tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post2340980536698530047..comments2024-01-08T09:37:04.406+01:00Comments on RÉSONAANCES: Higgs: stronger and more excitingJesterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08947218566941608850noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-84567222369362159962012-02-09T10:36:32.716+01:002012-02-09T10:36:32.716+01:00mmm.... so there were good reasons for stressing t...mmm.... so there were good reasons for stressing the point on hWW couplings... |-)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-26089070449668893532012-02-08T23:01:49.615+01:002012-02-08T23:01:49.615+01:00As in December the 95% CL exclusion line is, in bo...As in December the 95% CL exclusion line is, in both experiments, between 1 and 2 sigma upwards to respect to the expected one over a huge mass range, up to 180+ GeV. <br />Am I the only one finding this feature "disturbing"?<br /><br />Even if one considers a terrible sensitivity for the WW channel (let's say 40 GeV spread) it is difficult to have that kind of plateau.<br />It makes people think that they are not understanding something (background?). What do you think?GastroBearnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-7322329699414418532012-02-08T22:34:32.336+01:002012-02-08T22:34:32.336+01:00Comment to my comment one before: it may not be cl...Comment to my comment one before: it may not be clear that to boost sigma(VBF)xBR(h->gamma gamma) it's not necessary to pump up the hWW coupling. Another way is to increase Br(H->gamma gamma) and that can be done in popular models like composite Higgs or, up to a certain point, the MSSM.Jesterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08947218566941608850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-19171620593985895932012-02-08T22:26:06.121+01:002012-02-08T22:26:06.121+01:00Not too much, because ATLAS has 3 H->ZZ->4l ...Not too much, because ATLAS has 3 H->ZZ->4l events near 125 GeV. CMS may have just been unlucky. We'll with more data...Jesterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08947218566941608850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-22642025419522212922012-02-08T20:08:08.817+01:002012-02-08T20:08:08.817+01:00Are you concerned at all that in the CMS combined ...Are you concerned at all that in the CMS combined local p-value plot, (their Fig. 6, your 3rd plot), the valley at 124 GeV is totally due to H -> 2 gamma, while H -> ZZ -> 4l produces a completely separate valley at 119 GeV: neither of these two channels shows a valley where the other does?Chris Austinhttp://chrisaustin.infonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-26567653870670174552012-02-08T13:41:44.734+01:002012-02-08T13:41:44.734+01:00Great post, many thanksGreat post, many thanksAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-75553582848185461822012-02-08T10:50:48.161+01:002012-02-08T10:50:48.161+01:00Anon, increased VVh coupling is impossible in popu...Anon, increased VVh coupling is impossible in popular extensions of the SM, like the MSSM or composite Higgs, but there is no no-go theorem. There is an old obscure model by Georgi and Machacek where this can be realized.Jesterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08947218566941608850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-78265771604515306362012-02-08T08:27:33.484+01:002012-02-08T08:27:33.484+01:00Though not the first one to give a report on this,...Though not the first one to give a report on this, but You are really spot on.. again. Thanks.paolonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-18333729325132431812012-02-08T02:32:55.330+01:002012-02-08T02:32:55.330+01:00is there any sensible theory that explains a possi...is there any sensible theory that explains a possible enhanced VBF? It seems it requires a larger VVh coupling than in the SM. But I thought that no theory in the UV allows that. Perhaps an enhanced hgg vertex is more likely.<br />cheersAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-85897784937142648902012-02-08T02:29:00.453+01:002012-02-08T02:29:00.453+01:00It seems to me the adjacent bins have 2 events eac...It seems to me the adjacent bins have 2 events each (note that the signal profile in blue is at 120 GeV, not 125)Jesterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08947218566941608850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-49459971652229557412012-02-08T02:19:55.768+01:002012-02-08T02:19:55.768+01:00In the di-jet tagged gamma-gamma spectrum, bins wi...In the di-jet tagged gamma-gamma spectrum, bins with zero events have no data points. The bin with 7 events, which you think is "driving" the significance, is next to a bin that has apparently has no events. If that is so, the average number of events in the 2 adjacent bins is 3.5, pretty close to the SM expectation.Beijixionghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06541754882036041764noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-63011078152541487742012-02-08T01:54:47.868+01:002012-02-08T01:54:47.868+01:00Great update, thanks. Twice the SM rate is interes...Great update, thanks. Twice the SM rate is interesting indeed.Keahttp://pseudomonad.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.com