1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2: % New LateX2e command
3: %
4: \documentclass[a4paper,12pt]{article}
5: \usepackage{epsfig}
6: \usepackage{citesort}
7: %
8: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
9: % Text Dimensions
10: \topmargin -1.5cm % distance to headers
11: \headheight 5.0mm % height of header box
12: \headsep 8.0mm % distance to top line
13: \textheight 225mm % height of text
14: \footskip 8.0mm % distance from bottom line
15: \oddsidemargin 4.8mm % Horizontal alignment
16: \evensidemargin 4.8mm % Horizontal alignment
17: \textwidth 160mm % Horizontal alignment
18: \date{\today}
19: %
20: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
21: %
22: %\def\unit{\leavevmode\hbox{\small1\kern-3.6pt\normalsize1}}
23: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.1} \normalsize
24: \renewcommand{\topfraction}{0.8}
25: \renewcommand{\bottomfraction}{0.8}
26: % shortcuts
27: \newcommand{\bmat}{\left(\begin{array}}
28: \newcommand{\emat}{\end{array}\right)}
29: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{equation}}
30: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}}
31: \newcommand{\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}}
32: \newcommand{\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}
33: \def\ie{{\it i.e.}}
34: \newcommand{\W}{{\scriptscriptstyle W}}
35: \newcommand{\HH}{{\scriptscriptstyle H}}
36: \newcommand{\KK}{{\scriptscriptstyle K}}
37: \newcommand{\SM}{{\scriptscriptstyle SM}}
38: \newcommand{\alfasw}{\alpha_s({m_{\W}})}
39: \def\du#1#2{{\left(\delta^u_{#1}\right)_{#2}}}
40: \def\dd#1#2{{\left(\delta^d_{#1}\right)_{#2}}}
41: \newcommand{\la}{\lambda}
42: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
43: \def\lsim{\raise0.3ex\hbox{$\;<$\kern-0.75em\raise-1.1ex\hbox{$\sim\;$}}}
44: \def\gsim{\raise0.3ex\hbox{$\;>$\kern-0.75em\raise-1.1ex\hbox{$\sim\;$}}}
45: \def\Frac#1#2{\frac{\displaystyle{#1}}{\displaystyle{#2}}}
46: \def\no{\nonumber\\}
47: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
48: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
49: \def\dofig#1#2{\epsfxsize=#1\centerline{\epsfig{file=#2, angle=-90}}}
50: \def\dofigs#1#2#3{\centerline{\epsfxsize=#1\epsfig{file=#2, width=7.5cm,
51: height=7.5cm, angle=-90}
52: \hfil\epsfxsize=#1\epsfig{file=#3, width=7.5cm, height=7.5cm, angle=-90}}}
53: %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
54: %
55: \def\no{\nonumber\\}
56: \def\slash#1{\ooalign{\hfil/\hfil\crcr$#1$}}
57: \def\ep{\eta^{\prime}}
58: \def\susy{\mbox{\tiny SUSY}}
59: \def\sm{\mbox{\tiny SM}}
60: %%%%%%%%%%%%%
61:
62: \begin{document}
63: %
64: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\fnsymbol{footnote}}
65: \rightline{IPPP/03/30} \rightline{DCPT/03/60}
66: \rightline{HIP-2003-33/TH}
67: \vspace{.3cm}
68: {\Large
69: \begin{center}
70: {\bf Chargino contributions to the CP asymmetry in $B\to \phi K_S$ decay}
71: \end{center}}
72: \vspace{.3cm}
73: \begin{center}
74: D. Chakraverty$^{1}$, E. Gabrielli$^{1}$, K. Huitu$^{1,2}$,
75: and S. Khalil$^{3,4}$\\
76: \vspace{.3cm}
77: %
78: $^1$\emph{Helsinki Institute of Physics, POB 64, 00014 University of
79: Helsinki, Finland.}\\
80: $^2$\emph{Div. of HEP, Dept. of Phys. Sciences, POB 64,00014
81: University of Helsinki, Finland.}\\
82: $^3$ \emph{IPPP, University of Durham, South Rd., Durham
83: DH1 3LE, U.K.}\\
84: $^4$ \emph{Ain Shams University, Faculty of Science, Cairo, 11566, Egypt.}\\
85: \end{center}
86:
87: \vspace{.3cm}
88: \hrule \vskip 0.3cm
89: \begin{center}
90: \small{\bf Abstract}\\[3mm]
91: \end{center}
92: We perform a model independent analysis of
93: the chargino contributions to the CP asymmetry in
94: $B\to \phi K_S$ process. We use the mass insertion approximation
95: method generalized by including the possibility of a light right-stop.
96: We find that the dominant effect is given by
97: the contributions of the mass insertions $(\delta_{LL}^u)_{32}$
98: and $(\delta_{RL}^u)_{32}$ to the Wilson coefficient of the
99: chromomagnetic operator.
100: By considering both these contributions simultaneously,
101: the CP asymmetry in $B\to \phi K_S$ process
102: is significantly reduced and negative values, which are
103: within the 1$\sigma$ experimental range and satisfy the
104: $b\to s \gamma$ constraints, can be obtained.
105: %
106: \begin{minipage}[h]{14.0cm}
107: \end{minipage}
108: \vskip 0.3cm \hrule \vskip 0.5cm
109: The measurement of CP asymmetries in nonleptonic B decays
110: plays a crucial role in testing the CP violation mechanism
111: of the Standard Model (SM) and it is a powerful probe of New Physics
112: (NP) beyond the SM.
113: The CP asymmetries are usually described by the time dependent rates
114: $a_{f_{CP}}(t)$, for $B^0$ and $\bar{B}^0$ to a CP eigenstate $f_{CP}$
115: \begin{eqnarray}
116: a_{f_{CP}}(t)&=&\frac{\Gamma (\overline{B}^0(t)\to f_{CP})-\Gamma
117: (B^0(t)\to f_{CP})} {\Gamma (\overline{B}^0(t)\to f_{CP})+\Gamma (B^0(t)
118: \to f_{CP})}
119: \nonumber \\
120: &=&C_{f_{CP}}\cos\Delta M_{B_d}t+S_{f_{CP}}\sin\Delta M_{B_d}t
121: \label{CPasym}
122: \end{eqnarray}
123: where $C_{f_{CP}}$ and $S_{f_{CP}}$ represent the coefficients
124: of direct and indirect CP violations respectively, and
125: $\Delta M_{B_d}$ is the $B^0$ eigenstate mass difference.
126:
127: The time dependent CP asymmetry
128: $a_{J/\psi K_S}(t)$ in the B meson decay
129: $B\to J/\Psi K_S$ has been recently measured
130: by BaBar and Belle Collaboration, with an average of
131: $S_{J/\Psi K_S} = \sin{2\beta}=0.734 \pm 0.034$ \cite{babar,belle},
132: showing the first evidence of CP violation in B meson system
133: in perfect agreement with the Standard Model (SM) predictions.
134: This is expected, since the SM contribution is at tree-level.
135:
136: For the decay $B\to \phi K_S$, where the same weak phase is measured,
137: the situation is qualitatively different.
138: The SM contribution is at one-loop level, and one can expect crucial
139: contributions from New Physics.
140: The branching ratio for $B\to \phi K_S$ has recently
141: been measured by both BaBar and Belle \cite{Br}
142: with an average for the branching ratio of $BR(B\to \Phi K_S) =
143: \left(8.4^{+2.5}_{-2.1}\right)\times 10^{-6}$ which is
144: slightly different from the SM predictions. However, this is not
145: a signal of a real problem, since the SM evaluation of $BR(B\to \Phi K_S)$
146: is largely affected by theoretical uncertainties in the
147: evaluation of hadronic matrix elements.
148: On the other hand, the time dependent CP asymmetry in Eq.(\ref{CPasym})
149: is less sensitive to these uncertainties, since the hadronic
150: matrix elements almost cancel out in the ratio of rates.
151:
152: Recently BaBar and Belle Collaborations
153: \cite{babar2,belle} have also measured
154: the time dependent CP asymmetry in $B\to \phi K_S$ process, reporting
155: an average value of $S_{\phi K_S} = -0.39 \pm 0.41$.
156: In the SM, $S_{\phi K_S}$ is
157: expected to give the same value of $\sin 2\beta$ as extracted from
158: $S_{J/\psi K_S}$, up to terms of order $O(\lambda^2)$
159: where $\lambda$ is the Cabibbo mixing. Thus, the comparison of
160: the experimental results for $S_{J/\psi K_S}$ and $S_{\phi K_S}$
161: reveals a $2.7~ \sigma$ deviation from the SM prediction.
162: If this discrepancy will be confirmed with a better accuracy, it will be
163: a clean signal of NP.
164:
165: Due to the
166: additional sources of flavor and CP violation beyond the ones of
167: Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa (CKM) mixing matrix,
168: supersymmetric (SUSY) models are natural candidates
169: for explaining the difference between the CP asymmetries $S_{\phi K_S}$
170: and $S_{J/\psi K_S}$.
171: Recently, the gluino contributions to
172: $S_{\phi K_S}$ have been analyzed in Refs.\cite{Khalil:2002fm,gluino}.
173: In these works, it has been shown
174: that gluino exchanges can explain the experimental
175: results of $S_{\phi K_S}$ without conflicting the
176: experimental constraints from $S_{J/\psi K_S}$ and the branching ratio
177: $BR(b\to s \gamma)$.
178:
179: The main purpose of this letter is to show that also the chargino
180: contributions to $S_{\phi K_S}$ can be significant
181: and account for these recent measurements.
182: We perform a model independent analysis by using the well known
183: method of mass insertion approximation \cite{Hall:1985dx},
184: generalized by including the possibility of a light right-stop
185: in the otherwise almost degenerate squark spectrum.
186: In our analysis, we take into account all the operators that contribute to the
187: effective Hamiltonian for $\Delta B=1$ transitions
188: $H_{\mathrm{eff}}^{\Delta B=1}$ and provide analytical results
189: for the corresponding leading Wilson coefficients.
190:
191: Now we start our analysis of the SUSY contributions to the
192: time dependent CP asymmetry in $B\to \phi K_S$ decay.
193: In the following we will adopt the parameterization of
194: the SM and SUSY amplitudes as in Ref.\cite{Khalil:2002fm}, namely
195: \be
196: \left(\frac{A^{\susy}}{A^{\sm}}\right)_{\phi K_S}\equiv
197: R_{\phi}~ e^{i\theta_{\phi}}~e^{i\delta_{12}}
198: \label{ratio}
199: \ee
200: where $\theta_{\phi}$ is the SUSY CP violating phase,
201: and $\delta_{12}=\delta_{SM}-\delta_{SUSY}$
202: is the strong (CP conserving) phase.
203: In this case, the mixing CP asymmetry
204: $S_{\phi K_S}$ takes the following form
205: \begin{eqnarray}
206: S_{\phi K_S}\!&=&\!\Frac{\sin 2 \beta \!+\!2 R_{\phi}
207: \cos \delta_{12} \sin(\theta_{\phi}\!+\!2 \beta)\!+
208: R_{\phi}^2 \sin (2 \theta_{\phi}\!+\!2 \beta)}{1+ 2 R_{\phi}
209: \cos \delta_{12} \cos\theta_{\phi} +R_{\phi}^2}.
210: \label{cpmixing}
211: \end{eqnarray}
212: The most general amplitude for $B\to \phi K_S$ process can be written as
213: \begin{equation}
214: \overline{A}(\phi K)=-\frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}\sum_{i=1}^{12}
215: \left[C_i(\mu)+\tilde{C}_i(\mu)\right]
216: \langle\phi\bar{K}^0 | Q_i (\mu)|\bar{B}^0\rangle ,
217: \end{equation}
218: where $Q_i$ are the operators which contribute to the
219: effective Hamiltonian for $\Delta B=1$ transitions and $C_i(\mu)$ are
220: the corresponding Wilson coefficients at energy scale $\mu$.
221: The matrix elements $\langle\phi\bar{K}^0 | Q_i |\bar{B}^0\rangle$ are
222: calculated in the naive factorization approximation \cite{Ali:1998eb},
223: and their expressions can be found in Ref.\cite{Khalil:2002fm}.
224: In this notation, the $Q_{i=1-10}$ represent the
225: four-fermion operators, and $Q_{11}$ and $Q_{12}$ the magnetic and
226: chromomagnetic dipole operators respectively.
227: The Wilson coefficients $\tilde{C}_i$ are associated to the
228: operators $\tilde{Q}_i$ which are obtained from $Q_i$ by exchanging
229: $\gamma_5\to -\gamma_5$ in their chiral structure,
230: see Ref.\cite{Khalil:2002fm} for their definition.
231: In the SM, $\tilde{C}_i$ are chirally
232: suppressed with respect to $C_i$ ones by terms proportional to light quark
233: masses. However, in non-minimal
234: SUSY extensions of the SM
235: they can receive sizeable contributions, for instance from the
236: gluino mediated penguin and box diagrams.
237: On the other hand, the
238: chargino contributions to $\tilde{C}_i$ are always
239: suppressed by Yukawas of the first two generations.
240: Thus, we can
241: safely neglect $\tilde{C}_i$ contributions in our analysis.
242:
243: The Wilson coefficients $C_i(\mu)$ at a
244: lower scale $\mu \simeq \mathcal{O}(m_b)$ can be extrapolated by
245: the corresponding ones at high scale $C_i(\mu_W)$ as
246: $ C_i(\mu) = \sum_j \hat{U}_{ij}(\mu, \mu_W) \, C_j(m_W)$,
247: where $\hat{U}_{ij}(\mu, \mu_W)$ is the QCD evolution matrix and
248: $\mu_W \simeq m_W$.
249: Since the operator $Q_{12}$ is of order $\alpha_s$,
250: we include in our analysis the LO corrections only for the effective
251: Wilson coefficient $C_{12}(\mu)$,
252: while for the remaining ones $C_{i=1-10}(\mu)$
253: we use the matrix $\hat{U}_{ij}(\mu, \mu_W)$ at NLO order in QCD and QED
254: \cite{Buchalla:1995vs}.
255:
256: As is well known, supersymmetry affects the Wilson
257: coefficients $C_i(\mu)$ only at high scale $\mu\simeq \mu_W$.
258: The chargino contributions to $C_i(\mu_W)$, corresponding to
259: the effective Hamiltonian for $\Delta B=1$ transitions,
260: have been calculated exactly (at 1-loop) in Refs.\cite{BBMR} and \cite{GG}.
261: Here we provide the results for chargino contributions to $C_i(\mu_W)$,
262: evaluated at the first order in mass insertion approximation.
263: By using the notation of Ref.\cite{GG} we obtain
264: %-----------------------------------------
265: \begin{eqnarray}
266: F_{\chi}\!&=\!&\Big[ \sum_{a,b} K^{\star}_{a2} K_{b3}\du{LL}{ba} \Big]
267: R_F^{LL}
268: + \Big[\sum_a K^{\star}_{a2} K_{33} \du{RL}{3a}\Big] Y_t \, R_F^{RL}
269: \nonumber \\
270: &+ &\Big[ \sum_a K^{\star}_{32} K_{a3} \du{LR}{a3} \Big] Y_t\, R_F^{LR}
271: + \Big[ K^{\star}_{32} K_{33}\du{RR}{33} \Big] Y_t^2 R_F^{RR}
272: \label{Fch}
273: \end{eqnarray}
274: where for the definition of mass insertions $\du{AB}{ij}$ see Ref.\cite{Hall:1985dx}.
275: Same notation of
276: Ref.\cite{GG} has been used to relate $F$ quantities to
277: the Wilson coefficients $C_{i=1-10}(\mu_W)$, while for the magnetic and
278: chromomagnetic contributions we have $C_{11}(\mu_W)=M^{\gamma}$ and
279: $C_{12}(\mu_W)=M^{g}$.
280: Here $Y_t$ is Yukawa coupling of the top quark and
281: $F$ refers to the photon-penguins ($D$),
282: $Z$-penguins ($C$), gluon-penguins ($E$), boxes with external down
283: quarks ($B^{(d)}$) and up quarks ($B^{(u)}$),
284: magnetic-penguins ($M^{\gamma}$), and
285: chromomagnetic ($M^{g}$) penguin diagrams.
286: We want to stress that there are also contributions from box diagrams
287: mediated by both gluino and chargino exchanges, which affect only
288: $C_{i=1,2}(\mu_W)$, but their effect is negligible \cite{GG}, \cite{new}
289: and we will not include them in our analysis.
290:
291: The detailed expressions for $R_{F}$, including
292: contributions from chargino-gluino box diagrams,
293: are given in the appendix.
294: %will be given elsewhere \cite{new}.
295: Here we will just concentrate on the dominant contributions which turn out
296: to be due to the chromomagnetic ($M^{g}$) penguin and
297: $Z$-penguin ($C$) diagrams. In fact,
298: for light SUSY particles ($\lsim 1$ TeV),
299: the contribution from the chromomagnetic penguin is one order and two orders
300: of magnitudes larger than the corresponding ones from $Z$-penguin
301: and other diagrams, respectively.
302: However, in our numerical analysis we take into
303: account all the contributions.
304:
305: {}From Eq. (\ref{Fch}), it is clear that $LR$ and $RR$ contributions are
306: suppressed by order $\lambda^2$ or $\lambda^3$. Since we will work in
307: $\mathcal{O}(\lambda)$ order, we can neglect them and simplify
308: $F_{\chi}$ as,
309: \begin{eqnarray}
310: F_{\chi} = \Big[\;\du{LL}{32} + \lambda \du{LL}{31}\;\Big] R_F^{LL}
311: + \Big[\;\du{RL}{32} + \lambda \du{RL}{31}\;\Big]\, Y_t\, R_F^{RL}.
312: \label{Fchapprox}
313: \end{eqnarray}
314: The functions $R^{LL}_F$ and $R^{RL}_F$ depend on
315: the SUSY parameters through the chargino masses ($m_{\chi_i}$),
316: squark masses ($\tilde{m}$) and the entries of
317: the chargino mass matrix. For instance for $Z$ and
318: magnetic (chromomagnetic) dipole penguins $R_C^{LL,RL}$
319: and $R_{M^{\gamma (g)}}^{LL,RL}$ respectively, we have
320: \begin{eqnarray}
321: R_C^{LL}&=&
322: \sum_{i=1,2}|V_{i1}|^2 \, P_C^{(0)}(\bar x_i)
323: +\sum_{i,j=1,2} \left[ U_{i1}V_{i1}U_{j1}^{\star}V_{j1}^{\star}\,
324: P_C^{(2)}(x_i,x_j) \right.
325: \nonumber\\
326: &+& \left. |V_{i1}|^2 |V_{j1}|^2
327: \left(\frac{1}{8}-P_C^{(1)}(x_i, x_j)\right)\right]
328: \nonumber
329: \\
330: R_C^{RL}&=&-\frac{1}{2}
331: \sum_{i=1,2}\, V_{i2}^{\star}V_{i1}\, P_C^{(0)}(\bar x_i)
332: - \sum_{i,j=1,2}\, V_{j2}^{\star}V_{i1}\left(
333: U_{i1}U_{j1}^{\star}\, P_C^{(2)}(x_i, x_j)
334: \right.\nonumber \\
335: &+&
336: \left.
337: V_{i1}^{\star} V_{j1}\, P_C^{(1)}(x_i, x_j)\right)
338: \nonumber
339: \\
340: R_{M^{\gamma, g}}^{LL}&=&\sum_i |V_{i1}|^2\,
341: x_{Wi}\, P_{M^{\gamma,g}}^{LL}(x_i) - Y_b\sum_i V_{i1} U_{i2}\,
342: x_{Wi}\, \frac{m_{\chi_i}}{m_b} P_{M_{\gamma,g}}^{LR}(x_i)
343: \nonumber
344: \\
345: R_{M^{\gamma, g}}^{RL}&=&
346: -\sum_i V_{i1}V_{i2}^{\star}\,
347: x_{Wi}\, P_{M_{\gamma,g}}^{LL}(x_i),
348: \label{Rterms}
349: \end{eqnarray}
350: where $Y_b$ is the Yukawa coupling of bottom quark,
351: $x_{\W i}=m_W^2/m_{\chi_i}^2$,
352: $x_{i}=m_{\chi_i}^2/\tilde{m}^2$, $\bar x_i =\tilde{m}^2/m_{\chi_i}^2$, and
353: $x_{ij}=m_{\chi_i}^2/m_{\chi_j}^2$.
354: The loop functions $P_C^{(1,2)}$,
355: $P_{M_{\gamma, g}}^{LL(LR)}$ are given by
356: \bea
357: P_C^{(1,2)}(x,y)&=&-2 \left(x\frac{\partial }{\partial x}+
358: y\frac{\partial }{\partial y}\right) C_{\chi}^{(1,2)}(x,y),~~
359: \nonumber \\
360: P_{M_{\gamma}}^{LL(LR)}(x)&=&- x \frac{d}{d x} \Big(
361: x F_{1(3)}(x)+\frac{2}{3}x F_{2(4)}(x)\Big),~~~~
362: %\\
363: P_{M_{g}}^{LL(LR)}=-x \frac{d}{dx} \left(x F_{2(4)}(x) \right),
364: \eea
365: where $P_C^{(0)}(x)=-\lim_{y\to x} P_C^{(1)}(x,y)$,
366: and the functions $C_{\chi}^{(1,2)}(x,y)$ and
367: $F_i(x)$ can be found in Refs.\cite{BBMR} and \cite{GG}, respectively.
368: Finally, $U$ and $V$ are the matrices that diagonalize chargino mass matrix,
369: defined as $U^* M_{\tilde{\chi}^+} V^{-1} = \mathrm{diag}(m_{\tilde{\chi}_1^+},
370: m_{\tilde{\chi}_2^+})$
371: where we adopted the notation of Ref.\cite{GG} for the chargino matrix
372: $M_{\tilde{\chi}^+}$.
373:
374: Notice that the dependence from Yukawa bottom $Y_b$ in Eq.(\ref{Fch})
375: leads to enhancing $C_{12}$ at large $\tan\beta$.
376: Here, we also considered the case in which
377: the mass of stop-right ($m_{{\tilde t}_R}$)
378: is lighter than other squarks. In this case
379: the functional form of Eq.(\ref{Fch}) remains unchanged, while
380: only the expressions of $R_F^{RL}$ should be modified by replacing
381: the functions inside $P_{M^{\gamma, g}}^{LL,RL}$
382: as $-x_i \frac{d}{d x_i} x_i F_a(x_i) \to {1\over{(x_t -1)}}
383: \left[x_{it} F_a(x_{it}) -x_{i} F_a(x_{i})\right]$, with index $a=1-4$,
384: $ P_C^{(1,2)}(x_i, x_j)\to {2\over{(x_t -1)}}
385: \left[ C_{\chi}^{(1,2)}(x_{jt},x_{it}) - C_{\chi}^{(1,2)}(x_{j},x_{i})\right]$,
386: and $P_C^{(0)}({\bar x}_i,{\bar x}_{it})={4\over{(x_t -1)}}
387: \left[ C_{\chi}^{(1)}({\bar x}_{it},{\bar x}_{i}) -
388: C_{\chi}^{(1)}({\bar x}_{i},{\bar x}_{i}) \right]$,
389: where $x_{it}=\frac{m_{\chi_i}^2}{{m^2_{{\tilde t}_R}}}=1/\bar{x}_{it}$ and
390: $x_t=\frac{{m^2_{{\tilde t}_R}}}{\tilde{m}^2}$.
391:
392: In order to simplify our analysis,
393: we consider first the case where a mass insertion is dominant
394: over the others. In this case we retain
395: only the effect of a mass insertion per time,
396: switching off all the others. Thus, there is only one
397: SUSY CP phase which factorizes in the SUSY amplitude, and so
398: $\theta_\phi$ in Eq. (\ref{ratio}) can be identified with
399: the corresponding $arg[\du{AB}{ij}]$.
400:
401: We present our numerical
402: results in Figs. \ref{fig1}-\ref{fig3}, where
403: the CP asymmetry $S_{\Phi K_S}$ is plotted versus the SUSY CP violating phase.
404: In this analysis we worked at fixed values of $\tan{\beta}$
405: and scanned over all the relevant SUSY parameters -
406: $\tilde{m}$, the weak gaugino mass $M_2$, the $\mu$ term,
407: and $m_{{\tilde t}_R}$ - and required that they
408: satisfy the present experimental lower mass bounds, namely
409: the lightest chargino $m_{\chi} > 90$ GeV, heavy squarks
410: $\tilde{m} > 300$ GeV, and light right-stop $m_{{\tilde t}_R} > 150$ GeV.
411: In addition, we scanned over the real and imaginary
412: part of the corresponding mass insertions, by requiring that
413: the $b\to s \gamma$ and $B-\bar{B}$ mixing constraints
414: are satisfied. In our calculation we have used the
415: formula of the branching ratio (BR) $b\to s \gamma$ at the NLO in QCD, as
416: provided in Ref.\cite{Kagan:1998bh}. Indeed, the BR of $b\to s \gamma$
417: can be easily parametrized in terms of the SUSY contributions to
418: Wilson coefficients $C_{11}$ and $C_{12}$ at $\mu_W$ scale given in
419: Eq. (\ref{Fch}). For this parametrization, we used the central values of the
420: SM parameters as provided in Ref.\cite{Kagan:1998bh}, and the low energy
421: renormalization scale fixed at $\mu=m_b$.
422:
423: In Figs.\ref{fig1} and \ref{fig2} we show
424: the effects of one mass insertion
425: per time, $\du{LL}{32}$ and $\du{RL}{32}$, evaluated at
426: $\tan{\beta}=40$. In all these plots, the red points are allowed by
427: all experimental constraints, while
428: light-blue points correspond to the
429: points disallowed by $BR(b\to s \gamma)$ constraints
430: at 95\% C.L. , namely
431: $2.0\times 10^{-4} < BR(b\to s\gamma) < 4.5\times 10^{-4}$.
432: In order to get the maximum effect for the
433: negative values of CP asymmetry, we fixed
434: the strong CP conserving phase $\delta_{12}$ to be zero.
435: We have not shown the contributions of the other mass
436: insertions since they are sub-leading, being
437: suppressed by terms of order $\lambda$.
438:
439: As we can see from the results in Figs.\ref{fig1}-\ref{fig2},
440: there is no chance with only one mass insertion
441: to achieve negative values for the CP asymmetry.
442: The main reason for $\du{LL}{32}$ is due to the $b\to s \gamma$
443: constraints which are particularly sensitive to $\tan{\beta}$, while
444: this is not the case for $\du{RL}{32}$. Clearly, we have
445: considered also different values of $\tan{\beta}$, and we found that
446: the allowed regions in the scatter plots are not very sensitive to
447: $\tan{\beta}$.
448:
449: In Fig. \ref{fig3} we show another example, where we take simultaneously
450: both the mass insertions $\du{LL}{32}$ and $\du{RL}{32}$
451: per time, but assuming that their CP violating phase is the same.
452: As can be seen from Fig. \ref{fig3} there are points, allowed by
453: $b\to s \gamma$ constraints, which can fit inside the $1\sigma$ experimental
454: region.
455:
456: In order to understand the behavior of these results, it is very useful
457: to look at the numerical parametrization of the ratios
458: of amplitudes in terms of the relevant mass insertions.
459: Indeed, we would like to show that the main contribution to the
460: SUSY amplitude is provided by the chromomagnetic dipole operator.
461: For example, with $M_2=200$ GeV,
462: $\mu=300$ GeV, $m_{\tilde{q}}=400$ GeV, $m_{\tilde{t}_R}=150$ GeV, and
463: $\tan \beta=30$, we find
464: $R^{RL}_C\simeq -0.033$, $R^{LL}_{M^g}\simeq -0.068$, while
465: for all the other ones $R^{AB}_F \simeq O(10^{-3})$,
466: and the amplitudes ratio
467: $R_A\equiv \frac{A^{SUSY}}{A^{SM}}$ is given by
468: \be
469: R_A \simeq
470: 0.37 \du{LL}{31} + 1.64 \du{LL}{32} - 0.05
471: \du{RL}{31} -0.21 \du{RL}{32}.
472: \ee
473: Now, if we switch off the chromomagnetic dipole operator,
474: the coefficients of the mass insertions
475: $\delta^u_{LL}$ are significantly reduced, while the coefficients
476: of $\delta^u_{RL}$ are slightly changed
477: and $R_A$ takes the form
478: \be
479: R_A \simeq
480: -0.0031 \du{LL}{31} - 0.014 \du{LL}{32} - 0.045 \du{RL}{31} - 0.20 \du{RL}{32}.
481: \ee
482: It is worth mentioning that the chromomagnetic contributions are
483: sensitive to the value of $\tan \beta$. Indeed, the contribution
484: coming from $R_{M^{g}}^{LL}$ in Eq.(\ref{Rterms})
485: is enhanced by $\tan{\beta}$, due to the term proportional to $Y_b$.
486: For instance, for $\tan \beta \sim 10$, the value of
487: $R^{LL}_{M^g}$ is reduced to
488: $R^{LL}_{M^g}\simeq -0.023$, while $R^{RL}_C$ is slightly increased to
489: $R^{RL}_C\simeq -0.033$ and the amplitudes ratio becomes
490: \be
491: R_A \simeq
492: 0.12 (\delta^u_{LL})_{31} +
493: 0.54(\delta^u_{LL})_{32} - 0.05
494: (\delta^u_{RL})_{31} - 0.21 (\delta^u_{RL})_{32}.
495: \ee
496: Furthermore it is remarkable to notice that,
497: with heavy SUSY particles ($M_{\tilde{q}}\sim 1$ TeV),
498: the $Z$-penguin diagram would provide the dominant contributions to
499: $F_{\chi}$, since $R_C^{RL}$ tends to a constant value of order $-0.05$.
500: This effect clearly shows the phenomena of non-decoupling of
501: the chargino contribution to the Z penguin, as discussed for instance
502: in Ref.\cite{Isidori}.
503:
504: Finally, we stress that
505: the contribution of $(\delta^u_{LL})_{32}$
506: to the chromomagnetic dipole operator, which leads to
507: the dominant contribution to $S_{\phi K_S}$, is strongly
508: constrained by $b\to s \gamma$ (which is particularly sensitive to
509: $C_{11}(\mu_W)$ ). This is due to the fact that
510: $(\delta^u_{LL})_{32}$ gives almost the same contribution to both
511: $C_{11}(\mu_W)$ and $C_{12}(\mu_W)$, as can be seen from Eq.(\ref{Rterms}).
512: Notice that this is not the case for gluino exchanges, since there
513: the contributions to the chromomagnetic dipole operator are enhanced by
514: color factors with respect to the magnetic dipole ones,
515: allowing large contributions to $C_{12}$ while respecting the $b\to s\gamma$
516: constraints \cite{CGG}.
517: Regarding the effects of $(\delta^u_{RL})_{31}$ and $(\delta^u_{LL})_{31}$,
518: their contributions to $S_{\phi K_S}$ is quite small since
519: they are mostly constrained by $\Delta M_B$ and $\sin 2 \beta$
520: \cite{Gabrielli:2002fr}.
521:
522: For the above set of input parameters, the $b\to s \gamma$
523: limits impose $\vert (\delta^u_{LL})_{32} \vert < 0.58$. Thus,
524: the maximum individual mass insertion contributions are given by
525: $ \left\vert \frac{A^{SUSY}_{LL32}}{A^{SM}}\right\vert < 0.31$ and
526: $ \left\vert \frac{A^{SUSY}_{RL32}}{A^{SM}}\right \vert < 0.21.$
527: This shows that after imposing the $b\to s \gamma$ constraints,
528: the contribution from
529: $(\delta^u_{LL})_{32}$ is of the same order as the contribution
530: from $(\delta^u_{RL})_{32}$.
531:
532: Since the ratio $R_{\phi}\equiv |A^{SUSY}/A^{SM}| < 1$,
533: one can expand the expression of
534: $S_{\phi K_S}$ in Eq. (\ref{cpmixing}) in terms of $R_{\phi}$ and gets the
535: following simplified formula
536: \be
537: S_{\phi K_S} = \sin 2 \beta + 2 \cos 2 \beta~ \sin \theta_{\phi}~ R_{\phi},
538: \ee
539: which shows that with $R_{\phi} \sim 0.4$ and even if
540: $\sin \theta_{\phi}\sim -1$,
541: one can reduce $S_{\phi K_S}$ from the SM prediction $\sin 2 \beta$
542: to $0.2$ at most and
543: it is not possible with one mass insertion contribution to reach
544: negative CP asymmetry.
545: However, by considering the contributions from both
546: $(\delta^u_{LL})_{32}$ and $(\delta^u_{RL})_{32}$ simultaneously,
547: $R_{\phi}$ can become large and values of order
548: $S_{\phi K_S}\simeq -0.2$ can be achieved.
549:
550: It is worth mentioning that we have also considered the BR of $B^0\to \phi K^0$
551: decay and ensured that the SUSY effects do not violate the experimental limits
552: observed by BaBar and Belle \cite{Br}.
553:
554: Finally, let us emphasize that generally in supersymmetric models
555: the lighter chargino is expected to be one of the lightest
556: sparticles (for instance, in Anomaly Mediated SUSY breaking
557: models it is almost degenerate with the lightest one).
558: Thus, it can be expected to contribute significantly in the
559: one-loop processes.
560: Although the gluino contribution to the studied asymmetry can
561: be very large, on the other hand gluino in many models is one
562: of the heaviest SUSY partners and thus its contribution may be
563: reduced essentially.
564:
565: To conclude, we have studied the chargino contributions to the
566: CP asymmetry $S_{\phi K_S}$ and
567: showed that, although the experimental limits on $b \to s \gamma$
568: impose stringent constraints
569: on the parameter space, it is still possible to reduce
570: $S_{\phi K_S}$ significantly and negative values within the
571: $1\sigma$ experimental range can be obtained.
572:
573: \section*{Acknowledgments}
574: DC, EG, and KH thank the Academy
575: of Finland (project number 48787) for financial support.
576: SK would like to thank the Helsinki Institue of Physics for its
577: kind hospitality.
578: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% APPENDIX %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
579: \section*{Appendix}
580: Here we provide the analytical results for the
581: the expressions $R_{F}$ and $\bar{R}_{F}$ appearing in Eq.(\ref{Fch}),
582: which are given by
583:
584: \bea
585: R_D^{LL}&=&\sum_{i=1,2} \,
586: |V_{i1}|^2 \, x_{\W i}\, P_D(x_i)
587: \nonumber
588: \\
589: R_D^{RL}&=&-\sum_{i=1,2} V_{i2}^{\star}V_{i1} \, x_{\W i}\, P_D(x_i)
590: \nonumber
591: \\
592: R_D^{RR}&=&\sum_{i=1,2} \, |V_{i2}|^2 \, x_{\W i}\, P_D(x_i)
593: \nonumber
594: \\
595: R_D^{LR}&=&\left(R_D^{RL}\right)^{\star}
596: \nonumber
597: \\
598: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
599: R_E^{LL}&=&\sum_{i=1,2} \,
600: |V_{i1}|^2 \, x_{\W i}\, P_E(x_i)
601: \nonumber
602: \\
603: R_E^{RL}&=&-\sum_{i=1,2} V_{i2}^{\star}V_{i1} \, x_{\W i}\, P_E(x_i)
604: \nonumber
605: \\
606: R_E^{RR}&=&\sum_{i=1,2} \, |V_{i2}|^2 \, x_{\W i}\, P_E(x_i)
607: \nonumber
608: \\
609: R_E^{LR}&=&\left(R_E^{RL}\right)^{\star}
610: \nonumber
611: \\
612: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
613: R_C^{LL}&=&
614: \sum_{i=1,2}|V_{i1}|^2 \, P_C^{(0)}(\bar x_i)
615: +\sum_{i,j=1,2} \left[ U_{i1}V_{i1}U_{j1}^{\star}V_{j1}^{\star}\,
616: P_C^{(2)}(x_i,x_j) \right.
617: \nonumber\\
618: &+& \left. |V_{i1}|^2 |V_{j1}|^2
619: \left(\frac{1}{8}-P_C^{(1)}(x_i, x_j)\right)\right]
620: \nonumber
621: \\
622: R_C^{RL}&=&-\frac{1}{2}
623: \sum_{i=1,2}\, V_{i2}^{\star}V_{i1}\, P_C^{(0)}(\bar x_i)
624: - \sum_{i,j=1,2}\, V_{j2}^{\star}V_{i1}\left(
625: U_{i1}U_{j1}^{\star}\, P_C^{(2)}(x_i, x_j)
626: \right.\nonumber \\
627: &+&
628: \left.
629: V_{i1}^{\star} V_{j1}\, P_C^{(1)}(x_i, x_j)\right)
630: \nonumber
631: \\
632: R_C^{LR}&=&\left(R_C^{RL}\right)^{\star},
633: \nonumber
634: \\
635: R_C^{RR}&=&
636: \sum_{i,j=1,2}\, V_{j2}^{\star}V_{i2}\left(
637: U_{i1}U_{j1}^{\star}\, P_C^{(2)}(x_i, x_j) +
638: V_{i1}^{\star} V_{j1}\, P_C^{(1)}(x_i, x_j)\right)
639: \nonumber
640: \\
641: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
642: R_{B^{u}}^{LL}&=&
643: 2\sum_{i,j=1,2}\, V_{i1} V_{j1}^{\star}
644: U_{i1}U_{j1}^{\star}\,x_{Wj}\sqrt{x_{ij}}~
645: P_{B}^{u}(\bar x_j, x_{ij})
646: \nonumber
647: \\
648: R_{B^{u}}^{RL}&=&-
649: 2\sum_{i,j=1,2}\, V_{i1} V_{j2}^{\star}
650: U_{i1}U_{j1}^{\star}\,x_{Wj}\sqrt{x_{ij}}~
651: P_{B}^{u}(\bar x_j, x_{ij})
652: \nonumber
653: \\
654: R_{B^{u}}^{LR}&=&\left(R_{B^{u}}^{RL}\right)^{\star}
655: \nonumber
656: \\
657: R_{B^{u}}^{RR}&=&
658: 2\sum_{i,j=1,2}\, V_{i2} V_{j2}^{\star}
659: U_{i1}U_{j1}^{\star}\,x_{Wj}\sqrt{x_{ij}}~
660: P_{B}^{u}(\bar x_j, x_{ij})
661: \nonumber
662: \\
663: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
664: R_{B^{d}}^{LL}&=&
665: \sum_{i,j=1,2}\, |V_{i1}|^2 |V_{j1}|^2 \,x_{Wj}\,
666: P_{B}^{d}(\bar x_j, x_{ij})
667: \nonumber
668: \\
669: R_{B^{d}}^{RL}&=&-
670: \sum_{i,j=1,2}\, V_{i2}^{\star} V_{i1}
671: |V_{j1}|^2\,x_{Wj}\, P_{B}^{d}(\bar x_j, x_{ij})
672: \nonumber
673: \\
674: R_{B^{d}}^{LR}&=&\left(R_{B^{d}}^{RL}\right)^{\star}
675: \nonumber
676: \\
677: R_{B^{d}}^{RR}&=&
678: \sum_{i,j=1,2}\, V_{i2}^{\star} V_{i1}
679: V_{j1}^{\star}V_{j2}\, x_{Wj}\, P_{B}^{d}(\bar x_j, x_{ij})
680: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
681: \nonumber
682: \\
683: R_{M^{\gamma,g}}^{LL}&=&\sum_i |V_{i1}|^2\,
684: x_{Wi}\, P_{M^{\gamma,g}}^{LL}(x_i)
685: -Y_b\sum_i V_{i1} U_{i2}\,
686: x_{Wi}\, \frac{m_{\chi_i}}{m_b} P_{M_{\gamma,g}}^{LR}(x_i)
687: \nonumber
688: \\
689: R_{M^{\gamma,g}}^{LR}&=&-\sum_i V_{i1}^{\star}V_{i2}\,
690: x_{Wi}\, P_{M_{\gamma,g}}^{LL}(x_i)
691: +Y_b\sum_i V_{i2} U_{i2}\,
692: x_{Wi}\, \frac{m_{\chi_i}}{m_b} P_{M_{\gamma,g}}^{LR}(x_i)
693: \nonumber
694: \\
695: R_{M^{\gamma,g}}^{RL}&=&
696: -\sum_i V_{i1}V_{i2}^{\star}\,
697: x_{Wi}\, P_{M_{\gamma,g}}^{LL}(x_i)
698: \nonumber
699: \\
700: R_{M^{\gamma,g}}^{RR}&=&
701: \sum_i |V_{i2}|^2\,
702: x_{Wi}\, P_{M_{\gamma,g}}^{LL}(x_i)
703: \label{Rfunctions}
704: \eea
705: where $x_{\W i}=m_W^2/m_{\chi_i}^2$,
706: $x_{i}=m_{\chi_i}^2/\tilde{m}^2$, $\bar x_i =\tilde{m}^2/m_{\chi_i}^2$, and
707: $x_{ij}=m_{\chi_i}^2/m_{\chi_j}^2$.
708: The expressions for the functions $P_{E,D,C}$, $P_{B}^{(u,d)}$,
709: $P_{M_{\gamma,g}}^{LL}$, and $P_{M_{(\gamma,g)}}^{LR}$ ,
710: are given in the next subsection.
711:
712: There are other contributions which come from box diagrams, where both
713: chargino and gluino are exchanged ($B_{\tilde{g}}^{u,c}$),
714: and cannot be expressed in the same form of Eq.(\ref{Fch}).
715: We provide below the results for these
716: contributions, which affect only the Wilson coefficients
717: $C_{1,2}^{(u,c)}(\mu_W)$ as
718: \bea
719: C^{(u,c)}_1(\mu_W)
720: &=&\frac{\alfasw}{16\pi}\left(14-B^{(u,c)}_{\tilde{g}}\right)\nonumber \\
721: C^{(u,c)}_2(\mu_W)&=& 1+\frac{\alfasw}{48\pi}B^{(u,c)}_{\tilde{g}}
722: \eea
723: where
724: \bea
725: B_{\tilde{g}}^{u}&=&
726: \Big[\sum_{a} K^{\star}_{a2} K_{13}\du{LL}{1a}
727: \Big] R_{\tilde{g}}^{LL}(u)+
728: \Big[\sum_{a}
729: K^{\star}_{12} K_{a3}\du{LL}{a1}\Big]
730: \left(R_{\tilde{g}}^{LL}(u)\right)^{\star}
731: \nonumber \\
732: &+&
733: \Big[\sum_{a} K^{\star}_{1a} K_{13}\dd{LL}{a2}\Big] R_{\tilde{g}}^{LL}(d)
734: +
735: \Big[\sum_{a}
736: K^{\star}_{12} K_{1a}\dd{LL}{3a}\Big]
737: \left(R_{\tilde{g}}^{LL}(d)\right)^{\star}
738: \nonumber \\
739: &+&
740: \Big[\sum_{a} K^{\star}_{12} K_{33}\du{RL}{31}\Big]Y_t\, R_{\tilde{g}}^{RL}
741: \label{boxgluinoU}
742: \eea
743: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
744: \bea
745: B_{\tilde{g}}^{c}&=&
746: \Big[\sum_{a} K^{\star}_{a2} K_{23}\du{LL}{2a}\Big]
747: R_{\tilde{g}}^{LL}(u)+
748: \Big[\sum_{a} K^{\star}_{22} K_{a3}\du{LL}{a2} \Big]
749: \left(R_{\tilde{g}}^{LL}(u)\right)^{\star}
750: \nonumber \\
751: &+&
752: \Big[\sum_{a} K^{\star}_{2a} K_{23}\dd{LL}{a2}\Big]R_{\tilde{g}}^{LL}(d)
753: +
754: \Big[\sum_{a}
755: K^{\star}_{22} K_{2a}\dd{LL}{3a}\Big]
756: \left(R_{\tilde{g}}^{LL}(d)\right)^{\star}
757: \nonumber \\
758: &+&
759: \Big[\sum_{a} K^{\star}_{22} K_{33}\du{RL}{32}\Big] Y_t\,
760: R_{\tilde{g}}^{RL}
761: \label{boxgluinoC}
762: \eea
763: and the functions $R_i$ are given by
764: \bea
765: R_{\tilde{g}}^{LL}(u)&=&4 x_{W\tilde{g}} \, \sum_{i=1,2}\Big[
766: |V_{i1}|^2 P_B^{d}(z_i,y) +2 U_{i1}V_{i1}
767: \left(\frac{m_{\chi_i}}{m_{\tilde{g}}}\right) P_B^{u}(z_i,y)\Big]
768: \\
769: R_{\tilde{g}}^{LL}(d)&=&4x_{W\tilde{g}} \, \sum_{i=1,2}
770: \Big[|U_{i1}|^2 P_B^{d}(z_i,y)
771: +2 U_{i1}^{\star}V_{i1}^{\star}
772: \left(\frac{m_{\chi_i}}{m_{\tilde{g}}}\right) P_B^{u}(z_i,y)\Big]
773: \\
774: R_{\tilde{g}}^{RL}&=&-4x_{W\tilde{g}} \, \sum_{i=1,2}
775: \Big[V_{i1}V_{i2}^{\star} P_B^{d}(z_i,y)
776: +2 V_{i2}^{\star}U_{i1}^{\star}
777: \left(\frac{m_{\chi_i}}{m_{\tilde{g}}}\right) P_B^{u}(z_i,y)\Big]
778: \label{Rfunctgluino}
779: \eea
780: with $x_{W\tilde{g}}=m_W^2/m_{\tilde{g}}^2$,
781: $z_i=m_{\chi_i}^2/m_{\tilde{g}}^2$, and $y=\tilde{m}^2/m_{\tilde{g}}^2$.
782: In obtaining the above results in Eqs.(\ref{boxgluinoU})-(\ref{boxgluinoC})
783: we neglect terms of order of ${\cal O}(Y_b)$.
784:
785: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
786: \subsection*{Loop functions}
787: Here we provide the expressions for the loop functions of penguin
788: $P_{D,E,C}$, box $P_B^{(u,d,\tilde{g})}$, and
789: magnetic-- and chromomagnetic--penguin diagrams
790: $P_{M_{\gamma,g}}^{LL}$, and $P_{M_{\gamma,g}}^{LR}$
791: respectively, which enter in Eqs.(\ref{Rfunctions}),(\ref{Rfunctgluino})
792: \bea
793: P_D(x)&=&
794: {\frac{2\,x\,\left( -22 + 60\,x - 45\,{x^2} + 4\,{x^3} +
795: 3\,{x^4} - 3\,\left( 3 - 9\,{x^2} + 4\,{x^3} \right) \,
796: \log{x} \right) }{27\,{{\left(1- x \right) }^5}}}
797: \nonumber \\
798: P_E(x)&=&{\frac{x\,\left( -1 + 6\,x - 18\,{x^2} + 10\,{x^3} +
799: 3\,{x^4} - 12\,{x^3}\,\log{x} \right) }{9\,
800: {{\left(1- x \right) }^5}}}
801: \nonumber \\
802: P_C^{(0)}(x)&=&
803: {\frac{x\,\left( 3 - 4\,x + {x^2} + 2\,\log{x} \right) }
804: {8\,{{\left(1- x \right) }^3}}}
805: \nonumber \\
806: P_C^{(1)}(x,y)&=&\frac{1}{8\left(x-y\right)}\left[
807: \frac{x^2\left(x-1-\log{x}\right)}{(x-1)^2}
808: -\frac{y^2\left(y-1-\log{y}\right)}{(y-1)^2}\right]
809: \nonumber \\
810: P_C^{(2)}(x,y)&=&\frac{\sqrt{xy}}{4\left(x-y\right)}\left[
811: \frac{x\left(x-1-\log{x}\right)}{(x-1)^2}
812: -\frac{y\left(y-1-\log{y}\right)}{(y-1)^2}\right]
813: \nonumber \\
814: P_B^u(x,y)&=&
815: {\frac{-y - x\,\left( 1 - 3\,x + y \right) }
816: {4\,{{\left( x -1 \right) }^2}\,
817: {{\left( x - y \right) }^2}}} -
818: {\frac{x\,\left( {x^3} + y - 3\,x\,y + {y^2} \right) \,
819: \log{x}}{2\,{{\left(x -1 \right) }^3}\,
820: {{\left( x - y \right) }^3}}}
821: \nonumber \\
822: &+& {\frac{x\,y\,\log{y}}
823: {2\,{{\left( x - y \right) }^3}\,\left(y -1 \right) }}
824: \nonumber \\
825: P_B^d(x,y)&=&-
826: {\frac{x\,\left( 3\,y - x\,\left( 1 + x + y \right) \right) }
827: {4\,{{\left(x -1 \right) }^2}\,
828: {{\left( x - y \right) }^2}}} -
829: {\frac{x\,\left( {x^3} + \left( x -3 \right) \,{x^2}\,y +
830: {y^2} \right) \,\log{x}}{2\,
831: {{\left(x -1 \right) }^3}\,{{\left( x - y \right) }^3}}
832: }
833: \nonumber \\
834: &+& {\frac{x\,{y^2}\,\log{y}}
835: {2\,{{\left( x - y \right) }^3}\,\left(y -1 \right) }}
836: \nonumber \\
837: P_{M_{\gamma}}^{LL}(x)&=&- x \frac{d}{d x} \Big(
838: x F_{1}(x)+\frac{2}{3}x F_2(x)\Big)
839: \nonumber \\
840: P_{M_{\gamma}}^{LR}(x)&=&- x \frac{d}{d x} \Big(
841: x F_{3}(x)+\frac{2}{3}x F_4(x)\Big)
842: \nonumber \\
843: P_{M_{g}}^{LL}(x)&=&- x \frac{d}{d x} \Big(x F_2(x)\Big)
844: \nonumber \\
845: P_{M_{g}}^{LR}(x)&=&- x \frac{d}{d x} \Big(x F_4(x)\Big)
846: \eea
847: where the functions $F_i(x)$ are provided in Ref.\cite{BBMR}.
848: \subsection*{Light right-stop}
849: Here we generalize the above formulas for the case in which
850: the right-stop is lighter than other squarks.
851: Notice,
852: that this will modify only the expressions of $R_F^{RL}$ and $R_F^{RR}$,
853: since the light right-stop does not affect $R_F^{LL}$.
854: In the case of $R_F^{RR}$
855: the functional forms of $R_F^{RR}$ remain unchanged, while the
856: arguments of the functions involved are changed as
857: $x_i \to x_{it}$ and ${\bar x}_i \to {\bar x}_{it}$.
858: In the case of $R_F^{LR}$ and $R_F^{RL}$
859: the analytical expression of loop functions of penguin
860: $P_{D,E,C}$, box $P_B^{(u,d,\tilde{g})}$, and
861: magnetic and chromomagnetic penguin diagrams
862: $P_{M_{\gamma,g}}^{LL}$ and $P_{M_{\gamma,g}}^{LR}$ respectively,
863: should be changed as follows
864: \bea
865: P_D(x_i,x_{it})&=&{2\over{(x_t -1)}}
866: \left[x_{it} D_\chi(x_{it}) - x_i D_\chi(x_i)\right]
867: \nonumber \\
868: P_E(x_i,x_{it})&=&{2\over{(x_t -1)}}
869: \left[x_{it} E_\chi(x_{it}) - x_i E_\chi(x_i)\right]
870: \nonumber \\
871: P_C^{(1,2)}(x_i,x_{it}, x_j,x_{jt})&=& {2\over{(x_t -1)}}
872: \left[ C_{\chi}^{(1,2)}(x_{jt},x_{it}) - C_{\chi}^{(1,2)}(x_{j},x_{i})\right]
873: \nonumber \\
874: P_C^{(0)}({\bar x}_i,{\bar x}_{it})&=&{4\over{(x_t -1)}}
875: \left[ C_{\chi}^{(1)}({\bar x}_{it},{\bar x}_{i}) -
876: C_{\chi}^{(1)}({\bar x}_{i},{\bar x}_{i}) \right]
877: \nonumber \\
878: P_B^{(u)}({\bar x}_j,{\bar x}_{jt}, x_{ij})&=&{1\over{2(x_t -1)}}
879: \left[ B_{\chi}^{(u)}({\bar x}_{jt},{\bar x}_j, x_{ij})
880: -B_{\chi}^{(u)}({\bar x}_{j},{\bar x}_j, x_{ij}) \right]
881: \nonumber \\
882: P_B^{(d)}({\bar x}_j,{\bar x}_{jt}, x_{ij})&=&-{1\over{2(x_t -1)}}
883: \left[B_{\chi}^{(d)}({\bar x}_{jt},{\bar x}_j, x_{ij})
884: -B_{\chi}^{(d)}({\bar x}_{j},{\bar x}_j, x_{ij}) \right]
885: \nonumber \\
886: P_{M_{\gamma}}^{LL}(x_i,x_{it})&=&{1\over{(x_t -1)}}
887: \left[x_{it}\left( F_{1}(x_{it})+\frac{2}{3} F_2(x_{it})\right)
888: -x_{i}\left( F_{1}(x_{i})+\frac{2}{3} F_2(x_{i})\right)\right]
889: \nonumber \\
890: P_{M_{\gamma}}^{LR}(x_i,x_{it})&=&{1\over{(x_t -1)}}
891: \left[x_{it}\left( F_{3}(x_{it})+\frac{2}{3} F_4(x_{it})\right)
892: -x_{i}\left(F_{3}(x_{i})+\frac{2}{3} F_4(x_{i})\right)\right]
893: \nonumber \\
894: P_{M_{g}}^{LL}(x_i,x_{it})&=&{1\over{(x_t -1)}}
895: \left[x_{it} F_2(x_{it}) -x_{i} F_2(x_{i})\right]
896: \nonumber \\
897: P_{M_{g}}^{LR}(x_i,x_{it})&=&{1\over{(x_t -1)}}
898: \left[x_{it} F_4(x_{it}) -x_{i} F_4(x_{i})\right]
899: \label{Frightstop}
900: \eea
901: where $x_{i}=m_{\chi_i}^2/\tilde{m}^2$, $
902: {\bar x_i} =\tilde{m}^2/m_{\chi_i}^2$,
903: $x_{it}=m_{\chi_i}^2/{m^2_{{\tilde t}_R}}$,
904: ${\bar x_{it}} ={m^2_{{\tilde t}_R}}/m_{\chi_i}^2$,
905: $x_{ij}=m_{\chi_i}^2/m_{\chi_j}^2$ and $x_t={m^2_{{\tilde t}_R}}/\tilde{m}^2$.
906: The functions $D_{\chi},C_{\chi},E_{\chi},C^{(1,2)}_{\chi},
907: B^{(u,d)}_{\chi}$ and $F_i$ are provided in Ref.\cite{GG} and Ref.\cite{BBMR}
908: respectively.
909: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
910:
911:
912: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
913: %
914: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
915: %------------------------------------------------
916: \bibitem{babar}
917: B.~Aubert {\it et al.} [BABAR Collaboration],
918: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 89} (2002) 201802.
919: %------------------------------------------------
920: \bibitem{belle}
921: K.~Abe {\it et al.} [Belle Collaboration],
922: arXiv:hep-ex/0207098.
923: %------------------------------------------------
924: \bibitem{Br}
925: K.~F.~Chen [BELLE Collaboration], talk given at
926: 31st International Conference On High Energy Physics (ICHEP 2002)
927: 24-31 Jul 2002, Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
928: B.~Aubert {\it et al.} [BABAR Collaboration],
929: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 87} (2001) 151801.
930: %------------------------------------------------
931: \bibitem{babar2}
932: B.~Aubert {\it et al.} [BABAR Collaboration],
933: arXiv:hep-ex/0207070.
934: %------------------------------------------------
935: \bibitem{Khalil:2002fm}
936: S.~Khalil and E.~Kou,
937: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67}, 055009 (2003) and arXiv:hep-ph/0303214.
938: %------------------------------------------------
939: \bibitem{gluino}
940: G.~L.~Kane, P.~Ko, H.~b.~Wang, C.~Kolda, J.~h.~Park and L.~T.~Wang,
941: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 90}, 141803 (2003);
942: R.~Harnik, D.~T.~Larson, H.~Murayama and A.~Pierce,
943: arXiv:hep-ph/0212180;
944: M.~Ciuchini, E.~Franco, A.~Masiero and L.~Silvestrini,
945: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67}, 075016 (2003).
946: %------------------------------------------------
947: \bibitem{Hall:1985dx}
948: L.~J.~Hall, V.~A.~Kostelecky and S.~Raby,
949: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 267}, 415 (1986).
950: %------------------------------------------------
951: \bibitem{Ali:1998eb}
952: A.~Ali, G.~Kramer and C.~D.~Lu,
953: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 58} (1998) 094009.
954: %------------------------------------------------
955: \bibitem{Buchalla:1995vs}
956: G.~Buchalla, A.~J.~Buras and M.~E.~Lautenbacher,
957: Rev.\ Mod.\ Phys.\ {\bf 68}, 1125 (1996).
958: %------------------------------------------------
959: \bibitem{BBMR}
960: S.~Bertolini, F.~Borzumati, A.~Masiero and G.~Ridolfi,
961: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 353}, 591 (1991).
962: %------------------------------------------------
963: \bibitem{GG}
964: E.~Gabrielli and G.~F.~Giudice,
965: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 433}, 3 (1995)
966: [Erratum-ibid.\ B {\bf 507}, 549 (1997)];
967: A.J. Buras, P. Gambino, M. Gorbahn, S. Jager, and L. Silvestrini,
968: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 592}, 55 (2001).
969: %------------------------------------------------
970: \bibitem{new}
971: D. Chakraverty, E. Gabrielli, K. Huitu, and S. Khalil (in preparation)
972: %------------------------------------------------
973: \bibitem{Kagan:1998bh}
974: A.~L.~Kagan and M.~Neubert,
975: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 58}, 094012 (1998).
976: %------------------------------------------------
977: \bibitem{Isidori}
978: G.~Isidori, Osaka 2000, High Energy Physics, vol. 2, 795, hep-ph/0009024.
979: %------------------------------------------------
980: \bibitem{CGG}
981: M.~Ciuchini, E.~Gabrielli, and G.~F.~Giudice,
982: Phys. Lett. {\bf B388} 353 (1996); Erratum-ibid. {\bf B393} 489 (1997).
983: %------------------------------------------------
984: \bibitem{Gabrielli:2002fr}
985: E.~Gabrielli and S.~Khalil, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67}, 015008 (2003).
986: %------------------------------------------------
987: \end{thebibliography}
988: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
989: \vspace{1cm}
990: \begin{figure}[th]
991: \begin{center}
992: \hspace*{-7mm}
993: \epsfig{file=LL32_40.eps,width=12cm,height=8cm}\\
994: \caption{The mixing CP asymmetry as function of
995: $\arg[\du{LL}{32}]$, for $\tan \beta=40$, and with the contribution
996: of one mass insertion $|\du{LL}{32}|$.
997: Red points correspond to $|\du{LL}{32}|$ that satisfy all
998: the experimental bounds.
999: The light blue points are not allowed by $BR(b \to s \gamma)$.
1000: The strong phase $\delta_{12}$ is fixed at $\cos\delta_{12}=1$.
1001: }
1002: \label{fig1}
1003: \end{center}
1004: \end{figure}
1005: %---------------------------------------
1006: \begin{figure}[th]
1007: \begin{center}
1008: \hspace*{-7mm}
1009: \epsfig{file=RL32_40.eps,width=12cm,height=8cm}\\
1010: \caption{As in Fig. \ref{fig1}, but for the mass insertion
1011: $\du{RL}{32}$.}
1012: \label{fig2}
1013: \end{center}
1014: \end{figure}
1015: %---------------------------------------
1016: \begin{figure}[th]
1017: \begin{center}
1018: \hspace*{-7mm}
1019: \epsfig{file=LLRR_40.eps,width=12cm,height=8cm}\\
1020: \caption{The mixing CP asymmetry as function of
1021: $\arg[\du{LL}{32}]=\arg[\du{RL}{32}]$, for
1022: $\tan \beta=40$, and with the contribution of two
1023: mass insertions $|\du{RL}{32}|$ and $|\du{LL}{32}|$.
1024: Red points correspond to $|(\delta_{LL}^d)_{32}|$ and
1025: $|(\delta_{RL}^d)_{32}|$ that satisfy all the experimental
1026: bounds.
1027: The light blue points are not allowed by $BR(b \to s \gamma)$.
1028: The strong phase $\delta_{12}$ is fixed at $\cos\delta_{12}=1$.}
1029: \label{fig3}
1030: \end{center}
1031: \end{figure}
1032: %---------------------------------------
1033:
1034: \end{document}