many statistical measures have been developed to distinguish between the various cosmological models , ranging from direct measures of the power spectrum and correlation function from redshift surveys , to measures of velocity dispersion , bulk flows , and mach number from peculiar velocity surveys ( cf .
, @xcite for a review ) .
each of these measures is designed to be sensitive to different aspects of various models , such as @xmath0 , the initial power spectrum , or the gaussian character of the initial phase distribution .
one can get an intuitive understanding of the dependencies of different statistics by considering the following example .
compare n - body simulations of four different cosmological models : standard cdm , open cdm , cdm + @xmath1 , and a pure hdm model , the details of which are given in  3 .
each simulation is normalized to have the same value of @xmath3 , the standard deviation of the mass fluctuations within an 8 @xmath4 sphere , where @xmath5 is the hubble parameter in units of 100 @xmath6 .
the two point correlation function , @xmath7 , for each model is presented in figure 1a . despite their differences in initial power spectra ,
the final correlation functions are similar in all models . in general
, the correlation function does not depend strongly on @xmath0 if one retains the freedom to set the @xmath3 normalization .
in contrast , figure 1b shows the pairwise velocity dispersion , @xmath8 , as a function of separation for the same set of models .
a strong differentiation between the low and high @xmath0 models is apparent .
the velocity dispersion is easy to compute in simulations , but is difficult to measure in the geometric projection of phase space that is measured by redshift surveys . the traditional way to measure
the small - scale velocity dispersion of galaxies is via the anisotropy it introduces in the redshift - space two - point correlation function ( @xcite ; @xcite ; @xcite ; @xcite ) .
however , as it is a pair - weighted statistic , it is dominated by the densest regions , which are necessarily rare .
thus one finds large variance between estimates of the small - scale velocity dispersion between different samples ( @xcite ; @xcite ; @xcite ; @xcite ) , indicating that the small - scale velocity dispersion measured in this way is not very robust .
attempts have been made to use direct measures of peculiar velocities of galaxies as a constraint on @xmath9 ( e.g. , @xcite , @xcite ) , but other than the nearby universe , where the velocity field is observed to be very quiet ( @xcite ; @xcite ; @xcite ) , the errors on the individual peculiar velocity measurements swamp the signal from @xmath9 .
the primary goal of this paper is to present a statistic  the redshift dispersion ( @xmath10)that captures @xmath11 in a way which is naturally applied to volume limited samples drawn from redshift surveys . in the subsequent sections we motivate and present our redshift dispersion statistic .
again , because it is a pair - weighted statistic , computing @xmath11 by averaging over all densities results in a value heavily weighted by the densest regions .
however , this problem can be alleviated if the dispersion can be calculated _ as a function of density_. the theoretical motivation for our statistic stems from the cosmic virial theorem ( cvt ) , derived in peebles ( 1976a , hereafter p76 ) , which relates @xmath11 to @xmath12 and @xmath13 . in
2 we show that the cvt can be applied to subsets of particles in a system which correspond to surfaces of constant density . many assumptions are necessary to obtain the results shown in  2 , not all of which are obvious . in
3 we explore the relationships derived in  2 with simple n - body simulations , suggesting that the results of  2 hold over a wide range of scales .
the redshift dispersion is entirely independent of the results of  2 and  3 , which provide a context for the redshift dispersion that would otherwise be an unmotivated simulation based statistic .
 4 describes how to compute the redshift dispersion from a redshift survey .
 5 contains our conclusions and remarks on future work .
as will be shown in  4 , the redshift dispersion probes the pairwise peculiar velocity dispersion in regions of different density and is designed for comparing simulated and observed redshift surveys . in this section we attempt to provide a theoretical context and some motivation .
one of the main challenges of working with the pairwise velocity dispersion arises from its strong density dependence .
intuitively , both the number of galaxies and the velocity dispersion should be highest in the densest regions .
thus , averaging over all densities will give results dominated by rare , high density peaks .
this problem can be eliminated if the dispersion is calculated as a function of density .    in the case of
clustered , gravitationally interacting particles there exists a scaling relation between the velocity dispersion on small scales @xmath14 averaged over pairs separated by a distance @xmath15 , and the two point correlation function @xmath7 , the excess fractional probability of finding two particles with separation @xmath15 .
this result is contained in the cvt derived in p76 ( see also @xcite ; @xcite ; @xcite ) , which can be written ( r ) ( r ) r^2 .
several assumptions are used to obtain eq .
( 1 ) ( see p76 ) , including that @xmath13 is given by a power law @xmath16 ; @xmath17 , implying @xmath18 ; the three - point correlation function @xmath19 is given by a symmetrized product of the two - point correlation function ( see eq .
[ a23 ] ) ; and the mass of each galaxy is concentrated on scales smaller than their separation .
the validity of these assumptions is not obvious ( @xcite ) . for an excellent discussion of the implications of extended dark matter halos on the cvt , see bartlett & blanchard ( 1996 ) .
in addition , we are assuming that the _ galaxy _ velocity field is unbiased with respect to that of the dark matter .
while theoretical investigations have given strong suggestions that a velocity bias of order 2030% may exist ( @xcite , @xcite , @xcite ) , the difficulty in reliably tracing galaxies in simulations has prevented a good estimate of its magnitude ( @xcite ) .
for the motivational purposes of this paper , let us keep these assumptions as we work to derive the density dependence of the cvt .    to rewrite eq .
( 1 ) in terms of the density requires some new notation .
let @xmath20 denote the cross - correlation of particle sets @xmath21 and @xmath22 .
the two - point ( auto ) correlation function of all particles in a system @xmath23 can be written @xmath24 .
the correlation function can also be written as the average of the individual cross correlations ( r ) = 1 n _ _
i _ ( r ) , where @xmath25 is the total number of particles .
we can write down a similar expression for the velocity dispersion ( r ) = 1 n _ _ i ( r ) , where @xmath26 is the variance of the pairwise velocity between particle @xmath27 and all particles in @xmath23 which lie a distance @xmath15 from @xmath27 .
we show in appendix a that these expressions lead to a generalization of the cvt that holds for each particle : ( r ) _ ( r ) r^2 .
if the cvt holds for each particle , then it holds for any subset , @xmath28 : ( r ) _ ( r ) r^2 , where ( r ) _ i ( r ) , and _
( r ) _ i _ ( r ) .
let @xmath29 be the number of particles within a radius @xmath15 of the @xmath27th particle , and @xmath30 the set of all particles for which @xmath31 .
for this subset , the cvt is ( n , r ) = c_1 ( n , r ) r^2 , where @xmath32 , @xmath33 and @xmath34 is given by eq .
the quantity @xmath35 is related to the expected number of particles within a radius @xmath15 around any particle by _
0^r [ 1 + ( n , r ) ] 4 r^2 dr = n , where @xmath36 is the mean number of particles per unit volume .
if @xmath37 and @xmath38 ( as assumed in the original p76 derivation ) , the above expression yields ( n , r ) ( r ) = n , where @xmath39 .    inserting the above expression into eq .
( 8) yields ( n , r ) = c_1 c_2 n/(r)^1/3 , where @xmath40 .
the above expression shows that the pairwise velocity dispersion is proportional to @xmath12 and the local density ( through @xmath41 ) smoothed on a scale @xmath15 .
finally , since we are working with @xmath29 , which is the number of particles _ within _ a volume of radius @xmath15 centered on a particle , it is convenient to work with a similar velocity dispersion
. let @xmath42 be the average pairwise velocity dispersion of all the particles _ within _ a volume of radius @xmath15 .
@xmath42 can be obtained by integrating @xmath43 under the same assumptions used to derive eq .
( 1 ) ( r ) = c_1 c_3 = c_3 ( r ) , where @xmath44 . substituting eq .
( 12 ) into ( 11 ) results in ( n , r ) n/(r)^1/3 where the constant of proportionality is equal to c_1 c_2
c_3 = , and @xmath45 and @xmath46 are defined in appendix a.    the above derivation of eq .
( 13 ) holds whether or not the quantities are averaged over one or many particles with the same density .
the above velocity dispersion is computed with respect to the velocity of the central particle , @xmath47 .
the velocity dispersion can also be computed with respect to the mean velocity of the particles in a cell , @xmath48 . in a given cell , these two values of
the velocity dispersion will differ by @xmath49 .
the distribution of these differences for all cells in @xmath30 will peak at zero and have a width on the order of @xmath50 .
subsequent averaging over many cells with the same density will result in zero net difference .
thus , eq .
( 13 ) also applies for velocity dispersions computed with respect to the mean velocity in the cell if the results are averaged over many cells in @xmath30 .
( 13 ) conveniently relates two readily computable quantities : the velocity dispersion with respect to the mean velocity in a cell of radius @xmath15 to the number of particles in the cell , which is proportional to the density . in the next section ,
we explore the above form of the cvt with n - body simulations .
the previous section presented a derivation for a relationship linking the velocity dispersion to the local density . in this section
we explore the range over which eq .
( 13 ) holds using n - body simulations of specific cosmological models with different initial power spectra .
we are particularly interested in the dependence on @xmath12 when the number of objects is of the same order as expected from volume limited redshift surveys .
the simulations we consider are designed to probe a variety of popular cosmological models .
the four models are : standard cdm with @xmath51 , @xmath52 ; hdm with @xmath53 , @xmath54 ; open cdm with @xmath55 , @xmath56 ; and cdm + @xmath1 with @xmath57 , @xmath58 , @xmath56 .
the open cdm and cdm + @xmath1 models provide two alternatives to standard cdm that increase the ratio of large scale to small scale power .
they differ in evolution in that structure formation `` freezes out '' at an earlier epoch in the open model as the expansion rate exceeds the rate of gravitational collapse .
thus , to achieve the same level of structure today , collapse must begin earliest in the open cdm model , later in the cdm + @xmath1 model , and latest in standard cdm model .
while hdm is not generally considered a viable theory , it provides a significantly different power spectrum shape with which to explore our ideas .
the initial conditions are designed to treat the models , as much as possible , on an even footing .
all models assume a harrison - zeldovich primordial power spectrum , and use the same random phases for the fourier modes to generate the initial density field from their respective power spectra .
the cdm transfer functions are taken from efstathiou , bond , & white ( 1992 , eq .
