1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}
2: \voffset-1cm
3: \hoffset0cm
4: \oddsidemargin0cm
5: \evensidemargin0cm
6: \topmargin0cm
7: \textwidth16.cm
8: \textheight24cm
9:
10: \usepackage{epsfig}
11: \usepackage{feynarts}
12: \usepackage{axodraw}
13: \setlength{\arraycolsep}{0.5mm}
14:
15: \newcommand{\agt}{\,\rlap{\lower 3.5 pt \hbox{$\mathchar \sim$}} \raise 1pt
16: \hbox {$>$}\,}
17: \newcommand{\alt}{\,\rlap{\lower 3.5 pt \hbox{$\mathchar \sim$}} \raise 1pt
18: \hbox {$<$}\,}
19:
20: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
21: %The following macro is from world_sci.sty, originally written for DPF91
22:
23: \catcode`@=11
24: % Collapse citation numbers to ranges. Non-numeric and undefined labels
25: % are handled. No sorting is done. E.g., 1,3,2,3,4,5,foo,1,2,3,?,4,5
26: % gives 1,3,2-5,foo,1-3,?,4,5
27: \newcount\@tempcntc
28: \def\@citex[#1]#2{\if@filesw\immediate\write\@auxout{\string\citation{#2}}\fi
29: \@tempcnta\z@\@tempcntb\m@ne\def\@citea{}\@cite{\@for\@citeb:=#2\do
30: {\@ifundefined
31: {b@\@citeb}{\@citeo\@tempcntb\m@ne\@citea\def\@citea{,}{\bf ?}\@warning
32: {Citation `\@citeb' on page \thepage \space undefined}}%
33: {\setbox\z@\hbox{\global\@tempcntc0\csname b@\@citeb\endcsname\relax}%
34: \ifnum\@tempcntc=\z@ \@citeo\@tempcntb\m@ne
35: \@citea\def\@citea{,}\hbox{\csname b@\@citeb\endcsname}%
36: \else
37: \advance\@tempcntb\@ne
38: \ifnum\@tempcntb=\@tempcntc
39: \else\advance\@tempcntb\m@ne\@citeo
40: \@tempcnta\@tempcntc\@tempcntb\@tempcntc\fi\fi}}\@citeo}{#1}}
41: \def\@citeo{\ifnum\@tempcnta>\@tempcntb\else\@citea\def\@citea{,}%
42: \ifnum\@tempcnta=\@tempcntb\the\@tempcnta\else
43: {\advance\@tempcnta\@ne\ifnum\@tempcnta=\@tempcntb \else \def\@citea{--}\fi
44: \advance\@tempcnta\m@ne\the\@tempcnta\@citea\the\@tempcntb}\fi\fi}
45: \catcode`@=12
46: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
47:
48: \begin{document}
49:
50: \title{
51: \vskip-3cm{\baselineskip14pt
52: \centerline{\normalsize DESY 06-041\hfill ISSN 0418-9833}
53: \centerline{\normalsize MPP-2006-57\hfill}
54: \centerline{\normalsize hep-ph/0606073\hfill}
55: \centerline{\normalsize June 2006\hfill}
56: }
57: \vskip1.5cm
58: Single top production at HERA in the Standard Model and its minimal
59: supersymmetric extension}
60: \author{
61: {\sc W. Hollik${}^a$, A. H\"uttmann${}^b$\thanks{Present address: Deutsches
62: Elektronen-Synchrotron (DESY), Notkestr.\ 85, 22607 Hamburg, Germany.},
63: B.A. Kniehl${}^b$}\\
64: {\normalsize ${}^a$ Max-Planck-Institut f\"ur Physik
65: (Werner-Heisenberg-Institut),}\\
66: {\normalsize F\"ohringer Ring 6, 80805 Munich, Germany}\\
67: {\normalsize ${}^b$ II. Institut f\"ur Theoretische Physik,
68: Universit\"at Hamburg,}\\
69: {\normalsize Luruper Chaussee 149, 22761 Hamburg, Germany}}
70:
71: \date{Reveived 7 June 2006}
72:
73: \maketitle
74:
75: \thispagestyle{empty}
76:
77: \begin{abstract}
78: The H1 Collaboration at the DESY electron-proton collider HERA has observed,
79: in photoproduction and neutral-current deep-inelastic scattering, an
80: unexpected excess of events with isolated leptons and missing transverse
81: momentum, especially at large values of hadronic transverse momentum---a
82: signature typical for single top-quark production.
83: This observation is being substantiated in the HERA~II run.
84: Motivated by this, we evaluate the cross section of single top-quark photo-
85: and electroproduction both in the standard model and its minimal
86: supersymmetric extension, considering both minimal and non-minimal
87: flavour-violation scenarios in the latter case.
88:
89: \medskip
90:
91: \noindent
92: PACS numbers: 12.60.Jv, 13.60.Hb, 13.85.Ni, 14.65.Ha
93: \end{abstract}
94:
95: \newpage
96:
97: \section{Introduction}
98: \label{sec:one}
99:
100: Searches for single top-quark production via the neutral current (NC),
101: \begin{equation}
102: e^\pm p\rightarrow e^\pm t+X,
103: \label{eq:had}
104: \end{equation}
105: have been performed by the H1 Collaboration \cite{H1} and the ZEUS
106: Collaboration \cite{ZEUS} at the DESY electron-proton collider HERA.
107: The H1 Collaboration found several events, leading to a cross section of
108: $\sigma= 0.29{+0.15\atop-0.14}$~pb.
109: Alternatively, assuming that the observed events are due to a statistical
110: fluctuation, upper limits of 0.55~pb on $\sigma$ and of 0.27 on the anomalous
111: $tu\gamma$ coupling $\kappa_{tu\gamma}$ were established at the 95\% confidence
112: level (CL).
113: On the other hand, the ZEUS Collaboration found no evidence for top-quark
114: production and was able to place upper bounds of 0.225~pb on $\sigma$ and of
115: 0.174 on $\kappa_{tu\gamma}$ at 95\% CL.
116:
117: Single top-quark production via the charged current (CC) is possible at the
118: tree level, but its cross section is less than 1~fb \cite{CC}.
119: Furthermore, such events can be separated experimentally due to the absence of
120: a scattered electron or positron in the final state.
121:
122: In this work, we calculate the cross section of process~(\ref{eq:had}) in the
123: standard model (SM) and its minimal supersymmetric (SUSY) extension (MSSM),
124: considering both scenarios with minimal flavour violation (MFV) and
125: non-minimal flavour violation (NMFV).
126: The bulk of the cross section is due to photoproduction and electromagnetic
127: deep-inelastic scattering (DIS), while the contribution due to the exchange of
128: a virtual $Z$ boson is greatly suppressed by its mass.
129: Since photonic interactions cannot change flavour and the top quark does not
130: appear as a parton in the proton, we are dealing here with a loop-induced
131: process.
132: In the SM and the MFV MSSM, its cross section is further suppressed by the
133: smallness of the contributing elements of the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa (CKM)
134: matrix.
135: In more general MSSM scenarios, misalignment between the quark and squark
136: sectors can appear, and the CKM matrix is no longer the only source of flavour
137: violation.
138: Thus, the flavour-changing (FC) couplings are not Cabibbo suppressed, and
139: sizeable contributions to FC NC processes can occur.
140: On the other hand, there are strong experimental bounds on squark mixing
141: involving the first generation, coming from data on $K^0$--$\overline{K}^0$
142: and $D^0$--$\overline{D}^0$ mixing \cite{K0D0}.
143: If the squark mixing involving the first generation is neglected completely,
144: there are no new vertices for incoming up-quarks compared to the MFV MSSM.
145: Thus, every new contribution in this scenario is suppressed by the parton
146: distribution function (PDF) of the charm quark in the proton.
147: Because the SM cross section for NC single top-quark production is highly
148: suppressed, every detected event is an indication of physics beyond the SM.
149:
150: This paper is organised as follows.
151: In Section~\ref{sec:two}, we describe the analytical calculation of the SM
152: cross section.
153: In Section~\ref{sec:three}, we outline the theoretical framework of FC
154: interactions in the MSSM.
155: The numerical analysis is presented in Section~\ref{sec:four}.
156: Our conclusions are summarised in Section~\ref{sec:five}.
157:
158: \section{SM cross section}
159: \label{sec:two}
160:
161: In this section, the analytical calculation of the SM cross section is
162: described.
163: As indicated in Fig.~\ref{overview}, we denote the four-momenta of the
164: incoming proton, parton (up or charm quark), and electron by $P$, $p$, and
165: $k$, respectively, and those of the outgoing top quark and electron by
166: $p^\prime$ and $k^\prime$, respectively.
167: As for the centre-of-mass (CM) energy and the top-quark mass, we have
168: $S=(P+k)^2$ and $m_t^2=(p^\prime)^2$.
169: We neglect the masses of the proton, the incoming quarks, and the electron, so
170: that $P^2=p^2=k^2=k^{\prime2}=0$.
171: The four-momentum of the exchanged photon is given by $q=k-k^\prime$, and, as
172: usual, we introduce the virtuality variable $Q^2=-q^2>0$.
173: The variable $y=(q\cdot P)/(k\cdot P)$ measures the relative electron energy
174: loss in the proton rest frame.
175:
176: \subsection{Electroproduction}
177:
178: Single top-quark production in NC DIS occurs via the partonic subprocess
179: \begin{equation}
180: e^\pm q \rightarrow e^\pm t,
181: \label{eq:sub}
182: \end{equation}
183: where $q=u,c$.
184: The Feynman diagrams contributing in the SM to process~(\ref{eq:sub}) with
185: $q=u$ are depicted in Fig.~\ref{FeynmanSM}.
186: The ones for $q=c$ are similar.
187: The amplitude of this processes was also calculated in Ref.~\cite{SMMatr}.
188: There appears at least one off-diagonal element of the CKM matrix in each
189: term.
190: If the contributions of the inner-quark flavours to a single Feynman diagram
191: are added up and their masses are neglected, the amplitude of this Feynman
192: diagram vanishes due to the unitarity of the CKM matrix.
193: Thus, we cannot neglect the inner-quark masses here.
194: Although our choice $m_c=0<m_d$ appears unphysical at first sight, it is
195: inconsequential in practice.
196: In fact, we verified that the use of a realistic value of $m_c$ affects our
197: numerical results only insignificantly.
198: A detailed proof of hard-scattering factorisation with the inclusion of
199: heavy-quark masses may be found in Ref.~\cite{col}.
200:
201: Our calculation proceeds along the lines of Ref.~\cite{Lennart}.
202: The differential cross section of process~(\ref{eq:sub}) reads
203: \begin{equation}
204: \left(\frac{d\sigma}{dQ^2 dy}\right)_{\rm part}
205: =\frac{1}{16\pi \xi S}\overline{{\left|\mathcal{M}\right|}^2}
206: \delta\left(\xi y S-Q^2-m_t^2\right),
207: \label{eq:xs}
208: \end{equation}
209: where $\xi$, defined as $p=\xi P$, is the fraction of the proton momentum
210: passed on to the incoming quark and $\overline{{\left|\mathcal{M}\right|}^2}$
211: is the squared amplitude averaged (summed) over the spin and colour degrees of
212: freedom of the initial-state (final-state) particles.
213: The kinematically allowed ranges of $Q^2$ and $y$ are
214: \begin{eqnarray}
215: Q_{\rm cut}^2& < &Q^2 < y_{\rm max}S-m_t^2,
216: \nonumber\\
217: \frac{Q^2+m_t^2}{S}& <& y < y_{\rm max},
218: \end{eqnarray}
219: where $Q_{\rm cut}^2$ defines the demarcation between photoproduction and
220: electroproduction and $y_{\rm max}$ is an experimental acceptance cut.
221: In Ref.~\cite{H1}, values for $Q_{\rm cut}^2$ and $y_{\rm max}$ are not
222: specified.
223: In our numerical analysis, we employ the typical values
224: $Q_{\rm cut}^2=4$~GeV$^2$ and $y_{\rm max}=0.95$.
225: Our numerical results are insensitive to the precise choice of $y_{\rm max}$
226: as long it is close to unity.
227: On the other hand, the dependence on $Q_{\rm cut}^2$ approximately cancels out
228: in the combination of photoproduction and electroproduction, as we explicitly
229: verify.
230:
231: In the parton model of QCD, the hadronic cross section of
232: process~(\ref{eq:had}) is obtained by convoluting the partonic cross section
233: of process~(\ref{eq:sub}) with the appropriate PDF $F_q(\xi,\mu_F)$, where
234: $\mu_F$ is the factorisation scale, and summing over $q=u,c$, as
235: \begin{equation}
236: {\left(\frac{d\sigma}{dQ^2 dy}\right)}_{\rm hadr}
237: =\sum_{q=u,c}\int_0^1d\xi\, F_q(\xi,\mu_F)
238: {\left(\frac{d\sigma}{dQ^2 dy}\right)}_{\rm part}.
239: \end{equation}
240: There are two candidate mass scales for $\mu_F$, namely $\sqrt{Q^2}$ and
241: $m_t$, and the optimal choice is likely to lie somewhere in between, at
242: $\mu_F=\left(\sqrt{Q^2}+m_t\right)/2$ say.
243: At any rate, we have $\mu_F\gg m_c$, so that charm is an active quark flavour
244: in the initial state, contributing at full strength via its PDF.
245:
246: The expression for $\overline{{\left|\mathcal{M}\right|}^2}$ of
247: process~(\ref{eq:sub}) may be decomposed into a hadronic tensor $H^{\mu \nu}$
248: and a leptonic tensor $L^{\mu \nu}$, as
249: \begin{equation}
250: \label{Msquared}
251: \overline{{\left|\mathcal{M}\right|}^2}=\frac{e^2}{Q^4}L^{\mu\nu}H_{\mu\nu},
252: \end{equation}
253: where $e$ is the positron charge.
254: We have
255: \begin{equation}
256: H_{\mu\nu}=\frac{1}{2}\sum_{\rm spins}H_{\mu}^{\dagger}H_{\nu},
257: \end{equation}
258: where
259: \begin{eqnarray}
260: H_\mu&=&\overline{u}(p^\prime)
261: \left(F_1\gamma_\mu P_L+ F_2\gamma_{\mu}P_R+F_3p_\mu P_L
262: \right.\nonumber\\
263: &&{}+\left.F_4p_\mu P_R+F_5 p^{\prime}_\mu P_L+F_6 p_\mu^\prime P_R\right)u(p),
264: \end{eqnarray}
265: with helicity projectors $P_{L,R}=(1 \mp \gamma^5)/2$ and form factors
266: $F_1,\ldots,F_6$, which follow from the explicit evaluation of the Feynman
267: diagrams shown in Fig.~\ref{FeynmanSM} and their counterparts for an incoming
268: charm quark.
269: The leptonic tensor may be decomposed into transverse and longitudinal
270: components, as
271: \begin{equation}
272: L^{\mu\nu}=\frac{Q^2}{y^2}\left\{[1+(1-y)^2]\epsilon_T^{\mu\nu}
273: -4(1-y)\epsilon_L^{\mu\nu}\right\},
274: \end{equation}
275: where
276: \begin{eqnarray}
277: \epsilon_T^{\mu\nu}&=&-g^{\mu\nu}
278: +\frac{4Q^2}{\left(Q^2+m_t^2\right)^2}p^\mu p^\nu
279: +\frac{2}{Q^2+m_t^2}(p^\mu q^\nu +p^\nu q^\mu),
280: \nonumber\\
281: \epsilon_L^{\mu\nu}&=&
282: -\frac{1}{Q^2}\left(\frac{2Q^2}{Q^2+m_t^2}p^\mu+q^\mu\right)
283: \left(\frac{2Q^2}{Q^2+m_t^2}p^\nu+q^\nu\right).
284: \end{eqnarray}
285: To obtain the transversal and longitudinal parts of the cross section, the
286: hadron tensor is contracted with the transversal and longitudinal parts of the
287: lepton tensor, respectively.
288:
289: We generate and evaluate the Feynman diagrams in Fig.~\ref{FeynmanSM}, with
290: the virtual-photon leg amputated, with the help of the program packages
291: {\it FeynArts} \cite{FAalt,FAFCSUSY} and {\it FormCalc} \cite{FAFCSUSY,FCLT}.
292: We work in 't~Hooft-Feynman gauge and use dimensional regularisation to
293: extract the ultraviolet (UV) divergences.
294: We perform the Passarino-Veltman reduction and calculate the squared amplitude
295: (\ref{Msquared}) using the program package {\it FeynCalc} \cite{FeynCalc}.
296: For the numerical evaluation of the standard scalar one-loop integrals, we
297: employ the program package {\it LoopTools} \cite{FCLT,LoopTools}.
298: We perform the numerical integration with the aid of the program package
299: {\it Cuba} \cite{Cuba}.
300: As a check, we also calculate the amplitude of process~(\ref{eq:sub}) with the
301: help of the program package {\it FeynCalc} and by hand.
302: All three independent calculations are found to lead to the same result.
303: Furthermore, we verify the cancellation of the UV divergences, current
304: conservation, and the reality of the squared amplitude.
305:
306: \subsection{Photoproduction}
307:
308: In the photoproduction limit, the virtual photon is considered as real, with
309: $Q^2=0$, so that the longitudinal part of the cross section vanishes.
310: In turn, its energy distribution is described in the Weizs\"acker-Williams
311: approximation by the electron-to-photon splitting function
312: \begin{equation}
313: f_\gamma(y)=\frac{\alpha}{2\pi}\left[
314: \frac{1+(1-y)^2}{y}\ln\frac{Q_{\rm cut}^2}{Q_{\rm min}^2}
315: +2y m_e^2\left(\frac{1}{Q_{\rm cut}^2}-\frac{1}{Q_{\rm min}^2}\right)\right],
316: \end{equation}
317: where $\alpha=e^2/(4\pi)$ is Sommerfeld's fine-structure constant, $m_e$ is
318: the electron mass, and $Q_{\rm min}^2=y^2m_e^2/(1-y)$ corresponds to the
319: kinematic lower bound.
320: Thus, the cross section of process~(\ref{eq:sub}) in photoproduction is given
321: by
322: \begin{equation}
323: \left(\frac{d\sigma}{dy}\right)_{\rm part}=f_\gamma(y)\sigma_\gamma(y),
324: \end{equation}
325: with
326: \begin{equation}
327: \sigma_\gamma=\frac{\pi}{\xi yS}\overline{{\left|\mathcal{M}_\gamma\right|}^2}
328: \delta(\xi yS-m_t^2),
329: \end{equation}
330: where $\mathcal{M}_\gamma$ is the amplitude of $\gamma q\to t$.
331: The kinematically allowed range of $y$ is
332: \begin{equation}
333: \frac{m_t^2}{S} < y < y_{\rm max}.
334: \end{equation}
335: The hadronic cross section is again obtained by convoluting the partonic cross
336: section for a given incoming quark with the corresponding PDF and summing over
337: the incoming-quark flavours.
338: Here, the only candidate mass scale for $\mu_F$ is of order $m_t$, and it is
339: plausible to choose $\mu_F=m_t/2$ so that there is a smooth transition between
340: photoproduction and electroproduction.
341: Again, we have $\mu_F\gg m_c$, so that the use of a charm PDF is justified.
342:
343: \section{Minimal and non-minimal flavour violation in the MSSM}
344: \label{sec:three}
345:
346: In the MSSM, there are two sources of FC phenomena \cite{Hollik}.
347: The first one is due to flavour mixing in the quark sector, just as in the SM.
348: It is produced by the different flavour rotations in the up- and down-quark
349: sectors, and its strength is driven by the off-diagonal CKM matrix elements.
350: This mixing produces FC electroweak (EW) interaction terms involving CCs, now
351: also involving charged Higgs bosons, and SUSY EW interaction terms of the
352: chargino-quark-squark type.
353: Thus, the SM Feynman diagrams of Fig.~\ref{FeynmanSM} are supplemented by
354: those shown in Fig.~\ref{FeynmanMFV}, in which either charged Higgs bosons and
355: down-type quarks or charginos and down-type squarks circulate in the loops.
356: In the MFV MSSM, this is the only source of FC phenomena beyond the SM.
357:
358: The second source of FC phenomena, which is present in the NMFV MSSM, is due
359: to the possible misalignment between the rotations that diagonalise the quark
360: and squark sectors.
361: When the squark mass matrix is expressed in the basis where the squark fields
362: are parallel to the quark fields (the super CKM basis), it is in general
363: non-diagonal in flavour space.
364: This quark-squark misalignment produces new FC terms in NC as well as in CC
365: interactions.
366: In the SUSY QCD sector, the FC interaction terms involve NCs of the
367: gluino-quark-squark type.
368: In the case of process~(\ref{eq:sub}), this gives rise to the additional
369: Feynman diagrams shown in the first row of Fig.~\ref{FeynmanNMFV}.
370: In the SUSY EW sector, the FC interaction terms involve NCs of the
371: neutralino-quark-squark and the chargino-quark-squark type.
372: The first type appears exclusively due to quark-squark misalignment, as in the
373: SUSY-QCD case, whereas the second type receives contributions from both
374: sources, quark-squark misalignment and CKM mixing.
375: The additional Feynman diagrams involving neutralino-quark-squark interactions
376: are displayed in the second row of Fig.~\ref{FeynmanNMFV}.
377:
378: In order to simplify our analysis in the NMFV MSSM, we take the CKM matrix to
379: be diagonal, so that SM contributions (cf.\ Fig.~\ref{FeynmanSM}) and the
380: genuine MFV-MSSM contributions, i.e.\ the charged-Higgs-quark contributions
381: and the part of the chargino-squark contributions due to CKM mixing
382: (cf.\ Fig.~\ref{FeynmanMFV}), are zero.
383: We are then left with the gluino-squark and neutralino-squark contributions
384: (cf.\ Fig.~\ref{FeynmanNMFV}) and the residual chargino-squark contributions.
385:
386: Furthermore, we assume that the non-CKM squark mixing is significant only for
387: transitions between the second- and third-generation squarks, and that there
388: is only left-left (LL) mixing, given by an ansatz similar as in
389: Ref.~\cite{AnsatzSher}, where it is proportional to the product of the
390: SUSY masses involved.
391: This assumption is theoretically well motivated by the flavour-off-diagonal
392: squark squared-mass entries that are radiatively induced via the evolution
393: from high energies down to the EW scale according to the renormalisation group
394: equations (RGEs) \cite{Hikasa}.
395: These RGEs predict that the FC LL entries scale with the square of the
396: soft-SUSY-breaking masses, in contrast with the left-right (LR) or right-left
397: (RL) and the right-right (RR) entries, which scale with one or zero powers,
398: respectively.
399: Thus, the hierarchy LL${}\gg{}$LR, RL${}\gg{}$RR is usually assumed.
400: The same estimates also indicate that the LL entry for the mixing between the
401: second- and third-generation squarks is the dominant one due to the larger
402: quark-mass factors involved.
403: On the other hand, the LR and RL entries are experimentally more constrained,
404: mainly by $b \to s \gamma$ data~\cite{ciuchini}.
405: With the previous assumption, the squark squared-mass matrices in the
406: $(\tilde{u}_L,\tilde{c}_L,\tilde{t}_L,\tilde{u}_R,\tilde{c}_R,\tilde{t}_R)$
407: and
408: $(\tilde{d}_L,\tilde{s}_L,\tilde{b}_L,\tilde{d}_R,\tilde{s}_R,\tilde{b}_R)$
409: bases can be written as follows:
410: \begin{eqnarray}
411: M_{\tilde{u}}^2&=& \left( \begin{array}{cccccc}
412: M_{L,u}^2 &0&0& m_u X_u &0&0 \\
413: 0& M_{L,c}^2 & \lambda_{LL}^t M_{L,c} M_{L,t} &0& m_c X_c &0 \\
414: 0& \lambda_{LL}^t M_{L,c} M_{L,t} & M_{L,t}^2 &0&0& m_t X_t \\
415: m_u X_u &0&0& M_{R,u}^2 &0&0 \\
416: 0& m_c X_c &0&0& M_{R,c}^2 &0 \\
417: 0&0& m_t X_t &0&0& M_{R,t}^2
418: \end{array} \right),
419: \label{eq.usquarkmass}\\
420: M_{\tilde{d}}^2&=& \left( \begin{array}{cccccc}
421: M_{L,d}^2 &0&0& m_d X_d &0&0 \\
422: 0& M_{L,s}^2 & \lambda_{LL}^b M_{L,s} M_{L,b} &0& m_s X_s &0 \\
423: 0& \lambda_{LL}^b M_{L,s} M_{L,b} & M_{L,b}^2 &0&0& m_b X_b \\
424: m_d X_d &0&0& M_{R,d}^2 &0&0 \\
425: 0& m_s X_s &0&0& M_{R,s}^2 &0 \\
426: 0&0& m_b X_b &0&0& M_{R,b}^2
427: \end{array} \right),
428: \label{eq.dsquarkmass}
429: \end{eqnarray}
430: where
431: \begin{eqnarray}
432: M_{L,q}^2&=& M_{\tilde{Q},q}^2 + m_q^2
433: + \cos(2\beta) M_Z^2 \left(T_3^q - Q_q s_w^2\right),
434: \nonumber\\
435: M_{R,q}^2&=&M_{\tilde{U},q}^2+m_q^2
436: +\cos(2\beta) Q_q s_w^2 M_Z^2 \qquad (q=u,c,t),
437: \nonumber\\
438: M_{R,q}^2&=&M_{\tilde{D},q}^2+m_q^2
439: +\cos(2\beta) Q_q s_w^2 M_Z^2 \qquad (q=d,s,b),
440: \nonumber\\
441: X_q&=&A_q-\mu (\tan\beta)^{-2 T_3^q},
442: \end{eqnarray}
443: and $\lambda_{LL}^t$ and $\lambda_{LL}^b$ measure the squark flavour mixing
444: strengths in the $\tilde t$--$\tilde c$ and $\tilde b$--$\tilde s$ sectors,
445: respectively.
446: As for the SM parameters, $m_q$, $T_3^q$, and $Q_q$ are the mass, weak
447: isospin, and electric charge of quark $q$;
448: $M_Z$ is the $Z$-boson mass;
449: and $s_w=\sin\theta_w$ is the sine of the weak mixing angle $\theta_w$.
450: As for the MSSM parameters,
451: $\tan\beta=v_2/v_1$ is the ratio of the vacuum expectation values of the
452: two Higgs doublets;
453: $\mu$ is the Higgs-higgsino mass parameter;
454: $A_q$ are the trilinear Higgs-sfermion couplings;
455: and $M_{\tilde{Q},q}$, $M_{\tilde{U},q}$, and $M_{\tilde{D},q}$ are the scalar
456: masses.
457: Owing to SU(2)${}_L$ invariance, we have $M_{\tilde Q,u} = M_{\tilde Q,d}$,
458: $M_{\tilde Q,c} = M_{\tilde Q,s}$, and $M_{\tilde Q,t} = M_{\tilde Q,b}$.
459: Further MSSM input parameters include the EW gaugino masses $M_1$ and $M_2$,
460: the gluino mass $M_3$, and the mass $M_{A^0}$ of the CP-odd neutral Higgs
461: boson $A^0$.
462:
463: In order to reduce the NMFV-MSSM parameter space, we make the following
464: simplifying assumptions.
465: We assume that the flavour mixing strengths in the $\tilde t$--$\tilde c$ and
466: $\tilde b$--$\tilde s$ sectors coincide and put
467: $\lambda=\lambda_{LL}^t=\lambda_{LL}^b$ for a simpler notation.
468: Obviously, the choice $\lambda=0$ represents the case of zero squark flavour
469: mixing.
470: We assume that the various trilinear Higgs-sfermion couplings coincide and
471: write $A_0=A_u=A_c=A_t=A_d=A_s=A_b$.
472: We assume that the scalar masses coincide thus defining the common SUSY mass
473: scale $M_0=M_{\tilde{Q},q}=M_{\tilde{U},\{u,c,t\}}=M_{\tilde{D},\{d,s,b\}}$.
474: As for the gaugino masses, we impose the GUT relation
475: $M_1=(5/3)(s_w^2/c_w^2)M_2$, where $c_w^2=1-s_w^2$, while we treat the gluino
476: mass parameter $M_3$ as independent.
477: We are thus left with eight independent MSSM parameters, namely,
478: $\tan\beta$, $M_{A^0}$, $M_0$, $M_2$, $M_3$, $A_0$, $\mu$, and $\lambda$.
479:
480: \section{Numerical analysis}
481: \label{sec:four}
482:
483: In this section, we present our numerical results.
484: We adopt the SM parameters from Ref.~\cite{PDG} and the effective masses of
485: the down-type quarks from Ref.~\cite{Denner}:
486: \begin{eqnarray}
487: &&\alpha=1/137.035\,999\,11,\qquad \alpha_s=0.117\,6,
488: \nonumber\\
489: &&(\hbar c)^2=0.389\,379\,323~\mathrm{GeV^2 mb},\qquad
490: m_e=0.510\,998\,918~\mathrm{MeV},
491: \nonumber\\
492: && M_W=80.403~\mathrm{GeV},\qquad M_Z=91.187\,6~\mathrm{GeV},\qquad
493: m_t=172.7~\mathrm{GeV},
494: \nonumber\\
495: && m_d=0.041~\mathrm{GeV},\qquad m_s=0.15~\mathrm{GeV},\qquad
496: m_b=4.5~\mathrm{GeV}.
497: \end{eqnarray}
498: Here, $m_t$ and $m_b$ correspond to pole masses, while $m_d$ and $m_s$ were
499: determined so that their insertion in the perturbative formula for the
500: vacuum polarisation function of the photon reproduces the result extracted
501: from the total cross section of hadron production in $e^+e^-$ annihilation,
502: measured as a function of the CM energy, using a subtracted dispersion
503: relation.
504: %Here, $m_c$ and $m_b$ correspond to pole masses, while $m_u$, $m_d$, and $m_s$
505: %were determined so that the evaluation of the hadronic contribution to the
506: %running fine-structure constant at the $Z$-boson mass scale using the
507: %perturbative formula for the photon vacuum polarisation reproduces the result
508: %obtained from the analysis of the total cross section of hadron production
509: %in $e^+e^$ annihilation, measured as a function of the CM energy, using a
510: %subtracted dispersion relation.
511: This set of quark masses is especially appropriate for quantitative studies in
512: electroweak physics and is frequently employed in the literature.
513: It is used here for definiteness and convenience.
514: As a matter of principle, the precise definition of quark mass is not yet
515: fixed in an analysis of leading order (LO) in QCD like ours.
516: In fact, the freedom of choice of quark-mass definition contributes to the
517: theoretical uncertainty.
518: We employ the standard complex parametrisation of the CKM matrix in terms of
519: three angles $\theta_{12}$, $\theta_{23}$, $\theta_{13}$ and a phase
520: $\delta_{13}$,
521: \begin{equation}
522: V= \left( \begin{array}{ccc}
523: c_{12} c_{13} &
524: s_{12} c_{13} &
525: s_{13} e^{-i\delta_{13}} \\
526: -s_{12} c_{23} - c_{12} s_{23} s_{13} e^{i \delta_{13}} &
527: c_{12} c_{23} - s_{12} s_{23} s_{13} e^{i \delta_{13}} &
528: s_{23} c_{13} \\
529: s_{12} s_{23} - c_{12} c_{23} s_{13} e^{i \delta_{13}} &
530: -c_{12} s_{23} - s_{12} c_{23} s_{13} e^{i \delta_{13}} &
531: c_{23} c_{13}
532: \end{array} \right),
533: \end{equation}
534: where $c_{ij}=\cos{\theta_{ij}}$ and $s_{ij}=\sin{\theta_{ij}}$, and
535: adopt from Ref.~\cite{PDG} the values
536: \begin{equation}
537: s_{12}=0.227\,2,\qquad s_{23}=0.042\,2,\qquad s_{13}=0.004\,0,\qquad
538: \delta_{13}=1.00.
539: \end{equation}
540: As for the proton PDFs, we employ the LO set CTEQ6L1 \cite{Cteq} by the
541: Coordinated Theoretical-Experimental Project on QCD (CTEQ) Collaboration.
542: We choose the factorisation scale to be $\mu_F=\left(\sqrt{Q^2}+m_t\right)/2$,
543: with the understanding that $Q^2=0$ in the case of photoproduction.
544: At HERA~II, electrons or positrons of energy $E_e=27.6$~GeV collide with
545: protons of energy $E_p=920$~GeV in the laboratory frame, yielding a CM energy
546: of $\sqrt{S}=319$~GeV.
547:
548: \subsection{Standard Model}
549:
550: Figures~\ref{SMSigS} and \ref{SMdSigdQ} refer to the SM.
551: Figure~\ref{SMSigS} shows the total cross section of process~(\ref{eq:had})
552: as well as its photoproduction and electroproduction components as functions
553: of $\sqrt{S}$.
554: We observe that, for our choice of $Q_{\rm cut}^2$, the contribution due to
555: photoproduction is approximately twice as large as the one due to
556: electroproduction.
557: At the CM energy of HERA, the cross section is of order $10^{-10}$~fb and thus
558: many orders of magnitude too small to be measurable.
559: A possible future electron-proton supercollider that uses the HERA proton
560: beam with energy $E_p=920$~GeV and the electron beam of the international
561: linear $e^+e^-$ collider (ILC) with energy $E_e=500$~GeV would have a CM
562: energy of 1357~GeV.
563: At this energy, the cross section is of order $10^{-8}$~fb and likewise not
564: measurable.
565:
566: Figure~\ref{SMdSigdQ} shows the $Q^2$ distribution of the electroproduction
567: cross section as well as its transversal and longitudinal parts.
568: We observe that the transversal part makes the major contribution.
569:
570: \subsection{MSSM with minimal flavour violation}
571:
572: For definiteness, we assume that SUSY is broken according to the mSUGRA
573: scenario of a Grand Unified Theory (GUT).
574: We assign the following default values to the mSUGRA input parameters at the
575: GUT scale:
576: \begin{eqnarray}
577: &&\tan{\beta}=56,\qquad m_0=1.25~\mathrm{TeV},\qquad m_{1/2}=140~\mathrm{GeV},
578: \nonumber\\
579: && A_0=-260~\mathrm{GeV},\qquad \mathrm{sign}(\mu)=+1,
580: \label{eq:msugra}
581: \end{eqnarray}
582: where $m_0$ is the universal scalar mass,
583: $m_{1/2}$ is the universal gaugino mass, and
584: $A_0$ is the universal trilinear Higgs-sfermion coupling.
585: These values approximately maximise the cross section of
586: process~(\ref{eq:had}) and are in accordance with the experimental bounds from
587: $b\to s\gamma$ decay and on the masses of the various SUSY particles \cite{PDG}.
588: We calculate the MSSM mass spectrum with the help of the program package
589: {\it SuSpect} \cite{SuSpect}.
590:
591: Figures~\ref{MFVSigS}--\ref{MFVSigA0} all show the total cross section of
592: process~(\ref{eq:had}) in the MFV MSSM.
593: Specifically, Fig.~\ref{MFVSigS} displays the $\sqrt S$ dependence, also
594: separately for the photoproduction and electroproduction contributions, while
595: Figs.~\ref{MFVSigtb}--\ref{MFVSigA0} exhibit, for HERA experimental conditions,
596: the dependencies on $\tan\beta$, $m_{1/2}$, and $A_0$, respectively, also
597: separately for the charged-Higgs-boson and chargino contributions.
598:
599: From Fig.~\ref{MFVSigS} we observe that the cross section is of order
600: $10^{-5}$~fb at HERA energy and of order $10^{-3}$~fb for the future
601: electron-proton supercollider mentioned above.
602: Both values are too small to yield measurable results.
603:
604: From Fig.~\ref{MFVSigtb} we learn that, as $\tan{\beta}$ approaches its upper
605: limit, the cross section strongly increases and is mainly generated by the
606: loop diagrams involving charged Higgs bosons.
607: For small values of $\tan{\beta}$, the SM contribution ($\approx 10^{-10}$~fb)
608: is dominant.
609: Negative interference effects between the charged-Higgs, chargino, and SM
610: contributions can be seen at large values of $\tan{\beta}$.
611:
612: From Fig.~\ref{MFVSigmhalf} we see that, as $m_{1/2}$ approaches its lower
613: limit, the cross section strongly increases and is essentially made up by the
614: charged-Higgs-boson contribution alone.
615: The latter is dominant throughout the whole $m_{1/2}$ range, but there are
616: negative interference effects for all values of $m_{1/2}$.
617: The significant suppression of the chargino contribution for $\tan\beta=56$
618: familiar from Fig.~\ref{MFVSigtb} is actually present for all values of
619: $m_{1/2}$.
620:
621: As is evident from Fig.~\ref{MFVSigA0}, the cross section is largest for
622: $A_0=-260$~GeV and falls off by one (two) orders of magnitude as $A_0$ reaches
623: $-1$~TeV (1~TeV).
624: However, the variation with $A_0$ is less significant than those with
625: $\tan{\beta}$ and $m_{1/2}$.
626: For $\tan\beta=56$, the chargino contribution is several orders of magnitude
627: smaller than the charged-Higgs one and almost independent of $A_0$.
628:
629: We conclude that, in the MFV MSSM, the mSUGRA scenario characterised by the
630: input parameter values specified in Eq.~(\ref{eq:msugra}) approximately
631: maximises the cross section of process~(\ref{eq:had}), which still comes out
632: much below the threshold of observability at HERA and a future electron-proton
633: supercollider.
634:
635: \subsection{MSSM with non-minimal flavour violation}
636:
637: Prior to presenting our NMFV-MSSM results, we explain our choice of input
638: parameters.
639: Scanning the eight-dimensional parameter space defined at the end of
640: Section~\ref{sec:three}, we find that the following assignments, which we
641: henceforth take as default, approximately maximise the cross section of
642: process~(\ref{eq:had}):
643: \begin{eqnarray}
644: &&\tan\beta=8,\qquad
645: M_{A^0}=170~\mathrm{GeV},\qquad
646: M_0=475~\mathrm{GeV},\qquad
647: M_2=655~\mathrm{GeV},
648: \nonumber\\
649: &&M_3=195~\mathrm{GeV},\qquad
650: A_0=950~\mathrm{GeV},\qquad
651: \mu=345~\mathrm{GeV},\qquad
652: \lambda=0.73.
653: \end{eqnarray}
654: These parameters are in accordance with the lower bounds on the squark masses
655: of 100~GeV and with the experimental lower bounds for the masses of the other
656: SUSY particles \cite{PDG}.
657: They are also in accordance with the experimental bounds from $b\to s\gamma$
658: decay \cite{PDG}.
659: We calculate the MSSM spectrum using the program package {\it FeynHiggs}
660: \cite{FeynHiggs}.
661:
662: Figures~\ref{NMFVSigS}--\ref{NMFVSigMGl} all show the total cross section of
663: process~(\ref{eq:had}) in the NMFV MSSM.
664: Specifically, Fig.~\ref{NMFVSigS} displays the $\sqrt S$ dependence, also
665: separately for the photoproduction and electroproduction contributions, while
666: Figs.~\ref{NMFVSigLambda}--\ref{NMFVSigMGl} exhibit, for HERA experimental
667: conditions, the dependencies on $\lambda$, $M_0$, and $M_3$, respectively.
668: In Figs.~\ref{NMFVSigLambda} and \ref{NMFVSigMSUSY}, also the contributions
669: from loops involving gluinos, charginos, and neutralinos are shown separately.
670:
671: From Fig.~\ref{NMFVSigS} we read off values of order $10^{-4}$~fb and
672: $10^{-1}$~fb for the cross sections at HERA and the future electron-proton
673: supercollider mentioned above, respectively, which is discouraging in the case
674: of HERA and challenging for the electron-proton supercollider, depending on
675: its luminosity.
676:
677: From Fig.~\ref{NMFVSigLambda} we observe that the cross section strongly
678: increases with $\lambda$, by five orders of magnitude as $\lambda$ runs from 0
679: to 0.73.
680: For $\lambda>0.73$, the mass of the lightest squark is less than the lower
681: limit of 100~GeV.
682: The cross section is almost exhausted by the gluino contribution.
683: This may be understood by observing that the corresponding Feynman diagrams
684: are enhanced by a factor of $\alpha_s/\alpha$ relative to those of the
685: chargino and neutralino contributions.
686: The neutralino contribution exhibits a $\lambda$ dependence similar to the
687: full cross section, but is more than four orders of magnitude smaller.
688: The chargino contribution oscillates about a mean value of $10^{-10}$~fb in
689: the $\lambda$ range considered.
690: For $\lambda\alt0.3$ ($\lambda\agt0.3$), it overshoots (undershoots) the
691: neutralino contribution.
692:
693: From Fig.~\ref{NMFVSigMSUSY} we observe that the cross section strongly
694: decreases with increasing value of $M_0$, by more than three orders of
695: magnitude as $M_0$ runs from 475~GeV to 2~TeV.
696: The dominant role of the gluino contribution observed in
697: Fig.~\ref{NMFVSigLambda} attenuates in the large-$M_0$ regime, where the
698: chargino contribution gains influence.
699: Nevertheless, there is a clear hierarchy among the gluino, chargino, and
700: neutralino contributions for $M_0\agt700$~GeV, the latter one being least
701: important.
702: For $M_0\alt700$~GeV, the neutralino contribution exceeds the chargino one.
703: The chargino and neutralino contributions exhibit minima at 650~GeV and
704: 850~GeV, respectively.
705:
706: From Fig.~\ref{NMFVSigMGl} we learn that the cross section decreases by about
707: two orders of magnitude as $M_3$ runs from 195~GeV, the Tevatron search limit
708: \cite{PDG}, to 2~TeV.
709:
710: \section{Conclusion}
711: \label{sec:five}
712:
713: In this paper, the photoproduction and photonic electroproduction of single
714: top quarks in electron-proton scattering was analysed for the first time.
715: The analysis was performed at one loop in the SM as well as the MSSM with
716: minimal and non-minimal flavour mixing.
717: In all three models, the cross section turned out to be too small to be
718: measurable at HERA.
719: The physics at HERA remains interesting because, in the light of our results,
720: the single-top-quark-like events seen by the H1 Collaboration might be a sign
721: of physics not only beyond the SM, but also beyond the MSSM with conserved R
722: parity.
723:
724: \section*{Acknowledgements}
725:
726: We are grateful to John Collins for useful communications regarding
727: Ref.~\cite{col}.
728: The work of B.A.K. was supported in part by the German Research Foundation DFG
729: through the Collaborative Research Center No.\ 676 {\it Particles, Strings and
730: the Early Universe---the Structure of Matter and Space-Time} and by the German
731: Federal Ministry for Education and Research BMBF through Grant No.\ 05~HT6GUA.
732:
733: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
734:
735: \bibitem{H1}H1 Collaboration, A. Aktas et al.,
736: Eur.\ Phys.\ J. C 33 (2004) 9;\\
737: D.M. South, on behalf of the H1 Collaboration,
738: in: Proceedings of the 14th International Workshop on Deep Inelastic
739: Scattering (DIS 2006), Tsukuba, Japan, 20--24 April 2006
740: (World Scientific, Singapore, 2007) p.~325.
741:
742: \bibitem{ZEUS}ZEUS Collaboration, S. Chekanov et al.,
743: Phys.\ Lett.\ B 559 (2003) 153;\\
744: M. Corradi, on behalf of the ZEUS Collaboration,
745: in: Proceedings of the 14th International Workshop on Deep Inelastic
746: Scattering (DIS 2006), Tsukuba, Japan, 20--24 April 2006
747: (World Scientific, Singapore, 2007) p.~321.
748:
749: \bibitem{CC}T. Stelzer, Z. Sullivan, S. Willenbrock,
750: Phys.\ Rev.\ D 56 (1997) 5919;\\
751: S. Moretti, K. Odagiri,
752: Phys.\ Rev.\ D 57 (1998) 3040.
753:
754: \bibitem{K0D0}F. Gabbiani, E. Gabrielli, A. Masiero, L.Silvestrini,
755: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B 477 (1996) 321;\\
756: M. Misiak, S. Pokorski, J.Rosiek,
757: Adv.\ Ser.\ Direct.\ High Energy Phys.\ 15 (1998) 795.
758:
759: \bibitem{SMMatr}N.G. Deshpande, G. Eilam,
760: Phys.\ Rev.\ D 26 (1982) 2463;\\
761: S.-P. Chia, G. Rajagopal,
762: Phys.\ Lett.\ B 156 (1985) 405;\\
763: J.M. Soares, A. Barroso,
764: Phys.\ Rev.\ D 39 (1989) 1973;\\
765: A. Barroso,
766: Phys.\ Rev.\ D 42 (1990) 901;\\
767: C.-H. Chang, X.-Q. Li, J.-X. Wang, M.-Z. Yang,
768: Phys.\ Lett.\ B 313 (1993) 389.
769:
770: \bibitem{col} J.C. Collins,
771: Phys.\ Rev.\ D 58 (1998) 094002.
772:
773: \bibitem{Lennart}
774: B.A. Kniehl, L. Zwirner, Nucl. Phys. B 621 (2002) 337.
775:
776: \bibitem{FAalt}J. K\"ublbeck, M. B\"ohm, A. Denner,
777: Comput.\ Phys.\ Commun.\ 60 (1990) 165;\\
778: T. Hahn,
779: Comput.\ Phys.\ Commun.\ 140 (2001) 418.
780:
781: \bibitem{FAFCSUSY}T. Hahn, C. Schappacher,
782: Comput.\ Phys.\ Commun.\ 143 (2002) 54.
783:
784: \bibitem{FCLT}T. Hahn, M. P\~{e}rez-Victoria,
785: Comput.\ Phys.\ Commun.\ 118 (1999) 153.
786:
787: %\bibitem{FCneu}T. Hahn,
788: %Report No.\ MPP-2005-65, hep-ph/0506201.
789:
790: \bibitem{FeynCalc}R. Mertig, M. B\"ohm, A. Denner,
791: Comput.\ Phys.\ Commun.\ 64 (1991) 345.
792:
793: \bibitem{LoopTools}
794: T.~Hahn,
795: Acta Phys.\ Polon.\ B 30 (1999) 3469;\\
796: T.~Hahn,
797: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B (Proc.\ Suppl.) 89 (2000) 231;\\
798: T.~Hahn,
799: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B (Proc.\ Suppl.) 157 (2006) 236.
800:
801: \bibitem{Cuba}T. Hahn,
802: Comput.\ Phys.\ Commun.\ 168 (2005) 78.
803:
804: \bibitem{Hollik}A.M. Curiel, M.J. Herrero, W. Hollik, F. Merz,
805: S. Pe\~{n}aranda,
806: Phys.\ Rev.\ D 69 (2004) 075009;\\
807: S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, F. Merz, S. Pe\~{n}aranda,
808: Eur.\ Phys.\ J. C 37 (2004) 481.
809:
810: \bibitem{AnsatzSher}
811: T.P. Cheng, M. Sher,
812: Phys.\ Rev.\ D 35 (1987) 3484.
813:
814: \bibitem{Hikasa}
815: K. Hikasa, M. Kobayashi,
816: Phys.\ Rev.\ D 36 (1987) 724;\\
817: P. Brax, C.A. Savoy,
818: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B 447 (1995) 227.
819:
820: \bibitem{ciuchini}
821: M. Ciuchini, E. Franco, A. Masiero, L. Silvestrini,
822: Phys.\ Rev.\ D 67 (2003) 075016;\\
823: M. Ciuchini, E. Franco, A. Masiero, L. Silvestrini,
824: Phys.\ Rev.\ D 68 (2003) 079901 (Erratum).
825:
826: \bibitem{PDG}Particle Data Group, W.-M. Yao et al.,
827: J. Phys.\ G 33 (2006) 1.
828:
829: \bibitem{Denner}A. Denner,
830: Fortschr.\ Phys.\ 41 (1993) 307.
831:
832: \bibitem{Cteq}J. Pumplin, D.R. Stump, J. Huston, H.L. Lai, P. Nadolsky,
833: W.-K. Tung,
834: JHEP 07 (2002) 012.
835:
836: \bibitem{SuSpect}A. Djouadi, J.-L. Kneur, G. Moultaka,
837: Comput.\ Phys.\ Commun.\ 176 (2007) 426.
838:
839: \bibitem{FeynHiggs}S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, G. Weiglein,
840: Comput.\ Phys.\ Commun.\ 124 (2000) 76.
841:
842: \end{thebibliography}
843:
844: \newpage
845:
846: \begin{appendix}
847:
848: \begin{center}
849: \begin{figure}
850: \SetScale{0.8}
851: \unitlength=0.8bp%
852:
853: \begin{picture}(455,406) (15,-73)
854:
855: \SetWidth{0.5}
856:
857: \SetColor{Black}
858:
859: \Line(60,16)(180,16)
860:
861: \Line(210,16)(270,-44)
862:
863: \ArrowLine(315,121)(435,121)
864:
865: \ArrowLine(60,211)(195,211)
866:
867: \Photon(195,211)(300,136){7.5}{6}
868:
869: \ArrowLine(195,211)(315,316)
870:
871: \Text(121,220)[lb]{\Large{\Black{$k$}}}
872:
873: \Text(330,322)[lb]{\Large{\Black{$e^-$}}}
874:
875: \Text(25,205)[lb]{\Large{\Black{$e^-$}}}
876:
877: \Text(240,273)[lb]{\Large{\Black{$k^{\prime}$}}}
878:
879: \Text(230,142)[lb]{\Large{\Black{$\gamma$}}}
880:
881: \Text(270,173)[lb]{\Large{\Black{$q=k-k^\prime$}}}
882:
883: \Text(215,76)[lb]{\Large{\Black{$u, c$}}}
884:
885: \Text(250,48)[lb]{\Large{\Black{$p$}}}
886:
887: \Text(450,115)[lb]{\Large{\Black{$t$}}}
888:
889: \Text(374,130)[lb]{\Large{\Black{$p^\prime$}}}
890:
891: \Text(30,12)[lb]{\Large{\Black{$P$}}}
892:
893: \Text(104,40)[lb]{\Large{\Black{$P$}}}
894:
895: \Text(270,-65)[lb]{\Large{\Black{$X$}}}
896:
897: \Vertex(195,211){2.83}
898:
899: \Line(195,16)(255,-44)
900:
901: \Line(195,16)(300,121)
902:
903: \Line(60,1)(195,1)
904:
905: \Line(60,31)(195,31)
906:
907: \Line(195,16)(300,121)
908:
909: \GOval(195,16)(30,15)(0){0.882}
910:
911: \GOval(300,121)(15,15)(0){0.882}
912:
913: \end{picture}
914:
915: \caption{\label{overview}Schematic representation of the hadronic process
916: (\ref{eq:had}) explaining the four-momentum assignments.}
917:
918: \end{figure}
919: \end{center}
920:
921: %\newpage
922:
923: \begin{center}
924: \begin{figure}
925:
926: \unitlength=0.7bp%
927:
928: \begin{feynartspicture}(432,504)(3,4)
929: %\FALabel(33.,69.96)[]{\large $\gamma\quad u\quad \to\quad t$}
930:
931: \FADiagram{}
932: \FAProp(0.,15.)(7.,14.)(0.,){/Sine}{0}
933: \FALabel(3.7192,15.5544)[b]{$\gamma$}
934: \FAProp(0.,5.)(7.,6.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
935: \FALabel(3.7192,4.44558)[t]{$u$}
936: \FAProp(20.,10.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
937: \FALabel(16.75,11.07)[b]{$t$}
938: \FAProp(7.,14.)(7.,6.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
939: \FALabel(5.93,10.)[r]{$d_i$}
940: \FAProp(7.,14.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
941: \FALabel(10.5824,12.8401)[bl]{$d_i$}
942: \FAProp(7.,6.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/ScalarDash}{-1}
943: \FALabel(10.5824,7.15993)[tl]{$G$}
944: \FAVert(7.,14.){0}
945: \FAVert(7.,6.){0}
946: \FAVert(13.5,10.){0}
947:
948: \FADiagram{}
949: \FAProp(0.,15.)(7.,14.)(0.,){/Sine}{0}
950: \FALabel(3.7192,15.5544)[b]{$\gamma$}
951: \FAProp(0.,5.)(7.,6.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
952: \FALabel(3.7192,4.44558)[t]{$u$}
953: \FAProp(20.,10.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
954: \FALabel(16.75,11.07)[b]{$t$}
955: \FAProp(7.,14.)(7.,6.)(0.,){/ScalarDash}{1}
956: \FALabel(5.93,10.)[r]{$G$}
957: \FAProp(7.,14.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/ScalarDash}{-1}
958: \FALabel(10.5824,12.8401)[bl]{$G$}
959: \FAProp(7.,6.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
960: \FALabel(10.5824,7.15993)[tl]{$d_i$}
961: \FAVert(7.,14.){0}
962: \FAVert(7.,6.){0}
963: \FAVert(13.5,10.){0}
964:
965: \FADiagram{}
966: \FAProp(0.,15.)(7.,14.)(0.,){/Sine}{0}
967: \FALabel(3.7192,15.5544)[b]{$\gamma$}
968: \FAProp(0.,5.)(7.,6.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
969: \FALabel(3.7192,4.44558)[t]{$u$}
970: \FAProp(20.,10.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
971: \FALabel(16.75,11.07)[b]{$t$}
972: \FAProp(7.,14.)(7.,6.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
973: \FALabel(5.93,10.)[r]{$d_i$}
974: \FAProp(7.,14.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
975: \FALabel(10.5824,12.8401)[bl]{$d_i$}
976: \FAProp(7.,6.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Sine}{-1}
977: \FALabel(10.5824,7.15993)[tl]{$W$}
978: \FAVert(7.,14.){0}
979: \FAVert(7.,6.){0}
980: \FAVert(13.5,10.){0}
981:
982: \FADiagram{}
983: \FAProp(0.,15.)(7.,14.)(0.,){/Sine}{0}
984: \FALabel(3.7192,15.5544)[b]{$\gamma$}
985: \FAProp(0.,5.)(7.,6.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
986: \FALabel(3.7192,4.44558)[t]{$u$}
987: \FAProp(20.,10.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
988: \FALabel(16.75,11.07)[b]{$t$}
989: \FAProp(7.,14.)(7.,6.)(0.,){/ScalarDash}{1}
990: \FALabel(5.93,10.)[r]{$G$}
991: \FAProp(7.,14.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Sine}{-1}
992: \FALabel(10.5824,12.8401)[bl]{$W$}
993: \FAProp(7.,6.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
994: \FALabel(10.5824,7.15993)[tl]{$d_i$}
995: \FAVert(7.,14.){0}
996: \FAVert(7.,6.){0}
997: \FAVert(13.5,10.){0}
998:
999: \FADiagram{}
1000: \FAProp(0.,15.)(7.,14.)(0.,){/Sine}{0}
1001: \FALabel(3.7192,15.5544)[b]{$\gamma$}
1002: \FAProp(0.,5.)(7.,6.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1003: \FALabel(3.7192,4.44558)[t]{$u$}
1004: \FAProp(20.,10.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1005: \FALabel(16.75,11.07)[b]{$t$}
1006: \FAProp(7.,14.)(7.,6.)(0.,){/Sine}{1}
1007: \FALabel(5.93,10.)[r]{$W$}
1008: \FAProp(7.,14.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/ScalarDash}{-1}
1009: \FALabel(10.5824,12.8401)[bl]{$G$}
1010: \FAProp(7.,6.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1011: \FALabel(10.5824,7.15993)[tl]{$d_i$}
1012: \FAVert(7.,14.){0}
1013: \FAVert(7.,6.){0}
1014: \FAVert(13.5,10.){0}
1015:
1016: \FADiagram{}
1017: \FAProp(0.,15.)(7.,14.)(0.,){/Sine}{0}
1018: \FALabel(3.7192,15.5544)[b]{$\gamma$}
1019: \FAProp(0.,5.)(7.,6.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1020: \FALabel(3.7192,4.44558)[t]{$u$}
1021: \FAProp(20.,10.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1022: \FALabel(16.75,11.07)[b]{$t$}
1023: \FAProp(7.,14.)(7.,6.)(0.,){/Sine}{1}
1024: \FALabel(5.93,10.)[r]{$W$}
1025: \FAProp(7.,14.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Sine}{-1}
1026: \FALabel(10.5824,12.8401)[bl]{$W$}
1027: \FAProp(7.,6.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1028: \FALabel(10.5824,7.15993)[tl]{$d_i$}
1029: \FAVert(7.,14.){0}
1030: \FAVert(7.,6.){0}
1031: \FAVert(13.5,10.){0}
1032:
1033: \FADiagram{}
1034: \FAProp(0.,15.)(7.5,10.)(0.,){/Sine}{0}
1035: \FALabel(3.37021,11.6903)[tr]{$\gamma$}
1036: \FAProp(0.,5.)(7.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1037: \FALabel(4.12979,6.69032)[tl]{$u$}
1038: \FAProp(20.,10.)(16.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1039: \FALabel(18.25,11.07)[b]{$t$}
1040: \FAProp(7.5,10.)(11.,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1041: \FALabel(9.25,11.07)[b]{$u$}
1042: \FAProp(16.5,10.)(11.,10.)(-0.8,){/Straight}{-1}
1043: \FALabel(13.75,6.73)[t]{$d_i$}
1044: \FAProp(16.5,10.)(11.,10.)(0.8,){/ScalarDash}{1}
1045: \FALabel(13.75,13.27)[b]{$G$}
1046: \FAVert(7.5,10.){0}
1047: \FAVert(16.5,10.){0}
1048: \FAVert(11.,10.){0}
1049:
1050: \FADiagram{}
1051: \FAProp(0.,15.)(7.5,10.)(0.,){/Sine}{0}
1052: \FALabel(3.37021,11.6903)[tr]{$\gamma$}
1053: \FAProp(0.,5.)(7.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1054: \FALabel(4.12979,6.69032)[tl]{$u$}
1055: \FAProp(20.,10.)(16.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1056: \FALabel(18.25,11.07)[b]{$t$}
1057: \FAProp(7.5,10.)(11.,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1058: \FALabel(9.25,11.07)[b]{$u$}
1059: \FAProp(16.5,10.)(11.,10.)(-0.8,){/Straight}{-1}
1060: \FALabel(13.75,6.73)[t]{$d_i$}
1061: \FAProp(16.5,10.)(11.,10.)(0.8,){/Sine}{1}
1062: \FALabel(13.75,13.27)[b]{$W$}
1063: \FAVert(7.5,10.){0}
1064: \FAVert(16.5,10.){0}
1065: \FAVert(11.,10.){0}
1066:
1067: \FADiagram{}
1068: \FAProp(0.,15.)(9.,10.)(0.,){/Sine}{0}
1069: \FALabel(4.77275,13.3749)[bl]{$\gamma$}
1070: \FAProp(0.,5.)(2.7,6.5)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1071: \FALabel(1.62275,4.87506)[tl]{$u$}
1072: \FAProp(20.,10.)(9.,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1073: \FALabel(14.5,11.07)[b]{$t$}
1074: \FAProp(9.,10.)(6.3,8.5)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1075: \FALabel(7.92275,8.37506)[tl]{$t$}
1076: \FAProp(2.7,6.5)(6.3,8.5)(-0.8,){/Straight}{1}
1077: \FALabel(3.42725,9.81494)[br]{$d_i$}
1078: \FAProp(2.7,6.5)(6.3,8.5)(0.8,){/ScalarDash}{-1}
1079: \FALabel(5.57275,5.18506)[tl]{$G$}
1080: \FAVert(9.,10.){0}
1081: \FAVert(2.7,6.5){0}
1082: \FAVert(6.3,8.5){0}
1083:
1084:
1085: \FADiagram{}
1086: \FAProp(0.,15.)(9.,10.)(0.,){/Sine}{0}
1087: \FALabel(4.77275,13.3749)[bl]{$\gamma$}
1088: \FAProp(0.,5.)(2.7,6.5)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1089: \FALabel(1.62275,4.87506)[tl]{$u$}
1090: \FAProp(20.,10.)(9.,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1091: \FALabel(14.5,11.07)[b]{$t$}
1092: \FAProp(9.,10.)(6.3,8.5)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1093: \FALabel(7.92275,8.37506)[tl]{$t$}
1094: \FAProp(2.7,6.5)(6.3,8.5)(-0.8,){/Straight}{1}
1095: \FALabel(3.42725,9.81494)[br]{$d_i$}
1096: \FAProp(2.7,6.5)(6.3,8.5)(0.8,){/Sine}{-1}
1097: \FALabel(5.57275,5.18506)[tl]{$W$}
1098: \FAVert(9.,10.){0}
1099: \FAVert(2.7,6.5){0}
1100: \FAVert(6.3,8.5){0}
1101:
1102: %\FADiagram{}
1103:
1104: %\FADiagram{}
1105:
1106: %\FADiagram{}
1107:
1108: %\FADiagram{}
1109:
1110: %\FADiagram{}
1111:
1112: %\FADiagram{}
1113:
1114: %\FADiagram{}
1115:
1116: %\FADiagram{}
1117: \end{feynartspicture}
1118:
1119: \caption{\label{FeynmanSM}Feynman diagrams of partonic
1120: subprocess~(\ref{eq:sub}) in the SM.
1121: Here, $G$ is the charged Goldstone boson and $d_i$ with $i=1,2,3$ are the
1122: down-type quarks.}
1123:
1124: \end{figure}
1125: \end{center}
1126:
1127: %\newpage
1128:
1129: \begin{center}
1130: \begin{figure}
1131:
1132: \unitlength=0.7bp%
1133:
1134: \begin{feynartspicture}(432,450)(3,3)
1135: %\FALabel(33.,69.96)[]{\large $\gamma\quad u\quad \to\quad t$}
1136:
1137: \FADiagram{}
1138: \FAProp(0.,15.)(7.,14.)(0.,){/Sine}{0}
1139: \FALabel(3.7192,15.5544)[b]{$\gamma$}
1140: \FAProp(0.,5.)(7.,6.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1141: \FALabel(3.7192,4.44558)[t]{$u$}
1142: \FAProp(20.,10.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1143: \FALabel(16.75,11.07)[b]{$t$}
1144: \FAProp(7.,14.)(7.,6.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1145: \FALabel(5.93,10.)[r]{$d_i$}
1146: \FAProp(7.,14.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1147: \FALabel(10.5824,12.8401)[bl]{$d_i$}
1148: \FAProp(7.,6.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/ScalarDash}{-1}
1149: \FALabel(10.5824,7.15993)[tl]{$H$}
1150: \FAVert(7.,14.){0}
1151: \FAVert(7.,6.){0}
1152: \FAVert(13.5,10.){0}
1153:
1154: \FADiagram{}
1155: \FAProp(0.,15.)(7.,14.)(0.,){/Sine}{0}
1156: \FALabel(3.7192,15.5544)[b]{$\gamma$}
1157: \FAProp(0.,5.)(7.,6.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1158: \FALabel(3.7192,4.44558)[t]{$u$}
1159: \FAProp(20.,10.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1160: \FALabel(16.75,11.07)[b]{$t$}
1161: \FAProp(7.,14.)(7.,6.)(0.,){/ScalarDash}{1}
1162: \FALabel(5.93,10.)[r]{$H$}
1163: \FAProp(7.,14.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/ScalarDash}{-1}
1164: \FALabel(10.5824,12.8401)[bl]{$H$}
1165: \FAProp(7.,6.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1166: \FALabel(10.5824,7.15993)[tl]{$d_i$}
1167: \FAVert(7.,14.){0}
1168: \FAVert(7.,6.){0}
1169: \FAVert(13.5,10.){0}
1170:
1171: \FADiagram{}
1172: \FAProp(0.,15.)(7.5,10.)(0.,){/Sine}{0}
1173: \FALabel(3.37021,11.6903)[tr]{$\gamma$}
1174: \FAProp(0.,5.)(7.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1175: \FALabel(4.12979,6.69032)[tl]{$u$}
1176: \FAProp(20.,10.)(16.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1177: \FALabel(18.25,11.07)[b]{$t$}
1178: \FAProp(7.5,10.)(11.,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1179: \FALabel(9.25,11.07)[b]{$u$}
1180: \FAProp(16.5,10.)(11.,10.)(-0.8,){/Straight}{-1}
1181: \FALabel(13.75,6.73)[t]{$d_i$}
1182: \FAProp(16.5,10.)(11.,10.)(0.8,){/ScalarDash}{1}
1183: \FALabel(13.75,13.27)[b]{$H$}
1184: \FAVert(7.5,10.){0}
1185: \FAVert(16.5,10.){0}
1186: \FAVert(11.,10.){0}
1187:
1188: \FADiagram{}
1189: \FAProp(0.,15.)(9.,10.)(0.,){/Sine}{0}
1190: \FALabel(4.77275,13.3749)[bl]{$\gamma$}
1191: \FAProp(0.,5.)(2.7,6.5)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1192: \FALabel(1.62275,4.87506)[tl]{$u$}
1193: \FAProp(20.,10.)(9.,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1194: \FALabel(14.5,11.07)[b]{$t$}
1195: \FAProp(9.,10.)(6.3,8.5)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1196: \FALabel(7.92275,8.37506)[tl]{$t$}
1197: \FAProp(2.7,6.5)(6.3,8.5)(-0.8,){/Straight}{1}
1198: \FALabel(3.42725,9.81494)[br]{$d_i$}
1199: \FAProp(2.7,6.5)(6.3,8.5)(0.8,){/ScalarDash}{-1}
1200: \FALabel(5.57275,5.18506)[tl]{$H$}
1201: \FAVert(9.,10.){0}
1202: \FAVert(2.7,6.5){0}
1203: \FAVert(6.3,8.5){0}
1204:
1205: \FADiagram{}
1206: \FAProp(0.,15.)(7.,14.)(0.,){/Sine}{0}
1207: \FALabel(3.7192,15.5544)[b]{$\gamma$}
1208: \FAProp(0.,5.)(7.,6.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1209: \FALabel(3.7192,4.44558)[t]{$u$}
1210: \FAProp(20.,10.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1211: \FALabel(16.75,11.07)[b]{$t$}
1212: \FAProp(7.,14.)(7.,6.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1213: \FALabel(5.93,10.)[r]{$\tilde \chi_i$}
1214: \FAProp(7.,14.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1215: \FALabel(10.5824,12.8401)[bl]{$\tilde \chi_i$}
1216: \FAProp(7.,6.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/ScalarDash}{1}
1217: \FALabel(10.5824,7.15993)[tl]{$\tilde d_i^s$}
1218: \FAVert(7.,14.){0}
1219: \FAVert(7.,6.){0}
1220: \FAVert(13.5,10.){0}
1221:
1222: \FADiagram{}
1223: \FAProp(0.,15.)(7.,14.)(0.,){/Sine}{0}
1224: \FALabel(3.7192,15.5544)[b]{$\gamma$}
1225: \FAProp(0.,5.)(7.,6.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1226: \FALabel(3.7192,4.44558)[t]{$u$}
1227: \FAProp(20.,10.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1228: \FALabel(16.75,11.07)[b]{$t$}
1229: \FAProp(7.,14.)(7.,6.)(0.,){/ScalarDash}{-1}
1230: \FALabel(5.93,10.)[r]{$\tilde d_i^s$}
1231: \FAProp(7.,14.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/ScalarDash}{1}
1232: \FALabel(10.5824,12.8401)[bl]{$\tilde d_i^s$}
1233: \FAProp(7.,6.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1234: \FALabel(10.5824,7.15993)[tl]{$\tilde \chi_i$}
1235: \FAVert(7.,14.){0}
1236: \FAVert(7.,6.){0}
1237: \FAVert(13.5,10.){0}
1238:
1239: \FADiagram{}
1240: \FAProp(0.,15.)(7.5,10.)(0.,){/Sine}{0}
1241: \FALabel(3.37021,11.6903)[tr]{$\gamma$}
1242: \FAProp(0.,5.)(7.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1243: \FALabel(4.12979,6.69032)[tl]{$u$}
1244: \FAProp(20.,10.)(16.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1245: \FALabel(18.25,11.07)[b]{$t$}
1246: \FAProp(7.5,10.)(11.,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1247: \FALabel(9.25,11.07)[b]{$u$}
1248: \FAProp(16.5,10.)(11.,10.)(-0.8,){/Straight}{1}
1249: \FALabel(13.75,6.73)[t]{$\tilde \chi_i$}
1250: \FAProp(16.5,10.)(11.,10.)(0.8,){/ScalarDash}{-1}
1251: \FALabel(13.75,13.27)[b]{$\tilde d_i^s$}
1252: \FAVert(7.5,10.){0}
1253: \FAVert(16.5,10.){0}
1254: \FAVert(11.,10.){0}
1255:
1256: \FADiagram{}
1257: \FAProp(0.,15.)(9.,10.)(0.,){/Sine}{0}
1258: \FALabel(4.77275,13.3749)[bl]{$\gamma$}
1259: \FAProp(0.,5.)(2.7,6.5)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1260: \FALabel(1.62275,4.87506)[tl]{$u$}
1261: \FAProp(20.,10.)(9.,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1262: \FALabel(14.5,11.07)[b]{$t$}
1263: \FAProp(9.,10.)(6.3,8.5)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1264: \FALabel(7.92275,8.37506)[tl]{$t$}
1265: \FAProp(2.7,6.5)(6.3,8.5)(-0.8,){/Straight}{-1}
1266: \FALabel(3.42725,9.81494)[br]{$\tilde \chi_i$}
1267: \FAProp(2.7,6.5)(6.3,8.5)(0.8,){/ScalarDash}{1}
1268: \FALabel(5.57275,5.18506)[tl]{$\tilde d_i^s$}
1269: \FAVert(9.,10.){0}
1270: \FAVert(2.7,6.5){0}
1271: \FAVert(6.3,8.5){0}
1272:
1273: %\FADiagram{}
1274: \end{feynartspicture}
1275:
1276: \caption{\label{FeynmanMFV}Additional Feynman diagrams of partonic
1277: subprocess~(\ref{eq:sub}) arising in the MFV MSSM.
1278: Here, $\tilde d_i^s$ with $i=1,2,3$ and $s=1,2$ are the down-type squarks, and
1279: $\tilde\chi_i$ with $i=1,2$ are the charginos.}
1280:
1281: \end{figure}
1282: \end{center}
1283:
1284: %\newpage
1285:
1286: \begin{center}
1287: \begin{figure}
1288:
1289: \unitlength=0.7bp%
1290:
1291: \begin{feynartspicture}(432,300)(3,2)
1292: %\FALabel(33.,69.96)[]{\large $\gamma\quad u\quad \to\quad t$}
1293:
1294: \FADiagram{}
1295: \FAProp(0.,15.)(7.,14.)(0.,){/Sine}{0}
1296: \FALabel(3.7192,15.5544)[b]{$\gamma$}
1297: \FAProp(0.,5.)(7.,6.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1298: \FALabel(3.7192,4.44558)[t]{$c$}
1299: \FAProp(20.,10.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1300: \FALabel(16.75,11.07)[b]{$t$}
1301: \FAProp(7.,14.)(7.,6.)(0.,){/ScalarDash}{-1}
1302: \FALabel(5.93,10.)[r]{$\tilde u_a$}
1303: \FAProp(7.,14.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/ScalarDash}{1}
1304: \FALabel(10.5824,12.8401)[bl]{$\tilde u_a$}
1305: \FAProp(7.,6.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{0}
1306: \FALabel(10.4513,7.37284)[tl]{$\tilde g$}
1307: \FAVert(7.,14.){0}
1308: \FAVert(7.,6.){0}
1309: \FAVert(13.5,10.){0}
1310:
1311: \FADiagram{}
1312: \FAProp(0.,15.)(7.5,10.)(0.,){/Sine}{0}
1313: \FALabel(3.37021,11.6903)[tr]{$\gamma$}
1314: \FAProp(0.,5.)(7.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1315: \FALabel(4.12979,6.69032)[tl]{$c$}
1316: \FAProp(20.,10.)(16.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1317: \FALabel(18.25,11.07)[b]{$t$}
1318: \FAProp(7.5,10.)(11.,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1319: \FALabel(9.25,11.07)[b]{$u$}
1320: \FAProp(16.5,10.)(11.,10.)(-0.8,){/Straight}{0}
1321: \FALabel(13.75,6.98)[t]{$\tilde g$}
1322: \FAProp(16.5,10.)(11.,10.)(0.8,){/ScalarDash}{-1}
1323: \FALabel(13.75,13.27)[b]{$\tilde u_a$}
1324: \FAVert(7.5,10.){0}
1325: \FAVert(16.5,10.){0}
1326: \FAVert(11.,10.){0}
1327:
1328: \FADiagram{}
1329: \FAProp(0.,15.)(9.,10.)(0.,){/Sine}{0}
1330: \FALabel(4.77275,13.3749)[bl]{$\gamma$}
1331: \FAProp(0.,5.)(2.7,6.5)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1332: \FALabel(1.62275,4.87506)[tl]{$c$}
1333: \FAProp(20.,10.)(9.,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1334: \FALabel(14.5,11.07)[b]{$t$}
1335: \FAProp(9.,10.)(6.3,8.5)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1336: \FALabel(7.92275,8.37506)[tl]{$t$}
1337: \FAProp(2.7,6.5)(6.3,8.5)(-0.8,){/Straight}{0}
1338: \FALabel(3.54866,9.5964)[br]{$\tilde g$}
1339: \FAProp(2.7,6.5)(6.3,8.5)(0.8,){/ScalarDash}{1}
1340: \FALabel(5.57275,5.18506)[tl]{$\tilde u_a$}
1341: \FAVert(9.,10.){0}
1342: \FAVert(2.7,6.5){0}
1343: \FAVert(6.3,8.5){0}
1344:
1345: \FADiagram{}
1346: \FAProp(0.,15.)(7.,14.)(0.,){/Sine}{0}
1347: \FALabel(3.7192,15.5544)[b]{$\gamma$}
1348: \FAProp(0.,5.)(7.,6.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1349: \FALabel(3.7192,4.44558)[t]{$c$}
1350: \FAProp(20.,10.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1351: \FALabel(16.75,11.07)[b]{$t$}
1352: \FAProp(7.,14.)(7.,6.)(0.,){/ScalarDash}{-1}
1353: \FALabel(5.93,10.)[r]{$\tilde u_a$}
1354: \FAProp(7.,14.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/ScalarDash}{1}
1355: \FALabel(10.5824,12.8401)[bl]{$\tilde u_a$}
1356: \FAProp(7.,6.)(13.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{0}
1357: \FALabel(10.4513,7.37284)[tl]{$\tilde \chi_i^0$}
1358: \FAVert(7.,14.){0}
1359: \FAVert(7.,6.){0}
1360: \FAVert(13.5,10.){0}
1361:
1362: \FADiagram{}
1363: \FAProp(0.,15.)(7.5,10.)(0.,){/Sine}{0}
1364: \FALabel(3.37021,11.6903)[tr]{$\gamma$}
1365: \FAProp(0.,5.)(7.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1366: \FALabel(4.12979,6.69032)[tl]{$c$}
1367: \FAProp(20.,10.)(16.5,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1368: \FALabel(18.25,11.07)[b]{$t$}
1369: \FAProp(7.5,10.)(11.,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1370: \FALabel(9.25,11.07)[b]{$u$}
1371: \FAProp(16.5,10.)(11.,10.)(-0.8,){/Straight}{0}
1372: \FALabel(13.75,6.98)[t]{$\tilde \chi_i^0$}
1373: \FAProp(16.5,10.)(11.,10.)(0.8,){/ScalarDash}{-1}
1374: \FALabel(13.75,13.27)[b]{$\tilde u_a$}
1375: \FAVert(7.5,10.){0}
1376: \FAVert(16.5,10.){0}
1377: \FAVert(11.,10.){0}
1378:
1379: \FADiagram{}
1380: \FAProp(0.,15.)(9.,10.)(0.,){/Sine}{0}
1381: \FALabel(4.77275,13.3749)[bl]{$\gamma$}
1382: \FAProp(0.,5.)(2.7,6.5)(0.,){/Straight}{1}
1383: \FALabel(1.62275,4.87506)[tl]{$c$}
1384: \FAProp(20.,10.)(9.,10.)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1385: \FALabel(14.5,11.07)[b]{$t$}
1386: \FAProp(9.,10.)(6.3,8.5)(0.,){/Straight}{-1}
1387: \FALabel(7.92275,8.37506)[tl]{$t$}
1388: \FAProp(2.7,6.5)(6.3,8.5)(-0.8,){/Straight}{0}
1389: \FALabel(3.54866,9.5964)[br]{$\tilde \chi_i^0$}
1390: \FAProp(2.7,6.5)(6.3,8.5)(0.8,){/ScalarDash}{1}
1391: \FALabel(5.57275,5.18506)[tl]{$\tilde u_a$}
1392: \FAVert(9.,10.){0}
1393: \FAVert(2.7,6.5){0}
1394: \FAVert(6.3,8.5){0}
1395:
1396: \end{feynartspicture}
1397:
1398: \caption{\label{FeynmanNMFV}Additional Feynman diagrams of partonic
1399: subprocess~(\ref{eq:sub}) arising in the NMFV MSSM.
1400: Here, $\tilde g$ is the gluino, $\tilde u_a$ with $a=1,\ldots,6$ are the
1401: up-type squarks, and $\tilde\chi_i^0$ with $i=1,\ldots,4$ are the
1402: neutralinos.}
1403:
1404: \end{figure}
1405: \end{center}
1406:
1407: %\newpage
1408:
1409: \begin{center}
1410: \begin{figure}
1411: \epsfig{figure=SMSigS,scale=0.7}
1412: \caption{\label{SMSigS}Total cross section and its photoproduction and
1413: electroproduction parts in the SM as functions of $\sqrt S$.}
1414: \end{figure}
1415: \end{center}
1416:
1417: \begin{center}
1418: \begin{figure}
1419: \epsfig{figure=SMdSigdQ,scale=0.7}
1420: \caption{\label{SMdSigdQ}$Q^2$ distribution of the cross section and its
1421: transversal and longitudinal parts in the SM under HERA experimental
1422: conditions.}
1423: \end{figure}
1424: \end{center}
1425:
1426: \begin{center}
1427: \begin{figure}
1428: \epsfig{figure=MFVSigS,scale=0.7}
1429: \caption{\label{MFVSigS}Total cross section and its photoproduction and
1430: electroproduction parts in the MFV MSSM as functions of $\sqrt S$.}
1431: \end{figure}
1432: \end{center}
1433:
1434: \begin{center}
1435: \begin{figure}
1436: \epsfig{figure=MFVSigtb,scale=0.7}
1437: \caption{\label{MFVSigtb}Total cross section and its Higgs and chargino parts
1438: in the MFV MSSM as functions of $\tan\beta$ under HERA experimental
1439: conditions.}
1440: \end{figure}
1441: \end{center}
1442:
1443: \begin{center}
1444: \begin{figure}
1445: \epsfig{figure=MFVSigmhalf,scale=0.7}
1446: \caption{\label{MFVSigmhalf}Total cross section and its Higgs and chargino
1447: parts in the MFV MSSM as functions of $m_{1/2}$ under HERA experimental
1448: conditions.}
1449: \end{figure}
1450: \end{center}
1451:
1452: \begin{center}
1453: \begin{figure}
1454: \epsfig{figure=MFVSigA0,scale=0.7}
1455: \caption{\label{MFVSigA0}Total cross section and its Higgs and chargino
1456: parts in the MFV MSSM as functions of $A_0$ under HERA experimental
1457: conditions.}
1458: \end{figure}
1459: \end{center}
1460:
1461: \begin{center}
1462: \begin{figure}
1463: \epsfig{figure=NMFVSigS,scale=0.7}
1464: \caption{\label{NMFVSigS}Total cross section and its photoproduction and
1465: electroproduction parts in the NMFV MSSM as functions of $\sqrt S$.}
1466: \end{figure}
1467: \end{center}
1468:
1469: \begin{center}
1470: \begin{figure}
1471: \epsfig{figure=NMFVSigLambda,scale=0.7}
1472: \caption{\label{NMFVSigLambda}Total cross section and its gluino, chargino,
1473: and neutralino parts in the NMFV MSSM as functions of $\lambda$ under HERA
1474: experimental conditions.}
1475: \end{figure}
1476: \end{center}
1477:
1478: \begin{center}
1479: \begin{figure}
1480: \epsfig{figure=NMFVSigMSUSY,scale=0.7}
1481: \caption{\label{NMFVSigMSUSY}Total cross section and its gluino, chargino,
1482: and neutralino parts in the NMFV MSSM as functions of $M_0$ under HERA
1483: experimental conditions.}
1484: \end{figure}
1485: \end{center}
1486:
1487: \begin{center}
1488: \begin{figure}
1489: \epsfig{figure=NMFVSigMGl,scale=0.7}
1490: \caption{\label{NMFVSigMGl}Total cross section in the NMFV MSSM as function of
1491: $M_3$ under HERA experimental conditions.}
1492: \end{figure}
1493: \end{center}
1494:
1495: \end{appendix}
1496:
1497: \end{document}
1498: