2018
DOI: 10.1007/jhep08(2018)095
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effective field theory after a new-physics discovery

Abstract: When a new heavy particle is discovered at the LHC or at a future highenergy collider, it will be interesting to study its decays into Standard Model particles using an effective field-theory framework. We point out that the proper effective theory must be based on non-local operators defined in soft-collinear effective theory (SCET). For the interesting case where the new resonance is a gauge-singlet spin-0 boson, which is the first member of a new sector governed by a mass scale M , we show how a consistent … Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

2
30
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

4
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 120 publications
2
30
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A very similar operator mixing calculation appears in the SCET analysis of power-suppressed two-jet operators sourced by a new heavy particle[33]. In this application, the insertion of an external Higgs field operator corresponds to the lepton mass factor.…”
mentioning
confidence: 84%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…A very similar operator mixing calculation appears in the SCET analysis of power-suppressed two-jet operators sourced by a new heavy particle[33]. In this application, the insertion of an external Higgs field operator corresponds to the lepton mass factor.…”
mentioning
confidence: 84%
“…In this application, the insertion of an external Higgs field operator corresponds to the lepton mass factor. The off-diagonal anomalous dimension in[33] misses the factor w, because the one-particle reducible diagram with the Higgs insertion on the external leg was not included.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Note that both the matching coefficient H 2 (z) contain terms that are singular for z = 0, 1 and the two subtraction terms properly remove the singularities of the product of these two quantities. This generalizes a simple "plus-type" subtraction prescription for the bare operator proposed in [24,25], which works only for cases where the relevant matching coefficient approaches a constant plus power-suppressed terms as z → 0. Removing the endpoint divergences in the way described above comes at the price of introducing hard upper limits on the integrals over + and − in the last term of the factorization formula (2.9), which originally have power counting ± = O(m b ).…”
Section: Factorization Formula In Terms Of Bare Objectsmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…2 (z) contain terms that are singular for z = 0, 1 and the two subtraction terms properly remove the singularities of the product of these two quantities. This generalizes a simple "plus-type" subtraction prescription for the bare operator proposed in [12,29], which works only for cases where the relevant matching coefficient approaches a constant plus power-suppressed terms as z → 0. Figure 2.…”
Section: Factorization Formula In Terms Of Bare Objectsmentioning
confidence: 87%