the origin of the baryon asymmetry of the universe ( bau ) has been a great puzzle in particle physics and cosmology . from the latest observations of the cosmic microwave background radiations , the supernovae and the large scale structures , the baryon - to - photon ratio is given by  @xcite
@xmath6 the nonzero bau can be generated if the following three conditions are fulfilled  @xcite : ( i ) baryon number ( @xmath7 ) violation , ( ii ) @xmath8 and @xmath0 violation , and ( iii ) departure from thermal equilibrium .
electroweak baryogenesis is a scenario in which the bau is explained based only on electroweak physics  @xcite . the standard model ( sm ) can in principle
accommodate above three conditions .
however , it turns out that the sm fails to generate the bau due to the lack of sufficient @xmath0 violation  @xcite , and the electroweak phase transition ( ewpt ) is a smooth cross over for @xmath9 gev  @xcite , which makes the condition ( iii ) infeasible .
this failure motivates us to go beyond the sm .
so far , many attempts of electroweak baryogenesis have been made in the various new physics models such as the minimal supersymmetric standard model ( mssm )  @xcite , the two - higgs - doublet model  @xcite , the singlet - extended mssms  @xcite , and recently the fourth - generation models also have been paid much attention  @xcite . among them ,
the mssm is a theoretically well - motivated model and a good candidate for successful electroweak baryogenesis .
as far as the strong first order ewpt which is necessary for condition ( iii ) is concerned , the light higgs boson is generically favored . on the other hand , the negative results of the higgs boson(s )
searches at lep put the constraints on the higgs boson masses in the mssm  @xcite .
the analysis has been done based on several benchmarks rather than scanning whole parameter space .
recently , it is pointed out that the lep constraints can be relaxed in the more general case . in ref .
@xcite , it is found that the lightest higgs boson mass can be smaller than the @xmath1 boson mass .
such a light higgs boson can be viable since its coupling to @xmath1 boson is modified by the additional higgs bosons and suppressed enough to avoid the experimental observed limits .
we call a light higgs boson scenario ( lhs ) when the mass of the lightest higgs boson is less than 114.4 gev
. this scenario can accommodate the @xmath10 excess around 98 gev higgs boson mass in the lep experiments  @xcite and have parameter space that is consistent with the observed dark matter relic density  @xcite . in ref .
@xcite , it is claimed that the lhs can provide a solution for a little hierarchy problem as well .
as for the electroweak baryogenesis context , since the neutral higgs bosons are relatively light , they may give a new window to a viable baryogenesis scenario .
in the electroweak baryogenesis mechanism , a sphaleron process must be decoupled after the ewpt in order to avoid the washout of the generated bau .
because of this requirement , the ratio of the higgs vacuum expectation value ( vev ) to the temperature in question should be greater than some value . to search for the region where the strong first order ewpt is realized , and which is also experimentally allowed , not only the theoretical calculations of the zero temperature observables but also those at the finite temperature are mandatory .
the accuracy of the former calculations are already beyond at least the tree level . on the other hand ,
the sphaleron decoupling condition , which is derived using the tree - level higgs potential at zero temperature , has been frequently used to discuss the strength of the strong first order ewpt in the literature .
namely , @xmath11 is adopted as a practical criterion , where @xmath12 is the critical temperature at which the higgs potential has two degenerate minima and @xmath13 is the higgs vev at @xmath12 . to obtain more accurate theoretical predictions , the refined calculation of the sphaleron decoupling condition is indispensable .
the uncertainties of the condition is expected to be reduced up to about 10% level if we make the following improvements , i.e. , the sphaleron solution at finite temperature is used and the contributions from the zero modes of the fluctuations around sphaleron at finite temperature are taken into account .
in addition , the sphaleron decoupling condition must be imposed at the temperature @xmath14 lower than @xmath12 , at which the ewpt terminates . in practice , since it is difficult to determine this temperature , we substitute @xmath15 , a nucleation temperature of the critical bubble , in place of @xmath14 .
the critical bubble is defined as the bubble whose surface energy and volume energy becomes balanced .
only such bubbles can nucleate and expand in the symmetric phase .    in this article ,
the possibility of the strong first order ewpt in the lhs and the conventional decoupling limit is examined with a particular emphasis on the refinement of the sphaleron decoupling condition .
the analysis is conducted taking the latest experimental data into account as well .
it is well known that a light stop whose mass is smaller than that of top quark is required for the strong first order ewpt .
we search for the parameter space that is consistent with such a light stop . in the lhs ,
since the masses of all the higgs bosons are relatively light , typically , @xmath16 gev , the @xmath7 physics observables data can restrict the allowed region . here
, we consider the constraints from the following processes : @xmath17 , @xmath18 and @xmath19 .
the first two modes are relevant when the charged higgs bosons are light .
the last one , which has not been observed yet , can give a significant limit when the neutral higgs boson is light .
after finding the phenomenologically allowed region , we investigate the strength of the ewpt at not only @xmath12 but also @xmath15 . by using the one - loop effective potential at zero and finite temperatures ,
we calculate the sphaleron energy and the contributions from zero modes of the fluctuations around sphaleron to evaluate the sphaleron decoupling condition .
it is then demonstrated whether or not such an improved sphaleron decoupling condition is satisfied at @xmath12 and @xmath15 .    this article is organized as follows : in sec .  [
sec : gh ] , we present the lagrangian of the gauge - higgs system for describing the statics and dynamics of the ewpt . the lhs is discussed in sec .
[ sec : lhs ]
. the qualitative evaluation of the ewpt is outlined in sec .
[ sec : ewpt ] .
the critical bubbles and the sphaleron decoupling condition are analyzed in secs .
[ sec : cri_bub ] and [ sec : sph_dec ] , respectively .
the experimental constraints are considered in sec .
[ sec : ex_const ] . in sec .
[ sec : numerical ] , we show the numerical results .
section  [ sec : con_dis ] is devoted to the conclusion and discussion . in the appendix  [ app : mass_squared ] , we give the mass - squared matrices of the squarks to make our notation clear .
to discuss the statics and dynamics of the ewpt , we consider the gauge - higgs system , which is governed by the lagrangian @xmath20 the covariant derivatives are @xmath21 where @xmath22 is the pauli matrices , @xmath23 and @xmath24 are the gauge couplings for @xmath25 and @xmath26 , respectively .
@xmath27 is the effective potential , which is composed of the tree and one - loop parts @xmath28 the tree - level part is given by the f- , d- , and the soft supersymmetry ( susy ) breaking terms @xmath29 where @xmath30 the higgs doublets are parameterized as @xmath31 where we assume that @xmath32 is not broken at the vacuum . unlike the general two - higgs - doublet model  @xcite , @xmath0 violation can not be accommodated in the higgs potential at the tree level , leading to @xmath33 .
the one - loop part comprises the effective potentials at zero and nonzero temperatures @xmath34,\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath35 where @xmath36 is the zero temperature effective potential , which is regularized in the @xmath37 scheme , @xmath38 denotes the degrees of freedom of particle species @xmath39 , @xmath40 is the background - field - dependent mass , and @xmath41 is a renormalization scale , which is determined in such a way that the zero temperature one - loop correction to the effective potential vanishes in the vacuum . in
what follows , the contributions of the weak gauge bosons ( @xmath42 ) , the third - generation quarks ( @xmath43 ) , and squarks ( @xmath44 ) are taken into account .
the statistical factors of each particle is , respectively , given by @xmath45 where @xmath46 is the number of color .
in this article , we use the one - loop mass formulae of the higgs bosons presented in ref .  @xcite .
to make a discussion on the lhs clear , we rotate the two higgs doublets @xmath47 into @xmath48 by @xmath49 . for simplicity , we assume that @xmath0 is conserved for the moment .
the rotated higgs doublets are cast into the form @xmath50 where @xmath51 gev , @xmath39 is the @xmath0-odd higgs boson , @xmath52 is the charged higgs boson and ( @xmath53 ) are the nambu - goldstone bosons . @xmath54 and @xmath55 are related to the physical @xmath0-even higgs bosons ( @xmath56 ) via @xmath57 where @xmath58 is a mixing angle between @xmath59 and @xmath60 . it should be noticed that only @xmath54 possesses the higgs vev in the rotated basis , and we can identify it the sm - like higgs boson , i.e. , @xmath61 .    at the tree level ,
the higgs boson couplings to @xmath1 boson normalized to the corresponding sm values are , respectively , given by @xmath62 from eqs .
( [ rotated_phi ] ) , ( [ rotated_h ] ) , ( [ higgs_zz ] ) and ( [ higgs_za ] ) , one can see that @xmath63 , @xmath64 and @xmath65 for @xmath66 and @xmath67 , @xmath68 and @xmath69 for @xmath70 .
the former case ( decoupling limit ) is realized by taking @xmath71 and the latter one ( antidecoupling limit ) is possible for @xmath72 , which corresponds to the lhs .
depending on the theory parameters , some of the above four higgs boson couplings can be small enough to avoid the lep exclusion limits . in the lhs ,
for example , @xmath73 can be as light as about 100 gev for @xmath74 .
however , from the sum rules among the higgs boson couplings , i.e. , @xmath75 , not all higgs bosons are allowed to be light .
if the higgs boson is the sm - like , the mass of it should be larger than 114.4 gev since its coupling to the @xmath1 boson becomes the sm value .
we will discuss the experimental constraints in more detail in sec .
[ sec : ex_const ]
.    finally , we comment on the @xmath0-violating case .
although @xmath0 is conserved in the tree - level higgs sector , it can be broken by the radiative corrections such as the top / stop loops .
the realization of the maximal @xmath0 violation is called the cpx scenario  @xcite . in this scenario , it is possible to accommodate an even lighter higgs boson .
for instance , the mass of the lightest higgs boson can be as small as 40 gev , which is experimentally viable .
it is interesting to discuss the phenomenological consequences of this scenario .
however , the cpx scenario requires the relatively large ratios of @xmath76 assuming @xmath77 , which is not favored in the context of the strong first order ewpt that we will discuss in the next section .
to explain how the first order ewpt is strengthened in the mssm , we here give a brief review on the light stop scenario . to simplify the discussion , we use the high temperature expansion in the effective potential  @xcite . in the decoupling limit , @xmath73 is responsible for the electroweak symmetry breaking since @xmath78 . on the other hand , @xmath3
is mostly shared by @xmath79 in the lhs .
if the ewpt is first order , the critical temperature @xmath80 is given by the temperature at which the effective potential has two degenerate minima .
let @xmath13 be the nonzero vev at @xmath12 . from the argument using the high temperature expansion : @xmath81 in @xmath82 , one can see that @xmath83 can be enhanced when the quartic term in @xmath27 gets smaller and/or the coefficient of the cubic term with a negative coefficient ( denoted @xmath84 ) becomes larger .
the former implies that the light @xmath85 is favored in the decoupling / lhs limit .
the latter can be realized by the additional contributions from the bosons .
in fact , the effect of the lighter stop @xmath86 on @xmath84 is sizable due to the large top yukawa coupling constant ( @xmath87 ) and the degrees of freedom , i.e. , @xmath88 . in the high temperature expansion
, one can obtain @xmath89 where @xmath90 where @xmath91 and the @xmath92 contributions are neglected in the stop contribution , also the hierarchies between the soft susy breaking masses are implicitly assumed , namely , @xmath93 are taken to be consistent with the lep bounds on the higgs boson mass and the @xmath94 parameter . as a result of @xmath95 , which is necessary for the enhancement of the loop effect , the lighter stop
mass becomes less than the top mass @xmath96 . from eq .
( [ dele_hte ] ) , one can easily see that the no - mixing case @xmath97 maximizes the loop effect .
if we assume @xmath98 , we obtain @xmath99 , which is about 6 times as large as the sm contributions .    to make the analysis on the ewpt
precisely , the corrections from the daisy diagrams must be taken into account , which yield the temperature dependent terms in the field - dependent masses of particles .
for the light stop , we effectively have the following mass shift to leading order : @xmath100 where @xmath101 is positive and composed of the relevant couplings in the theory .
therefore , the ewpt would get weaker even if @xmath102 . nonetheless , as advocated in ref .
@xcite the choice of @xmath103 , which can induce the charge - color - breaking ( ccb ) vacuum , may still realize the same enhancement of the stop loop effect as outlined above . for simplicity
, we will not pursue this possibility and take @xmath104 putting the daisy diagrams aside in this article .
our analysis on the strength of the ewpt is expected to be the same , or might be more optimistic than the more realistic case depending on the model parameters .
the high temperature expansion makes it easy to see how the first order phase transition is strengthened analytically .
it is , however , untrustworthy to use the approximation when the masses of the particles in loops are somewhat larger than @xmath12 .
we thus adopt a different method .
although the numerical integrations contained in the definitions of @xmath82 are the standard way , it is an extremely time - consuming task .
therefore , we will use the following fitting functions in our numerical analysis : @xmath105 where the coefficients @xmath106 are determined by the least squared method . for @xmath107
, the errors of @xmath108 do not exceed @xmath109 for any @xmath110 , which is sufficient for our purpose . to determine @xmath12 and @xmath13 , we minimize @xmath27 with eq .
( [ i_fit ] ) in the three dimensional space @xmath111 numerically .
the first order ewpt begins at somewhat below @xmath12 . for the ewpt to proceed
, the radius of the bubble should be larger than some critical size , otherwise it would shrink by the surface tension of the bubble wall . the bubble of this critical size is called the critical bubble .
after nucleation of the critical bubbles , they start to percolate and eventually convert the symmetric phase into the broken phase if the supercooling is not too large .    from eq .
( [ gauge - higgs ] ) , the energy functional in the temporal gauge takes the form @xmath112.\end{aligned}\ ] ] here , we assume that the least energy has the pure - gauge configurations for @xmath113 and @xmath114 , hence @xmath115 . since a spherically symmetric configuration can give the least energy , the higgs fields depend only on radial coordinate @xmath116 .
the classical higgs fields are parameterized as @xmath117 where the gauge - invariant constant phase @xmath94 will be taken to make the boundary value @xmath118 at @xmath119 to vanish . to remove the energy source for the @xmath1 boson from the higgs current , the so - called  sourcelessness condition "
@xcite @xmath120 must be satisfied .
now let us introduce @xmath121 and @xmath122 .
one can easily see that only @xmath123 is a gauge - independent phase .
equation  ( [ sourcelessness ] ) can be rewritten as @xmath124 which is used to eliminate @xmath125 .
the energy functional is then reduced to @xmath126.\end{aligned}\ ] ] from this , the equations of motion ( eom ) for @xmath127 and @xmath123 are , respectively , given by @xmath128 the solutions can exist only when the temperature lies in the range @xmath129 , where @xmath130 is the temperature at which the higgs potential at the origin is destabilized in some direction .
since we focus on the @xmath0-conserving bubble walls  @xcite , @xmath131 is set to be zero in the following discussion .
the studies of the @xmath0-violating bubble walls can be found in refs .
the boundary conditions for eom are imposed in the symmetric ( @xmath119 ) and broken ( @xmath132 ) phases as @xmath133 it is convenient to parameterize the higgs profiles @xmath134 in terms of the dimensionless quantities @xmath135 then @xmath84 takes the form @xmath136,\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath137 . correspondingly , the eom are rewritten as @xmath138 with the boundary conditions @xmath139 we will comment on the numerical method to solve the eom for @xmath140 and @xmath141 in sec .
[ subsec : relaxation ] .
the bubble nucleation rate per unit time per unit volume is given by  @xcite @xmath142 where @xmath143 is the energy of the critical bubble at temperature @xmath4 .
note that this is a rate per unit volume .
we define the nucleation temperature @xmath15 as the temperature at which the rate of the nucleation of a critical bubble within a horizon volume is equal to the hubble parameter at that temperature .
since the horizon scale is roughly given by @xmath144 , the nucleation temperature is defined by @xmath145 where @xmath146 is the massless degrees of freedom at @xmath15 and @xmath147 is the planck mass ( @xmath148 gev ) . since a single bubble nucleated within the horizon volume
can not convert the whole region to the broken phase , the nucleation temperature defined by eq .
( [ def_tn ] ) simply gives an upper bound of the temperature at which the ewpt starts . to determine @xmath15 more precisely , simulations or the methods employed in ref .
@xcite are needed .    from eq .
( [ def_tn ] ) , it follows that @xmath149 roughly , @xmath150 is necessary for the development of the ewpt .      to solve the eom ( [ eom_h1 ] ) and ( [ eom_h2 ] ) under the boundary conditions ( [ bc_h ] )
, we use  relaxation methods . " to implement the relaxation methods successfully , the initial configurations of the bubbles are of great importance . here
, we take the kink - type ansatz for them , i.e. , @xmath151 where @xmath152 is the radius of the bubbles and @xmath153 is the bubble wall width . since the best values of @xmath152 and @xmath153 can vary as the temperature goes down ,
it is impossible to know them in advance .
nonetheless , it turns out that in most cases @xmath154 can give the successful initial configurations as long as @xmath4 lies somewhere between @xmath15 and @xmath12 . after obtaining the convergent solutions at some temperature , we use them as the initial configurations to search for the critical bubbles at the temperature which is near the previous one . by doing this process iteratively ,
we find @xmath15 .
as shown by manton in ref .
@xcite , the static and unstable classical solution with a finite energy can exist in the @xmath155 gauge theory .
such a configuration is called sphaleron , which has a maximal energy along the least energy path .
similar to the instanton process at zero temperature , the baryon number can be violated by the sphaleron process at finite temperature . although the instanton process , which is quantum tunneling , is highly suppressed and unobservable , the sphaleron process , which is thermal fluctuation , can be active at high temperature , especially before the electroweak symmetry is broken .    in order to avoid the washout of the generated bau after the phase transition
, the sphaleron process must be decoupled .
this condition can be obtained by demanding that the baryon number changing rate be smaller than the hubble parameter  @xcite @xmath156 where @xmath157 is number of generation , @xmath158 , @xmath159 is the negative mode of the fluctuations around sphaleron , @xmath160 is the @xmath161 coefficient  @xcite , @xmath162 and @xmath163 are contributions from the translational and rotational zero modes , respectively , @xmath164 is the sphaleron energy .
if we denote the sphaleron energy as @xmath165 , eq .
( [ sph_dec1 ] ) can be translated into @xmath166 . \label{sph_cond}\end{aligned}\ ] ] it should be noted that model dependent parameters other than the sphaleron energy in the right - hand side of eq .
( [ sph_cond ] ) contribute only logarithmically .    in the sm
@xcite , the sphaleron solution obtained with the tree - level higgs potential yields @xmath167  @xcite , @xmath168  @xcite , @xmath169  @xcite for @xmath170 . inserting these values into eq .
( [ sph_cond ] ) together with @xmath171 ,  @xmath172 , and @xmath173 gev , we find @xmath174 where @xmath175  @xcite is used . it is found that the contributions of the zero mode factors to @xmath2 can reach around 10% , while the contributions from the last three terms in the right - hand side of eq .
( [ sph_cond ] ) are only about 1% .
now we discuss the sphaleron decoupling condition in the mssm . as an example , we take @xmath176 , @xmath177 gev , @xmath178 gev , @xmath179 gev , @xmath180 gev , @xmath181 gev .
this parameter set is experimentally allowed as we will discuss in sec .
[ sec : numerical ] . to see the effects of the temperature dependence of the sphaleron solution and the zero mode factors on the sphaleron decoupling condition
, we consider the following three cases :    * the sphaleron decoupling condition without the zero mode factors based on the zero temperature potential @xmath182 .
* the sphaleron decoupling condition with the zero mode factors based on the zero temperature potential @xmath182 . * the sphaleron decoupling condition with the zero mode factors based on the full effective potential @xmath183 .
the result of each case is summarized in table [ tab : sph_cond ] .
@xmath184 is used in the right - hand side of eq .
( [ sph_cond ] ) .
as we see from i and ii , the contribution of the zero mode factors to the sphaleron decoupling condition can be as large as 10% level , which is the same as in the sm case . in case iii , @xmath185 is obtained , which is about 40% stronger than the usual rough estimate used in the literature .
we look into this case in more detail in the following .
the temperature dependences of @xmath186 , @xmath162 and @xmath163 are plotted in fig .
[ fig : sph_profile ] .
the endpoints of those curves correspond to those at @xmath12 .
the left panel shows that the sphaleron energy decreases as @xmath4 increases .
the change of the sphaleron energy is sizable around @xmath12 , hence which can be the dominant error of the sphaleron decoupling condition if we neglect this effect . on the other hand ,
as shown in the right panel the temperature dependences of @xmath162 and @xmath163 are mild and thus have little effects on @xmath2 . from this analysis
, we conclude that in order to evaluate the sphaleron decoupling condition within a 10% accuracy , the sphaleron solution and the zero mode factors at finite temperature must be taken into account .    here , we comment on the earlier work  @xcite .
the authors have evaluated sphaleron at finite temperature using the one - loop finite - temperature effective potential with the daisy resummations . in their analysis , only the energy was calculated and the zero mode factors were missing . to search for the possible region where the ewpt is strong first order , they used the following sphaleron decoupling condition  @xcite : @xmath187 in our calculation including the zero mode factors , this condition is translated into @xmath188 in case iii .
.the sphaleron decoupling conditions in the three cases i , ii , and iii . [ cols="^,^,^,^",options="header " , ]     [ tab : summary_dec ]
we have reanalyzed the strong first order ewpt in the mssm considering the experimental results such as the lep and the latest @xmath7 physics data .
@xmath2 was evaluated at both @xmath12 and @xmath15 in the lhs and ordinary decoupling limit . in the lhs with a light stop , the no - mixing scenario , which can maximize the stop thermal loop effect ,
can not be realized due to the severe constraint from @xmath18 .
combining with the other experimental data , especially the lep and @xmath189 mode , the allowed region becomes more constrained .
the sphaleron decoupling condition was also calculated using the one - loop effective potential at finite temperature .
we found that the contributions of the zero mode factors coming from the fluctuations around sphaleron can be as large as about 10% . in the phenomenologically allowed region , the typical values of the sphaleron decoupling conditions at @xmath15
are found to be @xmath190 .
it is observed that about 10% enhancement of @xmath2 is possible at @xmath15 in comparison with that at @xmath12 .
we find that @xmath191 in the lhs and @xmath192 in the decoupling limit .
however , such a strength of the ewpt is not enough to satisfy the sphaleron decoupling condition .
although electroweak baryogenesis in the mssm seems to be infeasible , it may be possible to circumvent the above negative conclusion .
some comments on the possible loopholes are in order .
firstly , the sphaleron decoupling condition is supposed to be imposed at the temperature at which the ewpt ends , which can relax the decoupling condition .
secondly , our calculations , which are based on the one - loop effective potential , can be modified by the higher - order loop contributions such as the two - loop effects  @xcite .
lastly , as we mentioned briefly in sec .  [ sec : ewpt ] the scalar potential can be extended in such a way that the lighter stop also has the vev , which can develop the ccb vacuum . in ref .
@xcite it is claimed that the ewpt is strong first order when the electroweak vacuum is metastable and the ccb vacuum is the global minimum .
since the time scale of the decay of the metastable vacuum is longer than the age of the universe , this scenario is viable .
the two - loop contributions are also included in their calculation .
it is interesting to investigate whether or not the ewpt is still strong enough to satisfy the sphaleron decoupling conditions that we have considered in this article .
a devoted study of the ewpt and the sphaleron decoupling condition based on the two - loop effective potential will be given elsewhere  @xcite .
here , we give the expressions of the mass - squared matrices of the stop and sbottom @xmath193 where @xmath87 and @xmath194 are the top and bottom yukawa couplings , respectively .        c.  amsler _ et al . _
[ particle data group ] , phys .
b * 667 * , 1 ( 2008 ) .
a.  d.  sakharov , pisma zh .
fiz .   * 5 * , 32 ( 1967 ) [ jetp lett .   * 5 * , 24 ( 1967  sopua,34,392 - 393.1991  ufnaa,161,61 - 64.1991 ) ] . for reviews ,
see a.  g.  cohen , d.  b.  kaplan and a.  e.  nelson , ann .
nucl .  part .
sci .   * 43 * , 27 ( 1993 ) ;   m.  quiros , helv .
acta * 67 * , 451 ( 1994 ) ;   v.  a.  rubakov and m.  e.  shaposhnikov , usp .  fiz .
nauk * 166 * , 493 ( 1996 ) [ phys .
39 * , 461 ( 1996 ) ] ;   k.  funakubo , prog .
* 96 * , 475 ( 1996 ) ;   m.  trodden , rev .
phys .   * 71 * , 1463 ( 1999 ) ;   w.  bernreuther , lect .
notes phys .
* 591 * , 237 ( 2002 ) .
m.  b.  gavela , p.  hernandez , j.  orloff and o.  pene , mod .
lett .   a * 9 * ( 1994 ) 795 ;   m.  b.  gavela , p.  hernandez , j.  orloff , o.  pene and c.  quimbay , nucl .  phys .
b * 430 * ( 1994 ) 382 ;   p.  huet and e.  sather , phys .
d * 51 * ( 1995 ) 379 ;   t.  konstandin , t.  prokopec and m.  g.  schmidt , nucl .
b * 679 * ( 2004 ) 246 .
k.  kajantie , m.  laine , k.  rummukainen and m.  e.  shaposhnikov , phys .
lett .   * 77 * , 2887 ( 1996 ) ;   k.  rummukainen , m.  tsypin , k.  kajantie , m.  laine and m.  e.  shaposhnikov , nucl .
b * 532 * , 283 ( 1998 ) ;   f.  csikor , z.  fodor and j.  heitger , phys .
lett .   * 82 * , 21 ( 1999 ) ;   y.  aoki , f.  csikor , z.  fodor and a.  ukawa , phys .
d * 60 * , 013001 ( 1999 ) .
m.  s.  carena , m.  quiros and c.  e.  m.  wagner , phys .
b * 380 * , 81 ( 1996 ) .
d.  delepine , j.  m.  gerard , r.  gonzalez felipe and j.  weyers , phys .
b * 386 * , 183 ( 1996 ) ;   p.  huet and a.  e.  nelson , phys .
d * 53 * , 4578 ( 1996 ) ;   b.  de carlos and j.  r.  espinosa , nucl .
b * 503 * , 24 ( 1997 ) ;   m.  s.  carena , m.  quiros , a.  riotto , i.  vilja and c.  e.  m.  wagner , nucl .  phys .
b * 503 * , 387 ( 1997 ) ;   a.  riotto , nucl .  phys .
b * 518 * , 339 ( 1998 ) ;   m.  s.  carena , m.  quiros and c.  e.  m.  wagner , nucl .
b * 524 * , 3 ( 1998 ) ;   k.  funakubo , a.  kakuto , s.  otsuki and f.  toyoda , prog .
phys .   * 99 * , 1045 ( 1998 ) ;   a.  riotto , phys .
d * 58 * , 095009 ( 1998 ) ;   k.  funakubo , prog .  theor .
* 101 * , 415 ( 1999 ) ;   k.  funakubo , s.  otsuki and f.  toyoda , prog .
phys .   * 102 * , 389 ( 1999 ) ;   j.  m.  cline , m.  joyce and k.  kainulainen , jhep * 0007 * , 018 ( 2000 ) ;   m.  s.  carena , j.  m.  moreno , m.  quiros , m.  seco and c.  e.  m.  wagner , nucl .  phys .
b * 599 * , 158 ( 2001 ) ;   m.  s.  carena , m.  quiros , m.  seco and c.  e.  m.  wagner , nucl .
b * 650 * , 24 ( 2003 ) ;   t.  prokopec , m.  g.  schmidt and s.  weinstock , annals phys .   *
314 * , 208 ( 2004 ) ;   t.  prokopec , m.  g.  schmidt and s.  weinstock , annals phys .   *
314 * , 267 ( 2004 ) ;   t.  konstandin , t.  prokopec and m.  g.  schmidt , nucl .
b * 716 * , 373 ( 2005 ) ;   c.  lee , v.  cirigliano and m.  j.  ramsey - musolf , phys .
d * 71 * , 075010 ( 2005 ) ;   v.  cirigliano , m.  j.  ramsey - musolf , s.  tulin and c.  lee , phys .
d * 73 * , 115009 ( 2006 ) ;   t.  konstandin , t.  prokopec , m.  g.  schmidt and m.  seco , nucl .
b * 738 * , 1 ( 2006 ) ;   v.  cirigliano , s.  profumo and m.  j.  ramsey - musolf , jhep * 0607 * , 002 ( 2006 ) ;   d.  j.  h.  chung , b.  garbrecht , m.  j.  ramsey - musolf and s.  tulin , phys .
lett .   * 102 * , 061301 ( 2009 ) . k.  funakubo , s.  tao and f.  toyoda , prog .  theor .
* 109 * , 415 ( 2003 ) .
m.  carena , g.  nardini , m.  quiros and c.  e.  m.  wagner , nucl .
b * 812 * , 243 ( 2009 ) .
k.  funakubo , a.  kakuto and k.  takenaga , prog .
* 91 * , 341 ( 1994 ) ;   m.  joyce , t.  prokopec and n.  turok , phys .
d * 53 * , 2930 ( 1996 ) ;   m.  joyce , t.  prokopec and n.  turok , phys .
d * 53 * , 2958 ( 1996 ) ;   j.  m.  cline , k.  kainulainen and a.  p.  vischer , phys .
d * 54 * , 2451 ( 1996 ) ;   j.  m.  cline and p.  a.  lemieux , phys .
d * 55 * , 3873 ( 1997 ) ;   s.  kanemura , y.  okada and e.  senaha , phys .
b * 606 * , 361 ( 2005 ) ;   l.  fromme , s.  j.  huber and m.  seniuch , jhep * 0611 * , 038 ( 2006 ) .
s.  j.  huber and m.  g.  schmidt , nucl .
b * 606 * , 183 ( 2001 ) ;   a.  menon , d.  e.  morrissey and c.  e.  m.  wagner , phys .
d * 70 * , 035005 ( 2004 ) ;   j.  kang , p.  langacker , t.  j.  li and t.  liu , phys .  rev .
lett .   * 94 * , 061801 ( 2005 ) ;   k.  funakubo , s.  tao and f.  toyoda , prog .
* 114 * , 369 ( 2005 ) ;   s.  j.  huber , t.  konstandin , t.  prokopec and m.  g.  schmidt , nucl .
b * 757 * , 172 ( 2006 ) ;   c.  balazs , m.  s.  carena , a.  freitas and c.  e.  m.  wagner , jhep * 0706 * , 066 ( 2007 )
. w.  s.  hou , arxiv:0803.1234 [ hep - ph ] ;   r.  fok and g.  d.  kribs , phys .
d * 78 * , 075023 ( 2008 ) ;   y.  kikukawa , m.  kohda and j.  yasuda , arxiv:0901.1962 [ hep - ph ] .
r.  barate _
[ lep working group for higgs boson searches and aleph collaboration and and ] , phys .
b * 565 * , 61 ( 2003 ) .
s.  schael _ et al . _
[ aleph collaboration and delphi collaboration and l3 collaboration and ] , eur .
j.   c * 47 * , 547 ( 2006 ) .
a.  belyaev , q.  h.  cao , d.  nomura , k.  tobe and c.  p.  yuan , phys .
lett .   * 100 * , 061801 ( 2008 ) .
m.  asano , s.  matsumoto , m.  senami and h.  sugiyama , phys .
b * 663 * , 330 ( 2008 ) ;   s.  g.  kim , n.  maekawa , k.  i.  nagao , k.  sakurai and t.  yoshikawa , phys .  rev .
d * 78 * , 075010 ( 2008 ) .
s.  g.  kim , n.  maekawa , a.  matsuzaki , k.  sakurai , a.  i.  sanda and t.  yoshikawa , phys .
d * 74 * , 115016 ( 2006 ) .
j.  f.  gunion , h.  e.  haber , g.  l.  kane and s.  dawson , `` the higgs hunter s guide , '' ;   `` errata for the higgs hunter s guide , '' arxiv : hep - ph/9302272 .
a.  pilaftsis and c.  e.  m.  wagner , nucl .
b * 553 * , 3 ( 1999 ) ;   m.  s.  carena , j.  r.  ellis , a.  pilaftsis and c.  e.  m.  wagner , nucl .
b * 586 * , 92 ( 2000 ) ;   m.  s.  carena , j.  r.  ellis , a.  pilaftsis and c.  e.  m.  wagner , phys .
b * 495 * , 155 ( 2000 ) ;   m.  s.  carena , j.  r.  ellis , a.  pilaftsis and c.  e.  m.  wagner , nucl .  phys .
b * 625 * , 345 ( 2002 ) ;   j.  s.  lee , a.  pilaftsis , m.  s.  carena , s.  y.  choi , m.  drees , j.  r.  ellis and c.  e.  m.  wagner , comput .
commun .
* 156 * , 283 ( 2004 ) .
j.  s.  lee , m.  carena , j.  ellis , a.  pilaftsis and c.  e.  m.  wagner , comput .
commun .   * 180 * , 312 ( 2009 ) .
l.  dolan and r.  jackiw , phys .
d * 9 * , 3320 ( 1974 ) .
k.  funakubo , a.  kakuto , s.  otsuki , k.  takenaga and f.  toyoda , prog .
theor .  phys .
* 94 * , 845 ( 1995 ) ;   k.  funakubo , a.  kakuto , s.  otsuki and f.  toyoda , prog .
phys .   * 98 * , 427 ( 1997 ) .
j.  m.  moreno , m.  quiros and m.  seco , nucl .
b * 526 * , 489 ( 1998 ) .
s.  j.  huber , p.  john , m.  laine and m.  g.  schmidt , phys .
b * 475 * , 104 ( 2000 ) ;   s.  j.  huber , p.  john and m.  g.  schmidt , eur .
j.   c * 20 * , 695 ( 2001 ) .
a.  d.  linde , nucl .
b * 216 * ( 1983 ) 421 [ erratum - ibid .
b * 223 * ( 1983 ) 544 ] .
m.  e.  carrington and j.  i.  kapusta , phys .
d * 47 * , 5304 ( 1993 ) .
n.  s.  manton , phys .
d * 28 * , 2019 ( 1983 ) .
p.  arnold and l.  d.  mclerran , phys .
d * 36 * , 581 ( 1987 ) .
l.  carson , x.  li , l.  d.  mclerran and r.  t.  wang , phys .
d * 42 * , 2127 ( 1990 ) .
g.  d.  moore , phys .
d * 59 * , 014503 ( 1999 ) .
since the effects of the @xmath26 part on the sphaleron energy is less than a few percent  @xcite , we neglect it in this article .
f.  r.  klinkhamer and r.  laterveer , z.  phys .
c * 53 * , 247 ( 1992 ) .
f.  r.  klinkhamer and n.  s.  manton , phys .
d * 30 * , 2212 ( 1984 ) .
l.  carson and l.  d.  mclerran , phys .
d * 41 * , 647 ( 1990 ) .
t.  akiba , h.  kikuchi and t.  yanagida , phys .
d * 40 * , 588 ( 1989 ) .
j.  m.  moreno , d.  h.  oaknin and m.  quiros , nucl .
b * 483 * , 267 ( 1997 ) .
m.  e.  shaposhnikov , nucl .
b * 287 * , 757 ( 1987 ) ;   m.  e.  shaposhnikov , nucl .
b * 299 * , 797 ( 1988 ) ;   a.  i.  bochkarev and m.  e.  shaposhnikov , mod .
lett .   a * 2 * , 417 ( 1987 ) ;   m.  e.  shaposhnikov , phys .
b * 277 * , 324 ( 1992 ) [ erratum - ibid .
b * 282 * , 483 ( 1992 ) ] .
t.  n.  phenomena , higgs working group , for the cdf collaboration and dzero collaboration , arxiv:0903.4001 [ hep - ex ] .
y.  okada , m.  yamaguchi and t.  yanagida , prog .
phys .   * 85 * , 1 ( 1991 ) ;   j.  r.  ellis , g.  ridolfi and f.  zwirner , phys .
b * 257 * , 83 ( 1991 ) ;   r.  barbieri and m.  frigeni , phys .  lett .
b * 258 * , 395 ( 1991 ) ;   y.  okada , m.  yamaguchi and t.  yanagida , phys .
b * 262 * , 54 ( 1991 ) ;   h.  e.  haber and r.  hempfling , phys .
lett .   * 66 * , 1815 ( 1991 ) ;   j.  r.  ellis , g.  ridolfi and f.  zwirner , phys .
b * 262 * , 477 ( 1991 ) .
e.  barberio _ et al .
_ [ heavy flavor averaging group ] , arxiv:0808.1297 [ hep - ex ] .
w.  s.  hou , phys .
d * 48 * , 2342 ( 1993 ) .
j.  r.  espinosa , nucl .
b * 475 * , 273 ( 1996 ) ;   d.  bodeker , p.  john , m.  laine and m.  g.  schmidt , nucl .
b * 497 * , 387 ( 1997 ) .
k.  funakubo and e.  senaha , in preparation .