text:
# Yang-Lee Zeros of the Q-state Potts Model on Recursive Lattices

## 1 Introduction

The $`Q`$-state Potts model plays an important role in the general theory of phase transitions and critical phenomena . It was initially defined for an integer $`Q`$ as a generalization of the Ising model ($`Q=2`$) to more-than-two components . Later on, it was shown that the Potts model for non-integer values of $`Q`$ may describe the properties of a number of physical systems such as dilute spin glasses , gelatation and vulcanization of branched polymers ($`0<Q<1`$. Also it was shown that the bond and site percolation problems could be formulated in terms of Potts models with pair and multisite interactions in the $`Q=1`$ limit.

In 1952, for the first time, Lee and Yang  in their famous papers studied the distribution of zeros of the partition function considered as a function of a complex magnetic filed ($`e^{\frac{2H}{kT}}`$ activity, $`H`$ is a magnetic field). They proved the circle theorem which states that zeros of the partition function of an Ising ferromagnet lie on unit circle in the complex activity plane (Yang-Lee zeros). After these pioneer works of Lee and Yang, Fisher , in 1964, initiated the study of partition function zeros in the complex temperature plane (Fisher zeros). These methods were then extended to other types of interactions and found wide applications .

Recently, much attention was drawn to the problem of Yang-Lee and Fisher zeros of the $`Q`$-state Potts model for both integer and non-integer values of $`Q`$. The microcanonical transfer matrix method was used to study the Yang-Lee and Fisher zeros of the non-integer $`Q`$-state Potts model in two and three dimensions -.

Derrida, De Seze and Itzykson  showed for the first time that the Fisher zeros in hierarchical lattice models are just the Julia set corresponding to the renormalization transformation. They found a fractal structure for the Fisher zeros in $`Q`$-state Potts model on the diamond lattice. Recently, Monroe investigated Julia sets of the Potts model on recursive lattices . He found that the box counting fractal dimension of the Julia set of the governing recurrence relation is a minimum at a phase transition. This gives an alternative criterion for studying phase transitions in models defined on recursive lattices.

In 1994, Glumac and Uzelac , using the transfer matrix method, analytically studied the distribution of Yang-Lee zeros for the one-dimensional ferromagnetic Potts model with arbitrary and continuous $`Q0`$. For $`0<Q<1`$ they obtained that for high temperatures the Yang-Lee zeros lie on a real interval and for low temperatures these are located partially on the real axis and in complex conjugate pairs on the activity plane. Later on, Monroe investigated this model by means of the dynamical systems approach and confirmed that for $`Q<1`$ there is a real interval of Yang-Lee zeros . Then, Kim and Creswick found that for $`Q>1`$ the Yang-Lee zeros lie on a circle with radius $`R`$, where $`R<1`$ for $`1<Q<2`$, $`R>1`$ for $`Q>2`$ and $`R=2`$ for $`Q=2`$ . However, it is not clear yet what is the location of Yang-Lee zeros for $`0<Q<1`$ at low temperatures .

In this paper the Yang-Lee zeros of the one-dimensional and Bethe lattice Q-state Potts models are studied using the dynamical systems approach. It is shown that for the one-dimensional Potts model the partition function becomes zero when the corresponding recurrence relation has neutral fixed points for a given value of magnetic field. Using this correspondence between zeros of the partition function and neutral fixed points of the recurrence relation the Yang-Lee zeros of both ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic Potts models are completely studied analytically. The location of Yang-Lee zeros of the ferromagnetic Potts model for $`0<Q<1`$ is found. Also, formulas for the density of Yang-Lee zeros are derived and edge singularity exponents are calculated. For the Potts model on a Bethe lattice it is shown that the Yang-Lee zeros are located on a phase coexistence line in the complex magnetic field plane. Here, the phase coexistence line is defined as a line in the complex magnetic field plane, where the absolute values of derivatives of the recurrence relation in two attracting fixed points are equal. It is noteworthy that, Monroe  used a similar criterion for studying critical properties of the Potts model on recursive lattices. For the Bethe lattice case an analytical study of Yang-Lee zeros is performed also. A formula for Yang-Lee edge singularity points is derived and edge singularity exponents are calculated. Our analitical treatment confirmed the results of numerical calculations. Further, metastability regions in a complex magnetic field plane are investigated. It is shown that the border of a metastability region may be found from the condition of existence of a neutral fixed point of the governing recurrence relation.

The structure of this paper is as follows, in Section 2 an exact recurrence relation (Potts-Bethe mapping) for the $`Q`$-state Potts model on a Bethe lattice is derived. Applying the theory of dynamical systems to the problem of phase transitions it is shown that critical points may be associated with neutral periodical points of the corresponding mapping. In section 3 the Yang-Lee zeros and edge singularities of ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic Potts models are studied analytically for non-integer $`Q`$, considering a 1D lattice as a Bethe lattice with coordination number $`\gamma =2`$. In Section 4 the Yang-Lee zeros and edge singularities of the Potts model on a Bethe lattice with coordination number $`\gamma >2`$ are studied numerically. In the last section the dynamics of complex magnetic metastability regions is studied numerically and the explanation of results is given.

## 2 The $`Q`$-state Potts Model on the Bethe lattice

The $`Q`$ state Potts model in the magnetic field is defined by the Hamiltonian

$$\beta =J\underset{}{}\delta (\sigma _i,\sigma _j)+h\underset{i}{}\delta (\sigma _i,0),$$
(1)
where $`\sigma _i`$ takes the values $`0`$, $`1`$, $`2`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, $`Q1`$ and $`\beta =1/kT`$. The first sum in the r.h.s. of (1) goes over all edges and the second one over all sites on the lattice.

The partition function of the model is given by

$$𝒵=\underset{\{\sigma \}}{}e^\beta ,$$

where the summation goes over all configurations of the system.

Using the recursive structure of the Bethe lattice (Fig. 1) one can derive an exact recurrence relation and apply the theory of dynamical systems to investigate the thermodynamical properties of models defined on it . Cutting the lattice at the central site $`0`$ one will obtain $`\gamma `$ interacting $`n`$th generation branches . By denoting the partition function of the $`n`$th generation branch with the basic site $`0`$ in the state $`\sigma _0`$ as $`g_n(\sigma _0)`$ the partition function may be written as follows

$$𝒵_n=\underset{\{\sigma _0\}}{}exp\left\{h\delta (\sigma _0,0)\right\}[g_n(\sigma _0)]^\gamma ,$$
(2)
where $`\sigma _0`$ is the Potts variable at the central site $`0`$ of the lattice (Fig. 1). Applying the ”cutting” procedure to a $`n`$th generation branch one can derive the recurrence relation for $`g_n(\sigma _0)`$

$$g_n(\sigma _0)=\underset{\{\sigma _1\}}{}exp\left\{J\delta (\sigma _0,\sigma _1)+h\delta (\sigma _1,0)\right\}[g_{n1}(\sigma _1)]^{\gamma 1}.$$
(3)
Introducing the notation

$$x_n=\frac{g_n(\sigma 0)}{g_n(\sigma =0)},$$
(4)
one can obtain the Potts-Bethe map from the Eq(3)

$$x_n=f(x_{n1}),f(x)=\frac{\mu +(z+Q2)x^{\gamma 1}}{z\mu +(Q1)x^{\gamma 1}}.$$
(5)
where $`\mu =e^h`$, and $`z=e^J`$.

The magnetization of the central site for a Bethe lattice of $`n`$ generations may be written as

$$M_n=𝒵_n^1\underset{\{\sigma _0\}}{}\delta (\sigma _0,0)e^\beta =\frac{\mu }{\mu +(Q1)x_n^\gamma }.$$
(6)
Instead of $`M(\mu )`$ in Eq.(6) it is more convenient to consider the function $`\overline{M}(\mu )=2M(\mu )1`$, which has the same analytical properties as $`M(\mu )`$ and give correct magnetization for the Ising model $`(Q=2)`$

$$\overline{M}(\mu )=\frac{\mu (Q1)x^\gamma }{\mu +(Q1)x^\gamma }.$$
(7)
In the following the formulas in Eqs.(5) and (6) will be generalized to non-integer values of $`Q0`$.

Let us now give some definitions and briefly discuss the problem of phase transitions on recursive lattices in terms of dynamical systems theory. The point $`x^{}`$ is called a periodical point with period $`n`$ of the mapping $`x_n=f(x_{n1})`$ if it is a solution to the equation $`f^k(x)=x`$. Here $`f^n`$ means a superposition $`f^nff\mathrm{}f`$. If $`k=1`$, $`x^{}`$ is called a fixed point. To analyze the stability of a periodic point $`x^{}`$ of period $`k`$, i.e. either iterations of $`f(x)`$ tend to the periodical point or move away from it, one should compute the derivative of $`f^k`$, $`\lambda =(f^k)^{}(x)`$ $`\left({}_{}{}^{}=\frac{d}{dx}\right)`$, at this point. A periodic point $`x^{}`$ is: (1) attracting (stable) if $`\left|\lambda \right|<1`$; (2) repelling (unstable) if $`\left|\lambda \right|>1`$ and (3) neutral (indifferent) if $`\left|\lambda \right|=1`$.

The thermodynamic properties of models defined on recursive lattices may be investigated by studying the dynamics of the corresponding recursive function. For the ferromagnetic Ising model, for example, this may be done as follows. For high temperatures ($`T>T_c`$) the recursive function Eq.(5) has only one attracting fixed point corresponding to a stable paramagnetic state. For low temperatures ($`T<T_c`$) the recursive function Eq.(5) has two attracting fixed points. In the absence of a magnetic field these two attracting fixed points correspond to two possible ferromagnetic states with opposite magnetizations. It is well known that for $`h=0`$ and $`T<T_c`$ the system undergoes a first order phase transition and the condition $`\left|\lambda _1\right|=\left|\lambda _2\right|`$ is satisfied, where $`\left|\lambda _{1,2}\right|`$ are derivatives of $`f(x)`$ in these attracting fixed points. In the presence of a magnetic field the stable state corresponds to the fixed point with maximum $`\left|\lambda \right|`$ and the magnetization in this state has the same direction as the external magnetic field. The other fixed point corresponds to a metastable state, which may be achieved by a sudden reversal in the sign of the magnetic field. The boundary of the metastability region may be found from the condition that one of the fixed points becomes neutral. For more details about the dynamics of metastable states see the book by Chaikin and Lubensky . The critical temperature corresponds to the values of the magnetic field and temperature when the fixed points of recursive function $`f(x)`$ are neutral and repelling. The values of external parameters (temperature, magnetic field, etc.) at which the recursive function $`f(x)`$ has a neutral periodical point of period $`k`$ may be obtained from the following system of equations

$$\{\begin{array}{c}f^k(x)=x\hfill \\ \left|f_{}^{k}{}_{}{}^{}(x)\right|=1.\hfill \end{array}$$
(8)
Thus, for the models defined on recursive lattices, critical points and the boundary of metastability regions may be associated with neutral periodical points of the model’s mapping. In the following section the Yang-Lee zeros of the 1D $`Q`$-state Potts model are investigated in terms of neutral fixed points.

## 3 The Yang-Lee zeros of 1D $`Q`$-state Potts model

A one-dimensional lattice may be considered as a particular case of the Bethe lattice with coordination number $`\gamma =2`$. In this case the Bethe-Potts mapping (5) becomes a Möbius transformation, i.e. a rational map of the form

$$R(x)=\frac{ax+b}{cx+d},adbc0,$$

where

$$R(\mathrm{})=a/c,R(d/c)=\mathrm{},$$

if $`c0`$, while $`R(\mathrm{})=\mathrm{}`$ when $`c=0`$. The dynamics of such maps is rather simple : If $`f(x)`$ is a Möbius transformation with two fixed points, then either $`f^n(x)`$ converge to one of the fixed points of $`f(x)`$ (one of the fixed points is attracting and the other is repelling), or they move cyclically through a finite set of points, or they form a dense subset of some circle (both fixed points are neutral). It follows from the dynamics of the Möbius transformation that phase transitions correspond to values of the temperature and magnetic field where the recursive function $`f(x)`$ has only neutral fixed points. Thus, to study the Yang-Lee zeros one should study the system (8) to find the values of $`\mu `$ at which this system has solutions for $`k=1`$. For neutral fixed points the system (8) may be written in the form

$$\{\begin{array}{c}f(x)=x\hfill \\ f^{}(x)=e^{i\varphi },\varphi [0,2\pi ],\hfill \end{array}$$
(9)
Excluding $`x`$ from the equations of the system (9) after some algebra one can find the equation of phase transitions in the form

$$z^2\mu ^22\left[(z1)(z+Q1)\mathrm{cos}\varphi +1Q\right]\mu +\left(z+Q2\right)^2=0.$$
(10)
where $`\varphi [0,2\pi ]`$. Since $`cos\varphi `$ is an even function of $`\varphi `$, we may restrict ourselves to $`\varphi [0,\pi ]`$. Thus, for given $`z`$ and $`Q`$ the equation (10) is a parametric equation of Yang-Lee zeros, where $`\varphi `$ is a parameter. Analyzing Eq.(10) one can find the location of Yang-Lee zeros of the Potts model. It is noteworthy that using this equation one can study the Fisher and Potts zeros111Zeros of the partition function considered as a function of complex $`Q`$. in the same way222The results will be published elsewhere..

First of all note that Eq.(10) is a quadratic equation of $`\mu `$ with real coefficients. Hence, solutions to this equation lie either on the real axes or in complex conjugate pairs on a circle with radius $`R=\left|\mu \right|=\frac{\left|z+Q2\right|}{z}`$ for any $`\varphi [0,\pi ]`$ (See also ). The solutions to the Eq(10) can be written in the form

$$\mu _{1,2}=A\left[2\mathrm{cos}^2\frac{\varphi }{2}B\pm 2\sqrt{\mathrm{cos}^2\frac{\varphi }{2}\left(\mathrm{cos}^2\frac{\varphi }{2}B\right)}\right],$$
(11)
where

$$A=\frac{(z1)(z+Q1)}{z^2}\text{and}B=\frac{z(z+Q2)}{(z1)(z+Q1)}.$$
(12)
Let us now study the Yang-Lee zeros of ferromagnetic Potts model, i.e. $`J>0`$ and $`z>1`$. For $`Q>1`$ one can easily find that $`B>1`$, hence, all solutions (11) are complex conjugate and lie on an arc of circle with radius $`R=\frac{z+Q2}{z}`$. If $`1<Q<2`$ then $`R<1`$ (the arc lies inside the unit circle), if $`Q>2`$ then $`R>1`$ (the arc lies outside the unit circle ) and $`R=1`$  for $`Q=2`$ (Ising model). Writing $`\mu `$ in the exponential form $`\mu =Re^{i\theta }`$ one can find

$$\mathrm{cos}\frac{\theta }{2}=\sqrt{\frac{(z1)(z+Q1)}{z(z+Q2)}}\mathrm{cos}\frac{\varphi }{2}.$$
(13)
From Eq.(13) one can see that there are no solutions with arguments in the interval $`0<\theta <\theta _0`$, where $`\theta _0=2\mathrm{arccos}\sqrt{B^1}`$. This is the well known gap  in the distribution of Yang-Lee zeros. It points to the absence of phase transitions in an 1D ferromagnetic Potts model for $`Q>1`$ at any real temperature. This is in good agreement with recent studies by Glumac and Uzelac , and Kim and Creswick , where the Yang-Lee zeros of the 1D Potts model was studied by using the transfer matrix method. Comparing our formula (13) with the corresponding formula (14) of Ref.  one can see that the argument $`\varphi `$ of the derivative in our method is nothing but the difference in the arguments of two maximal eigenvalues in the transfer matrix method. It follows from the Eqs.(11) and (13) that the Yang-Lee edge fields correspond to $`\varphi =0`$ and have the form

$$\mu _\pm =\frac{1}{z^2}\left\{\sqrt{(z1)(z+Q1)}\pm \sqrt{1Q}\right\}^2,$$
(14)
and $`\mu _\pm `$ are complex for $`Q>1`$.

$`B<1`$ when $`Q<1`$ and it is positive or negative depending on $`z`$. Hence, $`B`$ is negative when $`z2Q`$ ($`Q<1`$), and all values of $`\mu `$’s in (11) are real and lie between the $`\mu _{}`$ and $`\mu _+`$ where $`\mu _\pm >0`$.

$`0<B<1`$ when $`z>2Q`$ ($`Q<1`$), and all values of $`\mu `$’s in (11) are either real or complex depending on $`\varphi `$. For $`0<\varphi <\varphi _0`$, where $`\varphi _0=2\mathrm{arccos}\sqrt{B}`$, solutions (11) are real and lie in the interval $`[\mu _{},\mu _+]`$. For $`\varphi _0<\varphi <\pi `$ the solutions (11) are complex conjugate and lie on the circle with radius $`R=\frac{z+Q2}{z}`$.

For $`Q>1`$, the differentiation of both sides of Eq.(13) with respect to $`\mu `$ and $`\varphi `$ gives the density of Yang-Lee zeros $`g(\theta )`$ in the form

$$g(\theta )=\frac{1}{2\pi }\frac{|\mathrm{sin}\frac{\theta }{2}|}{\sqrt{\mathrm{sin}^2\frac{\theta }{2}\mathrm{sin}^2\frac{\theta _0}{2}}}.$$
(15)
From Eq.(15) it follows that the density function $`g(\theta )`$ for $`Q>1`$ diverges in the gap points $`\mu _\pm `$ with the exponent $`\sigma =\frac{1}{2}`$, i.e. $`g(\theta )|\theta \theta _0|^\sigma `$ when $`\varphi 0`$ or $`\theta \theta _0`$.

For $`Q<1`$, the corresponding density function $`g(\mu )`$ may be obtained by differentiation of both sides of Eq.(10)

$$g(\mu )=\frac{1}{2\pi \mu }\frac{|\mu \sqrt{\mu _+\mu _{}}|}{\sqrt{(\mu _+\mu )(\mu \mu _{})}}.$$
(16)
One can see that $`g(\mu )`$ diverges in the points $`\mu _\pm `$, i.e. $`g(\mu )|\mu \mu _\pm |^\sigma `$, with the exponent $`\sigma =\frac{1}{2}`$. Thus, for $`Q<1`$ the density function of Yang-Lee zeros of the 1D $`Q`$-state Potts ferromagnetic model has singularities only at the points $`\mu _\pm `$ \[Eq.(14)\] with the edge singularity exponent $`\sigma =\frac{1}{2}`$. The same is true for the antiferromagnetic case.

Glumac and Uzelac  considered for $`Q<1`$ case the contribution of the third eigenvalue of the transfer matrix ($`\lambda _2`$ in their notations). We want to note that for the 1D Potts model the transfer matrix method gives three and more eigenvalues only for $`Q>2`$, hence, the third and other eigenvalues should be neglected for $`Q<2`$. In this case the study of two maximal eigenvalues gives the same results as our method. The summary of results of the 1D ferromagnetic Potts model is given in Fig. 2. It is interesting to note that the argument $`\varphi `$ of the derivative in Eq.(9) corresponds to the argument of the maximal eigenvalue in the transfer matrix method.

The antiferromagnetic case may be studied in the same manner. The results are shown in Fig. 3.

## 4 Yang-Lee zeros of the $`Q`$ state Potts model on a Bethe lattice ($`Q>1`$)

Let us, at first, consider the ferromagnetic Potts model on the Bethe lattice with coordination number $`\gamma =3`$. In this case the system (8) may be studied analytically for neutral fixed points ($`k=1`$). The exclusion of $`x`$ from both equations (8) gives the following equation

$$z^3(Q1)\mu ^2[2(Q1)y(4\mathrm{cos}\varphi +1)+y^2(4e^{i\varphi }\mathrm{sin}^2\frac{\varphi }{2}+1)2(Q1)^2]\mu +(z+Q2)^3=0.$$
(17)
where $`y=(z1)(z+Q1)/2`$ and $`\varphi [0,2\pi ]`$. This equation describes the border of the metastability region in the complex $`\mu `$ plane (Fig. 4). The dashed areas in Fig. 4 show the metastability regions for different temperatures. Inside the metastability region there are two attracting fixed points and there is only one outside of it. The other fixed points are repelling. Note that such a behavior is valid for any $`\gamma `$. At $`\mu _\pm `$ at least two of the fixed points become neutral. It will be shown below that at $`\mu _\pm `$ the magnetization function (7) is singular and $`\mu _\pm `$ correspond to the Yang-Lee edge singularity points. These are solutions to the equation (17) for $`\varphi =0`$ and the critical temperature may be obtained from the condition $`\mu _+=\mu _{}`$. It follows from Eq(17) that the edge singularity points lie on a circle with radius $`R_\mu ^2=\frac{(z+Q2)^3}{z^3(Q1)}`$. Since there is no phase transition on the boundary of a metastability region it will not give rise to zeros of the partition function . The metastability region in the complex $`\mu `$-plane points to the existence of the first order phase transition for complex magnetic fields. The problem of finding the Yang-Lee zeros of models with first order phase transitions attracted much attention for many years. Recently, Biskup et al., showed that the position of partition function zeros is related to the phase coexistence lines in the complex planes . Dolan et al., used this approach to study Fisher zeros for Ising and Potts models on non-planar (’thin’) regular random graphs. It is interesting to note that the locus of Fisher zeros on a Bethe lattice is identical to the corresponding random graph . For our models the phase coexistence line is defined as a line in the complex plane, where the absolute values of the recursive function derivatives in two attracting fixed points are equal(see also ). Our numerical study showed that the phase coexistence line for $`T>T_c`$ is an arc of a circle with radius $`R_\mu `$ ending at the edge singularity points (the dashed line in Fig. 4).

Let us now study the analytical properties of the magnetization function (7) to prove that the edge singularity points $`\mu _\pm `$ correspond to its singularities. The fixed point equation of the Potts-Bethe mapping (5) may be written in the form

$$\mu =x^{\gamma 1}\frac{(Q1)x(z+Q2)}{1zx}.$$
(18)
For continuity at $`\mu 0`$, $`x`$ is defined to be equal to $`(Q1)/(z+Q2)`$ at $`\mu =0`$. Considering $`x`$ as function of $`\mu `$, one can study the singularities of $`x(\mu )`$ that also correspond to singularities of $`\overline{M}(\mu )`$. The singular points of $`x(\mu )`$ are $`\mu =0`$, $`\mu =\mathrm{}`$ and $`\mu (x_\pm )`$, $`x_\pm `$ being the points, where the derivative $`x/\mu `$ is infinite. $`x_\pm `$ satisfies the equation

$$x^2+\frac{z(z+Q2)(2\gamma )\gamma (Q1)}{z(Q1)(\gamma 1)}x+\frac{z+Q2}{z(Q1)}=0$$
(19)
Eq.(19) is obtained after differentiation both sides of Eq.(18) with respect to $`\mu `$ and $`x`$ from the condition that $`\mu /x`$ vanishes. Note that Eq.(19) may be derived from the system (8) for $`k=1`$ and $`\varphi =0`$ by excluding $`\mu `$ from both of the equations. At the singularity points of $`\overline{M}(\mu )`$ the recursive function has two neutral fixed points with $`\varphi =0`$ and the others are repelling.

The critical temperature may be obtained from the condition $`\mu _+=\mu _{}`$ or setting the discriminant of the quadratic equation (19) to zero

$$z_c=\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{1}{2}(2Q+\sqrt{(Q2)^2+4(Q1)\gamma ^2/(\gamma 2)^2}))& \text{for }Q>1,\hfill \\ 1Q& \text{for }Q<1.\hfill \end{array}$$
(20)
For $`Q>1`$ and $`1<z<z_c`$ the solutions $`x_\pm `$ are complex conjugate numbers with modulus $`R_x=\sqrt{\frac{z+Q2}{z(Q1)}}`$ and for $`z>z_c`$ they become real valued. For $`Q<1`$ the solutions $`x_\pm `$ are always real numbers. Substituting $`x_\pm =R_xe^{i\alpha _\pm }`$ into Eq.(18) one finds after some algebra

$$\mu _\pm =R_\mu e^{i[\stackrel{~}{\theta }_\pm +\alpha _\pm (\gamma 1)]},$$
(21)
where

$$R_\mu =R_x^\gamma (Q1),\mathrm{tan}\frac{\stackrel{~}{\theta }_\pm }{2}=\frac{1+zR_x}{1zR_x}\mathrm{tan}\frac{\alpha _\pm }{2}\text{and}\mathrm{cos}\alpha _\pm =\frac{(\gamma 2)z^2R_x^2+\gamma }{2(\gamma 1)zR_x}.$$
(22)
Note that the fixed point equation $`f(x)=x`$ and the magnetization $`\overline{M}(\mu )`$ are invariant under the transformation $`G:\{\mu \frac{R_\mu ^2}{\mu },x\frac{R_x^2}{x}\}`$. Moreover, for the magnetization function one has

$$\overline{M}(\mu )=\overline{M}\left(\frac{R_\mu ^2}{\mu }\right).$$
(23)
The Yang-Lee zeros of the Potts model on the Bethe lattice may be obtained also analytically by studying the analytical properties of the magnetization function (7). This was done for the first time by Bessis, Drouffe and Moussa  for the Ising model on Bethe lattice. Making use of singularities of $`x(\mu )`$ in analogy with  a careful analysis of the analytic properties of the function $`\overline{M}_\mu `$ Eq. (7) for $`Q>1`$ gives the following picture for Yang-Lee zeros: (a) For $`z<z_c`$: $`\overline{M}(\mu )`$ is analytic in the complex plane cut along an arc of the circle with radius $`R_\mu ^2=\frac{(z+Q2)^\gamma }{z^\gamma (Q1)^{\gamma 2}}`$, that contains the point $`R_\mu `$ and is limited by the points $`\mu _\pm `$, which are complex conjugate. Due to relation (23), the discontinuity along the cut is real and never vanishes except at the Yang-Lee edge singularity points $`\mu _\pm `$. This is in a good agreement with the Yang-Lee theory . The density of zeros $`g(R_\mu ,\theta )`$ may be calculated from

$$\underset{rR_\mu +}{lim}\overline{M}(\mu )\left|{}_{\mu =re^{i\theta }}{}^{}\underset{rR_\mu }{lim}\overline{M}(\mu )\right|{}_{\mu =re^{i\theta }}{}^{}=4\pi g(R_\mu ,\theta ).$$
(24)
Our numerical study of Eq.(24) shows that close to the edge singularity points $`\mu _\pm =e^{\pm i\theta _0}`$, $`g(R_\mu ,\theta )`$ has an exponential behavior $`g(R_\mu ,\theta )|\theta \theta _0|^\sigma `$ and $`\theta _0(T)(TT_c)^\mathrm{\Delta }`$ where $`\sigma =1/2`$ for $`z<z_c`$, $`\sigma =1/3`$ $`(\sigma =\frac{1}{\delta })`$ for $`z=z_c`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\frac{3}{2}`$ $`(\mathrm{\Delta }=\beta \delta )`$. Our results are in a good agreement with those of , where it was shown that the $`\sigma `$ exponent is universal and always equal to $`1/2`$ for $`T>T_c`$ and $`\sigma =1/\delta `$ for $`T=T_c`$ in ferromagnetic models on lattices with spatial dimension $`d>6`$.

(b) For $`z>z_c`$ the function $`\overline{M}(\mu )`$ is split into two different functions: $`\overline{M}_+(\mu )`$ defined for $`|\mu |<R_\mu `$ and $`\overline{M}_{}(\mu )`$ defined for $`|\mu |>R_\mu `$. The function $`\overline{M}_+(\mu )`$ can be analytically continued outside the circle $`|\mu |=R_\mu `$ into the $`z`$ plane cut along the real axes from $`\mu (x_+)`$ to $`\mathrm{}`$, where $`x_+`$ is the largest root of Eq.(19). The point $`\mu (x_+)`$ increases from unity to infinity when $`z`$ increases from $`z_c`$ to infinity. The discontinuity of $`\overline{M}_+(\mu )`$ across the cut is purely imaginary and does not change the sign. Hence, it has no influence on physical properties of the model and the Yang-Lee zeros lie on the circle $`|\mu |=R_\mu `$. The points $`\mu _\pm `$ correspond to the boundary of metastability for real magnetic fields and the plots of the iteration function $`f(x)`$ at these points are given in Fig. 5.

## 5 Complex Magnetic Field metastability regions

In the previous section the neutral fixed points of the recursive function $`f(x)`$ (5) was considered only. It was found that the set of values of the magnetic field, for which the recursive function (5) has at least one neutral fixed point gives the boundary of the metastability region in the complex $`\mu `$-plane. Inside it there are two attracting fixed points and others are repelling. Numerical experiments show that in the $`\mu `$-plane the recursive function Eq.(5) has a complex behavior with period doubling bifurcations. The question arises: What will happen to the metastability region if neutral periodical points of period $`k1`$ are also considered? To answer this question one has to study the system (8) for any $`k1`$. Since it is impossible to solve the system (8) directly for $`k1`$ and $`\gamma 3`$ analytically and even numerically for large $`k`$ and $`\gamma `$, the method developed in  is used. It gives a numerical algorithm for searching neutral periodical points for the recursive functions like Eq.(5) and is based on the theory of complex dynamical systems and the well known fact that the convergence of iterations to neutral periodical points is very weak and irregular, i.e. one has to make a number of iterations in order to approach a neutral periodic point. The algorithm is to find all critical points of the recursive function and investigate the convergence of all the orbits started at critical points (critical orbits). If all critical orbits converge to any attracting periodical point one says that the recursive function has only attracting and repelling periodical points. If at least one of the critical orbits does not converge, for example, after $`n`$ iterations, one says that the recursive function has a neutral periodical point. Of course, the last statement is not rigorous from the strong mathematical point of view since a weak convergence to an attracting periodical point is also possible. Depending on the choice of $`n`$ and $`\epsilon `$ (the accuracy of approaching an attracting periodical point), the resulting picture on the $`\mu `$-plane may change. Our simulation experiments show that $`n=700`$ and $`\epsilon =10^5`$ are optimal values and the data generated with this algorithm do not qualitatively change when $`n`$ and/or $`\epsilon `$ differ from their optimal values. For more details of the method and the $`C++`$ program code see .

One can easily find all critical points of the mapping $`f`$ from Eq.(5). The critical points are: $`x=0`$ with multiplicity $`\gamma 2`$ and $`x=\mathrm{}`$ with multiplicity $`\gamma 2`$. The degree of our mapping $`f`$ is $`d=(\gamma 1)`$. It may be shown that these are the only critical points of the mapping $`f`$ . Hence, one has to consider only the orbits of the points $`x_0=0`$ and $`x_0=\mathrm{}`$. For numerical calculations it is convenient to start iterations at the points $`x_1=f(0)=1/z`$ and $`x_1=f(\mathrm{})=(z+Q2)/(Q1)`$.

In Fig. 6 the dynamics of metastability regions of the $`Q`$-state Potts model on the Bethe lattice with coordination number $`\gamma =3`$ and $`z=3`$ is shown depending on $`Q`$. We have experimental evidence that in white regions all critical orbits converge. Figs. 6(a)-(d) show the metastability regions for the case $`Q>1`$. It is seen that the sets of black points are similar to the boundary of the Mandelbrot set of the quadratic mapping $`zz^2+c`$ (Figs. 6(c),(d)). This fact is known as the universality of the Mandelbrot set . The metastability region of the Ising model $`(Q=2)`$ at the critical temperature is shown in Fig. 6(c). It intersects the positive semi-axis at $`\mu =1`$, which is an evidence of the existence of real temperature second order phase transition in conformity with exact calculations . The $`Q<1`$ case is shown in Figs. 6(e)-(i). One can see that Fig. 6(e) resembles a mirror reflection of the Mandelbrot set boundary of (cf. Fig. 6(d)-(e)). It is noteworthy that for $`Q=1`$ and $`\gamma =3`$ the Bethe-Potts mapping becomes a quadratic one , and our numerical method fails . By lowering $`Q`$ the metastability regions become more and more complicated Figs. 6(f)-(i). Note that the dynamics of the metastability regions remains the same if one fixes $`Q`$ and changes the temperature.

## 6 Conclusions

We showed that the stability analysis of attracting fixed points of the recurrence relation, i.e. the condition that the absolute values of derivatives of the governing recurrence relation in two attracting fixed points are equal at a phase transition, may be successfully applied to a study of zeros of the partition function. Note that in the one-dimensional case the condition of a phase transition is equivalent to the condition of existence of neutral fixed points. It will be interesting to check the Monroe’s conjecture that at a phase transition the box counting dimension of the Julia set of the governing recurrence relation is a minimum for zeros of the partition function . We suppose that the box counting dimension of the Julia set of the recurrence relation should be a minimum for zeros of the partition function also.This may serve as a new criterion for studying zeros of the partition function for models on recursive lattices.

In conclusion we observe that numerical methods proposed in this paper are generic and may be used for investigation of zeros of the partition function and metastability regions of other models on recursive lattices.

## 7 Acknowledgments

This work was partly supported by the Grants INTAS-97-347, ISTC A-102, Dutch NWO: Nato Visitors Grant NB 62-562, and the Cariplo Foundation. One of the authors R. G. would like to thank Prof. S. Fauve and Prof. A. Hoekstra for fruitful discussions and International Centre for Theoretical Physics (ICTP, Italy) for hospitality.


format: text

text:
# Present and Future Electroweak Precision Measurements and the Indirect Determination of the Mass of the Higgs Boson

## I Introduction

In this contribution we address the status and possible future developments in the measurements of and the theoretical predictions for the most important electroweak precision observables. We estimate their precision from upcoming and proposed accelerator experiments. In all cases we quote uncertainties which we believe to be realistically achievable, not excluding even greater precisions. As a result of imposing similar standards in all cases, our quoted uncertainties should be directly comparable. Similarly, we attempt to anticipate which improvements can be expected in the theoretical predictions for the observables.

Within the SM, the mass of the Higgs boson, $`M_H`$, can be constrained indirectly with the help of electroweak precision observables (EWPO). Among the experimental measurements of EWPO which are used in global fits, the $`W`$-boson mass, $`M_W`$, and the effective leptonic weak mixing angle, $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$, have the largest impact on the extracted value of $`M_H`$. Although the current relative precision of $`M_W`$ is better by a factor of 1.8 compared to $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$, the latter is the most relevant parameter for the indirect $`M_H`$ determination due to its more pronounced dependence on the Higgs mass. For equal relative experimental precisions, it yields a 3.1 times higher sensitivity (for $`M_H`$ around 115 GeV). Other observables include the leptonic $`Z`$-boson width, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_l`$; the mass and width of the $`Z`$ boson, $`M_Z`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_Z`$; the peak hadronic cross section of the $`Z`$ boson, $`\sigma _{\mathrm{had}}^0`$; EWPO from deep inelastic neutrino scattering; and others. Furthermore the top quark mass, $`m_t`$, enters in the global fit; its value and its error have a strong impact on the extracted $`M_H`$ value. The results from rare B decays do not enter the fit directly, but they are important for constraining certain non-SM extensions of the Higgs sector.

In this article, we begin by summarizing the performance parameters we have assumed for future colliders. We then discuss several critical measurements and the anticipated experimental and theoretical uncertainties. Finally, we consider the precision of future indirect determination of the Higgs-boson mass from precision electroweak fits. A related discussion of these fits can be found in Ref. Baur:2001yp .

## II Collider Parameters

At the time of the present study, LEP has finished running, and nearly all of the relevant analyses are complete. The final results from Tevatron Run I are all available, and no results are yet available from Tevatron Run II. The b-factories at SLAC and KEK are running and have some results already available.

A proton-antiproton center-of-mass energy of 2 TeV is assumed for Run II of the Tevatron at Fermilab. Run IIA is expected to deliver an integrated luminosity of 2 fb-1 to each of the two experiments. The next phase of operations, Run IIB, is expected to deliver 15 fb-1 according to the plan currently adopted by Fermilab, but this could go as high as 30 fb-1 if additional upgrades are made to the accelerator complex. We refer to these two scenarios as Run IIB and Run IIB\*.

The Large Hadron Collider is assumed to deliver 100 $`\mathrm{fb}^1`$ to each experiment each year, with a proton-proton center-of-mass energy of 14 TeV.

For a future Linear Collider (LC), we assume an electron-positron (or electron-electron) center-of-mass energy of 0.5 TeV and 500 $`\mathrm{fb}^1`$ delivered to a single experiment. For those measurements which require polarized beams, we make this assumption explicit. “GigaZ” collectively denotes an LC operating at $`\sqrt{s}=M_Z`$ or $`\sqrt{s}2M_W`$ with a luminosity of $`5\times 10^{33}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}^1`$.

## III The Mass of the $`W`$ Boson

We begin by describing the experimental uncertainties in the measurement of the $`W`$-boson mass, first at hadron colliders, then at lepton colliders. We then discuss the theoretical issues. In the theoretical discussion, we use the phrase intrinsic uncertainties for the ones arising from unknown higher-order corrections in the perturbative expansion, as well as for other uncertainties arising from other computational limitations. These are to be distinguished from primordial uncertainties, which are those uncertainties in relating a primordial quantity (like the actual mass of the $`W`$ boson) to the observables that experiments use to estimate the primordial quantity. More details can be found in Ref. Baur:2001yp .

### III.1 Experimental Prospects

The current precision of $`M_W`$ is dominated by the direct mass reconstruction of $`W`$-pair events at LEP2. Transverse-mass fits from Run I at the Tevatron and data from threshold scans at LEP2 also contribute significantly but carry less statistical weight.

Hadron Colliders:

The next opportunity to improve the measurement of $`M_W`$ will be at Run II of the Tevatron. The measurement of the $`W`$-boson mass from Tevatron Run I data achieved a precision of 68 MeVcdfwmass2 ; Abazov:2001wq . A variety of methods can be used to measure the $`W`$-boson mass with different tradeoffs between statistical and systematic uncertainties. These include fits of the transverse mass and lepton $`p_T`$ spectra to templates from Monte Carlo simulations. Most systematics, such as the detector calibration and the recoil model, are driven by the number of $`Z`$-boson decays observedAbazov:2001wq ; cdfwmass2 . Measurements of the charge asymmetry in $`W\mathrm{}\nu `$ decays will help constrain the parton distribution functions. In the ratio method, developed by DØD0\_Wmass\_ratio , the $`Z`$-boson data are rescaled to fit the $`W`$-boson data. This reduces most experimental and some theoretical uncertainties at the cost of statistical sensitivity. In all cases, systematic uncertainties are expected to dominate. Since the main systematics differ, these methods can be used to check the results for consistency at the 10 MeV level.

Table 1 shows the expected precision of the $`W`$ mass measurement from the transverse mass fit, extrapolated from the Run Ib measurement by DØAbbott:1998ww . The calorimeter scale and linearity assume constraints from $`Z`$ data only, but not the $`J/\psi `$ and $`\pi ^0`$ data used in Run I. By about 30 fb-1, the determination of the energy resolution will be systematically limited by the uncertainty in the width of the $`Z`$ boson. The uncertainty due to electron removal was conservatively assumed to decrease only by half. Table 1 also shows an extrapolation of the uncertainty for the ratio method from Run I results by DØ. The systematic uncertainty for this method is smaller than for the transverse mass fit and it may well be the best for high integrated luminosities. We conclude that the $`W`$-boson mass will be measured at the end of Run II to a precision of 15 MeV, perhaps even 10 MeV, combining the results from both experiments, using several methods and the $`We\nu `$ and $`W\mu \nu `$ channels.

The improvement in the measurement of $`M_W`$ at the LHC is due to the large statistics which is expected to result in very small statistical errors and good control of many systematic uncertainties. However, as in Run IIB, theoretical improvements are needed, e.g. for radiative $`W`$ decays, the modeling of the $`p_T^W`$ distribution, and for constraining PDFs. In Ref. haywood  it has been argued that it should be possible to obtain an uncertainty on the $`W`$ mass due to PDFs smaller than 10 MeV.

Linear Collider:

As for the $`M_W`$ measurement at LEP2, the determination of the $`W`$ mass at the LC at center of mass (CM) energies above the $`W^+W^{}`$ production threshold will be based on direct reconstruction of $`W`$-pair events in 4-fermion production processes. For an integrated luminosity of 500 $`\mathrm{fb}^1`$ the uncertainty on $`M_W`$ is expected to be about 10 MeVklausyboy .

A determination of $`M_W`$ with the GigaZ option is based on a dedicated threshold scan. About one year of running would be needed to achieve a 5 MeV experimental error on $`M_W`$ wilson . This also requires that the knowledge of the absolute beam energy can be controlled to better than 2.5 MeV. Although this is of higher precision than currently foreseen for TESLA or NLC, it might be achievable with some additional effort wilson .

### III.2 Theoretical Issues

For the envisioned precision measurement of the $`W`$-boson mass, $`M_W`$, at present and future lepton and hadron colliders it is crucial that the theoretical predictions for the underlying production processes are well under control. The status and prospects of theoretical predictions for weak gauge boson production processes are presented in Ref. Baur  and briefly summarized in the following.

Hadron Colliders

QED corrections are known to produce a considerable shift in the $`W`$\- and $`Z`$-boson masses measured at hadron colliders cdfwmass ; d0wmass ; cdfwmass2 ; d0wmass2 . Given the expected accuracy for $`M_W`$ in Run II of the Tevatron and at the LHC, calculations including the full $`𝒪(\alpha )`$ electroweak corrections to weak-boson production in hadronic collisions are needed. A calculation of the electroweak $`𝒪(\alpha )`$ corrections to $`W`$ production has been carried out in Ref. BKW  in the leading-pole approximation, i.e. corrections which are very small at the $`W`$ pole were ignored. Calculations of the full $`𝒪(\alpha )`$ corrections to $`pp{}_{}{}^{^{()}}W\mathrm{}\nu _{\mathrm{}}`$ have recently appeared in Refs. eww2  and Zykunov:2001mn . While the corrections ignored in Ref. BKW  change the differential cross section in the $`W`$-pole region by less than 1% eww2 , they become large at high $`\mathrm{}\nu _{\mathrm{}}`$ invariant masses $`m(\mathrm{}\nu _{\mathrm{}})`$ due to Sudakov-like logarithms of the form $`\mathrm{ln}^2[m(\mathrm{}\nu _{\mathrm{}})/M_W]`$. They significantly affect the transverse mass distribution above the $`W`$ peak, which serves as a tool for a direct measurement of the $`W`$ width, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_W`$. Taking these corrections into account in future measurements of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_W`$ will be important.

The determination of the $`W`$-boson mass in a hadron collider environment requires a simultaneous precision measurement of the $`Z`$-boson mass, $`M_Z`$, and width, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_Z`$. When compared to the value measured at LEP1, the two quantities help to accurately calibrate detector components cdfwmass ; d0wmass ; cdfwmass2 ; d0wmass2 . It is therefore necessary to also understand electroweak corrections for $`Z`$-boson production. A calculation of the full $`𝒪(\alpha )`$ QED corrections to $`pp{}_{}{}^{^{()}}\gamma ,Z\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$ was carried out in Ref. BKS . Purely weak corrections were ignored in this first step towards a complete calculation of the $`𝒪(\alpha )`$ electroweak corrections to $`pp{}_{}{}^{^{()}}\gamma ,Z\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$. However, in order to properly calibrate the $`Z`$-boson mass and width using the available LEP data, it is desirable to use exactly the same theoretical input that has been used to extract $`M_Z`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_Z`$ at LEP, i.e. to include the purely weak corrections to $`pp{}_{}{}^{^{()}}\gamma ,Z\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$ and the $`𝒪(G_F^2m_t^2M_W^2)`$ corrections to the effective leptonic weak mixing parameter, $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$, and the $`W`$-boson mass dg , in the calculation. Such a calculation has recently been completed ewz2 . The additional corrections taken into account in Ref. ewz2  enhance the differential cross section in the $`Z`$-peak region by up to 1.2%. Since they are not uniform, they are expected to shift the $`Z`$-boson mass extracted from data upward by several MeV. Detailed simulations of this effect, however, have not been carried out yet.

For the analysis of Run IIA data Brock:1999ep  the presently available calculations of $`W`$\- and $`Z`$-boson production will likely be sufficient. However, to measure $`M_W`$ with a precision of less than 20 MeV in a hadron collider environment as foreseen in Run IIB and at the LHC, it will be necessary to take into account higher-order corrections, in particular multi-photon radiation effects.

Lepton Colliders

At LEP2 and a future Linear Collider (LC), $`M_W`$ is measured in $`W`$-pair production either in a dedicated threshold scan operating the machine at center-of-mass (CM) energies of $`161`$ GeV, or via direct reconstruction of the $`W`$ bosons at CM energies above 170 GeV. For state-of-the-art predictions for $`e^+e^{}WW4f`$ cross sections including $`𝒪(\alpha )`$ corrections, two MC generators are presently available, RacoonWW Denner:1999kn ; Denner:1999dt ; Denner:2000bj  and YFSWW3 Jadach:1998hi ; Jadach:2000tz ; Jadach:2001uu . As it is the case for all present calculations of $`𝒪(\alpha )`$ corrections to $`e^+e^{}WW4f`$, they rely on a double-pole approximation (DPA): electroweak $`𝒪(\alpha )`$ corrections are only considered for the terms that are enhanced by two resonant $`W`$ bosons. A tuned numerical comparison between RacoonWW and YFSWW3, supported by a comparison with a semi-analytical calculation Beenakker:1999gr  and a study of the intrinsic DPA ambiguity with RacoonWW mclep2 ; Denner:2000bj  and YFSWW3 mclep2 , shows that the current theoretical uncertainty for the total $`W`$-pair production cross section, $`\sigma _{WW}`$, is about 0.5% for CM energies between 170 GeV and 500 GeV mclep2 . Taking the observed differences mclep2  between the RacoonWW and YFSWW3 predictions at CM energies of 200 and 500 GeV as a guideline, a theoretical uncertainty of about $`1\%`$ can be assigned to the distribution of the $`W`$ production angle and the $`W`$ invariant-mass distribution in the $`W`$ resonance region. The theoretical uncertainties of the $`e^+e^{}WW4f`$ cross sections translate into uncertainties of the $`W`$ mass and the triple gauge-boson couplings (TGCs) extracted from data. A recent study Jadach:2001cz  based on the MC generators KoralW and YFSWW3 finds a theoretical uncertainty of $`\delta M_W=5`$ MeV due to unknown electroweak corrections at LEP2 energies. Using the MC generator YFSWW3, the ALEPH collaboration aleph  has derived (preliminary) results for the shifts in the extracted values for the TGCs due to the inclusion of electroweak corrections. For $`M_W`$ measurements well above the $`W`$-pair threshold at LEP2 energies and up to about 500 GeV the accuracy of the corresponding predictions is sufficient. More studies, however, are needed to properly estimate the uncertainties due to missing higher-order corrections at LC energies above 500 GeV.

In order to meet the goal of a combined error of $`\delta M_W=7`$ MeV wilson ; Baur:2001yp  in a threshold scan at a LC, the theoretical uncertainty of the extracted value of $`M_W`$ has to be less than 2–3 MeV. At present there is no study available on how this requirement translates into a constraint on the theoretical precision for $`\sigma _{WW}`$ in the threshold region. The DPA is not a valid approximation in the threshold region, as the $`e^+e^{}4f`$ cross section in this region is not dominated by $`W`$-pair production. Thus, $`\sigma _{WW}`$ in the threshold region is known with an accuracy of only about 1–2% Beenakker:1996kt ; Denner:2001zp , since predictions are based on an improved-Born approximation which neglects non-universal electroweak corrections. Assuming the theoretical predictions do not improve, the uncertainty of the $`W`$ mass obtained from a threshold scan is completely dominated by the theoretical error, and the precision of the $`W`$ mass is limited Baur  to about $`2030`$ MeV. Only the knowledge of the full $`𝒪(\alpha )`$ electroweak corrections to $`e^+e^{}4f`$ in the threshold region will allow one to decide whether the theoretical uncertainty of the $`M_W`$ measurement from a threshold scan can be reduced to the desired level. A full calculation of the $`𝒪(\alpha )`$ electroweak corrections to $`e^+e^{}WW4f`$ is currently not available, but there is ongoing work in this direction Vicini:1998iy ; Vicini:2001pd . This calculation is of enormous complexity and the requirement to include finite $`W`$-width effects poses severe problems with gauge invariance.

Higher Order Uncertainties:

Concerning the intrinsic uncertainties of $`M_W`$ from unknown higher orders, recent progress has been made for the prediction of $`M_W`$ by the inclusion of the full fermionic two-loop corrections weiglein , superseding the previous expansions in $`m_t^2/M_W^2`$. Since this expansion yielded similar values (with the same sign) for the $`m_t^4/M_W^4`$ and the $`m_t^2/M_W^2`$ terms (casting some doubt on the convergence), the full fermionic two-loop corrections constitute an important step towards a very precise $`M_W`$ prediction. The difference between the expansion calculation and the full result can reach up to about 4 MeV, depending on $`M_H`$. The only missing two-loop corrections to $`M_W`$ are the pure bosonic contributions. The $`M_H`$ dependence of the bosonic two-loop contributions to $`M_W`$ has recently been evaluated MWMHdep2 , indicating corrections of $`𝒪(1\mathrm{MeV})`$.

In order to quantify the remaining intrinsic uncertainties of the EWPO, one has to perform estimates of the possible size of uncalculated higher-order corrections. The results of calculations based on different renormalization schemes or on different prescriptions for incorporating non-leading contributions in resummed or expanded form differ from each other by higher-order corrections. One way of estimating the size of unknown higher-order corrections is thus to compare the results for the prediction of the EWPO from different codes in which the same corrections are organized in a somewhat different way. A detailed description of different “options” used in this comparison can be found in Ref. yellowbook1995  and an update in Ref. bardin1999 . This prescription may lead to an underestimate of the theoretical uncertainty if at an uncalculated order a new source of potentially large corrections (e.g. a certain enhancement factor) sets in. In general, it is not easy to quantify how large the variety of different codes and different “options” should be in order to obtain a reasonable estimate of the theoretical uncertainty.

Other (related) methods to estimate the size of missing higher order corrections are to vary the renormalization scales and schemes. While these methods usually give an order of magnitude estimate and a lower bound on the uncertainty, they can lead to underestimates whenever there are sizeable but scheme- and scale-invariant contributions. For example, the lowest order flavor singlet contribution to $`Z`$ decay, a separately gauge invariant and finite set of corrections, cannot be estimated by scale variations of the non-singlet contribution or by using different “options” for resumming non-leading contributions in computer codes.

In the following we use a simple minded, but rather robust and, in the past, quite successful method for estimating the uncertainties from unknown higher orders GAPP . The idea is to collect all relevant enhancement and suppression factors and setting the remaining coefficient (from the actual loop integrals) to unity. If, in a given order, terms with different group theory factors contribute, one can often choose the largest one as an estimate for the uncertainty. Our results are summarized in Table 2 Baur:2001yp . They are in good agreement with the estimates of the current uncertainties of $`M_W`$ performed in Refs. gambunc ; sirlunc ; MWMHdep2 ; freitunc .

## IV The effective leptonic weak mixing angle

### IV.1 Experimental Prospects

The current measurement of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ is dominated by the left-right asymmetry from SLDAbe:2000dq  and the $`b`$-quark forward-backward asymmetry from LEP1lepewwg .

At the Tevatron, the forward-backward asymmetry $`A_{FB}`$ in the process $`u\overline{u}+d\overline{d}Z\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$, measured near the $`Z`$ pole, gives a value of the weak mixing angle $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$. CDF published $`A_{FB}=0.070\pm 0.015(\text{stat})\pm 0.004(\text{syst})`$ based on data from Run IAbe:1996us . The statistical uncertainty scales to 0.0016 for 10 fb-1 and to 0.0009 for 30 fb-1. The most important systematic uncertainty arises from the parton distribution functions. These can be constrained by the charge asymmetry in $`W`$ decays. A theoretical uncertainty arises from the limited rapidity coverage and the $`p_T`$ distribution of the $`Z`$. Both the rapidity and $`p_T`$ distribution of the $`Z`$ will be measured and this uncertainty will be reduced. It is expected that the statistical uncertainty will dominate all systematicsBaur:2000cz ; Brock:1999ep .

Combining the electron and muon channels from both CDF and DØ and using a linear approximation for the relation between $`A_{FB}`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ leads to a projection for the precision of the $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ measurement of 0.00028 for 10 fb-1Baur:2000cz ; Brock:1999ep , to be compared with the current world-average precision of 0.00017. The precision is degraded somewhat when the full tree level relation between $`A_{FB}`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ is taken into account: 0.00029 for 15 fb-1 and 0.00020 for 30 fb-1. This is comparable to the current world averagepdg , and should clarify the 3.5$`\sigma `$ discrepancy between $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ from $`A_{\mathrm{LR}}`$ measured at SLDAbe:2000dq  and $`A_{FB}^{0,b}`$, measured at LEPlepewwg .

In $`pp`$ collisions at LHC, a forward-backward lepton asymmetry can also be measured, where the quark direction in the initial state has to be extracted from the boost direction of the $`\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$ system with respect to the beam axis. In order to improve the experimental uncertainty of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ at the LHC, it will be necessary to detect one of the leptons originating from $`Z\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$ over the entire pseudorapidity range of $`|\eta |<5`$ haywood . This requires an electron jet rejection factor of $`<0.01`$ in the forward region ($`2.5<|\eta |<5`$) of the electromagnetic calorimeter. The relevance of a more precise determination of PDFs in this respect remains to be investigated.

The determination of the effective leptonic mixing angle at the LC could in principle be performed by a fixed-target Møller scattering experiment kumar ; baurdem  (but see also Ref. gambinocuypers .) However, this would yield $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ at a scale of $`𝒪(0.5\mathrm{GeV})`$, making the extrapolation to $`M_Z`$ difficult. We therefore do not consider this option here in more detail (although sensitivity to physics beyond the SM might be possible.)

At GigaZ one hopes to improve the current precision of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ by more than an order of magnitude. This is envisaged by a precise measurement of $`A_{\mathrm{LR}}`$ moenig ; sn\_pol  using the Blondel scheme blondel . $`A_{\mathrm{LR}}`$ is then given as a function of polarized cross sections, where both beams have possibly different combinations of polarizations. Due to the anticipated drastic improvement in the accuracy, a reanalysis of the effect of primordial uncertainties in the determination of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ might become necessary. This determination of $`A_{\mathrm{LR}}`$ requires that both beams can be polarized independently and that the polarizations of the colliding $`e^+`$ and $`e^{}`$ bunches with opposite helicity states are equal (or that their difference is precisely determined; see Ref. moenig  for details). A precision of $`\delta A_{\mathrm{LR}}8\times 10^5`$ seems to be feasible moenig ; teslatdr , resulting in $`\delta \mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}10^5`$.

### IV.2 Theoretical Issues

Concerning the intrinsic uncertainties of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ from unknown higher orders, the situation is slightly worse than for $`M_W`$, since a result for the full fermionic two-loop corrections is not yet available, and one has to rely on the expansion in powers of $`m_t^2/M_W^2`$ sweffexpansion . Beyond two-loop order, the results for the pure fermion-loop contributions (incorporating in particular the leading terms in $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha `$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho `$) are known up to the four-loop order fermloop . Furthermore, the QCD corrections of $`𝒪(\alpha \alpha _s^2)`$ are known chetyrkin ; chetstein . More recently, also the leading three-loop terms of $`𝒪(G_F^3m_t^6)`$ and $`𝒪(G_F^2\alpha _sm_t^4)`$, which enter via the quantity $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho `$, have been calculated in the limit of vanishing Higgs-boson mass. The results have been found to be quite small, which is familiar from the $`M_H=0`$ limit of the $`𝒪(G_F^2m_t^4)`$ result vanderbij . In the latter case, the extension to finite values of $`M_H`$ and the inclusion of subleading terms led to an increase in the numerical result by a factor of up to 20.

A shift in the prediction for $`M_W`$, on the other hand, induces a shift in $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ according to

$$\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}=\left(1\frac{M_W^2}{M_Z^2}\right)\kappa (M_W^2),$$
(1)
where $`\kappa `$ is a calculable function in the SM. While the shift in $`M_W`$ induced by going from the result of the expansion in powers of $`m_t^2/M_W^2`$ to the result of the full fermionic two-loop corrections is known, the corresponding result for $`\kappa (M_W^2)`$ is still missing. The effect of inserting the new result for $`M_W`$ in Eq. (1), which amounts to an upward shift of about $`8\times 10^5`$ in $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ (for $`M_H115`$ GeV), has been (conservatively) treated as a theoretical uncertainty in the “Blue Band” of Fig. 1 (see Sec. VII).

The same method described earlier for $`M_W`$ is used to quantify the remaining intrinsic uncertainties of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ GAPP . Our results are summarized in Table 3, with a total contribution to the uncertainty of $`7\times 10^5`$. They are in good agreement with the estimates of the current uncertainties of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ performed in Refs. gambunc ; sirlunc ; MWMHdep2 ; freitunc .

## V Top quark properties

For the precision EW fits, the most important top quark property is its mass, $`m_t`$. Although from an experimental standpoint, $`m_t`$ is on the same footing as $`M_W`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$, theoretically it is handled a bit differently and affects the theoretical predictions for $`M_W`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$.

In Tevatron Run I, the top quark mass was measured to $`5`$ GeVAffolder:2000vy ; Abbott:1998dc . For Run II, $`t\overline{t}`$ data samples will be large enough to allow a double $`b`$-tag. For 15 fb-1 per experiment, 3200 double-tagged single-lepton and 1200 untagged dilepton events are expected.

The main systematic uncertainty for the top quark mass measurement is the jet energy scale. Using Run I methods, this uncertainy cannot be reduced below a couple of GeV. However, both experiments plan to use $`p\overline{p}Zb\overline{b}`$ events, which will help set the energy scale to a precision of about 0.5 GeVHeintz\_Zbb . In addition, the hadronically decaying $`W`$ in single-lepton $`t\overline{t}`$ events provides an independent calibration pointFrey:1997sg .

The next most important systematic uncertainty is modeling of initial and final state gluon radiation in $`t\overline{t}`$ events. In Run I, this uncertainty was estimated mainly by comparing predictions of different event generators. In Run II, the modeling of jet activity in top quark events can be constrained better by comparing double-tagged events with simulations. We estimate this uncertainty to be about 1 GeV, and expect it to decrease only slightly with increasing integrated luminosity. Other systematics will scale inversely with the square root of the integrated luminosity.

We extrapolate the uncertainty on the top mass based on Run I DØ results in the single-lepton channelAbbott:1998dc  in Table 4. We take the higher cross section at $`\sqrt{s}=2`$ TeV in account and we assume double $`b`$-tagging with an efficiency per $`b`$-jet of 65%. Double $`b`$-tagging will essentially eliminate the uncertainty due to the $`W`$+jets background. The uncertainty in the dilepton channelAbbott:1998dn  is also extrapolated in Table 4. No $`b`$-tagging is assumed here. For each channel and each experiment, a precision of abut 1.2 GeV is projected. By combining both channels and experiments an overall precision close to 1 GeV should be achievable.

At the LC, the top quark mass can either be extracted from a $`t\overline{t}`$ threshold scan that would determine a suitably defined threshold mass tttheo ; ttexp , or in the continuum by direct kinematical reconstruction of $`e^+e^{}\overline{t}tW^+W^{}b\overline{b}\mathrm{}^+\nu \mathrm{}^{}\overline{\nu }b\overline{b}`$ events yeh  which determines the pole mass. The remaining theoretical uncertainties are sufficiently small to allow a measurement of the threshold mass with a precision of $`100`$ MeV tttheo ; ttexp ; mtnew . (For the conversion of the $`\overline{\mathrm{MS}}`$ top quark mass to other top quark mass definitions see e.g. Ref. Chetyrkin:1999qi ; Melnikov:2000qh  and references therein.) The measurement of the pole mass at higher energies with an accuracy of 200 MeV or better may be possible yeh , but is limited in precision by QCD renormalon effects which are of $`𝒪(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{QCD})`$.

The precise measurement of $`m_t`$ at the LC will eliminate the main source of parametric uncertainties of the EWPO. The uncertainties induced in $`M_W`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ by the experimental error of $`m_t`$ will be reduced by the LC measurement to the level of 1 MeV and $`0.5\times 10^5`$, respectively, i.e. far below the uncertainty corresponding to the present error of $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _{\mathrm{had}}`$.

The $`t\overline{t}`$ threshold analysis at the LC will result in correlated measurements of $`\alpha _s`$ and $`m_t`$. Since an independent and more precise determination of $`\alpha _s(M_Z)`$ would be possible with GigaZ (to $`\pm 0.0010`$, from other GigaZ observables: the $`Z`$ width with 1 MeV uncertainty, and $`R_l`$ with 0.05% uncertainty jenssvengigaz ; alphas ), an improved value for $`m_t`$ can be expected as well.

## VI Rare B decays

Rare $`B`$ meson decay results are not among the inputs to the global fits for $`M_H`$, but they provide important constraints on the EW symmetry breaking sector, so they were included in this study. Rare $`B`$ meson decays that first appear at one loop in the Standard Model (SM) are especially sensitive to new physics that also enters at one loop. We considered the processes $`bs\gamma `$, $`B\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$, and $`BX_s\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$.

The decay $`\overline{B}X_s\gamma `$ has been measured bsgexpts  and is in agreement with the SM prediction. This allows constraints to be placed on new physics, most notably the two Higgs doublet model (2HDM) 2HDMbsg  and the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM) MSSMbsg . The constraints on new physics depend sensitively on the SM result; recent inclusion of quark mass effects Gambino:2001ew  in the SM calculation shifted the SM prediction by $`1\sigma `$. The current SM theoretical uncertainty in BR($`\overline{B}X_s\gamma `$) is about the same size as the experimental uncertainty and is limited by the charm quark mass dependence Gambino:2001ew . The BaBar and BELLE experiments expect to reduce the current 12% statistical uncertainty in BR($`\overline{B}X_s\gamma `$) to about 5%, which is limited by the amount of running off the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4s)`$ resonance to measure backgrounds.

The decay $`B\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$ is highly suppressed in the SM and has not been observed. The best current bound is BR$`(B_s\mu ^+\mu ^{})<2.6\times 10^6`$ Abe:1998ah  while the corresponding SM prediction is $`4\times 10^9`$ Logan:2000iv ; bsmmSM . New physics contributions to this decay from the 2HDM can enhance or suppress the branching ratio by a factor of two Logan:2000iv , while in the MSSM a much more dramatic enhancement is possible, even up to the current experimental bound at large $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ values MSSMBll . Both CDF and DØ expect to observe a few events at the SM rate with 15 fb-1 at Run II of the Tevatron; severe constraints or a discovery are possible in the MSSM.

The decay $`BX_s\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}`$ is not as highly suppressed and inclusive branching ratios of several $`\times 10^6`$ are expected in the SM; experimental bounds from BaBar are BR$`(BK\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{})<0.6\times 10^6`$ and BR$`(BK^{}\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{})<2.5\times 10^6`$ Aubert:2001xt , close to the SM predictions. BELLE has recently reported observation of $`BK\mu ^+\mu ^{}`$ BELLEBKmumu . The spectrum and asymmetries in this decay allow separate measurements of the signs and magnitudes of three Wilson coefficients Ali:1999mm  and are sensitive to MSSM contributions. More data is expected soon at BaBar and BELLE. CDF and DØ expect to be able to measure the BR, spectrum, and energy-dependent asymmetry for $`BK^{}\mu ^+\mu ^{}`$ at Run II of the Tevatron. Further refinements in the asymmetry and spectrum can be expected at BTev.

## VII Electroweak Global Fits

The LEP Electroweak Working Group’s most recent fit to the current precision electroweak data is shown in Fig. 1 ewwg . The figure shows $`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi ^2\chi ^2\chi _{\mathrm{min}}^2`$ as an approximately quadratic function of $`\mathrm{log}M_H`$. Therefore, the 95% CL upper limit can be approximated by $`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi ^2=2.71`$, corresponding to a 95% CL upper bound of $`M_H<196`$ GeV at present.

The precision of the fit results depends on the experimental uncertainties of the measured values of the EWPO and the theoretical uncertainties of their predictions. The SM predictions for the EWPO are calculated in terms of a small set of input parameters: $`M_Z,G_\mu ,\alpha (M_Z),m_{\mathrm{}},m_q,m_t,M_H`$, and $`\alpha _s(M_Z)`$. The fine structure constant, $`\alpha (0)`$, the $`Z`$-boson mass, $`M_Z`$, the lepton masses, $`m_{\mathrm{}}`$, and the Fermi constant, $`G_F`$, are currently the most precisely measured input parameters pdg , and their errors have negligible effects on the fit results Erler:1995fz ; lepewwg ; pgl . The dominant uncertainties presently arise from the experimental error on the top quark mass, $`m_t=174.3\pm 5.1`$ GeV pdg , the hadronic contribution to the fine structure constant at the $`Z`$-boson mass, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _{\mathrm{had}}`$ jegerlehner ; deltaalpha  (the value used in Fig. 1 is from Ref. deltaalpha1 ), as well as $`M_H`$. $`\alpha _s(M_Z)`$ is constrained mainly by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_Z`$, $`R_l`$, and $`\sigma _{\mathrm{had}}^0`$, with little theoretical uncertainty as long as one ignores the possibility of large new physics effects.

In practice, both EWPO and input parameters are used as constraints in the fits subject to their experimental uncertainties (which, as explained above, contain the primordial theoretical uncertainties related to extraction of the EWPO). The only distinction is that the input parameters are treated as fit parameters, and the EWPO are computed in terms of these. For example, $`m_t`$ which appears only in loops is chosen as input. Moreover, one usually prefers to compute less precise quantities in terms of more precise ones. The fit results are insensitive to these choices.

Table 5 summarizes the current status of the experimental uncertainties and the precision one expects to achieve at future colliders for the most relevant EWPO, $`M_W`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$, and the top quark mass, together with the expected experimental error on $`M_H`$Gunion:1996cn , assuming the SM Higgs boson has been discovered with $`M_H115`$ GeV. The entries in the table attempt to represent the combined results of all detectors and channels at a given collider, taking into account correlated systematic uncertainties.

The dominant parametric uncertainty of the EWPO presently arises from the experimental error of the top quark mass, $`\delta m_t=5.1`$ GeV. This error induces a parametric uncertainty of 32 MeV and $`16\times 10^5`$ in the $`W`$ mass and the leptonic effective mixing angle, respectively. The value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _{\mathrm{had}}`$ used in the fit is calculated according to deltaalpha , with the unsubtracted dispersion relation (UDR) approach, and the corresponding errors from its uncertainty, $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _{\mathrm{had}}=0.0002`$, are 3.7 MeV and $`7\times 10^5`$. Furthermore, the imperfect knowledge of the strong coupling constant, $`\delta \alpha _s(M_Z)=0.0028`$, introduces uncertainties of 2 MeV and $`3.5\times 10^5`$ and also an uncertainty in $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _{\mathrm{had}}`$ of about $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _{\mathrm{had}}=0.0001`$. While the uncertainty induced by the top quark mass is about as large as the present experimental error of $`M_W`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$, the parametric uncertainties induced by the errors of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _{\mathrm{had}}`$ and $`\alpha _s(M_Z)`$ are already smaller than the prospective experimental errors on $`M_W`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ at the Tevatron and the LHC (see Table 5). On the other hand, the accuracies reachable at GigaZ will clearly require a significantly improved experimental precision not only of $`m_t`$ (see Table 5), but also of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _{\mathrm{had}}`$ and $`\alpha _s(M_Z)`$. An improved determination of $`\alpha _s(M_Z)`$ with little theoretical uncertainty is, in fact, expected from GigaZ itself jenssvengigaz ; alphas .

The “Blue Band” shown in Fig. 1 is obtained by comparing the predictions of the EWPO using the codes ZFITTER ZFITTER  and TOPAZ0 TOPAZ0 . At present, the theoretical uncertainty represented by the width of the “Blue Band” mainly arises from the intrinsic uncertainties in the prediction for $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$, while the intrinsic uncertainty in the prediction for $`M_W`$, being significantly smaller than the experimental error, is less important.

We have performed a global fit to all data in the Standard Model based on the present experimental and parametric uncertainties and using the estimates of Tables 2 and 3 for the intrinsic theoretical uncertainties from unknown higher-order corrections. For the theoretical predictions the program GAPP GAPP  has been used. In contrast to the fit in Fig. 1, where the theory uncertainties are represented by the width of the blue band, we have added theoretical and experimental errors in quadrature. As a result we find

$$M_H=97_{36}^{+53}\mathrm{GeV},$$
(2)
and a 95% CL upper bound of $`M_H<194`$ GeV. These numbers are very close to the result of the fit in Fig. 1 ewwg .

Concerning the interpretation of the fit result, it should be kept in mind that it is based on the assumption that the Standard Model provides the correct description of the experimental measurements. This means, in particular, that the resulting bound on $`M_H`$ does not reflect the quality of the fit, i.e. it does not contain information about how well the SM actually describes the data.

## VIII Future indirect determinations of $`M_H`$

For the analysis in this section, we anticipate that in the future the currently missing corrections indicated in the upper part of Tables 2 and 3 will become available, and that the uncertainties listed in the lower part will be reduced by a factor of two.

In the following we will discuss the anticipated future experimental precisions of the EWPO reachable at the next generation of colliders as given in Table 5 in view of necessary improvements of the primordial theoretical uncertainties. In each case we also investigate whether the prospective parametric and intrinsic theoretical uncertainties of the EWPO will be sufficiently under control in order to match the projected experimental precision.

The improvement in the experimental determination of $`m_t`$ at Run IIA will reduce the parametric theoretical uncertainties of $`M_W`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ to values below the experimental errors of these observables. Similarly, the present values of the intrinsic theoretical uncertainties of $`M_W`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ (see Tables 2 and 3) are smaller than the envisaged experimental errors (see Table 5). On the other hand, an improvement of the theoretical prediction of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$, in particular the inclusion of the missing corrections of $`𝒪(\alpha ^2)`$, would lead to a significant reduction of the width of the “Blue Band” shown in Fig. 1. In the near future, the full two-loop results for $`M_W`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ constitute the most important contributions in the MSM theory calculations, and are needed on the time scale of Run II, which is taking place over the next $`5`$ years.

In view of the increased precision of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ at GigaZ and the largely reduced error of $`m_t`$ at the LC, it will be very important to reduce the uncertainty of $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }\alpha _{\mathrm{had}}`$ at least to the level of $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }\alpha (M_Z)=7\times 10^5`$ jegerlehner , corresponding to parametric uncertainties of $`M_W`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ of $`1.5`$ MeV and $`2.5\times 10^5`$, respectively. This will require improved measurements of $`R\sigma (e^+e^{}\mathrm{hadrons})/\sigma (e^+e^{}\mu ^+\mu ^{})`$ below about $`\sqrt{s}5`$ GeV. In case the uncertainty of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha (M_Z)`$ could even be improved by another factor of two (and taking also into account the expected improvement in the $`\alpha _s(M_Z)`$ determination at GigaZ), the limiting factor in the parametric uncertainty of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ would arise from the experimental error of $`M_Z`$ ($`\delta M_Z=2.1`$ MeV induces an uncertainty of $`1.4\times 10^5`$ in $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$), which is not expected to improve in the foreseeable future.

With the prospective future improvements of higher order corrections to the EWPO discussed above (i.e. complete electroweak two-loop results and a reduction of the uncertainties in the lower parts of Tables 2 and 3 by a factor of two), the intrinsic theoretical uncertainties of the EWPO will be comparable to or smaller than the parametric uncertainties and the experimental errors at GigaZ (see also Ref. gigaztheo .)

In summary, the projected experimental accuracies at GigaZ require on the theory side a considerable effort to reduce primordial theoretical uncertainties. In addition, improvements of the intrinsic and parametric uncertainties of the EWPO are needed. These tasks appear challenging, but, in view of the time scale of at least a decade, not unrealistic.

Based on the uncertainties expected at the next generation of colliders and our estimates of present and future theoretical uncertainties, we list in Table 6 the (cumulative) precision of $`M_H`$ at different colliders which one hopes to achieve from EWPOs. Results are given for $`\delta M_H/M_H`$ obtained from $`M_W`$ alone, from $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ alone, and from all precision data, taking into account the intrinsic and the parametric theoretical uncertainties and their correlated effects. These future estimates range from 25% at the end of Tevatron Run IIB to 18% after LHC to 8% after LC/GigaZ.

If the SM is the correct low energy theory, the Higgs boson will be discovered in Run II at the Tevatron or at the LHC. In this case, the indirect determination of $`M_H`$ from precision electroweak measurements will constitute an important internal consistency check of the SM. Possible new scales beyond the SM could manifest themselves in a disagreement of the directly and indirectly determined $`M_H`$ value jenssvengigaz ; sitgesproc .

###### Acknowledgements.

U.B. is supported by NSF grant PHY-9970703. The work of D.W. is supported by the U.S. Department of Energy under grant DE-FG02-91ER40685. D.R.W. is supported by NSF grant PHY-9972170. Fermilab is operated by Universities Research Association Inc. under contract no. DE-AC02-76CH03000 with the U.S. Department of Energy.


text:
# Chandra Detection of Highest Redshift (z∼6) Quasars in X-rays

## 1 Introduction

The highest redshift (z) quasars are of interest not only for their ‘record setting’ quality, but also because they can tell us about the formation of quasars and about conditions in the first few percent of the age of the universe. The discovery of z$`6`$ quasars (Fan et al. 2001; hereafter Paper I) was remarkable as it showed that luminous quasars with massive black-holes had formed when the Universe was less than a Gyr old. Quasars SDSSP J083643+005453 , SDSSP J103027+052455 , SDSSP J104433-012502 and SDSSP J130608+035626 at z=5.82, 6.28, 5.80 and 5.99 respectively were discovered as a part of the Sloan digital sky survey (SDSS, York et al. 2000) imaging multicolor observations. Follow-up spectroscopy revealed rich quasar spectra with strong Ly$`\alpha `$ forest. The importance of these observations was amplified by the realization that the neutral hydrogen fraction of the intergalactic medium increases drastically around z$`6`$, marking it to be the epoch of end of reionization (Becker et al. 2001, Fan et al. 2002, Pentericci et al. 2002).

Observations of high redshift quasars are also important to understand quasar evolution and associated, possible, growth of massive black holes. While the evidence for the evolution of the quasar luminosity function is clear (Boyle et al. 2000), we still do not know how the quasars evolve, i.e. which of observed properties of quasars exhibit change with time. Mathur (2000) suggested that accretion rate relative Eddington is likely to be a function of time, in which case properties related to accretion, such as those contributing to “eigenvector 1” (Boroson 2001) would be expected to change. X-ray studies of high redshift quasars are important as the X-ray slope changes with accretion rate and so may give us information about the evolution. The overall spectral energy distribution of quasars also changes with accretion rate. While small changes are difficult to see, the extreme cases, e.g. advection driven accretion flows (ADAF) show clearly different spectral energy distributions, including that in the X-ray band (Narayan et al. 1998 and references there in). So the hope of X-ray studies of high redshift quasars is that they may give us some clue about early accretion process, and so, possibly, about their evolution.

This goal has not been achieved yet, because X-ray detections of high redshift quasars have been rare. Prior to Chandra and XMM-Newton era, only a handful of z$`>4`$ quasars were detected in X-rays (Kaspi et al. 2000 and references there in). Thanks to the sensitivity of the Chandra observatory, the total number of X-ray detected z$`>4`$ quasars is now over two dozen (Silverman et al. 2002, Vignali et al. 2001, hereafter Paper II, and references there in). At redshift $`>5`$, however, the numbers are very sparse. The z=5.8 quasar SDSSP J104433-012502 was detected with XMM-Newton (Brandt et al. 2001, Mathur 2001) and a z$`5.2`$ quasar is reported to be detected with Chandra (Brandt et al. 2002) (A z=5.27 quasar SDSSp J120823.82+001027.7 is also reported to be detected by Vignali et al. 2001, but with only two counts, this is questionable). In spite of these small numbers, there have been tantalizing suggestions of changes of X-ray properties of quasars with redshift (e.g. Paper II, and references there in). Vignali et al. (2001) found suggestive evidence that Chandra detected high redshift quasars are fainter in X-rays compared to those detected earlier with ROSAT. Mathur (2001) found that the z=5.8 quasar SDSSP J104433-012502 is likely to have a steep X-ray slope. While these suggestions need to be confirmed with better observations, trends are encouraging. In this paper we report the Chandra detections of three z$`6`$ SDSS quasars.

## 2 Observations and Data Analysis

The sub-arcsecond angular resolution and very low background makes Chandra ideal for detecting faint sources like high redshift quasars. The z$`6`$ quasars SDSSP J083643+005453 , SDSSP J103027+052455 , and SDSSP J130608+035626 were observed with Chandra X-ray observatory on 29 January 2002 with director’s discretionary time. The data were made available to the astronomical community immediately. We downloaded the data from the Chandra X-ray Center (CXC) archive. Observation details are given in Table 1.

All the three observations were performed using the detector Advanced CCD Imaging Spectrometer for spectroscopy (ACIS-S). The sources were observed at the nominal aim-point on the back illuminated CCD S3. Analysis was performed in a standard manner using the software Chandra interactive analysis of observations (CIAO version 2.2.1; Elvis, in preparation)
(see also Chandra data processing threads at http://cxc.harvard.edu/ciao/documents\_threads.html).

Virtually all source counts are contained in the 2.9″ (5.75 pixel) radius extraction aperture that was centered upon the X-ray source centroid. Background counts were estimated from an annulus with inner and outer radii of 10 and 30 pixels, respectively. The background counts expected in the source extraction region are between 0.2 and 0.3 for the three sources, so we ignore the background in rest of the analysis. All the three sources are clearly detected in the broad band (0.5–8.0 keV). To determine the centroid position of the sources we used CIAO tool wavdetect (Freeman et al. 2002). The X-ray positions of all the three sources are within $`1^{\prime \prime }`$ of the optical positions (Table 2). We also extracted source counts in the soft (0.5–2.5 keV) and hard (5–8 keV) bands separately. Figure 1 shows the broad band ACIS-S images.

We calculated the probability of serendipitous source detection using the observed source flux distribution of Hasinger et al. (1998). Assuming the 0.5–2.5 keV flux limit of $`1\times 10^{15}`$ ergs cm-2 s-1 for the faintest of the three sources, and a detection cell of $`2.9^{\prime \prime }`$ radius, the expected number of sources is $`2.4\times 10^3`$ for each of the observation. So it is highly unlikely that the detected sources are unrelated to the quasars. We therefore conclude that SDSS sources observed by Chandra are detected.

Using the observed count rate, the broad band flux was determined assuming a power law slope of $`\alpha =1.0`$ and the Galactic NH values for each source (Table 2). The rest frame luminosity was calculated for two different cosmologies: H$`{}_{0}{}^{}=50`$ km s-1 Mpc-1 and q$`{}_{0}{}^{}=0.5`$ for consistency with earlier work and also with H$`{}_{0}{}^{}=75`$ km s-1 Mpc-1 and q$`{}_{0}{}^{}=0.5`$. The observed properties of all the three sources are presented in Table 2.

## 3 Discussion

The detections of z$`6`$ quasars in X-rays demonstrates the power of Chandra to detect such faint sources. The sources are detected up to rest frame energies of $`55`$ keV. With only a few counts detected, however, detailed source information is difficult to obtain. Nevertheless, we can learn about the overall broad band spectral energy distributions by determining the optical to X-ray ratio $`\alpha _{ox}`$ (defined as $`log(f_X/f_{opt})/log(\nu _X/\nu _{opt})`$ where $`f_X`$ and $`f_{opt}`$ are monochromatic flux densities at 2 keV and 2500 Å respectively in the rest frame of a quasar; Tananbaum et al. 1979). We calculated the optical monochromatic luminosity at 2500 Å using observed optical flux (Paper I) and assuming a power-law optical continuum slope with $`\alpha =0.5`$. The use of $`\alpha =0.5`$ is appropriate for the observed continuum in Paper I. The monochromatic luminosity at 2 keV was calculated assuming power-law slope $`\alpha =1`$. The resulting $`\alpha _{ox}`$ values are 1.49, 1.61, and 1.48 for SDSSP J083643+005453 , SDSSP J103027+052455 and SDSSP J130608+035626 respectively (Table 2). These are within the range observed for normal lower redshift quasars (e.g. Brandt et al. 2001). Thus the broad band X-ray properties of these highest redshift quasars do not appear to be any different from lower redshift objects.

For comparison with earlier work (Silverman et al. 2002, Paper II), in Figure 2 we have plotted the observed X-ray fluxes of z$`>4`$ quasars vs. their AB1450(1+z) magnitudes along with those reported here. The z$`6`$ quasars do not occupy any conspicuously different region on this plot, nor do the X-ray selected (ROSAT) sources look particularly bright (§1). In Figure 3, we have plotted the X-ray to optical flux ratio as a function of redshift. No obvious trend with redshift is apparent.

X-ray astronomers have traditionally used hardness ratios to extract spectral information when observed counts are too few to perform spectral analysis (Mathur 2001 and references there in). The hardness ratio is defined as HR=(soft $``$ hard)$`/`$(soft $`+`$ hard) where “soft” and “hard” are the counts in energy bands 0.5$``$2.5 keV and 2.5$``$8.0 keV respectively (we prefer HR over the band ratio BR=soft$`/`$hard sometimes used in the literature. HR is bounded well between $`1`$ and 1 for detected sources, compared to the 0 to $`\mathrm{}`$ range of BR). In these high-redshift sources we are observing rest frame energies above $`3.5`$ keV so that only highly absorbed sources would show evidence for absorption and we expect to be observing the pure continuum emission. The HR ratio of SDSSP J083643+005453 is consistent with that expected with a power-law slope $`\alpha =1`$. This object, however, is radio-loud (Paper I) and so its X-ray slope is expected to be flatter around a mean $`\alpha =0.5`$ (Wilkes & Elvis 1987). For SDSSP J103027+052455 , no counts are detected in the hard band, resulting in HR=1. A power-law with slope $`\alpha `$$`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{_>}{^{}}`$2 would then be required. For SDSSP J130608+035626 , on the other hand, a flatter power-law with $`\alpha 0.3`$ would be required to reproduce the observed HR of 0.56. We caution, however, against attaching too much significance to the above results, given the errors associated with observed counts in each band. Within the errors, the sources are consistent with the normal power-law slope expected for quasars, except possibly for SDSSP J103027+052455 .

Possibly, the most remarkable thing about these highest redshift quasars is that they are so absolutely unremarkable in both optical and X-ray bands implying no strong evolution out to redshifts $`6`$. The only possible difference could be in the X-ray spectral slope which could not be determined with the Chandra data. A lot more counts are needed to determine the exact spectral shape of these objects. The expected count rates with XMM-Newton are 11, 3 and 6 per ksec for the three objects respectively, for combined EPIC-pn and EPIC-MOS detectors with thin filters. For the brightest two objects a crude spectrum with about 300 counts can be obtained in a reasonable observing time of 25–50 ksec. We have an on-going program with XMM-Newton to do precision spectroscopy of some z$`>4`$ quasars. Extending this program to highest redshifts would be particularly interesting. Clearly, we have to work harder and look deeper to understand quasar evolution.

We thank the entire Chandra team for a very successful mission. We gratefully acknowledge support from grant GO-2118X from Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory to SM and NASA contract NAS8-39073 (CXC) to BJW and HG.