- Access by Xinjiang University
Method for renormalization group equation analysis and its application
Phys. Rev. D 50, 2071 – Published 1 August, 1994
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.50.2071
Abstract
We develop a general method for analyzing the renormalization group equations (RGE’s) to one-loop and two-loop order in grand unified theories (GUT’s) which can have an arbitrary number of symmetry-breaking scales and/or mass scales. The method is more efficient, convenient, and accurate than the current method for determining the ranges of symmetry-breaking scales and/or mass scales, as well as the ranges of unified gauge couplings. It does not involve the usual numerical integration of the RGE’s at all, but in fact solves the RGE’s analytically by a perturbative approach. The results are presented graphically and analyzed using simple geometrical considerations. We apply the method to two-step symmetry-breaking chains of SO(10) GUT’s and compare the results with those obtained by numerical integration. We discover that the numerical method itself often introduces errors which are comparable with two-loop corrections. Our method avoids these. We also apply our method to two-step symmetry-breaking chains of supersymmetric SO(10) GUT’s.
References (21)
- See, for example, Michael E. Fisher, Scaling, Universality, and Renormalization Group Theory (University of Maryland Department of Physics Printshop, College Park, MD, 1993), and references therein.
- D. J. Gross and F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 30, 1343 (1973); H. D. Politzer, ibid. 30, 1346 (1973).
- H. Georgi, H. Quinn and S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 33, 451 (1974).
- See, for example, G. G. Ross, Grand Unified Theories (Benjamin/Cummings, Menlo Park, CA, 1985); Rabindra N. Mohapatra, Unification and Supersymmetry, 2nd ed. (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1992), and references therein.
- For a recent review, see A. D. Dolgov, Phys. Rep. 222, 309 (1992), and references therein.
- J. C. Pati and A. Salam, Phys. Rev. D 10, 275 (1974); R. N. Mohapatra and J. C. Pati, ibid. 11, 566 (1975); ibid. 11, 2558 (1975); G. Senjanovic and R. N. Mohapatra, ibid. 12, 1502 (1975).
- See, for example, J. C. Butcher, The numerical analysis of ordinary differential equations: Runge-Kutta and general linear methods (Wiley-Interscience, New York, 1987), and references therein.
- D. R. T. Jones, Phys. Rev. D 25, 581 (1982).
- D. Chang, R. N. Mohapatra, J. M. Gipson, R. E. Marshak and M. K. Parida, Phys. Rev. D 31, 1718 (1985).
- S. Wolfram, Mathmatica: A System for Doing Mathematics by Computers (Addison-Wesley, Redwood City, CA, 1988, 1991).
- L. Hall, Nucl. Phys. B178, 75 (1981).
- N. G. Deshpande, E. Keith and P. B. Pal, Phys. Rev. D 46, 2261 (1992).
- P. Langacker and N. Polonsky, Phys. Rev. D 47, 4028 (1993), and references therein.
- N. G. Deshpande, E. Keith and P. B. Pal, Phys. Rev. D 47, 2892 (1993).
- N. G. Deshpande, E. Keith and T. G. Rizzo, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 3189 (1993).
- S. L. Adler, Phys. Rev. 177, 2426 (1969); J. S. Bell and R. Jackiw, Nuovo Cimento 51, 47 (1969).
- L. Lavoura, Phys. Rev. D 48, 2356 (1993). For , the trace of the product of the two U(1) charges over the light particles in the mass spectrum should be zero, in order to avoid a divergent mixing of their gauge fields.
- Dae-Gyu Lee, Phys. Rev. D 49, 1417 (1994).
- See, for recent work on threshold effect of SO(10) GUT's, R. N. Mohapatra and M. K. Parida, Phys. Rev. D 47, 264 (1993).
- The most recent LEP data from the L3 Collaboration [Phys. Rep. 236, 1 (1993)] yield similar contributions, i.e., 0.30, 0.38, and 0.67, respectively.
- Remember that were neglected when the results labeled (iv) in Table I were obtained. For example, when the approximated are introduced in the RGE analysis for the two-step symmetry-breaking chain through , which was considered in Sec. III, the solution will be closer to the result labeled (iv) rather than the result labeled (iv) in case I of the table.