1: \documentclass[12pt,a4paper]{article}
2: \usepackage{epsfig}
3: \pagestyle{plain}
4: \topmargin=-0.8in
5: \hoffset=-1.0cm
6: \voffset=1cm
7: \textwidth=160mm
8: \textheight=220mm
9: \def\baselinestretch{1.5}
10:
11: \begin{document}
12: \title{ Signals of the littlest Higgs model with T-parity at $e\gamma$ and $ep$ collisions}
13: \author{Chong-Xing Yue$^1$, Li Li$^2$, Shuo Yang$^1$, and Li-Na Wang$^1$\\
14: %\address{
15: {\small $^1$ Department of Physics, Liaoning Normal University,
16: Dalian 116029, P. R. China}
17: \\
18: %\address{
19: {\small $^2$ Department of Mathematics, Liaoning Normal University,
20: Dalian 116029, P. R. China}
21: \\}
22: \date{\today}
23:
24: \maketitle
25: %---------------------------------------------------------------------------
26: \begin{abstract}
27: Littlest Higgs model with T-parity predicts the existence of the
28: neutral, weakly interacting, new gauge boson $B_{H}$, which can be
29: seen as an attractive dark matter candidate. We study production of
30: the new gauge boson $B_{H}$ via $e\gamma$ and $ep$ collisions. We
31: find that $B_{H}$ can be abundantly produced via the subprocesses
32: $e^{-}\gamma\rightarrow L^{-}B_{H}$ and $\gamma q\rightarrow
33: B_{H}Q$, which might give rise to characteristic signals. Some
34: discussions about the $SM$ backgrounds for this kind of signals are
35: also given.
36:
37:
38: \vspace{1cm}
39:
40:
41: \end{abstract}
42:
43: \newpage
44: \noindent{\bf I. Introduction}
45:
46: Little Higgs models are proposed as an alternative solution to the
47: hierarchy problem of the standard model$(SM)$, which provide a
48: possible kind of electroweak symmetry breaking $(EWSB)$ mechanism
49: accomplished by a naturally light Higgs sector [1] (for review, see
50: [2]). In these models, the Higgs boson is a pseudo-Goldstone boson
51: and its mass is protected by a global symmetry and quadratic
52: divergence cancellations are due to contributions from new particles
53: with the same spin as the $SM$ particles. The dynamics of the Higgs
54: boson is described by a non-linear sigma model, valid up to the
55: cutoff scale $\Lambda\sim 4\pi f\sim 10 TeV$. The little Higgs
56: models generally predict the existence of the new gauge bosons,
57: fermions, and scalar particles at the $TeV$ scale. Some of these new
58: particles can generate characteristic signatures at the present and
59: future collider experiments [3,4].
60:
61:
62: So far, a number of specific models have been proposed, which differ
63: in the assumed higher symmetry and in the representations of the
64: scaler multiplets. Among of these models, the littlest Higgs $(LH)$
65: model [1] is one of the simplest and phenomenologically viable
66: models, which has all essential features of the little Higgs theory.
67: However, the electroweak precision data produce rather severe
68: constraints on the free parameters of the $LH$ model, due to the
69: large corrections to low-energy observables from the new particles
70: and the triplet scalar vacuum expectation value $(VEV)$ [5]. To
71: alleviate this difficulty, a $Z_{2}$ discrete symmetry, named
72: 'T-parity', is introduced into the $LH$ model, which is called $LHT$
73: model [6,7]. In the $LHT$ model, all the $SM$ particles are assigned
74: with an even T-parity, while all the new particles are assigned with
75: an odd T-parity, except for the little Higgs partner of the top
76: quark. In the $LHT$ model, the T-parity is an exact symmetry, the
77: $SM$ gauge bosons (T-even) do not mix with the T-odd new gauge
78: bosons, and thus the electroweak observables are not modified at
79: tree level. Beyond the tree level, small radiative corrections
80: induced by the $LHT$ model to the electroweak observables still
81: allow the scale parameter $f$ to be lower than 1 $TeV$ [6,8]. Since
82: the contributions of the little Higgs models to observables are
83: generally proportional to the factor $1/f^{2}$, so a lower $f$ is
84: very important for the phenomenology of these models and might
85: produce rich signatures at the collider experiments
86: [9,10,11,12,13,14,15].
87:
88:
89: An interesting feature of the $LHT$ model is that it predicts the
90: existence of the lightest T-odd particle, which is stable,
91: electrically neutral, and weakly interacting, new gauge boson
92: $B_{H}$. It has been shown that it can be seen as an attractive dark
93: matter candidate and might generate observable signals at the
94: hadronic colliders [11,15]. In this paper, we will discuss the
95: production of the new gauge boson $B_{H}$ via $e\gamma$ and $ep$
96: collisions and see whether it can produce observable signatures in
97: the future high energy $e^{+}e^{-}$ and $ep$ collider experiments,
98: i.e. $ILC$ [16] and $THERA$ [17].
99:
100: In the rest of this paper, we will give our results in detail. In
101: section II, we give some free parameters, which are related our
102: calculation. The production of the gauge boson $B_{H}$ via the
103: processes $e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow e^{-}\gamma\rightarrow L^{-}B_{H}$
104: and $ep\rightarrow \gamma q\rightarrow B_{H}Q$ at the $ILC$ and
105: $THERA$ experiments are considered in section III and section IV,
106: respectively. The relevant phenomenology discussions are given in
107: these sections. Our conclusions are given in section V.
108:
109: \noindent{\bf II. The relevant parameters about our calculation }
110:
111: Similar with the $LH$ model, the $LHT$ model [6,7] is based on an
112: $SU(5)/SO(5)$ global symmetry breaking pattern and the Higgs doublet
113: of the $SM$ is identified with a subset of the Goldstone boson
114: fields associated with this breaking. A subgroup $[SU(2)_{1}\times
115: U(1)_{1}]\times[SU(2)_{2}\times U(1)_{2}]$ of the $SU(5)$ is gauged,
116: and at the scale $f$ it is broken into the $SM$ electroweak symmetry
117: $SU(2)_{L}\times U(1)_{Y}$. This breaking scenario gives rise to
118: four new gauge bosons $W_{H}^{\pm}$, $Z_{H}$, and $B_{H}$. However,
119: in the $LHT$ model, T-parity is an automorphism which exchanges the
120: $[SU(2)_{1}\times U(1)_{1}]$ and $[SU(2)_{2}\times U(1)_{2}]$ gauge
121: symmetries. Under this transformation, the $SM$ gauge bosons
122: $W^{\pm}$, $Z$, and $\gamma$ are T-even and the new gauge bosons
123: $W_{H}^{\pm},Z_{H}$, and $B_{H}$ are T-odd.
124:
125: Among these new particles, the neutral gauge boson $B_{H}$ is the
126: lightest particle which can be seen as an attractive dark matter
127: candidate [9,10,11,12]. At the order of $\nu^{2}/f^{2}$, the mass of
128: the neutral gauge boson $B_{H}$ can be approximately written as:
129: \begin{equation}
130: M_{B_{H}}\simeq\frac{g'f}{\sqrt{5}} [1-\frac{5\nu^{2}}{8f^{2}}],
131: \end{equation}
132: where $g'$ is the $SM$ $U(1)_{Y}$ gauge coupling constant, and
133: $\nu\simeq246GeV$ is the electroweak scale. At the order of
134: $\nu^{2}/f^{2}$, the couplings of the neutral gauge boson $B_{H}$
135: with the first or second family fermions and their corresponding
136: little Higgs partners can be approximately written as [10]:
137: \begin{equation}
138: \pounds=iYg'\bar{Q}\gamma_{\mu}p_{L}qB^{\mu}_{H}+h.c.,
139: \end{equation}
140: where $Y=1/10$, $q=u,d,c,s,e,$ or $\mu$, and $Q$ is the T-odd
141: partner of the T-even $SM$ fermion $q$. The more exact expressions
142: of these couplings have been recently given in Ref.[15]. According
143: the formula given in Ref.[15], the coupling constant $Y$ is
144: generally not equal to $1/10$. However, for the scale parameter $
145: f\geq 500GeV $, the coupling constant $Y$ is very approach to this
146: value. Thus, as numerical estimation, we will assume that there are
147: a universal coupling constant $Y=1/10$ for the couplings of the
148: gauge boson $B_{H}$ to the $SM$ quark and lepton partners, as shown
149: in Eq.(2). Furthermore, as doing in Refs. [10,11], we also assume a
150: universal T-odd fermion mass $M_{Q}$ for the little Higgs partners
151: of the first and second family fermions, and take $M_{Q}\simeq
152: M_{B_{H}}+20GeV$.
153:
154:
155: In the $LHT$ model, because of the T-parity, the $SM$ gauge bosons
156: (T-even) do not mix with the T-odd new gauge bosons. Thus, the
157: electroweak observables are not modified at tree-level. The new
158: heavy T-odd particles, such as T-odd gauge bosons, T-odd fermions,
159: and T-odd triplet scalars, can only has contributions to the
160: electroweak observables at loop level, which are typically small. So
161: the scale parameter $f$ can be as low as $500GeV$ [8]. In this
162: paper, we will take the scale $f$ as free parameter and assume that
163: its value is in the range of $500GeV\sim2000GeV$.
164:
165: \noindent{\bf III. Production of the new gauge boson $B_{H}$ at
166: $e\gamma$ collision}
167:
168:
169: There are two Feynman diagrams, depicted in Fig.1, contributing
170: production of the new gauge boson $B_{H}$ associated with the T-odd
171: partner $L^{-}$ of the lepton $e^{-}$ via $e^{-}\gamma$ collision.
172: The corresponding scattering amplitude can be written as:
173: \begin{equation}
174: M=eYg'Q_{L} \bar{u}(L)[\frac{\not\varepsilon_{2} P_{L} (\not
175: P_{\gamma}+\not P_{e}+m_{e}) \not\varepsilon_{1}} {\hat
176: s-m_{e}^{2}}+\frac{\not\varepsilon_{1}(\not P_{L}-\not
177: P_{\gamma}+M_{L})\not\varepsilon_{2}P_{L}} {\hat u-M_{L}^{2}}]u(e),
178: \end{equation}
179: where $\hat s=(P_{\gamma}+P_{e})^{2}=(P_{B_{H}}+P_{L})^{2}$, $\hat
180: u=(P_{L}-P_{\gamma})^{2}=(P_{e}-P_{B_{H}})^{2}$. $\varepsilon_{1}$
181: and $\varepsilon_{2}$ are the polarization vectors of the gauge
182: bosons $\gamma$ and $B_{H}$, respectively. $M_{L}$ is the mass of
183: the $SM$ lepton partner $L^{-}$ and taken as $M_{L}=M_{Q}=
184: M_{B_{H}}+20GeV$.
185:
186:
187:
188: The effective cross section $\sigma_{1}(s)$ at a $ILC$ with the
189: center-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s}$ can be obtained by folding the
190: cross section $\hat{\sigma}_{1}(\hat{s})$ for the subprocess
191: $e^{-}\gamma\rightarrow L^{-}B_{H}$ with the photon distribution
192: function $f_{\gamma/e}$ [18]:
193: \begin{equation}
194: \sigma_{1}(s)=\int^{0.83}_{(M_{B_{H}}+M_{L})^{2}/s}
195: dx\hat{\sigma}_{1}(\hat{s})f_{\gamma/e}(x),
196: \end{equation}
197: where $\hat{s}=xs$.
198: \begin{figure}[htb] \vspace{-6cm}
199: \hspace{-2cm} \epsfig{file=fig1.ps,width=700pt,height=800pt}
200: \vspace{-20cm}
201: \caption{Feynman diagrams contribute to the process $e^{-}\gamma \rightarrow L^{-}B_{H}$. }
202: \label{ee}
203: \end{figure}
204:
205:
206: From above equations, we can see that, except the $SM$ input
207: parameters, the effective cross section $\sigma_{1}(s)$ is dependent
208: on the scale parameter $f$ and the center-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s}$.
209: So, we plot the cross section $\sigma_{1}(s)$ as a function of $f$
210: for $\sqrt{s}=1TeV$ in Fig.2. One can see from Fig.2 that the value
211: of $\sigma_{1}(s)$ is strongly dependent on the scale parameter $f$.
212: For $500GeV\leq f \leq2000GeV$, the value of the production cross
213: section $\sigma_{1}$ is in the range of $16.4fb\sim 1.5fb$. If we
214: assume that the $ILC$ experiment with $\sqrt{s}=1TeV$ has a yearly
215: integrated luminosity of $\pounds=500fb^{-1}$, then there will be
216: several hundreds up to ten thousands of the new gauge boson $B_{H}$
217: associated with the $SM$ lepton partner $L^{-}$ to be generated per
218: year.
219:
220:
221:
222: For $M_{L}=M_{B_{H}}+20GeV$, the lepton partner $L$ mainly decays to
223: $B_{H}l$ and there is $Br(L\rightarrow B_{H}l)\simeq 1$ [10,11].
224: Thus, the signal of the process $e^{-}\gamma\rightarrow L^{-}B_{H}$
225: should be an isolated charged lepton associated with large missing
226: energy. The most large backgrounds for the signal $l^{-}+\not E$
227: come from the $SM$ processes $e^{-}\gamma\rightarrow
228: e^{-}Z\rightarrow e^{-}\nu\nu$ and $e^{-}\gamma\rightarrow
229: W^{-}\nu_{e}\rightarrow l^{-}\nu\nu_{e}$. The scattered electron in
230: the process $e^{-}\gamma\rightarrow e^{-}Z$ has almost the same
231: energy $E_{e}=\sqrt{s}/2$ for $\sqrt{s}\gg M_{Z}$. Thus, the process
232: $e^{-}\gamma\rightarrow e^{-}Z$ could be easily distinguished from
233: the signal [19]. So, the most serious background process is
234: $e^{-}\gamma\rightarrow W^{-}\nu_{e}\rightarrow l^{-}\nu\nu_{e}$. To
235: discuss whether the possible signals of the $LHT$ model can be
236: detected via the process $e^{-}\gamma\rightarrow L^{-}B_{H}$ in the
237: future $ILC$ experiments, we future calculate the ratio of the
238: signal over the square root of the background
239: $(R_{1}=N_{1}/\sqrt{B})$. Our numerical results show that the $SM$
240: backgrounds are much large and the value of the ratio $R_{1}$ is
241: smaller than $0.5$ in most of the parameter space of the $LHT$
242: model. Thus, the possible signals of the $LHT$ model are very
243: difficult to be detected via $e\gamma$ collision in the future $ILC$
244: experiment with $\sqrt{s}=1TeV$ and $\pounds=500fb^{-1}$.
245:
246: \begin{figure}[htb] \vspace{-0.5cm}
247: \begin{center}
248: \epsfig{file=fig2.eps,width=220pt,height=205pt}
249: \hspace{-0.5cm}\vspace{-1.0cm}
250: \caption{The effective cross section $\sigma_{1}$ as a function of the scale parameter $f$ for the
251: \hspace*{1.9cm} center-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s}=1TeV$.}
252: \label{ee}
253: \end{center}
254: \end{figure}
255:
256:
257:
258: It is well known that a appropriate cut on the $SM$ background can
259: generally enhance the ratio of signal over square root of the
260: background. It has been shown that, with the suitably cut on the
261: final lepton transverse momentum and rapidity, the $SM$ background
262: $l^{-}\nu\nu_{e}$ can be reduced by more than one order of magnitude
263: $[19]$. Furthermore, beam polarization of the electron and positron
264: beams would lead to a substantial enhancement of the production
265: cross sections for some specific processes with a suitably chosen
266: polarization configuration. Thus, we expect that we might use these
267: methods to discriminate the signal $l^{-}+\not E$ from the $SM$
268: background.
269:
270:
271:
272: \noindent{\bf IV. Production of the neutral gauge boson $B_{H}$ at
273: $ep$ collision}
274:
275: Similar to the process $e^{-}\gamma\rightarrow L^{-}B_{H}$,
276: production of the new gauge boson $B_{H}$ associated with the T-odd
277: partner of the $SM$ quark at the $THERA$ proceeds via the s-channel
278: and t-channel Feynman diagrams, as shown in Fig.3. The invariant
279: scattering amplitude for the subprocess $\gamma q\rightarrow
280: B_{H}Q(q=u,c,d$ or $s)$ can be written as: \vspace{-0.5cm}
281:
282: \begin{equation}
283: M=eYg'Q_{Q} \bar{u}(L)[\frac{\not\varepsilon_{2} P_{Q} (\not
284: P_{\gamma}+\not P_{q}+m_{q}) \not\varepsilon_{1}} {\hat
285: s-m_{q}^{2}}+\frac{\not\varepsilon_{1}(\not P_{Q}-\not
286: P_{\gamma}+M_{Q})\not\varepsilon_{2}P_{Q}} {\hat u-M_{Q}^{2}}]u(q),
287: \end{equation}
288: where $\hat s=(P_{\gamma}+P_{q})^{2}=(P_{B_{H}}+P_{Q})^{2}$, $\hat
289: u=(P_{Q}-P_{\gamma})^{2}=(P_{q}-P_{B_{H}})^{2}$. $\varepsilon_{1}$
290: and $\varepsilon_{2}$ are the polarization vectors of the gauge
291: bosons $\gamma$ and $B_{H}$, respectively.
292:
293:
294: \begin{figure}[htb] \vspace{-6cm}
295: \hspace{-5cm} \epsfig{file=fig3.ps,width=700pt,height=800pt}
296: \vspace{-20cm}
297: \caption{Feynman diagrams contribute to the process $\gamma q \rightarrow B_{H}Q$ }
298: \label{ee}
299: \end{figure}
300:
301:
302: After calculating the cross section $\hat{\sigma}_{i}(\hat{s})$ of
303: the subprocess $\gamma q\rightarrow B_{H}Q$, the total cross section
304: $\sigma_{2}(s)$ of $B_{H}Q$ production can be obtained by folding
305: $\hat{\sigma}_{i}(\hat{s})$ with the parton distribution functions:
306: \begin{equation}
307: \sigma_{2}(s)=\sum_{i}\int^{0.83}_{\tau_{min}}d\tau\int^{1}_{\tau/0.83}
308: \frac{dx}{x}f_{\gamma/e}(\frac{\tau}{x})f_{i/p}(x)\hat{\sigma_{i}}(\hat{s}),
309: \end{equation}
310: with $\hat{s}=\tau s$, $\tau_{min}=\frac{(M_{B_{H}}+M_{Q})^{2}}{s}$,
311: $i=u,c,d$ and $s$. The backscattered high energy photon distribution
312: function has been given in Ref.[18]. In our calculation, we will
313: take the $CTEQ6L$ parton distribution function for $f_{i/p}(x)$
314: [20].
315:
316:
317: Our numerical results are shown in Fig.4, in which we have taken
318: $\sqrt{s}=1TeV$. One can see from Fig.4 that the production cross
319: section $\sigma_{2}$ is smaller than $\sigma_{1}$ in all of the
320: parameter space. This is because, compared with $\sigma_{1}$,
321: $\sigma_{2}$ is suppressed by the parton distribution function
322: $f_{i/p}(x)$ and the charge factor $Q_{q}^{2}$. For $500GeV\leq
323: f\leq 2000 GeV$, the value of the cross section $\sigma_{2}$ is in
324: the range of $14.6fb \sim 2.4\times10^{-3} fb.$ If we assume that
325: the $THERA$ collider with $\sqrt{s}=1TeV$ has a yearly integrated
326: luminosity of $\pounds=470fb^{-1}$[17], then there will be several
327: and up to hundreds of the $B_{H}Q$ events to be generated
328: per year.
329: \begin{figure}[htb]\vspace{-0.5cm}
330: \begin{center}
331: \epsfig{file=fig4.eps,width=220pt,height=205pt}
332: \hspace{-0.5cm}\vspace{-1cm}
333: \caption{The effective cross section $\sigma_{2}$ as a function of the scale parameter $f$ for the
334: \hspace*{1.9cm} center-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s}=1TeV$.}
335: \label{ee}
336: \end{center}
337: \end{figure}
338:
339:
340:
341: From above discussions, we can see that the $SM$ quark partner $Q$
342: mainly decays to $B_{H}q$ $(q=u,c,d$ or $s)$ and there is
343: $Br(Q\rightarrow B_{H}q)\simeq 1$. In this case, the signal of the
344: $B_{H}Q$ production at the $THERA$ collider is one jet plus large
345: missing energy. The backgrounds of the one jet$+\not E$ signal
346: mainly come from the $SM$ charged current(CC) process $e
347: p\rightarrow \nu X$ and the SM subprocess $\gamma q\rightarrow Zq$
348: with $Z\rightarrow \nu\bar{\nu}$. Measurement and QCD analysis of
349: the production cross section of the $SM$ CC process $e p\rightarrow
350: \nu X$ at the HERA collider has been extensively studied [21]. Its
351: cross section is very larger than that of the process $e p
352: \rightarrow \gamma q\rightarrow Zq$. Thus, we only take the $SM$ CC
353: process $e p\rightarrow \nu X$ as background of the process $e p
354: \rightarrow \gamma q\rightarrow B_{H} Q$. We have checked the $SM$
355: background and found that it is well above the signal of the one jet
356: plus missing energy from the $LHT$ model. However, this kind of the
357: $SM$ backgrounds have been well studied and will be precisely
358: measured at the $THERA$ collider experiments, one can still look for
359: excess in the one jet$+\not E$ signal to search for the possible
360: signals of the $LHT$ model.
361:
362: \noindent{\bf V. Conclusions}
363:
364: To avoid the severe constraints from the electroweak precision data
365: on the $LH$ model, the T-parity is introduced into this model, which
366: forms the $LHT$ model. A interesting feature of the $LHT$ model is
367: that it predicts the existence of the neutral, weakly interacting,
368: new gauge boson $B_{H}$, which can be seen as an attractive dark
369: matter candidate. This model can generate vary different signals
370: from those for the $LH$ model in the present or future high energy
371: experiments.
372:
373:
374: In this paper, we discuss production of the new gauge boson $B_{H}$
375: predicted by the $LHT$ model at the $ILC$ and $THERA$ collider
376: experiments via considering the subprocesses $e^{-}\gamma\rightarrow
377: L^{-}B_{H}$ and $\gamma q\rightarrow B_{H}Q$. We find that the new
378: gauge boson $B_{H}$ can be abundantly produced at these collider
379: experiments. The signals of the associated production of
380: $L^{-}B_{H}$ and $B_{H}Q$ are an isolated charged lepton with large
381: missing energy and one jet with large missing energy, respectively.
382: Thus, the possible signals of the $LHT$ model might be detected at
383: the $ILC$ and $THERA$ experiments by searching for one jet (or
384: charged lepton) with large missing energy. We further give some
385: discussions about the $SM$ backgrounds for this kind of signals.
386: Despite the fact that the $SM$ backgrounds are much large, it is
387: also need to careful study the $SM$ backgrounds in order to search
388: for these signals of the $LHT$ model in the future $ILC$ and $THERA$
389: collider experiments.
390:
391:
392: Certainly, if the new gauge boson $B_{H}$ and the $SM$ quark partner
393: $Q$ are enough light, the process $e p \rightarrow \gamma
394: q\rightarrow B_{H} Q$ can occur at the HERA with $ \sqrt{s}= 320
395: GeV$, which can also generate the characteristic signals at the HERA
396: experiments. However, considering the constraints on the mass
397: parameters $M_{B_{H}} $ and $M_{Q} $, we have not calculated the
398: cross section of this process at the HERA collider experiments.
399:
400: Other specific models beyond the $SM$, such as $SUSY$ and extra
401: dimension models, can also generate the similar signals with those
402: of the $L^{-}B_{H}$ and $B_{H}Q$ associated production. More
403: studying about this kind of signals is needed and it will be helpful
404: to discriminate various specific models beyond the $SM$ in the
405: future high energy experiments.
406:
407:
408:
409:
410:
411: \vspace{0.5cm} \noindent{\bf Acknowledgments}
412:
413: We would like to thank Prof. C. Diaconu for valuable helping and
414: comments on our work. This work was supported in part by Program for
415: New Century Excellent Talents in University(NCET-04-0290), the
416: National Natural Science Foundation of China under the Grants
417: No.10475037 and 10675057.
418:
419: \vspace{1.0cm}
420:
421:
422: \newpage
423: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
424:
425: \bibitem{1}
426: N. Arkani-Hamed, A. G. Cohen, E. Katz, A. E. Nelson, {\em JHEP}
427: {\bf 0207}, 034(2002).
428: \bibitem{2}
429: M. Schmaltz and D.Tucker-Smith, {\em Ann. Rev. Nucl. Parti. Sci.} {\bf
430: 55}, 229(2005).
431: \bibitem{3}
432: T. Han, H. E. Logan, and L. T. Wang, {\em JHEP} {\bf 0601}, 099(2006).
433: \bibitem{4}
434: M. Perelstein, {\em Prog.Part.Nucl.Phys.} {\bf
435: 58}, 247(2007).
436: \bibitem{5}
437: J. L. Hewett, F. J. Petriello and T. G. Rizzo, {\em JHEP} {\bf
438: 0310}, 062(2003). C. Csaki, J.Hubisz, G. D. Kribs, P. Meade, and J.
439: Terning, {\it Phys. Rev. D}{\bf 67}, 115002(2003);
440: C. Csaki et al., {\it Phys. Rev. D}{\bf 68}, 035009(2003); R. Casalbuoni,
441: A. Deandrea, M. Oertel, {\em JHEP} {\bf 0402}, 032(2004);
442: Mu-Chun Chen and S. Dawson, {\it Phys. Rev. D}{\bf70}, 015003(2004);
443: Chong-Xing Yue and Wei Wang, {\it Nucl. Phys. B}{\bf
444: 683}, 48(2004); W. Kilian and J. Reuter, {\it Phys. Rev. D}{\bf
445: 70}, 015004(2004); T. Gregoire,
446: D. R. Smith and J. G. Wacker, {\it Phys. Rev. D}{\bf
447: 69}, 115008(2004); Mu-Chun Chen, {\em Mod. Phys. Lett.
448: A}{\bf21}, 621(2006).
449: \bibitem{6}
450: H. C. Cheng and I. Low, {\em JHEP} {\bf 0309}, 051(2003); {\em JHEP} {\bf 0408}, 061(2004) .
451: \bibitem{7}
452: I. Low, {\em JHEP} {\bf 0410}, 067(2004).
453: \bibitem{8}
454: J. Hubisz, P. Meade, A. Noble and M. Perelstein, {\em JHEP} {\bf 0601}, 135(2006).
455: \bibitem{9}
456: J. Hubisz, P. Meade, {\it Phys. Rev. D}{\bf 71}, 035016(2005).
457: \bibitem{10}
458: A. Birkedal, A. Noble, M.Perelstein, and A. Spary, {\it Phys. Rev. D}{\bf 74}, 035002(2006).
459: \bibitem{11}
460: C. S. Chen, Kingman Cheung, and T.-C. Yuan, {\it hep-ph}/{\bf 0605314}.
461: \bibitem{12}
462: M. Asano et al., {\it hep-ph}/{\bf 0602157}; A. Martin, {\it hep-ph}/{\bf 0602206}.
463: \bibitem{13}
464: J. Hubisz, S. J. Lee, and G. Paz, {\em JHEP} {\bf 0606}, 041(2006);
465: M. Blanke et al., {\it hep-ph}/{\bf 0605214}; A.
466: J. Buras, A. Poschenrieder, S. Uhlig, W. A. Bardeen, {\it hep-ph}/{\bf
467: 0607189}; A. Freitas and D.Wyler, {\it hep-ph}/{\bf
468: 0609103}.
469: \bibitem{14}
470: C. O. Dib, R. Rosenfeld, A. Zerwekh, {\em JHEP} {\bf
471: 0605}, 074(2006); H. C. Cheng, I. Low, and L. T. Wang, {\it Phys. Rev. D}{\bf 74}, 055001(2006);
472: C. R. Chen, K. Tobe and C.-P. Yuan, {\em Phys. Lett.
473: B}{\bf640}: 263(2006).
474:
475: \bibitem{15}
476: A. Belyaev, Chuan-Ren Chen, K. Tobe,
477: C.-P. Yuan, {\it hep-ph}/{\bf 0609179}.
478: \bibitem{16}
479: T. Abe et al. [American Linear Collider Group], {\em hep-ex}/{\bf0106057};
480: J. A. Aguilar-Saavedra et al.
481: [{\it ECFA/DESY LC} Physics Working Group], {\em hep-ph}/{\bf
482: 0106315}; K. Abe et al. [{\em ACFA} Linear Collider Working Group],
483: {\em hep-ph}/{\bf 0109166}; G. Laow et al.,
484: {\em ILC} Techinical Review Committee, second report, 2003,
485: SLAC-R-606.
486:
487: \bibitem{17}
488: H. Abramowicz et al.({\it TESLA-N Study Group Colloboration}), {\it Technical Design Report},
489: DESY 01-011 preprint; A. K. Cifici, S. Su Handoy, \"{O} Yavas, {\it in Proc. of EPAC2000}
490: P.388; M. Klein, {\it THERA-electron-proton scattering at
491: $\sqrt{s}=1TeV$}, talk given at DIS'2000, Liverpool, April
492: 25-30, 2000.
493: P. J. Bussey, {\it Int. J. Mod. Phys. A}{\bf17}, 1065(2002).
494: \bibitem{18}
495: I. F. Ginzbury et al., {\em Nucl. Instrum. Meth. Phys. Res. Sec A}, {\bf 21}, 5(1984);
496: V. I. Telnov, {\em Nucl. Instrum. Meth. Phys. Res. Sec A}, {\bf 294}, 72(1990).
497: \bibitem{19}
498: F. M. Renard, {\em Z. Phys. C.}{\bf 14}, 209(1982); F. Cuypers, G. J. Van Oldenborgh, and R. Ruckl,
499: {\it Nucl. Phys. B}{\bf 383}, 45(1992); M. Raidal, {\it Nucl. Phys. B}{\bf
500: 441}, 49(1995); E. M. Gregores, M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, and S.
501: F. Novaes, {\it Phys. Rev. D}{\bf 56}, 2920(1997).
502: \bibitem{20}
503: J. Pumplin et al., {\em JHEP} {\bf 0207}, 012(2002); D. Stump et
504: al., {\em JHEP} {\bf 0310}, 046(2003).
505:
506: \bibitem{21}
507: C. Adloff et al.[H1 Collaboration], { \it Eur. Phys. J. C}{\bf 30}, 1(2003); S. Chekanov et al.
508: [ZEUS Collaboration], { \it Eur. Phys. J. C}{\bf 32}, 1(2003); A. Aktas et al.[H1 Collaboration],
509: { \it Phys. Lett. B}{\bf 634}, 173(2006).
510: \end{thebibliography}
511: \end{document}
512: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
513: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%FIG.5%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
514: