TheoryNo Access

Probing the Higgs with angular observables at future $e^{+} e^{-}$ $e^{+} e^{-}$ colliders

Zhen Liu

Theoretical Physics Department, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, IL 60510, USA

https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X1644005XCited by:3 (Source: Crossref)

Abstract

I summarize our recent works on using differential observables to explore the physics potential of future $e^{+} e^{-}$ $e^{+} e^{-}$ colliders in the framework of Higgs effective field theory. This proceeding is based upon Refs. 1 and 2. We study angular observables in the $e^{+} e^{-} \to Z H ℓ^{+} ℓ^{-} b \bar{b}$ $e^{+} e^{-} \to Z H ℓ^{+} ℓ^{-} b \bar{b}$ channel at future circular $e^{+} e^{-}$ $e^{+} e^{-}$ colliders such as CEPC and FCC-ee. Taking into account the impact of realistic cut acceptance and detector effects, we forecast the precision of six angular asymmetries at CEPC (FCC-ee) with center-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s} = 240$ $\sqrt{s} = 240$ GeV and 5 (30) ab $^{- 1}$ $^{- 1}$ integrated luminosity. We then determine the projected sensitivity to a range of operators relevant for the Higgsstrahlung process in the dimension-6 Higgs EFT. Our results show that angular observables provide complementary sensitivity to rate measurements when constraining various tensor structures arising from new physics. We further find that angular asymmetries provide a novel means of constraining the “blind spot” in indirect limits on supersymmetric scalar top partners. We also discuss the possibility of using $Z Z$ $Z Z$ -fusion at $e^{+} e^{-}$ $e^{+} e^{-}$ machines at different energies to probe new operators.

Keywords:

You currently do not have access to the full text article.
Recommend the journal to your library today!

References

1. N. Craig, J. Gu, Z. Liu and K. Wang, J. High Energy Phys. 03, 050 (2016), arXiv:1512.06877. Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
2. T. Han, Z. Liu, Z. Qian and J. Sayre, Phys. Rev. D 91, 113007 (2015), arXiv:1504.01399. Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
3. ATLAS Collab. (G. Aad et al.), Phys. Lett. B 716, 1 (2012), arXiv:1207.7214. Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
4. CMS Collab. (S. Chatrchyan et al.), Phys. Lett. B 716, 30 (2012), arXiv:1207.7235. Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
5. D. Asner et al., ILC Higgs White Paper, arXiv:1310.0763. Google Scholar
6. TLEP Design Study Working Group Collab. (M. Bicer et al.), J. High Energy Phys. 01, 164 (2014), arXiv:1308.6176. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
7. M. Ahmad et al., CEPC-SPPC Preliminary Conceptual Design Report, Volume I: Physics and Detector, http://cepc.ihep.ac.cn/preCDR/volume.html (2015). Google Scholar
8. M. Beneke, D. Boito and Y.-M. Wang, J. High Energy Phys. 1411, 028 (2014), arXiv:1406.1361. Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
9. N. Craig, M. Farina, M. McCullough and M. Perelstein, J. High Energy Phys. 1503, 146 (2015), arXiv:1411.0676. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
10. A. Apyan et al., CEPC-SPPC Preliminary Conceptual Design Report, Volume II: Accelerator, http://cepc.ihep.ac.cn/preCDR/volume.html (2015). Google Scholar
11. http://tlep.web.cern.ch/content/machine-parameters. Google Scholar
12. B. Henning, X. Lu and H. Murayama, What do precision Higgs measurements buy us?, arXiv:1404.1058. Google Scholar
13. S. Weinberg, Physica A 96, 327 (1979). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
14. C. N. Leung, S. Love and S. Rao, Z. Phys. C 31, 433 (1986). Crossref, ADS, Google Scholar
15. W. Buchmuller and D. Wyler, Nucl. Phys. B 268, 621 (1986). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
16. K. Hagiwara, R. Szalapski and D. Zeppenfeld, Phys. Lett. B 318, 155 (1993), arXiv:hep-ph/9308347. Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
17. G. Giudice, C. Grojean, A. Pomarol and R. Rattazzi, J. High Energy Phys. 0706, 045 (2007), arXiv:hep-ph/0703164. Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
18. B. Grzadkowski, M. Iskrzynski, M. Misiak and J. Rosiek, J. High Energy Phys. 1010, 085 (2010), arXiv:1008.4884. Crossref, ADS, Google Scholar
19. R. Contino, M. Ghezzi, C. Grojean, M. Muhlleitner and M. Spira, J. High Energy Phys. 1307, 035 (2013), arXiv:1303.3876. Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
20. Particle Data Group Collab. (K. Olive et al.), Chin. Phys. C 38, 090001 (2014). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
21. J. Ellis, V. Sanz and T. You, J. High Energy Phys. 1407, 036 (2014), arXiv:1404.3667. Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
22. J. Ellis, V. Sanz and T. You, J. High Energy Phys. 1503, 157 (2015), arXiv:1410.7703. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
23. A. Biekötter, A. Knochel, M. Krämer, D. Liu and F. Riva, Phys. Rev. D 91, 055029 (2015), arXiv:1406.7320. Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
24. A. Falkowski and F. Riva, J. High Energy Phys. 1502, 039 (2015), arXiv:1411.0669. Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
25. V. Barger, T. Han, P. Langacker, B. McElrath and P. Zerwas, Phys. Rev. D 67, 115001 (2003), arXiv:hep-ph/0301097. Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
26. N. Craig, S. Knapen and P. Longhi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 061803 (2015), arXiv:1410.6808. Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
27. A. Azatov, C. Grojean, A. Paul and E. Salvioni, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 147, 410 (2015), arXiv:1406.6338. Google Scholar

Vol. 31, No. 33

Metrics

Downloaded 33 times

History

Published: 24 October 2016

Keywords

PDF download

System Upgrade on Tue, May 28th, 2024 at 2am (EDT)

Abstract

Recommended