Towards consistent Electroweak Precision Data constraints in the SMEFT (original) (raw)

• B. Grinstein and M.B. Wise, Operator analysis for precision electroweak physics, Phys. Lett. B 265 (1991) 326 [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• Z. Han and W. Skiba, Effective theory analysis of precision electroweak data, Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) 075009 [hep-ph/0412166] [INSPIRE].
  ADS Google Scholar
• M. Ciuchini, E. Franco, S. Mishima and L. Silvestrini, Electroweak Precision Observables, New Physics and the Nature of a 126 GeV Higgs Boson, JHEP 08 (2013) 106 [arXiv:1306.4644] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• C.-Y. Chen, S. Dawson and C. Zhang, Electroweak Effective Operators and Higgs Physics, Phys. Rev. D 89 (2014) 015016 [arXiv:1311.3107] [INSPIRE].
  ADS Google Scholar
• M. Ciuchini et al., Update of the electroweak precision fit, interplay with Higgs-boson signal strengths and model-independent constraints on new physics, arXiv:1410.6940 [INSPIRE].
• Gfitter Group collaboration, M. Baak et al., The global electroweak fit at NNLO and prospects for the LHC and ILC, Eur. Phys. J. C 74 (2014) 3046 [arXiv:1407.3792] [INSPIRE].
  Google Scholar
• G. Durieux, F. Maltoni and C. Zhang, A global approach to top-quark flavor-changing interactions, Phys. Rev. D 91 (2015) 074017 [arXiv:1412.7166] [INSPIRE].
  ADS Google Scholar
• A.A. Petrov, S. Pokorski, J.D. Wells and Z. Zhang, Role of low-energy observables in precision Higgs boson analyses, Phys. Rev. D 91 (2015) 073001 [arXiv:1501.02803] [INSPIRE].
  ADS Google Scholar
• J.D. Wells and Z. Zhang, Precision Electroweak Analysis after the Higgs Boson Discovery, Phys. Rev. D 90 (2014) 033006 [arXiv:1406.6070] [INSPIRE].
  ADS Google Scholar
• J. Ellis, V. Sanz and T. You, Complete Higgs Sector Constraints on Dimension-6 Operators, JHEP 07 (2014) 036 [arXiv:1404.3667] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• M. Trott, On the consistent use of Constructed Observables, JHEP 02 (2015) 046 [arXiv:1409.7605] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• B. Henning, X. Lu and H. Murayama, How to use the Standard Model effective field theory, arXiv:1412.1837 [INSPIRE].
• A. Pomarol and F. Riva, Towards the Ultimate SM Fit to Close in on Higgs Physics, JHEP 01 (2014) 151 [arXiv:1308.2803] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• A. Falkowski and F. Riva, Model-independent precision constraints on dimension-6 operators, JHEP 02 (2015) 039 [arXiv:1411.0669] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• B. Grzadkowski, M. Iskrzynski, M. Misiak and J. Rosiek, Dimension-Six Terms in the Standard Model Lagrangian, JHEP 10 (2010) 085 [arXiv:1008.4884] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS MATH Google Scholar
• R. Alonso, E.E. Jenkins, A.V. Manohar and M. Trott, Renormalization Group Evolution of the Standard Model Dimension Six Operators III: Gauge Coupling Dependence and Phenomenology, JHEP 04 (2014) 159 [arXiv:1312.2014] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• W. Buchmüller and D. Wyler, Effective Lagrangian Analysis of New Interactions and Flavor Conservation, Nucl. Phys. B 268 (1986) 621 [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• L. Lehman, Extending the Standard Model Effective Field Theory with the Complete Set of Dimension-7 Operators, Phys. Rev. D 90 (2014) 125023 [arXiv:1410.4193] [INSPIRE].
  ADS Google Scholar
• ALEPH, DELPHI, L3, OPAL, SLD collaborations, the LEP Electroweak Working Group, the SLD Electroweak Group, the SLD Heavy Flavour Group, S. Schael et al., Precision electroweak measurements on the Z resonance, Phys. Rept. 427 (2006) 257 [hep-ex/0509008] [INSPIRE].
  ADS Google Scholar
• R.S. Chivukula and H. Georgi, Composite Technicolor Standard Model, Phys. Lett. B 188 (1987) 99 [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• L.J. Hall and L. Randall, Weak scale effective supersymmetry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65 (1990) 2939 [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• G. D’Ambrosio, G.F. Giudice, G. Isidori and A. Strumia, Minimal flavor violation: An effective field theory approach, Nucl. Phys. B 645 (2002) 155 [hep-ph/0207036] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• A.J. Buras, P. Gambino, M. Gorbahn, S. Jager and L. Silvestrini, Universal unitarity triangle and physics beyond the standard model, Phys. Lett. B 500 (2001) 161 [hep-ph/0007085] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• A. Manohar and H. Georgi, Chiral Quarks and the Nonrelativistic Quark Model, Nucl. Phys. B 234 (1984) 189 [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• E.E. Jenkins, A.V. Manohar and M. Trott, Naive Dimensional Analysis Counting of Gauge Theory Amplitudes and Anomalous Dimensions, Phys. Lett. B 726 (2013) 697 [arXiv:1309.0819] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS MATH Google Scholar
• G. Buchalla, O. Catà and C. Krause, On the Power Counting in Effective Field Theories, Phys. Lett. B 731 (2014) 80 [arXiv:1312.5624] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS MathSciNet MATH Google Scholar
• C. Arzt, M.B. Einhorn and J. Wudka, Patterns of deviation from the standard model, Nucl. Phys. B 433 (1995) 41 [hep-ph/9405214] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• LHC Higgs Cross section Working Group collaboration, S. Heinemeyer et al., Handbook of LHC Higgs Cross sections: 3. Higgs Properties, arXiv:1307.1347 [INSPIRE].
• G. Buchalla, O. Catà and C. Krause, A Systematic Approach to the SILH Lagrangian, Nucl. Phys. B 894 (2015) 602 [arXiv:1412.6356] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS MATH Google Scholar
• E.E. Jenkins, A.V. Manohar and M. Trott, On Gauge Invariance and Minimal Coupling, JHEP 09 (2013) 063 [arXiv:1305.0017] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• J.D. Wells, TASI lecture notes: Introduction to precision electroweak analysis, hep-ph/0512342 [INSPIRE].
• Particle Data Group collaboration, K. Olive et al., Review of Particle Physics, Chin. Phys. C38 (2014) 090001.
  Google Scholar
• P.J. Mohr, B.N. Taylor and D.B. Newell, CODATA Recommended Values of the Fundamental Physical Constants: 2010, Rev. Mod. Phys. 84 (2012) 1527 [arXiv:1203.5425] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• D.Y. Bardin and G. Passarino, The standard model in the making: precision study of the electroweak interactions, Oxford University Press, Oxford, U.K. (1999).
  Google Scholar
• E. Eichten, K.D. Lane and M.E. Peskin, New Tests for Quark and Lepton Substructure, Phys. Rev. Lett. 50 (1983) 811 [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• G. Breit and E. Wigner, Capture of Slow Neutrons, Phys. Rev. 49 (1936) 519 [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS MATH Google Scholar
• G. Altarelli, R. Kleiss, and C. Verzegnassi, Z physics at LEP-1. Vol. 1: standard physics, CERN-89-08-V-1 [INSPIRE].
• A. Sirlin, Theoretical considerations concerning the Z0 mass, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67 (1991) 2127 [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• G. Isidori, A.V. Manohar and M. Trott, Probing the nature of the Higgs-like Boson via h → _V_ℱ decays, Phys. Lett. B 728 (2014) 131 [arXiv:1305.0663] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• G. Isidori and M. Trott, Higgs form factors in Associated Production, JHEP 02 (2014) 082 [arXiv:1307.4051] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• M. Gonzalez-Alonso, A. Greljo, G. Isidori and D. Marzocca, Pseudo-observables in Higgs decays, Eur. Phys. J. C 75 (2015) 128 [arXiv:1412.6038] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• L3 collaboration, O. Adriani et al., Results from the L3 experiment at LEP, Phys. Rept. 236 (1993) 1 [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• TOPAZ collaboration, K. Miyabayashi et al., Measurement of the total hadronic cross-section and determination of γ-Z interference in e + e − annihilation, Phys. Lett. B 347 (1995) 171 [INSPIRE].
  ADS Google Scholar
• VENUS collaboration, K. Yusa et al., Precise measurement of the total hadronic cross-section in e + e − annihilation at \( \sqrt{s}=57.77 \) GeV, Phys. Lett. B 447 (1999) 167 [INSPIRE].
  ADS Google Scholar
• S. Kirsch and T. Riemann, SMATASY: A program for the model independent description of the Z resonance, Comput. Phys. Commun. 88 (1995) 89 [hep-ph/9408365] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• A. Leike, T. Riemann and J. Rose, S matrix approach to the Z line shape, Phys. Lett. B 273 (1991) 513 [hep-ph/9508390] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• G. Isidori, The interference parameter in the model independent approach to Z line shape, Phys. Lett. B 314 (1993) 139 [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• A. Freitas, Higher-order electroweak corrections to the partial widths and branching ratios of the Z boson, JHEP 04 (2014) 070 [arXiv:1401.2447] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• CDF, D0 collaborations, the Tevatron Electroweak Working Group, 2012 Update of the Combination of CDF and D0 Results for the Mass of the W Boson, arXiv:1204.0042 [INSPIRE].
• M. Awramik, M. Czakon, A. Freitas and G. Weiglein, Precise prediction for the W boson mass in the standard model, Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 053006 [hep-ph/0311148] [INSPIRE].
  ADS Google Scholar
• E.E. Jenkins, A.V. Manohar and M. Trott, Renormalization Group Evolution of the Standard Model Dimension Six Operators I: Formalism and lambda Dependence, JHEP 10 (2013) 087 [arXiv:1308.2627] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS MATH Google Scholar
• E.E. Jenkins, A.V. Manohar and M. Trott, Renormalization Group Evolution of the Standard Model Dimension Six Operators II: Yukawa Dependence, JHEP 01 (2014) 035 [arXiv:1310.4838] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• R. Alonso, H.-M. Chang, E.E. Jenkins, A.V. Manohar and B. Shotwell, Renormalization group evolution of dimension-six baryon number violating operators, Phys. Lett. B 734 (2014) 302 [arXiv:1405.0486] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• I. Brivio et al., Disentangling a dynamical Higgs, JHEP 03 (2014) 024 [arXiv:1311.1823] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar
• M.C. Gonzalez-Garcia, A. Gusso and S.F. Novaes, Constraints on four fermion contact interactions from precise electroweak measurements, J. Phys. G 24 (1998) 2213 [hep-ph/9802254] [INSPIRE].
  Article ADS Google Scholar