Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                

Probing wrong-sign Yukawa couplings at the LHC and a future linear collider

P. M. Ferreira, Rui Santos, John F. Gunion, and Howard E. Haber
Phys. Rev. D 89, 115003 – Published 3 June 2014

Abstract

We consider the two-Higgs-doublet model as a framework in which to evaluate the viability of scenarios in which the sign of the coupling of the observed Higgs boson to down-type fermions (in particular, b-quark pairs) is opposite to that of the Standard Model (SM), while at the same time all other tree-level couplings are close to the SM values. We show that, whereas such a scenario is consistent with current LHC observations, both future running at the LHC and a future e+e linear collider could determine the sign of the Higgs coupling to b-quark pairs. Discrimination is possible for two reasons. First, the interference between the b-quark and the t-quark loop contributions to the ggh coupling changes sign. Second, the charged-Higgs loop contribution to the γγh coupling is large and fairly constant up to the largest charged-Higgs mass allowed by tree-level unitarity bounds when the b-quark Yukawa coupling has the opposite sign from that of the SM (the change in sign of the interference terms between the b-quark loop and the W and t loops having negligible impact).

  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Figure
5 More
  • Received 26 March 2014

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.89.115003

© 2014 American Physical Society

Authors & Affiliations

P. M. Ferreira* and Rui Santos

  • Instituto Superior de Engenharia de Lisboa-ISEL, 1959-007 Lisboa, Portugal and Centro de Física Teórica e Computacional, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Avenida Professor Gama Pinto 2, 1649-003 Lisboa, Portugal

John F. Gunion

  • Davis Institute for High Energy Physics, University of California, Davis, California 95616, USA

Howard E. Haber§

  • Santa Cruz Institute for Particle Physics, University of California, Santa Cruz, California 95064, USA and Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720, USA

  • *ferreira@cii.fc.ul.pt
  • rsantos@cii.fc.ul.pt
  • gunion@physics.ucdavis.edu
  • §haber@scipp.ucsc.edu

Article Text (Subscription Required)

Click to Expand

References (Subscription Required)

Click to Expand
Issue

Vol. 89, Iss. 11 — 1 June 2014

Reuse & Permissions
Access Options
Author publication services for translation and copyediting assistance advertisement

Authorization Required


×

Images

  • Figure 1
    Figure 1

    Ratio of the lightest Higgs couplings to down quarks in the 2HDM relative to the SM as a function of tanβ. Left: Type-I and right: type-II. All μfh(LHC) are within 20% of the SM value.

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 2
    Figure 2

    Allowed regions for 2HDM type-II with all μfh(LHC) within 20% (blue/black), 10% (green/light grey) and 5% (red/dark grey) of the SM value of unity. Left: In the tanβ vs sinα plane. Right: In tanβ vs cos(βα) space.

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 3
    Figure 3

    Left panel: The Yukawa coupling ratio κD=hD2HDM/hDSM as a function of sin(βα) in the type-II 2HDM, with all μfh(LHC) within 20% (blue/black) and 10% (green/light grey) of their SM values. Right panel: Same ratio as a function of tanβ. If one demands consistency at the 5% level, no points survive.

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 4
    Figure 4

    For the 2HDM type-II, we show regions in κD vs tanβ space having sinα>0 that are allowed when μγγh(LHC) (cyan/grey) and μbbh(LHC) (black) are within 5% of the SM prediction of unity.

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 5
    Figure 5

    Assuming that the WW,ZZ rates are measured to be within 5% of the SM prediction, we plot μγγh(LHC) and μbbh(LHC) vs tanβ (left) and μγγh(LHC) vs μbbh(LHC) (right).

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 6
    Figure 6

    Allowed regions for 2HDM type-II with all μfh(LHC) within 20% (blue/black), 10% (green/light grey) and 5% (red/dark grey) of their SM values in κγ vs κD space (left); κg vs κD space (right).

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 7
    Figure 7

    κg2=Γ(hgg)2HDM/Γ(hSMgg) as a function of κD=hD2HDM/hDSM in type-II, with all μfh(LHC) within 20% (blue/black), 10% (green/light grey) and 5% (red/dark grey) of their SM values. Left panel: sinα<0. Right panel: sinα>0.

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 8
    Figure 8

    Left panel: μggh(ILC) as a function tanβ. Right panel: μbbh(ILC) as a function of tanβ. The model is type-II, requiring sinα>0, with all μfh(LHC) within 20% of the SM values in blue (black) and 10% of the SM values in green (light grey).

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 9
    Figure 9

    We show points in the v2ghH+H/mH±2 vs κD plane with the standard color scheme of Fig. 2.

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 10
    Figure 10

    We show points in the mH± vs κD plane with the standard color scheme of Fig. 2. Note: 900 GeV is the largest mH± considered in the scans—the κD+1 region would extend to arbitrarily large mH± corresponding to the decoupling limit.

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 11
    Figure 11

    In the left panel we plot λ3 vs κD using the color scheme of Fig. 2; in the right panel we plot |λ3| vs mH± for κD<0 (blue/black) and κD>0 (green/light gray) points with all μfh(LHC) within 20% of unity.

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 12
    Figure 12

    In the left panel we plot |a+| vs κD using the color scheme of Fig. 2; in the right panel we plot |a+| vs mH± for κD<0 (blue/black) and κD>0 (green/light gray) points with all μfh(LHC) within 20% of unity.

    Reuse & Permissions
×

Sign up to receive regular email alerts from Physical Review D

Log In

Cancel
×

Search


Article Lookup

Paste a citation or DOI

Enter a citation
×