A comprehensive approach to new physics simulations

Christensen, Neil D.; Aquino, Priscila de; Degrande, Céline; Duhr, Claude; Fuks, Benjamin; Herquet, Michel; Maltoni, Fabio; Schumann, Steffen

doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1541-5

Cited by 193 publications

(196 citation statements)

References 180 publications

(324 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

194

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We refer to the Appendix of Ref. [36] We find similar conclusions as for the Standard Model case except when comparing FeynRules 1.6 with the newer version run with one single CPU core. It may indeed seem that the UFO interface in FeynRules 2.0 is less efficient than in the previous version 1.6.…”

Section: Fr$parallelize = Falsesupporting

confidence: 63%

“…We refer to Ref. [36] for a detailed example. In order to employ the functionalities related to the ASperGe package, the user has to implement particle mixings in a specific way, using instances of the mixing class collected into a list dubbed M$MixingsDescription,…”

Section: Mixing Declarationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For more advanced examples, we recommend to consult the models already implemented [55] or the details given in Refs. [36,41,53].…”

Section: A Simple Examplementioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, possible issues can still arise from either faulty FeynRules input or software bugs. We have taken great pains to validate the FeynRules package [36], and we, further, plan to continually extend and improve these tests in order to make the FeynRules package ever more dependable. On the other hand, when a new model is implemented, it has been up to the author of that new model to validate it.…”

Section: Model Validation and Debuggingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, these implementations could be passed between theorists and experimentalists with great success. This early version was thoroughly tested both between different simulation tools, between different gauges and with independent implementations of a standard set of models [36]. A complete chain was established that went from theoretical model to parton-level simulation package to hadronization, at which point comparison with experiment could be done [37].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

FeynRules 2.0 — A complete toolbox for tree-level phenomenology

Alloul

Christensen

Degrande

et al. 2014

Computer Physics Communications

Self Cite

2,311

1,904

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

FeynRules is a Mathematica-based package which addresses the implementation of particle physics models, which are given in the form of a list of fields, parameters and a Lagrangian, into high-energy physics tools. It calculates the underlying Feynman rules and outputs them to a form appropriate for various programs such as CalcHep, FeynArts, MadGraph, Sherpa and Whizard. Since the original version, many new features have been added: support for two-component fermions, spin-3/2 and spin-2 fields, superspace notation and calculations, automatic mass diagonalization, completely general FeynArts output, a new universal FeynRules output interface, a new Whizard interface, automatic 1 → 2 decay width calculation, improved speed and efficiency, new guidelines for validation and a new web-based validation package. With this feature set, FeynRules enables models to go from theory to simulation and comparison with experiment quickly, efficiently and accurately.

show abstract

Section: Fr$parallelize = Falsesupporting

confidence: 63%

Section: Mixing Declarationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For more advanced examples, we recommend to consult the models already implemented [55] or the details given in Refs. [36,41,53].…”

Section: A Simple Examplementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Model Validation and Debuggingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

FeynRules 2.0 — A complete toolbox for tree-level phenomenology

Alloul

Christensen

Degrande

et al. 2014

Computer Physics Communications

Self Cite

2,311

1,904

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

From “Personalized” to “Precision” Medicine: The Ethical and Social Implications of Rhetorical Reform in Genomic Medicine

Juengst¹,

McGowan²,

Fishman³

et al. 2016

Hastings Center Report

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the late 1980s, the human genetics and genomics research community has been promising to usher in a “new paradigm for health care”—one that uses molecular profiling to identify human genetic variants implicated in multifactorial health risks. After the completion of the Human Genome Project in 2003, a wide range of stakeholders became committed to this “paradigm shift,” creating a confluence of investment, advocacy, and enthusiasm that bears all the marks of a “scientific/intellectual social movement” within biomedicine. Proponents of this movement usually offer four ways in which their approach to medical diagnosis and health care improves upon current practices, arguing that it is more “personalized,” “predictive,” “preventive,” and “participatory” than the medical status quo. Initially, it was personalization that seemed to best sum up the movement's appeal. By 2012, however, powerful opinion leaders were abandoning “personalized medicine” in favor of a new label: “precision medicine.” The new label received a decisive seal of approval when, in January 2015, President Obama unveiled plans for a national “precision medicine initiative” to promote the development and use of genomic tools in health care.

show abstract