1: \def\CTeXPreproc{Created by ctex v0.2.4, don't edit!}%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2: %\documentstyle[aps,preprint,epsfig]{revtex}
3: \documentclass[a4paper,12pt]{article}
4: \usepackage{epsfig}
5: %\usepackage[dvips]{graphicx}
6: \usepackage[dvips,usenames]{color}
7: %\usepackage{axodraw}
8: \usepackage{graphicx}
9:
10: \renewcommand{\textfraction}{0.0}
11: \renewcommand{\topfraction}{1.0}
12: \renewcommand{\bottomfraction}{1.0}
13: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.5}
14:
15: \newlength{\dinwidth}
16: \newlength{\dinmargin}
17: \setlength{\dinwidth}{21.0cm} \textheight23.2cm \textwidth17.0cm
18: \setlength{\dinmargin}{\dinwidth}
19: \addtolength{\dinmargin}{-\textwidth}
20: \setlength{\dinmargin}{0.5\dinmargin} \oddsidemargin -1.0in
21: \addtolength{\oddsidemargin}{\dinmargin}
22: \setlength{\evensidemargin}{\oddsidemargin}
23: \setlength{\marginparwidth}{0.9\dinmargin} \marginparsep 8pt
24: \setlength{\unitlength}{1cm} \marginparpush 5pt \topmargin -5pt
25: \headheight 12pt
26: \newcommand{\Correct}[1]{{\color{Red}\fbox{\color{Black}#1}}}
27: \newcommand{\spur}[1]{\not\! #1 \,}
28: %\date{}
29:
30: \begin{document}
31: \title{Higgs boson pair production process $e^+e^-\rightarrow ZHH$ in the littlest Higgs
32: model at the ILC}
33: \bigskip
34: \author{Yaobei Liu$^{a}$, Linlin Du$^{b}$, Xuelei Wang$^{b}$ \\
35: {\small a: Henan Institute of Science and Technology, Xinxiang
36: 453003, P.R.China}
37: \thanks{E-mail:hnxxlyb2000@sina.com}\\
38: {\small b: College of Physics and Information
39: Engineering,}\\
40: \small{Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, P.R.China}
41: \thanks{This work is supported in part by the National
42: Natural Science
43: Foundation of China(Grant No.10375017 and 10575029) and a grant from Henan Institute
44: of Science and Technology(06040) .}\\
45: }
46: \maketitle
47: %\date{today}
48: \begin{abstract}
49: \indent In this paper, we calculate the contribution of the
50: littlest Higgs(LH) model to the process $e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow
51: ZHH$ at the future high energy $e^{+}e^{-}$ collider($ILC$). The
52: results show that, within the parameter spaces preferred by the
53: electroweak precision, the deviation of the total cross sections
54: from its $SM$ value varies from a few percent to tens percent. The
55: correction of the LH model to the process might be detected at the
56: future $ILC$ experiments in the favorable parameter space. On the
57: other hand, we find that the correction of the LH model is
58: sensitive to the trilinear Higgs coupling in some case and the
59: process can also provide us a chance to probe such coupling in the
60: LH model.
61: \end{abstract}
62: PACS number(s): 12.60Cn, 14.80.Mz, 12.15.Lk, 14.80.Cp
63: \newpage
64: \section{Introduction}~~\\
65: \indent The standard model(SM)provides an excellent effective field
66: theory description of almost all particle physics experiments. But
67: in the SM the Higgs boson mass suffers from an instability under
68: radiative corrections. The naturalness argument suggests that the
69: cutoff scale of the SM is not much above the electroweak scale: New
70: physics will appear around TeV energies. Among the extended models
71: beyond the SM, the little Higgs model offers a very promising
72: solution to the hierarchy problem in which the Higgs boson is
73: naturally light as a result of nonlinearly realized symmetry
74: \cite{little-1,little-2,little-3}. The key feature of this kind of
75: models is that the Higgs boson is a pseudo-Goldstone boson of an
76: approximate global symmetry which is spontaneously broken by a
77: vacuum expectation value(VEV)
78: at a scale of a few TeV and thus is naturally light.\\
79: \indent The most economical little Higgs model is the littlest Higgs(LH) model, which is based on the $SU(5)/SO(5)$
80: nonlinear sigma model \cite{littlest}. It consists of a $SU(5)$ global
81: symmetry, which is spontaneously broken down to $SO(5)$ by a vacuum
82: condensate $f$. In the LH model, a set of new heavy gauge bosons$(B_{H},Z_{H},W_{H})$ and
83: a new heavy-vector-like quark(T) are introduced which just cancel
84: the quadratic divergence induced by SM gauge boson loops and the
85: top quark loop, respectively. The distinguishing features of this
86: model are the existence of these new particles and their
87: couplings to the light Higgs. Measurement of these couplings would
88: verify the structure of the cancelation of the Higgs mass
89: quadratic divergence and prove the existence of the little Higgs
90: mechanism\cite{ZHH-2}.\\
91: \indent The hunt for the Higgs boson and investigation of its properties is one of the most
92: important goals of present and future
93: high energy collider experiments. The precision electroweak measurement data and direct
94: searches suggest that the Higgs boson must be relative light and its mass should be roughly
95: in the range of 114.4GeV-208GeV at $95\%$ CL \cite{Higgs}. Studying the properties of the Higgs potential
96: will reveal details of the mass-generation mechanism in spontaneously broken
97: gauge theories, which can be obtained through measuring the Higgs boson self-interactions.
98: Recently, the Higgs boson pair production processes have been
99: widely considered, and the cross sections for these processes in
100: the SM have been evaluated at linear colliders and hadron
101: colliders. The phenomenology calculation show that it would be
102: extremely difficult to measure the Higgs self-coupling
103: $\lambda_{HHH}$ at the LHC \cite{LHC}, and $e^{+}e^{-}$ linear
104: colliders, where the study of the $e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow ZHH$ and
105: $HH\nu\overline{\nu}$ can be performed with good accuracy,
106: represent a possibly unique opportunity for performing the study
107: of the trilinear Higgs self-coupling \cite{ZHH-1,ZHH3,self}. For
108: the center of mass(c.m.)energy $\sqrt{s}$ from 500 GeV up to 1
109: TeV, the $ZHH$ production with intermediate Higgs boson mass is
110: the most promising process among the various Higgs
111: doublet-production processes. Since the cross section is
112: relatively large and all the final states can be identified
113: without large missing momentum, the process $e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow
114: ZHH$ is the best one among the various Higgs doublet-production
115: processes to look for the Higgs self-coupling
116: during the first stage of the future linear collider.\\
117: \indent We know that the most important Higgs production process at the linear collider
118: is the Higgs-strahlung process $e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow ZH$.
119: The correction effects of LH model to this process was studied in Ref.\cite{115004}. It is found that the
120: correction effects mainly come from the heavy gauge boson $B_{H}$, in most
121: parameter space, the deviation of the total cross section from its SM value is larger
122: than $5\%$, which may be detected at the future ILC experiment. However, the
123: double Higgs-strahlung process $e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow ZHH$
124: includes the trilinear Higgs coupling which is different from the
125: process $e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow ZH$. For the process
126: $e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow ZHH$, the
127: contribution of the LH model comes from not only the new heavy
128: gauge bosons $B_{H},Z_{H}$ but also the modification of the self-couplings of Higgs
129: boson. So the process $e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow ZHH$ can also provide
130: some useful information about the modification of trilinear Higgs coupling in
131: the LH model to complement the study of the process $e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow
132: ZH$.
133: In this paper, we
134: consider the double Higgs-strahlung process $e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow ZHH$ and study whether
135: the correction effects of LH model to this process can be detected at the future ILC
136: experiment.
137:
138: This paper is organized as follows, In section two, we first
139: briefly introduce the LH model, and then give the production
140: amplitude of the process. The numerical results and discussions
141: are presented in section three. Our conclusions are given in
142: section four.
143: \section{The process $e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow ZHH$
144: in the $LH$ model}~~\\
145: \indent The LH model is based on the $SU(5)/SO(5)$ nonlinear sigma
146: model. At the scale $\Lambda_{s}\sim4\pi$$f$, the global $SU(5)$
147: symmetry is broken into its subgroup $SO(5)$ via a vacuum
148: condensate $f$, resulting in 14 Goldstone bosons. The effective
149: field theory of these Goldstone bosons is parameterized by a
150: non-linear $\sigma$ model with gauged symmetry $[SU(2)\times
151: U(1)]^{2}$, spontaneously broken down to its diagonal subgroup
152: $SU(2)\times U(1)$ which is identified as the SM electroweak gauge
153: group. Four of these Goldstone bosons are eaten by the broken
154: gauge generators, leaving 10 states that transform under the SM
155: gauge group as a doublet H and a triplet $\Phi$. This breaking
156: scenario also gives rise to four massive gauge bosons $B_{H}$,
157: $Z_{H}$ and $W^{\pm}_{H}$, which might produce characteristic
158: signatures in the present and future high energy
159: collider experiments \cite{signatures-1,signatures-2,signatures-3}.\\
160: \indent After EWSB, the final mass eigenstates are obtained via the
161: mixing between the heavy and light gauge bosons.
162: They include the light (SM-like) bosons $Z_{L}$,$A_{L}$ and
163: $W^{\pm}_{L}$ observed at experiments, and new heavy bosons
164: $Z_{H}$,$B_{H}$ and $W^{\pm}_{H}$ that could be observed at future
165: experiments. The masses of neutral gauge bosons are given to ${\cal
166: O}(v^{2}/f^{2})$ by \cite{signatures-4}
167: \begin{eqnarray}
168: M^{2}_{A_{L}}&=&0,\\
169: M^{2}_{Z_{L}}&=&(M^{SM}_{Z})^{2}\{1-\frac{v^{2}}{f^{2}}[\frac{1}{6}+\frac{1}{4}(c^{2}-s^{2})^{2}+
170: \frac{5}{4}(c'^{2}-s'^{2})^{2}-\frac{x^{2}}{2}]\},\\
171: M^{2}_{Z_{H}}&=&(M^{SM}_{Z})^{2}c^{2}_{W}\{\frac{f^{2}}{s^{2}c^{2}v^{2}}-1+\frac{v^{2}}{2f^{2}}[
172: \frac{(c^{2}-s^{2})^{2}}{2c^{2}_{W}}+\chi_{H}\frac{g'}{g}\frac{c'^{2}s^{2}+c^{2}s'^{2}}{cc'ss'}]\},\\
173: M^{2}_{B_{H}}&=&(M^{SM}_{Z})^{2}s^{2}_{W}\{\frac{f^{2}}{5s'^{2}c'^{2}v^{2}}-1+\frac{v^{2}}{2f^{2}}[
174: \frac{5(c'^{2}-s'^{2})^{2}}{2s^{2}_{W}}-\chi_{H}\frac{g'}{g}\frac{c'^{2}s^{2}+c^{2}s'^{2}}{cc'ss'}]\},
175: \end{eqnarray}
176: with $x=\frac{4fv'}{v^{2}},~
177: \chi_{H}=\frac{5}{2}gg'\frac{scs'c'(c^{2}s'^{2}+s^{2}c'^{2})}{5g^{2}s'^{2}c'^{2}-g's^{2}c^{2}}$,
178: where~$v$=246 GeV is the elecroweak scale, $v'$ is the VEV of the
179: scalar $SU(2)_{L}$ triplet and $s_{W}(c_{W})$ represents the
180: sine(cosine) of the weak mixing angle.
181: $c(s=\sqrt{1-c^{2}})$ is the mixing parameter between $SU(2)_{1}$ and $SU(2)_{2}$
182: gauge bosons and the mixing parameter $c'(s'=\sqrt{1-c'^{2}})$ comes
183: from the mixing between $U(1)_{1}$ and $U(1)_{2}$ gauge bosons. Using these mixing parameters, we
184: can represent the SM gauge coupling constants as $g=g_{1}s=g_{2}c$
185: and $g'=g_{1}s'=g_{2}c'$. The mass of neutral scalar boson
186: $M_{\Phi^{0}}$ can be given as \cite{signatures-1}
187: \begin{eqnarray}
188: M^{2}_{\Phi^{0}}=\frac{2m^{2}_{H^{0}}f^{2}}{v^{2}(1-x^{2})}.
189: \end{eqnarray}
190: The above equation about the mass of $\Phi$ requires a constraint of
191: 0$\leq$x$<$1, which shows the relation
192: between the scale $f$ and the VEV of the Higgs field doublet and triplet$(v,v')$.\\
193: \indent Taking account of the gauge invariance of the Yukawa
194: couplings and the $U(1)$ anomaly cancellation, one can write the
195: couplings of the neutral gauge bosons $V_i(V_i=Z_{L},B_{H},Z_{H})$
196: to electrons pair in the form of
197: $\wedge_{\mu}^{V_i\bar{e}e}=i\gamma_{\mu}(g^{V_i\bar{e}e}_{V}+g^{V_i\bar{e}e}_{A}\gamma^{5})$
198: with \cite{signatures-1}
199: \begin{eqnarray}
200: g^{Z_{L}\bar{e}e}_{V}&=&-\frac{e}{4s_{W}c_{W}}\{(-1+4s^{2}_{W})-\frac{v^{2}}
201: {f^{2}}[\frac{1}{2}c^{2}(c^{2}-s^{2})-\frac{15}{2}(c'^{2}-s'^{2})(c'^{2}-\frac{2}{5})]\},\\
202: \nonumber
203: g^{Z_{L}\bar{e}e}_{A}&=&-\frac{e}{4s_{W}c_{W}}\{1+\frac{v^{2}}{f^{2}}[\frac{1}{2}c^{2}(c^{2}-s^{2})
204: +\frac{5}{2}(c'^{2}-s'^{2})(c'^{2}-\frac{2}{5})]\},\\ \nonumber
205: g^{Z_{H}\bar{e}e}_{V}&=&-\frac{ec}{4s_{W}s},
206: \hspace{5cm}g^{Z_{H}\bar{e}e}_{A}=\frac{ec}{4s_{W}s},\\ \nonumber
207: g^{B_{H}\bar{e}e}_{V}&=&\frac{e}{2c_{W}s'c'}(\frac{3}{2}c'^{2}-\frac{3}{5}),
208: \hspace{3cm}g^{B_{H}\bar{e}e}_{A}=\frac{e}{2c_{W}s'c'}(\frac{1}{2}c'^{2}-\frac{1}{5}).
209: \end{eqnarray}
210: The couplings of the gauge bosons to Higgs boson and self-Higgs
211: coupling can be written as
212: \begin{eqnarray}
213: g^{Z_{L\mu}Z_{L\nu}H}&=&\frac{ie^{2}vg_{\mu\nu}}{2s^{2}_{W}c^{2}_{W}}\{1-\frac{v^{2}}
214: {f^{2}}[\frac{1}{3}-\frac{3}{4}x^{2}+\frac{1}{2}(c^{2}-s^{2})^{2}+\frac{5}
215: {2}(c'^{2}-s'^{2})^{2}]\},\\ \nonumber
216: g^{Z_{H\mu}Z_{H\nu}H}&=&-\frac{ie^{2}}{2s_{W}^{2}}vg_{\mu\nu},
217: \hspace{4.0cm}g^{B_{H\mu}B_{H\nu}H}=-\frac{ie^{2}}{2c_{W}^{2}}vg_{\mu\nu},\\
218: \nonumber
219: g^{Z_{L\mu}Z_{H\nu}H}&=&-\frac{ie^{2}(c^{2}-s^{2})vg_{\mu\nu}}{4s^{2}_{W}c_{W}sc},
220: \hspace{2.7cm}g^{Z_{L\mu}B_{H\nu}H}=-\frac{ie^{2}(c'^{2}-s'^{2})vg_{\mu\nu}}{4s_{W}c^{2}_{W}s'c'},\\
221: \nonumber
222: g^{Z_{H\mu}B_{H\nu}H}&=&-\frac{ie^{2}vg_{\mu\nu}}{4s_{W}c_{W}}\frac{(c^{2}s'^{2}+s^{2}c'^{2})}{scs'c'},
223: \hspace{1.5cm}g^{Z_{L\mu}Z_{L\nu}HH}=\frac{ie^{2}vg_{\mu\nu}}{2s^{2}_{W}c^{2}_{W}},\\ \nonumber
224: g^{Z_{L\mu}Z_{H\nu}HH}&=&-\frac{ie^{2}(c^{2}-s^{2})g_{\mu\nu}}{4s^{2}_{W}c_{W}sc},
225: \hspace{2.7cm}g^{Z_{L\mu}B_{H\nu}HH}=-\frac{ie^{2}(c'^{2}-s'^{2})g_{\mu\nu}}{4s_{W}c^{2}_{W}s'c'},\\ \nonumber
226: g^{HHH}&=&-\frac{i3m_{H}^{2}}{v}[1-\frac{11v^{2}x^{2}}{4f^{2}(1-x^{2})}].
227: \end{eqnarray}
228: \indent In the LH model, the heavy triple Higgs boson $\Phi^{0}$ exchange
229: can also contribute to the process $e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow ZHH$.
230: However, compared to the contributions coming from the new gauge
231: bosons, the contribution of $\Phi^{0}$ exchanging is suppressed by
232: the order $v^{4}/f^{4}$, which can be seen from the couplings
233: between gauge bosons and scalars\cite{signatures-1}. Thus, we can
234: ignore the contribution of the scalar triplets to the process
235: $e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow ZHH$.
236:
237: The relevant Feynman diagrams for the process $e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow ZHH$ in the LH model are
238: shown in Fig.1 at the tree-level.
239: \begin{figure}[h]
240: \begin{center}
241: \epsfig{file=feynman.ps,width=450pt,height=500pt} \vspace{-8cm}
242: \caption{\small The Feynman diagrams of the process
243: $e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow ZHH$ in the $LH$ model.} \label{fig1}
244: \end{center}
245: \end{figure}
246:
247: The invariant production amplitudes of the process
248: can be written as
249: \begin{equation}
250: M=\sum_{V_{i}=Z_{L},Z_{H},B_{H}}M_{a}^{V_{i}}+
251: \sum_{V_{i,j}=Z_{L},Z_{H},B_{H}}M_{b}^{V_{i}V_{j}}+
252: \sum_{V_{i,j}=Z_{L},Z_{H},B_{H}}M_{c}^{V_{i}V_{j}}+
253: \sum_{V_{i}=Z_{L},Z_{H},B_{H}}M_{d}^{V_{i}},
254: \end{equation}
255: with
256: \begin{eqnarray}
257: M_{a}^{V_{i}}&=&\overline{v_{e}}(p_{1})\wedge_{\mu}^{V_{i}e\overline{e}}u_{e}(p_{2})
258: G^{\mu\nu}(p_{1}+p_{2}, M_{V_{i}})\wedge_{\nu\rho}^{HHZV_{i}}\varepsilon^{\rho}(p_{3}),\\
259: \nonumber
260: M_{b}^{V_{i}V_{j}}&=&\overline{v_{e}}(p_{1})\wedge_{\mu}^{V_{i}e\overline{e}}u_{e}(p_{2})
261: G^{\mu\nu}(p_{1}+p_{2}, M_{V_{i}})\wedge_{\nu\rho}^{HV_{i}V_{j}}G^{\rho\lambda}(p_{3}+p_{4}, M_{V_{j}})
262: \wedge_{\lambda\tau}^{HZV_{j}}\varepsilon^{\tau}(p_{3}),\\ \nonumber
263: M_{c}^{V_{i}V_{j}}&=&\overline{v_{e}}(p_{1})\wedge_{\mu}^{V_{i}e\overline{e}}u_{e}(p_{2})
264: G^{\mu\nu}(p_{1}+p_{2}, M_{V_{i}})\wedge_{\nu\rho}^{HV_{i}V_{j}}G^{\rho\lambda}(p_{3}+p_{5}, M_{V_{j}})
265: \wedge_{\lambda\tau}^{HZV_{j}}\varepsilon^{\tau}(p_{3}),\\ \nonumber
266: M_{d}^{V_{i}}&=&-\overline{v_{e}}(p_{1})\wedge_{\mu}^{V_{i}e\overline{e}}u_{e}(p_{2})
267: G^{\mu\nu}(p_{1}+p_{2}, M_{V_{i}})\wedge_{\nu\rho}^{HZV_{i}}G(p_{4}+p_{5},
268: M_{H})
269: g^{HHH}\varepsilon^{\rho}(p_{3}).
270: \end{eqnarray}
271: Here, $G^{\mu\nu}(p,M)=\frac{-ig^{\mu\nu}}{p^{2}-M^{2}}$ is the propagator of the particle.
272: We can see that this process in the LH model receives additional
273: contributions from the heavy gauge bosons $Z_H,B_H$. Furthermore,
274: the modification of the relations among the SM parameters and the
275: precision electroweak input parameters, the correction terms to the
276: SM $HHH$ coupling can also produce corrections to this process. In our numerical calculation, we will
277: also take into account these correction effects. The main decay
278: modes of $B_H$ and $Z_H$ are $V_i\rightarrow f\bar{f}$($f$
279: represents any quarks and leptons in the SM) and $V_i\rightarrow
280: ZH$. The decay widths of these modes have been explicitly given in
281: references
282: \cite{signatures-1,yue}.\\
283: \indent With above production amplitudes, we can obtain the
284: production cross section directly. In the calculation of the cross
285: section, instead of calculating the square of the amplitudes
286: analytically, we calculate the amplitudes numerically by using the
287: method of the references\cite{HZ} which can greatly simplify our
288: calculation.
289: \section{ The numerical results and discussions}\
290: \indent In the numerical calculation, we take the input parameters
291: as
292: $M_{Z}^{SM}=91.187$ GeV, $s_{W}^{2}=0.2315$ \cite{data}.
293: For the light Higgs boson H, in this paper,
294: we only take the illustrative value $M_{H}=120$ GeV. In this case,
295: the possible decay modes of H are $b\bar{b}$, $c\bar{c}$,
296: $l\bar{l}$[l=$\tau$, $\mu$ or e], $gg$ and $\gamma\gamma$. However,
297: the total decay width $\Gamma_{H}$ is dominated by the decay channel
298: $H\rightarrow b\bar{b}$. In the LH model, $\Gamma_{H}$ is modified
299: from that in the SM by the order of $v^{2}/f^{2}$ and has been
300: studied in Ref.\cite{bb}. The c.m. energy
301: of the ILC is assumed as $\sqrt{s}$=500 GeV.\\
302: \indent The absence of custodial $SU(2)$ global symmetry in the LH
303: model yields weak isospin violating contributions to the
304: electroweak precision observables. In the early study, global fits
305: to the experimental data put rather severe constraints in the
306: $f>4$ TeV at $95\%$ C.L.\cite{cons1,con1}. However, their analysis
307: is based on a simple assumption that the SM fermions are charged
308: only under $U(1)_{1}$. If the SM fermions are charged under
309: $U(1)_{1}\times U(1)_{2}$, the constraints become relaxed: the
310: substantial parameter space allows $f=1\sim2$ TeV \cite{cons2}. If
311: only the $U(1)_{Y}$ is gauged, the experimental constraints are
312: looser \cite{cons2,cons3}. Therefore , the new contributions are
313: suppressed: $f=1\sim2$ TeV allowed for the mixing
314: parameters $c$ and $c^{'}$ in the ranges of
315: $0 \sim 0.5,0.62 \sim 0.73$ \cite{cons2,constraints}.
316: The parameter $x<1$ parameterizes the ratio of the triplet and doublet
317: VEV's. Taking into account the constraints on $f,c,c',x$, we
318: take them as the free parameters in our numerical calculation.
319: The numerical results are summarized in Figs.(2-4).
320: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
321: \begin{figure}[h]
322: \begin{center}
323: \scalebox{0.85}{\epsfig{file=c.eps}}\\
324: \end{center}
325: \caption{\small The relative correction $\delta\sigma/\sigma^{SM}$
326: as a function of the mixing parameter c for f=1 TeV, $x$=0.5,
327: $M_{H}=120$ GeV and different values of the mixing parameter $c'$.}
328: \end{figure}
329:
330: \indent The relative correction $\delta\sigma/\sigma^{SM}$ is
331: plotted in Fig.2 as a function of the mixing parameter c for $f$=1
332: TeV, $x=0.5$, $M_{H}=120$ GeV, $c'=0.63,0.67,0.71$, respectively.
333: In Fig.2, $\delta\sigma=\sigma^{tot}-\sigma^{SM}$ and
334: $\sigma^{SM}$ is the tree-level cross section of the $ZHH$
335: production predicted by the SM.
336: From Fig.2, we can see that the absolute value of the relative correction
337: decreases with the mixing parameter c increasing. For
338: $x=0.5$,
339: the absolute value of $\delta\sigma/\sigma^{SM}$ is in the range of
340: $8\%-14\%$ in the most
341: parameter space limited by the electroweak precision data. The
342: curves also show that with an increase of the value of $c'$,
343: the effect of the LH
344: model is getting stronger. For $f<3$ TeV, the mass of $B_{H}$ may be lighter than
345: 500 GeV\cite{signatures-3}. In most parameter spaces of the LH
346: model, the mass of the heavy gauge boson $Z_{H}$ is larger than 1
347: TeV. So, there is no s-channel resonance effects in our numerical
348: results.\\
349: \begin{figure}[b]
350: \begin{center}
351: \scalebox{0.85}{\epsfig{file=x1.eps}}
352: \end{center}
353: \caption{\small The relative correction $\delta\sigma/\sigma^{SM}$
354: as a function of the mixing parameter $x$ for c=0.3, $c'$=0.67,
355: and $f=1,1.5,2$ TeV, respectively.}
356: \end{figure}
357: \indent To see the dependence of the relative correction on the
358: parameter $x$, in Fig.3, we plot $\delta\sigma/\sigma^{SM}$ as a
359: function of the mixing parameter $x$ for c=0.3, $c'=0.67$ and
360: three values of the scale parameter $f$. From Fig.3 we can see
361: that, the absolute
362: value of the relative correction decreases as $f$ increasing. The curves also demonstrate that
363: the effect of the LH model is not sensitive to $x$ in the range of
364: $x\leq 0.75$. This is because the deviations of the cross section
365: from the SM are mainly aroused by the contributions of the new gauge
366: bosons when $x\leq 0.75$. However, the figure shows that the
367: absolute values of $\delta\sigma/\sigma^{SM}$ raised quickly when we
368: take the $x\rightarrow 1$ limit and in this case the main
369: contribution to the cross section comes from the Feynman diagram
370: involving the trilinear interaction of the SM Higgs boson, which is
371: consistent with the conclusions for the contributions of the LH
372: model to Higgs boson pair production at hadron colliders
373: \cite{hadron}. So, if $x$ is large enough the significant correction
374: of the LH model to the trilinear Higgs coupling should be
375: observable. The process $e^+e^-\rightarrow ZHH$ can open a unique
376: window to probe the Higgs self-coupling which can complement the
377: process $e^+e^-\rightarrow ZH$.
378:
379: \begin{figure}[hb]
380: \begin{tabular}{cc}
381: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\scalebox{0.85}{\epsfig{file=f.eps}}
382: \end{tabular}
383: \caption{\small The relative correction $\delta\sigma/\sigma^{SM}$
384: as a function of the the scale parameter $f$ for c=0.3, $c'=0.67$,
385: $M_{H}=120$ GeV,
386: and three values of the mixing parameter $x$.}
387: \end{figure}
388:
389: In general, the contributions of the LH model to the observables
390: are dependent on the factor $1/f^{2}$. In order to obtain the
391: generic conclusion, we also plot $\delta\sigma/\sigma^{SM}$ as a
392: function of $f$(1-3 TeV) for three values of the parameter $x$ and
393: take $c=0.3$, $c^{'}=0.68$ in Fig 4. One can see that the absolute
394: relative correction drops sharply with $f$ increasing, which is
395: consistent with the conclusions for the corrections of the LH
396: model to other observables. On the other hand, we can see that the
397: absolute relative correction increases as the parameter $x$
398: increasing. For example, the absolute relative
399: correction may reach about $20\%$ when $x=0.8$ and $f=1$ TeV.\\
400: \indent As has been mentioned above, the total cross section of
401: $e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow ZHH$ can reach the order of $10^{-1}$ fb at
402: the ILC. This cross section amounts to about 100 events with the
403: integrated luminosity of 1000 $fb^{-1}$. The $1\sigma$ statistical
404: error corresponds to about $10\%$ precision. The reference\cite{ILC}
405: have reviewed the expected experimental precision with which the ZHH
406: cross section can be measured. Even we consider the systemic error
407: of the ILC, the ILC can measure the cross section with the precision
408: of $17\%$ assuming a 120 GeV Higgs and the integrated luminosity
409: 1000 $fb^{-1}$ at 500 GeV. The sensitivity can be further improved
410: when a multi-variable selection based on a neural network is applied
411: which can reduce the uncertainty from $17\%$ to $13\%$. The relative
412: correction of the LH model to the cross section is only comparable
413: to the ILC measurement precision and might be detected at the ILC in
414: the favorable parameter spaces(for example, small value of $f$)
415: preferred by the electroweak precision. The statistical acuracy to
416: measure the trilinear Higgs coupling is $22\%$ for $M_H=120$ GeV
417: with an integrated luminosity of $1000 fb^{-1}$, using the neural
418: network selection\cite{ILC}. Only for small $f$ and large $x$, the
419: correction of the LH model to the trilinear Higgs coupling can be
420: detected.
421: \section{Conclusion}
422: \indent The little Higgs model, which can solve the hierarchy
423: problem, is a promising alternative model of new physics beyond
424: the standard model. Among various little Higgs models, the
425: littlest Higgs(LH) model is one of the simplest and
426: phenomenologically viable models. The distinguishing feature of
427: this model is the existence of the new scalars, the new gauge
428: bosons, and the vector-like top quark. These new particles
429: contribute to the experimental observables which could provide
430: some clues of the existence of the LH model. In this paper, we
431: study the potential to detect the contribution of the LH model via
432: the process
433: $e^+e^-\rightarrow ZHH$ at the future $ILC$ experiments.\\
434: \indent In the parameter spaces($f=1\sim2$ TeV, $c=0\sim0.5$,
435: $c'=0.62\sim0.73$) limited by the electroweak precision data, we
436: calculate the cross section correction of the LH model to the
437: process $e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow ZHH$. We find that the correction
438: is significant even when we consider the constraint of electroweak
439: precision data on the parameters. The relative correction varies
440: from a few percent to tens of percents. The LH model is a weak
441: interaction theory and it is hard to detect its contributions and
442: measure its couplings at the LHC. With the high c.m. energy and
443: luminosity, the future ILC will open an ideal window to probe into
444: the LH model and study its properties. In some favorable case, the
445: relative correction of the LH model to the process
446: $e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow ZHH$ might be large enough to be measured
447: with high precision at the ILC. Furthermore, the process can also
448: open a unique window into the trilinear Higgs coupling in LH
449: model.
450:
451: \newpage
452: \begin{thebibliography}{100}
453: \bibitem{little-1}
454: N. Arkani-Hamed, A. G. Cohen, and H. Georgi, {\it Phys. Lett.}
455: B{\bf 513}, 232(2001).
456: \bibitem{little-2}
457: N. Arkani-Hamed, A. G. Cohen, T. Gregoire, and J. G. Wacker,
458: {\it JHEP} {\bf 0208} 020(2002); N. Arkani-Hamed, A. G. Cohen, E.
459: Katz, A. E. Nelson, T. Gregoire, and J. G. Wacker, {\it JHEP} {\bf
460: 0208} 021(2002).
461: \bibitem{little-3}
462: I. Low, W. Skiba, and D. Smith, {\it Phys. Rev.} D{\bf 66},
463: 072001(2002); M. Schmaltz, {\it Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl.} {\bf 117},
464: 40(2003); W. Skiba and J. Terning, {\it Phys. Rev.} D{\bf 68},
465: 075001(2003).
466: \bibitem{littlest}
467: N. Arkani-Hamed, A. G. Cohen, E. Katz, A. E. Nelson, {\it JHEP}
468: {\bf 0207} 034(2002).
469: \bibitem{ZHH-2}
470: Wolfgang, Kilian, Jurgen Reuter, {\it Phys. Rev.} D{\bf 70},
471: 015004(2004).
472: \bibitem{Higgs}
473: M. W. Grunewald, in the Proceedings of the Workingshop on
474: Electroweak Precision Data and the Higgs Mass, hep-ex/0304023; The
475: LEP collaborattions, the LEP Electroweak Working Group and the SLD
476: Heavy Flavour Group, hep-ex/0412015.
477: \bibitem{LHC}
478: U. Baur, T. Plehn, D. Rainwater, {\it Phys. Rev. Lett}.{\bf 89},
479: 151801(2002).
480: \bibitem{ZHH-1}
481: V. Barger and T. Han {\it Mod, Phys. Lett,} A{\bf 5}, 667(1999); A.
482: Djouadi, W. Killian, M. Muhlleitner and P. M. Zerwas, {\it
483: Eur.Phys.J.} C{\bf 10}, 27(1999); R. Casalbuon and L. Marconi, {\it
484: J. Phys.} G{\bf 29}, 1053(2003).
485: \bibitem{ZHH3}
486: G. Belanger, {\em et~al.}, hep-ph/0309010; Zhang Ren-You, {\em
487: et~al.}, {\it Phys. Lett.} B{\bf 578}, 349(2004).
488: \bibitem{self}
489: M. Battaglia, E. Boss, W. M. Yao,hep-ph/0111276; A. Djouadi, W.
490: Killian, M. Muhlleitner and P. M. Zerwas, hep-ph/0001169.
491: \bibitem{115004}
492: C. X. Yue, S. Z. Wang, D. Q. Yu, {\it Phys. Rev.} D{\bf 68},
493: 115004(2003).
494: \bibitem{signatures-1}
495: T. Han, H. E. Logan, B. McElrath, and L. T. Wang,
496: {\it Phys. Rev.} D{\bf 67}, 095004(2003).
497: \bibitem{signatures-2}
498: G. Burdman, M. Perelstein, and A. Pierce, {\it Phys. Rev. Lett.
499: }{\bf 90}, 241802(2003); T. Han, H. E. Logen, B. McElrath, and
500: L. T. Wang, {\it Phys. Lett.}
501: B{\bf 563}, 191(2003); G. Azuelos et~al., hep-ph/0402037; H. E.
502: Logan, {\it Phys. Rev.} D{\bf 70}, 115003(2004); G. Cho and A.
503: Omete, {\it Phys. Rev.} D{\bf 70}, 057701(2004).
504: \bibitem{signatures-3}
505: S. C. Park and J. Song, {\it Phys. Rev.} D{\bf 69}, 115010(2004).
506: \bibitem{signatures-4}
507: J. A. Conley, J. Hewett, and M. P. Le, {\it Phys. Rev.} D{\bf 72},
508: 115014(2005).
509: \bibitem{yue}
510: C. X. Yue, W. Wei, F. Zhang, {\it Nucl. Phys.} B{\bf 716},
511: 199(2005).
512: \bibitem {HZ}
513: K. Hagiwara and D. Zeppenfeld, {\it Nucl. Phys.} B{\bf 313},
514: 560(1989); V. Barger, T. Han, and D. Zeppenfeld, {\it Phys. Rev.}
515: D{\bf 41}, 2782(1990).
516: \bibitem{data}
517: Particle Data Group, D. E. Groom {\em et~al.},{\it Eur.Phys.J.C}
518: {\bf 15}, 1(2000); Particle Data Group, K. Hagiwara {\em et~al.},
519: {\it Phys. Rev.} D{\bf 66}, 010001(2002).
520: \bibitem{bb}
521: J.J. Liu, W. G. Ma, G. Li, R. Y. Zhang, H. S. Hou, {\it Phys. Rev.}
522: D{\bf 70}, 115001(2004); H. E. Logan, {\it Phys. Rev.} D{\bf 70},
523: 115003(2004); S. R. Choudhury, N. Gaur, A. Goyal, N. Mahajan, {\it
524: Phys. Lett.} B{\bf 601}, 164(2004); Gi-Chol Cho and Aya Omote, {\it
525: Phys. Rev.} D{\bf 70}, 057701(2004); G. A. Gonzalez-Sprinberg, R.
526: Martinez, and J. Alexis Rodriguez, {\it Phys. Rev.} D{\bf 71},
527: 035003(2005).
528: \bibitem{cons1}
529: J. L. Hewett, F. J. Petriell and T. G. Rizzo, {\bf JHEP 0310}
530: 062(2003).
531: \bibitem{con1}
532: C. Csaki, J. Hubisz, G. D. Kribs, P. Meade, and J. Terning, {\it
533: Phys. Rev.} D{\bf 67}, 115002(2003).
534: \bibitem{cons2}
535: C. Csaki, J. Hubisz, G. D. Kribs, P. Meade, and J. Terning, {\it
536: Phys. Rev.} D{\bf 68}, 035009(2003); T. Gregoire, D. R. Smith, and
537: J. G. Wacker, {\it Phys. Rev.} D{\bf 69}, 115008(2004); I. Low, W.
538: Skiba, and D. Smith, {\it Phys. Rev.} D{\bf 66}, 072001(2002).
539: \bibitem{cons3}
540: A. E. Nelson, hep-ph/0304036; E. Katz, J. Katz. Lee, A. E. Nelson,
541: and D. G. E. Walker, hep-ph/0312287.
542: \bibitem{constraints}
543: R. Casalbuoni, A. Deandrea, M. Oertel,{\bf JHEP 0402} 032(2004);
544: S. Chang and H. J. He, {\it Phys. Lett.} B{\bf 586}, 95(2004);
545: M. Chen and S. Dawson, {\it Phys. Rev.} D{\bf
546: 70}, 015003(2004); W. Kilian and J. Reuter, {\it Phys. Rev.} D{\bf
547: 70}, 015004(2004).
548: \bibitem{hadron}
549: J. J. Liu, W. G. Ma, G. Li, R. Y. Zhang, and H. S. Hou, {\it Phys.
550: Rev.} D{\bf 70}, 015001(2004).
551: \bibitem{ILC}
552: TESLA Technical Design Report, Part III "Physics at an $e^{+}e^{-}$
553: Linear Collider", TESLA Report 2001-23, hep-ph/0106315; K. Abe {\em
554: et~al.}[ACFA Linear Collider Working Group], hep-ph/0109166; G. Laow
555: {\em et~al.}, ILC Techinical Review Committee, second report, 2003,
556: SLAC-R-606.
557: \end{thebibliography}
558: \end{document}
559: