\br/\br_{\rm
exp} < 1$, $1< \br/\br_{\rm exp} < 10$, and $10 < \br/\br_{\rm
exp}$, respectively. Also shown, as cross-hatched regions, are those parameter ranges excluded by LEP bounds on the lightest chargino and neutralino masses. In the top row of plots, in which $\tan\beta = 2$ while $\tilde m_L$ varies between 100 GeV and 500 GeV, we have used $\tilde A_{E2,1} = 0$ (which would result from $\tilde V_E = K_L$) and $\tilde A_{E2,2} = 100\,\GeV$. Making $\tilde A_{E2,1} \sim
\tilde A_{E2,2}$ would not change the results significantly. For the remaining two rows of the figure, in which $\tan\beta = 2$ or $\tan\beta = 5$, we have set $\tilde A_{E2,2} = 0$. Making $\tilde
A_{E2,2} = 100\,\GeV$ does not make much difference when $\tan\beta
= 5$ so we omit the corresponding figure. To properly interpret these contours for any mixing, their scaling behavior is needed: $${\rm Br}(\mu \to e \gamma)= 4.9\times 10^{-11} \left [{{[\Delta
\tilde m^2_L+f M_0 \tilde A_{12}]/\tilde m_L^2}\over 0.1}\right
]^2\left [{|K_L^{1\mu*} K_L^{1e}|\over
0.04}\right ]^2 \left [{300\,\GeV\over \tilde m_L}\right ]^4  F
\label{eq:brratio}$$ where $F$ and $f$ arise from loop functions. Under different assumptions about the mixing angles and degree of degeneracy, the allowed regions will correspond to different contours in our plots. The value of $F$ is $\sim 1$ when $\mu \sim M_{1/2} \sim \tilde
m_L$, but can be one or two orders of magnitude larger when $\mu$ or $M_{1/2}$ are hierarchically lower than the slepton mass. Thus, while light sleptons result as expected in very large branching ratios (unless $\mu$ is accurately tuned
\br/\br_{\rm 
 exp } < 1 $, $ 1 < \br/\br_{\rm exp } < 10 $, and $ 10 < \br/\br_{\rm 
 exp}$, respectively. Also shown, as cross - hatched regions, are those argument compass excluded by LEP boundary on the light chargino and neutralino masses. In the top row of plot, in which $ \tan\beta = 2 $ while $ \tilde m_L$ vary between 100 GeV and 500 GeV, we have used $ \tilde A_{E2,1 } = 0 $ (which would leave from $ \tilde V_E = K_L$) and $ \tilde A_{E2,2 } = 100\,\GeV$. make $ \tilde A_{E2,1 } \sim 
 \tilde A_{E2,2}$ would not change the resultant role significantly. For the remaining two row of the number, in which $ \tan\beta = 2 $ or $ \tan\beta = 5 $, we have set $ \tilde A_{E2,2 } = 0$. draw $ \tilde 
 A_{E2,2 } = 100\,\GeV$ does not do much deviation when $ \tan\beta 
 = 5 $ so we omit the corresponding figure. To by rights interpret these contours for any mix, their scaling behavior is want: $ $ { \rm Br}(\mu \to e \gamma)= 4.9\times 10^{-11 } \left [ { { [ \Delta 
 \tilde m^2_L+f M_0 \tilde A_{12}]/\tilde m_L^2}\over 0.1}\right 
 ] ^2\left [ { |K_L^{1\mu * } K_L^{1e}|\over 
 0.04}\right ] ^2 \left [ { 300\,\GeV\over \tilde m_L}\right ] ^4   F 
 \label{eq: brratio}$$ where $ F$ and $ f$ arise from closed circuit functions. Under different assumptions about the desegregate angles and degree of degeneracy, the allowed regions will correspond to unlike contour in our plots. The value of $ F$ is $ \sim 1 $ when $ \mu \sim M_{1/2 } \sim \tilde 
 m_L$, but can be one or two orders of magnitude larger when $ \mu$ or $ M_{1/2}$ are hierarchically lower than the slepton mass. Thus, while light sleptons result as expected in very bombastic branching ratios (unless $ \mu$ is accurately tune
\br/\bg_{\rm
exp} < 1$, $1< \br/\br_{\rm exp} < 10$, akd $10 < \br/\br_{\rm
exp}$, rgspectivxly. Alsk shown, xs cross-hatched regions, are vhosw parqmeter ranges excluded by LEP blunds on the oightest cizrgino and nehbraliuo masses. In the top row ox plots, in whiwh $\tcn\beta = 2$ while $\tilde m_L$ varies betweqn 100 GeV ajd 500 GeV, we havg usec $\tilsv C_{E2,1} = 0$ (which would result from $\timde V_E = K_L$) and $\tilde A_{E2,2} = 100\,\GeV$. Making $\tilde A_{E2,1} \slm
\tipde A_{E2,2}$ would not cjange the rgaulew significangly. For tht xemaining tso rows of the figure, in which $\gan\beca = 2$ or $\tan\vera = 5$, we have sev $\tildv A_{E2,2} = 0$. Making $\tilde
A_{E2,2} = 100\,\GeV$ dpes not make mmch dmffeeence when $\tan\beta
= 5$ sm we omit the corrgsponding xiyure. To properly inteepeet tvese congiurr fkr ahy mixlng, their scaming behaviir is needed: $${\rm Br}(\mi \ei e \gamma)= 4.9\timss 10^{-11} \lest [{{[\Delta
\tilde m^2_L+f M_0 \tilde A_{12}]/\tilde m_L^2}\over 0.1}\rpght
]^2\meft [{|K_L^{1\mu*} K_L^{1e}|\over
0.04}\right ]^2 \left [{300\,\GeV\over \tilde m_P}\right ]^4  S
\label{eq:brratio}$$ where $F$ and $f$ arise from loop funwtiona. Unbcv diwdegent assumptions about the mixing angles and qsgtev of degeneracy, tme allowed regions wllk correspond tu diffzdeht contours in our plots. Jhe vaoue of $F$ ys $\som 1$ when $\mu \sim M_{1/2} \sim \tilde
n_L$, but can bv onw or two orders of magnitude uarggr whem $\mu$ or $M_{1/2}$ are hierarchieally mower than hhe sleptkv mass. Thus, whild lpght sleptons result as expectqd in verb larye brancfing ratiof (unless $\mk$ is accurately tuned
\br/\br_{\rm exp} < 1$, $1< \br/\br_{\rm exp} and < \br/\br_{\rm respectively. Also shown, parameter excluded by LEP on the lightest and neutralino masses. In the top of plots, in which $\tan\beta = 2$ while $\tilde m_L$ varies between 100 and 500 GeV, we have used $\tilde A_{E2,1} = 0$ (which would result $\tilde = and A_{E2,2} = 100\,\GeV$. Making $\tilde A_{E2,1} \sim \tilde A_{E2,2}$ would not change the results significantly. For remaining two rows of the figure, in which = 2$ or $\tan\beta 5$, we have set $\tilde = Making $\tilde = does make much difference $\tan\beta = 5$ so we omit the corresponding figure. To properly interpret these contours for any mixing, scaling behavior $${\rm Br}(\mu e 4.9\times \left [{{[\Delta \tilde \tilde A_{12}]/\tilde m_L^2}\over 0.1}\right ]^2\left [{|K_L^{1\mu*} \left [{300\,\GeV\over \tilde m_L}\right ]^4 F \label{eq:brratio}$$ where and $f$ from loop functions. Under different assumptions the mixing angles and degree of degeneracy, the regions will correspond to different contours in our plots. The value of $F$ is $\sim $\mu \sim M_{1/2} \sim m_L$, but can one two of larger when or $M_{1/2}$ are hierarchically lower than the slepton mass. Thus, while sleptons result as expected in very large branching ratios (unless accurately
\br/\br_{\rm
exp} < 1$, $1< \br/\br_{\rm exp} < 10$, and $10 < \br/\br_{\Rm
exp}$, respeCtiveLy. ALso ShOwn, aS croSs-hatched regioNS, are Those parameter ranges exCludeD bY lEP bOUnDs on tHe lightESt CHArgInO aNd nEuTRaLino mAssEs. In the Top row of plOts, In Which $\tan\beta = 2$ WHiLe $\tilde m_L$ vAriEs between 100 GeV And 500 geV, we hAvE usED $\tildE A_{E2,1} = 0$ (Which Would rESult frOm $\tilde V_E = k_L$) ANd $\tildE a_{E2,2} = 100\,\GeV$. MaKINg $\TildE A_{E2,1} \sim
\tilde A_{E2,2}$ woulD NoT Change the resulTs signIfICaNTLy. FOr tHe remaininG tWo rowS Of the fiGUrE, IN WhiCH $\tan\beta = 2$ or $\tan\Beta = 5$, we have sET $\tiLde A_{E2,2} = 0$. MAkIng $\TIlde
A_{E2,2} = 100\,\geV$ doEs NOt mAke much diffErenCe when $\tan\Beta
= 5$ so WE omit thE CorrespOnding FigUre. to prOPeRlY inTeRPreT ThEse COntOurs for aNy MiXing, tHeir SCALIng bEhaVior Is neeDed: $${\rm Br}(\mu \to e \gAmmA)= 4.9\timES 10^{-11} \leFt [{{[\DelTa
\tilDe m^2_L+F M_0 \Tilde a_{12}]/\tilde M_L^2}\oveR 0.1}\rIght
]^2\left [{|K_L^{1\mu*} K_L^{1e}|\Over
0.04}\Right ]^2 \left [{300\,\geV\OvEr \tIlDe m_L}\rIGht ]^4  F
\laBel{Eq:bRratio}$$ wHere $F$ anD $F$ arIsE FROm Loop functions. Under DiFFErEnt assumPtions ABoUt THe mixing AnGleS and DEGree oF degENeRacy, the aLlowed REgIoNs will cOrResponD tO diFfeRent cONtouRs in ouR plots. ThE valuE Of $F$ is $\sim 1$ when $\mu \SIm M_{1/2} \sim \tilde
m_L$, BUt CAN bE One oR twO orders of maGnitUDe laRger WHeN $\mu$ OR $M_{1/2}$ are HieraRcHIcALly lower than the slepToN mass. THus, whIle light sleptOns result aS EXPected in Very LArGE branching ratiOs (unlEss $\mu$ is accURately tuNed
\br/\br_{\rm
exp} < 1$, $1 < \br/\br_ {\rmexp } <  1 0$,and$10 < \br/\br_ { \rmexp}$, respectively. A lso s ho w n, a s  c ross- hatched re g i ons ,ar e t ho s eparam ete r range s excluded  by  L EP bounds on th e lightest  ch argino and n eut ralino  m ass e s. In  th e top  row o f  plots , in whic h$ \tan\b e ta = 2$ w hi le $ \tilde m_L$ varie s  b e tween 100 GeVand 50 0G eV , wehav e used $\t il de A_ { E2,1} = 0$ ( w hic h  would result  from $\til d e V _E = K _L $)a nd $\t ildeA_ { E2, 2} = 100\,\ GeV$ . Making$\tild e  A_{E2, 1 } \sim\tilde  A_ {E2 ,2}$ wo ul d n ot cha n ge  th e  re sults si gn if icant ly.F o r therem aini ng tw o rows of the  fi gure ,  in  whic h $\t an\b et a = 2 $ or $ \tan\ be ta = 5$, we hav e se t $\tilde  A_ {E 2,2 }= 0$. Making  $\ til de
A_{E 2,2} =1 00\ ,\ G e V $does not make much  d i f fe rence wh en $\t a n\ be t a
= 5$ s oweomit t he co rres p on ding fig ure. T o  p ro perly i nt erpret  t hes e c ontou r s fo r anymixing,their scaling behavi o r is needed:$ ${ \ r mB r}(\ mu\to e \gamm a)=4 .9\t imes 10 ^{- 1 1} \l eft [ {{ [ \D e lta
\tilde m^2_L+fM_ 0 \til de A_ {12}]/\tildem_L^2}\ove r 0 .1}\righ t
]^ 2 \l e ft [{|K_L^{1\m u*} K _L^{1e}|\o v er
0.04} \righ t ]^2 \l eft [{300 \ , \GeV\ove r \ til dem_L } \ ri ght ]^4  F
\l a b el{e q: brratio }$$  where$F$  an d $ f$ar ise fromloop fun ct io ns .Und er di f ferent a ss ump ti ons  abou t  the m ixing  ang le sa nddegreeo fd e gene ra cy , th e a ll owedregi o nswill co rrespondtod iffe re nt  contou rs in our plo ts . The valu eof$F$ is $ \sim 1$when $\mu \sim M_{1/2}\ sim \ti lde 
m_L$ , bu t can beone  or tw o o r ders o f magn itude  l arg e r  when $ \m u$or  $M_{1/2}$ a rehiera rc hica lly low er than the slepto n  ma ss. Thus, whi leligh t sl ept o ns res ul t  as e xpected in very  large bra nc h in g ratios ( u nle ss  $\mu$is accu ratel y  tuned
\br/\br_{\rm
exp} <_1$, $1<_\br/\br_{\rm exp} < 10$,_and $10_<_\br/\br_{\rm
exp}$, respectively._Also_shown, as cross-hatched_regions, are those_parameter ranges excluded by_LEP bounds on_the_lightest chargino and neutralino masses. In the top row of plots, in which $\tan\beta_=_2$ while_$\tilde_m_L$_varies between 100 GeV and_500 GeV, we have used_$\tilde A_{E2,1}_= 0$ (which would result from $\tilde V_E_=_K_L$) and $\tilde_A_{E2,2} = 100\,\GeV$. Making $\tilde A_{E2,1} \sim
\tilde A_{E2,2}$ would_not change the results significantly. For_the remaining two_rows_of_the figure, in which_$\tan\beta = 2$ or $\tan\beta =_5$, we have set $\tilde A_{E2,2}_= 0$. Making $\tilde
A_{E2,2} = 100\,\GeV$ does_not make much difference when $\tan\beta
=_5$ so we omit the_corresponding figure._To properly interpret these contours_for any mixing,_their scaling_behavior is needed:_$${\rm Br}(\mu \to e \gamma)= 4.9\times_10^{-11} \left [{{[\Delta
\tilde_m^2_L+f M_0 \tilde A_{12}]/\tilde m_L^2}\over 0.1}\right
]^2\left_[{|K_L^{1\mu*}_K_L^{1e}|\over
0.04}\right ]^2 \left_[{300\,\GeV\over_\tilde_m_L}\right ]^4_ F
\label{eq:brratio}$$ where_$F$_and $f$_arise_from loop functions. Under different assumptions_about_the mixing angles and degree of degeneracy,_the allowed regions will_correspond_to different contours in_our plots. The value of_$F$ is $\sim 1$ when $\mu_\sim M_{1/2}_\sim \tilde
m_L$,_but can be one or two orders of magnitude larger when_$\mu$ or $M_{1/2}$ are hierarchically lower_than the slepton mass._Thus, while_light_sleptons result as_expected_in very_large branching ratios (unless $\mu$ is accurately_tuned