{"id":"77799e77-71dc-44c2-899a-c3398a5b7b0a","arxiv_id":"2609.00692","paper_version":1,"verdict":"CONDITIONAL","confidence":"MODERATE","novelty_score":5.0,"correctness_risk":"medium","formal_verification":"none","parameter_count":9,"one_line_summary":"In the surviving Type 1B flavorful 2HDM sample, the predictions are h→sb ≫ h→db, t→ch ≫ t→uh, and h→μτ ≫ h→eτ, h→eμ, with one-loop corrections mostly preserving these hierarchies.","lead":"This paper computes flavor-violating Higgs and top decay rates in a specific two-Higgs-doublet model with a twisted flavor structure. It finds a stable ordering of decay channels and picks out the decays most worth searching for at the LHC.","discovery_kind":"extension","skeptic_critique":{"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash","headline":"The down-sector FCNC hierarchy hinges on the unverified rotation ansatz of Eq. (17); the paper provides no sensitivity check.","rationale":"The reader identified the rotation ansatz as the weakest assumption, and this stress-test concurs. This assumption is the most load-bearing because the entire down-sector FCNC phenomenology—the CKM-controlled narrow bands that distinguish this model from generic 2HDM and underpin the hierarchy predictions—is built on it. The paper's transparency about the assumption is commendable, but it does not substitute for a sensitivity study. Alternative rotation choices could restructure the flavor violation, potentially altering the claimed hierarchies. The one-loop calculation issues, while noted, are secondary to the tree-level hierarchy claim. Therefore the existing CONDITIONAL verdict is appropriate and should remain unchanged, pending such a test.","tokens_in":19906,"tokens_out":3620,"duration_ms":31397,"concrete_test":"Perform two additional scans using the same texture but with modified rotation conventions: (A) allow V_Rd to have off-diagonal elements up to the Cabibbo angle λ, e.g., (V_Rd)_{23} ∼ λ, while keeping V_Lu≈I; (B) set V_Lu=V_CKM, V_Ld=I, moving CKM to the up sector. For each, recompute the surviving sample and check if the hierarchy BR(h→sb) ≫ BR(h→db) holds for >99% of points. If yes, the concern is mitigated; if not, the hierarchy is not robust to the rotation choice.","verdict_should_be":"UNCHANGED","load_bearing_attack":"The paper's central quantitative prediction—that BR(h→sb) is the largest quark-flavor-violating Higgs mode, with a narrow CKM-controlled tree-level band—follows from the specific rotation ansatz of Eq. (17): V_Lu≈I, V_Ru≈I, V_Ld≈V_CKM, V_Rd≈I. Under this choice, the leading entries in M'_d (Eq. 15) are fixed to −V*_ts m_b and −V*_td m_b, which dominate over scanned O^d terms. The paper concedes in Sec. IIB that this rotation pattern is not fixed by the texture and that V_Rd≈I is an additional simplifying assumption. No sensitivity study is performed: alternative choices (e.g., non-identity V_Rd, or moving CKM into the up sector) would redistribute flavor violation. For instance, if V_Rd contains small off-diagonal entries, the down-sector FCNC couplings could receive contributions from right-handed currents, potentially altering the hierarchy. If V_Lu were instead to carry the CKM matrix, the down-sector would lose its CKM-weighted dominance, and the tree-level bands would widen. Thus the claimed robust pattern is conditional on an unmotivated ansatz.","agreement_with_reader":"agree"},"referee_report":{"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash","summary":"This paper analyzes flavor-violating decays of the SM-like Higgs boson (h→sb, h→db, h→uc, h→μτ, h→eτ, h→eμ) and rare top decays (t→ch, t→uh) in the Type 1B flavorful two-Higgs-doublet model with a twist (Ref. [14]). The authors present the mass-basis Yukawa reconstruction (Eqs. (14)-(16)), tree-level amplitudes, triangle-graph one-loop vertex corrections, and a 50,000-point scan subject to Higgs signal strengths, S/T/U, meson mixing, B→X_sγ, direct HFV, and μ-e conversion constraints, leaving a final sample of 542 points. The central results are the hierarchy pattern BR(h→sb)≫BR(h→db), holding in 539/542 points after the one-loop update, BR(t→ch)≫BR(t→uh) with median ratio 6.46×10^4, and BR(h→μτ)≫BR(h→eτ),BR(h→eμ). The down-sector rates are shown to occupy narrow tree-level bands controlled by the fixed CKM-weighted entries −V*_ts m_b and −V*_td m_b of Eq. (15). One-loop vertex corrections give O(0.4-0.5) median suppressions in the down sector, produce a 0.55% sample of inversion points through destructive tree-loop interference (Sec. IVF), and yield very large relative corrections in the alignment-suppressed t→ch channel, which the authors attribute to a denominator effect. The paper is transparent about conventions and presents quantitative, falsifiable channel hierarchies.","tokens_in":20463,"tokens_out":14400,"duration_ms":123863,"significance":"The qualitative hierarchy pattern, if robust, gives concrete targets for flavor-violation searches in this model class: h→μτ as the experimentally cleanest channel, h→sb as the largest quark-flavor-violating Higgs mode (with the paper honestly noting its reconstruction difficulties), and t→ch as the leading top-flavor probe. Strengths of the manuscript include a reproducible machine-checked pipeline (SARAH/SPheno/HiggsSignals/FeynArts-FormCalc-LoopTools), an explicit cut-flow (Fig. 3), honest disclosure that the rotation ansatz of Eq. (17) is not fixed by the texture, explicit quantiles and hierarchy fractions, and a clear separation of tree-level and loop-updated claims. The central quantitative results are, however, conditional on two assumptions that the paper identifies but does not stress-test: the down-sector CKM rotation ansatz of Eq. (17), which fixes the leading entries of Eq. (15), and the triangle-only one-loop scheme of Eq. (25), which produces order-unity or larger relative corrections.","major_comments":[{"comment":"The narrow, CKM-controlled tree-level bands for BR(h→sb) and BR(h→db) are a central quantitative claim, but they follow directly from the rotation ansatz V_Lu≈I, V_Ru≈I, V_Ld≈V_CKM, V_Rd≈I of Eq. (17), which the authors concede in Sec. IIB is not fixed by the texture, with V_Rd≈I described as an additional simplifying assumption. Under this ansatz the leading entries of M'_d in Eq. (15) are the fixed terms −V*_ts m_b and −V*_td m_b; any alternative rotation consistent with the textures (for example, a non-negligible V_Rd with texture-level O(1) off-diagonal entries, or CKM mixing generated in the up sector) would redistribute flavor violation through Eqs. (11)-(13) and change both the magnitudes and the ordering of the leading channels. No sensitivity study of this choice is provided, so the claimed stability of the down-sector predictions is not established beyond the specific ansatz. I request a companion scan with at least two alternative rotation conventions and an explicit statement of which hierarchy claims survive.","section":"Sec. IIB, Eq. (17); Sec. IVE, Table III"},{"comment":"The one-loop updates include only the triangle-vertex diagrams of Figs. 1-2, with no external-leg self-energies, Yukawa counterterms, or scalar wave-function renormalization, and no renormalization-scheme discussion. Table II shows that the resulting relative corrections are order unity in the headline down-sector channels (median δ1L = −0.444 for h→sb and −0.422 for h→db) and enormous elsewhere (h→uc median 4.09×10^3 and maximum 4.25×10^10; t→ch maximum 3.06×10^4). In these regimes the loop contribution is not a small perturbation of the tree amplitude, and the omitted counterterm and self-energy pieces, which are generically of the same order as a complete one-loop vertex, cannot be assumed negligible. This bears directly on the hierarchy-inversion claim of Sec. IVF, since the three inversion points require a near-total cancellation (K_sb ≈ 7×10^-3), and both the location and the existence of such cancellations could shift under a complete renormalized computation. I request either the full one-loop renormalized calculation for the quoted channels, or a reframing of the quantitative claims to tree level with the vertex triangles presented as an indicative estimate accompanied by an estimate of the omitted terms.","section":"Sec. IIIC-IVD, Eq. (25); Table II; Sec. IVF"},{"comment":"The interpretation of the down-sector rates as texture-level predictions is complicated by the selection itself. Figure 9 shows ρ_S(BR(B→X_sγ), log10 BR(h→sb)) = −0.909 and ρ_S(BR(B→X_sγ), log10 BR(h→db)) = −0.819, making BR(B→X_sγ) the dominant monotonic driver of both headline channels in the surviving sample. Since the B→X_sγ selection of Eq. (39) removes the high-BR(B→X_sγ) points, and the anti-correlation means these are precisely the low-BR(h→sb) and low-BR(h→db) points, the surviving distribution is compressed against the selection boundary; the reported medians and the 'narrow band' of Table III are therefore a mixture of the CKM-texture locking emphasized in Sec. IVE and constraint-edge selection. The paper should separate these two effects, for example by reporting the pull of the final sample with respect to the B→X_sγ interval or by recomputing the bands under a tighter and a looser B→X_sγ window, so that the prospective statements in Sec. IVH are not over-read as texture-determined predictions.","section":"Sec. IVC, IVE, and IVH; Fig. 9"}],"minor_comments":[{"comment":"Medians are quoted for six of the eight channels but not for h→eτ and h→eμ; please add them so that the abstract's relation BR(h→eτ)∼BR(h→eμ) can be checked against reported numbers.","section":"Sec. IVB, Fig. 4"},{"comment":"The typeset definition of O^f,ij_eff appears corrupted ('/radicaltp/radicalvertex/radicalvertex√'); it should read sqrt((|O^f_ij|^2+|O^f_ji|^2)/2).","section":"Eq. (44)"},{"comment":"Several entries have incomplete bibliographic data, including missing years or journal numbers in Refs. [11], [12], [22], [25], [27]-[32], and [35]; please standardize all entries.","section":"References"},{"comment":"The statement that the O-coefficients 'exactly reconstruct the physical fermion masses' is not accompanied by the reconstruction algorithm; please describe the fitting or iteration procedure, or point to the public code, so the texture scan is reproducible.","section":"Sec. IIB"},{"comment":"Defining the Higgs-signal-strength cut as Δχ²≤1 with χ²_HS,min taken from the generated sample makes the selection self-referential; please state the HiggsSignals data set and version and the reference point so that the threshold 150.872 is reproducible, or use a fixed SM reference.","section":"Sec. IIID, Eq. (36)"},{"comment":"The label 'HS/HB' in Fig. 3 is not defined in the text, and HiggsBounds is never mentioned; please clarify whether a HiggsBounds selection is part of the cut-flow and, if so, where it enters.","section":"Sec. IIIE and Fig. 3"},{"comment":"For h→sb, h→db, and h→uc the 'Source' column lists Refs. [26,29], which are theory papers; please state explicitly that these are indirect, analysis-dependent constraints rather than direct experimental limits.","section":"Table V"},{"comment":"Please specify the numerical values of the total widths used for the branching-ratio normalization in Eqs. (29) and (31); the current wording ('the widths used in the corresponding numerical normalization') is vague.","section":"Sec. IIIB"}],"recommendation":"major_revision","confidential_remarks":"The manuscript is honest, internally consistent, and technically careful in its reporting of the cut-flow and quantiles; my concerns are structural rather than computational. The rotation-ansatz sensitivity question is the main gate: the paper's headline 'CKM-stable' predictions are conditional on Eq. (17), and a sensitivity scan is well within the authors' scope. The one-loop triangle-only scheme is the second gate; given the order-unity corrections in the central channels, the missing counterterm and self-energy contributions should at minimum be acknowledged with an error estimate, or the claims reframed at tree level. The paper fits the journal's scope and, if revised along these lines, would provide useful target channels for LHC flavor-violation searches. I also note that the reference list is heavily weighted toward one research group's recent work, including Ref. [33] from the same authors; this is not disqualifying, but the experimental-constraint citations should be checked for completeness."},"author_rebuttal":null,"desk_editor":{"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash","letter":"You asked about 2609.00692. Here's my take.\n\nWhat this paper does: it takes the Type 1B F2HDM from Altmannshofer–Maddock (2018), runs a 542-point constrained scan with updated Higgs, flavor, and EW precision constraints, and computes one-loop vertex corrections for h→sb, h→db, h→uc, t→ch, and t→uh. That set of one-loop numbers, the surviving-sample statistics, and the rare inversion points (0.55% where tree-loop interference flips the h→sb vs h→db hierarchy) are new. The paper is transparent about its cut-flow, conventions, and code stack. The internal consistency is fine.\n\nNow the soft spots, in proportion. The biggest is the rotation ansatz of Eq. (17): V_Lu≈I, V_Ru≈I, V_Ld≈V_CKM, V_Rd≈I. The paper concedes in Sec. IIB that this is 'an additional simplifying assumption' not fixed by the texture. Under this assumption, the dominant entries in M'_d become −V*_ts m_b and −V*_td m_b, which gives the narrow CKM-controlled bands that the paper presents as stable predictions for h→sb and h→db. If the CKM were moved to the up sector or if V_Rd had small off-diagonals, the hierarchy would shift. The authors perform no sensitivity study. The claimed numerical hierarchy is therefore a conditional result, not a robust discovery.\n\nSecond, the 'one-loop-updated' quark rates omit counterterms and wave-function renormalization—the paper only includes one-loop vertex triangles. The authors are open about this, but the numerical quantiles (especially the three inversion points) should be read as illustrative. Third, the constraint set uses 2007 UTfit intervals and a relative Δχ² cut (Δχ²<1) on HiggsSignals, which is not a rigorous global fit. The surviving sample is useful but not definitive.\n\nOn the plus side, the qualitative pattern (down-sector CKM control, lepton and top alignment control, first-second generation suppression) is robust, and the paper states its caveats honestly. The h→μτ rate reaching 2.7e-4 is within HL-LHC reach, and the strong B→X_sγ correlation in the down-sector rates gives an external tie.\n\nWho this is for: theorists working on flavorful 2HDMs or flavor-violating Higgs phenomenology. It's a solid but incremental update. A reader who needs the most up-to-date numbers for this specific model will find it useful.\n\nRecommendation: deserves peer review. The referees should ask for a sensitivity study on the rotation ansatz and a note on the incompleteness of the loop calculation. With those additions, the paper would be publishable.","headline":"Competent scan of an existing model, but the central numerical predictions are conditional on a rotation ansatz the authors themselves call an additional simplifying assumption, and they don't test alternatives.","tokens_in":20957,"tokens_out":1212,"would_cite":false,"duration_ms":12176,"reading_group":"maybe","serious_thinker":"yes","would_accept_peer_review":true},"pith_extraction":{"msc":[],"pacs":["12.60.Fr","14.65.Ha"],"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash","headline":"The Type 1B two-Higgs-doublet model predicts that h→sb, t→ch, and h→μτ are the leading flavor-violating decay modes, with h→sb far above h→db and h→μτ far above the electron channels.","keywords":["flavor-violating Higgs decays","rare top decays","two-Higgs-doublet model","flavorful 2HDM","CKM matrix","one-loop vertex corrections","charged lepton flavor violation","h → μτ"],"falsifier":"A decisive falsifier is a rotation-sensitivity calculation not contained in the paper: rerun the same scan with the CKM matrix placed in the up-quark sector ($V_{Lu}\\simeq V_\\mathrm{CKM}$, $V_{Ld}\\simeq I$) and check whether the $h\\to sb\\gg h\\to db$ pattern survives; if it inverts or moves to $h\\to uc$, the claimed hierarchy is an artifact of the ansatz rather than a model prediction. A directly observable falsifier is the lepton sector: observation of $\\mathrm{BR}(h\\to e\\tau)$ or $\\mathrm{BR}(h\\to e\\mu)$ comparable to or above $\\mathrm{BR}(h\\to\\mu\\tau)$ would contradict the predicted $h\\to\\mu\\tau$ dominance.","tokens_in":21548,"feed_emoji":"⚛️","tokens_out":15549,"duration_ms":123911,"temperature":0.7,"pith_summary":"This paper argues that the Type 1B flavorful two-Higgs-doublet model — a two-doublet flavor structure in which one doublet gives mass mostly to the first two generations and the other to the third — predicts a strict, correlated pattern of rare Higgs and top decays. After applying Higgs signal-strength, electroweak-precision, meson-mixing, $B\\to X_s\\gamma$, and charged-lepton-flavor constraints to 50,000 parameter points, the surviving 542-point sample shows $\\mathrm{BR}(h\\to sb)\\gg\\mathrm{BR}(h\\to db)$, $\\mathrm{BR}(t\\to ch)\\gg\\mathrm{BR}(t\\to uh)$, and $\\mathrm{BR}(h\\to\\mu\\tau)\\gg\\mathrm{BR}(h\\to e\\tau),\\,\\mathrm{BR}(h\\to e\\mu)$, with median one-loop-updated rates of $8.43\\times10^{-4}$, $2.59\\times10^{-5}$, $3.93\\times10^{-8}$, and $5.41\\times10^{-6}$ in the leading channels. The paper's mechanism is that the down-sector Higgs rates are locked to CKM factors and therefore narrow, while the top and muon-tau channels are controlled by alignment and texture entries. If these predictions hold, they identify the specific flavor-violating channels colliders should target, with $h\\to\\mu\\tau$ the experimentally cleanest and $h\\to sb$ the largest but hardest to reconstruct.","feed_headline":"h→sb outruns h→db, t→ch outruns t→uh in this two-doublet model","feed_subtitle":"These are the channels a collider should target if this flavor structure is real — and h→μτ is the cleanest.","key_machinery":"The load-bearing machinery is the CKM-down mass reconstruction of the Type 1B Yukawa texture. The two doublets are assigned so that the first two generations couple dominantly to $\\Phi_1$ and the third generation to $\\Phi_2$, and the numerical rotation ansatz of Eq. (17) places all CKM mixing in the left-handed down-quark sector. In the down-sector mass matrix (15), the entries that drive $h\\to sb$ and $h\\to db$ are the fixed CKM-weighted terms $-V^*_{ts}m_b$ and $-V^*_{td}m_b$; scanned corrections are suppressed by $m_s/m_b$, which locks the tree-level rates into narrow bands and produces the down-sector hierarchy. The one-loop vertex corrections enter as tree-plus-triangle amplitudes, and the interference term between the two is the mechanism behind the rare $\\mathrm{BR}_{1L}(h\\to db)>\\mathrm{BR}_{1L}(h\\to sb)$ inversion points.","core_discovery":"The central claim is that the Type 1B F2HDM predicts a stable flavor-violating hierarchy: $\\mathrm{BR}(h\\to sb)\\gg\\mathrm{BR}(h\\to db)$, $\\mathrm{BR}(t\\to ch)\\gg\\mathrm{BR}(t\\to uh)$, and $\\mathrm{BR}(h\\to\\mu\\tau)\\gg\\mathrm{BR}(h\\to e\\tau)\\sim\\mathrm{BR}(h\\to e\\mu)$ across the constrained parameter sample. In the 542 surviving points the median one-loop branching ratios are $8.43\\times10^{-4}$ for $h\\to sb$, $2.59\\times10^{-5}$ for $h\\to db$, $3.93\\times10^{-8}$ for $t\\to ch$, and $5.41\\times10^{-6}$ for $h\\to\\mu\\tau$, with maxima $1.91\\times10^{-3}$, $7.20\\times10^{-5}$, $2.32\\times10^{-6}$, and $2.70\\times10^{-4}$. The near-constancy of the down-sector rates follows from the mass-matrix entries $-V^*_{ts}m_b$ and $-V^*_{td}m_b$, which dominate the scanned texture corrections, whereas $t\\to ch$ and $h\\to\\mu\\tau$ spread over orders of magnitude with alignment and texture sensitivity. One-loop vertex corrections preserve the hierarchy in $539$ of $542$ points; in the remaining three, destructive tree–loop interference suppresses $h\\to sb$ strongly enough that the one-loop $h\\to db$ rate exceeds it. The paper concludes that $h\\to sb$, $t\\to ch$, $h\\to db$, and $h\\to\\mu\\tau$ are the channels a future experiment should probe in this model class.","pith_inferences":["Inference: The rotation ansatz of Eq. (17) is the natural first thing to vary; the paper concedes the texture does not fix the rotation, so moving the CKM matrix to the up sector could redistribute the same flavor violation and change which channel is largest.","Inference: The strong anticorrelation of the surviving down-sector rates with $\\mathrm{BR}(B\\to X_s\\gamma)$ suggests that a single combined fit of radiative B decay, meson mixing, and Higgs FCNC rates could identify which scalar couplings the $B\\to X_s\\gamma$ bound is actually constraining.","Inference: Because the paper stops at rate-level predictions, a dedicated strange-tagging search for $h\\to sb$ at the $10^{-3}$ level is the concrete detector-level test that the results motivate but do not carry out."],"forward_implications":["A collider program for this model class should prioritize $h\\to sb$, $h\\to\\mu\\tau$, and $t\\to ch$: the first is numerically the largest quark-flavor-violating mode, the second is the cleanest lepton mode, and the third is the leading top-flavor probe.","The correlated pair $\\mathrm{BR}(h\\to sb)\\gg\\mathrm{BR}(h\\to db)$ and $\\mathrm{BR}(t\\to ch)\\gg\\mathrm{BR}(t\\to uh)$ gives a pattern of ratios that can distinguish this two-doublet flavor structure from structures with differently placed CKM mixing.","Because $\\mathrm{BR}(h\\to sb)$ and $\\mathrm{BR}(h\\to db)$ are tightly anticorrelated with $\\mathrm{BR}(B\\to X_s\\gamma)$, better measurements of the radiative B decay directly sharpen the model's Higgs-rate predictions.","One-loop corrections preserve the overall hierarchy in $539$ of $542$ surviving points; the rare inverted points are a genuine destructive tree–loop interference effect rather than evidence against the model's ordering.","The surviving sample keeps $\\mathrm{BR}(h\\to\\mu\\tau)\\gg\\mathrm{BR}(h\\to e\\tau),\\mathrm{BR}(h\\to e\\mu)$, so observing the electron channels at rates comparable to $h\\to\\mu\\tau$ would already point away from this realization."],"supporting_citations":[{"why":"Defines the Type 1B flavorful two-Higgs-doublet model with a twist, including the flavor assignment and Yukawa textures this analysis implements.","marker":"[14]"},{"why":"Supplies the 2HDM scalar-sector conventions and the perturbativity, unitarity, and bounded-from-below conditions used to preselect parameter points.","marker":"[6]"},{"why":"Supplies the model-independent two-sided 95% intervals for neutral-meson mixing that remove most of the generated parameter points.","marker":"[35]"},{"why":"Supplies the inclusive $B\\to X_s\\gamma$ interval that is the strongest low-energy driver of the surviving down-sector Higgs rates.","marker":"[36]"},{"why":"Provides the direct experimental upper bound on $h\\to\\mu\\tau$ used to constrain the lepton sector.","marker":"[15]"},{"why":"Provides the direct experimental upper bound on $h\\to e\\tau$ used to constrain the lepton sector.","marker":"[16]"},{"why":"Provides the direct experimental upper bound on $h\\to e\\mu$ used to constrain the lepton sector.","marker":"[17]"},{"why":"Supplies the direct experimental upper limits on $t\\to ch$ and $t\\to uh$ used in the top-decay comparison.","marker":"[24]"},{"why":"Supplies the electroweak precision $S,T,U$ central values and $1\\sigma$ ranges imposed on the surviving sample.","marker":"[34]"}],"fun_headline_variants":["Flavor-violating Higgs and top decay hierarchy survives loop checks","h→sb beats h→db, t→ch beats t→uh in twisted two-doublet model","One-loop corrections keep rare decay pattern in 539 of 542 F2HDM points","Type 1B F2HDM favors h→sb, t→ch, and h→μτ channels","Rare Higgs and top channels retain hierarchy after vertex corrections"],"cache_read_input_tokens":0,"weakest_assumption_plain":"The load-bearing premise is the numerical rotation choice of Eq. (17) — all CKM mixing in the left-handed down-quark sector and no right-handed mixing — which the paper itself calls an additional simplifying assumption; the Yukawa texture does not fix this rotation, so a different valid choice would redistribute the flavor violation and change which decay dominates.","fun_headline_variants_meta":{"raw":{"variants":["Flavor-violating Higgs and top decay hierarchy survives loop checks","h→sb beats h→db, t→ch beats t→uh in twisted two-doublet model","One-loop corrections keep rare decay pattern in 539 of 542 F2HDM points","Type 1B F2HDM favors h→sb, t→ch, and h→μτ channels","Rare Higgs and top channels retain hierarchy after vertex corrections"]},"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash","effort":"low","cost_usd":0.000317,"raw_usage":{"cost":0.00031668,"is_byok":false,"cost_details":{"upstream_inference_cost":0.00031668,"upstream_inference_prompt_cost":0.0001918,"upstream_inference_completions_cost":0.00012488},"total_tokens":1816,"prompt_tokens":1370,"completion_tokens":446,"prompt_tokens_details":{"audio_tokens":0,"video_tokens":0,"cached_tokens":0,"cache_write_tokens":0},"completion_tokens_details":{"audio_tokens":0,"image_tokens":0,"reasoning_tokens":348}},"tokens_in":1370,"tokens_out":446,"cost_source":"openrouter_usage","duration_ms":5497,"temperature":1.0,"reasoning_tokens":348,"transport_provider":"openrouter","cache_read_input_tokens":0,"cache_creation_input_tokens":0},"cache_creation_input_tokens":0},"created_at":"2026-09-09T00:17:51.681611+00:00","model_set":{"reader":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash"},"falsifier":"A decisive falsifier is a rotation-sensitivity calculation not contained in the paper: rerun the same scan with the CKM matrix placed in the up-quark sector ($V_{Lu}\\simeq V_\\mathrm{CKM}$, $V_{Ld}\\simeq I$) and check whether the $h\\to sb\\gg h\\to db$ pattern survives; if it inverts or moves to $h\\to uc$, the claimed hierarchy is an artifact of the ansatz rather than a model prediction. A directly observable falsifier is the lepton sector: observation of $\\mathrm{BR}(h\\to e\\tau)$ or $\\mathrm{BR}(h\\to e\\mu)$ comparable to or above $\\mathrm{BR}(h\\to\\mu\\tau)$ would contradict the predicted $h\\to\\mu\\tau$ dominance.","supporting_citations":[{"cited_title":"Flavorful Two Higgs Doublet Models with a Twist","cited_arxiv_id":"1805.08659","evidence_quote":"Defines the Type 1B flavorful two-Higgs-doublet model with a twist, including the flavor assignment and Yukawa textures this analysis implements."},{"cited_title":"Theory and phenomenology of two-Higgs-doublet models","cited_arxiv_id":"1106.0034","evidence_quote":"Supplies the 2HDM scalar-sector conventions and the perturbativity, unitarity, and bounded-from-below conditions used to preselect parameter points."},{"cited_title":"Model-independent constraints on Delta F=2 operators and the scale of New Physics","cited_arxiv_id":"0707.0636","evidence_quote":"Supplies the model-independent two-sided 95% intervals for neutral-meson mixing that remove most of the generated parameter points."},{"cited_title":"Averages of $b$-hadron, $c$-hadron, and $\\tau$-lepton properties as of summer 2016","cited_arxiv_id":"1612.07233","evidence_quote":"Supplies the inclusive $B\\to X_s\\gamma$ interval that is the strongest low-energy driver of the surviving down-sector Higgs rates."},{"cited_title":"Search for lepton-flavor violating decays of the Higgs boson in the $\\mu\\tau$ and e$\\tau$ final states in proton-proton collisions at $\\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV","cited_arxiv_id":"2105.03007","evidence_quote":"Provides the direct experimental upper bound on $h\\to\\mu\\tau$ used to constrain the lepton sector."},{"cited_title":"Searches for lepton-flavour-violating decays of the Higgs boson into $e\\tau$ and $\\mu\\tau$ in $\\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV $pp$ collisions with the ATLAS detector","cited_arxiv_id":"2302.05225","evidence_quote":"Provides the direct experimental upper bound on $h\\to e\\tau$ used to constrain the lepton sector."},{"cited_title":"Search for the lepton-flavor violating decay of the Higgs boson and additional Higgs bosons in the e$\\mu$ final state in proton-proton collisions at $\\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV","cited_arxiv_id":"2305.18106","evidence_quote":"Provides the direct experimental upper bound on $h\\to e\\mu$ used to constrain the lepton sector."},{"cited_title":"Search for flavour-changing neutral-current couplings between the top quark and the Higgs boson in multi-lepton final states in 13 TeV $pp$ collisions with the ATLAS detector","cited_arxiv_id":"2404.02123","evidence_quote":"Supplies the direct experimental upper limits on $t\\to ch$ and $t\\to uh$ used in the top-decay comparison."},{"cited_title":"Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Phys","cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"Supplies the electroweak precision $S,T,U$ central values and $1\\sigma$ ranges imposed on the surviving sample."}],"review_version":2}