Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

A comprehensive study of the charged Higgs boson in the two Higgs doublet type-II seesaw model

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read In the two-Higgs-doublet type-II seesaw model, a 3 TeV muon collider can discover the lighter charged Higgs through pair production at 5σ across a wide mass range.

desk verdict Useful new cross-section calculations for 2HDMcT charged Higgs at a muon collider, with a genuinely interesting Type-III tan(beta) enhancement for H+W-, but the 5-sigma discovery claims rest on benchmark points that violate the paper's own EWPO-consistency scan range. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.04493 v1 pith:WILG7OJB submitted 2025-08-06 hep-ph hep-th

Brahim Ait-Ouazghour , Abdesslam Arhrib , Mohamed Chabab , Khalid Goure This is my paper
classification hep-phhep-th
keywords chargedHiggsbosontwo-Higgs-doubletmodeltype-IIseesawmuoncollidertripletelectroweakprecisionobservablessignal-backgroundanalysisType-IIIYukawatexture
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper tries to establish that a future 3 TeV muon collider can be a discovery machine for the lighter charged Higgs boson of the two-Higgs-doublet type-II seesaw model, an extension of the Standard Model with two doublets and a triplet that generates neutrino masses. The muon collider matters because the muon is about 207 times heavier than the electron, which switches on $s$-channel neutral-Higgs exchange and $t$-channel neutrino diagrams that are negligible or absent in $e^+e^-$ collisions; in the Type-III Yukawa texture, where the muon coupling grows with $\tan\beta$, these amplitudes are enhanced. The paper finds that $\sigma(\mu^+\mu^- \to H_1^+ H_1^-)$ reaches about 3.15 fb at low charged-Higgs mass, that $\sigma(\mu^+\mu^- \to H_1^\pm W^\mp)$ reaches about 4.12 fb, and that a signal-background analysis gives $5\sigma$ discovery for pair production across the scanned 100--900 GeV mass range with 500 fb$^{-1}$ of data. The $H_1^+ H_2^-$ channel is roughly eighteen times weaker, but can reach 0.62 fb if the electroweak precision constraints are relaxed.

What carries the argument

The argument runs at tree level on four classes of diagrams: Drell--Yan $\gamma/Z$ exchange, $s$-channel exchange of the neutral scalars $h_1,h_2,h_3$ (and pseudoscalars $A_1,A_2$ for the $W^\pm$ channel), and $t$-channel neutrino exchange. The neutral-scalar amplitudes carry the muon Yukawa coupling, which in the Type-III texture scales like $\tan\beta$, and they can resonate when $\sqrt{s}$ approaches $m_{h_i}$ or $m_{A_j}$; the $t$-channel amplitude is suppressed by $m_\mu^2$ for pair production but by only one power of $m_\mu$ for $H_1^\pm W^\mp$, making the latter the $\tan\beta$-sensitive channel. These diagrams, absent or electron-mass-suppressed in $e^+e^-$ collisions, are what let m

What would settle it

Recompute the electroweak oblique parameters $S$ and $T$ for the benchmark points in Tables IV, IX, XI, and XII without the $\alpha_2 \approx \alpha_3 \approx 0$ approximation and test them against the 95% C.L. ellipse of Eq.~(29); if any accepted point falls outside the ellipse, the claimed cross sections and $5\sigma$ mass ranges are not valid points of the model. A direct measurement of $\sigma(\mu^+\mu^- \to H_1^+ H_1^-)$ at $\sqrt{s}=3$ TeV in the low-mass region, where the paper predicts about 3.15 fb, would also settle the central rate claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that in this model the lighter charged Higgs $H_1^\pm$ is produced at observable rates at a 3 TeV muon collider: $\sigma(\mu^+\mu^- \to H_1^+ H_1^-)$ can match or exceed the $e^+e^-$ pair-production cross section, reaching about 3.15 fb for small $m_{H_1^\pm}$; $\sigma(\mu^+\mu^- \to H_1^+ H_2^-)$ is about eighteen times smaller, at most 0.17 fb under the standard electroweak precision constraints and up to 0.62 fb if those constraints are relaxed; and $\sigma(\mu^+\mu^- \to H_1^\pm W^\mp)$ can reach about 4.12 fb because the Type-III muon Yukawa coupling and the relevant $s$-channel amplitudes grow with large $\tan\beta$. The paper further claims that these rates transl

Load-bearing premise

The benchmark points that produce the largest cross sections and the $5\sigma$ regions are drawn from a scan that keeps $\alpha_2$ and $\alpha_3$ at $|\alpha| \le 0.1$, because the electroweak precision calculation those points rely on assumes $\alpha_2 \approx \alpha_3 \approx 0$; if that approximation is not robust, the discovery regions sit outside the model's allowed parameter space.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • With $\sqrt{s}=3$ TeV and $L=500$ fb$^{-1}$, the $\mu^+\mu^- \to H_1^+ H_1^- \to \tau^+\nu_\tau \, \tau^-\bar\nu_\tau$ channel reaches $Z_{\rm disc}\ge 5$ for every scanned mass from 100 to 900 GeV, for systematic uncertainties of 5%, 10%, and 20%.
  • The $\mu^+\mu^- \to H_1^\pm W^\mp$ channel extends the charged-Higgs mass reach up to $\sqrt{s}-m_W$, beyond the $\sqrt{s}/2$ limit of pair production, but its $5\sigma$ reach at 500 fb$^{-1}$ appears only for zero systematic uncertainty and at high masses (700 and 900 GeV).
  • The $\mu^+\mu^- \to H_1^+ H_2^-$ channel is not a discovery channel under the standard constraints (about 16,000 fb$^{-1}$ needed for $5\sigma$), so it is competitive only if the $\alpha_{2,3}\approx 0$ electroweak-precision approximation is relaxed, which lifts the cross section up to 0.62 fb.
  • Since $\sigma(\mu^+\mu^- \to H_1^+ H_1^-) \approx \sigma(e^+e^- \to H_1^+ H_1^-)$ and can be enhanced by constructive interference, a muon collider is at least as good as an $e^+e^-$ collider for charged-Higgs pair searches in this model, with better prospects for the associated $W$ channel.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The quoted discovery regions rest on the $\alpha_{2,3}\approx 0$ approximation in the electroweak precision calculation; a full computation of $S$ and $T$ at nonzero $\alpha_2,\alpha_3$ could move some benchmark points outside the 95% C.L. ellipse and shrink the mass ranges. The paper does not perform that check.
  • Because the $s$-channel neutral-Higgs diagrams can resonate at $\sqrt{s}\approx m_{h_i}$ or $m_{A_j}$, a centre-of-mass energy scan could produce visible peaks in these cross sections; the paper's fixed-3-TeV analysis does not exploit that model-distinguishing handle.
  • The same large-$\tan\beta$ amplification that drives $H_1^\pm W^\mp$ production in the Type-III texture is absent in the Type-I, Type-II, and Type-IV textures, so measuring the ratio between $\sigma(\mu^+\mu^- \to H_1^\pm W^\mp)$ and $\sigma(\mu^+\mu^- \to H_1^+ H_1^-)$ could discriminate among 2HDM Yukawa types; this is an extension of the paper's argument, not one of its claims.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper studies charged-Higgs production at a 3 TeV muon collider in the two-Higgs-doublet type-II seesaw model (2HDMcT) with the Type-III Yukawa texture. It provides tree-level amplitudes for mu+ mu- -> H1+ H1-, mu+ mu- -> H1+ H2-, and mu+ mu- -> H1+/- W-/+; imposes theoretical and experimental constraints (unitarity, perturbativity, vacuum stability, EWPO, HiggsTools, B -> Xs gamma); and performs a MadGraph5/Pythia/Delphes signal-background analysis to derive 5-sigma discovery regions. The central numerical claims are that the pair-production cross section reaches about 3.15 fb, sigma(H1+H2-) is about 18 times smaller (about 0.17 fb, rising to 0.62 fb when EWPO constraints are relaxed), and sigma(H1+/- W-/+) reaches about 4.12 fb, with a 5-sigma discovery possible at 500 fb^-1 for the pair channel over a wide mass range.

Significance. The paper addresses a timely question, charged Higgs searches at a future muon collider, in a scalar sector that is less studied than the MSSM or the 2HDM. The analytic amplitudes are given explicitly, and the full simulation chain is described. The main strength is the breadth of the cross-section and significance analysis, including explicit Feynman diagrams and a cut-flow study. However, the benchmark points used for the discovery significance are not consistent with the model's own EWPO constraint as stated in Eq. (31), which undermines the quantitative conclusions until corrected. The qualitative observation that the muon collider can improve over e+e- pair production through muon-Yukawa-enhanced s-channel diagrams is plausible and worth pursuing.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. IV, Eq. (31); Sec. V, Tables IV, IX, XI, XII] The scan in Eq. (31) restricts alpha2,3 to [-0.1, 0.1], explicitly to remain consistent with the oblique-parameter approximation of Refs. [12,13]. Yet the benchmark points used in the significance analysis violate this range: BP2 in Table IV has alpha3=-0.62; BP5', BP7', BP8', BP9' in Table IX have alpha3 ~ 0.997, 0.998, 0.99, 0.98; and all points in Table XI have |alpha3| > 0.1, up to 1.49. These points cannot satisfy the chi2_ST test of Eq. (29) under the S,T computation of Ref. [13]. Consequently, the repeated statement in Sec. V that 'All evaluated points satisfy both theoretical and experimental constraints' is inaccurate for the very points that generate the largest significances in Tables VIII, X, and XVII. This is not a cosmetic issue: the EWPO constraint is what suppresses the couplings that drive sigma(H1+H2-) and the high-mass pair-production cross sections. Please rerun the b
  2. [Sec. V.B, Fig. 9, Tables X-XI] For the H1+H2- channel, the paper correctly notes that the cross section is suppressed when alpha2,3 ~ 0 and that Fig. 9 shows results 'except the EWPO constraints.' However, Table X then presents significance values for this channel using the relaxed benchmark points of Table XI, and the text states 'All evaluated points satisfy both theoretical and experimental constraints.' This is a direct contradiction: the points in Table XI are precisely those that violate the alpha2,3 ~ 0 condition. As a result, the discovery significances in Table X do not describe the constrained model. The authors should either quote these as illustrative of an unconstrained scenario, with the caveat stated in every table caption and in the main text, or use EWPO-valid points.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Eq. (19)-(20)] The text says 'M_Aj^Tree, j=1,2' amplitudes are given, but no pseudoscalar amplitude appears in Eq. (19) or in the squared amplitude Eq. (20). If these contributions vanish by CP/selection rules, please state this explicitly.
  2. [Eq. (14)] The prefactor 'e4πα2β3/3s' appears typeset incorrectly; it should presumably be (4π α^2 β^3)/(3s) times the interference bracket.
  3. [Sec. I] Typo: 'electroweak baryongenesis' should be 'baryogenesis'. There are also several missing spaces in the text, e.g., 'thepopulartwoHiggsDoubletModel'.
  4. [Table II] In C_{h_i}^W and C_{h_i}^Z, the factor-of-2 difference between the W and Z couplings would benefit from an explicit explanation, since it is central to the triplet contribution.
  5. [Sec. V.B and V.C] The kinematic distributions and cut flows are shown for a single benchmark (BP1, BP2, BP3) and then applied to all mass points. This is acceptable as a first estimate, but the systematic uncertainty of this extrapolation should be discussed.
  6. [Abstract] The statement 'sigma(mu+ mu- -> H1+ H2-) is roughly eighteen times smaller' is given without specifying the mass/tan(beta) range; please qualify it with the benchmark conditions.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: tree-level cross sections are self-contained; flagged EWPO benchmark inconsistency is a correctness issue, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The central derivation is self-contained. The amplitudes in Sec. III (Eqs. (10)-(13), (19)-(28)) are tree-level Feynman diagrams built from the model Lagrangian and explicit couplings, then squared and integrated to cross sections without any fitted coefficient. The comparison to e+e- -> H1+ H1- is made against the analytic Drell-Yan formula Eq. (14), so the claim that the muon cross section can match or exceed it is a direct computation, not a renamed input. The large-tan(beta) enhancement for the Type-III texture follows from the Yukawa coupling definitions in Table I (couplings proportional to 1/c_beta ~ tan(beta)) and is not a fitted parameter. The only same-author citations are Refs. [12,13] for the model and the oblique EWPO computation; these enter as stated constraints (Eq. (29)-(31)) but are not the source of the cross-section predictions. The paper does, however, contain a serious internal inconsistency that is a correctness issue rather than circularity: Eq. (31) restricts alpha2,3 to [-0.1,0.1], yet Tables IX, XI, and XII contain benchmark points with |alpha3| well outside this range, e.g., BP5', BP7', BP8', BP9' in Table IX have alpha3 ~ 0.997, 0.998, 0.99, 0.98, Table XI points have |alpha3| up to 1.49, and Table XII includes alpha3 = 0.998 and 0.99. The text in Sec. V.A repeatedly states that all evaluated points satisfy theoretical and experimental constraints, while also stating that alpha2,3 ~ 0 is necessary for the EWPO approximation used in Refs. [12,13]. This contradiction undermines the discovery-significance tables, but it does not make the cross-section derivation circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on a large parameter scan with several scanned couplings (lambda_i, mu1, vt, tan(beta), alpha2,3) and benchmark points selected to maximize cross sections; these are not derived quantities. The model itself is an invented entity with collider handles. The EWPO approximation alpha2,3 = 0 is a structural assumption that limits the claimed discovery reach.

free parameters (4)
  • alpha2, alpha3 = alpha2 ~ 0, alpha3 ~ 0 in all constrained-scan points
    The EWPO oblique parameter calculation of Refs. [12,13] is performed under the approximation alpha2,3 ~ 0; the scan restricts -0.1 <= alpha2,3 <= 0.1 to stay consistent with this, so the benchmark points are drawn from a constrained slice of the parameter space.
  • mu1 (triplet-doublet mixing parameter) = varies across benchmarks, e.g. 17.04, 56.06, ...
    mu1 controls triplet-doublet mixing and is scanned freely in the range -100 to 100; the benchmark points use specific values that maximize the cross sections, so it acts as a fitted parameter in the discovery-region projections.
  • lambda_i, lambda_bar_i quartic couplings = varies across benchmarks
    The quartic couplings are scanned within |lambda| <= 8 pi and benchmark points are selected to give favorable masses and couplings; the cross sections are not sensitive to these for the pair-production channel, but they set the spectrum and decay widths.
  • vt (triplet vev) = between 0 and 2 GeV, e.g. 0.18, 0.057, 0.19
    The triplet vacuum expectation value is scanned in the range 0 to 2 GeV; the selected benchmark values affect the mass splittings and the W, Z couplings of the neutral Higgses, and hence the resonance contributions.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The 2HDMcT model with Type-III Yukawa textures and CP conservation is a valid BSM framework.
    The entire analysis assumes the model's field content, the scalar potential of Eq. (3), and the Yukawa textures of Table I; this is the model hypothesis, not tested by the paper.
  • domain assumption The electroweak oblique parameter calculation of Refs. [12,13] is valid for the points scanned.
    The scan restricts alpha2,3 to small values in order to remain consistent with the S,T computation, implicitly assuming the approximation is accurate; if it is not, the allowed parameter space is different.
  • domain assumption HiggsTools (HiggsBounds + HiggsSignals) and the B->Xs gamma constraint correctly capture all relevant LHC and flavor bounds.
    The paper uses these packages to define the allowed parameter space; this is a standard tool, but the results inherit any model-specific limitations of the tool (e.g., simplified couplings for the triplet states).
  • domain assumption The Delphes muon collider TARGET detector model provides a reliable estimate of detector response at 3 TeV.
    The signal-background significances depend on this fast-simulation model, which is not a real detector; the cut efficiencies and tau-mistag rates are taken from a generic model.
invented entities (1)
  • The doubly charged Higgs H++ and the full 2HDMcT spectrum (H1, H2, H3, A1, A2, H1+/-, H2+/-) independent evidence
    purpose: The model's entire new-physics content; the study focuses on the charged Higgs H1+/- and H2+/-.
    The model predicts concrete masses, production cross sections, and decay signatures (e.g., l+l+ l-l- + 4j via H++ H--), which are falsifiable at colliders. The existence of these states is not proven by this paper but is testable.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A comprehensive study of the charged Higgs boson in the two Higgs doublet type-II seesaw model." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WILG7OJB

@misc{pith2026250804493,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A comprehensive study of the charged Higgs boson in the two Higgs doublet type-II seesaw model},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WILG7OJB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.04493}
}
abstract

We investigate the phenomenology of the charged Higgs boson within the Two-Higgs-Doublet Type-II Seesaw Model (2HDMcT Type-III) at future $\mu^+ \mu^-$ colliders. Focusing on $2 \to 2$ processes such as $\mu^+ \mu^- \to H^+_1 S^-$ ($S^- = H^-_1, H^-_2$) and $\mu^+ \mu^- \to H^+_1 W^-$, we incorporate both theoretical and experimental constraints to assess their production prospects. We find that $\sigma(\mu^+ \mu^- \to H_1^+ H_1^-)$ can reach or exceed the corresponding $e^+ e^-$ cross section, while $\sigma(\mu^+ \mu^- \to H_1^+ H_2^-)$ is roughly eighteen times smaller but can be enhanced up to 0.62 fb upon relaxing electroweak precision observables constraints. Moreover, we observe that the cross section for $\mu^+ \mu^- \to H^+_1 W^-$ is significantly enhanced due to the large $\tan\beta$ amplification characteristic of the Type-III scenario. Furthermore, we conduct a signal-background analysis and determine the discovery ($5\sigma$) regions at a 3 TeV muon collider for the $\mu^+ \mu^- \to H_1^+ H_1^-$, $\mu^+ \mu^- \to H_1^+ H_2^-$, and $\mu^+ \mu^- \to W^\pm H_1^\mp$ processes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.04493 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Tree-level Feynman diagrams for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Tree-level Feynman diagrams for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Tree-level Feynman diagrams for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Correlations between [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. The upper panels we show the production cross section for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Production cross sections for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Production cross sections for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Kinematic distributions for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Production cross sections for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Normalized kinematic distributions of the signal and backgrounds: the pseudorapidity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Normalized kinematic distributions of the signal and backgrounds: the pseudorapidity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_11.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Probing Doubly Charged Higgs Bosons with Three-Body Associated Production at Future $e^+e^-$ Colliders

    hep-ph 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Doubly charged Higgs bosons in the type-II seesaw 2HDM can be produced via 2-to-3 associated channels at e+e- colliders with cross sections up to ~10^2 fb and good 4-lepton discovery sensitivity.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

110 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [13]

    The two Higgs doublet type-II seesaw model: Naturalness and $\bar{B}\to X_s\gamma$ versus heavy Higgs masses

    B. Ait Ouazghour and M. Chabab,The two Higgs doublet type-II seesaw model: Naturalness and B¯Xsγ versus heavy 19 Higgs masses, Phys. Lett. B846 (2023) 138241, [arXiv:2305.08030]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2023

  2. [1]

    Charged Higgs pair production andµ+µ− → H ± 1 H ∓ 2 processes The tree-level Feynman diagrams contributing toµ+µ− → H + 1 H − 1 in the 2HDMcT are given in Fig. 1. At tree level thepairproductionprocessreceivescontributionsfromthe conventional Drell–Yan mechanism µ+µ− → γ∗, Z∗ → H + 1 H − 1 in Fig. 1(d4,5), as well as thes-channel neutral- Higgs exchange µ...

  3. [2]

    3 -(d1,2,3,4,5,6)) and through a t-channel diagram involving neutrino ex- change (see Fig

    µ+µ− → H ± 1 W ∓ process Inthe2HDMcTmodel,theprocess µ+µ− → H ± 1 W ∓ can occur through ans-channel mediated by the neutral Higgs bosons h1, h2, h3, A1, A2 and Z (see Fig. 3 -(d1,2,3,4,5,6)) and through a t-channel diagram involving neutrino ex- change (see Fig. 3 - (d7)). This process at a muon col- lider is highly promising for several reasons. Firstly,...

  4. [3]

    M. J. G. Veltman,The Infrared - Ultraviolet Connection, Acta Phys. Polon. B12 (1981) 437

    1981

  5. [4]

    Kajita,Nobel lecture: Discovery of atmospheric neutrino oscillations, Rev

    T. Kajita,Nobel lecture: Discovery of atmospheric neutrino oscillations, Rev. Mod. Phys.88 (Jul, 2016) 030501

    2016

  6. [5]

    − 2b5(b1 + b2) + b2 5 − 8M 2 W b2 1 − b5(b1 + b2) + b2 2 + b2 3 + b2 4 − 2S M 2 W 2m2 H ± 1 2(b2 1 + b2

  7. [6]

    − 2b5(b1 + b2) + b2 5 − 3(b2 3 + b2 4) + m2 H ± 1 − m2 H ± 1 2(b2 1 + b2

  8. [7]

    − 2b5(b1 + b2) + b2 5 + b2 3 + b2 4 + M 4 W − 2(b2 1 + b2

Show all 110 references
  1. [8]

    + 2b5(b1 + b2) + 3b2 5 + 2S3 2(b2 1 + b2

  2. [9]

    − 2b5(b1 + b2) + b2 5 + λ(s, m2 H ± 1 , M2 W ) cosθ − 4b5S(b1 + b2 − b5)(m2 H ± 1 + M 2 W − S) − λ(s, m2 H ± 1 , M2 W ) cosθ b2 3 + b2 4 + 4b2 5M 2 W − 2b2 5S + (m2 H ± 1 − M 2 W )2 b2 3 + b2 4 + 4b2 5M 2 W # (26) b1 = g2mµ 4mW 3X i=1 λhiH ± 1 W ∓ C l hi s − m2 hi + imhi Γhi ,...

  3. [10]

    I. P. Ivanov,Building and testing models with extended Higgs sectors, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.95 (2017) 160–208, [arXiv:1702.03776]

    2017 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Zwicky,Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen Nebeln, Helv

    F. Zwicky,Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen Nebeln, Helv. Phys. Acta6 (1933) 110–127

    1933

  5. [12]

    V. C. Rubin and W. K. Ford, Jr.,Rotation of the Andromeda Nebula from a Spectroscopic Survey of Emission Regions, Astrophys. J.159 (1970) 379–403

    1970

  6. [14]

    B. A. Ouazghour, M. Chabab, and K. Goure,Higgs photon associated production in a two Higgs doublet type-II seesaw model at future electron-positron colliders, Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (2024), no. 9 879, [arXiv:2403.07722]

    2024 arXiv

  7. [15]

    A. B. McDonald,Nobel lecture: The sudbury neutrino observatory: Observation of flavor change for solar neutrinos, Rev. Mod. Phys.88 (Jul, 2016) 030502

    2016

  8. [16]

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

    1978

  9. [17]

    S. L. Glashow and S. Weinberg,Natural conservation laws for neutral currents, Phys. Rev. D15 (Apr, 1977) 1958–1965

    1977

  10. [18]

    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, [arXiv:1106.0034]

    2012 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Dawson, C

    S. Dawson, C. Englert, and T. Plehn,Higgs Physics: It ain’t over till it’s over, Phys. Rept.816 (2019) 1–85, [arXiv:1808.01324]

    2019 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Ashanujjaman and K

    S. Ashanujjaman and K. Ghosh,Revisiting type-II see-saw: present limits and future prospects at LHC, JHEP 03 (2022) 195, [arXiv:2108.10952]

    2022

  13. [21]

    Weinberg,Baryon- and lepton-nonconserving processes, Phys

    S. Weinberg,Baryon- and lepton-nonconserving processes, Phys. Rev. Lett.43 (Nov, 1979) 1566–1570

    1979

  14. [22]

    − 2s2 wC 2 23]/2cw. The total widths for theZ boson, h1, h2 and h3 are in- troduced because of their necessity for the case where the center-of-mass energy becomes close to the mass of the neutral-Higgs state : √s ≈ mhi. The total widths forh1, h2 and h3 are computed at the le...

  15. [23]

    e2 s − g2m2 µY 2 6 4M 2 W t aA = − 2λZH ± 1 H ∓ 1 gA s − M 2 Z + iMZΓZ − g2m2 µY 2 6 4M 2 W t aS = gmµ 2MW 3X i=1 λhiH + 1 H − 1 C hi ℓ s − M 2 hi + iMhi Γhi − g2m3 µY 2 6 4M 2 W t aSA = − g2m3 µY 2 6 4M 2 W t (12) It is evident from Eq. 11 that the squared amplitude of the s-...

  16. [24]

    Ait Ouazghour, A

    B. Ait Ouazghour, A. Arhrib, R. Benbrik, M. Chabab, and L. Rahili,Theory and phenomenology of a two-Higgs-doublet type-II seesaw model at the LHC run 2, Phys. Rev. D100 (2019), no. 3 035031, [arXiv:1812.07719]

    2019 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Ait-Ouazghour, M

    B. Ait-Ouazghour, M. Chabab, and K. Goure,Unified Interpretation of 95 GeV Excesses in the Two Higgs Doublet type II Seesaw Model, arXiv:2410.11140

    arXiv

  18. [26]

    Chen and T

    C.-H. Chen and T. Nomura,Inert Dark Matter in Type-II Seesaw, JHEP 09 (2014) 120, [arXiv:1404.2996]

    2014 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Fileviez Perez, T

    P. Fileviez Perez, T. Han, G.-y. Huang, T. Li, and K. Wang, Neutrino Masses and the CERN LHC: Testing Type II Seesaw, Phys. Rev. D78 (2008) 015018, [arXiv:0805.3536]

    2008 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Y. Cai, T. Han, T. Li, and R. Ruiz,Lepton Number Violation: Seesaw Models and Their Collider Tests, Front. in Phys.6 (2018) 40, [arXiv:1711.02180]

    2018 arXiv

  21. [29]

    S. F. King,Models of Neutrino Mass, Mixing and CP Violation, J. Phys. G42 (2015) 123001, [arXiv:1510.02091]

    2015 arXiv

  22. [30]

    A. G. Akeroyd et al.,Prospects for charged Higgs searches at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C77 (2017), no. 5 276, [arXiv:1607.01320]

    2017 arXiv

  23. [31]

    M. J. Ramsey-Musolf,The electroweak phase transition: a collider target, JHEP 09 (2020) 179, [arXiv:1912.07189]

    2020 arXiv

  24. [32]

    ATLASCollaboration, M. Aaboud et al.,Search for additional heavy neutral Higgs and gauge bosons in the ditau final state produced in 36 fb−1 of pp collisions at√s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 01 (2018) 055, [arXiv:1709.07242]

    2018 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Aaboud et al.,Search for new phenomena in high-mass diphoton final states using 37 fb −1 of proton–proton collisions collected at√s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys

    ATLASCollaboration, M. Aaboud et al.,Search for new phenomena in high-mass diphoton final states using 37 fb −1 of proton–proton collisions collected at√s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Lett. B775 (2017) 105–125, [arXiv:1707.04147]

    2017 arXiv

  26. [34]

    CMS Collaboration, A. M. Sirunyan et al.,Search for a new scalar resonance decaying to a pair of Z bosons in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV, JHEP 06 (2018) 127, [arXiv:1804.01939]. [Erratum: JHEP 03, 128 (2019)]

    2018 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Aaboud et al.,Search for a heavy Higgs boson decaying into aZ boson and another heavy Higgs boson in theℓℓbb final state inpp collisions at√s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys

    ATLASCollaboration, M. Aaboud et al.,Search for a heavy Higgs boson decaying into aZ boson and another heavy Higgs boson in theℓℓbb final state inpp collisions at√s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Lett. B783 (2018) 392–414, [arXiv:1804.01126]

    2018 arXiv

  28. [36]

    CMS Collaboration, A. M. Sirunyan et al.,Search for heavy Higgs bosons decaying to a top quark pair in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV, JHEP 04 (2020) 171, [arXiv:1908.01115]. [Erratum: JHEP 03, 187 (2022)]

    2020 arXiv

  29. [37]

    CMS Collaboration, A. M. Sirunyan et al.,Search for MSSM Higgs bosons decaying toµ + µ − in proton-proton collisions at s=13TeV, Phys. Lett. B798 (2019) 134992, [arXiv:1907.03152]

    2019 arXiv

  30. [38]

    CMS Collaboration,Search for a charged Higgs boson decaying into a heavy neutral Higgs boson and a W boson in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV, arXiv e-prints (July, 2022) arXiv:2207.01046, [arXiv:2207.01046]

    2022 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Bejar Alonso and L

    I. Bejar Alonso and L. Rossi,HiLumi LHC Technical Design Report: Deliverable: D1.10,

  32. [40]

    Abe et al.,Linear Collider Physics Resource Book for Snowmass 2001, hep-ex/0106055

    T. Abe et al.,Linear Collider Physics Resource Book for Snowmass 2001, hep-ex/0106055

    2001 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Komamiya,Searching for Charged Higgs Bosons at O (1/2-tev to 1-tev)e+e− Colliders, Phys

    S. Komamiya,Searching for Charged Higgs Bosons at O (1/2-tev to 1-tev)e+e− Colliders, Phys. Rev. D38 (1988) 2158

    1988

  34. [42]

    Arhrib and G

    A. Arhrib and G. Moultaka,Radiative corrections to e+e− → H +H − : THDM versus MSSM, Nucl. Phys. B558 (1999) 3–40, [hep-ph/9808317]

    1999 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Guasch, W

    J. Guasch, W. Hollik, and A. Kraft,Radiative corrections to pair production of charged Higgs bosons in e + e- collisions, Nucl. Phys. B596 (2001) 66–80

    2001

  36. [44]

    Arhrib, M

    A. Arhrib, M. Capdequi Peyranere, W. Hollik, and G. Moultaka,Associated H −W + production in high-energy e+e− collisions, Nucl. Phys. B581 (2000) 34–60, [hep-ph/9912527]. [Erratum: Nucl.Phys. 2004, 400–401 (2004)]

    2000 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Kanemura,Possible enhancement of the e+ e- —> H+- W-+ cross-section in the two Higgs doublet model, Eur

    S. Kanemura,Possible enhancement of the e+ e- —> H+- W-+ cross-section in the two Higgs doublet model, Eur. Phys. J. C17 (2000) 473–486, [hep-ph/9911541]

    2000 arXiv

  38. [46]

    B. A. Ouazghour, A. Arhrib, K. Cheung, E.-s. Ghourmin, and L. Rahili,Comparison betweenµ-µ+ and e-e+ colliders for charged Higgs production in the 2HDM, Phys. Rev. D109 (2024), no. 11 115009, [arXiv:2308.15664]

    2024 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Heinemeyer and C

    S. Heinemeyer and C. Schappacher,Charged Higgs Boson production ate+e− colliders in the complex MSSM: a full one-loop analysis, Eur. Phys. J. C76 (2016), no. 10 535, [arXiv:1606.06981]

    2016 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Brein and T

    O. Brein and T. Hahn,On MSSM charged Higgs boson production in association with an electroweak W boson at electron positron colliders, Eur. Phys. J. C52 (2007) 397–411, [hep-ph/0610079]

    2007 arXiv

  41. [49]

    H. E. Logan and S.-f. Su,Variation of the Cross Section for e+e− → W +H − in the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model, Phys. Rev. D67 (2003) 017703, [hep-ph/0206135]

    2003 arXiv

  42. [50]

    A Multi-TeV Linear Collider Based on CLIC Technology: CLIC Conceptual Design Report,

  43. [51]

    Linear Collider American Working Group Collaboration, T. Abe et al.,Linear Collider Physics Resource Book for Snowmass 2001 - Part 2: Higgs and Supersymmetry Studies, inAPS / DPF / DPB Summer Study on the Future of Particle Physics, 5, 2001. hep-ex/0106056

    2001 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Abe et al.,Linear Collider Physics Resource Book for Snowmass 2001 - Part 3: Studies of Exotic and Standard Model Physics, hep-ex/0106057

    Linear Collider American Working Group Collaboration, T. Abe et al.,Linear Collider Physics Resource Book for Snowmass 2001 - Part 3: Studies of Exotic and Standard Model Physics, hep-ex/0106057

    2001 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Fujii et al.,Tests of the Standard Model at the International Linear Collider, arXiv:1908.11299

    LCC Physics Working GroupCollaboration, K. Fujii et al.,Tests of the Standard Model at the International Linear Collider, arXiv:1908.11299

    1908 arXiv

  46. [54]

    R. S. Gupta, H. Rzehak, and J. D. Wells,How well do we need to measure the Higgs boson mass and self-coupling?, Phys. Rev. D88 (2013) 055024, [arXiv:1305.6397]

    2013 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Baglio and C

    J. Baglio and C. Weiland,The triple Higgs coupling: A new probe of low-scale seesaw models, JHEP 04 (2017) 038, [arXiv:1612.06403]

    2017 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Tian and K

    ILC physics, detector studyCollaboration, J. Tian and K. Fujii,Measurement of Higgs boson couplings at the International Linear Collider, Nucl. Part. Phys. Proc. 273-275 (2016) 826–833

    2016

  49. [57]

    C. F. Dürig,Measuring the Higgs Self-coupling at the 20 International Linear Collider. PhD thesis, Hamburg U., Hamburg, 2016

    2016

  50. [58]

    Liu, K.-F

    T. Liu, K.-F. Lyu, J. Ren, and H. X. Zhu,Probing the quartic Higgs boson self-interaction, Phys. Rev. D98 (2018), no. 9 093004, [arXiv:1803.04359]

    2018 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Accomando et al.,Physics at the CLIC multi-TeV linear collider, in11th International Conference on Hadron Spectroscopy, CERN Yellow Reports: Monographs, 6,

    CLIC Physics Working GroupCollaboration, E. Accomando et al.,Physics at the CLIC multi-TeV linear collider, in11th International Conference on Hadron Spectroscopy, CERN Yellow Reports: Monographs, 6,

  52. [60]

    Liu and K.-P

    W. Liu and K.-P. Xie,Probing electroweak phase transition with multi-TeV muon colliders and gravitational waves, arXiv:2101.10469

    arXiv

  53. [61]

    An et al.,Precision Higgs physics at the CEPC, Chin

    F. An et al.,Precision Higgs physics at the CEPC, Chin. Phys. C43 (2019), no. 4 043002, [arXiv:1810.09037]

    2019 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Arbey et al.,Physics at the e+ e- Linear Collider, Eur

    A. Arbey et al.,Physics at the e+ e- Linear Collider, Eur. Phys. J. C75 (2015), no. 8 371, [arXiv:1504.01726]

    2015 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Bhattacharya, S

    S. Bhattacharya, S. Jahedi, and J. Wudka,Optimal determination of new physics couplings: a comparative study, JHEP 12 (2023) 026, [arXiv:2301.07721]

    2023

  56. [64]

    Abada et al.,FCC-ee: The Lepton Collider: Future Circular Collider Conceptual Design Report Volume 2, Eur

    FCCCollaboration, A. Abada et al.,FCC-ee: The Lepton Collider: Future Circular Collider Conceptual Design Report Volume 2, Eur. Phys. J. ST228 (2019), no. 2 261–623

    2019

  57. [65]

    Bicer et al.,First Look at the Physics Case of TLEP, JHEP 01 (2014) 164, [arXiv:1308.6176]

    TLEP Design Study Working GroupCollaboration, M. Bicer et al.,First Look at the Physics Case of TLEP, JHEP 01 (2014) 164, [arXiv:1308.6176]

    2014 arXiv

  58. [66]

    J. P. Delahaye, M. Diemoz, K. Long, B. Mansoulié, N. Pastrone, L. Rivkin, D. Schulte, A. Skrinsky, and A. Wulzer,Muon Colliders, arXiv:1901.06150

    1901 arXiv

  59. [67]

    T. Han, Y. Ma, and K. Xie,High Energy Leptonic Collisions and Electroweak Parton Distribution Functions, arXiv:2007.14300

    2007 arXiv

  60. [68]

    K. Long, D. Lucchesi, M. Palmer, N. Pastrone, D. Schulte, and V. Shiltsev,Muon Colliders: Opening New Horizons for Particle Physics, arXiv:2007.15684

    2007 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Capdevilla, D

    R. Capdevilla, D. Curtin, Y. Kahn, and G. Krnjaic,A No-Lose Theorem for Discovering the New Physics of (g − 2)µ at Muon Colliders, arXiv:2101.10334

    arXiv

  62. [70]

    A. G. Akeroyd, A. Arhrib, and C. Dove,Charged and pseudoscalar Higgs production at a muon collider, Phys. Rev. D61 (2000) 071702, [hep-ph/9910287]

    2000 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Huang, F

    G.-y. Huang, F. S. Queiroz, and W. Rodejohann,Gauged Lµ−Lτ at a muon collider, arXiv:2101.04956

    arXiv

  64. [72]

    Yin and M

    W. Yin and M. Yamaguchi,Muon g − 2 at multi-TeV muon collider, arXiv:2012.03928

    2012 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Buttazzo and P

    D. Buttazzo and P. Paradisi,Probing the muon g-2 anomaly at a Muon Collider, arXiv:2012.02769

    2012 arXiv

  66. [74]

    Capdevilla, D

    R. Capdevilla, D. Curtin, Y. Kahn, and G. Krnjaic,A Guaranteed Discovery at Future Muon Colliders, arXiv:2006.16277

    2006 arXiv

  67. [75]

    T. Han, D. Liu, I. Low, and X. Wang,Electroweak Couplings of the Higgs Boson at a Multi-TeV Muon Collider, arXiv:2008.12204

    2008 arXiv

  68. [76]

    T. Han, Z. Liu, L.-T. Wang, and X. Wang,WIMPs at High Energy Muon Colliders, arXiv:2009.11287

    2009 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Costantini, F

    A. Costantini, F. De Lillo, F. Maltoni, L. Mantani, O. Mattelaer, R. Ruiz, and X. Zhao,Vector boson fusion at multi-TeV muon colliders, 5, 2020.arXiv:2005.10289

    2020 arXiv

  70. [78]

    T. Han, S. Li, S. Su, W. Su, and Y. Wu,Heavy Higgs bosons in 2HDM at a muon collider, Phys. Rev. D104 (2021), no. 5 055029, [arXiv:2102.08386]

    2021 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Vignaroli,Charged resonances and MDM bound states at a multi-TeV muon collider, JHEP 10 (2023) 121, [arXiv:2304.12362]

    N. Vignaroli,Charged resonances and MDM bound states at a multi-TeV muon collider, JHEP 10 (2023) 121, [arXiv:2304.12362]

    2023 arXiv

  72. [80]

    Bechtle, O

    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, [arXiv:1102.1898]

    2011 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Hashemi,Charged Higgs Observability Through Associated Production With W at a Muon Collider, Eur

    M. Hashemi,Charged Higgs Observability Through Associated Production With W at a Muon Collider, Eur. Phys. J. C72 (2012) 2207, [arXiv:1206.2155]

    2012 arXiv

  74. [82]

    A. G. Akeroyd and S. Baek,Single charged Higgs production as a probe of CP violation at a muon collider, Phys. Lett. B500 (2001) 142–148, [hep-ph/0008286]

    2001 arXiv

  75. [83]

    B. A. Ouazghour, A. Arhrib, K. Cheung, E.-s. Ghourmin, M. Krab, and L. Rahili,Searching for charged Higgs bosons via e+e− → H ±W ∓S at the ILC, arXiv:2506.01554

    arXiv

  76. [84]

    B. A. Ouazghour, A. Arhrib, K. Cheung, E.-s. Ghourmin, and L. Rahili,Associated charged Higgs production within the 2HDM: e−e+ versus µ−µ+ colliders, arXiv:2408.13952

    arXiv

  77. [85]

    H. Bahl, T. Biekötter, S. Heinemeyer, C. Li, S. Paasch, G. Weiglein, and J. Wittbrodt,HiggsTools: BSM scalar phenomenology with new versions of HiggsBounds and HiggsSignals, Comput. Phys. Commun.291 (2023) 108803, [arXiv:2210.09332]

    2023 arXiv

  78. [86]

    Bechtle, S

    P. Bechtle, S. Heinemeyer, O. Stål, T. Stefaniak, and G. Weiglein,HiggsSignals : Confronting arbitrary Higgs sectors with measurements at the Tevatron and the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C74 (2014), no. 2 2711, [arXiv:1305.1933]

    2014 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Bechtle, S

    P. Bechtle, S. Heinemeyer, O. Stål, T. Stefaniak, and G. Weiglein,Probing the Standard Model with Higgs signal rates from the Tevatron, the LHC and a future ILC, JHEP 11 (2014) 039, [arXiv:1403.1582]

    2014 arXiv

  80. [88]

    Bechtle, S

    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), no. 2 145, [arXiv:2012.09197]

    2021 arXiv

  81. [89]

    Bechtle, O

    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, [arXiv:0811.4169]

    2010 arXiv

  82. [90]

    HFLAV Collaboration, Y. S. Amhis et al.,Averages of b-hadron, c-hadron, andτ-lepton properties as of 2021, Phys. Rev. D107 (2023) 052008, [arXiv:2206.07501]

    2021 arXiv

  83. [91]

    Bechtle, O

    P. Bechtle, O. Brein, S. Heinemeyer, O. Stål, T. Stefaniak, G. Weiglein, and K. E. Williams,HiggsBounds − 4: Improved Tests of Extended Higgs Sectors against Exclusion Bounds from LEP, the Tevatron and the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C 74 (2014), no. 3 2693, [arXiv:1311.0055]

    2014 arXiv

  84. [92]

    Bechtle, D

    P. Bechtle, D. Dercks, S. Heinemeyer, T. Klingl, T. Stefaniak, G. Weiglein, and J. Wittbrodt, HiggsBounds-5: Testing Higgs Sectors in the LHC 13 TeV Era, Eur. Phys. J. C80 (2020), no. 12 1211, [arXiv:2006.06007]

    2020 arXiv

  85. [93]

    Mertig, M

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

    1991

  86. [94]

    Shtabovenko, R

    V. Shtabovenko, R. Mertig, and F. Orellana,New Developments in FeynCalc 9.0, Comput. Phys. Commun. 207 (2016) 432–444, [arXiv:1601.01167]. 21

    2016 arXiv

  87. [95]

    Shtabovenko, R

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

    2020 arXiv

  88. [96]

    Shtabovenko, R

    V. Shtabovenko, R. Mertig, and F. Orellana,FeynCalc 10: Do multiloop integrals dream of computer codes?, Comput. Phys. Commun.306 (2025) 109357, [arXiv:2312.14089]

    2025 arXiv

  89. [97]

    Finally, the events undergo detector simulation us- ing Delphes-3.4.5 [98], where the muon collider Detec- tor TARGET model is implemented

    to account for fragmentation and parton shower- ing. Finally, the events undergo detector simulation us- ing Delphes-3.4.5 [98], where the muon collider Detec- tor TARGET model is implemented. Jets are reconstructed using the anti-kt algorithm [99] implemented inDelphes, with ...

  90. [98]

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

    1992

  91. [99]

    Grimus, L

    W. Grimus, L. Lavoura, O. M. Ogreid, and P. Osland,The Oblique parameters in multi-Higgs-doublet models, Nucl. Phys. B801 (2008) 81–96, [arXiv:0802.4353]

    2008 arXiv

  92. [100]

    Navas et al., Review of particle physics, Phys

    Particle Data GroupCollaboration, S. Navas et al., Review of particle physics, Phys. Rev. D110 (2024), no. 3 030001

    2024

  93. [101]

    Aad et al.,Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, Phys

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

    2012 arXiv

  94. [102]

    Chatrchyan et al.,Observation of a New Boson at a Mass of 125 GeV with the CMS Experiment at the LHC, Phys

    CMS Collaboration, S. Chatrchyan et al.,Observation of a New Boson at a Mass of 125 GeV with the CMS Experiment at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B716 (2012) 30–61, [arXiv:1207.7235]

    2012 arXiv

  95. [103]

    Hahn and C

    T. Hahn and C. Schappacher,The Implementation of the minimal supersymmetric standard model in FeynArts and FormCalc, Comput. Phys. Commun.143 (2002) 54–68, [hep-ph/0105349]

    2002 arXiv

  96. [104]

    Hahn and M

    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]

    1999 arXiv

  97. [105]

    Kublbeck, M

    J. Kublbeck, M. Bohm, and A. Denner,Feyn Arts: Computer Algebraic Generation of Feynman Graphs and Amplitudes, Comput. Phys. Commun.60 (1990) 165–180

    1990

  98. [106]

    Alwall, R

    J. Alwall, R. Frederix, S. Frixione, V. Hirschi, F. Maltoni, O. Mattelaer, H. S. Shao, T. Stelzer, P. Torrielli, and M. Zaro,The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations, JHEP 07 ...

    2014 arXiv

  99. [107]

    Sjostrand, S

    T. Sjostrand, S. Mrenna, and P. Z. Skands,A Brief Introduction to PYTHIA 8.1, Comput. Phys. Commun.178 (2008) 852–867, [arXiv:0710.3820]

    2008 arXiv

  100. [108]

    de Favereau, C

    DELPHES 3Collaboration, J. de Favereau, C. Delaere, P. Demin, A. Giammanco, V. Lemaître, A. Mertens, and M. Selvaggi,DELPHES 3, A modular framework for fast simulation of a generic collider experiment, JHEP 02 (2014) 057, [arXiv:1307.6346]

    2014 arXiv

  101. [109]

    Cacciari, G

    M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez,The anti-kt jet clustering algorithm, JHEP 04 (2008) 063, [arXiv:0802.1189]

    2008 arXiv

  102. [110]

    Cowan, K

    G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, and O. Vitells, Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics, Eur. Phys. J. C71 (2011) 1554, [arXiv:1007.1727]. [Erratum: Eur.Phys.J.C 73, 2501 (2013)]. 22

    2011 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.