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

Next-to-leading-order electroweak correction to H→Z0γ

Wen-Long Sang1,*, Feng Feng2,3,†, and Yu Jia3,4,‡

  • *Contact author: wlsang@swu.edu.cn
  • †Contact author: f.feng@outlook.com
  • ‡Contact author: jiay@ihep.ac.cn

Phys. Rev. D 110, L051302 – Published 27 September, 2024

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.110.L051302

Abstract

Inspired by the recent observation of the Higgs boson radiative decay into Z0 by ATLAS and CMS Collaborations, we investigate the next-to-leading-order (NLO) electroweak correction to this rare decay process in Standard Model (SM). Implementing the on shell renormalization scheme, we find that the magnitude of the NLO electroweak correction may reach 7% of the leading-order (LO) prediction, much more significant than that of the NLO QCD correction, which is merely about 0.3%. After incorporating the O(α) correction, the predicted partial width from various α schemes tend to converge to each other. Including both NLO electroweak and QCD corrections, the SM prediction for the branching fraction shifts from the LO value of (1.40–1.71)×10−3 to (1.55±0.06)×10−3, considerably lower than the measured value Bexp[H→Z0γ]=(3.4±1.1)×10−3. Resolving this discrepancy clearly calls for further theoretical investigations, and, more importantly, experimental efforts from HL-LHC and the prospective Higgs factories such as CEPC and FCC-ee.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (44)

  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. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS and CMS Collaborations), J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2016) 045.
  4. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Nature (London) 607, 52 (2022); 612, E24 (2022).
  5. A. Tumasyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Nature (London) 607, 60 (2022); 623, E4 (2023).
  6. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS and CMS Collaborations), Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 021803 (2024).
  7. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 809, 135754 (2020).
  8. A. Tumasyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2023) 233.
  9. A. Djouadi, J. Kalinowski, and M. Spira, Comput. Phys. Commun. 108, 56 (1998).
  10. D. de Florian et al. (LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group), 10.23731/CYRM-2017-002 (2017).
  11. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2023) 088.
  12. M. Herrero and R. A. Morales, Phys. Rev. D 102, 075040 (2020).
  13. T. T. Hong, V. K. Le, L. T. T. Phuong, N. C. Hoi, N. T. K. Ngan, and N. H. T. Nha, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2024, 033B04 (2024).
  14. S. Panghal and B. Mukhopadhyaya, arXiv:2310.04136.
  15. F. Buccioni, F. Devoto, A. Djouadi, J. Ellis, J. Quevillon, and L. Tancredi, Phys. Lett. B 851, 138596 (2024).
  16. D. Barducci, L. Di Luzio, M. Nardecchia, and C. Toni, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2023) 154.
  17. R. Boto, D. Das, J. C. Romao, I. Saha, and J. P. Silva, Phys. Rev. D 109, 095002 (2024).
  18. K. Cheung and C. J. Ouseph, arXiv:2402.05678.
  19. X. G. He, Z. L. Huang, M. W. Li, and C. W. Liu, arXiv:2402.08190.
  20. R. N. Cahn, M. S. Chanowitz, and N. Fleishon, Phys. Lett. 82B, 113 (1979).
  21. L. Bergstrom and G. Hulth, Nucl. Phys. B259, 137 (1985); B276, 744(E) (1986).
  22. M. Spira, A. Djouadi, and P. M. Zerwas, Phys. Lett. B 276, 350 (1992).
  23. T. Gehrmann, S. Guns, and D. Kara, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2015) 038.
  24. R. Bonciani, V. Del Duca, H. Frellesvig, J. M. Henn, F. Moriello, and V. A. Smirnov, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2015) 108.
  25. T. Hahn, Comput. Phys. Commun. 140, 418 (2001).
  26. R. Mertig, M. Bohm, and A. Denner, Comput. Phys. Commun. 64, 345 (1991).
  27. F. Feng and R. Mertig, arXiv:1212.3522.
  28. F. Feng, Comput. Phys. Commun. 183, 2158 (2012).
  29. A. V. Smirnov, Comput. Phys. Commun. 189, 182 (2015).
  30. X. Liu, Y. Q. Ma, and C. Y. Wang, Phys. Lett. B 779, 353 (2018).
  31. Z. F. Liu and Y. Q. Ma, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 222001 (2022).
  32. X. Liu and Y. Q. Ma, Comput. Phys. Commun. 283, 108565 (2023).
  33. A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, M. Roth, and D. Wackeroth, Nucl. Phys. B560, 33 (1999).
  34. A. Denner and S. Dittmaier, Nucl. Phys. B, Proc. Suppl. 160, 22 (2006).
  35. D. A. Ross and J. C. Taylor, Nucl. Phys. B51, 125 (1973); B58, 643(E) (1973).
  36. W. F. L. Hollik, Fortschr. Phys. 38, 165 (1990).
  37. A. Denner, Fortschr. Phys. 41, 307 (1993).
  38. R. L. Workman et al. (Particle Data Group), Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2022, 083C01 (2022).
  39. S. Eidelman and F. Jegerlehner, Z. Phys. C 67, 585 (1995).
  40. J. H. Kuhn and M. Steinhauser, Phys. Lett. B 437, 425 (1998).
  41. M. Steinhauser, Phys. Lett. B 429, 158 (1998).
  42. C. Sturm, Nucl. Phys. B874, 698 (2013).
  43. Z. Q. Chen, L. B. Chen, C. F. Qiao, and R. Zhu, arXiv:2404.11441.
  44. D. Binosi, J. Collins, C. Kaufhold, and L. Theussl, Comput. Phys. Commun. 180, 1709 (2009).

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation