1: \documentclass[12pt,a4paper]{article}
2:
3:
4: \newcommand{\ppbar}{p^{\!\!\!\!\!\textsuperscript{\tiny{(--)}}}\!\!}
5: \newcommand{\ptmiss}{{p\!\!\!\!\! \not \,\,\,\,}_T}
6: \newcommand{\mumu}{\mu^\pm \mu^\pm}
7: \newcommand{\ee}{e^\pm e^\pm}
8: \newcommand{\mue}{\mu^\pm e^\pm}
9:
10:
11: \usepackage{amsmath,amssymb,graphicx}
12: \usepackage{epsfig}
13: \usepackage{cite}
14:
15: \renewcommand{\labelenumi}{(\theenumi)}
16: \renewcommand{\theenumi}{\roman{enumi}}
17:
18: \renewcommand{\topfraction}{1}
19: \renewcommand{\bottomfraction}{1}
20: \renewcommand{\textfraction}{0}
21: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.2}
22: \parskip=1.0ex
23: \setcounter{topnumber}{10}
24: \setcounter{bottomnumber}{10}
25: \setcounter{totalnumber}{10}
26:
27: \textwidth=15.5cm
28: \textheight=23cm
29: \oddsidemargin=0.2cm
30: \evensidemargin=0.2cm
31: \topmargin=-1cm
32:
33: \begin{document}
34:
35: \begin{center}
36: \begin{Large}
37: {\bf Heavy neutrino signals at large hadron colliders}
38:
39: \end{Large}
40:
41: \vspace{0.5cm}
42: F. del Aguila$^1$, J. A. Aguilar--Saavedra$^1$, R. Pittau$^2$ \\[0.2cm]
43: {\it $^1$ Departamento de F\'{\i}sica Te\'orica y del Cosmos and CAFPE, \\
44: Universidad de Granada, E-18071 Granada, Spain} \\[0.1cm]
45: {\it $^2$ Dipartimento di Fisica Teorica, Universit\`a di Torino,
46: and INFN \\ Sezione di Torino, V. Pietro Giuria 1, I-10125 Torino, Italy}
47: \end{center}
48:
49: \begin{abstract}
50: We study the LHC discovery potential for heavy Majorana neutrino singlets in
51: the process $pp \to W^+ \to \ell^+ N \to \ell^+ \ell^+ jj$ ($\ell=e,\mu$)
52: plus its charge conjugate. With a fast detector simulation we show that
53: backgrounds involving two like-sign charged
54: leptons are not negligible and, moreover, they cannot be eliminated with simple
55: sequential
56: kinematical cuts. Using a likelihood analysis it is shown that, for heavy
57: neutrinos coupling only to the muon, LHC has $5\sigma$ sensitivity for masses
58: up to 200 GeV in the final state $\mu^\pm \mu^\pm jj$. This reduction in
59: sensitivity, compared to previous parton-level estimates, is driven by the
60: $\sim 10^2-10^3$ times larger background. Limits are also provided for
61: $e^\pm e^\pm jj$ and $e^\pm \mu^\pm jj$ final states, as well as for Tevatron.
62: For heavy Dirac neutrinos the prospects are worse because backgrounds involving
63: two opposite charge leptons are much larger. For this case, we study the
64: observability of the lepton flavour violating signal $e^\pm \mu^\mp jj$. As a
65: by-product of our analysis, heavy neutrino production has been implemented
66: within the ALPGEN framework.
67: \end{abstract}
68:
69:
70: \section{Introduction}
71:
72:
73:
74: Large hadron colliders involve strong interacting particles as initial states,
75: giving rise to huge hadronic cross sections. The large luminosities
76: expected will also provide quite large electroweak signals, with for instance
77: $1.6 \times 10^{10}$ ($4 \times 10^7$) $W$ bosons at LHC (Tevatron) for a
78: luminosity of 100 (2) fb$^{-1}$. Therefore, these colliders can be used for
79: precise studies of the leptonic sector as well, and
80: in particular they can produce new
81: heavy neutrinos at an observable level, or improve present limits on their
82: masses and mixings
83: \cite{Datta:1993nm,Almeida:2000pz,Panella:2001wq,Han:2006ip} (see
84: Ref.~\cite{delAguila:2006dx} for a review).
85: These new fermions transform trivially under the gauge symmetry group
86: of the Standard Model (SM), and in the absence of other interactions
87: they are produced and decay only through their mixing with the SM leptons.
88: With new
89: interactions, like for instance in left-right models \cite{Langacker:1984dc},
90: heavy neutrinos can be produced by gauge couplings
91: unsuppressed by small mixing angles, yielding larger cross sections and
92: implying a much higher collider discovery reach
93: \cite{Ferrari:2000sp,Gninenko:2006br,Keung:1983uu,Datta:1992qw}.
94: Heavy neutrinos could also be copiously
95: produced in pairs through the exchange of a relatively light
96: $Z'$ boson~\cite{delAguila:2007ua}.
97: In these scenarios, however, the observation of the new interactions could be
98: more interesting than the existence of new heavy neutrinos.
99:
100: We will concentrate on the first possibility and neglect other new production
101: mechanims, taking a conservative approach. In this case, for example,
102: it has been claimed by looking at the lepton number violating (LNV)
103: $\Delta L = 2$ process $p\ppbar \rightarrow \mu^\pm \mu^\pm jj$ that
104: LHC will be sensitive to heavy Majorana neutrinos with masses $m_N$
105: up to 400 GeV, whereas Tevatron is sensitive to masses up to 150 GeV
106: \cite{Almeida:2000pz,Han:2006ip}.
107: However, as we will show, taking into account the actual backgrounds these
108: limits are far from being realistic.
109: In particular, backgrounds involving $b$ quarks,
110: including for instance $t \bar t n j$ (with $nj$
111: standing for $n=0,1,2,\dots$ additional jets), are two orders of magnitude
112: larger than previously estimated.
113: Moreover, in the region $m_N < M_W$ the largest and irreducible background is
114: $b \bar b nj$, by far dominant but overlooked in previous parton-level analyses
115: \cite{Han:2006ip}.
116: In this work we make a detailed study, at the level of
117: fast simulation, of the LHC sensitivity to Majorana neutrinos in the process
118: $pp \rightarrow \mu^\pm\mu^\pm jj$, which is the cleanest final state,
119: for both $m_N > M_W$ and $m_N < M_W$.
120: We also study the processes $pp \to e^\pm e^\pm jj$ and
121: $pp \to e^\pm \mu^\pm jj$ for which the sensitivity is slightly worse. Heavy
122: Dirac neutrinos do not produce LNV signals and then their observation is much
123: more difficult. As an example, we examine the lepton flavour violating (LFV)
124: signal $e^\pm \mu^\mp jj$, produced by a heavy Dirac neutrino coupling to the
125: electron and muon.
126:
127:
128: The generation of heavy neutrino signals has been implemented in the
129: ALPGEN \cite{Mangano:2002ea} framework, including the process studied here
130: as well as other final states. In the following, after making precise our
131: assumptions and notation in section~\ref{sec:2}, we describe the
132: implementation of heavy neutrino production in ALPGEN in section~\ref{sec:3}.
133: We present our detailed results in section~\ref{sec:4}, where we will eventually
134: find that heavy neutrinos can be discovered up to masses of the order of
135: 200 GeV, and that for $N$ lighter than the $W$ boson its mixing can be probed
136: at the $10^{-2}$ level (for a ``reference'' mass $m_N = 60$ GeV).
137: These figures are much less optimistic than
138: in previous literature. Estimates for
139: Tevatron are given in section~\ref{sec:5}, and our conclusions are
140: drawn in section~\ref{sec:6}. In two appendices we detail the evaluation of the
141: $b \bar b nj$ background and the heavy neutrino mass reconstruction,
142: respectively.
143:
144:
145:
146: %\clearpage
147: \section{Heavy neutrino interactions}
148: \label{sec:2}
149:
150: Our assumptions and notation are reviewed in more detail in
151: Ref.~\cite{delAguila:2006dx}
152: (see also Refs.~\cite{Mohapatra:1998rq,Branco:1999fs}).
153: The SM is only extended with heavy neutrino singlets $N_j$, which
154: are assumed to have masses of the order of the electroweak scale,
155: up to few hundreds of GeV.
156: We concentrate on the lightest one, assuming for
157: simplicity that the other extra neutrinos are heavy enough to
158: neglect possible interference effects. The new heavy neutrino
159: $N$ (where we suppress the unnecessary subindex)
160: can have Dirac character, what requires the addition of at least two
161: singlets, or Majorana, in which case
162: $(N_L)^c \equiv C N_L^T = N_R$ and lepton number is violated.
163: In either case it is produced and decays
164: through its mixing with the light leptons, which is described
165: by the interaction Lagrangian (in standard notation)
166: \begin{eqnarray}
167: \mathcal{L}_W & = &
168: - \frac{g}{\sqrt 2} \left( \bar \ell \gamma^\mu V_{\ell N}
169: P_L N \; W_\mu + \bar N \gamma^\mu V_{\ell N}^* P_L \ell \; W_\mu^\dagger
170: \right) \,, \nonumber \\
171: \mathcal{L}_Z & = &
172: - \frac{g}{2 c_W} \left( \bar \nu_\ell \gamma^\mu
173: V_{\ell N} P_L N + \bar N \gamma^\mu V_{\ell N}^* P_L \nu_\ell \right)
174: Z_\mu \,, \nonumber \\
175: \mathcal{L}_H & = &
176: - \frac{g \, m_N}{2 M_W} \, \left( \bar \nu_\ell \, V_{\ell N}
177: P_R N + \bar N \, V_{\ell N}^* P_L \nu_\ell \right) H \,.
178: \label{ec:nNZ}
179: \end{eqnarray}
180: The SM Lagrangian remains unchanged in the limit of small
181: mixing angles $V_{\ell N}$, $\ell = e, \mu, \tau$ (which is the
182: actual case), up to very small corrections $O(V^2)$.
183: Neutral couplings involving two heavy neutrinos are also of order $V^2$.
184: The heavy neutrino mass $m_N$ joins two different bispinors
185: in the Dirac case and the same one in the Majorana case.
186: Heavy neutrino decays are given by their interactions in Eqs.~(\ref{ec:nNZ}):
187: $N \to W^+ \ell^-$, $N \to Z \nu$, $N \to H \nu$,
188: plus $N \to W^- \ell^+$ for a heavy Majorana neutrino.
189: For $m_N < M_W$ all these decays produce three body final
190: states, mediated by off-shell $W$, $Z$ or $H$ bosons.
191: The total width for a Majorana neutrino is twice larger than for a Dirac
192: one with the same couplings
193: \cite{Gluza:1996bz,Pilaftsis:1991ug,delAguila:2005pf,delAguila:2006dx}.
194:
195: As it is apparent from Eqs.~(\ref{ec:nNZ}), heavy neutrino signals are
196: proportional to the neutrino mixing with the SM leptons $V_{\ell N}$.
197: Limits on these matrix elements have been extensively discussed
198: in previous literature, and we quote here only the main results. Low-energy data
199: constrain the quantities
200: \begin{equation}
201: \Omega_{\ell \ell'} \equiv \delta_{\ell \ell'} - \sum_{i=1}^3 V_{\ell \nu_i}
202: V_{\ell' \nu_i}^* = \sum_{j=1}^n V_{\ell N_j} V_{\ell' N_j}^* \,.
203: \label{bounds1}
204: \end{equation}
205: A global fit to tree level processes
206: involving light neutrinos as external states gives
207: \cite{Bergmann:1998rg,Bekman:2002zk},
208: \begin{equation}
209: \Omega_{ee} \leq 0.0054 \,, \quad \Omega_{\mu \mu} \leq 0.0096 \,, \quad
210: \Omega_{\tau \tau} \leq 0.016
211: \label{eps1}
212: \end{equation}
213: at 90\% confidence level (CL). Note that a global fit
214: without the unitarity bounds implies $\Omega_{ee} \leq 0.012$
215: \cite{Bergmann:1998rg}.
216: Additionally, for Majorana neutrinos coupling to the electron the experimental
217: bound on neutrinoless double beta decay requires
218: \cite{Aalseth:2004hb}
219: \begin{equation}
220: \left| \, \sum_{j=1}^n \, V_{e N_j}^2 \, \frac{1}{m_{N_j}} \, \right|
221: \, < 5 \times 10^{-8} \; {\rm GeV}^{-1} \,.
222: \label{beta}
223: \end{equation}%
224: If $V_{e N_j}$ saturate $\Omega_{ee}$ in Eq. (\ref{eps1}),
225: this limit can be satisfied either demanding that $m_{N_j}$ are large enough,
226: beyond the TeV scale \cite{Benes:2005hn}
227: and then beyond LHC reach, or that there is a
228: cancellation among the different terms in Eq.~(\ref{beta}), as
229: may happen in definite models \cite{Ingelman:1993ve},
230: in particular for (quasi)Dirac
231: neutrinos.
232:
233: Flavour changing neutral processes further restrict $\Omega_{\ell \ell'}$.
234: The new contributions, and then the bounds, depend on the heavy neutrino
235: masses.
236: In the limit $m_{N_j}^2 \gg M_W^2 \gg |V_{\ell N_j}|^2 m_{N_j}^2$
237: \footnote{When $V_{\ell N_j} > M_W/m_{N_j}$ the non-decoupling terms in the amplitude, proportional to $V^4_{\ell N_j} m^2_{N_j}/M_W^2$, cannot be neglected
238: because they dominate over the $V_{\ell N_j}^2$ terms \cite{Ilakovac:1994kj}.}
239: they imply \cite{Tommasini:1995ii}
240: \begin{equation}
241: |\Omega_{e \mu}| \leq 0.0001 \,, \quad |\Omega_{e \tau}| \leq 0.01 \,, \quad
242: |\Omega_{\mu \tau}| \leq 0.01 \,.
243: \label{eps2}
244: \end{equation}
245: Except in the case of $\Omega_{e \mu}$, for which experimental constraints
246: on lepton flavour violation are rather stringent, these limits are similar
247: to the limits on the diagonal elements. An important difference, however, is
248: that (partial) cancellations among loop contributions of different
249: heavy neutrinos may be at work \cite{delAguila:2005mf}.
250: Cancellations with other new physics contributions are also possible. Since
251: we are interested in determining the heavy neutrino discovery potential and
252: the direct limits on neutrino masses and mixings which can be eventually
253: established, we must consider the largest possible neutrino mixings, although
254: they may require model dependent cancellations or fine-tuning.
255:
256:
257: %\clearpage
258: \section{Heavy neutrino production with ALPGEN}
259: \label{sec:3}
260:
261: For the signal event generation we have extended
262: ALPGEN~\cite{Mangano:2002ea} with heavy neutrino production. This Monte Carlo
263: generator evaluates tree level SM processes and provides unweighted events
264: suitable for simulation. A simple way of including new processes
265: taking advantage of the ALPGEN framework is to provide the corresponding
266: squared amplitudes decomposed as a sum over the different colour structures.
267: In the case of heavy neutrinos this is trivial because there is only
268: one term. This method requires to evaluate from the beginning the squared
269: amplitudes for the processes one is interested in, what is done using
270: HELAS~\cite{helas}. An alternative
271: possibility which gives more flexibility for future applications is to
272: implement the new vertices at the same level as the SM ones, what is quite more
273: involved.
274:
275: We have restricted ourselves to single heavy neutrino production.
276: Pair production is suppressed by an extra $V^2$ mixing factor and by
277: the larger center of mass energy required, what implies smaller
278: PDFs and more suppressed $s$-channel propagators.
279: Single heavy neutrino production can proceed through $s$-channel $W, Z$ or $H$
280: exchange. The first two production mechanisms have been implemented in ALPGEN
281: for the various possible final states given by the heavy neutrino decays
282: $N \to W^\pm \ell^\mp$, $N \to Z \nu_\ell$, $N \to H \nu_\ell$ with
283: $\ell=e,\mu,\tau$, and for both Dirac or Majorana $N$.
284: In the case $m_N < M_W$ all decays
285: are three-body, and mediated by off-shell $W$, $Z$ or $H$. The transition from
286: two-body to three-body decays on the $M_W$, $M_Z$ and $M_H$ thresholds is
287: smooth, since the calculation of matrix elements and the $N$ width are done for
288: off-shell intermediate bosons. Two approximations are made, however.
289: The small mixing of heavy neutrinos with charged leptons implies that
290: their production is dominated
291: by diagrams with $N$ on-shell, like those shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:diag}, with a
292: pole enhancement factor, and that non-resonant diagrams are negligible.
293: (Additionally, to isolate heavy neutrino signals from the background one
294: expects that the heavy neutrino mass will have to be reconstructed to
295: some extent.) Then, the only diagrams included are the resonant ones.
296: In the calculation we also neglect light fermion masses except for the bottom
297: quark.
298:
299: \begin{figure}[htb]
300: \begin{center}
301: \begin{tabular}{ccc}
302: \epsfig{file=Figs/pp1b.eps,height=3cm,clip=} & \hspace{1cm} &
303: \epsfig{file=Figs/pp1a.eps,height=3cm,clip=} \\
304: (a) & & (b) \\
305: \end{tabular}
306: \caption{Feynman diagrams for the process $q \bar q' \to \ell^+ N$, followed by
307: LNV decay $N \to \ell^{(')+ }W^-$ (a) and lepton number conserving (LNC)
308: decay $N \to \ell^{(')-} W^+$ (b).
309: The diagrams for the charge conjugate processes are similar.}
310: \label{fig:diag}
311: \end{center}
312: \end{figure}
313:
314: Generator-level results are presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:cross} for LHC and
315: Tevatron in the relevant mass ranges. Solid lines correspond to the total
316: $\mu N$ cross sections for $|V_{\mu N}| = 0.098$, $V_{eN}=V_{\tau N} = 0$.
317: The dashed lines are the cross sections for the final state
318: $\mu^\pm \mu^\pm jj$,
319: which is the cleanest one. The dotted lines are the same but with
320: kinematical cuts
321: \begin{align}
322: \mathrm{LHC}: \begin{array}{ccc} p_T^\mu \geq 10~\mathrm{GeV}\,, &
323: |\eta^\mu| \leq 2.5\,, & \Delta R_{\mu j} \geq 0.4\,, \\
324: p_T^j \geq 10~\mathrm{GeV}\,, & |\eta^j| \leq 2.5\,,
325: \end{array} \notag \\
326: \mathrm{Tevatron}: \begin{array}{ccc} p_T^\mu \geq 10~\mathrm{GeV}\,, &
327: |\eta^\mu| \leq 2\,, & \Delta R_{\mu j} \geq 0.4\,, \\
328: p_T^j \geq 10~\mathrm{GeV}\,, & |\eta^j| \leq 2.5\,,
329: \end{array}
330: \label{ec:gcuts}
331: \end{align}
332: included to reproduce roughly the
333: acceptance of the detector and give approximately the ``effective'' size of the
334: observable
335: signal. Of course, the correct procedure is to perform a simulation, as we do
336: in next section, but for illustrative purposes we include the
337: cross-sections after cuts. In particular, they clearly show that
338: although for $m_N < M_W$ the total cross sections grow several orders of
339: magnitude, both at LHC and Tevatron, partons tend to be produced with low
340: transverse momenta (the two muons and two
341: quarks result from the decay of an on-shell $W$), making the observable signal
342: much smaller. These results are in agreement with those previously obtained in
343: Ref.~\cite{Han:2006ip}.
344:
345: \begin{figure}[htb]
346: \begin{center}
347: \begin{tabular}{ccc}
348: \epsfig{file=Figs/cross-LHC.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} & &
349: \epsfig{file=Figs/cross-Tev.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=}
350: \end{tabular}
351: \caption{Cross sections for heavy neutrino production at LHC (left) and Tevatron
352: (right), as a function of the heavy neutrino mass, for $|V_{\mu N}| = 0.098$.
353: The solid lines correspond to total $\mu N$ cross section, the dashed lines
354: include the decay to like-sign muons and the dotted lines are the same but
355: including the kinematical cuts in Eq.~(\ref{ec:gcuts}).}
356: \label{fig:cross}
357: \end{center}
358: \end{figure}
359:
360:
361:
362: \section{Di-lepton signals at LHC}
363: \label{sec:4}
364:
365:
366: The most interesting scenario for LHC is when the heavy neutrino has Majorana
367: nature and couples only to the muon, so that it produces a
368: final state $\mu^\pm \mu^\pm jj$ with two same sign muons and at least two jets.
369: Since this LNV signal has sometimes been considered \cite{Almeida:2000pz,
370: Han:2006ip} to be almost background free (more realistic background estimates
371: are given in Ref.~\cite{Dreiner:2000vf}), a detailed discussion of the actual
372: backgrounds is worthwhile. A first group of processes
373: involves the production of additional leptons,
374: either neutrinos or charged leptons (which may be missed in the detector).
375: The main ones are $W^\pm W^\pm nj$ and $W^\pm Z nj$.
376: We point out that not only the processes
377: with $n=2$ contribute:
378: processes with $n<2$ are backgrounds due to the appearance of extra jets
379: from pile-up, and processes with $n>2$ cannot be cleanly removed because of
380: pile-up on the signal. A second group includes final states with $b$ and/or
381: $\bar b$ quarks, like $t\bar t nj$, with
382: semileptonic decay of the $t\bar t$ pair, and $Wb \bar b nj$, with $W$
383: decaying leptonically. In these cases the additional like-sign
384: muon results from the decay of a $b$ or $\bar b$ quark.
385: Only a tiny fraction of
386: such decays produce isolated muons with sufficiently high transverse momentum.
387: But, since the $t \bar tnj$ and $W b \bar b nj$ cross sections are so large,
388: these backgrounds are also much larger than
389: backgrounds with two weak gauge bosons.
390: Finally, $b \bar b nj$ production is several orders of magnitude
391: larger than all processes mentioned above,
392: but the produced muons have small $p_T$ and invariant mass in this
393: case. Then, in general it might be eliminated with suitable high-$p_T$ cuts on
394: charged leptons \cite{Abulencia:2007rd} (see section~\ref{sec:150}), but for
395: $m_N < M_W$ the heavy neutrino signal is also characterised by very small
396: transverse momenta (see section~\ref{sec:60}), and this background turns out
397: to be the dominant one. The same applies for $c \bar c nj$, but with the
398: difference that $c$ quark decays produce isolated charged leptons much less
399: often than $b$ decays.
400:
401: Other LNV signals produced by heavy neutrinos are $e^\pm e^\pm jj$
402: and $e^\pm \mu^\pm jj$. They have the same SM backgrounds but with one
403: important difference: $b$ decays produce ``apparently isolated'' electrons more
404: often than muons, because electrons are detected in the calorimeter while
405: muons travel to the muon chamber. Hence, the corresponding backgrounds
406: $t \bar t nj, b \bar b nj \to e^\pm e^\pm X/e^\pm \mu^\pm X$ are larger than
407: the ones involving only muons. A precise evaluation of these backgrounds,
408: optimising the criteria for electron isolation, seems to require a full
409: simulation of the detector.
410: The limits provided in these cases must be regarded with some caution in this
411: respect, and should be confirmed with a full detector simulation.
412:
413:
414: We have generated the signal and backgrounds using ALPGEN and
415: passing them through PYTHIA 6.4 \cite{pythia} with the MLM prescription
416: \cite{mlm} to avoid double counting of jet radiation. A fast simulation of the
417: ATLAS detector \cite{atlfast} has been performed.
418: For the signal and all
419: backgrounds except $b \bar b nj$ and $c \bar c nj$ the number of simulated
420: events corresponds to at least
421: 10 times the luminosity considered (which is 30 fb$^{-1}$), so as to reduce
422: statistical fluctuations, and the number of events is scaled accordingly. For
423: $b \bar b nj$ and $c \bar c nj$ the luminosity simulated is 0.075 fb$^{-1}$.
424: Their evaluation is further discussed in appendix~\ref{sec:a}.
425: It must also be noted that in the signal simulation all $W$ decays in
426: $p p \to \ell N \to \ell \ell' W$ are included. Leptonic $W$ decays give an
427: extra $\sim 20\%$ contribution to di-lepton final states when the
428: charged lepton from the $W$ decay is missed, or when $W$ decays to
429: $\tau \nu$ and the tau lepton decays hadronically.
430:
431:
432:
433:
434:
435: \subsection{$\ell^\pm \ell^\pm jj$ production for $m_N > M_W$}
436: \label{sec:150}
437:
438: In this mass region we take the reference values $m_N = 150$ GeV and
439: (a) $V_{\mu N} = 0.098$, $V_{eN} = V_{\tau N} = 0$; (b) $V_{e N} = 0.073$,
440: $V_{\mu N} = V_{\tau N} = 0$; (c) $V_{e N} = 0.073$, $V_{\mu N} = 0.098$,
441: $V_{\tau N} = 0$.
442: The pre-selection criteria used for our analysis are:
443: %
444: \begin{itemize}
445: \item[(i)] two like-sign isolated charged leptons with
446: pseudorapidity $|\eta^\ell| \leq 2.5$ and transverse momentum $p_T^\ell$
447: larger than 10 GeV (muons) or 15 GeV (electrons), and no additional isolated
448: charged leptons;
449: \item[(ii)] no additional non-isolated muons;
450: \item[(iii)] two jets with $|\eta^j| \leq 2.5$ and $p_T^j \geq 20$ GeV.
451: \end{itemize}
452: We point out that for $\mumu jj$ final states the requirement (ii)
453: reduces the backgrounds involving $Z$ bosons by almost a factor of two,
454: and thus proves to be quite useful. The number
455: of events at LHC for 30 fb$^{-1}$ after pre-selection cuts is given in
456: Table~\ref{tab:Nsb150}.
457: Additional backgrounds such as $t \bar b$, $t \bar t t \bar t$,
458: $t \bar t b \bar b$, $Z t \bar t nj$,
459: $WWZnj$, $WZZnj$ and $ZZZnj$ are smaller and we do not show them,
460: but they are included in the estimation of the signal significance below.
461: The number of like-sign dimuon events from $c \bar c nj$ displayed between
462: parentheses corresponds to an estimation, because no $\mumu X$ events are found
463: in the sample simulated (more details can be found in
464: appendix~\ref{sec:a}).
465: We also note that the higher $p_T$ threshold for electrons contributes to the
466: difference between the numbers of $\ee jj$ and $\mue jj$ events, which are
467: expected to be similar in some cases, for example for $t \bar t nj$.
468:
469: \begin{table}[htb]
470: \begin{center}
471: \begin{tabular}{cccccccc}
472: & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Pre-selection} & \hspace{.5cm} &
473: \multicolumn{3}{c}{Selection} \\
474: & $\mumu$ & $\ee$ & $\mue$
475: & & $\mumu$ & $\ee$ & $\mue$ \\
476: $N~(\mathrm{a})$ & 113.6 & 0 & 0
477: & & 59.1 & 0 & 0 \\
478: $N~(\mathrm{b})$ & 0 & 72.0 & 0
479: & & 0 & 17.6 & 0 \\
480: $N~(\mathrm{c})$ & 78.4 & 25.5 & 82.6
481: & & 41.6 & 4.7 & 22.4 \\
482: $b \bar b nj$ & 14800 & 52000 & 82000
483: & & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
484: $c \bar c nj$ & (11) & 300 & 200
485: & & (0) & 0 & 0 \\
486: $t \bar t nj$ & 1162.1 & 8133.0 & 15625.3
487: & & 2.4 & 8.3 & 7.7 \\
488: $tj$ & 60.8 & 176.5 & 461.5
489: & & 0.0 & 0.0 & 0.1 \\
490: $W b \bar b nj$ & 124.9 & 346.7 & 927.3
491: & & 0.4 & 0.6 & 0.3 \\
492: $W t \bar t nj$ & 75.7 & 87.2 & 166.9
493: & & 0.3 & 0.0 & 0.0 \\
494: $Z b \bar b nj$ & 12.2 & 68.9 & 117.0
495: & & 0.0 & 0.2 & 0.0 \\
496: $WW nj$ & 82.8 & 89.0 & 174.8
497: & & 0.5 & 0.1 & 0.7 \\
498: $WZ nj$ & 162.4 & 252.0 & 409.2
499: & & 4.8 & 1.8 & 2.3 \\
500: $ZZ nj$ & 3.8 & 13.3 & 12.9
501: & & 0.0 & 0.6 & 0.1 \\
502: $WWW nj$ & 31.9 & 30.1 & 64.8
503: & & 0.9 & 0.1 & 0.0
504: % TOTAL BKG 9.3 11.7 11.2
505: \end{tabular}
506: \caption{Number of $\ell^\pm \ell^\pm jj$ events at LHC for 30 fb$^{-1}$, at the
507: pre-selection and selection levels. The heavy
508: neutrino signal is evaluated assuming $m_N = 150$ GeV and coupling (a) to the
509: muon, $V_{\mu N} = 0.098$; (b) to the electron, $V_{e N} = 0.073$; (c) to both,
510: $V_{e N} = 0.073$ and $V_{\mu N} = 0.098$.}
511: \label{tab:Nsb150}
512: \end{center}
513: \end{table}
514:
515: Let us concentrate on $\mumu jj$ final states.
516: The fast simulation shows that SM backgrounds are about two orders of
517: magnitude larger than previously estimated (three orders if we include
518: $b \bar b nj$). Moreover, they cannot be sufficiently
519: suppressed with respect to the heavy neutrino signal using simple cuts.
520: Some obvious discriminating variables are:
521: \begin{itemize}
522: \item The missing momentum $\ptmiss$. It is smaller for the signal because
523: it does not have neutrinos in the final state, but nonzero due to energy
524: mismeasurement in the detector.
525: \item The separation between the muon with smallest $p_T$ (we label the two
526: muons as $\mu_1$, $\mu_2$, by decreasing transverse momentum) and the closest
527: jet, $\Delta R_{\mu_2 j}$.
528: For backgrounds involving high-$p_T$ $b$ quarks this separation tends to be
529: rather small.
530: \item The transverse momentum of the two muons, $p_T^{\mu_1}$ and
531: $p_T^{\mu_2}$, respectively.
532: In particular $p_T^{\mu_2}$
533: is a good discriminant against backgrounds from $b$ quarks, because
534: these typically have one muon with small $p_T$.
535: \end{itemize}
536: %
537: \begin{figure}[htb]
538: \begin{center}
539: \begin{tabular}{ccc}
540: \epsfig{file=Figs/ptmiss-150.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} & &
541: \epsfig{file=Figs/dRl2j-150.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} \\
542: \epsfig{file=Figs/ptl1-150.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} & &
543: \epsfig{file=Figs/ptl2-150.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=}
544: \end{tabular}
545: \caption{Normalised distributions of several discriminating variables for the
546: $\mumu jj$ signal with $m_N = 150$ GeV and its backgrounds (see the text).}
547: \label{fig:var1}
548: \end{center}
549: \end{figure}
550: %
551: %
552: \begin{figure}[p]
553: \begin{center}
554: \begin{tabular}{ccc}
555: \epsfig{file=Figs/Mjj-150.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} & &
556: \epsfig{file=./Figs/mN2-150.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} \\
557: \epsfig{file=./Figs/Mll-150.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} & &
558: \epsfig{file=Figs/dRl1j-150.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} \\
559: \epsfig{file=./Figs/bmult-150.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} & &
560: \epsfig{file=./Figs/mult-150.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} \\
561: \epsfig{file=./Figs/ptmax-150.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} & &
562: \epsfig{file=./Figs/ptmax2-150.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=}
563: \end{tabular}
564: \caption{Normalised distributions of several discriminating variables for the
565: $\mumu jj$ signal with $m_N = 150$ GeV and its backgrounds (see the text).}
566: \label{fig:vars2}
567: \end{center}
568: \end{figure}
569: %
570: These variables are plotted in Fig.~\ref{fig:var1} for the $\mumu jj$ signal
571: and the
572: backgrounds grouped in three classes with common features: (a) $b \bar b nj$,
573: where both muons come from $b$ quark decays (the contribution of $c \bar c nj$
574: is negligible); (b) $t \bar t nj$, $tj$ and
575: $W/Z b \bar b nj$, where one muon comes from a $b$ quark; (c) backgrounds
576: where both muons come from $W/Z$ decays (mainly di-boson and tri-boson
577: production). Kinematical cuts on the variables listed above do not render the
578: $\mu^\pm \mu^\pm jj$ final
579: state ``background free'', as it is apparent from the plots (and we have
580: explicitly checked). Indeed, for the large background cross sections in
581: Table~\ref{tab:Nsb150} the overlapping regions contain a large number of
582: background events, and they can be eliminated only by severely reducing the
583: signal. However, a likelihood analysis using
584: these and further variables can efficiently reduce the background. The
585: additional variables are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:vars2}:
586: \begin{itemize}
587: \item The invariant mass $m_{jj}$ of the two jets with largest transverse
588: momentum, which for the signal are assumed to originate from the $W$ hadronic
589: decay, and the invariant mass of $\mu_2$ (the muon with lowest $p_T$) and these
590: two jets, $m_{W \mu_2}$. (Further details about the $W$ and $N$ mass
591: reconstruction can be found in appendix~\ref{sec:b}.) An important observation
592: in this case is that in backgrounds involving $b$ quarks this muon typically
593: has a small $p_T$, displacing the background peaks to lower invariant masses.
594: \item The invariant mass of the two muons.
595: \item The separation between the muon with largest $p_T$ and the closest
596: jet, $\Delta R_{\mu_1 j}$.
597: \item The number of $b$-tagged jets $N_b$ and jet multiplicities $N_j$.
598: Especially the former helps to separate the backgrounds involving
599: $b$ quarks because they often have $b$-tagged jets. In this fast simulation
600: analysis we have fixed the
601: $b$-tagging efficiency to 60\%, but in a full simulation the $b$ tag probability
602: can be included in the likelihood function, improving the discriminating power
603: of this variable.
604: \item The transverse momenta of the two jets with largest
605: $p_T$, $p_T^\mathrm{max}$ and $p_T^\mathrm{max2}$ respectively.
606: \end{itemize}
607: These variables are not suited for performing kinematical cuts but greatly
608: improve the discriminating power of a likelihood function.
609: The resulting log-likelihood function is also shown in Fig. \ref{fig:logLS150},
610: where we distinguish four likelihood classes as in the previous figures:
611: the signal, $b \bar b nj$, backgrounds with one muon from $b$ decays,
612: and backgrounds with both muons from $W/Z$ decays.
613:
614: \begin{figure}[htb]
615: \begin{center}
616: \epsfig{file=Figs/logLS-150.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} \\
617: \caption{Log-likelihood function for the
618: $\mumu jj$ signal with $m_N = 150$ GeV and its backgrounds.}
619: \label{fig:logLS150}
620: \end{center}
621: \end{figure}
622:
623: The probability distributions built for $\mumu jj$ final states are used for
624: $\ee jj$ and $\mue jj$ as well.
625: As selection criteria we require $\log_{10} L_S/L_B \geq 1.4$ for $\mumu jj$
626: and $\log_{10} L_S/L_B \geq 2.5$ for $\ee jj$ and $\mue jj$ final states,
627: respectively, and that at least
628: one of the two heavy neutrino mass assignments
629: $m_{W \mu_1}$, $m_{W \mu_2}$ is between 130 and 170 GeV.\footnote{The latter
630: requirement assumes a previous knowledge of $m_N$. In the same way, the signal
631: distributions for the likelihood analysis must be built for a fixed $m_N$
632: value.
633: Thus, experimental searches must be performed by comparing data with
634: Monte-Carlo samples generated for different values of $m_N$. This procedure,
635: although more involved than a search with generic cuts, provides much better
636: sensitivity.}
637: The number of events surviving these cuts can be read on the right part of
638: Table~\ref{tab:Nsb150}. As it is apparent, the likelihood analysis is
639: quite effective in suppressing backgrounds, especially $b \bar b nj$,
640: $t\bar t nj$ and $W/Z b \bar b nj$.
641: The resulting
642: statistical significance for the heavy neutrino
643: signals are collected in Table~\ref{tab:sign150},
644: assuming a ``reference'' 20\% systematic uncertainty in the
645: backgrounds (which still has to be precisely evaluated in a dedicated study).
646: %
647: \begin{table}[htb]
648: \begin{center}
649: \begin{tabular}{cccc}
650: & $\mumu$ & $\ee$ & $\mue$ \\
651: $N~(\mathrm{a})$ & $16.2\sigma$ & $-$ & $-$ \\
652: $N~(\mathrm{b})$ & $-$ & $4.2\sigma$ & $-$ \\
653: $N~(\mathrm{c})$ & $11.4\sigma$ & $1.1\sigma$ & $5.5\sigma$ \\
654: \end{tabular}
655: \caption{Statistical significance of the heavy neutrino signals in the
656: different channels, for a mass $m_N = 150$ GeV and coupling (a) to the
657: muon, $V_{\mu N} = 0.098$; (b) to the electron, $V_{e N} = 0.073$; (c)
658: to both, $V_{e N} = 0.073$ and $V_{\mu N} = 0.098$.}
659: \label{tab:sign150}
660: \end{center}
661: \end{table}
662: %
663: The limits on heavy neutrino masses and couplings depend on the light lepton
664: they are coupled to. We can consider two extreme cases:
665: \begin{itemize}
666: \item[(a)] A 150 GeV heavy neutrino coupling only to the muon can be
667: discovered for mixings $|V_{\mu N}| \geq 0.054$, and if no background excess
668: is found the limits $|V_{\mu N}|^2 \leq 0.97\;(1.2) \times 10^{-3}$ can be set
669: at 90\% (95\%) CL, improving the ones from low energy processes (see
670: section~\ref{sec:2}) by a factor of 10. Heavy neutrino masses up to 200 GeV can
671: be observed with $5 \sigma$ at the LHC for $V_{\mu N} = 0.098$.
672: \item[(b)] A 150 GeV heavy neutrino coupling only to the electron can be
673: discovered for mixings $|V_{eN}| \geq 0.080$ (excluded by the limits in
674: section~\ref{sec:2}), but if no background excess is found the limits
675: $|V_{eN}|^2 \leq 2.1\;(2.5) \times 10^{-3}$, which are slightly better than
676: the one derived from
677: Eq.~(\ref{eps1}), can be set at 90\% (95\%) CL. Heavy neutrino masses up
678: to 145 GeV can be observed with $5 \sigma$ at the LHC for $V_{eN} = 0.073$.
679: \end{itemize}
680: For a heavy neutrino coupling to the electron and muon the limits depend on
681: both couplings as well as on its mass. The combined limits for $m_N = 150$ GeV
682: are displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig:comb150}. Except in the regions with $V_{eN}
683: \sim 0$ or $V_{\mu N} \sim 0$, the indirect limit from $\mu-e$ LFV processes,
684: also shown in this plot, is much more restrictive.
685:
686: \begin{figure}[htb]
687: \begin{center}
688: \epsfig{file=Figs/bound-em150.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} \\
689: \caption{Combined limits on $V_{eN}$ and $V_{\mu N}$, for $V_{\tau N} = 0$ and
690: $m_N = 150$ GeV. The red areas represent the 90\% CL limits if no signal is
691: observed. The white areas correspond to the region where a combined statistical
692: significance of $5\sigma$ or larger is achieved. The indirect limit from
693: $\mu-e$ LFV processes is also shown.}
694: \label{fig:comb150}
695: \end{center}
696: \end{figure}
697:
698: These limits can be considered conservative in the sense that only the
699: lowest-order signal contribution (without hard extra jets at the partonic
700: level) has been included, and further signal contributions $\ell N nj$ should
701: improve the heavy neutrino observability. If the Higgs is heavier than 120 GeV
702: the branching ratios $\mathrm{Br}(N \to W \ell)$ will increase as well. We also
703: stress again that in the $\ee jj$ and $\mue jj$ channels the evaluation of
704: $t \bar t nj$ and other backgrounds with isolated electrons from $b$ quarks must
705: be confirmed with a full simulation, with an eventual optimisation of the
706: isolation criteria. This is beyond the scope of the present work.
707:
708: It is worth explaining here in more detail why our results are much more
709: pessimistic than previous ones. With this purpose, we apply to signal
710: and backgrounds the sequential kinematical cuts in Ref.~\cite{Han:2006ip}:
711: \begin{itemize}
712: \item Missing energy $\ptmiss < 25$ GeV.
713: \item Lego-plot separation $\Delta R_{\mu j} > 0.5$.
714: \item Dijet invariant mass $60~\text{GeV} < m_{jj} < 100~\text{GeV}$, where
715: the two jets are expected to come from the $W$ boson in the case of the signal.
716: \end{itemize}
717: The number of events for the signal and main backgrounds after these cuts are
718: gathered in the left column of Table~\ref{tab:Nhan} (we do not show smaller
719: backgrounds for
720: brevity). For $m_N = 150$ GeV and $V_{\mu N} = 0.098$ the signal cross section
721: is reduced to 1.7 fb, to be compared to $\sim 2.2$ fb in
722: Ref.~\cite{Han:2006ip}.
723: But our total background cross section after cuts amounts to 44 fb, while
724: their estimate is of 0.04 fb.
725: This difference by a factor of $1000$ arises mainly from
726: the $b \bar b nj$ background, overlooked before,
727: which is by far the largest one. But even if $b \bar b nj$ is not taken into
728: account, the background cross section $\sim 0.88$ fb is 20 times larger,
729: due to:
730: (i) $t \bar t nj$, which was assumed negligible after cuts,
731: and $W/Z b \bar b nj$, also overlooked;
732: (ii) the $WZnj$ background, because parton-level analyses underestimate the
733: probability of missing a lepton and thus its contribution;
734: (iii) pile-up, which makes lower order processes ($n < 2$) contribute.
735: All these backgrounds, collected in Table~\ref{tab:Nhan}, can be
736: compared to $WWW$, which was found to be the main
737: background before.
738: The resulting statistical significance of the
739: signal, ignoring systematic errors, is $S/\sqrt B = 1.41 \sigma$
740: for 30 fb$^{-1}$,
741: far from the $\sim 30 \sigma$ previously estimated.
742: (If one makes the more realistic assumption that systematic errors are of order
743: 20\%, as we do in this work, then the statistical
744: significance is further reduced to $0.19\sigma$.)
745: It could be argued that the cuts in the previous list might be strengthened in
746: order to further reduce the backgrounds. But this would be at the
747: cost of reducing the signal as well.
748: On the other hand, additional cuts on lepton transverse momenta can be
749: introduced to reduce $b \bar b nj$ and $t \bar t nj$. Requiring that one charged
750: lepton has $p_T \geq 30$ GeV and the other one $p_T \geq 20$ GeV, the signal is
751: hardly affected while $b \bar b nj$ is essentially eliminated, as it is shown
752: in the second column of Table~\ref{tab:Nhan}. The statistical significance in
753: this case is $S/\sqrt B = 14.1 \sigma$
754: (ignoring systematic errors) or $12.1 \sigma$ (with 20\% systematics).
755: We emphasise that, as it can be observed by comparing
756: Tables~\ref{tab:Nsb150} and \ref{tab:Nhan}, a probabilistic analysis is much
757: more powerful in this case than a standard one based on cuts.
758: But at any rate recovering parton-level estimates for the
759: signal significance seems hardly possible.
760:
761: \begin{table}[htb]
762: \begin{center}
763: \begin{tabular}{ccc}
764: & Sequential cuts I & Sequential cuts II \\
765: $N~(\mu)$ & 51.3 & 44.0 \\
766: $b \bar b nj$ & 1293 & 2.7 \\
767: $t \bar t nj$ & 15.3 & 1.4 \\
768: $W b \bar b nj$ & 3.6 & 0.2 \\
769: $W t \bar t nj$ & 0.7 & 0.7 \\
770: $Z b \bar b nj$ & 0.9 & 0.0 \\
771: $WW nj$ & 0.5 & 0.5 \\
772: $WZ nj$ & 4.1 & 2.9 \\
773: $WWW nj$ & 1.1 & 0.9 \\
774: \end{tabular}
775: \caption{Number of $\mu^\pm \mu^\pm jj$ events at LHC for 30 fb$^{-1}$,
776: after the kinematical cuts in Ref.~\cite{Han:2006ip} (first column) and with
777: additional requirements (second column, see the text). The heavy
778: neutrino signal is evaluated assuming $m_N = 150$ GeV and $V_{\mu N} = 0.098$.}
779: \label{tab:Nhan}
780: \end{center}
781: \end{table}
782:
783: Finally, we would like to note that we have not addressed the observability of
784: heavy neutrino signals in $\tau$ lepton decay channels because they are
785: expected to have much worse sensitivity. For hadronic $\tau$ decays the charge
786: of the decaying lepton seems rather difficult to determine, hence backgrounds
787: from top pair and $Z$ production will be huge (see also section~\ref{sec:D}
788: below). For leptonic decays $\tau \to \ell \nu_\tau \bar \nu_{\ell}$,
789: $\ell=e,\mu$, not only the branching ratios are smaller,
790: but also the signal has final state neutrinos and thus the discriminating
791: power of $\ptmiss$ against di-boson and tri-boson backgrounds is much worse.
792:
793:
794:
795:
796: \subsection{$\ell^\pm \ell^\pm jj$ production for $m_N < M_W$}
797: \label{sec:60}
798:
799: In this mass region we take the reference values $m_N = 60$ GeV and
800: (a) $V_{\mu N} = 0.01$, $V_{eN} = V_{\tau N} = 0$; (b) $V_{e N} = 0.01$,
801: $V_{\mu N} = V_{\tau N} = 0$; (c) $V_{e N} = 0.01$, $V_{\mu N} = 0.01$,
802: $V_{\tau N} = 0$.
803: The pre-selection criteria are the same as before. The
804: likelihood analysis is performed distinguishing four classes:
805: the signal, $b \bar b nj$, backgrounds with one muon from $b$ decays,
806: and backgrounds with both muons from $W/Z$ decays.
807: The relevant variables are depicted in Figs.~\ref{fig:vars3} and
808: \ref{fig:vars4}:
809: %
810: \begin{figure}[p]
811: \begin{center}
812: \begin{tabular}{ccc}
813: \epsfig{file=Figs/ptl1-60.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} & &
814: \epsfig{file=Figs/ptl2-60.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} \\
815: \epsfig{file=Figs/dRl1j-60.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} & &
816: \epsfig{file=Figs/dRl2j-60.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} \\
817: \epsfig{file=./Figs/dhWl1-60.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} & &
818: \epsfig{file=./Figs/dhWl2-60.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} \\
819: \epsfig{file=./Figs/ptmax-60.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} & &
820: \epsfig{file=./Figs/ptmax2-60.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} \\
821: \end{tabular}
822: \caption{Normalised distributions of several discriminating variables for the
823: $m_N = 60$ GeV signal and the three background classes (see the text).}
824: \label{fig:vars3}
825: \end{center}
826: \end{figure}
827: %
828: \begin{figure}[htb]
829: \begin{center}
830: \begin{tabular}{ccc}
831: \epsfig{file=./Figs/ptmiss-60.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} & &
832: \epsfig{file=./Figs/Mlljj-60.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} \\
833: \epsfig{file=./Figs/bmult-60.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} & &
834: \epsfig{file=./Figs/mult-60.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} \\
835: \epsfig{file=Figs/cPhll-60.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} & &
836: \epsfig{file=Figs/logLS-60.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} \\
837: \end{tabular}
838: \caption{Normalised distributions of several discriminating variables for the
839: $m_N = 60$ GeV signal and the three background classes (see the
840: text). The last plot corresponds to the log-likelihood function.}
841: \label{fig:vars4}
842: \end{center}
843: \end{figure}
844: %
845: \begin{itemize}
846: \item The transverse momenta of the two muons (slightly smaller for $b \bar b
847: nj$ than for the signal, and much larger for the other backgrounds).
848: \item The distance between them and the closest jet, which is a good
849: discriminator against $t \bar t nj$ but not against $b \bar b nj$.
850: \item The rapidity difference between the muons and the $W^*$
851: from $N$ decay, which is reconstructed from the two jets with highest $p_T$.
852: \item The transverse momenta of the two jets with largest $p_T$. Again, these
853: two variables are excellent discriminators against high-$p_T$ backgrounds like
854: $t \bar t nj$ and di-boson production, but not very useful for $b \bar b nj$.
855: \item The missing transverse momentum.
856: \item The invariant mass of the two muons and two jets with highest $p_T$,
857: $m_{\mu \mu jj}$. For
858: the signal, these four particles result from the decay of an on-shell $W$ boson,
859: so the distribution is very peaked around 100 GeV (the position of the peak is
860: displaced as a consequence of pile-up, which generates jets with larger
861: $p_T$ than the ones from the signal itself). Unfortunately, for
862: $b \bar b nj$ the distribution is quite similar.
863: \item The number of $b$ tags and the jet multiplicity.
864: \item The azimuthal angle (in transverse plane) between the two muons,
865: $\phi_{\mu \mu}$. For $b \bar b$
866: without additional jets this angle is often close to $180^\circ$, but for
867: $b \bar b j$ and higher order processes (which are also huge) this no longer
868: holds.
869: \end{itemize}
870: The resulting log-likelihood function is presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:vars4}. As
871: it can be easily noticed with a quick look at the variables presented, the
872: kinematics of $b \bar b nj$ is
873: very similar to the signal and so this background is very difficult to
874: eliminate. In particular, for larger $m_N$ requiring large transverse momentum
875: for the leptons drastically reduces $b \bar b nj$
876: (as seen in the previous subsection),
877: but for $m_N < M_W$ it reduces significantly the signal as well.
878: As selection cut we require $\log_{10} L_S / L_B \geq 2.2$ for the three final
879: states, which practically eliminates all backgrounds except $b \bar b nj$.
880: The number of remaining background events is given in the right
881: part of Table~\ref{tab:Nsb60} (numbers of background events at pre-selection
882: equal those in Table~\ref{tab:Nsb150}, and are quoted on the left for
883: better comparison).
884: %
885: \begin{table}[htb]
886: \begin{center}
887: \begin{tabular}{cccccccc}
888: & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Pre-selection} & \hspace{.5cm} &
889: \multicolumn{3}{c}{Selection} \\
890: & $\mumu$ & $\ee$ & $\mue$
891: & & $\mumu$ & $\ee$ & $\mue$ \\
892: $N~(\mathrm{a})$ & 427.3 & 0 & 0
893: & & 42.1 & 0 & 0 \\
894: $N~(\mathrm{b})$ & 0 & 174.7 & 0
895: & & 0 & 33.9 & 0 \\
896: $N~(\mathrm{c})$ & 214.0 & 88.5 & 290.9
897: & & 20.4 & 17.1 & 39.3 \\
898: $b \bar b nj$ & 14800 & 52000 & 82000
899: & & 10.7 & 291 & 96 \\
900: $c \bar c nj$ & (11) & 300 & 200
901: & & (0) & 0 & 0 \\
902: $t \bar t nj$ & 1162.1 & 8133.0 & 15625.3
903: & & 0.3 & 1.3 & 1.3 \\
904: $tj$ & 60.8 & 176.5 & 461.5
905: & & 0.0 & 0.0 & 0.1 \\
906: $W b \bar b nj$ & 124.9 & 346.7 & 927.3
907: & & 0.2 & 2.4 & 1.3 \\
908: $W t \bar t nj$ & 75.7 & 87.2 & 166.9
909: & & 0.0 & 0.0 & 0.0 \\
910: $Z b \bar b nj$ & 12.2 & 68.9 & 117.0
911: & & 0.0 & 1.4 & 0.2 \\
912: $WW nj$ & 82.8 & 89.0 & 174.8
913: & & 0.0 & 0.0 & 0.0 \\
914: $WZ nj$ & 162.4 & 252.0 & 409.2
915: & & 0.6 & 0.4 & 0.5 \\
916: $ZZ nj$ & 3.8 & 13.3 & 12.9
917: & & 0.0 & 0.5 & 0.1 \\
918: $WWW nj$ & 31.9 & 30.1 & 64.8
919: & & 0.9 & 0.0 & 0.0
920: % TOTAL BKG 11.7 297.2 100.0
921: \end{tabular}
922: \caption{Number of $\ell^\pm \ell^\pm jj$ events at LHC for 30 fb$^{-1}$, at the
923: pre-selection and selection levels. The heavy
924: neutrino signal is evaluated assuming $m_N = 60$ GeV and coupling
925: (a) to the
926: muon, $V_{\mu N} = 0.01$; (b) to the electron, $V_{e N} = 0.01$; (c)
927: to both, $V_{e N} = 0.01$ and $V_{\mu N} = 0.01$.}
928: \label{tab:Nsb60}
929: \end{center}
930: \end{table}
931: %
932: Requiring larger $L_S/L_B$ for the $\ee jj$ and $\mue jj$ channels does not
933: improve the results, because it decreases the signals too much. The resulting
934: statistical significance for the heavy neutrino signals are collected in
935: Table~\ref{tab:sign60}, assuming a 20\% systematic uncertainty in the
936: backgrounds.
937: %
938: \begin{table}[htb]
939: \begin{center}
940: \begin{tabular}{cccc}
941: & $\mumu$ & $\ee$ & $\mue$ \\
942: $N~(\mathrm{a})$ & $10.0\sigma$ & $-$ & $-$ \\
943: $N~(\mathrm{b})$ & $-$ & $0.54\sigma$ & $-$ \\
944: $N~(\mathrm{c})$ & $4.9\sigma$ & $0.28\sigma$ & $1.75\sigma$ \\
945: \end{tabular}
946: \caption{Statistical significance of the heavy neutrino signals in the
947: different channels, for a mass $m_N = 60$ GeV and coupling
948: (a) to the
949: muon, $V_{\mu N} = 0.01$; (b) to the electron, $V_{e N} = 0.01$; (c)
950: to both, $V_{e N} = 0.01$ and $V_{\mu N} = 0.01$.}
951: \label{tab:sign60}
952: \end{center}
953: \end{table}
954: %
955: From these significances, the following limits can be extracted:
956: \begin{itemize}
957: \item[(a)] A 60 GeV neutrino coupling only to the muon can be
958: discovered for mixings $|V_{\mu N}| \geq 0.0070$, and bounds
959: $|V_{\mu N}|^2 \leq
960: 1.65 (1.95) \times 10^{-5}$ can be set at 90\% (95\%) CL if a background
961: excess is
962: not observed. These figures are $\sim 35$ times worse than in previous
963: parton-level estimates which overlooked the main background
964: $b \bar b nj$, but would still improve the direct limit from L3
965: \cite{Adriani:1992pq,Achard:2001qv} by an order of magnitude.
966: \item[(b)] A 60 GeV neutrino coupling only to the electron can be
967: discovered for mixings $|V_{e N}| \geq 0.030$, and bounds
968: $|V_{eN}|^2 \leq
969: 3.1 (3.6) \times 10^{-4}$ can be set at 90\% (95\%) CL if a background excess
970: is not observed.
971: \end{itemize}
972: The general limits for a heavy neutrino coupling to the electron and muon
973: are displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig:comb60}. It is interesting to observe that the
974: direct limit from non-observation of like-sign dileptons at LHC will be more
975: restrictive than indirect ones from $\mu-e$ LFV processes at low energies.
976:
977: \begin{figure}[htb]
978: \begin{center}
979: \epsfig{file=Figs/bound-em60.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} \\
980: \caption{Combined limits on $V_{eN}$ and $V_{\mu N}$, for $V_{\tau N} = 0$ and
981: $m_N = 60$ GeV. The red areas represent the 90\% CL limits if no signal is
982: observed. The white areas correspond to the region where a combined statistical
983: significance of $5\sigma$ or larger is achieved. The indirect limit from
984: $\mu-e$ LFV processes is also shown.}
985: \label{fig:comb60}
986: \end{center}
987: \end{figure}
988:
989:
990:
991:
992:
993: \subsection{Opposite-sign dilepton signals}
994: \label{sec:D}
995:
996: In final states $e^\pm \mu^\mp jj$ the analysis is similar but the
997: backgrounds are much larger. In particular, opposite-sign lepton pairs from
998: $b \bar b nj$ production are much more abundant than like-sign pairs.
999: Opposite-sign dileptons are produced from $t \bar t nj$ dileptonic decays and
1000: $W^+ W^- nj$ production (which is larger than $W^\pm W^\pm nj$).
1001: We assume a heavy Dirac neutrino with a mass of 60 GeV and
1002: $V_{eN} = 0.01$, $V_{\mu N} = 0.01$. A Majorana neutrino gives this signal too,
1003: but with half the cross section for the same couplings. We
1004: use the same pre-selection cuts as in the like-sign dilepton analysis but
1005: requiring instead opposite charge for the leptons.
1006: The number of signal and background events at pre-selection is collected in the
1007: left column of Table~\ref{tab:Nsb60D}. At pre-selection the $b \bar b nj$,
1008: $t \bar t nj$ and $WWnj$ backgrounds are 7, 15 and 70 times larger,
1009: respectively, than
1010: the corresponding ones for $\mu^\pm e^\mp$ in Table~\ref{tab:Nsb60}.
1011:
1012: \begin{table}[htb]
1013: \begin{center}
1014: \begin{tabular}{cccc}
1015: & Pre-selection & \hspace{.5cm} & Selection \\
1016: $N~(e,\mu)$ & 593.5 & & 14.7\\
1017: $b \bar b nj$ & 602000 & & 73 \\
1018: $c \bar c nj$ & 5750 & & 0 \\
1019: $t \bar t nj$ & 233135.1 & & 0.3 \\
1020: $tj$ & 1003.8 & & 0.0 \\
1021: $W b \bar b nj$ & 927.6 & & 0.0 \\
1022: $W t \bar t nj$ & 197.0 & & 0.0 \\
1023: $Z b \bar b nj$ & 180.8 & & 0.0 \\
1024: $WW nj$ & 12016.5 & & 0.7 \\
1025: $WZ nj$ & 412.1 & & 0.0 \\
1026: $ZZ nj$ & 14.2 & & 0.0 \\
1027: $WWW nj$ & 131.4 & & 0.0
1028: % TOTAL BKG 73.5
1029: \end{tabular}
1030: \caption{Number of $\mu^\pm e^\mp jj$ events at LHC for 30 fb$^{-1}$, at the
1031: pre-selection and selection levels. The heavy
1032: neutrino signal is evaluated assuming $m_N = 60$ GeV and coupling to electron
1033: and muon $V_{e N} = 0.01$, $V_{\mu N} = 0.01$.}
1034: \label{tab:Nsb60D}
1035: \end{center}
1036: \end{table}
1037:
1038: %
1039: \begin{figure}[p]
1040: \begin{center}
1041: \begin{tabular}{ccc}
1042: \epsfig{file=Figs/ptl1-60D.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} & &
1043: \epsfig{file=Figs/ptl2-60D.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} \\
1044: \epsfig{file=Figs/dRl1j-60D.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} & &
1045: \epsfig{file=Figs/dRl2j-60D.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} \\
1046: \epsfig{file=./Figs/dhWl1-60D.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} & &
1047: \epsfig{file=./Figs/dhWl2-60D.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} \\
1048: \epsfig{file=./Figs/ptmax-60D.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} & &
1049: \epsfig{file=./Figs/ptmax2-60D.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} \\
1050: \end{tabular}
1051: \caption{Normalised distributions of several discriminating variables for a
1052: 60 GeV Dirac neutrino and the three background classes (see the text).}
1053: \label{fig:vars5}
1054: \end{center}
1055: \end{figure}
1056: %
1057: \begin{figure}[p]
1058: \begin{center}
1059: \begin{tabular}{ccc}
1060: \epsfig{file=./Figs/ptmiss-60D.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} & &
1061: \epsfig{file=./Figs/Mlljj-60D.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} \\
1062: \epsfig{file=./Figs/bmult-60D.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} & &
1063: \epsfig{file=./Figs/mult-60D.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} \\
1064: \epsfig{file=Figs/cPhll-60D.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} & &
1065: \epsfig{file=Figs/logLS-60D.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} \\
1066: \end{tabular}
1067: \caption{Normalised distributions of several discriminating variables for a
1068: 60 GeV Dirac neutrino and the three background classes (see the
1069: text). The last plot corresponds to the log-likelihood function.}
1070: \label{fig:vars6}
1071: \end{center}
1072: \end{figure}
1073: %
1074:
1075: The kinematical variables useful for discriminating the signal against
1076: the backgrounds are the same as for a 60 GeV heavy Majorana neutrino in the
1077: like-sign
1078: dilepton channels. However, in this case the distributions for some
1079: backgrounds, namely $t \bar t nj$ and $WWnj$, are different. We have grouped
1080: backgrounds in three classes: $b \bar b nj$, $t \bar t nj$, and the other
1081: backgrounds
1082: (dominated by $WWnj$). The distributions for the relevant kinematical
1083: variables and the log-likelihood function are collected in
1084: Figs.~\ref{fig:vars5} and \ref{fig:vars6}. For event selection we require
1085: $\log_{10} L_S / L_B \geq 2.9$, yielding the number of events in the right
1086: columns of Table~\ref{tab:Nsb60D}.
1087: The significance of the heavy Dirac neutrino signal is only
1088: $0.86\sigma$. The combined limits on $V_{eN}$ and $V_{\mu N}$ are presented
1089: in Fig.~\ref{fig:comb60D}. The shape of the regions is drastically different
1090: from Figs.~\ref{fig:comb150} and \ref{fig:comb60} because the sensitivity in
1091: the $e^+ e^- jj$ and $\mu^+ \mu^- jj$ channels is negligible, and only when
1092: $N$ couples sizeably to both electron and muon the heavy neutrino signal is
1093: statistically significant in the $\mu^\pm e^\mp jj$ channel.
1094: The direct limit from non-observation of a $\mu^\pm e^\mp jj$ excess has a
1095: similar shape as the indirect limit but it is less restrictive in all cases.
1096:
1097:
1098: \begin{figure}[htb]
1099: \begin{center}
1100: \epsfig{file=Figs/bound-em60D.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} \\
1101: \caption{Combined limits on $V_{eN}$ and $V_{\mu N}$ for a 60 GeV Dirac
1102: neutrino. The red areas represent the 90\% CL limits if no signal is observed.
1103: The white areas correspond to the region where a combined statistical
1104: significance of $5\sigma$ or larger is achieved. The indirect limit from
1105: $\mu-e$ LFV processes is also shown.}
1106: \label{fig:comb60D}
1107: \end{center}
1108: \end{figure}
1109:
1110:
1111:
1112:
1113:
1114:
1115:
1116: \section{Estimates for Tevatron}
1117: \label{sec:5}
1118:
1119: The observability of heavy neutrino signals in like-sign
1120: dilepton channels at Tevatron seems to be dominated by the size of the signal
1121: itself. In contrast with LHC, backgrounds are much smaller. For example, the
1122: $WZjj$ and $WWjj$ backgrounds have cross sections of 0.1 and 0.09 fb,
1123: respectively, with the cuts in Eq.~(\ref{ec:gcuts}). Then,
1124: it seems reasonable to estimate the
1125: total background for 1 fb$^{-1}$ (including $b \bar b$) as one event. This
1126: rough estimation is in agreement with the detailed calculation in
1127: Ref.~\cite{D0},
1128: in which $b \bar b$ is estimated from real data.
1129: Therefore, if signal events have
1130: not been observed with the already collected luminosity, upper limits of
1131: 3.36 and 4.14 events \cite{Feldman:1997qc} can be set on the signal, at 90\%
1132: and 95\% CL, respectively. From Fig.~\ref{fig:cross},
1133: and for a fixed mass $m_N = 60$ GeV,
1134: this implies upper bounds $|V_{\mu N}|^2 \leq 1.3 \times 10^{-4}$ (90\% CL)
1135: $|V_{\mu N}|^2 \leq 1.6 \times 10^{-4}$ (95\% CL). This would slightly improve
1136: the limits from L3~\cite{Adriani:1992pq,Achard:2001qv}.
1137: Of course, a detailed simulation with the already collected data is
1138: necessary to make any claim, and the limits eventually obtained will depend on
1139: the actual number of observed like-sign dilepton events.
1140:
1141:
1142: Note also that, given the cross sections in Fig.~\ref{fig:cross}, for a
1143: luminosity of 1 fb$^{-1}$ and $V_{\mu N} = 0.098$ the heavy neutrino signals
1144: only exceed a handful of events for heavy neutrino masses $m_N < M_W$, and
1145: thus the Tevatron sensitivity (when acceptance and efficiency are taken into
1146: account)
1147: is limited to this mass range. This also holds for a heavy neutrino mixing with
1148: the tau lepton, for which the $N$ production can be larger but $\tau$ decay
1149: branching fractions must be also included in the final cross section.
1150: Then, if the small excess found by CDF
1151: \cite{Abulencia:2007rd} is confirmed, its explanation through heavy neutrinos
1152: requires additional interactions, for example mediated by a new $Z'$ boson
1153: \cite{delAguila:2007ua}.
1154:
1155:
1156:
1157:
1158: \section{Conclusions}
1159: \label{sec:6}
1160:
1161: Large hadron colliders are not in principle the best place to search for
1162: new heavy neutral leptons. However, Tevatron is performing quite well and LHC
1163: will start operating soon, so one must wonder if the large
1164: electroweak rates available at large hadron colliders allow to discover new
1165: heavy neutrinos, given the present constraints on them,
1166: or improve these constraints. This is indeed the case in models with extra
1167: interactions \cite{Ferrari:2000sp,Gninenko:2006br,Datta:1992qw}.
1168: In this work we have, however, assumed that no other interactions exist and
1169: that heavy neutrinos couple to the SM particles through its small mixing with
1170: the known leptons.
1171:
1172: Heavy Dirac or Majorana neutrinos with a significant coupling to the electron
1173: can be best produced and seen at $e^+ e^-$ colliders in $e^+ e^- \to N \nu \to
1174: \ell W \nu$,
1175: which has a large cross section and whose backgrounds have a moderate size
1176: \cite{Azuelos:1993qu,Gluza:1996bz,delAguila:2005mf,delAguila:2005pf}. On the
1177: contrary, a Majorana $N$ mainly coupling to the muon is easier to discover at
1178: a hadronic machine like LHC, in the process $q \bar q' \to W^+ \to \mu^+ N$
1179: with subsequent decay $N \to \mu^+ W \to \mu^+ q \bar q'$
1180: (plus the charge conjugate).
1181: However, even this LNV final state is not easy to deal with. SM
1182: backgrounds are large and require a careful analysis, especially
1183: those involving $b$ quarks, for example $b \bar b nj$ and $t \bar t n j$ which
1184: are the largest ones.
1185:
1186:
1187: For the simulation of the $\ell^\pm \ell^\pm jj$ signals from heavy neutrinos
1188: we have implemented heavy neutrino production in the ALPGEN framework. In the
1189: $\mumu jj$ channel
1190: we have shown, using a fast detector simulation,
1191: that a hevy neutrino with a mixing $V_{\mu N} = 0.098$ can be
1192: discovered with a $5\sigma$ significance up to masses $m_N = 200$ GeV.
1193: In the region $m_N < M_W$ we find that a 60 GeV neutrino can be
1194: discovered for mixings $|V_{\mu N}| \geq 0.0070$; upper limits
1195: $|V_{\mu N}|^2 \leq
1196: 1.65 (1.95) \times 10^{-5}$ can be set at 90\% (95\%) CL if a $\mumu jj$
1197: excess is
1198: not observed. These figures are in sharp constrast with previous estimates,
1199: and correspond to the increase in the background estimation of about two
1200: orders of magnitude (three for $m_N < M_W$).
1201: In particular, special care has to
1202: be taken with $b \bar b$ plus jets. The probability of a $b \bar b$ pair to give
1203: two like-sign isolated muons is tiny, but on the other hand the $b \bar b$
1204: cross section $\sim 1~\mu$b is huge. A reliable background calculation requires
1205: solving this $0 \cdot \infty$ indetermination, what is a
1206: computationally very demanding task in which some apparently reasonable
1207: simplifying assumptions, like requiring high transverse momenta of $b$ quarks
1208: at generator level, can result in an underestimation by a factor of 30.
1209: The $b \bar b nj$ background has been found to be negligible for
1210: larger $m_N$ values but dominant for $m_N < M_W$
1211: (after cuts, 5 times larger than the sum of the other backgrounds).
1212: This behaviour is due
1213: to the very different signal kinematics in these two cases.
1214: For $m_N < M_W$ the charged leptons are produced with very small transverse
1215: momentum, therefore a cut on this variable, which could be efficiently used
1216: to remove $b \bar b nj$, cannot be applied. On the other hand,
1217: requiring {\em e.g.} that one charged lepton has $p_T > 30$ GeV and the other
1218: one $p_T > 20$ GeV hardly affects the signal for $m_N = 150$ GeV, while it
1219: practically eliminates $b \bar b nj$.
1220:
1221:
1222: For the other like-sign dilepton channels, $\ee jj$ and $\mue jj$,
1223: the prospects are worse because backgrounds are much larger.
1224: We have found that
1225: a heavy neutrino with $V_{eN} = 0.073$ can be discovered
1226: with $5\sigma$ up to masses $m_N = 145$ GeV. In the region
1227: $m_N < M_W$, a heavy neutrino with $m_N = 60$ GeV can be discovered
1228: for mixings $|V_{eN}| \geq 0.030$; upper limits
1229: $|V_{eN}|^2 \leq 3.1 (3.6) \times 10^{-4}$ can be set at 90\% (95\%) CL if a
1230: background excess is
1231: not observed. The latter limits are of the same magnitude but worse than
1232: those from L3. Besides, couplings of this size
1233: would be in conflict with the non-observation of neutrinoless double beta
1234: decay, requiring cancellations with other new physics contributions. Finally,
1235: for a heavy neutrino with $m_N = 60$ GeV and coupling to both electron and muon
1236: we have found that
1237: direct limits on $V_{eN}$ and $V_{\mu N}$ will improve the indirect ones
1238: from $\mu-e$ LFV processes. For completeness we have also examined the LHC
1239: sensitivity for a Dirac neutrino coupling to the electron and muon,
1240: in $\mu^\pm e^\mp jj$ final states. The sensitivity is much worse, as expected
1241: from the larger LNC backgrounds involving opposite-sign dileptons, and the
1242: direct limits obtained are worse than the present indirect ones.
1243: Hence, LHC is not expected to provide any useful
1244: direct limit on heavy Dirac neutrinos, for which all final states conserve
1245: lepton number. By the same token, other decay channels such as $N \to
1246: Z\nu$, $N \to H \nu$ and production processes as $pp \to Z \to N \nu$,
1247: have too large backgrounds as well.
1248:
1249: In the detailed analyses presented for $m_N = 150$ GeV and $m_N = 60$ GeV
1250: we have shown that background suppression ($t \bar t nj$ and diboson production
1251: in the former case, $b \bar b nj$ in the latter) is not efficient
1252: with simple kinematical cuts, and requires more sophisticated methods, like the
1253: likelihood analysis applied here, or neural networks. The analysis could be
1254: further improved when one includes other variables not accessible at the level
1255: of fast simulation. For example, a $b \bar b$ pair giving two like-sign
1256: isolated muons is most often caused by the oscillation of one of the $B^0$
1257: mesons before decay.
1258: This should appear as a secondary vertex, which could be identified in the
1259: detector. On the other hand, the possibility of lepton charge misidentification
1260: should be addressed.
1261: Full simulation of $b \bar b nj$ for the LHC luminosity is beyond
1262: reach of present and foreseable computers, so this background will have to be
1263: estimated from data. In any case, we stress that $b \bar b nj$, as well as $t
1264: \bar t nj$, must always be considered as a potentially dangerous source of two
1265: like-sign dileptons. And, if a moderate background excess is observed
1266: at low transverse momenta, a precise evaluation of the $b \bar b nj$
1267: background is compulsory before drawing any conclusion.
1268:
1269: It is finally worth noting that heavy neutrino decays, as for any other
1270: vector-like fermion, are a source of Higgs bosons \cite{delAguila:1989rq}.
1271: Nevertheless, in contrast with the quark sector \cite{Aguilar-Saavedra:2006gw}
1272: Higgs boson production from $N$ decays is rather small, and only a handful
1273: of $\mu N \to \mu \nu H \to \mu \nu b \bar b$ events are expected to be found
1274: at LHC. Besides, we also point out that large effects due to heavy
1275: neutrinos and,
1276: more generally, other neutrino physics beyond the SM might be observed at
1277: large hadron colliders. However, in all cases they require new interactions
1278: and often model dependent constraints. This means further assumptions, and
1279: in this situation the main novel ingredient is not only the heavy neutrino.
1280: In this category there are many interesting scenarios, also including
1281: supersymmetry (see for an example Refs.~\cite{Porod:2000hv,Hirsch:2003fe}).
1282: Then, compared to these new physics models the limits established in this work
1283: are modest. For example, if the heavy neutrino has an interaction with a
1284: typical gauge strength, as in left-right models with a new
1285: heavy $W_R$, the LHC reach for $m_N$ increases up to approximately 2 TeV
1286: \cite{Ferrari:2000sp,Gninenko:2006br}. In the case of a new leptophobic
1287: $Z'_\lambda$
1288: boson, the $m_N$ reach in $N$ pair production $pp \to Z'_\lambda \to NN$
1289: is increased up to 800 GeV \cite{delAguila:2007ua}.
1290:
1291: \vspace{1cm}
1292: %\newpage
1293: \noindent
1294: {\Large \bf Acknowledgements}
1295: \vspace{0.3cm}
1296:
1297: \noindent
1298: This work has been supported by MEC project FPA2006-05294,
1299: Junta de Andaluc{\'\i}a projects FQM 101 and FQM 437,
1300: MIUR under contract 2006020509\_004,
1301: and by the European Community's Marie-Curie Research Training
1302: Network under contract MRTN-CT-2006-035505 ``Tools and Precision
1303: Calculations for Physics Discoveries at Colliders''.
1304: J.A.A.-S. acknowledges support by a MEC Ram\'on y Cajal contract.
1305:
1306:
1307:
1308: \appendix
1309: \section{Evaluation of the $b \bar b$ background}
1310: \label{sec:a}
1311:
1312: $b \bar b$ production, which has a huge cross section of order 1 $\mu$b at LHC,
1313: is the largest SM source of like-sign dileptons. Charged leptons are produced
1314: in the decays $b \to c \ell^- \nu$, $\bar b \to \bar c \ell^+ \nu$, and
1315: like-sign lepton pairs can arise when one of the
1316: $b$ quarks yields a $B^0$ meson which oscillates before decay. Additionally,
1317: like-sign
1318: charged leptons can be produced from the subsequent decay of the charm
1319: (anti)quark, {\em e.g.} $c \to s \ell^+ \nu$. We have investigated the relative
1320: contribution of the two
1321: sources by simulating with {\tt Pythia} a $b \bar b$ sample of 25 million
1322: events with and without $B^0$ mixing. The number of dielectron and dimuon
1323: events (requiring isolation and transverse momentum greater than 10 GeV) is
1324: gathered in Table~\ref{tab:Bmix}. A quick look at these numbers reveals that
1325: about $80\%$ of like-sign dileptons result from $B^0$ oscillation.
1326:
1327:
1328: \begin{table}[htb]
1329: \begin{center}
1330: \begin{tabular}{lcc}
1331: & $B^0$ mixing & No $B^0$ mixing \\
1332: \hline
1333: $\mu^\pm \mu^\pm$ & 55 & 12 \\
1334: $\mu^\pm e^\pm$ & 456 & 109 \\
1335: $e^\pm e^\pm$ & 1242 & 334 \\
1336: $\mu^+ \mu^-$ & 309 & 335 \\
1337: $\mu^\pm e^\mp$ & 1357 & 1643 \\
1338: $e^\pm e^\pm$ & 3755 & 4671 \\
1339: \end{tabular}
1340: \caption{Number of dilepton events obtained from a sample of 25 million
1341: $b \bar b$ events, when $B^0$ oscillation is allowed in
1342: {\tt Pythia} (first column) or not (second column).}
1343: \label{tab:Bmix}
1344: \end{center}
1345: \end{table}
1346:
1347: It must be emphasised that the theoretical evaluation of the $b \bar b$
1348: contribution to the like-sign dilepton SM background involves several
1349: uncertainties. The most obvious one affects the total $b \bar b$ cross section,
1350: which depends to a large extent on the generation cuts placed on $b$ transverse
1351: momenta. A second one involves $b$ quark fragmentation. We have used the
1352: Peterson parameterisation with $\epsilon_b = 0.0035$ \cite{Barate:1996fi}.
1353: With the default {\tt Pythia} setting $\epsilon_b = 0.005$ the number of
1354: (isolated) dileptons obtained is a factor $\sim 0.77$ smaller. But perhaps the
1355: largest uncertainty comes from the fact that our analysis relies on a fast
1356: simulation of the detector, which may be inadequate when studying delicate
1357: issues like lepton isolation. At any rate, a full simulation of a large
1358: $b \bar b$ sample is out of present reach and this background will have to be
1359: measured using real data.
1360:
1361: Apart from these theoretical uncertainties there is another one due to the
1362: limited statistics of the simulated samples. The $b \bar b$
1363: cross section is 1.4 $\mu$b when both $b$ quarks are required to have
1364: $p_T^b \geq 20$ GeV
1365: at the generator level.
1366: Fast simulation of 30 fb$^{-1}$ would take about 15000
1367: days in a modern single-processor system,
1368: making this computation difficult even in multi-processor grids.
1369: (Full simulation would take about
1370: $10^6$ years and, as emphasised above, in the real experiment this background
1371: must be estimated from data, as it has been done by D0 \cite{D0}.)
1372: Therefore, for our evaluations we have simulated samples of approximately 100,
1373: 35, 15 and 5 million events
1374: for $b \bar b$, $b \bar b j$, $b\bar b 2j$ and $b \bar b 3j$,
1375: respectively, corresponding to a luminosity $L = 0.075$ fb$^{-1}$ and the
1376: cross sections given by ALPGEN. The size of the samples is reduced when
1377: performing the MLM matching, which has efficiencies of 90.7\%, 41.8\%,
1378: 18.7\% and 12.7\%, respectively. The number
1379: of events at pre-selection is calculated by rescaling the number
1380: of events to 30 fb$^{-1}$. For example,
1381: \begin{equation}
1382: N(\mu^\pm \mu^\pm;\text{pre},30) \simeq N(\mu^\pm \mu^\pm;\text{pre},L) f_L \,,
1383: \end{equation}
1384: with $f_L = 400$. This rescaling introduces a large statistical uncertainty
1385: and, moreover, the estimation of the number of
1386: events after selection cuts cannot be done in this way, since no $\mu^\pm
1387: \mu^\pm$ events survive the cuts applied.
1388: Instead, we make the reasonable assumption
1389: that selection cuts, which are based on kinematical variables, have the same
1390: effect on all $\ell \ell'$
1391: events, where $\ell,\ell'=e,\mu$, not necessarily of the same charge.
1392: Then, for $b \bar b nj$ backgrounds the number of $\mu^\pm \mu^\pm$ events after
1393: selection cuts for 30 fb$^{-1}$ can be estimated from the samples with a smaller
1394: luminosity $L$ as
1395: \begin{equation}
1396: N(\mu^\pm \mu^\pm;\text{sel},30) \simeq N(\ell \ell';\text{sel},L)
1397: \left[ \frac{N(\mu^\pm \mu^\pm;\text{pre},L)}{N(\ell \ell';\text{pre},L)} f_L
1398: \right] \,.
1399: \label{ec:rescale}
1400: \end{equation}
1401: Since the total number of $\ell \ell'$ events is about $200$ times larger than
1402: the number
1403: of $\mu^\pm \mu^\pm$ events, the term in brackets in Eq.~(\ref{ec:rescale})
1404: is of order two, and thus the simulated samples provide a statistically more
1405: precise estimate
1406: of the results for $\mu^\pm \mu^\pm$ final states. We have explicitly checked
1407: whether the relevant kinematical distributions are similar or not for several
1408: final states.
1409: In particular, differences between electrons and muons might be expected due
1410: to the different energy resolution and isolation criteria.
1411: The most crucial variables for background suppresion are the transverse momenta
1412: of the two leptons. They are presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:bbsplit}, together with
1413: a ``signal'' sample
1414: included for comparison. The heavy neutrino sample corresponds to more than
1415: 40000 events, while the dilepton samples from $b \bar b nj$ contain 37
1416: $\mu^\pm \mu^\pm$, 382 $\mu^+ \mu^-$, 1497 $e^\pm e^\pm$ and 4676 $e^+ e^-$
1417: events, respectively. The $\mu^+ \mu^-$, $e^\pm e^\pm$ and $e^+ e^-$ samples
1418: have remarkably similar distributions, while $\mu^\pm \mu^\pm$ events
1419: apparently concentrate at lower transverse momenta. This seems to be only a
1420: statistical effect, given the smallness of the sample (only 37 events). This
1421: belief is strengthened if one realises that $e^\pm e^\pm$ and $e^+ e^-$ events
1422: have the same distributions (what suggests charge independence) and the same
1423: happens for $e^+ e^-$ and $\mu^+ \mu^-$ (suggesting flavour independence).
1424: Two further variables which might exhibit differences are the distance between
1425: the leptons and the closest jet, also shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:bbsplit}. In this
1426: case there seem to be small differences between the samples. However, these two
1427: variables are not determinant in suppressing the background, as it can be
1428: observed by comparing with the $N$ signal distribution, and any eventual
1429: difference in kinematics will have little effect on our calculations.
1430:
1431:
1432: \begin{figure}[htb]
1433: \begin{center}
1434: \begin{tabular}{ccc}
1435: \epsfig{file=Figs/PTl1-BB.eps,height=5cm,clip=} & \quad &
1436: \epsfig{file=Figs/PTl2-BB.eps,height=5cm,clip=} \\
1437: \epsfig{file=Figs/dRl1j-BB.eps,height=5cm,clip=} & \quad &
1438: \epsfig{file=Figs/dRl2j-BB.eps,height=5cm,clip=}
1439: \end{tabular}
1440: \caption{Distribution of several kinematical variables for $\mu^\pm \mu^\pm$
1441: events from heavy neutrino production and dilepton events from $b \bar b$
1442: production (see the text). }
1443: \label{fig:bbsplit}
1444: \end{center}
1445: \end{figure}
1446:
1447:
1448: Finally, it is worth remarking here
1449: that raising the $p_T^b$ threshold at generator level, {\em e.g.} to 50 GeV,
1450: leads to a dramatic
1451: reduction of the $b \bar b nj$ cross sections,
1452: making the simulation more manageable. However, this
1453: also results in a gross underestimation of the $b \bar b nj$ background.
1454: We have checked this by simulating two samples of 25 million $b \bar b$ events
1455: with $p_T^b \geq 20$ and $p_T^b \geq 50$ GeV, respectively.
1456: For pre-selection we just require two
1457: isolated muons of either charge with $p_T^\mu \geq 10$ GeV.
1458: For the $p_T^b \geq 20$ sample we obtain 364 $b \bar b \to \mu \mu$ events,
1459: while for the $p_T^b \geq 50$ sample we only obtain 287 events.
1460: Given the difference in cross sections (1430 nb for $p_T^b \geq 20$ GeV
1461: and 58.8 nb for $p_T^b \geq 50$ GeV),
1462: raising $p_T^b$ to 50 GeV at event
1463: generation would underestimate this backgrounds by a factor of 30.
1464: For $b \bar j$ we have checked that raising $p_T^b$ at event generation
1465: to 50 GeV reduces the number of dimuon events by a factor of 35.
1466: This seems to be related to the fact
1467: that $b$ quarks with larger transverse momentum give more collimated decay
1468: products, and thus the muons are less isolated. On the other hand, $b$ quarks
1469: with too low transverse momentum cannot produce muons with
1470: $p_T^\mu \geq 10$ GeV.
1471: For this reason, we expect that our evaluation of $b \bar b nj$ provides a good
1472: estimate of the actual background to be found at LHC.
1473:
1474: The evaluation of
1475: from $c \bar c nj$ proceeds in the same way. However, the number of dilepton
1476: events is much smaller and no $\mumu$ events appear
1477: in the samples simulated (containing about 145 million events after MLM
1478: matching). In this case the
1479: number of $\mumu jj$ events from $c \bar c nj$ production is estimated by
1480: comparing with $\ee nj$ events and assuming the same ratio of events
1481: $N(\mumu jj)/N(\ee jj)$ as for $b \bar b nj$ production.
1482: The result is shown between parentheses in the tables.
1483:
1484:
1485:
1486: \section{Heavy neutrino mass reconstruction}
1487: \label{sec:b}
1488:
1489:
1490: For heavy neutrinos $N$ heavier than the $W$ boson the decay
1491: $N \to \mu W \to \mu q \bar q'$ takes place with $W$ on shell; thus, the
1492: invariant mass of the two quarks is
1493: $M_W$ up to finite width effects. In simulated signal events, however, several
1494: extra jets often appear due to pile-up and initial/final state radiation, and
1495: it is not straightforward to identify the two ones originating from the $W$
1496: decay. We have tested two procedures:
1497: \begin{enumerate}
1498: \item To take, naively, the two jets with highest transverse momentum. This
1499: method will be denoted as `R1'.
1500: \item To try all possible pairings among the jets, choosing the pair giving an
1501: invariant mass closest to $M_W$. This method is denoted as `R2'.
1502: \end{enumerate}
1503: The difference between the two choices is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:rec-comp}
1504: (left) for the case of the heavy neutrino signal.
1505: The method R1 yields a moderate peak for the $W$ reconstructed mass
1506: $M_W^\text{rec}$. When included in likelihood function (see
1507: Fig.~\ref{fig:vars2}), this variable improves the signal significance about
1508: 2\%. (No improvement is found when performing a kinematical cut on
1509: $M_W^\text{rec}$ in addition to the cut on likelihood.)
1510: The second method R2 gives a considerably more peaked distribution for the
1511: signal, at the expense of strongly biasing the background, as it is shown in
1512: Fig.~\ref{fig:rec-comp} (right). Thus, with the second method the $W$ invariant
1513: mass is not a useful variable for discriminating the signal against the
1514: background.
1515:
1516: \begin{figure}[htb]
1517: \begin{center}
1518: \begin{tabular}{ccc}
1519: \epsfig{file=Figs/MWcomp-N.eps,height=5cm,clip=} & \quad &
1520: \epsfig{file=Figs/MWrec-bkg.eps,height=5cm,clip=}
1521: \end{tabular}
1522: \caption{Left: reconstructed $W$ mass for the heavy neutrino signal, using the
1523: two methods (R1 and R2) explained in the text. Right: reconstructed $W$ mass
1524: for the signal and SM backgrounds using the method R2.}
1525: \label{fig:rec-comp}
1526: \end{center}
1527: \end{figure}
1528:
1529: The heavy neutrino mass is obtained as the invariant mass of the jet pair
1530: selected to reconstruct the $W$, plus one of the two muons.
1531: In order to improve the reconstruction, the two jet
1532: momenta are rescaled so that their invariant mass coincides with $M_W$.
1533: For both $W$ reconstruction methods the results are very similar, as it can
1534: be observed in
1535: Fig.~\ref{fig:rec-comp2}. The invariant mass of the $W$ and the muon with
1536: smaller transverse momentum $m_{W\mu_2}$ is more concentrated around the true
1537: $m_N$, and is taken as the heavy neutrino reconstructed mass in our analysis.
1538: In case of discovery, this distribution might be used to determine $m_N$.
1539:
1540: \begin{figure}[htb]
1541: \begin{center}
1542: \begin{tabular}{ccc}
1543: \epsfig{file=Figs/mN1-comp.eps,height=5cm,clip=} & \quad &
1544: \epsfig{file=Figs/mN2-comp.eps,height=5cm,clip=}
1545: \end{tabular}
1546: \caption{Invariant mass of the reconstructed $W$ boson (rescaled) and the muon
1547: with highest ($\mu_1$) and lowest ($\mu_2$) transverse momentum, for the two
1548: $W$ reconstruction choices explained in the text.}
1549: \label{fig:rec-comp2}
1550: \end{center}
1551: \end{figure}
1552:
1553:
1554:
1555: For $m_N < M_W$ it is very difficult to identify the two jets coming from
1556: $N \to W^* \mu$, which have low transverse momenta, due to the appearance of
1557: extra jets from pile-up. This fact is clearly seen
1558: examining the invariant mass distribution of the two jets with highest $p_T$
1559: and either of the two muons, in Fig.~\ref{fig:mWl-N60}.
1560: In both cases the distribution peaks well above
1561: $m_N = 60$ GeV, indicating that one or the two jets do not really originate
1562: from the heavy neutrino decay. We have not found any improvement of the signal
1563: significance considering these variables in the likelihood analysis.
1564:
1565: \begin{figure}[htb]
1566: \begin{center}
1567: \epsfig{file=Figs/mWl-N60.eps,height=5cm,clip=}
1568: \caption{Invariant mass of the two jets with highest transverse momentum and
1569: each of the two muons, for a heavy neutrino signal with $m_N = 60$ GeV.}
1570: \label{fig:mWl-N60}
1571: \end{center}
1572: \end{figure}
1573:
1574: In case of discovery, one possibility for the $N$ mass determination could be
1575: to consider the
1576: invariant mass of the two muons, which we present in Fig.~\ref{fig:mNrec} (left)
1577: for heavy neutrino masses of 50, 60 and 70 GeV. This distribution seems to
1578: peak around $m_N/2$. Other possibility is to exploit the fact that, since the
1579: on-shell decay $W \to
1580: \mu N$ is two-body, the energy of this muon in the centre of mass
1581: (CM) system, $E_\mu^\text{CM}$, is fixed by $m_N$. Thus, we may determine the
1582: heavy neutrino mass as
1583: \begin{equation}
1584: m_N^\text{CM} = \sqrt{M_W^2 - 2 M_W E_\mu^\text{CM}} \,.
1585: \label{ec:mNrec}
1586: \end{equation}
1587: The $m_N$ reconstruction from the muon energy in the CM frame (defined as the
1588: rest frame of the two muons and two jets with largest $p_T$) is shown in
1589: Fig.~\ref{fig:mNrec} (right). For each event two values of $m_N^\text{CM}$ are
1590: calculated, corresponding to the two possible muon choices,
1591: and both are plotted. Imaginary values
1592: are discarded.
1593: These procedures for $m_N$ determination will be subject to
1594: possibly large systematic uncertainties, but their evaluation is beyond the
1595: scope of this work. (For example, the reconstruction from the muon energy in
1596: the CM
1597: frame is expected to have a systematic uncertainty from pile-up, which could be
1598: decreased using the muon energy in the laboratory frame, but at the expense of
1599: losing sensitivity to $m_N$.)
1600: If heavy neutrinos were discovered, interesting information about CP violation,
1601: relevant for leptogenesis, could also be inferred \cite{Bray:2007ru}.
1602:
1603: \begin{figure}[htb]
1604: \begin{center}
1605: \begin{tabular}{ccc}
1606: \epsfig{file=./Figs/mll-mN.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} & &
1607: \epsfig{file=./Figs/mNcm.eps,height=4.9cm,clip=} \\
1608: \end{tabular}
1609: \caption{Left: invariant mass of the two muons, for three heavy neutrino masses.
1610: Right: heavy neutrino mass reconstructed from the muon energy in CM frame.}
1611: \label{fig:mNrec}
1612: \end{center}
1613: \end{figure}
1614:
1615:
1616:
1617:
1618:
1619:
1620:
1621:
1622:
1623:
1624:
1625:
1626:
1627:
1628:
1629: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1630:
1631: \bibitem{Datta:1993nm}
1632: A.~Datta, M.~Guchait and A.~Pilaftsis,
1633: {\em Probing lepton number violation via Majorana neutrinos at hadron
1634: supercolliders,
1635: Phys.\ Rev.}\ {\bf D 50} (1994) 3195
1636: [{\tt hep-ph/9311257}].
1637: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D50,3195;%%
1638:
1639: \bibitem{Almeida:2000pz}
1640: F.~M.~L.~Almeida, Y.~A.~Coutinho, J.~A.~Martins Simoes and M.~A.~B.~do Vale,
1641: {\em On a signature for heavy Majorana neutrinos in hadronic collisions,
1642: Phys.\ Rev.}\ {\bf D 62} (2000) 075004
1643: [{\tt hep-ph/0002024}].
1644: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D62,075004;%%
1645:
1646: \bibitem{Panella:2001wq}
1647: O.~Panella, M.~Cannoni, C.~Carimalo and Y.~N.~Srivastava,
1648: {\em Signals of heavy Majorana neutrinos at hadron colliders,
1649: Phys.\ Rev.}\ {\bf D 65} (2002) 035005
1650: [{\tt hep-ph/0107308}].
1651: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D65,035005;%%
1652:
1653: \bibitem{Han:2006ip}
1654: T.~Han and B.~Zhang,
1655: {\em Signatures for Majorana neutrinos at hadron colliders,
1656: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.}\ {\bf 97} (2006) 171804
1657: [{\tt hep-ph/0604064}].
1658: %%CITATION = PRLTA,97,171804;%%
1659:
1660: \bibitem{delAguila:2006dx}
1661: F.~del Aguila, J.~A.~Aguilar-Saavedra and R.~Pittau,
1662: {\em Neutrino physics at large colliders,
1663: J.\ Phys.\ Conf.\ Ser.}\ {\bf 53} (2006) 506
1664: [{\tt hep-ph/0606198}].
1665: %%CITATION = 00462,53,506;%%
1666:
1667: \bibitem{Langacker:1984dc}
1668: P.~Langacker, R.~W.~Robinett and J.~L.~Rosner,
1669: {\em New heavy gauge bosons in $pp$ and $p \bar p$ collisions,
1670: Phys.\ Rev.}\ {\bf D 30} (1984) 1470.
1671: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D30,1470;%%
1672:
1673: \bibitem{Ferrari:2000sp}
1674: A.~Ferrari {\it et al.},
1675: {\em Sensitivity study for new gauge bosons and right-handed Majorana
1676: neutrino in $p p$ collisions at $\sqrt s = 14$ TeV,
1677: Phys.\ Rev.}\ {\bf D 62} (2000) 013001.
1678: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D62,013001;%%
1679:
1680: \bibitem{Gninenko:2006br}
1681: S.~N.~Gninenko, M.~M.~Kirsanov, N.~V.~Krasnikov and V.~A.~Matveev,
1682: {\em Detection of heavy Majorana neutrinos and right-handed bosons,}
1683: CMS-NOTE-2006-098.
1684: %%CITATION = CERN-CMS-NOTE-2006-098;%%
1685:
1686: \bibitem{Keung:1983uu}
1687: W.~Y.~Keung and G.~Senjanovic,
1688: {\em Majorana Neutrinos And The Production Of The Right-Handed Charged Gauge
1689: Boson,
1690: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.}\ {\bf 50}, 1427 (1983).
1691: %%CITATION = PRLTA,50,1427;%%
1692:
1693: \bibitem{Datta:1992qw}
1694: A.~Datta, M.~Guchait and D.~P.~Roy,
1695: {\em Prospect of heavy right-handed neutrino search at SSC / LHC energies,
1696: Phys.\ Rev.}\ D {\bf 47} (1993) 961
1697: [{\tt hep-ph/9208228}].
1698: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D47,961;%%
1699:
1700: \bibitem{delAguila:2007ua}
1701: F.~del Aguila and J.~A.~Aguilar-Saavedra,
1702: {\em Like-sign dilepton signals from a leptophobic $Z'$ boson,}
1703: {\tt arXiv:0705.4117 [hep-ph]}.
1704: %%CITATION = ARXIV:0705.4117;%%
1705:
1706: \bibitem{Mangano:2002ea}
1707: M.~L.~Mangano, M.~Moretti, F.~Piccinini, R.~Pittau and A.~D.~Polosa,
1708: {\em ALPGEN, a generator for hard multiparton processes in hadronic
1709: collisions,
1710: JHEP} {\bf 0307} (2003) 001
1711: [{\tt hep-ph/0206293}].
1712: %%CITATION = JHEPA,0307,001;%%
1713:
1714: \bibitem{Mohapatra:1998rq}
1715: R.N. Mohapatra and P.B. Pal,
1716: {\em Massive neutrinos in physics and astrophysics: second edition,
1717: World Sci. Lect. Notes Phys.} {\bf 72} (2004) 1.
1718: %%CITATION = NONE;%%
1719:
1720: \bibitem{Branco:1999fs}
1721: G.C. Branco, L. Lavoura and J.P. Silva,
1722: {\em CP Violation},
1723: Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK (1999).
1724: %%CITATION = NONE;%%
1725:
1726: \bibitem{Gluza:1996bz}
1727: J.~Gluza and M.~Zralek,
1728: {\em Heavy neutrinos production and decay in future $e^+ e^-$ colliders,
1729: Phys.\ Rev.}\ {\bf D 55} (1997) 7030
1730: [{\tt hep-ph/9612227}].
1731: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D55,7030;%%
1732:
1733: \bibitem{Pilaftsis:1991ug}
1734: A.~Pilaftsis,
1735: {\em Radiatively induced neutrino masses and large Higgs neutrino couplings
1736: in the Standard Model with Majorana fields,
1737: Z.\ Phys.}\ {\bf C 55} (1992) 275
1738: [{\tt hep-ph/9901206}].
1739: %%CITATION = ZEPYA,C55,275;%%
1740:
1741: \bibitem{delAguila:2005pf}
1742: F.~del Aguila and J.~A.~Aguilar-Saavedra,
1743: {\em $\ell W \nu$ production at CLIC: A window to TeV scale non-decoupled
1744: neutrinos,
1745: JHEP} {\bf 0505} (2005) 026
1746: [{\tt hep-ph/0503026}].
1747: %%CITATION = JHEPA,0505,026;%%
1748:
1749: \bibitem{Bergmann:1998rg}
1750: S.~Bergmann and A.~Kagan,
1751: {\em $Z$-induced FCNCs and their effects on neutrino oscillations,
1752: Nucl.\ Phys.}\ {\bf B 538} (1999) 368
1753: [{\tt hep-ph/9803305}].
1754: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B538,368;%%
1755:
1756: \bibitem{Bekman:2002zk}
1757: B.~Bekman, J.~Gluza, J.~Holeczek, J.~Syska and M.~Zralek,
1758: {\em Matter effects and CP violating neutrino oscillations with
1759: non-decoupling heavy neutrinos,
1760: Phys.\ Rev.}\ {\bf D 66} (2002) 093004
1761: [{\tt hep-ph/0207015}].
1762: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D66,093004;%%
1763:
1764: \bibitem{Aalseth:2004hb}
1765: C.~Aalseth {\it et al.},
1766: {\em Neutrinoless double beta decay and direct searches for neutrino mass,}
1767: {\tt hep-ph/0412300}.
1768: %%CITATION = HEP-PH/0412300;%%
1769:
1770: \bibitem{Benes:2005hn}
1771: P.~Benes, A.~Faessler, F.~Simkovic and S.~Kovalenko,
1772: {\em Sterile neutrinos in neutrinoless double beta decay,
1773: Phys.\ Rev.}\ {\bf D 71} (2005) 077901
1774: [{\tt hep-ph/0501295}].
1775: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D71,077901;%%
1776:
1777: \bibitem{Ingelman:1993ve}
1778: G.~Ingelman and J.~Rathsman,
1779: {\em Heavy Majorana neutrinos at $e p$ colliders,
1780: Z.\ Phys.}\ {\bf C 60} (1993) 243.
1781: %%CITATION = ZEPYA,C60,243;%%
1782:
1783: \bibitem{Ilakovac:1994kj}
1784: A.~Ilakovac and A.~Pilaftsis,
1785: {\em Flavor violating charged lepton decays in seesaw-type models,
1786: Nucl.\ Phys.}\ {\bf B 437} (1995) 491
1787: [{\tt hep-ph/9403398}].
1788: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B437,491;%%
1789:
1790: \bibitem{Tommasini:1995ii}
1791: D.~Tommasini, G.~Barenboim, J.~Bernabeu and C.~Jarlskog,
1792: {\em Nondecoupling of heavy neutrinos and lepton flavor violation,
1793: Nucl.\ Phys.}\ {\bf B 444} (1995) 451
1794: [{\tt hep-ph/9503228}].
1795: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B444,451;%%
1796:
1797: \bibitem{delAguila:2005mf}
1798: F.~del Aguila, J.~A.~Aguilar-Saavedra, A.~Martinez de la Ossa and D.~Meloni,
1799: {\em Flavour and polarisation in heavy neutrino production at $e^+ e^-$
1800: colliders,
1801: Phys.\ Lett.}\ {\bf B 613} (2005) 170
1802: [{\tt hep-ph/0502189}].
1803: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B613,170;%%
1804:
1805: \bibitem{helas}
1806: E. Murayama, I. Watanabe and K. Hagiwara,
1807: {\em HELAS: HELicity Amplitude Subroutines for Feynman Diagram Evaluations},
1808: KEK report 91-11, January 1992.
1809: %%CITATION = NONE;%%
1810:
1811: \bibitem{Dreiner:2000vf}
1812: H.~K.~Dreiner, P.~Richardson and M.~H.~Seymour,
1813: {\em Resonant slepton production in hadron hadron collisions,
1814: Phys.\ Rev.}\ {\bf D 63} (2001) 055008
1815: [{\tt hep-ph/0007228}].
1816: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D63,055008;%%
1817:
1818: \bibitem{Abulencia:2007rd}
1819: A.~Abulencia {\it et al.} [CDF Collaboration],
1820: {\em Inclusive search for new physics with like-sign dilepton events in $p
1821: \bar p$ collisions at $\sqrt s = 1.96$ TeV},
1822: {\tt hep-ex/0702051}.
1823: %%CITATION = HEP-EX/0702051;%%
1824:
1825: \bibitem{pythia}
1826: T. Sjostrand, S. Mrenna and P. Skands,
1827: {\em PYTHIA 6.4 physics and manual,
1828: JHEP} {\bf 0605} (2006) 026
1829: [{\tt hep-ph/0603175}].
1830: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0603175;%%
1831:
1832: \bibitem{mlm}
1833: M. L. Mangano, talk at Lund University,\\
1834: {\tt http://cern.ch/$\sim$mlm/talks/lund-alpgen.pdf}
1835: %%CITATION = NONE;%%
1836:
1837: \bibitem{atlfast}
1838: E. Richter-Was, D. Froidevaux and L. Poggioli,
1839: {\em ATLFAST 2.0 a fast simulation package for ATLAS},
1840: ATLAS note ATL-PHYS-98-131.
1841: %%CITATION = NONE;%%
1842:
1843:
1844: \bibitem{Adriani:1992pq}
1845: O.~Adriani {\it et al.} [L3 Collaboration],
1846: {\em Search for isosinglet neutral heavy leptons In $Z^0$ decays,
1847: Phys.\ Lett.}\ B {\bf 295} (1992) 371.
1848: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B295,371;%%
1849:
1850: \bibitem{Achard:2001qv}
1851: P.~Achard {\it et al.} [L3 Collaboration],
1852: {\em Search for heavy isosinglet neutrino in $e^+ e^-$ annihilation at LEP,
1853: Phys.\ Lett.}\ {\bf B 517} (2001) 67
1854: [{\tt hep-ex/0107014}].
1855: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B517,67;%%
1856:
1857: \bibitem{D0}
1858: D0 Collaboration, {\em Search for the associated production of charginos and
1859: neutralinos in the like sign dimuon channel}, note 5126-CONF.
1860: %%CITATION = NONE;%%
1861:
1862:
1863: \bibitem{Feldman:1997qc}
1864: G.~J.~Feldman and R.~D.~Cousins,
1865: {\em A Unified approach to the classical statistical analysis of small
1866: signals,
1867: Phys.\ Rev.}\ {\bf D 57} (1998) 3873
1868: [{\tt physics/9711021}].
1869: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D57,3873;%%
1870:
1871: \bibitem{Azuelos:1993qu}
1872: G.~Azuelos and A.~Djouadi,
1873: {\em New Fermions At $e^+ e^-$ Colliders. 2. Signals And Backgrounds,
1874: Z.\ Phys.}\ {\bf C 63} (1994) 327
1875: [{\tt hep-ph/9308340}].
1876: %%CITATION = ZEPYA,C63,327;%%
1877:
1878: \bibitem{delAguila:1989rq}
1879: F.~del Aguila, L.~Ametller, G.~L.~Kane and J.~Vidal,
1880: {\em Vector-like fermion and standard Higgs production at hadron colliders,''
1881: Nucl.\ Phys.}\ {\bf B 334} (1990) 1.
1882: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B334,1;%%
1883:
1884: \bibitem{Aguilar-Saavedra:2006gw}
1885: J.~A.~Aguilar-Saavedra,
1886: {\em Light Higgs boson discovery from fermion mixing,
1887: JHEP} {\bf 0612} (2006) 033
1888: [{\tt hep-ph/0603200}].
1889: %%CITATION = JHEPA,0612,033;%%
1890:
1891:
1892: \bibitem{Porod:2000hv}
1893: W.~Porod, M.~Hirsch, J.~Romao and J.~W.~F.~Valle,
1894: {\em Testing neutrino mixing at future collider experiments,
1895: Phys.\ Rev.}\ {\bf D 63} (2001) 115004
1896: [{\tt hep-ph/0011248}].
1897: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D63,115004;%%
1898:
1899: \bibitem{Hirsch:2003fe}
1900: M.~Hirsch and W.~Porod,
1901: {\em Neutrino properties and the decay of the lightest supersymmetric
1902: particle,
1903: Phys.\ Rev.}\ {\bf D 68} (2003) 115007
1904: [{\tt hep-ph/0307364}].
1905: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D68,115007;%%
1906:
1907: \bibitem{Barate:1996fi}
1908: R.~Barate {\it et al.} [ALEPH Collaboration],
1909: {\em Studies of quantum chromodynamics with the ALEPH detector,
1910: Phys.\ Rept.}\ {\bf 294} (1998) 1.
1911: %%CITATION = PRPLC,294,1;%%
1912:
1913: \bibitem{Bray:2007ru}
1914: S.~Bray, J.~S.~Lee and A.~Pilaftsis,
1915: {\em Resonant CP violation due to heavy neutrinos at the LHC},
1916: {\tt hep-ph/0702294}.
1917: %%CITATION = HEP-PH/0702294;%%
1918:
1919:
1920:
1921:
1922: \end{thebibliography}
1923:
1924: \end{document}
1925:
1926:
1927:
1928:
1929:
1930:
1931:
1932:
1933:
1934: