text:
# First measurement of the T-violating muon polarization in the decay 𝐾⁺→𝜇⁺𝜈𝛾

## 1 Introduction

The decay $`K^+\mu ^+\nu \gamma `$ ($`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$) is one of the kaon decays which could probe new physics beyond the Standard Model (SM). However, the decay is relatively poorly measured and there have been only a few experiments that determined the $`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$ branching ratio  and the structure-dependent component . Other interesting observables for this decay are the components of the muon polarization: $`P_T`$ which is the T-odd polarization component normal to the decay plane defined as $`P_T=\stackrel{}{s}_\mu (\stackrel{}{p}_\gamma \times \stackrel{}{p}_\mu )/|\stackrel{}{p}_\gamma \times \stackrel{}{p}_\mu |`$, and $`P_N`$–normal muon polarization (T–even) in the decay plane which is sensitive to the values and signs of the kaon vector $`F_V`$ and axial-vector $`F_A`$ form factors, as shown in . The contribution to $`P_T`$ from the Standard Model is known to be very small $`10^7`$ . The T-even transverse polarization due to final state interactions (FSI) can mimic the T-odd effect at the $`10^3`$ level . However, it can be reliably calculated. Therefore, any non-zero value of $`P_T`$ above the level of FSI or different from the FSI values, if the experimental sensitivity to the polarization is better than $`10^3`$, would indicate new physics. Several non-SM models predict non-zero values for $`P_T`$ in $`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$ decay  and from two of them (SUSY with R-parity and multi-Higgs models without natural flavor conservation) large values of $`P_T10^2`$ are expected.

In this letter we present the first results on $`P_T`$ obtained in the analysis of the $`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$ data accumulated in the KEK E246 experiment for the 1996–98 data taking period.

## 2 Experiment

The measurement was performed using the detector constructed to search for T-violating muon polarization in the $`K^+\pi ^0\mu ^+\nu `$ ($`K_{\mu 3}`$) decay. The apparatus is shown in Fig. 1,

and described in detail elsewhere . A separated $`K^+`$ beam ($`\pi /K6`$) of 660 MeV/$`c`$ was used with a typical intensity of $`3.0\times 10^5`$ kaons per 0.6-s spill duration with a repetition of 3 s. A $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{C}}`$erenkov counter with a multiplicity trigger distinguished $`K^+`$s from $`\pi ^+`$s with an efficiency of more than 99%. Kaons then were slowed in a Al+BeO degrader, and stopped in an active target made of 256 scintillating fibers located at the center of a 12-sector superconducting toroidal spectrometer. A charged particle ($`\mu ^+`$, $`e^+`$ or $`\pi ^+`$) from the kaon decay hit one of the twelve fiducial counters surrounding the target and was bent through one of the spectrometer sector gaps and detected by the TOF and $`\mu ^+`$ counters at the entrance of the polarimeter. Tracking of charged particles was provided by the target fibers, a scintillation ring hodoscope surrounding the target and multiwire proportional chambers at the entrance (C2) and exit (C3 and C4) of each magnet sector gap. The momentum resolution of the whole tracking system was $`\sigma _p`$=2.6 MeV/$`c`$ at 205 MeV/$`c`$.

The energies and angles of the photons were measured by the CsI photon calorimeter consisting of 768 CsI(Tl) modules . The CsI(Tl) barrel has twelve holes for the charged particle entry to the toroidal spectrometer and covers a solid angle of about $`0.75\times 4\pi `$ sr. Energy resolution of $`\sigma _E/E=2.7`$% at 200 MeV and angular resolutions of $`\sigma _\theta =2.3^{}`$ were obtained. Good time resolution of 3.5 ns (rms) at 100 MeV allowed us to use the fast CsI signal at the trigger level and thereby effectively suppress accidentals in the calorimeter.

Muons entering the polarimeter (Fig. 1c) were degraded by an Al+Cu block and stopped in a stack of pure Al plates. The stopper material (Al) was chosen because there is no depolarization of muons stopped in aluminum. Positrons from $`\mu ^+e^+\nu \overline{\nu }`$ decays of stopped muons were detected by 12 positron counters consisting of three layers of plastic scintillators which were located azimuthally between the muon stoppers. The time spectra of the positrons were recorded by multi-stop TDCs.

A three-level trigger for selection of events was used. At the first level, a signal from the kaon ring in the $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{C}}`$erenkov detector followed by a hit in at least one fiducial counter in coincidence with signals from the TOF and $`\mu ^+`$ counters of a corresponding magnet sector were required. The second level trigger required at least one hit in the CsI(Tl) calorimeter, and the third level trigger required the triple coincidence signal from the positron counter arrays adjacent to the corresponding magnet sector within 20 $`\mu `$s after the first level trigger.

The T-violating asymmetry was extracted using a double ratio as:

$$A_T=\frac{1}{4}\left[\frac{(N_{cw}/N_{ccw})_{fwd}}{(N_{cw}/N_{ccw})_{bwd}}1\right]$$
(1)
Here, $`N_{cw}`$ and $`N_{ccw}`$ are the sums over all 12 sectors of counts of clockwise ($`cw`$) and counter-clockwise ($`ccw`$) emitted positrons. Indices $`fwd`$ and $`bwd`$ denote two classes of events: forward events ($`fwd`$) when the angle between the photon and the beam direction (z-axis) was less than $`70^{}`$ and backward events ($`bwd`$) when the angle between the photon and the beam direction was more than $`110^{}`$. The signal values $`N_{cw}`$ and $`N_{ccw}`$ were extracted by integrating the positron time spectrum in the polarimeter after subtraction of the background. The signal integration region was chosen to be from 20 ns to 6 $`\mu `$s and the background fitting region for the background extraction was from 6.0 to 19.5 $`\mu `$s.

The sign of $`A_T`$ for events with forward-going photons is opposite to that for events with backward-going photons. This allows us to employ a double ratio method which is a powerful technique for reduction of most systematic errors. Moreover, considerable reduction of systematic effects was achieved from the azimuthal symmetry of the 12-gap detector and the use of the same positron detector as a $`cw`$ for one gap and a $`ccw`$ detector for the adjacent gap.

The value of $`P_T`$ is related to $`A_T`$ by

$$P_T=\frac{A_T}{\alpha \times f\times (1\beta )}$$
(2)
where $`\alpha `$ is the analyzing power of the polarimeter, $`f`$ is an angular attenuation factor and $`\beta `$ is the overall fraction of all backgrounds.

## 3 Analysis

The main problem of the $`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$ analysis is the rejection of the predominant $`K_{\mu 3}`$ background with only one photon ($`1\gamma `$) from the $`\pi ^0`$ decay detected by the CsI calorimeter. The extraction of $`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$ events was performed in two stages.

The first stage was mostly identical to that of the main ($`K_{\mu 3}`$) E246 analysis and was used to suppress $`K_{\mu 2}`$, $`K_{\pi 2}`$, $`K_{e3}`$, and $`K^+\pi ^+\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$, $`K^+\pi ^+\pi ^0\pi ^0`$ ($`K_{\pi 3}`$) background decays.

The $`K_{\pi 2}`$ and $`K_{\mu 2}`$ decays were rejected using a cut on the muon momentum $`p_\mu 190`$ MeV/$`c`$ selecting the $`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$ muons in the region of 100-190 MeV/$`c`$, as illustrated in Fig. 2.

Most of the muons from $`K_{\pi 2}`$ events, in which $`\pi ^+`$ decays in-flight, were rejected by applying the tracking cut $`\chi ^2<10`$. These events had kinks, i.e. the tracks did not point back to the kaon vertex. The $`K_{\pi 3}`$ backgrounds were negligible due to the combination of several suppressing factors: acceptance of the magnet spectrometer (the endpoints of charged particle momentum spectra for both decays are quite low: 125 and 133 MeV/c, respectively), the low probability of detecting these decays as one-photon events and, finally, most of $`\pi ^+`$s were stopped in the Cu degrader and did not reach the polarimeter. The $`K_{e3}`$ events were removed using a time-of-flight method by imposing a geometric cut on the two-dimensional spectrum of a charged particle mass calculated from time-of-flight vs. the energy deposited in the TOF counter (Fig. 3).

The background from accidental photons in the CsI(Tl) detector was suppressed using a photon energy threshold of 50 MeV and by requiring a coincidence between a photon signal in the CsI and a signal in the fiducial and TOF counters from a charged particle within a window of $`\pm 15`$ ns. Background associated with the beam was suppressed by a veto counter system surrounding the beam region.

The second stage of the analysis was aimed at the extraction of $`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$ events and the rejection of $`K_{\mu 3}`$ decays. Due to the precise measurement of the muon momentum and the photon energy and direction, the kinematics of $`K_{\mu 3}`$ and $`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$ decays can be reconstructed completely . The kinematic parameters such as missing mass squared $`M_{miss}^2`$, the angle between the muon and the photon, $`\mathrm{\Theta }_{\mu \gamma }`$, and the neutrino momentum, $`p_\nu `$, can be efficiently used to suppress the $`K_{\mu 3}`$ background. The missing mass squared for 1$`\gamma `$ events is

$$M_{miss}^2=E_{miss}^2\stackrel{}{p}_{miss}^2=(m_KE_\mu E_\gamma )^2(\stackrel{}{p}_K\stackrel{}{p}_\mu \stackrel{}{q})^2,$$
(3)
where $`\stackrel{}{q}`$ is the photon momentum. For $`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$ events, the neutrino is the only missing particle, therefore, $`\stackrel{}{p}_\nu =\stackrel{}{p}_{miss}`$, $`E_\nu =E_{miss}`$ and $`M_{miss}^2=E_\nu ^2\stackrel{}{p}_\nu ^2=0`$, while the $`M_{miss}^2`$ of $`K_{\mu 3}`$ events is distributed over a wide range with the maximum at about $`2\times 10^4`$ MeV2/$`c^4`$. The reconstructed neutrino momentum of $`1\gamma `$ events from experimental and Monte Carlo (MC) data after imposing the cuts $`0.7\times 10^4\mathrm{MeV}^2/c^4<M_{miss}^2<1.5\times 10^4\mathrm{MeV}^2/c^4`$ and $`\mathrm{\Theta }_{\mu \gamma }90^{}`$, and accepting events with $`E_\gamma >50`$ MeV is shown in Fig. 4.

The peak at $`p_\nu 220`$ MeV/$`c`$ in MC data corresponds to $`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$ events. In the region with $`p_\nu >200`$ MeV/$`c`$, the contamination of the $`K_{\mu 3}`$ events is estimated to be $`17`$%. Fig. 5

shows the experimental and MC spectra of neutrino missing mass after applying the cut $`p_\nu >200\mathrm{MeV}/c`$.

After applying the cuts $`p_\nu >200\mathrm{MeV}/c`$, $`0.7\times 10^4\mathrm{MeV}^2/c^4<M_{miss}^2<1.5\times 10^4\mathrm{MeV}^2/c^4`$ and $`\mathrm{\Theta }_{\mu \gamma }90^{}`$, the accepted $`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$ events are concentrated in the Dalitz plot region, as shown in Fig. 6

where the inner bremsstrahlung (IB) component and interference of the IB and structure-dependent with positive-helicity photon (SD+) term dominate.

A good test of the quality of detected $`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$ events is the value of the normal asymmetry, $`A_N`$. Its value is proportional to the T-even muon polarization, $`P_N`$, which is the in-plane component of the muon polarization normal to the muon momentum

$$P_N=\frac{\stackrel{}{s}_\mu (\stackrel{}{p}_\mu \times (\stackrel{}{p}_\gamma \times \stackrel{}{p}_\mu ))}{|\stackrel{}{p}_\mu \times (\stackrel{}{p}_\gamma \times \stackrel{}{p}_\mu )|}.$$
(4)
$`A_N`$ can be measured if the accepted events are separated into two classes: events where the photon moves into the left hemisphere with respect to the median plane of the given magnet sector and events where the photon moves into the right hemisphere. The values of $`A_N`$ for these two classes should be the same but opposite in sign. For $`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$ the normal polarization has a positive sign in the region where the selected events are located , as seen from Fig. 6, and its average value is about 0.2, while for $`K_{\mu 3}`$, the normal muon polarization calculated using the formulae of Ref.  has a negative sign over the whole Dalitz plot region, as shown in Fig. 7.

From this measurement, the value of $`A_N`$ for the one-photon $`K_{\mu 3}`$ events is $`A_N(K_{\mu 3})=(3.87\pm 0.06)\times 10^2`$ and for selected $`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$ events with tighter cuts $`0.7\times 10^4\mathrm{MeV}^2/c^4<M_{miss}^2<1.0\times 10^4\mathrm{MeV}^2/c^4`$, $`p_\nu >220\mathrm{MeV}/c`$ and $`\mathrm{\Theta }_{\mu \gamma }75^{}`$ the normal asymmetry is $`A_N(K_{\mu 2\gamma })=(3.59\pm 0.56)\times 10^2`$. These values are both non-zero and have opposite signs consistent with the expectation. That indicates a strong signature of the correct $`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$ selection and the suppression of one-photon $`K_{\mu 3}`$ events.

In Monte Carlo simulations the polarization value and corresponding asymmetry for $`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$ was obtained using the form factors from Chiral Perturbation Theory (ChPT) $`F_V=0.095`$, $`F_A=0.043`$  and $`f_K=159`$ MeV. After applying the same cuts to the MC data we obtained $`A_N(K_{\mu 2\gamma })=(4.06\pm 1.14)\times 10^2`$. These simulations were used to check the polarimeter sensitivity to muon polarization, i.e. the value of the analyzing power $`\alpha `$, and the geometric attenuation factor $`f`$. The $`\alpha `$ value obtained from $`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$ is in a good agreement with $`\alpha =0.289\pm 0.015`$  extracted from $`K_{\mu 3}`$ MC simulation. The attenuation factor $`f=0.80\pm 0.03`$ was obtained.

From the experimental data collected during the 1996-98 beam cycles, a total number of $`1.14\times 10^5`$ $`fwd+bwd`$ $`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$ events were extracted. The value of the transverse asymmetry measured for the collected events is $`A_T=(0.099\pm 0.320(stat))\times 10^2`$. The contamination of the beam accidental backgrounds in $`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$ events was estimated to be not higher than 8%. The constant background in the polarimeter was $`1112`$%. Both these backgrounds only dilute the sensitivity to $`P_T`$, but they do not produce any spurious T-violating asymmetry. Using MC data the background decay fractions were estimated to be $`\beta _{bgr}^{K_{\mu 3}}17`$% and $`\beta _{bgr}^{K_{\pi 2}}<0.5`$%. Thus, the total background contamination is $`\beta 25`$% which is used in the denominator of Eq. (2).

Using the values of $`A_T`$, $`\alpha `$, $`f`$ and $`\beta `$ given above we obtained the transverse polarization $`P_T=(0.57\pm 1.85(stat))\times 10^2`$. The mean value of transverse polarization due to the final state interactions for the Dalitz plot region in which the selected $`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$ events reside is $`P_T\text{(FSI)}=0.7\times 10^3`$ which is much less than the statistical error of $`P_T`$. The theoretical uncertainty of the $`P_T\text{(FSI)}`$ value is about $`15`$% and is connected with the uncertainties of $`F_V`$ and $`F_A`$ values. For the final result we subtract $`P_T\text{(FSI)}`$ from the measured $`P_T`$ value which gives $`P_T=(0.64\pm 1.85(stat))\times 10^2`$ and as the $`P_T\text{(FSI)}`$ uncertainty is more than two orders of magnitude less than the statistical error we do not include that uncertainty in the $`P_T`$ error.

The main systematic error contributions to $`P_T`$ come from the presence of the two large components of the muon in-plane polarization, $`P_L`$ which is parallel to the muon momentum and $`P_N`$ ($`P_TP_{N,L}1`$). However, most of their contribution is canceled by the azimuthal symmetry of the detector as well as by the $`fwd/bwd`$ ratio. The largest instrumental systematic errors are due to the misalignment of the polarimeter, the asymmetry of the magnetic field distribution, and the asymmetric kaon stopping distribution. The $`fwd/bwd`$ ratio efficiently reduces these contributions. Additionally, a non-zero value of $`P_T`$ for the $`K_{\mu 3}`$ background would contribute to the systematic error of $`P_T`$ for $`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$, but that was measured in the main E246 analysis with much higher accuracy and is consistent with zero  $`P_T(K_{\mu 3})=(1.12\pm 2.17(stat)\pm 0.90(syst))\times 10^3`$. All possible sources of systematic errors were considered in  for much higher statistics of 1$`\gamma `$ $`K_{\mu 3}`$ events as well as for $`K_{\mu 2}`$ and $`K_{\pi 2}`$ events. The total systematic error of $`P_T`$ for $`K_{\mu 3}`$ events was found to be $`0.9\times 10^3`$ , while for $`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$ we estimated the systematic error of $`P_T`$ to be less than $`\delta P_T^{sys}=1.0\times 10^3`$. The absence of significant systematic errors (comparable to the statistical error) is confirmed by measuring the dependence of the transverse asymmetry $`A_T`$ on the magnet sector number as seen in Fig. 8.

## 4 Results

We have performed the first measurement of the T-violating muon polarization in $`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$ decay based on about $`1.14\times 10^5`$ good $`fwd+bwd`$ $`K_{\mu 2\gamma }`$ events collected in 1996-98. These events are located in the Dalitz plot region where the IB and INT+ components dominate. The value obtained for $`P_T`$ is $`(0.64\pm 1.85(stat)\pm 0.10(syst))\times 10^2`$ including the theoretical background from final state interactions. At the present level of experimental sensitivity this value is consistent with no T-violation in this decay.

## 5 Acknowledgments

This work has been supported in Japan by a Grant-In-Aid from the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture, and by JSPS; in Russia by the Ministry of Science and Technology, and by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research; in Canada by NSERC and IPP, and by the TRIUMF infrastructure support provided under its NRC contribution; in the USA by the NSF. The authors gratefully acknowledge the support received from the INR and KEK staff.


format: text

text:
# Stellar evolution with rotation X:

## 1 Introduction

Wolf–Rayet stars play an important role in Astrophysics, as signatures of star formation in galaxies and starbursts, as injectors of chemical elements and of the radioactive isotope 26Al, as sources of kinetic energy into the interstellar medium and as progenitors of supernovae and maybe as progenitors of $`\gamma `$–ray bursts. As rotation affects all outputs of stellar models (Meynet & Maeder MMV (2000)), the main purpose of the present paper is to examine some consequences of rotation on the properties of Wolf–Rayet (WR) stars.

Let us recall some difficulties faced by non–rotating stellar models of WR stars. A good agreement between the predictions of the stellar models for the WR/O number ratios and the observed ones at different metallicities in regions of constant star formation was achieved provided the mass loss rates were enhanced by about a factor of two during the MS and WNL phases (Meynet & al. Mey94 (1994)). This solution, which at that time appeared reasonable in view of the uncertainties pertaining to the mass loss rates, is no longer applicable at present. Indeed, the estimates of the mass loss rates during the WR phase are reduced by a factor of 2 to 3, when account is taken of the clumping effects in the wind (Nugis and Lamers NuLa00 (2000); Hamann and Koesterke Ha99 (1999)). Also, the mass loss rates for O–type stars have been substantially revised (and in general reduced) by the new results of Vink et al. (Vink00 (2000), Vink01 (2001)), who also account for the occurrence of bi–stability limits which change the wind properties and mass loss rates. In this new context, it is quite clear that with these new mass loss rates the predicted numbers of WR stars by standard non–rotating models would be much too low with respect to the observations.

A second difficulty of the standard models with mass loss was the observed number of transition WN/WC stars. These stars simultaneously show some nitrogen characteristics of WN stars and some carbon of the further WC stage. The observed frequency of WN/WC stars among WR stars is around 4.4 % (van der Hucht Hu01 (2001)), while the frequency predicted by the standard models without extra mixing processes are lower by 1–2 orders of magnitude (Maeder & Meynet MaeMey94 (1994)). A third difficulty of the standard models as far as WR stars were concerned was that there were relatively too many WC stars with respect to WN stars predicted (see the review by Massey Mas03 (2003)). These difficulties are the signs that some process is missing in these models.

We explore here the effects of rotation on the WR stars and their formation. Rotation already improved many predictions of the stellar models, bringing better agreement with the observations. In particular, star models with rotation have at last enabled us (Maeder & Meynet MMVII (2001)) to solve the long–standing problem of the large number of observed red supergiants at low metallicities $`Z`$ in the SMC, while current models with any kind of reasonable mass loss usually predicted almost no red supergiants at low $`Z`$. Also, in addition to several other points, the new models also show significant He– and N–enhancements in O–type stars on the MS (Heger and Langer He00 (2000); Meynet & Maeder MMV (2000)), as well as in supergiants at various metallicities, as required by observations.

Sect. 2 summarizes the physics of these models. The evolution of the inner and surface rotation is discussed in Sect. 3. The evolutionary tracks are shown in Sect. 4. The effects of rotation on the WR star formation process and on the WR lifetimes are discussed in Sect. 5. Comparisons with the observed WR populations are performed in Sect. 6. Finally the predicted abundances in WR stars are discussed in Sect. 7.

## 2 Physics of the models

The present grid of models at solar metallicity is based in general on the same physical assumptions as in the grid by Meynet & Maeder (MMV (2000), paper V). However, in addition we include here several improvements that have appeared since. These are:

* As reference mass loss rates in the case of no rotation, we use the recent data by Vink et al. (Vink00 (2000); Vink01 (2001)). A bi–stability limit intervenes at T$`{}_{\mathrm{eff}}{}^{}=25000`$ K and produces some steep changes of the mass loss rates during MS evolution. For the domain not covered by these authors we use the results by de Jager et al. (Ja88 (1988)). Since the empirical values for the mass loss rates employed for non–rotating stars are based on stars covering the whole range of rotational velocities, we must apply a reduction factor to the empirical rates to make them correspond to the non–rotating case. The same reduction factor as in Maeder & Meynet (MMVII (2001)) was used here.
* During the Wolf–Rayet phase we apply the mass loss rates proposed by Nugis and Lamers (NuLa00 (2000)). These mass loss rates, which account for the clumping effects in the winds, are smaller by a factor 2–3 than the mass loss rates used in our previous non–rotating stellar grids (Meynet et al. Mey94 (1994)).
* The significant increases of the mass loss rates $`\dot{M}`$ with rotation are taken into account as explained in Maeder & Meynet (2000a ). This treatment, in contrast to the one usually used (Friend and Abbott Fr86 (1986)), accounts for the non–uniform brightness of rotating stars due to the von Zeipel theorem and for the fact that the Eddington factor is also a function of the rotation velocity. Due to the non–uniform brightness of a rotating star, the stellar winds are anisotropic. The rotation–induced anisotropy of the stellar winds is also accounted for during the Main Sequence (MS) phase according to the prescription of Maeder (Ma02 (2002)). For O–type stars, the polar winds are enhanced and this means that these stars lose a lot of mass, but a moderate amount of angular momentum. For stars cooler than T$`{}_{\mathrm{eff}}{}^{}=25000`$ K, the equatorial ejection becomes significant and leads to a larger ejection of angular momentum. After the MS phase, the ratios of the surface angular velocity to the break–up velocity are in general much too low for the anisotropies to be important. Interestingly enough, in cases of extreme mass loss such as in WR stars, the timescale for the transmission of the extra torque applied at the stellar surface by the anisotropies is longer than the timescale for the mass removal of the considered layers, so that the effects of the anisotropies of the stellar winds on the internal rotation are rather limited (Maeder Ma02 (2002)).
* In paper V, we did not account for the effects of horizontal turbulence on the shears (Talon & Zahn TaZa97 (1997)). We account for it in the present work in the same manner as we did in paper VII (Maeder & Meynet MMVII (2001)). Let us recall that the horizontal turbulence, expressed by a diffusion coefficient $`D_\mathrm{h}`$, tends to reduce the shear mixing in regions of steep $`\mu `$–gradients, making the diffusion coefficient $`D_{\mathrm{shear}}`$ proportional to $`D_\mathrm{h}`$ rather than to $`K`$, the thermal diffusivity. The difference can be large and it leads to smaller surface enhancements in the products of CNO burning. In regions of low $`\mu `$–gradients, the horizontal turbulence moderately increases the shear diffusion coefficient, making it proportional to $`D_\mathrm{h}+K`$ rather than to $`K`$ only, with little consequence for the surface enrichments.
* A moderate overshooting is included in the present rotating and non–rotating models. The radii of the convective cores are increased with respect to the values obtained by the Schwarzschild criterion by a quantity equal to 0.1 Hp, where Hp is the pressure scale height evaluated at the Schwarzschild boundary.
* As in paper VIII (Meynet & Maeder MMVIII (2002)), the opacities are from Iglesias & Rogers (IR96 (1996)), complemented at low temperatures with the molecular opacities of Alexander (http://web.physics.twsu.edu/alex/wwwdra.htm). The nuclear reaction rates are also the same as in paper VIII and are based on the new NACRE data basis (Angulo et al. Ang99 (1999)).
* The initial composition is changed with respect to paper V: the mass fraction of hydrogen is X = 0.705, the mass fraction of helium Y = 0.275. For the heavy elements, we adopt the same mixture as the one used to compute the opacity tables for solar composition.

The effect of rotation on the transport of the chemical species and the angular momentum are accounted for as in our papers VII and VIII. All the models were computed up to the end of the helium–burning phase.

## 3 Evolution of the rotation

### 3.1 Global view: the effects of coupling and mass loss

The evolution of the rotation velocities at the stellar surface depends mainly on 2 factors, the internal coupling and the mass loss.

1.– The coupling mechanisms transport angular momentum in the stellar interiors. The extreme case of strong coupling is the classical case of solid body rotation. In this case when mass loss is small, the star reaches the critical velocity during the MS phase more or less quickly depending on the initial rotation as shown by Sackman & Anand (Sa70 (1970); see also Langer La97 (1997)). In that case, coupling ensures that $`\mathrm{\Omega }/\mathrm{\Omega }_c`$ increases when the radius of the star increases. Let us recall that for $`\mathrm{\Omega }/\mathrm{\Omega }_c`$ to increase when the radius of the star increases, its suffices that $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ decreases less steeply with the radius than $`\mathrm{\Omega }_c`$ ($`R^{3/2}`$), or expressed in another way, if $`\mathrm{\Omega }R^\alpha `$ then $`\mathrm{\Omega }/\mathrm{\Omega }_c`$ increases with the radius when $`\alpha <3/2`$. In the case of no coupling, i.e. of local conservation of the angular momentum, rotation becomes more and more subcritical ($`\alpha =2`$). In the present models, the situation is intermediate, with a moderate coupling due mainly to meridional circulation, which is more efficient (Meynet & Maeder MMV (2000)) than shear transport, as far as transport of angular momentum is concerned.

2.– For a given degree of coupling, *the mass loss rates play a most critical role in the evolution of the surface rotation*. As shown by the comparison of the models at $`Z=0.02`$ and $`Z=0.004`$ (Maeder & Meynet MMVII (2001)), for masses greater than 20 M the models with solar composition have velocities that decrease rather rapidly, while at $`Z=0.004`$ the velocities go up. Thus, for the most massive stars with moderate or strong coupling, the mass loss rates are the main factor influencing the evolution of rotation.

Below a mass of about 12 M, the mass loss rates are smaller and the internal coupling plays the main role in the evolution of the rotational velocities. This provides an interesting possibility of tests on the internal coupling by studying the differences in rotational velocities for stars at different distances of the ZAMS. In particular, such a study could allow us to test the role of magnetic coupling in radiative envelopes, which is now a major open question in stellar rotation studies (Spruit spruit02 (2002)).

Figs. 1 and 2 show the evolution of the rotational velocities and of the fraction $`\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{c}}`$ of the angular velocity to the critical angular velocity at the surface of star models of different initial masses between 9 and 120 M with account taken of anisotropic mass loss during the MS phase. Globally these figures are rather similar to those of previous models (Meynet & Maeder MMV (2000)), except for the fact that the mass loss rates by Vink et al. (Vink00 (2000), Vink01 (2001)) are used here. These rates meet a bi–stability limit at $`\mathrm{log}T_{\mathrm{eff}}=4.40`$. Below this value there is a sudden increase of the mass loss rates, which makes the rotation velocities rapidly decrease, as for the most massive stars. This is clearly visible for the models below 40 M in Figs. 1 and 2. Thus, for these models with a rapidly decreasing velocity of rotation, we again stress that any comparison between observed and predicted rotation for these domains of mass is really much more a test of the mass loss rates than a test on the internal coupling and evolution of rotation. We may mention that for an initial velocity $`v_{\mathrm{ini}}300`$ km s-1, the account taken of the anisotropic wind does not play a major role (see Sect. 4).

Thus, the uncertainties on the mass loss rates and bi–stability limits prevent us from making significant tests on the internal physics and coupling in the massive stars for models with initial masses above about 12 M. Mass loss uncertainties dominate the problem. From the rather large differences between the values of the mass loss rates published over recent years, we know that these uncertainties are still great. Fortunately, below 12 M the comparisons may be meaningful and may reveal whether our models have the right kind of internal coupling.

### 3.2 Evolution of the rotational velocities during the WR stages

Fig. 3 (left) shows the evolution of the rotation period $`P`$, of the rotation velocities $`v`$ and of the fraction $`\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{c}}`$ of the angular velocity to the critical angular velocity at the surface during the WR stages of a star model with an initial mass of 85 M with $`v_{\mathrm{ini}}=300`$ km s-1 typical of a star which has both a WN and WC phase. During the WN stage of the 85 M model, until the actual mass of the star reaches a value near 23 M, the angular velocity decreases by a factor of $`5`$, correspondingly the period $`P=2\pi /\mathrm{\Omega }`$ grows by the same factor and the rotation velocity $`v=\mathrm{\Omega }R_\mathrm{e}`$ decreases much more since the equatorial radius $`R_\mathrm{e}`$ also decreases during this phase (by a factor of $`2`$). The fraction $`\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{c}}\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }R_\mathrm{e}^{\frac{3}{2}}}{(GM)^{\frac{1}{2}}}`$ also decreases very much, because the sensitivity to the decrease of the radius is larger than that to the mass (which decreases by a factor of $`2.7`$).

We adopt here the definition of the WN phases given by Foellmi et al. (Fo03 (2003)), putting a prefix “e” when the class is assigned by composition properties of the evolutionary models. Thus, eWNE means WN stars without hydrogen, while eWNL means WN stars with hydrogen, (see also Sect 5 below). When the H–content goes to zero (i.e. just before the star enters the eWNE stage), we see a dramatic increase of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ (or decrease of $`P`$), due to the strong contraction of the surface layer because the opacity of the surface layers becomes much smaller. This transition is fast, thus the transfer of angular momentum by meridional circulation is limited and the evolution of the rotation at the surface is dominated by the local conservation of angular momentum, which explains the rapid and large increase of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. However, we see that despite the strong decrease of $`P`$, the velocity $`v`$ and the ratio $`\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{c}}`$ do not change very much, since the radius is much smaller in the eWNE stage. When the star becomes a WC star with an actual mass of $``$ 17.3 M, there is very little change in the velocity, since rotation is already very low and the radius no longer decreases significantly.

Fig. 3 (right) shows the same for a star of 25 M with $`v_{\mathrm{ini}}=300`$ km s-1, which does not enter the eWNE and WC stages. We see that $`P`$ decreases (or $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ increases) during the WN stage. This is because the star model moves from $`\mathrm{log}T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ 4.29 to 4.70. The decrease of the radius makes the star rotate faster, slightly overwhelming the mass loss effects from 13.65 to 11.33 M. The increase of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and the decrease of $`R`$ nearly compensate for each other so that $`v`$ does not vary much during most of the WN phase, except at the very end. There the increase of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is more rapid than the decrease of the radius and an increase in the velocity is obtained. The reason for this behaviour is that in this model the stellar winds uncovers the layers, where the $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$–gradient is steep, and we start seeing layers which were deep inside and rotating rapidly.

Globally, we note that the rotational velocities of WR stars are modest in the 2 cases examined above, despite the very different masses and evolution stages. This is firstly the result of the strong mass loss necessary to produce the WR stars and also of the mass loss during the WR stages. We note however that, for a given initial velocity, the velocities obtained at the end of the He–burning phase for the WR stars decrease when the initial mass increases (see Table 1). This results from the simple fact that the higher the initial mass, the larger the quantity of mass (and thus of angular momentum) removed by the stellar winds.

Figs. 4 shows the evolution of rotation properties for a 60 M model with $`v_{\mathrm{ini}}=300`$ km s-1 (left) and with $`v_{\mathrm{ini}}=500`$ km s-1 (right). On the whole, these two cases are not very different from the case of the 85 M model shown above. In Fig. 4 (left), we firstly see an increase of $`P`$ and a corresponding decrease of $`v`$ and of $`\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{c}}`$; this decrease of the rotation is due, as before, to the high mass loss rates. Then, when the actual mass is about 38 M, $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ increases again due a decrease of the stellar radius as the star is moving to the left in the HR diagram (Fig. 7). The velocity $`v`$ does not change very much since the stellar radius is decreasing. When the actual mass of the star approaches 30 M, at an age of $`4.30710^6`$ yr, $`X_\mathrm{s}=0.10`$ and the outer stellar layers become more transparent, so that the star brightens rapidly above $`\mathrm{log}L/\mathrm{L}_{}=6.0`$ for a short time until an age of $`4.3310^6`$ yr. The corresponding variations in radius produce a sharp oscillation in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and velocity. Then at an age of $`4.3810^6`$ yr. until $`4.4410^6`$ yr., the star becomes an He–star (eWNE stage). The angular velocity remains nearly constant (cf. the evolution of the period) while the velocity and $`\mathrm{\Omega }/\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{c}`$ present some more variations linked to changes in the radius. Then, the star enters the WC stage, the mass loss rates are so large that despite the decrease of the radius, the rotation remains small. As was the case before, the presence of steep gradients of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ at the surface, may result in some cases in an increase of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ when the star is peeled off by the stellar winds.

The case of 60 M with $`v_{\mathrm{ini}}=500`$ km s-1 (right) contains features similar to the previous cases. The beginning of the curve, with the first bump of $`P`$, behaves like the case of $`v_{\mathrm{ini}}=300`$ km s-1 of 60 M. After the dip of $`P`$ at an age of $`4.0810^6`$ yr (actual mass of $``$ 37 M), the further evolution of $`P`$ is like the case of an 85 M star, marked by a large decrease of the angular velocity $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. Later, when the star becomes an He–star at an age $`4.5010^6`$ yr (actual mass $``$ 24 M), we see a sharp increase in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, in the velocity and in the ratio $`\mathrm{\Omega }/\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{c}`$. During the WC phase, the velocity remains between 30 and 40 km s-1, surprisingly, this is a factor $``$ 2 below the velocity reached during this phase by the 300 km s-1 stellar model. The lower value obtained for the initially faster rotating star results from the greater quantity of mass and thus of angular momentum lost during the previous evolutionary stages.

The main conclusion of this Section is that *the predicted surface rotation velocities of WR stars are relatively low, of the order of 50 km s-1*. Also, in the stellar interiors, rotation is modest with ratios $`\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{c}}{\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{s}}`$ of the angular velocity at the center to that at the surface which are only of the order of a few unities. This is the result of the very strong mass loss peeled off the star to make it a WR star. It is to be examined whether the further evolution and strong central contraction to the pre–supernova stage is able to accelerate enough to account for the observed rotation periods of pulsars and maybe also, for rotations fast enough, for enabling the collapsar model to work (Woosley Woo03 (2003)). A word of caution is necessary, since there are many paths leading to WR stars and we cannot exclude that some, possibly rare paths, may lead to WR stars with very high rotation.

## 4 Evolutionary tracks, masses and lifetimes

Fig. 5 presents the tracks for non–rotating and rotating evolutionary models for the whole mass range considered. As a result of the change of the opacities (slightly enhanced) and of the initial abundances ($`Y`$ = 0.275, instead of 0.30), the non–rotating tracks are shifted to lower effective temperatures with respect to paper V. The tracks also extend towards lower effective temperatures during the MS phase. This is a well known consequence of overshooting. Overshooting and core extension by rotation are also generally responsible for shorter extensions of the blue loops in the He–burning phase. This is what we observe in Fig. 5: the extension of the blue loops is further reduced by rotation in the case of the 9 M model, and the blue loops are even suppressed in the rotating model of 12 M.

The present non–rotating 12 M, with overshooting, presents a blue loop, while the non–rotating model of paper V, without overshooting, shows no blue loop. This is at first sight surprising because, as said above, more massive He–cores tend to reduce the extension of the blue loops, if not suppressing them (Lauterborn et al. la71 (1971); see also the discussion in Maeder & Meynet ma89 (1989)). As explained in paper V, this particular situation, at the limit where the loops generally disappear, results from the higher luminosity of the model having the more massive He–cores (either as a result of overshooting or as a result of rotation). The higher luminosity implies that the outer envelope is more extended, and is thus characterized by lower temperatures and higher opacities at a given mass coordinate. As a consequence, in the model with higher luminosity, during the first dredge–up, the outer convective zone proceeds much more deeply in mass, preventing the He–core to grow too much during the further evolutionary phases and enabling the apparition of a blue loop.

The effects of rotation on the tracks have already been discussed in previous works (Heger he98 (1998); Meynet & Maeder MMV (2000)), thus we shall be very brief here. Let us just list the main effects:

* On and near the ZAMS, the atmospheric effects of rotation produce a small shift of the tracks towards lower $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$. The effective temperature considered here is an appropriate averaged $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ over the stellar surface (see Meynet & Maeder MMI (1997)).
* Tracks with rotation become more luminous than for no rotation.
* For stars with initial masses inferior to $``$ 30 M, the MS bandwidth is enlarged by rotation. This is a consequence of the larger He–core produced during the H–burning phase in rotating models. As a numerical example, in the 20 M model with $`v_{\mathrm{ini}}`$ = 300 km s-1, the He–core at the end of the MS is about 38% more massive than in its non–rotating counterpart. In the models of paper V the enhancement due to rotation was only 20%. Likely most of the difference results from the inclusion here of a small overshooting. In the present models, the core enhancement due to rotation adds its effects to an already more extended core, having a higher central temperature, and thus this larger core reacts more strongly to further supplies of fuel by rotational diffusion.
* For initial masses superior to about 50 M, the rotating tracks show drastically reduced MS bandwidths. This was already the case in Meynet & Maeder (MMV (2000)). For instance, the reddest point reached at the end of the MS phase by the 60 M non–rotating stellar model is log $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ 4.15 , while for the $`v_{\mathrm{ini}}`$ = 300 km s-1 model, it is $``$ 4.6 , due to the fact that the surface He–enhancement leads to a bluer track, as a consequence of the reduced opacity. In this mass range, the rotating stellar models enter into the WR phase during the H–burning phase (see Sect. 5). The MS phase, identified here with the OV–type star phase, is thus considerably reduced. Since the stars, here as in any mass range, have different initial rotational velocities, one expects to find in the HR diagram stars corresponding to a variety of tracks with various initial velocities. Particularly, in the upper hot part of the HR diagram, for log $`L/L_{}`$ superior to about 5.8–5.9 and log $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ between 4.7 and 4.2, one may find in the same area of the HR diagram stars in very different evolutionary stages, which may also correspond to different types of massive stars: MS O–type stars, Of stars, transition stars, blue supergiants and WR stars.

For higher rotation velocities, the actual masses at the end of both the H– and He–burning phases become smaller (cf. Tables 1). For an initial velocity of 300 km s-1 and for stars with masses below $``$ 60 M, the actual masses at the end of the core H–burning phase are decreased by less than 11% with respect to the non–rotating models. For higher initial mass models, the decreases are much more important, because these stars enter the WR phase already at an early stage during the H–burning phase (see Sect. 5).

The evolutionary masses of a star can be determined by searching the mass of the evolutionary track passing through its observed position in the HR diagram. As can be seen from Fig. 5, the mass determined from the non–rotating evolutionary track is always greater than the one deduced from rotating models. Thus the use of non rotating tracks tends to overestimate the mass, and this might be a cause of a large part of the long–standing mass discrepancy problem (see e.g. Herrero et al. He20 (2000)).

Fig. 6 shows the final masses obtained for different initial masses and velocities. One notes that the new mass loss rates used in the present computations are smaller than those used in the stellar grids of Schaller et al. (Sch92 (1992)). For stars with initial masses above 40 M, rotating models produce final masses between 11.3 and 14.7. For comparison, non–rotating models end with final masses between 14.1–17.3 M. Interestingly, the average mass of WC stars, estimated on the basis of the 6 WC stars belonging to double–line spectroscopic binaries, is 12 $`\pm `$ 3 M (van der Hucht Hu01 (2001)), nearer to the rotating model results than the non–rotating ones. However we cannot discard the possibility that for these stars mass transfer in a Roche lobe overflow may have occurred, in which case this observation cannot be used to constrain single star models. The fact that the models with and without rotation near 50 M lead to about the same final masses, despite the increased mass loss rates for rotating models, is due to the differences in the evolutionary stages followed by each model (see Sect. 5).

Table 1 presents some properties of the models. Columns 1 and 2 give the initial mass and the initial velocity $`v_{\mathrm{ini}}`$ respectively. The mean equatorial velocity $`\overline{v}`$ during the MS phase is indicated in column 3. This quantity is defined as in paper V. The H–burning lifetimes $`t_H`$, the lifetimes $`t_\mathrm{O}`$ as an O–type star on the MS (we assumed that O–type stars have an effective temperature superior to about 31 500 K as suggested by the new effective temperature scale given by Martins et al. Mart02 (2002)), the masses M, the equatorial velocities $`v`$, the helium surface abundance $`Y_s`$ and the surface ratios (in mass) N/C and N/O at the end of the H–burning phase are given in columns 4 to 10. The columns 11 to 16 present some characteristics of the stellar models at the end of the He–burning phase, $`t_{He}`$ is the He–burning lifetime. The letter I attached to the value of the initial velocity (column 2) indicates that the model was calculated assuming isotropic stellar winds. These models were calculated until the end of the MS phase, except in the case of the 60 M model for which the evolution was pursued until the end of the core He–burning phase.

From Table 1 one sees that for $`Z=0.020`$ the lifetimes are increased by about 15–25% when the initial rotational velocity on the MS increases from 0 to 300 km s-1. Similar increases were found in paper V. The lifetimes of O–type stars are increased by similar amounts. As we shall see below, the increase due to rotation of the WR lifetimes is much greater and thus rotation predicts larger number ratios of WR to O–type stars than non–rotating stellar models.

Except for the models with initial masses superior to 85 M, the He–burning lifetimes are decreased by rotation. Thus the ratio of the He–burning lifetimes to the H–burning lifetimes are in general decreased by rotation. Typically for the 20 M model, this ratio passes from 0.11 to 0.08 when the initial velocity considered increases from 0 to 300 km s-1. The particular behaviour of the extremely massive stars results from the lower luminosities in the WC stage, which favour longer He–lifetimes.

The anisotropy of the wind induced by rotation has little impact when the initial velocity is equal or inferior to 300 km s-1. This can be seen by comparing the data presented in Table 1 for the two 60 M models with $`\upsilon _{\mathrm{ini}}`$ = 300 km s-1 computed with and without the account of the anisotropy. They are indeed very similar. On the other hand, as has been shown by Maeder (Ma02 (2002)), for higher initial velocities, in the mass range between 20 and 60 M, the anisotropies of the mass loss may significantly influence the evolution of the stellar velocities and may lead many stars to break–up.

## 5 Rotation and the properties of Wolf–Rayet stars

Here we consider the following question: what are the effects of rotation on the evolution of massive single stars into the Wolf–Rayet phase ? This subject has been discussed by Maeder (Maeder87 (1987)), Fliegner and Langer (Fl95 (1995)), Maeder & Meynet (2000b ) and Meynet (Me00 (2000)). We present here for the first time an extensive grid of models, accounting for the effects of the wind anisotropy, going through the WR phase. It is important to cover the whole mass range of star progenitors of WR stars in order to quantitatively assess the importance of rotation in the interpretation of the WR number statistics (see Sect. 6 below).

Let us reconsider the criteria which have been chosen to decide when a stellar model enters into the WR phase. Ideally, of course, the physics of the models should decide when the star is a WR star. However our poor knowledge of the atmospheric physics involved, as well as the complexity of models coupling stellar interiors to the winds, are such that this approach is not yet possible. Instead, it is necessary to adopt some empirical criteria for deciding when a star enters the WR phase. In this work the criteria are the following: the star is considered to be a WR star when $`\mathrm{log}T_{\mathrm{eff}}>4.0`$ and the mass fraction of hydrogen at the surface is $`X_\mathrm{s}<0.4`$. Reasonable changes to these values (for instance adopting $`X_\mathrm{s}<0.3`$ instead of 0.4) do not affect the results significantly.

The correspondence between the WR–subclasses and the surface abundances is established as follows: the stars enter the WR phase as WN stars i.e. as stars presenting strong He and N enrichments at their surface and strong depletion in carbon and oxygen as expected from CNO processed material. We call eWNL stars all the WN stars showing hydrogen at their surface (“e” stands for evolutionary, as recommended by Foellmi et al. Fo03 (2003)). The eWNE stars, on the other hand, are WN stars showing no hydrogen at their surface. The transitional WN/WC phase is characterized by the simultaneous presence at the surface of both H– and He–burning products (typically N and C or Ne). Here we suppose that this transition phase begins when the mass fraction of carbon at the surface becomes superior to 10% of the mass fraction of nitrogen. The phase is supposed to end when the mass fraction of nitrogen at the surface becomes inferior to 10% of the mass fraction of carbon. The WC phase corresponds to the stage where He–burning products appear at the surface. This phase begins when the transition WN/WC phase ends.

Figure 7 shows the evolutionary tracks and the evolution of the structure in a non–rotating and a rotating 60 M model. The rotating model has a time–averaged equatorial velocity on the Main Sequence (MS) of about 190 km s-1, not far from the mean equatorial velocity observed for O–type stars. Inspection of Fig. 7 shows the following features:

* The non–rotating 60 M star goes through an intermediate Luminous Blue Variable (LBV) phase before becoming a WR star, while the rotating model skips the LBV phase and goes directly from the O–type star phase into the WR phase. One also notes that during the O–type star phase, the rotating track is bluer than its non–rotating counterpart. This is due to the diffusion of helium into the outer radiative zone (see Heger & Langer He00 (2000); Meynet & Maeder MMV (2000)). This fact may slightly change the number of O–type stars deduced from the number of ionizing photons, a technique used to estimate the number of O–type stars from the spectral analysis of the integrated light of distant starburst regions (e.g. Schaerer Sc96 (1996)).
* There is no luminosity difference during the WC phase between the rotating and the non–rotating models. Since these stars follow a mass–luminosity relation (Maeder Maeder87 (1987); Schaerer & Maeder Sc92 (1992)), this implies that the masses of these two stars at this stage are about equal (see Fig. 6). At first sight this may be surprising. One would expect the rotating star to lose more mass than its non–rotating counterpart. However, in this particular case there are some compensating effects. Indeed, the non–rotating model enters into the WR phase later, but becomes redder during the MS phase and then becomes a LBV star. During these two last phases, the star undergoes strong mass loss (see the left panels of Fig. 7). The rotating model, on the other hand, enters the WR phase at an earlier stage, reaching at the end an identical mass to the non–rotating model. In general, however, the final masses obtained from the rotating models are smaller than those obtained from the non–rotating ones (see Fig. 6), leading to lower luminosities during the WC phase (see Fig. 8).
* From the lower panels of Fig. 7, we see that the non–rotating star enters the WR phase at the beginning of the core He–burning phase with a mass of about 27 M. Nearly the whole H–rich envelope has been removed by stellar winds during the previous phases (more precisely at the end of the MS phase and during the LBV phase). In this case, the main mechanism for making a WR star is mass loss by stellar winds. For the rotating model, on the other hand, the entry into the WR phase occurs at an earlier stage (although not at a younger age!), while the star is still burning hydrogen in its core. The mass of the star at this stage is about 45 M and a large H–rich envelope is still surrounding the convective core. The main effect making a WR star in this second case is rotationally induced mixing (Maeder Maeder87 (1987); Fliegner & Langer Fl95 (1995); Meynet Me00 (2000)).

In Fig. 8, the evolutionary tracks for a non–rotating and a rotating 120 M stellar model are shown. The beginning and the end of the various WR subphases are indicated along the tracks. The range of luminosities spanned by the rotating eWNL stars is considerably increased. This directly results from the point underlined just above, i.e. a rotating star enters the WR phase still with a large H–rich envelope. This considerably increases the duration of the eWNL phase and the star will cover during this stage a greater range of masses and luminosities. The rotating models also enter the further WR subclasses with smaller actual masses and lower luminosities. From Fig. 8, one sees that the rotating eWNE, WN/WC and WC stars have luminosities decreased by about a factor of two.

The differences between the behaviours of the rotating and non–rotating models have important consequences for the duration of the WR phase as a whole and for the lifetimes spent in the different WR subtypes, as can be appreciated from Figs. 9 and 10.

* Firstly, one notes that the WR lifetimes are enhanced. Typically for the 60 M model, the enhancement by rotation amounts to nearly a factor of 2.
* Second, the eWNL phase is considerably lengthened as explained just above. The duration of this phase increases with the initial velocity as can be seen from Fig. 11. When the initial velocity passes from 300 to 500 km s-1 (or when the time–averaged equatorial velocity during the O–type phase goes from 190 to 330 km s-1), the eWNL phase duration is increased by a factor of about 1.7. The durations of the eWNE and WC phases are, on the other hand, much less affected.
* Thirdly, in the rotating stellar model a new phase of modest, but of non–negligible duration, appears: the so–called transitional WN/WC phase. This phase is characterized by the simultaneous presence at the surface of both H– and He–burning products. The reason for this is the shallower chemical gradients that build up inside the rotating models. These shallower gradients inside the stars also produce a smoother evolution of the surface abundances as a function of time (or as a function of the remaining mass, see Figs. 16 and 18). For a transitional WN/WC phase to occur, it is necessary to have—for a sufficiently long period—both a He–burning core and a CNO–enriched envelope. In the highest mass stars, mass loss removes too rapidly the CNO–enriched envelope to allow a transitional WN/WC phase to appear. In the low mass range, the time spent in the WR phase is too short and the H–rich envelope too extended to allow He–burning products to diffuse up to the surface. Consequently, the transitional WN/WC phase only appears in the mass range between $``$ 30 and 60 M for $`v_{\mathrm{ini}}=300`$ km s-1.
* Finally, the minimum mass for a star to become a WR star (through the single star channel) is lowered by rotation. In the present case, the minimum mass is reduced from about 37 M for $`v_{\mathrm{ini}}=0`$ km s-1 to about 22 M for $`v_{\mathrm{ini}}=300`$ km s-1.

Of course, this applies to solar metallicity. At very different $`Z`$, the effects of rotation on the various subphases may be different. It is interesting to compare the present WR–lifetimes with those we obtained with our previous non–rotating stellar models (Meynet et al. Mey94 (1994); Maeder and Meynet MaeMey94 (1994)). This is done in Fig. 12. We see that the present non–rotating models follow more or less the behaviour we obtained with our normal mass loss rate models of 1994, although, due to smaller mass loss rates in the present grid, the WR lifetimes are in general reduced and the minimum mass for WR star formation from single stars is enhanced. Our rotating models, on the other hand, reproduce qualitatively the changes brought by an enhancement of the mass loss rates: an increase of the WR lifetimes and a decrease of the minimum mass for a single star to go through a WR phase.

From the above considerations, one can conclude that, compared to non–rotating models, stellar models including rotation will predict higher values of: (a) the numbers of WR stars relative to O–type stars, (b) the relative number of WN to WC stars, and (c) the relative number of transition WN/WC stars to WR stars. As shown in the next Section, the predictions of the rotating models are in better agreement with the observed number ratios at solar metallicity.

## 6 Comparison with the observed properties of Wolf–Rayet star populations

Following Maeder (Maeder91 (1991)) and Maeder & Meynet (MaeMey94 (1994)), one can easily estimate the theoretical number ratio of WR to O–type stars in a region of constant star formation. This ratio is simply given by the ratios of the mean lifetime of a WR star to that of an OV–type star. The averages are computed using an initial mass function as the weighting factor over the respective mass intervals considered. Assuming a Salpeter Initial Mass Function slope of 1.35, considering the O–type and WR star lifetimes given in tables 1 and 2, we obtain the predicted ratios given at the bottom of this last table.

Comparisons with observed number ratios are shown in Figs. 13 and 14. Obviously, unless most of the WR stars at solar metallicity are formed through Roche lobe overflow in a close binary system, which seems quite unrealistic (see the discussion in Maeder Maeder96 (1996); see also Foellmi et al. Fo03 (2003)), models with rotation are in much better agreement with observations. Of course a more refined estimate of the effects of rotation will require account of the initial distribution of the rotational velocities. However, since the initial velocity chosen here corresponds to a mean rotational velocity on the Main Sequence almost equal to the observed mean, we can hope that the present result is not too far from what one would obtain with a more complete analysis. The conclusion is that at solar metallicity, rotating models are in much better agreement with the observed statistics of WR stars than the non–rotating models. Interestingly a similar conclusion could be reached based on the results of our paper V, and this shows that the present results depend weakly on overshooting or on the inclusion of the effects of horizontal turbulence in the coefficient of shear diffusion.

In Fig. 14, the predicted values for the WC/WN number ratios are compared with observations. One sees that the WC/WN ratio increases with the metallicity along a relatively well defined relation. The observed point for the solar neighborhood is however well above the general trend. According to Massey (Mas03 (2003)) this may result from an underestimate of the number of WN stars.

Comparing with the theoretical predictions at solar metallicity, one obtains that the non–rotating models predict too few WN stars, while the rotating models give a value in the observed trend. This confirms the conclusion already reached above on the basis of the WR/O number ratio: rotating models much better account for the characteristics of the WR populations than non–rotating models.

There are 10 WN/WC stars listed in the VIIth catalogue of galactic WR stars of van der Hucht (Hu01 (2001)). Compared to the total number of known galactic WR stars (226) this represents a fraction of 4.4%. The present models predict for this fraction a value equal to 4% in good agreement with the observed ratio. We recall that models without mild mixing processes in radiative zones are unable to predict correctly the number of transition WN/WC stars. This was first shown by Langer (La91 (1991)).

In future work, it has to be checked by further computations at different metallicities that the rotating models, with reduced mass loss rates due to clumping, will account for the observed variation of the number ratios WR/O and WC/WN with metallicity.

## 7 Surface abundances in WR stars

We have already presented and discussed the effects of rotation on the surface abundance of massive stars at solar composition (Meynet & Maeder MMV (2000)). The main point is the enhancement of He and N during the MS phase due to the internal transport by shear mixing. However, we note that the enhancements in He and CNO products found here are in general smaller that those found in Meynet & Maeder (MMV (2000)). The situation is illustrated in Fig. 15 which compares the evolution of the N/C ratios for models with masses between 9 and 40 M of the above quoted paper and of the present work. We see that a difference in the enhancement of N/C is created during MS evolution and that the present ratios are smaller on average by a factor of about 1.5 for masses below 25 M. This is due to the fact that in the present models we are accounting for the effects of the horizontal turbulence on the shear mixing according to the study by Talon & Zahn (TaZa97 (1997)). The horizontal diffusion substantially reduces the effects of the shear mixing. In the higher mass range, the difference between the two sets of models is smaller, as can be seen by comparing the two 40 M tracks in Fig. 15. In this domain of masses, the large effects of mass loss by stellar winds are added to those of rotational mixing. Close comparisons with observations will be undertaken on the basis of these two sets of models to see whether the treatment by Talon & Zahn leads to a better agreement or not. However, the problem is intricate both observationally, because the scatter of the observations is large, and also theoretically because other effects may enter into the game, such as magnetic fields (Spruit spruit02 (2002)) or a higher horizontal turbulence. Let us also recall that the enhancements in He and N are much larger at lower metallicities $`Z`$ (Maeder & Meynet MMVII (2001)), because stars with lower $`Z`$ have in general steeper $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$–gradients, which favour internal mixing.

Fig. 16 shows the evolution of the surface abundances in a rotating and a non–rotating model with initial masses of 60 M. The progressive changes of the abundances of CNO elements between the initial cosmic values and the values of the nuclear equilibrium of the CNO cycle are much smoother for the rotating model than for the case without rotation. This is due to the internal mixing which makes flatter internal chemical gradients for rotating models. The rotational mixing also makes the change of abundances to occur much earlier in the peeling–off process. This is also true for the changes of H and He. Another significant difference for the 60 M model with rotation is the absence of an LBV phase as shown in Sect. 5. Without rotation, most of the change of CNO abundances occurs in the LBV phase, while in the case with rotation, the transition from cosmic to CNO equilibrium abundances occurs partly during the MS phase and partly during the eWNL phase which immediately follows it. We note that the nuclear equilibrium CNO values are essentially model independent as already stressed a long time ago (Smith & Maeder SmithM91 (1991)). This is true whether H is still present or not.

We see that at the end of the assumed eWNE phase, the transition to the WC abundances is very sharp in the absence of rotational mixing. This is because there is a strong chemical discontinuity in the classical models due to the fact that the convective core is usually growing during some part of the He–burning phase (Maeder Maeder83 (1983)). In the rotating case, the transitions are smoother, so that there are some stars observed with abundances in the transition regime, with simultaneously some 12C and some 14N present. As stated above, these correspond to the so–called WN/WC stars (Conti & Massey Co89 (1989); Crowther et al. Cr95 (1995)). These transition stars are likely to also have some 22Ne excess. Since the attribution of spectral types is a complex matter, it may even be that some of the stars in the transition stage are given a spectral type eWNE or WC, thus we might well have a situation where a WN star would have some 22Ne excess or a WC star would still have some 14N present.

Fig. 17 compares the predicted relation between the C/N and C/He ratios with some recent observations by Crowther et al. (Cr95 (1995)). During the eWNL phase, C/He and C/N decreases, but remain around the CNO equilibrium value equal to 0.015. Then during the transitional WN/WC phase, there is a huge increase of carbon, while nitrogen and helium remain constant. This is the reason why the lower part of the curve shows that when C/N changes by a factor $`10^3`$, C/He changes by the same amount. Then, when the star evolves towards the WC stage, C/He changes only slowly, while C/N grows very rapidly, since N quickly disappears. The comparison with the observations by Crowther et al. (Cr95 (1995)) shows a good agreement. However this agreement may be somewhat misleading here, in the sense that a 60 M non–rotating model would follow a similar track in the C/N versus C/He plane. The good correspondence here is not a real constraint on the models. What is more constraining is the expected number of stars in the transitional WN/WC phase. As seen in Sect. 5, the rotating models in this respect are much better than the non–rotating ones.

In the WC stage, the abundances of chemical elements are very much model dependent as was first shown by Smith & Maeder (SmithM91 (1991)). This is because in the WC stars, we see the products of partial He-burning. At the entry in the WC phase, the 12C and 16O abundances are lower, and that of He is higher in the models with rotation, due to their smooth chemical gradients. Also, the fraction of the WC phase spent with lower C/He and O/He ratios is longer in models with rotation. However, rotation does not affect the high 22Ne abundance during the WC phase. This is a consequence of the fact that most of this 22Ne results from the transformation of the 14N produced by the CNO cycle in the previous H–burning core. The value of the 14N and therefore that of the 22Ne is fixed by the characteristics of the CNO at equilibrium, which in turn depends on the nuclear physics and not on the pecularities of the stellar models. It is interesting to mention here that the high overabundance of 22Ne at the surface of the WC star predicted by the models is confirmed by the observations (Willis Wi99 (1999); Dessart et al. De00 (2000)). In the core, the abundance of 22Ne will stay at this equilibrium value until eventually it is turned into 25,26Mg with production of neutrons (through 22Ne($`\alpha `$,n)25Mg) and of s–elements.

Fig. 18 shows the same for models of 40 M with and without rotation. The enhancements of He and N only appear in the blue and yellow supergiant stage in the case without rotation, while they occur during the MS and blue supergiant phase when rotation is included; also in this case the changes are more progressive. The non–rotating model has almost no WNL phase and does not enter the WC stage. The model with rotation is very different, it has an extended WNL phase and then a remarkably large transition phase, where 14N is present with a significant abundance, while 12C, 16O and 22Ne are also there. Most of this transition phase is likely spent in the transition WN/WC phase, but probably not the whole, so that some peculiar WN stars with products of He–burning are possible. Also some WC stars with an unusual occurrence of 14N are very likely. Globally, we see that the transition phase where both characteristics of H– and He–burning phases are present is longer for stars of lower masses (see Sect. 5).

Fig. 19 shows an interesting diagram for the study of so–called “slash stars” of type Ofpe/WN, of the LBV and of the WN stars. It presents the evolution of the surface H–content as a function of the luminosity. The tracks go downwards in this diagram; first there is an initial brightening due to MS evolution, then the luminosity is about constant, except for $`X_\mathrm{s}0.20`$ if the mass loss is very high. Thus for stars above or equal to 25 M, this diagram is sensitive to both mass loss and mixing. Since WN subtypes are sensitive to the optical thickness of the winds, while $`X_\mathrm{s}`$ is sensitive to both mixing and mass loss, one should try to define the domains of this diagram where ”slash stars”, LBV, WN late and WN early are each located on average. Ideally this should also be attempted for stars in different galaxies. For masses below 25 M, this diagram indicates up to which stage mixing is proceeding for stars of different luminosities, which is also a useful indication.

The evolution of the (C+O)/He ratio as a function of luminosity is shown in Fig. 20, which is the key diagram for WC stars as shown by Smith & Maeder (SmithM91 (1991)). The evolution for a given mass is upwards, the luminosity decreases as the stellar masses decreases. At the same time, as a result of mass loss and mixing, the (C+O)/He ratio goes up, since there are more and more products of He–burning at the stellar surface. *Rotation drastically modifies the tracks of WC stars in this diagram, as well as the lifetimes*. The tracks of the models of 85 and 120 M are shifted to lower luminosities by rotation. As there is a tight mass–luminosity relation for He, C, O stars (Maeder Maeder83 (1983)), this is the result of the smaller mass at the entrance of the WC phase for models with rotation. The smaller mass is due mainly to the much longer WN phase of rotating models. (As a minor remark, we see that the (C+O)/He ratio goes slightly higher in models without rotation, this is due to the fact that the He– and C–burning proceeds a bit farther in non rotating models that have a higher mass). For the models of 60 M, there is a small difference at the beginning of the WC phase and this difference quickly disappears. The 40 M models enter the WC phase only if rotation is significant. In a previous work (Smith & Maeder SmithM91 (1991)), we have shown that metallicity $`Z`$ strongly shifts the tracks in this diagram. Thus, we now see that rotation is also producing great shifts. The location of WC stars of different subtypes and composition should be attempted; it would be particularly worth considering WC stars of galaxies of different $`Z`$.

## 8 Conclusion

The good agreement obtained here between the observed WR star populations and the predictions of the rotating stellar models reinforces the general conclusion, already obtained in previous works, namely that rotation is a key physical ingredient of massive star evolution. Population synthesis for galaxies and starbursts should also be based on stellar models with rotation. The same is true for nucleosynthetic models.

Rotation, in addition to making the models more realistic, opens new ways to explore very interesting questions. Among them let we cite the possible relations between rotation and the ring nebulae observed around some WR stars, the relation between rotation and the LBV phenomenon, the rotation of pulsars and the link to $`\gamma `$–ray bursts.


text:
# On the Colour Suppressed Decay Modes (𝐵⁰)̄→𝐷_𝑠⁺𝐷_𝑠⁻ and (𝐵_𝑠⁰)̄→𝐷⁺𝐷⁻

## I Introduction

There is presently great interest in decays of $`B`$-mesons, due to numerous experimental results coming from Ba Bar and Belle, and later at LHC.

It has been shown BBNS  that some classes of $`B`$-meson decay amplitudes exhibit QCD factorization. This means that, up to $`\alpha _s/\pi `$ (calculable) and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{QCD}/m_b`$ (not calculable), their amplitudes factorize into the product of two matrix elements of weak currents. Typically, the decay amplitudes which factorize in this sense are $`B\pi \pi `$ and $`BK\pi `$ where the energy release is big compared to the light meson masses. However, for various decays of the type $`\overline{B}D\overline{D}`$ where the energy release is of order 1 GeV, QCD factorization is not expected to hold. (Here $`\overline{B}`$, $`D`$, and $`\overline{D}`$ contain a heavy $`b`$, $`c`$, and anti-$`c`$ quark respectively). Such decay modes have been considered in connection with intermediate $`D\overline{D}`$ states for other $`B`$-decay modes PhaCo .

In a previous paper EFZ , it was pointed out that the decay mode $`D^0K^0\overline{K^0}`$ was zero in the factorized limit due to current conservation. However, there are in that case non-factorizable (colour suppressed) contributions in terms of chiral loops and soft gluon emission modelled by a gluon condensate.

In this paper we report on the following observation: The decay modes $`\overline{B^0}D_s^+D_s^{}`$ and $`\overline{B_s^0}D^+D^{}`$ have no factorized (colour non-suppressed) contributions. At quark level, these decays a priori proceed through the annihilation mechanism $`b\overline{s}c\overline{c}`$ and $`b\overline{d}c\overline{c}`$, respectively. However, within the factorized limit the annihilation mechanism will give a zero amplitude due to current conservation, as for $`D^0K^0\overline{K^0}`$. But there are non-zero factorized contributions through the axial part of the weak current if at least one of $`D`$-mesons in the final state is a vector meson $`D^{}`$. Such contributions are, however, proportional to the numerically non-favourable Wilson coefficient $`C_1`$, which we will neglect in this short paper. In contrast, the typical factorized decay modes which proceed through the spectator mechanism, say $`\overline{B^0}D^+D_s^{}`$, are proportional to the numerically favourable Wilson coefficient $`C_2`$. If the mesons in this amplitude are also allowed to be vector mesons, such amplitudes will generate non-factorizable ($`1/N_c`$) chiral loop contributions to the process $`\overline{B_d^0}D_s^+D_s^{}`$ due to $`K^0`$-exchange. These will be considered in the present paper.

There are also non-factorizable ($`1/N_c`$) contributions due to soft gluon emission. Such contributions can be calculated in terms of the (lowest dimension) gluon condensate within a recently developed Heavy Light Chiral Quark Model (HL$`\chi `$QM) ahjoe , which is based on Heavy Quark Effective Theory (HQEFT) neu . This model has been applied to processes with $`B`$-mesons in EHP ; ahjoeB . The gluon condensate contributions is also proportional to the favourable Wilson coefficient $`C_2`$.

In the next section (II), we shortly present the four quark Lagrangian at quark level. In section III we present our analysis of chiral loop contributions within the heavy light chiral perturbation theory. In section IV we give the calculation of non-factorizable matrix elements due to soft gluons expressed through the (model dependent) quark condensate. In section V we give the results and conclusion. Throughout the paper, we will give formulae and figures for the decay mode $`\overline{B^0}D_s^+D_s^{}`$. The treatment of $`\overline{B_s^0}D^+D^{}`$ will proceed analogously.

## II Effective non-leptonic Lagrangian at quark level

Based on the electroweak and quantum chromodynamical interactions, one constructs an effective Lagrangian at quark level in the standard way:

$$_W=\underset{i}{}C_i(\mu )Q_i(\mu ),$$
(1)
where all information of the short distance (SD) loop effects above a renormalization scale $`\mu `$ is contained in the (Wilson) coefficients $`C_i`$. In our case there are two relevant operators

$`Q_1=4(\overline{q}_L\gamma ^\alpha b_L)(\overline{c}_L\gamma _\alpha c_L),Q_2=4(\overline{c}_L\gamma ^\alpha b_L)(\overline{q}_L\gamma _\alpha c_L),`$ (2)
for $`q=d,s`$. Penguin operators may also contribute, but have small Wilson coefficients. We may write $`C_i=\frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}V_{cb}V_{cq}^{}a_i`$ , where $`a_110^1`$ and $`a_21`$ at the scale $`\mu =m_b`$. Performing perturbative QCD corrections within Heavy Quark Effective Theory (HQEFT) neu , the effective Lagrangian (1) can be evolved down to the scale $`\mu \mathrm{\Lambda }_\chi `$1 GeV GKMW ; Fleischer , where one finds $`|a_1|0.4`$ and $`|a_2|1.4`$. The $`b`$, $`c`$, and $`\overline{c}`$ quarks are then treated within HQEFT.

In order to study non-factorizable contributions at quark level, we may use the following relation between the generators of $`SU(3)_c`$ ($`i,j,l,n`$ are colour indices running from 1 to 3):

$$\delta _{ij}\delta _{ln}=\frac{1}{N_c}\delta _{in}\delta _{lj}+\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}t_{in}^at_{lj}^a,$$
(3)
where $`a`$ is the color octet index. Then the operators $`Q_{1,2}`$ may, by means of a Fierz transformation, be written in the following way :

$`Q_1={\displaystyle \frac{1}{N_c}}Q_2+2\stackrel{~}{Q_2},Q_2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{N_c}}Q_1+2\stackrel{~}{Q_1},`$ (4)
where the operators with the “tilde” contain colour matrices:

$`\stackrel{~}{Q_1}=4(\overline{q}_L\gamma ^\alpha t^ab_L)(\overline{c}_L\gamma _\alpha t^ac_L),\stackrel{~}{Q_2}=4(\overline{c}_L\gamma ^\alpha t^ab_L)(\overline{q}_L\gamma _\alpha t^ac_L).`$ (5)
To obtain a physical amplitude, one has to calculate the hadronic matrix elements of the quark operators $`Q_i`$ within some framework describing long distance (LD) effects.

As an example of a typical factorized case we choose the amplitude for $`\overline{B^0}D^+D_s^{}`$ obtained from (1) and (2):

$`D_s^{}D^+|_W|\overline{B^0}_F=(C_2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N_c}}C_1)D_s^{}|\overline{s}\gamma _\mu \gamma _5c|0D^+|\overline{c}\gamma _\mu b|\overline{B^0},`$ (6)
which will in section III be compared with our chiral loop contributions. This term is proportional to the $`D`$-meson decay constant times the Isgur-Wise function (for $`\overline{B}D`$ transition) and is vizualized in figure 1.

The factorized amplitude for $`\overline{B^0}D_s^+D_s^{}`$ obtained from (1) and (2) is vizualized in figure 2, and is given by

$`D_s^{}D_s^+|_W|\overline{B^0}_F=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}(C_1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N_c}}C_2)D_s^{}D_s^+|\overline{c_L}\gamma _\mu c_L|00|\overline{d_L}\gamma ^\mu b_L|\overline{B^0}.`$ (7)
Unless one or both of the $`D`$-mesons in the final state are vector mesons, this matrix element is zero due to current conservation:

$`D_s^+D_s^{}|\overline{c}\gamma _\mu c|00|\overline{d}\gamma ^\mu \gamma _5b|\overline{B^0}f_B(p_D+p_{\overline{D}})^\mu D_s^+D_s^{}|\overline{c}\gamma _\mu c|0=0.`$ (8)
The genuine non-factorizable part for $`\overline{B^0}D_s^+D_s^{}`$ can be written in terms of coulored currents (see eqs. (4) and (5)):

$`D_s^{}D_s^+|_W|\overline{B^0}_{NF}=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}8}C_2D_s^{}D_s^+|(\overline{q}_L\gamma ^\alpha t^ab_L)(\overline{c}_L\gamma _\alpha t^ac_L)|\overline{B^0}`$ (9)
We observe that the annihilation mechanism amplitude in the non-factorizable case has the numerically favourable Wilson coefficient $`C_2`$. This amplitude is, within the HL$`\chi `$QM vizualized later in figure 4 .

## III Heavy light chiral perturbation theory

Our calculations will be based on HQEFT neu , which is a systematic $`1/m_Q`$ expansion in the heavy quark mass $`m_Q`$. The heavy quark field $`Q(x)=b(x)`$ (eventually $`c(x)`$ or $`\overline{c}`$) is replaced with a “reduced” field $`Q_v^{(+)}(x)`$ for a heavy quark, and $`Q_v^{()}(x)`$ for a heavy antiquark. These are related to the full field $`Q(x)`$ in the following way:

$$Q_v^{(\pm )}(x)=P_\pm e^{im_Qvx}Q(x),$$
(10)
where $`P_\pm `$ are projecting operators $`P_\pm =(1\pm \gamma v)/2`$. The Lagrangian for heavy quarks is:

$$_{HQEFT}=\pm \overline{Q_v^{(\pm )}}ivDQ_v^{(\pm )}+𝒪(m_Q^1),$$
(11)
where $`D_\mu `$ is the covariant derivative containing the gluon field. In ahjoeB  the $`1/m_Q`$ corrections were calculated for $`B\overline{B}`$ -mixing. In this paper these will not be considered.

Integrating out the heavy and light quarks, the effective Lagrangian up to $`𝒪(m_Q^1)`$ can be written as itchpt ; ahjoe

$$=Tr\left[\overline{H_a^{(\pm )}}iv𝒟_{ba}H_b^{(\pm )}\right]g_𝒜Tr\left[\overline{H_a^{(\pm )}}H_b^{(\pm )}\gamma _\mu \gamma _5𝒜_{ba}^\mu \right],$$
(12)
where $`H_a^{(\pm )}`$ is the heavy meson field containing a spin zero and spin one boson:

$`H_a^{(\pm )}`$ $`P_\pm (P_{a\mu }^{(\pm )}\gamma ^\mu iP_{a5}^{(\pm )}\gamma _5).`$ (13)
The fields $`P_M^{(+)}(P_M^{()})`$ annihilates (creates) a heavy meson (vector for $`M=\mu `$ and pseudoscalar for $`M=5`$) containing a heavy quark (anti-quark) with velocity $`v`$. Furthermore, $`i𝒟_{ba}^\mu =i\delta _{ba}D^\mu 𝒱_{ba}^\mu `$, and $`a,b`$ are flavour indices. The vector and axial vector fields $`𝒱_\mu `$ and $`𝒜_\mu `$ contain the field $`\xi `$ (and its first derivative) which is a 3 by 3 matrix containing the (would be) Goldstone octet ($`\pi ,K,\eta `$) :

$$𝒱_\mu \frac{i}{2}(\xi ^{}_\mu \xi +\xi _\mu \xi ^{});𝒜_\mu \frac{i}{2}(\xi ^{}_\mu \xi \xi _\mu \xi ^{}),\xi expi(\mathrm{\Pi }/f)$$
(14)
where $`f`$ is the bare pion coupling, and $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ is a 3 by 3 matrix which contains the Goldstone bosons $`\pi ,K,\eta `$ in the standard way. The axial chiral coupling is $`g_𝒜0.6`$. Eqs. (12), (13), and (14) will be used for the chiral loop contributions.

The simplest way to calculate the matrix element of four quark operators like $`Q_{1,2}`$ in eq. (1) is by inserting vacuum states between the two currents, as indicated in section II. This vacuum insertion approach (VSA) corresponds to bosonizing the two currents in $`Q_{1,2}`$ separately and multiply them, i.e. the factorized case. Based on the symmetry of HQEFT, the bosonized current for decay of the $`b\overline{q}`$ system is itchpt ; ahjoe :

$$\overline{q_L}\gamma ^\mu Q_v^{(+)}\frac{\alpha _H}{2}Tr\left[\xi ^{}\gamma ^\alpha LH_b^{(+)}\right],$$
(15)
where $`Q_v^{(+)}`$ is a heavy $`b`$-quark field, $`v`$ is its velocity, and $`H_b^{(+)}`$ is the corresponding heavy meson field. This bosonization has to be compared with the matrix elements defining the meson decay constants $`f_H(H=B,D)`$ are the same when QCD corrections below $`m_Q`$ are neglected (see neu ; ahjoe ):

$$\alpha _H=\frac{f_H\sqrt{M_H}}{(C_v+C_\gamma )},$$
(16)
where $`C_{v,\gamma }`$ are Wilson coefficients due to perturbative QCD for scales $`\mu <m_Q`$ ($`Q=b,c`$ for $`H=B,D`$). We take $`\mu =\mathrm{\Lambda }_\chi `$, which is the scale where perturbative QCD are matched to our hadronic matrix elements.

For the $`W`$-boson materializing to a $`\overline{D}`$ we obtain the bosonized current

$$\overline{q_L}\gamma ^\mu Q_{\overline{v}}^{()}\frac{\alpha _H}{2}Tr\left[\xi ^{}\gamma ^\alpha LH_{\overline{c}}^{()}\right],$$
(17)
where $`\overline{v}`$ is the velocity of the heavy $`\overline{c}`$ quark and $`H_{\overline{c}}^{()}`$ is the corresponding field for the $`\overline{D}`$ meson.

For the $`bc`$ transition, we obtain the bosonized current

$$\overline{Q_v^{(+)}}\gamma ^\mu LQ_v^{}^{(+)}\zeta (\omega )Tr\left[\overline{H_c^{(+)}}\gamma ^\alpha LH_b^{(+)}\right],$$
(18)
where $`\zeta (\omega )`$ is the Isgur-Wise function for the $`\overline{B}D`$ \- transition, and $`v^{}`$ is the velocity of the heavy $`c`$-quark. Furthermore, $`\omega vv^{}=v\overline{v}=M_B/(2M_D)`$. Note also that from conservation of momentum we find the relation between the heavy quark velocities:

$`p_{\overline{B}}=p_D+p_{\overline{D}}v^\mu ={\displaystyle \frac{M_D}{M_B}}(v^{}+\overline{v})^\mu .`$ (19)
For the weak current for $`D\overline{D}`$ production (corresponding to the factorizable annihilation mechanism) we obtain

$$\overline{Q_v^{}^{(+)}}\gamma ^\mu LQ_{\overline{v}}^{()}\zeta (\lambda )Tr\left[\overline{H_c^{(+)}}\gamma ^\alpha LH_{\overline{c}}^{()}\right],$$
(20)
where $`\lambda =\overline{v}v^{}=[M_B^2/(2M_D^2)1]`$. The Isgur-Wise function $`\zeta (\lambda )`$ in (20) is a complex function, and not so well-known as for the $`bc`$ transition. In the factorized limit, the matrix elements of the four quark operators are obtained by multiplying the bosonized currents above.

In the following we will consider explicitely the decay mode $`\overline{B^0}D_s^+D_s^{}`$. The analysis of $`\overline{B_s^0}D^+D^{}`$ proceed the same way. To calculate the chiral loop amplitudes we need the (factorized) amplitudes for $`\overline{B_s^0}D_s^+D^{}`$ and $`\overline{B^0}D^+D^{}`$, which proceed through the spectator mechanism as in figure 1. The point is that the leading chiral coupling obtained from (12) is a coupling between a pseudoscalar meson $`H`$, vector meson $`H^{}`$ a light pseudoscalar $`M`$ ($`=\pi ,K,\eta `$).

Using the bosonized currents in eqs. (17) and (18), we obtain the following chiral loop amplitude for the process $`\overline{B^0}D_s^+D_s^{}`$ from the figure 3:

$`A(\overline{B^0}D_s^+D_s^{})_\chi =\left(V_{cd}^{}/V_{cs}^{}\right)A(\overline{B_d^0}D_d^+D_s^{})_FR^\chi ,`$ (21)
where the factorized amplitude for the process $`\overline{B^0}D^+D_s^{}`$ is

$`A(\overline{B^0}D^+D_s^{})_F={\displaystyle \frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}}V_{cb}V_{cs}^{}a_2\zeta (\omega )f_DM_D\sqrt{M_BM_D}(\lambda +\omega ).`$ (22)
The quantity $`R^\chi `$ is a sum of contributions $`R_{1,2}^\chi `$ from the left and right part of figure 3 respectively. In the $`\overline{MS}`$ scheme the results for $`R_{1,2}^\chi `$ are

$`R_1^\chi =`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{m_K^2}{2(4\pi f)^2}}g_{𝒜}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\left[\left\{2{\displaystyle \frac{(\omega +1)}{(\omega +\lambda )}}r(\omega )1\right\}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_K^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_\chi ^2}}\right)1\right],`$ (23)
$`R_2^\chi =`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{m_K^2}{2(4\pi f)^2}}g_{𝒜}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\left[\left\{2{\displaystyle \frac{(\omega +1)}{(\lambda +\omega )}}r(\lambda )1\right\}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_K^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_\chi ^2}}\right)1\right].`$ (24)
Adding these two contributions we find :

$`R^\chi =`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{m_K^2}{(4\pi f)^2}}g_{𝒜}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\left[\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{(\omega +1)}{(\omega +\lambda )}}[r(\omega )+r(\lambda )]1\right\}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_K^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_\chi ^2}}\right)1\right]`$ (25)
As usual, the $`1/N_c`$ suppression is due to $`f^2N_c`$. The function $`r(x)`$ is also appearing in loop calculations GKMW ; Fleischer  of the anomalous dimension in HQEFT (for $`x>1`$ and $`x<1`$ respectively):

$$r(x)\frac{1}{\sqrt{x^21}}\text{ln}(x+\sqrt{x^21}),r(x)=r(x)+\frac{i\pi }{\sqrt{x^21}},$$
(26)
which means that the amplitude gets an imaginary part. Numerically, we find

$`R^\chi \mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0.12}0.26i.`$ (27)
## IV Non-factorizable soft gluon emission

The genuine non-factorizable part (see eqs. (4), (5) and (9) ) can, within the framework presented in this section, be written in a quasi-factorized way in terms of matrix elements of coulored currents:

$`D_s^+D_s^{}|_W|\overline{B^0}_{NF}^G=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}8}C_2D_s^+D_s^{}|\overline{c}_L\gamma _\mu t^ac_L|GG|\overline{d}_L\gamma ^\mu t^ab_L|\overline{B^0},`$ (28)
where a $`G`$ in the bra-kets symbolizes emision of one gluon (from each current) as vizualized in figure 4.

We observe that the annihilation mechanism amplitude in the non-factorizable case has the numerically favourable Wilson coefficient $`C_2`$.

In order to calculate the matrix elements (28), we will use a model which incorporates emision of soft gluons modelled by a gluon condensate. This will be the Heavy Light Chiral Quark Model (HL$`\chi `$QM) recently developed in ahjoe . This model belongs to a class of models extensively studied in the literature chiqm ; barhi ; itCQM ; effr ; ebert3 ; bijnes . For details we refer to ref. ahjoe .

The Lagrangian for the HL$`\chi `$QM is

$$_{\text{HL}\chi \text{QM}}=_{\text{HQEFT}}+_{\chi \text{QM}}+_{\text{Int}}.$$
(29)
The first term is given in equation (11). The light quark sector is described by the Chiral Quark Model ($`\chi `$QM), having a standard QCD term and a term describing interactions between quarks and (Goldstone) mesons:

$$_{\chi \text{QM}}=\overline{\chi }\left[\gamma ^\mu (iD_\mu +𝒱_\mu +\gamma _5𝒜_\mu )m\right]\chi .$$
(30)
Here $`m`$ is the SU(3) invariant constituent light quark mass, and $`\chi `$ is the flavour rotated quark fields given by $`\chi _L=\xi ^{}q_L,\chi _R=\xi q_R`$, where $`q^T=(u,d,s)`$ are the light quark fields. The left- and right-handed projections $`q_L`$ and $`q_R`$ are transforming after $`SU(3)_L`$ and $`SU(3)_R`$ respectively. In (30) we have discarded terms involving the light current quark mass which is irrelevant in the present paper. The covariant derivative $`D_\mu `$ in (30) contains the soft gluon field forming the gluon condensates. The gluon condensate contributions are calculated by Feynman diagram techniques as in ahjoe ; EHP ; ahjoeB ; epb ; BEF . They may also be calculated by means of heat kernel techniques as in pider ; bijnes ; ebert3 .

The interaction between heavy meson fields and heavy quarks are described by the following Lagrangian ahjoe :

$$_{Int}=G_H\left[\overline{\chi }_a\overline{H_a^{(\pm )}}Q_v^{(\pm )}+\overline{Q_v^{(\pm )}}H_a^{(\pm )}\chi _a\right],$$
(31)
where $`G_H\sqrt{2m}/f`$ is a coupling constant. In ahjoe  it was shown how (12) could be obtained from the HL$`\chi `$QM. Performing this bosonization of the HL$`\chi `$QM, one encounters divergent loop integrals which will in general be quadratic-, linear- and logarithmic divergent ahjoe . Also, as in the light sector BEF  the quadratic and logarithmic integrals are related to the quark condensate and the gluon condensate respectively.

Within the model, one finds the following expression for the Isgur-Wise function ahjoe

$$\zeta (\omega )=\frac{2}{1+\omega }\left(1\rho \right)+\rho r(\omega ),$$
(32)
where $`\rho `$ is a hadronic parameter giving the deviation from the leading value ahjoe :

$$G_H^2=\frac{2m}{f^2}\rho ,\rho \frac{(1+3g_𝒜)+\frac{\mu _G^2}{\eta m^2}}{4(1+\frac{N_cm^2}{8\pi f^2})},\mu _G^2(H)=\frac{3}{2}m_Q(M_H^{}M_H),$$
(33)
where $`\eta =(1+2/\pi )`$. Numerically, the deviation of $`\rho `$ one is of order $`10\%`$. The simple expression in (32) is modified by perturbative QCD corrections down to $`\mu =\mathrm{\Lambda }_\chi `$ (analogous to eq. (16)) and chiral loop corrections. Our model dependent expression $`\zeta (\omega )`$ in (32) give a good description of the Isgur-Wise function.

The left part in figure 2 with gluon emision gives us the bosonized coloured current :

$`\left(\overline{q_L}t^a\gamma ^\alpha Q_{v_B}^{(+)}\right)_{1G}{\displaystyle \frac{G_Hg_s}{64\pi }}G_{\mu \nu }^aTr\left[\xi ^{}\gamma ^\alpha LH_b^{(+)}\left(\sigma ^{\mu \nu }{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi f^2}{m^2N_c}}\{\sigma ^{\mu \nu },\gamma v\}\right)\right],`$ (34)
where $`G_{\mu \nu }^a`$ is the octet gluon tensor, and $`H_b^{(+)}`$ represents the heavy $`\overline{B}`$-meson fields. Similarly the (heavy) $`D`$\- and $`\overline{D}`$-mesons are represented by $`H_c^{(+)}`$ and $`H_{\overline{c}}^{()}`$ corresponding to a heavy quark field $`Q_v^{}^{(+)}`$ and heavy anti-quak field $`Q_{\overline{v}}^{()}`$ respectively. The symbol $`\{,\}`$ denotes the anti-commutator.

For the creation of a $`D\overline{D}`$ pair in the right part of figure 2, the analogue of (34) is

$`\left(\overline{Q_v^{}^{(+)}}t^a\gamma ^\alpha LQ_{\overline{v}}^{()}\right)_{1G}{\displaystyle \frac{G_H^2g_s}{32\pi }}G_{\mu \nu }^aTr[\overline{H_c^{(+)}}\gamma ^\alpha LH_{\overline{c}}^{()}`$
$`\times ({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{r}}{\pi }}\sigma ^{\mu \nu }+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4m(\lambda 1)}}\{\sigma ^{\mu \nu },\gamma t\})],`$ (35)
where $`t=v^{}\overline{v}`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{r}r(\lambda )`$. Multiplying the currents in eqs. (34) and (35), and using the replacement:

$$g_s^2G_{\mu \nu }^aG_{\alpha \beta }^a4\pi ^2𝒽\frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }G^2𝒾\frac{1}{12}(g_{\mu \alpha }g_{\nu \beta }g_{\mu \beta }g_{\nu \alpha }),$$
(36)
we obtain the bosonized version for the operator $`\stackrel{~}{Q_1}`$ in eq. (5) (see also eq. (28)) as the product of two traces. (The expression may be simplified by using the Dirac algebra, but we do not enter these details here).

Taking the pseudoscalar parts of (34) and (35), we find the gluon condensate contribution for $`\overline{B^0}D_s^+D_s^{}`$ within our model:

$`A(\overline{B^0}D_s^+D_s^{})_G=C_2𝒽{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }}G^2𝒾{\displaystyle \frac{(G_H\sqrt{M_B})^3}{384m}}\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{3\stackrel{~}{r}}{\pi }}\right).`$ (37)
(For our algebraic manipulations, the program FORM Verm  was useful). The ratio between this amplitude and the factorized one in (22) scales as $`M_D/(N_cM_B)`$ times hadronic parameters calculated within HL$`\chi `$QM. We define a quantity $`R^G`$ for the gluon condensate amplitude analogously to $`R^\chi `$ in (21) and (25) for chiral loops. Numerically, we find that the ratio between the two amplitudes in (37) and (22) is

$`R_G\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0.055}+0.16i,`$ (38)
which is of order one third of the chiral loop contribution in eq. (25).

## V  Discussion and Results

Our amplitude is complex as expected. In the chiral loop amplitude these are due to physical cuts (exchanges of physical particles) to the one-loop order we consider in this paper. The Wilson coefficients turn complex when the c-quark is treated GKMW ; Fleischer  within HQEFT. This is also the case for the matrix elements that these Wilson coefficients should be matched to. There is a potential problem with a quark model without confinement that the amplitude may get an imaginary part due to production of free quarks. Still, within HQEFT one can hardly distinguish $`m_c`$ from $`M_D`$ because of the reparametrization invariance. Thus, at the present stage, it is not clear how well our model describes imaginary matrix elements, and we will not go into such details here, as the numerical consequences turn out to be minor.

Adding the amplitudes $`R_\chi `$ and $`R_G`$ and multiplying with the Wilson coefficient GKMW ; Fleischer  $`a_21.33+0.2i`$, we obtain the quantity:

$`\stackrel{~}{R_T}a_2(R_\chi +R_G)0.260.11i.`$ (39)
Dropping the imaginary parts of the three quantities would give instead the value $`0.25`$. Anyway, we have found that the amplitude for $`\overline{B^0}D_s^+D_s^{}`$ is of order $`1520\%`$ of the factorizable amplitude for $`\overline{B^0}D^+D_s^{}`$, before the different KM-factors are taken into account. We obtain the branching ratios

$`BR(\overline{B_d^0}D_s^+D_s^{})=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}6.5}\times 10^5\times |{\displaystyle \frac{V_{cb}}{0.041}}{\displaystyle \frac{V_{cd}^{}}{0.223}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{R_T}}{0.25}}{\displaystyle \frac{\zeta (\omega )}{0.9}}|^2`$ (40)
and

$$BR(\overline{B_s^0}D^+D^{})=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}8.9}\times 10^4\times |\frac{V_{cb}}{0.041}\frac{V_{cs}^{}}{0.974}\frac{\stackrel{~}{R_T}}{0.25}\frac{\zeta (\omega )}{0.9}|^2$$
(41)
The difference between the branching ratios is mainly due to the difference in KM factor. Taking into account the comments above, we end up with the conclusion that

$`BR(\overline{B_d^0}D_s^+D_s^{})7\times 10^5,\text{and}BR(\overline{B_s^0}D_s^+D_s^{})1\times 10^3.`$ (42)
The ongoing searches at Belle might soon give the limit on the rate $`\overline{B^0}D_s^+D_s^{}`$, while the detection of the $`\overline{B_s^0}`$ mode might be presently more difficult due to troubles with $`\overline{B_s^0}`$ identification.

S.F. thanks P. Križan and B. Golob for fruitful discussion