hep-ph0510217/ud.tex
1: \documentclass[preprint,aps,showpacs,prd,nofootinbib]{revtex4}
2: %\documentclass[aps,showpacs,prd,tightenlines,twocolumn,10pt,nofootinbib]{revtex4}
3: %\documentclass[aps,showpacs,prd,tightenlines,nofootinbib,10pt]{revtex4}
4: 
5: \usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}
6: \usepackage{bbm}
7: 
8: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{eqnarray}} % only untightened
9: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{eqnarray}}
10: \newcommand{\nn}{~\nonumber \\}
11: \newcommand{\bmp}{\noindent\begin{minipage}{16cm}}
12: \newcommand{\emp}{\end{minipage}\vskip 7mm} % 7mm untightened
13: 
14: %\newcommand{\titel}[1]{#1}
15: \newcommand{\titel}[1]{}
16: 
17: \usepackage{graphicx}
18: \usepackage{subfigure}
19: 
20: 
21: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
22: 
23: \begin{document}
24: 
25: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
26: 
27: \title{
28: Light composite Higgs and precision electroweak measurements on the
29: Z resonance: An update
30: }
31: 
32: \author{Dennis D. {\sc Dietrich}}
33: \author{Francesco {\sc Sannino}}
34: \affiliation{The Niels Bohr Institute, Copenhagen, Denmark}
35: \author{Kimmo {\sc Tuominen}}
36: \affiliation{Department of Physics, University of Jyv\"askyl\"a, Finland}
37: \affiliation{Helsinki Institute of Physics, University of Helsinki, Finland}
38: 
39: \date{October 17, 2005}
40: 
41: 
42: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
43: 
44: \begin{abstract}
45: 
46: We update our analysis of technicolour theories with techniquarks in higher
47: dimensional representations of the technicolour gauge group in the light of
48: the new electroweak precision data on the Z resonance.
49: 
50: \pacs{12.60.Fr, 12.60.Nz, 12.60.Rc}
51: 
52: \end{abstract}
53: 
54: 
55: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
56: 
57: \maketitle
58: 
59: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
60: 
61: \section{Introduction}
62: 
63: In \cite{Dietrich:2005jn}, we analysed technicolour theories
64: \cite{TC,TCrev} for the breaking of the electroweak symmetry with the
65: techniquarks in higher representations of the gauge group \cite{higher}. We
66: identified theories with two techniflavours in the two-index symmetric
67: representation of SU$_\mathrm{T}$(2) as being consistent with the electroweak
68: precision data available to that date \cite{Eidelman:2004wy}. At the same
69: time, this theory is quasi-conformal \cite{Sannino:2004qp,Hong:2004td} (walking
70: coupling). This feature is a necessity for being able to generate
71: sufficiently high masses for the ordinary fermions. It also helps avoiding inconsistently large
72: flavour-changing neutral currents and lepton number violation
73: due to extended technicolour interactions \cite{Cohen:1988sq,etc}. Remarkably, also
74: due to the walking, this special choice for the number of technicolours,
75: techniflavours, and the representation leads to a predicted mass of the
76: (non-elementary) Higgs of only 150GeV
77: \footnote{It is relevant to note that even for technicolour theories resembling
78: QCD the scalar sector is not simply described by just a heavy composite
79: Higgs. One might also observe for these type of technicolour theories at
80: CERN-LHC a scalar substantially lighter than one TeV. This composite scalar
81: is the direct analog of the QCD scalar $f_0(600)$ \cite{sigma} and it
82: is expected to be a four quark object.}.
83: For this particular set-up, in order
84: to avoid the Witten anomaly \cite{Witten:fp}, an additional family of leptons
85: has to be included, which, amongst other things, provides possible
86: non-hadronic components of
87: dark matter. For the masses of these leptons we were able to make
88: accurate predictions based on the electroweak precision data
89: at hand. Since
90: then new data has become available \cite{unknown:2005em}. It, at the 68$\%$
91: level of confidence, leads to a considerably larger parameter space for the
92: lepton masses than was expected previously at the 90$\%$ level of confidence.
93: 
94: Widely independently of this, in \cite{Dietrich:2005jn} we had
95: given an overview of the expected spectrum of technicolour-neutral particles.
96: However, there, we did not mention that any number of techniquarks in the
97: two-index symmetric representation of SU$_\mathrm{T}$(2) can be made
98: technicolour neutral by adding technigluons. This is so since for 
99: SU$_\mathrm{T}$(2) the two-index symmetric representation 
100: coincides with the adjoint
101: representation. The potentially lowest-lying technihadrons of this kind are
102: bound states made out of one techniquark and technigluons. 
103: From the viewpoint of the standard model such bound states possess only
104: weak interactions and mimic an additional lepton family. However, they also  
105: interact directly via the technicolour sector.
106: 
107: 
108: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
109: 
110: \section{Analysis for the new data}
111: 
112: After having fixed the number of particles, the gauge group, and the
113: representation, it still remains to define the hypercharge assignment 
114: which is constrained but not fixed entirely
115: by imposing the absence of gauge anomalies. 
116: We have studied the following cases
117: \cite{Dietrich:2005jn,Sannino:2005dy}: (I) a standard-model like case, in which the leptons
118: are neutral and singly negatively charged, respectively; (II) a case, in
119: which the leptons carry half elementary charges with opposite signs; (III) a
120: singly and a doubly negatively charged lepton. Apart from various hadronic
121: objects in all cases, in (I) the fourth neutrino is a natural dark matter
122: candidate.
123: 
124: The black shaded areas in Figs.~\ref{smleptons} and \ref{frleptons} show
125: the accessible range of values of the oblique parameters $S$ and $T$
126: \cite{Peskin:1990zt} \footnote{These parameters measure the contribution of
127: the non-standard-model particles to the vacuum polarisation of the gauge
128: bosons. Roughly speaking, $S$ is connected to the mixing of the photon with
129: the Z-boson and $T$ to contributions to the violation of the isospin
130: symmetry.} for degenerate techniquarks and if the masses of the leptons are
131: varied independently in the range from one to ten Z-boson masses. The value
132: of the third oblique parameter $U$ is close to zero for our model,
133: consistent with presented data. The larger
134: staggered ellipses in all of these plots are the 90$\%$ confidence level
135: contours from the global fit to the data presented in \cite{Eidelman:2004wy}.
136: The smaller single ellipse represents the 68$\%$ confidence level contour
137: from the new global fit in \cite{unknown:2005em}.
138: 
139: Even though it can be considered as a conservative estimate, already the
140: perturbative assessment of the oblique parameters in our theories shows a
141: considerable overlap with the data
142: (see Figs.~\ref{smleptons}a and \ref{frleptons}a). In nearly conformal
143: theories like ours the contribution of the techniquarks is further reduced by
144: non-perturbative effects \cite{nonpert1,nonpert2}. This reduction is of the
145: order of 20$\%$ \cite{nonpert2}. In the case of the integerly charged
146: leptons (III) the nonperturbative contributions do not change the
147: characterstics of the results (see Fig.~\ref{frleptons}). The same holds
148: for the fractionally charged leptons (II). No dedicated plot has been
149: devoted to that case, because it corresponds to a vertical line exactly in
150: the opening of the area shaded in black in the other plots. Put differently, 
151: the black area is contracted to zero width in the direction of $S$. The
152: situation is slightly different for the standard-model-like charges, where
153: an additional overlap with the right branch of the black area is
154: achieved. This corresponds to a second branch in the relative plot shown in
155: Fig.~\ref{masses}. For our model, the expected mass of the composite Higgs is
156: 150GeV \cite{Dietrich:2005jn}. Let it be noted that, even if it was as heavy
157: as 1TeV there would still be an overlap between the measurements and the
158: values attainable in our model.
159: 
160: Translating the overlap depicted in the perturbative versions of
161: Figs.~\ref{smleptons} and \ref{frleptons} to values of the lepton masses
162: favoured at the 68$\%$ level of confidence leads to the plots in
163: Fig.~\ref{masses}. For technical reasons not the exact intersection of the
164: parabolic shape with the interior of the ellipse is presented but with the
165: interior of a polygon characterised by:
166: $-0.1<S+T<+0.5$,
167: $-0.15<S-T<+0.025$,
168: and
169: $S<0.22$. 
170: In all investigated cases there exists
171: a branch for which the more negatively charged lepton ($m_2$) is about one Z-boson
172: mass ($m_Z$) heavier than the more positively charged lepton ($m_1$). The mass gap
173: of approximately one $m_Z$ is mostly dictated by the limits in the
174: ($S-T$)-direction. The second branch with $m_1>m_2$ is usually forbidden by
175: the limits imposed on $S$. This does not affect the situation for the
176: fractionally charged leptons (II), which yield no variation in $S$ as a
177: function of their masses. Incorporating non-perturbative corrections leads
178: to a second branch for not too small masses in the standard-model-like
179: situation (I). This corresponds to the overlap of the ellipse with the right
180: half of the black area in Fig.~\ref{smleptons}b.
181: 
182: 
183: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
184: 
185: \section{Summary}
186: 
187: In light of the fact that new relevant electroweak precision data have
188: appeared very recently we have 
189: investigated  the consequences for the technicolour theory with two 
190: techniflavours in the
191: two-index symmetric representation of SU$_\mathrm{T}(2)$ and one additional
192: lepton generation presented in \cite{Dietrich:2005jn}.
193: We found that the range of masses of the leptons, consistent 
194: with the new data at the 68$\%$ level of confidence \cite{unknown:2005em}, is 
195: much larger than with the previous data at the 90$\%$ level of confidence 
196: \cite{Eidelman:2004wy}. 
197: The comparison of our theory with the new precision measurements further 
198: strengthens our claim that certain technicolour theories are directly 
199: compatible with precision measurements.
200: 
201: 
202: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
203: 
204: \section*{Acknowledgments}
205: 
206: We would like to thank S.~Bolognesi, S.~B.~Gudnason, C.~Kouvaris, and 
207: K.~Petrov for discussions.
208: The work of F.S. is supported by the Marie Curie Excellence Grant under
209: contract MEXT-CT-2004-013510 and by a Skou Fellowship of the Danish
210: Research Agency.
211: 
212: \newpage
213: 
214: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
215: 
216: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
217: 
218: %\cite{Dietrich:2005jn}
219: \bibitem{Dietrich:2005jn}
220:   D.~D.~Dietrich, F.~Sannino and K.~Tuominen,
221:   %``Light composite Higgs from higher representations versus electroweak
222:   %precision measurements: Predictions for LHC,''
223:   Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 72}, 055001 (2005)
224:   [arXiv:hep-ph/0505059].
225:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0505059;%%
226: 
227: 
228: \bibitem{TC}
229:   L.~Susskind,
230:   %ynamics Of Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking In The Weinberg-Salam Theory,''
231:   Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 20} (1979) 2619;
232:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D20,2619;%%
233:   S.~Weinberg,
234:   Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 19} (1979) 1277.
235:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D19,1277;%%
236: 
237: 
238: \bibitem{TCrev}
239:   for recent reviews see:
240:   C.~T.~Hill and E.~H.~Simmons,
241:   %trong dynamics and electroweak symmetry breaking,''
242:   Phys.\ Rept.\  {\bf 381} (2003) 235
243:   [Erratum-ibid.\  {\bf 390} (2004) 553]
244:   [arXiv:hep-ph/0203079];
245:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0203079;%%
246:   K.~Lane,
247:   %wo lectures on technicolor,''
248:   arXiv:hep-ph/0202255.
249:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0202255;%%
250: 
251: 
252: \bibitem{higher}
253: K.~D.~Lane and E.~Eichten,
254: %``Two Scale Technicolor,''
255: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 222}, 274 (1989);
256: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B222,274;%% %\cite{Eichten:1979ah}
257: E.~Eichten and K.~D.~Lane,
258: %``Dynamical Breaking Of Weak Interaction Symmetries,''
259: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 90}, 125 (1980);
260: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B90,125;%%
261: E.~Corrigan and P.~Ramond,
262: %``A Note On The Quark Content Of Large Color Groups,''
263: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 87}, 73 (1979).
264: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B87,73;%%
265: 
266: %\cite{Eidelman:2004wy}
267: \bibitem{Eidelman:2004wy}
268:   S.~Eidelman {\it et al.}  [Particle Data Group],
269:   %``Review of particle physics,''
270:   Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 592}, 1 (2004).
271:   %%CITATION = PHLTA,B592,1;%%
272: 
273: 
274: %\cite{Sannino:2004qp}
275: \bibitem{Sannino:2004qp}
276: F.~Sannino and K.~Tuominen,
277: %``Orientifold Theory Dynamics and Symmetry Breaking,'' 
278: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 71}, 051901 (2005).
279: arXiv:hep-ph/0405209.
280: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0405209;%%
281: 
282: 
283: \bibitem{Hong:2004td}
284:   D.~K.~Hong, S.~D.~H.~Hsu and F.~Sannino,
285:   %``Composite Higgs from higher representations,''
286:   Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 597}, 89 (2004)
287:   [arXiv:hep-ph/0406200].
288:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0406200;%%
289: 
290: 
291: \bibitem{Cohen:1988sq}
292:   A.~G.~Cohen and H.~Georgi,
293:   %``Walking Beyond The Rainbow,''
294:   Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 314}, 7 (1989).
295:   %%CITATION = NUPHA,B314,7;%%
296: 
297: 
298: \bibitem{etc}
299:   T.~Appelquist and R.~Shrock,
300:   %eutrino masses in theories with dynamical electroweak symmetry
301:   %breaking,''
302:   Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 548} (2002) 204;
303:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0204141;%%
304:   %ynamical symmetry breaking of extended gauge symmetries,''
305:   Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 90} (2003) 201801;
306:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0301108;%%
307:   N.~D.~Christensen and R.~Shrock,
308:   %`Technifermion representations and precision electroweak constraints,''
309:   arXiv:hep-ph/0509109.
310:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0509109;%%
311: 
312: 
313: \bibitem{sigma}
314:  F.~Sannino and J.~Schechter,
315:  %`Exploring pi pi scattering in the 1/N(c) picture,''
316:  Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 52}, 96 (1995)
317:  [arXiv:hep-ph/9501417];
318:  %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9501417;%%
319:  M.~Harada, F.~Sannino and J.~Schechter,
320:  %`Large N(c) and chiral dynamics,''
321:  Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 69}, 034005 (2004)
322:  [arXiv:hep-ph/0309206];
323:  %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0309206;%%
324:  D.~Black, A.~H.~Fariborz, F.~Sannino and J.~Schechter,
325:  %`Putative light scalar nonet,''
326:  Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 59}, 074026 (1999)
327:  [arXiv:hep-ph/9808415];
328:  %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9808415;%%
329:  D.~Black, A.~H.~Fariborz, F.~Sannino and J.~Schechter,
330:  %`Evidence for a scalar kappa(900) resonance in pi K scattering,''
331:  Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 58}, 054012 (1998)
332:  [arXiv:hep-ph/9804273].
333:  %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9804273;%%
334: 
335: 
336: \bibitem{Witten:fp}
337: E.~Witten,
338: %``An SU(2) Anomaly,''
339: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 117}, 324 (1982).
340: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B117,324;%%
341: 
342: 
343: %\cite{unknown:2005em}
344: \bibitem{unknown:2005em}
345:     [ALEPH Collaboration],
346:   %``Precision electroweak measurements on the Z resonance,''
347:   arXiv:hep-ex/0509008.
348:   %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0509008;%%
349: 
350: 
351: \bibitem{Sannino:2005dy}
352:   F.~Sannino,
353:   %`Light composite Higgs: LCH @ LHC,''
354:   arXiv:hep-ph/0506205.
355:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0506205;%%
356: 
357: 
358: \bibitem{Mahbubani:2005pt}
359:   R.~Mahbubani and L.~Senatore,
360:   %`The minimal model for dark matter and unification,''
361:   arXiv:hep-ph/0510064.
362:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0510064;%%
363: 
364: 
365: \bibitem{Peskin:1990zt}
366:   M.~E.~Peskin and T.~Takeuchi,
367:   % ``A New Constraint On A Strongly Interacting Higgs Sector,''
368:   Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 65}, 964 (1990).
369:   %%CITATION = PRLTA,65,964;%%
370: 
371: 
372: \bibitem{nonpert1}
373:   T.~Appelquist and F.~Sannino,
374:   Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 59} (1999) 067702;
375:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9806409;%%
376:   T.~Appelquist, P.~S.~Rodrigues da Silva, and F.~Sannino,
377:   Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 60} (1999) 116007;
378:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9906555;%%
379:   Z.~y.~Duan, P.~S.~Rodrigues da Silva, and F.~Sannino,
380:   Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 592} (2001) 371.
381:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0001303;%%
382: 
383: \bibitem{nonpert2}
384:   R.~Sundrum and S.~D.~H.~Hsu,
385:   Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 391} (1993) 127;
386:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9206225;%%
387:   M.~Harada, M.~Kurachi and K.~Yamawaki,
388:   %`Enhanced pi+ - pi0 mass difference and vanishing S in the large N(f)
389:   %QCD,''
390:   arXiv:hep-ph/0509193.
391:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0509193;%%
392: 
393: 
394: \end{thebibliography}
395: 
396: 
397: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
398: 
399: \section*{Figures}
400: 
401: \begin{figure*}[h]
402: \centering
403:  \subfigure[~Perturbative]{
404:   \includegraphics[width=7cm]{oblique_new.eps}
405:  }
406:  \qquad
407:  \subfigure[~Non-perturbative]{
408:   \includegraphics[width=7cm]{oblique_nonpert_new.eps}
409:  }
410: \caption{\underline{Standard-model-like charge assignment.} {\it Left Panel}:
411: The area shaded in black corresponds to the accessible range for $S$
412: and $T$ with the masses of the extra neutrino and extra electron taken from
413: $m_Z$ to $10 m_Z$. The perturbative estimate for the contribution to $S$ from
414: techniquarks equals $1/2\pi$. The three staggered ellipses are the $90$\%
415: confidence level contours for the former global fit to the electroweak
416: precision data \cite{Eidelman:2004wy} with $U$ kept at $0$. The values of $U$
417: in our model lie typically between $0$ and $0.05$ whence they are consistent
418: with these contours. These contours from bottom to top are for Higgs masses of
419: $m_H = 117$, $340$, $1000$ GeV, respectively. The smaller ellipse to the
420: upper right is the 68\% confidence level contour for the new global fit to
421: electroweak precision data \cite{unknown:2005em} with $U=0$ and for a Higgs
422: $m_H=150$ GeV as predicted for our model.
423: {\it Right Panel}: With non-perturbative corrections to the $S$ parameter taken
424: into account in the technicolour sector of the theory.}
425: \label{smleptons}
426: \end{figure*}
427: 
428: \begin{figure*}
429: \centering
430:  \subfigure[~Perturbative]{
431:   \includegraphics[width=7cm]{oblique_integer_new_.eps}
432:  }
433:  \qquad
434:  \subfigure[~Non-perturbative]{
435:   \includegraphics[width=7cm]{oblique_integer_nonpert_new_.eps}
436:  }
437: \caption{\underline{Leptons with integer charges.} {\it Left Panel}: The
438: parabolic area shaded in black corresponds to the accessible range for $S$
439: and $T$ with the masses of the extra neutrino and extra electron taken from
440: $m_Z$ to $10 m_Z$. The perturbative estimate for the contribution to $S$ from
441: techniquarks equals $1/2\pi$. The three staggered ellipses are the $90$\%
442: confidence level contours for the former global fit to the electroweak
443: precision data \cite{Eidelman:2004wy} with $U$ kept at $0$. The values of $U$
444: in our model lie typically between $0$ and $0.05$ whence they are consistent
445: with these contours. These contours from bottom to top are for Higgs masses
446: of $m_H = 117$, $340$, $1000$ GeV, respectively. The smaller ellipse to the
447: upper right is the 68\% confidence level contour for the new global fit to
448: electroweak precision data \cite{unknown:2005em} with $U=0$ and for a Higgs
449: $m_H=150$GeV as predicted for our model.
450: {\it Right Panel}: With non-perturbative corrections to the $S$ parameter taken
451: into account in the technicolour sector of the theory.
452: }
453: \label{frleptons}
454: \end{figure*}
455: 
456: \begin{figure*}
457:  \centering
458:  \subfigure[~Standard-model-like (I)]{
459:   \includegraphics[width=5cm]{mass_SM_perturbative.eps}
460:  }
461:  \subfigure[~Integer charges (III)]{
462:   \includegraphics[width=5cm]{mass_integer_perturbative.eps}
463:  }
464:  \subfigure[~Fractional charges (II)]{
465:   \includegraphics[width=5cm]{mass_fractional_perturbative.eps}
466:  }
467:  \caption{
468: The shaded areas depict the range for the masses of the new leptons which
469: are accessible due to the oblique corrections in accordance with the
470: electroweak precision data without taking into account non-perturbative
471: corrections. $m_1$ ($m_2$) is the mass, in units of $m_Z$, for the lepton
472: with the higher (lower)
473: charge. The black stripes do not correspond exactly to the
474: overlap of the parabolic area with the 68\% ellipse in the (S,T)-plane from
475: \cite{unknown:2005em} but with a polygonal area defined by
476: $-0.1<S+T<+0.5$,
477: $-0.15<S-T<+0.025$,
478: and
479: $S<0.22$.
480: After taking into account non-perturbative corrections subfigures (b) and
481: (c)
482: stay qualitatively the same, while for not too small masses (a) has a second
483: branch with $m_1<m_2$ like in (c). This corresponds to the overlap of the
484: ellipse with the right branch of the parabolic area in Fig.~\ref{smleptons}b
485: as opposed to Fig.~\ref{smleptons}a.
486: }
487: \label{masses}
488: \end{figure*}
489: 
490: 
491: 
492: \end{document}