text:
# Next-to-leading order QCD predictions for associated production of top squarks and charginos at the CERN LHC

## I Introduction

The CERN Large Hadron Collider (LHC), with $`\sqrt{S}=14`$ TeV and a luminosity of 100 $`\mathrm{fb}^1`$ per year lhc , will be a wonderful machine for discovering new physics. In so many new physical models, the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM) nilles  is one of the most attractive models for the theorists and the high energy experimenters, and searching for supersymmetric (SUSY) particles, as a direct experimental evidence, is one of the prime objectives at the LHC. Therefore, a good understanding of theoretical predictions of the cross sections for the production of the SUSY particles is important.

The cross sections for the production of squarks and gluinos were calculated at the Born level already many years ago squark . To date, the productions of gluinos and squarks beenakker2 ; beenakker6 , top squarks beenakker3 , sleptons beenakker4 ; baer  and gauginos beenakker4  at the hadron colliders have been studied. Besides the leading order (LO) results, these calculations also have included the next-to-leading order (NLO) corrections to improve the accuracy of the theoretical predictions and reduce the uncertainty from the dependence of results on renormalization/factorization scale. It was recently pointed out in Ref. berger  that the associated production of a gaugino ($`\stackrel{~}{\chi }`$) with a gluino ($`\stackrel{~}{g}`$) or with a squark ($`\stackrel{~}{q}`$) is potentially a very important production mechanism, since the mass spectrum favors much lighter masses for the color-neutral charginos and neutralinos than for the colored squarks and gluinos in popular models of SUSY breaking. And a detailed NLO QCD calculation of the associated production of a gluino and a gaugino at the Tevatron and the LHC has been given in Ref. berger . However, the processes of the associated gaugino and squark productions have not been calculated at LO and NLO yet.

In this paper, we present the complete NLO QCD (including SUSY QCD) calculation for the cross sections of the associated production of top squarks (stops) and charginos at the LHC. Similar to $`ppgbtH^{}`$ charged , which is expected to be a dominate process for the charged Higgs boson production at the LHC, the associated production $`ppgb\stackrel{~}{t}_i\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}`$ may be also the dominate process for single top squark or chargino production at the LHC. This is due to the following reasons: first, the large top quark mass in stop mass matrix can lead to strong mixing, and induce large mass difference between the lighter mass eigenstate and the heavier one, which means that the phase space for the lighter stop will be great and benefit its production; second, besides containing a strong QCD coupling between the incoming partons, this process also includes an enhanced effects from the Yukawa coupling in the vertex $`b\stackrel{~}{t}_i\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}`$ of the final states. For simplicity, in this paper we neglect the bottom quark mass except in the Yukawa coupling. Such approximations are valid in all diagrams, in which the bottom quark appears as an initial state parton, according to the simplified Aivazis-Collins-Olness-Tung (ACOT) scheme acot . However, it was pointed out in Ref. nbpdf  that the approximations of the hard process kinematics and the introduction of conventional bottom quark densities will give rise to sizable bottom quark mass and kinematical phase space effects, and may overestimate the inclusive cross section, for example, in the processes of $`b\overline{b}H`$ bbbH  and $`bgbH`$ gbbH . Very recently, it is shown in Ref. bpdf1  that the bottom parton approach is still valid if we choose the factorization scale below the average final state mass: $`\mu _fCm_{\mathrm{av}}C(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}+m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}})/2`$ with $`C(1/4,\mathrm{},1/3)`$. Thus, in this paper, we choose $`\mu _f=m_{\mathrm{av}}/3`$ when we use the bottom parton approximation.

The arrangement of this paper is as follows. In Sec. II we show the LO results and define the notations. In Sec. III we present the details of the calculations of both the virtual and real parts of the NLO QCD corrections. In Sec. IV by a detailed numerical analysis we present the predictions for inclusive and differential cross sections at the LHC. The lengthy analytic expressions are summarized in Appendixes A and B.

## II Leading Order Production of Stops and Charginos

The partonic process of the LO associated production of stops and charginos is $`g(p_a)b(p_b)\stackrel{~}{t}_i(p_1)\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}(p_2)`$, and the related Feynman diagrams are shown in Fig. 1. In order to simplify our expressions, we introduce the following Mandelstam variables:

$`s=(p_a+p_b)^2,s_\mathrm{\Delta }=sm_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,`$
$`t=(p_ap_1)^2,t_1=tm_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,t_2=tm_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,`$
$`u=(p_ap_2)^2,u_1=um_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,u_2=um_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2.`$ (1)
After the $`n`$-dimensional phase space integration, the LO partonic differential cross sections are given by ($`n=42ϵ`$)

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^B}{dt_2du_2}}={\displaystyle \frac{\pi S_ϵ}{s^2\mathrm{\Gamma }(1ϵ)}}({\displaystyle \frac{t_2u_2sm_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2}{\mu _r^2s}})^ϵ\mathrm{\Theta }(t_2u_2sm_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2)\mathrm{\Theta }[s(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}+m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}})^2]`$
$`\times \delta (s+t+um_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2)\overline{|M_{ik}^B|}^2`$ (2)
with

$`\overline{|M_{ik}^B|}^2={\displaystyle \frac{g^2g_s^2}{12(1ϵ)}}(|l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}|^2+|k_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}|^2)({\displaystyle \frac{t_2+(1ϵ)u_2}{s}}+{\displaystyle \frac{ss_\mathrm{\Delta }u_1(u_2+2t_2)}{st_1}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2t_2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}{t_1^2}}),`$ (3)
where $`S_ϵ=(4\pi )^{2+ϵ}`$, and the indices $`(i,k)`$ label the outgoing particles ($`\stackrel{~}{t}_i,\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}`$). The scale parameter $`\mu _r`$ is introduced to provide the correct mass dimension for the coupling constant in $`n`$-dimensions. $`\overline{|M_{ik}^\mathrm{B}|}^2`$ is the LO squared matrix element, which has been summed the colors and spins of the outgoing particles, and averaged over the colors and spins of the incoming ones. $`l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}`$ and $`k_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}`$ are the left- and right- handed coupling constants of the vertex $`b\stackrel{~}{t}_i\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}`$, respectively, and are defined together with $`l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}`$ and $`k_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}`$ in the vertex $`t\stackrel{~}{b}_i\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^+`$, which is involved in the virtual corrections, as follows:

$`\left(\begin{array}{c}l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}\\ l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{c}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}V_{k1}^{}\\ R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}U_{k1}^{}\end{array}\right)+\left(\begin{array}{c}Y_tR_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}V_{k2}^{}\\ Y_bR_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}U_{k2}^{}\end{array}\right),\left(\begin{array}{c}k_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}\\ k_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{c}Y_bR_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}U_{k2}\\ Y_tR_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}V_{k2}\end{array}\right)`$ (14)
with

$`Y_t{\displaystyle \frac{m_t}{\sqrt{2}m_W\mathrm{sin}\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{h_t}{g}},Y_b{\displaystyle \frac{m_b}{\sqrt{2}m_W\mathrm{cos}\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{h_b}{g}}.`$ (15)
Here the angle $`\beta `$ is defined by $`\mathrm{tan}\beta v_2/v_1`$, the ratio of the vacuum expectation values of the two Higgs doublets. Matrices $`U`$ and $`V`$ are the chargino transformation matrices from interaction to mass eigenstates defined in Ref. gunion . Matrix $`R^{\stackrel{~}{q}}`$ $`(q=t,b)`$ is defined to transform the current eigenstates $`\stackrel{~}{q}_L`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{q}_R`$ to the mass eigenstates $`\stackrel{~}{q}_1`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{q}_2`$:

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{q}_1\\ \stackrel{~}{q}_2\end{array}\right)=R^{\stackrel{~}{q}}\left(\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{q}_L\\ \stackrel{~}{q}_R\end{array}\right),R^{\stackrel{~}{q}}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{cos}\theta _{\stackrel{~}{q}}& \mathrm{sin}\theta _{\stackrel{~}{q}}\\ \mathrm{sin}\theta _{\stackrel{~}{q}}& \mathrm{cos}\theta _{\stackrel{~}{q}}\end{array}\right)$$
(16)
with $`0\theta _{\stackrel{~}{q}}<\pi `$ by convention. Correspondingly, the mass eigenvalues $`m_{\stackrel{~}{q}_1}`$ and $`m_{\stackrel{~}{q}_2}`$ (with $`m_{\stackrel{~}{q}_1}m_{\stackrel{~}{q}_2}`$) are given by

$`\left(\begin{array}{cc}m_{\stackrel{~}{q}_1}^2& 0\\ 0& m_{\stackrel{~}{q}_2}^2\end{array}\right)=R^{\stackrel{~}{q}}M_{\stackrel{~}{q}}^2(R^{\stackrel{~}{q}})^{},M_{\stackrel{~}{q}}^2=\left(\begin{array}{cc}m_{\stackrel{~}{q}_L}^2& a_qm_q\\ a_qm_q& m_{\stackrel{~}{q}_R}^2\end{array}\right)`$ (21)
with

$`m_{\stackrel{~}{q}_L}^2`$ $`=`$ $`M_{\stackrel{~}{Q}}^2+m_q^2+m_Z^2\mathrm{cos}2\beta (I_{3L}^qe_q\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W),`$ (22)
$`m_{\stackrel{~}{q}_R}^2`$ $`=`$ $`M_{\{\stackrel{~}{U},\stackrel{~}{D}\}}^2+m_q^2+m_Z^2\mathrm{cos}2\beta e_q\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W,`$ (23)
$`a_q`$ $`=`$ $`A_q\mu \{\mathrm{cot}\beta ,\mathrm{tan}\beta \}`$ (24)
for {up, down} type squarks. Here $`M_{\stackrel{~}{q}}^2`$ is the squark mass matrix. $`M_{\stackrel{~}{Q},\stackrel{~}{U},\stackrel{~}{D}}`$ and $`A_{t,b}`$ are soft SUSY-breaking parameters and $`\mu `$ is the Higgs mixing parameter in the superpotential. $`I_{3L}^q`$ and $`e_q`$ are the third component of the weak isospin and the electric charge of the quark $`q`$, respectively.

The LO total cross section at the LHC is obtained by convoluting the partonic cross section with the parton distribution functions (PDFs) $`G_{b,g/p}`$ in the proton:

$$\sigma _{ik}^B=dx_1dx_2[G_{b/p}(x_1,\mu _f)G_{g/p}(x_2,\mu _f)+(x_1x_2)]\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^B,$$
(25)
where $`\mu _f`$ is the factorization scale.

## III Next-to-Leading Order Calculations

The NLO contributions to the associated production of stops and charginos can be separated into the virtual corrections arising from loop diagrams of colored particles and the real corrections arising from the radiations of a real gluon or a massless (anti)quark.

### III.1 Virtual Corrections

The virtual corrections to $`gb\stackrel{~}{t}_i\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}`$ arise from the Feynman diagrams shown in Fig. 2 and 3, which consist of self-energy, vertex and box diagrams. We carried out the calculation in t’Hooft-Feynman gauge and used the dimensional regularization in $`n=42ϵ`$ dimensions to regularize the ultraviolet (UV), soft infrared and collinear divergences in the virtual loop corrections. However, this method violates the supersymmetry. In order to restore the supersymmetry the simplest procedure is through finite shifts in the quark-squark-gluino(chargino) couplings beenakker5 :

$`\widehat{g}_s=g_s[1+{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{8\pi }}({\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}NC_F)],`$
$`\widehat{e}=e(1{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{8\pi }}C_F),`$
$`\widehat{h}_{t,b}=h_{t,b}(1{\displaystyle \frac{3\alpha _s}{8\pi }}C_F)`$ (26)
with $`N=3`$ and $`C_F=4/3`$. Since we have not such a coupling as $`\stackrel{~}{g}q\stackrel{~}{q}`$ at the tree-level, the first shift is not used in our calculations, and we just consider the latter two shifts. As for the Dirac matrix $`\gamma _5`$, we deal with it using the “naive” scheme, in which the $`\gamma _5`$-matrix anticommutes with the other $`\gamma _\mu `$-matrices. This is a legitimate procedure at the one-loop level for anomaly-free theories gamma5 .

The virtual corrections to the differential cross section can be expressed as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^V}{dt_2du_2}}={\displaystyle \frac{\pi S_ϵ}{s^2\mathrm{\Gamma }(1ϵ)}}({\displaystyle \frac{t_2u_2sm_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2}{\mu _r^2s}})^ϵ\mathrm{\Theta }(t_2u_2sm_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2)\mathrm{\Theta }[s(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}+m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}})^2]`$
$`\times \delta (s+t+um_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2)2\mathrm{Re}(\overline{M_{ik}^VM_{ik}^B}),`$ (27)
where $`M_{ik}^V`$ is the renormalized amplitude, which can be separated into two parts:

$$M_{ik}^V=M_{ik}^{unren}+M_{ik}^{con}.$$
(28)
Here $`M_{ik}^{unren}`$ contains the self-energy, vertex and box corrections, and $`M_{ik}^{con}`$ is the corresponding counterterm. Moreover, $`M_{ik}^{unren}`$ can be written as

$$M_{unren}=\underset{\alpha =a}{\overset{f}{}}M_{ik}^\alpha +\underset{\beta =a}{\overset{g}{}}M_{ik}^{\mathrm{box}(\beta )},$$
(29)
where $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ denote the corresponding diagram indexes in Fig. 2 and Fig. 3, respectively. We express each term further as

$`M_{ik}^\alpha =C_s{\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{12}{}}}f_l^\alpha M_l,`$ (30)
$`M_{ik}^{box(\beta )}=C_s{\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{12}{}}}f_l^{box(\beta )}M_l,`$ (31)
where $`C_s=igg_s^3/(16\pi ^2)`$, $`f_l^\alpha `$ and $`f_l^{box(\beta )}`$ are the form factors, which are given explicitly in Appendix A, and $`M_l`$ are the standard matrix elements defined as

$`M_{1,2}=v^T(p_2)C^1T^a\mathit{\epsilon ̸}(p_a)P_{L,R}u(p_b),`$
$`M_{3,4}=v^T(p_2)C^1T^a\mathit{}_a\mathit{\epsilon ̸}(p_a)P_{L,R}u(p_b),`$
$`M_{5,6}=v^T(p_2)C^1T^aP_{L,R}u(p_b)p_b\epsilon (p_a),`$
$`M_{7,8}=v^T(p_2)C^1T^aP_{L,R}u(p_b)p_2\epsilon (p_a),`$
$`M_{9,10}=v^T(p_2)C^1T^a\mathit{}_aP_{L,R}u(p_b)p_b\epsilon (p_a),`$
$`M_{11,12}=v^T(p_2)C^1T^a\mathit{}_aP_{L,R}u(p_b)p_2\epsilon (p_a).`$ (32)
Here $`C`$ is the charge conjugation operator, and $`T^a`$ is the $`SU(3)`$ color matrix.

$`M_{ik}^{con}`$ is separated into $`M_{ik}^{con(s)}`$ and $`M_{ik}^{con(t)}`$, i.e. the counterterms for $`s`$ and $`t`$ channels, respectively, which are given by ($`ji`$)

$`M_{ik}^{con}=M_{ik}^{con(s)}+M_{ik}^{con(t)},`$
$`M_{ik}^{con(s)}={\displaystyle \frac{igg_s}{s}}\{[l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}\mathrm{\Delta }+l_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}\delta Z_{ji}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}+\delta l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}](M_3+2M_5)+[k_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}\mathrm{\Delta }+k_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}\delta Z_{ji}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}+\delta k_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}](M_4+2M_6)\},`$
$`M_{ik}^{con(t)}=i2gg_s\{[{\displaystyle \frac{l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}}{t_1}}(\mathrm{\Delta }+{\displaystyle \frac{\delta m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}{t_1}})+{\displaystyle \frac{\delta l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}}{t_1}}+{\displaystyle \frac{l_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}\delta Z_{ji}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}}{tm_{\stackrel{~}{t}_j}^2}}](M_5M_7)+[{\displaystyle \frac{k_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}}{t_1}}(\mathrm{\Delta }+{\displaystyle \frac{\delta m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}{t_1}})`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\delta k_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}}{t_1}}+{\displaystyle \frac{k_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}\delta Z_{ji}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}}{tm_{\stackrel{~}{t}_j}^2}}](M_6M_8)\},`$
with

$`\mathrm{\Delta }={\displaystyle \frac{\delta g_s}{g_s}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\delta Z_g+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\delta Z_b+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\delta Z_{ii}^{\stackrel{~}{t}},`$
$`\delta l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}=R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}V_{k1}^{}\delta \theta ^{\stackrel{~}{t}}+Y_tV_{k2}^{}(R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta m_t}{m_t}}+R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}\delta \theta ^{\stackrel{~}{t}}),`$
$`\delta k_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}=Y_bU_{k2}(R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta m_b}{m_b}}R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}\delta \theta ^{\stackrel{~}{t}}).`$
where $`\delta m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2`$, $`\delta m_q(q=t,b)`$, $`\delta Z_b`$, $`\delta Z_g`$, $`\delta Z_{ii}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}`$, $`\delta Z_{ij}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}`$ and $`\delta \theta _{\stackrel{~}{t}}`$ are the renormalization constants, which are fixed by the on-shell renormalization scheme onmass , and can be written as (assuming $`m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_1}=m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_2}`$)

$`\delta m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2={\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{4\pi }}C_F\{4m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2B_0(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,0)A_0(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)+4A_0(m_t^2)+4[m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2B_1+m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2B_0`$
$`2m_tm_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}B_0](m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_t^2)\},`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta m_q}{m_q}}={\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{4\pi }}C_F\{(4B_0+2B_1)(m_q^2,m_q^2,0)1+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{2}{}}}[B_1{\displaystyle \frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}}{m_q}}\mathrm{sin}2\theta _{\stackrel{~}{q}}(1)^iB_0](m_q^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{q}_i}^2)\},`$
$`\delta Z_b={\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{2\pi }}C_FB_1(0,m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_1}^2),`$
$`\delta Z_g={\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{4\pi }}[{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}(B_0+2m_t^2B_0^{})(0,m_t^2,m_t^2)+2(B_0+2m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2B_0^{})(0,m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}{\displaystyle \underset{q,i}{}}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}B_0m_{\stackrel{~}{q}_i}^2B_0^{})(0,m_{\stackrel{~}{q}_i}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{q}_i}^2){\displaystyle \frac{7}{9}}],`$
$`\delta Z_{ii}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}={\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{2\pi }}C_F\{(B_0+2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2B_0^{})(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,0)[B_0+(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2m_t^2)B_0^{}`$
$`+4m_tm_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}B_0^{}](m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_t^2)\},`$
$`\delta Z_{ij}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{\Sigma }_{ij}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_j}^2)}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_j}^2}},`$
$`\delta \theta _{\stackrel{~}{t}}={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{Re}[\mathrm{\Sigma }_{12}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}^2)+\mathrm{\Sigma }_{12}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_2}^2)]}{2(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_2}^2)}},`$
where $`B_0^{}=B_0/p^2`$, $`A_0`$ and $`B_i`$ are the Passarino-Veltman one-point and two-point integrals, respectively, which are defined similar to Ref. denner  except that we take internal masses squared as arguments. Here the counterterm $`\delta \theta _{\stackrel{~}{t}}`$ for the stop mixing angle is fixed as Ref. theta , and

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{ij}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}={\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\{\mathrm{sin}4\theta _{\stackrel{~}{t}}[A_0(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_2}^2)A_0(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}^2)]+8m_tm_{\stackrel{~}{g}}\mathrm{cos}2\theta _{\stackrel{~}{t}}B_0(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_j}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_t^2)\}.`$
In $`\delta Z_{ii}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}`$, $`B_0^{}(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,0)`$ contains infrared divergences, and can be expressed as

$`B_0^{}(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,0)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}}({\displaystyle \frac{4\pi \mu _r^2}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}})^ϵ\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+ϵ)({\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ}}+2).`$
Moreover, the QCD coupling constant $`g_s`$ is renormalized in the modified minimal subtraction ($`\overline{MS}`$) scheme except that the divergences associated with the top quark and colored SUSY particle loops are subtracted at zero momentum subtract . Assuming that the scalar partners of the $`n_f=5`$ light quark flavors have a common mass $`m_{\stackrel{~}{q}}`$, we obtain

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta g_s}{g_s}}={\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s(\mu _r^2)}{4\pi }}[{\displaystyle \frac{\beta _0}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\overline{ϵ}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{N}{3}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2}{\mu _r^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{n_f}{6}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{q}}^2}{\mu _r^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}^2}{\mu _r^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_2}^2}{\mu _r^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m_t^2}{\mu _r^2}}],`$ (33)
which agrees with one given in Ref. beenakker2 . Here $`1/\overline{ϵ}=1/ϵ_{UV}\gamma _E+\mathrm{ln}(4\pi )`$, and

$`\beta _0=({\displaystyle \frac{11}{3}}N{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}n_f)+[{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}(N+1){\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}(n_f+1)]\beta _0^L+\beta _0^H,`$ (34)
where $`\beta _0^L`$ includes the contributions from the gluon and the quarks except the top quark, and $`\beta _0^H`$ contains the contributions from the top quark and all colored SUSY particles. The evolution of $`g_s`$ is determined by $`\beta _0^L`$. After renormalization, $`M_{ik}^V`$ is UV-finite, but it still contains the infrared (IR) divergences:

$`M_{ik}^V|_{IR}={\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{2\pi }}\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+ϵ)({\displaystyle \frac{4\pi \mu _r^2}{s}})^ϵ({\displaystyle \frac{A_2^V}{ϵ^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{A_1^V}{ϵ}})M_{ik}^B,`$ (35)
where

$`A_2^V={\displaystyle \frac{13}{3}},`$ (36)
$`A_1^V={\displaystyle \frac{43}{6}}{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{s}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}}+3\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{t_1}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{u_1}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}}.`$ (37)
Here the infrared divergences include the soft infrared divergences and the collinear infrared divergences. The soft infrared divergences can be cancelled by adding the real corrections, and the remaining collinear infrared divergences can be absorbed into the redefinition of PDF altarelli , which will be discussed in the following subsections.

### III.2 Real Gluon Emission

The Feynman diagrams of the real gluon emission process $`g(p_a)b(p_b)\stackrel{~}{t}_i(p_1)\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}(p_2)+g(p_3)`$ are shown in Fig.4. Using the notations analogous to ones defined in Ref. beenakker1 , we express our results in terms of the following invariants:

$`s=(p_a+p_b)^2,s_5=(p_1+p_2)^2,s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}=s_5\mathrm{\Delta }_s,`$
$`s_3=(p_2+p_3)^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,s_4=(p_1+p_3)^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}=s_3\mathrm{\Delta }_t,`$
$`t=(p_bp_2)^2,t^{}=(p_bp_3)^2,t_1=tm_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,t_2=tm_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,`$
$`u=(p_ap_2)^2,u^{}=(p_ap_3)^2,u_1=um_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,u_2=um_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,`$
$`u_6=(p_bp_1)^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,u_7=(p_ap_1)^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,`$ (38)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_s=m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2+m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_t=m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2`$.

The phase space integration for the real gluon emission will produce infrared singularities, which can be either soft or collinear and can be conveniently isolated by slicing the phase space into different regions defined by suitable cutoffs. In this paper, we use the two cutoff phase space slicing method cutoff  to decompose the three-body phase space into three regions.

First, the phase space can be separated into two regions by an arbitrary small soft cutoff $`\delta _s`$, according to whether the energy of the emitted gluon is soft, i.e. $`E_3\delta _s\sqrt{s}/2`$, or hard, i.e. $`E_3>\delta _s\sqrt{s}/2`$. Correspondingly, the partonic real cross section can be written as

$`\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^R=\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^S+\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^H,`$ (39)
where $`\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^S`$ and $`\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^H`$ are the contributions from the soft and hard regions, respectively. $`\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^S`$ contains all the soft infrared divergences, which can be explicitly obtained after the integration over the phase space of the emitted gluon. Second, to isolate the remaining collinear divergences from $`\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^H`$, we should introduce another arbitrary small cutoff, called collinear cutoff $`\delta _c`$, to further split the hard gluon phase space into two regions, according to whether the Mandelstam variables satisfy the collinear condition $`0<t^{}(u^{})<\delta _cs`$ or not. Then we have

$`\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^H=\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^{HC}+\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^{\overline{HC}},`$ (40)
where the hard collinear part $`\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^{HC}`$ contains the collinear divergences, which can be explicitly obtained after the integration over the phase space of the emitted gluon. And the hard non-collinear part $`\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^{\overline{HC}}`$ is finite and can be numerically computed using standard Monte-Carlo integration techniques monte , and can be written as

$`d\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^{\overline{HC}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2s}}\overline{|M_{ik}^{gb}|}^2d\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_3.`$ (41)
Here $`d\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_3`$ is the hard non-collinear region of the three-body phase space, and the explicit expressions of $`\overline{|M_{ik}^{gb}|}^2`$ can be found in Appendix B. In order to avoid introducing external ghost lines while summing over the gluon helicities, we limit ourselves to the sum over the physical polarizations of the gluons beenakker1 , i.e.

$`P_i^{\mu \nu }={\displaystyle \underset{T}{}}ϵ_T^\mu (k_i)ϵ_T^\nu (k_i)=g^{\mu \nu }+{\displaystyle \frac{n_i^\mu k_i^\nu +k_i^\mu n_i^\nu }{n_ik_i}}{\displaystyle \frac{n_i^2k_i^\mu k_i^\nu }{(n_ik_i)^2}},`$ (42)
where the index $`i`$ (=1,2) labels the two external gluons, and $`n_ik_i`$ is an arbitrary vector. This polarization sum obeys the transversality relations

$`k_{i\mu }P^{\mu \nu }=P^{\mu \nu }k_{i\nu }=n_{i\mu }P^{\mu \nu }=P^{\mu \nu }n_{i\nu }=0.`$ (43)
In the next two subsections, we will discuss in detail the soft and hard collinear gluon emission.

#### III.2.1 Soft gluon emission

In the limit that the energy of the emitted gluon becomes small, i.e. $`E_3\delta _s\sqrt{s}/2`$, the matrix element squared $`\overline{|M_{ik}^R|}^2`$ can be simply factorized into the Born matrix element squared times an eikonal factor $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{eik}`$:

$`\overline{|M_{ik}^R(gb\stackrel{~}{t}_i\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}+g)|}^2\stackrel{soft}{}(4\pi \alpha _s\mu _r^{2ϵ})\overline{|M_{ik}^B|}^2\mathrm{\Phi }_{eik},`$ (44)
where the eikonal factor $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{eik}`$ is given by

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{eik}=N{\displaystyle \frac{p_ap_1}{(p_ap_3)(p_1p_3)}}+N{\displaystyle \frac{p_ap_b}{(p_bp_3)(p_ap_3)}}C_F{\displaystyle \frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}{(p_1p_3)^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_bp_1}{(p_1p_3)(p_bp_3)}}.`$ (45)
Moreover, the phase space in the soft limit can also be factorized as

$`d\mathrm{\Gamma }_3(gb\stackrel{~}{t}_i\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}+g)\stackrel{soft}{}d\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(gb\stackrel{~}{t}_i\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{})dS,`$ (46)
where $`dS`$ is the integration over the phase space of the soft gluon, which is given by cutoff

$`dS={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2(2\pi )^{32ϵ}}}{\displaystyle _0^{\delta _s\sqrt{s}/2}}𝑑E_3E_3^{12ϵ}𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }_{22ϵ}.`$ (47)
Then the parton level cross section in the soft region can be expressed as

$`\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^S=(4\pi \alpha _s\mu _r^{2ϵ}){\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{\Gamma }_2\overline{|M_{ik}^B|}^2𝑑S\mathrm{\Phi }_{eik}}.`$ (48)
Using the approach of Ref. cutoff , after the integration over the soft gluon phase space, Eq. (48) becomes

$`\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^S=\widehat{\sigma }^B[{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1ϵ)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(12ϵ)}}({\displaystyle \frac{4\pi \mu _r^2}{s}})^ϵ]({\displaystyle \frac{A_2^s}{ϵ^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{A_1^s}{ϵ}}+A_0^s)`$ (49)
with

$`A_2^s={\displaystyle \frac{13}{3}},`$
$`A_1^s=2A_2^s\mathrm{ln}\delta _s+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{u_1}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}}3\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{t_1}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{s}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}},`$
$`A_0^s=2A_2^s\mathrm{ln}^2\delta _s2A_1^s\mathrm{ln}\delta _s+(C_F{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}})\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma +\beta }{\gamma \beta }}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{ln}^2{\displaystyle \frac{s(\beta \gamma )}{t_1}}+\mathrm{Li}_2[1+{\displaystyle \frac{t_1}{s(\gamma \beta )}}]`$
$`\mathrm{Li}_2[1+{\displaystyle \frac{s(\gamma +\beta )}{t_1}}]+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\{\mathrm{ln}^2{\displaystyle \frac{s(\beta \gamma )}{u_1}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{ln}^2{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma +\beta }{\gamma \beta }}+2\mathrm{L}\mathrm{i}_2[{\displaystyle \frac{t_1+s(\beta +\gamma )}{s(\beta \gamma )}}]`$
$`2\mathrm{L}\mathrm{i}_2[{\displaystyle \frac{t_1+s(\beta \gamma )}{u_1}}]\},`$
where $`\gamma =(s+m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2)/(2s)`$ and $`\beta =\sqrt{\gamma ^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2/s}`$.

#### III.2.2 Hard collinear gluon emission

In the hard collinear region, i.e. $`E_3>\delta _s\sqrt{s}/2`$ and $`0<t^{}(u^{})<\delta _cs`$, the emitted hard gluon is collinear to one of the incoming partons. As a consequence of the factorization theorems factor1 , the squared matrix element for $`gb\stackrel{~}{t}_i\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}+g`$ can be factorized into the product of the Born squared matrix element and the Altarelli-Parisi splitting function for $`bbg`$ and $`ggg`$ altarelli1 ; factor2 , i.e.

$`\overline{|M_{ik}^R(gb\stackrel{~}{t}_i\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}+g)|}^2\stackrel{collinear}{}(4\pi \alpha _s\mu _r^{2ϵ})\overline{|M_{ik}^B|}^2({\displaystyle \frac{2P_{bb}(z,ϵ)}{zt^{}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2P_{gg}(z,ϵ)}{zu^{}}}),`$ (50)
where $`z`$ denotes the fraction of incoming parton $`b(g)`$’s momentum carried by parton $`b(g)`$ with the emitted gluon taking a fraction $`(1z)`$, and $`P_{ij}(z,ϵ)`$ are the unregulated splitting functions in $`n=42ϵ`$ dimensions for $`0<z<1`$, which can be related to the usual Altarelli-Parisi splitting kernels altarelli1  as $`P_{ij}(z,ϵ)=P_{ij}(z)+ϵP_{ij}^{}(z)`$, explicitly

$`P_{qq}(z)=C_F{\displaystyle \frac{1+z^2}{1z}},P_{qq}^{}(z)=C_F(1z),`$
$`P_{gg}(z)=2N[{\displaystyle \frac{z}{1z}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1z}{z}}+z(1z)],P_{gg}^{}(z)=0.`$ (51)
Moreover, the three-body phase space also can be factorized in the collinear limit, and, for example, in the limit $`0<t^{}<\delta _cs`$ it has the following form cutoff :

$`d\mathrm{\Gamma }_3(gb\stackrel{~}{t}_i\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}+g)\stackrel{collinear}{}d\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(gb\stackrel{~}{t}_i\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{};s^{}=zs){\displaystyle \frac{(4\pi )^ϵ}{16\pi ^2\mathrm{\Gamma }(1ϵ)}}dzdt^{}[(1z)t^{}]^ϵ.`$ (52)
Note that the two-body phase space should be evaluated at a squared parton-parton energy of $`zs`$. Then the three-body cross section in the hard collinear region is given by cutoff

$`d\sigma _{ik}^{HC}=d\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^B[{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1ϵ)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(12ϵ)}}({\displaystyle \frac{4\pi \mu _r^2}{s}})^ϵ]({\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ}})\delta _c^ϵ[P_{bb}(z,ϵ)G_{b/p}(x_1/z)G_{g/p}(x_2)`$
$`+P_{gg}(z,ϵ)G_{g/p}(x_1/z)G_{b/p}(x_2)+(x_1x_2)]{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{z}}({\displaystyle \frac{1z}{z}})^ϵdx_1dx_2,`$ (53)
where $`G_{b(g)/p}(x)`$ is the bare PDF.

### III.3 Final States with an Additional Massless Quark

In addition to the real gluon emission, other real emission corrections to the inclusive cross section for $`pp\stackrel{~}{t}_i\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}`$ at NLO involve the processes with an additional massless (anti)quark in the final states, as shown in Fig.5 ($`q=u,d,s,c`$):

$`g(p_a)+g(p_b)\stackrel{~}{t}_i(p_1)+\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}(p_2)+\overline{b}(p_3),`$ (54)
$`q/\overline{q}(p_a)+b(p_b)\stackrel{~}{t}_i(p_1)+\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}(p_2)+q/\overline{q}(p_3),`$ (55)
$`b/\overline{b}(p_b)+b(p_a)\stackrel{~}{t}_i(p_1)+\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}(p_2)+b/\overline{b}(p_3),`$ (56)
$`q(p_a)+\overline{q}(p_b)\stackrel{~}{t}_i(p_1)+\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}(p_2)+\overline{b}(p_3).`$ (57)
Since the contributions from the processes (54)-(56) contain the initial state collinear singularities, we also need to use the two cutoff phase space slicing method cutoff . However, we only split the phase space into two regions, because there are no soft divergences here. Thus, according to the approach shown in Ref. cutoff , the cross sections for the processes with an additional massless (anti)quark in the final states can be expressed as ($`q=u,d,s,c,b`$)

$`d\sigma _{ik}^{add}={\displaystyle \underset{(\alpha ,\beta )}{}}\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^{\overline{C}}(\alpha \beta \stackrel{~}{t}_i\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}+X)[G_{\alpha /p}(x_1)G_{\beta /p}(x_2)+(x_1x_2)]dx_1dx_2`$
$`+d\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^B[{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1ϵ)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(12ϵ)}}({\displaystyle \frac{4\pi \mu _r^2}{s}})^ϵ]({\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ}})\delta _c^ϵ[P_{bg}(z,ϵ)G_{g/p}(x_1/z)G_{g/p}(x_2)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =q,\overline{q}}{}}P_{g\alpha }(z,ϵ)G_{\alpha /p}(x_1/z)G_{b/p}(x_2)+(x_1x_2)]{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{z}}({\displaystyle \frac{1z}{z}})^ϵdx_1dx_2,`$ (58)
where

$`P_{gq}(z)=C_F{\displaystyle \frac{1+(1z)^2}{z}},P_{gq}^{}(z)=C_Fz,`$
$`P_{qg}(z)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}[z^2+(1z)^2],P_{qg}^{}(z)=z(1z).`$ (59)
The first term in Eq.(58) represents the non-collinear cross sections for the four processes, and like Eq.(41) each $`\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^{\overline{C}}`$ can be written in the form:

$`d\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^{\overline{C}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2s}}\overline{|M_{ik}^{\alpha \beta }|}^2d\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_3,`$ (60)
where $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ denote the incoming partons in the partonic processes, and $`d\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_3`$ is the three body phase space in the non-collinear region. The explicit expressions of $`\overline{|M_{ik}^{\alpha \beta }|}^2`$ can be found in Appendix B. The second term in Eq.(58) represents the collinear singular cross sections.

Moreover, for the subprocesses $`gg/q\overline{q}\stackrel{~}{t}_i\overline{\stackrel{~}{t}}_i^{}\stackrel{~}{t}_i\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}\overline{b}`$ ($`q=u,d,s,c,b`$), assuming $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}>m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}`$, the stop momentum can approach the stop mass shell, which will lead to singularity arising from the stop propagator. Following the analysis shown in Ref. beenakker2 , this problem can easily be solved by introducing the non-zero stop widths $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}`$ and regularizing in this way the higher-order amplitudes. However, these on-shell stop contributions are already accounted for by the LO stop pair production with a subsequent decay into a chargino and a bottom quark, and thus should not be considered as a genuine higher order correction to the associated production of top squarks and charginos. Therefore, to avoid double counting, these pole contributions will be subtracted in our numerical calculations below in the same way as shown in Appendix B of Ref. beenakker2 .

### III.4 Mass factorization

As mentioned above, after adding the renormalized virtual corrections and the real corrections, the partonic cross sections still contain the collinear divergences, which can be absorbed into the redefinition of the PDF at NLO, in general called mass factorization altarelli . This procedure in practice means that first we convolute the partonic cross section with the bare PDF $`G_{\alpha /p}(x)`$, and then use the renormalized PDF $`G_{\alpha /p}(x,\mu _f)`$ to replace $`G_{\alpha /p}(x)`$. In the $`\overline{\mathrm{MS}}`$ convention, the scale dependent PDF $`G_{\alpha /p}(x,\mu _f)`$ is given by cutoff

$`G_{\alpha /p}(x,\mu _f)=G_{\alpha /p}(x)+{\displaystyle \underset{\beta }{}}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ}})[{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1ϵ)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(12ϵ)}}({\displaystyle \frac{4\pi \mu _r^2}{\mu _f^2}})^ϵ]{\displaystyle _x^1}{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{z}}P_{\alpha \beta }(z)G_{\beta /p}(x/z).`$ (61)
This replacement will produce a collinear singular counterterm, which is combined with the hard collinear contributions to result in, as the definition in Ref. cutoff , the $`𝒪(\alpha _s)`$ expression for the remaining collinear contribution:

$`d\sigma _{ik}^{coll}=d\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^B[{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1ϵ)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(12ϵ)}}({\displaystyle \frac{4\pi \mu _r^2}{s}})^ϵ]\{\stackrel{~}{G}_{g/p}(x_1,\mu _f)G_{b/p}(x_2,\mu _f)+G_{g/p}(x_1,\mu _f)\stackrel{~}{G}_{b/p}(x_2,\mu _f)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =b,g}{}}[{\displaystyle \frac{A_1^{sc}(\alpha \alpha g)}{ϵ}}+A_0^{sc}(\alpha \alpha g)]G_{g/p}(x_1,\mu _f)G_{b/p}(x_2,\mu _f)`$
$`+(x_1x_2)\}dx_1dx_2,`$ (62)
where

$`A_1^{sc}(qqg)=C_F(2\mathrm{ln}\delta _s+3/2),`$ (63)
$`A_1^{sc}(ggg)=2N\mathrm{ln}\delta _s+(11N2n_f)/6,`$ (64)
$`A_0^{sc}=A_1^{sc}\mathrm{ln}({\displaystyle \frac{s}{\mu _f^2}}),`$ (65)
$`\stackrel{~}{G}_{\alpha /p}(x,\mu _f)={\displaystyle \underset{\beta }{}}{\displaystyle _x^{1\delta _s\delta _{\alpha \beta }}}{\displaystyle \frac{dy}{y}}G_{\beta /p}(x/y,\mu _f)\stackrel{~}{P}_{\alpha \beta }(y)`$ (66)
with

$`\stackrel{~}{P}_{\alpha \beta }(y)=P_{\alpha \beta }\mathrm{ln}(\delta _c{\displaystyle \frac{1y}{y}}{\displaystyle \frac{s}{\mu _f^2}})P_{\alpha \beta }^{}(y).`$ (67)
Finally, the NLO total cross section for $`pp\stackrel{~}{t}_i\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}`$ in the $`\overline{MS}`$ factorization scheme is

$`\sigma _{ik}^{NLO}={\displaystyle }\{dx_1dx_2[G_{b/p}(x_1,\mu _f)G_{g/p}(x_2,\mu _f)+x_1x_2](\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^B+\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^V+\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^S+\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^{\overline{HC}})+d\sigma _{ik}^{coll}\}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{(\alpha ,\beta )}{}}{\displaystyle }dx_1dx_2[G_{\alpha /p}(x_1,\mu _f)G_{\beta /p}(x_2,\mu _f)+(x_1x_2)]\widehat{\sigma }_{ik}^{\overline{C}}(\alpha \beta \stackrel{~}{t}_i\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}+X).`$ (68)
Note that the above expression contains no singularities since $`A_2^V+A_2^s=0`$ and $`A_1^V+A_1^s+A_1^{sc}(bbg)+A_1^{sc}(ggg)=0`$.

### III.5 Differential Cross section in the Transverse Momentum

In this subsection we present the differential cross section in the transverse momentum $`p_T`$ of the charginos. Using the notations defined in Ref. beenakker2 , the differential distribution with respect to $`p_T`$ and $`y`$ for the processes

$`p(P_a)+p(P_b)\stackrel{~}{t}_i(p_1)+\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}(p_2)[+g(p_3)/q(p_3)/\overline{q}(p_3)]`$ (69)
is given by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2\sigma }{dp_Tdy}}=2p_TS{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha ,\beta }{}}{\displaystyle _{x_1^{}}^1}𝑑x_1{\displaystyle _{x_2^{}}^1}𝑑x_2x_1G_{\alpha /p}(x_1,\mu _f)x_2G_{\beta /p}(x_2,\mu _f){\displaystyle \frac{d^2\widehat{\sigma }_{\alpha \beta }}{dt_2du_2}},`$ (70)
where $`\sqrt{S}`$ is the total center-of-mass energy of the collider, and

$`p_T^2={\displaystyle \frac{T_2U_2}{S}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,y={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{ln}({\displaystyle \frac{T_2}{U_2}}),`$
$`x_1^{}={\displaystyle \frac{T_2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2+m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}{S+U_2}},x_2^{}={\displaystyle \frac{x_1U_2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2+m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}{x_1S+T_2}}`$ (71)
with $`T_2=(P_bp_2)^2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2`$ and $`U_2=(P_ap_2)^2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2`$. The limits of integral over $`y`$ and $`p_T`$ are

$`y^{max}(p_T)yy^{max}(p_T),0p_Tp_T^{max},`$ (72)
with

$`y^{max}(p_T)=\mathrm{arccosh}({\displaystyle \frac{S+m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}{2\sqrt{S(p_T^2+m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2)}}}),`$
$`p_T^{max}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\sqrt{S}}}\sqrt{(S+m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)^24m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2S}.`$ (73)
## IV Numerical Results and Conclusion

We now present the numerical results for total and differential cross sections for the associated production of top squarks and charginos at the LHC. In our numerical calculations the Standard Model (SM) parameters were taken to be $`\alpha _{ew}(m_W)=1/128`$, $`m_W=80.419`$ GeV, $`m_Z=91.1882`$ GeV, and $`m_t=174.3`$ GeV SM . We use the two-loop evolution of $`\alpha _s(Q)`$ runningalphas  ($`\alpha _s(M_Z)=0.118`$) and CTEQ6M (CTEQ6L) PDFs CTEQ  throughout the calculations of the NLO (LO) cross sections. Moreover, in order to improve the perturbative calculations, we take the running mass $`m_b(Q)`$ evaluated by the NLO formula runningmb :

$$m_b(Q)=U_6(Q,m_t)U_5(m_t,m_b)m_b(m_b)$$
(74)
with $`m_b(m_b)=4.25`$ GeV mb . The evolution factor $`U_f`$ is

$`U_f(Q_2,Q_1)=({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s(Q_2)}{\alpha _s(Q_1)}})^{d^{(f)}}[1+{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s(Q_1)\alpha _s(Q_2)}{4\pi }}J^{(f)}],`$
$`d^{(f)}={\displaystyle \frac{12}{332f}},J^{(f)}={\displaystyle \frac{8982504f+40f^2}{3(332f)^2}}.`$ (75)
In addition, in order to improve the perturbation calculations, especially for large $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$, we make the following replacement in the tree-level couplings runningmb :

$`m_b(Q){\displaystyle \frac{m_b(Q)}{1+\mathrm{\Delta }m_b}},`$ (76)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }m_b={\displaystyle \frac{2\alpha _s}{3\pi }}M_{\stackrel{~}{g}}\mu \mathrm{tan}\beta I(m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_1},m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_2},M_{\stackrel{~}{g}})+{\displaystyle \frac{h_t^2}{16\pi ^2}}\mu A_t\mathrm{tan}\beta I(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1},m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_2},\mu )`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{g^2}{16\pi ^2}}\mu M_2\mathrm{tan}\beta {\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{2}{}}}[(R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}})^2I(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i},M_2,\mu )+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}})^2I(m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_i},M_2,\mu )]`$ (77)
with

$`I(a,b,c)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(a^2b^2)(b^2c^2)(a^2c^2)}}(a^2b^2\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{a^2}{b^2}}+b^2c^2\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{b^2}{c^2}}+c^2a^2\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{c^2}{a^2}}).`$ (78)
And, it is necessary for avoiding double counting to subtract these (SUSY-)QCD corrections from the renormalization constant $`\delta m_b`$ in the following numerical calculations. The MSSM parameters are determined as follows:

(i) For the parameters $`M_1`$, $`M_2`$ and $`\mu `$ in the chargino and neutralino matrices, we take $`M_2`$ and $`\mu `$ as the input parameters, and assuming gaugino mass unification we take $`M_1=(5/3)\mathrm{tan}^2\theta _WM_2`$ and $`M_{\stackrel{~}{g}}=(\alpha _s(M_{\stackrel{~}{g}})/\alpha _2)M_2`$ Hidaka .

(ii) For the parameters in squark mass matrices, we assume $`M_{\stackrel{~}{Q}}=M_{\stackrel{~}{U}}=M_{\stackrel{~}{D}}`$ and $`A_t=A_b=300`$ GeV to simplify the calculations. Actually, the numerical results are not very sensitive to $`A_{t(b)}`$.

In our calculations, except in Fig.10, we always choose the renormalization scale $`\mu _r=m_{\mathrm{av}}`$, and the factorization scale $`\mu _f`$ is fixed to $`m_{\mathrm{av}}/3`$ instead of $`m_{\mathrm{av}}`$ as mentioned in Sec. I.

Before we discuss in detail the numerical results for associated production of top squarks and charginos at the LHC, in Fig.6 we first show that the following NLO QCD predictions do not depend on the arbitrary cutoffs $`\delta _s`$ and $`\delta _c`$ in the two cutoff phase space slicing method. Here we take $`\mu =200`$ GeV, $`M_2=300`$ GeV, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}=250`$ GeV, $`\mathrm{tan}\beta =30`$, and $`\delta _c=\delta _s/100`$. $`\sigma _{other}`$ includes the contributions from the Born cross section and the virtual corrections, which are cutoff-independent. We can see that the soft plus hard collinear contributions and the hard non-collinear contributions depend strongly on the cutoffs, and especially for the small cutoffs ($`\delta _s<10^4`$) their magnitudes can be ten times larger than the LO total cross section. However, the two contributions ($`\sigma _{soft}+\sigma _{hard/coll}`$ and $`\sigma _{hard/noncoll}`$) balance each other very well, and the final result $`\sigma _{NLO}`$ is independent of the cutoffs and keeps 0.23 pb. Therefore, we take $`\delta _s=10^4`$ and $`\delta _c=\delta _s/100`$ in the numerical calculations of Fig.7–13.

Fig.7 shows the dependence of the LO and NLO predictions for $`pp\stackrel{~}{t}_i\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}`$ on $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}`$, assuming $`\mu =200`$ GeV, $`M_2=300`$ GeV and $`\mathrm{tan}\beta =30`$, which means that two chargino masses are about $`182`$ GeV and $`331`$ GeV, respectively, and $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_2}`$ increases from 342 GeV to 683 GeV for $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}`$ in the range 100–600 GeV. One finds that the total cross sections for the $`\stackrel{~}{t}_2\stackrel{~}{\chi }_2^{}`$ channel are always smallest and less than 3 fb, but the total cross sections for other channels are large and range between $`10`$ fb and several hundred fb for most values of $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}`$. Especially for the $`\stackrel{~}{t}_1\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^{}`$ channel, the total cross section can reach 1 pb for small values of $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}`$ (100 GeV $`<m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}<`$ 160 GeV), which is almost the same as ones of top quark and charged Higgs boson associated production at the LHC. However, when $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}`$ get larger and close to $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_2}`$, the total cross section for the $`\stackrel{~}{t}_2\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^{}`$ channel is the largest, as shown in Fig.7. Moreover, Fig.7 also shows that the NLO QCD corrections enhance the LO results significantly, which are in general a few ten percent.

In Fig.8 we show the dependence of the LO and NLO predictions for $`pp\stackrel{~}{t}_i\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}`$ on $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^{}}`$, assuming $`\mu =400`$ GeV, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}=250`$ GeV and $`\mathrm{tan}\beta =30`$, which means that $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_2}=414`$ GeV and $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_2^{}}`$ increases from 417 GeV to 434 GeV for $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^{}}`$ in the range 100–300 GeV. One can see that the total cross sections for all channels can exceed $`10`$ fb. For small values of $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^{}}`$, the $`\stackrel{~}{t}_1\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^{}`$ channel has the largest total cross sections, and for large values of $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^{}}`$, the $`\stackrel{~}{t}_1\stackrel{~}{\chi }_2^{}`$ channel has the largest ones, which all can exceed 100 fb. Moreover, Fig.8 also shows that the NLO QCD corrections enhance the LO results, and especially for the $`\stackrel{~}{t}_1\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^{}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{t}_2\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^{}`$ channels, the enhancement can exceed $`50\%`$.

The associated production of $`\stackrel{~}{t}_1`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^{}`$ is the most important since the total cross sections are the largest for $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}<`$ 400 GeV and $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^{}}<`$ 230 GeV. Thus we mainly discuss this channel below.

Fig.9 gives the dependence of the $`K`$ factor (the ratio of the NLO total cross section over the LO one) on $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}`$ for the $`\stackrel{~}{t}_1\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^{}`$ production. Here we assume the same values of the MSSM parameters as in Fig.7. The $`K`$ factor contains four contributions: (i) The curve $`(b)`$ shows the ratio of the improved Born cross section, which is defined as convoluting the LO partonic cross section with the NLO PDFs, over the LO one. The corresponding $`K`$ factor ranges from 1.18 to 1.39. (ii) The NLO cross section in the curve $`(c)`$ contains only the contributions from the subprocess with two initial-state gluons, which are positive and the corresponding $`K`$ factor varies from $`0.30`$ to $`0.06`$. (iii) The NLO cross section in the curve $`(d)`$ collects only the contributions from massless (anti)quark emission subprocesses as shown in Eq.(55)-(57), and the corresponding $`K`$ factor keeps always about $`0.10`$. (iv) The NLO cross section in the curve $`(e)`$ includes only the virtual and the real gluon emission corrections, which are negative and the corresponding $`K`$ factor ranges between $`0.36`$ and $`0.29`$. Finally, summing above four parts leads to the total $`K`$ factor as shown in the curve $`(a)`$, which indicates that the NLO QCD corrections enhance the LO total cross section and vary from $`21\%`$ to $`27\%`$.

In Fig.10 we show the dependence of the total cross sections for the $`\stackrel{~}{t}_1\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^{}`$ production on the renormalization/factorization scale, assuming $`\mu =200`$ GeV, $`M_2=300`$ GeV, $`\mathrm{tan}\beta =30`$, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}=250`$ GeV, and $`\mu _r=\mu _f`$. One finds that the NLO QCD corrections reduce the dependence significantly. The cross sections vary by $`\pm 15\%`$ at LO but only by $`\pm 4\%`$ at NLO in the region $`0.5<\mu _f/m_{\mathrm{av}}<2.0`$. Thus the reliability of the NLO predictions has been improved substantially.

The cross sections of the $`\stackrel{~}{t}_1\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^{}`$ production as a function of $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ are displayed for $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}=200,300`$ and 400 GeV in Fig.11, assuming $`\mu =200`$ GeV and $`M_2=300`$ GeV. For the dotted curves, $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_b`$ in Eq.(76) is replaced by $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_b^{}`$ which only includes the corrections of the gluino piece and neglects the rest of the SUSY diagrams in Eq.(77). From Fig.11, one can see that the cross sections become large when $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ gets high or low, which is due to the fact that for the coupling $`b\stackrel{~}{t}_1\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^{}`$ at low $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ the top quark contribution is enhanced while at high $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ the bottom quark contribution becomes large. Fig.11 also shows that the NLO QCD corrections enhance the LO total cross sections, and for $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}=200`$ and $`300`$ GeV, the enhancement is more significant for the medium values of $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ than for the other values. Moreover, after comparing the solid curves with the dotted ones, we can see that the SUSY corrections to $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_b`$ except the gluino piece decrease the total cross sections significantly, especially for larger values of $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$.

Fig.12 shows the dependence of the total cross sections for the $`\stackrel{~}{t}_1\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^{}`$ production on the parameters $`\mu `$ and $`M_2`$, assuming $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}=250`$ GeV and $`\mathrm{tan}\beta =30`$. Note that the phenomenology at CERN $`e^+e^{}`$ LEP and Tevatron exclude  has excluded the parameter range $`|\mu |180`$ GeV, where one chargino mass and one of the neutralino masses can become very small, and especially the latter is zero for vanishing $`\mu `$. So we focus on the range $`|\mu |180`$ GeV. One can see that the cross sections increase with an increase of $`M_2`$ for $`|\mu |<450`$ GeV, and decrease with an increase of $`|\mu |`$ except $`|\mu |>350`$ GeV for $`M_2=300`$ GeV. The NLO QCD corrections can increase and decrease the LO total cross sections depending on the values of $`\mu `$ and $`M_2`$.

In Fig.13 we display the differential cross sections in the transverse momentum $`p_T`$ of $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^{}`$ for the $`\stackrel{~}{t}_1\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^{}`$ production in three cases, which are obtained after integration over all $`y`$ in Eq.(70), assuming $`\mu =200`$ GeV and $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}=250`$ GeV. In all cases, we find that the NLO QCD corrections enhance the LO differential cross sections for low $`p_T`$, but decrease the LO results for high $`p_T`$.

In conclusion, we have calculated the NLO inclusive total cross sections for the associated production processes $`pp\stackrel{~}{t}_i\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}`$ in the MSSM at the LHC. Our calculations show that the total cross sections for the $`\stackrel{~}{t}_1\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^{}`$ production for the lighter top squark masses in the region 100 GeV $`<m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}<`$ 160 GeV can reach 1 pb in the favorable parameter space allowed by the current precise experiments, and in other cases the total cross sections generally vary from $`10`$ fb to several hundred fb except both $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_1}>`$ 500 GeV and the $`\stackrel{~}{t}_2\stackrel{~}{\chi }_2^{}`$ production channel, which means that the LHC may produce abundant events of these processes, and it is very possible to discover these SUSY particles through the above processes in the future experiments, if the supersymmetry exists. Moreover, we find that the NLO QCD corrections in general enhance the LO total cross sections significantly, and vastly reduce the dependence of the total cross sections on the renormalization/factorization scale, which leads to increased confidence in predictions based on these results.

###### Acknowledgements.

We would like to thank T. Plehn, C.-P. Yuan, T.M.P. Tait and M. Klasen for useful discussions and valuable suggestions. This work was supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China.

## Appendix A

In this appendix, we collect the explicit expressions of the nonzero form factors in Eq.(30) and Eq.(31). For simplicity, we introduce the following abbreviations for the Passarino-Veltman three-point integrals $`C_{i(j)}`$ and four-point integrals $`D_{i(j)}`$, which are defined similar to Ref. denner  except that we take internal masses squared as arguments:

$`C_{i(j)}^a=C_{i(j)}(0,0,s;0,0,0),`$
$`C_{i(j)}^b=C_{i(j)}(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,s;0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,0),`$
$`C_{i(j)}^c=C_{i(j)}(t,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,0;m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2),`$
$`C_{i(j)}^d=C_{i(j)}(0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,t;0,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2),`$
$`C_{i(j)}^e=C_{i(j)}(m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,0,t;m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,0,0),`$
$`C_{i(j)}^f=C_{i(j)}(0,0,s;m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2),`$
$`C_{i(j)}^g=C_{i(j)}(s,0,0;m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2),`$
$`C_{i(j)}^h=C_{i(j)}(t,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,0;m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_t^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2),`$
$`C_{i(j)}^i=C_{i(j)}(t,m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,0;m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_t^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2),`$
$`C_{i(j)}^j=C_{i(j)}(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,s;m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_t^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2),`$
$`C_{i(j)}^k=C_{i(j)}(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,0,u;m_t^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2),`$
$`D_{i(j)}^a=D_{i(j)}(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,t,0,s,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2;0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,0,0),`$
$`D_{i(j)}^b=D_{i(j)}(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,u,0,s,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2;0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,0,0),`$
$`D_{i(j)}^c=D_{i(j)}(t,m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,u,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,0,0;0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2),`$
$`D_{i(j)}^d=D_{i(j)}(0,t,m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,s,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,0;m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_t^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2),`$
$`D_{i(j)}^e=D_{i(j)}(s,m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,u,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,0;m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2,m_t^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2),`$
$`D_{i(j)}^f=D_{i(j)}(t,m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,u,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,0,0;m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_t^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2,m_t^2).`$
Many above functions contain the soft infrared and collinear singularities, but all Passarino-Veltman integrals can be reduced down to the scalar function $`B_0`$, $`C_0`$ and $`D_0`$. Here we present the explicit expressions of $`C_0`$ and $`D_0`$, which contain the singularities and are used in our calculations:

$`C_0^a={\displaystyle \frac{C_ϵ}{s}}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{s}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{ln}^2{\displaystyle \frac{s}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi ^2}{3}}),`$
$`C_0^d={\displaystyle \frac{C_ϵ}{t_1}}[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2ϵ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ}}\mathrm{ln}({\displaystyle \frac{t_1}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}})\mathrm{Li}_2({\displaystyle \frac{t}{t_1}})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{ln}^2({\displaystyle \frac{t_1}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}})],`$
$`C_0^e={\displaystyle \frac{C_ϵ}{t_2}}[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ}}\mathrm{ln}({\displaystyle \frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}{t_1}})+\mathrm{Li}_2({\displaystyle \frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2}{m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}})\mathrm{Li}_2({\displaystyle \frac{t}{t_1}}){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{ln}^2(1{\displaystyle \frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{ln}^2({\displaystyle \frac{t_1}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}})],`$
$`D_0^a={\displaystyle \frac{C_ϵ}{st_1}}[{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2ϵ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{s}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{2}{ϵ}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{t_1}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{2}}\mathrm{Li}_2({\displaystyle \frac{t}{t_1}})+\mathrm{Li}_2({\displaystyle \frac{t_2}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2}})`$
$`\mathrm{Li}_2(1+{\displaystyle \frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2}{s}})+2\mathrm{L}\mathrm{i}_2({\displaystyle \frac{f_b}{st_1}}){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{ln}^2{\displaystyle \frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}}+\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{s}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{ln}^2{\displaystyle \frac{t_1}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}}+\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{st_1+f_b}{st_1}}(\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}{s}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{t_1}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}})\mathrm{R}(0,1,t_1,t_2,0,{\displaystyle \frac{s}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}})`$
$`\mathrm{R}(0,1,st_1,f_b,1,{\displaystyle \frac{t}{t_1}})\mathrm{R}(0,1,st_1,f_b,1,1+{\displaystyle \frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2}{s}})],`$
$`D_0^b=D_0^a(tu,t_1u_1,t_2u_2),`$
$`D_0^c={\displaystyle \frac{C_ϵ}{u_1t_1}}[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2ϵ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{t_1}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{u_1}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}}\mathrm{Li}_2({\displaystyle \frac{t}{t_1}})+\mathrm{Li}_2({\displaystyle \frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2}{m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}})`$
$`\mathrm{Li}_2({\displaystyle \frac{u}{u_1}}){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{ln}^2{\displaystyle \frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{ln}^2{\displaystyle \frac{t_1}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{ln}^2{\displaystyle \frac{u_1}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}}+\mathrm{R}({\displaystyle \frac{u}{m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2}},1,{\displaystyle \frac{f_c}{m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2}},s,1,{\displaystyle \frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}})`$
$`+\mathrm{R}({\displaystyle \frac{t}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}},1,{\displaystyle \frac{f_c}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}},u,1,1)+\mathrm{R}(0,1,u_1t_1,f_c,{\displaystyle \frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}},{\displaystyle \frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}})`$
$`\mathrm{R}(0,1,u_1t_1,f_c,{\displaystyle \frac{u_1}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}},{\displaystyle \frac{u}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}})\mathrm{R}(0,1,u_1t_1,f_c,{\displaystyle \frac{t_1}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}},{\displaystyle \frac{t}{m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}})],`$
where we define $`C_ϵ=\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+ϵ)(4\pi \mu _r^2/m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)^ϵ`$, and

$`f_b=t(t_1+u_1)+m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2),f_c=m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2tu,`$
$`\mathrm{R}(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,x_5,x_6)=\mathrm{Li}_2({\displaystyle \frac{x_6x_1^{}}{\mathrm{\Delta }^{}}})\mathrm{Li}_2({\displaystyle \frac{x_6x_2^{}}{\mathrm{\Delta }^{}}})+\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }^{}}{x_4}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{x_2^{}}{x_1^{}}}`$
with $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}=x_3x_6x_5x_4`$, $`x_1^{}=x_3+x_1x_4`$, and $`x_2^{}=x_3+x_2x_4`$.

Moreover, there are the following relations between the form factors ($`i=1\mathrm{}6`$):

$`f_{2i}^\alpha =f_{2i1}^\alpha (l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}k_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}},R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}R_{j2}^{\stackrel{~}{b}},R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}),`$
$`f_{2i}^{\mathrm{Box}(\beta )}=f_{2i1}^{\mathrm{Box}(\beta )}(l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}k_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}},R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}R_{j2}^{\stackrel{~}{b}},R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}).`$
Thus we will only present the explicit expressions of $`f_{2i1}^\alpha `$ and $`f_{2i1}^{\mathrm{Box}(\beta )}`$.

For the diagram $`(a)`$ in Fig.2, we find

$`f_1^a=3m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}C_0^fR_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}R_{j2}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}k_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}},`$
$`f_3^a={\displaystyle \frac{1}{6s}}l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}\{(92ϵ)B_0(s,0,0)40(12ϵ)C_{00}^a+18sC_0^a+(R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}})^2[36C_{00}^f+4C_{00}^g`$
$`18B_0(s,m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2)]\},`$
$`f_5^a=2f_3^a+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3s}}l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}\{s(7C_1^a2C_0^a20(1ϵ)(C_{12}^a+C_{22}^a+C_2^a)+16C_2^a)+(R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}})^2[2C_0^g(m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2`$
$`m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2)+2B_0(s,m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2)2B_0(0,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2)+2s(C_0^g+C_{11}^g+C_{12}^g+2C_1^g+9C_2^f+C_2^g`$
$`+9C_{12}^f+9C_{22}^f)]\},`$
$`f_9^a={\displaystyle \frac{2}{s}}f_1^a+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3s}}m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}(C_1^g+9C_2^f)R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}R_{j2}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}k_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}.`$
For the diagram $`(b)`$ in Fig.2, we find

$`f_1^b={\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}\{2l_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}[m_tR_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(C_1^j+C_2^j)m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(C_0^j+C_1^j+C_2^j)]m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}[l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(2C_0^b+C_1^b+2C_2^b)`$
$`2k_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}C_2^j]\},`$
$`f_3^b={\displaystyle \frac{4}{3s}}\{l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}[B_0(m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)2B_0(s,0,0)s_\mathrm{\Delta }(2C_0^b+C_1^b+C_2^b)+m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2(C_1^b2C_0^b+C_2^b)`$
$`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2C_2^b]+2k^{\stackrel{~}{t}}_{jk}R^{\stackrel{~}{b}}_{j1}[m_tm_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}C_0^j+R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(B_0(m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,m_t^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2)+m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2C_0^j+m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2(C_1^j+C_2^j))]`$
$`2(t_2+u_2+m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2)[l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(2C_0^b+C_1^b+2C_2^b)2k_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}C_2^j]+2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}l_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}[m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(C_0^j`$
$`+C_1^j)m_tR_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}C_1^j]\},`$
$`f_5^b=2f_3^b.`$
For the diagram $`(c)`$ in Fig.2, we find

$`f_1^c={\displaystyle \frac{8}{3s}}l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}R_{j2}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}B_0(s,m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2),`$
$`f_3^c={\displaystyle \frac{4}{3s}}l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}[2(1ϵ)B_1(s,0,0)+2(R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}})^2B_1(s,m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2)],`$
$`f_5^c=2f_3^c.`$
For the diagram $`(d)`$ in Fig.2, we find

$`f_5^d={\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}\{{\displaystyle \frac{l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}}{t_1}}[16B_0(t,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)+16B_0(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)+t_1(18C_0^d2C_1^c+27C_2^d)8m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2(C_1^c9C_2^d)]`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{4l_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}}{tm_{\stackrel{~}{t}_j}}}[8R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(B_0(t,m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_t^2)+B_0(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_t^2))(R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(2m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2+2m_t^2tm_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)`$
$`4m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}m_tR_{j2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}})(9C_1^hC_1(t,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,0;m_t^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_t^2))]\}+(R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}},R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}R_{j2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}),`$
$`f_7^d=f_5^d.`$
For the diagram $`(e)`$ in Fig.2, we find

$`f_5^e={\displaystyle \frac{8}{3t_1}}\{l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}[B_0(m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)t_2(C_0^e+C_1^e+C_2^e)2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2C_0^e2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2(C_1^e+C_2^e)]`$
$`2R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}[k_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}(B_0(m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,m_t^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2)+m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2C_0^i+t_2C_1^i+m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2C_1^i)l_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}(C_0^i+C_1^i)]`$
$`+2R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}m_t(k_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}C_0^il_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}C_1^i)\},`$
$`f_7^e=f_5^e.`$
For the diagram $`(f)`$ in Fig.2, we find

$`f_5^f={\displaystyle \frac{8}{3t_1}}\{{\displaystyle \frac{l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}}{t_1}}[2(t+m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)B_0(t,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)A_0(m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)]+{\displaystyle \frac{4l_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}}{tm_{\stackrel{~}{t}_j}^2}}[(tB_1+A_0(m_t^2)+m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2B_0)(R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}`$
$`+R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}R_{j2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}})m_tm_{\stackrel{~}{g}}(R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}+R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}R_{j2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}})B_0](t,m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_t^2)\},`$
$`f_7^f=f_5^f.`$
For the box diagram $`(a)`$ in Fig.3, we find

$`f_1^{\mathrm{Box}(a)}={\displaystyle \frac{3}{2t_2}}l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}[B_0(m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)B_0(t,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)+t_2(C_1^b+4D_{00}^a2t_1D_1^a)],`$
$`f_3^{\mathrm{Box}(a)}={\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}[C_0^a+C_0^b+C_1^a+C_1^b+C_2^a+C_2^b+4D_{00}^a2t_1(D_0^a+D_1^a+D_2^a+D_3^a)],`$
$`f_5^{\mathrm{Box}(a)}={\displaystyle \frac{3}{2t_2}}l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}\{2B_0(m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)2B_0(t,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)t_2[2C_0^a+2C_0^e+C_1^b+2C_1^e2C_2^a+C_2^b`$
$`+6D_{00}^a+s(D_{11}^a+5D_{13}^a+2D_1^a+4D_{33}^a+4D_3^a)s_\mathrm{\Delta }(D_{11}^a+2D_{13}^a+2D_1^a+D_{33}^a+2D_3^a)`$
$`t_1(2D_0^a+3D_{12}^a+3D_1^a+3D_{23}^a+2D_2^a+3D_3^a)+u_2(2D_0^a+D_{11}^a3D_{12}^a+D_{13}^a+3D_1^a`$
$`3D_{23}^a2D_2^a+D_3^a)]t_2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2(2D_{11}^a+D_{13}^a4D_1^aD_{33}^a6D_3^a)+t_2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2(D_{13}^a+D_{33}^a`$
$`2D_3^a)\},`$
$`f_7^{\mathrm{Box}(a)}={\displaystyle \frac{3}{2t_2}}l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}\{4B_0(m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)4B_0(t,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)+t_2[2C_0^b4C_0^e+C_1^bs(4D_{13}^a+2D_1^a`$
$`+D_{11}^a)+s_\mathrm{\Delta }(D_{13}^a+2D_1^a2D_3^a+D_{11}^a)t_1(D_1^a2D_2^a)u_2(3D_1^a2D_2^a+D_{11}^a)`$
$`(2D_0^a3D_{12}^a)(t_1+u_2)]t_2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2(2D_{11}^aD_{13}^a4D_1^a+2D_3^a)+t_2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2(D_{13}^a2D_3^a)\},`$
$`f_9^{\mathrm{Box}(a)}=6l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}(D_{12}^a+D_{13}^a+D_{23}^a+D_{33}^a+D_3^a),`$
$`f_{11}^{\mathrm{Box}(a)}=6l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}(D_{12}^a+D_{13}^a).`$
For the box diagram $`(b)`$ in Fig.3, we find

$`f_1^{\mathrm{Box}(b)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}(2C_0^b+C_1^b4D_{00}^b),`$
$`f_3^{\mathrm{Box}(b)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}[2C_0^a+2C_0^bC_0(u,m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,0;0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,0)+C_1^b+C_2^b4D_{00}^b+(t+m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2)D_3^b`$
$`2u_1D_0^b(u_1+2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)(D_1^b+D_3^b)],`$
$`f_5^{\mathrm{Box}(b)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}[2(C_0^a+C_1^a+C_2^aD_{00}^b)+(s+t_2)(2D_0^b+D_{11}^b+D_{12}^b+3D_1^b+2D_2^b+D_3^b)`$
$`s(D_{23}^b+D_{33}^b)+t_2(D_{13}^b+D_3^b)2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2(D_{11}^b+D_{12}^b+D_{13}^b+D_1^b)],`$
$`f_7^{\mathrm{Box}(b)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}[2C_0^b+C_1^b+C_1(u,m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,0;0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,0)+u_1(D_{11}^b+2D_1^b)+2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2D_{11}^b],`$
$`f_9^{\mathrm{Box}(b)}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}(D_{13}^b+D_{23}^b+D_{33}^b+D_3^b),`$
$`f_{11}^{\mathrm{Box}(b)}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}D_{13}^b.`$
For the box diagram $`(c)`$ in Fig.3, we find

$`f_1^{\mathrm{Box}(c)}=m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}f_3^{\mathrm{Box}(c)}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}D_{00}^c,`$
$`f_5^{\mathrm{Box}(c)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3t_2}}l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}\{2B_0(m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)2B_0(t,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)+t_2[2C_0^e2C_1^e+2D_{00}^c+(s+2t`$
$`+2u_2)(D_{13}^c+D_1^c)+2u(D_{13}^c+D_3^c+D_{23}^c+D_{33}^c)+u_1(2D_0^c+3D_1^cD_{23}^c+2D_2^c`$
$`D_{33}^c+D_3^c)+D_{12}^c(t+m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^22u_2)+D_{11}^c(t+u+u_2)]\},`$
$`f_7^{\mathrm{Box}(c)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3t_2}}l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}\{2B_0(m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)2B_0(t,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)+t_2[2C_0^e+sD_1^c+(t_1+u_2)(2D_1^c+D_{11}^c`$
$`+D_{13}^c)+(C_0+C_1+C_2)(m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,0,u;0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)+u_1(2D_0^c+3D_1^c+D_{11}^c+2D_{13}^c`$
$`+D_{33}^c+3D_3^c)+2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2(D_{11}^c+2D_{13}^c+D_1^c+D_{33}^c+D_3^c)]\},`$
$`f_9^{\mathrm{Box}(c)}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}(D_{11}^c+D_{12}^c+D_{13}^c+D_1^c),`$
$`f_{11}^{\mathrm{Box}(c)}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}(D_{11}^c+D_{13}^c+D_1^c).`$
For the box diagram $`(d)`$ in Fig.3, we find

$`f_1^{\mathrm{Box}(d)}=3R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}\{k_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(C_0^j+C_1^i2D_{00}^d+t_1D_2^d)+l_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}[m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(C_0^iC_0^j+2D_{00}^d+t_1D_0^d`$
$`+u_2D_0^d+u_2D_2^d)+m_tR_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(C_0^j2D_{00}^du_2D_2^d)]\},`$
$`f_3^{\mathrm{Box}(d)}=3R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}\{l_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}[m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_0^d+D_2^d)m_tR_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}D_2^d]+k_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}[m_tm_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}D_0^dR_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(C_0^j2D_{00}^d`$
$`+m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2D_0^d+tD_2^d)]\},`$
$`f_5^{\mathrm{Box}(d)}=6R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}\{l_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}[m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_{12}^d+D_1^d+D_{22}^d+D_2^d)m_tR_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_{12}^d+D_{22}^d)]`$
$`+k_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}[m_tm_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_1^d+D_2^d)+R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(C_0^j2D_{00}^dm_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2(D_1^d+D_2^d)+(t_1+u_2)(D_{11}^d+D_{12}^d`$
$`+D_{13}^d+D_1^d+D_{23}^d)+t_1D_2^dm_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2(D_{12}^d+D_{22}^d))]\},`$
$`f_7^{\mathrm{Box}(d)}=6R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}\{l_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}[m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_{22}^d+D_2^d)m_tR_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}D_{22}^d]+k_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}[m_tm_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}D_2^dR_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(C_1^i`$
$`+m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2D_2^dt_1(D_{12}^d+D_{23}^d)u_2(D_{12}^d+D_{23}^d)+m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2D_{22}^d)]\},`$
$`f_9^{\mathrm{Box}(d)}=6R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}\{l_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}[m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_0^d+D_{11}^d+2D_{12}^d+D_{13}^d+2D_1^d+D_{22}^d+D_{23}^d+2D_2^d)`$
$`m_tR_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_{11}^d+2D_{12}^d+D_{13}^d+D_1^d+D_{22}^d+D_{23}^d+D_2^d)]k^{\stackrel{~}{b}}_{jk}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_{11}^d`$
$`+D_{12}^d+D_{13}^d+D_1^d+D_{23}^d)\},`$
$`f_{11}^{\mathrm{Box}(d)}=6R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}\{l_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}[m_tR_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_{12}^d+D_{22}^d+D_{23}^d)m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_{12}^d+D_{22}^d+D_{23}^d+D_2^d)]`$
$`+k_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_{12}^d+D_{23}^d)\}.`$
For the box diagram $`(e)`$ in Fig.3, we find

$`f_1^{\mathrm{Box}(e)}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}[k_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}+l_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}(m_tR_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}})]D_{00}^e,`$
$`f_3^{\mathrm{Box}(e)}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}k_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}D_{00}^e,`$
$`f_5^{\mathrm{Box}(e)}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}\{l_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}[(R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}m_tm_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}})(D_{22}^e+D_{12}^e+D_{23}^e+D_2^e)m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_0^e+D_1^e`$
$`+D_2^e+D_3^e)]+k^{\stackrel{~}{b}}_{jk}[R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(2D_{00}^e+m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2(D_{12}^e+D_{22}^e+D_{23}^e+D_2^e))+s(D_{12}^e+D_{11}^e`$
$`+D_{13}^e+D_1^e)+m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}(R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}m_t)(D_0^e+D_1^e+D_2^e+D_3^e)]\},`$
$`f_7^{\mathrm{Box}(e)}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}\{l_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}[m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_{22}^e+D_2^e)m_tR_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}D_{22}^e]+k_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}[m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}m_tR_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}D_2^e+R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}((C_0`$
$`+C_1+C_2)(m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,0,u;m_t^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2)m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2D_2^esD_{12}^em_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2D_{22}^e)]\},`$
$`f_9^{\mathrm{Box}(e)}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}\{l_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}[(m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}m_tR_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}})(D_{11}^e+2D_{12}^e+D_{13}^e+D_1^e+D_{22}^e+D_{23}^e+D_2^e)`$
$`+m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_0^e+D_1^e+D_2^e+D_3^e)]k_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_{11}^e+D_{12}^e+D_{13}^e+D_1^e)\},`$
$`f_{11}^{\mathrm{Box}(e)}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}\{l_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}[m_tR_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_{12}^e+D_{22}^e)m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_{12}^e+D_{22}^e+D_2^e)]+k_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}D_{12}^e\}.`$
For the box diagram $`(f)`$ in Fig.3, we find

$`f_1^{\mathrm{Box}(f)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}\{l_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}[(m_tR_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}})(C_0^k2D_{00}^f+s(D_0^f+D_1^f+D_2^f+D_3^f))m_tR_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(C_0^i`$
$`+sD_0^f+t_1D_0^f)]+k^{\stackrel{~}{b}}_{jk}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}R^{\stackrel{~}{t}}_{i2}[C_0^k+C_1(t,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2;m_t^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2)+C_2^i2D_{00}^f+sD_2^f`$
$`t_1(D_0^f+D_1^f+D_3^f)]\},`$
$`f_3^{\mathrm{Box}(f)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}\{l_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}[m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_0^f+D_1^f+D_3^f)m_tR_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_1^f+D_3^f)]+k_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}[R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(C_0^iC_0^k`$
$`C_0(0,m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,u;m_t^2,m_t^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2)+2D_{00}^fm_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2D_0^fsD_2^f+t_1(D_0^f+D_3^f)m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2(D_1^f+D_3^f))`$
$`+m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}m_tR_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}D_0^f]\},`$
$`f_5^{\mathrm{Box}(f)}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}\{l_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}[(m_tR_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}})(D_{11}^f+D_{12}^f+2D_{13}^f+D_1^f+D_{23}^f+D_{33}^f+D_3^f)`$
$`m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_0^f+D_1^f+D_2^f+D_3^f)]k^{\stackrel{~}{b}}_{jk}[m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}(m_tR_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}})(D_0^f+D_1^f+D_2^f+D_3^f)`$
$`+R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(C_0^i+C_1^i+C_1(t,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2;m_t^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2)+C_2^i2D_{00}^f+(sm_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)(D_{11}^f+D_{12}^f`$
$`+D_{13}^f+D_1^f)m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2(D_{13}^f+D_{23}^f+D_{33}^f+D_3^f))]\},`$
$`f_7^{\mathrm{Box}(f)}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}\{l_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}[m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_0^f+D_1^f+D_3^f)+(m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}m_tR_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}})(D_{11}^f+2D_{13}^f`$
$`+D_1^f+D_{33}^f+D_3^f)]+k^{\stackrel{~}{b}}_{jk}[(m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}m_tR_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}^2t_1))(D_0^f+D_1^f+D_3^f)`$
$`R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{u_2}}(B_0(m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,m_t^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2)B_0(u,m_t^2,m_{\stackrel{~}{b}_j}^2))C_0^i+C_0^kC_1^is(D_{11}^f+D_{13}^f`$
$`+D_1^fD_2^f)+m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2(D_{11}^f+2D_{13}^f+D_1^f+D_{33}^f+D_3^f))]\},`$
$`f_9^{\mathrm{Box}(f)}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}\{l_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}[m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_0^f+D_1^f+D_2^f+D_3^f)+(m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}m_tR_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}})(D_{13}^f+D_{23}^f+D_{33}^f`$
$`+D_3^f)]+k_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_{11}^f+D_{12}^f+D_{13}^f+D_1^f)\},`$
$`f_{11}^{\mathrm{Box}(f)}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}R_{j1}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}\{l_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}[m_tR_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_{13}^fD_1^f+D_{33}^f)m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}R_{i1}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_{13}^f+D_{33}^f+D_3^f)]`$
$`k_{jk}^{\stackrel{~}{b}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}R_{i2}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}(D_{11}^f+D_{13}^f+D_1^f)\}.`$
For the box diagram $`(g)`$ in Fig.3, we find

$`f_1^{\mathrm{Box}(g)}={\displaystyle \frac{7}{6t_2}}l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}(B_0(m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)B_0(t,0,m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)),`$
$`f_5^{\mathrm{Box}(g)}={\displaystyle \frac{7}{3}}l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}C_2^e.`$
## Appendix B

In this Appendix, we collect the explicit expressions for the amplitudes squared of the radiations of a real gluon and a massless (anti-)quark. Since these expressions are only used to the hard non-collinear parts of real corrections in Eq.(41) and Eq.(60), they have no singularities and can be calculated in $`n=4`$ dimensions.

For the real gluon emission, we find

$`\overline{|M_{ik}^{gb}|}^2=X_{ik}[\overline{|M^{(s)}|}^2+\overline{|M^{(t)}|}^2+\overline{|M^{(st)}|}^2]+(st^{},s_4u_7,s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}u_2),`$
where $`X_{ik}=g^2g_s^4(|l_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}|^2+|k_{ik}^{\stackrel{~}{t}}|^2)`$, and

$`\overline{|M^{(s)}|}^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{ss_5}}\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{36s_4t^{}}}[t_2u^{}m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2s_4u_6(t_2+u_2)+u_6(u_6(s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}u_2)+(s_5+u_7)(s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}+t_2)`$
$`u^{}(s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}+m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2))s_4t^{}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2]{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8s_4u^{}}}[s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}t^{}u_6+u_6^2(u_2s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }})u_6u_7(s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}+t_2`$
$`+u_2)+(s_4t_2ss_{5\mathrm{\Delta }})(u_6+u_7)+t_2u_7^2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2(u_2(2s+t^{})+4t_2t^{}3ss_{3\mathrm{\Delta }})`$
$`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2(2u_6(t^{}+s)+u_7(4s+t^{}))]{\displaystyle \frac{t^{}}{8s_5u^{}}}[\mathrm{\Delta }_t(4t_2+u_2)+(4u_6+u_7)(2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2+s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }})]`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{u^{}}{36s_5t^{}}}[\mathrm{\Delta }_tt_2+u_6(s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}+2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2)]{\displaystyle \frac{1}{72s_4}}[11s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}u_6m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2(31t_2+34u_2)m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2(9u_6`$
$`+34u_7)]{\displaystyle \frac{1}{72s_5}}[\mathrm{\Delta }_t(31t_2+16u_2)+(31u_6+16u_7)(s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}+2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2)]\}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{s_5^2}}\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8u^2}}[4s(\mathrm{\Delta }_ts_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}+s_4s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}+2s_4m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2)+u^{}\mathrm{\Delta }_t(u_22t_2)+u^{}(s_42u_6)(s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}`$
$`+2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2)+s_5u^{}(s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2)]\}+{\displaystyle \frac{4u_2}{9ss_4^2}}m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2,`$
$`\overline{|M^{(t)}|}^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{t_1^2}}\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{16u^2}}[2t_2(s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}s_4+t^{})(s+u_2u_7)+4t_2u^{}(s_4+s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}+u_6m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)+s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}t_1u^{}]`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{t_2}{4s_4u^{}}}[u_7(s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}+s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}+t^{}+u_6)m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2(ss_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}t^{}+u_2+u_7)]+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{36s_4u_7}}[t_2(4m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^4`$
$`+s_4u_7)+2s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}t_1m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2]{\displaystyle \frac{1}{18s_4^2}}[m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2(t_2(16m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2+7s_4)+8t_1(s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}+s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }})){\displaystyle \frac{9}{4}}s_4s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}t_1]\}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{16s_4t_1u^{}}}[t_2u_7+4s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2+4u_7m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}(s+s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}t^{}+u_2+u_7)u_6(2s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}`$
$`2t_2u_2)],`$
$`\overline{|M^{(st)}|}^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{36s_5t_1}}\{{\displaystyle \frac{9}{s_4u^{}}}[u_7(s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}t^{}s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}u_6+2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2(t^{}+u_6))+m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2(u_6(u_2s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }})+t_2u_7`$
$`+(s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}+2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2)(t^{}s))]+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2ss_4}}[16m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2(u_2(t^{}+u_6)+t_2(2t^{}+2u_6+u_7+u^{}))`$
$`+16m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2(t^{}(2u_6+u_7)+u_6(2u_6+2u_7+u^{}))s_4t_2(9s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}+2u_67u_77m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)`$
$`+7s_4u_2u_6+ss_4(7s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2)(9s_5(s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}t_2+3t_2u_6+u_2u_6+t_2u_7)+14s_5t_2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2`$
$`+s_4m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2(9t_214u_6)2su_6(s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}+2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2)2sm_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2(8s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}+7s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}+14m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2)]`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{9}{4su^{}}}[2t^{}(\mathrm{\Delta }_t+s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }})(2t_2+u_2)+(s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}s_42t_2t^{}u_2+2u_6+u_7)(t_2u_7`$
$`u_2u_6)+(s_5t_24t^{}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2)(2u_6+u_7)3ss_4t_22s\mathrm{\Delta }_t(2t_2+u_2)2ss_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}(t_2`$
$`+u_2u_6)+4sm_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2(s_4+3u_6)+(s_5s)u_2u_6]{\displaystyle \frac{9}{u^2}}[ss_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}(s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}s_4+t^{})+(s`$
$`+u_2)(s_4t_2+s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}u_6)+s_4(u_2u_6t_2u_7)+2t^{}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2(s+u_2u_7)]{\displaystyle \frac{1}{su_7}}[t_1u_6(s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}`$
$`+2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2)u_6^2(u_22m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2)+t_1u_2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2+u_6m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2(2t_2+u_2)]\}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{36ss_4}}\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2t^{}u_7}}[2u_6^2(t_2`$
$`+u_2)s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}u_6u^{}+t_2u^{}m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2]{\displaystyle \frac{9}{4t_1u^{}}}[(2t_2+u_2)(u_6(t^{}s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}+u_2+u_7)+2t^{}(s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}`$
$`2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2))t_2u_7(s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}+4t_2+t^{}+3u_2u_7)]+{\displaystyle \frac{16m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2}{s_4t_1}}[u_2(t^{}+u_6)+t_2(2t^{}+2u_6`$
$`+u_7+u^{})]{\displaystyle \frac{1}{t_1u_7}}[2u_6m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2(2t_2+u_2)+t_1(s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}u_6+u_2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2)]\}.`$
For the subprocess with two initial-state gluons, we find

$`\overline{|M_{ik}^{gg}|}^2={\displaystyle \frac{3}{8}}\overline{|M_{ik}^{gb}|}^2(su^{},s_4u_6,s_3s_4+u_7+u^{},s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}s_4+u_7+u^{}+\mathrm{\Delta }_t).`$
For the subprocess with the initial-state $`q\overline{q}`$, we find

$`\overline{|M_{ik}^{q\overline{q}}|}^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{9s^2}}X_{ik}\{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{s_5^2}}[\mathrm{\Delta }_t(t^{}u_2+t_2u^{})+(t^{}u_7+u_6u^{})(s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}+2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2)]{\displaystyle \frac{1}{s_3^2}}[ss_3(\mathrm{\Delta }_s+s_3`$
$`s_4s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }})+s_3(t_2+t^{}u_6)(u_7u_2u^{})]{\displaystyle \frac{1}{s_3s_5}}[s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}t^{}u_22ss_3(\mathrm{\Delta }_t+s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }})`$
$`s_4u_2(2t_2+t^{}u_6)+t^{}u_7(s_3s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }})s_3u_7(2u_6t_2)+s_3u_6(u_2+u^{})s_4t_2(u^{}`$
$`u_7)2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2(t^{}(u_7u_2)2ss_4)+u^{}(t_2+2t^{}u_6)(s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}+2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2)]\}.`$
For the subprocess with the initial-state $`bq`$ or $`b\overline{q}`$, we find

$`\overline{|M_{ik}^{bq(\overline{q})}|}^2=\overline{|M_{ik}^{q\overline{q}}|}^2(su^{},s_4u_6,t_2s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }},s_3t_2,{\displaystyle \frac{1}{s_3}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{t_1}}).`$
For the subprocess with the initial-state $`b\overline{b}`$, we find

$`\overline{|M_{ik}^{b\overline{b}}|}^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{27}}X_{ik}\{{\displaystyle \frac{3s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}}{s^2s_3^2}}[s(s_4+s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}\mathrm{\Delta }_ss_{3\mathrm{\Delta }})+(t_2+t^{}u_6)(u_2u_7+u^{})]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{2t^{}}{ss_5^2u^{}}}[s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}u_7u_2m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2+(u_2+2u_7)m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2]{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ss_3s_5u^{}}}[\mathrm{\Delta }_st^{}u_2ss_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}`$
$`+s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}u_6(u_2u_7)+s_4t_2u_7+(s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }})t^{}u_7+(t_2+t^{})(s_4u_2+s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}u^{})`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_t(ss_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}t_2u^{})+2(ss_4+(t^{}u_6)u^{})m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2]+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4ss_3t_1u^{}}}[2ss_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}(s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}s_4`$
$`s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}+t^{})t^{}u_2(2t_22s_4+t^{})+m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2(2t_2u^{}+t^{}(u_22u_7+4u_p))+2(s_4t_2`$
$`s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}t_2)(s+u_2u_7)+s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}t^{}(u_72s)+m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_i}^2(2t_2u^{}t^{}u_2)]+{\displaystyle \frac{6}{s^2s_5^2}}[\mathrm{\Delta }_t(t^{}u_2+t_2u^{})`$
$`+(t^{}u_7+u_6u^{})(s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}+2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2)]{\displaystyle \frac{3}{s^2s_3s_5}}[s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}t^{}(u_2u_7)2ss_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}(\mathrm{\Delta }_t+s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }})`$
$`s_4u_2(2t_2+t^{})+s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}u_7(t^{}2u_6)+(s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}+s_4)(u_2u_6+t_2u_7)s_4t_2u^{}+s_{5\mathrm{\Delta }}u^{}(t_2`$
$`+2t^{}u_6)+s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }}u_6u^{}+2m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_k^{}}^2(2ss_4+(t_2+2t^{}u_6)u^{}+t^{}(u_2u_7))]\}`$
$`+(su^{},s_4u_6,t_2s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }},s_3t_1).`$
For the subprocess with the initial-state $`bb`$, we find

$`\overline{|M_{ik}^{bb}|}^2=\overline{|M_{ik}^{b\overline{b}}|}^2(st^{},s_4u_7,u_2s_{3\mathrm{\Delta }},s_3u_1).`$