Physics at the Tevatron Run II
We present recent physics results from the Tevatron Collider experiments CDF and D\O. \vspace{1pc}
lattice_proc.tex
%%%%%%%%%% espcrc2.tex %%%%%%%%%%
%
% $Id: espcrc2.tex 1.2 2000/07/24 09:12:51 spepping Exp spepping $
%
\documentclass[fleqn,twoside]{article}
\usepackage{espcrc2}

% change this to the following line for use with LaTeX2.09
% \documentstyle[twoside,fleqn,espcrc2]{article}

% if you want to include PostScript figures
\usepackage{graphicx}
% if you have landscape tables
%\usepackage[figuresright]{rotating}

% put your own definitions here:
%   \newcommand{\cZ}{\cal{Z}}
%   \newtheorem{def}{Definition}[section]
%   ...
\newcommand{\ttbs}{\char'134}
\newcommand{\AmS}{{\protect\the\textfont2
  A\kern-.1667em\lower.5ex\hbox{M}\kern-.125emS}}

\def\bsbar{${\overline{B}_s^0}$}
\def\bs{${B_s^0}$}

\def\bsdec{${B_s^0 \rightarrow J/\psi \phi}$}
\def\GeV  {\ensuremath{\mathrm{ Ge\kern -0.1em V } }}
\def\GeVc2{\ensuremath{\mathrm{ Ge\kern -0.1em V }\kern -0.2em /c^2 }}
\newcommand{\MT}{\ensuremath{M_{\mathrm{top}}}}
\newcommand{\MW}{\ensuremath{M_{\mathrm{ W }}}}
\newcommand{\Pt}{\ensuremath{t}}
\newcommand{\Ptt}{\ensuremath{\Pt\bar\Pt}}


% add words to TeX's hyphenation exception list
\hyphenation{author another created financial paper re-commend-ed Post-Script}

% declarations for front matter
\title{Physics at the Tevatron Run II}

\author{D. Zieminska\address  {Indiana University, Physics Department 
        Bloomington, IN 47405, U.S.A}}

%{\normalsize\sl (Representing the CDF and D\O\  Collaborations)}
       
\begin{document}

\begin{abstract}
We present recent physics results from the Tevatron Collider experiments CDF and D\O.
\vspace{1pc}
\end{abstract}

% typeset front matter (including abstract)
\maketitle

\section{INTRODUCTION}
The Tevatron Collider Run II started in March 2002 and is expected
to continue until the end of this decade. The Tevatron and the 
two detectors, CDF and D\O, have been performing  well in 2004,
each experiment is collecting data at the rate 
of $\approx$10 pb$^{-1}$ per week.
The total  luminosity accumulated by August 2004 is $\approx$500 pb$^{-1}$
per detector.
The rich physics program includes the
production and precision measurement of properties of  standard model (SM)
objects, as well as searches for phenomena beyond standard model.
In this brief review we focus on areas of most interest 
to the lattice community. We present
new results on the top quark mass
and their implication for the mass of the SM Higgs boson, 
on searches for the SM Higgs boson, on evidence for the $X(3872)$ state, 
on searches for pentaquarks, and on $b$ hadron properties.
All Run II results presented here are preliminary. 

\section{TOP QUARK MASS}

The experiments CDF and D\O\ published several direct  measurements of
the top quark pole mass, $\MT$, 
based on Run I data (1992-1996).
The ``lepton $+$ jets'' channel yields the most precise determination of
$\MT$. Recently, the
D\O\ collaboration published a new measurement~\cite{Mtop1-D0-l+j-new},
based on a powerful analysis technique yielding  greatly improved precision.
The differential probability 
that the measured variables in any event correspond to the signal
is calculated as a function of $\MT$. 
The maximum in the product of the individual event probabilities 
provides the best estimate of $\MT$.
The critical differences from previous analyses 
in the lepton $+$ jets decay channel lie in 
the assignment of more 
weight to events that are well measured or more likely to correspond to  
$t \bar t$ signal, 
and  the handling of the combinations of final-state objects
(lepton, jets, and imbalance in transverse momentum) 
and their identification with
top-quark decay products in an event. 
The new combined value for the top-quark mass from Run I is 
$\MT  =  178.0\pm4.3~\GeVc2$.

In Run II, both collaborations  have been exploring several different techniques 
for $\MT$
measurements. The best single CDF result comes from a dynamic likelihood method
(DLM). The method is similar to
the technique used in Ref.~\cite{Mtop1-D0-l+j-new}.
%The distribution of the maximum likelihood mass for each event and
%Figs. ~\ref{fig:cdf_tmm} and
The result is $\MT = 177.8^{+4.5}_{-5.0} (stat) \pm  6.2 (syst) ~\GeVc2$.
The joint likelihood of the selected events is shown in Fig. ~\ref{fig:cdf_tml}. 
%The systematic uncertainty is dominated by the modelling of the calorimeter 
%response and is expected to go down.
The Run II goal is a 1\% uncertainty on $\MT$. 

%\vspace*{-1cm}
%\begin{figure}[htb]
%\includegraphics[height=5.5cm,width=8.0cm]  {cdf_EvMass_datMC.eps}
%\vspace*{-1cm}
%\caption{The maximum likelihood mass distribution in data and Monte Carlo(CDF).}
%\label{fig:cdf_tmm}
%\end{figure}



\begin{figure}[htb]
\vspace*{-5mm}
%\vspace{9pt}
%\framebox[55mm]{\rule[-21mm]{0mm}{43mm}}
%\epsfig{file=mpks_1stminbias.eps}
\includegraphics[height=5.8cm,width=8.1cm]  {data_22ev_likelihood.eps}
\vspace*{-1.2cm}
\caption{The joint likelihood of top candidates(CDF).}
\label{fig:cdf_tml}
\end{figure}




\section{SEARCH FOR SM HIGGS BOSON}


The constraints on the SM Higgs ($H$)  boson  mass from
published  measurements, updated to include the new D\O\ top mass
measurement~\cite{Mtop1-D0-l+j-new}, are
$M_H = 117 ^{+67}_{-45}~\GeVc2$, $M_H < 251~\GeVc2$ at 95\% C.L.
The  new most likely  value of $M_H$
is above the experimentally excluded range,
and sufficiently low for $H$ to be observed at the Tevatron.


\begin{figure}[htb]
\vspace*{-5mm}
%\vspace{9pt}
%\framebox[55mm]{\rule[-21mm]{0mm}{43mm}}
%\epsfig{file=mpks_1stminbias.eps}
\includegraphics[height=7.5cm,width=7.8cm]  {d0_wbb_fig_3_err.eps}
\vspace*{-1.1cm}
\caption{Distribution of the dijet
invariant mass for $W+2 b$-tagged jets  events,
compared to the expectation (D\O). 
%The simulated samples are normalized to the integrated luminosity of the
%data using the expected cross sections.
%The expectation (multiplied by two) 
%for a 115 GeV Higgs boson is also shown.
}
\label{fig:d0_wbb_2tag}
\end{figure}



D\O\  has conducted a search for $H$ at $M_H < 140~\GeVc2$ 
in the production channel  
$p \bar{p} \rightarrow WH \rightarrow  e \nu b \bar{b}$. 
The experimental signature of  $WH \rightarrow e \nu b \bar{b}$
is a final state with 
one high $p_T$ electron, two  $b$ jets, and
large missing transverse energy  resulting from
the undetected neutrino.
The dominant backgrounds to $WH$ production
are  $W b \bar{b}$, $t \bar{t}$ and single-top production.
The distribution 
of the dijet mass for events with two $b$-tagged jets is shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:d0_wbb_2tag}. 
Also shown is the  expected contribution ($0.06$ events)  
from the $b \bar{b}$ decay of a
SM Higgs boson with $M_H =$ 115 $\GeVc2$.
No events are observed in the  dijet mass window of 85--135  $\GeVc2$.
%The expected SM background
%(including $W b \bar{b}$) is 1.07 $\pm$ 0.26
%events,  and the expected 
%%$WH$ signal is 0.049 $\pm$ 0.012 events,
%with a signal efficiency of $(0.21 \pm  0.03)\%$.
%Taking these errors into account, this tranlates into a cross section 
D\O\ sets a limit on the cross section
for $\sigma( p\bar{p} \rightarrow WH) \times B(H \rightarrow b \bar{b}) $
of 9.0 pb at the 95\% C.L.,  for a 115  $\GeVc2$ Higgs boson.
%The same study is performed for three other Higgs-boson mass points: 105, 125 and
%135 GeV, for which 0, 0 and 1 event are observed in the corresponding masswindows.
The results for mass points 105, 125, and 135 $\GeVc2$
 are 11.0, 9.1 and 12.2 pb,  respectively.



\begin{figure}[htb]
\vspace*{-1.2cm}
%\vspace{9pt}
%\framebox[55mm]{\rule[-21mm]{0mm}{43mm}}
%\epsfig{file=mpks_1stminbias.eps}
%\includegraphics[height=5cm,width=8.0cm]{cdf_whww.eps}
\includegraphics[height=0.33\textheight,width=8.0cm]{whww_aps04_bw.eps}

\vspace*{-1.2cm}
\caption{95\% limits on the $H$ production (CDF).}
\label{fig:cdf_whww}
\end{figure}


CDF  has done  a similar search, allowing either an  electron or a muon  
in the final state.  Both groups have also searched for $H$ produced in
gluon-gluon fusion, with subsequent decay to a pair of $W$ bosons.
The CDF results for both channels  are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:cdf_whww}. 



\section{THE STATE X(3872)}


\begin{figure}[htb]
%\vspace{9pt}

%\vspace*{-1mm}
%\framebox[55mm]{\rule[-21mm]{0mm}{43mm}}
%\epsfig{file=mpks_1stminbias.eps}
\includegraphics[height=8.0cm,width=7.5cm]  {X3872cdfPRL1FullM.eps}
\vspace*{-1cm}
\caption{The $X(3872)$ signal (CDF).}
\label{fig:cdf_x}
\end{figure}




 The existence of the $X(3872)$ state discovered by 
the Belle Collaboration~\cite{Belle-X}
 has been confirmed 
 in $p \bar{p}$ collisions by  CDF~\cite{cdf-X} (see Fig.~\ref{fig:cdf_x})
and D\O~\cite{d0-X}.
%see Fig. ~\ref{fig:cdf_x}
%and ~\ref{fig:d0_x2}.
 It is still unclear whether this particle is a $c\bar{c}$ state,
 or a more complex object.  When the data are separated according to
production and decay variables, D\O\  finds no significant
differences between the $X(3872)$ and
the $c \bar{c}$ state $\psi(2S)$.
CDF has analysed the ``lifetime'' distribution of the $X(3872)$ events in order to
quantify what fraction of this state arises from decay of $B$ hadrons, as opposed to
those produced promptly. The authors find that for the selected samples
28.3$\pm$1.0$(stat)\pm$0.7$(syst)$\% of $\psi(2S)$ candidates are from $b$ decays,
whereas 16.1$\pm$4.9$(stat)\pm$2.0$(syst)$\% of $X$ mesons arise from such decays.
%see  Fig. ~\ref{fig:cdf_x2}.

%


%\begin{figure}[htb]
%\includegraphics[height=0.30\textheight,width=7.5cm]  {final_frac6.eps}
%\vspace*{-1.2cm}
%\caption{Comparison of event-yield fractions for $X(3872)$ and $\psi(2S)$ in the regions: 
%(a) $p_T$($J/\psi \, \pi^+ \pi^-) >15$ GeV/$c$; (b) $|y|$ of $J/\psi \, \pi^+ 
%\pi^- < 1$;  (c)  cos($\theta_{\pi})$ $< 0.4$; (d) effective proper decay 
%length, $dl$ $< 0.01$ 
% cm; (e) isolation = 1; (f) cos($\theta_{\mu})$ $< 0.4$ (D\O).}
%\label{fig:d0_x2}
%\end{figure}


\section{SEARCH FOR PENTAQUARKS}



\begin{figure}[htb]

%\vspace{9pt}
%\framebox[55mm]{\rule[-21mm]{0mm}{43mm}}
%\epsfig{file=mpks_1stminbias.eps}
\includegraphics[height=0.27\textheight,width=7.6cm]  {mpks_1stminbias.eps}
\vspace*{-1.2cm}

\caption{Invariant mass distribution of an identified proton and a $K^0_s$ candidate. (CDF)
%The vertical lines indicate the $\Theta^+$ signal region  (CDF).
}
\label{fig:pqtheta}
\end{figure}
%



\begin{figure}[htb]

\vspace*{-0.9cm}
%\vspace{9pt}
%\framebox[55mm]{\rule[-21mm]{0mm}{43mm}}
%\epsfig{file=mpks_1stminbias.eps}
\includegraphics[height=0.25\textheight,width=8.0cm]  {CM_xicst_cc_1.eps}
\vspace*{-1.2cm}
\caption{Invariant mass distribution of the $(\Xi^-,\pi^+)$ system. (CDF) 
%The pentaquark mass is marked with an arrow.  (CDF)
}
\label{fig:pqxi}
\end{figure}


\begin{figure}[htb]
%\vspace{9pt}
\vspace*{-0.9cm}

%\framebox[55mm]{\rule[-21mm]{0mm}{43mm}}
%\epsfig{file=mpks_1stminbias.eps}
\includegraphics[height=0.25\textheight,width=7.6cm]  {theta_note_dstp_dedx_pt.eps}
\vspace*{-1.2cm}
\caption{Mass of the ($D^{*+}\bar p$) system. The arrow indicates the position of 
the $\Theta_c$ state (CDF).}
\label{fig:pqthetac}
\end{figure}



Following reports of evidence for exotic
baryons containing five quarks (pentaquarks), CDF has analysed 
its data for evidence of the following pentaquarks:
$\Theta^+$ ($uud\bar d \bar s$), doubly strange states 
$\Xi_{3/2}$, charmed states $\Theta_c$, and, most recently, 
a state $(udus\bar b)$, dubbed $R^+_s$, through its weak decay to $(J/\psi, p)$. 
With its excellent particle indentification and mass resolution,
CDF has a unique capability to search for  pentaquark states.
The signals of known states: $\phi$, $\Lambda$,
$\Lambda(1520)$, $K^*$, $\Xi$, 
compare favorably with those provided
by the authors of  the pentaquark evidence.
The group finds no evidence for pentaquark states, see Figs 
~\ref{fig:pqtheta},{\ref{fig:pqxi},\ref{fig:pqthetac}.
This can be interpreted as an indication that the pentaquark production 
in $p \bar p$ collisions is heavily suppressed compared to the conventional
hadron production, or as an evidence against the existence of pentaquarks.

\clearpage

\section{RECENT B PHYSICS RESULTS}


\subsection{Spectroscopy}

CDF has measured the mass of $b$ hadrons in exclusive $J/\psi$ channels.
The measurements of the $B_s$ and $\Lambda_b$ (Fig. \ref{fig:masslb})
masses are the current world's best.\\

$m(B^+)$ = 5279.10$\pm$0.41$(stat)\pm$0.36$(syst)$,

$m(B^0)$ = 5279.63$\pm$0.53$(stat)\pm$0.33$(syst)$,

$m(B_s)$ = 5366.01$\pm$0.73$(stat)\pm$0.33$(syst)$,

$m(\Lambda_b)$ = 5619.7$\pm$1.2$(stat)\pm$1.2$(syst)$ MeV/$c^2$.\\


\begin{figure}[htb]
\vspace*{-1mm}
%\framebox[55mm]{\rule[-21mm]{0mm}{43mm}}
\includegraphics[height=0.30\textheight,width=7.5cm]  {lambdav1c.eps}
\vspace*{-1cm}

\caption{The mass spectrum of $\Lambda_b$ candidates (CDF).}
\label{fig:masslb}
\end{figure}


D\O\ reports the first observation of the excited $B$ mesons 
$B_1$ and $B^*_2$ as two separate states in fully reconstructed
decays to $B^{(*)}\pi$. The mass of $B_1$ is measured to be
5724$\pm$4$\pm$7 MeV/c$^2$, and the mass difference $\Delta M$ between
$B^*_2$ and $B_1$ is 23.6$\pm$7.7$\pm$3.9 MeV/c$^2$
(Fig.  \ref{fig:d0_bexc}).

D\O\ observes semileptonic $B$ decays to narrow $D^{**}$ states,
the orbitally excited states  of the $D$ meson
seen as resonances in the $D^{*+}\pi^-$ invariant mass spectrum.
The $D^*$ mesons are reconstructed through the decay sequence 
$D^{*+} \rightarrow D^0\pi^+$, $D^0\rightarrow K^-\pi^+$.
The invariant mass  of oppositely charged $(D^*,\pi)$ pairs
is shown in Fig.  \ref{fig:d0_dstst}.
The mass peak between 2.4 and 2.5 GeV/$c^2$ can be interpreted as two merged 
narrow $D^{**}$ states, $D^0_1(2420)$ and $D^0_2(2460)$.
The combined branching fraction is 
$ {\cal B}(B\rightarrow D^0_1,D^0_2)\cdot {\cal B}(D^0_1,D^0_2\rightarrow D^{*+}\pi^-)=(0.280\pm0.021(stat)\pm0.088(syst)$\%. The systematic error includes the unknown phase between the
two resonances. Work is in progress on extracting the two Breit-Wigner
amplitudes.


\begin{figure}[htb]
\vspace*{-2mm}
%\framebox[55mm]{\rule[-21mm]{0mm}{43mm}}
\hspace*{-3mm}
\includegraphics[height=0.28\textheight,width=8.3cm]  {B08F02.eps}

\vspace*{-1cm}
\caption{Mass difference $\Delta M = M(B\pi)-M(B)$ for exclusive $B$ decays.
The background-subtracted signal is a sum of 
$B^*_1 \rightarrow B^* \pi$, $B^* \rightarrow B \gamma $ (open area)
and $B^*_2 \rightarrow B^*\pi$ $B^*\rightarrow B \gamma$ (lower peak in the shaded area)
and $B^*_2 \rightarrow B \pi$ (upper peak in the shaded area)  
(D\O).}
\label{fig:d0_bexc}
\end{figure}


\begin{figure}[htb]
%\vspace{9pt}
%\framebox[55mm]{\rule[-21mm]{0mm}{43mm}}
\includegraphics[height=0.25\textheight,width=7.5cm]  {B05F03.eps}

\vspace*{-1cm}
\caption{The invariant mass distribution of
$(D^*,\pi)$ pairs, opposite sign (points) and same-sign (solid histogram).}
\label{fig:d0_dstst}
\end{figure}






\subsection{Lifetimes}


CDF and D\O\ have measured  lifetimes of $b$ hadrons through the exclusively
reconstructed decays $B^+ \rightarrow J/\psi K^+$, $B^0 \rightarrow J/\psi K^{*0}$,
$B_s \rightarrow J/\psi \phi$, 
and $\Lambda_b \rightarrow J/\psi \Lambda$
(Fig. \ref{fig:d0_lbctau}).
The latest results are:  \\



 $\tau(B^+)$=1.65 $\pm$ 0.08 $^{+0.096}_{-0.123}$  ps ~(D\O\ 2003),

 $\tau(B^+)$=1.662 $\pm$ 0.033  $\pm$ 0.008  ps ~(CDF),

 $\tau(B^0_d)$=1.473  $^{+0.052}_{-0.050}$ $\pm$ 0.023    ps ~(D\O).

 $\tau(B^0_d)$=1.539 $\pm$ 0.051  $\pm$ 0.008  ps ~(CDF),

 $\tau(B^0_s)$=1.444   $^{+0.098}_{-0.090}$ $\pm$ 0.020   ps ~(D\O),

 $\tau(B^0_s)$=1.369 $\pm$ 0.100 $\pm$ $^{+0.008}_{0.010}$  ps ~(CDF),


 $\tau(\Lambda_b)$=1.221 $^{+0.217}_{-0.179}$ $\pm$ 0.043  ps ~(D\O),


 $\tau(\Lambda_b)$=1.25 $\pm$ 0.26 $\pm$ 0.10  ps ~(CDF 2003).\\



The measured lifetimes correspond to the following lifetime ratios:\\

$\tau(B^+)/\tau(B^0_d)$   =  1.080$\pm$0.042     ~(CDF),
 
$\tau(B^0_s)/\tau(B^0_d)$ =  0.890$\pm$0.072    ~(CDF),

$\tau(B^0_s)/\tau(B^0_d)$ = 0.980$ ^{+0.075}_{-0.070}   \pm$0.003    ~(D\O),

$\tau(\Lambda_b)/\tau(B^0_d)$ =  0.874$ ^{+0.169}_{-0.142}   \pm$0.028    ~(D\O).\\



\begin{figure}[htb]
%\vspace{9pt}
%\framebox[55mm]{\rule[-21mm]{0mm}{43mm}}
%\epsfig{file=mpks_1stminbias.eps}
\includegraphics[height=0.3\textheight,width=8.2cm]  {d0_lbctau_B11F02.eps}
\vspace*{-1cm}

\caption{ Fit projection on  $c\tau$ for the $\Lambda_b$ candidates.  (D\O)}
\label{fig:d0_lbctau}
\end{figure}


The $B_s$ lifetime measurements listed above are results of
a single-lifetime fit to data, integrated over the decay angles.
Because  of the presence of  final
states  common to \bs\ and its charge conjugate \bsbar,
the two meson states   are expected
to mix in such a way that the two CP  eigenstates may have a relatively
large lifetime difference.
It is possible to
separate the two CP components of \bsdec\ and thus to measure the
lifetime difference by studying the time evolution of the
polarization states of the vector mesons in the final state.
CDF has carried out a combined analysis of $B_s$ lifetimes 
and polarization amplitudes. The results for the lifetimes of the
low mass (CP even) and high mass (CP odd) eigenstates, and the relative 
width difference are:\\

 $\tau_L = 1.05 ^{+0.16}_{-0.13} \pm 0.02$ ~ps,
 
 $\tau_H = 2.07 ^{+0.58}_{-0.46} \pm 0.03$ ~ps,

 $\Delta \Gamma /\overline \Gamma   = 0.65 ^{+0.25}_{-0.33} \pm 0.01$.\\

Figure \ref{fig:cdf_dg} shows  the scan of the likelihood function 
for $\Delta \Gamma /\overline \Gamma$.
Pseudoexperiments tossed with $\Delta \Gamma /\overline \Gamma =0$
yield the betting odds for observing the above results at
1/315. For $\Delta \Gamma /\overline \Gamma = 0.12$ (SM prediction,
which has recently been updated to 0.14$\pm$0.05~\cite{dg_un}) the betting odds are
1/84.

\begin{figure}[htb]
\vspace*{-1mm}
\includegraphics[height=0.3\textheight,width=8.2cm]  {cdf_scan-dg-un.eps}

\vspace*{-1cm}
\caption{Scan of the likelihood function 
for $\Delta \Gamma /\overline \Gamma$ (CDF).
}
\label{fig:cdf_dg}
\end{figure}




D\O\ has used a novel technique to  measure the lifetime ratio
of the charged and neutral $B$ mesons, exploiting the large
semileptonic sample. $B$ hadrons were reconstructed in the channels
$B\rightarrow \mu^+ \nu D^*(2010)^-X$, which are dominated by $B^0$ decays, 
and  $B\rightarrow \mu^+ \nu D^0X$, which are dominated by $B^+$ decays.
The lifetime ratio was
obtained from the variation of the ratio of the number of events in these two
processes at different decay lengths.
The result is \\


$\tau(B^+)/\tau(B^0_d)$   =  1.093$\pm$0.021$\pm$0.022.      ~(D\O)




\subsection{Towards $B_s$ mixing}

Measurement of the $B_s$ oscillation frequency via \bs -\bsbar ~mixing
will provide an important constraint on the CKM matrix. The oscillation
frequency is proportional to the mass difference between the mass eigenstates,
$\Delta m_s$, and is related to the CKM matrix through 
$\Delta m_s \propto |V_{tb}V_{ts}|$. When combined with the
$B_d$ mass difference, $\Delta m_d$ it helps in extraction of $|V_{td}|$,
and thereby the CP violating phase. 

As a benchmark for future $B_s$ oscillation measurement, both groups
study  $B_d$ mixing, gaining an understanding of the different components
of a $B$ mixing analysis (sample composition, flavor tagging, vertexing,
asymmetry fitting). For a sample of partially reconstructed decays
$B\rightarrow D^*(2010)^+\mu^-X$, D\O\ obtains 
$\Delta m_d = 0.506 \pm 0.055 (stat) \pm  0.049 (syst))$ ps$^{-1}$ and
$\Delta m_d = 0.488 \pm 0.066 (stat) \pm  0.044 (syst))$ ps$^{-1}$
when employing  opposite side muon tagging and the same side tagging,
respectively.

The CDF result for semileptonic channels is
$\Delta m_d = 0.536 \pm 0.037 (stat) \pm  0.009 (s.c.) \pm 0.015 (syst)$ ps$^{-1}$.
CDF also reports a result on $B$ oscillations using fully reconstructed
decays:
$\Delta m_d = 0.526 \pm 0.056 (stat) \pm  0.005 (syst))$ ps$^{-1}$.

Reconstructing $B_s$ decays into different final states is another
important
 step in the \bs -\bsbar ~mixing analysis.
Thanks to the  large muon and tracking coverage,   D\O\ is accumulating
a  high statistics sample of semileptonic $B_s$ decays.
D\O\ reconstructs the $B_s \rightarrow D^+_s \mu^- X$ decays, with
$D^+_s \rightarrow \phi \pi^+ $ and
$D^+_s \rightarrow K^* K^+ $,
at a rate of $\approx$ 40(25) events per pb$^{-1}$,  respectively.
Figure \ref{fig:d0_bsdsphipi} shows the mass distribution of the
$D^+_s \rightarrow \phi \pi$ candidates.


\begin{figure}[htb]
\vspace*{-5mm}
%\framebox[55mm]{\rule[-21mm]{0mm}{43mm}}
%\epsfig{file=mpks_1stminbias.eps}
\includegraphics[height=0.3\textheight,width=8.0cm]  {blds-250.eps}
\vspace*{-1.2cm}
\caption{  $D^+_s \rightarrow \phi \pi^+$  signal. (D\O)}
\label{fig:d0_bsdsphipi}
\end{figure}


\begin{figure}[htb]
\vspace*{-10mm}
\hspace*{-4mm}
%\framebox[55mm]{\rule[-21mm]{0mm}{43mm}}
%\epsfig{file=mpks_1stminbias.eps}
\includegraphics[height=0.35\textheight,width=7.9cm]  {cdf_Bs-DsPi-PhiPi.eps}

\vspace*{-1.0cm}
\caption{ $B_s \rightarrow D_s \pi$, $D_s \rightarrow \phi \pi$  signal.  (CDF)}
\label{fig:cdf_bsdsphipi}
\end{figure}


CDF has clean signals for fully hadronic, flavor-specific  $B_s$ decays,
providing the best sensitivity to $B_s$ oscillations at high
$\Delta m_s$. Figure \ref{fig:cdf_bsdsphipi} shows the signal for
the best channel, $B_s \rightarrow D_s \pi$, $D_s \rightarrow \phi \pi$.

\clearpage


\subsection{Rare decays}

The purely leptonic decays $B_{d,s}^0 \rightarrow \mu^+
\mu^-$ are flavor-changing neutral current (FCNC) processes.
In the standard model, these decays are forbidden at the tree level and
proceed at a very low rate through higher-order diagrams.
The latest SM prediction~\cite{sm_ref3}
is ${\cal B}(B^0_s \rightarrow \mu^+ \mu^-)=(3.42\pm 0.54)\times
10^{-9}$, where the error is dominated by non-perturbative uncertainties. The
leptonic branching fraction of the $B_d^0$ decay is suppressed by CKM matrix elements $|V_{td}/V_{ts}|^2$
leading to a predicted SM branching fraction of $(1.00\pm0.14)\times 10^{-10}$.
The best published experimental bound (Fig.~\ref{fig:cdf_bsmumu})
 for the branching fraction
of $B^0_s$ $(B^0_d)$ is presently
${\cal B}(B^0_s \, (B^0_d) \rightarrow \mu^+\mu^-)<7.5\times 10^{-7}\, 
(1.9\times 10^{-7})$ at the 95\% C.L.~\cite{cdfII}.
The decay amplitude of $B^0_{d,s} \rightarrow \mu^+ \mu^-$ can be
significantly enhanced in some extensions of the SM. 

\begin{figure}[htb]
%\vspace{9pt}
%\framebox[55mm]{\rule[-21mm]{0mm}{43mm}}
%\epsfig{file=mpks_1stminbias.eps}
\includegraphics[height=8.3cm,width=7.9cm]  {cdfbsmumu_results_prl.eps}

\vspace*{-1cm}
\caption{Invariant mass for the events passing all requirements. (CDF)}
\label{fig:cdf_bsmumu}
\end{figure}


Assuming no contributions 
from the decay $B^0_d\rightarrow \mu^+\mu^-$ in the signal region,
D\O\  finds the conservative upper limit on the branching fraction 
to be ${\cal B}(B^0_s \rightarrow \mu^+ \mu^-) \leq 4.6\times 10^{-7}$ 
at the 95\% C.L. (Fig.~\ref{fig:d0_bsmumu}).






\begin{figure}[htb]
%\vspace{9pt}
%\framebox[55mm]{\rule[-21mm]{0mm}{43mm}}
%\epsfig{file=mpks_1stminbias.eps}
\includegraphics[height=5.0cm,width=8.0cm]  {B06F03.eps}
\vspace*{-1cm}
\caption{Invariant mass for the events  passing all requirements. (D\O)}
\label{fig:d0_bsmumu}
\end{figure}

\begin{thebibliography}{9}
\bibitem{Mtop1-D0-l+j-new} V. M. Abazov {\sl et al.}   D\O\ Collaboration, Nature 429 (2004). 638.
\bibitem{Belle-X}  S.K. Choi {\sl et al. }(Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 91}, 262001 (2003). 
\bibitem{cdf-X}   D. Acosta {\sl et al.} (CDF Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 93}, 072001 (2004).
\bibitem{d0-X}  V. M. Abazov {\sl et al.}  (D\O\ Collaboration), submitted to Phys. Rev. Lett.
\bibitem{dg_un}   U. Nierste, FNAL Chicago Flavor seminar, July 2004.
\bibitem{sm_ref3} A. J. Buras, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 566}, 115 (2003).
\bibitem{cdfII} D. Acosta {\sl et al.} (CDF Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 93}, 032001 (2004).
\end{thebibliography}


\end{document}

Tables should be presented in the form shown in
Table~\ref{table:1}.  Their layout should be consistent
throughout.

\begin{table*}[htb]
\caption{The next-to-leading order (NLO) results
{\em without} the pion field.}
\label{table:1}
\newcommand{\m}{\hphantom{$-$}}
\newcommand{\cc}[1]{\multicolumn{1}{c}{#1}}
\renewcommand{\tabcolsep}{2pc} % enlarge column spacing
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2} % enlarge line spacing
\begin{tabular}{@{}lllll}
\hline
$\Lambda$ (MeV)           & \cc{$140$} & \cc{$150$} & \cc{$175$} & \cc{$200$} \\
\hline
$r_d$ (fm)                & \m1.973 & \m1.972 & \m1.974 & \m1.978 \\
$Q_d$ ($\mbox{fm}^2$)     & \m0.259 & \m0.268 & \m0.287 & \m0.302 \\
$P_D$ (\%)                & \m2.32  & \m2.83  & \m4.34  & \m6.14  \\
$\mu_d$                   & \m0.867 & \m0.864 & \m0.855 & \m0.845 \\
$\mathcal{M}_{\mathrm{M1}}$ (fm)   & \m3.995 & \m3.989 & \m3.973 & \m3.955 \\
$\mathcal{M}_{\mathrm{GT}}$ (fm)   & \m4.887 & \m4.881 & \m4.864 & \m4.846 \\
$\delta_{\mathrm{1B}}^{\mathrm{VP}}$ (\%)   
                          & $-0.45$ & $-0.45$ & $-0.45$ & $-0.45$ \\
$\delta_{\mathrm{1B}}^{\mathrm{C2:C}}$ (\%) 
                          & \m0.03  & \m0.03  & \m0.03  & \m0.03  \\
$\delta_{\mathrm{1B}}^{\mathrm{C2:N}}$ (\%) 
                          & $-0.19$ & $-0.19$ & $-0.18$ & $-0.15$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}\\[2pt]
The experimental values are given in ref. \cite{Eato75}.
\end{table*}



\section{EQUATIONS}





Equations should be flush-left with the text margin; \LaTeX{} ensures
that the equation is preceded and followed by one line of white space.
\LaTeX{} provides the document class option {\tt fleqn} to get the
flush-left effect.

\begin{equation}
H_{\alpha\beta}(\omega) = E_\alpha^{(0)}(\omega) \delta_{\alpha\beta} +
                          \langle \alpha | W_\pi | \beta \rangle 
\end{equation}

You need not put in equation numbers, since this is taken care of
automatically. The equation numbers are always consecutive and are
printed in parentheses flush with the right-hand margin of the text and
level with the last line of the equation. For multi-line equations, use
the {\tt eqnarray} environment.

For complex mathematics, use the \AmS math package. This package
sets the math indentation to a positive value. To keep the equations
flush left, either load the \texttt{espcrc} package \emph{after} the
\AmS math package or set the command \verb|\mathindent=0pt| in the
preamble of your article.

\begin{thebibliography}{9}
\bibitem{Scho70} S. Scholes, Discuss. Faraday Soc. No. 50 (1970) 222.
\bibitem{Mazu84} O.V. Mazurin and E.A. Porai-Koshits (eds.),
                 Phase Separation in Glass, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1984.
\bibitem{Dimi75} Y. Dimitriev and E. Kashchieva, 
                 J. Mater. Sci. 10 (1975) 1419.
\bibitem{Eato75} D.L. Eaton, Porous Glass Support Material,
                 US Patent No. 3 904 422 (1975).
\end{thebibliography}

References should be collected at the end of your paper. Do not begin
them on a new page unless this is absolutely necessary. They should be
prepared according to the sequential numeric system making sure that
all material mentioned is generally available to the reader. Use
\verb+\cite+ to refer to the entries in the bibliography so that your
accumulated list corresponds to the citations made in the text body. 

Above we have listed some references according to the
sequential numeric system \cite{Scho70,Mazu84,Dimi75,Eato75}.
\end{document}

hep-lat0411013.extracted_bib
\begin{thebibliography}{9}
\bibitem{Mtop1-D0-l+j-new} V. M. Abazov {\sl et al.}   D\O\ Collaboration, Nature 429 (2004). 638.
\bibitem{Belle-X}  S.K. Choi {\sl et al. }(Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 91}, 262001 (2003). 
\bibitem{cdf-X}   D. Acosta {\sl et al.} (CDF Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 93}, 072001 (2004).
\bibitem{d0-X}  V. M. Abazov {\sl et al.}  (D\O\ Collaboration), submitted to Phys. Rev. Lett.
\bibitem{dg_un}   U. Nierste, FNAL Chicago Flavor seminar, July 2004.
\bibitem{sm_ref3} A. J. Buras, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 566}, 115 (2003).
\bibitem{cdfII} D. Acosta {\sl et al.} (CDF Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 93}, 032001 (2004).
\end{thebibliography}