Nuclear Physics B334 (1990) 1-23

North-Holland

VECTOR-LIKE FERMION AND STANDARD H I G G S P R O D U C T I O N

AT H A D R O N COLLIDERS*

F. del A G U I L A a, L1. AMETLLER b, G.L. K A N E c and J. VIDAL a

aDepartament de Fisica Tebrica, Universitat A utbnoma de Barcelona, 08193 Bellaterra

(Barcehma), Spain
bDepartament de Fisica i Enginveria Nuclear, EUPV, Universitat Polit~cnica de Catalut(va,
08800 Vilanova (Barcelona), Spain
CRandall Pt[vsics Laboratoo', Universi(v of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
aDepartarnent de Fisica Tebrica, Univ. de Valbncia, and IFIC. Univ. de Valbncia CSIC, 46100
Butjassot (Valencia), Spain

Received 21 September 1989

Vector-like fermions are characterized by large neutral current decay rates, in particular into
Higgs bosons. If they exist, their clear signals at hadron colliders open a window to Higgs
detection, especially to the intermediate Higgs mass region. We discuss in some detail rates and
signatures for simple cases.

1. Introduction

Vector-like fermions [1-14] are characterized by having their left- and right-
handed components transforming in the same way under the symmetry group of the
theory. For this reason their mass terms, ~L'/'R, are not forbidden by any symmetry.
As a consequence their masses are unbounded and they decouple when these are
taken to infinity [2]. This explains why they are essentially unconstrained by present
phenomenology, except for the bounds resulting from production limits [3]. On
similar grounds they can often contribute to new effects without upsetting existing
data.
The standard model may not need vector-like fermions, but by the same argu-
ment they are among the few particles which can naturally exist near the electroweak
scale and have no mandatory implications on the low-energy phenomenology
(although they may accommodate better CP violation .... [8-10]). It is important to
note that although this is surprising (because they are so apparently unconstrained)
their properties are to a large extent fixed! In particular, their decays are known to
some extent, and if they are produced, their detection can be (readily) accomplished,
and their properties stated [11]. It is important to note that vector-like fermions

* Research supported in part by the US DOE by CICYT and by the Spain-U.S. committee.

0550-3213/90/$03.50< Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.

(North-Holland)
2 F. del Aguila et al. / Higgs production

decay by exchange of standard electroweak gauge and Higgs bosons, W +-, Z, H, with
all three being comparable in size! Thus, vector-like fermions may transform a
collider into a Higgs factory [12]. The subject of this paper is the production and
decay of heavy vector-like fermions at hadron colliders, with special attention being
paid to the Higgs decay channel. In particular we will find that if a vector-like
fermion with mass M F ~< 1 TeV exists, a Higgs in the intermediate mass region
M n < 2 M w and decaying into qq cannot escape detection as the SSC.
It is easy to understand the relevant physics. Assume we add a vector-like quark
to the standard model. It will be stable in the absence of mixing with the known
fermions. This tells us that decay rates, and in general the physics of this new
fermion, are proportional to this mixing. Since the mixing results from the Yukawa
couplings giving masses to the standard fermions, that is to say from the
Higgs-fermion vertices, a dominant source of vector-like fermion decays is through
Higgs exchange. Moreover, these vertices are proportional to the corresponding
gauge boson-fermion vertices, because the latter themselves arise from the interplay
of current- and mass-fermion eigenstates which result from the mass generation
itself and thus from the same Yukawa couplings. The arbitrariness is (as always) due
to the mass of the new particle being unknown. (The Z c o u p l i n g s - like the H
ones - imply tree level flavour changing neutral currents. Many consequences have
been discussed elsewhere [1 14].)
The main point of the paper, the large branching ratio of a new vector-like
fermion into a Higgs, was presented in ref. [12] for the case of a new down quark at
the Tevatron. Here we present a more detailed discussion with emphasis on the
backgrounds for the different colliders and for the different extra vector-like
fermions in the 27 + 27 representation of E 6 [15]. Vector-like fermion production at
e + e - colliders was discussed elsewhere [13], taking into consideration the possibility
of an extra neutral gauge boson Z'. New vector-like lepton doublets were previously
considered at the SSC [14]. In all cases only vector boson decays were studied. Cross
sections are expected to be small at HERA for new vector-like fermions would have
to be produced through their mixing with standard fermions.
In sect. 2 we present the simplest possible cases. We add to the standard model
first one extra vector-like fermion with the quantum numbers of a down singlet D
quark, then an up down quark doublet ( u ) , and then an up singlet U quark, as well
J

as a singlet charged lepton E and a neutral charged lepton doublet (NE)(a heavy
neutral singlet N would be produced through its mixing with standard leptons, and
the corresponding cross section is negligible). The relevant lagrangian is spelled out.
The production cross sections are similar to those of the standard fermions, whereas
the decay rates are dictated by the different particle masses and the corresponding
kinematics. In sect. 3 we discuss the signatures and backgrounds at hadron colliders
(we work at the parton level). Finally sect. 4 is devoted to generalizations and
conclusions.
 lZ de/Aguila et a L / lliggs production 3

2. Production rates and branching ratios

The production of vector-like fermions is most efficient through the dominant

standard family diagonal couplings to gluons and electroweak gauge bosons, with
the difference that the W,tt± and Z~, couplings are vector-like, they couple to '/'y~'/'.
The decays are governed by the leading mixing terms. In table 1 we give the
lagrangian terms relevant for the different cases (in obvious notation). They are well
known [3] and the terms of present interest are those involving the standard Higgs
H. Let us discuss those involving a new down quark singlet D, already discussed in
refs. [9, 12]. We can choose a current eigenstate basis where the down mass matrix is
written as
dR DR

md m;
d~ m~ m
Z//a= (2.1)
m b m~
DL MQ

and zero elsewhere. MQ is the mass of the new vector-like down quark and m~ give
the mixing. The decay terms in table 1 result from working out the lagrangian in the
mass eigenstates to first order in m ~ / M << 1. (The Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa
matrix, C, appears when the up quarks are taken into account.) For the other cases
we proceed in a similar way, the difference being the proper initial matrices. In
particular, for an extra quark doublet they read
uR UR

UL ( A j
~'u =
UL m 1 m 2 m 3 M

g = C+ mc C',
k mt

dR DR

md
dL ms
J~d = (2.2)
mb
DL ml m2 m3 M
 TABLE 1
Relevant lagrangian terms for vector-like fermion production and decay

New
vector-like
fermion Dominant production terms

D "~QCD = -- i gs A a~, 1) Ta Y ~*D

'Y~QCD= ig*Aat,(UT~7 ~'U + I)T'~Y I'D)

U ~"gQCD = - ig, A a~,UTa yt' U

E £,°v+ z = eA~,J~M - eSw Zt, J~M;

Cw
Ja~ = Erie

+ Z - - eAp.JEM

_
g2 ZI,( NytH,¢
_
Ey~'E _ 2SWJEM
2 p. )
+ 2c w

+ ~ - W~+Nf~'E + h.c.: J~M = E-/~/:"

Dominant decay terms

gz - ,.1; _ mf \
-- D E - ttdci~7 D R) + h.c.
2Cw z~ ac, v~ MQ
__ D1 _ DI~

dRjYU MQ DR]

g2 Z~,ULTI, Q ULi_ IfUFt -ULi] +h.c.

+ 2c w

g2 mti _ ".l; . ]
2~'w Z~eL'V~MTEI" - tt~'77' EO + h.c.

,~ ( g2 __ ,*lj
=\ 7 W~+ NR YP" ML eRj
\
g2 -- D]j _ Dlj
2Cw Zt, E R y ~ ' ~ ep, j - l l E t f ' eR, ] + h.c.
 F. del Aguila et al. / Higgs production 5

where the 3 × 3 matrix A includes the standard up quark masses, the C matrix and
a new mixing matrix C', which is a priori partially observable. One could eventually
measure m i and C/m*] - rh*, which are the effective mixing parameters. Contribu-
tions of order m~mJM (mimJM 2) to light fermion masses (Cabibbo-
Kobayashi-Maskawa matrices) are negligible in our analysis. The absence of v R in
the minimal standard model simplifies the corresponding leptonic lagrangian terms
in table 1. An important observation is that the dominant decay terms are all
proportional.
Thus a new vector-like fermion F decays into W-+f, Zf and Hf (where f stands for
a standard fermion) with definite ratios, except for kinematical factors. The rates of
this novel source of boson production are similar for W +, Z and H. This distin-
guishes vector-like fermions, because if copiously produced at hadron colliders they
transform the latter into a small Higgs factory. The general conclusions for these
minimal extensions of the standard model will survive obvious generalizations as we
argue in sect. 4. Armed with table 1, we can now discuss production rates (we
concentrate on hadron colliders) and branching ratios. Note that new fermions are
mainly pair-produced because their mixing reduces associated production with
standard fermions.

2.1. NEW VECTOR-LIKE QUARKS

The most efficient way of pair-producing vector-like quarks, QQ, is through

strong interactions. The tree level cross section do/d/" for initial gg (qCt) partons [16]
is collected in ref. [17], eq. (5.17) [eq. (5.18)] and its erratum, in standard notation.
(Weak production from longitudinal W and Z fusion [18] is negligible for heavy
vector-like fermions which get their masses from explicit mass terms, and not from
the standard Yukawa couplings. Then scalar couplings result from mixing and are
suppressed.) The total cross section reduces to [17]

a(ab-~Q~)X) = f ¢ ; dM[l"(gi/M)dv_ f ° dz - M2 X a X b
a2Mo aln( M/~/s ) -- z 0

×{ ~-" [f(a'(xa,M2)f~b'(xh, M2)+f("'(x.,M2)fq(b'(xb, M2)]

flavours

do
X d7 ( qg~--+ QQ)

+S~"'(x., M2)f~e)(xb,
da
M2)~z (gg ~
Q~)) . (2.3)

where M is the QQ invariant mass, y the rapidity of the colliding partons

 F. delAguilaet aL / lfiggsproduction
TABLE2
Production cross sections for heavy quarks at present and future colliders. The expected number
of events is also given for the corresponding nominal luminosities

Vector-like QQ cross Number of

quark mass section [~q~dt events
Collider 0/s TeV) (GeV) (pb) (pb t y l) per year

Tevatron p~(1.8) 150 8 10 80

UNK p~(6) 300 7 100 700
LHC pp(17) 700 1.1 10a 11 × 103
SSC pp(40) 700 14 104 140 × 103

( x , , / , = ( M / ¢ s ) e + ' and z = cos 0", 0* the scattering angle of a Q in the center of

m a s s of the p a t t o n system QQ. F u r t h e r m o r e , z 0 = min[/3Q 1 t a n h ( l n ( f s - / M ) - [y], 1 ],
BQ = ( 1 - 4 M c ~ / M 2 ) , f are the p a r t o n d i s t r i b u t i o n functions a n d do/dz
= ~M2fiQdo/d~. W e collect in table 2 the c o r r e s p o n d i n g rates for present and
f u t u r e colliders a n d for illustrative vector-like quark masses MQ. (We do not
c o n s i d e r the C E R N collider because for MQ > M w the cross sections are too small
[19].) W e use E H L Q structure functions, set 1 [17], through the paper, with
Q2 = 4 M ~ in this case. Other structure functions [20, 21] give similar results. H i g h e r
o r d e r (strong) corrections are k n o w n [22] b u t we neglect them within our a p p r o x i -
m a t i o n s . N u m e r i c a l results must be u n d e r s t o o d as estimates because we do not
i n c l u d e f r a g m e n t a t i o n , detector simulation, etc . . . . . The p r o d u c t i o n cross sections
are those of a sequential quark because strong interactions are blind to the
e l e c t r o w e a k q u a n t u m numbers. This makes the vector-like quark b r a n c h i n g ratios
essential in o r d e r to distinguish a vector-like quark from a sequential one.
T h e b r a n c h i n g ratios for the decay of the new quarks are i m m e d i a t e l y calculated
using the c o r r e s p o n d i n g decay rates [13]

I-,l"l 2 xtj2(M , 2M, + 2 2 ) 2]

+ (Mo-
F(Q-3 Wqi)- 16 m(~") m~ q' -m(9~/q'

iml,12 xlJ2(M , Ma,

F(Q~Hqi )- 32 M~ MQM2 ( M ~ - M~ + m2q,), (2.4)

with X ( a , b, c) = a 4 + b 4 + c 4 - 2a2b 2 - 2a2c 2 - 2b2c 2. F ( Q ~ Z q i ) is o b t a i n e d

f r o m F ( Q --+ W q i ) by replacing M w by M z and dividing the whole expression by
2 c o s 2 0 w . W e have taken into account the mass of the final q u a r k mq (we use
m r = 100 G e V ) b u t neglected the C c) mixing. Branching ratios, as decay rates,
d e p e n d on the masses of the particles involved and on the mixing p a r a m e t e r s ml').
H o w e v e r , neglecting s t a n d a r d fermion masses total b r a n c h i n g ratios into W +, Z
 F. del Aguila et al. / Higgs production

TABLE 3
Decay branching ratios for a vector-like heavy quark a

D quark type U quark type

Q ---, W q Q --+ Z q Q --, H q Q --, W q Q -~ Z q Q ---, H q

MQ = 150 G e V

M H = 60 G e V 0.0 0.50 0.50 1.0 0.0 0.0

0.42 0.29 0.29 0.62 0.19 0.19
0.53 0.23 0.24 0.53 0.23 0.24
M H = 92 G e V 0.0 0.64 0.36 1.0 0.0 0.0
0.49 0.33 0.18 0.68 0.21 0.11
0.59 0.26 0.15 0.59 0.26 0.15

MQ = 300 G e V

M H = 92 G e V 0.43 0.31 026 0.57 0.20 0.23

0.49 0.28 0.23 0.53 0.25 0.22
0.52 0.26 0,22 0.52 0.26 0.22
M H = 150 G-eV 0.47 0.34 0.19 0.63 0.22 0.15
0.53 0.30 0.17 0.58 0.26 0.16
0.56 0.28 0.16 0.56 0.28 0.16

MQ = 700 G e V

M H = 150 G e V 0.49 0.27 024 0.52 0.25 0.23

0.50 0.27 0.23 0.51 0.26 0.23
0.51 0.26 023 0.51 0.26 0.23
M H = 300 G e V 0.52 0.29 0.19 0.55 0.27 0.18
0.54 0.28 0.18 0.54 0.28 0.18
0.54 0.28 0.18 0.54 0.28 0.18

aFor each boson we sum all the standard quark contributions. We take m t = 100 G c V and different
vector-like quark and Higgs masses. For each choice we display three cases: MQ >> Im~')l >2 Im{',)2], first
row: MQ >> Im[') I = Im[')l = Img')[, second row; MQ >> Im[[)2l >> [mg')l, third row.

a n d / o r H are independent of the mixing parameters. (That is, the f a c t o r s Iml')l 2/M(~
are c o m m o n to all the decays. Sometimes those ratios are written as additional
mixing angles [9].) This may not be a good approximation for the top quark mass,
m t. At any rate, according to table 1, a large m t would eventually translate into a
suppression of the Higgs decay rate for a new U quark singlet only for the case
m~ >> mr, 2. For a new D quark singlet such a heavy top results in an enhancement
of the Higgs branching ratio, whereas for a new (to) quark doublet the suppression
\ D /

or the enhancement depend on the particular signal. We postpone any further

discussion until sect. 3. In table 3 we give for illustration the branching ratios for
different mass values and mixing angles.
2.2. N E W V E C T O R - L I K E LEPTONS

As in the case of vector-like quarks, vector-like leptons couple little to the Higgs
and to longitudinal electroweak gauge bosons. (This makes inefficient the
8 F. del Aguila et al. / Higgs production

gluon-gluon and electroweak gauge boson fusion mechanisms [18, 23].) Then these
new leptons are mainly produced by the standard Drell-Yan mechanism. The cross
section for a charged lepton can be written

o( ab --+LLX) = f2¢TMLdMqn(M/~) dy
fin(eft~M) fozodz ~x,x~,
2

X{ flavoursZl [ fq~"(x., M2) f~h'( xh, M2)

+f~q")(xu,M2)f~qb)(xh, M2)]~z , (2.5)

where z 0 = min[/}L 1 tanh(ln(v/7/M) - [y[), 1], flL = (1 -- 4M2/M 2) and (in stan-
dard notation) [13, 24]

.
daq .
~ra2 flL f
. .
2 2 2)
dz M 2 2

+ 2 eLeq~l[ VlYq( 2 - ~8L2 + ~SLz

2 2) +aLaq2fiLZ ]

+~2[v2(Vq2 + a2)(2 - fiL2 + /~2z2)

+flLak(Vq + VLaLVqaq8BLZ]} (2.6)

where
1 M2(M2-M~)
2 2 ( M 2 - M 2 ) 2 + F z M2z 2
16SwCw

1 M4

~ 2 - 256S2wC2 ( M 2_ M2)2 + FZMz2

and the different charges are given in table 4. (In ref. [20] there is an extra factor
( 3 - ilL)/2 in d%/dz which we do not find.) The difference with the standard
model case is the vector-like character (couplings) of the new leptons (see tables 1
and 4). For a new vector-like lepton doublet ( ~y ) the same equations apply for NN
\
and EE production, but with the corresponding changes in table 4. For NE
production the W interchange gives a dOud/dZ formally equal to eq. (2.6) but
without the photon interchange (terms proportional to eLeq) and with M z, F z
replaced by M w, F w. The corresponding charges Qiud,NE are also given in table 4.
 F. de/Aguila et al. / ltiggs production 9

TABLE 4
Electric charge e/, and vector v/ and axial a/ couplings for standard quarks and for vector-like leptons

Fermion ej ~) aI

u-quark type ~
x ,2
1 - ~s w 1
d-quark type - ~ - 1 + 4~,~'~,
2 1
E singlet - 1 4s w 0
N doublet 0 2 0
E doublet 1 - 2 + 4s w 0
ud charge -- ~2Cw ~/2c w
N E charge 2~/2c w 0

(Eq. (2.5) must be trivially modified to allow for the ud annihilation.) Table 5
collects the total cross sections [eq. (2.5)] for different lepton masses and hadron
colliders, for illustration. Comparing tables 2 and 5, it is apparent that leptons are
more difficult to produce than quarks at hadron colliders. However, signals are
more striking and backgrounds less important for the same reason, as we discuss in
subsect. 2.6. The decays of these new leptons are governed by the corresponding
lagrangian terms in table 1. In all cases total branching ratios into W +, Z and H are
independent of the mixing parameters ml '~ because standard lepton masses are
negligible! (There is the subtlety, however, of a possible large r branching ratio
m 3') >> ml,2),
(') in which case r misidentification may become a problem.) Table 6
collects, for illustration, the branching ratios for different mass values (the decay
rate expressions are analogous to those of vector-like quarks, eq. (2.4)). As can be
observed, decay rates into Higgs are always large - given that N and E are almost
degenerate in mass for the (NE) doublet, their production and signals must always be
summed up! Let us now translate the total cross section numbers into more realistic
numbers for signals and backgrounds.

TABLE 5
Production cross sections (in pb) for heavy vector-like leptons at present and future collidcrs

Collider M L (GeV) E (N)

NN EE NE- + NE +

Tevatron 100 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.6

UNK 200 0.05 0.10 0.12 0.29
LHC 500 4 M 10 3 9 M 10 3 0.01 0.03
SSC 500 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.13
10 F. del Aguila et al. / Higgs production

TABLE6
Decay branching ratios for vector-likeheavy leptons. For each boson we sum all the standard
lepton contributions

N E
L~Wv L-oZd L--*H/ L-oW/ L-~Zv L--'Hv L-oWv L-oZd L-oHc~

ML = 100 GeV
MH = 60 GeV 0.51 0.07 0.42 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.14 0.86
MH = 92 GeV 0.85 0.11 0,04 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.74 0.26
ML = 200 GeV
MH = 92 GeV 0.55 0.27 0.18 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.59 0.41
MH = 150 GeV 0.63 0.31 0.06 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.83 0.17
ML = 500 GeV
Mn = 150 GeV 0.52 0.27 0.21 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.55 0.45
Mn = 300 GeV 0.58 0.30 0.12 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.72 0.28

3. Signatures and backgrounds

H e a v y f e r m i o n F F signals (and backgrounds) at h a d r o n colliders can be classified
b y the n u m b e r of lepton pairs (we include the n e u t r i n o missing/~t for this counting)
a n d the n u m b e r of large Pt jets. I n fact, vector-like fermions are pair produced a n d
t e n d to decay very fast into a s t a n d a r d fermion and an electroweak boson, the latter
d e c a y i n g i n t o two additional fermions (this if M H < 2 M w , in the Higgs b o s o n case).
Therefore, their signals are basically 6 leptons, 4 leptons + 2 jets, 2 leptons + 4 jets
a n d 6 jets. T h e b a c k g r o u n d s one should consider are s t a n d a r d model processes
l e a d i n g to the corresponding six fermion states. Their matrix elements are not
k n o w n at the m o m e n t , so one has to design a strategy in order to get a rough
estimate of their contributions.
O u r study is done at the p a r t o n level (without p a r t o n fragmentation, detector
s i m u l a t i o n . . . . ) where a quark or a gluon in a final state is considered a h a d r o n i c jet,
a n d cuts are directly applied to leptons a n d jets. We essentially apply two cuts to
signals a n d backgrounds. Final fully detectable fermions (charged leptons a n d jets)
are required to lie in a given interval of pseudorapidity, 17/[ <*/max (this means
k e e p i n g the central events), and, in addition, to have a m i n i m u m transverse
m o m e n t u m , Pt > P t TM, (including in this case neutrinos). K n o w i n g that signals can
be c o n s i d e r e d as isotropically produced (in first a p p r o x i m a t i o n ) a n d that the Pt of
the different final products tends to be large for large F F i n v a r i a n t masses, whilst
b a c k g r o u n d s prefer the f o r w a r d - b a c k w a r d direction a n d low Pt values, our cuts will
i m p r o v e the s i g n a l / b a c k g r o u n d ratios. We choose typical pp, in values for every
collider we consider and a c o m m o n ,/m~ = 4, for illustration.
 IE del Aguila et aL / Itiggs production 11

Our final goal is to determine the feasibility of detecting a (intermediate) Higgs

boson, once a F~" has been produced. We concentrated on six final fermion signals,
which are the relevant ones for observing a new fermion. In these samples there will
be a sizable percentage of events with a Higgs (for a vector-like fermion) if H -+ qq.
For a heavy Higgs ( M H > 2 M w ) which will decay mainly into WW, ZZ, one should
look to the 8 (10) final fermion signals for observing the Higgs, once the existence of
the heavy vector-like fermion is established by looking at the six fermion modes.
For both quark and leptons, the important signals will be (({, { v ) + j j j j . For a
quark one selects those events with the lepton pair reconstructing a W or a Z boson.
For a lepton one does the opposite: one cuts on the lepton pair invariant mass to
make sure it has not originated from a W or Z decay, Mei.f . >> M z. In such a
reduced sample one looks for events with M I 2 ~ , ~ j - - M j , j 3 j 4 - - M ~ _ ( M ~ j , j ~ - -
M ~ < ~ j , j - - M L ) in order to isolate those events coming from QQ (LL) and to
determine the heavy quark (lepton) mass M o (ML). In the lepton case the two jets
accompanying the leptons often reconstruct a W or a Z. Then comparing the
charged ({vjjjj) and neutral (g(jjjj) signals, the vector-like or sequential character of
the new fermion can be decided. Once M v is known one comes back to the initial
total FF sample (that is to say, one associates three fermions with F and the other
three fermions with F). An analysis of the two-jet invariant mass should then signal
the presence of the Higgs channel (together with the W and Z channels) and allow
for the determination of the Higgs mass.
Signals are estimated using the expressions given in sect. 2 and assuming isotropic,
on-shell decays of vector-like fermions and subsequent bosons. (Results are compat-
ible within our approximations with a proper treatment of the polarization ampli-
tudes [25].)

3.1. VECTOR-LIKE QUARKS

The signatures from QQ production have 6 jets, 2 leptons + 4 jets and 4 leptons
plus 2 jets. In table 7a we give the fraction of Q 0 decays into the channels with at
most one neutrino (in parentheses there is for each case the fraction of events which
are Higgs mediated if H --+ qgt)- g stands for e ~ and ~a+ and v for their neutrinos. In
table 7b we quote the cross sections (in the absence of any cut) for different
colliders and for the Q masses indicated for the signals in table 7a involving leptons.
The results of table 7a were obtained using m t = 100 GeV and the standard
model decay rates for W and Z, whereas the Higgs was supposed to decay into
quarks only. For calculating the fractions in table 7 we approximated all different
cases in table 3 to a common average ratio: W / Z / H = 2 / 1 / 1 , resulting in the
branching ratios

WW/ZZ/HH/WZ/WH/ZH = 4/1/1/4/4/2. (3.1)

In the absence of final flavour identification there is no difference between U and D

I2 ki del Aguila et al. / Higgs production

TABLE 7a
F r a c t i o n of (vector-like) QQ) decays into final states with at most one neutrino. {' s t a n d s for c a n d ~t. We
take an average for the b r a n c h i n g ratio into W, Z and H (see text) and assume that H always decays into
qq. F o r each mode wc give in parentheses the fraction of events with at least one Higgs

D e c a y mode ( F r a c t i o n of events
Signal fraction with a Higgs)

qTq[{{¢ 3 × 10 - 4 ( )
q~{f{v 4 × 10 . 3 ( )
qqq£q {'{ 0.03 (0.33 )
qYqqq[v 0.17 (0.33)
qqqqqq 0.59 (0.55)

quark singlets, whereas the difference with the ( ~ ) doublet is simply that in this
case both U and D contributions have to be summed up, due to the assumed
degeneracy of their masses, resulting in cross sections a factor of two larger than
those of the singlet cases (table 7b). This may not be enough to distinguish between
singlet and doublet vector-like quarks in hadron colliders. The best way to distin-
guish between them and a sequential quark is provided by the ratio

f?jjjj/dvjjjj - ~6(0), (3.2)

for a vector-like (sequential) quark.

TABLE 7b
Total cross sections (in pb) for the signals with at least one lepton, and for different colliders and
illustrative vector-like q u a r k masses

qCt E?E• qq {?d v qYqqZqt@ q q q q t~v

u) 1 U 1 U 1 U

Tevatron
MQ = 150 GeV 2 X 10 -3 0.03 0.2 1.3

UNK
MQ = 300 GeV 2 × 10 3 0.03 0.2 1.2

LHC
MQ = 700 G e V 3 × I0 4 4 × I0 -3 0.03 0.2

SSC
MQ = 700 GeV 4 × 10 3 0.05 0.4 2.4
 E del A guila et al. / Higgs production 13

From table 7a it can be inferred that the most likely final state is the 6 yet one,
whereas the 4 lepton + 2 jet final states have the smallest branching ratios, and the 2
lepton + 4 jet events the intermediate ones. Let us turn now to the discussion of the
backgrounds of the Q~) signals.
The 6 jet signal competes with a presumably huge QCD background, and with
additional background from ti production. Although the complete 2g ~ 6g matrix
elements are already available [26], we did not consider such a signal in our analysis
of QQ production. On the contrary, the 4 lepton channels are the cleanest signals
from the experimental point of view, but at the price of having cross sections which
are too small. We are left therefore with 2 lepton channels and striking signatures of
two charged or one charged and missing transverse momentum plus 4 jets in the
final state. From table 7a one realizes that the charged current channel is a factor
6 times larger than the neutral one, so for illustration we concentrate our
discussion of backgrounds on the former case. (Remember that the ratio
d~jjjj/(vjjjj - 1/6(0) [eq. (3.2)] is the signature for vector-like (sequential) quarks,
implying that the study of both signals is necessary for a complete analysis.)
There are essentially three sources of {vjjjj backgrounds in the standard model:

(i) ti --+ (Wq)(Wq) ~ {vqCtqq ;

(ii) qCtqCt(W~ { v ) '

(iii) qC~(W~ t ' r ) ( W , Z ---, q q ) .

The matrix elements of processes (ii) and (iii) are not available at the moment. The
same analysis we use for vector-like quarks can be applied to process (i), where the
only uncertain quantity is the top quark mass. For processes (ii) and (iii) we proceed
as follows. We take the background, Wjjjj or WWjj (with the appropriate subse-
quent decay of the W) and imagine considering in turn Wjj [27], Wjjj [28], Wjjjj or
WW [29], WWj [30], WWjj and apply the same set of cuts (when possible) to all
those processes with an increasing number of jets. Computing the cross sections for
the first process in both cases (given a set of cuts), one can obtain a rough estimate
of the other processes with additional jets multiplying the former results by a factor
0.2 for each extra jet present in the final state. Such a strategy, although
oversimplified, can be tested with the first step in the chains of additional jets and,
at this stage, proves to give good estimations of the results [28, 30]. This encourages
us to go one step further and present (rough) results of two extra jets with respect to
the initial, calculable processes. (Note that we cannot properly estimate the (essen-
tial) effect of Q reconstruction, which makes the use of the correct matrix elements
compulsory when they become available.)
The first process, ti background, turns out to be indistinguishable (except for the
total cross section) from the QQ signal in the fujjjj channel for M O - mt. One has
14 F. del Aguila et al. / Higgsproduction

TABLE 8
Expected number of events (for the luminosities in table 2) for Q Q ---, w w j j ---, #vjjjj; tt ---, w w j j ~ dvjjjj
(where the top-type quark mass m t = mQ); Wjj ~ ( v j j , with the two Q C D jets well separated in the lego
plot (Sr > 0.5) and " f a k i n g " a W (Mji ~ [ M w + 10 GeV]); and the W W --, Evjj c o n t i n u u m . W e show the
worst case with m t = MQ: detection is simpler if the masses are different. All final fermions satisfy
transverse momentum, Pt, and pseudorapidity (except for the neutrino), ~/, cuts. The Wjj background is
less of a problem for the SSC than for L H C because a larger Pt cut can be used. In parentheses we
estimate the Wjjjj(WWjj) backgrounds multiplying the Wjj ( W W ) results b y a reduction factor 0.2 for
each additional jet. For the Tevatron, at the values used ( M e = 150 GeV, 10 p b - 1 / y r ) the number of
events is too small for a signal to be detected, but if MQ decreases a little or the luminosity increases a
little, detection should be possible

Tevatron UNK LHC SSC

[ MQ = 150 GeV] [ MQ = 300 (}eW] [ MQ = 700 (}eW] [ MQ = 700 (}eV]
I~1 <4 I~i <4 I~1 <4 1,71 <4
Pt > 10 GeV Pt > 10 GeV Pt > 50 GeV Pt > 100 GeV

Q Q ---, WWjj - , {vjjjj

1

ti -* WWjj ---, ~vjjjj 20 174 1059 3770

Wjj ---, ~'vjj 174 19 360 25 800 1040
Mjj ~ [ M w + 10 GeV] ( - 7) ( - 774) ( - 1032) ( - 42)
3r > 0.5
W W ---, {vjj 13 524 1820 590
( - 0.5) ( - 21) ( - 73) ( - 24)

to rely on the {•jjjj signal to distinguish them: for QQ) production the cross sections
are smaller than for Evjjjj, whereas for t] the #~jjjj signal is absent (due to the
absence of tree level flavour changing neutral currents for standard quarks). For
MQ >> m t the top background in the charged channel could be reduced below the
new signal.
In table 8 we give the estimated number of events (using the luminosities of table
2) for the (vjjjj signal (we took into account that only 44% of the signal comes from
W ---, q~t), top, Wjjjj and WWjj backgrounds. We demanded that the final fermions
satisfy the pseudorapidity (except for the v) and transverse momentum cuts speci-
fied in table 8. We also give the expected number of events for Wjj and WW
processes. The Wjj sample was demanded to satisfy two additional cuts: M5 E [M w
+ 10 GeV], in which two jets "fake" a W, and with both jets well separated in the
lego plot, 8r = ~/(80) 2 + (8~) 2 > 0.5, where 80 is the separation on the azimuthal
angle in the transverse plane and 8~ the corresponding separation in pseudorapid-
ity. We find, with our set of cuts and heavy quark masses, that the signal becomes
comparable to the Wjj and WW processes for the SSC, and is one or two orders of
magnitude smaller for the other colliders. Once one estimates the real six fermion
backgrounds of the signals (see above) one concludes that signals are of the same
 F. del Aguila et al. / ttiggs production 15

order as the backgrounds for the Tevatron, U N K and LHC colliders, and dominate
by - 2 orders of magnitude the background at the SSC. The main reason for larger
background/signal ratios at U N K and LHC is the more relaxed cuts (compared to
the ones required at the other colliders). We made these choices for illustration,
without optimizing cuts. More stringent cuts on Pt would greatly reduce these ratios
and, to some extent, also the signals [31].
Since the capability of hadron colliders for efficiently producing heavy quark
pairs has been established, we discuss how to determine the masses of the particles
involved and their character. The first indication of a new quark is a measured cross
section larger than expected from the standard model sources of {pjjjj events. QQ
initiated processes would be identified (and the heavy quark mass measured)
demanding
MQ -~ Mw(e~)j -~ Mw(jj)j , (3.3)

where one of the four jets will be associated with the lepton pair. (Only the
transverse momentum of the neutrino is known through the missing transverse
momentum measurement. Assuming that Ev comes from a real W, the longitudinal
momentum of the u can be determined up to a sign, and both possibilities have to
be taken into account.) As we stated above the neutral-to-charged ratio in eq. (3.2)
then allows us to distinguish vector-like and sequential quarks. Previously a similar
analysis of the gZjjjj sample had to be performed, in particular one should require

Me -- Mztt/)) -- Mw@)). (3.4)

Finally, for vector-like quarks one can look for a intermediate mass Higgs in the
initial ( ~ , ~'~)jjjj samples, relaxing eqs. (3.3) and (3.4) and requiring only

Mw(e~)j -- Mjjj = Mz(t?)j -- M e , (3.5)

and then plotting the invariant mass of two of the three jets reconstructing M e. The
standard gauge boson peaks corresponding to W, Z, H --* qY:t must be observable. A
scatter plot of the hypothetical MQ versus Mjj could be used to enhance
signal/background, by selecting the regions that have a concentration for Me and
have Mjj = M z, M w or a concentration at any possible M . . Note that eq. (3.5)
ensures the sample to be ti background free and to have a small contamination of
the other backgrounds we consider.
In addition, other samples, as for instance the samples with more than one v
(although they are harder to control) should be consistent with the results we could
find. Also, if some L'~EZjj events with

Mz(~i)j = Mz(~i)j -- M O (3.6)

are found, a new determination of MQ is obtained.

1f9 P~ del Agutla et al. / tt:ggs productton

3.2. VECTOR-LIKE LEPTONS

Vector-like lepton cross sections are smaller than the vector-like quark ones at
hadron colliders, because leptons are mainly produced by Drell-Yan fusion. This
translates into a smaller upper bound on the accessible vector-like masses.
Once a LL pair has been produced, its signals involve two leptons plus either four
extra jets, or two extra leptons and two jets, or four additional leptons, depending
on the decay channels of the two bosons into which each initial lepton decays. The
decay fractions for a singlet E and a doublet ( ~ ) into signals including at most one
/

neutrino are given in table 9a. In parentheses we give the fraction of Higgs mediated
events. We have approximated the W / Z / H branching ratios to 2 / 1 / 1 for the E
singlet, although the values quoted in table 6 oscillate for the illustrative cases we
consider, especially for the choices of masses near threshold. Within such an
approximation, the relative gauge boson content in EE events is the same as for the
D D case, given in eq. (3.1). In the doublet case, N always decays into WE and E
into either Z f or HC with rates given in table 6. We approximate the Z / H ratio to
one for table 9. In this case the relative total gauge boson content depends on the
production cross section (table 5) because, in contrast with the quark case, they are
flavour dependent. In table 9b we give the total cross sections (with no cuts) for the
different signals and colliders we consider. The E~tvjj, f6jjjj and E~jjjj are the
biggest ones. Let us discuss the E~jjjj signal first. The lepton pair does not come
from a common source. In fact E(~) originates from L(L), so their joint invariant
mass is not restricted to be close to M z. This simple characteristic allows us to
distinguish such 2 lepton + 4 jet signal from many of the possible backgrounds
(vector-like quarks included!). These contain either EZ pairs from Z decays or from
WW ~ t~vl, where missing Pt is present and gives a distinctive signature from the
one we are considering. (The same argument can be formulated saying that the two
leptons resulting from the two-body decays of the new heavy leptons, are often back
to back (in the transverse plane) as has been emphasized [32] for standard heavy
leptons, in contradistinction with possible backgrounds from W a n d / o r Z produc-
tion). We have not performed a careful analysis of the background contribution to
the E2qClqq signal, but we believe that they have to be very small when race is far
from M z. (Another possibility for producing (~ with m ~? ~ M z would be processes
with 4 leptons where two of them escape detection. However, their contributions are
expected to be small.) Thus, in order to look for a heavy lepton in the f(jjjj sample,
with all final leptons and jets satisfying the cuts on pseudorapidity and transverse
momentum (similarly as for quarks in subsect. 3.1), one demands the lepton pair
mass to be somewhat larger than m z in order to reject all Z contributions. The
remaining events should be analyzed looking for one lepton-two jet associations
such that
M ejj -~ Mejj = M L , (3.7)

M L being the measured mass of the reconstructed heavy lepton. The expected
 TABLE 9
T h e s a m e as in table 7 b u t for (vector-like) L L

NN EE NE
Decay mode ( F r a c t i o n of events Decay mode ( F r a c t i o n o f events Decay mode ( F r a c t i o n of events Decay mode ' F r a c t i o n of events
Signal fraction with a Higgs) fraction w i t h a Higgs) fraction with a H i g g s ) fraction w i t h a Higgs)

{?{'?(? 3 × 10 - 4 ( ) -- ( ) 10 3 (_) _ ( ) .~
f(E/~{'v ( ) (--) -- (--) 7 X 10 . 3 (--)
#?#?q7~ 0.01 (0.59) -- (--) 0.06 (0.59) 0.02 ( )
{?#vq7~ 0.01 (--) 0.30 ( ) -- (--) 0.19 (0.59) ~.
d~q~qq 0.18 (0.83) 0.46 ( ) 0.72 (0.83) 0.58 (0.59) ~"
{vqqqq 0.29 (0.59) ( ) ( ) ( )

:z:

Edg'Eqgq f{Cvqq fEqgtqgq {vq~qq

Tevatron
M e = 100 G e V 3 × 10 - 5 3 x 10 - 4 -- 4 X 10 3 10 3 0.03 10 - 3 0.2 0.02 0.7 0.03 --

UNK
10 4 - - 2×10 3 7×10 4
M L = 200 G e V 10 s 0.01 5 x 10 4 0.08 9 × 10 - 3 0.3 0.01

LHC
M L = 500 G e V 10 - 6 10 s 2×10 -4 5x10 .5 l0 3 4×10 s 8×10 3 7×10 4 0.03 10 - 3

SSC
M L=500GeV 5x10 -6 4x 10 - 5 -- 9x10 -4 2x10 -4 5x10 3 2x10 4 0.04 3×10 3 0.1 5x10 3 _
18 k] del Aguila et al. / Higgs production

TABLE 10
Expected n u m b e r of events (for the luminosities in table 2) for the d o m i n a n t LL decay signals. All final
fermions satisfy transverse m o m e n t u m , Pt, and pseudorapidity (except for the neutrino), 7, cuts. We
also cut on the invariant mass of the two leptons Mgt ' ~,~ to enforce that they do not originate from a Z
or W decay. (For the E~{ujj signal see the text)

Tevatron UNK LHC SSC

( M L = 100 GeV) ( ME = 200 GeV) ( M L = 500 GeV) ( M L = 500 GeV)
I~l < 4 Inl < 4 I~1 < 4 I~1 < 4
Pt > 10 GeV Pt > 10 GeV Pt > 50 GeV Pt > 50 GeV
N o Me.c,t,, cut M~q, ~ > 100 GeV Mt~, t~ > 200 GeV Mr?, t~ > 200 GeV

f{jjjj E 0.01 0.5 1 5

(N) 0.9 18 54 239
fvjjjj E 0.02 0.9 2 9

{~Evjj E 7 x 10 - 4 0.03 0.08 0.3

04

number of events for the different vector-like leptons and hadron colliders consid-
ered (using the luminosities quoted in table 2) are given in table 10 for a given
choice of the heavy lepton mass, and the cuts indicated. Standard sequential heavy
leptons have similar cross sections and signals. However, they can be distinguished
from the vector-like ones with a good reconstruction of the mass of the two jets Mjj
accompanying the lepton [see eq. (3.7)]. If a sizable number of events have m~ -- m z
(E singlets decay into a Z 64% of the time, and ( ~ ) doublets do it often), we would
have a clear indication of the vector-like nature of the leptons. (Standard ones only
decay into W, through charged currents.)
A similar analysis must be done for t%jjjj once M L is known (from the E~ajjjj
analysis). Events satisfying
-- -- a c L (3.8)

would establish the singlet vector-like nature of the heavy leptons (see table 10). In
this case the primary E decay gives vW with subsequent boson decay into qq, so the
jet pair associated to the v must fulfill M~ = M w.
Finally the signal {ta{'ujj can be analyzed in a similar way and used to check the
consistency of the results obtained from the other channels.
Vector-like fermions are, like vector-like quarks, a source of Higgs production,
which shows up via the invariant mass of the two-jet pairs accompanying the
standard final leptons (except for the g't~gvjj channel and for the singlet E). The
quoted fractions of events with a Higgs in table 9a were estimated assuming an
intermediate Higgs mass and that H ---, qq with a branching ratio equal 1.
 F. del Aguila et al. / Higgs production 19

A final comment is devoted to the ~- lepton. Our analysis for L decays relies on a
good lepton (e,/~) identification. However~ if the mixing parameters were such that
m~') >> m[')2, the ~- lepton would be copiously produced in L decays. If it could not
be efficiently identified, a more careful (and involved) analysis would be required
and our conclusions should be revised.

4. Conclusions and generalizations

We have discussed vector-like fermion production at hadron colliders, and its
relevance for the detection of the standard Higgs boson. We have concentrated on
the intermediate mass region, M H < 2 M w, where the standard Higgs detection is
more problematic [34]. In table 11 we give the number of events with such a Higgs
(H ~ qq~ for the different vector-like fermion masses, signals, hadron colliders and
cuts considered in sects. 2 and 3. In particular, we conclude that if a new vector-like
fermion with a mass M v ~< 1 TeV exists, a standard Higgs in the intermediate mass
region cannot escape detection at the SSC. If M H > 2 M w the number of events with
a Higgs in the FF sample is similar to those quoted in table 11, but gives signals
with 8 (or 10) final fermions. The jet pair from a Higgs in table 11 must be replaced
by the four fermions coming from H - ~ WW, ZZ. For this range of heavy Higgs
masses, however, direct pair gauge boson production mediated by a Higgs will
eventually give better signals [35]. At any rate, the FF should also be observable. In
this case (and also in the case of an intermediate mass Higgs if established in some
other way [34]) the absence of such events would bound M v. (Although the best
way for establishing the existence of a new fermion is looking at its W and Z
decays.) If a heavy vector-like fermion is found, and no decay F ~ H + f is found,
any model of the Higgs sector is very constrained.
A large part of our work has been devoted to the detection of a vector-like
fermion, a step which should precede or be taken simultaneously with the Higgs
search we propose. Vector-like fermions have masses unrelated to the standard
model symmetry breaking and are therefore unbounded. They can be distinguished
from a sequential heavy fermion because they have tree level flavour changing
neutral currents [11]. They decay into Wf, Zf and Hf (f being a standard fermion)
with similar frequency. In fact, the corresponding couplings are proportional. Some
of the signals, however, coincide for a vector-like and a new sequential fermion. In
these cases they are backgrounds of each other. With appropriate cuts the signal to
(other) background ratios are larger than one; for distinguishing between vector-like
and sequential fermion production we must compare between different final signa-
tures. Looking to the {~jjjj, {vjjjj six final fermion signals and cutting on pseudora-
pidity and transverse momentum and demanding W a n d / o r Z reconstruction we
can reduce the backgrounds below the signals for Q~) production, allowing for a
measurement of MQ. (For instance, the cuts in table 11 are appropriate for the
Tevatron and the SSC, but the cuts for the other colliders are not stringent enough).
20 F. del A guila et al. / Higgs production

TABLE 11
Expected n u m b e r of events for the dominant F F signals in the Higgs channel, with the same cuts as in
tables 8 and 10

{vjjjj f?jjjj f?Yvjj

Tevatron
MQ = 150 GeV D = U
I~1 < 4 4 0.6

M E = 100 GcV E 0.01 9 X 10 -3

I~1 < 4
p , > 10 GeV (N) 0.3 0.07

UNK
MQ = 300 GeV D = U
I~1 < 4 32 5

M L = 200 GeV E 0.5 0.5

I~1 < 4
,>,ooev 10
Me,', e~ > 100 GeV

LHC
MQ = 700 GeV D = U
t~1 < 4 196 30
1 U
pt > 50 GeV =2(D)
M E = 500 GeV E 1
I~1 < 4
p,> 50GeV (N) 31

Met, r~ > 200 OeV

SSC
MQ = 700 GeV D = U
Inl < 4 699 107
i U
Pt> 10GeV =2(D)
M L = 500 GeV E 4
I~1 < 4
133 28
Mee, z~ > 200 GeV
 F. del Aguila et al. / Higgs production 21

For leptons an extra cut on the invariant mass of the two leptons produced in the
initial two-body decays (the only two leptons in the dominant signals) is required to
get rid of the large backgrounds resulting from Z ~ g( and W ~ t'v production,
M~?,~,,>> M z. Having established the existence of a new heavy fermion, to distin-
guish between a vector-like and a sequential one we must compare charged and
neutral decay processes. Finally, looking at the two jet invariant mass of the three
partons reconstructing M v (for M H < 2Mw) in the complete FF sample, the Higgs
can be detected and its mass M n measured.
Our numerical results were rough estimates because, in particular, we worked at
the parton level and neglected QCD corrections, with no proper background
estimates, without detector simulation, etc .... We did not discuss extreme cases
where the mixing parameters are chosen to force the new vector-like quark (lepton)
to decay mainly into a heavy top (~-). In view of the numerical results we believe
that our approximations are sufficient to have a good grasp of the main physics.
Vector-like leptons have cross sections too small for detection at present hadron
colliders, whereas a relative light vector-like quark (Me > Mw) could be detectable
at the Tevatron (but not at the SpaS). Larger hadron colliders, in particular the
SSC, have more chances of discovering the presence of heavy (vector-like) fermions.
We have discussed the simplest extensions of the standard model with extra
vector-like fermions. If more than one heavy vector-like fermion exists, the analysis
still holds. The mass terms invariant under the standard model symmetries (which
are the main source of vector-like fermion masses) can be diagonalized without any
loss of generality, and what we discussed above applies to each mass eigenstate of
the vector-like fermions. Each vector-like family will have its own mass and mixings
with the standard fermions. If the new replicas were degenerate in mass, their cross
sections would add (in particular, for three families, the cross sections would be
three times larger [12]). In models with an extended and complicated Higgs sector
the details may be different (as in the case of supersymmetric models, which are
under consideration). A fourth sequential family a n d / o r large mC)/MF mixings
may invalidate our approximations (for we only keep leading terms in mCl/Mv)
and part of our conclusions.
Our basic purpose is simply to alert experimenters to the new opportunities to
explore the Higgs sector should vector-like quarks (leptons) exist. If they do exist,
the Tevatron collider becomes a Higgs boson factory instead of a machine where
low production rates and difficult signatures render it essentially useless for Higgs
bosons, and at the SSC it becomes far easier to find intermediate-mass Higgs
bosons.

We thank C. Albajar, U. Baur, L. Di Lella, K. Jakobs, R. Kleiss and M. Quir6s

for clarifying discussions. Two of us (F.A. and L1.A.) acknowledge the kind
hospitality of the CERN Theory Group.
22 F. del Aguila et al. / Higgs production

Re(erenees
[1] P. Ramond, in Proc. 4th Kyoto summer Institute on Grand unified theories and related topics
(Kyoto, Japan, 1981), ed. M. Konuma and T. Maskawa (World Science, Singapore, 1981);
Standard model vector-like leptons were used (but with very low masses) by T.P. Cheng and L.F. Li,
Phys. Rev. D16 (1977) 1429
[2] F. del Aguila and M.J. Bowick, Phys. Lett. Bl19 (1982) 142
[3] F. del Aguila and M.J. Bowick, Nucl. Phys. B224 (1983) 107
[4] P. Fishbane, K. Garners, S. Meshkov and R. Norton, Phys. Rev. D32 (1985) 1189:
P. Fishbane, R. Norton and M. Rivard, Phys. Rev. D33 (1986) 2632
[5] R.W. Robinett, Phys. Rev. D33 (1986) 1908;
V. Barger, N. Deshpande, R.J.N. Phillips and K. Whisnant, Phys. Rev. D33 (1986) 1912:
M.J. Duncan and P. Langacker, Nucl. Phys. B277 (1986) 285:
S.M. Barr, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55 (1986) 2778;
J.A. Grifols, A. M6ndez and J. Sol,t, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57 (1986) 2348;
J.L. Hewett and T.G. Rizzo, Z. Phys. C34 (1987) 49:
B. Mukhopadhyaya, A. Ray and A. Raychaudhuri, Phys. Lett. B186 (1987) 147
[6] J. Bernabfu, A. Santamaria, J. Vidal, A. M6ndez and J.W.F. Valle, Phys. Lett. B187 (1987) 303:
P. Langacker and D. London, Phys. Rev. D38 (1988) 886, 907
[7] W. BuchmiJller and M. Gronau, Phys. Lett. B220 (1989) 641:
R. Barbieri and J. Hall, Nucl. Phys. B319 (1989) 1;
T.G. Rizzo, University of Wisconsin-Madison preprint, M A D / P H / 4 8 0 , 1989;
M.J. Duncan, CERN preprint, CERN-TH.5429/89
[8] F. del Aguila and J. Cort6s, Phys. Lett. B156 (1985) 243;
F. del Aguila, M.K. Chase and J. Cort6s, Nucl. Phys. B271 (1986) 61
[9] F. del Aguila, G.L. Kane and M. Quir6s, Phys. Lett. B196 (1987) 531~
J. Vidal, Phys. Rev. D38 (1988) 865;
K.S. Babu and L. Roszkowski, Nucl. Phys. B317 (1989) 97
[10] B. All6s, Phys. Lett. B221 (1989) 343
[11] G.L. Kane and M. Peskin, Nucl. Phys. B195 (1982) 29
[12] F. del Aguila, G.L. Kane and M. Quir6s, Phys. Rev. Lett. 63 (1989) 942
[13] F. del Aguila, E. Laerman and P. Zerwas, Nucl. Phys. B297 (1988) 1
[14] V. Barger, N.G. Deshpande, W.Y. Keung, M.H. Reno and M. Ruiz-Altaba, Mod. Phys. Lett. A2
(1987) 437
[15] I. Ghrsey, P. Ramond and P. Sikivie, Phys. Lett. B60 (1976) 177:
Y. Achiman and B. Stech, Phys. Lett. B77 (1978) 389;
Q. Shaft, Phys. Lett. B79 (1978) 301:
H. Ruegg and T. Schhcker, Nucl. Phys. B161 (1979) 388;
R. Barbieri and D.V. Nanopoulos, Phys. Lett. B91 (1980) 369
[16] B.L. Combridge, Nucl. Phys. B151 (1979) 489
[17] E. Eichten, I. Hinchliffe, K. Lane and C. Quigg, Rev. Mod. Phys. 56 (1984) 579: (E) 58 (1986) 1065,
and references therein
[18] S. Dawson and S.S.D. Willenbrock, Nucl. Phys. B284 (1987) 449
[19] C. Albajar et al. (UA1 Collaboration), Z. Phys. C37 (1988) 489, 505; Phys. Lett. B213 (1988) 405:
L. Di Lella, private communication
[20] D. Duke and J. Owens, Phys. Rev. D30 (1984) 49
[21] A.D. Martin, R.G. Roberts and W.J. Stirling, Phys. Rev. D37 (1988) 1161
[22] P. Nason, S. Dawson and R.K. Ellis, Nucl. Phys. B303 (1988) 607;
G, Altarelli, M. Diemoz, G. Martinelli and P. Nason, Nucl. Phys. B308 (1988i 724;
W. Beenakker, H. Kuijf and W.L. van Neerven, Phys. Rev. D40 (1989) 54
[23] S.S.D. Willenbrock and D.A, Dicus, Phys. Lett. B156 (1985) 429
[24] Particle Data Book, M. Aguilar-Benitez et al., Phys. Lett. B204 (1988) 1
[25] H, Baer, V. Barger and R.J. Phillips, Phys. Rev. D32 (1985) 688
 F. del Aguila et al. / Higgs production 23

[26] F.A. Berends, W.T. Giele and H. Kuijf, Leiden University preprint, 1989;
S.J. Parke and T.R. Taylor, Phys. Rev. Lett. 56 (1986) 2459
[27] W.J. Stirling, R. Kleiss and S.D. Ellis, Phys. Lett. B163 (1985) 261;
J.F. Gunion, Z, Kunszt and M. Soldate, Phys. Lett. B163 (1985) 389: (E) B168 (1986) 427
[28] F.A. Berends, W.T. Giele, H. Kuijf, R. Kleiss and W.J. Stirling, Phys. Lett. B224 (1989) 237;
K. Hagiwara and D. Zeppenfeld, Nucl. Phys. B313 (1989) 560
[29] R.W. Brown and K.O. Mikaeliam Phys. Rev. D19 (1979) 922
[30] U. Baur, E.W.W. Glover and J.J. van der Bij, Nucl. Phys. B318 (1989) 106
[31] F. del Aguila, L1. Ametller, R.D. Field and L1. Garrido, Phys. Lett. B201 (1988) 375:B221 (1989)
408
[32] I. Hinchliffe, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A4 (1989) 3867;
see also V. Barger, T. Han and J. Ohnemus, Phys. Rev. D37 (1988) 1174
[33] H. Baer, V. Barger, H. Goldberg and J. Ohnemus, Madison preprint, M A D / P H / 4 2 7 :
H. Baer, V. Barger and R.J.N. Phillips, Phys. Rev. D39 (1989) 2809: 3310; Madison preprint
MAD/PH/458:
J.L. Rosner, Phys. Rev. D39 (1989) 3297
[34] J.F. Gunion, G.L. Kane and J. Wudka, Nucl. Phys. B229 (1988) 231
[35] 3.F. Gunion, H.E. Haber, G.L. Kane and S. Dawson, The physics of Higgs bosons, UCD-89-4,
SCIPP-88/11, BNL-41644, to be published