Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- 2019:groups:higgs:lightscalars:exotichdecays [2019/06/24 10:57]
jose.miguel.no
+++ 2019:groups:higgs:lightscalars:exotichdecays [2019/06/26 09:20] (current)
antoine.lesauvage
@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 We consider two decay modes of $\phi$: $\phi \to \gamma \gamma$, $\phi \to \mu \mu$
-  * $\phi$ -> $\gamma\gamma$.
+  * $\phi$ -> $\gamma\gamma$. (**SG,AL**)
 Preliminary study from Bauer, Neubert, Thamm [[https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.00443|1708.00443]] (see also [[https://arxiv.org/pdf/1704.08207.pdf|1704.08207]]).
-For m_a < 47 MeV, they put limits on very light ALPs () from constraints on h -> Z $\gamma$, since for m_a < 47 MeV the two photons from the ALP decay are very collimated and seen as one in the detector. For not-so-light ALPs, they compute just number of signal events for gg -> h -> Z $\phi$, and assume limits for 100 events at LHC
+For m_{\phi} < 47 MeV, constraints from $h \to Z \gamma$, since for m_{\phi} < 47 MeV the two photons from the $\phi$ decay are very collimated and seen as one in the detector.
-  * $\phi$ -> $\mu\mu$
+For m_{\phi} > 47 MeV, they compute just number of signal events for $gg \to h \to Z \phi$, and assume limits for 100 events at LHC.
-Similar strategy to the one above!  In principle above 10 GeV we are safe from SM low mass resonances. Below 10 GeV? Also, how low can one go in mass by playing with muon isolation.
+$m_\phi < 35$ GeV: $h \to Z \phi$ (on-shell $Z \to \ell\ell$)
+$m_\phi > 35$ GeV: $h \to Z^* \phi$ ($h \to \ell\ell \phi$)
+__TO DO LIST__
+  - ASK FOR FEYNRULES FILE!
+  - Validate UFO File {{ :2019:groups:higgs:alp-pr.tar.gz |ALP UFO file }} (fixed by Peter Richardson) from Bauer, Thamm, Neubert. **[JN, SW]** //NOTE: We need to check for effective ggh coupling in UFO.// (CHECKED: They Have it, so we can generate gluon fusion production of $h$)
+  - SM background generation. **Done** **[SG,AL]**
+  - Generate signal: study kinematics of different $h$ production modes, as well as $m_{\phi}$ dependence.**[SG,AL]**
+  - Contur study (related to next item). Give **JB** range of parameters to scan for the model.
+  - Other constraints. 1) Higgs signal strengths bound on partial BSM width **[JN, SW]** 2) LEP Z width: Z → $h^*$ $\phi$, $h^*\to bb...$ leads to constraints from Z total width. **[JN, SW]** 3) LEP Exclusive Z decays? 4)...
+  * $\phi$ -> $\mu\mu$ Possiblly useful refs ($h\to ZZ^*\to4\mu$[[https://cds.cern.ch/record/2621479/files/ATLAS-CONF-2018-018.pdf| ATLAS-CONF-2018-018]],[[https://cds.cern.ch/record/2668684/files/HIG-19-001-pas.pdf|CMS]]; $h\to aa\to4\mu$[[https://arxiv.org/abs/1812.00380|1812.00380]]; $h\to aa\to2\tau2\mu$ [[https://inspirehep.net/record/1419565/files/HIG-15-011-pas.pdf|HIG-15-011-pas]], [[https://arxiv.org/pdf/1505.01609.pdf|1505.01609]]; $h\to ZZ_d\to 4l$[[http://arxiv.org/abs/1802.03388|1802.03388]])
-For $m_\phi > 35$ GeV:
+Similar strategy to the one above!  In principle above 10 GeV we are safe from SM low mass resonances. Below 10 GeV? Also, how low can one go in mass by playing with muon isolation.
-$h \to Z^* \phi$, $Z^* \to \mu\mu$ [names: **SG, AL, JN, GM**]
-$h^* \to Z \phi$ [UFO files from effective ggh coupling for kinematics and rescale rate with ggF cross section?]
-For 47MeV < $m_\phi < 35$ GeV:
-$h \to Z \phi$, $Z \to \mu\mu$, $\phi \to \gamma\gamma$ [names: **SG, AL, JN, GM, KT**]
+$h \to Z \phi$, $Z \to \mu\mu$, $\phi \to \mu\mu$ recasted from existing analysis of $h \to \phi \phi$, $\phi \to \mu\mu$.
-$h \to Z \phi$, $Z \to \mu\mu$, $\phi \to \mu\mu$ recasted from existing analysis of $h \to \phi \phi$, $\phi \to \mu\mu$ [names: **KT**]

Les Houches

User Tools

Site Tools

Differences

Page Tools