1: \documentstyle[12pt,epsfig,amssymb]{article}
2: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.1}
3: \parskip 2mm plus 2mm minus 2mm
4: \newlength{\dinwidth}
5: \newlength{\dinmargin}
6: \setlength{\dinwidth}{21.0cm} \textheight23.0cm \textwidth17.0cm
7: \setlength{\dinmargin}{\dinwidth}
8: \addtolength{\dinmargin}{-\textwidth}
9: \setlength{\dinmargin}{0.5\dinmargin} \oddsidemargin -1.0in
10: \addtolength{\oddsidemargin}{\dinmargin}
11: \setlength{\evensidemargin}{\oddsidemargin}
12: \setlength{\marginparwidth}{0.9\dinmargin} \marginparsep 8pt
13: \marginparpush 5pt \topmargin -42pt \headheight 12pt \headsep 30pt
14: %\footheight 12pt
15: \footskip 44pt
16:
17: \begin{document}
18:
19: \begin{center}
20:
21: {\Large \bf Parton distribution functions from the precise NNLO QCD fit}
22:
23: \vspace{1cm}
24: \textsc{S.~I.~Alekhin}
25:
26: \vspace{0.1in}
27: {\baselineskip=14pt Institute for High Energy Physics, 142284 Protvino, Russia}
28:
29: \begin{abstract}
30: We report the parton distribution functions (PDFs)
31: determined from the NNLO QCD analysis
32: of the world inclusive DIS data with account of the
33: precise NNLO QCD corrections to the evolution equations kernel.
34: The value of strong coupling constant
35: $\alpha^{\rm NNLO}_{\rm s}(M_{\rm Z})=0.1141\pm 0.0014({\rm exp.})$,
36: in fair agreement with one obtained using the earlier
37: approximate NNLO kernel by van Neerven-Vogt.
38: The intermediate bosons rates calculated in the NNLO using obtained PDFs
39: are in agreement to the latest Run II results.
40:
41: \end{abstract}
42: \end{center}
43: %{\bf PACS numbers:} 13.60.Hb,06.20.Jr,12.38.Bx\\
44: %{\bf Keywords:} high order QCD corrections, deep inelastic scattering
45: \vspace*{0.5cm}
46:
47: Account of the higher-order QCD corrections for
48: most of high-energy processes is important
49: due to the value of strong coupling constant $\alpha_{\rm s}$
50: is not small for a realistic kinematics.
51: This is also true for the deep-inelastic lepton-nucleon
52: scattering (DIS) process, which provides valuable information about
53: structure of nucleon. However,
54: since the next-to-next-to-leading order (NNLO) corrections were completely
55: calculated only lately, mostly often the analysis of the DIS data
56: was performed in the next-to-leading (NLO) approximation or, as the best,
57: with the approximate NNLO evolution kernels derived in
58: Ref.~\cite{vanNeerven:2000wp}
59: on the basis of calculations~\cite{Retey:2000nq,Catani:1994sq}.
60: With the recently calculated exact expressions for the
61: NNLO evolution kernels~\cite{Moch:2004pa}
62: one can improve available extractions of the NNLO PDFs
63: based on the approximate
64: evolution kernels getting rid of the error due to kernel uncertainty.
65: Even so consistent extraction of the NNLO PDFs from the global fits including
66: the jet production data~\cite{Martin:2004ir} is still unfeasible since
67: the NNLO coefficient functions for the jet production process are not
68: completely calculated. In this letter we describe the NNLO PDFs
69: obtained from the updated analysis
70: of the world data on inclusive DIS process~\cite{Alekhin:2002fv},
71: where the NNLO coefficient functions are known and full account of the
72: NNLO corrections is possible.
73:
74: We use for the analysis the charged-leptons proton/deuteron data on the DIS
75: cross sections collected in the SLAC-CERN-HERA
76: experiments~\cite{Whitlow:1992uw} with the cuts $Q^2>2.5~{\rm GeV}^2$,
77: $W>1.8~{\rm GeV}$, and $x<0.75$
78: imposed in order to reject the kinematical regions
79: problematic for the perturbative QCD (pQCD) and
80: where the nuclear corrections are particularly big.
81: The HERA data with $Q^2>300~{\rm GeV}^2$ were also cut off since they have
82: marginal impact on the precision of PDFs obtained, but complicate the analysis
83: due to account of the $Z$-boson contribution is required for this kinematics.
84: The pQCD evolution input for the $u$-, $d$-, $s$-quarks and gluons
85: at $Q^2_0=9~{\rm GeV}^2$ is
86: \begin{equation}
87: xu_{\rm V}(x,Q_0)=\frac{2}{N^{\rm V}_{\rm u}}
88: x^{a_{\rm u}}(1-x)^{b_{\rm u}}(1+\gamma_2^{\rm u}x),
89: \end{equation}
90: \begin{equation}
91: xu_{\rm S}(x,Q_0)=\frac{A_{\rm S}}{N_{\rm S}}
92: \eta_{\rm u} x^{a_{\rm s}}(1-x)^{b_{\rm su}},
93: \end{equation}
94: \begin{equation}
95: xd_{\rm V}(x,Q_0)=\frac{1}{N^{\rm V}_{\rm d}}x^{a_{\rm d}}(1-x)^{b_{\rm d}},
96: \end{equation}
97: \begin{equation}
98: xd_{\rm S}(x,Q_0)=\frac{A_{\rm S}}{N^{\rm S}}x^{a_{\rm s}}(1-x)^{b_{\rm sd}},
99: \end{equation}
100: \begin{equation}
101: xs_{\rm S}(x,Q_0)=\frac{A_{\rm S}}{N^{\rm S}}\eta_{\rm s}
102: x^{a_{\rm s}}(1-x)^{(b_{\rm su}+b_{\rm sd})/2},
103: \end{equation}
104: \begin{equation}
105: xG(x,Q_0)=A_{\rm G}x^{a_{\rm G}}(1-x)^{b_{\rm G}}
106: (1+\gamma^{\rm G}_1\sqrt{x}+\gamma^{\rm G}_2 x),
107: \end{equation}
108: where indices $V$ and $S$ correspond to the valence and sea distributions
109: correspondingly.
110: The normalization factors $N^{\rm V}_{\rm u,d}$ and $A_{\rm G}$
111: are calculated from other parameters using the fermion number and momentum
112: conservation. The value of parameter $N_{\rm S}$ is defined from
113: the condition that $A_{\rm S}$ gives total momentum carried by the sea quarks.
114: The value of $\eta_{\rm s}$ is fixed at 0.42. For the PDFs parameters
115: obtained in our fit this choice provides
116: the value of strange sea suppression factor equal to 0.41 at
117: $Q^2_0=20~{\rm GeV}^2$, in agreement to the CCFR/NuTeV analysis of
118: Ref.~\cite{Goncharov:2001qe}.
119: The $b$- and $c$-quarks contributions are accounted in
120: the massive scheme with the $O(\alpha_{\rm s}^2)$ correction
121: of Ref.~\cite{Laenen:1992xs} included.
122: For the lowest $Q/W$ data used in the fit
123: the power corrections are important and therefore we
124: take into account the target-mass correction by
125: Georgi-Politzer \cite{Georgi:1976ve}
126: and the dynamical twist-4 terms in the structure functions $F_{\rm 2,T}$
127: parameterized in a model-independent way
128: as the piece-linear functions of $x$.
129:
130: Parameters of the PDFs obtained in the NNLO fit with their errors due
131: to statistical and
132: systematical uncertainties in the data are given in Table~\ref{tab:pdfpars}.
133: These PDFs are comparable to ones of Ref.~\cite{Alekhin:2002fv} extracted using
134: the approximate NNLO kernel within the errors due to
135: the NNLO kernel uncertainty estimated in Ref.~\cite{vanNeerven:2000wp}.
136: However, at small $x$ and $Q$, where the NNLO corrections
137: are enhanced, impact of the new calculations is non-negligible.
138: With the exact NNLO corrections the QCD evolution of the gluon
139: distribution at small $x$ gets weaker and as a result
140: at small $x/Q$ the gluon distribution obtained using
141: the precise NNLO kernel is quite different
142: from the approximate one. In particular, while the
143: approximate NNLO gluon distribution is negative at
144: $Q^2\lesssim1.3~{\rm GeV}^2$, the
145: precise one remains positive even below $Q^2=1~{\rm GeV}^2$
146: (see Fig.\ref{fig:gluon}). For the NLO case the positivity of gluons
147: at small $x/Q$ is even worse than for the
148: approximate NNLO case due to the approximate
149: NNLO corrections dampen the gluon evolution at small $x$ too, therefore
150: the account of the NNLO corrections is crucial in this respect.
151: (cf. discussion of Ref.~\cite{Huston:2005jm}).
152: Positivity of the PDFs is not mandatory beyond the leading order,
153: however it
154: allows probabilistic interpretation of the parton model and facilitates
155: modeling of the soft processes, such as underlying events in the
156: hadron-hadron collisions at high energies.
157: The change of gluon distribution at small $x/Q$
158: as compared to the fit with approximate NNLO evolution
159: is rather due the change in evolution kernel than due to
160: shift in the fitted parameters of PDFs.
161: This is clear from comparison of the exact NNLO gluon distribution
162: to one obtained from the approximate NNLO fit and evolved to low $Q$
163: using the exact NNLO kernel (see Fig.\ref{fig:gluon}).
164: In the vicinity of crossover of the gluon distribution
165: to the negative values
166: its relative change due to variation of the evolution kernel
167: is quite big and therefore further fixation of the kernel at small $x$
168: discussed in Ref.~\cite{Altarelli:2003hk}
169: can be substantial for the low-$Q$ limit of PDFs.
170:
171: For the higher-mass kinematics at LHC
172: numerical impact of the NNLO kernel update is not dramatic.
173: The change in the Higgs and $W/Z$ bosons
174: production cross sections due to more precise definition of the NNLO
175: PDFs is comparable to the errors coming from the PDFs uncertainties.
176: The NNLO predictions for the
177: longitudinal deep-inelastic-scattering structure function
178: $F_{\rm L}$ at $x\sim10^{-5}$ measured by the H1
179: collaboration~\cite{Lobodzinska:2003yd}
180: also does not change too much since
181: they are given by the Mellin convolution of PDFs
182: with the coefficient functions and are defined by
183: the gluon distribution at relatively big values of $x$.
184: The obtained value of the strong coupling constant
185: $$
186: \alpha^{\rm NNLO}_{\rm s}(M_{\rm Z})=0.1141\pm 0.0014~({\rm stat+syst}),
187: $$
188: is in fair agreement to
189: $\alpha^{\rm NNLO}_{\rm s}(M_{\rm Z})=0.1143\pm 0.0014~({\rm stat+syst})$
190: obtained in the fit of Ref.~\cite{Alekhin:2002fv}
191: with the approximate
192: NNLO kernel and to the results of the exact NNLO analysis of the non-singlet
193: DIS data~\cite{Blumlein:2004ip}.
194:
195: \begin{table}
196: \caption{The PDFs parameters and $\chi^2/{\rm NDP}$ obtained in the fit.
197: The errors in parameters are obtained by propagation of the
198: statistical and systematical errors in data.}
199: \begin{center}
200: \begin{tabular}{lcc}
201: Valence quarks:&& \\ \hline
202: &$a_{\rm u}$&$0.724\pm0.027$\\
203: &$b_{\rm u}$&$4.0194\pm0.050$\\
204: &$\gamma_2^{\rm u}$&$1.04\pm0.35$\\
205: &$a_{\rm d}$&$0.775\pm0.073$\\
206: &$b_{\rm d}$&$5.15\pm0.15$\\
207: Gluon:&& \\ \hline
208: &$a_G$&$-0.118\pm0.021$\\
209: &$b_{\rm G}$&$9.6\pm1.2$\\
210: &$\gamma_1^{\rm G}$&$-3.83\pm0.51$\\
211: &$\gamma_2^{\rm G}$&$8.4\pm1.7$\\
212: Sea quarks:&& \\ \hline
213: &$A_{\rm S}$&$0.1586\pm0.0089$\\
214: &$a_{\rm s}$&$-0.2094\pm0.0044$\\
215: &$b_{\rm sd}$&$5.6\pm1.2$\\
216: &$\eta_{\rm u}$&$1.12\pm0.11$\\
217: &$b_{\rm su}$&$10.39\pm0.88$\\ \hline
218: $\chi^2/{\rm NDP}$&& 2534/2274 \\ \hline
219: \end{tabular}
220: \end{center}
221: \normalsize
222: \label{tab:pdfpars}
223: \end{table}
224:
225: The errors in PDFs parameters given in Table~\ref{tab:pdfpars}
226: are calculated as a propagation of the experimental errors
227: for the data points used in the fit. We calculate these errors using
228: the covariance matrix method~\cite{Alekhin:2000es} taking into account
229: statistical and systematic errors in data and correlations of the latter
230: as well. We also take into account the theoretical errors due to possible
231: variations of the
232: strange suppression factor $\eta_{\rm s}$ and the $c$-quark mass $m_{\rm c}$.
233: For this purpose we re-calculate the error matrix
234: for the PDFs parameters with $\eta_{\rm s}$ and $m_{\rm c}$ released.
235: Since the parameters $\eta_{\rm s}$ and $m_{\rm c}$ are not constraint by the
236: charged-leptons inclusive DIS data we confine their variation
237: adding to the data sample two ``measurements'': $\eta_{\rm s}=0.42\pm0.1$ and
238: $m_{\rm c}=1.5\pm0.25~{\rm GeV}$ with the errors in these measurements
239: representing our current understanding of the
240: uncertainties in these parameters.
241: In this approach the theoretical errors are included into the
242: total error in PDFs and their correlations with other sources of the PDFs
243: uncertainties are automatically taken into account.
244: The NNLO PDFs grid for the range of $Q^2=0.8\div2\cdot 10^8~{\rm GeV}^2$ and
245: $x=10^{-7}\div 1$ with the total uncertainties in PDFs supplied is available
246: directly\footnote{http://sirius.ihep.su/$\tilde{~}$alekhin/pdfa02/}
247: and through the LHAPDF library\footnote{http://durpdg.dur.ac.uk/lhapdf/}.
248: The LO and NLO PDFs grids are also supplied to provide a tool for
249: checking sensitivity of different calculation to the QCD order of PDFs.
250:
251: The NNLO inclusive rates for the
252: intermediate boson production at the FNAL
253: $\overline{p}p$ collider and the LHC
254: calculated using this grid and the code of Ref.~\cite{Hamberg:1990np}
255: with corrections of Ref.~\cite{Harlander:2002wh}
256: are given in Table~\ref{tab:wz}.
257: The masses and widths of the $W/Z$ bosons
258: were set as $M_W=80.425~{\rm GeV}$, $M_Z=91.188~{\rm GeV}$,
259: $\Gamma_W=2.124~{\rm GeV}$, $\Gamma_Z=2.495~{\rm GeV}$,
260: squared sine of the Weinberg angle $x_W(M_{\rm Z})=0.2312$,
261: squared cosine of the Cabibbo angle $c_C=0.9498$~\cite{Eidelman:2004wy}.
262: The errors quoted in Table~\ref{tab:wz}
263: are due to the total uncertainty in PDFs including the theoretical errors
264: considered. The calculations are in agreement to the latest Run II results
265: of Ref.~\cite{Bellavance:2005rg}
266: within the errors (see Fig.~\ref{fig:wz}). The errors in the data of Run II
267: are bigger than one in the calculations therefore the latter
268: can be used for better
269: calibration of the luminosity, which gives main contribution to the
270: measurements error.
271:
272: \begin{table}
273: \caption{The NNLO inclusive rates (in nb)
274: for the intermediate bosons production in the hadron-hadron collisions.
275: The errors are due to the total PDFs uncertainties.}
276: \begin{center}
277: \begin{tabular}{lcc}
278: & $W^{\pm}$ & $Z$ \\ \hline
279: $\overline{p}p~(1.96~{\rm TeV})$ & $26.11\pm0.44$ & $7.78\pm0.11$ \\
280: $pp~(14~{\rm TeV})$ & $197.0\pm5.3$ & $57.7\pm1.5$ \\ \hline
281: \end{tabular}
282: \end{center}
283: \normalsize
284: \label{tab:wz}
285: \end{table}
286:
287: In summary, we provide update of the analysis of the world DIS
288: inclusive data on the proton/deuteron targets with full account of the
289: NNLO QCD corrections including the recent calculations of the
290: exact NNLO evolution
291: kernel. The value of $\alpha_{\rm s}$ is in fair agreement to the earlier
292: version of the fit based on the approximate NNLO kernels.
293: With the exact NNLO corrections applied
294: we observe improvement in the positivity
295: of the gluon distributions extrapolated to small $x$ and $Q$: Now we have
296: gluons positive up to $Q=1~{\rm GeV}$, i.e. throughout kinematical region
297: where the parton model is applicable.
298: The NNLO $W/Z$-bosons rates calculated using the PDFs obtained
299: are in agreement with the recent Run II results
300: and can be used for better calibration of the Fermilab experiments
301: in view of the uncertainty
302: in the calculations due to PDFs are smaller than the experimental ones.
303: Since these PDFs are extracted from the data for one single process
304: they can be used for the quantitative studies of the PDFs universality
305: that is advantage as compared to ones determined from the global fits.
306:
307: {\bf Acknowledgments}
308:
309: I am indebted to S.Forte, S.Moch, R.Petti, and A.Vogt
310: for stimulating discussions and S. Kulagin for development of the Mathematica
311: package for access to the PDFs grid.
312: The work was supported by the RFBR grant 03-02-17177 and
313: by the Russian Ministry of Science grant NSh 1695.2003.2.
314:
315: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
316:
317: \bibitem{vanNeerven:2000wp}
318: W.~L.~van Neerven and A.~Vogt,
319: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 490}, 111 (2000)
320: [arXiv:hep-ph/0007362].
321: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0007362;%%
322:
323: \bibitem{Retey:2000nq}
324: A.~Retey and J.~A.~Vermaseren,
325: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 604}, 281 (2001)
326: [arXiv:hep-ph/0007294];
327: S.~A.~Larin, P.~Nogueira, T.~van Ritbergen and J.~A.~M.~Vermaseren,
328: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 492} (1997) 338
329: [arXiv:hep-ph/9605317].
330:
331: \bibitem{Catani:1994sq}
332: S.~Catani and F.~Hautmann,
333: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 427} (1994) 475
334: [arXiv:hep-ph/9405388].
335: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9405388;%%
336:
337: \bibitem{Moch:2004pa}
338: S.~Moch, J.~A.~M.~Vermaseren and A.~Vogt,
339: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 688} (2004) 101
340: [arXiv:hep-ph/0403192];
341: A.~Vogt, S.~Moch and J.~A.~M.~Vermaseren,
342: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 691} (2004) 129
343: [arXiv:hep-ph/0404111].
344:
345: \bibitem{Martin:2004ir}
346: A.~D.~Martin, R.~G.~Roberts, W.~J.~Stirling and R.~S.~Thorne,
347: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 604} (2004) 61
348: [arXiv:hep-ph/0410230].
349: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0410230;%%
350:
351: \bibitem{Alekhin:2002fv}
352: S.~Alekhin,
353: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 68} (2003) 014002
354: [arXiv:hep-ph/0211096].
355: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0211096;%%
356:
357: \bibitem{Whitlow:1992uw}
358: L.~W.~Whitlow, E.~M.~Riordan, S.~Dasu, S.~Rock and A.~Bodek,
359: Phys.\ Lett.\ {\bf B282}, 475 (1992);
360: A.~C.~Benvenuti {\it et al.} [BCDMS Collaboration],
361: Phys.\ Lett.\ {\bf B223} (1989) 485;
362: A.~C.~Benvenuti {\it et al.} [BCDMS Collaboration],
363: Phys.\ Lett.\ {\bf B237} (1990) 592;
364: M.~Arneodo {\it et al.} [New Muon Collaboration],
365: Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B483} (1997) 3
366: [hep-ph/9610231];
367: C.~Adloff {\it et al.} [H1 Collaboration],
368: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 21}, 33 (2001)
369: [arXiv:hep-ex/0012053];
370: S.~Chekanov {\it et al.} [ZEUS Collaboration],
371: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 21}, 443 (2001)
372: [arXiv:hep-ex/0105090].
373:
374: \bibitem{Goncharov:2001qe}
375: M.~Goncharov {\it et al.} [NuTeV Collaboration],
376: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 64} (2001) 112006
377: [arXiv:hep-ex/0102049].
378: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0102049;%%
379:
380: \bibitem{Laenen:1992xs}
381: E.~Laenen, S.~Riemersma, J.~Smith and W.~L.~van Neerven,
382: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 392} (1993) 229.
383:
384: \bibitem{Georgi:1976ve}
385: H.~Georgi and H.~D.~Politzer,
386: Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf D14}, 1829 (1976).
387:
388: \bibitem{Huston:2005jm}
389: J.~Huston, J.~Pumplin, D.~Stump and W.~K.~Tung,
390: arXiv:hep-ph/0502080.
391: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0502080;%%
392:
393: \bibitem{Altarelli:2003hk}
394: G.~Altarelli, R.~D.~Ball and S.~Forte,
395: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 674} (2003) 459
396: [arXiv:hep-ph/0306156].
397: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0306156;%%
398:
399: \bibitem{Lobodzinska:2003yd}
400: E.~M.~Lobodzinska,
401: arXiv:hep-ph/0311180.
402: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0311180;%%
403:
404: \bibitem{Blumlein:2004ip}
405: J.~Blumlein, H.~Bottcher and A.~Guffanti,
406: Nucl.\ Phys.\ Proc.\ Suppl.\ {\bf 135} (2004) 152
407: [arXiv:hep-ph/0407089].
408: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0407089;%%
409:
410: \bibitem{Alekhin:2000es}
411: S.~I.~Alekhin,
412: arXiv:hep-ex/0005042.
413: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0005042;%%
414:
415: \bibitem{Hamberg:1990np}
416: R.~Hamberg, W.~L.~van Neerven and T.~Matsuura,
417: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 359} (1991) 343
418: [Erratum-ibid.\ B {\bf 644} (2002) 403].
419: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B359,343;%%
420:
421: \bibitem{Harlander:2002wh}
422: R.~V.~Harlander and W.~B.~Kilgore,
423: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 88} (2002) 201801
424: [arXiv:hep-ph/0201206].
425: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0201206;%%
426:
427: \bibitem{Eidelman:2004wy}
428: S.~Eidelman {\it et al.} [Particle Data Group],
429: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 592} (2004) 1.
430: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B592,1;%%
431:
432: \bibitem{Bellavance:2005rg}
433: A.~M.~Bellavance [D0 - Run II Collaboration],
434: arXiv:hep-ex/0506025.
435: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0506025;%%
436:
437: \end{thebibliography}
438:
439: \begin{figure}
440: \centerline{\epsfig{file=g.ps,width=18cm,height=18cm}}
441: \caption{The gluon distributions obtained in the different variants of the
442: analysis (solid: the fit with the exact NNLO evolution; dashes:
443: the fit with approximate NNLO evolution; dots: the approximate NNLO
444: gluons evolved with the exact NNLO kernel; dashed-dots: the NLO fit).}
445: \label{fig:gluon}
446: \end{figure}
447:
448: \begin{figure}
449: \centerline{\epsfig{file=fnal.ps,width=18cm,height=18cm}}
450: \caption{The NNLO calculation of the $W/Z$ rates for Run II at Fermilab
451: compared to the data. The dotted lines give the uncertainty in
452: calulations due to errors in PDFs; the error bars of the data points give
453: the total error including one due to the luminosity uncertainty.
454: The branching ratios of the $W/Z$ leptonic decays
455: $BR(W \rightarrow l\nu)=0.107$ and $BR(Z \rightarrow ll)=0.034$
456: were applied.}
457: \label{fig:wz}
458: \end{figure}
459:
460: \end{document}
461:
462: