1: \documentstyle[12pt,epsfig,palatino]{article}

2: \textwidth 440pt 

3: \textheight 600pt 

4: \oddsidemargin 20pt 

5: \evensidemargin 20pt 

6: \topmargin -25pt 

7: \baselineskip 30pt 

8: \parindent 20pt 

9: \pagestyle{empty} 

10: %-------------------------------------------------------------------%

11: \def\beq{\begin{equation}}

12: \def\eeq{\end{equation}}

13: \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}}

14: \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}}

15: \def\bq{\begin{quote}}

16: \def\eq{\end{quote}}

17: \def\ra{\rightarrow}

18: \def\lra{\leftrightarrow}

19: \def\ups{\upsilon}

20: \def\bq{\begin{quote}}

21: \def\eq{\end{quote}}

22: \def\ra{\rightarrow}

23: \def\un{\underline}

24: \def\ov{\overline}

25: \newcommand{\vn}{{\vec{n}}}

26: \def\mpl{\ifmmode \overline M_{P}\else $\overline M_{P}$\fi}

27: %-------------------------------------------------------------------%

28: \begin{document} 

29: \baselineskip 22pt

30: \vspace*{-1in} 

31: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\fnsymbol{footnote}} 

32: \begin{flushright} 

33: SINP/TNP/05-06~~~\\

34: TIFR/TH/05-17~~~~~~~\\

35: {\tt hep-ph/0506158}

36: \end{flushright} 

37: \vskip 65pt 

38: \begin{center} 

39: {\Large \bf NLO-QCD Corrections to Dilepton Production

40: in the Randall-Sundrum Model}\\

41: \vspace{8mm} 

42: {\bf 

43: Prakash Mathews$^{a}$

44: \footnote{prakash.mathews@saha.ac.in}, 

45: V. Ravindran$^b$

46: \footnote{ravindra@mri.ernet.in},   

47: K.~Sridhar$^c$

48: \footnote{sridhar@theory.tifr.res.in}

49: }\\ 

50: \end{center}

51: \vspace{10pt} 

52: \begin{flushleft}

53: {\it 

54: a) Theory Group, Saha Institute of Nuclear Physics, 1/AF Bidhan Nagar,\\ 

55: Kolkata 700 064, India.\\

56:  

57: b) Harish-Chandra Research Institute, 

58:  Chhatnag Road, Jhunsi, Allahabad, India.\\

59: 

60: c) Department of Theoretical Physics, 

61: Tata Institute of Fundamental Research,\\   

62: Homi Bhabha Road, Mumbai 400 005, India. \\

63: 

64: } 

65: \end{flushleft}

66:  

67: \vspace{10pt} 

68: \begin{center}

69: {\bf ABSTRACT} 

70: \end{center} 

71: \vskip12pt 

72: The dilepton production process at hadron colliders in the Randall-Sundrum

73: (RS) model is studied at next-to-leading order in QCD. The NLO-QCD corrections

74: have been computed for the virtual graviton exchange process in the RS model,

75: in addition to the usual $\gamma,\ Z$-mediated processes of standard 

76: Drell-Yan. $K$-factors for the cross-sections at the LHC and Tevatron for 

77: differential in the invariant mass, $Q$, and the rapidity, $Y$, of the lepton 

78: pair are presented.  We find the $K$-factors are large over substantial regions

79: of the phase space.

80:  

81: \vfill 

82: \clearpage 

83: 

84: \setcounter{page}{1} 

85: \pagestyle{plain}

86: 

87: \noindent 

88: In brane-world models, the four dimensional

89: universe is a dynamical hypersurface: a $D_3$-brane (or 3-brane) 

90: existing in a higher dimensional spacetime. In many such models, the 

91: Standard Model (SM) fields are localized on the brane and only gravity 

92: can propagate in the bulk. The scale of quantum gravity

93: can be lowered down from the Planck scale to the TeV scale in these

94: models \cite{string} making it exciting for high-energy physics

95: not only because these suggest fresh perspectives to the 

96: solution of the hierarchy problem but also because these models throw

97: open the possibility of the discovery of new physics at energies

98: accessible to collider experiments. In addition, these models

99: provide new frameworks for gauge symmetry and supersymmetry breaking

100: and suggest theoretical approaches to the cosmological constant

101: problem and dark-matter problem.

102: 

103: The simplest model seeking to address the gauge hierarchy problem was the

104: the ADD model proposed by

105: Arkani-Hamed, Dimopoulos and Dvali \cite{dimo}, where, starting from

106: a higher dimensional theory, an effective four-dimensional theory

107: at a scale $M_S \sim {\rm TeV}$ is obtained. This is done by compactifying 

108: the extra dimensions to magnitudes which are large compared to the Planck 

109: length \cite{revadd}. 

110: 

111: The main problem that one faces within the ADD model is the 

112: reappearance of disparate scales $viz.$, the string scale and

113: the inverse of the compactification radius.

114: It was an attempt to avoid this problem that led to the formulation

115: of the Randall-Sundrum (RS) model \cite{rs}.

116: In the RS model 

117: the single extra dimension $\phi$ is compactified on a ${\bf

118: S}^1/{\bf Z}^2$ orbifold with a radius $R_c$ which is 

119: somewhat larger than the Planck length. 

120: Two 3-branes, the Planck brane and the TeV brane, are located

121: at the orbifold fixed points $\phi=0,\ \pi$, with the  

122: SM fields localised on the TeV brane.

123: The five-dimensional metric, which is {\it non-factorisable} or $warped$ 

124: is of the form

125: \begin{equation}

126: ds^2 = e^{-{\cal K}R_c\phi}\eta_{\mu\nu}dx^{\mu}dx^{\nu}~+~R_c^2d\phi^2  .

127: \label{eq1}

128: \end{equation} 

129: The exponential warp factor $e^{-{\cal K}R_c\phi}$ serves as a conformal factor 

130: for fields localised on the brane. 

131: Thus the huge ratio

132: $\frac{M_P}{M_{EW}} \sim 10^{15}$ can be generated by the exponent

133: ${\cal K}R_c$ which needs to be only of

134: ${\cal O}(10)$ thereby providing a way of avoiding the hierarchy problem. 

135: There remains the problems of stabilising 

136: $R_c$ against quantum fluctuations

137: but this can be done by introducing an extra scalar field in

138: the bulk \cite{gold, csaki}. 

139: 

140: The tower of massive Kaluza-Klein (KK) excitations of the graviton, 

141: $h^{(\vec{n})}_{\mu\nu}$, interact with the SM particles by:  

142: \begin{eqnarray} 

143: {\cal L}_{int} & \sim & -{1\over M_P}

144: %{1 \over \mpl} 

145: T^{\mu\nu}(x) h^{(0)}_{\mu\nu}(x) 

146: %-{e^{\pi {\cal K} R_c} \over \mpl} \sum_1^{\infty}

147: -{e^{\pi {\cal K} R_c} \over M_P} \sum_1^{\infty}

148: T^{\mu\nu}(x) h^{(n)}_{\mu\nu}(x) \ . 

149: \label{eq2}

150: \end{eqnarray} 

151: $T^{\mu\nu}$ is the

152: symmetric energy-momentum tensor for the particles on the

153: 3-brane. The masses of the $h^{(\vec{n})}_{\mu\nu}$ are given by 

154: \begin{eqnarray} 

155: M_n & = & x_n {\cal K} ~e^{-\pi {\cal K} R_c} \ ,

156: \label{eq3}

157: \end{eqnarray} 

158: where the $x_n$ are the zeros of the Bessel function $J_1(x)$. 

159: The zero-mode couples weakly and decouples

160: but the couplings of the

161: massive RS gravitons are enhanced by the exponential $e^{\pi {\cal K}

162: R_c}$ leading to interactions of electroweak strength. 

163: Consequently, except for the overall warp factor in the RS case,

164: the Feynman rules in the RS model are the same as those for the ADD case

165: \cite{grw, hlz}. 

166: 

167: The basic parameters of the RS model are 

168: \begin{eqnarray}

169: m_0 & = & {\cal K} e^{-\pi {\cal K} R_c} \ , \nonumber \\

170: c_0 & = & {\cal K}/M_P \ , 

171: \label{eq4}

172: \end{eqnarray}

173: where $m_0$ is a scale of the dimension of mass and sets the scale for 

174: the masses of the KK excitations, and $c_0$ is

175: an effective coupling. The interaction of massive KK gravitons with

176: the SM fields can be written as 

177: \begin{equation} 

178: {\cal L}_{int}  \sim 

179: %-\sqrt{8\pi} {c_0 \over m_0} \sum_n^{\infty} T^{\mu\nu}(x)

180: - {c_0 \over m_0} \sum_n^{\infty} T^{\mu\nu}(x)

181:  h^{(n)}_{\mu\nu}(x) \ . 

182: \label{eq5}

183: \end{equation} 

184: Since ${\cal K}$ is related to the curvature of the fifth dimension

185: we need to restrict it to small enough values to avoid effects

186: of strong curvature. On the other hand ${\cal K}$ should not

187: be too small compared to $M_P$ because that would reintroduce

188: a hierarchy. These considerations suggest $0.01 \le c_0 \le 0.1$. 

189: For our analysis we choose to work with the RS parameters $c_0$ and 

190: $M_1$ the first excited mode of the graviton rather then $m_0$.  

191: 

192: The decoupling of the graviton zero-mode and the existence of a mass gap

193: in the spectrum of KK gravitons imply that it is only the resonant

194: production and decay of the heavier KK modes or the virtual effects

195: of the KK modes that one can hope to detect in collider experiments.

196: The phenomenology of resonant production of the KK excitations and the 

197: virtual effects have already been studied in processes like dilepton 

198: production \cite{dhr}, diphoton production \cite{sridhar}, $t \bar t$ 

199: production at hadron colliders \cite{lmrs}, $\tau$-production at a 

200: linear collider \cite{namit} and pair production of KK modes in

201: $e^+e^-$ and hadron hadron colliders \cite{jp}.  The sensitivity of 

202: the CMS experiment to the resonant production of RS graviton KK modes 

203: has been studied for electron pair production \cite{cms}.  Recently 

204: D\O\ has reported the first direct search for RS graviton KK modes 

205: using dielectron, dimuon, and diphoton events \cite{d0}.

206: 

207: In an earlier work we had presented NLO-QCD corrections for $e^+ e^- \to$ 

208: hadrons \cite{us} and dilepton pair production at hadron colliders \cite{us1}

209: in the ADD model. These results for the dilepton pair production case are 

210: extended to the RS model, in this paper. We 

211: note that it is the same virtual graviton exchange process that contributes 

212: to dilepton production in both the ADD and RS models. The leading order 

213: process being the same, the QCD

214: corrections are also not model-dependent. However, as explained above,

215: the differences between the two models arise because of the difference

216: in the summation over the tower of KK gravitons and also in the overall

217: factors. Consequently, the relative weight of the subprocess cross-section

218: due to graviton exchange vis-a-vis the SM subprocess will be different

219: in the two models. This results in different $K$-factors in the ADD

220: and RS models and the dependence of the $K$-factors on the kinematic 

221: variables are also different. In this letter, we present the results

222: for dilepton production at the LHC and Tevatron in the RS model.

223: 

224: The process we are interested in is where two hadrons $P_1,P_2$ scatter 

225: and give rise to leptonic final states,

226: say $\mu^+,\mu^-$  

227: \begin{eqnarray}

228: P_1(p_1)+P_2(p_2) \rightarrow \mu^+(l_1)+\mu^-(l_2)+X(P_X)  \ ,

229: \label{eq6}

230: \end{eqnarray}

231: where $p_1,p_2$ are the momenta of incoming hadrons $P_1$ and $P_2$

232: respectively and $\mu^-,\mu^+$ are the outgoing leptons which have

233: the momenta $l_1,l_2$. 

234: The final inclusive hadronic state is denoted by $X$  

235: and carries the momentum $P_X$.

236: The hadronic cross section

237: can be expressed in terms of partonic cross sections

238: convoluted with appropriate parton distribution functions as follows

239: \begin{eqnarray}

240: 2 S~{d \sigma^{P_1 P_2} \over d Q^2}\left(\tau,Q^2\right)

241: &=&\sum_{ab={q,\overline q,g}} \int_0^1 dx_1

242: \int_0^1 dx_2~ f_a^{P_1}(x_1) ~

243: f_b^{P_2}(x_2)

244: \nonumber\\[2ex] &&

245: \times \int_0^1 dz \,\, 2 \hat s ~

246: {d \hat \sigma^{ab} \over d Q^2}\left(z,Q^2\right)

247: \delta(\tau-z x_1 x_2)\ .

248: \label{eq7}

249: \end{eqnarray}

250: The scaling variables are defined 

251: by $k_1 =x_1 p_1,k_2=x_2 p_2$ where $k_1,k_2$ are the momenta of

252: incoming partons.  

253: \begin{eqnarray}

254: (p_1+p_2)^2 &\equiv& S, \quad \quad \quad 

255: (k_1+k_2)^2 \equiv \hat s, \quad \quad \quad (l_1+l_2)^2=q.q \equiv Q^2,

256: \nonumber\\[2ex]

257: \tau&=&{Q^2 \over S} \ , 

258: \quad \quad \quad 

259: z={Q^2 \over \hat s } \ , 

260: \quad \quad \quad \tau=x_1 x_2 z \ .

261: \label{eq8}

262: \end{eqnarray}

263: The partonic cross section for the process

264: $a(k_1)+b(k_2) \rightarrow j(-q)+\displaystyle \sum_i^m X_i(-p_i)$ 

265: is given by

266: \begin{eqnarray}

267: 2 \hat s ~ {d \hat \sigma^{ab} \over d Q^2} &=&

268: {1 \over 2 \pi} \sum_{jj'=\gamma,Z,G}

269: \int dPS_{m+1}~  |M^{ab \rightarrow jj'}|^2\cdot P_j(q)\cdot P^*_{j'}(q)\cdot 

270: {\cal L}^{jj' \rightarrow l^+l^-}(q) \ .

271: \label{eq9}

272: \end{eqnarray}

273: In the above equation, the sum over Lorentz indices between 

274: matrix element squared and the propagators is implicit through

275: a symbol ``dot product".

276: The $m+1$ body phase space is defined as

277: \begin{eqnarray}

278: \int dPS_{m+1}&=&\int \prod_i^m \Bigg({d^n p_i \over (2\pi)^n} 

279: 2 \pi \delta^+(p_i^2)\Bigg) {d^nq\over (2\pi)^n} 2 \pi \delta^+(q^2-Q^2)

280: \nonumber\\[2ex]&&

281: \times (2 \pi)^n \delta^{(n)}(k_1+k_2+q+\sum_i^m p_i)\ , 

282: \label{eq10}

283: \end{eqnarray}

284: where $n$ is the space-time dimension.

285: The propagators are

286: \begin{eqnarray}

287: P_{\gamma}(q)&=&-{i \over Q^2} g_{\mu \nu}\ ,

288: \label{eq11}

289: \\ [2ex]

290: P_Z(q) &=& ~-{i \over 

291: (Q^2 -M_Z^2 - i M_Z \Gamma_Z)} g_{\mu\nu} \ ,

292: \label{eq12}

293: \\ [2ex]

294: P_{G}(q)&=&{\cal D}(Q^2) B_{\mu \nu \lambda \rho} (q) \ ,

295: \label{eq13}

296: \end{eqnarray}

297: where 

298: \begin{eqnarray}

299: B_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma}(q)&=&

300: \Bigg(g_{\mu \rho} - {q_\mu q_\rho \over {M_n}^2} \Bigg)

301: \Bigg(g_{\nu \sigma} - {q_\nu q_\sigma \over {M_n}^2} \Bigg)

302: +\Bigg(g_{\mu \sigma} - {q_\mu q_\sigma \over {M_n}^2} \Bigg)

303: \Bigg(g_{\nu \rho} - {q_\nu q_\rho \over {M_n}^2} \Bigg)

304: \nonumber\\[2ex]

305: && -{2 \over n-1} \Bigg(g_{\mu \nu} - {q_\mu q_\nu \over {M_n}^2} \Bigg)

306: \Bigg(g_{\rho \sigma} - {q_\rho q_\sigma \over {M_n}^2} \Bigg) \ .

307: \label{eq14}

308: \end{eqnarray}

309: The function ${\cal D}(Q^2)$ in the graviton propagator Eq.~(\ref{eq13}), 

310: results from summing over the KK modes, given by 

311: \begin{eqnarray}

312: {\cal D}(Q^2) &=& \sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{1}{Q^2 - M_n^2 + i M_n \Gamma_n} 

313: \equiv {\lambda \over m_0^2} \ ,

314: \label{eq15}

315: \end{eqnarray}

316: where $M_n$ are the masses of the individual resonances and the $\Gamma_n$ 

317: are the corresponding widths.  The graviton widths are obtained by calculating 

318: their decays into final states involving SM particles.  $\lambda$ is defined 

319: as 

320: \begin{eqnarray}

321: \lambda (x_s) & = & \sum_{n=1}^\infty 

322: \frac{x_s^2 -x_n^2 -i \frac{\Gamma_n}{m_0} x_n}

323:      {x_s^2 -x_n^2 +  \frac{\Gamma_n}{m_0} x_n} \ ,

324: \label{eq16}

325: \end{eqnarray}

326: where $x_s=Q/m_0$.  We have to 

327: sum over all the resonances to get the value of $\lambda(x_s)$. This is done 

328: numerically and for a given value of $x_s$, we retain all resonances which 

329: contribute with a significance greater than one per mil, and treat the 

330: remaining KK modes as virtual particles (in which case the sum can be done 

331: analytically).

332: 

333: We now present the distributions in the invariant lepton pair mass, $Q$, 

334: and the rapidity of the lepton pair, $Y$ at the LHC ($\sqrt{S}=14$ 

335: TeV) and Tevatron ($\sqrt{S}=1.96$ TeV).  From these distributions 

336: the effects of the NLO-QCD corrections can be clearly discerned.  For 

337: the parton density sets we adopt in leading order (LO) MRST 2001 LO 

338: ($\Lambda=0.1670~{\rm GeV}$) and in next-to-leading order the MRST 2001 

339: NLO ($\Lambda=0.2390$ GeV). For LHC we choose the kinematic ranges $300~

340: {\rm GeV}<Q<3000~{\rm GeV}$ and $|Y|<2.2$ at $Q=1.5$ TeV.  For Tevatron 

341: $300~{\rm GeV}<Q<1000$ GeV and $|Y| <0.9$ at $Q=300$ GeV.  The renormalisation

342: scale is taken to be same as the factorization scale $\mu_F$ and $\mu_F$ 

343: si chosen to be $\mu_F=Q$.

344: 

345: The cross-section $d\sigma/dQ$ as a function of $Q$ to NLO is presented in 

346: Fig.~1a for LHC.  For the figure, we have chosen the representative values 

347: of the RS model parameters: $M_1 =1.5$ TeV the first RS resonance mass and 

348: the coupling constant $c_0= 0.01$.  The width of the resonance is related 

349: to $c_0$ and hence a smaller $c_0$ corresponds to a narrow resonance.  The 

350: subsequent resonance are determined by $m_0$ and $x_n$.  To LO the dilepton 

351: case has been presented in \cite{dhr}.  To see the effect of the NLO effect 

352: we study the $K$-factor for the $Q$ and $Y$ distribution.  

353: 

354: The $K$-factor for the invariant lepton pair mass distribution defined by 

355: \begin{eqnarray}

356: K^I=\Bigg[ {d \sigma_{LO}^I(Q) \over dQ} \Bigg]^{-1}

357:        \Bigg[ {d \sigma_{NLO}^I(Q) \over dQ} \Bigg] \ ,

358: \label{eq17}

359: \end{eqnarray}

360: where $I=SM$, $I=SM+GR$ for both SM and gravity combined and $I=GR$ for 

361: only gravity.  It is possible to define $K^{GR}$ for the invariant 

362: lepton pair mass distribution, as there is no interference with SM 

363: \cite{us1}.  The results are presented in Fig.~1b. The parameters chosen 

364: are the same as in Fig.~1a.  In order to understand the 

365: behaviour of $K$-factor of the model involving both SM and gravity, it is 

366: useful to express it as

367: \begin{eqnarray}

368: K^{(SM+GR)}(Q) = \frac{K^{SM} + K^{GR} K^{(0)}}{1+K^{(0)}} \ ,

369: \label{eq18}

370: \end{eqnarray} 

371: where we have introduced a quantity $K^{(0)}$, defined as the ratio of the 

372: LO distribution of gravity to SM, given by 

373: \begin{eqnarray}

374: K^{(0)}(Q)=\Bigg[ {d \sigma_{LO}^{SM}(Q) \over dQ} \Bigg]^{-1}

375:        \Bigg[ {d \sigma_{LO}^{GR}(Q) \over dQ} \Bigg] \ .

