1: \NeedsTeXFormat{LaTeX2e}
2: \documentclass[12pt,english]{article}
3: \usepackage{babel}
4: \usepackage{epsfig}
5: \usepackage{amsmath}
6: \usepackage{amssymb}
7: \usepackage[small]{caption2}
8: \usepackage{fleqn}
9: \usepackage{graphicx}
10: \usepackage[small,loose]{subfigure}
11: \usepackage{cite}
12: \addtolength\textheight{115pt}
13: \addtolength\textwidth{60pt}
14: \addtolength\oddsidemargin{-37pt}
15: \setlength{\parindent}{20pt}
16: \setlength{\parskip}{4pt}
17: \frenchspacing
18: \sloppy
19: \headheight 12pt
20: \headsep 30pt
21: \footskip 24pt
22: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.2}
23: \addtolength{\topmargin}{-1.5cm}
24: \advance \headheight by 3.0truept
25: \setcaptionwidth{.85\textwidth}
26: \DeclareMathOperator{\re}{Re}
27: \DeclareMathOperator{\im}{Im}
28: \DeclareMathOperator{\tr}{tr}
29: \DeclareMathOperator{\Tr}{Tr}
30: \DeclareMathOperator{\diag}{diag}
31: \DeclareMathOperator{\quabla}{\boldsymbol{\square}}
32: \newcommand{\CenterObject}[1]{\ensuremath{\vcenter{\hbox{#1}}}}
33: \newcommand{\D}{\mathrm{d}}
34: \newcommand{\I}{\mathrm{i}}
35:
36: \makeatother
37:
38: \begin{document}
39: \title{
40: \begin{flushright}
41: {\normalsize DESY 05-086}
42: \end{flushright}
43: \vspace{1cm}
44: {\bf A Stringy Solution to the FCNC Problem\footnote{Based on a talk given at
45: Planck'05, 23-28 May 2005, ICTP, Trieste, Italy}}\\[0.8cm]}
46: \author{%
47: \textbf{Oleg~Lebedev }\\[0.4cm]
48: {\normalsize\textit{$$Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY,
49: 22603 Hamburg, Germany}}}
50: \maketitle
51: \hrule
52: \abstract{
53: The solution to the supersymmetric FCNC problem may not have a simple
54: field theory interpretation.
55: Here I advocate a possibility based on
56: string selection rules. The requirement of non--trivial Yukawa structures
57: restricts the form of the soft terms such that the FCNC problem
58: often does not arise.
59: }
60: \vspace{0.5cm}
61: \hrule
62: \vspace{1.5cm}
63:
64:
65: {\bf 1. Introduction}\\ \
66:
67: Generically, supersymmetric contributions to flavor changing neutral currents
68: (FCNC) are orders of magnitude too large, which is known as the
69: supersymmetric FCNC problem \cite{Ellis:1981ts}.
70: This problem appears in models with a light
71: ($<$ 1 TeV) SUSY spectrum and arbitrary flavor structure of the soft terms.
72: Simple field theory arguments suggest the following common remedies for the problem:
73:
74: $\bullet$ universality
75:
76: $\bullet$ decoupling
77:
78: $\bullet$ alignment \\
79: The first possibility implies that the soft terms are flavor--blind, the second
80: -- that the first two sfermion generations are very heavy, and the third --
81: that the soft and SM flavor structures are aligned. Any of these options
82: leads to sufficient suppression of the unwanted effects, yet it is quite
83: nontrivial to embed these mechanisms in string theory. For example,
84: universality of the soft terms would imply a special point in moduli space
85: and one would have to argue that the Universe rests precisely there.
86: The decoupling option assumes a rather peculiar SUSY spectrum and so on.
87: This is not to say that these solutions cannot be realized, rather they leave
88: one wondering if there could be options suggested by string theory itself
89: and which may not have a simple bottom--up interpretation.
90: I will try to argue that such an option exists and it is based on\\ \
91:
92: $\bullet$ string selection rules \\ \ \\
93: The basic idea is that all flavor effects are interrelated in string theory
94: and the FCNC problem should be analyzed in settings which allow
95: for realistic Yukawa matrices,
96: \begin{center}
97: \fbox {{\rm Yukawa couplings} $~~\leftrightarrow~~$ {\rm FCNC}}
98: \end{center}
99: In this framework, the form of the soft
100: terms is restricted and the FCNC problem often does not arise.\\ \
101:
102:
103: {\bf 2. String Yukawa couplings }\\ \
104:
105: Replication of chiral fermion families and generation of non--trivial
106: flavor structures have been successfully realized in heterotic and intersecting brane models.
107: The fermion mass hierarchy appears naturally if
108: the matter fields are twisted, i.e. localized at special points in the
109: compactified 6D space. The Yukawa coupling among three fields
110: located at three different points is exponentially suppressed by the area of the triangle
111: formed by these points \cite{Hamidi:1986vh}.
112: Then order one variations in the area translate into a
113: large hierarchy among the Yukawa couplings.
114:
115: In heterotic orbifold compactifications, twisted states are localized at orbifold
116: fixed points. Not all fixed points can couple together, they have to satisfy
117: string selection rules \cite{Hamidi:1986vh}. Consider
118: three fields $S_a$ ($a$=1,2,3) belonging to twisted sectors $\theta_a$
119: and localized at fixed points $f_a$. That is,
120: the boundary conditions for the corresponding closed string coordinates are given by
121: $$X_a(\tau,\sigma=\pi)=\theta_a X_a(\tau, \sigma=0) +l_a$$
122: with $l_a$ being a torus lattice vector in the conjugacy class associated with
123: the fixed point $f_a$.
124: The Yukawa couplings $S_1 S_2 S_3$ are allowed only if (see e.g.\cite{Bailin:1999nk})
125: $$ \theta_1 \theta_2 \theta_3 = {\bf 1} $$
126: and
127: $$ ({\bf 1}-\theta_1)f_1 + ({\bf 1}-\theta_2)f_2 + ({\bf 1}-\theta_3)f_3=0~. $$
128: This is required by the existence of classical solutions to
129: the string equations of motion with proper boundary conditions (instantons),
130: which are responsible for correlators of the twist fields.
131: These constraints can be derived from the monodromy condition
132: $\int _C dz ~\partial X + \int_C d \bar z ~ \bar \partial X =0$
133: with $z=\exp({\tau + i \sigma})$, $X(z,\bar z)$ being a classical solution to the
134: string equations of motion in the presence of the twist fields, and
135: $C$ is a contour encircling the positions of all three twist fields.
136: If this condition is not satisfied, the correlator of the twist fields vanishes
137: and the corresponding Yukawa coupling is zero.
138: Physically, the reason for this selection rule is that the strings should
139: have proper boundary conditions to be able to join or split, i.e. participate
140: in interactions.
141:
142:
143: For the allowed Yukawa couplings, the result depends on the T-modulus:
144: $$ Y_{_{123}} \sim {\rm e}^{-\alpha_{_{123}} T} $$
145: with $\alpha_{_{123}} \leq {\cal O}(1)$. If all $S_a$ are located at the same fixed point,
146: $\alpha_{_{123}}=0$ and the coupling is order one, otherwise it is exponentially suppressed.
147: This is the origin of the fermion mass hierarchy.
148: As explicit calculations show, semi--realistic Yukawa matrices can be produced if
149: {\it different generations} of one matter field belong to the
150: {\it same twisted sector}. To illustrate this point, let us consider a few examples.
151:
152: {\bf (1). $Z_3$.} This orbifold has nine moduli associated with the sizes of the $T^2$-tori
153: and angles between them. If
154: the matter fields are twisted, the Yukawa couplings are functions of these moduli
155: which provides enough freedom to fit the fermion
156: masses\footnote{The quark mixings can be generated by non--renormalizable
157: operators \cite{Casas:1989qx} or by introducing 3 generations of Higgses \cite{Abel:2002ih}. }
158: \cite{Casas:1989qx}.
159: There is only one twisted sector $\theta$
160: and the allowed coupling is of the type $\theta\theta\theta$.
161: Note that if one assumes that some of the fields are untwisted, the Yukawa couplings
162: would essentially be zero or one. Thus, the desired moduli dependence will be lost.
163:
164: {\bf (2). $Z_4$.} There are two twisted sectors $\theta, \theta^2$ and 4 moduli which enter
165: the Yukawa couplings $\theta\theta\theta^2$.
166: A satisfactory fit to the quark masses
167: can be obtained if different generations belong to the same twisted sector,
168: e.g. the quark, lepton and Higgs doublets are in $\theta$, while the singlets are in $\theta^2$
169: \cite{Casas:1992zt}. If one were to place, for instance, one generation of the quarks doublets
170: in $\theta^2$, the corresponding Yukawa coupling $\theta \theta^2 \theta^2$ would be
171: prohibited and the success of the fit would be lost.
172:
173:
174:
175: {\bf (3). $Z_6$.} This orbifold has three twisted sectors $\theta,\theta^2,\theta^3$
176: and allows for flavor non--diagonal Yukawa couplings $\theta\theta^2 \theta^3$.
177: A satisfactory fit to the quark masses and mixings is obtained for
178: the Higgses in $\theta$, the doublets in $\theta^2$ and the singlets in $\theta^3$ \cite{Ko:2004ic}.
179: This is also required by the presence of physical CP violation at the
180: renormalizable level, i.e.
181: a non--zero Jarlskog invariant \cite{Lebedev:2001qg}.
182: If some of the generations were reassigned to a different twisted sector, the Yukawa matrices
183: would contain many zeros and the Jarlskog invariant as well as some mixing angles
184: would vanish.
185:
186:
187: There are, of course, many more similar examples. The main message is that a satisfactory
188: fit to the quark masses or mixings at the renormalizable level appears to require
189: that different fermion generations belong to the same twisted sector\footnote{
190: This is also favored by the mechanisms of family replication in the
191: heterotic string (see e.g. \cite{Ibanez:1987sn},\cite{Buchmuller:2004hv}).}.
192:
193:
194:
195: This result also applies to semirealstic intersecting brane models \cite{Blumenhagen:2000wh}.
196: The chiral
197: fermions are localized at intersections of the branes which support the
198: Standard Model gauge groups. Different generations correspond to different
199: intersections of the same branes (Fig.\ref{f1}). Their Yukawa couplings are again exponentially
200: suppressed by the area of the triangle formed by the Higgs, the left--handed and the
201: right--handed quark vertices\footnote{For a discussion of the selection rules,
202: see \cite{Higaki:2005ie}.}. Realistic quark masses and mixings can be
203: obtained in such settings \cite{Cremades:2003qj}. What is important is that the existing mechanism of
204: family replication implies that different generations differ only in their
205: distances to the location of the Higgs, but are the same in other aspects.
206: In particular, the angles between the branes are the same at different intersections (Fig.\ref{f1})
207: leading to the same K\"ahler potential. Thus we reach the same conclusion
208: as in the heterotic string case. \\ \
209:
210: \begin{figure}[t]
211: \centerline{\CenterObject{\includegraphics[width=5.0cm]{oleg.eps}}}
212: \vspace*{0.3cm}
213: \caption{
214: %\footnotesize
215: Family replication in intersecting brane models.
216: The picture represents a $T^2$ torus with multiple brane intersections
217: corresponding to three generations of the quark doublets. }
218: \label{f1}
219: \end{figure}
220:
221:
222: {\bf 3. Soft terms and FCNC}\\ \
223:
224: What are the implications of the above conclusion for the soft terms ?
225: To answer this question, one has to analyze the K\"ahler potential,
226: \begin{equation}
227: K= \hat K + K_{\bar \alpha \beta} \phi^{* \bar \alpha} \phi^\beta +...,
228: \end{equation}
229: where $\phi^\alpha$ are matter fields.
230: In the heterotic string, twisted states have the following K\"ahler metric,
231: \begin{equation}
232: K_{\bar \alpha \beta}= \delta_{\bar \alpha \beta} (T+\bar T)^{n_\alpha}\;,
233: \label{k1}
234: \end{equation}
235: where $T$ is an overall modulus and $n_\alpha$ is a modular weight.
236: Diagonality of the K\"ahler metric is enforced by the
237: space group selection rules since different fixed points have
238: different quantum numbers with respect to this group.
239: The modular weights are determined by the twisted sector the state belongs to.
240: For non--oscillator states,
241: the modular weight only depends on whether
242: the corresponding twist rotates all three complex planes
243: in the compactified 6D space
244: or just two of them \cite{Ibanez:1992hc}:
245: \begin{eqnarray}
246: && n=-1 \;, ~~{\rm untwisted} \nonumber\\
247: && n=-2 \;, ~~{\rm twisted ~with~3~planes~rotated} \nonumber\\
248: && n=-1 \;, ~~{\rm twisted ~with~2~planes~rotated} \;. \label{weight}
249: \end{eqnarray}
250: In semirealistic models,
251: quark fields usually correspond to non--oscillator states,
252: so oscillators will not be discussed further.
253:
254:
255: In intersecting brane models, a similar expression holds and the role of
256: the modular weights is played by the angles between the relevant branes $\pi\nu_\alpha$
257: \cite{Lust:2004cx}:
258: \begin{equation}
259: K_{\bar \alpha \beta} \propto \delta_{\bar \alpha \beta} (T+\bar T)^{-\nu_\alpha}\;.
260: \label{k2}
261: \end{equation}
262:
263:
264: What these expressions tell us is that (1) the K\"ahler potential is
265: {\it flavor--diagonal}, (2) the diagonal entries are $equal$ if different
266: generations belong to the same twisted sector. This is intuitively clear from
267: the intersecting brane picture (Fig.\ref{f1}): localized fields couple only
268: to themselves in the K\"ahler potential (to leading order) and
269: these couplings are generation--independent since
270: the angles between the branes are the same.
271:
272:
273:
274: The soft terms relevant to the FCNC problem depend on the
275: K\"ahler potential and the Yukawa couplings $Y_{\alpha\beta\gamma}
276: \equiv Y_{Q_{_{L_i}} Q_{_{R_j}} H}~$ \cite{Soni:1983rm},
277: \begin{eqnarray}
278: &&m_\alpha^2=(m_{3/2}^2 +V_0) -\bar F^{\bar m} F^n \partial_{\bar m}
279: \partial_n \log K_\alpha \;,\label{soft}\\
280: &&A_{\alpha \beta \gamma}=F^m \left[
281: \hat K_m + \partial_m \log Y_{\alpha \beta \gamma}- \partial_m\log
282: (K_\alpha K_\beta K_\gamma) \nonumber
283: \right]\;,
284: \end{eqnarray}
285: where a diagonal K\"ahler metric has been assumed,
286: $K_{\bar \alpha \beta}=\delta_{\bar \alpha \beta} K_\beta$.
287: $m_\alpha^2$ are the squark masses and $A_{\alpha \beta \gamma}$
288: are the trilinear soft couplings. $F^n$ is an F--term associated
289: with a hidden superfield $h^n$ and subscripts denote differentiation
290: with respect to these fields. The gravitino mass and the ``vacuum energy''
291: are denoted by $m_{3/2}$ and $V_0$, respectively.
292:
293:
294:
295: Eqs.(\ref{k1}),(\ref{k2}) and (\ref{soft}) tell us that the squark masses
296: are {\it generation--independent}
297: as long as different generations belong to the same twisted
298: sector. This means that the FCNC problem is absent. Note that
299: the Yukawa and the A--term flavor structures can still be complicated \cite{Abel:2001cv}.
300: The FCNC induced by the A--terms are small \cite{Chankowski:2005jh} since the
301: corresponding SUSY contributions
302: are suppressed by the quark masses. This is illustrated in Fig.\ref{fig:lrydg2}.
303:
304:
305: Thus, the correlation between the Yukawa structure and the K\"ahler
306: potential in string models suppresses FCNC to a desired level.
307: The above considerations apply mostly to the quark sector. In the lepton sector,
308: FCNC constraints require the charged slepton masses to be universal and the A--terms
309: to be diagonal \cite{Chankowski:2005jh}. The latter condition
310: is specific to the lepton sector
311: and implies that the corresponding Yukawa matrix is diagonal.
312: This can be implemented in many orbifold models with diagonal
313: selection rules for renormalizable couplings, however the analysis
314: is obscured by the unknown origin of the neutrino masses and mixings
315: (see e.g. \cite{Giedt:2005vx}). \\ \
316:
317:
318:
319:
320: {\bf 4. Relaxing the assumptions}\\ \
321:
322: The conclusion that the FCNC are suppressed is based on the analysis of renormalizable
323: couplings in the superpotential.
324: One may wonder if non--renormalizable couplings can affect it.
325: There are two types of such contributions:
326:
327: (i) non--renormalizable couplings are only perturbations over the renormalizable
328: Yukawas
329:
330: (ii) non--renormalizable couplings lead to qualitative changes such as the
331: twisted sector assignment\\
332: In the former case the above discussion applies, whereas in the latter
333: the conclusions may change.
334:
335:
336: In general, some of the Yukawa entries may only be allowed at the non--renormalizable
337: level. For instance, off--diagonal entries of the Yukawa matrices
338: in $Z_3$ are forbidden at the renormalizable level (see, however, \cite{Abel:2002ih})
339: and are induced by higher dimensional
340: operators involving singlet fields, e.g. of the type $\theta\theta\theta (\theta)^9$
341: \cite{Casas:1989qx}.
342: In many cases, the presence of such operators does not change the conclusion
343: that different generations should belong to the same twisted sector in order to
344: get a good fit to the quark masses and mixings.
345: For instance, in $Z_3$ and $Z_7$ there is only one twisted sector, so this condition
346: will be satisfied as long as the fields are twisted.
347: Yet, it is also possible to evade this conclusion in some cases.
348:
349: Consider splitting the third family from the other two. For example, in $Z_6$ one
350: can place the first two families in the $\theta$ twisted sector and the third family
351: in the untwisted sector \cite{Kobayashi:2004ud}. In this case, the K\"ahler metric
352: remains diagonal, yet the modular weights for the light and heavy families become different
353: (Eq.(\ref{weight})). That means, the squark masses at the GUT scale have the structure
354: $$ m^2_i={\rm diag}(m^2,m^2,M^2)~, $$
355: with $m^2-M^2 \sim m^2$. What is relevant for the FCNC is off--diagonal elements
356: of the squark mass matrix at low energies in the physical (sCKM) basis, i.e. the basis
357: in which the quark masses are diagonal. To translate the above GUT boundary condition
358: into these quantities, one needs to (1) RG--run $m^2_i$ to low energies, (2)
359: rotate $m^2_i$ to the sCKM basis. Both of these effects are very important.
360: First, the gluino renormalization effect increases $m^2_i$ by about an order
361: of magnitude, $m^2_i \rightarrow m^2_i + 8 m_{\tilde g}^2$
362: \cite{Brignole:1993dj}. Second, the rotation
363: to the sCKM basis induces the off diagonal elements $(m^2-M^2) \epsilon$, where
364: $\epsilon $ is the rotation angle. The quantity governing the size of SUSY contributions
365: to the FCNC is
366: $$ \delta \sim {m^2-M^2 \over m^2+8 m_{\tilde g}^2} ~\epsilon \leq 10^{-3}~,\label{M}$$
367: with $m^2 \sim m_{\tilde g}^2$ and $\epsilon \leq 10^{-2}$.
368: For hierarchical Yukawa textures and the gluino mass larger or similar
369: to the squark masses,
370: it is usually small enough to satisfy all experimental
371: FCNC constraints \cite{Chankowski:2005jh}. Thus, we see that this scenario
372: does not suffer any significant FCNC problem (Fig.\ref{fig:scalar}).
373:
374:
375:
376: One could also consider the possibility that all three generations are
377: split,
378: $$ m^2_i={\rm diag}(m^2,M^2,{\cal M}^2)~. $$
379: (It would be difficult however to find convincing examples.)
380: In this case, the FCNC constraints are more severe, yet the RG--dilution mechanism
381: is at work. One finds that the FCNC constraints are satisfied as long
382: as the rotation matrices to the physical basis are similar to the CKM
383: matrix \cite{Chankowski:2005jh}.
384:
385: Thus, some of our assumptions can be relaxed without encountering a severe FCNC
386: problem. What is important in this analysis is that the K\"ahler metric stays
387: diagonal\footnote{Higher dimensional operators
388: may lead to off--diagonal terms in the K\"ahler metric.
389: These however are significantly suppressed.},
390: which is true in essentially all reasonable
391: models (see e.g. \cite{Brignole:1995fb}).
392: Finally, note that string theory restricts not only the form
393: of the K\"ahler potential but also the ``numbers'' entering into it:
394: the modular weights in semirealistic models are
395: either -1 or -2 (Eq.(\ref{weight})), so it is likely that the
396: first two generations have the same weights purely on the statistical
397: basis.\\ \
398:
399:
400: {\bf 5. Conclusion}\\ \
401:
402: Correlations between the structure of the Yukawa couplings and that of the
403: K\"ahler potential suppress SUSY--induced FCNC in string models.
404: This conclusion is valid for a standard SUSY spectrum with no peculiarities,
405: nor does it rely on family symmetries or universality.
406: It is based on string selection rules which stem from
407: properties of the compactified space
408: in heterotic and intersecting
409: brane models.
410:
411: The question that remains is what part of the analysis will survive
412: in a truly realistic model. Perhaps the details will change entirely,
413: but, as the above examples show, string theory may be clever enough
414: to avoid automatically the problems that bug phenomenologists.
415:
416:
417:
418:
419: {\bf Acknowledgements.} I would like to thank P. Chankowski
420: and S. Pokorski for collaboration on \cite{Chankowski:2005jh}.
421: I am also grateful to M. Ratz for his help with the manuscript
422: and to S. Abel, W. Buchm\"uller, S. Raby and O. Vives
423: for helpful comments.
424:
425:
426:
427:
428:
429:
430: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
431:
432:
433: \bibitem{Ellis:1981ts}
434: J.~R.~Ellis and D.~V.~Nanopoulos,
435: %``Flavor Changing Neutral Interactions In Broken Supersymmetric Theories,''
436: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 110}, 44 (1982).
437:
438:
439:
440: %\cite{Hamidi:1986vh}
441: \bibitem{Hamidi:1986vh}
442: S.~Hamidi and C.~Vafa,
443: %``Interactions On Orbifolds,''
444: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 279}, 465 (1987);
445: L.~J.~Dixon, D.~Friedan, E.~J.~Martinec and S.~H.~Shenker,
446: %``The Conformal Field Theory Of Orbifolds,''
447: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 282}, 13 (1987).
448:
449:
450: \bibitem{Bailin:1999nk}
451: D.~Bailin and A.~Love,
452: %``Orbifold compactifications of string theory,''
453: Phys.\ Rept.\ {\bf 315}, 285 (1999).
454:
455:
456:
457: %\cite{Casas:1989qx}
458: \bibitem{Casas:1989qx}
459: J.~A.~Casas and C.~Munoz,
460: %``Fermion Masses And Mixing Angles: A Test For String Vacua,''
461: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 332}, 189 (1990)
462: [Erratum-ibid.\ B {\bf 340}, 280 (1990)].
463:
464: \bibitem{Abel:2002ih}
465: S.~A.~Abel and C.~Munoz,
466: %``Quark and lepton masses and mixing angles from superstring constructions,''
467: JHEP {\bf 0302}, 010 (2003).
468:
469:
470: \bibitem{Casas:1992zt}
471: J.~A.~Casas, F.~Gomez and C.~Munoz,
472: %``Fitting the quark and lepton masses in string theories,''
473: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 292}, 42 (1992).
474:
475:
476: \bibitem{Ko:2004ic}
477: P.~Ko, T.~Kobayashi and J.~h.~Park,
478: %``Quark masses and mixing angles in heterotic orbifold models,''
479: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 598}, 263 (2004).
480:
481:
482: %\cite{Lebedev:2001qg}
483: \bibitem{Lebedev:2001qg}
484: O.~Lebedev,
485: %``The CKM phase in heterotic orbifold models,''
486: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 521}, 71 (2001).
487:
488:
489: \bibitem{Ibanez:1987sn}
490: L.~E.~Ibanez, J.~E.~Kim, H.~P.~Nilles and F.~Quevedo,
491: %``Orbifold Compactifications With Three Families Of SU(3) X SU(2) X
492: %U(1)**N,''
493: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 191}, 282 (1987).
494:
495: \bibitem{Buchmuller:2004hv}
496: W.~Buchmuller, K.~Hamaguchi, O.~Lebedev and M.~Ratz,
497: %``Dual models of gauge unification in various dimensions,''
498: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 712}, 139 (2005).
499:
500:
501: \bibitem{Blumenhagen:2000wh}
502: R.~Blumenhagen, L.~Goerlich, B.~Kors and D.~Lust,
503: %``Noncommutative compactifications of type I strings on tori with magnetic
504: %background flux,''
505: JHEP {\bf 0010}, 006 (2000);
506: G.~Aldazabal, S.~Franco, L.~E.~Ibanez, R.~Rabadan and A.~M.~Uranga,
507: %``Intersecting brane worlds,''
508: JHEP {\bf 0102}, 047 (2001). For a review, see R.~Blumenhagen, M.~Cvetic, P.~Langacker and G.~Shiu,
509: ``Toward realistic intersecting D-brane models,''
510: hep-th/0502005.
511:
512:
513:
514: %\cite{Higaki:2005ie}
515: \bibitem{Higaki:2005ie}
516: T.~Higaki, N.~Kitazawa, T.~Kobayashi and K.~j.~Takahashi,
517: ``Flavor structure and coupling selection rule from intersecting D-branes,''
518: hep-th/0504019.
519:
520:
521: \bibitem{Cremades:2003qj}
522: D.~Cremades, L.~E.~Ibanez and F.~Marchesano,
523: %``Yukawa couplings in intersecting D-brane models,''
524: JHEP {\bf 0307}, 038 (2003). For realistic examples, see e.g.
525: N.~Chamoun, S.~Khalil and E.~Lashin,
526: %``Fermion masses and mixing in intersecting branes scenarios,''
527: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 69}, 095011 (2004);
528: S.~A.~Abel, O.~Lebedev and J.~Santiago,
529: %``Flavour in intersecting brane models and bounds on the string scale,''
530: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 696}, 141 (2004).
531:
532:
533:
534:
535: \bibitem{Ibanez:1992hc}
536: L.~E.~Ibanez and D.~Lust,
537: %``Duality anomaly cancellation, minimal string unification and the effective
538: %low-energy Lagrangian of 4-D strings,''
539: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 382}, 305 (1992).
540:
541: %\cite{Lust:2004cx}
542: \bibitem{Lust:2004cx}
543: D.~Lust, P.~Mayr, R.~Richter and S.~Stieberger,
544: %``Scattering of gauge, matter, and moduli fields from intersecting branes,''
545: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 696}, 205 (2004).
546:
547:
548:
549: \bibitem{Soni:1983rm}
550: S.~K.~Soni and H.~A.~Weldon,
551: %``Analysis Of The Supersymmetry Breaking Induced By N=1 Supergravity
552: %Theories,''
553: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 126}, 215 (1983);
554: V.~S.~Kaplunovsky and J.~Louis,
555: %``Model independent analysis of soft terms in effective supergravity and in
556: %string theory,''
557: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 306}, 269 (1993);
558: A.~Brignole, L.~E.~Ibanez and C.~Munoz,
559: %``Soft supersymmetry-breaking terms from supergravity and superstring
560: %models,''
561: hep-ph/9707209.
562:
563:
564:
565: \bibitem{Abel:2001cv}
566: S.~Abel, S.~Khalil and O.~Lebedev,
567: %``The string CP problem,''
568: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 89}, 121601 (2002);
569: S.~Khalil, O.~Lebedev and S.~Morris,
570: %``CP violation and dilaton stabilization in heterotic string models,''
571: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 65}, 115014 (2002);
572: G.~G.~Ross and O.~Vives,
573: %``Yukawa structure, flavour and CP violation in supergravity,''
574: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67}, 095013 (2003).
575:
576:
577:
578: \bibitem{Chankowski:2005jh}
579: P.~H.~Chankowski, O.~Lebedev and S.~Pokorski,
580: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 717}, 190 (2005).
581:
582:
583: \bibitem{Giedt:2005vx}
584: J.~Giedt, G.~L.~Kane, P.~Langacker and B.~D.~Nelson,
585: ``Massive neutrinos and (heterotic) string theory,''
586: hep-th/0502032;
587: P.~Ko, T.~Kobayashi and J.~h.~Park,
588: ``Lepton masses and mixing angles from heterotic orbifold models,''
589: hep-ph/0503029.
590:
591:
592:
593: \bibitem{Kobayashi:2004ud}
594: T.~Kobayashi, S.~Raby and R.~J.~Zhang,
595: %``Constructing 5d orbifold grand unified theories from heterotic strings,''
596: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 593}, 262 (2004);
597: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 704}, 3 (2005).
598:
599:
600:
601:
602: \bibitem{Brignole:1993dj}
603: A.~Brignole, L.~E.~Ibanez and C.~Munoz,
604: %``Towards a theory of soft terms for the supersymmetric Standard Model,''
605: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 422}, 125 (1994);
606: D.~Choudhury, F.~Eberlein, A.~Konig, J.~Louis and S.~Pokorski,
607: %``Constraints on nonuniversal soft terms from flavor changing neutral
608: %currents,''
609: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 342}, 180 (1995);
610: P.~Brax and C.~A.~Savoy,
611: %``Flavor changing neutral current effects from flavor dependent supergravity
612: %couplings,''
613: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 447}, 227 (1995).
614:
615:
616:
617: %\cite{Brignole:1995fb}
618: \bibitem{Brignole:1995fb}
619: A.~Brignole, L.~E.~Ibanez, C.~Munoz and C.~Scheich,
620: %``Some issues in soft SUSY breaking terms from dilaton / moduli sectors,''
621: Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 74}, 157 (1997).
622:
623:
624:
625:
626:
627: \end{thebibliography}
628:
629:
630:
631: \newpage
632: \begin{figure}
633: \epsfig{figure=lrydg2.ps,width=\linewidth}
634: \vspace{1.0truecm}
635: \caption{\small{
636: Flavor violating mass insertions due to non--universal
637: A--terms \cite{Chankowski:2005jh}.
638: The SUSY parameters are chosen as
639: $m=2A$, $M_{1/2}=200$~GeV, $\tan\beta=15$
640: and order one $\tilde A_{ij}^{u,d}$ are generated randomly.
641: All experimental bounds (marked by a line) on FCNC
642: observables are satisfied.
643: (The nEDM, which is a {\it flavor--conserving} observable, is
644: problematic as shown in the two top left blocks. This represents
645: the SUSY CP problem which is not solved by the field theory mechanisms
646: mentioned in the introduction.)
647: }}
648: \label{fig:lrydg2}
649: \end{figure}
650: \newpage
651:
652:
653:
654: \newpage
655: \begin{figure}
656: \epsfig{figure=yd3kkg2.ps,width=\linewidth}
657: \vspace{1.0truecm}
658: \caption{\small{
659: Flavor violating mass insertions due to non--universal
660: soft scalar masses, $m_1=m_2\not=m_3$ \cite{Chankowski:2005jh}.
661: The SUSY parameters are chosen as
662: $A=0$, $M_{1/2}=200$~GeV, $\tan\beta=15$
663: and $m_3$ is varied randomly in the range $m_1/2\div m_1$.
664: The Yukawa matrices are assumed to be diagonalized by
665: matrices similar to the CKM one.
666: All experimental bounds (marked by a line) on FCNC
667: observables are satisfied.
668: (The $B$-physics observables are not shown.) }}
669: \label{fig:scalar}
670: \end{figure}
671: \newpage
672:
673:
674:
675:
676: \end{document}
677:
678:
679:
680:
681: