1: \part[KK states at the LHC in models with localized fermions]{Kaluza--Klein states at the LHC in models with localized fermions}
2:
3: {\it E.~Accomando and K.~Benakli}
4:
5: \begin{abstract}
6: We give a brief review of some aspects of physics with TeV size
7: extra-dimensions. We focus on a minimal model with matter localized at the
8: boundaries
9: for the study of the production of Kaluza-Klein excitations of gauge bosons.
10: We briefly discuss different ways to depart from this simple analysis.
11: \end{abstract}
12:
13: \section{INTRODUCTION}
14: %\section{Introduction}
15:
16: Despite the remarkable success of the Standard Model (SM) in describing the
17: physical phenomena at the energies probed at present accelerators, some of
18: its theoretical aspects are still unsatisfactory. One of the lacking parts
19: concerns understanding the gravitational interactions as they destroy the
20: renormalizability of the theory. Furthermore, these quantum gravity effects
21: seem to imply the existence of extended objects living in more than four
22: dimensions. This raises many questions, as:
23:
24: Is it possible that our world has more dimensions than those we are aware of?
25: If so, why don't we see the other dimensions? Is there a way to detect them?
26:
27: Of course, the answer to the last question can only come for specific class
28: of models as it depends on the details of the realization of the
29: extra-dimensions and the way known particles emerge inside them.
30: The examples discussed in this review are the pioneer models described in
31: Refs. \cite{Antoniadis:1990ew, Antoniadis:1993jp,Antoniadis:1992fh, Antoniadis:1994yi, Benakli:1995ut}, when embedded in the complete
32: and consistent framework given in \cite{Arkani-Hamed:1998rs,Antoniadis:1998ig}.
33: We focus on such a scenario as our aim is to understand the most
34: important concepts underlying extra-dimension physics, and not to
35: display a collection of hypothetical models.
36:
37: Within our framework, two fundamental energy scales play a major role. The
38: first one, $M_s=l_s^{-1}$, is related to the inner structure of the basic
39: objects of the theory, that we assume to be elementary strings.
40: Their point-like behavior is viewed as a low-energy phenomena; above $M_s$,
41: the string oscillation modes get excited making their true extended nature
42: manifest.
43: The second important scale, $R^{-1}$, is associated with the existence of a
44: higher dimensional space. Above $R^{-1}$ new dimensions open up and
45: particles, called Kaluza-Klein (KK) excitations, can propagate in them.
46:
47: \begin{figure}
48: \begin{center}
49: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{\nonSUSYBSMfigure{UED_defbrane2}}
50: \caption{Geometrical representation of models with localized fermions.}
51: \label{fig:fig1}
52: \end{center}
53: \end{figure}
54:
55: \section{MINIMAL MODELS WITH LOCALIZED FERMIONS}
56: %\section{Minimal models with localized fermions}
57:
58: In a pictorial way, gravitons and SM particles can be represented as
59: in Fig. 1. In particular, in the scenario we consider:
60: \begin{itemize}
61: \item the gravitons, depicted as closed strings, are seen to propagate in the
62: whole higher-dimensional space, 3+$d_\parallel$+$d_\perp$. Here,
63: 3+$d_\parallel$ defines the longitudinal dimension of the big brane drawn in
64: Fig. 1, which
65: contains the small 3-dimensional brane where the observed SM particles live.
66: The symbol $d_\perp$ indicates instead the extra-dimensions, transverse to
67: the big brane, which are felt only by gravity.
68: \item The SM gauge-bosons, drawn as open strings, can propagate only on
69: the (3+$d_\parallel$)-brane.
70: \item The SM fermions are localized on the 3-dimensional brane, which
71: intersects the (3+$d_\parallel$)-dimensional one. They do not propagate on
72: extra-dimensions (neither $d_\parallel$ nor $d_\perp$), hence they do not
73: have KK-excitations.
74: \end{itemize}
75:
76: \noindent
77: The number of extra-dimensions,
78: $D=d_\parallel$,$d_\perp$ or $d_\parallel$+$d_\perp$, which are compactified
79: on a $D$-dimensional torus of volume $V=(2 \pi)^D R_1 R_2 \cdots R_D$, can
80: be as big as six \cite{Antoniadis:1998ig} or seven \cite{Benakli:1998pw} dimensions. Assuming
81: periodic conditions on the wave functions along each compact direction, the
82: states propagating in the $(4+D)$-dimensional space are seen from the
83: four-dimensional point of view as a tower of states having a squared mass:
84: \begin{equation}
85: M^2_{KK}\equiv M^2_{\vec n} = m_0^2 +\frac {n_1^2}{R_1^2} +
86: \frac {n_2^2}{R_2^2}+ \cdots +\frac {n_D^2}{R_D^2}\, ,
87: \label{KKdef}
88: \end{equation}
89: with $m_0$ the four-dimensional mass and $n_i$ non-negative integers. The
90: states with $\sum_i n_i \neq 0$ are called KK-states. Assuming that leptons
91: and quarks are localized is quite a distinctive feature of this class of
92: models, giving rise to well defined predictions. An immediate consequence of
93: the localization is that fermion interactions do not preserve the momenta in
94: the extra-dimensions. One can thus produce single KK-excitations, for example
95: via $f\bar{f^\prime}\rightarrow V_{KK}^{(n)}$ where $f,f^\prime$ are fermions
96: and $V_{KK}^{(n)}$ represents massive KK-excitations of $W,Z,\gamma ,g$
97: gauge-bosons. Conversely, gauge-boson interactions conserve the internal
98: momenta, making the self-interactions of the kind
99: $VV\rightarrow V_{KK}^{(n)}$ forbidden. The experimental bounds on
100: KK-particles that we summarize in the following, as well as the discovery
101: potential of the LHC, depend very sensitively on the assumptions made.
102:
103: Electroweak measurements can place significant limits on the size of the
104: extra-dimensions. KK-excitations might affect low-energy observables through
105: loops. Their mass can thus be constrained by fits to the electroweak
106: precision data \cite{Nath:1999aa,Masip:1999mk,Marciano:1999ih,Strumia:1999jm,Casalbuoni:1999ns,Carone:1999nz,Delgado:1999sv}.
107: In particular, the fit to the measured values of $M_W$, $\Gamma_{ll}$ and
108: $\Gamma_{had}$ has led to $R^{-1}\ge$ 3.6 TeV.
109:
110: \section{WHAT CAN BE EXPECTED FROM THE LHC?}
111: %\section{What can be expected from the LHC?}
112:
113: The possibility to produce gauge-boson KK-excitations at future colliders was
114: first suggested in Ref. \cite{Antoniadis:1994yi}. Unfortunately, from the above-mentioned
115: limits, the discovery at the upgraded Tevatron is already excluded
116: (see for instance \cite{Accomando:1999sj}). Also expectations of a spectacular explosion
117: of new resonances at the LHC are sorely disappointed. In the most optimistic
118: case, the LHC will discover just the first excitation modes.
119:
120: The only distinctive key from other possible non-standard models with new
121: gauge-bosons would be the almost identical mass of the KK-resonances of all
122: gauge bosons. Additional informations would
123: be however needed to bring clear evidence for the higher-dimensional origin of
124: the observed particle. Despite the interpretation difficulties, detecting a
125: resonance would be of great impact.
126:
127: We could also be in the less favorable case in which the mass of the
128: KK-particles is bigger than the energy-scale probed at the LHC. In this
129: unfortunate but likely scenario, the indirect effect of such particles would
130: only consists in a slight increase of the events at high energies compared to
131: the SM predictions. In this case, the luminosity plays a crucial role. In the
132: last few years, several analysis have been performed in order to estimate the
133: possible reach of the LHC (see for example \cite{Antoniadis:1994yi,Accomando:1999sj,Antoniadis:1999bq,Nath:1999mw,
134: Rizzo:1999br,Lykken:1999ms,DeRujula:2000he,Dicus:2000hm,Macesanu:2002db}).
135:
136: The three classes of processes where the new KK-resonances could be observed
137: are:
138: \begin{itemize}
139: \item $pp\rightarrow l^+l^-$,
140: \item $pp\rightarrow l\nu_l$, where $l\nu_l$ is for $l^+\nu_l+\bar\nu_ll^-$,
141: \item $pp\rightarrow q\bar q$, where $q=u,d,s,c,b$.
142: \end{itemize}
143: The first class can be mediated by the KK-excitations of the electroweak
144: neutral gauge-bosons, $Z_{KK}^{(n)}$ and $\gamma_{KK}^{(n)}$, while the
145: second one can contain the charged $W_{KK}^{(n)}$ gauge-boson modes. Finally,
146: the third class can receive contributions from all electroweak gauge-bosons
147: plus the KK-modes $g_{KK}^{(n)}$ of the gluons.
148: \vskip -4.cm
149: \begin{figure}
150: \begin{center}
151: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{\nonSUSYBSMfigure{UED_etav1}}
152: \vskip -2.5cm
153: \caption{(a) Resonances of the first KK-excitation modes of $Z$ and $\gamma$
154: gauge-bosons. (b) Resonances of the first KK-excitation mode of the $W$-boson.
155: (c) Resonances of the first KK-excitation mode of the gluon. (d)
156: Under-hreshold effects due to the presence of $g_{KK}^{(n)}$, given in terms
157: of the number of standard deviations from the SM predictions.
158: The results have been obtained for the LHC with $\sqrt{s}$=14 TeV and L=100
159: fb$^{-1}$.}
160: \label{fi:fig2}
161: \end{center}
162: \end{figure}
163: \vskip 4.cm
164: Typically, one can expect a kind of signal as given in Fig. 2.
165: In the case where both outgoing particles are visible, a natural observable is
166: the invariant mass of the fermion pair. Distributions in such a variable are
167: shown in the upper and lower left-side plots, which display the
168: interplay between $Z_{KK}^{(n)}$ and $\gamma_{KK}^{(n)}$ resonances, and
169: the peaking structure due to $g_{KK}^{(n)}$, respectively.
170: In presence of a neutrino in the final state, one can resort to the transverse
171: mass distribution in order to detect new resonances. This is shown in the
172: upper right-side plot of Fig. 2 for the charged-current process with
173: $W_{KK}^{(n)}$ exchange.
174: Owing to the PDFs, the effective center-of-mass (CM) energy of the partonic
175: processes available at the LHC is not really high. The discovery limits of
176: the KK-resonances are thus rather modest, $R^{-1}\le$ 5-6 TeV. This estimate
177: finds confirmation in more detailed ATLAS and CMS analyses \cite{Vacavant:2003jb}.
178: Taking into account the present experimental bounds, there is no much space
179: left. Moreover, the resonances due to the gluon excitations have quite large
180: widths owing to the strong coupling value. They are thus spread and difficult
181: to detect already for compactification scales of the order of 5 TeV.
182:
183: But, what represents a weakness in this context can become important for
184: indirect searches. The large width, ranging between the order of a few
185: hundreds GeV for the KK-excitations of the electroweak gauge-bosons and the
186: TeV-order for the KK-modes of the gluons, can give rise to sizeable
187: effects even if the mass of the new particles is larger than the typical
188: CM-energy available at the LHC. This is illustrated in the lower right-side
189: plot of Fig. 2, where the number of standard deviations quantifies the
190: discrepancy with the SM predictions, coming from $g_{KK}^{(n)}$ contributions.
191: The under-threshold effects are driven by the tail of the broad Breit-Wigner,
192: which can extend over a region of several TeV, and
193: are dominated by the interference between SM and KK amplitudes. They thus
194: require to have non-suppressed SM contributions.
195: Their size, of a few-per-cent order for large compactification radii, can
196: become statistically significant according to the available luminosity.
197: In the extreme case of Fig. 2, we have a KK-gluon with mass
198: $M_1=R^{-1}$=20 TeV and width $\Gamma_1\simeq$2 TeV. Assuming a luminosity
199: L=100$fb^{-1}$, the interference terms give rise to an excess of about 2000
200: events. Similar conclusions hold for the indirect search of the
201: KK-excitations of the electroweak gauge-bosons. At 95\% confidence level, the
202: LHC could exclude values of compactification scales up to 12 and 14 TeV from
203: the $Z_{KK}^{(n)}+\gamma_{KK}^{(n)}$ and $W_{KK}^{(n)}$ channels,
204: respectively. The indirect search is exploited in the ATLAS and CMS joint
205: analysis of Ref. \cite{Vacavant:2003jb}.
206:
207: \section{GOING BEYOND MINIMAL}
208: %\section{Going beyond minimal}
209:
210: We have carried the discussion above for the case of one extra-dimension with
211: all fermions localized on the boundaries.
212: One can depart from this simple situation in many ways:
213: \begin{itemize}
214: \item {\it {\bf More extra-dimensions}}
215:
216: New difficulties arise for $D \geq 2$: the sum over KK propagators diverges
217: \cite{Antoniadis:1993jp}.
218: A simple regularization is to cut off the sum of the KK states at $M_s$.
219: This would be natural if the extra-dimension were discrete, however in our
220: model we assumed translation invariance of the background geometry (before
221: localizing any objects in it). String theory seems to choose a different
222: regularization \cite{Antoniadis:1993jp,Antoniadis:2000jv}. In fact the interaction of
223: $A^\mu (x,\vec y)=\sum_{{\vec n}}
224: {\cal A}^{\mu }_{\vec n}(x) \exp{i\frac {n_i y_i}{R_i}}$ with the current
225: density $j_\mu (x)$, associated to the massless localized fermions, is
226: described by the effective Lagrangian:
227: \begin{eqnarray}
228: \int d^4x \, \, \, \, \sum_{{\vec
229: n}} e^{-\ln {\delta} \sum_i\frac{n_i^2l_s^2}{2 R_i^2}} \, \,
230: \, \, \, j_\mu (x) \, {\cal A}^{\mu }_{\vec n}(x)\, ,
231: \end{eqnarray}
232: which can be written after Fourier transformation as
233: \begin{eqnarray} \int d^{4}y \,\int d^4x \, \,
234: \, \, (\frac{1}{l_s^2 2 \pi \ln {\delta}})^{2} e^{- \frac {{\vec
235: y}^2}{2 l_s^2 \ln {\delta}}} \, j_\mu (x) \, A^\mu (x,\vec y)\, .
236: \label{brwidth}
237: \end{eqnarray}
238: This means that the localized fermions are felt as a Gaussian distribution of
239: charge
240: $e^{-\frac {{\vec y}^2}{2 \sigma^2}}
241: j_\mu (x)$ with a width $\sigma=\sqrt{\ln {\delta}}\, l_s \sim 1.66 \, l_s$.
242: Here we used $\delta=16$ corresponding to a $Z_2$ orbifolding. The couplings
243: of the massive KK-excitations to the localized fermions are then given by:
244: \begin{eqnarray}
245: g_{{\vec n}} = {\sqrt{2}}\sum_{{\vec
246: n}} e^{-\ln {\delta} \sum_i\frac{n_i^2l_s^2}{2 R_i^2}} g_0
247: \label{coupling}
248: \end{eqnarray}
249: where the factor ${\sqrt{2}}$ stands for the relative normalization of the
250: massive KK wave function ($\cos(\frac {n_i y_i}{R_i})$) with respect to the
251: zero mode, and $g_0$ represents the coupling of the corresponding SM
252: gauge-boson.
253:
254:
255: The amplitudes depend on both $R$ and $M_s$ and thus, as phenomenological
256: consequence, all bounds depend on both parameters (see \cite{Accomando:1999sj}).
257:
258:
259: \item {\it {\bf Localized kinetic and/or mass terms for bulk fields}}
260:
261: Let us denote by $S_0(p,R,M_s)$ the sum of all tree-level boson propagators
262: weighted by a factor $\delta^{-\frac {{\vec n}^2}{R^2 M_s^2}}$ from the interaction
263: vertices. For simplicity we take $m_0=0$, and define $\delta S_0$ by
264: \begin{equation}
265: S_0(p,R,M_s)= \frac{1}{p^2} + \delta S_0 \ .
266: \label{Sbar}
267: \end{equation}
268:
269: In order to confront the theory with experiment, it is necessary to include
270: a certain number of corrections. The obvious one is a resummation of one-loop
271: self-energy correction to reproduce the gauge coupling of the massless
272: vector-bosons.
273: Here we parametrize these effects as two kinds of bubbles to be resummed:
274:
275:
276: \begin{itemize}
277: \item the first, denoted as ${\cal B}_{bulk}$ represents the bulk
278: corrections. This bubble preserves the KK-momentum,
279: \item the second, denoted as ${\cal B}_{bdary}$ represents the boundary
280: corrections. This bubble does not preserve the KK momentum. In fact, this can
281: represent a boundary mass term or tree-level coupling, but also localized
282: one-loop corrections due to boundary states \cite{Antoniadis:1993jp} or
283: induced by bulk states themselves \cite{Georgi:2000ks}.
284: \end{itemize}
285:
286:
287: Here, two simplifications have been made: (a) the corrections are the same
288: for all KK-states, and (b) the boundary corrections arise all from the same
289: boundary. This results in the corrected propagator \cite{Antoniadis:1993jp}:
290: \begin{equation}
291: S_{corr}(p,R,M_s)= \frac{S_0}{1- {\cal B}_{bulk} -{\cal B}_{bdary} -
292: p^2 \delta S_0 {\cal B}_{bdary}}\ .
293: \label{Sren}
294: \end{equation}
295: If we define the ``renormalized coupling'' as
296: $g^2(p^2) =\frac{g^2}{1- {\cal B}_{bulk} -{\cal B}_{bdary} }$, the result is
297: \begin{equation}
298: g^2 S_{corr}= g^2(p^2)S_0 - \delta S_0 \frac{g^2 (1- p^2 \delta S_0) {\cal B}_{bdary}}
299: {(1- {\cal B}_{bulk} -{\cal B}_{bdary})(1- {\cal B}_{bulk} -{\cal B}_{bdary}p^2 \delta S_0)} \ .
300: \label{Srenf}
301: \end{equation}
302: The first term in Eq.(\ref{Srenf}) is the contribution that was taken into
303: account in all phenomenological analysis, the second is the correction which
304: depends crucially on the size of ${\cal B}_{bdary}$.
305:
306: \item {\it {\bf Spreading interactions in the extra dimensions}}
307:
308: In the simplest scenario, all SM gauge-bosons propagate in the same compact
309: space. However, one may think that the three factors of the SM gauge-group
310: can arise from different branes, extended in different compact directions.
311: In this case, $d_\parallel$ TeV-dimensions might be longitudinal to some
312: brane and transverse to others. As a result, only some of the gauge-bosons
313: can exhibit KK-excitations. Such a framework is discussed in
314: \cite{Accomando:1999sj}.
315: \end{itemize}
316: \noindent
317: These are simplest extensions of the work we presented above. The
318: experimental limits depend now on many parameters
319: $M_s, {\cal B}_{bdary}, ...$ in addition to the different size of the
320: compactification space felt by the gauge-bosons.
321:
322: %\bibliography{accom4}
323: %\end{document}
324:
325:
326: