1: %\documentstyle[epsf,epsfig,axodraw,12pt]{article}

2: \documentclass[12pt,a4paper]{article}

3: \usepackage{axodraw}

4: \usepackage{epsfig}

5: %\usepackage{amsmath}

6: 

7: \let\log\ln

8: 

9: % relevant portions of a4.sty:

10: \topmargin 0pt

11: \baselineskip .7truecm

12: \textheight 32\baselineskip

13: \advance\textheight by \topskip

14: \oddsidemargin  .25 truein %   Left margin on odd-numbered pages.

15: \evensidemargin .25 truein %   Left margin on even-numbered pages.

16: \marginparwidth 1 in       %   Width of marginal notes.

17: \marginparwidth 0.75 in

18: \textwidth 6.125 true in % Width of text line.

19: 

20:  \setlength{\clubpenalty}{10000}

21:  \setlength{\widowpenalty}{10000}

22:  \setlength{\displaywidowpenalty}{10000}

23: \arraycolsep 2pt

24: \footnotesep 14pt

25: \if@twoside \oddsidemargin -17pt \evensidemargin 00pt

26: \else \oddsidemargin 00pt \evensidemargin 00pt

27: \fi

28: \topmargin 00pt \headheight 00pt \headsep 00pt

29: \textheight 230mm \textwidth 160mm

30: 

31: \expandafter\ifx\csname mathrm\endcsname\relax\def\mathrm#1{{\rm #1}}\fi

32: 

33: % slashed quantities

34: \newcommand{\ks}{k\hspace{-0.52em}/\hspace{0.1em}}

35: \newcommand{\ps}{p\hspace{-0.42em}/}%\hspace{0.1em}}

36: \newcommand{\rs}{r\hspace{-0.42em}/}%\hspace{0.1em}}

37: \newcommand{\qs}{q\hspace{-0.5em}/}%\hspace{0.1em}}

38: \newcommand{\ns}{n\hspace{-0.42em}/}%\hspace{0.1em}}

39: \newcommand{\Ds}{D\hspace{-0.65em}/}%\hspace{0.1em}}

40: 

41: % Equation Numbering

42: \renewcommand{\theequation}{\thesection.\arabic{equation}}

43: \newcounter{saveeqn}

44: \newcommand{\alpheqn}{\setcounter{saveeqn}{\value{equation}}%

45:    \addtocounter{saveeqn}{1} \setcounter{equation}{0}%

46:    \renewcommand{\theequation}%

47:    {{\thesection.\arabic{saveeqn}\alph{equation}}}}

48: \newcommand{\reseteqn}{\setcounter{equation}{\value{saveeqn}}%

49:    \renewcommand{\theequation}{\thesection.\arabic{equation}}}

50: 

51: \makeatletter 

52: \@addtoreset{equation}{section}

53: \makeatother

54: 

55: \renewcommand{\topfraction}{0.8}

56: \renewcommand{\bottomfraction}{0.5}

57: \renewcommand{\textfraction}{0.2}

58: \renewcommand{\floatpagefraction}{0.81}

59: 

60: %% Abbreviations for environments

61: \def\beq{\begin{equation}}

62: \def\eeq{\end{equation}}

63: \def\beqar{\begin{eqnarray}}

64: \def\eeqar{\end{eqnarray}}

65: \def\barr#1{\begin{array}{#1}}

66: \def\earr{\end{array}}

67: \def\bfi{\begin{figure}}

68: \def\efi{\end{figure}}

69: \def\btab{\begin{table}}

70: \def\etab{\end{table}}

71: \def\bce{\begin{center}}

72: \def\ece{\end{center}}

73: \def\nn{\nonumber}

74: \def\nl{\nonumber\\}

75: \def\nln{\nonumber\\*[-1ex]\phantom{\fbox{\rule{0em}{2ex}}}}

76: \def\co{,}

77: \def\nlc{\co\nonumber\\}

78: \def\eqskipcorr{\vspace{-\abovedisplayskip}

79:                 \vspace{\abovedisplayshortskip}}

80: 

81: \def\arraystretch{1.4}

82: 

83: % shorthands for Greek letters

84: \def\al{\alpha}

85: \def\be{\beta}

86: \def\ga{\gamma}

87: \def\de{\delta}

88: \def\veps{\varepsilon}

89: \def\eps{\epsilon}

90: \def\la{\lambda}

91: \def\si{\sigma}

92: \def\Ga{\Gamma}

93: \def\De{\Delta}

94: \def\La{\Lambda}

95: \def\S{\Sgma}

96: 

97: % new commands for cross referencing

98: \def\refeq#1{\mbox{(\ref{#1})}}

99: \def\refeqs#1{\mbox{(\ref{#1})}}

100: \def\refeqf#1{\mbox{(\ref{#1})}}

101: \def\reffi#1{\mbox{Fig.~\ref{#1}}}

102: \def\reffis#1{\mbox{Figs.~\ref{#1}}}

103: \def\refta#1{\mbox{Table~\ref{#1}}}

104: \def\reftas#1{\mbox{Tables~\ref{#1}}}

105: \def\refse#1{\mbox{Sect.~\ref{#1}}}

106: \def\refses#1{\mbox{Sects.~\ref{#1}}}

107: \def\refapps#1{\mbox{Apps.~\ref{#1}}}

108: \def\refapp#1{\mbox{Appendix~\ref{#1}}}

109: \def\citere#1{\mbox{Ref.~\cite{#1}}}

110: \def\citeres#1{\mbox{Refs.~\cite{#1}}}

111: 

112: % line characterizations for figure captions

113: \def\solid{\raise.9mm\hbox{\protect\rule{1.1cm}{.2mm}}}

114: \def\dash{\raise.9mm\hbox{\protect\rule{2mm}{.2mm}}\hspace*{1mm}}

115: \def\dot{\rlap{$\cdot$}\hspace*{2mm}}

116: \def\dashed{\dash\dash\dash\dash}

117: \def\ddashed{\dash\hspace*{-.5mm}\dash\hspace*{1mm}\dash\hspace*{-.5mm}\dash}

118: \def\dotted{\dot\dot\dot\dot\dot\dot}

119: \def\dashdotted{\dot\dash\dot\dash\dot}

120: % new line characterizations for figure captions

121: \def\solid{\raise.9mm\hbox{\protect\rule{12mm}{.2mm}}}

122: \def\dash{\raise.9mm\hbox{\protect\rule{1.6mm}{.2mm}}\hspace*{1mm}}

123: \def\dot{\raise.9mm\hbox{\protect\rule{0.8mm}{.2mm}}\hspace*{0.8mm}}

124: \def\dashdot{\raise.9mm\hbox{\protect\rule{.3mm}{.2mm}}\hspace*{.8mm}\raise.9mm\hbox{\protect\rule{1.3mm}{.2mm}}\hspace*{.8mm}}

125: \def\dashed{\dash\dash\dash\dash\dash\hspace*{-0.8mm}}

126: \def\dotted{\dot\dot\dot\dot\dot\dot\dot\dot\hspace*{-0.8mm}}

127: \def\dashdotted{\dashdot\dashdot\dashdot\dashdot\hspace*{-0.8mm}}

128: 

129: %physical units

130: \newcommand{\GeV}{\unskip\,\mathrm{GeV}}

131: \newcommand{\MeV}{\unskip\,\mathrm{MeV}}

132: \newcommand{\TeV}{\unskip\,\mathrm{TeV}}

133: \newcommand{\fba}{\unskip\,\mathrm{fb}}

134: \newcommand{\pba}{\unskip\,\mathrm{pb}}

135: \newcommand{\nba}{\unskip\,\mathrm{nb}}

136: 

137: %physical particles

138: \def\mathswitchr#1{\relax\ifmmode{\mathrm{#1}}\else$\mathrm{#1}$\fi}

139: \newcommand{\PM}{\mathswitchr M}

140: \newcommand{\Pm}{\mathswitchr m}

141: \newcommand{\PB}{\mathswitchr B}

142: \newcommand{\PV}{\mathswitch V}

143: \newcommand{\PX}{\mathswitch X}

144: \newcommand{\PW}{\mathswitchr W}

145: \newcommand{\Pw}{\mathswitchr w}

146: \newcommand{\Pz}{\mathswitchr z}

147: \newcommand{\PZ}{\mathswitchr Z}

148: \newcommand{\PA}{\mathswitchr A}

149: \newcommand{\Pg}{\mathswitchr g}

150: \newcommand{\PH}{\mathswitchr H}

151: \newcommand{\Pe}{\mathswitchr e}

152: \newcommand{\Ri}{\mathswitchr i}

153: \newcommand{\Pne}{\mathswitch \nu_{\mathrm{e}}}

154: \newcommand{\Pane}{\mathswitch \bar\nu_{\mathrm{e}}}

155: \newcommand{\Pnebar}{\mathswitch \bar\nu_{\mathrm{e}}}

156: \newcommand{\Pnmu}{\mathswitch \nu_\mu}

157: \newcommand{\Pd}{\mathswitchr d}

158: \newcommand{\PD}{\mathswitchr D}

159: \newcommand{\Pf}{\mathswitchr f}

160: \newcommand{\Pfbar}{\mathswitch \bar f}

161: \newcommand{\Ph}{\mathswitchr h}

162: \newcommand{\Pl}{\mathswitchr l}

163: \newcommand{\Pu}{\mathswitchr u}

164: \newcommand{\PU}{\mathswitchr U}

165: \newcommand{\Ps}{\mathswitchr s}

166: \newcommand{\Pb}{\mathswitchr b}

167: \newcommand{\Pc}{\mathswitchr c}

168: \newcommand{\Pt}{\mathswitchr t}

169: \newcommand{\Pq}{\mathswitchr q}

170: \newcommand{\Pep}{\mathswitchr {e^+}}

171: \newcommand{\Pem}{\mathswitchr {e^-}}

172: \newcommand{\Pmum}{\mathswitchr {\mu^-}}

173: \newcommand{\PWp}{\mathswitchr {W^+}}

174: \newcommand{\PWm}{\mathswitchr {W^-}}

175: \newcommand{\PWpm}{\mathswitchr {W^\pm}}

176: \newcommand{\Pp}{\mathswitchr {p}}

177: \newcommand{\PTT}{\mathswitchr {TT}}

178: \newcommand{\PN}{\mathswitch {N}}

179: \newcommand{\PPi}{\mathswitchr i}

180: 

181: % particle masses

182: \def\mathswitch#1{\relax\ifmmode#1\else$#1$\fi}

183: \newcommand{\MB}{\mathswitch {M_\PB}}

184: \newcommand{\Mf}{\mathswitch {m_\Pf}}

185: \newcommand{\Ml}{\mathswitch {m_\Pl}}

186: \newcommand{\Mq}{\mathswitch {m_\Pq}}

187: \newcommand{\MV}{\mathswitch {M_\PV}}

188: \newcommand{\MW}{\mathswitch {M_\PW}}

189: \newcommand{\hMW}{\mathswitch {\hat M_\PW}}

190: \newcommand{\MWpm}{\mathswitch {M_\PWpm}}

191: \newcommand{\MWO}{\mathswitch {M_\PWO}}

192: \newcommand{\MA}{\mathswitch {\lambda}}

193: \newcommand{\MZ}{\mathswitch {M_\PZ}}

194: \newcommand{\MH}{\mathswitch {M_\PH}}

195: \newcommand{\Me}{\mathswitch {m_\Pe}}

196: \newcommand{\Mmy}{\mathswitch {m_\mu}}

197: \newcommand{\Mta}{\mathswitch {m_\tau}}

198: \newcommand{\Md}{\mathswitch {m_\Pd}}

199: \newcommand{\Mu}{\mathswitch {m_\Pu}}

200: \newcommand{\Ms}{\mathswitch {m_\Ps}}

201: \newcommand{\Mc}{\mathswitch {m_\Pc}}

202: \newcommand{\Mb}{\mathswitch {m_\Pb}}

203: \newcommand{\Mt}{\mathswitch {m_\Pt}}

204: \newcommand{\GW}{\mathswitch {\Gamma_\PW}}

205: \newcommand{\GZ}{\Gamma_{\PZ}}

206: \newcommand{\PL}{\mathswitch {P_\PL}}

207: \newcommand{\PE}{\mathswitch {E}}

208: 

209: % shorthands for SM parameters

210: \newcommand{\thw}{\mathswitch {\theta_\mathrm{w}}}

211: \newcommand{\NCf}{\mathswitch {N_{\mathrm{C}}^f}}

212: \newcommand{\NCt}{\mathswitch {N_{\mathrm{C}}^t}}

213: \newcommand{\scrs}{\scriptscriptstyle}

214: \newcommand{\sw}{\mathswitch {s_{\scrs\PW}}}

215: \newcommand{\cw}{\mathswitch {c_{\scrs\PW}}}

216: \newcommand{\rw}{{\mathrm{W}}}

217: \newcommand{\ckm}{{\bf V}}

218: \newcommand{\gs}{g_{\mathrm{s}}}

219: \newcommand{\als}{\alpha_{\mathrm{s}}}

220: 

221: %\newcommand{\sw}{\mathswitch {s_\PW}}

222: %\newcommand{\cw}{\mathswitch {c_\PW}}

223: %\newcommand{\swbar}{\mathswitch {\bar s_\PW}}

224: \newcommand{\swbar}{\mathswitch {\bar s_{\scrs\PW}}}

225: \newcommand{\swfbar}{\mathswitch {\bar s_{\PW,\Pf}}}

226: \newcommand{\swqbar}{\mathswitch {\bar s_{\PW,\Pq}}}

227: \newcommand{\Qf}{\mathswitch {Q_\Pf}}

228: \newcommand{\Ql}{\mathswitch {Q_\Pl}}

229: \newcommand{\Qq}{\mathswitch {Q_\Pq}}

230: \newcommand{\vf}{\mathswitch {v_\Pf}}

231: \newcommand{\af}{\mathswitch {a_\Pf}}

232: \newcommand{\gesi}{\mathswitch {g_\Pe}^{\sigma}}

233: \newcommand{\gem}{\mathswitch {g_\Pe}^-}

234: \newcommand{\gep}{\mathswitch {g_\Pe}^+}

235: \newcommand{\GF}{\mathswitch {G_\mu}}

236: 

237: \hyphenation{brems-strah-lung}

238: 

239: %various shorthands

240: \def\ie{i.e.\ }

241: \def\eg{e.g.\ }

242: \def\cf{cf.\ }

243: 

244: % orders of magnitude

245: \newcommand{\ord}{{\cal O}}

246: %\renewcommand{\O}{{\cal O}}  % conflicts with hep-ph!

247: %\newcommand{\C}{{\cal C}}

248: \newcommand{\Oa}{\mathswitch{{\cal{O}}(\alpha)}}

249: \newcommand{\Oas}{\mathswitch{{\cal{O}}(\alpha_s)}}

250: \newcommand{\LA}{\stackrel{\mathrm{LA}}{=}}

251: 

252: % mathematical symbols

253: \newcommand{\SUtwo}{\mathrm{SU(2)}}

254: \newcommand{\Uone}{\mathrm{U}(1)}

255: \newcommand{\Tr}{\mathrm{Tr}}

256: 

257: %% roman symbols

258: \newcommand{\rR}{{\mathrm{R}}}

259: \newcommand{\rT}{{\mathrm{T}}}

260: \newcommand{\rL}{{\mathrm{L}}}

261: \newcommand{\ra}{\mathrm{a}}

262: \newcommand{\rd}{{\mathrm{d}}}

263: \newcommand{\re}{\mathrm{e}}

264: \newcommand{\ri}{{\mathrm{i}}}

265: \newcommand{\rj}{\mathrm{j}}

266: \newcommand{\rk}{\mathrm{k}}

267: \newcommand{\rr}{\mathrm{r}}

268: 

269: %% calligraphic symbols

270: \newcommand{\M}{{\cal{M}}}

271: \renewcommand{\L}{{\cal L}}

272: \newcommand{\F}{{\cal {F}}}

273: 

274: % various abbreviations

275: \newcommand{\EM}{\mathrm{EM}}

276: \newcommand{\EW}{\mathrm{EW}}

277: \newcommand{\CM}{\mathrm{CM}}

278: \newcommand{\Brems}{\mathrm{brems}}

279: \newcommand{\IR}{\mathrm{IR}}

280: \newcommand{\Born}{\mathrm{Born}}

281: \newcommand{\born}{\mathrm{Born}}

282: \newcommand{\NLO}{\mathrm{NLO}}

283: \newcommand{\fact}{{\mathrm{fact}}}

284: \newcommand{\nonfact}{{\mathrm{nf}}}

285: \newcommand{\sing}{{\mathrm{sing}}}

286: \newcommand{\finite}{{\mathrm{finite}}}

287: \newcommand{\SU}{\mathrm{SU}}

288: \newcommand{\U}{\mathrm{U}}

289: \newcommand{\ewgroup}{\SUtwo\times\Uone}

290: \newcommand{\cut}{\mathrm{cut}}

291: 

292: \newcommand{\virt}{\mathrm{virt}}

293: \newcommand{\Boxen}{\mathrm{B}}

294: \newcommand{\Ver}{\mathrm{V}}

295: \newcommand{\elect}{\mathrm{em}}

296: \newcommand{\w}{\mathrm{w}}

297: \newcommand{\fer}{\mathrm{fer}}

298: \newcommand{\bos}{\mathrm{bos}}

299: \newcommand{\rem}{\mathrm{rem}}

300: \newcommand{\run}{\mathrm{run}}

301: \newcommand{\RR}{\mathrm{RR}}

302: \newcommand{\LL}{\mathrm{LL}}

303: \newcommand{\LR}{\mathrm{LR}}

304: \newcommand{\RL}{\mathrm{RL}}

305: \newcommand{\TT}{\mathrm{TT}}

306: \newcommand{\rint}{\mathrm{int}}

307: \newcommand{\LT}{\mathrm{LT}}

308: \newcommand{\TL}{\mathrm{TL}}

309: 

310: \newcommand{\reps}{\mathrm{\varepsilon}}

311: \newcommand{\ieps}{\ri\epsilon}

312: \newcommand{\br}{{\mathrm{br}}}

313: \newcommand{\soft}{{\mathrm{soft}}}

314: \newcommand{\coll}{{\mathrm{coll}}}

315: \newcommand{\onel}{{\mathrm{1-loop}}}

316: \newcommand{\elm}{{\mathrm{em}}}

317: \newcommand{\ew}{{\mathrm{ew}}}

318: \newcommand{\htop}{{H,t}}

319: \newcommand{\weak}{{\mathrm{weak}}}

320: \newcommand{\bq}{{\bf q}}

321: \newcommand{\ehel}{\kappa}

322: \newcommand{\da}{\Delta\alpha}

323: \newcommand{\dr}{\Delta\rho}

324: \newcommand{\dLL}{\Delta_{\mathrm{LL}}}

325: 

326: \newcommand{\SC}{{\mathrm{LSC}}}

327: \renewcommand{\SS}{{\mathrm{SSC}}}

328: \newcommand{\cc}{{\mathrm{C}}}

329: \newcommand{\s}{{\mathrm{s}}}

330: \newcommand{\pre}{{\mathrm{PR}}}

331: \newcommand{\Yuk}{{\mathrm{Yuk}}}

332: 

333: \newcommand{\QCD}{{\mathrm{QCD}}}

334: \newcommand{\QED}{{\mathrm{QED}}}

335: \newcommand{\LEP}{{\mathrm{LEP}}}

336: \newcommand{\SLD}{{\mathrm{SLD}}}

337: \newcommand{\SM}{{\mathrm{SM}}}

338: \newcommand{\DPA}{{\mathrm{DPA}}}

339: \newcommand{\LPA}{{\mathrm{LPA}}}

340: \newcommand{\SPA}{{\mathrm{SPA}}}

341: 

342: % mathematical functions

343: \def\atn{\mathop{\mathrm{arctan}}\nolimits}

344: \def\Li{\mathop{\mathrm{Li}_2}\nolimits}

345: \def\cLi{\mathop{{\cal L}i_2}\nolimits}

346: \def\Re{\mathop{\mathrm{Re}}\nolimits}

347: \def\Im{\mathop{\mathrm{Im}}\nolimits}

348: \def\sgn{\mathop{\mathrm{sgn}}\nolimits}

349: \def\arc{\mathop{\mathrm{arc}}\nolimits}

350: 

351: %% commands for this paper

352: \newcommand{\qqVV}{{\bar q_1 q_2\to V_1 V_2}}

353: \newcommand{\Vff}{{V \to f\bar f'}}

354: \newcommand{\Vaff}{{V_1 \to f_3 \bar f_4}}

355: \newcommand{\Vbff}{{V_2 \to f_5 \bar f_6}}

356: \newcommand{\qqVVffff}{\bar q_1 q_2\to V_1 V_2 \to 4f}

357: \newcommand{\qqffff}{\bar q_1 q_2\to 4f}

358: \newcommand{\qqffffg}{\qqffff\ga}

359: \newcommand{\sparton}{\hat s}

360: \newcommand{\uparton}{\hat u}

361: \newcommand{\tparton}{\hat t}

362: 

363: \newcommand{\nr}{N}

364: \newcommand{\Mbar}{\overline{M}}

365: \newcommand{\scpr}[2]{(#1#2)}

366: \newcommand{\ttwo}{\tilde t}

367: \newcommand{\stwo}{\tilde s}

368: %\newcommand{\stwotwo}{\tilde{\tilde s}}

369: \newcommand{\stwotwo}{\bar s}

370: \newcommand{\ffp}{\mathswitch{\mathrm{f\/f}'}}

371: \newcommand{\mfp}{\mathswitch{\mathrm{mf}'}}

372: \newcommand{\mmp}{\mathswitch{\mathrm{mm}'}}

373: \newcommand{\mf}{\mathswitch{\mathrm{mf}}}

374: \newcommand{\mm}{\mathswitch{\mathrm{mm}}}

375: \newcommand{\im}{\mathswitch{\mathrm{im}}}

376: \newcommand{\iif}{\mathswitch{\mathrm{if}}}

377: \newcommand{\nf}{{\mathrm{nf}}}

378: 

379: \newcommand{\bew}{b^{\ew}}

380: \newcommand{\besw}{\tilde{b}^{\ew}}

381: \newcommand{\cew}{C^{\ew}}

382: \newcommand{\csew}{\tilde{C}^{\ew}}

383: %other shorthands for logarithms

384: \newcommand{\losmt}{\log{\left(\frac{\hat{s}}{\Mt^2}\right)}}

385: \newcommand{\los}{\log{\left(\frac{\hat{s}}{\MW^2}\right)}}

386: \newcommand{\Los}{\log^2{\left(\frac{\hat{s}}{\MW^2}\right)}}

387: \newcommand{\lomu}{\log{\left(\frac{\mu^2}{\MW}\right)}}

388: \newcommand{\loWZ}{\log{\left(\frac{\MW^2}{\MZ^2}\right)}}

389: \newcommand{\loZW}{\log{\left(\frac{\MZ^2}{\MW^2}\right)}}

390: \newcommand{\loWla}{\log{\left(\frac{\MW^2}{\la^2}\right)}}

391: \newcommand{\loWVa}{\log{\left(\frac{\MW^2}{M_{V^a}^2}\right)}}

392: \newcommand{\lots}{\log{\left(\frac{|\hat{t}|}{\hat{s}}\right)}}

393: \newcommand{\lous}{\log{\left(\frac{|\hat{u}|}{\hat{s}}\right)}}

394: \newcommand{\lotu}{\log{\left(\frac{|\hat{t}|}{|\hat{u}|}\right)}}

395: % shorthands for energy dependent single logarithms 

396: \newcommand{\ls}{l(s)}

397: \newcommand{\lu}{l(\mu^2)}

398: \newcommand{\lrM}{l(r_{kl},M^2)}

399: \newcommand{\lsMa}{l(s,M_{V_a}^2)}

400: \newcommand{\lsM}{l(s,M^2)}

401: \newcommand{\lsW}{l(s,\MW^2)}

402: \newcommand{\lsf}{l(s,m_f^2)}

403: \newcommand{\lmuf}{l(\mu^2,m_f^2)}

404: \newcommand{\lmuZ}{l(\mu^2,\MZ^2)}

405: \newcommand{\lmuW}{l(\mu^2,\MW^2)}

406: \newcommand{\lsl}{l_{\cc}}

407: \newcommand{\lpr}{l_{\pre}}

408: \newcommand{\lYuk}{l_{\Yuk}}

409: \newcommand{\lZ}{l_{\PZ}}

410: % shorthands for constant single logarithms

411: \newcommand{\lWf}{l(\MW^2,m_f^2)}

412: \newcommand{\lWfsi}{l(\MW^2,m_{f_\si}^2)}

413: \newcommand{\lWk}{l(\MW^2,m_k^2)}

414: \newcommand{\lWla}{l(\MW^2,\la^2)}

415: \newcommand{\lWfsii}{l(\MW^2,m_{f_{\si,i}}^2)}

416: \newcommand{\lWNB}{l(\MW^2,M_N^2)}

417: \newcommand{\lWa}{l(\MW^2,M_{V_a}^2)}

418: \newcommand{\lWZ}{l(\MW^2,\MZ^2)}

419: \newcommand{\ltW}{l(\Mt^2,\MW^2)}

420: \newcommand{\lHW}{l(\MH^2,\MW^2)}

421: \newcommand{\lemf}{l^\elm(m_f^2)}

422: \newcommand{\lemftau}{l^\elm(m_{f_\tau}^2)}

423: \newcommand{\lemfsi}{l^\elm(m_{f_\si}^2)}

424: \newcommand{\lem}{l^\elm(m^2)}

425: \newcommand{\lemk}{l^\elm(m_{k}^2)}

426: \newcommand{\lemphi}{l^\elm(m_{\varphi}^2)}

427: \newcommand{\leme}{l^\elm(m_\Pe^2)}

428: \newcommand{\lemW}{l^\elm(\MW^2)}

429: % shorthands for energy dependent double logarithms

430: \newcommand{\Ls}{L(s)}

431: \newcommand{\LrM}{L(|r_{kl}|,M^2)}

432: \newcommand{\Lrs}{L(|r_{kl}|,s)}

433: \newcommand{\LrMa}{L(|r_{kl}|,M_{V_a}^2)}

434: \newcommand{\LsM}{L(s,M^2)}

435: \newcommand{\LsW}{L(s,\MW^2)}

436: \newcommand{\LsZ}{L(s,\MZ^2)}

437: \newcommand{\Lsla}{L(s,\lambda^2)}

438: % shorthands for constant double logarithms

439: \newcommand{\Lkla}{L(m_k^2,\la^2)}

440: \newcommand{\LWk}{L(\MW^2,m_k^2)}

441: \newcommand{\LWf}{L(\MW^2,m_f^2)}

442: \newcommand{\LZW}{L(\MZ^2,\MW^2)}

443: \newcommand{\LWla}{L(\MW^2,\lambda^2)}

444: % shorthands for electromagnetic double logarithms

445: \newcommand{\Lemk}{L^\elm(s,\lambda^2,m_k^2)}

446: \newcommand{\Lemphi}{L^\elm(\hat{s},\lambda^2,m_\varphi^2)}

447: \newcommand{\Lemf}{L^\elm(s,\lambda^2,m_f^2)}

448: \newcommand{\Lemftau}{L^\elm(s,\lambda^2,m_{f_\tau}^2)}

449: \newcommand{\Leme}{L^\elm(s,\lambda^2,m_e^2)}

450: \newcommand{\LemW}{L^\elm(s,\lambda^2,\MW^2)}

451: \newcommand{\lrs}{\log{\frac{|r_{kl}|}{s}}}

452: 

453: \newcommand{\ltu}{\log{\frac{t}{u}}}

454: \newcommand{\lts}{\log{\frac{|t|}{s}}}

455: \newcommand{\lus}{\log{\frac{|u|}{s}}}

456: \newcommand{\lsu}{\log{\frac{s}{|u|}}}

457: 

458: \newcommand{\PT}{P_{\mathrm{T}}}

459: \newcommand{\ET}{E_{\mathrm{T}}}

460: \newcommand{\PTmiss}{P_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}}

461: \newcommand{\PTmax}{P_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{max}}}

462: \newcommand{\PTcut}{P_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{cut}}}

463: \newcommand{\MT}{M_{\mathrm{T}}}

464: \newcommand{\Mcut}{M^{\mathrm{cut}}}

465: \newcommand{\Minv}{M_{\mathrm{inv}}}

466: \newcommand{\Minvcut}{M_{\mathrm{inv}}^{\mathrm{cut}}}

467: \newcommand{\AEWS}{\mathrm{AEWS}}

468: %\newcommand{\Born}{{\mathrm{Born}}}

469: 

470: % some more new commands 

471: \newcommand{\epsi}{\varepsilon}

472: % \newcommand{\be}{\begin{eqnarray}}

473: % \newcommand{\ee}{\end{eqnarray}}

474: % \newcommand{\nl}{\nonumber \\}

475: \newcommand{\tc}[1]{\textcolor{#1}}

476: \newcommand{\sla}{\not \!}

477: \newcommand{\spinor}[1]{\left< #1 \right>}

478: \newcommand{\cspinor}[1]{\left< #1 \right>^*}

479: \newcommand{\Log}[1]{\log \left( #1\right) }

480: \newcommand{\Logq}[1]{\log^2 \left( #1\right) }

481: \newcommand{\mr}[1]{\mathrm{#1}}

482: % \newcommand{\cw}{c_\mathrm{w}}

483: % \newcommand{\sw}{s_\mathrm{w}}

484: \renewcommand{\i}{\mathrm{i}}

485: \newcommand{\delsoft}{\de_{\mathrm{s}}}

486: \newcommand{\delcoll}{\de_{\mathrm{c}}}

487: 

488: \makeatletter

489: \newcount\@tempcntc

490: \def\@citex[#1]#2{\if@filesw\immediate\write\@auxout{\string\citation{#2}}\fi

491:   \@tempcnta\z@\@tempcntb\m@ne\def\@citea{}\@cite{\@for\@citeb:=#2\do

492:     {\@ifundefined

493:        {b@\@citeb}{\@citeo\@tempcntb\m@ne\@citea

494:         \def\@citea{,\penalty\@m\ }{\bf ?}\@warning

495:        {Citation `\@citeb' on page \thepage \space undefined}}%

496:     {\setbox\z@\hbox{\global\@tempcntc0\csname

497: b@\@citeb\endcsname\relax}%

498:      \ifnum\@tempcntc=\z@ \@citeo\@tempcntb\m@ne

499:        \@citea\def\@citea{,\penalty\@m}

500:        \hbox{\csname b@\@citeb\endcsname}%

501:      \else

502:       \advance\@tempcntb\@ne

503:       \ifnum\@tempcntb=\@tempcntc

504:       \else\advance\@tempcntb\m@ne\@citeo

505:       \@tempcnta\@tempcntc\@tempcntb\@tempcntc\fi\fi}}\@citeo}{#1}}

506: 

507: \def\@citeo{\ifnum\@tempcnta>\@tempcntb\else\@citea

508:   \def\@citea{,\penalty\@m}%

509:   \ifnum\@tempcnta=\@tempcntb\the\@tempcnta\else

510:    {\advance\@tempcnta\@ne\ifnum\@tempcnta=\@tempcntb \else

511: \def\@citea{--}\fi

512:     \advance\@tempcnta\m@ne\the\@tempcnta\@citea\the\@tempcntb}\fi\fi}

513: \makeatother

514: 

515: % modifications for drafts

516: %\newcommand{\mpar}[1]{{\marginpar{\hbadness10000%

517: %                      \sloppy\hfuzz10pt\boldmath\bf#1}}%

518: %                      \typeout{marginpar: #1}\ignorespaces}

519: \marginparwidth 1.2cm

520: \marginparsep 0.2cm

521: \def\draftdate{\relax}

522: \def\mpar#1{\relax}

523: \def\mda{\relax}

524: \def\mua{\relax}

525: \def\mla{\relax}

526: \def\draft{

527: \def\thtystars{******************************}

528: \def\sixtystars{\thtystars\thtystars}

529: \typeout{}

530: \typeout{\sixtystars**}

531: \typeout{* Draft mode!

532:          For final version remove \protect\draft\space in source file *}

533: \typeout{\sixtystars**}

534: \typeout{}

535: \def\draftdate{\today}

536: \def\mua{\marginpar[\boldmath\hfil$\uparrow$]%

537:                    {\boldmath$\uparrow$\hfil}%

538:                     \typeout{marginpar: $\uparrow$}\ignorespaces}

539: \def\mda{\marginpar[\boldmath\hfil$\downarrow$]%

540:                    {\boldmath$\downarrow$\hfil}%

541:                     \typeout{marginpar: $\downarrow$}\ignorespaces}

542: \def\mla{\marginpar[\boldmath\hfil$\rightarrow$]%

543:                    {\boldmath$\leftarrow $\hfil}%

544:                     \typeout{marginpar: $\leftrightarrow$}\ignorespaces}

545: \def\Mua{\marginpar[\boldmath\hfil$\Uparrow$]%

546:                    {\boldmath$\Uparrow$\hfil}%

547:                     \typeout{marginpar: $\Uparrow$}\ignorespaces}

548: \def\Mda{\marginpar[\boldmath\hfil$\Downarrow$]%

549:                    {\boldmath$\Downarrow$\hfil}%

550:                     \typeout{marginpar: $\Downarrow$}\ignorespaces}

551: \def\Mla{\marginpar[\boldmath\hfil$\Rightarrow$]%

552:                    {\boldmath$\Leftarrow $\hfil}%

553:                     \typeout{marginpar: $\Leftrightarrow$}\ignorespaces}

554: \def\mpar##1{\marginpar{\hbadness10000%

555:                       \sloppy\hfuzz10pt\boldmath\bf##1}%

556:                       \typeout{marginpar: ##1}\ignorespaces}

557: \overfullrule 5pt

558: \oddsidemargin -15mm

559: \marginparwidth 29mm

560: }

561: 

562: \newcommand{\thismonth}{\ifcase\month\or January\or February\or March \or April

563: \or May \or June \or July \or August \or September \or \November \or 

564: \December\fi}

565: % change of eqnarray environment

566: %  Default is for left-hand side of equations to be flushleft.

567: %  To make them flushright, \let\@eqnsel = \hfil

568: 

569: \makeatletter

570: %\let\@eqnsel = \hfil

571: 

572: \def\eqnarray{\stepcounter{equation}\let\@currentlabel=\theequation

573: \global\@eqnswtrue

574: \global\@eqcnt\z@\tabskip\@centering\let\\=\@eqncr

575: %$$\halign to \displaywidth\bgroup\@eqnsel\hskip\@centering

576: %  $\displaystyle\tabskip\z@{##}$&\global\@eqcnt\@ne

577: $$\halign to \displaywidth\bgroup\hskip\@centering

578:   $\displaystyle\tabskip\z@{##}$\@eqnsel&\global\@eqcnt\@ne

579:   \hskip 2\arraycolsep \hfil${##}$\hfil

580:   &\global\@eqcnt\tw@ \hskip 2\arraycolsep $\displaystyle\tabskip\z@{##}$\hfil

581:    \tabskip\@centering&\llap{##}\tabskip\z@\cr}

582: \def\appendix{\par

583:  \setcounter{section}{0} \setcounter{subsection}{0}

584:  \def\thesection{\Alph{section}}}

585: 

586: \makeatother

587: 

588: \newcommand{\lsim}

589: {\;\raisebox{-.3em}{$\stackrel{\displaystyle <}{\sim}$}\;}

590: \newcommand{\gsim}

591: {\;\raisebox{-.3em}{$\stackrel{\displaystyle >}{\sim}$}\;}

592: \def\asymp#1{\;\raisebox{-.4em}{$\widetilde{\scriptstyle #1}$}\;}

593: \newcommand{\gl}

594: {\;\raisebox{.25em}{$>$}\hspace{-.75em}\raisebox{-.2em}{$<$}\;}

595: 

596: %\draft

597: 

598: %acronyms:  CM, LHC, EW

599: 

600: \def\eqalign#1{\null\,\vcenter{\openup\jot\ialign{\strut\hfil$%

601:         \displaystyle{##{}}$&$\displaystyle{{}##}$\hfil\crcr#1\crcr}}\,}

602: \let\oslash\slash

603: \def\slash#1{\setbox0\hbox{$#1$}\hbox to\wd0{\hss$/$\hss}\nobreak\hskip-\wd0\box0}

604: \def\fmruletab#1{{\openup1ex\halign{\hskip 1cm\hfil$\vcenter{\hsize=50pt\noindent##}$\hfil &\hskip 1cm $\displaystyle##$\hfil\cr#1}}}

605: \def\textscr#1{\textrm{\scriptsize #1}}

606: \def\tfrac#1#2{\textstyle\frac{#1}{#2}}

607: 

608: \begin{document}

609: 

610: \tolerance=100000

611: %

612: \thispagestyle{empty}

613: \setcounter{page}{0}

614: 

615: \thispagestyle{empty}

616: \def\thefootnote{\fnsymbol{footnote}}

617: \setcounter{footnote}{1}

618: \null

619: \draftdate\hfill  DFTT 06/2006

620: \\

621: %\strut\hfill ZU-TH 19/05 \\

622: %\strut\hfill DFTT 36/05\\

623: \strut\hfill hep-ph/0604273

624: \vskip 0cm

625: \vfill

626: \begin{center}

627: %  {\Large \bf A Quasi-Gauge-Invariant signal definition

628:   {\Large \bf Pseudo-observables in Axial gauge

629: \par} \vskip 2.5em

630: {\large

631: {\sc E. Accomando}}%

632: \\[.5cm]

633: {\it Dipartimento di Fisica Teorica, Universit\`a di Torino,\\

634: and INFN, Sezione di Torino,\\

635: Via P. Giuria 1, 10125 Torino, Italy}

636: \\[0.3cm]

637: \par

638: \end{center}\par

639: \vskip 2.0cm \vfill {\bf Abstract:} \par 

640: 

641: We have given a first application of the Axial gauge \`a la Dams and Kleiss 

642: to the Standard Model ($\SM$) physics at the LHC. We have focused on the issue 

643: of providing a 

644: well-behaved signal definition in presence of potentially strong gauge 

645: cancellations at high energies. As a first illustration, we have analysed the 

646: production of 

647: $\PW\PZ$ vector-boson pairs, which gives rise to four final-state fermions.

648: Purely leptonic final states, $\Pp\Pp\to l\bar\nu_ll^\prime\bar{l^\prime}$, 

649: have been numerically investigated in the region of high center-of-mass 

650: energies and large scattering angles, particularly sensitive to gauge 

651: dependences. We have found that the Axial gauge is the appropriate framework 

652: to recover a meaningful separation of signal and irreducible background over

653: the full energy domain.

654: \par

655: \vskip 1cm

656: \noindent

657: April 2006

658: \par

659: \null

660: \setcounter{page}{0}

661: \clearpage

662: \def\thefootnote{\arabic{footnote}}

663: \setcounter{footnote}{0}

664: 

665: \def\mla{\marginpar[\boldmath\hfil$\rightarrow$]%

666:                    {\boldmath$\leftarrow $\hfil}%

667:                     \typeout{marginpar: $\leftrightarrow$}\ignorespaces}

668: \def\mua{\marginpar[\boldmath\hfil$\uparrow$]%

669:                    {\boldmath$\uparrow$\hfil}%

670:                     \typeout{marginpar: $\uparrow$}\ignorespaces}

671: \def\mda{\marginpar[\boldmath\hfil$\downarrow$]%

672:                    {\boldmath$\downarrow$\hfil}%

673:                     \typeout{marginpar: $\downarrow$}\ignorespaces}

674: 

675: 

676: \section{Introduction}

677: \label{Introduction}

678: 

679: This letter deals with the phenomenology of the $\SM$ electroweak interactions 

680: at high energy scales. 

681: %Despite the role of the parton distribution functions (PDF) in decreasing the 

682: %statistics, the 

683: The high energy region has an enormous potential for particle discovery. A 

684: large set of new 

685: signatures is expected in this kinematical domain at the upcoming and future 

686: colliders. Of course, the signals might be very complicated and the background

687: overwhelming, expecially in hadronic environments. 

688: 

689: With increasing the energy, new channels with many particles in the final 

690: state will indeed open up, making difficult to understand the underlying 

691: physics. In this intricate context, the comparison between 

692: measurements and theoretical predictions will be far from easy task. A long 

693: chain of Monte Carlo simulations will be employed to deconvolute the observed 

694: quantities back to the partonic variables. With this prospect, identifying 

695: the signal

696: configuration and picking out the kinematical regions where it is expected to 

697: be enhanced over the background could probe decisive in the data analysis.

698: 

699: In this letter, the question we want to address is precisely how to disentagle 

700: the signal from its irreducible background. Commonly, what we consider as a 

701: signal is represented

702: by a subset of Feynman diagrams which describes the particles we are searching 

703: for as intermediate states. In most of the cases, this sub-contribution 

704: is not separately gauge invariant. The signal may indeed contain 

705: gauge-invariance-breaking terms which are only cancelled against their 

706: irreducible-background counterpart in the total amplitude. 

707: 

708: In principle, any bare selection of signal is not theoretically well-defined;

709: only gauge-independent quantities can be related to physical observables.

710: However, questions of principles are often of scarce practical relevance.

711: The point is to evaluate the numerical impact of the potentially 

712: badly-behaving terms. The answer is influenced by different factors. It varies 

713: according to the process at hand, the energy scale the reaction occurs at, and 

714: the gauge-fixing choice.  

715: 

716: It is quite a known fact that at LEP2 energies the gauge-invariance-breaking 

717: terms are generally unimportant, when computed in the 't Hooft Feynman gauge.

718: But, they might cause strong gauge cancellations between the various Feynman 

719: diagrams contributing to a given process at higher energy scales. This 

720: phenomenon is more and more enhanced as the off-shellness of the 

721: intermediate-state particles and the number of graphs increase 

722: \cite{kleiss_stirling,adp,phase}.

723: Complex processes with many particles in the final state might thus undergo 

724: huge interferences, making it senseless any signal selection.

725: 

726: In this letter we show that considering the Standard Model in the Axial gauge 

727: \`a la Dams and Kleiss \cite{dk} allows one to recover a quasi-gauge-invariant 

728: signal definition. In order to discuss this issue, we focus on the production 

729: of $\PW\PZ$ gauge-boson pairs with large invariant mass $\PM_{\PW\PZ}$ at the 

730: upcoming Large Hadron Collider (LHC), giving rise to four-fermion final 

731: states. The signal definition for this kind of processes has a well 

732: established reference. It has been in fact stated and largely used at LEP2 for 

733: the analysis of $\PW\PW$ and $\PZ\PZ$ physics.

734: 

735: The interest in the $\PW\PZ$ process is not only in giving a typical example

736: of high energy electroweak phenomenology. The LHC will in fact collect 

737: thousands of di-boson events \cite{Haywood:1999qg}, hence giving prospects for 

738: a detailed investigation of the $\PW\PW\PZ$ trilinear couplings in this 

739: channel. Possible anomalous self-interactions, which parametrize deviations 

740: from $\SM$ predictions due to new physics occurring at $\TeV$ scales, are 

741: indeed expected to increasingly enhance the gauge-boson pair-production cross 

742: section at large di-boson invariant masses. Extracting the signal is thus of 

743: vital importance to measure the involved trilinear gauge coupling. 

744: 

745: The paper is organized as follows: in \refse{sec:axialgauge} we briefly 

746: describe the axial gauge. The general setup of our numerical analysis

747: is given in \refse{sec:processes}. In \refse{sec:signal}, we discuss the 

748: possibility of a well-behaved signal definition, comparing the results in 

749: Unitary and Axial gauge. Our findings are summarized in 

750: \refse{sec:conclusions}. The SM Feynman rules in the axial gauge are listed in 

751: \refapp{sec:feynmanrules}.

752: 

753: \section{Axial gauge}

754: \label{sec:axialgauge}

755: 

756: One of the most appealing reasons for computing SM processes in the Axial gauge

757: is that it can provide a more severe check on gauge invariance (see for 

758: instance \citere{gauge_check}). In the following sections, we point out a 

759: further advantage, namely the possibility to minimize the gauge cancellations 

760: between Feynman diagrams at high energies. Here, we simply give a 

761: brief description of the Axial gauge content.

762: 

763: The formalism is not exceedingly cumbersome. There are indeed unphysical 

764: bosonic particles, as intermediate states, but no Fadeev-Popov ghosts.   

765: Moreover, two realizations are possible. The first one keeps the bilinear terms

766: in the unphysical bosons and the $\PW$ or $\PZ$ particles, giving rise to

767: mixed propagators \cite{kunszt-soper}. The latter has diagonalized 

768: propagators, but new interaction vertices \cite{dk}. In the following, we

769: discuss and use this latter approach.

770: 

771: The Axial gauge manifests its nature in the gauge-fixing part of the 

772: lagrangian

773: \beq

774: \L_{\textscr{gauge-fixing}}=

775: 	-\tfrac12\lambda n^\mu A^a_\mu A^a_\nu n^\nu

776:    -\tfrac12\lambda (n\cdot B)^2,

777: \eeq

778: where $A^a_\mu$ ($a$=1,2,3) are the SU(2) gauge fields, and $B_\mu$ belongs

779: to U(1). The four-vector $n_\mu$ represents the gauge invariance control 

780: parameter, the physical observables must be independent of. The resulting 

781: Feynman rules, obtained in the limit~$\lambda\to\infty$, are summarized in 

782: \refapp{sec:feynmanrules}. 

783: 

784: Once rewritten $A^3$ and $B$ in terms of the physical fields $\PZ$ and 

785: $\gamma$, and parametrizing the Higgs-doublet field as

786: \beq

787: \phi =\frac1{\sqrt 2}\pmatrix{\sqrt 2\phi_\PW\cr {v+\PH+i\phi_\PZ}\cr},~~~~~~~v=2\sqrt{-\mu^2/\lambda_\phi}

788: \eeq

789: where $\PH$ represents the Higgs field with mass $\PM_\PH$ and $\lambda_\phi$ 

790: the Higgs self-coupling, the mixing terms between physical and unphysical 

791: neutral fields are

792: \beq

793: \eqalign{

794: \L_{\PZ\phi_\PZ,\textscr{bilinear}}&=

795: 		-\tfrac12(\partial^\nu\PZ^\mu)(\partial_\nu\PZ_\mu)

796:       +\tfrac12(\partial^\mu\PZ_\mu)(\partial^\nu\PZ_\nu)

797: 		+\tfrac12\PM_\PZ^2\PZ_\mu\PZ^\mu\cr

798: 		&\qquad-\tfrac12\lambda n^\mu\PZ_\mu\PZ_\nu n^\nu

799: 		+\tfrac12(\partial^\mu\phi_\PZ)(\partial_\mu\phi_\PZ)

800: 		-\PM_\PZ\PZ^\mu\partial_\mu\phi_\PZ.

801: }

802: \eeq

803: This part of the Lagrangian can be diagonalized in momentum space by

804: applying the following transformation

805: \beq

806: \phi_\PZ(k)\to\phi_\PZ(k)+2i\PM_\PZ\frac{k^\mu \PZ_\mu(k)}{k^2}.

807: \eeq

808: After the diagonalization, the quadratic terms in the Lagrangian

809: for the field~$\PZ$ give rise to the $\PZ$-boson propagator

810: \beq

811: \Delta_{\nu\mu}=\frac{-i\left(

812:       g_{\nu\mu}

813:       -\frac{n_\nu k_\mu+n_\mu k_\nu}{n\cdot k}

814:       +k_\nu k_\mu\frac{n^2+(k^2-\PM_\PZ^2)/\lambda}{(n\cdot k)^2}

815:    \right)}{k^2-\PM_\PZ^2+i\epsilon}.

816: \eeq

817: Taking the limit $\lambda\to\infty$, one recovers the expression reported

818: in \refapp{sec:propagators}. An analogous procedure applies to the 

819: $\PW$-boson, and gives back the same propagator with $\PM_\PZ$ replaced by 

820: $\PM_\PW$.

821: 

822: The boson propagators in axial gauge display the peculiar property of being 

823: well-behaved at high energy. In the unitary gauge, the term 

824: $k_\mu k_\nu/\PM_\PV^2$ ($\PV =\PW,\PZ$) appearing in the numerator of the 

825: propagator leads to gauge-invariance-breaking terms of order $s/\PM_\PV^2$ 

826: (with $s$ the center-of-mass energy squared) in individual Feynman diagrams. 

827: By contrast, in axial gauge

828: each numerator factor $k_\mu$ is suppressed by a corresponding factor 

829: $1/(k\cdot n)$, preventing the growth with energy of individual diagrams and

830: the subsequent appearence of strong gauge cancellations between them.  

831: This important property, shared also by the new vertices, and its 

832: phenomenological consequences are the focus of this letter.

833: 

834: 

835: 

836: \section{Setup of the numerical analysis}

837: \label{sec:processes}

838: 

839: We consider the class of processes 

840: $\Pp\Pp\to l\bar\nu_ll^\prime\bar{l^\prime}$, where $l,l^\prime=\Pe$ or $\mu$. 

841: In our notation, $l\bar\nu_l$ indicates both $l^-\bar\nu_l$ and $l^+\nu_l$. 

842: These processes are characterized by three isolated charged leptons plus 

843: missing energy in the final state. They include $\PW\PZ$ production as 

844: intermediate state.  

845: 

846: Since the two incoming hadrons are protons and we sum over final states with 

847: opposite charges, we find

848: \beqar\label{eq:convol}%\refeq{eq:convol}

849: \rd\si^{h_1h_2}(P_1,P_2,p_f) = 

850: \int_0^1\rd x_1 \rd x_2 &&\sum_{U=u,c}\sum_{D=d,s}

851: \Bigl[f_{\bar\PD,\Pp}(x_1,Q^2)f_{\PU,\Pp}(x_2,Q^2)\,\rd\hat\si^{\bar\PD\PU}

852: (x_1P_1,x_2P_2,p_f)

853: \nl&&{}

854: +f_{\bar\PU,\Pp}(x_1,Q^2)f_{\PD,\Pp}(x_2,Q^2)\,\rd\hat\si^{\bar\PU\PD}

855: (x_1P_1,x_2P_2,p_f)

856: \nl&&{}

857: +f_{\bar\PD,\Pp}(x_2,Q^2)f_{\PU,\Pp}(x_1,Q^2)\,\rd\hat\si^{\bar\PD\PU}

858: (x_2P_2,x_1P_1,p_f)

859: \nl&&{}

860: +f_{\bar\PU,\Pp}(x_2,Q^2)f_{\PD,\Pp}(x_1,Q^2)\,\rd\hat\si^{\bar\PU\PD}

861: (x_2P_2,x_1P_1,p_f)

862: \Bigr]

863: \eeqar

864: in leading order of QCD.

865: 

866: For the masses we use the input values \cite{Hagiwara:pw}:

867: %\beq

868: %\begin{array}[b]{lcllcllcl}

869: %\MW & = & 80.425\GeV, \qquad &

870: %\MZ & = & 91.1876\GeV, \\

871: %\Mt & = & 178.0\GeV, &

872: %\Mb & = & 4.9\GeV.

873: %\end{array}

874: %\label{eq:SMpar}

875: %\eeq

876: \beq

877: \MW = 80.425\GeV,~~~~\MZ = 91.1876\GeV,~~~~\Mb = 4.9\GeV.

878: \label{eq:SMpar}

879: \eeq

880: All fermions but the b-quark are taken to be massless.

881: 

882: The weak mixing angle is fixed by $\sw^2=1-\MW^2/\MZ^2$.  Moreover, we

883: adopted the so called $G_{\mu}$-scheme, which effectively includes

884: higher-order contributions associated with the running of the

885: electromagnetic coupling and the leading universal two-loop

886: $\Mt$-dependent corrections. This corresponds to parametrize the

887: lowest-order matrix element in terms of the effective coupling

888: $\alpha_{G_{\mu}}=\sqrt{2}G_{\mu}\MW^2\sw^2/\pi$.

889: 

890: Additional input parameters are the quark-mixing matrix elements whose

891: values have been taken to be $|V_{\Pu\Pd}|=0.974$ \cite{Hocker:2001xe}, 

892: $|V_{\Pc\Ps}|=|V_{\Pu\Pd}|$, $|V_{\Pu\Ps}|=|V_{\Pc\Pd}|=

893: \sqrt{1- |V_{\Pu\Pd}|^2}$, and zero for all other relevant matrix elements.

894: 

895: For the numerical results presented here, we have used the fixed-width scheme 

896: with $\GZ$ and $\GW$ from standard formulas

897: \beqar

898: \GZ &=& {\alpha\MZ\over{24\sw^2\cw^2}} 

899: \Bigl[21-40\sw^2+{160\over 3}\sw^4+{\Mb^4\over\MZ^4}

900: (24\sw^2-16\sw^4)-9{\Mb^2\over\MZ^2}

901: \nl&&\qquad\qquad{}

902: +{\alpha_s\over\pi}\Bigl(15-28\sw^2+{88\over 3}\sw^4\Bigr)\Bigr]

903: %\nl&&{}

904: %9{\Mb^2\over\MZ^2}\Bigl(2(-1+{4\over 3}\sw^2)^2-3.667\Bigr)+

905: %{\Mb^4\over\MZ^4}\Bigl(15-33(-1+{4\over 3}\sw^2)^2\Bigr)\Bigr)\Bigr]

906: \eeqar

907: and 

908: \beq

909: \GW ={\alpha\MW\over{2\sw^2}}\left [{3\over 2}+{\alpha_s\over\pi}

910: \right ] .

911: \eeq

912: For the strong coupling we use $\alpha_s=0.117$.

913: 

914: As to parton distributions, we have used CTEQ6M \cite{cteq} at the

915: following factorization scale:

916: \begin{equation}\label{eq:scaleWZ}

917: Q^2={1\over 2}\left (\MW^2+\MZ^2+\PT^2(l\bar\nu_l)+

918: \PT^2(l^\prime\bar{l^\prime})\right )

919: \end{equation}

920: This scale choice appears to be appropriate for the calculation of

921: differential cross sections, in particular for vector-boson

922: transverse-momentum distributions \cite{Dixon:1999di,Frixione:1992pj}.

923: 

924: We have, moreover, implemented a general set of cuts, proper for LHC 

925: analyses, defined as follows:

926: \begin{itemize}

927: \item {charged lepton transverse momentum $\PT(l)>20\GeV$},

928:   

929: \item {missing transverse momentum $\PTmiss> 20\GeV$},

930:   

931: \item {charged lepton pseudo-rapidity $|\eta_l |< 3$}, where

932:   $\eta_l=-\log\left (\tan(\theta_l/2)\right )$, and $\theta_l$ is the

933:   polar angle of particle $l$ with respect to the beam,

934: \item {lepton pair invariant mass $\PM (l^\prime\bar{l^\prime})\ge 0.201\GeV$.}

935: \end{itemize}

936: These cuts approximately simulate the detector acceptance.

937: For the processes considered, we have also implemented further 

938: cuts which are described in due time. In the following sections, we present 

939: results for the LHC at $\CM$ energy $\sqrt s=14\TeV$ and an integrated 

940: luminosity $L=100\fba^{-1}$.

941: 

942: \section{Gauge scheme and signal definition}

943: \label{sec:signal}

944: 

945: In this section we discuss how to identify and separate the signal of $\PW\PZ$ 

946: production from the background. Let us first define these two contributions 

947: diagrammatically.

948: 

949: The generic process $\Pp\Pp\to l\bar\nu_ll^\prime\bar{l^\prime}$ is described 

950: by the Feynman diagrams drawn in \reffi{fi:diagrams}. The three 

951: doubly-resonant graphs mediated by $\PW$ and $\PZ$-boson production are 

952: displayed in the first row. From LEP2 on, this is what we call CC03 signal for 

953: the di-boson production \footnote{

954: The CC03 cross section was introduced and discussed in \citeres{cc03_1,cc03_2} 

955: in order to extract the $\PW\PW$ signal from the full set of 

956: $e^+e^-\rightarrow 4f$ processes.}. The irreducible 

957: background, represented by singly-resonant and non-resonant diagrams, is 

958: instead shown in the second row, and partially in the first row by the graphs 

959: with virtual photon exchange.

960: 

961: \begin{figure}

962:   \unitlength 1cm

963: \begin{center}

964: \begin{picture}(16.,15.)

965: \put(-0.5,-4){\epsfig{file=graf.eps,width=14cm}}

966: %\epsfig{file=graf.eps, width=14cm}

967: \end{picture}

968: \end{center}  

969: \vspace{-8.cm}

970: \caption{Feynman diagrams for the full process 

971: $\Pp\Pp\to l\bar\nu_ll^\prime\bar{l^\prime}$. The first row shows the 

972: doubly-resonant CC03 diagrams for $\PW\PZ$ production (when the photon is 

973: neglected). The latter represents the irreducible background, which the 

974: photon contribution in the first row must be added to.}

975: \label{fi:diagrams}

976: \end{figure}

977: From a practical point of view, the aim is to maximize the signal over the 

978: background ratio, picking out the kinematical regions where the first one is 

979: more enhanced and applying appropriate cuts to suppress the latter.

980: Hence, having at disposal a clear separation among the two contributions is 

981: highly desirable.

982: 

983: Unfortunately, signal and background do not individually preserve gauge 

984: invariance. Each of them includes indeed gauge-invariance-breaking terms which 

985: are only cancelled in their sum. Hence, only the full set of Feynman diagrams, 

986: i.e. the complete amplitude, is theoretically well-behaved.

987: Despite of that, one could still define a pseudo-observable using the pure

988: doubly-resonant CC03 contribution. 

989: 

990: The possibility of such a definition strongly depends on the size of the

991: terms which violate gauge invariance. As well known, their numerical impact 

992: can vary according to the energy and the off-shellness of the intermediate 

993: particles in the process. This generally makes their behaviour unpredictable. 

994: The off-shellness is indeed a variable one cannot always limit.

995: In the easy case at hand the virtuality of the produced $\PW$ and $\PZ$ 

996: bosons can be arbitrarily reduced, in this way suppressing the gauge violating 

997: terms. In the limit of on-shell $\PW\PZ$ production, the CC03 diagrams would 

998: in fact constitute a gauge independent set. But there are also opposite 

999: examples.

1000: %this is not the most general case. 

1001: When the virtual particles in a process are exchanged in t-channel, they 

1002: cannot be forced anymore to be almost on-shell, leaving thus unconstrained the 

1003: dangerous terms.

1004: 

1005: In the next two sections, we show that the gauge-fixing choice is the actual

1006: control key for the gauge-invariance-breaking terms. 

1007: 

1008: \subsection{CC03 in Unitary Gauge}

1009: 

1010: The CC03 cross section was introduced at LEP2 in order to combine the different

1011: final state measurements from the various collaborations, and increase the 

1012: statistics. Usually defined either in the Unitary gauge or in the 

1013: 't Hooft-Feynman gauge, the CC03 cross section is not an observable, but at

1014: LEP2 energies it was taken as a useful quantity. It contains interesting 

1015: informations about triple gauge boson vertices, and is sensible to the 

1016: $\PM_\PW$ value. At LEP2, the CC03 signal was then classified as a  

1017: pseudo-observable and widely used. Its reliability was based on its closeness

1018: to the full result, which implies neglegible gauge violating terms. 

1019: But, the crucial caveat was that such a signal definition might become very 

1020: problematic at future high energy colliders, owing to the much larger 

1021: backgrounds and gauge dependences.  

1022: 

1023: In Unitary gauge, delicate cancellations between doubly-resonant (DR) and 

1024: non-DR diagrams characterize the behaviour of off-shell cross sections in the 

1025: high-energy regime. In the 't Hooft-Feynman gauge, this kind of cancellations 

1026: generally appear moderately weakened, but still persist. In the massless limit 

1027: we are working in, the two 

1028: gauge schemes coincide. In the following, we refer to that as Unitary gauge.

1029:     

1030: For the example at hand, the behaviour of DR and non-DR diagrams is shown in 

1031: \reffi{fi:WZ_born_pt} (see also \citere{adp}).

1032: There, we have plotted the tree-level cross section as a function of the cut 

1033: on the transverse momentum of the reconstructed $\PZ$-boson, $\PT(l'\bar l')$.

1034: This cut selects large di-boson center-of-mass energies and wide scattering

1035: angles of the produced vector-bosons. This is exactly the kinematical region 

1036: dominated by the longitudinal gauge-boson production, and thus 

1037: particularly sensitive to the gauge-violation effects we want to analyse.

1038:  

1039: The first two curves in \reffi{fi:WZ_born_pt} represent, from top to bottom, 

1040: the contribution of the pure doubly-resonant diagrams, and the full result 

1041: including all Feynman diagrams which contribute to the same final state.

1042: The first clear information one can extract from the plot is that the 

1043: DR contribution ($\Pp\Pp\to \PW\PZ\to 4f$), which is lower than the exact 

1044: result ($\Pp\Pp\to 4f$) by about 1$\%$ around 

1045: threshold, increases with energy relatively to the full result. For 

1046: $\PTcut(l'\bar l')=300\GeV$, the difference between the two cross

1047: sections is already of order 20$\%$, and at very large energies the DR

1048: diagrams can even overestimate the result by a factor 2 or more.

1049: %For $\PTcut(l'\bar l')=800\GeV$, DR and full cross sections are 

1050: %$\sigma_{\DR}=2.4\times 10^{-5}\pba$ and 

1051: %$\sigma_{\full}=1.4\times 10^{-5}\pba$ respectively.

1052:    

1053: This behavior can only be explained with the existence of strong interferences

1054: between DR and non-DR subsets of diagrams, which are not separately 

1055: gauge-independent. The consequence is that in Unitary gauge it is extremely 

1056: hard to consider the pure DR contribution as a pseudo-observable.

1057: The diagrammatic approach, commonly adopted at LEP2 for 

1058: $\PW\PW$ and $\PZ\PZ$ physics, fails when describing the di-boson 

1059: production at the LHC in the high-$\PT$ region.

1060: In this gauge scheme, the only sensible observable is the total contribution.

1061: %for it is the only well defined gauge-independent quantity. 

1062: Thus, any signal definition seems to be completely lost.

1063: \begin{figure}

1064:   \begin{center}

1065: \epsfig{file=fig4.eps, angle=0}

1066: \end{center}  

1067: \caption{Born cross section for the full process 

1068:   $\Pp\Pp\to l\bar\nu_ll^\prime\bar{l^\prime}$ at $\sqrt{s}=14\TeV$ as a

1069:   function of the cut on the transverse momentum of the reconstructed

1070:   $\PZ$-boson. Standard cuts are applied. Legends as explained in the text.}

1071: \label{fi:WZ_born_pt}

1072: \end{figure}%

1073: A method which has been proposed to recover it consists in the double-pole 

1074: approximation (DPA). This approximation emerges from the CC03 diagrams upon

1075: projecting the vector-boson momenta in the matrix element to their on-shell 

1076: values. This means that the DPA is based on the residue of the double 

1077: resonance, which is related to the sub-processes of on-shell di-boson 

1078: production and subsequent on-shell vector-boson decay. Owing to that, the DPA 

1079: shares the property of preserving gauge invariance. 

1080: 

1081: For the case at hand, the DPA cross section is shown in \reffi{fi:WZ_born_pt},

1082: where it is represented by the third curve from top to bottom. One can see

1083: that the DPA is lower than the total cross section, their difference amounting 

1084: %The difference between the exact result and the DPA amounts 

1085: to roughly -15$\%$ for $\PT(l'\bar l')$ cuts above $100\GeV$. As displayed by

1086: the solid line overlapping the DPA curve, the gap reduces to the per-cent 

1087: level if one imposes cuts on the masses of the two lepton-pairs: 

1088: $|\PM (l^\prime\bar{l^\prime})-\PM_\PZ |\le 20\GeV$ and  

1089: $\MT(l\bar\nu_l)=\sqrt{\ET^2(l\bar\nu_l)-\PT^2(l\bar\nu_l)}\le \PM_\PW +20\GeV$.

1090: This shows that, in contrast to the CC03 cross section in Unitary gauge, the 

1091: DPA is theoretically well defined, and might be considered as a good estimate 

1092: of the di-boson production when restricted to the doubly-resonant region.

1093: 

1094: However, the method has two substantial limitations. A first obvious price to 

1095: be paid is the exclusion of the kinematical regions outside the s-channel 

1096: resonances, where the DPA is not valid. The second limit is represented by the 

1097: processes where the intermediate resonant particles are exchanged in t-channel 

1098: (i.e. they have space-like virtuality). In this case, the DPA cannot be 

1099: applied. One can rely only on its analogous given by the Equivalent Vector 

1100: Boson approximation (EVBA), whose reliability is still debated for it crucially

1101: depends on the applied kinematical cuts.

1102: 

1103: The two approximations can give an estimate of the signal. But their goodness

1104: must be first checked against an exact computation. This bottom-top procedure 

1105: of bringing the easier tool, represented by the approximate signal, to match 

1106: the full result proves to be extremely powerful in some case. The DPA has 

1107: been successfully employed for evaluating higher order corrections to the full 

1108: process. But, also the reverse can be highly useful. That means defining an 

1109: a-priori signal, which the full result should converge to. This is essential

1110: in experiments. A scan of the full phase space 

1111: in order to see where the signal is more enhanced, and how the background can

1112: be suppressed might in fact be decisive for data analyses. 

1113: 

1114: In both Unitary and 't Hooft-Feynman gauge schemes this is not possible.

1115: In the next section, we show that the Axial gauge is the appropriate

1116: framework to obtain an independent and well-behaved signal definition.

1117: 

1118: \subsection{CC03 in Axial Gauge}

1119:  

1120: We consider the same process as before, 

1121: $\Pp\Pp\to l\bar\nu_ll^\prime\bar{l^\prime}$, in Axial gauge. The matrix 

1122: element is written according to the Feynman rules written in 

1123: \refapp{sec:feynmanrules} (see also \citere{dk}). 

1124: 

1125: Since we assume all fermions to be massless, the contribution of the 

1126: unphysical fields $\phi_\PZ$ and $\phi_\PW$ to the amplitude can be ignored.

1127: This simplifies the computation sensibly, but does not alter the generality

1128: of the results. The cross sections and distributions presented in this 

1129: section have been obtained using $n_\mu =(2,1,1,1)$ as gauge vector.

1130: However, we checked that the non-gauge-invariant quantities we analyse in the 

1131: following have a very little dependence on that. 

1132: 

1133: Our aim is to show that in Axial gauge the diagrammatic approach can be 

1134: recovered. This means that a signal, \ie a selected subset of diagrams, 

1135: can be considered as a pseudo-observable even if non-gauge-invariant. 

1136: To this end, we have chosen a phase-space region characterized by large

1137: center of mass energies and large scattering angles of the produced vector 

1138: bosons, $\PT(l^\prime\bar{l^\prime})> 800\GeV$. This is in fact the 

1139: kinematical domain where the gauge-violating terms, if there, would be 

1140: enhanced as displayed in \reffi{fi:WZ_born_pt} for the Unitary gauge.

1141: 

1142: We have moreover selected four weakly correlated variables which reflect

1143: our most direct expectations on the signal and background behaviour, namely:

1144: 

1145: \begin{itemize}

1146: \item {$\PM(l^\prime\bar{l^\prime})$ - the invariant mass of the lepton pair 

1147: which could come from the $\PZ$-boson decay,}

1148: \item {$\PM(ll^\prime\bar{l^\prime})$ - the invariant mass of the three

1149: charged leptons,}

1150: \item{$\PM(l\bar\nu_l\bar{l^\prime})$ - the invariant mass of the two leptons

1151: which could come from the $\PW$-boson decay plus the opposite-sign lepton

1152: coming from the $\PZ$-boson,}

1153: \item{$\cos (l\bar{l^\prime})$ - the cosine of the angle between the charged

1154: lepton coming from the $\PW$-boson and the opposite-sign lepton from 

1155: the $\PZ$-boson.}

1156: \end{itemize}

1157: The corresponding differential cross sections are plotted in \reffi{fi:WZ_s1}.

1158: There, the solid line represents the full contribution coming from all ten

1159: tree-level diagrams. The two dashed lines compare instead the CC03 signal

1160: in the two gauge schemes. The long-dashed line gives CC03 in Unitary gauge (or 

1161: t'Hooft-Feynman gauge), while the dashed one shows the CC03 signal in Axial 

1162: gauge. Finally, as a reference, the dot-dashed line displays the DPA result.  

1163: \begin{figure}

1164:   \unitlength 1cm

1165:   \begin{center}

1166:   \begin{picture}(16.,15.)

1167:   \put(-2.5,-1){\epsfig{file=mz.ps,width=14cm}}

1168:   \put(5.5,-1){\epsfig{file=mzl.ps,width=14cm}}

1169:   \put(-2.5,-8){\epsfig{file=mwl.ps,width=14cm}}

1170:   \put(5.5,-8){\epsfig{file=cosepmum.ps,width=14cm}}

1171:   \end{picture}

1172:   \end{center}

1173: \vspace{-2.cm}

1174: \caption{Distributions for $\PW\PZ$ production. 

1175:   (a) Invariant mass of the same-flavour charged lepton pair. (b) Invariant 

1176:   mass of the charged leptons. (c) Invariant mass of the lepton pair which 

1177:   might come from a $\PW$-boson, and the opposite-charge lepton which might 

1178:   come from a $\PZ$-boson. (d) Cosine of the angle between opposite-charge 

1179:   and different-flavour leptons.

1180:   The contributions of the four final states 

1181:   $l\bar\nu_ll^\prime\bar{l^\prime}$ where $l,l^\prime =e,\mu$

1182:   are summed up, and standard cuts as well as 

1183:   $\PT(\PZ)> 800\GeV$ are applied. Legends as explained in the text. 

1184: }

1185: \label{fi:WZ_s1}

1186: \end{figure}

1187: The first left-side plot contains the $\PM(l^\prime\bar{l^\prime})$ invariant 

1188: mass. This observable peaks on $\PM_\PZ$, receiving the dominant contribution

1189: from the CC03 signal. But, it is also expected to have some tail outside the 

1190: resonant region, owing to all $\PW$-singly-resonant and non-resonant diagrams 

1191: drawn in \reffi{fi:diagrams}. In particular, the photon exchange should 

1192: generate a rise at low invariant mass values. The expected behaviour is well

1193: reproduced by the solid line, as it must. 

1194: 

1195: Expectations are equally satisfied if one looks at the CC03 signal in Axial 

1196: gauge. The so-defined signal is indeed concentrated around the 

1197: $\PZ$-resonance, going sharply to zero beyond a few $\Gamma_\PZ$. The 

1198: gauge-invariant DPA result comes as a further confirmation of the well-behaved 

1199: CC03 in Axial gauge. The gauge-violating terms thus appear under control. 

1200: 

1201: Compared to these results, the Unitary gauge shows its ill-defined nature. In 

1202: this scheme, the CC03 signal presents a long tail at large invariant masses, 

1203: which is completely unphysical. It in fact stands up over the full result by 

1204: an order of magnitude, implying the presence of huge gauge cancellations 

1205: between the CC03 diagrams and the rest. The $\PZ$-boson invariant mass 

1206: distribution clearly shows that the presence of the gauge-violating terms is 

1207: strictly linked to the virtuality of the intermediate gauge boson.   

1208: 

1209: An analogous discussion holds for the other two invariant mass distributions

1210: plotted in \reffi{fi:WZ_s1}. The top-right-side and the bottom-left-side plots

1211: represent the momentum of the fermion propagator in graphs 5 and 4 of   

1212: \reffi{fi:diagrams}, respectively. The two differential cross sections get the 

1213: dominant contributions from the large masses, as the $\PW$ and $\PZ$ bosons 

1214: are produced back-to-back mainly. But, they have also a sizeable low-mass 

1215: component coming from the afore-mentioned singly-resonant diagrams, as shown

1216: by the solid line. Once again, the CC03 signal in Axial gauge matches the

1217: expectations, while the Unitary gauge gives a result which lies above the total

1218: differential cross section, and displays unphysical tails.    

1219: 

1220: The last distribution on the bottom-right-side shows the cosine of the angle

1221: between the two charged leptons which could come from the $\PW$ and the 

1222: $\PZ$ bosons. The CC03 signal in Axial gauge peaks in the backward direction,

1223: as the $\PW$ and $\PZ$ bosons are produced back-to-back. The full CC10 shows

1224: in addition a forward rise coming from the graphs 4 and 5 in 

1225: \reffi{fi:diagrams}. These contributions are in fact enhanced when the two 

1226: leptons are produced collinearly. The Unitary gauge shows once more the usual

1227: effect. It distorts and overestimates both the signal and the total 

1228: differential cross sections, as for the previous variables. 

1229: 

1230: 

1231: \section{Conclusions}

1232: \label{sec:conclusions}

1233: 

1234: In this letter, we have applied for the first time the Axial gauge \`a la Dams 

1235: and Kleiss to analyze the $\SM$ physics at the LHC.

1236: For a precise understanding of the high-energy phenomenology, having at hand

1237: an unambiguous separation of signal and background is mandatory. We have shown 

1238: that the Axial gauge is the appropriate framework to obtain a 

1239: quasi-gauge-invariant signal definition. It allows in fact to isolate the 

1240: signal trasparently, keeping the gauge-violating terms well under control even 

1241: at very high energy scales.

1242: 

1243: For this first application, we have chosen to analyse the well-stated $\PW\PZ$ 

1244: production process (a more complicated process mediated by vector boson 

1245: scattering will be discussed in \citere{vbs_dk}). The signal definition has in 

1246: this case a very well known

1247: reference, namely the CC03 (NC02) cross section which was introduced and 

1248: widely used at LEP2 for $\PW\PW$ ($\PZ\PZ$) physics. This quantity is not 

1249: gauge invariant. It contains gauge-violating terms which cancel only when

1250: summed up with the irreducible-background counterpart. Nevertheless,

1251: it can be taken as a useful pseudo-observable if the gauge dependence is kept 

1252: well below the experimental accuracy. 

1253: 

1254: That was the case at LEP2 energies, where the gauge-violating-breaking terms

1255: were probed to be generally unimportant when computed in the 't Hooft-Feynman 

1256: gauge. With increasing the energy, the size of the potentially badly-behaving 

1257: terms might grow dramatically. Strong gauge cancellations between the various 

1258: diagrams contributing to the same final state can take place, making any 

1259: signal selection senseless.   

1260: 

1261: We have shown that the Axial gauge can recover the diagrammatic approach, and

1262: give a well-behaved signal definition over the full energy domain.

1263:    

1264: \section*{Acknowledgements}

1265: G.~Passarino is gratefully acknowledged for valuable comments on the 

1266: subject treated and for carefully reading the manuscript. 

1267: This work was supported by the Italian Ministero dell'Istruzione, 

1268: dell'Universit\`a e della Ricerca (MIUR) under contract Decreto MIUR 

1269: 26-01-2001 N.13 ``Incentivazione alla mobilit\`a di studiosi stranieri ed 

1270: italiani residenti all'estero''. 

1271: 

1272: \appendix

1273: 

1274: \section*{Appendix}

1275: 

1276: \section{Feynman rules}

1277: \label{sec:feynmanrules}

1278: 

1279: In this appendix, we list the SM Feynman rules in Axial gauge. We adopt the 

1280: same conventions as in \citere{dk}, which are here below summarized:

1281: \begin{enumerate}

1282: \item The Feynman rules that involve fermions are written only for the first 

1283:       generation of leptons ($\Pe,\nu_\Pe$).

1284: \item Particles and anti-particles are represented by lines with an arrow.

1285:       The momentum flows in the direction of the arrow. For particles 

1286:       described by lines without arrow, the momentum flows towards the vertex.

1287: \item We use the following notation:

1288:         \begin{center}

1289: 	$\Pg_\Pw = \frac{\Pg_\Pe}{\sin\theta_\Pw};\ \

1290: 	\Pg_\Pz = \frac{\Pg_\Pe}{\sin\theta_\Pw\cos\theta_\Pw};\ \

1291: 	p_l ={1\over 2}(1-\gamma^5);\ \

1292: 	p_r ={1\over 2}(1+\gamma^5).$

1293: 	\end{center}

1294: \item If reversing all arrows on a vertex yields a different vertex,

1295: 	that vertex is also a vertex of the theory. 

1296: 	The corresponding vertex factor is obtained by conjugation of

1297:         the original vertex, except for one factor of~$i$, and by reversing the

1298: 	sign of all momenta that belong to particles that do not carry an 

1299: 	arrow on their line. In the following, we give the expression of only 

1300: 	one sample vertex (the paired one must be derived).

1301: \end{enumerate}

1302: 

1303: \subsection{Propagators}

1304: \label{sec:propagators}

1305: \fmruletab{

1306: % 1

1307: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1308: \Line(0,25)(50,25)\Text(25,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PB(k)$}

1309: \end{picture}

1310: &

1311: \frac{-i\left(

1312:       g_{\nu\mu}

1313:       -\frac{n_\nu k_\mu+n_\mu k_\nu}{n\cdot k}

1314:       +k_\nu k_\mu\frac{n^2}{(n\cdot k)^2}

1315:    \right)}{k^2+i\epsilon}

1316: \cr

1317: % 2

1318: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1319: \ArrowLine(0,25)(50,25)\Text(25,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k)$}

1320: \end{picture}

1321: &

1322: \frac{-i\left(

1323:       g_{\nu\mu}

1324:       -\frac{n_\nu k_\mu+n_\mu k_\nu}{n\cdot k}

1325:       +k_\nu k_\mu\frac{n^2}{(n\cdot k)^2}

1326:    \right)}{k^2-\PM_\PW^2+i\epsilon}

1327: \cr

1328: % 3

1329: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1330: \ArrowLine(0,25)(50,25)\Text(25,27)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k)$}

1331: \end{picture}

1332: &

1333: \frac i{k^2}

1334: \cr

1335: % 4

1336: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1337: \Line(0,25)(50,25)\Text(25,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k)$}

1338: \end{picture}

1339: &

1340: \frac{-i\left(

1341:       g_{\nu\mu}

1342:       -\frac{n_\nu k_\mu+n_\mu k_\nu}{n\cdot k}

1343:       +k_\nu k_\mu\frac{n^2}{(n\cdot k)^2}

1344:    \right)}{k^2-\PM_\PZ^2+i\epsilon}

1345: \cr

1346: % 5

1347: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1348: \Line(0,25)(50,25)\Text(25,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k)$}

1349: \end{picture}

1350: &

1351: \frac i{k^2}

1352: \cr

1353: % 6

1354: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1355: \Line(0,25)(50,25)\Text(25,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k)$}

1356: \end{picture}

1357: &

1358: \frac i{k^2-\PM_\PH^2+i\epsilon}

1359: \cr

1360: % 7

1361: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1362: \ArrowLine(0,25)(50,25)\Text(25,27)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \Pe(k)$}

1363: \end{picture}

1364: &

1365: \frac{i(\slash k+\Pm_\Pe)}{k^2-\Pm_\Pe^2+i\epsilon}

1366: \cr

1367: % 8

1368: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1369: \ArrowLine(0,25)(50,25)\Text(25,27)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \nu_\Pe(k)$}

1370: \end{picture}

1371: &

1372: \frac{i(\slash k+\Pm_{\nu_\Pe})}{k^2-\Pm_{\nu_\Pe}^2+i\epsilon}

1373: \cr

1374: % 9 zie 7

1375: % 10 zie 8

1376: }

1377: 

1378: \subsection{Triple boson couplings without Higgs}

1379: \fmruletab{

1380: % 11

1381: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1382: \ArrowLine(0,0)(19,25)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_1)^\mu$}

1383: \ArrowLine(19,25)(0,50)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_2)^\nu$}

1384: \Line(19,25)(50,25)\Text(34,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PB(k_3)^\sigma$}

1385: \end{picture}

1386: &

1387: \eqalign{

1388: i\Pg_\Pe\left[\vphantom{\frac12}\right.&

1389: 		g^{\nu\sigma}(k_2^\mu+k_3^\mu)

1390: 		+g^{\mu\sigma}(k_1^\nu-k_3^\nu)

1391: 		-g^{\mu\nu}(k_1^\sigma+k_2^\sigma)\cr

1392: 		&\left.-\PM_\PW^2\left(

1393: 			g^{\nu\sigma}\frac{k_1^\mu}{k_1^2}

1394: 			+g^{\mu\sigma}\frac{k_2^\nu}{k_2^2}

1395: 			-(k_1^\sigma+k_2^\sigma)\frac{k_1^\mu}{k_1^2}\frac{k_2^\nu}{k_2^2}

1396: 		\right)

1397: 	\right]

1398: }

1399: \cr

1400: % 12

1401: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1402: \ArrowLine(19,25)(0,0)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_1)$}

1403: \ArrowLine(0,50)(19,25)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_2)^\mu$}

1404: \Line(19,25)(50,25)\Text(34,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PB(k_3)^\nu$}

1405: \end{picture}

1406: &

1407: i\Pg_\Pe\PM_\PW\left(g^{\mu\nu}-\frac{(k_1^\nu+k_2^\nu)k_2^\mu}{k_2^2}\right)

1408: \cr

1409: % 13 zie 12

1410: % 14

1411: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1412: \ArrowLine(0,0)(19,25)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_1)$}

1413: \ArrowLine(19,25)(0,50)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_2)$}

1414: \Line(19,25)(50,25)\Text(34,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PB(k_3)^\mu$}

1415: \end{picture}

1416: &

1417: i\Pg_\Pe(k_1^\mu+k_2^\mu)

1418: \cr

1419: % 15

1420: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1421: \ArrowLine(0,0)(19,25)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_2)^\nu$}

1422: \ArrowLine(19,25)(0,50)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_3)^\sigma$}

1423: \Line(19,25)(50,25)\Text(34,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_1)^\mu$}

1424: \end{picture}

1425: &	\eqalign{

1426: 	i\Pg_\Pw\cos\theta_\Pw\left[\vphantom{\frac12}\right.&

1427: 	-g^{\nu\sigma}(k_2^\mu+k_3^\mu)

1428: 	-g^{\mu\nu}(k_1^\sigma-k_2^\sigma)

1429: 	+g^{\mu\sigma}(k_1^\nu+k_3^\nu)\cr

1430: 	&+\PM_\PZ^2\sin^2\theta_\Pw\left(

1431: 		g^{\mu\sigma}\frac{k_2^\nu}{k_2^2}

1432: 		+g^{\mu\nu}\frac{k_3^\sigma}{k_3^2}

1433: 	\right)\cr

1434: 	&+\frac12\PM_\PZ^2\left(

1435: 		-(k_1^\sigma-k_2^\sigma)\frac{k_1^\mu}{k_1^2}\frac{k_2^\nu}{k_2^2}

1436: 		-(k_1^\nu+k_3^\nu)\frac{k_1^\mu}{k_1^2}\frac{k_3^\sigma}{k_3^2}

1437: 	\right)\cr

1438: 	&\left.+\PM_\PZ^2\left(\frac12-\sin^2\theta_\Pw\right)(k_2^\mu+k_3^\mu)

1439: 										\frac{k_2^\nu}{k_2^2}\frac{k_3^\sigma}{k_3^2}

1440: 	\right]\cr

1441: 	}

1442: \cr

1443: % 16

1444: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1445: \ArrowLine(19,25)(0,0)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_2)$}

1446: \ArrowLine(0,50)(19,25)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_3)^\nu$}

1447: \Line(19,25)(50,25)\Text(34,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_1)^\mu$}

1448: \end{picture}

1449: &

1450: -i\Pg_\Pz\PM_\PW\left(

1451: 	\sin^2\theta_\Pw g^{\mu\nu}

1452: 	-\frac12\frac{(k_1^\nu+k_2^\nu)k_1^\mu}{k_1^2}

1453: 	+\left(\cos^2\theta_\Pw-\frac12\right)\frac{(k_2^\mu+k_3^\mu)k_3^\nu}{k_3^2}

1454: \right)

1455: \cr

1456: % 17 zie 16

1457: % 18

1458: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1459: \ArrowLine(0,0)(19,25)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_2)$}

1460: \ArrowLine(19,25)(0,50)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_3)$}

1461: \Line(19,25)(50,25)\Text(34,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_1)^\mu$}

1462: \end{picture}

1463: &

1464: i\Pg_\Pw\left(k_2^\mu+k_3^\mu\right)\left(\cos\theta_\Pw-\frac1{2\cos\theta_\Pw}\right)

1465: \cr

1466: % 19

1467: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1468: \ArrowLine(0,0)(19,25)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_2)^\mu$}

1469: \ArrowLine(19,25)(0,50)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_3)^\nu$}

1470: \Line(19,25)(50,25)\Text(34,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_1)$}

1471: \end{picture}

1472: &

1473: \frac12\Pg_\Pw\PM_\PW\left(

1474: 	\frac{(k_2^\nu-k_1^\nu)k_2^\mu}{k_2^2}

1475: 	-\frac{(k_1^\mu+k_3^\mu)k_3^\nu}{k_3^2}

1476: \right)

1477: \cr

1478: % 20

1479: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1480: \ArrowLine(19,25)(0,0)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_2)$}

1481: \ArrowLine(0,50)(19,25)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_3)^\mu$}

1482: \Line(19,25)(50,25)\Text(34,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_1)$}

1483: \end{picture}

1484: &

1485: \frac12\Pg_\Pw\left(k_1^\mu+k_2^\mu\right)

1486: \cr

1487: % 21 zie 20

1488: }

1489: 

1490: \subsection{Triple boson couplings with Higgs}

1491: \fmruletab{

1492: % 22

1493: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1494: \ArrowLine(0,0)(19,25)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_2)^\mu$}

1495: \ArrowLine(19,25)(0,50)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_3)^\nu$}

1496: \Line(19,25)(50,25)\Text(34,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_1)$}

1497: \end{picture}

1498: &

1499: \frac i2\Pg_\Pw\PM_\PW\left(

1500: 	2g^{\mu\nu}

1501: 	-\frac{k_3^\nu(k_1^\mu+k_3^\mu)}{k_3^2}

1502: 	+\frac{k_2^\mu(k_1^\nu-k_2^\nu)}{k_2^2}

1503: 	-\PM_\PH^2\frac{k_2^\mu}{k_2^2}\frac{k_3^\nu}{k_3^2}

1504: \right)

1505: \cr

1506: % 23 zie 24

1507: % 24

1508: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1509: \ArrowLine(0,0)(19,25)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_2)$}

1510: \ArrowLine(19,25)(0,50)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_3)^\mu$}

1511: \Line(19,25)(50,25)\Text(34,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_1)$}

1512: \end{picture}

1513: &

1514: \frac i2\Pg_\Pw\left(k_2^\mu-k_1^\mu+\frac{\PM_\PH^2}{k_3^2}k_3^\mu\right)

1515: \cr

1516: % 25 

1517: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1518: \ArrowLine(0,0)(19,25)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_2)$}

1519: \ArrowLine(19,25)(0,50)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_3)$}

1520: \Line(19,25)(50,25)\Text(34,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_1)$}

1521: \end{picture}

1522: &

1523: -\frac i2\Pg_\Pw\frac{\PM_\PH^2}{\PM_\PW}

1524: \cr

1525: % 26

1526: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1527: \Line(0,0)(19,25)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_2)^\mu$}

1528: \Line(19,25)(0,50)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_3)^\nu$}

1529: \Line(19,25)(50,25)\Text(34,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_1)$}

1530: \end{picture}

1531: &

1532: i\Pg_\Pz\PM_\PZ\left(

1533: 	g^{\mu\nu}

1534: 	+\frac12(k_1^\nu-k_2^\nu)\frac{k_2^\mu}{k_2^2}

1535: 	+\frac12(k_1^\mu-k_3^\mu)\frac{k_3^\nu}{k_3^2}

1536: 	+\frac12\PM_\PH^2\frac{k_2^\mu}{k_2^2}\frac{k_3^\nu}{k_3^2}

1537: \right)

1538: \cr

1539: % 27

1540: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1541: \Line(0,0)(19,25)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_2)$}

1542: \Line(19,25)(0,50)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_3)^\mu$}

1543: \Line(19,25)(50,25)\Text(34,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_1)$}

1544: \end{picture}

1545: &

1546: \frac12\Pg_\Pz\left(k_1^\mu-k_2^\mu+\PM_\PH^2\frac{k_3^\mu}{k_3^2}\right)

1547: \cr

1548: % 28

1549: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1550: \Line(0,0)(19,25)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_2)$}

1551: \Line(19,25)(0,50)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_3)$}

1552: \Line(19,25)(50,25)\Text(34,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_1)$}

1553: \end{picture}

1554: &

1555: -\frac i2\Pg_\Pz\frac{\PM_\PH^2}{\PM_\PZ}

1556: \cr

1557: % 29

1558: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1559: \Line(0,0)(19,25)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_2)$}

1560: \Line(19,25)(0,50)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_3)$}

1561: \Line(19,25)(50,25)\Text(34,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_1)$}

1562: \end{picture}

1563: &

1564: -\frac{3i}2\Pg_\Pw\frac{\PM_\PH^2}{\PM_\PW}

1565: \cr

1566: }

1567: 

1568: \subsection{Couplings to the Fermions}

1569: \fmruletab{

1570: % 30

1571: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1572: \ArrowLine(0,0)(19,25)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \Pe(k_1)$}

1573: \ArrowLine(19,25)(0,50)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \Pe(k_2)$}

1574: \Line(19,25)(50,25)\Text(34,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PB(k_3)^\mu$}

1575: \end{picture}

1576: &

1577: i\Pg_\Pe\gamma^\mu

1578: \cr

1579: % 31

1580: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1581: \ArrowLine(0,0)(19,25)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \Pe(k_1)$}

1582: \ArrowLine(19,25)(0,50)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \Pe(k_2)$}

1583: \Line(19,25)(50,25)\Text(34,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_3)^\mu$}

1584: \end{picture}

1585: &

1586: i\Pg_\Pz\left

1587: (	\frac12\gamma^\mu p_l

1588: 	-\gamma^\mu\sin^2\theta_\Pw

1589: 	+\frac12\frac{\Pm_\Pe}{k_3^2}k_3^\mu\gamma^5\right

1590: )

1591: \cr

1592: % 32

1593: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1594: \ArrowLine(0,0)(19,25)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \Pe(k_1)$}

1595: \ArrowLine(19,25)(0,50)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \Pe(k_2)$}

1596: \Line(19,25)(50,25)\Text(34,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_3)$}

1597: \end{picture}

1598: &

1599: \frac12\Pg_\Pz\frac{\Pm_\Pe}{\PM_\PZ}\gamma^5

1600: \cr

1601: % 33

1602: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1603: \ArrowLine(0,0)(19,25)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \Pe(k_1)$}

1604: \ArrowLine(19,25)(0,50)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \Pe(k_2)$}

1605: \Line(19,25)(50,25)\Text(34,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_3)$}

1606: \end{picture}

1607: &

1608: -\frac i2\Pg_\Pw\frac{\Pm_\Pe}{\PM_\PW}

1609: \cr

1610: % 34

1611: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1612: \ArrowLine(0,0)(19,25)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \Pe(k_1)$}

1613: \ArrowLine(19,25)(0,50)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \nu_\Pe(k_2)$}

1614: \ArrowLine(19,25)(50,25)\Text(34,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_3)^\mu$}

1615: \end{picture}

1616: &

1617: -\frac{i\Pg_\Pw}{\sqrt2}V_{11}\left(

1618: 	\gamma^\mu p_l

1619: 	+\left(\Pm_{\nu_\Pe}p_l-\Pm_\Pe p_r\right)\frac{k_3^\mu}{k_3^2}

1620: \right)

1621: \cr

1622: % 35

1623: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1624: \ArrowLine(0,0)(19,25)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \Pe(k_1)$}

1625: \ArrowLine(19,25)(0,50)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \nu_\Pe(k_2)$}

1626: \ArrowLine(19,25)(50,25)\Text(34,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_3)$}

1627: \end{picture}

1628: &

1629: \frac i{\sqrt2}\frac{\Pg_\Pw}{\PM_\PW}V_{11}\left(\Pm_{\nu_e}p_l-\Pm_\Pe p_r\right)

1630: \cr

1631: % 36 zie 34

1632: % 37 zie 35

1633: % 38 

1634: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1635: \ArrowLine(0,0)(19,25)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \nu_\Pe(k_1)$}

1636: \ArrowLine(19,25)(0,50)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \nu_\Pe(k_2)$}

1637: \Line(19,25)(50,25)\Text(34,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_3)^\mu$}

1638: \end{picture}

1639: % 39 zie 30

1640: &

1641: -\frac i2\Pg_\Pz\left(\gamma^\mu p_l+\Pm_{\nu_\Pe}\gamma^5\frac{k_3^\mu}{k_3^2}\right)

1642: \cr

1643: % new rule

1644: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1645: \ArrowLine(0,0)(19,25)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \nu_\Pe(k_1)$}

1646: \ArrowLine(19,25)(0,50)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \nu_\Pe(k_2)$}

1647: \Line(19,25)(50,25)\Text(34,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_3)$}

1648: \end{picture}

1649: &

1650: -\frac12 \Pg_\Pw\frac{\Pm_{\nu_\Pe}}{\PM_\PW}\gamma^5

1651: \cr

1652: % new rule

1653: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1654: \ArrowLine(0,0)(19,25)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \nu_\Pe(k_1)$}

1655: \ArrowLine(19,25)(0,50)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \nu_\Pe(k_2)$}

1656: \Line(19,25)(50,25)\Text(34,26)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_3)$}

1657: \end{picture}

1658: &

1659: -\frac i2\Pg_\Pw\frac{\Pm_{\nu_\Pe}}{\PM_\PW}

1660: \cr

1661: % new rule

1662: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1663: \ArrowLine(19,25)(0,0)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \mu(k_1)$}

1664: \ArrowLine(0,50)(19,25)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \nu_\Pe(k_2)$}

1665: \ArrowLine(50,25)(19,25)\Text(34,27)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_3)^\mu$}

1666: \end{picture}

1667: &

1668: -\frac{i\Pg_\Pw}{\sqrt2}V^\dagger_{21}\left(

1669: 	\gamma^\mu p_l

1670: 	-\left(\Pm_\mu p_l-\Pm_{\nu_\Pe}p_r\right)\frac{k_3^\mu}{k_3^2}

1671: \right)

1672: \cr

1673: % new rule

1674: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1675: \ArrowLine(19,25)(0,0)\Text(10,12)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \mu(k_1)$}

1676: \ArrowLine(0,50)(19,25)\Text(10,38)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \nu_\Pe(k_2)$}

1677: \ArrowLine(50,25)(19,25)\Text(34,27)[b]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_3)$}

1678: \end{picture}

1679: &

1680: -\frac{i}{\sqrt2}\frac{\Pg_\Pw}{\PM_\PW}V^\dagger_{21}\left(

1681: 	\Pm_\mu p_l

1682: 	-\Pm_{\nu_\Pe}p_r

1683: \right)

1684: \cr

1685: % 40 zie 31

1686: % 41 zie 32

1687: % 42 zie 33

1688: % 43 zie 34

1689: % 44 zie 35

1690: % 45 zie 34

1691: % 46 zie 35

1692: % 47 zie 38

1693: }

1694: 

1695: \subsection{Quadruple boson couplings among $\PB$, $\PW$ and $\phi_\PW$}

1696: \fmruletab{

1697: % 48

1698: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1699: \ArrowLine(0,0)(25,25)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_1)^\mu$}

1700: \ArrowLine(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_2)^\nu$}

1701: \Line(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PB(k_3)^\sigma$}

1702: \Line(50,50)(25,25)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PB(k_4)^\tau$}

1703: \end{picture}

1704: &

1705: i\Pg_\Pe^2\left(

1706: 	-2g^{\mu\nu}g^{\sigma\tau}

1707: 	+g^{\mu\sigma}g^{\nu\tau}

1708: 	+g^{\mu\tau}g^{\nu\sigma}

1709: 	+2\PM_\PW^2g^{\sigma\tau}\frac{k_1^\mu}{k_1^2}\frac{k_2^\nu}{k_2^2}\right)

1710: \cr

1711: % 49

1712: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1713: \ArrowLine(0,0)(25,25)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_1)^\mu$}

1714: \ArrowLine(0,50)(25,25)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_2)^\nu$}

1715: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,0)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_3)^\sigma$}

1716: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,50)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_4)^\tau$}

1717: \end{picture}

1718: &

1719: \eqalign{

1720: i\Pg_\Pw^2\left[\vphantom{\frac12}\right.&

1721: 	2g^{\mu\nu}g^{\sigma\tau}

1722: 	-g^{\mu\sigma}g^{\nu\tau}

1723: 	-g^{\mu\tau}g^{\nu\sigma}\cr

1724: 	&+\frac12\PM_\PW^2\left(

1725: 		g^{\nu\tau}\frac{k_1^\mu}{k_1^2}\frac{k_3^\sigma}{k_3^2}

1726: 		+g^{\nu\sigma}\frac{k_1^\mu}{k_1^2}\frac{k_4^\tau}{k_4^2}

1727: 		+g^{\mu\tau}\frac{k_2^\nu}{k_2^2}\frac{k_3^\sigma}{k_3^2}

1728: 		+g^{\mu\sigma}\frac{k_2^\nu}{k_2^2}\frac{k_4^\tau}{k_4^2}

1729: 	\right)\cr

1730: 	&\left.-\frac12\PM_\PW^2\PM_\PH^2\frac{k_1^\mu}{k_1^2}\frac{k_2^\nu}{k_2^2}

1731: 										\frac{k_3^\sigma}{k_3^2}\frac{k_4^\tau}{k_4^2}

1732: \right]\cr

1733: }

1734: \cr

1735: % 50

1736: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1737: \ArrowLine(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_1)$}

1738: \ArrowLine(0,50)(25,25)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_2)^\mu$}

1739: \Line(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PB(k_3)^\nu$}

1740: \Line(50,50)(25,25)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PB(k_4)^\sigma$}

1741: \end{picture}

1742: &

1743: -2i\Pg_\Pe^2\PM_\PW g^{\nu\sigma}\frac{k_2^\mu}{k_2^2}

1744: \cr

1745: % 51

1746: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1747: \ArrowLine(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_1)$}

1748: \ArrowLine(0,50)(25,25)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_2)^\mu$}

1749: \ArrowLine(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_3)^\nu$}

1750: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,50)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_4)^\sigma$}

1751: \end{picture}

1752: &

1753: \frac i2\Pg_\Pw^2\PM_\PW\left(

1754: 	-g^{\nu\sigma}\frac{k_2^\mu}{k_2^2}

1755: 	-g^{\mu\sigma}\frac{k_3^\nu}{k_3^2}

1756: 	+\PM_\PH^2\frac{k_2^\mu}{k_2^2}\frac{k_3^\nu}{k_3^2}

1757: 		\frac{k_4^\sigma}{k_4^2}\right)

1758: \cr

1759: % 52

1760: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1761: \ArrowLine(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_1)$}

1762: \ArrowLine(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_2)$}

1763: \ArrowLine(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_3)^\mu$}

1764: \ArrowLine(50,50)(25,25)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_4)^\nu$}

1765: \end{picture}

1766: &-\frac i2 \Pg_\Pw^2\PM_\PH^2\frac{k_3^\mu}{k_3^2}\frac{k_4^\nu}{k_4^2}

1767: \cr

1768: % 53 zie 50

1769: % 54 zie 51

1770: % 55

1771: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1772: \ArrowLine(0,0)(25,25)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_1)$}

1773: \ArrowLine(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_2)$}

1774: \Line(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PB(k_3)^\mu$}

1775: \Line(50,50)(25,25)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PB(k_4)^\nu$}

1776: \end{picture}

1777: &

1778: 2i\Pg_\Pe^2g^{\mu\nu}

1779: \cr

1780: % 56

1781: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1782: \ArrowLine(0,0)(25,25)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_1)$}

1783: \ArrowLine(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_2)$}

1784: \ArrowLine(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_3)^\mu$}

1785: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,50)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_4)^\nu$}

1786: \end{picture}

1787: &

1788: \frac i2\Pg_\Pw^2\left(

1789: 	g^{\mu\nu}-\PM_\PH^2\frac{k_3^\mu}{k_3^2}\frac{k_4^\nu}{k_4^2}\right)

1790: \cr

1791: % 57

1792: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1793: \ArrowLine(0,0)(25,25)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_1)$}

1794: \ArrowLine(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_2)$}

1795: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,0)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_3)$}

1796: \ArrowLine(50,50)(25,25)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_4)^\mu$}

1797: \end{picture}

1798: &

1799: \frac i2\Pg_\Pw^2\frac{\PM_\PH^2}{\PM_\PW}\frac{k_4^\mu}{k_4^2}

1800: \cr

1801: % 58 zie 52

1802: % 59 zie 57

1803: % 60

1804: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1805: \ArrowLine(0,0)(25,25)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_1)$}

1806: \ArrowLine(0,50)(25,25)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_2)$}

1807: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,0)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_3)$}

1808: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,50)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_4)$}

1809: \end{picture}

1810: &

1811: -\frac i2\Pg_\Pw^2\frac{\PM_\PH^2}{\PM_\PW^2}

1812: \cr

1813: }

1814: 

1815: \subsection{Quadruple boson couplings with $\PZ$, and without $\phi_\PZ$ or 

1816: $\PH$}

1817: \fmruletab{

1818: % 61

1819: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1820: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_1)^\mu$}

1821: \ArrowLine(0,50)(25,25)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_2)^\nu$}

1822: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,0)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_3)^\sigma$}

1823: \Line(25,25)(50,50)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PB(k_4)^\tau$}

1824: \end{picture}

1825: &

1826: \eqalign{

1827: i\Pg_\Pe\Pg_\Pw\cos\theta_\Pw\left[

1828: 	-2g^{\mu\tau}g^{\nu\sigma}

1829: 	+g^{\mu\nu}g^{\sigma\tau}

1830: 	+g^{\mu\sigma}g^{\nu\tau}+\PM_\PZ^2\left(

1831: 		\frac12g^{\sigma\tau}\frac{k_1^\mu}{k_1^2}\frac{k_2^\nu}{k_2^2}\right.\right.\cr

1832: 	\left.\left.-\frac12g^{\nu\tau}\frac{k_1^\mu}{k_1^2}\frac{k_3^\sigma}{k_3^2}

1833: 		+g^{\mu\tau}(2\cos\theta_w^2-1)\frac{k_2^\nu}{k_2^2}

1834: 																	\frac{k_3^\sigma}{k_3^2}

1835: 	\right)

1836: \right]\cr

1837: }

1838: \cr

1839: % 62

1840: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1841: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_1)^\mu$}

1842: \ArrowLine(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_2)$}

1843: \ArrowLine(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_3)^\nu$}

1844: \Line(25,25)(50,50)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PB(k_4)^\sigma$}

1845: \end{picture}

1846: &

1847: i\Pg_\Pe\Pg_\Pz\PM_\PW\left(

1848: 	\frac12g^{\nu\sigma}\frac{k_1^\mu}{k_1^2}

1849: 	+g^{\mu\sigma}(1-2\cos^2\theta_\Pw)\frac{k_3^\nu}{k_3^2}

1850: \right)

1851: \cr

1852: % 63 zie 62

1853: % 64

1854: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1855: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_1)^\mu$}

1856: \ArrowLine(0,50)(25,25)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_2)$}

1857: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,0)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_3)$}

1858: \Line(25,25)(50,50)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PB(k_4)^\nu$}

1859: \end{picture}

1860: &

1861: i\Pg_\Pe\Pg_\Pz(2\cos^2\theta_\Pw-1)g^{\mu\nu}

1862: \cr

1863: % 65

1864: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1865: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_1)^\mu$}

1866: \Line(0,50)(25,25)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_2)^\nu$}

1867: \ArrowLine(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_3)^\sigma$}

1868: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,50)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_4)^\tau$}

1869: \end{picture}

1870: &

1871: \eqalign{

1872: -i\Pg_\Pw^2\left[\vphantom{\frac12}\right.

1873: 	&\cos^2\theta_\Pw\left(

1874: 		2g^{\mu\nu}g^{\sigma\tau}

1875: 		-g^{\mu\sigma}g^{\nu\tau}

1876: 		-g^{\mu\tau}g^{\nu\sigma}

1877: 	\right)\cr

1878: 	&+\frac12\PM_\PZ^2\sin^2\theta_\Pw\left(

1879: 		\frac1{\sin^2\theta_\Pw}g^{\sigma\tau}\frac{k_1^\mu}{k_1^2}

1880: 																		\frac{k_2^\nu}{k_2^2}

1881: 		+g^{\nu\tau}\frac{k_1^\mu}{k_1^2}\frac{k_3^\sigma}{k_3^2}

1882: 		-g^{\nu\sigma}\frac{k_1^\mu}{k_1^2}\frac{k_4^\tau}{k_4^2}\right.\cr

1883: 		&+g^{\mu\tau}\frac{k_2^\nu}{k_2^2}\frac{k_3^\sigma}{k_3^2}

1884: 		-g^{\mu\sigma}\frac{k_2^\nu}{k_2^2}\frac{k_4^\tau}{k_4^2}

1885: 		+\left(4\cos^2\theta_\Pw-\frac1{\sin^2\theta_\Pw}\right)g^{\mu\nu}

1886: 										\frac{k_3^\sigma}{k_3^2}\frac{k_4^\tau}{k_4^2}\cr

1887: 		&\left.\left.-\frac{\PM_\PH^2}{2\sin^2\theta_\Pw}\frac{k_1^\mu}{k_1^2}

1888: 				\frac{k_2^\nu}{k_2^2}\frac{k_3^\sigma}{k_3^2}\frac{k_4^\tau}{k_4^2}

1889: 	\right)

1890: \right]\cr

1891: }

1892: \cr

1893: % 66

1894: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1895: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_1)^\mu$}

1896: \Line(0,50)(25,25)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_2)^\nu$}

1897: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,0)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_3)$}

1898: \ArrowLine(50,50)(25,25)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_4)^\sigma$}

1899: \end{picture}

1900: &

1901: \eqalign{

1902: -\frac i2\frac{\Pg_\Pe^2\PM_\PW}{\cos^2\theta_\Pw}\left[\vphantom{\frac12}\right.

1903: 	g^{\nu\sigma}\frac{k_1^\mu}{k_1^2}

1904: 	+g^{\mu\sigma}\frac{k_2^\nu}{k_2^2}

1905: 	+\left(\frac1{\sin^2\theta_\Pw}-4\cos^2\theta_\Pw\right)g^{\mu\nu}

1906: 																	\frac{k_4^\sigma}{k_4^2}\cr

1907: 	\left.+\frac1{2\sin^2\theta_\Pw}\PM_\PH^2\frac{k_1^\mu}{k_1^2}

1908: 											\frac{k_2^\nu}{k_2^2}\frac{k_4^\sigma}{k_4^2}

1909: \right]\cr

1910: }

1911: \cr

1912: % 67 zie 66

1913: % 68

1914: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1915: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_1)^\mu$}

1916: \Line(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_2)^\nu$}

1917: \ArrowLine(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_3)$}

1918: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,50)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_4)$}

1919: \end{picture}

1920: &

1921: i\Pg_\Pz^2\left(

1922: 	\left(\frac12-2\cos^2\theta_\Pw\sin^2\theta_\Pw\right)g^{\mu\nu}

1923: 	+\frac14\PM_\PH^2\frac{k_1^\mu}{k_1^2}\frac{k_2^\nu}{k_2^2}

1924: \right)

1925: \cr

1926: % 69

1927: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1928: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_1)^\mu$}

1929: \Line(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_2)^\nu$}

1930: \Line(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_3)^\sigma$}

1931: \Line(25,25)(50,50)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_4)^\tau$}

1932: \end{picture}

1933: &

1934: \eqalign{

1935: 	-\frac i2\Pg_\Pz^2\PM_\PZ^2\left(\vphantom{\frac12}\right.&

1936: 		g^{\mu\nu}\frac{k_3^\sigma}{k_3^2}\frac{k_4^\tau}{k_4^2}

1937: 		+g^{\mu\sigma}\frac{k_2^\nu}{k_2^2}\frac{k_4^\tau}{k_4^2}

1938: 		+g^{\mu\tau}\frac{k_2^\nu}{k_2^2}\frac{k_3^\sigma}{k_3^2}

1939: 		+g^{\nu\sigma}\frac{k_1^\mu}{k_1^2}\frac{k_4^\tau}{k_4^2}\cr

1940: 		&\left.+g^{\nu\tau}\frac{k_1^\mu}{k_1^2}\frac{k_3^\sigma}{k_3^2}

1941: 		+g^{\sigma\tau}\frac{k_1^\mu}{k_1^2}\frac{k_2^\nu}{k_2^2}

1942: 		+\frac32\PM_\PH^2\frac{k_1^\mu}{k_1^2}\frac{k_2^\nu}{k_2^2}

1943: 											\frac{k_3^\sigma}{k_3^2}\frac{k_4^\tau}{k_4^2}

1944: 	\right)

1945: }

1946: \cr

1947: }

1948: 

1949: \subsection{Quadruple boson couplings with one $\phi_\PZ$ and no $\PH$}

1950: \fmruletab{

1951: % 70

1952: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1953: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_1)$}

1954: \ArrowLine(0,50)(25,25)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_2)^\mu$}

1955: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,0)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_3)^\nu$}

1956: \Line(25,25)(50,50)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PB(k_4)^\sigma$}

1957: \end{picture}

1958: &

1959: \frac12\Pg_\Pe\Pg_\Pw\PM_\PW\left(

1960: 	g^{\nu\sigma}\frac{k_2^\mu}{k_2^2}

1961: 	-g^{\mu\sigma}\frac{k_3^\nu}{k_3^2}

1962: \right)

1963: \cr

1964: % 71

1965: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1966: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_1)$}

1967: \ArrowLine(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_2)$}

1968: \ArrowLine(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_3)^\mu$}

1969: \Line(25,25)(50,50)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PB(k_4)^\nu$}

1970: \end{picture}

1971: &

1972: \frac12\Pg_\Pe\Pg_\Pw g^{\mu\nu}

1973: \cr

1974: % 72 zie 71

1975: % 73

1976: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1977: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_1)$}

1978: \Line(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_2)^\mu$}

1979: \ArrowLine(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_3)^\nu$}

1980: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,50)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_4)^\sigma$}

1981: \end{picture}

1982: &

1983: \frac12\Pg_\Pe^2\PM_\PZ\left(

1984: 	-\frac{g^{\nu\sigma}}{\sin^2\theta_w}\frac{k_2^\mu}{k_2^2}

1985: 	-g^{\mu\sigma}\frac{k_3^\nu}{k_3^2}

1986: 	+g^{\mu\nu}\frac{k_4^\sigma}{k_4^2}

1987: 	+\frac12\frac{\PM_\PH^2}{\sin^2\theta_\Pw}\frac{k_2^\mu}{k_2^2}

1988: 			\frac{k_3^\nu}{k_3^2}\frac{k_4^\sigma}{k_4^2}

1989: \right)

1990: \cr

1991: % 74

1992: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

1993: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_1)$}

1994: \Line(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_2)^\mu$}

1995: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,0)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_3)$}

1996: \ArrowLine(50,50)(25,25)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_4)^\nu$}

1997: \end{picture}

1998: &

1999: -\Pg_\Pe^2\left(\frac1{2\cos\theta_\Pw}g^{\mu\nu}+\frac{\PM_\PH^2}{4\sin^2\theta_\Pw\cos\theta_\Pw}\frac{k_2^\mu}{k_2^2}\frac{k_4^\nu}{k_4^2}\right)

2000: \cr

2001: % 75 zie 74

2002: % 76

2003: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

2004: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_1)$}

2005: \Line(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_2)^\mu$}

2006: \ArrowLine(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_3)$}

2007: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,50)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_4)$}

2008: \end{picture}

2009: &

2010: \frac14\Pg_\Pz^2\frac{\PM_\PH^2}{\PM_\PZ}\frac{k_2^\mu}{k_2^2}

2011: \cr

2012: % 77

2013: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

2014: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_1)$}

2015: \Line(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_2)^\mu$}

2016: \Line(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_3)^\nu$}

2017: \Line(25,25)(50,50)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_4)^\sigma$}

2018: \end{picture}

2019: &

2020: -\frac12\Pg_\Pz^2\PM_\PZ\left(

2021: 	g^{\nu\sigma}\frac{k_2^\mu}{k_2^2}

2022: 	+g^{\mu\sigma}\frac{k_3^\nu}{k_3^2}

2023: 	+g^{\mu\nu}\frac{k_4^\sigma}{k_4^2}

2024: 	+\frac32\PM_\PH^2\frac{k_2^\mu}{k_2^2}\frac{k_3^\nu}{k_3^2}

2025: 																		\frac{k_4^\sigma}{k_4^2}

2026: \right)

2027: \cr

2028: }

2029: 

2030: \subsection{Quadruple boson couplings with multiple $\phi_\PZ$ and no $\PH$}

2031: \fmruletab{

2032: % 78

2033: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

2034: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_1)$}

2035: \Line(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_2)$}

2036: \ArrowLine(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_3)^\mu$}

2037: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,50)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_4)^\nu$}

2038: \end{picture}

2039: &

2040: i\Pg_\Pw^2\left(\frac12g^{\mu\nu}-\frac14\PM_\PH^2\frac{k_3^\mu}{k_3^2}

2041: 																\frac{k_4^\nu}{k_4^2}\right)

2042: \cr

2043: % 79

2044: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

2045: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_1)$}

2046: \Line(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_2)$}

2047: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,0)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_3)$}

2048: \ArrowLine(50,50)(25,25)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_4)^\mu$}

2049: \end{picture}

2050: &

2051: \frac i4\Pg_\Pw^2\frac{\PM_\PH^2}{\PM_\PW}\frac{k_4^\mu}{k_4^2}

2052: \cr

2053: % 80 zie 79

2054: % 81

2055: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

2056: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_1)$}

2057: \Line(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_2)$}

2058: \ArrowLine(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_3)$}

2059: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,50)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_4)$}

2060: \end{picture}

2061: &

2062: -\frac i4\Pg_\Pw^2\frac{\PM_\PH^2}{\PM_\PW^2}

2063: \cr

2064: % 82

2065: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

2066: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_1)$}

2067: \Line(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_2)$}

2068: \Line(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_3)^\mu$}

2069: \Line(25,25)(50,50)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_4)^\nu$}

2070: \end{picture}

2071: &

2072: \frac i2\Pg_\Pz^2\left(

2073: 	g^{\mu\nu}

2074: 	+\frac32\PM_\PH^2\frac{k_3^\mu}{k_3^2}\frac{k_4^\nu}{k_4^2}

2075: \right)

2076: \cr

2077: % 83

2078: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

2079: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_1)$}

2080: \Line(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_2)$}

2081: \Line(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_3)$}

2082: \Line(50,50)(25,25)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_4)^\mu$}

2083: \end{picture}

2084: &

2085: \frac34\Pg_\Pz^2\frac{\PM_\PH^2}{\PM_\PZ}\frac{k_4^\mu}{k_4^2}

2086: \cr

2087: % 84

2088: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

2089: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_1)$}

2090: \Line(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_2)$}

2091: \Line(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_3)$}

2092: \Line(50,50)(25,25)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_4)$}

2093: \end{picture}

2094: &

2095: -\frac34i\Pg_\Pz^2\frac{\PM_\PH^2}{\PM_\PZ^2}

2096: \cr

2097: }

2098: \subsection{Quadruple boson couplings with one $\PH$}

2099: \fmruletab{

2100: % 85

2101: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

2102: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_1)$}

2103: \ArrowLine(0,50)(25,25)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_2)^\mu$}

2104: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,0)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_3)^\nu$}

2105: \Line(50,50)(25,25)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PB(k_4)^\sigma$}

2106: \end{picture}

2107: &

2108: -\frac i2\Pg_\Pe\Pg_\Pw\PM_\PW\left(

2109: 	g^{\nu\sigma}\frac{k_2^\mu}{k_2^2}

2110: 	+g^{\mu\sigma}\frac{k_3^\nu}{k_3^2}

2111: \right)

2112: \cr

2113: % 86

2114: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

2115: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_1)$}

2116: \ArrowLine(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_2)$}

2117: \ArrowLine(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_3)^\mu$}

2118: \Line(50,50)(25,25)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PB(k_4)^\nu$}

2119: \end{picture}

2120: &

2121: \frac i2\Pg_\Pe\Pg_\Pw g^{\mu\nu}

2122: \cr

2123: % 87 zie 86

2124: % 88

2125: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

2126: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_1)$}

2127: \Line(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_2)^\mu$}

2128: \ArrowLine(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_3)^\nu$}

2129: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,50)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_4)^\sigma$}

2130: \end{picture}

2131: &

2132: \frac i2\Pg_\Pe^2\PM_\PZ\left(

2133: 	g^{\mu\sigma}\frac{k_3^\nu}{k_3^2}

2134: 	+g^{\mu\nu}\frac{k_4^\sigma}{k_4^2}

2135: \right)

2136: \cr

2137: % 89

2138: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

2139: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_1)$}

2140: \Line(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_2)^\mu$}

2141: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,0)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_3)$}

2142: \ArrowLine(50,50)(25,25)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_4)^\nu$}

2143: \end{picture}

2144: &

2145: -\frac i2\frac{\Pg_\Pe^2}{\cos\theta_\Pw}g^{\mu\nu}

2146: \cr

2147: % 90 zie 89

2148: }

2149: 

2150: \subsection{Quadruple boson couplings with multiple $\PH$}

2151: \fmruletab{

2152: % 91

2153: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

2154: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_1)$}

2155: \Line(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_2)$}

2156: \ArrowLine(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_3)^\mu$}

2157: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,50)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_4)^\nu$}

2158: \end{picture}

2159: &

2160: i\Pg_\Pw^2\left(\frac12g^{\mu\nu}

2161: 	-\frac14\PM_\PH^2\frac{k_3^\mu}{k_3^2}\frac{k_4^\nu}{k_4^2}\right)

2162: \cr

2163: % 92

2164: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

2165: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_1)$}

2166: \Line(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_2)$}

2167: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,0)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_3)$}

2168: \ArrowLine(50,50)(25,25)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PW(k_4)^\mu$}

2169: \end{picture}

2170: &

2171: \frac i4\Pg_\Pw^2\frac{\PM_\PH^2}{\PM_\PW}\frac{k_4^\mu}{k_4^2}

2172: \cr

2173: % 93 zie 92

2174: % 94

2175: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

2176: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_1)$}

2177: \Line(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_2)$}

2178: \ArrowLine(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_3)$}

2179: \ArrowLine(25,25)(50,50)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PW(k_4)$}

2180: \end{picture}

2181: &

2182: -\frac i4\Pg_\Pw^2\frac{\PM_\PH^2}{\PM_\PW^2}

2183: \cr

2184: % 95

2185: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

2186: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_1)$}

2187: \Line(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_2)$}

2188: \Line(25,25)(50,0)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_3)^\mu$}

2189: \Line(50,50)(25,25)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_4)^\nu$}

2190: \end{picture}

2191: &

2192: \frac i2\Pg_\Pz^2\left(

2193: 	g^{\mu\nu}

2194: 	+\frac12\PM_\PH^2\frac{k_3^\mu}{k_3^2}\frac{k_4^\nu}{k_4^2}

2195: \right)

2196: \cr

2197: % 96

2198: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

2199: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_1)$}

2200: \Line(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_2)$}

2201: \Line(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_3)$}

2202: \Line(25,25)(50,50)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PZ(k_4)^\mu$}

2203: \end{picture}

2204: &

2205: \frac14\Pg_\Pz^2\frac{\PM_\PH^2}{\PM_\PZ}\frac{k_4^\mu}{k_4^2}

2206: \cr

2207: % 97

2208: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

2209: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_1)$}

2210: \Line(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_2)$}

2211: \Line(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_3)$}

2212: \Line(25,25)(50,50)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \phi_\PZ(k_4)$}

2213: \end{picture}

2214: &

2215: -\frac i4\Pg_\Pw^2\frac{\PM_\PH^2}{\PM_\PW^2}

2216: \cr

2217: % 98

2218: \begin{picture}(50,50)(0,0)

2219: \Line(25,25)(0,0)\Text(12,13)[rb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_1)$}

2220: \Line(25,25)(0,50)\Text(12,37)[rt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_2)$}

2221: \Line(50,0)(25,25)\Text(38,13)[lb]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_3)$}

2222: \Line(25,25)(50,50)\Text(38,37)[lt]{$\scriptscriptstyle \PH(k_4)$}

2223: \end{picture}

2224: &

2225: -\frac34i\Pg_\Pw^2\frac{\PM_\PH^2}{\PM_\PW^2}

2226: \cr

2227: }

2228: 

2229: %\section{(Un)physical Particles}

2230: %The $\phi_W$ and $\phi_Z$ fields are unphysical. This means that they

2231: %cannot be external lines in a Feynman graph. The pole at $k^2=0$ that

2232: %occurs in their propagators is canceled by the poles in the interaction

2233: %vertices that the $W$ and $Z$ particles have. The consequence is that

2234: %these particles cannot travel over macroscopic distances. 

2235: 

2236: \begin{thebibliography}{9}

2237: \bibitem{kleiss_stirling}

2238: R.~Kleiss and J.~W.~Stirling, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 182} (1986) 75.

2239: \bibitem{adp}

2240: Elena Accomando, Ansgar Denner, Stefano Pozzorini, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 65}

2241: (2002) 073003 [hep-ph/0110114].

2242: \bibitem{phase}

2243: E.~Accomando, A.~Ballestrero, E.~Maina, Nucl.\ Instrum.\ Meth.\ A {\bf 534} 

2244: (2004) 265 [hep-ph/0404236]; E.~Accomando, A.~Ballestrero, A.~Belhouari, 

2245: E.~Maina, hep-ph/0505225.

2246: \bibitem{dk}

2247: C.~Dams and R.~Kleiss, Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 34} (2004) 419 [hep-ph/0401136].

2248: \bibitem{Haywood:1999qg}

2249: S.~Haywood, P.~R.~Hobson, W.~Hollik, Z.~Kunszt {\it et al.},

2250: hep-ph/0003275, in {\sl Standard Model Physics (and more) at the LHC},

2251: eds.~G. Altarelli and M. L. Mangano, (CERN-2000-004, Gen\`eve, 2000) p.~117.

2252: \bibitem{gauge_check}

2253: Chris Dams and Ronald Kleiss, Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 36} (2004) 177 

2254: [hep-ph/0309336]. 

2255: %Muon Colliders, Monte Carlo and Gauge Invariance}

2256: \bibitem{kunszt-soper}

2257: Zoltan Kunszt, Davison E. Soper, Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 296} (1988) 253.

2258: \bibitem{Hagiwara:pw}

2259: K.~Hagiwara {\it et al.} [Particle Data Group Collaboration], Phys.\ Rev.\ 

2260: D {\bf 66} (2001) 010001.

2261: \bibitem{Hocker:2001xe}

2262: A.~H\"ocker, H.~Lacker, S.~Laplace, F.~Le~Diberder, Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C 

2263: {\bf 21} (2001) 225 [hep-ph/0104062].

2264: \bibitem{cteq}

2265: J.~Pumplin, D.~R.~Stump, J.~Huston, H.~L.~Lai, P.~Nadolsky and W.~K.~Tung,

2266: JHEP 0207 (2002) 012 [hep-ph/0201195].

2267: \bibitem{Dixon:1999di}

2268: L.~Dixon, Z.~Kunszt and A.~Signer, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 60} (1999) 114037 

2269: [hep-ph/9907305].

2270: \bibitem{Frixione:1992pj}

2271: S.~Frixione, P.~Nason and G.~Ridolfi, Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 383} (1992) 3.

2272: \bibitem{cc03_1}

2273: W.~Beenakker {\it et al.}, in {\sl Physics at LEP2}, eds.~G.~Altarelli, 

2274: T.~Sj\"ostrand and F.~Zwirner (CERN 96-01, Gen\`eve, 1996), Vol.1, p.79 

2275: [hep-ph/9602351].  

2276: \bibitem{cc03_2}

2277: Martin~W.~Gr\"unewald {\it et al.}, in

2278: {\sl Reports of the working groups on precision calculation for LEP2 physics},

2279: eds.~S.~Jadach, G.~Passarino and R.~Pittau (CERN-2000-09-A, Gen\`eve, 2000), 

2280: p.~1 [hep-ph/0005309]. 

2281: \bibitem{vbs_dk}

2282: E.~Accomando, in preparation.

2283: \end{thebibliography}

2284: 

2285: \end{document}

2286: