Electroweak Precision Observables in the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model

G. Weiglein; S. Heinemeyer; W. Hollik

REVIEW

Electroweak Precision Observables in the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model

S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, G. Weiglein

High Energy Physics - Phenomenology · Submitted 15 Dec 2004 · 265 references

Pith's verdict: A careful, quantitative review of MSSM electroweak precision physics; the only real soft spot is that the abstract states the mSUGRA light-scale preference more flatly than the body's own caveats support.

T0 · AI review

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

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

How Pith checks papers →

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

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv IDhep-ph/0412214 (version 1)

Pith IDIUGN6YGA, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

CitationG. Weiglein, S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik. "Electroweak Precision Observables in the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model." arXiv:hep-ph/0412214 (2004). https://pith.science/paper/IUGN6YGA

Cite this reviewBibTeX for Pith's review of this paper

Claim paper

Why Pith says this

Highlight any text to comment on it.

Editor's note

read the letter

This is the standard reference for electroweak precision observables in the MSSM, and it earns that status. If you need one place to see where the two-loop calculations stood in 2004 — Δρ at O(ααs) and O(αt², αtαb, αb²), Δr at O(ααs), the partial (g−2)μ two-loop results, the mh uncertainty budget — this is it, and the numbers are given concretely rather than gestured at. The separation of intrinsic from parametric uncertainties is done properly, with actual MeV and 10⁻⁵ figures, and the NMFV extension in §1.2.6 and §3.1.3 is a genuine addition beyond the minimal-flavour case. The discussion of pseudo-observables versus realistic observables in §1.3.2 is the kind of thing reviews usually skip and should not. Credit where due: this is synthesis with quantitative content, not a bibliography with prose between the entries. The stress-test concern is real but smaller than it sounds. Yes, the mSUGRA preference for a light scale sits exactly in the region where the authors themselves say the SM-extracted pseudo-observables would want explicit verification, and yes, the intrinsic MSSM errors in eq. (3.1) are scaling estimates, not calculations. But the paper says both things plainly — §1.3.2 flags the light-SUSY regime, §3.1.2 calls the estimate crude and notes it ignores tanβ enhancements. The only thing I would actually push on is the abstract, which states the 'clear preference' without carrying either caveat; a reader who stops at [abstract:s6] gets a firmer claim than the body delivers. That is a one-sentence fix, not a structural problem. Minor: the fit chapter is where I would want the χ² breakdown and the cosmological-constraint treatment spelled out, and the excerpt I saw truncates it, so I cannot vouch for the fit quality line by line. Who should read it: anyone doing SUSY electroweak precision work, and especially anyone about to quote a light-SUSY preference from precision data without checking what the theory errors were assumed to be. It deserves referee time — send it out, and ask the referee to check the mSUGRA fit section specifically.

Referee report

Significance

As a reference work the review is genuinely useful: it collects in one place the one- and two-loop status of the four observables, and, more importantly, it attaches explicit numerical uncertainty budgets to each — Tables 2.1 and 2.2, Eqs. (2.95)–(2.100), (2.125)–(2.131), (2.145)–(2.146) and (2.163)–(2.164). Those numbers, separating intrinsic from parametric uncertainties and projecting both to the ILC/GigaZ era, are the part of the paper most likely to be reused and cited. The work also makes falsifiable statements: the upper bound m_h ≲ 136 GeV for m_t = 178 GeV and M_SUSY ≤ 1 TeV (§2.7, §3.2), and the preference for a light SUSY scale, are both testable at the LHC and ILC. The treatment of the model dependence of pseudo-observables in §1.3.2 and the discussion of S,T,U in §1.3.3 are careful and, in my view, correct in emphasis. If the mSUGRA fit claim holds up under the sensitivity checks requested below, the review will be a standard reference for this subject.

Major objections (4)

[Abstract [abstract:s6] and §3.1.2, Eq. (3.1)] The abstract states without qualification that mSUGRA 'shows a clear preference for a relatively light mass scale of the SUSY particles', but the intrinsic MSSM theory uncertainties that enter the corresponding fit are, by the authors' own description in §3.1.2, 'a crude estimate' obtained by scaling known SM corrections by relative weight, and explicitly do not account for MSSM-specific enhancements such as powers of tanβ. Since the χ² separation between light and heavy SUSY regions scales with the assumed δM_W^intr and δ sin^2θ_eff^intr, the strength of the 'clear preference' is directly tied to a number the authors themselves flag as approximate. I would ask that the abstract be qualified accordingly, and that §4.5 report the sensitivity of the fit: e.g. repeat the preferred region with the intrinsic uncertainties of Eq. (3.1) doubled, and state whether the preference for a light scale survives. If it does, the claim is much stronger for having been shown.
[§1.3.2 and §4.5] Section 1.3.2 acknowledges that the pseudo-observables M_W and sin^2θ_eff are extracted using the SM in the subtraction and unfolding chain, and states that 'in some regions of the parameter space, in particular where some of the SUSY particles are very light, an explicit verification of the above assumption would however be desirable.' The headline result of the paper is precisely a preference for light SUSY, so the preferred region coincides with the region the authors mark as unverified. The limitation is acknowledged, but it is never quantified anywhere in the text I can see. I would ask for at least an order-of-magnitude estimate of the shift induced in M_W and sin^2θ_eff by using MSSM rather than SM subtraction terms for the lightest spectra admitted by the mSUGRA fit, so that the reader can judge whether the preferred region is robust against this effect.
[§1.3.4, Eq. (2.147), Fig. 3.22] Section 1.3.4 quotes three mutually inconsistent SM evaluations of a_μ, Eqs. (1.53)–(1.55), corresponding to 3.3σ, 2.1σ and 2.7σ, and the review then adopts the 2.7σ value of Eq. (2.147) throughout, including the contour positions in Fig. 3.22 which are drawn for a^exp_μ − a^theo,SM_μ = (24.5 ± 9.0) × 10^-10. The choice among disputed hadronic vacuum-polarization and light-by-light evaluations is thus load-bearing for the (g−2)_μ constraints on the μ–M_2 plane. The review should state explicitly that the derived constraints scale with that choice, and ideally show Fig. 3.22 (or an equivalent) for the 3.3σ and 2.1σ central values so that the reader can see how much of the excluded region is driven by the SM input rather than by the data.
[§2.9.2 and Chapters 3–4] The numerical results of Chapters 3 and 4 are produced with POMSSM, which footnote 4 of §2.9.2 describes as not yet publicly available ('A new version of POMSSM is currently prepared and will be available from the authors'), in combination with the public FeynHiggs. Since a substantial part of the review's value lies in the numerical scans and fit contours, the reader cannot independently reproduce them. I would ask for a short statement in §2.9.2 of exactly which results in Chapters 3–4 depend on the non-public code and what would be required to reproduce them, and, where possible, for the fit procedure of §4.5 (which observables enter the χ², how the cosmological constraints are imposed, and how the theoretical uncertainties are treated in the likelihood) to be specified explicitly rather than only referenced.

Minor objections (8)

[Eq. (2.5)] The second line reads 'M^{0 2}_Z = W^2_Z + δM^2_Z'; the symbol W^2_Z should presumably be M^2_Z.
[Table 1.4 caption vs §1.3.4] The caption of Table 1.4 states that the m_h accuracy is quoted 'assuming m_h ≈ 115 GeV', while the paragraph immediately preceding the table in §1.3.4 says 'for a value of m_h ≈ 120 GeV'. These should be made consistent.
[Eq. (2.83)] In the expression for Θ_Z the braces and parentheses do not balance, and the sum runs over α, β, γ, δ although only α and γ appear in the displayed terms. Please check the typesetting of this equation.
[Eq. (1.19)] The two-line layout with ±c_f/2 and separate u-type and d-type entries is difficult to parse. A single expression with an explicit flavour label, or a short sentence stating which sign and which X_q applies to which flavour, would help.
[Eq. (2.112)] The '≃' step drops the 2m_f^2/M_Z^2 correction multiplying |g_V^f|^2 as well as the corresponding term in |g_A^f|^2. Since the exact expression is given on the line above, a parenthetical note on the size of the neglected term for b quarks would avoid ambiguity.
[§2.7.2] The citation list 'Refs. [170,63,227,186]' is out of numerical order and reference [227] appears here for the first time in a position that suggests it may be misplaced. Please check the ordering and placement.
[Figs. 3.10 and 3.11] The SM and MSSM bands are distinguished only by colour and shading described in the caption. Adding a legend keyed directly to the bands, and stating the parameter ranges that generate each band edge in the figure itself rather than only in the text, would make these two figures considerably easier to read.
[Chapter 1] Since the review quotes 'current' experimental values throughout, it would be helpful to state the data cutoff date explicitly in the introduction or in the caption of Table 1.3, so that later readers can tell at a glance which generation of measurements the numbers refer to.

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

The paper

The paper claims

Precision electroweak data can already feel the effects of supersymmetric particles, and the fits prefer a light SUSY scale.

The reading

This review asks a single question: are the electroweak precision measurements — the $W$ boson mass, the effective leptonic weak mixing angle $sin^2 theta_{eff}$, the muon anomalous magnetic moment, and the lightest Higgs mass — accurate enough, and are the theory calculations precise enough, to detect the virtual effects of supersymmetric particles? The authors' answer is yes, conditionally. After cataloguing the one- and two-loop calculations in the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model and estimating the remaining theoretical and parametric uncertainties, they confront the data with the theory. Within the constrained mSUGRA scenario with cosmological constraints, the fit is good and pulls toward a relatively light scale for the superpartners. The practical payoff is a target: if the preference is real, the LHC and a future linear collider should find supersymmetry within reach, and the next round of precision measurements should sharpen the test considerably.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing quantity is the $rho$ parameter, $Delta rho = Sigma_Z(0)/M_Z^2 - Sigma_W(0)/M_W^2$, which isolates the leading universal corrections induced by mass splitting inside an isospin doublet — in the Standard Model the top-bottom splitting, in the MSSM the stop-sbottom splitting. Because $Delta rho$ shifts both $M_W$ and $sin^2 theta_{eff}$ in a fixed proportion, $delta M_W approx M_W c_W^2/(c_W^2 - s_W^2) Delta rho$ and $delta sin^2 theta_{eff} approx -c_W^2 s_W^2/(c_W^2 - s_W^2) Delta rho$, a single calculable number carries most of the supersymmetric sensitivity. The $W$ mass prediction itself follows from the muon-decay relation $M_W^2(1 - M_W^2/M_Z^2) = pi alpha/(sqrt{2} G_mu)(1 + Delta r)$, with $Delta r = Delta alpha - (c_W^2/s_W^2) Delta rho + (Delta r)_{rem}$, so the same $Delta rho$ reappears there. The paper's recurring technical check is that the $Delta rho$ approximation reproduces the full two-loop gluonic corrections to $Delta r$ to better than ten percent, which justifies using it to propagate supersymmetric effects into the observables. The numerical results are delivered through the public codes FeynHiggs and POMSSM, which package the resummed Higgs-sector and precision-observable calculations.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the electroweak precision observables have reached a level of experimental and theoretical control where they constrain the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model rather than merely accommodating it. On the theory side, the authors assemble the state of the art: complete one-loop corrections to $M_W$, $sin^2 theta_{eff}$ and $m_h$; the leading two-loop corrections of $O(alpha alpha_s)$ to the $rho$ parameter and to $Delta r$; the two-loop $O(alpha_t^2)$, $O(alpha_t alpha_b)$ and $O(alpha_b^2)$ corrections in the large-$M_{SUSY}$ limit; the resummation of $tan beta$-enhanced bottom-Yukawa effects; and the two-loop supersymmetric contributions to $(g-2)_mu$. They then quantify the residual uncertainty from unknown higher orders and from the experimental errors on $m_t$ and the hadronic contribution to $alpha$, arriving at estimated intrinsic uncertainties of roughly $10$ MeV in $M_W$, $12 times 10^{-5}$ in $sin^2 theta_{eff}$, and $3$ GeV in $m_h$. Confronting these predictions with LEP, SLC, Tevatron and Brookhaven data, the authors report that the mSUGRA scenario with cosmological constraints describes the data very well and shows a clear preference for a relatively light supersymmetric mass scale, while the Standard Model fit is also acceptable but slightly less favoured by the current central values.

Load-bearing premise

The fits assume that the precision observables extracted from the data using Standard Model subtraction terms can be reused unchanged as inputs for the MSSM, because the shifts from the full supersymmetric particle content are taken to be negligible at current experimental precision.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the mSUGRA preference for a light superpartner scale holds, the LHC and a future linear collider should discover supersymmetric particles within their kinematic reach rather than only setting limits.
The projected GigaZ accuracy on $sin^2 theta_{eff}$ of about $1.3 times 10^{-5}$ and the ILC accuracy on $M_W$ of about $7$ MeV would turn these observables into sharp discriminators between the Standard Model and the MSSM, provided the intrinsic theory errors fall to the estimated future levels of $2 times 10^{-5}$ and $2$ MeV.
A measured Higgs mass near the MSSM upper bound of roughly $136$ GeV for $m_t = 178$ GeV and $M_{SUSY} leq 1$ TeV would point to large stop mixing, while a much lighter value would point to small mixing or a heavier superpartner scale.
Non-minimal flavour violation in the second and third squark generations can shift $M_W$ by up to about $0.14$ GeV and $sin^2 theta_{eff}$ by up to about $7 times 10^{-4}$ in extreme regions, so improved precision would probe flavour mixing in the squark sector even without direct production.
The residual $2.7sigma$ discrepancy in $(g-2)_mu$ can be accounted for by supersymmetric loops with a mass scale between roughly $100$ and $600$ GeV for positive $mu$, which is compatible with the light-scale preference from the $W$ and $Z$ observables.

Reading between the lines

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

The paper's light-scale preference and the $(g-2)_mu$ preferred region overlap, so a combined fit treating both as constraints on one spectrum would be a sharper test than the separate discussions given here.
Because the $Delta rho$ approximation carries most of the supersymmetric sensitivity and is accurate to about ten percent at two loops, the dominant near-term gain may come less from new loop calculations than from reducing the experimental error on $m_t$, which currently induces about $26$ MeV of uncertainty in $M_W$ alone.
The acknowledged model dependence of the pseudo-observables — extracted using Standard Model subtraction terms — becomes a real liability precisely in the light-supersymmetry region the fit prefers, so a self-consistent MSSM extraction of $M_W$ and $sin^2 theta_{eff}$ would be the natural next step.
If the LHC finds a superpartner spectrum heavier than a few TeV, the precision-observable route to supersymmetry loses most of its discriminating power, since the loop effects decouple; that outcome would redirect the same machinery toward other weakly coupled new physics rather than toward the MSSM.

Original abstract

The current status of electroweak precision observables in the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM) is reviewed. We focus in particular on the $W$ boson mass, M_W, the effective leptonic weak mixing angle, sin^2 theta_eff, the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon, (g-2)_\mu, and the lightest CP-even MSSM Higgs boson mass, m_h. We summarize the current experimental situation and the status of the theoretical evaluations. An estimate of the current theoretical uncertainties from unknown higher-order corrections and from the experimental errors of the input parameters is given. We discuss future prospects for both the experimental accuracies and the precision of the theoretical predictions. Confronting the precision data with the theory predictions within the unconstrained MSSM and within specific SUSY-breaking scenarios, we analyse how well the data are described by the theory. The mSUGRA scenario with cosmological constraints yields a very good fit to the data, showing a clear preference for a relatively light mass scale of the SUSY particles. The constraints on the parameter space from the precision data is discussed, and it is shown that the prospective accuracy at the next generation of colliders will enhance the sensitivity of the precision tests very significantly.

The compiled record

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

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 6,330 input tokens, $0.0003 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.02 · states limitation 0.26 · human participants 0.02 · controlled comparison 0.05 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.11 · compares with prior results 0.27 · 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 current status of electroweak precision observables in the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM) is reviewed. We focus in particular on the $W$ boson mass, M_W, the effective leptonic weak mixing angle, sin^2 theta_eff, the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon, (g-2)_\mu, and the lightest CP-even MSSM Higgs boson mass, m_h. We summarize the current experimental situation and the status of the theoretical evaluations. An estimate of the current theoretical uncertainties from unknown higher-order corrections and from the experimental errors of the input parameters is given. We discuss future prospects for both the experimental accuracies and the precision of the theoretical predictions. Confronting the precision data with the theory predictions within the unconstrained MSSM and within specific SUSY-breaking scenarios, we analyse how well the data are described by the theory. The mSUGRA scenario with cosmological constraints yields a very good fit to the data, showing a clear preference for a relatively light mass scale of the SUSY particles. The constraints on the parameter space from the precision data is discussed, and it is shown that the prospective accuracy at the next generation of colliders will enhance the sensitivity of the precision tests very significantly.

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 current status of electroweak precision observables in the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM) is reviewed.	contribution 0.71	0.29	0.04	asserted 0.68
s1	We focus in particular on the $W$ boson mass, M_W, the effective leptonic weak mixing angle, sin^2 theta_eff, the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon, (g-2)_\mu, and the lightest CP-even MSSM Higgs boson mass, m_h.	contribution 0.96	0.35	0.04	asserted 0.63
s2	We summarize the current experimental situation and the status of the theoretical evaluations.	contribution 0.79	0.60	0.02	asserted 0.79
s3	An estimate of the current theoretical uncertainties from unknown higher-order corrections and from the experimental errors of the input parameters is given.	contribution 0.54	0.71	0.03	asserted 0.97
s4	We discuss future prospects for both the experimental accuracies and the precision of the theoretical predictions.	future work 0.90	0.60	0.03	unclear 0.62
s5	Confronting the precision data with the theory predictions within the unconstrained MSSM and within specific SUSY-breaking scenarios, we analyse how well the data are described by the theory.	method 0.56	0.85	0.10	asserted 0.82
s6	The mSUGRA scenario with cosmological constraints yields a very good fit to the data, showing a clear preference for a relatively light mass scale of the SUSY particles.	result 0.96	0.76	0.47	asserted 1.00
s7	The constraints on the parameter space from the precision data is discussed, and it is shown that the prospective accuracy at the next generation of colliders will enhance the sensitivity of the precision tests very significantly.	result 0.43	0.76	0.18	asserted 0.98

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: review 1.00 · evidence from analysis of existing data 0.57.

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

Figures

**Figure 2.** 7: The renormalization scale dependence of mh introduced via a DR definition of tan β and the Higgs field renormalization constants is shown as a function of MA (left plot) and tan β (right). The lower curves correspond to tan β = 2 (left) and MA = 100 GeV (right). For the upper curves we have set tan β = 20 (left) and MA = 500 GeV (right). µDR has been varied from mt/2 to 2mt . The other parameters are MSUSY = 500(1000) GeV, Xt = 2 MSUSY, M2 = µ = 500 GeV. The dotted line corresponds to a full on-shell scheme, for more details see Ref. [99]. Beyond two-loop order, corrections that…

**Figure 3.** 10: The current experimental results for MW and mt and the prospective accuracies at the next generation of colliders are shown in comparison with the SM prediction (mediumshaded and dark-shaded (red and blue) bands) and the MSSM prediction (light-shaded and dark-shaded (green and blue) bands). been found that the contribution of light gauginos and scalar leptons in the MSSM (in a scenario with vanishing SUSY contribution to ∆ρ) gives rise to a shift in MW and sin2 θeff as compared to the SM case which brings the MSSM prediction in better agreement with the experimental values of MW…

**Figure 4.** 7: The mSUGRA predictions for mh as functions of m1/2 with (a) tan β = 10 and (b) tan β = 50 for various A0 [248]. A hypothetical experimental value is shown, namely mh = 120 GeV. We display an optimistic anticipated theory uncertainty of ±0.2 GeV, as well as a more realistic theory uncertainty of ±0.5 GeV and the current theory uncertainty of ±3 GeV. 4.5 Fits in mSUGRA The results for EWPO presented in the last section have been used to perform a fit for the mSUGRA parameter space with CDM constraints [248]. We first review the fit using the currently existing data on MW , sin2 θeff…

Showing 3 of the paper's 4 figures. See all figures in the PDF ↗ Figures reproduced from arXiv:hep-ph/0412214 by the authors.

References

Works cited (265)

[1]

H.P. Nilles, Phys. Rep. 110 (1984) 1; H.E. Haber and G.L. Kane, Phys. Rep. 117 (1985) 75; R. Barbieri, Riv. Nuovo Cim. 11 (1988) 1

View on Pith 1984
[2]

S.L. Glashow, Nucl. Phys. B22 (1961) 579; S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 19 (1967) 19; A. Salam, in: Proceedings of the 8th Nobel Symposium, Editor N. Svartholm, Stockholm, 1968

View on Pith 1961
[3]

S. Eidelman et al. [Particle Data Group Collaboration], Phys. Lett. B 592 (2004) 1

View on Pith 2004
[4]

S. Abel et al. [SUGRA Working Group Collaboration], hep-ph/00031 54

View on Pith
[5]

ATLAS Collaboration, Detector and Physics Performance Technical Design Report , CERN/LHCC/99-15 (1999), see: atlasinfo.cern.ch/Atlas/GROUPS/PHYSICS/TDR/access.html

View on Pith 1999
[6]

CMS Collaboration, see: cmsinfo.cern.ch/Welcome.html/CMSdocuments/CMSplots/

View on Pith
[7]

J. Aguilar-Saavedra et al., TESLA TDR Part 3: “Physics at an e+e− Linear Collider,” hep-ph/0106315, see: tesla.desy.de/tdr/

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[8]

T. Abe et al. [American Linear Collider Working Group Collaboration], Resource book for Snowmass 2001 , hep-ex/0106055, hep-ex/0106056, hep-ex/0106057,

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[9]

K. Abe et al. [ACF A Linear Collider Working Group Collaboration], hep- ph/0109166

View on Pith
[10]

[LHC / LC Study Group], G. Weiglein et al., hep-ph/0410364

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[11]

J. Gunion, H. Haber, G. Kane and S. Dawson, The Higgs Hunter’s Guide , Addison- Wesley, 1990

View on Pith 1990
[12]

[LEP Higgs working group], hep-ex/0107030; hep-ex/0107031 ; LHWG-Note 2004-01, see: lephiggs.web.cern.ch/LEPHIGGS/papers/

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[13]

G. Abbiendi et al. [ALEPH, DELPHI, L3, OPAL Collaborations and L EP Working Group for Higgs boson searches], Phys. Lett. B 565 (2003) 61, hep-ex/0306033; 128

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[14]

M. Carena et al., [Tevatron Higgs working group], hep-ph/00103 38; updated as: L. Babukhadia et al. [CDF and D0 Working Group Members Collaboration ], FERMILAB-PUB-03-320-E, see: library.fnal.gov/archive/test-preprint/fermilab-pub-03-320-e.shtml

View on Pith
[15]

M. Carena and H. Haber, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 50 (2003) 63, hep-ph/0208209

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[16]

J. Ellis, S. Heinemeyer, K. Olive and G. Weiglein, Phys. Lett. B 515 (2001) 348, hep-ph/0105061

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[17]

A. Dedes, S. Heinemeyer, S. Su and G. Weiglein, Nucl. Phys. B 674 (2003) 271, hep- ph/0302174

View on Pith 2003
[18]

M. Gr¨ unewald, hep-ex/0304023; updated as: F. Teubert, talk given at “ICHEP04”, Beijing, China, August 2004, see: ichep04.ihep.ac.cn/data/ichep04/ppt/plenary/p21-teubert-f.ppt; see also: lepewwg.web.cern.ch/LEPEWWG/Welcome.html

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[19]

G. Bennett et al. [Muon g-2 Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 92 (2004) 161802, hep- ex/0401008

View on Pith 2004
[20]

S. L. Glashow und S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. D 15 (1977) 1958

View on Pith 1977
[21]

K. Hikasa and M. Kobayashi, Phys. Rev. D 36 (1987) 724; F. Gabbiani and A. Masiero, Nucl. Phys. B 322 (1989) 235

View on Pith 1987
[22]

P. Brax and C. Savoy, Nucl. Phys. B 447 (1995) 227, hep-ph/9503306

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1995
[23]

F. Gabbiani, E. Gabrielli, A. Masiero and L. Silvestrini, Nucl. Phys. B 477 (1996) 321, hep-ph/9604387

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1996
[24]

M. Misiak, S. Pokorski and J. Rosiek, Adv. Ser. Direct. High Energy Phys. 15 (1998) 795, hep-ph/9703442

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998
[25]

S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, F. Merz, S. Pe˜ naranda, Eur. Phys. J. C 37 (2004) 481, hep-ph/0403228

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[26]

H. Nilles, Phys. Lett. B 115 (1982) 193; Nucl. Phys. B 217 (1983) 366. A. Chamseddine, R. Arnowitt and P. Nath, Phys. Rev. Lett. 49 (1982) 970; R. Barbieri, S. Ferrara and C. Savoy, Phys. Lett. B 119 (1982) 343; H. Nilles, M. Srednicki and D. Wyler, Phys. Lett. B 120 (1983) 346. E. Cremmer, P. Fayet and L. Girardello, Phys. Lett. B 122 (1983) 41. S. Ferra...

View on Pith 1982
[27]

For reviews see also Ref. [1] and: A. Lahanas and D. Nanopoulos, Phys. Rept. 145 (1987) 1; S. Martin, in “Perspectives on supersymmetry” , ed. G. Kane, hep-ph/9709356, see: zippy.physics.niu.edu/primer.shtml

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1987
[28]

For a review, see: G.F. Giudice and R. Rattazzi, Phys. Rept. 322 (1999) 419, hep- ph/9801271

View on Pith 1999
[29]

L. Randall and R. Sundrum, Nucl. Phys. B 557 (1999) 79, hep-th/9810155

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999
[30]

G.F. Giudice, M.A. Luty, H. Murayama and R. Rattazzi, JHEP 9812 (1998) 027, hep- ph/9810442

View on Pith 1998
[31]

T. Gherghetta, G.F. Giudice, J.D. Wells, Nucl. Phys. B 559 (1999) 27, hep-ph/9904378

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999
[32]

M. Carena, S. Heinemeyer, C. Wagner and G. Weiglein, hep-ph/9 912223

View on Pith
[33]

M. Carena, S. Heinemeyer, C. Wagner and G. Weiglein, Eur. Phys. J. C 26 (2003) 601, hep-ph/0202167

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[34]

B. Allanach et al., Eur. Phys. J. C 25 (2002) 113, hep-ph/0202233

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002
[35]

M. Battaglia, A. De Roeck, J. Ellis, F. Gianotti, K. Olive and L. Pape , Eur. Phys. J. C 33 (2004) 273, hep-ph/0306219

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[36]

D. Choudhury, H. Dreiner, P. Richardson and S. Sarkar, Phys. Rev. D 61 (2000) 095009, hep-ph/9911365; A. Dedes, H. Dreiner and P. Richardson, Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 015001, hep- ph/0106199; H. Dreiner, C. Hanhart, U. Langenfeld and D. Phillips, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 055004, hep-ph/0304289

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000
[37]

M. Carena, S. Heinemeyer, C. Wagner and G. Weiglein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (2001) 4463, hep-ph/0008023

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[38]

A. Buras, hep-ph/9806471; T. Hurth, Rev. Mod. Phys. 75 (2003) 1159, hep-ph/0212304

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[39]

S. Abel, S. Khalil and O. Lebedev, Nucl. Phys. B 606 (2001) 151, hep-ph/0103320

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[40]

D. Demir, O. Lebedev, K. Olive, M. Pospelov and A. Ritz, Nucl. Phys. B 680 (2004) 339, hep-ph/0311314

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[41]

S. Bertolini et al., Nucl. Phys. B 353 , (1991) 591; R. Barbieri and G. Giudice, Phys. Lett. B 309 , (1993) 86; F. Borzumati, M. Olechowski and S. Pokorski, Phys. Lett. B 349 (1995) 311; G. Degrassi, P. Gambino and G. F. Giudice, JHEP 0012 (2000) 009, hep-ph/0009337; M. Carena, D. Garcia, U. Nierste and C. E. Wagner, Phys. Lett. B 499 (2001) 141, hep-ph/0...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1991
[42]

G. Buchalla and A. Buras, Nucl. Phys. B 400 (1993) 225; M. Misiak and J. Urban, Phys. Lett. B 451 (1999) 161, hep-ph/9901278; G. Buchalla and A. Buras, Nucl. Phys. B 548 (1999) 309, hep-ph/9901288; A. Buras, Phys. Lett. B 566 (2003) 115, hep-ph/0303060

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1993
[43]

K. Babu and C. Kolda, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84 (2000) 228, hep-ph/9909476; S. Choudhury and N. Gaur, Phys. Lett. B 451 (1999) 86, hep-ph/9810307; C. Bobeth, T. Ewerth, F. Kr¨ uger and J. Urban, Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001) 074014, hep- ph/0104284; A. Dedes, H. Dreiner and U. Nierste, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 251804, hep- ph/0108037; G. Isidori and A. Retico, JHEP ...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000
[44]

A. Dedes, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 18 (2003) 2627, hep-ph/0309233

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[45]

M. Herndon, talk given at “ICHEP04”, Beijing, China, August 20 04, see: www.ihep.ac.cn/data/ichep04/ppt/11 hq/8-0494-herndon-m.pdf

View on Pith
[46]

W. Hollik, J. Illana, S. Rigolin and D. St¨ ockinger, Phys. Lett. B 416 (1998) 345, hep- ph/9707437; Phys. Lett. B 425 (1998) 322, hep-ph/9711322

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998
[47]

D. Chang, W. Keung and A. Pilaftsis, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 900 [Erratum-ibid. 83 (1999) 3972], hep-ph/9811202; A. Pilaftsis, Phys. Lett. B 471 (1999) 174, hep-ph/9909485

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999
[48]

O. Lebedev, K. Olive, M. Pospelov and A. Ritz, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 016003, hep- ph/0402023

View on Pith 2004
[49]

P. Nath, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66 (1991) 2565; Y. Kizukuri and N. Oshimo, Phys. Rev. D 46 (1992) 3025

View on Pith 1991
[50]

T. Ibrahim and P. Nath, Phys. Lett. B 418 (1998) 98, hep-ph/9707409; Phys. Rev. D 57 (1998) 478 [Erratum-ibid. D 58 (1998) 019901] [Erratum-ibid. D 60 (1998) 079903] [Erratum-ibid. D 58 (1999) 119901], hep-ph/9708456; M. Brhlik, G. Good and G. Kane, Phys. Rev. D 59 , 115004 (1999), hep-ph/9810457

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998
[51]

D. Bardin et al., in Precision Calculations for the Z Resonance, Yellow report CERN 95-03, eds. D. Bardin, W. Hollik and G. Passarino, hep-ph/9709229 ; D. Bardin, M. Gr¨ unewald and G. Passarino, hep-ph/9902452

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[52]

G. Passarino, Prepared for Mini-Workshop on Electroweak Precision Data a nd the Higgs Mass, Zeuthen, Germany, 28 Feb - 1 Mar 2003

View on Pith 2003
[53]

P. Bechtle, K. Desch and P. Wienemann, in Ref. [10] and: hep-ph /0412012

View on Pith
[54]

R. Lafaye, T. Plehn and D. Zerwas, hep-ph/0404282. 131

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[55]

See: spa.desy.de/spa/

View on Pith
[56]

G. Cho and K. Hagiwara, Nucl. Phys. B 574 (2000) 623, hep-ph/9912260

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000
[57]

M. Peskin and T. Takeuchi, Phys. Rev. D 46 (1992) 381

View on Pith 1992
[58]

A. Denner, S. Dittmaier and G. Weiglein, hep-ph/9505271

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[59]

G. Altarelli and R. Barbieri, Phys. Lett. B 253 (1990) 161; G. Altarelli, R. Barbieri and F. Caravaglios, Nucl. Phys. B 405 (1993) 3

View on Pith 1990
[60]

S. Dittmaier, K. Kolodziej, M. Kuroda and D. Schildknecht, Nucl. Phys. B 426 (1994) 249 [Erratum ibid. B 446 (1994) 334], hep-ph/9404306; S. Dittmaier, M. Kuroda and D. Schildknecht, Nucl. Phys. B 448 (1995) 3, hep- ph/9501404

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1994
[61]

R. Barbieri, A. Pomarol, R. Rattazzi and A. Strumia, hep-ph/0 405040

View on Pith
[62]

J. Erler, S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, G. Weiglein and P. Zerwas, Phys. Lett. B 486 (2000) 125; hep-ph/0005024; R. Hawkings and K. M¨ onig, Eur. Phys. J. direct C8 (1999) 1; hep-ex/9910022; J. Erler and S. Heinemeyer, hep-ph/0102083

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000
[63]

S. Heinemeyer, S. Kraml, W. Porod and G. Weiglein, JHEP 0309 (2003) 075, hep- ph/0306181

View on Pith 2003
[64]

G. Weiglein, Nature 429 (2004) 613

View on Pith 2004
[65]

U. Baur, R. Clare, J. Erler, S. Heinemeyer, D. Wackeroth, G. W eiglein and D. Wood, contribution to the P1-WG1 report of the workshop “The Future o f Particle Physics”, Snowmass, Colorado, USA, July 2001, hep-ph/0111314

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[66]

A. Juste, C. Hays, talks given at the workshop Tev4LHC, Fermilab, September 2004, see: conferences.fnal.gov/tev4lhc/talks/040916 TeV4LHC TopEW/ ; C. Hays, private communication

View on Pith 2004
[67]

M. Davier, S. Eidelman, A. H¨ ocker and Z. Zhang, Eur. Phys. J. C 31 (2003) 503, hep-ph/0308213

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[68]

K. Hagiwara, A. Martin, D. Nomura and T. Teubner, Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 093003, hep-ph/0312250

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[69]

S. Ghozzi and F. Jegerlehner, Phys. Lett. B 583 (2004) 222, hep-ph/0310181

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[70]

J. de Troconiz and F. Yndurain, hep-ph/0402285

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[71]

M. Knecht and A. Nyﬀeler, Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 073034, hep-ph/0111058; M. Knecht, A. Nyﬀeler, M. Perrottet and E. De Rafael, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88 (2002) 071802, hep-ph/0111059; 132 I. Blokland, A. Czarnecki and K. Melnikov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88 (2002) 071803, hep- ph/0112117; M. Ramsey-Musolf and M. Wise, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (2002) 041601, hep-ph/0201297;...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002
[72]

K. Melnikov and A. Vainshtein, hep-ph/0312226

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[73]

T. Kinoshita and M. Nio, hep-ph/0402206

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[74]

A. Aloisio et al. [KLOE Collaboration], hep-ex/0407048

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[75]

A. H¨ ocker, hep-ph/0410081

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[76]

C. Bollini and J. Giambiagi, Nuovo Cimento B 12 (1972) 20; J. Ashmore, Nuovo Cimento Lett. 4 (1972) 289

View on Pith 1972
[77]

G. ’t Hooft and M. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B 44 (1972) 189; P. Breitenlohner and D. Maison, Commun. Math. Phys. 52 (1977) 11

View on Pith 1972
[78]

W. Siegel, Phys. Lett. B 84 (1979) 193; D. Capper, D. Jones and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, Nucl. Phys. B 167 (1980) 479

View on Pith 1979
[79]

W. Siegel, Phys. Lett. B 94 (1980) 37; L. Avdeev, Phys. Lett. B 117 (1982) 317; L. Avdeev and A. Vladimirov, Nucl. Phys. B 219 (1983) 262

View on Pith 1980
[80]

I. Jack and D. Jones, hep-ph/9707278, in Perspectives on Supersymmetry , ed. G. Kane (World Scientiﬁc, Singapore), p. 149

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[81]

P. White, Class. Quant. Grav. 9 (1992) 1663; N. Maggiore, O. Piguet and S. Wolf, Nucl. Phys. B 476 (1996) 329, hep-th/9604002

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1992
[82]

E. Kraus, Ann. Phys. 262 (1998) 144, hep-th/9709154; P. Grassi, Nucl. Phys. B 560 (1999) 499, hep-th/9908188

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998
[83]

W. Hollik, E. Kraus, M. Roth, C. Rupp, K. Sibold and D. St¨ ockinge r, Nucl. Phys. B 639 (2002) 3, hep-ph/0204350

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002
[84]

W. Hollik, E. Kraus and D. St¨ ockinger, Eur. Phys. J. C 11 (1999) 365, hep-ph/9907393

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999
[85]

W. Hollik and D. St¨ ockinger, Eur. Phys. J. C 20 (2001) 105, hep-ph/0103009

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[86]

R. Ferrari and P. Grassi, Phys. Rev. D 60 (1999) 065010, hep-th/9807191; R. Ferrari, P. Grassi and A. Quadri, Phys. Lett. B 472 (2000) 346, hep-th/9905192; P. Grassi, T. Hurth and M. Steinhauser, Ann. Phys. 288 (2001) 197, hep-ph/9907426; Nucl. Phys. B 610 (2001) 215, hep-ph/0102005

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999
[87]

I. Fischer, W. Hollik, M. Roth and D. St¨ ockinger, Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 015004, hep-ph/0310191. 133

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[88]

D. St¨ ockinger, talk given at the ECF A Linear Collider Workshop, Durham, Septem- ber 1–4, 2004, see www.ippp.dur.ac.uk/ECFA04/program.html

View on Pith 2004
[89]

K. Aoki, Z. Hioki, M. Konuma, R. Kawabe and T. Muta, Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 73 (1982) 1; M. B¨ ohm, W. Hollik and H. Spiesberger, Fortsch. Phys. 34 (1986) 687; see also Ref. [83]

View on Pith 1982
[90]

A. Freitas, W. Hollik, W. Walter and G. Weiglein, Nucl. Phys. B 632 (2002) 189 [Erratum-ibid. B 666 (2003) 305], hep-ph/0202131

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002
[91]

A. Denner, G. Weiglein and S. Dittmaier, Phys. Lett. B 333 (1994) 420, hep- ph/9406204; Nucl. Phys. B 440 (1995) 95, hep-ph/9410338

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1994
[92]

G. K¨ all´ en and A. Sabry,K. Dan. Vidensk. Selsk. Mat.-Fys. Medd. 29 (1955) No. 17; M. Steinhauser, Phys. Lett. B 429 (1998) 158, hep-ph/9803313

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1955
[93]

H. Burkhardt and B. Pietrzyk, Phys. Lett. B 513 (2001) 46

View on Pith 2001
[94]

F. Jegerlehner, J. Phys. G 29 (2003) 101, hep-ph/0312372

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[95]

W. Hollik and H. Rzehak, Eur. Phys. J. C 32 (2003) 127, hep-ph/0305328

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[96]

S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, H. Rzehak and G. Weiglein, hep-ph/0411 114

View on Pith
[97]

A. Djouadi, P. Gambino, S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, C. J¨ unger and G. Weiglein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78 (1997) 3626, hep-ph/9612363; Phys. Rev. D 57 (1998) 4179, hep- ph/9710438

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1997
[98]

T. Banks, Nucl. Phys. B 303 (1988) 172; L. Hall, R. Rattazzi and U. Sarid, Phys. Rev. D 50 (1994) 7048, hep-ph/9306309; R. Hempﬂing, Phys. Rev. D 49 (1994) 6168; M. Carena, M. Olechowski, S. Pokorski and C. Wagner, Nucl. Phys. B 426 (1994) 269, hep-ph/9402253

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1988
[99]

M. Frank, S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik and G. Weiglein, hep-ph/02021 66

View on Pith
[100]

A. Freitas and D. St¨ ockinger, Phys. Rev. 66 (2002) 095014, hep-ph/0205281

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002
[101]

H. Haber and R. Hempﬂing, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66 (1991) 1815; Y. Okada, M. Yamaguchi and T. Yanagida, Prog. Theor. Phys. 85 (1991) 1; J. Ellis, G. Ridolﬁ and F. Zwirner, Phys. Lett. B 257 (1991) 83; Phys. Lett. B 262 (1991) 477; R. Barbieri and M. Frigeni, Phys. Lett. B 258 (1991) 395

View on Pith 1991
[102]

M. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B 123 (1977) 89. 134

View on Pith 1977
[103]

R. Barbieri and L. Maiani, Nucl. Phys. B 224 (1983) 32; C. S. Lim, T. Inami and N. Sakai, Phys. Rev. D 29 (1984) 1488; E. Eliasson, Phys. Lett. B 147 (1984) 65; Z. Hioki, Prog. Theo. Phys. 73 (1985) 1283; J. A. Grifols and J. Sola, Nucl. Phys. B 253 (1985) 47; B. Lynn, M. Peskin and R. Stuart, CERN Report 86-02, p. 90; R. Barbieri, M. Frigeni, F. Giuliani...

View on Pith 1983
[104]

P. Chankowski, Phys. Rev. D 41 (1990) 2877; H. Cheng, J. Feng and N. Polonsky, Phys. Rev. D 56 (1997) 6875, hep-ph/9706438; M. Nojiri, D. Pierce and Y. Yamada, Phys. Rev. D 57 (1998) 1539, hep-ph/9707244; E. Katz, L. Randall and S. Su, Nucl. Phys. B 536 (1998) 3, hep-ph/9801416

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1990
[105]

A. Freitas, A. von Manteuﬀel and P. Zerwas, Eur. Phys. J. C 34 (2004) 487, hep- ph/0310182

View on Pith 2004
[106]

M. Beccaria, F. Renard and C. Verzegnassi, Phys. Rev. D 63 (2001) 095010, hep- ph/0007224; M. Beccaria, M. Melles, F. Renard and C. Verzegnassi, Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 093007, hep-ph/0112273; M. Beccaria, H. Eberl, F. Renard and C. Verzegnassi, Phys. Rev. 69 (2004) 091301, hep-ph/0403099

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[107]

M. Carena, D. Garcia, U. Nierste and C. Wagner, Nucl. Phys. B 577 (2000) 577, hep-ph/9912516; H. Eberl, K. Hidaka, S. Kraml, W. Majerotto and Y. Yamada, Phys. Rev. D 62 (2000) 055006, hep-ph/9912463

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000
[108]

J. Guasch, P. H¨ aﬂiger and M. Spira, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 115001, hep-ph/0305101

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[109]

A. Sirlin, Phys. Rev. D 22 (1980) 971; W. Marciano and A. Sirlin, Phys. Rev. D 22 (1980) 2695

View on Pith 1980
[110]

A. Djouadi and C. Verzegnassi, Phys. Lett. B 195 (1987) 265; A. Djouadi, Nuovo Cim. A 100 (1988) 357

View on Pith 1987
[111]

L. Avdeev et al., Phys. Lett. B 336 (1994) 560 [Erratum-ibid. B 349 (1995) 597], hep-ph/9406363; K. Chetyrkin, J K¨ uhn and M. Steinhauser, Phys. Lett. B 351 (1995) 331, hep- ph/9502291; Phys. Rev. Lett. 75 (1995) 3394, hep-ph/9504413

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1994
[112]

J. Van der Bij and F. Hoogeveen, Nucl. Phys. B 283 (1987) 477

View on Pith 1987
[113]

R. Barbieri, M. Beccaria, P. Ciafaloni, G. Curci and A. Vicere, Nucl. Phys. B 409 (1993) 105; J. Fleischer, F. Jegerlehner and O.V. Tarasov, Phys. Lett. B 319 (1993) 249

View on Pith 1993
[114]

J. van der Bij and M. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B 231 (1984) 205. 135

View on Pith 1984
[115]

J. Van der Bij, K. Chetyrkin, M. Faisst, G. Jikia and T. Seidenst icker, Phys. Lett. B 498 (2001) 156, hep-ph/0011373

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[116]

M. Faisst, J. Kuhn, T. Seidensticker and O. Veretin, Nucl. Phys. B 665 (2003) 649, hep-ph/0302275

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[117]

R. Boughezal, J. Tausk and J. van der Bij, hep-ph/0410216

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[118]

S. Heinemeyer and G. Weiglein, proceedings of the RADCOR2000 , Carmel, Sep. 2000, hep-ph/0102317

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000
[119]

S. Heinemeyer and G. Weiglein, JHEP 0210 (2002) 072, hep-ph/0209305; hep- ph/0301062

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002
[120]

T. Appelquist and J. Carazzone, Phys. Rev. D 11 (1975) 2856; A. Dobado, M. Herrero and S. Pe˜ naranda, Eur. Phys. J. C 7 (1999) 313, hep- ph/9710313, Eur. Phys. J. C 12 (2000) 673, hep-ph/9903211; Eur. Phys. J. C 17 (2000) 487, hep-ph/0002134

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1975
[121]

J. K¨ ublbeck, M. B¨ ohm, and A. Denner,Comput. Phys. Comm. 60 (1990) 165; T. Hahn, Comput. Phys. Comm. 140 (2001) 418, hep-ph/0012260; see: www.feynarts.de

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1990
[122]

R. Behrends, R. Finkelstein and A. Sirlin, Phys. Rev. 101 (1956) 866; S. Berman, Phys. Rev. 112 (1958) 267; T. Kinoshita and A. Sirlin, Phys. Rev. 113 (1959) 1652

View on Pith 1956
[123]

T. van Ritbergen and R. Stuart, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 488, hep-ph/9808283; Nucl. Phys. B 564 (2000) 343, hep-ph/9904240; M. Steinhauser and T. Seidensticker, Phys. Lett. B 467 (1999) 271, hep-ph/9909436

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999
[124]

W. Marciano, Phys. Rev. D 20 (1979) 274; A. Sirlin, Phys. Rev. D 29 (1984) 89; M. Consoli, W. Hollik and F. Jegerlehner, Phys. Lett. B 227 (1989) 167

View on Pith 1979
[125]

B. Kniehl, Nucl. Phys. B 347 (1990) 89; F. Halzen and B. Kniehl, Nucl. Phys. B 353 (1991) 567; B. Kniehl and A. Sirlin, Nucl. Phys. B 371 (1992) 141; Phys. Rev. D 47 (1993) 883

View on Pith 1990
[126]

A. Djouadi and P. Gambino, Phys. Rev. D 49 (1994) 3499 [Erratum-ibid. D 53 (1994) 4111], hep-ph/9309298

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1994
[127]

K. Chetyrkin, J.H. K¨ uhn and M. Steinhauser, Nucl. Phys. B 482 (1996) 213, hep- ph/9606230

View on Pith 1996
[128]

A. Freitas, W. Hollik, W. Walter and G. Weiglein, Phys. Lett. B 495 (2000) 338 [Erratum-ibid. B 570 (2003) 260], hep-ph/0007091; A. Freitas, S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, W. Walter and G. Weiglein, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 89 (2000) 82, hep-ph/0007129. 136

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000
[129]

M. Awramik and M. Czakon, Phys. Lett. B 568 (2003) 48, hep-ph/0305248

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[130]

M. Awramik and M. Czakon, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (2002) 241801, hep-ph/0208113; A. Onishchenko and O. Veretin, Phys. Lett. B 551 (2003) 111, hep-ph/0209010; M. Awramik, M. Czakon, A. Onishchenko and O. Veretin, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 053004, hep-ph/0209084

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002
[131]

G. Weiglein, Acta Phys. Polon. B 29 (1998) 2735, hep-ph/9807222; A. Stremplat, Diploma thesis (Univ. of Karlsruhe, 1998), see: www-itp.physik.uni-karlsruhe.de/diplomatheses.de.shtml

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998
[132]

M. Awramik, M. Czakon, A. Freitas and G. Weiglein, Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 053006, hep-ph/0311148

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[133]

G. Weiglein, Eur. Phys. J. C 33 (2004) S630, hep-ph/0312314

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[134]

V. Abazov et al. [D0 Collaboration], Nature 429 (2004) 638, hep-ex/0406031; P. Azzi et al. [CDF Collaboration, D0 Collaboration], hep-ex/0404010

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[135]

F. Jegerlehner, Talk presented at the LNF Spring School, Fra scati, Italy, 1999, see: www.ifh.de/∼fjeger/Frascati99.ps.gz ; hep-ph/0105283

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999
[136]

P. Chankowski, A. Dabelstein, W. Hollik, W. M¨ osle, S. Pokorski and J. Rosiek, Nucl. Phys. B 417 (1994) 101

View on Pith 1994
[137]

D. Garcia and J. Sol` a, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 9 (1994) 211

View on Pith 1994
[138]

P. Chankowski, S. Pokorski and J. Rosiek, Nucl. Phys. B 423 (1994) 437, hep- ph/9303309

View on Pith 1994
[139]

M. Drees, K. Hagiwara and A. Yamada, Phys. Rev. D 45 (1992) 1725

View on Pith 1992
[140]

S. Heinemeyer, PhD thesis, see: www-itp.physik.uni-karlsruhe.de/phd.de.shtml; G. Weiglein, hep-ph/9901317

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[141]

G. Passarino and M. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B 160 (1979) 151

View on Pith 1979
[142]

A. Davydychev und J. B. Tausk, Nucl. Phys. B 397 (1993) 123; F. Berends und J. B. Tausk, Nucl. Phys. B 421 (1994) 456

View on Pith 1993
[143]

W. Hollik, Fortschr. Phys. 38 (1990) 3

View on Pith 1990
[144]

D. Pierce, J. Bagger, K. Matchev and R. Zhang, Nucl. Phys. B 491 (1997) 3, hep- ph/9606211

View on Pith 1997
[145]

A. Dabelstein, W. Hollik and W. M¨ osle, hep-ph/9506251; W. M¨ osle, PhD thesis, University of Karlsruhe, Germany, 1997, se e: www-itp.physik.uni-karlsruhe.de/phd.de.shtml

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1997
[146]

The LEP Collaborations and the LEP Electroweak Working Group , the SLD Elec- troweak Working Group and Heavy Flavour Groups, hep-ex/03120 23. 137

View on Pith
[147]

K. Chetyrkin, A. Kataev and F. Tkachov, Phys. Lett. B 85 (1979) 277; M. Dine and J. Sapirstein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 43 (1979) 668; W. Celmaster and R. Gonsalves, Phys. Rev. Lett. 44 (1980) 560; S. Gorishny, A. Kataev and S. Larin, Phys. Lett. B 259 (1991) 144; L. Surguladze and M. Samuel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66 (1991) 560; A. Kataev, Phys. Lett. B 287 (1992) 209

View on Pith 1979
[148]

K. Chetyrkin and J. K¨ uhn, Phys. Lett. B 248 (1990) 359; Phys. Lett. B 406 (1997) 102; K. Chetyrkin, J. K¨ uhn and A. Kwiatkowski, Phys. Lett. B 282 (1992) 221; K. Chetyrkin and A. Kwiatkowski, Phys. Lett. B 305 (1993) 285; Phys. Lett. B 319 (1993) 307, hep-ph/9310229

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1990
[149]

B. Kniehl and J. K¨ uhn, Phys. Lett. B 224 (1990) 229; Nucl. Phys. B 329 (1990) 547; K. Chetyrkin and J. K¨ uhn, Phys. Lett. B 308 (1993) 127; S. Larin, T. van Ritbergen and J. Vermaseren, Phys. Lett. B 320 (1994) 159, hep- ph/9310378; K. Chetyrkin and O. Tarasov, Phys. Lett. B 327 (1994) 114, hep-ph/9312323

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1990
[150]

K. Chetyrkin, J. K¨ uhn and A. Kwiatkowski, in: Reports of the Working Group on Precision Calculations for the Z Resonance, p. 175, CERN 95-03 (1995), eds. D. Bardin, W. Hollik and G. Passarino; K. Chetyrkin, J. K¨ uhn and A. Kwiatkowski, Phys. Rep. 277 (1996) 189

View on Pith 1995
[151]

J. Fleischer, F. Jegerlehner, P. R¸ aczka and O. Tarasov, Phys. Lett. B 293 (1992) 437; G. Buchalla and A. Buras, Nucl. Phys. B 398 (1993) 285; G. Degrassi, Nucl. Phys. B 407 (1993) 271, hep-ph/9302288; K. Chetyrkin, A. Kwiatkowski and M. Steinhauser, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 8 (1993) 2785

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1992
[152]

A. Kwiatkowski and M. Steinhauser, Phys. Lett. B 344 (1995) 359, hep-ph/9409314; S. Peris and A. Santamaria, Nucl. Phys. B 445 (1995) 252, hep-ph/9502307

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1995
[153]

R. Harlander, T. Seidensticker and M. Steinhauser, Phys. Lett. B 426 (1998) 125, hep-ph/9712228; J. Fleischer, F. Jegerlehner, M. Tentyukov and O. Veretin, Phys. Lett. B 459 (1999) 625, hep-ph/9904256

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998
[154]

A. Czarnecki and J. K¨ uhn, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77 (1996) 3955, Erratum-ibid. 80 (1998) 893, hep-ph/9608366

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1996
[155]

K. Hagiwara and H. Murayama, Phys. Lett. B 246 (1990) 533

View on Pith 1990
[156]

C. J¨ unger, PhD Thesis, Univ. Karlsruhe, Shaker Verlag, Aac hen 1997, ISBN 3-8265- 2662-7, see: www-itp.physik.uni-karlsruhe.de/phd.de.shtml

View on Pith 1997
[157]

J. Jersak, E. Laermann, P. Zerwas, Phys. Rev. D 25 (1980) 1218 [Erratum-ibid. D 36 (1987) 310]; A. Djouadi, Z. Phys. C 39 (1988) 561; 138 A. Djouadi, B. Lampe, P. Zerwas, Z. Phys. C 67 (1995) 123; hep-ph/9411386; J. K¨ uhn, P. Zerwas et al., in:Z Physics at LEP 1 , CERN 89-08 (1989), eds. G. Altarelli, R. Kleiss, C. Verzegnassi, Vol. I, p. 267

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1980
[158]

G. Altarelli and B. Lampe, Nucl. Phys. B 391 (1993) 3; V. Ravindran and W. van Neerven, Nucl. Phys. B 445 (1998) 214, hep-ph/9809411; S. Catani, M. Seymour, JHEP 9907 (1999) 023, hep-ph/9905424

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1993
[159]

M. Awramik, M. Czakon, A. Freitas and G. Weiglein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004) 201805, hep-ph/0407317; Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 135 (2004) 119, hep-ph/0408207; hep-ph/0409142

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[160]

G. Degrassi, P. Gambino and A. Sirlin, Phys. Lett. B 394 (1997) 188, hep-ph/9611363

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1997
[161]

A. Dabelstein, Nucl. Phys. B 456 (1995) 25, hep-ph/9503443; Z. Phys. C 67 (1995) 495, hep-ph/9409375; P. Chankowski, S. Pokorski, J. Rosiek, Nucl. Phys. B 423 (1994) 437, hep-ph/9303309

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1995
[162]

R. Hempﬂing and A. Hoang, Phys. Lett. B 331 (1994) 99, hep-ph/9401219; R. Zhang, Phys. Lett. B 447 (1999) 89, hep-ph/9808299

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1994
[163]

S. Martin, Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 116003, hep-ph/0111209; D 66 (2002) 096001, hep-ph/0206136; D 67 (2003) 095012, hep-ph/0211366. D 68 075002 (2003), hep- ph/0307101; Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 016005, hep-ph/0312092

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002
[164]

M. Carena, M. Quir´ os and C. Wagner, Nucl. Phys. B 461 (1996) 407, hep-ph/9508343; H. Haber, R. Hempﬂing and A. Hoang, Z. Phys. C 75 (1997) 539, hep-ph/9609331

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1996
[165]

S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik and G. Weiglein, Phys. Rev. D 58 (1998) 091701, hep- ph/9803277; Phys. Lett. B 440 (1998) 296, hep-ph/9807423

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998
[166]

S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik and G. Weiglein, Eur. Phys. J. C 9 (1999) 343, hep- ph/9812472

View on Pith 1999
[167]

S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik and G. Weiglein, Phys. Lett. B 455 (1999) 179, hep- ph/9903404

View on Pith 1999
[168]

M. Carena, H. Haber, S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, C. Wagner and G . Weiglein, Nucl. Phys. B 580 (2000) 29, hep-ph/0001002

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000
[169]

S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik and G. Weiglein, hep-ph/9910283; J. Espinosa and R. Zhang, JHEP 0003 (2000) 026, hep-ph/9912236; G. Degrassi, P. Slavich and F. Zwirner, hep-ph/0105096

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000
[170]

G. Degrassi, S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, P. Slavich and G. Weiglein, Eur. Phys. J. C 28 (2003) 133, hep-ph/0212020

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[171]

A. Pilaftsis, Phys. Rev. D 58 (1998) 096010, hep-ph/9803297; Phys. Lett. B 435 (1998) 88, hep-ph/9805373. 139

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998
[172]

D. Demir, Phys. Rev. D 60 (1999) 055006, hep-ph/9901389; S. Choi, M. Drees and J. Lee, Phys. Lett. B 481 (2000) 57, hep-ph/0002287

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999
[173]

A. Pilaftsis and C. Wagner, Nucl. Phys. B 553 (1999) 3, hep-ph/9902371; M. Carena, J. Ellis, A. Pilaftsis and C. Wagner, Nucl. Phys. B 586 (2000) 92, hep- ph/0003180

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999
[174]

S. Heinemeyer, Eur. Phys. J. C 22 (2001) 521, hep-ph/0108059; M. Frank, S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik and G. Weiglein, hep-ph/0212037; in preparation

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[175]

S. Heinemeyer, hep-ph/0407244

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[176]

J. Espinosa and R. Zhang, Nucl. Phys. B 586 (2000) 3, hep-ph/0003246

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000
[177]

A. Brignole, G. Degrassi, P. Slavich and F. Zwirner, Nucl. Phys. B 631 (2002) 195, hep-ph/0112177

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002
[178]

A. Brignole, G. Degrassi, P. Slavich and F. Zwirner, Nucl. Phys. B 643 (2002) 79, hep-ph/0206101

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002
[179]

A. Dedes, G. Degrassi and P. Slavich, Nucl. Phys. B 672 (2003) 144, hep-ph/0305127

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[180]

S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik and G. Weiglein, Comp. Phys. Comm. 124 2000 76, hep- ph/9812320; hep-ph/0002213. The codes are accessible via www.feynhiggs.de

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000
[181]

T. Hahn, S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik and G. Weiglein, MPP–2003–147 , in proceedings of Physics at TeV Colliders , Les Houches, June 2003, hep-ph/0406152; in preparation

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[182]

S. Martin, hep-ph/0405022

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[183]

S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, and G. Weiglein, Eur. Phys. J. C 16 (2000) 139, hep- ph/0003022

View on Pith 2000
[184]

S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, J. Rosiek, and G. Weiglein, Eur. Phys. J. C 19 (2001) 535, hep-ph/0102081

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[185]

J. Branson et al. [CMS collaboration], hep-ph/0110021

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[186]

S. Heinemeyer, hep-ph/0408340

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[187]

B. Allanach, A. Djouadi, J. Kneur, W. Porod and P. Slavich, JHEP 0409 (2004) 044, hep-ph/0406166

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[188]

S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik and G. Weiglein, JHEP 0006 (2000) 009, hep-ph/9909540

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000
[189]

M. Beneke, I. Efthymiopoulos, M. Mangano, J. Womersley, Top Quark Physics , in CERN-YR-2000/01, eds. G. Altarelli and M. Mangano, hep-ph/000 3033. 140

View on Pith 2000
[190]

M. Winter, LC Note LC-PHSM-2001-016, see www.desy.de/∼lcnotes/notes.html ; talk given at the LHC/LC study group meeting, CERN, July 2002, see : www.ippp.dur.ac.uk/∼georg/lhclc/

View on Pith 2001
[191]

J. K¨ uhn and M. Steinhauser, Nucl. Phys. B 619 (2001) 588 [Erratum-ibid. B 640 (2002) 415], hep-ph/0109084; JHEP 0210 (2002) 018, hep-ph/0209357; A. Hoang, hep-ph/0204299; A. El-Khadra and M. Luke, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 52 (2002) 201, hep-ph/0208114; G. Corcella and A. Hoang, Phys. Lett. B 554 (2003) 133, hep-ph/0212297

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[192]

A. Hoang, Applications of Two-Loop Calculations in the Standard Mode l and its Min- imal Supersymmetric Extension , PhD thesis, Universit¨ at Karlsruhe, Shaker Verlag, Aachen 1995

View on Pith 1995
[193]

A. Czarnecki and W. Marciano, Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001) 013014, hep-ph/0102122

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[194]

M. Knecht, hep-ph/0307239; M. Passera, hep-ph/0411168

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[195]

A. Czarnecki, B. Krause and W. Marciano, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76 (1996) 3267, hep- ph/9512369; Phys. Rev. D 52 (1995) 2619, hep-ph/9506256

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1996
[196]

B. Krause, PhD thesis, Universit¨ at Karlsruhe, 1997, Shake r Verlag, ISBN 3-8265-2780-1

View on Pith 1997
[197]

S. Heinemeyer, D. St¨ ockinger and G. Weiglein, Nucl. Phys. B 699 (2004) 103, hep- ph/0405255

View on Pith 2004
[198]

T. Moroi, Phys. Rev. D 53 (1996) 6565 [Erratum-ibid. D 56 (1997) 4424], hep- ph/9512396

View on Pith 1996
[199]

S. Abel, W. Cottingham and I. Whittingham, Phys. Lett. B 259 (1991) 307; J. Lopez, D. Nanopoulos and X. Wang, Phys. Rev. D 49 (1994) 366, hep-ph/9308336

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1991
[200]

J. Ellis, D. Nanopoulos and K. Olive, Phys. Lett. B 508 (2001) 65, hep-ph/0102331; R. Arnowitt, B. Dutta, B. Hu and Y. Santoso, Phys. Lett. B 505 (2001) 177, hep- ph/0102344

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[201]

L. Everett, G. Kane, S. Rigolin and L. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (2001) 3484, hep- ph/0102145; U. Chattopadhyay and P. Nath, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (2001) 5854, hep-ph/0102157; S. Komine, T. Moroi and M. Yamaguchi, Phys. Lett. B 506 (2001) 93, hep-ph/0102204; S. Martin and J. Wells, Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001) 035003, hep-ph/0103067; H. Baer, C. Balazs, J. Ferran...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[202]

J. Feng and K. Matchev, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (2001) 3480, hep-ph/0102146. 141

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[203]

A. Djouadi, M. Drees and J. Kneur, JHEP 0108 (2001) 055, hep-ph/0107316

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[204]

G. Degrassi and G. Giudice, Phys. Rev. D 58 (1998) 053007, hep-ph/9803384

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998
[205]

S. Heinemeyer, D. St¨ ockinger and G. Weiglein, Nucl. Phys. B 690 (2004) 62, hep- ph/0312264

View on Pith 2004
[206]

C. Chen and C. Geng, Phys. Lett. B 511 (2001) 77, hep-ph/0104151

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[207]

A. Arhrib and S. Baek, Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 075002, hep-ph/0104225

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002
[208]

R. Scharf, Diploma thesis, Universit¨ at W¨ urzburg, 1991

View on Pith 1991
[209]

J. Vermaseren, math-ph/0010025

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[210]

See: www.wolfram.com

View on Pith
[211]

T. Hahn and C. Schappacher, Comput. Phys. Comm. 143 (2002) 54, hep-ph/0105349

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002
[212]

T. Hahn and M. P´ erez-Victoria, Comput. Phys. Comm. 118 (1999) 153, hep- ph/9807565. see: www.feynarts.de/formcalc

View on Pith 1999
[213]

T. Hahn, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 89 (2000) 231, hep-ph/0005029; see: www.feynarts.de/looptools

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000
[214]

G. Weiglein, R. Scharf and M. B¨ ohm, Nucl. Phys. B 416 (1994) 606, hep-ph/9310358; G. Weiglein, R. Mertig, R. Scharf and M. B¨ ohm, in New Computing Techniques in Physics Research 2 , ed. D. Perret-Gallix (World Scientiﬁc, Singapore, 1992), p. 617

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1994
[215]

P. Nogueira, J. Comput. Phys. 105 (1993) 279

View on Pith 1993
[216]

R. Harlander and M. Steinhauser, Phys. Lett. B 574 (2003) 258, hep-ph/0307346

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[217]

M. Steinhauser, PhD thesis, University of Karlsruhe (Shaker Verlag, Aachen, 1996)

View on Pith 1996
[218]

S. Larin, F. Tkachov and J. Vermaseren, Rep. No. NIKHEF-H /91-18 (Amsterdam, 1991)

View on Pith 1991
[219]

T. Seidensticker, Diploma thesis (University of Karlsruhe, 199 8), unpublished

View on Pith
[220]

F. Yuasa et al., Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 138, 18 (2000), hep-ph/0007053; see http://minami-home.kek.jp

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000
[221]

R. Harlander and M. Steinhauser, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 43 (1999) 167, hep- ph/9812357

View on Pith 1999
[222]

G. Weiglein, hep-ph/0109237

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[223]

S. Dittmaier, hep-ph/0308079

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[224]

A. Djouadi, J. Kalinowski and M. Spira, Comput. Phys. Comm. 108 (1998) 56, hep- ph/9704448. 142

View on Pith 1998
[225]

J. Lee, A. Pilaftsis et al., Comput. Phys. Comm. 156 (2004) 283, hep-ph/0307377

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[226]

S. Heinemeyer and G. Weiglein, hep-ph/0012364

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[227]

S. Heinemeyer and G. Weiglein, hep-ph/0307177, in Proceedings of the Workshop on Electroweak precision data and the Higgs mass , DESY Zeuthen 2003, eds. S. Dittmaier and K. M¨ onig, DESY-PROC-2003-1; S. Heinemeyer, hep-ph/0406245, to appear in the proceedings of Loops & Legs in Quan- tum Field Theory 2004 , Zinnowitz, Germany, April 2004

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[228]

M. Chanowitz, hep-ph/0304199

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[229]

G. Altarelli, F. Caravaglios, G. Giudice, P. Gambino and G. Ridolﬁ, JHEP 0106 (2001) 018, hep-ph/0106029

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[230]

G. Zeller et al. [NuTeV Collaboration], Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 111103, [Erratum-ibid. D 67 (2003) 119902] hep-ex/0203004

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002
[231]

S. Davidson, S. Forte, P. Gambino, N. Rius and A. Strumia, JHEP 0202 (2002) 037, hep-ph/0112302

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002
[232]

A. Kurylov, M. Ramsey-Musolf and S. Su, Phys. Lett. B 582 (2004) 222, hep- ph/0307270; O. Brein, B. Koch and W. Hollik, hep-ph/0408331

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[233]

P. Ball, S. Khalil and E. Kou, Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 115011, hep-ph/0311361

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[234]

T. Besmer, C. Greub and T. Hurth, Nucl. Phys. B 609 (2001) 359, hep-ph/0105292; F. Borzumati, C. Greub, T. Hurth and D. Wyler, Phys. Rev. D 62 (2000) 075005, hep-ph/9911245

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[235]

M. Neubert, hep-ph/0408179

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[236]

W. de Boer, A. Dabelstein, W. Hollik, W. M¨ osle and U. Schwickera th, Z. Phys. C 75 (1997) 627, hep-ph/9607286; hep-ph/9609209; W. de Boer, M. Huber, C. Sander and D. Kazakov, Phys. Lett. B 515 (2001) 283

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1997
[237]

D. Pierce and J. Erler, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 62 (1998) 97, hep-ph/9708374; Nucl. Phys. B 526 (1998) 53, hep-ph/9801238

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998
[238]

G. Cho, K. Hagiwara, C. Kao and R. Szalapski, hep-ph/990135 1; G. Cho and K. Hagiwara, Phys. Lett. B 514 (2001) 123, hep-ph/0105037; see also Ref. [56]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[239]

W. de Boer and C. Sander, Phys. Lett. B 585 (2004) 276, hep-ph/0307049

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[240]

G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, A. Cottrant, A. Pukhov and A. Se menov, hep-ph/0407218

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[241]

M. Peskin and J. Wells, Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001) 093003, hep-ph/0101342. 143

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[242]

A. Bartl, H. Eberl, S. Kraml, W. Majerotto and W. Porod, Proc eedings, Linear Collider Workshop Sitges 1999, hep-ph/9909378; M. Berggren, R. Ker¨ anen, H. Nowak and A. Sopczak, Proceeding s, Linear Collider Workshop Sitges 1999, hep-ph/9911345

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999
[243]

K. Desch, E. Gross, S. Heinemeyer, G. Weiglein and L. Zivkovic, JHEP 0409 (2004) 062, hep-ph/0406322

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[244]

L. Girardello and M. Grisaru, Nucl. Phys. B 194 (1982) 65

View on Pith 1982
[245]

I. Jack and D. Jones, Phys. Lett. B 457 (1999) 101, hep-ph/9903365

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999
[246]

S. Ambrosanio, A. Dedes, S. Heinemeyer, S. Su and G. Weiglein, Nucl. Phys. B 624 (2001) 3, hep-ph/0106255; A. Dedes, S. Heinemeyer, S. Su and G. Weiglein, hep-ph/0110219

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[247]

J. Ellis, S. Heinemeyer, K. Olive and G. Weiglein, JHEP 0301 (2003) 006, hep- ph/0211206

View on Pith 2003
[248]

J. Ellis, S. Heinemeyer, K. Olive and G. Weiglein, hep-ph/0411216

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[249]

M. Dine, W. Fischler, M. Srednicki, Nucl. Phys. B 189 (1981) 575; S. Dimopoulos, S. Raby, Nucl. Phys. B 192 (1981) 353; M. Dine, W. Fischler, Phys. Lett. B 110 (1982) 227; M. Dine, M. Srednicki, Nucl. Phys. B 202 (1982) 238; M. Dine, W. Fischler, Nucl. Phys. B 204 (1982) 346; L. Alvarez-Gaum´ e, M. Claudson, M. Wise, Nucl. Phys. B 207 (1982) 96; C. Nappi,...

View on Pith 1981
[250]

M. Dine, A. Nelson, Phys. Rev. D 48 (1993) 1277, hep-ph/9303230; M. Dine, A. Nelson, Y. Shirman, Phys. Rev. D 51 (1995) 1362, hep-ph/9408384; M. Dine, A. Nelson, Y. Nir, Y. Shirman, Phys. Rev. D 53 (1996) 2658, hep-ph/9507378

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1993
[251]

P. Fayet, Phys. Lett. B 70 (1977) 461; Phys. Lett. B 86 (1979) 272; Phys. Lett. B 175 (1986) 471; and in “Uniﬁcation of the fundamental particle interactions” , eds. S. Ferrara, J. Ellis, P. van Nieuwenhuizen (Plenum, New York, 1980) p. 587

View on Pith 1977
[252]

A. Pomarol and R. Rattazzi, JHEP 9905 (1999) 013, hep-ph/9903448

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999
[253]

Z. Chacko, M. Luty and E. Ponton, JHEP 0004 (2000) 001, hep-ph/9905390

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000
[254]

E. Katz, Y. Shadmi and Y. Shirman, JHEP 9908 (1999) 015, hep-ph/9906296

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999
[255]

I. Jack, D. Jones and R. Wild, Phys. Lett. B 535 , 193 (2002), hep-ph/0202101

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002
[256]

R. Barate et al. [ALEPH Collaboration], Phys. Lett. B 499 (2001) 53, hep-ex/0010062. 144

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[257]

J. Ellis, J. Hagelin, D. Nanopoulos, K. Olive and M. Srednicki, Nucl. Phys. B238 (1984) 453; H. Goldberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 50 (1983) 1419; J. Ellis, T. Falk, G. Ganis, K. Olive and M. Srednicki, Phys. Lett. B 510 (2001) 236, hep-ph/0102098

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1984
[258]

S. Ambrosanio, S. Heinemeyer, B. Mele, S. Petrarca, G. Poles ello, A. Rimoldi and G. Weiglein, hep-ph/0002191

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[259]

C. Bennett et al., Astrophys. J. Suppl. 148 (2003) 1, astro-ph/0302207; D. Spergel et al., Astrophys. J. Suppl. 148 (2003) 175, astro-ph/0302209

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[260]

J. Ellis, K. Olive, Y. Santoso and V. Spanos, Phys. Lett. B 565 (2003) 176, hep- ph/0303043

View on Pith 2003
[261]

U. Chattopadhyay, A. Corsetti and P. Nath, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 035005, hep- ph/0303201; H. Baer and C. Balazs, JCAP 0305, 006 (2003), hep-ph/0303114; A. Lahanas and D. Nanopoulos, Phys. Lett. B 568 , 55 (2003), hep-ph/0303130; R. Arnowitt, B. Dutta and B. Hu, hep-ph/0310103

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[262]

K. Chetyrkin, M. Misiak and M. M¨ unz, Phys. Lett. B 400 , (1997) 206, [Erratum-ibid. B 425 (1998) 414] hep-ph/9612313; P. Gambino and M. Misiak, Nucl. Phys. B 611 (2001) 338, hep-ph/0104034

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1997
[263]

P. Cho, M. Misiak and D. Wyler, Phys. Rev. D 54 , 3329 (1996), hep-ph/9601360; A. Kagan and M. Neubert, Eur. Phys. J. C 7 (1999) 5, hep-ph/9805303; A. Ali, E. Lunghi, C. Greub and G. Hiller, Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002) 034002, hep- ph/0112300; G. Hiller and F. Kr¨ uger, Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 074020, hep-ph/0310219

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1996
[264]

R. Barate et al. [ALEPH Collaboration], Phys. Lett. B 429 (1998) 169; S. Chen et al. [CLEO Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 251807, hep- ex/0108032; P. Koppenburg et al. [Belle Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004) 061803, hep- ex/0403004; K. Abe et al. [Belle Collaboration], Phys. Lett. B 511 (2001) 151, hep-ex/0103042; B. Aubert et al. [B...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998
[265]

T. Barklow, hep-ph/0312268. 145

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

Forward citations

Cited by 35 Pith papers

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

Higher order corrections to Higgs boson decays in the MSSM with complex parameters
hep-ph 2011-03 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

Full one-loop vertex corrections to MSSM Higgs cascade and fermion decays are large, and they shift which CPX parameter regions the LEP Higgs searches exclude, leaving an open window near 45 GeV.
On-shell Mass Renormalisation and RG-improved Effective Potential in Vector-like Lepton Models
hep-ph 2026-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

The authors construct on-shell renormalization schemes and redundancy-free two-loop RGEs for six vector-like lepton models, then use the RG-improved effective potential to map vacuum instability scales across the para...
Precise calculation of the W boson pole mass beyond the Standard Model with FlexibleSUSY
hep-ph 2022-04 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A rebuilt W boson mass calculation in FlexibleSUSY removes spurious non-decoupling logarithms from earlier versions, and the MRSSM is shown to reach the 2022 CDF W mass value at a Higgs mass of 125 GeV.
Precise prediction for the Higgs-Boson Masses in the $\mu\nu$SSM
hep-ph 2017-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A complete one-loop renormalization of the mu-nu SSM neutral scalar sector shows its SM-like Higgs mass prediction agrees with the NMSSM to within a few keV, and the model can host a 96 GeV scalar matching LEP and CMS...
Reconciling EFT and hybrid calculations of the light MSSM Higgs-boson mass
hep-ph 2017-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Three bookkeeping effects, chiefly an inappropriate DR-to-OS parameter conversion, explain most of the reported discrepancy between hybrid and pure EFT predictions of the light MSSM Higgs mass.

Show 30 more citing papers

Gauge-independent Renormalization of the 2-Higgs-Doublet Model
hep-ph 2016-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Combining the alternative tadpole scheme with the pinch technique yields gauge-independent, process-independent counterterms for the 2HDM mixing angles alpha and beta, whereas the widely used KOSY scheme produces gaug...
Effective theories of universal theories
hep-ph 2015-10 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

Universal theories, the class for which the S and T oblique parameters are meaningful, are shown to be fully described at dimension six by 16 basis-independent parameters, with explicit dictionaries to four SMEFT bases.
Momentum-dependent two-loop QCD corrections to the neutral Higgs-boson masses in the MSSM
hep-ph 2014-04 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Momentum-dependent two-loop QCD corrections shift the light MSSM Higgs mass by up to roughly 0.5 GeV, comparable to current experimental precision, and are now included in the FeynHiggs code.
Dirac Gauginos and the 125 GeV Higgs
hep-ph 2012-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Dirac-gaugino supersymmetric models can naturally produce a 125 GeV Higgs, and a new 'dynamical mu' variant can raise the diphoton rate while lowering bottom and tau rates, whereas the MSSM-without-mu variant is disfa...
Supersymmetry Without Prejudice
hep-ph 2008-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A large-scale scan of the 19-parameter pMSSM, filtered through LEP and Tevatron data, yields surviving models whose mass spectra and observable predictions are much broader than any conventional SUSY breaking scenario.
The Higgs Boson Masses and Mixings of the Complex MSSM in the Feynman-Diagrammatic Approach
hep-ph 2006-11 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

The complete one-loop Feynman-diagrammatic corrections to Higgs boson masses and mixings in the complex MSSM are computed with all phases and imaginary parts retained, and released in FeynHiggs 2.5.
Precise Prediction for M_W in the MSSM
hep-ph 2006-04 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

The W boson mass in the MSSM is predicted with a complete one-loop complex-phase calculation combined with all known higher-order corrections, yielding the most accurate MSSM prediction to date and shifts up to about ...
Search for Neutral MSSM Higgs Bosons at LEP
hep-ex 2006-02 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

Combined LEP data show no Higgs boson signal and exclude large MSSM parameter regions, including CP-violating scenarios.
Complementary Probes of Light Higgsinos: Electroweak Precision Measurements and Dark Matter Direct Detection
hep-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

Future electroweak precision measurements can probe light higgsinos up to 500 GeV even in compressed spectra below the neutrino fog, complementing direct detection which reaches the 1 TeV thermal relic mass.
Excesses in the low-mass Higgs-boson search and the W-boson mass measurement
hep-ph 2022-04 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

In the N2HDM type IV, parameter points that describe the 95 GeV excesses in the diphoton, tau-pair and b-bbar channels can also raise the predicted W-boson mass to the CDF value, at the cost of tension with the LEP ef...
SpecBit, DecayBit and PrecisionBit: GAMBIT modules for computing mass spectra, particle decay rates and precision observables
hep-ph 2017-05 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

GAMBIT's SpecBit, DecayBit and PrecisionBit modules provide a runtime-swappable interface that links spectrum generators, decay codes and precision calculators into a single consistent pipeline.
The Light and Heavy Higgs Interpretation of the MSSM
hep-ph 2016-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Both the light and the heavy CP-even MSSM Higgs bosons remain viable explanations of the 125 GeV signal, with the heavy case confined to a narrow parameter region that new benchmark scenarios make experimentally searchable.
Relic density of wino-like dark matter in the MSSM
hep-ph 2016-01 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Once the Sommerfeld effect, one-loop mass splittings and running couplings are included, wino-like neutralino dark matter in the MSSM matches the observed relic density for masses from 1.7 TeV to beyond 4 TeV, not jus...
Vacuum Stability and the MSSM Higgs Mass
hep-ph 2013-10 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Numerical bounce calculations show that a large part of the MSSM stop parameter space that yields a 125 GeV Higgs is either absolutely unstable or too short-lived against tunnelling into a charge- and colour-breaking vacuum.
MSSM Higgs Boson Searches at the LHC: Benchmark Scenarios after the Discovery of a Higgs-like Particle
hep-ph 2013-02 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

Six new low-energy MSSM Higgs benchmark scenarios are defined so that the 125.5 GeV LHC state can be identified with a neutral CP-even Higgs boson over wide regions of the MA-tan(beta) plane.
Mass Bounds on a Very Light Neutralino
hep-ph 2009-01 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Dropping the grand-unification relation between the two gaugino masses, a massless lightest neutralino is consistent with LEP collider data, electroweak precision observables, rare meson decays, supernova cooling, and...
The Higgs sector of the complex MSSM at two-loop order: QCD contributions
hep-ph 2007-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Adding the two-loop strong-interaction correction to the complex-parameter MSSM Higgs sector roughly doubles the sensitivity of the lightest Higgs mass to CP-violating phases, reaching shifts of about 5 GeV.
A Markov Chain Monte Carlo Analysis of the CMSSM
hep-ph 2006-02 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

A Bayesian MCMC scan of the Constrained MSSM yields 68% intervals for m1/2, m0, A0 and tan beta, shows m0 is prior-dependent while the other parameters are robust, and maps correlations among rare B decays and dark ma...
A Model of Vector-like Leptons for the Muon $g-2$ and the $W$ Boson Mass
hep-ph 2022-04 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

A vector-like lepton plus a second Higgs doublet under a new U(1)' symmetry can simultaneously accommodate the muon g-2 and W boson mass anomalies within existing constraints.
Precision calculations in the MSSM Higgs-boson sector with FeynHiggs 2.14
hep-ph 2018-11 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

Version 2.14 of FeynHiggs adds a DR-renormalized stop sector, non-degenerate matching thresholds, and a linear interpolation over complex phases, improving MSSM Higgs-mass predictions across low and high SUSY scales.
Delta r and the W-boson mass in the Singlet Extension of the Standard Model
hep-ph 2014-06 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

In the singlet extension of the Standard Model, the measured W boson mass constrains the Higgs mixing angle more tightly than direct searches or electroweak fits once the extra scalar is heavier than about 300 GeV.
MSSM Interpretations of the LHC Discovery: Light or Heavy Higgs?
hep-ph 2012-11 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

A seven-parameter MSSM fit to the 2012 LHC and Tevatron Higgs rates prefers the light CP-even Higgs over the Standard Model and still permits the heavy CP-even Higgs as the 126 GeV state.
The Supersymmetric Parameter Space in Light of B-physics Observables and Electroweak Precision Data
hep-ph 2007-06 accept novelty 4.0 of 10

Combining electroweak precision and B-physics measurements in a global fit, the authors find the constrained supersymmetric model prefers a low SUSY-breaking scale, with mild tension between the two data sets.
Indications of the CMSSM Mass Scale from Precision Electroweak Data
hep-ph 2006-04 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

Using the updated top quark mass and a global fit to precision electroweak data, the paper continues to prefer a CMSSM supersymmetry mass scale m1/2 around 300 to 600 GeV.
Phenomenological Indications of the Scale of Supersymmetry
hep-ph 2006-02 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

A global chi-square fit of five observables in four constrained SUSY scenarios favors a low soft-supersymmetry-breaking scale m1/2 near 300 to 600 GeV.
Les Houches "Physics at TeV Colliders 2005'' Beyond the Standard Model working group: summary report
hep-ph 2006-02 accept novelty 4.0 of 10

A comprehensive proceedings summary of BSM physics at TeV colliders, with reviews, tools, and original studies of SUSY and non-SUSY scenarios.
The role of polarized positrons and electrons in revealing fundamental interactions at the Linear Collider
hep-ph 2005-07 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

A comprehensive report argues that polarizing the positron beam as well as the electron beam substantially improves the physics reach of the International Linear Collider.
The Muon Magnetic Moment and Supersymmetry
hep-ph 2006-09 accept novelty 2.0 of 10

The review shows that the MSSM can fit the 2 sigma muon g-2 deviation with large tan beta or light superpartners, and that this fit implies upper and lower bounds on SUSY masses.
Supersymmetry and LHC era
hep-ph 2025-05 unverdicted novelty 1.0 of 10

This invited review summarizes the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model, current LHC bounds on gluinos, squarks, stops, sleptons, and neutralinos, and how split supersymmetry scenarios address the Higgs mass, W mass,...
Dark Matter and the ILC
hep-ph 2006-04 unverdicted novelty 1.0 of 10

The paper reviews the MSSM neutralino as dark matter and argues that ILC measurements of sparticle properties could determine the relic density to about 0.1%, matching cosmological satellite constraints.

How later papers used it

79 later papers cite it

Evidence: some. 52 of the citing papers share no author with it, and 2 of those carry a confident label from Pith's citation classifier.

Pith read 14 of the 105 citing sentences, choosing only those whose citation markers point at this paper alone, and wrote the paraphrases from them. The summary, the counts, the evidence level, the links and the quotes come from code; the summary counts the papers listed below. A later paper is listed under a label when Pith's citation classifier gives one of its sentences that label at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), Pith's reading finds that the citing paper itself did it, and a second check confirms the paraphrase against the sentence. This section lists uses only. It does not list criticism or disagreement, so their absence here says nothing about how the paper has been received. Papers that share an author with this one are listed apart, under "By the same authors". A quote is the citing authors' own sentence, shown when their paper's licence is CC BY, CC BY-SA or CC0. JSON

1 later paper by other authors is listed below: 1 used its data or values. 1 more paper by the same authors is listed: 1 used its data or values.

Uses its data or values 2 of 7 papers with this label · 1 by the same authors

Assumed an uncertainty of 10 MeV as discussed in the context of the theory error on Delta rho in this paper.

SpecBit, DecayBit and PrecisionBit: GAMBIT modules for computing mass spectra, particle decay rates and precision observables (2017) · 0.86 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting

By the same authors

Set a theoretical uncertainty of 3 GeV/c^2 on the prediction of this paper.

Prediction for the Lightest Higgs Boson Mass in the CMSSM using Indirect Experimental Constraints (2007) (same authors) · 0.86 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting

How the literature uses it

77 arXiv papers cite this in 103 sentences

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

Papers citing it · 68 sentences without a confident label

Uses its method or tool 1 paper

For the RGE running of the soft SUSY-breaking parameters, it uses SoftSUSY [ref] , which is combined consistently with the codes used for the various low-energy observables: FeynHiggs [ref] is used for the evaluation of the Higgs masses and $a_μ^SUSY$ (see also [ref] ), for the other electroweak precision data we have included a code based on [ref] , SuFla [ref] and SuperIso [ref] are used for flavour-related observables, and for dark-matter-related observables MicrOMEGAs [ref] and DarkSUSY [ref] are used.

Predictions for m_t and m_W in Minimal Supersymmetric Models · Introduction · 1.00

Uses its data or values 7 papers

In the case where the constraint on $m_h$ is applied (Eq. [ref]), its experimental error is parameterized from the $χ^2$ distribution of the measurement [ref] , and a theoretical uncertainty of 3 GeV$/c^2$ is set on its prediction [ref] .

Prediction for the Lightest Higgs Boson Mass in the CMSSM using Indirect Experimental Constraints · Multi-parameter Fit to Experimental Observables · 0.86
The current intrinsic error of $$ due to unknown higher-order corrections have been estimated to be [ref] ^intr,current = 3 .

Confronting Finite Unified Theories with Low-Energy Phenomenology · The lightest MSSM Higgs boson mass · 0.85
The remaining theoretical uncertainty on the light $$-even Higgs boson mass has been estimated to be $^theory ≲3$ depending on the parameter region [ref] .

MSSM Higgs Boson Searches at the LHC: Benchmark Scenarios after the Discovery of a Higgs-like Particle · Higgs mass calculations and their scheme dependence · 0.84

Compares with it 1 paper

Incidentally, let us point out that this is a different approach with respect to the MSSM (see e.g. [ref] ), in which case and owing to the supersymmetric invariance, less freedom is left over to settle independent renormalization conditions.

Neutral Higgs-pair production at Linear Colliders within the general 2HDM: quantum effects and triple Higgs boson self-interactions · Renormalization of the 2HDM Higgs sector · 0.83

Cites it as background 21 papers

In the context of the Standard Model, the mass of the W-boson can be inferred by comparing the muon decay prediction with the Fermi model [ref] M_W^2 (1-M_W^2/M_Z^2)= πα_em/√(2) G_F (1+Δr) , where $α_em$ and $G_F$ are the fine structure and Fermi constants respectively, and $Δr$ stands for all possible radiative corrections [ref] .

Sterile neutrinos, $0\nu\beta\beta$ decay and the W-boson mass anomaly in a Flipped $SU(5)$ from F-theory · A possible interpretation of the CDF measurement of the W-mass · 0.88
Corresponding calculations have been performed in [ref] and references therein for the MSSM, and for the NMSSM in [ref] .

$M_W$, Dark Matter and $a_\mu$ in the NMSSM · Introduction · 0.84
A large amount of work has been invested into calculating higher-order corrections to the mass spectrum within the MSSM with real parameters [ref] as well as the MSSM with complex parameters [ref] .

Complete two-loop QCD contributions to the lightest Higgs-boson mass in the MSSM with complex parameters · Introduction · 0.93

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] [1]

H.P. Nilles, Phys. Rep. 110 (1984) 1; H.E. Haber and G.L. Kane, Phys. Rep. 117 (1985) 75; R. Barbieri, Riv. Nuovo Cim. 11 (1988) 1

View on Pith 1984

[2] [2]

S.L. Glashow, Nucl. Phys. B22 (1961) 579; S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 19 (1967) 19; A. Salam, in: Proceedings of the 8th Nobel Symposium, Editor N. Svartholm, Stockholm, 1968

View on Pith 1961

[3] [3]

S. Eidelman et al. [Particle Data Group Collaboration], Phys. Lett. B 592 (2004) 1

View on Pith 2004

[4] [4]

S. Abel et al. [SUGRA Working Group Collaboration], hep-ph/00031 54

View on Pith

[5] [5]

ATLAS Collaboration, Detector and Physics Performance Technical Design Report , CERN/LHCC/99-15 (1999), see: atlasinfo.cern.ch/Atlas/GROUPS/PHYSICS/TDR/access.html

View on Pith 1999

[6] [6]

CMS Collaboration, see: cmsinfo.cern.ch/Welcome.html/CMSdocuments/CMSplots/

View on Pith

[7] [7]

J. Aguilar-Saavedra et al., TESLA TDR Part 3: “Physics at an e+e− Linear Collider,” hep-ph/0106315, see: tesla.desy.de/tdr/

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[8] [8]

T. Abe et al. [American Linear Collider Working Group Collaboration], Resource book for Snowmass 2001 , hep-ex/0106055, hep-ex/0106056, hep-ex/0106057,

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[9] [9]

K. Abe et al. [ACF A Linear Collider Working Group Collaboration], hep- ph/0109166

View on Pith

[10] [10]

[LHC / LC Study Group], G. Weiglein et al., hep-ph/0410364

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[11] [11]

J. Gunion, H. Haber, G. Kane and S. Dawson, The Higgs Hunter’s Guide , Addison- Wesley, 1990

View on Pith 1990

[12] [12]

[LEP Higgs working group], hep-ex/0107030; hep-ex/0107031 ; LHWG-Note 2004-01, see: lephiggs.web.cern.ch/LEPHIGGS/papers/

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[13] [13]

G. Abbiendi et al. [ALEPH, DELPHI, L3, OPAL Collaborations and L EP Working Group for Higgs boson searches], Phys. Lett. B 565 (2003) 61, hep-ex/0306033; 128

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[14] [14]

M. Carena et al., [Tevatron Higgs working group], hep-ph/00103 38; updated as: L. Babukhadia et al. [CDF and D0 Working Group Members Collaboration ], FERMILAB-PUB-03-320-E, see: library.fnal.gov/archive/test-preprint/fermilab-pub-03-320-e.shtml

View on Pith

[15] [15]

M. Carena and H. Haber, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 50 (2003) 63, hep-ph/0208209

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[16] [16]

J. Ellis, S. Heinemeyer, K. Olive and G. Weiglein, Phys. Lett. B 515 (2001) 348, hep-ph/0105061

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[17] [17]

A. Dedes, S. Heinemeyer, S. Su and G. Weiglein, Nucl. Phys. B 674 (2003) 271, hep- ph/0302174

View on Pith 2003

[18] [18]

M. Gr¨ unewald, hep-ex/0304023; updated as: F. Teubert, talk given at “ICHEP04”, Beijing, China, August 2004, see: ichep04.ihep.ac.cn/data/ichep04/ppt/plenary/p21-teubert-f.ppt; see also: lepewwg.web.cern.ch/LEPEWWG/Welcome.html

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[19] [19]

G. Bennett et al. [Muon g-2 Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 92 (2004) 161802, hep- ex/0401008

View on Pith 2004

[20] [20]

S. L. Glashow und S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. D 15 (1977) 1958

View on Pith 1977

[21] [21]

K. Hikasa and M. Kobayashi, Phys. Rev. D 36 (1987) 724; F. Gabbiani and A. Masiero, Nucl. Phys. B 322 (1989) 235

View on Pith 1987

[22] [22]

P. Brax and C. Savoy, Nucl. Phys. B 447 (1995) 227, hep-ph/9503306

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1995

[23] [23]

F. Gabbiani, E. Gabrielli, A. Masiero and L. Silvestrini, Nucl. Phys. B 477 (1996) 321, hep-ph/9604387

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1996

[24] [24]

M. Misiak, S. Pokorski and J. Rosiek, Adv. Ser. Direct. High Energy Phys. 15 (1998) 795, hep-ph/9703442

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998

[25] [25]

S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, F. Merz, S. Pe˜ naranda, Eur. Phys. J. C 37 (2004) 481, hep-ph/0403228

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[26] [26]

H. Nilles, Phys. Lett. B 115 (1982) 193; Nucl. Phys. B 217 (1983) 366. A. Chamseddine, R. Arnowitt and P. Nath, Phys. Rev. Lett. 49 (1982) 970; R. Barbieri, S. Ferrara and C. Savoy, Phys. Lett. B 119 (1982) 343; H. Nilles, M. Srednicki and D. Wyler, Phys. Lett. B 120 (1983) 346. E. Cremmer, P. Fayet and L. Girardello, Phys. Lett. B 122 (1983) 41. S. Ferra...

View on Pith 1982

[27] [27]

For reviews see also Ref. [1] and: A. Lahanas and D. Nanopoulos, Phys. Rept. 145 (1987) 1; S. Martin, in “Perspectives on supersymmetry” , ed. G. Kane, hep-ph/9709356, see: zippy.physics.niu.edu/primer.shtml

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1987

[28] [28]

For a review, see: G.F. Giudice and R. Rattazzi, Phys. Rept. 322 (1999) 419, hep- ph/9801271

View on Pith 1999

[29] [29]

L. Randall and R. Sundrum, Nucl. Phys. B 557 (1999) 79, hep-th/9810155

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999

[30] [30]

G.F. Giudice, M.A. Luty, H. Murayama and R. Rattazzi, JHEP 9812 (1998) 027, hep- ph/9810442

View on Pith 1998

[31] [31]

T. Gherghetta, G.F. Giudice, J.D. Wells, Nucl. Phys. B 559 (1999) 27, hep-ph/9904378

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999

[32] [32]

M. Carena, S. Heinemeyer, C. Wagner and G. Weiglein, hep-ph/9 912223

View on Pith

[33] [33]

M. Carena, S. Heinemeyer, C. Wagner and G. Weiglein, Eur. Phys. J. C 26 (2003) 601, hep-ph/0202167

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[34] [34]

B. Allanach et al., Eur. Phys. J. C 25 (2002) 113, hep-ph/0202233

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002

[35] [35]

M. Battaglia, A. De Roeck, J. Ellis, F. Gianotti, K. Olive and L. Pape , Eur. Phys. J. C 33 (2004) 273, hep-ph/0306219

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[36] [36]

D. Choudhury, H. Dreiner, P. Richardson and S. Sarkar, Phys. Rev. D 61 (2000) 095009, hep-ph/9911365; A. Dedes, H. Dreiner and P. Richardson, Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 015001, hep- ph/0106199; H. Dreiner, C. Hanhart, U. Langenfeld and D. Phillips, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 055004, hep-ph/0304289

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000

[37] [37]

M. Carena, S. Heinemeyer, C. Wagner and G. Weiglein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (2001) 4463, hep-ph/0008023

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[38] [38]

A. Buras, hep-ph/9806471; T. Hurth, Rev. Mod. Phys. 75 (2003) 1159, hep-ph/0212304

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[39] [39]

S. Abel, S. Khalil and O. Lebedev, Nucl. Phys. B 606 (2001) 151, hep-ph/0103320

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[40] [40]

D. Demir, O. Lebedev, K. Olive, M. Pospelov and A. Ritz, Nucl. Phys. B 680 (2004) 339, hep-ph/0311314

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[41] [41]

S. Bertolini et al., Nucl. Phys. B 353 , (1991) 591; R. Barbieri and G. Giudice, Phys. Lett. B 309 , (1993) 86; F. Borzumati, M. Olechowski and S. Pokorski, Phys. Lett. B 349 (1995) 311; G. Degrassi, P. Gambino and G. F. Giudice, JHEP 0012 (2000) 009, hep-ph/0009337; M. Carena, D. Garcia, U. Nierste and C. E. Wagner, Phys. Lett. B 499 (2001) 141, hep-ph/0...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1991

[42] [42]

G. Buchalla and A. Buras, Nucl. Phys. B 400 (1993) 225; M. Misiak and J. Urban, Phys. Lett. B 451 (1999) 161, hep-ph/9901278; G. Buchalla and A. Buras, Nucl. Phys. B 548 (1999) 309, hep-ph/9901288; A. Buras, Phys. Lett. B 566 (2003) 115, hep-ph/0303060

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1993

[43] [43]

K. Babu and C. Kolda, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84 (2000) 228, hep-ph/9909476; S. Choudhury and N. Gaur, Phys. Lett. B 451 (1999) 86, hep-ph/9810307; C. Bobeth, T. Ewerth, F. Kr¨ uger and J. Urban, Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001) 074014, hep- ph/0104284; A. Dedes, H. Dreiner and U. Nierste, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 251804, hep- ph/0108037; G. Isidori and A. Retico, JHEP ...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000

[44] [44]

A. Dedes, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 18 (2003) 2627, hep-ph/0309233

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[45] [45]

M. Herndon, talk given at “ICHEP04”, Beijing, China, August 20 04, see: www.ihep.ac.cn/data/ichep04/ppt/11 hq/8-0494-herndon-m.pdf

View on Pith

[46] [46]

W. Hollik, J. Illana, S. Rigolin and D. St¨ ockinger, Phys. Lett. B 416 (1998) 345, hep- ph/9707437; Phys. Lett. B 425 (1998) 322, hep-ph/9711322

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998

[47] [47]

D. Chang, W. Keung and A. Pilaftsis, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 900 [Erratum-ibid. 83 (1999) 3972], hep-ph/9811202; A. Pilaftsis, Phys. Lett. B 471 (1999) 174, hep-ph/9909485

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999

[48] [48]

O. Lebedev, K. Olive, M. Pospelov and A. Ritz, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 016003, hep- ph/0402023

View on Pith 2004

[49] [49]

P. Nath, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66 (1991) 2565; Y. Kizukuri and N. Oshimo, Phys. Rev. D 46 (1992) 3025

View on Pith 1991

[50] [50]

T. Ibrahim and P. Nath, Phys. Lett. B 418 (1998) 98, hep-ph/9707409; Phys. Rev. D 57 (1998) 478 [Erratum-ibid. D 58 (1998) 019901] [Erratum-ibid. D 60 (1998) 079903] [Erratum-ibid. D 58 (1999) 119901], hep-ph/9708456; M. Brhlik, G. Good and G. Kane, Phys. Rev. D 59 , 115004 (1999), hep-ph/9810457

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998

[51] [51]

D. Bardin et al., in Precision Calculations for the Z Resonance, Yellow report CERN 95-03, eds. D. Bardin, W. Hollik and G. Passarino, hep-ph/9709229 ; D. Bardin, M. Gr¨ unewald and G. Passarino, hep-ph/9902452

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[52] [52]

G. Passarino, Prepared for Mini-Workshop on Electroweak Precision Data a nd the Higgs Mass, Zeuthen, Germany, 28 Feb - 1 Mar 2003

View on Pith 2003

[53] [53]

P. Bechtle, K. Desch and P. Wienemann, in Ref. [10] and: hep-ph /0412012

View on Pith

[54] [54]

R. Lafaye, T. Plehn and D. Zerwas, hep-ph/0404282. 131

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[55] [55]

See: spa.desy.de/spa/

View on Pith

[56] [56]

G. Cho and K. Hagiwara, Nucl. Phys. B 574 (2000) 623, hep-ph/9912260

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000

[57] [57]

M. Peskin and T. Takeuchi, Phys. Rev. D 46 (1992) 381

View on Pith 1992

[58] [58]

A. Denner, S. Dittmaier and G. Weiglein, hep-ph/9505271

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[59] [59]

G. Altarelli and R. Barbieri, Phys. Lett. B 253 (1990) 161; G. Altarelli, R. Barbieri and F. Caravaglios, Nucl. Phys. B 405 (1993) 3

View on Pith 1990

[60] [60]

S. Dittmaier, K. Kolodziej, M. Kuroda and D. Schildknecht, Nucl. Phys. B 426 (1994) 249 [Erratum ibid. B 446 (1994) 334], hep-ph/9404306; S. Dittmaier, M. Kuroda and D. Schildknecht, Nucl. Phys. B 448 (1995) 3, hep- ph/9501404

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1994

[61] [61]

R. Barbieri, A. Pomarol, R. Rattazzi and A. Strumia, hep-ph/0 405040

View on Pith

[62] [62]

J. Erler, S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, G. Weiglein and P. Zerwas, Phys. Lett. B 486 (2000) 125; hep-ph/0005024; R. Hawkings and K. M¨ onig, Eur. Phys. J. direct C8 (1999) 1; hep-ex/9910022; J. Erler and S. Heinemeyer, hep-ph/0102083

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000

[63] [63]

S. Heinemeyer, S. Kraml, W. Porod and G. Weiglein, JHEP 0309 (2003) 075, hep- ph/0306181

View on Pith 2003

[64] [64]

G. Weiglein, Nature 429 (2004) 613

View on Pith 2004

[65] [65]

U. Baur, R. Clare, J. Erler, S. Heinemeyer, D. Wackeroth, G. W eiglein and D. Wood, contribution to the P1-WG1 report of the workshop “The Future o f Particle Physics”, Snowmass, Colorado, USA, July 2001, hep-ph/0111314

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[66] [66]

A. Juste, C. Hays, talks given at the workshop Tev4LHC, Fermilab, September 2004, see: conferences.fnal.gov/tev4lhc/talks/040916 TeV4LHC TopEW/ ; C. Hays, private communication

View on Pith 2004

[67] [67]

M. Davier, S. Eidelman, A. H¨ ocker and Z. Zhang, Eur. Phys. J. C 31 (2003) 503, hep-ph/0308213

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[68] [68]

K. Hagiwara, A. Martin, D. Nomura and T. Teubner, Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 093003, hep-ph/0312250

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[69] [69]

S. Ghozzi and F. Jegerlehner, Phys. Lett. B 583 (2004) 222, hep-ph/0310181

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[70] [70]

J. de Troconiz and F. Yndurain, hep-ph/0402285

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[71] [71]

M. Knecht and A. Nyﬀeler, Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 073034, hep-ph/0111058; M. Knecht, A. Nyﬀeler, M. Perrottet and E. De Rafael, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88 (2002) 071802, hep-ph/0111059; 132 I. Blokland, A. Czarnecki and K. Melnikov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88 (2002) 071803, hep- ph/0112117; M. Ramsey-Musolf and M. Wise, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (2002) 041601, hep-ph/0201297;...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002

[72] [72]

K. Melnikov and A. Vainshtein, hep-ph/0312226

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[73] [73]

T. Kinoshita and M. Nio, hep-ph/0402206

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[74] [74]

A. Aloisio et al. [KLOE Collaboration], hep-ex/0407048

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[75] [75]

A. H¨ ocker, hep-ph/0410081

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[76] [76]

C. Bollini and J. Giambiagi, Nuovo Cimento B 12 (1972) 20; J. Ashmore, Nuovo Cimento Lett. 4 (1972) 289

View on Pith 1972

[77] [77]

G. ’t Hooft and M. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B 44 (1972) 189; P. Breitenlohner and D. Maison, Commun. Math. Phys. 52 (1977) 11

View on Pith 1972

[78] [78]

W. Siegel, Phys. Lett. B 84 (1979) 193; D. Capper, D. Jones and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, Nucl. Phys. B 167 (1980) 479

View on Pith 1979

[79] [79]

W. Siegel, Phys. Lett. B 94 (1980) 37; L. Avdeev, Phys. Lett. B 117 (1982) 317; L. Avdeev and A. Vladimirov, Nucl. Phys. B 219 (1983) 262

View on Pith 1980

[80] [80]

I. Jack and D. Jones, hep-ph/9707278, in Perspectives on Supersymmetry , ed. G. Kane (World Scientiﬁc, Singapore), p. 149

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[81] [81]

P. White, Class. Quant. Grav. 9 (1992) 1663; N. Maggiore, O. Piguet and S. Wolf, Nucl. Phys. B 476 (1996) 329, hep-th/9604002

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1992

[82] [82]

E. Kraus, Ann. Phys. 262 (1998) 144, hep-th/9709154; P. Grassi, Nucl. Phys. B 560 (1999) 499, hep-th/9908188

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998

[83] [83]

W. Hollik, E. Kraus, M. Roth, C. Rupp, K. Sibold and D. St¨ ockinge r, Nucl. Phys. B 639 (2002) 3, hep-ph/0204350

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002

[84] [84]

W. Hollik, E. Kraus and D. St¨ ockinger, Eur. Phys. J. C 11 (1999) 365, hep-ph/9907393

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999

[85] [85]

W. Hollik and D. St¨ ockinger, Eur. Phys. J. C 20 (2001) 105, hep-ph/0103009

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[86] [86]

R. Ferrari and P. Grassi, Phys. Rev. D 60 (1999) 065010, hep-th/9807191; R. Ferrari, P. Grassi and A. Quadri, Phys. Lett. B 472 (2000) 346, hep-th/9905192; P. Grassi, T. Hurth and M. Steinhauser, Ann. Phys. 288 (2001) 197, hep-ph/9907426; Nucl. Phys. B 610 (2001) 215, hep-ph/0102005

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999

[87] [87]

I. Fischer, W. Hollik, M. Roth and D. St¨ ockinger, Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 015004, hep-ph/0310191. 133

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[88] [88]

D. St¨ ockinger, talk given at the ECF A Linear Collider Workshop, Durham, Septem- ber 1–4, 2004, see www.ippp.dur.ac.uk/ECFA04/program.html

View on Pith 2004

[89] [89]

K. Aoki, Z. Hioki, M. Konuma, R. Kawabe and T. Muta, Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 73 (1982) 1; M. B¨ ohm, W. Hollik and H. Spiesberger, Fortsch. Phys. 34 (1986) 687; see also Ref. [83]

View on Pith 1982

[90] [90]

A. Freitas, W. Hollik, W. Walter and G. Weiglein, Nucl. Phys. B 632 (2002) 189 [Erratum-ibid. B 666 (2003) 305], hep-ph/0202131

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002

[91] [91]

A. Denner, G. Weiglein and S. Dittmaier, Phys. Lett. B 333 (1994) 420, hep- ph/9406204; Nucl. Phys. B 440 (1995) 95, hep-ph/9410338

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1994

[92] [92]

G. K¨ all´ en and A. Sabry,K. Dan. Vidensk. Selsk. Mat.-Fys. Medd. 29 (1955) No. 17; M. Steinhauser, Phys. Lett. B 429 (1998) 158, hep-ph/9803313

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1955

[93] [93]

H. Burkhardt and B. Pietrzyk, Phys. Lett. B 513 (2001) 46

View on Pith 2001

[94] [94]

F. Jegerlehner, J. Phys. G 29 (2003) 101, hep-ph/0312372

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[95] [95]

W. Hollik and H. Rzehak, Eur. Phys. J. C 32 (2003) 127, hep-ph/0305328

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[96] [96]

S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, H. Rzehak and G. Weiglein, hep-ph/0411 114

View on Pith

[97] [97]

A. Djouadi, P. Gambino, S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, C. J¨ unger and G. Weiglein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78 (1997) 3626, hep-ph/9612363; Phys. Rev. D 57 (1998) 4179, hep- ph/9710438

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1997

[98] [98]

T. Banks, Nucl. Phys. B 303 (1988) 172; L. Hall, R. Rattazzi and U. Sarid, Phys. Rev. D 50 (1994) 7048, hep-ph/9306309; R. Hempﬂing, Phys. Rev. D 49 (1994) 6168; M. Carena, M. Olechowski, S. Pokorski and C. Wagner, Nucl. Phys. B 426 (1994) 269, hep-ph/9402253

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1988

[99] [99]

M. Frank, S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik and G. Weiglein, hep-ph/02021 66

View on Pith

[100] [100]

A. Freitas and D. St¨ ockinger, Phys. Rev. 66 (2002) 095014, hep-ph/0205281

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002

[101] [101]

H. Haber and R. Hempﬂing, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66 (1991) 1815; Y. Okada, M. Yamaguchi and T. Yanagida, Prog. Theor. Phys. 85 (1991) 1; J. Ellis, G. Ridolﬁ and F. Zwirner, Phys. Lett. B 257 (1991) 83; Phys. Lett. B 262 (1991) 477; R. Barbieri and M. Frigeni, Phys. Lett. B 258 (1991) 395

View on Pith 1991

[102] [102]

M. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B 123 (1977) 89. 134

View on Pith 1977

[103] [103]

R. Barbieri and L. Maiani, Nucl. Phys. B 224 (1983) 32; C. S. Lim, T. Inami and N. Sakai, Phys. Rev. D 29 (1984) 1488; E. Eliasson, Phys. Lett. B 147 (1984) 65; Z. Hioki, Prog. Theo. Phys. 73 (1985) 1283; J. A. Grifols and J. Sola, Nucl. Phys. B 253 (1985) 47; B. Lynn, M. Peskin and R. Stuart, CERN Report 86-02, p. 90; R. Barbieri, M. Frigeni, F. Giuliani...

View on Pith 1983

[104] [104]

P. Chankowski, Phys. Rev. D 41 (1990) 2877; H. Cheng, J. Feng and N. Polonsky, Phys. Rev. D 56 (1997) 6875, hep-ph/9706438; M. Nojiri, D. Pierce and Y. Yamada, Phys. Rev. D 57 (1998) 1539, hep-ph/9707244; E. Katz, L. Randall and S. Su, Nucl. Phys. B 536 (1998) 3, hep-ph/9801416

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1990

[105] [105]

A. Freitas, A. von Manteuﬀel and P. Zerwas, Eur. Phys. J. C 34 (2004) 487, hep- ph/0310182

View on Pith 2004

[106] [106]

M. Beccaria, F. Renard and C. Verzegnassi, Phys. Rev. D 63 (2001) 095010, hep- ph/0007224; M. Beccaria, M. Melles, F. Renard and C. Verzegnassi, Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 093007, hep-ph/0112273; M. Beccaria, H. Eberl, F. Renard and C. Verzegnassi, Phys. Rev. 69 (2004) 091301, hep-ph/0403099

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[107] [107]

M. Carena, D. Garcia, U. Nierste and C. Wagner, Nucl. Phys. B 577 (2000) 577, hep-ph/9912516; H. Eberl, K. Hidaka, S. Kraml, W. Majerotto and Y. Yamada, Phys. Rev. D 62 (2000) 055006, hep-ph/9912463

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000

[108] [108]

J. Guasch, P. H¨ aﬂiger and M. Spira, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 115001, hep-ph/0305101

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[109] [109]

A. Sirlin, Phys. Rev. D 22 (1980) 971; W. Marciano and A. Sirlin, Phys. Rev. D 22 (1980) 2695

View on Pith 1980

[110] [110]

A. Djouadi and C. Verzegnassi, Phys. Lett. B 195 (1987) 265; A. Djouadi, Nuovo Cim. A 100 (1988) 357

View on Pith 1987

[111] [111]

L. Avdeev et al., Phys. Lett. B 336 (1994) 560 [Erratum-ibid. B 349 (1995) 597], hep-ph/9406363; K. Chetyrkin, J K¨ uhn and M. Steinhauser, Phys. Lett. B 351 (1995) 331, hep- ph/9502291; Phys. Rev. Lett. 75 (1995) 3394, hep-ph/9504413

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1994

[112] [112]

J. Van der Bij and F. Hoogeveen, Nucl. Phys. B 283 (1987) 477

View on Pith 1987

[113] [113]

R. Barbieri, M. Beccaria, P. Ciafaloni, G. Curci and A. Vicere, Nucl. Phys. B 409 (1993) 105; J. Fleischer, F. Jegerlehner and O.V. Tarasov, Phys. Lett. B 319 (1993) 249

View on Pith 1993

[114] [114]

J. van der Bij and M. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B 231 (1984) 205. 135

View on Pith 1984

[115] [115]

J. Van der Bij, K. Chetyrkin, M. Faisst, G. Jikia and T. Seidenst icker, Phys. Lett. B 498 (2001) 156, hep-ph/0011373

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[116] [116]

M. Faisst, J. Kuhn, T. Seidensticker and O. Veretin, Nucl. Phys. B 665 (2003) 649, hep-ph/0302275

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[117] [117]

R. Boughezal, J. Tausk and J. van der Bij, hep-ph/0410216

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[118] [118]

S. Heinemeyer and G. Weiglein, proceedings of the RADCOR2000 , Carmel, Sep. 2000, hep-ph/0102317

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000

[119] [119]

S. Heinemeyer and G. Weiglein, JHEP 0210 (2002) 072, hep-ph/0209305; hep- ph/0301062

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002

[120] [120]

T. Appelquist and J. Carazzone, Phys. Rev. D 11 (1975) 2856; A. Dobado, M. Herrero and S. Pe˜ naranda, Eur. Phys. J. C 7 (1999) 313, hep- ph/9710313, Eur. Phys. J. C 12 (2000) 673, hep-ph/9903211; Eur. Phys. J. C 17 (2000) 487, hep-ph/0002134

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1975

[121] [121]

J. K¨ ublbeck, M. B¨ ohm, and A. Denner,Comput. Phys. Comm. 60 (1990) 165; T. Hahn, Comput. Phys. Comm. 140 (2001) 418, hep-ph/0012260; see: www.feynarts.de

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1990

[122] [122]

R. Behrends, R. Finkelstein and A. Sirlin, Phys. Rev. 101 (1956) 866; S. Berman, Phys. Rev. 112 (1958) 267; T. Kinoshita and A. Sirlin, Phys. Rev. 113 (1959) 1652

View on Pith 1956

[123] [123]

T. van Ritbergen and R. Stuart, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 488, hep-ph/9808283; Nucl. Phys. B 564 (2000) 343, hep-ph/9904240; M. Steinhauser and T. Seidensticker, Phys. Lett. B 467 (1999) 271, hep-ph/9909436

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999

[124] [124]

W. Marciano, Phys. Rev. D 20 (1979) 274; A. Sirlin, Phys. Rev. D 29 (1984) 89; M. Consoli, W. Hollik and F. Jegerlehner, Phys. Lett. B 227 (1989) 167

View on Pith 1979

[125] [125]

B. Kniehl, Nucl. Phys. B 347 (1990) 89; F. Halzen and B. Kniehl, Nucl. Phys. B 353 (1991) 567; B. Kniehl and A. Sirlin, Nucl. Phys. B 371 (1992) 141; Phys. Rev. D 47 (1993) 883

View on Pith 1990

[126] [126]

A. Djouadi and P. Gambino, Phys. Rev. D 49 (1994) 3499 [Erratum-ibid. D 53 (1994) 4111], hep-ph/9309298

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1994

[127] [127]

K. Chetyrkin, J.H. K¨ uhn and M. Steinhauser, Nucl. Phys. B 482 (1996) 213, hep- ph/9606230

View on Pith 1996

[128] [128]

A. Freitas, W. Hollik, W. Walter and G. Weiglein, Phys. Lett. B 495 (2000) 338 [Erratum-ibid. B 570 (2003) 260], hep-ph/0007091; A. Freitas, S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, W. Walter and G. Weiglein, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 89 (2000) 82, hep-ph/0007129. 136

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000

[129] [129]

M. Awramik and M. Czakon, Phys. Lett. B 568 (2003) 48, hep-ph/0305248

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[130] [130]

M. Awramik and M. Czakon, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (2002) 241801, hep-ph/0208113; A. Onishchenko and O. Veretin, Phys. Lett. B 551 (2003) 111, hep-ph/0209010; M. Awramik, M. Czakon, A. Onishchenko and O. Veretin, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 053004, hep-ph/0209084

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002

[131] [131]

G. Weiglein, Acta Phys. Polon. B 29 (1998) 2735, hep-ph/9807222; A. Stremplat, Diploma thesis (Univ. of Karlsruhe, 1998), see: www-itp.physik.uni-karlsruhe.de/diplomatheses.de.shtml

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998

[132] [132]

M. Awramik, M. Czakon, A. Freitas and G. Weiglein, Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 053006, hep-ph/0311148

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[133] [133]

G. Weiglein, Eur. Phys. J. C 33 (2004) S630, hep-ph/0312314

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[134] [134]

V. Abazov et al. [D0 Collaboration], Nature 429 (2004) 638, hep-ex/0406031; P. Azzi et al. [CDF Collaboration, D0 Collaboration], hep-ex/0404010

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[135] [135]

F. Jegerlehner, Talk presented at the LNF Spring School, Fra scati, Italy, 1999, see: www.ifh.de/∼fjeger/Frascati99.ps.gz ; hep-ph/0105283

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999

[136] [136]

P. Chankowski, A. Dabelstein, W. Hollik, W. M¨ osle, S. Pokorski and J. Rosiek, Nucl. Phys. B 417 (1994) 101

View on Pith 1994

[137] [137]

D. Garcia and J. Sol` a, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 9 (1994) 211

View on Pith 1994

[138] [138]

P. Chankowski, S. Pokorski and J. Rosiek, Nucl. Phys. B 423 (1994) 437, hep- ph/9303309

View on Pith 1994

[139] [139]

M. Drees, K. Hagiwara and A. Yamada, Phys. Rev. D 45 (1992) 1725

View on Pith 1992

[140] [140]

S. Heinemeyer, PhD thesis, see: www-itp.physik.uni-karlsruhe.de/phd.de.shtml; G. Weiglein, hep-ph/9901317

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[141] [141]

G. Passarino and M. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B 160 (1979) 151

View on Pith 1979

[142] [142]

A. Davydychev und J. B. Tausk, Nucl. Phys. B 397 (1993) 123; F. Berends und J. B. Tausk, Nucl. Phys. B 421 (1994) 456

View on Pith 1993

[143] [143]

W. Hollik, Fortschr. Phys. 38 (1990) 3

View on Pith 1990

[144] [144]

D. Pierce, J. Bagger, K. Matchev and R. Zhang, Nucl. Phys. B 491 (1997) 3, hep- ph/9606211

View on Pith 1997

[145] [145]

A. Dabelstein, W. Hollik and W. M¨ osle, hep-ph/9506251; W. M¨ osle, PhD thesis, University of Karlsruhe, Germany, 1997, se e: www-itp.physik.uni-karlsruhe.de/phd.de.shtml

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1997

[146] [146]

The LEP Collaborations and the LEP Electroweak Working Group , the SLD Elec- troweak Working Group and Heavy Flavour Groups, hep-ex/03120 23. 137

View on Pith

[147] [147]

K. Chetyrkin, A. Kataev and F. Tkachov, Phys. Lett. B 85 (1979) 277; M. Dine and J. Sapirstein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 43 (1979) 668; W. Celmaster and R. Gonsalves, Phys. Rev. Lett. 44 (1980) 560; S. Gorishny, A. Kataev and S. Larin, Phys. Lett. B 259 (1991) 144; L. Surguladze and M. Samuel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66 (1991) 560; A. Kataev, Phys. Lett. B 287 (1992) 209

View on Pith 1979

[148] [148]

K. Chetyrkin and J. K¨ uhn, Phys. Lett. B 248 (1990) 359; Phys. Lett. B 406 (1997) 102; K. Chetyrkin, J. K¨ uhn and A. Kwiatkowski, Phys. Lett. B 282 (1992) 221; K. Chetyrkin and A. Kwiatkowski, Phys. Lett. B 305 (1993) 285; Phys. Lett. B 319 (1993) 307, hep-ph/9310229

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1990

[149] [149]

B. Kniehl and J. K¨ uhn, Phys. Lett. B 224 (1990) 229; Nucl. Phys. B 329 (1990) 547; K. Chetyrkin and J. K¨ uhn, Phys. Lett. B 308 (1993) 127; S. Larin, T. van Ritbergen and J. Vermaseren, Phys. Lett. B 320 (1994) 159, hep- ph/9310378; K. Chetyrkin and O. Tarasov, Phys. Lett. B 327 (1994) 114, hep-ph/9312323

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1990

[150] [150]

K. Chetyrkin, J. K¨ uhn and A. Kwiatkowski, in: Reports of the Working Group on Precision Calculations for the Z Resonance, p. 175, CERN 95-03 (1995), eds. D. Bardin, W. Hollik and G. Passarino; K. Chetyrkin, J. K¨ uhn and A. Kwiatkowski, Phys. Rep. 277 (1996) 189

View on Pith 1995

[151] [151]

J. Fleischer, F. Jegerlehner, P. R¸ aczka and O. Tarasov, Phys. Lett. B 293 (1992) 437; G. Buchalla and A. Buras, Nucl. Phys. B 398 (1993) 285; G. Degrassi, Nucl. Phys. B 407 (1993) 271, hep-ph/9302288; K. Chetyrkin, A. Kwiatkowski and M. Steinhauser, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 8 (1993) 2785

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1992

[152] [152]

A. Kwiatkowski and M. Steinhauser, Phys. Lett. B 344 (1995) 359, hep-ph/9409314; S. Peris and A. Santamaria, Nucl. Phys. B 445 (1995) 252, hep-ph/9502307

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1995

[153] [153]

R. Harlander, T. Seidensticker and M. Steinhauser, Phys. Lett. B 426 (1998) 125, hep-ph/9712228; J. Fleischer, F. Jegerlehner, M. Tentyukov and O. Veretin, Phys. Lett. B 459 (1999) 625, hep-ph/9904256

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998

[154] [154]

A. Czarnecki and J. K¨ uhn, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77 (1996) 3955, Erratum-ibid. 80 (1998) 893, hep-ph/9608366

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1996

[155] [155]

K. Hagiwara and H. Murayama, Phys. Lett. B 246 (1990) 533

View on Pith 1990

[156] [156]

C. J¨ unger, PhD Thesis, Univ. Karlsruhe, Shaker Verlag, Aac hen 1997, ISBN 3-8265- 2662-7, see: www-itp.physik.uni-karlsruhe.de/phd.de.shtml

View on Pith 1997

[157] [157]

J. Jersak, E. Laermann, P. Zerwas, Phys. Rev. D 25 (1980) 1218 [Erratum-ibid. D 36 (1987) 310]; A. Djouadi, Z. Phys. C 39 (1988) 561; 138 A. Djouadi, B. Lampe, P. Zerwas, Z. Phys. C 67 (1995) 123; hep-ph/9411386; J. K¨ uhn, P. Zerwas et al., in:Z Physics at LEP 1 , CERN 89-08 (1989), eds. G. Altarelli, R. Kleiss, C. Verzegnassi, Vol. I, p. 267

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1980

[158] [158]

G. Altarelli and B. Lampe, Nucl. Phys. B 391 (1993) 3; V. Ravindran and W. van Neerven, Nucl. Phys. B 445 (1998) 214, hep-ph/9809411; S. Catani, M. Seymour, JHEP 9907 (1999) 023, hep-ph/9905424

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1993

[159] [159]

M. Awramik, M. Czakon, A. Freitas and G. Weiglein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004) 201805, hep-ph/0407317; Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 135 (2004) 119, hep-ph/0408207; hep-ph/0409142

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[160] [160]

G. Degrassi, P. Gambino and A. Sirlin, Phys. Lett. B 394 (1997) 188, hep-ph/9611363

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1997

[161] [161]

A. Dabelstein, Nucl. Phys. B 456 (1995) 25, hep-ph/9503443; Z. Phys. C 67 (1995) 495, hep-ph/9409375; P. Chankowski, S. Pokorski, J. Rosiek, Nucl. Phys. B 423 (1994) 437, hep-ph/9303309

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1995

[162] [162]

R. Hempﬂing and A. Hoang, Phys. Lett. B 331 (1994) 99, hep-ph/9401219; R. Zhang, Phys. Lett. B 447 (1999) 89, hep-ph/9808299

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1994

[163] [163]

S. Martin, Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 116003, hep-ph/0111209; D 66 (2002) 096001, hep-ph/0206136; D 67 (2003) 095012, hep-ph/0211366. D 68 075002 (2003), hep- ph/0307101; Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 016005, hep-ph/0312092

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002

[164] [164]

M. Carena, M. Quir´ os and C. Wagner, Nucl. Phys. B 461 (1996) 407, hep-ph/9508343; H. Haber, R. Hempﬂing and A. Hoang, Z. Phys. C 75 (1997) 539, hep-ph/9609331

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1996

[165] [165]

S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik and G. Weiglein, Phys. Rev. D 58 (1998) 091701, hep- ph/9803277; Phys. Lett. B 440 (1998) 296, hep-ph/9807423

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998

[166] [166]

S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik and G. Weiglein, Eur. Phys. J. C 9 (1999) 343, hep- ph/9812472

View on Pith 1999

[167] [167]

S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik and G. Weiglein, Phys. Lett. B 455 (1999) 179, hep- ph/9903404

View on Pith 1999

[168] [168]

M. Carena, H. Haber, S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, C. Wagner and G . Weiglein, Nucl. Phys. B 580 (2000) 29, hep-ph/0001002

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000

[169] [169]

S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik and G. Weiglein, hep-ph/9910283; J. Espinosa and R. Zhang, JHEP 0003 (2000) 026, hep-ph/9912236; G. Degrassi, P. Slavich and F. Zwirner, hep-ph/0105096

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000

[170] [170]

G. Degrassi, S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, P. Slavich and G. Weiglein, Eur. Phys. J. C 28 (2003) 133, hep-ph/0212020

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[171] [171]

A. Pilaftsis, Phys. Rev. D 58 (1998) 096010, hep-ph/9803297; Phys. Lett. B 435 (1998) 88, hep-ph/9805373. 139

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998

[172] [172]

D. Demir, Phys. Rev. D 60 (1999) 055006, hep-ph/9901389; S. Choi, M. Drees and J. Lee, Phys. Lett. B 481 (2000) 57, hep-ph/0002287

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999

[173] [173]

A. Pilaftsis and C. Wagner, Nucl. Phys. B 553 (1999) 3, hep-ph/9902371; M. Carena, J. Ellis, A. Pilaftsis and C. Wagner, Nucl. Phys. B 586 (2000) 92, hep- ph/0003180

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999

[174] [174]

S. Heinemeyer, Eur. Phys. J. C 22 (2001) 521, hep-ph/0108059; M. Frank, S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik and G. Weiglein, hep-ph/0212037; in preparation

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[175] [175]

S. Heinemeyer, hep-ph/0407244

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[176] [176]

J. Espinosa and R. Zhang, Nucl. Phys. B 586 (2000) 3, hep-ph/0003246

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000

[177] [177]

A. Brignole, G. Degrassi, P. Slavich and F. Zwirner, Nucl. Phys. B 631 (2002) 195, hep-ph/0112177

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002

[178] [178]

A. Brignole, G. Degrassi, P. Slavich and F. Zwirner, Nucl. Phys. B 643 (2002) 79, hep-ph/0206101

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002

[179] [179]

A. Dedes, G. Degrassi and P. Slavich, Nucl. Phys. B 672 (2003) 144, hep-ph/0305127

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[180] [180]

S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik and G. Weiglein, Comp. Phys. Comm. 124 2000 76, hep- ph/9812320; hep-ph/0002213. The codes are accessible via www.feynhiggs.de

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000

[181] [181]

T. Hahn, S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik and G. Weiglein, MPP–2003–147 , in proceedings of Physics at TeV Colliders , Les Houches, June 2003, hep-ph/0406152; in preparation

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[182] [182]

S. Martin, hep-ph/0405022

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[183] [183]

S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, and G. Weiglein, Eur. Phys. J. C 16 (2000) 139, hep- ph/0003022

View on Pith 2000

[184] [184]

S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, J. Rosiek, and G. Weiglein, Eur. Phys. J. C 19 (2001) 535, hep-ph/0102081

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[185] [185]

J. Branson et al. [CMS collaboration], hep-ph/0110021

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[186] [186]

S. Heinemeyer, hep-ph/0408340

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[187] [187]

B. Allanach, A. Djouadi, J. Kneur, W. Porod and P. Slavich, JHEP 0409 (2004) 044, hep-ph/0406166

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[188] [188]

S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik and G. Weiglein, JHEP 0006 (2000) 009, hep-ph/9909540

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000

[189] [189]

M. Beneke, I. Efthymiopoulos, M. Mangano, J. Womersley, Top Quark Physics , in CERN-YR-2000/01, eds. G. Altarelli and M. Mangano, hep-ph/000 3033. 140

View on Pith 2000

[190] [190]

M. Winter, LC Note LC-PHSM-2001-016, see www.desy.de/∼lcnotes/notes.html ; talk given at the LHC/LC study group meeting, CERN, July 2002, see : www.ippp.dur.ac.uk/∼georg/lhclc/

View on Pith 2001

[191] [191]

J. K¨ uhn and M. Steinhauser, Nucl. Phys. B 619 (2001) 588 [Erratum-ibid. B 640 (2002) 415], hep-ph/0109084; JHEP 0210 (2002) 018, hep-ph/0209357; A. Hoang, hep-ph/0204299; A. El-Khadra and M. Luke, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 52 (2002) 201, hep-ph/0208114; G. Corcella and A. Hoang, Phys. Lett. B 554 (2003) 133, hep-ph/0212297

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[192] [192]

A. Hoang, Applications of Two-Loop Calculations in the Standard Mode l and its Min- imal Supersymmetric Extension , PhD thesis, Universit¨ at Karlsruhe, Shaker Verlag, Aachen 1995

View on Pith 1995

[193] [193]

A. Czarnecki and W. Marciano, Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001) 013014, hep-ph/0102122

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[194] [194]

M. Knecht, hep-ph/0307239; M. Passera, hep-ph/0411168

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[195] [195]

A. Czarnecki, B. Krause and W. Marciano, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76 (1996) 3267, hep- ph/9512369; Phys. Rev. D 52 (1995) 2619, hep-ph/9506256

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1996

[196] [196]

B. Krause, PhD thesis, Universit¨ at Karlsruhe, 1997, Shake r Verlag, ISBN 3-8265-2780-1

View on Pith 1997

[197] [197]

S. Heinemeyer, D. St¨ ockinger and G. Weiglein, Nucl. Phys. B 699 (2004) 103, hep- ph/0405255

View on Pith 2004

[198] [198]

T. Moroi, Phys. Rev. D 53 (1996) 6565 [Erratum-ibid. D 56 (1997) 4424], hep- ph/9512396

View on Pith 1996

[199] [199]

S. Abel, W. Cottingham and I. Whittingham, Phys. Lett. B 259 (1991) 307; J. Lopez, D. Nanopoulos and X. Wang, Phys. Rev. D 49 (1994) 366, hep-ph/9308336

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1991

[200] [200]

J. Ellis, D. Nanopoulos and K. Olive, Phys. Lett. B 508 (2001) 65, hep-ph/0102331; R. Arnowitt, B. Dutta, B. Hu and Y. Santoso, Phys. Lett. B 505 (2001) 177, hep- ph/0102344

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[201] [201]

L. Everett, G. Kane, S. Rigolin and L. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (2001) 3484, hep- ph/0102145; U. Chattopadhyay and P. Nath, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (2001) 5854, hep-ph/0102157; S. Komine, T. Moroi and M. Yamaguchi, Phys. Lett. B 506 (2001) 93, hep-ph/0102204; S. Martin and J. Wells, Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001) 035003, hep-ph/0103067; H. Baer, C. Balazs, J. Ferran...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[202] [202]

J. Feng and K. Matchev, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (2001) 3480, hep-ph/0102146. 141

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[203] [203]

A. Djouadi, M. Drees and J. Kneur, JHEP 0108 (2001) 055, hep-ph/0107316

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[204] [204]

G. Degrassi and G. Giudice, Phys. Rev. D 58 (1998) 053007, hep-ph/9803384

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998

[205] [205]

S. Heinemeyer, D. St¨ ockinger and G. Weiglein, Nucl. Phys. B 690 (2004) 62, hep- ph/0312264

View on Pith 2004

[206] [206]

C. Chen and C. Geng, Phys. Lett. B 511 (2001) 77, hep-ph/0104151

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[207] [207]

A. Arhrib and S. Baek, Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 075002, hep-ph/0104225

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002

[208] [208]

R. Scharf, Diploma thesis, Universit¨ at W¨ urzburg, 1991

View on Pith 1991

[209] [209]

J. Vermaseren, math-ph/0010025

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[210] [210]

See: www.wolfram.com

View on Pith

[211] [211]

T. Hahn and C. Schappacher, Comput. Phys. Comm. 143 (2002) 54, hep-ph/0105349

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002

[212] [212]

T. Hahn and M. P´ erez-Victoria, Comput. Phys. Comm. 118 (1999) 153, hep- ph/9807565. see: www.feynarts.de/formcalc

View on Pith 1999

[213] [213]

T. Hahn, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 89 (2000) 231, hep-ph/0005029; see: www.feynarts.de/looptools

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000

[214] [214]

G. Weiglein, R. Scharf and M. B¨ ohm, Nucl. Phys. B 416 (1994) 606, hep-ph/9310358; G. Weiglein, R. Mertig, R. Scharf and M. B¨ ohm, in New Computing Techniques in Physics Research 2 , ed. D. Perret-Gallix (World Scientiﬁc, Singapore, 1992), p. 617

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1994

[215] [215]

P. Nogueira, J. Comput. Phys. 105 (1993) 279

View on Pith 1993

[216] [216]

R. Harlander and M. Steinhauser, Phys. Lett. B 574 (2003) 258, hep-ph/0307346

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[217] [217]

M. Steinhauser, PhD thesis, University of Karlsruhe (Shaker Verlag, Aachen, 1996)

View on Pith 1996

[218] [218]

S. Larin, F. Tkachov and J. Vermaseren, Rep. No. NIKHEF-H /91-18 (Amsterdam, 1991)

View on Pith 1991

[219] [219]

T. Seidensticker, Diploma thesis (University of Karlsruhe, 199 8), unpublished

View on Pith

[220] [220]

F. Yuasa et al., Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 138, 18 (2000), hep-ph/0007053; see http://minami-home.kek.jp

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000

[221] [221]

R. Harlander and M. Steinhauser, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 43 (1999) 167, hep- ph/9812357

View on Pith 1999

[222] [222]

G. Weiglein, hep-ph/0109237

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[223] [223]

S. Dittmaier, hep-ph/0308079

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[224] [224]

A. Djouadi, J. Kalinowski and M. Spira, Comput. Phys. Comm. 108 (1998) 56, hep- ph/9704448. 142

View on Pith 1998

[225] [225]

J. Lee, A. Pilaftsis et al., Comput. Phys. Comm. 156 (2004) 283, hep-ph/0307377

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[226] [226]

S. Heinemeyer and G. Weiglein, hep-ph/0012364

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[227] [227]

S. Heinemeyer and G. Weiglein, hep-ph/0307177, in Proceedings of the Workshop on Electroweak precision data and the Higgs mass , DESY Zeuthen 2003, eds. S. Dittmaier and K. M¨ onig, DESY-PROC-2003-1; S. Heinemeyer, hep-ph/0406245, to appear in the proceedings of Loops & Legs in Quan- tum Field Theory 2004 , Zinnowitz, Germany, April 2004

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[228] [228]

M. Chanowitz, hep-ph/0304199

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[229] [229]

G. Altarelli, F. Caravaglios, G. Giudice, P. Gambino and G. Ridolﬁ, JHEP 0106 (2001) 018, hep-ph/0106029

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[230] [230]

G. Zeller et al. [NuTeV Collaboration], Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 111103, [Erratum-ibid. D 67 (2003) 119902] hep-ex/0203004

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002

[231] [231]

S. Davidson, S. Forte, P. Gambino, N. Rius and A. Strumia, JHEP 0202 (2002) 037, hep-ph/0112302

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002

[232] [232]

A. Kurylov, M. Ramsey-Musolf and S. Su, Phys. Lett. B 582 (2004) 222, hep- ph/0307270; O. Brein, B. Koch and W. Hollik, hep-ph/0408331

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[233] [233]

P. Ball, S. Khalil and E. Kou, Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 115011, hep-ph/0311361

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[234] [234]

T. Besmer, C. Greub and T. Hurth, Nucl. Phys. B 609 (2001) 359, hep-ph/0105292; F. Borzumati, C. Greub, T. Hurth and D. Wyler, Phys. Rev. D 62 (2000) 075005, hep-ph/9911245

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[235] [235]

M. Neubert, hep-ph/0408179

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[236] [236]

W. de Boer, A. Dabelstein, W. Hollik, W. M¨ osle and U. Schwickera th, Z. Phys. C 75 (1997) 627, hep-ph/9607286; hep-ph/9609209; W. de Boer, M. Huber, C. Sander and D. Kazakov, Phys. Lett. B 515 (2001) 283

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1997

[237] [237]

D. Pierce and J. Erler, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 62 (1998) 97, hep-ph/9708374; Nucl. Phys. B 526 (1998) 53, hep-ph/9801238

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998

[238] [238]

G. Cho, K. Hagiwara, C. Kao and R. Szalapski, hep-ph/990135 1; G. Cho and K. Hagiwara, Phys. Lett. B 514 (2001) 123, hep-ph/0105037; see also Ref. [56]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[239] [239]

W. de Boer and C. Sander, Phys. Lett. B 585 (2004) 276, hep-ph/0307049

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[240] [240]

G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, A. Cottrant, A. Pukhov and A. Se menov, hep-ph/0407218

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[241] [241]

M. Peskin and J. Wells, Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001) 093003, hep-ph/0101342. 143

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[242] [242]

A. Bartl, H. Eberl, S. Kraml, W. Majerotto and W. Porod, Proc eedings, Linear Collider Workshop Sitges 1999, hep-ph/9909378; M. Berggren, R. Ker¨ anen, H. Nowak and A. Sopczak, Proceeding s, Linear Collider Workshop Sitges 1999, hep-ph/9911345

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999

[243] [243]

K. Desch, E. Gross, S. Heinemeyer, G. Weiglein and L. Zivkovic, JHEP 0409 (2004) 062, hep-ph/0406322

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[244] [244]

L. Girardello and M. Grisaru, Nucl. Phys. B 194 (1982) 65

View on Pith 1982

[245] [245]

I. Jack and D. Jones, Phys. Lett. B 457 (1999) 101, hep-ph/9903365

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999

[246] [246]

S. Ambrosanio, A. Dedes, S. Heinemeyer, S. Su and G. Weiglein, Nucl. Phys. B 624 (2001) 3, hep-ph/0106255; A. Dedes, S. Heinemeyer, S. Su and G. Weiglein, hep-ph/0110219

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[247] [247]

J. Ellis, S. Heinemeyer, K. Olive and G. Weiglein, JHEP 0301 (2003) 006, hep- ph/0211206

View on Pith 2003

[248] [248]

J. Ellis, S. Heinemeyer, K. Olive and G. Weiglein, hep-ph/0411216

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[249] [249]

M. Dine, W. Fischler, M. Srednicki, Nucl. Phys. B 189 (1981) 575; S. Dimopoulos, S. Raby, Nucl. Phys. B 192 (1981) 353; M. Dine, W. Fischler, Phys. Lett. B 110 (1982) 227; M. Dine, M. Srednicki, Nucl. Phys. B 202 (1982) 238; M. Dine, W. Fischler, Nucl. Phys. B 204 (1982) 346; L. Alvarez-Gaum´ e, M. Claudson, M. Wise, Nucl. Phys. B 207 (1982) 96; C. Nappi,...

View on Pith 1981

[250] [250]

M. Dine, A. Nelson, Phys. Rev. D 48 (1993) 1277, hep-ph/9303230; M. Dine, A. Nelson, Y. Shirman, Phys. Rev. D 51 (1995) 1362, hep-ph/9408384; M. Dine, A. Nelson, Y. Nir, Y. Shirman, Phys. Rev. D 53 (1996) 2658, hep-ph/9507378

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1993

[251] [251]

P. Fayet, Phys. Lett. B 70 (1977) 461; Phys. Lett. B 86 (1979) 272; Phys. Lett. B 175 (1986) 471; and in “Uniﬁcation of the fundamental particle interactions” , eds. S. Ferrara, J. Ellis, P. van Nieuwenhuizen (Plenum, New York, 1980) p. 587

View on Pith 1977

[252] [252]

A. Pomarol and R. Rattazzi, JHEP 9905 (1999) 013, hep-ph/9903448

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999

[253] [253]

Z. Chacko, M. Luty and E. Ponton, JHEP 0004 (2000) 001, hep-ph/9905390

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000

[254] [254]

E. Katz, Y. Shadmi and Y. Shirman, JHEP 9908 (1999) 015, hep-ph/9906296

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999

[255] [255]

I. Jack, D. Jones and R. Wild, Phys. Lett. B 535 , 193 (2002), hep-ph/0202101

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002

[256] [256]

R. Barate et al. [ALEPH Collaboration], Phys. Lett. B 499 (2001) 53, hep-ex/0010062. 144

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[257] [257]

J. Ellis, J. Hagelin, D. Nanopoulos, K. Olive and M. Srednicki, Nucl. Phys. B238 (1984) 453; H. Goldberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 50 (1983) 1419; J. Ellis, T. Falk, G. Ganis, K. Olive and M. Srednicki, Phys. Lett. B 510 (2001) 236, hep-ph/0102098

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1984

[258] [258]

S. Ambrosanio, S. Heinemeyer, B. Mele, S. Petrarca, G. Poles ello, A. Rimoldi and G. Weiglein, hep-ph/0002191

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[259] [259]

C. Bennett et al., Astrophys. J. Suppl. 148 (2003) 1, astro-ph/0302207; D. Spergel et al., Astrophys. J. Suppl. 148 (2003) 175, astro-ph/0302209

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[260] [260]

J. Ellis, K. Olive, Y. Santoso and V. Spanos, Phys. Lett. B 565 (2003) 176, hep- ph/0303043

View on Pith 2003

[261] [261]

U. Chattopadhyay, A. Corsetti and P. Nath, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 035005, hep- ph/0303201; H. Baer and C. Balazs, JCAP 0305, 006 (2003), hep-ph/0303114; A. Lahanas and D. Nanopoulos, Phys. Lett. B 568 , 55 (2003), hep-ph/0303130; R. Arnowitt, B. Dutta and B. Hu, hep-ph/0310103

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[262] [262]

K. Chetyrkin, M. Misiak and M. M¨ unz, Phys. Lett. B 400 , (1997) 206, [Erratum-ibid. B 425 (1998) 414] hep-ph/9612313; P. Gambino and M. Misiak, Nucl. Phys. B 611 (2001) 338, hep-ph/0104034

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1997

[263] [263]

P. Cho, M. Misiak and D. Wyler, Phys. Rev. D 54 , 3329 (1996), hep-ph/9601360; A. Kagan and M. Neubert, Eur. Phys. J. C 7 (1999) 5, hep-ph/9805303; A. Ali, E. Lunghi, C. Greub and G. Hiller, Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002) 034002, hep- ph/0112300; G. Hiller and F. Kr¨ uger, Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 074020, hep-ph/0310219

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1996

[264] [264]

R. Barate et al. [ALEPH Collaboration], Phys. Lett. B 429 (1998) 169; S. Chen et al. [CLEO Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 251807, hep- ex/0108032; P. Koppenburg et al. [Belle Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004) 061803, hep- ex/0403004; K. Abe et al. [Belle Collaboration], Phys. Lett. B 511 (2001) 151, hep-ex/0103042; B. Aubert et al. [B...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998

[265] [265]

T. Barklow, hep-ph/0312268. 145

View on Pith Pith review arXiv