Empirically Consistent Electroweak Radiative Corrections with the Two-Higgs Doublet Model
AI-generated Key Points
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the key points are generated using the paper metadata rather than the full article.
- Fukugita and Kubota explore electroweak radiative correction in the Higgs sector of the standard electroweak model.
- They find that this correction fits well with experimental data when the Higgs sector is extended to include two Higgs doublets.
- The authors predict where the charged and CP odd Higgs boson masses would lie in this extended model, assuming that the two CP even neutral Higgs boson masses are degenerate.
- If a charged Higgs boson is present and its mass lies in certain appropriate ranges, then the mass of neutral Higgs doublet boson can be arbitrarily large while still being consistent with the $W$ mass measurement.
- Their findings provide important insights into how extending the Higgs sector of the standard electroweak model can improve our understanding of electroweak radiative corrections and bring theoretical predictions into closer agreement with experimental data.
Authors: Masataka Fukugita, Takahiro Kubota
Abstract: The electroweak radiative correction, which turned out to be marginal within the standard electroweak model having the minimal Higgs sector in view of the present experimental information, fits well the experiment when the Higgs sector is extended to have two Higgs doublets. We predict the range where the charged and CP odd Higgs boson masses would lie, taking the two CP even neutral Higgs boson masses to be degenerate which makes the analysis in multiparameter space feasible. It is shown that the mass of neutral Higgs doublet boson can arbitrarily be large consistently with the $W$ mass, if the charged Higgs boson is present and it's mass lies in some appropriate ranges.
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.
Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting
Score: 0
Why do we need votes?
Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.
The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.
⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through a
tree representationLook for similar papers (in beta version)
By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.