# Search for the RS model with a small curvature through photon-induced process at the LHC

###### Abstract

In this paper, potential of the LHC to explore the phenomenology of the Randall-Sundrum-like scenario with the small curvature for the process through the subprocess is examined for two forward detector acceptances, and . This process is known to be one of the most clean channels. The sensitivity bounds on the anomalous model parameters have been found at the confidence level for various LHC integrated luminosity values.

## I Introduction

The Standard Model (SM) gives very satisfactory description of high energy physics at an energy scale of electroweak interactions. It is in perfect agreement with current experimental results. However, there are many open equations at the SM. One of this is the hierarchy problem. The extra dimensional models in high energy physics provide possible candidates for this problem. In this respect, these models have drawn attention over the recent years. There are many phenomenology paper of new physics models at the LHC. These searches generally include the usual proton-proton inelastic processes in which the interacted protons dissociate into jets. Due to these jets, such interactions give a very crowded environment. These formed jets create some uncertainties and make it difficult to detect the signals from the new physics which is beyond the SM. However, exclusive production provides a very clean environment. These type of processes have been much less examined in the literature. Both interacted protons remain intact, hence they do not dissociate into partons in the exclusive productions. ATLAS and CMS collaborations prepared a physics program of forward physics with extra detectors symmetrically located in a distance from the interaction point. These new detectors are equipped with charged particle trackers and they provides to tag intact scattered protons after the collision. Additionally, forward detectors can detect intact outgoing protons in the interval where is the momentum fraction loss of the intact protons where and are the energies of the incoming and intact scattered proton, respectively. These intervals are known as the acceptance of the forward detectors. If these machines are located closer to main detectors, a higher can be created. With applying this new detectors it is possible to obtain high energy photon-photon process with exclusive two particle final states such as leptons or photons. The programs about these detectors were prepared by ATLAS Forward Physics Collaboration (AFP) and CMS-TOTEM Precision Proton Spectrometer (CT-PPS) afp (); totem (). AFP cover , detector acceptance ranges. Similarly, CT-PPS has the acceptance ranges of , . Two types of measurements are planed by AFP with high precision: i) Exploratory physics (anomalous couplings between and or bosons, exclusive production, etc.), ii) standard QCD physics (double Pomeron exchange, exclusive production in the jet channel, single diffraction, physics, etc.) afp1 (); afp2 (). The CT-PPS experiment main motivations are the investigation of the proton-proton total cross-section, elastic proton-proton interactions, and all of the diffractive processes. Roman Pots detector is used in this experiment. In the forward location, almost all inelastic physical interactions can be detected by the charged particle detectors. A large solid angle unable to covered with the support of the CMS detector. In this way, the detectors can be used to precise studies ttm1 (); ttm2 (); ttm3 (). Due to high energy and high luminosity, this kind of interactions may cause a number of pile-up events. However, these backgrounds enable to rejected by applied exclusivity conditions, kinematics and timing constraints with use of forward detectors in conjunction with central detectors. Moreover, two lepton final states have very small backgrounds in the presence of pile-up events. Because, there are no other charged particles on the two lepton interaction vertex. Therefore, final state leptons are highly back-to-back with almost equivalent albrow (); albrow1 ().

Photon induced reactions were studied in by the CDF collaboration cdf1 (); cdf2 (). Obtained results in these experiments are consistent in theoretical expectations with through the subprocess (). At the LHC, the CMS collaboration have recently examined to measurement of the photon-induced reactions through the processes , from the TeV ch1 (); ch2 (). In this experiments show that the both the number of candidates and the kinematic distributions are in agreement with the expectation for exclusive and semi-exclusive production process. Similarly, ATLAS Collaboration reported a measurement of the exclusive ( ) cross-section in proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of TeV ath1 (). In this measurement, it is obtained that when proton absorptive effects due to the finite size of the proton are taken into account in the theory calculation, the obtained cross-sections are found to be consistent with the theoretical calculations. Another similar measurement was made by the ATLAS Collaboration at a center-of-mass energy of TeV ath2 (). In this experiment, it was obtained that the single-differential cross section as a function of (). The leptons channel measurements are combined and a total experimental precision of better than is achieved at low . In the literature, other phenomenological papers based on photon-induced reactions at the LHC for new physics beyond the SM can be found in lhc2 (); lhc4 (); inanc (); inan (); bil (); bil2 (); kok (); inan2 (); gru (); inanc2 (); ban (); epl (); inanc3 (); bil4 (); inanc4 (); hao1 (); hao2 (); ins (); kok2 (); fic1 (); fic2 ().

The forward detectors allow high energy photon-photon interaction as mention above. The photons are generated by the high energetic protons can be considered as an intense photon beam. These almost-real photons have very low virtuality so that it can be assumed that they are on-mass-shell. They radiate off the incoming protons with small angles and low transverse momentum. Intact protons thus deviate slightly from their trajectory along the beam path without being detected by central detectors. Intact protons and are measured by the forward detectors with a very large pseudorapidity. As a result, the final state is obtained through the process and measured at the main detector. The schematic diagram for this process is shown in Fig.1. Since, energy loses protons can be detected by the forward detectors, the invariant mass of the central system can be known.

The photon-induced reactions can be described by the equivalent photon approximation (EPA) budnev (); baur (). According to this method, quasi-real photons with low vitalities () interact to create final state X through the subprocess . In the EPA framework, emitted quasi-real photons bring a spectrum that is a function of virtuality and the photon energy ,

(1) |

Here proton mass. In the dipole approximations the other terms given as follows,

(2) | |||

(3) |

where, is the square of the magnetic moment of the proton, and are the relative the electric and magnetic form factors of the proton, respectively. In the photon-photon collisions, luminosity spectrum can be found with using EPA as follows,

(4) |

where, GeV is taken in the above equation since the contribution of higher virtualities more than this value is negligible. The cross section for the can be derived by integrating selected subprocess cross section over the photon spectrum,

(5) |

In this paper, we have investigated the RS-like scenario with the small curvature (the details is given in the next section) for the process through the subprocess . Because of the main contribution comes from the high energy region, we have made this calculation for two acceptance ranges and . Fig. 2 shows the behavior of the luminosity spectrum as a function of the for these two forward acceptance ranges.

## Ii RSSC model of warped extra dimension with small curvature

The Randall-Sundrum model with two branes (RS1 model Randall:1999 ()) was proposed as an alternative to the scenario with large flat extra dimensions (ADD model Arkani-Hamed:1998 (); Hamed:1998 (); Hamed2:1998 ()). The RS1 model is described by the following background warped metric

(6) |

where is the Minkowski tensor with the signature , and is an extra coordinate. The periodicity condition is imposed, and the points and are identified. Thus, we have a model of gravity in a slice of the AdS space-time compactified to the orbifold . The orbifold has two fixed points, and . It is assumed that there are two branes located at these points (called Planck and TeV brane, respectively). All the SM fields are confined to the TeV brane.

The classical action of the RS1 model is given by Randall:1999 ()

(7) |

where is the 5-dimensional metric, with , . The quantities

(8) |

are induced metrics on the branes, and are brane Lagrangians, , . is a reduced 5-dimensional Planck scale, , where is a fundamental gravity scale. The quantity is a 5-dimensional cosmological constant, are brane tensions.

The function in (6) was obtained in Randall:1999 () to be

(9) |

where is a parameter with a dimension of mass. It defines the curvature of the 5-dimensional space-time. Recently, a generalization of the warp factor war derived in Kisselev:2016 ()

(10) |

where is -independent quantity, with the fine tuning relations

(11) |

Here is a principal value of the multivalued inverse trigonometric function . This generalized solution (i) obeys the orbifold symmetry ; (ii) makes the jumps of on both branes; (iii) has the explicit symmetry with respect to the branes Kisselev:2016 ().

By taking in (10), we get the RS1 model (9), while putting , we come to the RS-like scenario with the small curvature of the space-time (RSSC model Giudice:2005 ()-Kisselev:2006 ()). What are main features of the RSSC model in comparison with those of the RS1 model?

The interactions of the Kaluza-Klein (KK) gravitons with the SM fields on the TeV brane are given by the effective Lagrangian density

(12) |

were is the reduced Planck mass, is the energy-momentum tensor of the SM fields. The coupling constant is equal to

(13) |

The hierarchy relation looks like ()

(14) |

The masses of the KK gravitons are proportional to the curvature parameter Kisselev:2005 ()

(15) |

where are zeros of the Bessel function . If we put TeV, the mass splitting will be small, , and we come to an almost continuous mass spectrum, similar to the mass spectrum of the ADD model Arkani-Hamed:1998 (). This is in contrast to the RS1 model, in which the gravitons are heavy resonances with masses above one-few TeV.

Let us calculate the scattering amplitude for the subprocess by adding -channel KK graviton exchange to the SM electromagnetic contribution, which is defined as

(16) |

where , and are incoming photon, outgoing lepton momenta and polarization vectors of photons. The coherent sum is over KK modes. Vertex functions for – and for – are given below

(17) | ||||

(18) |

Explicit forms of the tensors and are given by eqs. (A.1)-(A.2) in Appendix A, while is a tensor part of the graviton propagator

(19) |

The total amplitude squared consists of electromagnetic, KK and interference parts Atag:2009 ()

(20) |

where

(21) | ||||

(22) | ||||

(23) |

Here , are Mandelstam variables of the subprocess , and .

(24) |

were denotes the total width of the KK graviton with the mass . The sum (24) has been calculated in ref. Kisselev:2006 ()

(25) |

where

(26) |

The virtual graviton exchange should lead to deviations from the SM predictions both in a magnitude of the cross sections and in an angular distribution of the final leptons because of the spin-2 nature of the gravitons.

## Iii Numerical analysis

The KK graviton exchange studied in the previous Section should lead to deviations from the SM in magnitudes both of differential cross sections and of total cross sections for the photon-induced process at the LHC which goes via subprocess . Our goal is to calculate the dependence of these deviations on the parameters of the RSSC model.

As it was mentioned in Introduction, the process can be detected by using forward detectors CN-PPS (CMS-TOTEM Collaboration) and AFP (ATLAS Collaboration). In what follows, we will consider two acceptance regions of the forward detectors, and .

Before describing our numerical results, it is worth to make a few remarks about using the cut imposed on the muon rapidities during our calculations. In the c.m.s. of the colliding protons, two-muon system moves with the rapidity

(27) |

where are the energies of the photons, , is the invariant energy of the collision. The rapidities of the muons in the c.m.s. of two photons (= c.m.s of the system ) are equal to and , respectively. depends on the scattering angle in the c.m.s. of the subprocess

(28) |

Correspondingly, the muon rapidities in the c.m.s. of the colliding protons are equal to

(29) |

It is clear that the rapidity cuts are equivalent to the inequality

(30) |

In our case . Taking into account the cut imposed on the transverse momenta of the muons, , one can transform inequality (30) into the bound on the scattering angle of the muons in the c.m.s of two photons

(31) |

where

(32) |

It is convenient to use the rapidity cut in such a form (32). The reason is that the electromagnetic part of the matrix element (21) depends only on , while other two terms in , (22) and (23), are functions of the variable multiplied by functions of . Thus, the corresponding integrals ( em, KK, int)

(33) |

can be calculated analytically.

The inequality means that allowable values of the muon transverse momenta are bounded from below

(34) |

where . Thus, for fixed , the following kinematical bounds take place

(35) |

where .

The results of our numerical calculations of the differential cross sections as a function of the transverse momenta of the muons are presented in figs. 3-5. As one can see, exceeds the SM contribution for GeV, and the difference between and increases as grows. The effect is more pronounced for small values of , for which becomes dominant already for GeV.

Some comments should be made on a possible -dependence of . One may naively expect from eq. (25) that the KK contribution to the differential cross section should be

(36) |

Nevertheless, the results of our numerical calculations shows that

(37) |

at small and moderate values of . As a result, the differential cross section follows this -dependence. At large the -dependence tends to the form . It can be explained as follows Kisselev:2008 ()-Kisselev:2013 (). In the RSSC model the invariant part of the scattering amplitude (25) is a sum of rather sharp resonances whose widths are proportional to . The contribution of one resonance can be estimated as Kisselev:2008 ()-Kisselev:2013 ()

(38) |

Taking into account that the total number of the graviton resonances which contribute to the differential cross section , we come to eq. (37).

Figure 5 demonstrates us that the differential cross section is almost independent of the curvature parameter , with the exception of its weak dependence on around the point GeV. Thus, we can put limits on the fundamental gravity scale regardless of the parameter (provided is satisfied). This is in contrast to the RS1 model Randall:1999 () in which all cross sections depend substantially on the ratio .

The next two figures 6-7 shows us the total cross sections with and without KK graviton exchange versus the minimal transverse momentum of the final muons . The comparison with the pure SM predictions is also given. From all said above it is not surprising that the quantity does not depend on (see fig. 6). For both acceptance regions, its deviation from the SM gets higher as grows (see fig. 7). When the two figures are compared, we can see that the case has almost the same behaviour as the case with GeV. Moreover, for the acceptance region, as the changes, the cross sections almost do not change if . Therefore, it can be said that a high value of mimics a high value of .

In this motivation, we have obtained the limits on the for two cases: for GeV and for GeV. In sensitivity analysis, the likelihood method are used. In this method, it is assumed that the entire number of background events in every signal location respects the normal distribution with a fractional uncertainty. The statistical significance is obtained as follows SS (),

(39) |

where , are the signal and background events number, respectively. Here, we have assumed that the uncertainty of the background is negligible. Using our results on the cross sections, we have calculated 95% C.L. bounds on for two acceptance regions, with GeV and with GeV with using eq.( 39). The bounds are presented in fig. 8 as a function of the integrated LHC luminosity. Here, we assumed that the GeV. Note that the cut was imposed on the rapidities on the final muons. The results are presented in fig. 8 which have nearly the same behavior for the two acceptances regions. It can be see that 95% C.L. sensitivity of is about GeV for the and GeV for the when the LHC integrated luminosity values are equal to fb.

## Iv Conclusions

Photon-induced exclusive processes are of great importance for high-energy physics. They provide one with unique precision measurements of the electroweak sector of the SM. They also allow us to study physics beyond the SM. For instance, (semi)exclusive production by photon-photon interactions is very sensitive to quartic gauge anomalous couplings.

The dilepton production at the electroweak scale have been studied both at the Tevatron and LHC colliders. However, all previous experiments was done without a proton tag. Recently, the dimuon production in the process have been studied with the CMS-TOTEM forward detector CT-PPS using measurements based on the integrated luminosity of 10 fb at 13 TeV CMS-TOTEM:2018 (). 12 events with GeV matching forward detector kinematics were observed. This result is the first observation of proton-tagging electroweak collisions.

In ref. Atag:2009 () a potential of the photon-induced dilepton final states at the LHC for a phenomenology of two models with the extra dimensions was investigated. The constraints both on the fundamental gravity scale in the ADD model and on the pair – in the RS1 model (where , is a mass of the lightest graviton), were derived Atag:2009 ().

In the present paper we have studied the photon-induced production of the muon pair at the LHC for 14 TeV in the RSSC model with the warped extra dimension and small curvature Giudice:2005 ()-Kisselev:2006 (). For two acceptance regions, and , where is the proton energy fraction loss, the distributions in the muon transverse momenta are calculated as a function of the reduced fundamental gravity scale and curvature parameter . It is shown that the deviation from the SM gets higher as grows. The obtained cross sections almost do not change in the region GeV for the case . It means that the high value of mimics the high value of . The 95% L.C. discovery limits on are obtained for the acceptance region with GeV and for with GeV. Note that the cut was imposed on the rapidities of the final muons.

Let us stress that our limits on do not depend on the curvature parameter . In the RSSC model this fact also takes place for other processes, provided the inequality is satisfied Kisselev:2008 (). It is in contrast to the RS1 model, in which . As a result, the RS1 discovery limits on for all processes, including photon-induced collisions at the LHC Atag:2009 (), depend on a chosen value of .

## Appendix A

Symbols and in eq. (17) are defined as follows

(A.1) | ||||

(A.2) |

## References

- (1) L. Adamczyk, et al., Tech. Rep. CERN-LHCC-2015-009. ATLAS-TDR-024, May, 2015.
- (2) M. Albrow et al., CMS-TOTEM, Tech. Rep. CERN-LHCC-2014-021. TOTEM-TDR-003. CMS-TDR-13, September, 2014.
- (3) ATLAS Collaboration, Tech. Rep. CERN-LHCC-2011- 012. LHCC-I-020, (2011).
- (4) L. Adamczyk et al., Tech. Rep. ATLCOM- LUM-2011-006, CERN, 2011.
- (5) G. Antchev et al. (TOTEM Collaboration), EPL 96 21002, (2011).
- (6) G. Antchev et al. (TOTEM Collaboration), EPL 98 31002, (2012).
- (7) G. Antchev et al. (TOTEM Collaboration), CERNPH-EP-2012-239, (2012).
- (8) M. Albrow et al., (FP420 R and D Collaboration), JINST 4, T10001 (2009).
- (9) M.G. Albrowa, T.D. Coughlin and J.R. Forshaw, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 65, 149 (2010).
- (10) T. Aaltonen et al., (CDF Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 242001 (2009).
- (11) T. Aaltonen et al., (CDF Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 222002 (2009).
- (12) S. Chatrchyan et al., (CMS Collaboration), JHEP 1201, 052 (2012).
- (13) S. Chatrchyan et al., (CMS Collaboration), JHEP 1211, 080 (2012).
- (14) G. Aad et al., (ATLAS Collaboration)Phys. Lett. B 749, 242, (2015)
- (15) G. Aad et al., (ATLAS Collaboration), JHEP 08 009 (2016).
- (16) K. Piotrzkowski, Phys. Rev. D 63, 071502(R) (2001).
- (17) V. Goncalves and M. Machado, Phys. Rev. D 75, 031502(R) (2007).
- (18) İ. Şahin and S.C. İnan, JHEP 09, 069 (2009).
- (19) S.C. İnan, Phys. Rev. D 81, 115002 (2010).
- (20) S. Atağ and A. Billur, JHEP 11 060 (2010).
- (21) İ. Şahin and A. A. Billur, Phys. Rev. D 83, 035011 (2011).
- (22) İ. Şahin and M. Köksal, JHEP 11, 100 (2011).
- (23) S.C. İnan and A. A. Billur, Phys. Rev. D 84, 095002 (2011).
- (24) R. S. Gupta, Phys. Rev. D 85, 014006 (2012).
- (25) İ. Şahin, Phys. Rev. D 85, 033002 (2012).
- (26) B. Şahin and A. A. Billur, Phys.Rev. D 85 074026 (2012).
- (27) L.N. Epele et al., Eur. Phys. J. Plus 127, 60 (2012).
- (28) İ. Şahin and B. Şahin, Phys. Rev. D 86, 115001 (2012).
- (29) A.A. Billur, Europhys. Lett. 101, 21001 (2013).
- (30) İ. Şahin et al., Phys.Rev. D 88 095016 (2013).
- (31) H. Sun, C. X. Yue, Eur. Phys. J. C 74, 2823 (2014).
- (32) H. Sun, Nucl. Phys. B 886, 691 (2014).
- (33) İ. Şahin et al., Phys.Rev. D 91 035017 (2015).
- (34) M. Köksal and S.C. İnan, Adv. High Energy Phys. 2014, 315826 (2014)
- (35) S. Fichet, JHEP 1704, 088 (2017).
- (36) C. Baldenegro et al., JHEP 1706, 142 (2017).
- (37) V. Budnev, I. Ginzburg, G. Meledin and V. Serbo, Phys. Rep. 15, 181 (1975).
- (38) G. Baur et al., Phys. Rep. 364, 359 (2002).
- (39) L. Randall and R. Sundrum, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 3370 (1999).
- (40) N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos and G. Dvali, Phys. Lett. B 429, 263 (1998);
- (41) N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos and G. Dvali, Phys. Rev. D 59, 086004 (1999);
- (42) I. Antoniadis, N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos and G. Dvali, Phys. Lett. B 436, 257 (1998).
- (43) A.V. Kisselev, Nucl. Phys. B 909, 218 (2016).
- (44) G.F. Giudice, T. Plehn and A. Strumia, Nucl. Phys. B 706, 455 (2005).
- (45) A.V. Kisselev and V.A. Petrov, Phys. Rev. D 71, 124032 (2005).
- (46) A.V. Kisselev, Phys. Rev. D 73, 024007 (2006).
- (47) S. Ataǧ, S.C. İnan, İ Şahin, Phys. Rev. D 80, 075009 (2009).
- (48) A.V. Kisselev, JHEP 0809, 039 (2008).
- (49) A.V. Kisselev, JHEP 1304, 025 (2013).
- (50) G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, O. Vitells, Eur. Phys. J. C 71, 1554 (2011).
- (51) CMS-TOTEM Colllaboration, arXiv:1803.04496.