This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision Next revision Both sides next revision | ||
2017:groups:tools:contur [2017/09/20 23:02] jonathan.butterworth [Light Scalar Particles] |
2017:groups:tools:contur [2017/09/20 23:37] jonathan.butterworth |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 84: | Line 84: | ||
CP-even scalar: | CP-even scalar: | ||
- | |||
mphi in [10, 100] GeV | mphi in [10, 100] GeV | ||
f0B in [1, 10] TeV | f0B in [1, 10] TeV | ||
Line 91: | Line 90: | ||
CP-odd scalar: | CP-odd scalar: | ||
- | |||
mphi in [10, 100] GeV | mphi in [10, 100] GeV | ||
f0B in [1, 10] TeV | f0B in [1, 10] TeV | ||
Line 98: | Line 96: | ||
For each case, all the other f's should be set to very large values. | For each case, all the other f's should be set to very large values. | ||
+ | So, here is a scan using these ranges for the CP-odd scalar model (f0 value labelled $\Lambda$ on the vertical axis, $M_\phi$ on the horizontal. | ||
+ | {{2017:groups:tools:colorbarkey.png}} | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{:2017:groups:tools:combinedcl_.png?400|}} | ||
+ | |||
+ | ... so this is looking pretty promising. Everything excluded except the lowest mass/highest scale. This needs to be carefully checked, of course. All the yellow region above is excluded by the ATLAS diphoton cross sections: [[http://inspirehep.net/record/1591327|arXiv:1704.03839]]. If those are not included, the [[http://inspirehep.net/record/1448301|ATLAS $Z+\gamma$ measurements]] (in dilepton+photon and MET+photon) have quite some power on their own, see below. | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{:2017:groups:tools:combinedcl_zg.png?400|}} | ||
+ | Z+photon | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{:2017:groups:tools:combinedcl_metg.png?400|}} | ||
+ | Missing ET + photon | ||
+ | |||
+ | Remember, big caveat on this is that the data is assumed to exactly agree with the SM, which (given we only know that these data are //consistent// with the SM) that we are neglected the SM theory uncertainties. | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Older Stuff == | ||
- | <nodisp> | ||
Not really sure of what sensible parameter ranges would be at the moment, but here is an example run for CP-Odd scalar with some 8 TeV data. I (Jon) set $m_\phi = 80$ GeV, and setting the mass scales for the effective couplings at 50 or 100 TeV as follows: $f0B, f0W, f0H, f0gam, f0Z = 50$ TeV, $f0G, f0u, f0d, f0l = 100$ TeV. Total cross section is $4.4 pb^{-1}$. | Not really sure of what sensible parameter ranges would be at the moment, but here is an example run for CP-Odd scalar with some 8 TeV data. I (Jon) set $m_\phi = 80$ GeV, and setting the mass scales for the effective couplings at 50 or 100 TeV as follows: $f0B, f0W, f0H, f0gam, f0Z = 50$ TeV, $f0G, f0u, f0d, f0l = 100$ TeV. Total cross section is $4.4 pb^{-1}$. | ||
Line 110: | Line 123: | ||
Next step? Agree some sensible parameter ranges to scan, presumably mass and some subset of couplings; I can combine 7, 8 and 13 TeV limits, of course. | Next step? Agree some sensible parameter ranges to scan, presumably mass and some subset of couplings; I can combine 7, 8 and 13 TeV limits, of course. | ||
- | </nodisp> | + | |