2019:groups:higgs:gildener
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision Last revision Both sides next revision | ||
|
2019:groups:higgs:gildener [2019/10/30 16:11] jonathan.butterworth |
2019:groups:higgs:gildener [2019/10/30 17:06] jonathan.butterworth |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
| It would be interesting to investigate how much this mass equality can be relaxed and remain consistent with the T-parameter constraint. | It would be interesting to investigate how much this mass equality can be relaxed and remain consistent with the T-parameter constraint. | ||
| - | KL: The sum rule constraint for this model, ($M^4_{h_2} + M^4_{h_3} + 2M^4_{h^+})^{1/4} = 540$ GeV, follows from the Higgs-mass ($M({h_1}$) formula derived by E. Gildener and S. Weinberg in PRD 13, 3333 (1976). It is determined by minimizing the one-loop approximation to the S. Coleman--E. Weinberg potential for this model. Because of this sum rule constraint, when $M(h^+) = M(h_3) \simge 400$ GeV, the mass $M(h_2)$ and various branching ratios of $h^\pm$ and $h_3$ are very sensitive to small changes in M_{h+} = M_h3}. Especially the BR's for h+/- -> W+/- h2 and h3 -> Z h2 grow rapidly and become more important than t bbar and t tbar, respectively. | + | KL: The sum rule constraint for this model, ($M^4_{h_2} + M^4_{h_3} + 2M^4_{h^+})^{1/4} = 540$ GeV, follows from the Higgs-mass ($M({h_1}$) formula derived by E. Gildener and S. Weinberg in PRD 13, 3333 (1976). It is determined by minimizing the one-loop approximation to the S. Coleman--E. Weinberg potential for this model. Because of this sum rule constraint, when $M(h^+) = M(h_3) \simge 400$ GeV, the mass $M(h_2)$ and various branching ratios of $h^\pm$ and $h_3$ are very sensitive to small changes in $M(h^+) = M(h_3)$. Especially the BR's for $h^\pm \rightarrow W^\pm h_2$ and $h_3 \rightarrow Z h_2$ grow rapidly and become more important than $t \bar{b}$ and $t \bar{b}$, respectively. |
| Therefore, it is interesting and important to see how much the sum rule is affected by, e.g., the two-loop correction to the effective potential. That is, how seriously we should take the 540 GeV RHS of the sum rule? | Therefore, it is interesting and important to see how much the sum rule is affected by, e.g., the two-loop correction to the effective potential. That is, how seriously we should take the 540 GeV RHS of the sum rule? | ||
| {{:2019:groups:higgs:combinedhybrid2hdm_lh2.png?500|}} | {{:2019:groups:higgs:combinedhybrid2hdm_lh2.png?500|}} | ||
| + | |||
| + | Explanation of the legend: | ||
| + | On the left, yellow means excluded at 95% c.l. or more, green at 68%-95% (ie 2 and 1 sigma). | ||
| + | On the right, the same exclusions are shown but on a continuous scale (indicated by the bar on the right) with | ||
| + | 1 being fully excluded, 0 being zero sensitivity. | ||
| + | |||
| As you can see, the measurements disfavour $\tan\beta > 1$ regardless of $M = M_A$. There is some increase in sensitivity at high $M_A$. We can also plot the same data as a function of $M_{H^\prime}$: | As you can see, the measurements disfavour $\tan\beta > 1$ regardless of $M = M_A$. There is some increase in sensitivity at high $M_A$. We can also plot the same data as a function of $M_{H^\prime}$: | ||
2019/groups/higgs/gildener.txt ยท Last modified: 2019/10/31 12:58 by jonathan.butterworth
Page Tools
Except where otherwise noted, content on this wiki is licensed under the following license: Public Domain
