1: \documentclass[12pt,dvips]{article}
2:
3: \textwidth 16.25cm
4: \textheight 22.5cm
5: \hoffset -1.5cm
6: \voffset -1cm
7:
8: \setlength{\parindent}{1cm}
9: \setlength{\parskip}{5pt plus 2pt minus 1pt}
10: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.2}
11:
12: \usepackage{rotating}
13: \usepackage{axodraw}
14: \usepackage{epsfig}
15: \usepackage{epsf}
16: \usepackage{psfig}
17: \usepackage{cite}
18:
19: \setcounter{section}{0}
20: \setcounter{equation}{0}
21: \def\theequation{\arabic{section}.\arabic{equation}}
22: \def\tablename{\bf Table}
23: \def\figurename{\bf Figure}
24: %\def\thefootnote{\fnsymbol{footnote}}
25:
26:
27: \newcommand{\imag}{\Im {\rm m}}
28: \newcommand{\real}{\Re {\rm e}}
29:
30:
31: \renewcommand{\textfraction}{0}
32: \renewcommand{\topfraction}{1}
33: \renewcommand{\bottomfraction}{1}
34:
35: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
36:
37: \begin{document}
38:
39:
40: \begin{flushright}
41: CERN-PH-TH/2004-051 \\
42: MC-TH-2004-03 \\
43: {\tt hep-ph/0404167} \\
44: April 2004
45: \end{flushright}
46:
47:
48: \begin{center}
49: {\bf {\LARGE LHC Signatures of Resonant CP Violation }}\\[3mm] {\bf
50: {\LARGE in a Minimal Supersymmetric Higgs Sector}}
51: \end{center}
52:
53: \medskip
54:
55: \begin{center}
56: {\large John Ellis$^{\,a}$, Jae Sik Lee$^{\,b}$
57: and Apostolos Pilaftsis$^{\,b}$}
58: \end{center}
59:
60: \begin{center}
61: {\em $^a$Theory Division, Physics Department, CERN, CH-1211 Geneva 23,
62: Switzerland}\\[2mm]
63: {\em $^b$Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester}\\
64: {\em Manchester M13 9PL, United Kingdom}
65: \end{center}
66:
67: \bigskip
68: \bigskip
69: \bigskip
70:
71: \centerline{\bf ABSTRACT}
72: \medskip
73: \noindent
74: We present the general formalism for studying CP-violating phenomena
75: in the production, mixing and decay of a coupled system of
76: CP-violating neutral Higgs bosons at high-energy colliders.
77: Considering the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM) Higgs
78: sector in which CP violation is radiatively induced by phases in the
79: soft supersymmetry-breaking third-generation trilinear squark
80: couplings and gaugino masses, we apply our formalism to neutral Higgs
81: production via ${\bar b}b$, $gg$ and $W^+ W^-$ collisions at the LHC.
82: We discuss CP asymmetries in the longitudinal and transverse
83: polarizations of $\tau^+ \tau^-$ pairs. The signatures of CP
84: violation are more prominent in the production via $gg$ and $W^+ W^-$
85: than via ${\bar b}b$, and are resonantly enhanced when two (or all
86: three) neutral Higgs bosons are nearly degenerate with mass
87: differences comparable to their decay widths. Such scenarios occur
88: naturally in the MSSM for values of $\tan \beta \stackrel{>}{{}_\sim}
89: 5~(30)$ and large (small) charged Higgs-boson masses. We analyze
90: representative examples with large mixing between the three neutral
91: Higgs bosons weighing about 120~GeV, that may exhibit observable CP
92: asymmetries even as large as~80\%.
93:
94: \newpage
95:
96: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
97: \setcounter{equation}{0}
98: \section{Introduction}
99: \label{sec:introduction}
100: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
101:
102: If supersymmetry (SUSY) turns out to be realized at low energies
103: $\stackrel{<}{{}_\sim} 1$~TeV~\cite{HPN}, the following interesting
104: questions will then arise: does SUSY make observable contributions to
105: the violation of either flavour or CP? Even in the minimal
106: supersymmetric extension of the Standard Model (MSSM), the soft
107: SUSY-breaking sector may include about a hundred parameters that
108: violate these symmetries. However, if one imposes flavour conservation
109: on the soft SUSY-breaking parameters $m_0, m_{1/2}$ and $A$, and
110: assumes that they are universal, then only two physical CP-violating
111: phases remain: one in the gaugino masses $m_{1/2}$ and one in the
112: trilinear couplings $A$.
113:
114: These CP-violating phases may in principle be measured directly in the
115: production cross sections and decay widths of sparticles at
116: high-energy colliders~\cite{CPdirect,CPsoft}, or indirectly via their
117: radiative effect on the Higgs sector~\cite{APLB}~\footnote{Additional
118: indirect constraints on the soft SUSY-breaking phases and the MSSM
119: mass spectrum may be obtained from experimental limits on electric
120: dipole moments (EDMs)~\cite{EDM1,EDM2,CKP} and $B$-meson
121: observables~\cite{Bmeson1,DP}.}. The Higgs sector of the MSSM is
122: affected at the one-loop level by the trilinear
123: phase~\cite{APLB,PW,Demir,CDL,CEPW,INhiggs,KW,HeinCP,CEPW2} and at the
124: two-loop level by the gaugino mass
125: phase~\cite{CDL,CEPW,INhiggs,CEPW2}. This loop-induced CP violation
126: mixes the CP-even Higgses $h,H$ with the CP-odd Higgs boson $A$. Many
127: studies have been made of the masses and couplings of the resulting
128: mixed-CP Higgs bosons $H_{1,2,3}$, and some of their phenomenological
129: consequences for searches at LEP and future colliders have also been
130: considered~\cite{CHL,CPX,CEMPW,CPpp,CFLMP,KMR,CPee,CPphoton,CPmumu}.
131:
132: More complete studies of CP-violating Higgs bosons will require a
133: careful treatment of the resonant mixing of multiple Higgs bosons that
134: couple to the same initial and final states. In general, one could
135: expect that the CP-violating mixing of the heavier MSSM Higgs bosons
136: $H, A$ may be more important than their mixings with the lightest
137: CP-even Higgs boson $h$. However, non-negligible mixing among all
138: three neutral Higgs states is also possible in a general CP-violating
139: MSSM. Such a scenario naturally emerges from a parameter space where
140: $\tan\beta$ is large, i.e.~$\tan\beta \stackrel{>}{{}_\sim} 30$, and
141: the charged Higgs bosons $H^\pm$ are relatively light with $M_{H^\pm}
142: \stackrel{<}{{}_\sim} 160$~GeV.
143:
144: In this paper, we develop the general formalism for describing the
145: dynamics that governs the production, mixing and decay of a coupled
146: system of CP-violating neutral Higgs bosons. Our formalism makes use
147: of the field-theoretic resummation approach developed in~\cite{APNPB}
148: to treat unstable particle-mixing transitions. Within the context of
149: gauge theories, it is important that resummation approaches to
150: unstable particles consistently maintain crucial field-theoretic
151: properties, such as gauge invariance, analyticity and
152: unitarity~\cite{PP}. It has been shown in~\cite{PP,BP} that all these
153: properties are preserved within the framework of the Pinch
154: Technique~(PT)~\cite{PTgeneral}. Here, using the PT, we compute the
155: gauge-mediated diagonal as well as off-diagonal absorptive parts in
156: the resummed Higgs-boson propagator matrix. Finally, an essential
157: ingredient of our formalism is the inclusion of the CP-violating loop
158: corrections in the production and decay vertices of the Higgs bosons.
159:
160: We illustrate our general formalism for the coupled-channel
161: $H_{1,2,3}$ mixing by explicit treatments of the production processes
162: $g g$, $b {\bar b}$~\footnote{We note that the $b\bar{b}$ fusion
163: process may become the leading production channel at large $\tan\beta$
164: at the LHC, as has recently been shown in~\cite{BLS}.} and $W^+ W^-
165: \to H_{1,2,3} \to \tau^+ \tau^-$. These are the most important
166: production mechanisms for neutral Higgs bosons at the LHC, while the
167: decay channel that seems the most promising for studies of CP
168: violation is that into $\tau^+ \tau^-$ pairs. To quantify the genuine
169: signatures of CP violation, we calculate CP asymmetries that are
170: defined in terms of longitudinal and transverse polarizations of the
171: $\tau^\pm$ leptons. When $\tan\beta$ is large and/or the charged
172: Higgs boson mass is large, so that two or more Higgs bosons are nearly
173: degenerate, even small CP-violating phases could induce sizeable
174: CP-violating mixing. However, as we demonstrate, there are systematic
175: cancellations due to CPT-preserving rescattering effects in the
176: process $b {\bar b} \to H_{1,2,3} \to \tau^+ \tau^-$ that suppress the
177: CP-violating signatures in this case. There are no such cancellations
178: in $g g$ and $W^+ W^- \to H_{1,2,3} \to \tau^+ \tau^-$, which could
179: have much larger CP asymmetries at the LHC. We analyze representative
180: examples with large three-way mixing to show that these CP asymmetries
181: might well exceed the 10\% level and could even reach values up to
182: 80\%.
183:
184: Although our predictions are obtained in the MSSM with explicit CP
185: violation, it is important to stress that large CP-violating effects
186: could also occur in a general CP-violating 2-Higgs-doublet model with
187: a similar Higgs-boson mass spectrum. Our presentation is organized in
188: such a way that the formalism may easily be extended to Higgs
189: production at other colliders. For instance, our formalism can be
190: applied to $\gamma \gamma$ colliders~\cite{CPphoton,TauFusion}, which
191: are analogous to $g g$ collisions at the LHC, to $\mu^+ \mu^-$
192: colliders~\cite{CPmumu}, which have formal similarities with $b {\bar
193: b}$ collisions at the LHC, and to $WW$-fusion and Higgsstrahlung
194: processes at $e^+e^-$ linear colliders~\cite{Marek}.
195:
196: Section~\ref{sec:formalism} presents
197: the general formalism for the coupled-channel analysis of Higgs
198: bosons, including explicit formulae for the absorptive parts of the
199: Higgs-boson propagator matrix and the vertex corrections. In
200: Section~\ref{sec:production}, we apply the results of our formalism to
201: the production channels $gg,b\bar{b},W^+W^- \to \tau^+\tau^-$ at the
202: LHC. In Section~\ref{sec:numerical} we present numerical estimates of
203: particular CP-violating MSSM scenarios that exhibit large CP
204: asymmetries. Our numerical estimates are based on the Fortran code
205: {\tt CPsuperH}~\cite{CPsuperH}. Finally,
206: Section~\ref{sec:conclusions} contains our conclusions and discusses
207: the prospects for pursuing studies of Higgs-sector CP violation at
208: future colliders beyond the~LHC.
209:
210:
211: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
212: \setcounter{equation}{0}
213: \section{Formalism for Coupled-Channel Analyses of Higgs-Sector CP
214: Violation}
215: \label{sec:formalism}
216: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
217:
218: We consider situations where two or more MSSM Higgs bosons contribute
219: simultaneously to the production of some fermion-antifermion pair
220: whose polarization states can be measured. We treat explicitly
221: the example of $H_{1,2,3} \to \tau^+ \tau^-$, but the formalism could
222: easily be adapted to other cases such as $t {\bar t}, \chi^+_i
223: \chi^-_j$ or $\chi^0_i \chi^0_j$. There have been extensive
224: discussions of the masses and couplings of MSSM Higgs bosons mixed by
225: loop-induced CP violation~\cite{PW,Demir,CDL,CEPW}. To account
226: properly for the constraints that CPT invariance and unitarity imposes
227: on the cross sections~\cite{APNPB}, we must consider the full
228: off-shell propagator matrix for mixed MSSM Higgs bosons, including
229: off-diagonal absorptive parts.
230:
231: The absorptive part of the Higgs-boson propagator matrix receives
232: contributions from loops of fermions, vector bosons, associated pairs
233: of Higgs and vector bosons, Higgs-boson pairs, and sfermions:
234: \begin{equation}
235: \imag\widehat{\Pi}_{ij}(s)= \imag\widehat{\Pi}^{ff}_{ij}(s)+
236: \imag\widehat{\Pi}^{VV}_{ij}(s)+\imag\widehat{\Pi}^{HV}_{ij}(s) +
237: \imag\widehat{\Pi}^{HH}_{ij}(s)
238: + \imag\widehat{\Pi}^{\tilde{f}\tilde{f}}_{ij}(s)\,.
239: \end{equation}
240: The contributions of the exchanges of the bottom and top quarks,
241: $\tau$ leptons, neutralinos $\chi^0_i$ and charginos $\chi^+_i$ are
242: summed in $\imag\widehat{\Pi}^{ff}_{ij}(s)$. The latter may conveniently
243: be cast into the form
244: \begin{eqnarray}
245: \imag\widehat{\Pi}^{ff}_{ij}(s)&=&\frac{s}{8\pi}
246: \sum_{f,f^\prime=b,t,\tau,\tilde{\chi}^0,\tilde{\chi}^-}
247: K_f(s)\, g_f^2 \Delta_{ff^\prime}N_C^f
248: \left[ (1-\kappa_f-\kappa_{f^\prime})
249: (g^S_{H_i \bar{f^\prime}f} g^{S*}_{H_j \bar{f^\prime}f}
250: +g^P_{H_i \bar{f^\prime}f} g^{P*}_{H_j \bar{f^\prime}f}) \right.
251: \nonumber \\
252: && \hspace{-2cm}
253: \left.
254: -2 \sqrt{\kappa_f\kappa_{f^\prime}}
255: (g^S_{H_i \bar{f^\prime}f} g^{S*}_{H_j \bar{f^\prime}f}
256: -g^P_{H_i \bar{f^\prime}f} g^{P*}_{H_j \bar{f^\prime}f})\right]
257: \lambda^{1/2}(1,\kappa_f,\kappa_{f^\prime})\:
258: \Theta\left(s-(m_f+m_{f^\prime})^2\right),
259: \end{eqnarray}
260: where $K_{b,t}(s)\simeq 1 + 5.67\frac{\alpha_s(s)}{\pi}$,
261: $\Delta_{ff^\prime}=\delta_{ff^\prime}\,(f,f^\prime=b,t,\tau)$,
262: $\frac{4}{1+\delta_{ff^\prime}}\,(f,f'=\tilde{\chi}^0_{1,2,3,4})$, or
263: $1\,(f,f'=\tilde{\chi}^-_{1,2})$, and
264: $\lambda(x,y,z)=x^2+y^2+z^2-2(xy+yz+zx)$ with $\kappa_x\equiv
265: m_x^2/s$. Here and subsequently, we follow the convention of {\tt
266: CPsuperH} \cite{CPsuperH} for the couplings of the Higgs bosons to
267: fermions, vector bosons, Higgs bosons, and sfermions.
268: %--Referee Comments 3) : one sentence added
269: For the calculation of the bottom- and top-quark contributions,
270: the running quark
271: masses at the scale $\sqrt{s}$ have been used in the couplings
272: $g_{b,t}=gm_{b,t}(\sqrt{s})/2M_W$. Specifically, we use $m_b (m_t^{\rm
273: pole})=3$ GeV, where $m_t^{\rm pole}=175$ GeV.
274:
275: The vector-boson loop contributions are
276: \begin{eqnarray}
277: \label{hatVV}
278: \imag\widehat{\Pi}^{VV}_{ij}(s)&=&\frac{g^2g_{_{H_iVV}}g_{_{H_jVV}}\delta_V}
279: {128\pi M_W^2}
280: \beta_V\left[-4M_V^2(2s-3M_V^2)\right.
281: \nonumber \\
282: && \hspace{2cm}
283: \left.
284: +2M_V^2(M_{H_i}^2+M_{H_j}^2)
285: +M_{H_i}^2M_{H_j}^2 \right]\Theta(s-4 M_V^2),
286: \end{eqnarray}
287: where $\beta_V=(1-4\kappa_V)^{1/2}$ and $\delta_W=2$, $\delta_Z=1$.
288:
289: Correspondingly, the exchanges of Higgs and vector boson pairs give
290: %
291: \begin{eqnarray}
292: \label{hatHV}
293: \imag\widehat{\Pi}^{HV}_{ij}(s)
294: %HZ
295: &=&\frac{g^2}{64\pi M_W^2}\sum_{k=1,2,3}
296: g_{_{H_iH_kZ}}g_{_{H_jH_kZ}}
297: \lambda^{1/2}(1,\kappa_Z,\kappa_{H_k})
298: \left[-4sM_Z^2+(M_Z^2-M_{H_k}^2)^2 \right.
299: \nonumber \\
300: &&
301: \left.
302: +(M_Z^2-M_{H_k}^2)(M_{H_i}^2+M_{H_j}^2)
303: +M_{H_i}^2M_{H_j}^2 \right]
304: \Theta\left(s- (M_Z+M_{H_k})^2\right)
305: \nonumber \\
306: %HW
307: &+&\frac{g^2}{32\pi M_W^2}
308: \real(g_{_{H_iH^+W^-}}g^*_{_{H_jH^+W^-}})
309: \lambda^{1/2}(1,\kappa_W,\kappa_{H^\pm})
310: \left[-4sM_W^2+(M_W^2-M_{H^\pm}^2)^2 \right.
311: \nonumber \\
312: &&
313: \left.
314: +(M_W^2-M_{H^\pm}^2)(M_{H_i}^2+M_{H_j}^2)
315: +M_{H_i}^2M_{H_j}^2 \right]
316: \Theta\left(s- (M_W+M_{H^\pm})^2\right)\,.
317: \end{eqnarray}
318: %
319: In deriving (\ref{hatVV}) and (\ref{hatHV}), we apply the PT to the
320: MSSM Higgs sector following a procedure very analogous to the one
321: given in~\cite{PINCH} for the SM Higgs sector. As a consequence, the
322: PT self-energies $\imag\widehat{\Pi}^{VV}_{ij}(s)$ and
323: $\imag\widehat{\Pi}^{VH}_{ij}(s)$ depend linearly on $s$ at high
324: energies. This differs crucially from the bad high-energy dependence
325: $ \propto s^2$ that one usually encounters when the Higgs-boson
326: self-energies are calculated in the unitary gauge. In fact, if the
327: Higgs-boson self-energies are embedded in a truly gauge-independent
328: quantity such as the S-matrix element of a $2\to 2$ process, the badly
329: high-energy-behaved $s^2$-dependent terms cancel against corresponding
330: $s^2$ terms present in the vertices and boxes order by order in
331: perturbation theory. In this context, PT provides a self-consistent
332: approach to extract those $s^2$-dependent terms from boxes and
333: vertices, thus giving rise to effective Higgs self-energies that are
334: independent of the gauge-fixing parameter and $s^2$. More details on
335: the PT may be found in~\cite{PP,BP,PTgeneral,PINCH}.
336:
337:
338:
339: Finally, the contributions of the MSSM Higgs bosons and sfermions are
340: \begin{equation}
341: \label{A5}
342: \imag\widehat{\Pi}^{HH}_{ij}(s)=
343: \frac{v^2}{16\pi}\sum_{k\geq l=1,2,3}
344: \frac{S_{ij;kl}}{1+\delta_{kl}}
345: g_{_{H_iH_kH_l}} g_{_{H_jH_kH_l}}
346: \lambda^{1/2}(1,\kappa_{H_k},\kappa_{H_l})\:
347: \Theta\left(s- (M_{H_k}+M_{H_l})^2\right)\,,
348: \end{equation}
349: %
350: \begin{equation}
351: \label{A6}
352: \imag\widehat{\Pi}^{\tilde{f}\tilde{f}}_{ij}(s)=
353: \frac{v^2}{16\pi}\sum_{f=b,t,\tau}\sum_{k,l=1,2} N_C^f\,
354: g_{H_i\tilde{f}^*_k\tilde{f}_l}
355: g^*_{H_j\tilde{f}^*_k\tilde{f}_l}
356: \lambda^{1/2}(1,\kappa_{\tilde{f}_k},\kappa_{\tilde{f}_l})\:
357: \Theta\left(s- (M_{\tilde{f}_k}+M_{\tilde{f}_l})^2\right)\, .
358: \end{equation}
359: Note that the symmetry factor $S_{ij;kl}$ has to be calculated
360: appropriately. When $i=j=1$ and $k=l=2$, for example, the symmetry
361: factor for the squared self-coupling $g^2_{_{H_1H_2H_2}}$ is
362: $S_{11;22}=4$.
363:
364: When considering any specific production process and decay channel,
365: the Higgs-boson propagator matrix must be combined with the
366: appropriate vertices, that themselves receive CP-violating loop
367: corrections. Since the main decay channel we consider for the LHC is
368: $\tau^+ \tau^-$, and since many of the interesting Higgs production
369: and other decay mechanisms also involve fermions such as $b {\bar b}$,
370: we also summarize relevant aspects of the loop-induced corrections to
371: the $H_{1,2,3}f \bar{f}$ vertices.
372:
373: The exchanges of gluinos and charginos give finite loop-induced
374: corrections to the $H_{1,2,3}b {\bar b}$ Yukawa coupling with the
375: structure
376: \begin{equation}
377: h_b\ =\ \frac{\sqrt{2}m_b}{v\cos\beta}\,
378: \frac{1}{1+(\delta h_b/h_b)+(\Delta h_b/h_b)\tan\beta} \,.
379: \end{equation}
380: %--Referee Comments 1)
381: The $\tan\beta$-enhanced threshold correction $(\Delta h_b/h_b)$ has
382: terms proportional to the strong coupling $\alpha_s$ and the top-quark
383: Yukawa coupling $|h_t|^2$.
384: %which are given, for example, in~\cite{CEMPW}.
385: See Eqs.~(2.4) and (2.5) in~\cite{CEMPW} for
386: the analytic forms of $(\delta h_b/h_b)$ and
387: $(\Delta h_b/h_b)$, respectively.
388: In addition, there are contributions to $(\Delta
389: h_b/h_b)$ coming from the exchanges of binos and winos which are
390: proportional to the electromagnetic fine-structure constant
391: $\alpha_{\rm em}$~\cite{EWthreshold}. Taking CP violation into
392: account, these additional contributions read
393: %
394: \begin{eqnarray}
395: %\hspace{-1 cm}
396: (\Delta h_b/h_b)_{\rm em} &=&
397: -\, \frac{\alpha_{\rm em}\mu^*M_2^*}{4\pi\,s_W^2}\,\Bigg[\,
398: |U^{\tilde{t}}_{L1}|^2\, I(m_{\tilde{t}_1}^2,|M_2|^2,|\mu|^2)\:
399: +\: |U^{\tilde{t}}_{L2}|^2\,I(m_{\tilde{t}_2}^2,|M_2|^2,|\mu|^2)
400: \nonumber \\
401: &&+\ \frac{1}{2}\, |U^{\tilde{b}}_{L1}|^2\,
402: I(m_{\tilde{b}_1}^2,|M_2|^2,|\mu|^2)\: +\:
403: \frac{1}{2}\, |U^{\tilde{b}}_{L2}|^2\,
404: I(m_{\tilde{b}_2}^2,|M_2|^2,|\mu|^2)\, \Bigg]
405: \nonumber\\
406: && -\ \frac{\alpha_{\rm em}\mu^*M_1^*}{12\pi c_W^2}\,\Bigg[\,
407: \frac{1}{3}\,I(m_{\tilde{b}_1}^2,m_{\tilde{b}_2}^2,|M_1|^2)
408: \: +\: \frac{1}{2}\, |U^{\tilde{b}}_{L1}|^2\,
409: I(m_{\tilde{b}_1}^2,|M_1|^2,|\mu|^2)\nonumber\\
410: &&+\, \frac{1}{2}\, |U^{\tilde{b}}_{L2}|^2\,
411: I(m_{\tilde{b}_2}^2,|M_1|^2,|\mu|^2)\: +\:
412: |U^{\tilde{b}}_{R1}|^2\, I(m_{\tilde{b}_1}^2,|M_1|^2,|\mu|^2)\nonumber\\
413: &&+\, |U^{\tilde{b}}_{R2}|^2\,I(m_{\tilde{b}_2}^2,|M_1|^2,|\mu|^2)\,\Bigg]\,,
414: \end{eqnarray}
415: where
416: \begin{equation}
417: \label{Iabc}
418: I(a,b,c)\ =\ \frac{ab\, \ln (a/b)\: +\: bc\, \ln (b/c)\: + \:
419: ac\, \ln (c/a)}{(a-b)\,(b-c)\,(a-c)}\, .
420: \end{equation}
421: We follow the convention of {\tt CPsuperH}~\cite{CPsuperH} for the
422: mixing matrices of the stops $U^{\tilde{t}}$, sbottoms $U^{\tilde{b}}$
423: and staus $U^{\tilde{\tau}}$.
424:
425: There are formulae analogous to those above for the loop corrections
426: to the $H_{1,2,3} t {\bar t}$ vertices, which would be relevant for
427: CP-violation measurements in $e^- e^+ \to \nu \bar{\nu} t {\bar
428: t}$~\cite{Marek}, for example.
429:
430: Analogous exchanges of binos and winos give finite loop-induced
431: corrections to the $H_{1,2,3}\tau^+\tau^-$ coupling, which have a
432: similar structure:
433: \begin{equation}
434: h_\tau\ =\ \frac{\sqrt{2}m_\tau}{v\cos\beta}\,
435: \frac{1}{1+(\Delta h_\tau/h_\tau)\tan\beta} \,,
436: \end{equation}
437: where
438: \begin{eqnarray}
439: (\Delta h_\tau/h_\tau) &=&
440: -\, \frac{\alpha_{\rm em}\,\mu^*M_2^*}{4\pi\,s^2_W}\,
441: \Bigg[\, I(m_{\tilde{\nu}_\tau}^2,|M_2|^2,|\mu|^2)\:
442: +\: \frac{1}{2}\, |U^{\tilde{\tau}}_{L1}|^2\,
443: I(m_{\tilde{\tau}_1}^2,|M_2|^2,|\mu|^2)\nonumber\\
444: &&+\, \frac{1}{2}\, |U^{\tilde{\tau}}_{L2}|^2\,
445: I(m_{\tilde{\tau}_2}^2,|M_2|^2,|\mu|^2)\,\Bigg]
446: \ +\ \frac{\alpha_{\rm em}\,\mu^*M_1^*}{4\pi\,c_W^2}\,
447: \Bigg[\, I(m_{\tilde{\tau}_1}^2,m_{\tilde{\tau}_2}^2,
448: |M_1|^2)\nonumber\\
449: && +\: \frac{1}{2}\, |U^{\tilde{\tau}}_{L1}|^2\,
450: I(m_{\tilde{\tau}_1}^2,|M_1|^2,|\mu|^2)\: +\:
451: \frac{1}{2}\,
452: |U^{\tilde{\tau}}_{L2}|^2\, I(m_{\tilde{\tau}_2}^2,|M_1|^2,|\mu|^2)
453: \nonumber \\
454: &&-\,|U^{\tilde{\tau}}_{R1}|^2\,I(m_{\tilde{\tau}_1}^2,|M_1|^2,|\mu|^2)
455: \: -\: |U^{\tilde{\tau}}_{R2}|^2\,
456: I(m_{\tilde{\tau}_2}^2,|M_1|^2,|\mu|^2)\Bigg]\,.
457: \end{eqnarray}
458: The threshold corrections modify the couplings of the neutral Higgs bosons to
459: the scalar and pseudoscalar fermion bilinears as follows~\cite{CEMPW}:
460: \begin{eqnarray}
461: \hspace{-1.0 cm}
462: g^S_{H_i\bar{f}f}&=&
463: \frac{O_{\phi_1i}}{\cos\beta}\
464: \real\left({\frac{1}{1+\kappa_f \tan\beta}}\right)\
465: +\ \frac{O_{\phi_2i}}{\cos\beta}\ \real\left({\frac{\kappa_f}{1+\kappa_f
466: \tan\beta}}\right)\nonumber\\
467: && +\: O_{ai}\,
468: \imag\left({\frac{\kappa_f\,(\tan^2\beta+1)}{1+\kappa_f \tan\beta}}\right)\,,
469: \nonumber\\
470: g^P_{H_i\bar{f}f} &=&
471: \frac{O_{\phi_1i}}{\cos\beta}\
472: \imag\left({\frac{\kappa_f\,\tan\beta}{1+\kappa_f
473: \tan\beta}}\right)\ -\
474: \frac{O_{\phi_2i}}{\cos\beta}\ \imag\left({\frac{\kappa_f}{1+\kappa_f
475: \tan\beta}}\right)\nonumber\\
476: &&-\ O_{ai}\,
477: \real\left({\frac{\tan\beta-\kappa_f}{1+\kappa_f \tan\beta}}\right)\,,
478: \end{eqnarray}
479: where $f=b$ and $\tau^-$ and
480: \begin{equation}
481: \kappa_b\ =\ \frac{(\Delta h_b/h_b)}{1+(\delta h_b/h_b)}\,,\qquad
482: \kappa_\tau\ =\ (\Delta h_\tau/h_\tau)\,.
483: \end{equation}
484: There are similar formulae for the $H_{1,2,3}\mu^+\mu^-$ vertices that
485: would be relevant for $\mu^+ \mu^-$ colliders. The analogous
486: corrections to the $H_{1,2,3}e^+e^-$ vertices may be neglected.
487:
488: Additional contributions to Higgs-boson vertices may arise from
489: absorptive effects due to the opening of third-generation sfermion
490: pair production channels. However, if the $H_{1,2,3}$-boson masses are
491: well below the kinematic threshold of such production channels, these
492: absorptive effects are small and can be neglected. Finally, we remind
493: the reader that detailed analytic expressions for the effective
494: Higgs-boson couplings to the photon, the gluon, the $W^\pm$ bosons and
495: SUSY particles are given in~\cite{CPsuperH}.
496:
497:
498: \bigskip\bigskip
499:
500: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
501: \setcounter{equation}{0}
502: \section{Tau Pair Production at the LHC}
503: \label{sec:production}
504: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
505:
506: To further elucidate the formalism presented in
507: Section~\ref{sec:formalism}, we now discuss in more detail the
508: production, mixing and decay of Higgs bosons into polarized $\tau^+
509: \tau^-$ pairs at the LHC. We will study individually the three most
510: significant production channels for Higgs bosons in the MSSM at the
511: LHC: (i) $b\bar{b}$ fusion, (ii) $gg$ fusion and (iii) $W^+W^-$
512: fusion.
513:
514: %\vfill\eject
515:
516:
517: %--------------------------------------------
518: \subsection{$b {\bar b}$ Fusion}
519: %--------------------------------------------
520:
521: At large $\tan\beta$, an important mechanism for producing neutral
522: Higgs bosons at the LHC is $b {\bar b}$
523: fusion~\cite{BBH1,BBH2,GB2BH,BLS}. Figure~\ref{f1} illustrates how
524: the matrix element ${\cal M}^{b\bar{b}}$ for $b\bar{b} \rightarrow
525: \tau^+\tau^-$ receives contributions from the $s$-channel exchanges of
526: the neutral Higgs bosons. The loop-corrected propagator matrix and
527: vertices calculated in the previous section are indicated by shaded
528: circles. The matrix element can be written as
529: \begin{eqnarray}
530: \label{Mbb}
531: {\cal M}^{b\bar{b}}&=&-\frac{g^2 m_b m_\tau}
532: {4 M_W^2 \hat{s}}\sum_{i,j=1,2,3}
533: \ \sum_{\alpha ,\beta=\pm}
534: \Bigg\{(g^S_{H_i\bar{b}b}+i\alpha g^P_{H_i\bar{b}b})\,
535: \bar{v}(k_2,\bar{\lambda})P_\alpha u(k_1,\lambda)\: D_{ij}(\hat{s})\:
536: \nonumber \\
537: &&\hspace{3.0 cm}
538: \times
539: (g^S_{H_j\tau^+\tau^-}+i \beta g^P_{H_j\tau^+\tau^-})\,
540: \bar{u}(p_1,\sigma)P_\beta v(p_2,\bar{\sigma})\Bigg\}\,,
541: \end{eqnarray}
542: %Referee Comments 3)
543: where $P_\alpha=(1+\alpha\gamma_5)/2$ and the running bottom-quark mass
544: at the scale of $\sqrt{\hat{s}}$ is used.
545: We denote the helicities of
546: $\tau^-$ and $\tau^+$ by $\sigma$ and $\bar{\sigma}$ and those of the
547: $b$ and $\bar b$ by $\lambda$ and $\bar{\lambda}$, respectively, with
548: $\sigma,\lambda=+$ and $-$ standing for right- and left-handed
549: particles. The four-momenta of the $\tau^-$ and $\tau^+$ are $p_1$ and
550: $p_2$, respectively, those of the $b$ and $\bar{b}$ are $k_1$ and
551: $k_2$, respectively, and $\hat{s}$ is the centre-of-mass energy
552: squared of the ${\bar b} b$ pair that fuses into a Higgs boson:
553: $\hat{s}=(k_1+k_2)^2=(p_1+p_2)^2$.
554:
555: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% F I G U R E 1 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
556: \vspace*{0.5cm}
557: \begin{figure}[t]
558: \begin{center}
559: %\begin{picture}(250,100)(0,0)
560: \begin{picture}(250,120)(0,20)
561:
562: \ArrowLine(-30,100)(50,50)
563: \ArrowLine(50,50)(-30,0)
564: \DashCArc(50,50)(7,0,360){4}
565: \GOval(50,50)(7,7)(0){0.8}
566: \DashLine(57,50)(180,50){4}
567: \DashCArc(115,50)(15,0,360){4}
568: \GOval(115,50)(15,15)(0){0.8}
569: \DashCArc(180,50)(7,0,360){4}
570: \GOval(180,50)(7,7)(0){0.8}
571: \ArrowLine(270,100)(185,55)
572: \ArrowLine(185,45)(270,0)
573: \Text(0,95)[]{$b$}
574: \Text(0, 5)[]{$\bar{b}$}
575: \Text(80,40)[]{$H_i$}
576: \Text(155,40)[]{$H_j$}
577: \Text(230,90)[]{$\tau^+$}
578: \Text(230,10)[]{$\tau^-$}
579: \ArrowLine(210,55)(246,75)
580: \ArrowLine(210,45)(246,25)
581: \Text(240,60)[]{$p_2\,,\bar{\sigma}$}
582: \Text(240,40)[]{$p_1\,,\sigma$}
583: \ArrowLine(-10,80)(30,56)
584: \ArrowLine(-10,20)(30,44)
585: \Text(-10,35)[]{$k_2\,,\bar{\lambda}$}
586: \Text(-10,65)[]{$k_1\,,\lambda$}
587: %\ArrowLine(110,60)(160,60)
588: %\Text(135,70)[]{$k_1+k_2$}
589:
590: \end{picture}\\
591: \end{center}
592: \smallskip
593: \noindent
594: \caption{\it Mechanisms contributing to the process $b\bar{b} \to
595: H\to \tau^+\tau^-$, including off-diagonal absorptive parts in the
596: Higgs-boson propagator matrix.}\label{f1}
597:
598: \end{figure}
599: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
600:
601:
602: An important element of our formalism is the consideration of the
603: `full' $3 \times 3$ Higgs-boson propagator matrix $D(\hat{s})$
604: in~(\ref{Mbb})~\footnote{Strictly speaking, the complete propagator
605: matrix $D(\hat{s})$ is a $4\times 4$-dimensional matrix spanned by the
606: basis~$(H_1,H_2,H_3,G^0)$~\cite{APNPB}. However, to a good
607: approximation, we may neglect the small off-resonant self-energy
608: transitions of the Higgs bosons $H_{1,2,3}$ to the neutral would-be
609: Goldstone boson $G^0$.}. This is given by
610: \begin{equation}
611: \label{eq:hprop}
612: D (\hat{s}) = \hat{s}\,
613: \left(\begin{array}{ccc}
614: \hat{s}-M_{H_1}^2+i\imag\widehat{\Pi}_{11}(\hat{s}) &
615: i\imag\widehat{\Pi}_{12}(\hat{s})&
616: i\imag\widehat{\Pi}_{13}(\hat{s}) \\
617: i\imag\widehat{\Pi}_{21}(\hat{s}) &
618: \hat{s}-M_{H_2}^2+i\imag\widehat{\Pi}_{22}(\hat{s})&
619: i\imag\widehat{\Pi}_{23}(\hat{s}) \\
620: i\imag\widehat{\Pi}_{31}(\hat{s}) & i\imag\widehat{\Pi}_{32}(\hat{s}) &
621: \hat{s}-M_{H_3}^2+
622: i\imag\widehat{\Pi}_{33}(\hat{s})
623: \end{array}\right)^{-1} \,,
624: \end{equation}
625: %--Referee Comments 2) :
626: where the inversion of the 3-by-3 matrix is carried out analytically.
627: In (\ref{eq:hprop}), the absorptive parts of the Higgs self-energies
628: $\imag \widehat{\Pi}_{ij}(\hat{s})$ are given in
629: Section~\ref{sec:formalism} and $M_{H_{1,2,3}}$ are the one-loop
630: Higgs-boson pole masses, where higher-order absorptive effects on
631: $M_{H_{1,2,3}}$ have been ignored~\cite{CEPW2}. In the same context,
632: the off-shell dispersive parts of the Higgs-boson self-energies in the
633: Higgs-boson propagator matrix $D (\hat{s})$ have also been neglected,
634: since these are formally higher-order effects and very small in the
635: relevant Higgs-boson resonant region. Finally, we include
636: in~(\ref{Mbb}) the finite loop-induced corrections to the couplings of
637: Higgs bosons to $b$ quarks, $g^{S,P}_{H_i\bar{b}b}$, and $\tau$
638: leptons, $g^{S,P}_{H_j\tau^+\tau^-}$, due to the exchanges of gauginos
639: and Higgsinos, as has been discussed in Section~\ref{sec:formalism}.
640:
641: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% F I G U R E 2 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
642: \begin{figure}[t]
643: \bigskip
644: \begin{center}
645: \begin{picture}(300,100)(0,0)
646:
647: \Line(15,10)(55,90)
648: \Line(55,90)(285,90)
649: \Line(285,90)(245,10)
650: \Line(245,10)(15,10)
651:
652: \Text(-3,50)[]{$\tau^+$}
653: \Line(15,50)(145,50)
654: \Line(15,50)(20,54)
655: \Line(15,50)(20,47)
656:
657: \Text(298,50)[]{$\tau^-$}
658: \Line(155,50)(285,50)
659: \Line(285,50)(280,54)
660: \Line(285,50)(280,47)
661:
662: \Vertex(150,50){3}
663:
664: \Text(85,80)[]{$\bar{\alpha}$}
665: \ArrowArc(85,50)(20,60,135)
666: \Text(242,67)[]{$\alpha$}
667: \ArrowArc(225,50)(20,60,90)
668:
669: \Line(100,100)(147,53)
670: \Line(147,53)(147,58)
671: \Line(147,53)(142,53)
672: \Text(95,105)[]{$b$}
673:
674: \Line(200,0)(153,47)
675: \Line(153,47)(153,42)
676: \Line(153,47)(158,47)
677: \Text(205,-5)[]{$\bar{b}$}
678:
679: \ArrowArc(150,50)(30,314,360)
680: \Text(188,38)[]{$\Theta$}
681:
682: \DashLine(85,50)(105,90){3}
683: \DashLine(225,50)(245,90){3}
684:
685: \SetWidth{2}
686: \Line(225,50)(225,80)
687: \Line(225,80)(221,77)
688: \Line(225,80)(229,77)
689: \Text(69,80)[]{$\bar{P}_{_T}$}
690:
691: \Line(225,50)(255,50)
692: \Line(255,50)(252,53)
693: \Line(255,50)(252,47)
694: \Text(240,40)[]{${P}_{_L}$}
695:
696: \Line(85,50)(55,80)
697: \Line(55,80)(60,80)
698: \Line(55,80)(55,75)
699: \Text(215,79)[]{$P_{_T}$}
700:
701: \Line(85,50)(50,50)
702: \Line(50,50)(53,53)
703: \Line(50,50)(53,47)
704: \Text(65,40)[]{$\bar{P}_{_L}$}
705:
706: \end{picture}\\
707: \end{center}
708: \bigskip
709: \noindent
710: \caption{\it The $\tau^+ \tau^-$ production plane with definitions
711: of the scattering angle $\Theta$. The
712: transverse polarization vectors $P_T$ and $\bar{P}_T$
713: have azimuthal angles $\alpha$ and $\bar{\alpha}$,
714: respectively, with respect to the event plane.}\label{f2}
715: \end{figure}
716: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
717:
718:
719: In the centre-of-mass coordinate system for the $b {\bar b}$ pair, the
720: helicity amplitudes are given by
721: \begin{equation}
722: {\cal M}^{b\bar{b}}(\sigma\bar{\sigma};\lambda\bar{\lambda})\ =\
723: -\frac{g^2 m_b m_\tau}{4 M_W^2}\,
724: \langle \sigma ; \lambda \rangle_{b}
725: \delta_{\sigma\bar{\sigma}}\delta_{\lambda\bar{\lambda}}\,,
726: \label{eq:bbamp}
727: \end{equation}
728: where
729: \begin{equation}
730: \langle \sigma ; \lambda \rangle_{b}\ \equiv\ \sum_{i,j=1,2,3}
731: (\lambda\beta_b\,g^S_{H_i\bar{b}b}+i g^P_{H_i\bar{b}b})\: D_{ij}(\hat{s})\:
732: (\sigma\beta_\tau\,g^S_{H_j\tau^+\tau^-}-i g^P_{H_j\tau^+\tau^-})\,,
733: \end{equation}
734: with $\beta_f=\sqrt{1-4m_f^2/\hat{s}}$. Note that the cross sections
735: for general (longitudinal or transverse) $\tau^\pm$ polarizations can
736: be computed from the helicity amplitudes by a suitable
737: rotation~\cite{HaZe} from the helicity basis to a general spin basis.
738:
739: The $\tau$-polarization weighted squared matrix elements are given by
740: \begin{equation}
741: \overline{\left|{\cal M}^{b\bar{b}}\right|^2}\
742: =\ \frac{1}{12}\, \sum_{\lambda=\pm} \left(
743: \sum_{\sigma\sigma^\prime\bar{\sigma}\bar{\sigma}^\prime}
744: {\cal M}^{b\bar{b}}_{\sigma\bar{\sigma}}
745: {\cal M}^{b\bar{b}*}_{\sigma^\prime\bar{\sigma}^\prime}
746: \bar{\rho}_{\bar{\sigma}^\prime\bar{\sigma}}
747: \rho_{\sigma^\prime\sigma}
748: \right)\ =\ \frac{1}{12}\, \sum_{\lambda=\pm}
749: {\rm Tr}\left[{\cal M}^{b\bar{b}}\bar{\rho}^T
750: {\cal M}^{b\bar{b}\dagger}\rho\right]\,,
751: \label{eq:bsq}
752: \end{equation}
753: where $\rho$ and $\bar{\rho}$ are $2\times 2$ polarization density
754: matrices for the $\tau^-$ and $\tau^+$, respectively:
755: \begin{equation}
756: \rho\ =\ \frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{cc}
757: 1+P_L & P_T\,{\rm e}^{-i\alpha} \\[1mm]
758: P_T\,{\rm e}^{i\alpha} & 1-P_L
759: \end{array}\right)\,,\qquad
760: \bar{\rho}\ =\ \frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{cc}
761: 1+\bar{P}_L & -\bar{P}_T\,{\rm e}^{i\bar{\alpha}} \\[1mm]
762: -\bar{P}_T\,{\rm e}^{-i\bar{\alpha}} & 1-\bar{P}_L
763: \end{array}\right)\,.
764: \end{equation}
765: Evaluating the trace in (\ref{eq:bsq}) yields
766: \begin{eqnarray}
767: \overline{\left|{\cal M}^{b\bar{b}}\right|^2}
768: &=&\frac{1}{12}
769: \left( \frac{g^2m_bm_\tau}{4 M_W^2} \right)^2
770: \Bigg\{ C^b_1 (1+P_L\bar{P}_L)
771: +C^b_2 (P_L+\bar{P}_L) \nonumber \\
772: && \hspace{3.3 cm}
773: +P_T\bar{P}_T\left[C^b_3\cos(\alpha-\bar{\alpha})
774: +C^b_4\sin(\alpha-\bar{\alpha})\right]
775: \Bigg\}\,.
776: \label{Msquared}
777: \end{eqnarray}
778: The $\tau^+ \tau^-$ production plane is depicted schematically in
779: Fig.~\ref{f2}, where the transverse polarization angles $\alpha$ and
780: $\bar{\alpha}$ are also defined.
781:
782:
783: The coefficients $C^b_n(n=1-4)$ in (\ref{Msquared}) are defined in
784: terms of the helicity amplitudes by
785: \begin{eqnarray}
786: \label{Cbn}
787: C^b_1 \!\!&\equiv &\!\! \frac{1}{4}\sum_{\lambda=\pm}\left(
788: |\langle +;\lambda\rangle_{b}|^2 +|\langle -;\lambda\rangle_{b}|^2
789: \right) \,, \qquad
790: C^b_2\ \equiv\ \frac{1}{4}\sum_{\lambda=\pm}\left(
791: |\langle +;\lambda\rangle_{b}|^2 -|\langle -;\lambda\rangle_{b}|^2
792: \right) \,, \nonumber \\
793: C^b_3 \!\!&\equiv &\!\! -\frac{1}{2}\sum_{\lambda=\pm}\real\left(
794: \langle +;\lambda\rangle_{b} \langle -;\lambda\rangle_{b}^*
795: \right) \,, \qquad\quad\,
796: C^b_4\ \equiv\ \frac{1}{2}\sum_{\lambda=\pm}\imag\left(
797: \langle +;\lambda\rangle_{b} \langle -;\lambda\rangle_{b}^*
798: \right) \,.
799: \label{eq:c}
800: \end{eqnarray}
801: Under CP and CP$\widetilde{\rm T}$~\footnote{We define $\widetilde{\rm
802: T}$ as the naive ${\rm T}$-reversal transformation, under which the
803: spins and 3-momenta of the asymptotic states reverse sign, without
804: interchanging initial to final states. In addition, under the
805: operation of $\widetilde{\rm T}$, the matrix element gets complex
806: conjugated.} transformations, the helicity amplitudes transform as
807: follows:
808: \begin{equation}
809: \langle \sigma;\lambda\rangle_{b}
810: \, \stackrel{\rm CP}{\leftrightarrow} \,
811: +\langle -\sigma;-\lambda\rangle_{b}\,, \qquad
812: \langle \sigma;\lambda\rangle_{b}
813: \, \stackrel{\rm CP\widetilde{\rm T}}{\leftrightarrow} \,
814: +\langle -\sigma;-\lambda\rangle_{b}^*\,.
815: \end{equation}
816: Hence, the CP and CP$\widetilde{\rm T}$ parities of the coefficients
817: $C^b_n$ defined in (\ref{Cbn}) are given by
818: \begin{equation}
819: \label{CPparities}
820: C^b_1[++]\,, \qquad C^b_2[--]\,, \qquad
821: C^b_3[++]\,, \qquad C^b_4[-+]\,,
822: \end{equation}
823: where the first and second symbols in the square brackets are the CP
824: and CP$\widetilde{\rm T}$ parities, respectively. Consequently, the
825: coefficients $C^b_2$ and $C^b_4$ signify genuine phenomena of CP
826: violation, whereas $C^b_1$ and $C^b_3$ are CP-conserving. Here, we
827: should remark that a non-zero value for the CP$\widetilde{\rm T}$-odd
828: coefficient $C^b_2$ can only be induced by non-vanishing absorptive
829: effects. In our case, such effects mainly originate from the
830: absorptive parts of the Higgs-boson self-energies.
831:
832: Finally, for our phenomenological discussion in
833: Section~\ref{sec:numerical}, we define the parton-level cross sections
834: \begin{equation}
835: \label{eq:bparton}
836: \hat{\sigma}_i(b\bar{b}\to H \to \tau^+\tau^-)\ \equiv\
837: \frac{\beta_\tau}{192\pi \hat{s}}\
838: \left(\frac{g^2m_bm_\tau}{4M_W^2}\right)^2\,C^b_i\,,
839: \end{equation}
840: where the intermediate state $H$ collectively denotes all the $H_i\to
841: H_j$ resonant transitions with $i,j = 1,2,3$.
842:
843:
844: %--------------------------------------------
845: \subsection{$gg$ Fusion}
846: %--------------------------------------------
847: The matrix element ${\cal M}^{gg}$ for the process $gg \rightarrow H
848: \to \tau^+\tau^-$, depicted in Fig.~\ref{f3}, can be written as
849: \begin{eqnarray}
850: {\cal M}^{gg} &=& \frac{g\alpha_s m_\tau\delta^{ab}}{8\pi v
851: M_W}\nonumber\\
852: &&\hspace{-1cm}\times\, \sum_{i,j=1,2,3}^{3}\ \sum_{\alpha=\pm}
853: G_{H_i}(k_1,\epsilon_1;k_2,\epsilon_2)\: D_{ij}(\hat{s})\:
854: (g_{H_j\tau^+\tau^-}^S+i \alpha
855: g_{H_j\tau^+\tau^-}^P)\: \bar{u}(p_1,\sigma) P_\alpha
856: v(p_2,\bar{\sigma})\,.\qquad\quad
857: \end{eqnarray}
858: In the above, $a$ and $b$ are indices
859: of the SU(3) generators in the adjoint representation and $k_{1,2}$
860: and $\epsilon_{1,2}$ are the four-momenta and wave vectors of the two
861: gluons, respectively. Again, we denote the helicities of $\tau^-$ and
862: $\tau^+$ by $\sigma$ and $\bar{\sigma}$ with $\sigma=+$ and $-$
863: standing for right- and left-handed particles. The four-momenta of
864: $\tau^-$ and $\tau^+$ are $p_1$ and $p_2$, respectively, and
865: $\hat{s}=(k_1+k_2)^2=(p_1+p_2)^2$. The Higgs-boson propagator matrix
866: $D(\hat{s})$ was given in (\ref{eq:hprop}) and the loop-induced
867: couplings of the Higgs bosons $H_i$ to two gluons are given by
868: \begin{eqnarray}
869: G_{H_i}(k_1,\epsilon_1;k_2,\epsilon_2) &=& i\,S^g_i(\sqrt{\hat{s}})
870: \left(\epsilon_1\cdot\epsilon_2\: -\: \frac{2}{\hat{s}}\,
871: k_1\cdot\epsilon_2 k_2\cdot\epsilon_1\right)\ -\ i\,
872: P^g_i(\sqrt{\hat{s}})\ \frac{2}{\hat{s}}\,
873: \varepsilon_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}\epsilon_1^\mu\epsilon_2^\nu k_1^\rho
874: k_2^\sigma\,, \quad\nonumber\\
875: \end{eqnarray}
876: with $\varepsilon_{0123} = 1$. For the loop functions $S^g_i$ and
877: $P^g_i$, we follow the definitions of~\cite{CPsuperH}.
878:
879:
880:
881: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% F I G U R E 3 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
882: \begin{figure}[t]
883: \vspace*{1cm}
884: \begin{center}
885:
886: \SetWidth{1.0}
887:
888: \begin{picture}(250,100)(0,0)
889: \Gluon(-30,100)(60,60){6}{6}
890: \Gluon(-30,0)(60,40){6}{6}
891: \DashCArc(70,50)(15,0,360){4}
892: \GOval(70,50)(15,15)(0){0.8}
893: \DashCArc(130,50)(15,0,360){4}
894: \GOval(130,50)(15,15)(0){0.8}
895: \DashLine(85,50)(115,50){4}
896: \DashLine(145,50)(180,50){4}
897: \DashCArc(180,50)(7,0,360){4}
898: \GOval(180,50)(7,7)(0){0.8}
899: \ArrowLine(270,100)(185,55)
900: \ArrowLine(185,45)(270,0)
901: \Text(0,110)[]{$g_1^a$}
902: \Text(0,-10)[]{$g_2^b$}
903: \Text(100,40)[]{$H_i$}
904: \Text(165,40)[]{$H_j$}
905: \Text(230,90)[]{$\tau^+$}
906: \Text(230,10)[]{$\tau^-$}
907:
908: \SetWidth{0.5}
909:
910: \ArrowLine(210,55)(246,75)
911: \ArrowLine(210,45)(246,25)
912: \Text(240,60)[]{$p_2$}
913: \Text(240,40)[]{$p_1$}
914: \ArrowLine(-10,20)(35,40)
915: \ArrowLine(-10,80)(35,60)
916: \Text(-10,35)[]{$k_2\,,\epsilon_2$}
917: \Text(-10,65)[]{$k_1\,,\epsilon_1$}
918: \ArrowLine(110,70)(160,70)
919: \Text(135,80)[]{$k_1+k_2$}
920: \end{picture}
921: \end{center}
922: \smallskip
923: \noindent
924: \caption{\it Mechanisms contributing to the process
925: $gg \to H \to \tau^+\tau^-$ via the three
926: neutral Higgs bosons $H_{1,2,3}$.}\label{f3}
927: \end{figure}
928: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
929:
930: In the two-gluon centre-of-mass coordinate system with ${\bf k}_1$
931: along the positive $z$ direction and ${\bf k}_2$ along the negative
932: $z$ direction, the wave vectors of two photons are given by
933: \begin{equation}
934: \epsilon^\mu_1(\lambda_1)\ =\ \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\, \Big(0,-\lambda_1,
935: -i,0\Big)\,,\qquad
936: \epsilon^\mu_2(\lambda_2)\ =\ \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\,
937: \Big(0,-\lambda_2, i,0\Big)\,,
938: \end{equation}
939: where $\lambda=+1$ and $-1$
940: denote the right and left gluon helicities, respectively.
941: The helicity amplitudes are given by
942: \begin{equation}
943: {\cal M}^{gg}(\sigma\bar{\sigma};\lambda_1\lambda_2)\ =\
944: \frac{g\alpha_s m_\tau\sqrt{\hat{s}}\delta^{ab}}{8\pi v M_W}
945: \langle\sigma;\lambda_1\rangle_g
946: \delta_{\sigma\bar{\sigma}}\delta_{\lambda_1\lambda_2}\,,
947: \label{eq:ggamp}
948: \end{equation}
949: where the amplitude $\langle\sigma;\lambda\rangle_g$ is defined as
950: \begin{equation}
951: \langle\sigma;\lambda\rangle_g \equiv \sum_{i,j=1,2,3}
952: [S_i^g(\sqrt{\hat{s}})+i\lambda P_i^g(\sqrt{\hat{s}})]\:
953: D_{ij}(\hat{s})\: (\sigma\beta_\tau g_{H_j\tau^+\tau^-}^S -i
954: g_{H_j\tau^+\tau^-}^P)\,.
955: \end{equation}
956: %
957: We note that the amplitude (\ref{eq:ggamp}) has the same structure
958: as the amplitude (\ref{eq:bbamp}) for $b\bar{b}\rightarrow \tau^+\tau^-$,
959: except for the overall constant. We obtain from the helicity
960: amplitudes the polarization-weighted squared matrix elements given by
961: \begin{eqnarray}
962: \overline{\left|{\cal M}^{gg}\right|^2}
963: &=&\frac{1}{32}
964: \left( \frac{g\alpha_s m_\tau\sqrt{\hat{s}}}{8\pi v M_W} \right)^2
965: \Bigg\{ C^g_1 (1+P_L\bar{P}_L)
966: +C^g_2 (P_L+\bar{P}_L) \nonumber \\
967: && \hspace{3.3 cm}
968: +P_T\bar{P}_T\left[C^g_3\cos(\alpha-\bar{\alpha})
969: +C^g_4\sin(\alpha-\bar{\alpha})\right]
970: \Bigg\}\,,
971: \end{eqnarray}
972: where the coefficients $C_n^g$ are obtained by replacing
973: $\langle\sigma;\lambda\rangle_b \to \langle\sigma;\lambda\rangle_g$
974: and interpreting $\lambda$ as the gluon helicity in (\ref{eq:c}).
975:
976: Under the CP and CP$\widetilde{\rm T}$ transformations, the helicity
977: amplitudes transform as follows:
978: \begin{equation}
979: \langle \sigma;\lambda\rangle_{g}
980: \, \stackrel{\rm CP}{\leftrightarrow} \,
981: -\langle -\sigma;-\lambda\rangle_{g}\,, \qquad
982: \langle \sigma;\lambda\rangle_{g}
983: \, \stackrel{\rm CP\widetilde{\rm T}}{\leftrightarrow} \,
984: -\langle -\sigma;-\lambda\rangle_{g}^*\,,
985: \end{equation}
986: where the CP and CP$\widetilde{\rm T}$
987: parities of the coefficients $C^g_i$ are the same as those of the $C^b_i$.
988: Finally, we define the parton-level cross sections as:
989: \begin{equation}
990: \hat{\sigma}_i(gg\to H\to \tau^+\tau^-)\ \equiv\
991: \frac{\beta_\tau}{512\pi \hat{s}}
992: \left(\frac{g\alpha_s m_\tau\sqrt{\hat{s}}}{8\pi v M_W}\right)^2\,C^g_i\,.
993: \label{eq:gparton}
994: \end{equation}
995: Note that the CP- and CP$\widetilde{\rm T}$-odd cross section
996: $\hat{\sigma}_2$ receives contributions from the absorptive parts of
997: the $H_{1,2,3}gg$ vertices and Higgs-boson self-energies as well.
998:
999:
1000: %--------------------------------------------
1001: \subsection{$W^+ W^-$ Fusion}
1002: %--------------------------------------------
1003:
1004: The last important mechanism for the production of the MSSM neutral
1005: Higgs bosons at the LHC is $W^+ W^-$ fusion
1006: \cite{WWF0,WWF1,WWF2,WWTAUTAU}. The matrix element ${\cal M}^{WW}$
1007: for this process, $W^-(k_1) W^+(k_2) \rightarrow H \rightarrow \tau^-
1008: (p_1)\tau^+ (p_2)$ with $\hat{s}=(k_1+k_2)^2$, is given by
1009: \begin{equation}
1010: {\cal M}^{WW}\ =\ \frac{g^2 m_\tau}{2\hat{s}}
1011: \sum_{i,j=1}^3\ \sum_{\alpha =\pm}
1012: g_{H_iVV} \,\epsilon_1 \cdot \epsilon_2\:
1013: D_{ij}(\hat{s})\:
1014: (g_{H_j\tau^+\tau^-}^S+i \alpha g_{H_j\tau^+\tau^-}^P)
1015: \, \bar{u}(p_1,\sigma) P_\alpha v(p_2,\bar{\sigma})\,,
1016: \end{equation}
1017: where $\epsilon_1$ and $\epsilon_2$ are the polarization vectors of
1018: two vector bosons and $g_{H_iVV}$ denotes the coupling of the Higgs
1019: boson $H_i$ with a pair of gauge bosons, as defined through the
1020: interaction Lagrangian
1021: \begin{equation}
1022: {\cal L}_{HVV}\ =\ g M_W \left(W^+_\mu W^{-\mu}+\frac{1}{2 c_W^2} Z_\mu
1023: Z^\mu\right)\: \sum_{i=1}^3\, g_{H_iVV} H_i\,.
1024: \end{equation}
1025: In the $W^+ W^-$ centre-of-mass coordinate system with ${\bf k}_1$
1026: along the positive $z$ direction and ${\bf k}_2$ along the negative
1027: $z$ direction, the polarization vectors of two vector bosons are given
1028: by
1029: \begin{eqnarray}
1030: \epsilon_1^\mu(\lambda_1=\pm 1)\!\!&=&\!\!
1031: \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\,\Big(0,\mp 1,-i,0\Big)\,, \qquad\
1032: \epsilon_1^\mu(\lambda_1=0)\ =\ \frac{1}{\sqrt{k_1^2}}\,
1033: \Big(|{\bf k}_1|,0,0,k^0_1\Big)\,, \nonumber \\
1034: \epsilon_2^\mu(\lambda_2=\pm 1)
1035: \!\!&=&\!\!\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\,\Big(0,\mp 1,i,0\Big)\,,\qquad\quad
1036: \epsilon_2^\mu(\lambda_2=0)\ =\ \frac{1}{\sqrt{k_2^2}}\,
1037: \Big(|{\bf k}_2|,0,0,-k^0_2\Big)\,,
1038: \end{eqnarray}
1039: where the polarization vectors are normalized by
1040: $\epsilon_i(\lambda)\cdot\epsilon_i^*(\lambda^\prime)=
1041: -\delta_{\lambda\lambda^\prime}$, and $\lambda=\pm 1$ and $\lambda=0$
1042: denote the transverse (right and left helicities) and longitudinal
1043: polarizations, respectively. In this frame, the helicity amplitude is
1044: given by
1045: \begin{equation}
1046: {\cal M}^{WW}(\sigma\bar{\sigma};\lambda_1\lambda_2)\ =\
1047: \frac{g^2m_\tau}{2\sqrt{\hat{s}}} \langle \sigma;\lambda_1\rangle_W
1048: \delta_{\sigma\bar{\sigma}}\delta_{\lambda_1\lambda_2}\,,
1049: \end{equation}
1050: where the amplitude $\langle \sigma;\lambda\rangle_W$ is defined by
1051: \begin{equation}
1052: \langle \sigma;\lambda\rangle_W\ \equiv\
1053: \sum_{i,j=1,2,3} \omega(\lambda)\,g_{H_iVV}\: D_{ij}(\hat{s})\:
1054: (\sigma\beta_\tau\,g^S_{H_j\tau^+\tau^-}-i g^P_{H_j\tau^+\tau^-})\,,
1055: \end{equation}
1056: with
1057: \begin{equation}
1058: \omega(\pm)=1\quad \mbox{and} \quad
1059: \omega(0)=-k_1\cdot k_2/\sqrt{k_1^2k_2^2} \,.
