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

Abdelhak Djouadi (LPTO)

REVIEW

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

Abdelhak Djouadi (LPTO)

High Energy Physics - Phenomenology · Submitted 17 Mar 2005 · 300 references

Pith's verdict: A review that earned its place as the standard quantitative reference for SM Higgs decays and production, with 2005-vintage inputs and no error bands on the summary plots — both minor for the genre.

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 →

· 2 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/0503172 (version 2)

Pith IDVKR5JNRC, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

CitationAbdelhak Djouadi (LPTO). "The Anatomy of Electro-Weak Symmetry Breaking. I: The Higgs boson in the Standard Model." arXiv:hep-ph/0503172 (2005). https://pith.science/paper/VKR5JNRC

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

Nothing in here is new physics, and that is the point. This is Djouadi's Tome I, the compilation you reach for when you need a Higgs branching ratio or a production cross section with the QCD and electroweak corrections folded in. It did that job well enough that it became a standard citation, and it still reads cleanly twenty years on as a map of what was known before the LHC turned on. The abstract is honest about what it is [abstract:s1]. Judge it as a review and it holds up; judge it as a result and there is nothing to judge. The real contribution is synthesis: NLO and NNLO QCD corrections, the electroweak corrections, the loop-induced gamma-gamma, Z-gamma and gg channels, all gathered in one place with proper attribution to the people who computed them. The scalar-versus-pseudoscalar comparison in Sections 2.1.4 and 2.2.4 goes further than most reviews bother to — the azimuthal asymmetry distributions in the t-tbar and tau-tau channels are genuinely useful for anyone thinking about CP, and they are worked out, not just cited. The discussion of the global-fit Higgs mass in Section 1.3.1 is candid in a way that aged well: he states outright that the fit has only 6% probability and that dropping A_FB^b pushes the central value below the LEP direct bound. That is an acknowledged limitation, not a hidden one. The soft spot is the numbers. Inputs are 2005 vintage (mt = 178, alpha_s = 0.1172, running MS-bar masses in Table 1.1), and the summary plots do not carry propagated uncertainty bands, even though the Preamble promises them. Fig. 2.3 partly covers this by showing the Born, running-mass and full-QCD variants of the b-bbar and c-cbar widths, which is where the scheme dependence actually bites. So the gap is real but small, and it is the kind of gap that a review of this scope always has. One caveat on my read: the manuscript I saw was truncated partway through Chapter 2, so Chapters 3 and 4 were assessed from the table of contents and the Preamble synopsis rather than the full text. That is a limit on my access, not a defect in the paper. Who should read it: anyone starting Higgs phenomenology, and anyone who needs a defensible number for a branching ratio without rederiving it. It deserves referee time, though as a review the bar is different — the question is coverage and accuracy, and on the visible evidence both are there.

Referee report

Significance

The review's value is as a reference work: it collects in one place, with explicit formulae, the state of the art circa 2005 for Higgs decay and production, including the NLO (and in places NNLO) QCD corrections and the electroweak corrections, and it does so with attention to the scheme dependence of the quark masses (Fig. 2.3) that dominates the hadronic widths. Two features stand out as more than compilation: the systematic CP-odd comparison, with angular distributions in H/A -> VV -> 4f and H/A -> tau tau -> pi pi nu nu that would permit a parity determination, and the four-body expression Eq. (2.35), which reproduces the two- and three-body results across threshold. The numerical plots have served as benchmarks for the field, and the analytic formulae are the kind of material that is otherwise scattered across many primary papers.

Major objections (2)

[Preamble; Sec. 2.5; Sec. 3.7.1] The Preamble promises that 'the expected branching ratios of the Higgs particle, including the uncertainties which affect them, are given', and the summary plots of Sec. 2.5 and Sec. 3.7.1 are presented as the normalization reference for experimental studies. As far as I can see, the summary curves carry central values only. Because the hadronic widths depend on m_b(m_H) and alpha_s (Table 1.1 and Eq. 2.11), and the gluon-fusion cross section on the renormalization and factorization scales and on the PDF set, the residual theoretical uncertainty is at the several-percent level and is not negligible compared with the precision targeted at a future lepton collider. Please state explicitly, in the figure captions or in a short table, the input set used for each curve and the estimated theory uncertainty, or add an uncertainty band. Fig. 2.3 already illustrates the dominant scheme dependence for b bbar and c cbar; extending that logic to the summary plots would complete the deliverable the Preamble announces.
[Sec. 1.4.2, Eqs. (1.171)-(1.177)] With lambda = M_H^2/(2v^2) and the bracket of Eq. (1.175), the bracket in Eq. (1.177) is negative for m_t = 178 GeV, so the inequality as printed, M_H^2 > v^2 8 pi^2 [-12 m_t^4/v^4 + ...] log(Q^2/v^2), yields a negative lower bound and is vacuous. The prefactor should be v^2/(8 pi^2) and the bracket should enter with the opposite sign, equivalently the bound follows from lambda(v^2) > (1/16 pi^2)[12 m_t^4/v^4 - ...] log(Q^2/v^2). Relatedly, Eq. (1.173) is not consistent with the solution Eq. (1.172): the Landau pole of Eq. (1.172) sits at log(Lambda_C^2/v^2) = 4 pi^2/(3 lambda), i.e. Lambda_C = v exp(2 pi^2/(3 lambda)) = v exp(4 pi^2 v^2/(3 M_H^2)), not v exp(4 pi^2 v^2/M_H^2). The numerical bounds quoted in Eq. (1.178) and shown in Fig. 1.19 are correctly attributed to Ref. [136] and are not in question, but the displayed one-loop formulae should be corrected so that a reader can reproduce them.

Minor objections (8)

[Sec. 1.1.4, Eq. (1.84)] The O(alpha_s^3) term sits outside the square bracket and is divided by pi^2 rather than pi^3; please check the bracket structure and the power of pi in the three-loop coefficient.
[Sec. 1.4.2, Eq. (1.171)] The derivative should be with respect to log Q^2 (or ln Q^2), not Q^2, for consistency with the solution given in Eq. (1.172).
[Sec. 1.3.2, Eq. (1.147)] The factor (1 - M_Z^2/s)^2 appears to have migrated from the denominator into the numerator of the second term; please restore the fraction so that the expression matches the standard Higgs-strahlung cross section.
[Sec. 2.2.4, Eqs. (2.4) and (2.41)] Eq. (2.41) as printed is dimensionless (G_mu M_H^3/M_A times 8x^2), whereas the three-body expression Eq. (2.42) has the correct dimensions; please check the normalization. Eq. (2.4) with a dimensionless eta and an explicit M_V^2 factor also appears to have dimension six, so the normalization convention for the CP-odd AVV coupling should be stated explicitly, together with a warning that eta is not the MSSM tan-beta-enhanced coupling.
[Sec. 1.3.1, Eq. (1.141)] The 95% CL upper limit M_H < 260 GeV is quoted in isolation. Since the paper itself notes that the global fit has only a 6% probability and that removing A_FB^b moves the central value below the LEP direct bound, please attach that qualifier to the limit itself rather than only to the surrounding discussion.
[Sec. 2.2.3, Eq. (2.35)] The upper limit of the q_1^2 integral is M_H^2, but the upper limit of the second integral, (M_H - q_1)^2, becomes negative for q_1 > M_H; please state that the integrand vanishes in that region or adjust the integration limit.
[Sec. 2.1.4, Eq. (2.20)] The double sign in the interference term is not explained; please state explicitly which sign corresponds to the CP-even and which to the CP-odd case, and likewise for the azimuthal asymmetries in Eqs. (2.21) and (2.23).
[Sec. 1.3.2, Eq. (1.144)] There is a typographical error ('arcos' for 'arccos'), and the argument (3 - a^2)/(2a) should be checked in the region a > 1 where the arccosine argument leaves [-1, 1].

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

The paper

The paper claims

Fix one number — the Higgs mass — and every other Higgs prediction follows

The reading

This review asks a single question and answers it at length: in the Standard Model, how much about the Higgs boson is actually predicted before anyone has seen one? The author's answer is that everything follows from one unknown, the Higgs mass $M_H$; once it is fixed, the couplings to every fermion and gauge boson, all partial decay widths, the total width, the branching ratios, and the production cross sections at the Tevatron, the LHC and a future $e^+e^-$ collider are determined with no further freedom. The bulk of the work is the bookkeeping needed to make that statement quantitatively useful: Born-level formulas, then the large QCD corrections to hadronic decays, then the electroweak corrections, then the loop-induced decays into photons, $Z$ bosons and gluons that have no tree-level coupling at all. What makes the compilation worth having is that the corrections are not small — the running of the $b$ and $c$ masses alone shifts the dominant hadronic widths by factors of order two — so a naive tree-level table would misdirect experimental searches. The review also collects the indirect and theoretical constraints on $M_H$: precision electroweak fits favour a light Higgs near the direct-search limit, while unitarity, triviality, vacuum stability and fine-tuning bracket the range in which the Standard Model can remain a consistent perturbative theory.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the proportionality of every Higgs coupling to the mass of the particle it couples to, inherited from the single scalar doublet and its vacuum expectation value. Because the same $v$ sets the $W$ mass, the Fermi constant and the fermion Yukawa couplings, the Higgs has no independent coupling constants to adjust — this is what converts 'one unknown mass' into 'all observables predicted'. The machinery that makes the prediction usable is the renormalization-group treatment of the hadronic channels: large logarithms $α_s^n log^n(m_q/M_H)$ are absorbed by evaluating running $overline{MS}$ quark masses and $α_s$ at the scale $M_H$, which is why the $b$ and $c$ partial widths are computed with $m_b(M_H)$ and $m_c(M_H)$ rather than pole masses. The second piece of machinery is the set of loop amplitudes for $Hγγ$, $HZγ$ and $Hgg$, dominated by the $W$ boson and the top quark, which give the Higgs its only coupling to massless gauge bosons and hence its main production route at a hadron collider.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The claim the review is built to establish is that the Standard Model Higgs sector has no free shape, only a free scale. The couplings are fixed by the particle masses through $g_{Hf f} = m_f/v$ and $g_{HVV} = 2M_V^2/v$ with $v = (1/2^{1/2}G_μ)^{-1/2} = 246$ GeV, so a single input, $M_H$, determines the whole profile: which decay channel dominates in which mass window, how the total width grows, and how large each production cross section is at a given machine energy. The review works this out channel by channel. Below the $WW$ threshold the $b$ quark width dominates but is suppressed by the running mass at the scale $M_H$; above roughly 130 GeV the three-body $H → WW^*$ overtakes it; above the real $WW$ and $ZZ$ thresholds the width grows as $M_H^3$ until the Higgs becomes too broad to be called a resonance. Loop-induced decays into $γγ$, $γZ$ and $gg$ are kept because they do not decouple as the loop mass grows, making them a window on particles heavier than the Higgs itself, and because the gluon fusion rate built on the same vertex is the dominant production mechanism at the LHC. Alongside this, the review assembles the constraints: the precision electroweak fit gives $M_H = 114^{+69}_{-45}$ GeV with a 95% upper bound of 260 GeV, the direct LEP search gives $M_H > 114.4$ GeV, and the theoretical requirements of perturbative unitarity, positivity of the quartic coupling up to a cut-off, and tolerable fine-tuning bound the allowed region from above and below.

Load-bearing premise

Every number in the review is computed with one fixed set of electroweak inputs — a top mass of 178 GeV, $α_s(M_Z) = 0.1172$, and running quark masses evaluated at the scale of the Higgs — and the summary plots do not propagate the uncertainties on those inputs into the quoted rates.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

A measured Higgs mass alone yields a complete set of predicted branching ratios and cross sections, so any single measured rate can be checked against the rest of the table without further theoretical input.
The gluon fusion cross section, built from the same top-quark loop that mediates $H → gg$, is the largest production channel at the LHC and therefore the primary discovery mode over most of the allowed mass range.
Because the $b\bar b$ and $c\bar c$ widths depend sensitively on the running masses, a percent-level measurement of hadronic branching ratios would translate into a constraint on $α_s$ and the quark masses rather than on the Higgs sector.
The loop-induced $γγ$ and $Zγ$ rates are sensitive to any new charged or coloured particle whose mass comes from the Higgs mechanism, so a deviation from the tabulated values would be evidence for physics beyond the Standard Model before any such particle is produced directly.
The theoretical bounds — unitarity failing around 700 GeV, the triviality and stability window narrowing as the cut-off rises — mean that if the Higgs is absent or heavier than about 1 TeV, new phenomena must appear in the TeV range to restore unitarity in longitudinal gauge-boson scattering.

Reading between the lines

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

The review's tables are usable as a null hypothesis only to the extent that the electroweak inputs are held fixed; a reader who wants to test the Standard Model rather than confirm it would need the input-parameter uncertainties folded into the quoted rates, which the summary plots do not attempt.
The same coupling-to-mass proportionality that makes the predictions rigid also makes them fragile in one direction: any particle that acquires its mass from the Higgs enters the loop-induced $γγ$ and $gg$ rates even if it is far too heavy to produce, so those two channels carry more sensitivity to unknown physics than their small branching fractions suggest.
The precision-electroweak preference for a light Higgs sits close to the direct-search exclusion line, which means the two constraints are not independent confirmations but a near-coincidence; a shift in the top mass or in the hadronic vacuum-polarization input moves the fit region by tens of GeV.
The CP-discrimination material — azimuthal correlations in $H → τ^+τ^-$ and $H → t\bar t$ — is presented as a template rather than a measurement, and it defines the observable that a future lepton collider would need in order to distinguish a scalar from a pseudoscalar once a state is found.

Original abstract

This review is devoted to the study of the mechanism of electroweak symmetry breaking and this first part focuses on the Higgs particle of the Standard Model. The fundamental properties of the Higgs boson are reviewed and its decay modes and production mechanisms at hadron colliders and at future lepton colliders are described in detail.

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, 2,293 input tokens, $0.0001 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.12 · states limitation 0.26 · human participants 0.02 · controlled comparison 0.01 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.03 · compares with prior results 0.04 · mentions code or data availability 0.01.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v2. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

This review is devoted to the study of the mechanism of electroweak symmetry breaking and this first part focuses on the Higgs particle of the Standard Model. The fundamental properties of the Higgs boson are reviewed and its decay modes and production mechanisms at hadron colliders and at future lepton colliders are described in detail.

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	This review is devoted to the study of the mechanism of electroweak symmetry breaking and this first part focuses on the Higgs particle of the Standard Model.	contribution 0.81	0.32	0.08	asserted 0.87
s1	The fundamental properties of the Higgs boson are reviewed and its decay modes and production mechanisms at hadron colliders and at future lepton colliders are described in detail.	contribution 0.98	0.17	0.08	asserted 0.97

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: review 1.00 · evidence from literature 0.99.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v2

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 1.** 6: Left: the measured value of the e +e − → W+W− cross section at LEP2 and the prediction in the SM (full line) and when the s–channel Z boson or both γ and Z boson exchange diagrams are not contributing. Right: the 68% and 95% confidence level contours of the three two parameter fits to the W boson C and P conserving trilinear couplings, g Z 1 – λγ, g Z 1 –κγ and λγ–κγ, as measured at LEP2 with a c.m. energy up to √ s = 209 GeV and including systematical uncertainties; the fitted values are indicated with a cross and the SM value for each fit is in the center of the grid. From Ref

**Figure 2.** 3: The partial widths for the decays H → b ¯b (left) and H → cc¯ (right) as a function of MH . They are shown in the Born approximation (dotted lines), including only the running quark masses (dashed lines) and with the full set of QCD corrections (solid lines). The input pole masses are mb = 4.88 GeV and mc = 1.64 GeV and the running strong coupling constant is taken at the scale of the Higgs mass and is normalized to αs(MZ) = 0.1172. 2.1.3 The case of the top quark For Higgs bosons decaying into top quarks, the QCD corrections do not lead to large logarithms since mt is comparable…

**Figure 3.** 6: Diagrams for the gg → HZ process, which contributes to O(α 2 s ). At the LHC, the contribution of this gluon–gluon fusion mechanism to the pp → HZ total production cross section can be substantial. This is due to the fact that the suppression of the cross section by a power (αs/π) 2 is partly compensated by the increased gluon luminosity at high energies. In addition, the tree–level cross section for qq¯ → HZ drops for increasing c.m. energy and/or MH values, since it is mediated by s–channel gauge boson exchange. Note that the cross section for this process is negligible at the Te

**Figure 4.** 14: Higgs production cross sections in the ZZ fusion mechanism in e +e − collisions with c.m. energies √ s = 0.5, 1 and 3 TeV as a function of MH . Similarly to the WW fusion case, the overall cross section for the process e +e − → H + e +e − receives contributions gS from Higgs–strahlung with Z → e +e −, gZ± from ZZ fusion, and gI from the interference term between fusion and Higgs–strahlung [504] dσ(e +e − → He+e −) dEH d cos θ = G3 µM8 Z pH √ 2 π 3s (gS + gI + gZ+ + gZ−) (4.39) with gS = (ˆv 2 e + ˆa 2 e ) 2 192 sse + s1s2 (s − M2 Z ) 2 [(se − M2 Z ) 2 + M2 ZΓ 2 Z ] gI = (ˆv 2 e +…

Figures reproduced from arXiv:hep-ph/0503172 by the authors.

References

Works cited (300)

[136]

T. Hambye and K. Riesselmann, Phys. Rev. D55 (1997) 725 5

View on Pith 1997
[1]

S. Glashow, Nucl. Phys. 22 (1961) 579; S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 19 (1967) 1264; A. Salam, in “Elementary Particle Theory”, ed. N. Svartholm , Almqvist and Wiksells, Stockholm (1969) p. 367

View on Pith 1961
[2]

M. Gell-Mann, Phys. Lett. 8 (1964) 214; G. Zweig, CERN-Re port 8182/TH401 (1964); H. Fritzsch, M. Gell-Mann and H. Leutwyler, Phys. Lett. B47 ( 1973) 365; D. Gross and F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 30 (1973) 1343; H.D. Politze r, Phys. Rev. Lett. 30 (1973) 1346; G. ’t Hooft, Marseille Conference on Yang–Mill s ﬁelds (1972)

View on Pith 1964
[3]

P.A.M. Dirac, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A114 (1927) 243; P. Jo rdan and W. Pauli, Z. Phys. 47 (1928) 151; W. Heisenberg and W. Pauli, Z. Phys. 56 (1 929) 1; S. Tomonaga, Progr. Theor. Phys. 1 (1946) 27; J. Schwinger, Phys. Rev. 73 ( 1948) 416; R. Feynman, Phys. Rev. 76 (1949) 749

View on Pith 1927
[4]

E. Fermi, Nuovo Cim. 11 (1934) 1; ibid. Z. Phys. 88 (1934) 161; R. Feynman and M. Gell-Mann, Phys. Rev. 109 (1958) 193

View on Pith 1934
[5]

G. ’t Hooft, Nucl. Phys. B33 (1971) 173; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B35 (1971) 167; G. ’t Hooft and M. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B44 (1972) 189

View on Pith 1971
[6]

P.W. Higgs, Phys. Rev. Lett. 13 (1964) 508; ibid. Phys. Rev. 145 (1966) 1156; F. Englert and R. Brout, Phys. Rev. Lett. 13 (1964) 321; G.S. Gur alnik, C.R. Hagen and T. Kibble, Phys. Rev. Lett. 13 (1965) 585; T. Kibble, Phys. Re v. 155 (1967) 1554

View on Pith 1964
[7]

Ch. Llewellyn Smith, Phys. Lett. 46B (1973) 233; J.S. Bel l, Nucl. Phys. B60 (1973) 427; J.M. Cornwall, M.D. Levin and G. Tiktopoulos, Phys. Rev . Lett. 30 (1973) 1268; ibid. Phys. Rev. D10 (1974) 1145 and (E) ibid. D11 (1975) 972

View on Pith 1973
[8]

The LEP Collaborations (ALEPH, DELPHI, L3 and OPAL), the LEP Electroweak Working Group and the SLD Heavy Flavour Group, A combination of preliminary Electroweak measurements and constraints on the Standard M odel, hep-ex/0412015; http://lepewwg.web.cern.ch/LEPEWWG

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[9]

Particle Data Group, K. Hagiwara et al. , Phys. Rev. D66 (2002) 010001; S. Eidelman et al. , Phys. Let. B592 (2004) 1

View on Pith 2002
[10]

The LEP Collaboration (ALEPH, DELPHI, L3 and OPAL), Phy s. Lett. B565 (2003) 61. 295

View on Pith 2003
[11]

F.J. Hasert et al. (Gargamelle Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B46 (1973) 121; ibid. Phys. Lett. B46 (1973) 138; T. Eichten et al. (Gargamelle Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B46 (1973) 274

View on Pith 1973
[12]

G. Arnison et al. (UA1 Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B122 (1983) 103; M. Banner et al. (UA2 Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B122 (1983) 476; G. Arniso n et al. (UA1 Collabora- tion), Phys. Lett. B126 (1983) 398; P. Bagnaia et al. (UA2 Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B129 (1983) 130

View on Pith 1983
[13]

J. Gunion, H. Haber, G. Kane, and S. Dawson, The Higgs Hunter’s Guide , Addison– Wesley, Reading (USA), 1990

View on Pith 1990
[14]

F. Abe et al. (CDF Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 74 (1995) 2626; S. Aba chi et al. (D0 Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 74 (1995) 2632

View on Pith 1995
[15]

The CDF and DØ collaborations and the Tevatron Electrow eak Working Group, hep- ex/0404010

View on Pith
[16]

See for instance: I. Aitchison and A. Hey, Gauge Theories in Particle Physics , Adam Hilger, Bristol (UK), 1982; C. Quigg, Gauge Theories of the Strong, Weak, and Elec- tromagnetic Interactions, Benjamin-Cummings, Reading (USA), 1983; T.P. Cheng and L.F. Li, Gauge theory of Elementary Particle Physics , Oxford Sciences Publications, Clarendon Press, Oxfor...

View on Pith 1982
[17]

See for instance: E. Abers and B. Lee, Phys. Rep. 9 (1973) 1; M.A.B. Beg and A. Sirlin, Phys. Rept. 88 (1982) 1; C. Quigg, Introduction to gauge theories of the strong, weak and electromagnetic interactions , Lectures given at “NATO Advanced Study Inst.: Techniques and Concepts of High Energy Physics”, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands, July 1980, published ...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1973
[18]

See for instance: W.J. Stirling, Higgs Phenomenology, Lectures given at “42nd Scottish Universities Summer School in Physics: High Energy Phenome nology”, St. Andrews (Scotland), August 1993, published in Scottish Summer Scho ol 1993:0225-270; M.E. Peskin, Beyond the Standard Model , Lectures given at the European School of High- Energy Physics, Carry-le-...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1993
[19]

B.A. Kniehl, Phys. Rep. 240 (1994) 211

View on Pith 1994
[20]

A. Djouadi, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A10 (1995) 1

View on Pith 1995
[21]

M. Spira, Fortschr. Phys. 46 (1998) 203

View on Pith 1998
[22]

M. Steinhauser, Phys. Rept. 364 (2002) 247

View on Pith 2002
[23]

M. Carena and H.E. Haber, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 50 (200 3) 63

View on Pith
[24]

A. Djouadi, The Anatomy of Electro–Weak Symmetry Breaking, II: The Higg s bosons in the minimal Supersymmetric Model ; hep-ph/0503173

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[25]

A. Djouadi, The Anatomy of Electro–Weak Symmetry Breaking, III: The Hig gs sector in models beyond the SM and MSSM benchmarks , in preparation

View on Pith
[26]

C.N. Yang and R. Mills, Phys. Rev. 96 (1954) 191. 297

View on Pith 1954
[27]

S.L. Adler and W.A. Bardeen, Phys. Rev. 182 (1969) 1517; R. Jackiw, Lectures on “Current Algebra and its Applications”, Princeton Univers ity Press, 1972

View on Pith 1969
[28]

C. Bouchiat, J. Iliopoulos and Ph. Meyer, Phys. Lett. 38 B (1972) 519

View on Pith 1972
[29]

Y. Nambu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 4 (1960) 380; Y. Nambu and G. Jo na–Lasinio, Phys. Rev. 122 (1961) 345; ibid. Phys. Rev. 124 (1961) 246; J. Goldstone, Nuov. Cim. 19 (1961) 154; J. Goldstone, A. Salam and S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. 127 (1 962) 965

View on Pith 1960
[30]

K. Fujikawa, B.W. Lee and A. Sanda, Phys. Rev. D6 (1972) 2 923; Y.P. Yao, Phys. Rev. D7 (1973) 1647; G. ’t Hooft in Ref. [5]

View on Pith 1972
[31]

M. Chanowitz and M. Gaillard, Phys. Lett. 142B (1984) 85 ; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B261 (1985) 379

View on Pith 1984
[32]

B.W. Lee, C. Quigg and H.B. Thacker, Phys. Rev. D16 (1977 ) 1519

View on Pith 1977
[33]

C. E. Vayonakis, Lett. Nuovo Cimento 17 (1976) 383; H. We ldon, Phys. Lett. 146B (184) 59; G. J. Gounaris, R. K¨ ogerler and H. Neufeld, Phys. R ev. D34 (1986) 3257; Y.P. Yao and C.P. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D38 (1988) 2237; W. Marcian o, G. Valencia and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Rev. D40 (1989) 1725; J. Bagger and C. S chmidt, Phys. Rev. D41 (1990) 264; H. Veltman,...

View on Pith 1976
[34]

N. Cabibbo, Phys. Rev. Lett. 10 (1963) 531; M. Kobayashi and T. Maskawa, Prog. Theor. Phys. 49 (1973) 652

View on Pith 1963
[35]

S. Glashow, J. Illiopoulos and L. Maiani, Phys. Rev. D2 ( 1970) 1285

View on Pith 1970
[36]

D. Ross and M. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B95 (1975) 135

View on Pith 1975
[37]

T. Appelquist and J. Carazzone, Phys. Rev. D11 (1975) 28 56

View on Pith 1975
[38]

G. K¨ all´ en and A. Sabry, K. Dan. Vidensk. Selsk. Mat.-F ys. Medd. 29 (1955) No. 17; M. Steinhauser, Phys. Lett. B429 (1998) 158

View on Pith 1955
[39]

M. Davier and A. K¨ ocker, Phys. Lett. B419 (1998) 419; J. Erler, Phys. Rev. D59 (1999) 054008; F. Jegerlehner, hep-ph/0308117; K. Hagiwara, A. Ma rtin, D. Nomura and T. Teubner, Phys. Rev. D69 (2004) 093003

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998
[40]

H. Burkhardt and B. Pietrzyk, Phys. Lett. B513 (2001) 46

View on Pith 2001
[41]

R.E. Behrends, R.J. Finkelstein and A. Sirlin, Phys. Re v. 101 (1956) 866; T. Kinoshita and A. Sirlin, Phys. Rev. 113 (1959) 1652; T. van Ritbergen an d R. Stuart, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 488. 298

View on Pith 1956
[42]

For reviews, see e.g.: G. Altarelli, A QCD Primer , Lectures given at “2001 Euro- pean School of High-Energy Physics”, Beatenberg (Switzerl and), Aug–Sep 2001, hep- ph/0204179; S. Bethke, J. Phys. G26 (2000) R27; ibid. Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 121 (2003); I. Hinchliﬀe in Ref. [9]

View on Pith 2000
[43]

O. Tarasov, A. Vladimirov and A. Zharkov, Phys. Lett. B9 3 (1980) 429; S.A. Larin and J.A.M. Vermaseren, Phys. Lett. B303 (1993) 334

View on Pith 1980
[44]

M. Je˙ zabek and J. H. K¨ uhn, Nucl. Phys. B314 (1989) 1; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B320 (1989) 20; ibid. Phys. Rev. D48 (1993) 1910 ; A. Czarnecki, Phys. Lett. B252 (1 990) 467; C.S. Li, R.J. Oakes and T.C. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D43 (1991) 3759; A. De nner and T. Sack, Nucl. Phys. B358 (1991) 46; G. Eilam, R. Mendel, R. Migneron a nd A. Soni, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66 (199...

View on Pith 1989
[45]

For a detailed review on the top quark see, for instance, M. Beneke, I. Efthymiopoulos, M.L. Mangano and J. Womersley (conv) et al. , Top Quark Physics in the Report of the “1999 CERN Workshop on SM Physics at the LHC”, Report CERN -TH/2000-100, hep-ph/0003033

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999
[46]

For theoretically oriented reviews on the top quark pro perties, see: J.H. Kuhn, hep- ph/9707321; S. Dawson, hep-ph/0303191

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[47]

S. Narison, Light and heavy quark masses, ﬂavor breaking of chiral conde nsates, meson weak leptonic decay constants in QCD , hep-ph/0202200

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[48]

N. Gray, D.J. Broadhurst, W. Grafe and K. Schilcher, Z. P hys. C48 (1990) 673; K.G. Chetyrkin and M. Steinhauser, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83 (1999) 400 1; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B573 (2000) 617; K. Melnikov and T. van Ritbergen, Phys. Lett. B48 2 (2000) 99

View on Pith 1990
[49]

S.G. Gorishny, A.L. Kataev, S.A. Larin and L.R. Surgula dze, Mod. Phys. Lett. A5 (1990) 2703; ibid. Phys. Rev. D43 (1991) 1633

View on Pith 1990
[50]

K.G. Chetyrkin, Phys. Lett. B404 (1997) 161; J.A.M. Ver maseren, S.A. Larin and T. van Ritbergen, Phys. Lett. B405 (1997) 327

View on Pith 1997
[51]

The LEP2 WW Working Group (U. Parzefall et al. ), Note LEPEWWG/TGC/2003– 01; see the web site: http://lepewwg.web.cern.ch/LEPEWWG/tgc

View on Pith 2003
[52]

The CDF and DØ collaborations, Phys. Rev. D70 (2004) 092 008. 299

View on Pith 2004
[53]

Z Physics at LEP1 , CERN Report 89–08 (1989), eds. G. Altarelli, R. Kleiss and C . Verzegnassi; see this reference for earlier work

View on Pith 1989
[54]

Reports of the Working Group on Precision Calculations for t he Z Resonance , CERN Report 95–03 (1995), eds. D. Bardin, W. Hollik and G. Passari no

View on Pith 1995
[55]

Physics at LEP2 , CERN Report 96–01, eds. G. Altarelli, T. Sj¨ ostrand and F. Z wirner

View on Pith
[56]

For a more recent account of high–precision measuremen ts, see the review of W. Hollik, SM Theory , plenary talk given at the XXIX ICHEP, Vancouver, Canada, Ju ly 1998, hep-ph/9811313

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998
[57]

M. B¨ ohm and W. Hollik (conv.) et al. , Forward–Backward Asymmetries in Ref. [53], Part 1, p. 203; J. K¨ uhn and P.M. Zerwas (conv.) et al. , Heavy Flavors at LEP in Ref. [53], Part 1, p. 269

View on Pith
[58]

K.G. Chetyrkin, J.H. K¨ uhn and A. Kwiatkowski, QCD corrections to the e+e− cross- section and the Z boson decay rate , Phys. Rept. 277 (1996) 189 and in Ref. [54], p. 175

View on Pith 1996
[59]

F. Berends (conv.) et al. , The Z lineshape in Ref. [53], Part 1, p. 81

View on Pith
[60]

M. Consoli, W. Hollik and F. Jegerlehner, Electroweak radiative corrections for Z physics in Ref. [53], Part 1, p.7; G. Burgers, F. Jegerlehner, B. Knie hl and J. K¨ uhn, ∆r or the relation between the electroweak couplings and the we ak boson masses in Ref. [53], Part 1, p.55

View on Pith
[61]

M. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B123 (1977) 89; M.S. Chanowitz, M.A. Furman and I. Hinch- liﬀe, Phys. Lett. B78 (1978) 285

View on Pith 1977
[62]

A. Djouadi and C. Verzegnassi, Phys. Lett. B195 (1987) 2 65; A. Djouadi, Nuovo Cim. A100 (1988) 357; B. Kniehl, Nucl. Phys. B347 (1990) 86; F. Hal zen and B. Kniehl, Nucl. Phys. B353 (1991) 567; A. Djouadi and P. Gambino, Phys. Rev. D49 (1994) 3499

View on Pith 1987
[63]

L. Avdeev, J. Fleischer, S.M. Mikhailov and O. Tarasov, Phys. Lett. B336 (1994) 560 and (E) ibid. B349 (1995) 597; K.G. Chetyrkin, J.H. K¨ uhn and M. Steinhaus er, Phys. Lett. B351 (1995) 331

View on Pith 1994
[64]

J.J. van der Bij and F. Hoogeveen, Nucl. Phys. B283 (1987 ) 477. 300

View on Pith 1987
[65]

R. Barbieri, M. Beccaria, P. Ciafaloni, G. Curci and A. V icere, Phys. Lett. B288 (1992) 95; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B409 (1993) 105; J. Fleischer, F. Jegerlehner an d O.V. Tarasov, Phys. Lett. B319 (1993) 249

View on Pith 1992
[66]

G. Degrassi, P. Gambino and A. Vicini, Phys. Lett. B383 ( 1996) 219; G. Degrassi, P. Gambino and A. Sirlin, Phys. Lett. B394 (1997) 188; A. Freita s, W. Hollik, W. Walter and G. Weiglein, Phys. Lett. B495 (2000) 338; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B632 (2002) 189; M. Awramik and M. Czakon, Phys. Lett. B568 (2003) 48; M. Awramik , M. Czakon, A. Freitas and G. Weiglein,...

View on Pith 1997
[67]

G. Degrassi and P. Gambino, Nucl. Phys. B567 (2000) 3

View on Pith 2000
[68]

M. Awramik, M. Czakon, A. Freitas and G. Weiglein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004) 201805

View on Pith 2004
[69]

J. van der Bij, K. Chetyrkin, M. Faisst, G. Jikia and T. Se indensticker, Phys. Lett. B498 (2001) 156; M. Faisst, J.H. K¨ uhn, T. Seindensticker an d O. Veretin, Nucl. Phys. B665 (2003) 649

View on Pith 2001
[70]

M. Veltman, Acta. Phys. Pol. B8 (1977) 475

View on Pith 1977
[71]

T. Appelquist and C. Bernard, Phys. Rev. D22 (1980) 200; A. Longhitano, Nucl. Phys. B188 (1981) 118; M. Einhorn and J. Wudka, Phys. Rev. D39 (1989 ) 2758

View on Pith 1980
[72]

J.J. van der Bij and M. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B231 (1985) 2 05

View on Pith 1985
[73]

R. Boughezal, J.B. Tausk and J.J. van der Bij, hep-ph/04 10216

View on Pith
[74]

J. Jersak, E. Laermann and P.M. Zerwas Phys. Rev. D25 (19 82) 1218 and (E) ibid. D36 (1987) 310; A. Djouadi, J. K¨ uhn and P.M. Zerwas, Z. Phys. C46 (1990) 411; A. Djouadi, B. Lampe and P.M. Zerwas, Z. Phys. C67 (1995) 123; A. B. Arbuzov, D.Yu. Bardin and A. Leike, Mod. Phys. Lett. A7 (1992) 2029 and (E) ibid. A9 (1994) 1515

View on Pith 1987
[75]

A.A. Akhundov, D.Yu. Bardin and T. Riemann, Nucl. Phys. B276 1 (1986) 1; W. Beenakker and W. Hollik, Z. Physik C40 (1988) 141; J. Bernabe u, A. Pich and A. Santamaria, Phys. Lett. B200 (1988) 569; B.W. Lynn and R.G. S tuart, Phys. Lett. B252 (1990) 676

View on Pith 1986
[76]

F. Boudjema, A. Djouadi and C. Verzegnassi, Phys. Lett. B238 (1990) 423; A. Blondel, A. Djouadi and C. Verzegnassi, Phys. Lett. B293 (1992) 253; A . Djouadi, G. Girardi, C. Verzegnassi, W. Hollik and F.M. Renard, Nucl. Phys. B349 ( 1991) 48

View on Pith 1990
[77]

A. Denner, W. Hollik and B. Lampe, Z. Phys. C60 (1993) 193 . 301

View on Pith 1993
[78]

O.P. Sushkov, V.V. Flambaum and V.V. Khriplovich, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 20 (1975) 537; W. Alles, C. Boyer and A. Buras, Nucl. Phys. B119 (1977) 1 25

View on Pith 1975
[79]

M. Lemoine and M. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B164 (1980) 445; R . Phillipe, Phys. Rev. D26 (1982) 1588; M. Bohm, A. Denner, T. Sack, W. Beenakker, F. Behrends and H. Kuifj, Nucl. Phys. B304 (1988) 463; J. Fleisher, F. Jegerleh ner and M. Zralek, Z. Phys. C42 (1989) 409; W. Beenakker, K. Kolodziej and T. Sack, Phys. Lett. B258 (1991) 469; J. Fleisher, F. Jegerle...

View on Pith 1980
[80]

For a review of weak boson production in e+e− collisions including radiative corrections, see: W. Beenakker and A. Denner, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A9 (1994) 4 837

View on Pith 1994
[81]

For a recent review, see e.g. U. Baur, Measuring the W boson mass at hadron colliders , published in “Zeuthen 2003, Electroweak precision data and the Higgs mass”, p. 47, hep-ph/0304266

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[82]

For a detailed discussion of electroweak SM processes a t the LHC, including weak boson production, see: R. Haywood, P. Hobson, W. Hollik and Z . Kunszt (conv.) et al. , Report of the Electroweak Working Group at “1999 CERN Works hop on SM Physics at the LHC”, hep-ph/0003275

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999
[83]

S.D. Drell and T.M. Yan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 25 (1970) 316

View on Pith 1970
[84]

G. Altarelli, R.K. Ellis and G. Martinelli, Nuc. Phys. B 157 (1979) 461; J. Kubar–Andr´ e and F. Paige, Phys. Rev. D19 (1979) 221

View on Pith 1979
[85]

R. Hamberg, W.L. van Neerven and T. Matsuura, Nucl. Phys . B359 (1991) 343 and (E) ibid. B644 (2002) 403

View on Pith 1991
[86]

A. Sirlin, Phys. Rev. D22 (1980) 971; W. Marciano and A. S irlin, Phys. Rev. D22 (1980) 2695; ibid. Phys. Rev. D29 (1984) 945; A. Sirlin and W. Marciano, Nucl. Ph ys. B189 (1981) 442

View on Pith 1980
[87]

W. Marciano, Phys. Rev. D20 (1979) 274; W. Marciano and A . Sirlin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 46 (1981) 163; W. Marciano, S. Sarantakos and A. Sirlin, Nucl . Phys. B217 (1983) 84

View on Pith 1979
[88]

M. Awramik and M. Czakon, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (2002) 2418 01; A. Onishchenko and O. Veretin, Phys. Lett. B551 (2003) 111

View on Pith 2002
[89]

K. Gaemers and G. Gounaris, Z. Phys. C1 (1979) 259; K. Hag iwara, K. Hikasa, R. D. Peccei and D. Zeppenfeld, Nucl. Phys. B282 (1987) 253. 302

View on Pith 1979
[90]

G. Gounaris, J.-L. Kneur and D. Zeppenfeld (conv.) et al. , Triple Gauge Boson Cou- plings in Ref. [55], p. 525

View on Pith
[91]

W. Hollik, Fortsch. Phys. 38 (1990) 165

View on Pith 1990
[92]

M. Peskin and T. Takeuchi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65 (1990) 964 ; ibid. Phys. Rev. D46 (1992) 381

View on Pith 1990
[93]

G. Altarelli and R. Barbieri, Phys. Lett. B253 (1991) 16 1; G. Altarelli, R. Barbieri and F. Caravaglios, Nucl. Phys. B405 (1993) 3

View on Pith 1991
[94]

C.S. Wood et al. , Science 275 (1997) 1759; S.C. Bennett and C.E. Wieman, Phys . Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 2484; M. Kuchiev and V. Flambaum, Phys. R ev. Lett. 89 (2002) 283002

View on Pith 1997
[95]

G.P. Zeller et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 88 (2002) 091802

View on Pith 2002
[96]

For a review, see P. Gambino, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A19 (2004 ) 808

View on Pith 2004
[97]

Very recently, new O(α) photon bremsstrahlung corrections have been calculated a nd shown to remove the NuTeV discrepancy if included; M. Gluck, P. Jimenez–Delgado and E. Reya, hep-ph/0503103

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[98]

For a review, see M. Chanowitz, published in “Zeuthen 20 03, Electroweak precision data and the Higgs mass”, p. 15-24, hep-ph/0304199

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[99]

C.J.C. Burges and H. J. Schnitzer, Nucl. Phys. B228 (198 3) 464; C.N. Leung, S.T. Love and S. Rao, Z. Phys. C31 (1986) 433: W. Buchmuller and D. W yler, Nucl. Phys. B268 (1986) 621; K. Hagiwara, S. Ishihara, R. Szalapski and D . Zeppenfeld, Phys. Lett. B283 (1992) 353; ibid. Phys. Rev. D48 (1993) 2182

View on Pith 1986
[100]

K. Whisnant, J. M. Yang, B.-L. Young and X. Zhang, Phys. Rev. D56 (1997) 467; G.J. Gounaris, D.T. Papadamou and F. M. Renard, Z. Phys. C76 (1997 ) 333; J.M. Yang and B.-L Young, Phys. Rev. D56 (1997) 5907; G. Gounaris and G. Tsirigoti, Phys. Rev. D56 (1997) 3030

View on Pith 1997
[101]

See for instance, R. Barbieri and A. Strumia Phys. Lett . B462 (1999) 144; L. Hall and C. Kolda, Phys. Lett. B459 (1999) 213

View on Pith 1999
[102]

M. Peskin and J. Wells, Phys. Rev. D64 (2001) 093003

View on Pith 2001
[103]

For Z ′ physics as well as production and study at future colliders, see for instance: J.L. Hewett and T.G. Rizzo, Phys. Rept. 183 (1989) 193; A. Djo uadi et al. , Z. Phys. 303 C56 (1992) 289; A. Leike, Phys. Rept. 317 (1999) 143; M. Dittm ar et al. , Phys. Lett. B583 (2004) 111

View on Pith 1989
[104]

P.J. Franzini and P. Taxil (conv.) et al. , Higgs at LEP1 in Ref. [53], Part II, p. 59; E.W.N. Glover, J.J. van der Bij (conv.) et al. , Rare Z Decays in Ref. [53], Part II, p. 1

View on Pith
[105]

J.D. Bjorken, Proc. 1976 SLAC Summer Inst. Part. Phys. , SLAC report 198 (1977) 1

View on Pith 1977
[106]

F.A. Behrends and R. Kleiss, Nucl. Phys. B260 (1985) 32

View on Pith 1985
[107]

R.N. Cahn, M.S. Chanowitz and N. Fleishon, Phys. Lett. 82B (1979) 113

View on Pith 1979
[108]

L. Bergstrom and G. Hulth, Nucl. Phys. B259 (1985) 137

View on Pith 1985
[109]

ALEPH Collaboration (D. Buskulic et al. ), Phys. Lett. B384 (1996) 427; DELPHI Collaboration (P. Abreu et al. ), Nucl. Phys. B421 (1994) 3; L3 Collaboration (M. Acciarri et al. ), Phys. Lett. B385 (1996) 454; OPAL Collaboration (G. Alexa nder et al.), Z. Phys. C73 (1997) 189

View on Pith 1996
[110]

J.F. Grivaz, Rapporteur talk given at “International Europhysics Conference on High Energy Physics” (HEP 95), Brussels, 1995; Particle Data Gro up (R. M. Barnett et al.), Phys. Rev. D54 (1996) 1

View on Pith 1996
[111]

J. Ellis, M.K. Gaillard, and D.V. Nanopoulos, Nucl. Ph ys. B106 (1976) 292

View on Pith 1976
[112]

D.R.T. Jones and S.T. Petcov, Phys. Lett. B84 (1979) 44 0

View on Pith 1979
[113]

B.L. Joﬀe and V.A. Khoze, Sov. J. Part. Phys. 9 (1978) 50 ; E. Ma and Y. Okada, Phys. Rev. D20 (1979) 1052; J. Finjord, Physica Scripta 21 (1 980) 143

View on Pith 1978
[114]

M. Carena and P.M. Zerwas (conv.) et al. , Higgs Physics at LEP2 in Ref. [55], Part I, p. 351, hep-ph/9602250

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[115]

The LEP Collaborations (ALEPH, DELPHI, L3 and OPAL), h ep-ex/0107032

View on Pith
[116]

The LEP Collaborations (ALEPH, DELPHI, L3 and OPAL), h ep-ex/0107034

View on Pith
[117]

D.A. Dicus and S. Mathur, Phys. Rev. D7 (1973) 3111; B. L ee, C. Quigg and H. Thacker, Phys. Rev. Lett. 38 (1977) 883; H.A. Weldon, Phys. R ev. D30 (1984) 1547; M. Chanowitz, M. Golden and H. Georgi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57 (19 86) 2344; ibid. Phys. Rev. D36 (1987) 1490

View on Pith 1973
[118]

M. S. Chanowitz, Strong WW scattering at the end of the 90’s: Theory and experi - mental prospects, pulished in Zuoz 1998, “Hidden symmetries and Higgs phenom ena”, p. 81, hep-ph/9812215. 304

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998
[119]

M. L¨ uscher and P. Weisz, Phys. Lett. B212 (1988) 472; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B318 (1989) 705

View on Pith 1988
[120]

A. Arhrib, Unitarity constraints on scalar parameters of the standard and two Higgs doublets models , hep-ph/0012353

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[121]

W. Marciano and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Rev. D37 (1988) 2 509; S. Dawson and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62 (1989) 1232

View on Pith 1988
[122]

L. Durand, B. A. Kniehl and K. Riesselmann, Phys. Rev. D 51 (1995) 5007; A. Gh- inculov, Nucl. Phys. B455 (1995) 21; A. Frink, B. Kniehl, D. K reimer and K. Ries- selmann, Phys. Rev. D54 (1996) 4548; T. Binoth, A. Ghinculov and J.J. van der Bij, Phys. Rev. D57 (1998) 1487

View on Pith 1995
[123]

A. Ghinculov, Phys. Lett. B337 (1994) 137 and (E) ibid B346 (1995) 426; A. Frink, B. Kniehl and K. Riesselmann, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72 (1994) 2534 an d (E) ibid. 74 (1995) 1699; V. Borodulin and G. Jikia, Phys. Lett. B391 (1997) 434

View on Pith 1994
[124]

S. Dawson and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Rev. D40 (1989) 288 0

View on Pith 1989
[125]

L. Durand, P. Maher and K. Riesselmann, Phys. Rev. D48 ( 1993) 1084; K. Riessel- mann, Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) 6226; U. Nierste and K. Riesselma nn, Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) 6638

View on Pith 1996
[126]

K. Riesselmann and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Rev. D55 (199 7) 311

View on Pith
[127]

T. Cheng, E. Eichten and L. Li, Phys. Rev. D9 (1974) 2259 ; B. Pendleton and G. Ross, Phys. Lett. B98 (1981) 291; C. Hill, Phys. Rev. D24 (198 1) 691; J. Bagger, S. Dimopoulos and E. Masso, Nucl. Phys. B253 (1985) 397; M. Beg, C. Panagiotakopoulos and A. Sirlin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 52 (1984) 883; M. Duncan, R. Ph ilippe and M. Sher, Phys. Lett. B153 (1985) 1...

View on Pith 1974
[128]

K.G. Wilson and J. Kogut, Phys. Rept. 12 (1974) 75

View on Pith 1974
[129]

N. Cabibbo, L. Maiani, G. Parisi and R. Petronzio, Nucl . Phys. B158 (1979) 295; R. Dashen and H. Neuberger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 50 (1983) 1897; D. C allaway, Nucl. Phys. B233 (1984) 189; P. Hasenfratz and J. Nager, Z. Phys. C37 (198 8) 477; J. Kuti, L. Lin, and Y. Shen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 61 (1988) 678; R. Chivukula and E . Simmons, Phys. Lett. B388 (1996) 788

View on Pith 1979
[130]

A. Hasenfratz, Quantum Fields on the Computer , Ed. M. Creutz, World Scientiﬁc, Singapore, 1992, p. 125; M. G˜ ockeler, H. Kastrup, T. Neuhau s and F. Zimmermann, Nucl. Phys. B405 (1993) 555. 305

View on Pith 1993
[131]

M. Lindner, M. Sher and H.W. Zaglauer, Phys. Lett. 228B (1989) 139; M. Sher, Phys. Lett. B317 (1993) 159; ibid. Phys. Lett. B331 (1994) 448; G. Altarelli and I. Isidori, Phys. Lett. B337 (1994) 141; J.A. Casas, J.R. Espinosa and M. Quiros, Phys. Lett. B342 (1995) 171; J. Espinosa and M. Quiros, Phys. Lett. B353 ( 1995) 257

View on Pith 1989
[132]

M. Sher, Phys. Rept. 179 (1989) 273

View on Pith 1989
[133]

G. Isidori, G. Ridolﬁ and A. Strumia, Nucl. Phys. B609 ( 2001) 387

View on Pith 2001
[134]

G. Anderson, Phys. Lett. B243 (1990) 265; P. Arnold and S. Vokos, Phys. Rev. D44 (1991) 3620; J.R. Espinosa and M. Quiros, Phys. Lett. B353 (1 995) 257

View on Pith 1990
[135]

M. Lindner, Z. Phys. C31 (1986) 295; B. Grzadowski and M . Lindner, Phys. Lett. B178 (1986) 81

View on Pith 1986
[137]

M. Veltman, Acta Phys. Polon. B12 (1981) 437

View on Pith 1981
[138]

M. Einhorn and D. Jones, Phys. Rev. D46 (1992) 5206

View on Pith 1992
[139]

I. Jack and D.R.T. Jones, Nucl. Phys. B342 (1990) 127; R . Decker and J. Pestieau, Mod. Phys. Lett. A4 (1989) 2733; M. Capdequi-Peyran` ere, J. Montero and G. Moul- taka, Phys. Lett. B260 (1991) 138; P. Osland and T. Wu, Phys. L ett. B291 (1992) 315; M. Chaichian, R. Gonzalez-Felipe and K. Huitu, Phys. Le tt. B363 (1995) 101; A. Andrianov and N. Romanenko...

View on Pith 1990
[140]

C.F. Kolda and H. Murayama, JHEP 0007 (2000) 035

View on Pith 2000
[141]

J.A. Casas, J.R. Espinosa and I. Hidalgo, JHEP 0411 (20 04) 057

View on Pith
[142]

K. Hagiwara, R. Szalapski and D. Zeppenfeld, Phys. Let t. B318 (1993) 155; J.M. Hernandez, M.A. Perez and J.J. Toscano, Phys. Rev. D51 (1995 ) 2044

View on Pith 1993
[143]

G.J. Gounaris and F. M. Renard, Phys. Rev. D59 (1999) 11 3015

View on Pith 1999
[144]

J. Romao and S. Andringa, Eur. Phys. J. C7 (1999) 631

View on Pith 1999
[145]

L. Resnick, M.K. Sundaresan and P.J.S. Watson, Phys. R ev. D8 (1973) 172

View on Pith 1973
[146]

J.F. Gunion and H.E. Haber, Nucl. Phys. B272 (1986) 1

View on Pith 1986
[147]

T. Arens, U. Gieseler and L.M. Sehgal, Phys. Lett. B339 (1994) 127. 306

View on Pith 1994
[148]

E. Braaten and J.P. Leveille, Phys. Rev. D22 (1980) 715 ; N. Sakai, Phys. Rev. D22 (1980) 2220; T. Inami and T. Kubota, Nucl. Phys. B179 (1981) 1 71; S.G. Gorishny, A.L. Kataev and S.A. Larin, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 40 (1984) 329

View on Pith 1980
[149]

M. Drees and K. Hikasa, Phys. Rev. D41 (1990) 1547; ibid. Phys. Lett. B240 (1990) 455 and (E) ibid. B262 (1991) 497

View on Pith 1990
[150]

K.G. Chetyrkin, Phys. Lett. B390 (1997) 309; K.G. Chet yrkin and M. Steinhauser, Phys. Lett. B408 (1997) 320

View on Pith 1997
[151]

K.G. Chetyrkin and A. Kwiatkowski, Nucl. Phys. B461 (1 996) 3; S.A. Larin, T. van Ritbergen and J.A.M. Vermaseren, Phys. Lett. B362 (1995) 13 4

View on Pith 1995
[152]

A. Djouadi and P. Gambino, Phys. Rev. D51 (1995) 218

View on Pith 1995
[153]

K. Melnikov, Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) 5020

View on Pith 1996
[154]

R. Harlander and M. Steinhauser, Phys. Rev. D56 (1997) 3980

View on Pith 1997
[155]

R. Decker, M. Nowakowski and A. Pilaftsis, Z. Phys. C57 (1993) 339; ibid. Mod. Phys. Lett. A6 (1991) 3491 and (E) ibid. A7 (1992) 819

View on Pith 1993
[156]

A. Djouadi, J. Kalinowski and P.M. Zerwas, Z. Phys. C70 (1996) 435

View on Pith 1996
[157]

S. Moretti and W. Stirling, Phys. Lett. B347 (1995) 291 and (E) ibid. B366 (1996) 451

View on Pith 1995
[158]

J. R. Dell’Aquila and C.A. Nelson, Nucl. Phys. B320 (19 89) 61; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B320 (1989) 86; C.A. Nelson, Phys. Rev. D41 (1990) 2805; S. Weinbe rg, Phys. Rev. D42 (1990) 860; B.K. Bullock, K. Hagiwara and A.D. Martin, Phys. Lett. B273 (1991) 501; S. Barr and A. Zee, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65 (1990) 21; J. Gunion and R. Vega, Phys. Lett. B251 (1990) 157; D....

View on Pith 1989
[159]

V. Barger, K. Cheung, A. Djouadi, B. Kniehl and P. Zerwa s, Phys. Rev. D49 (1994) 79

View on Pith 1994
[160]

M. Kramer, J.H. Kuhn, M.L. Stong and P.M. Zerwas, Z. Phy s. C64 (1994) 21

View on Pith 1994
[161]

D. Chang, W.Y. Keung and I. Phillips, Phys. Rev. D48 (19 93) 3225. 307

View on Pith
[162]

H. Pois, T. Weiler and T.C. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D47 (1993) 3 886; D. Chang and W.Y. Keung, Phys. Lett. B305 (1993) 261

View on Pith 1993
[163]

B. Grzadkowski and J.F. Gunion, Phys. Lett. B350 (1995 ) 218

View on Pith 1995
[164]

J.H. Kuhn and F. Wagner, Nucl. Phys. B236 (1984) 16

View on Pith 1984
[165]

W. Bernreuther, A. Brandenburg and M. Flesch, Phys. Re v. D56 (1997) 90

View on Pith 1997
[166]

Z. Was and M. Worek, Acta Phys. Polon. B33 (2002) 1875; M . Worek, Acta Phys. Polon. B34 (2003) 4549; G.R. Bower, T. Pierzchala, Z. Was and M. Worek, Phys. Lett. B543 (2002) 227

View on Pith 2002
[167]

K. Desch, Z. Was and M. Worek, Eur. Phys. J. C29 (2003) 49 1; K. Desch, A. Imhof, Z. Was and M. Worek, Phys. Lett. B579 (2004) 157

View on Pith 2003
[168]

G. Pocsik and T. Torma, Z. Phys. C6 (1980) 1; T.G. Rizzo, Phys. Rev. D22 (1980) 722; W.-Y. Keung and W.J. Marciano, Phys. Rev. D30 (1984) 248

View on Pith 1980
[169]

D.A. Dicus, S. Willenbrock, T. Imbo, W.K. Keung and T. R izzo, Phys. Rev. D34 (1986) 2157; T.G. Rizzo, Phys. Rev. D31 (1985) 2366; P. Langa cker and J. Liu, Phys. Rev. D46 (1992) 5069

View on Pith 1986
[170]

A. Grau, G. Panchieri and R.J.N. Phillips, Phys. Lett. B251 (1990) 293

View on Pith 1990
[171]

R.N. Cahn, Rep. Prog. Phys. 52 (1989) 389; B. Kniehl, Ph ys. Lett. B244 (1990) 537; E. Gross, B. Kniehl and G. Wolf, Z. Phys. C63 (1994) 417 and (E) ibid. C66 (1995) 321; D.J. Summers, Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) 6374

View on Pith 1989
[172]

J.R. Dell’Aquila and C.A. Nelson, Phys. Rev. D33 (1986 ) 80; M. Duncan, G. Kane and W. Repko, Nucl. Phys. B272 (1986) 517; C.A. Nelson, Phys. Rev . D37 (1988) 1220; D. Chang, W.Y. Keung and I. Phillips, Phys. Lett. B305 (1993) 261; B. Grzadkowski, Phys. Lett. B305 (1993) 384; A. Soni and R.M. Xu, Phys. Rev. D4 8 (1993) 5259; T. Arens and L.M. Sehgal, Z. P...

View on Pith 1986
[173]

B. Grzadkowski, J.F. Gunion and J. Pliszka, Nucl. Phys . B583 (2000) 49

View on Pith 2000
[174]

S. Choi, D. Miller, M. Muhlleitner and P. Zerwas, Phys. Lett. B553 (2003) 61

View on Pith 2003
[175]

A. Djouadi and B. Kniehl, Correlations in Higgs production and decay as a probe of CP-violation in the scalar sector , published in Proceedings of Workshop on “ e+e− Collisions”, Report DESY–93–123C. 308

View on Pith
[176]

A.I. Va ˘ ınshte ˘ ın, M.B. Voloshin, V.I. Zakharov and M.A. Shifman, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 30 (1979) 711

View on Pith 1979
[177]

L. Okun, Leptons and Quarks , Ed. North Holland, Amsterdam, 1982

View on Pith 1982
[178]

M. Gavela, G. Girardi, C. Malleville and P. Sorba, Nucl . Phys. B193 (1981) 257

View on Pith 1981
[179]

H. Zheng and D. Wu, Phys. Rev. D42 (1990) 3760; A. Djouad i, M. Spira, J. van der Bij and P.M. Zerwas, Phys. Lett. B257 (1991) 187; S. Dawson an d R.P. Kauﬀman, Phys. Rev. D47 (1993) 1264; K. Melnikov and O. Yakovlev, Phys . Lett. B312 (1993) 179; A. Djouadi, M. Spira and P.M. Zerwas, Phys. Lett. B311 (1 993) 255; M. Inoue, R. Najima, T. Oka and J. Saito,...

View on Pith 1990
[180]

M. Spira, A. Djouadi, D. Graudenz and P.M. Zerwas, Nucl . Phys. B453 (1995) 17

View on Pith 1995
[181]

J. Fleischer, O.V. Tarasov and V.O. Tarasov, Phys. Let t. B584 (2004) 294

View on Pith 2004
[182]

K. Melnikov, M. Spira and O. Yakovlev, Z. Phys. C64 (199 4) 401

View on Pith
[183]

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

View on Pith 1992
[184]

F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 39 (1977) 1304; J. Ellis, M . Gaillard, D. Nanopoulos and C. Sachrajda, Phys. Lett. 83B (1979) 339; T. Rizzo, Phys. Rev . D22 (1980) 178

View on Pith 1977
[185]

H. Georgi, S. Glashow, M. Machacek and D. Nanopoulos, P hys. Rev. Lett. 40 (1978) 692

View on Pith 1978
[186]

T. Inami, T. Kubota and Y. Okada, Z. Phys. C18 (1983) 69

View on Pith 1983
[187]

A. Djouadi, M. Spira and P.M. Zerwas, Phys. Lett. B264 ( 1991) 440

View on Pith 1991
[188]

M. Spira, A. Djouadi, D. Graudenz and P.M. Zerwas, Phys . Lett. B318 (1993) 347

View on Pith 1993
[189]

S. Dawson and R.P. Kauﬀman, Phys. Rev. D49 (1994) 2298

View on Pith 1994
[190]

A. Djouadi, M. Spira and P.M. Zerwas, Z. Phys. C70 (1996 ) 427

View on Pith 1996
[191]

M.S. Chanowitz, M.A. Furman and I. Hinchliﬀe, Phys. Le tt. 78B (1978) 285; Nucl. Phys. B153 (1979) 402; J. Fleischer and F. Jegerlehner, Phys . Rev. D23 (1981) 2001; F. Jegerlehner, in “Workshop on Radiative Corrections in SU(2 )L × U(1)”, Trieste, Italy, June 1983, Eds. B.W. Lynn and J.F. Wheater (World Scientiﬁc, Singapore, 1984), p. 237; Z. Hioki, Phys...

View on Pith 1978
[192]

B.A. Kniehl, Nucl. Phys. B376 (1992) 3; D.Yu. Bardin, B .M. Vilenski ˘ ı and P.Kh. Khris- tova, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 53 (1991) 152; A. Dabelstein and W. H ollik, Z. Phys. C53 (1992) 507

View on Pith 1992
[193]

S. Dawson and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Lett. B211 (1988) 2 00; B.A. Kniehl, Nucl. Phys. B352 (1991) 1; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B357 (1991) 439; D.Yu. Bardin, B.M. Vilenski ˘ ı a nd P.Kh. Khristova, preprint JINR-P2-91-140

View on Pith 1988
[194]

B.A. Kniehl and A. Sirlin, Phys. Lett. B318 (1993) 367; B.A. Kniehl, Phys. Rev. D50 (1994) 3314

View on Pith 1993
[195]

A. Djouadi and P. Gambino, Phys. Rev. D49 (1994) 4705

View on Pith 1994
[196]

B.A. Kniehl and M. Spira, Nucl. Phys. B432 (1994) 39; A. Kwiatkowski and M. Stein- hauser, Phys. Lett. B338 (1994) 66 and (E) B342 (1995) 455

View on Pith 1994
[197]

B.A. Kniehl and M. Spira, Nucl. Phys. B443 (1995) 37; B. A. Kniehl, Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) 6477

View on Pith 1995
[198]

B.A. Kniehl and M. Steinhauser, Nucl. Phys. B454 (1995 ) 485; ibid. Phys. Lett. B365 (1996) 297

View on Pith 1996
[199]

K.G. Chetyrkin, B.A. Kniehl and M. Steinhauser, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78 (1997) 594; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B490 (1997) 19

View on Pith 1997
[200]

A. Djouadi, P. Gambino and B. Kniehl, Nucl. Phys. B523 ( 1998) 17

View on Pith 1998
[201]

A. Djouadi and P. Gambino, Phys. Rev. Lett. 73 (1994) 25 28

View on Pith 1994
[202]

F. Fugel, B. Kniehl and M. Steinhauser, Nucl. Phys. B70 2 (2004) 333

View on Pith 2004
[203]

U. Aglietti, R. Bonciani, G. Degrassi and A. Vicini, Ph ys. Lett. B595 (2004) 432

View on Pith 2004
[204]

G. Degrassi and F. Maltoni, Phys. Lett. B600 (2004) 255

View on Pith 2004
[205]

M. Steinhauser, in Proceedings of the Ringberg Worksh op on “The Higgs Puzzle”, hep-ph/9612395

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[206]

K.G. Chetyrkin, B.A. Kniehl and M. Steinhauser, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79 (1997) 353; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B510 (1998) 61

View on Pith 1997
[207]

A.L Kataev, JETP Lett. 66 (1997) 327; A. L. Kataev and V. Kim, hep-ph/93042428

View on Pith 1997
[208]

M. Steinhauser, Phys. Rev. D59 (1999) 054005. 310

View on Pith 1999
[209]

J.K. Korner, K. Melnikov and O. Yakovlev, Phys. Rev. D5 3 (1996) 3737

View on Pith 1996
[210]

M.A. Shifman, A.I. Va ˘ ınshte ˘ ın and V.I. Zakharov, Phys. Lett. 78B (1978) 443; A.I. Va ˘ ınshte ˘ ın, V.I. Zakharov and M.A. Shifman, Sov. Phys. Usp. 23 (1980) 429; M.B. Voloshin, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 44 (1986) 478

View on Pith 1978
[211]

B. Kniehl and M. Spira, Z. Phys. C69 (1995) 77; W. Kilian , Z. Phys. C69 (1995) 89

View on Pith 1995
[212]

S. L. Adler, J. C. Collins and A. Duncan, Phys. Rev. D15 ( 1977) 1712

View on Pith 1977
[213]

O. Tarasov, Preprint JINR P2-82-900 (1982), unpublis hed

View on Pith 1982
[214]

A. Djouadi, J. Kalinowski and M. Spira, Comput. Phys. C ommun. 108 (1998) 56

View on Pith 1998
[215]

P. Garbincius, Talk given at the 2004 Moriond Conferen ce on electroweak interactions, hep-ph/0406013

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[216]

The web site of the Collider Run II Integrated Luminosity at the address: http://www.fnal.gov/pub/now/tevlum.html

View on Pith
[217]

U. Heintz, S. Kuhlmann and S. Willenbrock, in Future Electroweak Physics at the Fermilab Tevatron, Report of the TeV2000 Study Group, edited by D. Amidei and R. Brock, Fermilab-PUB-96-082 (April 1996), pp. 120-156; W. M . Yao, in New Direction for High Energy Physics , proceedings of the 1996 DPF/DPB Summer Study on High Energy Physics, June 25-July 12, 1...

View on Pith 1996
[218]

M. Carena J. Conway, H. Haber and J. Hobbs (conv.) et al. , Report of the Higgs Working Group for “RUN II at the Tevatron”, hep-ph/0010338

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[219]

See the review talk given by J. Engelen in Ref. [220]

View on Pith
[220]

Proceedings of the Conference “Physics at LHC” in Vien na, 13–17 July 2004; see the web site: wwwhephy.oeaw.ac.at/phlhc04/

View on Pith 2004
[221]

F. Gianotti, M. Mangano et T. Virdee (conv.) et al., Physics Potential and experimental Challenges of the LHC Luminosity Upgrade , hep-ph/0204087

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[222]

U. Baur et al. , Report of the Working Group Physics at future colliders , in APS/DPF/DPB Snowmmass study in Ref. [223], hep-ph/0201227

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[223]

Proceedings of the APS/DPF/DPP Summer Study on the Fut ure of Particle Physics, Snowmass 2001, Colorado; see the web site http://snowmass2001.org/. 311

View on Pith 2001
[224]

Proceedings of the LaThuile Workshop on Physics at Fut ure Accelerators, La Thuile 1987, Yerllow Report CERN–87–07, 2 Volumes

View on Pith 1987
[225]

VLHC Design Study Group, Design Study for a Staged Very Large Hadron Collider , FERMILAB-TM-2149, June 2001

View on Pith 2001
[226]

S. Peggs, The Hadron Colliders Working Group Report in the 2001 Snowmass of Ref. [223]

View on Pith 2001
[227]

ATLAS Collaboration, Technical Proposal, CERN/LHCC/94-43

View on Pith
[228]

ATLAS Collaboration, Detector and Physics Performance Technical Design Report , Vols. 1 and 2, CERN–LHCC–99–14 and CERN–LHCC–99–15

View on Pith
[229]

CMS Collaboration, Technical Proposal, CERN–LHCC–94–38

View on Pith
[230]

CMS Collaboration, ECAL Project Technical Design Report, CERN/LHCC/97-33 and The compact muon solenoid: the muon Technical Design Report , CERN/LHCC/97-32

View on Pith
[231]

See the talks given by M. Nesssi (ATLAS) and A. Ball (CMS ) in Ref. [220]

View on Pith
[232]

Proceedings of the Large Hadron Collider Workshop, Aa chen 1990, CERN Report 90–10, G. Jarlskog and D. Rein (eds.)

View on Pith 1990
[233]

D. Froidevaux, Z. Kunszt and J. Stirling [conv.] et al., Report of the SM Higgs Working Group in the proceedings of Ref. [232], Vol. II; see also the R apporteurs talks by G. Altarelli and D. Denegri, ibid., Vol. I

View on Pith
[234]

S. Asai et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Eur. Phys. J. C32S2 (2004) 19

View on Pith 2004
[235]

S. Abdullin et al. (CMS Collaboration), CMS Note 2003/33

View on Pith 2003
[236]

G. Branson et al. (CMS and ATLAS Collaborations), Eur. Phys. J. direct C4 (200 2) N1

View on Pith
[237]

P. Sphicas, talk at the conference “Physics at LHC” in R ef. [220]; D. Froidevaux, talk given at the ﬁnal meeting of the European Network “Physics at Colliders”, Montpellier, 26–27 September 2004

View on Pith 2004
[238]

A. Djouadi, R. Kinnunen, E. Richter-Was, H.U. Martyn ( conv.) et al. , Report of the Higgs Working Group, Proceedings of the Les Houches Worksho p on “Physics at TeV Colliders”, 1999, hep-ph/0002258. 312

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999
[239]

D. Cavalli, A. Djouadi, K. Jakobs, A. Nikitenko, M. Spi ra, C.E.M. Wagner, W.-M. Yao (conv.) et al. , Report of the Higgs Working Group, Proceedings of the Les Ho uches Workshop on “Physics at TeV Colliders”, 2001, hep-ph/02030 56

View on Pith 2001
[240]

K.A. Assamagan, M. Narain, A. Nikitenko, M. Spira, D. Z eppenfeld (conv.) et al. , Report of the Higgs Working Group, Proceedings of the Les Hou ches Workshop on “Physics at TeV Colliders”, 2003, hep-ph/0406152

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[241]

S.L. Glashow, D. Nanopoulos and A. Yildiz, Phys. Rev. D 18 (1978) 1724; J. Finjord, G. Girardi and P. Sorba, Phys. Lett. B89 (1979) 99

View on Pith 1978
[242]

E. Eichten, I. Hinchliﬀe, K. Lane and C. Quigg, Rev. Mod . Phys. 56 (1984) 579

View on Pith 1984
[243]

R.N. Cahn and S. Dawson, Phys. Lett. 136B (1984) 196 and (E) ibid. B138 (1984) 464

View on Pith 1984
[244]

D. Dicus and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Rev. D32 (1985) 1642

View on Pith 1985
[245]

G. Altarelli, B. Mele and F. Pitolli, Nucl. Phys. B287 ( 1987) 205

View on Pith 1987
[246]

W. Kilian, M. Kramer and P.M. Zerwas, Phys. Lett. B373 ( 1996) 135

View on Pith 1996
[247]

R. Raitio and W.W. Wada, Phys. Rev. D19 (1979) 941; Z. Ku nszt, Nucl. Phys. B247 (1984) 339; A.S. Bagdasaryan et al. , Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 46 (1987) 315

View on Pith 1979
[248]

J. Ng and P. Zakarauskas, Phys. Rev. D29 (1984) 876

View on Pith 1984
[249]

R.M. Barnett, H.E. Haber and D.E. Soper, Nucl. Phys. B3 06 (1988) 697; F.I. Olness and W.-K. Tung, Nucl. Phys. B308 (1988) 813

View on Pith 1988
[250]

D.A. Dicus and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Rev. D39 (1989) 75 1

View on Pith 1989
[251]

E.N. Glover and J. van der Bij, Nucl. Phys. B309 (1988) 2 82; D.A. Dicus, C. Kao and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Lett. B203 (1988) 457; G. Jikia, Nucl. Phys. B412 (1994) 57

View on Pith 1988
[252]

T. Plehn, M. Spira and P.M. Zerwas, Nucl. Phys. B479 (19 96) 46

View on Pith
[253]

V. Barger, T. Han and R. Phillips, Phys. Rev. D38 (1988) 2766

View on Pith 1988
[254]

A. Djouadi, W. Kilian, M. M¨ uhlleitner and P. Zerwas, E ur. Phys. J. C10 (1999) 45

View on Pith 1999
[255]

W. Y. Keung, Mod. Phys. Lett. A2 (1987) 765; O. Eboli, G. Marques, S. Novaes and A. Natale, Phys. Lett. B197 (1987) 269; D. Dicus, K. Kallianpur and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Lett. B200 (1988) 187; K. Kallianpur, Phys. Lett. B215 (1988 ) 392; A. Dobrovolskaya and V. Novikov, Z. Phys. C52 (1991) 427. 313

View on Pith 1987
[256]

A. Abbasabadi, W. Repko, D. Dicus and R. Vega, Phys. Rev . D38 (1988) 2770

View on Pith 1988
[257]

V. Barger and T. Han, Mod. Phys. Lett. A5 (1990) 667

View on Pith 1990
[258]

R.K. Ellis, I. Hinchliﬀe, M. Soldate and J.J. van der Bi j, Nucl. Phys. B297 (1988) 221

View on Pith 1988
[259]

U. Baur and E. W. Glover, Nucl. Phys. B339 (1990) 38; C. K ao, Phys. Lett. B328 (1994) 420

View on Pith 1990
[260]

S. Dawson and R. Kauﬀman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68 (1992) 227 3; R.P. Kauﬀman, S.V. De- sai and D. Risal, Phys. Rev. D55 (1997) 4005 and Phys. Rev. D59 (1999) 057504

View on Pith 1992
[261]

V. Del Duca, W. Kilgore, C. Oleari, C. Schmidt and D. Zep penfeld, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 122001; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B616 (2001) 307

View on Pith 2001
[262]

V. Del Duca, A. Frizzo and F. Maltoni, JHEP 0405 (2004) 0 64

View on Pith 2004
[263]

K. Cheung, Phys. Rev. D49 (1994) 6224

View on Pith 1994
[264]

A. Djouadi, W. Kilian and T. Plehn, in preparation

View on Pith
[265]

A. Abassabadi, W. Repko, D. Dicus and R. Vega, Phys. Let t. B213 (1988) 386

View on Pith 1988
[266]

D. Rainwater, Phys. Lett. B503 (2001) 320

View on Pith 2001
[267]

A. Abassabadi, D. Bowser–Cho, D. Dicus and W. Repko, Ph ys. Rev. D58 (1998) 057301; ibid. Phys. Rev. D57 (1998) 550

View on Pith 1998
[268]

D. Dicus, Z. Phys. C39 (1988) 583

View on Pith 1988
[269]

K.J. Kallianpur, Phys. Lett. B215 (1988) 392

View on Pith 1988
[270]

C.G. Papadopoulos in Ref. [221]

View on Pith
[271]

B. Mele, S. Petrarca and A. Soddu, Phys. Lett. B435 (199 8) 401; G. Eilam, J.L. Hewett and A. Soni, Phys. Rev. D44 (1991) 1473 and (E) ibid. D59 (1999) 039901

View on Pith 1991
[272]

G. Mahlon and S. Parke, Phys. Lett. B347 (1995) 394

View on Pith 1995
[273]

A. Bialas and P.V. Landshoﬀ, Phys. Lett. B256 (1991) 54 0

View on Pith 1991
[274]

M. Boonekamp, R. Peschanksi and C. Royon, Phys. Rev. Le tt. 87 (2001) 251806; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B669 (2003) 277; B.E. Cox, J.R. Forshaw and B. Hei nemann, Phys. Lett. B540 (2002) 263; R. Enberg, G. Ingelman, A. Kissavos and N. Ti mneanu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (2002) 081801; J.-R. Cudell and O.F. Hernandez, Nuc l. Phys. B471 (1996) 471; E.M. Levin, hep-ph/99...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[275]

V.A. Khoze, A.D. Martin and M.G. Ryskin, Eur. Phys. J. C 23 (2002) 311; A. De Roeck et al. , Eur. Phys. J. C25 (2002) 391; A.B. Kaidalov, V.A. Khoze, A.D . Martin and M.G. Ryskin, Eur. Phys. J. C31 (2003) 387; ibid. Eur. Phys. J. C33 (2004) 261

View on Pith 2002
[276]

V.A. Khoze, A.D Martin and M.G. Ryskin, Eur. Phys. J. C2 6 (2002) 229

View on Pith 2002
[277]

A. De Roeck and V.A. Khoze in Ref. [240]

View on Pith
[278]

The NLO Fortran codes for HV,Hqq and gg → H production and the LO For- tran code for Q ¯QH production, have been written by M. Spira and can be found at http://people.web.psi.ch/spira/. See also M. Spira, hep-ph/9510347 for the users manual of the program HIGLU

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[279]

T. Han and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Lett. B273 (1990) 167

View on Pith 1990
[280]

H. Baer, B. Bailey and J. Owens, Phys. Rev. D47 (1993) 27 30; J. Ohnemus and W. Stirling, Phys. Rev. D47 (1993) 2722; S. Mrenna and C.P. Yuan , Phys. Lett. B416 (1998) 200

View on Pith 1993
[281]

A. Djouadi and M. Spira, Phys. Rev. D62 (2000) 014004

View on Pith 2000
[282]

T. Han, G. Valencia and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Rev. Lett . 69 (1992) 3274

View on Pith 1992
[283]

T. Figy, C. Oleari and D. Zeppenfeld, Phys. Rev. D68 (20 03) 073005

View on Pith
[284]

E. L. Berger and J. Campbell, Phys. Rev. D70 (2004) 0730 11

View on Pith 2004
[285]

S. Dawson, Nucl. Phys. B359 (1991) 283

View on Pith 1991
[286]

D. Graudenz, M. Spira and P. M. Zerwas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70 (1993) 1372; M. Spira, Ph. D. Thesis, R WTH Aachen, 1992

View on Pith 1993
[287]

W. Beenakker, S. Dittmaier, M. Kr¨ amer, B. Pl¨ umper, M . Spira and P.M. Zerwas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 201805; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B653 (2003) 151

View on Pith 2001
[288]

S. Dawson, L.H. Orr, L. Reina and D. Wackeroth, Phys. Re v. D67 (2003) 071503; S. Dawson, C. Jackson, L.H. Orr, L. Reina and D. Wackeroth, Ph ys. Rev. D68 (2003) 034022

View on Pith 2003
[289]

L. Reina and S. Dawson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 20180 4; L. Reina, S. Dawson and D. Wackeroth, Phys. Rev. D65 (2002) 053017

View on Pith 2001
[290]

S. Dittmaier, M. Kr¨ amer and M. Spira, Phys. Rev. D70 (2 004) 074010

View on Pith
[291]

S. Dawson, C. Jackson, L. Reina and D. Wackeroth, Phys. Rev. D69 (2004) 074027. 315

View on Pith 2004
[292]

I. Hinchliﬀe and S.F. Novaes, Phys. Rev. D38 (1988) 347 5; S. Catani, E. D’Emilio and L. Trentadue, Phys. Lett. B211 (1988) 335; R. P. Kauﬀman, Phy s. Rev. D44 (1991) 1415 and D45 (1992) 1512; C.P. Yuan, Phys. Lett. B283 (1992) 3 95; C. Balazs and C. P. Yuan, Phys. Lett. B478 (2000) 192; C. Balazs, J. Huston a nd I. Puljak, Phys. Rev. D63 (2001) 014021

View on Pith 1988
[293]

C.R. Schmidt, Phys. Lett. B413 (1997) 391; D. de Floria n, M. Grazzini and Z. Kunszt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 5209; D. de Florian and M. Grazzini , Phys. Rev. Lett. 85 (2000) 4678 and Nucl. Phys. B616 (2001) 247; S. Catani, D. de F lorian and M. Grazzini, Nucl. Phys. B596 (2001) 299; V. Ravindran, J. Smith and W.L. V an Neerven, Nucl. Phys. B634 (2002)...

View on Pith 1997
[294]

C. J. Glosser and C. R. Schmidt, JHEP 0212 (2002) 016

View on Pith 2002
[295]

G. Bozzi, S. Catani, D. de Florian and M. Grazzini, Phys . Lett. B564 (2003) 65

View on Pith 2003
[296]

C. Anastasiou, L. Dixon and K. Melnikov, Nucl. Phys. Pr oc. Suppl. 116 (2003) 193

View on Pith 2003
[297]

C. Anastasiou, K. Melnikov and F. Petriello, hep-ph/0 501130

View on Pith
[298]

V. Ravindran, J. Smith and W.L. Van Neerven, Nucl. Phys . B634 (2002) 247; ibid. Mod. Phys. Lett. A18 (2003) 1721; C. Anastasiou, K. Melnikov and F. Petriello, hep- ph/0409088

View on Pith 2002
[299]

O. Brein, A. Djouadi and R. Harlander, Phys. Lett. B579 (2004) 149

View on Pith 2004
[300]

R. Harlander and W. Kilgore, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88 (2002) 201801

View on Pith 2002

Forward citations

Showing 60 of 173 Pith papers that cite this

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. See all 173 Pith citations

The Strongly-Interacting Light Higgs
hep-ph 2007-03 accept novelty 8.0 of 10

Composite pseudo-Goldstone Higgs models reduce below the resonance scale to a two-parameter effective Lagrangian whose leading operators split into strong-coupling-sensitive and spectrum-only classes.
Precise predictions for the Higgs-boson decay H -> W W/Z Z -> 4 leptons
hep-ph 2006-04 accept novelty 8.0 of 10

Complete O(alpha) electroweak corrections to H -> WW/ZZ -> 4 leptons are computed with off-shell gauge bosons and implemented in the Monte Carlo generator PROPHECY4F.
A GOOFy Three Higgs Doublet Model
hep-ph 2026-10 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

The authors build a GOOFy symmetric three-Higgs doublet model, prove its RG invariance to two loops, and find it can describe observed particle masses and mixing after soft symmetry breaking.
Dark matter in the x-channel
hep-ph 2026-10 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

An 'x-channel' boundary condition makes the one-loop Higgs portal to a singlet dark matter scalar vanish at zero momentum, leaving collider pair production of charged mediators as the main probe.
Higher-Order Corrections to Higgs Boson Amplitudes with Full Quark Mass Dependence in Quantum Chromodynamics
hep-ph 2019-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

The thesis computes three-loop and two-loop QCD corrections to Higgs processes with full quark mass dependence, including a new analytic series-expansion treatment of elliptic two-loop master integrals for Higgs-plus-...

Show 55 more citing papers

Linearly polarized gluons at next-to-next-to leading order and the Higgs transverse momentum distribution
hep-ph 2019-07 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

The two-loop matching coefficient for the linearly polarized gluon TMD is computed in closed form, completing NNLO accuracy for the gluon contribution to the Higgs transverse-momentum spectrum within TMD factorization.
Pseudo-observables in Higgs decays
hep-ph 2014-12 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

A complete set of amplitude-level pseudo-observables is defined for on-shell Higgs decays, generalizing the kappa-framework and collapsing to a small number of measurable parameters under stated symmetry assumptions.
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.
Electroweak and QCD corrections to Higgs production via vector-boson fusion at the LHC
hep-ph 2007-10 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

Complete NLO QCD and electroweak corrections to Higgs production in vector-boson fusion with two jets show both are 5 to 10 percent and distort distributions by about 10 percent.
Scalar Correlator at O(alpha_s^4), Higgs Decay into b-quarks and Bounds on the Light Quark Masses
hep-ph 2005-11 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

The paper completes the O(alpha_s^4) calculation of the absorptive scalar quark correlator and applies it to Higgs decay and light-quark mass bounds.
Higher-Order Soft Corrections to Lepton Pair and Higgs Boson Production
hep-ph 2005-08 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

The complete threshold-enhanced N^3LO QCD coefficient functions for Drell-Yan and Higgs production are derived, and the D3 resummation coefficient is extracted, giving about 5% (LHC) and 10% (Tevatron) corrections to ...
Searches for electroweak singlets at future plasma wakefield colliders
hep-ph 2026-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

For a Higgs-portal singlet scalar, e+e- and gamma-gamma plasma wakefield colliders reach sensitivities comparable to a 10 TeV muon collider, with gamma-gamma winning if its geometric luminosity is not more than about ...
Multiboson production at multi-TeV lepton colliders as complementary probes to rare Higgs decays
hep-ph 2026-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A 10 to 30 TeV muon collider, especially through mu+ mu- to hh gamma and mu+ mu- to hh Z, can constrain the Higgs-loop SMEFT operators more strongly than rare-Higgs and electroweak projections alone.
Probing CP violation in dark scalar decays at the SHiP experiment
hep-ph 2026-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

The ratio of three-meson to two-meson decays of a GeV-scale dark scalar boson at SHiP can probe CP-violating mixing angles over a wide range of masses and couplings.
Improved analyses of the electroweak phase transition and its phenomenology in the Georgi-Machacek model
hep-ph 2026-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

In the Georgi-Machacek model, parameter points with a strong first-order electroweak phase transition predict deviations in h->gamma gamma, the Higgs self-coupling, and gravitational waves that next-generation experim...
Nonstandard Solution for Anomaly Cancellation as Seesaw Neutrino Origin in the SM
hep-ph 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A nonstandard anomaly-free fermion assignment yields a minimal two-copy seesaw whose neutrino sector predicts 0νββ effective masses of 1.17 to 4.07 meV (normal ordering) and 15.85 to 48.94 meV (inverted ordering).
A Novel One-loop Model for Majorana Neutrino Mass and Dark Matter
hep-ph 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A new model realizes the previously missing T4-3-i one-loop topology for Majorana neutrino mass, predicts one massless neutrino, and offers both fermionic and scalar dark matter candidates.
Dark Photons from Perturbative Decay of a Misaligned Higgs Field
hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Stochastically misaligned dark Higgs decay into dark photons can make all the dark matter for m_A′ ≈ 100 eV–1 GeV and g ≈ 10^-15–10^-10, shrinking to 10 keV–1 MeV with one-loop kinetic mixing.
Heavy neutral leptons from light scalar in fixed target and forward search experiments
hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

SHiP and FPF@FCC-hh are projected to extend experimental sensitivity to a light scalar mixing with the Higgs and to long-lived heavy neutrinos in a B-L seesaw model, with SHiP strongest for scalar masses around 0.5-1 GeV.
Parameter Inference from Final-State Entanglement in Higgs Decays
hep-ph 2025-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

With a spin/color-weighted entanglement entropy built from Higgs branching ratios, the Standard Model Higgs and W masses sit near the global maximum, and the preferred coupling ratio is SM-like.
Probing the Phenomenology of Dark Matter from Decoupled Freeze-Out
hep-ph 2025-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

In a scalar-plus-pseudoscalar mediator model, decoupled freeze-out can produce the observed dark matter relic density via s-wave annihilation while evading CMB limits, though indirect-detection and BBN bounds leave on...
Discovery Prospects for the 150 GeV charged scalar at Future $e^+e^-$ Colliders
hep-ph 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

At a 350 GeV electron-positron collider, a 150 GeV charged scalar in the real triplet Higgs model can be discovered with less than 1 fb^-1 and its mass measured to about 1 GeV at 500 fb^-1.
Anomalous Couplings from the Electroweak Chiral Lagrangian for Off-Shell Higgs in $gg\to Z_L Z_L$
hep-ph 2025-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

In the electroweak chiral Lagrangian, off-shell Higgs contributions to gg to Z_L Z_L at leading order reduce to two independent combinations of the anomalous couplings c_t, c_V, and c_ggh.
On the contribution from the light quarks to $H\to\gamma\gamma , \gamma Z$
hep-ph 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

The light-quark contribution to H to gamma gamma and H to gamma Z is nonzero and linear in quark masses, with a large enhancement in the two-photon channel.
Constraining Inflation via FIMP dark matter using the $\beta$-function with collider implications
hep-ph 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Combining Higgs inflation with feeble U(1)D vector dark matter via RG running narrows the allowed Higgs mixing angle and BSM Higgs mass, and predicts measurable deviations in Higgs self-couplings.
Freezing-in Cannibals with Low-reheating Temperature
hep-ph 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Non-instantaneous (low-temperature) reheating combined with 3-to-2 cannibal self-interactions reshapes the freeze-in dark matter parameter space and opens new light-DM regions for future colliders.
Quark-universal $U(1)$ breaking scalar at the LHC
hep-ph 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

In a quark-universal U(1)_B model, the scalar φ that breaks the symmetry can be discovered first through its diphoton decay, and its rate can explain the 95 GeV diphoton excess.
Flavor at FASER: Discovering Light Scalars Beyond Minimal Flavor Violation
hep-ph 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Flavored scalar models with a Froggatt-Nielsen symmetry make D-meson decays a major production source for long-lived scalars at FASER/FASER2, with reach presented model-independently in branching fraction and lifetime...
The Two Scales of New Physics in Loop-Induced Higgs Couplings
hep-ph 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A deviation in the loop-induced Higgs couplings hgg, hγγ, or hZγ caused solely by new vectorlike fermions implies an upper bound on the mass scale of new bosons needed to restore perturbativity and vacuum stability.
Minimal extension of the Standard Model with a mirror symmetry between fundamental fermions and a possible origin of dark matter
hep-ph 2024-12 reject novelty 6.0 of 10

A new U(1) extension of the Standard Model is proposed, with a neutrino-coupled gauge boson and a dark Higgs scalar as a freeze-in dark matter candidate, yielding an estimated coupling between 10^-8.5 and 10^-6 times ...
Spontaneous CP Violation and Flavor Changing Neutral Currents in Minimal SO(10)
hep-ph 2024-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

In minimal SO(10) with spontaneous CP violation, flavor-changing neutral currents and proton decay branching ratios are correlated through one mixing matrix, yielding a testable relation among future low-energy measurements.
Heating the dark matter halo with dark radiation from supernovae
hep-ph 2024-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Even a few parts per million of supernova energy emitted as dark radiation could transform cuspy dwarf dark matter halos into cored ones, and observed core sizes bound how much energy can go to new particles.
CPon Dark Matter
hep-ph 2024-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A light scalar from spontaneous CP violation, the CPon, can be a viable dark matter candidate with a mass between about 10 meV and 1 MeV and a suppression scale above 10^12 GeV.
Fingerprint of Low-Scale Leptogenesis in the Primordial Gravitational-Wave Spectrum
hep-ph 2020-04 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Summing all harmonic modes of cosmic-string loops, the gravitational-wave spectrum breaks from a flat plateau to a minus-one-third slope, and in the minimal gauged B-L model that break encodes the right-handed neutrino mass.
Freeze-in production of decaying dark matter in five steps
hep-ph 2018-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Light scalar dark matter in the keV range, produced via Higgs-mixing freeze-in, can match the observed relic abundance and potentially explain the 3.5 keV x-ray line while evading structure-formation constraints.
Cosmological Phase Transitions in Warped Space: Gravitational Waves and Collider Signatures
hep-ph 2018-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A perturbative superpotential expansion lets the authors compute the radion effective potential in strongly back-reacted soft-wall warped models, where the holographic phase transition completes and produces a gravita...
Search for an exotic decay of the Higgs boson to a pair of light pseudoscalars in the final state with two b quarks and two $\tau$ leptons in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=$ 13 TeV
hep-ex 2018-05 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

CMS finds no excess in the h to aa to 2tau2b channel and sets 95% CL upper limits of 3 to 12% on the branching fraction for pseudoscalar masses of 15 to 60 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...
Majorana Higgses at colliders
hep-ph 2016-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Gluon fusion through the Higgs portal can produce the Left-Right triplet Higgs at the LHC, and its decays to two or four heavy Majorana neutrinos give same-sign multilepton plus displaced-vertex signals projected to r...
What is the gamma gamma resonance at 750 GeV?
hep-ph 2015-12 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

If the 750 GeV diphoton excess is a real resonance, it needs percent-level couplings to gluons and photons, and if its apparent 45 GeV width is genuine it points to a strongly interacting sector.
Lepton Number Violation in Higgs Decay at LHC
hep-ph 2015-03 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Higgs decays to two heavy Majorana neutrinos, simulated through the full LRSM detector chain, can produce a discoverable same-sign dilepton plus jets signal at the 13 TeV LHC.
How to use the Standard Model effective field theory
hep-ph 2014-12 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

The paper provides a covariant one-loop matching method and a bosonic-sector map from Standard Model effective field theory Wilson coefficients to electroweak and Higgs precision observables.
Minimal Composite Higgs Models at the LHC
hep-ph 2014-02 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

Across seven SO(5)/SO(4) composite Higgs embeddings, gluon fusion is suppressed and Higgs branching fractions shift in patterns that differ enough between embeddings to be distinguishable by precise coupling measurements.
Phenomenology of the Higgs Effective Lagrangian via FeynRules
hep-ph 2013-10 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

A public FeynRules/UFO implementation of the dimension-six Higgs effective Lagrangian enables MadGraph 5 simulations of non-standard Higgs interactions, with explicit gauge-to-mass-basis translation tables.
Probing top-partners in Higgs + jets
hep-ph 2013-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Higgs plus a high-momentum jet is sensitive to top-partner mass and coupling, unlike inclusive Higgs production, and 300 fb⁻¹ at 14 TeV would probe mixing angles down to 0.05.
A handbook of vector-like quarks: mixing and single production
hep-ph 2013-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Precision electroweak data bound the mixing of all seven vector-like quark multiplets with the third generation, and a hypercharge -5/6 doublet can fit the LEP Z -> b bbar forward-backward asymmetry with a single mixi...
HiggsSignals: Confronting arbitrary Higgs sectors with measurements at the Tevatron and the LHC
hep-ph 2013-05 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

A public chi-squared tool that tests arbitrary multi-Higgs models against LHC and Tevatron Higgs signal-strength and mass measurements, validated against official ATLAS and CMS coupling fits.
A Bayesian view of the Higgs sector with higher dimensional operators
hep-ph 2013-04 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Fitting dimension-six operators to the 2012 LHC and Tevatron Higgs data, the authors find the top-Higgs coupling can be strongly suppressed and the Higgs-to-Z-photon width enhanced by up to a factor of twelve at 95% c...
Stepping Into Electroweak Symmetry Breaking: Phase Transitions and Higgs Phenomenology
hep-ph 2012-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A real triplet extension of the Higgs sector can break electroweak symmetry in two steps, the first strongly first order and the second leaving a stable neutral scalar as dark matter, with a suppressed Higgs diphoton ...
Coupling spans of the Higgs-like boson
hep-ph 2012-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Using existing Higgs rate measurements, the paper brackets the Higgs total width between a data-driven lower limit and a coupling-assumption upper limit, then converts that bracket into spans for individual Higgs coup...
The 125 GeV Higgs and Electroweak Phase Transition Model Classes
hep-ph 2012-09 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

A four-class taxonomy of electroweak phase transition models shows that the parameter region where an approximate continuous symmetry emerges is excluded by LHC invisible-decay limits, whereas the discrete-symmetry re...
The impact of heavy-quark loops on LHC dark matter searches
hep-ph 2012-08 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

Including top-quark loop diagrams in monojet dark matter production raises the predicted cross section by roughly 500 to 900 times over tree level and strengthens LHC limits on mass-coupled scalar and pseudoscalar med...
Higgs Low-Energy Theorem (and its corrections) in Composite Models
hep-ph 2012-06 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

The Higgs low-energy theorem is accurate to a few percent for single Higgs production but wrong by roughly 50% for double Higgs production in composite Higgs models, where heavy top partners give sizeable negative cor...
Electroweak Baryogenesis in Two Higgs Doublet Models and B meson anomalies
hep-ph 2011-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Solving the bubble wall profiles and transport equations numerically, the authors find that two-Higgs-doublet models produce the observed baryon asymmetry only in a small, highly constrained region of parameter space,...
Higgs Production with a Central Jet Veto at NNLL+NNLO
hep-ph 2010-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Summing jet-veto logarithms to NNLL and matching to NNLO gives a 15 to 20 percent scale uncertainty on the zero-jet Higgs cross section, larger than the 7 percent used in current Tevatron bounds.
Multivariate discrimination and the Higgs + W/Z search
hep-ph 2010-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A new significance-versus-efficiency curve ranks and combines multivariate discriminants for the H+W/Z to bb-bar search, yielding a reported 10 to 20 percent improvement over CDF and DZero variable sets against irredu...
Finite top mass effects for hadronic Higgs production at next-to-next-to-leading order
hep-ph 2009-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Top mass corrections to the NNLO gluon fusion Higgs cross section are below 0.5 percent for Higgs masses of 100 to 300 GeV, confirming the heavy-top limit.
Mellin Moments of the {$O(\alpha_s^3$)} Heavy Flavor Contributions to unpolarized Deep-Inelastic Scattering at $Q^2 \gg m^2$ and Anomalous Dimensions
hep-ph 2009-04 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

The authors compute the three-loop massive operator matrix elements and heavy-flavor Wilson coefficients for unpolarized deep-inelastic scattering at large Q squared, giving all pieces for general Mellin N except the ...
HiggsBounds: Confronting Arbitrary Higgs Sectors with Exclusion Bounds from LEP and the Tevatron
hep-ph 2008-11 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

HiggsBounds automates the comparison of arbitrary Higgs-sector predictions against LEP and Tevatron topological cross-section limits, selecting the single most sensitive search channel and returning a 95% CL exclusion...
General CP Violation in Minimal Left-Right Symmetric Model and Constraints on the Right-Handed Scale
hep-ph 2007-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

An analytic right-handed CKM matrix in the minimal left-right model yields lower bounds of about 2.5 to 4 TeV on the right-handed W mass and about 25 TeV on the flavor-changing neutral Higgs mass.

See all 173 Pith citations

How later papers used it

419 later papers cite it

Evidence: substantial. 406 of the citing papers share no author with it, and 82 of those carry a confident label from Pith's citation classifier.

Pith read 39 of the 563 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

12 later papers by other authors are listed below: 7 used its method or tool, 3 used its data or values and 2 compared their own results with it.

Uses its method or tool 7 of 34 papers with this label

Computed production cross sections for fusion processes by including the full NLO QCD corrections as in this paper.

Spontaneous Mirror Parity Violation, Common Origin of Matter and Dark Matter, and the LHC Signatures (2011) · 1.00 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting
For this partial rate, we apply the 4-body decay formula Eq. (2.35) of [ref] and work in the heavy $W_R$ limit.

Anatomy of Diluted Dark Matter in the Minimal Left-Right Symmetric Model (2023) · Majorana Higgs dilutor · 1.00
Computed the partial widths mostly following this paper, to an intended accuracy of about 10% including NLO QCD corrections to decays into light-flavor quarks.

Cosmological Signals of a Mirror Twin Higgs (2016) · 1.00 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting
Employed this paper's full one-loop result for the digluon decay width with a top quark mass of 172 and neglected the bottom quark contribution.

Interpretation of 750 GeV Diphoton Excess at LHC in Singlet Extension of Color-octet Neutrino Mass Model (2016) · 0.93 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting
Used this paper's count of the number of particles of the (3)_C representation in the loop in its decay width formula for s to gg.

Diphoton channel at the LHC experiments to find a hint for a new heavy gauge boson (2015) · 0.83 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting
Included QCD corrections in the H to q qbar rates as in this paper when evaluating the quantities and the sum of partial widths.

Hints of Standard Model Higgs Boson at the LHC and Light Dark Matter Searches (2011) · 0.90 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting
The basic integrals $I_1$ and $I_2$ are taken in [ref] and presented in term of $f$, $g$ functions as follows: [equation] Two complex functions $f, g$ can be expressed as follows: [equation]

One-loop expressions for $h\rightarrow l\bar{l}\gamma$ in Higgs extensions of the Standard Model (2023) · The basic integrals $I_1, I_2$ · 0.80

Uses its data or values 3 of 32 papers with this label

Applied the decay width Gamma_Z gamma obtained from the exact formulas given in this paper.

The LHC upper bounds for $pp \to \text{diboson}$, $t\bar t$ cross section on fermionic dark matter (2016) · 0.99 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting
Used the gluon-gluon fusion estimate of 800(80) fb from this paper as one of two estimates.

A hidden, heavier resonance of the Higgs field (2021) · 0.98 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting
Considered the lower value lambda_l of about 0.186 at the electroweak scale, which saturates the stability bound of this paper.

Cosmological Perturbations in the New Higgs Inflation (2010) · 0.93 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting

Compares with it 2 of 13 papers with this label

Compared its own calculated total SM Higgs width with this paper's width, which includes higher-order corrections, to show the error from including only leading terms.

Top quark rare decays in a two Higgs doublet model for the top (2007) · 1.00 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting
Compared its own tree-level total SM Higgs width with this paper's width calculated including higher-order corrections to show the role of radiative corrections.

Scalar FCNC and rare top decays in a two Higgs doublet model "for the top" (2008) · 0.98 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting

How the literature uses it

387 arXiv papers cite this in 517 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 · 280 sentences without a confident label

Contests it 1 paper

This relation, which includes the Higgs and $Z$ boson masses $m_H$ and $m_Z$, respectively, is in agreement with the formulae available in the literature[We would like to point out that there is a misprint in Eq. (7) of Ref. [ref] , which has to be multiplied by $1/4$.] [ref] .

Higher-Order Corrections to Higgs Boson Amplitudes with Full Quark Mass Dependence in Quantum Chromodynamics · Kinematics and Notation · contest 0.73

Builds on it 3 papers

Now, in close analogy to the Higgs boson decay [ref] we can calculate the decay width of the dark particles $χ$.

Minimal extension of the Standard Model with a mirror symmetry between fundamental fermions and a possible origin of dark matter · Cosmological stability of dark matter · 0.82
Adapting the expression for the Higgs decay to two photons from Ref. [ref] , the $H →γγ$ partial width including the two additional charged fermions becomes [equation] where $G_F$ is the Fermi constant, $M_H$ is the Higgs mass of 125 GeV, and we include the dominant contributions from the top quark, bottom quark, the $W$ boson, and the two new fermions.

Probing new $U(1)$ gauge symmetries via exotic $Z \to Z' \gamma$ decays · Collider searches for anomalons · 0.80
The following expressions for the loop-induced decays into $γγ, γZ, gg$ are modified from Sec. 2.3 in [ref] .

Characterizing LHC-Resonances in extended HEFT: information on the nature of extended scalar sectors · Loop-induced Decay from $D_c = 2$ Operators · 0.91

Uses its method or tool 29 papers

The decay widths of $h$ into $γγ, γZ and gg$ are given explicitly by [ref] [equation] with $v̂_f= 2 I_f^3 -4Q_f s^2_W$ and $v_H ^±_i=2c_W^2-1/c_W$.

Loop induced $h \rightarrow \gamma \gamma, Z\gamma, gg $ decays in 3-Higgs doublet models · LOOP INDUCED DECAYS INTO $γγ, γZ, gg$ · 0.84
The cross section of $gg →ϕ$ is estimated by CalcHEP_3.8 [ref] implementing the effective interaction for $ϕ$-gluon-gluon, and we get $σ(gg →ϕ) ≃sin^2 α×250$ pb applying K-factor 1.6 [ref] for $m_ϕ=$ 50 GeV and $√(s) = 13$ TeV case.

Multi-$Z'$ signatures of spontaneously broken local $U(1)'$ symmetry · Middle mass case: ${m_Z', m_ϕ} = {20, 50}$ GeV · 1.00
It is computed in the code [ref] using the following formula: [equation] where $A_SUSY^h_s g g, q$ and $A_SUSY^h_s g g, q̃$ represent the contributions to the $h_s g g$ coupling from quark loops and squark loops, respectively [ref] . $A_SM^h_s g g, q$ denotes the quark loop contribution in the SM with the formulation available in Ref. [ref] . $C_h_s q q̅^tree$ is the tree-level coupling between $h_s$ and quarks. $m_q (Q)$ and $m_q (pole)$ represent the running mass of the quark at scale $Q ≈m_h_s$ and the quark pole mass, respectively.

95GeV Excesses in the $\mathbb{Z}_3$-symmetric Next-to Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model · and signals · 1.00

Uses its data or values 30 papers

Therefore, by using the conventional estimate for $M_h=$ 700 GeV [ref] Γ^conv( M_h →ZZ)∼56.7 GeVand from Eq.([ref]) Γ( M_h →ZZ)∼m^2_h /M^2_h Γ^conv(M_h →ZZ)we could insert a given value for $m_h$ and compute Γ( M_h →ZZ)∼m^2_h/(700 GeV)^2 56.7 GeVWith the tentative identification $m_h= 125$ GeV, this gives Γ( M_h →ZZ)∼1.8 GeV Afterward, to obtain the total width, we will maintain exactly the other contributions reported in the literature [ref] for $M_h=$ 700 GeV, namely [The quoted value refers to a top-quark mass of 173.7 which averages between the two determinations 173.2(6) GeV and 174.2(1.4) GeV reported by the Particle Data Group [ref] and replaces the values 171.4 and 172.5 GeV used respectively in [ref] [ref] .] Γ(M_h→fermions+ gluons+ photons...)∼28 GeV and the same ratio Γ( M_h →WW)/Γ( M_h →ZZ) ∼2.03 These input numbers, which have very small uncertainties, produce a total decay

A resonance of the Higgs field at 700 GeV and a new phenomenology · A new phenomenology · 0.99
(The branching fraction of a SM-like Higgs boson of similar mass would be $BR(H_SM →γγ)≃0.15%$ [ref] .)

Enhanced di-photon Higgs signal in the Next-to-Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model · Properties of light Higgs bosons in the NMSSM · 0.96
For $M_h=$ 700 GeV, where $Γ^conv( M_h →ZZ)∼56.7 GeV$ [ref] , fixing $m_h=125$ GeV gives Γ( M_h →ZZ)∼m^2_h/(700 GeV)^2 56.7 GeV∼1.8 GeV Afterward, by maintaining the other contributions for $M_h=$ 700 GeV [ref] Γ(M_h→fermions+ gluons+ photons...)∼28 GeVand with the same ratio $Γ( M_h →WW)/Γ( M_h →ZZ)∼$ 2.03, we find a total width Γ( M_h →all) ∼28 GeV + 3.03 Γ(M_h →ZZ) ∼33.5 GeV and a fraction $B( M_h →ZZ)∼(1.8 / 33.5) ∼0.054$.

A hidden, heavier resonance of the Higgs field · Comparison with 4-lepton data · 0.96

Compares with it 11 papers

Our results reduce to the SM result found in the literature [ref] when the KK modes are removed and agree with the result in [ref] when we use tree-level KK masses in mUED.

Testing Minimal Universal Extra Dimensions Using Higgs Boson Searches at the LHC · Evaluation of amplitudes for Higgs production and decay in mUED · 0.99
The decay rate is: [equation] in agreement with the result in Ref. [ref] .

Higgs decay into a lepton pair and a photon: a roadmap to $\mathbf{H\to Z\gamma}$ discovery and probes of new physics · Resonant contribution and the Narrow-Width Approximation · 0.96
[ref] only if the branches of the piecewise function $g(τ)$ in eq.

The decay $h\to Z \gamma$ in the Standard-Model Effective Field Theory · $h→Zγ$ in the Standard Model and the input parameters scheme · 0.92

Cites it as background 138 papers

The recent discovery of Higgs-Boson at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) [ref] is quite crucial as it provides mass to the constituent particles of the Standard Model (SM) [ref] , which has been a successful theory in experiments.

Investigating non-minimal flavour-violating CMSSM in the light of Higgs-Boson mass using information theory · Introduction · 0.90
Precision predictions for the respective production rates are a key ingredient in the experimental searches, the higher-order radiative corrections usually being known to next-to-next-to-leading order (NNLO) in QCD and to next-to-leading order (NLO) as far as electro-weak corrections are concerned (see e.g. [ref] ).

Higher order constraints on the Higgs production rate from fixed-target DIS data · Introduction · 0.93
The partial width reads [ref] [equation] where $τ_i$ = $4m_i^2/m_H^2$, and the spin form factors are [equation] and the universal scaling function $f(τ)$ is [equation] Supersymmetry corrects this partial width [ref] by factors involving the Higgs mixing angle $α$ and $β$ arising from the two Higgs doublets.

Gluino-driven Radiative Breaking, Higgs Boson Mass, Muon $\mathbf{g-2}$, and the Higgs Diphoton Decay in SUGRA Unification · Higgs Diphoton Decay · 0.85

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] [136]

T. Hambye and K. Riesselmann, Phys. Rev. D55 (1997) 725 5

View on Pith 1997

[2] [1]

S. Glashow, Nucl. Phys. 22 (1961) 579; S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 19 (1967) 1264; A. Salam, in “Elementary Particle Theory”, ed. N. Svartholm , Almqvist and Wiksells, Stockholm (1969) p. 367

View on Pith 1961

[3] [2]

M. Gell-Mann, Phys. Lett. 8 (1964) 214; G. Zweig, CERN-Re port 8182/TH401 (1964); H. Fritzsch, M. Gell-Mann and H. Leutwyler, Phys. Lett. B47 ( 1973) 365; D. Gross and F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 30 (1973) 1343; H.D. Politze r, Phys. Rev. Lett. 30 (1973) 1346; G. ’t Hooft, Marseille Conference on Yang–Mill s ﬁelds (1972)

View on Pith 1964

[4] [3]

P.A.M. Dirac, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A114 (1927) 243; P. Jo rdan and W. Pauli, Z. Phys. 47 (1928) 151; W. Heisenberg and W. Pauli, Z. Phys. 56 (1 929) 1; S. Tomonaga, Progr. Theor. Phys. 1 (1946) 27; J. Schwinger, Phys. Rev. 73 ( 1948) 416; R. Feynman, Phys. Rev. 76 (1949) 749

View on Pith 1927

[5] [4]

E. Fermi, Nuovo Cim. 11 (1934) 1; ibid. Z. Phys. 88 (1934) 161; R. Feynman and M. Gell-Mann, Phys. Rev. 109 (1958) 193

View on Pith 1934

[6] [5]

G. ’t Hooft, Nucl. Phys. B33 (1971) 173; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B35 (1971) 167; G. ’t Hooft and M. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B44 (1972) 189

View on Pith 1971

[7] [6]

P.W. Higgs, Phys. Rev. Lett. 13 (1964) 508; ibid. Phys. Rev. 145 (1966) 1156; F. Englert and R. Brout, Phys. Rev. Lett. 13 (1964) 321; G.S. Gur alnik, C.R. Hagen and T. Kibble, Phys. Rev. Lett. 13 (1965) 585; T. Kibble, Phys. Re v. 155 (1967) 1554

View on Pith 1964

[8] [7]

Ch. Llewellyn Smith, Phys. Lett. 46B (1973) 233; J.S. Bel l, Nucl. Phys. B60 (1973) 427; J.M. Cornwall, M.D. Levin and G. Tiktopoulos, Phys. Rev . Lett. 30 (1973) 1268; ibid. Phys. Rev. D10 (1974) 1145 and (E) ibid. D11 (1975) 972

View on Pith 1973

[9] [8]

The LEP Collaborations (ALEPH, DELPHI, L3 and OPAL), the LEP Electroweak Working Group and the SLD Heavy Flavour Group, A combination of preliminary Electroweak measurements and constraints on the Standard M odel, hep-ex/0412015; http://lepewwg.web.cern.ch/LEPEWWG

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[10] [9]

Particle Data Group, K. Hagiwara et al. , Phys. Rev. D66 (2002) 010001; S. Eidelman et al. , Phys. Let. B592 (2004) 1

View on Pith 2002

[11] [10]

The LEP Collaboration (ALEPH, DELPHI, L3 and OPAL), Phy s. Lett. B565 (2003) 61. 295

View on Pith 2003

[12] [11]

F.J. Hasert et al. (Gargamelle Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B46 (1973) 121; ibid. Phys. Lett. B46 (1973) 138; T. Eichten et al. (Gargamelle Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B46 (1973) 274

View on Pith 1973

[13] [12]

G. Arnison et al. (UA1 Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B122 (1983) 103; M. Banner et al. (UA2 Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B122 (1983) 476; G. Arniso n et al. (UA1 Collabora- tion), Phys. Lett. B126 (1983) 398; P. Bagnaia et al. (UA2 Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B129 (1983) 130

View on Pith 1983

[14] [13]

J. Gunion, H. Haber, G. Kane, and S. Dawson, The Higgs Hunter’s Guide , Addison– Wesley, Reading (USA), 1990

View on Pith 1990

[15] [14]

F. Abe et al. (CDF Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 74 (1995) 2626; S. Aba chi et al. (D0 Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 74 (1995) 2632

View on Pith 1995

[16] [15]

The CDF and DØ collaborations and the Tevatron Electrow eak Working Group, hep- ex/0404010

View on Pith

[17] [16]

See for instance: I. Aitchison and A. Hey, Gauge Theories in Particle Physics , Adam Hilger, Bristol (UK), 1982; C. Quigg, Gauge Theories of the Strong, Weak, and Elec- tromagnetic Interactions, Benjamin-Cummings, Reading (USA), 1983; T.P. Cheng and L.F. Li, Gauge theory of Elementary Particle Physics , Oxford Sciences Publications, Clarendon Press, Oxfor...

View on Pith 1982

[18] [17]

See for instance: E. Abers and B. Lee, Phys. Rep. 9 (1973) 1; M.A.B. Beg and A. Sirlin, Phys. Rept. 88 (1982) 1; C. Quigg, Introduction to gauge theories of the strong, weak and electromagnetic interactions , Lectures given at “NATO Advanced Study Inst.: Techniques and Concepts of High Energy Physics”, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands, July 1980, published ...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1973

[19] [18]

See for instance: W.J. Stirling, Higgs Phenomenology, Lectures given at “42nd Scottish Universities Summer School in Physics: High Energy Phenome nology”, St. Andrews (Scotland), August 1993, published in Scottish Summer Scho ol 1993:0225-270; M.E. Peskin, Beyond the Standard Model , Lectures given at the European School of High- Energy Physics, Carry-le-...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1993

[20] [19]

B.A. Kniehl, Phys. Rep. 240 (1994) 211

View on Pith 1994

[21] [20]

A. Djouadi, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A10 (1995) 1

View on Pith 1995

[22] [21]

M. Spira, Fortschr. Phys. 46 (1998) 203

View on Pith 1998

[23] [22]

M. Steinhauser, Phys. Rept. 364 (2002) 247

View on Pith 2002

[24] [23]

M. Carena and H.E. Haber, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 50 (200 3) 63

View on Pith

[25] [24]

A. Djouadi, The Anatomy of Electro–Weak Symmetry Breaking, II: The Higg s bosons in the minimal Supersymmetric Model ; hep-ph/0503173

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[26] [25]

A. Djouadi, The Anatomy of Electro–Weak Symmetry Breaking, III: The Hig gs sector in models beyond the SM and MSSM benchmarks , in preparation

View on Pith

[27] [26]

C.N. Yang and R. Mills, Phys. Rev. 96 (1954) 191. 297

View on Pith 1954

[28] [27]

S.L. Adler and W.A. Bardeen, Phys. Rev. 182 (1969) 1517; R. Jackiw, Lectures on “Current Algebra and its Applications”, Princeton Univers ity Press, 1972

View on Pith 1969

[29] [28]

C. Bouchiat, J. Iliopoulos and Ph. Meyer, Phys. Lett. 38 B (1972) 519

View on Pith 1972

[30] [29]

Y. Nambu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 4 (1960) 380; Y. Nambu and G. Jo na–Lasinio, Phys. Rev. 122 (1961) 345; ibid. Phys. Rev. 124 (1961) 246; J. Goldstone, Nuov. Cim. 19 (1961) 154; J. Goldstone, A. Salam and S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. 127 (1 962) 965

View on Pith 1960

[31] [30]

K. Fujikawa, B.W. Lee and A. Sanda, Phys. Rev. D6 (1972) 2 923; Y.P. Yao, Phys. Rev. D7 (1973) 1647; G. ’t Hooft in Ref. [5]

View on Pith 1972

[32] [31]

M. Chanowitz and M. Gaillard, Phys. Lett. 142B (1984) 85 ; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B261 (1985) 379

View on Pith 1984

[33] [32]

B.W. Lee, C. Quigg and H.B. Thacker, Phys. Rev. D16 (1977 ) 1519

View on Pith 1977

[34] [33]

C. E. Vayonakis, Lett. Nuovo Cimento 17 (1976) 383; H. We ldon, Phys. Lett. 146B (184) 59; G. J. Gounaris, R. K¨ ogerler and H. Neufeld, Phys. R ev. D34 (1986) 3257; Y.P. Yao and C.P. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D38 (1988) 2237; W. Marcian o, G. Valencia and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Rev. D40 (1989) 1725; J. Bagger and C. S chmidt, Phys. Rev. D41 (1990) 264; H. Veltman,...

View on Pith 1976

[35] [34]

N. Cabibbo, Phys. Rev. Lett. 10 (1963) 531; M. Kobayashi and T. Maskawa, Prog. Theor. Phys. 49 (1973) 652

View on Pith 1963

[36] [35]

S. Glashow, J. Illiopoulos and L. Maiani, Phys. Rev. D2 ( 1970) 1285

View on Pith 1970

[37] [36]

D. Ross and M. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B95 (1975) 135

View on Pith 1975

[38] [37]

T. Appelquist and J. Carazzone, Phys. Rev. D11 (1975) 28 56

View on Pith 1975

[39] [38]

G. K¨ all´ en and A. Sabry, K. Dan. Vidensk. Selsk. Mat.-F ys. Medd. 29 (1955) No. 17; M. Steinhauser, Phys. Lett. B429 (1998) 158

View on Pith 1955

[40] [39]

M. Davier and A. K¨ ocker, Phys. Lett. B419 (1998) 419; J. Erler, Phys. Rev. D59 (1999) 054008; F. Jegerlehner, hep-ph/0308117; K. Hagiwara, A. Ma rtin, D. Nomura and T. Teubner, Phys. Rev. D69 (2004) 093003

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998

[41] [40]

H. Burkhardt and B. Pietrzyk, Phys. Lett. B513 (2001) 46

View on Pith 2001

[42] [41]

R.E. Behrends, R.J. Finkelstein and A. Sirlin, Phys. Re v. 101 (1956) 866; T. Kinoshita and A. Sirlin, Phys. Rev. 113 (1959) 1652; T. van Ritbergen an d R. Stuart, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 488. 298

View on Pith 1956

[43] [42]

For reviews, see e.g.: G. Altarelli, A QCD Primer , Lectures given at “2001 Euro- pean School of High-Energy Physics”, Beatenberg (Switzerl and), Aug–Sep 2001, hep- ph/0204179; S. Bethke, J. Phys. G26 (2000) R27; ibid. Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 121 (2003); I. Hinchliﬀe in Ref. [9]

View on Pith 2000

[44] [43]

O. Tarasov, A. Vladimirov and A. Zharkov, Phys. Lett. B9 3 (1980) 429; S.A. Larin and J.A.M. Vermaseren, Phys. Lett. B303 (1993) 334

View on Pith 1980

[45] [44]

M. Je˙ zabek and J. H. K¨ uhn, Nucl. Phys. B314 (1989) 1; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B320 (1989) 20; ibid. Phys. Rev. D48 (1993) 1910 ; A. Czarnecki, Phys. Lett. B252 (1 990) 467; C.S. Li, R.J. Oakes and T.C. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D43 (1991) 3759; A. De nner and T. Sack, Nucl. Phys. B358 (1991) 46; G. Eilam, R. Mendel, R. Migneron a nd A. Soni, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66 (199...

View on Pith 1989

[46] [45]

For a detailed review on the top quark see, for instance, M. Beneke, I. Efthymiopoulos, M.L. Mangano and J. Womersley (conv) et al. , Top Quark Physics in the Report of the “1999 CERN Workshop on SM Physics at the LHC”, Report CERN -TH/2000-100, hep-ph/0003033

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999

[47] [46]

For theoretically oriented reviews on the top quark pro perties, see: J.H. Kuhn, hep- ph/9707321; S. Dawson, hep-ph/0303191

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[48] [47]

S. Narison, Light and heavy quark masses, ﬂavor breaking of chiral conde nsates, meson weak leptonic decay constants in QCD , hep-ph/0202200

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[49] [48]

N. Gray, D.J. Broadhurst, W. Grafe and K. Schilcher, Z. P hys. C48 (1990) 673; K.G. Chetyrkin and M. Steinhauser, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83 (1999) 400 1; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B573 (2000) 617; K. Melnikov and T. van Ritbergen, Phys. Lett. B48 2 (2000) 99

View on Pith 1990

[50] [49]

S.G. Gorishny, A.L. Kataev, S.A. Larin and L.R. Surgula dze, Mod. Phys. Lett. A5 (1990) 2703; ibid. Phys. Rev. D43 (1991) 1633

View on Pith 1990

[51] [50]

K.G. Chetyrkin, Phys. Lett. B404 (1997) 161; J.A.M. Ver maseren, S.A. Larin and T. van Ritbergen, Phys. Lett. B405 (1997) 327

View on Pith 1997

[52] [51]

The LEP2 WW Working Group (U. Parzefall et al. ), Note LEPEWWG/TGC/2003– 01; see the web site: http://lepewwg.web.cern.ch/LEPEWWG/tgc

View on Pith 2003

[53] [52]

The CDF and DØ collaborations, Phys. Rev. D70 (2004) 092 008. 299

View on Pith 2004

[54] [53]

Z Physics at LEP1 , CERN Report 89–08 (1989), eds. G. Altarelli, R. Kleiss and C . Verzegnassi; see this reference for earlier work

View on Pith 1989

[55] [54]

Reports of the Working Group on Precision Calculations for t he Z Resonance , CERN Report 95–03 (1995), eds. D. Bardin, W. Hollik and G. Passari no

View on Pith 1995

[56] [55]

Physics at LEP2 , CERN Report 96–01, eds. G. Altarelli, T. Sj¨ ostrand and F. Z wirner

View on Pith

[57] [56]

For a more recent account of high–precision measuremen ts, see the review of W. Hollik, SM Theory , plenary talk given at the XXIX ICHEP, Vancouver, Canada, Ju ly 1998, hep-ph/9811313

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998

[58] [57]

M. B¨ ohm and W. Hollik (conv.) et al. , Forward–Backward Asymmetries in Ref. [53], Part 1, p. 203; J. K¨ uhn and P.M. Zerwas (conv.) et al. , Heavy Flavors at LEP in Ref. [53], Part 1, p. 269

View on Pith

[59] [58]

K.G. Chetyrkin, J.H. K¨ uhn and A. Kwiatkowski, QCD corrections to the e+e− cross- section and the Z boson decay rate , Phys. Rept. 277 (1996) 189 and in Ref. [54], p. 175

View on Pith 1996

[60] [59]

F. Berends (conv.) et al. , The Z lineshape in Ref. [53], Part 1, p. 81

View on Pith

[61] [60]

M. Consoli, W. Hollik and F. Jegerlehner, Electroweak radiative corrections for Z physics in Ref. [53], Part 1, p.7; G. Burgers, F. Jegerlehner, B. Knie hl and J. K¨ uhn, ∆r or the relation between the electroweak couplings and the we ak boson masses in Ref. [53], Part 1, p.55

View on Pith

[62] [61]

M. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B123 (1977) 89; M.S. Chanowitz, M.A. Furman and I. Hinch- liﬀe, Phys. Lett. B78 (1978) 285

View on Pith 1977

[63] [62]

A. Djouadi and C. Verzegnassi, Phys. Lett. B195 (1987) 2 65; A. Djouadi, Nuovo Cim. A100 (1988) 357; B. Kniehl, Nucl. Phys. B347 (1990) 86; F. Hal zen and B. Kniehl, Nucl. Phys. B353 (1991) 567; A. Djouadi and P. Gambino, Phys. Rev. D49 (1994) 3499

View on Pith 1987

[64] [63]

L. Avdeev, J. Fleischer, S.M. Mikhailov and O. Tarasov, Phys. Lett. B336 (1994) 560 and (E) ibid. B349 (1995) 597; K.G. Chetyrkin, J.H. K¨ uhn and M. Steinhaus er, Phys. Lett. B351 (1995) 331

View on Pith 1994

[65] [64]

J.J. van der Bij and F. Hoogeveen, Nucl. Phys. B283 (1987 ) 477. 300

View on Pith 1987

[66] [65]

R. Barbieri, M. Beccaria, P. Ciafaloni, G. Curci and A. V icere, Phys. Lett. B288 (1992) 95; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B409 (1993) 105; J. Fleischer, F. Jegerlehner an d O.V. Tarasov, Phys. Lett. B319 (1993) 249

View on Pith 1992

[67] [66]

G. Degrassi, P. Gambino and A. Vicini, Phys. Lett. B383 ( 1996) 219; G. Degrassi, P. Gambino and A. Sirlin, Phys. Lett. B394 (1997) 188; A. Freita s, W. Hollik, W. Walter and G. Weiglein, Phys. Lett. B495 (2000) 338; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B632 (2002) 189; M. Awramik and M. Czakon, Phys. Lett. B568 (2003) 48; M. Awramik , M. Czakon, A. Freitas and G. Weiglein,...

View on Pith 1997

[68] [67]

G. Degrassi and P. Gambino, Nucl. Phys. B567 (2000) 3

View on Pith 2000

[69] [68]

M. Awramik, M. Czakon, A. Freitas and G. Weiglein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004) 201805

View on Pith 2004

[70] [69]

J. van der Bij, K. Chetyrkin, M. Faisst, G. Jikia and T. Se indensticker, Phys. Lett. B498 (2001) 156; M. Faisst, J.H. K¨ uhn, T. Seindensticker an d O. Veretin, Nucl. Phys. B665 (2003) 649

View on Pith 2001

[71] [70]

M. Veltman, Acta. Phys. Pol. B8 (1977) 475

View on Pith 1977

[72] [71]

T. Appelquist and C. Bernard, Phys. Rev. D22 (1980) 200; A. Longhitano, Nucl. Phys. B188 (1981) 118; M. Einhorn and J. Wudka, Phys. Rev. D39 (1989 ) 2758

View on Pith 1980

[73] [72]

J.J. van der Bij and M. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B231 (1985) 2 05

View on Pith 1985

[74] [73]

R. Boughezal, J.B. Tausk and J.J. van der Bij, hep-ph/04 10216

View on Pith

[75] [74]

J. Jersak, E. Laermann and P.M. Zerwas Phys. Rev. D25 (19 82) 1218 and (E) ibid. D36 (1987) 310; A. Djouadi, J. K¨ uhn and P.M. Zerwas, Z. Phys. C46 (1990) 411; A. Djouadi, B. Lampe and P.M. Zerwas, Z. Phys. C67 (1995) 123; A. B. Arbuzov, D.Yu. Bardin and A. Leike, Mod. Phys. Lett. A7 (1992) 2029 and (E) ibid. A9 (1994) 1515

View on Pith 1987

[76] [75]

A.A. Akhundov, D.Yu. Bardin and T. Riemann, Nucl. Phys. B276 1 (1986) 1; W. Beenakker and W. Hollik, Z. Physik C40 (1988) 141; J. Bernabe u, A. Pich and A. Santamaria, Phys. Lett. B200 (1988) 569; B.W. Lynn and R.G. S tuart, Phys. Lett. B252 (1990) 676

View on Pith 1986

[77] [76]

F. Boudjema, A. Djouadi and C. Verzegnassi, Phys. Lett. B238 (1990) 423; A. Blondel, A. Djouadi and C. Verzegnassi, Phys. Lett. B293 (1992) 253; A . Djouadi, G. Girardi, C. Verzegnassi, W. Hollik and F.M. Renard, Nucl. Phys. B349 ( 1991) 48

View on Pith 1990

[78] [77]

A. Denner, W. Hollik and B. Lampe, Z. Phys. C60 (1993) 193 . 301

View on Pith 1993

[79] [78]

O.P. Sushkov, V.V. Flambaum and V.V. Khriplovich, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 20 (1975) 537; W. Alles, C. Boyer and A. Buras, Nucl. Phys. B119 (1977) 1 25

View on Pith 1975

[80] [79]

M. Lemoine and M. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B164 (1980) 445; R . Phillipe, Phys. Rev. D26 (1982) 1588; M. Bohm, A. Denner, T. Sack, W. Beenakker, F. Behrends and H. Kuifj, Nucl. Phys. B304 (1988) 463; J. Fleisher, F. Jegerleh ner and M. Zralek, Z. Phys. C42 (1989) 409; W. Beenakker, K. Kolodziej and T. Sack, Phys. Lett. B258 (1991) 469; J. Fleisher, F. Jegerle...

View on Pith 1980

[81] [80]

For a review of weak boson production in e+e− collisions including radiative corrections, see: W. Beenakker and A. Denner, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A9 (1994) 4 837

View on Pith 1994

[82] [81]

For a recent review, see e.g. U. Baur, Measuring the W boson mass at hadron colliders , published in “Zeuthen 2003, Electroweak precision data and the Higgs mass”, p. 47, hep-ph/0304266

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[83] [82]

For a detailed discussion of electroweak SM processes a t the LHC, including weak boson production, see: R. Haywood, P. Hobson, W. Hollik and Z . Kunszt (conv.) et al. , Report of the Electroweak Working Group at “1999 CERN Works hop on SM Physics at the LHC”, hep-ph/0003275

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999

[84] [83]

S.D. Drell and T.M. Yan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 25 (1970) 316

View on Pith 1970

[85] [84]

G. Altarelli, R.K. Ellis and G. Martinelli, Nuc. Phys. B 157 (1979) 461; J. Kubar–Andr´ e and F. Paige, Phys. Rev. D19 (1979) 221

View on Pith 1979

[86] [85]

R. Hamberg, W.L. van Neerven and T. Matsuura, Nucl. Phys . B359 (1991) 343 and (E) ibid. B644 (2002) 403

View on Pith 1991

[87] [86]

A. Sirlin, Phys. Rev. D22 (1980) 971; W. Marciano and A. S irlin, Phys. Rev. D22 (1980) 2695; ibid. Phys. Rev. D29 (1984) 945; A. Sirlin and W. Marciano, Nucl. Ph ys. B189 (1981) 442

View on Pith 1980

[88] [87]

W. Marciano, Phys. Rev. D20 (1979) 274; W. Marciano and A . Sirlin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 46 (1981) 163; W. Marciano, S. Sarantakos and A. Sirlin, Nucl . Phys. B217 (1983) 84

View on Pith 1979

[89] [88]

M. Awramik and M. Czakon, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (2002) 2418 01; A. Onishchenko and O. Veretin, Phys. Lett. B551 (2003) 111

View on Pith 2002

[90] [89]

K. Gaemers and G. Gounaris, Z. Phys. C1 (1979) 259; K. Hag iwara, K. Hikasa, R. D. Peccei and D. Zeppenfeld, Nucl. Phys. B282 (1987) 253. 302

View on Pith 1979

[91] [90]

G. Gounaris, J.-L. Kneur and D. Zeppenfeld (conv.) et al. , Triple Gauge Boson Cou- plings in Ref. [55], p. 525

View on Pith

[92] [91]

W. Hollik, Fortsch. Phys. 38 (1990) 165

View on Pith 1990

[93] [92]

M. Peskin and T. Takeuchi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65 (1990) 964 ; ibid. Phys. Rev. D46 (1992) 381

View on Pith 1990

[94] [93]

G. Altarelli and R. Barbieri, Phys. Lett. B253 (1991) 16 1; G. Altarelli, R. Barbieri and F. Caravaglios, Nucl. Phys. B405 (1993) 3

View on Pith 1991

[95] [94]

C.S. Wood et al. , Science 275 (1997) 1759; S.C. Bennett and C.E. Wieman, Phys . Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 2484; M. Kuchiev and V. Flambaum, Phys. R ev. Lett. 89 (2002) 283002

View on Pith 1997

[96] [95]

G.P. Zeller et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 88 (2002) 091802

View on Pith 2002

[97] [96]

For a review, see P. Gambino, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A19 (2004 ) 808

View on Pith 2004

[98] [97]

Very recently, new O(α) photon bremsstrahlung corrections have been calculated a nd shown to remove the NuTeV discrepancy if included; M. Gluck, P. Jimenez–Delgado and E. Reya, hep-ph/0503103

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[99] [98]

For a review, see M. Chanowitz, published in “Zeuthen 20 03, Electroweak precision data and the Higgs mass”, p. 15-24, hep-ph/0304199

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[100] [99]

C.J.C. Burges and H. J. Schnitzer, Nucl. Phys. B228 (198 3) 464; C.N. Leung, S.T. Love and S. Rao, Z. Phys. C31 (1986) 433: W. Buchmuller and D. W yler, Nucl. Phys. B268 (1986) 621; K. Hagiwara, S. Ishihara, R. Szalapski and D . Zeppenfeld, Phys. Lett. B283 (1992) 353; ibid. Phys. Rev. D48 (1993) 2182

View on Pith 1986

[101] [100]

K. Whisnant, J. M. Yang, B.-L. Young and X. Zhang, Phys. Rev. D56 (1997) 467; G.J. Gounaris, D.T. Papadamou and F. M. Renard, Z. Phys. C76 (1997 ) 333; J.M. Yang and B.-L Young, Phys. Rev. D56 (1997) 5907; G. Gounaris and G. Tsirigoti, Phys. Rev. D56 (1997) 3030

View on Pith 1997

[102] [101]

See for instance, R. Barbieri and A. Strumia Phys. Lett . B462 (1999) 144; L. Hall and C. Kolda, Phys. Lett. B459 (1999) 213

View on Pith 1999

[103] [102]

M. Peskin and J. Wells, Phys. Rev. D64 (2001) 093003

View on Pith 2001

[104] [103]

For Z ′ physics as well as production and study at future colliders, see for instance: J.L. Hewett and T.G. Rizzo, Phys. Rept. 183 (1989) 193; A. Djo uadi et al. , Z. Phys. 303 C56 (1992) 289; A. Leike, Phys. Rept. 317 (1999) 143; M. Dittm ar et al. , Phys. Lett. B583 (2004) 111

View on Pith 1989

[105] [104]

P.J. Franzini and P. Taxil (conv.) et al. , Higgs at LEP1 in Ref. [53], Part II, p. 59; E.W.N. Glover, J.J. van der Bij (conv.) et al. , Rare Z Decays in Ref. [53], Part II, p. 1

View on Pith

[106] [105]

J.D. Bjorken, Proc. 1976 SLAC Summer Inst. Part. Phys. , SLAC report 198 (1977) 1

View on Pith 1977

[107] [106]

F.A. Behrends and R. Kleiss, Nucl. Phys. B260 (1985) 32

View on Pith 1985

[108] [107]

R.N. Cahn, M.S. Chanowitz and N. Fleishon, Phys. Lett. 82B (1979) 113

View on Pith 1979

[109] [108]

L. Bergstrom and G. Hulth, Nucl. Phys. B259 (1985) 137

View on Pith 1985

[110] [109]

ALEPH Collaboration (D. Buskulic et al. ), Phys. Lett. B384 (1996) 427; DELPHI Collaboration (P. Abreu et al. ), Nucl. Phys. B421 (1994) 3; L3 Collaboration (M. Acciarri et al. ), Phys. Lett. B385 (1996) 454; OPAL Collaboration (G. Alexa nder et al.), Z. Phys. C73 (1997) 189

View on Pith 1996

[111] [110]

J.F. Grivaz, Rapporteur talk given at “International Europhysics Conference on High Energy Physics” (HEP 95), Brussels, 1995; Particle Data Gro up (R. M. Barnett et al.), Phys. Rev. D54 (1996) 1

View on Pith 1996

[112] [111]

J. Ellis, M.K. Gaillard, and D.V. Nanopoulos, Nucl. Ph ys. B106 (1976) 292

View on Pith 1976

[113] [112]

D.R.T. Jones and S.T. Petcov, Phys. Lett. B84 (1979) 44 0

View on Pith 1979

[114] [113]

B.L. Joﬀe and V.A. Khoze, Sov. J. Part. Phys. 9 (1978) 50 ; E. Ma and Y. Okada, Phys. Rev. D20 (1979) 1052; J. Finjord, Physica Scripta 21 (1 980) 143

View on Pith 1978

[115] [114]

M. Carena and P.M. Zerwas (conv.) et al. , Higgs Physics at LEP2 in Ref. [55], Part I, p. 351, hep-ph/9602250

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[116] [115]

The LEP Collaborations (ALEPH, DELPHI, L3 and OPAL), h ep-ex/0107032

View on Pith

[117] [116]

The LEP Collaborations (ALEPH, DELPHI, L3 and OPAL), h ep-ex/0107034

View on Pith

[118] [117]

D.A. Dicus and S. Mathur, Phys. Rev. D7 (1973) 3111; B. L ee, C. Quigg and H. Thacker, Phys. Rev. Lett. 38 (1977) 883; H.A. Weldon, Phys. R ev. D30 (1984) 1547; M. Chanowitz, M. Golden and H. Georgi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57 (19 86) 2344; ibid. Phys. Rev. D36 (1987) 1490

View on Pith 1973

[119] [118]

M. S. Chanowitz, Strong WW scattering at the end of the 90’s: Theory and experi - mental prospects, pulished in Zuoz 1998, “Hidden symmetries and Higgs phenom ena”, p. 81, hep-ph/9812215. 304

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998

[120] [119]

M. L¨ uscher and P. Weisz, Phys. Lett. B212 (1988) 472; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B318 (1989) 705

View on Pith 1988

[121] [120]

A. Arhrib, Unitarity constraints on scalar parameters of the standard and two Higgs doublets models , hep-ph/0012353

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[122] [121]

W. Marciano and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Rev. D37 (1988) 2 509; S. Dawson and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62 (1989) 1232

View on Pith 1988

[123] [122]

L. Durand, B. A. Kniehl and K. Riesselmann, Phys. Rev. D 51 (1995) 5007; A. Gh- inculov, Nucl. Phys. B455 (1995) 21; A. Frink, B. Kniehl, D. K reimer and K. Ries- selmann, Phys. Rev. D54 (1996) 4548; T. Binoth, A. Ghinculov and J.J. van der Bij, Phys. Rev. D57 (1998) 1487

View on Pith 1995

[124] [123]

A. Ghinculov, Phys. Lett. B337 (1994) 137 and (E) ibid B346 (1995) 426; A. Frink, B. Kniehl and K. Riesselmann, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72 (1994) 2534 an d (E) ibid. 74 (1995) 1699; V. Borodulin and G. Jikia, Phys. Lett. B391 (1997) 434

View on Pith 1994

[125] [124]

S. Dawson and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Rev. D40 (1989) 288 0

View on Pith 1989

[126] [125]

L. Durand, P. Maher and K. Riesselmann, Phys. Rev. D48 ( 1993) 1084; K. Riessel- mann, Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) 6226; U. Nierste and K. Riesselma nn, Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) 6638

View on Pith 1996

[127] [126]

K. Riesselmann and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Rev. D55 (199 7) 311

View on Pith

[128] [127]

T. Cheng, E. Eichten and L. Li, Phys. Rev. D9 (1974) 2259 ; B. Pendleton and G. Ross, Phys. Lett. B98 (1981) 291; C. Hill, Phys. Rev. D24 (198 1) 691; J. Bagger, S. Dimopoulos and E. Masso, Nucl. Phys. B253 (1985) 397; M. Beg, C. Panagiotakopoulos and A. Sirlin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 52 (1984) 883; M. Duncan, R. Ph ilippe and M. Sher, Phys. Lett. B153 (1985) 1...

View on Pith 1974

[129] [128]

K.G. Wilson and J. Kogut, Phys. Rept. 12 (1974) 75

View on Pith 1974

[130] [129]

N. Cabibbo, L. Maiani, G. Parisi and R. Petronzio, Nucl . Phys. B158 (1979) 295; R. Dashen and H. Neuberger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 50 (1983) 1897; D. C allaway, Nucl. Phys. B233 (1984) 189; P. Hasenfratz and J. Nager, Z. Phys. C37 (198 8) 477; J. Kuti, L. Lin, and Y. Shen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 61 (1988) 678; R. Chivukula and E . Simmons, Phys. Lett. B388 (1996) 788

View on Pith 1979

[131] [130]

A. Hasenfratz, Quantum Fields on the Computer , Ed. M. Creutz, World Scientiﬁc, Singapore, 1992, p. 125; M. G˜ ockeler, H. Kastrup, T. Neuhau s and F. Zimmermann, Nucl. Phys. B405 (1993) 555. 305

View on Pith 1993

[132] [131]

M. Lindner, M. Sher and H.W. Zaglauer, Phys. Lett. 228B (1989) 139; M. Sher, Phys. Lett. B317 (1993) 159; ibid. Phys. Lett. B331 (1994) 448; G. Altarelli and I. Isidori, Phys. Lett. B337 (1994) 141; J.A. Casas, J.R. Espinosa and M. Quiros, Phys. Lett. B342 (1995) 171; J. Espinosa and M. Quiros, Phys. Lett. B353 ( 1995) 257

View on Pith 1989

[133] [132]

M. Sher, Phys. Rept. 179 (1989) 273

View on Pith 1989

[134] [133]

G. Isidori, G. Ridolﬁ and A. Strumia, Nucl. Phys. B609 ( 2001) 387

View on Pith 2001

[135] [134]

G. Anderson, Phys. Lett. B243 (1990) 265; P. Arnold and S. Vokos, Phys. Rev. D44 (1991) 3620; J.R. Espinosa and M. Quiros, Phys. Lett. B353 (1 995) 257

View on Pith 1990

[136] [135]

M. Lindner, Z. Phys. C31 (1986) 295; B. Grzadowski and M . Lindner, Phys. Lett. B178 (1986) 81

View on Pith 1986

[137] [137]

M. Veltman, Acta Phys. Polon. B12 (1981) 437

View on Pith 1981

[138] [138]

M. Einhorn and D. Jones, Phys. Rev. D46 (1992) 5206

View on Pith 1992

[139] [139]

I. Jack and D.R.T. Jones, Nucl. Phys. B342 (1990) 127; R . Decker and J. Pestieau, Mod. Phys. Lett. A4 (1989) 2733; M. Capdequi-Peyran` ere, J. Montero and G. Moul- taka, Phys. Lett. B260 (1991) 138; P. Osland and T. Wu, Phys. L ett. B291 (1992) 315; M. Chaichian, R. Gonzalez-Felipe and K. Huitu, Phys. Le tt. B363 (1995) 101; A. Andrianov and N. Romanenko...

View on Pith 1990

[140] [140]

C.F. Kolda and H. Murayama, JHEP 0007 (2000) 035

View on Pith 2000

[141] [141]

J.A. Casas, J.R. Espinosa and I. Hidalgo, JHEP 0411 (20 04) 057

View on Pith

[142] [142]

K. Hagiwara, R. Szalapski and D. Zeppenfeld, Phys. Let t. B318 (1993) 155; J.M. Hernandez, M.A. Perez and J.J. Toscano, Phys. Rev. D51 (1995 ) 2044

View on Pith 1993

[143] [143]

G.J. Gounaris and F. M. Renard, Phys. Rev. D59 (1999) 11 3015

View on Pith 1999

[144] [144]

J. Romao and S. Andringa, Eur. Phys. J. C7 (1999) 631

View on Pith 1999

[145] [145]

L. Resnick, M.K. Sundaresan and P.J.S. Watson, Phys. R ev. D8 (1973) 172

View on Pith 1973

[146] [146]

J.F. Gunion and H.E. Haber, Nucl. Phys. B272 (1986) 1

View on Pith 1986

[147] [147]

T. Arens, U. Gieseler and L.M. Sehgal, Phys. Lett. B339 (1994) 127. 306

View on Pith 1994

[148] [148]

E. Braaten and J.P. Leveille, Phys. Rev. D22 (1980) 715 ; N. Sakai, Phys. Rev. D22 (1980) 2220; T. Inami and T. Kubota, Nucl. Phys. B179 (1981) 1 71; S.G. Gorishny, A.L. Kataev and S.A. Larin, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 40 (1984) 329

View on Pith 1980

[149] [149]

M. Drees and K. Hikasa, Phys. Rev. D41 (1990) 1547; ibid. Phys. Lett. B240 (1990) 455 and (E) ibid. B262 (1991) 497

View on Pith 1990

[150] [150]

K.G. Chetyrkin, Phys. Lett. B390 (1997) 309; K.G. Chet yrkin and M. Steinhauser, Phys. Lett. B408 (1997) 320

View on Pith 1997

[151] [151]

K.G. Chetyrkin and A. Kwiatkowski, Nucl. Phys. B461 (1 996) 3; S.A. Larin, T. van Ritbergen and J.A.M. Vermaseren, Phys. Lett. B362 (1995) 13 4

View on Pith 1995

[152] [152]

A. Djouadi and P. Gambino, Phys. Rev. D51 (1995) 218

View on Pith 1995

[153] [153]

K. Melnikov, Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) 5020

View on Pith 1996

[154] [154]

R. Harlander and M. Steinhauser, Phys. Rev. D56 (1997) 3980

View on Pith 1997

[155] [155]

R. Decker, M. Nowakowski and A. Pilaftsis, Z. Phys. C57 (1993) 339; ibid. Mod. Phys. Lett. A6 (1991) 3491 and (E) ibid. A7 (1992) 819

View on Pith 1993

[156] [156]

A. Djouadi, J. Kalinowski and P.M. Zerwas, Z. Phys. C70 (1996) 435

View on Pith 1996

[157] [157]

S. Moretti and W. Stirling, Phys. Lett. B347 (1995) 291 and (E) ibid. B366 (1996) 451

View on Pith 1995

[158] [158]

J. R. Dell’Aquila and C.A. Nelson, Nucl. Phys. B320 (19 89) 61; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B320 (1989) 86; C.A. Nelson, Phys. Rev. D41 (1990) 2805; S. Weinbe rg, Phys. Rev. D42 (1990) 860; B.K. Bullock, K. Hagiwara and A.D. Martin, Phys. Lett. B273 (1991) 501; S. Barr and A. Zee, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65 (1990) 21; J. Gunion and R. Vega, Phys. Lett. B251 (1990) 157; D....

View on Pith 1989

[159] [159]

V. Barger, K. Cheung, A. Djouadi, B. Kniehl and P. Zerwa s, Phys. Rev. D49 (1994) 79

View on Pith 1994

[160] [160]

M. Kramer, J.H. Kuhn, M.L. Stong and P.M. Zerwas, Z. Phy s. C64 (1994) 21

View on Pith 1994

[161] [161]

D. Chang, W.Y. Keung and I. Phillips, Phys. Rev. D48 (19 93) 3225. 307

View on Pith

[162] [162]

H. Pois, T. Weiler and T.C. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D47 (1993) 3 886; D. Chang and W.Y. Keung, Phys. Lett. B305 (1993) 261

View on Pith 1993

[163] [163]

B. Grzadkowski and J.F. Gunion, Phys. Lett. B350 (1995 ) 218

View on Pith 1995

[164] [164]

J.H. Kuhn and F. Wagner, Nucl. Phys. B236 (1984) 16

View on Pith 1984

[165] [165]

W. Bernreuther, A. Brandenburg and M. Flesch, Phys. Re v. D56 (1997) 90

View on Pith 1997

[166] [166]

Z. Was and M. Worek, Acta Phys. Polon. B33 (2002) 1875; M . Worek, Acta Phys. Polon. B34 (2003) 4549; G.R. Bower, T. Pierzchala, Z. Was and M. Worek, Phys. Lett. B543 (2002) 227

View on Pith 2002

[167] [167]

K. Desch, Z. Was and M. Worek, Eur. Phys. J. C29 (2003) 49 1; K. Desch, A. Imhof, Z. Was and M. Worek, Phys. Lett. B579 (2004) 157

View on Pith 2003

[168] [168]

G. Pocsik and T. Torma, Z. Phys. C6 (1980) 1; T.G. Rizzo, Phys. Rev. D22 (1980) 722; W.-Y. Keung and W.J. Marciano, Phys. Rev. D30 (1984) 248

View on Pith 1980

[169] [169]

D.A. Dicus, S. Willenbrock, T. Imbo, W.K. Keung and T. R izzo, Phys. Rev. D34 (1986) 2157; T.G. Rizzo, Phys. Rev. D31 (1985) 2366; P. Langa cker and J. Liu, Phys. Rev. D46 (1992) 5069

View on Pith 1986

[170] [170]

A. Grau, G. Panchieri and R.J.N. Phillips, Phys. Lett. B251 (1990) 293

View on Pith 1990

[171] [171]

R.N. Cahn, Rep. Prog. Phys. 52 (1989) 389; B. Kniehl, Ph ys. Lett. B244 (1990) 537; E. Gross, B. Kniehl and G. Wolf, Z. Phys. C63 (1994) 417 and (E) ibid. C66 (1995) 321; D.J. Summers, Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) 6374

View on Pith 1989

[172] [172]

J.R. Dell’Aquila and C.A. Nelson, Phys. Rev. D33 (1986 ) 80; M. Duncan, G. Kane and W. Repko, Nucl. Phys. B272 (1986) 517; C.A. Nelson, Phys. Rev . D37 (1988) 1220; D. Chang, W.Y. Keung and I. Phillips, Phys. Lett. B305 (1993) 261; B. Grzadkowski, Phys. Lett. B305 (1993) 384; A. Soni and R.M. Xu, Phys. Rev. D4 8 (1993) 5259; T. Arens and L.M. Sehgal, Z. P...

View on Pith 1986

[173] [173]

B. Grzadkowski, J.F. Gunion and J. Pliszka, Nucl. Phys . B583 (2000) 49

View on Pith 2000

[174] [174]

S. Choi, D. Miller, M. Muhlleitner and P. Zerwas, Phys. Lett. B553 (2003) 61

View on Pith 2003

[175] [175]

A. Djouadi and B. Kniehl, Correlations in Higgs production and decay as a probe of CP-violation in the scalar sector , published in Proceedings of Workshop on “ e+e− Collisions”, Report DESY–93–123C. 308

View on Pith

[176] [176]

A.I. Va ˘ ınshte ˘ ın, M.B. Voloshin, V.I. Zakharov and M.A. Shifman, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 30 (1979) 711

View on Pith 1979

[177] [177]

L. Okun, Leptons and Quarks , Ed. North Holland, Amsterdam, 1982

View on Pith 1982

[178] [178]

M. Gavela, G. Girardi, C. Malleville and P. Sorba, Nucl . Phys. B193 (1981) 257

View on Pith 1981

[179] [179]

H. Zheng and D. Wu, Phys. Rev. D42 (1990) 3760; A. Djouad i, M. Spira, J. van der Bij and P.M. Zerwas, Phys. Lett. B257 (1991) 187; S. Dawson an d R.P. Kauﬀman, Phys. Rev. D47 (1993) 1264; K. Melnikov and O. Yakovlev, Phys . Lett. B312 (1993) 179; A. Djouadi, M. Spira and P.M. Zerwas, Phys. Lett. B311 (1 993) 255; M. Inoue, R. Najima, T. Oka and J. Saito,...

View on Pith 1990

[180] [180]

M. Spira, A. Djouadi, D. Graudenz and P.M. Zerwas, Nucl . Phys. B453 (1995) 17

View on Pith 1995

[181] [181]

J. Fleischer, O.V. Tarasov and V.O. Tarasov, Phys. Let t. B584 (2004) 294

View on Pith 2004

[182] [182]

K. Melnikov, M. Spira and O. Yakovlev, Z. Phys. C64 (199 4) 401

View on Pith

[183] [183]

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

View on Pith 1992

[184] [184]

F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 39 (1977) 1304; J. Ellis, M . Gaillard, D. Nanopoulos and C. Sachrajda, Phys. Lett. 83B (1979) 339; T. Rizzo, Phys. Rev . D22 (1980) 178

View on Pith 1977

[185] [185]

H. Georgi, S. Glashow, M. Machacek and D. Nanopoulos, P hys. Rev. Lett. 40 (1978) 692

View on Pith 1978

[186] [186]

T. Inami, T. Kubota and Y. Okada, Z. Phys. C18 (1983) 69

View on Pith 1983

[187] [187]

A. Djouadi, M. Spira and P.M. Zerwas, Phys. Lett. B264 ( 1991) 440

View on Pith 1991

[188] [188]

M. Spira, A. Djouadi, D. Graudenz and P.M. Zerwas, Phys . Lett. B318 (1993) 347

View on Pith 1993

[189] [189]

S. Dawson and R.P. Kauﬀman, Phys. Rev. D49 (1994) 2298

View on Pith 1994

[190] [190]

A. Djouadi, M. Spira and P.M. Zerwas, Z. Phys. C70 (1996 ) 427

View on Pith 1996

[191] [191]

M.S. Chanowitz, M.A. Furman and I. Hinchliﬀe, Phys. Le tt. 78B (1978) 285; Nucl. Phys. B153 (1979) 402; J. Fleischer and F. Jegerlehner, Phys . Rev. D23 (1981) 2001; F. Jegerlehner, in “Workshop on Radiative Corrections in SU(2 )L × U(1)”, Trieste, Italy, June 1983, Eds. B.W. Lynn and J.F. Wheater (World Scientiﬁc, Singapore, 1984), p. 237; Z. Hioki, Phys...

View on Pith 1978

[192] [192]

B.A. Kniehl, Nucl. Phys. B376 (1992) 3; D.Yu. Bardin, B .M. Vilenski ˘ ı and P.Kh. Khris- tova, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 53 (1991) 152; A. Dabelstein and W. H ollik, Z. Phys. C53 (1992) 507

View on Pith 1992

[193] [193]

S. Dawson and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Lett. B211 (1988) 2 00; B.A. Kniehl, Nucl. Phys. B352 (1991) 1; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B357 (1991) 439; D.Yu. Bardin, B.M. Vilenski ˘ ı a nd P.Kh. Khristova, preprint JINR-P2-91-140

View on Pith 1988

[194] [194]

B.A. Kniehl and A. Sirlin, Phys. Lett. B318 (1993) 367; B.A. Kniehl, Phys. Rev. D50 (1994) 3314

View on Pith 1993

[195] [195]

A. Djouadi and P. Gambino, Phys. Rev. D49 (1994) 4705

View on Pith 1994

[196] [196]

B.A. Kniehl and M. Spira, Nucl. Phys. B432 (1994) 39; A. Kwiatkowski and M. Stein- hauser, Phys. Lett. B338 (1994) 66 and (E) B342 (1995) 455

View on Pith 1994

[197] [197]

B.A. Kniehl and M. Spira, Nucl. Phys. B443 (1995) 37; B. A. Kniehl, Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) 6477

View on Pith 1995

[198] [198]

B.A. Kniehl and M. Steinhauser, Nucl. Phys. B454 (1995 ) 485; ibid. Phys. Lett. B365 (1996) 297

View on Pith 1996

[199] [199]

K.G. Chetyrkin, B.A. Kniehl and M. Steinhauser, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78 (1997) 594; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B490 (1997) 19

View on Pith 1997

[200] [200]

A. Djouadi, P. Gambino and B. Kniehl, Nucl. Phys. B523 ( 1998) 17

View on Pith 1998

[201] [201]

A. Djouadi and P. Gambino, Phys. Rev. Lett. 73 (1994) 25 28

View on Pith 1994

[202] [202]

F. Fugel, B. Kniehl and M. Steinhauser, Nucl. Phys. B70 2 (2004) 333

View on Pith 2004

[203] [203]

U. Aglietti, R. Bonciani, G. Degrassi and A. Vicini, Ph ys. Lett. B595 (2004) 432

View on Pith 2004

[204] [204]

G. Degrassi and F. Maltoni, Phys. Lett. B600 (2004) 255

View on Pith 2004

[205] [205]

M. Steinhauser, in Proceedings of the Ringberg Worksh op on “The Higgs Puzzle”, hep-ph/9612395

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[206] [206]

K.G. Chetyrkin, B.A. Kniehl and M. Steinhauser, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79 (1997) 353; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B510 (1998) 61

View on Pith 1997

[207] [207]

A.L Kataev, JETP Lett. 66 (1997) 327; A. L. Kataev and V. Kim, hep-ph/93042428

View on Pith 1997

[208] [208]

M. Steinhauser, Phys. Rev. D59 (1999) 054005. 310

View on Pith 1999

[209] [209]

J.K. Korner, K. Melnikov and O. Yakovlev, Phys. Rev. D5 3 (1996) 3737

View on Pith 1996

[210] [210]

M.A. Shifman, A.I. Va ˘ ınshte ˘ ın and V.I. Zakharov, Phys. Lett. 78B (1978) 443; A.I. Va ˘ ınshte ˘ ın, V.I. Zakharov and M.A. Shifman, Sov. Phys. Usp. 23 (1980) 429; M.B. Voloshin, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 44 (1986) 478

View on Pith 1978

[211] [211]

B. Kniehl and M. Spira, Z. Phys. C69 (1995) 77; W. Kilian , Z. Phys. C69 (1995) 89

View on Pith 1995

[212] [212]

S. L. Adler, J. C. Collins and A. Duncan, Phys. Rev. D15 ( 1977) 1712

View on Pith 1977

[213] [213]

O. Tarasov, Preprint JINR P2-82-900 (1982), unpublis hed

View on Pith 1982

[214] [214]

A. Djouadi, J. Kalinowski and M. Spira, Comput. Phys. C ommun. 108 (1998) 56

View on Pith 1998

[215] [215]

P. Garbincius, Talk given at the 2004 Moriond Conferen ce on electroweak interactions, hep-ph/0406013

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[216] [216]

The web site of the Collider Run II Integrated Luminosity at the address: http://www.fnal.gov/pub/now/tevlum.html

View on Pith

[217] [217]

U. Heintz, S. Kuhlmann and S. Willenbrock, in Future Electroweak Physics at the Fermilab Tevatron, Report of the TeV2000 Study Group, edited by D. Amidei and R. Brock, Fermilab-PUB-96-082 (April 1996), pp. 120-156; W. M . Yao, in New Direction for High Energy Physics , proceedings of the 1996 DPF/DPB Summer Study on High Energy Physics, June 25-July 12, 1...

View on Pith 1996

[218] [218]

M. Carena J. Conway, H. Haber and J. Hobbs (conv.) et al. , Report of the Higgs Working Group for “RUN II at the Tevatron”, hep-ph/0010338

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[219] [219]

See the review talk given by J. Engelen in Ref. [220]

View on Pith

[220] [220]

Proceedings of the Conference “Physics at LHC” in Vien na, 13–17 July 2004; see the web site: wwwhephy.oeaw.ac.at/phlhc04/

View on Pith 2004

[221] [221]

F. Gianotti, M. Mangano et T. Virdee (conv.) et al., Physics Potential and experimental Challenges of the LHC Luminosity Upgrade , hep-ph/0204087

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[222] [222]

U. Baur et al. , Report of the Working Group Physics at future colliders , in APS/DPF/DPB Snowmmass study in Ref. [223], hep-ph/0201227

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[223] [223]

Proceedings of the APS/DPF/DPP Summer Study on the Fut ure of Particle Physics, Snowmass 2001, Colorado; see the web site http://snowmass2001.org/. 311

View on Pith 2001

[224] [224]

Proceedings of the LaThuile Workshop on Physics at Fut ure Accelerators, La Thuile 1987, Yerllow Report CERN–87–07, 2 Volumes

View on Pith 1987

[225] [225]

VLHC Design Study Group, Design Study for a Staged Very Large Hadron Collider , FERMILAB-TM-2149, June 2001

View on Pith 2001

[226] [226]

S. Peggs, The Hadron Colliders Working Group Report in the 2001 Snowmass of Ref. [223]

View on Pith 2001

[227] [227]

ATLAS Collaboration, Technical Proposal, CERN/LHCC/94-43

View on Pith

[228] [228]

ATLAS Collaboration, Detector and Physics Performance Technical Design Report , Vols. 1 and 2, CERN–LHCC–99–14 and CERN–LHCC–99–15

View on Pith

[229] [229]

CMS Collaboration, Technical Proposal, CERN–LHCC–94–38

View on Pith

[230] [230]

CMS Collaboration, ECAL Project Technical Design Report, CERN/LHCC/97-33 and The compact muon solenoid: the muon Technical Design Report , CERN/LHCC/97-32

View on Pith

[231] [231]

See the talks given by M. Nesssi (ATLAS) and A. Ball (CMS ) in Ref. [220]

View on Pith

[232] [232]

Proceedings of the Large Hadron Collider Workshop, Aa chen 1990, CERN Report 90–10, G. Jarlskog and D. Rein (eds.)

View on Pith 1990

[233] [233]

D. Froidevaux, Z. Kunszt and J. Stirling [conv.] et al., Report of the SM Higgs Working Group in the proceedings of Ref. [232], Vol. II; see also the R apporteurs talks by G. Altarelli and D. Denegri, ibid., Vol. I

View on Pith

[234] [234]

S. Asai et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Eur. Phys. J. C32S2 (2004) 19

View on Pith 2004

[235] [235]

S. Abdullin et al. (CMS Collaboration), CMS Note 2003/33

View on Pith 2003

[236] [236]

G. Branson et al. (CMS and ATLAS Collaborations), Eur. Phys. J. direct C4 (200 2) N1

View on Pith

[237] [237]

P. Sphicas, talk at the conference “Physics at LHC” in R ef. [220]; D. Froidevaux, talk given at the ﬁnal meeting of the European Network “Physics at Colliders”, Montpellier, 26–27 September 2004

View on Pith 2004

[238] [238]

A. Djouadi, R. Kinnunen, E. Richter-Was, H.U. Martyn ( conv.) et al. , Report of the Higgs Working Group, Proceedings of the Les Houches Worksho p on “Physics at TeV Colliders”, 1999, hep-ph/0002258. 312

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999

[239] [239]

D. Cavalli, A. Djouadi, K. Jakobs, A. Nikitenko, M. Spi ra, C.E.M. Wagner, W.-M. Yao (conv.) et al. , Report of the Higgs Working Group, Proceedings of the Les Ho uches Workshop on “Physics at TeV Colliders”, 2001, hep-ph/02030 56

View on Pith 2001

[240] [240]

K.A. Assamagan, M. Narain, A. Nikitenko, M. Spira, D. Z eppenfeld (conv.) et al. , Report of the Higgs Working Group, Proceedings of the Les Hou ches Workshop on “Physics at TeV Colliders”, 2003, hep-ph/0406152

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[241] [241]

S.L. Glashow, D. Nanopoulos and A. Yildiz, Phys. Rev. D 18 (1978) 1724; J. Finjord, G. Girardi and P. Sorba, Phys. Lett. B89 (1979) 99

View on Pith 1978

[242] [242]

E. Eichten, I. Hinchliﬀe, K. Lane and C. Quigg, Rev. Mod . Phys. 56 (1984) 579

View on Pith 1984

[243] [243]

R.N. Cahn and S. Dawson, Phys. Lett. 136B (1984) 196 and (E) ibid. B138 (1984) 464

View on Pith 1984

[244] [244]

D. Dicus and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Rev. D32 (1985) 1642

View on Pith 1985

[245] [245]

G. Altarelli, B. Mele and F. Pitolli, Nucl. Phys. B287 ( 1987) 205

View on Pith 1987

[246] [246]

W. Kilian, M. Kramer and P.M. Zerwas, Phys. Lett. B373 ( 1996) 135

View on Pith 1996

[247] [247]

R. Raitio and W.W. Wada, Phys. Rev. D19 (1979) 941; Z. Ku nszt, Nucl. Phys. B247 (1984) 339; A.S. Bagdasaryan et al. , Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 46 (1987) 315

View on Pith 1979

[248] [248]

J. Ng and P. Zakarauskas, Phys. Rev. D29 (1984) 876

View on Pith 1984

[249] [249]

R.M. Barnett, H.E. Haber and D.E. Soper, Nucl. Phys. B3 06 (1988) 697; F.I. Olness and W.-K. Tung, Nucl. Phys. B308 (1988) 813

View on Pith 1988

[250] [250]

D.A. Dicus and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Rev. D39 (1989) 75 1

View on Pith 1989

[251] [251]

E.N. Glover and J. van der Bij, Nucl. Phys. B309 (1988) 2 82; D.A. Dicus, C. Kao and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Lett. B203 (1988) 457; G. Jikia, Nucl. Phys. B412 (1994) 57

View on Pith 1988

[252] [252]

T. Plehn, M. Spira and P.M. Zerwas, Nucl. Phys. B479 (19 96) 46

View on Pith

[253] [253]

V. Barger, T. Han and R. Phillips, Phys. Rev. D38 (1988) 2766

View on Pith 1988

[254] [254]

A. Djouadi, W. Kilian, M. M¨ uhlleitner and P. Zerwas, E ur. Phys. J. C10 (1999) 45

View on Pith 1999

[255] [255]

W. Y. Keung, Mod. Phys. Lett. A2 (1987) 765; O. Eboli, G. Marques, S. Novaes and A. Natale, Phys. Lett. B197 (1987) 269; D. Dicus, K. Kallianpur and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Lett. B200 (1988) 187; K. Kallianpur, Phys. Lett. B215 (1988 ) 392; A. Dobrovolskaya and V. Novikov, Z. Phys. C52 (1991) 427. 313

View on Pith 1987

[256] [256]

A. Abbasabadi, W. Repko, D. Dicus and R. Vega, Phys. Rev . D38 (1988) 2770

View on Pith 1988

[257] [257]

V. Barger and T. Han, Mod. Phys. Lett. A5 (1990) 667

View on Pith 1990

[258] [258]

R.K. Ellis, I. Hinchliﬀe, M. Soldate and J.J. van der Bi j, Nucl. Phys. B297 (1988) 221

View on Pith 1988

[259] [259]

U. Baur and E. W. Glover, Nucl. Phys. B339 (1990) 38; C. K ao, Phys. Lett. B328 (1994) 420

View on Pith 1990

[260] [260]

S. Dawson and R. Kauﬀman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68 (1992) 227 3; R.P. Kauﬀman, S.V. De- sai and D. Risal, Phys. Rev. D55 (1997) 4005 and Phys. Rev. D59 (1999) 057504

View on Pith 1992

[261] [261]

V. Del Duca, W. Kilgore, C. Oleari, C. Schmidt and D. Zep penfeld, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 122001; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B616 (2001) 307

View on Pith 2001

[262] [262]

V. Del Duca, A. Frizzo and F. Maltoni, JHEP 0405 (2004) 0 64

View on Pith 2004

[263] [263]

K. Cheung, Phys. Rev. D49 (1994) 6224

View on Pith 1994

[264] [264]

A. Djouadi, W. Kilian and T. Plehn, in preparation

View on Pith

[265] [265]

A. Abassabadi, W. Repko, D. Dicus and R. Vega, Phys. Let t. B213 (1988) 386

View on Pith 1988

[266] [266]

D. Rainwater, Phys. Lett. B503 (2001) 320

View on Pith 2001

[267] [267]

A. Abassabadi, D. Bowser–Cho, D. Dicus and W. Repko, Ph ys. Rev. D58 (1998) 057301; ibid. Phys. Rev. D57 (1998) 550

View on Pith 1998

[268] [268]

D. Dicus, Z. Phys. C39 (1988) 583

View on Pith 1988

[269] [269]

K.J. Kallianpur, Phys. Lett. B215 (1988) 392

View on Pith 1988

[270] [270]

C.G. Papadopoulos in Ref. [221]

View on Pith

[271] [271]

B. Mele, S. Petrarca and A. Soddu, Phys. Lett. B435 (199 8) 401; G. Eilam, J.L. Hewett and A. Soni, Phys. Rev. D44 (1991) 1473 and (E) ibid. D59 (1999) 039901

View on Pith 1991

[272] [272]

G. Mahlon and S. Parke, Phys. Lett. B347 (1995) 394

View on Pith 1995

[273] [273]

A. Bialas and P.V. Landshoﬀ, Phys. Lett. B256 (1991) 54 0

View on Pith 1991

[274] [274]

M. Boonekamp, R. Peschanksi and C. Royon, Phys. Rev. Le tt. 87 (2001) 251806; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B669 (2003) 277; B.E. Cox, J.R. Forshaw and B. Hei nemann, Phys. Lett. B540 (2002) 263; R. Enberg, G. Ingelman, A. Kissavos and N. Ti mneanu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (2002) 081801; J.-R. Cudell and O.F. Hernandez, Nuc l. Phys. B471 (1996) 471; E.M. Levin, hep-ph/99...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[275] [275]

V.A. Khoze, A.D. Martin and M.G. Ryskin, Eur. Phys. J. C 23 (2002) 311; A. De Roeck et al. , Eur. Phys. J. C25 (2002) 391; A.B. Kaidalov, V.A. Khoze, A.D . Martin and M.G. Ryskin, Eur. Phys. J. C31 (2003) 387; ibid. Eur. Phys. J. C33 (2004) 261

View on Pith 2002

[276] [276]

V.A. Khoze, A.D Martin and M.G. Ryskin, Eur. Phys. J. C2 6 (2002) 229

View on Pith 2002

[277] [277]

A. De Roeck and V.A. Khoze in Ref. [240]

View on Pith

[278] [278]

The NLO Fortran codes for HV,Hqq and gg → H production and the LO For- tran code for Q ¯QH production, have been written by M. Spira and can be found at http://people.web.psi.ch/spira/. See also M. Spira, hep-ph/9510347 for the users manual of the program HIGLU

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[279] [279]

T. Han and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Lett. B273 (1990) 167

View on Pith 1990

[280] [280]

H. Baer, B. Bailey and J. Owens, Phys. Rev. D47 (1993) 27 30; J. Ohnemus and W. Stirling, Phys. Rev. D47 (1993) 2722; S. Mrenna and C.P. Yuan , Phys. Lett. B416 (1998) 200

View on Pith 1993

[281] [281]

A. Djouadi and M. Spira, Phys. Rev. D62 (2000) 014004

View on Pith 2000

[282] [282]

T. Han, G. Valencia and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Rev. Lett . 69 (1992) 3274

View on Pith 1992

[283] [283]

T. Figy, C. Oleari and D. Zeppenfeld, Phys. Rev. D68 (20 03) 073005

View on Pith

[284] [284]

E. L. Berger and J. Campbell, Phys. Rev. D70 (2004) 0730 11

View on Pith 2004

[285] [285]

S. Dawson, Nucl. Phys. B359 (1991) 283

View on Pith 1991

[286] [286]

D. Graudenz, M. Spira and P. M. Zerwas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70 (1993) 1372; M. Spira, Ph. D. Thesis, R WTH Aachen, 1992

View on Pith 1993

[287] [287]

W. Beenakker, S. Dittmaier, M. Kr¨ amer, B. Pl¨ umper, M . Spira and P.M. Zerwas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 201805; ibid. Nucl. Phys. B653 (2003) 151

View on Pith 2001

[288] [288]

S. Dawson, L.H. Orr, L. Reina and D. Wackeroth, Phys. Re v. D67 (2003) 071503; S. Dawson, C. Jackson, L.H. Orr, L. Reina and D. Wackeroth, Ph ys. Rev. D68 (2003) 034022

View on Pith 2003

[289] [289]

L. Reina and S. Dawson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 20180 4; L. Reina, S. Dawson and D. Wackeroth, Phys. Rev. D65 (2002) 053017

View on Pith 2001

[290] [290]

S. Dittmaier, M. Kr¨ amer and M. Spira, Phys. Rev. D70 (2 004) 074010

View on Pith

[291] [291]

S. Dawson, C. Jackson, L. Reina and D. Wackeroth, Phys. Rev. D69 (2004) 074027. 315

View on Pith 2004

[292] [292]

I. Hinchliﬀe and S.F. Novaes, Phys. Rev. D38 (1988) 347 5; S. Catani, E. D’Emilio and L. Trentadue, Phys. Lett. B211 (1988) 335; R. P. Kauﬀman, Phy s. Rev. D44 (1991) 1415 and D45 (1992) 1512; C.P. Yuan, Phys. Lett. B283 (1992) 3 95; C. Balazs and C. P. Yuan, Phys. Lett. B478 (2000) 192; C. Balazs, J. Huston a nd I. Puljak, Phys. Rev. D63 (2001) 014021

View on Pith 1988

[293] [293]

C.R. Schmidt, Phys. Lett. B413 (1997) 391; D. de Floria n, M. Grazzini and Z. Kunszt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 5209; D. de Florian and M. Grazzini , Phys. Rev. Lett. 85 (2000) 4678 and Nucl. Phys. B616 (2001) 247; S. Catani, D. de F lorian and M. Grazzini, Nucl. Phys. B596 (2001) 299; V. Ravindran, J. Smith and W.L. V an Neerven, Nucl. Phys. B634 (2002)...

View on Pith 1997

[294] [294]

C. J. Glosser and C. R. Schmidt, JHEP 0212 (2002) 016

View on Pith 2002

[295] [295]

G. Bozzi, S. Catani, D. de Florian and M. Grazzini, Phys . Lett. B564 (2003) 65

View on Pith 2003

[296] [296]

C. Anastasiou, L. Dixon and K. Melnikov, Nucl. Phys. Pr oc. Suppl. 116 (2003) 193

View on Pith 2003

[297] [297]

C. Anastasiou, K. Melnikov and F. Petriello, hep-ph/0 501130

View on Pith

[298] [298]

V. Ravindran, J. Smith and W.L. Van Neerven, Nucl. Phys . B634 (2002) 247; ibid. Mod. Phys. Lett. A18 (2003) 1721; C. Anastasiou, K. Melnikov and F. Petriello, hep- ph/0409088

View on Pith 2002

[299] [299]

O. Brein, A. Djouadi and R. Harlander, Phys. Lett. B579 (2004) 149

View on Pith 2004

[300] [300]

R. Harlander and W. Kilgore, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88 (2002) 201801

View on Pith 2002