1: \documentclass[aps,prd,groupedaddress,showpacs,showkeys]{revtex4}
2: \usepackage{epsfig}
3: \newcommand{\eq}{\begin{eqnarray}}
4: \newcommand{\en}{\end{eqnarray}}
5: \newcommand{\ba}[1]{\begin{eqnarray} \label{(#1)}}
6: \newcommand{\ea}{\end{eqnarray}}
7: \newcommand{\nn}{\nonumber}
8:
9: \newcommand{\rf}[1]{(\ref{(#1)})}
10: \def\p{\prime}
11: \def\la{\langle}
12: \def\ra{\rangle}
13: \def\cpv{C\hspace{-0.2em}P\hspace{-0.6em}/ }
14: \def\rpm{R_p \hspace{-0.8em}/\;\:}
15: \def\rp{$R_p\hspace{-1em}/\ \ $}
16: \def\rpp{$R_p\hspace{-0.8em}/\ \ $}
17:
18: \begin{document}
19:
20: \title{On the possible resolution of the B-meson decay \\
21: polarization anomaly in R-parity violating SUSY}
22: \author{
23: Amand Faessler$^1$,
24: Thomas Gutsche$^1$,
25: J.C. Helo$^2$, Sergey Kovalenko$^2$,
26: Valery E. Lyubovitskij$^1$
27: \footnote{On leave of absence
28: from Department of Physics, Tomsk State University,
29: 634050 Tomsk, Russia}
30: \vspace*{1.2\baselineskip}}
31:
32:
33: \affiliation{\mbox{}\\
34: $^1$ Institut f\"ur Theoretische Physik,
35: Universit\"at T\"ubingen,
36: \\ Auf der Morgenstelle 14, D-72076 T\"ubingen, Germany
37: \vspace*{1.2\baselineskip} \\
38: \hspace*{-1cm}$^2$ Centro de Estudios Subat\'omicos(CES),
39: Universidad T\'ecnica Federico Santa Mar\'\i a, \\
40: Casilla 110-V, Valpara\'\i so, Chile
41: \vspace*{1.2\baselineskip} \\}
42:
43: \date{\today}
44:
45: \begin{abstract}
46:
47: We examine the possible resolution of the recently observed
48: polarization anomaly in $B^0(\bar{B}^0)\rightarrow
49: \phi K^{*0}(\bar{K}^{*0})$-decay within R-parity
50: violating (\rp) SUSY.
51: We show that a combination of the superpotential trilinear
52: \rp-interactions, with the couplings $\lambda^{\prime}$, and
53: the soft SUSY breaking bilinear \rp \, sneutrino-Higgs mixing,
54: proportional to $\tilde{\mu}^2$, can potentially generate
55: the effective operators with the chirality structure necessary
56: to account for this anomaly.
57: However, we demonstrate that the existing experimental data on
58: $B_s\rightarrow \mu^+\mu^-$-decay lead to stringent upper limits on
59: the Wilson coefficients of these operators, which are about two orders
60: of magnitude below the values required for the resolution of the
61: B-decay polarization anomaly, and, therefore, it can hardly be
62: explained within the \rp SUSY framework.
63:
64: As a byproduct result of our analysis we derive new limits on the
65: products of the soft bilinear and the superpotential trilinear
66: \rp-parameters of the form $\tilde{\mu}^2 \lambda^{\prime}$.
67:
68: \end{abstract}
69:
70: \pacs{12.39.Fe, 11.30.Er, 13.40.Em, 14.20.Dh, 12.60.Jv}
71:
72:
73: \keywords{B-meson, CP-violation, polarization anomaly,
74: effective operators, supersymmetry, new physics}
75:
76: \maketitle
77:
78:
79: \newpage
80:
81: \section{Introduction}
82:
83: Now it is widely recognized that B-mesons offer powerful means for
84: testing the standard model (SM) and probe physics beyond its framework.
85: Recently, remarkable progress has been achieved in experimental and
86: theoretical studies of B-physics.
87: One of the most important experimental results of the last years in this
88: field was, certainly, the discovery of CP violation in the B-system.
89: The running B-experiments~\cite{PDG} at BABAR, BELLE, CDF, D0 and
90: CLEO have also collected a large statistics on various decay modes of
91: B-mesons some of which seem to be quite challenging for the SM.
92:
93: The BABAR~\cite{BABAR} and BELLE~\cite{BELLE} Collaborations reported
94: experimental data on B-meson decay to a pair of light vector mesons:
95: $B\rightarrow VV$ where $V=\rho, \phi, K^*$.
96: An intriguingly large transverse polarization fraction comparable to
97: the longitudinal one has been observed in the
98: $B^0(\bar{B}^0)\rightarrow \phi K^{*0}(\bar{K}^{*0})$-decay channel.
99: This result has been recently confirmed by the CDF collaboration~\cite{CDF}
100: as well. This polarization anomaly is hard to be explained within the SM
101: and may indicate some new physics. As is known, the SM predicts
102: for the helicity amplitudes of $B^0\rightarrow \phi K^{*0}$ the following
103: ratios~\cite{Ali:1978kn,Cheng-Yang}:
104: $H_{00}:H_{--}:H_{++} \sim {\cal O}(1):{\cal O}(1/m_b):{\cal O}(1/m^2_b)$,
105: where $H_{00}$ corresponds to the final vector mesons in the longitudinal
106: polarization state, while $H_{++}, H_{--}$ in the transverse positive and
107: negative one. This SM result is in an obvious disagreement with the
108: BABAR~\cite{BABAR}, BELLE~\cite{BELLE} and CDF~\cite{CDF} observations,
109: demonstrating that $|H_{++}\pm H_{--}|^2\approx |H_{00}|^2$.
110:
111: In the literature various efforts have been undertaken
112: to account for the polarization anomaly from the view point
113: of the SM~\cite{Cheng-Yang,Anom-SM} and in
114: various scenarios of new physics beyond the SM~\cite{Anom-BSM,Das:2004}.
115: In Ref.~\cite{Das:2004} a model independent analysis of the B-decay
116: polarization anomaly has been carried out on the basis of the effective
117: Lagrangian approach. Two sets of effective $\Delta B = 1$ operators
118: necessary for the resolution of this anomaly have been identified.
119: In addition from the experimental data~\cite{BABAR,BELLE} the
120: corresponding values of their Wilson coefficients have been determined.
121: These two sets of operators have the following chirality structure:
122: (i) $(1-\gamma_5)\otimes (1-\gamma_5)$,
123: $\sigma(1-\gamma_5)\otimes \sigma(1-\gamma_5)$ and
124: (ii) $(1+\gamma_5)\otimes (1+\gamma_5)$,
125: $\sigma(1+\gamma_5)\otimes \sigma(1+\gamma_5)$.
126:
127: In the present paper we use this model independent result in order
128: to examine the ability of R-parity violating SUSY (\rp SUSY) to
129: resolve the above discussed polarization anomaly in
130: $B^0(\bar{B}^0)\rightarrow \phi K^{*0}(\bar{K}^{*0})$-decay. In
131: Sec.~2 we specify the effective $\Delta B = 1$ operators satisfying
132: the polarization Anomaly Resolution Criteria (pARC). In Sec.~3 we
133: determine these operators in the context of \rp SUSY and derive
134: their Wilson coefficients. In Sec.~4 we study experimental limits on
135: these Wilson coefficients from the existing $B_s\rightarrow
136: \mu^+\mu^-$ data and discuss the compatibility of the pARC with
137: these limits.
138:
139:
140: \section{Criteria for resolution of the polarization anomaly}
141:
142: The effective Hamiltonian ${\cal H}$ describing
143: $\bar B^0\rightarrow \phi \bar K^{*0}$ with $\Delta B=1$
144: can be written in the form:
145: \eq\label{Eff-Hamilton}
146: {\cal H}_{\Delta B=1} \, = \,
147: {\cal H}_{\Delta B=1}^{SM} \, + \, {\cal H}_{\Delta B=1}^{NP} \, = \,
148: \frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}\sum_{i=1}^{14} c_i(\mu) \cdot O_i(\mu) \, + \,
149: \frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}} \sum_{i=15}^{44} c_i(\mu) \cdot O_i(\mu)
150: + \ {\rm H.c.} \,,
151: \en
152: where $c_i(\mu)$ are the Wilson coefficients evaluated at the
153: renormalization scale $\mu\sim m_b$.
154: The first 14 terms correspond to the penguin-dominated SM contributions
155: ${\cal H}_{\Delta B=1}^{SM}$ listed in Ref.~\cite{Buchalla},
156: the last 30 terms ${\cal H}_{\Delta B=1}^{NP}$
157: appear in the presence of new physics (NP).
158: In Ref.~\cite{Das:2004} it was shown
159: that out of the 30 NP-operators only the following operator set
160: \eq
161: O_{15} &=& \bar{s}_\alpha P_R b_\alpha
162: \cdot \bar{s}_\beta P_R s_\beta,\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
163: O_{16} = \bar{s}_{\alpha}P_R b_{\beta}\cdot \bar{s}_{\beta}P_R s_{\alpha},
164: \label{O:15-16}\\
165: O_{17} &=& \bar{s}_\alpha P_L b_\alpha
166: \cdot \bar{s}_\beta P_L s_\beta,\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \,
167: O_{18} = \bar{s}_{\alpha}P_L b_{\beta}\cdot \bar{s}_{\beta}P_L s_{\alpha},
168: \label{O:17-18}\\
169: O_{23} &=& \bar{s}_\alpha \sigma^{\mu\nu}P_R b_\alpha
170: \cdot \bar{s}_\beta \sigma_{\mu\nu}P_R s_\beta,\ \ \
171: O_{24} = \bar{s}_{\alpha}\sigma^{\mu\nu}P_R b_{\beta}\cdot
172: \bar{s}_{\beta}\sigma_{\mu\nu}P_R s_{\alpha},
173: \label{O:23-24}\\
174: O_{25} &=& \bar{s}_\alpha \sigma^{\mu\nu} P_L b_\alpha
175: \cdot \bar{s}_\beta \sigma_{\mu\nu}P_L s_\beta,\ \ \
176: O_{26} = \bar{s}_{\alpha}\sigma^{\mu\nu}P_L b_{\beta}\cdot
177: \bar{s}_{\beta}\sigma_{\mu\nu}P_L s_{\alpha}, \label{O:25-26}
178: \en
179: satisfies the polarization Anomaly Resolution Criteria
180: (pARC)~\cite{Das:2004}, allowing one to possibly solve the polarization
181: anomaly in $B^0(\bar{B}^0)\rightarrow \phi K^{*0}(\bar{K}^{*0})$-decay.
182: Here, $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are the color indices.
183: In what follows we denote the set of operators in
184: Eqs.~(\ref{O:15-16})-(\ref{O:25-26})
185: as pARC operators. In Ref.~\cite{Das:2004} it was noted that the
186: (pseudo-)scalar operators $O_{15-18}$ can be expressed in the basis
187: of (pseudo-)tensor operators $O_{23-26}$ by Fierz transformation
188: \eq\label{Fierz}
189: O_{15}&=& \frac{1}{12}O_{23}-\frac{1}{6}O_{24}, \ \ \
190: O_{16}= \frac{1}{12}O_{24}-\frac{1}{6}O_{23},\\
191: O_{17}&=& \frac{1}{12}O_{25}-\frac{1}{6}O_{26}, \ \ \
192: O_{18}= \frac{1}{12}O_{26}-\frac{1}{6}O_{25}.
193: \en
194: The contributions of the operators $O_{15-26}$ to the helicity amplitudes
195: of $\bar B^0\rightarrow \phi \bar K^{*0}$-decay can be calculated within
196: the QCD factorization (QCDF) approach in terms of the corresponding Wilson
197: coefficients and hadronic form factors. In this approach the helicity
198: amplitudes take the form~\cite{Cheng-Yang,Das:2004}
199: \eq\label{Helicity}
200: \bar{H}_{00} &=& - 4 i f^T_{\phi} m^2_B(\tilde{a}_{23}
201: - \tilde{a}_{25})\left[h_2 T_2(m^2_{\phi})-h_3 T_3(m^2_{\phi})\right],\\
202: \bar{H}_{\pm\pm} &=& - 4 i f^T_{\phi} m^2_B \left\{\tilde{a}_{23}
203: \left[\pm f_1 T_1(m^2_{\phi})-f_2 T_2(m^2_{\phi})\right]+
204: \tilde{a}_{25}\left[\pm f_1 T_1(m^2_{\phi})
205: + f_2 T_2(m^2_{\phi})\right]\right\} \,.
206: \en
207: Here the $\phi$-meson tensor decay constant $f^T_{\phi}$ and
208: the form factors of the $\bar{B}-\bar{K^*}$ transition are defined as
209: \eq\label{hadr-par}
210: \langle \phi(q,\epsilon_1)|\bar s \sigma^{\mu\nu} s |0\rangle
211: &=& -i f^T_{\phi} (\epsilon^{\mu *}_1 q^{\nu}-\epsilon^{\nu *}_1 q^{\mu}),\\
212: \langle \bar{K}^*(p',\epsilon_2)|\bar s
213: \sigma_{\mu\nu}q^{\nu}(1+\gamma_5) s |\bar{B}(p)\rangle &=&
214: 2 i \epsilon_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}\epsilon^{\nu *}_2
215: p^{\rho} p^{\prime \sigma} T_1(q^2)
216: \, + \, T_2(q^2) [\epsilon^*_{2 \mu}(m^2_B - m^2_{K^*}) \nonumber\\
217: &-& (\epsilon^*_2\cdot p)(p+p')_{\mu}]
218: + T_3(q^2) (\epsilon^*_2\cdot p) \left[q_{\mu}
219: - \frac{q^2 (p+p')_{\mu}}{m^2_B - m_{K^*}^2}\right]\,,
220: \en
221: with $q = p-p^\prime$ and $m_B = 5.279$ GeV, $m_{K^*} = 0.892$ GeV,
222: $m_\phi = 1.019$ GeV being the masses of the $B$, $K^*$ and
223: $\phi$ mesons, respectively.
224: The kinematical factors in Eqs.~(\ref{Helicity}) are:
225: \eq
226: f_1 &=& \frac{2 p_c}{m_B},\ \ \ \ f_1=\frac{m^2_B-m^2_{K^*}}{m_B^2}\,,
227: \label{def-H1}\\
228: h_2 &=& \frac{1}{2 m_{K^*}m_{\phi}} \ \biggl[\frac{(m^2_B - m_{\phi}^2
229: - m_{K^*}^2)(m^2_B - m_{K^*}^2)}{m_B^2} - 4 p_c^2 \biggr] \,,
230: \label{def-H2}\\
231: h_3 &=& \frac{1}{2 m_{K^*}m_{\phi}} \
232: \frac{4 p_c^2 m_{\phi}^2}{m^2_B - m_{K^*}^2} \,, \label{def-H3}
233: \en
234: where
235: $p_c$ is the momentum of the $\phi$ or $K^*$ meson in the rest frame
236: of the decaying $\bar B^0$ meson.
237: The effective coefficients in Eq.~(\ref{Helicity}) are expressed
238: in terms of the Wilson coefficients as~\cite{Das:2004}
239: \eq\label{a_23-def}
240: \tilde{a}_{23} &=& \left(1 +\frac{1}{2 N_c}\right) \left(c_{23}
241: + \frac{1}{12}c_{15} - \frac{1}{6}c_{16}\right)+
242: \left(\frac{1}{N_c}+\frac{1}{2}\right) \left(c_{24} + \frac{1}{12}c_{16}
243: - \frac{1}{6}c_{15}\right) + \mbox{nonfact.}\,, \\
244: \label{a_25-def}
245: \tilde{a}_{25} &=& \left(1 +\frac{1}{2 N_c}\right) \left(c_{25}
246: + \frac{1}{12}c_{17} - \frac{1}{6}c_{18}\right)+
247: \left(\frac{1}{N_c}+\frac{1}{2}\right) \left(c_{25} + \frac{1}{12}c_{18}
248: - \frac{1}{6}c_{17}\right) + \mbox{nonfact.}
249: \en
250: The last terms in~(\ref{a_23-def}) and~(\ref{a_25-def})
251: indicate corrections due to deviations from the QCDF.
252:
253: On the basis of the above equations in Ref.~\cite{Das:2004}
254: there has been made an analysis of the experimental data
255: obtained by BABAR~\cite{BABAR} and BELLE~\cite{BELLE}
256: on the angular distribution in
257: $B^0(\bar B^0)\rightarrow \phi K^{*0}(\bar K^{*0})$-decay.
258: It was shown that there are two theoretical scenarios which
259: can separately account for the polarization anomaly of these data.\\
260: Scenario (i): $\tilde{a}_{23}=0$ and
261: \eq\label{a_25-best-fit}
262: |\tilde{a}_{25}| = 2.10^{+0.19}_{-0.12} \times 10^{-4}, \ \ \
263: \delta_{25} = 1.15\pm 0.09,\ \ \phi_{25}= -0.12\pm 0.09 \,.
264: \en
265: Scenario (ii): $\tilde{a}_{25}=0$ and
266: \eq\label{a_23-best-fit}
267: |\tilde{a}_{23}| = 1.70^{+0.11}_{-0.07} \times 10^{-4}, \ \ \
268: \delta_{23} = 2.36\pm 0.10,\ \ \phi_{23}= 0.14\pm 0.09 \,.
269: \en
270: Here the following notations were used $\tilde{a}_{ij}=
271: |\tilde{a}_{ij}|e^{i \delta_{ij}}e^{i \phi_{ij}}$, identifying
272: $\phi_{ij}$ and $\delta_{ij}$ with the weak (coming from the terms in
273: Eq.~(\ref{Eff-Hamilton})) and strong phases, respectively.
274: The values of Eqs.~(\ref{a_25-best-fit}) and (\ref{a_23-best-fit})
275: correspond to the best fit values for the combined data of
276: BABAR~\cite{BABAR} and BELLE~\cite{BELLE}.
277: In what follows we use these results as a criterion to assess if
278: a particular model is able to resolve the polarization anomaly in
279: question or not.
280:
281: \section{pARC operators in \rp SUSY}
282:
283: In relation to the polarization anomaly in $\bar B^0\rightarrow \phi
284: \bar K^{*0}$ we are studying the $\Delta B = 1$ transitions on the
285: quark level. Here we derive the effective Lagrangian describing
286: these transitions within the minimal \rp SUSY model (\rp MSSM) and
287: show that among the resulting set of operators there emerge the pARC
288: operators $O_{15}$ and $O_{17}$. In the generic case of \rp MSSM
289: R-parity is violated by the following terms in the superpotential
290: \eq
291: W_{\rpm} = \mu_{j}L_{j}H_{2} +
292: \frac{1}{2}\lambda_{ijk}L_{i}L_{j}E_{k}^{c} + \bar\lambda
293: _{ijk}^{\prime }L_{i}Q_{j}D_{k}^{c} + \frac{1}{2}\bar\lambda
294: _{ijk}^{\prime \prime }U_{i}^{c}D_{j}^{c}D_{k}^{c}, \label{sup1} \en
295: and in the soft SUSY breaking part of the scalar potential
296: \eq\label{scalar}
297: V_{\rpm}^{\rm soft} = \Lambda_{ijk}\tilde L_i
298: \tilde L_j \tilde E_k^c + \Lambda^{\prime}_{ijk}\tilde L_i \tilde
299: Q_j \tilde D_k^c + \Lambda^{\prime\prime}_{ijk}\tilde U_i^c \tilde
300: D_j^c \tilde D_k^c + \tilde\mu_{2j}^2\tilde L_j H_2 +
301: \tilde\mu_{1j}^2\tilde L_j H^{\dagger}_1 + \ {\rm H.c.}
302: \en
303: In Eq.~(\ref{sup1}) $L$, $Q$ stand for the lepton and quark doublet
304: left-handed superfields, while $E^{c},\ U^{c},\ D^{c}$ for the
305: lepton and {\em up}, {\em down} quark singlet superfields; $H_{2}$
306: is the Higgs doublet superfields with a weak hypercharge $Y= +1$,
307: respectively. In Eq.~(\ref{scalar}) $\tilde{L}_i$ denotes the scalar
308: slepton weak doublet, $H_{1,2}$ are the scalar Higgs doublet fields.
309: In the above equations the trilinear terms proportional to $\lambda,
310: \bar\lambda^{\p}, \Lambda, \Lambda^{\p}$ and the bilinear terms
311: violate lepton number, while the trilinear terms proportional to
312: $\bar\lambda^{\p\p}, \Lambda^{\p\p}$ violate baryon number
313: conservation. The coupling constants $\lambda $
314: ($\bar\lambda^{\prime\prime }$) are antisymmetric in the first
315: (last) two indices. The bar sign in $\bar\lambda', \bar\lambda'' $
316: denotes that all the definitions are given in the gauge basis for
317: the quark fields. Later on we will change to the mass basis and drop
318: the bars. Using the freedom in the definition of lepton and Higgs
319: superfields we choose the basis where the vacuum expectation values
320: of all the sneutrino fields vanish: $\langle\tilde\nu_i\rangle=0$.
321:
322: The Lagrangian terms generated by the trilinear terms of the
323: superpotential in Eq.~(\ref{sup1}) and involving two down quarks
324: needed for the construction of the pARC operators
325: in~(\ref{O:15-16})-(\ref{O:25-26}) are as follows:
326: \eq\label{tril-lag}
327: {\cal L}_{\lambda} = - \lambda^{\prime}_{ijk}
328: \tilde \nu_{iL}\bar d_{k}P_L d_{j} - \frac{1}{2}
329: \lambda^{\prime\prime}_{ijk} \tilde u^\star _{i R}\bar d_{j}P_L
330: d^c_{k} + \ {\rm H.c.}
331: \en
332: where $d_j$ stands for the down quark.
333: It can be easily seen that the interactions in
334: Eq.~(\ref{tril-lag}) can generate in second order perturbation theory
335: the only $\Delta B = 1$ effective operator contributing to
336: $B^0(\bar B^0)\rightarrow \phi K^{*0}(\bar K^{*0})$-decay. This is the
337: operator $(\bar s P_L b)(\bar s P_R s)$ which does not belong to the
338: pARC operators listed in Eqs.~(\ref{O:15-16})-(\ref{O:25-26}). Thus,
339: we conclude that the trilinear \rp-couplings alone cannot resolve
340: the polarization anomaly in
341: $B^0(\bar B^0)\rightarrow \phi K^{*0}(\bar K^{*0})$-decay.
342:
343: Let us see if the bilinear \rp-terms may help in the solution of
344: this problem. The presence of the bilinear terms leads to terms in
345: the scalar potential which are linear in the sneutrino fields,
346: $\tilde{\nu}_{i}$. First, this results in $\tilde\nu-H^0_{1,2}$
347: mixing. Also, the linear terms drive the $\tilde{\nu}_{i}$ fields to
348: non-zero vacuum expectation values $\langle
349: \tilde{\nu}_{i}\rangle\neq 0$ at the minimum of the scalar
350: potential. At this ground state the MSSM vertices $\tilde{Z}\nu$ $
351: \tilde{\nu}$ and $\tilde{W}e\tilde{\nu}$ produce the gaugino-lepton
352: mixing mass terms $\tilde{Z}\nu\langle \tilde{\nu}\rangle,
353: \tilde{W}e\langle \tilde{\nu}\rangle $
354: (with $\tilde{W},\tilde{Z}$ being wino and zino fields).
355: These terms taken along with the lepton-higgsino
356: $\mu _{i}L_{i}\tilde{H}_{1}$ mixing from the
357: superpotential of Eq.~(\ref{sup1}) form $7\times 7$ neutral fermion and
358: $5\times 5$ charged fermion mass matrices~\cite{Now}. This leads to
359: a non-trivial neutrino mass matrix and Lepton Flavor Violation in the
360: sector of charged leptons. However, these effects are obviously irrelevant
361: for the generation of the effective 4-quark operators.
362:
363: The above mentioned effect of sneutrino-Higgs mixing $\tilde\nu-H^0_{1,2}$
364: is different. It corresponds to a non-diagonal mass matrix for the neutral
365: scalars $(H_1^0, H_2^0, \tilde\nu_e, \tilde\nu_{\mu},\tilde\nu_{\tau})$
366: in the bilinear part of the \rp \, scalar potential~\cite{snu-H}.
367: From Eqs.~(\ref{sup1}) and (\ref{scalar}) we write:
368: \eq\label{bil-scalar-pot}
369: V_{\rpm}^{\rm soft} = ( \mu^*\mu_j H_1^\dagger + \tilde\mu_{2j}^2 H_2
370: + \tilde\mu_{1j}^2 H^{\dagger}_1 ) \tilde{L}_j + \ {\rm H.c.}
371: \en
372: Using the minimization condition
373: \eq\label{mincond}
374: \tilde\mu_{1j}^2 + \mu^*\mu_j + \tilde\mu_{2j}^2 \tan\beta = 0
375: \en
376: in the basis of lepton and Higgs superfields where
377: $\langle\tilde\nu_i\rangle=0$ we can rewrite
378: Eq.~(\ref{bil-scalar-pot}) in the form
379: \eq\label{bil-scalar-pot-1}
380: V_{\rpm}^{\rm soft} =
381: \tilde\mu_{2j}^2 (H_2 - \tan\beta H^{\dagger}_1)\tilde{L}_j
382: + \ {\rm H.c.} \,,
383: \en
384: where $\tan\beta = \langle H^0_2\rangle/\langle H^0_1\rangle$.
385: Rotating these fields to the mass eigenstate basis we assume smallness
386: of sneutrino-Higgs mixing characterized by the small ratio
387: $(\tilde\mu_{kj}/M_{h_{1,2}})^2$, where $\tilde\mu^2_{kj}$ is the \rp
388: soft parameter from Eq.~(\ref{scalar}) and $M_{h_{1,2}}$ are the neutral
389: Higgs masses~\cite{Gunion}. In the leading order in this small parameter
390: we obtain the following interactions of sneutrinos with down quarks and
391: charged leptons
392: \eq\label{snu-h}
393: {\cal L}_{\tilde\nu ll} = \eta_{j} \
394: \left[\frac{m_{d_i}}{M_W}(\bar{d}_i\ d_i)
395: + \frac{m_{l_i}}{M_W}(\bar{l}_i\ l_i)\right]\tilde\nu_j \,,
396: \en
397: with the couplings
398: \eq\label{SH-par}
399: \eta_{j} = \frac{g_2}{2} \tilde\mu_{2j}^2
400: \frac{\tan\beta}{\sqrt{1+\tan^2\beta}}
401: \left(\frac{\cos\alpha}{M_{h_2}^2}-\frac{\sin\alpha}{M_{h_1}^2}\right) \,.
402: \en
403: Here $\alpha$ is the mixing angle of the neutral Higgses in the limit of
404: no mixing with the sneutrino fields:
405: \eq\label{Higgs-mix}
406: H_1^0 = -\sin\alpha\cdot h_1^0 + \cos\alpha\cdot h_2^0,\ \ \
407: H_2^0 = \cos\alpha\cdot h_1^0 + \sin\alpha\cdot h_2^0 \,,
408: \en
409: where $h^0_{1,2}$ are the corresponding mass eigenstates with the masses
410: $M_{h_1}, M_{h_2}$.
411: Note that $H^0_2$, which has no couplings to the down quarks and leptons,
412: does not contribute to Eq.~(\ref{snu-h}).
413:
414: Now, combining the trilinear and bilinear \rp-interactions from
415: Eq.~(\ref{tril-lag}) and Eq.~(\ref{snu-h}), as shown in Fig.1, we obtain
416: in second order perturbation theory the following effective Hamiltonian
417: after integrating out the heavy sneutrino fields:
418: \eq\label{b-dll}
419: {\cal H}_{\rpm} &=&
420: \frac{m_{d_j}}{M_W} (\bar{d}_j\ d_j)\left(\frac{\eta_i}{m_{\tilde\nu_i}^2}
421: \lambda^{\p *}_{im3}\ \bar{d}_m P_R b + \frac{\eta^*_i}{m_{\tilde\nu_i}^2}
422: \lambda^{\p}_{i3m}\ \bar{d}_m P_L b\right) + \nonumber\\
423: &+& \frac{m_{l_j}}{M_W} (\bar{l}_j\ l_j)
424: \left(\frac{\eta_i}{m_{\tilde\nu_i}^2} \lambda^{\p *}_{im3} \
425: \bar{d}_m P_R b + \frac{\eta^*_i}{m_{\tilde\nu_i}^2}
426: \lambda^{\p}_{i3m} \ \bar{d}_m P_L b\right) + \ {\rm H.c.}
427: \en
428: The 4-quark terms involve the pARC operators $O_{15}$ and $O_{17}$ from
429: the list of Eqs.~(\ref{O:15-16})-(\ref{O:25-26})
430: with the following Wilson coefficients:
431: \eq\label{c_15_17}
432: c_{15}= \frac{\sqrt{2}}{G_F}\frac{m_{s}}{M_W}
433: \frac{\eta_i}{m_{\tilde\nu_i}^2} \lambda^{\p *}_{i23} \,, \ \ \
434: c_{17}= \frac{\sqrt{2}}{G_F}\frac{m_{s}}{M_W}
435: \frac{\eta^*_i}{m_{\tilde\nu_i}^2} \lambda^{\p}_{i32} \,.
436: \en
437:
438: Thus \rp SUSY seems to satisfy the pARC as it allows
439: appropriate operator structures.
440: In the following we have to check if the existing
441: experimental constraints on the \rp-parameters entering into
442: the definition of the Wilson coefficients allow one to accommodate
443: the values of Eqs.~(\ref{a_25-best-fit}) and (\ref{a_23-best-fit}).
444:
445: \section{Experimental Constraints on Wilson coefficients}
446:
447: Examining Eq.~(\ref{b-dll}) we note that the strength of both
448: the 4-quark and quark-lepton operators is determined by the same
449: combination of the R-parity conserving and \rp-parameters forming the
450: Wilson coefficients $c_{15,17}$. Therefore, one can directly constrain
451: the $c_{15,17}$ parameters from the existing stringent experimental upper
452: bound on the $B_s\rightarrow \mu^+\mu^-$ branching ratio~\cite{CDF-Bmumu}
453: \eq\label{Lim1}
454: Br(B_s\rightarrow \mu^+\mu^-)\leq 1.0\times 10^{-7} \
455: ( 90\% \ {\rm C.L.} ) \,.
456: \en
457: An important advantage of this constraint is that it applies to the
458: coefficients $c_{15,17}$ as a whole, avoiding uncertainties related
459: to the presence of several R-parity conserving
460: $(\tan\beta, \alpha, M_{h_1,h_2}, m_{\tilde\nu})$ and
461: violating parameters $(\tilde\mu_{2j}^2, \lambda')$.
462:
463: The contribution of the quark-lepton interactions in the
464: Lagrangian (\ref{b-dll}) to the decay rate of this process
465: can be written in terms of the Wilson coefficients $c_{15,17}$ as
466: \eq\label{Br}
467: \Gamma(B_s\rightarrow \mu^+\mu^-)= \frac{G_F^2}{2}\frac{m_{B_s}}{32 \pi}
468: \left(\frac{m_{\mu}}{m_{s}}\right)^2
469: \left(f_{B_s}\frac{m^2_{B_s}}{m_b+m_s}\right)^2 (c_{15}-c_{17})^2
470: \left[1-\left(\frac{2 m_{\mu}}{m_{B_s}}\right)^2\right]^{3/2}
471: \en
472: where we used
473: \eq\label{hme1}
474: \langle 0|\bar{s} \gamma_5 b|\bar B_s^0\rangle =
475: i f_{B_s} \frac{m^2_{B_s}}{m_b+m_s} \,.
476: \en
477: We use the following numerical values for the quantities in above
478: equations: $f_{B_s} = 0.2$~GeV \cite{f_bs}, $m_{B_s}=5.367$~GeV,
479: $m_b =4.6$~GeV, $m_s = 0.15$~GeV and
480: $\tau_{B_s}= 1.46\times 10^{-12} $s~\cite{PDG}.
481: Considering the two scenarios of Ref.~\cite{Das:2004}
482: as displayed in Eqs.~(\ref{a_25-best-fit}) and (\ref{a_23-best-fit})
483: [denoted as (i) and (ii)] we get from the experimental
484: limit~(\ref{Lim1}) the following upper bounds
485: \eq\label{lim-c}
486: |c_{15}|, |c_{17}| \leq 1.4\times 10^{-4}.
487: \en
488: Using the definitions of Eqs.~(\ref{a_23-def}) and (\ref{a_25-def})
489: these limits can be translated to upper limits on the effective
490: coefficients
491: \eq\label{lim-a}
492: |\tilde{a}_{23}|, |\tilde{a}_{25}| \leq 5.9\times 10^{-6}.
493: \en
494: These limits are about two orders of magnitude smaller then
495: the values given in Eqs. (\ref{a_25-best-fit}) and (\ref{a_23-best-fit})
496: required for the solution of the polarization anomaly.
497:
498: Thus, we conclude that the polarization anomaly observed in
499: $B^0(\bar B^0)\rightarrow \phi K^{*0}(\bar K^{*0})$ decay
500: by the BABAR~\cite{BABAR} and BELLE~\cite{BELLE} collaborations
501: cannot be explained within the \rp SUSY framework, despite
502: the occurrence of effective operators with the chiral structure
503: required qualitatively.
504:
505: As a byproduct of our analysis the limits of Eq.~(\ref{lim-c})
506: set new upper limits on the products of the soft and superpotential
507: \rp-parameters of Eqs.~(\ref{SH-par}) and (\ref{c_15_17}).
508: Since the expressions for the Wilson coefficients $c_{15,17}$ contain
509: the R-parity conserving parameters as well we choose one representative
510: point in the SUSY parameter space in order to illustrate the limits on
511: the \rp-parameters. We take a typical mSUGRA:
512: the so-called SPS 1a point from the list of nine Snowmass benchmark
513: points \cite{SPS}. This choice corresponds to
514: $\tan\beta = 10$, $m_0=-A_0=0.25 m_{1/2}=100$ GeV and $\mu>0$.
515: For this parameters we find
516: \eq\label{RPV-limit}
517: \left(\frac{\tilde\mu_{2 i}}{100 \ \mbox{GeV}}\right)^2
518: |\lambda^{\prime}_{i23}|, \
519: \left(\frac{\tilde\mu_{2 i}}{100 \ \mbox{GeV}}\right)^2
520: |\lambda^{\prime}_{i32}|
521: \leq 5.6 \times 10^{-3}.
522: \en
523:
524: To our knowledge in the literature (for a review see, for
525: instance~\cite{RPV-rev}) there have not been established
526: experimental limits on these products of \rp-parameters.
527: However, there exist bounds on $\tilde\mu_{2i}^2$,
528: $\lambda^{\prime}_{i23}$ and $\lambda^{\prime}_{i32}$ separately
529: from various low energy processes ~\cite{RPV-rev}. This allows one to
530: obtain indirect bounds on their products and compare them with those
531: in Eq.~(\ref{RPV-limit}). The soft \rp-parameter $\tilde\mu_{2i}^2$,
532: contributes to the neutrino mass matrix at one-loop level.
533: Thus it is constrained by the present limits on neutrino masses and
534: mixing from neutrino oscillations. With the SPS 1a set of the R-parity
535: conserving parameters one has:
536: $(\tilde\mu_{2i}/100 \ {\rm GeV})^2\leq 10^{-4}$.
537: Existing constraints on the trilinear \rp-couplings
538: are typically as follows:
539: $\lambda^{\prime}_{i23}, \lambda^{\prime}_{i32} \leq 0.2$.
540: Combining these constraints we have the limits:
541: \eq\label{RPV-limit-lit}
542: \left(\frac{\tilde\mu_{2 i}}{100 \ \mbox{GeV}}\right)^2
543: |\lambda^{\prime}_{i23}|, \
544: \left(\frac{\tilde\mu_{2 i}}{100 \ \mbox{GeV}}\right)^2
545: |\lambda^{\prime}_{i32}|
546: \leq 2.0 \times 10^{-5}.
547: \en
548: which are two orders of magnitude better then those in
549: Eq.~(\ref{RPV-limit}). Nevertheless, the latter can still
550: be useful as direct constraints on the specific products of
551: the bilinear and trilinear \rp-parameters.
552: Note that these constraints correspond to a particular point
553: in the MSSM parameter space and in some other points the above
554: limits may significantly change. The detailed study of this
555: question is beyond the scope of the present paper.
556:
557: \section{Conclusions}
558:
559: We analyzed the \rp SUSY model with respect to its ability to
560: account for the polarization anomaly in $B^0(\bar B^0)\rightarrow
561: \phi K^{*0}(\bar K^{*0})$-decay observed by the BABAR \cite{BABAR}
562: and BELLE \cite{BELLE} collaborations. Within this framework we have
563: determined the effective $\Delta B=1$ operators with chirality
564: structures appropriate for a possible resolution of this anomaly.
565: However, the experimental data on $B\rightarrow \mu^+\mu^-$-decay
566: set stringent limits on the respective Wilson coefficients, which
567: are about two orders of magnitude below the values required to
568: resolve the polarization anomaly. This gap of two orders of
569: magnitude can hardly by eliminated by the uncertainties in the
570: hadronic parameters involved in the calculation of the helicity
571: amplitudes of $B^0(\bar B^0)\rightarrow \phi K^{*0}(\bar
572: K^{*0})$-decay. Therefore, we do not believe that \rp SUSY is able
573: to account for the B-decay polarization anomaly.
574:
575: As a byproduct we used the experimental data on
576: $B\rightarrow \mu^+\mu^-$-decay to set a new upper limit on the product
577: of the two \rp-parameters
578: $\tilde\mu^2_{2i} \, |\lambda^{\prime}_{i23}|$ and
579: $\tilde\mu^2_{2i} \, |\lambda^{\prime}_{i32}|$,
580: where $\tilde\mu^2_{2i}$ and $\lambda^{\prime}_{ijk}$ are bilinear
581: soft and trilinear superpotential \rp-parameters, respectively.
582:
583: \vspace*{1cm}
584:
585: {\bf Acknowledgments}\\[3mm]
586: \hspace*{1cm}
587: This work was supported in part by CONICYT (Chile) under grants
588: FONDECYT No.1030244 and PBCT/No.285/2006 and
589: by the DFG under contracts FA67/31-1 and GRK683.
590: This research is also a part of the EU Integrated
591: Infrastructure Initiative Hadronphysics project under the contract
592: No. RII3-CT-2004-506078 and President grant of Russia
593: "Scientific Schools" No. 5103.2006.2.
594: SK would like to thank Deutscher Akademischer Austausch Dienst (DAAD)
595: for the support within the program ``F\" orderung ausl\" andischer
596: Gastdozenten zu Lehrt\" atigkeiten an deutschen Hochschulen".
597: SK is also thankful to the T\"ubingen theory group for hospitality.
598: J.C.H. thanks High Energy Physics LatinAmerican-European Network (HELEN)
599: for the support within the Advanced Training program.
600:
601: \newpage
602:
603:
604: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
605: %%%%%% PDG %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
606: %\cite{PDG}
607: \bibitem{PDG}
608: W.~M.~Yao {\it et al.} [Particle Data Group],
609: %``Review of particle physics,''
610: J.\ Phys.\ G {\bf 33}, 1 (2006).
611: %%CITATION = JPHGB,G33,1;%%
612: %%%%%% polarization anomaly %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
613: \bibitem{BABAR}
614: %\cite{BABAR}
615: B.~Aubert {\it et al.} [BABAR Collaboration],
616: %``Rates, polarizations, and asymmetries in charmless
617: %vector-vector $B$ meson decays,''
618: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 91}, 171802 (2003)
619: [arXiv:hep-ex/0307026];
620: %%CITATION = PRLTA,91,171802;%%
621: %``Measurement of the $B^0 \to \phi K^0$ decay amplitudes,''
622: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 93}, 231804 (2004)
623: [arXiv:hep-ex/0408017];
624: %%CITATION = PRLTA,93,231804;%%
625: %``Vector - tensor and vector - vector decay amplitude analysis
626: %of B0 --> Phi K*0,''
627: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 98}, 051801 (2007)
628: [arXiv:hep-ex/0610073];
629: %%CITATION = PRLTA,98,051801;%%
630: A.~Gritsan,
631: %``Polarization puzzle in B --> Phi K* and other B --> V V at BaBar,''
632: arXiv:hep-ex/0409059.
633: %%CITATION = HEP-EX/0409059;%%
634: %
635: \bibitem{BELLE}
636: %\cite{BELLE}
637: K.~Abe {\it et al.} [BELLE Collaboration],
638: %``Measurement of polarization and triple-product correlations
639: %in B --> Phi K* decays,''
640: arXiv:hep-ex/0408141;
641: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0408141;%%
642: K.~F.~Chen {\it et al.} [BELLE Collaboration],
643: %``Measurement of polarization and triple-product correlations
644: %in B --> Phi K* decays,''
645: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 94}, 221804 (2005)
646: [arXiv:hep-ex/0503013].
647: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0503013;%%
648: \bibitem{CDF}
649: P.~Bussey [CDF Collaboration], Talk given at the ICHEP 2006.
650: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
651: %\cite{Ali:1978kn}
652: \bibitem{Ali:1978kn}
653: A.~Ali, J.~G.~Korner, G.~Kramer and J.~Willrodt,
654: %``Nonleptonic Weak Decays Of Bottom Mesons,''
655: Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 1}, 269 (1979);
656: %%CITATION = ZEPYA,C1,269;%%
657: %\cite{Korner:1979ci}
658: %\bibitem{Korner:1979ci}
659: J.~G.~Korner and G.~R.~Goldstein,
660: %``Quark And Particle Helicities In Hadronic Charmed Particle Decays,''
661: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 89}, 105 (1979).
662: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B89,105;%
663: %\cite{Cheng-Yang}
664: \bibitem{Cheng-Yang}
665: H.~Y.~Cheng and K.~C.~Yang,
666: %``Charmless B --> V V decays in QCD factorization:
667: %Implications of recent B --> Phi K* measurement,''
668: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 511}, 40 (2001)
669: [arXiv:hep-ph/0104090].
670: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0104090;%%
671: %
672: \bibitem{Anom-SM}
673: A.~L.~Kagan,
674: %``Polarization in B --> V V decays,''
675: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 601}, 151 (2004)
676: [arXiv:hep-ph/0405134];
677: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0405134;%%
678: H.~N.~Li and S.~Mishima,
679: %``Polarizations in B --> V V decays,''
680: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 71}, 054025 (2005)
681: [arXiv:hep-ph/0411146];
682: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0411146;%%
683: P.~Colangelo, F.~De Fazio and T.~N.~Pham,
684: %``The riddle of polarization in B --> V V transitions,''
685: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 597}, 291 (2004)
686: [arXiv:hep-ph/0406162];
687: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0406162;%
688: H.~Y.~Cheng, C.~K.~Chua and A.~Soni,
689: %``Final state interactions in hadronic B decays,''
690: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 71}, 014030 (2005)
691: [arXiv:hep-ph/0409317].
692: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0409317;%%
693: %
694: \bibitem{Anom-BSM}
695: E.~Alvarez, L.~N.~Epele, D.~G.~Dumm and A.~Szynkman,
696: %``Right handed currents and FSI phases in B0 --> Phi K*0,''
697: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 70}, 115014 (2004)
698: [arXiv:hep-ph/0410096];
699: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0410096;%%
700: A.~K.~Giri and R.~Mohanta,
701: %``Resolution of B0 --> Phi K*0 polarization anomaly with supersymmetry,''
702: arXiv:hep-ph/0412107;
703: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0412107;%%
704: C.~S.~Kim and Y.~D.~Yang,
705: %``Polarization anomaly in B --> Phi K* and probe of tensor interactions,''
706: arXiv:hep-ph/0412364;
707: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0412364;%%
708: W.~S.~Hou and M.~Nagashima,
709: %``Resolving the B --> Phi K* polarization anomaly,''
710: arXiv:hep-ph/0408007;
711: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0408007;%%
712: Y.~D.~S.~Yang, R.~M.~S.~Wang and G.~R.~S.~Lu,
713: %``Polarizations in decays B(u,d) --> V V and possible implications for
714: %R-parity violating SUSY,''
715: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 72}, 015009 (2005)
716: [arXiv:hep-ph/0411211];
717: C.~H.~Chen and C.~Q.~Geng,
718: %``Scalar interactions to the polarizations of B --> Phi K*,''
719: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 71}, 115004 (2005)
720: [arXiv:hep-ph/0504145];
721: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0504145;%%
722: S.~Baek, A.~Datta, P.~Hamel, O.~F.~Hernandez and D.~London,
723: %``Polarization states in B --> rho K* and new physics,''
724: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 72}, 094008 (2005)
725: [arXiv:hep-ph/0508149];
726: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0508149;%%
727: C.~S.~Huang, P.~Ko, X.~H.~Wu and Y.~D.~Yang,
728: %``MSSM anatomy of the polarization puzzle in B --> Phi K* decays,''
729: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 73}, 034026 (2006)
730: [arXiv:hep-ph/0511129];
731: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0511129;%%
732: Q.~Chang, X.~Q.~Li and Y.~D.~Yang,
733: %``Constraints on the anomalous tensor operators from
734: %B --> Phi K*, eta K* and
735: %eta K decays,''
736: arXiv:hep-ph/0610280;
737: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0610280;%%
738: C.~H.~Chen and H.~Hatanaka,
739: %``Nonuniversal Z' couplings in B decays,''
740: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 73}, 075003 (2006)
741: [arXiv:hep-ph/0602140].
742: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0602140;%%
743: %
744: \bibitem{Das:2004}
745: P.~K.~Das and K.~C.~Yang,
746: %``Data for polarization in charmless B --> Phi K*: A signal for new
747: %physics?,''
748: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 71}, 094002 (2005)
749: [arXiv:hep-ph/0412313].
750: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0412313;%%
751: %
752: \bibitem{Buchalla}
753: G.~Buchalla, A.~J.~Buras and M.~E.~Lautenbacher,
754: %``Weak Decays Beyond Leading Logarithms,''
755: Rev.\ Mod.\ Phys.\ {\bf 68}, 1125 (1996)
756: [arXiv:hep-ph/9512380].
757: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9512380;%%
758: %
759: \bibitem{Now}
760: M.~Nowakowski and A.~Pilaftsis,
761: %``W and Z boson interactions in supersymmetric models
762: %with explicit R-parity violation,''
763: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 461}, 19 (1996)
764: [arXiv:hep-ph/9508271];
765: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9508271;%%
766: A.~S.~Joshipura and M.~Nowakowski,
767: %``'Just so' oscillations in supersymmetric standard model,''
768: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 51}, 2421 (1995)
769: [arXiv:hep-ph/9408224].
770: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9408224;%
771: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
772: % Effective operators in SM
773: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
774: \bibitem{snu-H}
775: F.~de Campos, M.~A.~Garcia-Jareno, A.~S.~Joshipura, J.~Rosiek and
776: J.~W.~F.~Valle,
777: %``Novel Scalar Boson Decays In Susy With Broken R Parity,''
778: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 451}, 3 (1995)
779: [arXiv:hep-ph/9502237];
780: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9502237;%%
781: M.~A.~Diaz, J.~C.~Romao and J.~W.~F.~Valle,
782: %``Minimal supergravity with R-parity breaking,''
783: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 524}, 23 (1998)
784: [arXiv:hep-ph/9706315];
785: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9706315;%%
786: C.~H.~F.~Chang and T.~F.~F.~Feng,
787: %``The supersymmetric extension of the standard model
788: %with bilinear R-parity violation,''
789: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 12}, 137 (2000)
790: [arXiv:hep-ph/9901260];
791: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9901260;%%
792: S.~Davidson, M.~Losada and N.~Rius,
793: %``Neutral Higgs sector of the MSSM without R(p),''
794: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 587}, 118 (2000)
795: [arXiv:hep-ph/9911317];
796: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9911317;%
797: O.~C.~W.~Kong,
798: %``On the formulation of the generic supersymmetric standard model (or
799: %supersymmetry without R parity),''
800: Int.\ J.\ Mod.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 19}, 1863 (2004)
801: [arXiv:hep-ph/0205205].
802: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0205205;%%
803: %
804: \bibitem{Gunion}
805: %John~F.~Gunion, Howard~E.~Haber, Gordon~Kane, Sally~Dawson,
806: J.~F.~Gunion, H.~E.~Haber, G.~Kane, S.~Dawson,
807: {\it The Higgs Hunter's Guide},
808: Perseus Books Group; Lightning Source Inc, July 2000, 425p.
809: %\bibitem{hadr me}
810: %
811: %\bibitem{ff} Form factors
812: %
813: \bibitem{RPV-rev}
814: M.~Chemtob,
815: %``Phenomenological constraints on broken R parity symmetry
816: %in supersymmetry models,''
817: Prog.\ Part.\ Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf 54}, 71 (2005)
818: [arXiv:hep-ph/0406029];
819: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0406029;%%
820: R.~Barbier {\it et al.},
821: % R.~Barbier, C.~Berat, M.Besancon, M.Chemtob, A.Deandrea,
822: % E.Dudas, P.Fayet, S.Lavignac, G.Moreau, E.Perez, Y.Sirois,
823: %``R-parity violating supersymmetry,''
824: Phys.\ Rept.\ {\bf 420}, 1 (2005)
825: [arXiv:hep-ph/0406039];
826: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0406039;%%
827: A. Dedes, S. Rimmer, J. Rosiek, JHEP {\bf 0608}, 005 (2006)
828: [arXiv:hep-ph/0603225].
829:
830: \bibitem{CDF-Bmumu}
831: D.~Tonelli [CDF Collaboration],
832: %``CDF hot topics,''
833: {\it In the Proceedings of 4th Flavor Physics and CP Violation
834: Conference (FPCP 2006), Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada,
835: 9-12 Apr 2006, pp001}
836: [arXiv:hep-ex/0605038].
837: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0605038;%
838: \bibitem{f_bs}
839: S. Hashimoto, Int.J.Mod.Phys. {\bf A 20}, 5133 (2005);
840: F.~Bodi-Esteban, J.~Bordes and J.~Penarrocha,
841: %``B and B/s decay constants from moments of finite energy sum rules in
842: %QCD,''
843: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 38}, 277 (2004)
844: [arXiv:hep-ph/0407307].
845: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0407307;%%
846: %
847: \bibitem{SPS}
848: N.~Ghodbane and H.~U.~Martyn,
849: %``Compilation of SUSY particle spectra from Snowmass 2001 benchmark
850: %models,''
851: in {\it Proc. of the APS/DPF/DPB Summer Study on the Future of
852: Particle Physics (Snowmass 2001) } ed. N.~Graf,
853: arXiv:hep-ph/0201233.
854: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0201233;%%
855: \end{thebibliography}
856:
857: \begin{figure}
858: \begin{center}
859: \vspace*{1cm} \epsfig{file=fig1.eps, scale=1.0}
860: \end{center}
861:
862: \caption{The \rp SUSY contribution to the $\bar{b}\rightarrow ss\bar{s}$
863: (a) and to the $\bar{b} s \rightarrow l \bar{l}$ transition operators.
864: The sign $\otimes$ denotes \rp soft sneutrino-Higgs mixing.
865: The left hand vertices in both diagrams are due to
866: the \rp superpotential $\lambda^{\prime}$ coupling,
867: while the right hand ones correspond to the R-parity conserving
868: $H_1-q-\bar{q}$ and $H_1-l-\bar{l}$ Yukawa couplings.}
869: \end{figure}
870:
871:
872: \end{document}
873: