Γ(К⁻ωντ) / Γtotal Γ179/Γ

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>4.1±0.9 OUR FIT</td><td></td><td>(Produced by HFLAV)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>4.1±0.6±0.7</td><td>500</td><td>ARMS</td><td>05</td><td>CLE3 7.6 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

Γ(ħ⁻ωπ⁰ντ) / Γtotal Γ180/Γ

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>0.41±0.04 OUR FIT</td><td></td><td>(Produced by HFLAV)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.43±0.06±0.05</td><td>7283</td><td>BUSKULIC</td><td>97c</td><td>ALEP 1991-1994 LEP runs</td></tr></tbody></table>

Γ(ħ⁻ωπ⁰ντ) / Γ(ħ⁻h⁻h⁺ ≥ 0 neutrals ≥ 0K⁰ντ) Γ180/Γ62
Γ180/Γ62 = Γ180/(0.34598Γ36+0.34598Γ38+0.34598Γ41+0.34598Γ43+0.4247Γ48+0.6920Γ49+0.4849Γ52+0.6920Γ56+0.6534Γ61+Γ70+Γ78+Γ85+Γ89+Γ97+Γ103+Γ106+Γ107+0.2804Γ150+0.2302Γ151+0.2804Γ152+0.2804Γ154+0.3759Γ156+0.3257Γ160+0.7259Γ170+0.9078Γ178+0.9078Γ179+0.9078Γ180+0.892Γ182)

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>(2.69 ±0.28) × 10<sup>-2</sup> OUR FIT</td><td></td><td>(Produced by HFLAV)</td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We use the following data for averages but not for fits. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>0.028±0.003±0.003</td><td>430</td><td>1 BORTOLETTO</td><td>93</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> ≈ 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td colspan="5">1 Not independent of BORTOLETTO 93 Γ(τ⁻ → h⁻ωπ⁰ντ) / Γ(τ⁻ → h⁻h⁻h⁺2π⁰ντ (ex. K⁰)) value.</td></tr></tbody></table>

Γ(ħ⁻ωπ⁰ντ) / Γ(ħ⁻h⁻h⁺2π⁰ντ (ex. K⁰)) Γ180/Γ84

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>82±8 OUR FIT</td><td></td><td>(Produced by HFLAV)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>81±6±6</td><td></td><td>BORTOLETTO</td><td>93</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> ≈ 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>82±8 OUR FIT</td><td></td><td>(Produced by HFLAV)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>81±6±6</td><td></td><td>BORTOLETTO</td><td>93</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> ≈ 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

Γ(ħ⁻ω2π⁰ντ) / Γtotal Γ181/Γ

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1.4 ±0.4 ±0.3</td><td>53</td><td>ANASTASSOV</td><td>01</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>1.89<sup>+0.74</sup><sub>-0.67</sub> ±0.40</td><td>19</td><td>ANDERSON</td><td>97</td><td>CLEO Repl. by ANASTASSOV 01</td></tr></tbody></table>

Γ(π⁻ω2π⁰ντ) / Γtotal Γ182/Γ

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>0.72±0.16 OUR FIT</td><td></td><td>(Produced by HFLAV)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.73±0.12±0.12</td><td>1.1k</td><td>LEES</td><td>12x</td><td>BABR 468 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

Γ(ħ⁻2ωντ) / Γtotal Γ183/Γ

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;5.4 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT, B</td><td>06</td><td>BABR 232 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

Γ(ħ⁻h⁺ωντ) / Γtotal Γ184/Γ

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1.2±0.2±0.1</td><td>110</td><td>ANASTASSOV</td><td>01</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

Γ(2π⁻π⁺ωντ (ex. K⁰)) / Γtotal Γ185/Γ

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>0.84±0.06 OUR FIT</td><td></td><td>(Produced by HFLAV)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.84±0.04±0.06</td><td>2.4k</td><td>LEES</td><td>12x</td><td>BABR 468 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

Γ(e⁻γ) / Γtotal Γ186/Γ

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;3.3 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>10B</td><td>BABR 516 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;5.6 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>UNO</td><td>21</td><td>BELL 988 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.2 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HAYASAKA</td><td>08</td><td>BELL 535 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.1 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>06c</td><td>BABR 232 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.9 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HAYASAKA</td><td>05</td><td>BELL 86.7 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.7 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>EDWARDS</td><td>97</td><td>CLEO</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.1 × 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ABREU</td><td>95U</td><td>DLPH 1990-1993 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.2 × 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92k</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.0 × 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>KEH</td><td>88</td><td>CBAL E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;6.4 × 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HAYES</td><td>82</td><td>MRK2 E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 3.8-6.8 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

Γ(e⁻γ) / Γtotal Γ187/Γ

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;2.5 × 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 BRYMAN</td><td>21</td><td>RVUE 516 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

Γ(μ⁻γ) / Γtotal Γ188/Γ

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt; 4.2 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>UNO</td><td>21</td><td>BELL 988 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt; 4.4 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>10B</td><td>BABR 516 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 4.5 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HAYASAKA</td><td>08</td><td>BELL 535 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 6.8 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT, B</td><td>05A</td><td>BABR 232 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 3.1 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ABE</td><td>04B</td><td>BELL 86.3 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 1.1 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AHMED</td><td>00</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 3.0 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>EDWARDS</td><td>97</td><td>CLEO</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 6.2 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ABREU</td><td>95U</td><td>DLPH 1990-1993 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 0.42 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BEAN</td><td>93</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 3.4 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92k</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;55 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HAYES</td><td>82</td><td>MRK2 E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 3.8-6.8 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

Γ(μ⁻γγ) / Γtotal Γ189/Γ

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;5.8 × 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 BRYMAN</td><td>21</td><td>RVUE 516 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

Γ(e⁻π⁰γ) / Γtotal Γ190/Γ

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt; 8.0 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>07</td><td>BELL 401 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt; 1.3 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>071</td><td>BABR 339 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 1.9 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ENARI</td><td>05</td><td>BELL 154 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 3.7 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>97</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 17 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92k</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 14 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>KEH</td><td>88</td><td>CBAL E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;210 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HAYES</td><td>82</td><td>MRK2 E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 3.8-6.8 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

Γ(μ⁻π⁰γ) / Γtotal Γ191/Γ

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt; 1.1 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>071</td><td>BABR 339 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt; 1.2 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>07</td><td>BELL 401 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 4.1 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ENARI</td><td>05</td><td>BELL 154 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 4.0 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>97</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 4.4 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92k</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;82 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HAYES</td><td>82</td><td>MRK2 E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 3.8-6.8 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

Γ(e⁻K⁰S) / Γtotal Γ192/Γ

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;2.6 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10A</td><td>BELL 671 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;3.3 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>09d</td><td>BABR 469 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;5.6 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>06A</td><td>BELL 281 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;9.1 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>CHEN</td><td>02c</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.3 × 10<sup>-3</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HAYES</td><td>82</td><td>MRK2 E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 3.8-6.8 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

Γ(μ⁻K⁰S) / Γtotal Γ193/Γ

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;2.3 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10A</td><td>BELL 671 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;4.0 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>09d</td><td>BABR 469 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.9 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>06A</td><td>BELL 281 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;9.5 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>CHEN</td><td>02c</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.0 × 10<sup>-3</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HAYES</td><td>82</td><td>MRK2 E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 3.8-6.8 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

Γ(e⁻η) / Γtotal Γ194/Γ

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt; 9.2 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>07</td><td>BELL 401 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt; 1.6 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>071</td><td>BABR 339 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 2.4 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ENARI</td><td>05</td><td>BELL 154 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 8.2 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>97</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 6.3 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92k</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;24 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>KEH</td><td>88</td><td>CBAL E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

<footnote n="1">1 BRYMAN 21 reinterprets the upper limit result on B(τ⁻ → e⁻γ) and B(τ⁻ → μ⁻γ) by AUBERT 10B, estimating with a simulation the efficiency for this decay mode to be detected as the corresponding AUBERT 10B decay mode.</footnote>

<footnote n="1">1 BRYMAN 21 reinterprets the upper limit result on B(τ⁻ → e⁻γ) and B(τ⁻ → μ⁻γ) by AUBERT 10B, estimating with a simulation the efficiency for this decay mode to be detected as the corresponding AUBERT 10B decay mode.</footnote>
$\Gamma(\mu^{-}\eta)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;6.5 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>07</td><td>BELL 401 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>• • •</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.5 x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>07i</td><td>BABR 339 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.5 x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ENARI</td><td>05</td><td>BELL 154 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.4 x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ENARI</td><td>04</td><td>BELL 84.3 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;9.6 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>97</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.3 x 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92k</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(e^{-}\rho^{0})/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;2.2 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 TSUZUKI</td><td>23</td><td>BELL 980 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>• • •</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 1.8 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>11</td><td>BELL 854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 4.6 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>09w</td><td>BABR 451 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 6.3 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>NISHIO</td><td>08</td><td>BELL 543 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 6.5 x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL 158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 2.0 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 4.2 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>2 BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 1.9 x 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92k</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;37 x 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HAYES</td><td>82</td><td>MRK2 E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=3.8-6.8 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹Supersedes MIYAZAKI 11.

²BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.

$\Gamma(\mu^{-}\rho^{0})/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt; 1.7 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 TSUZUKI</td><td>23</td><td>BELL 980 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>• • •</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 1.2 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>11</td><td>BELL 854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 2.6 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>09w</td><td>BABR 451 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 6.8 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>NISHIO</td><td>08</td><td>BELL 543 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 2.0 x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL 158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 6.3 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 5.7 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>2 BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 2.9 x 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92k</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;44 x 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HAYES</td><td>82</td><td>MRK2 E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=3.8-6.8 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹Supersedes MIYAZAKI 11.

²BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.

$\Gamma(e^{-}\omega)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;2.4 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 TSUZUKI</td><td>23</td><td>BELL 980 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>• • •</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.8 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>11</td><td>BELL 854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.1 x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>08k</td><td>BABR 384 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.8 x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>NISHIO</td><td>08</td><td>BELL 543 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹Supersedes MIYAZAKI 11.

$\Gamma(\mu^{-}\omega)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;3.9 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 TSUZUKI</td><td>23</td><td>BELL 980 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>• • •</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.7 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>11</td><td>BELL 854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.0 x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>08k</td><td>BABR 384 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;8.9 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>NISHIO</td><td>08</td><td>BELL 543 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹Supersedes MIYAZAKI 11.

$\Gamma(e^{-}K^{*}(892)^{0})/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.9 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 TSUZUKI</td><td>23</td><td>BELL 980 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>• • •</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.2 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>11</td><td>BELL 854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;5.9 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>09w</td><td>BABR 451 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.8 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>NISHIO</td><td>08</td><td>BELL 543 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.0 x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL 158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;5.1 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;6.3 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>2 BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.8 x 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92k</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹Supersedes MIYAZAKI 11.

²BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.

$\Gamma_{195}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma(\mu^{-}K^{*}(892)^{0})/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;2.9 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 TSUZUKI</td><td>23</td><td>BELL 980 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>• • •</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.2 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>11</td><td>BELL 854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.7 x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>09w</td><td>BABR 451 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;5.9 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>NISHIO</td><td>08</td><td>BELL 543 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.9 x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL 158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.5 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;9.4 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>2 BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.5 x 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92k</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹Supersedes MIYAZAKI 11.

²BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.

$\Gamma_{196}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma(e^{-}K^{*}(892)^{0})/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.7 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 TSUZUKI</td><td>23</td><td>BELL 980 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>• • •</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.4 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>11</td><td>BELL 854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.6 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>09w</td><td>BABR 451 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.7 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>NISHIO</td><td>08</td><td>BELL 543 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.0 x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL 158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.4 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.1 x 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>2 BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹Supersedes MIYAZAKI 11.

²BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.

$\Gamma_{197}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma(\mu^{-}\rho^{0})/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;4.3 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 TSUZUKI</td><td>23</td><td>BELL 980 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>• • •</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.0 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>11</td><td>BELL 854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.3 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>09w</td><td>BABR 451 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.0 x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>NISHIO</td><td>08</td><td>BELL 543 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.0 x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL 158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.5 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;8.7 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>2 BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹Supersedes MIYAZAKI 11.

²BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.

$\Gamma_{198}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma(e^{-}\eta(958))/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt; 1.6 x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>07</td><td>BELL 401 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>• • •</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 2.4 x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>07i</td><td>BABR 339 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;10. x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ENARI</td><td>05</td><td>BELL 154 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(\mu^{-}\eta(958))/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.3 x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>07</td><td>BELL 401 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>• • •</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.4 x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>07i</td><td>BABR 339 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.7 x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ENARI</td><td>05</td><td>BELL 154 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(e^{-}f_{0}(980) \rightarrow e^{-}\pi^{+}\pi^{-})/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;3.2 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>09</td><td>BELL 671 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>• • •</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.4 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>09</td><td>BELL 671 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(e^{-}\phi)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;2.0 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 TSUZUKI</td><td>23</td><td>BELL 980 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>• • •</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.1 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>11</td><td>BELL 854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.1 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>09w</td><td>BABR 451 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.3 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>NISHIO</td><td>08</td><td>BELL 543 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.3 x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL 158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;6.9 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub>=10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹Supersedes MIYAZAKI 11.
$\Gamma(\mu^{-} \phi) / \Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;2.3 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 TSUZUKI</td><td>23</td><td>BELL 980 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;8.4 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>11</td><td>BELL 854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.9 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>09W</td><td>BABR 451 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.3 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>NISHIO</td><td>08</td><td>BELL 543 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.7 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL 158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.0 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ Supersedes MIYAZAKI 11.

$\Gamma(e^{-} e^{+} e^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt; 2.7 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HAYASAKA</td><td>10</td><td>BELL 782 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt; 2.9 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>LEES</td><td>10A</td><td>BABR 468 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 3.6 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>08</td><td>BELL 535 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 4.3 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>07BK</td><td>BABR 376 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 2.0 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>04J</td><td>BABR 91.5 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 3.5 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>04</td><td>BELL 87.1 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 2.9 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 0.33 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>¹ BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 1.3 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92K</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 2.7 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BOWCOCK</td><td>90</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.4–10.9</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;40 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HAYES</td><td>82</td><td>MRK2 E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 3.8–6.8 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.

$\Gamma(e^{-} \mu^{+} \mu^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt; 2.7 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HAYASAKA</td><td>10</td><td>BELL 782 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt; 3.2 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>LEES</td><td>10A</td><td>BABR 468 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 4.1 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>08</td><td>BELL 535 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 3.7 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>07BK</td><td>BABR 376 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 3.3 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>04J</td><td>BABR 91.5 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 2.0 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>04</td><td>BELL 87.1 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 1.8 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 0.36 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>¹ BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 1.9 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92K</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 2.7 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BOWCOCK</td><td>90</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.4–10.9</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;33 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HAYES</td><td>82</td><td>MRK2 E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 3.8–6.8 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.

$\Gamma(e^{+} \mu^{-} \mu^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.7 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HAYASAKA</td><td>10</td><td>BELL 782 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;2.6 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>LEES</td><td>10A</td><td>BABR 468 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.3 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>08</td><td>BELL 535 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;5.6 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>07BK</td><td>BABR 376 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.3 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>04J</td><td>BABR 91.5 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.0 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>04</td><td>BELL 87.1 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.5 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;0.35 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>¹ BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.8 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92K</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.6 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BOWCOCK</td><td>90</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.4–10.9</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.

$\Gamma(\mu^{-} e^{+} e^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt; 1.8 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HAYASAKA</td><td>10</td><td>BELL 782 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt; 2.2 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>LEES</td><td>10A</td><td>BABR 468 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 2.7 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>08</td><td>BELL 535 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 8.0 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>07BK</td><td>BABR 376 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 2.7 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>04J</td><td>BABR 91.5 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 1.9 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>04</td><td>BELL 87.1 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 1.7 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 0.34 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>¹ BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 1.4 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92K</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 2.7 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BOWCOCK</td><td>90</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.4–10.9</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;44 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HAYES</td><td>82</td><td>MRK2 E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 3.8–6.8 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.

$\Gamma_{209} / \Gamma$

$\Gamma(\mu^{+} e^{-} e^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.5 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HAYASAKA</td><td>10</td><td>BELL 782 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.8 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>LEES</td><td>10A</td><td>BABR 468 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.0 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>08</td><td>BELL 535 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;5.8 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>07BK</td><td>BABR 376 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.1 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>04J</td><td>BABR 91.5 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.0 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>04</td><td>BELL 87.1 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.5 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;0.34 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>¹ BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.4 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92K</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.6 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BOWCOCK</td><td>90</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.4–10.9</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.

$\Gamma_{210} / \Gamma$

$\Gamma(\mu^{-} \mu^{+} \mu^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt; 2.1 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HAYASAKA</td><td>10</td><td>BELL 782 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt; 8.0 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>SIRUNYAN</td><td>21D</td><td>CMS 33.2 fb<sup>-1</sup>, pp at 13 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 3.8 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AAD</td><td>16BA</td><td>ATLS 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup>, pp at 8 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 4.6 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>15AI</td><td>LHCB 3.0 fb<sup>-1</sup>, pp at 7, 8 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 8.0 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>¹ AAIJ</td><td>13AH</td><td>LHCB 1.0 fb<sup>-1</sup>, pp at 7 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 3.3 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>LEES</td><td>10A</td><td>BABR 468 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 3.2 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>08</td><td>BELL 535 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 5.3 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>07BK</td><td>BABR 376 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 1.9 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>04J</td><td>BABR 91.5 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 2.0 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>04</td><td>BELL 87.1 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 1.9 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 0.43 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>² BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 1.9 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92K</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 1.7 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BOWCOCK</td><td>90</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.4–10.9</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;49 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HAYES</td><td>82</td><td>MRK2 E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 3.8–6.8 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ Repl. by AAIJ 15AI.

² BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.

$\Gamma_{211} / \Gamma$

$\Gamma(e^{-} \pi^{+} \pi^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;2.3 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>13</td><td>BELL 854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;4.4 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10</td><td>BELL Repl. by MIYAZAKI 13</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.3 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL 158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.2 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT, BE</td><td>05D</td><td>BABR 221 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.2 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.4 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>¹ BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.7 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92K</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;6.0 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BOWCOCK</td><td>90</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.4–10.9</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.

$\Gamma_{212} / \Gamma$

$\Gamma(e^{+} \pi^{-} \pi^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;2.0 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>13</td><td>BELL 854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;8.8 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10</td><td>BELL Repl. by MIYAZAKI 13</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.0 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL 158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.7 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT, BE</td><td>05D</td><td>BABR 221 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.9 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.4 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>¹ BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.8 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92K</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.7 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BOWCOCK</td><td>90</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.4–10.9</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.

$\Gamma_{213} / \Gamma$

$\Gamma(\mu^{-} \pi^{+} \pi^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;2.1 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>13</td><td>BELL 854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;3.3 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10</td><td>BELL Repl. by MIYAZAKI 13</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.8 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL 158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.9 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT, BE</td><td>05D</td><td>BABR 221 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;8.2 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.4 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>¹ BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.6 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92K</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.9 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BOWCOCK</td><td>90</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.4–10.9</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.
$\Gamma(\mu^+\pi^-\pi^-)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;3.9 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>13</td><td>854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;3.7 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10</td><td>BELL</td><td>Repl. by MIYAZAKI 13</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.4 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL</td><td>158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT,BE</td><td>05d</td><td>BABR</td><td>221 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.4 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;6.9 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO</td><td>Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;6.3 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92k</td><td>ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.9 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BOWCOCK</td><td>90</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.4–10.9</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.

$\Gamma(e^+\pi^+K^-)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;3.7 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>13</td><td>BELL</td><td>854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;5.8 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10</td><td>BELL</td><td>Repl. by MIYAZAKI 13</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.2 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL</td><td>158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.2 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT,BE</td><td>05d</td><td>BABR</td><td>221 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;6.4 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.7 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO</td><td>Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.9 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92k</td><td>ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;5.8 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BOWCOCK</td><td>90</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.4–10.9</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.

$\Gamma(e^+\pi^-K^+)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;3.1 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>13</td><td>BELL</td><td>854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;5.2 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10</td><td>BELL</td><td>Repl. by MIYAZAKI 13</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.6 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL</td><td>158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.7 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT,BE</td><td>05d</td><td>BABR</td><td>221 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.8 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.6 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO</td><td>Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;5.8 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BOWCOCK</td><td>90</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.4–10.9</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.

$\Gamma(e^+\pi^-K^-)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;3.2 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>13</td><td>BELL</td><td>854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;6.7 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10</td><td>BELL</td><td>Repl. by MIYAZAKI 13</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.9 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL</td><td>158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.8 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT,BE</td><td>05d</td><td>BABR</td><td>221 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.1 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.5 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO</td><td>Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.0 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92k</td><td>ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.9 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BOWCOCK</td><td>90</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.4–10.9</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.

$\Gamma(e^+K^0_S K^0_S)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;7.1 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10a</td><td>BELL</td><td>671 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;2.2 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>CHEN</td><td>02c</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(e^+K^+K^-)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;3.4 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>13</td><td>BELL</td><td>854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;5.4 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10</td><td>BELL</td><td>Repl. by MIYAZAKI 13</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.0 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL</td><td>158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.4 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT,BE</td><td>05d</td><td>BABR</td><td>221 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;6.0 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(e^+K^-K^-)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;3.3 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>13</td><td>BELL</td><td>854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;6.0 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10</td><td>BELL</td><td>Repl. by MIYAZAKI 13</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.1 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL</td><td>158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.5 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT,BE</td><td>05d</td><td>BABR</td><td>221 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.8 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma_{219}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma(\mu^+\pi^-K^-)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;6.6 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>13</td><td>BELL</td><td>854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.6 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10</td><td>BELL</td><td>Repl. by MIYAZAKI 13</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.7 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL</td><td>158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.6 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT,BE</td><td>05d</td><td>BABR</td><td>221 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.5 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;8.7 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO</td><td>Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;11 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92k</td><td>ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.7 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BOWCOCK</td><td>90</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.4–10.9</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.

$\Gamma_{220}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma(\mu^-\pi^+K^+)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;4.5 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>13</td><td>BELL</td><td>854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.0 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10</td><td>BELL</td><td>Repl. by MIYAZAKI 13</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.3 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL</td><td>158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.2 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT,BE</td><td>05d</td><td>BABR</td><td>221 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.4 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.5 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO</td><td>Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.7 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BOWCOCK</td><td>90</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.4–10.9</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.

$\Gamma_{221}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma(\mu^+\pi^-K^-)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;4.8 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>13</td><td>BELL</td><td>854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;9.4 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10</td><td>BELL</td><td>Repl. by MIYAZAKI 13</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.9 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL</td><td>158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.2 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT,BE</td><td>05d</td><td>BABR</td><td>221 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.0 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.0 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO</td><td>Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;5.8 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92k</td><td>ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.0 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BOWCOCK</td><td>90</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.4–10.9</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.

$\Gamma_{222}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma(\mu^0_S K^0_S)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;8.0 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10a</td><td>BELL</td><td>671 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;3.4 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>CHEN</td><td>02c</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(\mu^-K^+K^-)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;4.4 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>13</td><td>BELL</td><td>854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;6.8 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10</td><td>BELL</td><td>Repl. by MIYAZAKI 13</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;8.0 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL</td><td>158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.5 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT,BE</td><td>05d</td><td>BABR</td><td>221 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;15 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(\mu^+K^-K^-)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;4.7 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>13</td><td>BELL</td><td>854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;9.6 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10</td><td>BELL</td><td>Repl. by MIYAZAKI 13</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.4 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL</td><td>158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.8 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT,BE</td><td>05d</td><td>BABR</td><td>221 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;6.0 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(e^0\pi^0)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;6.5 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>97</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma_{226}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma(\mu^+\pi^-K^-)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;6.6 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>13</td><td>BELL</td><td>854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.6 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10</td><td>BELL</td><td>Repl. by MIYAZAKI 13</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.7 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL</td><td>158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.6 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT,BE</td><td>05d</td><td>BABR</td><td>221 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.5 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;8.7 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO</td><td>Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;11 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92k</td><td>ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.7 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BOWCOCK</td><td>90</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.4–10.9</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.

$\Gamma_{227}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma(\mu^-\pi^+K^+)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;4.5 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>13</td><td>BELL</td><td>854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.0 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10</td><td>BELL</td><td>Repl. by MIYAZAKI 13</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.3 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL</td><td>158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.2 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT,BE</td><td>05d</td><td>BABR</td><td>221 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.4 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.5 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO</td><td>Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.7 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BOWCOCK</td><td>90</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.4–10.9</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.

$\Gamma_{228}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma(\mu^+\pi^-K^-)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;4.8 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>13</td><td>BELL</td><td>854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;9.4 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10</td><td>BELL</td><td>Repl. by MIYAZAKI 13</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.9 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL</td><td>158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.2 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT,BE</td><td>05d</td><td>BABR</td><td>221 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.0 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.0 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>CLEO</td><td>Repl. by BLISS 98</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;5.8 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92k</td><td>ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.0 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BOWCOCK</td><td>90</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.4–10.9</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹BARTELT 94 assume phase space decays.

$\Gamma_{223}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma(e^0\pi^0)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;7.1 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10a</td><td>BELL</td><td>671 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;3.4 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>CHEN</td><td>02c</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(e^0K^0)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;4.4 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>13</td><td>BELL</td><td>854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;6.8 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10</td><td>BELL</td><td>Repl. by MIYAZAKI 13</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;8.0 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL</td><td>158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.5 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT,BE</td><td>05d</td><td>BABR</td><td>221 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;15 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(e^0\pi^0)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;4.7 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>13</td><td>BELL</td><td>854 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;9.6 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10</td><td>BELL</td><td>Repl. by MIYAZAKI 13</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.4 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>BELL</td><td>158 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.2 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AUBERT,BE</td><td>05d</td><td>BABR</td><td>221 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;6.0 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(e^0\pi^0)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;6.5 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>97</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma_{233}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma(\mu^0\pi^0)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;14 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>97</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(e^0\eta\eta)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;35 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>97</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>
$$ \Gamma(\mu^- \eta \eta) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{235/\Gamma} $$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;60 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>97</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(e^{-} \pi^{0} \eta) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{236/\Gamma} $$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;24 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>97</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\mu^- \pi^0 \eta) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{237/\Gamma} $$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;22 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>97</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\rho e^{-} e^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{238/\Gamma} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;3.0 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>SAHOO</td><td>20</td><td>BELL 921 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\bar{\rho}e^{+} e^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{239/\Gamma} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;3.0 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>SAHOO</td><td>20</td><td>BELL 921 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\bar{\rho}e^{+} \mu^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{240/\Gamma} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;2.0 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>SAHOO</td><td>20</td><td>BELL 921 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\bar{\rho}e^{-} \mu^{+}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{241/\Gamma} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.8 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>SAHOO</td><td>20</td><td>BELL 921 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\rho \mu^{-} \mu^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{242/\Gamma} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;4.0 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>SAHOO</td><td>20</td><td>BELL 921 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><thead><tr><th colspan="5">• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;4.4 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>13AH</td><td>LHCB 1.0 fb<sup>-1</sup>, pp at 7 TeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\bar{\rho} \mu^{+} \mu^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{243/\Gamma} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.8 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>SAHOO</td><td>20</td><td>BELL 921 fb<sup>-1</sup> E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><thead><tr><th colspan="5">• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;3.3 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>13AH</td><td>LHCB 1.0 fb<sup>-1</sup>, pp at 7 TeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\bar{\rho}\gamma) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{244/\Gamma} $$

Test of lepton number and baryon number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;3.5 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>GODANG</td><td>99</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><thead><tr><th colspan="5">• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;29 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92K</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\bar{\rho}\pi^{0}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{245/\Gamma} $$

Test of lepton number and baryon number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;15 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>GODANG</td><td>99</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><thead><tr><th colspan="5">• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;66 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92K</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\bar{\rho}2\pi^{0}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{246/\Gamma} $$

Test of lepton number and baryon number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;33 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>GODANG</td><td>99</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\bar{\rho}\eta) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{247/\Gamma} $$

Test of lepton number and baryon number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt; 8.9 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>GODANG</td><td>99</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><thead><tr><th colspan="5">• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;130 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92K</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\bar{\rho}\pi^{0} \eta) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{248/\Gamma} $$

Test of lepton number and baryon number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;27 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>GODANG</td><td>99</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\Lambda\pi^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{249/\Gamma} $$

Test of lepton number and baryon number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;0.72 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>06</td><td>BELL 154 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\Lambda\pi^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{250/\Gamma} $$

Test of lepton number and baryon number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.4 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>06</td><td>BELL 154 fb<sup>-1</sup>, E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(e^{-} \text{light boson}) / \Gamma(e^{-} \bar{\nu}_{e} \nu_{\tau}) \qquad \Gamma_{251/\Gamma} $$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;5.3 × 10<sup>-3</sup></td><td>95</td><td>1 ADACHI</td><td>23A</td><td>BELL E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.58 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><thead><tr><th>&lt;0.008</th><th>95</th><th>2 BRYMAN</th><th>21</th><th>RVUE</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;0.015</td><td>95</td><td>3 ALBRECHT</td><td>95G</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.4–10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;0.018</td><td>95</td><td>4 ALBRECHT</td><td>90E</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.4–10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;0.040</td><td>95</td><td>5 BALTRUSAIT...85</td><td>MRK3</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 3.77 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

1. ADACHI 23A limit holds for bosons with mass = 0.0 GeV. The limit rises to $9.7 \times 10^{-3}$ for a mass of 1.0 GeV, then falls to $1.1 \times 10^{-3}$ at the upper mass limit of 1.6 GeV.

2. BRYMAN 21 reports indirect limits obtained from the consistency of the world averages of $B(\tau^{-} \to e^{-} \bar{\nu}_{e} \nu_{\tau})$ and $B(\tau^{-} \to \mu^{-} \bar{\nu}_{\mu} \nu_{\tau})$ with their Standard Model predictions, without a simulation of the efficiency as a function of the X mass for the searched decay modes to be detected as the corresponding Standard Model decay modes.

3. ALBRECHT 95G limit holds for bosons with mass < 0.4 GeV. The limit rises to 0.036 for a mass of 1.0 GeV, then falls to 0.006 at the upper mass limit of 1.6 GeV.

4. ALBRECHT 90E limit applies for spinless boson with mass < 100 MeV, and rises to 0.050 for mass = 500 MeV.

5. BALTRUSAITIS 85 limit applies for spinless boson with mass < 100 MeV.

$$ \Gamma(\mu^{-} \text{light boson}) / \Gamma(e^{-} \bar{\nu}_{e} \nu_{\tau}) \qquad \Gamma_{252/\Gamma} $$

Test of lepton family number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;3.4 × 10<sup>-3</sup></td><td>95</td><td>1 ADACHI</td><td>23A</td><td>BELL E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.58 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><thead><tr><th>&lt;0.011</th><th>95</th><th>2 BRYMAN</th><th>21</th><th>RVUE</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;0.026</td><td>95</td><td>3 ALBRECHT</td><td>95G</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.4–10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;0.033</td><td>95</td><td>4 ALBRECHT</td><td>90E</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.4–10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;0.125</td><td>95</td><td>5 BALTRUSAIT...85</td><td>MRK3</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 3.77 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

1. ADACHI 23A limit holds for bosons with mass = 0.0 GeV. The limit rises to $12.2 \times 10^{-3}$ for a mass of 1.0 GeV, then falls to $0.7 \times 10^{-3}$ at the upper mass limit of 1.6 GeV.

2. BRYMAN 21 reports indirect limits obtained from the consistency of the world averages of $B(\tau^{-} \to e^{-} \bar{\nu}_{e} \nu_{\tau})$ and $B(\tau^{-} \to \mu^{-} \bar{\nu}_{\mu} \nu_{\tau})$ with their Standard Model predictions, without a simulation of the efficiency as a function of the X mass for the searched decay modes to be detected as the corresponding Standard Model decay modes.

3. ALBRECHT 95G limit holds for bosons with mass < 1.3 GeV. The limit rises to 0.034 for a mass of 1.4 GeV, then falls to 0.003 at the upper mass limit of 1.6 GeV.

4. ALBRECHT 90E limit applies for spinless boson with mass < 100 MeV, and rises to 0.071 for mass = 500 MeV.

5. BALTRUSAITIS 85 limit applies for spinless boson with mass < 100 MeV.

τ-DECAY PARAMETERS

See the related review(s):

τ-Lepton Decay Parameters

$$ \rho(e \text{ or } \mu) \text{ PARAMETER} $$

(V-A) theory predicts $\rho = 0.75$.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>0.745 ± 0.008 OUR FIT</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.749 ± 0.008 OUR AVERAGE</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tbody><tr><td>0.742 ± 0.014 ± 0.006</td><td>81k</td><td>HEISTER</td><td>01E</td><td>ALEC 1991–1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.775 ± 0.023 ± 0.020</td><td>36k</td><td>ABREU</td><td>00L</td><td>DLPH 1992–1995 runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.781 ± 0.028 ± 0.018</td><td>46k</td><td>ACKERSTAFF</td><td>99D</td><td>OPAL 1990–1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.762 ± 0.035</td><td>54k</td><td>ACCIARRI</td><td>98R</td><td>L3 1991–1995 LEP runs</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tbody><tr><td>0.731 ± 0.031</td><td></td><td>1 ALBRECHT</td><td>98</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.5–10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tbody><tr><td>0.72 ± 0.09 ± 0.03</td><td></td><td>2 ABE</td><td>97O</td><td>SLD 1993–1995 SLC runs</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tbody><tr><td>0.747 ± 0.010 ± 0.006</td><td>55k</td><td>ALEXANDER</td><td>97E</td><td>CLEO E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tbody><tr><td>0.79 ± 0.10 ± 0.10</td><td>3732</td><td>FORD</td><td>87B</td><td>MAC E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 29 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tbody><tr><td>0.71 ± 0.09 ± 0.03</td><td>1426</td><td>BEHRENDS</td><td>85</td><td>CLE O<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> near T(4S)</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>0.735 ± 0.013 ± 0.008</td><td>31k</td><td>AMMAR</td><td>97B</td><td>CLE Repl. by ALEXANDER 97F</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tbody><tr><td>0.794 ± 0.039 ± 0.031</td><td>18k</td><td>ACCIARRI</td><td>96H</td><td>L3 Repl. by ACCIARRI 98R</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tbody><tr><td>0.732 ± 0.034 ± 0.020</td><td>8.2k</td><td>3 ALBRECHT</td><td>95</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.5–10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tbody><tr><td>0.738 ± 0.038</td><td></td><td>4 ALBRECHT</td><td>95C</td><td>ARG Repl. by ALBRECHT 98</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tbody><tr><td>0.751 ± 0.039 ± 0.022</td><td></td><td>BUSKULIC</td><td>95D</td><td>ALEC Repl. by HEISTER 01E</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tbody><tr><td>0.742 ± 0.035 ± 0.020</td><td>8000</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>90E</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.4–10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

1. Combined fit to ARGUS tau decay parameter measurements in ALBRECHT 98, ALBRECHT 95C, ALBRECHT 93G, and ALBRECHT 94E. ALBRECHT 98 use tau pair events of the type $\tau^{-} \to \tau^{+} \to (e^{-} \bar{\nu}_{e} \nu_{\tau})(\pi^{+} \nu^{0} \bar{\nu}_{\tau})$, and their charged conjugates.

2. ABE 97O assume $\eta = 0$ in their fit. Letting $\eta$ vary in the fit gives a $\rho$ value of 0.69 ± 0.13 ± 0.05.

3. Value is from a simultaneous fit for the $\rho$ and $\eta$ decay parameters to the lepton energy spectrum. Not independent of ALBRECHT 90E ($\rho$ or $\mu$) value which assumes $\eta = 0$. Result is strongly correlated with ALBRECHT 95C.

4. Combined fit to ARGUS tau decay parameter measurements in ALBRECHT 95C, ALBRECHT 93G, and ALBRECHT 94E.

$$ \rho(e) \text{ PARAMETER} $$

(V-A) theory predicts $\rho = 0.75$.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>0.747 ± 0.010 OUR FIT</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.744 ± 0.010 OUR AVERAGE</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tbody><tr><td>0.747 ± 0.019 ± 0.014</td><td>44k</td><td>HEISTER</td><td>01E</td><td>ALEC 1991–1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.744 ± 0.036 ± 0.037</td><td>17k</td><td>ABREU</td><td>00L</td><td>DLPH 1992–1995 runs</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tbody><tr><td>0.779 ± 0.047 ± 0.029</td><td>25k</td><td>ACKERSTAFF</td><td>99D</td><td>OPAL 1990–1995 LEP runs</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tbody><tr><td>0.68 ± 0.04 ± 0.07</td><td></td><td>1 ALBRECHT</td><td>98</td><td>ARG E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.5–10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><tr><td>0.71 ±0.14 ±0.05</td><td>ABE</td><td>970</td><td>SLD</td><td>1993-1995 SLC runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.747 ±0.012 ±0.004</td><td>34k</td><td>ALEXANDER</td><td>97f</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>0.735 ±0.036 ±0.020</td><td>4.7k</td><td><sup>2</sup>ALBRECHT</td><td>95</td><td>ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.5-10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>0.79 ±0.08 ±0.06</td><td>3230</td><td><sup>3</sup>ALBRECHT</td><td>93G</td><td>ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.4-10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>0.64 ±0.06 ±0.07</td><td>2753</td><td>JANSSEN</td><td>89</td><td>CBAL</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.4-10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>0.62 ±0.17 ±0.14</td><td>1823</td><td>FORD</td><td>87b</td><td>MAC</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 29 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>0.60 ±0.13</td><td>699</td><td>BEHRENDS</td><td>85</td><td>CLEO</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> near Υ(4S)</td></tr><tr><td>0.72 ±0.10 ±0.11</td><td>594</td><td>BACINO</td><td>79b</td><td>DLCO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 3.5-7.4 GeV</td></tr></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tr><td>0.732 ±0.014 ±0.009</td><td>19k</td><td>AMMAR</td><td>97b</td><td>CLEO</td><td>Repl. by ALEXANDER 97f</td></tr><tr><td>0.793 ±0.050 ±0.025</td><td></td><td>BUSKULIC</td><td>95d</td><td>ALEC</td><td>Repl. by HEISTER 01E</td></tr><tr><td>0.747 ±0.045 ±0.028</td><td>5106</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>90E</td><td>ARG</td><td>Repl. by ALBRECHT 95</td></tr></table>

¹ALBRECHT 98 use tau pair events of the type $τ^-τ^+ → (ℓ^-ν_ℓν_τ)(π^+π^0ν_τ)$, and their charged conjugates.

²ALBRECHT 95 use tau pair events of the type $τ^-τ^+ → (ℓ^-ν_ℓν_τ)(h^+h^-h^+(π^0)ν_τ)$ and their charged conjugates.

³ALBRECHT 93G use tau pair events of the type $τ^-τ^+ → (μ^-ν_μν_τ)(e^+ν_eν_τ)$ and their charged conjugates.

## ρ(μ) PARAMETER

(V-A) theory predicts $ρ = 0.75$.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>0.763 ±0.020 OUR FIT</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>0.770 ±0.022 OUR AVERAGE</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.776 ±0.045 ±0.019</td><td>46k</td><td>HEISTER</td><td>01E</td><td>ALEC</td><td>1991-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.999 ±0.098 ±0.045</td><td>22k</td><td>ABREU</td><td>00L</td><td>DLPH</td><td>1992-1995 runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.777 ±0.044 ±0.016</td><td>27k</td><td>ACKERSTAFF</td><td>99d</td><td>OPAL</td><td>1990-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.69 ±0.06 ±0.06</td><td></td><td><sup>1</sup>ALBRECHT</td><td>98</td><td>ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.5-10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>0.54 ±0.28 ±0.14</td><td></td><td>ABE</td><td>970</td><td>SLD</td><td>1993-1995 SLC runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.750 ±0.017 ±0.045</td><td>22k</td><td>ALEXANDER</td><td>97f</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>0.76 ±0.07 ±0.08</td><td>3230</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>93G</td><td>ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.4-10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>0.734 ±0.055 ±0.027</td><td>3041</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>90E</td><td>ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.4-10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>0.89 ±0.14 ±0.08</td><td>1909</td><td>FORD</td><td>87B</td><td>MAC</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 29 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>0.81 ±0.13</td><td>727</td><td>BEHRENDS</td><td>85</td><td>CLEO</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> near Υ(4S)</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tr><td>0.747 ±0.048 ±0.044</td><td>13k</td><td>AMMAR</td><td>97B</td><td>CLEO</td><td>Repl. by ALEXANDER 97f</td></tr><tr><td>0.693 ±0.057 ±0.028</td><td></td><td>BUSKULIC</td><td>95d</td><td>ALEC</td><td>Repl. by HEISTER 01E</td></tr></table>

¹ALBRECHT 98 use tau pair events of the type $τ^-τ^+ → (ℓ^-ν_ℓν_τ)(π^+π^0ν_τ)$, and their charged conjugates.

## ξ(e or μ) PARAMETER

(V-A) theory predicts $ξ = 1$.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>0.985 ±0.030 OUR FIT</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>0.981 ±0.031 OUR AVERAGE</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.986 ±0.068 ±0.031</td><td>81k</td><td>HEISTER</td><td>01E</td><td>ALEC</td><td>1991-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.929 ±0.070 ±0.030</td><td>36k</td><td>ABREU</td><td>00L</td><td>DLPH</td><td>1992-1995 runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.98 ±0.22 ±0.10</td><td>46k</td><td>ACKERSTAFF</td><td>99d</td><td>OPAL</td><td>1990-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.70 ±0.16</td><td>54k</td><td>ACCIARRI</td><td>98R</td><td>L3</td><td>1991-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>1.03 ±0.11</td><td></td><td><sup>1</sup>ALBRECHT</td><td>98</td><td>ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.5-10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>1.05 ±0.35 ±0.04</td><td></td><td><sup>2</sup>ABE</td><td>970</td><td>SLD</td><td>1993-1995 SLC runs</td></tr><tr><td>1.007 ±0.040 ±0.015</td><td>55k</td><td>ALEXANDER</td><td>97f</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tr><td>0.94 ±0.21 ±0.07</td><td>18k</td><td>ACCIARRI</td><td>96H</td><td>L3</td><td>Repl. by ACCIARRI 98R</td></tr><tr><td>0.97 ±0.14</td><td></td><td><sup>3</sup>ALBRECHT</td><td>95C</td><td>ARG</td><td>Repl. by ALBRECHT 98</td></tr><tr><td>1.18 ±0.15 ±0.16</td><td></td><td>BUSKULIC</td><td>95d</td><td>ALEC</td><td>Repl. by HEISTER 01E</td></tr><tr><td>0.90 ±0.15 ±0.10</td><td>3230</td><td><sup>4</sup>ALBRECHT</td><td>93G</td><td>ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.4-10.6 GeV</td></tr></table>

¹Combined fit to ARGUS tau decay parameter measurements in ALBRECHT 98, ALBRECHT 95C, ALBRECHT 93G, and ALBRECHT 94E. ALBRECHT 98 use tau pair events of the type $τ^-τ^+ → (ℓ^-ν_ℓν_τ)(π^+π^0ν_τ)$, and their charged conjugates.

²ABE 970 assume $η = 0$ in their fit. Letting $η$ vary in the fit gives a $ξ$ value of $1.02 ± 0.36 ± 0.05$.

³Combined fit to ARGUS tau decay parameter measurements in ALBRECHT 95C, ALBRECHT 93G, and ALBRECHT 94E. ALBRECHT 95C uses events of the type $τ^-τ^+ → (ℓ^-ν_ℓν_τ)(h^+h^-h^+(π^0)ν_τ)$ and their charged conjugates.

⁴ALBRECHT 93G measurement determines $ξ$ for the case $ξ(e) = ξ(μ)$, but the authors point out that other LEP experiments determine the sign to be positive.

## ξ(e) PARAMETER

(V-A) theory predicts $ξ = 1$.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>0.994 ±0.040 OUR FIT</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>1.00 ±0.04 OUR AVERAGE</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1.011 ±0.094 ±0.038</td><td>44k</td><td>HEISTER</td><td>01E</td><td>ALEC</td><td>1991-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>1.01 ±0.12 ±0.05</td><td>17k</td><td>ABREU</td><td>00L</td><td>DLPH</td><td>1992-1995 runs</td></tr><tr><td>1.13 ±0.39 ±0.14</td><td>25k</td><td>ACKERSTAFF</td><td>99d</td><td>OPAL</td><td>1990-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>1.11 ±0.20 ±0.08</td><td></td><td><sup>1</sup>ALBRECHT</td><td>98</td><td>ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.5-10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>1.16 ±0.52 ±0.06</td><td></td><td>ABE</td><td>970</td><td>SLD</td><td>1993-1995 SLC runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.979 ±0.048 ±0.016</td><td>34k</td><td>ALEXANDER</td><td>97f</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tr><td>1.03 ±0.23 ±0.09</td><td></td><td>BUSKULIC</td><td>95d</td><td>ALEC</td><td>Repl. by HEISTER 01E</td></tr></table>

¹ALBRECHT 98 use tau pair events of the type $τ^-τ^+ → (ℓ^-ν_ℓν_τ)(π^+π^0ν_τ)$, and their charged conjugates.

## ξ(μ) PARAMETER

(V-A) theory predicts $ξ = 1$.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>1.030 ±0.059 OUR FIT</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>1.06 ±0.06 OUR AVERAGE</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1.030 ±0.120 ±0.050</td><td>46k</td><td>HEISTER</td><td>01E</td><td>ALEC</td><td>1991-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>1.16 ±0.19 ±0.06</td><td>22k</td><td>ABREU</td><td>00L</td><td>DLPH</td><td>1992-1995 runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.79 ±0.41 ±0.09</td><td>27k</td><td>ACKERSTAFF</td><td>99d</td><td>OPAL</td><td>1990-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>1.26 ±0.27 ±0.14</td><td></td><td><sup>1</sup>ALBRECHT</td><td>98</td><td>ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.5-10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>0.75 ±0.50 ±0.14</td><td></td><td>ABE</td><td>970</td><td>SLD</td><td>1993-1995 SLC runs</td></tr><tr><td>1.054 ±0.069 ±0.047</td><td>22k</td><td>ALEXANDER</td><td>97f</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tr><td>1.23 ±0.22 ±0.10</td><td></td><td>BUSKULIC</td><td>95d</td><td>ALEC</td><td>Repl. by HEISTER 01E</td></tr></table>

¹ALBRECHT 98 use tau pair events of the type $τ^-τ^+ → (ℓ^-ν_ℓν_τ)(π^+π^0ν_τ)$, and their charged conjugates.

## η(e or μ) PARAMETER

(V-A) theory predicts $η = 0$.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>0.013 ±0.020 OUR FIT</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>0.015 ±0.021 OUR AVERAGE</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.012 ±0.026 ±0.004</td><td>81k</td><td>HEISTER</td><td>01E</td><td>ALEC</td><td>1991-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>-0.05 ±0.036 ±0.037</td><td></td><td>ABREU</td><td>00L</td><td>DLPH</td><td>1992-1995 runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.027 ±0.055 ±0.005</td><td>46k</td><td>ACKERSTAFF</td><td>99d</td><td>OPAL</td><td>1990-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.27 ±0.14</td><td>54k</td><td>ACCIARRI</td><td>98R</td><td>L3</td><td>1991-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>-0.13 ±0.47 ±0.15</td><td></td><td>ABE</td><td>970</td><td>SLD</td><td>1993-1995 SLC runs</td></tr><tr><td>-0.015 ±0.061 ±0.062</td><td>31k</td><td>AMMAR</td><td>97B</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>0.03 ±0.18 ±0.12</td><td>8.2k</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>95</td><td>ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.5-10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tr><td>0.25 ±0.17 ±0.11</td><td>18k</td><td>ACCIARRI</td><td>96H</td><td>L3</td><td>Repl. by ACCIARRI 98R</td></tr><tr><td>-0.04 ±0.15 ±0.11</td><td></td><td>BUSKULIC</td><td>95d</td><td>ALEC</td><td>Repl. by HEISTER 01E</td></tr></table>

## η(μ) PARAMETER

(V-A) theory predicts $η = 0$.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>0.094 ±0.073 OUR FIT</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>0.17 ±0.15 OUR AVERAGE</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.160 ±0.150 ±0.060</td><td>46k</td><td>HEISTER</td><td>01E</td><td>ALEC</td><td>1991-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.72 ±0.32 ±0.15</td><td></td><td>ABREU</td><td>00L</td><td>DLPH</td><td>1992-1995 runs</td></tr><tr><td>-0.59 ±0.82 ±0.45</td><td></td><td><sup>1</sup>ABE</td><td>970</td><td>SLD</td><td>1993-1995 SLC runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.010 ±0.149 ±0.171</td><td>13k</td><td><sup>2</sup>AMMAR</td><td>97B</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tr><td>0.010 ±0.065 ±0.001</td><td>27k</td><td><sup>3</sup>ACKERSTAFF</td><td>99d</td><td>OPAL</td><td>1990-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>-0.24 ±0.23 ±0.18</td><td></td><td>BUSKULIC</td><td>95d</td><td>ALEC</td><td>Repl. by HEISTER 01E</td></tr></table>

¹Highly correlated (corr. = 0.92) with ABE 970 $ρ(μ)$ measurement.

²Highly correlated (corr. = 0.949) with AMMAR 97B $ρ(μ)$ value.

³ACKERSTAFF 99d result is dominated by a constraint on $η$ from the OPAL measurements of the $τ$ lifetime and $B(τ^- → μ^-ν_μν_τ)$ assuming lepton universality for the total coupling strength.

## δξ(e or μ) PARAMETER

(V-A) theory predicts $δξ = 0.75$.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>0.746 ±0.021 OUR FIT</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>0.744 ±0.022 OUR AVERAGE</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.776 ±0.045 ±0.024</td><td>81k</td><td>HEISTER</td><td>01E</td><td>ALEC</td><td>1991-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.779 ±0.070 ±0.028</td><td>36k</td><td>ABREU</td><td>00L</td><td>DLPH</td><td>1992-1995 runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.65 ±0.14 ±0.07</td><td>46k</td><td>ACKERSTAFF</td><td>99d</td><td>OPAL</td><td>1990-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.70 ±0.11</td><td>54k</td><td>ACCIARRI</td><td>98R</td><td>L3</td><td>1991-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.63 ±0.09</td><td></td><td><sup>1</sup>ALBRECHT</td><td>98</td><td>ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.5-10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>0.88 ±0.27 ±0.04</td><td></td><td><sup>2</sup>ABE</td><td>970</td><td>SLD</td><td>1993-1995 SLC runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.745 ±0.026 ±0.009</td><td>55k</td><td>ALEXANDER</td><td>97f</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tr><td>0.81 ±0.14 ±0.06</td><td>18k</td><td>ACCIARRI</td><td>96H</td><td>L3</td><td>Repl. by ACCIARRI 98R</td></tr><tr><td>0.65 ±0.12</td><td></td><td><sup>3</sup>ALBRECHT</td><td>95C</td><td>ARG</td><td>Repl. by ALBRECHT 98</td></tr><tr><td>0.88 ±0.11 ±0.07</td><td></td><td>BUSKULIC</td><td>95d</td><td>ALEC</td><td>Repl. by HEISTER 01E</td></tr></table>

¹Combined fit to ARGUS tau decay parameter measurements in ALBRECHT 98, ALBRECHT 95C, ALBRECHT 93G, and ALBRECHT 94E. ALBRECHT 98 use tau pair events of the type $τ^-τ^+ → (ℓ^-ν_ℓν_τ)(π^+π^0ν_τ)$, and their charged conjugates.

²ABE 970 assume $η = 0$ in their fit. Letting $η$ vary in the fit gives a $δξ$ value of $0.87 ± 0.27 ± 0.04$.

³Combined fit to ARGUS tau decay parameter measurements in ALBRECHT 95C, ALBRECHT 93G, and ALBRECHT 94E. ALBRECHT 95C uses events of the type $τ^-τ^+ → (ℓ^-ν_ℓν_τ)(h^+h^-h^+(π^0)ν_τ)$ and their charged conjugates.

## δξ(e) PARAMETER

(V-A) theory predicts $δξ = 0.75$.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>0.734 ±0.028 OUR FIT</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>0.731 ±0.029 OUR AVERAGE</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.778 ±0.066 ±0.024</td><td>44k</td><td>HEISTER</td><td>01E</td><td>ALEC</td><td>1991-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.85 ±0.12 ±0.04</td><td>17k</td><td>ABREU</td><td>00L</td><td>DLPH</td><td>1992-1995 runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.72 ±0.31 ±0.14</td><td>25k</td><td>ACKERSTAFF</td><td>99d</td><td>OPAL</td><td>1990-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.56 ±0.14 ±0.06</td><td></td><td><sup>1</sup>ALBRECHT</td><td>98</td><td>ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.5-10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>0.85 ±0.43 ±0.08</td><td></td><td>ABE</td><td>970</td><td>SLD</td><td>1993-1995 SLC runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.720 ±0.032 ±0.010</td><td>34k</td><td>ALEXANDER</td><td>97f</td><td>CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>
• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

1.11 ±0.17 ±0.07 BUSKULIC 95D ALEP Repl. by HEISTER 01E
1 ALBRECHT 98 use tau pair events of the type τ⁻τ⁺ → (ℓ⁻ν_ℓν_τ)(π⁺π⁰ν_τ), and their charged conjugates.

### (δξ)(μ) PARAMETER

(V-A) theory predicts (δξ) = 0.75.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>0.778 ±0.037 OUR FIT</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>0.79 ±0.04 OUR AVERAGE</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.786 ±0.066 ±0.028</td><td>46k</td><td>HEISTER</td><td>01E ALEP</td><td>1991-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.86 ±0.13 ±0.04</td><td>22k</td><td>ABREU</td><td>00L DLPH</td><td>1992-1995 runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.63 ±0.23 ±0.05</td><td>27k</td><td>ACKERSTAFF</td><td>99D OPAL</td><td>1990-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.73 ±0.18 ±0.10</td><td></td><td>1 ALBRECHT</td><td>98 ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.5-10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>0.82 ±0.32 ±0.07</td><td></td><td>ABE</td><td>97O SLD</td><td>1993-1995 SLC runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.786 ±0.041 ±0.032</td><td>22k</td><td>ALEXANDER</td><td>97F CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

0.71 ±0.14 ±0.06 BUSKULIC 95D ALEP Repl. by HEISTER 01E
1 ALBRECHT 98 use tau pair events of the type τ⁻τ⁺ → (ℓ⁻ν_ℓν_τ)(π⁺π⁰ν_τ), and their charged conjugates.

### ξ(π) PARAMETER

(V-A) theory predicts ξ(π) = 1.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>0.993 ±0.022 OUR FIT</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>0.994 ±0.023 OUR AVERAGE</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.994 ±0.020 ±0.014</td><td>27k</td><td>HEISTER</td><td>01E ALEP</td><td>1991-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.81 ±0.17 ±0.02</td><td></td><td>ABE</td><td>97O SLD</td><td>1993-1995 SLC runs</td></tr><tr><td>1.03 ±0.06 ±0.04</td><td>2.0k</td><td>COAN</td><td>97 CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.987 ±0.057 ±0.027</td><td></td><td>BUSKULIC</td><td>95D ALEP</td><td>Repl. by HEISTER 01E</td></tr><tr><td>0.95 ±0.11 ±0.05</td><td></td><td>1 BUSKULIC</td><td>94D ALEP</td><td>1990+1991 LEP run</td></tr></tbody></table>

1 Superseded by BUSKULIC 95D.

### ξ(ρ) PARAMETER

(V-A) theory predicts ξ(ρ) = 1.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>0.994 ±0.008 OUR FIT</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>0.994 ±0.009 OUR AVERAGE</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.987 ±0.012 ±0.011</td><td>59k</td><td>HEISTER</td><td>01E ALEP</td><td>1991-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.99 ±0.12 ±0.04</td><td></td><td>ABE</td><td>97O SLD</td><td>1993-1995 SLC runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.995 ±0.010 ±0.003</td><td>66k</td><td>ALEXANDER</td><td>97F CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>1.022 ±0.028 ±0.030</td><td>1.7k</td><td>1 ALBRECHT</td><td>94E ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.4-10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1.045 ±0.058 ±0.032</td><td></td><td>BUSKULIC</td><td>95D ALEP</td><td>Repl. by HEISTER 01E</td></tr><tr><td>1.03 ±0.11 ±0.05</td><td></td><td>2 BUSKULIC</td><td>94D ALEP</td><td>1990+1991 LEP run</td></tr></tbody></table>

1 ALBRECHT 94e measure the square of this quantity and use the sign determined by ALBRECHT 90i to obtain the quoted result.

2 Superseded by BUSKULIC 95D.

### ξ(a₁) PARAMETER

(V-A) theory predicts ξ(a₁) = 1.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>1.001 ±0.027 OUR FIT</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>1.002 ±0.028 OUR AVERAGE</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1.000 ±0.016 ±0.024</td><td>35k</td><td>1 HEISTER</td><td>01E ALEP</td><td>1991-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>1.02 ±0.13 ±0.03</td><td>17.2k</td><td>ASNER</td><td>00 CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>1.29 ±0.26 ±0.11</td><td>7.4k</td><td>2 ACKERSTAFF</td><td>97R OPAL</td><td>1992-1994 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.85 <sup>+0.15</sup><sub>-0.17</sub> ±0.05</td><td></td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>95C ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.5-10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>1.25 ±0.23 <sup>+0.15</sup><sub>-0.08</sub></td><td>7.5k</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>93C ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.4-10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1.08 <sup>+0.46</sup><sub>-0.41</sub> ±0.14</td><td>2.6k</td><td>3 AKERS</td><td>95P OPAL</td><td>Repl. by ACKER-STAFF 97R</td></tr><tr><td>0.937 ±0.116 ±0.064</td><td></td><td>BUSKULIC</td><td>95D ALEP</td><td>Repl. by HEISTER 01E</td></tr></tbody></table>

1 HEISTER 01e quote 1.000 ± 0.016 ± 0.013 ± 0.020 where the errors are statistical, systematic, and an uncertainty due to the final state model. We combine the systematic error and model uncertainty.

2 ACKERSTAFF 97r obtain this result with a model independent fit to the hadronic structure functions. Fitting with the model of Kuhn and Santamaria (ZPHY C48, 445 (1990)) gives 0.87 ± 0.16 ± 0.04, and with the model of Isgur et al. (PR D39,1357 (1989)) they obtain 1.20 ± 0.21 ± 0.14.

3 AKERS 95p obtain this result with a model independent fit to the hadronic structure functions. Fitting with the model of Kuhn and Santamaria (ZPHY C48, 445 (1990)) gives 0.87 ± 0.27 <sup>+0.05</sup><sub>-0.06</sub>, and with the model of Isgur et al. (PR D39,1357 (1989)) they obtain 1.10 ± 0.31 <sup>+0.13</sup><sub>-0.14</sub>.

### ξ(all hadronic modes) PARAMETER

(V-A) theory predicts ξ = 1.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>0.995 ±0.007 OUR FIT</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>0.997 ±0.007 OUR AVERAGE</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.992 ±0.007 ±0.008</td><td>102k</td><td>1 HEISTER</td><td>01E ALEP</td><td>1991-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.997 ±0.027 ±0.011</td><td>39k</td><td>2 ABREU</td><td>00L DLPH</td><td>1992-1995 runs</td></tr><tr><td>1.02 ±0.13 ±0.03</td><td>17.2k</td><td>3 ASNER</td><td>00 CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>1.032 ±0.031</td><td>37k</td><td>4 ACCIARRI</td><td>98R L3</td><td>1991-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.93 ±0.10 ±0.04</td><td></td><td>ABE</td><td>97O SLD</td><td>1993-1995 SLC runs</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tbody><tr><td>1.29 ±0.26 ±0.11</td><td>7.4k</td><td>5 ACKERSTAFF</td><td>97R OPAL</td><td>1992-1994 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>0.995 ±0.010 ±0.003</td><td>66k</td><td>6 ALEXANDER</td><td>97F CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>1.03 ±0.06 ±0.04</td><td>2.0k</td><td>7 COAN</td><td>97 CLEO</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>1.017 ±0.039</td><td></td><td>8 ALBRECHT</td><td>95C ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.5-10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>1.25 ±0.23 <sup>+0.15</sup><sub>-0.08</sub></td><td>7.5k</td><td>9 ALBRECHT</td><td>93C ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.4-10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>0.970 ±0.053 ±0.011</td><td>14k</td><td>10 ACCIARRI</td><td>96H L3</td><td>Repl. by ACCIARRI 98R</td></tr><tr><td>1.08 <sup>+0.46</sup><sub>-0.41</sub> ±0.14</td><td>2.6k</td><td>11 AKERS</td><td>95P OPAL</td><td>Repl. by ACKER-STAFF 97R</td></tr><tr><td>1.006 ±0.032 ±0.019</td><td></td><td>12 BUSKULIC</td><td>95D ALEP</td><td>Repl. by HEISTER 01E</td></tr><tr><td>1.022 ±0.028 ±0.030</td><td>1.7k</td><td>13 ALBRECHT</td><td>94E ARG</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 9.4-10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>0.99 ±0.07 ±0.04</td><td></td><td>14 BUSKULIC</td><td>94D ALEP</td><td>1990+1991 LEP run</td></tr><tr><td>1.14 ±0.34 <sup>+0.34</sup><sub>-0.17</sub></td><td>3.9k</td><td>9 ALBRECHT</td><td>90I ARG</td><td>Repl. by ALBRECHT 93C</td></tr></tbody></table>

1 HEISTER 01E quote 0.992 ± 0.007 ± 0.006 ± 0.005 where the errors are statistical, systematic, and an uncertainty due to the final state model. We combine the systematic error and model uncertainty. They use τ → πν_τ, τ → Kν_τ, τ → ρν_τ, and τ → a₁ν_τ decays.

2 ABREU 00L use τ⁻ → h⁻ ≥ 0π⁰ν_τ decays.

3 ASNER 00 use τ⁻ → π⁻2π⁰ν_τ decays.

4 ACCIARRI 98R use τ → πν_τ, τ → Kν_τ, and τ → ρν_τ decays.

5 ACKERSTAFF 97R use τ → a₁ν_τ decays.

6 ALEXANDER 97f use τ → ρν_τ decays.

7 COAN 97f use h⁺h⁻ energy correlations.

8 Combined fit to ARGUS tau decay parameter measurements in ALBRECHT 95c, ALBRECHT 93G, and ALBRECHT 94E.

9 Uses τ → a₁ν_τ decays. Replaced by ALBRECHT 95c.

10 ACCIARRI 96H use τ → πν_τ, τ → Kν_τ, and τ → ρν_τ decays.

11 AKERS 95P use τ → a₁ν_τ decays.

12 BUSKULIC 95D use τ → πν_τ, τ → ρν_τ, and τ → a₁ν_τ decays.

13 ALBRECHT 94E measure the square of this quantity and use the sign determined by ALBRECHT 90i to obtain the quoted result. Uses τ → a₁ν_τ decays. Replaced by ALBRECHT 95c.

14 BUSKULIC 94d use τ → πν_τ and τ → ρν_τ decays. Superseded by BUSKULIC 95D.

### ξ'(μ) PARAMETER

(V-A) theory predicts ξ' = 1.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>0.22 ±0.94 ±0.42</strong></td><td>165</td><td>BODROV</td><td>23</td><td>BELL</td><td>E<sup>ee</sup><sub>cm</sub> = 10.6 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

### η(μ) PARAMETER

(V-A) theory predicts η = 0.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>-1.3 ±1.5 ±0.8</strong></td><td>71k</td><td>1 SHIMIZU</td><td>18A BELL</td><td>τ⁻ → ν_τ e⁻ ν_γ and<br>τ⁻ → ν_τ µ⁻ ν_γ</td></tr></tbody></table>

1 SHIMIZU 18A measurement procedure fits a distribution affected by η(μ), ξ_κ(μ) and η''(μ), floating η'(μ) and ξ_κ(μ) and fixing η''(μ) = 0. The contribution of η''(μ) is suppressed by m_μ/m_τ.

### ξ(κ)(e or μ) PARAMETER

(V-A) theory predicts ξ_κ(e or μ) = 0.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>0.5 ±0.4 ±0.2</strong></td><td>149k</td><td>1,2 SHIMIZU</td><td>18A BELL</td><td>τ⁻ → ν_τ e⁻ ν_γ and<br>τ⁻ → ν_τ µ⁻ ν_γ</td></tr></tbody></table>

1 SHIMIZU 18A measurement procedure fits a distribution of radiative tau decays into both electrons and muons affected by η(e or μ), ξ_κ(e or μ) and η''(e or μ), floating η(e or μ) and ξ_κ(e or μ) and fixing η''(e or μ) = 0. The contribution of η''(e or μ) is suppressed by m_e/m_τ for tau decaying to electrons and by m_μ/m_τ for tau decaying to muons.

2 Error correlated with SHIMIZU 18A (ξ_κ)(e) and (ξ_κ)(μ) values.

### ξ(κ)(e) PARAMETER

(V-A) theory predicts ξ_κ(e) = 0.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>-0.4 ±0.8 ±0.9</strong></td><td>78k</td><td>1,2 SHIMIZU</td><td>18A BELL</td><td>τ⁻ → ν_τ e⁻ ν_γ</td></tr></tbody></table>

1 SHIMIZU 18A measurement procedure fits a distribution affected by η(e), (ξ_κ)(e) and η''(e), floating (ξ_κ)(e) and fixing η''(e) = 0 and η''(e) = 0. The contribution of η''(e) is suppressed by m_e/m_τ.

2 Error correlated with SHIMIZU 18A (ξ_κ)(e or μ) value.

### ξ(κ)(μ) PARAMETER

(V-A) theory predicts ξ_κ(μ) = 0.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>0.8 ±0.5 ±0.3</strong></td><td>71k</td><td>1,2 SHIMIZU</td><td>18A BELL</td><td>τ⁻ → ν_τ µ⁻ ν_γ</td></tr></tbody></table>

1 SHIMIZU 18A measurement procedure fits a distribution affected by η(μ), ξ_κ(μ) and η''(μ), floating η(μ) and ξ_κ(μ) and fixing η''(μ) = 0. The contribution of η''(μ) is suppressed by m_μ/m_τ.

2 Error correlated with SHIMIZU 18A (ξ_κ)(e or μ) value.

## τ REFERENCES

<table><tbody><tr><td>AAD</td><td>23BM PRL 131 151802</td><td>G. Aad et al.</td><td>(ATLAS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ADACHI</td><td>23A PRL 130 181803</td><td>I. Adachi et al.</td><td>(BELLE II Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ADACHI</td><td>23C PR D108 032006</td><td>I. Adachi et al.</td><td>(BELLE II Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ANASHIN</td><td>23A PPN 54 185</td><td>V.V. Anashin et al.</td><td>(VEPP-4M KEDR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BODROV</td><td>23 PRL 131 021801</td><td>D. Bodrov et al.</td><td>(BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>Also</td><td>PR D108 012003</td><td>D. Bodrov et al.</td><td>(BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>TSUZUKI</td><td>23 JHEP 2308 116</td><td>N. Tsuzuki et al.</td><td>(BELLE Collab.)</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><thead><tr><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>TUMASYAN</td><td>23AS</td><td>PRL 131 151803</td><td>A. Tumasyan et al. (CMS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>INAMI</td><td>22</td><td>JHEP 2204 110</td><td>K. Inami et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BRYMAN</td><td>21</td><td>PR D104 075032</td><td>D.A. Bryman, S. Ito, R. Shrock (BRCO, TRIU+)</td></tr><tr><td>SIRUNYAN</td><td>21D</td><td>JHEP 2101 163</td><td>A.M. Sirunyan et al. (CMS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>UNO</td><td>21D</td><td>JHEP 2110 019</td><td>K. Uno et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>SAHOO</td><td>20</td><td>PR D102 111101</td><td>D. Sahoo et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>19</td><td>PR D100 071101</td><td>K. Sahoo et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LEES</td><td>18B</td><td>PRL D98 032010</td><td>J.P. Lees et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>SHIMIZU</td><td>18A</td><td>PTEP 2018 023C01</td><td>N. Shimizu et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AAD</td><td>16BA</td><td>EPJ C76 232</td><td>G.Aad et al. (ATLAS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AAJ</td><td>15AI</td><td>JHEP 1502 121</td><td>R. Aaj et al. (LHCb Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LEES</td><td>15G</td><td>PR D91 051103</td><td>J.P. Lees et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>14D</td><td>PR D90 012001</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESHI Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BELOUS</td><td>14</td><td>SRL 112 031801</td><td>K. Belous et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LEVICHEV</td><td>14</td><td>SPU 57 66</td><td>E.B. Levichev et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>RYU</td><td>14</td><td>PR D89 072009</td><td>S. Ryu et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AAJ</td><td>13H</td><td>PR D89 051106</td><td>R. Ryu et al. (LHCb Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>13</td><td>PR B719 346</td><td>Y. Miyazaki et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LEES</td><td>12M</td><td>PR D85 031102</td><td>J.P. Lees et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>Also</td><td></td><td>PR D85 099904 (errat.)</td><td>BABAR Collab.</td></tr><tr><td>LEES</td><td>12X</td><td>PR D86 092010</td><td>J.P. Lees et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LEES</td><td>12Y</td><td>PR D86 092013</td><td>J.P. Lees et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>DE</td><td>12Z</td><td>PR D86 092014</td><td>J. Baringer et al. (PDG Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>DEL-AMO-SA...</td><td>11E</td><td>PR D83 032002</td><td>P. del Amo Sanchez et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>11</td><td>PL B699 251</td><td>Y. Miyazaki et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AUBERT</td><td>10B</td><td>PRL 104 021802</td><td>B. Aubert et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AUBERT</td><td>10F</td><td>PR 105 051602</td><td>B. Aubert et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>YASAKA</td><td>10</td><td>PR D81 010001</td><td>K. Hayasaka et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LEE</td><td>10</td><td>PR D81 113007</td><td>M.J. Lee et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LEES</td><td>10A</td><td>PR D81 111101</td><td>J.P. Lees et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10A</td><td>PL B682 355</td><td>Y. Miyazaki et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>10A</td><td>PL B692 4</td><td>Y. Miyazaki et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABERT</td><td>09AK</td><td>PR D79 020005</td><td>B. Aubert et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AUBERT</td><td>09P</td><td>PR D79 012004</td><td>B. Aubert et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AUBERT</td><td>09W</td><td>PR 103 021801</td><td>B. Aubert et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>GROZIN</td><td>09A</td><td>PAN 72 1203</td><td>A.G. Grozin, I.B. Khriplovich, A.S. Rudenko (NOVO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>INAMI</td><td>09A</td><td>PL B672 209</td><td>K. Inami et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>09A</td><td>PL B672 317</td><td>Y. Miyazaki et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABERT</td><td>08</td><td>PR D77 118001</td><td>B. Aubert et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AUBERT</td><td>08K</td><td>PRL 100 071802</td><td>B. Aubert et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>FUJIKAWA</td><td>08K</td><td>PRL D78 027006</td><td>M. Fujikawa et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>HAYASAKA</td><td>08</td><td>PL B666 16</td><td>K. Hayasaka et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>08</td><td>PL B664 54</td><td>Y. Miyazaki et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>NISHIO</td><td>08</td><td>PL B664 35</td><td>Y. Nishio et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ANASHIN</td><td>07</td><td>JETPL 85 347</td><td>V.V. Anashin et al. (KEDR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AUBERT</td><td>07AP</td><td>PR D76 051104</td><td>B. Aubert et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AUBERT</td><td>07BK</td><td>PR D75 0251803</td><td>B. Aubert et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AUBERT</td><td>07J</td><td>PRL 98 061803</td><td>B. Aubert et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BELOUS</td><td>07</td><td>PRL 99 011801</td><td>K. Belous et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>EIDELMAN</td><td>07</td><td>MPL A22 159</td><td>S. Eidelman, M. Passera (NOVO, PADO)</td></tr><tr><td>EPIFANOV</td><td>07</td><td>PL B654 65</td><td>D. Epifanov et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>07</td><td>PL B648 341</td><td>Y. Miyazaki et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABDALLAH</td><td>06A</td><td>EPJ C46 1</td><td>J. Abdallah et al. (DELPHI Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AUBERT</td><td>06C</td><td>PRL 96 041801</td><td>B. Aubert et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AUBERT,B</td><td>06C</td><td>PRL D73 112003</td><td>B. Aubert et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>INAMI</td><td>06</td><td>PL B643 5</td><td>K. Inami et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>06</td><td>PL B632 51</td><td>S.J. Pizaki et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>MIYAZAKI</td><td>06A</td><td>EPJ B639 159</td><td>Y. Miyazaki et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>PDG</td><td>06</td><td>JP G33 1</td><td>W.-M. Yao et al. (PDG Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>YUSA</td><td>06</td><td>PL B640 138</td><td>Y. Yusa et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ARMS</td><td>05</td><td>PRL 94 241802</td><td>K. Arms et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AUBERT,B</td><td>05A</td><td>PRL 95 041802</td><td>B. Aubert et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AUBERT,B</td><td>05F</td><td>PRL 97 012003</td><td>B. Aubert et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AUBERT,B</td><td>05W</td><td>PR D72 072001</td><td>B. Aubert et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AUBERT,BE</td><td>05D</td><td>PR D79 191801</td><td>B. Aubert et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ENARI</td><td>05</td><td>PL B622 218</td><td>Y. Enari et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>HAYASAKA</td><td>05</td><td>PL B613 20</td><td>K. Hayasaka et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>SCHAEL</td><td>05C</td><td>PR L421 1911</td><td>S. Schael et al. (ALEPH Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABBIENDI</td><td>04J</td><td>EPJ C35 437</td><td>G. Abbiendi et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABDALLAH</td><td>04K</td><td>EPJ C35 159</td><td>J. Abdallah et al. (DELPHI Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABDALLAH</td><td>04T</td><td>EPJ C36 283</td><td>J. Abdallah et al. (DELPHI Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABE</td><td>04B</td><td>PRL 92 171802</td><td>K. Abe et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ACHARD</td><td>04J</td><td>PL PRL 92 121801</td><td>P. Achard et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AUBERT</td><td>04G</td><td>PRL 92 121801</td><td>A. Abert et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ENARI</td><td>04J</td><td>PRL 93 081803</td><td>Y. Enari et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>PDG</td><td>04</td><td>PL B592 1</td><td>S. Eidelman et al. (PDG Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>YUSA</td><td>04</td><td>PL B589 103</td><td>Y. Yusa et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABBIENDI</td><td>03</td><td>PL B551 35</td><td>G. Abbiendi et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BRIERE</td><td>03</td><td>PL B521 181802E</td><td>R. Briere et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>HEISTER</td><td>03F</td><td>EPJ C30 291</td><td>A. Heister et al. (ALEPH Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>INAMI</td><td>03</td><td>PL B551 16</td><td>K. Inami et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>CHEN</td><td>02C</td><td>PL D66 071101</td><td>S. Chen et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>REGAN</td><td>02</td><td>PRL 88 071805</td><td>B.C. Regan et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABBIENDI</td><td>02J</td><td>EPJ C10 653</td><td>G. Abbiendi et al. (DELPHI Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABREU</td><td>01M</td><td>PR D20 617</td><td>P. Abreu et al. (DELPHI Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ACCIARRI</td><td>01D</td><td>PL B507 47</td><td>M. Acciarri et al. (L3 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AICHARD</td><td>01F</td><td>PL B519 189</td><td>P. Aichard et al. (L3 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ANASTASSOV</td><td>01</td><td>PRL 86 4467</td><td>A. Anastassov et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>HEISTER</td><td>01E</td><td>EPJ C22 217</td><td>G. Abbiendi et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABBIENDI</td><td>00A</td><td>EPJ C22 23</td><td>G. Abbiendi et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABBIENDI</td><td>00C</td><td>EPJ C13 213</td><td>G. Abbiendi et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABBIENDI</td><td>00D</td><td>EPJ C13 197</td><td>G. Abbiendi et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABREU</td><td>00B</td><td>EPJ C16 229</td><td>P. Abreu et al. (DELPHI Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ACCIARRI</td><td>00L</td><td>PL B479 67</td><td>M. Acciarri et al. (L3 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AHMED</td><td>00</td><td>PR D41 071101</td><td>S. Ahmed et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>00</td><td>PL B485 37</td><td>H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ASNER</td><td>00</td><td>PR D81 012002</td><td>D.M. Asner et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ASNER</td><td>00B</td><td>PR D62 072006</td><td>D.M. Asner et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BERGFELD</td><td>00</td><td>PL R84 830</td><td>T. Bergfeld et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BROWDER</td><td>00</td><td>PR D60 052004</td><td>T.E. Browder et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>EDWARDS</td><td>00A</td><td>PR D61 072003</td><td>K.W. Edwards et al. G.A. Gonzalez-Springberg et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>GONZALEZ-S...</td><td>00</td><td>NP D582 3</td><td>G. Gonzalez-Springberg et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABBIENDI</td><td>99H</td><td>PL B447 134</td><td>G. Abbiendi et al. (DELPHI Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABREU</td><td>99A</td><td>EPJ C10 201</td><td>P. Abreu et al. (DELPHI Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ACKERSTAFF</td><td>99E</td><td>EPJ C8 3</td><td>K. Ackerstaff et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ACKERSTAFF</td><td>99E</td><td>EPJ C8 3</td><td>K. Ackerstaff et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BARATE</td><td>99K</td><td>PR D91 012001</td><td>R. Barate et al. (ALEPH Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BARATE</td><td>99R</td><td>EPJ C11 599</td><td>R. Barate et al. (ALEPH Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BISHAI</td><td>99</td><td>PL B28 821</td><td>M. Bishai et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>GODANG</td><td>99</td><td>PR D59 091303</td><td>R. Godang et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>RICCHI</td><td>99</td><td>PR D60 071202</td><td>S.J. Ricchichi et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ACCIARRI</td><td>98C</td><td>PL B426 207</td><td>M. Acciarri et al. (L3 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ACCIARRI</td><td>98E</td><td>PL B434 169</td><td>M. Acciarri et al. (L3 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ACCIARRI</td><td>98E</td><td>PL B438 405</td><td>M. Acciarri et al. (L3 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ACKERSTAFF</td><td>98M</td><td>EPJ C4 193</td><td>K. Ackerstaff et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ACKERSTAFF</td><td>98N</td><td>PL B431 188</td><td>K. Ackerstaff et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>98</td><td>PL B431 179</td><td>H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BARATE</td><td>98</td><td>EPJ C1 65</td><td>R. Barate et al. (ALEPH Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BARATE</td><td>98E</td><td>EPJ C4 29</td><td>R. Barate et al. (ALEPH Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BLISS</td><td>98</td><td>PR D57 5903</td><td>D.W. Bliss et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><thead><tr><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>ABE</td><td>97O</td><td>PRL 78 4691</td><td>K. Abe et al. (STD Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ACKERSTAFF</td><td>97J</td><td>PL B404 213</td><td>K. Ackerman et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ACKERSTAFF</td><td>97L</td><td>ZPHY C74 403</td><td>K. Ackerman et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ACKERSTAFF</td><td>97R</td><td>ZPHY C75 593</td><td>K. Ackerman et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALEXANDER</td><td>97F</td><td>PR D56 5320</td><td>J.P. Alexander et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AMMAR</td><td>97B</td><td>PR L78 4686</td><td>R. Ammar et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ANASTASSOV</td><td>97E</td><td>PR D55 2559</td><td>A. Anastassov et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>Also</td><td></td><td>PR D58 119903 (errat.)</td><td>A. Anastassov et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ANDERSON</td><td>97</td><td>PRL 79 3814</td><td>S. Anderson et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AVERY</td><td>97</td><td>PR D55 1119</td><td>P. Avery et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BARATE</td><td>97I</td><td>ZPHY C74 387</td><td>R. Barate et al. (ALEPH Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BARATE</td><td>97G</td><td>PL B414 362</td><td>R. Barate et al. (ALEPH Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BERGFELD</td><td>97</td><td>PRL 79 2406</td><td>T. Bergfeld et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BONVICINI</td><td>97</td><td>PRL 79 1221</td><td>G. Bonvicini et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BUSKULIC</td><td>97C</td><td>ZPHY C74 263</td><td>D. Buskulic et al. (ALEPH Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>COAN</td><td>97</td><td>PR D55 7291</td><td>T.E. Coan et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>EDWARDS</td><td>97F</td><td>PR D56 3919</td><td>K.W. Edwards et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>EDWARDS</td><td>97B</td><td>PR D56 5297</td><td>K.W. Edwards et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ESCRIBANO</td><td>97</td><td>PL B395 369</td><td>R. Escribano, E. Masso (BARC, PARIT)</td></tr><tr><td>ABREU</td><td>96B</td><td>PL B365 448</td><td>P. Abreu et al. (DELPHI Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ACCIARRI</td><td>96H</td><td>PL B377 313</td><td>M. Acciarri et al. (L3 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ACCIARRI</td><td>96K</td><td>PL B309 187</td><td>M. Acciarri et al. (L3 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>96J</td><td>PL D2 2637</td><td>M.S. Aaloo (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>96E</td><td>PRPL 276 223</td><td>H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALEXANDER</td><td>96D</td><td>PL B369 163</td><td>G. Alexander et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALEXANDER</td><td>96E</td><td>PL B374 341</td><td>G. Alexander et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALEXANDER</td><td>965</td><td>PL B388 437</td><td>G. Alexander et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BALEST</td><td>97R</td><td>PR D50 20</td><td>J.Z. Bai et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BALEST</td><td>96</td><td>PL B388 402</td><td>R. Balest et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BARTELT</td><td>96</td><td>PRL 76 4119</td><td>J.E. Bartelt et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BUSKULIC</td><td>96</td><td>ZPHY C70 579</td><td>D. Buskulic et al. (ALEPH Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BUSKULIC</td><td>96C</td><td>ZPHY C70 561</td><td>D. Buskulic et al. (ALEPH Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>COAN</td><td>97</td><td>PR D54 4037</td><td>T.E. Coan et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABE</td><td>95Y</td><td>PR D52 4828</td><td>K. Abe et al. (STD Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABE</td><td>95T</td><td>PRL 735 715</td><td>P. Abreu et al. (DELPHI Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABREU</td><td>95U</td><td>PL B359 411</td><td>P. Abreu et al. (DELPHI Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ACCIARRI</td><td>95</td><td>PL B345 93</td><td>M. Acciarri et al. (L3 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ACCIARRI</td><td>95F</td><td>PL B352 487</td><td>R. Akers et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AKERS</td><td>94E</td><td>PL D66 31</td><td>R. Akers et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AKERS</td><td>95I</td><td>ZPHY C66 543</td><td>R. Akers et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AKERS</td><td>95P</td><td>ZPHY C67 45</td><td>R. Akers et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AKERS</td><td>95Y</td><td>ZPHY C68 555</td><td>R. Akers et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>95</td><td>PL B341 441</td><td>H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>95E</td><td>PL B339 576</td><td>H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>95G</td><td>ZPHY C68 25</td><td>H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>95H</td><td>ZPHY C68 215</td><td>H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BALEST</td><td>95C</td><td>PRL 75 3809</td><td>R. Balest et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BERNABEU</td><td>95</td><td>NP B436 474</td><td>J. Bernabeu et al. (ALEPH Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BUSKULIC</td><td>95C</td><td>PL B346 371</td><td>D. Buskulic et al. (L3 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BUSKULIC</td><td>95D</td><td>PL B346 379</td><td>D. Buskulic et al. (ALEPH Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>Also</td><td></td><td>PL B363 265 (errat.)</td><td>D. Buskulic et al. (ALEPH Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABREU</td><td>94K</td><td>PL B334 435</td><td>P. Abreu et al. (DELPHI Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AKERS</td><td>94E</td><td>PL B328 207</td><td>R. Akers et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AKERS</td><td>94G</td><td>PL B339 278</td><td>R. Akers et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AKERS</td><td>94E</td><td>PL B337 383</td><td>H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ARTUSO</td><td>94</td><td>PRL 72 3762</td><td>M. Artuso et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BARTELT</td><td>94</td><td>PRL 73 1890</td><td>J.E. Bartelt et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BATTLE</td><td>94</td><td>PR L73 1079</td><td>M. Battle et al. (TPC/2gamma Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BAUER</td><td>94</td><td>PR D50 13</td><td>D.A. Bauer et al. (ALEPH Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BUSKULIC</td><td>94D</td><td>PL B321 168</td><td>D. Buskulic et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BUSKULIC</td><td>94E</td><td>PL B332 209</td><td>D. Buskulic et al. (ALEPH Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BUSKULIC</td><td>94F</td><td>PL B332 219</td><td>D. Buskulic et al. (ALEPH Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BIAUT</td><td>94B</td><td>PL B73 134</td><td>D. Glaub et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>GIBAUT</td><td>94B</td><td>PL B73 934</td><td>O. Adriani et al. (L3 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ADRIANI</td><td>93M</td><td>PRPL 236 1</td><td>H. Adriani et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>93C</td><td>ZPHY C58 61</td><td>H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>93E</td><td>PL B316 508</td><td>H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BALEST</td><td>93</td><td>PR D47 3671</td><td>R. Balest et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BEAN</td><td>93</td><td>PR L70 138</td><td>A. Bean et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BORTOLETO</td><td>93</td><td>PL R71 1791</td><td>D. Bortolotto et al. (BARC Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ESCRIBANO</td><td>93</td><td>PL B301 419</td><td>R. Escribano, E. Masso (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>PROCARIO</td><td>93</td><td>PR L70 1207</td><td>M. Procario et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABREU</td><td>92N</td><td>ZPHY C55 555</td><td>P. Abreu et al. (DELPHI Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ACTON</td><td>92F</td><td>PL B281 405</td><td>D.P. Acton et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ACTON</td><td>92F</td><td>PL B288 373</td><td>P.D. Acton et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AKERB</td><td>92</td><td>PL 69 3610</td><td>D.S. Akerib et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>PROCARIO</td><td>92</td><td>PL D71 3395 (errat.)</td><td>D.S. Akerib et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92D</td><td>ZPHY C53 367</td><td>H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92K</td><td>ZPHY C55 179</td><td>H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92M</td><td>PL B292 221</td><td>H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>92Q</td><td>ZPHY C56 339</td><td>H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AMMAR</td><td>92</td><td>PR D49 3976</td><td>R. Ammar et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ARTUSO</td><td>93</td><td>PRL 69 3278</td><td>M. Artuso et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BAI</td><td>92</td><td>PL B9 3021</td><td>J.Z. Bai et al. (BES Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BATTLE</td><td>92</td><td>PL B291 488</td><td>M. Battle et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BUSKULIC</td><td>92J</td><td>ZPHY C54 459</td><td>D. Buskulic et al. (ALEPH Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>DECAMP</td><td>92C</td><td>PL B297 459</td><td>D. Decamp et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ADAVE</td><td>92J</td><td>PL B265 451</td><td>B. Adeva et al. (L3 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>91D</td><td>PL B260 259</td><td>H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>GRIFOLI</td><td>91D</td><td>PL B266 201</td><td>G. Alexander et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ANTREASYAN</td><td>91</td><td>PL B259 216</td><td>D. Antreasyan et al. (Crystal Ball Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>GRIFOLI</td><td>91</td><td>PL B255 611</td><td>J.A. Gribof, A. Mendez (BARC Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABACHI</td><td>PR D41 1414</td><td>S. Abachi et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td><td>H. Abachi et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>90E</td><td>PL B246 278</td><td>H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>90I</td><td>PL B250 164</td><td>H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BEHREND</td><td>90</td><td>ZPHY C46 537</td><td>H.J. Behrend et al. (CELLO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BOWCOCK</td><td>90</td><td>PR D41 805</td><td>T.J.V. Bowcock et al. (BARC, WILL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>DELAGUILA</td><td>90</td><td>PL B252 116</td><td>M. Delaguil et al. (BARC Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>GOLDBERG</td><td>90</td><td>PL D251 223</td><td>M. Gold et al. (BARD Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>WU</td><td>90</td><td>PR D41 2339</td><td>D.Y. Wu et al. (Mark II Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABACHI</td><td>89B</td><td>PR D40 902</td><td>S. Abachi et al. (HRS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BEHREND</td><td>89B</td><td>PL B222 163</td><td>H.J. Behrend et al. (CELLO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>JANSSEN</td><td>89</td><td>PL B228 273</td><td>H. Janssen et al. (Crystal Ball Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>GONWORT</td><td>89</td><td>PL D21 7</td><td>C. Gonwort et al. (JGDE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ADEVA</td><td>88</td><td>PR D38 2665</td><td>B. Adeva et al. (Mark-J Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>88B</td><td>PL B202 149</td><td>H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>88L</td><td>ZPHY C41 1</td><td>H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>88M</td><td>ZPHY C41 405</td><td>H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AMMAR</td><td>88</td><td>PR D37 1750</td><td>D. Amidei et al. (MARK Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BEHREND</td><td>88</td><td>PL B200 226</td><td>H.J. Behrend et al. (CELLO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BRAUNSCH...</td><td>88C</td><td>ZPHY C39 331</td><td>W. Braunschweig et al. (TASSO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>KEH</td><td>88</td><td>PL B212 123</td><td>S. Keh et al. (Crystal Ball Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>TSCHIRHART</td><td>88B</td><td>PL B205 407</td><td>R. Tschirhart et al. (HRS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABACHI</td><td>88</td><td>PL B197 291</td><td>S. Abachi et al. (HRS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABACHI</td><td>88E</td><td>PL 59 2519</td><td>S. Abachi et al. (HRS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ADLER</td><td>88B</td><td>PR D59 1527</td><td>J. Adler et al. (Mark III Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AIHARA</td><td>87B</td><td>PR D35 1553</td><td>H. Aihara et al. (TPC Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AIHARA</td><td>87C</td><td>PL R9 5751</td><td>H. Aihara et al. (TPC Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>87L</td><td>PL B185 223</td><td>H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>87B</td><td>PL B199 580</td><td>H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BAND</td><td>87</td><td>PL B198 297</td><td>H.R. Band et al. (MAC Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BAND</td><td>87</td><td>PL 59 415</td><td>H.R. Band et al. (MAC Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BARINGER</td><td>87</td><td>PL 59 1993</td><td>P. Baringer et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><tbody><tr><td>BEBEK</td><td>87C</td><td>PR D36 690</td><td>C. Bebek et al.</td><td>(CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BURCHAT</td><td>87</td><td>PR D35 27</td><td>P.R. Burchat et al.</td><td>(Mark II Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BYLSMA</td><td>87</td><td>PR D35 2269</td><td>B.G. Bylsma et al.</td><td>(HRS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>COFFMAN</td><td>87</td><td>PR D36 2185</td><td>D.M. Coffman et al.</td><td>(Mark III Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>DERRICK</td><td>87</td><td>PL B189 260</td><td>M. Derrick et al.</td><td>(HRS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>FORD</td><td>87</td><td>PR D35 408</td><td>W.T. Ford et al.</td><td>(MAC Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>FORD</td><td>87B</td><td>PR D36 1971</td><td>W.T. Ford et al.</td><td>(MAC Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>GAN</td><td>87</td><td>PRL 59 411</td><td>K.K. Gan et al.</td><td>(Mark II Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>GAN</td><td>87B</td><td>PL B197 561</td><td>K.K. Gan et al.</td><td>(Mark II Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AIHARA</td><td>86E</td><td>PRL 57 1836</td><td>H. Aihara et al.</td><td>(TPC Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BARTEL</td><td>86D</td><td>PL B182 216</td><td>W. Bartel et al.</td><td>(JADE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>PDG</td><td>86</td><td>PL 170B 1</td><td>M. Aguilar-Benitez et al.</td><td>(CERN, CIT+)</td></tr><tr><td>RUCKSTUHL</td><td>86</td><td>PRL 56 2132</td><td>W. Ruckstuhl et al.</td><td>(DELCO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>SCHMIDKE</td><td>86</td><td>PRL 57 527</td><td>W.B. Schmidke et al.</td><td>(Mark II Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>YELTON</td><td>86</td><td>PRL 56 812</td><td>J.M. Yelton et al.</td><td>(Mark II Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALTHOFF</td><td>85</td><td>ZPHY C26 521</td><td>M. Althoff et al.</td><td>(TASSO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ASH</td><td>85B</td><td>PL 55 2118</td><td>W.W. Ash et al.</td><td>(MAC Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BALTRUSAITI...</td><td>85</td><td>PR 55 1842</td><td>R.M. Baltrusaitis et al.</td><td>(Mark III Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BARTEL</td><td>85F</td><td>PL 161B 188</td><td>W. Bartel et al.</td><td>(JADE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BEHREND</td><td>85</td><td>PR D32 2468</td><td>S. Behrends et al.</td><td>(CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BELTRAMI</td><td>85</td><td>PRL 54 1775</td><td>I. Beltrami et al.</td><td>(HRS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BERGER</td><td>85</td><td>ZPHY C28 1</td><td>C. Berger et al.</td><td>(PLUTO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BURCHAT</td><td>85</td><td>PRL 54 2489</td><td>P.R. Burchat et al.</td><td>(Mark II Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>FERNANDEZ</td><td>85</td><td>PRL 54 1624</td><td>E. Fernandez et al.</td><td>(MAC Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>MILLS</td><td>85</td><td>PRL 54 624</td><td>G.B. Mills et al.</td><td>(DELCO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AIHARA</td><td>84C</td><td>PR D30 2436</td><td>H. Aihara et al.</td><td>(TPC Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BEHREND</td><td>84</td><td>ZPHY C23 103</td><td>H.J. Behrend et al.</td><td>(CELLO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>MILLS</td><td>84</td><td>PL 52 1944</td><td>G.B. Mills et al.</td><td>(DELCO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BEHREND</td><td>83C</td><td>PL 127B 270</td><td>H.J. Behrend et al.</td><td>(CELLO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>SILVERMAN</td><td>83</td><td>PRL 271 1996</td><td>D.J. Silverman, G.L. Shaw</td><td>(UCI)</td></tr><tr><td>BEHREND</td><td>82</td><td>PL 114B 282</td><td>H.J. Behrend et al.</td><td>(CELLO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>82BLER</td><td>82</td><td>PRL 48 1586</td><td>C.A. Berger et al.</td><td>(Mark II Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>82BLER</td><td>82D</td><td>PL 109B 119</td><td>C.A. Blocker et al.</td><td>(Mark II Collab.) J</td></tr><tr><td>FELDMAN</td><td>82</td><td>PL 48 48</td><td>G.J. Feldman et al.</td><td>(Mark II Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>HAYES</td><td>81B</td><td>PRL 252 869</td><td>K.G. Hayes et al.</td><td>(Mark II Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BERGER</td><td>81B</td><td>PL 99B 489</td><td>C. Berger et al.</td><td>(PLUTO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>DORFAN</td><td>81</td><td>PRL 46 215</td><td>J.M. Dorfan et al.</td><td>(Mark II Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BRANDELIK</td><td>80</td><td>PL 92B 199</td><td>R. Brandelik et al.</td><td>(TASSO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ZUELTENTZ</td><td>80</td><td>PL 96B 214</td><td>A.A. Zholents et al.</td><td>(NOVO)</td></tr><tr><td>Also</td><td>80</td><td>SJPN 34 814</td><td>A.A. Zholents et al.</td><td>(NOVO)</td></tr><tr><td>BACINO</td><td>79B</td><td>PRL 42 749</td><td>W.J. Bacino et al.</td><td>(DELCO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>KIRKBY</td><td>79</td><td>SLAC-PUB-2419</td><td>J. Kirkby</td><td>(SLAC) J</td></tr><tr><td>BACINO</td><td>78B</td><td>PRL 41 13</td><td>W.J. Bacino et al.</td><td>(DELCO Collab.) J</td></tr><tr><td>Also</td><td>80</td><td>Tokyo Conf. 249</td><td>J. Kirz</td><td>(STON)</td></tr><tr><td>Also</td><td>80</td><td>PL 96B 214</td><td>A.A. Zholents et al.</td><td>(NOVO)</td></tr><tr><td>BRANDELIK</td><td>78</td><td>PL 73B 109</td><td>R. Brandelik et al.</td><td>(DASP Collab.) J</td></tr><tr><td>FELDMAN</td><td>78</td><td>Tokyo Conf. 777</td><td>G.J. Feldman et al.</td><td>(SLAC) J</td></tr><tr><td>JAROS</td><td>78</td><td>PRL 40 1120</td><td>J. Jaros et al.</td><td>(LGW Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>PERL</td><td>75</td><td>PRL 35 1489</td><td>M.L. Perl et al.</td><td>(LBL, SLAC)</td></tr></tbody></table>

OTHER RELATED PAPERS

<table><tbody><tr><td>DAVIER</td><td>06</td><td>RMP 78 1043</td><td>M. Davier, A. Hocker, Z. Zhang</td><td>(LALO, PARIN+)</td></tr><tr><td>RAHAL-CAL...</td><td>98</td><td>UJP A13 695</td><td>G. Rahal-Callot</td><td>(ETH)</td></tr><tr><td>GENTILE</td><td>96</td><td>PRPL 274 2878</td><td>S. Gentile, M. Pohl</td><td>(ROMAL, ETH)</td></tr><tr><td>WEINSTEIN</td><td>93</td><td>ARNPS 43 457</td><td>A.J. Weinstein, R. Stroynowski</td><td>(CIT, SMU)</td></tr><tr><td>PERL</td><td>92</td><td>RPP 55 653</td><td>M.L. Perl</td><td>(SLAC)</td></tr><tr><td>PICH</td><td>90</td><td>MPL A5 1995</td><td>A. Pich</td><td>(VALE)</td></tr><tr><td>BARISH</td><td>88</td><td>PRPL 157 1</td><td>B.C. Barish, R. Stroynowski</td><td>(CIT)</td></tr><tr><td>GAN</td><td>88</td><td>PR A3 531</td><td>K.K. Gan, M.L. Perl</td><td>(SLAC)</td></tr><tr><td>HAYES</td><td>88</td><td>PR D38 3351</td><td>K.G. Hayes, M.L. Perl</td><td>(SLAC)</td></tr><tr><td>PERL</td><td>80</td><td>ARNPS 30 299</td><td>M.L. Perl</td><td>(SLAC)</td></tr></tbody></table>

Heavy Charged Lepton Searches

Charged Heavy Lepton MASS LIMITS

Sequential Charged Heavy Lepton (L$^{±}$) MASS LIMITS

These experiments assumed that a fourth generation L$^{±}$ decayed to a fourth generation ν$_{L}$ (or L$^{0}$) where ν$_{L}$ was stable, or that L$^{±}$ decays to a light ℓ$_{ℓ}$ via mixing.

See the “Quark and Lepton Compositeness, Searches for” Listings for limits on radia-
tively decaying excited leptons, i.e. ℓ$^{*}$ → ℓγ. See the “WIMPs and other Particle
Searches” section for heavy charged particle search limits in which the charged particle
could be a lepton.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (GeV)</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&gt;100.8</td><td>95</td><td>ACHARD</td><td>01B L3</td><td>Decay to νW</td></tr><tr><td>&gt;101.9</td><td>95</td><td>ACHARD</td><td>01B L3</td><td>m<sub>L</sub> - m<sub>L<sup>0</sup></sub> &gt; 15 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table><table><tbody><tr><td>&gt;81.5</td><td>95</td><td>ACKERSTAFF</td><td>98C OPAL</td><td>Assumed m<sub>L</sub> - m<sub>L<sup>0</sup></sub> &gt; 8.4 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&gt;80.2</td><td>95</td><td>ACKERSTAFF</td><td>98C OPAL</td><td>m<sub>L<sup>0</sup></sub> &gt; m<sub>L</sub>± and L<sup>±</sup> → νW</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;48 or &gt; 61</td><td>95</td><td>1 ACCIARRI</td><td>96G L3</td><td>Decay to massless ν's</td></tr><tr><td>&gt;63.9</td><td>95</td><td>ALEXANDER</td><td>96P OPAL</td><td>m<sub>L</sub> - m<sub>L<sup>0</sup></sub> &gt; 7 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&gt;63.5</td><td>95</td><td>BUSKULIC</td><td>96S Alep</td><td>Decay to massless ν's</td></tr><tr><td>&gt;65</td><td>95</td><td>BUSKULIC</td><td>96S Alep</td><td>Decay to massless ν's</td></tr><tr><td>none 10-225</td><td>95</td><td>2 AHMED</td><td>94 CNTR</td><td>H1 Collab. at HERA</td></tr><tr><td>none 12.6-29.6</td><td>95</td><td>KIM</td><td>91B AMY</td><td>Massless ν assumed</td></tr><tr><td>&gt;44.3</td><td>95</td><td>AKRAWY</td><td>90G OPAL</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>none 0.5-10</td><td>95</td><td>3 RILES</td><td>90 MRK2</td><td>For (m<sub>L<sup>0</sup></sub> - m<sub>L<sup>0</sup></sub>) &gt; 0.25-0.4GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&gt;8</td><td>95</td><td>4 STOKER</td><td>89 MRK2</td><td>For (m<sub>L<sup>+</sup></sub> - m<sub>L<sup>0</sup></sub>) = 0.4 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&gt;12</td><td>95</td><td>4 STOKER</td><td>89 MRK2</td><td>For m<sub>L<sup>0</sup></sub> = 0.9 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>none 18.4-27.6</td><td>95</td><td>5 ABE</td><td>88 VNS</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>&gt;25.5</td><td>95</td><td>6 ADACHI</td><td>88B TOPZ</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>none 1.5-22.0</td><td>95</td><td>BEHREND</td><td>88C CELL</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>&gt;41</td><td>90</td><td>7 ALBAJAR</td><td>87B UA1</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tbody><tr><td>&gt; 22.5</td><td>95</td><td><sup>8</sup>ADEVA</td><td>85</td><td>MRKJ</td></tr><tr><td>&gt; 18.0</td><td>95</td><td><sup>9</sup>BARTEL</td><td>83</td><td>JADE</td></tr><tr><td>none 4-14.5</td><td>95</td><td><sup>10</sup>BERGER</td><td>81B PLUT</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>&gt; 15.5</td><td>95</td><td><sup>11</sup>BRANDELIK</td><td>81 TASS</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>&gt; 13.</td><td></td><td><sup>12</sup>AZIMOV</td><td>80</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>&gt; 16.</td><td>95</td><td><sup>13</sup>BARBER</td><td>80B CNTR</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>&gt; 0.490</td><td></td><td><sup>14</sup>ROTHE</td><td>69</td><td>RVUE</td></tr></tbody></table>

1 ACCIARRI 96G assumes LEP result that the associated neutral heavy lepton mass > 40 GeV.

2 The AHMED 94 limits are from a search for neutral and charged sequential heavy leptons at HERA via the decay channels $L^- \to e\gamma$, $L^- \to \nu W^-$, $L^- \to eZ$; and $L^0 \to \nu\gamma$, $L^0 \to e^-W^+$, $L^- \to \nu Z$, where the $W$ decays to $\ell\nu\ell$, or to jets, and $Z$ decays to $\ell^+\ell^-$ or jets.

3 RILES 90 limits were the result of a special analysis of the data in the case where the mass difference $m_{L^-} - m_{L^0}$ was allowed to be quite small, where $L^0$ denotes the neutrino into which the sequential charged lepton decays. With a slightly reduced $m_{L^+}$ range, the mass difference extends to about 4 GeV.

4 STOKER 89 (Mark II at PEP) gives bounds on charged heavy lepton ($L^+$) mass for the generalized case in which the corresponding neutral heavy lepton ($L^0$) in the SU(2) doublet is not of negligible mass.

5 ABE 88 search for $L^+$ and $L^-$ hadrons looking for acoplanar jets. The bound is valid for $m_\nu < 10$ GeV.

6 ADACHI 88b search for hadronic decays giving acoplanar events with large missing energy. $E_{cm}^{ee} = 52$ GeV.

7 Assumes associated neutrino is approximately massless.

8 ADEVA 85 analyze one-isolated-muon data and sensitive to $\tau < 10$ nanosec. Assume $J(\text{lepton}) = 0.30$. $E_{cm} = 40-47$ GeV.

9 BARTEL 83 limit is from PETRA $e^+e^-$ experiment with average $E_{cm} = 34.2$ GeV.

10 BERGER 81b is DESY DORIS and PETRA experiment. Looking for $e^+e^- \to L^+L^-$.

11 BRANDELIK 81 is DESY-PETRA experiment. Looking for $e^+e^- \to L^+L^-$.

12 AZIMOV 80 estimated probabilities for $M + N$ type events in $e^+e^- \to L^+L^-$ deducing semi-hadronic decay multiplicities of $L$ from $e^+e^-$ annihilation data at $E_{cm} = (2/3)m_L$. Obtained above limit comparing these with $e^+e^-$ data (BRANDELIK 80).

13 BARBER 80b looked for $e^+e^- \to L^+L^-$, $L \to \nu_L^+X$ with MARK-J at DESY-PETRA.

14 ROTHE 69 examines previous data on µ pair production and π and K decays.

Stable Charged Heavy Lepton (L$^{±}$) MASS LIMITS

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (GeV)</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&gt;102.6</td><td>95</td><td>ACHARD</td><td>01B L3</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&gt; 28.2</td><td>95</td><td><sup>15</sup>ADACHI</td><td>90C TOPZ</td></tr><tr><td>none 18.5-42.8</td><td>95</td><td>AKRAWY</td><td>900 OPAL</td></tr><tr><td>&gt; 26.5</td><td>95</td><td>DECAMP</td><td>90F ALEP</td></tr><tr><td>none m<sub>µ</sub>-36.3</td><td>95</td><td>SODERSTROM90</td><td>MRK2</td></tr></tbody></table>

15 ADACHI 90C put lower limits on the mass of stable charged particles with electric charge $Q$ satisfying $2/3 < Q/e < 4/3$ and with spin 0 or 1/2. We list here the special case for a stable charged heavy lepton.

Charged Long-Lived Heavy Lepton MASS LIMITS

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (GeV)</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>CHG</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&gt;574</td><td>95</td><td>CHATRCHYAN13AB CMS</td><td></td><td></td><td>Leptons singlet model</td></tr><tr><td>&gt;102.0</td><td>95</td><td>ABBENDI</td><td>03L OPAL</td><td></td><td>pair produced in e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup></td></tr><tr><td>&gt; 0.1</td><td></td><td><sup>16</sup>ANSORGE</td><td>73B HBC</td><td>-</td><td>Long-lived</td></tr><tr><td>none 0.55-4.5</td><td></td><td><sup>17</sup>BUSHNIN</td><td>73 CNTR</td><td>-</td><td>Long-lived</td></tr><tr><td>none 0.2-0.92</td><td></td><td><sup>18</sup>BARNA</td><td>68 CNTR</td><td>-</td><td>Long-lived</td></tr><tr><td>none 0.97-1.03</td><td></td><td><sup>18</sup>BARNA</td><td>68 CNTR</td><td>-</td><td>Long-lived</td></tr></tbody></table>

16 ANSORGE 73b looks for electron pair production and electron-like Bremsstrahlung.

17 BUSHNIN 73 is SERPUKHOV 70 GeV p experiment. Masses assume mean life above $7 \times 10^{-10}$ and $3 \times 10^{-8}$ respectively. Calculated from cross section (see “Charged Quasi-Stable Lepton Production Differential Cross Section” below) and 30 GeV muon pair production data.

18 BARNA 68 is SLAC photoproduction experiment.

Doubly-Charged Heavy Lepton MASS LIMITS

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (GeV)</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>CHG</th></tr></thead></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

none 1-9 GeV 90 <sup>19</sup>CLARK 81 SPEC ++

19 CLARK 81 is FNAL experiment with 209 GeV muons. Bounds apply to $\mu_P$ which couples with full weak strength to muon. See also section on “Doubly-Charged Lepton Production Cross Section.”

Doubly-Charged Lepton Production Cross Section
($\mu N$ Scattering)

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (cm<sup>2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>CHG</th></tr></thead></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<6. × 10<sup>-38</sup> 0 <sup>20</sup>CLARK 81 SPEC ++

20 CLARK 81 is FNAL experiment with 209 GeV muon. Looked for $\mu^+\mu^-$ nucleon → $\bar{\mu}_P^0X$, $\bar{\mu}_P^0X \to \mu^+\mu^-$ and $\mu^+\mu^+X$, $\mu^+\mu^+X \to 2\mu^+\nu\mu$. Above limits are for $\sigma \times \text{BR}$ taken from their mass-dependence plot figure 2.
REFERENCES FOR Heavy Charged Lepton Searches

<table>
  <tbody>
    <tr>
      <td>CHATRCHYAN 13AB</td>
      <td>JHEP 1307 122</td>
      <td>S. Chatrchyan et al.</td>
      <td>(CMS Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Also</td>
      <td>JHEP 2211 149 (errat.)</td>
      <td>S. Chatrchyan et al.</td>
      <td>(CMS Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>ABBENDI 03L</td>
      <td>PL B572 8</td>
      <td>G. Abbiendi et al.</td>
      <td>(OPAL Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>ACHARD 01B</td>
      <td>PL B517 75</td>
      <td>P. Achard et al.</td>
      <td>(L3 Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>ACKERSTAFF 98C</td>
      <td>EPJ C1 45</td>
      <td>K. Ackerman et al.</td>
      <td>(OPAL Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>ACCIARRI 96G</td>
      <td>PL B377 304</td>
      <td>M. Acciarri et al.</td>
      <td>(L3 Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>ALEXANDER 96P</td>
      <td>PL B385 433</td>
      <td>G. Alexander et al.</td>
      <td>(OPAL Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>BUSKULIC 96S</td>
      <td>PL B384 439</td>
      <td>D. Buskulic et al.</td>
      <td>(ALEPH Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>AHMED 94</td>
      <td>PL B340 205</td>
      <td>T. Ahmed et al.</td>
      <td>(H1 Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>KIM 91B</td>
      <td>IJMP A6 2583</td>
      <td>G.N. Kim et al.</td>
      <td>(AMY Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>ADACHI 90C</td>
      <td>PL B244 352</td>
      <td>I. Adachi et al.</td>
      <td>(TOPAZ Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>AKRAWY 90G</td>
      <td>PL B240 250</td>
      <td>M.Z. Akrawy et al.</td>
      <td>(OPAL Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>AKRAWY 90D</td>
      <td>PL B252 290</td>
      <td>M.Z. Akrawy et al.</td>
      <td>(OPAL Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>DECAMP 90F</td>
      <td>PL B236 511</td>
      <td>D. Decamp et al.</td>
      <td>(ALEPH Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>RILES 90</td>
      <td>PR D42 1</td>
      <td>K. Riles et al.</td>
      <td>(Mark II Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>SODERSTROM 90</td>
      <td>PRL 64 2980</td>
      <td>E. Soderstrom et al.</td>
      <td>(Mark II Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>STOKER 89</td>
      <td>PR D39 1811</td>
      <td>D.P. Stoker et al.</td>
      <td>(Mark II Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>ABE 88</td>
      <td>PRL 61 915</td>
      <td>K. Abe et al.</td>
      <td>(VENUS Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>ADACHI 88B</td>
      <td>PR D37 1339</td>
      <td>I. Adachi et al.</td>
      <td>(TOPAZ Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>BEHREND 88C</td>
      <td>ZPHY C41 7</td>
      <td>H.J. Behrend et al.</td>
      <td>(CELLO Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>ALBAJAR 87B</td>
      <td>PL B185 241</td>
      <td>C. Albajar et al.</td>
      <td>(UA1 Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>ADEVA 85</td>
      <td>PL 152B 439</td>
      <td>B. Adeva et al.</td>
      <td>(Mark-J Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Also</td>
      <td>PRPL 109 131</td>
      <td>B. Adeva et al.</td>
      <td>(Mark-J Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>BARTEL 83</td>
      <td>PL 123B 353</td>
      <td>W. Bartel et al.</td>
      <td>(JADE Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>BERGER 81B</td>
      <td>PL 99B 489</td>
      <td>C. Berger et al.</td>
      <td>(PLUTO Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>BRANDELIK 81</td>
      <td>PL 99B 163</td>
      <td>R. Brandelik et al.</td>
      <td>(TASSO Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>CLARK 81</td>
      <td>PRL 46 299</td>
      <td>A.R. Clark et al.</td>
      <td>(UCB, LBL, FNAL+)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Also</td>
      <td>PR D25 2762</td>
      <td>W.H. Smith et al.</td>
      <td>(LBL, FNAL, PRIN)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>AZIMOV 80</td>
      <td>JETPL 32 664<br>Translated from ZETFP 32 677.</td>
      <td>Y.I. Azimov, V.A. Khoze</td>
      <td>(PNPI)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>BARBER 80B</td>
      <td>PRL 45 1904</td>
      <td>D.P. Barber et al.</td>
      <td>(Mark-J Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>BRANDELIK 80</td>
      <td>PL 92B 199</td>
      <td>R. Brandelik et al.</td>
      <td>(TASSO Collab.)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>ANSORGE 73B</td>
      <td>PR D7 26</td>
      <td>R.E. Ansorge et al.</td>
      <td>(CAVE)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>BUSHNIN 73</td>
      <td>NP B58 476</td>
      <td>Y.B. Bushnin et al.</td>
      <td>(SERP)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Also</td>
      <td>PL 42B 136</td>
      <td>S.V. Golovkin et al.</td>
      <td>(SERP)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>ROTHE 69</td>
      <td>NP B10 241</td>
      <td>K.W. Rothe, A.M. Wolsky</td>
      <td>(PENN)</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>BARNA 68</td>
      <td>PR 173 1391</td>
      <td>A. Barna et al.</td>
      <td>(SLAC, STAN)</td>
    </tr>
  </tbody>
</table>

OTHER RELATED PAPERS

<table>
  <tr>
    <td>PERL</td>
    <td>81</td>
    <td>SLAC-PUB-2752</td>
    <td>M.L. Perl</td>
    <td>(SLAC)</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td colspan="5">Physics in Collision Conference.</td>
  </tr>
</table>

Neutrino Properties

NEUTRINO PROPERTIES

Revised July 2023 by P. Vogel (Caltech) and A. Piepke (Uni-
versity of Alabama).

The Neutrino Properties Listings concern measurements of
various properties of neutrinos. Nearly all of the measurements,
so far only limits, actually concern superpositions of the mass
eigenstates $\nu_i$, which are in turn related to the weak eigenstates
$\nu_\ell$, via the neutrino mixing matrix

$$
|\nu_{\ell}\rangle = \sum_{i} U_{\ell i} |\nu_{i}\rangle .
$$

In the analogous case of quark mixing via the CKM matrix,
the smallness of the off-diagonal terms (small mixing angles)
permits a “dominant eigenstate” approximation. However, the
results of neutrino oscillation searches show that the mixing
matrix contains two large mixing angles and a third angle that
is not exceedingly small. We cannot therefore associate any
particular state |νᵢ⟩ with any particular lepton label e, μ or τ.
Nevertheless, note that in the standard labeling the |ν₁⟩ has
the largest |νₑ⟩ component (~2/3), |ν₂⟩ contains ~1/3 of the
|νₑ⟩ component and |ν₃⟩ contains only a small ~2.5% |νₑ⟩
component.

Neutrinos are produced in weak decays with a definite lep-
ton flavor, and are typically detected by the charged current
weak interaction again associated with a specific lepton fla-
vor. Hence, the listings for the neutrino mass that follow are
separated into the three associated charged lepton categories.
Other properties (mean lifetime, magnetic moment, charge and

charge radius) are no longer separated this way. If needed, the
associated lepton flavor is reported in the footnotes.

Measured quantities (mass-squared, magnetic moments, mean lifetimes, etc.) all depend upon the mixing parameters |U<sub>li</sub>|<sup>2</sup>, but to some extent also on experimental conditions (e.g., on energy resolution). Many of these observables, in particular mass-squared, cannot distinguish between Dirac and Majorana neutrinos and are unaffected by CP phases.

Direct neutrino mass measurements are usually based on
the analysis of the kinematics of charged particles (leptons,
pions) emitted together with neutrinos (flavor states) in various
weak decays. The most sensitive neutrino mass measurement
to date, involving electron type antineutrinos, is based on
fitting the shape of the beta spectrum. The quantity m<sub>νe</sub><sup>2(eff)</sup> =
∑<sub>i</sub> |U<sub>ei</sub>|<sup>2</sup> m<sub>νi</sub><sup>2</sup> is determined or constrained, where the sum is
over all mass eigenvalues m<sub>νi</sub> that are too close together to
be resolved experimentally. (The quantity m<sub>νe</sub><sup>eff</sup> = √<span style="text-decoration:overline;">m<sub>νe</sub><sup>2(eff)</sup></span> is
often denoted ⟨m<sub>β</sub>⟩ in the literature.) If the energy resolution
is better than Δm<sub>ij</sub><sup>2</sup> ≡ m<sub>νi</sub><sup>2</sup> - m<sub>νj</sub><sup>2</sup>, the corresponding heavier
m<sub>νi</sub> and mixing parameter could be determined by fitting the
resulting spectral anomaly (step or kink).

The dependence of $m_{\nu_e}$ on the mass of the lightest neutrino is shown in Fig. 14.11 of the *Neutrino Masses, Mixing, and Oscillations* review. In the case of inverted ordering there is a minimum possible value of $m_{\nu_e}^{\text{eff}}$, approximately $\sqrt{(\Delta m_{32}^2)} \sim 50$ meV. If $m_{\nu_e}^{\text{eff}}$ is found to be larger than this value, it is impossible, based on this information only, to decide which ordering is realized in nature. On the other hand, if the $m_{\nu_e}^{\text{eff}}$ is less than ~50 meV, only the normal mass ordering is possible.

A limit on $m_{\nu_e}^{2(eff)}$ implies an upper limit on the minimum value $m_{\nu_e}^2$ of $m_{\nu_i}^2$, independent of the mixing parameters $U_{ei}$: $m_{\nu_e}^2 \le m_{\nu_e}^{2(eff)}$. However, if and when the value of $m_{\nu_e}^{2(eff)}$ is determined then its combination with the results derived from neutrino oscillations that give us the values of the neutrino mass-squared differences $\Delta m_{ij}^2 \equiv m_i^2 - m_j^2$, including eventually also their signs, and the mixing parameters $|U_{ei}|^2$, the individual neutrino mass squares $m_{\nu_j}^2 = m_{\nu_e}^{2(eff)} - \sum_i |U_{ei}|^2 \Delta m_{ij}^2$ can be determined.

So far solar, reactor, atmospheric and accelerator neutrino
oscillation experiments can be consistently described using
three active neutrino flavors, i.e. two mass splittings and three
mixing angles. However, several experiments with radioactive
sources, reactors, and accelerators imply the possible existence
of one or more non-interacting, i.e. sterile, neutrino species
that might be observable since they couple, albeit weakly, to
the flavor neutrinos |ν<sub>l</sub>⟩. In that case, the neutrino mixing
matrix would be n × n unitary matrix with n > 3.

Combined three neutrino analyses determine the squared mass differences and all three mixing angles to within reasonable accuracy. For given |Δm<sub>ij</sub><sup>2</sup>| a limit on m<sub>νe</sub><sup>2(eff)</sup> from beta decay defines an upper limit on the maximum value m<sub>max</sub> of m<sub>νi</sub>: m<sub>max</sub><sup>2</sup> ≤ m<sub>νe</sub><sup>2(eff)</sup> + Σ<sub>i<j</sub> |Δm<sub>ij</sub><sup>2</sup>|. The analysis of the low energy
beta decay of tritium, combined with the oscillation results, thus limits all active neutrino masses. Traditionally, experimental neutrino mass limits obtained from pion decay $\pi^+ \to \mu^+ + \nu_\mu$ or the shape of the spectrum of decay products of the $\tau$ lepton did not distinguish between flavor and mass eigenstates. These results are reported as limits of the $\mu$ and $\tau$ based neutrino mass. After the determination of the $|\Delta m^2_{ij}|$'s and the mixing angles $\theta_{ij}$, the corresponding neutrino mass limits are no longer competitive with those derived from low energy beta decays.

The spread of arrival times of the neutrinos from SN1987A, coupled with the measured neutrino energies, provided a time-of-flight limit on a quantity similar to $\langle m_\beta \rangle \equiv \sqrt{m_{\nu_e}^2(\text{eff})}$. This statement, clothed in various degrees of sophistication, has been the basis for a very large number of papers. The resulting limits, however, are no longer comparable with the limits from tritium beta decay.

Constraint, or eventually a value, of the sum of the neutrino masses $m_{tot}$ can be determined from the analysis of the cosmic microwave background anisotropy, combined with the galaxy redshift surveys and other data. These limits are reported in a separate table (Sum of Neutrino Masses, $m_{tot}$). Obviously, $m_{tot}$ represents an upper limit for all $m_i$ values. Note that many reported $m_{tot}$ limits are considerably more stringent than the listed $m_{\nu_e}^{\text{eff}}$ limits. Discussion concerning the model dependence of the $m_{tot}$ limit is continuing.

### $\bar{\nu}$ MASS (electron based)

Those limits given below are for the square root of $m_{\nu_e}^{2(\text{eff})} = \sum_i |U_{ei}|^2$ and $m_{\nu_i}^2$. Limits that come from the kinematics of $^3\text{H}\beta\bar{\nu}$ decay are the square roots of the limits for $m_{\nu_e}^{2(\text{eff})}$. Obtained from the measurements reported in the Listings for "$\bar{\nu}$ Mass Squared," below.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (eV)</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt; 0.8</td><td>90</td><td>1 AKER</td><td>22</td><td>3&beta; H decay</td></tr></tbody></table><p>• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •</p><table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;155</td><td>90</td><td>2 ESAHANI</td><td>23</td><td>CRES 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 1.1</td><td>90</td><td>3 AKER</td><td>19</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 2.05</td><td>95</td><td>4 ASEEV</td><td>11</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 5.8</td><td>95</td><td>5 PAGLIAROLI</td><td>10</td><td>ASTR SN1987A</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 2.3</td><td>95</td><td>6 KRAUS</td><td>05</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 21.7</td><td>90</td><td>7 ARNABOLDI</td><td>03A</td><td>BOLO 187&Re&beta; decay</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 5.7</td><td>95</td><td>8 LOREDO</td><td>02</td><td>ASTR SN1987A</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 2.5</td><td>95</td><td>9 LOBASHEV</td><td>99</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 2.8</td><td>95</td><td>10 WEINHEIMER</td><td>99</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 4.35</td><td>95</td><td>11 BELESEV</td><td>95</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 12.4</td><td>95</td><td>12 CHING</td><td>95</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 92</td><td>95</td><td>13 HIDDEMANN</td><td>95</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>15 +32/15</td><td></td><td>HIDDEMANN</td><td>95</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 19.6</td><td>95</td><td>KERNAN</td><td>95</td><td>ASTR SN 1987A</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 7.0</td><td>95</td><td>14 STOEFFL</td><td>95</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 7.2</td><td>95</td><td>15 WEINHEIMER</td><td>93</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 11.7</td><td>95</td><td>16 HOLZSCHUH</td><td>92B</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 13.1</td><td>95</td><td>17 KAWAKAMI</td><td>91</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 9.3</td><td>95</td><td>18 ROBERTSON</td><td>91</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 14</td><td>95</td><td>AVIGNONE</td><td>90</td><td>ASTR SN 1987A</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 16</td><td></td><td>SPERGEL</td><td>88</td><td>ASTR SN 1987A</td></tr><tr><td>17 to 40</td><td></td><td>19 BORIS</td><td>87</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr></tbody></table>

### $\bar{\nu}$ MASS SQUARED (electron based)

Given troubling systematics which result in improbably negative estimators of $m_{\nu_e}^{2(\text{eff})} = \sum_i |U_{ei}|^2 m_{\nu_i}^2$, in many experiments, we use only KRAUS 05, LOBASHEV 99, and AKER 22 for our average.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (eV<sup>2</sup>)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>0.08 ± 0.30</strong> OUR AVERAGE</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.1 ± 0.3</td><td>1 AKER</td><td>22</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>-0.67 ± 2.53</td><td>2 ASEEV</td><td>11</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>-0.6 ± 2.2 ± 2.1</td><td>3 KRAUS</td><td>05</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td colspan="4">• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •</td></tr><tr><td>-1.0 ± 0.9</td><td>4 AKER</td><td>19</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>-1.1</td><td>5 LOBASHEV</td><td>99</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>-1.9 ± 3.4 ± 2.2</td><td>6 WEINHEIMER</td><td>99</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>-3.7 ± 5.3 ± 2.1</td><td>7 BELESEV</td><td>95</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>-22 ± 4.8</td><td>8 HIDDEMANN</td><td>95</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>129 ± 6010</td><td>8 HIDDEMANN</td><td>95</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>313 ± 5994</td><td>9 HIDDEMANN</td><td>95</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>-130 ± 20 ± 15</td><td>9 STOEFFL</td><td>95</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>-31 ± 75 ± 48</td><td>10 SUN</td><td>93</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>-39 ± 34 ± 15</td><td>11 WEINHEIMER</td><td>93</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>-24 ± 48 ± 61</td><td>12 HOLZSCHUH</td><td>92B</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>-65 ± 85 ± 65</td><td>13 KAWAKAMI</td><td>91</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr><tr><td>-147 ± 68 ± 41</td><td>14 ROBERTSON</td><td>91</td><td>SPEC 3&beta; H decay</td></tr></tbody></table>

<footnote n="1">1 AKER 22 derive an upper limit on the kinematical neutrino mass using Tritium $\beta$-decay and the KATRIN spectrometer. The constraint is based on combining the first two science runs. Supersedes AKER 19.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">2 ESAHANI 23 report the first continuous-spectrum measurement of $^3\text{H}\beta$ decay, using cyclotron radiation emission spectroscopy (CRES) and a small demonstration detector. The energy resolution at the endpoint is demonstrated using $^{83}\text{Kr}$ and a kinematical neutrino mass limit derived from the spectral shape. A frequentist analysis obtained a limit of <152 eV.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">3 AKER 19 report a neutrino mass limit, derived from the first month of data collected by the KATRIN tritium endpoint experiment. The analysis of the electron kinematics shows no evidence for neutrino mass. The quoted result is based on a frequentist analysis of the data following the method described in LOKHOV 15, Using the method of Feldman and Cousins, the derived upper limit is < 0.8 eV at 90% C.L. Supersedes AKER 22.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">4 ASEEV 11 report the analysis of the entire beta endpoint data, taken with the Troitsk integrating electrostatic spectrometer between 1997 and 2002 (some of the earlier runs were rejected), using a windowless gaseous tritium source. The fitted value of $m_\nu$, based on the method of Feldman and Cousins, is obtained from the upper limit of the fit for $m_\nu^2$. Previous analysis problems were resolved by careful monitoring of the tritium gas column density. Supersedes LOBASHEV 99 and BELESEV 95.</footnote>

<footnote n="5">5 PAGLIAROLI 10 is critical of the likelihood method used by LOREDO 02.</footnote>

<footnote n="6">6 KRAUS 05 is a continuation of the work reported in WEINHEIMER 99. This result represents the final analysis of data taken from 1997 to 2001. Various sources of systematic uncertainties have been identified and quantified. The background has been reduced compared to the initial running period. A spectral anomaly at the endpoint, reported in LOBASHEV 99, was not observed.</footnote>

<footnote n="7">7 ARNABOLDI 03A et al. report kinematical neutrino mass limit using $\beta$-decay of $^{187}\text{Re}$. Bolometric $\text{AgReO}_4$ micro-calorimeters are used. Mass bound is substantially weaker than those derived from tritium $\beta$-decays but has different systematic uncertainties.</footnote>

<footnote n="8">8 LOREDO 02 updates LOREDO 89.</footnote>

<footnote n="9">9 LOBASHEV 99 report a new measurement which continues the work reported in BELESEV 95. This limit depends on phenomenological fit parameters used to derive their best fit to $m_\nu^2$, making unambiguous interpretation difficult. See the footnote under "$\bar{\nu}$ Mass Squared."</footnote>

<footnote n="10">10 WEINHEIMER 99 presents two analyses which exclude the spectral anomaly and result in an acceptable $m_\nu^2$. We report the most conservative limit, but the other is nearly the same. See the footnote under "$\bar{\nu}$ Mass Squared."</footnote>

<footnote n="11">11 BELESEV 95 (Moscow) use an integral electrostatic spectrometer with adiabatic magnetic collimation and a gaseous tritium sources. A fit to a normal Kurie plot above 18300-18350 eV (to avoid a low-energy anomaly) plus a monochromatic line 7-15 eV below the endpoint yields $m_\nu^2 = -4.1 \pm 10.9$ eV$^2$, leading to this Bayesian limit.</footnote>

<footnote n="12">12 CHING 95 quotes results previously given by SUN 93; no experimental details are given. A possible explanation for consistently negative values of $m_\nu^2$ is given.</footnote>

<footnote n="13">13 HIDDEMANN 95 (Munich) experiment uses atomic tritium embedded in a metal-dioxide lattice. Bayesian limit calculated from the weighted mean $m_\nu^2 = 221 \pm 4244$ eV$^2$ from the two runs listed below.</footnote>

<footnote n="14">14 STOEFFL 95 (LLNL) result is the Bayesian limit obtained from the $m_\nu^2$ errors given below but with $m_\nu^2$ set equal to 0. The anomalous endpoint accumulation leads to a value of $m_\nu^2$ which is negative by more than 5 standard deviations.</footnote>

<footnote n="15">15 WEINHEIMER 93 (Mainz) is a measurement of the endpoint of the tritium $\beta$ spectrum using an electrostatic spectrometer with a magnetic guiding field. The source is molecular tritium frozen onto an aluminum substrate.</footnote>

<footnote n="16">16 HOLZSCHUH 92B (Zurich) result is obtained from the measurement $m_\nu^2 = -24 \pm 48 \pm 61$ (1$\sigma$ errors), in eV$^2$, using the PDG prescription for conversion to a limit in $m_\nu$.</footnote>

<footnote n="17">17 KAWAKAMI 91 (Tokyo) experiment uses tritium-labeled arachidic acid. This result is the Bayesian limit obtained from the $m_\nu^2$ limit with the errors combined in quadrature. This was also done in ROBERTSON 91, although the authors report a different procedure.</footnote>

<footnote n="18">18 ROBERTSON 91 (LANL) experiment uses gaseous molecular tritium. The result is in strong disagreement with the earlier claims by the ITEP group [LUBIMOV 80, BORIS 87 (+ BORIS 88 erratum)] that $m_\nu$ lies between 17 and 40 eV. However, the probability of a positive $m_\nu^2$ is only 3% if statistical and systematic error are combined in quadrature.</footnote>

<footnote n="19">19 See also comment in BORIS 87B and erratum in BORIS 88.</footnote>

<footnote n="1">1 AKER 22 report results from the analysis of the Tritium $\beta$ spectrum using the combined data set collected by the KATRIN experiment in the first two science runs. Supersedes AKER 19.</footnote>
²ASEEV 11 report the analysis of the entire beta endpoint data, taken with the Troitsk integrating electrostatic spectrometer between 1997 and 2002, using a windowless gaseous tritium source. The analysis does not use the two additional fit parameters (see LOBASHEV 99) for a step-like structure near the endpoint. Using only the runs where the tritium gas column density was carefully monitored the need for such parameters was eliminated. Supersedes LOBASHEV 99 and BELESEV 95.

³KRAUS 05 is a continuation of the work reported in WEINHEIMER 99. This result represents the final analysis of data taken from 1997 to 2001. Problems with significantly negative squared neutrino masses, observed in some earlier experiments, have been resolved in this work.

⁴AKER 19 use the first month of data collected by the KATRIN experiment to determine $m_ν^2$. The result is consistent with a neutrino mass of zero and is used to place a limit on $m_ν$. Superseded by AKER 22.

⁵LOBASHEV 99 report a new measurement which continues the work reported in BELESEV 95. The data were corrected for electron trapping effects in the source, eliminating the dependence of the fitted neutrino mass on the fit interval. The analysis assuming a pure beta spectrum yields significantly negative fitted $m_ν^2 \approx -(20-10) \text{ eV}^2$. This problem is attributed to a discrete spectral anomaly of about $6 \times 10^{-11}$ intensity with a time-dependent energy of 5-15 eV below the endpoint. The data analysis accounts for this anomaly by introducing two extra phenomenological fit parameters resulting in a best fit of $m_ν^2=-1.9 \pm 3.4 \pm 2.2 \text{ eV}^2$ which is used to derive a neutrino mass limit. However, the introduction of phenomenological fit parameters which are correlated with the derived $m_ν^2$ limit makes unambiguous interpretation of this result difficult.

⁶WEINHEIMER 99 is a continuation of the work reported in WEINHEIMER 93. Using a lower temperature of the frozen tritium source eliminated the dewetting of the $T_2$ film, which introduced a dependence of the fitted neutrino mass on the fit interval in the earlier work. An indication for a spectral anomaly reported in LOBASHEV 99 has been seen, but its time dependence does not agree with LOBASHEV 99. Two analyses, which exclude the spectral anomaly either by choice of the analysis interval or by using a particular data set which does not exhibit the anomaly, result in acceptable $m_ν^2$ fits and are used to derive the neutrino mass limit published by the authors. We list the most conservative of the two.

⁷BELESEV 95 (Moscow) use an integral electrostatic spectrometer with adiabatic magnetic collimation and a gaseous tritium sources. This value comes from a fit to a normal Kurie plot above 18300-18350 eV (to avoid a low-energy anomaly), including the effects of an apparent peak 7-15 eV below the endpoint.

⁸HIDDEMANN 95 (Munich) experiment uses atomic tritium embedded in a metal-dioxide lattice. They quote measurements from two data sets.

⁹STOEFFL 95 (LLNL) uses a gaseous source of molecular tritium. An anomalous pileup of events at the endpoint leads to the negative value for $m_ν^2$. The authors acknowledge that "the negative value for the best fit of $m_ν^2$ has no physical meaning" and discuss possible explanations for this effect.

¹⁰SUN 93 uses a tritiated hydrocarbon source. See also CHING 95.

¹¹WEINHEIMER 93 (Mainz) is a measurement of the endpoint of the tritium β spectrum using an electrostatic spectrometer with a magnetic guiding field. The source is molecular tritium frozen onto an aluminum substrate.

¹²HOLZSCHUH 92B (Zurich) source is a monolayer of tritiated hydrocarbon.

¹³KAWAKAMI 91 (Tokyo) experiment uses tritium-labeled arachidic acid.

¹⁴ROBERTSON 91 (LANL) experiment uses gaseous molecular tritium. The result is in strong disagreement with the earlier claims by the ITEP group [LUBIMOV 80, BORIS 87 (+ BORIS 88 erratum)] that $m_ν$ lies between 17 and 40 eV. However, the probability of a positive $m_ν^2$ is only 3% if statistical and systematic error are combined in quadrature.

## ν MASS (electron based)

These are measurement of $m_ν$ (in contrast to $m_τ$, given above). The masses can be different for a Dirac neutrino in the absence of CPT invariance. The possible distinction between $ν$ and $\bar{ν}$ properties is usually ignored elsewhere in these Listings.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (eV)</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;460</td><td>68</td><td>YASUMI</td><td>94</td><td>163<sup>Ho</sup> decay</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;225</td><td>95</td><td>SPRINGER</td><td>87</td><td>163<sup>Ho</sup> decay</td></tr></tbody></table>

## ν MASS (muon based)

Limits given below are for the square root of $m_{\nu\mu}^2(\text{eff}) \equiv \sum_i |U_{\mu i}|^2 m_\nu^2$.

In some of the COSM papers listed below, the authors did not distinguish between weak and mass eigenstates.

OUR EVALUATION is based on OUR AVERAGE for the $\pi^\pm$ mass and the ASSAMAGAN 96 value for the muon momentum for the $\pi^+$ decay at rest. The limit is calculated using the unified classical analysis of FELDMAN 98 for a Gaussian distribution near a physical boundary. WARNING: since $m_{\nu\mu}^2(\text{eff})$ is calculated from the differences of large numbers, it and the corresponding limits are extraordinarily sensitive to small changes in the pion mass, the decay muon momentum, and their errors. For example, the limits obtained using JECKELMANN 94, LENZ 98, and the weighted averages are 0.15, 0.29, and 0.19 MeV, respectively.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (MeV)</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;0.19 (CL = 90%) OUR EVALUATION</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>&lt;0.17</td><td>90</td><td>1 ASSAMAGAN 96</td><td>SPEC</td><td>$m_\nu^2 = -0.016 \pm 0.023$</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;0.15</td><td></td><td>2 DOLGOV</td><td>95</td><td>COSM</td><td>Nucleosynthesis</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;0.48</td><td></td><td>3 ENQVIST</td><td>93</td><td>COSM</td><td>Nucleosynthesis</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;0.3</td><td></td><td>4 FULLER</td><td>91</td><td>COSM</td><td>Nucleosynthesis</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;0.42</td><td></td><td>4 LAM</td><td>91</td><td>COSM</td><td>Nucleosynthesis</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;0.50</td><td>90</td><td>5 ANDERHUB</td><td>82</td><td>SPEC</td><td>$m_\nu^2 = -0.14 \pm 0.20$</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;0.65</td><td>90</td><td>CLARK</td><td>74</td><td>ASPK</td><td>$K_{\mu 3}$ decay</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ASSAMAGAN 96 measurement of $\rho_\mu$ from $\pi^+ \to \mu^+ \nu$ at rest combined with JECK-ELMANN 94 Solution B pion mass yields $m_\nu^2 = -0.016 \pm 0.023$ with corresponding Bayesian limit listed above. If Solution A is used, $m_\nu^2 = -0.143 \pm 0.024 \text{ MeV}^2$. Re-places ASSAMAGAN 94.

²DOLGOV 95 removes earlier assumptions (DOLGOV 93) about thermal equilibrium below $T_{QCD}$ for wrong-helicity Dirac neutrinos (ENQVIST 93, FULLER 91) to set more stringent limits.

³ENQVIST 93 bases limit on the fact that thermalized wrong-helicity Dirac neutrinos would speed up expansion of early universe, thus reducing the primordial abundance. FULLER 91 exploits the same mechanism but in the older calculation obtains a larger production rate for these states, and hence a lower limit. Neutrino lifetime assumed to exceed nucleosynthesis time, ~1 s.

⁴Assumes neutrino lifetime >1 s. For Dirac neutrinos only. See also ENQVIST 93.

⁵ANDERHUB 82 kinematics is insensitive to the pion mass.

## ν MASS (tau based)

The limits given below are the square roots of limits for $m_{\nu\tau}^{2(\text{eff})} \equiv \sum_i |U_{\tau i}|^2 m_{\nu i}^2$.

In some of the ASTR and COSM papers listed below, the authors did not distinguish between weak and mass eigenstates.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (MeV)</th><th>CL%</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt; 18.2</td><td>95</td><td></td><td>1 BARATE</td><td>98F</td><td>ALEP 1991-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 28</td><td>95</td><td></td><td>2 ATHANAS</td><td>00</td><td>CLEO $E_{cm}^{ee} = 10.6$ GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 27.6</td><td>95</td><td></td><td>3 ACKERSTAFF</td><td>98T</td><td>OPAL 1990-1995 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 30</td><td>95</td><td>473</td><td>4 AMMAR</td><td>98</td><td>CLEO $E_{cm}^{ee} = 10.6$ GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 60</td><td>95</td><td></td><td>5 ANASTASSOV</td><td>97</td><td>CLEO $E_{cm}^{ee} = 10.6$ GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 0.37 or &gt;22</td><td>95</td><td></td><td>6 FIELDS</td><td>97</td><td>COSM Nucleosynthesis</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 68</td><td>95</td><td></td><td>7 SWAIN</td><td>97</td><td>THEO $m_\tau, \tau_\tau, \tau$ partial widths</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 29.9</td><td>95</td><td></td><td>8 ALEXANDER</td><td>96M</td><td>OPAL 1990-1994 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;149</td><td></td><td></td><td>9 BOTTINO</td><td>96</td><td>THEO $\pi, \mu, \tau$ leptonic decays</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1 or &gt;25</td><td></td><td></td><td>10 HANNESTAD</td><td>96C</td><td>COSM Nucleosynthesis</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 71</td><td>95</td><td></td><td>11 SOBIE</td><td>96</td><td>THEO $m_\tau, \tau_\tau, B(\tau^- \to e^- \bar{\nu}_e \nu_\tau)$</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 24</td><td>95</td><td>25</td><td>12 BUSKULIC</td><td>95H</td><td>ALEP 1991-1993 LEP runs</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 0.19</td><td></td><td></td><td>13 DOLGOV</td><td>95</td><td>COSM Nucleosynthesis</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 3</td><td></td><td></td><td>14 SIGL</td><td>95</td><td>ASTR SN 1987A</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 0.4 or &gt; 30</td><td></td><td></td><td>15 DODELSON</td><td>94</td><td>COSM Nucleosynthesis</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 0.1 or &gt; 50</td><td></td><td></td><td>16 KAWASAKI</td><td>94</td><td>COSM Nucleosynthesis</td></tr><tr><td>155-225</td><td></td><td></td><td>17 PERES</td><td>94</td><td>THEO $\pi, K, \mu, \tau$ weak decays</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 32.6</td><td>95</td><td>113</td><td>18 CINABRO</td><td>93</td><td>CLEO $E_{cm}^{ee} \approx 10.6$ GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 0.3 or &gt; 35</td><td></td><td></td><td>19 DOLGOV</td><td>93</td><td>COSM Nucleosynthesis</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 0.74</td><td></td><td></td><td>20 ENQVIST</td><td>93</td><td>COSM Nucleosynthesis</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 31</td><td>95</td><td>19</td><td>21 ALBRECHT</td><td>92M</td><td>ARG $E_{cm}^{ee} = 9.4-10.6$ GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 0.3</td><td></td><td></td><td>22 FULLER</td><td>91</td><td>COSM Nucleosynthesis</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 0.5 or &gt; 25</td><td></td><td></td><td>23 KOLB</td><td>91</td><td>COSM Nucleosynthesis</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 0.42</td><td></td><td></td><td>22 LAM</td><td>91</td><td>COSM Nucleosynthesis</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹BARATE 98F result based on kinematics of 2939 $\tau^- \to 2\pi^- \pi^+ \nu_\tau$ and $52 \tau^- \to 3\pi^- 2\pi^+(\pi^0) \nu_\tau$ decays. If possible 2.5% excited $a_1$ decay is included in 3-prong sample analysis, limit increases to 19.2 MeV.

²ATHANAS 00 bound comes from analysis of $\tau^- \to \pi^- \pi^+ \pi^- \nu_\tau$ decays.

³ACKERSTAFF 98T use $\tau^- \to 5\pi^\pm \nu_\tau$ decays to obtain a limit of 43.2 MeV (95%CL). They combine this with ALEXANDER 96M value using $\tau^- \to 3h^\pm \nu_\tau$ decays to obtain quoted limit.

⁴AMMAR 98 limit comes from analysis of $\tau^- \to 3\pi^- 2\pi^+ \nu_\tau$ and $\tau^- \to 2\pi^- \pi^+ 2\pi^0 \nu_\tau$ decay modes.

⁵ANASTASSOV 97 derive limit by comparing their $m_\tau$ measurement (which depends on $m_{\nu_\tau}$) to BAI 96 $m_\tau$ threshold measurement.

⁶FIELDS 97 limit for a Dirac neutrino. For a Majorana neutrino the mass region < 0.93 or >31 MeV is excluded. These bounds assume $N_\nu < 4$ from nucleosynthesis; a wider excluded region occurs with a smaller $N_\nu$ upper limit.

⁷SWAIN 97 derive their limit from the Standard Model relationships between the tau mass, lifetime, branching fractions for $\tau^- \to e^- \bar{\nu}_e \nu_\tau$, $\tau^- \to \mu^- \bar{\nu}_\mu \nu_\tau$, $\tau^- \to \pi^- \nu_\tau$, and $\tau^- \to K^- \nu_\tau$, and the muon mass and lifetime by assuming lepton universality and using world average values. Limit is reduced to 48 MeV when the CLEO $\tau$ mass measurement (BALEST 93) is included; see CLEO's more recent $m_{\nu_\tau}$ limit (ANASTASSOV 97). Consideration of mixing with a fourth generation heavy neutrino yields $\sin^2\theta_L < 0.016$ (95%CL).