1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}
2: \usepackage{epsf,graphics,epsfig,graphicx}
3:
4:
5: \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{0pt}
6: \setlength{\textwidth}{15.8cm}
7: \setlength{\topmargin}{-0.4in}
8: \setlength{\textheight}{22cm}
9: \addtolength{\jot}{5pt}
10: \addtolength{\arraycolsep}{-3pt}
11: \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
12: \renewcommand{\textfraction}{0}
13: \newcommand{\lsim}{\stackrel{<}{_\sim}}
14: \newcommand{\gsim}{\stackrel{>}{_\sim}}
15:
16: \def\be{\begin{equation}}
17: \def\ee{\end{equation}}
18: \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}}
19: \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}}
20:
21: \begin{document}
22:
23: \begin{titlepage}
24:
25: \begin{flushright}
26: LMU 04/04\\
27: hep-ph/0404220\\
28: May 2004\\
29: \end{flushright}
30:
31: \vspace{0.5cm}
32: \begin{center}
33: \Large\bf\boldmath
34: $b$-physics signals of the lightest CP-odd Higgs in the NMSSM at
35: large $\tan \beta$\\
36: \unboldmath
37: \end{center}
38:
39:
40: \vspace{0.8cm}
41: \begin{center}
42:
43:
44: Gudrun Hiller$^{1}$\\[0.1cm]
45: {\sl
46: Ludwig-Maximilians-Universit\"at M\"unchen, Sektion Physik,
47: Theresienstra\ss{}e 37 \\ D-80333 M\"unchen, Germany}\\[0.4cm]
48:
49: \end{center}
50:
51: \footnotetext[1]{email: hiller@theorie.physik.uni-muenchen.de}
52:
53: \vspace{0.3cm}
54: \begin{abstract}
55: \vspace{0.1cm}
56: \noindent
57:
58: We investigate the low energy phenomenology of the lighter pseudoscalar
59: $A_1^0$ in the NMSSM. The $A_1^0$ mass can naturally
60: be small due to a global $U(1)_R$ symmetry of the Higgs potential, which
61: is only broken by trilinear soft terms.
62: The $A_1^0$ mass is further
63: protected from renormalization group effects in the large $\tan \beta$ limit.
64: We calculate the $b \to s A_1^0$ amplitude at leading order in $\tan \beta$
65: and work out the contributions to rare $K$, $B$ and
66: radiative $\Upsilon$-decays and $B -\bar B$ mixing.
67: We obtain constraints on the $A_1^0$ mass and couplings
68: and show that masses down to ${\cal{O}}(10)$ MeV are allowed.
69: The $b$-physics phenomenology of the NMSSM differs from the MSSM in
70: the appearance of sizeable renormalization effects
71: from neutral Higgses to the photon and gluon dipole operators
72: and the breakdown of the MSSM
73: correlation between the $B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-$ branching ratio
74: and $B_s - \bar B_s$ mixing.
75: For $A_1^0$ masses above the tau threshold the $A_1^0$ can be searched for
76: in $b \to s \tau^+ \tau^-$ processes with
77: branching ratios $\lsim 10^{-3}$.
78:
79: \end{abstract}
80:
81: \vspace{0.4 cm}
82:
83: \end{titlepage}
84:
85: \section{Introduction}
86:
87: Sizeable flavor changing neutral current (FCNC) effects in meson decays
88: arise in the minimal supersymmetric Standard Model
89: (MSSM) at large $\tan \beta$, e.g.~\cite{Babu:1999hn}-\cite{Buras:2002vd}.
90: In this model, the amplitude of exchanging neutral Higgses
91: between down-type fermions $f$, i.e.~down-type quarks or charged leptons
92: \be
93: \sum_{S=h^0,H^0,A^0} \frac{(g_{\bar f f S})^2}{m_S^2} \propto
94: -\frac{\cos^2 (\beta-\alpha)}{m_{h^0}^2} -
95: \frac{\sin^2 ( \beta-\alpha)}{m_{H^0}^2}+\frac{1}{m_{A^0}^2} = 0
96: \label{eq:tree}
97: \ee
98: vanishes.
99: Here, $m_S$, $g_{\bar f f S}$ denote the Higgs masses and couplings to
100: a fermion pair, respectively and $\alpha$ is the
101: scalar mixing angle. Eq.~(\ref{eq:tree}) implies that the Wilson coefficients
102: for $b \to s \ell^+ \ell^-$ decays from scalar and pseudoscalar boson
103: exchange in the MSSM at large $\tan \beta$
104: are equal with opposite sign \cite{Huang:2000sm},\cite{Bobeth:2001sq}.
105: If the relation is broken, interesting effects via operator mixing are
106: induced \cite{Hiller:2003js}. In particular, the dipole operators
107: responsible for $b \to s \gamma$ and $b \to s g$ decays receive
108: sizeable contributions from the neutral Higgs bosons.
109: Furthermore, specific contributions to $B -\bar B$ mixing from
110: scalar exchange arise.
111: This happens in the presence of more Higgses,
112: such as in the next-to-minimal supersymmetric Standard Model (NMSSM).
113:
114: The NMSSM is the MSSM extended by a singlet $N$, with
115: the superpotential \cite{Nilles:1982dy,Ellis:1988er}
116: \be
117: W=Q Y_u H_u U+ Q Y_d H_d D+ L Y_e H_d E +
118: \lambda H_d H_u N -\frac{1}{3} k N^3
119: \ee
120: The physical NMSSM Higgs sector consists of
121: three scalars $h^0,H^0_{1,2}$ and
122: two pseudoscalars $A_{1,2}^0$.
123: As in the minimal model, $\tan \beta = v_u/v_d$ denotes the ratio
124: of Higgs doublet vevs $v_u=<H_u^0>=v \sin \beta$ and
125: $v_d=<H_d^0>=v \cos \beta$, where $v=\sqrt{2} m_W/g \simeq 174$ GeV.
126: The Higgs potential
127: \be
128: V_{higgs}=V_{soft}+V_F+V_D
129: \ee
130: where
131: \bea
132: V_{soft}\! &=&\! m_{H_d}^2 |H_d|^2 +m_{H_u}^2 |H_u|^2 +m_{N}^2 |N|^2
133: -(\lambda A_\lambda H_d H_u N+ h.c.)\! -(\frac{1}{3} k A_k N^3 \! + h.c.) \\
134: V_F \! &=& \! |\lambda|^2 \left( |H_d|^2+|H_u|^2\right) |N|^2 + |\lambda H_d
135: H_u -k N^2|^2 \\
136: V_D \! & = & \! \frac{g^2+g^{\prime 2}}{8} \left(
137: |H_d|^2-|H_u|^2\right) +\frac{g^2}{2} |H_u^\dagger H_d|^2
138: \eea
139: has a global $U(1)_R$ symmetry in the limit of vanishing soft terms
140: $A_k,A_\lambda \to 0$
141: \cite{Dobrescu:2000yn}.
142: If this symmetry is broken only
143: slightly, the model naturally contains a light pseudoscalar.
144: Its mass is given as
145: \be
146: m_{A_1^0}^2= 3 k x A_k +{\cal{O}}(\frac{1}{\tan \beta})
147: \ee
148: where $x=<N>$ denotes the vev of the singlet.
149: Note that a small $A_k$ remains small under renormalization group running
150: and thus protects $m_{A_1^0}$.
151:
152: Lower bounds on CP-odd scalar masses
153: are not very stringent and can be
154: as low as $\sim 100$ MeV \cite{Dobrescu:1999gv}.
155: Since the coupling $h^0 A_{1}^0 A_1^0$ is not suppressed the scalar Higgs
156: predominantly decays into the lighter pseudoscalars. This has
157: important consequences for the Tevatron and LHC Higgs searches
158: \cite{Dobrescu:2000yn,Dobrescu:2000jt}.
159:
160:
161: The motivation for this work is to find out how and to what extend
162: the NMSSM would signal itself in rare $b$-decays and at the same time,
163: whether existing data provide already bounds on
164: the NMSSM parameter space. We employ the large
165: $\tan \beta \gsim 30 $ and small $A_k \ll m_W,x$
166: limit and no flavor or CP violation other than in the CKM
167: matrix (``minimal flavor violation'').
168: Since a small $A_\lambda$ is not stable under radiative corrections,
169: we do not expand in small $A_\lambda$ and keep it finite.
170: Our study is based on mostly generic features of the NMSSM.
171: Specific analyses of the NMSSM particle spectrum
172: and parameter space have been carried out in a
173: GUT framework \cite{Ellwanger:1996gw}
174: at large $\tan \beta $ \cite{Ananthanarayan:1995xq},
175: with gauge mediated SUSY breaking \cite{Han:1999jc} and with
176: anomaly mediation \cite{Kitano:2004zd}.
177: %
178: For Higgs production in rare $b$-decays in other models, see
179: e.g.~\cite{Frere:1981cc,Haber:1987ua}.
180:
181:
182: This paper is organized as follows:
183: In Section \ref{sec:amplitude} we calculate the amplitude for
184: $b \to s A_1^0$ decays at large $\tan \beta$.
185: We discuss the NMSSM parameter space in Section \ref{sec:space}.
186: Phenomenological bounds from FCNC decays, $B - \bar B$ mixing
187: and $\Upsilon$-decays are worked out in Section \ref{sec:bounds}.
188: In Section \ref{sec:impact} we investigate the impact on semileptonic
189: and radiative rare $b$-decays.
190: We also analyse how much the MSSM tree level relation
191: Eq.~(\ref{eq:tree}) is broken by loop corrections.
192: We conclude in Section \ref{sec:conclusions}.
193: Feynman rules and the NMSSM particle spectrum at large
194: $\tan \beta$ and auxiliary functions are given in Appendix \ref{app:spectrum}
195: and \ref{app:conventions}. In Appendix \ref{app:decayrates} we give
196: decay rates of the $A_1^0$ and $b$-decay branching ratios.
197:
198:
199: \section{The $b \to s A_1^0$ amplitude at large $\tan \beta$}
200: \label{sec:amplitude}
201:
202: The amplitude for a FCNC $b \to s$ transition into the lightest CP-odd
203: scalar $A_1^0$ in the NMSSM is induced at one-loop.
204: In the large $\tan \beta$ limit, only two diagrams remain to be
205: calculated, which are shown in Figure \ref{fig:loops}.
206: (We neglect the strange quark mass).
207: Feynman rules are given in Appendix \ref{app:rules}, see also
208: \cite{Rosiek:1995kg} for the MSSM and
209: \cite{Franke:1995tc} for the NMSSM.
210:
211: The stop chargino wave function correction is identical to
212: the corresponding one in the MSSM.
213: Since the coupling of the $A_1^0$ to down-type fermions is
214: order $(\tan \beta)^0$, the 1PR diagram contributes to the $b \to s A_1^0$
215: amplitude at order $\tan \beta$.
216: %
217: The vertex correction shown in
218: Figure \ref{fig:loops} is the only 1PI diagram linear
219: in $\tan \beta$ because
220: {\it i} the $H^\pm W^\mp A_1^0$ coupling is $1/\tan \beta$ suppressed
221: since the $A_1^0$ is predominantly the gauge singlet
222: (the $H^+ H^- A_1^0$, $W^+ W^- A_1^0$ vertices are forbidden by CP),
223: {\it ii} the coupling of the $A_1^0$ to up-type quarks is $1/\tan^2 \beta$,
224: {\it iii} the coupling of the $A_1^0$ to up-type squarks is $1/\tan
225: \beta$ which can be seen from the F-term contribution $|\partial
226: W/\partial H_u|^2$
227: and {\it iv} the only $\tan \beta$ enhancement comes from the
228: $b_R \tilde t_L \tilde H_d$ or $b_R t_L H_d$ vertices.
229:
230: \begin{figure}[htb]
231: \vskip -1.2truein
232: \begin{center}
233: \includegraphics[height=7.6in,width=7in,angle=0]{nmssm}
234: %
235: \vskip -4.8truein
236: \end{center}
237: \caption[]{ \it The leading $b \to s A_1^0$
238: diagrams at large $\tan \beta$ in the NMSSM.}
239: \label{fig:loops}
240: \end{figure}
241:
242: We obtain the following amplitude
243: \be
244: \label{eq:amplitude}
245: i {\cal{A}}(b \to s A_1^0)=-4 \frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}} V_{tb} V_{ts}^* C_A
246: \frac{1}{16 \pi^2} \bar s_L b_R A_1^0
247: \ee
248: where
249: \be
250: C_A=-i \frac{\tan \beta m_b}{\sqrt{2}} \left[ -\frac{\delta_-}{x}
251: \sum_{i=1,2} X_i+
252: \lambda m_t \sin \theta_{\tilde t} \cos \theta_{\tilde t}
253: \sum_{l,j=1,2}
254: Y_{lj} \right]
255: \label{eq:ca}
256: \ee
257: and $\delta_-$ parametrizes the $A_1^0 \bar b b$ coupling, see
258: Eq.~(\ref{eq:delta}).
259: The $X,Y$ terms in Eq.~(\ref{eq:ca}) result from the wave function and
260: vertex correction, respectively .
261: They are written as
262: \bea
263: X_i & = & m_{\chi_i} U_{i2} \left[ \sqrt{2} m_W
264: V_{i1} \left(
265: -D_3(y_{c,i})+D_3(y_{1,i}) \cos^2 \theta_{\tilde t}+ D_3 (y_{2,i})
266: \sin^2 \theta_{\tilde t} \right) \nonumber \right. \\
267: &-& \left. m_t V_{i2}
268: \sin \theta_{\tilde t} \cos \theta_{\tilde t}
269: \left( D_3(y_{1i})-D_3(y_{2i}) \right)
270: \right] \\
271: Y_{lj} &=& V_{j2} U_{l2} \left[ \left( y_{1j} U_{j2} V_{l2}
272: -\frac{m_{\chi_l}}{m_{\chi_j}} U_{l2} V_{j2} \right)
273: D_2(y_{1j},z_{lj}) \nonumber \right. \\
274: && \left. \hspace{1cm}
275: - \left( y_{2j} U_{j2} V_{l2}
276: -\frac{m_{\chi_l}}{m_{\chi_j}} U_{l2} V_{j2} \right) D_2(y_{2j},z_{lj})
277: \right]
278: \eea
279: where
280: \be
281: y_{kj} = \frac{m_{\tilde t_k}^2}{m_{\chi_j}^2} \, ,~~~~~~
282: y_{cj} = \frac{m_{\tilde c}^2}{m_{\chi_j}^2} \, , ~~~~~~
283: z_{lj} = \frac{m_{\chi_l}^2}{m_{\chi_j}^2}
284: \ee
285: and $m_{\tilde t_k}, m_{\tilde c},m_{\chi_l}$ denote the stop, scharm
286: and chargino masses.
287: The stop mixing angle $\theta_{\tilde t}$, the chargino mixing matrices
288: $U,V$ and the loop functions $D_2,D_3$ are defined in Appendix
289: \ref{app:conventions}.
290: We used unitarity of the CKM matrix and neglected squark mixing
291: other than for stops and mass splitting between the first two generations.
292: %
293: The $b \to d A_1^0$ amplitude is obtained by replacing
294: `$s$' by `$d$' everywhere in Eq.~(\ref{eq:amplitude}).
295: The $s \to d A_1^0$ amplitude is given correspondingly with also
296: changing $m_b$ to $m_s$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:ca}).
297: %
298: Note that our calculation holds for
299: $|\delta_\pm v/x| <\tan \beta$, see Appendix \ref{app:spectrum}.
300: E.g.~for larger values of $\delta_- v/x$ the $A_1^0$
301: looses its mostly-singlet nature
302: and more $b \to s A_1^0$ diagrams need to be calculated.
303:
304: The coupling $C_A$ vanishes if the super GIM mechanism is
305: active, that is either all squark masses are degenerate
306: %$m_{\tilde c}=m_{\tilde t_1}=m_{\tilde t_2}$
307: or $m_{\tilde c}=m_{\tilde t_1}$ and $\theta_{\tilde t}=0$ (or $\pi$)
308: or $m_{\tilde c}=m_{\tilde t_2}$ and $\theta_{\tilde t}=\pi/2$.
309: %
310: We estimate the generic size of $C_A$ with order one stop mixing as
311: \be
312: |C_A| \simeq {\cal{O}}(\delta_- \tan \beta m_b m_t\frac{m_{\chi}}{x})
313: +{\cal{O}}(\lambda \tan \beta m_b m_t )
314: \label{eq:generic}
315: \ee
316: Since $ \lambda x$ is the NMSSM $\mu$-term which sets the mass scale
317: for the charginos, both terms are of comparable size.
318: %
319:
320:
321: \section{Viable points in the NMSSM parameter space \label{sec:space}}
322:
323: The relevant NMSSM parameter space consists of
324: $\lambda,k$ from the superpotential, the soft breaking
325: terms $A_\lambda, A_k$, the gaugino mass $m_2$, stop and scharm masses,
326: the stop mixing angle $\theta_{\tilde t}$ and $\tan \beta$.
327: We evaluate all parameters at the electroweak scale.
328:
329: %
330: The dimensionless couplings $\lambda$ and $k$
331: run towards smaller values, e.g.~$\lambda^2+k^2 \lsim 0.6 $ at the electroweak
332: scale for $\lambda,k \lsim 2 \pi$
333: at the high, GUT scale \cite{Miller:2003ay}. We use
334: $|\lambda|, |k| \leq 1$.
335: %
336: Similar to the MSSM,
337: electroweak symmetry breaking at large $\tan \beta$ requires
338: \cite{Ananthanarayan:1995xq}
339: \be
340: m_{H_u}^2 = -(\lambda x)^2-\frac{m_Z^2}{2}
341: \ee
342: and therefore the product of $\lambda$ and $x$ should not exceed
343: $\sim {\cal{O}}(1)$ TeV to avoid fine tuning.
344: On the other hand, the chargino mass scale is driven
345: by $\lambda x$, which should be at least ${\cal{O}}(100)$ GeV by
346: experimental search limits.
347: We assume the singlet vev $x$ to be of the order of the Fermi scale $v$,
348: or at least not smaller than 100 GeV and not bigger than 3 TeV.
349: % as an upper bound of an electroweak scale.
350: If $x$ exceeds this value, its
351: relation to the other vevs becomes unnatural and the model does not
352: give a solution to the
353: $\mu$ problem \cite{Nilles:1982dy}. Hence, the size of $\lambda$
354: is bounded from below
355: as $|\lambda| \gsim \mbox{few} \cdot 10^{-2}$
356: \cite{Han:1999jc,Miller:2003ay}.
357: Further, the extremization condition
358: %$\partial V_{higgs}/\partial H_d=0$
359: \be
360: m_{H_d}^2 = -\lambda^2 (x^2+v^2) +m_A^2 +\frac{m_Z^2}{2}
361: \ee
362: where we defined
363: \be
364: \label{eq:ma}
365: m_A^2 \equiv \lambda (A_\lambda+ k x) x \tan \beta
366: \ee
367: implies some cancellation among the $\tan \beta$ enhanced terms as
368: \cite{Ananthanarayan:1995xq}
369: \be
370: \label{eq:cancel}
371: A_\lambda+ k x \sim \frac{{\cal{O}}(100-1000 \, \mbox{GeV})}{\tan \beta}
372: \ee
373: Note that $m_A$
374: sets the scale for the heavy Higgses $A_2^0,H_2^0$ and $H^ \pm$,
375: see Appendix \ref{app:spectrum}.
376: %
377:
378: The NMSSM is further constrained by
379: non-observation of Higgses and superpartners.
380: At large $\tan \beta$, the mass of the lightest scalar
381: at tree level is given as
382: \be
383: m_{h^0}^2 \simeq m_Z^2-\frac{\lambda^4 v^2}{k^2}
384: \ee
385: where we expanded Eq.~(\ref{eq:higgsmass}) in $m_Z^2/4 k^2 x^2 \ll 1$
386: and $\lambda^2 v/k^2 x \ll 1$. In this approximation also
387: $m_{H_1^0}^2 \simeq 4 k^2 x^2+\frac{\lambda^4 v^2}{k^2}$ and
388: the scalar mixing angle $\theta$ is small.
389: Like in the MSSM, the $h^0$ tree level mass cannot be bigger than the
390: $Z$-mass because the raising of its upper bound in the NMSSM is
391: suppressed by large $\tan \beta$.
392: To be phenomenologically viable,
393: $m_{h^0}$ has to be lifted by radiative corrections above the
394: current search limit as in the MSSM \cite{Ellwanger:1993hn}.
395: % \cite{Elliott:uc} \cite{Elliott:bs}.
396: We require the scalar tree level mass to be bigger than 89 GeV, which
397: favors small $\lambda$ or $\lambda/k$ less than one.
398: %
399: We allow for $|m_2| \leq 1$ TeV and
400: check that the charginos are heavier than 90 GeV.
401: We treat the pseudoscalar masses $m_{A_1^0}$ and $m_{A_2^0}$
402: with $m_{A_2^0} \gsim 130$ GeV
403: as free parameters, i.e.~adjust $A_k$ and $A_\lambda$ accordingly.
404: %
405: The squark masses and stop mixing angle are effective parameters with
406: $m_{\tilde t_1}> 90 $ GeV and $m_{\tilde t_2},m_{\tilde c} \sim 1 $ TeV and
407: we do not relate them to fundamental parameters in the Lagrangian.
408:
409: The down-type fermion-$A_1^0$ vertex is proportional to
410: $\delta_- v/x$, see Eq.~(\ref{eq:A1bb}).
411: {}From Eqs.~(\ref{eq:ma}) and
412: (\ref{eq:cancel}) we obtain
413: \bea
414: \label{eq:simple}
415: \frac{v}{x}\delta_- &=& \frac{v}{x}
416: \left[-3 \frac{ k \lambda x^2}{m_A^2} \tan \beta +1 \right]
417: \simeq \pm 3 \frac{ k v m_\chi}{m_A^2} \tan \beta
418: \eea
419: %
420: where the second equation is a good approximation for not too large
421: $m_A\lsim 500$ GeV.
422: It then gives a lower bound on $| \delta_- v/x|$.
423: In particular, for
424: $\tan \beta=30$, $m_A \lsim 500\, (200) \, (130)$ GeV and
425: the ranges of parameters given in the preceding paragraphs,
426: we obtain $|\delta_- v/x| \gsim 0.1 \, (1) \, (3)$.
427: For larger values of $m_A$ cancellations between the two terms in
428: Eq.~(\ref{eq:simple}) are possible.
429: Note that the $\tan \beta $ factor
430: %in Eq.~(\ref{eq:simple})
431: is only a formal enhancement, since it is cancelled by the one in
432: $m_A^2$.
433: We find that
434: $|\delta_- v/x| \leq 62 \, (16)$ for $m_A \geq 500\, (1000)$ GeV.
435: %
436: Note that the small $A_\lambda \ll k x$ limit with $\delta_- \simeq -2$
437: makes its hard to satisfy Eq.(\ref{eq:cancel}).
438:
439:
440: \section{Phenomenology of the light ${A_1^0}$ \label{sec:bounds}}
441:
442: We work out constraints on the mass of the $A_1^0$
443: in the NMSSM at large $\tan \beta$
444: from $A_1^0$ production in rare decays (Section \ref{sec:rarebounds}),
445: $\bar B-B$ mixing (Section \ref{sec:mixingbounds}) and $B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-$
446: decays (Section \ref{sec:Bsmumu}).
447: We make use of the $b \to s A_1^0$ amplitude
448: calculated in Section \ref{sec:amplitude}. We scan the parameter space
449: in the regions discussed in Section \ref{sec:space}.
450: %
451: All FCNC bounds can be evaded by a sufficiently tuned-in super
452: GIM mechanism, see Section \ref{sec:amplitude}.
453: To quantify this, we demand in our numerical analysis
454: for the mass splitting $m_{\tilde t_2}-m_{\tilde t_1} > 50$ GeV
455: while varying $m_{\tilde t_1}$
456: and for the stop mixing
457: $\epsilon < \theta_{\tilde t} < \pi/2 - \epsilon $ or
458: $\pi/2+ \epsilon < \theta_{\tilde t} < \pi - \epsilon $
459: with $\epsilon=0.05$.
460: Bounds from other processes are discussed in Section \ref{sec:otherbounds}.
461: %
462:
463: Many experimental constraints we use here apply only if the
464: $A_1^0$ is sufficiently stable, i.e.~leaves the detector as missing energy.
465: This happens if the pseudoscalar width is smaller than
466: $E_{A}/(m_{A_1^0} \, d)$,
467: where $d \sim {\cal{O}}(10)$ m is the size of the detector and $E_{A}$ the
468: $A_1^0$ energy in the lab frame.
469: We work out bounds on $m_{A_1^0}$ as a function of
470: $|\delta_- v/x|$. If this coupling gets
471: smaller, the pseudoscalar decay rate
472: decreases, and a heavier Higgs will become missing energy and vice versa.
473: For decay rates of the $A_1^0$, see Appendix \ref{app:decayrates}.
474:
475: For Higgs masses below $2 m_\mu$ only the $e^+ e^-$ and $\gamma \gamma$
476: decay channels are relevant.
477: (The $A_1^0 \to \pi^0 \gamma$ decay is forbidden by CP and angular momentum
478: conservation and the $A_1^0 \to \pi^0 \gamma \gamma$ decay is
479: suppressed with respect to
480: the dielectron mode by phase space and powers of $\alpha$).
481: %
482: The $\gamma \gamma $ mode can compete with $A_1^0 \to f\bar f $ decays only
483: near the dimuon threshold.
484: This weakens the missing energy bounds in that region.
485:
486:
487: The point we want to make is to show that in the NMSSM ${A_1^0}$ masses
488: in the GeV range and below are not ruled out.
489: %
490: This is summarized in Figure \ref{fig:bounds}.
491: For details see the following subsections.
492: All experminental bounds are taken at 90 \% confidence level.
493: The requisite $b \to A_1^0$
494: branching ratios are given in Appendix \ref{app:decayrates}.
495: %
496: We recall that our approximation breaks down if $|\delta_\pm v/x|$ approaches
497: $\tan \beta$.
498:
499:
500: \begin{figure}[htb]
501: \vskip 0.0truein
502: \begin{center}
503: \includegraphics[height=5.0in,width=3.9in,angle=270]{bound2}
504: %\includegraphics[height=3.89in,width=4.99in,angle=0]{bound2}
505: \vskip 0.0truein
506: \end{center}
507: \caption[]{ \it Constraints on the $A_1^0$ mass as a function of
508: $|\delta_- v/x|$ at $\tan \beta=30$
509: in the NMSSM. Shaded regions are excluded.
510: The left bottom corner is excluded by
511: rare $K$-decay, see Eq.~(\ref{eq:Ktopi}).
512: The triangular region to the lower right is obtained from
513: radiative $\Upsilon(1s)$ decays, see Eq.~(\ref{eq:yps}).
514: The
515: region to the left of the vertical dashed blue lines can only be reached if
516: $m_A$ is bigger than the value indicated, see Section \ref{sec:space}.
517: Constraints from $\Delta m_d$ are
518: given for $m_A \geq 500$ GeV and
519: $m_A\geq 1000$ GeV. We also show the missing energy condition for
520: $B \to K$ decays given in Eq.~(\ref{eq:nunubound}) (dashed green line).
521: The vertical dashed lines indicate $m_{A_1^0}= 2 m_\mu$ and $3 m_\pi$.}
522: \label{fig:bounds}
523: \end{figure}
524:
525: \subsection{Rare $K$ and $B$-decays \label{sec:rarebounds}}
526:
527: If the Higgs boson is light enough,
528: it can be produced in $b \to s A_1^0$ or $s \to d A_1^0$ processes.
529: We analyze what bounds exist depending on the mass of the $A_1^0$.
530:
531: \subsubsection{$2 m_e < m_{A_1^0} <2 m_\mu$ \label{sec:lessmmu}}
532:
533: %
534: When produced in rare $B$-meson decays
535: the $A_1^0$ decays outside of the detector if
536: \be
537: m_{A_1^0} \lsim 17 \; \mbox{MeV} /| \delta_- v/x|
538: \label{eq:nunubound}
539: \ee
540: In this region the CLEO bound
541: ${\cal{B}}(B \to K_S^0 X^0) < 5.3 \cdot 10^{-5}$ \cite{Ammar:2001gi}
542: %, where $X^0$ is a massless
543: %weakly interacting particle that decays outside of the detector
544: applies. There is a similar missing energy bound from BaBar
545: ${\cal{B}}(B^- \to K^- \nu \bar \nu) < 7.0 \cdot 10^{-5}$ \cite{Aubert:2003yh}
546: \footnote{The experimental cut on the $K$ momentum
547: $|\vec p_K| > 1.5$ GeV is no restriction for light $m_{A_1^0} \ll
548: m_B$ discussed here.}.
549: %
550: We find that masses in the range given in
551: Eq.~(\ref{eq:nunubound}) are disfavored
552: since the $B \to K A_1^0$ decay, see Eq.~(\ref{eq:BKA}),
553: would happen too rapidly for most of the parameter space, although
554: cannot rigorously be excluded.
555: We stress that the size of the coupling $C_A$ can be quite large,
556: see Eq.~(\ref{eq:generic}) and already ${\cal{B}}(B \to X_s A_1^0) < 1$
557: cuts out a fraction of NMSSM points.
558:
559:
560: Rare decays into $e^+ e^-$ constrain Higgs masses below the muon threshold.
561: However,
562: the measurements of the inclusive $B \to X_s e^+ e^-$ branching ratios
563: contain cuts on the dilepton mass $m_{e e} \gsim 2 m_\mu$
564: \cite{Aubert:2003rv,Kaneko:2002mr}.
565: In the analysis of $B \to K^{(*)} e^+
566: e^-$ decays Belle applies $m_{e e} > 0.14$ GeV \cite{Ishikawa:2003cp}, whereas
567: BaBar \cite{Aubert:2003cm} has no cut, but
568: the efficiency is low in that region due to conversion photons.
569: Likewise, measurements of $K^+ \to \pi^+ e^+ e^-$ decays employ a high mass
570: trigger \cite{Appel:1999yq}.
571: Since also close to $2 m_\mu$ the two-photon decay of the
572: $A_1^0$ becomes sizeable,
573: we do not take the $e^+ e^-$ data into account.
574:
575: The bound ${\cal{B}}(K^+ \to \pi^+ A_1^0) < 4.5 \cdot 10^{-11}$
576: \cite{Adler:2002hy} is applicable if the $ A_1^0$ becomes
577: sufficiently stable to escape the detector. This happens for masses
578: \be
579: \label{eq:Ktopi}
580: m_{A_1^0} \lsim 5 \, \mbox{MeV}/|\delta_- v/x|
581: \ee
582: which then are excluded. The $K$-decay bound is five orders
583: of magnitude better than the one from $B \to K$ decays,
584: because the CKM and mass suppression of the $K \to \pi A_1^0$ decay rate
585: is compensated by the difference in life time
586: $|V_{td}/V_{ts}|^2 (m_K/m_B)^3 \tau(K^+)/\tau(B^+) \simeq 0.24$
587: \cite{Hagiwara:fs}, see Eq.~(\ref{eq:BKA}) and its $K \to \pi$ counterpart.
588:
589: \subsubsection{$2 m_\mu <m_{A_1^0} < 2 m_\tau$ \label{sec:hadronic}}
590:
591: $A_1^0$ decays into a muon pair are
592: included in $B \to X_s \mu^+ \mu^-$ signals.
593: Comparison of the $B \to X_s A_1^0$ branching ratio, see
594: Eq.~(\ref{eq:bsA}), with the data
595: ${\cal{B}}(B \to X_s \mu^+ \mu^-)\leq 10.4 \cdot 10^{-6}$
596: \cite{Hiller:2003js,Aubert:2003rv,Kaneko:2002mr}
597: shows that this is very unlikely.
598: The same happens in $K \to \pi \mu^+ \mu^-$ decays, which
599: for $m_{A_1^0} < m_K-m_\pi$ can hide a pseudoscalar decaying into muons.
600: With
601: ${\cal{B}}(K^+ \to \pi^+ \mu^+ \mu^-) \leq 10.4 \cdot 10^{-8}$
602: \cite{Hagiwara:fs}
603: only a tiny number of points survives the scan.
604: All allowed points are at the GIM boundary $\theta_{\tilde t} \simeq \pi/2$,
605: which is set by our value of the cut-off $\epsilon$.
606: %
607:
608: Above the $3 \pi$ threshold sizeable hadronic decays open up.
609: (The $A_1^0 \to 2 \pi \gamma$ decay is suppressed with respect to the
610: dimuon channel by phase space and $\alpha$, whereas $A_1^0 \to 2 \pi$
611: decay is forbidden by CP invariance.)
612: %
613: For the $A_1^0$ decaying hadronically into a strange final state we use
614: ${\cal{B}}(b \to s g) < 9 \%$ \cite{Coan:1997ye}.
615: %
616: This thins out the NMSSM model space for $3 m_\pi < m_{A_1^0} < 2 m_\tau$,
617: but cannot exclude this region. (We use
618: ${\cal{B}}(b \to s A_1^0) > {\cal{B}}(b \to d A_1^0)$.)
619:
620: \subsubsection{$ 2 m_\tau < m_{A_1^0} \lsim m_B$}
621:
622: If the $A_1^0$ is above the tau threshold, most of the time
623: it decays into
624: $\tau^+ \tau^-$ because its coupling to
625: $c \bar c$ is $\tan^2 \beta$ suppressed. Similar to the
626: constraint on the hadronically decaying pseudoscalar,
627: see Section \ref{sec:hadronic}, the mildly model-dependent bound
628: ${\cal{B}}(B \to X_s \tau^+ \tau^-) < 5$ \% \cite{Grossman:1996qj}
629: is not a challenge to the light CP-odd Higgs scenario.
630:
631: \subsection{NMSSM neutral Higgs contributions to $B -\bar B$ mixing
632: \label{sec:mixingbounds}}
633:
634: We calculate the contribution to $B -\bar B$ mixing from
635: pseudoscalar $A_{1,2}^0$ and scalar $h^0,H_{1,2}^0$ Higgs exchange
636: in the NMSSM at large $\tan \beta$.
637: It arises at two-loop from double insertion of the
638: FCNC $\bar s b$-Higgs vertices such as generated by the
639: diagrams in Figure \ref{fig:loops} for the $A_1^0$
640: and an intermediate boson propagator.
641: The dominant diagrams induced by the heavy Higgses, i.e.~the
642: ones other than the lightest CP-odd
643: scalar are the wave function corrections contributions with
644: $A_2^0,H_2^0$ exchange, see the Feynman rules in Appendix \ref{app:rules}.
645: They can compete with one-loop contributions
646: such as the Standard Model (SM) box diagrams due to
647: their $\tan^4 \beta$ enhancement.
648: Contributions from $h^0,H_1^0$ are subleading in $\tan \beta$.
649: We use an effective Hamiltonian ($q=d,s$)
650: \be
651: {\cal{H}}_{eff}^{\Delta B =2}= \frac{G_F^2 m_W^2}{16 \pi^2}
652: (V_{tb} {V_{tq}^*})^2 \sum_i C_i Q_i
653: \ee
654: where some of the relevant
655: operators are written as, see e.g.~\cite{Buras:2002vd}
656: \bea
657: Q^{VLL} & = & (\bar q_L \gamma_\mu b_L) (\bar q_L \gamma^\mu b_L) \\
658: Q_1^{SRR} & =& (\bar q_L b_R) (\bar q_L b_R) \\
659: Q_1^{SLR} & =& (\bar q_R b_L) (\bar q_L b_R)
660: \eea
661: The SM contribution is in the coefficient $C^{VLL}$.
662: %
663: The $A_2^0,H_2^0$ masses are degenerate at large $\tan \beta$
664: and their respective contributions to $Q_1^{SRR}$ cancel each other
665: just like in the MSSM, see Eq.~(\ref{eq:tree}).
666: They do, however, contribute to the operator $Q_1^{SLR}$ at order
667: $m_q/m_b$, and are important for $B_s$-mesons.
668: (This is the famous double penguin (DP) contribution of
669: the MSSM \cite{Isidori:2001fv,Buras:2002vd}.)
670:
671: We obtain at order $\tan^2 \beta/m_{A_1^0}^2$ in the NMSSM from
672: $A_1^0$ boson exchange
673: \be
674: C_1^{SRR}(\mu_t)=-\frac{1}{4 \pi^2} \frac{C_A^2}{m_W^2 m_{A_1^0}^2}
675: \ee
676: at the high, electroweak (matching) scale $\mu_t$.
677: Finite widths effects are neglected.
678: %
679: We define the size of the $B_q -\bar B_q$ mass difference $\Delta m_q$
680: with respect to its SM value as
681: \be
682: \frac{\Delta m_q}{(\Delta m_q)_{SM}} = 1+f_q
683: \ee
684: where
685: \be
686: \label{eq:fq}
687: f_q=\frac{\bar P_1^{SLL} }{S_0(\mu_t)} C_1^{SRR}(\mu_t)
688: \ee
689: and $S_0(\mu_t) = 2.38$ and $\bar P_1^{SLL}=-0.37$ \cite{Buras:2002vd}.
690: In Eq.~(\ref{eq:fq}) the
691: NMSSM contribution to $\Delta m_d$ by neutral Higgs exchange
692: in the $m_q=0$ limit has been given.
693: %
694: To be in agreement with data we require
695: $f_d > -0.6$ ($f_d$ is negative).
696: This includes $20$ \% uncertainty
697: and allows for cancellations between the $A_1^0$ contribution and
698: the charged Higgs, chargino boxes and the double penguins.
699: We assume similar sizes as in the MSSM, where
700: $-0.2 \lsim f_d^{H^\pm}+f_d^{\chi^\pm}+f_d^{DP} \lsim 0.4 $
701: \cite{Buras:2002vd}.
702: We find constraints for larger values of $|\delta_- v/x|$ and
703: $m_A \geq 500$ GeV, which are
704: displayed in Figure \ref{fig:bounds} for $\tan \beta=30$.
705: The other branch with $1+f_d <0$, where the NMSSM correction
706: is larger than the SM box gives very similar constraints and is not shown.
707: The leading $A_1^0$ contribution to $B -\bar B$ mixing is universal
708: in minimal flavor violation, $f_d =f_s$, since we neglect light quark masses.
709:
710: \subsection{$B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-$ decays \label{sec:Bsmumu}}
711:
712: We work out the contributions to $B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-$ decays
713: from neutral Higgs exchanges in the large $\tan \beta$ limit of the NMSSM.
714: With the effective Hamiltonian
715: \be
716: \label{eq:Heff}
717: {\cal{H}}_{eff}= -\frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}
718: V_{tb} V_{ts}^* \sum_i C_i {\cal{O}}_i
719: \ee
720: where
721: \be
722: {\cal{O}}_S = \frac{e^2}{16 \pi^2} \bar s_L b_R \bar \ell \ell \, , ~~~~~~
723: {\cal{O}}_P = \frac{e^2}{16 \pi^2} \bar s_L b_R \bar \ell \gamma_5 \ell
724: \ee
725: we obtain at the electroweak scale
726: (in parentheses is given the particle
727: that induces a particular Wilson coefficient)
728: \be
729: C_S=C_S(H_2^0)= -C_P(A_2^0) \, , ~~~~~~ C_P= C_P(A_1^0)+C_P(A_2^0)
730: \ee
731: where
732: \bea
733: C_P(A_1^0)& =& m_b m_\ell \tan \beta \frac{v}{4 m_W^2 \sin^2 \theta_W}
734: \left( \frac{v \delta_- }{x} \right) \frac{1}{m_{B_s}^2-m_{A_1^0}^2}
735: \nonumber \\
736: &\times &\left[ -\frac{\delta_-}{x}
737: \sum_{i=1,2} X_i+
738: \lambda m_t \sin \theta_{\tilde t} \cos \theta_{\tilde t}
739: \sum_{l,j=1,2}
740: Y_{lj} \right]
741: \\
742: C_P(A_2^0)& =& m_b m_\ell \tan^3 \beta \frac{1}{4 m_A^2 m_W^2 \sin^2 \theta_W}
743: \sum_{i=1,2} X_i
744: \eea
745: The expressions for $X$ and $Y$ are given in Section \ref{sec:amplitude}.
746: Our result for the $A^0_2,H^0_2$ contributions agrees with the
747: corresponding MSSM calculations \cite{Bobeth:2001sq}.
748: Note that the contributions from $A^0_2$ and $H^0_2$
749: are equal with opposite sign. Similar to
750: $B-\bar B$ mixing discussed in Section \ref{sec:mixingbounds},
751: the scalars $h^0$ and $H_1^0$ contribute at subleading order in $\tan \beta$.
752:
753:
754: The coefficients $C_{S,P}$ are model-independently constrained by data on the
755: $B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-$ branching ratio. With
756: ${\cal{B}}(B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-) <5.8 \cdot 10^{-7}$ \cite{Acosta:2004xj}
757: we obtain at the scale $\mu=m_W$
758: \bea\label{eq:CSPbound}
759: \sqrt{|C_S|^2+|C_P+\delta_{10}|^2 } \leq 1.3
760: \Bigg[\frac{{\mathcal{B}}( B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-)}{5.8 \times
761: 10^{-7}}\Bigg]^{1/2}
762: \Bigg[\frac{238\, \mbox{MeV}}{f_{B_s}}\Bigg]
763: \eea
764: Here, $\delta_{10}$ stems from the operator
765: ${\cal{O}}_{10} \propto \bar s_L \gamma_\mu b_L \bar \ell \gamma^\mu \gamma_5 \ell$, see \cite{Hiller:2003js} for details.
766: We find with
767: %$\delta_{10}=2 m_\mu m_b/m_{B_s}^2 A_{10}$,
768: $\delta_{10}^{SM} =-0.095$
769: \footnote{Susy effects are not $\tan \beta$ enhanced in
770: ${\cal{O}}_{10}$
771: and are small with minimal flavor violation \cite{Ali:1999mm}.}
772: at $\tan \beta=30$ the upper limits
773: $|\delta_- v/x| \lsim 42 \, (16) $ for $m_A =500 \, (1000)$ GeV,
774: which are
775: are weaker than the corresponding $\Delta m_d$ ones.
776: The expressions for the CKM suppressed
777: $B_d \to \mu^+ \mu^-$ decay are readily obtained.
778: Its experimental constraint is not as good as the $B_s$ one,
779: %
780: but we can cut out both
781: $m_{A_1^0} \simeq m_{B_d}$ and $m_{A_1^0} \simeq m_{B_s}$.
782:
783: \subsection{Non-FCNC bounds \label{sec:otherbounds}}
784:
785: The bounds from radiative $\Upsilon$-decays
786: apply if the $ A_1^0$ leaves the detector unseen
787: \cite{Hagiwara:fs,Balest:1994ch}.
788: Due to the larger boost the critical width to do so is
789: larger than in $B$-meson decays by $m_{\Upsilon}/m_B$.
790: We use
791: ${\cal{B}}( \Upsilon(1s) \to A^0 \gamma ) < 1.3 \cdot 10^{-5} $
792: \cite{Balest:1994ch} and obtain with Eq.~(\ref{eq:upsbr})
793: \be
794: \label{eq:yps}
795: |\delta_- v/x | \lsim 3.7 ~~~~~ \mbox{ for} ~~~ m_{A_1^0} \lsim 23 \, \mbox{MeV}/|\delta_- v/x| < 2 m_\mu
796: \ee
797: Furthermore, we get an upper bound $|\delta_- v/x| \lsim 100$ from
798: ${\cal{B}}(\Upsilon(1s) \to A_1^0 \gamma) <1$.
799:
800: Mass bounds from hadronic collisions are
801: not better than few to 200 MeV and
802: astro physics gives $m_{A_1^0} \gsim 0.2 $ MeV \cite{Hagiwara:fs},
803: which contain some model dependence.
804:
805: \section{Implications for $b \to s \ell^+ \ell^-$ and $ b \to s
806: \gamma, g$}
807: \label{sec:impact}
808:
809: Similar to the operators ${\mathcal{O}}_{S,P}$ discussed in
810: Section \ref{sec:Bsmumu},
811: the NMSSM Higgs sector also induces
812: contributions to 4-Fermi operators with quarks and leptons
813: ($f$ denotes a fermion)
814: %
815: \begin{eqnarray}\label{new:ops:scalar}
816: {\cal{O}}_{L}^f = \bar{s}_L b_R \bar{f}_R f_L \, , \quad
817: {\cal{O}}_{R}^f= \bar{s}_L b_R \bar{f}_L f_R
818: \end{eqnarray}
819: where
820: \be
821: C_{L, R}^f = \frac{e^2}{16 \pi^2} \frac{m_f}{m_\mu} (C_S \mp C_P)
822: \ee
823: These couplings arise in the NMSSM at large $\tan \beta$, where
824: \be
825: C_S-C_P=-2 C_P(A_2^0)-C_P(A_1^0) \, , ~~~~~~ C_S+C_P=C_P(A_1^0)
826: \ee
827: This is different from the MSSM, where the $A_1^0$ contribution is absent and
828: the sum of $C_S$ and $C_P$ and hence $C_R^f$ vanish.
829: We discuss corrections
830: to this tree level statement in Section \ref{sec:CRsize}.
831: %
832: All Wilson coefficients refer to the Hamiltonian
833: in Eq.~(\ref{eq:Heff}) and are evaluated at the scale $\mu=m_W$
834: unless otherwise stated.
835:
836: The constraint given in
837: Eq.~(\ref{eq:CSPbound}) implies for the Wilson coefficients for $b$-quarks
838: (we update the findings of
839: Ref.~\cite{Hiller:2003js} with the improved $B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-$ bound
840: \cite{Acosta:2004xj})
841: \begin{eqnarray}
842: \label{eq:clbbound}
843: \sqrt{ |C_{L}^b|^2+|C_{R}^b|^2 } \lsim 0.03
844: \end{eqnarray}
845: %
846: The operators ${\mathcal{O}}_{L,R}^b$
847: enter radiative and semileptonic rare $b \to s $ decays at one-loop
848: \cite{Hiller:2003js,Borzumati:1999qt}.
849: With the bound in Eq.~(\ref{eq:clbbound}) the new physics effect
850: from ${\mathcal{O}}_{L}^b$ is small, at the percent level
851: \cite{Hiller:2003js}.
852: However, the renormalization effect induced at leading log by
853: ${\cal{O}}_R^b$ can be large for the
854: photon and gluon dipole operators ${\cal{O}}_{7}$ and ${\cal{O}}_{8}$,
855: which can be written as
856: \be
857: {\cal{O}}_{7 } = \frac{e}{16\pi^2} m_b
858: \bar{s}_L \sigma_{\mu \nu} b_R F^{\mu \nu}, \quad
859: {\cal{O}}_{8 }=\frac{g_s}{16\pi^2} m_b
860: \bar{s}_{L \alpha} \sigma_{\mu \nu} T^a_{\alpha \beta}
861: b_{R \beta}G^{a \mu \nu}
862: \ee
863: %
864: To be specific,
865: we normalize their coefficients
866: to the ones in the SM,
867: and denote this ratio by $\xi$, such that $\xi^{SM}=1$. With
868: (see \cite{Hiller:2003js} for details)
869: \bea
870: \xi_7(m_b)& = & 0.514 + 0.450\, \xi_7(m_W) + 0.035\, \xi_8(m_W) -
871: 2.319 \,C_R^b \, , \\
872: \xi_8(m_b)&=& 0.542 + 0.458\, \xi_8(m_W) +19.790\,C_R^b
873: \eea
874: and Eq.~(\ref{eq:clbbound})
875: corrections of up to $7 \% $ and $59 \% $ to $\xi_7$ and $\xi_8$
876: are possible. This has impact on the extraction of Wilson
877: coefficients in $b \to s \gamma$, $b \to s g$ and
878: $b \to s \ell^+ \ell^-$ decays \cite{Hiller:2003js}.
879: For a full analysis of these decays, also the matching contributions
880: to $C_{7,8}$ from neutral Higgs loops in the large $\tan \beta$ NMSSM
881: have to be calculated.
882: Note that $\tan \beta$ enhanced corrections to the $b$-quark
883: mass, CKM elements and FCNCs from
884: non-holomorphic terms
885: %induced by PQ breaking
886: arise \cite{Babu:1999hn,Isidori:2001fv,Buras:2002vd}.
887: We leave this for future work.
888:
889: \subsection{Estimates of $C_S+C_P$ and $C_R^b$ \label{sec:CRsize}}
890:
891: We work out the NMSSM reach in $C_S+C_P$ by taking into account
892: all constraints discussed in the previous Sections \ref{sec:space} and
893: \ref{sec:bounds}.
894: The value of $C_S+C_P$ can saturate its upper bound given in
895: Eq.~(\ref{eq:CSPbound}) for large ranges of the parameter space.
896: If the $A_1^0$ gets very light, however, the $b \to s A_1^0$ coupling
897: $C_A$ has to decrease
898: and $C_S+C_P$ is small, e.g.~for $m_{A_1^0}=10$ MeV is
899: $|C_S+C_P|\leq 0.06$.
900: %
901: For intermediate masses the $A_1^0$ contribution dominates over the
902: one from the heavy pseudoscalar, that is $|C_P| \gg C_S$ and
903: $|C_R^b| \simeq |C_L^b| \lsim 0.024$.
904: %
905: This is illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:Cr}, where
906: we show $C_S+C_P$ as a function of
907: $\sqrt{|C_S|^2+|C_P+\delta_{10}^{SM}|^2} \propto
908: \sqrt{{\cal{B}}(B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-)}$ , see Eq.~(\ref{eq:CSPbound}), for
909: $m_A=500$ GeV and different values of $m_{A_1^0}$.
910:
911: \begin{figure}[htb]
912: \vskip 0.0truein
913: \begin{center}
914: \includegraphics[height=5.0in,width=3.9in,angle=270]{Cr-correlation_500}
915: %%\includegraphics[height=3.89in,width=4.99in,angle=0]{bound}
916: \vskip 0.0truein
917: \end{center}
918: \caption[]{ \it The correlation between $C_S+C_P$
919: and $\sqrt{|C_S|^2+|C_P+\delta_{10}^{SM}|^2 }$
920: in the NMSSM for $\tan \beta=30$, $m_{A}=500$ GeV and
921: $m_{A_1^0}=0.1 , 1 $ and $10$ GeV. Also shown is the experimental upper
922: bound given in Eq.~(\ref{eq:CSPbound}) (dashed line).}
923: % my little nitro suprateam 156
924: \label{fig:Cr}
925: \end{figure}
926:
927:
928: In the MSSM the size of $C_S+C_P$ is driven by the relation
929: Eq.~(\ref{eq:tree}), which is not protected from
930: radiative corrections.
931: To study their size we employ the two-loop calculation encoded in
932: {\it FeynHiggs }v.~2.02 \cite{feynhiggshome}.
933: By scanning the MSSM parameter space
934: we find
935: \be
936: | \frac{C_S+C_P}{C_S-C_P} |_{\mbox{\scriptsize \it MSSM}} < 0.2
937: ~~~~\mbox{or}~~~~|C_S+C_P|_{\mbox{\scriptsize \it MSSM}}<0.08
938: ~~~~\mbox{and}~~~~|C_R^b|_{\mbox{\scriptsize \it MSSM}}<1.3 \cdot 10^{-3}
939: \ee
940: %
941: The smallness of $C_S+C_P$ is a feature of the
942: Higgs sector of the MSSM. It holds also with
943: flavor violation beyond the CKM matrix.
944: As a result, the logarithmic renormalization of the dipole operators from
945: neutral (pseudo)scalars is tiny in this model.
946: For example, consider additional
947: right handed currents, which induce contributions to the helicity
948: flipped operators ${\cal{O}}^\prime_i$, i.e.~the ones obtained from
949: ${\cal{O}}_i$ with right $R$ and
950: left $L$ chiralities interchanged. In this case,
951: $C_S^\prime-C_P^\prime$
952: mixes onto the flipped dipole operators ${\cal{O}}^\prime_{7,8}$, but
953: $C_S^\prime=C_P^\prime$ in the large $\tan \beta $ MSSM
954: \cite{Isidori:2001fv}.
955:
956: \section{Conclusions \label{sec:conclusions}}
957:
958: We investigated the phenomenology of the light pseudoscalar $A_1^0$ which
959: lives in the NMSSM spectrum at large $\tan \beta$.
960: The $A_1^0$ has suppressed
961: gauge interactions but couples to Higgses and down-type matter.
962: %with $\delta_- m_f/x$.
963: We calculated the $b \to s A_1^0$ amplitude at leading order in $\tan \beta$.
964: Based on this, we estimated the NMSSM contributions to rare $K$, $B$ and
965: radiative $\Upsilon$-decays with the $A_1^0$ in the final state,
966: $B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-$ decays and $B -\bar B$ mixing.
967: We showed that
968: low energy data provide constraints on the $A_1^0$ mass and couplings,
969: but leave masses down to
970: ${\cal{O}}(10)$ MeV viable, see Figure \ref{fig:bounds}.
971: The $A_1^0$ predominantly decays into $\tau^+ \tau^-$ for
972: $2 m_\tau < m_{A_1^0} < 2 m_b$,
973: light hadrons for $3 m_\pi < m_{A_1^0} < 2 m_\tau$
974: and $e^+ e^-$or $\gamma \gamma$ for
975: $2 m_e < m_{A_1^0} < 2 m_\mu$. In the latter range, the $A_1^0$ can live
976: long enough to leave detectors undecayed, depending on $\delta_- v/x$.
977: For masses within $2 m_\mu < m_{A_1^0} < 3 m_\pi $ the $A_1^0$
978: decays mostly into muon pairs. Like the one from $B \to K$ decays
979: given in Eq.~(\ref{eq:nunubound}), this mass range has very
980: tight FCNC constraints, see Section \ref{sec:hadronic}, but is not
981: ruled out.
982:
983:
984: The $A_1^0$ can be searched for with improved measurements of
985: $\Upsilon$-decays or $B \to K$ plus missing energy.
986: The latter needs a high $K$-momentum cut
987: %$|\vec p_K|>2.61 \mbox{GeV}$ in $B$ restframe,
988: to suppress the $B \to K \nu \bar \nu$ background.
989: For $ m_{A_1^0}$ above the $\Psi^\prime$ mass the pseudoscalar can be seen
990: in $b \to s \tau^+ \tau^-$ decays. The required sensitivity for e.g.~the
991: $B \to X_s \tau^+ \tau^-$ branching ratio is
992: ${\cal{B}}(B \to X_s \mu^+ \mu^-) m_\tau^2/m_\mu^2 \lsim 10^{-3}$.
993: %which is below the bound derived in
994: %Ref.~\cite{Grossman:1996qj} of ${\cal{O}}(5 \%)$.
995:
996: The NMSSM has different implications for $b$-physics than the MSSM.
997: In particular, the leading log neutral Higgs contribution
998: to radiative $b \to s \gamma$ and $b \to s g$ decays
999: is tiny in the latter, but can reach
1000: experimental upper limits in the former, see Section \ref{sec:CRsize}.
1001: %
1002: Furthermore, the MSSM correlation between the $B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-$
1003: branching ratio and
1004: $B_s -\bar B_s$ mixing \cite{Buras:2002wq} breaks down due to the
1005: additional pseudoscalar.
1006: For example, for small $|C_S/C_P|$ the lighter CP-odd Higgs dominates the
1007: $B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-$ rate, which can be anything up to the
1008: experimental bound, see Figure \ref{fig:Cr}. At the same time $\Delta m_s$
1009: is near its SM value because the leading $A_1^0$ contribution is independent of the light quark flavor and constrained by $\Delta m_d$, and the
1010: double penguin from $A_2^0$ is suppressed.
1011: %
1012: This is in contrast to the MSSM, where a SM-like
1013: $\Delta m_s$ implies an upper bound on
1014: ${\cal{B}}(B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-)$.
1015:
1016: \bigskip
1017:
1018: \noindent
1019: {\bf Acknowledgements}
1020: G.H.~would like to thank Gerhard Buchalla, Yuval Grossman, Howie Haber and
1021: Anders Ryd for useful comments, Sven Heinemeyer for
1022: {\it FeynHiggs} support and Bogdan Dobrescu for collaboration at an
1023: early stage of this project. G.H.~gratefully acknowledges the hospitality
1024: of the SLAC theory group.
1025:
1026: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1027: \begin{appendix}
1028: \renewcommand{\theequation}{\Alph{section}-\arabic{equation}}
1029:
1030: \setcounter{equation}{0}
1031: \section{Higgs spectrum and couplings \label{app:spectrum}}
1032:
1033: We give the tree level Higgs spectrum, mixing angles in the
1034: minimal flavor and CP violating
1035: NMSSM at large $\tan \beta$ and $A_k \ll m_W,x$.
1036: The mass matrices in gauge eigenstates can be seen in
1037: \cite{Ellis:1988er}.
1038:
1039: The mass eigenstates of the pseudoscalar mixing matrix can be written as
1040: \bea
1041: \left( \begin{array}{c} A_1^0 \\ A_2^0 \end{array} \right)=
1042: \left( \begin{array}{cc}
1043: \cos \gamma & \sin \gamma \\
1044: -\sin \gamma & \cos \gamma \end{array} \right)
1045: \left( \begin{array}{c} A^0 \\ N_I \end{array} \right)
1046: \eea
1047: where $N_I=\rm Im N/\sqrt{2}$,
1048: $A^0=\sqrt{2} (\sin \beta \, \rm Im \, H_d^0 +\cos \beta \, \rm Im \,
1049: H_u^0)$ and the Goldstone boson is given as
1050: $G^0=\sqrt{2} (\cos \beta \, \rm Im \, H_d^0 -\sin \beta \, \rm Im \, H_u^0)$.
1051: The mixing angle and masses read as
1052: \be
1053: \label{eq:gamma}
1054: \gamma = \frac{\pi}{2}+ \frac{v}{x \tan \beta} \delta_- +
1055: {\cal{O}}(\frac{1}{\tan^2 \beta}) ~~~\mbox{i.e.}
1056: ~~\sin \gamma\simeq 1 \, ,~~
1057: \cos \gamma \simeq -\frac{v}{x \tan \beta} \delta_-
1058: \ee
1059: and
1060: \be
1061: m_{A_1^0}^2 =3 k x A_k \, ,~~~~~~~
1062: m_{A_2^0}^2 = m_A^2
1063: \ee
1064: where we defined
1065: \be
1066: \label{eq:delta}
1067: \delta_\mp = \frac{A_\lambda \mp 2 k x}{A_\lambda + k x}
1068: \ee
1069: and $m_A^2$ is given in Eq.~(\ref{eq:ma}).
1070:
1071: The scalar mass matrix
1072: can be diagonalized analytically in the large $\tan \beta $ limit
1073: by first decoupling the heaviest
1074: state and then rotating the remaining 2 by 2 block by the angle $\theta$
1075: along the lines of Ref.~\cite{Miller:2003ay}. The result can be written as
1076: \bea
1077: \left( \begin{array}{c} h^0 \\ H_1^0 \\ H_2^0 \end{array} \right)=
1078: {\sqrt{2}} \left( \begin{array}{ccc}
1079: \frac{1}{\tan \beta} (\cos \theta -\frac{ v}{x} \delta_+ \sin \theta) \; \;
1080: & \cos \theta \; & - \sin \theta \\
1081: \frac{1}{\tan \beta} (\sin \theta +\frac{v}{x} \delta_+
1082: \cos \theta) \; \;
1083: & \sin \theta \; & \cos \theta \\
1084: 1 \; \; & \frac{-1}{\tan \beta} \; & \frac{-v}{x \tan \beta}
1085: \delta_+ \end{array} \right)
1086: \left( \begin{array}{c} \rm Re \, H_d^0 -v_d\\ \rm Re \, H_u^0 -v_u\\ \rm Re
1087: \, N -x \end{array} \right)
1088: \eea
1089: with the mixing angle and scalar masses
1090: \bea
1091: \tan 2 \theta & = & \frac{4 \lambda^2 v x}{ 4 k^2 x^2-m_Z^2} \\
1092: m_{H_2^0}^2 &=&m_A^2 \, ,~~~~
1093: m_{h^0,H_1^0}^2 = \frac{1}{2} \left[ 4 k^2 x^2 + m_Z^2 \mp \sqrt{(4
1094: k^2 x^2 -m_Z^2)^2 + 16 \lambda^4 x^2 v^2 }
1095: \right]
1096: \label{eq:higgsmass}
1097: \eea
1098: The mass of the charged Higgs is given as
1099: \be
1100: m^2_{H^\pm}=m_A^2+m_W^2- \lambda^2 v^2
1101: \ee
1102:
1103: \subsection{Feynman rules \label{app:rules}}
1104:
1105: Feynman rules can be read off the Lagrangians given at
1106: leading order in $\tan \beta$.
1107: Note that $A_2^0 \simeq -A^0_{MSSM}$ in this limit.
1108:
1109: Couplings to up (u) and down (d) type fermions
1110: \bea
1111: \label{eq:A1bb}
1112: {\cal{L}}_{A^0_i \bar d d}&=& -i \frac{g m_d}{2 m_W} \left(
1113: \frac{v}{x} \delta_- A^0_1, \tan \beta A^0_2 \right) \bar d \gamma_5 d \\
1114: %
1115: {\cal{L}}_{A^0_i \bar u u}&=&
1116: -i \frac{g m_u}{2 m_W}
1117: \frac{1}{\tan \beta}
1118: \left(\frac{ v }{x \tan \beta} \delta_- A^0_1 , A^0_2 \right)
1119: \bar u \gamma_5 u \\
1120: %
1121: {\cal{L}}_{(h^0,H^0_i) \bar d d}&=& -\frac{g m_d}{2 m_W}
1122: \left( ( \cos \theta -\frac{ v}{x} \delta_+ \sin \theta) h^0,
1123: \nonumber \right. \\
1124: &\mbox{}& \left. (\sin \theta
1125: +\frac{v}{x} \delta_+ \cos \theta) H^0_1, \tan \beta H^0_2 \right) \bar d d
1126: \\
1127: {\cal{L}}_{(h^0,H^0_i) \bar u u}&=& -\frac{g m_u}{2 m_W}
1128: \left( \cos \theta h^0, \sin \theta H^0_1,
1129: - \frac{H_2^0 }{\tan \beta} \right) \bar u u
1130: \eea
1131: %
1132: Couplings to charginos
1133: \be
1134: {\cal{L}}_{A^0_1 \chi^+ \chi^- }=
1135: +i \frac{\lambda}{\sqrt{2}} A_1^0 \bar \chi^+_i \left[ U_{i2} V_{j2} L-
1136: U_{j2} V_{i2} R \right] \chi^+_j
1137: \ee
1138: where $L,R=(1 \mp \gamma_5)/2$ are chiral projectors.
1139:
1140: \renewcommand{\theequation}{\Alph{section}-\arabic{equation}}
1141: \setcounter{equation}{0}
1142: \section{Conventions, loop functions \label{app:conventions}}
1143:
1144: The chargino mass matrix is written as ($\mu_{MSSM}=-\lambda x $)
1145: \bea
1146: M_{\chi^\pm}= \left( \begin{array}{cc}
1147: m_2 & \sqrt{2} m_W \sin \beta \\
1148: \sqrt{2} m_W \cos \beta & -\lambda x \end{array} \right)
1149: \eea
1150: It is diagonalized by the orthogonal matrices $U,V$ (we do not include
1151: beyond CKM CP violation)
1152: \be
1153: U M_{\chi^\pm} V^T = \rm diag (m_{\chi_1},m_{\chi_2})
1154: \ee
1155:
1156: The stop mixing matrix is given as
1157: \bea
1158: \left( \begin{array}{c} \tilde t_1 \\ \tilde t_2 \end{array} \right)=
1159: \left( \begin{array}{cc}
1160: \cos \theta_{\tilde t} & \sin \theta_{\tilde t} \\
1161: -\sin \theta_{\tilde t} & \cos \theta_{\tilde t} \end{array} \right)
1162: \left( \begin{array}{c} \tilde t_L \\ \tilde t_R \end{array} \right)
1163: \eea
1164: Here, $\tilde t_{1,2}$ are the mass and $\tilde t_{L,R}$ the gauge
1165: eigenstates.
1166:
1167: The loop functions are defined as
1168: \bea
1169: D_2(x,y) &=& \frac{ x \ln x}{(1-x)(x-y)} + (x\leftrightarrow y) \, ,
1170: ~~~~~~~ D_2(1,1)=-\frac{1}{2}\\
1171: D_3(x) &=& \frac{x \ln x }{1-x} \, , ~~~~~~~ D_3(1)=-1
1172: \eea
1173:
1174: \renewcommand{\theequation}{\Alph{section}-\arabic{equation}}
1175: \setcounter{equation}{0}
1176: \section{Decay rates \label{app:decayrates}}
1177:
1178: The rate of the light NMSSM pseudoscalar into down-type fermions is
1179: given as
1180: \be
1181: \Gamma (A_1^0 \to \bar f f) =\frac{1}{4 \pi} \frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}
1182: \left( \frac{v}{x} \delta_- \right)^2 m_{A_1^0} m_f^2
1183: \sqrt{1- 4 \frac{m_f^2}{m_{A_1^0}^2}} \cdot r
1184: \label{eq:ffbarrate}
1185: \ee
1186: where $r=1$ for leptons and $r=N_C$ for quarks.
1187: The decay rate into up-quarks is $1/\tan^4 \beta$ suppressed.
1188: The rate into two photons reads as
1189: %
1190: \be
1191: \Gamma (A_1^0 \to \gamma \gamma)
1192: =\frac{\alpha^2}{8 \pi^3 } \frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}} m_{A_1^0}^3 | \sum_i I_i |^2
1193: \label{eq:gamgamrate}
1194: \ee
1195: where for $i=e,\mu,\tau$ and $d,s,b$ loops
1196: $I_i= r Q_i^2 \kappa_i F(\kappa_i) \delta_- v/x$,
1197: $\kappa_i=m_i^2/m_{A_1^0}^2$ and $Q_i$ is the charge of the fermion.
1198: The function $F(\kappa)$ can be seen in \cite{Gunion:1988mf}.
1199: It assumes the limits
1200: \bea
1201: \label{eq:fla}
1202: \kappa F(\kappa) =\left\{\begin{array}{l}
1203: \hspace{0.3cm} 0\quad \mathrm{for } \quad \kappa \ll 1\\
1204: -\frac{1}{2} \quad \mathrm{for }\quad \kappa \gg 1 \\
1205: -\frac{\pi^2}{8} \quad \mathrm{for } \quad \kappa=\frac{1}{4}
1206: \end{array} \right.
1207: \eea
1208: %
1209: Higgsino loops contribute as $I_{\tilde \chi}= \sqrt{2} U_{i2} V_{i2}
1210: \lambda m_W/m_\chi \kappa_{\tilde \chi} F(\kappa_{\tilde \chi}) $.
1211: It follows from Eq.~(\ref{eq:fla}) that near
1212: $m_{A_1^0} \leq 2 m_\mu$ the $\gamma \gamma$
1213: rate is dominated by the muon loop.
1214: Contributions from up-type quarks are suppressed by $1/\tan^4 \beta$.
1215:
1216: The decay rates for inclusive and exclusive $b \to s A_1^0$ FCNCs read as
1217: \bea
1218: \label{eq:bsA}
1219: \Gamma(B \to X_s A_1^0)&=&\frac{G_F^2 |V_{tb} V_{ts}^*|^2}{2^{10} \pi^5}
1220: |C_A|^2 \frac{(m_b^2-m_{A_1^0}^2)^2}{m_b^3} \\
1221: \label{eq:BKA}
1222: \Gamma(B \to K A_1^0)&=&\frac{G_F^2 |V_{tb} V_{ts}^*|^2}{2^{10} \pi^5}
1223: |C_A|^2 \frac{|\vec p_K|}{m_B^2} |f_0(m_{A}^2)|^2 (\frac{m_B^2-m_K^2}{m_b})^2
1224: \eea
1225: where the form factor $f_0$ parametrizes the matrix element
1226: \be
1227: <K(p_K)| \bar s_L b_R| B(p_B)>=\frac{1}{2} (\frac{m_B^2-m_K^2}{m_b})
1228: f_0 ((p_B-p_K)^2)
1229: \ee
1230: Here, $\vec p_K$ denotes the three momentum of the Kaon
1231: %
1232: and $f_0(0)\sim 0.3$ to 0.4 \cite{Ali:1999mm}.
1233:
1234: The branching ratio for radiative $\Upsilon$ decays is given as,
1235: e.g.~\cite{Haber:1987ua}
1236: \be
1237: \label{eq:upsbr}
1238: \frac{{\cal{B}}( \Upsilon \to A_1^0 \gamma)}{
1239: {\cal{B}}(\Upsilon \to \mu^+ \mu^-)}=
1240: \frac{G_F m_{\Upsilon}^2}{4 \sqrt{2} \pi \alpha}
1241: \left( \frac{v}{x} \delta_- \right)^2
1242: \left( 1-\frac{m_{A_1^0}^2}{m_\Upsilon^2} \right) F
1243: \ee
1244: where $F \sim 1/2$ includes QCD corrections and ${\cal{B}}(\Upsilon(1s) \to \mu^+ \mu^-)=(2.48 \pm 0.06) \%$ \cite{Hagiwara:fs}.
1245:
1246: \end{appendix}
1247:
1248: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1249: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1250:
1251: \bibitem{Babu:1999hn}
1252: %\cite{Choudhury:1998ze}
1253: %\bibitem{Choudhury:1998ze}
1254: S.~R.~Choudhury and N.~Gaur,
1255: %``Dileptonic decay of B/s meson in SUSY models with large tan(beta),''
1256: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 451}, 86 (1999)
1257: [arXiv:hep-ph/9810307];
1258: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9810307;%%
1259: %
1260: %\cite{Babu:1999hn}
1261: %\bibitem{Babu:1999hn}
1262: K.~S.~Babu and C.~F.~Kolda,
1263: %``Higgs-mediated B0 $\to$ mu+ mu- in minimal supersymmetry,''
1264: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 84}, 228 (2000)
1265: [arXiv:hep-ph/9909476];
1266: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9909476;%%
1267: %
1268: %\cite{Carena:1999py}
1269: %\bibitem{Carena:1999py}
1270: M.~Carena, D.~Garcia, U.~Nierste and C.~E.~M.~Wagner,
1271: %``Effective Lagrangian for the anti-t b H+ interaction in the MSSM and
1272: %charged Higgs phenomenology,''
1273: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 577}, 88 (2000)
1274: [arXiv:hep-ph/9912516].
1275: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9912516;%%
1276:
1277: %\cite{Huang:2000sm}
1278: \bibitem{Huang:2000sm}
1279: C.~S.~Huang, W.~Liao, Q.~S.~Yan and S.~H.~Zhu,
1280: %``B/s $\to$ l+ l- in a general 2HDM and MSSM,''
1281: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 63}, 114021 (2001)
1282: [Erratum-ibid.\ D {\bf 64}, 059902 (2001)]
1283: [arXiv:hep-ph/0006250].
1284: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0006250;%%
1285:
1286: %\cite{Bobeth:2001sq}
1287: \bibitem{Bobeth:2001sq}
1288: C.~Bobeth, T.~Ewerth, F.~Kruger and J.~Urban,
1289: %``Analysis of neutral Higgs-boson contributions to the decays anti-B/s $\to$
1290: %l+ l- and anti-B $\to$ K l+ l-,''
1291: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 64}, 074014 (2001)
1292: [arXiv:hep-ph/0104284].
1293: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0104284;%%
1294:
1295: %\cite{Buras:2001mb}
1296: \bibitem{Buras:2001mb}
1297: A.~J.~Buras, P.~H.~Chankowski, J.~Rosiek and L.~Slawianowska,
1298: %``Delta(M(s))/Delta(M(d)), sin 2beta and the angle gamma in the presence of
1299: %new Delta(F) = 2 operators,''
1300: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 619}, 434 (2001)
1301: [arXiv:hep-ph/0107048];
1302: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0107048;%%
1303: %\cite{Dedes:2002er}
1304: %\bibitem{Dedes:2002er}
1305: A.~Dedes and A.~Pilaftsis,
1306: %``Resummed effective Lagrangian for Higgs-mediated FCNC interactions in the
1307: %CP-violating MSSM,''
1308: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67}, 015012 (2003)
1309: [arXiv:hep-ph/0209306];
1310: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0209306;%%
1311: %\cite{Dedes:2003kp}
1312: %\bibitem{Dedes:2003kp}
1313: A.~Dedes,
1314: %``The Higgs penguin and its applications: An overview,''
1315: Mod.\ Phys.\ Lett.\ A {\bf 18}, 2627 (2003)
1316: [arXiv:hep-ph/0309233].
1317: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0309233;%%
1318:
1319:
1320:
1321:
1322: %\cite{Isidori:2001fv}
1323: \bibitem{Isidori:2001fv}
1324: G.~Isidori and A.~Retico,
1325: %``Scalar flavour-changing neutral currents in the large-tan(beta) limit,''
1326: JHEP {\bf 0111}, 001 (2001)
1327: [arXiv:hep-ph/0110121].
1328: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0110121;%%
1329:
1330:
1331: %\cite{Buras:2002vd}
1332: \bibitem{Buras:2002vd}
1333: A.~J.~Buras, P.~H.~Chankowski, J.~Rosiek and L.~Slawianowska,
1334: %``Delta(M(d,s)), B/(d,s)0 $\to$ mu+ mu- and B $\to$ X/s gamma in supersymmetry
1335: %at large tan(beta),''
1336: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 659}, 3 (2003)
1337: [arXiv:hep-ph/0210145].
1338: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0210145;%%
1339:
1340:
1341: %\cite{Hiller:2003js}
1342: \bibitem{Hiller:2003js}
1343: G.~Hiller and F.~Kr\"uger,
1344: %``More model-independent analysis of b $\to$ s processes,''
1345: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 69}, 074020 (2004)
1346: [arXiv:hep-ph/0310219].
1347: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0310219;%%
1348:
1349: %\cite{Nilles:1982dy}
1350: \bibitem{Nilles:1982dy}
1351: H.~P.~Nilles, M.~Srednicki and D.~Wyler,
1352: %``Weak Interaction Breakdown Induced By Supergravity,''
1353: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 120}, 346 (1983);
1354: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B120,346;%%
1355: %
1356: %\cite{Frere:ag}
1357: %\bibitem{Frere:ag}
1358: J.~M.~Frere, D.~R.~T.~Jones and S.~Raby,
1359: %``Fermion Masses And Induction Of The Weak Scale By Supergravity,''
1360: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 222}, 11 (1983);
1361: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B222,11;%%
1362: %
1363: %\cite{Derendinger:bz}
1364: %\bibitem{Derendinger:bz}
1365: J.~P.~Derendinger and C.~A.~Savoy,
1366: %``Quantum Effects And SU(2) X U(1) Breaking In Supergravity Gauge Theories,''
1367: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 237}, 307 (1984).
1368: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B237,307;%%
1369:
1370:
1371:
1372: %\cite{Ellis:1988er}
1373: \bibitem{Ellis:1988er}
1374: J.~R.~Ellis, J.~F.~Gunion, H.~E.~Haber, L.~Roszkowski and F.~Zwirner,
1375: %``Higgs Bosons In A Nonminimal Supersymmetric Model,''
1376: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 39}, 844 (1989).
1377: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D39,844;%%
1378:
1379: %\cite{Dobrescu:2000yn}
1380: \bibitem{Dobrescu:2000yn}
1381: B.~A.~Dobrescu and K.~T.~Matchev,
1382: %``Light axion within the next-to-minimal supersymmetric standard model,''
1383: JHEP {\bf 0009}, 031 (2000)
1384: [arXiv:hep-ph/0008192].
1385: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0008192;%%
1386:
1387: %\cite{Dobrescu:1999gv}
1388: \bibitem{Dobrescu:1999gv}
1389: B.~A.~Dobrescu,
1390: %``Minimal composite Higgs model with light bosons,''
1391: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 63}, 015004 (2001)
1392: [arXiv:hep-ph/9908391].
1393: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9908391;%%
1394:
1395: %\cite{Dobrescu:2000jt}
1396: \bibitem{Dobrescu:2000jt}
1397: B.~A.~Dobrescu, G.~Landsberg and K.~T.~Matchev,
1398: %``Higgs boson decays to CP-odd scalars at the Tevatron and beyond,''
1399: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 63}, 075003 (2001)
1400: [arXiv:hep-ph/0005308];
1401: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0005308;%%
1402: %
1403: %
1404: %\cite{Ellwanger:2004gz}
1405: %\bibitem{Ellwanger:2004gz}
1406: U.~Ellwanger, J.~F.~Gunion, C.~Hugonie and S.~Moretti,
1407: %``NMSSM Higgs discovery at the LHC,''
1408: arXiv:hep-ph/0401228.
1409: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0401228;%%
1410:
1411:
1412:
1413:
1414: %\cite{Ellwanger:1996gw}
1415: \bibitem{Ellwanger:1996gw}
1416: U.~Ellwanger, M.~Rausch de Traubenberg and C.~A.~Savoy,
1417: %``Phenomenology of supersymmetric models with a singlet,''
1418: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 492}, 21 (1997)
1419: [arXiv:hep-ph/9611251].
1420: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9611251;%%
1421:
1422:
1423:
1424:
1425: %\cite{Ananthanarayan:1995xq}
1426: \bibitem{Ananthanarayan:1995xq}
1427: B.~Ananthanarayan and P.~N.~Pandita,
1428: %``The nonminimal supersymmetric standard model with tan Beta approximately =
1429: %m(t) / m(b),''
1430: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 353}, 70 (1995)
1431: [arXiv:hep-ph/9503323],
1432: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9503323;%%
1433: %
1434: %\cite{Ananthanarayan:1995zr}
1435: %\bibitem{Ananthanarayan:1995zr}
1436: %B.~Ananthanarayan and P.~N.~Pandita,
1437: %``Particle Spectrum in the Non-Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model with
1438: %$\tan\beta\simeq m_t/m_b$,''
1439: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 371}, 245 (1996)
1440: [arXiv:hep-ph/9511415]
1441: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9511415;%%
1442: %
1443: %\cite{Ananthanarayan:1996zv}
1444: %\bibitem{Ananthanarayan:1996zv}
1445: %B.~Ananthanarayan and P.~N.~Pandita,
1446: and
1447: %``The Non-Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model at Large $\tan\beta$,''
1448: Int.\ J.\ Mod.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 12}, 2321 (1997)
1449: [arXiv:hep-ph/9601372].
1450: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9601372;%%
1451:
1452:
1453:
1454: %\cite{Han:1999jc}
1455: \bibitem{Han:1999jc}
1456: T.~Han, D.~Marfatia and R.~J.~Zhang,
1457: %``A gauge-mediated supersymmetry breaking model with an extra singlet Higgs
1458: %field,''
1459: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 61}, 013007 (2000)
1460: [arXiv:hep-ph/9906508].
1461: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9906508;%%
1462:
1463: %\cite{Kitano:2004zd}
1464: \bibitem{Kitano:2004zd}
1465: R.~Kitano, G.~D.~Kribs and H.~Murayama,
1466: %``Electroweak symmetry breaking via UV insensitive anomaly mediation,''
1467: arXiv:hep-ph/0402215.
1468: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0402215;%%
1469:
1470: %\cite{Frere:1981cc}
1471: \bibitem{Frere:1981cc}
1472: J.~M.~Frere, J.~A.~M.~Vermaseren and M.~B.~Gavela,
1473: %``The Elusive Axion,''
1474: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 103} (1981) 129;
1475: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B103,129;%%
1476: %
1477: %\cite{Hall:1981bc}
1478: %\bibitem{Hall:1981bc}
1479: L.~J.~Hall and M.~B.~Wise,
1480: %``Flavor Changing Higgs - Boson Couplings,''
1481: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 187}, 397 (1981);
1482: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B187,397;%%
1483: %
1484: %\cite{Grzadkowski:yp}
1485: % SM calculation
1486: %\bibitem{Grzadkowski:yp}
1487: B.~Grzadkowski and P.~Krawczyk,
1488: %``Higgs Particle Effects In Flavor Changing Transitions,''
1489: Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 18} (1983) 43;
1490: %%CITATION = ZEPYA,C18,43;%%
1491: %
1492: %
1493: %\cite{Bertolini:1988cj}
1494: % MSSM calculation
1495: %\bibitem{Bertolini:1988cj}
1496: S.~Bertolini, F.~Borzumati and A.~Masiero,
1497: %``Supersymmetric Contributions To B $\to$ S + H,''
1498: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 312}, 281 (1989);
1499: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B312,281;%%
1500: %
1501: %
1502: %\cite{Bird:2004ts}
1503: %\bibitem{Bird:2004ts}
1504: C.~Bird, P.~Jackson, R.~Kowalewski and M.~Pospelov,
1505: %``Search for dark matter in b $\to$ s transitions with missing energy,''
1506: arXiv:hep-ph/0401195.
1507: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0401195;%%
1508:
1509: %\cite{Haber:1987ua}
1510: \bibitem{Haber:1987ua}
1511: H.~E.~Haber, A.~S.~Schwarz and A.~E.~Snyder,
1512: %``Hunting The Higgs In B Decays,''
1513: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 294}, 301 (1987).
1514: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B294,301;%%
1515:
1516:
1517: %\cite{Rosiek:1995kg}
1518: \bibitem{Rosiek:1995kg}
1519: J.~Rosiek,
1520: %``Complete set of Feynman rules for the MSSM -- ERRATUM,''
1521: arXiv:hep-ph/9511250.
1522: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9511250;%%
1523:
1524: %\cite{Franke:1995tc}
1525: \bibitem{Franke:1995tc}
1526: F.~Franke and H.~Fraas,
1527: %``Neutralinos and Higgs Bosons in the Next-To-Minimal Supersymmetric Standard
1528: %Model,''
1529: Int.\ J.\ Mod.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 12}, 479 (1997)
1530: [arXiv:hep-ph/9512366].
1531: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9512366;%%
1532:
1533: %\cite{Miller:2003ay}
1534: \bibitem{Miller:2003ay}
1535: D.~J.~Miller, R.~Nevzorov and P.~M.~Zerwas,
1536: %``The Higgs sector of the next-to-minimal supersymmetric standard model,''
1537: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 681}, 3 (2004)
1538: [arXiv:hep-ph/0304049].
1539: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0304049;%%
1540:
1541: %\cite{Ellwanger:1993hn}
1542: \bibitem{Ellwanger:1993hn}
1543: U.~Ellwanger,
1544: %``Radiative corrections to the neutral Higgs spectrum in supersymmetry with a
1545: %gauge singlet,''
1546: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 303}, 271 (1993)
1547: [arXiv:hep-ph/9302224];
1548: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9302224;%%
1549: %
1550: %\cite{Pandita:1993hx}
1551: %\bibitem{Pandita:1993hx}
1552: P.~N.~Pandita,
1553: %``One loop radiative corrections to the lightest Higgs scalar mass in
1554: %nonminimal supersymmetric Standard Model,''
1555: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 318}, 338 (1993) and
1556: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B318,338;%%
1557: %
1558: %\cite{Pandita:tg}
1559: %\bibitem{Pandita:tg}
1560: %P.~N.~Pandita,
1561: %``Radiative Corrections To The Scalar Higgs Masses In A Nonminimal
1562: %Supersymmetric Standard Model,''
1563: Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 59} (1993) 575;
1564: %%CITATION = ZEPYA,C59,575;%%
1565: %
1566: %\cite{Elliott:uc}
1567: %\bibitem{Elliott:uc}
1568: T.~Elliott, S.~F.~King and P.~L.~White,
1569: %``Squark Contributions To Higgs Boson Masses In The Next-To-Minimal
1570: %Supersymmetric Standard Model,''
1571: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 314}, 56 (1993)
1572: [arXiv:hep-ph/9305282] and
1573: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9305282;%%
1574: %
1575: %\cite{Elliott:bs}
1576: %\bibitem{Elliott:bs}
1577: %T.~Elliott, S.~F.~King and P.~L.~White,
1578: %``Radiative Corrections To Higgs Boson Masses In The Next-To-Minimal
1579: %Supersymmetric Standard Model,''
1580: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 49}, 2435 (1994)
1581: [arXiv:hep-ph/9308309].
1582: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9308309;%%
1583:
1584: %\cite{Ammar:2001gi}
1585: \bibitem{Ammar:2001gi}
1586: R.~Ammar {\it et al.} [CLEO Collaboration],
1587: %``Search for the familon via B+- $\to$ pi+- X0, B+- $\to$ K+- X0, and B0 $\to$
1588: %K0(S) X0 decays,''
1589: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 87}, 271801 (2001)
1590: [arXiv:hep-ex/0106038].
1591: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0106038;%%
1592:
1593:
1594: %\cite{Aubert:2003yh}
1595: \bibitem{Aubert:2003yh}
1596: B.~Aubert {\it et al.} [BABAR Collaboration],
1597: %``A Search for the decay B- $\to$ K- nu anti-nu,''
1598: arXiv:hep-ex/0304020.
1599: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0304020;%%
1600:
1601:
1602:
1603: %\cite{Aubert:2003rv}
1604: \bibitem{Aubert:2003rv}
1605: B.~Aubert {\it et al.} [BABAR Collaboration],
1606: %``Measurement of the B $\to$ X(s) l+ l- branching fraction using a sum over
1607: %exclusive modes,''
1608: arXiv:hep-ex/0308016.
1609: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0308016;%%
1610:
1611: %\cite{Kaneko:2002mr}
1612: \bibitem{Kaneko:2002mr}
1613: J.~Kaneko {\it et al.} [Belle Collaboration],
1614: %``Measurement of the electroweak penguin process B $\to$ X/s l+ l-. ((B)),''
1615: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 90}, 021801 (2003)
1616: [arXiv:hep-ex/0208029].
1617: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0208029;%%
1618:
1619: %\cite{Ishikawa:2003cp}
1620: \bibitem{Ishikawa:2003cp}
1621: A.~Ishikawa {\it et al.} [Belle Collaboration],
1622: %``Observation of the electroweak penguin decay B $\to$ K* l+ l-,''
1623: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 91}, 261601 (2003)
1624: [arXiv:hep-ex/0308044].
1625: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0308044;%%
1626:
1627:
1628: %\cite{Aubert:2003cm}
1629: \bibitem{Aubert:2003cm}
1630: B.~Aubert {\it et al.} [BABAR Collaboration],
1631: %``Evidence for the rare decay B $\to$ K* l+ l- and measurement of the B $\to$
1632: %K l+ l- branching fraction,''
1633: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 91}, 221802 (2003)
1634: [arXiv:hep-ex/0308042].
1635: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0308042;%%
1636:
1637:
1638: %\cite{Appel:1999yq}
1639: \bibitem{Appel:1999yq}
1640: R.~Appel {\it et al.} [E865 Collaboration],
1641: %``A new measurement of the properties of the rare decay K+ $\to$ pi+ e+ e-,''
1642: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 83}, 4482 (1999)
1643: [arXiv:hep-ex/9907045].
1644: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 9907045;%%
1645:
1646: %\cite{Adler:2002hy}
1647: \bibitem{Adler:2002hy}
1648: S.~Adler {\it et al.} [E787 Collaboration],
1649: %``Search for the decay K+ $\to$ pi+ nu anti-nu in the momentum region P(pi) <
1650: %195-MeV/c,''
1651: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 537}, 211 (2002)
1652: [arXiv:hep-ex/0201037];
1653: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0201037;%%
1654: %\cite{unknown:2004hp}
1655: %\bibitem{unknown:2004hp}
1656: [E787 Collaboration],
1657: %``Further search for the decay K+ $\to$ pi+ nu anti-nu in the momentum region
1658: %p < 195-MeV/c,''
1659: arXiv:hep-ex/0403034.
1660: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0403034;%%
1661:
1662: %\cite{Hagiwara:fs}
1663: \bibitem{Hagiwara:fs}
1664: K.~Hagiwara {\it et al.} [Particle Data Group Collaboration],
1665: %``Review Of Particle Physics,''
1666: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66}, 010001 (2002).
1667: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D66,010001;%%
1668:
1669:
1670: %\cite{Coan:1997ye}
1671: \bibitem{Coan:1997ye}
1672: T.~E.~Coan {\it et al.} [CLEO Collaboration],
1673: %``Flavor-specific inclusive B decays to charm,''
1674: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 80}, 1150 (1998)
1675: [arXiv:hep-ex/9710028];
1676: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 9710028;%%
1677: %
1678: %\cite{Kagan:1997sg}
1679: %\bibitem{Kagan:1997sg}
1680: updated in
1681: A.~Kagan,
1682: %``The phenomenology of enhanced b $\to$ s g,''
1683: arXiv:hep-ph/9806266.
1684: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9806266;%%
1685:
1686: %\cite{Grossman:1996qj}
1687: \bibitem{Grossman:1996qj}
1688: Y.~Grossman, Z.~Ligeti and E.~Nardi,
1689: %``B $\to$ tau+ tau- (X) decays: First constraints and phenomenological
1690: %implications,''
1691: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 55}, 2768 (1997)
1692: [arXiv:hep-ph/9607473].
1693: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9607473;%%
1694:
1695: %\cite{Acosta:2004xj}
1696: \bibitem{Acosta:2004xj}
1697: D.~Acosta [CDF Collaboration],
1698: %``Search for B/s0 $\to$ mu+ mu- and B/d0 $\to$ mu+ mu- decays in p anti-p
1699: %collisions at s**(1/2) = 1.96-TeV,''
1700: arXiv:hep-ex/0403032.
1701: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0403032;%%
1702:
1703:
1704: %\cite{Ali:1999mm}
1705: \bibitem{Ali:1999mm}
1706: A.~Ali, P.~Ball, L.~T.~Handoko and G.~Hiller,
1707: %``A comparative study of the decays B $\to$ (K,K*) l+ l- in standard model
1708: %and supersymmetric theories,''
1709: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 61}, 074024 (2000)
1710: [arXiv:hep-ph/9910221].
1711: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9910221;%%
1712:
1713:
1714: %\cite{Balest:1994ch}
1715: \bibitem{Balest:1994ch}
1716: R.~Balest {\it et al.} [CLEO Collaboration],
1717: %``Upsilon (1s) $\to$ gamma + noninteracting particles,''
1718: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 51}, 2053 (1995).
1719: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D51,2053;%%
1720:
1721:
1722: %\cite{Borzumati:1999qt}
1723: \bibitem{Borzumati:1999qt}
1724: F.~Borzumati, C.~Greub, T.~Hurth and D.~Wyler,
1725: %``Gluino contribution to radiative B decays: Organization of QCD corrections
1726: %and leading order results,''
1727: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 62}, 075005 (2000)
1728: [arXiv:hep-ph/9911245].
1729: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9911245;%%
1730:
1731:
1732: \bibitem{feynhiggshome}
1733: %{\tt http://wwwth.mppmu.mpg.de/members/heinemey/feynhiggs/FeynHiggs.html}; \\
1734: %
1735: {\tt http://www.feynhiggs.de};
1736: %\cite{Heinemeyer:2001qd}
1737: %\bibitem{Heinemeyer:2001qd}
1738: S.~Heinemeyer,
1739: %``The Higgs boson sector of the complex MSSM in the Feynman-diagrammatic
1740: %approach,''
1741: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 22}, 521 (2001)
1742: [arXiv:hep-ph/0108059];
1743: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0108059;%%
1744: %
1745: %\cite{Frank:2002qa}
1746: %\bibitem{Frank:2002qa}
1747: M.~Frank, S.~Heinemeyer, W.~Hollik and G.~Weiglein,
1748: %``The Higgs boson masses of the complex MSSM: A complete one-loop
1749: %calculation,''
1750: arXiv:hep-ph/0212037.
1751: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0212037;%%
1752:
1753: %\cite{Buras:2002wq}
1754: \bibitem{Buras:2002wq}
1755: A.~J.~Buras, P.~H.~Chankowski, J.~Rosiek and L.~Slawianowska,
1756: %``Correlation between Delta M(s) and B/(s,d)0 $\to$ mu+ mu- in supersymmetry
1757: %at large tan(beta),''
1758: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 546}, 96 (2002)
1759: [arXiv:hep-ph/0207241].
1760: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0207241;%%
1761:
1762:
1763:
1764:
1765: %\cite{Gunion:1988mf}
1766: \bibitem{Gunion:1988mf}
1767: J.~F.~Gunion, G.~Gamberini and S.~F.~Novaes,
1768: %``Can The Higgs Bosons Of The Minimal Supersymmetric Model Be Detected At A
1769: %Hadron Collider Via Two Photon Decays?,''
1770: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 38}, 3481 (1988).
1771: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D38,3481;%%
1772:
1773:
1774: \end{thebibliography}
1775: \end{document}
1776:
1777:
1778:
1779:
1780: