- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review D

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access
  • Access by Xinjiang University

NLO SMEFT electroweak corrections to Higgs boson decays to four leptons in the narrow width approximation

Sally Dawson1,*, Matthew Forslund1,2,†, and Pier Paolo Giardino3,‡

  • *Contact author: dawson@bnl.gov
  • †Contact author: matthew.forslund@stonybrook.edu
  • ‡Contact author: pier.giardino@uam.es
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 111, 015016 – Published 22 January, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.111.015016

Abstract

Some of the most precise measurements of Higgs boson couplings are from the Higgs decays to 4 leptons, where deviations from the Standard Model predictions can be quantified in the framework of the Standard Model effective field theory (SMEFT). In this work, we present a complete next-to-leading order (NLO) SMEFT electroweak calculation of the rate for H→ℓ+ℓ−Z which we combine with the NLO SMEFT result for Z→ℓ+ℓ− to obtain the NLO rate for the H→4 lepton process in the narrow width approximation. The NLO calculation provides sensitivity to a wide range of SMEFT operators that do not contribute to the rate at lowest order and demonstrates the importance of including correlations between the effects of different operators when extracting limits on SMEFT parameters. We show that the extraction of the Higgs trilinear coupling from the decay H→ℓ+ℓ−Z,Z→ℓ+ℓ− in the narrow width approximation strongly depends on the contributions of other operators that first occur at NLO.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (51)

  1. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 251802 (2023).
  2. A. Hayrapetyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), arXiv:2409.13663.
  3. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Phys. Rep. 11, 001 (2024).
  4. A. Tumasyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Nature (London) 607, 60 (2022); 623, E4 (2023).
  5. S. Dawson et al., in Snowmass 2021 (2022), arXiv:2209.07510.
  6. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 957 (2020); 81, 29(E) (2021); 81, 398(E) (2021).
  7. A. Hayrapetyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2023) 040.
  8. J. Ellis, M. Madigan, K. Mimasu, V. Sanz, and T. You, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2021) 279.
  9. E. Celada, T. Giani, J. ter Hoeve, L. Mantani, J. Rojo, A. N. Rossia, M. O. A. Thomas, and E. Vryonidou, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2024) 091.
  10. E. d. S. Almeida, A. Alves, O. J. P. Éboli, and M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, Phys. Rev. D 105, 013006 (2022).
  11. B. Grinstein, C. W. Murphy, and D. Pirtskhalava, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2013) 077.
  12. S. Boselli, C. M. Carloni Calame, G. Montagna, O. Nicrosini, F. Piccinini, and A. Shivaji, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2018) 096.
  13. G. Degrassi, M. Fedele, and P. P. Giardino, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2017) 155.
  14. G. Degrassi, P. P. Giardino, F. Maltoni, and D. Pagani, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2016) 080.
  15. F. Maltoni, D. Pagani, A. Shivaji, and X. Zhao, Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 887 (2017).
  16. S. Schael et al. (ALEPH, DELPHI, L3, OPAL, SLD, LEP Electroweak Working Group, SLD Electroweak Group, and SLD Heavy Flavour Group Collaborations), Phys. Rep. 427, 257 (2006).
  17. A. Bredenstein, A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, and M. M. Weber, Phys. Rev. D 74, 013004 (2006).
  18. A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, and A. Mück, Comput. Phys. Commun. 254, 107336 (2020).
  19. I. Brivio and M. Trott, Phys. Rep. 793, 1 (2019).
  20. S. Dawson and P. P. Giardino, Phys. Rev. D 97, 093003 (2018).
  21. S. Dawson and P. P. Giardino, Phys. Rev. D 101, 013001 (2020).
  22. S. Dawson and P. P. Giardino, Phys. Rev. D 105, 073006 (2022).
  23. L. Bellafronte, S. Dawson, and P. P. Giardino, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2023) 208.
  24. K. Asteriadis, S. Dawson, P. P. Giardino, and R. Szafron, arXiv:2409.11466.
  25. K. Asteriadis, S. Dawson, P. P. Giardino, and R. Szafron, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 231801 (2024).
  26. W. Buchmuller and D. Wyler, Nucl. Phys. B268, 621 (1986).
  27. B. Grzadkowski, M. Iskrzynski, M. Misiak, and J. Rosiek, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2010) 085.
  28. A. Dedes, W. Materkowska, M. Paraskevas, J. Rosiek, and K. Suxho, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2017) 143.
  29. A. Greljo, A. Palavrić, and A. E. Thomsen, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2022) 010.
  30. K. Asteriadis, S. Dawson, and D. Fontes, Phys. Rev. D 107, 055038 (2023).
  31. C. Hays, A. Martin, V. Sanz, and J. Setford, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2019) 123.
  32. A. Alloul, N. D. Christensen, C. Degrande, C. Duhr, and B. Fuks, Comput. Phys. Commun. 185, 2250 (2014).
  33. R. Mertig, M. Bohm, and A. Denner, Comput. Phys. Commun. 64, 345 (1991).
  34. V. Shtabovenko, R. Mertig, and F. Orellana, Comput. Phys. Commun. 256, 107478 (2020).
  35. H. H. Patel, Comput. Phys. Commun. 218, 66 (2017).
  36. T. Hahn and M. Perez-Victoria, Comput. Phys. Commun. 118, 153 (1999).
  37. A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, and L. Hofer, Comput. Phys. Commun. 212, 220 (2017).
  38. E. E. Jenkins, A. V. Manohar, and M. Trott, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2013) 087.
  39. E. E. Jenkins, A. V. Manohar, and M. Trott, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2014) 035.
  40. R. Alonso, E. E. Jenkins, A. V. Manohar, and M. Trott, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2014) 159.
  41. K. Asteriadis, S. Dawson, P. P. Giardino, and R. Szafron, Amplitudes for e+e−→HZ, https://gitlab.com/smeft/h-to-l-l-z (2024).
  42. S. Catani and M. H. Seymour, Nucl. Phys. B485, 291 (1997); B510, 503(E) (1998).
  43. S. Dittmaier, A. Kabelschacht, and T. Kasprzik, Nucl. Phys. B800, 146 (2008).
  44. A. Denner and S. Dittmaier, Phys. Rep. 864, 1 (2020).
  45. D. Y. Bardin, A. Leike, T. Riemann, and M. Sachwitz, Phys. Lett. B 206, 539 (1988).
  46. G. Buchalla, O. Cata, and G. D’Ambrosio, Eur. Phys. J. C 74, 2798 (2014).
  47. G. Isidori, A. V. Manohar, and M. Trott, Phys. Lett. B 728, 131 (2014).
  48. A. M. Sirunyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 488 (2021).
  49. A. Freitas, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2014) 070.
  50. I. Brivio, T. Corbett, and M. Trott, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2019) 056.
  51. S. Dawson, D. Fontes, S. Homiller, and M. Sullivan, Phys. Rev. D 106, 055012 (2022).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 111, 015016– Published 22 January, 2025
  • Received 19 November 2024
  • Accepted 23 December 2024
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI. Funded by SCOAP3.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation