text:
# Identification of a nearby stellar association in the Hipparcos catalog: implications for recent, local star formation.

## 1. Introduction

For many years, the only known star clusters within 70 pc of Earth were the rich Hyades (at $``$ 45 pc) and the sparce U Ma nucleus (at $``$25 pc). Then a group of stars $``$55 pc from Earth was established as a bona fide association of T Tauri stars of age $``$10 million years (Webb et al 1999; Sterzik et al 1999; Webb, Reid, & Zuckerman 2000). This TW Hydrae Association (hereafter TWA) was unrecognized for many decades in spite of its being the nearest region of recent star formation (Kastner et al 1997). A ubiquitous signpost of newly formed stars has been a nearby molecular cloud. But no interstellar cloud has been found near TW Hya despite multiple searches. Therefore, we ask: do additional unrealized young associations far from molecular clouds exist near Earth?

Different teams have used the Hipparcos catalog to search for previously unrecognized stellar associations. For example, Platais et al (1998) undertook “A search for star clusters from the Hipparcos Data” and list basic data for 5 “very likely” new clusters and associations as well as 15 “possible” ones. Yet, in their own words, “At distances $`<`$100 pc the survey is incomplete as a result of the chosen search strategy.” Of the 20 potential new groupings in their Table 1, the closest, which contains 11 members from Hipparcos, is 132 pc away.

By contrast, the “Tucanae Association” we propose in the present paper is only $``$45 pc from Earth and much younger than the U Ma and Hyades clusters. Just as the sparse U Ma cluster nucleus is accompanied by more numerous U Ma stream stars, we suggest that the Sun is embedded in a stream of stars with similar space motions (the “Tucanae Stream”), with the Tucanae Association playing a role analogous to the U Ma nucleus. Figures 1a and 1b depict the Tucanae Association and some stream stars, respectively. These stars likely represent some of the younger, nearer, members of the more extensive Pleiades group or Local Association proposed by Eggen (e.g., see Jeffries 1995 and references therein).

## 2. Observations

Excepting TW Hya itself, the first T Tauri stars in the TWA were identified in a study of IRAS sources at high galactic latitude (de la Reza et al 1989; Gregorio-Hetem et al 1992). It has been shown that, on the main sequence, young stars are more likely 60 $`\mu `$m IRAS sources than are old stars (e.g., Jura et al 1993 & 1998; Silverstone et al 2000) and young stars are also more apt to be members of associations than are older stars. Therefore, we interrogated the Hipparcos catalog within a six degree radius of two dozen stars detected by IRAS at 60 $`\mu `$m and scattered around the sky. The stars were those with, in our opinion, reliable excesses at 60 $`\mu `$m listed by Mannings & Barlow (1998), Backman & Paresce (1993), and/or Silverstone et al. (2000). We searched for Hipparcos stars with similar proper motions and distances to the IRAS stars; results for our most interesting regions are presented in Figure 1, Tables 1 & 2 and are discussed below. Results at additional IRAS stars will be discussed in a later paper.

To verify or deny common space motions of Table 1 stars with similar distances and proper motions in the Hipparcos catalog, we measured radial velocities with the Bench Mounted Echelle (BME) spectrograph on the 1.5-m telescope at the Cerro Tololo Interamerican Observatory (CTIO). The spectra cover from $``$ 5000 - 8200Å at a typical measured resolution of 0.15Å. The data, obtained 21-26 (UT) August 1999, were reduced and calibrated in IRAF.

Six radial velocity standard stars were observed during the run with spectral types ranging from F6 to M1.5. Radial velocity was determined by cross-correlating the spectrum of the target and a standard star of similar spectral type observed close in time to the target. Approximately 15 echelle orders, chosen to produce strong correlations and have few atmospheric features, were used to compute the correlation. The accuracy of these measurements is strongly dependent on the S/N of the spectra and the spectral type and rotational velocity of the target star. The uncertainty ranges from $``$ 1-10 km/s, the majority being $`<`$2 km/s. H$`\alpha `$ line profiles and equivalent widths of lithium (6708Å) were also measured and are listed in Table 2.

Projected rotation velocities (v sin i) were measured and are listed in Table 2. We used a procedure similar to that of Strassmeier et al (1990), specifically we followed the prescription described in their Section IIId. We measured the FWHM of lines in the 6420Å region and corrected them for the instrumental broadening (0.134 km/s, FWHM) determined from five ThAr lamp lines at similar wavelengths. Following Strassmeier et al, we assumed a macroturbulent velocity, zeta, equal to 3 km/s. For a few of the faint late K-type and M-type stars, v sin i is quite uncertain due to low S/N.

With the 0.9-m telescope at CTIO we obtained BVRI photometry of stars in Table 1. The purpose was to determine whether any of the stars were sufficiently young to still be above the main sequence. These data will be reported in a later paper.

Properties of the 37 star systems we observed at CTIO are listed in Tables 1 and 2. The calculated UVW and the age indicators usually agree in the sense that the stars with space motions similar to those of stars in the youthful TWA (Soderblom, King & Henry 1998; Webb et al 2000), Beta Pic moving group (Barrado y Navascues et al 1999), and Local Association (Jeffries 1995), usually also have additional indications of youth. Youth is deduced from one or more of the following characteristics: ROSAT All-Sky Survey Bright Source Catalog (RASS-BSC, Voges et al. 1998) X-ray source, strong lithium 6708Å absorption, H$`\alpha `$ emission or weak (filled-in) absorption, rapid rotation, IRAS far-infrared excess emission, and, for the A- and late-B type stars, location near the bottom envelope of brightness of stars of comparable spectral type i.e. on or near the zero-age main sequence, (Jura et al 1998; Lowrance et al 2000).

We interprete Tables 1a and 2a in the following way. Nine or ten star systems near zero hours right ascension are likely to be part of a small stellar association similar to the TWA or the U Ma nucleus (see Figure 1c). These 10 stars are indicated in column 4 of Table 1a and we dub them ”the Tucanae Association”; their distribution is shown in Figure 1a. Other stars in the Tables and Figures, may be placed into one of the following catagories: (1) a member of the stream of nearby, young Local Association stars, or (2) a star with no obvious indications of youth that happens to have distance from Earth and proper motions similar to those of the Tucanae Association. Some of these stars may indeed be Tucanae Association members without signatures of youth (e.g. see discussion of HD 207129 below). An excess of stars with similar proper motions and distance from Earth seems to exist in the Tucanae region, indicating some stars listed in Table 1b may be Tucanae members. But individually, each of these stars is unlikely to be a member.

## 3. Results & Discussion

Ages have been deduced for a few stars in Table 1a. For example, HIP 92680 (PZ Tel) is above the main sequence and estimated to be 15-20 million years old (Favata et al 1998; Soderblom et al. 1998). With the NICMOS camera on HST, Lowrance et al. (2000) discovered a late M-type object within 4$`\mathrm{}`$ of the A-type star HR 7329; if a companion, which appears very likely, then the object is a brown dwarf of age $``$ 20 Myr. Other stars with similar space motions and ages around 20 million years have been identified close to the Sun, for example, Beta Pictoris (Jura et al 1993; Barrado y Navascues et al 1999) and Gliese 799 and 803 (Barrado y Navascues et al 1999).

The Tucanae Association itself is probably somewhat older than 20 million years. We tentatively assign an age of 40 Myrs based on the strength of H$`\alpha `$ emission lines seen in HIP 1910, 1993, and 2729 which are brighter than in stars of similar spectral type in the $`\alpha `$ Per cluster (see Figure 16 in Prosser 1992) whose age has recently been estimated to be 90 +/- 10 Myr (Stauffer et al 1999). Other indicators of age, the presence of rapid rotators, stars with high Li abundance and or large X-ray flux, all agree with this estimate but are somewhat less diagnostic. For example, the X-ray counts per second of the K- and M-type stars in Table 1a imply Lx/Lbol comparable to that of late-type stars in very young clusters (see Fig. 1 in Kastner et al. 1997). And Lx/Lbol of the late F- and G-type stars in Table 1a are typically three orders of magnitude larger than Lx/Lbol of the Sun (Fleming 1999) which suggests an age younger than the Pleiades (see Fig. 2 in Gaidos 1998).

Over 40 Myr, dispersion as small as 1 km/s in the critical V component of space velocity would lead to a 40 pc separation between stars. Since no such separation is present among the nuclear members (Fig. 1a), either the range in V given in Table 2a is due to measurement error or the stars are younger than 40 Myr or both. Measurement errors are characterized by, for example, differences between Hipparcos and PPM proper motions and the large uncertainty in radial velocity for A- and B-type members. Also, close companions in unrecognized binary systems will generate orbital motion that could shift the measured value of V away from the true V velocity of the binary system.

We chose the stars in Table 1 for further study at CTIO because of similar distances from Earth and proper motions. However, once radial velocities were measured it became clear that many of these stars share similar space motions (UVW) with other very young nearby stars found in very different directions. The mean UVW for the nine likely member systems of the Tucanae nucleus (PPM 366328 not included) is (-10.5, -20.8, +0.3) $`\pm `$ (2.3, 2.4, 3.0). For comparison, UVW for the TWA is -11, -18, -5 (Webb et al 2000) and, for the Beta Pic moving group, -10.3, -16.5, -10.2 (Barrado y Navascues et al 1999). In addition, we calculate UVW = -11, -18, -10 for $`\eta `$ Cha, the brightest member of the recently identified, young, compact $`\eta `$ Chamaeleontis cluster (Mamajeck, Lawson & Feigelson 1999). Similar space motions are also evident for some stars with far-IR excess emission as measured by IRAS or having strong lithium 6708Å lines (Jeffries 1995). As noted by Jeffries, many of these lithium stars have space motions similar to that of Eggen’s Local Association (U,V,W = -11, -21, -11). Four such stars, HD 172555, HD 195627, HD 207129 and HD 10647, are plotted as asterisks on Figures 1a and 1b. These four stars were not targeted by us for CTIO observations because they are significantly closer to Earth than stars in Table 1 and we did not initially recognize them as potential members of a common stream.

The G-type star HD 207129 is of special interest because it is surrounded by a cold dust ring detected by IRAS and is only 15.6 pc from Earth. Jourdain de Muizon et al (1999) argue that this star is 4.7 Gyrs old and construct a corresponding model for evolution of the dust ring. In contrast, we believe that HD 207129, UVW = -13.7, -22.3, +0.6, is actually a member of the Tucanae stream and probably only about as old as the Tucanae Association. Stars with space motions within the range encompassing the young groups listed above, (-15, -23, -13) $`<`$ (U, V, W) $`<`$ (-9, -16, +3), comprise less than 2% of the stars in Gleise’s Catalog of Nearby Stars. Thus the chance that HD 207129 is as old as 4.7 Gyrs and yet have a space motion so similar to many very young stars is small. Also, location of HD 207129 in the same direction as the Tucanae stream stars seen in Figure 1 supports the idea that they are kinematically associated. This strikes us as more compelling evidence for youth than the weak Ca II K-line emission, relied on by Jourdain de Muizon, as an indicator of a much older star. Not all young stars have activity in the Ca II lines. For example, the very young, F-type star HD 135344 which has a huge far-IR excess and associated CO rotational emission (Zuckerman, Forveille, & Kastner 1995), has no Ca activity (Duncan, Barlow & Ryan 1997). Finally, we note that the intrinsic X-ray luminosity of HD 207129 as measured by ROSAT is about 10 times that of the Sun.

Many papers published recently describe field stars with high lithium abundance, large X-ray fluxes, and other indicators suggestive of youth, but no consistent or compelling picture has been established for the solar vicinity. We believe it is now possible to paint a plausible picture of the recent star formation history of the present solar neighborhood.

Between 10 and 40 million years ago in a co-moving frame centered near the present position of the Sun, an ensemble of molecular clouds were forming stars at a modest rate. The spectral types of these stars ranged primarily from A to M, but included a few B-type stars also. About 10 Myrs ago, the most massive of the B-type stars exploded as a supernova at about the time that stars in the TWA were forming. This event terminated the star formation episodes and helped to generate a very low density region with radius of order 70 pc in most directions from the present position of the Sun (Welsh, Crifo & Lallemont 1998 and references therein). Thus we now have a “150 pc conspiracy” whereby molecular clouds (Taurus, Lupus, Cha, Sco, Oph) are seen in various directions, typically $``$150 from Earth, and, like the star-forming clouds 10-40 million years ago, mostly at negative declinations. If the rate of supernovae in the Galaxy is one per 50 years, then in a typical sphere of radius 70 pc, a supernova will explode every $``$107 years. Ten million years ago, the Sun would have been further than 100 pc from the supernova explosion.

The above picture is consistent with one painted by Elmegreen (1992 & 1993) which was based on more general considerations pertaining to local galactic structure and Gould’s Belt. In particular, Elmegreen remarks that ”The local star formation activity began 60 million years ago when the Carina arm passed through the local gas…This scenario is largely speculative…”. The recent discoveries of very nearby young star clusters and field stars in the southern hemisphere, greatly enhances the likelihood of Elmegreen’s speculative scenario.

## 4. Conclusions

We have found a previously unrecogized southern association - “the Tucanae Association” - which is only $``$45 pc from Earth, but not quite as young as the recently established TW Hydrae Association. Thus, in the past year, the number of known stellar associations within 60 pc of Earth has increased from two (the Hyades and U Ma) to four. The existence of the Tucanae and TW Hydrae Associations resolves the mystery of how the Beta Pictoris moving group can be so young, 20 $`\pm `$ 10 Myrs (Barrado y Navascues et al 1999) and yet so near to Earth (within 20 pc). That is, 10-40 million years ago, the region through which the Sun is now passing experienced a significant era of star formation which produced the Beta Pictoris group, the two southern associations, and related stream stars.

We thank the crew at CTIO including N. Suntzeff, T. Ingerson, M. Fernandez, A. Gomez, E. Cosgrove & R. Venegas for critical help acquiring these data. A special thanks to M. Smith for his flexibility with telescope maintenence schedules. We are grateful to M. Jura for calling the Mannings and Barlow paper to our attention and for pointing out the likelihood of proper motion companions to some of the stars in Table 1. We thank Dr. Jura and E. E. Becklin and P. Lowrance for comments on drafts of the paper. This research was supported by NSF Grant 9417156 to UCLA and by the UCLA Center for Astrobiology.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction to Gauge-Mediated SUSY Breaking

## 1 Introduction to Gauge-Mediated SUSY Breaking

Since no superpartners have been detected at collider experiments so far, supersymmetry (SUSY) cannot be an exact symmetry of Nature. The requirement of “soft” supersymmetry breaking  alone is not sufficient to reduce the free parameters to a number suitable for predictive phenomenological studies. Hence, motivated theoretical hypotheses on the nature of SUSY breaking and the mechanism through which it is transmitted to the visible sector of the theory \[here assumed to be the one predicted by the minimal SUSY extension of the standard model (MSSM)\] are highly desirable. If SUSY is broken at energies of the order of the Planck mass and the SUSY breaking sector communicates with the MSSM sector through gravitational interactions only, one falls in the supergravity-inspired (SUGRA) scheme. The most recognised alternative to SUGRA is based instead on the hypothesis that SUSY breaking occurs at relatively low energy scales and it is mediated mainly by gauge interactions (GMSB) . A good theoretical reason to consider such a possibility is that it provides a natural, automatic suppression of the SUSY contributions to flavour-changing neutral current and $`𝒞𝒫`$-violating processes. A pleasant consequence is that, at least in the simplest versions of GMSB, the MSSM spectrum and other observables depend on just a handful of parameters, typically

$$M_{\mathrm{mess}},N_{\mathrm{mess}},\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{tan}\beta ,\mathrm{sign}(\mu ),$$
(1)
where $`M_{\mathrm{mess}}`$ is the overall messenger scale; $`N_{\mathrm{mess}}`$ is the so-called messenger index, parameterising the structure of the messenger sector; $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the universal soft SUSY breaking scale felt by the low-energy sector; $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ is the ratio of the vacuum expectation values of the two Higgs doublets; sign($`\mu `$) is the ambiguity left for the SUSY higgsino mass after conditions for correct electroweak symmetry breaking (EWSB) are imposed (see e.g. Refs. ).

The phenomenology of GMSB (and more in general of any theory with low-energy SUSY breaking) is characterised by the presence of a very light gravitino $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$ ,

$$m_{3/2}m_{\stackrel{~}{G}}=\frac{F}{\sqrt{3}M_P^{}}\left(\frac{\sqrt{F}}{100\mathrm{TeV}}\right)^22.37\mathrm{eV},$$
(2)
where $`\sqrt{F}`$ is the fundamental scale of SUSY breaking, 100 TeV is a typical value for it, and $`M_P^{}=2.44\times 10^{18}`$ GeV is the reduced Planck mass. Hence, the $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$ is always the lightest SUSY particle (LSP) in these theories. If $`R`$-parity is assumed to be conserved, any produced MSSM particle will finally decay into the gravitino. Depending on $`\sqrt{F}`$, the interactions of the gravitino, although much weaker than gauge and Yukawa interactions, can still be strong enough to be of relevance for collider physics. As a result, in most cases the last step of any SUSY decay chain is the decay of the next-to-lightest SUSY particle (NLSP), which can occur outside or inside a typical detector or even close to the interaction point. The pattern of the resulting spectacular signatures is determined by the identity of the NLSP and its lifetime before decaying into the $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$,

$$c\tau _{\mathrm{NLSP}}\frac{1}{100}\left(\frac{\sqrt{F}}{100\mathrm{TeV}}\right)^4\left(\frac{m_{\mathrm{NLSP}}}{100\mathrm{GeV}}\right)^5,$$
(3)
where $``$ is a number of order unity depending on the nature of the NLSP.

The identity of the NLSP \[or, to be more precise, the identity of the sparticle(s) having a large branching ratio (BR) for decaying into the gravitino and the relevant SM partner\] determines four main scenarios giving rise to qualitatively different phenomenology:

Occurs whenever $`m_{\stackrel{~}{N}_1}<(m_{\stackrel{~}{\tau }_1}m_\tau )`$. Here typically a decay of the $`\stackrel{~}{N}_1`$ to $`\stackrel{~}{G}\gamma `$ is the final step of decay chains following any SUSY production process. As a consequence, the main inclusive signature at colliders is prompt or displaced photon pairs + X + missing energy. $`\stackrel{~}{N}_1`$ decays to $`\stackrel{~}{G}Z^0`$ and other minor channels may also be relevant at TeV colliders.

Defined by $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\tau }_1}<\mathrm{Min}[m_{\stackrel{~}{N}_1},m_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{}}_R}]m_\tau `$, features $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }_1\stackrel{~}{G}\tau `$ decays, producing $`\tau `$ pairs or charged semi-stable $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }_1`$ tracks or decay kinks + X + missing energy. Here and in the following, $`\mathrm{}`$ stands for $`e`$ or $`\mu `$.

When $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{}}_R}<\mathrm{Min}[m_{\stackrel{~}{N}_1},m_{\stackrel{~}{\tau }_1}+m_\tau ]`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{}}_R\stackrel{~}{G}\mathrm{}`$ decays are also open with large BR. In addition to the signatures of the stau NLSP scenario, one also gets $`\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$ pairs or $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{}}_R`$ tracks or decay kinks.

If $`|m_{\stackrel{~}{\tau }_1}m_{\stackrel{~}{N}_1}|<m_\tau `$ and $`m_{\stackrel{~}{N}_1}<m_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{}}_R}`$, both signatures of the neutralino NLSP and stau NLSP scenario are present at the same time, since $`\stackrel{~}{N}_1\stackrel{~}{\tau }_1`$ decays are not allowed by phase space.

Note that in the GMSB parameter space the relation $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{}}_R}>m_{\stackrel{~}{\tau }_1}`$ always holds. Also, one should keep in mind that the classification above is only valid as an indicative scheme in the limit $`m_e`$, $`m_\mu 0`$, neglecting also those cases where a fine-tuned choice of $`\sqrt{F}`$ and the sparticle masses may give rise to competition between phase-space suppressed decay channels from one ordinary sparticle to another and sparticle decays to the gravitino .

In this report, we treat two important aspects of the GMSB phenomenology at TeV colliders:

The consequences of the GMSB hypotheses on the light Higgs spectrum using the most accurate tools available today for model generation and $`m_h`$ calculation;

Studies and possible measurements at the LHC with the ATLAS detector in the stau NLSP or slepton co-NLSP scenarios, with focus on determining the fundamental SUSY breaking scale $`\sqrt{F}`$.

For this purpose, we generated about 30000 GMSB models under well defined hypotheses, using the program SUSYFIRE , as described in the following section.

## 2 GMSB Models

In the GMSB framework, the pattern of the MSSM spectrum is simple, as all sparticle masses are generated in the same way and scale approximately with a single parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, which sets the amount of soft SUSY breaking felt by the visible sector. As a consequence, scalar and gaugino masses are related to each other at a high energy scale, which is not the case in other SUSY frameworks, e.g. SUGRA. Also, it is possible to impose other conditions at a lower scale to achieve EWSB and further reduce the dimension of the parameter space.

To build our GMSB models, we adopt the usual phenomenological approach, in particular following Ref. , where problems relevant for GMSB physics at TeV colliders were also approached. We do not specify the origin of the SUSY higgsino mass $`\mu `$, nor do we assume that the analogous soft SUSY breaking parameter $`B\mu `$ vanishes at the messenger scale. Instead, we impose correct EWSB to trade $`\mu `$ and $`B\mu `$ for $`M_Z`$ and $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$, leaving the sign of $`\mu `$ undetermined. However, we are aware that to build a satisfactory GMSB model one should also solve the latter problem in a more fundamental way, perhaps by providing a dynamical mechanism to generate $`\mu `$ and $`B\mu `$, possibly with values of the same order of magnitude. This might be accomplished radiatively through some new interactions. However, in this case the other soft terms in the Higgs potential, namely $`m_{H_{1,2}}^2`$, will be also affected and this will in turn change the values of $`|\mu |`$ and $`B\mu `$ coming from EWSB conditions . Within the study (A), we are currently considering some “non-minimal” possibilities for GMSB models that to some extent take this problem into account, and we are trying to assess the impact on the light Higgs mass. We do not treat this topic here, but refer to  for further details.

To determine the MSSM spectrum and low-energy parameters, we solve the renormalisation group equation (RGE) evolution with the following boundary conditions at the $`M_{\mathrm{mess}}`$ scale,

$`M_a`$ $`=`$ $`N_{\mathrm{mess}}\mathrm{\Lambda }g\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{M_{\mathrm{mess}}}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _a}{4\pi }},(a=1,2,3)`$
$`\stackrel{~}{m}^2`$ $`=`$ $`2N_{\mathrm{mess}}\mathrm{\Lambda }^2f\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{M_{\mathrm{mess}}}}\right){\displaystyle \underset{a}{}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _a}{4\pi }}\right)^2C_a,`$ (4)
respectively for the gaugino and the scalar masses. In Eq. (4), $`g`$ and $`f`$ are the one-loop and two-loop functions whose exact expressions can be found e.g. in Ref. , and $`C_a`$ are the quadratic Casimir invariants for the scalar fields. As usual, the scalar trilinear couplings $`A_f`$ are assumed to vanish at the messenger scale, as suggested by the fact that they (and not their squares) are generated via gauge interactions with the messenger fields at the two loop-level only.

To single out the interesting region of the GMSB parameter space, we proceed as follows. Barring the case where a neutralino is the NLSP and decays outside the detector (large $`\sqrt{F}`$), the GMSB signatures are very spectacular and are generally free from SM background. Keeping this in mind and being interested in GMSB phenomenology at future TeV colliders, we consider only models where the NLSP mass is larger than 100 GeV, assuming that searches at LEP and Tevatron, if unsuccessful, will in the end exclude a softer spectrum in most cases. We require that $`M_{\mathrm{mess}}>1.01\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, to prevent an excess of fine-tuning of the messenger masses, and that the mass of the lightest messenger scalar be at least 10 TeV. We also impose $`M_{\mathrm{mess}}>M_{\mathrm{GUT}}\mathrm{exp}(125/N_{\mathrm{mess}})`$, to ensure perturbativity of gauge interactions up to the GUT scale. Further, we do not consider models with $`M_{\mathrm{mess}}>\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}10}^5\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. As a result of this and other constraints, the messenger index $`N_{\mathrm{mess}}`$, which we assume to be an integer independent of the gauge group, cannot be larger than 8. To prevent the top Yukawa coupling from blowing up below the GUT scale, we require $`\mathrm{tan}\beta >1.2`$ (and in some cases $`>1.5`$). This is also motivated by the current bounds from SUSY Higgs searches at LEP II . Models with $`\mathrm{tan}\beta >\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}55}`$ (with a mild dependence on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$) are forbidden by the EWSB requirement and typically fail in giving $`m_A^2>0`$.

To calculate the NLSP lifetime relevant to our study (B), one needs to specify the value of the fundamental SUSY breaking scale $`\sqrt{F}`$ on a model-by-model basis. Using perturbativity arguments, for each given set of GMSB parameters, it is possible to determine a lower bound according to Ref. ,

$$\sqrt{F}\sqrt{F_{\mathrm{mess}}}\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }M_{\mathrm{mess}}}>\mathrm{\Lambda }.$$
(5)
On the contrary, no solid arguments can be used to set an upper limit on $`\sqrt{F}`$ of relevance for collider physics, although some semi-qualitative cosmological arguments are sometimes evoked.

To generate our model samples using SUSYFIRE, we used logarithmic steps for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ (between about 45 TeV/$`N_{\mathrm{mess}}`$ and about 220 TeV/$`\sqrt{N_{\mathrm{mess}}}`$, which corresponds to excluding models with sparticle masses above $`4`$ TeV), $`M_{\mathrm{mess}}/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ (between 1.01 and $`10^5`$) and $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ (between 1.2 and about 60), subject to the constraints described above. SUSYFIRE starts from the values of SM particle masses and gauge couplings at the weak scale and then evolves up to the messenger scale through RGE’s. At the messenger scale, it imposes the boundary conditions (4) for the soft sparticle masses and then evolves the full set of RGE’s back to the weak scale. The decoupling of each sparticle at the proper threshold is taken into account. Two-loop RGE’s are used for gauge couplings, third generation Yukawa couplings and gaugino soft masses. The other RGE’s are taken at the one-loop level. At the scale $`\sqrt{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_2}}`$, EWSB conditions are imposed by means of the one-loop effective potential approach, including corrections from stops, sbottoms and staus. The program then evolves up again to $`M_{\mathrm{mess}}`$ and so on. Three or four iterations are usually enough to get a good approximation for the MSSM spectrum.

(A) The Light Higgs Boson Spectrum
in GMSB Models

Contribution by:
S. Ambrosanio, S. Heinemeyer, G. Weiglein

## A.1 Introduction

Within the MSSM, the masses of the $`𝒞𝒫`$-even neutral Higgs bosons are calculable in terms of the other low-energy parameters. The mass of the lightest Higgs boson, $`m_h`$, has been of particular interest, as it is bounded to be smaller than the $`Z^0`$ boson mass at the tree level. The one-loop results  for $`m_h`$ have been supplemented in the last years with the leading two-loop corrections, performed in the renormalisation group (RG) approach , in the effective potential approach  and most recently in the Feynman-diagrammatic (FD) approach . The two-loop corrections have turned out to be sizeable. They can lower the one-loop results by up to 20%. These calculations predict an upper bound on $`m_h`$ of about $`m_h130`$ GeV for an unconstrained MSSM with $`m_t=175`$ GeV and a common SUSY mass scale $`M_{\mathrm{SUSY}}1`$ TeV.

As discussed in Sec. 1, the GMSB scenario provides a relatively simple set of constraints and thus constitutes a very predictive and readily testable realization of the MSSM. The main goal of the present analysis is to study the spectrum of the lightest neutral $`𝒞𝒫`$-even Higgs boson, $`m_h`$, within the GMSB framework. Particular emphasis is given to the maximal value of $`m_h`$ achievable in GMSB after an exhaustive scanning of the parameter space. Our results are discussed in terms of the GMSB constraints on the low-energy parameters and compared to the cases of a SUGRA-inspired or an unconstrained MSSM.

## A.2 Calculation of $`m_h`$

To evaluate $`m_h`$, we employ the currently most accurate calculation based on the FD approach . The most important radiative corrections to $`m_h`$ arise from the top and scalar top sector of the MSSM, with the input parameters $`m_t`$, the masses of the scalar top quarks, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}`$, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_2}`$, and the $`\stackrel{~}{t}`$-mixing angle, $`\theta _{\stackrel{~}{t}}`$. Here we adopt the conventions introduced in Ref. . The complete diagrammatic one-loop result  has been combined with the dominant two-loop corrections of $`𝒪(\alpha \alpha _s)`$  and with the subdominant corrections of $`𝒪(G_F^2m_t^6)`$ . GMSB models are generated with the program SUSYFIRE, according to the discussion of Sec. 2. For this study, we consider only models with $`\mathrm{tan}\beta >1.5`$  and $`m_A>80`$ GeV . In addition, we always use $`m_t=175`$ GeV. A change of 1 GeV in $`m_t`$ translates roughly into a shift of 1 GeV (with the same sign) in $`m_h`$ as well. Thus, changing $`m_t`$ affects our results on $`m_h`$ in an easily predictable way.

The results of the $`m_h`$ calculation have been implemented in the program FeynHiggs . This Fortran code has been combined with SUSYFIRE, which has been used to calculate the low energy parameters $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}`$, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_2}`$, $`\theta _{\stackrel{~}{t}}`$, $`\mu `$, $`M_1`$, $`M_2`$, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}`$, $`\mathrm{}`$ for each of the $``$30000 GMSB models generated. These have then been passed to FeynHiggs for the $`m_h`$ evaluation in a coherent way. Indeed, we transform the $`\overline{\mathrm{MS}}`$ parameters in the SUSYFIRE output into on-shell parameters before feeding them into FeynHiggs. Compact expressions for the relevant transition formulas can be found in Refs. .

Compared to an existing analysis in the GMSB framework , we use a more complete evaluation of $`m_h`$. This leads in particular to smaller values of $`m_h`$ for a given set of input parameters in our analysis. Also, in Ref.  although some GMSB scenarios with generalised messenger sectors were considered, the parameter space for the “minimal” case with a unique, integer messenger index $`N_{\mathrm{mess}}=N_1=N_2=N_3`$ was not fully explored. Indeed, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ was in most cases limited to values smaller than 100 TeV and $`M_{\mathrm{mess}}`$ was fixed to $`10^5`$ TeV. Furthermore, partly as a consequence of the above assumptions, the authors did not consider models with $`N_{\mathrm{mess}}>4`$, i.e. their requirements for perturbativity of the MSSM gauge couplings up to the GUT scale were stronger than ours. We will see in the following section that maximal $`m_h`$ values in our analysis are instead obtained for larger values of the messenger scale and the messenger index.

## A.3 The Light Higgs Spectrum in GMSB

In the following, we give some results in the form of scatter plots showing the pattern in GMSB for $`m_h`$, $`m_A`$ as well as other low-energy parameters of relevance for the light Higgs spectrum.

In Fig. 1(a), we show the dependence of $`m_h`$ on $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$, where only models with $`\mathrm{tan}\beta >1.5`$, $`m_A>80`$ GeV and $`m_{\mathrm{NLSP}}>100`$ GeV are considered, while $`m_t`$ is fixed to 175 GeV. The dependence is strong for small $`\mathrm{tan}\beta <\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}10}`$, while for larger $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ the increase of the lightest Higgs mass is rather mild. The maximum values for $`m_h124`$ GeV are achieved for $`\mathrm{tan}\beta >50`$. It should be noted that for very large $`\mathrm{tan}\beta >\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}52}`$, we also find a few models with relatively small $`m_h<\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}100}`$ GeV. This is due to the fact that in this case EWSB conditions tend to drive $`m_A`$ toward very small values (cfr. Sec. 2). This is made visible by the scatter plot in Fig. 1(b), where the pseudoscalar Higgs mass is shown as a function of $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$. For such small values of $`m_A`$ and for large $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$, the relation $`m_hm_A`$ holds. Thus small $`m_h`$ values are quite natural in this region of the parameter space. On the other hand, one can see that extremely large values of $`m_A>\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}`$ TeV can only be obtained for small or moderate $`\mathrm{tan}\beta <\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}10}`$ GeV. A comparison between Fig 1(a) and (b) reveals that the largest $`m_h`$ values $`>\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}123}`$ GeV correspond in GMSB to $`m_A`$ values in the 300–800 GeV range. Indeed, it has been checked that such large $`m_h`$ values are in general obtained in the FD calculation for $`300<m_A<\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1000}`$ GeV, see Ref. .

In Fig. 2, we show the dependence of the lightest Higgs boson mass on the stop mixing parameter $`x_{\mathrm{top}}`$ defined by

$$x_{\mathrm{top}}\frac{A_{\mathrm{top}}\mu /\mathrm{tan}\beta }{m_S},\mathrm{where}m_S=\sqrt{(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}^2+m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_2}^2)/2}.$$
(6)
For equal soft SUSY breaking parameters in the stop sector with the $`D`$-terms neglected, $`x_{\mathrm{top}}`$ corresponds to the ratio $`X_t/M_S`$ of the off-diagonal and diagonal entries in the stop mixing matrix, see e.g. Ref. .

Maximal $`m_h`$ values are obtained for $`x_{\mathrm{top}}\pm 2`$, a minimum is reached around $`x_{\mathrm{top}}0`$. Thus, for large $`m_h`$ values a large numerator in Eq. (6) is required. From Fig. 3(a), one can see that in GMSB only negative values of $`A_{\mathrm{top}}`$ are allowed at the electroweak scale, as a consequence of the fact that the trilinear couplings are negligible at the messenger scale. Due to the logarithmic dependence of $`m_h`$ on the stop masses, relatively large values of $`|A_{\mathrm{top}}|`$ are needed for large $`m_h`$. In addition, large $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ is also required. From Fig. 3(b) one can check that this leads to values of $`x_{\mathrm{top}}0.95`$, which can only be achieved for positive $`\mu `$. Fig. 4(a) shows the dependence of $`A_{\mathrm{top}}`$ on $`\mu `$. Large values of $`|A_{\mathrm{top}}|`$ are only reached for large $`|\mu |`$ values. Therefore maximal $`h`$ masses are obtained for relatively large and positive $`\mu `$, as can be seen in Fig. 4(b).<sup>1</sup><sup>1</sup>1In general, for large values of $`|\mu |`$ and $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ the effects of the corrections from the $`b`$$`\stackrel{~}{b}`$ sector can become important, leading to a decrease in $`m_h`$. For the GMSB models under consideration, however, this is not the case as a consequence of the relatively large $`\stackrel{~}{b}`$ masses.

All these arguments about the combination of low energy parameters needed for large $`m_h`$ in GMSB are summarised in Tab. 1, where we report the 10 models in our sample that give rise to the highest $`m_h`$ values. Together with $`m_h`$, Tab. 1 shows the corresponding input GMSB parameters \[cfr. Eq. (1)\] as well as the values of the low energy parameters mentioned above.

It is interesting to note that all the models shown in Tab. 1 feature a large messenger index and values of the messenger scale not far from the maximum we allowed while generating GMSB models. We could not construct a single model with $`m_h>\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}122.5}`$ GeV having $`N_{\mathrm{mess}}<6`$ or $`M_{\mathrm{mess}}<10^5`$ TeV, for $`m_t=175`$ GeV. It is hence worth mentioning here that our choice of imposing $`M_{\mathrm{mess}}/\mathrm{\Lambda }<10^5M_{\mathrm{mess}}<\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}\times 10^{10}`$ GeV does not correspond to any solid theoretical prejudice. On the other hand it is true that $`M_{\mathrm{mess}}>\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}3}\times 10^8`$ GeV always corresponds to gravitino masses larger than $`1`$ keV, due to Eqs. (2) and (5). The latter circumstance might be disfavoured by cosmological arguments . A curious consequence is that the GMSB models with the highest $`m_h`$ belong always to the stau NLSP or slepton co-NLSP scenarios.

Note also that restricting ourselves to GMSB models with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<100`$ TeV, $`M_{\mathrm{mess}}<10^5`$ TeV and $`N_{\mathrm{mess}}4`$, we find a maximal $`m_h`$ value of 122.2 GeV, for $`m_t=175`$ GeV and $`\mathrm{tan}\beta 52`$. This is to be compared with the one-loop result of Ref. , $`m_h`$(max) = 131.7, for $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ around 30 (the assumed value of $`m_t`$ is not quoted).

Values for $`m_h`$ slightly larger than those we found here may also arise from non-minimal contributions to the Higgs potential, in connection with a dynamical generation of $`\mu `$ and $`B\mu `$ (cfr. Sec. 2). A treatment of this problem can be found in Ref. .

One should also keep in mind that our analysis still suffers from uncertainties due to unknown higher order corrections both in the RGE’s for GMSB model generation and in the evaluation of $`m_h`$ from low energy parameters. A rough estimate of these effects leads to shifts in $`m_h`$ not larger than 3 to 5 GeV.

## A.4 Conclusions

We conclude that in the minimal GMSB framework described above, values of $`m_h>\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}124.2}`$ GeV are not allowed for $`m_t=175`$ GeV. This is almost 6 GeV smaller than the maximum value for $`m_h`$ one can achieve in the MSSM without any constraints or assumptions about the structure of the theory at high energy scales . On the other hand, the alternative mSUGRA framework allows values of $`m_h`$ that are $`3`$ GeV larger than in GMSB . This makes the GMSB scenario slightly easier to explore via Higgs boson search. This result was expected in the light of the rather strong GMSB requirements, such as the presence of a unique soft SUSY breaking scale, the relative heaviness of the squarks and the gluino compared to non-strongly interacting sparticles, and the fact that the soft SUSY breaking trilinear couplings $`A_f`$ get nonzero values at the electroweak scale only by RGE evolution. Nevertheless, once the whole parameter space is explored, it is not true that mGMSB gives rise to $`m_h`$ values that are considerably smaller than in mSUGRA. Even smaller differences in the maximal $`m_h`$ might be present when considering non-minimal, complex messenger sectors  or additional contributions to the Higgs potential . In any case, as for mSUGRA, current LEP II or Tevatron data on Higgs boson searches are far from excluding mGMSB, and the upgraded Tevatron and the LHC will certainly be needed to deeply test any realistic SUSY model.

### Acknowledgements

S. A. and S. H. thank the organisers of the Workshop “Physics at TeV Colliders”, for the hospitality and the pleasant and productive atmosphere in Les Houches.

(B) Measuring the SUSY Breaking Scale at the LHC
in the Slepton NLSP Scenario of GMSB Models

Contribution by:
S. Ambrosanio, B. Mele, S. Petrarca, G. Polesello, A. Rimoldi

## B.1 Introduction

The fundamental scale of SUSY breaking $`\sqrt{F}`$ is perhaps the most important quantity to determine from phenomenology in a SUSY theory. In the mSUGRA framework, the gravitino mass sets the scale of the soft SUSY breaking masses in the MSSM ($`0.11`$ TeV), so that $`\sqrt{F}`$ is typically large $`10^{1011}`$ GeV \[cfr. Eq. (2)\]. As a consequence, the interactions of the $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$ with the other MSSM particles $`F^1`$ are too weak for the gravitino to be of relevance in collider physics and there is no direct way to access $`\sqrt{F}`$ experimentally. In GMSB theories, the situation is completely different. The soft SUSY breaking scale of the MSSM and the sparticle masses are set by gauge interactions between the messenger and low energy sectors to be $`\alpha _{\mathrm{SM}}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ \[cfr. Eq. (4)\], so that typical $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ values are $`10100`$ TeV. On the other hand, $`\sqrt{F}`$ is subject to the lower bound (5) only, which tells us that values well below $`10^{10}`$ GeV and even as low as several tens of TeV are perfectly reasonable. The $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$ is in this case the LSP and its interactions are strong enough to allow NLSP decays to the $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$ inside a typical detector size. The latter circumstance gives us a chance for extracting $`\sqrt{F}`$ experimentally through a measurement of the NLSP mass and lifetime \[cfr. Eq. (3)\].

Furthermore, the possibility of determining $`\sqrt{F}`$ with good precision opens a window on the physics of the SUSY breaking (the so-called “secluded”) sector and the way this SUSY breaking is transmitted to the messenger sector. Indeed, the characteristic scale of SUSY breaking felt by the messengers (and hence the MSSM sector) given by $`\sqrt{F_{\mathrm{mess}}}`$ in Eq. (5) can be also determined once the MSSM spectrum is known. By comparing the measured values of $`\sqrt{F}`$ and $`\sqrt{F_{\mathrm{mess}}}`$ it might well be possible to get information on the way the secluded and messenger sector communicate to each other. For instance, if it turns out that $`\sqrt{F_{\mathrm{mess}}}\sqrt{F}`$, then it is very likely that the communication occurs radiatively and the ratio $`\sqrt{F_{\mathrm{mess}}/F}`$ is given by some loop factor. On the contrary, if the communication occurs via a direct interaction, this ratio is just given by a Yukawa-type coupling constant, with values $`<\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1}`$, see Refs. .

An experimental method to determine $`\sqrt{F}`$ at a TeV scale $`e^+e^{}`$ collider through the measurement of the NLSP mass and lifetime was presented in Ref. , in the neutralino NLSP scenario. Here, we are concerned about the same problem, but at a hadron collider, the LHC, and in the stau NLSP or slepton co-NLSP scenarios. These scenarios provide a great opportunity at the LHC, since the characteristic signatures with semi-stable charged tracks are muon-like, but come from massive sleptons with a $`\beta `$ significantly smaller than 1. In particular, we perform our simulations in the ATLAS muon detector, whose large size and excellent time resolution  allow a precision measurement of the slepton time of flight from the production vertex out to the muon chambers and hence of the slepton velocity. Moreover, in the stau NLSP or slepton co-NLSP scenarios, the knowledge of the NLSP mass and lifetime is sufficient to determine $`\sqrt{F}`$, since the factor $``$ in Eq. (3) is exactly equal to 1. This is not the case in the neutralino NLSP scenario, where $``$ depends at least on the neutralino physical composition, and more information and measurements are needed for extracting a precise value of $`\sqrt{F}`$.

## B.2 Choice of the Sample Models <br>and Event Simulation

The two main parameters affecting the experimental measurement at the LHC of the slepton NLSP properties are the slepton mass and momentum distribution. Indeed, at a hadron collider most of the NLSP’s come from squark and gluino production, followed by cascade decays. Thus, the momentum distribution is in general a function of the whole MSSM spectrum. However, one can approximately assume that most of the information on the NLSP momentum distribution is provided by the squark mass scale $`m_{\stackrel{~}{q}}`$ only (in the stau NLSP scenario or slepton co-NLSP scenarios of GMSB, one generally finds $`m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}>m_{\stackrel{~}{q}}`$). To perform detailed simulations, we select a representative set of GMSB models generated by SUSYFIRE. We limit ourselves to models with $`m_{\mathrm{NLSP}}>100`$ GeV, motivated by the discussion in Sec. 2, and $`m_{\stackrel{~}{q}}<2`$ TeV, in order to yield an adequate event statistics after a three-year low-luminosity run (corresponding to 30 fb<sup>-1</sup>) at the LHC. Within these ranges, we choose eight extreme points (four in the stau NLSP scenario and four in the slepton co-NLSP scenario) allowed by GMSB in the ($`m_{\mathrm{NLSP}}`$, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{q}}`$) plane, in order to cover the various possibilities.

In Tab. 2, we list the input GMSB parameters we used to generate these eight points, while in Tab. 3 we report the corresponding values of the stau mass, the squark mass scale and the gluino mass. The “NLSP” column indicates whether the model belongs to the stau NLSP or slepton co-NLSP scenario. The last column gives the total cross section in pb for producing any pairs of SUSY particles at the LHC.

For each model, the events were generated with the ISAJET Monte Carlo  that incorporates the calculation of the SUSY mass spectrum and branching fraction using the GMSB parameters as input. We have checked that for the eight model points considered the sparticle masses calculated with ISAJET are in good agreement with the output of SUSYFIRE.

The generated events were then passed through ATLFAST , a fast particle-level simulation of the ATLAS detector. The ATLFAST package, however, was only used to evaluate the efficiency of the calorimetric trigger that selects the GMSB events. The detailed response of the detector to the slepton NLSP has been parametrised for this work using the results of a full simulation study, as described in the next section.

## B.3 Slepton detection

The experimental signatures of heavy long-lived charged particles at a hadron collider have already been studied both in the framework of GMSB and in more general scenarios . The two main observables one can use to separate these particles from muons are the high specific ionisation and the time of flight in the detector.

We concentrate here on the measurement of the time of flight, made possible by the timing precision ($`<\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1}`$ ns) and the size of the ATLAS muon spectrometer.

It was demonstrated with a full simulation of the ATLAS muon detector  that the $`\beta `$ of a particle can be measured with a resolution that can be approximately parameterised as $`\sigma (\beta )/\beta ^2=0.028`$. The resolution on the transverse momentum measurement for heavy particles is found to be comparable to the one expected for muons. We have therefore simulated the detector response to NLSP sleptons by smearing the slepton momentum and $`\beta `$ according to the parameterisations in Ref. .

An important issue is the online selection of the SUSY events. We have not made any attempt to evaluate whether the heavy sleptons can be selected using the muon trigger. For the event selection, we rely on the calorimetric $`E_T^{\mathrm{miss}}`$ trigger, consisting in the requirement of at least a hadronic jet with $`p_T>50`$ GeV, and a transverse momentum imbalance calculated only from the energy deposition in the calorimeter larger than 50 GeV. We checked that this trigger has an efficiency in excess of 80% for all the considered models.

A detailed discussion of the experimental assumptions underlying the results presented here is given in Ref. .

## B.4 Event Selection and Slepton Mass Measurement

In order to select a clean sample of sleptons, we apply the following requirements:

* at least a hadronic jet with $`P_T>50`$ GeV and a calorimetric
$`E_T^{\mathrm{miss}}>50`$ GeV (trigger requirement);
* at least one candidate slepton satisfying the following cuts:

+ $`|\eta |<`$2.4 to ensure that the particle is in the acceptance of the muon trigger chamber, and therefore both coordinates can be measured;
    + $`\beta _{\mathrm{meas}}<0.91`$, where $`\beta _{\mathrm{meas}}`$ is the $`\beta `$ of the particle measured with the time of flight in the precision chambers;
    + The $`P_T`$ of the slepton candidate, after the energy loss in the calorimeters has been taken into account, must be larger than 10 GeV, to ensure that the particle traverse all of the muon stations.

Considering an integrated luminosity of 30 fb<sup>-1</sup>, a number of events ranging from a few hundred for the models with 2 TeV squark mass scale to a few hundred thousand for a 500 GeV mass scale survive these cuts and can be used for measuring the NLSP properties.

From the measurements of the slepton momentum and of particle $`\beta `$, the mass can be determined using the standard relation $`m=p\frac{\sqrt{1\beta ^2}}{\beta }`$. For each value of $`\beta `$ and momentum, the measurement error is known and it is given by the parametrisations in Ref. . Therefore, the most straightforward way of measuring the mass is just to use the weighted average of all the masses calculated with the above formula.

In order to perform this calculation, the particle momentum is needed, which implies measuring the $`\eta `$ coordinate. In fact, with the precision chambers only one can only measure the momentum components transverse to the beam axis.

The measurement of the second coordinate must be provided by the trigger chambers, for which only a limited time window around the beam crossing is read out, therefore restricting the $`\beta `$ range where this measurement is available. Hence, we have evaluated the achieved measurement precision for two different $`\beta `$ intervals: $`0.6<\beta <0.91`$ and $`0.8<\beta <0.91`$ for the eight sample points. We found a statistical error well below the 0.1% level for those model points having $`m_{\stackrel{~}{q}}<1300`$ GeV. Even for the three models (B5, B7, B8) with lower statistics ($`m_{\stackrel{~}{q}}2`$ TeV), the error stays below the 0.4% level.

Many more details, tables and figures about this part of our study can be found in Ref. .

## B.5 Slepton Lifetime Measurement

The measurement of the NLSP lifetime at a high energy $`e^+e^{}`$ collider was studied in detail in Ref.  for the neutralino NLSP case. Similar to that study, the measurement of the slepton NLSP lifetime we are interested in here can be performed by exploiting the fact that two NLSP’s are produced in each event. One can therefore select $`N_1`$ events where a slepton is detected through the time-of-flight measurement described above, count the number of times $`N_2`$ when a second slepton is observed and use this information to measure the lifetime. Although in principle very simple, in practice this method requires an excellent control on all possible sources of inefficiency for detecting the second slepton.

We give here the basis of the method, without mentioning the experimental details. We provide an estimate of the achievable statistical error for the models considered and a parametrisation of the effect on the lifetime measurement of a generic systematic uncertainty on the slepton efficiency. In case the sparticle spectrum and BR’s can be measured from the SUSY events, as e.g. shown in Ref. , an accurate simulation of all the SUSY production processes can be performed, and the results from this section are representative of the measurement precision achievable in a real experiment.

Another method based on the same principles, but assuming minimal knowledge of the SUSY spectrum, is described in Ref. , where a detailed estimate of the achievable systematic precision is given.

We define $`N_1`$ starting from the event sample defined by the cuts discussed in Sec. B.4 Event Selection and Slepton Mass Measurement, with the additional requirement that, for a given value of the slepton lifetime, at least one of the produced sleptons decays at at a distance from the interaction vertex $`>10`$ m, and is therefore reconstructed in the muon system. For the events thus selected, we define $`N_2`$ as the subsample where a second particle with a transverse momentum $`>10`$ GeV is identified in the muon system. The search for the second particle should be as inclusive as possible, in order to minimise the corrections to the ratio. In particular, the cut $`\beta _{\mathrm{meas}}<0.91`$ is not applied, but particles with a mass measured from $`\beta `$ and momentum incompatible with the measured slepton mass are rejected. This leaves a background of high momentum muons in the sample that can be statistically subtracted using the momentum distribution of electrons. The ratio

$$R=\frac{N_2}{N_1}$$
(7)
is a function of the slepton lifetime. Its dependence on the NLSP lifetime $`c\tau `$ in metres in shown in Fig. 5 for four among our eight sample models. The curves for the model points not shown are either very similar to one of the curves we show or are mostly included between the external curves corresponding to points B1 and B8, thus providing no essential additional information. Note that the curve for model 6 starts from $`c\tau =2.5`$ m and not from $`c\tau =50`$ cm, as for the other models. This is due to the large value of $`M_{\mathrm{mess}}`$ (cfr. Tab. 2), determining a minimum NLSP lifetime allowed by theory which is macroscopic in this case \[cfr. Eqs. (3) and (5)\].

The probability for a particle of mass $`m`$, momentum $`p`$ and proper lifetime $`\tau `$ to travel a distance $`L`$ before decaying is given by the expression

$$P(L)=e^{mL/pc\tau }.$$
(8)
$`N_2`$ is therefore a function of the momentum distribution of the slepton, which is determined by the details of the SUSY spectrum. One needs therefore to be able to simulate the full SUSY cascade decays in order to construct the $`c\tau `$$`R`$ relationship.

The statistical error on $`R`$ can be evaluated as

$$\sigma (R)=\sqrt{\frac{R(1R)}{N_1}}.$$
(9)
Relevant for the precision with which the SUSY breaking scale can be measured is instead the error on the measured $`c\tau `$. This can be extracted from the curves shown in Fig. 5 and can be evaluated as

$$\sigma (\mathrm{c}\tau )=\sigma (R)/\left[\frac{R(c\tau )}{c\tau }\right].$$
(10)
The measurement precision calculated according to this formula is shown in Figs. 6 and 7 for the eight sample points, for an integrated luminosity of 30 fb<sup>-1</sup>. The full line in the plots is the error on $`c\tau `$ considering the statistical error on $`R`$ only. The available statistics is a function of the strongly interacting sparticles’ mass scale. Even if a precise $`R`$$`c\tau `$ relation can be built from the knowledge of the model details, there will be a systematic uncertainty in the evaluation of the losses in $`N_2`$, because of sleptons produced outside the $`\eta `$ acceptance, or absorbed in the calorimeters, or escaping the calorimeter with a transverse momentum below the cuts. The full study of these uncertainties is in progress.

At this level, we just parameterise the systematic error as a term proportional to $`R`$, added in quadrature to the statistical error. We choose two values, $`1\%R`$ and $`5\%R`$, and propagate the error to the $`c\tau `$ measurement. The results are represented by the dashed and dotted lines in Figs. 6 and 7.

For the models with squark mass scales up to 1200 GeV, assuming a 1% systematic error on the measured ratio, a precision better than 10% on the $`c\tau `$ measurement can be obtained for lifetimes between 0.5–1 m and 50–80 m. If the systematic uncertainty grows to 5%, the 10% precision can only be achieved in the range 1–10 m. If the mass scale goes up to 2 TeV, even considering a pure statistical error only, a 10% precision is not achievable. However a 20% precision is possible over $`c\tau `$ ranges between 5 and 100 m, assuming a 1% systematic error.

Note that the curves corresponding to the model points B2, B6 and B7 do not start from $`c\tau =50`$ cm, but from the theoretical lower limit on $`c\tau `$ of 1.8, 2.5 and 6.1 metres, respectively.

## B.6 Determining the SUSY Breaking Scale $`\sqrt{F}`$

Using the measured values of $`c\tau `$ and the NLSP mass, the SUSY breaking scale $`\sqrt{F}`$ can be calculated from Eq. (3), where $`=1`$ for the case where the NLSP is a slepton. From simple error propagation, the fractional uncertainty on the $`\sqrt{F}`$ measurement can be obtained adding in quadrature one fourth of the fractional error in $`c\tau `$ and five fourths of the fractional error on the slepton mass.

In Figs. 8 and 9, we show the fractional error on the $`\sqrt{F}`$ measurement as a function of $`\sqrt{F}`$ for our three different assumptions on the $`c\tau `$ error. The uncertainty is dominated by $`c\tau `$ for the higher part of the $`\sqrt{F}`$ range and grows quickly when approaching the lower limit on $`\sqrt{F}`$. This is because very few sleptons survive and the statistical error on both $`m_\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`c\tau `$ gets very large. If we assume a 1% systematic error on the ratio $`R`$ from which $`c\tau `$ is measured (dashed lines in Figs. 8 and 9), the error on $`\sqrt{F}`$ is better than 10% for $`1000<\sqrt{F}<\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}4000}`$ TeV for model points B1–B4 with higher statistics. For points B5–B8, in general one can explore a range of higher $`\sqrt{F}`$ values with a small relative error, essentially due to the heaviness of the decaying NLSP in these models. Note also that the theoretical lower limit (5) on $`\sqrt{F}`$ is equal to about 1200, 1500, 3900, 8900 TeV respectively in model points B2, B5, B6, B7, while it stays well below 1000 TeV for the other models.

## B.7 Conclusions

We have discussed a simple method to measure at the LHC with the ATLAS detector the fundamental SUSY breaking scale $`\sqrt{F}`$ in the GMSB scenarios where a slepton is the NLSP and decays to the gravitino with a lifetime in the range 0.5 m $`<c\tau _{\mathrm{NLSP}}<\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1}`$ km. This method requires the measurement of the time of flight of long lived sleptons and is based on counting events with one or two identified NLSP’s. It relies on the assumptions that a good knowledge of the MSSM sparticle spectrum and BR’s can be extracted from the observation of the SUSY events and that the systematic error in evaluating the slepton losses can be kept below the few percent level. We performed detailed, particle level simulations for eight representative GMSB models, some of them being particularly hard due to low statistics. We found that a level of precision of a few 10’s % on the SUSY breaking scale measurement can be achieved in significant parts of the $`1000<\sqrt{F}<\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}30000}`$ TeV range, for all models considered. More details as well as a full study of the systematics associated with this procedure and another less “model-dependent” method to measure $`\sqrt{F}`$ is presented in detail in Ref. .

### Acknowledgements

S. A. and G. P. thank the organisers of the Workshop “Physics at TeV Colliders”, for the hospitality and the pleasant and productive atmosphere in Les Houches.


text:
# 1 𝐽 vs. 𝑉/𝑁 curves for three mesas at 𝑇=4.2K and 𝑇=150 K. Inset a) shows temperature dependencies of the gap voltage, 𝑉_𝑔, and the voltage separation of multiple quasiparticle branches, Δ𝑉. Inset b) shows temperature dependencies of the zero-bias resistance.

Intrinsic tunneling spectroscopy in small Bi2212 mesas

Vladimir Krasnov1,2, August Yurgens1,3, Dag Winkler4,1 and Per Delsing1

1 MINA, Chalmers University of Technology, S41296, Göteborg, Sweden
2 Institute of Solid state Physics, 142432 Chernogolovka, Russia
3 P.L.Kapitsa Institute, 117334 Moscow, Russia
4 IMEGO Institute, Aschebergsgatan 46, S41133, Göteborg, Sweden

Tunneling spectroscopy of high-$`T_c`$ superconductors (HTSC) provides an important information about quasiparticle density of states (DOS), which is crucial for understanding HTSC mechanism. Surface tunneling experiments  showed, that besides the superconducting gap in the DOS, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, there is a structure usually referred to as the ”pseudo-gap”, which exists well above $`T_c`$. Both the behaviour of the superconducting gap and it’s correlation with the pseudo-gap are still a matter of controversy.

To avoid drawbacks of surface tunneling experiments, such as dependence on the surface deterioration, surface states and undefined geometry, we used ”intrinsic” tunneling spectroscopy. HTSC single crystals can be considered as stacks of atomic scale intrinsic Josephson junctions (IJJ’s). Using microfabrication, it is possible to make small HTSC mesa structures with a well defined geometry. Moreover, IJJ’s far from the sample surface can be measured, and deterioration of the sample surface becomes less important. Current-voltage characteristics (IVC’s) of mesas exhibiting tunnel junction behavior and can be used for studying DOS. On the other hand, intrinsic tunneling spectroscopy can suffer from ohmic heating of the IJJ’s and steps (defects) on the surface of the crystal.

In this paper we present experimental data for small area Bi2Sr2CaCu2O8+x (Bi2212) mesas containing few IJJ’s. By decreasing the mesa area, $`S`$, we minimize both the effect of overheating and the probability of defects in the mesa. Mesas with dimensions from 2 to 20 $`\mu `$m were fabricated simultaneously on top of Bi2212 single crystals. First a long and narrow mesa was fabricated using photolithography and chemical etching. Next, insulating CaF2 layer was deposited and lift-off was used to make an opening. Finally, Ag film was deposited and electrodes were formed on top of the initial mesa by photolithography and Ar-ion etching. After etching, mesas beneath Ag electrodes remain.

In Fig.1, normalized IVC’s of three mesas at $`T`$=4.2K and $`T`$=150 K are shown. The vertical axis represents the current density, $`J=I/S`$, and the horizontal axis shows the voltage per junction, $`V/N`$. IVC’s for different samples are plotted by different colours. Parameters of the mesas are listed in Table 1. From Fig.1 it is seen, that the normalized IVC’s merge quite well into one curve. This indicates good reproducibility of the fabrication procedure. The $`c`$-axis normal resistivity was, $`\rho _N=R_NS/Ns=44\pm 2.0`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$cm, where $`s=15.5\AA `$ is the spacing periodicity of IJJ’s and $`R_N`$ is the resistance at large bias current and $`T_c93`$ K.

| Table 1: | mesa | $`S`$ ($`\mu `$m2) | $`N`$ | $`R_N(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  | S251b | $`6\times 6`$ | 12 | 229.9 |
|  | S255b | $`5.5\times 6`$ | 12 | 256.4 |
|  | S211b | $`4\times 7.5`$ | 12 | 272.5 |
|  | S216b | $`4\times 20`$ | 10 | 87 |

From Fig.1 it is seen that IVC’s exhibit clear tunnel junction behavior: (i) At low bias, multiple quasiparticle branches are seen, representing one-by-one switching of IJJ’s into the resistive state. The number of IJJ’s in the mesa was obtained by counting those branches. (ii) At intermediate currents there is a pronounced knee in IVC’s, representing the sum-gap voltage, $`V_g=2\mathrm{\Delta }/e`$. (iii) At high currents, there is a well defined normal resistance branch, $`R_N`$. As seen from Fig.1, $`R_N`$ is almost temperature independent, as may be expected for a tunnel resistance. In contrast, the zero bias resistance, $`R(0)`$, increases sharply with decreasing $`T`$, as shown in inset b).

Inset a) in Fig.1 shows temperature dependence of the gap voltage, $`V_g`$, and the maximum spacing between multiple quasiparticle branches, $`\mathrm{\Delta }V`$, for four mesas on two diffrerent chips. Solid and open symbols represent branches for $`V>0`$ and $`V<0`$, respectively. $`\mathrm{\Delta }V`$ was determined at the ”maximum critical current”, at which the last IJJ switches to the resistive state, e.g. in Fig.1 that would correspond to $`J1.3\times 10^3`$ A/cm2. This current is fluctuating from run to run, therefore, causing an uncertainty in determination of $`\mathrm{\Delta }V`$. From the inset a) it is seen, that $`\mathrm{\Delta }V`$ is approximately two times less than $`V_g`$. This is simply due to the fact that all the IJJ’s switch to the resistive state before they reach the gap voltage, see Fig.1. However, it is seen that the temperature dependence of $`\mathrm{\Delta }V`$ reflects that for $`V_g`$. The observed $`V_g`$ correspond to $`\mathrm{\Delta }32`$ meV at $`T`$=4.2 K, in agreement with .

The IVC’s in Fig.1 suggest that there is no significant heating effect in our mesas. Indeed, overheating should cause the reduction of $`V_g`$. Instead, we observed that the normalized IVC’s merge into a single curve with identical $`V_g`$, despite a considerable difference in the dissipated power, $`PS`$. Moreover, we have checked that the voltages of the quasiparticle branches scale with their number, $`V_n\frac{n}{N}V_N`$, where $`V_N`$ is the top branch, with all IJJ’s in the resistive state. Thus, switching of additional IJJ’s does not cause visible overheating of the mesa. On the other hand, we did observe a strong overheating for even smaller mesas (2$`\times 4`$ $`\mu `$m2), containing larger number of IJJ’s $`(100)`$, so that a clear back-banding was seen at large currents, and significantly lower $`V_g`$ was obtained, similar to that in Refs.. Therefore, a small number of IJJ’s in the mesa decreases the risk of overheating.

In Fig.2, the conductance at different temperatures is shown for one of the samples. The sharp peak at $`V_g`$ and the depletion of conductance at $`\left|V\right|<V_g`$ is seen at low $`T`$, representing the superconducting gap in the DOS. The suppression of DOS below the gap results in strong temperature dependence of $`R(0)`$, see inset b) in Fig.1. With increasing temperature, the peak at $`V_g`$ shifts to lower voltages and decreases in magnitude. At $`T`$80 K, the peak is smeared out completely and only smooth depletion of the conductance remains at $`V`$=0. With the further increase of $`T`$, this depletion gradually decreases, but is still visible even at room temperature, representing the pseudo-gap in DOS. In agreement with the surface tunneling experiments, there is almost no changes in the conductance at $`T_c`$, which implies that the pseudo-gap coexists with the superconductivity.

There is a crucial difference between our, ”intrinsic”, and the surface tunneling experiments, which allows us to distinguish the superconducting gap from the pseudo gap. The difference is in existence of multiple quasiparticle branches in IVC’s, see Fig.1. Therefore, we have an additional quantity, the spacing between the quasiparticle branches, $`\mathrm{\Delta }V`$, which can be used for estimation of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Even though the peak in conductance is smeared out at $`T>`$80 K, the quasiparticle branches in the IVC’s remain well defined up to $`T_c`$. The $`\mathrm{\Delta }V`$ continuously decreases with increasing $`T`$ and vanishes exactly at $`T_c`$, as shown in inset a) in Fig.1.

This brings us to conclusion that the superconducting gap does close at $`T_c`$, in contrast to the statement of Ref.. On the other hand, the pseudo gap is almost independent of $`T`$, in agreement with . The pseudo gap can exist well above $`T_c`$ and, probably, can coexist with the superconducting gap even at $`T<T_c`$, see Fig.2. We can not conclude that the superconducting gap is developed from the pseudo gap nor that they are competing with each other. From our experiment, it seems more natural to assume that those two gaps are independent or only weakly dependent, despite having the same order of magnitude. In Ref.  possible scenarios of the pseudo gap were reviewed. One of the possible mechanisms is due to Coulomb charging effect in IJJ’s. Some experimental evidence for that was obtained in . For the smallest mesas, we have also seen certain features, such as a complete suppression of the critical current and an offset voltage in IVC’s, which may be explained in terms of the Coulomb charging effect. However, further study is necessary before making a decisive conclusion about the origin of the pseudo-gap.


text:
# Crystal-like high frequency phonons in the amorphous phases of solid water

\[

## Abstract

The high frequency dynamics of low- ($`LDA`$) and high-density amorphous-ice ($`HDA`$) and of cubic ice ($`I_c`$) has been measured by inelastic X-ray Scattering (IXS) in the 1$`÷`$15 nm-1 momentum transfer ($`Q`$) range. Sharp phonon-like excitations are observed, and the longitudinal acoustic branch is identified up to $`Q=8`$ nm-1 in $`LDA`$ and $`I_c`$ and up to 5 nm-1 in $`HDA`$. The narrow width of these excitations is in sharp contrast with the broad features observed in all amorphous systems studied so far. The ”crystal-like” behavior of amorphous ices, therefore, implies a considerable reduction in the number of decay channels available to sound-like excitations which is assimilated to low local disorder.

\] Amorphous polymorphism, i.e. the existence of two or more amorphous states in the phase diagram of a chemical substance, has recently attracted wide interest from the scientific community . In water, amorphous polymorphism has received particular attention as it was associated with a possible phase separation in the deeply undercooled liquid  \- this is suggested by the idea that the two amorphous water phases may be identified with the glassy forms of two liquid phases. In systems like water, the ergodic to non-ergodic transition from the undercooled liquid to the glass cannot be studied continuously as a function of temperature due to homogeneous crystallization. The glassy nature of the amorphous ice phases can, therefore, only be established indirectly, and this has contributed to raise controversies on the exact nature of the phase-diagram of water, and on the inter-relations among the different stable and metastable phases of this molecule .

The growing perception that the glassy state is a very general state of condensed matter justifies the many experimental, theoretical and simulation studies performed on glasses. Among them, there is a growing interest in the study of the collective dynamical properties at high frequency, i.e. in the wavelength regime approaching the interparticle distances. Here one expects that either a continuum description, valid in the hydrodynamic limit, or the ordered-medium (phonon) picture developed for crystalline materials will fail as a consequence of the disorder. The deviations can then be used to characterize and better understand the glassy state. More specifically, there is a number of dynamic signatures which are associated with the glassy state . At very low temperatures two-level states give rise to tunneling phenomena . At higher temperatures disorder scattering and anharmonicities play an increasingly important role leading to excess densities of states (Boson peak) and relaxational phenomena . Recently, the overdamping of sound waves at high frequency was proposed as a further criteria to characterize the glassy behavior . The study of the collective dynamics of amorphous ice at wavelengths approaching the distance among water molecules may contribute, therefore, to the understanding of the differences between these two phases, and may help to shed light on such issues as their relation to stable crystalline phases or on the existence of two different liquid phases.

In the present letter we present the excitation spectrum of both amorphous forms of water, i.e. high-density ($`HDA`$) and low-density amorphous ice ($`LDA`$), as determined by high resolution inelastic X-ray scattering (IXS) at momentum transfers ($`Q`$) comparable to the inverse of the inter-molecular distance. The experiment has been performed at the very high energy resolution ID16 beamline at the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility in Grenoble. The instrument energy resolution was set to 1.6 meV full width half maximum (FWHM) using 21.748 keV incident photons. The detection system was made up of five independent analyzer systems, displaced among each other by a constant angular offset corresponding to a $`Q`$-spacing of 3 nm-1. The $`Q`$ resolution was set to 0.4 nm-1 FWHM. The energy scans at constant $`Q`$-transfer took about 150’, and each $`Q`$ point was obtained by a typical averaging of 3-5 scans. The transverse dimensions of the beam at the sample were 0.15 $`\times `$ 0.3 mm2. Further experimental details can be found elsewhere .

The $`HDA`$ sample was obtained by pressurizing hexagonal D2O ice $`I_h`$ at 77 K  beyond 10 kbar using the piston-cylinder apparatus described previously . Keeping the sample always at liquid nitrogen temperature, the metastable compound was retrieved from the cell at ambient pressure in mm-size chunks ($`\rho =1.17\pm 0.02`$ g/cm3), and placed into a steel container with two diametrically opposed openings to allow for the passage of the incident and scattered X-ray beam. The effective powder sample thickness along the beam was $``$ 15 mm, matching well the X-ray photo-absorption length. Once filled, the container was transferred under a continuous helium flow from the liquid nitrogen bath onto the cold-finger of a precooled closed-cycle refrigerator. Above $`90`$ K $`HDA`$ transforms with a strongly temperature dependent rate to $`LDA`$ ($`\rho =0.94\pm 0.02`$ g/cm3), which, in turns, converts itself into cubic ice $`I_\mathrm{c}`$ at $`140`$ K. $`HDA`$ and $`LDA`$, after proper annealing, were both measured at 60 K, while $`I_c`$ after annealing was measured at 80 K. The similarity of the temperatures allows a direct comparison of the scattering intensities.

The purity of each phase was checked by measuring the respective static structure factors, $`S(Q)`$, reported in Fig. 1 with a momentum resolution of 0.04 nm-1. Both $`HDA`$ and $`LDA`$ samples show the known static structure factor  with no signs of Bragg-peaks and, therefore, they are free of crystalline ice XII . There is a pronounced small-angle signal in $`HDA`$ which disappears upon annealing to $`LDA`$. Within our energy resolution, its origin is purely elastic as it will be seen by the inelastic scans reported in the following. As only moderate changes in the elastic small angle signal were observed with neutrons , it is questionable whether the strong effect observed here is a real bulk property of the $`HDA`$ sample or whether its origin stems from surface scattering in the powder sample.

A selection of inelastic spectra obtained in the range $`Q<8`$ nm-1 are reported in Fig. 2 and Fig. 3. In both amorphous ice phases and in the cubic crystalline phase there are well pronounced resonances. Increasing $`Q`$ one initially observes a single feature with a marked dispersion. At $`Q`$-values higher than 5 nm-1, the spectra become more complicated by the appearance of additional inelastic features. As X-rays, like neutrons, couple directly to the longitudinal component of the density fluctuations, the dispersive excitation observed from the lowest $`Q`$-values can be readily identified with the longitudinal acoustic-like branches. In $`HDA`$ these excitations can be clearly observed up to about 5 nm-1, while, in $`LDA`$ and $`I_c`$, they can be safely distinguished from the other feature(s) up to 10 nm-1.

In order to derive the energy position, $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }(Q)`$, and the width, $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)`$, of the excitations, they have been fitted by a Lorenzian function convoluted with the experimentally determined instrumental resolution function. This resolution function corresponds to the central peak at $`E=0`$ in Fig. 2, that, as discussed previously, is due to the static disorder in the samples and to small angle scattering from the sample environment (see Fig. 2 and Ref.). The best fit to the inelastic X-ray scattering data shows that the excitation energy $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }(Q)`$ scales linearly with the momentum transfer $`Q`$ in the limit of small momentum transfers. ¿From the derived linear relation, $`\mathrm{\Omega }(Q)=cQ`$, it is possible to obtain the longitudinal sound velocities $`c_{HDA}=3550\pm 50`$ m/s, $`c_{LDA}=3550\pm 50`$ m/s and $`c_{I_c}=3750\pm 50`$ m/s, respectively. The differences among these values are small, and this is in agreement with the similar Debye level found in these three materials by neutron scattering experiments . The determination from the best fits of the resonance widths, $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)`$, is more involved, and is complicated by two facts: i) the absolute values for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)`$ are highly correlated with the background, and ii), particularly in $`HDA`$, the features appearing with increasing $`Q`$ on the low-frequency side of the acoustic-like peaks interfere with the fit. Therefore, no systematic dependence of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)`$ on $`Q`$ has been established. In both $`LDA`$ and $`HDA`$ one observes, however, that the resonances become broader with increasing $`Q`$-transfer. In any case care has to be taken in interpreting such broadening because the line shape of the resonances is unknown. For a single phonon it could be assumed Lorenzian reflecting the finite lifetime of the excitation. However, when taking a powder average the line shape acquires a non-analytic form even for the crystal due to the anisotropy within the multidimensional dispersion-sheet.

Despite the difficulty to give full account of the observed broadening in the measured spectra, one can deduce from Figs. 2 and 3 the following important observation: As seen by the naked eye, the width of the resonances remains by far smaller than the excitation energy, $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }(Q)`$, for all the considered $`Q`$-values. This result is very different from the observation made so far in other glassy systems. There, in fact, one observes an acoustic phonon-like resonance with a linear dispersion of $`\mathrm{\Omega }(Q)`$ vs $`Q`$ and a quadratic dispersion of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)`$ vs $`Q`$ up to a value $`Q=Q_m`$. $`Q_m`$ is defined by the relation $`\mathrm{\Omega }(Q_m)\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q_m)`$. At $`Q`$ larger than $`Q_m`$ it is no longer possible to observe well defined excitations and the inelastic part of the spectrum is, at the most, a broad and structureless background.

Let us take the position, $`Q_M`$, of the first sharp diffraction peak as an indicator for the extent of structural correlations in the two amorphous phases. This allows us to define a pseudo Brillouin zone  which extends to $`Q_M/210`$ nm-1 in $`HDA`$, and to $`Q_M/28`$ nm-1 in $`LDA`$. The quantity $`Q_m/Q_M`$ has so far always been found smaller than 0.5 . In the two amorphous ice phases studied here, excitations are very well defined up to $`Q`$-transfer values approaching $`Q_M`$, and, at least in $`LDA`$, the longitudinal acoustic-like branch can be identified very well at least up to $`Q=8`$ nm-1. In Ref. , it has been suggested the possible existence of a relation between the value of $`Q_m/Q_M`$ and the degree of fragility of the considered glass . The high value of $`Q_m/Q_M`$, which seems to approach unity in these two glasses, would imply that amorphous ices, and especially $`LDA`$, are the extreme end of fragile glasses. This is in contradiction to the view that water passes through an inflection in the deeply supercooled region where the liquid behavior changes from extremely fragile to strong .

A further observation coming from the analysis of the spectra in Fig. 2 and 3 is that the spectra of $`LDA`$, at all the considered $`Q`$-values, are very similar to those measured in ice $`I_c`$ . In $`HDA`$ the resemblance is less pronounced . The similarity of $`LDA`$ and $`I_c`$ holds not only for the resonances assigned to the acoustic mode, but also for the excitations at $``$7 meV, which appear at higher $`Q`$ and recall the transverse dynamics found in ice $`I_h`$ and liquid water . In fact, as in these systems, the excitations set in around 5 nm-1 and, as seen in Fig. 3, they become more pronounced beyond $`Q_M`$. The translational part of the density-of-states for $`I_h`$, $`I_c`$ and $`LDA`$, as obtained from INS spectra , is peaked around 6.5 meV (D2O). It is, therefore to be expected, that the INX spectra show excitations in this energy region at low $`Q`$ due to Umklapp processes. These processes take place via the Bragg peaks in the crystalline state and via the static structure factor in the case of $`LDA`$ .

Despite the high definition of the low $`Q`$ excitations in the two amorphous ice phases when compared to other glasses, one recovers a clear indication of the disordered character from the evolution of the inelastic spectrum at larger $`Q`$ values. The spectra of $`LDA`$ and $`HDA`$ are less structured, lacking the sharp features observed in ice $`I_c`$.

To conclude, we reported on an IXS measurement of the $`S(Q,E)`$ of the two known phases of amorphous ice. This has allowed to show that these two states of the water molecule possess a surprisingly crystal-like dynamic response. In both $`HDA`$ and $`LDA`$ the sound wave excitations are well defined. These experimental findings are in sharp contrast to the results found so far in other glasses, glass forming materials, liquids, dense gases and disordered materials in general. In these systems, in fact, an important broadening has always been observed in the inelastic part of the dynamic structure factor $`S(Q,E)`$. In this $`Q`$-region the scattering experiment becomes sensitive to the topological disorder which opens decay channels for sound excitations in addition to those available in the crystal. These channels are found practically absent in the case of the amorphous ice phases indicating a very low degree of local disorder. Structural results are controversially discussed and to date do not give a clear picture of the topology . Experimentally only the pair correlation functions are directly accessible. Higher order correlations, among these the orientational correlation function, must be obtained in an indirect way  e.g. via the dynamic response. We deduce from our data highly intact hydrogen bond networks both in $`LDA`$ and to some lesser degree equally in $`HDA`$. Although an intact network in itself is no warranty for the absence of decay channels — e.g. an infinite random framework of corner-linked SiO2-tetrahedra can undergo large phonon-assisted distortions  — it seems a necessary condition. In $`LDA`$ this network is perfectly annealed as it is not obtained via a fast quench from the liquid. Due to the constraints of the network the number of states the system can sample on the ps time scale should be small, i.e. there is a small configurational entropy, a view which is compatible with thermodynamic data . $`HDA`$ is expected to possess a larger configurational entropy, and on this basis one can justify that $`HDA`$ has more ”glassy behavior” than $`LDA`$.

Apart from structure and bonding the dynamical properties of the water molecule influence the decay of sound-like excitations both in crystalline and amorphous ice. We just want to point to the clear separation of translational and librational bands which independent of the structural details arises from the very small moment of inertia of the water molecule. This separation closes decay channels — e.g. present in SiO2 — involving resonances of acoustic-like and librational modes, and may equally explain the absence of strong excess intensities in the inelastic neutron scattering data . Temperature and the concomitant anharmonicities equally have to be given proper consideration in the discussion . In the end only detailed molecular dynamics calculations on well characterized ensembles combined with experiments on similar systems will be able to unambiguously give the reasons for the crystal like dynamic response of amorphous ice phases.

We acknowledge A. Mermet for his help during the IXS measurements, B. Gorges and R. Verbeni for technical support, F. Sciortino, C.A. Angell and G. Ruocco for useful discussions. We also acknowledge the financial support of the Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung under project number 03fu4dor5.

FIGURE CAPTIONS

FIG. 1 - Static structure factor of high density ($`HDA`$) and low density ($`LDA`$) amorphous ice as measured on the inelastic X-ray beamline prior to the inelastic experiments. No signs of Bragg peaks are observed, indicating that both amorphous phases are free of crystalline ice XII contaminations. Note the strong small-angle signal in $`HDA`$. The inset shows the diffraction pattern of cubic ice.

FIG. 2 - Inelastic X-ray spectra of high density amorphous ($`HDA`$), low density amorphous ($`LDA`$) and crystalline cubic ice ($`I_c`$) at the indicated $`Q`$ values lying mainly in the first pseudo Brillouin zone. The dashed line is a fit to the sinal using Lorenzian lineshapes convoluted with the resolution function (equally indicated). The solid line represents the inelastic contribution to the total fits. The numbers in brackets on the left of the elastic line give the elastic intensities in arbitrary units. Note the close resemblance of the sharp inelastic response of both amorphous phases to the crystalline phase.

FIG. 3 - Inelastic X-ray spectra of high density amorphous ($`HDA`$), low density amorphous ($`LDA`$) and crystalline cubic ice ($`I_c`$) at high $`Q`$ values in the second pseudo Brillouin zones. The dashed line gives the resolution function. The elastic intensities are given in brackets. For these high $`Q`$ values the excitations become part of a broad intensity distribution reminiscent of the density-of-states.