[ 7 ] ) with the parameter @xmath59 .
although this function was not intended for use in open models , it fits more detailed calculations to within 5% ( d. n. spergel 1995 , private communication ) .
the hdm transfer function is taken from holtzman ( 1989 , table 2a , line 52 ) . as stated in
 1 , each model is normalized to have the same linear value of @xmath60 , so as to provide similar correlation strengths and to isolate out the velocity dependencies .
although this normalization does not match that predicted from the observed fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background for some or all of the models ( c.f .
, @xcite ; @xcite ) , it roughly equalizes the amount of power on the scales where this paper is focused .
each of the simulations follows @xmath61 dark matter particles within a periodic cube of comoving size 100 @xmath4 ( 10,000 @xmath2 ) on a side .
the p3mg3a code ( @xcite ) , which implements the p@xmath62 m algorithm ( @xcite ; @xcite ) on the grape-3a hardware board ( @xcite ) , is used to evolve the simulations from redshift @xmath63 to @xmath64 using 1200 time steps .
a plummer force law with softening parameter of 156 @xmath65 is used for the gravitational interactions and the mass per particle is @xmath66 .
each simulation took approximately 2 hours to run on a sun sparc 10/51 workstation with a 4 chip grape-3a board .    the ideal way to construct an artificial galaxy catalog
is by identifying concentrations of gaseous and stellar material in high resolution n - body / hydrodynamic simulations .
current computer technology and algorithms now permit such simulations on the scale of small groups of galaxies ( @xcite ) . however ,
at the present time the realm of large volumes remain the domain of strictly gravitational n - body codes .
identifying galaxies from dark matter halos is a significant problem that may not be solvable ( @xcite ) ; although a variety of of impressive methods have been developed ( @xcite ; @xcite ) .
however , to keep things as simple as possible we choose a model in which mass traces light , and each particle is assumed to be a galaxy .
this approach neglects important processes , such as mass and velocity bias , the dependence of bias on cosmological models , and the interaction of dark matter halos .
nevertheless this approach should be sufficient for our purely motivational purposes .
future simulations which can both cover large volumes and resolve galaxies hydrodynamically will hopefully clarify the nature of the bias .    to extract the velocity dispersion of a particular surface of constant density , consider a set of particles where @xmath67 and @xmath68 are the position and velocity of the @xmath27th particle .
place spherical cells of radius @xmath15 on a uniform grid over the entire domain .
let @xmath69 be the number of particles in cell @xmath70 .
the correct way to compute the velocity dispersion in a cell is with respect to the mean motion of the particles . as was argued in  2 , eq .
( 13 ) will apply if the results are averaged over many cells with the same density .
denote the mean velocity in the @xmath70th cell by @xmath71 ; the velocity variance , @xmath72 , is then @xmath73 averaged over all particles in the cell . if @xmath30 is the set of all cells having @xmath41 particles ( @xmath74 ) , then the average velocity and variance as a function of @xmath41 is _
v(n , r ) _ j _
n    number of particles in the set @xmath30 ( note : @xmath75 ) .
these equations provide a specific prescription for computing the density dependence of the mean velocity and the velocity dispersion , which can readily be applied to the simulations .
plots of @xmath76 and @xmath77 are shown in figure  2 for the four models .
the cell size is @xmath78 , corresponding to @xmath79 .
all distances are expressed in units of @xmath2 .
figure  2 demonstrates three important points : both @xmath80 and @xmath81 are independent of the shape of the initial power spectrum ; @xmath80 is independent of the local density , while @xmath81 is proportional to the density ; and @xmath80 and @xmath81 have the same strong @xmath12 dependence that @xmath11 demonstrated in figure  1b .
formally , the power spectrum independence is explained by the derivation of the cvt ( see appendix a ) .
the velocity dispersion depends upon the evolved power spectrum , which is essentially indistinguishable between models ( figure  1 ) .
moreover , any remaining difference between models is encoded in the density distribution function , which is not apparent when density is the _ dependent _ variable in figure  2 .
to explore the range over which eq .
( 13 ) is valid , @xmath80 and @xmath50 were calculated over the range of cell sizes @xmath82 , corresponding to @xmath83 .
we obtained the following empirical fit for the mean velocity magnitude _
v ^1/2 /^ .
where @xmath84 . as @xmath80 already contains the desired @xmath12 dependence , it is convenient to represent @xmath81 in terms of the normalized velocity dispersion @xmath85 , with the resulting fit _ v^2/_v^2 n/^1/3 , which agrees with the theory to within the small factor @xmath86 .    the quality of the fits can be observed by plotting @xmath80 and @xmath87 against the scaled density ( @xmath88 ) , for each value of @xmath15 .
figure  3a shows the ratio of @xmath80 to the fitted value computed from eq .
( 17 ) for the @xmath89 and @xmath90 cdm models .
each line of data corresponds to a different value of @xmath15 , and has been offset from the next by one unit .
figure  3b shows a similar plot for the normalized velocity dispersion @xmath91 .
the solid lines are the best fits given by eq .
( 18 ) ; this has not been divided out .
the larger scatter at higher densities and smaller scales is due to the small number of cells contributing to the calculation at these values .
the key point to observe from figure  3a is how well the data points follow the horizontal lines corresponding to their fitted values .
the fits to the data shown in figure  3 are remarkable , considering that the range includes cells with underdensities ( @xmath92 ) of @xmath93 on scales of @xmath94 and cells with overdensities of nearly 200 on scales of @xmath95 . furthermore
, the scaling of @xmath81 is almost exactly that derived from the cvt , indicating that eq .
( 13 ) holds over a large range of scales and densities , even when @xmath96 .
the purpose of  2 was to theoretically motivate the local density and @xmath12 dependence of @xmath50 . in
3 the scaling relations in  2 were explored with simple n - body simulations .
in addition ,   2 and 3 have introduced the ideas which allow us to describe the main point of this paper  the redshift dispersion .
the formalism we have developed so far can not be directly applied to observations due to the geometric projection of a six dimensional phase space into a three dimensional redshift survey .
the redshift of galaxies represents the only probe , albeit indirect , of the peculiar velocity .
thus , any statistic that desires to take advantage of the properties of @xmath50 must be defined with the specific geometry of redshift space in mind . in this section
we now describe the redshift dispersion , a statistic with the aim of being readily measurable from volume limited samples taken from redshift surveys and which captures the essence of @xmath50 .    now let us define quantities analogous to those in  3 , but for redshift space .
consider a volume limited sample from a survey out to a maximum redshift of @xmath97 .
each data point consists of two angular coordinates on the celestial sphere and a redshift .
let us define cells within which to measure density and velocity dispersion in projection on the celestial sphere . the cell @xmath70 consists of a cone emanating from the origin with solid angle @xmath98 around the cell center .
the number of points in the cone @xmath70 is @xmath69 and is proportional to the projected density on the sky .
the mean and the variance of the redshifts in the cone are denoted @xmath99 and @xmath72 , which are depicted schematically in figure 4 .
if @xmath30 is the set of all cones with @xmath74 , then the average and variance of the redshift as a function of @xmath41 is _ z(n , ) _ j _
n u_j . and
^2_z(n , ) _ j _
n ^2_j . in analogy with eqs .  ( 15 ) and ( 16 ) .
the efficacy with which the @xmath10 statistic might distinguish between models is examined with the simulations discussed in  3 .
the simulations were transformed into redshift - space using @xmath100 , which is equal to one half of the simulation box size .
since the data are periodic , the origin can be placed at any point , allowing multiple perspectives to be drawn from a single simulation .
we computed @xmath101 for @xmath102 and @xmath103 cdm models .
the angular cell size was @xmath104 ( @xmath105 ) , and the cell centers were computed by creating a pseudo - uniform grid of points across the celestial sphere ( baumgardner & frederickson 1985 ) .
the data have been averaged over 27 different origins regularly distributed throughout the domain , and error bars computed from the standard deviation of this averaging .
the @xmath10 curves are plotted in figure  5 .
as with the velocity dispersion in figure  1b , the redshift dispersion shows a strong separation between the low and high @xmath12 models .
the differences become apparent at moderate angular over - densities ( @xmath106 ) .
the shape of the curves in figure  5 is due to the combined spatial and peculiar velocity contributions to @xmath10 , as is illustrated in figure  6 for the @xmath53 cdm simulation .
we know the full six - dimensional position of each galaxy in phase space in the n - body simulation , and thus can separate these two contributions . at low overdensities ,
@xmath10 is dominated by the spatial separation of the particles , as is indicated by the solid points in figure  6 ; the spatial component scales approximately as @xmath107 , due to the more tightly bound nature of denser systems . at higher overdensities the peculiar velocity dominates , scaling
approximately as @xmath108 , which is consistent with results of  2 and  3 . for smaller values of @xmath12
the spatial component behaves the same , but the peculiar velocity component is down by a factor of @xmath109 .
these results indicate that the greatest separation in the dispersion between models with different values of @xmath12 will occur in the denser regions ; so it is important that we sample many modestly dense regions , which requires a large volume .
in addition , to minimize projection effects the sample should not be too deep ( i.e. , @xmath97 not too large ) .
therefore , to apply the @xmath10 statistic requires a dense sample over a wide field .
if believable simulations of galaxies can be developed it might be possible to constrain models with the same final correlation function by varying @xmath0 in the simulations and finding the best fit to the observations .
for any one point , figure  5 indicates an error of about 0.15 in @xmath0 . using many points along the curve
, the errors may be small enough to significantly constrain the value of @xmath0 .
the current redshift surveys do not have enough data to attempt such a comparison . to get the level of separation shown in figure  5 required @xmath110 particles .
we have calculated @xmath101 from the iras 1.2 jansky survey ( @xcite ) , but a volume - limited sample taken from this survey contains only 800 galaxies at best .
the error bars from an 800 point sample in the simulations were too large to be able to distinguish between high and low @xmath12 models .
fortunately , a substantial increase in the amount of data available will be brought about by the sloan digital sky survey ( sdss ) .
the sdss will obtain spectra and measure the redshifts of the @xmath111 galaxies down to @xmath112 ( @xcite ) .
we can estimate the size of a volume - limited sample taken from the sdss using the schechter luminosity function @xmath113 fitted to the stromlo - apm survey ( @xcite ) _
s(l ) dl = ^ y^ e^-y dy ,   y = l / l^ , where @xmath114 , @xmath115 , and @xmath116 are parameters obtained from the fit .
the number of galaxies in a given volume , @xmath117 , brighter than @xmath118 , @xmath119 , can be computed by integrating the luminosity function n(v , l_0 ) = v
_ l_0^ ( l ) dl = v _
y^ e^-y dy = v ^ ( + 1,y_0 ) , where @xmath120 . for a volume
limited survey , @xmath118 is the luminosity an object would have if it had an apparent magnitude @xmath121 and was located at the volume edge @xmath97 ( @xmath122 ) . from this definition
it follows that y_0 = z^2_10 ^ 0.4 ( m^ - m_0 + 15 ) , where @xmath121 is the apparent magnitude limit of the survey .
the stromlo - apm survey was taken in the @xmath123 band , while the sloan will use the @xmath124 band .
the two can be equated by the approximate relation @xmath125 .
however , we set @xmath126 which gives a better value for the estimated total number of galaxies in the survey ( @xmath111 ) . inserting @xmath127 into eq .
( 23 ) gives @xmath128 .
setting @xmath129 results in @xmath130 .
this number might in fact be appreciably larger if there are many more faint galaxies than eq .
( 22 ) implies , and has been suggested by recent surveys for low - surface brightness galaxies ( cf . , @xcite ) . however , these galaxies are unlikely to have redshifts measured as part of the sdss
.    one could substantially increase the number of galaxies in a volume - limited survey of fixed depth by dropping the requirement that it include the origin .
figure  7 plots the expected number of galaxies in a series of volume limited shells for sdss and shows that a redshift shell between @xmath131 and @xmath132 would include almost @xmath133 galaxies !
ultimately , applying the redshift dispersion statistic to the sdss could provide many data points for comparing with simulations and perhaps constraining @xmath0 .
the @xmath10 curves can be evaluated for many angular sizes and redshift shells for both the sdss and for several next generation , high resolution , n - body / hydrodynamic simulations with different values of @xmath12 .
since the number of estimated objects in the sdss is the same order or more as the simulations shown in figure  5 , one might expect to obtain an equivalent separation between models for each value
. it should be interesting to compare @xmath10 measured in different simulations with the sdss as a function of @xmath41 , @xmath134 and shell geometry .
our goal has been to present a new statistic  the redshift dispersion ( @xmath10)that is sensitive to @xmath12 and is well suited for comparing real and simulated volume limited samples from redshift surveys . given the proper data , @xmath10 is easy to compute and can be applied on many scales without applying arbitrary assumptions .
we have used low resolution simulations , which are sufficient for our motivational purposes , to do a simple exploration of @xmath10 , which suggests that applying it to the sdss may be worthwhile .
in addition , with the right simulations , it might be possible to constrain @xmath12 in models where the simulations match the observed final correlation function .
we have shown that the pairwise velocity dispersion is intrinsically related to the local density and @xmath12 . in  2 and appendix
a it is shown that the cvt holds for each particle in a system and subsequently for any subset of particles , if we are careful to define the velocity dispersion and correlation function for these subsets appropriately .
the density dependence of the velocity dispersion can be extracted by looking at subsets of particles of a given local density ( see eq .  13 ) . knowing how @xmath50 depends upon the local density gives an indication as to why the standard approach of averaging @xmath11 over all densities is highly sensitive to the presence of rare density peaks .
exploring eq .
( 13 ) with n - body simulations of several cosmological models indicates that it holds over a wide range of length scales , @xmath135 .
our redshift dispersion statistic is simply the redshift - space analog of the quantity @xmath136 .
we have treated our galaxies as equal mass particles containing all the mass , ignoring the hypothesized global stochastic mapping from the dark matter mass and velocity distribution to the distribution of galaxies ( i.e. the mass and velocity bias functions ) , which may differ among the models .
a more general treatment would estimate the mass and velocity bias in each model and normalize the models such that the galaxy correlations , not the dark matter correlations , are similar . at best
, reliable estimates of these bias functions await the next generation of simulations where galaxies can be resolved within statistically meaningful volumes .
however , there are several arguments as to why the differences in the biases between models may not strongly affect our work .
first , the initial power spectra of currently favored hierarchical models all have similar slopes on galaxy formation scales .
hence , the initial conditions of galaxy formation  and the resulting bias  may be similar .
in addition , the hdm model , which has a very different initial power spectrum , has a similar final correlation function , which suggests that the final power on small scales is dominated by non - linear processes which erase initial differences .
any velocity bias which arises through dynamical friction should be similar for models evolved to similar clustering levels .
if velocity bias is related to galaxy formation sites preferentially near potential wells , then velocity bias could depend on mass density and the efficacy of this measure could be diminished . however , both types of bias appear to be strong only in the most non - linear regions ( @xmath137 ) ( @xcite ) , while our study focuses on the mildly non - linear regimes ( @xmath138 ) .
high resolution , hydrodynamic simulations that include detailed galaxy formation should improve our understanding of bias and how it changes from model to model .
intuitively , any bias , by eliminating objects in the underdense regions , should have the overall effect of shifting the data points in figure  5 to the left .
higher resolution will also incorporate the interactions of dark matter halos , which may significantly effect the three point correlation function on galaxy scales ( see @xcite ) .
all of these effects indicate more detailed simulations , beyond what is currently available , may be necessary for the actual application of the redshift dispersion .
the next logical step is to attempt to apply @xmath10 to denser redshift surveys than the iras 1.2 jansky survey . in the mean time
, additional studies on larger volume , higher resolution n - body simulations would be useful , but perhaps overkill until a suitable redshift survey becomes available . also , it is not clear that using dark matter halos without the proper means for identifying galaxies would add to these results .
further exploration should also be done on a wide variety of survey geometries . here
, we only looked at a single small sphere .
it is quite possible that a larger sphere or a shell might be the optimal shape to balance the tradeoff between high density and large numbers of clusters that make @xmath10 work best .
we would like to thank david spergel and our editor ed bertschinger for their helpful comments , and john baumgardner for the use of his icosahedral mesh code .
we gratefully acknowledge the grand challenge cosmology consortium and grants of computer time at the san diego and pittsburgh supercomputer centers .
mas acknowledges the support of the wm keck foundation , the alfred p. sloan foundation , and nasa astrophysical theory grant nag5 - 2882 .
this work was supported by nsf grants asc 9318185 and ast 9108103 .
in  2 we showed that the cvt applied to sets of particles provided it holds for individual particles . to prove the latter result we return to peebles original derivation ( see p76 ) .
@xcite later rederived the cosmic virial theorem by placing it in the context of the bbgky hierarchy .
we choose to use the earlier approach because of its simpler , more intuitive nature .
the essential derivation is still that found in p76 , but a few minor modifications have been added to elaborate key steps in the derivation .    the derivation of the cvt proceeds in the following manner .
first , an equation linking the velocity , acceleration , and correlation function of a general particle system is obtained from the conservation of phase space density .
second , the accelerations are linked through gravity to the two and three point correlation functions .
third , the assumptions of a cosmological system are applied to the general particle equation to obtain the scaling between the velocity dispersion and the density .
the key modification that we have made in order to show that this result applies for individual particles in the system is to replace the entire phase space with the phase space of a single particle .      to start , consider a system of particles with the position , velocity , and acceleration of the @xmath27th particle given by @xmath67 , @xmath68 , and @xmath139 .
strictly speaking , these are not phase space variables , but represent a three - dimensional single - particle distribution and its evolution in time .
now consider any two particles @xmath27 and @xmath70 having relative position , velocity , and acceleration : @xmath140 , @xmath141 , @xmath142 , as shown in figure  8a . the rate of change in the distance , @xmath15 , between the two particles obeys = v_r = / r , and the acceleration = ( + v^2 - ( /r)^2)/r = ( + v_t^2)/r , where @xmath143 . for a sufficiently large system ,
the number of particles found in a volume of phase space centered on the @xmath27th particle is @xmath144 , where @xmath145 is the phase space density of all pairs connected to the particle @xmath27 .
the function @xmath145 is related to the two point correlation function by dr ddf _ = ( 1 + _ ) 4 r^2 dr , where @xmath36 is the mean number density and @xmath146 is the isotropic two point correlation function of the @xmath27th particle , which is defined with respect to the joint probability @xmath147 .    for convenience , we now explicitly drop the subscript @xmath148 notation : @xmath149 , @xmath150 , and @xmath151 .
it should be understood that all these quantities are relative to the @xmath27th particle , including the velocities and accelerations .
having defined the particle system and the phase space density , @xmath152 , it is now possible to look at the time evolution of the particle within the system .
the integral of @xmath152 links it to @xmath13 giving the total number of particles with separation between @xmath15 and @xmath153 .
the number of particles with separation less than @xmath15 is n(r , t ) = _ 0^r dr ddf . at some later time @xmath154
there exists a @xmath155 such that n(r , t ) = n(r + , t + ) . without loss of generality , we could have just as well started at the point @xmath156 , and chosen @xmath154 and @xmath155 to satisfy n(r - , t ) = n(r , t + ) , which allows us to expand around @xmath15 and @xmath157 .
subtracting @xmath158 from the above expression , we have -[n(r , t ) - n(r - , t ) ] = n(r , t + ) - n(r , t ) .
the right side can be readily expanded in powers of @xmath154 and is simply @xmath159 .
likewise , from the definition of @xmath158 the left side is given by -[n(r , t ) - n(r - , t ) ] = - dd_r-^r dr f. the taylor expansion of the integral gives _
r^r dr f & & + & & f - ^2 f + & & f + ^2 ( f - ^2 f ) , where the last step made use of the following expansion for @xmath155 = + ^2 +  , which is valid for _ fixed _ @xmath160 and @xmath161 .
matching powers of @xmath154 gives an expression for @xmath162 & = & - dd(- ^2 ) f + & = & - dd f + dd ^2 f + & = & - 4 , where we have used @xmath163 , but @xmath164 .
the time derivative of @xmath165 can be written = 4 _ 0^r dr r^2 = 4 _ 0^r dr r^2 , which is combined with the previous expression to give - r^2 = _ 0^r dr r^2 . substituting in the expressions for @xmath160 and @xmath161 , and expanding the @xmath15 derivative results in the general equation derived in p76 r + = + r^-1 _ 0^r dr r^2 .
this equation represents the conservation of phase space for a single particle in a system , and is true for any particle in the system with a well defined phase space density and an isotropic two - point correlation function .      for gravitationally interacting particles ,
the acceleration term is simply @xmath166 , where _
i = g _ j m_j .
when averaging over phase space , @xmath167 can be written in terms of the two and three point correlation functions , which requires considering a third particle at @xmath168 ( see figure  8b ) .
the average force on @xmath27 is the force from @xmath70 plus the force due to @xmath169 weighted by the conditional probability of the third particle being located at @xmath170 & = & + gm + & = & + d^3 [ 1 + ( r ) + ( s ) + ( q ) + ( r , s , q ) ] where @xmath171 is the average mass per particle and the three point correlation function @xmath19 is defined by the probability dp_3 = dv_i dv_j dv_k ^3 [ 1 + ( r ) + ( s ) + ( q ) + ( r , s , q ) ] .
the first , second and third terms in the brackets integrate to zero by isotropy leaving = + d^3 [ ( q ) + ( r , s , q ) ] .
likewise , the force on @xmath70 is = - - d^3 [ ( s ) + ( r , q , s ) ] . because @xmath172 , the average of the total force is = - - d^3 [ ( q ) + ( r , s , q ) ] .      to obtain the scaling of the velocity dispersion we apply various approximations that are consistent with a cosmological model .
first , we consider the situation where the correlation function is assumed to be stationary in comparison to the motions of the particles , the time scale for changes in @xmath13 is much greater than the crossing time @xmath173 .
in addition , @xmath47 is randomly oriented so that @xmath174 , and @xmath175 .
these assumptions eliminate two terms from eq .
( a14 ) . combining with eq .
( a20 ) gives r = - - 6 g d^3 [ ( q ) + ( r , s , q ) ] .
the next step is to evaluate the integrals on the right . at this point
we impose a model for @xmath13 and @xmath19 .
observations indicate that the correlation functions are well modeled by power laws of the form ( r ) = ( ) ^ ,   = 1.77 ,   r_0 = 5.4 and , ( r , s , q ) = q[(r ) ( s ) + ( r ) ( q ) + ( s ) ( q ) ] ,   q 1.0 . using these relationships , the first integral
can be solved with the following identities @xmath176 , and @xmath177 , and by noting that in spherical coordinates @xmath178 d^3 ( q ) & = & s^2 ds dd ( q ) + & = & 2 ds d r ( ( r^2 - 2 s r + s^2)^1/2 ) + & = & 2 r^2 dy d ( ( r^2 - 2 y r^2 + y^2 r^2)^1/2 ) + & = & 2 r^2 _ 0^
dy _ 0^ + & = & . where @xmath179 , @xmath180 , and i_(y ) = ( y+1)^2 - \{1 - ( 2- ) y + y^2 } -    similar result d^3 ( r , s , q ) & = & d^3 q [ ( r ) ( s ) + ( r ) ( q ) + ( s ) ( q ) ] + & = & q d^3 ( q ) [ ( r ) + ( s ) ] + & = & , where @xmath181 . for our purposes
, it is sufficient to know that @xmath182 and @xmath183 are of order unity . inserting the above results into eq .
( a22 ) gives r = - - - .
finally , let @xmath184 . dividing through by @xmath15 , and integrating from @xmath15 to @xmath185 and dividing again by @xmath13 , gives an equation for the velocity dispersion ( r ) = + + for small @xmath15 the third term dominates the second .
the first term is negligible in the limit that @xmath171 is very small , i.e. , that the mass is divided up into many tiny individual particles .
thus the third term dominates , leaving the classic result ( r ) = . using the definition @xmath186 ,
we can rewrite the above expression as ( r ) = . which , if we return to the earlier notation ( measuring distances in terms of velocity @xmath187 ) gives the expression quoted in eq .
( 4 ) of  2 ( r ) _ ( r ) r^2 , with a proportionality constant c_1 = .    bartlett , j. , & blanchard , a. 1996 , , 307 , 1 baumgardner , j.r . , & frederickson , p.o .
1985 , siam j. numer .
, 22 , 1107 bertschinger , e. , & gelb , j. 1991 , computers in physics , 5 , 164 brieu , p.p . , summers , f j , & ostriker , j.p .
1995 , , 453 , 566 brown , m. , & peebles , p.j.e .
1987 , , 317 , 588 burstein , d. 1990 , rep .
, 53 , 421 couchman , h. , & carlberg , r. 1992 , , 389 , 453 dalcanton , j. , 1995 , ph.d .
thesis , princeton university davis , m. , & peebles , p.j.e .
1977 , , 34 , 425 davis , m. , & peebles , p.j.e .
1983 , , 267 , 465 efstathiou , g. , bond , j. r. , & white , s. d. m. 1992 , , 258 , 1 efstathiou , g. , davis , m. , white , s.d.m .
, & frenk , c.s .
1985 , , 57 , 241 efstathiou , g. , frenk , c.s . , white , s.d.m . &
davis , m. 1988 , , 235 , 715 evrard , a. e. , summers , f j , & davis , m. 1994 , , 422 , 11 fisher , k.b . ,
davis , m. , strauss , m.a . ,
yahil , a. , & huchra , j. 1994 , , 267 , 927 fisher , k.b . , huchra , j. , strauss , m.a . , davis , m. , yahil , a. , & schlegel , d. 1995 , , 100 , 69 gelb , j. , & bertschinger , e. 1994 , , 436 , 491 grski , k. m. , ratra , b. , sugiyama , n. , & banday , a. j. 1995 , , 444 , l65 gunn , j.e .
, & weinberg , d.h .
1995 , in s.j .
maddox and a. aragn - salamanca eds , wide - field spectroscopy and the distant universe ( singapore : world scientific ) , 3 guzzo , l. , fisher k.b . , strauss , m.a . ,
giovanelli , r. , & haynes , m.p .
1996 , astroph .
lett .  & comm . , 33 , 231 hockney , r.w . , & eastwood , j.w .
1981 , computer simulation using particles ( new york : mcgraw  hill ) holtzman , j. 1989 , , 71 , 1 loveday , j. , efstathiou , g. , maddox , s. j. , & peterson , b.a .
1996 , , 468 , l1 loveday , j. , peterson , b.a . , efstathiou , g. , & maddox , s. j. 1992 , , 390 , 338 marzke , r.o . ,
geller , m.j .
, da costa , l.n . , & huchra , j.p .
1995 , , 110 , 477 mo , h.j . ,
jing , y.p .
, & brner , g. 1993 , , 264 , 825 okumura , s. k. , et al .
1993 , pasj , 45 , 329 peebles , p.j.e .
1976a , , 45 , 3 ( p76 ) peebles , p.j.e .
1976b , , 205 , l109 peebles , p.j.e .
1980 , the large - scale structure of the universe ( princeton : princeton university press ) sandage , a. 1986 , , 307 , 1 somerville , r.s . , davis , m. , & primack , j.r .
1997 , , 479 , 616 stompor , r. , grski , k. m. , & banday , a. j. 1995 , , 277 , 1225 strauss , m.a .
, cen , r.y .
, & ostriker , j.p .
1993 , , 408 , 389 strauss , m.a .
, & willick , j.a .
1995 , , 261 , 271 summers , f j , davis , m. , & evrard , a. e. 1995 , , 454 , 1 willick , j.a . ,
strauss , m.a . ,
dekel , a. , & kolatt , t. 1997 , , in press ( astro - ph/9612240 ) zurek , w.h . ,
quinn , p.j . ,
salmon , j.k . , & warren , m.s .
, 1994 , , 431 , 559


in the overwhelming majority of the literature on supersymmetric extensions of the standard model , @xmath0-parity is imposed as an ad - hoc symmetry to avoid phenomena such as proton decay which has been very strongly constrained by experiment .
however , the proton can remain exactly stable even in the presence of a restricted set of @xmath0-parity violating interactions .
in fact , one needs to break both baryon and lepton number for the proton to decay , because the proton is the lightest fermion that carries zero lepton number but nonzero baryon number .
various low energy constraints on @xmath0-parity violating couplings have been studied in depth ( see @xcite and references therein ) , however certain aspects of collider phenomenology in the presence of @xmath0-parity violating couplings have not received the same amount of attention compared to the case of exact @xmath0-parity @xcite . in particular , there are two major differences between @xmath0-parity conserving and @xmath0-parity violating supersymmetric models that we wish to focus on in this paper that relate to the signatures at hadron colliders .
firstly , @xmath0-parity violation affects production mechanisms by allowing for supersymmetric partner particles to be resonantly produced @xcite .
secondly , the lightest supersymmetric particle need no longer be stable , and can decay promptly . since most experimental searches for supersymmetry focus on the presence of missing transverse energy carried off by a neutral lightest superpartner , this requires a major change in search strategies .
naturally , in order to account for dark matter , a supersymmetric theory with @xmath0-parity violation would need to have additional matter content with a symmetry that can stabilize the lightest particle in the dark sector .
finally , the fact that the lightest supersymmetric particle is no longer stable allows for spectra that are phenomenologically disfavored in models with exact @xmath0-parity and a colored superpartner can be the lightest one in the spectrum@xcite . in the rest of this paper
we wish to study some of the phenomenological consequences associated with @xmath0-parity violation with relatively light scalar superpartners , such as the stop .
uv motivated models of @xmath0-parity violation have been studied in the context of msugra and grand unified theories @xcite .
there also exist motivated models of new physics that are qualitatively different than the mssm , in which @xmath0-parity is violated .
an example is provided by the setup of ref .
@xcite , where supersymmetry is broken at high energies but reemerges as an accidental symmetry at low energies , and @xmath0-parity violation is unavoidable @xcite .
very recently , the cdf collaboration has announced an interesting observation of a resonance in dijets produced in association with a w boson @xcite .
the significance of this observation is @xmath4 using data with @xmath5 of integrated luminosity , and the mean value for the resonant dijet mass distribution is around 145 gev . in this paper
we will investigate the possibility that the cdf observation arises from the production and decay of new particles , and explore how this final state can arise in models of supersymmetry with @xmath0-parity violation .
the topology we consider is characterized by the production of a primary resonance that undergoes a charged - current transition to a secondary resonance by emitting a w - boson , with the secondary resonance subsequently decaying to two jets . for a supersymmetric realization of this topology , we will concentrate on the possibility of squarks or sleptons and sneutrino being the lightest ( s)particles in the spectrum .
we give a representative model in which the primary resonance is a bottom squark ( sbottom ) , and the secondary resonance a top squark ( stop ) , the production and decay of which occur through @xmath0-parity violating interactions respectively .
we will show that only one or two couplings beyond the mssm are needed for this topology to be consistent with the cdf observation .
we will also show that the required couplings can have large enough values without causing conflict with any existing constraints , and we will furthermore argue that the @xmath1 channel is in fact naturally the first place for the new physics to be observed in this scenario .    in the next section we present our sbottom - stop model ,
estimate the size of the necessary @xmath0-parity violating couplings and show that these are not in conflict with any existing bounds .
we will then go through various production and decay possibilities and argue why the new physics would appear first in the @xmath1 channel , and evaluate the discovery potential in other final states for the tevatron as well as the lhc . in section [ sec : sleptons ] we give an alternative setup with sleptons instead of squarks that can give rise to similar collider signatures and highlight the differences in phenomenology compared to the stop - sbottom model .    it should be emphasized that the most important aspect of the scenarios presented here are the production and decay topologies .
while the language of supersymmetry is utilized throughout , the topologies and signatures may be more widely applicable to other frameworks for the underlying physics , including ones with particles of different spin and gauge quantum numbers .
the @xmath0-parity violating terms in the superpotential are typically parameterized as @xmath6 where @xmath7 are flavor indices .
the first three types of terms violate lepton number while the @xmath8 type terms violate baryon number .    among the available @xmath0-parity violating couplings , @xmath8 type terms
are generically less constrained than @xmath9 or @xmath10 terms , since searches for new physics involving leptons typically have higher sensitivity .
the main constraints on @xmath8 type terms come from neutron - antineutron oscillations and flavor violation in the quark sector@xcite .
these constraints can be avoided however , as we will outline below , and for certain choices of @xmath11 , @xmath12 can be of order one . for resonant production we will need at least one coupling to be reasonably large , and this coupling should preferably involve two light quarks in order to give rise to interesting production cross sections .
note that the @xmath8 type terms are antisymmetric in the indices @xmath13 and @xmath14 .
therefore if two of the indices are to be 1 , the only choices are @xmath15 and @xmath16 , both of which are severely constrained from nuclear decays involving two neutrons@xcite . the next best possibility for resonant production is to make use of a strange quark pdf in the proton , and the there are several couplings of this type that are essentially unconstrained .
note however that there are many additional constraints on products of couplings and therefore the safest choice is to turn on as few @xmath0-parity violating terms as possible .
below , we will outline a model where the stop and sbottom are the main players for the phenomenology , and where only @xmath17 and @xmath18 is nonzero ( but need not be large ) . at the end of this section
we will point to an alternative choice with only @xmath19 turned on and argue that given a similar spectrum , the collider signatures are very similar .     as a function of the sbottom mass .
for this plot , the mass eigenstate is taken to be pure @xmath20 . ]    with @xmath21 turned on , sbottoms can be resonantly produced according to @xmath22 .
the cross section for this process is plotted in figure [ fig : rpvmodel ] for a value of @xmath23 .
if the sbottom happens to be the lightest state , then it will decay back through the @xmath0-parity violating coupling to a pair of jets . depending on the sbottom mass ,
this process is constrained by dijet resonance searches from ua2 @xcite ( light sbottoms ) , at the tevatron @xcite ( intermediate mass sbottoms ) and recent constraints from the lhc @xcite for heavy sbottoms . in figure
[ fig : lambdabound ] we use the cross section constraints to derive bounds on @xmath21 , or equivalently on @xmath24 , the partial width of the sbottom to @xmath25+@xmath26 . the exact relation between @xmath24 and @xmath21
is given in equation ( [ eqn : partialwidths ] ) . in terms of @xmath21
we find that the constraint from resonant production never goes below @xmath27 .
the pair production of sbottoms through qcd has a threshold at twice the sbottom mass , and therefore the cross section for this process is much lower than resonant production . with no other supersymmetric particles lighter than the sbottom , this process would manifest itself in a four jet final state , we will however introduce a different choice of spectrum shortly .
it is however interesting to think of the pair production of the lightest colored supersymmetric particle , and we will come back to this point in the next chapter .     from the dijet resonance searches at ua2 and cdf .
the numbers plotted here are conservative in the sense that we assume perfect acceptance and no suppression from left - right sbottom mixing . in terms of @xmath21 ,
the bound is always above 0.4 . ]
the collider prospects for this very minimal ( s)particle content are bleak for a value of @xmath21 below the bound . the presence of a neutralino below the mass of the sbottom does not lead to much improvement .
the sbottom would decay as @xmath28 , the neutralino then decaying through an off - shell sbottom as @xmath29 , thus populating the @xmath30 final state , which has a large background .
if there are charginos significantly lighter than the sbottom , this can lead to top quarks in the final state , which is potentially a more optimistic scenario , however the large mass gap necessary for decaying to on - shell tops forces the sbottoms to be heavier , reducing the cross section as a function of the lightest superpartner mass .         a possibility that is much more interesting collider - wise , and
the one we wish to consider in the rest of this section is the presence of a stop below the sbottom mass . in this case
the sbottom can decay as @xmath31 .
this mass spectrum is favored by the rg evolution of the squark masses , as the large yukawa couplings tend to drive the stop mass lighter .
note that since it is @xmath20 that is resonantly produced , for the w channel to dominate there needs to be some mixing between @xmath20 and @xmath32 .
as long as the left handed squarks are not decoupled however , the w decay mode can be dominant .
the partial widths of the sbottom into dijets and into @xmath33+@xmath34 are given by @xmath35 where @xmath36 is the triangle function and @xmath37 denote the mixing angles in the squark sector ( for @xmath38 , @xmath39 and likewise for the stop ) . in figure
[ fig : sbottombf ] we plot the branching fraction of @xmath31 for @xmath40 as a function of the sbottom mass , taking @xmath41gev .    with only @xmath21 nonzero
, the stop will have a three - body decay through on off - shell sbottom .
note however that the stop can also have two - body decays if there are additional nonzero @xmath0-parity violating couplings , specifically a nonzero value of @xmath42 .
note however that neutron - antineutron mixing constrains @xmath43 and @xmath44 to be of order @xmath45 while the constraints are much weaker on @xmath18@xcite .
note that the product of @xmath21 and @xmath18 is also not further constrained , and that stop production from a small value of @xmath18 is unobservable due to the pdfs for a @xmath26-@xmath46 initial state .
the decay modes of the stop are illustrated in figure [ fig : stopdecays ] .    with @xmath18 turned on , the two - body decay of the stop into jets can dominate , and the first signal to be seen would appear in the @xmath47 channel .
this is the channel where cdf recently reported observing an interesting signal@xcite . for this specific choice of couplings ,
one of the jets from the decay of the stop would be a b - jet .
currently the cdf analysis states that the heavy flavor content of the excess region is consistent with the sideband .
however the analysis does not provide a quantitative measure for whether the existence of a single b - jet is disfavored . as we will describe in section
[ sec : scharm ] , the same topology can be realized with a different choice of nonzero @xmath12 such that the final state has no heavy flavor jets .
the cdf analysis reports no significant deviation from the standard model expectation in an analogous channel with a dijet resonance produced in association with a z - boson .
note that in our minimal setup , this channel is expected to be absent .     to @xmath33+@xmath34 .
for this plot @xmath41gev , and @xmath48 . ]    in order to study the acceptance of the cdf analysis for the @xmath49 signal we have performed a monte carlo study . it is not trivial to generate monte carlo events for this setup due to the completely antisymmetric way that the color indices are contracted in the @xmath0-parity violating vertex .
while certain programs such as herwig incorporate aspects of @xmath0-parity violating physics , this is not adequate for our purposes and we have generated @xmath50 events by using cteq parton distribution functions @xcite and integrating over phase space using a custom - made code .
we then exported the events into lhe format @xcite by modifying the color flow to remove the antisymmetric color contractions , which can not be faithfully represented in the lhe format .
while this may introduce subtle changes at the level of non - perturbative qcd effects , we expect that the impact on the hard scattering observables will be negligible .
the events were passed through pythia@xcite for showering and hadronization , and later through pgs@xcite for detector effects .
we used the standard cdf parameter set in pgs with a cone jet algorithm and a cone size @xmath51 .
we analyzed the signal events using cuts designed to mimic the cdf event selection cuts , namely :    * the presence of an electron ( muon ) with @xmath52 ( @xmath53 ) @xmath54gev and @xmath55 and the absence of additional leptons in the event .
* missing transverse energy in excess of 25 gev .
* the presence of exactly two jets with @xmath56gev and @xmath57 . * a minimum @xmath58 of 0.52 between the lepton and the nearest jet . * a minimum @xmath53 of 40 gev for the dijet system . * a transverse mass in excess of 30 gev for the lepton - neutrino system , where the neutrino is taken to be the only source of missing transverse energy in the event . * an azimuthal angle in excess of 0.4 radians between the missing energy and either jet .
* @xmath59 for the two jets .
taking @xmath60gev , @xmath41gev and @xmath48 , we find that the number of events observed at cdf in the @xmath61+@xmath62 channels is consistent with @xmath63 , giving a total production cross section of @xmath64pb , a signal acceptance of @xmath65 which includes a 52% branching fraction for @xmath66 ( we take the branching fraction of @xmath67 to be 1 ) .
this value of @xmath21 is far below the bound from dijet resonance searches .
we plot the dijet invariant mass distribution from the stop decay in our sample in figure [ fig : mjj_300 ] .     and @xmath62 channels combined ) using the same cuts as the cdf analysis , with @xmath60gev and @xmath41gev .
@xmath63 and @xmath48 are used in order for the number of events after cuts to agree with the cdf observation with 4.3 fb@xmath68 of integrated luminosity . ]
another interesting question that is reported to be consistent with the background hypothesis but not ruled out by the cdf analysis is whether a primary resonance can be present in the @xmath1 system . in the topology considered here
, this system will reconstruct the sbottom mass . in figure
[ fig : mwjj_300 ] we plot the reconstructed sbottom mass in our model for a true value of @xmath60gev using both solutions for the neutrino rapidity in reconstructing the w - mass ( and discarding the event if no real solutions can be found ) .
note that while the stop mass is determined by the position of the observed dijet excess , the sbottom mass is an adjustable parameter in this model , and for lighter sbottom masses , the excess in @xmath69 may be difficult to resolve on top of background .
a definitive comparison of the primary resonance aspect of this topology with the cdf observation would require a full detector simulation of both signal and backgrounds , as well as the cdf data - driven estimates of background .
system from the sbottom decay ( @xmath61 and @xmath62 channels combined ) using the same cuts as the cdf analysis , with @xmath60gev and @xmath41gev .
both solutions for the neutrino momentum are included in the distribution . @xmath63 and @xmath48
are used in order for the number of events after cuts to agree with the cdf observation with 4.3 fb@xmath68 of integrated luminosity . ]
while in our topology the resonant production of any up - type squark is strongly suppressed due to the smallness of the couplings @xmath70 , the pair production of the stop is determined by qcd and can be an interesting production channel . in figure
[ fig : stoppairxsecn ] we show the stop pair production cross section as a function of its mass calculated by using the batch mode of calchep@xcite .
this production channel would manifest itself in the four jet channel , with two pairs of jets reconstructing narrow resonances of the same mass .
@xcite studied this channel with the conclusion that stops with up to @xmath71 can be discovered .
references @xcite also studied the same event topology at the tevatron and the lhc for various scenarios of underlying physics , and showed that there is strong discovery potential .
currently no search for new physics has been performed in this channel .
note that for a stop mass of 150gev , a search in the four jet channel analysis will be difficult at the lhc because of the larger trigger thresholds which will have low efficiency on the signal .
the tevatron has a unique advantage for the case of light stops , and an analysis of existing data could be used to explore this possibility .
@xmath0-parity violating interaction at the lhc . ]
the initial state for resonant anti - squark production through @xmath0-parity violating interactions is quark  quark ( rather than quark  anti - quark ) . in the scenario described here , with production through the @xmath21 coupling ,
one of the initial state quarks is a strange - quark . at the tevatron with @xmath72-@xmath73 collisions , as well as at the lhc with @xmath72-@xmath72 collisions , the parton distribution functions for the leading resonant production are therefore of the valence  sea type . aside from the relative center of mass energies
, there is no qualitative difference for the overall production rates between the tevatron and lhc for such a resonance .
however , the relative rates for sbottom versus anti - sbottom are significantly different . at the tevatron sbottom and anti - sbottom are produced at equal rates because of the charge symmetry of the colliding particles .
in contrast , at the lhc , production of anti - sbottom arising from valence
sea quark collisions is enhanced compared with sbottom production arising from sea  sea anti - quark collisions .
this leads to a significant charge asymmetry in the @xmath1 signal at the lhc , as shown in figure [ fig : chargeasymmetry ] .
a charge asymmetry is also present in the w+jets background due to the difference between the @xmath25 and @xmath74 valence quark parton distribution functions .
however , the w+jets background asymmetry arises predominantly from an order one difference in the relative magnitude of two types of valence  sea quark collisions , whereas the signal asymmetry is much larger since it arises from a difference between valence
sea versus sea  sea collisions .
the enhanced charge asymmetry of the @xmath1 signal may provide an additional handle at the lhc to isolate this supersymmetric scenario for the topology of a primary and secondary resonance with a charged - current transition .
finally , one can also consider the pair production of the sbottom through qcd . in the scenario with a lighter stop
, this channel will go to @xmath75 . while the combinatoric background can be reduced by reconstructing the stops as well as demanding equal sbottom masses
, the cross section is small compared to the irreducible standard model backgrounds of @xmath76+jets and @xmath77+jets in the dileptonic decay channel , and the additional background of w+jets for the semileptonic case . as one can see in figure [ fig : stoppairxsecn ] , even for moderately light sbottom masses , the cross section for this process is too low at the tevatron .
the leptonic branching fraction of @xmath34 bosons and acceptance effects make it unlikely that a statistically significant excess can be observed at the 7 tev lhc as well ( assuming a total integrated luminosity of @xmath78 ) .
this channel may become interesting for the 14 tev lhc with high statistics however .
type couplings may be induced at 1-loop from existing ones .
the black box denotes a @xmath79 coupling that is nonzero at tree level and the circles represent off diagonal couplings in flavor space . ]
we wish to briefly comment on the stability of the choice of nonzero @xmath12 that we use .
for instance , the 1-loop diagram in figure [ fig : flav ] shows how an existing @xmath8 coupling may induce additional @xmath0-parity violating couplings in the presence of neutralinos that couple off - diagonally in flavor space .
this can be avoided however if all three generations are nearly - degenerate .
for the model we outlined in this paper , one can imagine a mass spectrum such that all three generations are present , with @xmath80 .
the presence of the additional squarks does not significantly change the phenomenology that we discussed . with only @xmath21 and
@xmath18 turned on , the @xmath81 are not resonantly produced at observable rates .
they are pair produced , enhancing the cross section by a factor of three compared to that of a single stop in the four jet channel .
resonant production of the additional @xmath82 is also suppressed by the pdf s .
therefore the phenomenology is essentially identical to the minimal scenario with only a sbottom and a stop .
if the left - handed squarks are light enough to be produced , new decay channels with on - shell higgs or z bosons may open up .
other operators induced by a diagram similar to figure [ fig : flav ] but with a w in the loop rather than a neutralino are nonrenormalizable , and are small for our choice of nonzero @xmath79 since they are suppressed by quark masses and ckm angles
. we do not consider operators induced at higher loops .
there is a second choice for which nonzero @xmath79 can give rise to the cdf excess .
if @xmath19 is turned on , then both @xmath83 and @xmath84 can be resonantly produced from @xmath74-@xmath85 and @xmath74-@xmath26 initial states , respectively .
this choice has the advantage that @xmath19 will also induce decays of both the @xmath83 and the @xmath84 , so no second @xmath12 need be turned on .
there are several disadvantages however .
since both @xmath83 and @xmath84 are now resonantly produced through the same coupling , the ua2 dijet resonance bound on the lighter state ( assumed to have a mass of 150 gev ) will directly apply to the production cross section of the heavier state , and therefore on the cross section for the @xmath1 decay mode .
furthermore , the branching fraction for the w - mode depends on the left - right squark mixing and may be much smaller for the second generation squarks compared to @xmath86 and @xmath33 . finally , the production cross section for a @xmath74-@xmath26 initial state is lower than that of the @xmath25-@xmath26 initial state by a factor of order one .
since this affects the bounds from dijet resonances in the same way as the production cross section however , one can simply compensate by using a larger value of @xmath79 as long as one is not already at the upper limit .
zero mass mixing is assumed . from bottom to top , the three pairs of curves are for the tevatron , 7 tev lhc and 14 tev lhc respectively . ]     for resonant slepton and sneutrino production from ua2 and cdf with only @xmath87 turned on .
the numbers plotted here are conservative in the sense that we assume perfect acceptance and we neglect left - right mixing .
the bound on @xmath87 never goes below 0.3 for the sneutrino and below 0.2 for the slepton . ]
@xmath0-parity violation through @xmath8-type terms is not the only possibility to resonantly produce superpartners at a hadron collider .
one can also consider the resonant production of left - handed sleptons through a @xmath9 type coupling .
the @xmath88 couplings necessary in this scenario are generically more constrained that the @xmath8 couplings @xcite .
while we will not attempt to build a detailed model as in the squark case , we remark that a similar final state can be obtained .
resonant production of a left - handed slepton , with charged - current decay through an off - shell w@xmath89 to the sneutrino , which subsequently decays back through the @xmath0-parity violating coupling , gives an @xmath90jj signature .
the main difference with a left - handed @xmath91 doublet only , is that the mass splitting between the slepton and sneutrino arises only from electroweak symmetry breaking and is parametrically small .
the leptons in this scenario are then significantly softer than those arising from an on - shell w topology .
the production cross section and the bound from dijet resonance searches for this scenario are plotted in figures [ fig : sleptonxsec ] and [ fig : sleptonbound ] respectively . rather than go through all the details of the phenomenology again
, we highlight here the differences compared to the squark case .
since many @xmath88 are constrained through lepton flavor violating processes , there are few choices in which couplings can be turned on to match the cdf @xmath1 observation .
one possibility is resonant stau production from a nonzero value of @xmath87
. scenarios of @xmath0-parity violation with @xmath92 and @xmath93 lsp have been considered in msugra scenarios ( see for example @xcite , @xcite and references therein ) . as in the squark case , there is a charge asymmetry in the resonant production of the slepton vs. the anti - slepton . unlike the squark case however , the origin of this asymmetry is the difference between the @xmath25 and @xmath74 valence quark pdf s .
therefore the asymmetries of the signal and the w+jets background will be of the same size . additionally , unlike in the case of squarks
, sleptons are only pair produced through electroweak interactions , so pair production cross sections will be much smaller , and only @xmath94-@xmath95 initial states can contribute , which is a disadvantage for the lhc compared to the squark case where the @xmath96-@xmath96 initial state contributes .    if both right- and left - handed sleptons are light enough to be produced , then the same production and decay topology discussed above can arise with resonant production of the heavier states that charged - current decay through an on - shell w - boson to the lighter states which subsequently decay back to two jets .
since in @xmath9-type @xmath0-parity violation both resonant production as well as the charged - current coupling involve the left - handed component of sleptons , significant left - right mixing is required in order for both the cross section as well as the w branching fraction to be sizeable in this case .
if kinematically open , decay modes with on - shell higgs and @xmath97-bosons also arise in this scenario .
we have explored a production and decay topology for hadron colliders in which a primary resonance undergoes a charged - current transition to a secondary resonance that subsequently decays to dijets .
supersymmetric scenarios with @xmath0-parity violation where a light sbottom is resonantly produced and decays to a w - boson and stop , which decays to a pair of jets through the @xmath0-parity violating coupling , give a concrete realization of this topology .
other possibilities for underlying theoretical frameworks that could give topologies of this type include technicolor @xcite ( for reviews of phenomenology see @xcite ) , two - higgs - doublet models ( for a detailed overview see @xcite ) , and excited quarks @xcite .
we have argued that with such a topology , the new physics may be observed first in the @xmath1 channel , possibly consistent with the recent cdf observation in this channel .
we have also pointed to other final states that would be associated with this scenario . in particular , for strongly interacting resonances , other important topologies are pair production of the secondary state giving rise to a 4 jet signature , as well as pair production of the primary state giving rise to a w@xmath2w@xmath3 + 4 jets signature , both with two equal mass dijet resonances within the 4 jets .
we argued that due to the smallness of the mass of the secondary state , the former would most effectively be searched for at the tevatron , while the latter has better prospects at the upgraded lhc .
we have outlined how a less minimal supersymmetric model can be set up with all three generations of squarks present , without significantly changing the collider phenomenology , but forbidding additional @xmath0-parity violating couplings to be induced at loop - level from existing ones .
we have also shown that there is an alternative choice of couplings for the squark scenario , where the phenomenology is focused on the second generation squarks rather than the third .
this alternative model needs only one @xmath0-parity violating coupling to be nonzero , however the branching fraction for the w mode may be small unless there is significant left - right mixing in the squark sector .
finally we have outlined an alternative supersymmetric scenario with the same production and decay topology , but where the new particles are sleptons rather than squarks .
many additional production channels such as pair production through qcd are absent in this case .    to conclude
, we believe that even if the cdf @xmath1 observation proves not to be due to new physics , that collider signatures of @xmath0-parity violating supersymmetric models should be further explored by both theorists and experimental searches .    * note added : * after this paper was submitted , several developments took place .
cdf updated their analysis with a @xmath98 data set in which the significance of the excess was reported as @xmath99 after accounting for systematic uncertainties @xcite . in this analysis , various other consistency checks were performed on the analysis , such as using different monte carlo generators , making the jet cuts inclusive ( rather than demanding exactly two jets ) , varying the jet energy scale and some of the analysis cuts .
the excess was reported as being robust under these variations .
this is true of the signal in our scenario as well , the effect of these variations to the acceptance of our monte carlo sample is mild .
there is however a result in the updated cdf analysis that has a larger impact on our scenario , namely the heavy flavor content in the jets accompanying the @xmath34-boson has been reported quantitatively .
this result is difficult to reconcile with one of the two jets being a b - jet in each event , and therefore disfavors our sbottom - stop benchmark .
note however that both the second generation squark benchmark as well as the slepton benchmark which we proposed produce light jets in the final state and are therefore still consistent with the cdf update .
another dramatic development was the release of a d  search for new physics in the same final state @xcite .
this analysis reports that d  does not observe an excess consistent with the cdf result , and for a gaussian centered at the same mass they obtain a best fit for the cross section of @xmath100 .
considering that the d  analysis uses cuts very similar to the cdf analysis , it is not at the moment clear why the two experiments obtain such drastically different results . while this development casts doubt on the existence of new physics in this final state
, it is also possible that there is a signal with a cross section smaller than the one reported by cdf but still consistent with the d  result , for example around @xmath101 .
if that were to be the case , the signal in our scenario could easily have a smaller cross section by using a higher mass for the first resonant squark or slepton , or by having smaller @xmath0-parity violating couplings . as we remarked at the end of our conclusions , as theorists we believe this topology for the resonant production of supersymmetric particles to be an interesting one that should be studied further even if the eventual resolution of the discrepancy between cdf and d  results disfavors a new physics explanation .
we also wish to mention a variety of other new physics explanations that were proposed to explain the cdf excess after the submission of this paper .
these include technicolor models @xcite , new gauge bosons @xcite , extended higgs sectors @xcite and other possibilities @xcite . since technicolor is arguably the most commonly associated type of new physics associated with the @xmath1 final state , we want to point to a few phenomenological differences between our scenario and a technicolor model , which could be used in order to distinguish the two signals .
for one , since a techni - pion is expected to couple to sm fermions proportionally to their mass , it is expected to decay preferentially to @xmath102 pairs . in our scenario ,
the alternative squark and slepton benchmarks would only give rise to light jets in the final state whereas the sbottom - stop benchmark would produce a single @xmath46-jet .
as mentioned earlier in this note , the cdf update appears to disfavor the existence of @xmath46-tagged jets in the excess .
another possibility that can distinguish between our scenario and a technicolor model is to look for pair production of the primary resonance . in both our sbottom - stop as well as our alternative squark benchmarks , both the heavier as well as
the lighter squarks are expected to be pair produced from qcd processes , giving rise to a @xmath103 final state for the lighter squark and a @xmath104 final state for the heavier squark , as we mentioned at the end of section [ sec : squarks ] , whereas techni - rhos and techni - pions in minimal technicolor models do not carry color charge and will not be pair produced in the same way .
note however that pair production is not a good discriminant if the resonantly produced superpartners are sleptons which also do not carry color .
r.  barbier _ et al .
_ , phys .
rept .   * 420 * , 1 ( 2005 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0406039 ] .
s.  dawson , e.  eichten , c.  quigg , phys .
rev .   * d31 * , 1581 ( 1985 ) ; h.  baer , x.  tata , cambridge , uk : univ . pr .
( 2006 ) 537 p ; k.  nakamura _ et al . _
[ particle data group collaboration ] , j.  phys .
g * g37 * , 075021 ( 2010 ) .
s.  dimopoulos , r.  esmailzadeh , l.  j.  hall and g.  d.  starkman , phys .
d * 41 * , 2099 ( 1990 ) .
h.  k.  dreiner and g.  g.  ross , nucl .
b * 365 * , 597 ( 1991 ) .
u.  sarid and s.  d.  thomas , phys .
lett .   *
85 * , 1178 ( 2000 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9909349 ] .
n.  sakai and t.  yanagida , nucl .
b * 197 * , 533 ( 1982 ) .
l.  j.  hall and m.  suzuki , nucl .
b * 231 * , 419 ( 1984 ) .
d.  e.  brahm and l.  j.  hall , phys .
d * 40 * , 2449 ( 1989 ) .
r.  hempfling , nucl .
b * 478 * , 3 ( 1996 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9511288 ] .
a.  y.  smirnov and f.  vissani , nucl .
b * 460 * , 37 ( 1996 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9506416 ] .
k.  tamvakis , phys .
b * 382 * , 251 ( 1996 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9604343 ] .
k.  tamvakis , phys .
b * 383 * , 307 ( 1996 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9602389 ] .
r.  barbieri , a.  strumia and z.  berezhiani , phys .
b * 407 * , 250 ( 1997 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9704275 ] .
g.  f.  giudice and r.  rattazzi , phys .
b * 406 * , 321 ( 1997 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9704339 ] .
h.  k.  dreiner , arxiv : hep - ph/9707435 . m.  a.  diaz , j.  c.  romao and j.  w.  f.  valle , nucl .  phys .
b * 524 * , 23 ( 1998 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9706315 ] .
b.  c.  allanach , a.  dedes and h.  k.  dreiner , phys .
d * 69 * , 115002 ( 2004 ) [ erratum - ibid .
d * 72 * , 079902 ( 2005 ) ] [ arxiv : hep - ph/0309196 ] .
r.  sundrum , jhep * 1101 * , 062 ( 2011 ) [ arxiv:0909.5430 [ hep - th ] ] .
r.  sundrum , private communication .
t.  aaltonen _ et al . _
[ cdf collaboration ] , phys .
d * 79 * , 112002 ( 2009 ) [ arxiv:0812.4036 [ hep - ex ] ] .
g.  aad _ et al . _ [ atlas collaboration ] , arxiv:1103.3864 [ hep - ex ] .
v.  khachatryan _ et al . _
[ cms collaboration ] , phys .
lett .   * 105 * , 211801 ( 2010 ) [ arxiv:1010.0203 [ hep - ex ] ] .
j.  pumplin , d.  r.  stump , j.  huston , h.  l.  lai , p.  m.  nadolsky and w.  k.  tung , jhep * 0207 * ( 2002 ) 012 [ arxiv : hep - ph/0201195 ] .
e.  boos _ et al .
_ , arxiv : hep - ph/0109068 . t.  sjostrand , s.  mrenna and p.  z.  skands , `` pythia 6.4 physics and manual , '' jhep * 0605 * , 026 ( 2006 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0603175 ] .
j.  conway _ et  al .
_ , `` pgs 4 : pretty good simulation of high energy collisions , '' 2006 , www.physics.ucdavis.edu/@xmath105conway/research/software/pgs/pgs4-general.htm    a.  pukhov _ et al . _ , arxiv : hep - ph/9908288 ; a.  pukhov , arxiv : hep - ph/0412191 .
d.  choudhury , m.  datta and m.  maity , phys .
d * 73 * , 055013 ( 2006 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0508009 ] .
r.  s.  chivukula , m.  golden and e.  h.  simmons , nucl .
b * 363 * , 83 ( 1991 ) .
b.  a.  dobrescu , k.  kong and r.  mahbubani , phys .
b * 670 * , 119 ( 2008 ) [ arxiv:0709.2378 [ hep - ph ] ] . c.  kilic , t.  okui and r.  sundrum , jhep * 0807 * , 038 ( 2008 ) [ arxiv:0802.2568 [ hep - ph ] ] . c.  kilic , s.  schumann and m.  son , jhep * 0904 * , 128 ( 2009 ) [ arxiv:0810.5542 [ hep - ph ] ] . y.  bai and b.  a.  dobrescu , arxiv:1012.5814 [ hep - ph ] .
k.  desch , s.  fleischmann , p.  wienemann , h.  k.  dreiner and s.  grab , phys .
d * 83 * , 015013 ( 2011 ) [ arxiv:1008.1580 [ hep - ph ] ] .
h.  k.  dreiner and s.  grab , phys .
b * 679 * , 45 ( 2009 ) [ arxiv:0811.0200 [ hep - ph ] ] .
l.  susskind , `` dynamics of spontaneous symmetry breaking in the weinberg - salam theory , '' phys
.  rev .
d * 20 * , 2619 ( 1979 ) ; s.  weinberg , `` implications of dynamical symmetry breaking , '' phys .
d * 13 * , 974 ( 1976 ) ; s.  weinberg , `` implications of dynamical symmetry breaking : an addendum , '' phys .
d * 19 * , 1277 ( 1979 ) .
e.  farhi and l.  susskind , `` technicolor , '' phys .
rept .   * 74 * , 277 ( 1981 ) ; c.  t.  hill and e.  h.  simmons , `` strong dynamics and electroweak symmetry breaking , '' phys .
rept .   * 381 * , 235 ( 2003 ) [ erratum - ibid .   *
390 * , 553 ( 2004 ) ] [ arxiv : hep - ph/0203079 ] .
k.  lane and s.  mrenna , `` the collider phenomenology of technihadrons in the technicolor straw man model , '' phys .
d * 67 * , 115011 ( 2003 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0210299 ] .
g.  h.  brooijmans _ et al .
_ , `` new physics at the lhc : a les houches report .
physics at tev colliders 2007  new physics working group , '' arxiv:0802.3715 [ hep - ph ] .
j.  f.  gunion , h.  e.  haber , g.  l.  kane and s.  dawson , front .
phys .   * 80 * , 1 ( 2000 ) .
h.  terazawa , m.  yasue , k.  akama and m.  hayashi , phys .
b * 112 * , 387 ( 1982 ) .
f.  m.  renard , nuovo cim .
a * 77 * , 1 ( 1983 ) .
a.  de rujula , l.  maiani and r.  petronzio , phys .
b * 140 * , 253 ( 1984 ) .
m.  r.  buckley , d.  hooper , j.  kopp , e.  neil , phys .
rev .   * d83 * , 115013 ( 2011 ) .
[ arxiv:1103.6035 [ hep - ph ] ] ; f.  yu , phys .  rev .   * d83 * , 094028 ( 2011 ) .
[ arxiv:1104.0243 [ hep - ph ] ] ; x.  -p .
wang , y.  -k .
wang , b.  xiao , j.  xu , s.  -h .
zhu , phys .
* d83 * , 117701 ( 2011 ) .
[ arxiv:1104.1161 [ hep - ph ] ] ; k.  cheung , j.  song , phys .
lett .   * 106 * , 211803 ( 2011 ) .
[ arxiv:1104.1375 [ hep - ph ] ] ; a.  e.  nelson , t.  okui , t.  s.  roy , [ arxiv:1104.2030 [ hep - ph ] ] ; s.  jung , a.  pierce , j.  d.  wells , [ arxiv:1104.3139 [ hep - ph ] ] ; p.  ko , y.  omura , c.  yu , [ arxiv:1104.4066 [ hep - ph ] ] ; p.  j.  fox , j.  liu , d.  tucker - smith , n.  weiner , [ arxiv:1104.4127 [ hep - ph ] ] ; d.  -w .
jung , p.  ko , j.  s.  lee , [ arxiv:1104.4443 [ hep - ph ] ] ; s.  chang , k.  y.  lee , j.  song , [ arxiv:1104.4560 [ hep - ph ] ] ; k.  s.  babu , m.  frank , s.  k.  rai , [ arxiv:1104.4782 [ hep - ph ] ] ; z.  liu , p.  nath , g.  peim , phys .
lett .   * b701 * , 601 - 604 ( 2011 ) .
[ arxiv:1105.4371 [ hep - ph ] ] ; j.  l.  hewett , t.  g.  rizzo , [ arxiv:1106.0294 [ hep - ph ] ] ; a.  e.  faraggi , v.  m.  mehta , [ arxiv:1106.5422 [ hep - ph ] ] .
q.  -h .
cao , m.  carena , s.  gori , a.  menon , p.  schwaller , c.  e.  m.  wagner , l.  -t .
wang , [ arxiv:1104.4776 [ hep - ph ] ] ; b.  dutta , s.  khalil , y.  mimura , q.  shafi , [ arxiv:1104.5209 [ hep - ph ] ] ; c.  -h .  chen , c.  -w .
chiang , t.  nomura , y.  fusheng , [ arxiv:1105.2870 [ hep - ph ] ] .
x.  -p .
wang , y.  -k .
wang , b.  xiao , j.  xu , s.  -h .
zhu , phys .
rev .   * d83 * , 115010 ( 2011 ) .
[ arxiv:1104.1917 [ hep - ph ] ] ; r.  sato , s.  shirai , k.  yonekura , phys .
* b700 * , 122 - 125 ( 2011 ) .
[ arxiv:1104.2014 [ hep - ph ] ] ; l.  a.  anchordoqui , h.  goldberg , x.  huang , d.  lust , t.  r.  taylor , phys .
* b701 * , 224 - 228 ( 2011 ) .
[ arxiv:1104.2302 [ hep - ph ] ] ; b.  a.  dobrescu , g.  z.  krnjaic , [ arxiv:1104.2893 [ hep - ph ] ] ; h.  b.  nielsen , [ arxiv:1104.4642 [ hep - ph ] ] ; b.  bhattacherjee , s.  raychaudhuri , [ arxiv:1104.4749 [ hep - ph ] ] ; g.  segre , b.  kayser , [ arxiv:1105.1808 [ hep - ph ] ] ; t.  enkhbat , x.  -g .
he , y.  mimura , h.  yokoya , [ arxiv:1105.2699 [ hep - ph ] ] .