Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Complete set of positivity constraints on the HEFT at NLO

Debsubhra Chakraborty*, Susobhan Chattopadhyay†, and Rick S. Gupta‡

  • *Contact author: debsubhra.chakraborty@tifr.res.in
  • †Contact author: susobhan.chattopadhyay@tifr.res.in
  • ‡Contact author: rsgupta@theory.tifr.res.in

Phys. Rev. D 113, 053007 – Published 23 March, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/7qgz-9ykc

Abstract

We present the complete set of positivity bounds on the Higgs effective field theory (HEFT) at next-to-leading order (NLO). We identify the 15 operators that can be constrained by positivity, as they contribute to s2-growth in the amplitude for longitudinal gauge-Higgs scattering, that is to all possible 2-to-2 scattering processes involving longitudinal gauge bosons, VL=WL±,ZL, and the Higgs boson, h. We find two sets of constraints: (i) specific linear combinations of CP-even Wilson coefficients (WCs) must be positive, and (ii) the magnitudes of some WCs—including all CP-odd ones—must be smaller than products of other CP-even WCs. We present our final constraints on the 15 dimensional HEFT space and show how known positivity bounds on the 3 dimensional space of dimension 8 SMEFT can be recovered from them. We find that only about 5% of the parameter space for WCs of HEFT operators at NLO complies with these positivity constraints. Additionally, we obtain double-sided bounds on these WCs by fully exploiting the implications of unitarity and st-crossing symmetry. For WCs contributing to the vector boson scattering process our final constraints are in most cases significantly stronger than the experimental ones. For the VLVL,hh→hh and VLVL,hh→VLh process, there are no reported experimental limits and our theoretical constraints provide the first bounds.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (57)

  1. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 716, 1 (2012).
  2. S. Chatrchyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 716, 30 (2012).
  3. A. Adams, N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dubovsky, A. Nicolis, and R. Rattazzi, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2006) 014.
  4. T. N. Pham and T. N. Truong, Phys. Rev. D 31, 3027 (1985).
  5. B. Ananthanarayan, D. Toublan, and G. Wanders, Phys. Rev. D 51, 1093 (1995).
  6. M. R. Pennington and J. Portoles, Phys. Lett. B 344, 399 (1995).
  7. B. Bellazzini, J. Elias Miró, R. Rattazzi, M. Riembau, and F. Riva, Phys. Rev. D 104, 036006 (2021).
  8. A. J. Tolley, Z.-Y. Wang, and S.-Y. Zhou, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2021) 255.
  9. S. Caron-Huot and V. Van Duong, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2021) 280.
  10. N. Arkani-Hamed, T.-C. Huang, and Y.-t. Huang, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2021) 259.
  11. A. Sinha and A. Zahed, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 181601 (2021).
  12. B. Bellazzini and F. Riva, Phys. Rev. D 98, 095021 (2018).
  13. C. Zhang and S.-Y. Zhou, Phys. Rev. D 100, 095003 (2019).
  14. C. Zhang and S.-Y. Zhou, Phys. Rev. D 100, 095003 (2019).
  15. Q. Bi, C. Zhang, and S.-Y. Zhou, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2019) 137.
  16. G. N. Remmen and N. L. Rodd, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2019) 032.
  17. G. N. Remmen and N. L. Rodd, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 081601 (2020); 127, 149901(E) (2021).
  18. D. Ghosh, R. Sharma, and F. Ullah, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2023) 199.
  19. Q. Chen, K. Mimasu, T. A. Wu, G.-D. Zhang, and S.-Y. Zhou, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2024) 180.
  20. A. Falkowski and R. Rattazzi, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2019) 255.
  21. T. Cohen, N. Craig, X. Lu, and D. Sutherland, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2021) 237.
  22. I. Banta, T. Cohen, N. Craig, X. Lu, and D. Sutherland, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2022) 029.
  23. R. Gómez-Ambrosio, F. J. Llanes-Estrada, A. Salas-Bernárdez, and J. J. Sanz-Cillero, Phys. Rev. D 106, 053004 (2022).
  24. R. Gómez-Ambrosio, F. J. Llanes-Estrada, A. Salas-Bernárdez, and J. J. Sanz-Cillero, Commun. Theor. Phys. 75, 095202 (2023).
  25. R. L. Delgado, R. Gómez-Ambrosio, J. Martínez-Martín, A. Salas-Bernárdez, and J. J. Sanz-Cillero, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2024) 037.
  26. C. Zhang and S.-Y. Zhou, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 201601 (2020).
  27. J. Distler, B. Grinstein, R. A. Porto, and I. Z. Rothstein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 041601 (2007).
  28. L. Vecchi, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2007) 054.
  29. A. C. Longhitano, Phys. Rev. D 22, 1166 (1980).
  30. A. C. Longhitano, Nucl. Phys. B188, 118 (1981).
  31. T. Appelquist and C. Bernard, Phys. Rev. D 22, 200 (1980).
  32. T. Appelquist and G.-H. Wu, Phys. Rev. D 48, 3235 (1993).
  33. G. Buchalla and O. Cata, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2012) 101.
  34. R. Alonso, M. B. Gavela, L. Merlo, S. Rigolin, and J. Yepes, Phys. Lett. B 722, 330 (2013); 726, 926(E) (2013).
  35. G. Buchalla, O. Catà, and C. Krause, Nucl. Phys. B880, 552 (2014); B913, 475(E) (2016).
  36. I. Brivio, T. Corbett, O. J. P. Éboli, M. B. Gavela, J. Gonzalez-Fraile, M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, L. Merlo, and S. Rigolin, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2014) 024.
  37. I. Brivio, J. Gonzalez-Fraile, M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, and L. Merlo, Eur. Phys. J. C 76, 416 (2016).
  38. H. Sun, M.-L. Xiao, and J.-H. Yu, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2023) 043.
  39. M. S. Chanowitz, M. Golden, and H. Georgi, Phys. Rev. D 36, 1490 (1987).
  40. L. Gráf, B. Henning, X. Lu, T. Melia, and H. Murayama, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2023) 064.
  41. J. M. Cornwall, D. N. Levin, and G. Tiktopoulos, Phys. Rev. D 10, 1145 (1974).
  42. B. M. Gavela, E. E. Jenkins, A. V. Manohar, and L. Merlo, Eur. Phys. J. C 76, 485 (2016).
  43. M. Froissart, Phys. Rev. 123, 1053 (1961).
  44. A. Martin, Nuovo Cimeto A 42, 930 (1965).
  45. C. de Rham, S. Melville, A. J. Tolley, and S.-Y. Zhou, Phys. Rev. D 96, 081702 (2017).
  46. D.-Y. Hong, Z.-H. Wang, and S.-Y. Zhou, arXiv:2404.04479.
  47. P. Virtanen et al. (S. Contributors), SciPy.optimize.linprog, SciPy Developers (2020), sciPy library, version 1.0.
  48. O. J. P. Eboli, M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, and M. Martines, Phys. Rev. D 109, 033007 (2024).
  49. A. S. Sirunyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 812, 135992 (2021).
  50. A. S. Sirunyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 809, 135710 (2020).
  51. T. A. Aad et al. (G. Collaboration), J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2024) 004.
  52. G. N. Remmen and N. L. Rodd, Phys. Rev. D 113, 036027 (2026).
  53. D. Chakraborty, S. Chattopadhyay, and R. S. Gupta, Towards the HEFT-hedron: The complete set of positivity constraints on HEFT operators at NLO., Presented at the 8th General Meeting of the LHC EFT Working Group (2024), https://indico.cern.ch/event/1411765/contributions/6220821/.
  54. K. Hagiwara, R. D. Peccei, D. Zeppenfeld, and K. Hikasa, Nucl. Phys. B282, 253 (1987).
  55. J. Reuter, W. Kilian, and M. Sekulla, arXiv:1307.8170.
  56. B. Henning, X. Lu, T. Melia, and H. Murayama, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2017) 016; 09 (2019) 019.
  57. H.-L. Li, Z. Ren, J. Shu, M.-L. Xiao, J.-H. Yu, and Y.-H. Zheng, Phys. Rev. D 104, 015026 (2021).

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation