Constraints on and future prospects for Two-Higgs-Doublet Models in light of the LHC Higgs signal

Beranger Dumont; John F. Gunion; Sabine Kraml; Yun Jiang

REVIEW

Constraints on and future prospects for Two-Higgs-Doublet Models in light of the LHC Higgs signal

Beranger Dumont, John F. Gunion, Yun Jiang, Sabine Kraml

High Energy Physics - Phenomenology · Submitted 14 May 2014 · 44 references

Pith's verdict: A solid, comprehensive post-LHC8 2HDM status paper whose feed-down bookkeeping is the durable contribution; the per-channel 95% cuts make the boundary claims looser than they read.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (selfhosted/deepseek-v4.1-flash) read the paper on October 29, 2026 and answered a fixed list of questions about it. T0 is the starting level every paper gets. The levels describe how deeply Pith has checked the paper, never the authors.

T0 AI review An AI read the paper and answered a fixed list of questions.
T1 Audit Automatic checks that the references and files the paper relies on exist and match.
T2 Compute The paper's code or calculations re-run with the same results.
T3 Formal statement The claims written out in a formal math language a computer can read.
T4 Proof Those claims proved, and the proof checked by computer.

How Pith checks papers →

· 4 major objections · 8 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv ID1405.3584 (version 2)

Pith IDR55QWAFQ, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

CitationBeranger Dumont, John F. Gunion, Sabine Kraml, Yun Jiang. "Constraints on and future prospects for Two-Higgs-Doublet Models in light of the LHC Higgs signal." arXiv:1405.3584 (2014). https://pith.science/paper/R55QWAFQ

Cite this reviewBibTeX for Pith's review of this paper

Claim paper

Why Pith says this

Highlight any text to comment on it.

Editor's note

read the letter

This is the paper you keep on the shelf if you work on 2HDM fits. It is the most complete post-LHC8 status accounting for Type I and Type II, covering both the h = 125.5 GeV and H = 125.5 GeV identifications, and the feed-down treatment is the piece other groups now reuse. The abstract undersells it: [abstract:s1] and [abstract:s2] describe a scan, but the actual new content is the FD formalism in Appendix A (including corrections to the formulas of [31]), the explicit FDOK / Low FD / High FD thresholds, and the mH = 125.5 GeV case worked through with the nondecoupling charged-Higgs loop. The sharpest sub-claim is falsifiable and clean: in Type II with mH = 125.5 GeV, a future 5% confirmation of SM-like diphoton and ZZ rates kills the scenario outright. That argument is imported from [41], which is published, so it is supported rather than a gap. The FD estimate is also deliberately conservative — no acceptance reduction applied — which is the right direction to err, and they say so. The stress-test concern lands. Section II C requires chi-squared below 6.18 for each decay channel separately, which is four independent 2D 95% cuts, not a joint 95% over the channel set. The paper is explicit that the cut is 'in two dimensions' per channel, so nothing is hidden, but the surviving point sets in Figs. 2-4 and 18 are systematically more permissive than a genuine joint fit. The central survival claim is safe — a looser cut only enlarges the allowed space — but the boundary claims inherit the looseness: the wrong-sign Type II Yukawa branch surviving at 95% and dying at 10% precision, and the large positive cos(beta-alpha) branch for tan beta below about 7. A joint likelihood would settle it and is cheap. Two smaller things: the FDOK thresholds are heuristic and acknowledged as such, and the claim that FD limits do not constrain the parameter space rests on visual overlap in Fig. 18 rather than a quantitative statement. Minor. The Gaussian refit of digitized 68% contours is standard and stated. This is for 2HDM phenomenologists and anyone setting LHC14 targets. It deserves a referee.

Referee report

Significance

The paper is a careful and unusually complete treatment of an important question, and several of its elements are genuinely valuable: the explicit and documented chain of cuts, the full feed-down formalism of Appendix A (which corrects and extends [31]), the falsifiable and physically sharp prediction of Appendix B for the mH = 125.5 GeV Type II case, and the systematic LHC14 projections for the non-SM-like Higgs states including the low-mA windows below 100 GeV that escape LEP and LHC8 limits. The use of the public 2HDMC code and of digitized public likelihoods makes the analysis reproducible in principle. The central claim, that both Type I and Type II 2HDMs remain viable with the 125.5 GeV state as either h or H, is well supported by the material presented, and the paper is candid about the approximations it makes.

Major objections (4)

[§II C, Eq. (5)] The postLHC8 selection requires chi-squared_Y < 6.18 separately for each of the four final states Y = gamma-gamma, VV, bb, tau-tau, and the text states explicitly that 6.18 'corresponds to 95% C.L. in two dimensions.' This is four independent per-channel 95% cuts, not a joint 95% C.L. over the full channel set, so the surviving point sets in Figs. 2, 3, 4 and 18 are systematically more permissive than a genuine joint analysis would give. The paper is transparent about the per-channel nature of the cut, and the headline claim (that the 2HDMs remain viable) is only strengthened by a looser selection, so this is not a threat to the central result. It does, however, affect the quantitative boundary statements, in particular the survival of the wrong-sign Type II branch (C_hD < 0, sin alpha > 0) at 95% C.L. in Fig. 3 and the large positive cos(beta-alpha) Type II branch for tan beta < ~7 in Fig. 2. Please either perform a joint chi-squared over the four channels (with the cross-channel correlations stated, or explicitly neglected) or state in the text how much the quoted boundaries would move under a joint cut, so that the reader can judge which of the surviving regions are robust and which are artifacts of the per-channel selection.
[§III B and §IV, Figs. 7, 9, 19, 24] The future-prospects analysis is phrased entirely in terms of hypothetical measurements agreeing with the SM prediction at the ±15%, ±10% and ±5% level, and the resulting statements about which regions survive (for example that SM±10% eliminates the wrong-sign Type II Yukawa branch, or that SM±5% eliminates mH = 125.5 GeV in Type II) are among the paper's most quoted conclusions. These projections are compared against experimental precision only; the theoretical uncertainty on the corresponding SM predictions, which for gluon fusion is of order 10% at 8 TeV and remains several percent at 14 TeV, is not discussed anywhere. Since a '±5% measurement' of a gluon-fusion-dominated rate is not meaningful without a commensurate theory calculation, the ±5% and ±10% scenarios should be qualified by the expected theory uncertainty, or the analysis repeated with the theory error folded into the comparison. At minimum the paper should state which of its conclusions are limited by this and which are not.
[§II B] The heavy-Higgs limits are applied after two rescalings: the width correction f = sqrt((Gamma_H^2 + (4 GeV)^2)/(Gamma_H^SM^2 + (4 GeV)^2)), and, for the searches implemented as fully inclusive, a rescaling by sigma_tot^SM / sigma_ggF^SM. Both are load-bearing, since the green and blue point sets in Figs. 2-4 and 18 are defined by these limits, yet neither is validated. The 4 GeV resolution that enters f is supported only by a private communication (Ref. [40]), and the inclusive rescaling assumes that the experimental acceptances for the ggF and inclusive SM production mechanisms are equivalent, which is not obviously true for the 4-lepton and 2-lepton-2-neutrino analyses. Please document the resolution with a published source, state the range of f actually encountered across the scan (in particular for the large-tan beta Type II points where the H width can exceed the SM width rather than fall below it), and give some estimate of the systematic uncertainty introduced by the inclusive rescaling.
[§IV and Appendix B] The sharpest claim of the paper is that for mH = 125.5 GeV in Type II the charged-Higgs loop produces 'at least' a 5% reduction of C_Hgamma, so that a future confirmation of C_Hgamma within 5% of the SM would eliminate the scenario. The elimination is therefore at the boundary of the stated precision: if the suppression is exactly 5% and the 5% is a 1-sigma uncertainty, the exclusion is at the 1-sigma level rather than a decisive one. The argument of Appendix B, Eqs. (B1)-(B2), establishes the asymptotic bound but not the distribution of the suppression across the allowed parameter space. Please show the distribution of C_Hgamma for the postLHC8 Type II points (Fig. 30 shows C_Hgamma versus C_HD but not the histogram or the fraction of points with suppression substantially larger than 5%), and state explicitly whether the 5% in the projection is a 1-sigma or a 2-sigma uncertainty, so that the strength of the elimination claim can be judged.

Minor objections (8)

[§III C, Eq. (8)] Eq. (8) defines mu_FD_Zh with only the gluon-fusion numerator, whereas the general expression in Eq. (A3) includes both sigma_ggF_A and sigma_bbA. Please reconcile the two, or state that the bbA contribution is negligible in the relevant region.
[Appendix B, Eqs. (B1)-(B2)] Eq. (B1) and the asymptotic form (B2) should be accompanied by an explicit statement of the coupling normalization convention, so that the mass dimensions of g_HH+H- and of the ratio in Eq. (B2) can be checked by the reader without consulting Ref. [7].
[§II C] The combination of ATLAS and CMS into a single per-channel likelihood ignores the correlations between the two experiments induced by common luminosity, PDF and theory systematics. This should be stated where the combination is described.
[§III C] The FDOK thresholds mu_FD_ggFh+bbh <= 0.1 and mu_FD_Zh <= 0.3 are justified by the statement that the corresponding channels are measured to roughly 15% and 50% accuracy at LHC8. Please give references for these two numbers.
[§II A, Eq. (3)] The interval notation is inconsistent: 'mH in ]128 GeV, 2 TeV]' mixes an open lower and a closed upper bracket with a style not used elsewhere in the paper. Please use a uniform convention throughout.
[Figs. 2 and 18] The captions note that many Low-FD and High-FD points have postLHC8-FDOK points hidden beneath them, which makes the overlap impossible to judge visually. A marker shape or a small inset indicating the overlap fraction would make these figures considerably more informative.
[Table I] In the Type II h row the up-type and down-type entries are run together in the typeset table; please separate them so that C_U = cos alpha / sin beta and C_D = -sin alpha / cos beta are unambiguously distinguishable.
[Figs. 11 and 13] The depleted regions at low tan beta and mH or mA around 200-350 GeV are discussed in the text as arising from the removal of high-feed-down points. A sentence in the captions pointing this out would help the reader connect these figures to Fig. 15.

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

The paper

The paper claims

The 125.5 GeV Higgs can be either the lighter or the heavier CP-even state of a two-Higgs-doublet model, and the paper maps what that leaves for the other Higgs bosons.

The reading

The paper asks a concrete question: if the 125.5 GeV particle seen at the LHC is one of the two CP-even Higgs bosons of a Two-Higgs-Doublet Model (2HDM) of Type I or Type II, how much of each model's parameter space is still alive, and what should the next LHC run look for? The authors scan the full parameter set, discard points that fail precision electroweak, stability, unitarity, perturbativity, $B$-physics and LEP constraints, then discard points that conflict with LHC8 searches for heavier Higgs bosons, and finally keep only points whose predicted signal strengths fall inside the 95% C.L. regions for $gg$F+$tth$ versus VBF+$Vh$ in the $gg$, $ZZ/WW$, $b$-$b$ and $tau$-$tau$ final states. They treat both identifications of the observed state, the lighter $h$ and the heavier $H$, and they carefully account for the possibility that decays of heavier Higgs bosons feed extra events into the 125.5 GeV signal. The payoff is a status report plus a forecast: in most of the surviving space the other Higgs bosons should be visible at the 14 TeV LHC, but there are corners of Type I where nothing beyond the 125.5 GeV state would be found.

What carries the argument

The argument runs on a two-dimensional signal-strength plane: for each final state $Y = gamma gamma, VV, bbar b, tau tau$ the experimental 68% C.L. contours in $(mu_{ggF+ttH}, mu_{VBF+VH})$ are digitized and refit as a bivariate Gaussian with fitted widths, correlation and best-fit point, so that a scan point is kept only if each $chi^2_Y$ stays below 6.18. Feeding this are the 2HDMC spectrum calculator with the physical-basis inputs $(m_h, m_H, m_A, m_{H^pm}, taneta, alpha, m_{12})$, and a separate feed-down bookkeeping: the net branching ratios $P_{FD}$ for chains such as $H to hh$, $A to Zh$, $H to AA$, $H to H^+H^-$ with $H^pm to W^pm h$ are computed and a point is called FDOK only if the induced contamination is below 10% in $gg$F+$bbh$ and below 30% in $Zh$. Perturbativity ($|lambda_i| < 4pi$) does much of the actual shaping of the allowed regions, and the nondecoupling limit $v^2 g_{HH^+H^-} operatorname{sgn}(C_H^V)/m_{H^pm}^2 to -2$ is what fixes the 5% floor on $C_H^gamma$.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Both Type I and Type II 2HDMs remain consistent with the full 7+8 TeV Higgs data set at 95% C.L. whether the 125.5 GeV state is the lighter CP-even Higgs $h$ or the heavier one $H$, but the two identifications leave very different room for the rest of the spectrum. For $m_h = 125.5$ GeV the vector coupling $C_h^V$ must be close to $+1$ and $C_h^U$ close to $+1$, while Type II also admits a second branch with large positive $cos(eta-alpha)$ at $taneta < 7$ in which the down-type Yukawa has the opposite sign to the SM, $C_h^D approx -1$. For $m_H = 125.5$ GeV there is no decoupling limit at all: perturbativity of the quartic couplings, especially $lambda_{HHAA}$, caps $m_A$ and $m_{H^pm}$ at roughly 600-800 GeV, so the extra states must be reachable or excluded. The sharpest claim is that in the Type II version of the $m_H = 125.5$ GeV scenario the charged-Higgs loop in the $Hgamma gamma$ coupling does not decouple and suppresses it by at least 5%, so a future measurement confirming SM-like diphoton and $ZZ$ rates at the 5% level would eliminate that scenario outright; the same precision would also remove the wrong-sign Yukawa branch and, in Type II, the $m_H = 125.5$ GeV case entirely.

Load-bearing premise

Every 95% C.L. statement in the paper rests on refitting each experimental contour in the signal-strength plane as a symmetric bivariate Gaussian from a digitized plot, so any non-Gaussianity or coarseness in that reconstruction propagates directly into which parameter points survive.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

At $sqrt{s}=14$ TeV the surviving points give $[sigma(gg to H) + sigma(bbH)] BR(H to ZZ)$ up to about 1 pb near $m_H approx 150$ GeV, and $H,A to tau tau$ rates up to several pb, so the heavier neutral states are discoverable over much of the space.
If the 125.5 GeV rates converge to within $pm 5%$ of the SM, the Type II $m_H = 125.5$ GeV scenario and the Type II wrong-sign Yukawa branch are both eliminated, and the Type I $m_H = 125.5$ GeV case survives only on the $sin alpha < 0$ branch with $mu_{gg}(gamma gamma) gtrsim 0.95$.
The triple-Higgs coupling is a diagnostic: in Type II even $pm 15%$ agreement with the SM forces $C_{hhh}$ (or $C_{HHH}$) below 1, while in Type I $C_{hhh}$ as small as 0.3 survives $pm 5%$, which is within reach of a 3 TeV $e^+e^-$ collider.
Points with $m_A$ below about 100 GeV survive all LEP and LHC8 limits because the $ZAh$ coupling scales as $cos(eta-alpha)$ and is tiny, yet they can still have sizable $gg to A$ and $bbA$ cross sections, so existing 8 TeV data can still probe them.
In Type I with $m_H = 125.5$ GeV, $m_A$ between 200 and 300 GeV and large $taneta$ leaves the $A$ and $h$ essentially undetectable even with 3000 fb$^{-1}$, whereas in Type II the $A$ should be seen in $tau tau$ or $tbar t$.
The $gg to A to Zh$ contamination of the $Zh$ channel can mimic a violation of custodial symmetry when $C_Z$ and $C_W$ are extracted separately from $Zh$ and $Wh$ production, which may be a more sensitive probe of feed down than the direct $A to Zh$ search.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

If the Gaussian reconstruction of the experimental contours distorts the true likelihoods, the boundary claims move first: the survival of the wrong-sign Yukawa branch and the exact precision at which the $m_H = 125.5$ GeV Type II scenario dies are the most fragile numbers in the paper.
The FDOK thresholds are deliberately conservative in one direction only: the authors compute feed down without applying any experimental acceptance reduction, so the true contamination is likely smaller and the FD-excluded mass windows near $m_H, m_A approx 200$-$350$ GeV may be less empty than the plots suggest.
A natural extension the paper does not pursue is to fold the same machinery into a global fit that includes the $tbar t H$ and $H to mu mu$ channels, which the authors themselves note are simple rescaling of the $tau tau$ rates and could tighten the low-$taneta$ region.
Because the $m_H = 125.5$ GeV case has no decoupling limit, a null search for $A$ and $H^pm$ up to roughly 600-800 GeV would be a clean kill of that entire identification, independent of the details of the Higgs coupling fits.

Original abstract

We analyze the Two-Higgs-Doublet Models (2HDMs) of Type I and II for consistency with the latest measurements of the ~125.5 GeV Higgs-like signal at the LHC. To this end, we perform scans of the 2HDM parameter space taking into account all relevant pre-LHC constraints as well as the most recent limits coming from searches for heavy Higgs-like states at the LHC. The current status of the 2HDMs of Type I and II is discussed assuming that the observed 125.5 GeV state is one of the two CP-even Higgs bosons, either the lighter h or the heavier H. Implications for future experiments, including expectations regarding other lighter or heavier Higgs bosons are given. The possible importance of heavier Higgs bosons feeding the signals for the 125.5 GeV state is also evaluated.

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged, kept beside the review and separate from it. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 4,375 input tokens, $0.0002 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.02 · states limitation 0.18 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.05 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.26 · compares with prior results 0.18 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v2. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

We analyze the Two-Higgs-Doublet Models (2HDMs) of Type I and II for consistency with the latest measurements of the ~125.5 GeV Higgs-like signal at the LHC. To this end, we perform scans of the 2HDM parameter space taking into account all relevant pre-LHC constraints as well as the most recent limits coming from searches for heavy Higgs-like states at the LHC. The current status of the 2HDMs of Type I and II is discussed assuming that the observed 125.5 GeV state is one of the two CP-even Higgs bosons, either the lighter h or the heavier H. Implications for future experiments, including expectations regarding other lighter or heavier Higgs bosons are given. The possible importance of heavier Higgs bosons feeding the signals for the 125.5 GeV state is also evaluated.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#	sentence	role	the authors' own work	states the main conclusion	strength
s0	We analyze the Two-Higgs-Doublet Models (2HDMs) of Type I and II for consistency with the latest measurements of the ~125.5 GeV Higgs-like signal at the LHC.	contribution 0.99	0.86	0.06	asserted 0.86
s1	To this end, we perform scans of the 2HDM parameter space taking into account all relevant pre-LHC constraints as well as the most recent limits coming from searches for heavy Higgs-like states at the LHC.	method 0.99	0.94	0.03	asserted 0.97
s2	The current status of the 2HDMs of Type I and II is discussed assuming that the observed 125.5 GeV state is one of the two CP-even Higgs bosons, either the lighter h or the heavier H.	contribution 0.56	0.44	0.11	asserted 0.57
s3	Implications for future experiments, including expectations regarding other lighter or heavier Higgs bosons are given.	future work 0.71	0.75	0.09	asserted 0.82
s4	The possible importance of heavier Higgs bosons feeding the signals for the 125.5 GeV state is also evaluated.	contribution 0.82	0.83	0.08	hedged possibility 0.93

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: simulation study 0.80 · evidence from analysis of existing data 0.74.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v2

not examined

full text
figures and tables
references and citing sentences
relations to other papers

levels run

P abstract

not run

S sections
T body sentences
C citations
R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

Figures

**Figure 1.** FIG. 1: Values for the quartic coupling

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2: Constraints in the cos(

**Figure 4.** FIG. 4: Constraints in the

**Figure 5.** FIG. 5: Correlations of signal strengths for the

**Figure 6.** FIG. 6: Cross sections (in pb) for

**Figure 7.** FIG. 7: The postLHC8-FDOK points in the cos(

**Figure 8.** FIG. 8: The postLHC8-FDOK points in the

**Figure 9.** FIG. 9: The postLHC8-FDOK points in the

**Figure 11.** FIG. 11: Scatter plots of [

**Figure 12.** FIG. 12: Same information as in Fig. 11 but in the tan

**Figure 13.** FIG. 13: Scatterplots of [

**Figure 14.** FIG. 14: Scatter plots of [

**Figure 18.** FIG. 18: Constraints in the planes cos(

**Figure 19.** FIG. 19: Constraints on the 2HDM of Type I and Type II in the sin(

**Figure 22.** FIG. 22: Constraints in the

**Figure 24.** FIG. 24: We display points in the sgn(

**Figure 27.** FIG. 27: Rates (in pb) of pseudoscalar

**Figure 30.** FIG. 30: For Type II 2HDM, we plot

**Figure 31.** FIG. 31: For Type I 2HDM, we plot: Left,

Showing 29 of the paper's 32 figures. See all figures in the PDF ↗ Figures reproduced from arXiv:1405.3584 by the authors.

References

Works cited (44)

[31]

A. Arhrib, P. Ferreira, and R. Santos, Are There Hidden Scalars in LHC Higgs Results? , JHEP 1403 (2014) 053, [ arXiv:1311.1520]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014
[41]

P. Ferreira, J. F. Gunion, H. E. Haber, and R. Santos, Probing wrong-sign Yukawa couplings at the LHC and a future linear collider , Phys.Rev. D89 (2014) 115003, [ arXiv:1403.4736]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014
[29]

A. Drozd, B. Grzadkowski, J. F. Gunion, and Y. Jiang, Two-Higgs-Doublet Models and Enhanced Rates for a 125 GeV Higgs , JHEP 1305 (2013) 072, [ arXiv:1211.3580]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[30]

G. Belanger, B. Dumont, U. Ellwanger, J. Gunion, and S. Kraml, Global ﬁt to Higgs signal strengths and couplings and implications for extended Higgs sectors , Phys.Rev. D88 (2013) 075008, [arXiv:1306.2941]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[40]

A. Korytov. private communication

View on Pith
[1]

ATLAS Collaboration, G. Aad et al., Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC , Phys.Lett. B716 (2012) 1–29, [arXiv:1207.7214]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012
[2]

CMS Collaboration, S. Chatrchyan et al., Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC , Phys.Lett. B716 (2012) 30–61, [ arXiv:1207.7235]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012
[3]

ATLAS Collaboration, G. Aad et al., Updated coupling measurements of the Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector using up to 25/fb of proton-proton collision data , 2014. ATLAS-CONF-2014-009

View on Pith 2014
[4]

CMS Collaboration, Combination of standard model Higgs boson searches and measurements of the properties of the new boson with a mass near 125 GeV , 2013. CMS PAS HIG-13-005

View on Pith 2013
[5]

ATLAS Collaboration, G. Aad et al., Measurements of Higgs boson production and couplings in diboson ﬁnal states with the ATLAS detector at the LHC , Phys.Lett. B726 (2013) 88–119, [ arXiv:1307.1427]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[6]

J. F. Gunion, H. E. Haber, G. L. Kane, and S. Dawson, THE HIGGS HUNTER’S GUIDE , Front.Phys. 80 (2000) 1–448

View on Pith 2000
[7]

J. F. Gunion and H. E. Haber, The CP conserving two Higgs doublet model: The Approach to the decoupling limit , Phys.Rev. D67 (2003) 075019, [ hep-ph/0207010]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[8]

G. Branco, P. Ferreira, L. Lavoura, M. Rebelo, M. Sher, et al., Theory and phenomenology of two-Higgs-doublet models, Phys.Rept. 516 (2012) 1–102, [ arXiv:1106.0034]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012
[9]

C.-W. Chiang and K. Yagyu, Implications of Higgs boson search data on the two-Higgs doublet models with a softly broken Z2 symmetry, JHEP 1307 (2013) 160, [arXiv:1303.0168]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[10]

B. Grinstein and P. Uttayarat, Carving Out Parameter Space in Type-II Two Higgs Doublets Model, JHEP 1306 (2013) 094, [ arXiv:1304.0028]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[11]

B. Coleppa, F. Kling, and S. Su, Constraining Type II 2HDM in Light of LHC Higgs Searches, JHEP 1401 (2014) 161, [ arXiv:1305.0002]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014
[12]

O. Eberhardt, U. Nierste, and M. Wiebusch, Status of the two-Higgs-doublet model of type II, JHEP 1307 (2013) 118, [ arXiv:1305.1649]. 52

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[13]

S. Chang, S. K. Kang, J.-P. Lee, K. Y. Lee, S. C. Park, et al., Two Higgs doublet models for the LHC Higgs boson data at √s = 7 and 8 TeV , JHEP 1409 (2014) 101, [arXiv:1310.3374]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014
[14]

K. Cheung, J. S. Lee, and P.-Y. Tseng, Higgcision in the Two-Higgs Doublet Models , JHEP 1401 (2014) 085, [ arXiv:1310.3937]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014
[15]

A. Celis, V. Ilisie, and A. Pich, Towards a general analysis of LHC data within two-Higgs-doublet models, JHEP 1312 (2013) 095, [ arXiv:1310.7941]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[16]

L. Wang and X.-F. Han, Status of the aligned two-Higgs-doublet model confronted with the Higgs data, JHEP 1404 (2014) 128, [ arXiv:1312.4759]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014
[17]

J. Baglio, O. Eberhardt, U. Nierste, and M. Wiebusch, Benchmarks for Higgs Pair Production and Heavy Higgs Searches in the Two-Higgs-Doublet Model of Type II , Phys.Rev. D90 (2014) 015008, [ arXiv:1403.1264]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014
[18]

S. Inoue, M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, and Y. Zhang, CPV Phenomenology of Flavor Conserving Two Higgs Doublet Models , Phys.Rev. D89 (2014) 115023, [ arXiv:1403.4257]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014
[19]

N. Craig, J. Galloway, and S. Thomas, Searching for Signs of the Second Higgs Doublet , arXiv:1305.2424

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[20]

V. Barger, L. L. Everett, H. E. Logan, and G. Shaughnessy, Scrutinizing the 125GeV Higgs boson in two Higgs doublet models at the LHC, ILC, and Muon Collider , Phys.Rev. D88 (2013) 115003, [ arXiv:1308.0052]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[21]

M. Carena, I. Low, N. R. Shah, and C. E. Wagner, Impersonating the Standard Model Higgs Boson: Alignment without Decoupling , JHEP 1404 (2014) 015, [ arXiv:1310.2248]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014
[22]

C.-Y. Chen, S. Dawson, and M. Sher, Heavy Higgs Searches and Constraints on Two Higgs Doublet Models, Phys.Rev. D88 (2013) 015018, [ arXiv:1305.1624]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[23]

S. Kanemura, H. Yokoya, and Y.-J. Zheng, Complementarity in direct searches for additional Higgs bosons at the LHC and the International Linear Collider , Nucl.Phys. B886 (2014) 524–553, [arXiv:1404.5835]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014
[24]

L. Wang and X.-F. Han, Study of the heavy CP-even Higgs with mass 125 GeV in two-Higgs-doublet models at the LHC and ILC , JHEP 1411 (2014) 085, [ arXiv:1404.7437]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014
[25]

G. Dorsch, S. Huber, and J. No, A strong electroweak phase transition in the 2HDM after LHC8, JHEP 1310 (2013) 029, [ arXiv:1305.6610]. 53

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[26]

J. Shu and Y. Zhang, Impact of a CP Violating Higgs Sector: From LHC to Baryogenesis , Phys.Rev.Lett. 111 (2013) 091801, [ arXiv:1304.0773]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[27]

M. Ahmadvand, Baryogenesis within the two-Higgs-doublet model in the Electroweak scale , Int.J.Mod.Phys. A29 (2014) 1450090, [ arXiv:1308.3767]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014
[28]

G. Dorsch, S. Huber, K. Mimasu, and J. No, Echoes of the Electroweak Phase Transition: Discovering a second Higgs doublet through A0→ZH0, Phys.Rev.Lett. 113 (2014), no. 21 211802, [arXiv:1405.5537]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014
[32]

CMS Collaboration, Search for extended Higgs sectors in the H→hh and A→Zh channels in√s = 8 TeV pp collisions with multileptons and photons ﬁnal states, CMS-PAS-HIG-13-025,

View on Pith
[33]

D. Eriksson, J. Rathsman, and O. Stal, 2HDMC: Two-Higgs-Doublet Model Calculator Physics and Manual , Comput.Phys.Commun. 181 (2010) 189–205

View on Pith 2010
[34]

D. Eriksson, J. Rathsman, and O. Stal, 2HDMC: Two-Higgs-doublet model calculator , Comput.Phys.Commun. 181 (2010) 833–834

View on Pith 2010
[35]

CMS Collaboration, Higgs to tau tau (MSSM), CMS-PAS-HIG-13-021 ,

View on Pith
[36]

ATLAS Collaboration, Measurements of the properties of the Higgs-like boson in the four lepton decay channel with the ATLAS detector using 25 fb1 of proton-proton collision data, ATLAS-CONF-2013-013,

View on Pith 2013
[37]

Properties of the Higgs-like boson in the decay H→ZZ→ 4𝓁 in pp collisions at√s = 7 and 8 TeV, Tech. Rep. CMS-PAS-HIG-13-002, CERN, Geneva, 2013

View on Pith 2013
[38]

https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/CMSPublic/Hig13002TWiki#Limit_Plot

View on Pith
[39]

Search for a heavy Higgs boson in the H→ZZ→ 2𝓁2nu channel in pp collisions at√s = 7 and 8 TeV, Tech. Rep. CMS-PAS-HIG-13-014, CERN, Geneva, 2013. 54

View on Pith 2013
[42]

A. Efrati and Y. Nir, What if λhhh⁄= 3m2h/v, arXiv:1401.0935

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[43]

S. Dawson, A. Gritsan, H. Logan, J. Qian, C. Tully, et al., Higgs Working Group Report of the Snowmass 2013 Community Planning Study , arXiv:1310.8361

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[44]

B. Coleppa, F. Kling, and S. Su, Exotic Decays Of A Heavy Neutral Higgs Through HZ/AZ Channel, JHEP 1409 (2014) 161, [ arXiv:1404.1922]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014

Forward citations

Cited by 26 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

Search for a light pseudoscalar Higgs boson in final states with boosted muon pairs and tau lepton pairs in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV
hep-ex 2026-09 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

No evidence is found for a light pseudoscalar Higgs boson in decays of the 125 GeV Higgs boson or a heavier scalar to muon and tau final states; 95% confidence level upper limits are set on the production cross sectio...
Next-to-leading order unitarity fits in Two-Higgs-Doublet models with soft $\mathbb{Z}_2$ breaking
hep-ph 2016-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Global fits with NLO unitarity conditions cap the 2HDM quartic couplings at 4.2 in magnitude and heavy Higgs mass splittings at 235 GeV (type I) and 100 GeV (type II) at 95% confidence.
New LHC Benchmarks for the CP-conserving Two-Higgs-Doublet Model
hep-ph 2015-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

A new 'hybrid' input parametrization for the CP-conserving 2HDM, anchored on the observed 125 GeV Higgs, yields seven benchmark scenarios for LHC Run II Higgs searches.
Global fits of the two-loop renormalized Two-Higgs-Doublet model with soft $Z_2$ breaking
hep-ph 2015-03 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Two-loop RGEs and global fits show that a stable Two-Higgs-Doublet model up to the Planck scale requires quartic couplings below about 1 and pushes the heavy Higgs masses above 340 to 360 GeV in type II and Y.
Addressing the LHC flavour anomalies with horizontal gauge symmetries
hep-ph 2015-03 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A single U(1)' horizontal gauge symmetry with charges (L_mu - L_tau) - a(B1 + B2 - 2B3) can simultaneously account for the B to K* mu mu, R(K), and h to mu tau anomalies, predicting tau to 3mu at a rate within reach o...

Show 21 more citing papers

Explaining $h\to\mu^\pm\tau^\mp$, $B\to K^* \mu^+\mu^-$ and $B\to K \mu^+\mu^-/B\to K e^+e^-$ in a two-Higgs-doublet model with gauged $L_\mu-L_\tau$
hep-ph 2015-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A single model with gauged muon-minus-tauon symmetry and heavy vector-like quarks can account for the h to mu tau, B to K* mu mu and R(K) anomalies at once, and implies a tau to three-muon rate above roughly 4e-8 time...
The Higgs Vacuum Uplifted: Revisiting the Electroweak Phase Transition with a Second Higgs Doublet
hep-ph 2017-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

In two-Higgs-doublet models the strength of the electroweak phase transition tracks the zero-temperature vacuum energy difference, with a heavy pseudoscalar and a shifted Higgs self-coupling as collider signatures.
Neutrino Masses and Absence of Flavor Changing Interactions in the 2HDM from Gauge Principles
hep-ph 2017-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

An extra gauged U(1) with suitable charges can generate the discrete symmetry that suppresses flavor-changing neutral currents in the Type I Two Higgs Doublet Model while also permitting a seesaw mechanism for neutrin...
Search for light bosons in decays of the 125 GeV Higgs boson in proton-proton collisions at sqrt(s) = 8 TeV
hep-ex 2017-01 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

No sign of Higgs decays to pairs of light bosons in 19.7 fb^-1 of 8 TeV CMS data; 95% CL upper limits on the exotic branching fraction reach 17% (4 tau), 16% (2 mu 2 b), and 4% (2 mu 2 tau) in favorable 2HDM+S scenarios.
Scrutinizing the Alignment Limit in Two-Higgs-Doublet Models. Part 2: $m_H=125$ GeV
hep-ph 2015-11 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

If the 125 GeV Higgs is the heavier CP-even state of a two-doublet model, all extra scalars must lie below about 630 GeV, and gluon fusion into A then Zh is the most promising Run 2 discovery channel.
Scrutinizing the Alignment Limit in Two-Higgs-Doublet Models. Part 1: $m_h = 125$ GeV
hep-ph 2015-07 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

In Type I and Type II two-Higgs-doublet models, a 125 GeV Higgs can appear Standard-Model-like through alignment without decoupling, while its bottom-quark and triple-Higgs couplings still deviate by up to tens of per...
The Hunt for the Rest of the Higgs Bosons
hep-ph 2015-04 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

Three LHC search channels for additional Higgs bosons, heavy Higgs to top pairs, invisible Higgs with b or t quarks, and charged Higgs in tb, remain uncovered and are projected to give meaningful reach at 14 TeV.
Search for a 'stable alignment limit' in two Higgs-doublet models
hep-ph 2015-03 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Requiring the two-Higgs-doublet potential to stay stable up to the Planck scale, with the observed Higgs in the alignment limit, forces the nonstandard scalars to be nearly degenerate and tan beta above about 3.
Benchmarks for Higgs Effective Theory: Extended Higgs Sectors
hep-ph 2015-02 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Explicit dimension-six matching coefficients are derived for singlet, two-Higgs-doublet, and dilaton extensions of the Higgs sector, and used to estimate where the effective field theory breaks down.
Lilith: a tool for constraining new physics from Higgs measurements
hep-ph 2015-02 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

The authors release Lilith, an open-source tool that builds a global Higgs likelihood from published signal strengths and reproduces the ATLAS and CMS coupling fits, with a documented Gaussian approximation that degra...
Higgs $\to \mu \tau$ in Abelian and Non-Abelian Flavor Symmetry Models
hep-ph 2014-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Two electroweak-scale flavor models, A4 and gauged Lμ−Lτ, can reproduce the CMS h→μτ hint while predicting correlated rates for h→eτ, h→ττ, μ→eγ, τ→μγ, and neutrino-mixing correlations.
Maximally Symmetric Two Higgs Doublet Model with Natural Standard Model Alignment
hep-ph 2014-08 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

A maximally symmetric SO(5) two-Higgs-doublet model naturally realizes the Standard Model alignment limit, and its softly broken version predicts a quasi-degenerate heavy Higgs spectrum testable via four-top final states.
Higgs pair production via gluon fusion in the Two-Higgs-Doublet Model
hep-ph 2014-07 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

NLO-plus-parton-shower predictions for all seven Two-Higgs-Doublet-Model Higgs pair final states show K-factors of 1.5 to 1.7, roughly halved scale uncertainties, and resonant heavy-Higgs enhancements of the light pai...
Probing wrong-sign Yukawa couplings at the LHC and a future linear collider
hep-ph 2014-03 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

A wrong-sign Higgs-bottom coupling survives current LHC data in the type-II 2HDM, but a 5% measurement of the diphoton rate, or a gluon-gluon rate measurement at a linear collider, would resolve the sign.
Benchmarks for Higgs Pair Production and Heavy Higgs Searches in the Two-Higgs-Doublet Model of Type II
hep-ph 2014-03 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

Current data forbid the 2HDM triple-h coupling from exceeding its Standard Model value at three sigma, but still allow gluon-fusion Higgs-pair production to be enhanced by more than a factor of 50 when a heavy Higgs l...
Status of the Charged Higgs Boson in Two Higgs Doublet Models
hep-ph 2017-06 accept novelty 4.0 of 10

Combining LHC, LEP and flavour data, the charged Higgs of the Type II 2HDM is pushed above about 600 GeV independent of tan beta, while lighter charged Higgses survive only with suppressed fermion couplings.
Light Higgs bosons in Two-Higgs-Doublet Models
hep-ph 2014-12 accept novelty 4.0 of 10

Type I and Type II two-Higgs-doublet models admit tuned but viable windows with a neutral Higgs below 62 GeV, and in Type II the light pseudoscalar can be produced at 8 TeV with cross sections large enough to matter.
Extending two-Higgs-doublet models by a singlet scalar field - the Case for Dark Matter
hep-ph 2014-08 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

A singlet-scalar dark matter particle added to Type I and Type II two-Higgs-doublet models survives LUX and SuperCDMS direct-detection limits only for masses above roughly 55 GeV, except for a few Type II points near ...
Update of Global Two-Higgs-Doublet Model Fits
hep-ph 2017-11 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

Combining LHC Run 1 and Run 2 Higgs signal strengths and heavy-Higgs searches, the fit excludes deviations from the alignment limit larger than 0.03 in type I and 0.02 in types II, X and Y, and sets lower bounds on th...
Scalar sector of Two-Higgs-Doublet models: A mini-review
hep-ph 2015-07 conditional novelty 2.0 of 10

After the 125 GeV Higgs, 2HDM scalar parameter space is squeezed by stability, unitarity, and T-parameter constraints, with softly broken U(1) symmetry allowing heavier individual nonstandard scalars than exact Z2.
Building and testing models with extended Higgs sectors
hep-ph 2017-02 accept novelty 1.0 of 10

A pedagogical survey of how extended Higgs sectors are built and tested, covering 2HDM, NHDM, singlet and triplet extensions, and their collider and astroparticle signatures.

How later papers used it

69 later papers cite it

Evidence: substantial. 56 of the citing papers share no author with it, and 7 of those carry a confident label from Pith's citation classifier.

Pith read 19 of the 122 citing sentences, choosing only those whose citation markers point at this paper alone, and wrote the paraphrases from them. The summary, the counts, the evidence level, the links and the quotes come from code; the summary counts the papers listed below. A later paper is listed under a label when Pith's citation classifier gives one of its sentences that label at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), Pith's reading finds that the citing paper itself did it, and a second check confirms the paraphrase against the sentence. This section lists uses only. It does not list criticism or disagreement, so their absence here says nothing about how the paper has been received. Papers that share an author with this one are listed apart, under "By the same authors". A quote is the citing authors' own sentence, shown when their paper's licence is CC BY, CC BY-SA or CC0. JSON

1 later paper by other authors is listed below: 1 built on it. 2 more papers by the same authors are listed: 1 built on it and 1 used its data or values.

Builds on it 2 papers · 1 by the same authors

Considered more extended constraints than this paper, particularly those from LHC heavy Higgs searches, to address how much current data constrain the Higgs potential in the hidden light Higgs scenario.

Higgs potential and hidden light Higgs scenario in two Higgs doublet models (2015) · 1.00 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting

By the same authors

Revisited this paper's analysis to ask what new or updated signal strength results for the ~125.5 GeV Higgs boson imply in the 2HDM context.

Addendum to "Constraints on and future prospects for Two-Higgs-Doublet Models in light of the LHC Higgs signal" (2014) (same authors) · 0.84 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting

Uses its data or values 1 of 3 papers with this label · 1 by the same authors

By the same authors

Randomly chose 1250 points for further analysis from the ~5200 points this paper's 2HDM analysis found consistent with Higgs observations at 68% C.L. for m_h ~ 125.5.

Extending two-Higgs-doublet models by a singlet scalar field - the Case for Dark Matter (2014) (same authors) · 0.98 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting

How the literature uses it

69 arXiv papers cite this in 122 sentences

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Papers citing it · 71 sentences without a confident label

Builds on it 2 papers

In the present note, we now revisit the analysis of [ref] and ask what are the implications in the 2HDM context of all these new (or updated) results on the signal strengths of the $∼125.5$ Higgs boson.

Addendum to "Constraints on and future prospects for Two-Higgs-Doublet Models in light of the LHC Higgs signal" · Introduction · 0.84
To answer the question, we consider more extended constraints than in Ref. [ref] , particularly those from the LHC heavy Higgs searches.

Higgs potential and hidden light Higgs scenario in two Higgs doublet models · Introduction · 1.00

Uses its method or tool 3 papers

These include: requiring consistency with “preLHC" constraints; an accurate fit to the combined ATLAS and CMS Higgs signal data when the $h$ is identified with the $∼125.5$ state; and enforcing LHC limits on the other Higgs bosons ($H$, $A$ and $$) of the 2HDM using the procedures of [ref] .

Extending two-Higgs-doublet models by a singlet scalar field - the Case for Dark Matter · Introduction · 0.96
Regarding constraints from the Higgs signal strength measurements at $125$, for each of the observed Higgs decay modes ($γγ$, $WW^(*)$, $ZZ^(*)$, $bb̅$, $ττ̅$) we require agreement at the 95% CL with the ATLAS+CMS combined signal strength ellipse in the (ggF+ttH) and (VBF+VH) plane, as explained in [ref] .

Light Higgs bosons in Two-Higgs-Doublet Models · Introduction · 0.86
A detailed describe of $Numh$ calculation can be found in [ref] [ref] .

The Heavy Higgs Decay Effect and Its Impact on Higgs Data Fitting in NMSSM · The Branching Ratios of Scalars · 0.89

Uses its data or values 3 papers

In the case of $m_h∼125.5$, the 2HDM analysis of [ref] found $∼5200$ points consistent with Higgs observations at 68% C.L. in the model, from which we randomly chose 1250 points for further analysis.

Extending two-Higgs-doublet models by a singlet scalar field - the Case for Dark Matter · DM full mass scan · 0.98
Current limits on $sin(β-α)$ from Type-I models [ref] are rather weak, corresponding to $sin(β-α) > 0.85$.

The Electron/Muon Specific Two Higgs Doublet Model at e+ e- Colliders · Constraints from LEP-200 · 0.83
For our numerical work, we employ the $=125$ or $=125$ parameter points of [ref] that described the LHC Higgs data at the (rather stringent) 68% CL, supplemented by the latest $b→s$ constraint of $480$ for the model [ref] .

Isospin-violating dark-matter-nucleon scattering via two-Higgs-doublet-model portals · The 2HDMS Dark-Matter Model · 0.92

Compares with it 2 papers

Regarding the allowed ranges of $m_H$, $m_A$ and $m_H^±$, there is no visible change with respect to [ref] .

Addendum to "Constraints on and future prospects for Two-Higgs-Doublet Models in light of the LHC Higgs signal" · $∼125.5$ scenarios · 1.00
While no statistical fit is performed, the surviving set of parameter points indicate that the SM alignment required by the LHC Higgs results impose an upper bound on the masses of $H^±$ and $A^0$ of $m_H^±, A^0 ≲600$ GeV, similar to what is found in [ref] .

Disfavouring Electroweak Baryogenesis and a hidden Higgs in a CP-violating Two-Higgs-Doublet Model · A closer look at the hidden-Higgs scenario · 0.90

Cites it as support 3 papers

The recent global fits of the LHC data in the 2HDM context [ref] certifies that alignment is indeed a reasonable assumption.

Search for a 'stable alignment limit' in two Higgs-doublet models · The scalar potential · 1.00
In fact, it has recently been verified [ref] by fitting the 2HDM (type I and II) to available experimental data, that the model indeed allows for masses of extra scalars even within the $150-200$ GeV range, which is below the decoupling regime.

Measuring CP violation in Two-Higgs-Doublet models in light of the LHC Higgs data · The alignment limit · 0.97
In view of the recent global fits for 2HDMs using the LHC Higgs data, alignment is a reasonable assumption [ref] .

New limits on $\mathbf{\tan\beta}$ for 2HDMs with $\mathbf{Z_2}$ symmetry · The scalar potential · 0.99

Cites it as background 28 papers

For notations and conventions, we also refer to [ref] .

Addendum to "Constraints on and future prospects for Two-Higgs-Doublet Models in light of the LHC Higgs signal" · Introduction · 0.89
This is the wrong sign limit [ref] (see also [ref] for the CP-conserving 2HDM and [ref] for the complex 2HDM) and it is imposed only at tree-level.

Wrong sign and symmetric limits and non-decoupling in 2HDMs · The light Higgs scenario · 0.91
This procedure results in four distinct types, some of which include a peculiar and interesting region of parameter space called the wrong-sign limit [ref] .

$pp\to A\to Zh$ and the wrong-sign limit of the Two-Higgs-Doublet Model · Introduction · 0.91

What it cites · 21 sentences without a confident label

Contests 1 paper

The formulas for the various $P_H,2H$ and $P_H,1H$'s cases can be found in [ref] which we will repeat in the following context (including some corrections we found).

Are There Hidden Scalars in LHC Higgs Results? · Generic formalism for feed down processes · contest 0.79

Uses the method or tool of 2 papers

To combine the information provided by ATLAS, CMS and the Tevatron experiments on the $$, $ZZ^(*)$, $WW^(*)$, $bb̅$ and $ττ$ final states including the error correlations among the (VBF+VH) and (ggF+ttH) production modes, we follow the approach of [ref] .

Global fit to Higgs signal strengths and couplings and implications for extended Higgs sectors · Constraints from the signal strength measurements at 125.5 GeV · 1.00
For this we closely follow the approach of [ref] .

Two-Higgs-Doublet Models and Enhanced Rates for a 125 GeV Higgs · Introduction · 1.00

Uses data or values from 3 papers

In practice, we employ the signal strength likelihoods in the $$ versus $$ planes for each of the final states $Y$ as determined in [ref] , combining all publicly available information from ATLAS and CMS.[Combining VBF and VH is motivated in models where the couplings of the Higgs to $WW$ and to $ZZ$ are scaled equally, as is the case in any 2HDM because of custodial symmetry.

Global fit to Higgs signal strengths and couplings and implications for extended Higgs sectors · Introduction · 0.86
The lower bounds from $B$ physics are shown as a function of $$ in Fig. 15 of [ref] in the case of the Type II model (roughly $m^*∼300$ in this case) and in Fig. 18 of [ref] in the case of the Type I model.

Theory and phenomenology of two-Higgs-doublet models · Scan ranges and procedures · 0.85
For example, from [ref] we find that the predicted precision on $_hhh$ for ILC1000 with $L=500-1000$ of 21% and for ILC1000 with $L=1600-2500$ is of order 13%.

Higgs Working Group Report of the Snowmass 2013 Community Planning Study · Implications for the future · 0.98

Compares with 1 paper

These results should be compared to the ggF limits obtained recently in [ref] , which are shown as black lines in the plots of Fig. [ref]; see also projections at the 14 TeV LHC in [ref] .

Exotic Decays Of A Heavy Neutral Higgs Through HZ/AZ Channel · Implications for the future · 1.00

Cites as background 21 papers

A large number of papers [ref] performed fits of current data for the 125.5 GeV Higgs-like state (as per the status post Moriond 2013) within the context of 2HDMs, and investigated the consequent phenomenology of the other Higgs states present in the models.

Status of the aligned two-Higgs-doublet model confronted with the Higgs data · Introduction · 0.87
A large number of papers [ref] performed fits of current data for the 125.5 GeV Higgs-like state (as per the status post Moriond 2013) within the context of 2HDMs, and investigated the consequent phenomenology of the other Higgs states present in the models.

CPV Phenomenology of Flavor Conserving Two Higgs Doublet Models · Introduction · 0.87
A large number of papers [ref] performed fits of current data for the 125.5 GeV Higgs-like state (as per the status post Moriond 2013) within the context of 2HDMs, and investigated the consequent phenomenology of the other Higgs states present in the models.

Carving Out Parameter Space in Type-II Two Higgs Doublets Model · Introduction · 0.87

Discussion

Disagree with the review, or know something it missed? Leave a comment, highlight any passage above to comment on it, or challenge this review formally.

[1] [31]

A. Arhrib, P. Ferreira, and R. Santos, Are There Hidden Scalars in LHC Higgs Results? , JHEP 1403 (2014) 053, [ arXiv:1311.1520]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014

[2] [41]

P. Ferreira, J. F. Gunion, H. E. Haber, and R. Santos, Probing wrong-sign Yukawa couplings at the LHC and a future linear collider , Phys.Rev. D89 (2014) 115003, [ arXiv:1403.4736]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014

[3] [29]

A. Drozd, B. Grzadkowski, J. F. Gunion, and Y. Jiang, Two-Higgs-Doublet Models and Enhanced Rates for a 125 GeV Higgs , JHEP 1305 (2013) 072, [ arXiv:1211.3580]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[4] [30]

G. Belanger, B. Dumont, U. Ellwanger, J. Gunion, and S. Kraml, Global ﬁt to Higgs signal strengths and couplings and implications for extended Higgs sectors , Phys.Rev. D88 (2013) 075008, [arXiv:1306.2941]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[5] [40]

A. Korytov. private communication

View on Pith

[6] [1]

ATLAS Collaboration, G. Aad et al., Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC , Phys.Lett. B716 (2012) 1–29, [arXiv:1207.7214]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012

[7] [2]

CMS Collaboration, S. Chatrchyan et al., Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC , Phys.Lett. B716 (2012) 30–61, [ arXiv:1207.7235]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012

[8] [3]

ATLAS Collaboration, G. Aad et al., Updated coupling measurements of the Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector using up to 25/fb of proton-proton collision data , 2014. ATLAS-CONF-2014-009

View on Pith 2014

[9] [4]

CMS Collaboration, Combination of standard model Higgs boson searches and measurements of the properties of the new boson with a mass near 125 GeV , 2013. CMS PAS HIG-13-005

View on Pith 2013

[10] [5]

ATLAS Collaboration, G. Aad et al., Measurements of Higgs boson production and couplings in diboson ﬁnal states with the ATLAS detector at the LHC , Phys.Lett. B726 (2013) 88–119, [ arXiv:1307.1427]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[11] [6]

J. F. Gunion, H. E. Haber, G. L. Kane, and S. Dawson, THE HIGGS HUNTER’S GUIDE , Front.Phys. 80 (2000) 1–448

View on Pith 2000

[12] [7]

J. F. Gunion and H. E. Haber, The CP conserving two Higgs doublet model: The Approach to the decoupling limit , Phys.Rev. D67 (2003) 075019, [ hep-ph/0207010]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[13] [8]

G. Branco, P. Ferreira, L. Lavoura, M. Rebelo, M. Sher, et al., Theory and phenomenology of two-Higgs-doublet models, Phys.Rept. 516 (2012) 1–102, [ arXiv:1106.0034]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012

[14] [9]

C.-W. Chiang and K. Yagyu, Implications of Higgs boson search data on the two-Higgs doublet models with a softly broken Z2 symmetry, JHEP 1307 (2013) 160, [arXiv:1303.0168]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[15] [10]

B. Grinstein and P. Uttayarat, Carving Out Parameter Space in Type-II Two Higgs Doublets Model, JHEP 1306 (2013) 094, [ arXiv:1304.0028]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[16] [11]

B. Coleppa, F. Kling, and S. Su, Constraining Type II 2HDM in Light of LHC Higgs Searches, JHEP 1401 (2014) 161, [ arXiv:1305.0002]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014

[17] [12]

O. Eberhardt, U. Nierste, and M. Wiebusch, Status of the two-Higgs-doublet model of type II, JHEP 1307 (2013) 118, [ arXiv:1305.1649]. 52

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[18] [13]

S. Chang, S. K. Kang, J.-P. Lee, K. Y. Lee, S. C. Park, et al., Two Higgs doublet models for the LHC Higgs boson data at √s = 7 and 8 TeV , JHEP 1409 (2014) 101, [arXiv:1310.3374]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014

[19] [14]

K. Cheung, J. S. Lee, and P.-Y. Tseng, Higgcision in the Two-Higgs Doublet Models , JHEP 1401 (2014) 085, [ arXiv:1310.3937]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014

[20] [15]

A. Celis, V. Ilisie, and A. Pich, Towards a general analysis of LHC data within two-Higgs-doublet models, JHEP 1312 (2013) 095, [ arXiv:1310.7941]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[21] [16]

L. Wang and X.-F. Han, Status of the aligned two-Higgs-doublet model confronted with the Higgs data, JHEP 1404 (2014) 128, [ arXiv:1312.4759]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014

[22] [17]

J. Baglio, O. Eberhardt, U. Nierste, and M. Wiebusch, Benchmarks for Higgs Pair Production and Heavy Higgs Searches in the Two-Higgs-Doublet Model of Type II , Phys.Rev. D90 (2014) 015008, [ arXiv:1403.1264]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014

[23] [18]

S. Inoue, M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, and Y. Zhang, CPV Phenomenology of Flavor Conserving Two Higgs Doublet Models , Phys.Rev. D89 (2014) 115023, [ arXiv:1403.4257]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014

[24] [19]

N. Craig, J. Galloway, and S. Thomas, Searching for Signs of the Second Higgs Doublet , arXiv:1305.2424

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[25] [20]

V. Barger, L. L. Everett, H. E. Logan, and G. Shaughnessy, Scrutinizing the 125GeV Higgs boson in two Higgs doublet models at the LHC, ILC, and Muon Collider , Phys.Rev. D88 (2013) 115003, [ arXiv:1308.0052]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[26] [21]

M. Carena, I. Low, N. R. Shah, and C. E. Wagner, Impersonating the Standard Model Higgs Boson: Alignment without Decoupling , JHEP 1404 (2014) 015, [ arXiv:1310.2248]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014

[27] [22]

C.-Y. Chen, S. Dawson, and M. Sher, Heavy Higgs Searches and Constraints on Two Higgs Doublet Models, Phys.Rev. D88 (2013) 015018, [ arXiv:1305.1624]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[28] [23]

S. Kanemura, H. Yokoya, and Y.-J. Zheng, Complementarity in direct searches for additional Higgs bosons at the LHC and the International Linear Collider , Nucl.Phys. B886 (2014) 524–553, [arXiv:1404.5835]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014

[29] [24]

L. Wang and X.-F. Han, Study of the heavy CP-even Higgs with mass 125 GeV in two-Higgs-doublet models at the LHC and ILC , JHEP 1411 (2014) 085, [ arXiv:1404.7437]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014

[30] [25]

G. Dorsch, S. Huber, and J. No, A strong electroweak phase transition in the 2HDM after LHC8, JHEP 1310 (2013) 029, [ arXiv:1305.6610]. 53

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[31] [26]

J. Shu and Y. Zhang, Impact of a CP Violating Higgs Sector: From LHC to Baryogenesis , Phys.Rev.Lett. 111 (2013) 091801, [ arXiv:1304.0773]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[32] [27]

M. Ahmadvand, Baryogenesis within the two-Higgs-doublet model in the Electroweak scale , Int.J.Mod.Phys. A29 (2014) 1450090, [ arXiv:1308.3767]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014

[33] [28]

G. Dorsch, S. Huber, K. Mimasu, and J. No, Echoes of the Electroweak Phase Transition: Discovering a second Higgs doublet through A0→ZH0, Phys.Rev.Lett. 113 (2014), no. 21 211802, [arXiv:1405.5537]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014

[34] [32]

CMS Collaboration, Search for extended Higgs sectors in the H→hh and A→Zh channels in√s = 8 TeV pp collisions with multileptons and photons ﬁnal states, CMS-PAS-HIG-13-025,

View on Pith

[35] [33]

D. Eriksson, J. Rathsman, and O. Stal, 2HDMC: Two-Higgs-Doublet Model Calculator Physics and Manual , Comput.Phys.Commun. 181 (2010) 189–205

View on Pith 2010

[36] [34]

D. Eriksson, J. Rathsman, and O. Stal, 2HDMC: Two-Higgs-doublet model calculator , Comput.Phys.Commun. 181 (2010) 833–834

View on Pith 2010

[37] [35]

CMS Collaboration, Higgs to tau tau (MSSM), CMS-PAS-HIG-13-021 ,

View on Pith

[38] [36]

ATLAS Collaboration, Measurements of the properties of the Higgs-like boson in the four lepton decay channel with the ATLAS detector using 25 fb1 of proton-proton collision data, ATLAS-CONF-2013-013,

View on Pith 2013

[39] [37]

Properties of the Higgs-like boson in the decay H→ZZ→ 4𝓁 in pp collisions at√s = 7 and 8 TeV, Tech. Rep. CMS-PAS-HIG-13-002, CERN, Geneva, 2013

View on Pith 2013

[40] [38]

https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/CMSPublic/Hig13002TWiki#Limit_Plot

View on Pith

[41] [39]

Search for a heavy Higgs boson in the H→ZZ→ 2𝓁2nu channel in pp collisions at√s = 7 and 8 TeV, Tech. Rep. CMS-PAS-HIG-13-014, CERN, Geneva, 2013. 54

View on Pith 2013

[42] [42]

A. Efrati and Y. Nir, What if λhhh⁄= 3m2h/v, arXiv:1401.0935

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[43] [43]

S. Dawson, A. Gritsan, H. Logan, J. Qian, C. Tully, et al., Higgs Working Group Report of the Snowmass 2013 Community Planning Study , arXiv:1310.8361

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[44] [44]

B. Coleppa, F. Kling, and S. Su, Exotic Decays Of A Heavy Neutral Higgs Through HZ/AZ Channel, JHEP 1409 (2014) 161, [ arXiv:1404.1922]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014