1: %cpy: 09-17-06
2: %% LyX 1.3 created this file. For more info, see http://www.lyx.org/.
3: %% Do not edit unless you really know what you are doing.
4: %\documentclass[12pt,letterpaper,prd,nofootinbib,fleqn,floatfix,preprintnumbers]{revtex4}
5: \documentclass[12pt,letterpaper,prd,nofootinbib,floatfix,preprintnumbers]{revtex4}
6: %\documentclass[12pt,letterpaper,prd,floatfix,preprintnumbers]{revtex4}
7: %\documentclass[12pt]{article}
8: \usepackage{graphicx}
9: \usepackage{amssymb}
10:
11: \makeatletter
12: \makeatother
13: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%x%%%%%%%
14:
15: \newcommand{\etmiss}{\not\hskip-5truedd E_{T} }
16: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
17: \begin{document}
18:
19: \preprint{MSUHEP-060915}
20: \preprint{hep-ph/0609179}
21:
22:
23: \title{Phenomenology of Littlest Higgs Model with T-parity:\\
24: including effects of T-odd fermions}
25:
26:
27: \author{Alexander Belyaev, Chuan-Ren Chen, Kazuhiro Tobe, C.-P. Yuan}
28: \affiliation{Department of Physics and Astronomy,
29: Michigan State University,
30: East Lansing, MI 48824, USA}
31:
32: \begin{abstract}
33: We study the collider phenomenology of a Littlest Higgs model with
34: T-parity. We first stress the important role of the T-odd $SU(2)$
35: doublet fermions (introduced to make the model T-parity invariant)
36: in high energy scattering processes, such as
37: $q\bar{q}\rightarrow W_H^+ W_H^-$ where $W_H^\pm$ are the T-odd
38: partners of $W$-bosons. Because the mass of the T-odd $SU(2)$
39: doublet fermions cannot be too heavy to be consistent with low energy data,
40: they can be copiously produced
41: at the CERN Large Hadron Collider (LHC). Therefore, we study the
42: collider phenomenology of the model with emphasis on the contributions
43: of the T-odd fermion to the production of the heavy T-parity partners
44: (either bosons or fermions) of the usual particles at the LHC.
45: The production cross sections and the decay branching ratios of the
46: new heavy particles are classified and various experimental signatures
47: are discussed.
48: \end{abstract}
49:
50: \date{\today}
51:
52: \maketitle
53:
54: \section{Introduction}
55: The standard model (SM) is an excellent low energy description of the elementary
56: particles. The absence of any significant deviations from the SM predictions on
57: the electroweak precision measurements suggests that the cutoff scale of the SM,
58: as a low energy effective theory, is as large as, or larger than,
59: $10$~TeV~\cite{Barbieri:2000gf}. However, having such a relatively high cutoff scale
60: in the SM, the Higgs boson receives a large radiative correction to its mass
61: parameter and therefore, the SM requires unsatisfactory fine-tuning to yield a
62: correct scale of the electroweak symmetry breaking. This fine-tuning problem of
63: the Higgs mass parameter (known as the ``Little hierarchy problem'') has been one
64: of the driving forces to consider physics beyond the SM. Moreover, a recent
65: finding of the necessity of dark matter candidate also provides a strong
66: motivation to seek for physics beyond the SM.
67:
68:
69:
70: It has been shown recently that the collective symmetry breaking mechanism in the
71: Little Higgs models~\cite{LittleHiggs} can provide an interesting solution to the
72: Little hierarchy problem and the Littlest Higgs (LH) ~\cite{ Arkani-Hamed:2002qy}
73: model is the most economical Little Higgs model discussed in the literature.
74: However, the original version of the LH model suffers from precision
75: electroweak constrains \cite{EWC} and the value of $f$, which characterizes
76: the mass scale of new particles in the model, is forced to be larger than
77: about $4$ TeV.
78: Since the
79: cutoff scale of the model is about $4 \pi f$, the fine tuning
80: between the cutoff scale and the weak scale will be needed again
81: for a too large value of $f$. The Littlest
82: Higgs model with T-parity
83: (LHT)~\cite{Low:2004xc,Hubisz:2004ft,Hubisz:2005tx,Cheng:2003ju} is one of the
84: attractive Little Higgs models. It provides a possible dark matter candidate
85: \cite{Asano:2006nr} and furthermore, all dangerous tree-level contributions to low
86: energy electroweak (EW) observables are forbidden by T-parity and hence the
87: corrections to low energy EW observables are loop-suppressed and small. As a
88: result, the relatively low new particle mass scale $f$ is still allowed by data,
89: e.g., $f>500$ GeV~\cite{Hubisz:2005tx}.
90:
91:
92:
93:
94:
95: The LHT predicts heavy T-odd gauge bosons which are T-parity
96: partners of the SM gauge bosons. Moreover, in order to implement T-parity in the fermion sector,
97: one introduces the heavy
98: T-odd $SU(2)$-doublet fermions, which are T-parity partners of the SM
99: $SU(2)$-doublet fermions and
100: unique to Little Higgs models with T-parity.
101: Therefore, having the relatively low new particle mass scale $f$, the CERN Large Hadron Collider (LHC)
102: will have a great potential to directly produce the T-parity partners of the SM particles,
103: and hence it is important to probe the LHT at the LHC.
104:
105: In previous works on studying the phenomenology of the LHT \cite{Hubisz:2004ft},
106: the effects of T-odd $SU(2)$ doublet fermions were not included.
107: A preliminary study on the phenomenology of
108: these T-odd $SU(2)$-doublet fermions in the LHT was reported in
109: Ref.~\cite{sasha_pheno}. Although, motivated by the dark matter consideration,
110: Ref.~\cite{Chen:2006ie} studied some interesting processes which include the
111: effects of T-odd $SU(2)$ doublet fermions, a complete study
112: on the phenomenology of these T-odd fermions in the LHT has not yet been presented.
113:
114: In this paper, we first stress the important role of the T-odd fermions in
115: high energy scattering processes relevant to the LHC, such as
116: $q\bar{q}\rightarrow W_H^+ W_H^-$, where $W_H^\pm$ is the T-parity partner
117: of $W$-boson. We show that it is necessary to include the contribution
118: from the t-channel process, via the exchange of these T-odd heavy fermions,
119: to render its scattering amplitude with a good high energy behavior, so that its partial-wave
120: amplitudes respect the unitarity
121: condition. We also show that its numerical effect cannot be ignored for
122: studying the collider phenomenology at the LHC. Furthermore, since the current
123: experimental constraints of the four-fermion contact interactions place an
124: upper bound on the T-odd $SU(2)$ doublet fermion masses
125: \cite{Hubisz:2005tx}, we find not only that the T-odd fermion contribution
126: to $q\bar{q}\rightarrow W_H^+ W_H^-$ is quantitatively important, but also
127: that the direct pair production rate of the T-odd fermions could be significant
128: at the LHC. To illustrate this point, we classify all production processes
129: of the new heavy particles predicted by the LHT, and calculate the
130: corresponding production cross sections and decay branching ratios, including the
131: effects induced by the T-odd $SU(2)$ doublet fermions. The rest of this
132: paper is organized as follows. In Sec.~II, we briefly review the model we
133: study here, a Littlest Higgs model with T-parity.
134: In Sec.~III, we discuss
135: the high energy behavior of $u\bar{u}\rightarrow W_H^+ W_H^-$ process to
136: illustrate the importance of the T-odd $SU(2)$ doublet fermion contribution
137: to high energy scattering processes, in order to restore the unitarity of
138: partial wave amplitudes.
139: In Sec.~IV, we show our numerical results of the
140: phenomenological study on the Littlest Higgs model with T-parity at the LHC
141: energy. Our conclusion is given in Sec.~V.
142:
143:
144:
145:
146:
147: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
148: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
149:
150:
151: \section{A Littlest Higgs Model with T-Parity}
152: In this section, we briefly review the Littlest Higgs Model with T-parity studied
153: in~\cite{Low:2004xc,Hubisz:2004ft,Hubisz:2005tx}
154: and present our notation of the model.
155: The Littlest Higgs model is based on an $SU(5)/SO(5)$ non-linear
156: sigma model~\cite{Arkani-Hamed:2002qy}. A vacuum expectation value
157: (VEV) of an $SU(5)$ symmetric tensor field ($\Sigma_0$) breaks the
158: $SU(5)$ to $SO(5)$ at the scale $f$ with
159: %\begin{eqnarray}
160: \begin{equation}
161: \Sigma_0 = \left(
162: \begin{array}{ccccc}
163: 0& 0& 0& 1& 0\\
164: 0& 0& 0& 0& 1\\
165: 0& 0& 1& 0& 0\\
166: 1& 0& 0& 0& 0\\
167: 0& 1& 0& 0& 0
168: \end{array}
169: \right).
170: %\end{eqnarray}
171: \end{equation}
172: %
173: A subgroup $[SU(2)_1\times U(1)_1]\times [SU(2)_2\times U(1)_2]$
174: of the $SU(5)$ is gauged, and at the scale $f$ it is broken into
175: the SM electroweak symmetry $SU(2)_L \times U(1)_Y$. The 14
176: Nambu-Goldstone bosons $\Pi^a$ associated with the global symmetry breaking
177: decompose under $SU(2)_L \times U(1)_Y$ as ${\bf 1_0}\oplus{\bf
178: 3_{0}}\oplus {\bf 2_{1/2}}\oplus{\bf 3_{1}}$ and they are
179: parametrized by the non-linear sigma model field $\Sigma =\xi^2
180: \Sigma_0$ as the fluctuations around the VEV in the broken
181: directions, where $\xi=e^{i\Pi^a X^a/f}$ and $X^a$ are the
182: generators of the broken symmetry.
183: The components ${\bf 1_0}$ and ${\bf 3_0}$ in the Nambu-Goldstone
184: boson multiplet are eaten by the heavy gauge bosons associated with the
185: gauge symmetry breaking.
186: The $SU(2)$ doublet ${\bf 2_{1/2}}$ is considered to be the Higgs doublet.
187: The doublet ${\bf 2_{1/2}}$ and the triplet ${\bf 3_{1}}$ Higgs bosons remain
188: in the low energy effective theory, which are introduced through:
189: \begin{eqnarray}
190: \Pi^a X^a &=&
191: \left(
192: \begin{array}{ccc}
193: {\bf 0}_{2\times 2} & \frac{H}{\sqrt{2}} & \Phi \\
194: \frac{H^\dagger}{\sqrt{2}} & 0 & \frac{H^{\rm T}}{\sqrt{2}} \\
195: \Phi^\dagger & \frac{H^*}{\sqrt{2}} & {\bf 0}_{2\times 2}
196: \end{array}
197: \right)~{\rm with}~
198: H=\left(
199: \begin{array}{c}
200: -i\pi^+\\
201: \frac{h+i\pi^0}{\sqrt{2}}
202: \end{array}
203: \right)~{\rm and}~
204: \Phi=\left(
205: \begin{array}{cc}
206: -i\phi^{++} & -i\frac{\phi^+}{\sqrt{2}}\\
207: -i\frac{\phi^+}{\sqrt{2}} & -i \frac{\phi^0+i\phi^P}{\sqrt{2}}
208: \end{array}
209: \right),
210: \end{eqnarray}
211: where ${\bf 0}_{2\times 2}$ is a two by two matrix with zero components and
212: the superscript {\rm T} denotes taking transpose.
213: Here we only
214: show the doublet Higgs $H({\bf 2_{1/2}})$, where $\pi^+$ and $\pi^0$ are eaten
215: by the SM $W$- and $Z$-bosons,
216: respectively, and the triplet Higgs $\Phi({\bf 3_{1}})$,
217: which forms a symmetric tensor with components $\phi^{\pm\pm}$, $\phi^\pm$, $\phi^0$ and
218: $\phi^P$~\cite{Han:2003wu}.
219: Since the non-linear sigma model field $\Sigma$ transforms as $\Sigma\rightarrow V\Sigma V^{\rm T}$
220: under the $SU(5)$ rotation $V$,
221: its gauge-invariant kinetic term is
222: given by
223: \begin{eqnarray}
224: {\cal L} &=& \frac{f^2}{8}{\rm Tr}(D_\mu \Sigma)^\dagger (D^\mu \Sigma),
225: \label{kinetic_sigma}
226: \end{eqnarray}
227: where the covariant derivative $D_\mu$ for the $[SU(2)_1\times U(1)_1]\times [SU(2)_2\times U(1)_2]$
228: gauge symmetry is defined as
229: \begin{eqnarray}
230: D_\mu \Sigma &=\partial_\mu\Sigma -i& \sum_{A=1,2}\left[
231: \bar{g}_A (W_{A \mu}^a Q_A^a \Sigma +\Sigma Q_A^a W_{A \mu}^a)
232: +\bar{g}'_A(B_{A \mu} Y_A \Sigma +\Sigma Y_A B_{A \mu})\right].
233: \end{eqnarray}
234: Here $W_{A\mu}^a$ and $B_{A\mu}$ ($A=1,2$) are gauge bosons, and
235: $\bar{g}_A$ and $\bar{g}'_A$ are gauge couplings for $SU(2)_A$ and $U(1)_A$ gauge symmetries,
236: respectively. They are related to the SM gauge couplings $g$ for $SU(2)_L$ and $g'$ for $U(1)_Y$ as
237: $1/g^2=1/{\bar{g}^2_1}+1/{\bar{g}^2_2}$ and $1/g'^2=1/{\bar{g}'^2_1}+1/{\bar{g}'^2_2}$.
238: The generators for $SU(2)_A$ (denoted as $Q_A^a$) and for $U(1)_A$ (denoted as $Y_A$) are explicitly
239: expressed as
240: \begin{eqnarray}
241: Q_1^a&=&\left(
242: \begin{array}{ccc}
243: \sigma^a/2 & {\bf 0}_2 & {\bf 0}_{2\times 2}\\
244: {\bf 0}_2^{\rm T} & 0 & {\bf 0}_2^{\rm T}\\
245: {\bf 0}_{2\times 2} & {\bf 0}_2 & {\bf 0}_{2\times 2}
246: \end{array}
247: \right),~~~~
248: Q_2^a=\left(
249: \begin{array}{ccc}
250: {\bf 0}_{2\times 2} & {\bf 0}_2 & {\bf 0}_{2\times 2}\\
251: {\bf 0}_2^{\rm T} & 0 & {\bf 0}_2^{\rm T}\\
252: {\bf 0}_{2\times 2} & {\bf 0}_2 & -\sigma^{a*}/2
253: \end{array}
254: \right),\\
255: Y_1 &=& {\rm diag.}(3,3,-2,-2,-2)/10,~~~Y_2={\rm diag.}(2,2,2,-3,-3)/10,
256: \end{eqnarray}
257: where $\sigma^a$ is the Pauli matrix, ${\bf 0}_2=(0,0)^{\rm T}$ and ``diag.'' denotes
258: a diagonal matrix.
259:
260: \subsection{Gauge boson sector}
261:
262: T-parity~\cite{Cheng:2003ju,Low:2004xc} is naturally introduced in this framework.
263: It exchanges $[SU(2)_1\times U(1)_1]$ and $[SU(2)_2\times U(1)_2]$ symmetries.
264: For example, $W_{1\mu}^a \leftrightarrow W^a_{2\mu}$ and $B_{1\mu}\leftrightarrow B_{2\mu}$ under T-parity.
265: The Lagrangian Eq.~(\ref{kinetic_sigma}) is invariant under T-parity
266: if $\bar{g}_1=\bar{g}_2$ and $\bar{g}'_1=\bar{g}'_2$ and $\Sigma$ transforms as
267: $\Sigma\rightarrow \tilde{\Sigma}=\Sigma_0 \Omega \Sigma^\dagger \Omega \Sigma_0$
268: with $\Omega ={\rm diag.}(1,1,-1,1,1)$.
269: Note that the doublet Higgs $H$ (triplet Higgs $\Phi$)
270: is even (odd) under T-parity.
271: The T-even combinations of the gauge fields are SM $SU(2)_L$ gauge
272: bosons $(W^a_\mu)$ and $U(1)_Y$ hypercharge gauge boson $(B_\mu)$,
273: defined as $W_\mu^a=\frac{W_{1 \mu}^a+W_{2\mu}^a}{\sqrt{2}}$ and
274: $B_\mu=\frac{B_{1\mu}+B_{2\mu}}{\sqrt{2}}$.
275: The T-odd combinations are T-parity partners of the SM gauge bosons.
276: After taking into account electroweak symmetry breaking, the masses of
277: the T-parity partners of
278: the photon $(A_H)$, $Z$-boson $(Z_H)$ and $W$-boson $(W_H)$ are given by
279: \begin{eqnarray}
280: M_{A_H} &=&\frac{g'f}{\sqrt{5}} \left[1-\frac{5v_{SM}^2}{8f^2}+\cdots\right],~
281: M_{Z_H} \simeq M_{W_H}=gf \left[1-\frac{v_{SM}^2}{8f^2}+\cdots\right].
282: \end{eqnarray}
283: Here $v_{SM}$ is the electroweak breaking scale, $v_{SM}\simeq 246$ GeV,
284: so that at tree level the SM gauge boson
285: masses can be expressed as $M_W=\frac{g}{2}v_{SM}$ and $M_Z=\frac{\sqrt{g^2+g^{'2}}}{2}v_{SM}$
286: for $W$-boson and $Z$-boson, respectively.
287: Because of the smallness of $g'$, the T-parity partner of the photon $A_H$ tends to be the
288: lightest T-odd particle in this framework. Since the lightest T-odd particle is stable,
289: it can be an interesting dark matter candidate~\cite{Asano:2006nr}.
290:
291:
292: %
293: Because of the T-parity, SM gauge bosons do not mix with the T-odd heavy gauge bosons
294: even after the electroweak symmetry breaking.
295: Consequently, the low energy EW observables are not modified at tree
296: level.
297: Since the new heavy T-odd particles always contribute to loops in pairs,
298: the loop corrections to the EW observables are typically small.
299: As a result, the new particle mass scale $f$ can be
300: as low as 500 GeV~\cite{Hubisz:2005tx}, and hence,
301: T-odd heavy gauge bosons can be copiously produced at the LHC.
302:
303:
304: \subsection{T-odd $SU(2)$ doublet fermion sector}
305:
306: To implement T-parity in the fermion sector, one introduces two $SU(2)$ fermion doublets
307: $q_i$ $(i=1,2)$ for each SM fermion doublet~\cite{Low:2004xc,Hubisz:2004ft,Hubisz:2005tx}.
308: Here $q_i$ are the doublet under $SU(2)_i$ $(i=1,2)$,
309: and T-parity exchanges $q_1$ and $q_2$. The T-even combination of $q_i$ is the SM
310: fermion doublet and the other T-odd
311: combination is its T-parity partner. To generate a heavy mass for the T-odd fermion doublet,
312: we introduce the following interaction, as suggested in
313: Ref.~\cite{Low:2004xc,Hubisz:2004ft,Hubisz:2005tx}:
314: %
315: \begin{eqnarray}
316: {\cal L}_{\kappa}&=& -\kappa f (\bar{\Psi}_2 \xi \Psi_c
317: +\bar{\Psi}_1 \Sigma_0 \Omega \xi^\dagger \Omega\Psi_c)+{\rm hermitian~conjugate~(h.c.)}.
318: \label{kappa}
319: \end{eqnarray}
320: %
321: Here the fermion $SU(2)$ doublets $q_1$ and $q_2$ are embedded into incomplete $SU(5)$ multiplets
322: $\Psi_1$ and $\Psi_2$ as
323: $\Psi_1=(q_1,0,{\bf 0}_2)^{\rm T}$ and $\Psi_2=({\bf 0}_2,0,q_2)^{\rm T}$,
324: and the doublets $q_1$ and $q_2$
325: are explicitly written as
326: $q_A=-\sigma_2 \left(
327: u_{L_A},
328: d_{L_A}
329: \right)^{\rm T}=\left(
330: i d_{LA},
331: -i u_{LA}
332: \right)^{\rm T}$
333: with $A=1,2$.
334: Under the global $SU(5)$,
335: the multiplets $\Psi_1$ and $\Psi_2$ transform as
336: $\Psi_1 \rightarrow V^* \Psi_1$ and $\Psi_2 \rightarrow V \Psi_2$,
337: where $V$ is an $SU(5)$ rotation matrix.
338: A multiplet $\Psi_c$ is also introduced as
339: $\Psi_c=(q_c,\chi_c,\tilde{q}_c)^{\rm T}$,
340: which transforms non-linearly under $SU(5)$:
341: $\Psi_c \rightarrow U \Psi_c$ where
342: $U$ is an unbroken $SO(5)$ rotation matrix in non-linear representation
343: of $SU(5)$.
344: The object $\xi$ and the non-linear sigma model field
345: $\Sigma~(\equiv \xi^2 \Sigma_0)$
346: transform like
347: $\xi \rightarrow V\xi U^\dagger=U\xi \Sigma_0 V^T \Sigma_0$
348: and $\Sigma \rightarrow V\Sigma V^{\rm T}$, respectively,
349: under $SU(5)$. T-parity transformation laws are defined as follows:
350: $\Psi_1 \leftrightarrow -\Sigma_0 \Psi_2$,
351: $\Psi_c \rightarrow -\Psi_c$, and
352: $\xi \rightarrow \Omega \xi^\dagger \Omega$.
353: Thus,
354: $q_1\leftrightarrow -q_2$ and
355: $\Sigma \rightarrow \tilde{\Sigma}\equiv
356: \Sigma_0 \Omega \Sigma^\dagger \Omega \Sigma_0$
357: under T-parity.
358: One can verify that the interaction in Eq.~(\ref{kappa}) is invariant under
359: T-parity.
360:
361: From the interaction in Eq.~(\ref{kappa}), one can see that the T-odd fermion doublet
362: $q_-\equiv (q_1+q_2)/\sqrt{2}=(id_{L_-},-iu_{L_-})^{\rm T}$ gets a Dirac
363: mass, with
364: $\tilde{q}_c\equiv(id_{R_-},-iu_{R_-})^{\rm T}$, as
365: \begin{eqnarray}
366: M_{d_-}&\simeq& \sqrt{2}\kappa f,~~M_{u_-}\simeq \sqrt{2}\kappa f
367: \left(1-\frac{v_{SM}^2}{8f^2}+\cdots\right).
368: \label{Todd_mass}
369: \end{eqnarray}
370: One may think that assuming a large $\kappa$ value, these T-odd fermions will decouple and
371: hence we may ignore any effects induced by the T-odd $SU(2)$ doublet fermions. However, as pointed out
372: in Ref.~\cite{Hubisz:2005tx}, there is non-decoupling effect in some four-fermion operators
373: whose coefficients become larger as the magnitude of $\kappa$ increases.
374: %\footnote{ The interaction in Eq.~(\ref{kappa}) also induces
375: %important effect in the Higgs production via gluon-gluon fusion
376: %process $(gg\rightarrow h)$ as pointed out in
377: %Ref.~\cite{Chen:2006cs}.}
378: The constraint on the four-fermion
379: contact interaction contributing to the
380: $e^+e^-\rightarrow q\bar{q}$ scattering sets an
381: important upper
382: bound on the T-odd fermion masses $M_{q_-}$ as~\cite{Hubisz:2005tx}
383: \begin{eqnarray}
384: M_{q_{-}}<4.8 \left(
385: \frac{f}{1~{\rm TeV}} \right)^2~{\rm TeV}.
386: \label{T-odd-limit}
387: \end{eqnarray}
388: Here we have assumed a universal $\kappa$ value to all T-odd fermion
389: couplings generated by Eq.~(\ref{kappa})
390: Therefore, the effect of T-odd fermions to high energy collider
391: phenomenology may not be negligible, and actually it is
392: quantitatively important as we will discuss in later sections.
393: The interaction terms in
394: Eq.~(\ref{kappa}) in general contain
395: flavor indices, and large flavor mixings
396: can cause flavor-changing-neutral-current (FCNC) problem~\cite{Hubisz:2005bd}.
397: For simplicity, we assume the flavor diagonal and universal $\kappa$ in this study.
398:
399: In the multiplet $\Psi_c$, there are other extra T-odd fermions. For those fermions,
400: we simply assume Dirac masses, as suggested in Ref.~\cite{Cheng:2003ju,Low:2004xc}.
401: Furthermore, we assume that
402: their Dirac masses are so large (as large as about 3 TeV) that these extra T-odd
403: fermions are decoupled, but remains to be small enough
404: not to generate the naturalness problem
405: in the Higgs mass parameter. Thus, in our following analysis, we will not consider any effects induced by
406: these extra T-odd fermions.
407:
408: \begin{table}[t]
409: \begin{center}
410: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
411: \hline
412: & $q_1$ & $q_2$ & $U_{L_1}$ & $U_{L_2}$ & $U_{R_1}$ & $U_{R_2}$ & $u_{R_+}$ & $d_{R_+}$\\
413: \hline
414: $Y_1$ & $1/30$ & $2/15$ & $8/15$ & $2/15$ & $8/15$ & $2/15$ & $1/3$ & $-1/6$ \\
415: $Y_2$ & $2/15$ & $1/30$ & $2/15$ & $8/15$ & $2/15$ & $8/15$ & $1/3$ & $-1/6$ \\
416: \hline
417: \end{tabular}
418: \end{center}
419: \caption{$U(1)_A$ charges $Y_A$ for fermions. The SM hypercharge is given by $Y=Y_1+Y_2$.}
420: \label{U1_charges}
421: \end{table}
422: The $U(1)_A$ charges $Y_A$ for fermions are listed in Table~\ref{U1_charges}.\footnote{
423: Strictly speaking, these $U(1)_A$ charges $Y_A$ ($A=1,2$) for fermions are defined by a
424: sum of the $U(1)_A$ charges from the original $SU(5)$ and extra fermion $U(1)$ charges.}
425: Those charges are determined by the gauge invariance of the Yukawa couplings which
426: we will discuss later.
427: In addition to the normal SM gauge interactions,
428: the T-odd fermions interact with their SM partner fermions and the heavy gauge boson as follows:
429: \begin{eqnarray}
430: {\cal L}&=&\frac{g}{\sqrt{2}} W^+_{H\mu}(\bar{u}_{L}\gamma_\mu d_{L_-}
431: +\bar{u}_{L_-}\gamma_\mu d_{L})+{\rm h.c.} \nonumber
432: \\
433: &+&\sum_{f=u,d}\left[(g c_H T_{3f}+g's_H Y') Z_{H\mu}
434: +(-g s_H T_{3f}+g' c_H Y') A_{H\mu}\right] \bar{f}_L \gamma_\mu f_{L_-}
435: +{\rm h.c.},
436: \label{Todd_fermi_Todd_gauge_int}
437: \end{eqnarray}
438: where $Y'=-1/10$, and $s_H~(\equiv\sin\theta_H)$
439: describes the degree of mixing between heavy neutral gauge bosons
440: with
441: $s_H\simeq \frac{gg'}{g^2-g^{'2}/5}\frac{v_{SM}^2}{4f^2}$ and $c_H\equiv\cos\theta_H$.
442: For clarity, the corresponding Feynman rules are presented in Appendix A.
443: Through these interactions, the T-odd fermion can contribute to
444: heavy gauge boson productions.
445: Also, it can be directly produced via exchanging light gauge bosons,
446: heavy gauge bosons, and gluons
447: at high energy hadron colliders,
448: such as the LHC, as we will discuss in the following sections.
449:
450: \subsection{Yukawa couplings for Top and other fermions}
451:
452: In order to cancel the large radiative correction to Higgs mass parameter induced by top-quark,
453: we introduce in the top sector the singlet fields $U_{L_1}$ and
454: $U_{L_2}$, which are embedded,
455: together with the $q_1$ and $q_2$ doublets, into the following
456: multiplets:
457: $Q_1=(q_1,U_{L_1},0_2)^{\rm T}$ and $Q_2=(0_2,U_{L_2},q_2)^{\rm T}$.
458: For the top-Yukawa interaction, one can write down the following T-parity invariant
459: Lagrangian:~\cite{Low:2004xc,Hubisz:2004ft,Hubisz:2005tx}:
460: \begin{eqnarray}
461: {\cal L}_t&=& -\frac{\lambda_1f}{2\sqrt{2}} \epsilon_{ijk} \epsilon_{xy}
462: \left[(\bar{Q}_1)_i \Sigma_{jx} \Sigma_{ky}-
463: (\bar{Q}_2 \Sigma_0)_i \tilde{\Sigma}_{jx} \tilde{\Sigma}_{ky}
464: \right] u_{R_+}
465: \nonumber \\
466: &&
467: -\lambda_2 f (\bar{U}_{L_1} U_{R_1}+\bar{U}_{L_2} U_{R_2}) +{\rm h.c.},
468: \label{top_yukawa_int}
469: \end{eqnarray}
470: where $\epsilon_{ijk}$ and $\epsilon_{xy}$ are antisymmetric tensors,
471: and $i,~j$ and $k$ run over $1-3$ and $x$ and $y$ over $4-5$.
472: $u_{R_+}$ and $U_{R_i}$ $(i=1,2)$ are $SU(2)$ singlets.
473: Under T-parity, these fields transform as
474: %\begin{eqnarray}
475: $Q_1 \leftrightarrow -\Sigma_0 Q_2~$,
476: $U_{R_1}\leftrightarrow -U_{R_2}$ and $u_{R_+}\rightarrow u_{R_+}$.
477: %\end{eqnarray}
478: The above Lagrangian contains the following mass terms:
479: \begin{eqnarray}
480: {\cal L}_t &\simeq&
481: -\lambda_1 f \left[
482: \frac{v_{SM}}{f}\left(1-\frac{v_{SM}^2}{4f^2}+\cdots\right) \bar{u}_{L_+} u_{R_+}
483: +\left(1-\frac{v_{SM}^2}{2f^2}\right) \bar{U}_{L_+} u_{R_+}\right]
484: \nonumber
485: \\
486: &-&\lambda_2 f \left(\bar{U}_{L_+} U_{R_+}+\bar{U}_{L_-} U_{R_-}
487: \right)+{\rm h.c.}
488: \label{top-yukawa}
489: \end{eqnarray}
490: Here we have defined the T-parity eigenstates as $q_+\equiv (q_1-q_2)/\sqrt{2}=(id_{L_+},-iu_{L_+})$,
491: $U_{L_\pm}=\frac{U_1\mp U_2}{\sqrt{2}}$
492: and $U_{R_\pm}=\frac{U_{R_1}\mp U_{R_2}}{\sqrt{2}}$.
493: One T-odd Dirac fermion $T_-$ ($T_{-L} \equiv U_{L_-},~T_{-R} \equiv U_{R_-}$)
494: gets a mass $M_{T_-}=\lambda_2 f$ (cf. Eq.~(\ref{top-yukawa})), and
495: a T-odd combination of the doublets $q_1$ and $q_2$
496: obtains a mass from ${\cal L}_\kappa$ (cf. Eq.~(\ref{kappa})).
497: The left-handed (or right-handed) top quark ($t$) is a linear combination of
498: $u_{L_+}$ and $U_{L_+}$ (or $u_{R+}$ and $U_{R_+}$), and another independent
499: linear combination is a heavy T-even partner of the top quark $(T_+)$:
500: \begin{eqnarray}
501: \left(
502: \begin{array}{c}
503: u_{X_+}\\
504: U_{X_+}
505: \end{array}
506: \right) &=&
507: \left(
508: \begin{array}{cc}
509: c_X & s_X\\
510: -s_X & c_X
511: \end{array}
512: \right)
513: \left(
514: \begin{array}{c}
515: t_X\\
516: T_{+X}
517: \end{array}
518: \right)
519: ,~~(X=L,R),
520: \end{eqnarray}
521: where the mixings are approximately expressed by
522: \begin{eqnarray}
523: s_L = s_\alpha^2 \frac{v_{SM}}{f}+\cdots,~~
524: s_R = s_\alpha\left[
525: 1-\frac{c_\alpha^2(c_\alpha^2-s_\alpha^2)}{2}\frac{v_{SM}^2}{f^2}+\cdots)\right],
526: \label{s_LR}
527: \end{eqnarray}
528: with $s_\alpha=\lambda_1/\sqrt{\lambda_1^2+\lambda_2^2}$ and
529: $c_\alpha=\lambda_2/\sqrt{\lambda_1^2+\lambda_2^2}$.
530: The masses of the top quark ($t$) and T-even heavy top quark ($T_+$) are given by
531: \begin{eqnarray}
532: M_t &=&\lambda_1 c_\alpha v_{SM}\left[1-\frac{c_\alpha^4+s_\alpha^4}{4}\frac{v_{SM}^2}{f^2}
533: +\cdots\right],~~~
534: %\\
535: %\nonumber
536: M_{T_+}=\frac{\lambda_1}{s_\alpha} f \left[1-\frac{c_\alpha^2 s_\alpha^2}{2}\frac{v_{SM}^2}{f^2}
537: +\cdots\right].
538: \end{eqnarray}
539: Note that the T-even heavy top ($T_+$) is always heavier than the T-odd heavy top
540: $(T_-)$ in the effective theory considered here.
541: The Feynman rules
542: of
543: SM and heavy gauge boson interactions in the top sector
544: are also summarized in Appendix A.
545: We note that the coupling strength of $W^+ \bar{t}b$ is $V_{tb}^{eff}=V_{tb}c_L$
546: (see Appendix A)
547: where $V_{tb}$ is the $(t,b)$ element of the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa (CKM) matrix.
548: For our numerical results shown below,
549: we have assumed $V_{tb}=1$, so that $V_{tb}^{eff}=c_L=\sqrt{1-s_L^2}$,
550: where $s_L$ is given in Eq.~(\ref{s_LR}). Once the $V_{tb}^{eff}$ is measured experimentally, then
551: the parameter space of the model can be further constrained. In other word, when the parameter
552: $s_\alpha$ varies, the effective coupling strength of $W^+ \bar{t}b$ also varies
553: under our assumption $V_{tb}=1$, so that the single-top production rate at the Tevatron and
554: the LHC also
555: varies. As $s_\alpha\rightarrow 0$, it is approaching to the SM $W^+ \bar{t}b$ coupling strength.
556:
557: In the top sector, there are two free parameters $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$, which can be
558: replaced by $\lambda_1$ and $s_\alpha$ as two independent parameters.
559: The experimental value of the top quark mass ($M_t$) gives the relation between
560: $\lambda_1$ and $s_\alpha$ as
561: \begin{eqnarray}
562: \lambda_1=\frac{M_t}{v_{SM}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-s_\alpha^2}} \geq 0.71
563: \label{lambda1}
564: \end{eqnarray}
565: for $s_\alpha \geq 0$ and $M_t=175$ GeV.
566: Moreover, following the method presented in Ref.~\cite{Chanowitz:1978uj},
567: we calculated the $J=1$ partial wave amplitudes in the coupled system
568: of $(t\bar{t},~T_+\bar{T}_+,~b\bar{b},~WW,~Zh)$ states, which are relevant to
569: the top Yukawa coupling, to estimate the unitarity limit of the
570: corresponding scattering amplitudes.
571: From the unitarity limit,
572: we can get a mild constraint on the parameters: $s_\alpha/c_\alpha \leq 3.3$,
573: which corresponds to
574: \begin{eqnarray}
575: s_\alpha\leq 0.96~~{\rm and}~~\lambda_1\leq 2.5,
576: \label{unitarity}
577: \end{eqnarray}
578: cf. Eq.~(\ref{lambda1}). Its detailed discussion is presented in
579: Appendix B for completeness.
580: We could also discuss the ``naturalness'' constraint on these parameters. If we calculate the one-loop
581: contribution to the Higgs mass parameter ($m_h$) induced by the top sector,
582: the correction is described by
583: %\begin{eqnarray}
584: $\Delta m_h^2 =c \frac{y_t^2}{16 \pi^2} M_{T_+}^2 \equiv a_H M_H^2,$
585: %\end{eqnarray}
586: where $y_t=\sqrt{2}M_t/v_{SM}$ and $c$ is a constant of $O(1)$. This correction should not be much
587: larger than the Higgs boson (on-shell) mass squared $M_H^2$, otherwise fine-tuning is needed. Thus the coefficient
588: $a_H$ is a measure of the ``naturalness'' of the Higgs mass correction.
589: If we take $\bar{a}_H(=a_H/2c)$ to be smaller than $10$, we get the upper
590: limit on $M_{T_+}$ as
591: \begin{eqnarray}
592: M_{T_+}\leq 6.7~{\rm TeV} \sqrt{\frac{\bar{a}_H}{10}}\left(
593: \frac{M_H}{120~{\rm GeV}}\right) \, .
594: \end{eqnarray}
595: In other word,
596: \begin{eqnarray}
597: s_\alpha \geq 0.11 \sqrt{\frac{10}{\bar{a}_H}}\left(
598: \frac{120~{\rm GeV}}{M_H}\right)\left(\frac{f}{1~{\rm TeV}}\right).
599: \label{naturalness}
600: \end{eqnarray}
601: We summarize these constraints on the parameters of
602: the top sector in Fig.~\ref{top_const}.
603: \begin{figure}[t]
604: \centering
605: %\includegraphics*[width=0.95\textwidth]{figs/uuww.eps}
606: \includegraphics*[width=1\textwidth]{1_lam_vs_sa.eps}
607: \caption{Allowed region of parameters $\lambda_1$ and $s_\alpha$.
608: Solid line (red) represents a relation between
609: $\lambda_1$ and $s_\alpha$ required by top quark
610: mass ($M_t=175$ GeV), cf. Eq.~(\ref{lambda1}).
611: Dashed line (green) shows an upper limit on
612: $s_\alpha$ from the unitarity bound on the $J=1$
613: partial wave amplitude in the coupled system of
614: $(t\bar{t},~T_+\bar{T}_+,~b\bar{b},~WW,~Zh)$ states,
615: as expressed in Eq.~(\ref{unitarity}). Dash-dotted
616: lines (blue) show that naturalness consideration
617: puts lower limit on $s_\alpha$ (or equivalently
618: lower limit on $\lambda_1$), as shown in
619: Eq.~(\ref{naturalness}), and the shaded region in
620: upper-left area of the figure is excluded for $f=1$
621: TeV. For $f=2$ TeV, the excluded region is extended
622: to the dash-dotted line with $f=2$ TeV. Here we have
623: assumed $\bar{a}_H=10$ and $M_H=120$ GeV. }
624: \label{top_const}
625: \end{figure}
626:
627: For the first and second generation up-type quark Yukawa couplings, we
628: assume the same forms of Yukawa couplings as those
629: for the top quark, cf. Eq.~(\ref{top-yukawa}),
630: except that we do not introduce $SU(2)$-singlet fields $U_{L_A}$ and $U_{R_A}$
631: for the first and second generations because we do not require the cancellation of the
632: quadratic divergences induced from the light quark sectors, for their Yukawa couplings are tiny.
633:
634: For down-type quark Yukawa couplings, one of the possible effective
635: Lagrangians~\cite{Hubisz,Chen:2006cs}\footnote{
636: We thank J.~Hubisz for pointing out this possibility.
637: The effective Lagrangian for the down-type quark Yukawa couplings proposed in
638: Ref.~\cite{Hubisz:2004ft} is not invariant under $U(1)_A$ ($A=1,2$).}
639: is given by
640: \begin{eqnarray}
641: {\cal L}_{\rm down} &=&\frac{i\lambda_d}{2\sqrt{2}}
642: f \epsilon_{ij} \epsilon_{xyz}\left[
643: (\bar{\Psi}'_2)_x \Sigma_{i y} \Sigma_{j z} X
644: -(\bar{\Psi}'_1 \Sigma_0)_x \tilde{\Sigma}_{i y}
645: \tilde{\Sigma}_{j z} {\tilde{X}}
646: \right]d_{R_+},
647: \label{down-yukawa}
648: \end{eqnarray}
649: where $\Psi'_1=(-\sigma_2 q_1,0,0_2)^{\rm T}$ and
650: $\Psi'_2=(0_2,0,-\sigma_2 q_2)^{\rm T}$.
651: Here $X$ transforms into $\tilde{X}$ under T-parity, and
652: it is a singlet under $SU(2)_i~(i=1-2)$
653: with its $U(1)_i~(i=1-2)$ charges being $(Y_1,~Y_2)=(1/10,~-1/10)$.
654: In this paper, we take $X=(\Sigma_{33})^{-1/4}$, where $\Sigma_{33}$ is the
655: $(3,3)$ component of the non-linear sigma model field $\Sigma$.
656:
657: For charged lepton (neutrino) sector, we assume the same Yukawa structure
658: as that for down-type quark (first and second generation up-type quark) sector.
659:
660:
661: \subsection{Higgs boson sector}
662:
663: As we have shown, there are $SU(2)_L$ doublet and triplet Higgs bosons
664: in the low energy effective theory.
665: The gauge and Yukawa interactions break the global symmetry, so these Higgs bosons
666: receive masses from radiative corrections via gauge and Yukawa interactions.
667: Because of the collective symmetry breaking mechanism, the doublet Higgs boson
668: does not receive large quadratic divergence in its mass parameter, and
669: hence the natural mass scale of the doublet Higgs boson is of the order of weak scale.
670: On the other hand, the triplet Higgs boson mass is not protected by such a mechanism,
671: therefore, its mass scale is naturally of the order of $f$.
672: Calculating the dominant quadratically divergent top- and gauge-loop corrections
673: to the effective Higgs potential,
674: one gets~\cite{ Arkani-Hamed:2002qy}
675: \begin{eqnarray}
676: {\cal L}_{eff}&=&a_t \lambda_1^2 f^4 \epsilon^{wx}\epsilon_{yz} \epsilon^{ijk} \epsilon_{klm}
677: \left( \Sigma_{iw} \Sigma_{jx} \Sigma^{*my} \Sigma^{*lz}
678: +\tilde{\Sigma}_{iw} \tilde{\Sigma}_{jx} \tilde{\Sigma}^{*my}\tilde{\Sigma}^{*lz}
679: \right)\nonumber \\
680: &+&a_g f^4 \left( g^2 {\rm Tr}\sum_{A=1,2}(Q_A^a\Sigma)(Q_A^a\Sigma)^*
681: +%\right.\nonumber \\
682: %&&\left.\hspace{4cm}
683: +g'^2 {\rm Tr} \sum_{A=1,2}(Y_A\Sigma)(Y_A\Sigma)^*\right),
684: \\
685: &\simeq& -M^2_\Phi \left( {\rm Tr}\Phi^\dagger \Phi+\frac{h^4}{16f^2}\right)+\cdots,
686: \label{phi_mass}
687: \end{eqnarray}
688: where $a_t$ and $a_g$ are constants of the order of 1.
689: Note that because of the collective symmetry breaking mechanism, the doublet Higgs boson
690: does not receive quadratically divergent
691: top- and gauge-loop corrections at one-loop level, however, it receives the logarithmically
692: divergent one-loop and quadratically divergent two-loop corrections, even though we don't show them
693: explicitly in Eq.~(\ref{phi_mass}). As shown in Eq.~(\ref{phi_mass}),
694: the coefficient of the ${\rm Tr}\Phi^\dagger \Phi$ term is
695: $-M^2_\Phi$.
696: Hence, the mass of the triplet Higgs boson is
697: related to the quartic coupling of the doublet Higgs boson. Consequently,
698: there is a relation between the triplet and doublet Higgs boson masses, which
699: is approximately expressed as
700: \begin{eqnarray}
701: M_\Phi \simeq \frac{\sqrt{2}M_H}{v_{SM}} f.
702: \label{triplet_mass}
703: \end{eqnarray}
704: In our analysis, we take the doublet
705: Higgs boson mass $M_H$ as a free parameter, and we calculate the triplet Higgs boson mass
706: using Eq.~(\ref{triplet_mass})\footnote{
707: After the electroweak symmetry breaking, each component of the triplet
708: Higgs multiplet receives different correction to their masses, and hence
709: non-degeneracy will be induced. In our analysis, we have not included
710: this non-degeneracy in the triplet mass spectrum.
711: }.
712: Since the triplet Higgs multiplet
713: can participate in electroweak interactions and the triplet Higgs boson masses
714: can be of the order of TeV, they
715: can be directly produced at the LHC.
716:
717: In Table \ref{mass_spectrum}, we list the typical mass spectrum of
718: the heavy T-parity partners of the SM particles. Here we have taken
719: the scale $f$ to be 1 TeV, $s_\alpha=1/\sqrt{2}$ (or, equivalently,
720: $\lambda_1=\lambda_2\sim {\frac{\sqrt{2} M_t}{v_{SM}}}\sim 1$), $\kappa=1$, and the
721: top quark and Higgs boson masses to be $175$ and 120 GeV, respectively.
722: We will assume this set of model parameter values in the rest of this paper, unless otherwise stated.
723:
724: \begin{table}[t]
725: \begin{center}
726: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
727: \hline
728: & $A_H$ & $Z_H~(W_H)$ & $T_+$ & $T_-$ & $u_-$ & $d_-$ & $\Phi$ \\
729: \hline
730: Mass (TeV) & 0.15 &0.65 &1.4 &1.0 & 1.4 & 1.4 & 0.69\\
731: \hline
732: \end{tabular}
733: \end{center}
734: \caption{Typical values of masses for the heavy T-parity partners of the SM particles.
735: Here we take the scale $f$ to be 1 TeV, $s_\alpha=1/\sqrt{2}$, $\kappa=1$, and the
736: top quark and Higgs boson masses to be $175$ and $120$ GeV, respectively.
737: }
738: \label{mass_spectrum}
739: \end{table}
740:
741:
742:
743:
744:
745: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
746:
747:
748: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
749:
750:
751: \section{High energy behavior of $u\bar{u}\rightarrow W_{H}^{+}W_{H}^{-}$}
752: Before we present a detailed study on the collider phenomenology of the Littlest Higgs model
753: with T-parity, we stress in this section
754: the importance of the T-odd $SU(2)$ doublet fermion contributions
755: to high energy processes.
756: To illustrate the important role of the T-odd $SU(2)$ doublet fermions
757: in high energy processes,
758: we discuss the high energy behavior of $u\bar{u} \rightarrow W_H^+ W_H^-$.
759: %
760: The tree-level diagrams for this process are given in Fig.~\ref{uubar-WHWH}. The amplitudes of
761: the s-channel process with photon and $Z$-boson exchanged are expressed by $A^{\gamma}$ and
762: $A^{Z}$, respectively, and the amplitude of the t-channel process with
763: T-odd down-quark $d_{-}$ exchanged is $A^{d_-}$.
764: %
765: %\begin{figure}[ht]
766: \begin{figure}[t]
767: \centering
768: %\includegraphics*[width=0.95\textwidth]{figs/uuww.eps}
769: \includegraphics*[width=1\textwidth]{2_uuww.eps}
770: \caption{Feynman diagrams for $u\bar{u}\rightarrow W_{H}^{+}W_{H}^{-}$.}
771: \label{uubar-WHWH}
772: \end{figure}
773: %
774: For the scattering process $u (p_1) \bar{u} (p_2) \rightarrow W_H^+
775: (p_3) W_H^- (p_4) $, we find
776: \begin{eqnarray*}
777: A^{\gamma} & = & \frac{2e^{2}}{3s}\bar{v}(p_{2})\{(-\not\not{p}_{3}+\not\not{p_{4}})
778: \varepsilon^{\ast}(p_{3})\cdot\varepsilon^{\ast}(p_{4})
779: \\
780: & & \,\,\,\,\,\,\,
781: -2p_{4}\cdot\varepsilon^{\ast}(p_{3})\not{\varepsilon^{\ast}(p_{4})}
782: +2p_{3}\cdot\varepsilon^{\ast}(p_{4})\not{\varepsilon^{\ast}(p_{3})}\} u(p_{1})
783: \, ,\\
784: A^{Z} & = & \frac{e^{2}}{2\sin^{2}\theta_{W}}\frac{1}{s-M_{Z}^{2}}\bar{v}(p_{2})
785: \{(-\not\not{p_{3}}+\not\not{p_{4}})\varepsilon^{\ast}(p_{3})\cdot\varepsilon^{\ast}(p_{4})\\
786: & & \,\,\,\,\,\,\,-2p_{4}\cdot\varepsilon^{\ast}(p_{3})\not{\varepsilon^{\ast}(p_{4})}+2p_{3}
787: \cdot\varepsilon^{\ast}(p_{4})\not{\varepsilon^{\ast}(p_{3})}\}(L+R)u(p_{1})
788: \, ,\\
789: A^{d_-} & = & -\frac{g^{2}}{2}\frac{1}{t-M_{d_-}^{2}}\bar{v}(p_{2})\not{\varepsilon}^{\ast}(p_{4})
790: P_{L}(\not\not{t}-M_{d_-})\not{\epsilon^{\ast}(p_{3})}P_{L}u(p_{1}) \, ,
791: \end{eqnarray*}
792: where $L=(1-\frac{4}{3}\sin^{2}\theta_{w})P_{L}$, $R=-\frac{4}{3}\sin^{2}\theta_{W}P_{R}$,
793: $\theta_{W}$ is the weak mixing angle, and $P_{L}=\frac{1-\gamma_{5}}{2}$ ($P_{R}\
794: =\frac{1+\gamma_{5}}{2}$)
795: is the left-handed (right-handed) projection operator.
796: In the center-of-mass frame of $W_{H}^{+}W_{H}^{-}$,
797: the 4-momenta of the particles can be chosen to be
798: \begin{eqnarray*}
799: p_{1} &=& (E,0,0,E),~~
800: p_{2} = (E,0,0,-E),\\
801: p_{3} &=& (E,\, p\sin\theta,0,p\cos\theta),~~
802: p_{4} = (E,-p\sin\theta,0,-p\cos\theta) \, ,
803: \end{eqnarray*}
804: where $E$ is the energy of incoming and outgoing particles, $p$
805: is the momentum of outgoing heavy gauge bosons and $\theta$ is the scattering
806: angle. In order to check its high energy behavior, we consider
807: the case that both the heavy gauge bosons $W_{H}^{+}$ and $W_{H}^{-}$
808: are longitudinally polarized. Since the incoming fermion $u$
809: and anti-fermion $\bar{u}$ have opposite helicities, the helicity
810: amplitudes of s-channel and t-channel processes can be easily found
811: to be
812: %
813: \begin{eqnarray*}
814: A^{\gamma}(-+) & = & \frac{8e^{2}Ep(p^{2}-3E^{2})}{3sM_{W_{H}}^{2}}\sin\theta
815: \, , \\
816: A^{Z}(-+) & = & (1-\frac{4}{3}s_{W}^{2})\frac{e^{2}}{s_{W}^{2}(s-M_{Z}^{2})}
817: \frac{2Ep(p^{2}-3E^{2})}{M_{W_{H}}^{2}}\sin\theta
818: \, , \\
819: A^{d_-}(-+) & = & \frac{e^{2}}{s_{W}^{2}(t-M_{d_-}^{2})}\frac{E(2E^{3}\cos\theta+p^{3}
820: -3pE^{2})}{M_{W_{H}}^{2}}\sin\theta
821: \, ,
822: \end{eqnarray*}
823: where $s_{W}\equiv \sin\theta_{W}$ , $(-+)$ are the helicities of
824: $(u\,\bar{u})$, the Mandelstam variables $s\equiv(p_{1}+p_{2})^{2}$ and
825: $t\equiv(p_{1}-p_{3})^{2}$,
826: and $M_{Z}$ , $M_{W_{H}}$ and $M_{d_-}$ are the
827: masses of $Z$-boson, heavy $W$-boson and heavy T-odd down-quark,
828: respectively. As we take the high energy limit, i.e. $\sqrt{s}\gg M_{X}$
829: ($X=Z$, $W_{H}$ and
830: $d_-$), each amplitude behaves as follows:
831: \begin{eqnarray}
832: A^{\gamma}(-+) &=& -\frac{s_{W}^{2}\sin\theta}{3f^{2}}s,~~\\
833: A^{Z}(-+) &=& -(1-\frac{4}{3}s_{W}^{2})\frac{\sin\theta}{4f^{2}}s,~~
834: \\
835: A^{d_-}(-+) &=& \frac{\sin\theta}{4f^{2}}s.
836: \end{eqnarray}
837: It is evident that each term diverges as energy goes to infinity,
838: but their sum is zero
839: because of the cancellation between the s-channel and t-channel contributions.
840: Therefore, we conclude that including the contribution from the T-odd
841: down-quark is essential to warrant a good high energy behavior of the
842: scattering process $u\bar{u}\rightarrow W_{H}^{+}W_{H}^{-}$.
843: This can be illustrated by partial-wave analysis, as to be given below.
844:
845: \begin{figure}[t]
846: \centering
847: \includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{3_unitarity_sum.eps}
848: \caption{$J=1$ partial-wave amplitude of the
849: $u\bar{u}\rightarrow W_{H}^{+}W_{H}^{-}$ process,
850: as a function of $M_{W_H W_H}(=\sqrt{s})$. The
851: plots are shown for $M_{d_{-}}=1$, 3, 5 TeV and
852: $\infty$.}
853: \label{J1amplitude}
854: \end{figure}
855:
856: The $J=1$ partial-wave amplitude (denoted as $a^{J=1}$) of
857: the $u\bar{u}\rightarrow W_{H}^{+}W_{H}^{-}$ process, for producing
858: longitudinal $W_H$'s, consists of two contributions: one from s-channel,
859: another from t-channel. We find
860: %
861: \begin{eqnarray*}
862: a_{\rm s-channel}^{J=1} & = & \frac{\alpha s}{48\sqrt{2}s_{W}^{2}M_{W_{H}}^{2}}\beta(3-\beta^{2})
863: \, , \\
864: a_{\rm t-channel}^{J=1} & = & \frac{\alpha s}{64\sqrt{2}s_{W}^{2}M_{W_{H}}^{2}}
865: \int_{-1}^{1}\frac{\sin^{2}\theta(2\cos\theta+\beta^{3}-3\beta)}{1-\beta\cos\theta+\frac{2M_{d_-}^{2}}{s}}d\cos\theta
866: \, ,
867: \end{eqnarray*}
868: where $\alpha=\frac{e^{2}}{4\pi}$ and
869: $\beta\equiv {\sqrt {1- 4 M_{W_H}^{2}/ s}}$ .
870: ($e$ is the unit of electric charge.)
871: When $s\gg M_{W_{H}}^{2}$ and $s\gg
872: M_{d_-}^{2}$, we have
873: \begin{equation}
874: a_{\rm s-channel}^{J=1} = - a_{\rm t-channel}^{J=1} = \frac{\alpha s}{24\sqrt{2}s_{W}^{2}M_{W_{H}}^{2}}
875: \,.
876: \end{equation}
877: %
878: In Fig.~\ref{J1amplitude}, we show the $J=1$ partial-wave amplitude of
879: the $u\bar{u}\rightarrow W_{H}^{+}W_{H}^{-}$ process, as a function of
880: the invariant mass $(\sqrt{s})$ of the $W_{H}^{+}W_{H}^{-}$ pair, for cases with $M_{d_{-}}=1$,
881: 3, 5 TeV and $\infty$.
882: We found that the unitarity is not
883: violated up to about 15 TeV in the decoupling limit of the T-odd down
884: quark, i.e. $M_{d_{-}}\rightarrow \infty$. On the other hand,
885: the constraint on the four-fermi operator
886: contributing to the $e^+e^-\rightarrow q\bar{q}$ scattering sets an
887: important upper limit on the T-odd fermion mass, as shown in
888: Eq.~(\ref{T-odd-limit}), thus the decoupling limit of the T-odd
889: fermions is not a realistic assumption and
890: the T-odd fermion contribution generates an important correction to
891: $u\bar{u}\rightarrow W_{H}^{+}W_{H}^{-}$ process. This contribution
892: was not taken into account
893: in the previous study~\cite{Hubisz:2004ft}.
894: As we show later, the theoretical prediction of the pair
895: production cross section of heavy $W$-boson significantly
896: depends on the mass of the T-odd down-quark.
897: %\begin{eqnarray}
898: %M_{\rm odd}<4.8 \left(
899: %\frac{f}{1~{\rm TeV}} \right)^2~{\rm TeV}.
900: %\label{T-odd-limit}
901: %\end{eqnarray}
902: %
903: Moreover, because the mass of the T-odd $SU(2)$ doublet fermions cannot be
904: too heavy, cf. Eq.~(\ref{T-odd-limit}), they can be copiously
905: produced at the LHC. Therefore, in the following section, we study the collider
906: phenomenology of the LHT with emphasis on the contributions of the
907: T-odd fermion to the production of the heavy T-parity partners
908: (either bosons or fermions) at the LHC.
909:
910: \newpage
911:
912:
913: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
914: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
915:
916: \section{Phenomenology}
917:
918:
919: The Little Higgs mechanism which provides the cancellation of
920: dominant
921: quadratic divergences from the top-quark and SM gauge bosons
922: in Higgs boson mass term, demands the
923: presence of the partners to SM fermions and bosons. In particular,
924: detection of the T-even and T-odd partners of top quark would
925: provide a clear hint for the Little Higgs mechanism with T-parity.
926: Similarly, the heavy T-odd gauge
927: bosons of the electroweak gauge boson partners are also essential
928: components of the Little Higgs mechanism.
929: Many studies~\cite{Hewett:2002px,Burdman:2002ns,Han:2003wu,Perelstein:2003wd,%
930: Hubisz:2004ft,Han:2005ru,Cheng:2005as,Berger:2005ht,Meade:2006dw}
931: have been presented in the literature on the
932: detection strategies for T-even and/or T-odd partners of top quark
933: and heavy T-odd gauge bosons at high energy colliders.
934: On the other hand, the T-odd $SU(2)$ partners of SM fermions
935: of the first and second generations received so far little
936: attention with respect to collider phenomenology.
937: As we have shown, these fermions are crucial component of LHT
938: for providing its consistency with respect to unitarity
939: and viability
940: with respect to constraints from contact interactions.
941:
942:
943: In this section, we first discuss
944: the production of these heavy T-odd fermions, either produced in pairs
945: or in association with heavy T-odd gauge bosons
946: at the LHC. Then, we discuss
947: the impact of T-odd fermion contribution
948: to the production of heavy T-odd gauge
949: boson pairs. As discussed in the previous section, it is necessary to
950: include the contribution from these heavy T-odd fermions to yield an
951: unitary scattering amplitude. For completeness, we will also discuss the
952: production of heavy T-odd triplet Higgs bosons.
953: In the end of this section, we will briefly discuss the potential of the
954: LHC for testing LHT by classifying several most interesting
955: experimental signatures.
956:
957:
958: \subsection{Direct Production Rates at the LHC}
959:
960: Given the model described in section II, we can easily calculate
961: the direct production rates of non-SM fermions, gauge bosons and
962: triplet Higgs bosons. In our numerical results, we have used
963: CTEQ6M parton distribution functions~\cite{Pumplin:2002vw}
964: with the renormalization and
965: factorization scales chosen to be the invariant mass of the
966: constituent process. Only the leading order results are reported
967: here. For our phenomenological analysis we
968: have implemented the complete LHT into CalcHEP
969: package~\cite{Pukhov:2004ca}\footnote{We are grateful to Alexander Pukhov
970: for developing new CalcHEP version while visiting Michigan State University.}
971: and used it in our analysis.
972: To check our analytical derivation of the effective lagrangian
973: for the implementation of the LHT into CalcHEP,
974: we applied LanHEP package~\cite{Semenov:1998eb}
975: for automatic generations of Feynman rules for the CalcHEP.
976: Indeed, it turned out that independent implementation
977: of the model was crucial for the cross check
978: of the previous studies~\cite{Hubisz:2004ft}.
979:
980: In our analysis we fix the model parameters to be
981: $\kappa=1$, $s_{\alpha}=1/\sqrt{2}$
982: (or equivalently, $\lambda_1=\lambda_2\sim \frac{\sqrt{2} M_t}{v_{SM}}\sim 1$),
983: the Higgs boson mass $M_H$=120~GeV, and the top-quark mass $M_t=175$~GeV,
984: while studying the signal production rates as a function of the new particle mass scale $f$.
985: With this choice of the model parameters, the effective $W^+\bar{t}b$ coupling
986: is $\frac{g}{\sqrt{2}} V_{tb}^{eff}\gamma_\mu P_L$ with $V_{tb}^{eff}=c_L=\sqrt{1-s_L^2}
987: \simeq1-0.008\left(\frac{1~{\rm TeV}}{f}\right)^2$.
988:
989:
990:
991: \subsubsection{Quark-Quark production rates}
992:
993: The LHC is a proton-proton hadron collider, so that a heavy T-odd quark,
994: denoted as $q_-$ can be copiously produced in pairs as long as its mass is
995: not too large. There are two main mechanisms of T-odd quark pair production.
996: Firstly, $q_- q_-^{(')}$, same-sign-charge quarks can be produced
997: via exchanging the T-odd heavy photon and $Z$-boson ($A_H$ and $Z_H$)
998: in $t$~(or $u$)-channel processes initiated by
999: same-sign-charge light quarks. A respective Feynman diagram corresponding to this process is
1000: shown in Fig.~\ref{qq_EW}. Secondly, $q_- \bar{q}^{(')}_-$ pair production takes place
1001: via both electroweak and obviously dominating QCD processes. The respective
1002: QCD Feynman diagrams for this process are shown in Fig.~\ref{qQ_QCD}.
1003:
1004: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1005: \begin{figure}[htb]
1006: \centering
1007: \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{4_prod_qq.eps}
1008: \caption{Representative Feynman diagram for
1009: $pp \rightarrow q_{-} q_{-}^{(')}$
1010: via t-channel exchange
1011: of T-odd photon $A_H$ and T-odd $Z$-boson $Z_H$.}
1012: \label{qq_EW}
1013: \end{figure}
1014:
1015: \begin{figure}[htb]
1016: \centering
1017: \includegraphics[width=0.99\textwidth]{5_prod_qQ_tot.eps}
1018: \caption{QCD Feynman diagrams for
1019: $pp \rightarrow q_{-} \bar{q}_{-}$
1020: process.}
1021: \label{qQ_QCD}
1022: \end{figure}
1023:
1024:
1025: %
1026: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1027: \begin{figure}[htb]
1028: \centering
1029: %{
1030: %\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{figs/qq_m34_6m.eps}%
1031: \includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{6_qq_m34_6m.eps}%
1032: \caption{The first and second generation heavy T-odd quark production
1033: cross sections at the LHC,
1034: where $q^+ = \lbrace u_-, c_-,{\bar d_-}, {\bar s_-}\rbrace$
1035: and
1036: $q^- = \lbrace {\bar u_-}, {\bar c_-} , d_-, s_-\rbrace$.
1037: The solid curve presents the production cross section
1038: of heavy quark pairs with positive
1039: charges ($q_-^+q_-^+$), dashed curve is for the
1040: production of heavy quark pairs with negative charges
1041: ($q_-^-q_-^-$) and dot-dashed curve is for the production of heavy quark pairs
1042: with opposite-sign charges ($q_-^+q_-^-$).
1043: The corresponding masses of the new heavy particles relevant to
1044: the production processes under consideration are listed in the
1045: top margin of the figure,
1046: corresponding to the respective $f$ values at the bottom.
1047: }
1048: \label{qq}
1049: \end{figure}
1050:
1051: In Fig.~\ref{qq} we present pair production rates of
1052: first and second generation heavy T-odd quarks versus $f$ value,
1053: organized by their electric charges.
1054: The corresponding masses of the new heavy particles relevant to
1055: the production processes under consideration are listed in the
1056: top margin of the figure,
1057: corresponding to the respective $f$ values at the bottom.
1058: For example, in Fig.~\ref{qq},
1059: for $f=1$~TeV one has
1060: $M_{q_-}\simeq 1.4$~TeV,
1061: $M_{W_H}\simeq 0.65$~TeV and
1062: $M_{A_H}\simeq 0.15$~TeV.
1063:
1064:
1065:
1066:
1067: The solid curve presents the production cross section
1068: of heavy quark pairs with positive
1069: charges, $q_-^+q_-^+$, which includes, for example, $u_- u_-$,
1070: ${\bar d}_- {\bar d}_-$ and $u_-{\bar d}_-$ pairs.
1071: The dashed curve is for the
1072: production of heavy quark pairs with negative charges,
1073: $q_-^-q_-^-$, which includes, for
1074: example,
1075: ${\bar u}_- {\bar u}_-$,
1076: $d_- d_-$ and $d_-{\bar u}_-$
1077: pairs. The dot-dashed curve is for the production of heavy quark pairs
1078: with opposite-sign charges, $q_-^+q_-^-$, which includes, for example,
1079: ${u}_-{d}_-$ and $\bar{u}_- {\bar d}_-$ pairs.
1080: It is evident that the heavy T-odd quark pair
1081: production rates are sizable. The production rate of positive charge
1082: pairs is larger than that of the negative charge pairs because of the
1083: larger parton density associated with positive charge pair production
1084: in proton-proton collision.
1085: One should notice that electroweak $q_-^+q_-^+$
1086: production is comparable with essentially QCD $q_-^+q_-^-$
1087: production!
1088: This happens because the production of heavy quark pairs with positive
1089: charges is initiated by both valence quarks in the proton
1090: which have higher parton density than that contributing to
1091: either QCD or EW $q_-^+q_-^-$ production.
1092: Furthermore, $q_-^+q_-^+$ ($q_-^-q_-^-$) production becomes even more sizable
1093: as compared to $q_-^+q_-^-$ production
1094: when $f$ (and so the T-odd quark mass) increases, since
1095: the contribution from valence quarks becomes more
1096: important in the large $x$-value region.
1097: This is an important result because the $q_-^+q_-^+$ ($q_-^-q_-^-$) production
1098: can provide an exciting experimental signatures at the LHC,
1099: as we shall discuss together with their detection strategies in the following subsections.
1100:
1101: \begin{figure}[htb]
1102: \centering
1103: \includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{7_q3q3_m34_6m.eps}
1104: \caption{The third generation heavy T-odd and T-even quark production
1105: cross sections at the LHC.\label{q3q3}}
1106:
1107: %}
1108: \end{figure}
1109: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1110:
1111: In Fig.~\ref{q3q3} we present various production rates of
1112: heavy T-even and T-odd top quark pairs as well as the rate of
1113: single T-even heavy top quark associatively produced with SM
1114: light quarks as a function of $f$. The T-odd bottom quark
1115: pair production rate is also given.
1116:
1117:
1118: The T-odd heavy singlet top
1119: quark pairs ($T_- {\bar T}_-$) have the largest cross section (solid curve)
1120: because in the LHT, considered here,
1121: the T-odd heavy singlet top quark ($T_-$)
1122: is lighter than the T-even heavy top ($T_+$).
1123: Note that the mass of T-odd doublet quarks
1124: is determined by the choice of $\kappa$ value
1125: which is taken to be 1. In this case
1126: T-odd heavy doublet top quark ($t_-$) mass
1127: is larger than the $T_-$ mass
1128: and is about the same as the $T_+$ mass.
1129:
1130: As $f$ increases,
1131: both $T_-$ and $T_+$ become heavier, and the single-$T_+$
1132: production in association with light
1133: quarks ($\bar{q}T_+ + q\bar{T}_+$) (long-dashed curve)
1134: rate becomes larger than the $T_- {\bar T}_-$ rate.
1135: This is because of the phase space suppression in $T_- {\bar T}_-$
1136: (or $T_+ {\bar T}_+$ - dotted curve)
1137: pair production, for producing two heavy particles, as compared to
1138: producing only one heavy particle in single-$T_+$ event.
1139: Furthermore, the single-$T_+$ production mechanism is dominated by
1140: longitudinal $W$-boson fusion with the incoming bottom quark in
1141: the t-channel production process, similar to the SM t-channel
1142: single-top production~\cite{Yuan:1989tc,single_top_t}.
1143: Due to the collinear enhancement for
1144: the light quark emitting a $W$-boson in the high energy region,
1145: the constituent cross section of single-$T_+$ process does not
1146: drop as fast as that of pair production process.
1147: We note that for a fixed $T_+$ mass, the single-$T_+$ production rate
1148: is proportional to $s_\alpha^2/c_\alpha^2$.
1149: This is because the coefficient of $W^+ \bar{T}_+b$ coupling is
1150: $V_{tb}^{eff}\frac{s_L}{c_L}\sim V_{tb}^{eff} s_\alpha^2\frac{v_{SM}}{f}\simeq
1151: V_{tb}^{eff} \frac{s_\alpha}{c_\alpha}\frac{M_t}{M_{T_+}}$, cf. Appendix A.
1152: In Fig.~\ref{q3q3}, we also show the production rates of the T-odd
1153: $t_-{\bar t}_-$ and $b_- {\bar b}_-$ pairs (short-dashed curve),
1154: where $t_-$ and $b_-$
1155: are originated from the T-odd $SU(2)$ doublet quark fields, and their
1156: masses are generated from the $\kappa$ term of the effective
1157: Lagrangian.
1158: One can see that $T_+ {\bar T}_+$ and
1159: $t_-{\bar t}_-$ (or $b_- {\bar b}_-$) production cross sections are very close
1160: to each other because of the same production mechanism and
1161: the similar masses of $T_+$ and $t_-$ ($b_-$)
1162: (for this particular choice of model parameters).
1163: Fig.~\ref{q3q3} also presents cross sections for
1164: the associate $tT_+$ (short dot-dashed line) and $bT_+$ (long dot-dashed line)
1165: productions. The $tT_+$ production rate dominates over
1166: the $bT_+$ rate because the diagram with t-channel $W$-boson exchange
1167: plays the leading role for the $tT_+$ production, and the
1168: similar diagram for $bT_+$ production is suppressed by CKM
1169: matrix elements.
1170: For example, it is suppressed by $V_{cb}$
1171: in the $cb\to b T_+$ production process.
1172:
1173:
1174: %\newpage
1175: \subsubsection{Quark-Boson production rates}
1176: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1177: \begin{figure}[htb]
1178: \includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{8_vq_m34_6m.eps}
1179: \caption{Heavy quark-boson associated production rates at the LHC.}
1180: \label{vp}
1181: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1182: \end{figure}
1183:
1184: Another production mechanism for heavy T-odd quarks in the LHT
1185: is via associated production with heavy T-odd gauge bosons.
1186: Since the initial state of the scattering processes is T-even, the
1187: final state has to be a pair of T-odd particles. For example, the
1188: $d_- W^+_H$ pair can be produced via the
1189: $u g\to d_- W^+_H$
1190: production.
1191: In Fig.~\ref{vp}, we show the
1192: associated production rates of heavy T-odd gauge bosons
1193: with all possible T-odd heavy quarks and anti-quarks, including
1194: the T-odd partner of heavy top (anti-)~quark,
1195: as a function of $f$ value.
1196: The fractional contribution from $t_{-}W^{-}_{H}$
1197: (and ${\bar t}_{-}W^{+}_{H}$),
1198: initiated by an incoming $b$-quark, to the $q_{-}W^{-}_{H}$ production
1199: is at the percent level, because of the smallness of $b$-quark parton
1200: density inside the proton.
1201: Similarly, the fractional contribution from $b_{-}Z_{H}$
1202: (and ${\bar b}_{-}Z_{H}$) to the $q_{-}Z_{H}$ production
1203: is also at the percent level, while the $t_{-}Z_{H}$ contribution is not
1204: included because we do not take top quark as a parton in our calculation.
1205: The same conclusion for $q_{-}Z_{H}$ production also holds for $q_{-}A_{H}$
1206: production after substituting $Z_{H}$ by $A_{H}$.
1207:
1208: One can see that $q_-W_H$ (solid line) associate production
1209: is the dominant one, $q_-Z_H$ (dashed line) production rate is about a factor of 2
1210: smaller due to the ratio in their couplings $|g_{qq_-W_H}/g_{qq_-Z_H}|\simeq\sqrt{2}$,
1211: and $q_-A_H$ (dot-dashed line) production is suppressed even more
1212: due to $|g_{qq_-W_H}/g_{qq_-A_H}|\simeq 5\sqrt{2} \cot\theta_W$.
1213:
1214: We note that due to T-parity, the
1215: T-even heavy top quark $T_+$ can be produced associatively with
1216: the SM (hence, T-even) gauge bosons, not the T-odd heavy gauge
1217: bosons, whose production rates are also given in Fig.~\ref{vp}
1218: (dotted line). Since $bT_+W$ coupling is suppressed as $v/f$,
1219: one can see that $T_+W^-$ (${\bar T}_+ W^+$) rate
1220: is significantly smaller than the $q_-W_H$ rate,
1221: and this suppression
1222: obviously grows with the increase of $f$ value.
1223:
1224: \subsubsection{Boson-Boson production rates}
1225: As discussed in the previous section, the presence of the T-odd
1226: heavy quarks in the model is essential for unitarising the
1227: scattering amplitudes of $qq \to V_H V_H$ processes, where $V_H$
1228: denotes T-odd heavy electroweak gauge bosons. In Fig.~\ref{vv} we
1229: show all possible T-odd heavy gauge boson pair production cross sections
1230: versus $f$ values.
1231: We note that due to the destructive effect from the t-channel
1232: T-odd heavy quark exchange diagram, which is needed to respect unitarity in high
1233: energy region, the predicted T-odd gauge boson pair production
1234: rates are smaller than those reported in
1235: Ref.~\cite{Hubisz:2004ft} where the important T-odd heavy quark exchange
1236: diagram was not included in the calculations.
1237:
1238: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1239: %\begin{figure}[htb]
1240: \begin{figure}[t]
1241: %\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{figs/vv.eps}
1242: \includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{9_vv_m34_6m.eps}
1243: \caption{Heavy T-odd gauge boson pair production rates at the LHC.}
1244: \label{vv}
1245: \end{figure}
1246: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1247:
1248:
1249:
1250: \begin{figure}[htb]
1251: %\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{figs/vv.eps}
1252: \includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{10_whwhkappa.eps}
1253: \caption{Heavy T-odd gauge boson pair, $pp\to W_H^{+} W_H^{-}$, production rates at the LHC.}
1254: \label{whwhkappa}
1255: \end{figure}
1256:
1257: Moreover, it is not a constant suppression factor in every
1258: production channel such that the relative difference between the
1259: $Z_H W^\pm_H$ and $W^+_H W^-_H$ rates is much smaller than that reported in
1260: Ref.~\cite{Hubisz:2004ft}. To examine the dependence on model parameters,
1261: we show in Fig.~\ref{whwhkappa}
1262: the production cross section
1263: of $W^+_H W^-_H$ pair at
1264: the LHC as a function of $f$ for various choices of $\kappa$
1265: values. We note that the curve for $\kappa \to \infty$
1266: corresponds to the calculation without including the T-odd heavy
1267: quark contribution which overestimates $W^+_H W^-_H$ production rate
1268: by a significant factor.
1269: In the later section, we shall come back to discuss its detection
1270: strategies at the LHC.
1271:
1272:
1273:
1274:
1275: %\newpage
1276: \subsubsection{Higgs-Higgs production rates}
1277: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1278: \begin{figure}[htb]
1279: %\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{figs/hh.eps}
1280: \includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{11_hh_m34_6m.eps}
1281: \caption{Heavy T-odd Higgs production rates at the LHC.}
1282: \label{phiphi}
1283: \end{figure}
1284: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1285:
1286: In the LHT, the direct production mechanism of the normal
1287: (T-even) Higgs boson is similar to the SM Higgs boson production
1288: though with somewhat suppressed couplings. We refer the reader to
1289: Ref.~\cite{Chen:2006cs} for more detailed discussions. In high energy
1290: collision,
1291: the T-odd triplet Higgs bosons can be produced in
1292: $qq \to \phi \phi$ processes at the tree level via gauge interactions of $\phi$, where
1293: $\phi$ denotes any of the T-odd heavy triplet Higgs bosons. Their
1294: direct production rates are small because at tree level they are
1295: produced via s-channel processes
1296: with highly virtual gauge boson
1297: propagators. Though t-channel diagrams also take place,
1298: they are strongly suppressed because they
1299: involve heavy T-odd quarks
1300: and the $qq_-\phi$ coupling is suppressed at least by $v/f$.
1301:
1302: Nevertheless, the T-even Higgs bosons can be copiously produced
1303: from the decay of T-odd heavy quarks, as to be discussed below.
1304: For that, we shall first examine the decay
1305: branching ratios of the T-odd heavy quarks and gauge bosons
1306: predicted in this model.
1307:
1308:
1309: \def\baselinestretch{0.9}
1310: %\newpage
1311:
1312:
1313: \subsection{Decay branching ratios}
1314:
1315: %\begin{table}
1316: %
1317: %\begin{center}
1318: % use packages: array
1319:
1320: %\end{center}
1321:
1322: {
1323: %\begin{verbatim}
1324: %f=1TeV
1325: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1326: %uo do bo
1327: %======== ======== =========
1328: %uo-> ~W+ d 62% do-> ~W- u 62% bo-> ~W- t 62%
1329: %uo-> ZH u 31% do-> ZH d 31% bo-> ZH b 31%
1330: %uo-> AH u 7% do-> AH d 7% bo-> AH b 7%
1331: %uo-> W+ do 0% do-> W- uo 0% bo-> P- t 0.61%
1332: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1333: % to tt
1334: %========= =========
1335: %to-> ~W+ b 62% tt-> AH t 100%
1336: %to-> ZH t 30% tt-> ZH t 0.00022%
1337: %to-> AH t 7% (suppressed by del^2 compared to AH t channel)
1338: %to-> P+ b 0.00063% tt-> PS t 0.035%
1339: %to-> PS t 0.6%
1340: %to-> P0 t 0.9%
1341: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1342: %te ~W+ ZH
1343: %========= ========= =========
1344: %te-> W+, b 44% ~W+ -> W+ AH 100% ZH -> AH H 100%
1345: %te-> H, t 19% ~W+ -> W+ ZH (MZH~=MWH) ZH -> te tt
1346: %te-> ZL, t 21% ZH -> t tt
1347: %te-> AH,tt 16% ZH -> te To
1348: %(there is a ZH -> b Bo
1349: % non-trivial ZH -> d Do
1350: % behavior of ZH -> u Uo
1351: % Br as a function of ZH -> W+ ~W-
1352: % sin(alpha)=
1353: % lam1/sqrt(lam1^2+lam2^2)
1354: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1355: %P+ PS ~++
1356: %======== ======== ==========
1357: %P+ can not decay at 1->2 PS can not decay at 1->2 ~++ -> P+ W+
1358: %(there is not enough PS (there is not enough PS (no 1->2 decay
1359: % except for small except for small at tree-level)
1360: % kappa : P+ -> t Bo kappa : PS -> t To
1361: % and P+ -> b To) and PS -> b Bo)
1362: %P+ -> B to PS -> Te tt
1363: %P+ -> te Bo PS -> t TT
1364: %P+ -> t Bo PS -> te To
1365: %P+ -> W- ~++ PS -> t To
1366: %P+ -> W+ PS PS -> b Bo
1367: %P+ -> W+ P0 PS -> W+ P-
1368: %\end{verbatim}
1369: %
1370: %}
1371: %\caption{Typical decay branching ratios of the heavy particles}
1372: %\label{table}
1373: %\end{table}
1374: \begin{table}
1375: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
1376: \hline
1377: Particle & Decay Mode & Branching Ratio(\%) & Particle & Decay Mode & Branching Ratio(\%) \\
1378: \hline
1379: $u_{-}$ & $W_{H}^{+}$ $d$ & 61 & $d_{-}$ & $W_{H}^{-}$ $u$ & 62 \\
1380: & $Z_{H}$ $u$ & 30 & & $Z_{H}$ $d$ & 31 \\
1381: & $A_{H}$ $u$ & 8.6 & & $A_{H}$ $d$ & 6.3 \\
1382: \hline
1383: $b_{-}$ & $W_{H}^{-}$ $t$ & 60 & $t_{-}$ & $W_{H}^{+}$ $b$ & 62 \\
1384: & $Z_{H}$ $b$ & 32 & & $Z_{H}$ $t$ & 29 \\
1385: & $A_{H}$ $b$ & 6.6 & & $A_{H}$ $t$ & 8.2 \\
1386: \hline
1387: $T_{-}$ & $A_{H}$ $t$ & 100 & $T_{+}$ & $W^{+}$ $b$ & 46 \\
1388: & & & & $Z$ $t$ & 22 \\
1389: & & & & $H$ $t$ & 20 \\
1390: & & & & $A_{H}$ $T_{-}$ & 12 \\
1391: \hline
1392: $W_{H}^{+}$ & $A_{H}$ $W^{+}$ & 100 & $Z_{H}$ & $A_{H}$ $H$ & 100 \\
1393: \hline
1394: $\phi^{+}$ & $A_{H}$ $W^{+}$ & 100 & $\phi^{0}$ & $A_{H}$ $Z$ & 100 \\
1395: \hline
1396: $\phi^{p}$ & $A_{H}$ $H$ & 100 & & & \\
1397: \hline
1398: \end{tabular}
1399: \caption{Decay branching ratio of heavy
1400: particles in Littlest Higgs Model with T-parity.
1401: Values in this table are calculated with parameters
1402: $\kappa = 1$, $f = 1$ TeV, $M_{H} = 120$ GeV
1403: and $M_t = 175$ GeV. We notice that
1404: for this set of model parameter values,
1405: the
1406: triplet Higgs $\phi^{++}$ doesn't have two-body decay modes at tree level.}
1407: \label{table}
1408: \end{table}
1409:
1410:
1411: In order to study the phenomenology of the T-odd heavy particles
1412: predicted in the LHT, we need to know about their decay
1413: branching ratios. In addition to the SM parameters, the dominant
1414: two-body decay modes of the first and second generation T-odd
1415: quarks only depend on two more parameters: $f$ and $\kappa$, i.e.
1416: $f$ determines the mass of the T-odd heavy gauge bosons and both $f$ and
1417: $\kappa$ determine the mass of T-odd heavy quarks. If $\kappa$ is
1418: of the order of 1, then because of the smallness of gauge coupling
1419: strength, the T-odd gauge bosons are typically lighter than the
1420: T-odd quarks. When the lightest T-odd particle (LTP) is $A_H$ so that it
1421: could be a good candidate for dark matters, the heavy T-odd quarks
1422: mainly decay into a normal QCD jet plus a T-odd heavy gauge boson
1423: $W^\pm_H$, $Z_H$ or $A_H$. As shown in Table~\ref{table}, the decay
1424: branching ratio (BR) into $W^\pm_H + jet$ is about twice of
1425: BR($Z_H + jet$) and one order of magnitude larger than BR($A_H +
1426: jet$) for $f=1$\,TeV and $\kappa=1$. This feature also holds for
1427: the T-odd heavy top ($t_-$) and bottom ($b_-$) quarks which are
1428: originated from the T-odd $SU(2)$ doublet quark fields and gain their masses from
1429: $\kappa$ terms. The T-odd heavy $SU(2)$ singlet top quark ($T_-$),
1430: originated from the top quark Yukawa interaction Lagrangian,
1431: decays almost 100\% into the $t A_H$ mode. The T-even heavy $SU(2)$
1432: singlet top quark ($T_+$) has a more complicated decay pattern
1433: and can decay into $W^+ b$, $H t$, $Z t$ and $A_H t_-$ modes
1434: with nontrivial dependence on the model parameters such as $f$,
1435: $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ (or, equivalently, the masses of heavy
1436: T-odd gauge bosons, $T_+$ and $T_-$).
1437: In Fig.~\ref{tpdecay},
1438: we present the decay
1439: branching ratios for the above decay channels of $T_+$ as a
1440: function of $c_\alpha$ (left frame) for $f$=1~TeV,
1441: and as a function of $f$ for $s_\alpha=1/\sqrt{2}$ (right frame)
1442: \footnote{ We have found disagreement for branching
1443: ratios of $T_+$ for small values of $s_\alpha$
1444: as compared to results reported in Ref.~\cite{Hubisz:2004ft}.
1445: In our paper, $c_\alpha$ corresponds to $s_\lambda$
1446: of Ref.~\cite{Hubisz:2004ft}.
1447: For the sake of comparison
1448: we present $c_\alpha$ dependence of BR$(T_+)$
1449: in the left frame of Fig.~\ref{tpdecay}.}.
1450: One can see that at $c_\alpha\simeq 1$,
1451: BR$(T_+\to Ht)$ becomes dominant since for small $s_\alpha$,
1452: $HT_+t$ coupling is proportional to $c_\alpha$
1453: while the couplings of $T_+$ in the other decay channels are suppressed
1454: by $s_\alpha$.
1455: Note that for our analysis, the coefficient of the $W^+\bar{t}b$ coupling
1456: $V_{tb}^{eff}\equiv V_{tb}c_L$ varies as $c_L$, cf. Appendix A.
1457: Here $V_{tb}$ is taken to be 1.
1458: On the other hand,
1459: the BR of T-odd heavy quarks are quite
1460: insensitive to the LHT parameters as long as the mass of the
1461: T-odd heavy quark is larger than $A_H$. For example, the values of
1462: BRs shown in Table~\ref{table} also hold
1463: (within a few percents) for $f=0.5-1$\,TeV range.
1464: Hereafter, we will take $f=1$~TeV as the reference point.
1465:
1466: \begin{figure}[htb]
1467: %\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{figs/hh.eps}
1468: \includegraphics[width=0.99\textwidth]{12_tp_decay.eps}
1469: \caption{T-even heavy top decay branching
1470: ratios for $\kappa=1$, $\lambda_1=\lambda_2$~(or, $s_\alpha=1/\sqrt{2}$) and $M_H=120$~GeV.}
1471: \label{tpdecay}
1472: \end{figure}
1473:
1474:
1475: The striking feature of the T-odd heavy gauge boson decay pattern
1476: is that $W^\pm_H$ almost exclusively decay into a $W^\pm A_H$
1477: pair, while $Z_H$ decays into a $Z H$ pair, for $\kappa$ being of
1478: the order 1 and the mass of the (T-even) Higgs boson is about
1479: 120\,GeV. This is because the masses of $W^\pm_H$ and $Z_H$ are
1480: about the same and are smaller than the T-odd heavy quark masses
1481: (unless $\kappa$ is much less than 1).
1482: In such cases, the normal
1483: (T-even) Higgs boson can be copiously produced from the decay of
1484: T-odd heavy gauge boson $Z_H$ which can be produced either
1485: associatively with T-odd heavy quarks or another heavy T-odd gauge
1486: bosons, as discussed above.
1487:
1488:
1489: For the chosen model parameters, with $\kappa = 1$ and
1490: $\lambda_1 = \lambda_2$~(or, $s_\alpha=1/\sqrt{2}$)
1491: and $M_H=120$~GeV, there is no tree-level two-body decay mode for
1492: the T-odd doubly charged triplet Higgs boson, $\phi^{\pm\pm}$,
1493: while $\phi^{\pm}$ decays into $W^{\pm} A_H$ mode,
1494: and $\phi^0$ and $\phi^{P}$ decay into $ZA_H$ and $HA_H$ modes,
1495: respectively. However, for $M_H\ge 130$~GeV, the $W^\pm_H W^\pm$
1496: mode could be opened for $\phi^{\pm\pm}$ Higgs boson.
1497:
1498:
1499:
1500: \def\baselinestretch{0.8}
1501: %\newpage
1502:
1503: \subsection{Signal processes and the collider signatures}
1504:
1505: In this section we shall discuss various experimental signatures
1506: of signal processes at the LHC for the same values of model
1507: parameters as given in the previous section. For simplicity, we
1508: shall concentrate on the pure leptonic decay modes of gauge bosons
1509: in the final decay chain of T-odd heavy quarks and gauge bosons.
1510:
1511: \subsubsection{The 1st and 2nd generation heavy T-odd quark pair production}
1512:
1513: According to the multiplicity and charge of the leptons produced
1514: from the first and second generation T-odd heavy quark chain
1515: decays, we can classify the T-odd heavy quark pair event signature
1516: as signal events with like-sign di-leptons, opposite-sign
1517: di-leptons, and single charged lepton with large missing
1518: transverse momentum.
1519:
1520: \begin{figure}[htb]
1521: \centering{
1522: \includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{13_qq_sign_m34_6m.eps}}%
1523: \caption{\label{qqsign}
1524: Rates for like-sign di-lepton, opposite-sign di-lepton and
1525: single charged lepton signatures from
1526: the 1st and 2nd generation heavy T-odd quark pair production at the LHC.}
1527: \end{figure}
1528:
1529: %
1530: %\begin{itemize}
1531: \noindent
1532: {\bf
1533: 1) like-sign di-lepton ($\ell^\pm\ell^\pm + \etmiss +jets$) signature (LSL)}\\
1534: %
1535: As shown in Fig.~\ref{qq_EW}, the valence quark initiated $pp\to q_-
1536: q_-$ processes via the
1537: exchange of heavy electroweak gauge bosons could give rise to a
1538: large production rate of signal events with a pair of like-sign
1539: charged leptons in the final state to yield a distinct
1540: experimental signature. For example,
1541: \\
1542: $u_{-}u_{-} \to W_H^+ d W_H^+ d \to W^+ W^+ A_H A_H d
1543: d $ \ \ \ and \ \ \
1544: $u_{-}\bar{d}_{-}\to W_H^+ d W_H^+ \bar{u} \to W^+ W^+ A_H A_H d\bar{u}$\\
1545: chains lead to the $\ell^+\ell^+ + \etmiss +jets$ signature, while
1546: \\
1547: $d_{-}d_{-} \to W_H^- u W_H^- u \to W^- W^- A_H A_H uu$
1548: \ \ \ and \ \ \ $d_{-}\bar{u}_{-}\to W_H^- u W_H^- \bar{d} \to
1549: W^- W^- A_H A_H u\bar{d}$
1550: \\
1551: processes
1552: produce $\ell^-\ell^- + \etmiss +jets$ final state.
1553: \\
1554: The overall decay branching ratios for the above reactions can be
1555: easily calculated from Table~\ref{table} which yields $Br[q_{-}q_{-}\to
1556: LSL]=0.62^2 \times (2/9)^2 \simeq 0.019$. Depending on the
1557: values of $f$, the LSL signal event rate for positively charged leptons
1558: is about at 23 fb level
1559: for a lower value of $f=0.5$~TeV and
1560: about 0.6 fb for $f=1$~TeV,
1561: as shown in Fig.~\ref{qqsign}.
1562: LSL signal event rate for negatively charged leptons
1563: is 5 fb and 0.1 fb, respectively, as shown by dotted line
1564: in Fig.~\ref{qqsign}.
1565:
1566: With the high luminosity option of the LHC, around
1567: $300\,{\rm fb}^{-1}$, there will be a large number of signal
1568: events with like-sign di-leptons, with large transverse momentum
1569: ($P_T$), and large missing transverse momentum ($\etmiss$)
1570: in the
1571: $\ell^-\ell^- + \etmiss +jets$
1572: or
1573: $\ell^+\ell^+ + \etmiss +jets$ signature.
1574: The prominent
1575: feature of this signal signature is that it is free of large
1576: $t\bar{t}$ background. This is similar to the case for studying
1577: the longitudinal weak boson scattering processes in the TeV region,
1578: with emphasis on the so called Gold-platted purely leptonic decay
1579: mode of weak bosons. As shown in Ref.~\cite{Bagger:1993zf},
1580: after imposing the
1581: kinematic cuts on the charged leptons, the SM background rate,
1582: which is dominated by the intrinsic electroweak $q q W^\pm W^\pm$
1583: production and the $Wt {\bar t}$ associate production, is already
1584: down to the level of a few tenth fb. It is expected that one can
1585: further discriminate the signal event from the SM background event
1586: by requiring a large scalar sum of the transverse momenta, contributed
1587: by the two high $P_T$ charged leptons, jets and $\etmiss$, which
1588: is known as the $H_T$ parameter in the search for top quark at the
1589: Tevatron~\cite{top-observ}. This is because in the signal event, two heavy
1590: T-odd quarks are produced so that the center-of-mass system has a
1591: much larger mass. Furthermore, one can use the kinematic
1592: constraints, similar to those used in the $t {\bar t}$ analysis
1593: carried out at the Tevatron, to purify the data sample with
1594: T-odd heavy quarks. Finally, one can construct the transverse mass
1595: of the final state system, in analogy to the one introduced in
1596: Ref.~\cite{Bagger:1993zf}
1597: for studying the longitudinal weak boson scattering, to
1598: further discriminate the SM background from the signal events.
1599: Therefore, the LSL signature of the T-odd quark pair events is
1600: expected to provide a clear verification or disproof of the Littlest Higgs model
1601: with T-parity
1602: unless the signal
1603: production rate is largely suppressed for very large
1604: $f$ and therefore very heavy T-odd quarks.
1605: %
1606: %\item
1607: \\
1608: %
1609: %
1610: %
1611: {\bf 2) opposite-sign lepton
1612: ($\ell^\pm\ell^\mp + \etmiss +jets$) signature (OSL)}\\
1613: %
1614: A shown in Fig.~\ref{qq}, the production of T-odd heavy quark pairs
1615: with opposite electric charges has a higher rate than the
1616: like-sign heavy quark pairs. For example,
1617: \\
1618: $u_{-}\bar{u}_{-} \to W_H^+ d W_H^- \bar{d} \to W^+ W^- A_H A_H \bar{d} d $,\\
1619: \ \ \ \
1620: $u_{-} d_- \to W_H^+ d W_H^- u \to W^+ W^- A_H A_H du$,
1621: \\
1622: $d_{-}\bar{d}_{-} \to W_H^- u W_H^+ \bar{u} \to W^- W^+A_H A_H u\bar{u}$, \\
1623: $d_{-}\bar{u}_{-}\to W_H^- u W_H^+ \bar{d} \to W^- W^- A_H A_H u\bar{d}$
1624: \\
1625: processes all give rise to the $\ell^+\ell^- + \etmiss +jets$
1626: signature.
1627: When the mass of the T-odd heavy quarks increases, the
1628: electroweak production rate becomes more important than the QCD
1629: production rate. One of the reasons is that the former process is
1630: dominated by the t-channel exchange of a relative
1631: light $A_H$ boson, and the later process is induced by the s-channel
1632: exchange of a virtual gluon.
1633: Another reason is that the
1634: former process can be initiated by two valence quarks (via t-channel process)
1635: while the later process must involve a sea-quark parton
1636: whose density function becomes smaller in the large $x$-region
1637: for producing a heavier
1638: T-odd heavy quark pair.
1639:
1640: The overall decay branching ratio for the above
1641: reactions is equal to Br[$q_{-}q_{-}\to LSL]$.
1642: Hence, the OSL
1643: signal event rate is larger than the LSL signal event rate
1644: as indicated by the dot-dashed line in Fig.~\ref{qqsign}.
1645: However, the OSL signal suffers from a much larger SM background rate
1646: induced by the $t {\bar t}$ production. Nevertheless, the same
1647: strategies discussed above to suppress the SM background rate in
1648: the LSL analysis also applies to the OSL case because the signal
1649: events are all generated from a system with a much larger mass
1650: (i.e., the invariant mass of the heavy T-odd quark pair) as
1651: compared to the SM background processes. To be certain, a detailed
1652: Monte Carlo analysis is needed which is beyond the scope of this
1653: work.
1654: %
1655: %
1656: \\
1657: {\bf 3) Single charged lepton ($\ell^\pm + \etmiss +jets$) signature (1L)}\\
1658: %
1659: One may also consider the signal event signature with only one
1660: charged lepton in its final state, with one of $W^\pm$ decaying
1661: leptonically and another hadronically. The overall decay branching
1662: for the above reactions is equal to $ Br[q_{-}q_{-}\to 1L]=
1663: Br[q_{-}q_{-}\to W_{H}W_{H}qq\to 1L]+Br[q_{-}q_{-}\to W_{H}A_{H}qq\to 1L]=
1664: 0.62^2
1665: \times 2/9 \times 2/3 \times 2 + 0.62\times 0.086 \times 2/9 \times 2
1666: \simeq 0.14\simeq 6\times Br[q_{-}q_{-}\to LSL]$. The production rate is also higher,
1667: as presented by the dashed line in Fig.~\ref{qqsign}, for all the above T-odd heavy
1668: quark pair production channels are combined.
1669: On the other hand, the expected background will also be orders of
1670: magnitude higher. Hence, it is more challenging to detect the
1671: signal events in the single charged lepton mode.
1672:
1673:
1674:
1675: \subsubsection{The third generation heavy quark pair production}
1676: %
1677:
1678: In order to cancel the quadratic divergence induced by the top
1679: quark loop for Higgs boson mass correction at the one-loop order,
1680: we need to introduce additional heavy quarks (heavy partners of top quark)
1681: into the LHT
1682: model.
1683: In general, there are $T_+$, $T_-$,
1684: originated from the top quark Yukawa sector, cf.~Eq.~(\ref{top_yukawa_int}),
1685: and $t_-$, originated
1686: from the $\kappa$ term interaction with $b_-$ as its isospin
1687: partner, cf.~Eq.~(\ref{kappa}).
1688:
1689: \begin{figure}[htb]
1690: \centering{
1691: \includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{14_q3q3_sign_m34_6m.eps}}
1692: \caption{\label{q3q3sign}
1693: Rates for opposite-sign di-lepton and
1694: single charged lepton signatures from
1695: the third generation heavy quark pair production
1696: at the LHC.}
1697: \end{figure}
1698:
1699:
1700: \noindent
1701: {\bf 1) $T_{-}\bar{T}_{-}$ production}
1702: with
1703: $T_{-}\bar{T}_{-}\to A_H A_H t\bar{t}$\\
1704: %
1705: The $T_{-}\bar{T}_{-}$ production rate at the LHC is quite large,
1706: which is about $30$~fb for $f=1$\,TeV. The experimental
1707: signature of this signal event can be either OSL or 1L. Its
1708: production rate only depends on $T_{-}$ mass and the decay branching ratio
1709: of $T_{-}\to t A_H$ is about 100\%. Therefore, it is important to
1710: test this production mode at the LHC, for the signal rate can be
1711: predicted with great confidence. We present OSL rates for
1712: $T_{-}\bar{T}_{-}$ production in Fig.~\ref{q3q3sign} as solid
1713: line.
1714: There have been a few studies in the literature to
1715: discuss how to detect this channel at the
1716: LHC~\cite{Hubisz:2004ft,Cheng:2005as},
1717: though more
1718: detailed Monte Carlo analysis is needed to confirm how well this
1719: channel can be detected. It was also pointed out that it could be
1720: very challenging to distinguish this production channel with the
1721: top-squark (stop) pair productions predicted by the Minimal
1722: Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM) with the subsequent decay of stop
1723: into top quark and the lightest supersymmetric particle
1724: (neutralino)~\cite{Cheng:2005as}.
1725: Needless to say that distinguishing the LHT from the
1726: MSSM generally requires studying of all detectable
1727: experimental signatures induced by various
1728: production mechanisms predicted by the models.
1729: %
1730: %
1731: \\
1732: {\bf 2) $t_{-}\bar{t}_-$ and $b_{-}\bar{b}_-$ production}\\
1733: %
1734: For the particular choice of $\kappa=1$, which makes $t_-$ and $b_-$
1735: heavier then ${T}_{-}$,
1736: the $t_{-}\bar{t}_-$ production rate is at least one order of
1737: magnitude (depending on the value of $f$) lower than the $T_{-}\bar{T}_{-}$ rate.
1738: In case of
1739: $t_{-}\bar{t}_-$ production, there will be two $b$-jets
1740: associatively produced with a pair of OSL or 1L in its event
1741: signature.
1742: %({\bf or} $t{\bar t}$ + Higgs pair + $\etmiss$)
1743: Likewise, the $b_{-}\bar{b}_-$ process gives rise to a
1744: $t\bar{t}$ pair in addition to the OSL or 1L signature.
1745: %({\bf or} two $b$-jets + Higgs pair + $\etmiss$)
1746: The rate for OSL+$t\bar{t}$ signature
1747: is presented in Fig.~\ref{q3q3sign}
1748: by dashed line.
1749: The rate for OSL+$b\bar{b}$ from $t_-\bar{t}_-$ production
1750: is very similar and is not shown.
1751: Depending on $\kappa$, $t_{-}\bar{t}_-$
1752: production rate could be higher or lower than the $T_{-}\bar{T}_{-}$ production rate,
1753: making it, respectively, harder or easier to observe.
1754: %
1755: \\
1756: {\bf 3) $T_{+}\bar{T}_{+}$ production}\\
1757: %
1758: Since ${T_{+}}$ is heavier than $T_{-}$, the $pp\to
1759: T_{+}\bar{T}_{+}$ production rate
1760: (similar to the $t_{-}\bar{t}_-$ or $b_{-}\bar{b}_-$ production rate)
1761: is at least one order of
1762: magnitude
1763: lower than the $T_{-}\bar{T}_{-}$ production rate
1764: (depending on the value of $f$).
1765: The highest rates are for $T_{+}\bar{T}_{+}\to W^+W^-b\bar{b}$ signature which
1766: should be checked against the SM $t\bar{t}$ background.
1767: The rate for OSL+$b\bar{b}$ signature
1768: is presented in Fig.~\ref{q3q3sign}
1769: by the dot-dashed line.
1770: Again,
1771: the techniques discussed about for using the large invariant mass
1772: of the heavy system in the signal event to distinguish it from the
1773: SM background event could be useful for detecting the signal event
1774: in this channel.
1775: \\
1776: {\bf 4) single $T_{+}$ production}\\
1777: %
1778: The rate of single-$T_{+}$ production associated with a light quark
1779: via t-channel electroweak interaction is
1780: actually higher than the rate of $T_{+}\bar{T}_{+}$ pair
1781: production via strong interaction, as clearly shown in Fig.~\ref{q3q3}.
1782: The dominant experimental signature of the signal event is the same as the SM
1783: single-top event though it is expected with a much larger missing
1784: transverse momentum.
1785: In Fig~\ref{q3q3sign} the dotted line presents the rate of 1L signature
1786: originated from the single $T_{+}$ production in association with the light quark.
1787: Furthermore, the transverse mass of the
1788: signal event will be larger than that of the SM single-top event.
1789: In analogy to the SM single-top event, the single-$T_{+}q$ event
1790: is also characterized by a forward-jet which populates in the
1791: large rapidity region and can be used to suppress $t {\bar t}$ and
1792: $Wb {\bar b}$ backgrounds \cite{Yuan:1989tc}.
1793: Again, a Monte Carlo study is
1794: needed to draw any definite conclusion about its detection at the
1795: LHC.
1796:
1797:
1798: \subsubsection{ $q_{-}V_H$ associate production}
1799:
1800:
1801: As discussed in Ref.~\cite{Chen:2006cs}
1802: Higgs boson production rate via gluon-gluon fusion process
1803: is always smaller than that predicted by SM.
1804: However, because in most part of the model parameter space, a
1805: heavy T-odd $Z_H$ decays almost entirely into a $ZH$ pair, it
1806: provides new production channels for the SM-like Higgs boson. The
1807: experimental signature of the $ q_{-}V_H$ pair production can be
1808: classified as follows.
1809: %
1810: \begin{figure}[t]
1811: \centering{
1812: \includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{15_vq_sign_m34_6m.eps}}%
1813: \caption{\label{vqsign}
1814: Rates for opposite-sign lepton and
1815: associate Higgs production signatures
1816: from T-odd boson and T-odd quark associate production, $V_H q_{-}$,
1817: at the LHC.}
1818: \end{figure}
1819:
1820: \noindent
1821: {\bf 1) $q_-W_H$ production} \\
1822: %
1823: This signal process gives rise to OSL and 1L signatures with
1824: one less jet as compared to the T-odd heavy quark pair production,
1825: but without the LSL signature. The OSL signature rate for this process is presented
1826: as the solid line in Fig.~\ref{vqsign}.
1827: %
1828: \\
1829: {\bf 2) $q_-Z_H$ production} \\
1830: %
1831: The interesting decay chain of this signal process is $q_-Z_H\to
1832: q' W_H Z_H \to q' W^+ A_H A_H H$ in which a high $P_T$ Higgs
1833: boson is associatively produced with a $W$-boson. Its event rate
1834: is large, at about 12\,fb level for $f=1$\,TeV and $\kappa=1$. With
1835: a large $\etmiss$ in the event, it could be detectable, though a
1836: detailed Monte Carlo study is needed.
1837: The respective rate for $q' W^+ A_H A_H H$ signature is presented in
1838: Fig.~{~\ref{vqsign} by the dashed line.
1839: %
1840: \\
1841: {\bf 3) $q_-A_H$ production} \\
1842: %
1843: The decay chain $q_-A_H\to W_H q' A_H \to W A_H q' A_H $ provides
1844: the $W^\pm$ + $\etmiss$ signature which is however not a
1845: promising channel to look for the signal, because the SM
1846: backgrounds, such as the $WZ(\to\nu\nu)$ production, could be quite large.
1847:
1848: \subsubsection{ $V_H V_H$ production}
1849:
1850: The experimental signatures of $V_H V_H$ events are similar to
1851: that of $ q_{-}V_H$ events, but with one less high-$P_T$ jet.
1852: Therefore, it requires a larger production cross section to detect
1853: such a signal event.
1854: %
1855: \begin{figure}[htb]
1856: \centering{
1857: \includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{16_vv_sign_m34_6m.eps}}
1858: \caption{\label{vvsign}
1859: Rates for OSL, $WH$ and $HH$ signatures for
1860: various $V_H V_H$ production reactions at the LHC.}
1861: \end{figure}
1862:
1863: \noindent
1864: {\bf 1) $Z_H W_H$ production} \\
1865: %
1866: The event rate of $Z_H W_H\to A_H H W A_H$ is about the same as
1867: that for $ q_{-}V_H$ production, but with almost 100\% decay
1868: branching ratio. The rate as a function of
1869: $f$ is presented in Fig.~\ref{vvsign}
1870: by the dashed line.
1871: Its experimental signature is the $WH$ associate
1872: production with large missing $\etmiss$.
1873: %
1874: \\
1875: {\bf 2) $W_H^+ W_H^-$ production} \\
1876: %
1877: The event rate of $W_H^+ W_H^-\to W^+ A_H W^- A_H$ is about 5
1878: times smaller than that for $ q_{-}V_H$ production.
1879: The solid line of Fig.~\ref{vvsign} presents this OSL signature
1880: rate. Hence, it is
1881: more challenging to detect such a signal event in the pure leptonic channel.
1882: %
1883: \\
1884: {\bf 3) $Z_H Z_H $ production} \\
1885: %
1886: The event signature of $Z_H Z_H \to A_H H A_H H $ is the
1887: production of a pair of Higgs bosons with large $\etmiss$ in the
1888: event. Its production rate is about one order of magnitude smaller
1889: than the $W_H^+ W_H^-$ production rate,
1890: as indicated by the dot-dashed line in Fig.~\ref{vvsign}.
1891: On the other hand, in spite of its
1892: small production rate, this process offers an interesting
1893: production channel for Higgs boson pairs.
1894:
1895: \subsubsection{Heavy T-odd Higgs boson production}
1896:
1897: The highest heavy T-odd Higgs
1898: production rate, with its cross section around 1\,fb for $f\simeq$1~TeV,
1899: comes from the $\phi^{++}\phi^{-}$ or $\phi^{--}\phi^{+}$ production channels.
1900: For the model parameters under study, there is no allowed two-body
1901: decay mode for $\phi^{++}$ boson, due to mass
1902: constraints. Nevertheless, 3-body decay modes of $\phi^{++}$ can take
1903: place at tree level, and it is also possible to have 2-body
1904: radiative decay modes dominating the decay branching ratios of $\phi^{++}$.
1905: Hence, there will be multiple jets and
1906: leptons in such kind of signal events.
1907:
1908:
1909:
1910:
1911:
1912: \newpage
1913: \section{Conclusions}
1914:
1915: The Littlest Higgs model with T-parity
1916: (LHT)~\cite{Low:2004xc,Hubisz:2004ft,Hubisz:2005tx,Cheng:2003ju}
1917: is an attractive Little Higgs model which provides not only
1918: solution to the Little hierarchy problem but also a possible dark
1919: matter candidate \cite{Asano:2006nr}. Because of the T-parity,
1920: T-odd gauge bosons contribute to the electroweak observables at
1921: the weak scale in pairs, hence, the mass scale ($f$) of new
1922: particles predicted in this model can be as low as
1923: 500\,GeV~\cite{Hubisz:2005tx}. With the possibility of such a low
1924: mass scale, many interesting phenomenology has been studied in the
1925: literature~\cite{Hubisz:2004ft}. In order to implement T-parity in
1926: the fermion sector of the model, the heavy T-odd $SU(2)$-doublet
1927: fermions, which are T-parity partners of the SM fermion doublets,
1928: have to be introduced. A preliminary study on the phenomenology of
1929: these T-odd $SU(2)$-doublet fermions in the LHT was reported in
1930: Ref.~\cite{sasha_pheno}. In this paper, we present a detailed
1931: study of the phenomenology of the LHT with the emphasis on the
1932: role of the T-odd fermions in high energy scattering processes at
1933: the LHC.
1934:
1935: In Sec. II, we present the effective Lagrangian of the LHT studied in
1936: this paper.
1937: Some relevant Feynman rules are also summarized in Appendix A.
1938: Particular attention has been given to discussing the
1939: properties of those T-odd $SU(2)$-doublet fermions (denoted as
1940: $q_-$), including their masses and interactions to other particles
1941: predicted in the model. As shown in Eq.~(\ref{Todd_mass}), their masses are
1942: about ${\sqrt 2} \kappa f$ where $\kappa$ is the coefficient
1943: introduced in the interaction Lagrangian, cf. Eq.~(\ref{kappa}), for
1944: generating a large mass to $q_-$. (For simplicity, we have assumed
1945: a constant $\kappa$ value, independent of quark flavor and
1946: family.) While the typical cutoff scale of the effective theory is
1947: about $4 \pi f$, the mass of the T-odd $SU(2)$-doublet fermions is
1948: bounded from above due to the low energy constraint induced by the
1949: four-fermion contact interaction presented in Eq.~(\ref{T-odd-limit}).
1950: Hence, in our study
1951: the $\kappa$ value is required to be less than about 3.4 for $f$
1952: about 1\,TeV. Similar kind of constraints on the two parameters
1953: ($\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$) in the top quark sector are also
1954: discussed in Sec. II. The results are given in Eqs.~(\ref{lambda1}),
1955: (\ref{unitarity}) and (\ref{naturalness}). A detailed discussion on
1956: the $J=1$ partial-wave amplitudes in the coupled system
1957: of $(t\bar{t},~T_+\bar{T}_+,~b\bar{b},~WW,~Zh)$ states, which are
1958: relevant to the top Yukawa coupling, is presented in Appendix B.
1959: Finally, we note that the T-parity symmetry is correctly
1960: implemented in our effective Lagrangian such that the
1961: $[SU(2)\times U(1)]^2$ gauge symmetry is non-linearly realized in all
1962: sectors, including the bottom quark Yukawa interaction sector.
1963: (It differs from the model presented in
1964: Ref.~\cite{Hubisz:2004ft} in which the similar sector is not gauge
1965: invariant.)
1966:
1967: In Sec. III, we stress the importance of the T-odd $SU(2)$ doublet
1968: fermion contributions to high energy processes. As an example, we
1969: discuss the high energy behavior of $u\bar{u} \rightarrow W_H^+
1970: W_H^-$ through partial-wave analysis. To have a gauge-invariant
1971: amplitude, both types of Feynman diagrams shown in
1972: Fig.~\ref{uubar-WHWH} need to be included in order to satisfy unitarity condition
1973: in high energy collision. Furthermore, as shown in Sec. II, the
1974: mass of $q_-$ is bounded from above by low energy data in this effective theory.
1975: Therefore, the decoupling limit of the T-odd fermions is not a
1976: realistic assumption and the T-odd fermion contribution generates
1977: important correction to $u\bar{u}\rightarrow
1978: W_{H}^{+}W_{H}^{-}$ process, which has not been taken into account
1979: in the previous study~\cite{Hubisz:2004ft}.
1980:
1981: Because the mass of the T-odd $SU(2)$ doublet fermions cannot be
1982: too heavy, cf. Eq.~(\ref{T-odd-limit}), they can be copiously
1983: produced at the LHC. Therefore, in Sec. IV, we study the collider
1984: phenomenology of the LHT with emphasis on the contributions of the
1985: T-odd fermion to the production of the heavy T-parity partners
1986: (either bosons or fermions) at the LHC. Fig.~\ref{qq} shows the
1987: production cross sections of the first and second generation heavy
1988: T-odd quarks. As shown, their cross sections are quite sizable at
1989: the LHC. In Fig.~\ref{q3q3}, we show the similar plot for the third
1990: generation heavy T-odd and T-even quarks. As discussed in Sec. II, the LHT
1991: contains additional T-odd and T-even heavy quarks which are the
1992: T-parity partners of top quark. The T-even partner ($T_+$) of top
1993: quark can be produced singly or in pairs.
1994: We
1995: also show in Fig.~\ref{vp} the associate production cross section of
1996: T-odd fermions and T-odd gauge bosons. The associate production
1997: cross sections of $T_+$ and weak gauge bosons are also shown in
1998: the same figure. In Fig.~\ref{vv}, we show the production cross sections
1999: of heavy T-odd gauge boson pairs. As an illustration, the
2000: dependence of the $pp\to W_H^{+} W_H^{-}$ production on the mass
2001: of T-odd fermion is given in Fig.~\ref{whwhkappa}. For completeness, we also
2002: show the production rate of heavy T-odd Higgs bosons in Fig.~\ref{phiphi}, though
2003: their production rates are generally small.
2004:
2005: Before we discuss the probable experimental signatures predicted
2006: by this model at the LHC, we presented typical decay branching
2007: channels of the T-parity partners in Table~\ref{table} and Fig.~\ref{tpdecay}. It
2008: turns out that the result of Table~\ref{table} is not very sensitive to the
2009: choice of model parameters such as $f$, $\lambda_1$, $s_\alpha$ and $M_H$
2010: for T-odd fermions.
2011: Similarly, Fig.~\ref{tpdecay} also presents
2012: a typical pattern of branching ratios
2013: for T-even heavy top-quark partner $T_+$,
2014: though this pattern depends on the choice of model parameters
2015: such as $s_\alpha$ and $M_H$.
2016:
2017: Combining the
2018: information on the production cross section of heavy particles and
2019: their decay branching ratios into particular decay channels, one
2020: can easily calculate production rates of events with certain
2021: experimental signature. Some of those results are shown in the
2022: remaining figures of the paper.
2023:
2024: We concluded in Sec.~IV that the like-sign di-lepton signature of
2025: the 1st and 2nd generation heavy T-odd quark pair production is the
2026: most useful channel to discover these new have quarks at the LHC.
2027: Because the heavy T-odd gauge boson $Z_H$ almost always decays
2028: into a pair of Higgs boson $H$ and T-odd photon $A_H$, the
2029: production processes with $Z_H$ in the final state provide a new
2030: production mechanism for single-Higgs or Higgs-pair production.
2031: Their rates are presented in Figs.~\ref{vqsign}~and~\ref{vvsign}, respectively.
2032:
2033: We also provide for the first time
2034: the complete CalcHEP LHT model files
2035: including T-odd $SU(2)$ doublet fermions,
2036: which is available at
2037: \verb|http://hep.pa.msu.edu/LHT/|.
2038:
2039: \acknowledgments
2040: We thank Qing-Hong Cao, Jay Hubisz,
2041: Alexander Pukhov and Riccardo Rattazzi for useful
2042: discussions. C.P.Y. and K.T. thank the National Center for
2043: Theoretical Sciences in Taiwan for its hospitality, where part of
2044: the work was done. This work was supported in part by the US
2045: National Science Foundation under award PHY-0555545.
2046: %
2047: \vspace{1in}
2048:
2049: {\bf Note added:} While finalizing the write-up of this work,
2050: we are aware of the paper by A.~Freitas and
2051: D.~Wyler~\cite{Freitas:2006vy} who studied the phenomenology
2052: of T-odd fermion in the LHT.
2053:
2054: \appendix
2055: \section{Feynman rules}
2056: Most of the Feynman rules for the Littlest Higgs model with T-parity have
2057: been presented in Ref.~\cite{Hubisz:2004ft} and the references
2058: therein except for T-odd $SU(2)$ doublet fermions. We agree with
2059: their results in the hep-ph arXiv version (v3) of
2060: Ref.~\cite{Hubisz:2004ft} after identifying $T_+=-t'_+$ and $T_-=-t'_-$
2061: (their $t'_\pm$ fields correspond to our $T_\pm$). In this
2062: appendix, we list a few Feynman rules relevant to our analysis,
2063: especially those related to T-odd fermions.
2064: They are listed in Tables~\ref{feynman-rules1}--\ref{feynman-rules3} below.
2065:
2066: We also provide for the first time the complete CalcHEP LHT
2067: model files including T-odd $SU(2)$ doublet fermions which
2068: is available at
2069: \verb|http://hep.pa.msu.edu/LHT/|.
2070:
2071:
2072:
2073: In Tables IV, V and VI, we have defined the following coefficients.
2074: $s_H~(=\sin\theta_H)$ describes the degree
2075: of mixing between heavy neutral gauge bosons with
2076: $s_H\simeq \frac{gg'}{g^2-g^{'2}/5}\frac{v_{SM}^2}{4f^2}$
2077: and $c_H=\cos\theta_H$.
2078: Also,
2079: $s_L \simeq s_\alpha^2 \frac{v_{SM}}{f}$ and
2080: $c_L =\sqrt{1-s_L^2}$. In addition,
2081: $P_{L}=\frac{1-\gamma_{5}}{2}$ and $P_{R}\
2082: =\frac{1+\gamma_{5}}{2}$
2083: are the left-handed and right-handed projection operators, respectively.
2084: We note that in those tables we have suppressed the CKM matrix element
2085: dependence. For example, from Table VI, we can read out the coupling of
2086: $W^+_\mu \bar{t} b$ to be $V_{tb} (i\frac{g}{\sqrt{2}}c_L \gamma_\mu
2087: P_L)$, after restoring the CKM matrix element $V_{tb}$ derived from the
2088: interaction Lagrangian.
2089: In the above expression, the product of $V_{tb} c_L$, which is defined
2090: as $V_{tb}^{eff}$, should be identified with the CKM matrix element
2091: determined from the low energy processes (or from measuring the SM
2092: single-top direct production rate at the Tevatron or the LHC~\cite{Yuan:1989tc,single_top_t}).
2093: Thus, from Table VI, we read out the coupling of
2094: $W^+ \bar{T}_+ b$
2095: to be
2096: $V_{tb} (i\frac{g}{\sqrt{2}}s_L\gamma_\mu P_L)$,
2097: after restoring the CKM matrix element dependence, which can be
2098: rewritten as
2099: $V_{tb}^{eff} (i\frac{g}{\sqrt{2}}{\frac{s_L}{c_L}}\gamma_\mu P_L)$.
2100: The coefficient of $W^+\bar{T}_+ b$ coupling $V_{tb}^{eff}{\frac{s_L}{c_L}}$
2101: is approximately equal to $V_{tb}^{eff}s_L$ up to $v_{SM}^2/f^2$ corrections,
2102: for $s_L\propto v_{SM}/f$, cf. Eq.~(\ref{s_LR}).
2103:
2104:
2105:
2106:
2107:
2108:
2109: \begin{table}[h]
2110: \begin{center}
2111: \begin{tabular}{|c|c||c|c|}
2112: \hline
2113: Interaction & Feynman rule & Interaction & Feynman rule\\
2114: \hline \hline
2115: $W_{H_\mu}^+ \bar{u} d_-$ & $i\frac{g}{\sqrt{2}}\gamma_\mu P_L$ & $W_{H_\mu}^- \bar{d} u_-$ & $i\frac{g}{\sqrt{2}}\gamma_\mu P_L$\\
2116: $Z_{H_\mu} \bar{u} u_-$ & $i(\frac{g c_H}{2}-\frac{g' s_H}{10}) \gamma_\mu P_L$ &
2117: $Z_{H_\mu} \bar{d} d_-$ & $i(-\frac{g c_H}{2}-\frac{g' s_H}{10}) \gamma_\mu P_L$ \\
2118: $A_{H_\mu} \bar{u} u_-$ & $i(-\frac{g s_H}{2}-\frac{g' c_H}{10}) \gamma_\mu P_L$ &
2119: $A_{H_\mu} \bar{d} d_-$ & $i(\frac{g s_H}{2}-\frac{g' c_H}{10}) \gamma_\mu P_L$ \\
2120: \hline
2121: \end{tabular}
2122: \caption{Feynman rules for the 1st and 2nd
2123: generation T-odd fermion interaction with heavy gauge boson and
2124: SM fermion.\label{feynman-rules1}}
2125: \end{center}
2126: \end{table}
2127:
2128: \begin{table}[h]
2129: \begin{center}
2130: \begin{tabular}{|c|c||c|c|}
2131: \hline
2132: Interaction & Feynman rule & Interaction & Feynman rule\\
2133: \hline \hline
2134: $W_{H_\mu}^+ \bar{t} b_-$ & $i\frac{gc_L}{\sqrt{2}}\gamma_\mu P_L$ & $W_{H_\mu}^- \bar{b} t_-$ & $i\frac{g}{\sqrt{2}}\gamma_\mu P_L$\\
2135: $W_{H_\mu}^+ \bar{T}_+ b_-$ & $i\frac{g s_L}{\sqrt{2}}\gamma_\mu P_L$ & & \\
2136: $Z_{H_\mu} \bar{t} t_-$ & $i(\frac{g c_H}{2}-\frac{g' s_H}{10})c_L \gamma_\mu P_L$ &
2137: $Z_{H_\mu} \bar{b} b_-$ & $i(-\frac{g c_H}{2}-\frac{g' s_H}{10}) \gamma_\mu P_L$ \\
2138: %
2139: $Z_{H_\mu} \bar{T}_+ t_-$ & $i(\frac{g c_H}{2}-\frac{g' s_H}{10})s_L \gamma_\mu P_L$ &
2140: $Z_{H_\mu} \bar{t} T_-$ & $-i\frac{2}{5}g' s_H \gamma_\mu (s_L P_L +s_R P_R)$ \\
2141: %
2142: $Z_{H_\mu} \bar{T}_+ T_-$ & $i\frac{2}{5}g's_H \gamma_\mu (c_L P_L +c_R P_R)$& & \\
2143: %
2144: $A_{H_\mu} \bar{t} t_-$ & $i(-\frac{g s_H}{2}-\frac{g' c_H}{10})c_L \gamma_\mu P_L$ &
2145: $A_{H_\mu} \bar{b} b_-$ & $i(\frac{g s_H}{2}-\frac{g' c_H}{10}) \gamma_\mu P_L$ \\
2146: %
2147: $A_{H_\mu} \bar{T}_+ t_-$ & $i(-\frac{g s_H}{2}-\frac{g' c_H}{10})s_L \gamma_\mu P_L$ &
2148: $A_{H_\mu} \bar{t} T_-$ & $-i\frac{2}{5} g' c_H\gamma_\mu (s_L P_L+s_R P_R)$ \\
2149: %
2150: $A_{H_\mu} \bar{T}_+ T_-$ & $i\frac{2}{5} g' c_H\gamma_\mu (c_L P_L+c_R P_R)$ & &\\
2151: \hline
2152: \end{tabular}
2153: \caption{Feynman rules for the 3rd generation
2154: T-odd fermion interaction with heavy gauge boson and
2155: SM fermion.\label{feynman-rules2}}
2156: \end{center}
2157: \end{table}
2158:
2159:
2160: \begin{table}[h]
2161: \begin{center}
2162: \begin{tabular}{|c|c||c|c|}
2163: \hline
2164: Interaction & Feynman rule & Interaction & Feynman rule\\
2165: \hline \hline
2166: $W^+_\mu \bar{t} b$ & $i\frac{g}{\sqrt{2}}c_L \gamma_\mu P_L$ & $W^+ \bar{T}_+ b$ & $i\frac{g}{\sqrt{2}}s_L\gamma_\mu P_L$\\
2167: $Z_\mu \bar{t} t$ & $i\frac{g}{c_W}\gamma_\mu \left\{(\frac{1}{2}c_L^2-\frac{2}{3}s_W^2) P_L -\frac{2}{3}s_W^2 P_R\right\}$
2168: & $Z_\mu \bar{t} T_+$ & $i\frac{g}{c_W}\frac{s_L c_L}{2} \gamma_\mu P_L$\\
2169: $Z_\mu \bar{T}_+ T_+$ & $i\frac{g}{c_W}\gamma_\mu \left\{(\frac{1}{2}s_L^2-\frac{2}{3}s_W^2) P_L -\frac{2}{3}s_W^2 P_R\right\}$ & & \\
2170: \hline
2171: \end{tabular}
2172: \caption{Feynman rules for the SM gauge interaction with top sector.\label{feynman-rules3}}
2173: \end{center}
2174: \end{table}
2175:
2176: \section{Unitarity bound from $J=1$ partial wave amplitudes in the coupled system of
2177: ($t\bar{t}$, $T_+\bar{T}_+$, $b\bar{b}$, $WW$, $Zh$) states}
2178:
2179: The amplitudes for $t\bar{t}\rightarrow t\bar{t}$, $T_+\bar{T}_+$, $b\bar{b}$, $WW$, and $Zh$ processes
2180: and their inverse processes
2181: contribute to $J=1$ partial wave amplitude matrix in this coupled system.
2182: The $J=1$ partial wave amplitudes are given by
2183: \begin{eqnarray}
2184: a_{\mu\mu'}^1 &=& \frac{1}{32\pi}\int_{-1}^1 d(\cos\theta)d^1_{\mu\mu'}(\theta)T_{\mu\mu'}.
2185: \end{eqnarray}
2186: Here $d_{\mu\mu'}^1(\theta)$ is the well-known Wigner d-function. For fermions, $\mu$ and
2187: $\mu'$ are defined by $\mu=(\lambda-\bar{\lambda})/2$ and $\mu'=(\lambda'-\bar{\lambda}')/2$,
2188: where $\lambda$'s are the helicities of the fermions: $\lambda~(\bar{\lambda})$ for the initial
2189: state fermion (anti-fermion) and $\lambda'~(\bar{\lambda}')$ for the final state fermion
2190: (anti-fermion), and for bosons, $\mu=0$. $T_{\mu\mu'}$ is a helicity amplitude with $\mu$ and $\mu'$.
2191:
2192: Writing the channels in the order $t_+\bar{t}_-$, $(T_+)_+(\bar{T_+})_-$, $W^+W^-$, $hZ$,
2193: $t_-\bar{t}_+$ and $b_-\bar{b}_+$, the $J=1$ partial wave amplitude matrix $a^1$ is given by
2194: \begin{equation}
2195: a^1 = \frac{M_t^2}{16\pi v_{SM}} \left(
2196: \begin{array}{cccccc}
2197: 0 & 0 & -\sqrt{2} & -i\sqrt{2} & - 1 & +1\\
2198: 0 & 0 & -\sqrt{2}R^2 & -i\sqrt{2}R^2 & R^2 & R^2\\
2199: -\sqrt{2} & -\sqrt{2}R^2 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \sqrt{2}(1+R^2)\\
2200: i\sqrt{2} & i\sqrt{2}R^2 & 0 & 0 & i\sqrt{2}(1+R^2) & 0\\
2201: -1 & R^2 & 0 & -i\sqrt{2}(1+R^2) & 0 & 0\\
2202: 1 & R^2 & \sqrt{2}(1+R^2) & 0 & 0 & 0\\
2203: \end{array}
2204: \right),
2205: \label{J1_amp}
2206: \end{equation}
2207: where $R=\lambda_1/\lambda_2$. Here we have assumed that the center-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s}$ is much larger
2208: than masses of particles considered here, and only couplings in top sector are relevant, and gauge couplings
2209: and all other Yukawa couplings are taken to be zero.
2210: We have not shown explicitly the color indices in Eq.~(\ref{J1_amp}), however all color neutral channels should
2211: be taken into account. Thus the $J=1$ partial wave amplitude matrix in this system is $14\times 14$.
2212: Note that the parameter $R$ is the only unknown parameter in Eq.~(\ref{J1_amp}),
2213: and the absolute value of the largest eigenvalue of the $J=1$ partial wave amplitude matrix
2214: increases as $R$ gets larger. The requirement that the absolute value of the largest eigenvalue
2215: be less than a half $(|a^1_{\rm max}|<1/2)$ yields the upper bound on the parameter R as
2216: \begin{eqnarray}
2217: R<3.3,
2218: \end{eqnarray}
2219: for $M_t=175$ GeV.
2220: In terms of $s_\alpha$, this bound corresponds to
2221: \begin{eqnarray}
2222: s_\alpha<0.96,
2223: \end{eqnarray}
2224: since $R=s_\alpha/c_\alpha$. Using the top-quark mass constraint, cf. Eq.~(\ref{lambda1}), this bound
2225: generates a bound on $\lambda_1$ as
2226: \begin{eqnarray}
2227: \lambda_1=\frac{M_t}{v_{SM}\sqrt{1-s_\alpha^2}}<2.5,
2228: \end{eqnarray}
2229: for $M_t=175$ GeV.
2230:
2231:
2232:
2233: \begin{thebibliography}{xx}
2234: %
2235: %\bibliography{bib}
2236: %\bibliographystyle{unsrt}
2237: %\cite{Barbieri:2000gf}
2238: \bibitem{Barbieri:2000gf}
2239: R.~Barbieri and A.~Strumia,
2240: %``The 'LEP paradox',''
2241: arXiv:hep-ph/0007265.
2242: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0007265;%%
2243:
2244:
2245: %\cite{Schmaltz:2005ky}
2246: %\bibitem{Schmaltz:2005ky}
2247: %For example, see
2248: % M.~Schmaltz and D.~Tucker-Smith,
2249: %``Little Higgs review,''
2250: % arXiv:hep-ph/0502182.
2251: % %%CITATION
2252: %
2253: \bibitem{LittleHiggs}
2254: %\cite{Arkani-Hamed:2001nc}
2255: %\bibitem{Arkani-Hamed:2001nc}
2256: N.~Arkani-Hamed, A.~G.~Cohen and H.~Georgi,
2257: ``Electroweak symmetry breaking from dimensional deconstruction,''
2258: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 513}, 232 (2001)
2259: [arXiv:hep-ph/0105239].
2260: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0105239;%%
2261: %
2262: For reviews, see, for example,
2263: %\cite{Schmaltz:2005ky}
2264: %\bibitem{Schmaltz:2005ky}
2265: M.~Schmaltz and D.~Tucker-Smith,
2266: ``Little Higgs review,''
2267: arXiv:hep-ph/0502182;
2268: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0502182;%%
2269: %
2270: %\cite{Perelstein:2005ka}
2271: %\bibitem{Perelstein:2005ka}
2272: M.~Perelstein,
2273: ``Little Higgs models and their phenomenology,''
2274: arXiv:hep-ph/0512128;
2275: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0512128;%%
2276: %
2277: and references therein.
2278: %
2279: %\cite{Arkani-Hamed:2002qy}
2280: \bibitem{Arkani-Hamed:2002qy}
2281: N.~Arkani-Hamed, A.~G.~Cohen, E.~Katz and A.~E.~Nelson,
2282: ``The Littlest Higgs,''
2283: JHEP {\bf 0207}, 034 (2002)
2284: [arXiv:hep-ph/0206021].
2285: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0206021;%%
2286:
2287: %%%%%%%%Electroweak Constrains on LH%%%%%%%%%
2288: \bibitem{EWC}
2289: %\bibitem{Csaki:2002qg}
2290: C.~Csaki, J.~Hubisz, G.~D.~Kribs, P.~Meade and J.~Terning,
2291: ``Big corrections from a little Higgs,''
2292: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67}, 115002 (2003)
2293: [arXiv:hep-ph/0211124].
2294: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0211124;%%
2295: %\cite{Csaki:2003si}
2296: %\cite{Hewett:2002px}
2297: %\bibitem{Hewett:2002px}
2298: J.~L.~Hewett, F.~J.~Petriello and T.~G.~Rizzo,
2299: ``Constraining the littlest Higgs,''
2300: JHEP {\bf 0310}, 062 (2003)
2301: [arXiv:hep-ph/0211218].
2302: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0211218;%%
2303: %\bibitem{Csaki:2003si}
2304: C.~Csaki, J.~Hubisz, G.~D.~Kribs, P.~Meade and J.~Terning,
2305: ``Variations of little Higgs models and their electroweak constraints,''
2306: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 68}, 035009 (2003)
2307: [arXiv:hep-ph/0303236].
2308: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0303236;%%
2309: %\cite{Chen:2003fm}
2310: %\bibitem{Chen:2003fm}
2311: M.~C.~Chen and S.~Dawson,
2312: ``One-loop radiative corrections to the rho parameter in the littlest Higgs
2313: model,''
2314: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 70}, 015003 (2004)
2315: [arXiv:hep-ph/0311032].
2316: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0311032;%%
2317: %\cite{Kilian:2003xt}
2318: %\bibitem{Kilian:2003xt}
2319: W.~Kilian and J.~Reuter,
2320: %``The low-energy structure of little Higgs models,''
2321: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 70}, 015004 (2004)
2322: [arXiv:hep-ph/0311095].
2323: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0311095;%%
2324: %\cite{Han:2004az}
2325: %\bibitem{Han:2004az}
2326: Z.~Han and W.~Skiba,
2327: ``Effective theory analysis of precision electroweak data,''
2328: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 71}, 075009 (2005)
2329: [arXiv:hep-ph/0412166].
2330: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0412166;%%
2331: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2332: %\cite{Low:2004xc}
2333: \bibitem{Low:2004xc}
2334: I.~Low,
2335: ``T parity and the littlest Higgs,''
2336: JHEP {\bf 0410}, 067 (2004)
2337: [arXiv:hep-ph/0409025].
2338: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0409025;%%
2339:
2340: %\cite{Hubisz:2004ft}
2341: \bibitem{Hubisz:2004ft}
2342: J.~Hubisz and P.~Meade,
2343: ``Phenomenology of the littlest Higgs with T-parity,''
2344: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 71}, 035016 (2005)
2345: [arXiv:hep-ph/0411264].
2346: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0411264;%%
2347:
2348: %\cite{Hubisz:2005tx}
2349: \bibitem{Hubisz:2005tx}
2350: J.~Hubisz, P.~Meade, A.~Noble and M.~Perelstein,
2351: ``Electroweak precision constraints on the littlest Higgs model with T
2352: %parity,''
2353: JHEP {\bf 0601}, 135 (2006)
2354: [arXiv:hep-ph/0506042].
2355: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0506042;%%
2356:
2357: %\cite{Cheng:2003ju}
2358: \bibitem{Cheng:2003ju}
2359: H.~C.~Cheng and I.~Low,
2360: ``TeV symmetry and the Little hierarchy problem,''
2361: JHEP {\bf 0309}, 051 (2003)
2362: [arXiv:hep-ph/0308199];
2363: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0308199;%%
2364: %
2365: %\cite{Cheng:2004yc}
2366: %\bibitem{Cheng:2004yc}
2367: % H.~C.~Cheng and I.~Low,
2368: ``Little hierarchy, Little Higgses, and a Little symmetry,''
2369: JHEP {\bf 0408}, 061 (2004)
2370: [arXiv:hep-ph/0405243].
2371: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0405243;%%
2372: %%%%%%%%%%%%% Dark Matter %%%%%%%%%
2373: %\cite{Asano:2006nr}
2374:
2375:
2376:
2377: \bibitem{Asano:2006nr}
2378: M.~Asano, S.~Matsumoto, N.~Okada and Y.~Okada,
2379: ``Cosmic positron signature from dark matter in the littlest Higgs model
2380: with T-parity,''
2381: arXiv:hep-ph/0602157.
2382: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0602157;%%%\cite{Birkedal:2006fz}
2383: %\bibitem{Birkedal:2006fz}
2384: A.~Birkedal, A.~Noble, M.~Perelstein and A.~Spray,
2385: ``Little Higgs dark matter,''
2386: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 74}, 035002 (2006)
2387: [arXiv:hep-ph/0603077].
2388: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0603077;%%
2389:
2390: \bibitem{sasha_pheno}
2391: A.~Belyaev, C.-R.~Chen, K.~Tobe and C.-P.~Yuan,
2392: Talk at Monte Carlo Tools for Beyond the Standard Model Physics (March 2006, Fermilab)
2393: given by A.~Belyaev, http://theory.fnal.gov/mc4bsm/agenda.html;
2394: talk at Osaka university (May 2006, Osaka) given by C.-P.~Yuan,
2395: http://www-het.phys.sci.osaka-u.ac.jp/seminar/seminar/seminar.html;
2396: talk at 2006 Summer Institute on Collider Phenomenology (June 2006, National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan)
2397: given by K.~Tobe,
2398: http://charm.phys.nthu.edu.tw/~hep/summer2006/
2399: and talk at ICHEP'06 (July 2006, Moscow) given by A.~Belyaev,
2400: http://ichep06.jinr.ru/reports/116$\_$11s1$\_$10p20$\_$belyaev.pdf
2401:
2402: %\cite{Chen:2006ie}
2403: \bibitem{Chen:2006ie}
2404: C.~S.~Chen, K.~Cheung and T.~C.~Yuan,
2405: ``Novel collider signature for little Higgs dark matter models,''
2406: arXiv:hep-ph/0605314.
2407: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0605314;%%
2408: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2409:
2410: %\cite{Han:2003wu}
2411: \bibitem{Han:2003wu}
2412: T.~Han, H.~E.~Logan, B.~McElrath and L.~T.~Wang,
2413: ``Phenomenology of the little Higgs model,''
2414: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67}, 095004 (2003)
2415: [arXiv:hep-ph/0301040].
2416: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0301040;%%
2417:
2418: %\cite{Hubisz:2005bd}
2419: \bibitem{Hubisz:2005bd}
2420: J.~Hubisz, S.~J.~Lee and G.~Paz,
2421: ``The flavor of a little Higgs with T-parity,''
2422: arXiv:hep-ph/0512169;
2423: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0512169;%%
2424: %\cite{Blanke:2006sb}
2425: %\bibitem{Blanke:2006sb}
2426: M.~Blanke, A.~J.~Buras, A.~Poschenrieder, C.~Tarantino, S.~Uhlig and A.~Weiler,
2427: ``Particle antiparticle mixing, $\epsilon_K$, $\Delta\Gamma_q$, $A_{SL}^q$,
2428: $A_{CP}(B/d\rightarrow \psi K_S)$, $A_{CP}(B_s \rightarrow \psi \phi)$ and $B \rightarrow X_{s,d} \gamma$
2429: in the littlest Higgs model with T-parity,''
2430: arXiv:hep-ph/0605214.
2431: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0605214;%%
2432:
2433: %%%%%
2434: %\cite{Chanowitz:1978uj}
2435: \bibitem{Chanowitz:1978uj}
2436: M.~S.~Chanowitz, M.~A.~Furman and I.~Hinchliffe,
2437: ``Weak Interactions Of Ultraheavy Fermions,''
2438: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 78}, 285 (1978);
2439: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B78,285;%%
2440: %\cite{Chanowitz:1978mv}
2441: %\bibitem{Chanowitz:1978mv}
2442: % M.~S.~Chanowitz, M.~A.~Furman and I.~Hinchliffe,
2443: ``Weak Interactions Of Ultraheavy Fermions. 2,''
2444: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 153}, 402 (1979).
2445: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B153,402;%%
2446:
2447: \bibitem{Hubisz} J.~Hubisz, unpublished work.
2448:
2449: %\cite{Chen:2006cs}
2450: \bibitem{Chen:2006cs}
2451: C.~R.~Chen, K.~Tobe and C.-P.~Yuan,
2452: ``Higgs boson production and decay in little Higgs models with T-parity,''
2453: arXiv:hep-ph/0602211.
2454: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0602211;%%
2455:
2456:
2457: %%%Little Higgs collider phenomenology %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2458: %\cite{Hewett:2002px}
2459: \bibitem{Hewett:2002px}
2460: J.~L.~Hewett, F.~J.~Petriello and T.~G.~Rizzo,
2461: ``Constraining the littlest Higgs. ((U)),''
2462: JHEP {\bf 0310}, 062 (2003)
2463: [arXiv:hep-ph/0211218].
2464: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0211218;%%
2465:
2466: %\cite{Burdman:2002ns}
2467: \bibitem{Burdman:2002ns}
2468: G.~Burdman, M.~Perelstein and A.~Pierce,
2469: ``Collider tests of the little Higgs model,''
2470: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 90}, 241802 (2003)
2471: [Erratum-ibid.\ {\bf 92}, 049903 (2004)]
2472: [arXiv:hep-ph/0212228].
2473: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0212228;%%
2474:
2475: %\cite{Perelstein:2003wd}
2476: \bibitem{Perelstein:2003wd}
2477: M.~Perelstein, M.~E.~Peskin and A.~Pierce,
2478: ``Top quarks and electroweak symmetry breaking in little Higgs models,''
2479: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 69}, 075002 (2004)
2480: [arXiv:hep-ph/0310039].
2481: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0310039;%%
2482:
2483: %\cite{Han:2005ru}
2484: \bibitem{Han:2005ru}
2485: T.~Han, H.~E.~Logan and L.~T.~Wang,
2486: ``Smoking-gun signatures of little Higgs models,''
2487: JHEP {\bf 0601}, 099 (2006)
2488: [arXiv:hep-ph/0506313].
2489: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0506313;%%
2490:
2491: %\cite{Cheng:2005as}
2492: \bibitem{Cheng:2005as}
2493: H.~C.~Cheng, I.~Low and L.~T.~Wang,
2494: ``Top partners in little Higgs theories with T-parity,''
2495: arXiv:hep-ph/0510225.
2496: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0510225;%%
2497:
2498: %\cite{Berger:2005ht}
2499: \bibitem{Berger:2005ht}
2500: C.~F.~Berger, M.~Perelstein and F.~Petriello,
2501: ``Top quark properties in little Higgs models,''
2502: arXiv:hep-ph/0512053.
2503: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0512053;%%
2504:
2505: %\cite{Meade:2006dw}
2506: \bibitem{Meade:2006dw}
2507: P.~Meade and M.~Reece,
2508: ``Top partners at the LHC: Spin and mass measurement,''
2509: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 74}, 015010 (2006)
2510: [arXiv:hep-ph/0601124].
2511: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0601124;%%
2512:
2513: %\cite{Pumplin:2002vw}
2514: \bibitem{Pumplin:2002vw}
2515: J.~Pumplin, D.~R.~Stump, J.~Huston, H.~L.~Lai, P.~Nadolsky and W.~K.~Tung,
2516: ``New generation of parton distributions with uncertainties from global QCD
2517: %analysis,''
2518: JHEP {\bf 0207}, 012 (2002)
2519: [arXiv:hep-ph/0201195].
2520: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0201195;%%
2521:
2522: %
2523: %\cite{Pukhov:2004ca}
2524: \bibitem{Pukhov:2004ca}
2525: A.~Pukhov,
2526: ``CalcHEP 3.2: MSSM, structure functions, event generation, batchs, and
2527: %generation of matrix elements for other packages,''
2528: arXiv:hep-ph/0412191.
2529: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0412191;%%
2530:
2531: %\cite{Semenov:1998eb}
2532: \bibitem{Semenov:1998eb}
2533: A.~Semenov,
2534: ``LanHEP: A package for automatic generation of Feynman rules from the
2535: %Lagrangian,''
2536: Comput.\ Phys.\ Commun.\ {\bf 115} (1998) 124.
2537: %%CITATION = CPHCB,115,124;%%
2538: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SM single top production (T-channel) %%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2539: \bibitem{Yuan:1989tc}
2540: C.-P.~Yuan,
2541: %``A NEW METHOD TO DETECT A HEAVY TOP QUARK AT THE TEVATRON,''
2542: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 41}, 42 (1990).
2543: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D41,42;%%
2544:
2545:
2546: \bibitem{single_top_t}
2547: %\cite{Dawson:1984gx}
2548: %\bibitem{Dawson:1984gx}
2549: S.~Dawson,
2550: ``The Effective W Approximation,''
2551: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 249}, 42 (1985);
2552: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B249,42;%%
2553: %\cite{Willenbrock:1986cr}
2554: %\bibitem{Willenbrock:1986cr}
2555: S.~S.~D.~Willenbrock and D.~A.~Dicus,
2556: ``Production Of Heavy Quarks From W Gluon Fusion,''
2557: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 34}, 155 (1986);
2558: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D34,155;%%
2559: %
2560: %\cite{Ellis:1992yw}
2561: %\bibitem{Ellis:1992yw}
2562: R.~K.~Ellis and S.~J.~Parke,
2563: ``Top quark production by W gluon fusion,''
2564: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 46}, 3785 (1992);
2565: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D46,3785;%%
2566: %
2567: %\cite{Carlson:1993dt}
2568: %\bibitem{Carlson:1993dt}
2569: D.~O.~Carlson and C.-P.~Yuan,
2570: ``Studying the top quark via the W - gluon fusion process,''
2571: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 306}, 386 (1993);
2572: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B306,386;%%
2573: %
2574: %\cite{Bordes:1994ki}
2575: %\bibitem{Bordes:1994ki}
2576: G.~Bordes and B.~van Eijk,
2577: ``Calculating QCD corrections to single top production in hadronic
2578: %interactions,''
2579: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 435}, 23 (1995);
2580: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B435,23;%%
2581: %
2582: %\cite{Heinson:1996zm}
2583: %\bibitem{Heinson:1996zm}
2584: A.~P.~Heinson, A.~S.~Belyaev and E.~E.~Boos,
2585: ``Single top quarks at the Fermilab Tevatron,''
2586: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 56}, 3114 (1997)
2587: [arXiv:hep-ph/9612424];
2588: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9612424;%%
2589: %
2590: %\cite{Stelzer:1997ns}
2591: %\bibitem{Stelzer:1997ns}
2592: T.~Stelzer, Z.~Sullivan and S.~Willenbrock,
2593: ``Single-top-quark production via W-gluon fusion at next-to-leading order,''
2594: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 56}, 5919 (1997)
2595: [arXiv:hep-ph/9705398];
2596: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9705398;%%
2597: %
2598: %\cite{Cao:2005pq}
2599: %\bibitem{Cao:2005pq}
2600: Q.~H.~Cao, R.~Schwienhorst, J.~A.~Benitez, R.~Brock and C.-P.~Yuan,
2601: ``Next-to-leading order corrections to single top quark production and decay
2602: at the Tevatron. II: t-channel process,''
2603: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 72}, 094027 (2005)
2604: [arXiv:hep-ph/0504230].
2605: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0504230;%%
2606:
2607: %\cite{Bagger:1993zf}
2608: \bibitem{Bagger:1993zf}
2609: J.~Bagger {\it et al.},
2610: ``The Strongly interacting W W system: Gold plated modes,''
2611: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 49}, 1246 (1994)
2612: [arXiv:hep-ph/9306256];
2613: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9306256;%%
2614: %\cite{Bagger:1995mk}
2615: %\bibitem{Bagger:1995mk}
2616: J.~Bagger {\it et al.},
2617: ``LHC analysis of the strongly interacting W W system: Gold plated modes,''
2618: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 52}, 3878 (1995)
2619: [arXiv:hep-ph/9504426].
2620: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9504426;%%
2621:
2622:
2623:
2624: %AB:
2625: \bibitem{top-observ}
2626: S.~Abachi {\it et al.} [D0 Collaboration],
2627: %``Observation of the top quark,''
2628: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 74}, 2632 (1995)
2629: [arXiv:hep-ex/9503003];
2630: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 9503003;%%
2631: %\cite{Abe:1995hr
2632: F.~Abe {\it et al.} [CDF Collaboration],
2633: %``Observation of top quark production in $\bar{p}p$ collisions,''
2634: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 74}, 2626 (1995)
2635: [arXiv:hep-ex/9503002].
2636: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 9503002;%%
2637:
2638: %\cite{Yuan:1989tc}
2639:
2640:
2641:
2642:
2643: %\cite{Freitas:2006vy}
2644: \bibitem{Freitas:2006vy}
2645: A.~Freitas and D.~Wyler,
2646: ``Phenomenology of mirror fermions in the littlest Higgs model with
2647: T-parity,''
2648: arXiv:hep-ph/0609103.
2649: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0609103;%%
2650: \end{thebibliography}
2651: \end{document}
2652: