- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review D

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
  • Letter
  • Open Access

Minimal model for the W-boson mass, (g−2)μ, h→μ+μ−, and quark-mixing-matrix unitarity

Andreas Crivellin*

Matthew Kirk†

Anil Thapa‡

  • Physik-Institut, Universitat Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, CH-8057 Zurich, Switzerland and Paul Scherrer Institut, CH-5232 Villigen PSI, Switzerland

  • Departament de Física Quàntica i Astrofísica (FQA), Institut de Ciències del Cosmos (ICCUB), Universitat de Barcelona (UB), Barcelona 08028, Spain

  • Department of Physics, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia 22904-4714, USA

  • *andreas.crivellin@cern.ch
  • †mjkirk@icc.ub.edu
  • ‡wtd8kz@virginia.edu
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 108, L031702 – Published 25 August, 2023

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.108.L031702

Abstract

The SU(2)L triplet scalar with hypercharge Y=0 predicts a positive definite shift in the W mass, with respect to the Standard Model prediction, if it acquires a vacuum expectation value. As this new field cannot couple directly to Standard Model fermions (on its own), it has no significant impact on other low-energy precision observables and is weakly constrained by collider searches. In fact, the multilepton anomalies at the LHC even point toward new scalars that decay dominantly to W bosons, as the neutral component of the triplet naturally does. In this article, we show that with a minimal extension of the scalar triplet model by a heavy vectorlike lepton, being either (I) an SU(2)L doublet with Y=−1/2 or (II) an SU(2)L triplet with Y=−1, couplings of the triplet to Standard Model leptons are possible. This minimal extension can then provide, in addition to the desired positive shift in the W mass, a chirally enhanced contribution to (g−2)μ. In addition, versions (I) and (II) can improve on Z→μ+μ− and alleviate the tension in first-row Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa unitarity (known as the Cabibbo angle anomaly), respectively. Finally, both options, in general, predict sizable changes of h→μ+μ−, i.e., much larger than most other (g−2)μ explanations where only O(%) effects are expected, making this channel a smoking gun signature of our model.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (146)

  1. A. Crivellin, Anomalies in particle physics, in Proceedings of the 8th Symposium on Prospects in the Physics of Discrete Symmetries (2023), arXiv:2304.01694.
  2. T. Aaltonen et al. (CDF Collaboration), High-precision measurement of the W boson mass with the CDF II detector, Science 376, 170 (2022).
  3. B. Abi et al. (Muon g−2 Collaboration), Measurement of the Positive Muon Anomalous Magnetic Moment to 0.46 ppm, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 141801 (2021).
  4. A. Crivellin, Explaining the Cabibbo angle anomaly, arXiv:2207.02507.
  5. R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collaboration), Measurement of the W boson mass, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2022) 036.
  6. ATLAS Collaboration, Improved W boson mass measurement using 7 TeV proton-proton collisions with the ATLAS detector (to be published).
  7. T. Aoyama et al., The anomalous magnetic moment of the muon in the standard model, Phys. Rep. 887, 1 (2020).
  8. S. Borsanyi et al., Leading hadronic contribution to the muon magnetic moment from lattice QCD, Nature (London) 593, 51 (2021).
  9. A. D’Alise et al., Standard model anomalies: Lepton flavour non-universality, g−2 and W-mass, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2022) 125.
  10. E. Bagnaschi, M. Chakraborti, S. Heinemeyer, I. Saha, and G. Weiglein, Interdependence of the new “MUON G-2” result and the W-boson mass, Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 474 (2022).
  11. K. S. Babu, S. Jana, and V. P. K., Correlating W-Boson Mass Shift with Muon g−2 in the Two Higgs Doublet Model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 121803 (2022).
  12. K. Cheung, W.-Y. Keung, and P.-Y. Tseng, Isodoublet vector leptoquark solution to the muon g−2, R(K,K*), R(D,D*), and W-mass anomalies, Phys. Rev. D 106, 015029 (2022).
  13. J. Kawamura, S. Okawa, and Y. Omura, W boson mass and muon g−2 in a lepton portal dark matter model, Phys. Rev. D 106, 015005 (2022).
  14. K. I. Nagao, T. Nomura, and H. Okada, A model explaining the new CDF II W boson mass linking to muon g−2 and dark matter, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 138, 365 (2023).
  15. G. Arcadi and A. Djouadi, 2HD plus light pseudoscalar model for a combined explanation of the possible excesses in the CDF MW measurement and (g−2)μ with dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 106, 095008 (2022).
  16. T. A. Chowdhury, J. Heeck, A. Thapa, and S. Saad, W boson mass shift and muon magnetic moment in the Zee model, Phys. Rev. D 106, 035004 (2022).
  17. A. Bhaskar, A. A. Madathil, T. Mandal, and S. Mitra, Combined explanation of W-mass, muon g−2, R(K(*)) and R(D(*)) anomalies in a singlet-triplet scalar leptoquark model, Phys. Rev. D 106, 115009 (2022).
  18. S. Baek, Implications of CDF W-mass and (g−2)μ on U(1)Lμ−Lτ model, arXiv:2204.09585.
  19. J. Kim, S. Lee, P. Sanyal, and J. Song, CDF W-boson mass and muon g−2 in a type-X two-Higgs-doublet model with a Higgs-phobic light pseudoscalar, Phys. Rev. D 106, 035002 (2022).
  20. J. Kim, Compatibility of muon g−2, W mass anomaly in type-X 2HDM, Phys. Lett. B 832, 137220 (2022).
  21. R. Dcruz and A. Thapa, W boson mass shift, dark matter, and (g−2)ℓ in a scotogenic-Zee model, Phys. Rev. D 107, 015002 (2023).
  22. T. A. Chowdhury and S. Saad, Leptoquark-vectorlike quark model for the CDF mW, (g−2)μ, R(K(*)) anomalies, and neutrino masses, Phys. Rev. D 106, 055017 (2022).
  23. N. Chakrabarty, The muon g−2 and W-mass anomalies explained and the electroweak vacuum stabilised by extending the minimal type-II seesaw, arXiv:2206.11771.
  24. O. Atkinson, M. Black, C. Englert, A. Lenz, and A. Rusov, MUonE, muon g−2 and electroweak precision constraints within 2HDMs, Phys. Rev. D 106, 115031 (2022).
  25. S. Arora, M. Kashav, S. Verma, and B. C. Chauhan, Muon (g−2) and the W-boson mass anomaly in a model based on Z4 symmetry with a vector-like fermion, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2022, 113B06 (2022).
  26. W.-S. Hou, G. Kumar, and S. Teunissen, Enhanced Bq→ℓℓ′ and B→(K,π)ℓℓ′ in light of (g−2)μ, Phys. Rev. D 107, 095017 (2023).
  27. J. M. Yang and Y. Zhang, Low energy SUSY confronted with new measurements of W-boson mass and muon g−2, Sci. Bull. 67, 1430 (2022).
  28. F. Domingo, U. Ellwanger, and C. Hugonie, MW, dark matter and aμ in the NMSSM, Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 1074 (2022).
  29. G. Cacciapaglia, A. Cagnotta, R. Calabrese, F. Carnevali, A. De Iorio, A. O. M. Iorio, S. Morisi, and F. Sannino, Radiative flavor template at the LHC: g−2 and the W mass, Phys. Rev. D 107, 055033 (2023).
  30. A. de Giorgi, L. Merlo, and S. Pokorski, The low-scale seesaw solution to the MW and (g−2)μ anomalies, Fortschr. Phys. 71, 2300020 (2023).
  31. R. Primulando, J. Julio, and P. Uttayarat, Minimal Zee model for lepton g−2 and W-mass shifts, Phys. Rev. D 107, 055034 (2023).
  32. R. N. C. Pfeifer, Calculations beyond the standard model: W mass in CDF II, and Muon g−2, arXiv:2212.01255.
  33. C.-H. Chen, C.-W. Chiang, and C.-W. Su, Top-quark FCNC decays, LFVs, lepton g−2, and W mass anomaly with inert charged Higgses, arXiv:2301.07070.
  34. P. Mishra, M. K. Behera, and R. Mohanta, Neutrino phenomenology, W mass anomaly & muon (g−2) in minimal type-III seesaw using T′ modular symmetry, Phys. Rev. D 107, 115004 (2023).
  35. M. Ahmadvand and F. Hajkarim, Lepton g−2 and W-boson mass anomalies in the DFSZ axion model, arXiv:2302.09610.
  36. J. Heeck and A. Thapa, Zee-model predictions for lepton flavor violation, Phys. Lett. B 841, 137910 (2023).
  37. X.-F. Han, F. Wang, L. Wang, J. M. Yang, and Y. Zhang, Joint explanation of W-mass and muon g−2 in the 2HDM*, Chin. Phys. C 46, 103105 (2022).
  38. D. A. Ross and M. J. G. Veltman, Neutral currents in neutrino experiments, Nucl. Phys. B95, 135 (1975).
  39. J. F. Gunion, R. Vega, and J. Wudka, Higgs triplets in the Standard Model, Phys. Rev. D 42, 1673 (1990).
  40. P. H. Chankowski, S. Pokorski, and J. Wagner, (Non)decoupling of the Higgs triplet effects, Eur. Phys. J. C 50, 919 (2007).
  41. T. Blank and W. Hollik, Precision observables in SU(2)×U(1) models with an additional Higgs triplet, Nucl. Phys. B514, 113 (1998).
  42. J. R. Forshaw, A. Sabio Vera, and B. E. White, Mass bounds in a model with a triplet Higgs, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2003) 059.
  43. M.-C. Chen, S. Dawson, and T. Krupovnickas, Higgs triplets and limits from precision measurements, Phys. Rev. D 74, 035001 (2006).
  44. R. S. Chivukula, N. D. Christensen, and E. H. Simmons, Low-energy effective theory, unitarity, and non-decoupling behavior in a model with heavy Higgs-triplet fields, Phys. Rev. D 77, 035001 (2008).
  45. P. Bandyopadhyay and A. Costantini, Obscure Higgs boson at colliders, Phys. Rev. D 103, 015025 (2021).
  46. M. Chabab, M. C. Peyranère, and L. Rahili, Probing the Higgs sector of Y=0 Higgs triplet model at LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 873 (2018).
  47. P. Fileviez Perez, H. H. Patel, and A. D. Plascencia, On the W mass and new Higgs bosons, Phys. Lett. B 833, 137371 (2022).
  48. Y. Cheng, X.-G. He, F. Huang, J. Sun, and Z.-P. Xing, Electroweak precision tests for triplet scalars, Nucl. Phys. B989, 116118 (2023).
  49. T.-K. Chen, C.-W. Chiang, and K. Yagyu, Explanation of the WS mass shift at CDF II in the extended Georgi-Machacek model, Phys. Rev. D 106, 055035 (2022).
  50. T. G. Rizzo, Kinetic mixing, dark Higgs triplets, and MW, Phys. Rev. D 106, 035024 (2022).
  51. W. Chao, M. Jin, H.-J. Li, and Y.-Q. Peng, Axion-like dark matter from the type-II seesaw mechanism, arXiv:2210.13233.
  52. J.-W. Wang, X.-J. Bi, P.-F. Yin, and Z.-H. Yu, Electroweak dark matter model accounting for the CDF W-mass anomaly, Phys. Rev. D 106, 055001 (2022).
  53. Y. Shimizu and S. Takeshita, W boson mass and grand unification via the type-II seesaw-like mechanism, Nucl. Phys. B994, 116290 (2023).
  54. G. Lazarides, R. Maji, R. Roshan, and Q. Shafi, Heavier W boson, dark matter, and gravitational waves from strings in an SO(10) axion model, Phys. Rev. D 106, 055009 (2022).
  55. G. Senjanović and M. Zantedeschi, SU(5) grand unification and W-boson mass, Phys. Lett. B 837, 137653 (2023).
  56. S. von Buddenbrock, A. S. Cornell, A. Fadol, M. Kumar, B. Mellado, and X. Ruan, Multi-lepton signatures of additional scalar bosons beyond the standard model at the LHC, J. Phys. G 45, 115003 (2018).
  57. S. Buddenbrock, A. S. Cornell, Y. Fang, A. Fadol Mohammed, M. Kumar, B. Mellado, and K. G. Tomiwa, The emergence of multi-lepton anomalies at the LHC and their compatibility with new physics at the EW scale, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2019) 157.
  58. S. von Buddenbrock, R. Ruiz, and B. Mellado, Anatomy of inclusive tt¯W production at hadron colliders, Phys. Lett. B 811, 135964 (2020).
  59. Y. Hernandez, M. Kumar, A. S. Cornell, S.-E. Dahbi, Y. Fang, B. Lieberman, B. Mellado, K. Monnakgotla, X. Ruan, and S. Xin, The anomalous production of multi-lepton and its impact on the measurement of Wh production at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 365 (2021).
  60. O. Fischer et al., Unveiling hidden physics at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 665 (2022).
  61. G. Coloretti, A. Crivellin, S. Bhattacharya, and B. Mellado, Searching for low-mass resonances decaying into W bosons, arXiv:2302.07276.
  62. A. Czarnecki and W. J. Marciano, Muon anomalous magnetic moment: A harbinger for “new physics”, Phys. Rev. D 64, 013014 (2001).
  63. D. Stöckinger, Muon (g−2) and physics beyond the standard model, Adv. Ser. Dir. High Energy Phys. 20, 393 (2009).
  64. G. F. Giudice, P. Paradisi, and M. Passera, Testing new physics with the electron g−2, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2012) 113.
  65. A. Freitas, J. Lykken, S. Kell, and S. Westhoff, Testing the muon g−2 anomaly at the LHC, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2014) 145; 09 (2014) 155(E).
  66. K. Kowalska and E. M. Sessolo, Expectations for the muon g−2 in simplified models with dark matter, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2017) 112.
  67. A. Crivellin, M. Hoferichter, and P. Schmidt-Wellenburg, Combined explanations of (g−2)μ,e and implications for a large muon EDM, Phys. Rev. D 98, 113002 (2018).
  68. R. Capdevilla, D. Curtin, Y. Kahn, and G. Krnjaic, No-lose theorem for discovering the new physics of (g−2)μ at muon colliders, Phys. Rev. D 105, 015028 (2022).
  69. G. Guedes and P. Olgoso, A bridge to new physics: Proposing new—and reviving old—explanations of aμ, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2022) 181.
  70. A. Crivellin and M. Hoferichter, Consequences of chirally enhanced explanations of (g−2)μ for h→μμ and Z→μμ, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2021) 135.
  71. D. Stockinger, The muon magnetic moment and supersymmetry, J. Phys. G 34, R45 (2007).
  72. B. Grzadkowski, M. Iskrzynski, M. Misiak, and J. Rosiek, Dimension-six terms in the standard model Lagrangian, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2010) 085.
  73. A. Crivellin, D. Mueller, and F. Saturnino, Correlating h→μ+μ− to the Anomalous Magnetic Moment of the Muon via Leptoquarks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 021801 (2021).
  74. S. Fajfer, J. F. Kamenik, and M. Tammaro, Interplay of new physics effects in (g−2)ℓ and h→ℓ+ℓ−—lessons from SMEFT, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2021) 099.
  75. M. Aaboud et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Measurement of the W-boson mass in pp collisions at s=7  TeV with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 110 (2018); 78, 898(E) (2018).
  76. S. Schael et al. (ALEPH, DELPHI, L3, OPAL, and LEP Electroweak Collaborations), Electroweak measurements in electron-positron collisions at W-boson-pair energies at LEP, Phys. Rep. 532, 119 (2013).
  77. J. de Blas, M. Pierini, L. Reina, and L. Silvestrini, Impact of the Recent Measurements of the Top-Quark and W-Boson Masses on Electroweak Precision Fits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 271801 (2022).
  78. A. Sirlin, On the O(α2) corrections to τ(μ), m(W), m(Z) in the SU(2)L×U(1) theory, Phys. Rev. D 29, 89 (1984).
  79. A. Djouadi and C. Verzegnassi, Virtual very heavy top effects in LEP / SLC precision measurements, Phys. Lett. B 195, 265 (1987).
  80. L. Avdeev, J. Fleischer, S. Mikhailov, and O. Tarasov, 0(ααs2) correction to the electroweak ρ parameter, Phys. Lett. B 336, 560 (1994); 349, 597(E) (1995).
  81. K. G. Chetyrkin, J. H. Kuhn, and M. Steinhauser, QCD Corrections from Top Quark to Relations Between Electroweak Parameters to Order αs2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 3394 (1995).
  82. K. G. Chetyrkin, J. H. Kuhn, and M. Steinhauser, Corrections of order O(GFMt2αs2) to the ρ parameter, Phys. Lett. B 351, 331 (1995).
  83. M. Awramik, M. Czakon, A. Freitas, and G. Weiglein, Precise prediction for the W boson mass in the Standard Model, Phys. Rev. D 69, 053006 (2004).
  84. G. Degrassi, P. Gambino, and P. P. Giardino, The mW−mZ interdependence in the Standard Model: A new scrutiny, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2015) 154.
  85. R. L. Workman et al. (Particle Data Group), Review of particle physics, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2022, 083C01 (2022).
  86. S. Kanemura and K. Yagyu, Radiative corrections to electroweak parameters in the Higgs triplet model and implication with the recent Higgs boson searches, Phys. Rev. D 85, 115009 (2012).
  87. J. Alcaraz et al. (ALEPH, DELPHI, L3, OPAL, and LEP Electroweak Working Group Collaborations), A Combination of preliminary electroweak measurements and constraints on the standard model, arXiv:hep-ex/0612034.
  88. A. Crivellin, M. Hoferichter, and C. A. Manzari, Fermi Constant from Muon Decay Versus Electroweak Fits and Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa Unitarity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 071801 (2021).
  89. D. Bryman, V. Cirigliano, A. Crivellin, and G. Inguglia, Testing lepton flavor universality with pion, kaon, tau, and beta decays, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 72, 69 (2022).
  90. B. Belfatto, R. Beradze, and Z. Berezhiani, The CKM unitarity problem: A trace of new physics at the TeV scale?, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 149 (2020).
  91. Y. Grossman, E. Passemar, and S. Schacht, On the statistical treatment of the Cabibbo angle anomaly, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2020) 068.
  92. A. Crivellin, F. Kirk, C. A. Manzari, and M. Montull, Global electroweak fit and vector-like leptons in light of the Cabibbo angle anomaly, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2020) 166.
  93. A. M. Coutinho, A. Crivellin, and C. A. Manzari, Global Fit to Modified Neutrino Couplings and the Cabibbo-Angle Anomaly, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 071802 (2020).
  94. A. Crivellin and M. Hoferichter, β Decays as Sensitive Probes of Lepton Flavor Universality, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 111801 (2020).
  95. J. C. Hardy and I. S. Towner, Superallowed 0+→0+ nuclear β decays: 2020 critical survey, with implications for Vud and CKM unitarity, Phys. Rev. C 102, 045501 (2020).
  96. C.-Y. Seng, D. Galviz, W. J. Marciano, and U.-G. Meißner, Update on |Vus| and |Vus/Vud| from semileptonic kaon and pion decays, Phys. Rev. D 105, 013005 (2022).
  97. C.-Y. Seng, X. Feng, M. Gorchtein, and L.-C. Jin, Joint lattice QCD–dispersion theory analysis confirms the quark-mixing top-row unitarity deficit, Phys. Rev. D 101, 111301 (2020).
  98. V. Cirigliano, A. Crivellin, M. Hoferichter, and M. Moulson, Scrutinizing CKM unitarity with a new measurement of the Kμ3/Kμ2 branching fraction, Phys. Lett. B 838, 137748 (2023).
  99. M. Endo and S. Mishima, Muon g−2 and CKM unitarity in extra lepton models, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2020) 004.
  100. M. Kirk, Cabibbo anomaly versus electroweak precision tests: An exploration of extensions of the Standard Model, Phys. Rev. D 103, 035004 (2021).
  101. A. Crivellin, M. Kirk, T. Kitahara, and F. Mescia, Global fit of modified quark couplings to EW gauge bosons and vector-like quarks in light of the Cabibbo angle anomaly, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2023) 234.
  102. J. Aebischer, J. Kumar, P. Stangl, and D. M. Straub, A global likelihood for precision constraints and flavour anomalies, Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 509 (2019).
  103. P. Stangl, D. Straub, M. Kirk, A. Smolkovic, M. Hudec, and N. Sahoo, smelli/smelli: v2.4.0, 10.5281/zenodo.7868616 (2023).
  104. D. M. Straub, flavio: A python package for flavour and precision phenomenology in the standard model and beyond, arXiv:1810.08132.
  105. D. Straub et al., flav-io/flavio: v2.5.4, 10.5281/zenodo.7859312 (2023).
  106. J. Aebischer, J. Kumar, and D. M. Straub, wilson: A python package for the running and matching of Wilson coefficients above and below the electroweak scale, Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 1026 (2018).
  107. G. W. Bennett et al. (Muon g-2 Collaboration), Final report of the muon E821 anomalous magnetic moment measurement at BNL, Phys. Rev. D 73, 072003 (2006).
  108. T. Aoyama, M. Hayakawa, T. Kinoshita, and M. Nio, Complete Tenth-Order QED Contribution to the Muon g−2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 111808 (2012).
  109. T. Aoyama, T. Kinoshita, and M. Nio, Theory of the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron, Atoms 7, 28 (2019).
  110. A. Czarnecki, W. J. Marciano, and A. Vainshtein, Refinements in electroweak contributions to the muon anomalous magnetic moment, Phys. Rev. D 67, 073006 (2003); 73, 119901(E) (2006).
  111. C. Gnendiger, D. Stöckinger, and H. Stöckinger-Kim, The electroweak contributions to (g−2)μ after the Higgs boson mass measurement, Phys. Rev. D 88, 053005 (2013).
  112. M. Davier, A. Hoecker, B. Malaescu, and Z. Zhang, Reevaluation of the hadronic vacuum polarisation contributions to the standard model predictions of the muon g−2 and α(mZ2) using newest hadronic cross-section data, Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 827 (2017).
  113. A. Keshavarzi, D. Nomura, and T. Teubner, Muon g−2 and α(MZ2): A new data-based analysis, Phys. Rev. D 97, 114025 (2018).
  114. G. Colangelo, M. Hoferichter, and P. Stoffer, Two-pion contribution to hadronic vacuum polarization, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2019) 006.
  115. M. Hoferichter, B.-L. Hoid, and B. Kubis, Three-pion contribution to hadronic vacuum polarization, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2019) 137.
  116. M. Davier, A. Hoecker, B. Malaescu, and Z. Zhang, A new evaluation of the hadronic vacuum polarisation contributions to the muon anomalous magnetic moment and to α(mZ2), Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 241 (2020); 80, 410(E) (2020).
  117. A. Keshavarzi, D. Nomura, and T. Teubner, g−2 of charged leptons, α(MZ2), and the hyperfine splitting of muonium, Phys. Rev. D 101, 014029 (2020).
  118. A. Kurz, T. Liu, P. Marquard, and M. Steinhauser, Hadronic contribution to the muon anomalous magnetic moment to next-to-next-to-leading order, Phys. Lett. B 734, 144 (2014).
  119. K. Melnikov and A. Vainshtein, Hadronic light-by-light scattering contribution to the muon anomalous magnetic moment revisited, Phys. Rev. D 70, 113006 (2004).
  120. P. Masjuan and P. Sanchez-Puertas, Pseudoscalar-pole contribution to the (g−2)μ: A rational approach, Phys. Rev. D 95, 054026 (2017).
  121. G. Colangelo, M. Hoferichter, M. Procura, and P. Stoffer, Dispersion relation for hadronic light-by-light scattering: Two-pion contributions, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2017) 161.
  122. M. Hoferichter, B.-L. Hoid, B. Kubis, S. Leupold, and S. P. Schneider, Dispersion relation for hadronic light-by-light scattering: Pion pole, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2018) 141.
  123. A. Gérardin, H. B. Meyer, and A. Nyffeler, Lattice calculation of the pion transition form factor with Nf=2+1 Wilson quarks, Phys. Rev. D 100, 034520 (2019).
  124. J. Bijnens, N. Hermansson-Truedsson, and A. Rodríguez-Sánchez, Short-distance constraints for the HLbL contribution to the muon anomalous magnetic moment, Phys. Lett. B 798, 134994 (2019).
  125. G. Colangelo, F. Hagelstein, M. Hoferichter, L. Laub, and P. Stoffer, Longitudinal short-distance constraints for the hadronic light-by-light contribution to (g−2)μ with large-Nc Regge models, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2020) 101.
  126. T. Blum, N. Christ, M. Hayakawa, T. Izubuchi, L. Jin, C. Jung, and C. Lehner, Hadronic Light-by-Light Scattering Contribution to the Muon Anomalous Magnetic Moment from Lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 132002 (2020).
  127. G. Colangelo, M. Hoferichter, A. Nyffeler, M. Passera, and P. Stoffer, Remarks on higher-order hadronic corrections to the muon g−2, Phys. Lett. B 735, 90 (2014).
  128. T. Blum, P. A. Boyle, V. Gülpers, T. Izubuchi, L. Jin, C. Jung, A. Jüttner, C. Lehner, A. Portelli, and J. T. Tsang (RBC and UKQCD Collaboration), Calculation of the Hadronic Vacuum Polarization Contribution to the Muon Anomalous Magnetic Moment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 022003 (2018).
  129. M. Cè et al., Window observable for the hadronic vacuum polarization contribution to the muon g−2 from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D 106, 114502 (2022).
  130. C. Alexandrou et al. (Extended Twisted Mass Collaboration), Lattice calculation of the short and intermediate time-distance hadronic vacuum polarization contributions to the muon magnetic moment using twisted-mass fermions, Phys. Rev. D 107, 074506 (2023).
  131. A. Bazavov et al., Light-quark connected intermediate-window contributions to the muon g−2 hadronic vacuum polarization from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D 107, 114514 (2023).
  132. T. Blum et al., An update of Euclidean windows of the hadronic vacuum polarization, arXiv:2301.08696.
  133. G. Colangelo, A. X. El-Khadra, M. Hoferichter, A. Keshavarzi, C. Lehner, P. Stoffer, and T. Teubner, Data-driven evaluations of Euclidean windows to scrutinize hadronic vacuum polarization, Phys. Lett. B 833, 137313 (2022).
  134. F. V. Ignatov et al. (CMD-3 Collaboration), Measurement of the e+e−→π+π− cross section from threshold to 1.2 GeV with the CMD-3 detector, arXiv:2302.08834.
  135. R. R. Akhmetshin et al. (CMD-2 Collaboration), High-statistics measurement of the pion form factor in the rho-meson energy range with the CMD-2 detector, Phys. Lett. B 648, 28 (2007).
  136. M. N. Achasov et al., Update of the e+e−→π+π− cross-section measured by SND detector in the energy region 400<s<1000−MeV, J. Exp. Theor. Phys. 103, 380 (2006).
  137. J. P. Lees et al. (BABAR Collaboration, Precise measurement of the e+e−→π+π−(γ) cross section with the initial-state radiation method at BABAR, Phys. Rev. D 86, 032013 (2012).
  138. A. Anastasi et al. (KLOE-2 Collaboration), Combination of KLOE σ(e+e−→π+π−γ(γ)) measurements and determination of aμπ+π− in the energy range 0.10<s<0.95  GeV2, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2018) 173.
  139. M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collaboration), Measurement of the e+e−→π+π− cross section between 600 and 900 MeV using initial state radiation, Phys. Lett. B 753, 629 (2016); 812, 135982(E) (2021).
  140. M. N. Achasov et al. (SND Collaboration), Measurement of the e+e−→π+π− process cross section with the SND detector at the VEPP-2000 collider in the energy region 0.525<s<0.883  GeV, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2021) 113.
  141. A. Carmona, A. Lazopoulos, P. Olgoso, and J. Santiago, matchmakereft: Automated tree-level and one-loop matching, SciPost Phys. 12, 198 (2022).
  142. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), A search for the dimuon decay of the standard model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Lett. B 812, 135980 (2021).
  143. A. M. Sirunyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Evidence for Higgs boson decay to a pair of muons, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2021) 148.
  144. M. Cepeda et al., Report from working group 2: Higgs physics at the HL-LHC and HE-LHC, CERN Yellow Rep. Monogr. 7, 221 (2019).
  145. A. M. Sirunyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Search for vector-like leptons in multilepton final states in proton-proton collisions at s=13  TeV, Phys. Rev. D 100, 052003 (2019).
  146. CMS Collaboration, Combined search for electroweak production of winos, binos, Higgsinos, and sleptons in proton-proton collisions at s=13  TeV (to be published).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 108, L031702– Published 25 August, 2023
  • Received 9 May 2023
  • Accepted 7 August 2023
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI. Funded by SCOAP3.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation