Radiative Corrections — An Experimentalist’s View

  • P. Rankin
Part of the NATO ASI Series book series (NSSB, volume 233)


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 Z0 resonance is modified by initial state radiation, and considers how the Z0 self energy corrections allow a probe of physics above the Z0 mass scale. In particular, the sensitivity to the top quark mass of the various asymmetry measurements which may be made at the Z0 pole is discussed.


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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    When the top mass is measured we could instead adjust the Higgs mass or the Higgs structure of the model.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    This interpretation assumes that no unknown particles are contributing to the running.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    “A Precision Measurement of the Mass and Width of the Z0 Resonance at the Fermilab Tevatron”,CDF Collaboration, PRL63, 720(1989); “Measurements of Z0 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 Z0 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 Z0”, L3 collaboration, L3 preprint/001; “Measurement of the Z0 Mass and Width with the OPAL detector at LEP”, OPAL collaboration, CERN-EP/89–133.Google Scholar
  4. 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. 5.
    Detailed formulae describing these effects can be found in R.N. Cahn, “Analytic forms for the e+e- annihilation cross-section near the Z0 including initial state radiation”, Phys.Rev. D36:2666,1987.ADSGoogle Scholar
  6. 5a.
    Another useful treatment can be found in D.Y. Bardin et al,” Energy dependent width effects in Z0 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 Z0 physics, this contains an exhaustive list of references.ADSGoogle Scholar
  7. 6.
    For more details see W.Beenakker et al, “Rules of thumb for the Z0 line shape”, University of Leiden preprint, October 1989.Google Scholar
  8. 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
  9. 8.
    J.E. Campagne and R.Zitoun, University of Paris preprint LPNHE-88.08.Google Scholar
  10. 9.
    D.C. Kennedy at al, SLAC-PUB-4128(1988).Google Scholar
  11. 10.
    S.Jadach and B.F.L. Ward, Comp.Phys.Commun.,1989,in press.Google Scholar
  12. 11.
    G. Bonvicinni and L.Trentadue, preprint UM-HE-88–36.Google Scholar
  13. 12.
    See G. Burgers contribution to Polarization at LEP, CERN 88–06.Google Scholar
  14. 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
  15. 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
  16. 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
  17. 16.
    B.F.L. Ward, private communication.Google Scholar
  18. 17.
    Further experiments at low energies could reduce this error significantly.Google Scholar
  19. 18.
    H.Burkhart et al, in Polarization at LEP, vol 1 (p 145–157).Google Scholar
  20. 19.
    J. Kuhn, proceedings of the Rinberg Conference on Electroweak Radiative Corrections and this conference.Google Scholar
  21. 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
  22. 21.
    D.R. Yennie, S.C. Frautschi and H. Suura, Annals of Phys. 13(1961)369.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 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
  24. 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
  25. 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
  26. 25.
    D. Y. Bardin et al, “Z line shape”, contribution to the second CERN yellow report on LEP100 Z physics.Google Scholar
  27. 26.
    P. Langacker,” The implications of recent Mz, Mw and neutral current measurements for the top quark mass”, UPR-0400T, September 1989.Google Scholar
  28. 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
  29. 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
  30. 29.
    There was some discussion at the conference about the gauge invariance of some of the running coupling schemes, in particular the sin2 *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
  31. 30.
    Sin2θw is decreased by a similar amount. The direction of the change is different than one might expect because increasing the Z0 mass by 45 MeV/c2 corresponds to an increase of 50 MeV/c2 in the W mass if everything else is kept fixed.Google Scholar
  32. 31.
    Increasing the Higgs mass to 1000 GeV would raise sin2 * θ. Calculations give 0.0236, but they are unreliable for such a high Higgs mass.Google Scholar
  33. 32.
    D. Y. Bardin et al; contribution to the second CERN yellow report on LEP100 physics.Google Scholar
  34. 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
  35. 34.
    J. Drees, Proceedings of the Rinberg Conference on Electroweak radiative corrections.Google Scholar
  36. 35.
    B.W. Lynn, “High Precision Tests of Electroweak Physics on the Z0 resonance”, contribution to report on CERN yellow report on Polarization at LEP.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. Rankin
    • 1
  1. 1.University of ColoradoBoulderUSA

Personalised recommendations