The two-loop supersymmetric corrections to lepton anomalous magnetic and electric dipole moments Tai-Fu Feng a,b,c, Xue-Qian Li d, Lin Lin a, Jukka Maalampi b, He-Shan Song a a Department of Physics, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 64, China arxiv:hep-ph/647v Apr 6 b Department of Physics, 44 University of Jyväskylä,Finland c Center for Theoretical Physics, Seoul National University, Seoul, 5-74, Korea and d Department of Physics, Nankai University, Tianjin 37, China Dated: February, 8 Abstract Using the effective Lagrangian method, we analyze the electroweak corrections to the anomalous dipole moments of lepton from some special two-loop topological diagrams which are composed of neutralino chargino - slepton sneutrino in the minimal supersymmetric etension of the standard model MSSM. Considering the translational invariance of the inner loop momenta and the electromagnetic gauge invariance, we get all dimension 6 operators and derive their coefficients. After applying equations of motion to the eternal leptons, the anomalous dipole moments of lepton are obtained. The numerical results imply that there is a parameter space where the two-loop supersymmetric corrections to the muon anomalous dipole moments may be significant. PACS numbers:.3.er,.6.jv,4.8.cp Keywords:
I. INTRODUCTION At both aspects of eperiment and theory, the magnetic dipole moment of lepton as well as the electric dipole moment draw great attention of physicists because of their obvious importance. The anomalous dipole moments of muon not only can be used for testing loop effect in the standard model SM, but also provide a potential window to detect new physics beyond the SM. The current eperimental world average of the muon magnetic dipole moment is a ep µ = 659 3 8. Contributions to the muon magnetic dipole moment are generally divided into three sectors: QED loops, hadronic contributions as well as electroweak corrections. With the hadronic contributions which are driven from the most recent e e data, we can get the following SM predictions, 3, 4 a SM µ = 659 8.9 8. a SM µ = 659 75.6 7.5 a SM µ = 659 79.4 9.3. The deviations between the above theoretical predictions and the eperimental data are all approimately within error range of σ. Although this σ deviation cannot be regarded as a strong evidence for new physics, along with the eperimental measurement precision and theoretical prediction accuracy being constantly improved, this deviation may turn more significant in near future. In fact, the current eperimental precision 8 already puts very restrictive bounds on new physics scenarios. In the SM, the electroweak one- and two-loop contributions amount to 9.5 and 4.4 5 respectively. Comparing with the standard electroweak corrections, the supersymmetric corrections are generally suppressed by Λ EW /Λ NP, where Λ EW denotes the electroweak energy scale and Λ NP denotes the supersymmetric energy scale. However, there is a parameter space where the one-loop supersymmetric corrections are comparable to that from the SM 6. Since the one-loop contribution can be large, the two-loop supersymmetric corrections are possibly quite important 7. Utilizing the heavy mass epansion approimation HME together with the corresponding projection operator method, the two-loop standard electroweak corrections to muon
anomalous magnetic dipole moment MDM have been evaluated 8. Within the framework of CP conservation, the authors of Ref. 9 present the supersymmetric corrections from some special two-loop diagrams where a close chargino neutralino or scalar fermion loop is inserted into those two-higgs-doublet one-loop diagrams. Ref. discusses the contributions to muon MDM from the effective vertices H W γ, h H γγ which induced by the scalar quarks of the third generation. In this work, we calculate the corrections from some special two-loop diagrams which are composed of internal neutralino chargino and scalar lepton lines. Since the electric dipole moment EDM of muon is also of special interest in both theoretical and eperimental aspects, we as well present the lepton EDM here by keeping all possible CP violation phases. All the diagrams which we are going to calculate, were not discussed in literature. Besides, we first epress our results in the form which eplicitly satisfies the Ward identity requested by the QED gauge theory. In order to rationally predict the muon EDM, we certainly need to take the current upper eperimental bounds on electron and neutron EDMs as rigorous constraints into account. Nevertheless, if we invoke a cancellation mechanism among different supersymmetric contributions 3, or assume those sfermions of the first generation to be heavy enough 4, the loop inducing lepton and neutron EDMs restrict the argument of the µ parameter to be π/5 tan, but no constraints on other eplicit CP violation phases are enforced. Here, we apply the effective Lagrangian method to get the anomalous dipole momentums of lepton in this work. In concrete calculation, we assume that all eternal leptons as well as photon are off-shell, then epand the amplitude of corresponding triangle diagrams according to the eternal momenta of leptons and photon. Using loop momentum translational invariance, we write the sum of the triangle diagrams which correspond to the corresponding self-energy in the form which eplicitly satisfies the Ward identity required by the QED gauge symmetry. Then we can get all dimension si operators together with their coefficients. After applying the equations of motion for eternal leptons, higher dimensional operators, such as dimension eight operators, also contribute to the muon MDM and EDM in principle. However, the contributions of dimension eight operators contain an additional suppression factor m µ /Λ compared to that of dimension si operators, where m NP µ is the mass of muon. Setting Λ NP GeV, this suppression factor is about 6. Under current eperimental precision, it implies that the contributions of all higher dimension operators 3
D 8 can be neglected safely. We adopt the naive dimensional regularization with the anti-commuting γ 5 scheme, where there is no distinction between the first 4 dimensions and the remaining D 4 dimensions. Since the bare effective Lagrangian contains the ultra-violet divergence which is induced by divergent sub-diagrams, we give the renormalized results in the MS scheme and on-massshell scheme 5 respectively. The two-loop theoretical prediction certainly relies on our concrete choice of regularization scheme and renormalization scheme, however, our numerical results show that there is only tiny difference between the theoretical predictions by different regularization and renormalization schemes. We will discuss this problem in our other work. Through repeating the supersymmetric one-loop results, we introduce the effective Lagrangian method and our notations in net section. We will demonstrate how to obtain the supersymmetric two-loop corrections to the lepton MDMs and EDMs in Section III. In the Section IV we study the dependence of the lepton MDMs and EDMs on the supersymmetry parameters numerically. Conclusions are presented in the last Section. II. OUR NOTATIONS AND THE SUPERSYMMETRIC ONE-LOOP RESULTS operators The lepton MDMs and EDMs that we will calculate can actually be epressed as the L MDM = e 4m l a l lσ µν l F µν, L MDM = i d l lσ µν γ 5 l F µν. 3 Here, l denotes the lepton fermion, F µν is the electromagnetic field strength, m l is the lepton mass and e represents the electric charge respectively. Note that the lepton here is on-shell. In fact, it is convenient to get the corrections of the loop-diagrams to lepton MDMs and EDMs in terms of the effective Lagrangian method, if the masses of all the internal lines are much heavier than the eternal lepton mass. Assuming eternal leptons as well as photon all are off-shell, we epand the amplitude of corresponding triangle diagrams according to the eternal momenta of leptons and photon. Then we can get all higher dimension operators together with their coefficients. As discussed in the introduction, it is enough to retain only 4
Ẽ i ν i FIG. : The one-loop self energy diagrams which lead to the lepton MDMs and EDMs in MSSM, the corresponding triangle diagrams are obtained by attaching a photon in all possible ways to the internal particles. those dimension 6 operators in later calculations : O = 4π l i/d 3 ω l, O = e 4π id µlγ µ F σω l, O = e 3 4π lf σγ µ ω id µ l, O = e 4 4π l µ F µν γ ν ω l, O 5 = m l 4π l i/d ω l, O 6 = em l 4π l F σω l, 4 with D µ = µ iea µ and ω = γ 5 /. At one-loop level, there are two triangle diagrams which contribute to lepton MDMs and EDMs Fig.. After epanding the amplitude according to eternal momenta, the triangle diagrams determine following dimension 6 operators together with their coefficients as = 4π e L L Ẽi s w c w d 4 q iπ 4 q m q m Ẽ i { ξ IN i m q m Ẽ i q m 3 O Ẽ i 4 Ẽ i q 6 q m 3 O 4 Ẽ i 5 q O q m 3 O 3 Ẽ i
L L ν i η I N i m q m Ẽ i q m 3 O 4 Ẽ i q 6 q m 3 O 4 Ẽ i m m Ẽ i m η I N i ξi O N i q m O 5 6 Ẽ i Ẽ i q O q m 3 O 3 Ẽ i m m Ẽ i ξ I N i ηi O N i q m 5 O, 6 Ẽ i m = 4π e s w 6 { ξ IC i q d 4 q iπ 4 q m q m ν i m 4 q m m q m 3 O 4 3q O 3 q m 4 q q m 3O O 3 m η I m w c C i m 4 m q m 3 O q 4 q m 3O O 3 q 6 q m 3q O 3 q m 4 m η I C mw c i ξi m C i q m O q 5 q m O 6 m ξ I C mw c i ηi m C i q m O q 5 q m O, 5 6 with ξ I N i = R Ẽ Ii N s w N c w η I N i = s wrẽ 3Ii N m l c w m w c RẼ Ii N 3, ξ I C i = R ν IiV, m l c w m w c RẼ 3Ii N 3, η I = C i IiU R ν. 6 Here, N, V, U denote the miing matrices of neutralinos and charginos respectively, I, J =,, 3 are the indices of generations. We also adopt the shortcut notations: c w = cosθ w, s w = sin θ w, c = cos, where θ w is the Weinberg angle, and tan = υ /υ is the ratio between the vacuum epectation values of two Higgs doublets. As for the miing 6
matrices of sleptons and sneutrinos, RẼ, are: R ν R M M LL LR Ẽ M M RẼ = m δ Ẽ ij, i, j =,, 6 i LR RR Those 3 3 matrices are defined as R ν M ν R ν = m ν i δ ij, i, j =,, 3. 7 M LL IJ = M L IJ m δ IJ m Z s w cos δ IJ, M RR IJ = M R IJ m δ IJ m Z s w cos δ IJ, M LR IJ = µ H m tanδ IJ m A e IJ, M ν = M L IJ IJ m cos I, J =,, 3, 8 Z where M L, M R, A e are the bilinear and trilinear soft breaking parameters in the lepton sector separately, and µ H denotes the µ-parameter in the soft supersymmetry breaking terms. Applying the equations of motion for leptons in Eq.5, we can get the lepton MDMs as Ẽi a = e s w c w a ν i { d 4 q iπ 4 q m q m Ẽ i m m Ẽ i ξ I N i η I N i q q m Ẽ i 3 m m m Ẽ i Re ξ I N i ηi N i q m Ẽ i e { ξ I = 4π s w c w N i η I ρ N i, Ẽi 6 / Re ξ I N i ηi ρ N i Ẽi, = e s w { d 4 q iπ 4 q m q m ν i m m ξ I C i m η I m q w c C i q m 3 m m l I Re η I m w c q C i ξi, C i q m e { ξ I = 64π s C i m η I m ρ w w c C i νi 6 m Re η I m w c C i ξi C i ϕ3 7 νi, 9
with i = m /Λ, and Λ denotes the new physics scale. The definitions of the functions i NP NP ρ,, y, ϕ,,3, y can be found in appendi C. If we change our notations to that of Ref. 6, one can notice that those epressions are completely the same as the corresponding equations given in Ref. 6. In order to obtain the above epressions, we have used the following identities which originate from the loop momentum translational invariance: d D q q π D q m D d D q π D q m, d D q q π D q m D d D q q π D q m. In the CP conservation framework, the supersymmetric one-loop contribution is approimately given by GeV a L 3 µ tan, Λ NP when all supersymmetric masses are assumed to be equal to Λ NP, and tan. Correspondingly, the one loop supersymmetric contributions to the lepton EDMs can also be written as d Ẽi = d ν i = e3 s w e 3 s w c w m m Im η I Ẽ N i ξi N i i d 4 q iπ 4 q m q m Ẽ i 3 e 3 = Im η I 44π s w c w Λ N i ξi N i / ρ Ẽi, NP m m Im η I m w c d 4 q C i ξi C i e 3 m = 4π s Λ Im η I m w NP w c C i ξi C i / Certainly, supersymmetry inducing operators O, 3, 6 As we have seen above, only the operators O 6 level. However, we will find that operators O, 3 EDMs at the two loop order. q iπ 4 q m 3 q m ν i ϕ 3 νi. also contribute to the lepton MDMs. contribute to the EDMs of lepton at one loop also contribute to both lepton MDMs and III. THE TWO-LOOP SUPERSYMMETRIC CORRECTIONS In this sector, we analyze the two-loop supersymmetric corrections to lepton anomalous dipole moments. The two-loop supersymmetric corrections to the coefficients of those 8
operators in Eq. 4 originate from the two-loop self-energy diagrams of leptons, which are depicted in Fig.. The corresponding dipole moment diagrams are obtained by attaching a photon to these diagrams in all possible ways. In these diagrams there is no new suppression factor, ecept a factor arising from loop integration, and the divergence caused by the sub-diagrams can be subtracted in the MS or on-shell schemes safely. It turns out that for some regions of the parameter space the two-loop results are comparable with the one-loop contributions 9,. The reason for this is that the dependence of the two-loop results on the relevant parameters differs from that of the one-loop results. Among those two-loop contributions which have been analyzed in the literature, the corrections to muon MDM from the effective vertices γγh, γzh induced by the scalar quarks of the third generation can be very well approimated by the formulaes a t, L µ.3 m tµ H tan m t M H signa t, a b, L µ.3 m b A b tan m bm H signµ H, 3 where m t and m b are the masses of the lighter t and b, A t,b denote the trilinear soft breaking parameters of the t and b quarks, respectively, and M H is the mass of the heavy CP-even Higgs bosons. As for the two-loop diagrams where a close chargino neutralino loop is inserted into those two-higgs-doublet one-loop diagrams, the correspondingly contribution can be approimated as, L tan GeV a signµh, 4 µ 5 if all supersymmetric masses are set equal, i.e. µ H = m = M A = Λ NP, and the U gaugino mass m relates to the SU gaugino mass m by the GUT relation m = 5m /3s w c w with the CP conservation assumption. Here M A is the mass of CP-odd neutral Higgs. Although other contributions in Ref.9, cannot be neglected also, they cannot be approimated as the succinct formulaes above. Among the two-loop supersymmetric diagrams under investigation, the corrections to the coefficients of operators in Eq. 4 originate from three types of graphs: the lepton selfenergy diagrams, where there are two neutralinos and two sleptons; a chargino, a neutralino and two sleptons or two charginos and two sleptons as virtual particles in the loop Fig.. In our previous works 6, we analyzed the contributions to the rare decay b sγ and neutron 9 Λ NP
Ẽ j ν j l J ν J Ẽ i Ẽ i a b Ẽ i ν i ν J l J ν j ν j c d FIG. : The two-loop self energy diagrams which lead to the lepton MDMs and EDMs in MSSM, the corresponding triangle diagrams are obtained by attaching a photon in all possible ways to the internal particles. EDM from the same topological two-loop diagrams which are composed of gluino, chargino neutralino, and squarks. Certainly, Figs. does not include all diagrams with internal slepton/neutrnalino chargino which contribute to the anomalous dipole moments of muon. Beside those diagrams in Fig., there are two-loop diagrams where a neutralino chargino one-loop self-energy composed of lepton-slepton or a slepton one-loop self-energy composed of lepton-neutralino chargino is inserted into those one-loop diagrams in Fig.. However, those diagrams belong to different topological classes, and we will analyze the corrections from those two-loop diagrams in our future works. We will adopt below a terminology where, for eample, the neutralino-neutralino contribution means the sum of those triangle diagrams indeed two triangles bound together, which have two neutralinos and two sleptons with a photon being attached in all possible ways to the internal lines. Because the sum of the triangle diagrams corresponding to each self-energy obviously respects the Ward identity requested by QED gauge symmetry, we can calculate the contributions of all the
self-energies separately. Since the two-loop analysis is more subtle than the analysis at one-loop level, we show here in some detail how to evaluate all the processes, which contribute at two-loop level to the theoretical prediction of the lepton MDMs and EDMs. Taking the same steps, which we did in our earlier works 6, we obtain the following epressions for the relevant effective Lagrangian from the neutralino-neutralino self energy diagram: L = e4 4π d D q 4s w c w 4 π D π D { ξ I N j ηj N i ηj N j ξi N i D 4 N a ρ= 4 N a ρ O ρ η I N j ξj N i ξj N j ηi N i ρ= ρ O ρ 4 N b m m ξ I N j ξj N i ξj N j ξi N i ρ= 4 N b ρ O ρ m m η I N j ηj N i ηj ηi N j N i ρ= m 6 η I m N j ξj N i ξj ξi N j N i N c ρ=5 m 6 ξ I m N j ηj N i ηj ηi N j N i N c ρ=5 m 6 η I m N j ηj N i ηj ξi N j N i N d ρ=5 m 6 ξ I m N j ξj N i ξj ηi N j N i N d ρ=5 ρ O ρ ρ O ρ ρ O ρ ρ O ρ ρ O ρ 5 with D = q q m q l J m q m q Ẽ m q j Ẽ m Those tedious i. epressions of the form factors N a, b ρ =,, 4 and N c, d ρ = 5, 6 are ρ ρ listed in appendi B. In order to epress the sum of those corresponding triangle diagram amplitudes which satisfy the Ward identity required by the QED gauge symmetry eplicitly, here we use the identities given in appendia. In a similar way, we can rigorously verify the following equations with those identities: N a, b π D d D q π D D 3 q q,, i j
Ẽ j Ẽ i ν j ν i FIG. 3: The diagrams which cancel the ultra-violet divergence of the two-loop diagrams, represents the counter terms which originate from the corresponding one-loop diagrams. Here, the corresponding triangle diagrams are obtained by attaching a photon to the internal charged slepton or chargino. N a, b π D d D q π D π D d D q π D D N d, N c D 6 q q,, i j π D d D q π D D 6. 6 In fact, this is the direct consequence of the CPT invariance in the fundamental Lagrangian. The coefficients of high dimensional operators in Eq. 5 contain ultra-violet divergence that is caused by those divergent sub-diagrams. In order to obtain physical predictions on lepton MDMs and EDMs, it is necessary to adopt a concrete renormalization scheme removing the ultra-violet divergence. In literature, the ultra-violet divergence is removed in
either the on-mass-shell renormalization scheme 8, 9, or the simpler MS renormalization scheme, 4, 6. As an over-subtracted renormalization scheme, on-shell scheme looks more physical than MS renormalization scheme. However, there are at least two eternal legs of the divergent sub-diagram being the internal lines of the whole two-loop diagrams. This signifies that an artistic on-shell scheme is not more superior to the simpler MS scheme in our case. Certainly, theoretical predictions on lepton anomalous dipole moments depend on the concrete renormalization scheme. Here, we present firstly the renormalized results which are obtained in the MS renormalization scheme. We put the relatively complicated results which are obtained by the on-mass-shell scheme, in the appendi. For the two-loop neutralino-neutralino diagrams, the bare effective Lagrangian contains the following ultra-violet divergence L e4 96s 4 w c4 4π Λ w NP { Γ ǫ ǫ ρ Ẽj ρ Ẽi ǫ ϕ Ẽi 4π ǫ ǫ3 ln R ξ I N j ηj N i ηj ξi N j N i ϕ Ẽj O O 3 η I N j ξj N i ξj N j ηi N i 6 m m O O 3 ρ Ẽi ǫϕ 3 Ẽi η I N j ξj N i ξj ξi O N j N i 6 ξ I N j ηj N i ηj N j ηi N i O 6 m 6 m ρ Ẽj ǫϕ 3 Ẽj η I N j ηj N i ηj ξi O N j N i 6 ξ I N j ξj N i ξj N j ηi N i O 6, 7 with ǫ = D/, where D denotes the dimension of time-space. Generally, the renormalization scale Λ RE and the new physics scale Λ NP should be of the same order in quantity, but there does not eist a compelling reason to make them equal. Here we keep the ratio R = Λ /Λ as a free parameter in the epressions. In Eq. 7, we only retain the RE NP 3
operators O that contribute to the lepton anomalous dipole moments, and the ellipsis,3,6 represents the convergent parts of those coefficients. Certainly, the ultra-violet divergence contained in the amplitude of counter diagrams the first two diagrams in Fig. 3 will eactly cancel these divergences: L C = e 4 4π Λ 96s 4 NP w c4 w { ǫ ǫ ln R Γ ǫ 4π ǫ ǫ Ẽi 3 3 Ẽi, Ẽi Ẽj 3 ρ Ẽi ρ Ẽj ξ I N j ηj N i ηj ξi O N j N i O 3 η I N j ξj N i ξj N j ηi N i O O 3 m 6 ǫ ln m R ρ, Ẽj ǫ Ẽ j,, Ẽj Ẽj η I N j ηj N i ηj ξi O N j N i 6 ξ I N j ξj N i ξj ηi O N j N i 6 6 m ǫ ln m R ρ, Ẽi ǫ Ẽ i,, Ẽi Ẽi η I N j ξj N i ξj ξi O N j N i 6 ξ I N j ηj N i ηj N j ηi N i O 6 3,, Ẽj Ẽj. 8 Adding Eq. 8 and Eq. 5, we get the two-loop neutralino-neutralino corrections to the lepton MDMs: a L, e 4 = 4π s w c w 4 Re ξ I N j ηj N i ηj ξi N j N i { Ω N, l J ; Ẽ i ; Ẽj / F N, l J ; Ẽ i ; Ẽj Re η I N j ξj N i ξj ηi N j N i 4
Re ξ I N j ξj N i ξj ξi N j N i Re η I N j ηj N i ηj ηi N j N i together with the lepton EDMs d L, / Ω N,3 l J ; Ẽ i ; Ẽj Re η I N j ξj N i ξj N j ξi N i / Ω N,4 l J ; Ẽ i ; Ẽj Re η I N j ηj N i ηj N j ξi N i,9 e 5 The form factors are epressed as where = 4π s w c w 4 Λ NP Im ξ I N j ηj N i ηj ξi N j N i { / Ω N, l J ; Ẽ i ; Ẽj Im η I N j ξj N i ξj ηi N j N i / F N, ; l J Ẽ i ; Ẽj Im ξ I N j ξj N i ξj ξi N j N i Im η I N j ηj N i ηj ηi N j N i / Ω N,3 ; l J Ẽ i ; Ẽj Im η I N j ξj N i ξj ξi N j N i / Ω N,3 ; l J Ẽ i ; Ẽj Im η I N j ηj N i ηj ξi N j N i. Ω N, l J ; Ẽ i ; Ẽj = 4{ ln R ρ, ρ Ẽi, ϕ Ẽj, Ẽi ϕ Ẽj Ẽi F N, l J ; Ẽ i ; Ẽj, 3 3 Ẽi, Ẽi Ẽj 3 3,, Ẽj Ẽj Ω N,3 ; l J Ẽ i ; Ẽj = 4{ ln R ρ, ϕ 3 Ẽi, Ẽi Ẽ i,, Ẽi Ẽi F N,3 l J ; Ẽ i ; Ẽj, Ω N,4 ; l J Ẽ i ; Ẽj = 4{ ln R ρ, ϕ 3 Ẽj, Ẽj Ẽ j,, Ẽj Ẽj F N,4 l J ; Ẽ i ; Ẽj, m,n = m lnn m lnn 5
and other functions ρ,, ϕ,,3, F N,i i =,, 4 are defined in appendi C. In Eq., all terms in the brackets are correct only for the naive dimensional regularization scheme and MS renormalization scheme. As for the two-loop neutralino-chargino corrections, we have a L, e 4 { = m l I Re λ J 4π s 4 w c m w w c ζj ηi ηi N i C j C i N j Ω M, ; νi ; Ẽj 4 l I / Re λ J ζj ξi ξi N i C j C i N j F M,3 F M,4 ; νi ; Ẽj l / Re λ J I ζj ξi ηi N i C j C i N j Ω M,3 ; νi ; Ẽj / m m w c Ω M,4 ; νi ; Ẽj Re λ J N i ζj C j ηi C i ξi N j, 3 as well as d L, e 5 = 4π s 4 w c Λ w NP { m Im λ J m w c ζj ηi ηi N i C j C i N j F M, F M, ; νi ; Ẽj l I / Im λ J ζj ξi ξi N i C j C i N j F M,3 F M,4 ; νi ; Ẽj / Im λ J N i ζj C j ξi C i ηi N j Ω M,3 ; νi ; Ẽj / m mw c where the couplings are defined as Ω M,4 ; νi ; Ẽj Im λ J N i ζj C j ηi C i ξi N j, 4 ζ I = RẼ C i Ii V m l RẼ 3Ii U, mw c λ I N i = R ν Ii N s w N c w. 5 6
With the naive dimensional regularization scheme and MS renormalization scheme, the form factors are written as Ω M, ; νi ; Ẽj { ln R ρ νi = ϕ Ẽj 3 ρ, ϕ νi Ẽj 3, νi Ẽj 3 F M, F M, l J ; Ẽ i ; Ẽj, Ω M,3 ; νi ; Ẽj { = 4 3,, Ẽj Ẽj ln R ϕ3 νi ϕ 3 νi,, νi F M,5 ; νi ; Ẽj, Ω M,4 ; νi ; Ẽj = { ln R ρ 4 Ẽj ϕ 3 Ẽj Ẽ j,, Ẽj Ẽj F M,6 ; νi ; Ẽj. 6 The tedious epressions of functions F M,i i =,, 6 are put in appendi C. With the naive dimensional regularization scheme and MS renormalization scheme, the resulting theoretical predictions on lepton anomalous dipole moments from two-loop chargino-chargino diagrams are similarly epressed as a L, = e 4 4π s 4 w { m Re η I m w c C j ξj C i ξj ηi C j C i m l J Re ξ I m w c C j ηj i C i ηj ξi Ω ; C j C C, l J ν i 4 / m m l J Re η I m 4 w c4 C j ηj C i ηj ηi C j C i Re ξ I C j ξj C i ξj ξi F ; C j C i C, lj νi ; νj m m l J Re η I m 3 w c3 C j ηj C i ηj ξi C j C i m Re η I m w c C j ξj C i ξj ξi C j C i ; ΩC,3 l J ν i ΩC,4 lj ; νi ; νj ; νj ; νj,7 7
and d L, e 5 = 4π s 4 Λ w NP { m / Im η I m w c C j ξj C i ξj ηi C j C i m l J m w c Im ξ I C j ηj C i ηj C j ξi C i Ω C, l J ; ν i / m m l J Im η I 4m 4 w c4 C j ηj C i ηj ηi C j C i Im ξ I C j ξj C i ξj ξi F ; C j C i C, lj νi ; νj ; νj Here, m m l J Im η I m 3 w c3 C j ηj C i ηj ξi ; ΩC,4 C j C i lj νi m Im η I mw c C j ξj C i ξj ξi ; ΩC,3 C j C i lj νi ; νj ; νj.8 Ω C, ; l J ν i ; νj { ln R ρ νi = 4 ϕ νj F C, ; l J ν i ; νj, Ω C,3 ; l J ν i ; νj = { ln R ϕ3 F C,3 ; l J ν i ; νj, Ω C,4 ; l J ν i ; νj = { ln R ϕ3 F C,4 l J ; ν i ; νj ρ νj ϕ νi 3 3, νi 3 3,, νj, νi ϕ 3, νi 8,, νi νj ϕ 3, νj 8,, νj, 9 where the definitions of the functions F C,i, i =,, 4 can be found in appendi C. Thus, we obtain the MDMs and EDMs of leptons in the MS renormalization scheme. However, the on-shell renormalization scheme is also adopted frequently to remove the ultraviolet divergence which appears in the radiative electroweak corrections 5. As an oversubtract scheme, the counter terms include some finite terms which originate from those 8
renormalization conditions in the on-shell scheme beside the ultra-violet divergence to cancel the corresponding ultra-violet divergence in amplitude. In the concrete calculation performed here, we need the following counter terms to cancel the ultra-violet divergence in the one-loop corrections to the verte Ẽ i li { = e δe δcẽ i li sw c w e δ IJ δzl l JI δ δ ij δz ijδ IJ δ Ẽ N s w N c w δz δ IJ δ ij R Ẽ jj e δc c w R jjn δ IJ δ ij δ e δs Ẽ w s w R jjn δ IJ δ ij δ Ẽ w em l δe δm J lj δm w δs w δc δ IJ δ ij δ mw s w c e m l m J w s w c δzl l JIδ ij δ δz ijδ IJ δ Ẽ δz δ IJ δ ij R j3jn 3 ω Ẽ { e δe c w e δc w δ IJ δ ij δ c w δzr l JI δ ij δ δz ijδ IJ δ Ẽ δz δ IJ δ ij R Ẽ j3jn em l J mw s w c δe e δm lj m l J δm w m w δs w s w δc c δ IJ δ ij δ δzr l JI δ ij δ δz Ẽ ijδ IJ δ δz δ IJ δ ij R Ẽ jjn 3 ω.3 Here, δe represents the renormalization correction to electrical charge, δm w and δm l J stand the renormalization corrections to the W-boson and lepton masses respectively, δc w, δs w as well as δc are the renormalization corrections to parameters c w, s w and c, and δz L,R l JI, δzẽ ij, δz separately denote the wave function renormalization constants of leptons, sleptons, and neutralinos. In the on-shell scheme, we can fi those renormalization parameters by the mass-shell renormalization conditions 9,. They include UV divergence which cancel the corresponding UV divergence in amplitudes and the finite contributions which are determined by the on-shell condition, to the resultant epression of the finite amplitudes. In a similar way, we can write the counter terms for the one-loop corrections to the verte ν i δc ν i li = e s w δe e δs w δ IJ δ ij δ s w ijδ δz ν IJ δ δz δ IJ δ ij δzl l JIδ ij δ R ν jjv ω 9 em l J δe δm lj mw s w c e m l J
δm w δs w δc δ IJ δ ij δ m w s w c δzr l JI δ ij δ ijδ δz ν IJ δ δz δ IJ δ ij R ν jju ω, 3 with δz ν ij, δz are the wave function renormalization constants of sneutrino and chargino respectively. In order to shorten the length of tet, we put the epressions of the theoretical predictions on the MDMs and EDMs of leptons in terms of the on-shell renormalization scheme in the appendi. So far, we have obtained all the corrections from two-loop supersymmetric diagrams shown in Fig.. Beside the two loop diagrams discussed here, it is well known that the twoloop Bar-Zee type diagrams also lead to significant contributions to the fermion MDMs and EDMs in the supersymmetric theory 4. The Bar-Zee diagram corrections to muon MDM are discussed in, the contributions of Bar-Zee diagrams to muon EDM are analyzed in 7. Beside those two-loop diagrams that have been analyzed in literature and the diagrams presented in this work, there are still large amounts of two-loop diagrams that have concrete contributions to muon MDM and EDM. The present status of two-loop calculations cannot be considered as a complete analysis on MDM and EDM of muon in the framework of supersymmetry. In the following section, we will only consider the corrections from those two-loop diagrams in Fig. to the one-loop supersymmetric theoretical predictions on lepton MDM and EDM through numerical method with some assumptions on the parameter space of MSSM. IV. NUMERICAL RESULTS With the theoretical formulation derived in previous sections, we numerically analyze the dependence of the muon MDM and EDM on the supersymmetric parameters in this section. Especially, we will present the dependence of the muon MDM and EDM on some supersymmetric CP phases in some detail here. Within three standard error deviations, the present eperimental data can tolerate new physics corrections to the muon MDM as < a µ < 5. Since the scalar leptons ν µ, µ, appear as the internal intermediate particles in the two-loop diagrams which are investigated in this work, the corrections of these diagrams will be suppressed strongly when slepton masses are much higher than the electroweak scale. To investigate if those diagrams can result in concrete
corrections to the muon MDM and EDM, we choose a suitable supersymmetric parameter region where the masses of the second generation sleptons are lying in the range < TeV. M µ In this work, we neglect all other possible sources of flavor violation ecept those due to the CKM matri, and try to avoid ambiguities of the unification conditions of the softbreaking parameters at the grand unification scale in the msugra scheme. The MSSM Lagrangian contains several sources of CP violating phases: the phases of the µ parameter in the superpotential and the corresponding bilinear coupling of the soft breaking terms, three phases of the gaugino mass terms, and the phases of the trilinear sfermion Yukawa couplings in the soft Lagrangian. As we are not considering the spontaneous CP violation in this work, the CP phase of the soft bilinear coupling vanishes due to the tree level neutral Higgs tadpole condition. Moreover, for the model we employ here, the mass of the lightest Higgs boson sets a strong constraint on the parameter space of the new physics. As indicated in the literature 8, the CP violation would cause changes to the neutral-higgsquark coupling, neutral Higgs-gauge-boson coupling and self-coupling of Higgs boson. The present eperimental lower bound on the mass of the lightest Higgs bosons is relaed to 6 GeV. In our numerical analysis we will take this constraint for the parameter space into account. As a cross check, we have compared our one-loop supersymmetric prediction on muon MDM in CP conservation framework with that obtained with corresponding Fortran subroutine on muon MDM in the code FeynHiggs, and find a perfect agreement. In the two-loop sector, we check our Fortran subroutine on two-loop vacuum integrals with the corresponding programs in the package FeynHiggs, and also find that they agree with each other very well. For guaranteeing validity of the results, we also independently develop certain programs for those two-loop integrals to check our two-loop integrals in Fortran code. Without losing too much generality, we will fi the following values for the supersymmetric parameters: = = = 5 GeV, m M µl M µr A µ = m = 3 GeV. Taking µ H = 3 GeV, we plot the MDM and EDM of muon versus the CP phase = for θ µ arga µ tan = 5 or tan = in Fig.4. As tan = 5, one-loop supersymmetric correction to the MDM of muon Dash-Dot line reaches 4. With our choice for the parameter space, the two-loop supersymmetric corrections can approimately be as large as 3% of the one-loop results. For tan =, one-loop supersymmetric prediction on the MDM of muon Sold line is about 7.4, whereas the relative correction from two-loop
supersymmetric contribution to one-loop result is approimated as 3%. In other words, the corrections of these two-loop diagrams turn more and more insignificantly along with the increase of tan. Actually, the third and fourth terms of neutralino-neutralino contribution Eq. 9 and the third term of neutralino-chargino contribution Eq. 3 dominate the corrections to muon MDM from the two-loop diagrams in Fig., and those terms depend on the parameter tan very mildly. Because the CP phase affects the anomalous dipole θ µ moments of muon through the miing matri RẼ for sleptons of second generation, this leads to that the variation of the muon MDM versus is very gentle. Taking = π/, θ µ θ µ the theoretical prediction on muon EDM approimates as.8 4 e cm for tan = 5, and.5 4 e cm for tan =. The muon EDM of this order can be detected hopefully in near future eperiments with eperimental precision 4 e cm. Now, we analyze the variation of supersymmetric corrections to the muon anomalous dipole moments with the CP phase θ = argm. Taking µ H = 3 GeV, we plot the MDM and EDM of muon versus the CP phase θ for tan = 5 or tan = in Fig.5. Here, we find that muon MDM depends on the CP phase θ very gently. For tan = 5, the one-loop correction to the muon MDM is about 4. With our choice for the supersymmetric parameters, muon MDM is approimated as 5.5 when we include the corrections from those two-loop diagrams in Fig.. As tan = 5, the one-loop contribution to the muon EDM originates from the neutralino-slepton diagram, and two-loop contribution mainly originates from the neutralino-neutralino diagrams. Because the concrete dependence of one-loop result on the CP phase θ differs from that of two-loop result on θ drastically, it is easy to understand why the correction to muon EDM from two-loop diagrams becomes dominant. When tan =, the one-loop correction to muon MDM is enhanced, this leads to that a µ can reach 7.4, the correction from those two-loop diagrams to muon MDM turn insignificant now. However, the theoretical prediction on muon EDM eceeds the precision of future eperiment already. Perhaps the most interesting subject to study is the variation of muon MDM and EDM versus the CP phase θ = argm. Taking µ H = 3 GeV, we plot the MDM and EDM of muon versus the CP phase θ = argm for large tan = 5 or tan = in Fig.6. Generally, the two-loop correction to the muon MDM is 3% approimately for tan = 5. In the largest CP violation θ = π/ case, the EDM of muon is large enough and can be eperimentally tested with the eperimental precision in near future: 4 e cm. For
3 d µ 4 e cm - - 5 a µ 5..5..5. θ µ /π FIG. 4: The supersymmetric corrections to the MDM and EDM of muon vary with the CP violating phase = when µ θ µ arga µ H = 3 GeV and tan = 5 or tan =, where the dash-dot lines stand for the results of one loop with tan = 5, the dash-dot-dot lines stand for the results of two loop in MS scheme with tan = 5, the short dash lines stand for the results of two loop in mass shell scheme with tan = 5, the solid lines stand for the results of one loop with tan =, the dash lines stand for the results of two loop in MS scheme with tan =, and the dot lines stand for the results of two loop in mass shell scheme with tan =. tan =, the one-loop supersymmetric corrections to the MDM and EDM are enhanced drastically. Especially for the muon EDM, it reaches e cm, which can be detected easily in the future eperiment. In the above analysis, we always suppose µ H >. It is well known that the sign of the one-loop contribution depends on the relative sign of µ H and m. Assuming CP conservation with θ = θ = =, we plot the muon MDM versus µ θ ν H as tan = 5 or tan = in Fig. 7. The plot shows that the correction from the two-loop diagrams can be neglected safely when µ H GeV. Ecept the parameter µ H, another parameter tan plays an important role in our analysis. Assuming CP conservation and setting µ H = 3 GeV, we 3
4 3 d µ 4 e cm - - -3-4 5 a µ 5..5..5. θ /π FIG. 5: The supersymmetric corrections to the MDM and EDM of muon vary with the CP violating phase θ = argm when µ H = 3 GeV and tan = 5 or tan =, where the dash-dot lines stand for the results of one loop with tan = 5, the dash-dot-dot lines stand for the results of two loop in MS scheme with tan = 5, the short dash lines stand for the results of two loop in mass shell scheme with tan = 5, the solid lines stand for the results of one loop with tan =, the dash lines stand for the results of two loop in MS scheme with tan =, and the dot lines stand for the results of two loop in mass shell scheme with tan =. plot the theoretical predictions on muon MDM versus tan in Fig. 8. Since the dominant contribution from the two-loop diagrams depends on tan weakly, the variation of two-loop correction is not very obvious with the increase of tan. In other words, the correction from those two-loop diagrams turns insignificant in large tan case because the one-loop supersymmetric prediction on muon MDM is proportional to tan. All the numerical results are obtained under the assumption M µ < TeV. Since the supersymmetric corrections to the muon MDM and EDM contain a suppression factor Λ /Λ, the contributions from the considered diagrams Fig. become insignificant if EW SUSY the supersymmetric scale Λ SUSY Λ EW. 4
d µ e cm - - a µ - -..5..5. θ /π FIG. 6: The supersymmetric corrections to the MDM and EDM of muon vary with the CP violating phase θ = argm when µ H = 3 GeV and tan = 5 or tan =, where the dash-dot lines stand for the results of one loop with tan = 5, the dash-dot-dot lines stand for the results of two loop in MS scheme with tan = 5, the short dash lines stand for the results of two loop in mass shell scheme with tan = 5, the solid lines stand for the results of one loop with tan =, the dash lines stand for the results of two loop in MS scheme with tan =, and the dot lines stand for the results of two loop in mass shell scheme with tan =. V. CONCLUSIONS In this work, we analyze some two-loop supersymmetric corrections to the anomalous dipole moments of muon by the effective Lagrangian method. In our calculation, we keep all dimension 6 operators. We remove the ultra-violet divergence caused by the divergent subdiagrams in the MS and on-shell renormalization schemes respectively. After applying the equation of motion for muon, we derive the muon MDM and EDM. Numerically, we analyze the dependence of muon anomalous dipole moments on CP violation phases. There is an eperimentally allowed supersymmetric parameter space where those two-loop corrections 5
3 a µ - - -3-4 - 4 µ H GeV FIG. 7: The supersymmetric corrections to the MDM and EDM of muon vary with µ H for tan = 5 or tan = in CP conservation framework, where the dash-dot line stands for the results of one loop with tan = 5, the dash-dot-dot line stands for the results of two loop in MS scheme with tan = 5, the short dash line stands for the results of two loop in mass shell scheme with tan = 5, the solid line stands for the results of one loop with tan =, the dash line stands for the results of two loop in MS scheme with tan =, and the dot line stands for the results of two loop in mass shell scheme with tan =. on the muon MDM are significant and cannot be neglected, meanwhile the EDM of muon can be large enough to be eperimentally detected with the eperimental precision of near future. Acknowledgments The work is supported by the Academy of Finland under the contract no. 495 and 793, the ABRL Grant No. R4-3--- of Korea, and also partly by the National Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNNSFC. The author T.F.F. also thanks Prof. Lee, C.-K. for useful comments. 6
5 4 3 µ H = 3 GeV a µ - - -3-4 -5 µ H = 3 GeV 3 4 5 tan FIG. 8: The supersymmetric corrections to the MDM and EDM of muon vary with tan for µ H = 3 GeV in CP conservation framework, Where the dash-dot line stands for the results of one loop with µ H = 3 GeV, the dash-dot-dot line stands for the results of two loop in MS scheme with µ H = 3 GeV, the short dash line stands for the results of two loop in mass shell scheme with µ H = 3 GeV, the solid line stands for the results of one loop with µ H = 3 GeV, the dash line stands for the results of two loop in MS scheme with µ H = 3 GeV, and the dot line stands for the results of two loop in mass shell scheme with µ H = 3 GeV. APPENDIX A: THE IDENTITIES FOR TWO-LOOP INTEGRALS d D { q q q q q q q π D π D D q q m d D { q q q q q q π D π D D π D d D q π D D d D q π D π D D d D q π D π D D q q m { q q q q q q q m { q q q q qq q q q m { q q 3 q q q q q m { q q q q q q D q q m d D { q q q 3 q q π D π D D q q m π D d D q π D q q q q m q q q m Dq D q q q, q q q q q m q q 3 q m q q q q q m q q 3 q m 7 q,, D q q q, q q q, q q q, D 3 q q q,
d D { q q q q q q q 3 π D π D D q q m d D { q q q q q q q q π D π D D q q m d D { q q q q q q q π D π D D π D d D q π D D π D d D q π D D π D d D q π D D π D d D q π D D π D d D q π D D π D d D q π D D π D d D q π D D π D d D q π D D π D d D q π D D q q m { q q q q q 3 Dq q qq, q q q q m q q q m q q q q m q q q q,, D q q D q q,, q q m { q q q q 3 q q Dq q D q q q q m q m { q q q q q q q q q D 3 q q q m q m q q, { q q q qq q q q q q q m q m q q, { q q q q q D q q q q, q m { q q q q q q D 3 q m q m { q q q q q q q m q m q q D q, { q q q q q q 3 D q m { q q q q m q q q q, d D { q q q π D π D D q m d D { q q q q π D π D D q m d D { q q q π D π D D D q q D π D d D q π D q q q q q m q q q q q m q q 3 q m q q 3 q m q m q q, { q q q q D q q m d D { q q q qq q π D π D D q q m qq q q, q q q Dq q q q, D q q q q q q D q q, qq q D q q, D 3 q q q q q q, q m q q q m D q, 8
d D { q q q qq q π D π D D q q m d D { q q q q q q π D π D D q q m d D { q q q q q q π D π D D π D d D q π D D π D d D q π D D π D d D q π D D π D d D q π D D π D d D q π D D π D d D q π D D π D d D q π D D π D d D q π D D q q q m q q q q m q q q q m q, D q q, q q q m q, { q q q q q D q q q m q m, { q q q q D q q m q m, { q q q q q D q q m q m q q, { q q q q q q q m q m q D q, { q q q q q, q q m q m { q q q q D, q q m q m { q q q D, q m q m { q q q D. q m q m A with D = q q m q m q m. APPENDIX B: THE FORM FACTORS N a = 4 q q q q q 4 q q q DD q m 3 D q m Ẽ j Ẽ j 8 DD 8 DD D 3q q q q q q q q q q m Ẽ j q m q q q 3q q q q q q q m Ẽ j q m 3q q q q q q q q q m Ẽ j q m 9
N a N a q q q 4 q q q q q q m DD q m Ẽ j 3 8 q q q q q q q q, D q m q m = 6 q q q q q q q q q q DD q m 3 D q m Ẽ j Ẽ j 6 q q q q q q q m q m DD Ẽ j q q q q q D D q m q m Ẽ j 3 q q q q q q D 4 q q q q q DD DD D q 3 q q q m q m D Ẽ j q q D D 4 q q q q DD D q q q q q q m q m D q D q m D Ẽ j Ẽ i Ẽ j q q q q q q m 6 q q q qq q q q DD q m 3 D q m q m Ẽ i Dq q q 4D q m, 3 = 6 q q q q q q qq q qq DD q m 3 D q m Ẽ j Ẽ j q 3 q q q q q q m q m DD Ẽ j D 4 q q q q q DD D 6 q q q q q q DD q m q m 3q q q q q q D q Ẽ j m q m Ẽ j qq q q m q m D q q qq D Ẽ j Ẽ i 6 DD D q q q q q q q q q q q m 3 D q m q q q q m q m q q q 4q m D q q, D q Ẽ i m Ẽ i 3
N a N b N b 4 = 4 q q q q q 4 q q q q q DD q m 3 DD q m Ẽ j 3 4 q q q q q q q m q m DD Ẽ j 4 q q qq q q q m q m DD Ẽ j q q q q q q m q m D Ẽ j D 3D q q q q q D D q q q qq D D q q q q DD qq q q m q m q q q q q q DD q m 3 q m Ẽ j Ẽ i Ẽ j Ẽ i 6q q 8q q q q q q m 3D q 6 D 3 3D q D q 3D q m = 4 q q q q DD q m 3 Ẽ j 8 DD 4 D D 3q q q 4q q q q q m Ẽ j q m q q q q q q m q m Ẽ i q q, q q m l J 4 q q q q DD q m 3 q q q q m 8 5q q q q 3q q q DD q m q m Ẽ j Ẽ j q q q m Ẽ j q m 4 D = 6 q qq q DD q m 3 D Ẽ j q q q q m, 6 q q q q q q m q m DD Ẽ j q q q q m Ẽ j q q q q q 3 q m q m DD Ẽ j D D q q D q m q q q q DD D D q q q q m q m Ẽ j D q q q q D D q q q m Ẽ j q m Ẽ i 6 q q q q DD q m 3 q q q m q m 4q m, Ẽ i 3
N b N b N c N c 3 = 6 q q q q q q q DD q m 3 D q m Ẽ j Ẽ j 6 q q m q m q q q q DD Ẽ j q m q m Ẽ j D 4 3 q q q q q DD q q q q D D q q q q 3q q q DD D D q m q m Ẽ j q q D q m q m 6 q q q q DD q m Ẽ j Ẽ i 3 q q D q m 4 = 4 q qq q DD q m 3 D Ẽ j D 4 q q q q q q m q m DD Ẽ j q q q q m q m 4q m, Ẽ i q q q m Ẽ j q m q q q q D D 4 q q m q m q q q q q q q q DD D D Ẽ j q q D q m q m 4 q q q q DD q m Ẽ j Ẽ i 3 q q 6q q m q q 6q 3D q m q m 3D Ẽ i 5, 6 q q m q m q m Ẽ i 3D 5 = 4 D 4 D 6 = D q q q q 4 q q q q q q q m D q m q m Ẽ j Ẽ j q q q q q q q q q q q q m q m q m Ẽ j, q q 3q q m Ẽ i q q q q q q q q m q m q q q q q D q m Ẽ j Ẽ j qq q qq q m q m D Ẽ j q q q q m D D q q q, q q m q q qq D 3
N d N d 5 = 4 D q q q q m Ẽ j D D 6 = D q q q q q 4 q q q q q q m D q m q m Ẽ j Ẽ j D q q q q m q q q q m Ẽ j q q q q q q m Ẽ j, 4 D q q q q q m q q q q q q m q m D Ẽ j q q qq q q q D q m q q q q D q m Ẽ j D D q q q q m D q q q q m Ẽ i D D q q q q q m. B APPENDIX C: THE FUNCTIONS ρ = 6 ln ln 4 5 3, ρ = ln ln 3, ϕ = 3 3 ln ln 4 8 6 3, ϕ = 6 3ln ln 8 37, 4 6 3 ϕ 3 = ln ln 3 3. C Ψ 3a ; A B ; = { 4 3, 3, A B 3 A A B ln A 3 A ln A 3 B ln B 3 B ln B A A Φ A A A Φ A B B Φ B B B Φ B. C Ψ 3b ; A B ; 33
= 8{,, A B A B A ln A A ln A B ln B B ln B A A Φ A A A Φ A B B Φ B B B Φ B. C3 Ψ 3c ; A B ; = { 6,, A B A A B B,, 3 A A B A A ln A 3 A A A ln A 3 B B B ln B 3 B B B ln B A λ A Φ A A λ A Φ A B λ B Φ B B λ B Φ B. C4 Ψ a ; A B ; = { A A B Φ A Φ A A Φ B B Φ B B. C5 Ψ b ; A B ; = 4{,, A B A B,, A A B ln A A ln A B ln B B ln B A A Φ A A A Φ A B B Φ B B B Φ B. C6 Ψ c ; A B ; 34
= 8{,, A B A B,, A B A A ln A A A ln A B B ln B B B ln B A Φ A A Φ A B Φ B B Φ B. C7 Ψ d ; A B ; { =, A B, A A B Φ A A Φ A B Φ B B Φ B. C8 Ψ a ; A B ; = {, A Φ A B A A Φ A B Φ B B Φ B. C9 Ψ b ; A B ; = 4{,, A B,, A B A ln A A ln A B ln B B ln B A Φ A A Φ A B Φ B B Φ B. C = Ψ ; A B ; Φ A B A Φ A Φ B Φ B. C 35
F N, ; l J Ẽ i ; Ẽj { 3 = Ψ 4 3 3a 3 8 Ẽj Ψd Ψ b Ψ 4 Ẽj 3b 3 Ψ Ẽj 3 3c Ẽj 3 Ψ 8 b Ψ Ẽj 4 d Ψb Ψ Ẽj 8 d 4 Ẽj Ẽi Ψa Ψ 8 b ; l J Ẽ j ; Ẽi { 3 Ψ 4 3b 3 Ψ 4 Ẽj 3 3a 8 Ψd Ψ b Ψ 8 b Ẽi Ẽj Ψ a l J ; Ẽ i ; Ẽj. C F N, ; l J Ẽ i ; Ẽj { = 3 3 4 3 Ψa Ψ b 8 Ẽj Ψa Ψ b 4 Ẽj 3Ψb Ẽj 4Ψ c Ψ d Ψ 8 b Ψa Ψ 8 b Ẽi Ẽj Ẽj Ψ 4 ; l J Ẽ j ; Ẽi { 3 3 8 Ẽj Ψb Ψ d 4 3 Ψa Ψ b Ψ 8 b Ψ 8 b Ẽi l J ; Ẽ i ; Ẽj. C3 F N,3 ; l J Ẽ i ; Ẽj { = 4 Ψa Ψ b Ψa Ψ b Ẽj Ẽj 3Ψb 4Ψ 6 c Ψ d Ψa Ψ Ẽj b 4 l J Ψa Ψ b ; lj Ẽj ; Ẽi 4 Ψb Ψ ; l d J Ẽ i ; Ẽj. C4 36
F N,4 ; l J Ẽ i ; Ẽj { = 3Ψb 4Ψ 6 c Ψ d Ẽj 4 Ψa Ψ b 3 4 4 4 Ẽi l J Ψa Ψ b 4 Ψb Ψ ; l d J Ẽ j ; Ẽi. Ẽj ; lj Ẽi ; Ẽj Ẽj C5 F M, ; νi ; Ẽj { 3 = Ψ 4 3 3a 3 8 Ẽj Ψb Ψ d Ẽj Ẽj 4 Ψ 3b 3 Ψ 3c Ψb Ψ 4 d ; Ẽj ; νi Ẽj { 3 8 Ψb Ψ d Ψ 4 Ẽj 3b 3 Ψ 4 3 3a ; νi ; Ẽj. C6 F M, ; νi ; Ẽj { 3 = Ψ 4 3 3a 8 Ẽj Ψa Ψ b Ψ d Ẽj 3 Ψ 4 3b Ẽj Ẽj 4 Ψ b 3 Ψ c 3 Ψ d Ψa Ψ b ; Ẽj ; νi Ẽj { 8 3 Ẽj 4 Ψ 3b 3 Ψ 3c Ψ 4 b Ẽj 3 Ψb Ψ d Ψ 4 3 3a ; νi ; Ẽj. C7 F M,3 ; νi ; Ẽj 37
{ = 3 3 4 3 Ψa Ψ b 4 Ẽj 3Ψb 4Ψ c Ẽj Ψ d 8 Ψa Ψ b ; Ẽj ; νi Ẽj { 3 8 Ẽj Ψb Ψ d 8 Ψa Ψ b 3 4 3 Ψa Ψ b ; νi ; Ẽj. C8 F M,4 ; νi ; Ẽj { = 3 3 4 3 Ψa Ψ b 8 Ẽj Ψb Ψ d Ẽj 8 Ψa Ψ b ; Ẽj ; νi Ẽj { 3 4 Ẽj 3Ψb 4Ψ c Ψ d Ψa Ψ 4 b Ẽj 3 8 Ψa Ψ b 4 3 Ψa Ψ b ; νi ; Ẽj. C9 F M,5 ; νi ; Ẽj { = 4 Ψa Ψ b 3Ψb 4Ψ 6 c Ψ d Ẽj Ẽj Ψa Ψ b ; Ẽj ; νi Ẽj 4 Ψb Ψ d ; νi ; Ẽj. C F M,6 ; νi ; Ẽj = 4 Ψb Ψ d ; Ẽj ; νi Ẽj { 4 Ψa Ψ b 3Ψb 4Ψ 6 c Ψ d Ẽj Ψa Ψ b ; νi ; Ẽj. C Ẽj 38
F C, ; l J ν i ; νj { = 3 Ψ 4 3 3a 3 4 νj Ψb Ψ d νj νj 4 Ψ 3b 3 Ψ 3c Ψ 4 b Ψa Ψ νj 4 b ; l J ν j ; νi νj { 3 Ψ 4 νj 3b Ψb Ψ 8 d Ψb νj 8 νi νj Ψ d Ψ 4 a 3 Ψ 4 νj 3 3a 8 Ψa Ψ b Ψ d Ψ 8 a 3 Ψ 8 a ; l J ν i ; νj. C νi F C, ; l J ν i ; νj { 3 3 = 4 3 Ψa Ψ b 4 νj 3Ψb 4Ψ c Ψ d νj 4 Ψa Ψ b Ψ 4 ; l J ν j ; νi νj { 3 4 νj Ψb Ψ c 3Ψ d 8 Ψa 4 νi νj Ψ 8 a νi 3 3 Ψa Ψ b 8 νj Ψ b ; l J ν i ; νj. C3 F C,3 ; l J ν i ; νj { = 4 Ψa Ψ b 3Ψb 4Ψ 6 c Ψ d νj νj Ψa Ψ b ; l J ν j ; νi νj { 4 Ψb Ψ d Ψa ; l J ν i ; νj. C4 νi 39
F C,4 ; l J ν i ; νj = 4 { 6 νj Ψb Ψ d l J ; ν j ; νi 3Ψb 4Ψ c Ψ d νj Ψa Ψ b 4 νj Ψa Ψ b l J 4 Ψa Ψ b Ψa Ψ b ; l J ν i ; νj. C5 APPENDIX D: THE RESULTS IN THE ON-SHELL SCHEME δ a L, = a L, on shell a L, MS e 4 { l I = ln 4π 4 s 4 w c4 4 ϑ RE lj, ρ Ẽi, Ẽj w ln RE ϑ l, ρ J Ẽj, Ẽi Re ξ I N j ηj N i ηj N j ξi N i Re η I N j ξj N i ξj ηi N j N i 48 / ϑ l ρ J, Ẽi, Ẽj ϑ l, ρ J Ẽj, Ẽi Re ξ I N j ξj N i ξj N j ξi N i Re η I N j ηj N i ηj N j ηi N i 4 / ln ϑ RE lj, ρ Ẽi Ẽj 4
/ ρ 8 Ẽi ϑ l, J Ẽj Re η I N j ηj N i ηj ξi N j N i l I / ρ 4 Ẽi ln RE ϑ l, J Ẽj l I / ϑ 8 l ρ J, Ẽi Ẽj Re η I N j ξj N i ξj N j ξi N i. D δ d L, = d L, on shell d L, MS e 5 { / 4 = 4π 4 s 4 w c4 Λ w NP ϑ lnre lj ln RE ϑ l, ρ J Ẽj, Ẽi Im ξ I N j ηj N i ηj N j ξi N i Im η I N j ξj N i ξj N j ηi N i / ϑ 48 l ρ J, Ẽi, Ẽj ϑ l, ρ J Ẽj, Ẽi Im ξ I N j ξj N i ξj N j ξi N i Im η I N j ηj N i ηj N j ηi N i 4 / ln ϑ RE, ρ lj Ẽi Ẽj / ρ 8 Ẽi ϑ l, J Ẽj Im η I N j ηj N i ηj ξi N j N i / ρ 4 Ẽi ln RE ϑ l, J Ẽj Ẽi ρ Ẽj 4
/ ϑ 8 l ρ J, Ẽi Ẽj Im η I N j ξj N i ξj N j ξi N i. D δ a L, = a L, on shell a L, { l I / e 4 = 44π s 4 w c w, νi ρ Ẽj 3 MS ρ νi, Ẽj Re ξ I N j λj N i ζj C j ξi C i ln RE 3,, ρ νi, Ẽj ρ νi ln RE,, Ẽj m Re η I m w c N j λj ζj ηi N i C j C i / ϕ 3 νi ln RE, Ẽj 4, νi ρ Ẽj Re η I N j λj N i ζj C j ξi C i m l I / ρ mw c Ẽj ln RE, νi ϕ 3 νi, Ẽj Re ξ I N j λj N i ζj C j ηi C i. D3 δ d L, = d L, on shell d L, MS l { I = e 5 44π Λ NP s 4 w c w / ϕ 3 νi ln RE, Ẽj 4, νi ρ Ẽj Re η I N j λj N i ζj C j ξi C i 4
m / m w c ρ Ẽj ln RE, νi ϕ 3 νi, Ẽj Re ξ I N j λj N i ζj C j ηi C i. D4 δ a L, = a L, on shell a L, MS l { I = e4 ln 4π s ϑ 4 RE l J, ρ νi νj w ln RE ϑ l, ρ J νj νi m l J Re ξ I m w c C j ηj C i ηj ξi C j C i m Re η I m w c C j ξj C i ξj ηi C j C i / ϑ l J ϑ l, ρ J νj νi Re ξ I C j ξj C i ξj C j ξi C i, ρ νi νj m m l J Re η I 4m 4 w c4 C j ηj C i ηj ηi C j C i m m l J ln m ϑ 3 RE w c3 lj m m l J, ϕ νi 3, νj m 3 w c3 / ϑ l, ϕ J νj 3, νi Re η I C j ηj C i ηj ξi C j C i m m ln RE ϑ m w c l, ϕ J νj 3, νi m w c / ϑ l J, ϕ νi 3, νj Re η I C j ξj C i ξj C j ξi C i. D5 43
δ d L, = d L, on shell d L, MS = e5 / { l I ln 4π s 4 Λ ϑ RE l J, ρ νi νj w NP ln RE ϑ l, ρ J νj νi m l J Im ξ I m w c C j ηj C i ηj ξi C j C i m Im η I m w c C j ξj C i ξj ηi C j C i / ϑ l J ϑ l, ρ J νj νi Im ξ I C j ξj C i ξj C j ξi C i m m l J 4m 4 w c4, ρ νi νj Im η I C j ηj C i ηj C j ηi C i m m l J ln m ϑ 3 RE w c3 lj m m l J, ϕ νi 3, νj m 3 w c3 / ϑ l, ϕ J νj 3, νi Im η I C j ηj C i ηj ξi C j C i m m ln RE ϑ m w c l, ϕ J νj 3, νi m w c / ϑ l J, ϕ νi 3, νj Im η I C j ξj C i ξj C j ξi C i. D6 The Muon g Collaboration, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 84 Erratum-ibid. 89, 993; hep-e/33. M. Davier, S. Eidelman, A. Hocker and Z. Zhang, Eur. Phys. J. C 3, 533. 3 K. Hagiwara, A. Martin, D. Normura and T. Teubner, Phys. Lett. B 557, 693. 44
4 S. Ghozzi, F. Jegerlehner, hep-ph/38. 5 A. Czarnecki and W. Marciano, Phys. Rev. D 64, 34; M. Knecht, hep-ph/3739. 6 T. Moroi, Phys. Rev. D 53, 6565996; ibid. 56,444997 Erratum. 7 G. Degrassi and G. Giudice, Phys. Rev. D 58, 537998. 8 A. Czarnecki, B. Krause and W. J. Marciano, Phys. Rev. D. 5, 69995; Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 367996; T. Kukhto, E. Kuraev, A. Schiller and Z. Silagadze, Nucl. Phys. B. 37, 56799. 9 S. Heinemeyer, D. Stöckinger and G. Weiglein, Nucl. Phys. B. 69, 64; ibid. 699, 34. C. Chen, C. Geng, Phys. Lett. B. 5, 77. Y.K. Semertzidis et al., hep-ph/87. J. Feng, K. Matchev and Y. Shadmi, hep-ph/57. 3 P. Nath, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 56599; T. Ibrahim, P. Nath, Phys. Lett. B48, 98; Phys. Rev. D57, 478998; 58, 3998; 6, 934; M. Brhlik, G. J. Good, G. L. Kane, ibid. 59, 54999; A. Bartl, T. Gajdosik, W. Porod, P. Stockinger and H. Stremnitzer, ibid. 6, 733999, J. Diaz-Cruz, J. Ferrandis, Phys. Rev. D 7, 3535. 4 D. Chang, W. Keung and A. Pilaftsis, Phys. Rev. Lett. 8, 9999; A. Pilaftsis, Phys. Lett. B47, 74999; D. Chang, W. Chang and W. Keung, ibid. 478, 39. 5 M. Bohm, H. Spiesberger, W. Hollik, Fortsch.Phys. 34, 687986. 6 Tai-Fu Feng, Phys. Rev. D 7, 964; Tai-Fu Feng, Xue-Qian Li, Jukka Maalampi, Xinmin Zhang, Phys. Rev. D. 7, 5655. 7 Tai-Fu Feng, Tao Huang, Xue-Qian Li, Xin-Min Zhang, Shu-Min Zhao, Phys.Rev.D. 68, 643. 8 A. Pilaftsis, Phys. Rev. D58, 96998; Phys. Lett. B435, 88998; A. Pilaftsis, C. E. M. Wagner, Nucl. Phys. B 533, 3999; M. Carena, J. Ellis, A. Pilaftsis, C. E. M. Wagner, ibid. 586, 9; ibid. 65, 345. 9 A. Denner, Fortschr. Phys. 4, 37993. W. Hollik, E. Kraus, M. Roth, C. Rupp, K. Sibold and D. Stöckinger, Nucl. Phys. B 639, 3. S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik and G. Weiglein, Comp. Phys. Comm. 4, 76. 45