text:
# Study of the process 𝑒⁺𝑒⁻→𝜋⁺𝜋⁻𝜋⁺𝜋⁻𝜋⁰ with CMD-2 detector

## 1 Introduction

Measurements of the total cross section of $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation into hadrons at low energies as well as of the cross sections of exclusive hadronic channels are of great interest for better understanding the interactions of light quarks. This precise knowledge is also necessary for calculations of effects such as contributions of hadronic vacuum polarization to $`(g2)_\mu `$ and $`\alpha (M_Z^2)`$ , tests of the Standard Model via the hypothesis of conserved vector current (CVC) relating $`e^+e^{}`$ hadrons to hadronic $`\tau `$-lepton decays .

Annihilation of $`e^+e^{}`$ into five pions was first observed by M3N , DM1  and CMD  detectors. These limited data samples allowed one to study this process qualitatively and estimate the magnitude of the corresponding cross section. Later measurements by various groups in Orsay and Novosibirsk (see ) provided more detailed information on the energy dependence of the cross section for the processes $`e^+e^{}\eta \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ and $`e^+e^{}\omega \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$.

Both isoscalar and isovector intermediate states can contribute to the cross section of the reaction $`e^+e^{}\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^0`$. In the isoscalar case the final $`\omega (782)\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ state is produced via $`\omega (782)`$ and its excitations ($`\omega (1420),\omega (1600)`$), whereas the isovector contribution includes the $`\eta \pi ^+\pi ^{}(\eta \rho (770))`$ final state arising from the $`\rho (770)`$ and its excitations ($`\rho (1450),\rho (1700)`$). Since violation of isospin symmetry in electromagnetic interactions is small, one can expect that the interference between the modes with different isospin is also small, so that the two cross sections could be found independently.

## 2 Experiment and event selection

The experiment was performed with the CMD-2 detector at the $`e^+e^{}`$ collider VEPP-2M in Novosibirsk . The c.m. energy range from the threshold of hadron production to 1.4 GeV was scanned with 10 MeV steps. The highest energy attainable at VEPP-2M is rather close to the threshold of both final states studied, and therefore for the analysis of five pion production about 3 pb<sup>-1</sup> of data collected in the energy range 1280 to 1380 MeV were used.

The tracking system of the detector consists of a drift chamber with about 250 $`\mu `$ resolution transverse to the beam and a proportional Z-chamber used for the trigger, both inside a superconducting solenoid with a field of 1 T. Photons are detected in the barrel CsI calorimeter with 8-10% energy resolution and the endcap BGO calorimeter with 6% energy resolution. More details on the detector can be found elsewhere .

To select events of the processes under study the following cuts were applied:

1. Four charged tracks and two or more photons are found.
2. The sum of the charges of all tracks is equal to zero.
3. For each track the Z coordinate of the origin is close to the interaction point – $`|Z_{tr}|<7`$ cm.
4. The impact parameter of each track is small enough — $`R_{min}<0.5`$ cm.

The background remaining after applying these cuts is mostly caused by the process $`e^+e^{}\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ where extra photons appear because of the splitting of clusters from charged particles.

The events selected by the above process were kinematically reconstructed with the following constraints:

$$\underset{i=1,4}{}E_{ch}(i)+\underset{j=1,2}{}E_\gamma (j)=2E_{beam},$$

$$\underset{i=1,4}{}\stackrel{}{P}_{ch}(i)+\underset{j=1,2}{}\stackrel{}{P}_\gamma (j)=0,$$

where $`E_{ch}`$, $`\stackrel{}{P}_{ch}`$ are energies and momenta of charged particles, while $`E_\gamma `$ and $`\stackrel{}{P}_\gamma `$ are those for photons. The kinematic fit tries all possible photon pairs in the event and the one with the smallest $`\chi ^2`$ value is used in further analysis. The events with thus chosen pairs of photons were again processed by kinematic reconstruction with an additional constraint requiring the invariant mass of the two photons be equal to the $`\pi ^0`$ mass:

$$m_{\gamma \gamma }=m_{\pi ^0}.$$

The second stage helps to increase the three pion invariant mass $`m_{\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^0}`$ resolution.

To further suppress the background from $`\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ events two additional cuts were used :

1. The energy of each of the two selected photons is large enough — $`E_\gamma >40`$ MeV. This cut efficiently rejects events with fake photons emerging because of the cluster splitting.
2. The $`\chi ^2`$ parameter characterizing the quality of the kinematic fit is $`\chi ^2<4`$.

The $`m_{\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^0}`$ distribution of selected events is presented in Fig. 1.

Since all four possible combinations of pions contribute, a large combinatorial background is observed. The left peak in the figure corresponds to the $`\eta \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ production whereas the right one is caused by the process $`e^+e^{}\omega \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$. The number of events for each process is found by fitting the histogram with the sum of three curves: $`\eta \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$, $`\omega \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ and the background of the $`e^+e^{}\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ process. The shape of the curves has been found from simulation based on matrix elements consistent with the simplest Lorentz structure of the Feynman diagrams shown in Fig. 2(a) and Fig. 2(b).

The interference between diagrams with different charges of intermediate $`\rho `$ mesons and with transpositions of identical pions in the final state has been taken into account. Simulation of the background process $`e^+e^{}\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ was performed according to Ref. . The procedure of statistical separation for events from different processes was checked by using simulation and the systematic error associated with this procedure was found to be negligible.

## 3 Results

The detection efficiency for our selection criteria was found to be 25% and 23% for $`\omega \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ and $`\eta \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ respectively, with no significant energy dependence. The radiative corrections for each process were calculated following Ref. .

The value of the radiative correction varied with energy from -16.5% to -20.0% for each process. The number of signal events and corresponding cross sections are presented in Table 1 for each energy and shown in Figs. 3(a) and 3(b) in comparison with the results of other experiments . The systematic uncertainty mainly comes from the difference in $`\chi ^2`$ distributions for simulation and experimental data and was estimated as $`15`$%. Our results for the cross section of the process $`e^+e^{}\omega \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ are higher than those from DM2, but they are not incompatible within the large statistical and systematic uncertainties. The cross section of the process $`e^+e^{}\eta \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ agrees with the results of other measurements by ND and DM2 as well as with the preliminary results from CMD-2  obtained using the decay mode $`\eta \gamma \gamma `$.

The number of background events found in this way is consistent with the estimate based on the value of the cross section for the process $`e^+e^{}\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ obtained by CMD-2 . One can therefore conclude that the cross section of the five pion production is saturated by the $`\omega \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ and $`\eta \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ intermediate states.

To understand whether the data allow a small contribution from the $`\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^0`$ final state other than $`\omega \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ or $`\eta \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$, the following analysis was carried out. A strict cut on $`\chi ^2<1`$ was imposed considerably suppressing the background from $`\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$. The expected shape of the $`m_{\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^0}`$ distribution was determined from a simulation of the process $`e^+e^{}\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^0`$ assuming a constant matrix element. Next a fit of the experimental distribution of $`m_{\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^0}`$ was performed assuming all four contributions discussed above. Results of this fit in terms of the upper limits on the possible contribution to the cross section of $`\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^0`$ production at 95% confidence level are shown in the last column of Table 1. One can see that these limits are typically much smaller than the $`\omega \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ cross section indicating the smallness of other intermediate mechanisms of $`\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^0`$ production.

Results of the fit are shown in Figs. 3(a), 3(b) and presented in Table 2. The $`\chi ^2`$/n.d.f. value is equal to 15.1/19 and 37/31 for $`\omega \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ and $`\eta \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ respectively. Hatched areas show separate contributions for each resonance. One can see that the contributions of $`\omega (1420)`$ for $`\omega \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ and $`\rho (1700)`$ for $`\eta \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ are negligible compared to the $`\omega (1600)`$ and $`\rho (1450)`$ respectively and are not statistically significant. The fit with one resonance only was additionally performed which results in $`\chi ^2`$/n.d.f = 23/23 and $`\chi ^2`$/n.d.f = 43/35 for $`\omega \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ and $`\eta \pi +\pi ^{}`$ respectively.

To estimate the possible variation of parameters we performed the fit of the $`\omega \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ cross section under the assumption that the total width is completely determined by the decay $`\omega _{1,2}\rho \pi \pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^0`$. In accordance with , the branching ratio of the $`\omega (1420)`$ is dominated by the $`\rho \pi `$ decay while for the $`\omega (1600)`$ it is about $``$ 50 %, so that this assumption does not look completely unreasonable. In this case $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{1,2}(s)=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{1,2}^0\frac{W_{\rho \pi }(s)}{W_{\rho \pi }(m_{1,2})}`$, where $`W_{\rho \pi }`$ is the squared matrix element of the $`\rho \pi `$ decay integrated over the phase space. $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{1,2}^0`$ as well as $`m_{1,2}`$, $`\varphi `$ and $`\sigma _{1,2}`$ are parameters of the fit. $`B_{e^+e^{}}B_{fin}`$ presented in Tables 2 and 3 were calculated in accordance with the relation $`B_{e^+e^{}}B_{fin}=\frac{\sigma (m^2)}{12\pi }m^2`$.

The fit results of which are presented in Table 3 has $`\chi ^2`$/n.d.f = 13/19 indicating a good fit to this hypothesis. As one can conclude from comparison of Table 2 and Table 3, the parameters of the $`\omega (1420)`$ are more or less stable while for the $`\omega (1600)`$ the level of their variation is of the order of two standard deviations. More precise experimental information collected in the whole energy range from 1.4 to 2 GeV is obviously necessary to determine unambiguously the properties of the $`\rho `$(770) and $`\omega `$(782) excitations.

## 4 Conclusions

The cross section of $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation into five pions has been measured in the energy range 1.28 - 1.38 GeV using the CMD-2 detector. The cross section is saturated by the contributions of $`\omega \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ and $`\eta \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ intermediate mechanisms. The energy dependence of the cross sections is compatible with the generally accepted pattern of two higher mass excitations for both $`\rho `$(770) and $`\omega `$(782) mesons, although an acceptable fit was obtained with one isoscalar and one isovector resonace only ($`\omega (1600)`$ and $`\rho (1450)`$). Parameters of the resonances are rather model dependent and more detailed information at c.m. energies above 1.4 GeV is required for their unambiguous determination.


format: text

text:
# ac Susceptibility in Granular Superconductors: Theory and Experiment.

## I Introduction

The influence of the granular structure on the electromagnetic superconducting properties has been consistently recognized , and simple formulas and models were used to account for the main features of the ac susceptibility $`\chi (B,T)`$ as a function of temperature $`(T)`$ and magnetic field $`(B)`$. The critical state model, and its extended versions, have been useful in interpreting the observed values of the magnetic response of type-II superconductors and the underlying interplay between pinning and creep forces on Josephson vortices in the grain and intergrain regions, both in zero-field cooling and field cooling experiments . Other effects, such as phase coherence and decoherence phenomena, peculiar to Josephson junctions and the quantum interference effects in the loops, add extra complexity to the polycrystalline magnetic response. In general, these effects have been neglected or taken into account only partially (or indirectly) to describe the ac susceptibility in polycrystalline superconductors. It is the purpose of this paper to consider them explicitly, to deduce a simple formula to describe the granular superconductors susceptibility in terms of the Josephson junction and loop areas, the penetration depth, the decoherence decay length and a critical exponent, and to show the ability of the formula to account qualitatively and quantitatively the rather complex behavior of $`\chi (B,T)`$. To illustrate this, magnetic response data of quite different samples are considered and fitted with fairly good results.

The understanding of the granular structure influence on the electromagnetic properties is not only of relevant interest but also of a challenging nature. Many effects, related with the phase coherence and Josephson vortices pinning and displacements, combine to give rise to fluorishly different experimental results. Careful measurements reveal subtle and systematic quantum coherence phenomena that affect the order parameter of adjacent superconducting grains and produce well defined field- and sample-dependent oscillations, apparent in the critical transport and screening currents behavior.

In the last years we have been interested in high precision measurements of critical transport and screening currents as functions of the temperature, magnetic field and the granularity of the superconducting samples. The main idea in these experiments was to reduce the effects of macroscopic averaging . Recently, a phenomenological theory of the Josephson junction between two superconducting grains, taking into account the effects of coherence and decoherece decay lengths on the order parameter, has been suggested to describe the Ambegaokar-Baratoff to Ginsburg-Landau transition in the temperature behavior of the critical transport current .

In the present paper, we study the behavior of the magnetic susceptibility $`\chi `$ as a function of the temperature and the external magnetic field. The measurement of $`\chi `$ permits to study the tunneling phenomena far away from the critical points and limits the current paths to a few adjacent grains. For this report we consider two quite different samples: a ”bad” and porous sample B, with irregular grains and low magnetic susceptibility, and a ”good” sample G, with closely packed parallelepiped shaped grains and much higher value of $`\chi `$ (see Figure 1). The ”bad” sample susceptibility also presents oscillations and a pronounced decrease of $`\chi `$ with increasing magnetic field (see Figure 2).

The contentsof this paper are as follows. In the second Section we recast the Clem’s picture of the screening currents in granular systems. We then recall, in Section III, some basic and known expressions of the superconducting theory and ‘put them together’ in a kind of phenomenological formula to describe the real part of the ac susceptibility. In Section IV, this phenomenological theory is applied to rather different granular superconductors, and finally in Section V we give a brief discussion.

## II Screening currents in granular systems

It is well known that the basic magnetic properties of ceramics are created by the currents circulating inside the grains, which tend to expel the external magnetic field from parts of the volume (regions of the type I in Figure 3) and thus lead to a diamagnetic behavior. Following Clem’s picture of the granular behavior, we distinguish three characteristic regions as shown in Figure 3. In this Figure, the screening current in regions II, responsible for the basic diamagnetic properties of the material, is distributed as suggested in the lower part of the Figure. The current density reaches its maximum (critical value) at the boundary of this region II, and beyond this region’s ”surface”, i.e. in region III , there is no screening current.

Josephson tunneling junctions are formed in regions III and IV and the Josephson tunneling process connects the ‘surfaces’ of regions II in adjacent grains, which are of course in a critical state. It is important to stress that, even if the applied magnetic field is weak, far away from its critical value (from the macroscopic point of view), the screening currents and the local magnetic field on each grain determine a local criticality and the penetration length, the existence or non existence of screening currents and, consequently, the position of the surfaces limiting the regions II, which (from the microscopical point of view) are in critical condition.

The ceramic structure permits the flowing of circulating currents over clusters of grains. The represented cluster of three grains (in Figure 4) is only an example; there is a possibility of current paths over a great amount of grains with Josephson type junctions between each pair. The corresponding currents produce some additional magnetic effects and modify the magnitude of $`\chi `$. These currents are, of course, regulated by the quantum interference phenomena and the Josephson junctions.

In Figure 4, the current 1 flowing over the external part of a cluster circulates in the same direction as the intragranular currents. This current has a diamagnetic character and raises the value of $`\left|\chi \right|`$. However, it does not expel the external magnetic field completely from the junctions. The internal part of the circuit contains the current 2, flowing in the opposite direction, though alongwith the currents inside the grains, it is of paramagnetic character, and permits the passage of some vortices of external magnetic field through the intergranular region V.

## III Theory of the magnetic response in polycrystalline samples

As in the case of the critical transport current, the behavior of the magnetization current presents systematic sample-dependent oscillations. These oscillations in polycrystalline and highly random systems, with low density of irregular grains, can also be explained reasonably well in terms of the superposition of Josephson junction and quantum-interfering intergrain currents. Therefore, the total current contains the contributions of the Josephson type currents

$$j_J=j_c\frac{\mathrm{sin}(\pi \varphi _J/\varphi _o)}{\pi \varphi _u/\varphi _o}$$
(1)
and loop currents

$$j_l=j_J\mathrm{cos}(\pi \varphi _l/\varphi _o).$$
(2)
Here $`j_c`$ is the lowest junction’s critical current in the loop $`l`$, $`\varphi _J`$ is the magnetic flux through the junction’s area given by

$$\varphi _J=BS_J=B\left(2\lambda _J+d\right)(r_J2\lambda _J),$$
(3)
and $`\varphi _l`$ the magnetic flux through the loops’s area taken as

$$\varphi _l=BS_l=B\pi \left(r_l+\lambda _J\right)^2.$$
(4)
At this level we have the fundamental quantities in terms of the basic granular parameters: the distance between two adjacent grains $`d`$, the junction size $`r_J`$, the loop area $`r_l`$ and the magnetic penetration length $`\lambda _J`$ whose temperature dependence is

$$\lambda _J=\lambda _o\left(1T/T_c\right)^\beta ,$$
(5)
with $`\lambda _o`$ the zero temperature penetration depth and $`\beta `$ a positive critical exponent (in BCS theory $`\beta =1/2`$).

In macroscopic samples, different areas of junctions and loops are possible. Therefore, the total magnetization current $`j_M`$ can be thought of as the superposition of a collection of loop currents $`j_l`$ modulated by $`j_J`$. Thus, to describe the magnetization current we shall consider the expression

$$j_M=\underset{l,J}{}j_c(T,B)\left|\frac{\mathrm{sin}\left(\pi \varphi _J/\varphi _o\right)}{\pi \varphi _J/\varphi _o}\right|\mathrm{cos}\left(\pi \varphi _l/\varphi _o\right)$$
(6)
where

$$j_c(T,B)=j_o\left(1T/T_c\right)^\alpha \mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{2\lambda _o}{\zeta _o}\left(1T/T_c\right)^{\alpha 0.5}+\frac{2\lambda _o}{\zeta _o}\right]$$
(7)
and $`\zeta _o`$ is the zero temperature decoherence length defined as in reference . In polycrystalline samples many of these parameters vary randomly. Notice that the temperature dependence is not completely factorized because both $`\varphi _J`$ and $`\varphi _l`$ depend also on the temperature, and $`\alpha `$ and $`\zeta _o`$ depend on the magnetic field.

On the other hand, taking into account that the magnetization current and the susceptibility are quantities proportional to each other, it is possible to conclude that the real part of the susceptibility $`\chi `$ is described by a similar function , i.e.

$$Re\chi _c(T,B)=\chi _c(0,B)\left(1T/T_c\right)^\alpha \mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{2\lambda _o}{\zeta }\left(1T/T_c\right)^{\alpha 0.5}+\frac{2\lambda _o}{\zeta }\right]$$
(8)
The magnetic field dependence is like that in equation (7). For small values of $`B`$, applied in the experimental measurements discussed below, we can safely assume that the sum upon the junction and loop indices can be substituted by a contribution of a junction and a loop with ”effective” areas $`S_{J,eff}`$ and $`S_{l,eff}`$, such that

$$\chi _c(0,B)=\chi _c(0,0)\left|\frac{\mathrm{sin}\left(\pi BS_{J,eff}/\varphi _o\right)}{\left(\pi BS_{J,eff}/\varphi _o\right)}\right|\mathrm{cos}\left(\pi BS_{l,eff}/\varphi _o\right)$$
(9)
These equations will be used, in the next section, to adjust the experimental points choosing different values for the parameters $`\alpha `$, $`\zeta `$, $`\chi _o`$, $`S_{J,eff}`$ and $`S_{l,eff}`$. Taking $`d0`$, and the ”average” value of $`\lambda _o`$ ($`\lambda _o3000nm`$), it is also possible to estimate the ”effective” values of $`r_{J,eff}`$ and $`r_{l,eff}`$.

## IV Experimental results and discussion

As mentioned above, a more flexible but rigorous application of the definition of the critical parameter lead us, as in previous works, to determine reliable and precise measurements of critical transport currents as functions of the magnetic field, based on direct transport critical currents measurements for different temperatures, . Similarly, direct temperature dependence of the magnetic susceptibility $`\chi `$ in polycrystalline superconducting samples allows us to determine, with high precision, the magnetic field dependence of $`\chi `$ for different fixed temperatures.

In the experimental procedure, partially explained in references , the temperature is slowly raised by natural heating during the experiment, while the external magnetic field is kept constant. In this way, a set of temperature dependent susceptibility data is obtained. Changing the magnetic field, a new set of data $`\chi =\chi _B\left(T\right)`$, with $`B`$ taken as a parameter, is obtained. All these data $`\chi _B\left(T\right)`$, corresponding to different applied magnetic fields, generate a surface in the $`B`$-$`T`$-$`\chi `$ space and define the susceptibility $`\chi =\chi (B,T)`$.

A series of $`Y`$-based samples were prepared by standard solid state reactions. The mixture of high purity $`Y_2O_3`$, $`Ba_2CO_3`$ and $`CuO`$ powders were ground, pelleted at a pressure of $`5tons/in^2`$ and pre-fired at $`910^oC`$ for 24 hours. This procedure was repeated three times for heating temperatures of $`920^oC`$, $`930^oC`$ and $`940^oC`$. An extra sintering of compact pellets in oxygen flow at $`950^oC`$ for $`24h`$ was followed by a slow cooling in oxygen flow. The cooling rate of this stage was varied in order to get two samples with different grain sizes. In Figure 1 we observe the different structures of samples G and B that will be analyzed in this paper – sample B with grains separated by inter granular dark regions and sample G, with closely packed grains and a minimum spacing between them (see Figure 1).

The samples were cut and polished in the shape of thin disks and then mounted on cooper paste in order to decrease the temperature gradient. The temperature of the sample was measured with a platinum resistor and a Lake Shore detector. These samples were cooled in an APD SCS cryostat adapted for $`AC`$ susceptibility measurements. The output signal was processed with a Lock-in amplifier.

In Figure 2, the susceptibilities of samples G and B, are plotted together to make evident the influence of the physical structure on the behavior of $`\chi `$ as a function of the temperature and the external magnetic field. In the case of sample B, $`\chi `$ takes relatively low values even for a low temperature ($`35K`$) and zero magnetic field (see Figure 5), and the constant temperature susceptibility as a function of the magnetic field decreases with visible oscillations due to the Josephson junction effects. The susceptibility reduces rapidly with increasing temperature, from $`0.49`$ (at $`T=35K`$) to $`0.38`$ (at $`T=70K`$). At $`B250\mu T`$, the magnetic field effect on $`\chi `$ is weaker because some junctions are already disconnected and $`\chi `$ is controlled mainly by the diamagnetic properties of the grains. The high-temperature curve oscillates with the magnetic field less than the low temperature curve for the same reason.

The susceptibility shown in Figure 6 for sample G exhibits a completely different behavior and higher values ($`0.73`$ for $`T=35K`$ and $`B50\mu T`$). It is obvious that the intergrain currents can flow easier through short junctions, and thus screen the external magnetic field more efficiently. The susceptibility decreases with the magnetic field, but without visible oscillations. The reduced width of the Josephson junctions does not permit an appreciable penetration of the magnetic field into them. The decrease of $`\chi `$ with temperature corresponds to an increase of the type III regions, where vortices of the external magnetic field can penetrate.

In all cases, it was possible to fit the data by choosing the values of $`r_J`$, $`r_l`$, $`\zeta `$, $`\alpha `$ and $`\chi _c(0,0)`$, as indicated in Table I. Besides the sample-dependent (zero field and zero temperature) scaling susceptibility factor $`\chi _c(0,0)`$, which comprises the global magnetic field response, the critical exponent $`\alpha `$, the decoherence length $`\zeta `$, and the Josephson junction and loop effective areas values, correspond quite well to the samples characteristics. In the case of sample B (see Figure 5) the adjustment is not exact, due to the irregular shapes of the grains and junctions. The fitting is far more better for sample G, where the loops of currents do not play an important role (see Figure 6). The major difference within the parameter values in Table I appears in the parameter $`r_l`$, which for sample G is practically vanishing, while for sample B it has a relatively high value. In sample B the porous structure forces the Cooper pairs to larger loops around the intergrain regions V. On the contrary, in sample B such loops are not necessary because the grains are arranged very closely.

Concerning the critical exponent $`\alpha `$ appearing in the polynomial and exponential temperature dependent factors, we notice that their values remain between $`1/2`$ and $`1`$ (increasing with the magnetic field), as was found already in previous reports, where the order parameter was shown to decay exponentially because of the intergrain tunneling process. Finally, the fitting values of the decoherence length $`\zeta `$, are more or less the same for both samples and, as expected, grow with the magnetic field.

## V Conclusions

In this paper we studied another physical quantity characterizing the polycrystalline superconductors electromagnetic properties. We show that, as for the critical transport currents, the Josephson and loop’s interfering currents have, depending on the sample quality, different degrees of influence on the magnetic field response. The susceptibility of equations (8) and (9) gives reasonably good predictions on its behavior as a function of the temperature and the external magnetic field. The oscillations of $`\chi `$, observed experimentally, are well explained on the basis of the quantum interference theory, the exponential suppression of the order parameter induced by tunneling processes, and the polynomial temperature dependence known from the standard theory.

###### Acknowledgements.

We acknowledge discussions with Professor H. Simanjuntak and the partial support of CONACyT of México under Project No. 350-E9301 and of The Abdus Salam International Center for Theoretical Physics, Trieste-Italy.

Captions

1. Microscopic images of the samples G and B.
2. The susceptibility of the good and bad samples differ in magnitude and have a qualitatively different begavior as functions of the applied magnetic field. The curves shown here are for $`T=35K`$.
3. The screening currents distributions and the tunneling path in the two adjacent ceramic grains. In regions I we assume complete Meissner effect; in regions II flow the screening currents, with a density distribution as shown below, reaching a critical value at the boundary of this and regions III, where the external magnetic field penetrates; finally, the intergrain region IV is also shown.
4. An idealized picture of three adjacent grains with Josephson’s junctions between them, forming an elementary tunneling circuit. Each grain has its own regions of the types I, II, and III, as explained in Figure 3. The screening currents circulate within regions II in the counter-clock direction. The intergrain tunneling current 1 circulates in the same direcion in the outer part of the circuit, while the current 2 in the inner part of the circuit has the opposite, clockwise direction. The external magnetic field can penetrate into the region III of each grain, and into the regions IV and V between the grains.
5. Behavior of $`\chi `$ as a function of the applied magnetic field at different temperatures for the sample B.
6. Behavior of $`\chi `$ as a function of the applied magnetic field at different temperatures for sample G.


text:
# Electromagnetically induced absorption in magneto-optically trapped atoms.

## I Introduction.

The interaction of radiation with a coherently prepared atomic medium has attracted considerable attention in recent years . While most coherent processes have been studied using three or more atomic energy levels, it was recently demonstrated that degenerate two-level systems constitute an interesting host for coherent spectroscopical effects . A new coherent effect observed in degenerate two-level systems, is the increase of the atomic absorption occurring when the lower atomic energy level has a smaller (angular momentum) degeneracy than the upper level and the frequencies of two mutually coherent optical fields match the condition for Raman resonance between ground-state Zeeman sublevels. This phenomenon, the change in sign taken apart, share several properties with electromagnetically induced transparency (EIT)  and was designated electromagnetically induced absorption (EIA) . The spectral properties of EIA depending on field intensity, magnetic field and optical fields polarizations were recently analyzed . In particular, the sensitive dependence of the EIA spectrum on magnetic field makes it a potentially useful tool for the characterization of the magnetic atomic environment . To date, the reported observations of EIA were carried in vapor samples. It is worth noticing that the atomic transitions normally used for magneto-optical trapping and cooling verify the conditions for EIA : they are closed transitions with a larger angular momentum in the excited state than in the ground state. This paper presents the first observation of EIA on a cold atomic sample in a magneto optical trap (MOT) using the trapping transition. It is shown that EIA constitute a simple and direct tool for the inspection of the atomic density distribution with respect to the trapping quadrupolar magnetic field .

We have performed EIA spectroscopy on a sample of magneto-optically cooled $`{}_{}{}^{85}Rb`$ atoms in the presence of the trapping MOT field. In addition to the fields necessary for the MOT operation, the sample was submitted to a fixed frequency pump field and a tunable probe field with linear and mutually orthogonal polarizations. Both fields were quasiresonant with the closed $`5S_{1/2}(F=3)`$ $`5P_{3/2}(F^{}=4)`$ transition of $`{}_{}{}^{85}Rb`$ (trapping transition). A copropagating geometry was used for the pump and the probe waves. This geometry has the advantage of avoiding a spatial dependence of the relative phase between the pump and the probe field that would exist, for instance, in a counter-propagating geometry and allow more direct comparison with theory. However, the copropagating geometry has the disadvantage of requiring very low intensity in both the pump and probe waves to avoid “blowing” the trapped atoms by the radiative force exerted by the quasiresonant fields. Consequently, EIA was observed only in a regime of pump and probe intensities many orders of magnitude below saturation for which the perturbation of the MOT by the pump and probe field was observed to be negligible. Since small field intensities were used, the corresponding EIA resonances were small compared to the linear absorption. This required the use of a highly sensitive detection technique in order to distinguish the EIA resonances from the large linear absorption background. A double-frequency lock-in detection was used.

## II Setup.

The experiments were done on a standard magneto optical trap for $`{}_{}{}^{85}Rb`$ with three pairs of counterpropagating trapping beams along orthogonal directions. The maximum available total trapping field power was $`20`$ $`mW`$ and the trapping beam cross section $`1cm`$. A repumping field of $`1`$ $`mW`$ generated by an independent laser was superimposed to the trapping beams. The MOT used a quadrupolar magnetic field distribution with a magnetic field gradient of $`1G/mm`$ along the symmetry axis (vertical). The MOT produced a cold atom cloud of typical $`0.7mm`$ transverse dimension containing (at maximum trapping field power) $`10^7`$ atoms. The trapping and pump fields were obtained from the same (frequency stabilized) extended cavity diode laser (master laser) using in each case the following procedure: the output of the master laser was frequency shifted by an acousto optic modulator (AOM) to a fixed frequency position relative to the $`5S_{1/2}(F=3)`$ $`5P_{3/2}(F^{}=4)`$ atomic transition and used to injection-lock a separate laser diode for power increase. As in , the probe field was obtained from the pump by the use of two additional consecutive AOMs, one of them driven by a tunable RF generator. In this way, all three trapping, pump and probe fields were highly correlated. The pump and probe waves with orthogonal linear polarizations are superimposed on a $`50cm`$ long polarization-preserving single mode optical fiber and subsequently focussed on the cold atoms sample ($`0.3mm`$ beam waist). Intensity was controlled with neutral density filters in order to have approximately the same power in the pump and probe waves. At the sample, both waves had a central intensity around $`0.1\mu W/cm^2`$. The pump and the probe fields were mechanically chopped at frequencies $`f_1`$ and $`f_2`$ ($`1`$ and $`1.2kHz`$ respectively). After the sample, a photodiode detected the transmitted light. The photodiode output was analyzed with a lock-in amplifier using as reference the sum frequency $`f=f_1+f_2`$. With this technique, only the nonlinear component of the absorption, proportional to the product of the pump and probe field intensities was detected. The spectra were recorded by scanning the frequency offset between the tunable probe and the fixed-frequency pump.

## III Results and discussion.

An example of a low resolution nonlinear absorption spectrum as a function of the frequency difference between the probe and the pump fields is presented in Fig. 1. In this spectrum, the pump frequency is kept fixed at the center of the $`5S_{1/2}(F=3)`$ $`5P_{3/2}(F^{}=4)`$ transition of $`{}_{}{}^{85}Rb`$. The spectrum presents three distinct features. Two of these are centered around $`\delta =0`$. There is a broad resonance (dip) whose width is given by the excited state width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }/2\pi =6MHz`$. At the bottom of this resonance there is a much narrower one with opposite sign. The broad resonance corresponds to an increase in the transmission due to the saturation of the sample by the pump field while the narrow feature represents an increase of the absorption. The latter corresponds to EIA. The sub-natural width of this resonance is an indication of its coherent nature. The inset in Fig. 1 shows the calculated signal around $`\delta =0`$ using the model described in . An interesting feature in the spectrum in Fig. 1 is the large dip appearing around $`\delta 10MHz`$. This resonance occurs when the probe frequency equals the frequency of the trapping beams (red-detuned $`10MHz`$ with respect to the atomic transition). Since, as a consequence of the technique used for the fields preparation, the probe, pump and trapping beams are highly correlated, it is rather natural to observe a coherent resonance involving the probe and the trapping fields. However, keeping in mind the two-frequencies detection technique used, the pump field must also participate in the generation of any detected signal. Consequently the peak observed around $`\delta 10MHz`$ corresponds to a nonlinear process involving at least one photon from each of the tree fields (pump, probe and trapping). The study of this multiphoton effect is beyond the scope of this paper. We focus our attention on the EIA structure observed around $`\delta =0`$. Fig. 2(a) presents a detailed view of this structure observed in a MOT with a total trapping beams power attenuated to approximately $`4mW/cm^2`$. Under this condition the linear absorption by the cold atoms was maximum ($`40\%`$) at the trapping transition. A triplet structure is clearly visible which is reminiscent of the EIA spectrum obtained in a homogeneous sample for perpendicular pump and probe polarizations in the presence of a magnetic field orthogonal to both polarizations . The observed value of the frequency separation between the center and the two sidebands would correspond in that case to a magnetic field of $`B0.3G`$. This figure is of the order of the typical magnetic field magnitude within the cold atoms volume due to the quadrupolar distribution. Since in our experiment the pump and probe beams overlap a significant fraction ($`20\%`$) of the cold atomic sample, the EIA spectrum is due to the average contribution from atoms in different magnetic environments.

The hypothesis that the observed structure of the EIA spectrum is determined by the magnetic field present at the MOT can be tested by adding a small bias magnetic field at the sample. This was achieved by varying the current in the Helmholtz coils surrounding the trap that are normally used to compensate the earth field. The effect of the bias field is to change the magnetic field distribution at the position explored by the pump and probe waves. It also produces a translation of the cloud that results in a variation in the total number of atoms interacting with the pump and probe waves. Significant changes in the relative weight and positions of the resonances occur for different bias magnetic fields. Since in these measurements the pump, probe and trapping fields are kept unchanged, we conclude that the observed spectral structure is mainly determined by the magnetic field. When the pump-probe beam was carefully aligned through the atomic cloud for maximum linear absorption, the observed structure of the EIA spectrum was a triplet \[Fig. 2(a)\]. This structure represents the total response of the magnetically inhomogeneous sample. We have compared this observation with the numerical calculation of the response arising from $`1000`$ atoms in different positions in an ideal MOT. We used a Monte Carlo procedure where the position of the atom is randomly chosen (uniform distribution) within an oblate ellipsoidal volume, representing the trapped cloud, centered at the zero of a quadrupolar magnetic field. The vertical dimension (along the symmetry axis) of the ellipsoid is shorter by a factor of two than the horizontal one. The absolute value of the magnetic field at the points where the principal axis intercept the ellipsoid surface is $`B_{MAX}`$. The pump field polarization is vertical and the probe polarization horizontal. For each atomic position the local magnetic field is evaluated  and the corresponding nonlinear response is calculated using the model described in . Then the total absorption is calculated as the sum of the individual atomic contributions. The result of the simulation is shown in Fig. 2(b) where a realistic value of $`B_{MAX}=0.8G`$ has been chosen. The total absorption spectrum is a triplet in agreement with our observation. Unlike, the ideal ellipsoidal sample assumed for the calculation, the actual cloud of cold atoms is not symmetric around the zero of the magnetic field distribution. This is due to power imbalance and wavefront irregularities in the counterpropagating trapping beams. This produces a cold cloud displaced from the zero of the magnetic field with an asymmetric shape and an irregular atomic density distribution. This explains the fact that varying the position of the pump-probe beam across the atomic sample we were able to observe significant variations of the nonlinear absorption shape ranging from a single-peak spectrum, a doublet, a triplet or even a five-peaks structure.

Considering that the EIA spectra were recorded with the trapping field on, it is somehow surprising to observe spectral structures determined by the Zeeman shift of ground-state sublevels by the quadrupolar magnetic field. In the trapping region, the resonant interaction of the atoms with the trapping field results in significant displacement of the atomic levels due to (AC Stark) light shift. The magnitude of the light shift is different for different ground-state sublevels and depends on the local trapping field intensity and polarization experienced by the atom. The six trapping beams are responsible for a rather complicate interference pattern resulting in three dimensional modulation of the trapping field intensity and polarization with a spatial period of half wavelength . The importance of the ground-state sublevels light shifts in a MOT is well illustrated by the peculiar shape of the absorption spectra of the trapped atoms in the MOT  analyzed by Grison and coworkers . The influence of the ground-state Zeeman sublevels light shifts on the absorption spectra of strongly driven degenerate two-level systems was studied in . Since the light shifts are uncorrelated with the Zeeman shift produced by the quadrupolar magnetic field, one should expect that the former will result in an inhomogeneous dispersion of the energies of the ground-state sublevels producing a smearing of the EIA resonance frequencies.

We have observed the variation of the EIA spectrum with the intensity of the trapping field (Fig. 3). For low trapping field intensities a well resolved triplet was obtained. The width of the central peak of the upper trace in Fig. 3 is $`30kHz`$. This is to our knowledge the narrowest coherent resonance observed to date in an operating MOT . As the trapping field intensity is increased, the EIA resonances broaden. For large enough trapping field intensity, the triplet structure transforms into a unique broad peak. It is worth noticing that a regime can be found where the trapped cloud is rather dense (linear absorption around $`40\%`$) while at the same time the magnetic-field-dependent structure of the EIA spectrum remains clearly resolved. In this regime the modification of the ground-state sublevels by the light shift produced by the trapping field is small compared to the Zeeman shift.

The fact that the EIA spectrum reflects the magnetic-field distribution within the trapped atoms cloud may be used for mapping the magnetic-field variations inside the cold atoms sample. This possibility is illustrated in figure 4 showing the modification of the EIA spectrum as the pump-probe beam is translated in the equatorial plane of the cold atom cloud. Between two consecutive traces of Fig. 4 the pump-probe beam was translated by $`100\mu m`$. From bottom to top, the spectra in figure 4 evolve from a well resolved tripled into a broad unresolved peak. The series in Fig. 4 may be interpreted as a mapping of the magnetic field inside the cold atoms cloud averaged over the volume explored by the pump-probe beam. In these measurements the pump-probe beam diameter at the sample is $`0.3mm`$ a figure which is only a factor of $`2.3`$ smaller than the estimated cold atoms cloud diameter. This limits in our case the spatial resolution of the magnetic field mapping. A two orders of magnitude improvement in the resolution is in principle possible with a tight focussed pump-probe beam. The spectra presented in Fig. 4 clearly indicate the lack of symmetry of our MOT. As a matter of fact, the zero of the magnetic field, around which symmetric variations of the EIA spectrum should take place, is located outside the region of large atomic density.

The mapping of the magnetic field using EIA spectroscopy, appear as a rather simple and straightforward technique. It can be achieved in a cw regime without the need for turning off the MOT trapping beams and with very low-power pump and probe fields. As demonstrated here, these fields can be easily obtained from the trapping laser. As in the example shown, qualitative information about the atomic density distribution with respect to the quadrupolar magnetic field is directly inferred from the spectra. The fitting of the experimental EIA spectra to theoretical predictions (based on consistent assumptions for the trapped cloud density distribution) can in principle be used as a tomographic technique for the characterization of the atoms in the MOT . This approach was not developed in the present case in view of the irregular atomic density distribution observed in our MOT.

## IV Conclusions.

We have observed EIA resonances on a sample of cold atoms in a MOT in the presence of the trapping light beams. An operating regime of the MOT (with moderate trapping beams intensity) could be found where the atomic density is quite large while at the same time the atomic ground state is weakly perturbed by the trapping field. In this regime the energy shift of the ground state sublevels is essentially governed by the Zeeman effect. Coherent resonances as narrow as $`30kHz`$ were observed for the first time in an operating MOT. EIA absorption spectroscopy, performed in a cw regime with very low optical intensities, appears as a suitable tool for the inspection of the Zeeman shift produced for the quadrupolar magnetic field at different positions of the cold atom sample.

## V Acknowledgments.

The authors are thankful to A. Akulshin for his contribution to the early stages of this study and to H. Failache for helpful discussions. This work was supported by the Uruguayan agencies: CONICYT, CSIC and PEDECIBA and by the ICTP/CLAF.


text:
# Multiphase Gas in Intermediate Redshift Galaxies

## 1. Hubble and the More Complete Picture

Within the field of quasar absorption lines, one long–standing question is how the halos and ISM of earlier epoch galaxies compare or relate, in an evolutionary sense, to those of the present epoch. The look–back time to $`z=1`$ covers well more than half the age of the universe. Furthermore, spectral and morphological properties of absorbing galaxies are accessible with present day ground–based and spaced–based observatories (Steidel, Dickinson, & Persson 1994; Steidel 1998). Thus, absorption line studies at intermediate redshifts provide an opportunity to examine the gaseous evolution of galaxies.

The ISM and halos of local galaxies are comprised of many ionization phases, including diffused ionized gas, extended coronae, and denser low ionization regions often located in front of shock fronts (e.g. Dahlem 1998). In absorption, simultaneous study of both the low and high ionization phases in our Galaxy have been required to constrain the ionization mechanisms, chemical abundance variations, and the dust properties (e.g. Savage & Sembach 1996).

A significant obstacle in the face of rapid progress with studies employing absorption lines, however, is that the strongest transitions of the cosmologically most abundant elements lie in the far to near ultraviolet (UV) portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. Fortunately, at $`z1`$, the near UV transitions, which are most often associated with neutral and low ionization ions111Meaning ions with ionization potentials in the range of a few to $`30`$ eV., are redshifted into the visible. Thus, they can be observed from the ground with large aperture telescopes. However, the far UV transitions, associated with moderate and high ionization ions222Meaning those with ionization potentials ranging between $`30`$ and $`50`$ eV and between $`50`$ and $`140`$ eV, respectively., are redshifted to the near UV; a study of the high ionization component requires a spaced–based telescope, i.e. HST. The HST archive is rich with $`R=1300`$ FOS spectra of quasars, the majority due to the QSO Absorption Line Key Project (Bahcall et al. 1993).

## 2. The CIV–MgII Kinematics Connection: Multiphase Gas

We used HIRES/Keck spectra ($`R6`$ km s-1) and archival FOS/HST spectra ($`R230`$ km s-1) to place constraints on the ionization and multiphase distribution of absorbing gas at $`z=0.4`$ to $`z=1`$. In Figure 1, we present Mgii $`\lambda 2796`$ and the Civ $`\lambda \lambda 1548,1550`$ doublet for each of 40 systems (note that the velocity scale for Mgii is 500 km s-1 and for Civ is 3000 km s-1). Ticks above the HIRES spectra give the velocities of the Voigt profile Mgii sub–components and ticks above the FOS data give the expected location of these components for the Civ doublet. The labels “D”, “L”, and “Bl” denote detection, limit, and blend, respectively. The systems are presented in order of increasing Mgii kinematic spread from the upper left to lower right.

Based upon a highly significant correlation between the Civ equivalent widths and the Mgii kinematics, it is inferred that most intermediate redshift galaxies have multiphase gaseous structures (Churchill et al. 1999, 2000). The low ionization gas is in multiple, narrow components, $`b5`$ km s-1, and the high ionization gas is kinematically spread out with $`b70`$ km s-1 (using the doublet ratio method). This is an effective velocity dispersion, for the FOS spectra are of too low resolution to resolve velocity splittings below $`500`$ km s-1.

## 3. Case Study; The Complex Triple System at z=0.93

The three systems at $`z=0.9254`$, $`0.9276`$, and $`0.9343`$ along the line of sight to PG $`1206+459`$ exhibit complex Mgii kinematics and exceptionally strong Civ, Nv, and Ovi absorption. We investigated the ionization and spatial distribution of these systems using detailed photoionization models (Cloudy; Ferland 1996).

In the top panels of Figure 2, the HIRES/Keck spectra of the Feii $`\lambda 2600`$ transition and of the Mgii $`\lambda \lambda 2796,2803`$ doublet are shown with a Voigt profile model spectrum superimposed; the ticks give the component centers. The systemic redshifts of the three systems, A, B, and C, are labeled. The lower two panels show the normalized FOS/HST spectrum (histogram) with tuned model predictions (not fits) superimposed (see Churchill & Charton 1999). The dotted–line is a single–phase model, assuming all absorption arises due to ionization balance in the Mgii clouds; a single phase of gas fails to account for the high ionization absorption strengths. The solid spectrum is a two–phase model, which allows the higher ionization gas to reside in a separate phase.

Based upon the photoionization modeling, a highly ionized phase, not seen in Mgii, is required to account for the observed Civ, Nv, and Ovi absorption. An “effective” Doppler width of $`50b100`$ km s-1 is consistent with the complex, blended Civ data. The physical size of the high ionization component is less than 30 kpc, with the best values between 10 and 20 kpc.

Based upon the sizes and effective Doppler widths, we infer that the highly ionized material is analogous to the Galactic coronae (Savage et al. 1997), material stirred up by energetic mechanical processes, such as galactic fountains. In this scenario, the gas is concentrated around the individual galaxies which presumably provide a source of support, heating, and chemical enrichment.

It seems promising that the answer to the posed question (§ 1) may be forthcoming when HST resolves the FOS profiles with STIS and COS.

### Acknowledgments.

Thanks are due to S. Kirhakos, C. Steidel, and D. Schneider for their contributions to the work presented here. I am especially grateful to all who work to make HST a unique platform for astronomy.

## References

Bahcall, J. N. et al. 1993, ApJS, 87, 1

Churchill, C. W., & Charlton, J. C. 1999, AJ, 118, 59

Churchill, C. W., et al. 1999, ApJ, 519, L43

Churchill, C. W., et al. 2000, ApJ, 543, in press

Dahlem, M. 1998, PASP, 109, 1298

Ferland, G. 1996, Hazy, University of Kentucky Internal Report

Savage B. D. & Sembach K. M. 1996, ARA&A, 34, 279

Steidel, C. C., Dickinson, M. & Persson, E. 1994, ApJ, 437, L75

Steidel, C. C. 1998, in Galactic Halos: A UC Santa Cruz Workshop, ASP Conf. Series, V136, ed. D. Zaritsky (San Francisco : PASP), 167


text:
# A Higgs or Not a Higgs? McGill-00/29, IASSNS-HEP-00/72

## I Motivation

This talk***Presented by C. Burgess to ICHEP XXX, Osaka, Japan, July/August 2000. is a telegraphic summary of the much more detailed discussion of the physics of a new scalar presented in ref. . We encourage interested readers to look to this reference, which fills in the fine pencil work behind the broad brush strokes presented here. (Lack of space also necessarily limits the number of papers we can cite, so please see  for more extensive referencing.)

Much has been written about the properties of the Higgs boson, both in its Standard Model (SM) guise, or within one of the more popular variant models, such as two doublet models (THDMs), left-right symmetric models (LRSMs) or supersymmetric generalizations of these. Considerable experimental effort also has gone into Higgs searches, partly guided by the many detailed theoretical studies. The recent indications for a Higgs having a mass of order 115 GeV has led to an extension of LEP’s running time, and may yet bring news of a final discovery.

But if a new scalar is indeed found, how can we know if it is our friend the Higgs rather than some other kind of scalar imposter? Ideally, this is answered by measuring all of the scalar’s couplings and comparing the results to the well-known SM predictions. Unfortunately, the precision required to distinguish the SM Higgs from its popular close cousins is not likely to be available soon after discovery.

This talk addresses what we can do in the meantime. Instead of being glum due to the cup being half-empty – i.e. over our likely inability to distinguish scalars coming from well-motivated, but closely related models – we would like to rejoice at it being half-full: there will be numerous theories which predict scalars which are experimentally distinguishable from the SM very early on. It was the purpose of Ref.  to provide the first systematic roadmap to these dark and poorly explored corners of theory space.

## II The Framework

Of course any analysis must come with working assumptions, our goal is to minimize ours and to tie them closely to physical questions. We assume that at first only a new scalar is discovered, and all other new particles are reasonably heavy compared to it. E.g.: if the new scalar has mass 115 GeV, we imagine all other particles being much heavier (say $`>200`$ GeV). This assumption permits the analysis of the scalar’s properties within the effective theory obtained by integrating out all other heavier particles. The lowest-dimension effective couplings of such a scalar are the most important at low energies. Up to dimension 4 the complete list of couplings is:

$$\frac{m_h^2}{2}h^2+\frac{\nu }{3!}h^3+\frac{a_Z}{2}Z_\mu Z^\mu h+a_WW_\mu ^{}W^\mu h,$$

and

$$\underset{Q(f)=Q(f^{})}{}\overline{f}\left(y_{ff^{}}+i\gamma _5z_{ff^{}}\right)f^{}h+\frac{\lambda }{4!}h^4+\left(\frac{b_Z}{4}Z_\mu Z^\mu +\frac{b_W}{2}W_\mu ^{}W^\mu \right)h^2$$

Some dimension-five interactions can also be important:

$`c_gG_{\mu \nu }^\alpha G_\alpha ^{\mu \nu }h+\stackrel{~}{c}_gG_{\mu \nu }^\alpha \stackrel{~}{G}_\alpha ^{\mu \nu }h+c_\gamma F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }h`$ (2)
$`\stackrel{~}{c}_\gamma F_{\mu \nu }\stackrel{~}{F}^{\mu \nu }h+c_{Z\gamma }Z_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }h+\stackrel{~}{c}_{Z\gamma }Z_{\mu \nu }\stackrel{~}{F}^{\mu \nu }h.`$
Ref.  gives expressions for how observables depend on these couplings without making common theoretically-motivated assumptions (like $`y_fm_f/v1`$). It also collects current experimental limits on their size.

## III Consequences

1. Map of Model Space The kinds of experimental distinctions likely to be possible soon after discovery can be summarized by the answers provided to four questions. ($`i`$) Q1: Are trilinear $`hWW`$ and $`hZZ`$ couplings of order electromagnetic in size ($`O(e)`$ or larger)? ($`ii`$) Q2: Is the same true for Yukawa couplings? ($`iii`$) Q3: Are electromagnetic $`h\gamma \gamma `$ couplings $`O(e^2/16\pi ^2)`$ or larger? ($`iv`$) Are gluonic $`hgg`$ couplings $`O(g^2/16\pi ^2)`$ or larger?

There are 12 possible combinations of answers to these 4 yes/no questions because a ‘yes’ answer to Q1 generally implies a ‘yes’ answer to Q3. Table 1 enumerates the 12 options, and places the most popular models. Three features emerge:

1. The most popular models tend to cluster together, making them difficult to easily distinguish from one another.
2. Models are not completely clustered so experiments can immediately provide some information about the viability of some popular models.
3. Some categories are empty in Table 1, indicating a failure of theoretical imagination. Should experiments point us to the empty slots, theorists will fill them, so we must bear in mind they can exist.

Similarly general statements may be made concerning the finer distinctions amongst models sharing one of the entries of the Table. For instance loop corrections to Yukawa couplings are known to distinguish supersymmetric models from some 2HDMs. We show how these arguments rely on an underlying chiral symmetry, and so apply more generally than to these two alternatives. Alternatively, by comparing general expressions for $`hWW`$ and $`hZZ`$ couplings in multi-Higgs models, we find general inequalities which these couplings must satisfy, depending on the electroweak representation filled out by the various Higgses.

## Acknowledgments

Support from N.S.E.R.C. (Canada), F.C.A.R. (Québec), DoE Grant No. DE-FG02-94ER40823 (US), the Ambrose Monell Foundation and a Marie Curie EC grant (TMR-ERBFMBICT 972147) is gratefully acknowledged.


text:
# Search for Direct CP Violation in Ξ Hyperon Decay

## Abstract

Using data collected with the CLEO II detector we have performed a search for direct CP violation in the $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ hyperon system. CP violation gives rise to an asymmetry, $`𝒜`$, between the parity-violating angular distributions of the decay chains $`\mathrm{\Xi }^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }\pi ^{},\mathrm{\Lambda }p\pi ^{}`$ and $`\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}^+\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\pi ^+,\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\overline{p}\pi ^+`$. In the Standard Model, $`𝒜10^4`$ to $`10^5`$. If CP violation were found at a higher level it could indicate the presence of new physics. We find no evidence for CP violation: $`𝒜=0.057\pm 0.064\pm 0.039`$. We also obtain $`A_\mathrm{\Xi }=0.070\pm 0.064\pm 0.045`$ and $`\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}}=0.49_{0.05}^{+0.06}\pm 0.10`$.

preprint:   CLNS 98/1587 CLEO 98-16

D. E. Jaffe,1 G. Masek,1 H. P. Paar,1 E. M. Potter,1 S. Prell,1 V. Sharma,1 D. M. Asner,2 A. Eppich,2 J. Gronberg,2 T. S. Hill,2 D. J. Lange,2 R. J. Morrison,2 H. N. Nelson,2 T. K. Nelson,2 D. Roberts,2 B. H. Behrens,3 W. T. Ford,3 A. Gritsan,3 H. Krieg,3 J. Roy,3 J. G. Smith,3 J. P. Alexander,4 R. Baker,4 C. Bebek,4 B. E. Berger,4 K. Berkelman,4 V. Boisvert,4 D. G. Cassel,4 D. S. Crowcroft,4 M. Dickson,4 S. von Dombrowski,4 P. S. Drell,4 K. M. Ecklund,4 R. Ehrlich,4 A. D. Foland,4 P. Gaidarev,4 L. Gibbons,4 B. Gittelman,4 S. W. Gray,4 D. L. Hartill,4 B. K. Heltsley,4 P. I. Hopman,4 D. L. Kreinick,4 T. Lee,4 Y. Liu,4 N. B. Mistry,4 C. R. Ng,4 E. Nordberg,4 M. Ogg,4,***Permanent address: University of Texas, Austin TX 78712. J. R. Patterson,4 D. Peterson,4 D. Riley,4 A. Soffer,4 B. Valant-Spaight,4 A. Warburton,4 C. Ward,4 M. Athanas,5 P. Avery,5 C. D. Jones,5 M. Lohner,5 C. Prescott,5 A. I. Rubiera,5 J. Yelton,5 J. Zheng,5 G. Brandenburg,6 R. A. Briere,6Permanent address: Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213. A. Ershov,6 Y. S. Gao,6 D. Y.-J. Kim,6 R. Wilson,6 T. E. Browder,7 Y. Li,7 J. L. Rodriguez,7 H. Yamamoto,7 T. Bergfeld,8 B. I. Eisenstein,8 J. Ernst,8 G. E. Gladding,8 G. D. Gollin,8 R. M. Hans,8 E. Johnson,8 I. Karliner,8 M. A. Marsh,8 M. Palmer,8 M. Selen,8 J. J. Thaler,8 K. W. Edwards,9 A. Bellerive,10 R. Janicek,10 P. M. Patel,10 A. J. Sadoff,11 R. Ammar,12 P. Baringer,12 A. Bean,12 D. Besson,12 D. Coppage,12 R. Davis,12 S. Kotov,12 I. Kravchenko,12 N. Kwak,12 L. Zhou,12 S. Anderson,13 Y. Kubota,13 S. J. Lee,13 R. Mahapatra,13 J. J. O’Neill,13 R. Poling,13 T. Riehle,13 A. Smith,13 M. S. Alam,14 S. B. Athar,14 Z. Ling,14 A. H. Mahmood,14 S. Timm,14 F. Wappler,14 A. Anastassov,15 J. E. Duboscq,15 K. K. Gan,15 C. Gwon,15 T. Hart,15 K. Honscheid,15 H. Kagan,15 R. Kass,15 J. Lee,15 J. Lorenc,15 H. Schwarthoff,15 A. Wolf,15 M. M. Zoeller,15 S. J. Richichi,16 H. Severini,16 P. Skubic,16 A. Undrus,16 M. Bishai,17 S. Chen,17 J. Fast,17 J. W. Hinson,17 N. Menon,17 D. H. Miller,17 E. I. Shibata,17 I. P. J. Shipsey,17 S. Glenn,18 Y. Kwon,18,Permanent address: Yonsei University, Seoul 120-749, Korea. A.L. Lyon,18 S. Roberts,18 E. H. Thorndike,18 C. P. Jessop,19 K. Lingel,19 H. Marsiske,19 M. L. Perl,19 V. Savinov,19 D. Ugolini,19 X. Zhou,19 T. E. Coan,20 V. Fadeyev,20 I. Korolkov,20 Y. Maravin,20 I. Narsky,20 R. Stroynowski,20 J. Ye,20 T. Wlodek,20 M. Artuso,21 E. Dambasuren,21 S. Kopp,21 G. C. Moneti,21 R. Mountain,21 S. Schuh,21 T. Skwarnicki,21 S. Stone,21 A. Titov,21 G. Viehhauser,21 J.C. Wang,21 S. E. Csorna,22 K. W. McLean,22 S. Marka,22 Z. Xu,22 R. Godang,23 K. Kinoshita,23,§§§Permanent address: University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati OH 45221 I. C. Lai,23 P. Pomianowski,23 S. Schrenk,23 G. Bonvicini,24 D. Cinabro,24 R. Greene,24 L. P. Perera,24 G. J. Zhou,24 S. Chan,25 G. Eigen,25 E. Lipeles,25 J. S. Miller,25 M. Schmidtler,25 A. Shapiro,25 W. M. Sun,25 J. Urheim,25 A. J. Weinstein,25 and F. Würthwein25

1University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093

2University of California, Santa Barbara, California 93106

3University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309-0390

4Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853

5University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611

6Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138

7University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822

8University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois 61801

9Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1S 5B6

and the Institute of Particle Physics, Canada

10McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada H3A 2T8

and the Institute of Particle Physics, Canada

11Ithaca College, Ithaca, New York 14850

12University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas 66045

13University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455

14State University of New York at Albany, Albany, New York 12222

15Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210

16University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma 73019

17Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907

18University of Rochester, Rochester, New York 14627

19Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94309

20Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas 75275

21Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York 13244

22Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee 37235

23Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061

24Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan 48202

25California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91125

To date $`CP`$ violation has only been observed in the neutral kaon system  and its origin remains unknown. It is believed that there is insufficient $`CP`$ violation in the minimal standard model (MSM) to generate the matter-antimatter asymmetry of the universe . Searches for additional $`CP`$ violation beyond the MSM may help reconcile this problem.

In the MSM $`CP`$ violation effects are due to a single complex phase in the CKM quark mixing matrix . In the standard phase convention the two matrix elements with large phases are $`V_{ub}`$ and $`V_{td}`$. Because these elements have small magnitudes and involve the third generation, $`CP`$ violation in kaon decays is small. In the kaon system, $`ϵ`$ is a measure of CP violation due to mixing  and $`ϵ^{}`$ is a measure of CP violation in the decay amplitude, called direct CP violation. Theoretical errors are too large to interptret the measured value of $`ϵ^{}/ϵ`$ as evidence for the MSM mechanism of CP violation or for physics beyond the MSM. In the MSM, and its extensions, large $`CP`$-violating effects are anticipated in $`B`$ meson decays. $`CP`$ violation may also be observed by comparing $`\mathrm{\Delta }S=1`$ hyperon and antihyperon non-leptonic decays . The latter is the subject of this Letter.

In hyperon and kaon decay gluonic penguin transitions  are thought to give rise to the relative weak phase difference between particle and antiparticle amplitudes. In kaon decays the interference is between the two isospin amplitudes, whereas in $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ decay it is between the $`S`$ and $`P`$ wave amplitudes. Consequently, in $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ decay the $`CP`$ violation observable is not a rate difference but a difference, $`𝒜`$, in the degree of parity violation in charge conjugate states. MSM predictions of $`𝒜`$ depend on the values of $`ϵ`$, the top quark mass and the hadronic matrix element. The dominant uncertainty is due to incomplete knowledge of the hadronic matrix element. The Superweak model  and models with a very heavy neutral Higgs where there are no $`|\mathrm{\Delta }S|=1`$ $`CP`$-odd effects predict no $`CP`$ asymmetries. Other models in which $`|\mathrm{\Delta }S|=1`$ $`CP`$ nonconservation is dominant, predict asymmetries which are on the order of, or larger than those in the MSM. Theoretical predictions of $`A_\mathrm{\Xi }`$ and $`A_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ range from $`10^4`$ to $`10^5`$ .

Parity violation occurs in hyperon $`\frac{1}{2}^+\frac{1}{2}^+0`$ decays due to the existence of two orbital angular momentum amplitudes of opposite parity. The parity violation observable is an asymmetry in the angular decay distribution due to interference between the two amplitudes. In the decay $`\mathrm{\Xi }^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }\pi ^{}`$ followed by $`\mathrm{\Lambda }p\pi ^{}`$, the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is produced with a polarization equal to

$$𝐏_𝚲=\frac{(\alpha _\mathrm{\Xi }+\widehat{𝚲}𝐏_𝚵)\widehat{𝚲}\beta _\mathrm{\Xi }(\widehat{𝚲}\times 𝐏_𝚵)\gamma _\mathrm{\Xi }\widehat{𝚲}\times (\widehat{𝚲}\times 𝐏_𝚵)}{(1+\alpha _\mathrm{\Xi }\widehat{𝚲}𝐏_𝚵)}$$
(1)
where $`𝑷_𝚵`$ is the $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ polarization, $`\alpha _\mathrm{\Xi },\beta _\mathrm{\Xi }`$ and $`\gamma _\mathrm{\Xi }`$ are the $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ asymmetry parameters, which measure the degree of parity violation in $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ decay, and $`\widehat{𝚲}`$ is a unit vector along the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ momentum in the $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ rest frame . If the $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ polarization is unobserved, or if the $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ is not polarized, Equation 1 reduces to $`𝐏_𝚲=\alpha _\mathrm{\Xi }\widehat{𝚲}`$. The angular distribution of the proton from the decay of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is therefore

$$\frac{dN}{d\mathrm{cos}\theta _\mathrm{\Lambda }}1+\alpha _\mathrm{\Xi }\alpha _\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{cos}\theta _\mathrm{\Lambda }$$
(2)
where $`\theta _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the angle between the proton momentum vector in the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ rest frame and $`\widehat{𝚲}`$, and $`\alpha _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decay asymmetry which measures the degree of parity violation in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decay. If $`CP`$ is conserved in the decays $`\mathrm{\Lambda }p\pi `$ and $`\mathrm{\Xi }\mathrm{\Lambda }\pi `$, $`\alpha _\mathrm{\Lambda }=\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}`$ and $`\alpha _\mathrm{\Xi }=\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}}`$, respectively. Therefore the $`CP`$-violating asymmetry parameters, $`A_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`A_\mathrm{\Xi }`$, are defined as

$$A_\mathrm{\Lambda }=\frac{\alpha _\mathrm{\Lambda }+\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}}{\alpha _\mathrm{\Lambda }\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}}\mathrm{and}A_\mathrm{\Xi }=\frac{\alpha _\mathrm{\Xi }+\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}}}{\alpha _\mathrm{\Xi }\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}}}.$$
(3)
If CP is conserved in the decay sequence $`\mathrm{\Xi }\mathrm{\Lambda }\pi ,\mathrm{\Lambda }p\pi `$, $`\alpha _\mathrm{\Xi }\alpha _\mathrm{\Lambda }=\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}}\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}`$. Therefore we measure the $`CP`$-violating asymmetry parameter :

$$𝒜=\frac{\alpha _\mathrm{\Xi }\alpha _\mathrm{\Lambda }\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}}\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}}{\alpha _\mathrm{\Xi }\alpha _\mathrm{\Lambda }+\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}}\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}}=A_\mathrm{\Xi }+A_\mathrm{\Lambda }+𝒪(\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _\mathrm{\Xi }\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _\mathrm{\Lambda })A_\mathrm{\Xi }+A_\mathrm{\Lambda }$$
(4)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _{\mathrm{\Xi },\mathrm{\Lambda }}=\alpha _{\mathrm{\Xi },\mathrm{\Lambda }}+\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }},\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}`$.

The data sample in this study was collected with the CLEO II detector  at the Cornell Electron Storage Ring (CESR). The integrated luminosity consists of 4.83 $`fb^1`$ taken at and just below the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ resonance, corresponding to approximately 5 million $`e^+e^{}c\overline{c}`$ and 1.25 million $`e^+e^{}s\overline{s}`$ events. The latter process is the dominant source of $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$’s in this analysis.

The $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is reconstructed in the $`p\pi ^{}`$ decay mode***Charge conjugation is implied in this paper except were explicitly noted. We require two oppositely charged tracks to originate from a common vertex. The positive track is required to be consistent with a proton hypothesisHadronic particles are identified by requiring specific ionization energy loss measurements ($`dE/dx`$), combined with time-of-flight (TOF) information when available. The two measurements are combined into a joint probability for the particle to be a pion, a kaon or a proton. A charged track is defined to be consistent with a particle hypothesis if its probability is greater than 0.003.. The momentum of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ candidate is calculated by extrapolating the charged track momenta to the secondary vertex. The invariant mass of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ candidates is required to be within three standard deviations (3$`\sigma `$ = 6.0 MeV/c2) of the known $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ mass. Track combinations which satisfy interpretation as $`K_s^0\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ are rejected. Combinatoric background is reduced by requiring the momentum of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ candidates to be greater than 800 MeV/c. Due to this requirement $`B`$ decays are not a signifcant source of $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$’s.

The $`\mathrm{\Xi }^{}`$ is reconstructed in the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\pi ^{}`$ decay mode. $`\mathrm{\Xi }^{}`$ candidates are formed by combining each $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ candidate with a negatively charged track consistent with a pion hypothesis. The $`\mathrm{\Xi }^{}`$ candidate vertex is formed from the intersection of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ momentum vector and the negatively charged track. To obtain the $`\mathrm{\Xi }^{}`$ momentum, and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\pi `$ invariant mass, the momentum of the charged track is recalculated at the new vertex. The invariant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\pi `$ mass is shown in Fig. 1 for all $`\mathrm{\Xi }^{}`$ candidates satisfying the selection criteria.

The $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\pi `$ mass is fit is to a double Gaussian with widths and ratio of areas fixed from a GEANT  based Monte Carlo (MC) simulation of the detector and a first order Chebyshev polynomial to describe the combinatorial background. The $`\mathrm{\Xi }\mathrm{\Lambda }\pi `$ events are generated using LUND/JETSET 7.3 , in the process $`e^+e^{}s\overline{s}\mathrm{\Xi }X`$. The MC momentum distributions and production angles of all particles in the decay chain are in good agreement with observation. We find $`8434\pm 109`$ events consistent with $`\mathrm{\Xi }\mathrm{\Lambda }\pi `$. The mean of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\pi `$ invariant mass distribution is in agreement with the MC simulation.

The $`\mathrm{cos}\theta _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ resolution function has both Gaussian and symmetric non-Gaussian components. The resolution in $`\mathrm{cos}\theta _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`\sigma _{av}`$, defined to be the average of the rms variance of the two components, weighted by their relative normalizations is $`\sigma _{av}=0.030`$.

The product of the decay asymmetry parameters, $`\alpha _\mathrm{\Xi }\alpha _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, is measured using a one dimensional unbinned maximum likelihood fit to the $`\mathrm{cos}\theta _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ distribution given in Equation 2, in a manner similar to . This technique enables a likelihood fit to be performed to variables modified by experimental acceptance and resolution. The probability function of the signal $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_s`$ is determined by generating one high statistics MC sample of $`\mathrm{\Xi }^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }\pi ^{}`$ at fixed $`\alpha _\mathrm{\Xi }\alpha _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. By suitable weighting of the accepted MC events a likelihood is evaluated for each data event for trial values of $`\alpha _\mathrm{\Lambda }\alpha _\mathrm{\Xi }`$, and a fit performed. The probability for each event is determined by sampling $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_S`$ using an interval centered on each data point.

Background is incorporated directly into the fit by constructing the log-likelihood function: $`\mathrm{ln}=_{i=1}^Nln(P_S\mathrm{\Gamma }_S+P_B\mathrm{\Gamma }_B)`$ where $`N`$ is the number of events in the signal region, defined to be within 7.5 Mev/c2 ($`\pm 3\sigma `$) of the $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ mass, and $`P_S`$ and $`P_B`$ are the probabilities that events are signal and background respectively. The probability distribution of background in the signal region, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_B`$, is determined from 15 MeV/c2 wide ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }\pi `$) mass sidebands above and below the signal region.

To ensure that there is no gross bias in the analysis technique we assume $`CP`$ conservation and determine the decay asymmetry in $`\mathrm{\Xi }^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }\pi ^{}`$, combining $`\mathrm{\Xi }^+`$ and $`\mathrm{\Xi }^{}`$ events. We find $`\alpha _{\mathrm{\Xi },\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}}\alpha _{\mathrm{\Lambda },\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}=0.291\pm 0.021`$ where the error is statistical. The result is in good agreement with the world average $`\alpha _\mathrm{\Xi }\alpha _\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.293\pm 0.007`$ .

We have considered the following sources of systematic uncertainties and give our estimate of their magnitude in parentheses. The error associated with finite MC statistics is estimated by varying the size of the MC sample used in the fit $`(1.6\%)`$. The uncertainty from varying the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ selection criteria and particle identification is $`(6.3\%,+2.1\%)`$. The uncertainty associated with MC modeling of slow pions from $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ decay is obtained by varying the slow pion reconstruction efficiency according to our understanding of the CLEO II detector $`(0.0\%,+0.7\%)`$. The error due to finite interval size is determined by varying the size of the interval for both signal and background $`(0.5\%,+4.1\%)`$. The uncertainty arising from incomplete knowledge of the background shape in the sidebands is evaluated by varying the size of the mass sideband region $`(1.2\%,+0.9\%)`$. A binned fit is also performed and the result is consistent with the maximum likelihood fit. This measurement is insensitive to production polarization, $`𝐏_𝚵`$, and no systematic error has been included from this source (see below). Combining all sources of systematic errors in quadrature the total systematic error is $`(6.6\%,+5.0\%)`$ and $`\alpha _{\mathrm{\Xi },\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}}\alpha _{\mathrm{\Lambda },\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}=0.291\pm 0.021\text{(stat)}_{0.015}^{+0.019}\text{(syst)}`$.

To search for $`CP`$ violation the $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ candidates are sorted into charge conjugate states. There are $`4204\pm 75`$ $`\mathrm{\Xi }^{}`$ decays and $`4200\pm 75`$ $`\mathrm{\Xi }^+`$ decays. Using the same fitting procedure as above, and one MC sample for each charge conjugate state, we measure $`\alpha _\mathrm{\Xi }\alpha _\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.275\pm 0.030_{0.015}^{+0.019}`$ and $`\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}}\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}=0.308\pm 0.030_{0.016}^{+0.021}`$ respectively. Data and fit projections are shown in Fig. 3. From these results we calculate $`𝒜=0.057\pm 0.064`$ where the statistical error is estimated using the method in .

Most systematic errors associated with $`\mathrm{\Xi }^{}`$ reconstruction apply equally to $`\mathrm{\Xi }^+`$ and cancel when determining the asymmetry $`𝒜`$. If there is any $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ production polarization, it is required to be normal to the production plane. The angular distribution with respect to this plane will have opposite slopes for $`\mathrm{\Xi }^{}`$ and $`\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}^+`$. However both the production plane and detector acceptance are uniformly distributed in the azimuthal angle $`\varphi `$. Therefore this result is insensitive to production polarization. If there is any difference between the relative angular efficiencies of $`\mathrm{\Xi }^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Xi }^+`$ that is not modeled accurately by MC, this would lead to a biased value of $`𝒜`$. A momentum dependent asymmetry in detection efficiencies for negative and positive soft pions could, in principle, exist due to differing hadronic interaction cross sections of $`\pi ^{}`$ and $`\pi ^+`$ in the 3.5 cm radius CLEO II beryllium beam pipe. We assume this effect to be absent for two reasons. (1) In this analysis, typical decay lengths for $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ are 6 cm and 11 cm respectively, therefore most tracks originate outside the beam pipe. (2) There is no evidence for a momentum dependent asymmetry in the CLEO II detection efficiency for tracks that originate inside the beampipe .

The $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\pi ^{}(\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\pi ^+)`$ mass sidebands consist mostly of real $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$’s paired with random pions. The efficiency corrected angular distribution of the sidebands in each charge conjugate state will be the same if the MC accurately models the relative angular efficiency of slow $`\pi ^+`$ and $`\pi ^{}`$. To study this precisely, a high statistics sideband sample is obtained by relaxing the selection criteria and increasing the width of the sideband regions. The fit, performed on $`12365\pm 111(12353\pm 111)`$ events in the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\pi ^{}(\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\pi ^+)`$ sideband regions, yields $`\alpha _\mathrm{\Xi }\alpha _\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.062\pm 0.016`$ in the $`\mathrm{\Xi }^{}`$ sideband and $`\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}}\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}=0.077\pm 0.016`$ in the $`\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}^+`$ sideband. The difference between these two values $`0.015\pm 0.023`$ indicates that there is no statistically significant discrepancy in the modeling of the $`\mathrm{\Xi }^{}`$ and $`\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}^+`$ detector angular acceptance in MC compared to data. The error on the difference is taken as the systematic error on the $`CP`$ asymmetry parameter measurement. The result is

$$𝒜=0.057\pm 0.064\pm 0.039$$
(5)
There are three measurements of $`A_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$   . Using the most precise: $`A_\mathrm{\Lambda }=+0.013\pm 0.022`$  we obtain $`A_\mathrm{\Xi }=0.070\pm 0.064\pm 0.045`$. Where the second error is systematic and includes the error on $`A_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

It is possible to obtain a more precise value for $`𝒜`$ by combining our value for $`\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}}\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}`$ with the PDG value of $`\alpha _\mathrm{\Xi }\alpha _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ to obtain $`𝒜=0.025_{0.056}^{+0.061}`$ and $`A_\mathrm{\Xi }=0.038_{0.060}^{+0.065}`$ where the statistical and systematic errors have been combined.

Finally, as this measurement of $`\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}}\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}`$ is significantly more precise than the only published value , by combining with: $`\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}=0.63\pm 0.13`$ , we obtain $`\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}}=0.49_{0.05}^{+0.06}\pm 0.10`$, where the first error is the combined statistical and systematic error from this study and the second error is from $`\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}`$.

In conclusion, from a sample of approximately 4,000 $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ decays and similar number of $`\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}`$, we have measured $`\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}}\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}=0.308\pm 0.030_{0.016}^{+0.021}`$, and obtained $`\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}}=0.49_{0.05}^{+0.06}\pm 0.10`$. We have searched for direct CP violation by measuring the asymmetry parameter $`𝒜`$. We find no evidence for $`CP`$ violation: $`𝒜=0.057\pm 0.064\pm 0.039`$ and $`A_\mathrm{\Xi }=0.070\pm 0.064\pm 0.045`$As this paper was about to be submitted, we became aware of K.B. Luk et al. hep-ex/0007030, July 2000. This paper measures $`\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}}\alpha _{\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}`$, $`𝒜`$ and $`A_\mathrm{\Xi }`$ with greater precision than the values reported here. The two analyses are consistent but employ different experimental techniques..

We gratefully acknowledge the effort of the CESR staff in providing us with excellent luminosity and running conditions. This work was supported by the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Department of Energy, Research Corporation, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, the A.P. Sloan Foundation, the Swiss National Science Foundation, and the Alexander von Humboldt Stiftung.