8 In the ALRM, since v 6 = 0, M$_{W}$$_{R}$ takes the value of the upper limit of this range. The prediction of W ± R in addition to Z ′ distinguishes these two models from the multitude of other proposals with an extra U (1) ′ gauge symmetry. Consider the possible discovery of Z ′ at the LHC. For M$_{Z}$ ′ = 1 TeV, only an integrated luminosity of 0.2 fb − 1 is required [1]. Its discovery channel is presumably µ $^{+}$µ $^{−}$, but it will also have 4 charged muons in the final state from Δ ++ R Δ −− R , and perhaps even 8 charged muons, as shown below. In addition to all SM particles, Z ′ also decays into n ¯ , Δ ++ R Δ −− R , ξ + $_{R}$ξ − $_{R}$, A 0 $_{R}$H 0 R $_{1}$, H + $_{L}$H − $_{L}$, and A 0 $_{L}$H 0 $_{L}$. In particular, the subsequent decay Δ ±± R → µ $^{±}$µ± will be a unique signature where the like-sign dimuons have identical invariant masses $^{1}$. The interactions of Z ′ with fermions come from where g ′ = e/ √ x (1 − x )(1 − 2 x ). Ignoring fermion masses, each fermionic partial width is given by where c$_{L,R}$ are the coefficients from J$_{Z}$ ′ = xJ 3 L + (1 − x ) J 3 R − xJ$_{em}$ , and a color factor of 3 should be added for each quark. In the DLRM, we have Here we need to consider 3 families for u, d, ν, e but only one for n . with the partial decay width V. Z’ DECAY L = − g $^{′}$Z ′ $_{µ}$J µ Z ′ , (27) Γ( Z ′ → ¯ ff ) = ( g $^{′}$) $^{2}$M$_{Z}$ ′ 24 π [ c 2 L + c 2 $_{R}$] , (28) u$_{L}$ = − x 6 , u$_{R}$ = 1 2 − 7 x 6 , d$_{L}$ = − x 6 , d$_{R}$ = x 3 , (29) ν$_{L}$ = x 2 , n$_{R}$ = 1 − x 2 , e$_{L}$ = x 2 , e$_{R}$ = − 1 2 + x 2 . (30) L = − g $^{′}$(1 − x ) Z ′ $_{µ}$[( ∂ $^{µ}$H 0 R $_{1}$) A 0 R − ( ∂ $^{µ}$A 0 $_{R}$) H 0 R $_{1}$] , (31) Γ( Z ′ → A 0 $_{R}$H 0 R $_{1}$) = ( g $^{′}$) $^{2}$M$_{Z}$ ′ (1 − x ) 2 48 π , (32) The decay of Z ′ → A 0 $_{R}$H 0 R 1 to scalars come from 1 Not all models involving doubly charged scalars have this decay, see for example [11].