meson - antimeson mixing has traditionally been of importance because it is sensitive to heavy degrees of freedom that propagate in the underlying mixing amplitudes .
estimates of the charm quark and top quark mass scales were inferred from the observation of mixing in the @xmath4 and @xmath5 systems , respectively , before these particles were discovered directly .
this success has motivated attempts to indirectly detect new physics ( np ) signals by comparing the observed meson mixing with predictions of the standard model ( sm ) .
mixing in the kaon sector has historically placed stringent constraints on the parameter space of theories beyond the sm and provides an essential hurdle that must be passed in the construction of models with np . however , anticipated breakthroughs from the b - factories and the tevatron collider have not been borne out  the large mixing signal in the @xmath5 and @xmath6 systems is successfully described in terms of the sm alone ( although the parameter spaces of various np models have become increasingly constrained ) .
short of awaiting lhcb and the construction of a super - b facility , there is one remaining example for possibly observing indirect signs of np in meson mixing , the @xmath1 flavor oscillations . in this case , the sm mixing rate is sufficiently small that the np component might be able to compete  @xcite .
there has been a flurry of recent experimental activity regarding the detection of @xmath1-@xmath7 mixing  @xcite , which marks the first time flavor changing neutral currents ( fcnc ) have been observed in the charged @xmath8 quark sector . with the potential window to discern large np effects in the charm sector  @xcite and the anticipated improved accuracy for future mixing measurements , the motivation for a comprehensive up - to - date theoretical analysis of new physics contributions to @xmath3 meson mixing is compelling .
the heightened interest in @xmath1-@xmath7 mixing started with the almost simultaneous observations by the babar  @xcite and belle  @xcite collaborations of nonzero mixing signals at about the per cent level , , @xmath9 , @xmath10 and @xmath11 are standard and are given in eqs .
( [ xy]),([y - defs ] ) . ] & & y_d = ( 0.97 0.44 0.31 ) 10 ^ -2  , + & & y_d^(cp ) = ( 1.31 0.32 0.25)10 ^ -2  .
this was soon followed by the announcement by the belle collaboration of mixing measurements from the dalitz plot analyses of @xmath12  @xcite , x_d = ( 0.80 0.29 0.17)10 ^ -2  ,
y_d = ( 0.33 0.24 0.15)10 ^ -2  . a preliminary fit to the current database  , @xmath13 .
these are essentially unchanged from the hfag preliminary results given above and used in our analysis ; the difference will not affect our numerical results .
] by the heavy flavor averaging group ( hfag ) gives  @xcite [ hfag ] & & x_d = 8.7^+3.0_-3.4 10 ^ -3  , y_d = ( 6.62.1 ) 10 ^ -3  .
since this paper addresses the issue of the mass splitting induced by mixing , our primary concern is with the signal for @xmath14 , seen here to be a 2.4 sigma effect .
this is below the generally accepted threshold for `` evidence '' and is more in the nature of a `` hint '' .
however , we note that a 2.4 sigma effect will automatically have a non - zero lower bound at @xmath15 confidence - level . for the sake of reference
, we cite the one - sigma window for the hfag value of @xmath14 , 5.4 10 ^ -3 < x_d < 11.7 10 ^ -3  , [ xbnds ] or equivalently for @xmath16 itself , 8.7 10 ^ -15 < m_d < 1.9 10 ^ -14  .
[ mbnds ]    let us briefly describe our strategy for dealing with the above hfag values in light of both sm and np contributions .
we shall argue in sect .
iii that the sm predictions , although indeed compatible with the observed range of values for the @xmath3 mixing parameters , contain significant hadronic uncertainties .
moreover , we do not know the relative _ phase _ between the sm contribution and that from any np model , so that @xmath14 will lie between the extreme limiting cases of constructive and destructive interference .
in addition , since the observation of @xmath3 mixing is new , the measurements will fluctuate with future refinements in the analyses and as more data is collected .
to best deal with these realities , we will present our results by displaying a given np prediction as a pure np signal ( _ i.e. _ as if there were no sm component ) and for comparison , display curves of constant @xmath14 for the five values x_d = 15.0 10 ^ -3  , 11.7 10 ^ -3  , 8.0 10 ^ -3  , 5.0 10 ^ -3  , 3.0 10 ^ -3  .
[ xrange ] this ( approximately hfag 2@xmath17 ) range reveals the sensitivity of @xmath14 to variations in the underlying np parameter space . we will then show the present constraints placed on the np model parameter space , by assuming that the np contribution can not exceed the @xmath18 upper bound on @xmath19
this procedure mirrors that which is traditionally employed in obtaining bounds on np from @xmath4-@xmath20 mixing .
@xmath1-@xmath7 mixing at the observed level is much larger than the quark - level ( ` short - distance ' ) sm prediction  @xcite but is in qualitative accord with hadron - level ( ` long - distance ' ) sm expectations .
however , because the latter are beset with hadronic uncertainties , it can not be rigorously concluded that only sm physics is being detected . in this paper , we will consider a broad menu of np possibilities . as the operation of the lhc looms near , the number of potentially viable np models has never been greater .
our organizational approach to analyzing these is to address np models with :    1 .
extra fermions ( sect .
iv ) a : fourth generation b : heavy vector - like quarks ( 1 ) : @xmath21 singlet quarks ( 2 ) : @xmath22 singlet quarks c : little higgs models 2 .
extra gauge bosons ( sect .
v ) a : generic z models b : family symmetries c : left - right symmetric model d : alternate left - right models from e@xmath23 theories e : vector leptoquark bosons 3 .
extra scalars ( sect .
vi ) a : flavor conserving two - higgs - doublet models b : flavor changing neutral higgs models c : scalar leptoquark bosons d : higgsless models 4 .
extra space dimensions ( sect .
vii ) a : universal extra dimensions b : split fermion models c : warped geometries 5 .
extra symmetries ( sect .
viii ) a : minimal supersymmetric standard model b : quark - squark alignment models c : supersymmetry with r - parity violation d : split supersymmetry    in the above , we have chosen to consider only supersymmetry in sect .
viii due to its extensive literature and to cover other extended symmetries elsewhere in the paper .
any np degree of freedom will generally be associated with a generic heavy mass scale @xmath24 , at which the np interaction will be most naturally described .
at the scale @xmath25 of the charm mass , this description will have been modified by the effects of qcd .
these should not be neglected , so we perform our np analyses at one - loop level for the strong interactions .
the theoretical background for this is presented in sect .
finally , in order to place the np discussion within its proper context , it makes sense to first review sm charm mixing .
this is done in sect .
the remainder of the paper then amounts to considering charm mixing with lots of ` extras ' .
the paper concludes in sect .
ix with a summary of our findings .
let us first review some formal aspects of charm mixing .
the mixing arises from @xmath26 interactions that generate off - diagonal terms in the mass matrix for @xmath1 and @xmath27 mesons .
the expansion of the off - diagonal terms in the neutral @xmath3 mass matrix to second order in the weak interaction is [ m12 ] ( m - ) _ 21 = 0bar | h_w^|c|=2 | d^0 + _ n 0bar | h_w^|c|=1 | n n | h_w^|c|=1 | d^0 m_d - e_n+i  , where @xmath28 and @xmath29 are the effective @xmath26 and @xmath30 hamiltonians .
the off - diagonal mass - matrix terms induce mass eigenstates @xmath31 and @xmath32 that are superpositions of the flavor eigenstates @xmath1 and @xmath27 , @xmath33 where @xmath34 . the key quantities in @xmath1 mixing are the mass and width differences , @xmath35 or equivalently their dimensionless equivalents , x_d , y_d  , [ xy ] where @xmath36 is the average width of the two neutral @xmath3 meson mass eigenstates .
two quantities , @xmath11 and @xmath37 , which are actually measured in most experimental determinations of @xmath38 , are defined as y_d^(cp ) & & ( _ + - _ -)/ ( _ + + _ - ) = y_d - x_d(-a_prod )  , + y_d & & y_d _ k - x_d _ k  , [ y - defs ] where the transition rates @xmath39 pertain to decay into final states of definite cp , @xmath40 is the so - called production asymmetry of @xmath1 and @xmath41 ( giving the relative weight of @xmath1 and @xmath2 in the sample ) and @xmath42 is the strong phase difference between the cabibbo favored and double cabibbo suppressed amplitudes  @xcite . the quantities @xmath43 and @xmath44 account for the presence of cp violation in @xmath1-@xmath7 mixing , with @xmath43 being related to the @xmath45 parameters of eq .
( [ definition1 ] ) as @xmath46 and @xmath44 a cp - violating phase of @xmath47 ( if one neglects direct cp - violation )  @xcite . in practice
, @xmath48 is measured by comparing decays of @xmath1 into a state of definite cp , such as @xmath49 , to decays of @xmath1 into a final state which is not a cp - eigenstate ( such as @xmath50 ) whereas @xmath51 is extracted from a time - dependent analysis of the @xmath52 transition  @xcite .
the states @xmath53 allow for effects of cp violation .
however , cp violation in @xmath1 mixing is negligible in the standard model and there is no evidence for it experimentally  @xcite .
many new physics scenarios contain new phases which can induce sizable cp violation in the @xmath3 meson sector .
nonetheless , a thorough investigation of such effects is beyond the scope of the present paper .
therefore , we shall work in the limit of cp invariance ( so that @xmath54 ) for the remainder of this paper . throughout
, our phase convention will be @xmath55 then @xmath56 become the cp eigenstates @xmath57 with @xmath58 .    keeping in mind the neglect of cp - violation and also the phase convention of eq .
( [ phase ] ) , we relate the mixing quantities @xmath14 and @xmath9 to the mixing matrix as @xmath59 \ \ , \nonumber \\ & & y_{\rm d } = \frac{1}{2 m_{\rm d}\gamma_{\rm d}}\ ,   { \rm im}\ , \langle \d0bar |      \,i\
{ \rm d}^4 x\ , t \big\ {      { \cal h}^{|\delta c|=1}_w ( x)\ , { \cal h}^{|\delta c|=1}_w(0 ) \big\ }      | d^0 \rangle \ \ , \end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath60 is the weak hamiltonian density for @xmath30 transitions and @xmath61 denotes the time - ordered product .
there is no contribution to @xmath9 from the local @xmath26 term , as it has no absorptive part .
new physics contributions to @xmath9 have already been addressed in ref .
@xcite , so the primary thrust of this paper will be to focus on @xmath14 .    the next step , in sect .
ii , is to expand the time - ordered product of eq .
