Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 28 references

The paper argues that muon–antimuon separation efficiency in the magnetized calorimeter is a decisive acceptance factor for dimuon sgoldstino searches at SND@HL-LHC, and that neglecting it materially overestimates sensitivity for highly boo

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 02:29 UTC pith:CY3GBE6G

load-bearing objection The genuinely new piece is the muon–antimuon separation effect in the magnetized SND@HL-LHC HCAL, and the qualitative conclusion holds; the quantitative reach is hostage to an ad hoc two-track acceptance model that needs a real simulation. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.29656 v1 pith:CY3GBE6G submitted 2026-07-31 hep-ph hep-ex

Sgoldstino Phenomenology at SND@HL-LHC

D. Kalashnikov , E. K. Karkaryan This is my paper
classification hep-ph hep-ex
keywords sgoldstinosupersymmetry breakinglong-lived particleSND@HL-LHCfar-forward detectordimuon signaturemuon track separationmagnetized calorimeter
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper asks whether the proposed SND@HL-LHC forward detector can see light scalar sgoldstinos decaying to muon pairs, and under what conditions. Its central claim is that the two muons must be resolvable as separate tracks inside the magnetized calorimeter, and that this separation requirement — alongside geometric acceptance and decay-in-volume probability — strongly affects the observable signal. For sgoldstinos produced in B-meson decays, which are boosted to roughly 700–900 GeV, the muon pair is so collimated that a conservative 1 cm track-separation threshold rejects almost all decays, while a 1 mm threshold plus magnetic bending restores much of the reach. The paper estimates that SND@HL-LHC could probe sgoldstino masses from the dimuon threshold up to about 2.5 GeV and supersymmetry-breaking scales up to √F ≈ 4000 TeV, depending on couplings and production channel. A sympathetic reader would take away that detector-level two-track effects must be folded into future far-forward dimuon search projections.

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that muon–antimuon separation efficiency is a first-order effect in far-forward dimuon searches for light sgoldstinos. Using the proposed SND@HL-LHC layout with a magnetized 1.75 T hadronic calorimeter, the authors define a separation factor A_μ(mS, pS, zdec): the probability that a sgoldstino decay into μ+μ− produces two tracks resolvable by the HCAL, requiring Δr > Δμ over at least 15 cm. They evaluate this factor numerically for two resolution benchmarks (Δμ = 1 mm and 1 cm) and apply it to simulated meson-production samples. The result is that for the dominant B-meson production channel, most sgoldstinos decaying inside the detector have momenta around 70

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the muon–antimuon separation factor A_μ(mS, pS, zdec), a step-like function of sgoldstino momentum. It encodes the acceptance criterion that a decay is observable only if the transverse distance between the μ+ and μ− tracks exceeds a resolution threshold Δμ (1 mm optimistic, 1 cm conservative) over a path length dμ = 15 cm along the detector axis. The trajectories are computed by numerically propagating muons through the 1.75 T magnetic field of the HCAL, with the field bending opposite charges in opposite directions, which can either separate the tracks or, for certain initial directions, make them cross. This factor is what converts a naive 'decays inside the det

Load-bearing premise

The entire quantitative conclusion rests on the assumed two-track resolution thresholds — Δμ = 1 mm or 1 cm, taken from single-muon reconstruction studies — and on the neglect of energy loss and multiple scattering in the iron slabs; if the real detector resolves muon pairs worse than these benchmarks, the separation factor is lower and the projected reach shrinks.

What would settle it

A dedicated two-track simulation or test-beam measurement of the SND@HL-LHC magnetized hadronic calorimeter, evaluating the minimum resolvable muon-pair separation as a function of muon momentum, opening angle, and iron-slab traversal, would settle the central claim. Concretely, reconstructing muon pairs from a test beam through a prototype HCAL stack and comparing the two-track efficiency to the Δr > Δμ, dμ = 15 cm criterion would confirm or falsify the step-function behavior in Fig. 7; if the true resolvable separation at the relevant momenta is well below 1 cm, the paper's conservative sepa

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • SND@HL-LHC, under the background-free assumption and with the separation criterion applied, can probe sgoldstino masses from the dimuon threshold to about 2.5 GeV and supersymmetry-breaking scales up to √F ≈ 4000 TeV for the chosen benchmark scenarios.
  • For light sgoldstinos produced in B-meson decays, the muon-separation requirement substantially reduces the observable event rate; a conservative 1 cm resolution threshold eliminates almost all of the signal unless the magnetic field restores some acceptance.
  • The magnetic field of the HCAL is important for light sgoldstinos: with Δμ = 1 mm, the magnetized case yields sensitivity regions that the non-magnetized case does not, extending the reach in √F.
  • For heavier sgoldstinos (mS around and above 1 GeV), the intrinsic opening angle is often large enough that high spatial resolution alone is sufficient, and the magnetic field provides only a moderate improvement.
  • Flavor-violating couplings open up a D-meson production channel; in the conservative case, magnetic bending raises the momentum cutoff enough to recover a sensitivity region for lighter sgoldstinos.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the true two-track resolution of the magnetized HCAL is better than the single-muon benchmarks used here (smaller effective Δμ), the separation-factor cutoff shifts upward in momentum and the projected reach for B-produced sgoldstinos improves; worse resolution would shrink it further. A dedicated two-track simulation is the natural next step.
  • The separation-factor logic applies beyond sgoldstinos: any far-forward search for long-lived particles decaying to collimated muon pairs — dark photons, ALPs, heavy neutral leptons — should fold in the same two-track acceptance rather than treating the dimuon final state as automatically background-free.
  • Because the separation cut preferentially removes the smallest-opening-angle events, the surviving sample has larger opening angles and somewhat later decay vertices; this may change the background composition (e.g., neutrino-induced single muons with a nearby random track) and deserves a dedicated background study.
  • The paper defers direct sgoldstino production via gluon fusion; if included, those sgoldstinos would have even harder spectra and thus even more collimated muon pairs, making the separation factor even more restrictive. The sensitivity projections for the direct channel would likely be optimistic until that analysis is done.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies light scalar sgoldstino phenomenology at the proposed SND@HL-LHC far-forward detector, focusing on the dimuon final state from sgoldstino decays in the detector volume. It reviews the effective sgoldstino Lagrangian from prior work, computes branching fractions and meson-production rates for two representative SUSY-breaking parameter sets, introduces a muon–antimuon separation acceptance factor based on muon propagation in the magnetized hadronic calorimeter, and presents 95% CL sensitivity contours in the (m_S, √F) plane. The central claim is that the muon-pair separation requirement substantially reduces the observable signal, especially for highly boosted sgoldstinos from B-meson decays, and must be included in future dimuon searches.

Significance. The paper identifies a genuinely important detector effect for the SND@HL-LHC concept: dimuon pairs from long-lived-particle decays can be so collimated that track separation in the calorimeter becomes a dominant acceptance factor. The new separation factor is computed from first principles—muon propagation in a 1.75 T field—with no fitting, and the authors explicitly distinguish optimistic and conservative spatial-resolution benchmarks. They also transparently label the hadronic-width modeling switch at 1 GeV as an artifact. If the acceptance model is validated with a dedicated simulation, the qualitative conclusion—that separation efficiency should be taken into account—is robust and valuable for far-forward LLP searches. The quantitative reach contours, however, are conditional on that validation.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. 3.1, Fig. 7] The muon-separation acceptance A_μ is the load-bearing new element of the analysis, but it is based on an ad hoc criterion: requiring Δr > Δμ over a path dμ = 15 cm, with Δμ taken from single-muon spatial-resolution benchmarks in Ref. [9]. The paper itself states that no dedicated study of muon–antimuon separation in the SND HCAL is available. Single-muon resolution does not determine two-track separation; track reconstruction typically requires the two hits to be separated by several times the position resolution and to be associated across multiple layers. The numerical propagation also neglects energy loss and multiple scattering in the 1.7 m of iron slabs, which for lower-momentum muons can shift hit positions by amounts comparable to Δμ. For the B-meson sample with p_S ≈ 700–900 GeV (Fig. 5b), the conservative acceptance cutoff in Fig. 7b is steep, so small changes in the acceptance
  2. [Sec. 2.1, Figs. 9–11 and abstract] The abstract and conclusion claim SND@HL-LHC can probe m_S up to about 2.5 GeV and √F up to about 4000 TeV. This heavier-mass reach relies on the hand-set transition at m_S = 1 GeV from χPT to a pure gluonic hadronic width, with no quantitative estimate of the associated uncertainty. The text acknowledges that the 1 GeV feature is an artifact of the modeling choice and that uncertainties from chiral perturbation theory and resonances are not investigated. Since the lifetime and hence the decay-inside-detector probability depend directly on the hadronic width, the reach in the 1–3 GeV region is not robust without an uncertainty estimate. The authors should either quantify the effect of this modeling choice on the heavy-mass contours or soften the corresponding claim in the abstract.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 3.1] Typo: 'Due to the the high momentum' should read 'Due to the high momentum'.
  2. [Eq. (3)] The notation 'm3SM 2γγ' is ambiguous in the rendered text; it should be written as m_S^3 M_γγ^2 (i.e., the cube of the sgoldstino mass times the square of the M_γγ parameter).
  3. [Fig. 7 caption] The caption states 'mS = 400MeV' but the main text discusses several masses; please clarify whether all curves in Fig. 7 use m_S = 400 MeV or indicate otherwise.
  4. [Table 1] The B-meson and kaon branching-fraction limits are taken from Refs. [4,16,19,20], some of which are dated. The authors should check whether more recent measurements (e.g., HFLAV/PDG updates) strengthen these constraints and could affect the excluded regions shown in Figs. 9–12.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circular derivation: the muon-separation factor is an independent geometric acceptance model, not a fitted or self-referential quantity.

full rationale

The paper's central new quantity is the muon–antimuon separation factor A_mu, computed in Sec. 3.1 by numerically propagating muon trajectories in the detector magnetic field (Eqs. 25–27) and imposing an explicit resolution criterion (Delta_r > Delta_mu over d_mu = 15 cm). This is a geometric/kinematic acceptance model with no fitted parameters and no event-count data fed back into it. The sensitivity formula, Eq. (32), multiplies this factor with independently imported branching fractions, decay probabilities, and production spectra; A_mu is not defined in terms of the signal rate, and no 'prediction' is statistically forced by a previous fit. The effective Lagrangian, decay widths, and meson production formulas are imported from prior literature (Refs. [4,6,13,15]), which is standard practice and not circular. One cited source, Ref. [11], shares an author with the present paper and supplies the flavor-violating decay width formula used in the D-meson sensitivity estimates, but the main conclusion about muon-separation efficiency does not reduce to this formula, and the paper explicitly acknowledges the absence of a dedicated two-track simulation ('no dedicated study of muon–antimuon separation in the SND HCAL is available'). That is a validation limitation, not a circularity. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained for its central claim, with only a peripheral, non-load-bearing self-citation.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

9 free parameters · 7 axioms · 0 invented entities

No new particles, forces, or conservation laws are introduced; the sgoldstino is taken from prior literature. The central claim rests on imported effective theory plus several hand-set benchmarks: the SUSY parameter sets (Eq 16), the flavor-violating scale ˜mLR = 30 GeV, the hadronic-treatment switch at 1 GeV, and the track-separation thresholds Δμ and dμ. The separation acceptance model, being new and unvalidated by dedicated simulation, is the most consequential ad hoc input.

free parameters (9)
  • Rγ = 0.3 (constant)
    Scale-dependent factor in Γ(S→γγ) (Eqs 3–4) fixed to 0.3 for all mS in the study, justified by the limited relevant mass range.
  • SUSY Higgs-sector benchmark (μ, tanβ) = μ = 1 TeV, tanβ = 6
    Used in Eq (8) for the sgoldstino–Higgs mixing angle θ; values chosen by hand.
  • Parameter set 1 (M3, Mγγ, Aq, Al) = M3 = Mγγ = Aq = Al = 0.3√F
    Eq (16): representative natural SUSY scenario.
  • Parameter set 2 (M3, Mγγ, Aq, Al) = M3 = 3 TeV, Mγγ = 1 TeV, Aq = Al = 0.5√F
    Eq (16): chosen explicitly to keep the width small enough for sgoldstinos to reach the detector while keeping high μμ branching and production.
  • ˜mLR (flavor-violating scale) = 30 GeV
    Set equal for all flavor transitions; satisfies δ^q_ij < 10^-3 constraints and gives sufficiently large branching fractions.
  • mS,switch (hadronic treatment threshold) = 1.0 GeV
    Hand-set boundary between χPT and gluonic descriptions of the hadronic width; acknowledged artifact.
  • Δμ (track separation threshold) = 1 mm (optimistic), 1 cm (conservative)
    Two resolution benchmarks from Ref [9] single-muon studies; drives the separation factor.
  • dμ (required separation path length) = 15 cm
    Chosen as three 5-cm HCAL layers; no dedicated two-track validation.
  • ˜α (form-factor higher-resonance parameter) = 0.4
    Eq (23) from Ref [17]; accounts for higher resonances in meson form factors.
axioms (7)
  • domain assumption Low-energy effective sgoldstino Lagrangian (Eq 1) captures all relevant interactions
    Taken from Refs [4,5,6]; the paper does not derive it or test whether higher-dimension operators are negligible.
  • domain assumption Chiral perturbation theory gives the hadronic decay widths for mS < 1 GeV
    Secs 2.1 and 2.2 rely on χPT for S→ππ, KK and for η→πS; χPT has sizable uncertainties in this mass range, acknowledged by the authors.
  • domain assumption The dimuon signature is background-free
    Sec 4 assumes NS > 3 gives the 95% CL reach, citing Refs [7,11,26,27]; no dedicated SND@HL-LHC background estimate is presented.
  • domain assumption Direct sgoldstino production via gluon fusion is negligible relative to meson decays
    Sec 2.2 leaves direct production to future work; if it contributes, the reach could be larger, but the separation argument for harder spectra would apply.
  • ad hoc to paper Hand-set switch at mS = 1 GeV between χPT and gluonic descriptions of the hadronic width
    Sec 2.1: 'We use mS = 1.0 GeV as the threshold...' and Fig 1 shows the resulting artifact. This choice directly shapes the mS ≳ 1 GeV sensitivity contours (Fig 11).
  • ad hoc to paper Muon-separation acceptance criterion (Δr > Δμ over dμ = 15 cm) with Δμ = 1 mm or 1 cm
    Sec 3.1 adopts single-muon resolution benchmarks from Ref [9]; no dedicated two-track simulation validates this acceptance model.
  • domain assumption Sgoldstinos satisfying the direction cut travel along the detector axis for the decay-length calculation
    Sec 4: 'we assume that all sgoldstinos satisfying (29) travel along the detector axis' — small-angle approximation applied to Eq (31).

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-daily-deepseek · 14842 in / 20104 out tokens · 184423 ms · 2026-08-03T02:29:08.149997+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We study the phenomenology of light scalar sgoldstinos, with masses from the dimuon threshold up to a few GeV, focusing on their production and detection prospects at the SND@HL-LHC experiment. We review the effective sgoldstino interactions with Standard Model particles, the dominant meson-decay production channels, and the relevant experimental constraints on the model parameter space. We also outline the recently proposed SND@HL-LHC detector configuration and discuss the kinematics and track separation of the muon pair produced in sgoldstino decays inside the detector volume. For two representative sets of supersymmetry-breaking parameters, we present sensitivity estimates and show that the muon-antimuon separation efficiency should be taken into account in searches for the dimuon signal.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.29656 by D. Kalashnikov, E. K. Karkaryan.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Branching fractions of sgoldstino decays into lighter SM particles for the two model [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Feynman diagrams for meson decays into a sgoldstino via flavor-conserving sgoldstino [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Comparison of parent-meson branching fractions into sgoldstinos for set 1 in ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Outline of the proposed detector for SND@HL-LHC. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Sgoldstino momentum distributions for decays inside the detector volume. Set 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Schematic illustration of the muon–antimuon separation criterion used in this work. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Fraction of muon–antimuon pairs satisfying the cut for different sgoldstino decay [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Schematic illustration of the muon–antimuon trajectory for opposite bending and the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Sensitivity regions for NS > 3 (95% CL) for the parameter set 1 as in (16) with m˜ LR = 0 for optimistic ∆µ = 1 mm and conservative ∆µ = 1 cm. Solid lines correspond to sgoldstinos decaying inside the detector with successful muon–antimuon separation. Dashed lines correspond to sgoldstinos decaying inside the detector with successful muon–antimuon separation in the absence of a magnetic field. Dotted lines… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Sensitivity regions for NS > 3 (95% CL) for the parameter set 2 as in (16) with m˜ LR = 0 for optimistic ∆µ = 1 mm and conservative ∆µ = 1 cm. Solid lines correspond to sgoldstinos decaying inside the detector with successful muon–antimuon separation. Dashed lines correspond to sgoldstinos decaying inside the detector with successful muon–antimuon separation in the absence of a magnetic field. Dotted line… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Sensitivity regions for NS > 3 (95% CL) for the heavier-sgoldstino case with m˜ LR = 0 and set 2 parameters from Eq. (16). Solid lines correspond to sgoldstinos decaying inside the detector with successful muon–antimuon separation. Dashed lines correspond to sgoldstinos decaying inside the detector with successful muon–antimuon separation in the absence of a magnetic field. Dotted lines correspond to sgol… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Sensitivity regions for NS > 3 (95% CL) with a nonzero flavor-violating contribution, m˜ LR = 30 GeV. Solid lines correspond to sgoldstinos decaying inside the detector with successful muon–antimuon separation. Dashed lines correspond to sgoldstinos decaying inside the detec￾tor with successful muon–antimuon separation in the absence of a magnetic field. Dotted lines correspond to sgoldstinos decaying int… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Sgoldstino momentum distributions for decays inside the detector volume. Set 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_13.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

28 extracted references · 10 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Wess and B

    J. Wess and B. Zumino. Supergauge transformations in four-dimensions.Nucl. Phys. B, 70:39–50, 1974. doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(74)90355-1

    doi:10.1016/0550-3213(74)90355-1 1974

  2. [2]

    G. F. Giudice and R. Rattazzi. Theories with gauge mediated supersymmetry breaking. Phys. Rept., 322:419–499, 1999. doi: 10.1016/S0370-1573(99)00042-3

    work page doi:10.1016/s0370-1573(99)00042-3 1999

  3. [3]

    Aspects of spontaneously broken N=1 global supersymmetry in the presence of gauge interactions.Nucl

    Andrea Brignole, Ferruccio Feruglio, and Fabio Zwirner. Aspects of spontaneously broken N=1 global supersymmetry in the presence of gauge interactions.Nucl. Phys. B, 501: 332–374, 1997. doi: 10.1016/S0550-3213(97)80767-5

    work page doi:10.1016/s0550-3213(97)80767-5 1997

  4. [4]

    D. S. Gorbunov. Light sgoldstino: Precision measurements versus collider searches.Nucl. Phys. B, 602:213–237, 2001. doi: 10.1016/S0550-3213(01)00122-5. 16

    work page doi:10.1016/s0550-3213(01)00122-5 2001

  5. [5]

    Lowscalesupersymmetrybreaking: Effective description, electroweak breaking and phenomenology.Nucl

    A.Brignole, J.A.Casas, J.R.Espinosa, andI.Navarro. Lowscalesupersymmetrybreaking: Effective description, electroweak breaking and phenomenology.Nucl. Phys. B, 666:105– 143, 2003. doi: 10.1016/S0550-3213(03)00539-X

    work page doi:10.1016/s0550-3213(03)00539-x 2003

  6. [6]

    K. O. Astapov and D. S. Gorbunov. Decaying light particles in the SHiP experiment. III. Signal rate estimates for scalar and pseudoscalar sgoldstinos.Phys. Rev. D, 93(3):035008,

  7. [7]

    Searches for new physics at snd@lhc.Journal of High Energy Physics, 2022(3):006, 2022

    Alexey Boyarsky, Oleksii Mikulenko, Maksym Ovchynnikov, and Lesya Shchutska. Searches for new physics at snd@lhc.Journal of High Energy Physics, 2022(3):006, 2022. doi: 10.1007/JHEP03(2022)006. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2022)006

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep03(2022)006 2022

  8. [8]

    Abbaneo et al

    D. Abbaneo et al. AdvSND, The Advanced Scattering and NeutrinoDetector at High Lumi LHC Letter of Intent. Technical report, CERN, Geneva, 2024. URLhttps://cds.cern. ch/record/2895224

    arXiv 2024

  9. [9]

    Abbaneo et al

    D. Abbaneo et al. SND@HL-LHC, Scattering and Neutrino Detector in Run 4 of the LHC. Technical report, CERN, Geneva, 2025. URLhttps://cds.cern.ch/record/2926288

    arXiv 2025

  10. [10]

    Anchordoqui et al

    Luis A. Anchordoqui et al. The Forward Physics Facility: Sites, experiments, and physics potential.Phys. Rept., 968:1–50, 2022. doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2022.04.004

    doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2022.04.004 2022

  11. [11]

    Sgoldstino signal at FASER: prospects in searches for supersymmetry.JHEP, 08:155, 2022

    Sergey Demidov, Dmitry Gorbunov, and Dmitry Kalashnikov. Sgoldstino signal at FASER: prospects in searches for supersymmetry.JHEP, 08:155, 2022. doi: 10.1007/JHEP08(2022) 155

    doi:10.1007/jhep08(2022 2022

  12. [12]

    Voloshin and Valentin I

    Mikhail B. Voloshin and Valentin I. Zakharov. Measuring QCD Anomalies in Hadronic Transitions Between Onium States.Phys. Rev. Lett., 45:688, 1980. doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevLett.45.688

    1980

  13. [13]

    Bezrukov and D

    F. Bezrukov and D. Gorbunov. Light inflaton hunter’s guide.Journal of High Energy Physics, 2010(5), May 2010. arXiv:0912.0390 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  14. [14]

    K. O. Astapov and S. V. Demidov. Sgoldstino-Higgs mixing in models with low-scale supersymmetry breaking.JHEP, 01:136, 2015. doi: 10.1007/JHEP01(2015)136

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep01(2015)136 2015

  15. [15]

    Leutwyler and M

    H. Leutwyler and M. A. Shifman. Light higgs particle in decays of k andηmesons.Nuclear Physics B, 343(2):369–397, October 1990. ISSN 0550-3213. doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(90) 90475-S

    doi:10.1016/0550-3213(90 1990

  16. [16]

    Zyla et al

    P.A. Zyla et al. Review of Particle Physics.PTEP, 2020(8):083C01, 2020. doi: 10.1093/ ptep/ptaa104. PDG web site

    2020

  17. [17]

    Teresa Palmer and Jan O. Eeg. Form factors for semileptonic d decays.Physical Review D, 89(3), Feb 2014. arXiv:1306.0365 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  18. [18]

    Supersymmetric renormalisation of the ckm matrix and new constraints on the squark mass matrices.Phys

    Andreas Crivellin and Ulrich Nierste. Supersymmetric renormalisation of the ckm matrix and new constraints on the squark mass matrices.Phys. Rev. D, 79:035018, 2009. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.79.035018

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.79.035018 2009

  19. [19]

    StudyofthedecayK + →π +ννinthemomentumregion140< p π < 199 M eV c .Phys

    A.V.Artamonovetal. StudyofthedecayK + →π +ννinthemomentumregion140< p π < 199 M eV c .Phys. Rev. D, 79:092004, May 2009. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.79.092004. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD.79.092004. Phys. Rev. D 79, 092004. 17

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.79.092004 2009

  20. [20]

    J.-T. Wei, P. Chang, I. Adachi, H. Aihara, V. Aulchenko, T. Aushev, A. M. Bakich, V. Balagura, E. Barberio, A. Bondar, and et al. Measurement of the differential branch- ing fraction and forward-backward asymmetry forB→K ∗l+l−.Physical Review Let- ters, 103(17), Oct 2009. ISSN 1079-7114. doi: 10.1103/physrevlett.103.171801. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/P...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  21. [21]

    Forward experiment sensitivity estimator for the LHC and future hadron colliders.Phys

    Felix Kling and Sebastian Trojanowski. Forward experiment sensitivity estimator for the LHC and future hadron colliders.Phys. Rev. D, 104(3):035012, 2021. doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevD.104.035012

    2021

  22. [22]

    Katzy, Evgeny Yatsenko, and Klaus Werner

    Tanguy Pierog, Iurii Karpenko, Jan M. Katzy, Evgeny Yatsenko, and Klaus Werner. EPOS LHC: Test of collective hadronization with data measured at the CERN Large Hadron Collider.Phys. Rev. C, 92(3):034906, Sep 2015. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.92.034906

    doi:10.1103/physrevc.92.034906 2015

  23. [23]

    Cosmic Ray Monte Carlo Package, CRMC, Aug 2021

    Ralf Ulrich, Tanguy Pierog, and Colin Baus. Cosmic Ray Monte Carlo Package, CRMC, Aug 2021. Version 2.0.1, Zenodo: 10.5281/zenodo.5270381

    doi:10.5281/zenodo.5270381 2021

  24. [24]

    Christiansen, Richard Corke, Nishita Desai, Philip Ilten, Stephen Mrenna, Stefan Prestel, Christine O

    Torbjorn Sjostrand, Stefan Ask, Jesper R. Christiansen, Richard Corke, Nishita Desai, Philip Ilten, Stephen Mrenna, Stefan Prestel, Christine O. Rasmussen, and Peter Z. Skands. An Introduction to PYTHIA 8.2.Comput. Phys. Commun., 191:159–177, 2015. doi: 10. 1016/j.cpc.2015.01.024

    2015

  25. [25]

    Measurement of the inelasticppcross-section at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV.JHEP, 06:100, 2018

    Roel Aaij et al. Measurement of the inelasticppcross-section at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV.JHEP, 06:100, 2018. doi: 10.1007/JHEP06(2018)100

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep06(2018)100 2018

  26. [26]

    Feng, Iftah Galon, Felix Kling, and Sebastian Trojanowski

    Jonathan L. Feng, Iftah Galon, Felix Kling, and Sebastian Trojanowski. Forward search experiment at the LHC.Physical Review D, 97(3), Feb 2018. arXiv:1708.09389 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  27. [27]

    Casper, Yannick Favre, Jonathan L

    Akitaka Ariga, Tomoko Ariga, Jamie Boyd, Franck Cadoux, David W. Casper, Yannick Favre, Jonathan L. Feng, Didier Ferrere, Iftah Galon, Sergio Gonzalez-Sevilla, and et al. FASER’s physics reach for long-lived particles.Physical Review D, 99(9), May 2019. arXiv:1811.12522 [hep-ph]. 18

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  28. [2016]

    doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.93.035008

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.93.035008