ALBERT

Description: New Physics contributions to Δ F =2 transitions in the simplest extensions of the Standard Model (SM), the models with constrained Minimal Flavor Violation (CMFV), are parametrized by a single variable S ( v ), the value of the real box diagram function that in CMFV is bounded from below by its SM value S 0 ( x t ). With already very precise experimental values of ε K , Δ M d , Δ M s and precise values of the CP-asymmetry $S_{\psi K_{S}}$ and of $\hat{B}_{K}$ entering the evaluation of ε K , the future of CMFV in the Δ F =2 sector depends crucially on the values of | V cb |, | V ub |, γ , $F_{B_{s}} \sqrt{\hat{B}_{B_{s}}}$ and $F_{B_{d}} \sqrt{\hat{B}_{B_{d}}}$ . The ratio ξ of the latter two non-perturbative parameters, already rather precisely determined from lattice calculations, allows then together with Δ M s /Δ M d and $S_{\psi K_{S}}$ to determine the range of the angle γ in the unitarity triangle independently of the value of S ( v ). Imposing in addition the constraints from | ε K | and Δ M d allows to determine the favorite CMFV values of | V cb |, | V ub |, $F_{B_{s}}\sqrt{\hat{B}_{B_{s}}}$ and $F_{B_{d}} \sqrt{\hat{B}_{B_{d}}}$ as functions of S ( v ) and γ . The | V cb | 4 dependence of ε K allows to determine | V cb | for a given S ( v ) and γ with a higher precision than it is presently possible using tree-level decays. The same applies to | V ub |, | V td | and | V ts | that are automatically determined as functions of S ( v ) and γ . We derive correlations between $F_{B_{s}}\sqrt{\hat{B}_{B_{s}}}$ and $F_{B_{d}} \sqrt{\hat{B}_{B_{d}}}$ , | V cb |, | V ub | and γ that should be tested in the coming years. Typically $F_{B_{s}}\sqrt{\hat{B}_{B_{s}}}$ and $F_{B_{d}} \sqrt{\hat{B}_{B_{d}}}$ have to be lower than their present lattice values, while | V cb | has to be higher than its tree-level determination, with a significance depending on the evolution of their errors. Within the SM this would imply values for $\mathcal{B}(K^{+}\rightarrow\pi^{+}\nu\bar{\nu})$ and $\mathcal{B}(K_{L}\rightarrow\pi^{0}\nu\bar{\nu})$ that are typically larger by (15–20) % than those presently quoted in the literature. The region in the space of these three parameters allowed by CMFV indicates tensions in this class of models and hints for the presence of new sources of flavor violation and/or new local operators in Δ F =2 data that are strongly suppressed in these models. As a byproduct we propose to reduce the present uncertainty in the charm contribution to ε K by using the experimental value of Δ M K .

Description: Within the framework of modified teleparallel gravity, we reconstruct a f ( T ) model corresponding to the QCD ghost dark energy scenario. For a spatially flat FRW universe containing only the pressureless matter, we obtain the time evolution of the torsion scalar T (or the Hubble parameter). Then, we calculate the effective torsion equation of state parameter of the QCD ghost f ( T )-gravity model as well as the deceleration parameter of the universe. Furthermore, we fit the model parameters by using the latest observational data including SNeIa, CMB and BAO data. We also check the viability of our model using a cosmographic analysis approach. Moreover, we investigate the validity of the generalized second law (GSL) of gravitational thermodynamics for our model. Finally, we point out the growth rate of matter density perturbation. We conclude that in QCD ghost f ( T )-gravity model, the universe begins a matter dominated phase and approaches a de Sitter regime at late times, as expected. Also this model is consistent with current data, passes the cosmographic test, satisfies the GSL and fits the data of the growth factor well as the ΛCDM model.

Description: Loop quantum cosmology is considered in the inflation era. A slow roll scalar field solution with power law potential is presented in the neighborhood of the transition time, i.e. when the universe enters inflation phase from super-inflation. The compatibility of the model with Planck 2013 data is discussed. The domain of validity of the second and the generalized second laws of thermodynamics for this solution and some other examples is studied.

Description: In this work, we systematically investigate the one-loop corrections to $t\bar{t}$ production in the littlest Higgs model with T-parity (LHT) at the LHC for $\sqrt{s}=8,14~\mbox{TeV}$ . We focus on the effects of LHT particles on $t\bar{t}$ cross section, polarization asymmetries, spin correlation and charge asymmetry at the LHC. We also study the top quark forward–backward asymmetry at Tevatron and its correlations with the LHC observables. We found that: (1) the contributions of the LHT particles to $t\bar{t}$ production can only reach about 1 % at the 14 TeV LHC. Meanwhile, the anomalous top quark forward–backward asymmetry at Tevatron is also hardly to be explained in the LHT model. (2) The parity violating asymmetries in $t\bar{t}$ production, such as left–right asymmetry | A LR | and the polarization | P t | can, respectively, reach 1.1 % and 0.5 %, which may have the potential to provide a signal of LHT at the LHC.

Description: We evaluate the massless scalar field quasi-normal frequencies of Schwarzschild black hole in the quintessence background, using the third-order WKB approximation method. Results show that quintessence decreases the oscillation frequency while increases the damping time of the scalar field. Moreover, with the increase of the quintessential state parameter ω q (the ratio of the pressure to the energy density), the imaginary parts’ absolute values of the quasi-normal frequencies increase monotonously. This indicates that the scalar field decays more rapidly in the larger ω q quintessence state, which agrees with the cases of other perturbation fields for black holes in the quintessence background. For the special case of SdS black hole ( ω q =−1), the oscillation frequency and the damping rate increase with the decrease of the normalization factor c (corresponding to the cosmological constant Λ in SdS black hole).

Description: For neutrino mixing we propose to use the parameter set X i (=| V ei | 2 ) and Ω i (= ϵ ijk | V μj | 2 | V τk | 2 ), with two constraints. These parameters are directly measurable since the neutrino oscillation probabilities are their quadratic functions. Physically, the set Ω i signifies a quantitative measure of μ – τ asymmetry. Available neutrino data indicate that all the Ω i ’s are small (〈 O (10 −1 )), but with large uncertainties. The behavior of Ω i as functions of the induced neutrino mass in matter is found to be simple, which should facilitate the analyses of long baseline experiments.

Description: There exist dark-energy models that predict the occurrence of a “little rip”. At the point of a little rip the Hubble rate and its cosmic time derivative approach infinity, which is quite similar to the big rip singularity except that the former happens at infinite future and the latter at a finite cosmic time; both events happen in the future and at high energies. In the case of the big rip, a combination of ultra-violet and infra-red effects can smooth its doomsday. We therefore wonder if the little rip can also be smoothed in a similar way. We address the ultra-violet and infra-red effects in general relativity through a brane-world model with a Gauss–Bonnet term in the bulk and an induced gravity term on the brane. We find that the little rip is transformed in this case into a sudden singularity, or a “big brake”. Even though the big brake is smoother than the little rip in that the Hubble rate is finite at the event, the trade-off is that it takes place sooner, at a finite cosmic time. In our estimate, the big brake would happen at roughly 1300 Gyr.

Description: A novel single-particle technique to measure emittance has been developed and used to characterise seventeen different muon beams for the Muon Ionisation Cooling Experiment (MICE). The muon beams, whose mean momenta vary from 171 to 281 MeV/ c , have emittances of approximately 1.2–2.3  π  mm-rad horizontally and 0.6–1.0  π  mm-rad vertically, a horizontal dispersion of 90–190 mm and momentum spreads of about 25 MeV/ c . There is reasonable agreement between the measured parameters of the beams and the results of simulations. The beams are found to meet the requirements of MICE.

Description: The effective Lagrangian with scalar and vector resonances that might result from new strong physics beyond the SM is formulated and studied. In particular, the scalar resonance representing the recently discovered 125-GeV boson is complemented with the SU (2) L + R triplet of hypothetical vector resonances. Motivated by experimental and theoretical considerations, the vector resonance is allowed to couple directly to the third quark generation only. The coupling is chiral-dependent and the interaction of the right top quark can differ from that of the right bottom quark. To estimate the applicability range of the effective Lagrangian the unitarity of the gauge boson scattering amplitudes is analyzed. The experimental fits and limits on the free parameters of the vector resonance triplet are investigated.

Description: Support for interactions of spin- $\frac{3}{2}$ particles is implemented in the FeynRules and ALOHA packages and tested with the MadGraph  5 and CalcHEP event generators in the context of three phenomenological applications. In the first, we implement a spin- $\frac{3}{2}$ Majorana gravitino field, as in local supersymmetric models, and study gravitino and gluino pair-production. In the second, a spin- $\frac{3}{2}$ Dirac top-quark excitation, inspired from compositeness models, is implemented. We then investigate both top-quark excitation and top-quark pair-production. In the third, a general effective operator for a spin- $\frac{3}{2}$ Dirac quark excitation is implemented, followed by a calculation of the angular distribution of the s -channel production mechanism.

Description: We look for possible spectral features and systematic effects in the Fermi LAT publicly available high-energy gamma-ray data by studying photons from the Galactic center, nearby galaxy clusters, nearby brightest galaxies, AGNs, unassociated sources, hydrogen clouds and from the Earth limb. Apart from the already known 130 GeV gamma-ray excesses from the first two sources, we find no statistically significant excesses from any of the cosmological sources nor from any control region. Therefore our main effort goes to the study of gamma rays appearing from the Earth limb. In the energy range of 30 to 200 GeV the Earth limb gamma-ray spectrum follows a power-law with spectral index 2.86±0.05 at 95 % CL, in a good agreement with the PAMELA measurement of the cosmic ray proton spectral index of 2.82–2.85, confirming the physical origin of the limb gamma-rays. In subsets of the Earth limb data at small photon incidence angle spectral features occur, including a feature at 130 GeV. We observe a systematic ∼2 σ -level difference in the Earth limb spectra with small and large incidence angles. The behavior of those spectral features as well as the background indicates that those may be statistical fluctuations or complicated unknown systematic effects of the Fermi LAT. In the latter case, only the Fermi LAT Collaboration can give the final answer having access to raw data and all details of the reconstruction.

Description: We consider the non-abelian self-dual two-form theory (Chu and Ko, J. High Energy Phys. 1205:028, 2012 ) and find new exact solutions. Our solutions are supported by Yang–Mills (anti)instantons in four dimensions and describe a wave moving in null directions. We argue and provide evidence that these instanton wave solutions correspond to an M-wave (MW) on the worldvolume of multiple M5-branes. When dimensionally reduced on a circle, the MW/M5 system is reduced to the D0/D4 system with the D0-branes represented by the Yang–Mills instanton of the D4-branes Yang–Mills gauge theory. We show that this picture is precisely reproduced by the dimensional reduction of our instanton wave solutions.

Description: An alternative method to account for the Gribov ambiguities in gauge theories is presented. It is shown that, to eliminate Gribov ambiguities, at infinitesimal level, it is required to break the BRST symmetry in a soft manner. This can be done by introducing a suitable extra constraint that eliminates the infinitesimal Gribov copies. It is shown that the present approach is consistent with the well established known cases in the literature, i.e., the Landau and maximal Abelian gauges. The method is valid for gauges depending exclusively on the gauge field and is restricted to classical level. However, occasionally, we deal with quantum aspects of the technique, which are used to improve the results.

Description: We calculate the branching ratio of a bottom hadron decaying into a charmed hadron and a charged ρ meson within the QCD factorization approach. We consider the effect of the finite width correction of the ρ meson. Our numerical calculation shows an obvious correction because of this effect. We find that the finite width effect of the ρ meson reduces the branching ratios by about 9 % to 11 % for bottom meson decay channels: $B^{+}\to\overline{D^{0}}\rho^{+}$ , B 0 → D − ρ + , and $B^{0}_{s}\to D^{-}_{s}\rho^{+}$ , and increases the branching ratio by about 10 % for $\varLambda_{b}^{0}\to\varLambda_{c}^{+}\rho^{-}$ .

Description: In this paper, we carry out a numerical and systematic analysis of the neutrino mass textures, which contain one vanishing minor and equality between two cofactors. Among 60 logically possible textures, only eight of them are excluded for both the normal and inverted hierarchy by the current experimental data at 3 σ level. We also demonstrate that the future long-baseline neutrino oscillation experiments, especially for the measurement of the θ 23 mixing angle, will play an important role in the model selection. The phenomenological implications from neutrinoless double-beta decay and the cosmology observation are also examined. A discussion of the flavor symmetry realization of the textures is also given.

Description: In this article, we calculate the $B_{c}^{*} \to B_{c}$ electromagnetic form-factor with the three-point QCD sum rules and then study the radiative decays $B_{c}^{*\pm} \to B_{c}^{\pm} \gamma$ . Experimentally, we can study the radiative transitions using the decay cascades $B_{c}^{*\pm}\to B_{c}^{\pm} \gamma\to J/\psi\ell^{\pm}\bar{\nu}_{\ell} \gamma\to\mu^{+} \mu^{-} \ell^{\pm}\bar{\nu}_{\ell} \gamma$ in the future at the LHCb.

Description: A consistent theory of massive gravity, where the graviton acquires mass by spontaneously breaking diffeomorphism invariance, is now well established. We supersymmetrize this construction using N =1 fields. Coupling to N =1 supergravity is done by applying the rules of tensor calculus to construct an action invariant under local N =1 supersymmetry. The supersymmetric action is shown, at the quadratic level, to be free of ghosts and have as its spectrum a massive graviton, two gravitinos (with different masses) and a massive vector.

Description: We examine the ATLAS and CMS 7 & 8 TeV multijet supersymmetry (SUSY) searches requiring the incidence of a single lepton in the framework of the supersymmetric grand unified model No-Scale Flipped SU (5) with extra vector-like flippon multiplets derived from F-Theory, or $\mathcal{F}\mbox{--} \mathit{SU}(5)$ for short. Investigated are five multijet + lepton SUSY searches: 4.7 fb −1 ATLAS 7 TeV gluino and light stop searches, as well as 13 fb −1  ATLAS and 9.7 fb −1  CMS 8 TeV light stop searches. Most significantly, all five leptonic SUSY searches represent statistically independent data samples. Findings show that all five orthogonal sets of leptonic LHC observations give a lower bound to the gaugino mass scale at M 1/2 ≥680 GeV, with all the current best fits correlating within a narrow region. Furthermore, eight statistically independent LHC SUSY search regions (leptonic + all-hadronic) accessible to the No-Scale $\mathcal{F}\mbox{--} \mathit{SU}(5)$ model space intersect with all the currently operating beyond the Standard Model experiments within the range of M 1/2 =680–850 GeV, with the upper bound established by the lower experimental limit of the anomalous magnetic moment (g μ −2)/2 of the muon. We emphasize that this region of the $\mathcal{F}\mbox{--} \mathit{SU}(5)$ model space may not be fully probed by leptonic SUSY searches at the LHC until the 13 TeV LHC energizes in 2015. Additionally, we describe an efficient technique for the effective statistical disentanglement of searches sensitive to mutually overlapping event spaces.

Description: Gluon production on two scattering centers is studied in the formalism of reggeized gluons. Different contributions to the inclusive cross section are derived with the help of the Lipatov effective action. The AGK relations between these contributions are established. The inclusive cross section found is compared to the one in the dipole picture and demonstrated to be the same.

Description: The S-wave charmonium decaying to a P-wave and S-wave light hadron pairs are supposed to be suppressed by the helicity selection rule in the perturbative QCD framework. With an effective Lagrangian method, we show that the intermediate charmed meson loops can provide a possible mechanism for the evasion of the helicity selection rule, and result in sizeable decay branching ratios in some of those channels. The theoretical predictions can be examined by the forthcoming BES-III data in the near future.

Description: It is believed that choked gamma-ray bursts (CGRBs) are the potential candidates for the production of high energy neutrinos in GeV–TeV energy range. These CGRBs outnumber the successful GRBs by many orders. So it is important to observe neutrinos from these cosmological objects with the presently operating neutrino telescope IceCube. We study the three-flavor neutrino oscillation of these high energy neutrinos in the presupernova star environment which is responsible for the CGRB. For the presupernova star we consider three different models and calculate the neutrino oscillation probabilities, as well as neutrino flux on the surface of these star. The matter effect modifies the neutrino flux of different flavors on the surface of the star. We have also calculated the flux of these high energy neutrinos on the surface of the Earth. We found that for neutrino energies below ≤10 TeV the flux ratio does not amount to 1:1:1, whereas for higher energy neutrinos it does.

Description: In this work we consider the evolution of the interactive dark fluids in the background of homogeneous and isotropic FRW model of the universe. The dark fluids consist of a warm dark matter and a dark energy and both are described as perfect fluid with barotropic equation of state. The dark species interact non-gravitationally through an additional term in the energy conservation equations. An autonomous system is formed in the energy density spaces and fixed points are analyzed. A general expression for the deceleration parameter has been obtained and it is possible to have more than one zero of the deceleration parameter. Finally, vanishing of the deceleration parameter has been examined with some examples.

Description: We calculate partial Bayes factors to quantify how the feasibility of the constrained minimal supersymmetric standard model (CMSSM) has changed in the light of a series of observations. This is done in the Bayesian spirit where probability reflects a degree of belief in a proposition and Bayes’ theorem tells us how to update it after acquiring new information. Our experimental baseline is the approximate knowledge that was available before LEP, and our comparison model is the Standard Model with a simple dark matter candidate. To quantify the amount by which experiments have altered our relative belief in the CMSSM since the baseline data we compute the partial Bayes factors that arise from learning in sequence the LEP Higgs constraints, the XENON100 dark matter constraints, the 2011 LHC supersymmetry search results, and the early 2012 LHC Higgs search results. We find that LEP and the LHC strongly shatter our trust in the CMSSM (with M 0 and M 1/2 below 2 TeV), reducing its posterior odds by approximately two orders of magnitude. This reduction is largely due to substantial Occam factors induced by the LEP and LHC Higgs searches.

Description: Further investigation of the participant plane correlations within a Glauber model framework is presented, focusing on correlations between three or four participant planes of different order. A strong correlation is observed for $\cos(2\varPhi_{2}^{*}+3\varPhi _{3}^{*}-5\varPhi_{5}^{*})$ which is a reflection of the elliptic shape of the overlap region. The correlation between the corresponding experimental event plane angles can be easily measured. Strong correlations of similar geometric origin are also observed for $\cos(2\varPhi_{2}^{*}+4\varPhi _{4}^{*}- 6\varPhi_{6}^{*})$ , $\cos(2\varPhi_{2}^{*}-3\varPhi_{3}^{*}-4\varPhi_{4}^{*}+5\varPhi_{5}^{*})$ , $\cos(6\varPhi_{2}^{*}+3\varPhi_{3}^{*}- 4\varPhi_{4}^{*}- 5\varPhi_{5}^{*})$ , $\cos(\varPhi_{1}^{*}-2\varPhi_{2}^{*}-3\varPhi_{3}^{*}+4\varPhi _{4}^{*})$ , $\cos(\varPhi_{1}^{*}+6\varPhi_{2}^{*}-3\varPhi _{3}^{*}-4\varPhi_{4}^{*})$ , and $\cos(\varPhi_{1}^{*}+2\varPhi_{2}^{*}+3\varPhi_{3}^{*}-6\varPhi _{6}^{*})$ , which are also measurable. Experimental measurements of the corresponding event plane correlators in heavy ion collisions at RHIC and the LHC may improve our understanding of the physics underlying the measured higher order flow harmonics.

Description: Assuming the newly observed Z c (3900) to be a molecular state of $D\bar{D}^{*}(D^{*} \bar{D})$ , we calculate the partial widths of Z c (3900)→ J / ψ + π ; ψ ′+ π ; η c + ρ and $D\bar{D}^{*}$ within the light-front model (LFM). Z c (3900)→ J / ψ + π is the channel by which Z c (3900) was observed, our calculation indicates that it is indeed one of the dominant modes whose width can be in the range of a few MeV depending on the model parameters. Similar to Z b and $Z_{b}'$ , Voloshin suggested that there should be a resonance $Z_{c}'$ at 4030 MeV, which can be a molecular state of $D^{*}\bar{D}^{*}$ . Then we go on calculating its decay rates to all the aforementioned final states and the $D^{*}\bar{D}^{*}$ as well. It is found that if Z c (3900) is a molecular state of ${1\over\sqrt{2}}(D\bar{D}^{*}+D^{*}\bar{D})$ , the partial width of $Z_{c}(3900)\to D\bar{D}^{*}$ is rather small, but the rate of Z c (3900)→ ψ (2 s ) π is even larger than Z c (3900)→ J / ψπ . The implications are discussed and it is indicated that with the luminosity of BES and BELLE, the experiments may finally determine if Z c (3900) is a molecular state or a tetraquark.

Description: A search for a charged Higgs boson ( H + ) in $t\bar{t}$ decays is presented, where one of the top quarks decays via t → H + b , followed by H + → two jets ( $c\bar{s}$ ). The other top quark decays to Wb , where the W  boson then decays into a lepton ( e / μ ) and a neutrino. The data were recorded in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 7~\mathrm {TeV}$ by the ATLAS detector at the LHC in 2011, and correspond to an integrated luminosity of 4.7 fb −1 . With no observation of a signal, 95 % confidence level (CL) upper limits are set on the decay branching ratio of top quarks to charged Higgs bosons varying between 5 % and 1 % for H + masses between 90 GeV and 150 GeV, assuming $\mathcal{B}(H^{+} \rightarrow c\bar{s})=100~\%$ .

Description: At a future linear collider very precise measurements, typically with errors of 〈1 %, are expected to be achievable. Such an accuracy gives sensitivity to the quantum corrections, which therefore must be incorporated in theoretical calculations in order to determine the underlying new physics parameters from prospective linear collider measurements. In the context of the chargino–neutralino sector of the minimal supersymmetric standard model, this involves fitting one-loop predictions to prospective measurements of the cross sections, forward–backward asymmetries and of the accessible chargino and neutralino masses. Taking recent results from LHC SUSY and Higgs searches into account we consider three phenomenological scenarios, each with characteristic features. Our analysis shows how an accurate determination of the desired parameters is possible, providing in addition access to the stop masses and mixing angle.

Description: A planar boundary introduced à la Symanzik in the 5D topological BF theory, with only the requirements of locality and power counting, allows to uniquely determine a gauge invariant, non-topological 4D Lagrangian. The boundary condition on the bulk fields is interpreted as a duality relation for the boundary fields, in analogy with the fermionization duality which holds in the 3D case. This suggests that the 4D degrees of freedom might be fermionic, although starting from a bosonic bulk theory. The method we propose to dimensionally reduce a Quantum Field Theory and to identify the resulting degrees of freedom can be applied to a generic spacetime dimension.

Description: In this work we study a Hořava-like 5-dimensional model in the context of braneworld theory. The equations of motion of such model are obtained and, within the realm of warped geometry, we show that the model is consistent if and only if λ takes its relativistic value 1. Furthermore, we show that the elimination of problematic terms involving the warp factor second order derivatives are eliminated by imposing detailed balance condition in the bulk. Afterwards, Israel’s junction conditions are computed, allowing the attainment of an effective Lagrangian in the visible brane. In particular, we show that the resultant effective Lagrangian in the brane corresponds to a (3+1)-dimensional Hořava-like model with an emergent positive cosmological constant but without detailed balance condition. Now, restoration of detailed balance condition, at this time imposed over the brane, plays an interesting role by fitting accordingly the sign of the arbitrary constant β , insuring a positive brane tension and a real energy for the graviton within its dispersion relation. Also, the brane consistency equations are obtained and, as a result, the model admits positive brane tensions in the compactification scheme if, and only if, β is negative and the detailed balance condition is imposed.

Description: We have included the effective description of squark interactions with charginos/neutralinos in the MadGraph MSSM model. This effective description includes the effective Yukawa couplings, and another logarithmic term which encodes the supersymmetry-breaking. We have performed an extensive test of our implementation analyzing the results of the partial decay widths of squarks into charginos and neutralinos obtained by using FeynArts/FormCalc programs and the new model file in MadGraph. We present results for the cross-section of top-squark production decaying into charginos and neutralinos.

Description: We present the NLO SUSY-QCD corrections to the production of a pair of the lightest neutralinos plus one jet at the LHC, appearing as a monojet signature in combination with missing energy. We fully include all non-resonant diagrams, i.e. we do not assume that production and decay factorise. We derive a parameter point based on the p19MSSM which is compatible with current experimental bounds and show distributions based on missing transverse energy and jet observables. Our results are produced with the program GoSam Cullen et al. (Eur. Phys. J. C 72:1889, 2012 ) for automated one-loop calculations in combination with MadDipole/MadGraph for the real radiation part.

Description: We present a new environment for computations in particle physics phenomenology employing recent developments in cloud computing. On this environment users can create and manage “virtual” machines on which the phenomenology codes/tools can be deployed easily in an automated way. We analyze the performance of this environment based on “virtual” machines versus the utilization of physical hardware. In this way we provide a qualitative result for the influence of the host operating system on the performance of a representative set of applications for phenomenology calculations.

Description: A Monte Carlo event generator is implemented for a two-Higgs-doublet model with maximal CP symmetry, the MCPM. The model contains five physical Higgs bosons; the  ρ ′, behaving similarly to the standard-model Higgs boson, two extra neutral bosons h ′ and  h ″, and a charged pair  H ± . The special feature of the MCPM is that, concerning the Yukawa couplings, the bosons  h ′, h ″ and H ± couple directly only to the second-generation fermions but with strengths given by the third-generation-fermion masses. Our event generator allows the simulation of the Drell–Yan-type production processes of h ′, h ″ and H ± in proton–proton collisions at LHC energies. Also the subsequent leptonic decays of these bosons into the μ + μ − , μ + ν μ and $\mu^{-} \bar{\nu}_{\mu}$ channels are studied as well as the dominant background processes. We estimate the integrated luminosities needed in pp collisions at center-of-mass energies of 8 and 14 TeV for significant observations of the Higgs bosons h ′, h ″ and H ± in these muonic channels.

Description: We study a radiative inverse seesaw model with local B – L symmetry, in which we extend the neutrino mass structure that is generated through a kind of inverse seesaw framework to the more generic one than our previous work. We focus on the real part of bosonic particle as a dark matter and investigate the features in $\mathcal{ O}\mbox {(1--80)}~\mbox{GeV}$ mass range, reported by the experiments such as CoGeNT and XENON (2012).

Description: We investigate the stability of the holographic description of the universe. By treating the perturbation globally, we discover that this description is stable, which is support for the holographic description of the universe.

Description: Direct searches at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) have pushed the lower limits on the masses of the gluinos ( $\tilde{g}$ ) and the squarks of the first two generations ( $\tilde{q}$ ) to the TeV range. On the other hand, the limits are rather weak for the third generation squarks and masses around a few hundred GeV are still allowed. A comparatively light third generation of squarks is also consistent with the lightest Higgs boson with mass ∼125 GeV. In view of this, we consider the direct production of a pair of sbottom quarks ( $\tilde{b}_{1}$ ) at the LHC and study their collider signatures. We focus on the scenario where the $\tilde{b}_{1}$ is not the next-to-lightest supersymmetric particle (NLSP) and hence can also decay to channels other than the commonly considered decay mode to a bottom quark and the lightest neutralino ( $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ ). For example, we consider the decay modes containing a bottom quark and the second neutralino ( $\tilde{b}_{1} \to b \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ ) and/or a top quark and the lightest chargino ( $\tilde{b}_{1} \to t \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}$ ) following the leptonic decays of the neutralino, chargino and the top quark giving rise to a four leptons ( ℓ ) + two b -jets + missing transverse momentum ( ) final state. We show that a sbottom mass ≲550 GeV can be probed in this channel at the 14 TeV LHC energy with integrated luminosity ≲100 fb −1 .

Description: The MEG (Mu to Electron Gamma) experiment has been running at the Paul Scherrer Institut (PSI), Switzerland since 2008 to search for the decay μ + →e + γ by using one of the most intense continuous μ + beams in the world. This paper presents the MEG components: the positron spectrometer, including a thin target, a superconducting magnet, a set of drift chambers for measuring the muon decay vertex and the positron momentum, a timing counter for measuring the positron time, and a liquid xenon detector for measuring the photon energy, position and time. The trigger system, the read-out electronics and the data acquisition system are also presented in detail. The paper is completed with a description of the equipment and techniques developed for the calibration in time and energy and the simulation of the whole apparatus.

Description: We present a study on the beam single spin asymmetries $A_{LU}^{\sin\phi_{h}}$ of π + , π − and π 0 production in semi-inclusive deep inelastic scattering process, by considering Collins effect and the g ⊥ D 1 term simultaneously. We calculate the twist-3 distributions $e(x, \boldsymbol{k}_{T}^{2})$ and $g^{\perp}(x, \boldsymbol{k}_{T}^{2})$ for the valence quarks inside the proton in a spectator model. We consider two different options for the form of diquark propagator, as well as two different choices for the model parameters in the calculation. Using the model results, we estimate the beam spin asymmetries $A_{LU}^{\sin\phi_{h}}$ for the charged and neutral pions and compare the results with the measurement from the HERMES Collaboration. We also make predictions on the asymmetries at CLAS with a 5.5 GeV beam using the same model results. It is found that different choices for the diquark propagator will not only lead to different expressions for the distribution functions, but also result in different sizes of the asymmetries. Our study also shows that, although the spectator model calculation can describe the asymmetries for certain pion production in some kinematic regions, it seems difficult to explain the asymmetries of pion production for all three pions in a consistent way from the current versions.

Description: Using the full set of the LHC Higgs data from the runs at 7 and 8 TeV center of mass energies that have been released by the ATLAS and CMS collaborations, we determine the couplings of the Higgs particle to fermions and gauge bosons as well as its parity or CP composition. We consider ratios of production cross sections times decay branching fractions in which the theoretical (and some experimental) uncertainties as well as some ambiguities from new physics cancel out. A fit of both the signal strengths in the various search channels that have been conducted, H → ZZ , WW , γγ , ττ and $b\bar{b}$ , and their ratios shows that the observed ∼126 GeV particle has couplings to fermions and gauge bosons that are Standard Model-like already at the 68 % confidence level (CL). From the signal strengths in which the theoretical uncertainty is taken to be a bias, the particle is shown to be at most 68 % CP-odd at the 99 %CL and the possibility that it is a pure pseudoscalar state is excluded at the 4 σ level when including both the experimental and theoretical uncertainties. The signal strengths also measure the invisible Higgs decay width which, with the same type of uncertainty analysis, is shown to be $\varGamma_{H}^{\mathrm{inv}}/ \varGamma_{H}^{\mathrm{SM}} \leq0.52$ at the 68 %CL.

Description: In this work, we consider a network of cosmic strings to explain a possible deviation from Λ CDM behaviour. We use different observational data to constrain the model and show that a small but non-zero contribution from the string network is allowed by the observational data, which can result in a reasonable departure from Λ CDM evolution. But by calculating the Bayesian evidence, we show that the present data still strongly favour the concordance Λ CDM model irrespective of the choice of the prior.

Description: A Higgs-like particle with a mass of about 125.5 GeV has been discovered at the LHC. Within the current experimental uncertainties, this new state is compatible with both the predictions for the Standard Model (SM) Higgs boson and with the Higgs sector in the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM). We propose new low-energy MSSM benchmark scenarios that, over a wide parameter range, are compatible with the mass and production rates of the observed signal. These scenarios also exhibit interesting phenomenology for the MSSM Higgs sector. We propose a slightly updated version of the well-known $m_{h}^{\max}$ scenario, and a modified scenario ( $m_{h}^{\mathrm{mod}}$ ), where the light $\mathcal{CP}$ -even Higgs boson can be interpreted as the LHC signal in large parts of the M A –tan β plane. Furthermore, we define a light stop scenario that leads to a suppression of the lightest $\mathcal{CP}$ -even Higgs gluon fusion rate, and a light stau scenario with an enhanced decay rate of h → γγ at large tan β . We also suggest a τ - phobic Higgs scenario in which the lightest Higgs can have suppressed couplings to down-type fermions. We propose to supplement the specified value of the μ  parameter in some of these scenarios with additional values of both signs. This has a significant impact on the interpretation of searches for the non-SM-like MSSM Higgs bosons. We also discuss the sensitivity of the searches to heavy Higgs decays into light charginos and neutralinos, and to decays of the form H → hh . Finally, in addition to all the other scenarios where the lightest $\mathcal{CP}$ -even Higgs is interpreted as the LHC signal, we propose a low - M H scenario, where instead the heavy $\mathcal{CP}$ -even Higgs boson corresponds to the new state around 125.5 GeV.

Description: An inclusive search for supersymmetric processes that produce final states with jets and missing transverse energy is performed in pp collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 8 TeV. The data sample corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 11.7 fb −1 collected by the CMS experiment at the LHC. In this search, a dimensionless kinematic variable, α T , is used to discriminate between events with genuine and misreconstructed missing transverse energy. The search is based on an examination of the number of reconstructed jets per event, the scalar sum of transverse energies of these jets, and the number of these jets identified as originating from bottom quarks. No significant excess of events over the standard model expectation is found. Exclusion limits are set in the parameter space of simplified models, with a special emphasis on both compressed-spectrum scenarios and direct or gluino-induced production of third-generation squarks. For the case of gluino-mediated squark production, gluino masses up to 950–1125 GeV are excluded depending on the assumed model. For the direct pair-production of squarks, masses up to 450 GeV are excluded for a single light first- or second-generation squark, increasing to 600 GeV for bottom squarks.

Description: In a recent work a modified BPHZ scheme has been introduced and applied to one-loop Feynman graphs in non-commutative ϕ 4 -theory. In the present paper, we first review the BPHZ method and then we apply the modified BPHZ scheme as well as Zimmermann’s forest formula to the sunrise graph, i.e. a typical higher-loop graph involving overlapping divergences. Furthermore, we show that the application of the modified BPHZ scheme to the IR-singularities appearing in non-planar graphs (UV/IR mixing problem) leads to the introduction of a 1/ p 2 term and thereby to a renormalizable model. Finally, we address the application of this approach to gauge field theories.

Description: We investigate the existence of possible stable strange matter and related stability windows at finite temperature for different models that are generally applied to describe quark stars, namely, the quark-mass density dependent model, the MIT bag model and the Nambu–Jona-Lasinio model. We emphasize that, although the limits for stable strange matter depend on a comparison with the ground state of 56 Fe, which is a zero temperature state, the quantity that has to be used in the search for strange matter in proto-quark stars is the free energy and we analyze stability windows up to temperatures of the order of 40 MeV. The effects of strong magnetic fields on stability windows are computed and the resulting mass-radius relations for different stages of the proto-quark star are analyzed.

Description: We review and update current limits on possible anomalous couplings of the top quark to gauge bosons. We consider data from top quark decay (as encoded in the \(W\) -boson helicity fractions) and single-top production (in the \(t\) -, \(s\) - and \(Wt\) -channels). We find improved limits with respect to previous results (in most cases of almost one order of magnitude) and extend the analysis to include four-quark operators. We find that new electroweak physics is constrained to live above an energy scale between 430 GeV and 3.2 TeV (depending on the form of its contribution). For comparison, strongly interacting new physics is bounded by scales higher than 1.3 or 1.5 TeV (again depending on its contribution).

Description: Based on the truncated Dyson–Schwinger equations for fermion and massive boson propagators in QED \(_3\) , the fermion chiral condensate and the mass singularities of the fermion propagator via the Schwinger function are investigated. It is shown that the critical point of the chiral phase transition is apparently different from that of the deconfinement phase transition and in Nambu phase the fermion is confined only for small gauge-boson mass.

Description: Motivated by the discrepancies noted recently between the theoretical calculations of the electromagnetic \(\omega \pi \) form factor and certain experimental data, we investigate this form factor using analyticity and unitarity in a framework known as the method of unitarity bounds. We use a QCD correlator computed on the spacelike axis by operator product expansion and perturbative QCD as input, and exploit unitarity and the positivity of its spectral function, including the two-pion contribution that can be reliably calculated using high-precision data on the pion form factor. From this information, we derive upper and lower bounds on the modulus of the \(\omega \pi \) form factor in the elastic region. The results provide a significant check on those obtained with standard dispersion relations, confirming the existence of a disagreement with experimental data in the region around \(0.6\, \text {GeV}\) .

Description: We make a frequentist analysis of the parameter space of the NUHM2, in which the soft supersymmetry (SUSY)-breaking contributions to the masses of the two Higgs multiplets, \(m^2_{H_{u,d}}\) , vary independently from the universal soft SUSY-breaking contributions \(m^2_0\) to the masses of squarks and sleptons. Our analysis uses the MultiNest sampling algorithm with over \(4 \times 10^8\) points to sample the NUHM2 parameter space. It includes the ATLAS and CMS Higgs mass measurements as well as the ATLAS search for supersymmetric jets +  \({/\!\!E}_T\) signals using the full LHC Run 1 data, the measurements of \(\mathrm{BR}(B_s \rightarrow \mu ^+\mu ^-)\) by LHCb and CMS together with other B-physics observables, electroweak precision observables and the XENON100 and LUX searches for spin-independent dark-matter scattering. We find that the preferred regions of the NUHM2 parameter space have negative SUSY-breaking scalar masses squared at the GUT scale for squarks and sleptons, \(m_0^2 〈 0\) , as well as \(m^2_{H_u} 〈 m^2_{H_d} 〈 0\) . The tension present in the CMSSM and NUHM1 between the supersymmetric interpretation of \((g-2)_\mu \) and the absence to date of SUSY at the LHC is not significantly alleviated in the NUHM2. We find that the minimum \(\chi ^2 = 32.5\) with 21 degrees of freedom (dof) in the NUHM2, to be compared with \(\chi ^2/\mathrm{dof} = 35.0/23\) in the CMSSM, and \(\chi ^2/\mathrm{dof} = 32.7/22\) in the NUHM1. We find that the one-dimensional likelihood functions for sparticle masses and other observables are similar to those found previously in the CMSSM and NUHM1.

Description: We study the anatomy and phenomenology of lepton flavor violation (LFV) in the context of flavored gauge mediation (FGM). Within FGM, the messenger sector couples directly to the MSSM matter fields with couplings controlled by the same dynamics that explains the hierarchies in the SM Yukawas. Although the pattern of flavor violation depends on the particular underlying flavor model, FGM provides a built-in flavor suppression similar to wave function renormalization or SUSY partial compositeness. Moreover, in contrast to these models, there is an additional suppression of left–right flavor transitions by third-generation Yukawas that in particular provides an extra protection against flavor-blind phases. We exploit the consequences of this setup for lepton flavor phenomenology, assuming that the new couplings are controlled by simple \(U(1)\) flavor models that have been proposed to accommodate large neutrino mixing angles. Remarkably, it turns out that in the context of FGM these models can pass the impressive constraints from LFV processes and leptonic electric dipole moments (EDMs) even for light superpartners, therefore offering the possibility of resolving the longstanding muon \(g-2\) anomaly.

Description: This work is based on pilgrim dark energy conjecture which states that phantom-like dark energy possesses the enough resistive force to preclude the formation of black hole. The non-flat geometry is considered which contains the interacting generalized ghost pilgrim dark energy with cold dark matter. Some well-known cosmological parameters (evolution parameter ( \(\omega _{\Lambda }\) ) and squared speed of sound) and planes ( \(\omega _{\Lambda }\) – \(\omega _{\Lambda }'\) and statefinder) are constructed in this scenario. The discussion of these parameters is totally done through pilgrim dark energy parameter ( \(u\) ) and interacting parameter ( \(d^2\) ). It is interesting to mention here that the analysis of evolution parameter supports the conjecture of pilgrim dark energy. Also, this model remains stable against small perturbation in most of the cases of \(u\) and \(d^2\) . Further, the cosmological planes correspond to \(\Lambda \) CDM limit as well as different well-known dark energy models.

Description: We derive expressions for the differential distributions and the total cross section of the double-parton interaction in direct photon interaction with proton and nuclei. We demonstrate that in this case the cross section is more directly related to the nucleon generalized parton distribution than in the case of double-parton interactions in the proton–proton collisions. We focus on the production of two dijets each containing charm (anticharm) quarks and carrying \(x_1,x_2〉0.2\) fractions of the photon momentum. Numerical results are presented for the \(e\) – \(p\) collisions at LHeC, HERA, and for the ultraperipheral \(AA\) and \(pA\) collisions at the LHC. We find that the events of this kind would be abundantly produced at the LHeC. For \(\sqrt{s}=1.3\) TeV the expected rate is \(2\times 10^9\) events for 1 year ( \(10^7\)  s) of running and the luminosity \(10^{34}\)  cm \(^{-2}~\hbox {s}^{-1}\) , for the transverse cutoff of \(p_t〉5\)  GeV. This would make it feasible to use these processes for the model independent determination of two parton GPDs in nucleon and in nuclei. We also find that a significant number of such double-parton interactions should be produced in \(p\) – \(Pb\) and \(Pb\) – \(Pb\) collisions at the LHC: \({\sim } 6\times 10^4\) for \(Pb\) – \(Pb\) , and \({\sim } 7 \times 10^3\) for \(p\) – \(Pb\) collisions for the same transverse momentum cutoff and running time \(10^{6}~\mathrm{s}\) , and in HERA where \(1.2\times 10^5\) events were produced for the integrated HERA luminosity of 1.2 fb \(^{-1}\) . Further studies are necessary to identify the kinematics where these MPIs could be separated from conventional 2-to-4 multijet events.

Description: Elaborating on the four-dimensional helicity scheme, we propose a pure four-dimensional formulation (FDF) of the \(d\) -dimensional regularization of one-loop scattering amplitudes. In our formulation particles propagating inside the loop are represented by massive internal states regulating the divergences. The latter obey Feynman rules containing multiplicative selection rules which automatically account for the effects of the extra-dimensional regulating terms of the amplitude. We present explicit representations of the polarization and helicity states of the four-dimensional particles propagating in the loop. They allow for a complete, four-dimensional, unitarity-based construction of \(d\) -dimensional amplitudes. Generalized unitarity within the FDF does not require any higher-dimensional extension of the Clifford and the spinor algebra. Finally we show how the FDF allows for the recursive construction of \(d\) -dimensional one-loop integrands, generalizing the four-dimensional open-loop approach.

Description: We study the primordial Universe in a cosmological model where inflation is driven by a fluid with a polytropic equation of state \(p = \alpha \rho + k\rho ^{1 + 1/n}\) . We calculate the dynamics of the scalar factor and build a Universe with constant density at the origin. We also find the equivalent scalar field that could create such an equation of state and calculate the corresponding slow-roll parameters. We calculate the scalar perturbations, the scalar power spectrum, and the spectral index.

Description: The dynamics of a charged particle moving around a slowly rotating Kerr black hole in the presence of an external magnetic field is investigated. We are interested in exploring the conditions under which the charged particle can escape from the gravitational field of the black hole after colliding with another particle. The escape velocity of the charged particle in the innermost stable circular orbit is calculated. The effective potential and escape velocity of the charged particle with angular momentum in the presence of the magnetic field is analyzed. This work serves as an extension of a preceding paper dealing with the Schwarzschild black hole (Zahrani et al., Phys Rev D 87:084043, 2013 ).

Description: We consider a cosmological model dominated by a stiff fluid with a constant bulk viscosity. We classify all the possible cases of the universe predicted by the model and analyze the scale factor and the density as well as the curvature scalar. We find that when the dimensionless constant bulk viscous parameter is in the range \(0 〈 \bar{\zeta }〈6\) the model begins with a big bang and makes a transition from the decelerating expansion epoch to an accelerating epoch and then tends to the de Sitter phase as \( t\rightarrow \infty \) . The transition into the accelerating epoch would be in the recent past when \(4〈\bar{\zeta }〈6.\) For \(\bar{\zeta }〉6\) the model does not have a big bang and shows an increase in the fluid density and scalar curvature as the universe expands which eventually saturates as the scale factor \(a \rightarrow \infty \) in the future. We have analyzed the model with statefinder diagnostics and find that the model is different from the \(\Lambda \) CDM model but approaches the \(\Lambda \) CDM point as \(a \rightarrow \infty \) . We have also analyzed the status of the generalized second law of thermodynamics with an apparent horizon as the boundary of the universe and found that the law is generally satisfied when \(0 \le \bar{\zeta }〈6\) , and for \(\bar{\zeta }〉6\) the law is satisfied when the scale factor is larger than a minimum value.

Description: We investigate the approximate Noether gauge symmetries of the geodesic Lagrangian for the Bardeen spacetime model. This is accommodated by a set of new approximate Noether gauge symmetry relations for the perturbed geodesic Lagrangian in the spacetime. A detailed analysis of the spacetime of the Bardeen model up to third-order approximate Noether gauge symmetries is presented.

Description: The CRESST-II cryogenic dark matter search aims for the detection of WIMPs via elastic scattering off nuclei in CaWO \(_4\) crystals. We present results from a low-threshold analysis of a single upgraded detector module. This module efficiently vetoes low energy backgrounds induced by \(\alpha \) -decays on inner surfaces of the detector. With an exposure of 29.35 kg live days collected in 2013 we set a limit on spin-independent WIMP-nucleon scattering which probes a new region of parameter space for WIMP masses below 3 GeV/c \(^2\) , previously not covered in direct detection searches. A possible excess over background discussed for the previous CRESST-II phase 1 (from 2009 to 2011) is not confirmed.

Description: It is well known that quaternions represent rotations in 3D Euclidean and Minkowski spaces. However, the product by a quaternion gives rotation in two independent planes at once and to obtain single-plane rotations one has to apply half-angle quaternions twice from the left and on the right (with inverse). This ‘double-cover’ property is a potential problem in the geometrical application of split quaternions, since the (2+2)-signature of their norms should not be changed for each product. If split quaternions form a proper algebraic structure for microphysics, the representation of boosts in (2+1)-space leads to the interpretation of the scalar part of quaternions as the wavelengths of particles. The invariance of space-time intervals and some quantum behaviors, like noncommutativity and the fundamental spinor representation, probably also are algebraic properties. In our approach the Dirac equation represents the Cauchy–Riemann analyticity condition and two fundamental physical parameters (the speed of light and Planck’s constant) emerge from the requirement of positive definiteness of the quaternionic norms.

Description: This paper summarizes in a simple and intuitive way why the neutrons, the muons and the solar neutrinos cannot give any significant contribution to the DAMA annual modulation results. A number of these elements have already been presented in individual papers; they are recalled here together with few simple considerations which demonstrate the incorrectness of the claim reported in Davis (PRL 113:081302, 2014 ).

Description:    We study the stability of static, spherically symmetric solutions to the Einstein equations with a scalar field as the source. We describe a general methodology of studying small radial perturbations of scalar-vacuum configurations with arbitrary potentials V ( ϕ ), and in particular space-times with throats (including wormholes), which are possible if the scalar is phantom. At such a throat, the effective potential for perturbations V eff has a positive pole (a potential wall) that prevents a complete perturbation analysis. We show that, generically, (i) V eff has precisely the form required for regularization by the known S-deformation method, and (ii) a solution with the regularized potential leads to regular scalar field and metric perturbations of the initial configuration. The well-known conformal mappings make these results also applicable to scalar-tensor and f ( R ) theories of gravity. As a particular example, we prove the instability of all static solutions with both normal and phantom scalars and V ( ϕ )≡0 under spherical perturbations. We thus confirm the previous results on the unstable nature of anti-Fisher wormholes and Fisher’s singular solution and prove the instability of other branches of these solutions including the anti-Fisher “cold black holes.” Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-12 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1791-2 Authors K. A. Bronnikov, Center for Gravitation and Fundamental Metrology, VNIIMS, Ozyornaya 46, Moscow, 119361 Russia J. C. Fabris, Departamento de Física, Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo, Avenida Fernando Ferrari 514, 29075-910 Vitória, ES, Brazil A. Zhidenko, Centro de Matemática, Computação e Cognição, Universidade Federal do ABC, Rua Santa Adélia, 166, 09210-170 Santo André, SP, Brazil Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 71 Journal Issue Volume 71, Number 11

Description:    We show that a five-dimensional Universal Extra Dimension model, compactified on a line segment, is consistently formulated even when the gauge symmetry is broken solely by non-zero Dirichlet boundary conditions on a bulk Higgs field, without any quartic interaction. We find that the longitudinal W + W − elastic scattering amplitude, under the absence of the Higgs zero mode, is unitarized by exchange of infinite towers of KK Higgs bosons. Resultant amplitude scales linearly with the scattering energy , exhibiting five-dimensional nature. A tree-level partial-wave unitarity condition is satisfied up to 6.7 (5.7) TeV for the KK scale m KK =430 (500) GeV, favored by the electroweak data within 90% CL. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-9 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1786-z Authors Kenji Nishiwaki, Department of Physics, Kobe University, Kobe, 657-8501 Japan Kin-ya Oda, Department of Physics, Osaka University, Osaka, 560-0043 Japan Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 71 Journal Issue Volume 71, Number 11

Description:    This paper starts with a self-contained discussion of the so-called Akulov–Volkov action , which is traditionally taken to be the leading-order action of the Goldstino field. Explicit expressions for and its chiral version are presented. We then turn to the issue on how these actions are related to the leading-order action proposed in the newly proposed constrained superfield formalism. We show that may yield or a totally different action , depending on how the auxiliary field in the former is integrated out. However, and always yield the same S -matrix elements, as one would have expected from general considerations in quantum field theory. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-5 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1793-0 Authors Haishan Liu, Zhejiang Institute of Modern Physics, Department of Physics, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310027, P.R. China Hui Luo, Zhejiang Institute of Modern Physics, Department of Physics, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310027, P.R. China Mingxing Luo, Zhejiang Institute of Modern Physics, Department of Physics, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310027, P.R. China Liucheng Wang, Zhejiang Institute of Modern Physics, Department of Physics, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310027, P.R. China Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 71 Journal Issue Volume 71, Number 11

Description:    We introduce novel extensions of the Standard Model featuring a supersymmetric technicolor sector. First we consider Super Yang–Mills which breaks to via the electroweak (EW) interactions and coupling to the MSSM. This is a well defined, economical and calculable extension of the SM involving the smallest number of fields. It constitutes an explicit example of a natural supersymmetric conformal extension of the Standard Model featuring a well defined connection to string theory. It allows us to interpolate, depending on how we break the underlying supersymmetry, between unparticle physics and Minimal Walking Technicolor. As a second alternative we consider other extensions of the Minimal Walking Technicolor model. The new models allow all the standard model matter fields to acquire a mass. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-13 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1784-1 Authors Matti Antola, Department of Physics, Helsinki Institute of Physics, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 64, Helsinki, 000140 Finland Stefano Di Chiara, CP³-Origins, Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense M, Denmark Francesco Sannino, CP³-Origins, Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense M, Denmark Kimmo Tuominen, Department of Physics, University of Jyväskylä, P.O. Box 35 (YFL), Jyväskylä, Finland Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 71 Journal Issue Volume 71, Number 11

Description:    The flavour and glue structure of the light scalar mesons in QCD are probed by studying the couplings of the I =0 mesons σ (600) and f 0 (980) to the operators , α s G 2 and to two photons. The Roy dispersive representation for the ππ amplitude is used to determine the pole positions as well as the residues in the complex plane. On the real axis, is constrained to solve the Roy equation together with elastic unitarity up to the threshold leading to an improved description of the f 0 (980). The problem of using a two-particle threshold as a matching point is discussed. A simple relation is established between the coupling of a scalar meson to an operator j S and the value of the related pion form-factor computed at the resonance pole. Pion scalar form-factors as well as two-photon partial-wave amplitudes are expressed as coupled-channel Omnès dispersive representations. Subtraction constants are constrained by chiral symmetry and experimental data. Comparison of our results for the couplings with earlier determinations of the analogous couplings of the lightest I =1 and I =1/2 scalar mesons are compatible with an assignment of the σ , κ , a 0 (980), f 0 (980) into a nonet. Concerning the gluonic operator α s G 2 we find a significant coupling to both the σ and the f 0 (980). Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-14 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1814-z Authors B. Moussallam, Groupe de Physique Théorique, Institut de Physique Nucléaire Université Paris-Sud 11, 91406 Orsay, France Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 71 Journal Issue Volume 71, Number 12

Description:    We obtain limits on the anomalous magnetic and electric dipole moments of the ν τ through the reaction and in the framework of a 331 model. We consider initial-state radiation, and neglect W and photon exchange diagrams. The results are based on the data reported by the L3 Collaboration at LEP, and compare favorably with the limits obtained in other models, complementing previous studies on the dipole moments. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-6 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1819-7 Authors A. Gutiérrez-Rodríguez, Facultad de Física, Universidad Autonóma de Zacatecas, Apartado Postal C-580, 98060 Zacatecas, Mexico Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 71 Journal Issue Volume 71, Number 12

Description:    In this article, we study the Λ c and Λ b baryons in the nuclear matter using the QCD sum rules, and obtain the in-medium masses , , the in-medium vector self-energies , , and the in-medium pole residues , . The mass-shifts are and , respectively. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-6 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1816-x Authors Zhi-Gang Wang, Department of Physics, North China Electric Power University, Baoding, 071003 P.R. China Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 71 Journal Issue Volume 71, Number 12

Description:    We study CP asymmetries in rare B decays within supersymmetry with a U (2) 3 flavour symmetry, motivated by the SUSY flavour and CP problems, the hierarchies in the Yukawa couplings and the absence so far of any direct evidence for SUSY. Even in the absence of flavour-blind phases, we find potentially sizable CP violating contributions to b → s decay amplitudes. The effects in the mixing-induced CP asymmetries in B → ϕK S and B → η ′ K S , angular CP asymmetries in B → K ∗ μ + μ − and the direct CP asymmetry in B → X s γ can be in the region to be probed by LHCb and next generation B factories. At the same time, these effects in B decays are compatible with CP violating contributions to meson mixing, including a non-standard B s mixing phase hinted by current tensions in the CKM fit mostly between and . Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-7 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1812-1 Authors Riccardo Barbieri, Scuola Normale Superiore and INFN, Piazza dei Cavalieri 7, 56126 Pisa, Italy Paolo Campli, Scuola Normale Superiore and INFN, Piazza dei Cavalieri 7, 56126 Pisa, Italy Gino Isidori, INFN, Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Via E. Fermi 40, 00044 Frascati, Italy Filippo Sala, Scuola Normale Superiore and INFN, Piazza dei Cavalieri 7, 56126 Pisa, Italy David M. Straub, Scuola Normale Superiore and INFN, Piazza dei Cavalieri 7, 56126 Pisa, Italy Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 71 Journal Issue Volume 71, Number 12

Description:    We revise the SU ( N c ), N c =3,4,6, lattice data on pure gauge theories at finite temperature by means of a quasi-particle approach. In particular, we focus on the relation between the effective mass of the quasi-particle and the order of the deconfinement transition, the scaling of the interaction measure with , the role of gluon condensate, and the screening mass. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-7 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1826-8 Authors P. Castorina, Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Catania, Via Santa Sofia 64, 95123 Catania, Italy V. Greco, Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Catania, Via Santa Sofia 64, 95123 Catania, Italy D. Jaccarino, Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Catania, Via Santa Sofia 64, 95123 Catania, Italy D. Zappalà, Sezione di Catania, INFN, Via Santa Sofia 64, 95123 Catania, Italy Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 71 Journal Issue Volume 71, Number 12

Description:    We calculate the meson screening mass in a pion superfluid in the framework of Nambu–Jona-Lasinio model. The minimum of the attractive quark potential is always located at the phase boundary of pion superfluid. Different from the temperature and baryon density effect, the potential at finite isospin density cannot be efficiently suppressed and the matter is always in a strongly coupled phase due to the Goldstone mode in the pion superfluid. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-8 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1822-z Authors Yin Jiang, Physics Department, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084 China Ke Ren, Physics Department, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084 China Tao Xia, Physics Department, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084 China Pengfei Zhuang, Physics Department, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084 China Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 71 Journal Issue Volume 71, Number 12

Description:    We consider RFDiff invariant Hořava–Lifshitz gravity action with additional Lagrange multiplier term that is a function of scalar curvature. We find its Hamiltonian formulation and we show that the constraint structure implies the same number of physical degrees of freedom as in General Relativity. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-10 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1820-1 Authors J. Klusoň, Department of Theoretical Physics and Astrophysics, Faculty of Science, Masaryk University, Kotlářská 2, 611 37 Brno, Czech Republic Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 71 Journal Issue Volume 71, Number 12

Description:    We reconsider the utility of the radiative decay B → γℓν with an energetic photon in the final state for determining parameters of the B -meson light-cone distribution amplitude. Including 1/ m b power corrections and radiative corrections at next-to-leading logarithmic order, we perform an improved analysis of the existing BABAR data. We find a provisional lower limit on the inverse moment of the B meson distribution amplitude, λ B , which, due to the inclusion of radiative and power corrections, is significantly lower than the previous result. More data with large photon energy are, however, required to obtain reliable results, as should become available in the future from SuperB factories. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-9 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1818-8 Authors M. Beneke, Institut für Theoretische Teilchenphysik und Kosmologie, RWTH Aachen University, 52074 Aachen, Germany J. Rohrwild, Institut für Theoretische Teilchenphysik und Kosmologie, RWTH Aachen University, 52074 Aachen, Germany Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 71 Journal Issue Volume 71, Number 12

Description:    We study anomalous high- p T baryon production in AA -collisions due to formation of the two parton collinear gq system in the anti-sextet color state for quark jets and gg system in the decuplet/anti-decuplet color states for gluon jets. Fragmentation of these states, which are absent for NN -collisions, after escaping from the quark–gluon plasma leads to baryon production. Our qualitative estimates show that this mechanism can be potentially important at RHIC and LHC energies. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-12 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1829-5 Authors P. Aurenche, LAPTH, Université de Savoie, CNRS, BP 110, 74941 Annecy-le-Vieux Cedex, France B. G. Zakharov, L.D. Landau Institute for Theoretical Physics, GSP-1, 117940, Kosygina Str. 2, 117334 Moscow, Russia Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 71 Journal Issue Volume 71, Number 12

Description:    The mass spectra of charmonia, bottomonia and B c mesons are calculated in the framework of the QCD-motivated relativistic quark model based on the quasipotential approach. The dynamics of heavy quarks and antiquarks is treated fully relativistically without application of the nonrelativistic v 2 / c 2 expansion. The known one-loop radiative corrections to the heavy quark potential are taken into account perturbatively. The heavy quarkonium masses are calculated up to rather high orbital and radial excitations ( L =5, n r =5). On this basis the Regge trajectories are constructed both in the total angular momentum J and radial quantum number n r . It is found that the daughter trajectories are almost linear and parallel, while parent trajectories exhibit some nonlinearity in the low mass region. Such nonlinearity is most pronounced for bottomonia and is only marginal for charmonia. The obtained results are compared with the available experimental data, and a possible interpretation of the new charmonium-like states above open charm production threshold is discussed. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-13 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1825-9 Authors D. Ebert, Institut für Physik, Humboldt–Universität zu Berlin, Newtonstr. 15, 12489 Berlin, Germany R. N. Faustov, Dorodnicyn Computing Centre, Russian Academy of Sciences, Vavilov Str. 40, 119991 Moscow, Russia V. O. Galkin, Institut für Physik, Humboldt–Universität zu Berlin, Newtonstr. 15, 12489 Berlin, Germany Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 71 Journal Issue Volume 71, Number 12

Description:    As the largest mass concentrations in the local Universe, nearby clusters of galaxies and their central galaxies are prime targets in searching for indirect signatures of dark matter annihilation (DMA). We seek to constrain the dark matter annihilation emission component from multi-frequency observations of the central galaxy of the Virgo cluster. The annihilation emission component is modeled by the prompt and inverse-Compton gamma rays from the hadronization of annihilation products from generic weakly interacting dark matter particles. This component is fitted to the excess of the observed data above the spectral energy distribution (SED) of the jet in M87, described with a best-fit synchrotron-self-Compton (SSC) spectrum. While this result is not sufficiently significant to claim a detection, we emphasize that a dark matter “double hump signature” can be used to unambiguously discriminate the dark matter emission component from the variable jet-related emission of M87 in future, more extended observation campaigns. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-5 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1815-y Authors Sheetal Saxena, Institute for Theoretical Physics and Astrophysics, University of Würzburg, Campus Hubland Nord, Emil-Fischer-Str. 31, 97074 Würzburg, Germany Alexander Summa, Institute for Theoretical Physics and Astrophysics, University of Würzburg, Campus Hubland Nord, Emil-Fischer-Str. 31, 97074 Würzburg, Germany Dominik Elsässer, Institute for Theoretical Physics and Astrophysics, University of Würzburg, Campus Hubland Nord, Emil-Fischer-Str. 31, 97074 Würzburg, Germany Michael Rüger, Institute for Theoretical Physics and Astrophysics, University of Würzburg, Campus Hubland Nord, Emil-Fischer-Str. 31, 97074 Würzburg, Germany Karl Mannheim, Institute for Theoretical Physics and Astrophysics, University of Würzburg, Campus Hubland Nord, Emil-Fischer-Str. 31, 97074 Würzburg, Germany Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 71 Journal Issue Volume 71, Number 11

Description:    The jet fragmentation function and transverse profile for jets with 25 GeV〈 p T jet 〈500 GeV and | η jet |〈1.2 produced in proton–proton collisions with a center-of-mass energy of 7 TeV are presented. The measurement is performed using data with an integrated luminosity of 36 pb −1 . Jets are reconstructed and their momentum measured using calorimetric information. The momenta of the charged particle constituents are measured using the tracking system. The distributions corrected for detector effects are compared with various Monte Carlo event generators and generator tunes. Several of these choices show good agreement with the measured fragmentation function. None of these choices reproduce both the transverse profile and fragmentation function over the full kinematic range of the measurement. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Experimental Physics Pages 1-25 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1795-y Authors The ATLAS Collaboration, CERN, 1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland G. Aad, Fakultät für Mathematik und Physik, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, Freiburg i.Br., Germany B. Abbott, Homer L. Dodge Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, United States of America J. Abdallah, Institut de Física d’Altes Energies and Departament de Física de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona and ICREA, Barcelona, Spain A. A. Abdelalim, Section de Physique, Université de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland A. Abdesselam, Department of Physics, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom O. Abdinov, Institute of Physics, Azerbaijan Academy of Sciences, Baku, Azerbaijan B. Abi, Department of Physics, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK, United States of America M. Abolins, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, United States of America H. Abramowicz, Raymond and Beverly Sackler School of Physics and Astronomy, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel H. Abreu, LAL, Univ. Paris-Sud and CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France E. Acerbi, INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy B. S. Acharya, INFN Gruppo Collegato di Udine, Udine, Italy D. L. Adams, Physics Department, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY, United States of America T. N. Addy, Department of Physics, Hampton University, Hampton, VA, United States of America J. Adelman, Department of Physics, Yale University, New Haven, CT, United States of America M. Aderholz, Max-Planck-Institut für Physik (Werner-Heisenberg-Institut), München, Germany S. Adomeit, Fakultät für Physik, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, München, Germany P. Adragna, Department of Physics, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom T. Adye, Particle Physics Department, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom S. Aefsky, Department of Physics, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA, United States of America J. A. Aguilar-Saavedra, Departamento de Fisica Teorica y del Cosmos and CAFPE, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain M. Aharrouche, Institut für Physik, Universität Mainz, Mainz, Germany S. P. Ahlen, Department of Physics, Boston University, Boston, MA, United States of America F. Ahles, Fakultät für Mathematik und Physik, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, Freiburg i.Br., Germany A. Ahmad, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, United States of America M. Ahsan, Physics Department, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, TX, United States of America G. Aielli, INFN Sezione di Roma Tor Vergata, Roma, Italy T. Akdogan, Department of Physics, Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey T. P. A. Åkesson, Fysiska Institutionen, Lunds Universitet, Lund, Sweden G. Akimoto, International Center for Elementary Particle Physics and Department of Physics, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan A. V. Akimov, P.N. Lebedev Institute of Physics, Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia A. Akiyama, Graduate School of Science, Kobe University, Kobe, Japan M. S. Alam, University at Albany, Albany, NY, United States of America M. A. Alam, Department of Physics, Royal Holloway University of London, Surrey, United Kingdom J. Albert, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada S. Albrand, Laboratoire de Physique Subatomique et de Cosmologie, Université Joseph Fourier and CNRS/IN2P3 and Institut National Polytechnique de Grenoble, Grenoble, France M. Aleksa, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland I. N. Aleksandrov, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, JINR Dubna, Dubna, Russia F. Alessandria, INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy C. Alexa, National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest, Romania G. Alexander, Raymond and Beverly Sackler School of Physics and Astronomy, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel G. Alexandre, Section de Physique, Université de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland T. Alexopoulos, Physics Department, National Technical University of Athens, Zografou, Greece M. Alhroob, Physikalisches Institut, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany M. Aliev, Department of Physics, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany G. Alimonti, INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy J. Alison, Department of Physics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States of America M. Aliyev, Institute of Physics, Azerbaijan Academy of Sciences, Baku, Azerbaijan P. P. Allport, Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom S. E. Allwood-Spiers, SUPA—School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom J. Almond, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom A. Aloisio, INFN Sezione di Napoli, Napoli, Italy R. Alon, Department of Particle Physics, The Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel A. Alonso, Fysiska Institutionen, Lunds Universitet, Lund, Sweden M. G. Alviggi, INFN Sezione di Napoli, Napoli, Italy K. Amako, KEK, High Energy Accelerator Research Organization, Tsukuba, Japan P. Amaral, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland C. Amelung, Department of Physics, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA, United States of America V. V. Ammosov, State Research Center Institute for High Energy Physics, Protvino, Russia A. Amorim, Laboratorio de Instrumentacao e Fisica Experimental de Particulas—LIP, Lisboa, Portugal G. Amorós, Instituto de Física Corpuscular (IFIC) and Departamento de Física Atómica, Molecular y Nuclear and Departamento de Ingenierá Electrónica and Instituto de Microelectrónica de Barcelona (IMB-CNM), University of Valencia and CSIC, Valencia, Spain N. Amram, Raymond and Beverly Sackler School of Physics and Astronomy, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel C. Anastopoulos, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland L. S. Ancu, Albert Einstein Center for Fundamental Physics and Laboratory for High Energy Physics, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland N. Andari, LAL, Univ. Paris-Sud and CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France T. Andeen, Nevis Laboratory, Columbia University, Irvington, NY, United States of America C. F. Anders, Physikalisches Institut, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany G. Anders, Kirchhoff-Institut für Physik, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany K. J. Anderson, Enrico Fermi Institute, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States of America A. Andreazza, INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy V. Andrei, Kirchhoff-Institut für Physik, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany M-L. Andrieux, Laboratoire de Physique Subatomique et de Cosmologie, Université Joseph Fourier and CNRS/IN2P3 and Institut National Polytechnique de Grenoble, Grenoble, France X. S. Anduaga, Instituto de Física La Plata, Universidad Nacional de La Plata and CONICET, La Plata, Argentina A. Angerami, Nevis Laboratory, Columbia University, Irvington, NY, United States of America F. Anghinolfi, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland N. Anjos, Laboratorio de Instrumentacao e Fisica Experimental de Particulas—LIP, Lisboa, Portugal A. Annovi, INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy A. Antonaki, Physics Department, University of Athens, Athens, Greece M. Antonelli, INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy A. Antonov, Moscow Engineering and Physics Institute (MEPhI), Moscow, Russia J. Antos, Department of Subnuclear Physics, Institute of Experimental Physics of the Slovak Academy of Sciences, Kosice, Slovak Republic F. Anulli, INFN Sezione di Roma I, Roma, Italy S. Aoun, CPPM, Aix-Marseille Université and CNRS/IN2P3, Marseille, France L. Aperio Bella, LAPP, CNRS/IN2P3 and Université de Savoie, Annecy-le-Vieux, France R. Apolle, Department of Physics, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom G. Arabidze, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, United States of America I. Aracena, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Stanford, CA, United States of America Y. Arai, KEK, High Energy Accelerator Research Organization, Tsukuba, Japan A. T. H. Arce, Department of Physics, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States of America J. P. Archambault, Department of Physics, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON, Canada S. Arfaoui, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland J-F. Arguin, Physics Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and University of California, Berkeley, CA, United States of America E. Arik, Department of Physics, Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey M. Arik, Department of Physics, Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey A. J. Armbruster, Department of Physics, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States of America O. Arnaez, Institut für Physik, Universität Mainz, Mainz, Germany C. Arnault, LAL, Univ. Paris-Sud and CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France A. Artamonov, Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics (ITEP), Moscow, Russia G. Artoni, INFN Sezione di Roma I, Roma, Italy D. Arutinov, Physikalisches Institut, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany S. Asai, International Center for Elementary Particle Physics and Department of Physics, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan R. Asfandiyarov, Department of Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, United States of America S. Ask, Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom B. Åsman, Department of Physics, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden L. Asquith, High Energy Physics Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL, United States of America K. Assamagan, Physics Department, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY, United States of America A. Astbury, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada A. Astvatsatourov, II Physikalisches Institut, Justus-Liebig-Universität Giessen, Giessen, Germany G. Atoian, Department of Physics, Yale University, New Haven, CT, United States of America B. Aubert, LAPP, CNRS/IN2P3 and Université de Savoie, Annecy-le-Vieux, France E. Auge, LAL, Univ. Paris-Sud and CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France K. Augsten, Czech Technical University in Prague, Praha, Czech Republic M. Aurousseau, Department of Physics, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa N. Austin, Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom G. Avolio, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California Irvine, Irvine, CA, United States of America R. Avramidou, Physics Department, National Technical University of Athens, Zografou, Greece D. Axen, Department of Physics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada C. Ay, II Physikalisches Institut, Georg-August-Universität, Göttingen, Germany G. Azuelos, Group of Particle Physics, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada Y. Azuma, International Center for Elementary Particle Physics and Department of Physics, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan M. A. Baak, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland G. Baccaglioni, INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy C. Bacci, INFN Sezione di Roma Tre, Roma, Italy A. M. Bach, Physics Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and University of California, Berkeley, CA, United States of America H. Bachacou, DSM/IRFU (Institut de Recherches sur les Lois Fondamentales de l’Univers), CEA Saclay (Commissariat a l’Energie Atomique), Gif-sur-Yvette, France K. Bachas, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland G. Bachy, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland M. Backes, Section de Physique, Université de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland M. Backhaus, Physikalisches Institut, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany E. Badescu, National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest, Romania P. Bagnaia, INFN Sezione di Roma I, Roma, Italy S. Bahinipati, Department of Physics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada Y. Bai, Institute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China D. C. Bailey, Department of Physics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada T. Bain, Department of Physics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada J. T. Baines, Particle Physics Department, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom O. K. Baker, Department of Physics, Yale University, New Haven, CT, United States of America M. D. Baker, Physics Department, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY, United States of America S. Baker, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University College London, London, United Kingdom E. Banas, The Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Krakow, Poland P. Banerjee, Group of Particle Physics, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada Sw. Banerjee, Department of Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, United States of America D. Banfi, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland A. Bangert, Santa Cruz Institute for Particle Physics, University of California Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA, United States of America V. Bansal, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada H. S. Bansil, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom L. Barak, Department of Particle Physics, The Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel S. P. Baranov, P.N. Lebedev Institute of Physics, Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia A. Barashkou, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, JINR Dubna, Dubna, Russia A. Barbaro Galtieri, Physics Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and University of California, Berkeley, CA, United States of America T. Barber, Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom E. L. Barberio, School of Physics, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia D. Barberis, INFN Sezione di Genova, Genova, Italy M. Barbero, Physikalisches Institut, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany D. Y. Bardin, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, JINR Dubna, Dubna, Russia T. Barillari, Max-Planck-Institut für Physik (Werner-Heisenberg-Institut), München, Germany M. Barisonzi, Fachbereich C Physik, Bergische Universität Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany T. Barklow, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Stanford, CA, United States of America N. Barlow, Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom B. M. Barnett, Particle Physics Department, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom R. M. Barnett, Physics Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and University of California, Berkeley, CA, United States of America A. Baroncelli, INFN Sezione di Roma Tre, Roma, Italy G. Barone, Section de Physique, Université de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland A. J. Barr, Department of Physics, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom F. Barreiro, Departamento de Fisica Teorica C-15, Universidad Autonoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain J. Barreiro Guimarães da Costa, Laboratory for Particle Physics and Cosmology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, United States of America P. Barrillon, LAL, Univ. Paris-Sud and CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France R. Bartoldus, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Stanford, CA, United States of America A. E. Barton, Physics Department, Lancaster University, Lancaster, United Kingdom D. Bartsch, Physikalisches Institut, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany V. Bartsch, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom R. L. Bates, SUPA—School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom L. Batkova, Faculty of Mathematics, Physics & Informatics, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovak Republic J. R. Batley, Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom A. Battaglia, Albert Einstein Center for Fundamental Physics and Laboratory for High Energy Physics, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland M. Battistin, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland G. Battistoni, INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy F. Bauer, DSM/IRFU (Institut de Recherches sur les Lois Fondamentales de l’Univers), CEA Saclay (Commissariat a l’Energie Atomique), Gif-sur-Yvette, France H. S. Bawa, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Stanford, CA, United States of America B. Beare, Department of Physics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada T. Beau, Laboratoire de Physique Nucléaire et de Hautes Energies, UPMC and Université Paris-Diderot and CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France P. H. Beauchemin, Department of Physics, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom R. Beccherle, INFN Sezione di Genova, Genova, Italy P. Bechtle, DESY, Hamburg and Zeuthen, Germany H. P. Beck, Albert Einstein Center for Fundamental Physics and Laboratory for High Energy Physics, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland M. Beckingham, Fakultät für Mathematik und Physik, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, Freiburg i.Br., Germany K. H. Becks, Fachbereich C Physik, Bergische Universität Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany A. J. Beddall, Department of Physics Engineering, Gaziantep University, Gaziantep, Turkey A. Beddall, Department of Physics Engineering, Gaziantep University, Gaziantep, Turkey S. Bedikian, Department of Physics, Yale University, New Haven, CT, United States of America V. A. Bednyakov, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, JINR Dubna, Dubna, Russia C. P. Bee, CPPM, Aix-Marseille Université and CNRS/IN2P3, Marseille, France M. Begel, Physics Department, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY, United States of America S. Behar Harpaz, Department of Physics, Technion: Israel Inst. of Technology, Haifa, Israel P. K. Behera, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States of America M. Beimforde, Max-Planck-Institut für Physik (Werner-Heisenberg-Institut), München, Germany C. Belanger-Champagne, Department of Physics, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada P. J. Bell, Section de Physique, Université de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland W. H. Bell, Section de Physique, Université de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland G. Bella, Raymond and Beverly Sackler School of Physics and Astronomy, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel L. Bellagamba, INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy F. Bellina, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland M. Bellomo, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland A. Belloni, Laboratory for Particle Physics and Cosmology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, United States of America O. Beloborodova, Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics (BINP), Novosibirsk, Russia K. Belotskiy, Moscow Engineering and Physics Institute (MEPhI), Moscow, Russia O. Beltramello, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland S. Ben Ami, Department of Physics, Technion: Israel Inst. of Technology, Haifa, Israel O. Benary, Raymond and Beverly Sackler School of Physics and Astronomy, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel D. Benchekroun, Faculté des Sciences Ain Chock, Réseau Universitaire de Physique des Hautes Energies—Université Hassan II, Casablanca, Morocco C. Benchouk, CPPM, Aix-Marseille Université and CNRS/IN2P3, Marseille, France M. Bendel, Institut für Physik, Universität Mainz, Mainz, Germany N. Benekos, Department of Physics, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL, United States of America Y. Benhammou, Raymond and Beverly Sackler School of Physics and Astronomy, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel D. P. Benjamin, Department of Physics, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States of America M. Benoit, LAL, Univ. Paris-Sud and CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France J. R. Bensinger, Department of Physics, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA, United States of America K. Benslama, Physics Department, University of Regina, Regina, SK, Canada S. Bentvelsen, Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics and University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands D. Berge, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland E. Bergeaas Kuutmann, DESY, Hamburg and Zeuthen, Germany N. Berger, LAPP, CNRS/IN2P3 and Université de Savoie, Annecy-le-Vieux, France F. Berghaus, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada E. Berglund, Section de Physique, Université de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland J. Beringer, Physics Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and University of California, Berkeley, CA, United States of America K. Bernardet, CPPM, Aix-Marseille Université and CNRS/IN2P3, Marseille, France P. Bernat, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University College London, London, United Kingdom R. Bernhard, Fakultät für Mathematik und Physik, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, Freiburg i.Br., Germany C. Bernius, Physics Department, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY, United States of America T. Berry, Department of Physics, Royal Holloway University of London, Surrey, United Kingdom A. Bertin, INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy F. Bertinelli, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland F. Bertolucci, INFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy M. I. Besana, INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy N. Besson, DSM/IRFU (Institut de Recherches sur les Lois Fondamentales de l’Univers), CEA Saclay (Commissariat a l’Energie Atomique), Gif-sur-Yvette, France S. Bethke, Max-Planck-Institut für Physik (Werner-Heisenberg-Institut), München, Germany W. Bhimji, SUPA—School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom R. M. Bianchi, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland M. Bianco, INFN Sezione di Lecce, Lecce, Italy O. Biebel, Fakultät für Physik, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, München, Germany S. P. Bieniek, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University College London, London, United Kingdom K. Bierwagen, II Physikalisches Institut, Georg-August-Universität, Göttingen, Germany J. Biesiada, Physics Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and University of California, Berkeley, CA, United States of America M. Biglietti, INFN Sezione di Roma Tre, Roma, Italy H. Bilokon, INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy M. Bindi, INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy S. Binet, LAL, Univ. Paris-Sud and CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France A. Bingul, Department of Physics Engineering, Gaziantep University, Gaziantep, Turkey C. Bini, INFN Sezione di Roma I, Roma, Italy C. Biscarat, Domaine scientifique de la Doua, Centre de Calcul CNRS/IN2P3, Villeurbanne Cedex, France U. Bitenc, Fakultät für Mathematik und Physik, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, Freiburg i.Br., Germany K. M. Black, Department of Physics, Boston University, Boston, MA, United States of America R. E. Blair, High Energy Physics Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL, United States of America J.-B. Blanchard, LAL, Univ. Paris-Sud and CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France G. Blanchot, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland T. Blazek, Faculty of Mathematics, Physics & Informatics, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovak Republic C. Blocker, Department of Physics, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA, United States of America J. Blocki, The Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Krakow, Poland A. Blondel, Section de Physique, Université de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland W. Blum, Institut für Physik, Universität Mainz, Mainz, Germany U. Blumenschein, II Physikalisches Institut, Georg-August-Universität, Göttingen, Germany G. J. Bobbink, Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics and University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands V. B. Bobrovnikov, Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics (BINP), Novosibirsk, Russia S. S. Bocchetta, Fysiska Institutionen, Lunds Universitet, Lund, Sweden A. Bocci, Department of Physics, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States of America C. R. Boddy, Department of Physics, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom M. Boehler, DESY, Hamburg and Zeuthen, Germany J. Boek, Fachbereich C Physik, Bergische Universität Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany N. Boelaert, Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Kobenhavn, Denmark S. Böser, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University College London, London, United Kingdom J. A. Bogaerts, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland A. Bogdanchikov, Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics (BINP), Novosibirsk, Russia A. Bogouch, B.I. Stepanov Institute of Physics, National Academy of Sciences of Belarus, Minsk, Republic of Belarus C. Bohm, Department of Physics, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden V. Boisvert, Department of Physics, Royal Holloway University of London, Surrey, United Kingdom T. Bold, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California Irvine, Irvine, CA, United States of America V. Boldea, National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest, Romania N. M. Bolnet, DSM/IRFU (Institut de Recherches sur les Lois Fondamentales de l’Univers), CEA Saclay (Commissariat a l’Energie Atomique), Gif-sur-Yvette, France M. Bona, Department of Physics, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom V. G. Bondarenko, Moscow Engineering and Physics Institute (MEPhI), Moscow, Russia M. Bondioli, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California Irvine, Irvine, CA, United States of America M. Boonekamp, DSM/IRFU (Institut de Recherches sur les Lois Fondamentales de l’Univers), CEA Saclay (Commissariat a l’Energie Atomique), Gif-sur-Yvette, France G. Boorman, Department of Physics, Royal Holloway University of London, Surrey, United Kingdom C. N. Booth, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom S. Bordoni, Laboratoire de Physique Nucléaire et de Hautes Energies, UPMC and Université Paris-Diderot and CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France C. Borer, Albert Einstein Center for Fundamental Physics and Laboratory for High Energy Physics, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland A. Borisov, State Research Center Institute for High Energy Physics, Protvino, Russia G. Borissov, Physics Department, Lancaster University, Lancaster, United Kingdom I. Borjanovic, Institute of Physics, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia S. Borroni, Department of Physics, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States of America K. Bos, Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics and University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands D. Boscherini, INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy M. Bosman, Institut de Física d’Altes Energies and Departament de Física de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona and ICREA, Barcelona, Spain H. Boterenbrood, Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics and University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands D. Botterill, Particle Physics Department, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom J. Bouchami, Group of Particle Physics, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada J. Boudreau, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States of America E. V. Bouhova-Thacker, Physics Department, Lancaster University, Lancaster, United Kingdom C. Bourdarios, LAL, Univ. Paris-Sud and CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France N. Bousson, CPPM, Aix-Marseille Université and CNRS/IN2P3, Marseille, France A. Boveia, Enrico Fermi Institute, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States of America J. Boyd, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland I. R. Boyko, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, JINR Dubna, Dubna, Russia N. I. Bozhko, State Research Center Institute for High Energy Physics, Protvino, Russia I. Bozovic-Jelisavcic, Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences, Belgrade, Serbia J. Bracinik, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom A. Braem, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland P. Branchini, INFN Sezione di Roma Tre, Roma, Italy G. W. Brandenburg, Laboratory for Particle Physics and Cosmology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, United States of America A. Brandt, Department of Physics, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, United States of America G. Brandt, Department of Physics, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany O. Brandt, II Physikalisches Institut, Georg-August-Universität, Göttingen, Germany U. Bratzler, Graduate School of Science and Technology, Tokyo Metropolitan University, Tokyo, Japan B. Brau, Department of Physics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, United States of America J. E. Brau, Center for High Energy Physics, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, United States of America H. M. Braun, Fachbereich C Physik, Bergische Universität Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany B. Brelier, Department of Physics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada J. Bremer, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland R. Brenner, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Uppsala, Uppsala, Sweden S. Bressler, Department of Physics, Technion: Israel Inst. of Technology, Haifa, Israel D. Breton, LAL, Univ. Paris-Sud and CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France D. Britton, SUPA—School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom F. M. Brochu, Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom I. Brock, Physikalisches Institut, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany R. Brock, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, United States of America T. J. Brodbeck, Physics Department, Lancaster University, Lancaster, United Kingdom E. Brodet, Raymond and Beverly Sackler School of Physics and Astronomy, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel F. Broggi, INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy C. Bromberg, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, United States of America G. Brooijmans, Nevis Laboratory, Columbia University, Irvington, NY, United States of America W. K. Brooks, Departamento de Física, Universidad Técnica Federico Santa María, Valparaíso, Chile G. Brown, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom H. Brown, Department of Physics, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, United States of America P. A. Bruckman de Renstrom, The Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Krakow, Poland D. Bruncko, Department of Subnuclear Physics, Institute of Experimental Physics of the Slovak Academy of Sciences, Kosice, Slovak Republic R. Bruneliere, Fakultät für Mathematik und Physik, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, Freiburg i.Br., Germany S. Brunet, Department of Physics, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, United States of America A. Bruni, INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy G. Bruni, INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy M. Bruschi, INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy T. Buanes, Department for Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway F. Bucci, Section de Physique, Université de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland J. Buchanan, Department of Physics, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom N. J. Buchanan, Department of Physics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada P. Buchholz, Fachbereich Physik, Universität Siegen, Siegen, Germany R. M. Buckingham, Department of Physics, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom A. G. Buckley, SUPA—School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom S. I. Buda, National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest, Romania I. A. Budagov, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, JINR Dubna, Dubna, Russia B. Budick, Department of Physics, New York University, New York, NY, United States of America V. Büscher, Institut für Physik, Universität Mainz, Mainz, Germany L. Bugge, Department of Physics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway D. Buira-Clark, Department of Physics, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom O. Bulekov, Moscow Engineering and Physics Institute (MEPhI), Moscow, Russia M. Bunse, Institut für Experimentelle Physik IV, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany T. Buran, Department of Physics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway H. Burckhart, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland S. Burdin, Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom T. Burgess, Department for Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway S. Burke, Particle Physics Department, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom E. Busato, Laboratoire de Physique Corpusculaire, Clermont Université and Université Blaise Pascal and CNRS/IN2P3, Aubiere Cedex, France P. Bussey, SUPA—School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom C. P. Buszello, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Uppsala, Uppsala, Sweden F. Butin, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland B. Butler, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Stanford, CA, United States of America J. M. Butler, Department of Physics, Boston University, Boston, MA, United States of America C. M. Buttar, SUPA—School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom J. M. Butterworth, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University College London, London, United Kingdom W. Buttinger, Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom S. Cabrera Urbán, Instituto de Física Corpuscular (IFIC) and Departamento de Física Atómica, Molecular y Nuclear and Departamento de Ingenierá Electrónica and Instituto de Microelectrónica de Barcelona (IMB-CNM), University of Valencia and CSIC, Valencia, Spain D. Caforio, INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy O. Cakir, Department of Physics, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey P. Calafiura, Physics Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and University of California, Berkeley, CA, United States of America G. Calderini, Laboratoire de Physique Nucléaire et de Hautes Energies, UPMC and Université Paris-Diderot and CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France P. Calfayan, Fakultät für Physik, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, München, Germany R. Calkins, Department of Physics, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL, United States of America L. P. Caloba, Universidade Federal do Rio De Janeiro COPPE/EE/IF, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil R. Caloi, INFN Sezione di Roma I, Roma, Italy D. Calvet, Laboratoire de Physique Corpusculaire, Clermont Université and Université Blaise Pascal and CNRS/IN2P3, Aubiere Cedex, France S. Calvet, Laboratoire de Physique Corpusculaire, Clermont Université and Université Blaise Pascal and CNRS/IN2P3, Aubiere Cedex, France R. Camacho Toro, Laboratoire de Physique Corpusculaire, Clermont Université and Université Blaise Pascal and CNRS/IN2P3, Aubiere Cedex, France P. Camarri, INFN Sezione di Roma Tor Vergata, Roma, Italy M. Cambiaghi, INFN Sezione di Pavia, Pavia, Italy D. Cameron, Department of Physics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway S. Campana, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland M. Campanelli, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University College London, London, United Kingdom V. Canale, INFN Sezione di Napoli, Napoli, Italy F. Canelli, Enrico Fermi Institute, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States of America A. Canepa, TRIUMF, Vancouver, BC, Canada J. Cantero, Departamento de Fisica Teorica C-15, Universidad Autonoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain L. Capasso, INFN Sezione di Napoli, Napoli, Italy M. D. M. Capeans Garrido, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland I. Caprini, National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest, Romania M. Caprini, National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest, Romania D. Capriotti, Max-Planck-Institut für Physik (Werner-Heisenberg-Institut), München, Germany M. Capua, INFN Gruppo Collegato di Cosenza, Arcavata di Rende, Italy R. Caputo, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, United States of America R. Cardarelli, INFN Sezione di Roma Tor Vergata, Roma, Italy T. Carli, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland G. Carlino, INFN Sezione di Napoli, Napoli, Italy L. Carminati, INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy B. Caron, TRIUMF, Vancouver, BC, Canada S. Caron, Fakultät für Mathematik und Physik, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, Freiburg i.Br., Germany G. D. Carrillo Montoya, Department of Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, United States of America A. A. Carter, Department of Physics, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom J. R. Carter, Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom J. Carvalho, Laboratorio de Instrumentacao e Fisica Experimental de Particulas—LIP, Lisboa, Portugal D. Casadei, Department of Physics, New York University, New York, NY, United States of America M. P. Casado, Institut de Física d’Altes Energies and Departament de Física de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona and ICREA, Barcelona, Spain M. Cascella, INFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy C. Caso, INFN Sezione di Genova, Genova, Italy A. M. Castaneda Hernandez, Department of Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, United States of America E. Castaneda-Miranda, Department of Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, United States of America V. Castillo Gimenez, Instituto de Física Corpuscular (IFIC) and Departamento de Física Atómica, Molecular y Nuclear and Departamento de Ingenierá Electrónica and Instituto de Microelectrónica de Barcelona (IMB-CNM), University of Valencia and CSIC, Valencia, Spain N. F. Castro, Laboratorio de Instrumentacao e Fisica Experimental de Particulas—LIP, Lisboa, Portugal G. Cataldi, INFN Sezione di Lecce, Lecce, Italy F. Cataneo, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland A. Catinaccio, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland J. R. Catmore, Physics Department, Lancaster University, Lancaster, United Kingdom A. Cattai, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland G. Cattani, INFN Sezione di Roma Tor Vergata, Roma, Italy S. Caughron, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, United States of America D. Cauz, INFN Gruppo Collegato di Udine, Udine, Italy P. Cavalleri, Laboratoire de Physique Nucléaire et de Hautes Energies, UPMC and Université Paris-Diderot and CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France D. Cavalli, INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy M. Cavalli-Sforza, Institut de Física d’Altes Energies and Departament de Física de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona and ICREA, Barcelona, Spain V. Cavasinni, INFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy F. Ceradini, INFN Sezione di Roma Tre, Roma, Italy A. S. Cerqueira, Universidade Federal do Rio De Janeiro COPPE/EE/IF, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil A. Cerri, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland L. Cerrito, Department of Physics, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom F. Cerutti, INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy S. A. Cetin, Division of Physics, Dogus University, Istanbul, Turkey F. Cevenini, INFN Sezione di Napoli, Napoli, Italy A. Chafaq, Faculté des Sciences Ain Chock, Réseau Universitaire de Physique des Hautes Energies—Université Hassan II, Casablanca, Morocco D. Chakraborty, Department of Physics, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL, United States of America K. Chan, Department of Physics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada B. Chapleau, Department of Physics, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada J. D. Chapman, Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom J. W. Chapman, Department of Physics, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States of America E. Chareyre, Laboratoire de Physique Nucléaire et de Hautes Energies, UPMC and Université Paris-Diderot and CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France D. G. Charlton, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom V. Chavda, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom C. A. Chavez Barajas, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland S. Cheatham, Department of Physics, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada S. Chekanov, High Energy Physics Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL, United States of America S. V. Chekulaev, TRIUMF, Vancouver, BC, Canada G. A. Chelkov, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, JINR Dubna, Dubna, Russia M. A. Chelstowska, Institute for Mathematics, Astrophysics and Particle Physics, Radboud University Nijmegen/Nikhef, Nijmegen, Netherlands C. Chen, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United States of America H. Chen, Physics Department, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY, United States of America S. Chen, Department of Physics, Nanjing University, Jiangsu, China T. Chen, Department of Physics, Nanjing University, Jiangsu, China X. Chen, Department of Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, United States of America S. Cheng, Institute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China A. Cheplakov, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, JINR Dubna, Dubna, Russia V. F. Chepurnov, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, JINR Dubna, Dubna, Russia R. Cherkaoui El Moursli, Faculté des Sciences, Université Mohammed V, Rabat, Morocco V. Chernyatin, Physics Department, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY, United States of America E. Cheu, Department of Physics, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, United States of America S. L. Cheung, Department of Physics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada L. Chevalier, DSM/IRFU (Institut de Recherches sur les Lois Fondamentales de l’Univers), CEA Saclay (Commissariat a l’Energie Atomique), Gif-sur-Yvette, France G. Chiefari, INFN Sezione di Napoli, Napoli, Italy L. Chikovani, E. Andronikashvili Institute of Physics, Georgian Academy of Sciences, Tbilisi, Georgia J. T. Childers, Kirchhoff-Institut für Physik, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany A. Chilingarov, Physics Department, Lancaster University, Lancaster, United Kingdom G. Chiodini, INFN Sezione di Lecce, Lecce, Italy M. V. Chizhov, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, JINR Dubna, Dubna, Russia G. Choudalakis, Enrico Fermi Institute, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States of America S. Chouridou, Santa Cruz Institute for Particle Physics, University of California Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA, United States of America I. A. Christidi, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University College London, London, United Kingdom A. Christov, Fakultät für Mathematik und Physik, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, Freiburg i.Br., Germany D. Chromek-Burckhart, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland M. L. Chu, Institute of Physics, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan J. Chudoba, Institute of Physics, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Praha, Czech Republic G. Ciapetti, INFN Sezione di Roma I, Roma, Italy K. Ciba, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, AGH-University of Science and Technology, Krakow, Poland A. K. Ciftci, Department of Physics, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey R. Ciftci, Department of Physics, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey D. Cinca, Laboratoire de Physique Corpusculaire, Clermont Université and Université Blaise Pascal and CNRS/IN2P3, Aubiere Cedex, France V. Cindro, Department of Physics, Jožef Stefan Institute and University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia M. D. Ciobotaru, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California Irvine, Irvine, CA, United States of America C. Ciocca, INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy A. Ciocio, Physics Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and University of California, Berkeley, CA, United States of America M. Cirilli, Department of Physics, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States of America M. Ciubancan, National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest, Romania A. Clark, Section de Physique, Université de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland P. J. Clark, SUPA—School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom W. Cleland, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States of America J. C. Clemens, CPPM, Aix-Marseille Université and CNRS/IN2P3, Marseille, France B. Clement, Laboratoire de Physique Subatomique et de Cosmologie, Université Joseph Fourier and CNRS/IN2P3 and Institut National Polytechnique de Grenoble, Grenoble, France C. Clement, Department of Physics, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden R. W. Clifft, Particle Physics Department, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom Y. Coadou, CPPM, Aix-Marseille Université and CNRS/IN2P3, Marseille, France M. Cobal, INFN Gruppo Collegato di Udine, Udine, Italy A. Coccaro, INFN Sezione di Genova, Genova, Italy J. Cochran, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United States of America P. Coe, Department of Physics, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom J. G. Cogan, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Stanford, CA, United States of America J. Coggeshall, Department of Physics, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL, United States of America E. Cogneras, Domaine scientifique de la Doua, Centre de Calcul CNRS/IN2P3, Villeurbanne Cedex, France C. D. Cojocaru, Department of Physics, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON, Canada J. Colas, LAPP, CNRS/IN2P3 and Université de Savoie, Annecy-le-Vieux, France A. P. Colijn, Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics and University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands C. Collard, LAL, Univ. Paris-Sud and CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France N. J. Collins, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom C. Collins-Tooth, SUPA—School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom J. Collot, Laboratoire de Physique Subatomique et de Cosmologie, Université Joseph Fourier and CNRS/IN2P3 and Institut National Polytechnique de Grenoble, Grenoble, France G. Colon, Department of Physics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, United States of America P. Conde Muiño, Laboratorio de Instrumentacao e Fisica Experimental de Particulas—LIP, Lisboa, Portugal E. Coniavitis, Department of Physics, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom M. C. Conidi, Institut de Física d’Altes Energies and Departament de Física de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona and ICREA, Barcelona, Spain M. Consonni, Institute for Mathematics, Astrophysics and Particle Physics, Radboud University Nijmegen/Nikhef, Nijmegen, Netherlands V. Consorti, Fakultät für Mathematik und Physik, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, Freiburg i.Br., Germany S. Constantinescu, National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest, Romania C. Conta, INFN Sezione di Pavia, Pavia, Italy F. Conventi, INFN Sezione di Napoli, Napoli, Italy J. Cook, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland M. Cooke, Physics Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and University of California, Berkeley, CA, United States of America B. D. Cooper, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University College London, London, United Kingdom A. M. Cooper-Sarkar, Department of Physics, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom N. J. Cooper-Smith, Department of Physics, Royal Holloway University of London, Surrey, United Kingdom K. Copic, Nevis Laboratory, Columbia University, Irvington, NY, United States of America T. Cornelissen, INFN Sezione di Genova, Genova, Italy M. Corradi, INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy F. Corriveau, Department of Physics, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada A. Cortes-Gonzalez, Department of Physics, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL, United States of America G. Cortiana, Max-Planck-Institut für Physik (Werner-Heisenberg-Institut), München, Germany G. Costa, INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy M. J. Costa, Instituto de Física Corpuscular (IFIC) and Departamento de Física Atómica, Molecular y Nuclear and Departamento de Ingenierá Electrónica and Instituto de Microelectrónica de Barcelona (IMB-CNM), University of Valencia and CSIC, Valencia, Spain D. Costanzo, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom T. Costin, Enrico Fermi Institute, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States of America D. Côté, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland L. Courneyea, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada G. Cowan, Department of Physics, Royal Holloway University of London, Surrey, United Kingdom C. Cowden, Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom B. E. Cox, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom K. Cranmer, Department of Physics, New York University, New York, NY, United States of America F. Crescioli, INFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy M. Cristinziani, Physikalisches Institut, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany G. Crosetti, INFN Gruppo Collegato di Cosenza, Arcavata di Rende, Italy R. Crupi, INFN Sezione di Lecce, Lecce, Italy S. Crépé-Renaudin, Laboratoire de Physique Subatomique et de Cosmologie, Université Joseph Fourier and CNRS/IN2P3 and Institut National Polytechnique de Grenoble, Grenoble, France C.-M. Cuciuc, National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest, Romania C. Cuenca Almenar, Department of Physics, Yale University, New Haven, CT, United States of America T. Cuhadar Donszelmann, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom M. Curatolo, INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy C. J. Curtis, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom P. Cwetanski, Department of Physics, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, United States of America H. Czirr, Fachbereich Physik, Universität Siegen, Siegen, Germany Z. Czyczula, Department of Physics, Yale University, New Haven, CT, United States of America S. D’Auria, SUPA—School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom M. D’Onofrio, Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom A. D’Orazio, INFN Sezione di Roma I, Roma, Italy P. V. M. Da Silva, Universidade Federal do Rio De Janeiro COPPE/EE/IF, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil C. Da Via, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom W. Dabrowski, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, AGH-University of Science and Technology, Krakow, Poland T. Dai, Department of Physics, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States of America C. Dallapiccola, Department of Physics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, United States of America M. Dam, Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Kobenhavn, Denmark M. Dameri, INFN Sezione di Genova, Genova, Italy D. S. Damiani, Santa Cruz Institute for Particle Physics, University of California Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA, United States of America H. O. Danielsson, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland D. Dannheim, Max-Planck-Institut für Physik (Werner-Heisenberg-Institut), München, Germany V. Dao, Section de Physique, Université de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland G. Darbo, INFN Sezione di Genova, Genova, Italy G. L. Darlea, University Politehnica Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania C. Daum, Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics and University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands J. P. Dauvergne, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland W. Davey, School of Physics, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia T. Davidek, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University in Prague, Praha, Czech Republic N. Davidson, School of Physics, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia R. Davidson, Physics Department, Lancaster University, Lancaster, United Kingdom E. Davies, Department of Physics, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom M. Davies, Group of Particle Physics, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada A. R. Davison, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University College London, London, United Kingdom Y. Davygora, Kirchhoff-Institut für Physik, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany E. Dawe, Department of Physics, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada I. Dawson, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom J. W. Dawson, High Energy Physics Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL, United States of America R. K. Daya, Physics Department, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX, United States of America K. De, Department of Physics, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, United States of America R. de Asmundis, INFN Sezione di Napoli, Napoli, Italy S. De Castro, INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy P. E. De Castro Faria Salgado, Physics Department, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY, United States of America S. De Cecco, Laboratoire de Physique Nucléaire et de Hautes Energies, UPMC and Université Paris-Diderot and CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France J. de Graat, Fakultät für Physik, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, München, Germany N. De Groot, Institute for Mathematics, Astrophysics and Particle Physics, Radboud University Nijmegen/Nikhef, Nijmegen, Netherlands P. de Jong, Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics and University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands C. De La Taille, LAL, Univ. Paris-Sud and CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France H. De la Torre, Departamento de Fisica Teorica C-15, Universidad Autonoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain B. De Lotto, INFN Gruppo Collegato di Udine, Udine, Italy L. De Mora, Physics Department, Lancaster University, Lancaster, United Kingdom L. De Nooij, Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics and University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands D. De Pedis, INFN Sezione di Roma I, Roma, Italy A. De Salvo, INFN Sezione di Roma I, Roma, Italy U. De Sanctis, INFN Gruppo Collegato di Udine, Udine, Italy A. De Santo, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom J. B. De Vivie De Regie, LAL, Univ. Paris-Sud and CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France S. Dean, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University College London, London, United Kingdom R. Debbe, Physics Department, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY, United States of America D. V. Dedovich, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, JINR Dubna, Dubna, Russia J. Degenhardt, Department of Physics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States of America M. Dehchar, Department of Physics, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom C. Del Papa, INFN Gruppo Collegato di Udine, Udine, Italy J. Del Peso, Departamento de Fisica Teorica C-15, Universidad Autonoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain T. Del Prete, INFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy M. Deliyergiyev, Department of Physics, Jožef Stefan Institute and University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia A. Dell’Acqua, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland L. Dell’Asta, INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy M. Della Pietra, INFN Sezione di Napoli, Napoli, Italy D. della Volpe, INFN Sezione di Napoli, Napoli, Italy M. Delmastro, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland P. Delpierre, CPPM, Aix-Marseille Université and CNRS/IN2P3, Marseille, France N. Delruelle, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland P. A. Delsart, Laboratoire de Physique Subatomique et de Cosmologie, Université Joseph Fourier and CNRS/IN2P3 and Institut National Polytechnique de Grenoble, Grenoble, France C. Deluca, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, United States of America S. Demers, Department of Physics, Yale University, New Haven, CT, United States of America M. Demichev, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, JINR Dubna, Dubna, Russia B. Demirkoz, Institut de Física d’Altes Energies and Departament de Física de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona and ICREA, Barcelona, Spain J. Deng, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California Irvine, Irvine, CA, United States of America S. P. Denisov, State Research Center Institute for High Energy Physics, Protvino, Russia D. Derendarz, The Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Krakow, Poland J. E. Derkaoui, Faculté des Sciences, Université Mohamed Premier and LPTPM, Oujda, Morocco F. Derue, Laboratoire de Physique Nucléaire et de Hautes Energies, UPMC and Université Paris-Diderot and CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France P. Dervan, Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom K. Desch, Physikalisches Institut, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany E. Devetak, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, United States of America P. O. Deviveiros, Department of Physics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada A. Dewhurst, Particle Physics Department, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom B. DeWilde, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, United States of America S. Dhaliwal, Department of Physics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada R. Dhullipudi, Physics Department, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY, United States of America A. Di Ciaccio, INFN Sezione di Roma Tor Vergata, Roma, Italy L. Di Ciaccio, LAPP, CNRS/IN2P3 and Université de Savoie, Annecy-le-Vieux, France A. Di Girolamo, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland B. Di Girolamo, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland S. Di Luise, INFN Sezione di Roma Tre, Roma, Italy A. Di Mattia, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, United States of America B. Di Micco, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland R. Di Nardo, INFN Sezione di Roma Tor Vergata, Roma, Italy A. Di Simone, INFN Sezione di Roma Tor Vergata, Roma, Italy R. Di Sipio, INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy M. A. Diaz, Departamento de Fisica, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile F. Diblen, Department of Physics Engineering, Gaziantep University, Gaziantep, Turkey E. B. Diehl, Department of Physics, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States of America J. Dietrich, DESY, Hamburg and Zeuthen, Germany T. A. Dietzsch, Kirchhoff-Institut für Physik, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany S. Diglio, LAL, Univ. Paris-Sud and CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France K. Dindar Yagci, Physics Department, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX, United States of America J. Dingfelder, Physikalisches Institut, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany C. Dionisi, INFN Sezione di Roma I, Roma, Italy P. Dita, National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest, Romania S. Dita, National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest, Romania F. Dittus, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland F. Djama, CPPM, Aix-Marseille Université and CNRS/IN2P3, Marseille, France T. Djobava, High Energy Physics Institute, Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi, Georgia M. A. B. do Vale, Universidade Federal do Rio De Janeiro COPPE/EE/IF, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil A. Do Valle Wemans, Laboratorio de Instrumentacao e Fisica Experimental de Particulas—LIP, Lisboa, Portugal T. K. O. Doan, LAPP, CNRS/IN2P3 and Université de Savoie, Annecy-le-Vieux, France M. Dobbs, Department of Physics, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada R. Dobinson, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland D. Dobos, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland E. Dobson, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland M. Dobson, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California Irvine, Irvine, CA, United States of America J. Dodd, Nevis Laboratory, Columbia University, Irvington, NY, United States of America C. Doglioni, Department of Physics, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom T. Doherty, SUPA—School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom Y. Doi, KEK, High Energy Accelerator Research Organization, Tsukuba, Japan J. Dolejsi, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University in Prague, Praha, Czech Republic I. Dolenc, Department of Physic

Description:    In this paper, we consider F ( R )= R + f ( R ) theory instead of Einstein gravity with conformal anomaly and look for its analytical solutions. Depending on the free parameters, one may obtain both uncharged and charged solutions for some classes of F ( R ) models. Calculation of Kretschmann scalar shows that there is a singularity located at r =0. The geometry of uncharged (charged) solution corresponds to the Schwarzschild (Reissner–Nordström) singularity. Further, we discuss the viability of our models in detail. We show that these models can be stable, depending on their parameters and in different epochs of the universe. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-9 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1823-y Authors S. H. Hendi, Physics Department, College of Sciences, Yasouj University, Yasouj, 75914 Iran D. Momeni, Department of Physics, Faculty of Sciences, Tarbiat Moa’llem University, Tehran, Iran Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 71 Journal Issue Volume 71, Number 12

Description:    The motion of a massive test particle in a Schwarzschild spacetime surrounded by a perfect fluid with equation of state p 0 = wρ 0 is investigated. Deviations from geodesic motion are analyzed as a function of the parameter w , ranging from w =1, which corresponds to the case of massive free scalar fields, down into the so-called “phantom” energy, with w 〈−1. It is found that the interaction with the fluid leads to capture (escape) of the particle trajectory in the case 1+ w 〉0 (〈0), respectively. Based on this result, it is argued that inspection of the trajectories of test particles in the vicinity of a Schwarzschild black hole with matter around may offer a new means of gaining insights into the nature of cosmic matter. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-4 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1913-5 Authors Donato Bini, CNR, Istituto per le Applicazioni del Calcolo “M. Picone”, 00185 Rome, Italy Andrea Geralico, ICRA, University of Rome “La Sapienza”, 00185 Rome, Italy Sauro Succi, CNR, Istituto per le Applicazioni del Calcolo “M. Picone”, 00185 Rome, Italy Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 72 Journal Issue Volume 72, Number 3

Description:    A possibility of KLOE-2 experiment to measure the width and the π 0 γγ ∗ form factor F ( Q 2 ) at low invariant masses of the virtual photon in the space-like region is considered. This measurement is an important test of the strong interaction dynamics at low energies. The feasibility is estimated on the basis of a Monte-Carlo simulation. The expected accuracy for is at a per cent level, which is better than the current experimental world average and theory. The form factor will be measured for the first time at Q 2 ≤0.1 GeV 2 in the space-like region. The impact of these measurements on the accuracy of the pion-exchange contribution to the hadronic light-by-light scattering part of the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon is also discussed. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-8 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1917-1 Authors D. Babusci, INFN, Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, 00044 Italy H. Czyż, Institute of Physics, University of Silesia, Katowice, 40007 Poland F. Gonnella, Dipartimento di Fisica, Università “Tor Vergata”, Roma, 00133 Italy S. Ivashyn, A.I. Akhiezer Institute for Theoretical Physics, NSC “Kharkiv Institute for Physics and Technology”, Kharkiv, 61108 Ukraine M. Mascolo, Dipartimento di Fisica, Università “Tor Vergata”, Roma, 00133 Italy R. Messi, Dipartimento di Fisica, Università “Tor Vergata”, Roma, 00133 Italy D. Moricciani, INFN, Sezione Roma “Tor Vergata”, Roma, 00133 Italy A. Nyffeler, Regional Centre for Accelerator-based Particle Physics, Harish-Chandra Research Institute, Chhatnag Road, Jhusi, Allahabad 211 019, India G. Venanzoni, INFN, Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, 00044 Italy KLOE-2 Collaboration Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 72 Journal Issue Volume 72, Number 3

Description:    We evaluate all two-body decay modes of the gluino, in the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model with complex parameters (cMSSM). This constitutes an important step in the cascade decays of SUSY particles at the LHC. The evaluation is based on a full one-loop calculation of all two-body decay channels, also including hard QED and QCD radiation. The dependence of the gluino decay to a scalar quark and a quark on the relevant cMSSM parameters is analyzed numerically. We find sizable contributions to the decay widths and branching ratios. They are, roughly of , but can go up to ±10% or higher, where the pure SUSY QCD contributions alone can give an insufficient approximation to the full one-loop result. Therefore the full corrections are important for the correct interpretation of gluino decays at the LHC. The results will be implemented into the Fortran code FeynHiggs . Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-28 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1905-5 Authors S. Heinemeyer, Instituto de Física de Cantabria (CSIC-UC), Santander, Spain C. Schappacher, Institut für Theoretische Physik, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, 76128 Karlsruhe, Germany Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 72 Journal Issue Volume 72, Number 3

Description:    Deep-inelastic positron-proton scattering events at low photon virtuality, Q 2 , with a forward jet, produced at small angles with respect to the proton beam, are measured with the H1 detector at HERA. A subsample of events with an additional jet in the central region is also studied. For both samples, differential cross sections and normalised distributions are measured as a function of the azimuthal angle difference, Δ ϕ , between the forward jet and the scattered positron in bins of the rapidity distance, Y , between them. The data are compared to predictions of Monte Carlo generators based on different evolution approaches as well as to next-to-leading order calculations in order to test the sensitivity to QCD evolution mechanisms. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Experimental Physics Pages 1-12 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1910-8 Authors The H1 Collaboration F. D. Aaron, National Institute for Physics and Nuclear Engineering (NIPNE), Bucharest, Romania C. Alexa, National Institute for Physics and Nuclear Engineering (NIPNE), Bucharest, Romania V. Andreev, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia S. Backovic, Faculty of Science, University of Montenegro, Podgorica, Montenegro A. Baghdasaryan, Yerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, Armenia S. Baghdasaryan, Yerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, Armenia E. Barrelet, LPNHE, Université Pierre et Marie Curie Paris 6, Université Denis Diderot Paris 7, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France W. Bartel, DESY, Hamburg, Germany K. Begzsuren, Institute of Physics and Technology of the Mongolian Academy of Sciences, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia A. Belousov, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia P. Belov, DESY, Hamburg, Germany J. C. Bizot, LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France V. Boudry, LLR, Ecole Polytechnique, CNRS/IN2P3, Palaiseau, France I. Bozovic-Jelisavcic, Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences, University of Belgrade, 1100 Belgrade, Serbia J. Bracinik, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK G. Brandt, DESY, Hamburg, Germany M. Brinkmann, DESY, Hamburg, Germany V. Brisson, LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France D. Britzger, DESY, Hamburg, Germany D. Bruncko, Institute of Experimental Physics, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Košice, Slovak Republic A. Bunyatyan, Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik, Heidelberg, Germany G. Buschhorn, Max-Planck-Institut für Physik, München, Germany L. Bystritskaya, Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia A. J. Campbell, DESY, Hamburg, Germany K. B. Cantun Avila, Departamento de Fisica Aplicada, CINVESTAV, Mérida, Yucatán, Mexico F. Ceccopieri, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels and Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium K. Cerny, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Praha, Czech Republic V. Cerny, Institute of Experimental Physics, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Košice, Slovak Republic V. Chekelian, Max-Planck-Institut für Physik, München, Germany J. G. Contreras, Departamento de Fisica Aplicada, CINVESTAV, Mérida, Yucatán, Mexico J. A. Coughlan, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Chilton, Didcot, UK J. Cvach, Institute of Physics, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Praha, Czech Republic J. B. Dainton, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK K. Daum, Fachbereich C, Universität Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany B. Delcourt, LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France J. Delvax, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels and Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium E. A. De Wolf, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels and Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium C. Diaconu, CPPM, Aix-Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, 13288 Marseille, France M. Dobre, Institut für Experimentalphysik, Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany V. Dodonov, Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik, Heidelberg, Germany A. Dossanov, Max-Planck-Institut für Physik, München, Germany A. Dubak, Faculty of Science, University of Montenegro, Podgorica, Montenegro G. Eckerlin, DESY, Hamburg, Germany S. Egli, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland A. Eliseev, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia E. Elsen, DESY, Hamburg, Germany L. Favart, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels and Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium A. Fedotov, Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia R. Felst, DESY, Hamburg, Germany J. Feltesse, CEA, DSM/Irfu, CE-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France J. Ferencei, Institute of Experimental Physics, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Košice, Slovak Republic D.-J. Fischer, DESY, Hamburg, Germany M. Fleischer, DESY, Hamburg, Germany A. Fomenko, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia E. Gabathuler, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK J. Gayler, DESY, Hamburg, Germany S. Ghazaryan, DESY, Hamburg, Germany A. Glazov, DESY, Hamburg, Germany L. Goerlich, Institute for Nuclear Physics, Cracow, Poland N. Gogitidze, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia M. Gouzevitch, DESY, Hamburg, Germany C. Grab, Institut für Teilchenphysik, ETH, Zürich, Switzerland A. Grebenyuk, DESY, Hamburg, Germany T. Greenshaw, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK B. R. Grell, DESY, Hamburg, Germany G. Grindhammer, Max-Planck-Institut für Physik, München, Germany S. Habib, DESY, Hamburg, Germany D. Haidt, DESY, Hamburg, Germany C. Helebrant, DESY, Hamburg, Germany R. C. W. Henderson, Department of Physics, University of Lancaster, Lancaster, UK E. Hennekemper, Kirchhoff-Institut für Physik, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany H. Henschel, DESY, Zeuthen, Germany M. Herbst, Kirchhoff-Institut für Physik, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany G. Herrera, Departamento de Fisica, CINVESTAV IPN, México City, Mexico M. Hildebrandt, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland K. H. Hiller, DESY, Zeuthen, Germany D. Hoffmann, CPPM, Aix-Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, 13288 Marseille, France R. Horisberger, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland T. Hreus, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels and Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium F. Huber, Physikalisches Institut, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany M. Jacquet, LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France X. Janssen, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels and Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium L. Jönsson, Physics Department, University of Lund, Lund, Sweden H. Jung, DESY, Hamburg, Germany M. Kapichine, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia I. R. Kenyon, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK C. Kiesling, Max-Planck-Institut für Physik, München, Germany M. Klein, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK C. Kleinwort, DESY, Hamburg, Germany T. Kluge, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK R. Kogler, DESY, Hamburg, Germany P. Kostka, DESY, Zeuthen, Germany M. Kraemer, DESY, Hamburg, Germany J. Kretzschmar, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK K. Krüger, Kirchhoff-Institut für Physik, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany M. P. J. Landon, Queen Mary and Westfield College, London, UK W. Lange, DESY, Zeuthen, Germany G. Laštovička-Medin, Faculty of Science, University of Montenegro, Podgorica, Montenegro P. Laycock, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK A. Lebedev, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia V. Lendermann, Kirchhoff-Institut für Physik, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany S. Levonian, DESY, Hamburg, Germany K. Lipka, DESY, Hamburg, Germany B. List, DESY, Hamburg, Germany J. List, DESY, Hamburg, Germany R. Lopez-Fernandez, Departamento de Fisica, CINVESTAV IPN, México City, Mexico V. Lubimov, Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia A. Makankine, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia E. Malinovski, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia P. Marage, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels and Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium H.-U. Martyn, I. Physikalisches Institut der RWTH, Aachen, Germany S. J. Maxfield, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK A. Mehta, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK A. B. Meyer, DESY, Hamburg, Germany H. Meyer, Fachbereich C, Universität Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany J. Meyer, DESY, Hamburg, Germany S. Mikocki, Institute for Nuclear Physics, Cracow, Poland I. Milcewicz-Mika, Institute for Nuclear Physics, Cracow, Poland F. Moreau, LLR, Ecole Polytechnique, CNRS/IN2P3, Palaiseau, France A. Morozov, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia J. V. Morris, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Chilton, Didcot, UK M. Mudrinic, Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences, University of Belgrade, 1100 Belgrade, Serbia K. Müller, Physik-Institut der Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland Th. Naumann, DESY, Zeuthen, Germany P. R. Newman, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK C. Niebuhr, DESY, Hamburg, Germany D. Nikitin, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia G. Nowak, Institute for Nuclear Physics, Cracow, Poland K. Nowak, DESY, Hamburg, Germany J. E. Olsson, DESY, Hamburg, Germany D. Ozerov, Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia P. Pahl, DESY, Hamburg, Germany V. Palichik, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia I. Panagoulias, DESY, Hamburg, Germany M. Pandurovic, Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences, University of Belgrade, 1100 Belgrade, Serbia Th. Papadopoulou, DESY, Hamburg, Germany C. Pascaud, LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France G. D. Patel, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK E. Perez, CEA, DSM/Irfu, CE-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France A. Petrukhin, DESY, Hamburg, Germany I. Picuric, Faculty of Science, University of Montenegro, Podgorica, Montenegro S. Piec, DESY, Hamburg, Germany H. Pirumov, Physikalisches Institut, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany D. Pitzl, DESY, Hamburg, Germany R. Plačakytė, Institut für Experimentalphysik, Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany B. Pokorny, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Praha, Czech Republic R. Polifka, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Praha, Czech Republic B. Povh, Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik, Heidelberg, Germany V. Radescu, Physikalisches Institut, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany N. Raicevic, Faculty of Science, University of Montenegro, Podgorica, Montenegro T. Ravdandorj, Institute of Physics and Technology of the Mongolian Academy of Sciences, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia P. Reimer, Institute of Physics, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Praha, Czech Republic E. Rizvi, Queen Mary and Westfield College, London, UK P. Robmann, Physik-Institut der Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland R. Roosen, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels and Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium A. Rostovtsev, Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia M. Rotaru, National Institute for Physics and Nuclear Engineering (NIPNE), Bucharest, Romania J. E. Ruiz Tabasco, Departamento de Fisica Aplicada, CINVESTAV, Mérida, Yucatán, Mexico S. Rusakov, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia D. Šálek, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Praha, Czech Republic D. P. C. Sankey, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Chilton, Didcot, UK M. Sauter, Physikalisches Institut, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany E. Sauvan, CPPM, Aix-Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, 13288 Marseille, France S. Schmitt, DESY, Hamburg, Germany L. Schoeffel, CEA, DSM/Irfu, CE-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France A. Schöning, Physikalisches Institut, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany H.-C. Schultz-Coulon, Kirchhoff-Institut für Physik, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany F. Sefkow, DESY, Hamburg, Germany L. N. Shtarkov, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia S. Shushkevich, DESY, Hamburg, Germany T. Sloan, Department of Physics, University of Lancaster, Lancaster, UK I. Smiljanic, Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences, University of Belgrade, 1100 Belgrade, Serbia Y. Soloviev, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia P. Sopicki, Institute for Nuclear Physics, Cracow, Poland D. South, DESY, Hamburg, Germany V. Spaskov, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia A. Specka, LLR, Ecole Polytechnique, CNRS/IN2P3, Palaiseau, France Z. Staykova, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels and Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium M. Steder, DESY, Hamburg, Germany B. Stella, Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Roma Tre and INFN Roma 3, Roma, Italy G. Stoicea, National Institute for Physics and Nuclear Engineering (NIPNE), Bucharest, Romania U. Straumann, Physik-Institut der Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland T. Sykora, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Praha, Czech Republic P. D. Thompson, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK T. H. Tran, LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France D. Traynor, Queen Mary and Westfield College, London, UK P. Truöl, Physik-Institut der Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland I. Tsakov, Institute for Nuclear Research and Nuclear Energy, Sofia, Bulgaria B. Tseepeldorj, Institute of Physics and Technology of the Mongolian Academy of Sciences, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia J. Turnau, Institute for Nuclear Physics, Cracow, Poland A. Valkárová, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Praha, Czech Republic C. Vallée, CPPM, Aix-Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, 13288 Marseille, France P. Van Mechelen, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels and Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium Y. Vazdik, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia D. Wegener, Institut für Physik, TU Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany E. Wünsch, DESY, Hamburg, Germany J. Žáček, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Praha, Czech Republic J. Zálešák, Institute of Physics, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Praha, Czech Republic Z. Zhang, LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France A. Zhokin, Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia H. Zohrabyan, Yerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, Armenia F. Zomer, LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 72 Journal Issue Volume 72, Number 3

Description:    We analyze the effect of higher derivative corrections to the near horizon geometry of the extremal vanishing horizon (EVH) black hole solutions in four dimensions. We restrict ourselves to a Gauss–Bonnet correction with a dilation dependent coupling in an Einstein–Maxwell-dilaton theory. This action may represent the effective action as it arises in tree level heterotic string theory compactified to four dimensions or the K3 compactification of type II string theory. We show that EVH black holes, in this theory, develop an AdS 3 throat in their near horizon geometry. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-6 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1911-7 Authors Hossein Yavartanoo, Department of Physics, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, 130-701 Korea Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 72 Journal Issue Volume 72, Number 3

Description:    We show how the measurement of appropriately constructed particle-energy/momentum correlations allows access to the bulk viscosity of strongly interacting hadron matter in heavy-ion collisions. This measurement can be performed by the LHC and RHIC experiments in events with high-particle multiplicity, following up on existing estimates of the shear viscosity based on elliptic flow. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-8 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1873-9 Authors Antonio Dobado, Departamento de Física Teórica I, Universidad Complutense, 28040 Madrid, Spain Felipe J. Llanes-Estrada, Departamento de Física Teórica I, Universidad Complutense, 28040 Madrid, Spain Juan M. Torres-Rincon, Departamento de Física Teórica I, Universidad Complutense, 28040 Madrid, Spain Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 72 Journal Issue Volume 72, Number 2

Description:    Modified gravity scenarios where a change of regime appears at acceleration scales a 〈 a 0 have been proposed. Since for 1 M ⊙ systems the acceleration drops below a 0 at scales of around 7000 AU, a statistical survey of wide binaries with relative velocities and separations reaching 10 4 AU and beyond should prove useful to the above debate. We apply the proposed test to the best currently available data. Results show a constant upper limit to the relative velocities in wide binaries which is independent of separation for over three orders of magnitude, in analogy with galactic flat rotation curves in the same a 〈 a 0 acceleration regime. Our results are suggestive of a breakdown of Kepler’s third law beyond a ≈ a 0 scales, in accordance with generic predictions of modified gravity theories designed not to require any dark matter at galactic scales and beyond. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-8 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1884-6 Authors X. Hernandez, Instituto de Astronomía, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, AP 70-264, México, Distrito Federal 04510, México M. A. Jiménez, Instituto de Astronomía, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, AP 70-264, México, Distrito Federal 04510, México C. Allen, Instituto de Astronomía, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, AP 70-264, México, Distrito Federal 04510, México Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 72 Journal Issue Volume 72, Number 2

Description:    We provide a systematic study of charmless B s → PP , PV , VV decays ( P and V denote pseudoscalar and vector mesons, respectively) based on an approximate six-quark operator effective Hamiltonian from QCD. The calculation of the relevant hard-scattering kernels is carried out, the resulting transition form factors are consistent with the results of QCD sum-rule calculations. By taking into account important classes of power corrections involving “chirally enhanced” terms and the vertex corrections as well as weak annihilation contributions with non-trivial strong phase, we present predictions for the branching ratios and CP asymmetries of B s decays into PP, PV and VV final states, and also for the corresponding polarization observables in VV final states. It is found that the weak annihilation contributions with non-trivial strong phase have remarkable effects on the observables in the color-suppressed and penguin-dominated decay modes. In addition, we discuss the SU(3) flavor symmetry and show that the symmetry relations are generally respected. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-18 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1914-4 Authors Fang Su, State Key Laboratory of Theoretical Physics, Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics China, Institute of Theoretical Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100190 China Yue-Liang Wu, State Key Laboratory of Theoretical Physics, Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics China, Institute of Theoretical Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100190 China Yi-Bo Yang, State Key Laboratory of Theoretical Physics, Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics China, Institute of Theoretical Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100190 China Ci Zhuang, State Key Laboratory of Theoretical Physics, Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics China, Institute of Theoretical Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100190 China Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 72 Journal Issue Volume 72, Number 3

Description:    The current 7 TeV run of the LHC experiment shall be able to probe gluino and squark masses up to values larger than 1 TeV. Assuming that hints for SUSY are found in the jets plus missing energy channel by the end of a 5 fb −1 run, we explore the flavour constraints on three models with a CMSSM-like spectrum: the CMSSM itself, a seesaw extension of the CMSSM, and Flavoured CMSSM. In particular, we focus on decays that might have been measured by the time the run is concluded, such as B s → μμ and μ → eγ . We also analyse constraints imposed by neutral meson bounds and electric dipole moments. The interplay between collider and flavour experiments is explored through the use of three benchmark scenarios, finding the flavour feedback useful in order to determine the model parameters and to test the consistency of the different models. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-26 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1863-y Authors L. Calibbi, Max-Planck-Institut für Physik (Werner-Heisenberg-Institut), Föhringer Ring 6, 80805 München, Germany R. N. Hodgkinson, Departament de Física Teòrica and IFIC, Universtat de València-CSIC, 46100 Burjassot, Spain J. Jones Pérez, INFN, Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Via E. Fermi 40, 00044 Frascati, Italy A. Masiero, Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Padova, via F. Marzolo 8, 35131 Padova, Italy O. Vives, Departament de Física Teòrica and IFIC, Universtat de València-CSIC, 46100 Burjassot, Spain Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 72 Journal Issue Volume 72, Number 2

Description:    In this work, we have considered the power-law correction of entropy on the horizon. If the flat FRW Universe is filled with the n components fluid with interactions, the GSL of thermodynamics for apparent and event horizons have been investigated for equilibrium and non-equilibrium cases. If we consider a small perturbation around the de Sitter spacetime, the general conditions of the validity of GSL have been found. Also if a phantom dominated Universe has a pole-like type scale factor, the validity of GSL has also been analyzed. Further we have obtained constraints on the power-law parameter α in the phantom and quintessence dominated regimes. Finally we obtain conditions under which GSL breaks down in a cosmological background. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-6 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1875-7 Authors Ujjal Debnath, Department of Mathematics, Bengal Engineering and Science University, Shibpur, Howrah, 711 103 India Surajit Chattopadhyay, Department of Computer Application (Mathematics Section), Pailan College of Management and Technology, Bengal Pailan Park, Kolkata, 700 104 India Ibrar Hussain, School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (SEECS), National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST), H-12, Islamabad, Pakistan Mubasher Jamil, Center for Advanced Mathematics and Physics (CAMP), National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST), H-12, Islamabad, Pakistan Ratbay Myrzakulov, Eurasian International Center for Theoretical Physics, Eurasian National University, Astana, 010008 Kazakhstan Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 72 Journal Issue Volume 72, Number 2

Description:    We report on double-differential inclusive cross-sections of the production of secondary protons, charged pions, and deuterons, in the interactions with a 5% λ int thick stationary aluminium target, of proton and pion beams with momentum from ±3 GeV/ c to ±15 GeV/ c . Results are given for secondary particles with production angles 20 ∘ 〈 θ 〈125 ∘ . Cross-sections on aluminium nuclei are compared with cross-sections on beryllium, carbon, copper, tin, tantalum and lead nuclei. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Experimental Physics Pages 1-75 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1882-8 Authors A. Bolshakova, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia I. Boyko, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia G. Chelkov, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia D. Dedovitch, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia A. Elagin, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia D. Emelyanov, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia M. Gostkin, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia A. Guskov, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia Z. Kroumchtein, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia Yu. Nefedov, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia K. Nikolaev, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia A. Zhemchugov, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia F. Dydak, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland J. Wotschack, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland A. De Min, Politecnico di Milano and INFN, Sezione di Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy V. Ammosov, Institute of High Energy Physics, Protvino, Russia V. Gapienko, Institute of High Energy Physics, Protvino, Russia V. Koreshev, Institute of High Energy Physics, Protvino, Russia A. Semak, Institute of High Energy Physics, Protvino, Russia Yu. Sviridov, Institute of High Energy Physics, Protvino, Russia E. Usenko, Institute of High Energy Physics, Protvino, Russia V. Zaets, Institute of High Energy Physics, Protvino, Russia Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 72 Journal Issue Volume 72, Number 2

Description:    We establish an extended version of the Einstein–Maxwell-axion model by introducing into the Lagrangian cross-terms, which contain the gradient four-vector of the pseudoscalar (axion) field in convolution with the Maxwell tensor. The gradient model of the axion–photon coupling is applied to cosmology: we analyze the Bianchi-I type Universe with an initial magnetic field, electric field induced by the axion–photon interaction, cosmological constant and dark matter, which is described in terms of the pseudoscalar (axion) field. Analytical, qualitative and numerical results are presented in detail for two distinguished epochs: first, for the early Universe with magnetic field domination; second, for the stage of late-time accelerated expansion. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-14 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1895-3 Authors A. B. Balakin, Kazan Federal University, Institute of Physics, Kremlevskaya str. 18, 420008 Kazan, Russia V. V. Bochkarev, Kazan Federal University, Institute of Physics, Kremlevskaya str. 18, 420008 Kazan, Russia N. O. Tarasova, Kazan Federal University, Institute of Physics, Kremlevskaya str. 18, 420008 Kazan, Russia Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 72 Journal Issue Volume 72, Number 2

Description:    Grand Unified Theories often involve additional Abelian group factors, apart from the standard model hypercharge, that generally lead to loop-induced mixing gauge-kinetic terms. In this letter, we show that at the one-loop level this effect can be avoided in many cases by a suitable choice of basis in group space and present a general scheme for the construction of this basis. In supersymmetric theories, however, a residual mixing in the soft SUSY breaking gaugino mass terms may appear. We generalize the renormalization group equations for the gaugino mass terms to account for this effect. In a further calculation we also present the necessary adjustments in the renormalization group equations of the trilinear soft-breaking couplings and the soft-breaking scalar mass squares. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-4 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1885-5 Authors Felix Braam, Physikalisches Institut, University of Freiburg, 79104 Freiburg, Germany Jürgen Reuter, Physikalisches Institut, University of Freiburg, 79104 Freiburg, Germany Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 72 Journal Issue Volume 72, Number 2

Description:    We propose a measurement of leading neutrons spectra at LHC in order to extract inclusive π + p and π + π + cross-sections with high p T jets production. The cross-sections for these processes are simulated with the use of parton distributions in hadrons. In this work we estimate the possibility to extract parton distributions in the pion from the data on these cross-sections and also search for signatures of fundamental differences in the pion and proton structure. Content Type Journal Article Category Special Article - Tools for Experiment and Theory Pages 1-7 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1886-4 Authors V. A. Petrov, Institute for High Energy Physics, 142 281 Protvino, Russia R. A. Ryutin, Institute for High Energy Physics, 142 281 Protvino, Russia A. E. Sobol, Institute for High Energy Physics, 142 281 Protvino, Russia M. J. Murray, University of Kansas, Kansas City, KS, USA Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 72 Journal Issue Volume 72, Number 2

Description:    The conformal invariance of the Hawking temperature, conjectured for the asymptotically flat and stationary black holes by Jacobson and Kang, is semiclassically evaluated for a simple particular case of symmetrical spherically and non-asymptotically flat black hole. By using the Bogoliubov coefficients, the metric euclideanization, the reflection coefficient and the gravitational anomaly, as methods of calculating the Hawking temperature, we find that it is invariant under a specific conformal transformation of the metric. We briefly discuss the results for each method. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-9 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1891-7 Authors Glauber Tadaiesky Marques, ICIBE–LASIC, Universidade Federal Rural da Amazônia-Brazil, Av. Presidente Tancredo Neves 2501, CEP66077-901 Belém/PA, Brazil Manuel E. Rodrigues, Centro de Ciências Exatas, Departamento de Física, Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo, Av. Fernando Ferrari s/n, Campus de Goiabeiras, CEP29075-910 Vitória/ES, Brazil Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 72 Journal Issue Volume 72, Number 2

Description:    In this paper, we consider a theory of gravity with a metric-dependent torsion namely the F ( R , T ) gravity, where R is the curvature scalar and T is the torsion scalar. We study the geometric root of such theory. In particular we give the derivation of the model from the geometrical point of view. Then we present the more general form of F ( R , T ) gravity with two arbitrary functions and give some of its particular cases. In particular, the usual F ( R ) and F ( T ) gravity theories are particular cases of the F ( R , T ) gravity. In the cosmological context, we find that our new gravitational theory can describe the accelerated expansion of the Universe. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-9 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-2203-y Authors Ratbay Myrzakulov, Eurasian International Center for Theoretical Physics and Department of General & Theoretical Physics, Eurasian National University, Astana, 010008 Kazakhstan Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 72 Journal Issue Volume 72, Number 11

Description:    The s -wave kaon–antikaon ( ) scattering length is studied by lattice QCD using pion masses m π =330–466 MeV. Through wall sources without gauge fixing, we calculate four-point functions in the I =1 channel with the “Asqtad”-improved staggered fermion formulation, and observe an attractive signal, which is consistent with pioneering lattice studies on potential. Extrapolating the scattering length to the physical point, we obtain , where the first error is statistical and the second is systematic. These simulations are conducted with MILC gauge configurations at lattice spacing a ≈0.15 fm. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-10 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-2159-y Authors Ziwen Fu, Key Laboratory of Radiation Physics and Technology of Education Ministry, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610064 P.R. China Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 72 Journal Issue Volume 72, Number 9

Description:    Recently, Kostelecky [V.A. Kostelecky, Phys. Lett. B 701 , 137 ( 2011 )] proposed that the spontaneous Lorentz invariance violation (sLIV) is related to Finsler geometry. Finsler spacetime is intrinsically anisotropic and naturally induces Lorentz invariance violation (LIV). In this paper, the electromagnetic field is investigated in locally Minkowski spacetime. The Lagrangian is presented explicitly for the electromagnetic field. It is compatible with the one in the standard model extension (SME). We show the Lorentz-violating Maxwell equations as well as the electromagnetic wave equation. The formal plane wave solution is obtained for the electromagnetic wave. The speed of light may depend on the direction of light and the lightcone may be enlarged or narrowed. The LIV effects could be viewed as influence from an anisotropic media on the electromagnetic wave. In addition, birefringence of light will not emerge at the leading order in this model. A constraint on the spacetime anisotropy is obtained from observations on gamma-ray bursts (GRBs). Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-7 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-2165-0 Authors Zhe Chang, Institute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 100049 Beijing, China Sai Wang, Institute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 100049 Beijing, China Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 72 Journal Issue Volume 72, Number 9

Description:    The quark condensate is calculated within the world-line effective-action formalism, by using for the Wilson loop an ansatz provided by the stochastic vacuum model. Starting with the relation between the quark and the gluon condensates in the heavy-quark limit, we diminish the current quark mass down to the value of the inverse vacuum correlation length, finding in this way a 64 % decrease in the absolute value of the quark condensate. In particular, we find that the conventional formula for the heavy-quark condensate cannot be applied to the c -quark, and that the corrections to this formula can reach 23 % even in the case of the b -quark. We also demonstrate that, for an exponential parametrization of the two-point correlation function of gluonic field strengths, the quark condensate does not depend on the non-confining non-perturbative interactions of the stochastic background Yang–Mills fields. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-7 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-2179-7 Authors Dmitri Antonov, Departamento de Física and Centro de Física das Interacções Fundamentais, Instituto Superior Técnico, UT Lisboa, Av. Rovisco Pais, 1049-001 Lisbon, Portugal José Emílio F. T. Ribeiro, Departamento de Física and Centro de Física das Interacções Fundamentais, Instituto Superior Técnico, UT Lisboa, Av. Rovisco Pais, 1049-001 Lisbon, Portugal Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 72 Journal Issue Volume 72, Number 10

Description:    A measurement of the integrated luminosity at the ep collider HERA is presented, exploiting the elastic QED Compton process ep → eγp . The electron and the photon are detected in the backward calorimeter of the H1 experiment. The integrated luminosity of the data recorded in 2003 to 2007 is determined with a precision of 2.3 %. The measurement is found to be compatible with the corresponding result obtained using the Bethe–Heitler process. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Experimental Physics Pages 1-13 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-2163-2 Authors The H1 Collaboration F. D. Aaron, National Institute for Physics and Nuclear Engineering (NIPNE), Bucharest, Romania C. Alexa, National Institute for Physics and Nuclear Engineering (NIPNE), Bucharest, Romania V. Andreev, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia S. Backovic, Faculty of Science, University of Montenegro, Podgorica, Montenegro A. Baghdasaryan, Yerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, Armenia S. Baghdasaryan, Yerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, Armenia E. Barrelet, LPNHE, Université Pierre et Marie Curie Paris 6, Université Denis Diderot Paris 7, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France W. Bartel, DESY, Hamburg, Germany K. Begzsuren, Institute of Physics and Technology of the Mongolian Academy of Sciences, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia A. Belousov, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia P. Belov, DESY, Hamburg, Germany J. C. Bizot, LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France V. Boudry, LLR, Ecole Polytechnique, CNRS/IN2P3, Palaiseau, France I. Bozovic-Jelisavcic, Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences, University of Belgrade, 1100 Belgrade, Serbia J. Bracinik, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK G. Brandt, DESY, Hamburg, Germany M. Brinkmann, DESY, Hamburg, Germany V. Brisson, LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France D. Britzger, DESY, Hamburg, Germany D. Bruncko, Institute of Experimental Physics, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Košice, Slovak Republic A. Bunyatyan, Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik, Heidelberg, Germany A. Bylinkin, Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia L. Bystritskaya, Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia A. J. Campbell, DESY, Hamburg, Germany K. B. Cantun Avila, Departamento de Fisica Aplicada, CINVESTAV, Mérida, Yucatán, México F. Ceccopieri, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels and Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium K. Cerny, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Praha, Czech Republic V. Cerny, Institute of Experimental Physics, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Košice, Slovak Republic V. Chekelian, Max-Planck-Institut für Physik, München, Germany J. G. Contreras, Departamento de Fisica Aplicada, CINVESTAV, Mérida, Yucatán, México J. A. Coughlan, STFC, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, Oxfordshire, UK J. Cvach, Institute of Physics, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Praha, Czech Republic J. B. Dainton, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK K. Daum, Fachbereich C, Universität Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany B. Delcourt, LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France J. Delvax, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels and Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium E. A. De Wolf, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels and Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium C. Diaconu, CPPM, Aix-Marseille Univ., CNRS/IN2P3, 13288 Marseille, France M. Dobre, Institut für Experimentalphysik, Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany V. Dodonov, Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik, Heidelberg, Germany A. Dossanov, Institut für Experimentalphysik, Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany A. Dubak, Faculty of Science, University of Montenegro, Podgorica, Montenegro G. Eckerlin, DESY, Hamburg, Germany S. Egli, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland A. Eliseev, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia E. Elsen, DESY, Hamburg, Germany L. Favart, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels and Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium A. Fedotov, Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia R. Felst, DESY, Hamburg, Germany J. Feltesse, CEA, DSM/Irfu, CE-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France J. Ferencei, Institute of Experimental Physics, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Košice, Slovak Republic D.-J. Fischer, DESY, Hamburg, Germany M. Fleischer, DESY, Hamburg, Germany A. Fomenko, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia E. Gabathuler, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK J. Gayler, DESY, Hamburg, Germany S. Ghazaryan, DESY, Hamburg, Germany A. Glazov, DESY, Hamburg, Germany L. Goerlich, Institute for Nuclear Physics, Cracow, Poland N. Gogitidze, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia M. Gouzevitch, DESY, Hamburg, Germany C. Grab, Institut für Teilchenphysik, ETH, Zürich, Switzerland A. Grebenyuk, DESY, Hamburg, Germany T. Greenshaw, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK G. Grindhammer, Max-Planck-Institut für Physik, München, Germany S. Habib, DESY, Hamburg, Germany D. Haidt, DESY, Hamburg, Germany R. C. W. Henderson, Department of Physics, University of Lancaster, Lancaster, UK E. Hennekemper, Kirchhoff-Institut für Physik, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany H. Henschel, DESY, Zeuthen, Germany M. Herbst, Kirchhoff-Institut für Physik, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany G. Herrera, Departamento de Fisica, CINVESTAV IPN, México City, México M. Hildebrandt, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland K. H. Hiller, DESY, Zeuthen, Germany D. Hoffmann, CPPM, Aix-Marseille Univ., CNRS/IN2P3, 13288 Marseille, France R. Horisberger, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland T. Hreus, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels and Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium F. Huber, Physikalisches Institut, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany M. Jacquet, LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France X. Janssen, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels and Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium L. Jönsson, Physics Department, University of Lund, Lund, Sweden H. Jung, DESY, Hamburg, Germany M. Kapichine, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia I. R. Kenyon, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK C. Kiesling, Max-Planck-Institut für Physik, München, Germany M. Klein, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK C. Kleinwort, DESY, Hamburg, Germany T. Kluge, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK R. Kogler, Institut für Experimentalphysik, Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany P. Kostka, DESY, Zeuthen, Germany M. Krämer, DESY, Hamburg, Germany J. Kretzschmar, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK K. Krüger, Kirchhoff-Institut für Physik, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany M. P. J. Landon, School of Physics and Astronomy, Queen Mary, University of London, London, UK W. Lange, DESY, Zeuthen, Germany G. Laštovička-Medin, Faculty of Science, University of Montenegro, Podgorica, Montenegro P. Laycock, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK A. Lebedev, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia V. Lendermann, Kirchhoff-Institut für Physik, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany S. Levonian, DESY, Hamburg, Germany K. Lipka, DESY, Hamburg, Germany B. List, DESY, Hamburg, Germany J. List, DESY, Hamburg, Germany B. Lobodzinski, DESY, Hamburg, Germany R. Lopez-Fernandez, Departamento de Fisica, CINVESTAV IPN, México City, México V. Lubimov, Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia E. Malinovski, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia H.-U. Martyn, I. Physikalisches Institut der RWTH, Aachen, Germany S. J. Maxfield, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK A. Mehta, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK A. B. Meyer, DESY, Hamburg, Germany H. Meyer, Fachbereich C, Universität Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany J. Meyer, DESY, Hamburg, Germany S. Mikocki, Institute for Nuclear Physics, Cracow, Poland I. Milcewicz-Mika, Institute for Nuclear Physics, Cracow, Poland F. Moreau, LLR, Ecole Polytechnique, CNRS/IN2P3, Palaiseau, France A. Morozov, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia J. V. Morris, STFC, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, Oxfordshire, UK K. Müller, Physik-Institut der Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland Th. Naumann, DESY, Zeuthen, Germany P. R. Newman, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK C. Niebuhr, DESY, Hamburg, Germany D. Nikitin, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia G. Nowak, Institute for Nuclear Physics, Cracow, Poland K. Nowak, Institut für Experimentalphysik, Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany J. E. Olsson, DESY, Hamburg, Germany D. Ozerov, DESY, Hamburg, Germany P. Pahl, DESY, Hamburg, Germany V. Palichik, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia I. Panagoulias, DESY, Hamburg, Germany M. Pandurovic, Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences, University of Belgrade, 1100 Belgrade, Serbia Th. Papadopoulou, DESY, Hamburg, Germany C. Pascaud, LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France G. D. Patel, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK E. Perez, CEA, DSM/Irfu, CE-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France A. Petrukhin, DESY, Hamburg, Germany I. Picuric, Faculty of Science, University of Montenegro, Podgorica, Montenegro H. Pirumov, Physikalisches Institut, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany D. Pitzl, DESY, Hamburg, Germany R. Plačakytė, DESY, Hamburg, Germany B. Pokorny, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Praha, Czech Republic R. Polifka, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Praha, Czech Republic B. Povh, Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik, Heidelberg, Germany V. Radescu, DESY, Hamburg, Germany N. Raicevic, Faculty of Science, University of Montenegro, Podgorica, Montenegro T. Ravdandorj, Institute of Physics and Technology of the Mongolian Academy of Sciences, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia P. Reimer, Institute of Physics, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Praha, Czech Republic E. Rizvi, School of Physics and Astronomy, Queen Mary, University of London, London, UK P. Robmann, Physik-Institut der Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland R. Roosen, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels and Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium A. Rostovtsev, Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia M. Rotaru, National Institute for Physics and Nuclear Engineering (NIPNE), Bucharest, Romania J. E. Ruiz Tabasco, Departamento de Fisica Aplicada, CINVESTAV, Mérida, Yucatán, México S. Rusakov, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia D. Šálek, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Praha, Czech Republic D. P. C. Sankey, STFC, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, Oxfordshire, UK M. Sauter, Physikalisches Institut, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany E. Sauvan, CPPM, Aix-Marseille Univ., CNRS/IN2P3, 13288 Marseille, France S. Schmitt, DESY, Hamburg, Germany L. Schoeffel, CEA, DSM/Irfu, CE-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France A. Schöning, Physikalisches Institut, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany H.-C. Schultz-Coulon, Kirchhoff-Institut für Physik, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany F. Sefkow, DESY, Hamburg, Germany L. N. Shtarkov, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia S. Shushkevich, DESY, Hamburg, Germany T. Sloan, Department of Physics, University of Lancaster, Lancaster, UK Y. Soloviev, DESY, Hamburg, Germany P. Sopicki, Institute for Nuclear Physics, Cracow, Poland D. South, DESY, Hamburg, Germany V. Spaskov, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia A. Specka, LLR, Ecole Polytechnique, CNRS/IN2P3, Palaiseau, France Z. Staykova, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels and Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium M. Steder, DESY, Hamburg, Germany B. Stella, Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Roma Tre and INFN Roma 3, Roma, Italy G. Stoicea, National Institute for Physics and Nuclear Engineering (NIPNE), Bucharest, Romania U. Straumann, Physik-Institut der Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland T. Sykora, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Praha, Czech Republic P. D. Thompson, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK T. H. Tran, LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France D. Traynor, School of Physics and Astronomy, Queen Mary, University of London, London, UK P. Truöl, Physik-Institut der Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland I. Tsakov, Institute for Nuclear Research and Nuclear Energy, Sofia, Bulgaria B. Tseepeldorj, Institute of Physics and Technology of the Mongolian Academy of Sciences, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia J. Turnau, Institute for Nuclear Physics, Cracow, Poland A. Valkárová, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Praha, Czech Republic C. Vallée, CPPM, Aix-Marseille Univ., CNRS/IN2P3, 13288 Marseille, France P. Van Mechelen, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels and Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium Y. Vazdik, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia D. Wegener, Institut für Physik, TU Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany E. Wünsch, DESY, Hamburg, Germany J. Žáček, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Praha, Czech Republic J. Zálešák, Institute of Physics, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Praha, Czech Republic Z. Zhang, LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France A. Zhokin, Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia R. Žlebčík, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Praha, Czech Republic H. Zohrabyan, Yerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, Armenia F. Zomer, LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 72 Journal Issue Volume 72, Number 10

Description:    A combination of the inclusive diffractive cross section measurements made by the H1 and ZEUS Collaborations at HERA is presented. The analysis uses samples of diffractive deep inelastic ep scattering data at a centre-of-mass energy where leading protons are detected by dedicated spectrometers. Correlations of systematic uncertainties are taken into account, resulting in an improved precision of the cross section measurement which reaches 6 % for the most precise points. The combined data cover the range 2.5〈 Q 2 〈200 GeV 2 in photon virtuality, in proton fractional momentum loss, 0.09〈| t |〈0.55 GeV 2 in squared four-momentum transfer at the proton vertex and 0.0018〈 β 〈0.816 in , where x is the Bjorken scaling variable. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Experimental Physics Pages 1-17 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-2175-y Authors The H1 and ZEUS Collaborations F. D. Aaron, National Institute for Physics and Nuclear Engineering (NIPNE), Bucharest, Romania H. Abramowicz, Raymond and Beverly Sackler Faculty of Exact Sciences, School of Physics, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel I. Abt, Max-Planck-Institut für Physik, Munich, Germany L. Adamczyk, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, AGH-University of Science and Technology, Krakow, Poland M. Adamus, National Centre for Nuclear Research, Warsaw, Poland R. Aggarwal, Department of Physics, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India C. Alexa, National Institute for Physics and Nuclear Engineering (NIPNE), Bucharest, Romania V. Andreev, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia S. Antonelli, University and INFN Bologna, Bologna, Italy P. Antonioli, INFN Bologna, Bologna, Italy A. Antonov, Moscow Engineering Physics Institute, Moscow, Russia M. Arneodo, Università del Piemonte Orientale, Novara, and INFN, Torino, Italy O. Arslan, Physikalisches Institut der Universität Bonn, Bonn, Germany V. Aushev, Institute for Nuclear Research, National Academy of Sciences, Kyiv, Ukraine Y. Aushev, Department of Nuclear Physics, National Taras Shevchenko University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine O. Bachynska, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany S. Backovic, Faculty of Science, University of Montenegro, Podgorica, Montenegro A. Baghdasaryan, Yerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, Armenia S. Baghdasaryan, Yerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, Armenia A. Bamberger, Fakultät für Physik der Universität Freiburg i.Br., Freiburg i.Br., Germany A. N. Barakbaev, Institute of Physics and Technology of Ministry of Education and Science of Kazakhstan, Almaty, Kazakhstan G. Barbagli, INFN Florence, Florence, Italy G. Bari, INFN Bologna, Bologna, Italy F. Barreiro, Departamento de Física Teórica, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain E. Barrelet, LPNHE, Université Pierre et Marie Curie Paris 6, Université Denis Diderot Paris 7, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France W. Bartel, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany N. Bartosik, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany D. Bartsch, Physikalisches Institut der Universität Bonn, Bonn, Germany M. Basile, University and INFN Bologna, Bologna, Italy K. Begzsuren, Institute of Physics and Technology of the Mongolian Academy of Sciences, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia O. Behnke, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany J. Behr, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany U. Behrens, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany L. Bellagamba, INFN Bologna, Bologna, Italy A. Belousov, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia P. Belov, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany A. Bertolin, INFN Padova, Padova, Italy S. Bhadra, Department of Physics, York University, Toronto, Ontario M3J 1P3, Canada M. Bindi, University and INFN Bologna, Bologna, Italy J. C. Bizot, LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France C. Blohm, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany V. Bokhonov, Institute for Nuclear Research, National Academy of Sciences, Kyiv, Ukraine K. Bondarenko, Department of Nuclear Physics, National Taras Shevchenko University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine E. G. Boos, Institute of Physics and Technology of Ministry of Education and Science of Kazakhstan, Almaty, Kazakhstan K. Borras, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany D. Boscherini, INFN Bologna, Bologna, Italy D. Bot, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany V. Boudry, LLR, Ecole Polytechnique, CNRS/IN2P3, Palaiseau, France I. Bozovic-Jelisavcic, Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences, University of Belgrade, 1100 Belgrade, Serbia T. Bołd, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, AGH-University of Science and Technology, Krakow, Poland N. Brümmer, Physics Department, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA J. Bracinik, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK G. Brandt, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany M. Brinkmann, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany V. Brisson, LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France D. Britzger, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany I. Brock, Physikalisches Institut der Universität Bonn, Bonn, Germany E. Brownson, Department of Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706, USA R. Brugnera, Dipartimento di Fisica dell’ Università and INFN, Padova, Italy D. Bruncko, Institute of Experimental Physics, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Košice, Slovak Republic A. Bruni, INFN Bologna, Bologna, Italy G. Bruni, INFN Bologna, Bologna, Italy B. Brzozowska, Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland A. Bunyatyan, Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik, Heidelberg, Germany P. J. Bussey, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK A. Bylinkin, Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia B. Bylsma, Physics Department, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA L. Bystritskaya, Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia A. Caldwell, Max-Planck-Institut für Physik, Munich, Germany A. J. Campbell, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany K. B. Cantun Avila, Departamento de Fisica Aplicada, CINVESTAV, Mérida, Yucatán, México M. Capua, Physics Department and INFN, Calabria University, Cosenza, Italy R. Carlin, Dipartimento di Fisica dell’ Università and INFN, Padova, Italy C. D. Catterall, Department of Physics, York University, Toronto, Ontario M3J 1P3, Canada F. Ceccopieri, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels, Belgium K. Cerny, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics of Charles University, Praha, Czech Republic V. Cerny, Institute of Experimental Physics, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Košice, Slovak Republic S. Chekanov, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL 60439-4815, USA V. Chekelian, Max-Planck-Institut für Physik, Munich, Germany J. Chwastowski, The Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Cracow, Poland J. Ciborowski, Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland R. Ciesielski, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany L. Cifarelli, University and INFN Bologna, Bologna, Italy F. Cindolo, INFN Bologna, Bologna, Italy A. Contin, University and INFN Bologna, Bologna, Italy J. G. Contreras, Departamento de Fisica Aplicada, CINVESTAV, Mérida, Yucatán, México A. M. Cooper-Sarkar, Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK N. Coppola, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany M. Corradi, INFN Bologna, Bologna, Italy F. Corriveau, Department of Physics, McGill University, Montréal, Québec H3A 2T8, Canada M. Costa, Università di Torino and INFN, Torino, Italy J. A. Coughlan, STFC, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, Oxfordshire, UK J. Cvach, Institute of Physics of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Praha, Czech Republic G. D’Agostini, Dipartimento di Fisica, Università’La Sapienza’ and INFN, Rome, Italy J. B. Dainton, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK F. Dal Corso, INFN Padova, Padova, Italy K. Daum, Fachbereich C, Universität Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany B. Delcourt, LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France J. Delvax, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels, Belgium R. K. Dementiev, Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia M. Derrick, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL 60439-4815, USA R. C. E. Devenish, Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK S. De Pasquale, University and INFN Bologna, Bologna, Italy E. A. De Wolf, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels, Belgium J. del Peso, Departamento de Física Teórica, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain C. Diaconu, CPPM, Aix-Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, 13288 Marseille, France M. Dobre, Institut für Experimentalphysik, Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany D. Dobur, Fakultät für Physik der Universität Freiburg i.Br., Freiburg i.Br., Germany V. Dodonov, Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik, Heidelberg, Germany B. A. Dolgoshein, Moscow Engineering Physics Institute, Moscow, Russia G. Dolinska, Department of Nuclear Physics, National Taras Shevchenko University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine A. Dossanov, Institut für Experimentalphysik, Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany A. T. Doyle, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK V. Drugakov, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Zeuthen, Germany A. Dubak, Faculty of Science, University of Montenegro, Podgorica, Montenegro L. S. Durkin, Physics Department, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA S. Dusini, INFN Padova, Padova, Italy G. Eckerlin, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany S. Egli, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland Y. Eisenberg, Department of Particle Physics and Astrophysics, Weizmann Institute, Rehovot, Israel A. Eliseev, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia E. Elsen, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany P. F. Ermolov, Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia A. Eskreys, The Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Cracow, Poland S. Fang, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany L. Favart, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels, Belgium S. Fazio, Physics Department and INFN, Calabria University, Cosenza, Italy A. Fedotov, Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia R. Felst, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany J. Feltesse, CEA, DSM/Irfu, CE-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France J. Ferencei, Institute of Experimental Physics, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Košice, Slovak Republic J. Ferrando, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK M. I. Ferrero, Università di Torino and INFN, Torino, Italy J. Figiel, The Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Cracow, Poland D.-J. Fischer, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany M. Fleischer, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany A. Fomenko, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia M. Forrest, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK B. Foster, Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK E. Gabathuler, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK G. Gach, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, AGH-University of Science and Technology, Krakow, Poland A. Galas, The Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Cracow, Poland E. Gallo, INFN Florence, Florence, Italy A. Garfagnini, Dipartimento di Fisica dell’ Università and INFN, Padova, Italy J. Gayler, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany A. Geiser, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany S. Ghazaryan, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany I. Gialas, Department of Engineering in Management and Finance, Univ. of the Aegean, Chios, Greece A. Gizhko, Department of Nuclear Physics, National Taras Shevchenko University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine L. K. Gladilin, Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia D. Gladkov, Moscow Engineering Physics Institute, Moscow, Russia C. Glasman, Departamento de Física Teórica, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain A. Glazov, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany L. Goerlich, The Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Cracow, Poland N. Gogitidze, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia O. Gogota, Department of Nuclear Physics, National Taras Shevchenko University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine Y. A. Golubkov, Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia P. Göttlicher, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany M. Gouzevitch, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany C. Grab, Institut für Teilchenphysik, ETH, Zurich, Switzerland I. Grabowska-Bołd, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, AGH-University of Science and Technology, Krakow, Poland A. Grebenyuk, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany J. Grebenyuk, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany T. Greenshaw, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK I. Gregor, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany G. Grigorescu, NIKHEF and University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands G. Grindhammer, Max-Planck-Institut für Physik, Munich, Germany G. Grzelak, Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland O. Gueta, Raymond and Beverly Sackler Faculty of Exact Sciences, School of Physics, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel M. Guzik, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, AGH-University of Science and Technology, Krakow, Poland C. Gwenlan, Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK A. Hüttmann, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany T. Haas, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany S. Habib, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany D. Haidt, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany W. Hain, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany R. Hamatsu, Department of Physics, Tokyo Metropolitan University, Tokyo, Japan J. C. Hart, STFC, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, Oxfordshire, UK H. Hartmann, Physikalisches Institut der Universität Bonn, Bonn, Germany G. Hartner, Department of Physics, York University, Toronto, Ontario M3J 1P3, Canada R. C. W. Henderson, Department of Physics, University of Lancaster, Lancaster, UK E. Hennekemper, Kirchhoff-Institut für Physik, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany H. Henschel, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Zeuthen, Germany M. Herbst, Kirchhoff-Institut für Physik, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany G. Herrera, Departamento de Fisica, CINVESTAV IPN, México City, México M. Hildebrandt, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland E. Hilger, Physikalisches Institut der Universität Bonn, Bonn, Germany K. H. Hiller, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Zeuthen, Germany J. Hladký, Institute of Physics of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Praha, Czech Republic D. Hochman, Department of Particle Physics and Astrophysics, Weizmann Institute, Rehovot, Israel D. Hoffmann, CPPM, Aix-Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, 13288 Marseille, France R. Hori, Department of Physics, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan R. Horisberger, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland T. Hreus, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels, Belgium F. Huber, Physikalisches Institut, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany Z. A. Ibrahim, Jabatan Fizik, Universiti Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Y. Iga, Polytechnic University, Tokyo, Japan R. Ingbir, Raymond and Beverly Sackler Faculty of Exact Sciences, School of Physics, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel M. Ishitsuka, Department of Physics, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo, Japan M. Jacquet, LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France H.-P. Jakob, Physikalisches Institut der Universität Bonn, Bonn, Germany X. Janssen, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels, Belgium F. Januschek, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany T. W. Jones, Physics and Astronomy Department, University College London, London, UK L. Jönsson, Physics Department, University of Lund, Lund, Sweden M. Jüngst, Physikalisches Institut der Universität Bonn, Bonn, Germany H. Jung, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany I. Kadenko, Department of Nuclear Physics, National Taras Shevchenko University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine B. Kahle, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany S. Kananov, Raymond and Beverly Sackler Faculty of Exact Sciences, School of Physics, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel T. Kanno, Department of Physics, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo, Japan M. Kapichine, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia U. Karshon, Department of Particle Physics and Astrophysics, Weizmann Institute, Rehovot, Israel F. Karstens, Fakultät für Physik der Universität Freiburg i.Br., Freiburg i.Br., Germany I. I. Katkov, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany P. Kaur, Department of Physics, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India M. Kaur, Department of Physics, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India I. R. Kenyon, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK A. Keramidas, NIKHEF and University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands L. A. Khein, Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia C. Kiesling, Max-Planck-Institut für Physik, Munich, Germany J. Y. Kim, Institute for Universe and Elementary Particles, Chonnam National University, Kwangju, South Korea D. Kisielewska, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, AGH-University of Science and Technology, Krakow, Poland S. Kitamura, Department of Physics, Tokyo Metropolitan University, Tokyo, Japan R. Klanner, Institut für Experimentalphysik, Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany M. Klein, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK U. Klein, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany C. Kleinwort, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany E. Koffeman, NIKHEF and University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands R. Kogler, Institut für Experimentalphysik, Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany N. Kondrashova, Department of Nuclear Physics, National Taras Shevchenko University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine O. Kononenko, Department of Nuclear Physics, National Taras Shevchenko University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine P. Kooijman, NIKHEF and University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands I. Korol, Department of Nuclear Physics, National Taras Shevchenko University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine I. A. Korzhavina, Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia P. Kostka, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Zeuthen, Germany A. Kotański, Department of Physics, Jagellonian University, Cracow, Poland U. Kötz, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany H. Kowalski, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany M. Krämer, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany J. Kretzschmar, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK K. Krüger, Kirchhoff-Institut für Physik, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany O. Kuprash, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany M. Kuze, Department of Physics, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo, Japan M. P. J. Landon, School of Physics and Astronomy, Queen Mary, University of London, London, UK W. Lange, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Zeuthen, Germany G. Laštovička-Medin, Faculty of Science, University of Montenegro, Podgorica, Montenegro P. Laycock, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK A. Lebedev, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia A. Lee, Physics Department, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA V. Lendermann, Kirchhoff-Institut für Physik, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany B. B. Levchenko, Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia S. Levonian, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany A. Levy, Raymond and Beverly Sackler Faculty of Exact Sciences, School of Physics, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel V. Libov, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany S. Limentani, Dipartimento di Fisica dell’ Università and INFN, Padova, Italy T. Y. Ling, Physics Department, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA K. Lipka, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany M. Lisovyi, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany B. List, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany J. List, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany E. Lobodzinska, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany B. Lobodzinski, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany W. Lohmann, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Zeuthen, Germany B. Löhr, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany E. Lohrmann, Institut für Experimentalphysik, Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany K. R. Long, High Energy Nuclear Physics Group, Imperial College London, London, UK A. Longhin, INFN Padova, Padova, Italy D. Lontkovskyi, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany R. Lopez-Fernandez, Departamento de Fisica, CINVESTAV IPN, México City, México V. Lubimov, Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia O. Y. Lukina, Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia J. Maeda, Department of Physics, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo, Japan S. Magill, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL 60439-4815, USA I. Makarenko, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany E. Malinovski, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia J. Malka, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany R. Mankel, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany A. Margotti, INFN Bologna, Bologna, Italy G. Marini, Dipartimento di Fisica, Università’La Sapienza’ and INFN, Rome, Italy J. F. Martin, Department of Physics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario M5S 1A7, Canada H.-U. Martyn, I. Physikalisches Institut der RWTH, Aachen, Germany A. Mastroberardino, Physics Department and INFN, Calabria University, Cosenza, Italy M. C. K. Mattingly, Andrews University, Berrien Springs, MI 49104-0380, USA S. J. Maxfield, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK A. Mehta, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK I.-A. Melzer-Pellmann, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany S. Mergelmeyer, Physikalisches Institut der Universität Bonn, Bonn, Germany A. B. Meyer, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany H. Meyer, Fachbereich C, Universität Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany J. Meyer, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany S. Miglioranzi, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany S. Mikocki, The Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Cracow, Poland I. Milcewicz-Mika, The Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Cracow, Poland F. Mohamad Idris, Jabatan Fizik, Universiti Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia V. Monaco, Università di Torino and INFN, Torino, Italy A. Montanari, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany F. Moreau, LLR, Ecole Polytechnique, CNRS/IN2P3, Palaiseau, France A. Morozov, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia J. V. Morris, STFC, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, Oxfordshire, UK J. D. Morris, H.H. Wills Physics Laboratory, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK K. Mujkic, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany K. Müller, Physik-Institut der Universität Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland B. Musgrave, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL 60439-4815, USA K. Nagano, Institute of Particle and Nuclear Studies, KEK, Tsukuba, Japan T. Namsoo, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany R. Nania, INFN Bologna, Bologna, Italy T. Naumann, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Zeuthen, Germany P. R. Newman, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK C. Niebuhr, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany A. Nigro, Dipartimento di Fisica, Università’La Sapienza’ and INFN, Rome, Italy D. Nikitin, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia Y. Ning, Nevis Laboratories, Columbia University, Irvington on Hudson, NY 10027, USA T. Nobe, Department of Physics, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo, Japan D. Notz, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany G. Nowak, The Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Cracow, Poland K. Nowak, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany R. J. Nowak, Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland A. E. Nuncio-Quiroz, Physikalisches Institut der Universität Bonn, Bonn, Germany B. Y. Oh, Department of Physics, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA N. Okazaki, Department of Physics, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan K. Olkiewicz, The Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Cracow, Poland J. E. Olsson, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany Y. Onishchuk, Department of Nuclear Physics, National Taras Shevchenko University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine D. Ozerov, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany P. Pahl, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany V. Palichik, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia M. Pandurovic, Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences, University of Belgrade, 1100 Belgrade, Serbia K. Papageorgiu, Department of Engineering in Management and Finance, Univ. of the Aegean, Chios, Greece A. Parenti, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany C. Pascaud, LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France G. D. Patel, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK E. Paul, Physikalisches Institut der Universität Bonn, Bonn, Germany J. M. Pawlak, Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland B. Pawlik, The Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Cracow, Poland P. G. Pelfer, University and INFN Florence, Florence, Italy A. Pellegrino, NIKHEF and University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands E. Perez, CEA, DSM/Irfu, CE-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France W. Perlański, Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland H. Perrey, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany A. Petrukhin, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany I. Picuric, Faculty of Science, University of Montenegro, Podgorica, Montenegro K. Piotrzkowski, Institut de Physique Nucléaire, Université Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium H. Pirumov, Physikalisches Institut, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany D. Pitzl, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany R. Plačakytė, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany P. Pluciński, National Centre for Nuclear Research, Warsaw, Poland B. Pokorny, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics of Charles University, Praha, Czech Republic N. S. Pokrovskiy, Institute of Physics and Technology of Ministry of Education and Science of Kazakhstan, Almaty, Kazakhstan R. Polifka, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics of Charles University, Praha, Czech Republic A. Polini, INFN Bologna, Bologna, Italy B. Povh, Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik, Heidelberg, Germany A. S. Proskuryakov, Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia M. Przybycień, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, AGH-University of Science and Technology, Krakow, Poland V. Radescu, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany N. Raicevic, Faculty of Science, University of Montenegro, Podgorica, Montenegro A. Raval, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany T. Ravdandorj, Institute of Physics and Technology of the Mongolian Academy of Sciences, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia D. D. Reeder, Department of Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706, USA P. Reimer, Institute of Physics of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Praha, Czech Republic B. Reisert, Max-Planck-Institut für Physik, Munich, Germany Z. Ren, Nevis Laboratories, Columbia University, Irvington on Hudson, NY 10027, USA J. Repond, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL 60439-4815, USA Y. D. Ri, Department of Physics, Tokyo Metropolitan University, Tokyo, Japan E. Rizvi, School of Physics and Astronomy, Queen Mary, University of London, London, UK A. Robertson, Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK P. Robmann, Physik-Institut der Universität Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland P. Roloff, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany R. Roosen, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels, Belgium A. Rostovtsev, Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia M. Rotaru, National Institute for Physics and Nuclear Engineering (NIPNE), Bucharest, Romania I. Rubinsky, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany J. E. Ruiz Tabasco, Departamento de Fisica Aplicada, CINVESTAV, Mérida, Yucatán, México S. Rusakov, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia M. Ruspa, Università del Piemonte Orientale, Novara, and INFN, Torino, Italy R. Sacchi, Università di Torino and INFN, Torino, Italy D. Šálek, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics of Charles University, Praha, Czech Republic U. Samson, Physikalisches Institut der Universität Bonn, Bonn, Germany D. P. C. Sankey, STFC, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, Oxfordshire, UK G. Sartorelli, University and INFN Bologna, Bologna, Italy M. Sauter, Physikalisches Institut, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany E. Sauvan, CPPM, Aix-Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, 13288 Marseille, France A. A. Savin, Department of Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706, USA D. H. Saxon, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK M. Schioppa, Physics Department and INFN, Calabria University, Cosenza, Italy S. Schlenstedt, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Zeuthen, Germany P. Schleper, Institut für Experimentalphysik, Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany W. B. Schmidke, Max-Planck-Institut für Physik, Munich, Germany S. Schmitt, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany U. Schneekloth, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany L. Schoeffel, CEA, DSM/Irfu, CE-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France V. Schönberg, Physikalisches Institut der Universität Bonn, Bonn, Germany A. Schöning, Physikalisches Institut, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany T. Schörner-Sadenius, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany H.-C. Schultz-Coulon, Kirchhoff-Institut für Physik, Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany J. Schwartz, Department of Physics, McGill University, Montréal, Québec H3A 2T8, Canada F. Sciulli, Nevis Laboratories, Columbia University, Irvington on Hudson, NY 10027, USA F. Sefkow, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany L. M. Shcheglova, Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia R. Shehzadi, Physikalisches Institut der Universität Bonn, Bonn, Germany S. Shimizu, Department of Physics, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan L. N. Shtarkov, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia S. Shushkevich, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany I. Singh, Department of Physics, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India I. O. Skillicorn, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK W. Słomiński, Department of Physics, Jagellonian University, Cracow, Poland T. Sloan, Department of Physics, University of Lancaster, Lancaster, UK W. H. Smith, Department of Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706, USA V. Sola, Institut für Experimentalphysik, Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany A. Solano, Università di Torino and INFN, Torino, Italy Y. Soloviev, Fakultät für Physik der Universität Freiburg i.Br., Freiburg i.Br., Germany D. Son, Center for High Energy Physics, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, South Korea P. Sopicki, The Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Cracow, Poland V. Sosnovtsev, Moscow Engineering Physics Institute, Moscow, Russia D. South, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany V. Spaskov, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia A. Specka, LLR, Ecole Polytechnique, CNRS/IN2P3, Palaiseau, France A. Spiridonov, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany H. Stadie, Institut für Experimentalphysik, Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany L. Stanco, INFN Padova, Padova, Italy Z. Staykova, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels, Belgium M. Steder, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany N. Stefaniuk, Department of Nuclear Physics, National Taras Shevchenko University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine B. Stella, Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Roma Tre and INFN Roma 3, Rome, Italy A. Stern, Raymond and Beverly Sackler Faculty of Exact Sciences, School of Physics, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel T. P. Stewart, Department of Physics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario M5S 1A7, Canada A. Stifutkin, Moscow Engineering Physics Institute, Moscow, Russia G. Stoicea, National Institute for Physics and Nuclear Engineering (NIPNE), Bucharest, Romania P. Stopa, The Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Cracow, Poland U. Straumann, Physik-Institut der Universität Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland S. Suchkov, Moscow Engineering Physics Institute, Moscow, Russia G. Susinno, Physics Department and INFN, Calabria University, Cosenza, Italy L. Suszycki, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, AGH-University of Science and Technology, Krakow, Poland T. Sykora, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels, Belgium J. Sztuk-Dambietz, Institut für Experimentalphysik, Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany J. Szuba, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany D. Szuba, Institut für Experimentalphysik, Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany A. D. Tapper, High Energy Nuclear Physics Group, Imperial College London, London, UK E. Tassi, Physics Department and INFN, Calabria University, Cosenza, Italy J. Terrón, Departamento de Física Teórica, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain T. Theedt, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany P. D. Thompson, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK H. Tiecke, NIKHEF and University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands K. Tokushuku, Institute of Particle and Nuclear Studies, KEK, Tsukuba, Japan J. Tomaszewska, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany T. H. Tran, LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France D. Traynor, School of Physics and Astronomy, Queen Mary, University of London, London, UK P. Truöl, Physik-Institut der Universität Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland V. Trusov, Department of Nuclear Physics, National Taras Shevchenko University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine I. Tsakov, Institute for Nuclear Research and Nuclear Energy, Sofia, Bulgaria B. Tseepeldorj, Institute of Physics and Technology of the Mongolian Academy of Sciences, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia T. Tsurugai, Faculty of General Education, Meiji Gakuin University, Yokohama, Japan M. Turcato, Institut für Experimentalphysik, Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany O. Turkot, Department of Nuclear Physics, National Taras Shevchenko University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine J. Turnau, The Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Cracow, Poland T. Tymieniecka, National Centre for Nuclear Research, Warsaw, Poland M. Vázquez, NIKHEF and University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands A. Valkárová, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics of Charles University, Praha, Czech Republic C. Vallée, CPPM, Aix-Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, 13288 Marseille, France P. Van Mechelen, Inter-University Institute for High Energies ULB-VUB, Brussels, Belgium Y. Vazdik, Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia A. Verbytskyi, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany O. Viazlo, Department of Nuclear Physics, National Taras Shevchenko University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine N. N. Vlasov, Fakultät für Physik der Universität Freiburg i.Br., Freiburg i.Br., Germany R. Walczak, Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK W. A. T. Wan Abdullah, Jabatan Fizik, Universiti Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia D. Wegener, Institut für Physik, TU Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany J. J. Whitmore, Department of Physics, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA K. Wichmann, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany L. Wiggers, NIKHEF and University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands M. Wing, Physics and Astronomy Department, University College London, London, UK M. Wlasenko, Physikalisches Institut der Universität Bonn, Bonn, Germany G. Wolf, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany H. Wolfe, Department of Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706, USA K. Wrona, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany E. Wünsch, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany A. G. Yagües-Molina, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany S. Yamada, Institute of Particle and Nuclear Studies, KEK, Tsukuba, Japan Y. Yamazaki, Institute of Particle and Nuclear Studies, KEK, Tsukuba, Japan R. Yoshida, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL 60439-4815, USA C. Youngman, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany O. Zabiegalov, Department of Nuclear Physics, National Taras Shevchenko University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine J. Žáček, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics of Charles University, Praha, Czech Republic J. Zálešák, Institute of Physics of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Praha, Czech Republic L. Zawiejski, The Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Cracow, Poland O. Zenaiev, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany W. Zeuner, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany Z. Zhang, LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France B. O. Zhautykov, Institute of Physics and Technology of Ministry of Education and Science of Kazakhstan, Almaty, Kazakhstan N. Zhmak, Institute for Nuclear Research, National Academy of Sciences, Kyiv, Ukraine A. Zhokin, Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia A. Zichichi, University and INFN Bologna, Bologna, Italy R. Žlebčík, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics of Charles University, Praha, Czech Republic H. Zohrabyan, Yerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, Armenia Z. Zolkapli, Jabatan Fizik, Universiti Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia F. Zomer, LAL, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, Orsay, France D. S. Zotkin, Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia A. F. Żarnecki, Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 72 Journal Issue Volume 72, Number 10

Description:    The pMSSM provides a broad perspective on SUSY phenomenology. In this paper we generate two new, very large, sets of pMSSM models with sparticle masses extending up to 4 TeV, where the lightest supersymmetric particle (LSP) is either a neutralino or gravitino. The existence of a gravitino LSP necessitates a detailed study of its cosmological effects and we find that Big Bang Nucleosynthesis places strong constraints on this scenario. Both sets are subjected to a global set of theoretical, observational and experimental constraints resulting in a sample of ∼225k viable models for each LSP type. The characteristics of these two model sets are briefly compared. We confront the neutralino LSP model set with searches for SUSY at the 7 TeV LHC using both the missing (MET) and non-missing E T ATLAS analyses. In the MET case, we employ Monte Carlo estimates of the ratios of the SM backgrounds at 7 and 8 TeV to rescale the 7 TeV data-driven ATLAS backgrounds to 8 TeV. This allows us to determine the pMSSM parameter space coverage for this collision energy. We find that an integrated luminosity of ∼5–20 fb −1 at 8 TeV would yield a substantial increase in this coverage compared to that at 7 TeV and can probe roughly half of the model set. If the pMSSM is not discovered during the 8 TeV run, then our model set will be essentially void of gluinos and lightest first and second generation squarks that are ≲700–800 GeV, which is much less than the analogous mSUGRA bound. Finally, we demonstrate that non-MET SUSY searches continue to play an important role in exploring the pMSSM parameter space. These two pMSSM model sets can be used as the basis for investigations for years to come. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-26 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-2156-1 Authors Matthew W. Cahill-Rowley, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA JoAnne L. Hewett, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA Stefan Hoeche, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA Ahmed Ismail, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA Thomas G. Rizzo, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 72 Journal Issue Volume 72, Number 9

Description:    In the context of strongly coupled Electroweak Symmetry Breaking, composite light scalar singlet and composite triplet of heavy vectors may arise from an unspecified strong dynamics and the interactions among themselves and with the Standard Model gauge bosons and fermions can be described by a SU (2) L × SU (2) R / SU (2) L + R effective chiral Lagrangian. In this framework, the production of the V + V − and V 0 V 0 final states at the LHC by gluon fusion mechanism is studied in the region of parameter space consistent with the unitarity constraints in the elastic channel of longitudinal gauge boson scattering and in the inelastic scattering of two longitudinal Standard Model gauge bosons into Standard Model fermions pairs. The expected rates of same-sign di-lepton and tri-lepton events from the decay of the V 0 V 0 final state are computed and their corresponding backgrounds are estimated. It is of remarkable relevance that the V 0 V 0 final state can only be produced at the LHC via a gluon fusion mechanism since this state is absent in the Drell–Yan process. It is also found that the V + V − final-state production cross section via gluon fusion mechanism is comparable with the V + V − Drell–Yan production cross section. The comparison of the V 0 V 0 and V + V − total cross sections will be crucial for distinguishing the different models since the vector pair production is sensitive to many couplings. This will also be useful to determine if the heavy vectors are only composite vectors or are gauge vectors of a spontaneously broken gauge symmetry. Content Type Journal Article Category Regular Article - Theoretical Physics Pages 1-10 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-2154-3 Authors A. E. Cárcamo Hernández, Universidad Técnica Federico Santa María and Centro Científico-Tecnológico de Valparaíso, Casilla 110-V, Valparaíso, Chile Journal The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields Online ISSN 1434-6052 Print ISSN 1434-6044 Journal Volume Volume 72 Journal Issue Volume 72, Number 9