Precision Measurement of<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>sin</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>θ</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>W</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math>from Semileptonic Neutrino Scattering

Abramowicz, H.; Belusević, R.; Blondel, A.; Blümer, H.; Böckmann, P.; Brummel, H. D.; Buchholz, P.; Burkhardt, Hans; Debu, P.; Duda, Julia; Dydak, F.; Falkenburg, Brigitte; Fiedler, Mascha O.; Geiges, R.; Geweniger, C.; Grant, A.; Guyot, C.; Hagelberg, R.; Hepp, V.; Hughes, E. W.; Kampschulte, B.; Keilwerth, H.; Kleinknecht, K.; Knobloch, J.; Krasny, M. W.; Królikowski, J.; Kurz, N.; Lipniacka, A.; Merlo, J.-P.; Müller, E.; Para, A.; Pérez, P.; Perrier, Frédéric; Pollman, D.; Ranjard, F.; Renk, B.; Schuller, J. P.; Taureg, H.; Tittel, K.; Turlay, R.; Vallage, B.; Wachsmuth, H.; Wotschack, J.

doi:10.1103/physrevlett.57.298

Cited by 139 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One disturbing feature of the CTEQ1 parton distributions was that the strange quark distribution s(x, Q) obtained was considerably larger in the x < 0.1 region then those obtained from leading-order parton model analysis of the neutrino dimuon production data [33,34,35]. It was pointed out that this s(x, Q) behavior follows necessarily from the high precision input data sets on total inclusive structure functions measured by the CCFR and NMC collaborations through the familiar ("charge ratio") parton model identity 5 6…”

Section: Cteq1 Parton Distributionsmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…Data from the earlier EMC experiment [17] are excluded since the disagreement between these data with other data sets appears to be understood now as the result of the new NMC analysis. Data from the CDHSW neutrino experiment [18] are also not used since in the (wide) region where they agree with the CCFR results, the latter completely dominate due to the much smaller errors; and in the (narrow) region where they disagree, it would be inconsistent to include both sets. 4 To apply the selected experimental results to the study of the parton structure of the nucleon, the heavy target neutrino data must be converted to their nucleon equivalent.…”

Section: Experimental Inputmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Global QCD analysis and the CTEQ parton distributions

et al. 1995

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The CTEQ program for the determination of parton distributions through a global QCD analysis of data for various hard scattering processes is fully described. A new set of distributions, CTEQ3, incorporating several new types of data is reported and compared to the two previous sets of CTEQ distributions. Comparison with current data is discussed in some detail. The remaining uncertainties in the parton distributions and methods to further reduce them are assessed. Comparisons with the results of other global analyses are also presented. † This work is supported in part by DOE, NSF and TNRLC

show abstract

Section: Cteq1 Parton Distributionsmentioning

confidence: 86%

Section: Experimental Inputmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global QCD analysis and the CTEQ parton distributions

et al. 1995

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The weak charge from atomic parity violation (APV) in Tl has been measured by groups in Oxford [25] and Seattle [26], Q W ( 205 Tl) = −114.77 ± 1.23 ± 3.44, and in Cs by the Boulder group [27], Q W ( 133 Cs) = −72.11 ± 0.27 ± 0.89, where the first errors are experimental and the second theoretical. The recent result of the deep inelastic scattering (DIS) experiment of CCFR [28] is combined with the measurements of CDHS [29] and CHARM [30], yielding κ = 0.5805 ± 0.0039, where κ is a linear combination of effective 4-Fermi operator coefficients. Similarly, ν µ e scattering experiments, dominated by the recent CHARM II results [31], yield determinations of leptonic 4-Fermi operator coefficients, g νe V = −0.041 ± 0.015 and g νe A = −0.507 ± 0.014.…”

Section: • 6 Low Energy Observablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bounds on supersymmetry from electroweak precision analysis

Erler

Pierce

1998

Nuclear Physics B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Standard Model global fit to precision data is excellent. The Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model can also fit the data well, though not as well as the Standard Model. At best, supersymmetric contributions either decouple or only slightly decrease the total χ 2 , at the expense of decreasing the number of degrees of freedom. In general, regions of parameter space with large supersymmetric corrections from light superpartners are associated with poor fits to the data. We contrast results of a simple (oblique) approximation with full one-loop results, and show that for the most important observables the non-oblique corrections can be larger than the oblique corrections, and must be taken into account. We elucidate the regions of parameter space in both gravity-and gauge-mediated models which are excluded. Significant regions of parameter space are excluded, especially with positive supersymmetric mass parameter µ. We give a complete listing of the bounds on all the superpartner and Higgs boson masses. For either sign of µ, and for all supersymmetric models considered, we set a lower limit on the mass of the lightest CP-even Higgs scalar, m h ≥ 78 GeV. Also, the first and second generation squark masses are constrained to be above 280 (325) GeV in the supergravity (gauge-mediated) model.

show abstract

“…Recent direct W mass measurements, in GeV, include 79.92 ± 0.39 [21], 80.35 ± 0.37 [22], and 80.41 ± 0.18 [9], with average 80.33 ± 0.15. Data [10,23,24]…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of atomic parity violation measurements on precision electroweak physics

Rosner

1996

Phys. Rev. D

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The impact of atomic parity violation experiments on the determination of the weak mixing parameter sin 2 and the Peskin-Takeuchi parameters S and T is reassessed in the light of recent electroweak measurements at CERN LEP, SLAC, and Fermilab. Since the weak charge Q W provides unique information on S, its determination with a factor of 4 better accuracy than present levels can have a noticeable effect on global fits. However, the measurement of ⌬Q W /Q W for two different isotopes provides primarily information on sin 2 . To specify this quantity to an accuracy of Ϯ0.0004, comparable to that now provided by other electroweak experiments, one would have to determine ⌬Q W /Q W in cesium to about 0.1% of its value, with comparable demands for other nuclei. The relative merits of absolute measurements of Q W and isotope ratios for discovering effects of new gauge bosons are noted briefly.

show abstract

Precision Measurement ofsin2θWfrom Semileptonic Neutrino Scattering

Cited by 139 publications

References 27 publications

Global QCD analysis and the CTEQ parton distributions

Global QCD analysis and the CTEQ parton distributions

Bounds on supersymmetry from electroweak precision analysis

Impact of atomic parity violation measurements on precision electroweak physics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About