pith. sign in

arxiv: 2412.18540 · v3 · submitted 2024-12-24 · ✦ hep-ph · hep-ex

Higgs Decays to Zγ and γγ in the Flavor-Gauged Two Higgs Doublet Model

Feng-Zhi Chen , Qiaoyi Wen , Fanrong Xu This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-23 06:31 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph hep-ex
keywords flavor-gauged two Higgs doublet modelHiggs decaysZ gammagamma gammacharged HiggsFCNCfermion-Z vertex corrections
0
0 comments X

The pith

In the flavor-gauged two Higgs doublet model the h to Z gamma decay receives fermion-Z vertex corrections on top of charged Higgs loop effects.

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

The paper examines the Higgs decays to Z gamma and to two photons inside the flavor-gauged two Higgs doublet model, which adds a second scalar doublet, a singlet scalar, and an extra U(1) flavor gauge symmetry that produces a new Z prime boson. Both decay modes feel the influence of loops with charged Higgs particles, yet only the Z gamma channel is further altered by corrections to the fermion couplings with the ordinary Z boson. Those same corrections affect top-quark observables and the flavor-changing process in which a b quark decays to a strange quark plus a lepton pair. The authors locate an allowed region with charged Higgs mass above 200 GeV and negative trilinear coupling between the Higgs and the charged scalars that satisfies present one-sigma limits, where the two-photon signal strength supplies the strongest bound on the scalar parameters. They also map the allowed values of the top-quark flavor charges using top and b to s lepton lepton data, and note that fourteen-percent precision on the Z gamma rate at the High-Luminosity LHC will tighten the test of the model.

Core claim

In the flavor-gauged two Higgs doublet model both h to Z gamma and h to gamma gamma are sensitive to charged Higgs loops, but h to Z gamma receives an additional shift from fermion-antifermion-Z vertex corrections generated by the U(1) flavor charges. These vertex corrections also modify top-quark observables and the b to s lepton lepton rate. A viable window exists for charged Higgs masses above 200 GeV and negative lambda h H+ H- that remains consistent with current one-sigma data, with the gamma gamma signal strength acting as the dominant constraint on the scalar sector; the b to s lepton lepton process supplies the strongest limit on the top-quark charges Q tL and Q tR.

What carries the argument

The U(1)' flavor gauge symmetry that assigns charges to the fermions and thereby corrects the ordinary Z boson couplings to fermion pairs while also introducing a new Z' gauge boson.

If this is right

  • The two-photon signal strength supplies the leading constraint on the scalar parameters.
  • The b to s lepton lepton process places the tightest restriction on the top-quark flavor charges.
  • Fourteen-percent precision on the Z gamma rate at the High-Luminosity LHC will substantially enlarge the testable region of the model.
  • Both decay channels remain sensitive to the charged-Higgs mass and the sign of the trilinear coupling lambda h H+ H-.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Precision measurements of top-quark couplings at future colliders could independently test the same vertex corrections that appear in the Higgs decay.
  • The model may produce correlated shifts in other flavor-changing neutral current processes beyond b to s lepton lepton.
  • If the vertex corrections are observed, they would link the Higgs sector directly to flavor anomalies without requiring new particles in the decay loops themselves.

Load-bearing premise

The U(1)' flavor symmetry modifies the fermion couplings to the Z boson through the specific left- and right-handed top charges in the way assumed by the model.

What would settle it

A measured signal strength for h to Z gamma that lies outside the band predicted for the allowed region of charged-Higgs mass and trilinear coupling, or a top-charge point that satisfies the top observables yet violates the b to s lepton lepton bound.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.18540 by Fanrong Xu, Feng-Zhi Chen, Qiaoyi Wen.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: We have intentionally omitted the external legs self-energy diagrams for this decay Z γ h f f f γ Z h f f f Z γ h W± W± W± γ Z h W± W± W± Z γ h W± W± Z γ h H± H± H± γ Z h H± H± H± Z γ h H± H± Z γ h W± H± H± Z γ h H± W± W± γ Z h H± W± FIG. 1. One-loop Feynman diagrams for h → Zγ. mode because they lack the Lorentz structure specified in Eq. (15), and the divergences present in the calculations of the Feynma… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: In the depiction of the first and second diagrams in each row, distinct momenta p1 γ (p1) γ (p2) h f f f γ (p2) γ (p1) h f f f γ (p1) γ (p2) h W± W± W± γ (p2) γ (p1) h W± W± W± γ γ h W± W± γ (p1) γ (p2) h H± H± H± γ (p2) γ (p1) h H± H± H± γ γ h H± H± FIG. 2. One-loop Feynman diagrams for h → γγ. and p2 are assigned to differentiate the two identical photons in the final state. Paralleling the approach for … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Left: The magnitude of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Feynman rules for the relevant vertices and propagators in the unitary gauge. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

This work examines the $h\to Z\gamma$ and $h\to\gamma\gamma$ decays in the flavor-gauged two Higgs doublet model (FG2HDM), which augments the Standard Model (SM) with an additional scalar doublet, a singlet, and a $U(1)'$ flavor gauge symmetry. Beyond the SM spectrum, FG2HDM predicts five additional physical scalars and a new neutral gauge boson, $Z'$. We demonstrate that while both decay channels are sensitive to charged Higgs loops, $h \to Z\gamma$ is uniquely modified by fermion-antifermion-$Z$ ($f\bar{f}Z$) vertex corrections. These vertex corrections further impact top-quark observables and the flavor-changing neutral current (FCNC) process $b\to s\ell^+\ell^-$. Our analysis identifies a viable parameter space ($m_{H^\pm}>200$~GeV and $\lambda_{hH^+H^-}<0$) consistent with current $1\sigma$ experimental limits, where the signal strength $\mu_{\gamma\gamma}$ remains the primary constraint on scalar sector parameters. Regarding the $f\bar{f}Z$ couplings, we delineate the allowed regions in the $\mathcal{Q}_{tL}$-$\mathcal{Q}_{tR}$ plane by evaluating the leading top-quark contributions, revealing that $b\to s\ell^+\ell^-$ imposes the most stringent bounds. Finally, we highlight that the $14\%$ projected precision for $\mu_{Z\gamma}$ at the High-Luminosity LHC (HL-LHC) will significantly enhance sensitivity to the FG2HDM.

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.

Referee Report

0 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript examines the decays h → Zγ and h → γγ in the flavor-gauged two Higgs doublet model (FG2HDM), which extends the SM by an extra scalar doublet, a singlet, and a U(1)' flavor gauge symmetry that introduces a Z' boson and modifies ff̄Z vertices. It shows that charged-Higgs loops contribute to both channels while the ff̄Z vertex corrections (from the new U(1)' charges) affect only h → Zγ, and also constrain top-quark observables and b → sℓ⁺ℓ⁻. The authors identify a viable parameter region with m_{H^±} > 200 GeV and λ_{hH⁺H⁻} < 0 that satisfies current 1σ experimental limits, with μ_γγ as the dominant scalar-sector constraint and b → sℓ⁺ℓ⁻ providing the tightest bounds on the top charges Q_{tL}, Q_{tR}; they further note that the projected 14% precision on μ_{Zγ} at HL-LHC will improve sensitivity.

Significance. If the loop and vertex calculations hold, the work supplies a concrete illustration of how a flavor gauge symmetry can produce differential modifications between h → Zγ and h → γγ while simultaneously linking the Higgs sector to FCNC processes. The explicit viable region under existing limits and the forecast for HL-LHC measurements constitute useful phenomenological guidance for this class of models.

minor comments (1)
  1. The abstract and introduction would benefit from a brief statement of the precise loop integrals or effective couplings used for the charged-Higgs contributions (e.g., the form of the Passarino-Veltman functions or the definition of λ_{hH⁺H⁻}).

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough review and positive recommendation to accept the manuscript. The report accurately captures the key features of our analysis, including the differential impact on h → Zγ versus h → γγ, the role of charged-Higgs loops and ff̄Z vertex corrections, and the viable parameter space under current constraints.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity identified

full rationale

The paper starts from an explicit model definition (extra doublet, singlet, U(1)' gauge symmetry) and derives the h→Zγ and h→γγ amplitudes via standard loop calculations and vertex corrections induced by the model's charges. The identification of viable regions (m_H±>200 GeV, λ_hH+H−<0) applies external experimental limits as constraints rather than re-deriving them from the same inputs. No self-definitional equations, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the chain. The work is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 2 axioms · 2 invented entities

The central claims rest on the existence of the FG2HDM Lagrangian, the loop-level calculation of the decays, and the assumption that current experimental limits can be directly applied without additional theoretical uncertainties.

free parameters (3)
  • m_{H^±}
    Lower bound >200 GeV chosen to satisfy experimental limits; value is fitted to data rather than derived.
  • λ_{hH⁺H⁻}
    Sign chosen negative to remain consistent with 1σ limits on μ_γγ.
  • Q_{tL}, Q_{tR}
    New U(1)' charges scanned and bounded by top and b→sℓℓ data.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The FG2HDM Lagrangian with U(1)' flavor gauge symmetry generates the stated f f̄Z vertex corrections.
    Invoked when claiming unique modification to h→Zγ.
  • standard math Standard Model loop calculations plus new scalar loops fully capture the decay amplitudes.
    Background assumption for all rate predictions.
invented entities (2)
  • Z' no independent evidence
    purpose: New neutral gauge boson from U(1)' breaking that participates in flavor interactions.
    Postulated by the model definition; no independent collider evidence provided in abstract.
  • Additional physical scalars (five beyond SM) no independent evidence
    purpose: Extra Higgs states whose loops modify the decay rates.
    Introduced by the two-doublet-plus-singlet content; no direct observation claimed.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5839 in / 1776 out tokens · 20708 ms · 2026-05-23T06:31:52.282193+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 63 canonical work pages · 18 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC

    G. Aadet al.(ATLAS), Phys. Lett. B716, 1 (2012), arXiv:1207.7214 [hep-ex]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  2. [2]

    Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC

    S. Chatrchyanet al.(CMS), Phys. Lett. B716, 30 (2012), arXiv:1207.7235 [hep-ex]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  3. [3]

    Observation of a new boson with mass near 125 GeV in pp collisions at sqrt(s) = 7 and 8 TeV

    S. Chatrchyanet al.(CMS), JHEP06, 081 (2013), arXiv:1303.4571 [hep-ex]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  4. [4]

    T. D. Lee, Phys. Rev. D8, 1226 (1973)

    work page 1973

  5. [5]

    S. L. Glashow and S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. D15, 1958 (1977)

    work page 1958

  6. [6]

    E. A. Paschos, Phys. Rev. D15, 1966 (1977)

    work page 1966

  7. [7]

    Yukawa Alignment in the Two-Higgs-Doublet Model

    A. Pich and P. Tuzon, Phys. Rev. D80, 091702 (2009), arXiv:0908.1554 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  8. [8]

    M. Jung, A. Pich, and P. Tuzon, JHEP11, 003 (2010), arXiv:1006.0470 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  9. [9]

    P. M. Ferreira, L. Lavoura, and J. P. Silva, Phys. Lett. B688, 341 (2010), arXiv:1001.2561 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  10. [10]

    Unitary symmetry and leptonic decays

    N. Cabibbo, Phys. Rev. Lett.10, 531 (1963)

    work page 1963

  11. [11]

    Kobayashi and T

    M. Kobayashi and T. Maskawa, Prog. Theor. Phys.49, 652 (1973)

    work page 1973

  12. [12]

    G. C. Branco, W. Grimus, and L. Lavoura, Phys. Lett. B380, 119 (1996), arXiv:hep- ph/9601383

    work page arXiv 1996

  13. [13]

    Family non-universal Z' models with protected flavor-changing interactions

    A. Celis, J. Fuentes-Martin, M. Jung, and H. Serodio, Phys. Rev. D92, 015007 (2015), arXiv:1505.03079 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  14. [14]

    Ordell, R

    A. Ordell, R. Pasechnik, H. Serˆ odio, and F. Nottensteiner, Phys. Rev. D100, 115038 (2019), arXiv:1909.05548 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2019

  15. [15]

    Ordell, R

    A. Ordell, R. Pasechnik, and H. Serˆ odio, Phys. Rev. D102, 035016 (2020), arXiv:2006.08676 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  16. [16]

    P. M. Ferreira, F. F. Freitas, J. a. Gon¸ calves, A. P. Morais, R. Pasechnik, and V. Vatellis, Phys. Rev. D106, 075017 (2022), arXiv:2202.13153 [hep-ph]. 23

    work page arXiv 2022

  17. [17]

    Aadet al.(ATLAS), Phys

    G. Aadet al.(ATLAS), Phys. Lett. B809, 135754 (2020), arXiv:2005.05382 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2020

  18. [18]

    Tumasyanet al.(CMS), JHEP05, 233 (2023), arXiv:2204.12945 [hep-ex]

    A. Tumasyanet al.(CMS), JHEP05, 233 (2023), arXiv:2204.12945 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2023

  19. [19]

    Aadet al.(ATLAS, CMS), Phys

    G. Aadet al.(ATLAS, CMS), Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 021803 (2024), arXiv:2309.03501 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2024

  20. [20]

    Spira, A

    M. Spira, A. Djouadi, and P. M. Zerwas, Phys. Lett. B276, 350 (1992)

    work page 1992

  21. [21]

    The rare decay $H\to Z\gamma$ in perturbative QCD

    T. Gehrmann, S. Guns, and D. Kara, JHEP09, 038 (2015), arXiv:1505.00561 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  22. [22]

    Next-to-Leading Order QCD Corrections to the Decay Width $H \to Z \gamma$

    R. Bonciani, V. Del Duca, H. Frellesvig, J. M. Henn, F. Moriello, and V. A. Smirnov, JHEP 08, 108 (2015), arXiv:1505.00567 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  23. [23]

    Buccioni, F

    F. Buccioni, F. Devoto, A. Djouadi, J. Ellis, J. Quevillon, and L. Tancredi, Phys. Lett. B 851, 138596 (2024), arXiv:2312.12384 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  24. [24]

    Chen, L.-B

    Z.-Q. Chen, L.-B. Chen, C.-F. Qiao, and R. Zhu, Phys. Rev. D110, L051301 (2024), arXiv:2404.11441 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  25. [25]

    W.-L. Sang, F. Feng, and Y. Jia, Phys. Rev. D110, L051302 (2024), arXiv:2405.03464 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  26. [26]

    Panghal and B

    S. Panghal and B. Mukhopadhyaya, (2023), arXiv:2310.04136 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  27. [27]

    Lichtenstein, M

    G. Lichtenstein, M. A. Schmidt, G. Valencia, and R. R. Volkas, Nucl. Phys. B1013, 116850 (2025), arXiv:2312.09409 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  28. [28]

    T. T. Hong, V. K. Le, L. T. T. Phuong, N. . C. Hoi, N. T. K. Ngan, and N. H. T. Nha, PTEP 2024, 033B04 (2024), [Erratum: PTEP 2024, 059201 (2024)], arXiv:2312.11045 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  29. [29]

    R. Boto, D. Das, J. C. Romao, I. Saha, and J. P. Silva, Phys. Rev. D109, 095002 (2024), arXiv:2312.13050 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  30. [30]

    N. Das, T. Jha, and D. Nanda, Phys. Rev. D109, 115020 (2024), arXiv:2402.01317 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  31. [31]

    Cheung and C

    K. Cheung and C. J. Ouseph, Phys. Rev. D110, 055016 (2024), arXiv:2402.05678 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  32. [32]

    He, Z.-L

    X.-G. He, Z.-L. Huang, M.-W. Li, and C.-W. Liu, JHEP10, 135 (2024), arXiv:2402.08190 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  33. [33]

    B. A. Ouazghour, M. Chabab, and K. Goure, Eur. Phys. J. C84, 879 (2024), arXiv:2403.07722 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  34. [34]

    Arhrib, K

    A. Arhrib, K. H. Phan, V. Q. Tran, and T.-C. Yuan, (2024), arXiv:2405.03127 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  35. [35]

    A. I. Hern´ andez-Ju´ arez, R. Gait´ an, and R. Martinez, Phys. Rev. D111, 015001 (2025), arXiv:2405.03094 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    Grojean, G

    C. Grojean, G. Guedes, J. Roosmale Nepveu, and G. M. Salla, JHEP12, 065 (2024), arXiv:2405.20371 [hep-ph]. 24

    work page arXiv 2024

  37. [37]

    Hu, Z.-Y

    H.-c. Hu, Z.-Y. Zhang, N.-Y. Zhu, and H.-X. Chen, Chin. Phys. C48, 093101 (2024), arXiv:2406.00946 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  38. [38]

    Arhrib, R

    A. Arhrib, R. Benbrik, L. Rahili, S. Semlali, and B. Taki, Eur. Phys. J. C84, 799 (2024), arXiv:2406.13001 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  39. [39]

    K. H. Phan, D. T. Tran, and T. H. Nguyen, PTEP2025, 023B05 (2025), arXiv:2406.15749 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  40. [40]

    Israr and M

    S. Israr and M. Rehman, Eur. Phys. J. Plus140, 397 (2025), arXiv:2407.01210 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    Mantzaropoulos, Phys

    K. Mantzaropoulos, Phys. Rev. D110, 055041 (2024), arXiv:2407.09145 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  42. [42]

    R. Boto, P. N. Figueiredo, J. C. Rom˜ ao, and J. P. Silva, JHEP11, 108 (2024), arXiv:2407.15933 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  43. [43]

    Barducci, L

    D. Barducci, L. Di Luzio, M. Nardecchia, and C. Toni, JHEP12, 154 (2023), arXiv:2311.10130 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  44. [44]

    ATLAS Collaboration (ATLAS), ATLAS-CONF-2025-007 (2025)

    work page 2025

  45. [45]

    Wen and F

    Q. Wen and F. Xu, Phys. Rev. D111, 115024 (2025)

    work page 2025

  46. [46]

    $h \rightarrow Z \gamma$ in the complex two Higgs doublet model

    D. Fontes, J. C. Rom˜ ao, and J. a. P. Silva, JHEP12, 043 (2014), arXiv:1408.2534 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  47. [47]

    Search for Higgs boson decays to a photon and a Z boson in pp collisions at sqrt(s)=7 and 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector

    G. Aadet al.(ATLAS), Phys. Lett. B732, 8 (2014), arXiv:1402.3051 [hep-ex]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  48. [48]

    Search for a Higgs boson decaying into a Z and a photon in pp collisions at sqrt(s) = 7 and 8 TeV

    S. Chatrchyanet al.(CMS), Phys. Lett. B726, 587 (2013), arXiv:1307.5515 [hep-ex]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  49. [49]

    J. F. Gunion, H. E. Haber, G. L. Kane, and S. Dawson,The Higgs Hunter’s Guide, Vol. 80 (2000)

    work page 2000

  50. [50]

    The Anatomy of Electro-Weak Symmetry Breaking. I: The Higgs boson in the Standard Model

    A. Djouadi, Phys. Rept.457, 1 (2008), arXiv:hep-ph/0503172

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  51. [51]

    Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Phys

    S. Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D110, 030001 (2024)

    work page 2024

  52. [52]

    Bergstrom and G

    L. Bergstrom and G. Hulth, Nucl. Phys. B259, 137 (1985), [Erratum: Nucl.Phys.B 276, 744–744 (1986)]

    work page 1985

  53. [53]

    H. H. Patel, Comput. Phys. Commun.197, 276 (2015), arXiv:1503.01469 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  54. [54]

    Handbook of LHC Higgs Cross Sections: 4. Deciphering the Nature of the Higgs Sector

    D. de Florianet al.(LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group),2/2017(2016), 10.23731/CYRM-2017-002, arXiv:1610.07922 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.23731/cyrm-2017-002 2017

  55. [55]

    A. M. Sirunyanet al.(CMS), JHEP03, 056 (2020), arXiv:1907.11270 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2020

  56. [56]

    Aadet al.(ATLAS), Eur

    G. Aadet al.(ATLAS), Eur. Phys. J. C81, 737 (2021), arXiv:2103.12603 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2021

  57. [57]

    Aadet al.(ATLAS), JHEP07, 163 (2024), arXiv:2312.04450 [hep-ex]

    G. Aadet al.(ATLAS), JHEP07, 163 (2024), arXiv:2312.04450 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2024

  58. [58]

    Aadet al.(ATLAS), JHEP05, 305 (2024), arXiv:2403.02126 [hep-ex]

    G. Aadet al.(ATLAS), JHEP05, 305 (2024), arXiv:2403.02126 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2024

  59. [59]

    Buchmuller and D

    W. Buchmuller and D. Wyler, Nucl. Phys. B268, 621 (1986). 25

    work page 1986

  60. [60]

    Dimension-Six Terms in the Standard Model Lagrangian

    B. Grzadkowski, M. Iskrzynski, M. Misiak, and J. Rosiek, JHEP10, 085 (2010), arXiv:1008.4884 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  61. [61]

    The Standard Model as an Effective Field Theory

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  62. [62]

    J. A. Aguilar-Saavedra, Nucl. Phys. B812, 181 (2009), arXiv:0811.3842 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  63. [63]

    Wen and F

    Q. Wen and F. Xu, Phys. Rev. D108, 095038 (2023), arXiv:2305.19038 [hep-ph]. 26

    work page arXiv 2023