Recent Developments in SMEFT: Theory, Tools, and Phenomenology

Micha{\l} Ryczkowski

arxiv: 2604.22608 · v2 · submitted 2026-04-24 · ✦ hep-ph

Recent Developments in SMEFT: Theory, Tools, and Phenomenology

Micha{\l} Ryczkowski This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 10:56 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph

keywords SMEFTEffective Field TheoryBeyond the Standard ModelPhenomenologyComputational ToolsCollider PhysicsWilson CoefficientsNew Physics Searches

0 comments

The pith

The Standard Model Effective Field Theory provides a systematic framework for studying indirect effects of heavy new physics.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper reviews recent advancements in Effective Field Theories with a focus on the Standard Model Effective Field Theory. It shows how SMEFT parameterizes potential deviations from the Standard Model caused by new physics at scales too high for direct production at the LHC. A reader would care because it organizes current tools and studies that enable model-independent searches for beyond-Standard-Model effects. The review matters given the Standard Model's success alongside unresolved issues such as dark matter and the lack of new particle signals at colliders.

Core claim

The author presents SMEFT as the Standard Model Lagrangian extended by higher-dimensional operators suppressed by a new physics scale, and surveys recent theoretical progress, computational tools for calculations and matching, and phenomenological applications that use these operators to interpret experimental data.

What carries the argument

The Standard Model Effective Field Theory (SMEFT), consisting of the Standard Model plus all gauge-invariant higher-dimensional operators, which encodes the low-energy effects of heavy new physics through Wilson coefficients.

If this is right

Computational tools now allow more precise predictions of SMEFT contributions to collider processes.
Phenomenological studies can extract bounds on operator coefficients from LHC and other experimental results.
Theoretical advances improve matching of SMEFT to specific ultraviolet models of new physics.
This framework enables more comprehensive indirect searches for beyond-Standard-Model effects in the absence of direct discoveries.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Widespread use of SMEFT could standardize how experimental collaborations report limits on new physics across different models.
The reviewed tools might be extended to include cosmological data for addressing dark matter or baryogenesis within the same effective description.
Future matching calculations could test which specific high-scale models remain viable after incorporating the latest SMEFT constraints.

Load-bearing premise

The selected recent developments accurately represent the current state of SMEFT research without major omissions or selection bias.

What would settle it

Discovery of new particles with masses near the electroweak scale in future LHC data would challenge the core premise that new physics is heavy enough to be described by an effective theory rather than explicit particle content.

read the original abstract

Despite the remarkable success of the Standard Model in describing fundamental interactions, unresolved phenomena such as dark matter, dark energy, and matter-antimatter asymmetry strongly suggest the existence of physics beyond the Standard Model. The absence of new particle discoveries at the LHC indicates that such New Physics may be significantly heavier than the electroweak scale. In this context, Effective Field Theories offer a powerful framework for studying the indirect effects of heavy New Physics. This contribution reviews some of the recent advancements, computational tools, and phenomenology of Effective Field Theories, with a particular focus on the Standard Model Effective Field Theory.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This is a straightforward review summarizing recent SMEFT literature on theory, tools, and phenomenology, with no new results or derivations.

read the letter

This paper is a review that collects and organizes existing work on the Standard Model Effective Field Theory. It covers how SMEFT parametrizes heavy new physics effects, lists some computational tools for matching and running, and touches on phenomenological applications at colliders and elsewhere. That is the main contribution: a compact overview rather than fresh calculations or novel operator bases. The abstract makes clear the scope is limited to selected recent advancements, which keeps the piece focused but also means it functions more as a pointer to the literature than a definitive synthesis. The stress-test note is right that there are no internal claims to falsify here, since the central statement is simply that the paper reviews some developments. On the positive side, the structure appears logical for someone entering the area or needing quick references to tools and key observables. The citation pattern is not visible in detail, but a review of this type stands or falls on whether it accurately captures the main threads without major gaps. The weakest point is the selective nature noted in the abstract; any review risks under-emphasizing certain sub-topics or newer papers that appeared after the cutoff. If the full text delivers balanced coverage of matching procedures, global fits, and current LHC constraints, it will be serviceable. If it leans too heavily on a narrow set of references, its utility drops. This is the sort of paper that belongs in a proceedings or a dedicated review journal rather than a high-impact research venue. It is worth sending to peer review so that experts can check completeness and suggest missing references. For a reading group it is only maybe material, useful mainly for newcomers who want a single starting point. I would not cite it in my own work except as a general pointer if the tool list turns out to be particularly well-curated.

Referee Report

0 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript is a review of recent developments in Effective Field Theories with a focus on the Standard Model Effective Field Theory (SMEFT). It motivates the use of SMEFT for studying indirect effects of heavy new physics (given the lack of direct discoveries at the LHC) and covers theoretical advancements, computational tools, and phenomenological applications.

Significance. If the coverage is accurate, the review would be useful to the high-energy physics community by consolidating recent SMEFT progress into a single reference, aiding both theorists and phenomenologists working on beyond-Standard-Model searches. The paper appropriately cites external literature rather than advancing new derivations.

minor comments (1)

[Abstract] Abstract: the statement that the paper 'reviews some of the recent advancements' is vague on scope; adding one or two concrete examples of tools or phenomenological topics covered would help readers assess relevance without reading the full text.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive summary of our review on recent developments in SMEFT and for recommending minor revision. No specific major comments were raised in the report, so we interpret the minor revision as referring to general improvements in clarity, coverage, or presentation that we will address in the revised version.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Review paper with no internal derivations or predictions

full rationale

This is a review article whose central claim is descriptive: it summarizes recent advancements, tools, and phenomenology in SMEFT by referencing external literature. No original equations, derivations, fitted parameters, or predictions are advanced that could reduce to the paper's own inputs by construction. The abstract and structure confirm it performs no self-referential fitting or uniqueness claims; all technical content is attributed to cited prior work. This is the expected and correct outcome for a review.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

As a review of existing literature, the paper introduces no new free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; its content rests entirely on cited prior work.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5386 in / 957 out tokens · 24175 ms · 2026-05-08T10:56:14.174773+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

66 extracted references · 66 canonical work pages · 4 internal anchors

[1]

Buchmuller and D

W. Buchmuller and D. WylerNucl. Phys. B268(1986) 621–653. REFERENCES7

work page 1986
[2]

Dimension-Six Terms in the Standard Model Lagrangian

B. Grzadkowski, M. Iskrzynski, M. Misiak, and J. RosiekJHEP10 (2010) 085,arXiv:1008.4884 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2010
[3]

The Chiral Approach to the Electroweak Interactions

F. FeruglioInt. J. Mod. Phys. A8(1993) 4937–4972, arXiv:hep-ph/9301281

work page Pith review arXiv 1993
[4]

Effective Theory of a Dynamically Broken Electroweak Standard Model at NLO

G. Buchalla and O. CataJHEP07(2012) 101,arXiv:1203.6510 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2012
[5]

The Effective Chiral Lagrangian for a Light Dynamical "Higgs Particle"

R. Alonso, M. B. Gavela, L. Merlo, S. Rigolin, and J. YepesPhys. Lett. B722(2013) 330–335,arXiv:1212.3305 [hep-ph]. [Erratum: Phys.Lett.B 726, 926 (2013)]

work page Pith review arXiv 2013
[6]

The Standard Model as an Effective Field Theory

I. Brivio and M. TrottPhys. Rept.793(2019) 1–98, arXiv:1706.08945 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2019
[7]

Isidori, F

G. Isidori, F. Wilsch, and D. WylerRev. Mod. Phys.96no. 1, (2024) 015006,arXiv:2303.16922 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2024
[8]

Aebischer, A

J. Aebischer, A. J. Buras, and J. KumararXiv:2507.05926 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv
[9]

Banta, T

I. Banta, T. Cohen, N. Craig, X. Lu, and D. SutherlandJHEP02 (2022) 029,arXiv:2110.02967 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2022
[10]

On the Power Counting in Effective Field Theories

G. Buchalla, O. Cat´ a, A. Celis, and C. KrausePhys. Lett. B731 (2014) 80–86,arXiv:1312.5624 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2014
[11]

B. M. Gavela, E. E. Jenkins, A. V. Manohar, and L. MerloEur. Phys. J. C76no. 9, (2016) 485,arXiv:1601.07551 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2016
[12]

The Art of Counting: a reappraisal of the HEFT expansion

I. Brivio, R. Gr¨ ober, and K. SchmidJHEP04(2026) 202, arXiv:2511.23410 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026
[13]

Extending the Standard Model Effective Field Theory with the Complete Set of Dimension-7 Operators

L. LehmanPhys. Rev. D90no. 12, (2014) 125023,arXiv:1410.4193 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2014
[14]

C. W. MurphyJHEP10(2020) 174,arXiv:2005.00059 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2020
[15]

H.-L. Li, Z. Ren, J. Shu, M.-L. Xiao, J.-H. Yu, and Y.-H. ZhengPhys. Rev. D104no. 1, (2021) 015026,arXiv:2005.00008 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2021
[16]

Liao and X.-D

Y. Liao and X.-D. MaJHEP11(2020) 152,arXiv:2007.08125 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2020
[17]

R. V. Harlander, T. Kempkens, and M. C. SchaafPhys. Rev. D108 no. 5, (2023) 055020,arXiv:2305.06832 [hep-ph]. 8REFERENCES

work page arXiv 2023
[18]

Gluon-fusion Higgs production in the Standard Model Effective Field Theory

N. Deutschmann, C. Duhr, F. Maltoni, and E. VryonidouJHEP12 (2017) 063,arXiv:1708.00460 [hep-ph]. [Erratum: JHEP 02, 159 (2018)]

work page Pith review arXiv 2017
[19]

Alasfar, J

L. Alasfar, J. de Blas, and R. Gr¨ oberJHEP05(2022) 111, arXiv:2202.02333 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2022
[20]

Heinrich, J

G. Heinrich, J. Lang, and L. ScybozJHEP08(2022) 079, arXiv:2204.13045 [hep-ph]. [Erratum: JHEP 10, 086 (2023)]

work page arXiv 2022
[21]

Heinrich, S

G. Heinrich, S. Jones, M. Kerner, T. Stone, and A. VestnerJHEP11 (2024) 040,arXiv:2407.04653 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2024
[22]

Maltoni, G

F. Maltoni, G. Ventura, and E. VryonidouJHEP12(2024) 183, arXiv:2406.06670 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2024
[23]

Dedes, M

A. Dedes, M. Paraskevas, J. Rosiek, K. Suxho, and L. TrifyllisJHEP 08(2018) 103,arXiv:1805.00302 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2018
[24]

Dedes, K

A. Dedes, K. Suxho, and L. TrifyllisJHEP06(2019) 115, arXiv:1903.12046 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2019
[25]

J. M. Cullen and B. D. PecjakJHEP11(2020) 079, arXiv:2007.15238 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2020
[26]

E. E. Jenkins, A. V. Manohar, and M. TrottJHEP10(2013) 087, arXiv:1308.2627 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2013
[27]

E. E. Jenkins, A. V. Manohar, and M. TrottJHEP01(2014) 035, arXiv:1310.4838 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2014
[28]

Alonso, E

R. Alonso, E. E. Jenkins, A. V. Manohar, and M. TrottJHEP04 (2014) 159,arXiv:1312.2014 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2014
[29]

Di Noi, R

S. Di Noi, R. Gr¨ ober, and M. K. MandalJHEP12(2025) 220, arXiv:2408.03252 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[30]

L. Born, J. Fuentes-Mart´ ın, S. Kvedarait˙ e, and A. E. ThomsenJHEP 05(2025) 121,arXiv:2410.07320 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[31]

HaischJHEP06(2025) 004,arXiv:2503.06249 [hep-ph]

U. HaischJHEP06(2025) 004,arXiv:2503.06249 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[32]

C. Duhr, A. Vasquez, G. Ventura, and E. VryonidouJHEP07(2025) 160,arXiv:2503.01954 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[33]

Di Noi, B.A

S. Di Noi, B. A. Erdelyi, and R. Gr¨ oberarXiv:2510.14680 [hep-ph]. REFERENCES9

work page arXiv
[34]

Dedes, P

A. Dedes, P. Koz´ ow, and M. SzleperPhys. Rev. D104no. 1, (2021) 013003,arXiv:2011.07367 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2021
[35]

Cappati, R

A. Cappati, R. Covarelli, P. Torrielli, and M. ZaroJHEP09(2022) 038,arXiv:2205.15959 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2022
[36]

Dedes, J

A. Dedes, J. Rosiek, and M. RyczkowskiPhys. Rev. D112no. 5, (2025) 055044,arXiv:2506.12917 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[37]

Henning, X

B. Henning, X. Lu, T. Melia, and H. MurayamaJHEP08(2017) 016, arXiv:1512.03433 [hep-ph]. [Erratum: JHEP 09, 019 (2019)]

work page arXiv 2017
[38]

Fuentes-Martín, M

J. Fuentes-Mart´ ın, M. K¨ onig, J. Pag` es, A. E. Thomsen, and F. Wilsch Eur. Phys. J. C83no. 7, (2023) 662,arXiv:2212.04510 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2023
[39]

Carmona, A

A. Carmona, A. Lazopoulos, P. Olgoso, and J. SantiagoSciPost Phys. 12no. 6, (2022) 198,arXiv:2112.10787 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2022
[40]

J. C. CriadoComput. Phys. Commun.227(2018) 42–50, arXiv:1710.06445 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2018
[41]

CoDEx: Wilson coefficient calculator connecting SMEFT to UV theory

S. Das Bakshi, J. Chakrabortty, and S. K. PatraEur. Phys. J. C79 no. 1, (2019) 21,arXiv:1808.04403 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2019
[42]

DsixTools 2.0: The Effective Field Theory Toolkit,

J. Fuentes-Martin, P. Ruiz-Femenia, A. Vicente, and J. VirtoEur. Phys. J. C81no. 2, (2021) 167,arXiv:2010.16341 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2021
[43]

Wilson: a Python package for the running and matching of Wilson coefficients above and below the electroweak scale

J. Aebischer, J. Kumar, and D. M. StraubEur. Phys. J. C78no. 12, (2018) 1026,arXiv:1804.05033 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2018
[44]

Guedes, P

G. Guedes, P. Olgoso, and J. SantiagoSciPost Phys.15no. 4, (2023) 143,arXiv:2303.16965 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2023
[45]

RGESolver: a C++ library to perform renormalization group evolution in the Standard Model Effective Theory,

S. Di Noi and L. SilvestriniEur. Phys. J. C83no. 3, (2023) 200, arXiv:2210.06838 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2023
[46]

Giani, G

T. Giani, G. Magni, and J. RojoEur. Phys. J. C83no. 5, (2023) 393,arXiv:2302.06660 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2023
[47]

Stangl, PoSTOOLS2020, 035 (2021), arXiv:2012.12211 [hep-ph]

P. StanglPoSTOOLS2020(2021) 035,arXiv:2012.12211 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2021
[48]

De Blas et al.,HEPfit: a code for the combination of indirect and direct constraints on high energy physics models, Eur

J. De Blaset al. Eur. Phys. J. C80no. 5, (2020) 456, arXiv:1910.14012 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2020
[49]

ter Hoeve, G

J. ter Hoeve, G. Magni, J. Rojo, A. N. Rossia, and E. Vryonidou JHEP01(2024) 179,arXiv:2309.04523 [hep-ph]. 10REFERENCES

work page arXiv 2024
[50]

Brivio, Y

I. Brivio, Y. Jiang, and M. TrottJHEP12(2017) 070, arXiv:1709.06492 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2017
[51]

Interpreting top-quark LHC measurements in the standard-model effective field theory

D. Barducciet al.arXiv:1802.07237 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv
[52]

Degrande, G

C. Degrande, G. Durieux, F. Maltoni, K. Mimasu, E. Vryonidou, and C. ZhangPhys. Rev. D103no. 9, (2021) 096024,arXiv:2008.11743 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2021
[53]

Dedes, M

A. Dedes, M. Paraskevas, J. Rosiek, K. Suxho, and L. Trifyllis Comput. Phys. Commun.247(2020) 106931,arXiv:1904.03204 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2020
[54]

Dedes, J

A. Dedes, J. Rosiek, M. Ryczkowski, K. Suxho, and L. Trifyllis Comput. Phys. Commun.294(2024) 108943,arXiv:2302.01353 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2024
[55]

Scattering Amplitudes

H. Elvang and Y.-t. HuangarXiv:1308.1697 [hep-th]

work page Pith review arXiv
[56]

Effective Field Theory Amplitudes the On-Shell Way: Scalar and Vector Couplings to Gluons

Y. Shadmi and Y. WeissJHEP02(2019) 165,arXiv:1809.09644 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2019
[57]

Aoude and C

R. Aoude and C. S. MachadoJHEP12(2019) 058, arXiv:1905.11433 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2019
[58]

Durieux, T

G. Durieux, T. Kitahara, Y. Shadmi, and Y. WeissJHEP01(2020) 119,arXiv:1909.10551 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2020
[59]

Accettulli Huber and S

M. Accettulli Huber and S. De AngelisJHEP11(2021) 221, arXiv:2108.03669 [hep-th]

work page arXiv 2021
[60]

Baratella, C

P. Baratella, C. Fernandez, and A. PomarolNucl. Phys. B959(2020) 115155,arXiv:2005.07129 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2020
[61]

Baratella, C

P. Baratella, C. Fernandez, B. von Harling, and A. PomarolJHEP03 (2021) 287,arXiv:2010.13809 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2021
[62]

L. C. Bresciani, G. Brunello, G. Levati, P. Mastrolia, and P. Paradisi JHEP10(2025) 190,arXiv:2412.04160 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2025
[63]

Aebischer, L

J. Aebischer, L. C. Bresciani, and N. SelimovicJHEP08(2025) 209, arXiv:2502.14030 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2025
[64]

De Angelis and G

S. De Angelis and G. DurieuxSciPost Phys.16(2024) 071, arXiv:2308.00035 [hep-ph]. REFERENCES11

work page arXiv 2024
[65]

Chala, J

M. Chala, J. L´ opez Miras, J. Santiago, and F. VilchesSciPost Phys. 18no. 6, (2025) 185,arXiv:2411.12798 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[66]

Gr¨ ober, A

R. Gr¨ ober, A. N. Rossia, and M. RyczkowskiJHEP02(2026) 245, arXiv:2509.02680 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2026

[1] [1]

Buchmuller and D

W. Buchmuller and D. WylerNucl. Phys. B268(1986) 621–653. REFERENCES7

work page 1986

[2] [2]

Dimension-Six Terms in the Standard Model Lagrangian

B. Grzadkowski, M. Iskrzynski, M. Misiak, and J. RosiekJHEP10 (2010) 085,arXiv:1008.4884 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2010

[3] [3]

The Chiral Approach to the Electroweak Interactions

F. FeruglioInt. J. Mod. Phys. A8(1993) 4937–4972, arXiv:hep-ph/9301281

work page Pith review arXiv 1993

[4] [4]

Effective Theory of a Dynamically Broken Electroweak Standard Model at NLO

G. Buchalla and O. CataJHEP07(2012) 101,arXiv:1203.6510 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2012

[5] [5]

The Effective Chiral Lagrangian for a Light Dynamical "Higgs Particle"

R. Alonso, M. B. Gavela, L. Merlo, S. Rigolin, and J. YepesPhys. Lett. B722(2013) 330–335,arXiv:1212.3305 [hep-ph]. [Erratum: Phys.Lett.B 726, 926 (2013)]

work page Pith review arXiv 2013

[6] [6]

The Standard Model as an Effective Field Theory

I. Brivio and M. TrottPhys. Rept.793(2019) 1–98, arXiv:1706.08945 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2019

[7] [7]

Isidori, F

G. Isidori, F. Wilsch, and D. WylerRev. Mod. Phys.96no. 1, (2024) 015006,arXiv:2303.16922 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2024

[8] [8]

Aebischer, A

J. Aebischer, A. J. Buras, and J. KumararXiv:2507.05926 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv

[9] [9]

Banta, T

I. Banta, T. Cohen, N. Craig, X. Lu, and D. SutherlandJHEP02 (2022) 029,arXiv:2110.02967 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2022

[10] [10]

On the Power Counting in Effective Field Theories

G. Buchalla, O. Cat´ a, A. Celis, and C. KrausePhys. Lett. B731 (2014) 80–86,arXiv:1312.5624 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2014

[11] [11]

B. M. Gavela, E. E. Jenkins, A. V. Manohar, and L. MerloEur. Phys. J. C76no. 9, (2016) 485,arXiv:1601.07551 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2016

[12] [12]

The Art of Counting: a reappraisal of the HEFT expansion

I. Brivio, R. Gr¨ ober, and K. SchmidJHEP04(2026) 202, arXiv:2511.23410 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

[13] [13]

Extending the Standard Model Effective Field Theory with the Complete Set of Dimension-7 Operators

L. LehmanPhys. Rev. D90no. 12, (2014) 125023,arXiv:1410.4193 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2014

[14] [14]

C. W. MurphyJHEP10(2020) 174,arXiv:2005.00059 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2020

[15] [15]

H.-L. Li, Z. Ren, J. Shu, M.-L. Xiao, J.-H. Yu, and Y.-H. ZhengPhys. Rev. D104no. 1, (2021) 015026,arXiv:2005.00008 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2021

[16] [16]

Liao and X.-D

Y. Liao and X.-D. MaJHEP11(2020) 152,arXiv:2007.08125 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2020

[17] [17]

R. V. Harlander, T. Kempkens, and M. C. SchaafPhys. Rev. D108 no. 5, (2023) 055020,arXiv:2305.06832 [hep-ph]. 8REFERENCES

work page arXiv 2023

[18] [18]

Gluon-fusion Higgs production in the Standard Model Effective Field Theory

N. Deutschmann, C. Duhr, F. Maltoni, and E. VryonidouJHEP12 (2017) 063,arXiv:1708.00460 [hep-ph]. [Erratum: JHEP 02, 159 (2018)]

work page Pith review arXiv 2017

[19] [19]

Alasfar, J

L. Alasfar, J. de Blas, and R. Gr¨ oberJHEP05(2022) 111, arXiv:2202.02333 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2022

[20] [20]

Heinrich, J

G. Heinrich, J. Lang, and L. ScybozJHEP08(2022) 079, arXiv:2204.13045 [hep-ph]. [Erratum: JHEP 10, 086 (2023)]

work page arXiv 2022

[21] [21]

Heinrich, S

G. Heinrich, S. Jones, M. Kerner, T. Stone, and A. VestnerJHEP11 (2024) 040,arXiv:2407.04653 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2024

[22] [22]

Maltoni, G

F. Maltoni, G. Ventura, and E. VryonidouJHEP12(2024) 183, arXiv:2406.06670 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2024

[23] [23]

Dedes, M

A. Dedes, M. Paraskevas, J. Rosiek, K. Suxho, and L. TrifyllisJHEP 08(2018) 103,arXiv:1805.00302 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2018

[24] [24]

Dedes, K

A. Dedes, K. Suxho, and L. TrifyllisJHEP06(2019) 115, arXiv:1903.12046 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2019

[25] [25]

J. M. Cullen and B. D. PecjakJHEP11(2020) 079, arXiv:2007.15238 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2020

[26] [26]

E. E. Jenkins, A. V. Manohar, and M. TrottJHEP10(2013) 087, arXiv:1308.2627 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2013

[27] [27]

E. E. Jenkins, A. V. Manohar, and M. TrottJHEP01(2014) 035, arXiv:1310.4838 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2014

[28] [28]

Alonso, E

R. Alonso, E. E. Jenkins, A. V. Manohar, and M. TrottJHEP04 (2014) 159,arXiv:1312.2014 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2014

[29] [29]

Di Noi, R

S. Di Noi, R. Gr¨ ober, and M. K. MandalJHEP12(2025) 220, arXiv:2408.03252 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025

[30] [30]

L. Born, J. Fuentes-Mart´ ın, S. Kvedarait˙ e, and A. E. ThomsenJHEP 05(2025) 121,arXiv:2410.07320 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025

[31] [31]

HaischJHEP06(2025) 004,arXiv:2503.06249 [hep-ph]

U. HaischJHEP06(2025) 004,arXiv:2503.06249 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025

[32] [32]

C. Duhr, A. Vasquez, G. Ventura, and E. VryonidouJHEP07(2025) 160,arXiv:2503.01954 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025

[33] [33]

Di Noi, B.A

S. Di Noi, B. A. Erdelyi, and R. Gr¨ oberarXiv:2510.14680 [hep-ph]. REFERENCES9

work page arXiv

[34] [34]

Dedes, P

A. Dedes, P. Koz´ ow, and M. SzleperPhys. Rev. D104no. 1, (2021) 013003,arXiv:2011.07367 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2021

[35] [35]

Cappati, R

A. Cappati, R. Covarelli, P. Torrielli, and M. ZaroJHEP09(2022) 038,arXiv:2205.15959 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2022

[36] [36]

Dedes, J

A. Dedes, J. Rosiek, and M. RyczkowskiPhys. Rev. D112no. 5, (2025) 055044,arXiv:2506.12917 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025

[37] [37]

Henning, X

B. Henning, X. Lu, T. Melia, and H. MurayamaJHEP08(2017) 016, arXiv:1512.03433 [hep-ph]. [Erratum: JHEP 09, 019 (2019)]

work page arXiv 2017

[38] [38]

Fuentes-Martín, M

J. Fuentes-Mart´ ın, M. K¨ onig, J. Pag` es, A. E. Thomsen, and F. Wilsch Eur. Phys. J. C83no. 7, (2023) 662,arXiv:2212.04510 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2023

[39] [39]

Carmona, A

A. Carmona, A. Lazopoulos, P. Olgoso, and J. SantiagoSciPost Phys. 12no. 6, (2022) 198,arXiv:2112.10787 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2022

[40] [40]

J. C. CriadoComput. Phys. Commun.227(2018) 42–50, arXiv:1710.06445 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2018

[41] [41]

CoDEx: Wilson coefficient calculator connecting SMEFT to UV theory

S. Das Bakshi, J. Chakrabortty, and S. K. PatraEur. Phys. J. C79 no. 1, (2019) 21,arXiv:1808.04403 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2019

[42] [42]

DsixTools 2.0: The Effective Field Theory Toolkit,

J. Fuentes-Martin, P. Ruiz-Femenia, A. Vicente, and J. VirtoEur. Phys. J. C81no. 2, (2021) 167,arXiv:2010.16341 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2021

[43] [43]

Wilson: a Python package for the running and matching of Wilson coefficients above and below the electroweak scale

J. Aebischer, J. Kumar, and D. M. StraubEur. Phys. J. C78no. 12, (2018) 1026,arXiv:1804.05033 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2018

[44] [44]

Guedes, P

G. Guedes, P. Olgoso, and J. SantiagoSciPost Phys.15no. 4, (2023) 143,arXiv:2303.16965 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2023

[45] [45]

RGESolver: a C++ library to perform renormalization group evolution in the Standard Model Effective Theory,

S. Di Noi and L. SilvestriniEur. Phys. J. C83no. 3, (2023) 200, arXiv:2210.06838 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2023

[46] [46]

Giani, G

T. Giani, G. Magni, and J. RojoEur. Phys. J. C83no. 5, (2023) 393,arXiv:2302.06660 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2023

[47] [47]

Stangl, PoSTOOLS2020, 035 (2021), arXiv:2012.12211 [hep-ph]

P. StanglPoSTOOLS2020(2021) 035,arXiv:2012.12211 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2021

[48] [48]

De Blas et al.,HEPfit: a code for the combination of indirect and direct constraints on high energy physics models, Eur

J. De Blaset al. Eur. Phys. J. C80no. 5, (2020) 456, arXiv:1910.14012 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2020

[49] [49]

ter Hoeve, G

J. ter Hoeve, G. Magni, J. Rojo, A. N. Rossia, and E. Vryonidou JHEP01(2024) 179,arXiv:2309.04523 [hep-ph]. 10REFERENCES

work page arXiv 2024

[50] [50]

Brivio, Y

I. Brivio, Y. Jiang, and M. TrottJHEP12(2017) 070, arXiv:1709.06492 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2017

[51] [51]

Interpreting top-quark LHC measurements in the standard-model effective field theory

D. Barducciet al.arXiv:1802.07237 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv

[52] [52]

Degrande, G

C. Degrande, G. Durieux, F. Maltoni, K. Mimasu, E. Vryonidou, and C. ZhangPhys. Rev. D103no. 9, (2021) 096024,arXiv:2008.11743 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2021

[53] [53]

Dedes, M

A. Dedes, M. Paraskevas, J. Rosiek, K. Suxho, and L. Trifyllis Comput. Phys. Commun.247(2020) 106931,arXiv:1904.03204 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2020

[54] [54]

Dedes, J

A. Dedes, J. Rosiek, M. Ryczkowski, K. Suxho, and L. Trifyllis Comput. Phys. Commun.294(2024) 108943,arXiv:2302.01353 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2024

[55] [55]

Scattering Amplitudes

H. Elvang and Y.-t. HuangarXiv:1308.1697 [hep-th]

work page Pith review arXiv

[56] [56]

Effective Field Theory Amplitudes the On-Shell Way: Scalar and Vector Couplings to Gluons

Y. Shadmi and Y. WeissJHEP02(2019) 165,arXiv:1809.09644 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2019

[57] [57]

Aoude and C

R. Aoude and C. S. MachadoJHEP12(2019) 058, arXiv:1905.11433 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2019

[58] [58]

Durieux, T

G. Durieux, T. Kitahara, Y. Shadmi, and Y. WeissJHEP01(2020) 119,arXiv:1909.10551 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2020

[59] [59]

Accettulli Huber and S

M. Accettulli Huber and S. De AngelisJHEP11(2021) 221, arXiv:2108.03669 [hep-th]

work page arXiv 2021

[60] [60]

Baratella, C

P. Baratella, C. Fernandez, and A. PomarolNucl. Phys. B959(2020) 115155,arXiv:2005.07129 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2020

[61] [61]

Baratella, C

P. Baratella, C. Fernandez, B. von Harling, and A. PomarolJHEP03 (2021) 287,arXiv:2010.13809 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2021

[62] [62]

L. C. Bresciani, G. Brunello, G. Levati, P. Mastrolia, and P. Paradisi JHEP10(2025) 190,arXiv:2412.04160 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2025

[63] [63]

Aebischer, L

J. Aebischer, L. C. Bresciani, and N. SelimovicJHEP08(2025) 209, arXiv:2502.14030 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2025

[64] [64]

De Angelis and G

S. De Angelis and G. DurieuxSciPost Phys.16(2024) 071, arXiv:2308.00035 [hep-ph]. REFERENCES11

work page arXiv 2024

[65] [65]

Chala, J

M. Chala, J. L´ opez Miras, J. Santiago, and F. VilchesSciPost Phys. 18no. 6, (2025) 185,arXiv:2411.12798 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025

[66] [66]

Gr¨ ober, A

R. Gr¨ ober, A. N. Rossia, and M. RyczkowskiJHEP02(2026) 245, arXiv:2509.02680 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2026