text:
# Extra dimensions at the one loop level: 𝑍→𝑏𝑏̄ and 𝐵-𝐵̄ mixing

## I Introduction

In the last years there has been a revival of interest in new physics scenarios in which the ordinary four dimensional standard model (SM) arises as a low energy effective theory of models defined in five or more dimensions. Apart from the fact that this type of models arise naturally in string scenarios, there are various reasons for this renewed interest. Probably the most exciting one is the realization that the size of the extra dimensions can be amazingly large without contradicting present experimental data . This opens the door to the possibility of testing these models in the near future. In fact, a general feature of models with large extra dimensions is the presence of a tower of Kaluza-Klein (KK) states which, if light enough, could be produced in the next generation of accelerators (see for instance ). In addition, models based on large extra dimensions can be used to shed light on a variety of problems. First of all, by introducing a new scale close to the electroweak scale the hierarchy problem is pushed by a few orders of magnitude . Furthermore, by resorting to extra dimensions one might gain new insights on the size of the cosmological constant . In addition, supersymmetry breaking could be explained in the context of such theories . Moreover, the linear running of gauge couplings obtained in models with extra dimensions can be used to lower the scale of gauge coupling unification (see for instance ). Finally, by assigning fermions to different configurations of the extra dimensions one hopes to reproduce the hierarchical pattern of fermion masses (see for instance ).

Models with compact extra dimensions are in general not renormalizable, and one should regard them as low energy manifestations of some more fundamental theory, perhaps string theory. The effects of the extra dimensions are communicated to the four dimensional world through the presence of infinite towers of KK modes, which modify qualitatively the behavior of the low energy theory. In particular, the non-renormalizability of the theory is found when summing the infinite tower of KK states. Indeed, already when computing tree level processes, one encounters sums of the type

$$\underset{n_1,n_2,\mathrm{}=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{n_1^2+n_2^2+\mathrm{}+n_\delta ^2},$$
(1)
where $`\delta `$ is the number of extra dimensions. The above sum is divergent if $`\delta >1`$. Notice that this type of behavior is different from conventional non-renormalizable theories where, at least at tree level, all processes are finite. Then, if $`\delta >1`$ one readily assumes that the theory should be cut off at some scale above the compactification scale. In practice this is implemented by truncating the tower of KK modes at $`n_i100`$. Such a truncation mechanism is dynamically realized in the context of some string theories, where an exponential dumping factor suppresses the couplings of the KK modes to ordinary matter . Models with only one extra dimension ($`\delta =1`$) are especially interesting because the above sum is convergent. Therefore, the tree level predictions of five dimensional models are particularly stable with respect to the scale of any new physics beyond the compactification scale. However, as commented before, even such models are not renormalizable, and one expects that their bad high energy behavior will eventually manifest itself also at the level of the four dimensional theory with an infinity of KK modes. Thus, it is interesting to study the behavior of this type of models at the one loop level and investigate to what extent their good tree level behavior is maintained. We will show in section III that the effect of summing the infinite tower of KK modes amounts to changing the propagator of the particle having KK modes by a propagator which behaves like $`1/k`$ for large $`k`$, instead of the canonical $`1/k^2`$ behavior. This ultimately will trigger the non-renormalizability even of models with only one extra dimension. In spite of that the integrals involving only one summation over KK modes are as well behaved as their counterparts in the original (zero-mode) renormalizable four dimensional theory; they too will therefore give rise to finite results.

Models with extra dimensions are also interesting from the phenomenological point of view because they are very predictive once the spectrum and the symmetries have been specified (e.g. which fields live in four dimensions and which fields live in the extra dimensions). For instance, five dimensional extensions of the SM or the minimal supersymmetric standard model (MSSM) contain only one additional parameter, the compactification radius, $`R`$, or its inverse, the compactification scale $`M_c=1/R`$. In principle the theory also depends on the cutoff scale of the theory $`M_s<100M_c`$; however, for models with a single extra dimension this scale does not appear at tree level and, as we will see, many one-loop results are also rather insensitive to it. On the other hand, models with more than one extra dimension can depend heavily on this additional parameter.

In this paper we study a model with only one extra dimension at the one loop level following the bottom-up approach. Specifically, we will build a four-dimensional quantum field theory (QFT) containing an infinite tower of KK modes, derived from a five dimensional model. In this framework we will study some of the theoretical issues that arise when keeping the infinite tower of KK modes, as well as some of their phenomenological consequences.

There are many different types of models with large extra dimensions depending on the fields they contain and the exact location of these fields . For our purposes we will adopt the simplest generalization of the SM, namely the so-called 5DSM with fermions living in four dimensions and gauge bosons and a single scalar doublet propagating in five dimensions. This simple model will allow us to explore the behavior of the theory at the one loop level and, at the same time, to extract some phenomenological constraints derived from one loop processes which are enhanced due to their strong dependence on the top-quark mass, $`m_t`$. Thus, in section II we derive the relevant four dimensional Lagrangian containing the tower of KK modes from the five dimensional one. At energies much smaller than the compactification scale the tower of KK modes can be integrated out. This gives rise to a four-fermion interaction, which is also derived in section II. In section III we use the process $`Zb\overline{b}`$ as a laboratory to study the effect of the KK tower of charged scalar fields at the one-loop level. This process is also phenomenologically interesting because it is very well measured and because it is sensitive to the presence of additional scalar fields with couplings proportional to $`m_t`$. We find that the scalar KK modes give rise to a finite contribution, and discuss the reason for that. The theoretical prediction thus obtained, combined with the existing precise experimental value of $`R_b`$, is used to set stringent bounds on the compactification scale. Section IV is devoted to the study of two related processes, namely $`K`$-$`\overline{K}`$ and $`B`$-$`\overline{B}`$ mixing, induced by box diagrams involving the exchange of two scalar towers of KK modes. These diagrams are also enhanced by the top quark mass and are interesting from the phenomenological point of view. Contrary to the case of $`Zb\overline{b}`$, the presence of two towers of KK modes renders these diagrams divergent. Introducing the cutoff of the theory, $`M_s,`$ we estimate their contribution and compare it with the available experimental data. Finally in section V we collect and discuss the results.

## II The Lagrangian

When studying the dominant radiative corrections induced by the exchange of KK modes, it is natural to focus on processes which are known to be sensitive to radiative corrections even in the absence of KK modes. In the SM the most important loop effects are those enhanced due to the dependence on the heavy top-quark mass: $`Zb\overline{b}`$ , $`B`$-$`\overline{B}`$-mixing , and the $`\rho `$ parameter.

If fermions live in four dimensions, as is the case in the model we consider, there are no KK modes associated with the top quark; therefore, there are no additional one-loop corrections to the $`\rho `$ parameter enhanced by the top-quark mass. On the other hand, in models with gauge bosons living in the extra dimensions the $`\rho `$ parameter is already modified at tree level, because the KK modes of gauge bosons mix with the standard zero-mode gauge bosons, a fact which provides interesting constraints on the compactification scale . We will therefore focus on the remaining two processes mentioned above.

In the SM the dominant contributions to $`Zb\overline{b}`$ and $`B`$-$`\overline{B}`$ -mixing come from diagrams with the charged scalars (the would-be Goldstone bosons) running in the loop, because their couplings are proportional to the top-quark mass. One can easily establish this in the Feynman or in the Landau gauges. The contributions from the exchange of gauge bosons are suppressed by powers of $`(m_W/m_t)^2`$ and vanish in the gauge-less limit ($`g0)`$ or in the large top-quark mass limit. However, because the top quark mass is not so heavy, the convergence of the expansion is rather slow  and the complete calculation is needed in order to match the experimental accuracy against the SM prediction. In spite of that, the dominant large top-quark mass approximation is good enough for many purposes, in particular when estimating the size of contributions stemming from new physics.

If the scalar doublet lives in five dimensions it will give rise to a tower of KK modes with Yukawa couplings proportional to the top-quark mass. Therefore, we expect the contributions from diagrams containing these couplings to be numerically dominant. If the scalar doublet lives in four dimensions there could still be important contributions coming from the exchange of the KK modes of the gauge bosons, but they are not enhanced by the top-quark mass. Therefore, we will only consider the coupling of a scalar doublet living in five dimensions to fermions living in four dimensions.

The relevant pieces of the five dimensional Lagrangian are ($`\mu =0,1,2,3`$ are four dimensional indices and $`M=0,1,2,3,5`$***Following the standard notation we label the fifth component as $`5`$, even though we started at $`0`$.  are five dimensional ones)

$$L=d^5x(_M\phi ^{}^M\phi (\overline{Q}_LY_uu_R\phi \delta (x^5)+\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}.)+\mathrm{}),$$
(2)
where $`\phi (x^M)`$ is the $`SU(2)`$ scalar doublet which lives in five dimensions. $`Q_L(x^\mu )`$ and $`u_R(x^\mu )`$ are the standard left-handed quark doublets and right-handed singlets, respectively, which live in four dimensions. They carry additional flavor and color indices which have been suppressed. $`Y_u`$ are $`3\times 3`$ matrices in the flavor space. We have not written the Yukawa interaction of the down quarks because it is proportional to the down quark masses which are small. Of course these interactions are present and necessary for generating down quark masses and mixings. We have also omitted the kinetic terms of fermions, as well as gauge bosons interactions, which will not be relevant in our approximation. The r le of $`\delta (x^5)`$ is to force the fermions to live in four dimensions. As usual, one assumes that the fifth dimension $`x^5`$ is compactified on a circle of radius $`R`$ with the points $`x^5`$ and $`x^5`$ identified (that is, an orbifold $`S^1/_2`$). Fields even under the $`_2`$ symmetry will have zero modes which will be present in the low energy theory. Fields odd under $`_2`$ will only have KK modes and will disappear from the low energy spectrum. One chooses the scalar doublet to be even under the $`_2`$ symmetry in order to have a standard zero mode Higgs field. Following the standard Kaluza-Klein construction, we Fourier expand the scalar fields as follows (from now on $`x`$ refers only to the four dimensional coordinates $`x^\mu `$)

$$\phi (x^\mu ,x^5)=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\mathrm{cos}\frac{nx^5}{R}\phi _n(x^\mu ).$$
(3)
Substituting this expression into the fifth dimensional Lagrangian, eq. (2), and integrating over the fifth component leads to the four dimensional Lagrangian for the KK modes $`\phi _n(x)`$. The kinetic terms, however, are not canonical, and we need to perform the following redefinitions of fields and couplings in order to cast them into canonical form:

$$\phi _0(x)\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi R}}\phi _0(x),\phi _n(x)\frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi R}}\phi _n(x),(n0),Y_u\sqrt{2\pi R}Y_u.$$
(4)
Then, we arrive at the following four dimensional Lagrange density

$``$ $`=`$ $`_\mu \phi _0^{}^\mu \phi _0(\overline{Q}_LY_uu_R\phi _0+\text{h}.\text{c}.)`$ (5)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}(_\mu \phi _n^{}^\mu \phi _n{\displaystyle \frac{n^2}{R^2}}\phi _n^{}\phi _n(\overline{Q}_LY_uu_R\sqrt{2}\phi _n+\text{h}.\text{c}.)),`$ (6)
which will be used in our calculations. Fermions obtain their masses when the neutral component of the zero mode Higgs field, $`\phi _0^{(0)}`$, acquires a vacuum expectation value $`\phi _0^{(0)}v`$. Mass matrices are diagonalized in the standard way, and, if we only keep terms proportional to the top quark mass we obrtain the following Yukawa interaction between the mass eigenstates and the KK modes of scalar fields

$$_Y=\sqrt{2}\frac{m_t}{v}\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(\overline{t}_Lt_R\phi _n^{(0)}+\underset{f}{\overset{d,s,b}{}}\overline{f}_LV_{tf}^{}t_R\phi _n^{()}+\mathrm{h}.c.),$$
(7)
where $`V_{tf}`$ is the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa (CKM) matrix, while $`\phi _n^{(0)}`$ and $`\phi _n^{()}`$ are the neutral and charged components of the KK scalar doublets, respectively. Notice the additional factor $`\sqrt{2}`$ in the coupling of the KK modes, which comes from the normalization of the zero mode in the Fourier expansion.

In the low energy limit one can integrate out the KK modes (by using the equations of motion, for instance) and obtain the following four fermion interaction (in the weak basis)

$$_{\mathrm{eff}}=\frac{(\pi R)^2}{3}(\overline{Q}_LY_uu_R)(\overline{u}_RY_u^{}Q_L),$$
(8)
which can be expressed in terms of the mass eigenstates (keeping only terms proportional to $`m_t).`$

$$_{\mathrm{eff}}=\frac{(\pi R)^2}{3}\frac{m_t^2}{v^2}\left[\left(\overline{t}_Lt_R\right)\left(\overline{t}_Rt_L\right)+\underset{f,f^{}}{\overset{d,s,b}{}}\left(\overline{f^{}}_Lt_R\right)\left(\overline{t}_Rf_L\right)V_{tf}V_{tf^{}}^{}\right].$$
(9)
The above Lagrangian provides, for instance, a four fermion interaction $`(\overline{b}_Lt_R)(\overline{t}_Rb_L)`$ (and also $`(\overline{s}_Lt_R)(\overline{t}_Rs_L)`$ and $`(\overline{d}_Lt_R)(\overline{t}_Rd_L)`$ ) which much in the spirit of ref.  can contribute at one loop level to the decay $`Zb\overline{b}`$ as well to $`B`$-$`\overline{B}`$ and $`K`$-$`\overline{K}`$ mixing. However, if we use the effective four-fermion interaction, the loop integral in fig. 2 is divergent and following ref.  one can only compute in this way the dominant logarithmic contributions. To obtain the non-logarithmic parts one should calculate the one-loop matching with the complete theory. One of the advantages of models with large extra dimensions is that they provide this full theory, which will allow us, as we will immediately show, to compute not only the logarithmic corrections but also the finite parts. In order to accomplish this, one has to maintain all KK modes as dynamical particles. Therefore, in what follows we will use the interactions given in eq. (7).

## III $`Zb\overline{b}`$

In the SM there are many diagrams contributing to the vertex corrections to $`Zb\overline{b}`$. In the Feynman or in the Landau gauges the dominant contribution for large $`m_t`$ is captured by diagrams such as the one shown in fig. 1, with a charged would-be Goldstone boson running in the loop. In the unitary gauge these corrections originate from the longitudinal parts of the gauge boson propagators. In general there are strong cancellations among vertex diagrams (as the graph of fig. 1) and diagrams with self-energies in the external fermion legs in such a way that the dominant contribution is finite. By far the easiest way to compute these corrections is to resort to the equivalence theorem , i.e. to use the Ward identities  that relate the $`Z`$-$`b\overline{b}`$ vertex to the $`G^0`$-$`b\overline{b}`$ vertex , where $`G^0`$ denotes the would-be Goldstone boson associated to the $`Z`$ gauge boson.

In the model we are considering, there are additional contributions enhanced by $`m_t`$ that arise from the presence of the charged scalar KK modes, with interactions governed by eq. (7), which give rise to the diagram of fig. 1. If the gauge bosons also possess KK modes there will be additional diagrams, such as the one shown in fig. 1, in which the KK modes of the scalars will be replaced by the corresponding KK modes of the $`W`$-gauge bosons. Even though their contribution is formally suppressed by a factor $`(m_W/m_t)^2`$, we will estimate it at the end of this section. In such a case it is important to realize that the KK modes of the charged scalars appearing inside the loop are not the would-be Goldstone bosons of the KK modes of the gauge bosons. In fact the mass of the KK modes associated to the gauge bosons is given by their fifth componentsFifth components of gauge bosons are odd under the $`_2`$ symmetry, therefore they do not have zero modes. Masses for the zero-mode gauge bosons should be provided by the usual Higgs mechanism, while masses for non-zero mode gauge bosons are provided by their fifth components. Thus, only the zero mode scalars play the r le of Goldstone bosons. . This distinction becomes clear if one uses the unitary gauge for the KK modes of the gauge bosons. In this case the fifth components of the five dimensional gauge bosons are completely absorbed by the KK modes of the gauge bosons, i.e. there are not graphs containing would-be Goldstone bosons, while the KK modes of the scalars remain in the spectrum of physical particles, i.e. the diagram of fig. 1 persists.

Again, the easiest way to calculate the contribution of the scalar KK modes is to resort to the equivalence theorem for the external $`Z`$ and compute the diagram of fig. 1 with the Z replaced by the $`G^{(0)}`$. Since the couplings of the KK modes to fermions are universal, summing all scalar contributions amounts to replacing the propagator of the SM would-be Goldstone boson by (for Euclidean momenta, which we will use in the momentum integrals after the Wick rotation)

$$\frac{1}{k_E^2}\frac{1}{k_E^2}+2\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{k_E^2+n^2/R^2}=\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{k_E^2+n^2/R^2}=\pi R\frac{\mathrm{coth}(k_E\pi R)}{k_E},$$
(10)
where $`k_E=\sqrt{k_E^2}.`$

Notice the behavior of this propagator: for small $`k_E`$ it reduces to the standard Goldstone propagator plus, if expanded at leading order, an additional constant which furnishes the contact interaction derived above, eq. (8). However, for large $`k_E`$ it goes as $`1/k_E`$; as a result the ultraviolet (UV) behavior of this theory is worse than in the SM by one power of $`k_E`$, a fact which will eventually trigger the non-renormalizability of the theory. However, since in the large $`k_E`$ limit only even powers of $`k_E`$ contribute in standard QFT integrals, this worse UV behavior of the non-standard propagator does not create additional problems, as long as only one such propagator is inserted into a convergent graph. For instance, the dominant SM contribution to the $`Zb\overline{b}`$ vertex, fig. 1, is convergent because the integrand behaves as $`1/k_E^6;`$ when we use the non-standard propagator this behavior will drop to $`1/k_E^5`$, which still leads to a convergent result.

To see how this works in detail we parametrize the effective $`Z\overline{b}b`$ vertex as

$$\frac{g}{c_W}\overline{b}\gamma ^\mu (g_LP_L+g_RP_R)bZ_\mu ,$$
(11)
where $`P_L=(1\gamma _5)/2`$ and $`P_R=(1+\gamma _5)/2`$ are, respectively, the left and right chirality projectors, $`c_W^2=1s_W^2=m_W^2/m_Z^2`$, and

$`g_L`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}s_W^2+\delta g_L^{\mathrm{SM}}+\delta g_L^{\mathrm{NP}}`$ (12)
$`g_R`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}s_W^2+\delta g_R^{\mathrm{SM}}+\delta g_R^{\mathrm{NP}}.`$ (13)
In the above equations the $`1/2+s_W^2/3`$ and $`s_W^2/3`$ are the tree level contributions, $`\delta g_L^{\mathrm{SM}}`$ and $`\delta g_L^{\mathrm{SM}}`$ denote higher order corrections within the SM, whereas $`\delta g_L^{\mathrm{NP}}`$ and $`\delta g_L^{\mathrm{NP}}`$ parametrize the contributions coming from new physics. Notice that, in general, $`g_R`$ only receives sub-dominant corrections (not proportional to the top quark mass) in both the SM and in most of new physics scenarios. In particular, the dominant SM contribution comes from the Goldstone boson diagrams running in the loop, fig. 1, and it is given by

$$\delta g_L^{\mathrm{SM}}\sqrt{2}G_Fm_t^4i\frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}\frac{1}{(k^2m_t^2)^2k^2}=\frac{\sqrt{2}G_Fm_t^2}{(4\pi )^2}.$$
(14)
Therefore, adding the KK modes we obtain

$$\delta g_L^{\mathrm{NP}}\delta g_L^{\mathrm{SM}}\left(F(a)1\right),$$
(15)
where $`a=\pi Rm_t`$, and

$`F(a)`$ $`=`$ $`\pi R{\displaystyle \frac{dk_Ek_E^2\mathrm{coth}(k_E\pi R)}{(k_E^2+m_t^2)^2}/\frac{dk_Ek_E}{(k_E^2+m_t^2)^2}}`$ (16)
$`=`$ $`2a{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑x{\displaystyle \frac{x^2}{(1+x^2)^2}}\mathrm{coth}(ax)`$ (17)
is the ratio of the non-standard to the standard integrals (in the Euclidean). $`F(a)`$ is, as expected, perfectly convergent. It can be expanded for small $`a`$, yielding

$$F(a)1+a^2\left(\frac{1}{3}\frac{4}{\pi ^2}\zeta ^{}(2)\frac{2}{3}\mathrm{log}(a/\pi )\right)1+a^2\left(0.80979\frac{2}{3}\mathrm{log}(a)\right),$$
(18)
where $`\zeta ^{}`$ is the derivative of the Riemann zeta function. As commented before, the logarithmic contribution can be obtained easily by using the four-fermion interaction at the loop level and then cutting off the integrals at $`k_E1/a`$. This model, in addition to the logarithmic contribution provides also the non-logarithmic piece, and the result reported above is valid for any value of $`a`$. One important point about this result is that the additional contribution from the KK modes is always positive, a fact which will be of particular importance in the following phenomenological analysis.

A shift in the $`Zb\overline{b}`$ couplings gives a shift in $`R_b=\mathrm{\Gamma }_b/\mathrm{\Gamma }_h`$ (here $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_b=\mathrm{\Gamma }(Zb\overline{b})`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_h=\mathrm{\Gamma }(Z\mathrm{hadrons})`$) given by

$$R_b=R_b^{\mathrm{SM}}\frac{1+\delta _{bV}^{\mathrm{NP}}}{1+R_b^{\mathrm{SM}}\delta _{bV}^{\mathrm{NP}}},$$
(19)
where

$$\delta _{bV}^{\mathrm{NP}}=\frac{\delta \mathrm{\Gamma }_b}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_b^{\mathrm{SM}}}2\frac{g_L}{(g_L)^2+(g_R)^2}\delta g_L^{\mathrm{NP}}4.6\delta g_L^{\mathrm{NP}}$$
(20)
gives the relative change to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_b`$ due to vertex corrections coming from new physics, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_b=\mathrm{\Gamma }_b^{\mathrm{SM}}+\delta \mathrm{\Gamma }_b`$. Here, quantities with superscript SM denote standard model values including complete radiative corrections. Note that non-vertex corrections are universal for all quarks and cancel in the ratio $`R_b`$.

In recent years there has been a significant controversy surrounding $`R_b`$, because for some time its measured value was more than two standard deviations away from the one predicted in the SM. However, the present experimental value is perfectly compatible with the SM : $`R_b^{\mathrm{exp}}=0.2164\pm 0.00073`$, while $`R_b^{\mathrm{SM}}=0.2157\pm 0.0002`$, although the central value is still somewhat higher. Using these values together with equations (14), (15), (19) and (20), one immediately finds that $`F(a)1=0.24\pm 0.31`$. However, as commented before, $`F(a)`$ is always larger than $`1`$ since corrections from extra dimensions are always positive. In this case one should be especially careful when estimating confidence levels (CL) for the bounds on $`F(a)1`$. For this purpose we used the prescription of ref. , which provides more reliable limits than other approaches, and found the following 95% CL limit of $`F(a)1<0.39`$. After evaluation of the integral (17) the previous limit translates into an upper bound on $`a`$, $`a<0.56`$, which amounts to the following lower bound on the compactification scale $`M_c`$,

$$M_c>1\mathrm{TeV}.$$
(21)
If only 68% CL limits are required we obtain $`F(a)1<0.11`$, $`a<0.26`$, and $`M_c>2\mathrm{TeV}`$. Quite interestingly, these one-loop bounds are comparable to those obtained from tree level processes .

In the above discussion we have not taken into account the effects of the gauge boson KK modes because their contribution is suppressed by $`(m_W/m_t)^2`$. However, since $`(m_W/m_t)^21/4`$, such contributions, even though formally suppressed, could become numerically relevant and affect the obtained bounds. In addition, those contributions are present even if the scalar doublet lives in four dimensions and, as a consequence, has no KK modes. Therefore, we will provide an estimate of their size.

At energies below the compactification scale one can integrate the KK modes of the gauge bosons and obtain the following four-fermion interaction for the third generation (in the eigenvalue basis and neglecting CKM mixings)

$$_{\mathrm{gauge}}=\frac{(\pi R)^2}{3}\frac{g^2}{2}\left(\overline{b}_L\gamma _\mu t_L\right)\left(\overline{t}_L\gamma ^\mu b_L\right),$$
(22)
to be compared with the contribution from scalar modes obtained from (9) (again neglecting CKM mixings)

$$_{\mathrm{Ytb}}=\frac{(\pi R)^2}{3}\frac{m_t^2}{v^2}\left(\overline{b}_Lt_R\right)\left(\overline{t}_Rb_L\right).$$
(23)
As commented above and discussed in ref. , one can use these effective Lagrangians to obtain the leading logarithmic corrections to $`Zb\overline{b}`$. In order to achieve that we compute the divergent part of the diagram shown in fig. 2, where the symbol $``$ denotes the insertion of any of these four-fermion operators. It turns out that the different Lorentz structure of the two four fermion interactions in (22) and (23) gives an additional factor $`2`$ in the former case. Therefore, up to non-logarithm corrections, one can include the effect of the exchange of KK modes of gauge bosons by multiplying the effect of the scalar KK modes by a factor $`1+2(m_W/m_t)^2`$, which gives a non-negligible correction. Notice that due to the positive relative sign, inclusion of this correction would lead to a 20% improvement in the bound on $`M_c.`$ Moreover, this correction will remain even in the absence of scalar KK modes; in that case one can still place a bound on $`M_c`$ of about $`0.7`$ TeV.

## IV Box contributions to $`K`$-$`\overline{K}`$ and $`B`$-$`\overline{B}`$ mixing and the divergences

In the SM, the mixing between the $`B^0`$ meson and its anti-particle is also completely dominated by the top-quark contribution. The explicit $`m_t`$ dependence of the box diagrams is given by the loop function

$$S(x_t)_{\text{SM}}=\frac{x_t}{4}\left[1+\frac{9}{1x_t}\frac{6}{(1x_t)^2}\frac{6x_t^2\mathrm{log}(x_t)}{(1x_t)^3}\right],x_t\frac{m_t^2}{M_W^2},$$
(24)
which contains the hard $`m_t^2`$ term, i.e. $`x_t/4`$, induced by the longitudinal $`W`$ exchanges. The same function controls the top–quark contribution to the $`K`$-$`\overline{K}`$ mixing parameter $`\epsilon _K`$. The measured top-quark mass, $`m_t=175`$ GeV, implies $`S(x_t)_{\text{SM}}2.5`$.

The KK modes of the charged components of the doublet also contribute to this box diagram. The total dominant contribution, SM plus KK modes, can be obtained by substituting the propagator (10) in the box diagram, fig. 3. However, as discussed in the previous section, the modified propagator behaves as $`1/k_E`$ for large $`k_E`$, and therefore, the insertion of two propagators of this type turns this modified diagram into UV divergent. On the other hand, the insertion of only one modified propagator still yields a finite result.

We write the correction to $`S(x_t)`$ as

$$S(x_t)=S(x_t)_{\text{SM}}+\delta S(x_t),\delta S(x_t)=\frac{x_t}{4}\left(G(a)1\right),$$
(25)
where the function $`G(a)`$ is again the ratio of the non-standard to standard box integralsNotice that, even though the SM box integral is given exactly by the same expression as that of the SM vertex integral in the previous section, their original structures are rather different . In particular, the box diagram contains two scalar propagators whereas the vertex diagram only contains one.

$`G(a)`$ $`=`$ $`(\pi R)^2{\displaystyle \frac{dk_Ek_E^3\mathrm{coth}^2(k_E\pi R)}{(k_E^2+m_t^2)^2}/\frac{dk_Ek_E}{(k_E^2+m_t^2)^2}}`$ (26)
$`=`$ $`2a^2{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑x{\displaystyle \frac{x^3}{(1+x^2)^2}}\mathrm{coth}^2(ax)`$ (27)
which is clearly divergent for $`x\mathrm{}`$. In order to estimate this integral, we split $`\mathrm{coth}(ax)\frac{1}{ax}(1+\underset{}{ax\mathrm{coth}(ax)1})`$ and rewrite $`G(a)`$ as

$`G(a)`$ $`=`$ $`2{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑x{\displaystyle \frac{x}{(1+x^2)^2}}\left(1+2\left(ax\mathrm{coth}(ax)1\right)+\left(ax\mathrm{coth}(ax)1\right)^2\right)`$ (28)
$`=`$ $`1+2\left(F(a)1\right)+2{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑x{\displaystyle \frac{x}{(1+x^2)^2}}\left(ax\mathrm{coth}(ax)1\right)^2.`$ (29)
The divergence is contained in the last term. To evaluate it we cut off the integral at $`xn_s/a`$, where $`n_s`$ is related to the scale at which new physics enters to regulate the five dimensional theory. In particular, $`M_sn_sM_c`$ and $`n_s1`$. Then, after a change of variable $`y=ax`$ the last term can be re-written as

$`2a^2{\displaystyle _0^{n_s}}𝑑y{\displaystyle \frac{y}{(a^2+y^2)^2}}\left(y\mathrm{coth}(y)1\right)^2`$ $``$ $`2a^2{\displaystyle _0^{n_s}}𝑑y{\displaystyle \frac{1}{y^3}}\left(y\mathrm{coth}(y)1\right)^2`$ (30)
$``$ $`2a^2\left(1.38136+\mathrm{log}(n_s)\right),`$ (31)
where in the second expression we have assumed $`a1`$, and, in addition, in the last expression we have also taken $`n_s1`$. Combining this result with (29) and (18) we obtain

$$G(a)1+a^2\left(1.14314\frac{4}{3}\mathrm{log}(a)+2\mathrm{log}(n_s)\right).$$
(32)
We have checked that the coefficients of the two logarithms, $`\mathrm{log}(a)`$ and $`\mathrm{log}(n_s)`$, can also be obtained by performing first the convergent momentum integrals and subsequently truncating the divergent double series at $`n_s`$. However, this latter method is technically far more complicated than the one presented here.

For moderate values of $`a0.2`$ and $`n_s10`$ the new physics correction is only about $`0.2`$. For more extreme values (for instance $`a0.6`$ and $`n_s100`$), we find that the contribution from extra dimensions to the function $`G(a)`$ is about $`3`$. Notice also that, as discussed at the end of sec. III, the presence of diagrams with gauge boson KK modes could modify the bounds on $`M_c`$ by a factor of about 20%. However, given the uncertainty in the calculation of the box diagrams due to the dependence on the scale $`M_s,`$ estimating such effects seems superfluous. The important point, however, is that the contribution from extra dimensions to the function $`S(x_t)`$ is always positive.

We can use the measured $`B_d^0`$-$`\overline{B}_d^0`$ mixing to infer the experimental value of $`S(x_t)`$ and, therefore, to set a limit on the $`\delta S(x_t)`$ contribution. The explicit dependence on the quark–mixing parameters can be resolved by combining the constraints from $`\mathrm{\Delta }M_{B_d^0}`$, $`\epsilon _K,`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(bu)/\mathrm{\Gamma }(bc)`$. In ref.  a complete analysis of the allowed values for $`S(x_t)`$ was performed by varying all parameters in their allowed regions. The final outcome of such an analysis is that $`S(x_t)`$ could take values within a rather large interval, namely

$$1<S(x_t)<10.$$
(33)
Since most of the errors come from uncertainties in theoretical calculations, it is rather difficult to assign confidence levels to the bounds quoted above. The lower limit is very stable under changes of parameters, while the upper limit could be modified by a factor of 2 by simply doubling some of the errors.

Given that the standard model value for $`S(x_t)`$ is $`S(x_t)_{\mathrm{SM}}=2.5`$, *positive* contributions can be comfortably accommodated, whereas negative contributions are more constrained. As we have seen, extra dimensions result in *positive* contributions to $`S(x_t)`$; in fact one can obtain values that could approach the upper limit of $`S(x_t)`$ only for rather small values of the compactification scale $`M_c`$ and large values of the scale of new physics, $`M_s`$. It seems therefore that, at present, the above bounds do not provide good limits on $`M_c`$. On the other hand, if future experiments combined with theoretical improvements were to furnish a value for $`S(x_t)`$ exceeding that of the SM, our analysis shows that such a discrepancy could easily be accommodated in models with large extra dimensions.

## V Conclusions

We have studied, at the one loop level, the minimal extension of the SM with one extra dimension compactified in $`S^1/_2`$. Fermions live in 4 dimensions, while gauge bosons and the scalar doublet live in 5 dimensions and therefore give rise to a tower of KK modes. In the case of a single extra dimension the contribution of the infinite tower of KK modes lead to finite tree level predictions. We have investigated whether this feature persists at the one loop level, by considering two amplitudes which are enhanced by the top-quark mass, namely $`Zb\overline{b}`$ and $`B`$-$`\overline{B}`$ mixing.

The infinite tower of KK modes enters in the calculation of $`Zb\overline{b}`$ by modifying the propagator of the charged scalars running in the vertex diagram. This can be effectively taken into account by using a modified propagator for the scalars which for large $`k`$ behaves as $`1/k`$, instead of the canonical behavior of $`1/k^2`$. In spite of that the effect is finite and calculable. The result, when compared with precise experimental data on $`R_b=\mathrm{\Gamma }_b/\mathrm{\Gamma }_h`$, is used to place stringent limits on the compactification scale, $`M_c,`$ $`M_c>1`$ TeV at the 95% CL, which are comparable to the bounds obtained from tree-level processes.

The box diagrams contributing to $`B`$-$`\overline{B}`$ and $`K`$-$`\overline{K}`$ mixings contain two propagators of KK modes. The double sum over KK modes amounts to the replacement of both propagators by the aforementioned softer ones, a fact which increases the UV behavior of the diagram by two powers, and renders it divergent. Thus, due to such contributions the theory becomes non-renormalizable already at the one-loop level. To estimate their size one has to assume that the model is embedded in a more complete theory which would provide an effective cutoff at scales larger than $`M_c`$. In practice, this can be realized either by cutting off the infinite integrals at momenta of order of $`M_s`$, the scale where new physics enters to regularize the five dimensional theory, or by truncating the sum of KK modes at some value of $`n_s`$, $`n_sM_s/M_c`$, with $`n_s`$ expected to be order $`100`$ or less. This way we can estimate the correction induced by the extra dimension to the function $`S(x_t)`$ which parametrizes the short distance physics in $`B`$-$`\overline{B}`$ and $`K`$-$`\overline{K}`$ mixings. A phenomenological analysis shows that $`1<S(x_t)<10,`$ while the SM value is $`S(x_t)=2.5`$. This suggests that moderate *positive* extra contributions to $`S(x_t)`$ are still allowed. Since within the model we consider the contributions to $`S(x_t)`$ from KK modes is always positive and moderate in size, no interesting bounds can be obtained form this process. However, if in the future a value of $`S(x_t)`$ larger than the SM value is found, extra dimensions could easily accommodate it.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work has been funded by CICYT under the Grant AEN-99-0692, by DGESIC under the Grant PB97-1261 and by the DGEUI of the Generalitat Valenciana under the Grant GV98-01-80.


format: text

text:
# Ultraviolet Galaxy Counts from STIS Observations of the Hubble Deep Fields1footnote 11footnote 1Based on observations made with the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope, obtained from the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under NASA contract NAS 5-26555..

## 1 Introduction

Imaging of random fields at high galactic latitude is a powerful tool for investigating galaxy formation and evolution. Number counts of galaxies, as a function of filter bandpass, have provided the first solid evidence for the evolution of the normal galaxy population (e.g., Tyson 1988; Lilly, Cowie & Gardner 1991). Much work has been done in the optical and near-infrared, and the number counts of galaxies are now well established observationally at bright magnitudes through wide-area surveys done both with electronic detectors (Gardner et al. 1996) and photographic plates (Maddox et al. 1990). At faint magnitudes, the Hubble Deep Field projects have established the galaxy counts in the optical and near-infrared to AB=30 magnitude (Williams et al. 1996; Thompson et al. 1999; Gardner et al. 2000; Ferguson, Dickinson & Williams 2000). The AB magnitude system is defined by $`AB=2.5log(F_\nu )48.6`$ where $`F_\nu `$ is given in erg cm-2 s-1 Hz-1 (Oke 1971).

Bright galaxy counts in the ultraviolet have been measured from balloon-borne imaging in the 2000Å window by the FOCA experiment (Milliard et al. 1992), with follow-up ground-based optical spectroscopy by Treyer et al. (1998) and Sullivan et al. (2000). With a 40 cm telescope, FOCA surveyed a total area of about 6 square degrees near the North Galactic Pole over the magnitude range $`17.75<F(2000)_{AB}<20.75`$, measuring a nearly Euclidean slope for the counts. The colors and spectra of their detected galaxies are consistent with an actively star-forming population dominated by Sdm or later types in the redshift range $`0<z<0.5`$. The data show a larger population of UV-emitting galaxies than had previously been assumed (Armand & Milliard 1994), with a steep faint-end slope for the UV luminosity function.

In this Letter, we present faint galaxy counts in the near- and far-ultraviolet (NUV & FUV) obtained by imaging several fields with the Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph (STIS; Kimble et al. 1998; Woodgate et al. 1998).

## 2 Description of the data

We have examined three datasets. The largest field consists of follow-up STIS imaging of part of the Hubble Deep Field North (HDFN-Fol; Williams et al. 1996), and contains 6 fields of view with the FUV and NUV detectors. The second field consists of the primary STIS observations of the Hubble Deep Field South (HDFS-Pri; Gardner et al. 2000). The third field was a parallel field imaged with STIS in the optical and ultraviolet during a deep imaging campaign of the HDFN (hereafter HDFN-Par) done with NICMOS (Thompson et al. 1999). It is located $`8.5\mathrm{}`$ East of the deep field. All observations used the F25QTZ filter, and are dark noise limited in both the FUV and NUV. These data have been used for a measurement of the diffuse FUV background emission (Brown et al. 2000). Details of the field and the FUV exposure times are given in that paper. The NUV exposure times range from 16,865s to 22,616s per field of view.

We used the public reduction of the HDFS-Pri field (Gardner et al. 2000), and reduced the data on the HDFN-Fol and HDFN-Par fields in the same way. All of the exposures are dithered, which results in a variable exposure time across the final images. In addition, the presence of the FUV dark glow (described in detail by Gardner et al. 2000 and Brown et al. 2000) results in noise that varies by a factor of 2 across the field.

All three fields have deep optical imaging, reaching a 3$`\sigma `$ limiting AB magnitude of $``$29. The HDFN-Fol and HDFS-Pri fields are contained within the deep optical fields. The HDFN-Par field was observed with STIS in the 50CCD mode for 34,076 s. The HDFN-Par observations were made during the first NICMOS camera 3 campaign when the focus of the telescope was changed, and are therefore slightly out of focus, and somewhat less sensitive to point sources than they would otherwise be. However, we do not make a distinction between point sources and extended sources in our analysis, and we take source size into account in our determination of the galaxy counts, so this will not affect our results.

### 2.1 Object detection and photometry

We used the publicly released SExtractor (Bertin & Arnouts 1996) version 2 catalog for the HDFS-Pri field, and followed a similar procedure for object detection and photometry on the other two fields. As SExtractor has problems handling quantized low-signal data, we computed the flux in the UV images within the pixels assigned to each object in the optical, with local background subtraction. See Gardner et al. (2000) for a more detailed discussion of this procedure. We have made the assumption that there are no objects detectable on the UV images that are undetected on the optical images. Visual inspection of the images confirms this assumption. In addition, the photometry are isophotal magnitudes, where the isophote has been determined in the optical.

In Figure 1 we plot the UV-optical colors of the detected galaxies in the HDFN-Fol field. The optical flux is determined from the SExtractor version 2 catalog of the sum of the HDFN F814W and F606W images (hereafter VI). We plot as a solid line the location on this figure where objects with VIAB=30 would be, and as a dotted line where objects with VIAB=29 would be. If we take $`VI_{AB}`$=29 as the completeness limit for the HDFN catalog, then there are only three galaxies detected at the $`3\sigma `$ limit in our NUV catalog and no galaxies in our FUV catalog that are fainter than this in the optical. The three galaxies are fainter than $`NUV_{AB}`$=28 in the UV, and the UV-optical color distribution does not show a sharp cut-off at the optical detection limit.

### 2.2 Measurement of the number counts

There has been considerable debate about incompleteness in measurements of galaxy counts due to the distribution of central surface brightness in galaxies (McGaugh 1994; Ferguson & McGaugh 1995). For every photometric survey the apparent magnitude detection limit is a function of central surface brightness, or galaxy size (Petrosian 1998). While this criticism has been directed at surveys done with photographic plates and bright isophotal detection limits, the high resolution of HST data makes them less sensitive to extended objects. We determine the area and the completeness for each apparent magnitude galaxy bin simultaneously, using simulations which sample the optical HDFN catalog.

We use the error maps to determine the area over which each galaxy would have been detected. We smooth them with a median filter of $`0.4\mathrm{}\times 0.4\mathrm{}`$, in order to remove small-scale variations introduced during hot pixel removal or the drizzling process. The number of pixels where a galaxy of a given size and magnitude would be detected at 3 sigma gives the area. To eliminate edge effects, we remove a region around the perimeter of each field equal to the radius of a circle with the same area as the galaxy. We plot these areas as a function of magnitude in Figure 2. At bright magnitudes, the galaxies would be detected anywhere in our survey area, except the edges of the images. At fainter levels, the detection area depends on galaxy size, and drops to zero where galaxies are too faint to be detected at all.

Next we construct a catalog of simulated galaxies to correct for incompleteness in our measured counts, using the isophotal sizes and optical magnitudes from the entire HDFN VI catalog. We simulate 400 galaxies in each UV magnitude bin. We convert these to simulated VI magnitudes with random UV-optical colors selected from a Gaussian distribution plotted as an inset to Figure 1. We then take from the HDFN catalog the galaxy with the closest-matching optical magnitude. This gives us a size for the simulated galaxy, effectively bootstrap sampling the size distribution of the HDFN VI catalog, but using a UV-selected galaxy sample. For each simulated galaxy, we determine the area of detection, and plot this in Figure 2. In each of our apparent magnitude bins, the combined area and completeness is the average of all of the detection areas for the simulated galaxies, including those simulated galaxies for which the detection area is zero.

We make no attempt at star-galaxy separation, other than to remove the bright point source in the middle of the HDFN-Fol field. The region around and including the target quasar has also been removed from the HDFS-Pri field.

### 2.3 Isophotal to total magnitude correction

We plot the galaxy counts in Figure 3, and list them in Table LABEL:counts. The data plotted in Figures 1 and 2 refer to the isophotal magnitudes. We have also corrected the isophotal magnitudes to total magnitudes using simulations of the object detection procedure in the HDFN VI image, as described by Ferguson (1998). We fit a 5th order polynomial to the median difference of the isophotal and total magnitudes in the simulations in half-magnitude bins, as a function of isophotal magnitude. The corrections are $`0.20`$ mag for the galaxies at $`VI_{AB}<28`$, the majority of our sample. This procedure operates on the assumption that there are no UV-to-optical color gradients in the galaxies, a reasonable approximation for spiral galaxies. Elliptical galaxies tend to have larger isophotal-to-total corrections in the optical than spiral galaxies, but are more centrally concentrated in the UV than in the optical. These corrections tend to steepen the counts slightly (every galaxy is made brighter), but the changes are mostly within the Poissonian errors on the bins.

### 2.4 Extragalactic background radiation from resolved objects

Brown et al. (2000) measured the diffuse FUV background radiation after removing the resolved objects. The contribution of resolved galaxies is the integral of the flux from the galaxy counts; this flux is dominated by galaxies near the break where K-corrections become significant. Since we do not sample this break, we construct a model of the counts extending to bright levels. We convert the FOCA counts to the FUV using the model of Gardner (1998), which gives $`F(2000)_{AB}FUV_{AB}=0.05`$ for star-forming galaxies at low redshift. We fit a power law with a Euclidean slope of 0.6 to these data (intercept $`9.9\pm 0.15`$), and fit a power law to our data (slope $`0.14\pm 0.06`$, intercept $`0.7\pm 1.6`$). The integrated background from this model is $`\nu I_\nu =3.9_{0.8}^{+1.1}nWm^2sr^2`$, or $`I_\lambda =195_{39}^{+59}phs^1cm^2sr^1\AA ^1`$ at 1595Å, where the statistical errors come from the errors in the fitted slopes. This is an upper limit, and as an alternative, we fit a third power laws connecting the faintest FOCA point with our brightest point (slope $`0.45\pm 0.06`$, intercept $`7.0\pm 1.3`$). This gives a lower limit of $`2.9_{0.4}^{+0.6}`$ in sterance, or $`144_{19}^{+28}`$ in photon units. Our range of 144 to 195 photon units is mildly inconsistent with the prediction by Armand, Milliard, & Deharveng (1994) of 40 to 130 photon units. Of the $``$300 photon units measured for the total background (Bowyer 1991), our measurements reduce the contribution required from truly diffuse sources (e.g., dust-scattered Galactic starlight, the inter-galactic medium, or H II two-photon emission).

We fit our NUV data with two power laws, breaking at $`NUV_{AB}=26.75`$, and we convert the FOCA counts to the NUV using $`F(2000)_{AB}NUV_{AB}=0.02`$. The three power laws are (slope, intercept) = ($`0.6,10.0\pm 0.15`$), ($`0.33\pm 0.07`$,$`3.7\pm 1.7`$), and ($`0.06\pm 0.09`$, $`6.7\pm 2.5`$). The integrated background is $`3.6_{0.5}^{+0.7}`$ in sterance, or $`179_{25}^{+35}`$ in photon units.

## 3 Discussion

The most striking feature of the faint counts is the very flat slope of the NUV counts at the faintest magnitude bins. In the range $`26.5<NUV_{AB}<29.0`$, the slope is $`0.06\pm 0.09`$, formally a turnover. Changes in the slope of the galaxy counts can contain information about the cosmological parameters (Yoshii & Peterson 1991). The intrinsic and intergalactic absorption at wavelengths shorter than the Lyman limit, which removes nearly all flux, provides a redshift cut-off for galaxies in the observed UV, and counts fainter than $`M_{}`$ at this redshift are effectively volume-limited, sampling the faint end of the luminosity function. The flat slope we see is inconsistent with a no-evolution model extrapolation of the luminosity function measured locally by Sullivan et al. (2000), indicative of evolution in the star formation properties of galaxies (see also Steidel et al. 1999).

In Figure 3 we plot a prediction of the UV galaxy counts from the model of Granato et al. (2000). The prediction is much steeper than the observed counts, underpredicting them at bright magnitudes and overpredicting the number of faint galaxies. This model assumes that the rate of star formation is proportional to the rate of infalling cold gas, unless a major merger takes place. In a merger between galaxies with a mass ratio of 0.3 or greater, all of the available gas is converted into stars. A possible explanation for the flat slope of the counts is given by Somerville, Primack & Faber (2000), based on a suggestion by White & Frenk (1991). They investigate a scenario in which all mergers, independent of mass ratio, trigger starbursts. Additional starbursting galaxies (within the context of models in which the total starformation rate is fixed), have the effect of increasing the number of bright galaxies and decreasing the number of faint galaxies in the luminosity function. Additional flattening of the counts will be seen if the duty cycle for starbursts is short, and is followed by an extended quiescent phase between the starburst episodes.

We would like to acknowledge the contributions of our co-investigators on the HDFN-Fol project: Mark Dickinson, Andy Fruchter, Mauro Giavalisco, Sally Heap, Ray Lucas, Piero Madau, Eliot Malumuth, Lucia Pozzetti, Bruce Woodgate and Gerry Williger. We would like to thank Carlos Frenk, Cedric Lacy, Simon White and Rachel Somerville for useful discussions and model predictions. We would like to thank Rodger Thompson, Nick Collins and Robert S. Hill for assisting with the HDFN-Par field. We would like to thank Bob Williams and the HDFN and HDFS teams. Support for this work was provided by NASA through grants numbered GO-07410.03-96A and AR-08380.01-97A from the Space Telescope Science Institute which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under NASA contract NAS5-26555. TMB acknowledges support from the STIS Investigation Definition Team and the Goddard Space Flight Center.


text:
# The Nature of Faint Submillimeter Galaxies

## 1 Introduction

The results of the highly successful far-infrared (FIR) survey undertaken by IRAS led to a wide-spread realisation of the ubiquity and importance of highly-obscured star-forming and active galaxies in the local universe. More recent work in the FIR and submm wavebands has produced a similar revolution in our understanding of obscured galaxies in the distant universe. These observations employ the COBE and ISO satellites and the Sub-millimeter Common User Bolometer Array (SCUBA) on the 15-m JCMT111The JCMT is operated by the Joint Astronomy Centre on behalf of the United Kingdom Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council (PPARC), the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research, and the National Research Council of Canada. and have shown that obscured galaxies contribute a substantial fraction of the total emitted radiation at high redshifts.

The rough equivalence of the energy density in the optical background and that detected in the FIR/submm by COBE suggests that, averaged over all epochs, approximately half of the total radiation in the universe came from obscured sources (either stars or AGN). Clearly including these class of galaxies in models of galaxy evolution is critical to obtain a complete understanding of the formation and evolution of galaxies.

As we will show in the next section, the bulk of the emission in the FIR/submm comes from a relatively small population of extremely luminous, dusty galaxies. These galaxies lie at high redshifts, $`z>1`$–4, are both massive and gas-rich and they may dominate the total star formation in the universe at these early epochs. The analogs of this population in the local universe are the Ultra-Luminous Infrared Galaxies (ULIRGs) uncovered by IRAS. As a benchmark for the following discussion we note that a ULIRG similar to Arp 220 with a far-infrared luminosity of $`L_{FIR}3\times 10^{12}L_{}`$ and a star-formation rate (SFR) of $`300`$ M yr-1 would have a 850-$`\mu `$m flux density of $`>3`$ mJy out to $`z10`$ in a spatially flat Universe.222We assume $`q_o=0.5`$ and $`h_{100}=0.5`$ unless otherwise stated.

## 2 Submm number counts and the FIR background

The advent of sensitive submm imaging with SCUBA has allowed a number of groups to undertake ‘blank’-field surveys for faint submm galaxies. Results on the number density of sources in blank fields as a function of 850-$`\mu `$m flux density have been published by three groups. Unfortunately, due to the modest resolution of the SCUBA maps, 15′′ FWHM, these surveys are confusion limited at $`2`$ mJy and resolve $`50`$% of the COBE background.

Our collaboration has taken a complimentary approach to these ‘blank’ field surveys by using massive gravitational cluster lenses to increase the sensitivity and resolution of SCUBA. This survey covers seven lensing clusters at $`z=0.19`$–0.41 (new results from two similar lensing surveys with SCUBA were also reported at this meeting). Our analysis uses well-constrained lens models to correct the observed source fluxes for lens amplification. For the median source amplification, $`2.5\times `$, this survey covers an area of the source plane equivalent to 15 arcmin2 at a $`3\sigma `$ flux limit of $`2`$ mJy. The amplification also results in a factor of two finer beam size at this depth so that these counts have a fainter confusion limit than the blank field observations. The surface density of sources at the limit of our survey (0.5 mJy) is $`8`$ arcmin-2 (the equivalent density of ‘normal’ field galaxies is reached at $`I23.5`$) and we resolve $`100`$% of the COBE background. We conclude that the majority of the extragalactic submm background arises in a relatively sparse population of extremely luminous galaxies, $`L>10^{12}L_{}`$.

## 3 Optical counterparts to submm galaxies

The first attempts at identifying counterparts to the submm sources in our survey concentrated on exploiting the high-quality, archival Hubble Space Telescope WFPC2 imaging which existed for the majority of these fields. These frames typically reach limits of $`I27`$ on the background source-plane and we felt confident of identifying a large fraction of the submm galaxies (reflecting the optical bias of the author). Figure 1 shows the identifications from Smail et al. (1998) but ordered in terms of our current understanding of the reliability of the proposed counterparts (based on the near-infrared and radio follow-up discussed in the next section).

If we remove the two central cluster galaxies from our sample (SMM J21536+1741 and SMM J14010+0252) – we conclude that only about half of the original identifications which were proposed are likely to be correct. Indeed, of all the submm galaxies detected in all the SCUBA surveys, only three have confirmed counterparts: SMM J02399$``$0136, SMM J14011+0252 and SMM J02399$``$0134 (Fig. 1), where the confirmation comes from identification of CO emission at the same redshift as the proposed counterpart. For a handful of other sources, their continuum detections with millimeter interferometers and the improved astrometry which these provide, have been used to identify likely counterparts. Equally, identifications of counterparts have been claimed when a galaxy with sufficiently unusual characteristics is found within the submm error box (e.g. an ERO), but so far none of these have been confirmed in CO.

The relatively low identification rate, even with the high-quality optical imaging we have available, results partly from the fact that source confusion with the large SCUBA beam is compounded by clustering, potentially leading to deviations of the order of the beam-size. Indeed the clearest route to identifying counterparts is usually to overlay the raw SCUBA map onto the optical image and to use the information present in the shape of the submm emission to search for possible merging of sources. We believe that source confusion may have contributed to the ambiguities in the identification of counterparts for SMM J21536+1742, SMM J22471$``$0206 and SMM J02400$``$0134. However, the main difficulty with identifying optical counterparts arises because the majority of the submm population are extremely faint at optical wavelengths: at least half and perhaps upto 75% of galaxies in Fig. 1 have optically faint counterparts, $`I25`$–27 (i.e. Classes 0 and 1). Removing the known AGN from the sample, the proportion of starburst-powered submm galaxies which have optically faint counterparts rises to 90%. We now briefly discuss some of the observations which have led us to this conclusion.

## 4 Near-infrared and radio counterparts to submm galaxies

The first indication that things might not be as clear-cut as the proposed optical identifications suggested came from $`K`$-band imaging of our SCUBA fields using UKIRT333UKIRT is operated by the Joint Astronomy Centre on behalf of PPARC. These images reach $`K21`$ in the source plane and uncovered new candidates (H5 and N4 in Fig. 2) within the submm error-boxes of two of the submm sources. These galaxies are undetected in very deep HST and Keck $`R`$\- and $`I`$-band imaging ($`I>27`$ corrected for lens amplification), but are relatively bright in the $`K`$-band. Their colours, $`(IK)>6.0`$ and $`>6.8`$ for H5 and N4 respectively, place them firmly in the rare class of Extremely Red Objects (EROs). The surface density of ERO-submm galaxies in our survey means that they account for around half of all ERO’s – providing an important link between these two populations. Moreover, the extreme submm to optical ratios of these galaxies, $`L_{FIR}/L_B>300`$ (assuming they lie at $`z2.5`$–3, as suggested by fits to their SEDs), combined with their high inferred star formation rates underlines the difficulties faced when attempting to use UV-selected samples to audit star formation at $`z1`$.

The next phase of the identification process used very deep 1.4 GHz maps of our fields from the VLA. These maps allow us to identify radio counterparts or place stringent limits ($`<20\mu `$Jy in the source plane) on the radio flux of the submm galaxies. Moreover, the recent work on submm-to-radio spectral indices for distant star forming galaxies has provided us with a useful tool for estimating the redshift distribution of a complete submm-selected sample. We can compare the redshift limits derived in this manner with the spectroscopic redshifts for individual candidate optical counterparts and hence determine the reliability of these proposed counterparts as shown in Fig. 1. On the basis of this analysis we conclude that the submm population brighter than $`1`$ mJy has a median redshift of at least $`<z>2`$, and using the available spectral index models, probably $`<z>2.5`$–3. The high median redshift means that the submm population, if predominately powered by starbursts (rather than AGN), contributes a substantial fraction of the total star formation density at high redshifts.

Our on-going program of observations of this sample of submm galaxies, using near-infrared imaging and spectroscopy and millimeter interferometry is reported elsewhere in this volume.

## 5 The submm population at other wavelengths

To understand the role of the submm galaxies in galaxy formation and evolution we first have to determine the relative contributions to their extreme luminosities from AGN and starburst-powered emission. Hard X-ray observations can uncover the presence of a dominant AGN power source in even highly obscured sources, and hence provide a simple estimate of the AGN fraction in the submm population. Unfortunately, even for high-redshift sources, Chandra provides relatively poor hard X-ray response, and hence to-date all the X-ray studies of submm galaxies have achieved is to confirm the presence of modestly-obscured AGN in those galaxies in which optical spectroscopy had already identified AGN emission. These galaxies account for 10–20% of the submm population, in-line with estimates from the models of the X-ray background. Much more interesting limits on the fraction of highly-obscured AGN in this population will come from Newton observations. Equally useful constraints on the fraction of obscured AGN and the breakdown of AGN- versus starburst-powered emission in individual galaxies will come from high-resolution, mid-infrared observations (using OSCIR or Michelle on Gemini) which are sensitive to emission from hot-dust and PAHs. However, we conclude that, on present evidence, it seems safe to assume that the majority of the emission from the submm population is powered by star formation.

## 6 The relationship between FIR- and UV-selected galaxies

Finally, we briefly discuss the relationship of submm galaxies to other classes of high-redshift sources. Recently it has been claimed that UV- and optically-selected galaxy samples at $`z0`$–3 can completely account for the extragalactic background, not only in the optical/UV, but also in the far-infrared and submm. This calculation relies upon the correction of the UV luminosities of these samples for the effects of dust extinction, using a correlation between reddening (measured through the spectral slope in the UV) and UV luminosity from observations of normal galaxies at low redshifts. Unfortunately, as was graphically illustrated at this conference, this correlation doesn’t hold (even locally) for galaxies with bolometric luminosities typical of the population we have found at higher redshifts which dominate the submm counts and produce the bulk of the COBE background. This clearly calls into question the reliability of this type of calculation.

The argument that UV-selected samples can provide a complete picture is supported using optical/UV and submm observations of an example of a ‘representative’ submm galaxy, SMM J14011+0252 (Fig. 3). However, this galaxy is far from typical of the majority of the submm population – which would be better described using the ERO, HR 10, as an archetype. Moreover, even within the SMM J14011+0252 system it appears from interferometry observations that the dominant bolometric component resides, not in the UV-bright companion J2, but in the much redder galaxy J1. Using a UV-weighted spectral slope (which has a substantial contribution from J2) in an attempt to predict the unobscured star formation rate (which mostly occurs in J1) in this system seems questionable – why should the UV properties of J2 have any bearing on the degree of obscuration and star formation in J1?

Instead, if we adopt HR 10 as a template for a typical submm galaxy then we find that: as HR10 has a far higher ratio of far-IR to far-UV luminosity than the other galaxies considered it would not be included in UV-selected surveys despite its large star formation rate. We conclude therefore that UV light is an inappropriate tracer of star formation in the highly-obscured galaxies that contain a large fraction of the star formation in the high redshift universe. Further study of this remarkable population is essential for a complete understanding of the formation of massive galaxies.

## Acknowledgments

We thank our collaborator on the HST lensing project, Harald Ebeling, for allowing us to present the WFPC2 image of A 1835. IRS acknowledges travel support to attend this conference. The research presented here was supported by the Royal Society \[IRS\], PPARC \[RJI\], the Raymond and Beverly Sackler Foundations \[AWB\] and the CNRS \[JPK\].


text:
# Electronic Structure of Sr2FeMoO6

## I figure captions

Fig. 1. LMTO band dispersions for Sr2FeMoO6 along symmetry directions (see text).

Fig. 2. The dispersions of the bands with $`t_{2g}`$ symmetry at the Mo site for (a) up spin and (b) down spin. All other degrees of freedom have been integrated out as discussed in the text.

Fig. 3. Energy level diagram expected at the Fe (left panel) and Mo (central panel) sites from an ionic picture. The energy levels at Mo are modified in the presence of Fe-Mo hopping interactions as shown in the right panel.

Fig. 4 The experimental (solid circles) and calculated (solid line) Mo 3$`d`$ core level spectrum for Sr2FeMoO6. The experimental spectra (solid circles) for for MoO3 and Mo-metal are also shown.