( [ ope ] ) in local operators of increasing dimension ( higher dimension operators being suppressed by powers of @xmath62 ) .
though the particles present in models with new physics may not be produced in charm quark decays , their effects can nonetheless be seen in the form of effective operators generated by the exchanges of these new particles . even without specifying the form of these new interactions , we know that their effect is to introduce several @xmath26 effective operators built out of the sm degrees of freedom .      by integrating out new degrees of freedom associated with new interactions at a scale @xmath24 , we are left with an effective hamiltonian written in the form of a series of operators of increasing dimension .
operator power counting then tells us the most important contributions are given by the operators of the lowest possible dimension , @xmath63 in this case .
this means that they must contain only quark degrees of freedom . realizing this , we can write the complete basis of these effective operators , which can be done most conveniently in terms of chiral quark fields , [ seriesofoperators ] f |
h_np | i = g
_ i=1 c_i ( )   f | q_i | i ( )  , where the prefactor @xmath64 has the dimension of inverse - squared mass , the @xmath65 are dimensionless wilson coefficients , operators as @xmath66 and those for @xmath67 operators as @xmath68 . ] and the @xmath69 are the effective operators :    l q_1 = ( _ l _ c_l )  ( _ l ^c_l )  , + q_2 = ( _ l _ c_l )  ( _ r ^c_r )  , + q_3 = ( _ l c_r )  ( _ r c_l )  , + q_4 = ( _ r c_l )  ( _ r c_l )  ,    l q_5 = ( _ r _ c_l )  ( _ r ^ c_l )  , + q_6 = ( _ r _ c_r )  ( _ r ^c_r )  , + q_7 = ( _ l c_r )  ( _ l c_r )  , + q_8 = ( _ l _ c_r )  ( _ l ^ c_r )  .    [ setofoperators ] in total , there are eight possible operator structures that exhaust the list of possible independent contributions to @xmath26 transitions . since these operators are generated at the scale @xmath24 where the new physics is integrated out , a non - trivial operator mixing can occur when we take into account renormalization group running of these operators between the scales @xmath24 and @xmath70 , with @xmath70 being the scale where the hadronic matrix elements are computed .
we shall work at the renormalization scale @xmath71  gev .
this evolution is determined by solving the rg equations obeyed by the wilson coefficients , [ anomeq ] c ( ) = ^t c ( )  , where @xmath72 represents the matrix of anomalous dimensions of the operators in eq .
( [ setofoperators ] ) ( note the transposition ) .
( [ anomeq ] ) can be solved by transforming to the basis where the transpose of the anomalous dimension matrix is diagonal , integrating , and then transferring back to the original basis @xmath73 . at leading order , we have c ( ) = u ( , m ) c(m )  , where @xmath74 is the evolution matrix , obtained from eq .
( [ anomeq ] ) by u ( _ 1,_2 ) = v _ d v^-1  . in the above , @xmath75 is the vector containing the diagonal elements of the diagonalized transposed matrix of the anomalous dimensions @xmath76 , @xmath77 is the matrix that diagonalizes @xmath78 and r(_1,_2 )  . for completeness , we display the matrix of anomalous dimensions at leading - order ( lo ) in qcd  @xcite , = (    c c c c c c c c 6- & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 + 0 & & 12 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 + 0 & 0 & -6 n_c+ & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 + 0 & 0 & 0 & 6 - 6 n_c+ & - & 0 & 0 & 0 + 0 & 0 & 0 & -24- & 6 + 2 n_c - & 0 & 0 & 0 + 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 6- & 0 & 0 + 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 6 - 6 n_c+ & - + 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & -24- & 6 + 2 n_c - +    ) we note that ref .
@xcite also includes the next - to - leading order ( nlo ) expressions for the elements in the anomalous dimensions matrix .
however , we perform our calculations at lo here since the nlo corrections to the matching conditions in the various models of new physics have generally not been computed .    due to the relatively simple structure of @xmath79 , one can easily write the evolution of each wilson coefficient in eq .
( [ seriesofoperators ] ) from the new physics scale @xmath80 down to the hadronic scale @xmath70 , taking into account quark thresholds . corresponding to each of the eight operators @xmath81 ( @xmath82 ) is an rg factor @xmath83 .
the first of these , @xmath84 , is given explicitly by r_1(,m)&= & ( ) ^2/7 ( ) ^6/23 ( ) ^6/25  .
[ wilson ] and the rest can be expressed in terms of @xmath84 as    l r_2(,m ) = [ r_1(,m)]^1/2  , + r_3(,m ) = [ r_1(,m)]^-4  , + r_4(,m ) = [ r_1(,m)]^(1 + ) /6  , + r_5(,m ) = [ r_1(,m)]^(1 - ) /6  ,    l + r_6(,m ) = r_1(,m )  , + r_7(,m ) = r_4(,m )  , + r_8(,m ) = r_5(,m )  .
the rg factors are generally only weakly dependent on the np scale @xmath24 since it is taken to be larger than the top quark mass , @xmath85 , and the evolution of @xmath86 is slow at these high mass scales . in table
[ tab : lo ] , we display numerical values for the @xmath83 with @xmath87  tev and @xmath88  gev . here , we compute @xmath86 using the one - loop evolution and matching expressions for perturbative consistency with the rg evolution of the effective hamiltonian .
c||c|c|c|c|c @xmath89 & @xmath90 & @xmath91 & @xmath92 & @xmath93 & @xmath94 + @xmath95 & @xmath96 & @xmath97 & @xmath98 & @xmath99 & @xmath100 + @xmath101 & @xmath102 & @xmath103 & @xmath104 & @xmath105 & @xmath106 +    .05 in      we will need to evaluate the @xmath1-to-@xmath7 matrix elements of the eight dimension - six basis operators .
in general , this implies eight non - perturbative parameters that would have to be evaluated by means of qcd sum rules or on the lattice .
we choose those parameters ( denoted by @xmath107 ) as follows , @xmath108 where latexmath:[$\langle q_i \rangle \equiv \langle { \bar d}^0    @xmath3 meson decay constant . by and large ,
the compensatory @xmath110-factors @xmath111 are unknown , except in vacuum saturation and in the heavy quark limit ; there , one has @xmath112 .    since most of the matrix elements in eq .
( [ me ] ) are not known , we will need something more manageable in order to obtain numerical results .
the usual approach to computing matrix elements is to employ the vacuum saturation approximation .
however , because some of the @xmath110-parameters are known , we would like to introduce a ` modified vacuum saturation ' ( mvs ) , where all matrix elements in eq .
( [ me ] ) are written in terms of ( known ) matrix elements of @xmath113 and @xmath114 matrix elements @xmath115 and @xmath116 , @xmath117 where we denote @xmath118 as the number of colors and , as in ref .
@xcite , define [ bbar ] |b_d^(s ) b_d^(s ) as well as [ eta ]  .    in our numerical work ,
we take @xmath119 , which is the most recent result from the quenched lattice calculation  @xcite , and use the cleo - c determination @xmath120  @xcite .
we urge the lattice community to perform an evaluation of the @xmath121 parameters defined in eq .
( [ me ] ) for the full operator set relevant to @xmath3 meson mixing .
theoretical predictions of @xmath14 and @xmath9 within the standard model span several orders of magnitude . roughly , there are two approaches , neither of which give very reliable results because @xmath25 is in some sense intermediate between the heavy - quark and light - quark limits .
consider , for example , @xmath122 as given in eq .
( [ ope ] ) @xmath123 to utilize this relation , one inserts intermediate states between the @xmath124 weak hamiltonian densities @xmath125 .
this can be done using either quark or hadron degrees of freedom .
let us consider each of these possibilities in turn .
the `` inclusive '' ( or quark - level ) approach is based on the operator product expansion ( ope ) . in the @xmath126 limit , where @xmath127 is a scale characteristic of the strong interactions , @xmath128 and @xmath129 can be expanded in terms of matrix elements of local operators  @xcite of increasing dimensions suppressed by powers of inverse charm quark mass .    .
]    an instructive example concerns a recent analysis of the leading dimension @xmath130 case  @xcite in which the width difference @xmath9 is calculated in terms of quarks ( _ cf _ fig .
[ fig : loop ] ) and the mass difference @xmath14 is then found from dispersion relations .
the calculation is carried out as an expansion in qcd , including leading - order @xmath131 and next - to - leading order @xmath132 contributions with @xmath133 here , lo and nlo denote only the corrections at that order and not the full quantity computed to that order . because @xmath134 , @xmath38 experiences no @xmath135-quark contribution .- quark contribution to @xmath16 ; its numerical contribution is subleading ( @xmath136 whereas @xmath137 ) . ]
this leaves only @xmath138 , @xmath139 and @xmath140 intermediate states contributing to the mixing diagram of fig .
[ fig : loop ] .
taking @xmath141 , the mixing loop - functions will depend on @xmath142 .
table  [ tab : qkmix ] examines in detail the loop - functions for @xmath122 and shows the results of carrying out an expansion in powers of @xmath143 .
we see that the contributions of the individual intermediate states in the mixing diagram are _ not _ intrinsically small  in fact , they begin to contribute at @xmath144
. however , flavor cancellations remove all contributions through @xmath145 for @xmath122 , so the net result is @xmath146 .
charm mixing clearly experiences a remarkable gim suppression !
the corresponding result for @xmath16 turns out to be @xmath145 .
summarizing , the leading dependences in @xmath143 for the dimension six contributions are y_d^(lo ) ~z^3x_d^(lo ) ~z^2y_d^(nlo ) ~z^2x_d^(nlo ) ~z^2  .
[ order ]    .flavor cancellations in @xmath122 . [ cols="^,^,^,^",options="header " , ]     .05 in    we recommend further experimental study of this subject on two fronts .
first , of course , is the need to reduce error bars in the measured values of @xmath9 and especially @xmath14 . equally important
is continuing the search for evidence of cp violation in mixing for the @xmath1 system .
cp violation provides an interesting contrast with @xmath1 mixing because it provides an independent arena for competition between the sm and np signals .
there is especially room for improvement in the sm analysis of charm cp violation , and work on this is underway .
the work of e.g. was supported in part by the u.s .
national science foundation under grant phy0555304 , j.h . was supported by the u.s .
department of energy under contract de - ac02 - 76sf00515 , s.p . was supported by the u.s .
department of energy under contract de - fg02 - 04er41291 and a.p .  was supported in part by the u.s .
national science foundation under career award phy0547794 , and by the u.s .
department of energy under contract de - fg02 - 96er41005 .
j.h . would like to thank the theoretical physics group at fermilab for their hospitality and e.g. , j.h .
, and a.p .
thank the high energy physics group at the university of hawaii for their hospitality while part of this work was performed .
we would like to thank c.f .
berger , s. chivukula , b. dobrescu , j. donoghue , k.c .
kong , b. lillie , e. lunghi , e. simmons and t. tait for discussions related to this work and especially t. browder , t. rizzo , and x. tata for a careful reading of the manuscript .
here , we collect the formulae used throughout the manuscript to compute the contributions to @xmath1-@xmath147 mixing in the various new physics models .
the loop functions , first calculated by inami lim , apply for several np scenarios discussed in the text . for a contribution from two internal quarks of the same flavor in the box diagram ,
the loop function is @xmath148 -{3x^3\over 2(1-x)^3}\ln x\ \ , \ ] ] and for two quarks of different flavors , @xmath149   + ( x_i \leftrightarrow x_j ) \right .
\nonumber   \\ & & \left . \hspace{5.0 cm } - { 3\over 4(1-x_i)(1-x_j ) } \right ) \ \ .\end{aligned}\ ] ]              the loop functions with one @xmath155 and one sm @xmath156 boson and with two @xmath155 being exchanged in the box diagram are @xmath157\ , \nonumber \\
a_{\rm wh}(x , y ) & = & 2x^2\left[{1\over ( x - y)(1-x)}+{y\ln y\over ( x - y)^2(1-y ) }
+ { ( x^2-y)\ln x\over ( x - y)^2(1-x)^2}\right . \nonumber\\ & & \left . -{1\over 4}\left ( { x\over ( x - y)(1-x ) } + { y^2\ln y\over ( 1-y)(x - y)^2 } + { x(x+xy-2y)\ln x\over ( x - y)^2(1-x)^2}\right)\right]\ \ .\end{aligned}\ ] ]              the coupling of two zero - mode fermions to the @xmath159 gauge boson kk state , @xmath160 , relative to the sm coupling strength is @xmath161 \int_{e^{-\pi kr_c}}^1 dz\ , z^{(1 - 2c_f)}{j_1(x_nz)+\alpha_ny_1(x_nz ) \over |j_1(x_n)+\alpha_ny_1(x_n)|}\ \ , \ ] ] where the roots @xmath162 for the gauge boson kk spectrum are given by @xmath163 = 0\ \ , \ ] ] and @xmath164 is defined by @xmath165          # 1 # 2 # 3 int .
.  phys .  *
# 1 * ,  # 2 ( # 3 ) # 1 # 2 # 3 mod .
# 1 * ,  # 2 ( # 3 ) # 1 # 2 # 3 nucl .
# 1 * ,  # 2 ( # 3 ) # 1 # 2 # 3 phys .
# 1 * ,  # 2 ( # 3 ) # 1 # 2 # 3 phys .  rep .
* # 1 * ,  # 2 ( # 3 ) # 1 # 2 # 3 phys .
* # 1 * ,  # 2 ( # 3 ) # 1 # 2 # 3 phys .
lett .  * # 1 * ,  # 2 ( # 3 ) # 1 # 2 # 3 rev .
# 1 * ,  # 2 ( # 3 ) # 1 # 2 # 3 z.  phys .
* # 1 * ,  # 2 ( # 3 ) a.  datta and d.  kumbhakar , z.  phys .
c * 27 * , 515 ( 1985 ) .          the babar collaboration , b. aubert , , ` search for @xmath168 mixing using doubly flavor tagged semileptonic decay modes , ' arxiv:0705.0704 [ hep - ex ] . g.  burdman and i.  shipsey , ann .
nucl .  part .
sci .   * 53 * , 431 ( 2003 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0310076 ] ; g.  burdman , e.  golowich , j.l .
hewett and s.  pakvasa , phys .
d * 52 * , 6383 ( 1995 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9502329 ] ; j.l .
hewett , t.  takeuchi and s.d .
thomas , in _ electroweak symmetry breaking and beyond the standard model _ ed . by t. barklow , , world scientific , arxiv : hep - ph/9603391 ; s.  bianco , f.  l.  fabbri , d.  benson and i.  bigi , riv .
nuovo cim .
* 26n7 * , 1 ( 2003 ) [ arxiv : hep - ex/0309021 ] ; a.  a.  petrov , int .
j.  mod .
a * 21 * , 5686 ( 2006 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0611361 ] ; a.  a.  petrov , _ in the proceedings of flavor physics and cp violation ( fpcp 2003 ) , paris , france , 3 - 6 jun 2003 , pp mec05 _ [ arxiv : hep - ph/0311371 ] ; h.  n.  nelson , in _ proc . of the 19th
symp . on photon and lepton interactions at high energy lp99
jaros and m.e .
peskin , arxiv : hep - ex/9908021 .
heavy flavor averaging group , http://www.slac.stanford.edu/xorg/hfag/charm/index.html ; d. asner , ` charm physics ' , talk at the _ workshop on flavor in the era of the lhc _ , cern ( 3/26 - 28/07 ) ; b. peterson , talk given at the _ charm 2007 workshop _
, cornell university , ithaca , ny , august 2007 .    e.  golowich and a.a .
petrov , phys .
b * 625 * , 53 ( 2005 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0506185 ] .
a.  f.  falk , y.  nir and a.  a.  petrov , jhep * 9912 * , 019 ( 1999 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9911369 ] .
s.  bergmann , y.  grossman , z.  ligeti , y.  nir and a.a .
petrov , phys .
b * 486 * , 418 ( 2000 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0005181 ] .
y.  nir , ` lessons from babar and belle measurements of @xmath169 mixing parameters , ' arxiv : hep - ph/0703235 .
particle data group ( w .- m .
yao et al . ) , ` review of particle physics ' , j.phys.g33:1-1232,2006 .
e.  golowich , s.  pakvasa and a.a .
petrov , phys .
* 98 * , 181808 - 1 ( 2007 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0610039 ] .
m.  ciuchini , e.  franco , v.  lubicz , g.  martinelli , i.  scimemi and l.  silvestrini , nucl .
b * 523 * , 501 ( 1998 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9711402 ] .
r.  gupta , t.  bhattacharya and s.  r.  sharpe , phys .
d * 55 * , 4036 ( 1997 ) [ arxiv : hep - lat/9611023 ] .
m.  artuso _ et al . _
[ cleo collaboration ] , phys .
* 95 * , 251801 ( 2005 ) [ arxiv : hep - ex/0508057 ] .
bigi and n.g .
uraltsev , nucl .
b * 592 * , 92 ( 2001 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0005089 ] .
falk , y.  grossman , z.  ligeti and a.a .
petrov , phys .
d * 65 * , 054034 ( 2002 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0110317 ] .
e.  golowich , a.a .
petrov and g.  yeghiyan ( in progress ) .
e.  golowich and a.  a.  petrov , phys .
b * 427 * , 172 ( 1998 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9802291 ] .
donoghue , e.  golowich , b.r .
holstein and j.  trampetic , phys .
d * 33 * , 179 ( 1986 ) .
l. wolfenstein , b164 170 1985 .
f.  buccella , m.  lusignoli , g.  miele , a.  pugliese and p.  santorelli , phys .
d * 51 * , 3478 ( 1995 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9411286 ] .
falk , y.  grossman , z.  ligeti , y.  nir and a.a .
petrov , phys .
d * 69 * , 114021 ( 2004 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0402204 ] .
m.e .  peskin and t.  takeuchi ,
d * 46 * , 381 ( 1992 ) .
lep electroweak working group , phys .
rept .   * 427 * , 257 ( 2006 ) [ arxiv : hep - ex/0509008 ] .
see , for example , h.j .
he , n.  polonsky and s.f .
su , phys .
d * 64 * , 053004 ( 2001 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0102144 ] .
chanowitz , m.a .
furman and i.  hinchliffe , phys .
b * 78 * , 285 ( 1978 ) ; nucl .
b * 153 * , 402 ( 1979 ) .
babu , x.g .
he , x.  li and s.  pakvasa , phys .
b * 205 * , 540 ( 1988 ) .
f.  gursey , p.  ramond and p.  sikivie , phys .
b * 60 * , 177 ( 1976 ) .
j.l .  hewett and t.g .
rizzo , phys .
* 183 * , 193 ( 1989 ) .
n.  arkani - hamed , a.g .
cohen , e.  katz and a.e .
nelson , jhep * 0207 * , 034 ( 2002 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0206021 ] .
n.  arkani - hamed , a.g .
cohen , e.  katz , a.e .
nelson , t.  gregoire and j.g .
wacker , jhep * 0208 * , 021 ( 2002 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0206020 ] .
bjorken , s.  pakvasa and s.f .
tuan , phys .
d * 66 * , 053008 ( 2002 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0206116 ] .      n.  arkani - hamed , a.g .
cohen and h.  georgi , phys .
b * 513 * , 232 ( 2001 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0105239 ] ; for a review , see , m.  perelstein , prog .  part .
* 58 * , 247 ( 2007 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0512128 ] .
j.  y.  lee , jhep * 0412 * , 065 ( 2004 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0408362 ] . c.  h.  chen ,
c.  q.  geng and t.  c.  yuan , ` @xmath3-@xmath170
mixing and rare d decays in the littlest higgs model with non - unitarity matrix , ' arxiv:0704.0601 [ hep - ph ] .    c.  csaki , j.  hubisz , g.  d.  kribs , p.  meade and j.  terning , phys .
d * 67 * , 115002 ( 2003 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0211124 ] ; j.  l.  hewett , f.  j.  petriello and t.  g.  rizzo , jhep * 0310 * , 062 ( 2003 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0211218 ] ; m.  c.  chen and s.  dawson , phys .
d * 70 * , 015003 ( 2004 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0311032 ] . c.  csaki , j.  hubisz , g.  d.  kribs , p.  meade and j.  terning , phys .
d * 68 * , 035009 ( 2003 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0303236 ] .
h.  c.  cheng and i.  low , jhep * 0309 * , 051 ( 2003 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0308199 ] ; h.  c.  cheng and i.  low , jhep * 0408 * , 061 ( 2004 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0405243 ] .
c.  t.  hill and r.  j.  hill , arxiv : hep - ph/0701044 ; c.  t.  hill and r.  j.  hill , arxiv:0705.0697 [ hep - ph ] .
j.  hubisz , s.  j.  lee and g.  paz , jhep * 0606 * , 041 ( 2006 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0512169 ] ; m.  blanke , a.  j.  buras , a.  poschenrieder , c.  tarantino , s.  uhlig and a.  weiler , jhep * 0612 * , 003 ( 2006 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0605214 ] . m.  blanke , a.  j.  buras , s.  recksiegel , c.  tarantino and s.  uhlig , ` littlest higgs model with t - parity confronting the new data on @xmath169 mixing , ' arxiv : hep - ph/0703254 .
see , for example , p.  savard , `` searches for extra dimensions and new gauge bosons at the tevatron , '' talk given at the _ xxxiii international conference on high energy physics _
, 26 july-2 august 2006 , moscow , russia ; t.  adams , `` searches for new phenomena with lepton final states at the tevatron , '' talk given at _
rencontres de moriond electroweak interactions and unified theories 2007 _ , la thuile , italy 10 - 17 march 2007 ; a.  abulencia _ et al . _
[ cdf collaboration ] , ` search for @xmath171 boson decaying to electron - neutrino pairs in @xmath172 collisions at @xmath173 tev , ' arxiv : hep - ex/0611022 .
t.  g.  rizzo , z phenomenology and the lhc , arxiv : hep - ph/0610104 .
p.  langacker and m.  plumacher , phys .
d * 62 * , 013006 ( 2000 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0001204 ] .
a.  arhrib , k.  cheung , c.  w.  chiang and t.  c.  yuan , phys .
d * 73 * , 075015 ( 2006 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0602175 ] .
n.  g.  deshpande , e.  keith and t.  g.  rizzo , phys .
lett .   * 70 * , 3189 ( 1993 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9211310 ] .
k.  kiers , m.  assis and a.  a.  petrov , phys .  rev .
d * 71 * , 115015 ( 2005 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0503115 ] .
g.  beall , m.  bander and a.  soni , phys .
lett .   * 48 * , 848 ( 1982 ) .
d.  chang , r.  n.  mohapatra and m.  k.  parida , phys .
d * 30 * , 1052 ( 1984 ) .
f.  i.  olness and m.  e.  ebel , phys .
d * 30 * , 1034 ( 1984 ) ; p.  langacker and s.  uma sankar , phys .
d * 40 * , 1569 ( 1989 ) .
t.  g.  rizzo , phys .
d * 50 * , 325 ( 1994 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9311265 ] .
z.  chacko , h.  s.  goh and r.  harnik , phys .
lett .   * 96 * , 231802 ( 2006 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0506256 ] ; h.  s.  goh and s.  su , phys .
d * 75 * , 075010 ( 2007 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0611015 ] .
k.  s.  babu , x.  g.  he and e.  ma , phys
.  rev .
d * 36 * , 878 ( 1987 ) .
e.  ma , mod .
lett .   a * 3 * , 319 ( 1988 ) .
b.  abbott _ et al . _
[ d0 collaboration ] , phys .
lett .   * 83 * , 2896 ( 1999 ) [ arxiv : hep - ex/9904023 ] .
s.  davidson , d.  c.  bailey and b.  a.  campbell , z.  phys .
c * 61 * , 613 ( 1994 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9309310 ] .
m.  leurer , phys .
d * 50 * , 536 ( 1994 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9312341 ] . for a summary , see , j.  l.  hewett and t.  g.  rizzo , phys .
d * 56 * , 5709 ( 1997 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9703337 ] .
see , for example , b.  grinstein and m.  b.  wise , phys .
b * 201 * , 274 ( 1988 ) ; t.  g.  rizzo , phys .
d * 38 * , 820 ( 1988 ) ; j.l .
hewett , phys .
lett .   * 70 * , 1045 ( 1993 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9211256 ] ; v.d .
barger , m.  s.  berger and r.  j.  n.  phillips , phys .
* 70 * , 1368 ( 1993 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9211260 ] .
m.  misiak _ et al .
_ , phys .
lett .   * 98 * , 022002 ( 2007 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0609232 ] .
barger , j.l .
hewett and r.j.n .
phillips , phys .
d * 41 * , 3421 ( 1990 ) .
g.  isidori and a.  retico , jhep * 0111 * , 001 ( 2001 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0110121 ] ; a.j .
buras , p.h .
chankowski , j.  rosiek and l.  slawianowska , nucl .
b * 619 * , 434 ( 2001 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0107048 ] . s.  pakvasa and h.  sugawara , 73b 61 1978 .
cheng and m.  sher , phys .
d * 35 * , 3484 ( 1987 ) .
l.  j.  hall and s.  weinberg , phys .
d * 48 * , 979 ( 1993 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9303241 ] .
d.  acosta _ et al .
_ [ cdf collaboration ] , phys .  rev .
d * 72 * , 051107 ( 2005 ) [ arxiv : hep - ex/0506074 ] ; a.  abulencia _ et al .
_ [ cdf collaboration ] , phys .  rev .
d * 73 * , 051102 ( 2006 ) [ arxiv : hep - ex/0512055 ] .
r.  s.  chivukula , n.  j.  evans and e.  h.  simmons , phys .
d * 66 * , 035008 ( 2002 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0204193 ] .
n.  arkani - hamed , a.  g.  cohen , t.  gregoire and j.  g.  wacker , jhep * 0208 * , 020 ( 2002 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0202089 ] .
c.  csaki , c.  grojean , l.  pilo and j.  terning , phys .
lett .   * 92 * , 101802 ( 2004 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0308038 ] . c.  csaki , c.  grojean , h.  murayama , l.  pilo and j.  terning , phys .
d * 69 * , 055006 ( 2004 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0305237 ] .
y.  nomura , jhep * 0311 * , 050 ( 2003 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0309189 ] ; r.  barbieri , a.  pomarol and r.  rattazzi , phys .
b * 591 * , 141 ( 2004 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0310285 ] ; h.  davoudiasl , j.  l.  hewett , b.  lillie and t.  g.  rizzo , phys .
d * 70 * , 015006 ( 2004 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0312193 ] ; g.  burdman and y.  nomura , phys .
d * 69 * , 115013 ( 2004 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0312247 ] ; g.  cacciapaglia , c.  csaki , c.  grojean and j.  terning , phys .
d * 70 * , 075014 ( 2004 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0401160 ] ; h.  davoudiasl , j.  l.  hewett , b.  lillie and t.  g.  rizzo , jhep * 0405 * , 015 ( 2004 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0403300 ] . c.  csaki , c.  grojean , j.  hubisz , y.  shirman and j.  terning , phys .
d * 70 * , 015012 ( 2004 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0310355 ] . for a review of tev - scale extra dimensional models and their experimental consequences ,
see for example , j.  hewett and m.  spiropulu , ann .
nucl .  part .
sci .   * 52 * , 397 ( 2002 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0205106 ] ; t.  g.  rizzo , _ in the proceedings of 32nd slac summer institute on particle physics ( ssi 2004 ) : natures greatest puzzles , menlo park , california , 2 - 13 aug 2004 , pp l013 _ [ arxiv : hep - ph/0409309 ] .
i.  antoniadis , phys .
b * 246 * , 377 ( 1990 ) ; j.  d.  lykken , phys .
d * 54 * , 3693 ( 1996 ) [ arxiv : hep - th/9603133 ] ; i.  antoniadis and m.  quiros , phys .
b * 392 * , 61 ( 1997 ) [ arxiv : hep - th/9609209 ] .
t.  appelquist , h.  c.  cheng and b.  a.  dobrescu , phys .
d * 64 * , 035002 ( 2001 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0012100 ] .    g.  servant and t.  m.
p.  tait , nucl .
b * 650 * , 391 ( 2003 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0206071 ] , new j.  phys .   * 4 * , 99 ( 2002 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0209262 ] ; h.  c.  cheng , j.  l.  feng and k.  t.  matchev , phys .
lett .   * 89 * , 211301 ( 2002 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0207125 ] . c. lin , search for universal extra dimensions in the multi - lepton channel at the tevatron , cdf
thesis , fermilab - pub-05 - 572-e .
h.  c.  cheng , k.  t.  matchev and m.  schmaltz , phys .
d * 66 * , 036005 ( 2002 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0204342 ] .
a.  j.  buras , m.  spranger and a.  weiler , nucl .
b * 660 * , 225 ( 2003 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0212143 ] .
n.  arkani - hamed , y.  grossman and m.  schmaltz , phys .
d * 61 * , 115004 ( 2000 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9909411 ] .
e.  a.  mirabelli and m.  schmaltz , phys .
d * 61 * , 113011 ( 2000 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9912265 ] ; g.  c.  branco , a.  de gouvea and m.  n.  rebelo , phys .
b * 506 * , 115 ( 2001 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0012289 ] ; d.  e.  kaplan and t.  m.  p.  tait , jhep * 0111 * , 051 ( 2001 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0110126 ] ; y.  grossman and g.  perez , phys .
d * 67 * , 015011 ( 2003 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0210053 ] ; c.  biggio , f.  feruglio , i.  masina and m.  perez - victoria , nucl .
b * 677 * , 451 ( 2004 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0305129 ] ; b.  lillie , jhep * 0312 * , 030 ( 2003 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0308091 ] ; y.  grossman , r.  harnik , g.  perez , m.  d.  schwartz and z.  surujon , phys .
d * 71 * , 056007 ( 2005 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0407260 ] ; g.  perez and t.  volansky , phys .
d * 72 * , 103522 ( 2005 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0505222 ] .
a.  delgado , a.  pomarol and m.  quiros , jhep * 0001 * , 030 ( 2000 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9911252 ] ; w.  f.  chang and j.  n.  ng , jhep * 0212 * , 077 ( 2002 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0210414 ] .
b.  lillie and j.  l.  hewett , phys .
d * 68 * , 116002 ( 2003 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0306193 ] .
l.  randall and r.  sundrum , phys .
* 83 * , 3370 ( 1999 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9905221 ] .
s.  j.  huber and q.  shafi , phys .
b * 498 * , 256 ( 2001 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0010195 ] ; s.  j.  huber , nucl .
b * 666 * , 269 ( 2003 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0303183 ] ; g.  burdman , phys .
b * 590 * , 86 ( 2004 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0310144 ] ; k.  agashe , g.  perez and a.  soni , phys .  rev .  lett .   * 93 * , 201804 ( 2004 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0406101 ] . k.  agashe , g.  perez and a.  soni , phys .
d * 71 * , 016002 ( 2005 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0408134 ] .
h.  davoudiasl , j.  l.  hewett and t.  g.  rizzo , phys .
b * 473 * , 43 ( 2000 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9911262 ] ; a.  pomarol , phys .
b * 486 * , 153 ( 2000 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9911294 ] .
y.  grossman and m.  neubert , phys .
b * 474 * , 361 ( 2000 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9912408 ] ; t.  gherghetta and a.  pomarol , nucl .
b * 586 * , 141 ( 2000 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0003129 ] .
h.  davoudiasl , j.  l.  hewett and t.  g.  rizzo , phys .
d * 63 * , 075004 ( 2001 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0006041 ] .
s.  j.  huber and q.  shafi , phys .
d * 63 * , 045010 ( 2001 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0005286 ] ; s.  j.  huber , c.  a.  lee and q.  shafi , phys .
b * 531 * , 112 ( 2002 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0111465 ] ; c.  csaki , j.  erlich and j.  terning , phys .  rev .
d * 66 * , 064021 ( 2002 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0203034 ] ; j.  l.  hewett , f.  j.  petriello and t.  g.  rizzo , jhep * 0209 * , 030 ( 2002 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0203091 ] . k.  agashe , a.  delgado , m.  j.  may and r.  sundrum , jhep * 0308 * , 050 ( 2003 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0308036 ] . k.  agashe , r.  contino and a.  pomarol , nucl .  phys .
b * 719 * , 165 ( 2005 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0412089 ] ; k.  agashe , a.  e.  blechman and f.  petriello , phys .
d * 74 * , 053011 ( 2006 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0606021 ] .
h.  davoudiasl and a.  soni , arxiv:0705.0151 [ hep - ph ] .
j.  r.  ellis and d.  v.  nanopoulos , phys .
b * 110 * , 44 ( 1982 ) .
h.  p.  nilles , phys .
rept .   * 110 * , 1 ( 1984 ) .
h.  georgi , phys .
b * 169 * , 231 ( 1986 ) .
l.  j.  hall , v.  a.  kostelecky and s.  raby , nucl .
b * 267 * , 415 ( 1986 ) . for a comprehensive study of fcnc effects in supersymmetry
see , s.  bertolini , f.  borzumati , a.  masiero and g.  ridolfi , nucl .
b * 353 * , 591 ( 1991 ) ; f.  gabbiani , e.  gabrielli , a.  masiero and l.  silvestrini , nucl .
b * 477 * , 321 ( 1996 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9604387 ] ; i.  i.  y.  bigi , f.  gabbiani and a.  masiero , z.  phys .
c * 48 * , 633 ( 1990 ) .
m.  ciuchini , e.  franco , d.  guadagnoli , v.  lubicz , v.  porretti and l.  silvestrini , jhep * 0609 * , 013 ( 2006 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0606197 ] .
j.  a.  bagger , k.  t.  matchev and r.  j.  zhang , phys .
b * 412 * , 77 ( 1997 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9707225 ] .
m.  ciuchini , e.  franco , d.  guadagnoli , v.  lubicz , m.  pierini , v.  porretti and l.  silvestrini , d - anti - d mixing and new physics : general considerations and constraints on the mssm , arxiv : hep - ph/0703204 .
y.  nir and n.  seiberg , phys .
b * 309 * , 337 ( 1993 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9304307 ] .
y.  nir and g.  raz , phys .
d * 66 * , 035007 ( 2002 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0206064 ] .
see , for example , l.  e.  ibanez and g.  g.  ross , nucl .
b * 368 * , 3 ( 1992 ) .
k.  agashe and m.  graesser , phys .
d * 54 * , 4445 ( 1996 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9510439 ] .
for a recent summary of constraints on the r - parity violating couplings , see , h. baer and x. tata , _ weak scale supersymmetry : from superfields to scattering events _ ( cambridge university press , cambridge , england 2006 ) .
see , also , b.  c.  allanach , a.  dedes and h.  k.  dreiner , phys .
d * 60 * , 075014 ( 1999 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9906209 ] ; g.  bhattacharyya , ` a brief review of r - parity - violating couplings , ' arxiv : hep - ph/9709395 , and references therein .
n.  arkani - hamed and s.  dimopoulos , jhep * 0506 * , 073 ( 2005 ) [ arxiv : hep - th/0405159 ] ; g.  f.  giudice and a.  romanino , nucl .
b * 699 * , 65 ( 2004 ) [ erratum - ibid .
b * 706 * , 65 ( 2005 ) ] [ arxiv : hep - ph/0406088 ] .


nasa s _ kepler _ mission has discovered that many of the planetary systems around solar - type stars contain multiple planets ( kepler multis , * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
planets detected in these systems likely possess low mutual inclinations ( e.g. * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ) , and are spaced closely . in multiple systems that contain high number of planets ( 4 - 6 )
, the spacing is so tight that there may be of order @xmath1 planets fitted inside the orbit of mercury .
systems where a single planet transit ( kepler single ) and where multiple planets transit ( kepler multis ) may share the same intrinsic architecture but only differ in transit geometry .
however , a few statistical studies have shown that this is not the case .
there appears to be an excess in the number of singles over what one expects by extrapolating from the kepler multis @xcite , suggesting that many of the singles are intrinsically singles .
even the multis may contain different sorts of systems .
a direct probe of the underlying population is provided by transit - time - variations ( ttv ) .
@xcite probed the presence of close - companions ( transiting or not ) around kepler candidates using ttv signals .
they found a striking correlation between the fraction of planets that show detectable ttvs and their transit multiplicity .
systems where four or more planets transit enjoy four times higher ttv fraction than kepler singles do , and about twice as high as those with two or three transiting planets
. this led them to propose that there are at least two different classes of kepler systems , one closely packed and one sparsely populated ( also see * ? ? ?
besides from planet spacing , orbital eccentricity and inclinations also differ between the two classes . compared to kepler multis
, the transit durations of kepler singles appear to be longer , requiring their orbits to have higher eccentricities ( wu , unpublished ) ; study of stellar obliquity suggests that kepler singles may lie on orbits more misaligned with the stellar spin than the multis @xcite .
both lend to the picture that kepler multis are dynamically cold systems , while singles are dynamically hotter .
what could have produced such a dichotomy ?
@xcite explored the possibility of dynamical instability .
they boosted the masses of observed triple planetary systems by about a factor of 10 and found that these systems could become destabilized within 10 billion years .
this led them to hypothesize that kepler singles may be the aftermath of dynamical instability . in this study , we provide much more definite arguments to this hypothesis by investigating the spacing distribution among the closely packed multi systems ( 4 planets and more ) .
we find that , adopting realistic planetary masses and ages , kepler high multiple systems are packed close to the boundary of stability .
this proximity has to be explained .
unless the formation mechanism is somehow capable of producing this proximity , the most likely explanation is that the primordial systems had a range of spacing , but the ones that were packed too closely have been sculpted away by the subsequent billions of years of evolution . in this hypothesis , kepler singles and lower multiples are the descendants of kepler multis .
if this true , we may be able to recover the primordial spacing of planetary systems .
here , we set the scene by reviewing some previous results on stability in multiple planetary systems .
johannes kepler ( 1571 - 1630 ) , after whom the _ kepler _ mission is named , initially believed that the spacing of planets in the solar system is limited by packing perfect solids ( polygons with identical faces ) .
he discarded this idea after developing his famous kepler laws .
however , the question still remains , how tight can you pack planets together without affecting dynamical instability . over the past few decades , some theoretical progress have been made in answering this question , and in some special cases the answers are known exactly
.    one usually measure spacing between every two planets in a unit called the mutual hill sphere @xmath4 where @xmath5 , @xmath6 are the semi - major axis and mass of the two planets , and @xmath7 the mass of the central star . in this unit , planet spacing can be expressed as a dimensionless number @xmath8 @xmath9    we first focus only on orbits that are circular and coplanar .
a well known result , derived by @xcite based on overlapping of first order mean - motion resonances , is that a test particle ( @xmath10 ) perturbed by a planet ( @xmath11 ) is subject to orbital chaos if it lies too close to the planet , @xmath12 where @xmath13 is the planet mass ratio and the numerical coefficient is adopted from @xcite . in @xmath8 value , the critical spacing is @xmath14 this result is little modified if the test particle is instead substituted by a planet @xcite .
the dependence of @xmath15 on @xmath16 ( albeit weak ) indicates that hill sphere is not necessarily the best unit to measure stability .
however , we adopt it here for convenience .
there is also an important result on hill stability ( stability against orbit crossing ) , popularized in astronomy by @xcite . as a result of total energy and angular momentum conservation , two initially circular
, coplanar planets can avoid close encounters at all times if they are separated by more than @xmath17 .
these two criteria meet at @xmath18 and their physical connection is discussed in @xcite . for systems where there are more than 2 planets
, there is yet no theoretical understanding for the origin of dynamical instability ( see attempts by , e.g. * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
whatever information we have on how tight one can pack planets in these cases are empirical results from numerical simulations @xcite .
these we summarize below
.    generally speaking , systems with more planets ( @xmath19 ) require larger @xmath8 spacing to stay stable . to compare the various numerical studies ,
we scale the physical timescale by the orbital period of the inner most planet in the system , @xmath20 ( also see * ? ? ?
we also suppress error - bars in the fitting results but caution that there are intrinsically large scatters .
* dependence on @xmath21 : two - planet systems can remain indefinitely stable as long as they are above a critical spacing .
this may not hold for large - n systems .
it appears that a larger spacing does not guarantee eternal peace but only delays the time of instability ( we return to this point in  [ subsec : extrapolate ] ) .
numerically , the critical spacing at which an average system undergoes their first encounter at time @xmath21 can be modelled as @xcite , @xmath22 though the alternative scalings @xmath23 and @xmath24 $ ] have been adopted by @xcite and @xcite respectively .
the numerical coefficients @xmath25 and @xmath26 depend on system parameters like the number of planets , their masses , and orbital eccentricities and inclinations .
two results most relevant to our case are @xmath27 for systems of @xmath28 planets all with @xmath29 @xcite , and @xmath30 for @xmath31 planet systems with @xmath32 @xcite .
both scalings are obtained for circular , coplanar systems with a uniform planetary mass and a uniform k - spacing . *
dependence on @xmath19 :
the most comprehensive study to date on this issue is that by @xcite .
they found , for @xmath33 , and @xmath34 , the critical separation for a system of circular , coplanar planets goes as @xmath35 this results roughly recovers equation when @xmath36 .
the initial rise of @xmath15 with @xmath19 is intuitively understood as the presence of more planetary perturbers exerts more strain on the delicate dynamical systems .
the subsequent flattening of @xmath15 with @xmath19 is , however , surprising and not understood .
one guess is that dynamical instability is most affected by close neighbours , and the presence of far - away neighbours , once beyond a certain separation , do not matter .
for instance , a system of 8 neptunes will space a period range of @xmath37 .
with such a large spacing , newly added planets have no chance of participating in any mmrs with the pre - existing planets , and therefore should not adversely affect the stability of the system .
* dependence on @xmath16 : it is found that less massive planets , with their smaller hill spheres , need be separated by slightly higher values of @xmath8 .
both @xcite and @xcite found that , for every decade of drop in @xmath16 ( within the range of @xmath38 to @xmath39 ) , the critical separation @xmath8 should increase by @xmath40 .
* eccentricity / inclination : if the planetary orbits are dynamically hot , more elbow room is needed to maintain stability ( e.g. * ? ? ? * ) .
@xcite showed that , at low eccentricities , increasing the average eccentricity by @xmath41 raises @xmath42 by @xmath43 .
we know of no study that explores the impact of mutual inclination separately , so we provide some illustrations of this below .    returning to our problem at hand
a system of 8 flat , circular planets , with masses of @xmath44 , and an inner orbit of @xmath45 au , may remain stable for over 1 gyrs ( or @xmath46 ) , if @xmath47 ( extrapolating from equation [ eq : tauk ] ) .
this valueis broadly consistent with the spacing observed in tight kepler systems .
however , a more refined approach is required .      to compare theoretical results to kepler systems , we need to overcome a few restrictions of previous studies .
first , in almost all previous numerical simulations , planets in a given systems are assigned identical masses and identical spacing , in contrast to realistic systems .
inhomogeneities in mass and spacing may impact results significantly , e.g. , they will introduce large scatter in stability lifetimes , among systems that have comparable bulk parameters .
it is therefore necessary to study system stability in a statistical sense  previous investigations have studied only a small number of cases ( typically fewer than a hundred systems ) .
we accomplish this by integrating a much larger number of systems ( @xmath48 ) .
in addition , we wish to study the impacts of small eccentricity and inclination .
lastly , our simulations run for a factor of @xmath49 longer than previous works , up to @xmath50 years .
although still shorter than the typical system ages ( a giga - year ) , they provide a better indicator for long - term stability .
we generate artificial planetary systems as follows : each system contains @xmath51 planets orbiting around a 1 solar mass star , on coplanar and circular orbits .
the number @xmath51 is chosen for a number of reasons : this is the largest number of transiting planets in a multiple system ( e.g. * ? ? ?
* ) ; it is close enough to the plateau in equation , the results may be considered valid for all systems with more than @xmath51 planets ; it is computationally feasible .
the mass of the host star is taken to be @xmath52 , while the mass of the planets are drawn from a uniform distribution between @xmath53 , consistent with the range of masses observed in kepler systems @xcite .
the latter assumption is robust as we know the stability threshold only depends weakly on the planet masses (  [ subsec : previous ] ) .
the inner most planet is placed at @xmath45 au .
we then determine the spacing , in unit of mutual hill sphere , for an adjacent pair of planets by drawing from a normal distribution with mean @xmath54 and variance @xmath55 , @xmath56 the initial arguments of periapsis and the mean motions are drawn from a uniform distribution in @xmath57 $ ] .
we adopt the wisdom - holman integration scheme @xcite , as implemented in the swifter package by david e. kaufmann , an improved version of the original swift package by levison and duncan .
the post - newtonian correction is added as an additional potential of the form @xmath58 , and we adopt a time - step of @xmath59 years .
integrations are discontinued either when two planets approached one another within one mutual hill radius ( and therefore are destined for a close encounter ) , or when a preset time limit ( usually @xmath60 years ) is reached .
we record the stability time of each system , and analyze how it depends on various parameters .
of particular interest is the survival probability at a given time .
we integrate , up to a time of @xmath60 years , a total of 8,000 circular , coplanar systems ( @xmath61 ) with @xmath62 and @xmath63 .
in addition , we simulate 120 such systems , within the range @xmath62 and @xmath64 , up to a time of @xmath50 years .
we report the survival probability , the fraction of systems that remain stable up to a time @xmath65 , as a function of planet spacing .
overall , a wider @xmath54 leads to a higher survival probability ( fig .
[ fig : figure3 ] ) , however , the dispersion in @xmath8 ( @xmath55 ) also impacts stability . for the same @xmath66 ,
systems with a greater @xmath8 dispersion amongst its pairs are less stable . in other words ,
a pair of planets with a smaller - than - average @xmath8 have a destabilizing effect on the whole system that out - weighs any corresponding stabilizing effect afforded by a planet pair with a larger - than - average @xmath8 .
we find , empirically , that our results can be succinctly summarized using an effective spacing , @xmath67    we arrive at this combination by noticing that , in our simulations , increasing @xmath68 by 1.0 has the same effect on stability as decreasing @xmath66 by @xmath69 .
so for systems with a varied spacing , @xmath70 acts as an equivalence of @xmath8 in systems with a uniform spacing .
such a combination can also explain the results in @xcite where they made some preliminary explorations on the impact of a @xmath8-dispersion .
we can now fit the survival probability reported in fig .
[ fig : figure4 ] as a function of @xmath70 ( the functional form being somewhat arbitrary ) @xmath71^{2}}\ , , } \label{eq : sk}\ ] ] for @xmath72 and @xmath73 otherwise . here
the dimensionless time @xmath20 , and @xmath74 is the orbital period of the inner most planet ( @xmath2 days in our case ) .
we now define a threshold spacing , @xmath75 , as the smallest @xmath70 necessary to achieve a survival probability of @xmath76 at time @xmath65 .
this spacing has a similar functional form to that presented in @xcite , but with different numerical coefficients , @xmath77 we compare our critical spacing with those from previous works in fig .
[ fig : kcollection ] .
our results , with a spread in @xmath8 and in planetary masses , have to be characterized by @xmath78 .
this differs from the definition of @xmath15 for other groups , which typically adopt a uniform @xmath8 and mass .
however , results broadly agree within error - bars ( as given by * ? ? ? * ) but ours tend to fall below . in other words , at the same spacing ( measured by @xmath70 in our cases ) , inhomogeneous systems ( with mass and spacing dispersions ) remain stable slightly longer than homogeneous systems do .
we note that homogenous systems , with their uniform period ratios , tend to be strongly affected by the presence of mean - motion resonances ( * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* see , e.g. ) .
this may partially explain the difference .
a more important difference between homogenous and inhomogeneous systems is that the former may reach eternal stability at a finite spacing ( as suggested by * ? ? ?
* ) , while we do not observe this for the latter ( see  [ subsec : extrapolate ] ) .
from now on , we consider that our results ( equation [ eq : k50 ] ) supercedes equations - .    our scaling is valid for 4 orders of magnitude in @xmath21 ( @xmath79 to @xmath80 , fig .
[ fig : figure4 ] ) . in subsequent sessions
, we assume that it remains valid for another one order of magnitude , to @xmath81 ( or @xmath82 1 gyrs ) . at this epoch , the critical spacing is @xmath83 .
( with @xmath65 ranging from @xmath84 to @xmath50 yrs ) , for systems with different @xmath54 .
each point represents results from some @xmath85 systems , with its horizontal error bars representing the width in @xmath54 and vertical error bars accounting for poisson error in numbers .
the solid lines show the aggregated results for a distribution of @xmath55 .
the latter is taken to be a gaussian distribution with a mean of @xmath86 and a dispersion of @xmath43 , with the exception of the black curve where @xmath64 .
it appears that @xmath54 is a reasonable indicator for system stability .
however , system stability also depends on the dispersion in @xmath8 .
as the two curves ( dashed and dotted , both for @xmath87 yrs but each with a different @xmath55 ) show , systems with larger dispersion tend to be more unstable .
so simply measuring the mean does not reveal the whole picture.,scaledwidth=49.0% ]     but with the results plotted against @xmath88 .
this combination of parameters is found to describe the numerical results succinctly .
different solid lines represent equation , evaluated at their respective times . dashed curve shows the extrapolation of equation to @xmath89 yrs ( or @xmath81 ) .
, scaledwidth=49.0% ]     spacing required to maintain stability over time @xmath21 ( x - axis , in logarithm ) , as obtained by different groups .
the @xcite results ( in red , equation [ eq : tauk ] , with vertical error bars ) are for @xmath29 ; the @xcite results ( in blue , equation [ eq : tauk2 ] ) applies to @xmath90 ; we insert @xmath91 into the fitting formula of @xcite , and modify their expression to suit present notation , to obtain the magenta line .
all these simulations are of uniform mass and uniform spacing and therefore are not statistical in nature . our results , @xmath78 ( eq . [ eq : k50 ] ) , are plotted as a black curve .
the horizontal extent of each curve also delineates the respective time range probed by different studies  the present study probes up to@xmath33 , ten times longer than previous ones .
our critical spacing are broadly consistent , though somewhat smaller , than those of previous studies .
, scaledwidth=45.0% ]      here , we explore quantitatively how eccentricity and inclination affect the critical spacing .
we generate 12,000 artificial 7-planet systems with a normal distribution in spacing , @xmath92 , @xmath93 , and a rayleigh distribution in eccentricity and inclination .
the scale factors are @xmath94 and @xmath95 , e.g. , @xmath96 we explore the range @xmath97 $ ] , and @xmath98 $ ] ( in radian , corresponding to a range of @xmath99 $ ] ) .
the initial longitudes of ascending nodes are randomly distributed between @xmath73 and @xmath100 .
given the extra dimension in orbital parameters , it is only feasible to integrate these systems up to a time of one million years ( @xmath101 ) .
the survival probability for different types of orbits are shown in fig .
[ fig : figure5 ] .    individually
, mutual inclination and initial eccentricity each has a strong destabilizing effect on stability . for the range of parameters that we explore ,
the critical spacing can be characterized as @xmath102 where @xmath103 is the corresponding value for circular , coplanar systems for the same @xmath21 ( eq . [ eq : k50 ] ) .
an eccentricity dispersion of a mere one percent requires the spacing to expand by one hill sphere , for @xmath104 . in relative terms , mutual inclination is less destructive to stability , by about a factor of @xmath105 .
one can also scale the above result in a natural unit of the problem , the hill eccentricity , @xmath106 . for our parameters , ( @xmath107 ) , @xmath108 .
the expression for critical spacing , re - cast in these units , is , @xmath109 this leads to a surprisingly geometrical interpretation for our result . for every unit of eccentricity rise ( in unit of @xmath110 ) , the average spacing between two adjacent planets ( @xmath8 ) have to rise by @xmath111 in order to maintain stability ; however , such a rise in eccentricity also reduces the closest approach ( measured from the apo - apsis of the inner planet to the periapsis of the outer one ) by @xmath112 .
so a system of mildly eccentric planets behaves similarly as a circular system that have the same closest approach .
we do not have a ready explanation for this result .    in the following ,
we assume that the survival stability obtained at these shorter integrations can be extrapolated to longer times , in the form of equation .     as a function of orbital eccentricity , at time @xmath113 myrs ( @xmath101 ) .
different curves stand for different mutual inclinations .
for comparison , we overplot in dots the result of @xcite for coplanar systems . , scaledwidth=49.0% ]      we do not yet understand the origin for the scaling in equation .
so it may be prudent to ask : can the scaling be extrapolated to as long as one billion years ?
for instance , in two - planet systems , it is known that beyond certain spacing the system can remain eternally stable .
if high - n planetary system exhibits the same behaviour , equation will break down at a certain spacing . lacking analytical understandings
, we turn to numerical simulations for insight . @xcite
experimented with equal - mass , constant - spacing 3-planet ( or 5-planet ) systems and found that as planet spacing reaches @xmath114 ( @xmath115 for 5-planet ) , the stability time , clocked at @xmath60 dynamical time at this point , starts to lift off and increases with @xmath8 much more steeply than eq . .
it appears that this equation is violated beyond @xmath60 dynamical times , and indefinite stability at large spacing appears possible .
however , our results here suggest the opposite .
we have integrated non - equal - mass , non - uniform spacing 7-planet systems for up to @xmath80 dynamical times , while still observing that equation holds well .
there is no unusual transition that occurs at @xmath60 dynamical times .
we suspect that our heterogeneous set - up ( a dispersion of mass and spacing ) opens up a more complex phase - space .
such dynamical system may not exhibit a single characteristic timescale , as the more restrictive cases in @xcite . in which case
, it may be reasonable to extrapolate eq . by one order of magnitude , to 1 gyrs ( @xmath116 dynamical time ) .
previous studies @xcite have identified that mean motion resonances tend to be disruptive for dynamical stability .
this is also demonstrated in more detail in @xcite where they showed that , when the positions for kepler-11 planets are shifted away from their current values , they may encounter mean motion resonances and become destabilized . here ,
using the 8000 circular , coplanar systems that we have produced , we perform a statistical investigation on the effect of resonances on stability ( fig .
[ fig : mmr ] ) .
it appears that , by @xmath60 yrs , systems that contain near resonant pairs are preferentially destroyed , compared to neighbouring systems .
this is an order unity effect for first - order resonances , and weaker , albeit still visible , for second order resonances .
similar carving is also seen in our eccentric , inclined ensembles .    amongst kepler
s multi - planet systems , there has been an observed tendency for planets to ` pile up ' just wide of mean motion resonances @xcite . a number of mechanisms have been proposed for this asymmetry , including resonant repulsion @xcite , stochastic migration @xcite , adiabatic mass accretion @xcite , and planetesimal interactions @xcite .
we observe that ( inset in fig .
[ fig : mmr ] ) , for circular , coplanar systems , systems with period ratios just inward of mmrs are more severely carved relative to those on the far side of resonances .
the asymmetry is more pronounced in slightly eccentric , inclined systems .
this asymmetric carving may present another explanation for the observed systems .
more investigation is planned in the future .
yrs ) the locations of the first order ( dashed red lines ) and the second order resonances ( dashed blue lines ) coincide with reduced survival rates , showing that mean - motion resonances tend to de - stabilize systems .
the little inset at the top - right focuses on regions of width @xmath117 around 3 first order mmrs ( 2:1 , 3:2 , 4:3 ) . there is a definite asymmetry : systems on the near side of resonances are preferentially depleted relative to those on the far side .
the lower panel is the observed period ratios among all kepler systems .
these also show a relative deficit of systems near these resonances in the near - side .
the similarity between the two is intriguing.,scaledwidth=45.0% ]
observational data from the space telescope was retrieved from the nasa exoplanet archive in june 19 , 2014 .
all planet candidates with a koi disposition of `` false positive '' were removed .
we are only concerned with high - multiple systems ( @xmath118 planets ) and our sample include 4 six - planet systems , 18 five - planet systems and 55 four - planet systems .
there are a total of @xmath119 adjacent pairs , with @xmath120 pairs in @xmath121 and @xmath122 systems alone .      to compare against theoretical results in  [ sec : tight ]
, we require the intrinsic @xmath8-distribution ( as opposed to the apparent one ) of kepler s multi - systems .
however , such a distribution is not straightforward to obtain , due to three factors .
first , the @xmath8 parameter depends on planetary masses , which are not known for vast majority of planets .
secondly , the presence of non - transiting ( ` missing ' ) planets , either because they are too small to be detectable , or because they are unfortunately inclined relative to our line - of - sight , will cause the observed @xmath8 to be artificially inflated .
thirdly , one must account for selection effects .
the koi sample is severely incomplete for planets with period outward of @xmath123 days @xcite .
systems that have tighter - than - average spacing will be preferentially picked up as high multiple systems , while those with larger spacings will not .
this tends to skew the apparent @xmath8-distribution toward smaller @xmath8 values in these systems .
we overcome the first hurdle by adopting the mass - radius relationship as obtained for planets that have measured masses .
recent studies using both transit timing variation @xcite and radial velocity @xcite techniques have shown that planet masses scales approximately linearly with planet radii , or @xmath124 .
this applies to planets with sizes of a few earth radii , the vast majority of our sample , and recent studies show that this relation may even extend to planets as small as @xmath125 @xcite .
this relation differs from the one that applies to solar system planets @xcite .
we plot the resulting apparent @xmath8-distribution in fig .
[ fig : figure1 ] .
there appears to be a sharp rise in the number of pairs above @xmath126 , and a sharp drop beyond @xmath127 , with some @xmath128 of pairs spaced between @xmath129 .
in addition , the apparent @xmath8-distribution for @xmath130 systems and that of @xmath131 systems are statistically different ( ks test returns a value of @xmath132 ) , with the former peaking at @xmath133 while the latter around @xmath134 .
it appears that even 4p systems may be heterogeneous , containing both tight spacing systems and large spacing systems .
this prompts us to focus our attention exclusively to @xmath121 and @xmath122 systems in subsequent sections .
lastly , we notice that our adopted mass - radius relation leads to a sharper peak in @xmath8-distribution , when compared to other power laws .
-distribution of high - multiple kepler systems are shown as solid histograms for the 4p and 5p+6p systems .
the mass - radius relation is assumed to be @xmath135 . according to ks test ,
the two histograms are statistically different , with the 5p+ systems more tightly spaced .
the dotted curve shows the @xmath136 systems when we adopt instead @xmath137 , a scaling obtained for solar system planets @xcite .
this leads to a more diffuse @xmath8-distribution .
, scaledwidth=49.5% ]    to overcome the second and the third hurdles , it is necessary to `` observe '' synthetic populations to extract their apparent @xmath8-distributions .
we now describe our procedure in constructing and observing these synthetic populations .    each planetary system orbit around a central star that is sun - like , and have planets
whose radii are distributed based on the determination in @xcite , namely , with equal probability per logarithmic bin between @xmath113 and @xmath138 , and a linearly decreasing probability between @xmath139 to @xmath140 .
the mass of each planet is then determined using our default mass - radius expression .
the orbital inclination , measured relative to a fixed plane , satisfies a rayleigh distribution with scale parameter @xmath95 ( eq . [ eq : probe ] ) .
planets are placed in circular orbits , and all euler angles are uniformly distributed .
the period of the inner - most planet in each system is drawn from a rayleigh distribution with a scale parameter of 5 days .
this distribution is a good representation for our sample of planetary systems , but our conclusion is not sensitive to this particular choice . to assign periods to the remaining planets , we assign a @xmath8 value that satisfies equation with a mean @xmath54 and a variance @xmath55 .
each system is assumed to extend out to well beyond the observing boundary .    with these choices , our average system , with @xmath141 days and @xmath142 ,
contain roughly 7 planets ( ranging from 6 - 10 planets ) inward of @xmath143 days .
for the entire ensemble , the period distribution is flat in logarithmic space , consistent with observational determinations @xcite .
we then identify planets that transit ( impact parameter smaller than the stellar radius ) .
not every planet that transits may be identified by the kepler pipeline .
we correct for this by adopting the detection completeness as a function of planet size and orbital period , as obtained in fig . 2 of @xcite .
this effectively limit the detection sphere to periods inward of @xmath123 days , and miss some small planets .
our procedure therefore accounts for both the missing planets and the selection bias .
the @xmath8-distribution from these detections are then compared against that in fig .
[ fig : figure1 ] .
we find that the best fit , using only 5p+ systems , is obtained when @xmath144 .
this corresponds to an effective spacing of @xmath145 .    as is shown in fig .
[ fig:3 ] , the observed @xmath8-distribution is always broader than its intrinsic counterpart .
the broadening is caused by intervening planets missed by transit surveys : our simulations show that for low inclinations ( @xmath146 ) , @xmath147 of the apparent 5p and 6p systems contain one or more missing planets hidden in - between the transiting planets .
moreover , the apparent tight spacing in high multiples is not a result of selection bias , namely , only systems that have intrinsically the tightest distribution can fit inside the detection sphere ( @xmath123 days ) and be observed as a high - multiple system ( see  [ sec : discussion ] )
.    we can translate the @xmath8-distribution to a more intuitive unit , the number of planets within a decade of semi - major axis , typically located from 0.1 to 1.0 au for our case .
this number is marked as planets per sma decade in multiple figures .
the 5p+ systems contain between 6 to 10 planets per sma decade , with a mean of @xmath115 .
contrast this with only 4 planets per decade in the terrestrial region of the solar system .
our determination of the intrinsic @xmath8-distribution is not affected by our choice of inclination dispersion , perhaps a bit paradoxically .
a higher dispersion means more planets in a given system escape detection in a transit survey , and this should have increased the average @xmath8 value .
however , this also disqualifies such a system from our high multiple sample . as a result , the intrinsic @xmath8-distribution we obtain , by focussing on high multiples only , is not much affected .
, for the 5p+ systems fail to account for some of the more widely spaced 4p pairs . here
, we adopt @xmath148  the @xmath8-distribution does not vary much when the inclination dispersion is varied .
, scaledwidth=49.0% ]
gyro - chronology studies , the dating of stars using their stellar rotation periods , reveal that stars in the kepler field , at least ones that have measurable rotation periods , have typical ages of a couple gyrs @xcite .
this motivates us to assume a default age of 1 gyrs for all kepler systems .
this may be an underestimate in many cases .
older stars are much less magnetically active and therefore less variable .
they also rotate with longer periods . as a result
, they may not be selected for gyro - chronology studies and results from the latter may be biased towards younger stars . fortunately , an older age simply strengthens the argument we present below .
if all kepler high multi systems are circular , coplanar , equation predicts that @xmath76 of the planetary systems can remain stable to beyond @xmath149 yrs ( @xmath150 ) if @xmath151 .
this is surprisingly close to our best fit for kepler high multis , @xmath145 .
the proximity is even more striking if one allows for just a small amount of eccentricity and non - coplanarity in the systems . adopting the measurements by @xcite for ttv pairs
, @xmath152 , equation requires that @xmath153 .
this observation , that kepler high multis are perched at the cliff of instability ( see also * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ) , as we suggest below , is most likely the result of continuous sculpting .
this suggestion is the main thesis of this work .
our intrinsic distribution exhibits a sharp fall - off at larger @xmath8 ( see fig . [ fig:3 ] ) , similar to the observed population .
we believe this fall - off is genuine , not a result of observational bias . when synthetically observing populations of planets with a range of @xmath54 and @xmath55 , we find that even systems with spacing as large as @xmath154 ( fixing @xmath155 ) can be observed as 5p+ only @xmath156 less frequently than our best fit ( @xmath157 )
. their presence should therefore be detectable .
the lack of such wide spacing system in the observed high multis is therefore likely genuine .
the formation of planets themselves is not yet understood and different theories have been proposed @xcite .
however , it looks likely that they were made in the first few myrs .
this is corroborated by the presence of hydrogen envelopes on these low - mass planets , for both neptunes ( e.g. * ? ? ?
* ) and super - earths @xcite .    how does such a formation time jibe with the orbital spacing of the observed systems ?
the nascent disk can weed out ( and possibly reform ) systems that are unstable within a few million years ( @xmath158 , eq .
[ eq : k50 ] ) , but it should not discriminate among systems that have spacing wider than this . on the other hand , while it is natural that only systems with spacing wide enough to be stable over their lifetimes can be observed , it is striking how the observed systems skirt the edge of stability .
this chain of thought then leads us to propose the following scenario .
planetary systems were initially formed with a range of @xmath159 .
this distribution is continuously sculpted by dynamical instability .
so by 1 gyrs , the remaining population will exhibit a sharp cut - off at the border of stability .
we call this the sculpting hypothesis.    under this hypothesis , it is possible to reconstruct the initial planet population , after we posit a number of assumptions , some more sound than others .
we assume that the all systems have the same small @xmath8-dispersion as we observe in today s high multis , @xmath160 . since orbital spacing in a system
likely reflects its formation environment , we expect the spacings to be similar within a given system .
we further assume that all systems at birth have the same dispersion in eccentricity as the currently observed ttv sample , @xmath161 , and a comparable dispersion in inclination .
to reverse the effect of carving , we augment the current planet population by three populations that are similar in number but shifted to a smaller @xmath70 by @xmath162 , for the three logarithmic time intervals between @xmath163 and @xmath164 yrs . the value @xmath165 , according to our numerical experiments , is the range of spacing that is carved away by the passing of each logarithmic interval .
and the initial @xmath163 yrs is the putative lifetime of our nascent disks .
the resulting initial population is illustrated in fig .
[ fig : figure6 ] . in this model , by 1 gyrs of age , roughly @xmath128 of the original systems have been disrupted .
this fraction could rise or drop depending on what we assume for the initial @xmath70 distribution .
, namely , the observed ( histogram ) and the underlying ( green curve ) spacing distributions for 5p and 6p systems . the dashed curves , from bottom to top ,
represent our reconstruction of the earlier spacing distributions at , @xmath50 , @xmath60 and @xmath166 years , respectively .
see text for details .
the primordial population ( posited to be the one at @xmath166 yrs ) are in average more tightly spaced , and contain roughly 4 times more systems than those remain today .
, scaledwidth=49.0% ]    what happen to systems that experience dynamical instability , in the interval since their birth and today ?
once two planets are excited to crossing orbits , they will physically collide with each other after a short time , as determined by the area of the planet subtended on the sky , @xmath167 this expression assumes that the planets have acquired significant eccentricities and inclinations before impact , and that there is little gravitational focussing .
both assumptions are born out by our numerical simulations . in particular , the latter assumption is reasonble because at collision , their relative velocities can be higher than their surface escape velocities ( @xmath168 , see , e.g. * ? ? ? * ) , since the keplerian orbital speed is of order @xmath169 at the relevant distance .
such a collision will likely be destructive , as opposed to conglomerative @xcite .
some planets may be lost and massive debris may be produced .
the former will increase the spacing within the system , while the latter will tend to cool down the orbit and prevent further instabilities from happening . at the moment , we are incapable of predicting the outcome of such a collision , but speculate that this may explain the abundant low - multiple systems one observes in the field .
we speculate briefly on the physical environment that can give rise to the compact spacing of systems .
if our sculpting hypothesis proves correct , this is not restricted to only the high multiple systems , but likely applies to all close - in planetary systems .
the orbital spacings between terrestrial planets are wide , with @xmath170 .
these values have been reproduced by a number of simulations where these planets conglomerate out of a sea of smaller bodies ( e.g. , * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ) . in these simulations where there is zero or little dissipation acting on the planetary orbits
, the proto - planets can stir each other up to of order their surface escape velocities .
their orbits , being dynamically hot , require larger spacing to avoid further disruption .
this reasoning is supported by simulations of @xcite , which we discuss below .
starting from a population of mars - sized proto - planets , but exerting an artificial dissipation on the planet eccentricity with timescale @xmath171 , @xcite showed that , terrestrial - like systems ( @xmath172 ) can be produced if @xmath171 is relatively weak ( more than a million times the orbital period ) , and closely - packed systems result if damping is strong .
when @xmath173 orbital time , in particular , the simulations produce systems that are spaced between @xmath28 to @xmath174  much like the initial population that we inferred in fig .
[ fig : figure6 ] . at @xmath45
au , this corresponds to a damping time of @xmath175 yrs . in systems ,
the primordial disk is likely more massive than the terrestrial system studied by @xcite , so the requisite e - damping time may be even shorter . to put this timescale into context , the expected e - damping time from type - i migration in a minimum mass solar nebula
is @xmath176 yrs @xcite .
so if our sculpting hypothesis is correct , we infer that the formation environment of the planets have to be moderately dissipative , with an eccentricity damping timescale that is longer than the type - i damping timescale , but much shorter than the million - year lifetime of the nascent disks .
we can look at our results in a different way .
the observed spacing could be used to constrain the values of eccentricity and mutual inclination in ( and only in ) these high multiple systems .
inverting equation , adopting @xmath177 ( required at 1 gyrs ) and @xmath178 ( observed at 1 gyrs ) , we find the following independent limits , @xmath179 although this constraint is obtained for our choice of mass - radius relationship , it likely applies even when the latter deviates from our choice .
similar constraints on orbital shapes were also obtained by @xcite for a specific planetary system , kepler-11 . if @xmath180 , as characteristic of 2-body relaxation in disks @xcite , we would obtain @xmath181 and @xmath182 .
these are indeed very cold dynamical systems .
how do these constraints compare to what we have found via other channels ?
most previous studies have not isolated high - multiple systems from the general catalogue and their results are therefore not directly comparable , though a number of studies of planet mutual inclinations have indicated low values ( e.g. * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
there are only a few studies on planet eccentricities .
studying the distribution of transit durations in kepler candidates have led @xcite to conclude that @xmath183 .
however , this result is heavily plagued by uncertainties in stellar radius determinations and is likely an over - estimate .
ttv studies @xcite , on the other hand , have led to a much smaller eccentricity dispersion ( @xmath161 ) , for a sub - population of planet pairs that are near mean - motion resonances .
in fact , this small but non - zero dispersion partially motivates us in claiming that the observed systems lie on the edge of instability .
ttv studies also reported the existence of another sub - population where the eccentricities are substantially higher ( @xmath184 ) , but these likely occur exclusively in low - multiple systems .
the architecture of kepler multiple systems contains important pieces of clue for planet formation . in this work
, we show that high - multiple kepler systems have spacings that narrowly afford them dynamical stability in the giga - year timescale .
this leads us to suggest that many more planetary systems were initially formed with even smaller spacing , but they have been since whittled down by dynamical instability , possibly producing some of the low - multiple kepler systems we see today . if this is true , the final formation stage of these planets proceed in highly dissipative environment , with eccentricity damping timescales much shorter than the disk lifetimes .    along the way ,
our numerical explorations have uncovered a number of interesting features in the stability of high - n systems .
consistent with previous investigations , we find that system stability time , quantified here as the time by which @xmath76 of the initial systems remain stable , rises sharply with the spacing .
when the spacings in a given system are not uniform but exhibit a spread , one can easily quantify the effect by adopting an effective spacing , @xmath185 .
we give fitting formula for stability time when the planetary orbits are slightly eccentric and/or mutually inclined .
eccentricity , even at the level @xmath186 , affects critical spacing significantly . as a result , we are able to place a stringent limit on the eccentricity of high - multiple kepler systems , @xmath181 .
we find that systems that contain mean - motion - resonance pairs are preferentially destabilized .
a large number of both theoretical and observational questions remain unanswered . what provides the strong eccentricity dissipation in planet formation ?
what is the origin of dynamical instability in high - multiple systems ?
what are the final outcomes in these dynamically unstable systems ?
how do these outcomes compare against the observed systems ?
we thank the anonymous referee for a meticulous and thoughful set of comments . bp
thanks nserc for an undergraduate summer fellowship , and nikhil mahajan for assistances .
yw acknowledges the nserc funding , as well as conversations with yoram lithwick , doug lin ( who pointed out that johannes kepler did ponder about the planet packing problem ) and scott tremaine .