1060: \end{equation}
1061: The factor $\omega(0)$ becomes $1-\hat{s}/2M_W^2$ for on-shell vector
1062: bosons and dominates the amplitude for $\hat{s}\gg M_W^2$.
1063:
1064: \medskip
1065:
1066: One can then obtain the following averaged amplitude squared:
1067: \begin{eqnarray}
1068: \overline{\left|{\cal M}^{WW}\right|^2}
1069: &=&\frac{1}{9}
1070: \left( \frac{g^2m_\tau}{2\sqrt{\hat{s}}} \right)^2
1071: \Bigg\{ C^W_1 (1+P_L\bar{P}_L)
1072: +C^W_2 (P_L+\bar{P}_L) \nonumber \\
1073: && \hspace{2.3 cm}
1074: +P_T\bar{P}_T\left[C^W_3\cos(\alpha-\bar{\alpha})
1075: +C^W_4\sin(\alpha-\bar{\alpha})\right]
1076: \Bigg\}\,,
1077: \end{eqnarray}
1078: where the coefficients $C_n^W$ can be obtained by replacing
1079: $\langle\sigma;\lambda\rangle_b \to \langle\sigma;\lambda\rangle_W$
1080: and summing over $\lambda=\pm,0$ in (\ref{eq:c}). The CP and
1081: CP$\widetilde{\rm T}$ parities of the coefficients $C^W_n$ are the
1082: same as those of $C^b_n$ or $C^g_n$, and the parton-level cross
1083: sections are defined similarly as
1084: \begin{equation}
1085: \label{eq:Wparton}
1086: \hat{\sigma}_i(W^+_{T,L}W^-_{T,L}\to H \to \tau^+\tau^-)\
1087: \equiv\ \frac{\beta_\tau}{144\, \pi\hat{s}}
1088: \left( \frac{g^2m_\tau}{2\sqrt{\hat{s}}} \right)^2 C^W_i\,.
1089: \end{equation}
1090: In kinematic situations where the longitudinal $W^+_LW^-_L$
1091: contributions can be neglected, the average factor $1/144$ should be
1092: replaced by $1/64$. Finally, we note that it is straightforward to
1093: calculate $ZZ$-fusion processes in a similar fashion, although their
1094: cross sections are smaller approximately by a factor of 4 than
1095: $W^+W^-$ collisions at the hadron level.
1096:
1097:
1098: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1099: \setcounter{equation}{0}
1100: \section{Numerical Examples}
1101: \label{sec:numerical}
1102: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1103:
1104: We now present some numerical examples of CP-violating Higgs signatures in
1105: $\tau^+ \tau^-$ production at the LHC. As already mentioned, these
1106: signatures may be enhanced at large $\tan \beta$, and three-way mixing is
1107: potentially important for small charged Higgs-boson masses. Since the
1108: prospects for observing $H_{1,2,3}
1109: \to \tau^+ \tau^-$ at the LHC are best for light Higgs bosons, we present
1110: in this section some numerical analyses in a specific scenario in which
1111: all the three Higgs states mix significantly.
1112:
1113: Explicitly, we take the following parameter set:
1114: \begin{eqnarray}
1115: \label{MSSM1}
1116: &&\tan\beta=50, \ \ M_{H^\pm}^{\rm pole}=155~~{\rm GeV},
1117: \nonumber \\
1118: &&M_{\tilde{Q}_3} = M_{\tilde{U}_3} = M_{\tilde{D}_3} =
1119: M_{\tilde{L}_3} = M_{\tilde{E}_3} = M_{\rm SUSY} = 0.5 ~~{\rm TeV},
1120: \nonumber \\
1121: && |\mu|=0.5 ~~{\rm TeV}, \ \
1122: |A_{t,b,\tau}|=1 ~~{\rm TeV}, \ \
1123: |M_2|=|M_1|=0.3~~{\rm TeV}, \ \ |M_3|=1 ~~{\rm TeV},
1124: \nonumber \\
1125: &&
1126: \Phi_\mu = 0^\circ, \ \
1127: \Phi_A=\Phi_{A_t} = \Phi_{A_b} = \Phi_{A_\tau} = 90^\circ, \ \
1128: \Phi_1 = \Phi_2 = 0^\circ,
1129: \end{eqnarray}
1130: and we consider two values for the phase of the gluino mass parameter
1131: $M_3$: $\Phi_3 = -90^\circ\,, -10^\circ$.
1132: For $\Phi_3 = -10^\circ$, {\tt CPsuperH} yields for
1133: the masses and widths of the neutral Higgs bosons: \\
1134: \begin{eqnarray}
1135: &&
1136: M_{H_1}=120.2~~{\rm GeV}, \ \
1137: M_{H_2}=121.4~~{\rm GeV}, \ \
1138: M_{H_3}=124.5~~{\rm GeV}, \ \
1139: \nonumber \\ &&
1140: \Gamma_{H_1}=1.19~~{\rm GeV}, \ \ \ \
1141: \Gamma_{H_2}=3.42~~{\rm GeV}, \ \ \ \ \ \
1142: \Gamma_{H_3}=3.20~~{\rm GeV},
1143: \end{eqnarray}
1144: and for $\Phi_3 = -90^\circ$:
1145: \begin{eqnarray}
1146: &&
1147: M_{H_1}=118.4~~{\rm GeV}, \ \
1148: M_{H_2}=119.0~~{\rm GeV}, \ \
1149: M_{H_3}=122.5~~{\rm GeV}, \ \
1150: \nonumber \\ &&
1151: \Gamma_{H_1}=3.91~~{\rm GeV}, \ \ \ \
1152: \Gamma_{H_2}=6.02~~{\rm GeV}, \ \ \ \ \ \
1153: \Gamma_{H_3}=6.34~~{\rm GeV},
1154: \end{eqnarray}
1155: respectively.
1156:
1157: In Figs.~\ref{fig:3mix} and~\ref{fig:3mix34}, we show the parton-level
1158: cross sections $\hat{\sigma}_{i}(b\bar{b}\rightarrow H \rightarrow
1159: \tau^+\tau^-)$,
1160: $\hat{\sigma}_{i}(gg\rightarrow H \rightarrow \tau^+\tau^-)$ and
1161: $\hat{\sigma}_{i}(WW\rightarrow H \rightarrow \tau^+\tau^-)$ defined in
1162: (\ref{eq:bparton}), (\ref{eq:gparton}) and (\ref{eq:Wparton}),
1163: respectively, as functions of the $\tau^+ \tau^-$ invariant mass
1164: $\sqrt{{\hat s}}$. The solid lines are for $\Phi_3=-90^\circ$ and the
1165: dashed (red) ones for $\Phi_3=-10^\circ$. We recall that
1166: non-vanishing
1167: of $\hat{\sigma}_2$ and $\hat{\sigma}_{4}$ are direct signals of CP
1168: violation in longitudinally and transversally polarized
1169: $\tau^+\tau^-$ pairs, respectively.
1170:
1171: The parton-level cross sections $\hat{\sigma}_{i}(WW\rightarrow
1172: \tau^+\tau^-)$ have been computed by neglecting the contribution of
1173: the longitudinally-polarized $W^\pm$, i.e., setting $\omega(0)=0$. For
1174: the
1175: MSSM scenario defined in~(\ref{MSSM1}), this is a plausible
1176: approximation for Higgs-boson masses below the $WW$ threshold.
1177: Possible uncertainties that such a treatment may introduce
1178: largely cancel when we consider ratios of the
1179: cross sections $\hat{\sigma}_{i}(WW\rightarrow \tau^+\tau^-)$, such as
1180: the CP asymmetries to be defined later in this section.
1181:
1182: In Fig.~\ref{fig:3mix}, we observe that the cross section
1183: $\hat{\sigma}_2$, which quantifies CP violation in the production of
1184: longitudinally polarized $\tau$-lepton pairs at the parton level, is
1185: comparable to the spin-averaged cross section $\hat{\sigma}_1$ in $WW$
1186: and $gg$ collisions. This implies that CP violation can be very large
1187: in these channels. Instead, in $b {\bar b}$ fusion, the ratio
1188: $\hat{\sigma}_2/\hat{\sigma}_1$ is always less than 1\%, so
1189: CP-violating effects in the production of longitudinally polarized
1190: $\tau$ leptons are unobservably small in this case.
1191:
1192: The smallness of $\hat{\sigma}_2$ in $b {\bar b}$ fusion is a result
1193: of an intriguing interplay between unitarity and CPT
1194: invariance~\cite{APNPB}. In detail, the CP-violating cross section
1195: $\hat{\sigma}_2$ may be calculated by
1196: \begin{equation}
1197: \hat{\sigma}_2 (b\bar{b}\to H\to \tau^+\tau^-) \ =\ \frac{1}{4}\,
1198: \bigg[\, \hat{\sigma} (b\bar{b} \to H \to \tau^+_R \tau^-_R) \ -\
1199: \hat{\sigma} (b\bar{b} \to H \to \tau^+_L\tau^-_L)\, \bigg]\,,
1200: \end{equation}
1201: where $\hat{\sigma}$ denotes the usual subprocess cross section. For
1202: the scenario under study, unitarity cuts of $b\bar{b}$ pairs dominate
1203: the absorptive part of the Higgs-boson self-energies. Employing this
1204: fact and the optical theorem, we obtain
1205: \begin{eqnarray}
1206: \label{s2CP}
1207: \sum\limits_{\lambda = L,R}\ \hat{\sigma}_2 (b_\lambda \bar{b}_\lambda
1208: \to H \to \tau^+\tau^-) &=& C_{\rm PS}\, \bigg( \, \imag\, {\cal
1209: T} (\tau^+_R \tau^-_R \to H \to \tau^+_R \tau^-_R) \nonumber\\
1210: && \hspace{-3cm}-\ \imag\, {\cal T} (\tau^+_L \tau^-_L \to H \to \tau^+_L
1211: \tau^-_L)\,\bigg)\quad +\quad {\cal O}\Big[\hat{\sigma}'_2\,B(H_{1,2,3}\to
1212: \tau^+\tau^-)\Big]\, , \qquad
1213: \end{eqnarray}
1214: where $C_{\rm PS}$ is a phase-space correction factor and ${\cal
1215: T}(\tau^+_{L,R} \tau^-_{L,R} \to H \to \tau^+_{L,R} \tau^-_{L,R})$
1216: denote the usual matrix elements. In~(\ref{s2CP}), $\hat{\sigma}'_2$
1217: is the CP-violating cross-section $\hat{\sigma}_2$ calculated by
1218: omitting the off-diagonal absorptive parts in the Higgs-boson
1219: propagator matrix $D(\hat{s})$. The size of $\hat{\sigma}'_2$ is
1220: smaller at least by a factor 10 than the spin-averaged cross-section
1221: $\hat{\sigma}_1$. On the other hand, CPT invariance imposes the
1222: constraint
1223: \begin{equation}
1224: \label{CPTconstraint}
1225: {\cal T} (\tau^+_R \tau^-_R \to H \to \tau^+_R \tau^-_R)\ =\
1226: {\cal T} (\tau^+_L \tau^-_L \to H \to \tau^+_L \tau^-_L)\, .
1227: \end{equation}
1228: With the aid of (\ref{CPTconstraint}), it is not difficult to see
1229: using~(\ref{s2CP}) that the CP-violating cross section $\hat{\sigma}_2
1230: (b\bar{b}\to H\to \tau^+\tau^-)$ vanishes up to CP-violating terms
1231: suppressed by extra factors of order $B(H_{1,2,3}\to \tau^+\tau^-)$.
1232:
1233: Our numerical estimates presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:3mix34} show that
1234: the CP-violating transverse-polarization cross section
1235: $\hat{\sigma}_{4}$ may be quite sizeable for all production channels.
1236: However, $\hat{\sigma}_{4}$ generically exhibits an alternating sign
1237: for $b\bar{b}$ and $gg$ collisions, and CP violation becomes very
1238: small when we integrate over the whole Higgs-boson resonance region.
1239: Moreover, the transverse $\tau^\pm$ polarizations will be difficult to
1240: measure at the LHC because of the experimental conditions, notably the
1241: large boosts of the $\tau^\pm$. On the other hand, analogous
1242: asymmetries might be observable in ${\bar t} t$ production and/or in
1243: $\tau^+ \tau^-$ production at a $\mu^+ \mu^-$ collider.
1244:
1245: The Higgs production channels via $b\bar{b}$ and $gg$ fusion processes
1246: can be separated from the $W^+W^-$ fusion channel by applying a number
1247: of kinematic cuts~\cite{ATLAS} including the imposition of a veto on
1248: any hadronic activity between jets~\cite{JF0,JF1}. Therefore, we
1249: treat the contributions from $b\bar{b}$ and $gg$ collisions to the
1250: physical Higgs-exchange process $pp \to H \to \tau^+\tau^- X$
1251: separately from those coming from $WW$ fusion. More explicitly, the
1252: physical $\tau^+ \tau^-$ cross section can be computed by integrating
1253: the parton-level cross sections with the distribution of $b$ quarks,
1254: gluons and $W$-bosons in the proton,
1255: \begin{eqnarray}
1256: \label{xggbb}
1257: \tau\ \frac{d\sigma_{\rm tot}}{d\tau}\, \Big( pp\, (b\bar{b},gg)\ \to\
1258: \tau^+\tau^- X \Big) &=&
1259: 4\, \hat{\sigma}_1(b\bar{b}\rightarrow H \rightarrow \tau^+\tau^-) \
1260: \tau\,\frac{d{\cal L}^{bb}}{d\tau}\nonumber\\
1261: &&+\, 4\ K\,\hat{\sigma}_1(gg\rightarrow H \rightarrow \tau^+\tau^-) \
1262: \tau\,\frac{d{\cal L}^{gg}}{d\tau}\,,\\[3mm]
1263: \label{xWW}
1264: \tau\,\frac{d\sigma_{\rm tot}}{d\tau}\,\Big( pp\, (W^+ W^-)\ \to\
1265: \tau^+\tau^- X\Big) &=&
1266: \, 4\, \hat{\sigma}_1( W^+ W^-
1267: \rightarrow H \rightarrow \tau^+\tau^-)\ \tau\,\frac{d{\cal
1268: L}^{WW}}{d\tau}\, ,
1269: \end{eqnarray}
1270: where $\tau$ is the Drell--Yan variable $\tau=\hat{s}/s$ and $s$ is
1271: the invariant squared centre-of-mass energy of the LHC. In
1272: (\ref{xggbb}), we use the value $K=1+\frac{\alpha_s(\hat{s})}{\pi}\,
1273: (\pi^2+11/2)$, ignoring the small difference between the $K-$factors
1274: for CP-even and CP-odd Higgs states. The effective luminosities for
1275: $b\bar{b}$ and $gg$ collisions, ${\cal L}^{bb}$ and ${\cal L}^{gg}$,
1276: may be determined by
1277: \begin{eqnarray}
1278: \tau\frac{d{\cal L}^{bb}}{d\tau} &=&
1279: \int_{\tau}^1 dx\, \left[\,\frac{\tau}{x}\,
1280: b(x,Q) \,
1281: \bar{b}\left(\frac{\tau}{x},Q\!\right)\
1282: +\ (b\leftrightarrow \bar{b})\, \right] \,,\nonumber \\
1283: \tau\frac{d{\cal L}^{gg}}{d\tau} &=&
1284: \int_{\tau}^1dx\ \frac{\tau}{x}\,g(x,Q)\,g\left(\frac{\tau}{x},Q\right)\,,
1285: \end{eqnarray}
1286: where $b(x,Q)$, $\bar{b}(x,Q)$ and $g(x,Q)$ are the $b$, $\bar{b}$
1287: and gluon distribution functions in the proton and $Q$ is the
1288: factorization scale. In our numerical analysis, we use the
1289: leading-order CTEQ6L~\cite{CTEQ6} parton distribution functions for
1290: $b(x,Q)$ and $\bar{b}(x,Q)$, and the CTEQ6M parton distribution
1291: function for $g(x,Q)$. We choose the factorization scale
1292: $Q=\sqrt{\hat{s}}/4$ for the $b$-quark fusion process as suggested and
1293: confirmed in~\cite{BBH2}.
1294:
1295: Correspondingly, in (\ref{xWW}), the effective luminosities for the
1296: transverse and longitudinal $W$-bosons, denoted as $W^\pm_{T,L}$, can
1297: be computed in terms of effective densities $F_{W_{T,L}^\pm}^p\!(x,Q)$
1298: in the colliding protons, which are in turn calculated in terms of the
1299: quark parton distribution functions $q(x,Q)$ in the
1300: proton:\footnote{Here we consider identical polarizations for the
1301: $W^\pm$ bosons in the $W^+W^-$ fusion process.}
1302: \begin{eqnarray}
1303: \tau\ \frac{d{\cal L}^{W_P W_P}}{d\tau} &=&
1304: \int_\tau^1 dx\
1305: \left[\,\frac{\tau}{x}\,
1306: F_{W_P^+}^p\!(x,Q) \,
1307: F_{W_P^-}^p\!\!\left(\frac{\tau}{x},Q\!\right)\
1308: +\ (W_P ^+\leftrightarrow W_P^-)\, \right]\,,\nonumber\\
1309: F_{W_P^+}^p(x,Q) &=& \sum_{q=u,\bar{d},c,\bar{s}}\
1310: \int_x^1 \frac{dy}{y} \ q(y,Q)\,F^q_{W^+_P}(x/y,Q)\, ,
1311: \end{eqnarray}
1312: where the transverse $(P=T)$ and longitudinal $(P=L)$ effective
1313: densities $F^q_{W^+_{T,L}}$ in the quark $q$ are given by
1314: \cite{WWF1,WWF2}
1315: \begin{eqnarray}
1316: F^q_{W^+_T}(x,Q) &=&\frac{\alpha_{\rm em}}{8\pi\,s_W^2}\
1317: \ln\left(\frac{Q^2}{M_W^2}\right)\
1318: \frac{1+(1-x)^2}{x}\ ,\nonumber\\
1319: F^q_{W^+_L}(x,Q) &=& \frac{\alpha_{\rm em}}{4\pi\,s_W^2}\ \frac{1-x}{x}\ .
1320: \end{eqnarray}
1321: Note that the summation over quark flavours $q$ in the expression for
1322: $F_{W_{T,L}^-}^p(x,Q)$ includes $q=\bar{u},d,\bar{c},s$. Moreover, we
1323: take $Q = \sqrt{\hat{s}}$ in our numerical estimates.
1324:
1325: To analyze the signatures of CP violation in the production of
1326: longitudinally polarized $\tau$-leptons, we first define the physical
1327: observables
1328: \begin{equation}
1329: \sigma_{RR}\ =\ \sigma(pp\ \to\ H\ \to\ \tau^+_R\tau^-_R X) \,, \qquad
1330: \sigma_{LL}\ =\ \sigma(pp\ \to\ H\ \to\ \tau^+_L\tau^-_L X) \, .
1331: \end{equation}
1332: Evidently, the total cross section for Higgs production and decay
1333: into $\tau^+\tau^-$ pairs is given in terms of $\sigma_{RR}$ and
1334: $\sigma_{LL}$ by
1335: \begin{equation}
1336: \sigma_{\rm tot} (pp\ \to\ H\ \to\ \tau^+\tau^- X)\ = \ \sigma_{RR}\ +\
1337: \sigma_{LL}\ .
1338: \end{equation}
1339: Although the initial state $pp$ is not symmetric under CP, it can,
1340: however, be shown that, up to negligible higher-order CP-violating
1341: electroweak effects, the effective luminosities for $gg$, $b\bar{b}$
1342: and $W^+W^-$ densities will be practically the same for $pp$ and
1343: $\bar{p}\bar{p}$ collisions. Therefore, the difference of cross
1344: sections
1345: \begin{equation}
1346: \label{DeltaCP}
1347: \Delta\sigma_{\rm CP}\ =\ \sigma_{RR}\ -\ \sigma_{LL}
1348: \end{equation}
1349: is a measure of genuine CP violation at the LHC. In analogy
1350: with~(\ref{xggbb}) and~(\ref{xWW}), the CP-violating cross section
1351: $\Delta\sigma_{\rm CP}$ can be computed by
1352: \begin{eqnarray}
1353: \label{xCPggbb}
1354: \tau\ \frac{d\Delta\sigma_{\rm CP}}{d\tau}\, \Big( pp\, (b\bar{b},gg)\ \to\
1355: \tau^+\tau^- X \Big) &=&
1356: 4\,\hat{\sigma}_2\, (b\bar{b}\rightarrow H \rightarrow \tau^+\tau^-) \
1357: \tau\,\frac{d{\cal L}^{bb}}{d\tau}\nonumber\\
1358: &&+\ 4\, K\,\hat{\sigma}_2\, (gg\rightarrow H \rightarrow \tau^+\tau^-) \
1359: \tau\,\frac{d{\cal L}^{gg}}{d\tau}\,,\\[3mm]
1360: \label{xCPWW}
1361: \tau\,\frac{d\Delta\sigma_{\rm CP}}{d\tau}\,\Big( pp\, (W^+ W^-)\ \to\
1362: \tau^+\tau^- X\Big) &=& 4\, \hat{\sigma}_2 ( W^+ W^- \to H \to \tau^+\tau^-)\
1363: \tau\,\frac{d{\cal L}^{WW}}{d\tau}\, .\qquad
1364: \end{eqnarray}
1365: To gauge the sizes of the signatures of CP violation at the LHC, we
1366: define the following two CP asymmetries:
1367: \begin{equation}
1368: \label{CPasym}
1369: a_{\rm CP} (\tau)\ \equiv \ \frac{\tau\
1370: \frac{\displaystyle d\Delta\sigma_{\rm CP}}{\displaystyle d\tau}}{
1371: \tau\ \frac{\displaystyle d\sigma_{\rm tot}}{\displaystyle d\tau}}\ ,
1372: \qquad\qquad
1373: {\cal A}_{\rm CP} \ \equiv \
1374: \frac{ \Delta\sigma_{\rm CP} }{\sigma_{\rm tot}}\ ,
1375: \end{equation}
1376: pertinent to the hadron-level processes $pp\, (b\bar{b},gg,WW)\ \to\
1377: H\ \to\ \tau^+\tau^- X$.
1378:
1379: We plot in Fig.~\ref{fig:cxtd} the differential cross sections $\tau\,
1380: \frac{d\sigma_{\rm tot}}{d\tau}$ and $\tau\, \frac{d\Delta\sigma_{\rm
1381: CP}}{d\tau}$ as functions of $\sqrt{\hat{s}}$. The upper two frames
1382: are for the process $b\bar{b}\rightarrow \tau^+\tau^-$, the frames in
1383: the middle for $gg\rightarrow \tau^+\tau^-$, and the lower ones for
1384: $W^+W^- \to \tau^+\tau^-$. We observe that the the main production
1385: mechanism is $b {\bar b}$ fusion, which gives a cross section about
1386: five times larger than that due to gluon fusion for the scenario under
1387: consideration. However, as has been mentioned above, the
1388: $W^+W^-$-fusion production mechanism, albeit much smaller, can be
1389: experimentally distinguished from that due to $b\bar{b}$ and $gg$
1390: collisions. Therefore, in Fig.~\ref{fig:ratio} we display the CP
1391: asymmetry $a_{\rm CP}$ defined in (\ref{CPasym}) separately for the $b
1392: {\bar b} + gg$ and $W^+ W^-$ subprocesses. We note that the large CP
1393: asymmetry in $gg$ subprocess is diluted by the dominant cross section
1394: via $b\bar{b}$ fusion\footnote{Specifically, the total CP asymmetry in
1395: the $gg$ subprocess is ${\cal A}_{\rm CP}^{gg}=-8.4\,(-6.2)\,\%$, for
1396: $\Phi_3=-90^\circ\,(-10^\circ)$. However, after the inclusion of
1397: $b\bar{b}$ collisions, the combined CP asymmetry ${\cal A}_{\rm
1398: CP}^{b\bar{b}+gg}$ reduces to $-1.4\,(-1.0)\,\%$ .}.
1399:
1400: %%%Paragraph added
1401: It is important to emphasize here that the CP-violating observable
1402: $\tau\, \frac{d\Delta\sigma_{\rm CP}}{d\tau}$ for the
1403: $WW$-fusion process does not change sign as
1404: the $\tau^+\tau^-$-system energy $\sqrt{\hat{s}}$ varies over the
1405: entire Higgs-boson resonant region.
1406: Such a kinematic behaviour is ensured by the presence of
1407: the off-diagonal absorptive parts of the Higgs-boson
1408: self-energies.
1409: Instead, if these off-diagonal absorptive
1410: parts are neglected, we find the erroneous result that the
1411: CP-violating observable flips sign in the resonant region, thereby
1412: leading to unobservably small CP asymmetries when averaged over the
1413: energy $\sqrt{\hat{s}}$.
1414:
1415: Although CP violation in the $WW$ and $gg$ production channels may be
1416: sizeable, it is difficult to measure the differential CP asymmetry
1417: $a_{\rm CP}$ at the LHC because of the low energy resolution of the
1418: reconstructed $\tau^+\tau^-$ invariant mass. This last fact also
1419: limits our ability to reconstruct with sufficient accuracy the line
1420: shape of the decaying coupled Higgs-boson system at the LHC. This is
1421: unfortunate since one would miss the very interesting feature shown in
1422: Fig.~\ref{fig:cxtd} that, unlike the case of a single resonance, the
1423: locations of the various maxima in the resonant line shapes described
1424: by $\tau\, \frac{d\sigma_{\rm tot}}{d\tau}$ crucially depend on the
1425: production and decay channels of the coupled Higgs-boson
1426: system. Therefore, the extra analyzing power of $e^+e^-$ and
1427: $\mu^+\mu^-$ colliders would be highly valuable for unravelling the
1428: existence of a strongly-mixed Higgs-boson system and studying in more
1429: detail its dynamical properties.
1430:
1431:
1432: Motivated by the large differential CP asymmetry in the
1433: $W^+W^-$-fusion process, we perform a numerical analysis of the total
1434: CP asymmetry for the reaction $pp(WW) \to H \to \tau^+\tau^-$,
1435: integrated over the Higgs resonance peaks. We present in
1436: Figs.~\ref{fig:p3m10},~\ref{fig:p3m70} and~\ref{fig:p3m90} the
1437: predicted values for the cross-section $\sigma_{\rm tot} (pp(WW) \to H
1438: \to \tau^+\tau^- X)$ and its associated total integrated CP asymmetry
1439: ${\cal A}^{WW}_{\rm CP}$ defined in~(\ref{CPasym}) as functions of
1440: $\Phi_A = \Phi_{A_t} = \Phi_{A_b} = \Phi_{A_\tau}$, for $\Phi_3 =
1441: -10^\circ$, $-70^\circ$, and $-90^\circ$, respectively. In the upper
1442: two frames of the figures, we display the dependence of the
1443: Higgs-boson masses and their decay widths on the CP-violating phase
1444: $\Phi_A$, where the solid, dashed and dotted lines refer to the $H_1$,
1445: $H_2$ and $H_3$ bosons, respectively. In our numerical analysis, we
1446: fix the remaining parameters of the MSSM as in~(\ref{MSSM1}). Unlike
1447: in Figs.~\ref{fig:p3m10},~\ref{fig:p3m70}, and~\ref{fig:p3m90}, we
1448: present in Fig.~\ref{fig:pam90} numerical estimates by fixing the
1449: value of $\Phi_A$ to $-90^\circ$, but varying the CP-violating phase
1450: $\Phi_3$. For the scenario under study, all three Higgs bosons mix
1451: among themselves significantly, giving rise to level crossings as the
1452: CP-odd phases vary. These effects of level crossing lead to a
1453: non-trivial behaviour in $\Gamma_{H_i}$, which is between 1 GeV and
1454: 10~GeV~\footnote{In Fig.~\ref{fig:pam90}, the widths of the $H_1$ and
1455: $H_2$ become larger than 10~GeV when $\Phi_3 > 100^\circ$ or $\Phi_3 <
1456: -140^\circ$, where $M_{H_1}$ decreases very rapidly and $H_1$
1457: decouples from the $H_2 - H_3$ mixing system.}, and in ${\cal A}_{\rm
1458: CP}^{WW}$. We find that the total cross section is between 0.1 pb and
1459: 0.7 pb and is comparable to the corresponding SM cross section 0.3 pb
1460: for $M_{H_{\rm SM}}=120$~GeV~\cite{ATLAS}. We observe that the CP
1461: asymmetry ${\cal A}^{WW}_{\rm CP}$ is large for a wide range of CP
1462: phases and can even be as large as 80\% for $\Phi_3=-70^\circ$. Even
1463: for small CP-violating phases, $\Phi_3=-10^\circ$ and $(180^\circ -
1464: |\Phi_A|) < 20^\circ$, the CP asymmetry can be $\sim$~50\%, as shown
1465: in Fig.~\ref{fig:p3m10}. Again, we note that possible uncertainties
1466: in the calculation of the cross sections largely cancel in the CP
1467: asymmetry ${\cal A}_{\rm CP}$.
1468:
1469: Finally, we comment briefly on the possible impact of low-energy
1470: constraints on the CP asymmetries, especially those arising from the
1471: non-observation of the electron and neutron EDMs and the absence of
1472: the Higgs-mediated $B$-meson decay $B_{s,d} \to \mu\mu$ at the
1473: Tevatron~\cite{CDFmumu}. The EDM constraints may be considerably
1474: relaxed if we consider scenarios with the first two generations of
1475: squarks heavier than about 3~TeV, and if we allow some degree of
1476: cancellations~\cite{EDM2} between the one- and higher-loop EDM
1477: contributions~\cite{EDMnote}. For the scenarios under study, we have
1478: estimated that the required degree of cancellation is always smaller
1479: than 80\%, where 100\% corresponds to complete
1480: cancellation. Therefore, a full implementation of EDM constraints will
1481: not alter the results of the present analysis in a significant way. On
1482: the other hand, the lack of observation of $B_{s,d} \to \mu\mu$ at the
1483: Tevatron~\cite{CDFmumu} imposes further constraints on the parameters
1484: of the CP-violating MSSM. However, the derived constraints are highly
1485: flavour-dependent and can be dramatically relaxed for certain choices
1486: of the soft SUSY-breaking mass spectrum that enable unitarity
1487: cancellations in the flavour space. For a detailed study,
1488: see~\cite{DP}.
1489:
1490: %\vfill\eject
1491:
1492:
1493: \section{Conclusions and Prospects}\label{sec:conclusions}
1494:
1495: We have presented the general formalism for analyzing CP-violating
1496: phenomena in the production, mixing and decay of a coupled system of
1497: multiple CP-violating neutral Higgs bosons. Our formalism, which is
1498: developed from~\cite{APNPB}, can be applied to models with an extended
1499: CP-violating Higgs sector, including the highly predictive framework
1500: of the MSSM with radiative Higgs-sector CP violation. An important
1501: element of the formalism is the consideration of the full
1502: $s$-dependent $3\times 3$ Higgs-boson propagator matrix, where the
1503: gauge-mediated contributions to self-energies have been calculated in
1504: the framework of the Pinch Technique~\cite{PTgeneral,PINCH}.
1505:
1506: As an application of our formalism, we have studied in detail the
1507: production of CP-violating MSSM $H_{1,2,3}$ bosons via ${\bar b} b$,
1508: $gg$ and $W^+ W^-$ collisions and their subsequent decays into $\tau^+
1509: \tau^-$ pairs at the LHC. In addition to the Higgs self-energy
1510: effects, we have also given explicitly the relevant formulae in the
1511: MSSM with loop-induced CP violation in the production and decay
1512: vertices. We have considered specific MSSM scenarios that predict
1513: three nearly degenerate, strongly-mixed Higgs bosons with
1514: $M_{H_{1,2,3}} \sim 120$~GeV. Such scenarios naturally occur in a
1515: general CP-violating MSSM when $\tan\beta$ is larger than 30 and the
1516: charged Higgs boson is lighter than about 160~GeV.
1517:
1518: We have analyzed CP asymmetries in both longitudinally- and
1519: transversely-polarized $\tau^+ \tau^-$ pairs. CP asymmetries that make
1520: use of the transverse polarization of the $\tau$-lepton, although
1521: being intrinsically very large in the CP-violating MSSM scenarios
1522: mentioned above, generically exhibit an alternating sign and become
1523: unobservably small after averaging over the entire Higgs-boson
1524: resonant region. Also, reconstruction of transversely polarized
1525: $\tau$ leptons appears rather difficult at the LHC. However, such CP
1526: asymmetries might ideally be tested at a $\mu^+\mu^-$ collider, where
1527: a high energy resolution can be achieved.
1528:
1529: At the LHC, more promising are CP asymmetries based on the
1530: longitudinal $\tau$-lepton polarization. In particular, the CP
1531: asymmetry in the production channel $W^+W^- \to H_{1,2,3} \to \tau^+
1532: \tau^-$ may well exceed the 10\% level and reach values up to 80\%.
1533: It is important to stress again that the $WW$ production channel can
1534: be cleanly isolated from the $gg$ and $b\bar{b}$ channels, mainly by
1535: vetoing any hadronic activity between jets (for details,
1536: see~\cite{ATLAS}). Hence, depending on the efficiency of longitudinal
1537: $\tau$-lepton polarization techniques~\cite{Was}, the production
1538: channel $W^+W^- \to H_{1,2,3} \to \tau^+ \tau^-$ may become the
1539: `golden' channel for studying signatures of Higgs-sector CP violation
1540: at the~LHC.
1541:
1542: The formalism presented in this paper may easily be applied to other
1543: colliders as well, most notably to $e^+e^-$, $\gamma \gamma$ and
1544: $\mu^+ \mu^-$ colliders. At $e^+e^-$ linear colliders, Higgs
1545: bosons can copiously be produced via the Higgsstrahlung or $W^+W^-$
1546: fusion processes. At $\gamma\gamma$ and $\mu^+\mu^-$ colliders, the
1547: polarizations of the colliding beams may also be varied, thereby
1548: providing additional probes of Higgs-sector CP violation. The
1549: aforementioned colliders can provide cleaner experimental conditions
1550: than the LHC. Consequently, even if the CP asymmetries discussed here
1551: prove difficult to observe at the LHC, the formalism and the analysis
1552: techniques developed here to investigate Higgs-sector CP violation
1553: will be directly applicable to such future colliders as well.
1554:
1555:
1556: \subsection*{Acknowledgements}
1557: We thank Jeff Forshaw for discussions. The work of JSL and AP is
1558: supported in part by the PPARC research grant PPA/G/O/2000/00461.
1559:
1560:
1561: \newpage
1562:
1563:
1564: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1565:
1566:
1567: \bibitem{HPN} For reviews, see, H.P. Nilles, Phys.\ Rep.\ {\bf 110}
1568: (1984) 1; H. Haber and G. Kane, Phys.\ Rep.\ {\bf 117} (1985) 75;
1569: J.F. Gunion, H.E. Haber, G.L. Kane and S. Dawson, {\it The Higgs
1570: Hunter's Guide}, (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1990).
1571:
1572: \bibitem{CPdirect} S.~Y.~Choi, J.~Kalinowski, G.~Moortgat-Pick and
1573: P.~M.~Zerwas, Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 22} (2001) 563; S.~Y.~Choi,
1574: A.~Djouadi, M.~Guchait, J.~Kalinowski, H.~S.~Song and P.~M.~Zerwas,
1575: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 14} (2000) 535; A.~Bartl, S.~Hesselbach,
1576: K.~Hidaka, T.~Kernreiter and W.~Porod, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 573}
1577: (2003) 153; A.~Bartl, H.~Fraas, O.~Kittel and W.~Majerotto, Phys.\
1578: Rev.\ D {\bf 69} (2004) 035007.
1579:
1580: \bibitem{CPsoft} For a review, see D.~J.~H.~Chung, L.~L.~Everett,
1581: G.~L.~Kane, S.~F.~King, J.~Lykken and L.~T.~Wang, hep-ph/0312378.
1582:
1583: \bibitem{APLB} A. Pilaftsis, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 58} (1998) 096010;
1584: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 435} (1998) 88.
1585:
1586: \bibitem{EDM1} J. Ellis, S. Ferrara and D.V. Nanopoulos, Phys.\
1587: Lett.\ B {\bf 114} (1982) 231; W. Buchm\"uller and D. Wyler, Phys.\
1588: Lett.\ B {\bf 121} (1983) 321; J. Polchinski and M. Wise, Phys.\
1589: Lett.\ B {\bf 125} (1983) 393; F. del Aguila, M. Gavela, J. Grifols
1590: and A. Mendez, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 126} (1983) 71; M. Dugan, B.
1591: Grinstein and L. Hall, Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 255} (1985) 413; R.
1592: Garisto and J.D. Wells, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 55} (1997) 1611.
1593:
1594: \bibitem{EDM2} T. Ibrahim and P. Nath, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 58} (1998)
1595: 111301; Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 61} (2000)~093004; M.~Brhlik, L.~Everett,
1596: G.L.~Kane and J.~Lykken,
1597: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 83} (1999) 2124; Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 62}
1598: (2000) 035005; S.~Pokorski, J.~Rosiek and C.A.~Savoy,
1599: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 570} (2000) 81; E.~Accomando, R.~Arnowitt and
1600: B.~Dutta, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 61} (2000)
1601: 115003; A.~Bartl, T.~Gajdosik, W.~Porod, P.~Stockinger and
1602: H.~Stremnitzer, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 60} (1999) 073003; T.~Falk,
1603: K.A.~Olive, M.~Pospelov and R.~Roiban, Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 60} (1999)
1604: 3; S.A.~Abel, S.~Khalil and O.~Lebedev, Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 606}
1605: (2001) 151.
1606:
1607: \bibitem{CKP} For discussions on Higgs-mediated EDMs in the MSSM with
1608: explicit CP violation, see
1609: D. Chang, W.-Y. Keung and A. Pilaftsis, Phys.\ Rev.\
1610: Lett.\ {\bf 82} (1999) 900; A. Pilaftsis, Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 644}
1611: (2002) 263; D.~A.~Demir, O.~Lebedev, K.~A.~Olive, M.~Pospelov and A.~Ritz,
1612: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 680} (2004) 339.
1613:
1614:
1615: \bibitem{Bmeson1} For recent studies in the CP-violating MSSM, see
1616: P.H. Chankowski and Lucja Slawianowska, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 63} (2001)
1617: 054012; C.S. Huang, W. Liao, Q.-S. Yuan and S.-H. Zhu, Phys.\
1618: Rev.\ D {\bf 63} (2001) 114021; D.~A.~Demir and K.~A.~Olive, Phys.\
1619: Rev.\ D {\bf 65} (2002) 034007; M.~Boz and N.~K.~Pak, Phys.\ Lett.\
1620: B {\bf 531} (2002) 119; A.~J.~Buras, P.~H.~Chankowski, J.~Rosiek and
1621: L.~Slawianowska, Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 659} (2003) 3;
1622: T.~Ibrahim and P.~Nath, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67}
1623: (2003) 016005; Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67} (2003) 095003.
1624:
1625: \bibitem{DP} For the general resummed form of the effective Lagrangian
1626: for Higgs-mediated FCNC interactions, see A. Dedes and A. Pilaftsis,
1627: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67} (2003) 015012.
1628:
1629: \bibitem{PW} A. Pilaftsis and C.E.M. Wagner, Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 553}
1630: (1999) 3.
1631:
1632: \bibitem{Demir} D.A. Demir, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 60} (1999) 055006.
1633:
1634: \bibitem{CDL} S.Y. Choi, M. Drees and J.S. Lee, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf
1635: 481} (2000) 57.
1636:
1637: \bibitem{CEPW} M. Carena, J. Ellis, A. Pilaftsis and C.E.M. Wagner,
1638: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 586} (2000) 92.
1639:
1640:
1641: \bibitem{INhiggs} T. Ibrahim and P. Nath, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 63}
1642: (2001) 035009; Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66} (2002) 015005; T. Ibrahim,
1643: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 64} (2001) 035009; S.~W.~Ham, S.~K.~Oh,
1644: E.~J.~Yoo, C.~M.~Kim and D.~Son, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 68} (2003) 055003.
1645:
1646: \bibitem{CEPW2} M. Carena, J. Ellis, A. Pilaftsis and C.E.M. Wagner,
1647: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 625} (2002) 345.
1648:
1649: \bibitem{KW} G.L. Kane and L.-T. Wang, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 488} (2000) 383.
1650:
1651: \bibitem{HeinCP} S.~Heinemeyer, Eur.\ Phys.\ J. C {\bf 22} (2001) 521.
1652:
1653: \bibitem{CHL} S.Y. Choi and J.S. Lee, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 61} (2000)
1654: 015003; S.Y. Choi, K. Hagiwara and J.S. Lee, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 64}
1655: (2001) 032004;
1656: S.~Y.~Choi, M.~Drees, J.~S.~Lee and J.~Song,
1657: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 25} (2002) 307.
1658:
1659: \bibitem{CPX} M. Carena, J. Ellis, A. Pilaftsis and C.E.M. Wagner,
1660: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 495} (2000) 155.
1661:
1662: \bibitem{CEMPW} M. Carena, J. Ellis, S. Mrenna, A. Pilaftsis and
1663: C.E.M. Wagner, Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 659} (2003) 145.
1664:
1665: \bibitem{CPpp} A. Dedes and S. Moretti, Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 84}
1666: (2000) 22; Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 576} (2000) 29; S.Y. Choi and J.S. Lee,
1667: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 61} (2000) 115002; S.Y. Choi, K. Hagiwara and
1668: J.S. Lee, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 529} (2002) 212;
1669: A.~Arhrib, D.~K.~Ghosh and O.C.~Kong,
1670: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 537} (2002) 217;
1671: E.~Christova, H.~Eberl, W.~Majerotto and S.~Kraml,
1672: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 639} (2002) 263; JHEP {\bf 0212} (2002) 021;
1673: W.~Khater and P.~Osland, Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 661} (2003) 209.
1674:
1675: \bibitem{CFLMP} B.E. Cox, J.R. Forshaw, J.S. Lee, J.W. Monk and
1676: A.~Pilaftsis, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 68} (2003) 075004;
1677: A.G.~Akeroyd, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 68} (2003) 077701.
1678:
1679: \bibitem{KMR} V.A. Khoze, A.D. Martin and M.G. Ryskin, hep-ph/0401078.
1680:
1681: \bibitem{CPee} B.~Grzadkowski, J.~F.~Gunion and J.~Kalinowski, Phys.\
1682: Rev.\ D {\bf 60} (1999) 075011; A.G.~Akeroyd and A. Arhrib, Phys.\
1683: Rev.\ D {\bf 64} (2001) 095018.
1684:
1685: \bibitem{CPphoton} S.~Y.~Choi and J.~S.~Lee, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 62}
1686: (2000) 036005; E.~Asakawa, S.~Y.~Choi, K.~Hagiwara and J.S. Lee,
1687: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 62} (2000) 115005; J.~S.~Lee, hep-ph/0106327;
1688: S.~Y.~Choi, B.~C.~Chung, P.~Ko and J.~S.~Lee, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66}
1689: (2002) 016009; R.~M.~Godbole, S.~D.~Rindani and R.~K.~Singh,
1690: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67} (2003) 095009.
1691:
1692: \bibitem{CPmumu} D.~Atwood and A.~Soni, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 52} (1995)
1693: 6271; B.~Grzadkowski and J.F.~Gunion, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 350} (1995)
1694: 218; A.~Pilaftsis, Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 77} (1996) 4996;
1695: S.Y.~Choi and J.S.~Lee, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 61} (2000) 111702;
1696: E.~Asakawa, S.Y.~Choi and J.S.~Lee, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 63} (2001) 015012;
1697: S.Y.~Choi, M.~Drees, B.~Gaissmaier and J.S.~Lee, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 64}
1698: (2001) 095009; M.S.~Berger, Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 87} (2001) 131801;
1699: C.~Blochinger {\it et al.}, hep-ph/0202199.
1700:
1701: \bibitem{APNPB} A.~Pilaftsis, Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 504} (1997) 61.
1702:
1703: \bibitem{PP} J. Papavassiliou and A. Pilaftsis, Phys.\ Rev.\
1704: Lett.\ {\bf 75} (1995) 3060; Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 53}
1705: (1996) 2128; Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 54} (1996) 5315.
1706:
1707: \bibitem{BP} For studies of the PT beyond the one-loop level, see,
1708: D. Binosi and J. Papavassiliou, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66} (2002)
1709: 111901; Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66} (2002) 025024; J.\ Phys.\ G {\bf 30}
1710: (2004) 203; D. Binosi, hep-ph/0401182.
1711:
1712: \bibitem{PTgeneral} J.M.\ Cornwall, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 26} (1982)
1713: 1453; J.~M.~Cornwall and J.~Papavassiliou, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 40}
1714: (1989) 3474; J. Papavassiliou, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 41} (1990) 3179;
1715: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 50} (1994) 5958; G.~Degrassi and A.~Sirlin, Phys.\
1716: Rev.\ D {\bf 46} (1992) 3104. S. Hashimoto, J. Kodaira, Y. Yasui, and
1717: K. Sasaki, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 50} (1994) 7066; N.J. Watson, Phys.\
1718: Lett.\ B {\bf 349} (1995) 155.
1719:
1720: \bibitem{BLS} F.~Borzumati, J.~S.~Lee and W.~Y.~Song, hep-ph/0401024.
1721:
1722: \bibitem{TauFusion} S.~Y.~Choi, J.~Kalinowski, J.~S.~Lee,
1723: M.~M.~Muhlleitner, M.~Spira and P.~M.~Zerwas,
1724: %``Determining tan(beta) in \tau\tau Fusion to SUSY Higgs Bosons at a Photon
1725: %Collider,''
1726: hep-ph/0404119.
1727: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0404119;%%
1728:
1729: \bibitem{Marek} A. Pilaftsis and M. Nowakowski, Int.\ J. Mod.\ Phys.\
1730: A {\bf 9} (1994) 1097; B.~Grzadkowski, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 338} (1994)
1731: 71.
1732:
1733: \bibitem{CPsuperH}
1734: J.~S.~Lee, A.~Pilaftsis, M.~Carena, S.~Y.~Choi, M.~Drees, J.~R.~Ellis and
1735: C.~E.~M.~Wagner, Comput.\ Phys.\ Commun.\ {\bf 156} (2004) 283
1736: [arXiv:hep-ph/0307377].
1737:
1738: \bibitem{PINCH} J.~Papavassiliou and A.~Pilaftsis, Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\
1739: {\bf 80} (1998) 2785; Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 58} (1998) 053002.
1740:
1741: \bibitem{EWthreshold} J.~Guasch, W.~Hollik and S.~Penaranda, Phys.\
1742: Lett.\ B {\bf 515} (2001) 367; M.~Carena, S.~Mrenna and
1743: C.~E.~M.~Wagner, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 60} (1999) 075010; Phys.\ Rev.\ D
1744: {\bf 62} (2000) 055008; T.~Ibrahim and P. Nath,
1745: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 69} (2004) 075001.
1746:
1747: \bibitem{BBH1} D.~A.~Dicus and S.~Willenbrock, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 39}
1748: (1989) 751; D.~Dicus, T.~Stelzer, Z.~Sullivan and S.~Willenbrock,
1749: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 59} (1999) 094016; C.~Balazs, H.~J.~He and
1750: C.~P.~Yuan, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 60} (1999) 114001.
1751:
1752:
1753: \bibitem{BBH2} J.~Campbell, R.~K.~Ellis, F.~Maltoni and
1754: S.~Willenbrock, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67} (2003) 095002;
1755: F.~Maltoni, Z.~Sullivan and S.~Willenbrock, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67}
1756: (2003) 093005; E.~Boos and T.~Plehn, hep-ph/0304034;
1757: R.~V.~Harlander and W.~B.~Kilgore,
1758: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 68} (2003) 013001; S.~Dittmaier,
1759: M.~Kramer and M.~Spira, hep-ph/0309204; S.~Dawson, C.~B.~Jackson,
1760: L.~Reina and D.~Wackeroth, hep-ph/0311067.
1761:
1762: \bibitem{GB2BH} J.~j.~Cao, G.~p.~Gao, R.~J.~Oakes and J.~M.~Yang,
1763: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 68} (2003) 075012; H.~S.~Hou, W.~G.~Ma,
1764: R.~Y.~Zhang, Y.~B.~Sun and P.~Wu, JHEP {\bf 0309} (2003) 074.
1765:
1766:
1767: \bibitem{HaZe} K.~Hagiwara and D.~Zeppenfeld, Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf
1768: 274} (1986) 1.
1769:
1770: \bibitem{WWF0}
1771: R.~N.~Cahn and S.~Dawson,
1772: %``Production Of Very Massive Higgs Bosons,''
1773: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 136} (1984) 196
1774: [Erratum-ibid.\ B {\bf 138} (1984) 464].
1775: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B136,196;%%
1776:
1777: \bibitem{WWF1}
1778: S.~Dawson, %``The Effective W Approximation,''
1779: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 249} (1985) 42;
1780: G.~L.~Kane, W.~W.~Repko and W.~B.~Rolnick,
1781: %``The Effective W+-, Z0 Approximation For High-Energy Collisions,''
1782: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 148} (1984) 367;
1783: J.~Lindfors,
1784: %``Higgs Boson Production By W And Z Collisions,''
1785: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 167} (1986) 471.
1786: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B167,471;%%
1787:
1788: \bibitem{WWF2}
1789: %\cite{Godbole:1986qx}
1790: %\bibitem{Godbole:1986qx}
1791: R.~M.~Godbole and S.~D.~Rindani,
1792: %``Intermediate Mass Higgs Boson Production And The Equivalent Vector Boson
1793: %Approximation,''
1794: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 190} (1987) 192;
1795: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B190,192;%%
1796: %
1797: %\cite{Han:1992hr}
1798: %\bibitem{Han:1992hr}
1799: T.~Han, G.~Valencia and S.~Willenbrock,
1800: %``Structure function approach to vector boson scattering in p p collisions,''
1801: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 69} (1992) 3274;
1802: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9206246].
1803: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9206246;%%
1804: %
1805: %\cite{Kuss:1995yv}
1806: %\bibitem{Kuss:1995yv}
1807: I.~Kuss and H.~Spiesberger,
1808: %``Luminosities for vector boson - vector boson scattering at high-energy
1809: %colliders,''
1810: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 53} (1996) 6078.
1811: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9507204].
1812: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9507204;%%
1813:
1814: \bibitem{WWTAUTAU}
1815: %\cite{Rainwater:1998kj}
1816: %\bibitem{Rainwater:1998kj}
1817: D.~L.~Rainwater, D.~Zeppenfeld and K.~Hagiwara,
1818: %``Searching for H $\to$ tau tau in weak boson fusion at the LHC,''
1819: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 59} (1999) 014037;
1820: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9808468];
1821: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9808468;%%
1822: %
1823: %\cite{Plehn:1999xi}
1824: %\bibitem{Plehn:1999xi}
1825: T.~Plehn, D.~L.~Rainwater and D.~Zeppenfeld,
1826: %``A method for identifying H $\to$ tau tau $\to$ e+- mu-+ missing p(T) at
1827: %the CERN LHC,''
1828: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 61} (2000) 093005.
1829: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9911385].
1830: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9911385;%%
1831:
1832:
1833: \bibitem{ATLAS} For instance, see S. Asai {\it et al.}, hep-ph/0402254.
1834:
1835: \bibitem{JF0} R.~N.~Cahn, S.~D.~Ellis, R.~Kleiss and W.~J.~Stirling,
1836: %``Transverse Momentum Signatures For Heavy Higgs Bosons,''
1837: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 35} (1987) 1626;
1838: V.~D.~Barger, T.~Han and R.~J.~N.~Phillips,
1839: %``Improving The Heavy Higgs Boson Two Charged Lepton - Two Neutrino Signal,''
1840: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 37} (1988) 2005;
1841: K.~Iordanidis and D.~Zeppenfeld,
1842: %``Searching for a heavy Higgs boson via the H $\to$ l nu j j decay
1843: %mode at the CERN LHC,''
1844: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 57} (1998) 3072;
1845: D.~L.~Rainwater and D.~Zeppenfeld,
1846: %``Observing $H \to W^{(*)}W^{(*)} \to e^\pm \mu^\mp /\!\!\!{p}_T$ in
1847: %weak boson fusion with dual forward jet tagging at the CERN LHC,''
1848: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 60} (1999) 113004 [Erratum-ibid.\ D {\bf 61}
1849: (2000) 099901].
1850:
1851:
1852: \bibitem{JF1} J.~M.~Butterworth, B.~E.~Cox and J.~R.~Forshaw,
1853: %``W W scattering at the LHC,''
1854: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 65} (2002) 096014.
1855:
1856: \bibitem{CTEQ6} J.~Pumplin, D.~R.~Stump, J.~Huston, H.~L.~Lai,
1857: P.~Nadolsky and W.~K.~Tung, JHEP {\bf 0207} (2002) 012.
1858:
1859: \bibitem{CDFmumu}
1860: D.~Acosta {\it et al.} [CDF Collaboration],
1861: %``Search for B/s0 $\to$ mu+ mu- and B/d0 $\to$ mu+ mu- decays in p anti-p
1862: %collisions at s**(1/2) = 1.96-TeV,''
1863: arXiv:hep-ex/0403032.
1864: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0403032;%%
1865:
1866: \bibitem{EDMnote} See A.~Pilaftsis in~\cite{CKP}.
1867:
1868: \bibitem{Was} T.~Pierzchala, E.~Richter-Was, Z.~Was and M.~Worek,
1869: %``Spin effects in tau-lepton pair production at LHC,''
1870: Acta Phys.\ Polon.\ B {\bf 32} (2001) 1277;
1871: S.~Moretti and D.~P.~Roy,
1872: %``The tau polarisation test for the H/A $\to$ tau+ tau- signal at the LHC,''
1873: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 545} (2002) 329.
1874:
1875: \end{thebibliography}
1876:
1877:
1878: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1879: \begin{figure}[p]
1880: \epsfig{figure=s12.eps,height=18cm,width=18cm}
1881: \caption{\it The parton-level cross sections
1882: $\hat{\sigma}_{1,2}(b\bar{b}\rightarrow H \rightarrow \tau^+\tau^-)$
1883: in pb, $\hat{\sigma}_{1,2}(gg\rightarrow H \rightarrow \tau^+\tau^-)$
1884: in fb, and $\hat{\sigma}_{1,2}(W^+W^-\rightarrow H \rightarrow
1885: \tau^+\tau^-)$ in pb as functions of $\sqrt{{\hat s}}$. The solid
1886: lines are for the three-Higgs mixing scenario with $\Phi_3=-90^\circ$
1887: and the dashed ones with $\Phi_3=-10^\circ$.}\label{fig:3mix}
1888: \end{figure}
1889: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1890:
1891: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1892: \begin{figure}[p]
1893: \epsfig{figure=s34.eps,height=18cm,width=18cm}
1894: \caption{\it The parton-level cross sections
1895: $\hat{\sigma}_{3,4}(b\bar{b}\rightarrow H \rightarrow \tau^+\tau^-)$ in pb,
1896: $\hat{\sigma}_{3,4}(gg\rightarrow H \rightarrow \tau^+\tau^-)$ in fb, and
1897: $\hat{\sigma}_{3,4}(W^+W^-\rightarrow H \rightarrow \tau^+\tau^-)$ in pb
1898: as functions of $\sqrt{{\hat s}}$.
1899: The solid lines are for the three-Higgs mixing scenario
1900: with $\Phi_3=-90^\circ$ and
1901: the dashed ones with $\Phi_3=-10^\circ$.}
1902: \label{fig:3mix34}
1903: \end{figure}
1904: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1905:
1906: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1907: \begin{figure}[p]
1908: \epsfig{figure=s12h.eps,height=18cm,width=18cm}
1909: \vspace{-0.7cm}
1910: \caption{\it The differential cross sections $\tau\,
1911: \frac{d\sigma_{\rm tot}}{d\tau}$ and $\tau\, \frac{d\Delta\sigma_{\rm
1912: CP}}{d\tau}$ as functions of $\sqrt{{\hat s}}$. The upper frames are
1913: for the process $b\bar{b}\rightarrow H \rightarrow \tau^+\tau^-$, the
1914: middle ones for $gg\rightarrow H \rightarrow \tau^+\tau^-$ and the
1915: lower ones for $W^+W^-\rightarrow H \rightarrow \tau^+\tau^-$. The
1916: solid lines are for the three-Higgs mixing scenario with
1917: $\Phi_3=-90^\circ$ and the dashed ones with
1918: $\Phi_3=-10^\circ$.}\label{fig:cxtd}
1919: \end{figure}
1920: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1921:
1922: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1923: \begin{figure}[p]
1924: \epsfig{figure=asym.eps,height=18cm,width=18cm}
1925: \vspace{-8cm}
1926: \caption{\it Numerical estimates of differential CP asymmetries
1927: $a_{\rm CP}$ defined in~(\ref{CPasym}) as functions of $\sqrt{{\hat
1928: s}}$. The solid line corresponds to the three-Higgs mixing scenario with
1929: $\Phi_3=-90^\circ$ and the dashed one to $\Phi_3=-10^\circ$. }
1930: \label{fig:ratio}
1931: \end{figure}
1932: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1933:
1934: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1935: \begin{figure}[p]
1936: \epsfig{figure=p3m10.eps,height=18cm,width=18cm}
1937: \caption{\it Numerical estimates of Higgs-boson masses and decay
1938: widths, the cross-section $\sigma_{\rm tot} (pp(WW) \to H \to
1939: \tau^+\tau^- X)$ and its associated total CP asymmetry ${\cal
1940: A}^{WW}_{\rm CP}$ defined in~(\ref{CPasym}) as functions of $\Phi_A =
1941: \Phi_{A_t} = \Phi_{A_b} = \Phi_{A_\tau}$, for $\Phi_3 = -10^\circ$.
1942: In the upper two frames, the solid, dashed and dotted lines
1943: refer to the
1944: $H_1$, $H_2$ and $H_3$ bosons, respectively.}\label{fig:p3m10}
1945: \end{figure}
1946: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1947:
1948: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1949: \begin{figure}[p]
1950: \centerline{\epsfig{figure=p3m70.eps,height=18cm,width=18cm}}
1951: \caption{\it The same as in Fig.~\ref{fig:p3m10}, but for
1952: $\Phi_3 = -70^\circ$.}\label{fig:p3m70}
1953: \end{figure}
1954: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1955:
1956: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1957: \begin{figure}[p]
1958: \epsfig{figure=p3m90.eps,height=18cm,width=18cm}
1959: \caption{\it The same as in Fig.~\ref{fig:p3m10}, but for
1960: $\Phi_3 = -90^\circ$.}\label{fig:p3m90}
1961: \end{figure}
1962: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1963:
1964: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1965: \begin{figure}[p]
1966: \epsfig{figure=pam90.eps,height=18cm,width=18cm}
1967: \caption{\it Numerical values for $M_{H_{1,2,3}}$ and
1968: $\Gamma_{H_{1,2,3}}$, $\sigma_{\rm tot} (pp(WW) \to H \to \tau^+\tau^-
1969: X)$ and ${\cal A}^{WW}_{\rm CP}$ as functions of $\Phi_3$, for $\Phi_A
1970: = \Phi_{A_t} = \Phi_{A_b} = \Phi_{A_\tau} = -90^\circ$. We follow the
1971: same line conventions as in Fig.~\ref{fig:p3m10}.}\label{fig:pam90}
1972: \end{figure}
1973: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1974:
1975:
1976:
1977: \end{document}
1978:
1979:
1980:
1981:
1982:
1983:
1984:
1985:
1986:
1987: