DOCSLIB.ORG

Arxiv:1407.4336V2 [Hep-Ph] 10 May 2016 I.Laigtrelo Orcin Otehgsmass Higgs the to Corrections Three-Loop Leading III

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arxiv:1407.4336V2 [Hep-Ph] 10 May 2016 I.Laigtrelo Orcin Otehgsmass Higgs the to Corrections Three-Loop Leading III Higgs boson mass in the Standard Model at two-loop order and beyond Stephen P. Martin1,2 and David G. Robertson3 1Department of Physics, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb IL 60115 2Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, P.O. Box 500, Batavia IL 60510 3Department of Physics, Otterbein University, Westerville OH 43081 We calculate the mass of the Higgs boson in the Standard Model in terms of the underlying Lagrangian parameters at complete 2-loop order with leading 3-loop corrections. A computer program implementing the results is provided. The program also computes and minimizes the Standard Model effective po- tential in Landau gauge at 2-loop order with leading 3-loop corrections. Contents I. Introduction 1 II. Higgs pole mass at 2-loop order 2 III. Leading three-loop corrections to the Higgs mass 11 IV. Computer code implementation and numerical results 13 V. Outlook 19 arXiv:1407.4336v2 [hep-ph] 10 May 2016 Appendix: Some loop integral identities 20 References 22 I. INTRODUCTION The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) has discovered [1] a Higgs scalar boson h with mass Mh near 125.5 GeV [2] and properties consistent with the predictions of the minimal Standard Model. At the present time, there are no signals or hints of other new elementary particles. In the case of supersymmetry, the limits on strongly interacting superpartners are model dependent, but typically extend to over an order of magnitude above Mh. It is therefore quite possible, if not likely, that the Standard Model with a minimal Higgs sector exists 2 as an effective theory below 1 TeV, with all other fundamental physics decoupled from it to a very good approximation. Within this model, precision calculations can help to relate observable quantities to the underlying Lagrangian parameters, as well as help to constrain new physics models, including those for which decoupling may not hold. One such observable quantity is the physical mass Mh itself. At tree level, Mh is directly proportional to the square root of the Higgs field self interaction coupling, λ. One important question has to do with the stability of the Standard Model vacuum [4–15]. The observed value of Mh is in the range that would apparently correspond to metastability of the vacuum [16–20], assuming that there is no new physics between the electroweak scale and the Planck scale. It is therefore important to pin down the relationship between λ and Mh as accurately as possible. Parametric uncertainties, notably the dependences on the top-quark mass and the QCD coupling, are not insignificant, and will likely remain so for some time. However, our attitude is that theoretical calculations should, to the extent possible, be pushed to the point that all limitations of our understanding can be reliably and unambiguously blamed on experimental error. The purpose of this paper is to present a full 2-loop calculation of the minimal Standard Model Higgs boson pole mass Mh, in terms of the MS Lagrangian parameters v,λ,yt,g,g′,g3, with the leading 3-loop corrections in the limit g ,y λ,g,g′. The relations between these 3 t ≫ parameters and other observables, such as the physical masses of the top quark and the Z and W bosons, are left to separate calculations. The result for Mh is probably too long to present as an analytical formula in print without forfeiting the goodwill of the reader, and in any case evaluation of it will necessarily rely on numerical work done by computer. We therefore present most of our results in the form of an electronic file, and as a public computer code. The computer code also performs the related task of minimizing the 2-loop effective potential [21] of the Standard Model with leading 3-loop corrections [22], implementing the form of the minimization condition given recently in [23, 24], which resummed Goldstone contributions to eliminate spurious imaginary parts and potentially infrared singular contributions. Previous work on the 2-loop contributions to the relation between λ and Mh includes the QCD corrections [18, 19], which can be obtained from the 2-loop QCD correction [25, 26] to the Higgs self-energy function. The non-QCD corrections have been obtained by [19] and [20] but were given there only in the form of simple interpolating formulas. II. HIGGS POLE MASS AT 2-LOOP ORDER To fix our conventions and notation, we write the Higgs kinetic and self-interaction La- grangian as µ 2 2 = ∂ Φ†∂ Φ Λ m Φ†Φ λ(Φ†Φ) , (2.1) L − µ − − − 3 where we use the metric with signature ( ,+,+,+), and m2 < 0, and the complex doublet − Higgs field is 1 [v + h(x)+ iG0(x)] Φ(x)= √2 . (2.2) G+(x) Here v is the Higgs vacuum expectation value (VEV), which we take to be evaluated at the minimum of the effective potential evaluated at 2-loop order with leading 3-loop corrections. This means that the sum of tadpole diagrams (including the tree-level one) vanishes at that same order, and so need not be included. Because the Landau gauge is used for the evaluation of the effective potential in [21]-[24], our calculation also is restricted to that gauge-fixing scheme. The other relevant couplings in the theory are the top-quark Yukawa coupling yt and the SU(3) SU(2) U(1) gauge couplings g , g, g′. In principle, the bottom quark c × L × Y 3 and other fermion Yukawa couplings can also be included, but they make only a very tiny difference even at 1-loop order, where their inclusion is straightforward (see below). All of 2 the couplings λ, m , yt, g3, g, g′, and the VEV v, are running parameters in the MS scheme. In order to obtain the Higgs boson physical mass Mh, we calculate the self-energy function 1 1 Π(s)= Π(1)(s) + Π(2)(s)+ ... (2.3) 16π2 (16π2)2 consisting of the sum of all 1-particle-irreducible 2-point Feynman diagrams, in the regulated theory in d =4 2ǫ dimensions. In this paper, factors of 1/(16π2)ℓ are extracted as a way − of signifying the loop order ℓ. Rather than including counterterm diagrams separately, we 2 found it more efficient to do the calculation in terms of the bare quantities λB, mB, ytB, g3B, gB, gB′ , and VEV vB, and then re-express the results in terms of the MS quantities. The complex pole squared mass is the solution of 1 1 M 2 iΓ M s = m2 +3λ v2 + Π(1)(s ) + Π(2)(s ), (2.4) h − h h ≡ pole B B B 16π2 pole (16π2)2 pole where 3-loop order effects are consistently neglected in this section. We then apply the MS relations between bare and renormalized parameters: φ φ φ 2 2ǫ 2 1 c1,1 1 c2,2 c2,1 v = µ− v 1+ + + + ... , (2.5) B 16π2 ǫ (16π2)2 ǫ2 ǫ h i 1 cλ 1 cλ cλ λ = µ2ǫ λ + 1,1 + 2,2 + 2,1 + ... , (2.6) B 16π2 ǫ (16π2)2 ǫ2 ǫ h i 4 2 2 2 1 cm 1 cm cm m2 = m2 + 1,1 + 2,2 + 2,1 + ..., (2.7) B 16π2 ǫ (16π2)2 ǫ2 ǫ yt 1 c y = µǫ y + 1,1 + ... , (2.8) tB t 16π2 ǫ g h 1 c i g = µǫ g + 1,1 + ... , (2.9) B 16π2 ǫ h g′ i ǫ 1 c1,1 g′ = µ g′ + + ... , (2.10) B 16π2 ǫ ǫ g3B = µ h[g3 + ...] , i (2.11) to obtain spole in terms of the renormalized parameters. Here µ is the regularization scale, related to the MS renormalization scale Q by 2 γE 2 Q =4πe− µ , (2.12) where γE = 0.5772 ... is the Euler-Mascheroni constant, and the counterterm coefficients are, to the orders required for this paper: φ 2 9 2 3 2 c = 3y + g + g′ , (2.13) 1,1 − t 4 4 φ 2 2 9 4 27 2 2 1 2 2 33 4 27 2 2 91 4 c = 12g y y y g y g′ g + g g′ + g′ , (2.14) 2,2 3 t − 4 t − 8 t − 8 t − 32 16 32 φ 2 2 27 4 45 2 2 85 2 2 271 4 9 2 2 431 4 2 c = 10g y + y y g y g′ + g g g′ g′ 3λ , (2.15) 2,1 − 3 t 8 t − 16 t − 48 t 64 − 32 − 192 − λ 4 2 2 9 2 3 2 9 4 3 2 2 3 4 c = 3y +6λy + 12λ λg λg′ + g + g g′ + g′ , (2.16) 1,1 − t t − 2 − 2 16 8 16 λ 2 4 2 2 45 6 27 4 2 13 4 2 9 4 2 2 135 2 2 c = 24g y 24g y λ y + y g + y g′ y λ + 108y λ y λg 2,2 3 t − 3 t − 2 t 2 t 2 t − 2 t t − 4 t 53 2 2 27 2 4 9 2 2 2 9 2 4 3 2 2 2 2 y λg′ + y g + y g g′ + y g′ + 144λ 81λ g 27λ g′ − 4 t 16 t 8 t 16 t − − 4 45 2 2 7 4 195 6 119 4 2 37 2 4 73 6 +24λg + λg g′ λg′ g g g′ + g g′ + g′ , (2.17) 4 − 4 − 64 − 64 64 64 λ 2 4 2 2 15 6 2 4 2 3 4 2 2 45 2 2 c = 8g y + 20g y λ + y y g′ y λ 36y λ + y λg 2,1 − 3 t 3 t 2 t − 3 t − 4 t − t 8 t 85 2 2 9 2 4 21 2 2 2 19 2 4 3 2 2 2 2 + y λg′ y g + y g g′ y g′ 78λ + 27λ g +9λ g′ 24 t − 16 t 8 t − 16 t − 73 4 39 2 2 629 4 305 6 289 4 2 559 2 4 379 6 λg + λg g′ + λg′ + g g g′ g g′ g′ , (2.18) −32 16 96 64 − 192 − 192 − 192 m2 2 2 9 2 3 2 c = m 3y +6λ g g′ , (2.19) 1,1 t − 4 − 4 m2 2h 2 2 9 4 2i 81 2 2 35 2 2 2 2 2 c = m 12g y + y + 36y λ y g y g′ + 54λ 27λg 9λg′ 2,2 − 3 t 4 t t − 8 t − 8 t − − 249h 4 45 2 2 55 4 + g + g g′ g′ , (2.20) 32 16 − 32 i 5 x x x x y y y z z A B I S x x y u y y z v x z z u T U M FIG.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 10. Electroweak Model and Constraints on New Physics
    1 10. Electroweak Model and Constraints on New Physics 10. Electroweak Model and Constraints on New Physics Revised March 2020 by J. Erler (IF-UNAM; U. of Mainz) and A. Freitas (Pittsburg U.). 10.1 Introduction ....................................... 1 10.2 Renormalization and radiative corrections....................... 3 10.2.1 The Fermi constant ................................ 3 10.2.2 The electromagnetic coupling........................... 3 10.2.3 Quark masses.................................... 5 10.2.4 The weak mixing angle .............................. 6 10.2.5 Radiative corrections................................ 8 10.3 Low energy electroweak observables .......................... 9 10.3.1 Neutrino scattering................................. 9 10.3.2 Parity violating lepton scattering......................... 12 10.3.3 Atomic parity violation .............................. 13 10.4 Precision flavor physics ................................. 15 10.4.1 The τ lifetime.................................... 15 10.4.2 The muon anomalous magnetic moment..................... 17 10.5 Physics of the massive electroweak bosons....................... 18 10.5.1 Electroweak physics off the Z pole........................ 19 10.5.2 Z pole physics ................................... 21 10.5.3 W and Z decays .................................. 25 10.6 Global fit results..................................... 26 10.7 Constraints on new physics............................... 30 10.1 Introduction The standard model of the electroweak interactions (SM) [1–4] is based on the gauge group i SU(2)×U(1), with gauge bosons Wµ, i = 1, 2, 3, and Bµ for the SU(2) and U(1) factors, respectively, and the corresponding gauge coupling constants g and g0. The left-handed fermion fields of the th νi ui 0 P i fermion family transform as doublets Ψi = − and d0 under SU(2), where d ≡ Vij dj, `i i i j and V is the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa mixing [5,6] matrix1.
    [Show full text]
  • Basics of Thermal Field Theory
    September 2021 Basics of Thermal Field Theory A Tutorial on Perturbative Computations 1 Mikko Lainea and Aleksi Vuorinenb aAEC, Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of Bern, Sidlerstrasse 5, CH-3012 Bern, Switzerland bDepartment of Physics, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 64, FI-00014 University of Helsinki, Finland Abstract These lecture notes, suitable for a two-semester introductory course or self-study, offer an elemen- tary and self-contained exposition of the basic tools and concepts that are encountered in practical computations in perturbative thermal field theory. Selected applications to heavy ion collision physics and cosmology are outlined in the last chapter. 1An earlier version of these notes is available as an ebook (Springer Lecture Notes in Physics 925) at dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31933-9; a citable eprint can be found at arxiv.org/abs/1701.01554; the very latest version is kept up to date at www.laine.itp.unibe.ch/basics.pdf. Contents Foreword ........................................... i Notation............................................ ii Generaloutline....................................... iii 1 Quantummechanics ................................... 1 1.1 Path integral representation of the partition function . ....... 1 1.2 Evaluation of the path integral for the harmonic oscillator . ..... 6 2 Freescalarfields ..................................... 13 2.1 Path integral for the partition function . ... 13 2.2 Evaluation of thermal sums and their low-temperature limit . .... 16 2.3 High-temperatureexpansion. 23 3 Interactingscalarfields............................... ... 30 3.1 Principles of the weak-coupling expansion . 30 3.2 Problems of the naive weak-coupling expansion . .. 38 3.3 Proper free energy density to (λ): ultraviolet renormalization . 40 O 3 3.4 Proper free energy density to (λ 2 ): infraredresummation .
    [Show full text]
  • Relation Between the Pole and the Minimally Subtracted Mass in Dimensional Regularization and Dimensional Reduction to Three-Loop Order
    SFB/CPP-07-04 TTP07-04 DESY07-016 hep-ph/0702185 Relation between the pole and the minimally subtracted mass in dimensional regularization and dimensional reduction to three-loop order P. Marquard(a), L. Mihaila(a), J.H. Piclum(a,b) and M. Steinhauser(a) (a) Institut f¨ur Theoretische Teilchenphysik, Universit¨at Karlsruhe (TH) 76128 Karlsruhe, Germany (b) II. Institut f¨ur Theoretische Physik, Universit¨at Hamburg 22761 Hamburg, Germany Abstract We compute the relation between the pole quark mass and the minimally sub- tracted quark mass in the framework of QCD applying dimensional reduction as a regularization scheme. Special emphasis is put on the evanescent couplings and the renormalization of the ε-scalar mass. As a by-product we obtain the three-loop ZOS ZOS on-shell renormalization constants m and 2 in dimensional regularization and thus provide the first independent check of the analytical results computed several years ago. arXiv:hep-ph/0702185v1 19 Feb 2007 PACS numbers: 12.38.-t 14.65.-q 14.65.Fy 14.65.Ha 1 Introduction In quantum chromodynamics (QCD), like in any other renormalizeable quantum field theory, it is crucial to specify the precise meaning of the parameters appearing in the underlying Lagrangian — in particular when higher order quantum corrections are con- sidered. The canonical choice for the coupling constant of QCD, αs, is the so-called modified minimal subtraction (MS) scheme [1] which has the advantage that the beta function, ruling the scale dependence of the coupling, is mass-independent. On the other hand, for a heavy quark besides the MS scheme also other definitions are important — first and foremost the pole mass.
    [Show full text]
  • Quark Mass Renormalization in the MS and RI Schemes up To
    ROME1-1198/98 Quark Mass Renormalization in the MS and RI schemes up to the NNLO order Enrico Francoa and Vittorio Lubiczb a Dip. di Fisica, Universit`adegli Studi di Roma “La Sapienza” and INFN, Sezione di Roma, P.le A. Moro 2, 00185 Roma, Italy. b Dip. di Fisica, Universit`adi Roma Tre and INFN, Sezione di Roma, Via della Vasca Navale 84, I-00146 Roma, Italy Abstract We compute the relation between the quark mass defined in the min- imal modified MS scheme and the mass defined in the “Regularization Invariant” scheme (RI), up to the NNLO order. The RI scheme is conve- niently adopted in lattice QCD calculations of the quark mass, since the relevant renormalization constants in this scheme can be evaluated in a non-perturbative way. The NNLO contribution to the conversion factor between the quark mass in the two schemes is found to be large, typically of the same order of the NLO correction at a scale µ ∼ 2 GeV. We also give the NNLO relation between the quark mass in the RI scheme and the arXiv:hep-ph/9803491v1 30 Mar 1998 renormalization group-invariant mass. 1 Introduction The values of quark masses are of great importance in the phenomenology of the Standard Model and beyond. For instance, bottom and charm quark masses enter significantly in the theoretical expressions of inclusive decay rates of heavy mesons, while the strange quark mass plays a crucial role in the evaluation of the K → ππ, ∆I = 1/2, decay amplitude and of the CP-violation parameter ǫ′/ǫ.
    [Show full text]
  • MS-On-Shell Quark Mass Relation up to Four Loops in QCD and a General SU
    DESY 16-106, TTP16-023 MS-on-shell quark mass relation up to four loops in QCD and a general SU(N) gauge group Peter Marquarda, Alexander V. Smirnovb, Vladimir A. Smirnovc, Matthias Steinhauserd, David Wellmannd (a) Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron, DESY 15738 Zeuthen, Germany (b) Research Computing Center, Moscow State University 119991, Moscow, Russia (c) Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics of Moscow State University 119991, Moscow, Russia (d) Institut f¨ur Theoretische Teilchenphysik, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) 76128 Karlsruhe, Germany Abstract We compute the relation between heavy quark masses defined in the modified minimal subtraction and the on-shell schemes. Detailed results are presented for all coefficients of the SU(Nc) colour factors. The reduction of the four-loop on- shell integrals is performed for a general QCD gauge parameter. Altogether there are about 380 master integrals. Some of them are computed analytically, others with high numerical precision using Mellin-Barnes representations, and the rest numerically with the help of FIESTA. We discuss in detail the precise numerical evaluation of the four-loop master integrals. Updated relations between various arXiv:1606.06754v2 [hep-ph] 14 Nov 2016 short-distance masses and the MS quark mass to next-to-next-to-next-to-leading order accuracy are provided for the charm, bottom and top quarks. We discuss the dependence on the renormalization and factorization scale. PACS numbers: 12.38.Bx, 12.38.Cy, 14.65.Fy, 14.65.Ha 1 Introduction Quark masses are fundamental parameters of Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) and thus it is mandatory to determine their numerical values as precisely as possible.
    [Show full text]
  • Higgs Boson Mass and New Physics Arxiv:1205.2893V1
    Higgs boson mass and new physics Fedor Bezrukov∗ Physics Department, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269-3046, USA RIKEN-BNL Research Center, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973, USA Mikhail Yu. Kalmykovy Bernd A. Kniehlz II. Institut f¨urTheoretische Physik, Universit¨atHamburg, Luruper Chaussee 149, 22761, Hamburg, Germany Mikhail Shaposhnikovx Institut de Th´eoriedes Ph´enom`enesPhysiques, Ecole´ Polytechnique F´ed´eralede Lausanne, CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland May 15, 2012 Abstract We discuss the lower Higgs boson mass bounds which come from the absolute stability of the Standard Model (SM) vacuum and from the Higgs inflation, as well as the prediction of the Higgs boson mass coming from asymptotic safety of the SM. We account for the 3-loop renormalization group evolution of the couplings of the Standard Model and for a part of two-loop corrections that involve the QCD coupling αs to initial conditions for their running. This is one step above the current state of the art procedure (\one-loop matching{two-loop running"). This results in reduction of the theoretical uncertainties in the Higgs boson mass bounds and predictions, associated with the Standard Model physics, to 1−2 GeV. We find that with the account of existing experimental uncertainties in the mass of the top quark and αs (taken at 2σ level) the bound reads MH ≥ Mmin (equality corresponds to the asymptotic safety prediction), where Mmin = 129 ± 6 GeV. We argue that the discovery of the SM Higgs boson in this range would be in arXiv:1205.2893v1 [hep-ph] 13 May 2012 agreement with the hypothesis of the absence of new energy scales between the Fermi and Planck scales, whereas the coincidence of MH with Mmin would suggest that the electroweak scale is determined by Planck physics.
    [Show full text]
  • Pole Mass, Width, and Propagators of Unstable Fermions
    DESY 08-001 ISSN 0418-9833 NYU-TH/08/01/04 January 2008 Pole Mass, Width, and Propagators of Unstable Fermions Bernd A. Kniehl∗ II. Institut f¨ur Theoretische Physik, Universit¨at Hamburg, Luruper Chaussee 149, 22761 Hamburg, Germany Alberto Sirlin† Department of Physics, New York University, 4 Washington Place, New York, New York 10003, USA Abstract The concepts of pole mass and width are extended to unstable fermions in the general framework of parity-nonconserving gauge theories, such as the Standard Model. In contrast with the conventional on-shell definitions, these concepts are gauge independent and avoid severe unphysical singularities, properties of great importance since most fundamental fermions in nature are unstable particles. Gen- eral expressions for the unrenormalized and renormalized dressed propagators of unstable fermions and their field-renormalization constants are presented. PACS: 11.10.Gh, 11.15.-q, 11.30.Er, 12.15.Ff arXiv:0801.0669v1 [hep-th] 4 Jan 2008 ∗Electronic address: [email protected]. †Electronic address: [email protected]. 1 The conventional definitions of mass and width of unstable bosons are 2 2 2 mos = m0 + Re A(mos), (1) 2 Im A(mos) mosΓos = − ′ 2 , (2) 1 − Re A (mos) where m0 is the bare mass and A(s) is the self-energy in the scalar case and the transverse self-energy in the vector boson case. The subscript os means that Eqs. (1) and (2) define the on-shell mass and the on-shell width, respectively. However, it was shown in Ref. [1] that, in the context of gauge theories, mos and Γos are gauge dependent in next-to-next-to-leading order.
    [Show full text]
  • One-Loop Calculations and the Mass of the Top Quark
    One-Loop Calculations and the Mass of the Top Quark µ+ e− W + ⌫µ g b g γ t b u t + e W − γ d THESIS submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in THEORETICAL PHYSICS Author : BSc. M.P.A. Sunder Student ID : 5494990 Supervisor : prof. dr. E.L.M.P. Laenen Utrecht & Amsterdam, The Netherlands, June 30, 2016 One-Loop Calculations and the Mass of the Top Quark BSc. M.P.A. Sunder Institute for Theoretical Physics, Utrecht University Leuvenlaan 4, 3584 CE Utrecht, The Netherlands June 30, 2016 Abstract The top quark pole mass is affected by perturbative divergences known as renormalons, therefore this mass parameter possesses a theoretical ambiguity of order LQCD, the infrared scale of divergence. We subtract a part of the static tt potential and obtain the potential-subtracted mass which is renormalon-free and thus measurable with bigger precision. We demonstrate the presence of the renormalon ambiguity in the top quark pole mass and in the static tt potential and with this the cancellation of the renormalon ambiguity in the potential-subtracted mass. Before we discuss renormalons, we review how one computes one-loop quantum corrections in QED and the SM, starting from the gauge-principles that underlie these theories. We focus on renormalisation and its non-perturbative implications, we discuss how the conservation of Noether current affects the counter terms in QED and verify the optical theorem explicitly for top quark decay. Contents 1 Introduction 9 2 A Description of QED 17 2.1 The lepton sector
    [Show full text]
  • Fate of the False Vacuum in a Singlet-Doublet Fermion Extension Model with RG-Improved Effective Action
    PHYSICAL REVIEW D 101, 055038 (2020) Fate of the false vacuum in a singlet-doublet fermion extension model with RG-improved effective action † Yu Cheng* and Wei Liao Institute of Modern Physics, School of Sciences, East China University of Science and Technology, 130 Meilong Road, Shanghai 200237, People’s Republic of China (Received 30 September 2019; accepted 13 March 2020; published 30 March 2020) We study the effective potential and the renormalization group (RG) improvement to the effective potential of a Higgs boson in a singlet-doublet fermion dark matter extension of the Standard Model (SM), and in general singlet-doublet fermion extension models with several copies of doublet fermions or singlet fermions. We study the stability of the electroweak vacuum with the RG-improved effective potential in these models beyond the SM. We study the decay of the electroweak vacuum using the RG-improved effective potential in these models beyond the SM. In this study we consider the quantum correction to the kinetic term in the effective action and consider the RG improvement of the kinetic term. Combining all these effects, we find that the decay rate of the false vacuum is slightly changed when calculated using the RG-improved effective action in the singlet-doublet fermion dark matter model. In general singlet- doublet fermion extension models, we find that the presence of several copies of doublet fermions can make the electroweak vacuum stable if the new Yukawa couplings are not large. If the new Yukawa couplings are large, the electroweak vacuum can be turned into metastable or unstable again by the presence of extra fermions.
    [Show full text]
  • Quark Masses 1 66
    66. Quark masses 1 66. Quark Masses Updated August 2019 by A.V. Manohar (UC, San Diego), L.P. Lellouch (CNRS & Aix-Marseille U.), and R.M. Barnett (LBNL). 66.1. Introduction This note discusses some of the theoretical issues relevant for the determination of quark masses, which are fundamental parameters of the Standard Model of particle physics. Unlike the leptons, quarks are confined inside hadrons and are not observed as physical particles. Quark masses therefore cannot be measured directly, but must be determined indirectly through their influence on hadronic properties. Although one often speaks loosely of quark masses as one would of the mass of the electron or muon, any quantitative statement about the value of a quark mass must make careful reference to the particular theoretical framework that is used to define it. It is important to keep this scheme dependence in mind when using the quark mass values tabulated in the data listings. Historically, the first determinations of quark masses were performed using quark models. These are usually called constituent quark masses and are of order 350MeV for the u and d quarks. Constituent quark masses model the effects of dynamical chiral symmetry breaking discussed below, and are not directly related to the quark mass parameters mq of the QCD Lagrangian of Eq. (66.1). The resulting masses only make sense in the limited context of a particular quark model, and cannot be related to the quark mass parameters, mq, of the Standard Model. In order to discuss quark masses at a fundamental level, definitions based on quantum field theory must be used, and the purpose of this note is to discuss these definitions and the corresponding determinations of the values of the masses.
    [Show full text]
  • Pole Mass Renormalon and Its Ramifications
    TUM-HEP-1358/21 July 30, 2021 Pole mass renormalon and its ramifications Martin Beneke1 Physik Department T31, Technische Universit¨atM¨unchen, James-Franck-Straße 1, D - 85748 Garching, Germany Abstract. I review the structure of the leading infrared renormalon divergence of the relation between the pole mass and the MS mass of a heavy quark, with applications to the top, bottom and charm quark. That the pole quark mass definition must be abandoned in pre- cision computations is a well-known consequence of the rapidly diverg- ing series. The definitions and physics motivations of several leading renormalon-free, short-distance mass definitions suitable for processes involving nearly on-shell heavy quarks are discussed. 1 Introduction The existence of a short-distance scale Q ΛQCD and infrared (IR) finiteness are important requirements for the application of perturbation expansions to strong inter- action (QCD) processes, but they are not always enough in practice. The perturbative series is divergent, most likely asymptotic. One of the sources of divergent behaviour, called IR renormalon [1,2,3,4,5], arises from the sensitivity of the process to the in- evitable long-distance scale ΛQCD. The degree of IR sensitivity limits the ultimate accuracy of the perturbative approximation. For the pole mass of a heavy quark, this observation has been exceptionally important for particle physics phenomenology, leading to a better understanding of quark mass renormalization at scales of order and below the mass of the quark, and to much improved precision in heavy quark and quarkonium physics. The quark two-point function Z p2!m2 i(6p + m) d4x eipx hΩjT (q (x)¯q (0))jΩ i ! δ Z + less singular (1) a b ab p2 − m2 has a pole1 to any order in the perturbative expansion.
    [Show full text]
  • NNLO QCD Corrections to Differential Top-Quark Pair Production with The
    NNLO QCD corrections to differential top-quark pair production with the MS mass Stefano Catani INFN Firenze based on JHEP (2020) 027 [ 2005.00557 ] ( see also JHEP (2019) 100 [ 1906.06535 ] ) in collaboration with Simone Devoto, Massimiliano Grazzini, Stefan Kallweit, Javier Mazzitelli Top 2020, Durham, September 14, 2020 Outline Relation between pole mass and MS mass some general features Top-quark production at the LHC unequal role of pole mass and MS mass Cross sections for tt¯ on-shell production from pole mass and MS mass QCD results with MS mass total and single-differential cross sections up to NNLO Effects due to the MS running mass a first study: invariant-mass distribution of tt¯ pair Summary 2 POLE vs. MS MASS top-quark mass: fundamental parameter of SM to be properly defined by renormalization of related UV divergences pole mass Mt : pole of renormalized propagator (“customary” mass for physical particle) MS mass mt(μm) : “subtract” UV divergences in dimensional regularization (more abstract definition) different renormalization schemes are perturbatively related: we specifically use mass relation at NNLO (k ≤ 3) coefficients d(k) known for k ≤ 4 MS mass depends on arbitrary renormalization scale μm (similarly to QCD coupling αS(μR) ) and scale dependence is perturbatively computable [Renormalization Group (RG) evolution] ∞ k+1 coefficients known for d ln m (μ ) α (μ ) γk k ≤ 4 t m = − γ S m 2 ∑ k ( ) d ln μm k=0 π we specifically use RG evolution at NNLO (k ≤ 2) Note: scale dependence of mass d ln m (μ) 1 d ln α (μ) MS t ∼ S at LO much slower than αS d ln μ 2 d ln μ 3 MS mass mt(μm) can be specified by: its value at a reference scale + RG evolution (no special physical meaning; customary reference scale: m¯ t somehow analogous to reference scale MZ for αS(μR)) a scale of the order of the mass itself (“intrinsic” definition) mt(m¯ t) = m¯ t typical values at NNLO Mt = 173 GeV ⟷ m¯ t = 164 GeV ( �( GeV) variations w.r.t.
    [Show full text]