1: %Modern Physics Letters A in LaTex %mpla-la.tex
2: \documentstyle[twoside,psfig,epsfig]{article}
3:
4: %--------------------NEW ADDITIONS TO EXISTING ARTICLE.STY---------------------
5: \catcode`\@=11
6: \long\def\@makefntext#1{
7: \protect\noindent \hbox to 3.2pt {\hskip-.9pt
8: $^{{\eightrm\@thefnmark}}$\hfil}#1\hfill} %CAN BE USED
9:
10: \def\thefootnote{\fnsymbol{footnote}}
11: \def\@makefnmark{\hbox to 0pt{$^{\@thefnmark}$\hss}} %ORIGINAL
12:
13: \def\ps@myheadings{\let\@mkboth\@gobbletwo
14: \def\@oddhead{\hbox{}
15: \rightmark\hfil\eightrm\thepage}
16: \def\@oddfoot{}\def\@evenhead{\eightrm\thepage\hfil
17: \leftmark\hbox{}}\def\@evenfoot{}
18: \def\sectionmark##1{}\def\subsectionmark##1{}}
19: %--------------------START OFMPLA1.STY----------------------------------------
20: %THIS STYLE FILE (MPLA1.STY) IS FOR REFERENCES FROM 1--9 ITEMS ONLY
21:
22: %THIS STYLE FILE WILL PRODUCE
23: %$^1$ IN BODY TEXT AND 1. AT REFERENCE SECTION
24:
25: \oddsidemargin=\evensidemargin
26: \addtolength{\oddsidemargin}{-30pt}
27: \addtolength{\evensidemargin}{-30pt}
28:
29: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30: \newcommand{\symbolfootnote}{\renewcommand{\thefootnote}
31: {\fnsymbol{footnote}}}
32: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\fnsymbol{footnote}}
33: \newcommand{\alphfootnote}
34: {\setcounter{footnote}{0}
35: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\sevenrm\alph{footnote}}}
36:
37: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
38: \renewcommand{\footnoterule}{ } %NO FOOTNOTE RULE IN LATEX
39: %\footnotesep 10pt
40: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
41: %NEWLY-DEFINED SECTION COMMANDS
42: \newcounter{sectionc}\newcounter{subsectionc}\newcounter{subsubsectionc}
43: \renewcommand{\section}[1] {\vspace{12pt}\addtocounter{sectionc}{1}
44: \setcounter{subsectionc}{0}\setcounter{subsubsectionc}{0}\noindent
45: {\tenbf\thesectionc. #1}\par\vspace{5pt}}
46: \renewcommand{\subsection}[1] {\vspace{12pt}\addtocounter{subsectionc}{1}
47: \setcounter{subsubsectionc}{0}\noindent
48: {\bf\thesectionc.\thesubsectionc. {\kern1pt \bfit #1}}\par\vspace{5pt}}
49: \renewcommand{\subsubsection}[1] {\vspace{12pt}\addtocounter{subsubsectionc}{1}
50: \noindent{\tenrm\thesectionc.\thesubsectionc.\thesubsubsectionc.
51: {\kern1pt \tenit #1}}\par\vspace{5pt}}
52: \newcommand{\nonumsection}[1] {\vspace{12pt}\noindent{\tenbf #1}
53: \par\vspace{5pt}}
54:
55: %NEW MACRO TO HANDLE APPENDICES
56: \newcounter{appendixc}
57: \newcounter{subappendixc}[appendixc]
58: \newcounter{subsubappendixc}[subappendixc]
59: \renewcommand{\thesubappendixc}{\Alph{appendixc}.\arabic{subappendixc}}
60: \renewcommand{\thesubsubappendixc}
61: {\Alph{appendixc}.\arabic{subappendixc}.\arabic{subsubappendixc}}
62:
63: \renewcommand{\appendix}[1] {\vspace{12pt}
64: \refstepcounter{appendixc}
65: \setcounter{figure}{0}
66: \setcounter{table}{0}
67: \setcounter{lemma}{0}
68: \setcounter{theorem}{0}
69: \setcounter{corollary}{0}
70: \setcounter{definition}{0}
71: \setcounter{equation}{0}
72: \renewcommand{\thefigure}{\Alph{appendixc}.\arabic{figure}}
73: \renewcommand{\thetable}{\Alph{appendixc}.\arabic{table}}
74: \renewcommand{\theappendixc}{\Alph{appendixc}}
75: \renewcommand{\thelemma}{\Alph{appendixc}.\arabic{lemma}}
76: \renewcommand{\thetheorem}{\Alph{appendixc}.\arabic{theorem}}
77: \renewcommand{\thedefinition}{\Alph{appendixc}.\arabic{definition}}
78: \renewcommand{\thecorollary}{\Alph{appendixc}.\arabic{corollary}}
79: \renewcommand{\theequation}{\Alph{appendixc}.\arabic{equation}}
80: % \noindent{\tenbf Appendix \theappendixc. #1}\par\vspace{5pt}}
81: \noindent{\tenbf Appendix \theappendixc #1}\par\vspace{5pt}}
82: \newcommand{\subappendix}[1] {\vspace{12pt}
83: \refstepcounter{subappendixc}
84: \noindent{\bf Appendix \thesubappendixc. {\kern1pt \bfit #1}}
85: \par\vspace{5pt}}
86: \newcommand{\subsubappendix}[1] {\vspace{12pt}
87: \refstepcounter{subsubappendixc}
88: \noindent{\rm Appendix \thesubsubappendixc. {\kern1pt \tenit #1}}
89: \par\vspace{5pt}}
90:
91:
92: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
93: %FOLLOWING THREE COMMANDS ARE FOR `LIST' COMMAND.
94: \topsep=0in\parsep=0in\itemsep=0in
95: \parindent=15pt
96:
97: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
98: \newcommand{\textlineskip}{\baselineskip=13pt}
99: \newcommand{\smalllineskip}{\baselineskip=10pt}
100:
101: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
102: %MACRO FOR COPYRIGHT BLOCK
103: \def\eightcirc{
104: \begin{picture}(0,0)
105: \put(4.4,1.8){\circle{6.5}}
106: \end{picture}}
107: \def\eightcopyright{\eightcirc\kern2.7pt\hbox{\eightrm c}}
108:
109: %\newcommand{\copyrightheading}[1]
110: % {\vspace*{-2.5cm}\smalllineskip{\flushleft
111: % {\footnotesize Modern Physics Letters A, #1}\\
112: % {\footnotesize $\eightcopyright$\, World Scientific Publishing
113: % Company}\\
114: % }}
115:
116: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
117: %MACRO FOR PUBLISHER INFORMATION SECTION
118: \newcommand{\pub}[1]{{\begin{center}\footnotesize\smalllineskip
119: Received #1\\
120: \end{center}
121: }}
122:
123: \newcommand{\publisher}[2]{{\begin{center}\footnotesize\smalllineskip
124: Received #1\\
125: Revised #2
126: \end{center}
127: }}
128:
129: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
130: %MARCO FOR ABSTRACT BLOCK
131: \def\abstracts#1#2#3{{
132: \centering{\begin{minipage}{4.5in}\footnotesize\baselineskip=10pt
133: \parindent=0pt #1\par
134: \parindent=15pt #2\par
135: \parindent=15pt #3
136: \end{minipage}}\par}}
137:
138: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
139: %MARCO FOR KEYWORDS BLOCK
140: \def\keywords#1{{
141: \centering{\begin{minipage}{4.5in}\footnotesize\baselineskip=10pt
142: {\footnotesize\it Keywords}\/: #1
143: \end{minipage}}\par}}
144:
145: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
146: %NEW MACRO FOR BIBLIOGRAPHY
147: \newcommand{\bibit}{\nineit}
148: \newcommand{\bibbf}{\ninebf}
149: \renewenvironment{thebibliography}[1]
150: {\frenchspacing
151: \ninerm\baselineskip=11pt
152: \begin{list}{\arabic{enumi}.}
153: {\usecounter{enumi}\setlength{\parsep}{0pt}
154: \setlength{\leftmargin 12.7pt}{\rightmargin 0pt} %FOR 1--9 ITEMS
155: % \setlength{\leftmargin 17pt}{\rightmargin 0pt} %FOR 10--99 ITEMS
156: % \setlength{\leftmargin 22pt}{\rightmargin 0pt} %FOR 100+ABOVE ITEMS
157: \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt} \settowidth
158: {\labelwidth}{#1.}\sloppy}}{\end{list}}
159:
160: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
161: %LIST ENVIRONMENTS
162: \newcounter{itemlistc}
163: \newcounter{romanlistc}
164: \newcounter{alphlistc}
165: \newcounter{arabiclistc}
166: \newenvironment{itemlist}
167: {\setcounter{itemlistc}{0}
168: \begin{list}{$\bullet$}
169: {\usecounter{itemlistc}
170: \setlength{\parsep}{0pt}
171: \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}}}{\end{list}}
172:
173: \newenvironment{romanlist}
174: {\setcounter{romanlistc}{0}
175: \begin{list}{$($\roman{romanlistc}$)$}
176: {\usecounter{romanlistc}
177: \setlength{\parsep}{0pt}
178: \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}}}{\end{list}}
179:
180: \newenvironment{alphlist}
181: {\setcounter{alphlistc}{0}
182: \begin{list}{$($\alph{alphlistc}$)$}
183: {\usecounter{alphlistc}
184: \setlength{\parsep}{0pt}
185: \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}}}{\end{list}}
186:
187: \newenvironment{arabiclist}
188: {\setcounter{arabiclistc}{0}
189: \begin{list}{\arabic{arabiclistc}}
190: {\usecounter{arabiclistc}
191: \setlength{\parsep}{0pt}
192: \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}}}{\end{list}}
193:
194: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
195: %FIGURE CAPTION
196: \newcommand{\fcaption}[1]{
197: \refstepcounter{figure}
198: \setbox\@tempboxa =
199: \hbox{\footnotesize Fig.~\thefigure. #1}
200: \ifdim \wd\@tempboxa > 5in
201: {\begin{center}
202: \parbox{5in}{\footnotesize\smalllineskip Fig.~\thefigure. #1}
203: \end{center}}
204: \else
205: {\begin{center}
206: {\footnotesize
207: Fig.~\thefigure. #1}
208: \end{center}}
209: \fi}
210:
211:
212: %TABLE CAPTION
213: \newcommand{\tcaption}[1]{
214: \refstepcounter{table}
215: \setbox\@tempboxa = \hbox{\footnotesize Table~\thetable. #1}
216: \ifdim \wd\@tempboxa > 5in
217: {\begin{center}
218: \parbox{5in}{\footnotesize\smalllineskip Table~\thetable. #1}
219: \end{center}}
220: \else
221: {\begin{center}
222: {\footnotesize Table~\thetable. #1}
223: \end{center}}
224: \fi}
225:
226: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
227: %MACROS FOR SETTING \cite{x} OR \citeup{x}
228: \def\@citex[#1]#2{\if@filesw\immediate\write\@auxout
229: {\string\citation{#2}}\fi
230: \def\@citea{}\@cite{\@for\@citeb:=#2\do
231: {\@citea\def\@citea{,}\@ifundefined
232: {b@\@citeb}{{\bf ?}\@warning
233: {Citation `\@citeb' on page \thepage \space undefined}}
234: {\csname b@\@citeb\endcsname}}}{#1}}
235:
236: \newif\if@cghi
237: \def\cite{\@cghitrue\@ifnextchar [{\@tempswatrue
238: \@citex}{\@tempswafalse\@citex[]}}
239: \def\citelow{\@cghifalse\@ifnextchar [{\@tempswatrue
240: \@citex}{\@tempswafalse\@citex[]}}
241: \def\@cite#1#2{{$\null^{#1}$\if@tempswa\typeout
242: {IJCGA warning: optional citation argument
243: ignored: `#2'} \fi}}
244: \newcommand{\citeup}{\cite}
245:
246: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
247: %FOR SUB/SUPERSCRIPT BOLDFACED + ITALICS
248: \def\pmb#1{\setbox0=\hbox{#1}
249: \kern-.025em\copy0\kern-\wd0
250: \kern.05em\copy0\kern-\wd0
251: \kern-.025em\raise.0433em\box0}
252: \def\mbi#1{{\pmb{\mbox{\scriptsize ${#1}$}}}}
253: \def\mbr#1{{\pmb{\mbox{\scriptsize{#1}}}}}
254:
255: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
256: %FOR FNSYMBOL FOOTNOTE AND ALPH{FOOTNOTE}
257: \def\fnm#1{$^{\mbox{\scriptsize #1}}$}
258: \def\fnt#1#2{\footnotetext{\kern-.3em
259: {$^{\mbox{\scriptsize #1}}$}{#2}}}
260:
261: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
262: %FOR CREATING THE OPENING PAGE NUMBER
263: \def\fpage#1{\begingroup
264: \voffset=.3in
265: \thispagestyle{empty}\begin{table}[b]\centerline{\footnotesize #1}
266: \end{table}\endgroup}
267:
268: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
269: %MACRO FOR RUNNINGHEAD
270: \def\runninghead#1#2{\pagestyle{myheadings}
271: \markboth{{\protect\footnotesize\it{\quad #1}}\hfill}
272: {\hfill{\protect\footnotesize\it{#2\quad}}}}
273: \headsep=15pt
274:
275: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
276: \font\tenrm=cmr10
277: \font\tenit=cmti10
278: \font\tenbf=cmbx10
279: \font\bfit=cmbxti10 at 10pt
280: \font\ninerm=cmr9
281: \font\nineit=cmti9
282: \font\ninebf=cmbx9
283: \font\eightrm=cmr8
284: \font\eightit=cmti8
285: \font\eightbf=cmbx8
286: \font\sevenrm=cmr7
287: \font\fiverm=cmr5
288:
289: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
290: \newtheorem{theorem}{\indent Theorem}
291: %OR \newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[sectionc] WHICH HAS SECTION NUMBER
292:
293: \newtheorem{lemma}{Lemma}
294: %OR USE \newtheorem{lemma}{Lemma}[sectionc]
295:
296: \newtheorem{definition}{Definition}
297: \newtheorem{corollary}{Corollary}
298: %USERS CAN ADD ON THEIR OWN NEW THEOREM-LIKE ENVIRONMENTS.
299:
300: \newcommand{\proof}[1]{{\tenbf Proof.} #1 $\Box$.}
301: \def\be{\begin{equation}}
302: \def\ee{\end{equation}}
303: \def\simlt{\stackrel{<}{{}_\sim}}
304: \def\simgt{\stackrel{>}{{}_\sim}}
305: %--------------------END OF MPLA1.STY------------------------------------------
306:
307: %--------------------START OF DATA FILE----------------------------------------
308: \textwidth=5truein
309: \textheight=7.56truein
310:
311: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
312: %DEFINITIONS
313: \def\qed{\hbox{${\vcenter{\vbox{ %HOLLOW SQUARE
314: \hrule height 0.4pt\hbox{\vrule width 0.4pt height 6pt
315: \kern5pt\vrule width 0.4pt}\hrule height 0.4pt}}}$}}
316:
317: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\fnsymbol{footnote}} %USE SYMBOLIC FOOTNOTE
318:
319: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
320:
321: \begin{document}
322: \setlength{\textheight}{7.7truein} %for 2nd page onwards
323:
324: %\runninghead{The Neutralino Mass: Correlation With The Charginos}
325: %{M. Boz, N. K. Pak}
326:
327: \normalsize\textlineskip
328: \thispagestyle{empty}
329: \setcounter{page}{1}
330:
331: %\copyrightheading{} %{Vol. 0, No.0 (1992) 000--000}
332:
333: %\vspace*{0.88truein}
334:
335: \fpage{1}
336: \centerline{\bf THE NEUTRALINO MASS: CORRELATION WITH THE CHARGINOS}
337: \vspace*{0.37truein}
338: \centerline{\footnotesize M\"{U}GE BOZ}
339: \baselineskip=12pt
340: \centerline{\footnotesize\it Physics Department, Hacettepe University}
341: \baselineskip=10pt
342: \centerline{\footnotesize\it Ankara, 06532, Turkey }
343: \vspace*{10pt}
344:
345:
346: \centerline{\footnotesize NAMIK K. PAK}
347: \baselineskip=12pt
348: \centerline{\footnotesize\it Physics Department, Middle East Tecnical University}
349: \baselineskip=10pt
350: \centerline{\footnotesize\it Ankara, 06531, Turkey }
351: \vspace*{10pt}
352:
353:
354:
355:
356: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
357: \begin{abstract}
358: \noindent
359: As the fundamental SU(2) supersymmetric parameters can be
360: determined in the chargino sector, and the
361: remaining fundamental parameters of the minimal supersymmetric
362: extensions of the standard model can
363: be analyzed in the neutralino sector, the two sectors
364: can be correlated via these parameters.
365: We have shown that for the CP conserving case,
366: the masses of all the neutralinos can be determined in terms of
367: the chargino masses,
368: and $\tan\beta$. In this case the neutralino masses are quite insensitive to the
369: variations of $\tan\beta$; they change by about $\%15$ when $\tan\beta$
370: varies in the range from 5 to 50.
371: In the CP violating case, the neutralino masses are found to be
372: quite sensitive to the variations of the CP violating phase.
373: For the heavier neutralinos the dependence of the masses to the CP violating phase
374: show complementary behaviour at CP violating points.\\
375: %PACS: 12.60.Jv, 11.30.Er, 11.30.Pb\\
376: %Key-Words: supersymmetry, explicit CP violation, neutralino, chargino.
377: \end{abstract}
378: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
379: \section{Introduction and Summary}
380: The Lagrangian of the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model
381: (MSSM) contains various mass parameters which are not necassarily real~\cite{Dugan}.
382: The phases of these parameters appear in several CP violating processes
383: such as the electric dipole moments~\cite{Ibrahim},
384: the decays and mixings of mesons~\cite{DemirOlive},
385: the Higgs phenomenology~\cite{Pilaftsis1,Boz2,BozPak},
386: and the chargino/neutralino systems~\cite{Choi1,Choi2,Choi3}.
387:
388:
389: One of the simplest sectors in supersymmetric (SUSY) theories
390: is that of the charginos. The $2\times 2$ chargino mass matrix
391: \begin{eqnarray}
392: M_{\chi}=\left(\begin{array}{c c} M_{2} & \sqrt{2} M_{W} \sin \beta \\
393: \sqrt{2} M_{W} \cos \beta & \mu \end{array}\right)~,
394: \end{eqnarray}
395: is built up by the SU(2) gaugino,
396: and the Higgsino mass parameters, $M_2$ and $\mu$, respectively, and the ratio
397: $\tan\beta=v_2/v_1$ of the expectation values of the two neutral
398: Higgs fields which break the electroweak symmetry.
399:
400: In the CP violating theories $M_2$, and
401: $\mu$ can be
402: complex. However, by the reparametrization of the fields $M_2$ can be taken as
403: real and positive, so that the remaining non-trivial phase can
404: be attributed to the $\mu$ parameter.
405: We define,
406: \begin{eqnarray}
407: \mu=|\mu|e^{i \varphi_\mu}
408: \end{eqnarray}
409: The chargino mass matrix $M_{\chi}$ can be diagonalized by
410: the following transformation:
411: \begin{eqnarray}
412: \label{def}
413: {\cal{U}}^{*} M_{\chi} {{\cal{V}}^{-1}} = \mbox{Diag}
414: (M_{ {\chi}^+_{1}}, M_{ {\chi}^+_{2}})~,
415: \end{eqnarray}
416: with the chargino mass eigenvalues $m^2_{\tilde{\chi}^+_{1,2}}$:
417: %
418: \begin{eqnarray}
419: m^2_{\tilde{\chi}^+_{1,2}}
420: =\frac{1}{2}\left[M^2_2+|\mu|^2+2 M^2_W \mp \Delta_\chi \right]
421: \end{eqnarray}
422: %
423: where
424: %
425: \begin{eqnarray}
426: \Delta_\chi &=&\bigg[(M^2_2-|\mu|^2-2 M_W^2 \cos 2 \beta)^2\nonumber\\
427: &+&
428: 8 M_W^2 ( M_2 ^2 \cos^2 \beta + |\mu|^2 \sin^2 \beta
429: + M_2 |\mu| \sin 2 \beta \cos\varphi_\mu) \bigg]^{1/2}
430: \end{eqnarray}
431: gives the difference between the two chargino masses
432: ($M_{\chi^+_2}^2- M_{\chi^+_1}^2$).
433:
434:
435: For given $\tan\beta$, the fundamental SUSY parameters $M_2$ and $|\mu|$
436: can be derived from these two masses~\cite{Choi2,Moultaka98}.
437: The sum and the difference of the chargino masses lead to the following equations
438: involving $M_2$ and $|\mu|$:
439: %
440: \begin{eqnarray}
441: \label{M2}
442: M_2^2+ |\mu|^2 = M^2_{\chi^+_1} + M^2_{\chi^+_2}-2 M^2_W~,
443: \end{eqnarray}
444: %
445: \begin{eqnarray}
446: \label{eq7}
447: M_2^2|\mu|^2 - 2 M^2_W \sin 2 \beta \cos \varphi_{\mu} M_2 |\mu| +
448: (M^4_W \sin^{2} 2 \beta - M^2_{\chi^+_1} M^2_{\chi^+_2})=0~.
449: \end{eqnarray}
450: The solution of (\ref{eq7}) is given as:
451: \begin{eqnarray}
452: \label{m2mu}
453: M_2 |\mu| = M^2_W \cos \varphi_{\mu} \sin 2\beta \pm \sqrt {M_{\chi^+_1}^2 M_{\chi^+_2}^2-
454: M_W^4 \sin^2 2 \beta \sin^2 \varphi_{\mu}}~.
455: \end{eqnarray}
456: %
457: From (6) and (8) one obtains the following solutions for $M_2$ and $|\mu|$:
458: \begin{eqnarray}
459: \label{M2mu}
460: 2 M_2^2 &=& (M^2_{\chi^+_1}+M^2_{\chi^+_2}- 2 M_W^2) \mp
461: \sqrt{ (M^2_{\chi^+_1}+M^2_{\chi^+_2}- 2 M_W^2)^2 -Q_{\pm}}~,
462: \end{eqnarray}
463: %
464: \begin{eqnarray}
465: 2 |\mu|^2 &=& (M^2_{\chi^+_1}+M^2_{\chi^+_2}- 2 M_W^2) \pm
466: \sqrt {(M^2_{\chi^+_1}+ M^2_{\chi^+_2}- 2 M_W^2)^2 - Q_{\pm}}~,
467: \end{eqnarray}
468: with
469: \begin{eqnarray}
470: Q_{\pm} &=&4 \bigg[M^2_{\chi^+_1} M^2_{\chi^+_2}
471: +M_W^4 \cos 2 \, \varphi_{\mu} \sin^ 2 2 \beta \nonumber\\
472: &\pm & 2 M_W^2 \cos \varphi_{\mu} \sin 2 \beta
473: \sqrt{M^2_{\chi^+_1} M^2_{\chi^+_2} -M_W^4 \sin^2 \varphi_{\mu} \sin^2 2 \beta}\bigg]~,
474: \end{eqnarray}
475: where the upper signs correspond to $M_2 < |\mu|$ regime, and the lower ones to
476: $M_2 > |\mu|$.
477:
478: Therefore, for given $\tan\beta$, $M_2$
479: and $|\mu|$ can be determined in terms of the masses of the charginos
480: (${M_{\chi^+_1}}$ and ${M_{\chi^+_2}}$) by
481: using (9), and (10) from which one gets four solutions corresponding to
482: different physical scenarios.
483: For $|\mu|< M_2$, the lightest chargino has a stronger higgsino-like component
484: and therefore is referred as higgsino-like~\cite{Choi3,Moultaka98}.
485: The solution $|\mu|>M_2$, corresponding to gaugino-like situation, can be
486: readily obtained by
487: the substitutions:
488: $M_2 \rightarrow |\mu|$, and $\mu \rightarrow \mbox{sign}
489: (\mu) \, M_2$~\cite{Choi3,Moultaka99}.
490:
491:
492: Let us now consider the mass matrix of the neutralino system:
493: \begin{eqnarray} M_{{\chi}^{0}} \ =\ \left(
494: \begin{array}{cccc} M_{1} & 0 & -M_Z s_W \cos\beta & M_Z s_W \sin\beta\\
495: 0 & M_{2} & M_Z c_W \cos \beta & -M_Z c_W \sin \beta\\
496: -M_Z s_W \cos \beta & M_Z c_W \cos \beta & 0 & -\mu \\
497: M_Z s_W \sin \beta & -M_Z c_W \sin \beta &
498: -\mu & 0 \end{array}\right),
499: \end{eqnarray}
500: The main difference of the mass spectra of the neutralino and chargino
501: system is the appearence of the SU(2) gaugino mass $M_1$, in the former.
502:
503:
504: The neutralino mass matrix can be diagonalized as follows:
505: \begin{eqnarray}
506: {\cal{N}}^{T} \, M_{{\chi}^{0}} \, {\cal{N}} =\mbox{Diag} \left(M_{\chi^{0}_4}, \cdots,
507: M_{\chi^{0}_1}\right)~,
508: \label{neutmat}
509: \end{eqnarray}
510: with ordering
511: $M_{\chi^{0}_4} > M_{\chi^{0}_3} > M_{\chi^{0}_2} > M_{\chi^{0}_1}$.
512:
513: Assuming the two chargino masses are known, it is possible to express the
514: neutralino masses in terms of these, for given $\tan\beta$.
515: In this work, we have obtained the neutralino masses numerically, by using
516: (\ref{neutmat}). In doing this, we use (9) and (10), for given $\tan\beta$.
517:
518:
519: Complete analytical solutions
520: can be derived for the
521: neutralino mass eigenvalues
522: (\ref{neutmat}) as functions of the SUSY parameters
523: %${M_2, |\mu|, \tan\beta}$
524: for both CP conserving~\cite{GunionHaber},
525: and CP violating theories~\cite{Choi3}.
526: Admitedly, the diagonalization
527: of the neutralino mass matrix is no easy job and the analytic expressions of the
528: resulting eigenvalues are rather lengthy and
529: complicated.
530:
531:
532: However, there are theoretically well motivated
533: assumptions, like for instance the universality of the soft mass parameters,
534: which could be easily implementable to the system.
535: Typically,
536: the gaugino mass parameter universality at the grand unification (GUT) scale,
537: leads to the approximate relation~\cite{Moultaka98}:
538: \begin{eqnarray}
539: M_1(M_Z) = 5/3 \tan^2 \theta_W M_2 (M_Z)~.
540: \end{eqnarray}
541:
542:
543: Furthermore, there are also very reasonable approximations
544: to these mass eigenvalues in limiting cases which are sufficiently compact to
545: allow a good understanding
546: of the analytic dependencies.
547: For instance, a particularly interesting
548: limit is approached when the
549: the supersymmetry mass parameters and their
550: splittings are much larger than
551: the electroweak scale $M_{SUSY}^2 >> M_Z^2$.
552: In this limit
553: the neutralino mass eigenvalues can be written in compact
554: (approximate) form as~\cite{Choi3}:
555: \begin{eqnarray}
556: M_{\chi^{0}_1}& =& |M_1| + {\cal Z}_1 \bigg[|M_1|+|\mu|\sin 2\beta
557: \cos \varphi_\mu \bigg]~,
558: \end{eqnarray}
559: \begin{eqnarray}
560: M_{\chi^{0}_2} &
561: =& |M_2| + {\cal Z}_2 \bigg[|M_2|+|\mu|\sin 2 \beta
562: \cos \varphi_\mu \bigg]~,
563: \end{eqnarray}
564: \begin{eqnarray}
565: M_{\chi^{0}_3} &=&|\mu| \bigg [1 - \frac{(1-\sin 2 \beta)}{2} \, ( {\cal Z}_1+{\cal Z} _2)\bigg]\nonumber\\[1mm]
566: &+& \frac{(1-\sin 2 \beta)}{2}\, \bigg[ {\cal Z}_1|M_1|
567: + {\cal Z}_2 |M_2| \bigg]\cos\varphi_\mu~,
568: \end{eqnarray}
569: \begin{eqnarray}
570: M_{\chi^{0}_4} & =&|\mu|\bigg
571: [1 - \frac{(1+\sin 2 \beta)}{2} \, ( {\cal Z}_1+{\cal Z} _2)\bigg]\nonumber\\[1mm]
572: &-& \frac{(1+\sin 2 \beta)}{2} \, \bigg[ {\cal Z}_1 |M_1|
573: + {\cal Z}_2 |M_2| \bigg]\cos\varphi_\mu~,
574: \end{eqnarray}
575: where
576: \begin{eqnarray}
577: {\cal Z}_ 1 =\frac{m^2_Z\, s^2_W}{|M_1|^2-|\mu|^2} \qquad {\rm and} \qquad
578: {\cal Z }_2 =\frac{m^2_Z\, c^2_W}{|M_2|^2-|\mu|^2}~.
579: \end{eqnarray}
580:
581: The masses of the charginos and neutralinos
582: are interesting observables which provide
583: clues about the SUSY-breaking structure of the
584: system~\cite{Tesla}. Therefore, particle masses, SUSY parameters,
585: the relations between the masses
586: themselves, the relations between the basic gaugino parameters and the physical masses,
587: are important for calculations.
588: Previous works on the subject include the analysis
589: at the lowest order processes~\cite{Moultaka99}, in the on-shell scheme~\cite{Hollik},
590: and aim to reconstruct the basic parameters based on
591: chargino production~\cite{Choi1,Choi2}.
592:
593:
594: In this work, our aim is to obtain the neutralino masses, from those of the charginos
595: and investigate the effects of the CP violating phase on the masses of the neutralinos,
596: taking the two chargino masses and $\tan\beta$ as input parameters.
597:
598:
599: In CP violating theories, the gaugino mass $M_2$, and the Higgsino-Dirac
600: mass parameter $\mu$ can be complex. However,
601: the gaugino mass $M_2$ can be taken to be real,
602: and hence the phase of the $\mu$ parameter
603: becomes the only non-trivial CP violating phase
604: in the theory. In this work, we choose $M_2$ to be real.
605: which means $M_1$ to be real also,
606: due to the interrelation between them. Thus, the only
607: non-trivial CP violating phase can
608: be attributed to the $\mu$ parameter.
609:
610:
611: In the following, we first briefly consider the CP conserving case,
612: where we calculate the neutralino masses numerically,
613: and analyze their dependence of $\tan\beta$.
614: Then we turn to the case for which there is CP violation in the theory,
615: and study the sensitivity of the neutralino masses to the CP violating phase.
616:
617: \section{Numerical Analysis}
618:
619: \subsection{CP conserving case}
620:
621: In the first part of the analysis,
622: we set $\varphi_{\mu}=0$ and
623: we take the two chargino masses,
624: and $\tan\beta$ as input parameters,
625: and calculate the neutralino masses $M_{\chi^{0}_i}$.
626:
627:
628: In our analysis, we fix the heavy chargino mass as $M_{\chi^+_2}=320~\mbox{GeV}$,
629: and choose two different values for the light chargino mass ($M_{\chi^+_1}$), as
630: $\tan\beta$ varies from 5 to 50.
631: \begin{figure}[htb]
632: \vspace*{-2.5truein}
633: \hspace*{0.3truein}
634: \centerline{\psfig{file=pFig1a.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }
635: \hspace*{-2.6truein}
636: \psfig{file=pFig1b.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }}
637: \vspace*{-2.9truein}
638: \fcaption{The $\tan\beta$ dependence of
639: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$, when
640: $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$~(left panel), and $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$~(right panel)
641: for $M_2<|\mu|$.}
642: \label{fig1}
643: \end{figure}
644: \begin{figure}[htb]
645: \vspace*{-2.5truein}
646: \hspace*{0.3truein}
647: \centerline{\psfig{file=mFig1a.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }
648: \hspace*{-2.6truein}
649: \psfig{file=mFig1b.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }}
650: \vspace*{-2.9truein}
651: \fcaption{The $\tan\beta$ dependence of
652: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$, when
653: $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$~(left panel), and $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$~(right panel)
654: for $M_2>|\mu|$.}
655: \label{fig2}
656: \end{figure}
657:
658:
659: In Figure 1 and Figure 2, we plot the variation of the lightest neutralino mass $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$
660: with respect to $\tan\beta$,
661: for $M_2 < |\mu|$ and for $M_2 > |\mu|$ regimes, respectively.
662: In both Figures the left panels are for $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$, and
663: the right panels are for $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$.
664:
665: It can be seen from both Figures that
666: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ increases with $\tan\beta$,
667: at both values of the lightest chargino mass
668: ($M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$ and $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$)
669: for both $M_2 < |\mu|$ and $M_2 > |\mu|$ regimes.
670:
671:
672: One can deduce that when $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$,
673: the gaugino and Higgsino Dirac mass
674: lie in the $M_2 \, (|\mu|) \sim 104-113~\mbox{GeV}$
675: and $|\mu|\, (M_2) \sim 299-296~\mbox{GeV}$ intervals, respectively, for $M_2 < |\mu|$
676: ($M_2 > |\mu|$).
677: When $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$, one can again deduce that
678: $M_2 \, (|\mu|)$ ranges from 164 to 175$~\mbox{GeV}$, whereas
679: $|\mu| \, (M_2)$ changes from 297 to 290 $\mbox{GeV}$.
680:
681: A comparative analysis of Figure 1 and Figure 2 suggest that
682: the lightest neutralino mass ($M_{{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$) changes by at most $\%15$
683: as $\tan\beta$ varies from 5 to
684: 50, thus depicting a low sensitivity.
685: For instance, the maximal and minimal values of
686: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ can be read as 45~$\mbox{GeV}$, and 52~$\mbox{GeV}$,
687: at $\tan\beta=5$, and $\tan\beta=50$, respectively, at $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$,
688: for $M_2 < |\mu|$.
689: Similar observations can be made for the $M_2 > |\mu|$ regime.
690: \begin{figure}[htb]
691: \vspace*{-2.5truein}
692: \hspace*{0.3truein}
693: \centerline{\psfig{file=pFig2a.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }
694: \hspace*{-2.6truein}
695: \psfig{file=pFig2b.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }}
696: \vspace*{-2.9truein}
697: \fcaption{ The $\tan\beta$ dependence of
698: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{2}}$, when
699: $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$~(left panel), and
700: $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$~(right panel) $M_2<|\mu|$.}
701: \label{fig3}
702: \end{figure}
703: \begin{figure}[htb]
704: \vspace*{-2.5truein}
705: \hspace*{0.3truein}
706: \centerline{\psfig{file=mFig2a.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }
707: \hspace*{-2.6truein}
708: \psfig{file=mFig2b.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }}
709: \vspace*{-2.9truein}
710: \fcaption{ The $\tan\beta$ dependence of
711: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{2}}$, when
712: $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$~(left panel), and
713: $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$~(right panel) $M_2>|\mu|$.}
714: \label{fig4}
715: \end{figure}
716:
717:
718:
719: In Figure 3 and in Figure 4, we plot the variation of the second light
720: neutralino mass $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{2}}$
721: with respect to $\tan\beta$,
722: for $M_2 < |\mu|$ and for $M_2 > |\mu|$ regimes, respectively.
723: In both Figures the left panels are for $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$, and
724: the right panels are for $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$.
725:
726: It can be seen from Figure 3 and Figure 4 that
727: similar to the variation of $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ (Figures 1 and 2),
728: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{2}}$
729: increases as $\tan\beta$ varies from 5 to 50,
730: for both $M_2 < |\mu|$ and $M_2 > |\mu|$ regimes.
731: The lower-upper bounds of $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{2}}$
732: can be read as 90-104 $\mbox{GeV}$ when $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$~(left panel of Fig. 3),
733: and 142-160~$\mbox{GeV}$ when $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$~(right panel of Fig. 3) for $M_2 < |\mu|$.
734: In passing to $M_2 > |\mu|$ regime, it is seen that the lower-upper bounds of $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{2}}$
735: increase by an amount of $\sim \%10$ (Figure 4).
736: \begin{figure}[htb]
737: \vspace*{-2.5truein}
738: \hspace*{0.3truein}
739: \centerline{\psfig{file=2pFig3a.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }
740: \hspace*{-2.6truein}
741: \psfig{file=2pFig3b.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }}
742: \vspace*{-2.9truein}
743: \fcaption{ The $\tan\beta$ dependence of
744: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{3}}$, when
745: $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$~(left panel), and
746: $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$~(right panel) for $M_2<|\mu|$.}
747: \label{fig5}
748: \end{figure}
749: \begin{figure}[htb]
750: \vspace*{-2.5truein}
751: \hspace*{0.3truein}
752: \centerline{\psfig{file=2mFig3a.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }
753: \hspace*{-2.6truein}
754: \psfig{file=mFig3b.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }}
755: \vspace*{-2.9truein}
756: \fcaption{ The $\tan\beta$ dependence of
757: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{3}}$, when
758: $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$~(left panel), and
759: $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$~(right panel) for $M_2>|\mu|$.}
760: \label{fig6}
761: \end{figure}
762:
763: Up to now we have studied the $\tan\beta$ behaviour of the lighter neutralinos
764: ($M_{{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$
765: and $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{2}}$). The assigned values for the
766: fundamental parameters in our numerical analysis indeed satisfy the assumption
767: which went into the
768: expressions (15)-(16).
769:
770: Next, we pass to the heavier neutralinos in which case
771: we plot the variation of the next-to heaviest neutralino $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{3}}$
772: mass with respect to $\tan\beta$,
773: for $M_2 < |\mu|$ and for $M_2 > |\mu|$ regimes in Figure 5 and in Figure 6, respectively.
774: In both of the Figures the left panels are for $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$, and
775: the right panels are for $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$.
776:
777: We observe from Figure 5 that the
778: behaviour of the ${\chi}^{0}_{3}$ mass with respect to $\tan\beta$
779: is the same with the lighter neutralinos
780: (${\chi}^{0}_{1}$ and ${\chi}^{0}_{2}$), for the lighter
781: chargino ($M_{\chi^+_1}=105~ \mbox{GeV}$), however it
782: reverses for the heavier chargino ($M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$) for the $M_2 < |\mu|$
783: regime. To understand this interesting behaviour it may be useful to look into the
784: analytic expression (17), where $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{3}}$ is related to
785: the gaugino masses of $M_1$ and $M_2$
786: by the combinations of
787: $Z_1$ and $Z_2$.
788: It can be observed that among the two contributions to the expression (17),
789: the first term of (17) always dominates, as compared to the second term
790: for both $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$ and $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$,
791: cases.
792:
793:
794: One notes that this term increases with
795: increasing $\tan\beta$ for
796: the lighter chargino mass ($M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$), whereas
797: it decreases
798: for the heavier chargino mass ($M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$).
799: Since the contribution of this term is dominant, the neutralino mass gets heavier with the
800: increase in $\tan\beta$
801: for the lighter
802: chargino mass (the left panel of Figure 5), and the behaviour is reversed for the heavier chargino mass
803: (the right panel of Figure 5).
804:
805:
806: As can be seen from (17), as the lighter chargino mass $M_{\chi^+_1}$ moves from a
807: lower value ($M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$)
808: to a higher one ($M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$), then the three different
809: $\tan\beta$ contributions compete against each other, and their roles are
810: changed at a certain critical value.
811: This is the reason for the shift of the pattern of Figure 5 from one panel
812: to the other.
813: The critical value of the chargino mass is $M_{\chi^+_1}=130~\mbox{GeV}$
814: at which the $\tan\beta$-$M_{{\chi}^{0}_{3}}$ behaviour reverses.
815:
816: Similar observations can be made for the
817: $M_2 > |\mu|$ regime,
818: by taking into account of the fact that
819: the roles of $M_2$ and $|\mu|$ are interchanged for this case,
820: under the substitution:
821: %mentioned in the Introduction,
822: %namely
823: $M_2 \rightarrow |\mu|$, and $ \mu \rightarrow \mbox{sign}
824: (\mu) \, M_2$~\cite{Choi3,Moultaka99}.
825:
826:
827: That this behaviour is observed for
828: the mass of ${\chi}^{0}_{3}$ particularly,
829: is due to the fact that
830: its mass lies in the transitional region from
831: the lighter chargino masses to the heavier.
832: \begin{figure}[htb]
833: \vspace*{-2.5truein}
834: \hspace*{0.3truein}
835: \centerline{\psfig{file=pFig4a.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }
836: \hspace*{-2.6truein}
837: \psfig{file=pFig4b.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }}
838: \vspace*{-2.9truein}
839: \fcaption{ The $\tan\beta$ dependence of
840: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{4}}$, when
841: $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$~(left panel), and
842: $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$~(right panel) for $M_2<|\mu|$.}
843: \label{fig7}
844: \end{figure}
845: \begin{figure}[htb]
846: \vspace*{-2.5truein}
847: \hspace*{0.3truein}
848: \centerline{\psfig{file=mFig4a.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }
849: \hspace*{-2.6truein}
850: \psfig{file=mFig4b.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }}
851: \vspace*{-2.9truein}
852: \fcaption{ The $\tan\beta$ dependence of
853: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{4}}$, when
854: $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$~(left panel), and
855: $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$~(right panel) for $M_2>|\mu|$.}
856: \label{fig8}
857: \end{figure}
858:
859:
860:
861:
862: In Figure 7 and in Figure 8, we plot the variation of the mass of the heaviest
863: neutralino $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{4}}$ with respect to $\tan\beta$,
864: for $M_2 < |\mu|$ and for $M_2 > |\mu|$ regimes, respectively.
865: In both Figures the left panels are for $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$, and
866: the right panels are for $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$.
867:
868:
869:
870: We see from Figure 7 and Figure 8 that
871: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{4}}$ decreases, as $\tan\beta$ increases.
872: Like $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{3}}$, it can be observed that among the two contributions to (18),
873: the first term of (18) always dominates, as compared to the second term
874: for both $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$ and $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$,
875: cases. One notes that this term decreases
876: with increasing $\tan\beta$
877: for both the lighter and the heavier chargino masses
878: ($M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$ and $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$, respectively).
879: Since the contribution of this term is dominant, $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{4}}$ gets lightened
880: with the increase in $\tan\beta$.
881:
882: A comparative analysis of Figure 7 and Figure 8 suggest that the mass of the heaviest neutralino
883: remains around $325~\mbox{GeV}$ for the lighter chargino ($M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$),
884: and does not exceed $330~\mbox{GeV}$,
885: for the heavier chargino ($M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$).
886:
887:
888: \subsection{CP violating case}
889:
890: In the second part of our analysis, we carry out the analysis when there is CP
891: violation. In the following, we analyze the $\varphi_{\mu}$ dependence of
892: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{i}}$, as $\varphi_{\mu}$ ranges from 0 to $ 2 \pi$.
893: In our analysis, we fix $M_{\chi^+_2}=320~\mbox{GeV}$ and
894: we choose two values of the lightest chargino mass, like the CP conserving case.
895: Here, we consider two specific values of
896: $\tan\beta $; Namely, $\tan\beta=5$, and $\tan\beta=50$, representing the low and
897: high $\tan\beta$ regimes.
898: \begin{figure}[htb]
899: \vspace*{-2.5truein}
900: \hspace*{0.3truein}
901: \centerline{\psfig{file=pFig5a.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }
902: \hspace*{-2.6truein}
903: \psfig{file=pFig5b.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }}
904: \vspace*{-2.9truein}
905: \fcaption{The $\varphi_{\mu}$ dependence of
906: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$, when $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$~(left panel),
907: and $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$~(right panel), for $M_2<|\mu|$. }
908: \label{fig9}
909: \end{figure}
910: \begin{figure}[htb]
911: \vspace*{-2.5truein}
912: \hspace*{0.3truein}
913: \centerline{\psfig{file=mFig5a.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }
914: \hspace*{-2.6truein}
915: \psfig{file=mFig5b.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }}
916: \vspace*{-2.9truein}
917: \fcaption{The $\varphi_{\mu}$ dependence of
918: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$, when $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$~(left panel),
919: and $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$~(right panel), for $M_2>|\mu|$. }
920: \label{fig10}
921: \end{figure}
922:
923: In Figures 9, and 10, we show the $\varphi_{\mu}$ dependence of
924: the mass of the lightest neutralino
925: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$, at $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$~(left panels), and
926: $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$~(right panels), for $M_2 < |\mu|$,
927: and $M_2 > |\mu|$ regimes, respectively. In
928: each panel the dotted curves are for $\tan\beta=5$, whereas
929: the solid ones are for $\tan\beta=50$.
930:
931: %As the left panels of Figure 9 and Figure 10 suggest,
932: When $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$,
933: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ changes from 45 to 60~$\mbox{GeV}$
934: and from 70 to 105~$\mbox{GeV}$, for the $M_2 < |\mu|$ and $M_2 >|\mu|$ regimes, respectively, at $\tan\beta=5$,
935: as $\varphi_{\mu}$ varies in the [0 , $ \pi$] interval.
936: For $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$, it is
937: seen that the lower
938: and upper bounds of $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$
939: increases for both $M_2 <|\mu|$ and $M_2> |\mu|$ regimes, as expected.
940:
941:
942: A comparative analysis of Figures 9 and Figure 10
943: suggest that $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ is quite
944: sensitive to the variations of $\varphi_{\mu}$.
945: It is interesting to note that
946: when $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$,
947: %for the $M_2 >|\mu|$ regime,
948: $\varphi_{\mu}$ dependence of
949: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ is sharper at the CP violating points ($\varphi_{\mu}$=$\pi/2$ and $3\pi/2$),
950: for the $M_2 >|\mu|$ regime, at both $\tan\beta=5$ and $\tan\beta=50$.
951: When $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$~(right panel of Figure 10),
952: one observes a slower variation at the CP violating points.
953: On the other hand, for the $M_2< |\mu|$ regime, it can be seen that
954: the variation of $\varphi_{\mu}$
955: (at both $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$ and
956: $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$),
957: is slower as compared to $M_2 >|\mu|$ regime (see, for instance the analytical
958: expression of $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ given by (15)).
959:
960:
961:
962:
963: One notes that, when $M_{\chi^+_2}=320~\mbox{GeV}$,
964: $(i)$ $|\mu|$ changes from $299~\mbox{GeV}$, to $292~\mbox{GeV}$,
965: whereas $M_2$ from $104~\mbox{GeV}$ to $124~\mbox{GeV}$, for
966: $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$,
967: $(ii)$ $|\mu|$ changes from $297~\mbox{GeV}$, to $280~\mbox{GeV}$,
968: whereas $M_2$ from $164~\mbox{GeV}$ to $192~\mbox{GeV}$, for
969: $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$ at $\tan\beta=5$.
970: On the other hand,
971: $(i)$ $|\mu|$ changes from $296~\mbox{GeV}$, to $295~\mbox{GeV}$,
972: whereas $M_2$ from $113~\mbox{GeV}$ to $115~\mbox{GeV}$, for
973: $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$,
974: $(ii)$ $|\mu|$ changes from $290~\mbox{GeV}$, to $288~\mbox{GeV}$,
975: whereas $M_2$ from $175~\mbox{GeV}$ to $178~\mbox{GeV}$, for
976: $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$ at $\tan\beta=50$.
977: \begin{figure}[htb]
978: \vspace*{-2.5truein}
979: \hspace*{0.3truein}
980: \centerline{\psfig{file=pFig6a.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }
981: \hspace*{-2.6truein}
982: \psfig{file=pFig6b.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }}
983: \vspace*{-2.9truein}
984: \fcaption{The $\varphi_{\mu}$ dependence of
985: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{2}}$, when $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$~(left panel),
986: and $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$~(right panel), for $M_2<|\mu|$. }
987: \label{fig11}
988: \end{figure}
989: \begin{figure}[htb]
990: \vspace*{-2.5truein}
991: \hspace*{0.3truein}
992: \centerline{\psfig{file=mFig6a.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }
993: \hspace*{-2.6truein}
994: \psfig{file=mFig6b.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }}
995: \vspace*{-2.9truein}
996: \fcaption{The $\varphi_{\mu}$ dependence of
997: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{2}}$, when $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$~(left panel),
998: and $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$~(right panel), for $M_2>|\mu|$. }
999: \label{fig12}
1000: \end{figure}
1001:
1002:
1003:
1004:
1005: In Figures 11, and 12, we show the $\varphi_{\mu}$ dependence of
1006: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{2}}$, for $M_2 < |\mu|$,
1007: and $M_2 > |\mu|$ regimes, respectively,
1008: when $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$~(left panels), and
1009: $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$~(right panels).
1010: In each Figure, the dotted curves correspond to $\tan\beta=5$, whereas
1011: the solid curves to $\tan\beta=50$.
1012:
1013: One notes from the left panel of Figure 11 that
1014: the variation is $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{2}}$,
1015: is more faster as compared to $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ (see Figure 9).
1016: Such behaviour can be explained by referring into the analytic expression
1017: of $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{2}}$ (16).
1018:
1019: On the other hand,
1020: as can be seen from the left panel of Figure 12, starting from $\varphi_{\mu}=0$
1021: at $112~\mbox{GeV}$, $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{2}}$
1022: decreases to $105~\mbox{GeV}$ at $\varphi_{\mu}=\pi/2$,
1023: then it increases to $140~\mbox{GeV}$ at $\varphi_{\mu}=\pi$,
1024: at $\tan\beta=5$. For the heavier chargino~(right panel)
1025: one observes a faster and sharper variation of $\varphi_{\mu}$,
1026: as compared to the lighter chargino~(left panel).
1027: However, it is seen that $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{2}}$
1028: gets heavier together with the heavier chargino mass ($M_{\chi^+_1}=160~ \mbox{GeV}$),
1029: without causing too big splitting among the low and high $\tan\beta$
1030: regimes. For instance, the maximal values at $\varphi_{\mu}=\pi$, for $\tan\beta=5$ and
1031: $\tan\beta=50$ cases, are $178~\mbox{GeV}$ and $180~\mbox{GeV}$, respectively.
1032: \begin{figure}[htb]
1033: \vspace*{-2.5truein}
1034: \hspace*{0.3truein}
1035: \centerline{\psfig{file=pFig7a.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }
1036: \hspace*{-2.6truein}
1037: \psfig{file=pFig7b.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }}
1038: \vspace*{-2.9truein}
1039: \fcaption{The $\varphi_{\mu}$ dependence of
1040: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{3}}$, when $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$~(left panel),
1041: and $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$~(right panel), for $M_2<|\mu|$. }
1042: \label{fig13}
1043: \end{figure}
1044: \begin{figure}[htb]
1045: \vspace*{-2.5truein}
1046: \hspace*{0.3truein}
1047: \centerline{\psfig{file=mFig7a.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }
1048: \hspace*{-2.6truein}
1049: \psfig{file=mFig7b.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }}
1050: \vspace*{-2.9truein}
1051: \fcaption{The $\varphi_{\mu}$ dependence of
1052: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{3}}$, when $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$~(left panel),
1053: and $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$~(right panel), for $M_2>|\mu|$. }
1054: \label{fig14}
1055: \end{figure}
1056:
1057:
1058:
1059: In Figures 13, and 14, we show the $\varphi_{\mu}$ dependence of
1060: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{3}}$, at $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$~(left panels), and
1061: $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$~(right panels), for $M_2 < |\mu|$,
1062: and $M_2 > |\mu|$ regimes, respectively.
1063: In the each panel, the dotted curves correspond to $\tan\beta=5$, whereas
1064: the solid curves to $\tan\beta=50$.
1065:
1066: It is seen from the left panel of Figure 13 that the variation of $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{3}}$
1067: with respect to $\varphi_{\mu}$ is much faster as compared to the lighter
1068: neutralinos $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$, and $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{2}}$, as expected (see for
1069: instance the analytical expression of $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{3}}$ given by the expression
1070: (17)).
1071:
1072: It is interesting to note that
1073: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{3}}$ at lighter
1074: $M_{\chi^+_1}$~($M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$, the left panel
1075: of Figure 12) has similar $\varphi_{\mu}$ dependence
1076: with that of $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{3}}$
1077: at heavier $M_{\chi^+_1}$~($M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$, the right
1078: panel of Figure 14).
1079:
1080:
1081: Finally, in Figures 15, and 16, we show the $\varphi_{\mu}$ dependence of
1082: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{4}}$, at $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$~(left panels), and
1083: $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$~(right panels), for $M_2 < |\mu|$,
1084: and $M_2 > |\mu|$ regimes, respectively.
1085: In the each panel, the dotted curves correspond to $\tan\beta=5$, whereas
1086: the solid curves to $\tan\beta=50$.
1087: \begin{figure}[htb]
1088: \vspace*{-2.5truein}
1089: \hspace*{0.3truein}
1090: \centerline{\psfig{file=pFig8a.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }
1091: \hspace*{-2.6truein}
1092: \psfig{file=pFig8b.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }}
1093: \vspace*{-2.9truein}
1094: \fcaption{The $\varphi_{\mu}$ dependence of
1095: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{4}}$, when $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$~(left panel),
1096: and $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$~(right panel), for $M_2<|\mu|$. }
1097: \label{fig15}
1098: \end{figure}
1099: \begin{figure}[htb]
1100: \vspace*{-2.5truein}
1101: \hspace*{0.3truein}
1102: \centerline{\psfig{file=mFig8a.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }
1103: \hspace*{-2.6truein}
1104: \psfig{file=mFig8b.ps,height=7.0in,width=5.0in }}
1105: \vspace*{-2.9truein}
1106: \fcaption{The $\varphi_{\mu}$ dependence of
1107: $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{4}}$, when $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$~(left panel),
1108: and $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$~(right panel), for $M_2>|\mu|$. }
1109: \label{fig16}
1110: \end{figure}
1111:
1112:
1113: A comparative analysis of Figures 13-16 suggest that
1114: for the heavier neutralinos (i=3,4), the dependence of the masses to $\varphi_{\mu}$
1115: show complementary behaviour.
1116: For instance the CP violating points
1117: ($\varphi_{\mu}=\pi/2, 3 \pi/2$)
1118: appear as local maxima
1119: for the ${\chi}^{0}_{3}$ mass,
1120: as opposed to
1121: ${\chi}^{0}_{4}$ case where
1122: those values are local minima, for both values of
1123: $M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$ and
1124: $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$,
1125: in the $M_2 < |\mu|$ regime. This
1126: complementarity at the CP violating points for the heavier sector can easily
1127: be seen from the expressions (17)-(18).
1128: A similar complementarity holds for
1129: the lighter neutralinos (i=1,2),
1130: at the lighter chargino mass in the $M_2 > |\mu|$ regime
1131: (the left panels of Figures 10 and 12).
1132: On the other hand, the CP violating points appear as local maxima
1133: for both values of the
1134: lightest chargino masses in the $M_2 < |\mu|$ regime (Figures 9 and 11).
1135:
1136:
1137:
1138: It can also be seen from Figures 9-16, that the variations of the lighter
1139: neutralino masses (i=1,2) with $\tan\beta$, is about $\%15$
1140: in the range from 5 to 50 at the CP violating points as in the CP conserving case.
1141: However, for the heavier neutralino case, the difference of the masses
1142: between high and low $\tan\beta$ regimes becomes very small.
1143:
1144:
1145:
1146:
1147:
1148: \section{Conclusions}
1149:
1150: We have analyzed the neutralino system, whose parameters are
1151: extracted from the chargino system, for both CP conserving and CP violating
1152: cases. Here is a brief summary of our main results:
1153:
1154: When $\varphi_{\mu}=0$,
1155: given $M_{\chi^+_1}$, $M_{\chi^+_2}$ and $\tan\beta$, the masses of all the
1156: neutralinos can be determined.
1157: The variation of $\tan\beta$ from 5 to 50 leads to at most
1158: $\%15$ change in the neutralino masses.
1159:
1160: The $\tan\beta$ behaviour of the lighter neutralinos $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{i}}$
1161: (i=1,2) are opposite to the that of the heaviest
1162: neutralino (i=4) for the lower and the higher values of the
1163: lighter chargino mass ($M_{\chi^+_1}=105~\mbox{GeV}$, and $M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$),
1164: for both $M_2 <|\mu|$ and $M_2 >|\mu|$ cases.
1165: The assigned values for the
1166: fundamental parameters in our numerical analysis indeed
1167: satisfy the assumption which went into the
1168: expressions (15)-(18).
1169: On the other hand, the switched behaviour of $M_{{\chi}^{0}_{3}}$ stems from the
1170: fact that the different
1171: $\tan\beta$ contributions given by (17) compete against each other, and their roles are
1172: changed at a certain critical value.
1173: Namely, there is a critical value of
1174: the lighter chargino mass $M_{\chi^+_1}=130~\mbox{GeV}$
1175: at which the $\tan\beta$-$M_{{\chi}^{0}_{3}}$ behaviour reverses.
1176:
1177:
1178:
1179: Our analysis shows that for the lower value of the lighter chargino mass
1180: ($M_{\chi^+_1}=105~
1181: \mbox{GeV}$), $M_2$ $(|\mu|)$ ranges in the $\sim 104-113~\mbox{GeV}$
1182: interval, as $|\mu|$ $(M_2)$ changes from $\sim 299-296~\mbox{GeV}$, for $M_2 < |\mu|$
1183: ($M_2 > |\mu|$), as $\tan\beta$
1184: ranging from 5 to 50. On the other hand, for the higher value of the
1185: lighest chargino mass ($M_{\chi^+_1}=160~\mbox{GeV}$), the corresponding values
1186: are: $M_2 \, (|\mu|)$: 164-175$~\mbox{GeV}$, and
1187: $|\mu| \, (M_2)$: 297-290 $\mbox{GeV}$.
1188:
1189:
1190:
1191:
1192: In the CP violating case, the complementary behaviour among
1193: the heavier neutralinos (i=3,4) can be observed
1194: in the sense that while the CP violating points appearing as local maxima
1195: for the ${\chi}^{0}_{3}$ mass, they turn out to be local minima for ${\chi}^{0}_{4}$,
1196: for values of the lighter chargino mass in the $M_2 < |\mu|$ regime.
1197: This complementarity at the CP violating points for the heavier sector can easily
1198: be seen from the expressions (17)-(18).
1199: Such a behaviour can also be observed for the lighter neutralinos
1200: (i=1,2), but only
1201: for the lighter chargino case in the $M_2 > |\mu|$ regime.
1202:
1203:
1204:
1205:
1206:
1207:
1208: \begin{thebibliography}{000}
1209: \bibitem{Dugan}
1210: M.~Dugan, B.~Grinstein and L.~J.~Hall,
1211: %``CP Violation In The Minimal N=1 Supergravity Theory,''
1212: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 255}, 413 (1985).
1213: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B255,413;%%
1214:
1215:
1216: \bibitem {Ibrahim}
1217: T.~Ibrahim and P.~Nath,
1218: %``The neutron and the lepton EDMs in MSSM, large CP violating phases, and the cancellation mechanism,''
1219: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 58}, 111301 (1998)
1220: [Erratum-ibid.\ D {\bf 60}, 099902 (1999)]
1221: [arXiv:hep-ph/9807501];
1222: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9807501;%%
1223: T.~Ibrahim and P.~Nath,
1224: %``Large CP phases and the cancellation mechanism in EDMs in SUSY, string and brane models,''
1225: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 61}, 093004 (2000)
1226: [arXiv:hep-ph/9910553];
1227: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9910553;%%
1228: T.~Ibrahim,
1229: %``Mixing of the CP even and the CP odd Higgs bosons and the EDM constraints,''
1230: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 64}, 035009 (2001)
1231: [arXiv:hep-ph/0102218].
1232: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0102218;%%
1233:
1234: \bibitem{DemirOlive}
1235: D.~A.~Demir and K.~A.~Olive,
1236: %``B $\to$ X/s gamma in supersymmetry with explicit CP violation,''
1237: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 65}, 034007 (2002)
1238: [arXiv:hep-ph/0107329];
1239: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0107329;%%
1240: M.~Boz and N.~K.~Pak,
1241: %``Dipole coefficients in B $\to$ X/s gamma in supersymmetry with large tan(beta) and explicit CP violation,''
1242: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 531}, 119 (2002)
1243: [arXiv:hep-ph/0201199].
1244: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0201199;%%
1245:
1246:
1247: \bibitem{Pilaftsis1}
1248: A.~Pilaftsis,
1249: %``Higgs scalar-pseudoscalar mixing in the minimal supersymmetric standard model,''
1250: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 435}, 88 (1998)
1251: [arXiv:hep-ph/9805373];
1252: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9805373;%%
1253: %A.~Pilaftsis,
1254: %``CP-odd tadpole renormalization of Higgs scalar-pseudoscalar mixing,''
1255: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 58}, 096010 (1998)
1256: [arXiv:hep-ph/9803297];
1257: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9803297;%%
1258: A.~Pilaftsis and C.~E.~Wagner,
1259: %``Higgs bosons in the minimal supersymmetric standard model with explicit CP violation,''
1260: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 553}, 3 (1999)
1261: [arXiv:hep-ph/9902371];
1262: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9902371;%%
1263: D.~A.~Demir,
1264: %``Effects of the supersymmetric phases on the neutral Higgs sector,''
1265: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 60}, 055006 (1999)
1266: [arXiv:hep-ph/9901389];
1267: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9901389;%%
1268: M.~Carena, J.~R.~Ellis, A.~Pilaftsis and C.~E.~Wagner,
1269: %``Renormalization-group-improved effective potential for the MSSM Higgs sector with explicit CP violation,''
1270: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 586}, 92 (2000)
1271: [arXiv:hep-ph/0003180];
1272: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0003180;%%
1273: S.~Y.~Choi, M.~Drees and J.~S.~Lee,
1274: %``Loop corrections to the neutral Higgs boson sector of the MSSM with explicit CP violation,''
1275: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 481}, 57 (2000)
1276: [arXiv:hep-ph/0002287];
1277: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0002287;%%
1278: T.~Ibrahim and P.~Nath,
1279: %``Corrections to the Higgs boson masses and mixings from chargino, W and charged Higgs exchange loops and large CP phases,''
1280: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 63}, 035009 (2001)
1281: [arXiv:hep-ph/0008237];
1282: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0008237;%%
1283: S.~W.~Ham, S.~K.~Oh, E.~J.~Yoo and H.~K.~Lee,
1284: %``The Mass Of The Charged Higgs Boson In The Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model With Explicit CP Violation At 1-Loop Level,''
1285: J.\ Phys.\ G {\bf 27}, 1 (2001).
1286: %%CITATION = JPHGB,G27,1;%%
1287:
1288: \bibitem{Boz2}
1289: M.~Boz,
1290: %``The Higgs masses and explicit CP violation in the gluino axion model,''
1291: Mod.\ Phys.\ Lett.\ A {\bf 17}, 215 (2002)
1292: [arXiv:hep-ph/0008052];
1293: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0008052;%%
1294: %M.~Boz,
1295: %``The CP properties of the lightest Higgs boson with sbottom effects,''
1296: J.\ Phys.\ G {\bf 28}, 2377 (2002)
1297: [arXiv:hep-ph/0207050];
1298: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0207050;%%
1299: %M.~Boz,
1300: %``The constraints on CP violating phases in models with a dynamical gluino
1301: %phase,''
1302: Mod.\ Phys.\ Lett.\ A {\bf 19}, 433 (2004)
1303: [arXiv:hep-ph/0311248].
1304: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0311248;%%
1305:
1306:
1307:
1308: \bibitem{BozPak}
1309: M.~Boz and N.~K.~Pak,
1310: %``Explicit CP violation in the general two-doublet model, with real CKM matrix,''
1311: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 65}, 075014 (2002);
1312: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D65,075014;%%
1313: A.~Dedes and A.~Pilaftsis,
1314: %``Resummed effective Lagrangian for Higgs-mediated FCNC interactions in the
1315: %CP-violating MSSM,''
1316: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67}, 015012 (2003)
1317: [arXiv:hep-ph/0209306];
1318: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0209306;%%
1319: D.~A.~Demir,
1320: %``Higgs boson couplings to quarks with supersymmetric CP and flavor
1321: %violations,''
1322: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 571}, 193 (2003)
1323: [arXiv:hep-ph/0303249];
1324: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0303249;%%
1325:
1326:
1327:
1328: \bibitem{Choi1}
1329: S.~Y.~Choi, A.~Djouadi, H.~K.~Dreiner, J.~Kalinowski and P.~M.~Zerwas,
1330: %``Chargino pair production in e+ e- collisions,''
1331: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 7}, 123 (1999)
1332: [arXiv:hep-ph/9806279].
1333: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9806279;%%
1334:
1335: \bibitem{Choi2}
1336: S.~Y.~Choi, A.~Djouadi, M.~Guchait, J.~Kalinowski, H.~S.~Song and P.~M.~Zerwas,
1337: %``Reconstructing the chargino system at e+ e- linear colliders,''
1338: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 14}, 535 (2000)
1339: [arXiv:hep-ph/0002033].
1340: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0002033;%%
1341:
1342:
1343: \bibitem{Choi3}
1344: S.~Y.~Choi, J.~Kalinowski, G.~Moortgat-Pick and P.~M.~Zerwas,
1345: %``Analysis of the neutralino system in supersymmetric theories,''
1346: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 22}, 563 (2001)
1347: [Addendum-ibid.\ C {\bf 23}, 769 (2002)]
1348: [arXiv:hep-ph/0108117].
1349: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0108117;%%
1350:
1351:
1352:
1353: \bibitem{Moultaka98}
1354: G.~Moultaka,
1355: ``Extracting chargino/neutralino mass parameters from physical
1356: observables,''
1357: Talk given at 29th International Conference on High-Energy Physics (ICHEP 98),
1358: Vancouver, Canada, 23-29 Jul 1998.
1359: In *Vancouver 1998, High energy physics, vol. 2* 1703-1709.
1360: arXiv:hep-ph/9810214.
1361: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9810214;%%
1362:
1363:
1364:
1365: \bibitem{Moultaka99}
1366: J.~L.~Kneur and G.~Moultaka,
1367: %``Inverting the supersymmetric standard model spectrum: From physical to
1368: %Lagrangian ino parameters,''
1369: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 59}, 015005 (1999)
1370: [arXiv:hep-ph/9807336];
1371: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9807336;%%
1372: %\bibitem{Kneur:1999nx}
1373: %J.~L.~Kneur and G.~Moultaka,
1374: %``Phases in the gaugino sector: Direct reconstruction of the basic parameters
1375: %and impact on the neutralino pair production,''
1376: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 61}, 095003 (2000)
1377: [arXiv:hep-ph/9907360].
1378: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9907360;%%
1379:
1380:
1381: \bibitem{GunionHaber}
1382: J.~F.~Gunion and H.~E.~Haber,
1383: %``Two-Body Decays Of Neutralinos And Charginos,''
1384: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 37}, 2515 (1988).
1385: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D37,2515;%%
1386:
1387:
1388:
1389: \bibitem{Tesla}
1390: J.~A.~Aguilar-Saavedra {\it et al.} [ECFA/DESY LC Physics Working Group
1391: Collaboration],
1392: %``TESLA Technical Design Report Part III: Physics at an e+e- Linear
1393: %Collider,''
1394: arXiv:hep-ph/0106315.
1395: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0106315;%%
1396:
1397:
1398:
1399: \bibitem{Hollik}
1400: T.~Fritzsche and W.~Hollik,
1401: %``Complete one-loop corrections to the mass spectrum of charginos and
1402: %neutralinos in the MSSM,''
1403: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 24}, 619 (2002)
1404: [arXiv:hep-ph/0203159];
1405: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0203159;%%
1406: %\bibitem{Eberl:2001eu}
1407: H.~Eberl, M.~Kincel, W.~Majerotto and Y.~Yamada,
1408: %``One-loop corrections to the chargino and neutralino mass matrices in the
1409: %on-shell scheme,''
1410: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 64}, 115013 (2001)
1411: [arXiv:hep-ph/0104109].
1412: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0104109;%%
1413:
1414:
1415:
1416: \end{thebibliography}
1417:
1418: \end{document}
1419:
1420:
1421:
1422:
1423:
1424:
1425:
1426:
1427:
1428:
1429:
1430:
1431:
1432:
1433:
1434:
1435:
1436:
1437:
1438:
1439:
1440:
1441:
1442:
1443:
1444:
1445:
1446:
1447:
1448:
1449:
1450:
1451:
1452: