1: % ****** Start of file apssamp.tex ******

2: %

3: %   This file is part of the APS files in the REVTeX 4 distribution.

4: %   Version 4.0 of REVTeX, August 2001

5: %

6: %   Copyright (c) 2001 The American Physical Society.

7: %

8: %   See the REVTeX 4 README file for restrictions and more information.

9: %

10: % TeX'ing this file requires that you have AMS-LaTeX 2.0 installed

11: % as well as the rest of the prerequisites for REVTeX 4.0

12: %

13: % See the REVTeX 4 README file

14: % It also requires running BibTeX. The commands are as follows:

15: %

16: %  1)  latex apssamp.tex

17: %  2)  bibtex apssamp

18: %  3)  latex apssamp.tex

19: %  4)  latex apssamp.tex

20: %

21: %\documentclass[twocolumn,showpacs,preprintnumbers,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4}

22: \documentclass[preprint,showpacs,preprintnumbers,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4}

23: 

24: % Some other (several out of many) possibilities

25: %\documentclass[preprint,aps]{revtex4}

26: %\documentclass[preprint,aps,draft]{revtex4}

27: %\documentclass[prb]{revtex4}% Physical Review B

28: 

29: \usepackage{graphicx}% Include figure files

30: \usepackage{dcolumn}% Align table columns on decimal point

31: \usepackage{bm}% bold math

32: %\usepackage{epsfig}

33: \usepackage{slashed}

34: \usepackage{slashbox}

35: 

36: %\nofiles

37: 

38: \newcommand{\re}{\mathop{\mathrm{Re}}\nolimits}

39: \newcommand{\im}{\mathop{\mathrm{Im}}\nolimits}

40: %\newcommand{\notp}{\not{\hbox{\kern-2.3pt $p$}}}

41: %\newcommand{\notk}{\not{\hbox{\kern-2.3pt $k$}}}

42: \newcommand{\notp}{{\slashed{p}}}

43: \newcommand{\notk}{{\slashed{k}}}

44: 

45: \begin{document}

46: 

47: \preprint{DESY~06-207\hspace{12.55cm} ISSN 0418-9833}

48: %\preprint{NYU-TH/06/10/20\hspace{14.3cm}}

49: \preprint{MPP-2006-219, NYU-TH/06/10/20\hspace{11.6cm}}

50: %\preprint{October 2006\hspace{14.9cm}}

51: 

52: \title{Simple On-Shell Renormalization Framework for the

53: Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa Matrix}

54: 

55: \author{Bernd A. Kniehl}

56: \email{bernd.kniehl@desy.de}

57: \thanks{permanent address: II. Institut f\"ur Theoretische Physik,

58: Universit\"at Hamburg, Luruper Chaussee 149, 22761 Hamburg, Germany.}

59: \author{Alberto Sirlin}

60: \email{alberto.sirlin@nyu.edu}

61: \thanks{permanent address: Department of Physics, New York University,

62: 4 Washington Place, New York, New York 10003, USA.}

63: \affiliation{Max-Planck-Institut f\"ur Physik (Werner-Heisenberg-Institut),

64: F\"ohringer Ring 6, 80805 Munich, Germany}

65: 

66: \date{\today}

67: 

68: \begin{abstract}

69: We present an explicit on-shell framework to renormalize the

70: Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa (CKM) quark mixing matrix at the one-loop level.

71: It is based on a novel procedure to separate the external-leg mixing

72: corrections into gauge-independent self-mass (sm) and gauge-dependent

73: wave-function renormalization contributions, and to adjust non-diagonal mass

74: counterterm matrices to cancel all the divergent sm contributions, and also

75: their finite parts subject to constraints imposed by the hermiticity of the

76: mass matrices.

77: It is also shown that the proof of gauge independence and finiteness of the

78: remaining one-loop corrections to $W\to q_i+\overline{q}_j$ reduces to that in

79: the unmixed, single-generation case.

80: Diagonalization of the complete mass matrices leads then to an explicit

81: expression for the CKM counterterm matrix, which is gauge independent,

82: preserves unitarity, and leads to renormalized amplitudes that are

83: non-singular in the limit in which any two fermions become mass degenerate.

84: \end{abstract}

85: 

86: \pacs{11.10.Gh, 12.15.Ff, 12.15.Lk, 13.38.Be}

87: \maketitle

88: 

89: \section{\label{sec:one}%

90: Introduction}

91: 

92: The Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa (CKM) \cite{cab} quark mixing matrix is one of

93: the basic pillars of the electroweak sector of the Standard Model (SM).

94: In fact, the detailed determination of this matrix is one of the major aims of 

95: recent experiments carried out at the $B$ factories \cite{pdg}, as well as the

96: objective of a wide range of theoretical studies

97: \cite{pdg,Czarnecki:2004cw,Marciano:2005ec}.

98: 

99: An important theoretical problem associated with the CKM matrix is its

100: renormalization.

101: An early discussion, in the two-generation framework, was presented in

102: Ref.~\cite{Marciano:1975cn}, which focused mostly on the removal of the

103: ultraviolet (UV) divergent contributions.

104: In recent years there have been a number of interesting analyses that address

105: the renormalization of both the UV-divergent and finite contributions at

106: various levels of generality and complexity \cite{Denner:1990yz}.

107: 

108: In Ref.~\cite{short}, we outlined an explicit and direct on-shell framework to

109: renormalize the CKM matrix at the one-loop level, which can be regarded as a

110: simple generalization of Feynman's approach in Quantum Electrodynamics (QED)

111: \cite{Feynman:1949zx}.

112: 

113: In the present paper, we present a detailed discussion of this renormalization

114: framework and of the calculations underpinning its implementation.

115: We recall that, in QED, the self-energy insertion in an external leg involving

116: an outgoing fermion is of the form

117: \begin{eqnarray}

118: \Delta{\cal M}^{\rm leg}&=&\overline{u}(p)\Sigma(\notp)\frac{1}{\notp-m},

119: \label{eq:dm}\\

120: \Sigma(\notp)&=&A+B(\notp-m)+\Sigma_{\rm fin}(\notp),

121: \label{eq:sig}

122: \end{eqnarray}

123: where $u(p)$ is the spinor of the external particle, $\Sigma(\notp)$ the

124: self-energy, $i(\notp-m)^{-1}$ the particle's propagator, $A$ and $B$

125: UV-divergent constants, and $\Sigma_{\rm fin}(\notp)$ the finite part that

126: behaves as $\Sigma_{\rm fin}(\notp)\propto(\notp-m)^2$ in the neighborhood of

127: $\notp=m$.

128: The contribution of $A$ to Eq.~(\ref{eq:dm}) exhibits a pole as $\notp\to m$,

129: while the term proportional to $B$ is regular in this limit and that involving

130: $\Sigma_{\rm fin}(\notp)$ clearly vanishes.

131: We may refer to $A$ and $B$ as the ``self-mass'' (sm) and ``wave-function

132: renormalization'' (wfr) contributions, respectively.

133: The contribution $A$ is gauge independent and is canceled by the mass

134: counterterm.

135: The contribution $B$ is in general gauge dependent but, since the $(\notp-m)$

136: factor cancels the propagator's singularity, in Feynman's approach it is

137: combined with the proper vertex diagrams leading to a gauge-independent result.

138: In other formulations, $B$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:sig}) is canceled by an explicit

139: field renormalization counterterm $\delta Z$, which also modifies the

140: tree-level vertex coupling and, consequently, transfers once more this

141: contribution to the vertex amplitude.

142: 

143: \begin{figure}[ht]

144: \begin{center}

145: \includegraphics[bb=112 626 524 779,width=\textwidth]{fig1ab.ps}

146: \end{center}

147: \caption{\label{fig:one}%

148: Fermion self-energy diagrams.}

149: \end{figure}

150: 

151: In the case of the CKM matrix we encounter off-diagonal as well as diagonal

152: external-leg contributions generated by virtual effects involving $W^\pm$

153: bosons and charged Goldstone bosons ($\phi^\pm$).

154: As a consequence, the self-energy corrections to an external leg involving an

155: outgoing quark is of the form

156: \begin{equation}

157: \Delta{\cal M}_{ii^\prime}^{\rm leg}=\overline{u}_i(p)\Sigma_{ii^\prime}(\notp)

158: \frac{1}{\notp-m_{i^\prime}},

159: \label{eq:dmii}

160: \end{equation}

161: where $i$ denotes the external quark of momentum $p$ and mass $m_i$,

162: $i^\prime$ the initial virtual quark of mass $m_{i^\prime}$,

163: $i(\notp-m_{i^\prime})^{-1}$ is the corresponding propagator, and

164: $\Sigma_{ii^\prime}(\notp)$ the self-energy (see Fig.~\ref{fig:one}).

165: In Fig.~\ref{fig:one}(b) we have included the tadpole diagram involving a

166: virtual $\phi^\pm$ boson because its contribution is necessary to remove the

167: gauge dependence in the diagonal contributions of Fig.~\ref{fig:one}(a).

168: 

169: There are other contributions involving virtual effects of $Z^0$ bosons,

170: neutral Goldstone bosons ($\phi^0$), photons ($\gamma$), and Higgs bosons

171: ($H$) as well as additional tadpole diagrams, but all of these lead to

172: diagonal expressions of the usual kind.

173: An analytic expression for the full result may be found, e.g., in

174: Ref.~\cite{Kniehl:2000rb}.

175: 

176: In Sec.~\ref{sec:twoa} we analyze in detail the contributions arising from

177: the diagrams in Fig.~\ref{fig:one}.

178: After carrying out the Dirac algebra in a way that treats the $i$ and

179: $i^\prime$ quarks on an equal footing, we find that the 

180: $\Sigma_{ii^\prime}(\notp)$ contributions can be classified as follows:

181: (i) terms with a left factor $(\notp-m_i)$;

182: (ii) terms with a right factor $(\notp-m_{i^\prime})$;

183: (iii) terms with a left factor $(\notp-m_i)$ and a right factor

184: $(\notp-m_{i^\prime})$; and

185: (iv) constant terms not involving $\notp$.

186: 

187: We note that, in Eq.~(\ref{eq:dmii}), $\Sigma_{ii^\prime}(\notp)$ is inserted

188: between the external-quark spinor $\overline{u}_i(p)$ and the virtual-quark

189: propagator $i(\notp-m_{i^\prime})^{-1}$.

190: It follows that off-diagonal contributions of class (i) vanish in

191: Eq.~(\ref{eq:dmii}), since $(\notp-m_{i^\prime})^{-1}$ is non-singular for

192: $i^\prime\ne i$, while $\overline{u}_i(p)(\notp-m_i)=0$.

193: However, there are in general diagonal contributions of class (i), since for

194: $i^\prime=i$ the factor $(\notp-m_i)$ may cancel against the propagator in

195: Eq.~(\ref{eq:dmii}).

196: In contributions of class (ii), the right factor $(\notp-m_{i^\prime})$

197: cancels the propagator in Eq.~(\ref{eq:dmii}).

198: In analogy with the cancellation of $\Sigma_{\rm fin}(\notp)$ in

199: Eqs.~(\ref{eq:dm}) and (\ref{eq:sig}), contributions of class (iii) vanish in

200: both the diagonal and off-diagonal cases, since the right factor

201: $(\notp-m_{i^\prime})$ cancels the propagator in Eq.~(\ref{eq:dmii}), and

202: again $\overline{u}_i(p)(\notp-m_i)=0$.

203: %A common feature of the contributions to Eq.~(\ref{eq:dmii}) arising from

204: %classes (i) and (ii) is that the virtual-quark propagator

205: %$i(\notp-m_{i^\prime})^{-1}$ has been effectively canceled and, as a

206: %consequence, they are non-singular as $\notp\to m_{i^\prime}$.

207: A common feature of all the non-vanishing contributions to Eq.~(\ref{eq:dmii})

208: arising from classes (i) and (ii) is that the virtual-quark propagator

209: $i(\notp-m_{i^\prime})^{-1}$ has been canceled in both the diagonal

210: $(i^\prime=i)$ and off-diagonal $(i^\prime\ne i)$ cases and, as a consequence,

211: they are non-singular as $\notp\to m_{i^\prime}$.

212: Thus, they can be suitably combined with the proper vertex diagrams, in analogy

213: with $B$ in QED.

214: In  contrast, the contributions of class (iv) to Eq.~(\ref{eq:dmii}) retain the

215: virtual-quark propagator $i(\notp-m_{i^\prime})^{-1}$ and are singular in

216: this limit.

217: 

218: In Sec.~\ref{sec:twoa} we show that, in our formulation, the contributions

219: to Eq.~(\ref{eq:dmii}) of class (iv) are gauge independent, while those

220: arising from classes (i) and (ii) contain gauge-dependent pieces.

221: 

222: \begin{figure}[ht]

223: \begin{center}

224: \includegraphics[bb=112 634 508 754,width=\textwidth]{fig2abc.ps}

225: \end{center}

226: \caption{\label{fig:two}%

227: Proper $Wq_i\overline{q}_j$ vertex diagrams.}

228: \end{figure}

229: 

230: In analogy with the QED case, we identify class (iv) and classes (i) and (ii)

231: as self-mass (sm) and wave-function renormalization (wfr) contributions,

232: respectively.

233: They are listed explicitly in Secs.~\ref{sec:twob} and \ref{sec:twoc}.

234: In Sec.~\ref{sec:twoc}, we also discuss important simplifications that

235: occur in the wfr contributions to the physical $W\to q_i+\overline{q}_j$

236: amplitude.

237: In particular, we show that the gauge-dependent and the UV-divergent parts of

238: these contributions depend only on the external-quark masses $m_i$ and $m_j$

239: and do not involve the CKM matrix elements, except for an overall factor

240: $V_{ij}$, in analogy with the proper vertex diagrams depicted in 

241: Fig.~\ref{fig:two}.

242: This result implies that, once the divergent sm contributions are removed in

243: the renormalization process, the proof of finiteness and gauge independence of

244: the remaining one-loop corrections to the $W\to q_i+\overline{q}_j$ amplitude

245: is the same as in the much simpler case of a hypothetical single generation

246: made of the $i$ and $j$ quarks with unit CKM coupling.

247: 

248: By contrast, since the sm contributions to Eq.~(\ref{eq:dm}) are proportional

249: to $(\notp-m_{i^\prime})^{-1}$, they have a structure unsuitable for the

250: combination with vertex diagrams.

251: Thus, one expects such terms to be separately gauge independent, as we find.

252: 

253: The plan of this paper is the following.

254: In Sec.~\ref{sec:two} we evaluate the diagrams depicted in

255: Fig.~\ref{fig:one} and prove the various properties described above.

256: In Sec.~\ref{sec:three} we study the cancellation of sm contributions by

257: suitably adjusting the mass counterterms, subject to restrictions imposed by

258: hermiticity.

259: In Sec.~\ref{sec:four} we discuss the diagonalization of the complete mass

260: matrix, i.e.\ the renormalized plus counterterm mass matrices, and show

261: explicitly how this procedure generates a CKM counterterm matrix in a manner

262: that preserves unitarity and gauge independence.

263: Section~\ref{sec:five} contains our conclusions.

264: 

265: \boldmath

266: \section{\label{sec:two}%

267: Evaluation of $\Sigma_{ii^\prime}(\notp)$ and Gauge Independence of the

268: Self-Mass Contributions}

269: \unboldmath

270: 

271: In subsection~\ref{sec:twoa} we evaluate the one-loop diagrams of

272: Fig.~\ref{fig:one}, explain the separation into wfr and sm amplitudes, and

273: show explicitly the cancellation of gauge dependences in the latter.

274: Following standard conventions, $\Sigma_{ii^\prime}(\notp)$ is defined as $i$

275: times the diagrams of Fig.~\ref{fig:one}.

276: 

277: We show how the various contributions can be classified in the categories

278: (i)--(iv) described in Sec.~\ref{sec:one}.

279: As explained in Sec.~\ref{sec:one}, terms of class (iii) give a vanishing

280: contribution to the correction $\Delta{\cal M}_{ii^\prime}^{\rm leg}$

281: associated with an external leg, while those belonging to classes (i) and (ii)

282: effectively cancel the virtual-quark propagator $i(\notp-m_{i^\prime})^{-1}$.

283: They naturally combine with the proper vertex diagrams and are identified with

284: wfr contributions.

285: They are generally gauge dependent.

286: By contrast, in our formulation, the contributions of class (iv) to

287: $\Delta{\cal M}_{ii^\prime}^{\rm leg}$ are gauge independent and proportional

288: to $i(\notp-m_{i^\prime})^{-1}$, with a cofactor that is independent of

289: $\notp$ although it depends on the chiral projectors $a_\pm$.

290: They are identified with sm contributions.

291: 

292: The sm and wfr contributions to $\Delta{\cal M}_{ii^\prime}^{\rm leg}$ are

293: given explicitly in subsections~\ref{sec:twob} and \ref{sec:twoc}.

294: 

295: Although the main focus of this paper is the study of the sm contributions,

296: in Sec.~\ref{sec:twoc} we also digress on the further simplifications of

297: the wfr contributions that occur in the important $W\to q_i+\overline{q}_j$

298: amplitude.

299: 

300: \boldmath

301: \subsection{\label{sec:twoa}%

302: Evaluation of $\Sigma_{ii^\prime}(\notp)$}

303: \unboldmath

304: 

305: For definiteness, we first consider the case in which $i$ and $i^\prime$ in

306: Fig.~\ref{fig:one}(a) are up-type quarks and $l$ is a down-type quark.

307: Following standard conventions, we denote by $V_{il}$ the CKM matrix element

308: involving the up-type quark $i$ and the down-type quark $l$.

309: Simple modifications in other cases are discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:twod}.

310: 

311: Writing the $W$-boson propagator in the $R_\xi$ gauge as

312: \begin{equation}

313: {\cal D}_{\mu\nu}^W=-i\frac{g_{\mu\nu}-k_\mu k_\nu(1-\xi_W)/(k^2-m_W^2\xi_W)}

314: {k^2-m_W^2},

315: \label{eq:w}

316: \end{equation}

317: where $\xi_W$ is the gauge parameter, we first consider the contribution to

318: Fig.~\ref{fig:one}(a) of the second, $\xi_W$-dependent term.

319: We call this contribution $M_{ii^\prime}^{\rm GD}(W)$, where the notation

320: reminds us that this is the gauge-dependent part of the $W$-boson contribution.

321: After some elementary algebra, we find

322: \begin{eqnarray}

323: M_{ii^\prime}^{\rm GD}(W)&=&\frac{g^2}{2}V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger(1-\xi_W)

324: \int_n\frac{1}{\left(k^2-m_W^2\right)\left(k^2-m_W^2\xi_W\right)}

325: \nonumber\\

326: &&{}\times a_+\left[-\notk-\notp-m_l+(\notp-m_l)\frac{1}{\notp-\notk-m_l}

327: (\notp-m_l)\right]a_-,

328: \end{eqnarray}

329: where $a_\pm=(1\pm\gamma_5)/2$, $\int_n=\mu^{4-n}\int d^nk/(2\pi)^n$, and

330: $\mu$ is the 't~Hooft mass scale.

331: The term proportional to $\notk$ cancels, since the integrand is odd under

332: $\notk\to-\notk$, and the $m_l$ term cancels because of the chiral

333: projectors.

334: We rewrite $\notp a_-$ as follows:

335: \begin{eqnarray}

336: 2\notp a_-&=&\notp a_-+a_+\notp

337: \nonumber\\

338: &=&(\notp-m_i)a_-+a_+(\notp-m_{i^\prime})+m_ia_-+m_{i^\prime}a_+,

339: \end{eqnarray}

340: so that the $i$ and $i^\prime$ quarks are treated on an equal footing.

341: In the terms not involving $m_l$, we employ the unitarity relation,

342: \begin{equation}

343: V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger=\delta_{ii^\prime},

344: \label{eq:uni}

345: \end{equation}

346: and $M_{ii^\prime}^{\rm GD}(W)$ becomes

347: \begin{eqnarray}

348: M_{ii^\prime}^{\rm GD}(W)&=&\frac{g^2}{2}(1-\xi_W)

349: \int_n\frac{1}{\left(k^2-m_W^2\right)\left(k^2-m_W^2\xi_W\right)}

350: \left\{-\frac{\delta_{ii^\prime}}{2}[a_+(\notp-m_i)+(\notp-m_i)a_-

351: \right.\nonumber\\

352: &&{}+\left.m_i]+V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger

353:  a_+(\notp-m_l)\frac{1}{\notp-\notk-m_l}(\notp-m_l)a_-\right\}.

354: \label{eq:mgd}

355: \end{eqnarray}

356: The tadpole diagram of Fig.~\ref{fig:one}(b) contributes

357: \begin{equation}

358: M_{ii^\prime}^{\rm tad}(\phi)=-\frac{g^2m_i}{4m_W^2}\delta_{ii^\prime}

359: \int_n\frac{1}{k^2-m_W^2\xi_W}.

360: \end{equation}

361: Its combination with the term proportional to $\delta_{ii^\prime}m_i$ in

362: Eq.~(\ref{eq:mgd}) gives

363: \begin{equation}

364: -\frac{g^2m_i}{4m_W^2}\delta_{ii^\prime}\int_n\frac{1}{k^2-m_W^2},

365: \end{equation}

366: a gauge-independent amplitude.

367: Thus,

368: \begin{eqnarray}

369: \lefteqn{M_{ii^\prime}^{\rm GD}(W)+M_{ii^\prime}^{\rm tad}(\phi)

370: =-\frac{g^2m_i}{4m_W^2}\delta_{ii^\prime}\int_n\frac{1}{k^2-m_W^2}}

371: \nonumber\\

372: &&{}-\frac{g^2}{4}\delta_{ii^\prime}(1-\xi_W)

373: \int_n\frac{1}{\left(k^2-m_W^2\right)\left(k^2-m_W^2\xi_W\right)}

374: [a_+(\notp-m_i)+(\notp-m_i)a_-]

375: \nonumber\\

376: &&{}+\frac{g^2}{2}V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger(1-\xi_W)

377: \int_n\frac{1}{\left(k^2-m_W^2\right)\left(k^2-m_W^2\xi_W\right)}

378: a_+(\notp-m_l)\frac{1}{\notp-\notk-m_l}(\notp-m_l)a_-.

379: \qquad\label{eq:gdtad}

380: \end{eqnarray}

381: Using the relations

382: \begin{eqnarray}

383: a_+(\notp-m_l)&=&(\notp-m_i)a_-+m_ia_--m_la_+,

384: \nonumber\\

385: (\notp-m_l)a_-&=&a_+(\notp-m_{i^\prime})+m_{i^\prime}a_+-m_la_-,

386: \end{eqnarray}

387: the last term of Eq.~(\ref{eq:gdtad}) may be written as

388: \begin{eqnarray}

389: M_{ii^\prime}^{\rm last}&=&

390: \frac{g^2}{2}V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger(1-\xi_W)

391: \int_n\frac{1}{\left(k^2-m_W^2\right)\left(k^2-m_W^2\xi_W\right)}

392: [(\notp-m_i)a_-+m_ia_--m_la_+]

393: \nonumber\\

394: &&{}\times

395: \frac{1}{\notp-\notk-m_l}

396: [a_+(\notp-m_{i^\prime})+m_{i^\prime}a_+-m_la_-].

397: \label{eq:last}

398: \end{eqnarray}

399: On the other hand, the contribution $M_{ii^\prime}(\phi)$ to diagram

400: \ref{fig:one}(a) arising from the $\phi^\pm$ boson is

401: \begin{equation}

402: M_{ii^\prime}(\phi)=

403: \frac{g^2}{2m_W^2}V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger

404: \int_n\frac{1}{k^2-m_W^2\xi_W}

405: (m_ia_--m_la_+)\frac{1}{\notp-\notk-m_l}

406: (m_{i^\prime}a_+-m_la_-).

407: \end{equation}

408: Its combination with the term proportional to

409: \begin{equation}

410: (m_ia_--m_la_+)\frac{1}{\notp-\notk-m_l}(m_{i^\prime}a_+-m_la_-)

411: \end{equation}

412: in Eq.~(\ref{eq:last}) leads to a gauge-independent amplitude.

413: 

414: Combining these results, we have

415: \begin{eqnarray}

416: \lefteqn{M_{ii^\prime}^{\rm GD}(W)+M_{ii^\prime}^{\rm tad}(\phi)

417: +M_{ii^\prime}(\phi)

418: =-\frac{g^2m_i}{4m_W^2}\delta_{ii^\prime}\int_n\frac{1}{k^2-m_W^2}}

419: \nonumber\\

420: &&{}+\frac{g^2}{2m_W^2}V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger

421: \int_n\frac{1}{k^2-m_W^2}

422: (m_ia_--m_la_+)\frac{1}{\notp-\notk-m_l}(m_{i^\prime}a_+-m_la_-)

423: \nonumber\\

424: &&{}-\frac{g^2}{4}\delta_{ii^\prime}(1-\xi_W)

425: \int_n\frac{1}{\left(k^2-m_W^2\right)\left(k^2-m_W^2\xi_W\right)}

426: [a_+(\notp-m_i)+(\notp-m_i)a_-]

427: \nonumber\\

428: &&{}+\frac{g^2}{2}V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger(1-\xi_W)

429: \int_n\frac{1}{\left(k^2-m_W^2\right)\left(k^2-m_W^2\xi_W\right)}

430: \left[(\notp-m_i)a_-\frac{1}{\notp-\notk-m_l}a_+(\notp-m_{i^\prime})

431: \right.

432: \nonumber\\

433: &&{}+\left.(\notp-m_i)a_-\frac{1}{\notp-\notk-m_l}(m_{i^\prime}a_+-m_la_-)

434: +(m_ia_--m_la_+)\frac{1}{\notp-\notk-m_l}a_+(\notp-m_{i^\prime})

435: \right].

436: \qquad\label{eq:sum}

437: \end{eqnarray}

438: The contribution of the gauge-independent part of the $W$-boson propagator,

439: i.e.\ the first term in Eq.~(\ref{eq:w}), leads to

440: \begin{equation}

441: M_{ii^\prime}^{\rm GI}(W)=

442: -\frac{g^2}{2}V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger

443: \int_n\frac{1}{k^2-m_W^2}

444: a_+\gamma^\mu\frac{1}{\notp-\notk-m_l}\gamma_\mu a_-.

445: \label{eq:gi}

446: \end{equation}

447: In order to classify the various contributions according to the discussion

448: of Sec.~\ref{sec:one}, we evaluate the integral that appears in

449: Eq.~(\ref{eq:gi}) and in the second term of Eq.~(\ref{eq:sum}):

450: \begin{eqnarray}

451: K(\notp,m_l)&=&

452: \int_n\frac{1}{\left(k^2-m_W^2\right)(\notp-\notk-m_l)}

453: \nonumber\\

454: &=&-\frac{i}{16\pi^2}\left\{

455: \notp[\Delta+I(p^2,m_l)-J(p^2,m_l)]+m_l[2\Delta+I(p^2,m_l)]\right\},

456: \label{eq:k}

457: \end{eqnarray}

458: where

459: \begin{eqnarray}

460: \Delta&=&\frac{1}{n-4}+\frac{1}{2}[\gamma_E-\ln(4\pi)]+\ln\frac{m_W}{\mu},

461: \\

462: \{I(p^2,m_l);J(p^2,m_l)\}

463: &=&\int_0^1dx\,\{1;x\}\ln\frac{m_l^2x+m_W^2(1-x)-p^2x(1-x)-i\varepsilon}

464: {m_W^2}.

465: \label{eq:ij}

466: \end{eqnarray}

467: Next, we insert Eq.~(\ref{eq:k}) into the second term of Eq.~(\ref{eq:sum})

468: and into Eq.~(\ref{eq:gi}) and finally add Eqs.~(\ref{eq:sum}) and

469: (\ref{eq:gi}).

470: Treating the terms involving $\notp a_-$ and $\notp a_+$ in the symmetric way

471: explained before Eq.~(\ref{eq:uni}), evaluating the integral

472: $\int_n\left(k^2-m_W^2\right)^{-1}$ and employing once more the unitarity

473: relation~(\ref{eq:uni}) in some of the $m_l$-independent terms, we find that

474: the complete contribution from Figs.~\ref{fig:one}(a) and (b) can be expressed

475: in the form:

476: \begin{eqnarray}

477: M_{ii^\prime}^{(1)}&=&M_{ii^\prime}^{\rm GD}(W)

478: +M_{ii^\prime}^{\rm GI}(W)+M_{ii^\prime}^{\rm tad}(\phi)

479: +M_{ii^\prime}(\phi)

480: \nonumber\\

481: &=&\frac{ig^2}{32\pi^2}V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger

482: \left\{-m_i\left(1+\frac{m_i^2}{2m_W^2}\Delta\right)

483: \right.

484: \nonumber\\

485: &&{}+\frac{m_l^2}{2m_W^2}

486: (m_ia_-+m_{i^\prime}a_+)[3\Delta+I(p^2,m_l)+J(p^2,m_l)]

487: \nonumber\\

488: &&{}-\left[m_ia_-+m_{i^\prime}a_+

489: +\frac{m_im_{i^\prime}}{2m_W^2}(m_ia_++m_{i^\prime}a_-)\right]

490: [I(p^2,m_l)-J(p^2,m_l)]

491: \nonumber\\

492: &&{}-\frac{1}{2m_W^2}

493: \left[m_im_{i^\prime}((\notp-m_i)a_++a_-(\notp-m_{i^\prime}))

494: +m_l^2((\notp-m_i)a_-+a_+(\notp-m_{i^\prime}))\right]

495: \nonumber\\

496: &&{}\times

497: [\Delta+I(p^2,m_l)-J(p^2,m_l)]

498: \nonumber\\

499: &&{}-[(\notp-m_i)a_-+a_+(\notp-m_{i^\prime})]

500: \left[\Delta+\frac{1}{2}+I(p^2,m_l)-J(p^2,m_l)\right]

501: \nonumber\\

502: &&{}+i8\pi^2(1-\xi_W)

503: \int_n\frac{1}{\left(k^2-m_W^2\right)\left(k^2-m_W^2\xi_W\right)}

504: [a_+\left(\notp-m_{i^\prime}\right)+(\notp-m_i)a_-]

505: \nonumber\\

506: &&{}-i16\pi^2(1-\xi_W)

507: \int_n\frac{1}{\left(k^2-m_W^2\right)\left(k^2-m_W^2\xi_W\right)}

508: \nonumber\\

509: &&{}\times

510: \left[(\notp-m_i)a_-\frac{1}{\notp-\notk-m_l}a_+(\notp-m_{i^\prime})

511: +(\notp-m_i)a_-\frac{1}{\notp-\notk-m_l}(m_{i^\prime}a_+-m_la_-)\right.

512: \nonumber\\

513: &&{}+\left.\left.

514: (m_ia_--m_la_+)\frac{1}{\notp-\notk-m_l}a_+(\notp-m_{i^\prime})

515: \right]\right\}.

516: \label{eq:one}

517: \end{eqnarray}

518: The last two terms in Eq.~(\ref{eq:one}) are gauge dependent and include a

519: left factor $(\notp-m_i)$  or a right factor $(\notp-m_{i^\prime})$ or both.

520: Thus, they belong to the classes (i), (ii), or (iii) discussed in

521: Sec.~\ref{sec:one}.

522: The integrals in these two terms can readily be evaluated using the identity

523: \begin{equation}

524: \frac{1-\xi_W}{\left(k^2-m_W^2\right)\left(k^2-m_W^2\xi_W\right)}

525: =\frac{1}{m_W^2}\left[\frac{1}{k^2-m_W^2}-\frac{1}{k^2-m_W^2\xi_W}\right]

526: \label{eq:ide}

527: \end{equation}

528: and Eq.~(\ref{eq:k}).

529: We find

530: \begin{eqnarray}

531: &&i8\pi^2(1-\xi_W)\int_n\frac{1}{\left(k^2-m_W^2\right)

532: \left(k^2-m_W^2\xi_W\right)}

533: =\Delta-\frac{1}{2}-\xi_W\left(\Delta-\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{2}\ln\xi_W\right),

534: \label{eq:vac}

535: \\

536: &&L(\notp,m_l,\xi_W)\equiv i16\pi^2(1-\xi_W)

537: \int_n\frac{1}{\left(k^2-m_W^2\right)\left(k^2-m_W^2\xi_W\right)

538: (\notp-\notk-m_l)}

539: \nonumber\\

540: &&{}=\frac{1}{m_W^2}\int_0^1dx\,[\notp(1-x)+m_l]\ln

541: \frac{m_l^2x+m_W^2\xi_W(1-x)-p^2x(1-x)-i\varepsilon}

542: {m_l^2x+m_W^2(1-x)-p^2x(1-x)-i\varepsilon}.

543: \label{eq:l}

544: \end{eqnarray}

545: 

546: If $i$ is an outgoing, on-shell up-type quark, the external-leg amplitude is

547: obtained by multiplying Eq.~(\ref{eq:one}) on the left by $\overline{u}_i(p)$,

548: the spinor of the outgoing quark, and on the right by

549: $i(\notp-m_{i^\prime})^{-1}$, the propagator of the initial virtual quark.

550: Thus, the relevant amplitude associated with the external leg is

551: \begin{equation}

552: \Delta{\cal M}_{ii^\prime}^{\rm leg}=\overline{u}_i(p)M_{ii^\prime}^{(1)}

553: \frac{i}{\notp-m_{i^\prime}}.

554: \label{eq:leg}

555: \end{equation}

556: This brings about important simplifications.

557: Using the well-known rules to treat indeterminate factors of the form

558: $\overline{u}_i(p)(\notp-m_i)(\notp-m_i)^{-1}$ \cite{Feynman:1949zx,schweber},

559: one readily finds the following identities for both diagonal ($i^\prime=i$)

560: and off-diagonal ($i^\prime\ne i$) contributions:

561: \begin{eqnarray}

562: &&\overline{u}_i(p)[(\notp-m_i)a_\pm+a_\mp(\notp-m_{i^\prime})]

563: \frac{i}{\notp-m_{i^\prime}}=i\overline{u}_i(p)a_\mp,

564: \label{eq:idone}\\

565: &&\overline{u}_i(p)(\notp-m_i)O_1(\notp-m_{i^\prime})

566: \frac{i}{\notp-m_{i^\prime}}=0,

567: \label{eq:idtwo}\\

568: &&\overline{u}_i(p)[(\notp-m_i)a_-L(\notp,m_l,\xi_W)(m_{i^\prime}a_+-m_la_-)

569: +(m_ia_--m_la_+)L(\notp,m_l,\xi_W)a_+(\notp-m_{i^\prime})]

570: \nonumber\\

571: &&\times\frac{i}{\notp-m_{i^\prime}}=i\overline{u}_i(p)(m_ia_--m_la_+)

572: L(\notp,m_l,\xi_W)a_+,

573: \label{eq:idthree}

574: \end{eqnarray}

575: where $O_1$ is a generic Dirac operator that is regular in the limit

576: $\notp\to m_{i^\prime}$ and $L(\notp,m_l,\xi_W)$ is the integral defined in

577: Eq.~(\ref{eq:l}).

578: These identities tell us that terms in $M_{ii^\prime}^{(1)}$ of class (iii)

579: give a vanishing contribution to $\Delta{\cal M}_{ii^\prime}^{\rm leg}$

580: (cf.\ Eq.~(\ref{eq:idtwo})), while those of classes (i) and (ii) combine to

581: cancel the $(\notp-m_{i^\prime})^{-1}$ factor in Eq.~(\ref{eq:leg})

582: (cf.\ Eqs.~(\ref{eq:idone}) and (\ref{eq:idthree})).

583: 

584: In the second and third terms of Eq.~(\ref{eq:one}), we expand the functions

585: $I(p^2,m_l)$ and $J(p^2,m_l)$ about $p^2=m_i^2$.

586: The lowest-order term, with $p^2$ set equal to $m_i^2$, is independent of

587: $\notp$ and, therefore, belongs the class (iv).

588: The same is true of the other contributions in the first two terms of

589: Eq.~(\ref{eq:one}).

590: They lead to a multiple of $i(\notp-m_{i^\prime})^{-1}$ in

591: Eq.~(\ref{eq:leg}) with a cofactor that involves the chiral projectors

592: $a_\pm$, but is independent of $\notp$.

593: Thus, they belong to class (iv) and are identified as the sm contributions.

594: The terms of ${\cal O}\left(p^2-m_i^2\right)$ in the expansions of

595: $I(p^2,m_l)$ and $J(p^2,m_l)$ give only diagonal contributions ($i^\prime=i$)

596: to Eq.~(\ref{eq:leg}), belong to class (i)

597: because $p^2-m_i^2=(\notp-m_i)(\notp+m_i)$, and cancel the

598: $(\notp-m_i)^{-1}$ factor in Eq.~(\ref{eq:leg}).

599: Terms of  ${\cal O}\left(\left(p^2-m_i^2\right)^2\right)$ and higher in this

600: expansion give vanishing contributions to

601: $\Delta{\cal M}_{ii^\prime}^{\rm leg}$.

602: 

603: As mentioned before, the terms of classes (i) and (ii) in

604: $M_{ii^\prime}^{(1)}$ (including those generated by the expansions of

605: $I(p^2,m_l)$ and $J(p^2,m_l)$) are identified as wfr contributions.

606: In contrast to the sm contributions, they contain gauge-dependent parts

607: (cf.\ the last two terms in Eq.~(\ref{eq:one})).

608: Both the sm and wfr contributions contain UV divergences.

609: 

610: \subsection{\label{sec:twob}%

611: Self-Mass Contributions}

612: 

613: The sm contributions $\Delta{\cal M}_{ii^\prime}^{\rm leg,sm}$ to

614: the external-leg correction for an outgoing on-shell up-type quark $i$ are

615: obtained by inserting the first three terms of Eq.~(\ref{eq:one}) with $p^2$

616: set equal to $m_i^2$ into Eq.~(\ref{eq:leg}):

617: \begin{eqnarray}

618: \Delta{\cal M}_{ii^\prime}^{\rm leg,sm}&=&

619: \frac{g^2}{32\pi^2}V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger

620: \overline{u}_i(p)\left\{m_i\left(1+\frac{m_i^2}{2m_W^2}\Delta\right)

621: \right.

622: \nonumber\\

623: &&{}-\frac{m_l^2}{2m_W^2}

624: (m_ia_-+m_{i^\prime}a_+)

625: \left[3\Delta+I\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)+J\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)\right]

626: \nonumber\\

627: &&{}+\left[m_ia_-+m_{i^\prime}a_+

628: +\frac{m_im_{i^\prime}}{2m_W^2}(m_ia_++m_{i^\prime}a_-)\right]

629: \nonumber\\

630: &&{}\times\left.

631: \left[I\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)-J\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)\right]\right\}

632: \frac{1}{\notp-m_{i^\prime}}.

633: \label{eq:legsm}

634: \end{eqnarray}

635: The amplitudes $I\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)$ and $J\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)$,

636: defined in Eq.~(\ref{eq:ij}), are real except when $m_i=m_t$ corresponding to

637: an external on-shell top quark.

638: The diagonal contributions in this case include imaginary parts that cannot be

639: removed by a mass counterterm, in conjunction with a singular propagator.

640: The problem arises because, in the usual calculation of its decay rate, the

641: top quark is treated as an asymptotic state, rather than an unstable particle.

642: In analogy with the case of the $Z^0$ boson, its proper treatment examines the

643: resonance region in the virtual propagation of the top quark between its

644: production and decay vertices.

645: One finds that, in the narrow-width approximation, in which contributions of

646: next-to-next-to-leading order are neglected, $\im\Sigma(m_t)$ is related to

647: the total decay width $\Gamma_t$ by the expression

648: $\im\Sigma(m_t)=-\Gamma_t[1-\re\Sigma^\prime(m_t)]$ and provides the

649: $i\Gamma_t$ term in the resonance amplitude.

650: The latter is proportional to

651: $i(\notp-m_t+i\Gamma_t)^{-1}[1-\re\Sigma^\prime(m_t)]^{-1}$, where the first

652: factor is the resonant propagator and the second one the wfr term that

653: contributes to the top-quark couplings to the external particles in the

654: production and decay vertices.

655: Since the imaginary parts of $I\left(m_t^2,m_l\right)$ and

656: $J\left(m_t^2,m_l\right)$ in the diagonal top-quark contributions are

657: effectively absorbed in the $i\Gamma_t$ term in the resonance propagator, we

658: remove them from Eq.~(\ref{eq:legsm}).

659: Specifically, in the diagonal contributions to Eq.~(\ref{eq:legsm}) involving

660: an external top quark, $I\left(m_t^2,m_l\right)$ and $J\left(m_t^2,m_l\right)$

661: are replaced by their real parts.

662: 

663: We see that Eq.~(\ref{eq:legsm}) satisfies the basic properties explained

664: before:

665: it is a multiple of the virtual-quark propagator $i(\notp-m_{i^\prime})^{-1}$

666: with a cofactor that is gauge and momentum independent.

667: As expected in a chiral theory, it involves the $a_\pm$ projectors.

668: 

669: \subsection{\label{sec:twoc}%

670: Wave-Function Renormalization Contributions}

671: 

672: For completeness, we exhibit the wfr contributions

673: $\Delta{\cal M}_{ii^\prime}^{\rm leg,wfr}$ to the external-leg

674: correction.

675: They are obtained by inserting the last four terms of Eq.~(\ref{eq:one})

676: into Eq.~(\ref{eq:leg}), employing the identities of

677: Eqs.~(\ref{eq:idone})--(\ref{eq:idthree}), and incorporating the diagonal

678: contributions arising from the expansions of $I(p^2,m_l)$ and $J(p^2,m_l)$ in

679: the second and third terms of Eq.~(\ref{eq:one}):

680: \begin{eqnarray}

681: \Delta{\cal M}_{ii^\prime}^{\rm leg,wfr}&=&

682: \frac{g^2}{32\pi^2}V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger\overline{u}_i(p)

683: \left\{\left[I\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)-J\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)\right]a_+

684: \right.

685: \nonumber\\

686: &&{}+\frac{1}{2m_W^2}(m_im_{i^\prime}a_-+m_l^2a_+)

687: \left[\Delta+I\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)-J\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)\right]

688: \nonumber\\

689: &&{}-\delta_{ii^\prime}\frac{m_i^2m_l^2}{2m_W^2}

690: \left[I^\prime\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)+J^\prime\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)\right]

691: +\delta_{ii^\prime}m_i^2\left(1+\frac{m_i^2}{2m_W^2}\right)

692: \nonumber\\

693: &&{}\times

694: \left[I^\prime\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)-J^\prime\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)\right]

695: %\nonumber\\

696: %&&{}

697: +\left[\xi_W\left(\Delta+\frac{1}{2}\ln\xi_W-\frac{1}{2}\right)+1\right]

698: a_+

699: \nonumber\\

700: &&{}-\left.N(m_i,m_l,\xi_W)a_+\right\},

701: \label{eq:legwfr}

702: \end{eqnarray}

703: where

704: \begin{equation}

705: \left\{I^\prime\left(m_i^2,m_l\right);J^\prime\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)\right\}

706: =-\int_0^1\frac{dx\,\{1;x\}x(1-x)}{m_l^2x+m_W^2(1-x)-m_i^2x(1-x)-i\varepsilon}

707: \end{equation}

708: are the derivatives of $I(p^2,m_l)$ and $J(p^2,m_l)$ with respect to $p^2$,

709: evaluated at $p^2=m_i^2$, and

710: \begin{equation}

711: N(m_i,m_l,\xi_W)=\frac{1}{m_W^2}\int_0^1dx\,\left[m_i^2(1-x)-m_l^2\right]\ln

712: \frac{m_l^2x+m_W^2\xi_W(1-x)-m_i^2x(1-x)-i\varepsilon}

713: {m_l^2x+m_W^2(1-x)-m_i^2x(1-x)-i\varepsilon}.

714: \end{equation}

715: The previous to last term in Eq.~(\ref{eq:legwfr}) was obtained by using

716: Eqs.~(\ref{eq:vac}) and (\ref{eq:idone}), and combining the result with other

717: $\Delta$-dependent contributions.

718: The last term in Eq.~(\ref{eq:legwfr}) was obtained by using

719: Eqs.~(\ref{eq:l}) and (\ref{eq:idthree}), and carrying out some elementary

720: Dirac algebra.

721: Employing Eq.~(\ref{eq:uni}) in $m_l$-independent terms, we see that the

722: UV-divergent part in Eq.~(\ref{eq:legwfr}) is given by

723: \begin{equation}

724: \Delta{\cal M}_{ii^\prime}^{\rm leg,wfr,div}

725: =\frac{g^2}{32\pi^2}V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger\overline{u}_i(p)

726: \Delta\left[\frac{m_i^2}{2m_W^2}a_-

727: +\left(\xi_W+\frac{m_l^2}{2m_W^2}\right)a_+\right],

728: \label{eq:legdiv}

729: \end{equation}

730: which contains both diagonal and off-diagonal pieces.

731: In particular, the

732: diagonal part of Eq.~(\ref{eq:legdiv}) contains a gauge-dependent

733: contribution, while the off-diagonal term is gauge independent.

734: 

735: We now digress on the further simplifications that take place when

736: Eq.~(\ref{eq:legwfr}) is inserted in the physical $W\to q_i+\overline{q}_j$

737: amplitude.

738: In this case, Eq.~(\ref{eq:legwfr}) is multiplied on the right by

739: $(-ig/\sqrt2)V_{i^\prime j}\gamma^\mu a_-v_j\epsilon_\mu$, where

740: $v_j$ is the spinor associated with the $\overline{q}_j$ quark and

741: $\epsilon^\mu$ is the polarization four-vector of the $W$ boson.

742: Because of the chiral projectors, the contribution of the term proportional to

743: $(m_im_{i^\prime}/2m_W^2)a_-[\Delta+I-J]$ vanishes.

744: Next, we note that the first, second, fifth, and sixth terms between curly

745: brackets in Eq.~(\ref{eq:legwfr}) are independent of $i^\prime$.

746: %Employing the unitarity relation~(\ref{eq:uni}), we have

747: %$V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger V_{i^\prime j}=V_{ij}\delta_{lj}$.

748: Denoting these contributions as $f(m_i,m_l)$ and employing the unitarity

749: relation~(\ref{eq:uni}), we have

750: $V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger V_{i^\prime j}f(m_i,m_l)

751: =V_{il}\delta_{lj}f(m_i,m_l)=V_{ij}f(m_i,m_j)$.

752: Thus, the contributions of these terms to the $W\to q_i+\overline{q}_j$

753: amplitude are proportional to $V_{ij}$ and depend only on the external-fermion

754: masses $m_i$ and $m_j$.

755: The same is true of the corresponding contributions arising from the

756: $\overline{q}_j$ external leg.

757: We emphasize that this result includes all the gauge-dependent and all the

758: UV-divergent contributions in Eq.~(\ref{eq:legwfr}).

759: This important property is shared by the proper vertex diagrams of

760: Fig.~\ref{fig:two}, which are also proportional to $V_{ij}$ and depend only

761: on $m_i$ and $m_j$.

762: As explained in Sec.~\ref{sec:one}, this property implies that, once the

763: divergent sm contributions are canceled by renormalization, the proof of

764: finiteness and gauge independence of the remaining one-loop corrections to the

765: $W\to q_i+\overline{q}_j$ amplitude is the same as in the single-generation 

766: case.

767: 

768: Although the contributions to the $W\to q_i+\overline{q}_j$ amplitude from the

769: terms involving $I^\prime\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)$ and

770: $J^\prime\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:legwfr}) are not simplified

771: by the unitarity relations without appealing to suitable approximations, we

772: note that they are finite and gauge independent.

773: It is important to point out that the simplifications we encountered in the

774: $W\to q_i+\overline{q}_j$ amplitude depend crucially on the fact that the wfr

775: terms cancel the virtual-quark propagator $i(\notp-m_{i^\prime})^{-1}$.

776: 

777: \subsection{\label{sec:twod}%

778: Other Cases}

779: 

780: Equations~(\ref{eq:legsm}) and (\ref{eq:legwfr}) exhibit the sm and wfr

781: contributions to the external-leg corrections in the case of an outgoing

782: on-shell up-type quark $i$.

783: Here $i^\prime$ labels the initial virtual up-type quark in

784: Fig.~\ref{fig:one}(a) and $l$ the down-type quark in the loop.

785: 

786: The corresponding expressions for an incoming up-type quark can be gleaned by

787: multiplying Eq.~(\ref{eq:one}) by $u_{i^\prime}(p)$ on the right and by

788: $i(\notp-m_i)^{-1}$ on the left.

789: Interchanging $i$ and $i^\prime$, it is easy to see that the sm contributions

790: for an incoming up-type quark are obtained from Eq.~(\ref{eq:legsm}) by

791: substituting $V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger\to V_{i^\prime l}V_{li}^\dagger$,

792: interchanging $a_-\leftrightarrow a_+$ between the curly brackets, and

793: multiplying the resulting expression by $u_i(p)$ on the right and by

794: $(\notp-m_{i^\prime})^{-1}$ on the left.

795: Similarly, the wave-function renormalization for an incoming up-type quark is

796: obtained from Eq.~(\ref{eq:legwfr}) by

797: substituting $V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger\to V_{i^\prime l}V_{li}^\dagger$,

798: interchanging $a_-\leftrightarrow a_+$ between the curly brackets, and

799: multiplying the resulting expression by $u_i(p)$ on the right.

800: The expressions for an incoming (outgoing) up-type antiquark are the same as

801: those for an outgoing (incoming) up-type quark with the substitution

802: $u_i(p)\to v_i(-p)$, the negative-energy spinor.

803: In the case of antiquarks, $p$ in these expressions is identified with the 

804: four-momentum in the direction of the arrows in the Feynman diagrams, which is

805: minus the four-momentum of the antiparticle.

806: Finally, the expression for an outgoing down-type quark is obtained from that

807: of an outgoing up-type quark by substituting

808: $V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger\to V_{jl}^\dagger V_{lj^\prime}$, where $j$ and

809: $j^\prime$ denote the on-shell and virtual down-type quarks, respectively, and

810: $l$ the up-type quark in the loop.

811: The other down-type-quark amplitudes are obtained from the corresponding

812: up-type-quark expressions in a similar manner.

813: 

814: \section{\label{sec:three}%

815: Mass Renormalization}

816: 

817: In order to generate mass counterterms suitable for the renormalization of

818: the sm contributions shown in Eq.~(\ref{eq:legsm}), we may proceed as

819: follows.

820: In the weak-eigenstate basis, the bare mass matrices $m_0^{\prime Q}$ for the

821: up- and down-type quarks ($Q=U,D$) are non-diagonal, and the corresponding

822: terms in the Lagrangian density may be written as

823: $-\overline{\psi}_R^{\prime Q}m_0^{\prime Q}\psi_L^{\prime Q}+\mbox{h.c.}$,

824: where $\psi_L^{\prime Q}$ and $\psi_R^{\prime Q}$ are left- and right-handed

825: column spinors that include the three up-type (or down-type) quarks.

826: Decomposing  $m_0^{\prime Q}=m^{\prime Q}-\delta m^{\prime Q}$, where

827: $m^{\prime Q}$ and $\delta m^{\prime Q}$ are identified as the

828: renormalized and counterterm mass matrices, we envisage a biunitary

829: transformation of the quark fields that diagonalizes $m^{\prime Q}$,

830: leading to a renormalized mass matrix $m^Q$ that is diagonal, real and endowed

831: with positive entries.

832: The same operation transforms $\delta m^{\prime Q}$ into a new matrix

833: $\delta m^Q$ which, in general, is non-diagonal.

834: In the new framework, which we may identify as the mass-eigenstate basis, the

835: mass term is given by

836: \begin{equation}

837: -\overline{\psi}\left(m-\delta m^{(-)}a_--\delta m^{(+)}a_+\right)\psi

838: =-\overline{\psi}_R\left(m-\delta m^{(-)}\right)\psi_L

839: -\overline{\psi}_L\left(m-\delta m^{(+)}\right)\psi_R,

840: \label{eq:mass}

841: \end{equation}

842: where $m$ is real, diagonal, and positive, and $\delta m^{(-)}$ and

843: $\delta m^{(+)}$ are arbitrary non-diagonal matrices subject to the

844: hermiticity constraint

845: \begin{equation}

846: \delta m^{(+)}=\delta m^{(-)\dagger}.

847: \label{eq:her}

848: \end{equation}

849: This constraint follows from the requirement that the mass terms in the

850: Lagrangian density, displayed in Eq.~(\ref{eq:mass}), must be hermitian.

851: In order to simplify the notation, we do not exhibit the label $Q$, but it

852: is understood that Eq.~(\ref{eq:mass}) represents two different mass matrices

853: involving the up- and down-type quarks.

854: 

855: As is customary, the mass counterterms are included in the interaction

856: Lagrangian.

857: Their contribution to Eq.~(\ref{eq:leg}) is given by

858: \begin{equation}

859: i\overline{u}_i(p)\left(\delta m_{ii^\prime}^{(-)}a_-

860: +\delta m_{ii^\prime}^{(+)}a_+\right)\frac{i}{\notp-m_{i^\prime}}.

861: \label{eq:dmmp}

862: \end{equation}

863: We now adjust $\delta m_{ii^\prime}^{(-)}$ and $\delta m_{ii^\prime}^{(+)}$

864: to cancel, as much as possible, the sm contributions given in

865: Eq.~(\ref{eq:legsm}).

866: The cancellation of the UV-divergent parts is achieved by choosing

867: \begin{eqnarray}

868: \left(\delta m_{\rm div}^{(-)}\right)_{ii^\prime}&=&

869: \frac{g^2m_i}{64\pi^2m_W^2}\Delta

870: \left(\delta_{ii^\prime}m_i^2-3V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger m_l^2\right),

871: \nonumber\\

872: \left(\delta m_{\rm div}^{(+)}\right)_{ii^\prime}&=&

873: \frac{g^2m_{i^\prime}}{64\pi^2m_W^2}\Delta

874: \left(\delta_{ii^\prime}m_i^2-3V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger m_l^2\right),

875: \end{eqnarray}

876: It is important to note that

877: \begin{equation}

878: \left(\delta m_{\rm div}^{(+)}\right)_{ii^\prime}

879: =\left(\delta m_{\rm div}^{(-)}\right)_{i^\prime i}^*,

880: \end{equation}

881: so that $\delta m_{\rm div}^{(+)}$ and $\delta m_{\rm div}^{(-)}$ satisfy the

882: hermiticity requirement of Eq.~(\ref{eq:her}).

883: 

884: In order to discuss the cancellation of the finite parts, we call $ii^\prime$

885: channel the amplitude in which $i$ labels the outgoing, on-shell up-type quark

886: and ${i^\prime}$ the initial, virtual one (cf.\ Fig.~\ref{fig:one}).

887: Then the $i^\prime i$ channel is the amplitude in which the roles are

888: reversed: ${i^\prime}$ is the outgoing, on-shell quark, while $i$ is the

889: initial, virtual one.

890: 

891: Comparing Eq.~(\ref{eq:legsm}) with Eq.~(\ref{eq:dmmp}), we see that a complete

892: cancellation of the sm corrections for an outgoing up-type quark or an

893: incoming up-type antiquark in the $ii^\prime$ channel is achieved by adjusting

894: the mass counterterms according to

895: \begin{eqnarray}

896: \delta m_{ii^\prime}^{(-)}&=&

897: \frac{g^2m_i}{32\pi^2}\left\{\delta_{ii^\prime}

898: \left(1+\frac{m_i^2}{2m_W^2}\Delta\right)

899: -V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger\frac{m_l^2}{2m_W^2}

900: \left[3\Delta+I\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)+J\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)\right]\right.

901: \nonumber\\

902: &&{}+\left.

903: V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger\left(1+\frac{m_{i^\prime}^2}{2m_W^2}\right)

904: \left[I\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)-J\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)\right]\right\},

905: \nonumber\\

906: \delta m_{ii^\prime}^{(+)}&=&

907: \frac{g^2m_{i^\prime}}{32\pi^2}\left\{\delta_{ii^\prime}

908: \left(1+\frac{m_i^2}{2m_W^2}\Delta\right)

909: -V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger\frac{m_l^2}{2m_W^2}

910: \left[3\Delta+I\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)+J\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)\right]\right.

911: \nonumber\\

912: &&{}+\left.

913: V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger\left(1+\frac{m_i^2}{2m_W^2}\right)

914: \left[I\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)-J\left(m_i^2,m_l\right)\right]\right\}.

915: \label{eq:mct}

916: \end{eqnarray}

917: Once $\delta m_{ii^\prime}^{(-)}$ and $\delta m_{ii^\prime}^{(+)}$ are fixed,

918: the mass counterterms for the reverse $i^\prime i$ channel are determined by

919: the hermiticity condition of Eq.~(\ref{eq:her}), to wit

920: \begin{equation}

921: \delta m_{i^\prime i}^{(-)}=\delta m_{ii^\prime}^{(+)*},\qquad

922: \delta m_{i^\prime i}^{(+)}=\delta m_{ii^\prime}^{(-)*}.

923: \label{eq:mher}

924: \end{equation}

925: Since the functions $I$ and $J$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:legsm}) are evaluated at

926: $p^2=m_i^2$ in the $ii^\prime$ channel and at $p^2=m_{i^\prime}^2$ in the

927: $i^\prime i$ channel, we see that the mass counterterms in

928: Eqs.~(\ref{eq:mct}) and (\ref{eq:mher}) cannot remove completely the sm

929: contributions in both amplitudes.

930: Taking into account this restriction, we choose the following renormalization

931: prescription.

932: 

933: Writing the mass counterterm matrix for the up-type quark in the explicit

934: form

935: \begin{equation}

936: \left(

937: \begin{array}{ccc}

938: \delta m_{uu} & \delta m_{uc} & \delta m_{ut} \\

939: \delta m_{cu} & \delta m_{cc} & \delta m_{ct} \\

940: \delta m_{tu} & \delta m_{tc} & \delta m_{tt}

941: \end{array}

942: \right),

943: \end{equation}

944: where 

945: $\delta m_{ii^\prime}=\delta m_{ii^\prime}^{(-)}a_-

946: +\delta m_{ii^\prime}^{(+)}a_+$

947: $(i,i^\prime=u,c,t)$,

948: we choose $\delta m_{uu}$, $\delta m_{cc}$, and $\delta m_{tt}$ to cancel, as

949: is customary, all the diagonal contributions in Eq.~(\ref{eq:legsm}).

950: For the non-diagonal entries, we choose

951: $\delta m_{uc}$, $\delta m_{ut}$, and $\delta m_{ct}$ to cancel completely the

952: contributions in Eq.~(\ref{eq:legsm}) corresponding to the $uc$, $ut$, and

953: $ct$ channels, respectively.

954: The remaining mass counterterms, $\delta m_{cu}$, $\delta m_{tu}$, and

955: $\delta m_{tc}$ are then fixed by the hermiticity condition in

956: Eq.~(\ref{eq:her}).

957: This implies that the finite parts of the sm corrections in the $cu$,

958: $tu$, and $tc$ channels are not fully canceled.

959: However, after the mass renormalization is implemented, the residual

960: contributions from Eq.~(\ref{eq:legsm}) to the $W\to q_i+\overline{q}_j$

961: amplitudes are finite, gauge independent, and very small in magnitude (see

962: Appendix~\ref{sec:A}).

963: In fact, they are of second (first) order in the small ratios $m_q^2/m_W^2$

964: ($q\ne t)$ when the top quark is not (is) the external particle and,

965: furthermore, they include small CKM matrix elements.

966: 

967: An analogous approach is followed for the down-type-quark mass counterterms.

968: We call $j^\prime j$ channel the amplitude involving an incoming, on-shell

969: down-type quark $j$ and a virtual down-type quark $j^\prime$.

970: In analogy with Eq.~(\ref{eq:mct}), the complete cancellation of the sm

971: corrections for an incoming down-type quark (or an outgoing down-type

972: antiquark) in the $j^\prime j$ channel is implemented by choosing:

973: \begin{eqnarray}

974: \delta m_{j^\prime j}^{(-)}&=&

975: \frac{g^2m_{j^\prime}}{32\pi^2}\left\{\delta_{jj^\prime}

976: \left(1+\frac{m_j^2}{2m_W^2}\Delta\right)

977: -V_{j^\prime l}^\dagger V_{lj}\frac{m_l^2}{2m_W^2}

978: \left[3\Delta+I\left(m_j^2,m_l\right)+J\left(m_j^2,m_l\right)\right]\right.

979: \nonumber\\

980: &&{}+\left.

981: V_{j^\prime l}^\dagger V_{lj}\left(1+\frac{m_j^2}{2m_W^2}\right)

982: \left[I\left(m_j^2,m_l\right)-J\left(m_j^2,m_l\right)\right]\right\},

983: \nonumber\\

984: \delta m_{j^\prime j}^{(+)}&=&

985: \frac{g^2m_j}{32\pi^2}\left\{\delta_{jj^\prime}

986: \left(1+\frac{m_j^2}{2m_W^2}\Delta\right)

987: -V_{j^\prime l}^\dagger V_{lj}\frac{m_l^2}{2m_W^2}

988: \left[3\Delta+I\left(m_j^2,m_l\right)+J\left(m_j^2,m_l\right)\right]\right.

989: \nonumber\\

990: &&{}+\left.

991: V_{j^\prime l}^\dagger V_{lj}\left(1+\frac{m_{j^\prime}^2}{2m_W^2}\right)

992: \left[I\left(m_j^2,m_l\right)-J\left(m_j^2,m_l\right)\right]\right\},

993: \label{eq:mctd}

994: \end{eqnarray}

995: where $l$ labels the virtual up-type quark in the self-energy loop.

996: 

997: We emphasize that Eqs.~(\ref{eq:mct}) and (\ref{eq:mctd}) contain all the

998: off-diagonal sm contributions since they only arise from

999: Fig.~\ref{fig:one}(a) and the analogous diagrams involving the down-type

1000: quarks.

1001: On the other hand, there are many additional diagonal sm contributions from

1002: other diagrams.

1003: 

1004: Writing the mass counterterm matrix for the down-type quarks in the form

1005: \begin{equation}

1006: \left(

1007: \begin{array}{ccc}

1008: \delta m_{dd} & \delta m_{ds} & \delta m_{db} \\

1009: \delta m_{sd} & \delta m_{ss} & \delta m_{sb} \\

1010: \delta m_{bd} & \delta m_{bs} & \delta m_{bb}

1011: \end{array}

1012: \right),

1013: \end{equation}

1014: we choose $\delta m_{dd}$, $\delta m_{ss}$, and $\delta m_{bb}$ to cancel the

1015: diagonal sm contributions, and $\delta m_{sd}$, $\delta m_{bd}$, and

1016: $\delta m_{bs}$ to cancel the corresponding off-diagonal terms.

1017: The hermiticity constraint implies then that the finite parts of the sm

1018: contributions are not fully canceled in the reverse $ds$, $db$, and $sb$

1019: channels.

1020: We find that, after the mass renormalization is implemented, the residual

1021: contributions involving the top quark in the self-energy loop are of first

1022: order in the small ratios, while the others are of second order.

1023: Nonetheless, as shown in Appendix~\ref{sec:A}, their contributions to the

1024: $W\to q_i+\overline{q}_j$ amplitudes are also very small.

1025: In particular, the smallness in the $ds$ channel arises because some

1026: contributions are of second order in $m_q^2/m_W^2$  ($q\ne t$) and others are

1027: proportional to $m_s^2/m_t^2$ with very small CKM coefficients.

1028: 

1029: We note that, in these renormalization prescriptions, the residual sm

1030: contributions are convergent in the limit $m_{i^\prime}\to m_i$ or

1031: $m_{j^\prime}\to m_j$, since the singularities of the virtual propagators

1032: $i(\notp-m_{i^\prime})^{-1}$ and $i(\notp-m_{j^\prime})^{-1}$ are canceled, a

1033: characteristic property of wfr contributions.

1034: Thus, these residual sm terms can be regarded as additional finite and

1035: gauge-independent contributions to wave-function renormalization that happen

1036: to be numerically very small.

1037: 

1038: It is also interesting to note that these renormalization prescriptions imply

1039: that the sm contributions are fully canceled when the $u$ or $d$ quarks or

1040: antiquarks are the external, on-shell particles.

1041: This is of special interest since $V_{ud}$, the relevant parameter in the

1042: $W\to u+\overline{d}$ amplitude, is by far the most accurately measured CKM

1043: matrix element \cite{Czarnecki:2004cw,Marciano:2005ec}.

1044: 

1045: \section{\label{sec:four}%

1046: Diagonalization of the Mass Counterterms and Derivation of the CKM Counterterm

1047: Matrix}

1048: 

1049: In Sec.~\ref{sec:three}, we showed explicitly how the UV-divergent parts of

1050: the one-loop sm contributions associated with external quark legs [cf.\

1051: Fig.~\ref{fig:one}(a)] can be canceled by suitably adjusting the non-diagonal

1052: mass counterterm matrix.

1053: By imposing on-shell renormalization conditions, we also showed how the finite

1054: parts of such contributions can be canceled up to the constraints imposed by

1055: the hermiticity of the mass matrix.

1056: We also recall that, in our formulation, the sm contributions and,

1057: consequently, also the mass counterterms are explicitly gauge independent.

1058: 

1059: In this section, we discuss the diagonalization of the complete mass matrix of

1060: Eq.~(\ref{eq:mass}), which includes the renormalized and counterterm mass

1061: matrices.

1062: We show how this procedure generates a CKM counterterm matrix that

1063: automatically satisfies the basic properties of gauge independence and

1064: unitarity.

1065: 

1066: Starting with Eq.~(\ref{eq:mass}), we implement a biunitary transformation

1067: that diagonalizes the matrix $m-\delta m^{(-)}$.

1068: Specifically, we consider the transformations

1069: \begin{eqnarray}

1070: \psi_L&=&U_L\hat\psi_L,

1071: \label{eq:pl}\\

1072: \psi_R&=&U_R\hat\psi_R,

1073: \label{eq:pr}

1074: \end{eqnarray}

1075: and choose the unitary matrices $U_L$ and $U_R$ so that

1076: \begin{equation}

1077: U_R^\dagger\left(m-\delta m^{(-)}\right)U_L={\cal D},

1078: \label{eq:d}

1079: \end{equation}

1080: where $\cal D$ is diagonal and real.

1081: From Eq.~(\ref{eq:d}), it follows that

1082: \begin{equation}

1083: U_L^\dagger\left(m-\delta m^{(-)\dagger}\right)\left(m-\delta m^{(-)}\right)

1084: U_L={\cal D}^2,

1085: \end{equation}

1086: which, through ${\cal O}(g^2)$, reduces to

1087: \begin{equation}

1088: U_L^\dagger\left(m^2-m\delta m^{(-)}-\delta m^{(-)\dagger}m\right)U_L

1089: ={\cal D}^2.

1090: \end{equation}

1091: Writing $U_L=1+ih_L$, where $h_L$ is hermitian and of ${\cal O}(g^2)$, we have

1092: \begin{equation}

1093: m^2+i(m^2h_L-h_Lm^2)-m\delta m^{(-)}-\delta m^{(-)\dagger}m={\cal D}^2,

1094: \label{eq:hl}

1095: \end{equation}

1096: where we have neglected terms of ${\cal O}(g^4)$.

1097: Recalling that, in our formulation, $m$ is diagonal (cf.\

1098: Sec.~\ref{sec:three}) and taking the $ii^\prime$ component,

1099: Eq.~(\ref{eq:hl}) becomes

1100: \begin{equation}

1101: m_i^2\delta_{ii^\prime}+i\left(m_i^2-m_{i^\prime}^2\right)(h_L)_{ii^\prime}

1102: -m_i\delta m_{ii^\prime}^{(-)}-\delta m_{ii^\prime}^{(-)\dagger}m_{i^\prime}

1103: ={\cal D}_i^2\delta_{ii^\prime}.

1104: \label{eq:dis}

1105: \end{equation}

1106: For diagonal terms, with $i=i^\prime$, the term proportional to

1107: $(h_L)_{ii^\prime}$ does not contribute.

1108: Furthermore, Eq.~(\ref{eq:mct}) tells us that

1109: $\delta m_{ii}^{(-)}=\delta m_{ii}^{(+)}$.

1110: Consequently, for diagonal elements of the mass counterterm matrix, one has

1111: $\delta m_{ii}^{(-)}a_-+\delta m_{ii}^{(+)}a_+=\delta m_i$, where

1112: $\delta m_i=\delta m_{ii}^{(-)}=\delta m_{ii}^{(+)}$.

1113: We note that the hermiticity condition of Eq.~(\ref{eq:mher}) implies that

1114: $\delta m_i$ is real.

1115: Therefore, for $i=i^\prime$, Eq.~(\ref{eq:dis}) reduces to

1116: $m_i^2-2m_i\delta m_i={\cal D}_i^2$ or, equivalently, through ${\cal O}(g^2)$,

1117: to

1118: \begin{equation}

1119: {\cal D}_i=m_i-\delta m_i.

1120: \label{eq:di}

1121: \end{equation}

1122: In order to satisfy Eq.~(\ref{eq:dis}) for $i\ne i^\prime$, we need to cancel

1123: the off-diagonal contributions

1124: $m_i\delta m_{ii^\prime}^{(-)}+\delta m_{ii^\prime}^{(-)\dagger}m_{i^\prime}$.

1125: This is achieved by adjusting the non-diagonal elements of $h_L$ according to

1126: \begin{equation}

1127: i(h_L)_{ii^\prime}=\frac{m_i\delta m_{ii^\prime}^{(-)}

1128: +\delta m_{ii^\prime}^{(+)}m_{i^\prime}}{m_i^2-m_{i^\prime}^2}

1129: \qquad (i\ne i^\prime),

1130: \label{eq:hlii}

1131: \end{equation}

1132: where we have employed the hermiticity relation of Eq.~(\ref{eq:her}).

1133: Since the diagonal elements $(h_L)_{ii}$ do not contribute to

1134: Eq.~(\ref{eq:dis}), it is convenient to choose $(h_L)_{ii}=0$.

1135: In Appendix~\ref{sec:B}, we show that the alternative selection

1136: $(h_L)_{ii}\ne0$ has no physical effect on the $Wq_i\overline{q}_j$

1137: interactions.

1138: 

1139: Returning to Eq.~(\ref{eq:d}) and writing $U_R=1+ih_R$, one finds that $h_R$

1140: is obtained from $h_L$ by substituting

1141: $\delta m^{(-)}\leftrightarrow\delta m^{(+)}$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:hlii}).

1142: Thus,

1143: \begin{equation}

1144: i(h_R)_{ii^\prime}=\frac{m_i\delta m_{ii^\prime}^{(+)}

1145: +\delta m_{ii^\prime}^{(-)}m_{i^\prime}}{m_i^2-m_{i^\prime}^2}

1146: \qquad (i\ne i^\prime).

1147: \label{eq:hrii}

1148: \end{equation}

1149: In fact, substituting $U_L=1+ih_L$ and $U_R=1+ih_R$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:d}) and

1150: employing Eqs.~(\ref{eq:hlii}) and (\ref{eq:hrii}), one readily verifies that

1151: the l.h.s.\ of Eq.~(\ref{eq:d}) is indeed diagonal through ${\cal O}(g^2)$.

1152: Furthermore, one recovers Eq.~(\ref{eq:di}).

1153: 

1154: The above analysis is carried out separately to diagonalize the mass matrices

1155: of the up- and down-type quarks.

1156: Thus, we obtain two pairs of $h_L$ and $h_R$ matrices: $h_L^U$ and $h_R^U$ for

1157: the up-type quarks and $h_L^D$ and $h_R^D$ for the down-type quarks.

1158: 

1159: Next, we analyze the effect of transformation (\ref{eq:pl}) on the

1160: $Wq_i\overline{q}_j$ interaction.

1161: Following standard conventions, the latter is given by

1162: \begin{equation}

1163: {\cal L}_{Wq_i\overline{q}_j}=-\frac{g_0}{\sqrt2}\overline{\psi}_i^U

1164: V_{ij}\gamma^\lambda a_-\psi_j^DW_\lambda+\mbox{h.c.},

1165: \end{equation}

1166: where $\psi_i^U$ ($i=u,c,t$) and $\psi_j^D$ ($j=d,s,b$) are the fields

1167: of the up- and down-type quarks, respectively, $W_\lambda$ is the field that

1168: annihilates a $W^+$ boson or creates a $W^-$ boson, $g_0$ is the bare

1169: SU(2)$_L$ coupling, and $V_{ij}$ are the elements of the unitary CKM matrix.

1170: Alternatively, in matrix notation, we have

1171: \begin{equation}

1172: {\cal L}_{Wq_i\overline{q}_j}=-\frac{g_0}{\sqrt2}\overline{\psi}_L^U

1173: V\gamma^\lambda\psi_L^DW_\lambda+\mbox{h.c.}.

1174: \label{eq:lwqq}

1175: \end{equation}

1176: It is important to note that, in the formulation of this paper, in which the

1177: UV-divergent sm terms are canceled by the mass counterterms and the proof of

1178: finiteness of the other contributions to the $W\to q_i+\overline{q}_j$

1179: amplitude after the renormalization of $g_0$ is the same as in the unmixed

1180: case (cf.\ Sec.~\ref{sec:twoc}), $V_{ij}$ are finite quantities.

1181: 

1182: Inserting Eq.~(\ref{eq:pl}) in Eq.~(\ref{eq:lwqq}), we find, through terms of

1183: ${\cal O}(g^2)$, that

1184: \begin{equation}

1185: {\cal L}_{Wq_i\overline{q}_j}=-\frac{g_0}{\sqrt2}\overline{\hat\psi}_L^U

1186: (V-\delta V)\gamma^\lambda\hat\psi_L^DW_\lambda+\mbox{h.c.},

1187: \label{eq:hc}

1188: \end{equation}

1189: where

1190: \begin{equation}

1191: \delta V=i\left(h_L^UV-Vh_L^D\right).

1192: \label{eq:dv}

1193: \end{equation}

1194: One readily verifies that $V-\delta V$ satisfies the unitarity condition

1195: through terms of ${\cal O}(g^2)$, namely

1196: \begin{equation}

1197: (V-\delta V)^\dagger(V-\delta V)=1+{\cal O}(g^4).

1198: \end{equation}

1199: Since $V$ is finite and unitary, it is identified with the renormalized CKM

1200: matrix.

1201: On the other hand, in the $(\hat\psi_L,\hat\psi_R)$ basis, in which the

1202: complete quark mass matrices are diagonal, $\delta V$ and $V_0=V-\delta V$

1203: represent the counterterm and bare CKM matrices, respectively.

1204: 

1205: We now show explicitly that the $ih_L^UV$ term in $\delta V$ leads to the same

1206: off-diagonal contribution to the $W\to q_i+\overline{q}_j$ amplitude as the

1207: insertion of the mass counterterms $\delta m^{U(-)}$ and $\delta m^{U(+)}$ in

1208: the external up-type-quark line.

1209: Indeed, the $ih_L^UV$ contribution is given by

1210: \begin{equation}

1211: {\cal M}(ih_L^UV)=\frac{ig}{\sqrt2}\overline{u}_ii

1212: \left(h_L^U\right)_{ii^\prime}V_{i^\prime j}\gamma^\lambda a_-v_j

1213: \epsilon_\lambda,

1214: \label{eq:mihv}

1215: \end{equation}

1216: where, again, $u_i$ and $v_j$ are the external up- and down-type-quark spinors,

1217: respectively, and $\epsilon_\lambda$ is the $W$-boson polarization four-vector.

1218: Inserting Eq.~(\ref{eq:hlii}), Eq.~(\ref{eq:mihv}) becomes

1219: \begin{equation}

1220: {\cal M}(ih_L^UV)=\frac{ig}{\sqrt2}\overline{u}_i

1221: \frac{m_i^U\delta m_{ii^\prime}^{U(-)}

1222: +\delta m_{ii^\prime}^{U(+)}m_{i^\prime}^U}{\left(m_i^U\right)^2

1223: -\left(m_{i^\prime}^U\right)^2}

1224: V_{i^\prime j}\gamma^\lambda a_-v_j\epsilon_\lambda,

1225: \label{eq:mihv1}

1226: \end{equation}

1227: where it is understood that $i\ne i^\prime$ and the label $Q=U,D$, which we

1228: had suppressed from Eq.~(\ref{eq:mass}) through Eq.~(\ref{eq:hrii}), is again

1229: displayed.

1230: On the other hand, the off-diagonal mass counterterm insertion in the external

1231: up-type-quark line is given by

1232: \begin{equation}

1233: {\cal M}\left(\delta m^{U(-)},\delta m^{U(+)}\right)

1234: =-\frac{ig}{\sqrt2}\overline{u}_ii\left(\delta m_{ii^\prime}^{U(-)}a_-

1235: +\delta m_{ii^\prime}^{U(+)}a_+\right)\frac{i}{\notp-m_{i^\prime}^U}

1236: V_{i^\prime j}\gamma^\lambda a_-v_j\epsilon_\lambda.

1237: \label{eq:mmm}

1238: \end{equation}

1239: Rationalizing the propagator $i(\notp-m_{i^\prime}^U)^{-1}$, one finds after

1240: some elementary algebra that Eq.~(\ref{eq:mihv1}) coincides with

1241: Eq.~(\ref{eq:mmm}).

1242: An analogous calculation shows that the $-iVh_L^D$ term in $\delta V$ leads to

1243: the same off-diagonal contribution to the  $W\to q_i+\overline{q}_j$ amplitude

1244: as the insertion of the mass counterterms $\delta m^{D(-)}$ and

1245: $\delta m^{D(+)}$ in the external down-type-quark line.

1246: Since the mass counterterms are adjusted to cancel the off-diagonal sm

1247: contributions to the extent allowed by the hermiticity of the mass matrix, the

1248: same is true of the CKM counterterm matrix $\delta V$.

1249: In particular, $\delta V$ fully cancels the UV-divergent part of the

1250: off-diagonal sm contributions.

1251: As mentioned above, in the formulation of this section, the complete mass

1252: matrix is diagonal, with elements of the form given in Eq.~(\ref{eq:di}),

1253: where $m_i$ are the renormalized masses and $\delta m_i$ the corresponding

1254: mass counterterms.

1255: The quantities $\delta m_i$ are then adjusted to fully cancel the diagonal sm

1256: corrections in the external legs, in analogy with QED.

1257: As also explained above, the additional UV divergences arising from the wfr

1258: contributions, proper vertex diagrams, and renormalization of $g_0$ cancel

1259: among themselves as in the single-generation case.

1260: 

1261: For completeness, we explicitly exhibit the counterterm of the CKM matrix in

1262: component form:

1263: \begin{eqnarray}

1264: \delta V_{ij}&=&i\left[\left(h_L^U\right)_{ii^\prime}V_{i^\prime j}

1265: -V_{ij^\prime}\left(h_L^D\right)_{j^\prime j}\right]

1266: \nonumber\\

1267: &=&\frac{m_i^U\delta m_{ii^\prime}^{U(-)}

1268: +\delta m_{ii^\prime}^{U(+)}m_{i^\prime}^U}{\left(m_i^U\right)^2

1269: -\left(m_{i^\prime}^U\right)^2}V_{i^\prime j}

1270: -V_{ij^\prime}\frac{m_{j^\prime}^D\delta m_{j^\prime j}^{D(-)}

1271: +\delta m_{j^\prime j}^{D(+)}m_j^D}{\left(m_{j^\prime}^D\right)^2

1272: -\left(m_j^D\right)^2},

1273: \label{eq:dvii}

1274: \end{eqnarray}

1275: where we have used Eqs.~(\ref{eq:hlii}), (\ref{eq:hrii}), and (\ref{eq:dv})

1276: and it is understood that $i\ne i^\prime$ in the first term and

1277: $j^\prime\ne j$ in the second one.

1278: 

1279: We note that Eq.~(\ref{eq:dvii}) involves contributions proportional to

1280: $\left(m_i^U-m_{i^\prime}^U\right)^{-1}$ and

1281: $\left(m_{j^\prime}^D-m_j^D\right)^{-1}$, which would become very large if the

1282: masses of different flavors were nearly degenerate.

1283: This is to be expected, since the role of these counterterms is precisely to

1284: cancel the analogous sm contributions to Eq.~(\ref{eq:dmii}) arising from

1285: Fig.~\ref{fig:one}, so that the renormalized expressions are indeed free from

1286: such singular behavior.

1287: 

1288: It is important to emphasize that, in this formulation, both the renormalized

1289: CKM matrix $V$ and its bare counterpart $V_0=V-\delta V$ are explicitly gauge

1290: independent and satisfy the unitarity constraints $V^\dagger V=1$ and

1291: $V_0^\dagger V_0=1$, respectively, through the order of the calculation.

1292: The explicit construction of the CKM counterterm matrix, as given in 

1293: Eqs.~(\ref{eq:dv}) and (\ref{eq:dvii}), satisfying this important property, is

1294: the main result of this section.

1295: 

1296: \section{\label{sec:five}%

1297: Conclusions}

1298: 

1299: In this paper we have presented a natural on-shell framework to renormalize the

1300: CKM matrix at the one-loop level.

1301: We have shown the gauge independence of the sm contributions and discussed

1302: their cancellation in two equivalent formulations:

1303: the first one involves non-diagonal mass counterterms, while the second one is

1304: based on a CKM counterterm matrix.

1305: We have also established the important fact that the proof of gauge

1306: independence and finiteness of the remaining one-loop corrections to the

1307: $W\to q_i+\overline{q}_j$ amplitude can be reduced to the single-generation

1308: case.

1309: The analysis has led us to an explicit expression for the CKM counterterm

1310: matrix $\delta V_{ij}$, given in Eq.~(\ref{eq:dvii}), that satisfies the basic

1311: property of gauge independence and is consistent with the unitarity of both

1312: $V_0=V-\delta V$ and $V$, the bare and renormalized CKM matrices.

1313: Furthermore, it leads to renormalized amplitudes that are non-singular in the

1314: limit in which any two fermions become mass degenerate.

1315: Because $V$ is finite, gauge independent, and unitary, its elements can be

1316: identified with the experimentally measured CKM matrix elements.

1317: 

1318: \begin{acknowledgments}

1319: 

1320: We are grateful to the Max Planck Institute for Physics in Munich for the

1321: hospitality during a visit when this manuscript was finalized.

1322: The work of B.A.K. was supported in part by the German Research Foundation

1323: through the Collaborative Research Center No.\ 676 {\it Particles, Strings and

1324: the Early Universe---the Structure of Matter and Space-Time}.

1325: The work of A.S. was supported in part by the Alexander von Humboldt

1326: Foundation through the Humboldt Reseach Award No.\ IV~USA~1051120~USS and by

1327: the National Science Foundation through Grant No.\ PHY-0245068.

1328: 

1329: \end{acknowledgments}

1330: 

1331: \begin{appendix}

1332: 

1333: \boldmath

1334: \section{\label{sec:A}%

1335: Residual Self-Mass Corrections $C_{ij}$}

1336: \unboldmath

1337: 

1338: In this appendix we evaluate the finite and gauge-independent residual

1339: contributions $-C_{ij}\overline{u}_i\gamma^\lambda a_-v_j\epsilon_\lambda$ to

1340: the $W\to q_i + \overline{q}_j$ amplitude that are not removed in our mass

1341: renormalization prescription due to the restrictions imposed by the

1342: hermiticity of the mass matrices.

1343: Inserting Eq.~(\ref{eq:legsm}) and its counterpart for down-quark matrices in

1344: the expression for the $W\to q_i+\overline{q}_j$ amplitude and implementing

1345: our mass renormalization subtractions, we find the residual sm corrections

1346: $C_{ij}$ to be

1347: \begin{eqnarray}

1348: C_{ij}&=&\frac{g^2}{32\pi^2}\left\{

1349: \frac{V_{il}V_{li^\prime}^\dagger V_{i^\prime j}}{m_i^2-m_{i^\prime}^2}

1350: \left[\left(m_i^2+m_{i^\prime}^2+\frac{m_i^2m_{i^\prime}^2}{m_W^2}\right)

1351: (I(p^2,m_l)-J(p^2,m_l))\right.\right.

1352: \nonumber\\

1353: &&{}-\left.\frac{m_l^2}{2m_W^2}\left(m_i^2+m_{i^\prime}^2\right)

1354: (I(p^2,m_l)+J(p^2,m_l))\right]_{p^2=m_{i^\prime}^2}^{p^2=m_i^2}

1355: \nonumber\\

1356: &&{}+\frac{V_{ij^\prime}V_{j^\prime k}^\dagger V_{kj}}{m_j^2-m_{j^\prime}^2}

1357: \left[\left(m_j^2+m_{j^\prime}^2+\frac{m_j^2m_{j^\prime}^2}{m_W^2}\right)

1358: (I(p^2,m_k)-J(p^2,m_k))\right.

1359: \nonumber\\

1360: &&{}-\left.\left.\frac{m_k^2}{2m_W^2}\left(m_j^2+m_{j^\prime}^2\right)

1361: (I(p^2,m_k)+J(p^2,m_k))\right]_{p^2=m_{j^\prime}^2}^{p^2=m_j^2}\right\},

1362: \label{eq:shift}

1363: \end{eqnarray}

1364: where the $l$ and $k$ summations are over $l=d,s,b$ and $k=u,c,t$, and it is

1365: understood that only terms with $(i,i^\prime)=(c,u),(t,u),(t,c)$ or

1366: $(j^\prime,j)=(d,s),(d,b),(s,b)$ are included.

1367: 

1368: For the reader's convenience, we list compact analytic results for the

1369: functions $I(p^2,m_l)$ and $J(p^2,m_l)$ defined in Eq.~(\ref{eq:ij}):

1370: \begin{eqnarray}

1371: I(p^2,m_l)&=&-2+\frac{p^2+m_l^2-m_W^2}{2p^2}\ln\frac{m_l^2}{m_W^2}

1372: -2\frac{m_lm_W}{p^2}f\left(\frac{p^2-m_l^2-m_W^2}{2m_lm_W}\right),

1373: \nonumber\\

1374: J(p^2,m_l)&=&\frac{1}{2p^2}\left[-m_l^2+m_W^2+m_l^2\ln\frac{m_l^2}{m_W^2}

1375: +\left(p^2-m_l^2+m_W^2\right)I(p^2,m_l)\right],

1376: \label{eq:ana}

1377: \end{eqnarray}

1378: where

1379: \begin{equation}

1380: f(x)=

1381: \begin{cases}

1382: \sqrt{x^2-1}\cosh^{-1}(-x) & \text{if $x\le-1$,} \\

1383: -\sqrt{1-x^2}\cos^{-1}(-x) & \text{if $-1<x\le1$,} \\

1384: \sqrt{x^2-1}\left(-\cosh^{-1}x+i\pi\right) & \text{if $x>1$.}

1385: \end{cases}

1386: \end{equation}

1387: In practical applications of Eq.~(\ref{eq:ana}), one encounters strong

1388: numerical cancellations between the various terms when $|p^2|\ll m_W^2$.

1389: It is then advantageous to employ the expansions of $I(p^2,m_l)$ and

1390: $J(p^2,m_l)$ in $p^2$ about $p^2=0$,

1391: \begin{eqnarray}

1392: I(p^2,m_l)&=&-1+\frac{m_l^2}{m_l^2-m_W^2}\ln\frac{m_l^2}{m_W^2}

1393: +\frac{p^2}{\left(m_l^2-m_W^2\right)^2}

1394: \left(-\frac{m_l^2+m_W^2}{2}+\frac{m_l^2m_W^2}{m_l^2-m_W^2}

1395: \ln\frac{m_l^2}{m_W^2}\right)

1396: \nonumber\\

1397: &&{}+{\cal O}\left((p^2)^2\right),

1398: \nonumber\\

1399: J(p^2,m_l)&=&\frac{1}{2\left(m_l^2-m_W^2\right)}

1400: \left(\frac{-m_l^2+3m_W^2}{2}

1401: +\frac{m_l^2\left(m_l^2-2m_W^2\right)}{m_l^2-m_W^2}

1402: \ln\frac{m_l^2}{m_W^2}\right)

1403: \nonumber\\

1404: &&{}+\frac{p^2}{\left(m_l^2-m_W^2\right)^3}

1405: \left(\frac{-m_l^4+5m_l^2m_W^2+2m_W^4}{6}

1406: -\frac{m_l^2m_W^4}{m_l^2-m_W^2}\ln\frac{m_l^2}{m_W^2}\right)

1407: \nonumber\\

1408: &&+{\cal O}\left((p^2)^2\right).

1409: \end{eqnarray}

1410: 

1411: The standard parameterization of the CKM matrix, in terms of the three angles

1412: $\theta_{12}$, $\theta_{23}$, and $\theta_{13}$ and the phase $\delta$, reads

1413: \cite{pdg}:

1414: \begin{equation}

1415: V=\left(

1416: \begin{array}{ccc}

1417: V_{ud} & V_{us} & V_{ub} \\

1418: V_{cd} & V_{cs} & V_{cb} \\

1419: V_{td} & V_{ts} & V_{tb}

1420: \end{array}

1421: \right)

1422: =\left(

1423: \begin{array}{ccc}

1424: c_{12}c_{13} & s_{12}c_{13} & s_{13}e^{-i\delta} \\

1425: -s_{12}c_{23}-c_{12}s_{23}s_{13}e^{i\delta} &

1426: c_{12}c_{23}-s_{12}s_{23}s_{13}e^{i\delta} & s_{23}c_{13} \\

1427: s_{12}s_{23}-c_{12}c_{23}s_{13}e^{i\delta} &

1428: -c_{12}s_{23}-s_{12}c_{23}s_{13}e^{i\delta} & c_{23}c_{13}

1429: \end{array}

1430: \right),

1431: \label{eq:vckm}

1432: \end{equation}

1433: where $s_{ij}=\sin\theta_{ij}$ and $c_{ij}=\cos\theta_{ij}$.

1434: An equivalent set of four real parameters are $\lambda$, $A$,

1435: $\overline{\rho}$, and $\overline{\eta}$, which are related to

1436: $\theta_{12}$, $\theta_{23}$, $\theta_{13}$, and $\delta$ as \cite{pdg}

1437: \begin{eqnarray}

1438: s_{12}&=&\lambda,\nonumber\\

1439: s_{23}&=&A\lambda^2,\nonumber\\

1440: s_{13}e^{i\delta}&=&\frac{A\lambda^3(\overline{\rho}+i\overline{\eta})

1441: \sqrt{1-A^2\lambda^4}}{\sqrt{1-\lambda^2}

1442: \left[1-A^2\lambda^4(\overline{\rho}+i\overline{\eta})\right]}.

1443: \label{eq:wolf}

1444: \end{eqnarray}

1445: 

1446: In our numerical evaluation of Eq.~(\ref{eq:shift}), we identify

1447: $g^2/(4\pi)=\hat\alpha(m_Z)/\sin^2\hat\theta_W(m_Z)$ and employ the values

1448: $\hat\alpha(m_Z)=1/127.918$ and $\sin^2\hat\theta_W(m_Z)=0.23122$ \cite{pdg}.

1449: We take the $W$-boson mass to be $m_W=80.403$~GeV \cite{pdg}. 

1450: As for the quark masses, we use the values $m_u=62$~MeV, $m_d=83$~MeV,

1451: $m_s=215$~MeV, $m_c=1.35$~GeV, $m_b=4.5$~GeV \cite{Czarnecki:2004cw} and

1452: $m_t=172.7$~GeV \cite{pdg}; in the case of the lighter quarks, these

1453: correspond to effective masses that are especially appropriate for electroweak

1454: analyses like ours.

1455: We evaluate the CKM matrix elements from Eqs.~(\ref{eq:vckm}) and

1456: (\ref{eq:wolf}) using the values $\lambda=0.2272$, $A=0.818$,

1457: $\overline{\rho}=0.221$, and $\overline{\eta}=0.340$ \cite{pdg}.

1458: 

1459: \begin{table}

1460: \begin{center}

1461: \caption{Residual self-mass corrections $C_{ij}$ as evaluated from

1462: Eq.~(\ref{eq:shift}) in the form $(\re C_{ij},\im C_{ij})$.}

1463: \label{tab:one}

1464: \begin{ruledtabular}

1465: \begin{tabular}{cccc}

1466: \backslashbox{$i$}{$j$} & $d$ & $s$ & $b$ \\

1467: \hline

1468: $u$ & $(0,0)$ & $(-1.6\times10^{-12},-5.2\times10^{-13})$ &

1469: $(-3.2\times10^{-9},4.9\times10^{-9})$ \\

1470: $c$ & $(4.5\times10^{-13},1.2\times10^{-13})$ &

1471: $(4.9\times10^{-13},1.5\times10^{-13})$ &

1472: $(-6.1\times10^{-8},2.1\times10^{-12})$ \\

1473: $t$ & $(-1.5\times10^{-9},-7.9\times10^{-8})$ &

1474: $(-1.6\times10^{-7},3.7\times10^{-7})$ &

1475: $(-4.0\times10^{-9},1.6\times10^{-8})$ \\

1476: \end{tabular}

1477: \end{ruledtabular}

1478: \end{center}

1479: \end{table}

1480: In Table~\ref{tab:one}, we present our results for the residual sm corrections

1481: $C_{ij}$.

1482: As explained in Sec.~\ref{sec:three}, in our renormalization prescription

1483: $C_{ud}=0$.

1484: As shown in Table~\ref{tab:one}, for the other $W\to q_i + \overline{q}_j$

1485: amplitudes, the real and imaginary parts of $C_{ij}$ are very small.

1486: For example, the fractional corrections of $\re C_{ij}$ with respect to the

1487: real parts of the corresponding Born amplitude couplings, namely

1488: $\re C_{ij}/\re V_{ij}$, reach a maximum value of $4\times10^{-6}$ for

1489: $t\to W + s$ and are much smaller for several other cases.

1490: It is important to note that the $C_{ij}$ are non-singular in the limits

1491: $m_{i^\prime}\to m_i$ or $m_{j^\prime}\to m_j$, since the

1492: $\left(m_i^2-m_{i^\prime}^2\right)^{-1}$ and

1493: $\left(m_j^2-m_{j^\prime}^2\right)^{-1}$ singularities are canceled by the

1494: subtraction procedure in Eq.~(\ref{eq:shift}).

1495: For this reason, as also explained in Sec.~\ref{sec:three}, these residual

1496: corrections can be regarded as additional finite and gauge-independent wfr

1497: contributions, which happen to be very small.

1498: 

1499: \boldmath

1500: \section{\label{sec:B}%

1501: Case $(h_L)_{ii}\ne0$}

1502: \unboldmath

1503: 

1504: Since the diagonal elements $(h_L)_{ii}$ do not contribute to the

1505: diagonalization condition of Eq.~(\ref{eq:dis}), in the analysis of

1506: Sec.~\ref{sec:four}, we chose $(h_L)_{ii}=0$.

1507: We now show that the alternative choice $(h_L)_{ii}\ne0$ has no physical

1508: effect on the $Wq_i\overline{q}_j$ coupling though ${\cal O}(g^2)$.

1509: As explained in Sec.~\ref{sec:four}, the biunitary transformation of

1510: Eqs.~(\ref{eq:pl}) and (\ref{eq:pr}) leads to a $Wq_i\overline{q}_j$

1511: interaction described through terms of ${\cal O}(g^2)$ by

1512: Eqs.~(\ref{eq:hc}) and (\ref{eq:dv}).

1513: Writing these expressions in component form and separating out the

1514: contributions involving the diagonal elements of $h^U$ and $h^D$, we obtain an

1515: expression proportional to

1516: \begin{equation}

1517: \overline{\hat\psi}_i^{(U)}\left[V_{ij}-i\left(h_L^U\right)_{ii}V_{ij}

1518: +V_{ij}i\left(h_L^D\right)_{jj}\right]\gamma^\lambda a_-\hat\psi_j^{(D)},

1519: \end{equation}

1520: which can be written as

1521: \begin{equation}

1522: \overline{\hat\psi}_i^{(U)}\left[1-i\left(h_L^U\right)_{ii}\right]V_{ij}

1523: \left[1+i\left(h_L^D\right)_{jj}\right]\gamma^\lambda a_-\hat\psi_j^{(D)}

1524: +{\cal O}(g^4).

1525: \end{equation}

1526: In turn, this can be expressed as

1527: \begin{equation}

1528: \overline{\hat\psi}_i^{(U)}\exp\left[-i\left(h_L^U\right)_{ii}\right]V_{ij}

1529: \exp\left[i\left(h_L^D\right)_{jj}\right]\gamma^\lambda a_-\hat\psi_j^{(D)}

1530: +{\cal O}(g^4).

1531: \end{equation}

1532: Since $h_L^U$ and $h_L^D$ are hermitian, the diagonal elements are real.

1533: Thus $\exp\left[-i\left(h_L^U\right)_{ii}\right]$ and

1534: $\exp\left[i\left(h_L^D\right)_{jj}\right]$ are multiplicative phases that can

1535: be absorbed in redefinitions of the $\hat\psi_j^{(U)}$ and $\hat\psi_j^{(D)}$

1536: fields.

1537: 

1538: \end{appendix}

1539: 

1540: \begin{thebibliography}{99}

1541: 

1542: \bibitem{cab} N. Cabibbo,

1543: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf10}, 531 (1963);

1544: M. Kobayashi and T. Maskawa,

1545: Prog.\ Theor.\ Phys.\ {\bf49}, 652 (1973).

1546: 

1547: \bibitem{pdg}

1548: W.-M. Yao {\it et al.}\ (Particle Data Group),

1549: J. Phys.\ G {\bf33}, 1 (2006), and references cited therein.

1550: 

1551: \bibitem{Czarnecki:2004cw}

1552: A. Czarnecki, W.J. Marciano, and A. Sirlin,

1553: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf70}, 093006 (2004), and references cited therein.

1554: 

1555: \bibitem{Marciano:2005ec}

1556: W.J. Marciano and A. Sirlin,

1557: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf96}, 032002 (2006).

1558: 

1559: \bibitem{Marciano:1975cn}

1560: W.J. Marciano and A. Sirlin,

1561: Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B93}, 303 (1975).

1562: 

1563: \bibitem{Denner:1990yz}

1564: A.~Denner and T.~Sack,

1565: Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B347}, 203 (1990);

1566: B.A. Kniehl and A. Pilaftsis,

1567: {\it ibid.}\ {\bf B474}, 286 (1996);

1568: P. Gambino, P.A. Grassi, and F. Madricardo,

1569: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 454}, 98 (1999);

1570: A. Barroso, L. Br\"ucher, and R. Santos,

1571: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf62}, 096003 (2000);

1572: Y. Yamada,

1573: {\it ibid.}\ {\bf 64}, 036008 (2001);

1574: K.-P.O. Diener and B.A. Kniehl,

1575: Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B617}, 291 (2001);

1576: A. Pilaftsis,

1577: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf65}, 115013 (2002);

1578: D. Espriu, J. Manzano, and P. Talavera,

1579: {\it ibid.}\ {\bf66}, 076002 (2002);

1580: Y. Zhou,

1581: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf577}, 67 (2003);

1582: J.\ Phys.\ G {\bf30}, 491 (2004);

1583: Y. Liao,

1584: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf69}, 016001 (2004);

1585: A. Denner, E. Kraus, and M. Roth,

1586: {\it ibid.}\ {\bf70}, 033002 (2004).

1587: 

1588: \bibitem{short}

1589: B.A. Kniehl and A. Sirlin,

1590: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf97}, 221801 (2006).

1591: 

1592: \bibitem{Feynman:1949zx}

1593: R.P. Feynman,

1594: Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf76}, 769 (1949) (see especially Section~6);

1595: Quantum Electrodynamics: A Lecture Note and Reprint Volume,

1596: (W.A. Benjamin, Inc., New York, 1962), p.~145 {\it et seqq.}.

1597: 

1598: \bibitem{Kniehl:2000rb}

1599: B.A. Kniehl, F. Madricardo, and M. Steinhauser,

1600: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf62}, 073010 (2000).

1601: 

1602: \bibitem{schweber}

1603: S.S. Schweber,

1604: An Introduction to Relativistic Quantum Field Theory,

1605: (Row, Peterson and Company, Evanston, 1961), p.~539,

1606: and references cited therein;

1607: L.S.~Brown,

1608: Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf187}, 2260 (1969);

1609: A. Sirlin,

1610: Rev.\ Mod.\ Phys.\ {\bf50}, 573 (1978);

1611: {\bf 50}, 905(E) (1978) (see Appendix~A).

1612: 

1613: \end{thebibliography}

1614: 

1615: \end{document}

1616: