format: text

text:
# JLC Overview11footnote 1 Talk presented at APPI2002 workshop, 13-16 February, 2002, APPI, Iwate, Japan

## 1 Introduction

JLC is a linear collider for $`e^+e^{}`$ collision at the energy frontier. The designed initial center-of-mass energy of the collider is 500 GeV with a luminosity of up to about $`2.5\times 10^{34}/cm^2/s`$. In this energy region, the production of a light Higgs boson is expected, in addition to the high statics productions of Top quarks and $`W`$ bosons. The productions of other new particles are also predicted in models such as SUSY models. Studies of these particles at JLC will make an indispensable contribution to our understanding of the fundamental forces and constituents.

Considering the importance of the $`e^+e^{}`$ linear collider project, the Asian Committee for future Accelerators (ACFA) has initiated a working group to study physics scenarios and experimental feasibilities at the linear collider in 1997. Four ACFA workshops have been held since then, and the group published a report in summer 2001. This report consists of discussions on physics at JLC, studies of a detector for JLC, and optional experiments using $`\gamma \gamma `$, $`\gamma e^{}`$, and $`e^{}e^{}`$ collisions. Since it is impossible to cover everything in a short time, selected topics from the report are presented in this talk.

In the following two sections, the parameters of the JLC accelerator and the detector are described. In the subsequent section, selected topics concerning the physics on Higgs, Top and SUSY are described. Please see the ACFA report, for topics not covered here.

## 2 Accelerator

The layout of the JLC accelerator is shown in Fig. 1. The accelerator consists of two systems: one for electrons and the other for positrons. In the electron system, electrons are generated by an $`e^{}`$ gun and accelerated to about 2 GeV by the Linac; the emittance is reduced by the damping ring (DR) and the longitudinal beam size is reduced by the bunch compressors (BC1, BC2). The electrons are then accelerated to by the Pre-Linac (up to 10 GeV), and then by the Main Linac. The final focus system (FFS) focuses the beam size at the interaction points (IP). The positron system is similar to the electron one, except for positron generation. Positrons are generated by injecting high energy electrons on a high Z target. For efficient collection of the produced positrons, an additional dumping ring (Pre-DR) is inserted before DR.

The parameters of the JLC accelerator are summarized in Table 1. The first three columns (A, X, Y) are parameters described in the ACFA Report. The A is a typical parameter set which we can expect at the early stage of accelerator operation. Together with the operation, tuning of the machine is proceed, and we will be able to operate high current beams with very low emittances, and the luminosity as high as the Y parameter can be expected. Recently, the international Technical Review Committee has been organized to review accelerator technology developed in each region. The last two columns in Table 1 show the parameters prepared for that committee. The TRC-500 parameter is similar to the Y parameter as for as the luminosity is concerned.

From an experimental point of view, the JLC accelerator has several unique features. Firstly, the JLC beam has a special time structure. One pulse of the JLC beam consists of many bunches with a small time separation of 2.8 nsec to 1.4 nsec. The pulse length of the beam is about 270 nsec, while there is a very long interval on the order of 10 msec between each pulse. This makes it hard to make an event trigger during a beam pulse while leaving sufficient time for a trigger decision between the pulses.

Secondly, due to the magnetic field produced by the opposite beam of high charge density, beam particles loose their energy and emit low energy $`e^\pm `$ and $`\gamma `$ particles, which is known as Beamstrahlung. The beamstrahlung smears the collision energies and reduces the effective luminosity at the nominal center-of-mass energy. The amount of this effect depends on the accelerator parameters, and it becomes significant just above the threshold of particle production where the production cross section changes rapidly with the energy. The spectra in the case of A and Y parameters are shown in Fig. 4 together with the bremsstrahlung spectra.

Thirdly, the energy spread of the beam in the main linac is relatively larger than that of conventional circular colliders, since there are no strong bending magnets to fix the energy. However, the spread of the collision energy can be controlled to some extent by adjusting the RF phases of the linacs. We will be able to select the spectrum such as a wide but short tail spectrum, or a narrow but long tail spectrum, depending on the physics requirements. The typical spectrum is shown in Fig. 4.

Lastly, if bypass lines along the main linac are prepared, we can take data at lower energies without significant changes to the facility. A run at the $`Z_0`$ pole is useful for detector calibration. The cross sections of $`W`$ pair production and top quark production are maximum at their threshold. The same is true for the production of the light Higgs boson. Since the energies for them are different, possibility to conduct experiments at different energies is important to maximize the physics output of the JLC.

## 3 Detector

The goals of the JLC detector performance have been set as follows:

* Efficient, high-purity $`b/c`$ tagging capability.
* A momentum resolution of the tracking devices sufficiently good so that the missing mass measured in the process $`e^+e^{}ZH\mathrm{}\overline{\mathrm{}}X`$ is only limited by the spread of the initial beam energy.
* The resolution of the calorimeter is good enough so that the invariant mass of a 2 jets system is comparable with that of the natural width of $`W`$ and $`Z`$.
* Good hermeticity so that invisible particles can be identified efficiently.
* Beam related backgrounds must be shielded by the masking system completely. The detector must be equipped with a time-stamping device so as to identify the bunch of the event and to reduce the backgrounds which come from different bunches, but in the same beam pulse.

To this end, a general purpose detector was considered as a basis for physics studies and the development of detector technologies. A cross-sectional view of the detector is shown in Fig. 5, and the detector system near the interaction region is shown in Fig. 6. All of the detectors except for the muon detector are placed inside a solenoidal magnetic field of 3 Tesla. With a sandwiched lead-scintillator system, the calorimeter is aimed to achieve a resolution of $`15\%/\sqrt{E}(\mathrm{GeV})1\%`$ for electro-magnetic particles and $`40\%\sqrt{E}(\mathrm{GeV})2\%`$ for hadronic particles. A central tracking device is a small cell jet chamber. Together with a CCD vertex detector, a momentum resolution($`\frac{\sigma _{p_t}}{p_t}`$) of $`1\times 10^4p_t(\mathrm{GeV})0.1\%`$ is expected. In the forward region, the region above 200 mrad is fully covered by the calorimeter. For the region below 200 mrad, an active mask, a luminosity monitor and a pair monitor will be used to measure energetic $`e^+/e^{}`$; thus, the minimum veto angle is 11 mrad. Please see the ACFA report concerning detector hardware studies performed to achieve these design goals.

## 4 Physics

The total cross sections of the standard model processes and new particle productions are shown in Fig. 7. With the machine parameters of Y in Table 1, we can expect to collect data of the integrated luminosity of 500 fb-1 within two years. This will allow us not only discoveries of new particles but also precise studies of new particles and the standard model particles. The expected precisions that we can obtain from these studies and the implications for physics beyond the standard model are described in the ACFA report in detail. Here, selected topics on Higgs, Top and SUSY physics are described in the following subsections.

### 4.1 Higgs

The standard model of elementary particles consists of three families of matter fermions, gauge bosons and Higgs boson. Gauge bosons are massless due to gauge symmetry, but they acquire masses when Higgs spontaneously breaks the symmetry. Though the gauge nature of forces among fermions has been tested very precisely experimentally, the key feature of the standard model, that the symmetry is broken by the Higgs, has yet to be confirmed experimentally. To this end, first of all, the Higgs particle must be discovered.

In the standard model, the mass of the Higgs boson is just a parameter. However, its self energy diverges with its mass. It is so divergent that if its mass is heavier than about 200 GeV, new physics must show up below the GUT energy and GUT models must be abondened. If it is light, the Higgs can be elementary up to the GUT energy.

Although the Higgs boson has been searched extensively, no signal of direct production has been found, and a lower mass bound of 114.1 GeV at the 95% confidence level has been set. On the other hand, the precise measurements of the standard model processes allow us to probe tiny loop effects of the Higgs boson. According to a global analysis of the electro-weak data, the most probable value of the Higgs boson mass is $`106_{38}^{+57}`$ GeV while it is less than 222 GeV at the 95% CL. Thus the Higgs boson is likely to be light and its production is expected at an early stage of the JLC experiments.

Feynman diagrams of the Higgs production at JLC are shown in Fig. 8. They consists of Higgs-strahlung from $`s`$-channel $`Z`$ boson, and $`t`$-channel productions by $`WW`$ and $`ZZ`$ fusion. The total cross sections of the Higgs production near to the threshold region are shown in Fig. 9. For a Higgs of mass 120 GeV, the cross section is maximum at a center-of-mass energy of about 250 GeV. For this case, its production is mainly by the Higgs-strahlung process, while at 500 GeV, about half of the cross section is due to the $`WW`$ and $`ZZ`$ fusion processes.

As an example of the Higgs study at JLC, we consider an experiment at $`\sqrt{s}`$=250 GeV and a Higgs mass of 120 GeV. For this case, the Higgs is produced mainly by Higgs-strahlung and it decays mainly to $`b\overline{b}`$ (Branching ratio of $`Hb\overline{b}`$ decay is about 67%). Therefore the event signature of Higgs production is categorized, according to the decay mode of $`Z`$, to 4 jets, 2 jets + missing, or 2 jets + 2 leptons as shown in Fig. 10.

The 4-jet mode is selected by requiring, in principle, a successful forced four-jet clustering and $`b`$-jet tagging. Selecting two jet-pairs, where the mass of one pair and the missing mass of the other pair are both consistent with $`Z`$, we could see a clear indication of Higgs even at a low integrated luminosity of 5 fb-1 (Fig. 11a). In the case of the 2-jet mode, the mass of the Higgs is measured by just calculating the invariant mass of all of the detected particles. Requiring $`b`$-jet tagging, the missing $`p_t`$ and the missing mass being consistent with $`Z\nu \overline{\nu }`$, a clean signal can also be seen in this mode (Fig. 11b) at a integrated luminosity of 5 fb-1. In Fig. 11c, the missing mass of $`\mu \overline{\mu }`$ disregarding the decay mode of the Higgs is shown. The selection criteria for this mode is just two $`\mu `$ tracks in good tracking device acceptance, and that their invariant mass is consistent with $`m_z`$. This mode allows a search independently of Higgs decay modes. If the Higgs mass is heavier than about 140 GeV, the Higgs decay to gauge bosons becomes dominant and the search in 4-jet and 2-jet modes must be replaced by searches in gauge boson modes. However, a search in the 2-lepton mode is valid even in this case. Once the design luminosity of the JLC is achieved, the standard Higgs boson will be discovered very easily, as long as it is kinematically accessible.

If 50 fb-1 of data is taken, the Higgs signals are evident in all three decay modes, as shown in Fig. 12. Note that 50 fb-1 of data can be collected for less than one month of the design luminosity of parameter Y.

With two years of operation of the Y parameter, we will be able to accumulate 500 fb-1 data. With this amount of data, the significance for the standard model Higgs boson is more than 100 if its mass is light (Fig. 13). Even if the standard model Higgs is not the case, a CP-even Higgs boson can be searched irrespective to their decay mode, and if not found, the 5$`\sigma `$ upper bound of the cross section of 10 fb can be obtained for Higgs mass of up to 200 GeV. This will rule out any GUT model where the Higgs self coupling should not diverge up to GUT energy .

Once a new particle is discovered, the next task is to study its property, such as spin, parity and the strength of $`ZZH`$ coupling, and to establish the particle as the Higgs. To study the spin, the threshold behavior and the angular distribution of the production and decay are useful.

To measure the mass of Higgs, three methods can be considered: (1) direct mass reconstruction using $`H2jets`$ mode, (2) a measurement of the recoil mass using the $`Ze\overline{e}/\mu \overline{\mu }`$ decay mode, and (3) combined fitting with beam-energy constraints. The natural width of the Higgs is very small (about several MeV unless gauge boson channels dominate) and JLC has a wide energy spread. The detector must have a high resolution at least comparable with the beam energy spread, and be well calibrated using $`Z`$ signals for example.

A typical mass resolution obtained using the 2-jet mode is shown in Fig. 15. This plot is obtained from an example program of the JSF package. According to a Gauss fit, we obtained a $`\sigma `$ of 2.7 GeV, while the peak position is shifted about 2.3 GeV. About 15k events are expected for 500 fb-1. Therefore, a statistical accuracy of less than 30 MeV for the Higgs mass is expected, while the detector must be well calibrated for an unbiased measurement.

If we use the lepton channel, the mass measurement will be less biased because the Higgs is detected independently of its decay mode as the recoil mass of the lepton pair. However, to achieve high precision measurements of the Higgs mass, a precise tracking device and a narrow initial energy spread is essential. An example, in the case of the distribution of the recoil mass of $`\mu `$ pair is shown in Fig. 15. In this figure, the signal channel ($`e^+e^{}ZH`$ for $`m_H=120`$ GeV) is shown together with the background channel ($`e^+e^{}ZZ`$). Backgrounds below the signal peak are $`ZZ`$ events at lower collision energies whose energy losses are due to not only the initial state radiation but also the beamstrahlung. The backgrounds can be reduced siginificantly if we apply $`b`$-tagging to the jets from the Higgs decay, but it is not applied here for the measurement irrespective to the Higgs decay mode. The width of the signal is mainly due to the initial beam energy spread, but is reduces by about 10% if measured at a 10 GeV lower center-of-mass energy due to a kinematical effect. In any case, a mass resolution of about 150 MeV and a precision of the cross section of about 8% are expected from this channel. If we combine the $`e^+e^{}`$ channel and the integrated luminosity of 500 fb-1 is considered, a mass resolution of about 45 MeV and a resolution of the cross section of about 2.7% are expected.

The branching ratio of the Higgs boson also needs to be measured, because they may provide hints for physics beyond the standard model. In the standard model, the strength of Higgs fermion coupling is proportional to the fermion mass. However, many models beyond the standard model assumes more than one Higgs doublets; thus the proportionality of the mass and the coupling strength obeys different formula.

When the Higgs decays to a fermion pair, the vertex detector is very powerful to identify its flavor. Several methods, such as $`nsig`$ and topological vertex hunting algorithms have been studied and found to be useful to identify Higgs to $`c\overline{c}`$ decay mode at a precision of 25 %.

The Higgs decay to $`WW^{}`$ was studied in the process $`e^+e^{}ZH`$, where $`Z`$ decays to $`q\overline{q}`$ or $`\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$ and $`H`$ decays to $`WW^{}\mathrm{}\nu q\overline{q}`$. For this study, good jet mass measurements are crucial and lepton channels are useful to reduce combinatorial backgrounds. With the help of a kinematical constraint fit, 5.1% accuracy of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\sigma Br(HWW))/\sigma Br(HWW^{})`$ is expected for an integrated luminosity of 500 fb-1.

In the standard model, the total width of the Higgs boson is 2 to 10 MeV for a light Higgs boson of mass from 100 to 140 GeV, thus a directly measurement of the width is difficult. However, by combining the measurement of $`\sigma Br(HWW)`$ with the measurement of the total cross section $`(\sigma _{total})`$, the total width $`(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{total})`$ of the Higgs boson can be estimated. This is because $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{total}=\mathrm{\Gamma }(HWW)Br(HWW)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(HWW)`$ can be obtained from $`\sigma _{total}`$ assuming $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{HZZ}/\mathrm{\Gamma }_{HWW}=(M^W\mathrm{cos}\theta _W/M_Z)^2`$, which is satisfied as long as $`W`$ and $`Z`$ are SU(2) gauge bosons. The accuracy of the measurement of the total width can be expressed as

$$\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }_H}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_H}\right)^2=\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\sigma BR(HWW)}{\sigma BR(HWW)}\right)^2+\left(2\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\sigma _{total}}{\sigma _{total}}\right)^2,$$

which becomes about 6.4% for an integrated luminosity of 500 fb-1. Since heavy particles make a non-negligible contribution to the total width, this measurement provides a tool to prove the particle spectrum at higher energies.

### 4.2 Top

According to the PDG, the mass of the top quark is $`174.3\pm 3.2\pm 4.0`$ GeV. This implies that the JLC at $`\sqrt{s}`$ 350 GeV would be a top factory. In addition, because $`m_t`$ is larger than $`m_W+m_b`$, the top quark decays to $`Wb`$ almost 100% of the time in the standard model. The total width ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }_t`$) is about 1.4 GeV, which implies that the top decays before entering the non-perturbative QCD region. $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_t`$ acts as an infrared cutoff, and clean tests of QCD are possible. Vertecies including top, such as $`t\overline{t}\gamma `$, $`t\overline{t}Z`$, $`tbW`$, $`t\overline{t}g`$, and $`t\overline{t}H`$, could be studied, where effects due to new physics beyond the standard model may be found.

At $`t\overline{t}`$ threshold, $`t\overline{t}`$ resonances are formed. The lowest resonance ($`E_{1S}`$) is about 3 GeV below twice the mass of the top quark. There are many resonances below the open threshold, while their mass differences are small, less than, say, 2-times the total width of the top quark. Therefore, although they overlap, a “bump” in the cross section will be seen. From its position in $`\sqrt{s}`$, we will know the mass of the top quark. From its height and width, information such as the total width of the top quark, and $`\alpha _s`$ can be obtained. On the other hand, the initial state radiation and the beamstrahlung reduce the luminosity usable for resonance production, and the initial beam energy spread smears the peak and/or affects the shape of the peak if the relative spread is larger than about 0.4%.

When a top quark is produced, it decays to $`bW`$. $`W`$ decays to a quark pair or a lepton and a neutrino. According to the decay mode of $`W`$, the signature of $`t\overline{t}`$ events are categorized as follows:

|  |  | Branching ratio |
| --- | --- | --- |
| a) | 2 $`b`$ jets + 4 jets from $`W`$ | $`45`$%, |
| b) | 2 $`b`$ jets + 2 jets from $`W`$ and $`\mathrm{}\nu `$ | $`44`$%, |
| c) | 2 $`b`$ jets + 2 pairs of $`\mathrm{}\nu `$ | $`11`$%. |

All modes can be used for measuring the total cross section. The direction and charge of the top quark can be identified in decay modes a) and b), which are used to measure the top quark momentum and the forward-backward asymmetry. The basic cuts to select $`t\overline{t}`$ events are: (1) event shape cuts such as those on the number of charged particles, the number of jets and thrust, (2) mass cuts to select $`W`$’s and b jets, (3) requirements of leptons in the cases of b) and c), and (4) $`b`$ tagging.

A typical measurement of the energy dependence of the $`t\overline{t}`$ cross section around the threshold region is shown in Fig. 16-(a). In the figure, 11 points of 1 fb-1 measurement are shown. The lines in the figure are theoretical curves for three cases for the value of $`|V_{tb}|`$. If $`|V_{tb}|`$ becomes smaller, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_t`$ becomes smaller and the threshold becomes steeper. The position of the shoulder is determined by the mass of the top. Thus, this measurements could impose a constraint on the plane of the total width and the mass of the top quark, as shown in Fig. 16.

When the toponium resonance is formed, the top quark decays to $`bW`$ before $`t\overline{t}`$ annihilation. Therefore, if the $`tbW`$ decay is measured precisely, the top quark momentum in the resonance can be reconstructed to study the toponium potential. This is in contrast to the charmonium and the bottomnium resonance where the $`q\overline{q}`$ annihilation modes dominate. In Fig. 17, the momentum distribution of the top quark in the toponium resonance is shown for three values of $`\alpha _s`$. The larger is $`\alpha _s`$, the deeper is the toponium potential and the larger is the peak momentum. According to a simulation study, 1$`\sigma `$ bound for the precision of the peak momentum $`(|p|_{peak})`$ measurement is about 200 MeV for an integrated luminosity of 100 fb-1. This value translates to sensitivities of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }_t/\mathrm{\Gamma }_t=0.03`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _s(M_Z)/\alpha _s=0.002`$, when only one parameter is varied while the others is fixed and the mass of the lowest toponium resonance is known.

At energies higher than the threshold of the process $`e^+e^{}t\overline{t}H`$, we can measure the top Yukawa coupling directly. There are two kinds of diagrams contributing to this process at the tree level. The first one includes a diagram where a Higgs boson is radiated off the final-state top or anti-top quarks $`(Hofft)`$, and is thus proportional to the top Yukawa coupling. In the second diagram, the Higgs boson is emitted from the $`s`$-channel Z boson $`(HoffZ)`$ and is independent of the top Yukawa coupling. However, the contribution of the $`HoffZ`$ diagram is tiny, as shown in Fig. 18.

Considering the light Higgs, where it decays mainly to $`b\overline{b}`$, the signature of this process is 2 $`W`$’s and 4 $`b`$’s, where $`W`$ decays to $`q\overline{q}^{}`$ or $`\mathrm{}\nu `$. In a simulation study, 8 jets or 6 jets + $`\mathrm{}\nu `$ final states were selected using jet clustering to find $`W`$ and $`H`$ jet pairs. The background processes are $`e^+e^{}t\overline{t}`$ and $`e^+e^{}t\overline{t}Z`$ . The former process can be removed by requiring more than two $`b`$-jets. The latter process is irreducible, and the background is severe if the Higgs mass is close to the mass of $`Z`$. If $`m_H=100`$ GeV and $`m_t`$=170 GeV, the expected number of events at $`\sqrt{s}=700`$ GeV is 114, combining 8-jet and 6-jet + $`\mathrm{}\nu `$ mode, while that of the background process is 133, when the integrated luminosity is 100 fb-1. This translates to an accuracy of the top Yukawa couping of 14%.

### 4.3 SUSY

Since the radiative correction to the scalar particle is quadratically divergent, the light Higgs boson in GUT models raises the fine-tuning problem. One motivation of SUSY is to solve this problem by introducing super-symmetric particles with mass on the order of 1 TeV or less, and cancel the divergence. Another solution to the fine-tuning problem is to introduce extra dimensions.

Obviously, SUSY is broken and the mass spectrum of SUSY particles varies depending on the SUSY breaking models and model parameters. Since SUSY particle searches at JLC is model independent, their measurements are useful to distinguish various models.

In gravity mediated models, gaugino masses are unified at the GUT scale, but at the EW scale, charginos and neutralinos are lighter than the gluino ($`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }}\frac{1}{3}m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}`$) because they receive radiative corrections differently. Accordingly, the lightest neutralino ($`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$) is expected to be the lightest SUSY particle. Similarly, the right-handed fermion is expected to be the lightest matter fermion ($`m_{\stackrel{~}{f}_R}<m_{\stackrel{~}{f}_R}<m_{\stackrel{~}{q}}`$). Therefore, channels to search for sparticles are the right-handed sfermion($`\stackrel{~}{f}_R`$) decays to the right-handed fermion($`f_R`$) and LSP($`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$) or the chargino decays ($`\stackrel{~}{\chi }^\pm `$) to the gauge bosons($`W^\pm `$) and LSP($`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$). The event signature of the sparticle production is a missing $`p_t`$.

In anomaly mediated models, SUSY symmetry is broken by loop effects. The mass differences among gauginos and fermions are usually small, though the neutralino is expected to be LSP. If the mass difference of LSP and the next LSP is large, the signature of the sparticle production is a missing $`p_t`$. It is similar to the case of the gravity mediated models. However, if the mass difference is small, particle multiplicities of events are small and special care must be taken to find sparticles.

On the contrary, in the gauge mediated models, the gravitino is the LSP and the next lightest sparticles, NLSP, can be $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$, lightest stau ($`\stackrel{~}{\tau _1}`$), or right-handed electron ($`\stackrel{~}{e}_R`$) depending on model parameters. Their lifetimes also depend on the parameters. If the lifetime of the NLSP is short and decays near to the interaction point, the event signature is the missing $`p_t`$ due to energies taken away by the gravitino. If it is long, but decayed, with in the detector, spectacular events, such as off-vertex $`\gamma `$ or $`\tau `$ tracks may be seen. If their lifetime is very long and does not decay within the detector, the NLSP momentum is not detected. In this case, we needs to search for the next-to-next LSP to NLSP decays, and the event signature is again the missing $`p_t`$.

In any case, the detection of SUSY particle is easy at JLC once the kinematical threshold is exceeded, and no model assumption, such as mass spectrum etc, is required for its detection. Once they are discovered, the masses and couplings will be precisely measured from which we will study the SUSY breaking mechanism and underlying physics.

As an example of SUSY studies at JLC, searches and studies of right handed scalar leptons are discussed below. We consider the process, $`e^+e^{}\stackrel{~}{\mu }^+\stackrel{~}{\mu }^{}`$, where $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }^\pm `$ decays to $`\mu ^\pm `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$. The signature of this event is a missing $`p_t`$ due to an un-detected momentum of $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$, which leads to acoplanar $`\mu ^\pm `$ events. The distribution of the acoplanarity angle($`\mathrm{\Theta }_{acop}`$) is shown in Fig. 19. Since only the $`B`$ boson (the gauge boson of $`U(1)_Y`$ group) contributes to smuon($`\stackrel{~}{\mu }^\pm `$) production, the use of a right-handed electron beam enhances the signal twice, while it reduces the major $`W^+W^{}`$ backgrounds completely, as can be seen in the Figure.

In the decay of smuon, the energy distribution of muon is flat as smuon is a scalar particle. The end points of its energy distribution are kinematically fixed by the masses of the parent and daughter particles. Namely, the masses of smuon and the LSP can be determined from the end points of the smuon energy distribution. An example of the energy distribution is shown in Fig. 20. For the case used for a Monte Calro study, the expected mass resolution of smuon is $`\pm 0.8`$ GeV, and that for LSP is $`\pm 0.6`$ GeV if the 20 fb-1 data is corrected at $`\sqrt{s}=350`$ GeV.

If the universal scalar mass is the case such as expected in models like gravity mediated models, not only the smuon but also the selectron is produced at a similar energy. In this case, the signature is acoplanar $`e^\pm `$, and can be easily distinguished from an acoplanar $`\mu ^\pm `$ signal. The mass of selectron is measured from the end points of $`e^\pm `$ energy distribution. Combining the mass measurement of smuon, the model assumption of the universal scalar mass can be easily tested.

Concerning the third generation slepton, stau($`\stackrel{~}{\tau }`$), its mass matrix contains large off-diagonal elements since the tau mass ($`m_\tau `$) is much heavier than the other leptons. This produces a large mixing between left-handed and right-handed stau and a large mass splitting between the mass eigen states of the stau ($`\stackrel{~}{\tau }_1`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }_2`$) is expected. Thus, $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }_1`$ may be the lightest charged SUSY particle.

The signature of stau pair production is a pair of leptons or low multiplicity hadron jets from tau decays. Since a neutrino is produced in tau decay, the energy distribution of the observed leptons or hadron jets is not uniform, as with the case of the smuon or selectron. Still, the energy distribution of the decayed daughter reflects the masses of the stau and neutralino and we will be able to determine their masses. An example of an energy distribution of $`\rho `$ mesons from tau decay is shown in Fig. 21-(a). From the fit, the mass of the stau can be determined at 2% precission using a sample corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 100 fb-1.

Generally, the total cross section of the right handed slepton and the left handed slepton is different due to the difference of the weak hyper charge. If $`\sqrt{s}>>m_Z`$ and the beam electron is right-handed, only a $`B`$ boson of the $`U(1)_Y`$ gauge group contributes to slepton production. In this case, the total cross section of the right handed slepton is four times larger than that of the left handed slepton. Thus if the mass is fixed, the cross section of the lightest stau($`\stackrel{~}{\tau }_1`$) is determined by the mixing ratio of $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }_R`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }_L`$ ($`\mathrm{sin}\theta _{\stackrel{~}{\tau }}`$). To put it another way, the mixing angle of the stau sector can be measured using a measurement of the total cross section of a stau. According to a monte calro simulation of 100 fb-1 luminosity at 500 GeV, a 6.5% precission measurement of $`\mathrm{sin}\theta _{\stackrel{~}{\tau }}`$ is expected.

There is also a mixing in the stau decay, which decays to a tau and a neutralino. The neutralino consists of a Bino($`\stackrel{~}{B}^0`$), a Wino($`\stackrel{~}{W}_3^0`$) and Higgsinos($`\stackrel{~}{H}_1^0`$ , $`\stackrel{~}{H}_2^0`$). If a stau interacts with a Bino or a Wino, a tau with the opposite helicity is produced. If a stau interacts with a Higgsino, a tau with the same helicity is produced. As a result, the polarization of the daughter tau is determined by the mixing angles of the neutralino and the stau mixing angle. This property can be exploited to determine $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$.

## 5 Summary

In this talk, after a short summary of the JLC accelerator and the detector, selected topics on physics of the Higgs, Top and SUSY particles are presented. The initial goal of JLC is to achieve a center-of-mass energy of 500 GeV with a luminosity of about $`2.5\times 10^{34}/cm^2/s`$. JLC will be a Top factory. If the Higgs boson is as light as expected from recent electroweak data, JLC will also be a Higgs factory. Some SUSY particles may be observed at JLC. A clean experimental environment will allow us to provide definite results on studies of these particles. It will be an indispensable basis for our understanding of the physics beyond the standard model. The beginning of the JLC experiment is highly awaited.

Acknowledgments
This talk is based on the ACFA report. The author would like to thank the members of ACFA Joint Linear Collider Physics and Detector working group.


text:
# Reply to “On scaling solutions with a dissipative fluid”

## Acknowledgments

LPC and ASJ thank the University of Buenos Aires for partial support under project X-223. This work was partially supported by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology under grant BFM 2000–0351-C03–01 and 2000–1322.


text:
# Comment on “Ehrenfest times for classically chaotic systems”

In a recent Rapid Communication , the authors, Silvestrov and Beenakker, introduce a way to lengthen the Ehrenfest time, $`\tau `$, for fully chaotic systems. We disagree with several statements made in their paper, and address the following points essential to their conclusions: 1) it is not true that all semiclassical approximations for chaotic systems fail at a so-called ‘logtime’, $`\tau \mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{})`$, differing only by a numerical coefficient; and 2) the limitation of the semiclassical approximation as expressed in the authors’ Eq. (8) is not limited by their argument leading to Eq. (12).

It is important to distinguish between the correspondence of quantum and classical dynamical propagations, and the faithfulness of semiclassical approximations. If one takes the Ehrenfest time, $`\tau `$, to be the upper limit for which a quantum mechanical wave packet is described by solving classical equations of motion without invoking a semiclassical construction of the wave packet, then the Ehrenfest time increases logarithmically slowly for chaotic systems as $`\tau \lambda ^1\mathrm{ln}(S/\mathrm{})`$ ; there is no controversy on this point. In this expression $`\lambda `$ is sum of the positive Lyapunov exponents, and $`S`$ is some characteristic classical action such as that of the shortest periodic orbit. If, instead, one defines $`\tau `$ as the time scale beyond which the semiclassical approximation no longer faithfully reproduces the quantum propagation of a wave packet, then $`\tau `$ is not a so-called “logtime”, but is proportional to inverse algebraic powers of $`\mathrm{}`$ .

The precise exponent in the breakdown time scale has been shown to depend on a few basic features of the chaotic dynamical system being considered. We mention work on three separate paradigms of chaos. It was shown in the stadium billiard , that $`\tau \mathrm{}^{1/2}\mathrm{ln}S/\mathrm{}`$ (essentially $`\mathrm{}^{1/2}`$). The $`\mathrm{}^{1/2}`$ behavior was linked to the fact that the stable and unstable manifolds associated with trajectories in the stadium have discontinuities in their slopes where they fold over upon themselves. The $`\mathrm{ln}S/\mathrm{}`$ part of the expression is due to the ‘stickiness’ of phase space in the neighborhood of the marginally stable bouncing ball trajectories. In contrast, a general dynamical system possessing stable and unstable manifolds that are continuous in their slopes gives $`\tau \mathrm{}^{1/3}`$ ; this was illustrated with the kicked rotor. A third example that has been studied extensively is the quantum bakers map. There it was shown that for some quantities, the breakdown time scale could be as great as $`\tau \mathrm{}^1`$ , although $`\mathrm{}^{1/2}`$ was typical .

Note that the semiclassical approximations in Refs.  involve no uniformizations or caustic corrections. They are, in fact, either exactly or poor man’s versions of the standard WKB method, and developed specifically for chaotic systems. For wave packets, the standard time-dependent WKB method involves sets of complex trajectories . Nevertheless, in the above cited work on $`\tau `$, no classically non-allowed processes are taken into account. One essential ingredient relied upon in these works, the ‘area-$`\mathrm{}`$ rule’ is contained in Ref. . This rule is in contradiction with the argument of Ref.  leading to Eq. (12) which contains the relation $`\mathrm{}^{7/6c}<<1`$, $`c`$ being the coefficient of proportionality in the logtime scale relation. The consequences of the area-$`\mathrm{}`$ rule carefully considered in conjunction with the geometrical properties of evolving stable and unstable manifolds give a precise formulation of the semiclassical breakdown due to caustics and the resultant algebraic time scales . The crucial point is that the distance between local classical manifolds (the criterion used by Silvestrov and Beenakker) is actually of no importance - what matters is the area enclosed by following the manifold from one branch to the next in a given locality. To miss this point unfortunately leads to a qualitatively different and incorrect result.

Finally, we do agree with the authors that there should be important or morphological distinctions in the nature of evolving wave packets as they surpass each relevant time scale. Examples include interference phenomena necessarily arising beyond the logtime, and localization effects sometimes supressing classical diffusion beyond algebraic time scales .


text:
# Simple models of small world networks with directed links

## I Introduction

Real life networks, whether made by nature, (e.g. neural, metabolic and ecological networks) fhcs ; bm ; jtao ; kas ; plh , or made by human (e.g. the World Wide Web, power grids, transport networks and social networks of relations between individuals or institutes) ajb ; n2 ; deb , have special features which is a blend of those of regular networks on the one hand and completely random ones on the other hand. To study any process in these networks,(the spreading of an epidemic in human society, a virus in the internet, or an electrical power failure in a large city, to name only a few), an understanding of their topological and connectivity properties is essential (for a review see ab1  and references therein). Recently obtained data from many real networks show that like random networks b ; asbs , they have low diameter, and like regular networks, they have high clustering. Since the pioneering work of Watts and Strogatz ws , these networks have attracted a lot of attentions and have been studied from various directions bw ; nmw ; ka ; z ; jb .
In contrast to most of the models studied so far, many real networks like the World Wide Web, neural, power grids, metabolic and ecological networks have directed one-way links bkmr ; t2 ; ste ; jtao . These types of networks may have significant differences in both their static and dynamic properties with the Watts-Strogatz (WS) model and its variations slr ; t1 ; t2 . The presence of directed links affects strongly many of the properties of a network. For example, for the same pattern of shortcuts, the average shortest path in an directed network is longer than that in an undirected one, due to the presence of bonds with the wrong directions (blocks) in many paths. So is the spreading time of any dynamic effect on the lattice.
Consider the quantity $`V(T)`$ defined as the average number of sites which are visited at least once when we start a naive spreading process at a site and continue it for $`T`$ steps. Note that we mean an average over an ensemble of networks and initially infected sites and by the naive spreading process we mean that at each step of the spreading process all the neighbors of an infected site are equally infected. The quantity $`V(T)`$ may be taken as a crude approximation for the number of people who have been infected by a contiguous disease after $`T`$ time steps has elapsed since the first person has been infected. Clearly this is a simplification of the real phenomena, since in real world a disease may not affect an immunized person or may not transmit with certainty in a contact. However as a first approximation, $`V(T)`$ may give a sensible measure of the effect in the whole network. Since in an directed network, an effect only spreads to those neighbors into which there are correctly directed links, there will be pronounced differences in this important quantity between an directed and an undirected network. As a concrete example consider a ring with $`N`$ sites, without any shortcuts, where to emphasize the absence of shortcuts, we denote $`V(T)`$ by $`V_0(T)`$. If all the links have the same direction, we have $`V_0(T)=T`$, and if all of them are bidirectional, we have $`V_0(T)=2T`$. In both cases the whole lattice gets infected after a finite time. However if the links are randomly directed then $`V_0(T)`$ may be much lower and furthermore, there is a finite probability that only a small fraction of the whole lattice gets infected.
Adding shortcuts to this ring of course has a positive effect on the spreading. In a sense we have a chance to see the interplay of two different concepts of small worlds in these networks. The size of the world as a whole may be small due to the ease of communication with the remote points provided by long range connections, however the world accessible to an individual may be small due to the absence of properly directed links to connect it to the outside world.
It is therefore natural to ask how the presence of directed links and (or) directed shortcuts affects quantitatively the small world properties of a network? How we can make a simple model of a small world network with such random directions? A WS-type model for these networks may be as shown in figure (1). However due to their complexity, these networks should usually be studied by numerical or simulation methods and they seldom amend themselves to exact analytical treatment.

### I.1 The aim, structure and results of this paper

As we will show in this paper, with slight simplification one can introduce simpler models which although retain most of the small world features, are still amenable to analytical treatment. This is what we are trying to do in this paper. In this paper we introduce one such model following our earlier work kr  which was in turn inspired by the work of dm . The basic simplifying feature of these networks is that all the shortcuts are made via a central site, figure (2). For such a network many of the small world quantities, can be calculated exactly.

In particular, once $`V(T)`$ defined above is calculated, many other quantities like the average shortest path between two sites can be obtained. An exact calculation of $`V(T)`$ is however difficult for the case where both the shortcuts and the links have random directions. We therefore proceed in two steps to separate the effects of randomness in the two types of connections. First, in section 2, we remove the shortcuts and calculate exactly $`V(T)`$ for a ring with random links, figure (3).

To emphasize the absence of shortcuts we denote this quantity by $`V_0(T)`$. Note that $`V_0(T)`$ depends only on the structure of the underlying ring and its short-range connections. Then in section 3, we consider only the effects of randomly directed shortcuts, that is we let directions of the links on the ring to be regular and fixed say clockwise, and calculate exactly $`V(T)`$, where again for emphasis on the shortcuts we denote this quantity by $`S(T)`$.
We then argue, in section 4 that in the scaling limit where the number of sites goes to infinity with the number of shortcuts kept finite, most of the spreading takes place via the links and only from time to time it propagates to remote points via the shortcuts. In this limit it is plausible to suggest a form for $`V(T)`$ which takes into account the effect of both the random links and the shortcuts in the form $`V(T)=S(V_0(T))`$. This may not be an exact relation but as we will see it will give a fairly good approximation of $`V(T)`$, as shown by the agreement of our analytical results and the results of simulations. This then means that in more complicated networks, one can separate the effects of short and long range connections and superimpose their effect in a suitable way. We conclude the paper with a discussion.

## II Exact calculation of $`V_0(T)`$ in a ring with random bonds

Consider a regular ring of $`N`$ sites whose bonds are directed randomly. Each link may be directed clockwise with probability $`r`$, counterclockwise with probability $`\mathrm{}`$, and bidirectional with probability $`1r\mathrm{}`$.
Thus we have a problem similar to bond percolation in a small world network. Suppose that at time $`T=0`$ site number $`1`$ is infected with a virus. We ask the following questions:
After $`T`$ seconds how many sites have been infected on the average? What is the average speed of propagation of this decease in the network? These questions have obvious answers for rings with regularly directed or bi-directional bonds, namely the number of infected sites are respectively $`T`$ and $`2T`$, with corresponding speeds of propagation being $`1`$ and $`2`$. In the randomly directed network, the situation is different. For example if both neighbors of site $`1`$ are directed into this site, this site can not affect any other site of the network. Such a site being effectively isolated has an accessible world bkmr  of zero size ( figure3). To proceed with exact calculation, consider the right hand side of site $`1`$. The probability that exactly $`k<T`$ extra sites to the right have been infected is $`P_+(k):=(1\mathrm{})^k\mathrm{}`$, and the probability that exactly $`T`$ extra sites have been infected is $`P_+(T):=(1\mathrm{})^T`$. Therefore the average number of extra sites infected to the right of the original site is

$`V_0^+(T)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{T}{}}}kP_+(k)=T(1\mathrm{})^T+{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{T1}{}}}k(1\mathrm{})^k\mathrm{}`$ (1)
$`=`$ $`T(1\mathrm{})^T+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{}}}[1\mathrm{}+(1\mathrm{})^T(\mathrm{}1\mathrm{}T)].`$ (2)
Going to the large $`N`$ limit where,

$$N\mathrm{},\mathrm{}0\mu :=\mathrm{}N,t:=\frac{T}{N},\upsilon _+(t):=\frac{V_0^+(T)}{N}$$
(3)
we find the simple result

$$\upsilon _0^+(t)=\frac{1}{\mu }(1e^{\mu t})$$
(4)
The same type of reasoning gives the number of sites infected to the left $`\upsilon _0^{}(t)`$ and thus the total number of infected sites will be:

$$\upsilon _0(t)=\frac{1}{\mu }(1e^{\mu t})+\frac{1}{\lambda }(1e^{\lambda t})$$
(5)
where $`\lambda :=rN`$. What are the meaning of the scaled variables? The parameter $`\mu `$ is the total number of sparse blocked sites in the way of propagation to the right, with a similar meaning for $`\lambda `$. $`\upsilon _0(t)`$ is the fraction of infected sites up to time $`t`$. In a bidirectional lattice, all the sites could be infected after the passage of $`T=\frac{N}{2}`$ seconds, or at $`t=\frac{1}{2}`$ and if $`t`$ passes $`\frac{1}{2}`$, some of the sites become doubly visited. Therefore it is plausible for the sake of comparison to define a quantity in our ring, namely the average size of the accessible world as $`\upsilon _0^{\mathrm{𝑎𝑐𝑐}}:=\upsilon _0(\frac{1}{2})`$, which turns out to be:

$$\upsilon _0^{\mathrm{𝑎𝑐𝑐}}=\frac{1}{\mu }(1e^{\frac{\mu }{2}})+\frac{1}{\lambda }(1e^{\frac{\lambda }{2}})$$
(6)
It is seen that the presence of only a small number of blocked bonds causes a significant drop in the average size of this accessible world. For example a value of $`\lambda =\mu =4`$ leads to $`\upsilon _0^{\mathrm{𝑎𝑐𝑐}}0.4`$. The long range connections (shortcuts) make the world small with the ease of communication they provide, however blockades make the world small in this new sense.
The speed of propagation is found from

$$\dot{\upsilon }_0(t)=e^{\mu t}+e^{\lambda t}.$$
(7)
In the symmetric case where $`\lambda =\mu `$, equation (5) simplifies to:

$$\upsilon _0(t)=\frac{2}{\mu }(1e^{\mu t})$$
(8)
with

$$\dot{\upsilon }_0(t)=2e^{\mu t}$$
(9)
Note that at the early stages of spreading when $`\mu t<<1`$, and the effects of blocked bonds has not yet been experienced, the infection propagates with speed equal to $`2`$ as in a regular network. The effect of blocking comes into play when $`t`$ becomes comparable to $`\frac{1}{\mu }`$.
As a few number of shortcuts may enhance the speed of propagation, a few number of blocked bonds may have the opposing effect. First the blocks reduce the speed of propagation as is clear from (7) and second and more importantly they reduce the number of accessible sites, or the size of accessible world. It will thus be of interest to see how these two effects compete in a random network where there are both shortcuts and blocks. We will study this in the final section of this paper. To this end we first study the effect of directed shortcuts in an otherwise regular ring with no blocks.

## III The long range connections

In this section we are to consider only the effect of randomly directed shortcuts in the spreading process and obtain exactly the function $`S(T)`$ for this network, figure (4).

Note that this function has the same meaning as $`V(T)`$, except that for emphasis on the role of shortcuts in it we have adopted a new name for it. We fix a regular clockwise ring. Between a site and the center there is a shortcut going into the center with probability $`p`$ and out of the center with probability $`q`$. The site remains unconnected to the center with probability $`1pq`$. The average number of connections into and out of the center are respectively $`M_i:=Np`$ and $`M_o:=Nq`$.
Consider sites $`1`$ and $`j`$. We want to find the probability that the shortest path between these two sites be of length $`l`$, a probability which we denote by $`P(1,j;l)`$. A typical shortest path of length $`l`$ connecting these two nodes is shown in figure (4), where the first inward connection to the center occurs at site $`i`$ and the last outward connection from the center occurs at site $`j+il`$. Such a path occurs with probability $`(1p)^{i1}pq(1q)^{li}`$. Summing over all such configurations gives us the probability for the shortest path between sites $`1`$ and $`j`$ to be of length $`l`$. For $`lj1`$, we have:

$$p(1,j;lj1)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{l}{}}(1p)^{i1}pq(1q)^{li}=pq[\frac{(1p)^l}{qp}+\frac{(1q)^l}{pq}],$$
(10)
and $`p(1,j;j1)`$ is determined from normalization:

$$P(1,j;j1)=1\underset{l=1}{\overset{j2}{}}P(1,j;l)=\frac{1}{pq}\left(p(1q)^{j1}q(1p)^{j1}\right)$$
(11)
Note that $`p(1,j;lj1)`$ dose not depend on $`j`$, a property which is true for standard small world networks aks .
Now consider a naive spreading process starting at site $`1`$. The number of sites affected up to time $`T`$, denoted by $`S(T)`$, builds up in two ways, via the links on the ring and via the shortcuts. The first way gives a contribution $`T+1`$ and the second way gives a contribution $`(NT1)_{l=1}^Tp(1,j;l)`$ aks  where $`(NT1)`$ is the number of sites beyond direct reach at time $`T`$ which has been multiplied by the probability of any of these sites being at a distance shorter than $`T`$ to site $`1`$ via a shortcut. Putting this together we find:

$`S(T)=T+1+(NT1){\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{T}{}}}P(1,j;l)`$ (12)
$`=N+(NT1)[{\displaystyle \frac{q}{pq}}(1p)^{T+1}+{\displaystyle \frac{p}{qp}}(1q)^{T+1}]`$
In the scaling limit where $`N\mathrm{},p,q0,`$ where $`M_i`$ and $`M_o`$ are kept fixed and $`s(t):=\frac{S(T)}{N}`$, we find:

$$s(t)=1\frac{1t}{M_iM_o}\left(M_ie^{M_ot}M_oe^{M_it}\right)$$
(13)
In the symmetric case where $`M_i=M_o=M`$ this equation simplifies to:

$$s(t)=1(1t)(1+Mt)e^{Mt}$$
(14)
with the speed of propagation

$$\dot{s}(t)=e^{Mt}(1+Mt+M^2tM^2t^2)$$
(15)
Figure (5) shows the speed of propagation as a function of time for several values of $`M`$.

## IV The spreading effect in a directed small world network

We now come to the problem of composing both the blocks and the shortcuts in a model of small world network. That is we consider the ring of figure (2) where randomly directed shortcuts are added to a ring with randomly directed links. We can not obtain exact expressions for this network from first principle probability considerations. However we can obtain expressions for $`\upsilon (t)`$ in the scaling limit by a heuristic argument and compare our results with those of simulations. Consider equation (14). This equation shows how the presence of $`2M`$ randomly directed shortcuts in a regular clockwise ring affects the spreading effect. On the other hand we know that the number of sites infected up to time $`t`$ in the absence of shortcuts, has changed to $`\upsilon _0(t)`$. Due to the rarity of shortcuts compared to the regular bonds, most of the spreading takes place via the local bonds, the role of shortcuts is just to make multiple spreading processes happen in different regions of the network. This role is the same whatever the underlying lattice is, and therefore for a general network, at least in the scaling regime, we can assume that equation (14) can be elevated to $`\upsilon (t)=s(\upsilon _0(t))`$, i.e;

$$\upsilon (t)=1(1\upsilon _0(t))(1+M\upsilon _0(t))e^{M\upsilon _0(t)}.$$
(16)
For a fully random network where $`2M`$ randomly directed shortcuts are distributed on a ring with already random links, we assume that this relation holds true with $`\upsilon _0(t)`$ taken from (5). This suggestion may not provide an exact solution for the network, however we think it provides a fairly good approximation. In fact exact solution for the case where all the links on the ring are bidirectional is possible and it confirms the above ansatz, that is we obtain an exact expression only by setting $`\upsilon _0(t)=2t`$ in the above formula. Moreover this separation of the effect of short and long range connections may be also useful in more complicated networks. Whether this assumption is plausible or not can be checked by comparison with simulations. The results of simulations are compared with those of equations (5) and(13) in figure (6) and (7).

## V Static properties

Once the functions $`V(T)`$ or $`\upsilon (t)`$ are obtained, the static properties of the network i.e., the average shortest path between two arbitrary sites and its probability distribution can be calculated directly.
Since $`V(T)`$ by definition is the number of sites whose shortest distance to site $`1`$ is less than or equal to $`T`$, we find the number of sites whose shortest distance is exactly $`T`$ to be $`V(T)V(T1)`$. Since site $`1`$ is an arbitrary site, we find the probability distribution of the shortest distance between two arbitrary sites which are accessible to each other as: $`P(T)=\frac{V(T)V(T1)}{V_{\mathrm{𝑎𝑐𝑐}}}`$, where $`V_{\mathrm{𝑎𝑐𝑐}}`$ is the average size of the accessible world. (There is of course a slight approximation here in that we are taking averages of the denominator and numerator separately.)
For a regular ring with shortcuts, $`V_{\mathrm{𝑎𝑐𝑐}}=N`$, since all the sites are accessible. We will discuss the case of random rings in the sequel. In the scaling regime the above formulas transform to:

$$P(t)=\dot{\upsilon }(t).$$
(17)
Note that $`P(t)`$ is normalized, i.e. $`_0^1P(t)𝑑t=\upsilon (1)\upsilon (0)=1`$. The average shortest path for the network of figure (4) when $`M_i=M_o=M`$, turns out to be:

$$t_0^1tP(t)𝑑t=_0^1t\dot{\upsilon }(t)=\frac{1}{M^2}(2M3+(M+3)e^M)$$
(18)
This is in accord with the result of dm . This formula shows that the presence of a small number of shortcuts, causes a significant drop in the average shortest path from $`1`$ to very small values. In this sense the world gets smaller by long range connections.
We now study the static effects of random directed bonds on a ring without shortcuts. The presence of blocks makes the world small in a different sense, namely for each site the number of accessible sites gets smaller. In fact the average size of the world accessible to a site is not $`N`$ anymore but it is given by $`V(\frac{N}{2})`$ (see the paragraph leading to equation (6)). Hence the probability of shortest paths is given by $`P(T):=\frac{V(T)V(T1)}{V(\frac{N}{2})}`$, or in the scaling limit by

$$P(t):=\frac{\dot{\upsilon }(t)}{\upsilon (\frac{1}{2})}$$
(19)
This probability is normalized, i.e. $`_0^{\frac{1}{2}}P(t)𝑑t=1`$. We obtain from (19)

$$t=\frac{1}{\upsilon (\frac{1}{2})}_0^{\frac{1}{2}}t\dot{\upsilon }(t)𝑑t$$
(20)
However in order to assess the situation in this network, we should compare the average shortest path with the size of this small world itself, namely we should calculate $`\frac{t}{\upsilon _0^{acc}}`$. Inserting equation (8) into (20) we find:

$$\frac{t}{\upsilon _0^{acc}}=\frac{2(\mu +2)e^{\frac{\mu }{2}}}{4(1e^{\frac{\mu }{2}})^2}$$
(21)
Figure (8) shows both the average size of the accessible world $`\upsilon _0^{acc}`$ and the ratio $`\frac{t}{\upsilon _0^{acc}}`$ of the average shortest path to the size of accessible world as a function of the number of blocks $`\mu `$. It is seen that for $`\mu =0`$, when there is no block, the size is $`1`$ and the average of the shortest path is $`\frac{1}{4}`$ as it should be. With a few number of blocks the size drops dramatically and the average of shortest path within the world increases. Note that with increasing $`\mu `$ the average shortest path increases to its maximum value of $`\frac{1}{2}`$.

For the fully random network, we use equations (16) and (19) to obtain the average of shortest path. The result is shown in figure (9) for several values of the parameters.

## VI conclusion

We have studied the effect of directed short and long range connections in a simple model of small world network. In our models all the shortcuts pass via a central site in the network. This makes possible an almost exact calculation of many of the properties of the network. We have calculated the function $`V(T)`$, defined as the number of sites affected up to time $`T`$ when a naive spreading process starts in the network. As opposed to shortcuts, the presence of un-favorable bonds has a negative effect on this quantity. Hence the spreading process may be able to affect only a fraction of the total sites of the network. We have defined this fraction to be the average size of the accessible world in our model and have calculated it exactly for our model. We have studied also the interplay of shortcuts, and un-favorable bonds on the small world properties like the size of accessible world, the speed of propagation of a spreading process, and the average shortest path between two arbitrary sites. Our results show that one can separately take into account the effect of randomness in the directions of shortcuts and the short-range connections in the underlying lattice and at the end super-impose the two effects in a suitable way. We expect that this will hold also in more complicated lattices of small world networks.