J. C. Romao - Lisbon, IST & Lisbon, CFTP

J. C. Romao
Are you J. C. Romao?

Claim your profile, edit publications, add additional information:

Contact Details

Name
J. C. Romao
Affiliation
Lisbon, IST & Lisbon, CFTP
City
Lisbon
Country
Portugal

Pubs By Year

Pub Categories

 
High Energy Physics - Phenomenology (50)
 
High Energy Physics - Experiment (3)
 
Astrophysics (1)

Publications Authored By J. C. Romao

We discuss the validity of the Standard Model Effective Field Theory (SM EFT) as the low-energy effective theory for the two-Higgs-doublet Model (2HDM). Using the up-to-date Higgs signal strength measurements at the LHC, one can obtain a likelihood function for the Wilson coefficients of dimension-6 operators in the EFT Lagrangian. Given the matching between the 2HDM and the EFT, the constraints on the Wilson coefficients can be translated into constraints on the parameters of the 2HDM Lagrangian. Read More

2016Oct
Authors: D. de Florian1, C. Grojean2, F. Maltoni3, C. Mariotti4, A. Nikitenko5, M. Pieri6, P. Savard7, M. Schumacher8, R. Tanaka9, R. Aggleton10, M. Ahmad11, B. Allanach12, C. Anastasiou13, W. Astill14, S. Badger15, M. Badziak16, J. Baglio17, E. Bagnaschi18, A. Ballestrero19, A. Banfi20, D. Barducci21, M. Beckingham22, C. Becot23, G. Bélanger24, J. Bellm25, N. Belyaev26, F. U. Bernlochner27, C. Beskidt28, A. Biekötter29, F. Bishara30, W. Bizon31, N. E. Bomark32, M. Bonvini33, S. Borowka34, V. Bortolotto35, S. Boselli36, F. J. Botella37, R. Boughezal38, G. C. Branco39, J. Brehmer40, L. Brenner41, S. Bressler42, I. Brivio43, A. Broggio44, H. Brun45, G. Buchalla46, C. D. Burgard47, A. Calandri48, L. Caminada49, R. Caminal Armadans50, F. Campanario51, J. Campbell52, F. Caola53, C. M. Carloni Calame54, S. Carrazza55, A. Carvalho56, M. Casolino57, O. Cata58, A. Celis59, F. Cerutti60, N. Chanon61, M. Chen62, X. Chen63, B. Chokoufé Nejad64, N. Christensen65, M. Ciuchini66, R. Contino67, T. Corbett68, D. Curtin69, M. Dall'Osso70, A. David71, S. Dawson72, J. de Blas73, W. de Boer74, P. de Castro Manzano75, C. Degrande76, R. L. Delgado77, F. Demartin78, A. Denner79, B. Di Micco80, R. Di Nardo81, S. Dittmaier82, A. Dobado83, T. Dorigo84, F. A. Dreyer85, M. Dührssen86, C. Duhr87, F. Dulat88, K. Ecker89, K. Ellis90, U. Ellwanger91, C. Englert92, D. Espriu93, A. Falkowski94, L. Fayard95, R. Feger96, G. Ferrera97, A. Ferroglia98, N. Fidanza99, T. Figy100, M. Flechl101, D. Fontes102, S. Forte103, P. Francavilla104, E. Franco105, R. Frederix106, A. Freitas107, F. F. Freitas108, F. Frensch109, S. Frixione110, B. Fuks111, E. Furlan112, S. Gadatsch113, J. Gao114, Y. Gao115, M. V. Garzelli116, T. Gehrmann117, R. Gerosa118, M. Ghezzi119, D. Ghosh120, S. Gieseke121, D. Gillberg122, G. F. Giudice123, E. W. N. Glover124, F. Goertz125, D. Gonçalves126, J. Gonzalez-Fraile127, M. Gorbahn128, S. Gori129, C. A. Gottardo130, M. Gouzevitch131, P. Govoni132, D. Gray133, M. Grazzini134, N. Greiner135, A. Greljo136, J. Grigo137, A. V. Gritsan138, R. Gröber139, S. Guindon140, H. E. Haber141, C. Han142, T. Han143, R. Harlander144, M. A. Harrendorf145, H. B. Hartanto146, C. Hays147, S. Heinemeyer148, G. Heinrich149, M. Herrero150, F. Herzog151, B. Hespel152, V. Hirschi153, S. Hoeche154, S. Honeywell155, S. J. Huber156, C. Hugonie157, J. Huston158, A. Ilnicka159, G. Isidori160, B. Jäger161, M. Jaquier162, S. P. Jones163, A. Juste164, S. Kallweit165, A. Kaluza166, A. Kardos167, A. Karlberg168, Z. Kassabov169, N. Kauer170, D. I. Kazakov171, M. Kerner172, W. Kilian173, F. Kling174, K. Köneke175, R. Kogler176, R. Konoplich177, S. Kortner178, S. Kraml179, C. Krause180, F. Krauss181, M. Krawczyk182, A. Kulesza183, S. Kuttimalai184, R. Lane185, A. Lazopoulos186, G. Lee187, P. Lenzi188, I. M. Lewis189, Y. Li190, S. Liebler191, J. Lindert192, X. Liu193, Z. Liu194, F. J. Llanes-Estrada195, H. E. Logan196, D. Lopez-Val197, I. Low198, G. Luisoni199, P. Maierhöfer200, E. Maina201, B. Mansoulié202, H. Mantler203, M. Mantoani204, A. C. Marini205, V. I. Martinez Outschoorn206, S. Marzani207, D. Marzocca208, A. Massironi209, K. Mawatari210, J. Mazzitelli211, A. McCarn212, B. Mellado213, K. Melnikov214, S. B. Menari215, L. Merlo216, C. Meyer217, P. Milenovic218, K. Mimasu219, S. Mishima220, B. Mistlberger221, S. -O. Moch222, A. Mohammadi223, P. F. Monni224, G. Montagna225, M. Moreno Llácer226, N. Moretti227, S. Moretti228, L. Motyka229, A. Mück230, M. Mühlleitner231, S. Munir232, P. Musella233, P. Nadolsky234, D. Napoletano235, M. Nebot236, C. Neu237, M. Neubert238, R. Nevzorov239, O. Nicrosini240, J. Nielsen241, K. Nikolopoulos242, J. M. No243, C. O'Brien244, T. Ohl245, C. Oleari246, T. Orimoto247, D. Pagani248, C. E. Pandini249, A. Papaefstathiou250, A. S. Papanastasiou251, G. Passarino252, B. D. Pecjak253, M. Pelliccioni254, G. Perez255, L. Perrozzi256, F. Petriello257, G. Petrucciani258, E. Pianori259, F. Piccinini260, M. Pierini261, A. Pilkington262, S. Plätzer263, T. Plehn264, R. Podskubka265, C. T. Potter266, S. Pozzorini267, K. Prokofiev268, A. Pukhov269, I. Puljak270, M. Queitsch-Maitland271, J. Quevillon272, D. Rathlev273, M. Rauch274, E. Re275, M. N. Rebelo276, D. Rebuzzi277, L. Reina278, C. Reuschle279, J. Reuter280, M. Riembau281, F. Riva282, A. Rizzi283, T. Robens284, R. Röntsch285, J. Rojo286, J. C. Romão287, N. Rompotis288, J. Roskes289, R. Roth290, G. P. Salam291, R. Salerno292, R. Santos293, V. Sanz294, J. J. Sanz-Cillero295, H. Sargsyan296, U. Sarica297, P. Schichtel298, J. Schlenk299, T. Schmidt300, C. Schmitt301, M. Schönherr302, U. Schubert303, M. Schulze304, S. Sekula305, M. Sekulla306, E. Shabalina307, H. S. Shao308, J. Shelton309, C. H. Shepherd-Themistocleous310, S. Y. Shim311, F. Siegert312, A. Signer313, J. P. Silva314, L. Silvestrini315, M. Sjodahl316, P. Slavich317, M. Slawinska318, L. Soffi319, M. Spannowsky320, C. Speckner321, D. M. Sperka322, M. Spira323, O. Stål324, F. Staub325, T. Stebel326, T. Stefaniak327, M. Steinhauser328, I. W. Stewart329, M. J. Strassler330, J. Streicher331, D. M. Strom332, S. Su333, X. Sun334, F. J. Tackmann335, K. Tackmann336, A. M. Teixeira337, R. Teixeira de Lima338, V. Theeuwes339, R. Thorne340, D. Tommasini341, P. Torrielli342, M. Tosi343, F. Tramontano344, Z. Trócsányi345, M. Trott346, I. Tsinikos347, M. Ubiali348, P. Vanlaer349, W. Verkerke350, A. Vicini351, L. Viliani352, E. Vryonidou353, D. Wackeroth354, C. E. M. Wagner355, J. Wang356, S. Wayand357, G. Weiglein358, C. Weiss359, M. Wiesemann360, C. Williams361, J. Winter362, D. Winterbottom363, R. Wolf364, M. Xiao365, L. L. Yang366, R. Yohay367, S. P. Y. Yuen368, G. Zanderighi369, M. Zaro370, D. Zeppenfeld371, R. Ziegler372, T. Zirke373, J. Zupan374
Affiliations: 1eds., 2eds., 3eds., 4eds., 5eds., 6eds., 7eds., 8eds., 9eds., 10The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 11The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 12The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 13The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 14The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 15The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 16The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 17The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 18The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 19The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 20The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 21The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 22The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 23The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 24The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 25The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 26The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 27The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 28The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 29The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 30The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 31The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 32The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 33The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 34The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 35The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 36The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 37The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 38The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 39The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 40The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 41The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 42The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 43The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 44The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 45The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 46The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 47The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 48The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 49The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 50The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 51The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 52The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 53The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 54The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 55The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 56The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 57The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 58The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 59The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 60The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 61The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 62The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 63The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 64The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 65The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 66The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 67The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 68The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 69The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 70The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 71The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 72The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 73The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 74The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 75The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 76The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 77The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 78The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 79The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 80The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 81The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 82The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 83The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 84The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 85The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 86The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 87The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 88The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 89The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 90The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 91The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 92The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 93The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 94The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 95The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 96The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 97The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 98The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 99The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 100The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 101The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 102The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 103The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 104The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 105The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 106The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 107The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 108The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 109The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 110The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 111The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 112The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 113The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 114The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 115The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 116The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 117The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 118The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 119The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 120The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 121The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 122The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 123The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 124The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 125The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 126The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 127The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 128The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 129The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 130The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 131The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 132The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 133The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 134The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 135The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 136The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 137The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 138The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 139The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 140The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 141The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 142The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 143The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 144The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 145The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 146The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 147The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 148The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 149The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 150The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 151The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 152The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 153The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 154The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 155The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 156The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 157The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 158The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 159The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 160The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 161The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 162The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 163The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 164The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 165The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 166The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 167The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 168The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 169The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 170The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 171The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 172The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 173The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 174The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 175The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 176The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 177The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 178The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 179The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 180The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 181The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 182The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 183The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 184The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 185The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 186The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 187The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 188The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 189The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 190The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 191The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 192The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 193The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 194The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 195The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 196The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 197The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 198The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 199The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 200The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 201The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 202The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 203The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 204The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 205The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 206The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 207The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 208The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 209The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 210The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 211The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 212The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 213The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 214The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 215The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 216The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 217The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 218The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 219The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 220The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 221The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 222The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 223The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 224The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 225The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 226The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 227The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 228The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 229The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 230The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 231The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 232The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 233The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 234The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 235The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 236The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 237The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 238The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 239The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 240The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 241The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 242The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 243The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 244The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 245The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 246The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 247The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 248The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 249The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 250The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 251The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 252The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 253The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 254The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 255The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 256The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 257The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 258The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 259The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 260The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 261The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 262The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 263The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 264The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 265The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 266The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 267The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 268The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 269The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 270The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 271The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 272The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 273The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 274The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 275The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 276The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 277The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 278The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 279The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 280The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 281The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 282The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 283The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 284The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 285The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 286The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 287The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 288The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 289The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 290The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 291The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 292The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 293The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 294The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 295The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 296The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 297The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 298The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 299The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 300The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 301The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 302The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 303The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 304The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 305The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 306The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 307The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 308The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 309The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 310The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 311The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 312The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 313The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 314The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 315The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 316The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 317The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 318The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 319The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 320The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 321The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 322The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 323The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 324The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 325The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 326The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 327The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 328The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 329The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 330The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 331The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 332The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 333The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 334The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 335The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 336The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 337The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 338The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 339The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 340The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 341The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 342The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 343The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 344The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 345The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 346The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 347The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 348The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 349The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 350The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 351The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 352The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 353The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 354The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 355The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 356The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 357The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 358The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 359The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 360The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 361The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 362The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 363The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 364The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 365The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 366The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 367The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 368The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 369The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 370The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 371The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 372The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 373The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, 374The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group

This Report summarizes the results of the activities of the LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group in the period 2014-2016. The main goal of the working group was to present the state-of-the-art of Higgs physics at the LHC, integrating all new results that have appeared in the last few years. The first part compiles the most up-to-date predictions of Higgs boson production cross sections and decay branching ratios, parton distribution functions, and off-shell Higgs boson production and interference effects. Read More

The rare decay $h \rightarrow \Upsilon \gamma$ has a very small rate in the Standard Model, due to a strong cancellation between the direct and indirect diagrams. Models with a changed $hbb$ coupling can thus lead to a great increase in this decay. Current limits on two Higgs doublet models still allow for the possibility that the $hbb$ coupling might have a sign opposite to the Standard Model; the so-called "wrong-sign". Read More

We review the role of the Higgs boson in preserving unitarity of the scattering amplitudes in the Standard Model (SM). We will look at the processes $\nu_e + \bar{\nu}_e \rightarrow W^-_L +W^+_L $, $ W^-_L + W^+_L \rightarrow W^-_L +W^+_L $ and $e^- + e^+ \rightarrow W^-_L +W^+_L $ for longitudinally polarized gauge bosons. Special emphasis will be put in using algebraic methods to evaluate the amplitudes and cross sections. Read More

Neutrino mass generation through the Higgs mechanism not only suggests the need to reconsider the physics of electroweak symmetry breaking from a new perspective, but also provides a new theoretically consistent and experimentally viable paradigm. We illustrate this by describing the main features of the electroweak symmetry breaking sector of the simplest type-II seesaw model with spontaneous breaking of lepton number. After reviewing the relevant "theoretical" and astrophysical restrictions on the Higgs sector, we perform an analysis of the sensitivities of Higgs boson searches at the ongoing ATLAS and CMS experiments at the LHC, including not only the new contributions to the decay channels present in the Standard Model (SM) but also genuinely non-SM Higgs boson decays, such as "invisible" Higgs boson decays to majorons. Read More

With the discovery of the Higgs boson at the Large Hadron Collider the high energy physics community's attention has now turned to understanding the properties of the Higgs boson, together with the hope of finding more scalars during run 2. In this work we discuss scenarios where using a combination of three decays, involving the 125 GeV Higgs boson, the Z boson and at least one more scalar, an indisputable signal of CP-violation arises. We use a complex two-Higgs doublet model as a reference model and present some benchmark points that have passed all current experimental and theoretical constraints, and that have cross sections large enough to be probed during run 2. Read More

We discuss the CP nature of the Yukawa couplings of the Higgs boson in the framework of a complex two Higgs doublet model (C2HDM). After analysing all data gathered during the Large Hadron Collider run 1, the measurement of the Higgs couplings to the remaining SM particles already restricts the parameter space of many extensions of the SM. However, there is still room for very large CP-odd Yukawa couplings to light quarks and leptons while the top-quark Yukawa coupling is already very constrained by current data. Read More

The discovery of the Higgs boson suggests that also neutrinos get their mass from spontaneous symmetry breaking. In the simplest ungauged lepton number scheme, the Standard Model (SM) Higgs has now two other partners: a massive CP-even, as well as the massless Nambu-Goldstone boson, called majoron. For weak-scale breaking of lepton number the invisible decays of the CP- even Higgs bosons to the majoron lead to potentially copious sources of events with large missing energy. Read More

We start by presenting the current status of a complex flavour conserving two-Higgs doublet model. We will focus on some very interesting scenarios where unexpectedly the light Higgs couplings to leptons and to b-quarks can have a large pseudoscalar component with a vanishing scalar component. Predictions for the allowed parameter space at end of the next run with a total collected luminosity of $300 \, fb^{-1}$ and $3000 \, fb^{-1}$ are also discussed. Read More

The latest LHC data confirmed the existence of a Higgs-like particle and made interesting measurements on its decays into $\gamma \gamma$, $Z Z^\ast$, $W W^\ast$, $\tau^+ \tau^-$, and $b \bar{b}$. It is expected that a decay into $Z \gamma$ might be measured at the next LHC round, for which there already exists an upper bound. The Higgs-like particle could be a mixture of scalar with a relatively large component of pseudoscalar. Read More

It has been pointed out recently that current experiments still allow for a two Higgs doublet model where the $h b \bar{b}$ coupling ($k_D m_b/v$) is negative; a sign opposite to that of the Standard Model. Due to the importance of delayed decoupling in the $h H^+ H^-$ coupling, $h \rightarrow \gamma \gamma$ improved measurements will have a strong impact on this issue. For the same reason, measurements or even bounds on $h \rightarrow Z \gamma$ are potentially interesting. Read More

We discuss several manifestations of charged lepton flavour violation at high energies. Focusing on a supersymmetric type I seesaw, considering constrained and semi-constrained supersymmetry breaking scenarios, we analyse different observables, both at the LHC and at a future Linear Collider. We further discuss how the synergy between low- and high-energy observables can shed some light on the underlying mechanism of lepton flavour violation. Read More

We construct a comprehensive list of non-supersymmetric standard model extensions with a low-scale LR-symmetric intermediate stage that may be obtained as simple low-energy effective theories within a class of renormalizable $SO(10)$ GUTs. Unlike the traditional "minimal" LR models many of our example settings support a perfect gauge coupling unification even if the LR scale is in the LHC domain at a price of only (a few copies of) one or two types of extra fields pulled down to the TeV-scale ballpark. We discuss the main aspects of a potentially realistic model building conforming the basic constraints from the quark and lepton sector flavour structure, proton decay limits, etc. Read More

We suggest a minimal extension of the simplest A4 flavour model that can induce a nonzero theta13 value, as required by recent neutrino oscillation data from reactors and accelerators. The predicted correlation between the atmospheric mixing angle theta23 and the magnitude of theta13 leads to an allowed region substantially smaller than indicated by neutrino oscillation global fits. Moreover, the scheme correlates CP violation in neutrino oscillations with the octant of the atmospheric mixing parameter theta23 in such a way that, for example, maximal mixing necessarily violates CP. Read More

We study the potential of an e+- e- Linear Collider for charged lepton flavour violation studies in a supersymmetric framework where neutrino masses and mixings are explained by a type-I seesaw. Focusing on e-mu flavour transitions, we evaluate the background from standard model and supersymmetric charged currents to the e mu + missing E_T signal. We study the energy dependence of both signal and background, and the effect of beam polarisation in increasing the signal over background significance. Read More

We construct lists of supersymmetric models with extended gauge groups at intermediate steps, all of which are based on SO(10) unification. We consider three different kinds of setups: (i) The model has exactly one additional intermediate scale with a left-right (LR) symmetric group; (ii) SO(10) is broken to the LR group via an intermediate Pati-Salam (PS) scale; and (iii) the LR group is broken into $SU(3)_{c} \times SU(2)_{L} \times U(1)_{R} \times U(1)_{B-L}$, before breaking to the SM group. We use sets of conditions, which we call the "sliding mechanism", which yield unification with the extended gauge group(s) allowed at arbitrary intermediate energy scales. Read More

When performing a full calculation within the Standard Model or its extensions, it is crucial that one utilizes a consistent set of signs for the gauge couplings and gauge fields. Unfortunately, the literature is plagued with differing signs and notations. We present all Standard Model Feynman rules, including ghosts, in a convention-independent notation, and we table the conventions in close to 40 books and reviews. Read More

We revisit the potential of a Linear Collider concerning the study of lepton flavour violation, in view of new LHC bounds and of the (very) recent developments in lepton physics. Working in the framework of a type I supersymmetric seesaw, we evaluate the prospects of observing seesaw-induced lepton flavour violating final states of the type e \mu + missing energy, arising from e+ e- and e- e- collisions. In both cases we address the potential background from standard model and supersymmetric charged currents. Read More

It has been pointed out that supersymmetric extensions of the Standard Model can induce significant changes to the theoretical prediction of the ratio $\Gamma(K\rightarrow e\nu)/\Gamma (K\rightarrow\mu\nu)\equiv R_{K}$, through lepton flavour violating couplings. In this work we carry out a full computation of all one-loop corrections to the relevant $\nu\ell H^{+}$ vertex, and discuss the new contributions to $R_{K}$ arising in the context of different constrained (minimal supergravity inspired) models which succeed in accounting for neutrino data, further considering the possibility of accommodating a near future observation of a $\mu\to e\gamma$ transition. We also re-evaluate the prospects for $R_{K}$ in the framework of unconstrained supersymmetric models. Read More

Left-right symmetric extensions of the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model can explain neutrino data and have potentially interesting phenomenology beyond that found in minimal SUSY seesaw models. Here we study a SUSY model in which the left-right symmetry is broken by triplets at a high scale, but significantly below the GUT scale. Sparticle spectra in this model differ from the usual constrained MSSM expectations and these changes affect the relic abundance of the lightest neutralino. Read More

We review Lepton Flavour Violation (LFV) in the supersymmetric version of the seesaw mechanism (type I, II, III) and in Left-Right models. The LFV needed to explain neutrino masses and mixings is the only source of LFV and has experimental implications both in low-energy experiments where we search for the radiative decays of leptons, and at the LHC where we look at its imprint on the LFV decays of the sparticles and on slepton mass splittings. We discuss how this confrontation between high- and low-energy LFV observables may provide information about the underlying mechanism of LFV. Read More

We consider a supersymmetric type III seesaw, where the additional heavy states are embedded into complete SU(5) representations to preserve gauge coupling unification. Complying with phenomenological and experimental constraints strongly tightens the viable parameter space of the model. In particular, one expects very characteristic signals of lepton flavour violation both at low-energies and at the LHC, which offer the possibility of falsifying the model. Read More

We study the impact of a type-I SUSY seesaw concerning lepton flavour violation (LFV) at low-energies and at the LHC. At the LHC, $ \chi_2^0\to \tilde \ell \,\ell \to \ell \,\ell\,\chi_1^0$ decays, in combination with other observables, render feasible the reconstruction of the masses of the intermediate sleptons, and hence the study of $\ell_i - \ell_j$ mass differences. If interpreted as being due to the violation of lepton flavour, high-energy observables, such as large slepton mass splittings and flavour violating neutralino and slepton decays, are expected to be accompanied by low-energy manifestations of LFV such as radiative and three-body lepton decays. Read More

We study the phenomenology of a supersymmetric left-right model, assuming minimal supergravity boundary conditions. Both left-right and (B-L) symmetries are broken at an energy scale close to, but significantly below the GUT scale. Neutrino data is explained via a seesaw mechanism. Read More

We study a supersymmetric version of the seesaw mechanism type-III. The model consists of the MSSM particle content plus three copies of 24 superfields. The fermionic part of the SU(2) triplet contained in the 24 is responsible for the type-III seesaw, which is used to explain the observed neutrino masses and mixings. Read More

We study the impact of a type-I SUSY seesaw concerning lepton flavour violation (LFV) both at low-energies and at the LHC. The study of the di-lepton invariant mass distribution at the LHC allows to reconstruct some of the masses of the different sparticles involved in a decay chain. In particular, the combination with other observables renders feasible the reconstruction of the masses of the intermediate sleptons involved in $ \chi_2^0\to \tilde \ell \,\ell \to \ell \,\ell\,\chi_1^0$ decays. Read More

We propose an A_4 flavor-symmetric SU(3)xSU(2)xU(1) seesaw model where lepton number is broken spontaneously. A consistent two-zero texture pattern of neutrino masses and mixing emerges from the interplay of type-I and type-II seesaw contributions, with important phenomenological predictions. We show that, if the Majoron becomes massive, such seesaw scenario provides a viable candidate for decaying dark matter, consistent with cosmic microwave background lifetime constraints that follow from current WMAP observations. Read More

The Large Hadron Collider presents an unprecedented opportunity to probe the realm of new physics in the TeV region and shed light on some of the core unresolved issues of particle physics. These include the nature of electroweak symmetry breaking, the origin of mass, the possible constituent of cold dark matter, new sources of CP violation needed to explain the baryon excess in the universe, the possible existence of extra gauge groups and extra matter, and importantly the path Nature chooses to resolve the hierarchy problem - is it supersymmetry or extra dimensions. Many models of new physics beyond the standard model contain a hidden sector which can be probed at the LHC. Read More

We study neutrino masses in the framework of the supersymmetric inverse seesaw model. Different from the non-supersymmetric version a minimal realization with just one pair of singlets is sufficient to explain all neutrino data. We compute the neutrino mass matrix up to 1-loop order and show how neutrino data can be described in terms of the model parameters. Read More

We calculate the relic density of the lightest neutralino in a supersymmetric seesaw type-II (``triplet seesaw'') model with minimal supergravity boundary conditions at the GUT scale. The presence of a triplet below the GUT scale, required to explain measured neutrino data in this setup, leads to a characteristic deformation of the sparticle spectrum with respect to the pure mSugra expectations, affecting the calculated relic dark matter (DM) density. We discuss how the DM allowed regions in the (m_0,M_{1/2}) plane change as a function of the (type-II) seesaw scale. Read More

We reconsider the role that the possible detection of lepton flavour violating (LFV) decays of supersymmetric particles at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) can play in helping reconstruct the underlying neutrino mass generation mechanism within the simplest high-scale minimal supergravity (mSUGRA) seesaw schemes. We study in detail the LFV scalar tau decays at the LHC, assuming that the observed neutrino masses arise either through the pure type-I or the simpler type-II seesaw mechanism. We perform a scan over the mSUGRA parameter space in order to identify regions where lepton flavour violating decays of $\chi^0_2$ can be maximized, while respecting current low-energy constraints, such as those coming from the bounds on Br($\mu \to e \gamma$). Read More

2008Jun
Affiliations: 1Turin U. & INFN, Turin, 2Valencia U., IFIC, 3Turin U. & INFN, Turin, 4Lisbon, IST & Lisbon, CFTP, 5Valencia U., IFIC

We show that within the inverse seesaw mechanism for generating neutrino masses minimal supergravity is more likely to have a sneutrino as the lightest superparticle than the conventional neutralino. We also demonstrate that such schemes naturally reconcile the small neutrino masses with the correct relic sneutrino dark matter abundance and accessible direct detection rates in nuclear recoil experiments. Read More

The most general supersymmetric seesaw mechanism has too many parameters to be predictive and thus can not be excluded by any measurements of lepton flavour violating (LFV) processes. We focus on the simplest version of the type-I seesaw mechanism assuming minimal supergravity boundary conditions. We compute branching ratios for the LFV scalar tau decays, ${\tilde \tau}_2 \to (e,\mu) + \chi^0_1$, as well as loop-induced LFV decays at low energy, such as $l_i \to l_j + \gamma$ and $l_i \to 3 l_j$, exploring their sensitivity to the unknown seesaw parameters. Read More

We review models for neutrino mass, with special emphasis in supersymmetric models where R-parity is broken either explicitly or spontaneously. The simplest unified extension of the MSSM with explicit bilinear R-parity violation provides a predictive scheme for neutrino masses and mixings which can account for the observed atmospheric and solar neutrino anomalies. Despite the smallness of neutrino masses R-parity violation is observable at present and future high-energy colliders, providing an unambiguous cross-check of the model. Read More

Current neutrino oscillation data indicate the existence of two large lepton mixing angles, while Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix elements are all small. Here we show how supersymmetric SO(10) with extra chiral singlets can easily reconcile large lepton mixing angles with small quark mixing angles within the framework of the successful Fritzsch ansatz. Moreover we show how this is fully consistent with the thermal leptogenesis scenario, avoiding the so-called gravitino problem. Read More

We consider an extended supersymmetric SO(10) seesaw model with only doublet Higgs scalars, in which neutrino masses are suppressed by the scale of D-parity violation. Leptogenesis can occur at the TeV scale through the decay of a singlet Sigma, thereby avoiding the gravitino crisis. Washout of the asymmetry can be effectively suppressed by the absence of direct couplings of Sigma to leptons. Read More

We study the stability of the Harrison-Perkins-Scott (HPS) mixing pattern, assumed to hold at some high energy scale, against supersymmetric radiative corrections. We work in the framework of a reference minimal supergravity model (mSUGRA) where supersymmetry breaking is universal and flavor-blind at unification. The radiative corrections considered include both RGE running as well as threshold effects. Read More

It is pointed out that the recent measurement of the angle $\gamma$ of the unitarity triangle, providing irrefutable evidence for a complex Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa (CKM) matrix, presents a great challenge for supersymmetric models with spontaneous CP violation. We construct a new minimal extension of the minimal supersymmetric standard model (MSSM), with spontaneous CP breaking, which leads to a complex CKM matrix, thus conforming to present experimental data. This is achieved through the introduction of two singlet chiral superfields and a vector-like quark chiral superfield which mixes with the standard quarks. Read More

We study the mass spectra, production and decay properties of the lightest supersymmetric CP-even and CP-odd Higgs bosons in models with spontaneously broken R-parity (SBRP). We compare the resulting mass spectra with expectations of the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM), stressing that the model obeys the upper bound on the lightest CP-even Higgs boson mass. We discuss how the presence of the additional scalar singlet states affects the Higgs production cross sections, both for the Bjorken process and the "associated production". Read More

We review supersymmetric models where R-parity is broken either explicitly or spontaneously. The simplest unified extension of the MSSM with explicit bilinear R--Parity violation provides a predictive scheme for neutrino masses and mixings which can account for the observed atmospheric and solar neutrino anomalies. Despite the smallness of neutrino masses R-parity violation is observable at present and future high-energy colliders, providing an unambiguous cross-check of the model. Read More

Leptoquarks arise naturally in models attempting the unification of the quark and lepton sectors of the standard model of particle physics. Such particles could be produced in the interaction of high energy quasi-horizontal cosmic neutrinos with the atmosphere, via their direct coupling to a quark and a neutrino. The hadronic decay products of the leptoquark, and possibly its leptonic decay products would originate an extensive air shower, observable in large cosmic ray experiments. Read More

Searches for physics beyond the Standard Model of particle physics are performed at accelerators worldwide. Although having poorer detection capabilities and large beam uncertainties, ultra high energy cosmic ray (UHECR) experiments present a unique opportunity to look for new physics far beyond the TeV. Nearly horizontal energetic neutrinos, seeing a large atmospheric target volume and with negligible background from "ordinary" cosmic rays, are ideal to explore rare processes. Read More

We propose a new seesaw mechanism for neutrino masses within a class of supersymmetric SO(10) models with broken D-parity. It is shown that in such scenarios the B-L scale can be as low as TeV without generating inconsistencies with gauge coupling unification nor with the required magnitude of the light neutrino masses. This leads to a possibly light new neutral gauge boson as well as relatively light quasi-Dirac heavy leptons. Read More

In models with substructure in the fermionic sector, excited fermion states are expected. Excited leptons could be produced in the interaction of high energy quasi-horizontal cosmic neutrinos with the atmosphere via neutral and charged current processes, $\nu N \to \nu^* X$ and $\nu N \to \ell^* X$. The hadronic component X, and possibly part of the excited lepton decay products, would originate an extensive air shower, observable in large cosmic ray experiments. Read More

We reconsider the possible presence of charge and colour breaking minima in the scalar potential of the minimal supersymmetric standard model (MSSM) and its minimal generalization with R-parity explicitly broken by bilinear terms (RMSSM). First we generalize some results previously derived for the MSSM case. Next we investigate how robust is the MSSM against its RMSSM extension. Read More

The Higgs boson may decay mainly to an invisible mode characterized by missing energy, instead of the Standard Model channels. This is a generic feature of many models where neutrino masses arise from the spontaneous breaking of ungauged lepton number at relatively low scales, such as spontaneously broken R-parity models. Taking these models as framework, we reanalyze this striking suggestion in view of the recent data on neutrino oscillations that indicate non-zero neutrino masses. Read More

Recently Babu, Ma and Valle proposed a model of quark and lepton mixing based on $A_4$ symmetry. Within this model the lepton and slepton mixings are intimately related. We perform a numerical study in order to derive the slepton masses and mixings in agreement with present data from neutrino physics. Read More

We investigate the supersymmetric A_4 model recently proposed by Babu, Ma and Valle. The model naturally gives quasi-degenerate neutrinos that are bi-largely mixed, in agreement with observations. Furthermore, the mixings in the quark sector are constrained to be small, making it a complete model of the flavor structure. Read More

The simplest unified extension of the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model with bilinear R--Parity violation provides a predictive scheme for neutrino masses which can account for the observed atmospheric and solar neutrino parameters. Despite the smallness of neutrino masses R-parity violation is observable at present and future high-energy colliders, providing an unambiguous cross-check of the model. Read More

We study the possibilities of spontaneous CP violation in the Next-to-Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model with an extra singlet tadpole term in the scalar potential. We calculate the Higgs boson masses and couplings with radiative corrections including dominant two loop terms. We show that it is possible to satisfy the LEP constraints on the Higgs boson spectrum with non-trivial spontaneous CP violating phases. Read More