- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review D

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Lepton flavor-violating transitions in effective field theory and gluonic operators

Alexey A. Petrov1,2 and Dmitry V. Zhuridov1

  • 1Department of Physics and Astronomy, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan 48201, USA
  • 2Michigan Center for Theoretical Physics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, USA

PDF

Phys. Rev. D 89, 033005 – Published 10 February, 2014

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.89.033005

Abstract

Lepton flavor-violating processes offer interesting possibilities to probe new physics at multi-TeV scale. We discuss those in the framework of effective field theory, emphasizing the role of gluonic operators. Those operators are obtained by integrating out heavy quarks that are kinematically inaccessible at the scale where low-energy experiments take place and make those experiments sensitive to the couplings of lepton flavor-changing neutral currents to heavy quarks. We discuss constraints on the Wilson coefficients of those operators from the muon conversion μ−+(A,Z)→e−+(A,Z) and from lepton flavor-violating tau decays with one or two hadrons in the final state, e.g., τ→ℓη(′) and τ→ℓπ+π− with ℓ=μ,e. To illustrate the results we discuss explicit examples of constraining parameters of leptoquark models.

View figure in article

Article Text

References (41)

  1. See, e.g., W. J. Marciano and A. I. Sanda, Phys. Lett. 67B, 303 (1977).
  2. J. D. Vergados, Phys. Rep. 133, 1 (1986).
  3. V. Cirigliano, R. Kitano, Y. Okada, and P. Tuzon, Phys. Rev. D 80, 013002 (2009).
  4. A good example of this approach can be seen in a discussion of charm mixing, see, e.g., E. Golowich, J. Hewett, S. Pakvasa, and A. A. Petrov, Phys. Rev. D 76, 095009 (2007).
  5. For a similar approach to generate lepton flavor-violating transitions with photons in the final state, see, e.g., M. Raidal and A. Santamaria, Phys. Lett. B 421, 250 (1998); K. J. Healey, A. A. Petrov, and D. Zhuridov, Phys. Rev. D 87, 117301 (2013).

  6. For example, a Q1 operator would result from an operator of the form (ℓ¯1RHL2L)(q¯RHQL) (where L2L and QL are the electroweak doublets of leptons and quarks, correspondingly). This is a dimension-eight operator that is suppressed by two powers of the NP scale and two powers of the scale v associated with electroweak symmetry breaking.

  7. T. P. Cheng and M. Sher, Phys. Rev. D 35, 3484 (1987).
  8. W.-j. Li, Y.-d. Yang, and X.-d. Zhang, Phys. Rev. D 73, 073005 (2006).
  9. For lepton flavor-conserving operators a similar approach is followed in H. Potter and G. Valencia, Phys. Lett. B 713, 95 (2012). In that paper the scale Λ denotes a combination of a new physics scale, electroweak scale, and scales associates with heavy quark masses.
  10. M. E. Peskin and D. V. Schroeder, An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory Reading (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1995), p. 842; R. N. Cahn, Report No. LBL-29789.
  11. T. G. Rizzo, Phys. Rev. D 22, 178 (1980); 22, 1824(E) (1980).
  12. W. J. Marciano and A. I. Sanda, Phys. Rev. Lett. 38, 1512 (1977).
  13. O. U. Shanker, Phys. Rev. D 20, 1608 (1979).
  14. J. Bernabeu, E. Nardi, and D. Tommasini, Nucl. Phys. B409, 69 (1993).
  15. T. S. Kosmas, G. K. Leontaris, and J. D. Vergados, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 33, 397 (1994).
  16. R. Barbieri and L. J. Hall, Phys. Lett. B 338, 212 (1994).
  17. R. Barbieri, L. J. Hall, and A. Strumia, Nucl. Phys. B445, 219 (1995).
  18. For a recent review, see, for example, A. Czarnecki, W. J. Marciano, and K. Melnikov, AIP Conf. Proc. 435, 409 (1998).
  19. W. H. Bertl et al. (SINDRUM II Collaboration), Eur. Phys. J. C 47, 337 (2006).
  20. R. Kitano, M. Koike, and Y. Okada, Phys. Rev. D 66, 096002 (2002); 76, 059902 (2007).
  21. T. S. Kosmas, S. Kovalenko, and I. Schmidt, Phys. Lett. B 511, 203 (2001).
  22. M. A. Shifman, A. I. Vainshtein, and V. I. Zakharov, Phys. Lett. 78B, 443 (1978).
  23. H.-Y. Cheng and C.-W. Chiang, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2012) 009.
  24. H. De Vries, C. W. De Jager, and C. De Vries, At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 36, 495 (1987).
  25. G. Fricke, C. Bernhardt, K. Heilig, L. A. Schaller, L. Schellenberg, E. B. Shera, and C. W. Dejager, At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 60, 177 (1995).
  26. T. Suzuki, D. F. Measday, and J. P. Roalsvig, Phys. Rev. C 35, 2212 (1987).
  27. R. Harnik, J. Kopp, and J. Zupan, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2013) 026.
  28. C. Dohmen et al. (SINDRUM II Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 317, 631 (1993).
  29. T. S. Kosmas, A. Faessler, F. Simkovic, and J. D. Vergados, Phys. Rev. C 56, 526 (1997).
  30. D. Black, T. Han, H.-J. He, and M. Sher, Phys. Rev. D 66, 053002 (2002).
  31. C.-H. Chen and C.-Q. Geng, Phys. Rev. D 74, 035010 (2006).
  32. For more elaborate studies of hadronic effects, see J. T. Daub, H. K. Dreiner, C. Hanhart, B. Kubis, and U. G. Meissner, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2013) 179.
  33. M. B. Voloshin, Yad. Fiz. 44, 738 (1986) [Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 44, 478 (1986)].
  34. T. Feldmann, P. Kroll, and B. Stech, Phys. Rev. D 58, 114006 (1998).
  35. M. Beneke and M. Neubert, Nucl. Phys. B651, 225 (2003).
  36. A. A. Petrov, Phys. Rev. D 58, 054004 (1998).
  37. J. Beringer et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 86, 010001 (2012); see, also, Y. Amhis et al. (Heavy Flavor Averaging Group Collaboration), arXiv:1207.1158; Y. Miyazaki et al. (Belle Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 719, 346 (2013).
  38. W. Buchmuller, R. Ruckl, and D. Wyler, Phys. Lett. B 191, 442 (1987); 448, 320(E) (1999).
  39. S. Davidson, D. C. Bailey, and B. A. Campbell, Z. Phys. C 61, 613 (1994).
  40. M. Gonderinger and M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2010) 045; 05 (2012) 047(E).
  41. E. Gabrielli, Phys. Rev. D 62, 055009 (2000).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 89, 033005– Published 10 February, 2014
  • Received 17 September 2013

© 2014 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation