: We now present explicit expressions for the quantities $\Delta_{L}$ and
270: $\Delta_R$, i.e. the coefficients of the dimension-four operators
271: in (\ref{leff}). The relevant one-loop diagrams, which
272: involve the exchange of sleptons, gauginos and
273: Higgsinos, are shown in Fig.~1. The diagrammatic computation
274: is consistently performed in the gauge symmetry limit,
275: at zero external momentum\footnote{In particular,
276: the only Higgs insertion we consider is that explicitly depicted in
277: the diagrams. Further Higgs insertions or momentum dependent effects
278: correspond to higher dimension operators and give subleading
279: corrections to $\Phi^0\to \mu \tau$, in the limit of heavy
280: superpartners and large $\tan\beta$.}.
281: %
282: \begin{figure}[t]
283: \vspace{0.4cm}
284: %
285: %
286: \begin{center}
287: %
288: \begin{picture}(120,80)(-60,-40)
289: \ArrowLine(-50,0)(-34,0)
290: \ArrowLine(0,0)(-34,0)
291: \ArrowLine(0,0)(34,0)
292: \ArrowLine(50,0)(34,0)
293: \DashArrowArcn(0,-20)(40,150,90){4}
294: \DashArrowArcn(0,-20)(40,90,30){4}
295: \DashArrowLine(0,20)(0,40){3}
296: \Text(-50,-10)[]{$\mu$}
297: \Text(50,-8)[]{$\tau^c$}
298: \Text(0,-8)[]{\small $\tilde{B}^0$}
299: \Text(10,35)[]{\small $H_2^0$}
300: \Text(-34,20)[]{$\tilde{e}_{L_\alpha}$}
301: \Text(34,20)[]{$\tilde{e}_{R_\beta}$}
302: \Text(-50,40)[]{$(a)$}
303: \end{picture}
304: %
305: \hglue 2.5cm
306: \begin{picture}(120,80)(-60,-40)
307: \ArrowLine(-50,0)(-34,0)
308: \ArrowLine(-17,0)(-34,0)
309: \ArrowLine(-17,0)(0,0)
310: \ArrowLine(17,0)(0,0)
311: \ArrowLine(17,0)(34,0)
312: \ArrowLine(50,0)(34,0)
313: \DashArrowArcn(0,-20)(40,150,30){4}
314: \DashArrowLine(0,0)(0,-20){3}
315: \Text(-50,-10)[]{$\mu$}
316: \Text(50,-8)[]{$\tau^c$}
317: \Text(27,-9)[]{\small $\tilde{H}_1^0$}
318: \Text(11,-9)[]{\small $\tilde{H}_2^0$}
319: \Text(-17,-8)[]{\small $\tilde{B}^0$}
320: \Text(0,-28)[]{\small $H_2^0$}
321: \Text(0,30)[]{$\tilde{e}_{L_\alpha}$}
322: \Text(-50,40)[]{$(b)$}
323: \end{picture}
324: %
325: \end{center}
326: %
327: \begin{center}
328: %
329: \begin{picture}(120,80)(-60,-40)
330: \ArrowLine(-50,0)(-34,0)
331: \ArrowLine(-17,0)(-34,0)
332: \ArrowLine(-17,0)(0,0)
333: \ArrowLine(17,0)(0,0)
334: \ArrowLine(17,0)(34,0)
335: \ArrowLine(50,0)(34,0)
336: \DashArrowArcn(0,-20)(40,150,30){4}
337: \DashArrowLine(0,0)(0,-20){3}
338: \Text(-50,-10)[]{$\mu$}
339: \Text(50,-8)[]{$\tau^c$}
340: \Text(27,-9)[]{\small $\tilde{H}_1^0$}
341: \Text(11,-9)[]{\small $\tilde{H}_2^0$}
342: \Text(-17,-8)[]{\small $\tilde{W}^0$}
343: \Text(0,-28)[]{\small $H_2^0$}
344: \Text(0,30)[]{$\tilde{e}_{L_\alpha}$}
345: \Text(-50,40)[]{$(c)$}
346: \end{picture}
347: %
348: \hglue 2.5cm
349: \begin{picture}(120,80)(-60,-40)
350: \ArrowLine(-50,0)(-34,0)
351: \ArrowLine(-17,0)(-34,0)
352: \ArrowLine(-17,0)(0,0)
353: \ArrowLine(17,0)(0,0)
354: \ArrowLine(17,0)(34,0)
355: \ArrowLine(50,0)(34,0)
356: \DashArrowArcn(0,-20)(40,150,30){4}
357: \DashArrowLine(0,0)(0,-20){3}
358: \Text(-50,-10)[]{$\mu$}
359: \Text(50,-8)[]{$\tau^c$}
360: \Text(29,-9)[]{\small $\tilde{H}_1^-$}
361: \Text(11,-9)[]{\small $\tilde{H}_2^+$}
362: \Text(-9,-7)[]{\small $\tilde{W}^-$}
363: \Text(-27,-7)[]{\small $\tilde{W}^+$}
364: \Text(0,-28)[]{\small $H_2^0$}
365: \Text(0,30)[]{$\tilde{\nu}_\alpha$}
366: \Text(-50,40)[]{$(d)$}
367: \end{picture}
368: %
369: \end{center}
370: %
371: \begin{center}
372: %
373: \begin{picture}(120,80)(-60,-40)
374: \ArrowLine(-50,0)(-34,0)
375: \ArrowLine(0,0)(-34,0)
376: \ArrowLine(0,0)(34,0)
377: \ArrowLine(50,0)(34,0)
378: \DashArrowArcn(0,-20)(40,150,90){4}
379: \DashArrowArcn(0,-20)(40,90,30){4}
380: \DashArrowLine(0,20)(0,40){3}
381: \Text(-50,-10)[]{$\tau$}
382: \Text(50,-8)[]{$\mu^c$}
383: \Text(0,-8)[]{\small $\tilde{B}^0$}
384: \Text(10,35)[]{\small $H_2^0$}
385: \Text(-34,20)[]{$\tilde{e}_{L_\alpha}$}
386: \Text(34,20)[]{$\tilde{e}_{R_\beta}$}
387: \Text(-50,40)[]{$(e)$}
388: \end{picture}
389: %
390: \hglue 2.5cm
391: \begin{picture}(120,80)(-60,-40)
392: \ArrowLine(-50,0)(-34,0)
393: \ArrowLine(-17,0)(-34,0)
394: \ArrowLine(-17,0)(0,0)
395: \ArrowLine(17,0)(0,0)
396: \ArrowLine(17,0)(34,0)
397: \ArrowLine(50,0)(34,0)
398: \DashArrowArcn(0,-20)(40,150,30){4}
399: \DashArrowLine(0,0)(0,-20){3}
400: \Text(-50,-10)[]{$\tau$}
401: \Text(50,-8)[]{$\mu^c$}
402: \Text(-27,-9)[]{\small $\tilde{H}_1^0$}
403: \Text(-11,-9)[]{\small $\tilde{H}_2^0$}
404: \Text(17,-8)[]{\small $\tilde{B}^0$}
405: \Text(0,-28)[]{\small $H_2^0$}
406: \Text(0,30)[]{$\tilde{e}_{R_\alpha}$}
407: \Text(-50,40)[]{$(f)$}
408: \end{picture}
409: %
410: \end{center}
411: \vspace{-0.3cm}
412: \caption{\small Diagrams that contribute to $\Delta_L$
413: [(a),(b), (c),(d)] and to $\Delta_R$ [(e),(f)].}
414: \label{f1}
415: %
416: \end{figure}
417: %
418: In the superfield basis in which the charged lepton mass matrix
419: is diagonal,
420: the mass matrices of the left-handed and right-handed sleptons read:
421: \be{matri}
422: \tilde{{\cal M}}^2_L =
423: \pmatrix{
424: \tilde{m}^2_{L \mu \mu} & \tilde{m}^2_{L \mu \tau} \cr
425: \tilde{m}^2_{L \mu \tau} & \tilde{m}^2_{L \tau \tau} }, \, \,~~~~
426: \tilde{{\cal M}}^2_R = \pmatrix{
427: \tilde{m}^2_{R \mu \mu} & \tilde{m}^2_{R \mu \tau} \cr
428: \tilde{m}^2_{R \mu \tau} & \tilde{m}^2_{R \tau \tau} } .
429: \end{equation}
430: We are interested in scenarios with
431: large LFV, either in $\tilde{{\cal M}}^2_L$
432: [$({\rm LFV})_L$] or in $\tilde{{\cal M}}^2_R$ [$({\rm LFV})_R$].
433: Large $({\rm LFV})_L$ means that $\tilde{m}^2_{L \mu \tau}$
434: is comparable to $\tilde{m}^2_{L \mu \mu}$ and $\tilde{m}^2_{L \tau\tau}$.
435: Similarly, large $({\rm LFV})_R$ means that $\tilde{m}^2_{R \mu \tau}$
436: is comparable to $\tilde{m}^2_{R \mu \mu}$ and $\tilde{m}^2_{R \tau\tau}$.
437: The flavour states $\tilde{L}_\mu =
438: (\tilde{\nu}_\mu , \tilde{\mu}_L)^T,
439: \tilde{L}_\tau =
440: (\tilde{\nu}_\tau , \tilde{\tau}_L)^T$ are related to the
441: $\tilde{{\cal M}}^2_L$ eigenstates
442: $\tilde{L}_2 =
443: (\tilde{\nu}_2 , \tilde{e}_{L_2})^T,
444: \tilde{L}_3 =
445: (\tilde{\nu}_3 , \tilde{e}_{L_3})^T$
446: by the relations $\tilde{L}_\mu = c_L \tilde{L}_2 - s_L \tilde{L}_3, ~
447: \tilde{L}_\tau = s_L \tilde{L}_2 + c_L \tilde{L}_3$.
448: Analogous relations hold for the right-handed
449: sleptons: $\tilde{\mu}_{R} = c_R \tilde{e}_{R_2} - s_R \tilde{e}_{R_3}, ~
450: \tilde{\tau}_{R} = s_R \tilde{e}_{R_2} + c_R \tilde{e}_{R_3}$,
451: where $ \tilde{e}_{R_2}$ and $ \tilde{e}_{R_3}$ are the eigenstates of
452: $\tilde{{\cal M}}^2_R$.
453: The mixing parameters satisfy the following relations:
454: \be{mix}
455: s_L c_L =
456: \frac{\tilde{m}^2_{L \mu \tau}}{\tilde{m}^2_{L_2}-\tilde{m}^2_{L_3} }~ ,
457: ~~~~~~~s_R c_R =
458: \frac{\tilde{m}^2_{R \mu \tau}}{\tilde{m}^2_{R_2}-\tilde{m}^2_{R_3} } ~,
459: \ee
460: where $\tilde{m}^2_{L_\al}$ and $\tilde{m}^2_{R_\al}$ ($\al =2,3$) are
461: the eigenvalues of $\tilde{{\cal M}}^2_L$ and $\tilde{{\cal M}}^2_R$,
462: respectively.
463: The other relevant parameters are the Bino ($\tilde{B}$) mass $M_1$,
464: the Wino ($\tilde{W}^0, \tilde{W}^{\pm}$) mass $M_2$ and the
465: $\mu$ parameter. The latter appears in the Higgsino mass terms
466: $-\mu (\tilde{H}^0_1
467: \tilde{H}^0_2 - \tilde{H}^-_1
468: \tilde{H}^+_2) +{\rm h.c.}$ and in the cubic interaction $-Y_\tau \mu
469: H^{0*}_2 \tilde{\tau}^*_R \tilde{\tau}_L +{\rm h.c.}$.
470: The explicit evaluation of the diagrams gives for $\Delta_L$:
471: \be{deltaL}
472: \Delta_L = \Delta^{(a)}_L + \Delta^{(b)}_L+\Delta^{(c)}_L
473: + \Delta^{(d)}_L ,
474: \ee
475: \beqn{deltaL2}
476: \Delta^{(a)}_L &=& - \frac{g'^2}{16 \pi^2} \mu M_1 s_L c_L\left[
477: s^2_R \left(
478: {\rm I}(M^2_1, \tilde{m}^2_{R_2}, \tilde{m}^2_{L_2}) -
479: {\rm I}(M^2_1, \tilde{m}^2_{R_2}, \tilde{m}^2_{L_3})\right)
480: \right. \nonumber \\
481: && \left. +c^2_R\left( {\rm I}(M^2_1, \tilde{m}^2_{R_3},
482: \tilde{m}^2_{L_2}) -
483: {\rm I}(M^2_1, \tilde{m}^2_{R_3}, \tilde{m}^2_{L_3}) \right)\right]
484: , \nonumber\\
485: \Delta^{(b)}_L &=& - \frac{g'^2}{32\pi^2} \mu M_1 s_L c_L\left[
486: {\rm I}(M^2_1,\mu^2, \tilde{m}^2_{L_2}) -
487: {\rm I}(M^2_1,\mu^2, \tilde{m}^2_{L_3})
488: \right] , \nonumber\\
489: \Delta^{(c)}_L &=& \frac{g^2}{32 \pi^2} \mu M_2 s_L c_L\left[
490: {\rm I}(M^2_2,\mu^2, \tilde{m}^2_{L_2}) -
491: {\rm I}(M^2_2,\mu^2, \tilde{m}^2_{L_3}) \right] , \nonumber\\
492: \Delta^{(d)}_L &=& \frac{g^2}{16 \pi^2} \mu M_2 s_L c_L\left[
493: {\rm I}(M^2_2,\mu^2, \tilde{m}^2_{L_2}) -
494: {\rm I}(M^2_2,\mu^2, \tilde{m}^2_{L_3}) \right] ,
495: \eeqn
496: and for $\Delta_R$:
497: \be{deltaR}
498: \Delta_R = \Delta^{(e)}_R + \Delta^{(f)}_R ,
499: \ee
500: \beqn{deltaR2}
501: \Delta^{(e)}_R &=& - \frac{g'^2}{16 \pi^2} \mu M_1 s_R c_R\left[
502: s^2_L \left({\rm I}(M^2_1, \tilde{m}^2_{L_2}, \tilde{m}^2_{R_2})
503: -{\rm I}(M^2_1, \tilde{m}^2_{L_2}, \tilde{m}^2_{R_3})\right)
504: \right.\nonumber \\
505: && \left.
506: + c^2_L \left({\rm I}(M^2_1, \tilde{m}^2_{L_3},\tilde{m}^2_{R_2}) -
507: {\rm I}(M^2_1, \tilde{m}^2_{L_3},\tilde{m}^2_{R_3})\right)
508: \right] , \nonumber\\
509: \Delta^{(f)}_R &=& \frac{g'^2}{16 \pi^2} \mu M_1 s_R c_R\left[
510: {\rm I}(M^2_1,\mu^2, \tilde{m}^2_{R_2}) -
511: {\rm I}(M^2_1,\mu^2, \tilde{m}^2_{R_3})\right] ,
512: \eeqn
513: %
514: The function ${\rm I}$, which has mass dimension $-2$,
515: is the standard three-point one-loop integral:
516: \be{In}
517: {\rm I}(x,y,z)= \frac{ xy \log\frac{x}{y} +yz \log\frac{y}{z}
518: + zx \log\frac{z}{x}}{ (x-y) (z-y)(z-x)} .
519: \ee
520: %
521: Our results for the LFV diagrams in Fig.~\ref{f1}
522: can be compared with similar ones presented in \cite{BK,DER}.
523: However, one notices some
524: differences in those works: {\it i}) there LFV effects were
525: treated at linear order, through the mass insertion approximation;
526: {\it ii}) only LFV in the left-handed sleptons was considered, since
527: LFV was related to the seesaw generation of neutrino masses;
528: {\it iii}) the relative signs between the $\tilde{B}$ diagram and
529: gaugino-Higgsino diagrams differ from ours.
530: This sign is crucial to correctly determine the interference effects,
531: as we will see below. Notice that such a sign discrepancy
532: does not depend on the fact that we use a different
533: sign convention for the $\mu$ parameter.
534:
535: For the sake of completeness we also present the expressions
536: of the FC parameters $\Delta_\mu, \Delta'_\mu, \Delta_\tau$, which are
537: relevant for establishing the relations between the lepton masses
538: ($m_\mu$, $m_\tau$) and the
539: corresponding Yukawa couplings.
540: Such quantities are induced by diagrams analogous
541: to those in Fig.~1 but with the same
542: flavour in the external fermion lines (either muon or tau flavour):
543: \beqn{deltamu}
544: \Delta_\mu & =&
545: - \frac{g'^2}{16 \pi^2} \mu M_1\left[
546: c^2_L c^2_R
547: {\rm I}(M^2_1, \tilde{m}^2_{L_2}, \tilde{m}^2_{R_2})
548: +c^2_L s^2_R
549: {\rm I}(M^2_1, \tilde{m}^2_{L_2}, \tilde{m}^2_{R_3}) \right. \nonumber \\
550: && \left.
551: +s^2_L c^2_R
552: {\rm I}(M^2_1, \tilde{m}^2_{L_3}, \tilde{m}^2_{R_2})
553: +s^2_L s^2_R
554: {\rm I}(M^2_1, \tilde{m}^2_{L_3}, \tilde{m}^2_{R_3})
555: +\frac12
556: c^2_L {\rm I}(M^2_1,\mu^2, \tilde{m}^2_{L_2}) \right. \nonumber\\
557: && \left. + \frac12
558: s^2_L {\rm I}(M^2_1,\mu^2, \tilde{m}^2_{L_3})
559: - c^2_R {\rm I}(M^2_1,\mu^2, \tilde{m}^2_{R_2})
560: - s^2_R {\rm I}(M^2_1,\mu^2, \tilde{m}^2_{R_3}) \right] \nonumber \\
561: &&
562: +\frac{3g^2}{32 \pi^2}\mu M_2 \left[c^2_L
563: {\rm I}(M^2_2,\mu^2, \tilde{m}^2_{L_2})+
564: s^2_L
565: {\rm I}(M^2_2,\mu^2, \tilde{m}^2_{L_3})\right] , \\
566: %%
567: \Delta'_\mu &= &
568: - \frac{g'^2}{16 \pi^2} \mu M_1 s_L c_L s_R c_R\left[
569: {\rm I}(M^2_1, \tilde{m}^2_{L_2}, \tilde{m}^2_{R_2})
570: -{\rm I}(M^2_1, \tilde{m}^2_{L_2}, \tilde{m}^2_{R_3}) \right. \nonumber \\
571: && \left. -
572: {\rm I}(M^2_1, \tilde{m}^2_{L_3}, \tilde{m}^2_{R_2})+
573: {\rm I}(M^2_1, \tilde{m}^2_{L_3}, \tilde{m}^2_{R_3}) \right] , \\
574: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
575: \Delta_\tau & =&
576: - \frac{g'^2}{16 \pi^2} \mu M_1\left[
577: s^2_L s^2_R
578: {\rm I}(M^2_1, \tilde{m}^2_{L_2}, \tilde{m}^2_{R_2})
579: +s^2_L c^2_R
580: {\rm I}(M^2_1, \tilde{m}^2_{L_2}, \tilde{m}^2_{R_3}) \right. \nonumber \\
581: && \left.
582: +c^2_L s^2_R
583: {\rm I}(M^2_1, \tilde{m}^2_{L_3}, \tilde{m}^2_{R_2})
584: +c^2_L c^2_R
585: {\rm I}(M^2_1, \tilde{m}^2_{L_3}, \tilde{m}^2_{R_3})
586: +\frac12
587: s^2_L {\rm I}(M^2_1,\mu^2, \tilde{m}^2_{L_2}) \right. \nonumber\\
588: && \left. + \frac12
589: c^2_L {\rm I}(M^2_1,\mu^2, \tilde{m}^2_{L_3})
590: - s^2_R {\rm I}(M^2_1,\mu^2, \tilde{m}^2_{R_2})
591: - c^2_R {\rm I}(M^2_1,\mu^2, \tilde{m}^2_{R_3}) \right] \nonumber \\
592: &&
593: +\frac{3g^2}{32 \pi^2}\mu M_2 \left[s^2_L
594: {\rm I}(M^2_2,\mu^2, \tilde{m}^2_{L_2})+
595: c^2_L
596: {\rm I}(M^2_2,\mu^2, \tilde{m}^2_{L_3})\right] .
597: \eeqn
598: These formulas are quite general as they include possible
599: LFV in the slepton mass matrices.
600: By setting $c_L =c_R=1$, $s_L=s_R=0$
601: one can easily
602: recover for $\Delta_\mu$ and $\Delta_\tau$ the corresponding cases\footnote{
603: In this limit of vanishing LFV, different expressions for $\Delta_\tau$
604: can be found
605: in the literature \cite{all,GHP,BK}, and some discrepancies
606: exist among them.
607: Our result for $\Delta_\tau$ is consistent with that in
608: \cite{GHP}, taking into account that we use
609: an opposite sign convention for the $\mu$ parameter and
610: include left-right slepton mixing at linear order.
611: To our knowledge no explicit expression for $\Delta_\mu$
612: or $\Delta'_\mu$ appears in the literature. In principle $\Delta_\mu$
613: can be distinct from $\Delta_\tau$.}
614: without LFV, whereas $\Delta'_\mu$ vanishes as this term requires
615: both $({\rm LFV})_L$ and $({\rm LFV})_R$.
616: %
617: Incidentally, notice
618: that $\Delta'_\mu$ in eq.~(\ref{lefffc}) is multiplied by
619: $Y_\tau$.
620: Thereby, if $({\rm LFV})_L$ and $({\rm LFV})_R$ are both large,
621: the relation between the muon mass and Yukawa coupling
622: could receive large
623: ($\tanb$ and $Y_\tau/Y_\mu$ enhanced)
624: corrections\footnote{
625: In this limit of large $({\rm LFV})_L$ {\it and} $({\rm LFV})_R$,
626: analogous enhancement effects also
627: appear in the muon magnetic and electric dipole operators,
628: see e.g. \cite{g2}.
629: For similar enhancement effects in the relation between
630: quark masses and Yukawa couplings, see e.g. \cite{demir}.},
631: and the ratios
632: $BR(\Phi^0\to \mu^+ \mu^-)/BR(\Phi^0\to \tau^+ \tau^-)$
633: could differ significantly from the tree
634: level expectation $(m_\mu/m_\tau)^2$.
635: However, having simultaneously large $({\rm LFV})_L$
636: and $({\rm LFV})_R$ does not seem very natural
637: if the smallness of $m_\mu/m_\tau$ is related to
638: an underlying supersymmetric flavour symmetry.
639:
640: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
641: \section{Numerical results and implications at colliders}
642:
643: Now we give some numerical examples to appreciate
644: the size of the effects we are discussing.
645: %
646: For definiteness, we discuss separately the case of large $({\rm LFV})_L$,
647: with negligible $({\rm LFV})_R$, and the complementary case of large
648: $({\rm LFV})_R$, with negligible $({\rm LFV})_L$.
649: %
650: Let us redefine in (\ref{matri})
651: $\tilde{m}^2_{L \tau \tau} \equiv \tilde{m}^2_L$ and
652: $\tilde{m}^2_{R \tau \tau} \equiv \tilde{m}^2_R$.
653: %%%%%%
654: As a representative case of
655: large $({\rm LFV})_L$, we choose
656: $ \tilde{m}^2_{L \mu \mu}= \tilde{m}^2_L$ and
657: $\tilde{m}^2_{L \mu \tau} = 0.8 \cdot \tilde{m}^2_L$, while
658: $\tilde{m}^2_{R \mu \tau} \sim 0$.
659: Analogously, for the case of large $({\rm LFV})_R$
660: we choose $ \tilde{m}^2_{R \mu \mu}=
661: \tilde{m}^2_R$ and
662: $\tilde{m}^2_{R \mu \tau} = 0.8 \cdot \tilde{m}^2_R$, while
663: $\tilde{m}^2_{L \mu \tau} \sim 0$.
664: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
665: We show the quantity $|50 \Delta_L|^2$
666: as a function of $|\mu|/\tilde{m}_L$ in Fig.~\ref{f2} and
667: $|50 \Delta_R|^2$ as a function of $|\mu|/\tilde{m}_R$
668: in Fig.~\ref{f3}, for fixed values of other mass ratios.
669: We have inserted a factor 50 to make it easier
670: the numerical estimate of eq.~(\ref{rphi}) for the reference case of
671: $\tan\beta=50$.
672: %%
673: The curves depicted
674: %\vskip -2.0cm
675: \begin{figure}[p]
676: \vskip -1.cm
677: \hglue 2.5cm
678: \epsfig{file=saa_fl.ps,height=9.cm,width= 12.1cm}
679: \vskip -0.2cm
680: \caption{\small
681: The quantity $|50 \Delta_L|^2$ as a function of $|\mu|/\tilde{m}_L$,
682: for $\tilde{m}^2_{L \mu \tau} = 0.8 \cdot \tilde{m}^2_L$
683: and four choices of
684: the other relevant mass ratios:
685: 1) $M_1= M_2 =\tilde{m}_R= \tilde{m}_L$ (solid line);
686: 2) $M_1= \tilde{m}_L/3$, $M_2 =\tilde{m}_R= \tilde{m}_L$ (dotted line);
687: 3) $M_1=M_2 = \tilde{m}_L$, $ \tilde{m}_R= \tilde{m}_L/3$ (dashed line);
688: 4) $M_1=M_2 = \tilde{m}_L$, $ \tilde{m}_R= 3\tilde{m}_L$ (thin solid line).
689: }
690: \label{f2}
691: \vskip -0.1cm
692: \end{figure}
693: %
694: \begin{figure}[p]
695: \vskip -1.cm
696: \hglue 2.5cm
697: \epsfig{file=saa_fr.ps,height=9.cm,width= 12.1cm}
698: \vskip -0.2cm
699: \caption{\small
700: The quantity $|50 \Delta_R|^2$ as a function
701: of $|\mu|/\tilde{m}_R$, for
702: $\tilde{m}^2_{R \mu \tau} = 0.8 \cdot \tilde{m}^2_R$
703: and four choices of
704: the other relevant mass ratios:
705: 1) $M_1 =\tilde{m}_L= \tilde{m}_R$ (solid line);
706: 2) $M_1= \tilde{m}_R/3$, $\tilde{m}_L= \tilde{m}_R$ (dotted line);
707: 3) $M_1= \tilde{m}_R$, $ \tilde{m}_L= \tilde{m}_R/3$ (dashed line);
708: 4) $M_1=\tilde{m}_R$, $\tilde{m}_L= 3\tilde{m}_R$ (thin solid line).}
709: \label{f3}
710: \vskip -0.1cm
711: \end{figure}
712: exhibit a common behaviour\footnote{
713: This behaviour would be visible for all the curves if we had not cut
714: the axes.} with respect
715: %
716: to the ratio $|\mu|/\tilde{m}_L$ or $|\mu|/\tilde{m}_R$:
717: for each curve there is a deep minimum which separates
718: the right-side region,
719: where the pure $\tilde{B}^0$ diagram dominates as
720: that mass ratio increases (diagram (a) for $({\rm LFV})_L$
721: and diagram (e) for $({\rm LFV})_R$ in Fig.~\ref{f1}),
722: from the left-side one in which the Higgsino-gaugino diagrams dominate.
723: The deep wells for either $|\Delta_{L}|^2$ or $|\Delta_R|^2$ are due
724: to the destructive interference of the above mentioned diagrams.
725: Notice that the interference would be constructive if the sign of
726: $M_1$ were opposite to that of $M_2$.
727: %
728:
729: In the case of $({\rm LFV})_L$ we can see that values of
730: $|50\Delta_L|^2$ larger than $\sim 5\times 10^{-4}$
731: are achieved both in the left and right ranges in Fig.~\ref{f2}.
732: The example
733: with $\tilde{m}_R= \tilde{m}_L/3$ (dashed line)
734: provides larger values in the range $|\mu|/\tilde{m}_L \gsim 3$ since
735: the pure $\tilde{B}^0$ diagram is further enhanced by the smaller
736: $\tilde{m}_R$.
737: %
738: In the case of $({\rm LFV})_R$, values of
739: $|50\Delta_R|^2$ larger than $\sim 5\times 10^{-4}$ can be
740: obtained for large values of $|\mu|/\tilde{m}_R$ (see Fig.~\ref{f3}).
741: An enhancement appears for $\tilde{m}_L= \tilde{m}_R/3$ (dashed line),
742: in analogy to the $({\rm LFV})_L$ example mentioned above.
743: On the other hand, in the left-side region the values of
744: $|50\Delta_R|^2$ are smaller with respect to the analogous
745: ones of $|50\Delta_L|^2$.
746: %
747: Indeed, in this range $|\Delta_R|^2$ is dominated by the
748: $\tilde{H}$-$\tilde{B}$ diagram (proportional to $g'^{2}$),
749: while $|\Delta_L|^2$
750: is dominated by the $\tilde{H}$-$\tilde{W}$ diagrams
751: (proportional to $g^{2}$).
752:
753: We now make contact with the physical observable, i.e.
754: the $ BR(\Phi^0\to \mu^+\tau^-)$ in (\ref{rphi}), and discuss
755: the phenomenological implications.
756: We recall that the Higgs boson masses and
757: the angle $\alpha$ in the coefficients $C_\Phi$
758: are also affected, through radiative
759: corrections, by a set of MSSM parameters not involved in the
760: determination of $\Delta_L, \Delta_R$,
761: such as the mass parameters of the squark-gluino sector
762: (see e.g. \cite{rc} and references therein).
763: The latter parameters indirectly affect also
764: the $BR(\Phi^0\to \tau^+\tau^-)$ through radiative
765: corrections to $BR(\Phi^0\to b \bar{b})$ (see e.g. \cite{all1,GHP}).
766: %
767: We do not make a definite choice of those parameters and only
768: outline some general features of
769: $ BR(\Phi^0\to \mu^+\tau^-)$ at large $\tanb$
770: and the prospects for these decay channels
771: at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) and other colliders\footnote{
772: For recent discussions and references on supersymmetric Higgs phenomenology
773: see also \cite{higgs}. An unconventional scenario has been recently discussed
774: in \cite{BCEN}.}.
775: It is convenient to schematically separate the three Higgs
776: bosons into two groups.
777: %
778: The CP-odd and one of the CP-even Higgs bosons have about
779: the same mass, non-standard
780: (enhanced) couplings with down-type fermions and suppressed couplings
781: with up-type fermions and electroweak gauge bosons.
782: These bosons, which are mainly contained in $H^0_1$, correspond
783: to $H^0, A^0$ ($h^0, A^0$)
784: for $m_A \gsim m_\star$ ($m_A \lsim m_\star$), where
785: $m_\star \sim 110 - 130~{\rm GeV}$.
786: The other CP-even Higgs has a mass $\sim m_\star$
787: and Standard Model-like couplings with up-type fermions and
788: electroweak gauge bosons.
789: It is mainly contained in $H^0_2$ and corresponds to
790: $h^0$ ($H^0$) for $m_A \gsim m_\star$ ($m_A \lsim m_\star$).
791: Let us discuss the different Higgs bosons, assuming
792: for definiteness $\tan\beta\sim 50$,
793: $|50\Delta|^2 \sim 10^{-3}$ ($\Delta = \Delta_L$ or $\Delta_R$) and
794: an integrated luminosity of $100 ~{\rm fb}^{-1}$ at LHC.
795: \begin{enumerate}
796: \item
797: If $\Phi^0$ denotes one of
798: the `non-standard' Higgs bosons, we have $C_\Phi \simeq 1$ and
799: $ BR(\Phi^0\to \tau^+\tau^-) \sim 10^{-1}$, so
800: $ BR(\Phi^0\to \mu^+\tau^-) \sim 10^{-4}$.
801: The main production mechanisms at LHC are bottom-loop mediated gluon fusion
802: and associated production with $b \bar{b}$, which yield cross sections
803: $\sigma\sim (10^3, 10^2, 20)~{\rm pb}$
804: for $m_A \sim(100,200,300)~{\rm GeV}$, respectively.
805: The corresponding numbers of $\Phi^0\to \mu^+\tau^-$ events are about
806: $(10^4,10^3, 2\cdot 10^2)$.
807: These estimates do not change much if
808: the bottom Yukawa coupling $Y_b$ is enhanced (suppressed)
809: by radiative corrections,
810: since in this case the enhancement (suppression) of $\sigma$ would be
811: roughly compensated by the suppression (enhancement) of
812: $BR(\Phi^0\to \mu^+\tau^-)$.
813: \item
814: If $\Phi^0$ denotes the other (more `Standard Model-like') Higgs boson,
815: the factor $C_\Phi\cdot
816: BR(\Phi^0\to \tau^+\tau^-)$ strongly depends on $m_A$, while
817: the production cross section at LHC, which is
818: dominated by top-loop mediated gluon fusion, is
819: $\sigma \sim 30~{\rm pb}$.
820: For $m_A\sim 100~{\rm GeV}$ we may have
821: $C_\Phi\cdot BR(\Phi^0\to \tau^+\tau^-)\sim 10^{-1}$ and
822: $BR(\Phi^0\to \mu^+\tau^-) \sim 10^{-4}$, which
823: would imply $\sim 300$ $ \mu^+\tau^-$ events.
824: The number of events is generically smaller
825: for large $m_A$ since $C_\Phi$ scales as $ 1/m_A^4$, consistently
826: with the expected decoupling of LFV effects for such a Higgs boson.
827: However, an enhancement can occur under certain conditions.
828: In particular, for a range of $m_A$ values the (radiatively corrected)
829: off-diagonal element of the Higgs boson mass matrix could be
830: over-suppressed.
831: In this case the $\Phi^0 b {b}^c,~ \Phi^0 \tau {\tau}^c$
832: couplings would also be suppressed and as a result
833: the number of $ \mu^+\tau^-$ events could be even ${\cal O}(10^3)$.
834: \end{enumerate}
835:
836: The above discussion suggests that LHC may offer good chances
837: to detect the decays $\Phi^0\to \mu\tau$, especially in the case
838: of non-standard Higgs bosons.
839: This indication should be supported by a detailed study of the
840: background (which is beyond the scope of this work), for instance
841: by generalizing the analyses in \cite{gen}.
842: At Tevatron the sensitivity is lower than at LHC because
843: both the expected luminosity
844: and the Higgs production cross sections are smaller.
845: The number of events would be smaller by a factor $10^2 - 10^3$.
846: A few events may be expected
847: also at $e^+ e^-$ or $\mu^+ \mu^-$ future colliders,
848: assuming integrated luminosities of
849: $500~{\rm fb}^{-1}$ and $1~{\rm fb}^{-1}$, respectively.
850: At a $\mu^+ \mu^-$ collider
851: an enhancement may occur for the non-standard Higgs bosons
852: if radiative corrections strongly suppress $Y_b$, since in this
853: case both the resonant production cross section [$\sigma
854: \sim (4\pi/m^2_A) BR( \Phi^0 \to \mu^+\mu^-)$] and the
855: LFV branching ratios
856: $BR(\Phi^0\to \mu^+\tau^-)$ would be enhanced.
857: As a result, for
858: light $m_A$, hundreds of $\mu^+\tau^-$ events could occur.
859: %%%%%%%%% about charged Higgs
860:
861: Finally we notice that, although we have focused on LFV decays
862: of neutral Higgs bosons,
863: also charged Higgs bosons have LFV decays, i.e
864: $ H^+ \to \tau^+ \nu_\mu$ and $H^+ \to \mu^+ \nu_\tau$
865: (and related charge conjugated channels).
866: Also these decays are controlled by the parameters
867: $\Delta_L$ and $\Delta_R$, at lowest order in $SU(2)_W$
868: breaking effects.
869: The FV couplings with the charged Higgs bosons
870: emerge by taking into account the $SU(2)_W$ completion
871: of eqs.~(\ref{Ltree}) and (\ref{leff}).
872: It is straightforward to find
873: $BR(H^+\to \tau^+\nu_\mu)
874: = \tan^2\beta~ |\Delta_L|^2
875: ~ { BR(H^+ \to \tau^+ \nu_\tau)} $ and
876: $BR(H^+\to \mu^+\nu_\tau)
877: = \tan^2\beta~ |\Delta_R|^2 ~{ BR(H^+\to \tau^+ \nu_\tau)} $. However,
878: it is more natural to compare $H^+\to \mu^+\nu_\tau$ with
879: $ H^+\to \mu^+\nu_\mu$ so that:
880: \be{phi+}
881: BR(H^+\to \mu^+\nu_\tau)
882: \simeq \left(\frac{m_\tau}{m_\mu}\right)^2 \tan^2\beta~ |\Delta_R|^2
883: ~ BR(H^+\to \mu^+\nu_\mu) .
884: \ee
885: For $\tan^2\beta ~|\Delta_R|^2 \sim 10^{-3}$ this would lead
886: to a 30\% enhancement in the
887: channel $H^+\to \mu^+$ + {\it missing energy}.
888:
889: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
890: \section{Final remarks and conclusions}
891:
892: A few comments are in order about possible correlations
893: between the decays $\Phi^0\to \mu\tau$ and other LFV processes.
894: We have seen that non-negligible rates for $\Phi^0\to \mu\tau$ can
895: only be obtained for large $\tan\beta$ and large LFV.
896: In this limit also the decay rate for $\tau \to \mu \gamma$,
897: which is dominated by diagrams analogous to those of Fig.~\ref{f1}
898: with an extra photon attached \cite{lfv}, is enhanced and could exceed
899: the experimental limit.
900: However, we recall that the rate of $\tau \to \mu \gamma$ decreases
901: as the superparticle masses increase, whereas
902: the rate of $\Phi^0\to \mu\tau$ does not, since the
903: latter is induced by dimension-four effective operators and only
904: depends on mass ratios. Therefore to obtain an adequate suppression
905: of $\tau\to \mu \ga$ the superparticle spectrum has to be raised
906: towards the TeV region, although some slepton may be lighter.
907: For instance, in the case 1) of $({\rm LFV})_L$ shown in Fig.~\ref{f2}
908: ($M_1= M_2 =\tilde{m}_R= \tilde{m}_L$),
909: for $|\mu|/\tilde{m}_L \sim 1$ we obtain
910: $|50 \Delta_L|^2 \sim 6\times 10^{-4}$.
911: In this particular example the present bound
912: $BR(\tau \to \mu \gamma) < 6\times 10^{-7}$ \cite{belle1}
913: constrains $\tilde{m}_L \gsim 1.4~ {\rm TeV}$
914: for $\tan\beta=50$, which implies
915: ${\rm min}(\tilde{m}_{L_2},\tilde{m}_{L_3}) \gsim 0.6~ {\rm TeV}$,
916: ${\rm max}(\tilde{m}_{L_2},\tilde{m}_{L_3}) \gsim 1.9~ {\rm TeV}$ and
917: $M_1, M_2, \tilde{m}_R, |\mu| \gsim 1.4 ~{\rm TeV}$.
918: %
919:
920: The decays $\Phi^0\to \mu\tau$ are also correlated to
921: the decay $\tau \to 3\mu$. We recall that the latter
922: receives $\tanb$-enhanced contributions of two types:
923: from dipole LFV operators via photon exchange \cite{lfv}
924: and from the scalar LFV operators (\ref{LFV})
925: via Higgs exchange \cite{BK,DER}.
926: The dipole contribution is directly related to the
927: $\tau\to \mu \ga$ decay rate and is consequently bounded, i.e.
928: $BR(\tau\to 3\mu)_{\ga^*} \sim 2.3\times 10^{-3} ~ BR( \tau\to \mu \ga)
929: \lsim 1.4 \times 10^{-9}$. As for the Higgs-mediated contribution,
930: we obtain the following estimate:
931: \be{tau3}
932: BR(\tau\to 3\mu)_{\Phi^*} \sim 10^{-7}
933: \left(
934: \frac{\tan\beta}{50}\right)^6
935: \left(\frac{100 ~{\rm GeV}}{m_{A}}\right)^4 ~
936: \left( \frac{|50 \Delta_L|^2 +|50 \Delta_R|^2}{10^{-3}} \right) ~.
937: \ee
938: Therefore, this contribution
939: can exceed the dipole induced one\footnote{
940: Here our conclusion is in qualitative agreement with
941: that drawn by \cite{BK}.
942: On the other hand, the authors of \cite{DER} conclude that
943: Higgs-mediated contributions to $\tau \to 3\mu$ are subleading
944: compared to the photonic penguin ones.
945: We believe that this different conclusion is partly due to the fact
946: that in \cite{DER}
947: the superparticle masses are chosen to lie below the TeV scale, so
948: sizeable values for the LFV Higgs couplings are
949: prevented by the $\tau\to \mu \ga$ constraint.}
950: and be not far from
951: the present bound, $BR(\tau \to 3 \mu) < 3.8 \times 10^{-7}$ \cite{belle2}.
952: Notice that the parameter region in which this occurs
953: is also the most favorable one for the observation of
954: the $\Phi^0 \to \mu \tau$ decays, so an interesting correlation
955: emerges.
956:
957: Throughout our work we have focused on the second and third generations,
958: implicitly assuming that large slepton mixing only appears in
959: that sector. In a scenario in which staus
960: are mainly mixed with selectrons rather than with smuons,
961: our discussion and numerical estimates concerning
962: $\Phi^0 \to \mu \tau$ decays can be directly translated
963: to $\Phi^0 \to e \tau$ decays, with obvious substitutions.
964: The case of large smuon-selectron mixing is somewhat
965: different. Although the strong constraints
966: from $\mu \to e \gamma$ can be satisfied by taking sufficiently heavy
967: superparticles, the decays $\Phi^0 \to \mu e $
968: are generically suppressed by the presence of $Y_\mu$.
969: The latter decays could be $Y_\tau$-enhanced if both
970: $({\rm LFV})_L$ and $({\rm LFV})_R$ were present,
971: and staus were mixed with both smuons and selectrons.
972:
973: In summary, we have studied the LFV couplings of Higgs bosons
974: in a general MSSM framework, allowing for generic LFV entries
975: in the slepton mass matrices, but without invoking any specific
976: mechanism to generate them.
977: We have computed the branching ratios
978: of $\Phi^0 \to \mu \tau$ decays, which depend on ratios
979: of MSSM mass parameters, and
980: increase for increasing $\tanb$ and LFV.
981: Although cancellations can occur in some regions of parameter space,
982: ${\cal O}(10^{-4})$ values
983: are achievable, and they are compatible with the bounds
984: on $\tau\to \mu \ga$ for a superparticle spectrum in the TeV range.
985: If the Higgs spectrum is relatively light ($m_A\lsim 300$ GeV),
986: our results indicate that future colliders (in particular LHC)
987: may be able to detect the decays $\Phi^0\to \mu\tau$, especially
988: in the case of non-standard Higgs bosons. Moreover, the detection
989: of these decays is closely correlated with that of $\tau \to 3 \mu$,
990: which may be observed in the near future.
991:
992:
993: \vspace{0.9cm}
994:
995: \noindent
996: {\bf Acknowledgments}\\
997:
998: \noindent
999: This work was partially supported
1000: by the European Union under the contracts
1001: HPRN-CT-2000-00148 (Across the Energy Frontier) and
1002: HPRN-CT-2000-00149 (Collider Physics).
1003:
1004: \vspace{1.5cm}
1005:
1006: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1007: \vspace{0.7cm}
1008: \bibitem{nus}
1009: J.~A.~Goodman [Super-Kamiokande Collaboration],
1010: %``Recent Results From Super-Kamiokande,''
1011: Int.\ J.\ Mod.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 17} (2002) 3353;
1012: M.~B.~Smy [Super-Kamiokande collaboration],
1013: %``Solar neutrino precision measurements using all 1496 days of Super-Kamiokande-I data,''
1014: arXiv:hep-ex/0208004;
1015: %
1016: Q.~R.~Ahmad {\it et al.} [SNO Collaboration],
1017: %``Measurement of the charged current interactions produced by B-8 solar neutrinos at the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory,''
1018: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 87} (2001) 071301
1019: [arXiv:nucl-ex/0106015] and
1020: %Q.~R.~Ahmad {\it et al.} [SNO Collaboration],
1021: %``Direct evidence for neutrino flavor transformation from neutral-current interactions in the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory,''
1022: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 89} (2002) 011301
1023: [arXiv:nucl-ex/0204008];
1024: K.~Eguchi {\it et al.} [KamLAND Collaboration],
1025: %``First results from KamLAND: Evidence for reactor anti-neutrino disappearance,''
1026: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 90} (2003) 021802
1027: [arXiv:hep-ex/0212021].
1028:
1029: \bibitem{QFV}
1030: %C.~S.~Huang and Q.~S.~Yan,
1031: %``B $\to$ X/s tau+ tau- in the flipped SU(5) model,''
1032: %Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 442} (1998) 209
1033: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9803366];
1034: C.~S.~Huang, W.~Liao and Q.~S.~Yan,
1035: %``The promising process to distinguish supersymmetric
1036: %models with large tan(beta) from the standard model: B $\to$ X/s mu+ mu-,''
1037: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 59} (1999) 011701 [arXiv:hep-ph/9803460];
1038: %
1039: C.~Hamzaoui, M.~Pospelov and M.~Toharia,
1040: %``Higgs-mediated FCNC in supersymmetric models with large tan(beta),''
1041: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 59} (1999) 095005
1042: [arXiv:hep-ph/9807350];
1043: %
1044: K.~S.~Babu and C.~Kolda,
1045: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 84} (2000) 228
1046: [arXiv:hep-ph/9909476];
1047: %
1048: A.~J.~Buras, P.~H.~Chankowski, J.~Rosiek and L.~Slawianowska,
1049: %``Delta(M(s))/Delta(M(d)), sin 2beta and the angle gamma in the presence of new Delta(F) = 2 operators,''
1050: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 619} (2001) 434
1051: [arXiv:hep-ph/0107048] and
1052: arXiv:hep-ph/0210145;
1053: C.~Bobeth, T.~Ewerth, F.~Kruger and J.~Urban,
1054: %``Analysis of neutral Higgs-boson contributions to the decays anti-B/s $\to$ l+ l- and anti-B $\to$ K l+ l-,''
1055: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 64} (2001) 074014
1056: [arXiv:hep-ph/0104284] and Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66} (2002) 074021
1057: [arXiv:hep-ph/0204225];
1058: G.~Isidori and A.~Retico,
1059: %``Scalar flavour-changing neutral currents in the large-tan(beta) limit,''
1060: JHEP {\bf 0111} (2001) 001
1061: [arXiv:hep-ph/0110121] and JHEP {\bf 0209} (2002) 063
1062: [arXiv:hep-ph/0208159].
1063:
1064:
1065:
1066: \bibitem{BK}
1067: K.~S.~Babu and C.~Kolda,
1068: %``Higgs-mediated tau $\to$ 3mu in the supersymmetric seesaw model,''
1069: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 89} (2002) 241802
1070: [arXiv:hep-ph/0206310].
1071:
1072: \bibitem{sher1}
1073: M.~Sher,
1074: %``tau $\to$ mu eta in supersymmetric models,''
1075: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66} (2002) 057301
1076: [arXiv:hep-ph/0207136].
1077:
1078: \bibitem{DER}
1079: A.~Dedes, J.~R.~Ellis and M.~Raidal,
1080: %``Higgs mediated B/(s,d)0 $\to$ mu tau, e tau and tau $\to$ 3mu, e mu mu decays in supersymmetric seesaw models,''
1081: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 549} (2002) 159
1082: [arXiv:hep-ph/0209207].
1083:
1084:
1085: \bibitem{CHT}
1086: A.~M.~Curiel, M.~J.~Herrero and D.~Temes,
1087: %``Flavour changing neutral Higgs boson decays from squark: Gluino loops,''
1088: arXiv:hep-ph/0210335.
1089:
1090: \bibitem{demir}
1091: D.~A.~Demir,
1092: %``Higgs boson couplings to quarks with supersymmetric CP and flavor violations,''
1093: arXiv:hep-ph/0303249.
1094:
1095:
1096: \bibitem{sher}
1097: J.~L.~Diaz-Cruz and J.~J.~Toscano,
1098: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 62} (2000) 116005
1099: [arXiv:hep-ph/9910233];
1100: M.~Sher,
1101: %``Scalar mediated FCNC at the first muon collider,''
1102: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 487} (2000) 151
1103: [arXiv:hep-ph/0006159].
1104:
1105: \bibitem{gen}
1106: T.~Han and D.~Marfatia,
1107: %``h $\to$ mu tau at hadron colliders,''
1108: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 86} (2001) 1442
1109: [arXiv:hep-ph/0008141];
1110: %
1111: U.~Cotti, L.~Diaz-Cruz, C.~Pagliarone and E.~Vataga,
1112: %``Search for the lepton flavor violating Higgs decay H $\to$ tau mu
1113: % at hadron colliders,'' in {\it Proc. of the APS/DPF/DPB Summer
1114: % Study on the Future of Particle Physics (Snowmass 2001) } ed. N.~Graf,
1115: % eConf {\bf C010630} (2001) P102
1116: arXiv:hep-ph/0111236;
1117: K.~A.~Assamagan, A.~Deandrea and P.~A.~Delsart,
1118: %``Search for the lepton flavor violating decay A0/H0 $\to$ tau+- mu-+ at hadron colliders,''
1119: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67} (2003) 035001
1120: [arXiv:hep-ph/0207302].
1121:
1122:
1123: \bibitem{DC}
1124: J.~L.~Diaz-Cruz,
1125: %``A more flavored Higgs boson in supersymmetric models,''
1126: arXiv:hep-ph/0207030.
1127:
1128: \bibitem{bottom}
1129: L.~J.~Hall, R.~Rattazzi and U.~Sarid,
1130: %``The Top quark mass in supersymmetric SO(10) unification,''
1131: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 50} (1994) 7048
1132: [arXiv:hep-ph/9306309];
1133: %
1134: R.~Hempfling,
1135: %``Yukawa coupling unification with supersymmetric threshold corrections,''
1136: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 49} (1994) 6168.
1137:
1138:
1139: \bibitem{all}
1140: M.~Carena, M.~Olechowski, S.~Pokorski and C.~E.~Wagner,
1141: %``Electroweak symmetry breaking and bottom - top Yukawa unification,''
1142: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 426} (1994) 269
1143: [arXiv:hep-ph/9402253];
1144: D.~M.~Pierce, J.~A.~Bagger, K.~T.~Matchev and R.~j.~Zhang,
1145: %``Precision corrections in the minimal supersymmetric standard model,''
1146: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 491} (1997) 3 [arXiv:hep-ph/9606211].
1147: %
1148:
1149:
1150:
1151: \bibitem{GHP}
1152: %
1153: J.~Guasch, W.~Hollik and S.~Penaranda,
1154: %``Distinguishing Higgs models in H $\to$ b anti-b / H $\to$ tau+ tau-,''
1155: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 515} (2001) 367
1156: [arXiv:hep-ph/0106027].
1157:
1158: \bibitem{g2}
1159: T.~Moroi,
1160: %``The Muon Anomalous Magnetic Dipole Moment in the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model,''
1161: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 53} (1996) 6565
1162: [Erratum-ibid.\ D {\bf 56} (1997) 4424]
1163: [arXiv:hep-ph/9512396];
1164: J.~L.~Feng, K.~T.~Matchev and Y.~Shadmi,
1165: %``Theoretical expectations for the muon's electric dipole moment,''
1166: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 613} (2001) 366
1167: [arXiv:hep-ph/0107182];
1168: A.~Romanino and A.~Strumia,
1169: %``Electron and muon electric dipoles in supersymmetric scenarios,''
1170: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 622} (2002) 73
1171: [arXiv:hep-ph/0108275];
1172: G.~C.~Cho, N.~Haba and J.~Hisano,
1173: %``The stau exchange contribution to muon g-2 in the decoupling solution,''
1174: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 529} (2002) 117
1175: [arXiv:hep-ph/0112163];
1176: S.~Baek, P.~Ko and J.~H.~Park,
1177: %``Muon anomalous magnetic moment from effective supersymmetry,''
1178: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 24} (2002) 613
1179: [arXiv:hep-ph/0203251].
1180:
1181:
1182: \bibitem{rc}
1183: %
1184: A.~Brignole, G.~Degrassi, P.~Slavich and F.~Zwirner,
1185: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 631} (2002) 195
1186: [arXiv:hep-ph/0112177] and
1187: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 643} (2002) 79
1188: [arXiv:hep-ph/0206101].
1189:
1190: \bibitem{all1}
1191: %
1192: %
1193: M.~Carena, S.~Mrenna and C.~E.~Wagner,
1194: %``MSSM Higgs boson phenomenology at the Tevatron collider,''
1195: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 60} (1999) 075010
1196: [arXiv:hep-ph/9808312] and
1197: %
1198: %M.~Carena, S.~Mrenna and C.~E.~Wagner,
1199: %``The complementarity of LEP, the Tevatron and the LHC in the
1200: % search for a light MSSM Higgs boson,''
1201: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 62} (2000) 055008
1202: [arXiv:hep-ph/9907422];
1203: K.~S.~Babu and C.~F.~Kolda,
1204: %``Signatures of supersymmetry and Yukawa unification in Higgs decays,''
1205: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 451} (1999) 77
1206: [arXiv:hep-ph/9811308].
1207:
1208: \bibitem{higgs}
1209: E.~Boos, A.~Djouadi, M.~Muhlleitner and A.~Vologdin,
1210: %``The MSSM Higgs bosons in the intense-coupling regime,''
1211: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66} (2002) 055004
1212: [arXiv:hep-ph/0205160];
1213: M.~Carena and H.~E.~Haber,
1214: %``Higgs boson theory and phenomenology,''
1215: arXiv:hep-ph/0208209;
1216: G.~Degrassi, S.~Heinemeyer, W.~Hollik, P.~Slavich and G.~Weiglein,
1217: %``Towards high-precision predictions for the MSSM Higgs sector,''
1218: arXiv:hep-ph/0212020.
1219:
1220: \bibitem{BCEN}
1221: A.~Brignole, J.~A.~Casas, J.~R.~Espinosa and I.~Navarro,
1222: %``Low-scale supersymmetry breaking: Effective description, electroweak breaking and phenomenology,''
1223: arXiv:hep-ph/0301121.
1224:
1225:
1226: \bibitem{belle1}
1227: K.~Inami, T.~Hokuue and T.~Ohshima [BELLE Collaboration],
1228: %``Search for lepton flavor violating tau $\to$ mu gamma decay,''
1229: arXiv:hep-ex/0210036.
1230: %\bibitem{PDG}
1231: %K.~Hagiwara {\it et al.} [Particle Data Group Collaboration],
1232: %%``Review Of Particle Physics,''
1233: %Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66} (2002) 010001.
1234:
1235: \bibitem{lfv}
1236: J.~Hisano, T.~Moroi, K.~Tobe, M.~Yamaguchi and T.~Yanagida,
1237: %``Lepton flavor violation in the supersymmetric standard model with seesaw induced neutrino masses,''
1238: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 357} (1995) 579
1239: [arXiv:hep-ph/9501407];
1240: J.~Hisano, T.~Moroi, K.~Tobe and M.~Yamaguchi,
1241: %``Lepton-Flavor Violation via Right-Handed Neutrino Yukawa Couplings in Supersymmetric Standard Model,''
1242: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 53} (1996) 2442
1243: [arXiv:hep-ph/9510309] and
1244: %
1245: %J.~Hisano, T.~Moroi, K.~Tobe and M.~Yamaguchi,
1246: %``Exact event rates of lepton flavor violating processes in supersymmetric SU(5) model,''
1247: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 391} (1997) 341
1248: [Erratum-ibid.\ B {\bf 397} (1997) 357]
1249: [arXiv:hep-ph/9605296];
1250: J.~Hisano, D.~Nomura and T.~Yanagida,
1251: %``Atmospheric neutrino oscillation and large lepton flavour violation in the SUSY SU(5) GUT,''
1252: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 437} (1998) 351
1253: [arXiv:hep-ph/9711348];
1254: %
1255: J.~Hisano and D.~Nomura,
1256: %``Solar and atmospheric neutrino oscillations and lepton flavor violation in supersymmetric models with the right-handed neutrinos,''
1257: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 59} (1999) 116005
1258: [arXiv:hep-ph/9810479].
1259: %
1260:
1261: \bibitem{belle2}
1262: Y.~Yusa, H.~Hayashii, T.~Nagamine and A.~Yamaguchi [BELLE Collaboration],
1263: %``Search for neutrinoless tau decays tau $\to$ 3l and tau $\to$ l K0(S),''
1264: arXiv:hep-ex/0211017.
1265: \end{thebibliography}
1266: \end{document}
1267:
1268:
1269:
1270:
1271:
1272:
1273:
1274:
1275:
1276:
1277:
1278:
1279:
1280:
1281:
1282: