Contents. arxiv:hep-ph/ v1 2 Apr List of Figures. List of Tables. 1 Introduction 1

Transcription

1 arxiv:hep-ph/9848v Apr 998 Contents Contents List of Figures List of Tables Introduction The Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model 4. General Aspects Electroweak Gauge Bosons and Higgs Bosons Gauginos and Higgsinos Charginos Neutralinos The Gluino Leptons and Quarks Sfermions Experimental bounds I IV VI 3 Decay Widths 3. General Remarks The relevant parts of the Lagrangian Two body decays Three Body Decays of the Light Stop The Decay of thelight Stopinto a W-Boson, abottomquark and the Lightest Neutralino The Decay of the Light Stop into a charged Higgs Boson, a Bottom Quark and the Lightest Neutralino The Decay of the Light Stop into a Bottom Quark, a Slepton and a Lepton The Decay of the light Stop into a Charm-quark and a Neutralino.. I

2 CONTENTS II 4 Numerical results for LEP 4. Light Stop Light Sbottom Light Stau Tau Sneutrino Production of sfermions at a Linear Collider 37 6 Masses and mixing angles Outlook on the following chapters Masses and mixing angles of staus and sbottoms Masses and mixing angles of the stops Higgs masses and mixing angle Numerical results for sleptons 5 7. Decays of ν τ Decays of τ Decays of τ Numerical results for t, Decays of t Decays of t Numerical results for b, 7 9. Decays of b Decays of b Higher order decays of t and b 79. Three body decays of t The decay b c χ Summary 87 A Formulae for the three body decay widths 89 A. Light Stop into W, Bottom, and Neutralino A. Light Stop into charged Higgs, Bottom, and Neutralino A.3 Light Stop into Bottom, Slepton and Lepton A.4 Some analytical solutions of integrals A.4. The integrals J i A.4. The solution of J t m A.4.3 The solution of J tm A.4.4 The solution of J t m

3 CONTENTS III A.4.5 The solution of J tt m,m A.4.6 The solution of J tt m,m A.4.7 The solution of J ttm,m A.4.8 The solution of J st s,m,m A.4.9 The solution of J st s,m,m B Calculation of sfermion parameters 4 C Production cross sections 6 C. Tree Level C. SUSY-QCD Corrections C.3 Initial-State Radiation Bibliography Zusammenfassung 6 Lebenslauf 9

4 List of Figures 3. Feynman diagrams for the decay t bw χ Feynman diagrams for the decay t bh χ Production cross sections for a light stop at LEP Parameter domains in the M,µ plane for t decays at LEP Total decay widths of a light stop at LEP for tanβ = Total decay widths of a light stop at LEP for tanβ = Branching ratios for stop decays into sleptons at LEP Total decay widths of a light stop at LEP three body decays Branching ratios of the stop decay into stau at LEP Production cross sections for a light sbottom at LEP Parameter domains in the M,µ plane for b decays at LEP Decay widths of a light sbottom at LEP for tanβ = Branching ratios for b b χ at LEP for tanβ = Production cross sections for a light stau at LEP Parameter domains in the M,µ plane for τ decays at LEP Branching ratios for τ decays at LEP for tanβ = Production cross sections for ν τ at LEP Parameter domains in the M,µ plane for ν τ decays at LEP Branching ratios for ν τ decays at LEP for tanβ = Total cross section σe e ν τ ν τ Total cross section σe e τ τ Total cross section σe e τ τ Total cross section σe e t t Total cross section e e t t Total cross section σe e t t Total cross section σe e b b Total cross section σe e b b Stau masses and mixing angle as a function of µ Sbottom masses and mixing angle as a function of µ IV

5 LIST OF FIGURES V 6.3 Stop masses and mixing angle as a function of µ for tanβ = Stop masses and mixing angle as a function of A t for tanβ = Higgs masses and mixing angle as a function of µ Higgs masses and mixing angle as a function of A t = A b Branching ratios for ν τ decays as a function of µ Branching ratios for ν τ decays as a function of µ Branching ratios for τ decays as a function of µ Branching ratios for τ decays as a function of µ Branching ratios for τ decays as a function of µ for tanβ = Branching ratios for τ decays as a function of A τ for tanβ = Branching ratios for τ decays as a function of µ for tanβ = Branching ratios for t decays as a function of µ Total decay widths of t as a function of µ Branching ratios for t decays as a function of A t = A b Branching ratios for t decays as a function of µ for tanβ = Branching ratios for t decays as a function of µ for tanβ = Branching ratios for t decays as a function of A t for tanβ = Branching ratios for t decays as a function of tanβ for A t = 5 GeV Branching ratios for b decays as a function of µ Branching ratios for b decays as a function of A b = A t Branching ratios for b decays as a function of µ Branching ratios for b decays as a function of µ and A b for tanβ = Branching ratios for b decays as a function of tanβ for A b = 5 GeV Branching ratios for b decays as a function of µ for tanβ = Branching ratios for b decays as a function of A b for tanβ = Branching ratios for three body decays of t as a function of cosθ t.. 8. Branching ratios for three body decays of t as a function of tanβ Branching ratios for three body decays of t as a function of cosθ t Branching ratios for three body decays of t as a function of tanβ Branching ratios for three body decays of t as a function of M D Branching ratios for b c χ C. Feynman diagrams for the process e e f i fj f e,ν e

6 List of Tables. Particle content of the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model Parameters for different scenarios at LEP Parameters and physical quantities used in Fig Parameters and physical quantities used in Fig VI

7 Chapter Introduction Our understanding of the fundamental forces appearing in nature rests to a large extent on our increasing understanding of the underlying symmetries. Parallel to this happened the development of quantum field theories for the electromagnetic, weak and strong interactions see e.g. []. In these theories the fundamental states are described by fields whose interactions obey the underlying symmetries. The theory which explains up to now all experimental facts is the so-called Standard Model SM which is based on the gauge group SU3 SU U see e.g. [, 3, 4] and references therein. Despite its enormous success the SM still leaves many questions open, e.g.: Is it possible to explain the origin of the various parameters of the model? Can gravity be included? What is the origin of fermion masses? What is the origin of electroweak symmetry breaking? A first step to answering these questions could be the embedding of the SM in a Grand Unified Theory GUT [3, 5]. In this case the SMappearsasthelowenergylimitofaGUTwithonlyonegaugecoupling. However, the simplest possibility based on SU5 has been ruled out by experiment[6]. Besides this, the SM and its simple GUT extensions exhibit the so-called hierarchy problem [7]. Here the question arises how one can stabilize the masses of fundamental scalars in the range of the electroweak scale. Radiative corrections push these masses up either to the GUT- or the Planck-scale. The stabilization can be achieved through cancellation between terms, each of the order 5 GeV. This seems to be rather unnatural, because these terms have to be adjusted up to 3 digits. One possibility to solve this problem is supersymmetry SUSY[8]. SUSY is a symmetry, which relates bosons to fermions and vice versa [9, ]. Due to the fact that fermionic loops enter with the opposite sign of bosonic loops, one gets an automatic cancellation between different contributions of the radiative corrections to scalar masses. Moreover, repeated applications of supersymmetric transformations are equivalent to a Poincaré transformation. Therefore, supersymmetry, if it is a local symmetry, contains the graviton among its gauge fields and includes Einstein s

8 CHAPTER. INTRODUCTION theory of gravity see e.g. []. For this reason local supersymmetry is called supergravity SUGRA. Beside these more theoretical advantages it has been shown that within supersymmetric GUTs a unification of gauge couplings consistent with experiments can be achieved [6]. Some other appealing features of SUSY are: It can be shown that the SUSY algebra is the only nontrivial extension of the set of spacetime symmetries which forms one of the building blocks of relativistic quantum field theory []. Electroweak symmetry breaking can be achieved due to radiative effects caused by the large top mass [3]. Some models contain a stable lightest supersymmetric particle which serves as a good candidate for dark matter [4]. Therefore, it is very interesting to study the phenomenological aspects of supersymmetric theories. For technical details and how to construct a phenomenological acceptable theory we would like to refer the interested reader to the literature, e.g. [, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, ]. The simplest supersymmetric extension of the SM is called Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model MSSM. In this model every known SM particle obtains a supersymmetric partner. One has to enlarge the Higgs sector to obtain a consistent theory by adding an extra Higgs doublet of opposite hypercharge. The second Higgs doublet is needed to give mass to both up- and down-type quarks and to cancel the triangle anomaly caused by the supersymmetric partners of the Higgs-doublets. Due to the fact that no supersymmetric partner of the SM particles has been found up to now, SUSY has to be broken. This can be achieved by adding by hand soft SUSY breaking terms. These consist of scalar and gaugino mass terms, as well as trilinear A-terms and bilinear B-terms interactions []. Such a model is the most conservative approach to realistic model building, but the large parameter space causes it to be rather unpredictable. However, there are many different ways to construct a more fundamental theory which reduces the number of free parameters. For example in minimal supergravity models there are only five additional parameters which remain as free parameters see e.g. [8, 9, ]. In this work we will use the MSSM as framework. In this model there exists a conserved quantum number called R-parity R = 3BLS, where B, L and S denote baryon number, lepton number and spin, respectively. This leads to two important phenomenological implications: Firstly, SUSY particles can only be produced in pairs. Secondly, the lightest supersymmetric particle LSP is stable. In recent years it has turned out that third generation sfermions the scalar partners of the top- and bottom quark, the tau and the tau-neutrino are of special interest. This is mainly due to two reasons: Firstly, large Yukawa couplings lead to a different

9 CHAPTER. INTRODUCTION 3 phenomenology compared to the sfermions of the first two generations. Secondly, if a SUSY GUT is realized in nature, studies of renormalization group equations RGEs [8, ] indicate, that third generation sfermions are in general lighter than the sfermions of the first two generations for the stop which is the scalar partner of the top quark this has been pointed out in [3]. For these reasons it is possible that one of them is the lightest charged SUSY particle and hence its appearance could be the first experimental evidence of SUSY. In the following we will study their phenomenology at e e colliders. However, most of our results can also be applied to hadron colliders. This work is organized in the following manner: In Chapter we present the particle content of the MSSM. The relevant interaction Lagrangian and the formulae for the various decay widths of the sfermions are given in Chapter 3. In Chapter 4 we discuss the phenomenology of sfermions at LEP s = 9 GeV. In particular the influence of the Yukawa couplings on the decay pattern will be discussed. The production of sfermions at an e e Linear Collider LC with an energy range between 5 GeV and TeV is discussed in Chapter 5. In Chapter 6 we discuss our strategy for exploring the phenomenology of sfermions with masses of several hundred GeV which will be presented in Chapters 7, 8, and 9. Here we put special emphasis on the decays into gauge and Higgs bosons. Higher order decays of the light stop and the light sbottom are discussed in Chapter. In Chapter we give a summary of the main topics. Appendix A gives the analytical solutions for the three body decay widths. In Appendix B we present the formulae for computation of the MSSM parameters from sfermion masses and mixing angles. Finally, the formulae for the production cross sections including ISR- and QCD-corrections are given in Appendix C.

10 Chapter The Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model. General Aspects The simplest linear extension of the Standard Model SM is the so-called Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model MSSM. It has the same gauge group as the SM: SU3 C SU L U Y which breaks spontaneously to SU3 C U em. This spontaneous symmetry breaking can be achieved through radiative corrections due to the large top mass [3]. In addition to the SM particles we have a second Higgs doublet, spin partners for the Higgs fields called higgsinos, spin partners for the gauge bosons called gauginos and two spin partners for each fermion called sfermions one for each helicity state. In Tab.. all particles of the MSSM are listed except the graviton and its partner, the gravitino. In the following we will briefly discuss the mass eigenstates of this model. SM particles additional Higgs j = q Li = uli d Li SUSY particles ũli, u Ri, d Ri j = q Li = d Li νli νli l Li =, e Ri lli = e Li ẽ Li, ũ Ri, d Ri, ẽ Ri j = g a j = g a γ, Z, W ± χ i = a i γ b i Z ci H d i H j = H = H H, H = H H χ ± k = α k W ± β k H±, Table.: Particle content of the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model. 4

11 CHAPTER. THE MINIMAL SUPERSYMMETRIC STANDARD MODEL 5. Electroweak Gauge Bosons and Higgs Bosons As already mentioned there are two Higgs doublets H and H in the MSSM. The scalar potential V Higgs reads at tree-level [7] V Higgs = m H H m H H m 3Hiǫ T ij H j h.c. g 3 H σij k i H j H σ k ij i H j g H 4 H H H.. k= The phases of the fields can be chosen such that m 3 >. Note, that the quadric terms are determined through the gauge couplings in contrast to the Standard Model or a general two Higgs doublet model where these couplings are free parameters. Due to spontaneous symmetry breaking of SU L U Y one gets for the vacuum expectation values vevs of the Higgs fields: v H = H =.. v The diagonalization of the mass matrices for the charged and the neutral Higgs fields leads to five physical Higgs bosons and three Goldstone bosons. The physical Higgs bosons are two charged Higgs bosons H ±, two scalar Higgs bosons h,h and a pseudoscalar Higgs boson A. The three Goldstone-bosons form together with the SU U gauge-bosons the photon and the Z - and W ± -bosons. The masses of the gauge bosons m W = g v, m Z = g g v.3 fix the sum of the vevs v = v v. The ratio tanβ v /v remains as a free parameter of the model. At tree-level one gets the following mass relations: and thus m A = m m.4 m h,h = m A m Z m A m Z 4m A m Z cos β.5 m H = ± m A m W.6 m h minm Z,m A, m H m Z, m H ± m W..7 It has been shown that one-loop corrections are important for the Higgs-masses. In the effective potential approach [4] the potential V Higgs modifies to V one loop V one loop = V Higgs ln M π STrM4 Q A total one-loop computation has been given in [5, 6]. For the discussions in Chapter 6-9 the most important corrections stemming from third generation quarks and squarks [7, 8] have been included.

12 CHAPTER. THE MINIMAL SUPERSYMMETRIC STANDARD MODEL 6.3 Gauginos and Higgsinos.3. Charginos The mass eigenstates of the charged gauginos and higgsinos are called charginos χ ±,. In the basis ψ j = iλ,ψ H ψ j = iλ,ψ H.9 one finds the following mass term [9, 3] L = m χ ± ψ j, ψ X j T ψ j X ψ j. with X = M mw sinβ mw cosβ µ.. The mass matrix X can be diagonalized by two real, unitary matrices U and V M D = U XV.. The mass eigenstates are defined through: χ i = V ij ψ j, χ i = U ij ψ j i,j =,..3 For the eigenvalues ± m χ, tanβ > : m χ ±, = and the matrix elements U ij and V ij one gets [9] for M µ m W sinβ M µ m W sinβ U = U = ǫ U M µ m W cosβ W U = U = M µ m W cosβ W V = V = M µ m W cosβ W V = V = ǫ V M µ m W cosβ W

13 CHAPTER. THE MINIMAL SUPERSYMMETRIC STANDARD MODEL 7 with W = M µ m W 4Mµ m W sinβ.9 ǫ U = signmcosβ µsinβ and ǫ V = signmsinβ µcosβ.. For tanβ < one has to replace U ij by ǫ U U ij and V ij by ǫ V V ij. In the chosen phase convention the mass eigenvalue of the heavier chargino is always positive. For Mµ m W sinβ < > the lighter mass eigenvalue is positive negative. The following asymptotic behavior can be deduced from Eqs..4.8: for M µ the lighter chargino is mainly a higgsino whereas the heavier chargino is mainly gaugino like. For µ M the charginos interchange their nature..3. Neutralinos Analogous to the chargino case a mixture takes place between neutral gauginos and neutral higgsinos [3, 3]. The mass eigenstates are called neutralinos χ j j =,..,4. In the basis ψ j = iλ γ, iλ Z,ψ H cosβ ψ H sinβ,ψ H sinβ ψ H cosβ. the mass matrix has the form [3]: M cos θ W M sin θ W M M sinθ W cosθ W M M Y = sinθ W cosθ W M sin θ W M cos θ W m Z m Z µsinβ µcosβ µcosβ µsinβ. This matrix can be diagonalized by a 4 4 unitary matrix N. The neutralino mass eigenstates are given by: χ i = N ij ψ j i,j =,..,4..3 Here ψ = ψj, ψ j denotes a four component spinor whereas the ψ j are two component Weyl spinors. The ordering of the neutralino mass eigenstates is given by m χ < m χ < m χ 3 < m χ 4. Under the assumption that the neutral gaugino higgsino mixing contains no source of CP violation, the matrix N is real. The mass eigenvalues can be either positive or negative. This sign is related to the CP eigenvalue of the corresponding neutralino [3]. In the following, the GUT relation M = 5/3tan θ W M.4 is assumed for the U gaugino mass M and the SU gaugino mass M. For M µ the lighter two neutralinos are mainly higgsinos and the heavier two are mainly gauginos where the heaviest is mainly the zino and the second heaviest mainly the photino. For µ M the lightest neutralino is mainly the photino, the second one is mainly the zino and the two heaviest states are mainly higgsinos.

14 CHAPTER. THE MINIMAL SUPERSYMMETRIC STANDARD MODEL The Gluino For the gluino there is the following mass term L m g = m g g g..5 In the framework of a GUT the gluino mass m g is related to the SU gaugino mass M through M = m g α/α s sin θ W..6 where α and α s are the electroweak and strong coupling respectively. It has been shown that QCD corrections to this relation can be important [33]..4 Leptons and Quarks The leptons and quarks have similar mass terms as in the SM: L f = v Ē La h e ab E R b v DLa h d ab D R b v Ū La h d ab U R b h.c...7 With the help of the unitary 3 3 matrices V l jk one gets the mass eigen states: E phys L a,r a = V L,R e,ab E L a,r a, D phys L a,r a = V L,R d,ab D L a,r a, U phys L a,r a = V L,R u,ab U L a,r a.8 with E phys = e,µ,τ, D phys = d,s,b and U phys = u,c,t. For the masses one finds diagm e,m µ,m τ = v Ve L he Ve R, diagm d,m s,m b = v Vd L hd Vd R, diagm u,m c,m t = v Vu L hu Vu R..9 Note, that there are no interactions between neutral gauge bosons and fermions of different generations GIM-mechanism [34]. However, there are interactions between the W ± and quarks of different generations. The strength of these interactions is related to the so-called Cabbibo Kobayashi Maskawa CKM matrix K CKM [35, 36] which is given by K CKM Vu L Vd L. The analogous matrix in the lepton sector does not exist because there are no right-handed neutrinos in the MSSM. Note, that the masses of the u-quarks are proportional to v whereas the masses of the d-quarks and the leptons are proportional to v. Therefore, we have h t = h b if tanβ = m t /m b. In such a case the τ Yukawa coupling is also of the order of the top Yukawa coupling. This has important consequences for the phenomenology of the supersymmetric partners of the τ lepton and the b quark in high tanβ scenarios as will be shown in Chapters 4, 9 and 7.

15 CHAPTER. THE MINIMAL SUPERSYMMETRIC STANDARD MODEL 9.5 Sfermions As already mentioned every SM fermion has two spin partners denoted by f L and f R, one for each helicity state. The obvious exception are the neutrinos which are only left handed states in our model. In the following the scalar partners for the fermions quarks, leptons will be called sfermions squarks, sleptons. A similar notation will be used for the scalar partners of a specific fermion, e.g. the scalar partners of the top-quarks will be called stops. For the sfermions one gets the following mass terms: with L f = f L, f R M LL M LR M RL M RR fl f R M LL = M F v i hf h f T 3 I e f sin θ W cosβm Z 3.3 M LR = M RL = v ia f g f µh f M LL = M F v i hf h f e f sin θ W cosβm Z 3..3 Here F denotes Q in case of squarks and L in case of sleptons, F denotes E,D,U, and f denotes e,d,u. T 3 I is the third component of the weak isospin and e q is the electric charge of the corresponding fermion. In case of up-type squarks v i is v whereas in case of down-type squarks and charged sleptons v i = v. A f is a scalar quantity whereas M F,F and gf are 3 3 matrices. In principal the entries of these matrices are free quantities, but especially for the first two generations they are very constrained in order to avoid oversized Flavour Changing Neutral Currents FCNCs [37, 38]. Therefore, we will assume that M F and M F are diagonal and that gf = h f. In this case one can perform a rotation in the sfermion sector analogous to the fermion sector to decouple the generations. The only exception will be the mixing between the stops and the scalar left charm. This will be discussed in section 3.5. With the above assumptions the masses of the sneutrinos are given by m ν = M L cosβm Z..3 For the other sfermions one gets mass matrices of the following form [39]: M M f T = F I 3 e f sin θ W cosβm Z m f m f A f µθβ m f A f µθβ M F e f sin θ W cosβm Z m f with Θβ = { cotβ for T 3 I = tanβ for T 3 I =.33

16 CHAPTER. THE MINIMAL SUPERSYMMETRIC STANDARD MODEL The mass eigenvalues are given by: m f, = M M fll frr M fll M frr 4M flr.34 with the eigenstates f = cosθ f sinθ f f sinθ f cosθ f cosθ f = fl f R.35 m f A f µθβ M fll m f M 4 flr.36 sinθ f = M fll m f M fll m f M 4 flr..37 cosθ f is proportional to the fermion mass as can be read of Eq..36. Therefore, one can safely neglect the mixing for the first two generations but not for the third generation. Especially for the stops one expects a strong mixing and mass splitting between the heavier and the lighter state due to the large top mass. For large tanβ the product µtanβ can be large leading to a strong mixing and large mass splitting in the sbottom and in the stau sector too. Note, that in this convention sinθ f is always positive because M fll m f = M fll M frr M fll M frr 4M flr..38 A more detailed discussion on sfermion masses and mixing angles will be given in Chapter 6..6 Experimental bounds LEP has obtained a model independent experimental mass-bound on charged supersymmetric particles which is m > 45 GeV [4, 4]. Stronger limits have been reported during the last two years from the various LEP runs at higher energy [4, 4, 43, 44, 45]. In the first half year LEP was running at s = 7 7 GeV. There the following limits have been obtained [46, 47]: m t > 73.3 GeV, > m b 73 GeV, µ R > 59 GeV, ẽ R > 58 GeV, τ R > 53 GeV, m h > 69.5 GeV, m A > 6.5 GeV, m H > 5.5 GeV, > m χ GeV if m ντ =. TeV. Note, that these bounds depend on various assumptions. The D experiment at FNAL obtained additionalmasslimitsforthestop[47,48]excludingthemassrange4gev < m t < GeV if the mass difference m t m χ > 3 GeV. The bound on the gluino mass is m g > 75 GeV [49].

17 Chapter 3 Decay Widths 3. General Remarks As already mentioned, in the MSSM exists a conserved quantum number called R- parity leading to the existence of a lightest stable supersymmetric particle LSP. We will assume that the lightest neutralino is the LSP for cosmological reasons see e.g. [5] and references therein. Ingeneral, sfermionsdecayaccordingto f k χ if and f k χ ± j f. Normally, the flavour conserving decay into the lightest neutralino is always possible except in case of the light stop because of the large t-quark mass. Nevertheless, the decay of a light stop into the lighter chargino and a b-quark can still be accessible in this case. As we will show later there is a wide range of SUSY parameters where all two body decays of the light stop are forbidden at tree level. Therefore, the flavour changing decay into a c-quark and the LSP becomes important [5]. Moreover, three body decays of the light stop can be competitive: t bw χ, bh χ f, b, ν f, bf ν f where f denotes e,µ,τ. In the next section we collect the relevant terms of the interaction Lagrangian which are needed for the computation of the decay widths. After this we will list the formulae for the two body decays of the sfermions. In the subsequent section we present the matrix elements, the Feynman diagrams and the formulae for the above mentioned three body decays of the light stop. For completeness we also present the formulae for the decay t c χ in our notation.

18 CHAPTER 3. DECAY WIDTHS 3. The relevant parts of the Lagrangian The part of the Lagrangian, which is needed for the calculation of the subsequent decay widths, is given by: L I = g [ f kijp f L l f ijp R χ f j i f kijp f L lijp f R χ f ] j i h.c. g f=ντ,t f =τ,b f=τ,ν τ,b,t [ f b f ki P L a f ki P R χ i fk h.c. ] g [ W µ χ k O P Lkj L O R P ki R γµ χ j h.c.] g [ H χ k Q P Rkj L Q L P ki R χ j h.c. ] g [ W µ tγ µ P L bh.c. ] g iw µ A W t i bj t i µ bj A W ν τ τ i ν τ µ τ i h.c. i,j=, i=, g [ H tm b tanβp R m t cotβp L bh.c. ] mw g H i,j=, [ ig cosθ W Z µ gh iga B f f=τ,b,t B f f=τ,b,t [ C H t i bj t i bj cosθ t sinθ t f=τ,b i=, C H ν τ τ i ν τ τ i h.c. t µ t t µ t cosθ f sinθ f f h f h.c. gh A f f f f f µ f f µ f ] B f f=τ,b,t f H f h.c. g s T a jk q=b,t qj cosθ q P R sinθ q P L g a q k ] q j sinθ q P R cosθ q P L g a q k h.c. 3. where P R,L = ±γ 5 /. The T a jk are the generators of SU3. In the following we will use the abbreviation R f for the mixing matrix Eq..35: R f = cosθ f sinθ f sinθ f cosθ f. 3.

19 CHAPTER 3. DECAY WIDTHS 3 The Yukawa couplings of the sfermions are given by: m τ Y τ = mw cosβ, Y m b b = mw cosβ, Y m t t = mw sinβ. 3.3 The q i -q - χ ± j couplings read with l q ij = R q ino q jn, k q ij = R q io q j 3.4 O t j = Vj Y t V j In case of sleptons we have:, O b j = Uj Y b U j. 3.5 l τ ij = R τ in Oτ jn, k τ ij =, l ν j = V j, k ν j = Y τu j. 3.6 with O τ j = Uj Y τ U j. 3.7 The f i -f- χ k couplings are given by with and a f ik = R f ina f kn, b f ik = R f inb f kn 3.8 A f k = f f Lk h f Rk, B f k = h f Lk f f Rk h t Lk = Y tsinβnk3 cosβn k4 flk t = sinθ 3 W N k 3 sin θ W N k cosθ W h t Rk = Y tsinβn k3 cosβn k4 frk t = sinθ 3 W tanθ W Nk Nk, h b Lk = Y bcosβnk3 sinβn k4 flk b = sinθ 3 W N k 3 sin θ W N k cosθ W h b Rk = Y bcosβn k3 sinβn k4 frk b = sinθ 3 W tanθ W Nk Nk 3. h τ Lk = Y τcosβnk3 sinβn k4 flk τ = sinθ W N k sin θ W N k cosθ W h τ Rk = Y 3. τcosβn k3 sinβn k4 frk τ = sinθ W tanθ W Nk N k

20 CHAPTER 3. DECAY WIDTHS 4 In case of ν τ we get a ντ k = N k cosθw and b ντ k =. The couplings t i - b j -W read A W t i bj = A W bi t j T = The couplings τ i - ν τ -W are given by cosθ b cosθ t sinθ b cosθ t cosθ b sinθ t sinθ b sinθ t 3.3 A W τ ν τ = cosθ τ, A W τ ν τ = sinθ τ. 3.4 The couplings between light sfermion, heavy sfermion and neutral Higgs read: B f h = m Z sinθ f cosθ W e f sin θ W sinαβ m f cosθ f µcosα A m W cosβ f sinα B f H = m Z sinθ f cosθ W e f sin θ W cosαβ m f cosθ f µsinα A m W cosβ f cosα 3.5 B f A = m f m W A f tanβ µ if f = b,τ and in case of f = t we get B t h = m Z sinθ t cosθ W 4 3 sin θ W mt cosθ t sinαβ B t H = m Z sinθ t cosθ W 4 3 sin θ W B t A = mt m W A t cotβ µ µsinα A m W sinβ tcosα mtcosθ t cosαβ µcosα A m W sinβ tsinα 3.6 The couplings t i - b j -H are given by C H t i bj = C H bi t j T = mw R t m b tanβ m t cotβ m W sinβ m ba b tanβ µ m t A t cotβ µ m b m t /sinβ R b 3.7 and the couplings τ i - ν τ -H are given by C H τ i ν τ = mw R τ m τ tanβ m W sinβ m τ A τ tanβ µ The W - χ j - χ k couplings read: 3.8 O L kj = V j sinβn k3 cosβn k4 V j sinθ W N k cosθ W N k 3.9 O R kj = U j cosβn k3 sinβn k4 U j sinθ W N k cosθ W N k 3.

21 CHAPTER 3. DECAY WIDTHS 5 The H - χ j - χ k couplings are given by: [ Q L kj = cosβ V j cosβn k4 sinβn k3 V ] j sinθ W N k cosθ W sinθ W tanθ W N k [ Q R kj = sinβ U j cosβn k3 sinβn k4 U ] j sinθ W N k cosθ W sinθ W tanθ W N k Two body decays The decay widths for the electroweak two body decays of the sfermions f i are given by f i denotes t,, b,, τ, or ν τ : Γ f i f χ k = g λ m fi,m f,m χ k 6πm 3 fi [ ] a f ik b f ik m fi m f 4a f m χ b f ik ik m fm χ k k 3.3 g λ m fi,m Γ f i f χ ± k = f,m χ ± k 6πm 3 fi [ k f ik l f ik m fi m f m χ ± k ] 4k f ik l f ik m f m χ ± k 3.4 Γ f i W ± f j = g A W fi f j λ 3 m fi,m W,m m f j 6πm Wm 3 fi 3.5 Γ f i H ± f g C H fi λm fi,m j = f H,m f j j 3.6 6πm 3 fi Γ f Z f = g sin θ fλ 3 m f,m Z,m f 56πm Wm 3 f 3.7 Γ f H f = g B f H λ m f,m H,m f 6πm 3 f 3.8

22 CHAPTER 3. DECAY WIDTHS 6 with λx,y,z = x y z xy xz yz. In Eq. 3.8 H denotes h, H or A. Squarks can also decay into a gluino and a quark: Γ q g q = α sλ m q,m g,m q 3m 3 q m q m g m q sinθ qm g m q 3.9 Γ q g q = α sλ m q,m g,m q 3m 3 q m q m g m q sinθ qm g m q 3.4 Three Body Decays of the Light Stop The Decay of the Light Stop into a W-Boson, a Bottom Quark and the Lightest Neutralino In Fig. 3. we show the Feynman diagrams for the decay t W b χ. The matrix element for this decay is given by: T fi = g A W t p t µ p bi bi ūp b [ ] b b p bi m bi i P L a b i P R vp χ ǫ µ p W im bi Γ bi g g i= i= ūp b [ ] ± p χ i l t i P R k t i P L p χ ± i m χ ± i m χ ± i ± ± im χ i Γ χ i [ O L i P L O R i P R ] γ µ vp χ ǫ µ p W ūp b γ µ p t m [ ] t P L b t p t m t im t Γ P L a t P R vp χ ǫ µ p W 3.3 t The decay width is given by Γ t W b χ = = α 6πm 3 t sin 4 θ W m t m W m b m χ ds F χ χ F χ t F χ b F tt F t b F b b. 3.3 The explicit expressions for the F ij is given are Appendix A.

23 CHAPTER 3. DECAY WIDTHS 7 W b t b, χ b t W χ, χ t χ t W b Fig. 3.: Feynman diagrams for the decay t W b χ. The arrow of a fermionic line defines a fermion flow and is not necessarily identical with the momentum flow used in our calculations.

24 CHAPTER 3. DECAY WIDTHS The Decay of the Light Stop into a charged Higgs Boson, a Bottom Quark and the Lightest Neutralino In Fig. 3. we show the Feynman diagrams for the decay t H b χ. The matrix element for this decay is given by: ūp T fi = g C H t b [ ] b b i P L a b i P R vp χ bi p bi m bi im bi Γ bi i= ūp g b [ ] l t i P R k t i P L [ p χ ± ± i m χ ] [ ] Q L i i P L Q R i P R vp χ i= p χ m χ ± ± ± ± im χ i i i Γ χ i g ūp b [m b tanβp L m t cotβp R ][ p t m t ] [ ] b t P L a t P R vp χ mw p t m t im t Γ t 3.33 The decay width is given by Γ t H b χ = α = 6πm 3 t sin 4 θ W m t m H ± m b m χ ds G χ χ G χ t G χ b G tt G t b G b b 3.34 The explicit expressions for the G ij are given in Appendix A The Decay of the Light Stop into a Bottom Quark, a Slepton and a Lepton Here we have the following possibilities: t b ν e e, b ν µ µ t bẽ L ν e, b µ L ν µ t b ν τ τ t b τ, ν τ

25 CHAPTER 3. DECAY WIDTHS 9 H t b b, χ b H t χ, χ t χ t H b Fig. 3.: Feynman diagrams for the decay t H b χ. The arrow of a fermionic line defines a fermion flow and is not necessarily identical with the momentum flow used in our calculations.

26 CHAPTER 3. DECAY WIDTHS Note, that the decays into ẽ R and µ R are negligible because the couplings to the charginos are proportional to m e /m W and µ/m W respectively. In the case of decays into sneutrinos and leptons the matrix elements have the generic form: T fi = g i= ūp b [ l t i P R k t i P L ][ p χ ± i p χ ± i m χ ± i m χ ± i ] [ l f ki P R k f ki P L ± ± im χ i Γ χ i ] vp f, 3.35 whereas for the decays into sleptons and neutrinos we get: ūp b [ ] l t i P R k t i P L ][ p χ [ ] ± ± T fi = g i m χ l f ki P L vp f i, ± ± i= im χ i Γ χ i p χ ± i m χ ± i 3.36 In both cases the decay width is given by Γ t b ll = α m t m b 3 5 = 6πm 3 t sin 4 ds W θ ls l c ij s j 4 D i s 3.37 W m l m l i= j= with D, s = 3.38 s m χ m χ Γ χ ± ± ±,,, D 3 s = Re s m χ ± im χ ± Γ χ ± s m χ ± im χ ± Γ χ ± The explicit expressions for the W l l and c ij are given in Appendix A The Decay of the light Stop into a Charmquark and a Neutralino For completeness we will also rewrite the results of [5] for the two body decay t c χ. They found that the decay is dominated by top charm squark mixing, which is induced at one loop level. In the limit m c only the left charm squark contributes to this mixing. In the basis of Eq..35 the respective t t c L

27 CHAPTER 3. DECAY WIDTHS mixing matrix is given by M t t c L = m t L cosθ t R sinθ t m t L sinθ t R cosθ t Lcosθ t Rsinθ t Lsinθ t Rcosθ t m c L L R are t L c L t R c L mixing terms with L = g M 6π ln X m W 3.4 K tb K cb m b m W cos β M Q M D M H A b 3.4 R = g M 6π ln X K tb K cb m b m W m W cos β m ta b 3.4 where M X is a high scale which we assume to be the Planck mass to get a maximal mixing. M Q, M D and M H are soft SUSY breaking squark and Higgs mass terms and K tb and K cb are the respective elements of the CKM matrix. One gets Eq. 3.4 and 3.4 as one step solutions in lnm P/M W of the renormalization group equation in the framework of supergravity theories. Note, that one shouldstayaway froma b = because inthiscase higher orderterms inlnm P /M W become important for R. Note, also that in this approximation M D, M Q and M H can be evaluated at any scale because the induced error is of higher order. Therefore, the expressions should be treated as rough estimates giving the order of magnitude for the mixing. For that reason we will use the formula for the decay width in Eq mainly as a check if this decay clearly dominates or if it is negligible. In the following ǫ gives the size of the charm squark component of the lighter stop, which we calculated numerically. Therefore, in this decay mode the charmsquark component of the lighter stop couples with the charm quark and the LSP χ and the width is given by Γ t c χ = g 6π ǫ f c L m t m χ m t 3.43 where fl c = ft L as given in Eq. 3.. Before discussing our results in detail we give the conditions leading to a large ǫ: i m t and m cl have almost the same size, ii tanβ becomes large cosβ small which will enhance L and R iii tanθ t L / R which will maximize the M 3 and M 3 components of the mixing matrix M t t c L Eq. 3.4 and iv the parameters M D, M Q, M H and A b entering L and R are big.

28 Chapter 4 Numerical results for LEP 4. Light Stop The total cross sections for the process e e t t at s = GeV are shown in Fig. 4. asafunction of cosθ t for several mass values of t. Here ISR- and SUSY-QCD-corrections are included [5, 53]. For completeness the formulae are given in Appendix C. The main corrections are due to ISR- and gluonicqcd-corrections[54]. Form t = 8GeVthecrosssectionreaches.4pb. Therefore, one can expect 6 to 3 t t events assuming an integrated luminosity of 3 pb. Moreover, the cross section shows a clear dependence on the mixing angle for m t < 8 GeV and cosθ t >.6. In this region cross section measurements should therefore allow to determine the stop mixing angle once m t is known. Assuming m t < m l, ν the main decay modes are t c χ and t b χ. As σ [pb] cosθ t Fig. 4.: Total cross section for e e t t in pb at s = GeV as a function of cosθ t for t masses 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 GeV. ISR- and QCD-corrections are included. already mentioned in Chapter 3 the first decay is a FCNC decay occurring at one loop level whereas the second one occurs at tree level. Therefore, t b χ dominates with practically % branching ratio if it is kinematically allowed. As χ further decays into χ l ν l or χ q q the signature is two acoplanar b jets accompanied

29 CHAPTER 4. NUMERICAL RESULTS FOR LEP 3 a M [GeV] 3 b M [GeV] 3 5 m t < m χ m t < m χ 5 m t < m χ m t < m χ 5 5 a c b a c b 5 5 a b c a c b -4-4 µ [GeV] -4-4 µ [GeV] Fig. 4.: Kinematically allowed parameter domains in the M, µ plane for m t = 9 GeV, a tanβ =.5 and b tanβ = 4 for the decays: a t c χ, b t c χ, c t b χ. The dark grey area is excluded by LEP and the bright grey area is excluded by LEP.5 s = 7 GeV, m νe = 9 GeV. by two charged leptons large missing energy E/, or a single charged lepton jets E/, or jets E/. Here b tagging techniques can be used to extract the signal. Moreover, in this case it is most likely that χ will be observed first and its decay properties can be used for identifying t. If m t < m b m χ the decay t c χ has practically % branching ratio. The signature is then two acoplanar jets E/. Generally, in this case the invisibly energy will be larger than in the case of t b χ. In Fig. 4. a b we show the domains of the stop decay modes in the M,µ plane for m t = 9GeV and tanβ =.5 4. Note, that there is a small strip where the decay t c χ is also possible. If the lifetime of t is longer than the typical hadronization time of O 3 s, i.e. Γ t <. GeV, it will first hadronize into a colourless t q or t qq bound state before decaying. The process of t fragmentation was discussed in detail in [55]. Fast moving stops first radiate off gluons at small angles. This process can be treated perturbatively. After that the non-perturbative hadronization phase follows leading to t q and t qq hadrons. If the velocity β t is / the energy loss of the stop due to gluon radiation and due to hadronization is of comparable size. Near the threshold, the gluon emission is suppressed by β 4 t. Hadronization is generally expected in case of t c χ, t bl ν l and t bν l since these decays involve the electroweak coupling twice see Fig However, also in case of t b χ this can happen as illustrated in Fig. 4.3 and 4.4.

30 CHAPTER 4. NUMERICAL RESULTS FOR LEP 4 Scenario µ M tanβ m χ m χ m χ ± m χ ± pt pt pt pt pt pt pt pt pt pt Table 4.: Parameters used in the the different scenarios for LEP. In addition, we give the respective values for the masses in GeV of the two lighter neutralinos and the charginos. The other parameters are given in the text. Γ t [GeV] cosθ t Fig. 4.3: Total decay width of the light stop as a function of cosθ t for the scenarios pt solid line, pt dashed line, pt3 dashed dotted line and pt4 long dashed line of Tab. 4.. tanβ =.5 Γ t [GeV] cosθ t Fig. 4.4: Total decay width of the light stop as a function of cosθ t for the scenarios pt5 solid line, pt6 dashed line, pt7 dashed dotted line and pt8 long dashed line of Tab. 4.. tanβ = 4

31 CHAPTER 4. NUMERICAL RESULTS FOR LEP 5 In Fig we show the width of t b χ as a function of cosθ t for m t = 9GeV, m χ 8GeV,tanβ =.54, andfourdifferent setsofm andµasgiven intab.4.. Inadditionwepresenttherethemassesofthetwolighterneutralinosand of both charginos. In case of pt pt5 the chargino is mainly gaugino-like M µ, in case of pt3 pt7 the chargino is mainly higgsino-like M µ, whereas in the other cases we have a strongly mixed chargino M µ. In the last case we have taken two different points in the M,µ plane with a different sign for µ. For small tanβ and gaugino-like charginos pt in Fig. 4.3 the t b χ interaction is dominated by V cosθ t. The deviation of the decay width from the cos θ t shape is due to constructive and destructive interference with the term proportional to the top Yukawa coupling Y t V sinθ t which becomes especially important for t t R and increases with decreasing µ. In the case of pt3 this part of the coupling leads to a sin θ t shape. If the gaugino- and higgsino-components of the chargino are of comparable size pt and pt4 a more complicated interplay of the gaugino and higgsino couplings give rise to an intricate dependence on the mixing angle and a large asymmetry in the sign of µ. In Fig. 4.4 we show the total decay widths for the large tanβ =4 scenarios pt5, pt6, pt7 and pt8 of Tab. 4.. Here the term Y b U cosθ t becomes important if the chargino has a sizable higgsino-component. This leads to an enhancement of the decay width and to a shift of the maxima compared to the case tanβ =.5 Fig Let us now turn to the case that three body decays of t into sleptons are kinematically possible and that m χ > m t. In this case the decay chain will be either t bl ν l bl ν l χ or t bν l l, bl ν l χ. These decays compete with the decay t c χ. The signature is b jets charged leptons E/ or b jet c jet charged lepton E/ or c jets E/. If the three body decays dominate, one may ask if there is a chance to distinguish between the different sleptons. It should be no problem to identify the generation by identifying the nature of the charged lepton. To answer the question whether the final state occurs through sneutrinos and/or charged sleptons requires most likely the study of the angular distribution of the b-jets, the lepton and the angle between the jet and the lepton. In the following examples we will assume that the parameters MẼ and M L are the same for every generation. For small tanβ this is justified by RGE studies. The modifications for a high tan β scenario will be discussed later. Before going into detail we want to remark that: i The charged sleptons are expected to be heavier than the sneutrinos because of the D-term contributions. Therefore, the discovery of those decay modes is not only an evidence for a light stop but at the same time most likely the first evidence of light sneutrinos. The sneutrino decays invisibly into ν l χ. Therefore, it is difficult to detect. ii Even for small tanβ the influence of the τ Yukawa coupling and stau mixing can lead to sizable effects. iii In case that the

32 CHAPTER 4. NUMERICAL RESULTS FOR LEP 6 a BR t b BR t cosθ t cosθ t Fig. 4.5: Branching ratios for stop decays into sleptons for the scenarios pt9 a and pt b of Tab. 4.. The other parameters are given in the text. The curves correspond to the following decays: t bν τ τ, t be ν e bµ ν µ, and t bτ ν τ. chargino is mainly higgsino-like there is only a small mass difference between the chargino and the lightest neutralino. Therefore, the charged particles will most likely have too little energy to pass the experimental cuts [56]. We will therefore discuss examples where the lighter chargino is either mainly a gaugino pt9 of Tab. 4. or where it is highly mixed pt of Tab. 4.. iv The existence of this decay and the fact that the stop should be heavier than the lightest neutralino implies an upper bound on the lighter chargino which is approximately given by < m χ m t. Here it is assumed that χ is the LSP and that the GUT relation.4 between the gaugino masses M and M is valid. In Fig. 4.5 we show the branching ratios for the three body decays for the scenarios pt9 and pt of Tab. 4. and for m t = 8 GeV. Both cases are low tanβ scenarios tan β =.5. We have used the following flavor independent parameters in the slepton sector: MẼ = 59.8 GeV, M L = 7. GeV and A τ = 5 GeV 774.5GeV in case of scenario pt9 pt. They lead to the following physical quantities: m νi = 6 GeV i = e,µ,τ, mẽl = 77.9 GeV, mẽr = 65.7 GeV, m τ = 58.4, m τ = 83.5 and cosθ τ =.5. Therefore, the decays into all sneutrinos and the lighter stau arepossible. Note, that also thedecays into ẽ R and µ R are kinematically allowed. However, as already mentioned in Chapter 3, these decays are negligible because the coupling of χ i -ẽ R -ν e χ i - µ R -ν µ is proportional m e m µ. We expect that the numbers of produced electrons and muons are nearly equal and that they are smaller than the number of produced τ leptons.

33 CHAPTER 4. NUMERICAL RESULTS FOR LEP 7 Γ t [GeV] cosθ t Fig. 4.6: Total decay widths of a light stopforthescenarios pt9fulllineandpt dashedline asgiven intab.4.. Theother parameters are given in the text. BR t bν τ τ cosθ t Fig. 4.7: Branching ratio for the decay t bν τ τ as a function of cosθ t for M = 75 GeV, µ = 5 GeV and tanβ =.5 pt9 of Tab. 4.. The masses of the sleptons are: m νi = 6 GeV i = e,µ,τ, m τ = 58.4 and cosθ τ = long dashed line,.4 short long dashed line,.39 short dashed line,.5 full line and.68 middle long dashed line. The other parameters are given in the text. In Fig. 4.5a the situation for scenario pt9 is shown. The decays into sneutrinos dominate over the decays into τ except in the region < cosθ t <.5. This behaviour can be understood by combining the following facts: i The sleptons couple mainly to χ because tanβ is small. ii cosθ τ =.5 and therefore τ τ R. iii The t - χ,-b couplings are dominated by l t,. iv Near cosθ t =.5 the coupling l t vanishes whereas l t is near its maximum. Therefore, the exchange of the heavier chargino becomes important. Note, that χ couples stronger to τ than to ν τ in this example. Moreover, the interference terms have opposite signs: in case of the stau sneutrino it is positive negative for cosθ t <.5 and negative positive for cosθ t >.5. Let us now turn to scenario pt where we have two main differences compared to the above example: i the heavier chargino has rather large gaugino components U =.997 and V =.65. ii The mass difference between the charginos is much smaller compared to the previous example see Tab. 4.. The decay into the stau proceeds mainly through χ ± exchange whereas the decays into the sneutrinos

34 CHAPTER 4. NUMERICAL RESULTS FOR LEP 8 proceed mainly through χ exchange. Looking at the t - χ,-b couplings one sees that l t < l t l t > l t if cosθ t <. cosθ t >.. l t l t vanishes near cosθ t =.8 cosθ t =.8. Moreover, the interference term is negative for all decay modes if cosθ t <.8. The combination of all facts leads to the pronounced maximum of BR t bν τ τ near cosθ t =.7. Because of the large asymmetry it should be possible to determine the sign of cosθ t if BR t bν τ τ can be measured. In Fig. 4.6 we show the total decay width for both examples. One can easily see that the decay width has a minimum near the above mentioned cosθ t values where l t vanishes. In case of scenario pt9 pt the decay width varies over orders of magnitude. This difference in the order is due to the different mass of the heavier chargino. In both cases the stop will hadronize before decaying. The branching ratios depend not only on the kinematics but also on the stau mixing angle. To get a feeling for this dependence let us first look at the possible range for cosθ τ. As can be seen from the formulae given in Appendix B we can fix µ and tanβ, vary A τ and calculate cosθ τ. Keeping m τ and m ντ fixed one can first calculate m τ see Eq. B. and then MẼ Eq. B. to get a feeling if the parameters are reasonable. One gets.39 > cosθ τ >.68, 77.9 GeV < m τ < 9. GeV and 64.3 GeV < MẼ < 79.9 GeV if A τ is varied between TeV and TeVinscenario pt9. InFig.4.7weshow thebranching ratioforthedecayinto a stau for the following A τ, MẼ, cosθ τ, m τ sets: -, 55.97,.39, 8.8, -375, 5.69,, 77.9,, 53.7, -.4, 78.9, 5, 59.8, -.5, 83.5 and, 7.4, -.68, 9.. The masses are given in GeV. A large ratio A τ /MẼ implies the possible danger of a charge breaking minimum. However, to our knowledge there is no sufficient way to treat this problem. Therefore, we will leave it aside for the moment. For a discussion of this topic see e.g. [57] and references therein. One can easily see that the importance of the decay t bν τ τ grows with cosθ τ because this implies a stronger coupling to the lighter chargino. We have checked that the dependence on cosθ τ is similar in scenario pt. An interesting detail is that even for cosθ τ = there is small range of cosθ t where BR t bν τ τ is of O. because of the Yukawa coupling to the heavier chargino. In the case that a large tanβ scenario is realized in nature, it is expected that the lighter stau is the lightest slepton. In the energy range of LEP the most likely scenario would be that the stau is lighter than the stop and the stop lighter than the other sleptons. This can be seen in the following way: let us first assume MẼ = M L for simplicity. The mass of the lighter stau is then given by: m τ = M L m τ 4 m Z cosβ 4 m4 Z cos β/ sinθ W m τ µtanβ M L m τ 4 m Z cosβ m τ µ tanβ. 4. The last relation holds because / sinθ W.4. The mass of the tau sneutrino