This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
2015:groups:higgs:eftvhval:start [2015/06/16 16:23] veronica.sanz |
2015:groups:higgs:eftvhval:start [2015/06/19 10:30] (current) adam.falkowski |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
**Chair:** Veronica Sanz (VH), Christoph Englert (HH) | **Chair:** Veronica Sanz (VH), Christoph Englert (HH) | ||
- | **Members:** Fawzi Boudjema, Adam Falkowski, Benjamin Fuks, Florian Goertz, Jose Santiago, Jose Miguel No, Felix Yu, Adam Martin, Ciaran Williams, Ken Mimasu. **Please add your name if it is missing.** | + | **Members:** Fawzi Boudjema, Adam Falkowski, Benjamin Fuks, Florian Goertz, Jose Santiago, Jose Miguel No, Felix Yu, Adam Martin, Ciaran Williams, Ken Mimasu, Alexandra Oliveira, Alberto Tonero, Andrey Katz. **Please add your name if it is missing.** |
__Topics for discussion VH:__ | __Topics for discussion VH:__ | ||
Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
* tree-level: | * tree-level: | ||
- Dilaton, radion exchange: Matching in [[http://arxiv.org/pdf/1502.07352.pdf]]. Ken for form factora. | - Dilaton, radion exchange: Matching in [[http://arxiv.org/pdf/1502.07352.pdf]]. Ken for form factora. | ||
- | - Composite Higgs type spin-one exchange: 2 Adams, Cedric, Andrey. Adam F UV with S->0. | + | - Composite Higgs type spin-one exchange Adam M., Cedric, Andrey, Adam F., Florian. Model with a custodial triplet is proposed e.g. [[http://arxiv.org/abs/1406.7320|1406.7320]]. It predicts large S, so one may need to tweak it to obtain a realistic (fine-tuned) model with a light resonance. |
* one-loop: | * one-loop: | ||
- 2HDM: Matching in [[http://arxiv.org/pdf/1502.07352.pdf]]. Ken | - 2HDM: Matching in [[http://arxiv.org/pdf/1502.07352.pdf]]. Ken | ||
Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
- Spin-one: From Composite-Higgs type. Alexandra O. | - Spin-one: From Composite-Higgs type. Alexandra O. | ||
- Not possible from MC point of view, I understood that is maybe non relevant in kinematics point of view, it would act like more terms to the renormalization of three level coupling | - Not possible from MC point of view, I understood that is maybe non relevant in kinematics point of view, it would act like more terms to the renormalization of three level coupling | ||
+ | * Pseudo-Observables: VS, FB | ||
+ | * Presentation of results together with the HXSWG, feducial cross sections: VS, CPE | ||
__Topics for discussion HH:__ | __Topics for discussion HH:__ | ||
- How big can pp>HH be in concrete UV scenarios | - How big can pp>HH be in concrete UV scenarios | ||
- | * colored scalars (recast MSSM?) : region of cancellations in gg-> h can be seen in Eq.18 of [[http://arxiv.org/pdf/1207.7355.pdf]], see also [[http://arxiv.org/pdf/1312.3317.pdf]]. Matching colored scalars with EFT in [[http://arxiv.org/pdf/1412.1837v1.pdf]] and [[http://arxiv.org/pdf/1504.02409.pdf]] for non-degenerate stops. | + | * colored scalars (recast MSSM?) : region of cancellations in gg-> h can be seen in Eq.18 of [[http://arxiv.org/pdf/1207.7355.pdf]], see also [[http://arxiv.org/pdf/1312.3317.pdf]]. Matching colored scalars with EFT in [[http://arxiv.org/pdf/1412.1837v1.pdf]] and [[http://arxiv.org/pdf/1504.02409.pdf]] for non-degenerate stops. VS, FY + BSM |
- | * 2HDM : Matching of the c_6 to 2HDM is in [[http://arxiv.org/pdf/1502.07352.pdf]], Eq 3.41, and Eq. 3.28 in the alignment limit. | + | * 2HDM : Matching of the c_6 to 2HDM is in [[http://arxiv.org/pdf/1502.07352.pdf]], Eq 3.41, and Eq. 3.28 in the alignment limit. CPE, BF |
* Scalar fourplet of SU(2)_L only induces c_6 at the tree level (see e.g. http://arxiv.org/abs/1412.8480): FG | * Scalar fourplet of SU(2)_L only induces c_6 at the tree level (see e.g. http://arxiv.org/abs/1412.8480): FG | ||
* Setup without relevant operator (mu^2=0) -> large enhancement of pp>HH (factor 2-3), http://arxiv.org/pdf/1504.00355v2.pdf: FG | * Setup without relevant operator (mu^2=0) -> large enhancement of pp>HH (factor 2-3), http://arxiv.org/pdf/1504.00355v2.pdf: FG | ||
- | - What is the EFT parameter range expected from such scenarios (-> //deliverable//: c_6 vs Lambda contour plot) | + | - What is the EFT parameter range expected from such scenarios (-> //deliverable//: c_6 vs Lambda contour plot) CD (composite Higgs), JN (2HDM), CPE, FG |
- | - Are dim 6 unitarity constraints relevant for the limit setting | + | |
- How much can we learn from binned distribution at a small expected signal yield (-> //deliverable//: compare differential distributions for H>hh (with m_H large) and EFT, binned log-likelihood hypothesis test to quantify consistency) | - How much can we learn from binned distribution at a small expected signal yield (-> //deliverable//: compare differential distributions for H>hh (with m_H large) and EFT, binned log-likelihood hypothesis test to quantify consistency) | ||
* 5 parameters EFT scan translated to 2D kinematics to set experimental benchmarks https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/Sandbox/NonResonantHHAtLHC | * 5 parameters EFT scan translated to 2D kinematics to set experimental benchmarks https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/Sandbox/NonResonantHHAtLHC | ||
* Allow combination of different channels by coordinating bins/benchmarks | * Allow combination of different channels by coordinating bins/benchmarks | ||
- Backgrounds in HH | - Backgrounds in HH | ||
- | * mass resolution of Higgs tagging | + | * mass resolution of Higgs tagging (CP and CPE) |
* Can we control Z>bbar (-> //deliverable//: estimate, simulate or dig out expected resolution) | * Can we control Z>bbar (-> //deliverable//: estimate, simulate or dig out expected resolution) | ||
* can we disentangle dim 6 effects from qq>HZ leakage | * can we disentangle dim 6 effects from qq>HZ leakage | ||
- | * What is needed to control the backgrounds better |