376: \label{eq19}

377: \end{eqnarray}

378: The behaviour of $K^{(0)}(Q)$ is governed by competing couplings constants 

379: of SM and gravity and the parton fluxes.  In the RS case the gravity 

380: contribution is significant in the resonance region, (see Fig.1a).  In 

381: the off resonance region the $K$-factor is hence purely $K^{SM}$.  In the 

382: resonance region where the gravity effect dominates the $K^{(SM+GR)}$ factor

383: shifts to the $K^{GR}$ value (see Fig.~1b).  This behaviour of the $K$-factor 

384: of the RS case is very distinct from the corresponding case we presented in 

385: the ADD case \cite{us1}.  To incorporate the NLO effects for an 

386: appropriate distribution one needs to take into account the behaviour of the 

387: $K$-factor accordingly.  For $M_1=300$ GeV the $K$-factor is about $1.5$

388: in the resonance region.   This is due to the fact that at loq $Q$ ($Q=300$ 

389: GeV) the gluon flux becomes dominant at Tevatron.  The behaviour of $K^{GR}$ 

390: is the same as in the ADD case \cite{us1}.  

391: 

392: In Fig.~1c, we have plotted the scale variations of the $Q$

393: distribution for both LO and NLO cross sections. We define $R^I$ for 

394: the invariant lepton mass distribution as 

395: \begin{eqnarray}

396: R_{LO}^I&=&\Bigg[ {d \sigma_{LO}^I(Q,\mu=\mu_0) \over dQ} \Bigg]^{-1}

397:        \Bigg[ {d \sigma_{LO}^I(Q,\mu) \over dQ } \Bigg] \ ,

398: \nonumber\\[2ex]

399: R_{NLO}^I&=&\Bigg[ {d \sigma_{NLO}^I(Q,\mu=\mu_0) \over dQ} \Bigg]^{-1}

400:        \Bigg[ {d \sigma_{NLO}^I(Q,\mu) \over dQ} \Bigg] \ ,

401: \label{eq20}

402: \end{eqnarray}

403: where $\mu_0$ is a fixed scale which is chosen to be $\mu_0=1.5$ TeV for

404: LHC.  As can be seen from the figure, the inclusion of the NLO corrections

405: stabilises the cross-section with respect to the scale $\mu$.  Here 

406: we have chosen $\mu_0=1.5$ TeV, ie. the first resonance region.  The 

407: scale variation is driven by the gravity part as its the dominant 

408: contribution.

409: 

410: In Fig.~2a the double differential cross section $d^2\sigma/dQdY$

411: is displayed for rapidity region $\vert Y \vert \le 2.2$ for a $Q$ value of 

412: 1.5 TeV.  To plot this distribution the $Q$ value is chosen such that it 

413: lies at the first resonance, where the gravity effect dominates.  Hence the 

414: dominant contribution is purely gravity.  The RS model parameters remain the 

415: same as before.  The $K$ factor as a function of $Y$ is plotted for a choice 

416: of $Q$ in the resonance region where the dominant contribution to 

417: $K^{(SM+GR)}$ factor comes from the gravity part Fig.~2b.  The $R$ ratio using 

418: the $Y$ distribution is plotted in Fig.~2c for the central region of rapidity 

419: and for a $Q$ value of 1.5 TeV.  In this region the scale variation is also

420: dictated by the gravity contribution.  

421: 

422: The corresponding analysis for the Tevatron is done for the $Q$ range

423: $300 < Q < 1000$ GeV and for the RS parameter $M_1=300$ GeV and the 

424: coupling $c_0=0.01$.  At low $Q$ the gravity effects of the RS model is 

425: dominant in the resonance and off the resonance region the effect is 

426: negligible.  As $Q$ increases the effect of gravity starts to become

427: comparable to the SM contribution as is seen towards the third resonance 

428: in Fig.~3a.  In Fig.~3b we have plotted the $K$-factor for $Q$ 

429: distribution at the Tevatron.  Using Eq.~(\ref{eq18}) we can understand 

430: the behaviour of $K^{SM+GR}$.  As expected the behaviour of $K^{GR}$ is 

431: same as the ADD case \cite{us1}.  The double differential cross section 

432: $d^2\sigma /dQdY$ for $Q=300$ GeV is plotted as a function of rapidity $Y$.  

433: In the resonance region the dominant contribution is from the RS.

434: In contrast for ADD \cite{us1} only at large $Q$ the gravity effects became 

435: comparable to the SM at Tevatron.  The corresponding $K$-factor is plotted 

436: in Fig.~4b.  Scale variation for the $Q$ and double differential $dQdY$

437: is given in Fig.~3c and Fig.~4c respectively.

438: 

439: In a recent analysis by D\O\ \cite{d0}, the LO cross section was scaled by a 

440: constant $K$-factor of 1.34 to account for the NLO effect for the RS case.  

441: This does not yield a realistic picture as can be seen from Fig.~3b.  In

442: the RS case due to the resonant production, the $K$-factor is very different 

443: from the ADD case reported earlier \cite{us1}.    

444: 

445: In summary, we have presented the results for the cross-section for

446: dilepton production in the Randall-Sundrum model at the LHC and Tevatron. 

447: The large incident gluon flux at the LHC makes the NLO QCD corrections

448: very important. Moreover, when the NLO corrections are taken into

449: account the cross-sections are stabilised with respect to scale

450: variations. In order to derive robust bounds on the RS model at

451: the LHC using the dilepton production process, the inclusion

452: of the NLO QCD corrections in the cross-section is crucial.

453: 

454: \vspace{20pt}

455: \noindent

456: {\it Acknowledgments:} PM thanks S.~Moretti for useful discussion.  VR would 

457: like to thank Prof.~W.~L.~van Neerven for discussion.  The work of PM and KS 

458: is part of a project (IFCPAR Project No. 2904-2) on `Brane-World Phenomenology'

459: supported by the Indo-French Centre for the Promotion of Advanced Research, 

460: New Delhi, India. PM would also like to thank IPPP, Durham for warm hospitality

461: where part of this work was done.  PM and VR thank S.~Raychaudhuri for 

462: providing the code that evaluates the RS KK mode sum in the propagator.   

463: 

464: %\end{document}

465: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------

466: \eject

467: \centerline{\large \bf Figure Caption} 

468: \vspace{.5cm}

469: 

470: \noindent

471: Figure 1. (a) The cross section is plotted as a function of invariant mass 

472: $Q$ of the lepton pair for $M_1=1.5$ TeV at LHC.  (b) The corresponding 

473: $K$-factor for $Q$ distribution SM, gravity and SM plus gravity. (c) Scale 

474: variation of the cross section at LO and NLO as defined in Eq.~(\ref{eq19}) 

475: for $Q=1.5$ TeV. \\[1ex]

476: 

477: \noindent

478: Figure 2. (a) The double differential cross section $d^2 \sigma/dQ dY$ is 

479: plotted as a function of rapidity $Y$ for $Q=1.5$ TeV at LHC. 

480: (b) The K-factor for the distribution in (a) is plotted for the rapidity 

481: range.  (c) The scale variation of the ratio R is plotted as a function 

482: of $\mu/\mu_0$ for $Y=0$. \\[1ex]

483: 

484: \noindent

485: Figure 3. (a) The cross section is plotted as a function of invariant mass

486: $Q$ of the lepton pair for $M_1=300$ GeV and $c_0=0.01$ at the Tevatron. (b)

487: The $K$-factor for $Q$ distribution for the same RS parameters in (a) is

488: plotted. (c) The variation of the cross section with respect to the scale. 

