# L. Merlo

## Publications Authored By L. Merlo

A Higgs-like dilaton owns couplings that differ from those of the Standard Model Higgs and of a generic Composite Higgs. The complete bosonic basis for a Higgs-like dilaton is presented at the first subleading order. The comparison with Standard Model, SMEFT and with the generic Lagrangian for the minimal $SO(5)/SO(4)$ Composite Higgs model is performed. Read More

We study the leading effective interactions between the Standard Model fields and a generic singlet CP-odd (pseudo)Goldstone boson. Two possible frameworks for electroweak symmetry breaking are considered: linear and non-linear. For the latter case, the basis of leading effective operators is determined and compared with that for the linear expansion. Read More

The basis of leading operators which are not invariant under baryon number is constructed within the Higgs Effective Field Theory. This list contains 12 dimension six operators, which preserve the combination B-L, to be compared to only 6 operators for the Standard Model Effective Field Theory. The discussion on the independent flavour contractions is presented in detail for a generic number of fermion families adopting the Hilbert series technique. Read More

**Authors:**D. de Florian

^{1}, C. Grojean

^{2}, F. Maltoni

^{3}, C. Mariotti

^{4}, A. Nikitenko

^{5}, M. Pieri

^{6}, P. Savard

^{7}, M. Schumacher

^{8}, R. Tanaka

^{9}, R. Aggleton

^{10}, M. Ahmad

^{11}, B. Allanach

^{12}, C. Anastasiou

^{13}, W. Astill

^{14}, S. Badger

^{15}, M. Badziak

^{16}, J. Baglio

^{17}, E. Bagnaschi

^{18}, A. Ballestrero

^{19}, A. Banfi

^{20}, D. Barducci

^{21}, M. Beckingham

^{22}, C. Becot

^{23}, G. Bélanger

^{24}, J. Bellm

^{25}, N. Belyaev

^{26}, F. U. Bernlochner

^{27}, C. Beskidt

^{28}, A. Biekötter

^{29}, F. Bishara

^{30}, W. Bizon

^{31}, N. E. Bomark

^{32}, M. Bonvini

^{33}, S. Borowka

^{34}, V. Bortolotto

^{35}, S. Boselli

^{36}, F. J. Botella

^{37}, R. Boughezal

^{38}, G. C. Branco

^{39}, J. Brehmer

^{40}, L. Brenner

^{41}, S. Bressler

^{42}, I. Brivio

^{43}, A. Broggio

^{44}, H. Brun

^{45}, G. Buchalla

^{46}, C. D. Burgard

^{47}, A. Calandri

^{48}, L. Caminada

^{49}, R. Caminal Armadans

^{50}, F. Campanario

^{51}, J. Campbell

^{52}, F. Caola

^{53}, C. M. Carloni Calame

^{54}, S. Carrazza

^{55}, A. Carvalho

^{56}, M. Casolino

^{57}, O. Cata

^{58}, A. Celis

^{59}, F. Cerutti

^{60}, N. Chanon

^{61}, M. Chen

^{62}, X. Chen

^{63}, B. Chokoufé Nejad

^{64}, N. Christensen

^{65}, M. Ciuchini

^{66}, R. Contino

^{67}, T. Corbett

^{68}, D. Curtin

^{69}, M. Dall'Osso

^{70}, A. David

^{71}, S. Dawson

^{72}, J. de Blas

^{73}, W. de Boer

^{74}, P. de Castro Manzano

^{75}, C. Degrande

^{76}, R. L. Delgado

^{77}, F. Demartin

^{78}, A. Denner

^{79}, B. Di Micco

^{80}, R. Di Nardo

^{81}, S. Dittmaier

^{82}, A. Dobado

^{83}, T. Dorigo

^{84}, F. A. Dreyer

^{85}, M. Dührssen

^{86}, C. Duhr

^{87}, F. Dulat

^{88}, K. Ecker

^{89}, K. Ellis

^{90}, U. Ellwanger

^{91}, C. Englert

^{92}, D. Espriu

^{93}, A. Falkowski

^{94}, L. Fayard

^{95}, R. Feger

^{96}, G. Ferrera

^{97}, A. Ferroglia

^{98}, N. Fidanza

^{99}, T. Figy

^{100}, M. Flechl

^{101}, D. Fontes

^{102}, S. Forte

^{103}, P. Francavilla

^{104}, E. Franco

^{105}, R. Frederix

^{106}, A. Freitas

^{107}, F. F. Freitas

^{108}, F. Frensch

^{109}, S. Frixione

^{110}, B. Fuks

^{111}, E. Furlan

^{112}, S. Gadatsch

^{113}, J. Gao

^{114}, Y. Gao

^{115}, M. V. Garzelli

^{116}, T. Gehrmann

^{117}, R. Gerosa

^{118}, M. Ghezzi

^{119}, D. Ghosh

^{120}, S. Gieseke

^{121}, D. Gillberg

^{122}, G. F. Giudice

^{123}, E. W. N. Glover

^{124}, F. Goertz

^{125}, D. Gonçalves

^{126}, J. Gonzalez-Fraile

^{127}, M. Gorbahn

^{128}, S. Gori

^{129}, C. A. Gottardo

^{130}, M. Gouzevitch

^{131}, P. Govoni

^{132}, D. Gray

^{133}, M. Grazzini

^{134}, N. Greiner

^{135}, A. Greljo

^{136}, J. Grigo

^{137}, A. V. Gritsan

^{138}, R. Gröber

^{139}, S. Guindon

^{140}, H. E. Haber

^{141}, C. Han

^{142}, T. Han

^{143}, R. Harlander

^{144}, M. A. Harrendorf

^{145}, H. B. Hartanto

^{146}, C. Hays

^{147}, S. Heinemeyer

^{148}, G. Heinrich

^{149}, M. Herrero

^{150}, F. Herzog

^{151}, B. Hespel

^{152}, V. Hirschi

^{153}, S. Hoeche

^{154}, S. Honeywell

^{155}, S. J. Huber

^{156}, C. Hugonie

^{157}, J. Huston

^{158}, A. Ilnicka

^{159}, G. Isidori

^{160}, B. Jäger

^{161}, M. Jaquier

^{162}, S. P. Jones

^{163}, A. Juste

^{164}, S. Kallweit

^{165}, A. Kaluza

^{166}, A. Kardos

^{167}, A. Karlberg

^{168}, Z. Kassabov

^{169}, N. Kauer

^{170}, D. I. Kazakov

^{171}, M. Kerner

^{172}, W. Kilian

^{173}, F. Kling

^{174}, K. Köneke

^{175}, R. Kogler

^{176}, R. Konoplich

^{177}, S. Kortner

^{178}, S. Kraml

^{179}, C. Krause

^{180}, F. Krauss

^{181}, M. Krawczyk

^{182}, A. Kulesza

^{183}, S. Kuttimalai

^{184}, R. Lane

^{185}, A. Lazopoulos

^{186}, G. Lee

^{187}, P. Lenzi

^{188}, I. M. Lewis

^{189}, Y. Li

^{190}, S. Liebler

^{191}, J. Lindert

^{192}, X. Liu

^{193}, Z. Liu

^{194}, F. J. Llanes-Estrada

^{195}, H. E. Logan

^{196}, D. Lopez-Val

^{197}, I. Low

^{198}, G. Luisoni

^{199}, P. Maierhöfer

^{200}, E. Maina

^{201}, B. Mansoulié

^{202}, H. Mantler

^{203}, M. Mantoani

^{204}, A. C. Marini

^{205}, V. I. Martinez Outschoorn

^{206}, S. Marzani

^{207}, D. Marzocca

^{208}, A. Massironi

^{209}, K. Mawatari

^{210}, J. Mazzitelli

^{211}, A. McCarn

^{212}, B. Mellado

^{213}, K. Melnikov

^{214}, S. B. Menari

^{215}, L. Merlo

^{216}, C. Meyer

^{217}, P. Milenovic

^{218}, K. Mimasu

^{219}, S. Mishima

^{220}, B. Mistlberger

^{221}, S. -O. Moch

^{222}, A. Mohammadi

^{223}, P. F. Monni

^{224}, G. Montagna

^{225}, M. Moreno Llácer

^{226}, N. Moretti

^{227}, S. Moretti

^{228}, L. Motyka

^{229}, A. Mück

^{230}, M. Mühlleitner

^{231}, S. Munir

^{232}, P. Musella

^{233}, P. Nadolsky

^{234}, D. Napoletano

^{235}, M. Nebot

^{236}, C. Neu

^{237}, M. Neubert

^{238}, R. Nevzorov

^{239}, O. Nicrosini

^{240}, J. Nielsen

^{241}, K. Nikolopoulos

^{242}, J. M. No

^{243}, C. O'Brien

^{244}, T. Ohl

^{245}, C. Oleari

^{246}, T. Orimoto

^{247}, D. Pagani

^{248}, C. E. Pandini

^{249}, A. Papaefstathiou

^{250}, A. S. Papanastasiou

^{251}, G. Passarino

^{252}, B. D. Pecjak

^{253}, M. Pelliccioni

^{254}, G. Perez

^{255}, L. Perrozzi

^{256}, F. Petriello

^{257}, G. Petrucciani

^{258}, E. Pianori

^{259}, F. Piccinini

^{260}, M. Pierini

^{261}, A. Pilkington

^{262}, S. Plätzer

^{263}, T. Plehn

^{264}, R. Podskubka

^{265}, C. T. Potter

^{266}, S. Pozzorini

^{267}, K. Prokofiev

^{268}, A. Pukhov

^{269}, I. Puljak

^{270}, M. Queitsch-Maitland

^{271}, J. Quevillon

^{272}, D. Rathlev

^{273}, M. Rauch

^{274}, E. Re

^{275}, M. N. Rebelo

^{276}, D. Rebuzzi

^{277}, L. Reina

^{278}, C. Reuschle

^{279}, J. Reuter

^{280}, M. Riembau

^{281}, F. Riva

^{282}, A. Rizzi

^{283}, T. Robens

^{284}, R. Röntsch

^{285}, J. Rojo

^{286}, J. C. Romão

^{287}, N. Rompotis

^{288}, J. Roskes

^{289}, R. Roth

^{290}, G. P. Salam

^{291}, R. Salerno

^{292}, R. Santos

^{293}, V. Sanz

^{294}, J. J. Sanz-Cillero

^{295}, H. Sargsyan

^{296}, U. Sarica

^{297}, P. Schichtel

^{298}, J. Schlenk

^{299}, T. Schmidt

^{300}, C. Schmitt

^{301}, M. Schönherr

^{302}, U. Schubert

^{303}, M. Schulze

^{304}, S. Sekula

^{305}, M. Sekulla

^{306}, E. Shabalina

^{307}, H. S. Shao

^{308}, J. Shelton

^{309}, C. H. Shepherd-Themistocleous

^{310}, S. Y. Shim

^{311}, F. Siegert

^{312}, A. Signer

^{313}, J. P. Silva

^{314}, L. Silvestrini

^{315}, M. Sjodahl

^{316}, P. Slavich

^{317}, M. Slawinska

^{318}, L. Soffi

^{319}, M. Spannowsky

^{320}, C. Speckner

^{321}, D. M. Sperka

^{322}, M. Spira

^{323}, O. Stål

^{324}, F. Staub

^{325}, T. Stebel

^{326}, T. Stefaniak

^{327}, M. Steinhauser

^{328}, I. W. Stewart

^{329}, M. J. Strassler

^{330}, J. Streicher

^{331}, D. M. Strom

^{332}, S. Su

^{333}, X. Sun

^{334}, F. J. Tackmann

^{335}, K. Tackmann

^{336}, A. M. Teixeira

^{337}, R. Teixeira de Lima

^{338}, V. Theeuwes

^{339}, R. Thorne

^{340}, D. Tommasini

^{341}, P. Torrielli

^{342}, M. Tosi

^{343}, F. Tramontano

^{344}, Z. Trócsányi

^{345}, M. Trott

^{346}, I. Tsinikos

^{347}, M. Ubiali

^{348}, P. Vanlaer

^{349}, W. Verkerke

^{350}, A. Vicini

^{351}, L. Viliani

^{352}, E. Vryonidou

^{353}, D. Wackeroth

^{354}, C. E. M. Wagner

^{355}, J. Wang

^{356}, S. Wayand

^{357}, G. Weiglein

^{358}, C. Weiss

^{359}, M. Wiesemann

^{360}, C. Williams

^{361}, J. Winter

^{362}, D. Winterbottom

^{363}, R. Wolf

^{364}, M. Xiao

^{365}, L. L. Yang

^{366}, R. Yohay

^{367}, S. P. Y. Yuen

^{368}, G. Zanderighi

^{369}, M. Zaro

^{370}, D. Zeppenfeld

^{371}, R. Ziegler

^{372}, T. Zirke

^{373}, J. Zupan

^{374}

**Affiliations:**

^{1}eds.,

^{2}eds.,

^{3}eds.,

^{4}eds.,

^{5}eds.,

^{6}eds.,

^{7}eds.,

^{8}eds.,

^{9}eds.,

^{10}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{11}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{12}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{13}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{14}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{15}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{16}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{17}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{18}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{19}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{20}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{21}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{22}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{23}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{24}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{25}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{26}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{27}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{28}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{29}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{30}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{31}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{32}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{33}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{34}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{35}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{36}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{37}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{38}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{39}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{40}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{41}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{42}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{43}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{44}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{45}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{46}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{47}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{48}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{49}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{50}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{51}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{52}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{53}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{54}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{55}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{56}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{57}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{58}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{59}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{60}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{61}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{62}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{63}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{64}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{65}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{66}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{67}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{68}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{69}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{70}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{71}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{72}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{73}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{74}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{75}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{76}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{77}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{78}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{79}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{80}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{81}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{82}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{83}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{84}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{85}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{86}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{87}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{88}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{89}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{90}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{91}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{92}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{93}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{94}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{95}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{96}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{97}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{98}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{99}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{100}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{101}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{102}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{103}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{104}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{105}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{106}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{107}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{108}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{109}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{110}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{111}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{112}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{113}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{114}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{115}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{116}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{117}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{118}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{119}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{120}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{121}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{122}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{123}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{124}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{125}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{126}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{127}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{128}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{129}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{130}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{131}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{132}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{133}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{134}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{135}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{136}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{137}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{138}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{139}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{140}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{141}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{142}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{143}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{144}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{145}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{146}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{147}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{148}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{149}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{150}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{151}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{152}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{153}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{154}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{155}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{156}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{157}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{158}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{159}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{160}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{161}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{162}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{163}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{164}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{165}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{166}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{167}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{168}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{169}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{170}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{171}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{172}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{173}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{174}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{175}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{176}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{177}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{178}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{179}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{180}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{181}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{182}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{183}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{184}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{185}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{186}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{187}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{188}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{189}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{190}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{191}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{192}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{193}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{194}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{195}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{196}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{197}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{198}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{199}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{200}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{201}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{202}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{203}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{204}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{205}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{206}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{207}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{208}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{209}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{210}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{211}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{212}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{213}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{214}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{215}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{216}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{217}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{218}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{219}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{220}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{221}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{222}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{223}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{224}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{225}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{226}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{227}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{228}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{229}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{230}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{231}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{232}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{233}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{234}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{235}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{236}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{237}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{238}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{239}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{240}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{241}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{242}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{243}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{244}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{245}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{246}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{247}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{248}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{249}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{250}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{251}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{252}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{253}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{254}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{255}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{256}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{257}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{258}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{259}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{260}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{261}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{262}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{263}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{264}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{265}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{266}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{267}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{268}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{269}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{270}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{271}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{272}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{273}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{274}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{275}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{276}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{277}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{278}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{279}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{280}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{281}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{282}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{283}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{284}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{285}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{286}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{287}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{288}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{289}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{290}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{291}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{292}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{293}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{294}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{295}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{296}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{297}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{298}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{299}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{300}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{301}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{302}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{303}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{304}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{305}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{306}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{307}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{308}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{309}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{310}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{311}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{312}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{313}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{314}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{315}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{316}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{317}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{318}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{319}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{320}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{321}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{322}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{323}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{324}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{325}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{326}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{327}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{328}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{329}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{330}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{331}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{332}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{333}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{334}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{335}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{336}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{337}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{338}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{339}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{340}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{341}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{342}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{343}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{344}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{345}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{346}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{347}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{348}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{349}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{350}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{351}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{352}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{353}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{354}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{355}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{356}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{357}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{358}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{359}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{360}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{361}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{362}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{363}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{364}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{365}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{366}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{367}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{368}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{369}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{370}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{371}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{372}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{373}The LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group,

^{374}The 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 gauging of the lepton flavour group is considered in the Standard Model context and in its extension with three right-handed neutrinos. The anomaly cancellation conditions lead to a Seesaw mechanism as underlying dynamics for all leptons; requiring in addition a phenomenologically viable setup leads to Majorana masses for the neutral sector: the type I Seesaw Lagrangian in the Standard Model case and the inverse Seesaw in the extended model. Within the minimal extension of the scalar sector, the Yukawa couplings are promoted to scalar fields in the bifundamental of the flavour group. Read More

The complete effective chiral Lagrangian for a dynamical Higgs is presented and constrained by means of a global analysis including electroweak precision data together with Higgs and triple gauge boson coupling data from the LHC Run~I. The operators' basis up to next-to-leading order in the expansion consists of 148 (188 considering right-handed neutrinos) flavour universal terms and it is presented here making explicit the custodial nature of the operators. This effective Lagrangian provides the most general description of the physical Higgs couplings once the electroweak symmetry is assumed, and it allows for deviations from the $SU(2)_L$ doublet nature of the Standard Model Higgs. Read More

We derive the general counting rules for a quantum effective field theory (EFT) in $\mathsf{d}$ dimensions. The rules are valid for strongly and weakly coupled theories, and predict that all kinetic energy terms are canonically normalized. They determine the energy dependence of scattering cross sections in the range of validity of the EFT expansion. Read More

The Higgs portal to scalar Dark Matter is considered in the context of non-linearly realised electroweak symmetry breaking. We determine the dominant interactions of gauge bosons and the physical Higgs particle $h$ to a scalar singlet dark matter candidate. Phenomenological consequences are also studied in detail, including the possibility of distinguishing this scenario from the standard Higgs portal in which the electroweak symmetry breaking is linearly realised. Read More

In Alonso et al., JHEP 12 (2014) 034, the CP-even sector of the effective chiral Lagrangian for a generic composite Higgs model with a symmetric coset has been constructed, up to four momenta. In this paper, the CP-odd couplings are studied within the same context. Read More

Flavour symmetries are fundamental tools in the search for an explanation to the flavour puzzle: fermion mass hierarchies, the neutrino mass ordering, the differences between the mixing matrices in the quark and lepton sector, can all find an explanation in models where the fermion generations undergo specific geometric relations. An overview on the implementation of continuous symmetries in the flavour sector is presented here, focussing on the lepton sector. Read More

Flavour symmetries are fundamental tools in the search for an explanation to the flavour puzzle: fermion mass hierarchies, the neutrino mass ordering, the differences between the mixing matrices in the quark and lepton sector, can all find an explanation in models where the fermion generations undergo specific geometric relations. An overview on the implementation of continuous symmetries in the flavour sector is presented here, focussing on the lepton sector. Read More

In composite Higgs models the Higgs is a pseudo-Goldstone boson of a high-energy strong dynamics. We have constructed the effective chiral Lagrangian for a generic symmetric coset, restricting to CP-even bosonic operators up to four momenta which turn out to depend on seven parameters, aside from kinetic terms. Once the same sources of custodial symmetry breaking as in the Standard Model are considered, the total number of operators in the basis increases up to ten, again aside from kinetic terms. Read More

We determine the complete set of independent gauge and gauge-Higgs CP-odd effective operators for the generic case of a dynamical Higgs, up to four derivatives in the chiral expansion. The relation with the linear basis of dimension six CP-odd operators is clarified. Phenomenological applications include bounds inferred from electric dipole moment limits, and from present and future collider data on triple gauge coupling measurements and Higgs signals. Read More

We analyze the leading effective operators which induce a quartic momentum dependence in the Higgs propagator, for a linear and for a non-linear realization of electroweak symmetry breaking. Their specific study is relevant for the understanding of the ultraviolet sensitivity to new physics. Two methods of analysis are applied, trading the Lagrangian coupling by: i) a "ghost" scalar, after the Lee-Wick procedure; ii) other effective operators via the equations of motion. Read More

Whether the anarchical ansatz or more symmetric structures best describe the neutrino parameters is a long standing question that underwent a revival of interest after the discovery of a non- vanishing reactor angle and the indication of a non-maximal atmospheric angle. In this letter, a Bayesian statistical approach is adopted in order to analyse and compare the two hypotheses within the context of U(1) flavour models. We study the constraints on individual model parameters and perform model comparison: the results elect constructions with built-in hierarchies among the matrix elements as preferred over the anarchical ones, with values of the evidence that depends slightly on whether the U(1) charges are also considered as free parameters or not, and on the priors used. Read More

Flavour physics is a priceless window on physics beyond the Standard Model. In particular, flavour violation in the lepton sector looks very promising, as high precision measurements are prospected in future experiments investigating on $\mu\rightarrow e$ conversion in atomic nuclei: the predictions for this observable are analysed in the context of the type I Seesaw mechanism. Furthermore, new ideas to explain the Flavour Puzzle recently appeared, mainly based on a possible dynamical origin of the Yukawa couplings and on flavour symmetries. Read More

The pattern of deviations from Standard Model predictions and couplings is different for theories of new physics based on a non-linear realization of the $SU(2)_L\times U(1)_Y$ gauge symmetry breaking and those assuming a linear realization. We clarify this issue in a model-independent way via its effective Lagrangian formulation in the presence of a light Higgs particle, up to first order in the expansions: dimension-six operators for the linear expansion and four derivatives for the non-linear one. Complete sets of pure gauge and gauge-Higgs operators are considered, implementing the renormalization procedure and deriving the Feynman rules for the non-linear expansion. Read More

A dynamical origin of the Yukawa couplings is a promising scenario to explain the flavour puzzle. The focus of this letter is set on the role of the neutrino Majorana character: when an $O(2)_{N_R}$ flavour symmetry acts on the right-handed neutrino sector, the minimum of the scalar potential allows for large mixing angles -in contrast to the simplest quark case- and predicts a maximal Majorana phase. This leads to a strong correlation between neutrino mass hierarchy and mixing pattern. Read More

With the discovery of a scalar resonance at ATLAS and CMS, the understanding of the electroweak symmetry breaking origin seems a much closer goal. A strong dynamics at relatively low scales is still a good candidate. In this talk, the complete effective Lagrangian up to d < 6 will be presented, both for the gauge and the flavour sectors. Read More

Minimal Flavour Violation hypothesis can provide an attractive framework for Dark Matter (DM). We consider scalar DM candidates carrying flavour quantum numbers and whose representation under the flavour group guarantees DM stability. They interact with the Standard Model fields through Higgs portal at renormalisable level and also to quarks through dimension-6 operators. Read More

We generalize the basis of CP-even chiral effective operators describing a dynamical Higgs sector, to the case in which the Higgs-like particle is light. Gauge and gauge-Higgs operators are considered up to mass dimension five. This analysis completes the tool needed to explore at leading order the connection between linear realizations of the electroweak symmetry breaking mechanism - whose extreme case is the Standard Model - and non-linear realizations with a light Higgs-like particle present. Read More

The Higgs-fermion couplings are sensitive probes of possible new physics behind a stable light Higgs particle. It is then essential to identify the flavour pattern of those interactions. We consider the case in which a strong dynamics lies behind a light Higgs, and explore the implications within the Minimal Flavour Violation ansatz. Read More

The recent results that $\theta_{13}$ is relatively large, of the order of the previous upper bound, and the indications of a sizable deviation of $\theta_{23}$ from the maximal value are in agreement with the predictions of Anarchy in the lepton sector. The quark and charged lepton hierarchies can then be reproduced in a SU(5) GUT context by attributing non-vanishing $U(1)_{FN}$ charges, different for each family, only to the SU(5) tenplet states. The fact that the observed mass hierarchies are stronger for up quarks than for down quarks and charged leptons supports this idea. Read More

Minimal Flavour Violation can be realized in several ways in the lepton sector due to the possibility of Majorana neutrino mass terms. We derive the scalar potential for the fields whose background values are the Yukawa couplings, for the simplest See-Saw model with just two right-handed neutrinos, and explore its minima. The Majorana character plays a distinctive role: the minimum of the potential allows for large mixing angles -in contrast to the simplest quark case- and predicts a maximal Majorana phase. Read More

The recent measurements of the neutrino reactor angle require a re-examination of flavour models based on discrete groups. Indeed, when these models deal with the Tri-Bimaximal, the Bimaximal and the Golden Ratio mixing patterns, some tensions arise in order to accommodate the reactor angle. In particular, strong constraints come from lepton flavour violating processes, like mu -> e gamma. Read More

We review the application of non-Abelian discrete groups to Tri-Bimaximal (TB) neutrino mixing, which is supported by experiment as a possible good first approximation to the data. After summarizing the motivation and the formalism, we discuss specific models, mainly those based on A4 but also on other finite groups, and their phenomenological implications, including the extension to quarks. The recent measurements of \theta_13 favour versions of these models where a suitable mechanism leads to corrections to \theta_13 that can naturally be larger than those to \theta_12 and \theta_23. Read More

Discrete non-Abelian Symmetries have been extensively used to reproduce the lepton mixings. In particular, the S4 group turned out to be suitable to describe predictive mixing patterns, such as the well-known Tri-Bimaximal and the Bimaximal schemes, which all represent possible first approximations of the experimental lepton mixing matrix. We review the main application of the S4 discrete group as a flavour symmetry, first dealing with the formalism and later with the phenomenological implications. Read More

Discrete flavour groups have been studied in connection with special patterns of neutrino mixing suggested by the data, such as Tri-Bimaximal mixing (groups A4, S4... Read More

**Authors:**M. Hirsch, D. Meloni, S. Morisi, S. Pastor, E. Peinado, J. W. F. Valle, Adisorn Adulpravitchai, D. Aristizabal Sierra, F. Bazzocchi, Gautam Bhattacharyya, G. Blankenburg, M. S. Boucenna, I. de Medeiros Varzielas, Marco Aurelio Diaz, Gui-Jun Ding, J. N. Esteves, Yasaman Farzan, Sebastian Garcia Saenz, W. Grimus, Claudia Hagedorn, J. Jones-Perez, Anjan S. Joshipura, Avihay Kadosh, Kenji Kadota, Sin Kyu Kang, Joern Kersten, Benjamin Koch, Martin B. Krauss, Philipp Leser, Patrick Otto Ludl, Vinzenz Maurer, Luca Merlo, Grigoris Panotopoulos, A. Papa, Heinrich Pas, Ketan M. Patel, Werner Rodejohann, U. J. Saldana Salazar, H. Serodio, Yusuke Shimizu, Martin Spinrath, Emmanuel Stamou, Hiroaki Sugiyama, M. Taoso, Takashi Toma, Liliana Velasco-Sevilla

**Category:**High Energy Physics - Phenomenology

The main goals of the first "Workshop on FLAvor SYmmetries and consequences in accelerators and cosmology" (FLASY) was to summarize the theoretical status of flavor symmetries, bringing together young researchers in the field to stimulate discussions and new collaborations, with the aim of investigating possible new physics scenarios to be tested at the LHC, as well as in future neutrino, cosmology experiments and dark matter searches. Read More

We develop a variant of the Minimal Flavour Violation ansatz for the case of a strongly interacting heavy-Higgs boson sector. The tower of effective operators differs from that for a Higgs system in the linear regime, and the new operators obtained at leading order include a CP-odd one. We investigate the impact of these operators on Delta F=1 and Delta F=2 observables, demonstrating that the non-linear scenario may have an interesting impact on the anomalies in present data. Read More

We present an extensive analysis of Delta F=2 observables and of B -> X_s gamma in the framework of a specific Maximally Gauged Flavour (MGF) model of Grinstein et al. including all relevant contributions, in particular tree-level heavy gauge boson exchanges that are considered in the present paper for the first time. The model allows in principle for significant deviations from the Standard Model predictions for epsilon_K, Delta M_{B_{d,s}}, mixing induced CP-asymmetries S_{psi K_S} and S_{psi phi} and B -> X_s gamma decay. Read More

We present a supersymmetric flavour model based on the T' discrete group, which explains fermion masses and mixings. The flavour symmetry, acting in the supersymmetric sector, provides well defined sfermion mass matrices and the resulting supersymmetric spectrum accounts for sufficiently light particles that could be seen at LHC. Furthermore, several contributions to FCNC processes are present and they can be useful to test the model in the present and future experiments. Read More

We describe the phenomenology of the flavour changing neutral current sector of a supersymmetric model, invariant under the T' discrete flavour group. This model has been proposed in Ref.[1] and describes realistic leptonic and hadronic masses and mixings and predicts the amount of flavour changing in terms of the small flavour breaking parameter u in [0. Read More

The branching ratio of the rare decay B->X_s gamma provides potentially strong constraints on models beyond the Standard Model. Considering a general scenario with new heavy neutral gauge bosons, present in particular in Z' and gauge flavour models, we point out two new contributions to the B->X_s gamma decay. The first one originates from one-loop diagrams mediated by gauge bosons and heavy exotic quarks with electric charge -1/3. Read More

We analyze the most natural formulations of the minimal lepton flavour violation hypothesis compatible with a type-I seesaw structure with three heavy singlet neutrinos N, and satisfying the requirement of being predictive, in the sense that all LFV effects can be expressed in terms of low energy observables. We find a new interesting realization based on the flavour group $SU(3)_e\times SU(3)_{\ell+N}$ (being $e$ and $\ell$ respectively the SU(2) singlet and doublet leptons). An intriguing feature of this realization is that, in the normal hierarchy scenario for neutrino masses, it allows for sizeable enhancements of $\mu \to e$ transitions with respect to LFV processes involving the $\tau$ lepton. Read More

Assuming the Minimal Flavour Violation hypothesis, we derive the general scalar potential for fields whose background values are the Yukawa couplings. We analyze the minimum of the potential and discuss the fine-tuning required to dynamically generate the mass hierarchies and the mixings between different quark generations. Two main cases are considered, corresponding to Yukawa interactions being effective operators of dimension five or six (or, equivalently, resulting from bi-fundamental and fundamental scalar fields, respectively). Read More

In view of the fact that the data on neutrino mixing are still compatible with a situation where Bimaximal mixing is valid in first approximation and it is then corrected by terms of order of the Cabibbo angle, we present examples where these properties are naturally realized. The models are supersymmetric in 4-dimensions and based on the discrete non-Abelian flavour symmetry S4. Read More

We study the set of models in which the Standard Model symmetry is extended with the flavour group A4 and there are three copies of the Standard Model Higgs that transform as a triplet under this group. In this setup, new channels for flavour violating processes can be studied once the A4 representations of the fermions in the theory are given. We show that it is of great importance to take these constraints into account as they can put severe constraints on the viability of flavour models. Read More

We consider an extension of the Standard Model in which the symmetry is enlarged by a global flavour factor A4 and the scalar sector accounts for three copies of the Standard Model Higgs, transforming as a triplet of A4. In this context, we study the most general scalar potential and its minima, performing for each of them a model independent analysis on the related phenomenology. We study the scalar spectrum, the new contributions to the oblique corrections, the decays of the Z and W, the new sources of flavour violation, which all are affected by the introduction of multiple Higgses transforming under A4. Read More

Effective Flavour Models do not address questions related to the nature of the fundamental renormalisable theory at high energies. We study the ultraviolet completion of Flavour Models, which in general has the advantage of improving the predictivity of the effective models. In order to illustrate the important features we provide minimal completions for two known A4 models. Read More

The flavour puzzle is an open problem both in the Standard Model and in its possible supersymmetric or grand unified extensions. In this thesis, we discuss possible explanations of the origin of fermion mass hierarchies and mixings by the use of non-Abelian discrete flavour symmetries. We present a T'- and an S4-based realisations in which the spontaneous breaking of the symmetry produces realistic fermion mass hierarchies, the quark mixing matrix comparable to the Wolfenstein parametrisation and the lepton mixing matrix close to the so-called tribimaximal pattern. Read More

Both Grand Unified symmetries and discrete flavour symmetries are appealing ways to describe apparent structures in the gauge and flavour sectors of the Standard Model. Both symmetries put constraints on the high energy behaviour of the theory. This can give rise to unexpected interplay when building models that possess both symmetries. Read More

We compute the branching ratios for mu-> e gamma, tau-> mu gamma and tau -> e gamma in a supersymmetric model invariant under the flavour symmetry group A4 X Z3 X U(1)_{FN}, in which near tri-bimaximal lepton mixing is naturally predicted. At leading order in the small symmetry breaking parameter u, which is of the same order as the reactor mixing angle theta_{13}, we find that the branching ratios generically scale as u^2. Applying the current bound on the branching ratio of mu -> e gamma shows that small values of u or tan(beta) are preferred in the model for mass parameters m_{SUSY} and m_{1/2} smaller than 1000 GeV. Read More

We study renormalization group running effects on neutrino mixing patterns when a (type I) seesaw model is implemented by suitable flavour symmetries. We are particularly interested in mass-independent mixing patterns to which the widely studied tribimaximal mixing pattern belongs. In this class of flavour models, the running contribution from neutrino Yukawa coupling, which is generally dominant at energies above the seesaw threshold, can be absorbed by a small shift on neutrino mass eigenvalues leaving mixing angles unchanged. Read More

In this note we discuss the vacuum alignment in supersymmetric models with spontaneously broken flavour symmetries in the presence of soft supersymmetry (SUSY) breaking terms. We show that the inclusion of soft SUSY breaking terms can give rise to non-vanishing vacuum expectation values (VEVs) for the auxiliary components of the flavon fields. These non-zero VEVs can have an important impact on the phenomenology of this class of models, since they can induce an additional flavour violating contribution to the sfermion soft mass matrix of right-left (RL) type. Read More

The neutrino oscillation data find a good approximation in the so-called tri-bimaximal pattern. Recently a paper appeared showing that also the bimaximal pattern, which is already ruled out by the measurements, could be a very good starting point in order to describe the lepton mixing. In this paper I review both the flavour structures and then I present an explicit flavour model based on the discrete group S4, in which the PMNS mixing matrix is of the bimaximal form in first approximation and after it receives corrections which bring it in agreement with the data. Read More

The neutrino oscillation data are well explained by the tri-bimaximal pattern. Recently a paper appeared showing that also the bimaximal pattern could be a very good starting point in order to describe the lepton mixing. In this paper I review both the flavour structures and then I present an explicit model based on the discrete symmetry group S4. Read More

In models with flavour symmetries added to the gauge group of the Standard Model the CP-violating asymmetry necessary for leptogenesis may be related with low-energy parameters. A particular case of interest is when the flavour symmetry produces exact Tri-Bimaximal lepton mixing leading to a vanishing CP-violating asymmetry. In this paper we present a model-independent discussion that confirms this always occurs for unflavoured leptogenesis in type I see-saw scenarios, noting however that Tri-Bimaximal mixing does not imply a vanishing asymmetry in general scenarios where there is interplay between type I and other see-saws. Read More

The neutrino oscillation data are well explained by the tri-bimaximal pattern. Recently it has been shown that also the bimaximal pattern could be a very good starting point in order to describe the lepton mixing. In this paper I review both the flavour structures and then I present an explicit example. Read More

In view of the fact that the data on neutrino mixing are still compatible with a situation where Bimaximal mixing is valid in first approximation and it is then corrected by terms of order of the Cabibbo angle, arising from the diagonalization of the charged lepton masses, we construct a model based on the discrete group S4 where those properties are naturally realized. The model is supersymmetric in 4-dimensions and the complete flavour group is S4 x Z4 x U(1)_FN, which also allows to reproduce the hierarchy of the charged lepton spectrum. The only fine tuning needed in the model is to reproduce the small observed value of r, the ratio between the neutrino mass squared differences. Read More