Exploring Extended Higgs Dynamics via Higgsstrahlung at FCC-ee

Anisha; Christoph Englert; Francisco Arco; Margarete M\"uhlleitner; Stefano Di Noi

REVIEW

Exploring Extended Higgs Dynamics via Higgsstrahlung at FCC-ee

Anisha, Francisco Arco, Stefano Di Noi, Christoph Englert, Margarete Mühlleitner

High Energy Physics - Phenomenology · Submitted 3 Sep 2026 · 89 references

Pith's verdict: Well-executed NLO 2HDM study showing FCC-ee can probe extended scalars via Higgsstrahlung even in the alignment limit—the central claim holds, though the theory-error qualification on the FCC-ee sensitivity contour deserves a quantitative footnote.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash) read the paper on September 8, 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 →

· 2 major objections · 5 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv ID2609.04039 (version 1)

Pith IDVSMLFNL6, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

CitationAnisha, Christoph Englert, Francisco Arco, Margarete M\"uhlleitner, Stefano Di Noi. "Exploring Extended Higgs Dynamics via Higgsstrahlung at FCC-ee." arXiv:2609.04039 (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VSMLFNL6

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 a solid paper. The main thing it does that hasn't been done before is a systematic NLO exploration of e+e- → hZ in the 2HDM with a focus on alignment without decoupling. The key result is clear: even when the 125 GeV Higgs is exactly SM-like in its tree-level couplings (cos(β-α)=0), inter-Higgs couplings λhϕϕ can produce cross-section deviations up to -1.8% (Fig. 6), well above the FCC-ee experimental projection of 0.31%. That's a nontrivial and timely point for the future collider community.

The NLO calculation is competently done with standard tools, the constraints (unitarity, vacuum stability, HiggsBounds/Signals, flavour) are properly applied, and the paper is well organised. The authors are honest about limitations: they note the narrow-width approximation for h→bb and explicitly state (page 12) that the SM prediction must be known to a comparable level for the 0.31% contour to be interpreted as a BSM reach statement.

The soft spot is exactly that: the SM theory error on σ(e+e-→hZ) is not quantified. The stress-test note is right that 0.3-0.5% theory error is plausible and could eat into the reach for the smallest deviations. But this doesn't invalidate the main message—the -1.8% benchmark is robust even with a 0.5% theory error. The paper would be stronger with a simple estimate (scale variation, parametric uncertainties) or at least an explicit caveat on which contours are solid. That's a minor revision, not a flaw.

Who should read this: FCC-ee phenomenologists, Higgs-sector model builders, anyone working on indirect BSM discovery at lepton colliders. The paper deserves a serious referee and should be published. I'd bring it to a reading group and would cite it when discussing 2HDM constraints from future e+e- data.

Referee report

Major objections (2)

[Section 3.4, Fig. 6 and accompanying text] The paper quotes the FCC-ee projected sensitivity of 0.31% on σ(e+e-→hZ) as an experimental-only estimate. On page 12 the authors correctly note that 'this projected precision neglects theoretical uncertainties, i.e. the SM prediction needs to be known to a comparable level', but no quantitative estimate of the SM theory error is provided. For deviations near the 0.31% contour, the interpretation as 'observable' is ambiguous because missing higher-order electroweak corrections, scale dependence, and parametric uncertainties in m_t, α_s, and m_h could each reach 0.3–0.5%. The strongest deviation (-1.8%) is safe, but the reach contours in Figs. 5 and 6 should be accompanied by a discussion of how a realistic SM theory error (or a combined experimental+theory uncertainty) would affect the excluded region. I recommend adding a brief estimate of the dominant SM theory uncertainties, even if approximate, and re-plotting at least one benchmark with a combined uncertainty band.
[Section 3.5, Eq. (3.6) and surrounding discussion] The treatment of h→b\bar{b} decays uses the narrow-width approximation and neglects off-shell effects, as stated. However, the potential size of these approximations is not quantified. The authors mention that 'a complete treatment should also include off-shell effects'. For a paper aiming to assess FCC-ee sensitivity at the 0.2% level, some estimate of the theoretical uncertainty introduced by the narrow-width approximation and the neglect of subleading three- and four-body decays would be valuable. A reference to existing off-shell calculations (e.g., Prophecy4f) and a rough uncertainty estimate (e.g., 'expected to be below 0.1% based on Ref. [90]') would strengthen the analysis.

Minor objections (5)

[Abstract and Introduction] The phrase 'small, concrete parameter space' in the abstract could be misinterpreted; the scanned parameter space is fairly broad (Eq. 3.5). Consider rephrasing to 'a well-defined, bounded parameter space'.
[Section 2.2, Eq. (2.10)] The scaling c_{β-α} ~ (v/Λ_{2HDM})^2 is stated without derivation. A brief explanation or reference to Ref. [25] would help the reader.
[Section 3.2, Fig. 4] The color bar labels in the left panels are small and the black dotted line δ_{2HDM}=δ_{eff} is hard to see in the lower-left panel. Consider thickening the line or using a different plot style for clarity.
[Section 3.4, page 12] The sentence 'this projected precision neglects theoretical uncertainties, i.e. the SM prediction needs to be known to a comparable level' is important but appears only once. Consider adding a brief quantitative remark in the conclusions.
[References] Ref. [5] is a CERN internal document (FCC collaboration, 2025). Please include the arXiv number or a persistent DOI if available, otherwise state that it is an internal note.

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

The paper

The paper claims

FCC-ee's Higgsstrahlung cross-section precision could reveal additional Higgs bosons in the Two-Higgs-Doublet Model through loop effects that differ from simple coupling modifications.

The reading

The paper studies how precisely measuring the process e+e- -> hZ at the future FCC-ee collider could reveal the presence of additional Higgs particles. It uses the Two-Higgs-Doublet Model (2HDM) as a representative extension of the Standard Model. The authors compute the cross section at next-to-leading order and scan over the model's parameters. They find that even when the known Higgs boson has exactly Standard Model couplings to W and Z bosons (the 'alignment limit'), contributions from extra scalars in loop diagrams can change the cross section by up to 1.8%. This is larger than the expected experimental precision of 0.31%, meaning FCC-ee could detect these effects. Including the Higgs decay to bottom quarks further enhances sensitivity. The work demonstrates that interpretations solely in terms of the Higgs self-coupling are insufficient; the full model structure matters.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Contributions from additional scalars produce deviations in the e+e- -> hZ cross section that exceed the FCC-ee sensitivity of 0.31% even in the alignment limit, reaching up to1.8% (Fig. 6), demonstrating FCC-ee's indirect potential for BSM discovery.

Load-bearing premise

The FCC-ee projected uncertainty of 0.31% on sigma(e+e- -> hZ) assumes that systematic uncertainties and theoretical errors in the SM prediction are negligible relative to statistical precision. The authors note that 'the SM prediction needs to be known to a comparable level' (page 12), but no detailed estimate of theory errors is provided.

Original abstract

The Future Circular Electron-Positron Collider (FCC-ee) will probe aspects of the Higgs boson and the electroweak scale with unprecedented precision via associated Higgs production with a $Z$ boson. We focus on the Two-Higgs-Doublet Model (2HDM) to frame the FCC-ee's precision constraints within a small, concrete parameter space at next-to-leading order. We demonstrate that the projected precision of the FCC-ee's 240 GeV run will enable a precise analysis of Beyond-the-Standard-Model (BSM)-relevant Higgs-sector interactions near the alignment limit. As the key aspects of the 2HDM that drive deviations of the cross section from its Standard Model expectation (presence of new scalar states, Higgs mixing, and non-trivial inter-Higgs couplings) are also typically present in extensions more complex than the 2HDM, this demonstrates the FCC-ee's indirect potential for unveiling BSM physics around the electroweak scale.

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-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 3,828 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.03 · states limitation 0.33 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.37 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.17 · compares with prior results 0.33 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

The Future Circular Electron-Positron Collider (FCC-ee) will probe aspects of the Higgs boson and the electroweak scale with unprecedented precision via associated Higgs production with a $Z$ boson. We focus on the Two-Higgs-Doublet Model (2HDM) to frame the FCC-ee's precision constraints within a small, concrete parameter space at next-to-leading order. We demonstrate that the projected precision of the FCC-ee's 240 GeV run will enable a precise analysis of Beyond-the-Standard-Model (BSM)-relevant Higgs-sector interactions near the alignment limit. As the key aspects of the 2HDM that drive deviations of the cross section from its Standard Model expectation (presence of new scalar states, Higgs mixing, and non-trivial inter-Higgs couplings) are also typically present in extensions more complex than the 2HDM, this demonstrates the FCC-ee's indirect potential for unveiling BSM physics around the electroweak scale.

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	The Future Circular Electron-Positron Collider (FCC-ee) will probe aspects of the Higgs boson and the electroweak scale with unprecedented precision via associated Higgs production with a $Z$ boson.	background 0.99	0.06	0.06	asserted 0.88
s1	We focus on the Two-Higgs-Doublet Model (2HDM) to frame the FCC-ee's precision constraints within a small, concrete parameter space at next-to-leading order.	method 0.87	0.72	0.06	asserted 0.96
s2	We demonstrate that the projected precision of the FCC-ee's 240 GeV run will enable a precise analysis of Beyond-the-Standard-Model (BSM)-relevant Higgs-sector interactions near the alignment limit.	result 0.85	0.61	0.46	asserted 0.95
s3	As the key aspects of the 2HDM that drive deviations of the cross section from its Standard Model expectation (presence of new scalar states, Higgs mixing, and non-trivial inter-Higgs couplings) are also typically present in extensions more complex than the 2HDM, this demonstrates the FCC-ee's indirect potential for unveiling BSM physics around the electroweak scale.	interpretation 1.00	0.44	0.63	asserted 0.87

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: simulation study 0.51 · evidence from simulation or computation 0.75.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v1

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

References

Works cited (89)

[90]

A. Denner, S. Dittmaier and A. M¨ uck,PROPHECY4F 3.0: A Monte Carlo program for Higgs-boson decays into four-fermion final states in and beyond the Standard Model,Comput. Phys. Commun.254(2020) 107336, [1912.02010]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020
[1]

K. J. F. Gaemers and F. Hoogeveen,Higgs Production and Decay Into Heavy Flavors With the Gluon Fusion Mechanism,Phys. Lett. B146(1984) 347–349. – 16 –

View on Pith 1984
[2]

S. Jung, J. Song and Y. W. Yoon,Dip or nothingness of a Higgs resonance from the interference with a complex phase,Phys. Rev. D92(2015) 055009, [1505.00291]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2015
[3]

P. Basler, S. Dawson, C. Englert and M. M¨ uhlleitner,Di-Higgs boson peaks and top valleys: Interference effects in Higgs sector extensions,Phys. Rev. D101(2020) 015019, [ 1909.09987]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020
[4]

S. Weinberg,Phenomenological Lagrangians,Physica A96(1979) 327–340. [5]FCCcollaboration, M. Selvaggi, J. Eysermans, A. Blondel (eds),Prospects in Electroweak, Higgs and Top physics at FCC, Mar., 2025. 10.17181/n2emg-43f06

View on Pith doi:10.17181/n2emg-43f06 1979
[6]

K. Asteriadis, S. Dawson, P. P. Giardino and R. Szafron,Impact of Next-to-Leading-Order Weak Standard-Model-Effective-Field-Theory Corrections ine+e−→ZH ,Phys. Rev. Lett.133 (2024) 231801, [2406.03557]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024
[7]

S. Dawson, M. Forslund and P. P. Giardino,NLO SMEFT electroweak corrections to Higgs boson decays to four leptons in the narrow width approximation,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 015016, [2411.08952]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025
[8]

L. Bellafronte, S. Dawson, C. Del Pio, M. Forslund and P. P. Giardino,Complete Next-to-Leading-Order Standard-Model-Effective-Field-Theory Electroweak Corrections to Higgs Decays,Phys. Rev. Lett.136(2026) 051801, [2508.14966]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2026
[9]

L. Bellafronte, S. Dawson, C. Del Pio, M. Forslund and P. P. Giardino,Higgs Decays at NLO in the SMEFT,2601.09599

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[10]

T. Cohen, N. Craig, X. Lu and D. Sutherland,Is SMEFT Enough?,JHEP03(2021) 237, [2008.08597]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2021
[11]

S. Dittmaier, S. Schuhmacher and M. Stahlhofen,Integrating out heavy fields in the path integral using the background-field method: general formalism,Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) 826, [2102.12020]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2021
[12]

S. Dittmaier, S. Schuhmacher and M. Stahlhofen,Integrating out a heavy Higgs singlet: on the edge between SMEFT and HEFT,2604.01125

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[13]

R. Alonso, C. Englert, W. Naskar and S. U. Rahaman,Assessing (H)EFT theory errors by pitting EoM against field redefinitions,JHEP03(2026) 199, [2511.15609]

View on Pith arXiv 2026
[14]

I. Brivio, R. Gr¨ ober and K. Schmid,The Art of Counting: a reappraisal of the HEFT expansion,JHEP04(2026) 202, [2511.23410]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2026
[15]

B. Assi, A. Martin and W. Shepherd,EFT Validity and Truncation Uncertainty from few Nuisance Parameters,2607.02649

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[16]

S. Dawson, D. Fontes, C. Quezada-Calonge and J. J. Sanz-Cillero,Matching the 2HDM to the HEFT and the SMEFT: Decoupling and perturbativity,Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 055034, [2305.07689]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2023
[17]

S. Dawson, D. Fontes, C. Quezada-Calonge and J. J. Sanz-Cillero,Is the HEFT matching unique?,Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 055037, [2311.16897]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024
[18]

S. Das Bakshi, S. Dawson, D. Fontes and S. Homiller,Relevance of one-loop SMEFT matching in the 2HDM,Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 075022, [2401.12279]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024
[19]

A. Denner and S. Dittmaier,Electroweak Radiative Corrections for Collider Physics,Phys. Rept.864(2020) 1–163, [1912.06823]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020
[20]

M. E. Peskin and T. Takeuchi,Estimation of oblique electroweak corrections,Phys. Rev. D46 (1992) 381–409. – 17 –

View on Pith 1992
[21]

M. McCullough,An Indirect Model-Dependent Probe of the Higgs Self-Coupling,Phys. Rev. D 90(2014) 015001, [1312.3322]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014
[22]

S. Di Vita, G. Durieux, C. Grojean, J. Gu, Z. Liu, G. Panico et al.,A global view on the Higgs self-coupling at lepton colliders,JHEP02(2018) 178, [1711.03978]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018
[23]

T. D. Lee,A Theory of Spontaneous T Violation,Phys. Rev. D8(1973) 1226–1239

View on Pith 1973
[24]

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

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012
[25]

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
[26]

F. M. Arco Garc´ ıa,Searching for Triple Higgs Couplings: a phenomenological analysis in the Two Higgs Doublet Model. PhD thesis, Madrid, Autonoma U., 2023

View on Pith 2023
[27]

S. L. Glashow and S. Weinberg,Natural Conservation Laws for Neutral Currents,Phys. Rev. D15(1977) 1958

View on Pith 1977
[28]

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

View on Pith 1977
[29]

M. Aoki, S. Kanemura, K. Tsumura and K. Yagyu,Models of Yukawa interaction in the two Higgs doublet model, and their collider phenomenology,Phys. Rev. D80(2009) 015017, [0902.4665]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2009
[30]

R. Coimbra, M. O. P. Sampaio and R. Santos,ScannerS: Constraining the phase diagram of a complex scalar singlet at the LHC,Eur. Phys. J. C73(2013) 2428, [1301.2599]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[31]

M. M¨ uhlleitner, M. O. P. Sampaio, R. Santos and J. Wittbrodt,ScannerS: parameter scans in extended scalar sectors,Eur. Phys. J. C82(2022) 198, [2007.02985]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022
[32]

M. E. Peskin and T. Takeuchi,A New constraint on a strongly interacting Higgs sector,Phys. Rev. Lett.65(1990) 964–967

View on Pith 1990
[33]

J. Haller, A. Hoecker, R. Kogler, K. M¨ onig, T. Peiffer and J. Stelzer,Update of the global electroweak fit and constraints on two-Higgs-doublet models,Eur. Phys. J. C78(2018) 675, [1803.01853]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018
[34]

G. Funk, D. O’Neil and R. M. Winters,What the Oblique Parameters S, T, and U and Their Extensions Reveal About the 2HDM: A Numerical Analysis,Int. J. Mod. Phys. A27(2012) 1250021, [1110.3812]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012
[35]

A. G. Akeroyd, A. Arhrib and E.-M. Naimi,Note on tree level unitarity in the general two Higgs doublet model,Phys. Lett. B490(2000) 119–124, [hep-ph/0006035]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000
[36]

I. F. Ginzburg and I. P. Ivanov,Tree-level unitarity constraints in the most general 2HDM, Phys. Rev. D72(2005) 115010, [hep-ph/0508020]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2005
[37]

N. G. Deshpande and E. Ma,Pattern of Symmetry Breaking with Two Higgs Doublets,Phys. Rev. D18(1978) 2574

View on Pith 1978
[38]

A. Barroso, P. M. Ferreira, I. P. Ivanov and R. Santos,Metastability bounds on the two Higgs doublet model,JHEP06(2013) 045, [1303.5098]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[39]

P. Bechtle, O. Brein, S. Heinemeyer, G. Weiglein and K. E. Williams,HiggsBounds: Confronting Arbitrary Higgs Sectors with Exclusion Bounds from LEP and the Tevatron, Comput. Phys. Commun.181(2010) 138–167, [0811.4169]. – 18 –

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2010
[40]

P. Bechtle, O. Brein, S. Heinemeyer, G. Weiglein and K. E. Williams,HiggsBounds 2.0.0: Confronting Neutral and Charged Higgs Sector Predictions with Exclusion Bounds from LEP and the Tevatron,Comput. Phys. Commun.182(2011) 2605–2631, [1102.1898]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2011
[41]

P. Bechtle, O. Brein, S. Heinemeyer, O. St˚ al, T. Stefaniak, G. Weiglein et al.,HiggsBounds− 4: Improved Tests of Extended Higgs Sectors against Exclusion Bounds from LEP, the Tevatron and the LHC,Eur. Phys. J. C74(2014) 2693, [1311.0055]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014
[42]

P. Bechtle, S. Heinemeyer, O. Stal, T. Stefaniak and G. Weiglein,Applying Exclusion Likelihoods from LHC Searches to Extended Higgs Sectors,Eur. Phys. J. C75(2015) 421, [1507.06706]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2015
[43]

P. Bechtle, D. Dercks, S. Heinemeyer, T. Klingl, T. Stefaniak, G. Weiglein et al., HiggsBounds-5: Testing Higgs Sectors in the LHC 13 TeV Era,Eur. Phys. J. C80(2020) 1211, [2006.06007]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020
[44]

H. Bahl, T. Biek¨ otter, S. Heinemeyer, C. Li, S. Paasch, G. Weiglein et al.,HiggsTools: BSM scalar phenomenology with new versions of HiggsBounds and HiggsSignals,Comput. Phys. Commun.291(2023) 108803, [2210.09332]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2023
[45]

P. Bechtle, S. Heinemeyer, O. St˚ al, T. Stefaniak and G. Weiglein,HiggsSignals : Confronting arbitrary Higgs sectors with measurements at the Tevatron and the LHC,Eur. Phys. J. C74 (2014) 2711, [1305.1933]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014
[46]

P. Bechtle, S. Heinemeyer, O. St˚ al, T. Stefaniak and G. Weiglein,Probing the Standard Model with Higgs signal rates from the Tevatron, the LHC and a future ILC,JHEP11(2014) 039, [1403.1582]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014
[47]

P. Bechtle, S. Heinemeyer, T. Klingl, T. Stefaniak, G. Weiglein and J. Wittbrodt, HiggsSignals-2: Probing new physics with precision Higgs measurements in the LHC 13 TeV era,Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) 145, [2012.09197]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2021
[48]

S. Kanemura, Y. Okada, E. Senaha and C. P. Yuan,Higgs coupling constants as a probe of new physics,Phys. Rev. D70(2004) 115002, [hep-ph/0408364]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[49]

T. Appelquist and J. Carazzone,Infrared Singularities and Massive Fields,Phys. Rev. D11 (1975) 2856

View on Pith 1975
[50]

H. M. Georgi, S. L. Glashow, M. E. Machacek and D. V. Nanopoulos,Higgs Bosons from Two Gluon Annihilation in Proton Proton Collisions,Phys. Rev. Lett.40(1978) 692

View on Pith 1978
[51]

G. Crawford and D. Sutherland,Scalars with non-decoupling phenomenology at future colliders, JHEP04(2025) 197, [2409.18177]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025
[52]

C. Kilic, S. Mathai and T. Youn,Constraints on Loryons in a Two Higgs Doublet Model, 2601.14389

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[53]

I. Banta, T. Cohen, N. Craig, X. Lu and D. Sutherland,Non-decoupling new particles,JHEP 02(2022) 029, [2110.02967]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022
[54]

´I. Asi´ ain, R. Gr¨ ober and L. Tiberi,Is the Standard Model Effective Field Theory Enough for Higgs Pair Production?,2602.16288

View on Pith arXiv
[55]

P. S. Bhupal Dev and A. Pilaftsis,Maximally Symmetric Two Higgs Doublet Model with Natural Standard Model Alignment,JHEP12(2014) 024, [1408.3405]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014
[56]

F. Arco, S. Heinemeyer and M. J. Herrero,Exploring sizable triple Higgs couplings in the 2HDM,Eur. Phys. J. C80(2020) 884, [2005.10576]. – 19 –

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020
[57]

F. Arco, S. Heinemeyer and M. J. Herrero,Triple Higgs couplings in the 2HDM: the complete picture,Eur. Phys. J. C82(2022) 536, [2203.12684]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022
[58]

Anisha, F. Arco, S. Di Noi, C. Englert and M. M¨ uhlleitner,Z and Higgs factory implications of two Higgs doublets with first-order phase transitions,JHEP10(2025) 179, [2506.18555]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025
[59]

G. J. van Oldenborgh and J. A. M. Vermaseren,New Algorithms for One Loop Integrals,Z. Phys. C46(1990) 425–438

View on Pith 1990
[60]

R. Mertig, M. Bohm and A. Denner,FeynCalc: Computer algebraic calculation of Feynman amplitudes,Comput. Phys. Commun.64(1991) 345–359

View on Pith 1991
[61]

T. Hahn,Generating Feynman diagrams and amplitudes with FeynArts 3,Comput. Phys. Commun.140(2001) 418–431, [hep-ph/0012260]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[62]

T. Hahn and M. Perez-Victoria,Automatized one loop calculations in four-dimensions and D-dimensions,Comput. Phys. Commun.118(1999) 153–165, [hep-ph/9807565]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999
[63]

T. Hahn,Automatic loop calculations with FeynArts, FormCalc, and LoopTools,Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl.89(2000) 231–236, [hep-ph/0005029]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000
[64]

V. Shtabovenko, R. Mertig and F. Orellana,New Developments in FeynCalc 9.0,Comput. Phys. Commun.207(2016) 432–444, [1601.01167]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2016
[65]

V. Shtabovenko, R. Mertig and F. Orellana,FeynCalc 9.3: New features and improvements, Comput. Phys. Commun.256(2020) 107478, [2001.04407]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020
[66]

J. F. Gunion, H. E. Haber, G. L. Kane and S. Dawson,The Higgs Hunter’s Guide, vol. 80. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, 2000, 10.1201/9780429496448

View on Pith doi:10.1201/9780429496448
[67]

J. Fleischer and F. Jegerlehner,Radiative Corrections to Higgs Decays in the Extended Weinberg-Salam Model,Phys. Rev. D23(1981) 2001–2026

View on Pith 1981
[68]

M. Krause, R. Lorenz, M. Muhlleitner, R. Santos and H. Ziesche,Gauge-independent Renormalization of the 2-Higgs-Doublet Model,JHEP09(2016) 143, [1605.04853]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2016
[69]

M. Krause, M. Muhlleitner, R. Santos and H. Ziesche,Higgs-to-Higgs boson decays in a 2HDM at next-to-leading order,Phys. Rev. D95(2017) 075019, [1609.04185]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2017
[70]

M. Krause, D. Lopez-Val, M. Muhlleitner and R. Santos,Gauge-independent Renormalization of the N2HDM,JHEP12(2017) 077, [1708.01578]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2017
[71]

M. Krause, M. M¨ uhlleitner and M. Spira,2HDECAY —A program for the calculation of electroweak one-loop corrections to Higgs decays in the Two-Higgs-Doublet Model including state-of-the-art QCD corrections,Comput. Phys. Commun.246(2020) 106852, [ 1810.00768]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020
[72]

A. Denner, L. Jenniches, J.-N. Lang and C. Sturm,Gauge-independent MS renormalization in the 2HDM,JHEP09(2016) 115, [1607.07352]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2016
[73]

L. Altenkamp, S. Dittmaier and H. Rzehak,Renormalization schemes for the Two-Higgs-Doublet Model and applications to h→WW/ZZ→4 fermions,JHEP09(2017) 134, [1704.02645]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2017
[74]

L. Altenkamp, S. Dittmaier and H. Rzehak,Precision calculations forh→WW/ZZ→4 fermions in the Two-Higgs-Doublet Model with Prophecy4f,JHEP03(2018) 110, [1710.07598]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018
[75]

M. Fox, W. Grimus and M. L¨ oschner,Renormalization and radiative corrections to masses in a general Yukawa model,Int. J. Mod. Phys. A33(2018) 1850019, [1705.09589]. – 20 –

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018
[76]

W. Grimus and M. L¨ oschner,Renormalization of the multi-Higgs-doublet Standard Model and one-loop lepton mass corrections,JHEP11(2018) 087, [1807.00725]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018
[77]

A. Denner, S. Dittmaier and J.-N. Lang,Renormalization of mixing angles,JHEP11(2018) 104, [1808.03466]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018
[78]

S. Dittmaier and H. Rzehak,Electroweak renormalization based on gauge-invariant vacuum expectation values of non-linear Higgs representations. Part I. Standard Model,JHEP05 (2022) 125, [2203.07236]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022
[79]

S. Dittmaier and H. Rzehak,Electroweak renormalization based on gauge-invariant vacuum expectation values of non-linear Higgs representations. Part II. Extended Higgs sectors,JHEP 08(2022) 245, [2206.01479]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022
[80]

S. Kanemura, M. Kikuchi and K. Yagyu,New renormalization scheme in the two Higgs doublet models,Phys. Lett. B858(2024) 139050, [2408.08033]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024
[81]

T. Guerandel, M. Maniatis, L. Sartore and I. Schienbein,The Two-Higgs Doublet Model beyond tree-level: A gauge-invariant formalism,2505.12564

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[82]

C. Englert and M. McCullough,Modified Higgs Sectors and NLO Associated Production, JHEP07(2013) 168, [1303.1526]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[83]

N. Craig, C. Englert and M. McCullough,New Probe of Naturalness,Phys. Rev. Lett.111 (2013) 121803, [1305.5251]. [84]FCCcollaboration, A. Abada et al.,FCC Physics Opportunities: Future Circular Collider Conceptual Design Report Volume 1,Eur. Phys. J. C79(2019) 474

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[85]

S. Dawson, D. Fontes, S. Homiller and M. Sullivan,Role of dimension-eight operators in an EFT for the 2HDM,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 055012, [2205.01561]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022
[86]

J. Ellis, K. Mimasu and F. Zampedri,Dimension-8 SMEFT analysis of minimal scalar field extensions of the Standard Model,JHEP10(2023) 051, [2304.06663]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2023
[87]

N. Adhikary, T. Biswas, J. Chakrabortty, C. Englert and M. Spannowsky,Electroweak scalar effects beyond dimension-six in SMEFT,Phys. Rev. D113(2026) 036003, [2501.12160]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2026
[88]

M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, J.-H. Yu and J. Zhou,Probing extended scalar sectors with precision e+e−→Zhand Higgs diphoton studies,JHEP10(2021) 155, [2104.10709]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2021
[89]

HDECAYcollaboration, A. Djouadi, J. Kalinowski, M. Muehlleitner and M. Spira,HDECAY: Twenty++ years after,Comput. Phys. Commun.238(2019) 214–231, [1801.09506]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2019
[91]

G. Degrassi, P. P. Giardino, F. Maltoni and D. Pagani,Probing the Higgs self coupling via single Higgs production at the LHC,JHEP12(2016) 080, [1607.04251]. – 21 –

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2016

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] [90]

A. Denner, S. Dittmaier and A. M¨ uck,PROPHECY4F 3.0: A Monte Carlo program for Higgs-boson decays into four-fermion final states in and beyond the Standard Model,Comput. Phys. Commun.254(2020) 107336, [1912.02010]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020

[2] [1]

K. J. F. Gaemers and F. Hoogeveen,Higgs Production and Decay Into Heavy Flavors With the Gluon Fusion Mechanism,Phys. Lett. B146(1984) 347–349. – 16 –

View on Pith 1984

[3] [2]

S. Jung, J. Song and Y. W. Yoon,Dip or nothingness of a Higgs resonance from the interference with a complex phase,Phys. Rev. D92(2015) 055009, [1505.00291]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2015

[4] [3]

P. Basler, S. Dawson, C. Englert and M. M¨ uhlleitner,Di-Higgs boson peaks and top valleys: Interference effects in Higgs sector extensions,Phys. Rev. D101(2020) 015019, [ 1909.09987]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020

[5] [4]

S. Weinberg,Phenomenological Lagrangians,Physica A96(1979) 327–340. [5]FCCcollaboration, M. Selvaggi, J. Eysermans, A. Blondel (eds),Prospects in Electroweak, Higgs and Top physics at FCC, Mar., 2025. 10.17181/n2emg-43f06

View on Pith doi:10.17181/n2emg-43f06 1979

[6] [6]

K. Asteriadis, S. Dawson, P. P. Giardino and R. Szafron,Impact of Next-to-Leading-Order Weak Standard-Model-Effective-Field-Theory Corrections ine+e−→ZH ,Phys. Rev. Lett.133 (2024) 231801, [2406.03557]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024

[7] [7]

S. Dawson, M. Forslund and P. P. Giardino,NLO SMEFT electroweak corrections to Higgs boson decays to four leptons in the narrow width approximation,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 015016, [2411.08952]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025

[8] [8]

L. Bellafronte, S. Dawson, C. Del Pio, M. Forslund and P. P. Giardino,Complete Next-to-Leading-Order Standard-Model-Effective-Field-Theory Electroweak Corrections to Higgs Decays,Phys. Rev. Lett.136(2026) 051801, [2508.14966]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2026

[9] [9]

L. Bellafronte, S. Dawson, C. Del Pio, M. Forslund and P. P. Giardino,Higgs Decays at NLO in the SMEFT,2601.09599

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[10] [10]

T. Cohen, N. Craig, X. Lu and D. Sutherland,Is SMEFT Enough?,JHEP03(2021) 237, [2008.08597]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2021

[11] [11]

S. Dittmaier, S. Schuhmacher and M. Stahlhofen,Integrating out heavy fields in the path integral using the background-field method: general formalism,Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) 826, [2102.12020]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2021

[12] [12]

S. Dittmaier, S. Schuhmacher and M. Stahlhofen,Integrating out a heavy Higgs singlet: on the edge between SMEFT and HEFT,2604.01125

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[13] [13]

R. Alonso, C. Englert, W. Naskar and S. U. Rahaman,Assessing (H)EFT theory errors by pitting EoM against field redefinitions,JHEP03(2026) 199, [2511.15609]

View on Pith arXiv 2026

[14] [14]

I. Brivio, R. Gr¨ ober and K. Schmid,The Art of Counting: a reappraisal of the HEFT expansion,JHEP04(2026) 202, [2511.23410]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2026

[15] [15]

B. Assi, A. Martin and W. Shepherd,EFT Validity and Truncation Uncertainty from few Nuisance Parameters,2607.02649

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[16] [16]

S. Dawson, D. Fontes, C. Quezada-Calonge and J. J. Sanz-Cillero,Matching the 2HDM to the HEFT and the SMEFT: Decoupling and perturbativity,Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 055034, [2305.07689]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2023

[17] [17]

S. Dawson, D. Fontes, C. Quezada-Calonge and J. J. Sanz-Cillero,Is the HEFT matching unique?,Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 055037, [2311.16897]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024

[18] [18]

S. Das Bakshi, S. Dawson, D. Fontes and S. Homiller,Relevance of one-loop SMEFT matching in the 2HDM,Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 075022, [2401.12279]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024

[19] [19]

A. Denner and S. Dittmaier,Electroweak Radiative Corrections for Collider Physics,Phys. Rept.864(2020) 1–163, [1912.06823]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020

[20] [20]

M. E. Peskin and T. Takeuchi,Estimation of oblique electroweak corrections,Phys. Rev. D46 (1992) 381–409. – 17 –

View on Pith 1992

[21] [21]

M. McCullough,An Indirect Model-Dependent Probe of the Higgs Self-Coupling,Phys. Rev. D 90(2014) 015001, [1312.3322]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014

[22] [22]

S. Di Vita, G. Durieux, C. Grojean, J. Gu, Z. Liu, G. Panico et al.,A global view on the Higgs self-coupling at lepton colliders,JHEP02(2018) 178, [1711.03978]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018

[23] [23]

T. D. Lee,A Theory of Spontaneous T Violation,Phys. Rev. D8(1973) 1226–1239

View on Pith 1973

[24] [24]

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

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012

[25] [25]

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

[26] [26]

F. M. Arco Garc´ ıa,Searching for Triple Higgs Couplings: a phenomenological analysis in the Two Higgs Doublet Model. PhD thesis, Madrid, Autonoma U., 2023

View on Pith 2023

[27] [27]

S. L. Glashow and S. Weinberg,Natural Conservation Laws for Neutral Currents,Phys. Rev. D15(1977) 1958

View on Pith 1977

[28] [28]

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

View on Pith 1977

[29] [29]

M. Aoki, S. Kanemura, K. Tsumura and K. Yagyu,Models of Yukawa interaction in the two Higgs doublet model, and their collider phenomenology,Phys. Rev. D80(2009) 015017, [0902.4665]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2009

[30] [30]

R. Coimbra, M. O. P. Sampaio and R. Santos,ScannerS: Constraining the phase diagram of a complex scalar singlet at the LHC,Eur. Phys. J. C73(2013) 2428, [1301.2599]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[31] [31]

M. M¨ uhlleitner, M. O. P. Sampaio, R. Santos and J. Wittbrodt,ScannerS: parameter scans in extended scalar sectors,Eur. Phys. J. C82(2022) 198, [2007.02985]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022

[32] [32]

M. E. Peskin and T. Takeuchi,A New constraint on a strongly interacting Higgs sector,Phys. Rev. Lett.65(1990) 964–967

View on Pith 1990

[33] [33]

J. Haller, A. Hoecker, R. Kogler, K. M¨ onig, T. Peiffer and J. Stelzer,Update of the global electroweak fit and constraints on two-Higgs-doublet models,Eur. Phys. J. C78(2018) 675, [1803.01853]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018

[34] [34]

G. Funk, D. O’Neil and R. M. Winters,What the Oblique Parameters S, T, and U and Their Extensions Reveal About the 2HDM: A Numerical Analysis,Int. J. Mod. Phys. A27(2012) 1250021, [1110.3812]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012

[35] [35]

A. G. Akeroyd, A. Arhrib and E.-M. Naimi,Note on tree level unitarity in the general two Higgs doublet model,Phys. Lett. B490(2000) 119–124, [hep-ph/0006035]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000

[36] [36]

I. F. Ginzburg and I. P. Ivanov,Tree-level unitarity constraints in the most general 2HDM, Phys. Rev. D72(2005) 115010, [hep-ph/0508020]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2005

[37] [37]

N. G. Deshpande and E. Ma,Pattern of Symmetry Breaking with Two Higgs Doublets,Phys. Rev. D18(1978) 2574

View on Pith 1978

[38] [38]

A. Barroso, P. M. Ferreira, I. P. Ivanov and R. Santos,Metastability bounds on the two Higgs doublet model,JHEP06(2013) 045, [1303.5098]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[39] [39]

P. Bechtle, O. Brein, S. Heinemeyer, G. Weiglein and K. E. Williams,HiggsBounds: Confronting Arbitrary Higgs Sectors with Exclusion Bounds from LEP and the Tevatron, Comput. Phys. Commun.181(2010) 138–167, [0811.4169]. – 18 –

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2010

[40] [40]

P. Bechtle, O. Brein, S. Heinemeyer, G. Weiglein and K. E. Williams,HiggsBounds 2.0.0: Confronting Neutral and Charged Higgs Sector Predictions with Exclusion Bounds from LEP and the Tevatron,Comput. Phys. Commun.182(2011) 2605–2631, [1102.1898]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2011

[41] [41]

P. Bechtle, O. Brein, S. Heinemeyer, O. St˚ al, T. Stefaniak, G. Weiglein et al.,HiggsBounds− 4: Improved Tests of Extended Higgs Sectors against Exclusion Bounds from LEP, the Tevatron and the LHC,Eur. Phys. J. C74(2014) 2693, [1311.0055]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014

[42] [42]

P. Bechtle, S. Heinemeyer, O. Stal, T. Stefaniak and G. Weiglein,Applying Exclusion Likelihoods from LHC Searches to Extended Higgs Sectors,Eur. Phys. J. C75(2015) 421, [1507.06706]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2015

[43] [43]

P. Bechtle, D. Dercks, S. Heinemeyer, T. Klingl, T. Stefaniak, G. Weiglein et al., HiggsBounds-5: Testing Higgs Sectors in the LHC 13 TeV Era,Eur. Phys. J. C80(2020) 1211, [2006.06007]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020

[44] [44]

H. Bahl, T. Biek¨ otter, S. Heinemeyer, C. Li, S. Paasch, G. Weiglein et al.,HiggsTools: BSM scalar phenomenology with new versions of HiggsBounds and HiggsSignals,Comput. Phys. Commun.291(2023) 108803, [2210.09332]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2023

[45] [45]

P. Bechtle, S. Heinemeyer, O. St˚ al, T. Stefaniak and G. Weiglein,HiggsSignals : Confronting arbitrary Higgs sectors with measurements at the Tevatron and the LHC,Eur. Phys. J. C74 (2014) 2711, [1305.1933]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014

[46] [46]

P. Bechtle, S. Heinemeyer, O. St˚ al, T. Stefaniak and G. Weiglein,Probing the Standard Model with Higgs signal rates from the Tevatron, the LHC and a future ILC,JHEP11(2014) 039, [1403.1582]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014

[47] [47]

P. Bechtle, S. Heinemeyer, T. Klingl, T. Stefaniak, G. Weiglein and J. Wittbrodt, HiggsSignals-2: Probing new physics with precision Higgs measurements in the LHC 13 TeV era,Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) 145, [2012.09197]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2021

[48] [48]

S. Kanemura, Y. Okada, E. Senaha and C. P. Yuan,Higgs coupling constants as a probe of new physics,Phys. Rev. D70(2004) 115002, [hep-ph/0408364]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[49] [49]

T. Appelquist and J. Carazzone,Infrared Singularities and Massive Fields,Phys. Rev. D11 (1975) 2856

View on Pith 1975

[50] [50]

H. M. Georgi, S. L. Glashow, M. E. Machacek and D. V. Nanopoulos,Higgs Bosons from Two Gluon Annihilation in Proton Proton Collisions,Phys. Rev. Lett.40(1978) 692

View on Pith 1978

[51] [51]

G. Crawford and D. Sutherland,Scalars with non-decoupling phenomenology at future colliders, JHEP04(2025) 197, [2409.18177]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025

[52] [52]

C. Kilic, S. Mathai and T. Youn,Constraints on Loryons in a Two Higgs Doublet Model, 2601.14389

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[53] [53]

I. Banta, T. Cohen, N. Craig, X. Lu and D. Sutherland,Non-decoupling new particles,JHEP 02(2022) 029, [2110.02967]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022

[54] [54]

´I. Asi´ ain, R. Gr¨ ober and L. Tiberi,Is the Standard Model Effective Field Theory Enough for Higgs Pair Production?,2602.16288

View on Pith arXiv

[55] [55]

P. S. Bhupal Dev and A. Pilaftsis,Maximally Symmetric Two Higgs Doublet Model with Natural Standard Model Alignment,JHEP12(2014) 024, [1408.3405]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014

[56] [56]

F. Arco, S. Heinemeyer and M. J. Herrero,Exploring sizable triple Higgs couplings in the 2HDM,Eur. Phys. J. C80(2020) 884, [2005.10576]. – 19 –

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020

[57] [57]

F. Arco, S. Heinemeyer and M. J. Herrero,Triple Higgs couplings in the 2HDM: the complete picture,Eur. Phys. J. C82(2022) 536, [2203.12684]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022

[58] [58]

Anisha, F. Arco, S. Di Noi, C. Englert and M. M¨ uhlleitner,Z and Higgs factory implications of two Higgs doublets with first-order phase transitions,JHEP10(2025) 179, [2506.18555]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025

[59] [59]

G. J. van Oldenborgh and J. A. M. Vermaseren,New Algorithms for One Loop Integrals,Z. Phys. C46(1990) 425–438

View on Pith 1990

[60] [60]

R. Mertig, M. Bohm and A. Denner,FeynCalc: Computer algebraic calculation of Feynman amplitudes,Comput. Phys. Commun.64(1991) 345–359

View on Pith 1991

[61] [61]

T. Hahn,Generating Feynman diagrams and amplitudes with FeynArts 3,Comput. Phys. Commun.140(2001) 418–431, [hep-ph/0012260]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[62] [62]

T. Hahn and M. Perez-Victoria,Automatized one loop calculations in four-dimensions and D-dimensions,Comput. Phys. Commun.118(1999) 153–165, [hep-ph/9807565]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999

[63] [63]

T. Hahn,Automatic loop calculations with FeynArts, FormCalc, and LoopTools,Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl.89(2000) 231–236, [hep-ph/0005029]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000

[64] [64]

V. Shtabovenko, R. Mertig and F. Orellana,New Developments in FeynCalc 9.0,Comput. Phys. Commun.207(2016) 432–444, [1601.01167]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2016

[65] [65]

V. Shtabovenko, R. Mertig and F. Orellana,FeynCalc 9.3: New features and improvements, Comput. Phys. Commun.256(2020) 107478, [2001.04407]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020

[66] [66]

J. F. Gunion, H. E. Haber, G. L. Kane and S. Dawson,The Higgs Hunter’s Guide, vol. 80. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, 2000, 10.1201/9780429496448

View on Pith doi:10.1201/9780429496448

[67] [67]

J. Fleischer and F. Jegerlehner,Radiative Corrections to Higgs Decays in the Extended Weinberg-Salam Model,Phys. Rev. D23(1981) 2001–2026

View on Pith 1981

[68] [68]

M. Krause, R. Lorenz, M. Muhlleitner, R. Santos and H. Ziesche,Gauge-independent Renormalization of the 2-Higgs-Doublet Model,JHEP09(2016) 143, [1605.04853]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2016

[69] [69]

M. Krause, M. Muhlleitner, R. Santos and H. Ziesche,Higgs-to-Higgs boson decays in a 2HDM at next-to-leading order,Phys. Rev. D95(2017) 075019, [1609.04185]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2017

[70] [70]

M. Krause, D. Lopez-Val, M. Muhlleitner and R. Santos,Gauge-independent Renormalization of the N2HDM,JHEP12(2017) 077, [1708.01578]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2017

[71] [71]

M. Krause, M. M¨ uhlleitner and M. Spira,2HDECAY —A program for the calculation of electroweak one-loop corrections to Higgs decays in the Two-Higgs-Doublet Model including state-of-the-art QCD corrections,Comput. Phys. Commun.246(2020) 106852, [ 1810.00768]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020

[72] [72]

A. Denner, L. Jenniches, J.-N. Lang and C. Sturm,Gauge-independent MS renormalization in the 2HDM,JHEP09(2016) 115, [1607.07352]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2016

[73] [73]

L. Altenkamp, S. Dittmaier and H. Rzehak,Renormalization schemes for the Two-Higgs-Doublet Model and applications to h→WW/ZZ→4 fermions,JHEP09(2017) 134, [1704.02645]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2017

[74] [74]

L. Altenkamp, S. Dittmaier and H. Rzehak,Precision calculations forh→WW/ZZ→4 fermions in the Two-Higgs-Doublet Model with Prophecy4f,JHEP03(2018) 110, [1710.07598]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018

[75] [75]

M. Fox, W. Grimus and M. L¨ oschner,Renormalization and radiative corrections to masses in a general Yukawa model,Int. J. Mod. Phys. A33(2018) 1850019, [1705.09589]. – 20 –

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018

[76] [76]

W. Grimus and M. L¨ oschner,Renormalization of the multi-Higgs-doublet Standard Model and one-loop lepton mass corrections,JHEP11(2018) 087, [1807.00725]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018

[77] [77]

A. Denner, S. Dittmaier and J.-N. Lang,Renormalization of mixing angles,JHEP11(2018) 104, [1808.03466]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018

[78] [78]

S. Dittmaier and H. Rzehak,Electroweak renormalization based on gauge-invariant vacuum expectation values of non-linear Higgs representations. Part I. Standard Model,JHEP05 (2022) 125, [2203.07236]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022

[79] [79]

S. Dittmaier and H. Rzehak,Electroweak renormalization based on gauge-invariant vacuum expectation values of non-linear Higgs representations. Part II. Extended Higgs sectors,JHEP 08(2022) 245, [2206.01479]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022

[80] [80]

S. Kanemura, M. Kikuchi and K. Yagyu,New renormalization scheme in the two Higgs doublet models,Phys. Lett. B858(2024) 139050, [2408.08033]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024

[81] [81]

T. Guerandel, M. Maniatis, L. Sartore and I. Schienbein,The Two-Higgs Doublet Model beyond tree-level: A gauge-invariant formalism,2505.12564

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[82] [82]

C. Englert and M. McCullough,Modified Higgs Sectors and NLO Associated Production, JHEP07(2013) 168, [1303.1526]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[83] [83]

N. Craig, C. Englert and M. McCullough,New Probe of Naturalness,Phys. Rev. Lett.111 (2013) 121803, [1305.5251]. [84]FCCcollaboration, A. Abada et al.,FCC Physics Opportunities: Future Circular Collider Conceptual Design Report Volume 1,Eur. Phys. J. C79(2019) 474

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[84] [85]

S. Dawson, D. Fontes, S. Homiller and M. Sullivan,Role of dimension-eight operators in an EFT for the 2HDM,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 055012, [2205.01561]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022

[85] [86]

J. Ellis, K. Mimasu and F. Zampedri,Dimension-8 SMEFT analysis of minimal scalar field extensions of the Standard Model,JHEP10(2023) 051, [2304.06663]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2023

[86] [87]

N. Adhikary, T. Biswas, J. Chakrabortty, C. Englert and M. Spannowsky,Electroweak scalar effects beyond dimension-six in SMEFT,Phys. Rev. D113(2026) 036003, [2501.12160]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2026

[87] [88]

M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, J.-H. Yu and J. Zhou,Probing extended scalar sectors with precision e+e−→Zhand Higgs diphoton studies,JHEP10(2021) 155, [2104.10709]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2021

[88] [89]

HDECAYcollaboration, A. Djouadi, J. Kalinowski, M. Muehlleitner and M. Spira,HDECAY: Twenty++ years after,Comput. Phys. Commun.238(2019) 214–231, [1801.09506]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2019

[89] [91]

G. Degrassi, P. P. Giardino, F. Maltoni and D. Pagani,Probing the Higgs self coupling via single Higgs production at the LHC,JHEP12(2016) 080, [1607.04251]. – 21 –

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2016