1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}
2: \usepackage{axodraw}
3: \usepackage[dvips]{graphicx}
4: %\usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}
5: \def\NPB#1#2#3{{\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B#1} (19#2) #3}
6: \def\PLB#1#2#3{{\em Phys. Lett.} {\bf B#1} (19#2) #3}
7: \def\PLBold#1#2#3{{\em Phys. Lett.} {\bf#1B} (19#2) #3}
8: \def\PRD#1#2#3{{\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D#1} (19#2) #3}
9: \def\PRL#1#2#3{{\em Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf#1} (19#2) #3}
10: \def\PRT#1#2#3{{\em Phys. Rep.} {\bf#1} (19#2) #3}
11: \def\ARAA#1#2#3{{\em Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys.} {\bf#1} (19#2) #3}
12: \def\RMP#1#2#3{{\em Rev. Mod. Phys.} {\bf#1} (19#2) #3}
13: \def\ARNP#1#2#3{{\em Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.} {\bf#1} (19#2) #3}
14: \def\MODA#1#2#3{{\em Mod. Phys. Lett.} {\bf A#1} (19#2) #3}
15: \def\ZPC#1#2#3{{\em Zeit. f\"ur Physik} {\bf C#1} (19#2) #3}
16: \def\APJ#1#2#3{{\em Ap. J.} {\bf#1} (19#2) #3}
17: \def\JPG#1#2#3{{\em J. Phys.} {\bf G#1} (19#2) #3}
18: \def\IJMPA#1#2#3{{\em Int. J. Mod. Phys.} {\bf A#1} (19#2) #3}
19: \def\NC#1#2#3{{\em Nuovo Cim.} {\bf A#1} (19#2) #3}
20: \def\PR#1#2#3{{\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf #1} (19#2) #3}
21:
22: \begin{document}
23: \title{Associate Higgs and Gauge Boson Production at Hadron Colliders
24: in a Model with Vector Resonances}
25:
26: \author{ Alfonso R. Zerwekh
27: \footnote{alfonsozerwekh@uach.cl} \\
28: Instituto de F{\'{\i}}sica, Facultad de Ciencias \\
29: Universidad Austral de Chile \\ Casilla 567, Valdivia, Chile}
30: \date{}
31:
32: \maketitle
33:
34: \begin{abstract}
35: Motivated by new models of dynamical electroweak symmetry breaking
36: that predict a light composite higgs boson, we build an effective
37: lagrangian which describes the Standard Model (with a light Higgs)
38: and vector resonances. We compute the cross section for the associate
39: production of a higgs and a gauge boson. For some values of model
40: parameters we find that the cross section is significantly enhanced with
41: respect to the Standard Model. This enhancement is similar at the
42: LHC and the Tevatron for the same range of resonance mass.
43: \end{abstract}
44:
45:
46: \section{Introduction}
47: \label{sec:intro}
48:
49: One of the main challenges faced today by Particle Physics is to
50: elucidate the nature of electroweak symmetry breaking. This is the
51: only aspect of the Standard Model that still has not been directly
52: tested by experiment. Moreover, there is a general agreement in the
53: sense that, due to the hierarchy and triviality problems, the standard
54: higgs sector is not satisfactory and it really points to
55: the existence of new physics at the TeV scale.
56:
57: One possibility for such new physics is the existence of a new
58: strong interaction that dynamically breaks the electroweak symmetry
59: \cite{technicolor}. The
60: best known realization of this elegant idea, technicolor, has
61: been challenged by LEP precision measurements. In fact, the original
62: models, which are scaled up versions of QCD, are ruled out. A great
63: progress toward the construction of potentially more successful models was
64: the introduction of walking technicolor which basically means that the
65: interaction is quasi-conformal over a large range of
66: energy. Nevertheless, in general these models predict that the composite
67: scalar (the higgs) in the spectrum must be heavy, while the
68: current experimental data seem to point to the existence of a light
69: higgs.
70:
71: Very recently a new kind of technicolor models has been proposed
72: \cite{newmodels} whose
73: main characteristic is that technifermions are not in the fundamental
74: representation of the technicolor group. In these models the walking
75: behavior of the coupling constant appears naturally and they are not in
76: conflict with the current limits on the oblique parameters. But the
77: most remarkable feature of these models is that they predict the
78: existence of light composite higgs with a mass around 150 GeV.
79:
80:
81: Inspired by such models, we write down an effective lagrangian which
82: describes the Standard Model with a light higgs and vector resonances
83: which are a general prediction of dynamical symmetry breaking models
84: \cite{dominici}.
85: The model is minimal in the sense that we assume that any other
86: composite state would be heavier than the vector resonances, and so
87: they are not taken into account, and there are no physical technipions in the
88: spectrum.
89:
90:
91: In what follows we will study some aspects of such a model. Section
92: \ref{sec:lag}
93: is devoted to the construction of the lagrangian. In section \ref{sec:res} we
94: compute the cross section for the associate production of a higgs
95: and a gauge boson and we compare the results with the Standard Model.
96: Finally in section \ref{sec:con} we present our conclusions.
97:
98:
99: \section{The Lagrangian}
100: \label{sec:lag}
101:
102: \subsection{Gauge Sector}
103: \label{sec:gaugesector}
104:
105:
106: We start by noticing that, in general, dynamical electroweak symmetry
107: breaking models predict the existence of composite vector particles (
108: the so called technirho and techniomega) that mix with the gauge
109: bosons of the Standard Model. In order to describe this mixing, we use
110: a generalization of Vector Meson Dominance \cite{VMD} introduced
111: in \cite{zerwekh_and_rosenfeld} and developed
112: in \cite{zerwekh}. In this approach we choose a representation where
113: all vector fields transform as gauge fields and they mix through a mass
114: matrix. On the other hand, gauge invariance imposes that the mass
115: matrix has a null determinant. In our case, the lagrangian for the
116: gauge sector can be written as:
117:
118: \begin{eqnarray}
119: \label{eq:vectlag}
120: {\cal L}&=& -\frac{1}{4}W^{a}_{\mu \nu}W^{a \mu \nu}
121: -\frac{1}{4}\tilde{\rho}^{a}_{\mu \nu}\tilde{\rho}^{a \mu \nu}
122: \nonumber \\
123: & & + \frac{M^2}{2}\left(
124: \frac{g^2}{g^2_2}W^a_{\mu}W^{a\mu}+\tilde{\rho}^{a}_{\mu}\tilde{\rho}^{a\mu}-
125: \frac{2g}{g_2}W^a_{\mu}\tilde{\rho}^{a \mu}\right) \nonumber \\
126: & &-\frac{1}{4}B_{\mu \nu}B^{\mu \nu}
127: -\frac{1}{4}\tilde{\omega}_{\mu \nu}\tilde{\omega}^{\mu \nu}
128: \nonumber \\
129: & & + \frac{M'^2}{2}\left(
130: \frac{g'^2}{g'^2_2}B_{\mu}B^{\mu}+\tilde{\omega}_{\mu}\tilde{\omega}^{\mu}-
131: \frac{2g'}{g'_2}B_{\mu}\tilde{\omega}^{\mu}\right)
132: \end{eqnarray}
133: where
134:
135: \begin{eqnarray}
136: \label{eq:def1}
137: W^{a}_{\mu
138: \nu}&=&\partial_{\mu}W^a_{\nu}-\partial_{\nu}W^a_{\mu}+g\epsilon^{abc}
139: W^b_{\mu} W^c_{\nu} \\
140: \tilde{\rho}^{a}_{\mu
141: \nu}&=&\partial_{\mu}\tilde{\rho}^a_{\nu}-\partial_{\nu}\tilde{\rho}^a_{\mu}
142: +g_2\epsilon^{abc}
143: \tilde{\rho}^b_{\mu} \tilde{\rho}^c_{\nu} \\
144: B_{\mu
145: \nu}&=&\partial_{\mu}B_{\nu}-\partial_{\nu}B_{\mu}\\
146: \tilde{\omega}_{\mu
147: \nu}&=&\partial_{\mu}\tilde{\omega}_{\nu}-\partial_{\nu}\tilde{\omega}_{\mu}
148: \end{eqnarray}
149: and $M$ ($M'$) is the hard mass of the proto-technirho
150: (proto-techniomega). Notice that our lagrangian is written in term of
151: non-physical fields. The physical ones will be obtained by
152: diagonalizing the mass matrix.
153:
154: By construction, lagrangian (\ref{eq:vectlag}) is invariant under
155: $SU(2)_{\mbox{L}} \times U(1)_{\mbox{Y}}$. The symmetry breaking to
156: $U(1)_{\mbox{em}}$ will be described by mean of the vacuum expectation
157: value of a scalar field, as in the Standard Model. In other words, we
158: will use an effective gauged linear sigma model as a phenomenological
159: description of the electroweak symmetry breaking.
160:
161: \subsection{Fermions}
162: \label{sec:fermions}
163:
164: As usual, fermions are minimally coupled to gauge bosons through a
165: covariant derivative. Because in our scheme all the vector bosons
166: transform as gauge fields, it is possible to include the
167: proto-technirho and the proto-techniomega in an ``extended'' covariant
168: derivative \cite{zerwekh}, resulting in the following lagrangian for
169: the fermion sector:
170:
171: \begin{equation}
172: \label{eq:fermionlag}
173: {\cal
174: L}=\bar{\psi_L}i\gamma^{\mu}D_{\mu}\psi_L+\bar{\psi_R}i\gamma^{\mu}
175: \tilde{D}_{\mu}\psi_R
176: \end{equation}
177: with
178: \begin{eqnarray}
179: D_{\mu}&=&\partial_{\mu}+ i\tau^a g(1-x_1)W^a_{\mu}+
180: i\tau^a g_2 x_1 \tilde{\rho}^a_{\mu} \nonumber \\
181: & &+ i\frac{Y}{2} g'(1-x_2)B_{\mu} + i\frac{Y}{2} g'_2 x_2
182: \tilde{\omega}_{\mu}
183: \end{eqnarray}
184: and
185: \begin{equation}
186: \tilde{D}_{\mu}=\partial_{\mu}+ i\frac{Y}{2} g'(1-x_3)B_{\mu} +
187: i\frac{Y}{2} g'_2 x_3
188: \tilde{\omega}_{\mu}
189: \end{equation}
190:
191: The parameters $x_i$ ($i=1,2,3$) play a role similar to fermion
192: delocalization in deconstruction models \cite{Chivukula:2005bn}.
193:
194: A direct coupling between fermions and the vector resonances can
195: appear naturally in technicolor due to extended technicolor
196: interactions. Nevertheless, they must be proportional to the fermion
197: mass and then,they are not important except for the top quark.
198: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
199: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Answer to referee's point 2) %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
200: In what follows, for simplicity, we take $x_1=x_2=x_3=0$.
201: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
202:
203:
204: \subsection{Higgs Sector and Mass Matrices}
205: \label{sec:higgs}
206:
207: In our effective model the higgs sector is assumed to be the same as
208: in
209: the Standard Model except by the possibility of including a direct
210: coupling between the higgs doublet and the vector resonances through an
211: ``extended'' covariant derivative as was shown for the fermion
212: sector. That is, the lagrangian for the Higgs sector is:
213:
214: \begin{equation}
215: \label{eq:Higgs}
216: {\cal L}= \left(D^{\mu}\Phi \right)^{\dagger}\left(D_{\mu}\Phi
217: \right)-V\left(\Phi \right)
218: \end{equation}
219: where, as usual
220:
221: \begin{equation}
222: \label{eq:potential}
223: V\left(\Phi \right)=-\mu^2 \Phi^{\dagger}\Phi+\lambda\left(
224: \Phi^{\dagger}\Phi \right)^2
225: \end{equation}
226: and
227:
228: \begin{eqnarray}
229: D_{\mu}&=&\partial_{\mu}+ i\tau^a g(1-f_1)W^a_{\mu}+
230: i\tau^a g_2 f_1 \tilde{\rho}^a_{\mu} \nonumber \\
231: & &+ i\frac{Y}{2} g'(1-f_2)B_{\mu} + i\frac{Y}{2} g'_2 f_2
232: \tilde{\omega}_{\mu}
233: \end{eqnarray}
234:
235:
236: This direct coupling may seem natural in a context where the higgs and
237: the vector resonances are both composite states of the same underlying
238: strong sector. Nevertheless, in this work we will avoid it (we choose
239: $f_1=f_2=0$) because, in principle, it can introduce dangerous tree
240: level corrections to the $\rho$ parameter.
241:
242:
243: Once the electroweak symmetry has been broken, the mass matrix of the vector
244: bosons takes contributions from (\ref{eq:vectlag}) and from the Higgs
245: mechanism. For the neutral vector bosons, the resulting mass matrix is:
246:
247: \begin{equation}
248: \label{eq:neutralmassmatrix}
249: {\cal M_{\mbox{neutral}}}=\frac{v^2}{4}\left [
250: \begin{array}[h]{c c c c}
251: (1+\alpha)g^2 & -\alpha g g_2 & -g g' & 0 \\
252: -\alpha g g_2 & \alpha g_2^2 & 0 & 0 \\
253: -g g' & 0 & (1+\alpha ')g'^2 & - \alpha ' g' g_2'\\
254: 0 & 0 & - \alpha ' g' g_2' & \alpha ' g'^2
255: \end{array}
256: \right ]
257: \end{equation}
258: where
259:
260: \begin{equation}
261: \label{eq:alpha}
262: \alpha=\frac{4M^2}{v^2 g^2_2}
263: \end{equation}
264: and
265: \begin{equation}
266: \label{eq:alphaprima}
267: \alpha '=\frac{4M'^2}{v^2 g'^2_2}
268: \end{equation}
269:
270: In what follows, in order to simplify our analysis, we will assume that
271: $\alpha ' = \alpha $ and $ g_2' = g_2 $. Notice that this assumption
272: implies that the technirho and the techniomega will have the same
273: mass. We will also assume that $M$
274: is proportional to $g_2^2$ which is quit natural when we realize that
275: $M$ is a dynamical mass produced by the underlying strong interaction.
276:
277: On the other hand, the mass matrix for the charged vector bosons can
278: be written as:
279:
280: \begin{equation}
281: \label{eq:chargedmassmatrix}
282: {\cal M_{\mbox{charged}}}=\frac{v^2}{4}\left [
283: \begin{array}[h]{c c}
284: (1+\alpha)g^2 & -\alpha g g_2 \\
285: -\alpha g g_2 & \alpha g_2^2
286: \end{array}
287: \right ]
288: \end{equation}
289:
290: We diagonalize the mass matrices in the limit $g_2 \rightarrow \infty$
291: and we obtain the following expressions for the physical fields (we
292: have dropped the Lorentz indexes).
293: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
294: %%% Answer to referee's point 6) %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
295: We write the transformation to physical fields in the limit $g/g_2 \ll
296: 1$ and we keep terms up to order $g/g_2$.
297: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
298:
299:
300: \begin{eqnarray*}
301: \label{eq:eigenvectors}
302: A&=&\frac{g'}{\sqrt{g^2+g'^2}}W^3+\frac{g}{\sqrt{g^2+g'^2}}B+\frac{g
303: g'}{g_2\sqrt{g^2+g'^2}}\tilde{\rho}^3+ \frac{g
304: g'}{g_2\sqrt{g^2+g'^2}}\tilde{\omega}\\
305: Z&=&\frac{g}{\sqrt{g^2+g'^2}}W^3-\frac{g'}{\sqrt{g^2+g'^2}}B+\frac{g^2
306: }{g_2\sqrt{g^2+g'^2}}\tilde{\rho}^3- \frac{
307: g'^2}{g_2\sqrt{g^2+g'^2}}\tilde{\omega}\\
308: \rho^0&=&-\frac{g}{g_2}W^3+\tilde{\rho}^3\\
309: \omega&=&-\frac{g'}{g_2}B+\tilde{\omega}\\
310: W^{\pm}&=&\tilde{W}^{\pm}+\frac{g}{g_2}\tilde{\rho}^{\pm}\\
311: \rho^{\pm}&=&\tilde{\rho}^{\pm}-\frac{g}{g_2}\tilde{W}^{\pm}
312: \end{eqnarray*}
313: where
314: $$
315: \tilde{W}^{\pm}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(W^1 \mp i W^2\right)
316: $$
317: and
318: $$
319: \tilde{\rho}^{\pm}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\rho^1 \mp i \rho^2\right)
320: $$
321:
322:
323: The relevant Feynman rules, in terms of the physical
324: fields, for the associate production of a higgs and a gauge boson can be found
325: in table \ref{tab:FeynmanRules} while figure \ref{fig:diagrams} shows
326: the Feynman diagrams for the processes studied in this work.
327:
328: \begin{table}[htbp]
329: \centering
330: \begin{tabular}{l|l}\hline
331: Fields in the vertex & Variational derivative of Lagrangian by fields
332: \\ \hline
333: $H$ $\omega^0_{\mu }$ ${Z}_{\nu }$&
334: $\frac{1}{2}\frac{ e{}^2 M_W \sqrt{\alpha} v}{ c_w{}^3 M_{\rho}}g^{\mu
335: \nu}$\\
336: $H$ $\rho^0_{\mu }$ ${Z}_{\nu }$ &
337: $-\frac{1}{2}\frac{ e{}^2 M_W \sqrt{\alpha} v}{ c_w{}^2
338: M_{\rho} s_w}g^{\mu
339: \nu} $\\
340: $H$ $\rho^+_{\mu }$ $W^-{}_{\nu }$ &
341: $-\frac{1}{2}\frac{ e{}^2 M_W \sqrt{\alpha} v}{ M_{\rho}
342: s_w{}^2 } g^{\mu \nu} $\\
343: $\bar{u}$ $d$ $\rho^+_{\mu }$&
344: $\frac{1}{8}\frac{ e{}^2 \sqrt{2} \sqrt{\alpha} Vud v}{
345: M_{\rho} s_w{}^2}(1-\gamma^5) \gamma^\mu $\\
346: $\bar{u}$ $u$ $\omega^0_{\mu }$ &
347: $\frac{1}{24}\frac{ e{}^2 \sqrt{\alpha} v}{ c_w{}^2 M_{\rho}}
348: \gamma^\mu\big((1-\gamma^5) +4(1+\gamma^5) \big)$\\
349: $\bar{u}$ $u{}$ $\rho^0_{\mu }$ &
350: $\frac{1}{8}\frac{ e{}^2 \sqrt{\alpha} v}{ c_w M_{\rho} s_w}
351: (1-\gamma^5)\gamma^\mu $\\
352: \hline
353: \end{tabular}
354: \caption{Feynman Rules for the relevant couplings of the vector resonances
355: for the associated production of a higgs and a gauge
356: bosons. The couplings of the $W^{\pm}$ and $Z$ to the quarks are
357: identical, in our limit, to the SM}
358: \label{tab:FeynmanRules}
359: \end{table}
360:
361:
362:
363: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
364: %%%%%%%%%%%Answer to referre'a point 1) %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
365: We have build our lagrangian based on an extension of vector meson
366: dominance. Another possibility for studying models with vector
367: resonances is to consider the so called hidden local symmetry\cite{bando}. In
368: this case, the model would correspond to a nonlinear sigma model
369: based on the coset space $U(2)_L\otimes
370: U(2)_R/U(2)_V$. The
371: archetype of this kind of model applied to a strong electroweak model
372: is the so called BESS model \cite{dominici,mbess} (which is based on $(SU(2)_L
373: \otimes SU(2)_R)/SU(2)_V$ and hence does not have a techniomega). Of
374: course such a model does not include a higgs, nevertheless a
375: ``linear'' version of the BESS model exists \cite{lbess} which include
376: scalars in the spectrum.
377: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
378:
379:
380: \section{Results}
381: \label{sec:res}
382:
383: We use LanHEP \cite{LanHEP} and CompHEP \cite{CompHEP} in order to
384: compute the cross section of the associate production of a higgs and a
385: gauge boson at the LHC and the Tevatron (Run II). We choose to work
386: with $\alpha=0.1$ because for values of $\alpha$ of this order, the
387: vector resonances can be light (i.e. $M_{\rho} \approx 250$ GeV) while
388: $g_2/g$ is still much bigger than one. As $\alpha$ approaches to one,
389: the vector resonances became too heavy and their observation is
390: increasingly difficult. On the other hand, if $\alpha$ is too small
391: the coupling of the vector resonances to the SM fields are suppressed.
392:
393:
394: The decay width of the vector resonances were also computed with CompHEP.
395: In the range of masses considered here, the techniomega and the charged
396: technirho decay
397: mainly into fermions
398: % (notice that $\rho W Z$ and $\rho W A$ vertices
399: %do not exist in this
400: %model)
401: while the neutral technirho decays mainly into a
402: pair of $W$'s.
403:
404:
405: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
406: %%%%%%%% Answer to referee's point 3) %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
407: Notice that $\rho W Z$ and $\rho W A$ vertices do not exist in this
408: model. Indeed, gauge invariance avoid the generation of such couplings
409: from Yang-Mills kinetic terms. For example, a $\rho W A$ vertex
410: coming from Yang-Mills term would violate gauge symmetry in the
411: process $\gamma W \rightarrow \gamma W$. A discussion about this
412: coupling in a similar model can be found in \cite{rosenfeld}.
413: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
414:
415:
416: Our aim in this work is to study the impact of the presence of vector
417: resonances on the higgs production in association with a gauge
418: boson. In particular, we want to compare the predictions of this
419: scenario with the Standard Model. For this reason we define the
420: following quantity as a measure of the enhancement of the signal over
421: the Standard Model:
422:
423: \begin{equation}
424: \label{eq:r}
425: \epsilon=\frac{\sigma-\sigma_{\mbox{SM}}}{\sigma_{\mbox{SM}}}
426: \end{equation}
427: \noindent
428: where $\sigma$ is the cross section predicted by
429: our effective lagrangian and $\sigma_{\mbox{SM}}$ is the cross section
430: predicted by the Standard Model.
431:
432: In figure \ref{fig:lhc_wh} we show the value of $\epsilon$ as a function of
433: the mass of the technirho ($M_{\rho}$) for three values of the higgs
434: mass ($M_H=115$ GeV (solid line),$150$ GeV (dashed line) and $200$ GeV
435: (dotted line)) for the process $pp \rightarrow H W^+$ at the
436: LHC. Observe that in this case, the cross section is
437: significatively enhanced with respect to the standard model when the
438: technirho has a mass between 200 GeV and 350 GeV. The variation of
439: this enhancement as function of $\alpha$ is shown in figure
440: \ref{fig:alfa} for $M_H=150$ GeV and $g2/g=10$
441:
442: On the other hand,
443: when a higgs and a $Z$ are produced (figure \ref{fig:lhc_zh}), the
444: cross section is less enhanced and we expect that this channel will
445: not be sensible to the presence of the vector resonances.
446:
447: We also compute the cross section of the process $p\bar{p} \rightarrow
448: H W^+$ at the Tevatron (Run II). The result is shown in figure
449: \ref{fig:tev} for $M_H=150$ GeV. Notice that the enhancement in this
450: case is comparable to the prediction for the LHC.
451:
452: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
453: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Answer to referee's point 4)%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
454: The point in the parameter space we use for studying our model was
455: chosen in order to maximize the deviation from the Standard Model for
456: the selected channel. This procedure allows us to evaluate the
457: possibility of testing the model. Let's now consider the restrictions
458: imposed by data on the electroweak parameters $S, T$ and $U$. This is
459: not the place for performing a detailed calculation of these
460: parameters in our model, nevertheless we expect that the final result
461: must be similar to the one obtained in the minimal BESS model.
462: \cite{dominici,mbess}. Written in the notation of the original
463: authors, this result is:
464: \begin{eqnarray*}
465: \epsilon_1&=&0\\
466: \epsilon_2&=&0\\
467: \epsilon_3&=&-\frac{b}{2}+\left(\frac{g}{g''}\right)^2
468: \end{eqnarray*}
469: where $\epsilon_1,\epsilon_2,\epsilon_2$ are proportional to $T,U$
470: and $S$ respectively, $g''$ is our coupling constant $g_2$ and $b$
471: corresponds to our parameter $x_1$ which represents a direct
472: coupling of the proto-technirho to fermions. For the set of
473: parameters used above we obtain
474: $\epsilon_3=0.01$ which is disfavored by precision
475: measurements. Nevertheless, we can be consistent with the constrains
476: imposed by precision data by choosing $x_1=2(g/g_2)^2$. In this case,
477: our results on $\sigma-\sigma_{\mbox{\tiny{SM}}}$ are modified by a
478: factor $0.60$ and an important enhancement remains in the channel
479: $pp \rightarrow H W^+$ for $M_{\rho}$
480: around $250$ GeV.
481: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
482:
483:
484:
485: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
486: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Answer to referee's point 5)%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
487: At this point a word must be said about the direct search of our
488: vector resonances and the mass limits imposed to them by current
489: data. In general the results of direct search, performed at the
490: Tevatron and LEP, of the technirho and techniomega predicted in usual walking
491: technicolor models applies to our case, except by the fact that we have
492: suposed there are no physical technipions in the spectrum. In this
493: case, considering the technirho decay to charged
494: leptons and a pair of $W$'s, the technirho (as well as the
495: techniomega) is excluded for $M_{\rho}<206$ GeV\cite{pdg}.
496: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
497:
498:
499: \section{Conclusions}
500: \label{sec:con}
501:
502: We have constructed an effective lagrangian which represents the
503: Standard Model with a light higgs bosons and vector resonances that
504: mix with the gauge bosons. We fixed the parameter of the model that
505: connects the mass of the new vector bosons with their coupling
506: constant, in such a way that the model were compatible with light
507: resonances.
508:
509: We want to emphasize that, although this effective lagrangian is
510: inspired by a new technicolor scenario recently proposed in
511: \cite{newmodels}, we do not claim that the values chosen for our study
512: represent the low energy limit of the specific models constructed there.
513:
514: The most obvious process for searching differences between
515: our model and the predictions of the Standard Model is the associate
516: production of a higgs and a gauge boson. We found that the most
517: sensitive channel is the production of the higgs and $W$.
518:
519: For a range of resonance's mass between $200$ GeV and $350$ GeV the
520: enhancement of the cross section is significant at both, the LHC and
521: the Tevatron.
522:
523: \section*{Acknowledgements}
524:
525: The author is grateful to Rog\'erio Rosenfeld for valuable comments
526:
527:
528: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
529:
530: \bibitem{technicolor}
531: For a recent review see
532: C.~T.~Hill and E.~H.~Simmons,
533: %``Strong dynamics and electroweak symmetry breaking,''
534: Phys.\ Rept.\ {\bf 381}, 235 (2003)
535: [Erratum-ibid.\ {\bf 390}, 553 (2004)]
536: [arXiv:hep-ph/0203079].
537: \bibitem{newmodels}
538: D.~D.~Dietrich, F.~Sannino and K.~Tuominen,
539: %``Light composite Higgs from higher representations versus electroweak
540: %precision measurements: Predictions for LHC,''
541: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 72}, 055001 (2005)
542: [arXiv:hep-ph/0505059].\\
543:
544: \bibitem{dominici}
545: For a review of effective models of a strong electroweak symmetry
546: breaking sector with scalar and vector resonances, see
547: D.~Dominici,
548: %``Tests for a strong electroweak sector at future e+ e- high-energy
549: %colliders,''
550: Riv.\ Nuovo Cim.\ {\bf 20}, 1 (1997)
551: [arXiv:hep-ph/9711385].
552: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9711385;%%
553:
554: \bibitem{VMD}
555: For a modern review on Vector Meson Dominance see,
556: H.~B.~O'Connell, B.~C.~Pearce, A.~W.~Thomas and A.~G.~Williams,
557: %``Rho - omega mixing, vector meson dominance and the pion form-factor,''
558: Prog.\ Part.\ Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf 39}, 201 (1997)
559: [arXiv:hep-ph/9501251].
560:
561: \bibitem{zerwekh_and_rosenfeld}
562: A.~R.~Zerwekh and R.~Rosenfeld,
563: %``Gauge invariance, color-octet vector resonances and double technieta production at the Tevatron,''
564: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 503}, 325 (2001)
565: [arXiv:hep-ph/0103159].
566:
567: \bibitem{zerwekh}
568: A.~R.~Zerwekh,
569: %``Effective description of a gauge field and a tower of massive vector
570: %resonances,''
571: arXiv:hep-ph/0307130.
572: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0307130;%%
573:
574: \bibitem{Chivukula:2005bn}
575: R.~S.~Chivukula, E.~H.~Simmons, H.~J.~He, M.~Kurachi and M.~Tanabashi,
576: %``Deconstructed Higgsless models with one-site delocalization,''
577: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 71}, 115001 (2005)
578: [arXiv:hep-ph/0502162]
579:
580: \bibitem{bando}M. Bando, T. Kugo e K. Yamawaki, \PRT{164}{88}{217}.
581:
582: \bibitem{mbess}R. Casalbuoni, S. De Curtis, D. Dominici and R. Gatto,
583: \PLB{155}{85}{95}; \NPB{282}{87}{235};\\
584: R. Casalbuoni, P. Chiappetta, A. Deandrea, D. Dominici
585: and R. Gatto, \ZPC{60}{93}{315};\\
586: R. Casalbuoni, P. Chiappetta, S. De Curtis, F. Feruglio,
587: R. Gatto, B. Mele and J. Terron, \PLB{249}{90}{130};\\
588: R. Casalbuoni, P. Chiappetta,M.C. Cousinou, S. De
589: Curtis, F. Feruglio, R. Gatto, \PLB{253}{91}{275};\\
590: L. Antichini,R. Casalbuoni and S. De Curtis,\PLB{348}{95}{521}.
591:
592:
593: \bibitem{lbess}
594: R.~Casalbuoni, S.~De Curtis, D.~Dominici and M.~Grazzini,
595: %``New vector bosons in the electroweak sector: A renormalizable model with
596: %decoupling,''
597: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 56}, 5731 (1997)
598: [arXiv:hep-ph/9704229].
599:
600: \bibitem{LanHEP}
601: A.~V.~Semenov,
602: %``LanHEP: A package for automatic generation of Feynman rules in field
603: %theory. Version 2.0,''
604: arXiv:hep-ph/0208011.
605: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0208011;%%
606: \\
607: A. Semenov. LanHEP - a package for automatic generation of Feynman
608: rules. User's manual. INP MSU Preprint 96-24/431, Moscow, 1996;
609: hep-ph/9608488 \\
610: A. Semenov. Nucl.Inst.\& Meth. A393 (1997) p. 293. \\
611: A. Semenov. LanHEP - a package for automatic generation of Feynman
612: rules from the Lagrangian. Updated version 1.3. INP MSU Preprint
613: 98-2/503. \\
614: Home page:http://theory.sinp.msu.ru/~semenov/lanhep.html
615:
616: \bibitem{CompHEP}
617: E.Boos et al. [CompHEP Collaboration], CompHEP 4.4: Automatic
618: computations from Lagrangians to events,
619: Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A534(2004), p250 [hep-ph/0403113].\\
620: CompHEP - a package for evaluation of Feynman diagrams and integration
621: over multi-particle phase space. User's manual for version 3.3,
622: hep-ph/9908288 \\
623: Home page: http://theory.sinp.msu.ru/comphep
624:
625:
626: \bibitem{rosenfeld}R.~Rosenfeld,
627: %``An Alternative model for the electroweak symmetry breaking sector and its
628: %signature in future e gamma colliders,''
629: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 50}, 4283 (1994)
630: [arXiv:hep-ph/9403356].
631:
632:
633: \bibitem{pdg}S. Eidelman et al, Phys. Lett. B 592, 1 (2004).
634: \end{thebibliography}
635: \newpage
636:
637: \begin{figure}[htbp]
638: \centering
639: \includegraphics[scale=1.5]{diag_wh.eps}\\
640: \begin{picture}(2,2)
641: \Text(1,1)[b]{a)}
642: \end{picture}\\
643:
644: \includegraphics[scale=1.5]{diag_zh.eps}\\
645: \begin{picture}(2,2)
646: \Text(1,1)[b]{b)}
647: \end{picture}
648: \caption{Feynman diagrams for the production of a Higgs and a
649: $W^+$ (a) , and a Higgs and a $Z$ (b)}
650: \label{fig:diagrams}
651: \end{figure}
652:
653:
654:
655:
656: \begin{figure}[htbp]
657: \centering
658: \includegraphics{lhc_wh.eps}
659: \caption{Enhancement of the cross section in the process $pp
660: \rightarrow W^+ H$ at the LHC for three values of the higgs mass:
661: $M_H=115$ GeV (solid line), $150$ GeV (dashed line) and $200$ GeV
662: (pointed line)}
663: \label{fig:lhc_wh}
664: \end{figure}
665:
666: \begin{figure}[htbp]
667: \centering
668: \includegraphics{lhc_zh_200.eps}
669: \caption{Enhancement of the cross section in the process $pp
670: \rightarrow Z H$ at the LHC for $M_H=200$ GeV}
671: \label{fig:lhc_zh}
672: \end{figure}
673:
674: \begin{figure}[htbp]
675: \centering
676: \includegraphics{alfa.eps}
677: \caption{Enhancement of the cross section in the process $p\bar{p}
678: \rightarrow W^+ H$ at the LHC as a function of $\alpha$ for
679: $M_H=150$ GeV and $g/g2=0.1$ }
680: \label{fig:alfa}
681: \end{figure}
682:
683: \begin{figure}[htbp]
684: \centering
685: \includegraphics{tev.eps}
686: \caption{Enhancement of the cross section in the process $p\bar{p}
687: \rightarrow W^+ H$ at the Tevatron for $M_H=150$ GeV }
688: \label{fig:tev}
689: \end{figure}
690:
691: \end{document}