4.7 Article

Anomalous couplings in associated VH production with Higgs boson decay to massive b quarks at NNLO in QCD

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW D
卷 105, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.105.014023

关键词

-

资金

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) [396021762-TRR 257]
  2. ERC [804394 hipQCD]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We have combined the NNLO QCD description of Higgs boson production with an electroweak vector boson and a similar description of Higgs boson decays into a pair of b quarks, as well as the anomalous couplings that modify the interactions between the Higgs and electroweak vector bosons. The resulting numerical code is a powerful tool for studying these anomalous couplings in the associated Higgs boson production process. By studying the impact of these anomalous couplings on cross sections and differential distributions, we show that with higher QCD precision, smaller anomalous couplings can be probed in regions where the effects of higher-dimensional operators in the Standard Model effective field theory are small and the effective field theory expansion is under control.
We combine the NNLO QCD description of Higgs boson production in association with an electroweak vector boson V = W or Z with a similarly precise description of Higgs boson decays into a pair of massive b quarks and with the anomalous couplings that modify interactions of the Higgs and electroweak vector bosons. The resulting numerical code provides the most advanced theoretical tool to investigate such anomalous couplings in the associated Higgs boson production process. We study the impact of anomalous couplings on fiducial cross sections and differential distributions and argue that, with increased QCD precision, smaller anomalous couplings become accessible in kinematic regions where the effects of higher-dimensional operators in the Standard Model effective field theory remain small and the effective field theory expansion is under control.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据