charge - parity ( cp ) violation is one of the least understood phenomena in high energy physics . in the standard model ( sm ) ,
cp violation is parametrized by one arbitrary phase in the quark mixing matrix and its value fixed by experimental observations .
models beyond the sm , especially those including supersymmetry , predict several new cp - odd phases .
the effects of some of these phases , particularly the ones coming from the soft supersymmetry breaking scalar masses , have been studied extensively @xcite . in the minimal supersymmetric standard model ( mssm ) , these phases need to either be unreasonably small , or the scalar fermion masses unusually large @xcite .    a solution to this so called `` susy cp - problem '' has been suggested by the authors in @xcite . by enlarging the supersymmetric gauge sector to be left - right symmetric , parity forces yukawa couplings to be hermitean , and mass terms in the superpotential to be real .
thus the cp problem is solved at the right - handed ( @xmath1 , or seesaw ) scale @xmath2 .
if @xmath2 is of the order of the electroweak scale , then no other phase can be generated and the problem is solved . if however @xmath2 is a higher scale , the scenario favored by neutrino masses and grand - unification schemes with left - right models as intermediate steps , this is no longer the case . in some variants of the model ,
the phases appear only at two loop level and are thus naturally small @xcite , in others the electroweak phase is generated form the renormalization group equations evolution from the seesaw scale , and the electron dipole moment ( edm ) problems persist @xcite .
the left - right supersymmetric model ( lrsusy ) enlarges the minimal supersymmetric standard model ( mssm ) gauge symmetry @xmath3 to @xmath4 .
this symmetry allows for the seesaw mechanism within supersymmetry and predicts neutrino masses and mixing naturally . in the supersymmetric sector of the theory
, it introduces right - handed gauginos in addition to several higgsinos .
we expect this change to be most pronounced in the electroweak chargino sector , where previously forbidden right - right interactions are now allowed to proceed with a strength comparable to left - left interactions .
this could have significant effects on the cp - phases in the sector , where more phases are allowed , which could distinguish the model from the mssm .
by contrast , we expect the effect to be less pronounced in the neutralino sector , where right - handed gaugino interactions are permitted in mssm .    in this work ,
we investigate the effects of such phases on the masses , production , and decay rates of charginos .
our emphasis is on an analysis of a general unconstrained model , assuming arbitrary phases , and finding the combination of angles that would affect the phenomenology , as well as presenting experimentally testable signals from the chargino sector .
we assume in what follows that the phases can be taken arbitrarily large , and that cp - violation restrictions in the quark and lepton sectors can be satisfied either by allowing scalar masses to be large , or through cancellations of various contributions @xcite .    we perform a detailed and complete analysis of the chargino sector including masses , production rates , forward - backward asymmetry in production and decays . for decays , we chose to analyze the channel most sensitive to left - right symmetry , the decay into a sneutrino and a lepton .
we analyze the dependence on production and subsequent decay from a polarized @xmath0 beam and the t - odd asymmetry associated with this .
our paper is organized as follows : in section [ sec : model ] we present the general framework of the left - right supersymmetric model with special emphasis on the chargino sector .
we then discuss the chargino masses , with particular attention paid to the effect of the cp - odd angles in section [ sec : masses ] . in section [ sec :
production ] , we investigate the cross section for chargino production in an unpolarized @xmath0 collider and its dependence on the phases in the theory . we discuss the variation of the decay rates of charginos with cp - phases as well as the t - odd asymmetry in polarized production and decay in section [ sec : decays ] . section [ sec : conclusion ] is devoted to our summary and conclusions .
the minimal supersymmetric left - right model is based on the gauge group @xmath4 @xcite .
the matter fields of this model consist of three families of both left and right handed quark @xmath5 and lepton @xmath6 fields .
the higgs sector consists of two bidoublet ( @xmath7 ) and four triplet higgs ( @xmath8 and @xmath9 ) superfields .
the bidoublet higgs superfields implement the @xmath10 symmetry breaking and generate a cabibbo - kobayashi - maskawa ( ckm ) mixing matrix .
the triplet higgs @xmath11 bosons allow for the seesaw mechanism , while the additional triplet fields @xmath12 are needed to cancel triangle gauge anomalies in the fermionic sector .
the most general superpotential involving these superfields is : @xmath13 where @xmath14 and @xmath15 are the yukawa couplings for the quarks and leptons , respectively and @xmath16 is the coupling for the triplet higgs bosons .
the parameters @xmath17 and @xmath18 are the higgs mass parameters
. left right symmetry requires all @xmath19-matrices to be hermitean in the generation space and @xmath16 matrix to be symmetric . here
@xmath20 denotes ( possible ) non - renormalizable terms arising from higher scale physics or planck scale effects @xcite .
the presence of these terms insures that , when the susy breaking scale is above @xmath21 , the ground state is r - parity conserving .
left - right supersymmetric models have one additional problem : two of the physical higgs bosons can contribute flavor - violating neutral currents ( fcnc ) by violating flavor by two units and by generating too large a contribution to the @xmath22 mass splitting .
this problem can be circumvented by raising the right - handed mass scale to @xmath23 tev @xcite .
in addition , the lagrangian also includes soft supersymmetry breaking terms as well as @xmath24- and , @xmath25-terms . for a more detailed description of the model ,
see @xcite .    in the supersymmetric sector of the model
there are six singly - charged charginos , corresponding to @xmath26 , @xmath27 , @xmath28 , @xmath29 , @xmath30 , and @xmath31 .
the model also has eleven neutralinos , corresponding to @xmath32 , @xmath33 , @xmath34 , @xmath35 , @xmath36 , @xmath37 , @xmath38 , @xmath39 , @xmath40 , @xmath41 , and @xmath42 .
the doubly charged higgs and higgsinos do not affect quark phenomenology , but the neutral and singly charged components do , through mixings in the chargino and neutralino mass matrices .
the terms relevant to the masses of charginos in the lagrangian are @xmath43 where @xmath44 and @xmath45 , and @xmath46 where we have taken , for simplification , @xmath47 . here
@xmath48 and @xmath49 are the bidoublet higgs bosons vacuum expectation values ( vevs ) , @xmath50 and @xmath51 are the triplet higgs bosons vevs , and @xmath52 the @xmath53 and @xmath1 gaugino masses , respectively .
the chargino mass eigenstates @xmath54 are obtained by @xmath55 with @xmath56 and @xmath57 unitary matrices satisfying @xmath58 the diagonalizing matrices @xmath59 and @xmath56 are obtained by computing the eigenvectors corresponding to the eigenvalues of @xmath60 and @xmath61 , respectively .
from the above general mass matrices for charginos , we can obtain analytic expressions for the eigenvalues .
first , note that the vevs of the triplet higgs bosons , @xmath50 and @xmath51 , are responsible for giving masses to @xmath62 bosons , as well as implementing the seesaw mechanism .
as such , @xmath63 several tev , and thus we can safely decouple @xmath64 and @xmath65 from the lighter chargino states .
we now incorporate the most general set of cp violating phases in the mass matrix .
that is , we do not restrict the phases according to any particular scenario , and allow the most general set of phases .
these can easily be generated from the rge evolution running down from @xmath2 to the electroweak scale .
since @xmath52 and @xmath66 , the higgsino coupling parameter are assumed complex at the electroweak scale , with nontrivial phases @xmath67 and @xmath68 , respectively , then they can include phases : @xmath69 and , in addition we allow the higgs vacuum expectation values to be complex , with phases @xmath70 : @xmath71 and @xmath72 . the chargino mass matrix @xmath73 with the most general allowed set of @xmath74 violating phases becomes @xmath75 where the phase angles ( i.e. @xmath76 ) are in the interval @xmath77 $ ] .
the results in the @xmath78 conserving limit , maybe obtained by simple taking the values @xmath79 or @xmath80 , in the matrix . using the transformation @xmath81 where @xmath82 is a unitary matrix .
then the matrix @xmath83 can be written as @xmath84 where we have defined @xmath85 and @xmath86 .
these phases allow for both explicit and/or spontaneous cp violation ; in the latter case @xmath87 and @xmath88.the dependence with respect to only two angles is now clear .
the phases @xmath89 and @xmath90 are the new sources of @xmath74 violation , which can vary in the range @xmath91 , and @xmath92 , respectively . to diagonalize the matrix @xmath83 we use the following transformation @xmath93v^{-1 } = { \rm diag}(\mathrm{\tilde{m}}_{\chi^{\pm}_{1}},\mathrm{\tilde{m}}_{\chi^{\pm}_{2}},\mathrm{\tilde{m}}_{\chi^{\pm}_{3}},\mathrm{\tilde{m}}_{\chi^{\pm}_{4}})\equiv m_{d}^{2},\end{aligned}\ ] ]
where we assume @xmath94 .
notice that the transformation matrix @xmath56 is now a @xmath95 matrix and a function only of @xmath89 and @xmath96 .
the chargino masses can be determined by solving the eigenvalue equation analytically .
we use the method outlined in @xcite .
we get the exact analytic expressions for the chargino masses as functions of the cp angles , i.e. , @xmath97 .
the analytic formulas for the chargino masses are given by @xmath98^{\frac{1}{2}},\\ \mathrm{\tilde{m}}_{\chi^{\pm}_{2 } } & = & { \cal r}e\left[\frac{a}{4}-\frac{\alpha}{2}+\frac{1}{2}\,\sqrt{\zeta-\varpi-\frac{\lambda}{4\alpha } } \right]^{\frac{1}{2}},\\ \mathrm{\tilde{m}}_{\chi^{\pm}_{3 } } & = & { \cal r}e\left[\frac{a}{4}+\frac{\alpha}{2}-\frac{1}{2}\,\sqrt{\zeta-\varpi+\frac{\lambda}{4\alpha } } \right]^{\frac{1}{2}},\\ \mathrm{\tilde{m}}_{\chi^{\pm}_{4 } } & = & { \cal r}e\left[\frac{a}{4}+\frac{\alpha}{2}+\frac{1}{2}\,\sqrt{\zeta-\varpi+\frac{\lambda}{4\alpha}}\right]^{\frac{1}{2}},\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath99 represents the real value of the function and @xmath100,\\ \zeta & \equiv & \nonumber \left[\frac{a^{2}}{2}-\frac{4b}{3}-\nu\right],\,\,\;\nu \equiv\nonumber\frac{(2^{\frac{1}{3}}\,\gamma)}{3\,\epsilon},\\ \varpi & \equiv & \nonumber\frac{\epsilon}{32^{\frac{1}{3}}},\,\,\,\epsilon \equiv \nonumber(\delta+\sqrt{\eta})^{\frac{1}{3}},\:\quad\qquad\eta \equiv \nonumber ( -4\,\gamma^{3}+\delta^{2}),\\ \gamma & \equiv & \nonumber ( b^{2}+3\,a\,c+12\,d),\;\delta \equiv\nonumber(2\,b^{3}+9\,a\,b\,c+27\,c^{2}+27\,a^{2}\,d-72\,b\,d),\\ \lambda & \equiv&\nonumber ( a^{3}-4\,a\,b-8\,c),\end{aligned}\ ] ] with parameters @xmath101 given in terms of the chargino mass - squared matrix elements @xmath102 as : @xmath103 , \nonumber \\
c    & \equiv & \frac16\left [ ( { \rm tr}m_{ij})^3- 3 { \rm tr}m_{ij}{\rm tr}m^2_{ij}+2 { \rm tr}m^3_{ij}\right ] , ~ d   \equiv{\det } m_{ij}.\end{aligned}\ ] ] similarly , we can obtain analytic expressions for the diagonalizing matrices @xmath104 . while expressions for these exist in the literature @xcite , here we will fix the masses and @xmath105 and use the numerical values for the elements which include the phases .
we now investigate the phase dependence of the masses and take as an example the light chargino mass scenario . in numerical analyses
we assume the following relations among the parameters of the model : @xmath106 , and we set @xmath107 gev , @xmath108 gev , and @xmath109 . as mentioned before
, we further assume the vev s @xmath50 and @xmath51 to be big enough for @xmath110 to decouple from the lighter charginos . in fig .
[ fig : masses ] , the cp - odd phase dependences of the lightest and the heaviest chargino masses are shown in a two - dimensional contour plot .
the masses of the four charginos in the cp - conserving case are @xmath111 gev . among four , the second heaviest is independent of phases and determined completely by the higgsino mass ( @xmath66 ) .
this is clear from the chargino mass matrix given in eq .
( [ eq : charmassmatrix ] ) where the phase dependence of the @xmath66 entry disappears when we consider @xmath112 . from analyses
, we observe that the second lightest mass is practically independent of cp - odd phases so that we only include the figures for the lightest and the heaviest masses .
3.5 in 3.5 in    -0.2 in    in the left graph of fig .
[ fig : masses ] , we give the phase dependence of the heaviest chargino mass .
this chargino is important for the analysis in section [ sec : decays ] .
it can be seen that the dependence is not strong and the mass varies in 272 - 280 gev range and the cp - odd phases can enhance its value by at most @xmath113 , which occurs in the parameter regions @xmath114 , @xmath115 , or @xmath116 .
these regions are denoted with dashed - dotted line contours in the graph .
the ones with the solid line are the regions where the mass takes its lowest value . from the graph , these are approximately @xmath117 , @xmath118 , and @xmath119 .    the second graph in fig .
[ fig : masses ] shows the same phase dependence for the lightest chargino mass @xmath120 . unlike the case of the heaviest chargino
, there is a strong dependence on the cp - odd phases @xmath89 and @xmath96 .
when we span the whole region in the @xmath121 space , the mass runs in the interval @xmath122 gev .
this means that up to @xmath123 destructive effects in the lightest chargino mass could be generated from cp - odd phases .
if one divides the @xmath96 interval into two equal regions and the interval for @xmath89 into 4 equal parts , the mass is at its lowest value for either very small @xmath96 values ( @xmath124 ) with @xmath125 or maximum @xmath96 value ( @xmath126 ) with two possible values for @xmath89 , either @xmath127 or @xmath128 .
note that the regions bounded by the contours corresponding to 104 gev are not experimentally allowed .
at the future linear collider one will be able to determine the masses of charginos and the pair production cross section to high accuracies . in this part ,
we evaluate and illustrate the chargino pair production in unpolarized @xmath0 annihilation with non - trivial phases .
the cross sections without cp - violation phases are analyzed in @xcite . for completeness
, we include the expressions for the cross sections here .
we introduce the following variables @xmath129 where the momenta of the incoming particles are represented by @xmath130 and the momenta of the outgoing particles by @xmath131 .
the chargino production occurs at tree - level through @xmath132 in the s - channel , and @xmath133 in the t - channel .
note that the channels through @xmath134 and @xmath135 are new channels specific to lrsusy . the corresponding production cross section and effects of cp - phases have been analyzed in mssm @xcite .
5.8 in    -0.6 cm    the lagrangian responsible for the interaction is : @xmath136{\chi}^{+}_{j } \nonumber   \\&+&\frac { g_{r}\sqrt { \cos 2 \theta_{w}}}{\cos\theta_{w } } z^{\mu}_{l } \bar{\chi}^{+}_{i}\gamma^{\mu}\biggl[o^{\prime l}_{ij}p_{l}+o^{\prime r}_{ij}p_{r}\biggr ] { \chi}^{+}_{j } \nonumber \\   & -&g \sum_i { \bar \chi}_i^{+ c } \left \ { \left [ v_{i1}^{\ast}p_l-\left ( \frac{m_{\nu_k}u_{i3}}{\sqrt{2}m_w \sin \beta } + \frac{m_{e_k}u_{i4}}{\sqrt{2}m_w \cos \beta } \right)p_r\right ] e_k { \tilde \nu}_{lk}^{\ast } \right .
\nonumber \\        & + & \left .
\left [ u_{i2}p_r- \left ( \frac{m_{\nu_k}v_{i3}^{\ast}}{\sqrt{2}m_w \sin \beta } + \frac{m_{e_k}v_{i4}^{\ast}}{\sqrt{2}m_w \cos \beta}\right ) p_l\right ] e_k { \tilde \nu}_{rk}^{\ast } \right\},\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath137 is the left(right ) chirality projection operator and we define the following matrices @xmath138 we perform the calculation in the center of mass frame , where the expression for the cross section is given by @xmath139 where we neglect the lepton masses .
the triangle function @xmath140 is defined as @xmath141 and @xmath142 is the invariant amplitude of the collision process .
the @xmath143 vertex is defined as @xmath144 where @xmath145 , and @xmath146    the total cross section is obtained by integrating over the angle @xmath147 .
it yields @xmath148 where the terms in the cross section are as follows @xmath149\lambda^{1/2}(1,y , z ) , \\
\sigma_{\tilde{\nu}_{l } } & & \hspace*{-0.2cm}= \frac{g^{4}}{128\pi s}|v_{i1}|^{2}|v_{j1}|^{2}\biggl\{\biggl[\frac{1}{(a^{2}-b^{2})}-\frac{(y - z)^{2}}{(a^{2}-b^{2})}-4\lambda^{-1/2}(1,y , z)\nonumber\\ & & \times \biggl(\ln(\frac{a+b}{a - b})-\frac{2ab}{a^{2}-b^{2}}\biggr)+4\biggl(1-\frac{a}{b}\ln(\frac{a+b}{a - b})+\frac{a^{2}}{a^{2}-b^{2}}\biggr)\biggr]\biggr\}\lambda^{1/2}(1,y , z ) , \\
\sigma_{\tilde{\nu}_{r } } & & \hspace*{-0.2cm}= \frac{g^{4}}{128\pi s}|u_{i2}|^{2}|u_{j2}|^{2}\biggl\{\biggl[\frac{1}{(a^{\prime 2}-b^{2})}-\frac{(y - z)^{2}}{(a^{\prime 2}-b^{2})}-4\lambda^{-1/2}(1,y , z)\nonumber\\   & & \times \biggl(\ln(\frac{a^{\prime}+b}{a^{\prime}-b})-\frac{2a^{\prime}b}{a^{\prime 2}-b^{2}}\biggr)+4\biggl(1-\frac{a^{\prime}}{b}\ln(\frac{a^{\prime}+b}{a^{\prime}-b})+\frac{a^{\prime 2}}{a^{\prime 2}-b^{2}}\biggr)\biggr]\biggr\}\lambda^{1/2}(1,y , z ) , \\
\sigma_{\gamma z_{l } } & & \hspace*{-0.2cm}= \frac{e^{2}g^{2 } } { 32 \pi\cos^{2}\theta_{w}}\delta_{ij}(c_{l}+c_{r}){\cal r}e[d_{z_l}(s)(o^{\prime l}_{ij}+o^{\prime r}_{ij})]\nonumber\\   & & \times [ 1-(y - z)^{2}+\frac{1}{3}\lambda(1,y , z)+4x]\lambda^{1/2}(1,y , z ) , \\ \sigma_{\gamma z_{r } } & & \hspace*{-0.2cm}= \frac{e^{2}g^{2 } } { 32\pi\cos^{2}\theta_{w}}\cos2\theta_{w}\delta_{ij}(c_{l}^{\prime}+c_{r}^{\prime}){\cal r}e[d_{z_r}(s)(o^{l}_{ij}+o^{r}_{ij } ) ] \nonumber\\   & & \times [ 1-(y - z)^{2}+\frac{1}{3}\lambda(1,y , z)+4x]\lambda^{1/2}(1,y , z ) , \\ \sigma_{\gamma \tilde{\nu}_{l } } & & \hspace*{-0.2cm}= \frac{-e^{2}g^{2}}{64 \pi s}|v_{i1}|^{2}\delta_{ij}\biggl[[1-(y - z)^{2}+4x ] \frac{1}{b}\ln(\frac{a+b}{a - b})-4(1+a)\nonumber\\ & & \times \biggl(2-\frac{a}{b}\ln(\frac{a+b}{a - b})\biggr)\biggr]\lambda^{1/2}(1,y , z ) , \\ \sigma_{\gamma \tilde{\nu}_{r } } & & \hspace*{-0.2cm}= \frac{-e^{2}g^{2}}{64 \pi s}|u_{i2}|^{2}\delta_{ij}\biggl[[1-(y - z)^{2}+4x ] \frac{1}{b}\ln(\frac{a^{\prime}+b}{a^{\prime}-b}-4(1+a^{\prime})\nonumber\\ & & \times \biggl(2-\frac{a^{\prime}}{b}\ln(\frac{a^{\prime}+b}{a^{\prime}-b})\biggr)\biggr]\lambda^{1/2}(1,y , z ) , \\
\sigma_{z_{l } \tilde{\nu}_{l } } & & \hspace*{-0.2cm}= \frac{-g^{4}}{64 \pi\cos^{2}\theta_{w}}c_l\biggl\{{\cal r}e[d_{z_l}(s)v_{i1}^{\ast}v_{j1}o^{\prime l}_{ij } ] \biggl([1-(y - z)^{2}]\frac{1}{b}\ln(\frac{a+b}{a - b})-4(1+a)\nonumber\\ & & \times [ 2-\frac{a}{b}\ln(\frac{a+b}{a - b})]\biggr)+{\cal r}e[d_{z_l}(s)v^{\ast}_{i1}v_{j1}o^{\prime r}_{ij}]\frac{4x}{b}\ln(\frac{a+b}{a - b})\biggr\}\lambda^{1/2}(1,y , z ) , \\ \sigma_{z_{l } \tilde{\nu}_{r } } & & \hspace*{-0.2cm}= \frac{-g^{4}}{64 \pi\cos^{2}\theta_{w}}c_r\biggl\{{\cal r}e[d_{z_l}(s)u_{i2}u^{\ast}_{j2}o^{\prime l}_{ij } ] \biggl([1-(y - z)^{2}]\frac{1}{b}\ln(\frac{a^{\prime}+b}{a^{\prime}-b } ) - 4(1+a^{\prime})\nonumber\\ & & \times [ 2-\frac{a^{\prime}}{b}\ln(\frac{a^{\prime}+b}{a^{\prime}-b})]\biggr)+{\cal r}e[d_{z_l}(s)u_{i2}u^{\ast}_{j2}o^{\prime r}_{ij}]\frac{4x}{b}\ln(\frac{a^{\prime}+b}{a^{\prime}-b})\biggr\}\lambda^{1/2}(1,y , z ) , \\
\sigma_{z_{r } \tilde{\nu}_{l } } & & \hspace*{-0.2cm}= \frac{-g^{4}}{64 \pi\cos^{2}\theta_{w}}\cos2\theta_{w } c_l^{\prime}\biggl\{{\cal r}e[d_{z_r}(s)v_{i1}^{\ast } v_{j1}o^{l}_{ij } ] \biggl([1-(y - z)^{2 } ] \frac{1}{b}\ln(\frac{a+b}{a - b})\nonumber\\ & & -4(1+a)[2-\frac{a}{b}\ln(\frac{a+b}{a - b})]\biggr)+{\cal r}e[d_{z_r}(s)v^{\ast}_{i1}v_{j1}o^{r}_{ij}]\frac{4x}{b } \ln(\frac{a+b}{a - b})\biggr\}\nonumber \\ & & \times \lambda^{1/2}(1,y , z ) , \\
\sigma_{z_{r } \tilde{\nu}_{r } } & & \hspace*{-0.2cm}= \frac{-g^{4}}{64 \pi\cos^{2}\theta_{w}}\cos2\theta_{w } c_r^{\prime}\biggl\{{\cal r}e[d_{z_r}(s)u_{i2}u^{\ast}_{j2}o^{l}_{ij } ] \biggl([1-(y - z)^{2 } ] \frac{1}{b}\ln(\frac{a^{\prime}+b}{a^{\prime}-b})\nonumber\\ & & -4(1+a^{\prime})[2-\frac{a^{\prime}}{b}\ln(\frac{a^{\prime}+b}{a^{\prime}-b})]\biggr)+{\cal r}e[d_{z_r}(s)u_{i2}u^{\ast}_{j2}o^{r}_{ij}]\frac{4x}{b } \ln(\frac{a^{\prime}+b}{a^{\prime}-b})\biggr\}\nonumber \\&&\times \lambda^{1/2}(1,y , z ) , \\
\sigma_{z_{l , r } } & & \hspace*{-0.2cm}= \frac{g^{4}s}{64 \pi\cos^{4}\theta_{w}}\cos2\theta_{w } ( c_{l}c_l^{\prime}+ c_{r}c_r^{\prime } ) \biggl [ { \cal r}e[d_{z_l}(s)d_{z^{\ast}_r } ( s ) ( o^{\prime l}_{ij}o^{l \ast } _ { ij}+o^{\prime r}_{ij}o^{r \ast } _ { ij } ) ] \nonumber \\ & & \times [ 1-(y - z)^{2}+\frac{1}{3}\lambda(1,y , z)]+ 4x{\cal r}e[d_{z_l}(s)d_{z^{\ast}_r}(s)(o^{\prime l}_{ij}o^{r \ast}_{ij}+o^{l \ast}_{ij}o^{\prime r}_{ij } ) ] \biggr ] \nonumber \\ & & \times ] \lambda^{1/2}(1,y , z ) , \\ \sigma_{z_l } & & \hspace*{-0.2cm}= \frac{g^{4}s}{64 \pi\cos^{4}\theta_{w}}|d_{z_l}(s)|^{2}(c_{l}^{2}+c_{r}^{2 } ) \biggl\{(|o^{\prime l}_{ij}|^{2}+|o^{\prime r}_{ij}|^{2 } ) \nonumber \\    & & \times [ 1-(y - z)^{2}+\frac{1}{3}\lambda(1,y , z)]+4x{\cal r}e[{o}^{\prime l}_{ij}\,{o}^{\prime r \ast}_{ij } ] \biggr\ } \lambda^{1/2}(1,y , z ) , \\ \sigma_{z_r } & & \hspace*{-0.2cm}= \frac{g^{4}s \cos^{2}2\theta_{w}}{64 \pi\cos^{2}\theta_{w}}|d_{z_r}(s)|^{2}(c_{l}^{\prime 2}+c_{r}^{\prime 2})\biggl\{(|o^{l}_{ij}|^{2}+|o^{r}_{ij}|^{2 } ) \nonumber \\   & & \times [ 1-(y - z)^{2}+\frac{1}{3}\lambda(1,y , z)]+4x{\cal r}e [ o^{l}_{ij}\,o^{r \ast}_{ij } ] \biggr\}\lambda^{1/2}(1,y , z).\end{aligned}\ ] ] here , we have taken @xmath150 , @xmath151 and @xmath152 ; @xmath153 , and the variables @xmath154 are defined as @xmath155    in fig .
[ fig : cs11 ] , the cross section for the process @xmath156 in the ( @xmath157)-plane is depicted at two different center of mass energies , 500 and 1000 gev .
the value of the cross section without cp - odd phases is around 50 pb for @xmath158 gev and 0.35 pb for @xmath159 gev .
cp - odd phases can lead to either constructive or destructive interference effects , about a maximum @xmath160 for constructive and @xmath161 for destructive effects at @xmath158 gev .
these occur at @xmath162 and @xmath163 in the @xmath164-plane , respectively . for @xmath159
gev , there exists a similar situation with about @xmath165 constructive ( destructive ) effects . in this case
, the maximum occurs at @xmath163 .
the case with final states @xmath166 is shown in fig .
[ fig : cs22 ] . in this case ,
constructive ( destructive ) effect can reach up to @xmath167 at @xmath158 gev and @xmath168 at @xmath159 gev .    3.5 in 3.5 in    -0.2 in    3.5 in 3.5 in    -0.2 in    3.5 in 3.5 in    -0.2 in    figs .
[ fig : cs12 ] and [ fig : cs14 ] represent the cp - odd phase dependence of the cross sections for @xmath169 and @xmath170 , respectively .
the extrema for the cross section occur in more than one region in the @xmath164 plane . for the @xmath171 case at @xmath158
gev the maximum cross section is obtained for @xmath172 and @xmath173 $ ] , and the minimum at around @xmath174 and @xmath175 .
the cp - odd phase effects are slightly smaller for constructive interference : around @xmath176 for the constructive ( destructive ) case . at @xmath159 gev
, there is almost no destructive interference in the entire plane .
the cross section can get enhanced at most by @xmath123 in three different intervals shown in fig .
[ fig : cs12 ] .
the @xmath177 case is similar to the @xmath178 or @xmath166 and the @xmath89 values for getting a maximum ( minimum ) value for the cross section are the same ( around @xmath179 for constructive and @xmath180 for destructive ) each at different center of mass energies , 500 and 1000 gev .
the enhancement can be more than @xmath181 for both energies .
the destructive effects can not exceed @xmath123 at @xmath159 gev , but become more than @xmath182 at @xmath158 gev .
3.5 in 3.5 in    -0.2 in    3.5 in 3.5 in    -0.2 in    we also consider the angular distribution @xmath183 where @xmath184 is angle between the chargino and the electron beam , as well as the forward backward asymmetry ( @xmath185 ) defined as : @xmath186    3.5 in 3.5 in    -0.2 in    3.5 in 3.5 in    -0.2 in    in fig .  [ fig : afb11 ] , the forward - backward asymmetry ( @xmath185 ) is shown in the @xmath164-plane for @xmath187 at both @xmath158 gev ( on the left ) and @xmath159 gev ( on the right ) .
the asymmetry without cp - odd phases is around @xmath188 at @xmath158 gev and @xmath189 at @xmath159 gev .
even though the asymmetry is a lot bigger at @xmath159 gev than at @xmath158 gev , it is more sensitive to the cp - odd phases for latter case .
the change in @xmath185 can be as much as @xmath181 and can even change sign ( there is an almost symmetric pattern with respect to @xmath190 line ) .
however , the increase in @xmath185 can not exceed @xmath191 at @xmath159 gev .
for @xmath192 and @xmath193 , cp - odd phases effects cancel each other .
maximum constructive effects occur around @xmath179 for both angles . as depicted in fig .
[ fig : afb22 ] , the maximum asymmetry for @xmath194 is obtained at around @xmath195 at both @xmath158 and @xmath196 gev ( around @xmath197 and @xmath123 increase , respectively ) .
maximum destructive interference effects are slightly smaller and take place for @xmath198 .
the final set of graphs for @xmath185 is shown in fig .
[ fig : afb12 ] for the process @xmath169 . at @xmath158 gev ,
cp - odd phases have constructive effects in almost the entire range and the asymmetry can reach a maximum @xmath199 , for which @xmath185 is about @xmath200 bigger than the case without cp phases . for values of the phases around @xmath179 ,
destructive effects get maximized at @xmath159 gev and suppress the @xmath185 to be as small as @xmath201 for the phases around @xmath179 .
the suppression in percentage is almost equal to the enhancement at @xmath158 gev .
in this section we consider chargino production by a polarized @xmath0 beam , followed by two body chargino decay .
we calculate the associated production and decay cross section and the observable t - odd asymmetry .
two - body decays of charginos have been studied in the context of the mssm without cp violating phases @xcite . there
, the rates of interest are for decays to sm particles : @xmath202 , if kinematically allowed . though these processes are also allowed in lrsusy
, their decay ratios do not differ significantly from the ones in mssm .
we choose to concentrate here on those decays which could show a difference in signals between mssm and lrsusy .
these are the decays to leptons / sleptons , which are sensitive to the right - handed gauginos .
these decay widths are : @xmath203 \right ] , \nonumber \\
\gamma_d ( \chi^+_i \rightarrow l_j^+{\tilde \nu}_{rj})&= & \frac{g^2{\tilde m}_{\chi_i^+ } \lambda^{1/2}(1 , y^2_l , y^2_{{\tilde \nu}_r})}{64 \pi y_w^2 \cos^2 \beta } \left [ \left ( 1+y_l^2-y_{{\tilde \nu}_r}^2 \right ) \left ( y_l^2 |v_{i4}|^2 + 2y_w^2 \cos^2\beta|u_{i2}|^2 \right ) \right .
\nonumber \\ & -&\left .
4\sqrt{2 } y_w y_l \cos \beta \;{\cal r}e[u_{i2}v_{i4 } ] \right ] ,   \\ \gamma_d ( \chi^+_i \rightarrow { \tilde l}_{lj}^+ { \nu}_{j})&= & \frac{g^2{\tilde m}_{\chi_i^+ } \lambda^{1/2}(1 , y^2_{{\tilde l}_l } , 0)}{64 \pi y_w^2 \cos^2 \beta } \left [ \left ( 1+y_l^2-y_{{\tilde l}_l}^2 \right ) \left ( y_l^2 |v_{i4}|^2 + 2y_w^2 \cos^2\beta|u_{i1}|^2 \right ) \right ] , \nonumber \\ \gamma_d ( \chi^+_i \rightarrow { \tilde l}_{rj}^+ { \nu}_{j})&= & \frac{g^2{\tilde m}_{\chi_i^+ } \lambda^{1/2}(1 , y^2_{{\tilde l}_r } , 0)}{64 \pi y_w^2 \cos^2 \beta } \left [ \left ( 1+y_l^2-y_{{\tilde l}_r}^2 \right ) \left ( y_l^2 |u_{i4}|^2 + 2y_w^2 \cos^2\beta|v_{i2}|^2 \right ) \right ] , \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath204 .
similarly , charginos could decay to quarks / squarks , if kinematically allowed , though if sleptons are lighter , we expect the decay rates to ( s)leptons to dominate over the ones to ( s)quarks . in principle the decay processes are similar , and we have , as in the mssm @xcite : @xmath205 if kinematically allowed
. these types of decays would be less important phenomenologically than the decays into neutralinos if the lightest neutralino is the lightest supersymmetric particle ( lsp ) .
the first two would be dominant if the sneutrino is the lsp and the last two would be possible for a heavier chargino if @xmath206 , and if the neutralino is the lsp . in the case the neutralino is the lps , the scalar leptons and scalar neutrinos would decay further , @xmath207 .
we concentrate in this section on the first two decay channels , since we expect these to show the strongest deviations from mssm ( due to the availability of the right - handed sneutrino ) .
we study the chargino production @xmath208 with longitudinally polarized beams , and the subsequent decay of one of the charginos into a sneutrino and anti - lepton @xmath209 .
we define the triple product : @xmath210 and the t - odd asymmetry : @xmath211 where here the cross section @xmath212 is the product of the chargino pair production cross section and the branching ratio for the decay into the sneutrino .
this asymmetry is sensitive both to the phases in the chargino mass matrix , and to absorptive contributions , which do not contribute to cp violation . to eliminate the absorptive effects
, we study the cp asymmetry : @xmath213 with @xmath214 the asymmetry for the cp conjugated process @xmath215 .    in order to calculate the cross section for the combined process of chargino production and decay of @xmath216
, we use the spin density matrix formalism for the production and decays of charginos as in @xcite .
the amplitude for the whole process is : @xmath217 where @xmath218 is the helicity amplitude for the production , @xmath219 the helicity amplitude for the decay , and @xmath220 is the chargino propagator . in the above formulas @xmath221 is the helicity of the decaying chargino , and
@xmath222 its four - momentum squared .
the total differential cross section is defined as : @xmath223 where the index @xmath224 runs over the charginos , sneutrino and emitted lepton momenta and @xmath225 is the energy of the incoming beam .    in the definition of the asymmetry : @xmath226 the only cp sensitive contribution comes from the production and decay amplitudes corresponding to @xmath227 polarization perpendicular to the production plane . in the notation of @xcite , the production amplitudes are : @xmath228 with @xmath229 \nonumber \\   & & \times e_b^2m_{\chi_i^- } q \sin \theta \ ; { \cal i}m \left ( o^{\prime l}_{ij } o^{\prime \ast r}_{ij}\right ) ,   \nonumber \\
\sigma^2_p(z_lz_r)&= & \frac{g^4\cos 2 \theta_w}{\cos^4 \theta_w }   \left [ c_rc_r^{\prime}(1+p_{e^-})(1-p_{e^+})-c_lc_l^{\prime}(1-p_{e^-})(1+p_{e^+ } ) \right ] \nonumber \\   & & \times e_b^2m_{\chi_i^- } q \sin \theta \ ; { \cal i}m \left ( d_{z_l}d_{z_r}^{\ast}o^{\prime l}_{ij } o^ { \ast r}_{ij}+ d^{\ast}_{z_l}d_{z_r}o^
{ l}_{ij } o^ { \prime \ast r}_{ij}\right ) ,    \nonumber \\   \sigma^2_p(z_rz_r)&= & 2 \frac{g^4\cos^2 2 \theta_w}{\cos^4 \theta_w } |d_{z_r}|^2 \left [ c_r^{\prime 2}(1+p_{e^-})(1-p_{e^+})-c_l^{\prime 2}(1-p_{e^-})(1+p_{e^+ } ) \right ] \nonumber \\   & & \times e_b^2m_{\chi_i^- } q \sin \theta \ ; { \cal i}m \left ( o^ { l}_{ij } o^ { \ast r}_{ij}\right ) ,   \nonumber
\\   \sigma^2_p({\tilde \nu}_lz_l)&= & \frac{g^4}{\cos^2 \theta_w } c_l^2(1-p_{e^-})(1+p_{e^+ } ) e_b^2m_{\chi_i^- } q \sin \theta   \ ; { \cal i}m \left ( v_{i1}^{\ast}v_{j1 } o^{\prime r}_{ij } d_{z_l } d_{{\tilde \nu}_l}^{\ast } \right ) ,   \nonumber \\
\sigma^2_p({\tilde \nu}_r z_l)&= &   \frac{g^4}{\cos^2 \theta_w } c_r^2(1+p_{e^-})(1-p_{e^+ } ) e_b^2m_{\chi_i^- } q \sin \theta   \ ; { \cal i}m \left ( u_{i2}u_{j2}^{\ast } o^{\prime l}_{ij } d_{z_l } d_{{\tilde \nu}_r}^{\ast } \right ) , \nonumber \\
\sigma^2_p({\tilde \nu}_l z_r)&= & \frac{g^4 \cos 2 \theta_w}{\cos^2 \theta_w } c_l^{\prime 2}(1-p_{e^-})(1+p_{e^+ } ) e_b^2m_{\chi_i^- } q \sin \theta   \ ; { \cal i}m \left ( v_{i1}^{\ast}v_{j1 } o^ { r}_{ij } d_{z_r } d_{{\tilde \nu}_l}^{\ast } \right ) ,   \nonumber \\   \sigma^2_p({\tilde \nu}_rz_r)&= & \frac{g^4 \cos 2 \theta_w}{\cos^2 \theta_w } c_r^{\prime 2}(1+p_{e^-})(1-p_{e^+ } ) e_b^2m_{\chi_i^- } q \sin \theta   \ ; { \cal i}m \left ( u_{i2}u_{j2}^{\ast } o^ { l}_{ij } d_{z_r } d_{{\tilde \nu}_r}^{\ast } \right ) .
\nonumber \\\end{aligned}\ ] ] in these expressions the angle @xmath230 is the scattering angle between the incoming electron beam and the @xmath231 chargino in the laboratory frame , @xmath232 is the beam energy , @xmath233 is the positron ( electron ) polarization , and @xmath234 .
similarly , the chargino decay amplitudes are : @xmath235 and the conjugated decay process @xmath236 amplitudes have an overall @xmath237 sign . here
@xmath238 is the spin polarization component perpendicular to the production plane and @xmath239 is the momentum of the antilepton .
see @xcite for details .
the production contribution independent of the chargino polarization vectors can be obtained from the expressions for the cross sections in section [ sec : production ] , in the same way as the polarization - independent part of the chargino decay can be obtained from the partial decay widths , eq .
( [ decays ] ) .
for example : @xmath240{\tilde m}_{\chi_i^+ } \right ] , \nonumber \\ d(l^+ { \tilde \nu}_r)\hspace*{-0.2cm}&&=\frac{g^2}{2}\left [ \left ( |u_{i2}|^2-\frac { m_l^2}{2m_w^2 \cos^2\beta}|v_{i4}|^2\right ) ( { \tilde m}_{\chi_i^+}^2-m_{{\tilde \nu}_r}^2-m_l^2 ) \right .
\nonumber \\ & & \left .
- 2\sqrt{2 } \frac { m_l^2}{m_w \cos\beta } { \cal r}e[u_{i2}^{\ast } v_{i4}]{\tilde m}_{\chi_i^+ } \right ] .
\end{aligned}\ ] ] with these expressions for the density matrices , the asymmetry becomes : @xmath241 where @xmath242 .
using the narrow width approximation for the chargino propagator : @xmath243 the total cross section appearing in the denominator is obtained as @xmath244 and is polarization - independent .
an interesting sign of lrsusy would be given by the case in which at least one of charginos could decay to an anti - lepton and a right - handed sneutrino .
this might be an unlikely scenario , since @xmath245 is expected to be large .
the splitting between the left and right sneutrinos is proportional to the dirac neutrino mass , and it is conceivable that this is in the mev region .
if so , the right handed neutrino could be kinematically accessible for the decay of a heavier chargino . to achieve this
, we consider a different mass scenario than in the previous section .
we take the right - handed gaugino mass @xmath246 gev , larger than the left - handed one ( @xmath107 gev ) . under these circumstances , with the notation @xmath247 , the fourth chargino @xmath248 is mainly a right - handed gaugino and it is heavy enough to decay to an anti - lepton and a right - handed sneutrino ( taken to have mass of 500 gev ) .
the third lightest state is now mainly higgsino and we will consider @xmath249 in conjunction with its production process from @xmath0 scattering . since @xmath250 vanishes for the production of same charginos , we will only consider @xmath251 and @xmath252 processes , even though some other channels ( with @xmath253 chargino final states ) are allowed for cross section consideration .    3.5 in 3.5 in    -0.2 in    3.5 in 3.5 in    -0.2 in    in fig .
[ fig : sigatoddl ] , we present , on the left , the total production - decay cross section @xmath254 ( @xmath255 or @xmath66 ) at @xmath256 gev in the cp - odd phases @xmath164-plane with electron - positron beam polarization @xmath257 , and , on the right , the corresponding asymmetry @xmath250 for the same chain with the same parameter set , defined as in the caption of the figure .
the total cross section including the particular decay channel is @xmath258 fb without cp - odd phases and depends only weakly on the phases .
the maximum enhancement is around @xmath191 .
the cross section is approximately constant on the contours @xmath259 , and maximum enhancement occurs along such contours .
there is a similar pattern in the asymmetry @xmath250 which varies in ( -3.5%,3.5% ) interval .
cp - odd phases can give large asymmetry in the entire @xmath164 range .
@xmath250 takes values of @xmath260 along @xmath261 or @xmath262 , and @xmath263 along @xmath264 .
these values for both the cross section and the asymmetry are pretty much consistent with the mssm results , as expected .
however , the process @xmath252 which is shown in fig .
[ fig : sigatoddr ] , is peculiar to the left right supersymmetric model and measuring the t - odd asymmetry associated with it could be used to distinguish it from mssm . even though the total cross section is comparatively small with respect to the previous case
, the asymmetry can reach @xmath265 .
since the asymmetry is around @xmath266 without the phases , the experimental availability of an asymmetry measurement would allow us to bound the cp - odd phases in the chargino sector of the model .
we have analysed the influence of the cp - violating phases in the chargino sector of the left - right supersymmetric model .
our emphasis has been mostly on the presence of a right - handed wino , and less so on additional higgsinos , which arise from ( model - dependent ) ways to break the symmetry . to achieve this , we decoupled the additional higgsinos by retaining only those originating from the bidoublet higgs bosons , which are common to all left - right models .
the added advantage of this method is that we are able to solve analytically for the chargino mass eigenvalues . from the most general set of phases in the mass matrix , two cp - odd phases arise ( as opposed to just one in mssm ) and their influence is the strongest on the lightest chargino ( mostly a mixture of left and right winos ) mass , where effects of up to 20% can be detected .
the phases influence weakly the heaviest ( corresponding to the mssm higgsino ) mass , and not much the other two states .    for the chargino production from @xmath0 pairs , a large cp - odd phase effect in the cross section
is obtained for either same or different states production , at both @xmath267 and @xmath196 gev .
the variation of the cross section has distinct features : it is enhanced or depressed for a single region of combined parameter space for same charginos , while for different charginos the enhancement can occur for several parameter regions .
the forward - backward asymmetry @xmath185 ( 1.2% at @xmath267 gev and 12% @xmath268 gev without cp phases ) is a very sensitive probe of cp - odd angles , being enhanced to 50% for @xmath267 gev for @xmath269 production .
this is even more pronounced for @xmath270 where the maximum forward - backward asymmetry can be almost four times its value without cp phases
.    a distinguishing sign of a left - right gaugino sector would be the decay of charginos into left and right , if kinematic restrictions allow it , scalar neutrino .
we study these decays
seperately , in conjunction with the chargino production from a polarized electron - positron beam , and investigate the dependence of the cross section for chargino production and decay , as well as the cp asymmetry in this decay , @xmath250 , as a function of the two cp - odd phases . though for this decay to occur , the right - handed gaugino mass must be larger than the right sneutrino mass , and neither should decouple from the energy spectrum of the lower lying charginos , we find this possibility very interesting for detecting a signal for left - right supersymmetry . while the cross section for production and decay is enhanced , but not very sensitive to the cp - phases , the t - odd asymmetry is very sensitive to the phases .
if the decay into the right - handed sneutrino is open , the enhancement of the asymmetry could be four times the one obtained in mssm and would serve as a distinguishing signal for this model .    in summary ,
additional cp - odd phases arise in lrsusy .
their effect is strongest in forward - backward asymmetry of the production , and in the cp - asymmetry in polarized production , followed by the decay into a neutrino and slepton .
both of these asymmetries show large enhancements with respect to their values in mssm .
99 j.  r.  ellis , s.  ferrara and d.  v.  nanopoulos , phys .
b * 114 * , 231 ( 1982 ) ; j.  polchinski and m.  b.  wise , phys .
b * 125 * , 393 ( 1983 ) ; m.  dugan , b.  grinstein and l.  j.  hall , nucl .
b * 255 * , 413 ( 1985 ) .
a.  i.  sanda , phys .
d * 32 * , 2992 ( 1985 ) ; y.  kizukuri and n.  oshimo , phys .  rev .
d * 46 * , 3025 ( 1992 ) ; y.  kizukuri and n.  oshimo , phys .  rev .
d * 45 * , 1806 ( 1992 ) .
r.  n.  mohapatra and a.  rasin , phys .
* 76 * , 3490 ( 1996 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9511391 ] ; r.  n.  mohapatra and a.  rasin , phys .
d * 54 * , 5835 ( 1996 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9604445 ] ; r.  kuchimanchi , phys .
* 76 * , 3486 ( 1996 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9511376 ] .
m.  frank , phys .
d * 59 * , 055006 ( 1999 ) ; m.  frank , j.  phys .
g * 25 * , 1813 ( 1999 ) .
t.  ibrahim and p.  nath , phys .
d * 61 * , 093004 ( 2000 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9910553 ] ; t.  ibrahim and p.  nath , phys .
d * 57 * , 478 ( 1998 ) [ erratum - ibid .
d * 58 * , 019901 ( 1998 ) ,  errat , d * 60 * , 079903 ( 1999 ) ,  errat , d * 60 * , 119901 ( 1999 ) ] [ arxiv : hep - ph/9708456 ] .
r.  m.  francis , m.  frank and c.  s.  kalman , phys .
d * 43 * , 2369 ( 1991 ) .
z.  chacko and r.  n.  mohapatra , phys .
d * 58 * , 015003 ( 1998 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9712359 ] ; b.  dutta and r.  n.  mohapatra , phys .
d * 59 * , 015018 ( 1999 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9804277 ] .
m.  e.  pospelov , phys .
d * 56 * , 259 ( 1997 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9611422 ] ; g.  couture , m.  frank , h.  konig and m.  pospelov , eur .
j.  c * 7 * , 135 ( 1999 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9701299 ] .
m.  frank and i.  turan , phys .
d * 72 * , 035008 ( 2005 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0506197 ] .
m.  frank , phys .
d * 62 * , 053004 ( 2000 ) ; g.  barenboim , k.  huitu , j.  maalampi and m.  raidal , phys .
b * 394 * , 132 ( 1997 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9611362 ] ; k.  huitu , j.  maalampi , a.  pietila and m.  raidal , nucl .
b * 487 * , 27 ( 1997 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9606311 ] .
p.  ball , j.  m.  frere and j.  matias , nucl .
b * 572 * , 3 ( 2000 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9910211 ] ; p.  ball and r.  fleischer , phys .
b * 475 * , 111 ( 2000 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9912319 ] .
g.  j.  gounaris , c.  le mouel and p.  i.  porfyriadis , phys .
d * 65 * , 035002 ( 2002 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0107249 ] ; g.  j.  gounaris and c.  le mouel , phys .  rev .
d * 66 * , 055007 ( 2002 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0204152 ] .
m.  frank and h.  n.  saif , z.  phys .
c * 69 * , 673 ( 1996 ) ; m.  frank , c.  s.  kalman and h.  n.  saif , z.  phys .
c * 59 * , 655 ( 1993 ) .
a.  bartl , h.  fraas , o.  kittel and w.  majerotto , phys .
b * 598 * , 76 ( 2004 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0406309 ] ; o.  kittel , a.  bartl , h.  fraas and w.  majerotto , phys .
d * 70 * , 115005 ( 2004 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0410054 ] .
s.  y.  choi , j.  s.  shim , h.  s.  song and w.  y.  song , phys .
b * 449 * , 207 ( 1999 ) ; s.  y.  choi , a.  djouadi , h.  s.  song and p.  m.  zerwas , eur .  phys .
j.  c * 8 * , 669 ( 1999 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9812236 ] .
s.  y.  choi , j.  kalinowski , g.  moortgat - pick and p.  m.  zerwas , eur .
j.  c * 22 * , 563 ( 2001 ) [ addendum - ibid .
c * 23 * , 769 ( 2002 ) ] [ arxiv : hep - ph/0108117 ] .
j.  f.  gunion and h.  e.  haber , phys .
d * 37 * , 2515 ( 1988 ) .
o.  kittel , a.  bartl , h.  fraas and w.  majerotto , phys .
d * 70 * , 115005 ( 2004 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0410054 ] ; a.  bartl , h.  fraas , o.  kittel and w.  majerotto , phys .
b * 598 * , 76 ( 2004 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0406309 ] ; a.  bartl , k.  hohenwarter - sodek , t.  kernreiter and h.  rud , eur .
j.  c * 36 * , 515 ( 2004 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/0403265 ] ; g.  moortgat - pick , h.  fraas , a.  bartl and w.  majerotto , eur .
j.  c * 7 * , 113 ( 1999 ) [ arxiv : hep - ph/9804306 ] .