489: \\[1ex]

490: 

491: \noindent

492: Figure 4. (a) The double differential cross section $d^2 \sigma/dQ dY$ is

493: plotted as a function of rapidity $Y$ for $Q=300$ GeV at the Tevatron for

494: the RS parameters $M_1=300$ GeV and $c_0=0.01$.  (b) The $K$-factor for the 

495: distribution in (a) is plotted for the rapidity range.  (c) The scale 

496: variation of the ratio R is plotted as a function of $\mu/\mu_0$ for the

497: central rapidity region $Y=0$.

498: 

499: \eject

500: \input{rs_fig}

501: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------

502: \begin{thebibliography}{999} 

503:  

504: \bibitem{string}

505: P.~Horava and E.~Witten, {\it Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B460} (1996) 506;

506: J.D.~Lykken {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D54} (1996) 3697;

507: E.~Witten, {\it Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B471} (1996) 135.

508: 

509: \bibitem{dimo} 

510: N.~Arkani-Hamed, S.~Dimopoulos and G.~Dvali, 

511: {\it Phys. Lett.} {\bf B249} (1998) 263;

512: I.~Antoniadis, N.~Arkani-Hamed, S.~Dimopoulos and G.~Dvali, 

513: {\it Phys. Lett.}  {\bf B436} (1998) 257. 

514: 

515: \bibitem{revadd} For a review of the ADD model, see 

516: I. Antoniadis and K. Benakli, {\it Int. J. Mod. Phys} {\bf A15} 

517: (2000) 4237; A. Perez-Lorenzana, Univ. of Maryland Preprint No.

518: UMD-PP-00-088 (2000) hep-ph/0008333.

519: K. Sridhar, {\it Int. J. Mod. Phys} {\bf A15} (2000) 2397.

520: 

521: \bibitem{rs} L. Randall and R. Sundrum, {\it Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 83}

522: (1999) 3370.

523: 

524: \bibitem{gold} W.D. Goldberger and M.B. Wise, Phys. Rev.  Lett. 

525: 83 (1999) 4922; {\it Phys.Lett.} {\bf B475} (2000) 275.

526: 

527: \bibitem{csaki} C. Csaki, M. Graesser, L. Randall and J. Terning,

528: {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D 62} (1999) 045015, C. Csaki, M. Graesser and

529: G.D. Kribs, {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D 63} (2001) 065002.

530: 

531: \bibitem{grw} 

532: G.~F.~ Giudice, R.~Rattazzi and J.~D.~Wells, 

533: {\it Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B544} (1999) 3. 

534: 

535: \bibitem{hlz} 

536: T.~Han, J.~D.~Lykken and R-J.~Zhang, {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D59} (1999) 105006.

537: 

538: \bibitem{dhr} H. Davoudiasl, J.L. Hewett and T.G. Rizzo, 

539: {\it Phys. Rev. Lett} {\bf 84} (2000) 2080; {\it ibid.} {\it Phys. Rev.} 

540: {\bf D63} (2001) 075004.

541: 

542: \bibitem{sridhar} K. Sridhar, {\it JHEP} {\bf 0105} (2001) 066.

543: 

544: \bibitem{lmrs} S. Lola, Prakash Mathews, Sreerup Raychaudhuri and K.~Sridhar, 

545: CERN Preprint No. CERN-TH-2000-275 (2000) hep-ph/0010010. 

546: 

547: \bibitem{namit} N. Mahajan, {\it J.Phys.G} {\bf 29} (2003) 2677.

548: \bibitem{jp} Pankaj Jain and Sukanta Panda {\it JHEP} {\bf 0403} 

549: (2004) 011.

550: 

551: \bibitem{cms} C. Collard and M.-C. Lemaire, CMS NOTE 2004/024.

552: 

553: \bibitem{d0} V. M. Abazov {\it et.~al.}, D\O ~Collaboration, hep-ex/0505018.

554: 

555: \bibitem{us}  

556: Prakash Mathews, V. Ravindran and K. Sridhar, {\it JHEP} {\bf 0408} (2004) 048. 

557: 

558: \bibitem{us1}  Prakash Mathews, V. Ravindran, K. Sridhar and W.L. van Neerven 

559: {\it Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B713} (2005) 333.  

560: 

561: \end{thebibliography} 

562: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------

563: \end{document} 

564: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------

565: 

566: 

567: