1: \documentclass[twocolumn,prd,showpacs,nofootinbib,preprintnumbers,
2: amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4}
3: \usepackage{graphicx}
4:
5: \newcommand{\Real}{\mathop\mathrm{Re}\nolimits}
6: \newcommand{\Imag}{\mathop\mathrm{Im}\nolimits}
7: \newcommand{\half}{\frac{1}{2}}
8: \newcommand{\sm}[1]{{\scriptscriptstyle \rm #1}}
9: \def\la{\langle }
10: \def\ra{\rangle }
11: \renewcommand{\l}{\left(}
12: \renewcommand{\r}{\right)}
13:
14:
15: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
16: \begin{document}
17:
18: \preprint{INR/TH-2003-4}
19:
20: \title{Transverse muon polarization in $K^+\to\mu^+\nu_\mu\gamma$:
21: scanning over the Dalitz plot}
22: \author{F.~L.~Bezrukov}
23: \email{fedor@ms2.inr.ac.ru}
24: \author{D.~S.~Gorbunov}
25: \email{gorby@ms2.inr.ac.ru}
26: \author{Yu.~G.~Kudenko}
27: \email{kudenko@wocup.inr.troitsk.ru}
28: \affiliation{
29: Institute for Nuclear Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences,\\
30: 60th October Anniversary prospect 7a, Moscow 117312, Russia
31: }
32: \date{April 15, 2003}
33:
34: \begin{abstract}
35: We study the potential of the
36: measurement of the transverse muon polarization $P_T$ in the
37: $K\to\mu\nu_\mu\gamma$ decay with the sensitivity of
38: $\delta P_T\sim 10^{-4}$. It is shown that the forthcoming
39: experiment can measure the contribution of the electromagnetic final
40: state interactions to $P_T$ that gives a possibility to
41: unambiguously determine the signs of the sum of the kaon form factors
42: $F_V$ and $F_A$ even without fixing their difference. We also
43: estimate the sensitivity of this experiment to the new physics, which
44: could give rise to $T$-violation: multi-Higgs doublet models,
45: supersymmetric extensions of the Standard Model, left-right symmetric
46: model and leptoquark models.
47: \end{abstract}
48:
49: \pacs{13.20.Eb, 11.30.Er, 12.60.-i, 12.39.Fe}
50:
51: \maketitle
52:
53:
54: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
55: \section{Introduction}
56:
57: In spite of remarkable progress in study of $CP$-violation phenomena
58: in both K and B sectors it remains an interesting issue. The Standard
59: Model~(SM) successfully describes existing experimental data by a single
60: phase of the CKM matrix, although it is hard to believe that this
61: phase is the only source of $CP$-violation. For example, the baryon
62: asymmetry of the Universe can not be explained by the CKM phase only
63: and at least one additional source of the $CP$-violation is required.
64:
65: A good place to look for new $CP$-violating phases is a measurement of
66: processes where the SM $CP$-violation is vanishing or very
67: suppressed while additional or alternative sources of $CP$-violation can
68: produce a sizable effect. Such interesting observables are the
69: electric dipole moment of neutron which is extremely small in the SM,
70: and the transverse lepton polarization in three-body decays
71: of kaons and B-mesons~\cite{Lee:iz,general,Gabrielli:1992dp}.
72:
73: In this paper, we study the $T$-odd muon polarization in the decay
74: $K^+\to\mu^+\nu_\mu\gamma$~($K_{\mu2\gamma}$). Namely, we investigate the
75: possibility to measure the vector and axial-vector kaon form factors,
76: $F_V$ and $F_A$, from the $T$-odd muon polarization emerging due to the
77: electromagnetic final state interactions (FSI). Also we analyze potential
78: contributions to $P_T$ from various extensions of the SM. In this study
79: we focus on the
80: Dalitz plot region where $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ events have a large angle between
81: photon and muon momenta.
82: This is the region, where $T$-odd muon polarization exhibits the best
83: sensitivity to $F_V$ and $F_A$. Moreover, we found that in this region
84: the ratio of the possible contribution to $P_T$ from new physics and
85: FSI contribution to $P_T$ becomes the largest. Hence, the analysis of
86: the $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ events at large $\theta$ will provide the best
87: accuracy in measurement of the relevant
88: parameters of the new physics or the strongest constraints on them.
89:
90: It is found that $P_T$ dependence on the kaon form factors gives a
91: possibility to unambiguously determine in $K_{\mu2\gamma}$
92: decay the signs of the sum of the kaon form factors
93: without fixing their difference.
94: Combined with
95: measurement of the normal muon polarization, which is very sensitive
96: to $F_V$ and $F_A$~\cite{Bezrukov:2003ka}, this allows
97: the values of the kaon form factors to be unambiguously
98: extracted with 1\% accuracy from this experiment.
99: Investigating the prospects of new experiments in searching for new
100: physics we show that, generally, they are limited mostly by the
101: uncertainty in FSI predictions rather than by the anticipated
102: statistical error.
103:
104: The outline of the paper is as follows. In Section~\ref{SecII} we introduce
105: the parameters describing muon transverse polarization $P_T$ in the
106: $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ decay, recall the relevant formulae and
107: estimate the expected sensitivity to $P_T$ in forthcoming experiments.
108: In Sec.~\ref{SecIII}, an approach to determine the signs of the sum of
109: the kaon form factors from the FSI polarization is discussed
110: and the accuracy of this method is estimated. In Sec.~\ref{SecIV}
111: we study the discovery potential of the $P_T$ measurements in search for new
112: physics. Specifically, we estimate the upper bounds on the $P_T$ in
113: multi-Higgs doublet models, supersymmetric
114: extensions of the Standard Model, left-right symmetric model and
115: leptoquark models. Sec.~\ref{SecV} contains conclusions and
116: final remarks.
117:
118:
119: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
120: \section{Transverse muon polarization in $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ decay}
121: \label{SecII}
122:
123:
124: \subsection{General description}
125:
126: Introducing three unit vectors
127: \begin{equation*}
128: \vec{e}_L= \frac{\vec{p}_\mu }{ |\vec{p}_\mu|} \,,\;
129: \vec{e}_N= \frac{\vec{p}_\mu\times (\vec{q}\times \vec{p}_\mu)
130: }{ |\vec{p}_\mu\times (\vec{q}\times \vec{p}_\mu)|} \,,\;
131: \vec{e}_T = \frac{\vec{q}\times \vec{p}_\mu}{
132: |\vec{q}\times \vec{p}_\mu|} \,,
133: \end{equation*}
134: with $p_\mu$ and $q$ being the four-momenta of $\mu^+$ and $\gamma$,
135: respectively, one can define longitudinal ($P_L$), normal ($P_N$) and
136: transverse ($P_T$) components of the muon polarization as the
137: corresponding contributions to the squared matrix element of
138: the $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ decay,
139: \begin{equation*}
140: |M|^2=\rho_{0}[1+(P_L {\vec e}_L+P_N {\vec e}_N+P_T {\vec
141: e}_T)\cdot \vec{\xi}\,]\;,
142: \end{equation*}
143: with ${\vec \xi}$ being a unit vector along muon spin and $\rho_{0}$
144: is
145: \begin{multline*}
146: \rho_0(x,y) = \frac{1}{2}e^2 G^2_F |V_{us}|^2
147: (1-\lambda) \times\\
148: \left\{
149: f_\mathrm{IB}(x,y)+f_\mathrm{SD}(x,y)+f_\mathrm{IBSD}(x,y) \right\} \;,
150: \end{multline*}
151: where the internal bremsstrahlung ($\mathrm{IB}$), structure dependent
152: ($\mathrm{SD}$) and interference contributions ($\mathrm{IBSD}$) are given as
153: follows~\cite{Gabrielli:1992dp,Bijnens:1992en,Chen:1997gf}
154: \begin{align}
155: \label{fIB}
156: f_\mathrm{IB}&=\frac{4m^2_\mu|f_K|^2}{ \lambda x^2}
157: \left[x^2+2(1-r_\mu)\left(1-x-\frac{r_\mu}{\lambda}\right)\right]\!,
158: \\
159: \label{fSD}
160: f_\mathrm{SD}&= m^4_K x^2\bigg[|F_V+F_A|^2\frac{\lambda^2 }{ 1-\lambda}
161: \left(1-x-\frac{r_\mu}{ \lambda}\right) \nonumber \\
162: &\qquad+|F_V-F_A|^2(y-\lambda)\bigg]\;,
163: \\
164: \label{fIBSD}
165: f_\mathrm{IBSD}&= - 4m_K m^2_\mu\bigg[\Real[f_K(F_V+F_A)^*]
166: \left(1-x-\frac{r_\mu}{\lambda}\right) \nonumber\\
167: &\qquad -\Real[f_K(F_V-F_A)^*]\frac{1-y+\lambda}{\lambda}\bigg] \;.
168: \end{align}
169: Here we used the standard notations $\lambda=(x+y-1-r_\mu)/x$,
170: $r_\mu=m^2_\mu/m^2_K$, and $x=2E_{\gamma}/m_K$, $y=2E_\mu/m_K$ with
171: $E_\gamma$, $E_\mu$ being the photon and muon energies in the kaon
172: rest frame, respectively; $G_F$ is the Fermi constant, $V_{us}$ is the
173: corresponding element of the Cabibbo--Kobayashi--Maskawa (CKM) matrix
174: and $f_K=159.8$~MeV is the kaon decay constant. In terms of these variables
175: the differential decay width reads
176: \begin{equation*}
177: d\Gamma(\vec{\xi}\,) =
178: \frac{m_K}{32(2\pi)^3}|M(x,y,\vec{\xi}\,)|^2 dx\,dy \;.
179: \end{equation*}
180: The transverse muon polarization $P_T$ is determined using
181: the partial decay width
182: \begin{equation}\label{PT}
183: P_T=\frac{d\Gamma(\vec{e}_T)-d\Gamma(-\vec{e}_T) }
184: {d\Gamma(\vec{e}_T)+d\Gamma(-\vec{e}_T)}
185: \equiv\frac{\rho_T}{\rho_0} \;.
186: \end{equation}
187: This is a $T$-odd observable (both $P_L$ and $P_N$ are $T$-even), hence in
188: the $T$-invariant theory its value equals zero at tree level.
189: Moreover, $P_T$ does not have tree-level contributions from the
190: $CP$-violating phase in the CKM matrix. These two features make $P_T$
191: a very promising observable for new $CP$-violating physics searches.
192: At the same time, as will be seen in the Sec.~\ref{SecIII}, analysis
193: of loop contributions from the Standard Model (FSI) is also of a
194: special physical interest.
195:
196:
197: \subsection{Experimental sensitivity to $P_T$}
198:
199: For the following analysis let us estimate the level of precision
200: which could be achieved experimentally.
201:
202: The running E246 experiment at KEK \cite{Abe:1999nc} dedicated for a
203: measurement of $P_T$ in the decay $K^+\to \pi^0\mu^+\nu$ has only a
204: limited sensitivity of about $10^{-2}$ to $P_T$ in $K_{\mu2\gamma}$
205: \cite{Kudenko:2000sc}. There is a proposal for a new experiment in
206: which a statistical sensitivity $P_T\leq 10^{-4}$ in $K_{\mu2\gamma}$
207: can be reached~\cite{Kudenko:yk}. The main features of this
208: experiment include a high resolution measurement of neutral particles
209: from $K_{\mu3}$ and $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ decays, usage of an active muon
210: polarimeter which provides information about stopped muons (stopping
211: point, momentum), positron direction, and also detects photons, and a
212: highly efficient photon veto system covering nearly $4\pi$ solid
213: angle. This approach allows to accumulate $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ events for
214: all $\theta$ angles between photon and muon momenta due to efficient
215: photon veto detector. This system eliminates $K_{\pi2}$ decays which
216: are the main background source at large $\theta$.
217:
218: Using parameters of the proposed detector~\cite{Kudenko:yk} and the
219: kaon beam intensity of about $10^7\;K^+$ per second expected at the
220: JHF~\cite{jhf} one can estimate the sensitivity to $P_T$ which could be
221: achieved in this experiment. With the analyzing power of the detector
222: $\sim 0.3$ and the kinematical attenuation factor $\sim 0.8$, the
223: expected sensitivity to $P_T$ in some region ${\cal R}$ of the Dalitz
224: plot can be expressed as
225: \begin{equation}\label{eq:pt}
226: \delta P_T({\cal R}) \simeq \frac{1}
227: {0.3\cdot0.8\sqrt{N_{K_{\mu2\gamma}}({\cal R})}}\;,
228: \end{equation}
229: where $N_{K_{\mu2\gamma}}({\cal R})$ is the number of
230: $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ events in the region ${\cal R}$.
231: In this experiment, the most effective suppression of background
232: events are anticipated in the kinematic region with
233: $E_{\gamma}>20$~MeV, $E_{\mu}>200$~MeV. There the number
234: of $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ events accumulated for one year
235: running period is estimated to be $3\times 10^{10}$.
236: In what follows we adopt these cuts as well as the number of events.
237:
238: The branching ratio of this decay for $E_\gamma>20$~MeV and
239: $E_\mu>200$~MeV integrated over $10^\circ$ wide bins
240: in $\theta$ is presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:2}.
241: \begin{figure}
242: \begin{center}
243: \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{rho0_theta}
244: \end{center}
245: \caption{Branching ratio for $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ decay for $10^\circ$
246: wide bins in $\theta$; $E_\gamma>20$~MeV, $E_\mu>200$~MeV.
247: Dependence of this branching ratio on the values of the
248: $F_V$, $F_A$ form factors is quite weak.}
249: \label{fig:2}
250: \end{figure}
251: From this plot one can
252: estimate the sensitivity to $P_T$ in various $\theta$ regions.
253:
254:
255: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
256: \section{FSI and pinning down the kaon form factors}
257: \label{SecIII}
258:
259:
260: \subsection{Predictions and experimental data}
261:
262: Due to lack of understanding of the QCD low-energy structure, there
263: is no definite prediction for the values of the $F_V$ and $F_A$ form
264: factors: the calculation of them is a model dependent procedure. So,
265: the measurement of these form factors would give a possibility to make
266: a choice between various candidates for the correct description of the QCD
267: low-energy limit.
268:
269: The distribution of the $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ decay width over Dalitz plot
270: allows only the absolute values of the sum and difference
271: of the kaon form factors to be measured, since the term $f_\mathrm{IBSD}$ (see
272: Eq.~\eqref{fIBSD}) is small. The terms with linear and quadratic
273: dependence on $F_V$ and $F_A$ give the comparable contribution in some
274: regions of the Dalitz plot that could, in principle, make it possible
275: to measure the signs as well as the magnitudes of the form factors.
276: Unfortunately, in the region where the linear terms grow, the dominant
277: contribution to $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ (internal bremsstrahlung \eqref{fIB},
278: which depends only on $f_K$) also increases, that significantly
279: reduces the sensitivity of Dalitz plot measurements
280: to the kaon form factors. In practice, the situation is even worse,
281: since only the absolute value of the sum of the
282: kaon form factors has been measured with good accuracy
283: in these measurements, while their
284: difference still has only lower and upper
285: bounds~\cite{Adler:2000vk,Hagiwara:pw}:
286: \begin{gather}
287: |F_V+F_A|=0.165\pm0.013\;,
288: \label{bound-on-sum-from-Kl2gamma}\\
289: -0.24<F_A-F_V<0.04 \;.
290: \label{bound-on-dif-from-Kl2gamma}
291: \end{gather}
292:
293: Recently, both vector and axial-vector form factors have been measured
294: in $K^+\to\mu^+\nu_{\mu}e^+e^-$ and $K^+\to e^+\nu_{e}e^+e^-$
295: decays~\cite{Poblaguev:2002ug}. These decays are generalizations of
296: $K_{l2\gamma}$ for the case of a virtual photon in the final state, so
297: the kaon form factors $F_V$ and $F_A$ are believed to be the same in
298: all these processes. The combined fit for both four-body decay
299: experiments results in
300: \begin{equation}\label{measured-values}
301: F_V=-0.112\pm0.018 \;,\qquad F_A=-0.035\pm0.020 \;.
302: \end{equation}
303: These values are in a good agreement with ${\cal O}\l p^4\r$
304: predictions~\cite{CFT,Bijnens:1992en} of the chiral perturbation theory (ChPT)
305: \begin{equation}
306: F_V=-0.096 \;,\qquad F_A=-0.041\pm0.006 \;.
307: \label{CFT-predictions}
308: \end{equation}
309:
310:
311: \subsection{Dependence on $Q^2$}
312: \label{sec:Q2}
313:
314: It is worth to note that actually $F_V$ and $F_A$ are not
315: constants, but some functions of the momentum of the lepton pair,
316: $Q^2\equiv(p_K-q)^2$, with $p_K$ being kaon four-momentum.
317: In ChPT $Q^2$-dependence emerges due to higher
318: order corrections, which have not been calculated yet. Their
319: magnitude can be estimated as
320: \begin{equation*}
321: \frac{\Delta F_{V,A}}{F_{V,A}}\sim \frac{Q^2}{m_{V,A}^2}
322: =(1-x)\frac{m_K^2}{m_{V,A}^2}\;,
323: \end{equation*}
324: where $m_{V}$ and $m_{A}$ are masses of the first strange hadronic
325: vector ($K^{\ast}$) and axial-vector ($K_1$) resonances, respectively.
326: This estimate implies corrections as large as 25\%, hence the
327: experimental data on $K_{l2\gamma}$ should be fitted with at least two
328: additional parameters, that generally decreases the chances to
329: determine $F_V$ and $F_A$ in $K_{l2\gamma}$ experiments.
330:
331: In $K^+\to l^+\nu_{l}e^+e^-$ both vector and axial-vector form factors
332: get additional dependence on the non-zero $q^2$ that also increases
333: the bias in the corresponding fitting procedure. In
334: Ref.~\cite{Poblaguev:2002ug} experimental data was fitted assuming
335: constant form factors and form factors depending on $Q^2$ and $q^2$
336: \begin{equation}\label{fQq}
337: F_{V,A}(Q^2,q^2) = \frac{F_{V,A}}{(1-q^2/m_{\rho}^2)(1-Q^2/m_{V,A}^2)}
338: \;,
339: \end{equation}
340: with $m_\rho$ being mass of $\rho$ meson. This dependence appears in
341: the approximation of dominance of the contribution of lowest lying
342: resonances~\cite{CFT}.
343: The experimental data favors the
344: dependence~(\ref{fQq}) over the constant $F_{V,A}$, though the
345: accuracy achieved in this experiment did not allow definite
346: confirmation or rejection of $Q^2$-, $q^2$-dependence.
347:
348: The determination of the $Q^2$-dependence of the form factors may be
349: done in future experiments. In particular, analysis of the $P_N$ muon
350: polarization in $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ decays can improve knowledge about
351: the $F_{V,A}$ behavior for sure~\cite{Bezrukov:2003ka}.
352: However, at present, the unknown $Q^2$-dependence imports some
353: uncertainty into predictions for muon asymmetry to be measured in
354: future experiments. This concerns FSI contribution as well as possible
355: contribution from new physics, since both are functions of the kaon
356: form factors.
357:
358: To avoid all these difficulties one can try to find a physical
359: observable which strongly depends on $F_V$ and $F_A$ and can be
360: measured with an accuracy sufficient to distinguish the signs of kaon
361: form factors in the $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ decay. This implies that:
362: \emph{(i)} the observable we are interested in should exhibit linear
363: dependence on $F_V$ and $F_A$ in some region of the Dalitz plot;
364: \emph{(ii)} in this region the differential partial width should be
365: sufficiently large; \emph{(iii)}
366: the $Q^2$-corrections in this region
367: should be small enough to unambiguously determine the sign of the kaon
368: form factors.
369:
370: Below we consider the transverse muon polarization calculated in the
371: framework of the Standard Model as a physical observable, which pins
372: down the signs of kaon form factors in $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ decay.
373:
374:
375: \subsection{Final state interactions}
376:
377: In the framework of the Standard Model, the contribution to $P_T$
378: emerges only at loop levels due to the FSI. This
379: contribution has been recently calculated~\cite{Braguta:2002gz} at
380: one-loop level. The expression for $\rho^{SM}_T(x,y)$ can be read out from
381: Ref.~\cite{Braguta:2002gz} after changing the definitions of the form
382: factors: $F^{\mbox{\scriptsize\cite{Braguta:2002gz}}}_V\to-m_KF_V$ and
383: $F^{\mbox{\scriptsize\cite{Braguta:2002gz}}}_A\to m_KF_A$.
384: The asymmetry is positive
385: at any relevant $(x,y)$ and its absolute value ranges from zero to
386: $1.5\times10^{-3}$. The Dalitz plot distribution of $P_T$ for several
387: values of the form factors satisfying
388: \eqref{bound-on-sum-from-Kl2gamma}, \eqref{bound-on-dif-from-Kl2gamma}
389: is presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:Pt_Dalitz}.
390: \begin{figure*}
391: \begin{center}
392: \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Kmu_pt}
393: \end{center}
394: \caption{$P_T$ distribution for different $F_V+F_A$ and $F_A-F_V$ values.
395: The imposed cuts $E_\gamma>20 \mathrm{MeV}$,
396: $E_\mu>200 \mathrm{MeV}$ and the region
397: $120^\circ<\theta<160^\circ$ are also shown.}
398: \label{fig:Pt_Dalitz}
399: \end{figure*}
400:
401:
402: \subsection{Experimental prospects for determination of the form factors}
403:
404: The transverse muon polarization emerging from the FSI exhibits
405: the behavior we are looking for
406: to pin down the signs of the kaon form
407: factors. Indeed, the muon transverse polarization is sensitive to the
408: signs of $F_V$ and $F_A$, especially at large angles $\theta$ between
409: photon and muon momenta.
410:
411: To illustrate this point we present the $P_T$ values integrated over
412: $10^\circ$--intervals as a function of $\theta$ in
413: Fig.~\ref{fig:1}.
414: \begin{figure}
415: \begin{center}
416: \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{pt_theta}
417: \end{center}
418: \caption{$P_T$ (FSI) asymmetry for $10^\circ$ wide bins in $\theta$.
419: Upper region corresponds to negative $F_V+F_A$ and lower one --- to
420: positive.}
421: \label{fig:1}
422: \end{figure}
423: The value of $P_T$ associated with a bin
424: $\theta_1<\theta<\theta_2$ is determined as
425: \begin{equation}\label{theta-definition}
426: P_T(\theta_1<\theta<\theta_2)
427: = \frac{
428: \int\limits_{\mbox{\scriptsize cuts, }\theta_1<\theta<\theta_2}
429: \rho_T\,dx\,dy
430: }{
431: \int\limits_{\mbox{\scriptsize cuts, }\theta_1<\theta<\theta_2}
432: \rho_0\,dx\,dy
433: }\;,
434: \end{equation}
435: where the additional relevant cuts are $E_\gamma>20~\mathrm{MeV}$,
436: $E_\mu>200~\mathrm{MeV}$. We evaluate $P_T$ for four different sets
437: of the form factors corresponding to the boundaries of the allowed
438: intervals~\eqref{bound-on-sum-from-Kl2gamma},
439: \eqref{bound-on-dif-from-Kl2gamma}. One can see that the predictions
440: for $P_T$ differ significantly, and in the region of large angles,
441: $\theta>120^\circ$, {\it the sign of $F_V+F_A$ can be unambiguously
442: determined from the $P_T$ analysis only}.
443: Suppression of $K_{\pi2}$ decays becomes less efficient
444: at very large $\theta$ angles because of low
445: efficiency of
446: the detection of low energy photons from asymmetrical $\pi^0$ decays,
447: so we adopt the region $120^{\circ} < \theta <
448: 160^{\circ}$ as the realistic region with the best sensitivity to the
449: kaon form factors. The difference between the $P_T$ values
450: increases with $\theta$ and
451: reaches its maximum value at $\theta\sim150^\circ$, as seen from
452: Fig.~\ref{fig:1}. Although the
453: differential $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ branching ratio decreases at large
454: $\theta$, its value is still reasonable at large $\theta$, see
455: Figure~\ref{fig:2}. The fraction of the $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ events
456: within $120^{\circ} < \theta < 160^{\circ}$ is about 7\%. By making
457: use of Eq.~(\ref{eq:pt}), the statistical sensitivity to $P_T$ in this
458: Dalitz plot region is estimated to be
459: \begin{equation}
460: \delta P_T(120^\circ<\theta<160^\circ) \sim
461: 1.0\times10^{-4}\;,~~~1\sigma~{\rm level}.
462: \label{statsens}
463: \end{equation}
464:
465: To unambiguously determine the sign of $F_V+F_A$ without any
466: additional data on the difference of the form factors one has to be
467: able to distinguish the $P_T$ values with $F_V+F_A=0.165$,
468: $F_A-F_V=-0.24$ and $F_V+F_A=-0.165$, $F_A-F_V=0.04$ (the two closest
469: lines in Fig.~\ref{fig:1}). For these two sets of the form factors,
470: the difference between $P_T$ values in the region
471: $120^\circ<\theta<160^\circ$ is $1.6\times10^{-4}$, that allows
472: determination of the sign of the sum of the form factors at the
473: level of 1.6 $\sigma$. Note, there is no usual degeneracy related to
474: the signs of the sum of the form factors, that provides a
475: possibility to pin down the sign of the sum without fixing the
476: difference.
477:
478: If the difference between the form factors is measured with better
479: precision than in Eq.~\eqref{bound-on-dif-from-Kl2gamma} one has to
480: compare the situations with equal $F_A-F_V$ and different signs of the
481: sum of the form factors, that gives the difference in $P_T$ values in
482: the same region $(120^\circ<\theta<160^\circ)$ of
483: $(2.6\div3.6)\times10^{-4}$ depending on the precise value of
484: $F_A-F_V$. Then the statistical sensitivity~(\ref{statsens}) allows to
485: determine the signs at the level of $3\div4$ $\sigma$.
486:
487: So, measurement of $P_T$ allows
488: signs of the form factors to be distinguished. It is worth to note in
489: passing, that at large $\theta$ the
490: main contribution to the $P_T$~(FSI)
491: comes from the Dalitz plot region $x>0.4$, where the
492: uncertainty associated with the momentum of the lepton pair $Q^2$ is
493: $\lesssim$15\%. This uncertainty is
494: small enough to be neglected, because it is significantly less than
495: the difference in $P_T$ for the form factors of different signs,
496: see Fig.~\ref{fig:1}.
497:
498: Recently we found~\cite{Bezrukov:2003ka} that the normal muon
499: polarization $P_N$ is extremely sensitive to the values of the form
500: factors. Since measurement of $P_T$ pins down the sign of the form
501: factors, it will provide a possibility of an independent cross-check
502: of the results from measurement of $P_N$ in the future
503: experiment~\cite{Kudenko:yk}, which will determine $F_V$ and $F_A$
504: with accuracy as high as 1\%~\cite{Bezrukov:2003ka} basing only on its
505: own experimental data.
506: %DG:e
507:
508: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
509: \section{New Physics}
510: \label{SecIV}
511:
512:
513: \subsection{Standard parameterization}
514: \label{st-param}
515: For a general investigation of possible contribution
516: of some new $CP$-violating sources to the transverse muon polarization in
517: $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ we
518: first introduce the most general four-fermion interaction
519: \begin{equation*}
520: \begin{split}
521: {\cal L}&=-\frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}V_{us}^*\bar{s}\gamma^{\alpha}
522: (1-\gamma_5) u\cdot
523: \bar{\nu}\gamma_{\alpha}(1-\gamma_5)\mu
524: \\
525: &+G_V \bar{s}\gamma^{\alpha}u\cdot
526: \bar{\nu}\gamma_{\alpha}(1-\gamma_5)\mu+G_A \bar{s}\gamma^{\alpha}\gamma_5 u\cdot
527: \bar{\nu}\gamma_{\alpha}(1-\gamma_5)\mu
528: \\
529: & +G_S \bar{s}u\cdot \bar{\nu}(1+\gamma_5)\mu
530: +G_P \bar{s}\gamma_5 u\cdot \bar{\nu}(1+\gamma_5)\mu \nonumber
531: +\mathrm{h.c.}\;,
532: \end{split}
533: \end{equation*}
534: where $G_S$, $G_P$, $G_V$, and $G_A$, arising from new physics, denote
535: scalar, pseudoscalar, vector, and axial-vector coupling constants,
536: respectively. Their contribution to $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ decay amplitude
537: may be taken into account by the redefinition of the usual kaon form
538: factors as follows,
539: \begin{eqnarray*}
540: f_K &\to& f_K \left(1+\Delta_P +\Delta_A\right),
541: \nonumber\\
542: F_V &\to& F_V (1+\Delta_V),
543: \nonumber\\
544: F_A &\to& F_A (1-\Delta_A),
545: \end{eqnarray*}
546: with
547: \begin{equation*}
548: \Delta_{(P,A,V)}=
549: \frac{\sqrt{2}}{G_FV^*_{us}}
550: \left(\frac{G_PB_0}{m_{\mu}},G_A,G_V\right)\,.
551: \end{equation*}
552: The constant $B_0$ is related to
553: quark condensate as $\la 0|\bar{q}q|0\ra=-\frac{1}{2}B_0f_{\pi^0}^2$ and may be
554: evaluated from the masses of kaon and quarks,
555: $B_0=M_{K^0}^2/(m_d+m_s)\approx2$~GeV.
556: The scalar type interaction $G_S$ does not contribute to
557: $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ decay because of parity, and will not be considered
558: below. Note, however, that it contributes to the transverse muon
559: polarization in the $K\to\pi^0\mu\nu_\mu$ ($K_{\mu3}$) decays (while the
560: pseudoscalar interaction $G_P$ does not).
561:
562: The imaginary parts of the new coupling constants are responsible for
563: $CP$-violation and could give rise to the tree-level contributions to
564: the muon polarization~\cite{Gabrielli:1992dp,Bijnens:1992en,Chen:1997gf},
565: \begin{equation*}
566: \begin{split}
567: \rho_T(x,y)=&-2e^2G^2_F |V_{us}|^2 m^2_K m_{\mu}\frac{1-\lambda}{\lambda}
568: \sqrt{\lambda y-\lambda^2-r_{\mu}}\\
569: & \times\Biggl\{ \Imag[f_K(F_V+F_A)^*]\frac{\lambda}{1-\lambda}
570: \times\left(1-x-\frac{r_{\mu}}{\lambda}\right)\\
571: & \hphantom{\times\Biggl\{\,}+
572: \Imag[f_K(F_V-F_A)^*]\Biggr\}\,.
573: \end{split}
574: \end{equation*}
575: It is convenient to rewrite $P_T(x,y)$ as
576: \begin{equation*}
577: P_T(x,y) = P^V_T(x,y)+P^A_T(x,y)
578: \end{equation*}
579: with
580: \begin{eqnarray}
581: P^V_T(x,y)&=&\sigma_V(x,y)\Imag(\Delta_A+\Delta_V)\,,
582: \nonumber\\
583: P^A_T(x,y)&=&[\sigma_V(x,y)-\sigma_A(x,y)]\Imag(\Delta_P)\,,
584: \label{pt-va}
585: \end{eqnarray}
586: where
587: \begin{multline*}
588: \sigma_V(x,y)=2e^2G^2_F|V_{us}|^2 m^2_K m_{\mu}f_KF_V
589: \\
590: \times\frac{\sqrt{\lambda y-\lambda^2-r_{\mu}}}{\rho_0(x,y)}
591: \left[\frac{\lambda-1}{\lambda}-
592: \l1-x-\frac{r_{\mu}}{\lambda}\r\right]\;,
593: \end{multline*}
594: \begin{multline*}
595: \sigma_A(x,y)=2e^2G^2_F |V_{us}|^2 m^2_K m_{\mu}f_K F_A
596: \\
597: \times\frac{\sqrt{\lambda y-\lambda^2-r_{\mu}}}{\rho_0(x,y)}
598: \left[\frac{\lambda-1}{\lambda}+
599: \left(1-x-\frac{r_{\mu}}{\lambda}\right)\right]\;.
600: \end{multline*}
601:
602:
603: \subsection{Distribution over the Dalitz plot}
604:
605: To illustrate the sensitivity of the transverse muon polarization to
606: new physics we adopt the experimental
607: values~(\ref{measured-values}) for the kaon form factors
608: and plot the integrated over
609: $10^\circ$ $\theta$-intervals $P_T$ values as a function of $\theta$ (see the
610: definition~(\ref{theta-definition})) in Fig.~\ref{fig:FSI-fvfa-exp}.
611: The distribution of $P_T^V$ and $P_T^A$ over the Dalitz plot are
612: completely determined by the functions $\sigma_V(x,y)$ and
613: $[\sigma_V(x,y)-\sigma_A(x,y)]$, presented in Fig.~\ref{sv_sv-sa}.
614: \begin{figure*}
615: \begin{center}
616: \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Ksvsa}
617: \end{center}
618: \caption{Distribution of $\sigma_V$ and $[\sigma_V-\sigma_A]$
619: over the Dalitz plot.
620: \label{sv_sv-sa}}
621: \end{figure*}
622: \begin{figure}
623: \begin{center}
624: \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{ptint_FSI_newphys}
625: \end{center}
626: \caption{FSI contribution to $P_T$ for $10^\circ$ wide
627: bins in $\theta$; the kaon form factors are equal to the measured
628: values~(\ref{measured-values}).}
629: \label{fig:FSI-fvfa-exp}
630: \end{figure}
631: Indeed, the values of new $CP$-violating coupling constants provide
632: only the normalization factors, see Eqs.~(\ref{pt-va}). To understand
633: the general behavior we present $P_T^V$ and
634: $P_T^A$ values for $10^\circ$ wide bins in $\theta$ at
635: $\Imag(\Delta_V+\Delta_A)=\Imag(\Delta_P)=1$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:new-phys}.
636: \begin{figure}
637: \begin{center}
638: \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{ptint_newphys}
639: \end{center}
640: \caption{$P_T$ for $10^\circ$ wide
641: bins in $\theta$ at $\Imag(\Delta_V+\Delta_A)=\Imag(\Delta_P)=1$;
642: the kaon form factors are equal to the measured
643: values~(\ref{measured-values}).
644: \label{fig:new-phys}}
645: \end{figure}
646:
647: Comparing Figs.~\ref{fig:FSI-fvfa-exp} and \ref{fig:new-phys} one can
648: realize that while both FSI and new-physics contributions are peaked
649: at large $\theta$, the slope is steeper in the former case:
650: \begin{gather}\label{hierarchy}
651: \frac{P_T^V(\theta\sim150^\circ)}{P_T^V(\theta\sim20^\circ)}\simeq20
652: \;,\qquad
653: \frac{P_T^A(\theta\sim150^\circ)}{P_T^A(\theta\sim20^\circ)}\simeq35
654: \;,\\
655: \frac{P_T^{FSI}(\theta\sim150^\circ)}{P_T^{FSI}(\theta\sim20^\circ)}\simeq4.5
656: \;.
657: \end{gather}
658: %\textbf{The following does not follows from the previous...}
659: This shows that the sensitivity to new physics increases the region of
660: Dalitz plot with large $\theta$ angles. Indeed,
661: the best way to distinguish FSI and new-physics contributions is to
662: compare the $\theta$-dependence and $P_T$ averaged over the large
663: angles, $\theta=120^\circ\div160^\circ$.
664: For this range we obtain
665: \begin{eqnarray}
666: P_T^V(120^\circ<\theta<160^\circ)&=&0.14\cdot\Imag(\Delta_V+\Delta_A)
667: \;,\label{ptv}\\
668: P_T^A(120^\circ<\theta<160^\circ)&=&0.15\cdot\Imag(\Delta_P)
669: \;.\label{pta}
670: \end{eqnarray}
671: Taking into account the expected experimental sensitivity
672: \eqref{statsens} one may hope to detect effects of new physics leading to
673: $\Imag(\Delta_V+\Delta_A)$ or $\Imag\Delta_P$ as small as
674: $0.7\times10^{-3}$ at 1 $\sigma$ level.
675:
676: In the estimation of the sensitivity presented above we neglected the
677: contribution to $P_T$ from the FSI. This is possible if one reduces the
678: uncertainty in the prediction of $P_T^{FSI}$ to values smaller than
679: $\delta P_T$. To this end careful determination of the $F_A$ and
680: $F_V$ form factors from other experiments is needed. For example, from
681: $K\to l\nu_le^+e^-$, see Eq.~\eqref{measured-values}, or from the
682: measurement of the normal muon polarization $P_N$ in $K_{\mu2\gamma}$
683: decay, which is also a very sensitive to the form factors
684: observable~\cite{Bezrukov:2003ka}. Simultaneous measurement of both
685: $P_N$ and $P_T$ in one experiment with the same statistical sensitivity
686: provides good opportunity for accurate determination of $F_A$ and
687: $F_V$ from $P_N$ and, therefore, precise calculation of the FSI contribution
688: to measured $P_T$ and clear separation the non-SM $P_T$ from
689: physics background.
690:
691: The values of $\Delta_V$, $\Delta_A$ and $\Delta_P$ are completely
692: determined by the physics beyond the Standard Model. Below we
693: consider several extensions of the SM and present the corresponding
694: bounds on $\Delta_V$, $\Delta_A$ and $\Delta_P$ from existing
695: experimental data.
696:
697:
698: \subsection{Two-Higgs-doublet models with suppressed FCNC}
699:
700: In a general two-Higgs doublet~(2HD) model~\cite{Lee:iz} up- and down-type
701: quarks, as well as leptons, couple to both two-Higgs doublets.
702: The up- and down-type quark mass matrices cannot be diagonalized
703: simultaneously, that is the reason for flavor changing neutral current
704: to be induced at tree level. The relevant terms
705: read~\cite{Chen:1997gf}
706: \begin{multline}
707: {\cal L}_{\sm{2HD}}=
708: \frac{zm_\mu}{4M_H^2}\bar{s}\sum_i[\tilde{\xi}_{i2}^{D*}V_{ui}^{*}
709: \l1-\gamma_5\r-\tilde{\xi}_{i1}^{U*}V_{is}^{*}\l1+\gamma_5\r] u
710: \\\label{2HD-lagr}
711: \times\bar{\nu}\l1+\gamma_5\r\mu
712: \end{multline}
713: where $M_H$ is the mass of charged Higgs boson, $zm_{l_i}$ are
714: coupling constants of charged Higgs boson and corresponding leptons
715: and $\tilde{\xi}_{ij}^{U,D}$ are mixing matrices parameterizing up-
716: and down-type quark interactions with the lightest neutral Higgs
717: boson. This interaction results in the muon transverse polarization
718: \begin{equation}\label{pt2hd}
719: P_T=-[\sigma_V-\sigma_A]\frac{B_0z}{2\sqrt{2}G_FM_H^2|V_{us}|}
720: \sum_i\Imag[V_{is}^*\tilde{\xi}_{i1}^U+V_{ui}^*\tilde{\xi}_{i2}^{D*}]\;.
721: \end{equation}
722:
723: The measurement of the $b\to s\gamma$ gives
724: $M_H>315$~GeV~\cite{Gambino:2001ew}, perturbativity bound (see,
725: e.g.,~\cite{Barger:1989fj}) implies $z<2$~GeV$^{-1}$ and, if the only
726: relevant terms in Eq.~(\ref{pt2hd}) are $\tilde{\xi}^U_{11}$ and
727: $\tilde{\xi}^D_{22}$, neutral kaon system constrains them to be
728: $\lesssim10^{-2}\sqrt{M_H/\mathrm{GeV}}$~\cite{Chen:1997gf}. With
729: account of Eq.~(\ref{pta}) this favors the limit
730: \begin{equation*}
731: \begin{split}
732: |P_T(120^\circ<\theta<160^\circ)|& \lesssim 3\times10^{-2}
733: \l\frac{315~\rm{GeV}}{M_H}\r^{3/2}\\
734: &\times
735: \l\frac{z}{2~\rm{GeV}^{-1}}\r
736: \l\frac{
737: \Imag[\tilde{\xi}_{11}^U+\tilde{\xi}_{22}^{D*}]}{10^{-2}}\r\;.
738: \end{split}
739: \end{equation*}
740: It is more than 300 times larger than the expected experimental
741: sensitivity to $P_T$~\cite{Kudenko:yk}. Note, that without special
742: fine-tuning between
743: $\Imag[\tilde{\xi}_{11}^U]$ and $\Imag[\tilde{\xi}_{22}^{D*}]$, the
744: strongest limit on $P_T$ comes from the search for
745: transverse muon polarization in $K\to\pi^0\mu\nu$ decay~\cite{Abe:2002vc},
746: since
747: the interaction~(\ref{2HD-lagr}) generally provides both $G_P$ and
748: $G_S$ of the same order~\cite{Kobayashi:1995cy} (see
749: Sec.~\ref{st-param}). This yields
750: \begin{equation*}
751: |P_T(120^\circ<\theta<160^\circ)|\lesssim3\times10^{-3}\;
752: \end{equation*}
753: at 95\% CL.
754:
755: On the other hand, depending on the structure of the mixing matrices
756: $\tilde{\xi}^U$, $\tilde{\xi}^D$, the lower bound on $P_T$ in 2HD
757: model can be as large as 0.1.
758:
759:
760: \subsection{Three-Higgs-doublet models}
761:
762: In these models three different Higgs doublets ($h_u$, $h_d$, $h_l$)
763: couple to up-, down-type quarks and leptons, respectively.
764: The relevant interaction
765: between SM fermions and charged Higgs bosons for $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ decay
766: reads
767: \begin{equation}\label{THDML}
768: \begin{split}
769: {\cal
770: L}=&\frac{\sqrt{G_F}}{\sqrt[4]{2}}\sum_{i=1}^2\biggl\{h_i^+
771: [\alpha_i\bar{u}VM_d\l1+\gamma_5\r d
772: \\
773: +&\beta_i\bar{u}M_uV\l1-\gamma_5\r
774: d+\gamma_i\bar{\nu}M_l\l1+\gamma_5\r e]\biggr\}+h.c.\;,
775: \end{split}
776: \end{equation}
777: where $V$ is the CKM matrix, $M_d$, $M_u$ and $M_l$ are diagonal
778: down-type quark, up-type quark and lepton mass matrices, respectively,
779: and $\alpha_i$, $\beta_{i}$ and $\gamma_i$ ($i=1,2$) are complex
780: mixing parameters in Higgs sector. This interaction results
781: in~\cite{Kobayashi:1995cy}
782: \begin{eqnarray}
783: \nonumber
784: P_T&=&-[\sigma_V-\sigma_A]\l\frac{m_K^2}{m_1^2}-\frac{m_K^2}{m_2^2}\r\\&\times&
785: \l\Imag{\gamma_1\alpha_1^*}-\frac{m_u}{m_s}\Imag{\gamma_1\beta_1^*}\r
786: \label{pt3hd}
787: \end{eqnarray}
788: where $m_i$ are the masses of charged Higgs bosons. The current
789: experimental constraints on the parameters of the theory (see, e.g.,
790: Ref.~\cite{Grossman:1994jb} for a collection of relevant formulae)
791: give the same order bound on $P_T$ as from~\cite{Abe:2002vc}
792: for $P_T$ in $K\to\pi^0\mu\nu$
793: decay (as far as $G_P$ and $G_S$ emerging from
794: Lagrangian~(\ref{THDML}) are generally of the same order),
795: $$
796: |P_T(120^\circ<\theta<160^\circ)|\lesssim3\times10^{-3}\;,~~~95\%~{\rm CL}\;.
797: $$
798: This upper limit is about 30 times larger than the expected
799: sensitivity of the new experiment.
800:
801:
802: \subsection{Supersymmetric models with R-parity}
803:
804: In the minimal supersymmetric extension of the Standard Model (MSSM)
805: the relevant four-fermion interactions emerge due to W-boson and
806: charged Higgs boson exchanges with couplings being enhanced by
807: squark-gluino loops.
808:
809: Right-handed current interaction is generated by the diagram with
810: gluino, stop and sbottom particles running in the loop with left-right
811: mass insertions both for stop and sbottom. This gives rise to the
812: effective interaction~\cite{Wu:1996hi}
813: \begin{eqnarray}
814: {\cal L}_I&\!\!\!=\!\!\!&-C\frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}\bar{s}\gamma^\alpha\l1+\gamma_5\r u
815: \cdot
816: \bar{\nu}\gamma_\alpha\l1-\gamma_5\r\mu+\mathrm{h.c.}\;,~~
817: \label{efsusy}
818: \\\nonumber
819: C&\!\!\!=\!\!\!&I_0
820: \frac{m_tm_b\l A_t-\mu\cot{\beta}\r\l
821: A_b-\mu\tan{\beta}\r}{M^4_{\tilde{g}}} \\\nonumber
822: &\!\!\!\times\!\!\!&\frac{\alpha_s[M_{\sm{SUSY}}]}{36\pi} V_{31}^{U_{\sm{R}}}V_{32}^{D_{\sm R}*}V_{33}^{SCKM*}\;,
823: \end{eqnarray}
824: where $A_t$ and $A_b$ are the soft supersymmetry breaking trilinear
825: terms for stops and sbottoms, $\mu$ is Higgs superfield mixing
826: parameter, $\tan{\beta}$ is the ratio of the two Higgs vacuum
827: expectation values, $M_{\tilde{g}}$ is gluino mass, $V^{U_{\sm{R}}}$
828: and $V^{D_{\sm R}}$ are the rotations in the generation space between
829: up-type right-handed squarks and down-type right-handed squarks and
830: corresponding quark partners, respectively; $V^{SCKM}$ is the super
831: CKM matrix associated with W-squark-squark couplings, and $I_0$ is
832: given by the integral
833: \begin{equation*}
834: I_0\!=\!\int_0^1\!dz_1\int_0^{1-z_1}\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!dz_2\frac{24z_1z_2}{\l
835: 1+\l\frac{m^2_{\tilde{t}}}{M^2_{\tilde{g}}}-1\r
836: z_1+\l\frac{m^2_{\tilde{b}}}{M^2_{\tilde{g}}}-1\r z_2\r^2}\;.
837: \end{equation*}
838: For W-boson exchange, the interaction~(\ref{efsusy}) provides the polarization
839: \begin{eqnarray}
840: \nonumber
841: P_{T_W}&=&-\sigma_VI_0
842: \frac{m_tm_b\l A_t-\mu\cot{\beta}\r\l
843: A_b-\mu\tan{\beta}\r}{M^4_{\tilde{g}}} \\
844: &\times&\frac{\alpha_s[M_{\sm{SUSY}}]}{18\pi}
845: \frac{\Imag[{V_{31}^{U_{\sm{R}}}V_{32}^{D_{\sm R}*}V_{33}^{SCKM*}}]}{|V_{us}|}\;.
846: \label{ptsusywR1}
847: \end{eqnarray}
848: Current experimental constraints on the parameters of the
849: theory~\cite{Hagiwara:pw} leads to
850: \begin{equation}\label{PTWestimate}
851: |P_{T_W}(120^\circ<\theta<160^\circ)|
852: \lesssim 0.8\times10^{-3} \;,
853: \end{equation}
854: where we set $m_{\tilde{t}}=m_{\tilde{b}}=M_{\tilde{g}}/2$,
855: $\tan\beta\simeq50$,
856: $M_{\tilde{g}}\simeq A_b\simeq\mu\simeq A_t\simeq 500 \mathrm{GeV}$,
857: and $\Imag[{V_{31}^{U_{\sm{R}}}V_{32}^{D_{\sm R}*}V_{33}^{SCKM*}}]\simeq0.5$.
858:
859: The charged Higgs boson exchange enhanced by gluon-stop-sbottom loops
860: gives rise to the effective interaction~\cite{Wu:1996hi}
861: \begin{gather}
862: {\cal L}_{II}\!=\!-C_1\frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}\bar{s}\l1+\gamma_5\r u
863: \cdot
864: \bar{\nu}\l1+\gamma_5\r\mu\nonumber\\
865: -
866: C_2\frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}\bar{s}\l1-\gamma_5\r u
867: \cdot
868: \bar{\nu}\l1+\gamma_5\r\mu
869: +\mathrm{h.c.}\;,
870: \nonumber\\
871: \! \!C_1\!\!=\!\!\frac{\alpha_s[M_{\sm{SUSY}}]}{3\pi}I_1\frac{m_tm_\mu\tan{\beta}}{M_{H^+}^2}
872: \frac{A_t\cot{\beta}\!+\!\mu}{M_{\tilde{g}}}
873: V_{31}^{U_{\sm{R}}}V_{32}^{D_{\sm L}*}V_{33}^{H*}\;,\nonumber\\
874: \!\!C_2\!\!=\!\!\frac{\alpha_s[M_{\sm{SUSY}}]}{3\pi}I_1\frac{m_bm_\mu\tan{\beta}}{M_{H^+}^2}
875: \frac{A_b\tan{\beta}\!+\!\mu}{M_{\tilde{g}}}
876: V_{31}^{U_{\sm{L}}}V_{32}^{D_{\sm R}*}V_{33}^{H*}\;,
877: \nonumber\\\nonumber
878: I_1\!\!=\!\!\int_0^1dz_1\int_0^{1-z_1}\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!dz_2\frac{2}{
879: 1+\l\frac{m^2_{\tilde{t}}}{M^2_{\tilde{g}}}-1\r
880: z_1+\l\frac{m^2_{\tilde{b}}}{M^2_{\tilde{g}}}-1\r z_2}\;,
881: \end{gather}
882: where $V^H$ is the mixing in the coupling between charged Higgs and
883: up-type right-handed and down-type left-handed squarks, $V^{U_{\sm
884: L}}$ and $V^{D_{\sm L}}$ are the rotations in the generation space between
885: up-type left-handed squarks and down-type left-handed squarks and
886: corresponding quark partners, respectively. This results in
887: \begin{eqnarray}
888: \nonumber
889: P_{T_H}\!\!\!&=&\!\!\!-\!\!\l\sigma_V-\sigma_A\r\frac{\alpha_s[M_{\sm{SUSY}}]}{3\pi}I_1
890: \frac{B_0m_t\tan\beta}{M_{H^+}^2}\frac{A_t\cot{\beta}+\mu}{M_{\tilde{g}}}
891: \\&\times&\frac{\Imag[{V_{31}^{U_{\sm{R}}}V_{32}^{D_{\sm
892: L}*}V_{33}^{H*}}]}{|V_{us}|}\nonumber\\\nonumber&
893: -&\l\sigma_V-\sigma_A\r\frac{\alpha_s[M_{\sm{SUSY}}]}{3\pi}I_1
894: \frac{B_0m_b\tan\beta}{M_{H^+}^2}\frac{A_b\tan{\beta}+\mu}{M_{\tilde{g}}}
895: \\&\times&\frac{\Imag[{V_{31}^{U_{\sm{L}}}V_{32}^{D_{\sm
896: R}*}V_{33}^{H*}}]}{|V_{us}|}\;.
897: \label{ptsusywR2}
898: \end{eqnarray}
899: With the estimate $\Imag[{V_{31}^{U_{\sm{R}}}V_{32}^{D_{\sm
900: L}*}V_{33}^{H*}}]\simeq0.5$ and
901: $\Imag[{V_{31}^{U_{\sm{L}}}V_{32}^{D_{\sm R}*}V_{33}^{H*}}]\simeq0.5$
902: and the same settings as listed below Eq.~(\ref{PTWestimate}) both
903: terms in Eq.~(\ref{ptsusywR2}) are of the order $10^{-2}$.
904:
905: So, $P_{T_W}$ and $P_{T_H}$ are 10 and 100 times larger, respectively,
906: than the expected
907: experimental sensitivity.
908:
909: Note in passing, that without a special cancellation associated with
910: light superpartners, charge Higgs boson gives large contribution to
911: $b\to s\gamma$. This yields the bound
912: $M_H>315$~GeV~\cite{Gambino:2001ew}, which decreases the upper limit
913: on $P_{T_H}$ by an order of magnitude.
914:
915:
916: \subsection{Supersymmetric models without R-parity}
917:
918: In this section we consider the supersymmetric extensions of the
919: Standard Model with the violation of the R-parity and the lepton
920: number. The relevant superpotential is given by
921: \begin{equation*}
922: {\cal W}_{\sm{RV}}=\half\lambda_{ijk}L_iL_jE_k^c+\lambda'_{ijk}L_iQ_jD_k^c
923: \end{equation*}
924: with $L_i$ and $E^c_i$ being the chiral superfields of lepton doublets
925: and singlets, and $Q_i$, $D_i^c$ denote chiral superfields of quark
926: doublets and down-type singlets, respectively. In this model the
927: contribution to $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ decay arises due to the interaction
928: \begin{equation*}
929: {\cal
930: L}_{\sm{RV}}=-\frac{\lambda_{2i2}^*\lambda_{i12}'}{4M^2_{\tilde{e}_{\sm{L_i}}}}
931: \bar{s}(1-\gamma_5)u\cdot\bar{\nu}(1+\gamma_5)\mu\;,
932: \end{equation*}
933: where $M_{\tilde{e}_{\sm{L_i}}}$ are masses of the left-handed
934: sleptons. The resulting
935: transverse muon polarization reads~\cite{Chen:1997gf}
936: \begin{equation}\label{ptsusy-w/oR}
937: P_T=(\sigma_V-\sigma_A)\Imag[\lambda_{2i2}^*\lambda_{i12}']\frac{B_0}{m_\mu|V_{us}|}
938: \frac{1}{2\sqrt{2}G_FM^2_{\tilde{e}_{\sm{L_i}}}}\;.
939: \end{equation}
940: The strongest relevant experimental limit
941: on the parameters of the model comes from the
942: measurement of $K_L\to\bar{\mu}\mu$ decay rate~\cite{Choudhury:1996ia},
943: and one can obtain
944: from Eqs.~(\ref{pta}), (\ref{ptsusy-w/oR})
945: \begin{eqnarray}
946: &&|P_T(120^\circ<\theta<160^\circ)| \lesssim 1.5\times10^{-5}
947: \label{ptsusy-w/oR-numbers}\\
948: &\times&\Biggl(
949: \l\frac{\Imag[\lambda_{212}^*\lambda_{112}']}{3.8\times10^{-7}}\r
950: \l\frac{M_{\tilde{\nu}_1}}{M_{\tilde{e}_{\sm{L_1}}}}\r^2\nonumber\\&+&
951: \l\frac{\Imag[\lambda_{232}^*\lambda_{312}']}{3.8\times10^{-7}}\r
952: \l\frac{M_{\tilde{\nu}_3}}{M_{\tilde{e}_{\sm{L_3}}}}\r^2
953: \Biggr)\nonumber
954: \end{eqnarray}
955: with $M_{\tilde{\nu}_i}$ being sneutrino masses. This contribution
956: (\ref{ptsusy-w/oR-numbers}) is obviously too small to be detected. Note in
957: passing that in models with relevant hierarchy in slepton sector or in
958: models with some cancellation of the sparticle contributions to
959: $K_L\to\bar{\mu}\mu$ decay, one could expect $P_T$ in $K_{\mu2\gamma}$
960: at the level of $10^{-3}$.
961:
962:
963: \subsection{Left-right symmetric models}
964:
965: In models with left-right gauge symmetries $SU(2)_L\times
966: SU(2)_R\times U(1)_{B_L}$~\cite{left-right} the four-fermion
967: interaction which contributes to $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ decay is given by
968: \begin{equation*}
969: {\cal L}_{\sm{LR}}=-\frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}\l\frac{g_R}{g_L}\r\xi
970: V_{us}^{R*}\bar{s}\gamma_\mu(1+\gamma_5)u\cdot\bar{\nu}\gamma^\mu(1-\gamma_5)\mu
971: \end{equation*}
972: where $\xi$ is left-right complex mixing parameter, $V^R$ is
973: right-handed CKM matrix and $g_{L,R}$ are coupling constants of
974: $SU(2)_L$ and $SU(2)_R$, respectively. This interaction
975: results~\cite{Chen:1997gf} in
976: \begin{equation}\label{ptlr}
977: P_T=2\sigma_V\frac{g_R}{g_L}\Imag(\xi V_{us}^{R*})\;.
978: \end{equation}
979: With the current experimental constraints on the parameters of the
980: theory~\cite{Barenboim:1996nd} one can obtain from Eqs.~(\ref{ptv}),
981: (\ref{ptlr})
982: \begin{multline*}
983: |P_T(120^\circ<\theta<160^\circ)| \lesssim 2\times10^{-3}
984: \\
985: \times \l\frac{g_R/g_L}{1}\r
986: \Imag\biggl[\l\frac{\xi}{0.033}\r\l\frac{V_{us}^{R*}}{|V_{us}|}\r\biggr]\;,
987: \end{multline*}
988: %DG:b: As I realized, it is impossible to reduce somehow significantly
989: % this constraint
990: that is 20 times larger than the expected statistical
991: uncertainty of $P_T$~(\ref{statsens}).
992: %DG:e
993:
994: \subsection{Leptoquark models}
995:
996: There exist two leptoquark models contributing to $P_T$ in
997: $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ decay. The quantum numbers of the leptoquarks under
998: the Standard Model group are
999: \begin{equation*}
1000: \begin{split}
1001: \phi_1=&\l3,2,\frac{7}{3}\r\;,~~~({\rm Model~I})\;,\\
1002: \phi_2=&\l3,1,-\frac{2}{3}\r\;,~~~({\rm Model~II})\;,
1003: \label{}
1004: \end{split}
1005: \end{equation*}
1006: and the general couplings involving these leptoquarks are given by
1007: \begin{equation*}
1008: \begin{split}
1009: {\cal
1010: L}_{{\sm{LQ}}_I}=&\l\frac{\lambda_1}{2}\bar{Q}\l1+\gamma_5\r e
1011: +\frac{\lambda_1'}{2}\bar{u}\l1-\gamma_5\r L\r\phi_1+\mathrm{h.c.}\;,\\
1012: {\cal
1013: L}_{{\sm{LQ}}_{II}}=&\l\frac{\lambda_2}{2}\bar{Q}\l1+\gamma_5\r L^c
1014: +\frac{\lambda_2'}{2}\bar{u}\l1-\gamma_5\r e^c\r\phi_2+\mathrm{h.c.}\;.
1015: \label{}
1016: \end{split}
1017: \end{equation*}
1018: The relevant terms read
1019: \begin{equation*}
1020: \begin{split}
1021: {\cal
1022: L}_{{\sm{LQ}}_I}^{K\mu\nu}=&
1023: \frac{\lambda_1^{22}\lambda_1'^{1i*}}{4M_{\phi_1}^2}\bar{s}
1024: \l1+\gamma_5\r\mu\cdot\bar{\nu}_i\l1+\gamma_5\r u+h.c.\;,\\
1025: {\cal
1026: L}_{{\sm{LQ}}_{II}}^{K\mu\nu}=&
1027: \frac{\lambda_2^{2i}\lambda_2'^{12*}}{4M_{\phi_2}^2}\bar{s}
1028: \l1+\gamma_5\r\nu_i^c\cdot\bar{\mu}^c\l1+\gamma_5\r u
1029: +h.c.\;,
1030: \end{split}
1031: \end{equation*}
1032: where $M_{\phi_{1}}$ are leptoquark masses, and they
1033: provide~\cite{Chen:1997gf}
1034: \begin{eqnarray}
1035: \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!P_{T_I}\!\!&=&\!\!-\l\sigma_V-\sigma_A\r\Imag[\lambda_1^{22}\lambda_1'^{1i*}]
1036: \frac{B_0}{m_\mu|V_{us}|}\frac{\sqrt{2}}{8G_FM_{\phi_1}^2}\;,
1037: \label{ptlq1}\\
1038: \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!P_{T_{II}}\!\!&=&\!\!-\l\sigma_V-\sigma_A\r\Imag[\lambda_2^{2i}\lambda_2'^{12*}]
1039: \frac{B_0}{m_\mu|V_{us}|}\frac{\sqrt{2}}{8G_FM_{\phi_2}^2}\;.
1040: \label{ptlq2}
1041: \end{eqnarray}
1042: With the current experimental constraints on the parameters of the
1043: models with leptoquarks, the strongest limit on $P_T$ comes from the
1044: measurement of the $P_T$ in
1045: $K\to\pi^0\mu\nu$ decay~\cite{Abe:2002vc}
1046: (supposing that $G_P$ and $G_S$ constants are
1047: generally of the same order in this theory), that yields
1048: \begin{equation*}
1049: |P_T(120^\circ<\theta<160^\circ)|\lesssim3\times10^{-3}
1050: \end{equation*}
1051: at 95\% CL. This bound is larger than
1052: the expected experimental sensitivity by a factor of 30.
1053:
1054:
1055:
1056: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1057: \section{Conclusions}
1058: \label{SecV}
1059:
1060: The analysis presented in this paper concerns the information which
1061: could be drawn from the experiment on the measurement of the
1062: transverse muon polarization $P_T$ in $K\to\mu\nu\gamma$ decay.
1063:
1064: It was found that the FSI $P_T$ distribution over the Dalitz plot is
1065: sensitive to the values of the kaon form factors. The best
1066: sensitivity is exhibited in the region of large angles $\theta$
1067: between muon and photon. The $P_T$ calculated in this region allows
1068: to pin down the signs of the kaon form factors in spite of the
1069: uncertainties associated with the unknown dependence of the form
1070: factors on the momentum of the lepton pair. To this end the
1071: statistics of $\geq 10^{9}$ $K_{\mu2\gamma}$ events with large
1072: $\theta > 120^{\circ}$ is required.
1073:
1074: It was recently demonstrated~\cite{Bezrukov:2003ka} that the normal
1075: muon polarization $P_N$ is very sensitive to the signs and the values
1076: of the kaon form factors. Since $P_N$ emerges at tree level, the
1077: statistics expected in the new experiment proposed at JHF allows to
1078: determine for sure the kaon form factors with a few percent accuracy.
1079: The unknown dependence of the form factors on the momentum of the
1080: lepton pair should be determined by fitting the experimental data on
1081: the $P_N$ Dalitz plot distribution.
1082:
1083: Finally, it was shown that possible new-physics contributions and the
1084: FSI contribution to $P_T$ show different behavior over the Dalitz
1085: plot. In particular, at large $\theta$ the new-physics contributions
1086: to $P_T$ grow by one and a half orders of magnitude, that suggests to
1087: consider this region as the most interesting to probe the new physics
1088: responsible for $T$-violating effects. In most cases the contribution
1089: from new physics can exceed the measurable level of $P_T$ by one or
1090: two orders of magnitude. Moreover, extraction of form factor values from
1091: $P_N$ allows the background contribution from FSI to the non-SM
1092: T-violating muon polarization to be determined with small uncertainty.
1093:
1094: It is worth to note, that the signs of pion form factors $F^\pi_V$ and
1095: $F^\pi_A$ have not been measured yet~\cite{Hagiwara:pw}. The
1096: experimental situation there is similar to kaons, though $F^\pi_V$ has
1097: a definite CVC prediction and the pion form factors are almost
1098: constants over the whole Dalitz plot. The FSI contributions to $P_T$
1099: is of the order of $10^{-4}$ ($10^{-3}$) for $\pi_{\mu2\gamma}$
1100: ($\pi_{e2\gamma}$)~\cite{Bezrukov:2002zc}. From the analysis given
1101: above, we can suggest that the measurement of the transverse lepton
1102: polarization in $\pi_{l2\gamma}$ would allow to pin down the signs of
1103: the pion form factors, if possible contributions to $P_T$ from physics
1104: beyond the Standard Model are negligible. This issue will be
1105: considered elsewhere.
1106:
1107: The work is supported in part by RFBR grant 02-02-17398 and by the
1108: program SCOPES of the Swiss National Science Foundation, project
1109: No.~7SUPJ062239. The work of F.B.\ is supported in part by CRDF grant
1110: RP1-2364-MO-02. The work of D.G.\ is supported in part by the INTAS
1111: YSF 2001/2-142.
1112:
1113:
1114: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1115: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1116: \bibitem{Lee:iz}
1117: T.~D.~Lee,
1118: %``A Theory Of Spontaneous T Violation,''
1119: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 8}, 1226 (1973).
1120: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D8,1226;%%
1121:
1122: \bibitem{general}
1123: S.~Weinberg,
1124: %``Unitarity Constraints On CP Nonconservation In Higgs Exchange,''
1125: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 42}, 860 (1990);
1126: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D42,860;%%
1127: R.~Garisto and G.~L.~Kane,
1128: %``Nonstandard model CP violation in K(mu3) decays as a method of probing for new physics,''
1129: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 44}, 2038 (1991);
1130: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D44,2038;%%
1131: G.~Belanger and C.~Q.~Geng,
1132: %``T violating muon polarization in K(mu-3) decays,''
1133: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 44}, 2789 (1991);
1134: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D44,2789;%%
1135: G.~H.~Wu and J.~N.~Ng,
1136: %``Supersymmetric time reversal violation in semileptonic decays of charged mesons,''
1137: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 392}, 93 (1997)
1138: [arXiv:hep-ph/9609314].
1139: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9609314;%
1140:
1141: \bibitem{Gabrielli:1992dp}
1142: E.~Gabrielli,
1143: %``The decays K+ $\to$ e+ electron-neutrino gamma
1144: %and K+ $\to$ mu+ muon-neutrino gamma, and tensorial couplings
1145: %in the effective weakHamiltonian,''
1146: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 301} (1993) 409.
1147: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B301,409;%%
1148:
1149: \bibitem{Bijnens:1992en}
1150: J.~Bijnens, G.~Ecker and J.~Gasser,
1151: %``Radiative semileptonic kaon decays,''
1152: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 396}, 81 (1993)
1153: [arXiv:hep-ph/9209261].
1154: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9209261;%%
1155:
1156: \bibitem{Chen:1997gf}
1157: C.~H.~Chen, C.~Q.~Geng and C.~C.~Lih,
1158: %``T violating muon polarization in K+ $\to$ mu+ nu gamma,''
1159: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 56}, 6856 (1997)
1160: [arXiv:hep-ph/9709447].
1161: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9709447;%%
1162:
1163:
1164: \bibitem{Abe:1999nc}
1165: M.~Abe {\it et al.} [KEK-E246 Collaboration],
1166: %``Search for T-violating transverse muon polarization in K+ $\to$ pi0 mu+ nu decay using stopped kaons,''
1167: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 83}, 4253 (1999);
1168: %%CITATION = PRLTA,83,4253;%%
1169:
1170:
1171: \bibitem{Kudenko:2000sc}
1172: Y.~G.~Kudenko,
1173: %``Search for T-violation in K+ $\to$ pi0 mu+ nu and K+ $\to$ mu+ nu gamma decays,''
1174: Phys.\ Atom.\ Nucl.\ {\bf 65}, 244 (2002)
1175: [Yad.\ Fiz.\ {\bf 65}, 269 (2002)]
1176: [arXiv:hep-ex/0103007].
1177: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0103007;%%
1178:
1179: \bibitem{Kudenko:yk}
1180: Y.~G.~Kudenko and A.~N.~Khotyantsev,
1181: %``New Method For Measurement Of A T-Violating Muon Polarization In K+ Decays,''
1182: Phys.\ Atom.\ Nucl.\ {\bf 63}, 820 (2000)
1183: [Yad.\ Fiz.\ {\bf 63}, 890 (2000)];
1184: %%CITATION = PANUE,63,820;%%
1185: Yu.~Kudenko, Measurement of T-violation in K$^+$ decays at JHF,
1186: Proceedings of the International Workshop on JHF
1187: Science, March 4-7,1998, Tsukuba, Japan, v.II, p.39.
1188: %%CITATION = NONE;%%
1189:
1190: \bibitem{jhf}M.~Furusaka {\it et al}., The Joint Project for
1191: High-Intensity Proron Accelerators, KEK Report 99-4, 1999.
1192: %%CITATION = NONE;%%
1193:
1194: \bibitem{Adler:2000vk}
1195: S.~C.~Adler {\it et al.} [E787 Collaboration],
1196: %``Measurement of structure dependent K+ $\to$ mu+ nu/mu gamma decay,''
1197: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 85}, 2256 (2000)
1198: [arXiv:hep-ex/0003019].
1199: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0003019;%%
1200:
1201: \bibitem{Hagiwara:pw}
1202: K.~Hagiwara {\it et al.} [Particle Data Group Collaboration],
1203: %``Review Of Particle Physics,''
1204: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66}, 010001 (2002).
1205: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D66,010001;%%
1206:
1207: \bibitem{Poblaguev:2002ug}
1208: A.~A.~Poblaguev {\it et al.},
1209: %``Experimental study of the radiative decays K+ $\to$ mu+ nu e+ e- and K+ $\to$ e+ nu e+ e-,''
1210: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 89}, 061803 (2002)
1211: [arXiv:hep-ex/0204006].
1212: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0204006;%%
1213:
1214: \bibitem{Bezrukov:2003ka}
1215: F.~L.~Bezrukov, D.~S.~Gorbunov and Y.~G.~Kudenko,
1216: %``Pinning down the kaon form factors in K^+ $\to$ mu^+ nu_mu gamma decay,''
1217: arXiv:hep-ph/0302106.
1218: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0302106;%%
1219:
1220: \bibitem{CFT}
1221: D.~Y.~Bardin and E.~A.~Ivanov,
1222: %``Weak Electromagnetic Decays. (In Russian),''
1223: Sov.\ J.\ Part.\ Nucl.\ {\bf 7}, 286 (1976)
1224: [Fiz.\ Elem.\ Chast.\ Atom.\ Yadra {\bf 7}, 726 (1976)].
1225: %%CITATION = SJPNA,7,286;%%
1226:
1227: \bibitem{Braguta:2002gz}
1228: V.~V.~Braguta, A.~E.~Chalov and A.~A.~Likhoded,
1229: %``Muon transverse polarization in the K(l2 gamma) decay in SM,''
1230: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66}, 034012 (2002)
1231: [arXiv:hep-ph/0205203].
1232: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0205203;%%
1233:
1234: \bibitem{Gambino:2001ew}
1235: P.~Gambino and M.~Misiak,
1236: %``Quark mass effects in anti-B $\to$ X/s gamma,''
1237: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 611}, 338 (2001)
1238: [arXiv:hep-ph/0104034].
1239: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0104034;%%
1240:
1241: \bibitem{Barger:1989fj}
1242: V.~D.~Barger, J.~L.~Hewett and R.~J.~Phillips,
1243: %``New Constraints On The Charged Higgs Sector In Two Higgs Doublet Models,''
1244: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 41}, 3421 (1990).
1245: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D41,3421;%%
1246:
1247: \bibitem{Kobayashi:1995cy}
1248: M.~Kobayashi, T.~T.~Lin and Y.~Okada,
1249: %``Time reversal violation in K+ $\to$ mu+ neutrino gamma decay and three Higgs model,''
1250: Prog.\ Theor.\ Phys.\ {\bf 95}, 361 (1996)
1251: [arXiv:hep-ph/9507225].
1252: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9507225;%%
1253:
1254: \bibitem{Grossman:1994jb}
1255: Y.~Grossman,
1256: %``Phenomenology of models with more than two Higgs doublets,''
1257: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 426}, 355 (1994)
1258: [arXiv:hep-ph/9401311].
1259: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9401311;%%
1260:
1261: \bibitem{Wu:1996hi}
1262: G.~H.~Wu and J.~N.~Ng,
1263: %``T-violation in K+ $\to$ mu+ nu gamma decay and supersymmetry,''
1264: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 55}, 2806 (1997)
1265: [arXiv:hep-ph/9610533].
1266: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9610533;%%
1267:
1268: \bibitem{Abe:2002vc}
1269: M.~Abe {\it et al.},
1270: %``Further search for T-violation in the decay K+ $\to$ pi0 mu+ nu,''
1271: [arXiv:hep-ex/0211049].
1272: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0211049;%%
1273:
1274: \bibitem{Choudhury:1996ia}
1275: D.~Choudhury and P.~Roy,
1276: %``New Constraints On Lepton Nonconserving R-parity Violating Couplings,''
1277: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 378}, 153 (1996)
1278: [arXiv:hep-ph/9603363].
1279: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9603363;%%
1280:
1281: \bibitem{left-right}
1282: J.~C.~Pati and A.~Salam,
1283: %``Lepton Number As The Fourth Color,''
1284: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 10}, 275 (1974);
1285: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D10,275;%%
1286: R.~N.~Mohapatra and J.~C.~Pati,
1287: %``Left-Right Gauge Symmetry And An 'Isoconjugate' Model Of CP Violation,''
1288: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 11}, 566 (1975);
1289: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D11,566;%%
1290: R.~N.~Mohapatra and J.~C.~Pati,
1291: %``A 'Natural' Left-Right Symmetry,''
1292: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 11}, 2558 (1975);
1293: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D11,2558;%%
1294: G.~Senjanovic and R.~N.~Mohapatra,
1295: %``Exact Left-Right Symmetry And Spontaneous Violation Of Parity,''
1296: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 12}, 1502 (1975).
1297: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D12,1502;%%
1298:
1299: \bibitem{Barenboim:1996nd}
1300: G.~Barenboim, J.~Bernabeu, J.~Prades and M.~Raidal,
1301: %``Constraints on the W(R) mass and CP-violation in left-right models,''
1302: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 55}, 4213 (1997)
1303: [arXiv:hep-ph/9611347].
1304: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9611347;%%
1305:
1306: \bibitem{Bezrukov:2002zc}
1307: F.~L.~Bezrukov and D.~S.~Gorbunov,
1308: %``T-odd correlations in pi $\to$ e nu/e gamma and pi $\to$ mu nu/mu gamma decays,''
1309: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66}, 054012 (2002)
1310: [arXiv:hep-ph/0205158].
1311: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0205158;%%
1312:
1313: \end{thebibliography}
1314: \end{document}
1315:
1316: