4.4 Article

Positivity bounds in vector theories

Journal

JOURNAL OF HIGH ENERGY PHYSICS
Volume -, Issue 12, Pages -

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/JHEP12(2022)086

Keywords

Effective Field Theories; Scattering Amplitudes

Funding

  1. European Research Council (ERC) under the European Unions Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme grant [801781]
  2. Swiss National Science Foundation grant [179740]
  3. Royal Society through a Wolfson Research Merit Award
  4. European Union's Horizon 2020 Research Council grant MassiveCosmo [724659, ST/T000791/1]
  5. Simons Foundation award under the Simons Foundation's Origins of the Universe initiative, 'Cosmology Beyond Einstein's Theory' [ERC-2016-COG]
  6. Simons Investigator award [555326]
  7. STFC grants [690508, ST/P000762/1]
  8. European Research Council (ERC) [724659] Funding Source: European Research Council (ERC)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Assuming unitarity, locality, causality, and Lorentz invariance, this paper derives new constraints on the effective field theory coefficients for the Generalized Proca and Proca Nuevo massive vector models, while finding interesting analogues between the two models.
Assuming unitarity, locality, causality, and Lorentz invariance of the, otherwise unknown, UV completion, we derive a new set of constraints on the effective field theory coefficients for the most general, ghost-free Generalized Proca and Proca Nuevo massive vector models. For the Generalized Proca model, we include new interactions that had not been previously considered in the context of positivity bounds and find these additional terms lead to a widened parameter space for the previously considered interactions. Although, the Generalized Proca and Proca Nuevo models are inequivalent, we find interesting analogues between the coefficients parameterizing the two models and the roles they play in the positivity bounds.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available