Radiative Corrections pp 245-270 | Cite as

# Radiative Corrections — An Experimentalist’s View

Chapter

## Abstract

This paper reviews our current understanding of the effects of radiative corrections on the experimental measurements which will be made at the SLC and at LEP. It discusses how the shape of the Z^{0} resonance is modified by initial state radiation, and considers how the Z^{0} self energy corrections allow a probe of physics above the Z^{0} mass scale. In particular, the sensitivity to the top quark mass of the various asymmetry measurements which may be made at the Z^{0} pole is discussed.

## Keywords

Higgs Mass Radiative Correction Initial State Radiation Asymmetry Measurement Electroweak Radiative Correction
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

## References

- 1.When the top mass is measured we could instead adjust the Higgs mass or the Higgs structure of the model.Google Scholar
- 2.This interpretation assumes that no unknown particles are contributing to the running.Google Scholar
- 3.“A Precision Measurement of the Mass and Width of the Z
^{0}Resonance at the Fermilab Tevatron”,CDF Collaboration, PRL63, 720(1989); “Measurements of Z^{0}Boson Resonance Parameters in e^{+}e^{-}Annihilation”, M2 Collaboration, PRL63, 2173(1989); “Determination of the Number of Light Neutrino Species”, ALEPH Collaboration, CERN-EP/89–132; “Measurement of the Mass and Width of the Z^{0}Particle from Multihadronic Final States Produced in e+e^{-}Annihilations”, DELPHI Collaboration,CERN-EP/89–134; “A Determination of the Properties of the Neutral Intermediate Vector Boson Z^{0}”, L3 collaboration, L3 preprint/001; “Measurement of the Z^{0}Mass and Width with the OPAL detector at LEP”, OPAL collaboration, CERN-EP/89–133.Google Scholar - 4.The
*β*parameter can be traced back to a paper by M.Greco in PL 56B,367 (1975). The value of the parameter at the low energies the calculations were then being applied at was 0.007, and since the James Bond movies were popular the name*β*was chosen.Google Scholar - 5.Detailed formulae describing these effects can be found in R.N. Cahn, “Analytic forms for the e
^{+}e^{-}annihilation cross-section near the Z^{0}including initial state radiation”, Phys.Rev. D36:2666,1987.ADSGoogle Scholar - 5a.Another useful treatment can be found in D.Y. Bardin et al,” Energy dependent width effects in Z
^{0}line shape”, Phys.Lett. B206:539,1988. An apparent disagreement as to the size of the energy dependent width effect between these two treatments can be traced to a difference in the form they assume for the Breit-Wigner when the width is constant. See also the “Z line Shape” by D.Y. Bardin et al. in the second CERN yellow report on LEP Z^{0}physics, this contains an exhaustive list of references.ADSGoogle Scholar - 6.For more details see W.Beenakker et al, “Rules of thumb for the Z
^{0}line shape”, University of Leiden preprint, October 1989.Google Scholar - 7.One may or may not be free to choose all three of these variables. Various assumptions may be made which allow the width and/or the cross-section to be calculated within the framework of the Standard Model.Google Scholar
- 8.J.E. Campagne and R.Zitoun, University of Paris preprint LPNHE-88.08.Google Scholar
- 9.D.C. Kennedy at al, SLAC-PUB-4128(1988).Google Scholar
- 10.S.Jadach and B.F.L. Ward, Comp.Phys.Commun.,1989,in press.Google Scholar
- 11.G. Bonvicinni and L.Trentadue, preprint UM-HE-88–36.Google Scholar
- 12.See G. Burgers contribution to Polarization at LEP, CERN 88–06.Google Scholar
- 13.For example his contributions to the Rinberg Workshop on Electroweak Radiative Corrections, and his contribution to the second CERN yellow report on LEP physics.Google Scholar
- 14.As of July 1989 the differences between the different libraries of routines to calculate electroweak corrections (Hollik, Stuart) were being resolved, and a standard library was coming into existence. A note of caution should however be sounded: agreement over results when particular terms are included is not the same as including the effects of all diagrams which contribute.Google Scholar
- 15.R. Kleiss, Status report on Electroweak Monte Carloes, Proceedings of the Rinberg conference on Electroweak Radiative Corrections and compare to the latest LEP status report.Google Scholar
- 16.B.F.L. Ward, private communication.Google Scholar
- 17.Further experiments at low energies could reduce this error significantly.Google Scholar
- 18.H.Burkhart et al, in Polarization at LEP, vol 1 (p 145–157).Google Scholar
- 19.J. Kuhn, proceedings of the Rinberg Conference on Electroweak Radiative Corrections and this conference.Google Scholar
- 20.Recent discussions (September 1989) on the status of Bhabha Monte Carloes with Bennie Ward suggest that these effects are now understood at the 1% level.Google Scholar
- 21.D.R. Yennie, S.C. Frautschi and H. Suura, Annals of Phys. 13(1961)369.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.S. Jadach and B.F.L. Ward,” Exclusive exponentiation in the Monte Carlo Yennie, Frautschi, and Suura approach”,TPJU 19/89, UTHEP 89–0703.Google Scholar
- 23.This approach, due to Jadach and Ward is based on YFS theory, (see article to appear in Phys.Rev.D40, Dec. 1st issue,1989) the program philosophy is the same as that of KORALZ3.Google Scholar
- 24.G. D’Agostini et al, “Determination of
*α*_{s}and the Z Mass from measurements of the Total Hadronic Cross-Section”, Desy 89–057.Google Scholar - 25.D. Y. Bardin et al, “Z line shape”, contribution to the second CERN yellow report on LEP100 Z physics.Google Scholar
- 26.P. Langacker,” The implications of recent M
_{z}, M_{w}and neutral current measurements for the top quark mass”, UPR-0400T, September 1989.Google Scholar - 27.When the W mass is much better measured we can use it to predict the top mass, or vice versa. The current uncertainty in the W mass is too large for interesting limits on the top mass to be obtained.Google Scholar
- 28.This comparison, and that of table 5 uses the versions of code supplied by W.Hollik and B.Lynn to the author. They do not rely on previously published values. The small difference can be attributed to slightly different treatments by the two authors of b/t quark effects.Google Scholar
- 29.There was some discussion at the conference about the gauge invariance of some of the running coupling schemes, in particular the sin
^{2}_{*}θ scheme. The problems raised with the original formulation of this scheme (D. Kennedy and B. W. Lynn, Nucl. Phys. B322:l,1989.) have been addressed by Lynn in SU-ITP-867 (Aug 1989) which has been submitted to Phys.Lett. Similar calculations have been developed by W. Hollik, the interested reader is recommended to read his DESY report 88–188, for a complete discussion of this issue.Google Scholar - 30.Sin
^{2}θ_{w}is decreased by a similar amount. The direction of the change is different than one might expect because increasing the Z^{0}mass by 45 MeV/c^{2}corresponds to an increase of 50 MeV/c^{2}in the W mass if everything else is kept fixed.Google Scholar - 31.Increasing the Higgs mass to 1000 GeV would raise sin
^{2}_{*}*θ*. Calculations give 0.0236, but they are unreliable for such a high Higgs mass.Google Scholar - 32.D. Y. Bardin et al; contribution to the second CERN yellow report on LEP100 physics.Google Scholar
- 33.For the current (September 1989) status of these programs see D. Bardin et al,” On Some New Analytic Calculations for the Process e
^{+}e^{-}→ ff̿ + (nγ)”, CERN-TH.5434/89.Google Scholar - 34.J. Drees, Proceedings of the Rinberg Conference on Electroweak radiative corrections.Google Scholar
- 35.B.W. Lynn, “High Precision Tests of Electroweak Physics on the Z
^{0}resonance”, contribution to report on CERN yellow report on Polarization at LEP.Google Scholar

## Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1990