Full Text

Turn on search term navigation

Published for SISSA by Springer

Received: April 25, 2014

Accepted: June 11, 2014

Published: July 29, 2014

R.L. Delgado,a A. Dobado.a M.J. Herrerob and J.J. Sanz-Cillerob

aDepartamento de Fsica Terica I, UCM, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Avda. Complutense s/n, 28040 Madrid, Spain

bDepartamento de Fsica Terica and Instituto de Fsica Terica, IFT-UAM/CSIC, Universidad Autnoma de Madrid,C/ Nicols Cabrera 13-15, Cantoblanco, 28049 Madrid, Spain

E-mail: mailto:[email protected]

Web End [email protected] , [email protected], [email protected], mailto:[email protected]

Web End [email protected]

Abstract: In this work we study the W +LW L and ZLZL scattering pro

cesses within the e ective chiral Lagrangian approach, including a light Higgs-like scalar as a dynamical eld together with the would-be-Goldstone bosons w and z associated to the electroweak symmetry breaking. This approach is inspired by the possibility that the Higgs-like boson be a composite particle behaving as another Goldstone boson, and assumes the existence of a mass gap between mh, mW , mZ and the potential new emergent resonances, setting an intermediate energy region (above mh,W,Z and below the resonance

masses) where the use of these e ective chiral Lagrangians are the most appropriate tools to compute the relevant observables. We analyse in detail the proper chiral counting rules for the present case of photon-photon scattering and provide the computation of the one-loop W +LW L and ZLZL scattering amplitudes within this E ective Chiral

Lagrangian approach and the Equivalence Theorem, including a discussion on the involved renormalization procedure. We also propose here a joint analysis of our results for the two-photon scattering amplitudes together with other photonic processes and electroweak (EW) precision observables for a future comparison with data. This could help to disentangle the nature of the light Higgs-like particle.

Keywords: Higgs Physics, Beyond Standard Model, Chiral Lagrangians

ArXiv ePrint: 1404.2866

Open Access, c

The Authors.

Article funded by SCOAP3. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2014)149

Web End =10.1007/JHEP07(2014)149

One-loop ! W +LW L and ! ZLZL from the Electroweak Chiral Lagrangian with a light Higgs-like scalar

JHEP07(2014)149

Contents

1 Introduction 1

2 The Electroweak Chiral Lagrangian with a light Higgs 5

3 Electroweak chiral loops and renormalized ECLh parameters 9

4 Coset parametrizations and relevant Feynman rules 12

5 Analytical results for the one-loop ! wawb scattering amplitudes 155.1 Analytical results for zz 16

5.2 Analytical results for w+w 18

6 Discussion 20

7 Conclusions 22

A Feynman rules 25A.1 Vertices from L2 25A.2 Vertices from L4 27

B Contribution from each diagram to the ! wawb amplitudes 28B.1 zz scattering amplitude 28

B.2 w+w scattering amplitude 28

C One-loop ! zz and ! w+w scattering in MCHM 30

D Related observables: Sparameter and other photon transitions 34

1 Introduction

The present consensus in the High Energy Physics Community points towards the interpretation that the recently discovered scalar particle at the CERN-LHC [1, 2] could very well be the Higgs particle of the Standard Model of Particle Physics (SM). The most recent measurements of this scalar Higgs mass by the ATLAS and CMS collaborations set mATLASh = 125.5 0.6 GeV [3] and mCMSh = 125.7 0.4 GeV [4], respectively. These experiments also show that the most probable JP quantum numbers for this discovered particle are 0+, and conclude that the measured Higgs couplings to the other SM particles are in agreement so far, although yet with moderate precision, with the values predicted in the SM. Also the Higgs-like particle width h has been found to be h < 17.4 MeV which is about 4.2 times the SM value [5]. However, there is one crucial issue of this

JHEP07(2014)149

discovered Higgs-like boson yet to be answered. The present data are still compatible with either an elementary or a composite Higgs boson hypothesis, therefore any optimal strategy to disentangle the real nature of this new scalar particle is very welcome in the search for a complete understanding of the Higgs system and the Higgs Mechanism of the Electroweak Theory.

In the present paper we assume that the Higgs boson is a composite particle and propose as one of these optimal strategies where to look for deviations respect to the SM predictions, the particular scattering processes where two photons scatter and produce two longitudinal weak bosons, i.e, we propose to look at the scattering amplitudes

M( ZLZL) and M( W +LW L). One of the most singular features of these two

processes is that they do not receive contributions from the Higgs particle within the SM at the tree level. And even more, the neutral channel, ZLZL indeed vanishes in

the SM at the tree level. Therefore, they are very sensitive processes to potential deviations from new physics in the Higgs sector, and they are specially appropriate for the case of a composite Higgs particle, since the new induced interactions from its composite nature with the photon-photon initial state could test the compositeness hypothesis more e ciently than other scattering processes not involving photons in the external legs.

Assuming that the Higgs boson is a composite particle, and not assuming any specic underlying strongly interacting theory explaining its properties in terms of its constituents, still allows for two qualitatively di erent possibilities. Either the composite Higgs particle appears as a resonance or it appears as a pseudo Goldstone Boson. On one hand we know that the measured Higgs mass is not far from the weak boson masses and, besides, there seems to be no new particles nor resonances in the spectra showing up at the presently available energies at LHC. This apparent mass gap between the boson masses, mW , mZ,

mh and the potential new particles/resonances masses leads to the preference for the hypothesis of the Higgs composite particle being another would-be-Goldstone-Boson. Notice that the assumed Electroweak Symmetry Breaking pattern, SU(2)L U(1)Y U(1)em

seems to work, leading to the correct explanation of the mass generation for mW and mZ with the three corresponding would-be-Goldstone-bosons (WBGBs), w and z, trans-muted into the three needed longitudinal components, W L and ZL. Here we are inspired by the appealing idea that the composite Higgs boson, h, together with the w and z bosons are the associated Goldstone Bosons (GBs) of a larger spontaneous global symmetry breaking pattern containing the Electroweak Symmetry Breaking pattern, once the gauge interactions are included.

There are several Models proposed in the literature for a composite Higgs with specic implementations for the relevant global symmetry breaking pattern, like the Composite Higgs Model based on the coset SO(5)/SO(4), usually called minimally composite Higgs model (MCHM) [69], dilaton models with spontaneous breaking of scale invariance [10, 11], and others [12]. We do not consider here any specic model for composite Higgs, but instead work in a model independent way with the most appropriate tool provided by E ective Field Theories (EFTs). Concretely, we use here the EFT that is based in a non-linear realization of the Electroweak Chiral Symmetry Breaking (EWCSB) pattern, SU(2)L SU(2)R

SU(2)L+R, that is built with the so-called Electroweak Chiral Lagrangian with a light

JHEP07(2014)149

Higgs-like scalar (ECLh). The scalar sector of this ECLh contains the three needed w and z bosons and the Higgs particle h as dynamical elds, and it shares with the SM the previously mentioned EWCSB pattern, with SU(2)C = SU(2)L+R being the so-called custodial symmetry, and with the Higgs eld being a singlet under this symmetry. The choice of a non-linear realization for the ECLh, instead of a linear one, and the name Chiral are due to the obvious close analogy with the Chiral Lagrangian (CL) of low energy QCD which, in its simplest version, is based in the well known Chiral Symmetry Breaking pattern, SU(2)R SU(2)L SU(2)V . In this QCD case the dynamics of mesons, that are

identied with the associated GBs of this breaking, is well described by the CL [13] and the systematic methods of Chiral Perturbation Theory (ChPT) [1416]. The choice of a non-linear realization for the QCD mesons is a crucial ingredient for the understanding of the low energy meson phenomenology, in particular, for scattering processes involving the dynamics of multiple mesons. This motivates the choice of a non-linear realization also for the ECLh and, consequently, most of the EFT techniques that were learnt from ChPT are nowadays applied to this new e ective Lagrangian for the Electroweak Theory.

The ECLh is, on the other hand, the natural extension of the old models for the Strongly Interacting Electroweak Symmetry Breaking Sector (SIEWSBS), rst introduced by Appelquist and Longhitano [1719], and later studied by other authors (see, for instance, [20] and [21]). These old models for the SIEWSBS together with the methods inherited from the CLs [13] and ChPT [1416] for the study of low energy pion dynamics lead to the building of the so-called Electroweak Chiral Lagrangians (ECLs) [22]. These ECLs were used mainly for the study of the scattering of longitudinal EW gauge bosons [2227] and also for the study of other interesting observables like the ones proposed here, M( W +LW L) and M( ZLZL) [28], the so-called oblique S and T param

eters [29, 30] or some related EW precision observables like r, [31] and others [32]. These ECLs did not include the Higgs particle as an explicit dynamical eld but instead it was considered as a potentially emergent resonance of the strongly interacting underlying system. In fact the Higgs particle was assumed to appear at the O(1 TeV) scale and there

were indeed explicit computations of the ECL parameters emerging from the integration to one-loop level of such a heavy Higgs within the SM context [33, 34]. After the discovery of a relatively light Higgs these ECLs are obviously not considered anymore, however, yet the generic EFT methods that were developed for the ECLs, basically following a similar path as in ChPT, are yet applicable to the ECLh case.

At present the complete list of terms contributing to this ECLh at the tree level is well known, including all the operators with bosonic and fermionic elds up to chiral dimension d = 4 [35, 36], and there are several works that use the ECLh for phenomenological purposes, like those devoted to the study of deviations in the Higgs-like particle couplings to fermions and EW bosons at the tree level, and the possibility to disentangle these deviations at the LHC [37, 38]. On the other hand there are a few works including also the most relevant one-loop contributions from the ECLh, like the ones studying the scattering of longitudinal EW gauge bosons [3943], the oblique S and T parameters [44, 45] and others dealing with the renormalization program of the e ective action which, so far, has only been studied for the linear realization case [4648].

JHEP07(2014)149

In this paper we present a one-loop computation of the M( ZLZL) and M(

W +LW L) scattering amplitudes with the ECLh, valid up to next to leading order in the chiral expansion, and take a special attention to the role played by the hypothetical composite Higgs boson in these physical processes, as well as in the one-loop renormalization program with the ECLh that we describe also in detail here. We postpone the study of the potential experimental signatures at colliders, like LHC and future ILC, that are implied by our computation, for a future work.

For the explicit computation here with the ECLh we make the following assumptions and approximations:

1. The ECLh is SU(2)L U(1)Y gauge invariant and provides a good description of

scattering processes, whenever their relevant energies, s, are su ciently low, say, s ECLh, where ECLh = min (4v, M). Here, v = 246 GeV, 4v 3 TeV is the

typical scale introduced by the chiral loops, as in any other Chiral Lagrangian, and M refers to the mass of any potentially emergent resonance. In the present paper we focus on the bosonic part of the ECLh and leave the fermionic contributions for another work. We also assume CP invariance in our selection of the relevant terms of the ECLh.

2. We work in the Landau gauge that simplies the one-loop computation since it implies massless WBGBs, i.e., for the present computation we take mw = mz = 0.

3. We use the Equivalence Theorem (ET) [4952] that has been proven to work also within the context of a SIEWSBS [5356]. For the present computation it means that, for energies well above the EW gauge boson masses, mW , mZ s, the following approximations can be done:

M W +LW L

(1.1)

M( ZLZL) M( zz) . (1.2)

The use of this theorem will allow us to extract the leading contributions to our observables in terms of diagrams with only w, z and h in the internal lines. The diagrams with internal , W , Z lines would enter at higher orders in g and g and these would lead to subleading contributions under the assumption of small g, g,

or more precisely for gv, gv s with v kept xed, which is precisely the energy

range set by the ET, mW , mZ s. Besides, due to the close values of mh with

mW and mZ, the two previous assumptions together lead to the following window of applicability in energies for our computation:

mh, mW , mZ s ECLh . (1.3)

4. Finally, we also assume custodial symmetry invariance in the scalar sector of the ECLh as in the SM. It means that the custodial symmetry breaking terms included here for the bosonic sector are exclusively induced by the gauging of the hyper-charge group, U(1)Y , hence their corresponding contributions to the observables will be driven by the small coupling g. Equivalently, by setting to zero the hyper-charge gauge coupling in the ECLh considered here one recovers the full symmetry, SU(2)L SU(2)R.

JHEP07(2014)149

M w+w

The paper is organized as follows. In section 2 we introduce the ECLh and select the relevant terms for the present computation of the one-loop M( w+w) and M( zz)

scattering amplitudes up to O e2p2

. We also include a detailed description on how we implement the chiral dimension counting in the ECLh. The relevant chiral parameters for the present computation will also be specied in this section. Section 3 contains an illustrative and generic description of the various contributions entering in the present computation, analyzing separately the Leading Order (LO) tree level terms, i.e. of O(e2), the

Next to Leading Order tree level terms, i.e. of O e2p2

, and the one-loop contributions generated from the LO terms, which are of this same order, i.e. of O e2p2

. The renormalization of the ECLh parameters is also discussed in this section. Section 4 introduces the two di erent parametrizations of the coset that we have used in this computation, as a check of the parametrization independence of our nal result. We also present the nal e ective Lagrangian in terms of the relevant elds, the photon eld and the w, z, h

elds, and derive the corresponding Feynman Rules (collected in appendix A) for the two chosen parametrizations. Section 5 contains the analytical results of our computation of the one-loop wawb scattering amplitudes . In section 6 we discuss the results and

compare them with the predictions of other interesting observables that have been selected here because they involve the same ECLh parameters and therefore there are correlations among them. We also propose here the use of global analysis for all these observables as a promising method to extract the values of the ECLh parameters from data. Section 7 is nally devoted to the conclusions. Technical details as the Feynman rules, the individual contributions from the various loop diagrams, the detailed predictions for the related observables and the specic results for the scattering processes in the particular model MCHM have been relegated to the appendices.

2 The Electroweak Chiral Lagrangian with a light Higgs

The ECLh is a gauged non-linear e ective Lagrangian coupled to a singlet scalar particle that contains as dynamical elds the EW gauge bosons, W , Z and , the corresponding would-be GBs, w, z, and the Higgs-like scalar boson, h. The WBGBs, w, z, are described by a matrix eld U that takes values in the SU(2)L SU(2)R/SU(2)L+R coset,

and transforms as U LUR under the action of the global group SU(2)L SU(2)R that

denes the EW Chiral symmetry. The subgroup SU(2)L+R = SU(2)C denes the custodial symmetry group. We will assume here that, as it happens in the SM, the scalar sector of the ECLh preserves this custodial symmetry, except for the explicit breaking due to the gauging of the U(1)Y symmetry. Two particular parametrizations of this unitary matrix U in terms of the dimensionless w/v and z/v elds, with v = 246 GeV will be presented in section 4, where it will be also commented on the advantages and disadvantages of each of these parametrizations, both leading to the same predictions for the physical observables. Regarding the Higgs eld h one has to take into account that it is a singlet under the EW Chiral symmetry SU(2)L SU(2)R and, therefore, there are not particular restric

tions on the implementation of this eld into the ECLh from the EW Chiral symmetry requirements. The Higgs eld is consequently introduced in the ECLh via multiplicative

JHEP07(2014)149

polynomial functions, F(h), and their derivatives. These polynomials are generically of

the form, (1 + 2ah/v + b(h/v)2 + . . .), where a, b . . . are general ECLh parameters that are added to the other ECLh parameters and that take particular values in specic models. The EW gauge elds are introduced as usual by means of the gauge principle that ensures the SU(2)L U(1)Y gauge invariance of the ECLh. Concretely, they are introduced by

the covariant derivative of the U eld, DU, and by the SU(2)L and U(1)Y eld strength tensors, and B respectively. In summary, the basic functions for the building of the SU(2)L U(Y )L gauge invariant ECLh are the following:

U w, z

= 1 + iwaa/v + O w2

JHEP07(2014)149

SU(2)L SU(2)R/SU(2)L+R, (2.1)

F(h) = 1 + 2ahv + b

h v

2+ . . . , (2.2)

DU = U + iU iU

B, (2.3) =

+ i

, B = B

B, (2.4) = g~/2, B = g B3/2, (2.5)

V = (DU)U, T = U3U, (2.6)

where we have also included the usual V and T chiral elds.

According to the usual counting rules of Chiral Lagrangians, the SU(2)L U(1)Y

invariant terms in the ECLh are organized by means of their chiral dimension, meaning that a term Ld with chiral dimension d will contribute to O(pd) in the corresponding power

momentum expansion. For the present computation of one-loop M( W +LW L) and

M( ZLZL) scattering amplitudes by means of the Equivalence Theorem there are just

a few terms in the ECLh that are involved in the corresponding one-loop M( w+w) and M( zz) scattering amplitudes. Thus, we focus here mainly on this subset of

ECLh terms that we present in this section and classify according to its chiral dimension.

The chiral dimension of each term in the ECLh can be found out by following the scaling with p of the various contributing basic functions. First, as it is usual in E ective Chiral Lagrangians, the derivatives and the masses of the dynamical particles are considered as soft scales of the EFT and are consequently of the same order in the chiral counting,i.e. of O(p). The gauge boson masses, mW and mZ are examples of these soft masses in

the case of the ECLh. These are generated from the covariant derivative in eq. (2.3) once the U eld is expanded in terms of the wa elds as:

DU = i ~

v + i

v i

B 3

v + . . . (2.7)

where the dots represent terms with higher powers of (wa/v) and whose precise form will depend on the particular parametrization of U. Once the gauge elds are rotated to the physical basis then they get the usual gauge boson squared mass values at lowest order: m2W = g2v2/4 and m2Z =

g2 + g2

v2/4. Furthermore, in order to have a power counting consistent with the loop expansion one needs all the terms in the covariant derivative above to be of the same order. Thus, the proper assignment is , (gv) , (gv) O(p) or,

equivalently, , mW , mZ O(p). In addition, due to the close values of the EW gauge

boson masses with the experimental Higgs boson mass, we will also consider in this work the Higgs-like boson mass mh as another soft mass in the ECLh with, a similar chiral counting as mW and mZ. That implies, mh O(p), or equivalently (v2) O(p2), with

being the SM Higgs self-coupling. One can similarly conclude on the scaling of all the other building blocks of the ECLh that we summarize and collect in the following:

, mW , mZ, mh O(p), (2.8) DU, V, gv, T ,

, B O(p), (2.9) , B O p2

. (2.10)

Notice that to get the correct chiral counting of quantities involving the couplings g and/or g it is convenient to rewrite them in terms of (gv) and/or (gv) and dimensionless elds, correspondingly. For instance, B = (gv)(B/v)3/2 (gv)(B/v)3/2 O(p2).

Similarly, one can check other examples like (1/g)2 B B O(p2) etc.

With these building blocks one then construct the ECLh up to a given order in the chiral expansion. We require this Lagrangian to be CP invariant, Lorentz invariant and SU(2)L U(1)Y gauge invariant. For the present work we include terms with chiral dimen

sion up to O(p4), therefore, the ECLh can be generically written as:

LECLh = L2 + L4 + LGF + LFP , (2.11) where L2 refers to the terms with chiral dimension 2, i.e O(p2), L4 refers to the terms

with chiral dimension 4, i.e O(p4), and LGF and LFP are the gauge-xing (GF) and the

corresponding non-abelian Fadeev-Popov (FP) terms that have been explicitly separated as they are particular terms added to EW gauge theory to x the gauge freedom in the path integral. As we said in the introduction, the Landau gauge is assumed all along this work, which is the most convenient one for the present computation since the WBGBs w and z are massless in this gauge. The convenience of the Landau gauge choice in the context of the gauged non-linear sigma model was emphasized long ago in [17], since in this gauge there are no direct couplings of the GB to the ghosts.

We focus next in the relevant terms for w+w and zz scattering processes.

First, the relevant terms in the leading order (LO) Lagrangian of O(p2) are given by

L2 =

2g2 Tr

+ v2

JHEP07(2014)149

1 + 2ahv + bh2v2 Tr

2g2 Tr

B B

DUDU + 12h h + . . . , (2.12)

where the dots stand for O(p2) operators with three or more Higgs elds which do not

enter into this computation. In particular, notice that the Higgs self-interaction terms do not enter here for this same reason. Besides, the Higgs mass term is not included either, because it would lead to subleading contributions to the observables of interest here when compared to the set of contributions that we are considering which will dominate in the assumed energy range given in eq. (1.3).

Second, the complete next to leading order (NLO) Lagrangian of O(p4) contain many

terms. In particular it includes the complete set of CP-even, Lorentz and gauge invariant operators that were rst collected by Longhitano in ref. [18, 19], and also listed in other works like [2628, 31, 33, 34] and references therein. The total list in ref. [18, 19] includes 14 operators of chiral dimension 4, which are reduced to just 5 if one rejects operators that are not custodial symmetry invariant, even in the case of switching o the g gauge couplings, and also by the use of the equations of motion. This reduced list of 5 terms is given by the explicit terms below:

LLonghitano = a1Tr

+ a4 [Tr(VV)] [Tr (V V )] + a5 [Tr(VV )] [Tr (VV )] + . . . , (2.13)

where our notation for the chiral parameters ai is as in refs. [33, 34] and they are related to Longhitanos i chiral parameters by: a1 = (g/g)1, a2 = (g/g)2, a3 = 3, a4 = 4,

a5 = 5. They are also related with the usual notation for the chiral parameters Li from the QCD Chiral Lagrangian [1416] restricted to two light avours:1 L1 = a5, L2 = a4,

L9 = a3 a2, L10 = a1.

The parameters a4 and a5, on the other hand, are of great relevance since they participate with a leading role in the scattering of longitudinal EW gauge bosons like, for instance, W +LW L W +LW L and W +LW L ZLZL. These have been studied within the

ECLh context by several authors [3943] and they are of much interest due to the implications for LHC which presumably will explore these scattering amplitudes in the future run. However the implications of a1,2,3 within the context of the ECLh have not been studied yet, and this is one of our goals here. As we will see next, these a1,2,3 are the

relevant chiral parameters entering in wawb scattering. Notice also that the rst

three operators involving a1,2,3 have been written in such a way that if the U(1)Y gauge group were promoted to a wider symmetry SU(2)R with the help of spurionic elds for the two missing gauge bosons, these operators would be SU(2)L SU(2)R invariant.

Finally, in the building of the O(p4) terms of the ECLh, one has to add extra terms involving the Higgs eld, which include adding polynomial factors in front of the previous operators of the generic type (1 + ki(h/v) + gi(h/v)2 + . . .) and also in front of the other

O(p4) terms like and B B. In summary, by selecting the subset of O(p4) terms that are relevant for the scattering of interest here, i.e. for w+w and zz, we

nd the following short list of contributing terms:

L4 = a1Tr U BU

U BU

+ ia2Tr

U BU[V , V ] ia3Tr [V , V ]

JHEP07(2014)149

+ ia2Tr

+ . . . (2.14)

1Notice that while this correspondence between the ECL parameters ai and the SU(3) CL parameters Lj from QCD is valid at the tree-level, this is no longer true at the loop level where the renormalization and running of the e ective Lagrangian parameters depend on the symmetry group. However, we can still keep the analogy between the EW and QCD e ective Lagrangians at the loop level if we relate the ECL parameters with those in the original CL for low energy QCD in the case of SU(2) [1416] leading to: 1 = 4a5, 2 = 4a4, 5 = a1, 6 = 2(a2 a3).

U BU[V , V ] ia3Tr [V , V ]

hv Tr

cB hv Tr

B B

where we have used the same conventions for the denition of the cW and cB parameters as in refs. [35, 36]. Notice that the last two terms in the previous equation, once the gauge elds are rotated to the physical basis, lead to one of the relevant operators here involving the photon eld strength, A = A A, which is:

hv Tr

hv e2AA + . . . . (2.15)

Finally to nish this section, we nd illustrative to compare the di erent settings for the ECLh parameters in some specic and most popular models, like the Higgsless ECL models, the SM itself, the SO(5)/SO(4) MCHM, dilaton models and others. If we make the comparison at the LO Lagrangian level (i.e at L2 level), the values of the ECLh parameters

in these models are, correspondingly:

a2 = b = 0 Higgsless ECL [1719], a2 = b = 1 SM,

a2 = 1

v2f2 , b = 1

cB hv Tr

B B

JHEP07(2014)149

2v2f2 SO(5)/SO(4) MCHM [69],

a2 = b = v2

f2 , Dilaton [10, 11]. (2.16)

If we make the comparison at the NLO Lagrangian level, then one has to set in addition the values of the ECLh parameters in L4. Thus, for instance, in comparing with the

Higgsless ECL models one sets, in addition to the previous values above, c and all the involved parameters in the polynomial functions for the Higgs eld to zero. The rest of ai parameters are present in the ECL as in the ECLh case. In the comparison with the SM, for consistency, one has to set obviously all parameters in L4 to zero, ai = 0, c = 0, etc.

3 Electroweak chiral loops and renormalized ECLh parameters

In this section we describe the systematic procedure for our computation of the one-loop

M( w+w) and M( zz) scattering amplitudes, starting with the relevant terms

of the ECLh that have been xed in the previous section.

First, as in any Chiral E ective Theory, one has to x the order in the Chiral expansion up to which the amplitude is to be computed. Here we set the computation up to O(p4), meaning that the amplitude will have two type of contributions: the Leading Order contributions (LO), i.e, O(p2) and the Next to leading order contributions (NLO), i.e, O(p4).

Next, and following the standard counting rules of Chiral Lagrangians [1316, 57], one has to consider the contributions from chiral loops here called, for obvious reasons, electroweak chiral loops, that are produced by the LO Lagrangian. In the present context of ECLh these EW chiral loops will include the Higgs boson particle in the loops, in addition to the usual dynamical elds of the Chiral Lagrangians. These EW chiral loops do also contribute to order O(p4) and have to be taken into account together with the xing of a well

dened renormalization prescription to deal with the divergences that are generated by the

EW chiral loops, usually computed in dimensional regularization which will also be considered in this work. This implies setting a well dened procedure for the renormalization of the ECLh parameters. Notice that dimensional regularization is particulary appropriate for dealing with CL since it is chiral invariant so that no extra terms must be added to the action to restore chiral invariance as would be the case if one uses a cuto or other non-invariant regularization methods (see for example [58] and references therein).

In order to clarify the various steps to follow in our case, let us rst shortly review how do the Weinbergs chiral power counting rules [13] apply to the present case of ECLh. With this purpose in mind, let us rst write the term with chiral dimension d in the ECLh,

Ld, in the generic form:

Ld =

Xkf(d)kpd

JHEP07(2014)149

k, (3.1)

where, refers to any of the bosonic elds in the ECLh, h, wa, W a, B; p refers to either a derivative acting on the corresponding bosonic eld or a soft mass, mW,Z,h; and f(d)k are the corresponding coe cients in front of the terms with k powers of the dimensionless eld (/v). For instance, for the lowest dimension terms, L2 and L4, these go respectively

as: f(2)k v2 and f(4)k ai, where by ai we mean here generically all the dimensionless parameters in L4 like a1, a2, a3 and c. The coe cients of higher chiral dimension terms f(d)k

will be correspondingly of lower energy (canonical) dimension [E]4d. Now, according to the usual Weinbergs chiral counting rules, the contribution to a given scattering amplitude from each Feynman diagram containing L loops generated with the LO L2, E external legs

and Nd interaction vertices from Ld, scales in powers of p as follows:

p2 vE2

p2 162v2

f(d)kp(d2) v2

!Nd, (3.2)

where we see explicitly the typical suppression factor of the chiral loops given by p2/ 162v2

for each loop. For further details on the power counting in EW Chiral Lagrangians, see refs. [5962]. Notice also that, for d = 2, the last factor scales as p0, meaning that the same result for the total scaling of M is obtained for any number N2 of vertices from L2

entering in the Feynman diagram. Then, applying this chiral counting to our wawb scattering processes (with four external legs), we nd immediately that the contribution from a generic Feynman diagram containing L loops generated with L2, and N4 interaction

vertices from L4 (and for any N2) scales in powers of p as follows:

p2v2 p2 162v2

aip2 v2

N4 e2

p2 162v2

aip2 v2

N4, (3.3)

where, as already stated above, the ai here refer generically to all the EW chiral parameters of L4, i.e., a1, a2, a3 and c in the present work. Furthermore, for the particular present case

with two photons in the initial state, as it will be shown later in the explicit computation, the rst factor p2/v2

indeed appears here as e2 with e being the electromagnetic coupling, therefore, we have also rewritten in eq. (3.3) this generic expression in terms of the (e2)

pre-factor.

Summarizing, we can now use the previous expression to the right in eq. (3.3) to conclude on the various contributions entering into our computation of the one-loop M(

wawb) amplitudes, and also set the various steps to follow. Generically, we will split the amplitudes into two parts:

M= MLO + MNLO, (3.4)

1. The LO contributions are given by all the tree-level diagrams (L = 0) with vertices from just the L2 Lagrangian, i.e with N4 = 0:

MLO = MtreeO(e2) e2. (3.5)

2. The NLO contributions come from two types of graphs:

MNLO = M1loopO(e2p2) + MtreeO(e2p2) . (3.6)

One-loop diagrams (L = 1) with only vertices from L2, i.e with N4 = 0. These

contribute as,

M1loopO(e2p2) e2

. (3.7)

It is known that these loops may generate UV divergences, therefore, requiring the presence of local counter-terms to fulll the renormalization.

Tree-level diagrams (L = 0) with only one vertex from the L4 Lagrangian,

i.e. with N4 = 1, and the remaining vertices from the L2 Lagrangian. These

contribute as,

MtreeO(e2p2) e2

. (3.8)

3. The nal step is to dene a specic renormalization prescription to cancel out the one-loop UV divergences that appear in M1loopO(e2p2). This is performed in a systematic way

by the renormalization of the EW chiral parameters in L4. In contrast, the parameters

in L2 do not get renormalized. This renormalization program is completely analogous

to the one in Chiral Perturbation Theory [1316]. In our present case this will imply, in principle, the renormalization of the four EW chiral parameters entering here, namely, a1, a2, a3 and c:

a1, a2, a3, c ar1, ar2, ar3, cr (3.9)

by the proper counterterms ai, with

ari = ai + ai , (3.10)

that will remove the UV divergences appearing, as usual in dimensional regularization, as functions of 1/

dened as,

1 = 2

where:

p2 162v2

JHEP07(2014)149

ai p2

, (3.11)

1 E + ln 4

with D = 4 2. These ai counterterms in turn, will lead to the corresponding

running of the e ective EW parameters, i.e. the dependence with the renormalization

scale of these parameters, ari().

One of the big surprises in this work, that we anticipate here, is that after the very intriguing computation of all the very many loops and contributing terms to the scattering amplitudes, it turns out that the nal result for the M1loopO(e2p2) terms are indeed nite!!. This means that the particular combination of the EW chiral parameters a1, a2, a3, c entering here does not need renormalization, and therefore this will give us the result for the physical one-loop amplitude in terms of a renormalization group invariant combination of these a1, a2, a3, c parameters. This is a very interesting result, but all this will be presented and discussed in full detail later.

4 Coset parametrizations and relevant Feynman rules

In order to perform the computations we are dealing with in this work we have to chose some parametrization of the coset. As it was described in the previous section our e ective low-energy theory is a gauged non-linear sigma model based in the coset SU(2)L

SU(2)R/SU(2)L+R coupled to the light scalar h. The gauge group is SU(2)L U(1)Y and

SU(2)L+R is the custodial symmetry group. Therefore the coset is just the space SU(2) which is isomorphic to the three dimensional sphere S3. In order to have an explicit e ective Lagrangian we need to introduce some particular coordinates on this space that will play the role of the WBGB elds. These three elds must be independent and properly normalized but otherwise they are arbitrary since there is a well known theorem about non linear sigma models guaranteeing that the S matrix elements (on-shell amplitudes) are independent of the particular coordinates chosen (see for example [58] and references therein). For the case considered here, one of the most popular elections is the exponential representation given by:

U(x) = exp i ~

v , (4.1)

where ~

= aa(x) and a (a = 1, 2, 3) are the Pauli matrices. However, as we will see later, this is not at all the most e cient coset parametrization in this case. These coordinates are inspired in ChPT where one usually deals with a SU(3) coset. However here we are using just a SU(2) coset which is isomorphic to S3. Then it is possible to introduce the much simpler coordinates:

U(x) =

r1 2v2 + i~v , (4.2)

where again ~

= aa(x) and 2 =

Pa(a)2 = ~2. We will call these coordinates spherical to distinguish them from the exponential ones. As we will see next, the Lagrangian, the Feynman rules and even the Feynman diagrams are simpler (meaning lesser in number) in the spherical representations but the nal results for the amplitudes are parametrization independent, as expected. We have checked explicitly this fact by making the computations using both representations independently.

JHEP07(2014)149

It is not very di cult to nd the transformation equations passing from one set of coordinates to the other. To do that we rst realize that the exponential representation can also be written as:

U(x) = cos

v + i

sin

v , (4.3)

where = 2 with 2 =

Pa(a)2. Therefore, we have:

a = a v sin

v , (4.4)

which implies 2 = v2 sin2(/v). By expanding the result above we can get the series:

a = a"1 1 6

JHEP07(2014)149

2+ 1 120

41 5040

6+ . . .

. (4.5)

Also it is easy to show the useful relation

. (4.6)

From these elds it is useful to introduce the elds = (1 i2)/2, 0 = 3 which

implies 2 = 2+ + 00 and similar denitions for and 0. These two sets of elds represent equally the WBGB w and z responsible for the W and Z masses respectively.

Now we can write the leading order Lagrangian found in the previous section in terms of the two above parametrizations keeping photons as the only gauge elds. In the case of the exponential parametrization we have the O(p2) Lagrangian,

L2(, h, )= 12hh +

2F(h)

v22 sin2

ab ab 2

+ ab

+ ieF(h)A v22 sin2v ++v2+3 2 sin v

cos v v sinv +h.c.

+ e2F(h)AA+

v22 sin2

v , (4.7)

and for the spherical parametrization,

L2(, h, ) = 1 2hh +

2F(h)

ab + ab v2 2

+ ieF(h)A(+ +) + e2F(h)AA+ (4.8)

where in both cases, the relevant terms in F(h) are:

F(h) = 1 + 2ahv + b

h2v2 . (4.9)

These second coordinates give rise to a much simpler Lagrangian and simpler Feynman rules and diagrams for a given processes. For example using the coordinates photons only couple to two WBGB. On the other hand the exponential parametrization produces couplings of photons to an arbitrary large number of WBGBs.

For the two processes of interest here, zz and w+w, the relevant O(p2)

Lagrangians for the two parametrizations considered here are:

L2(, h, ) = 1 2hh +

2F(h) 2+ + 00

+ F(h)

6v2

+ + + + 00

2 2

2+ + 00 i

+ ieF(h)

1 2 3v2

6v2 2

+ h.c.

+ e2F(h)AA+

2 3v2

(4.10)

JHEP07(2014)149

and

L2(, h, ) = 12hh +

2F(h) 2+ + 00

+ F(h)

2v2 + + + + 00

+ e2F(h)AA+. (4.11)

These are the relevant pieces of the L2 Lagrangian (in the corresponding coset parametriza

tion) for our photon-photon computation, where we use the Landau gauge and the WBGBs are massless and we are, in practice, taking mh = 0. All these assumptions together with the fact that we are using dimensional regularization will reduce considerably the number of diagrams to be computed.

From these Lagrangians above it is now straightforward to get the Feynman rules for the relevant couplings. In appendix A we show the relevant rules obtained from both parametrizations for incoming particles. As one could have expected, those rules involving less than four WBGBs are exactly the same in both parametrizations. This is because both coordinates di er in terms which are at least quadratic in the WBGBs. Thus the vertices with four WBGBs are indeed di erent in both parametrizations if the WBGBs are o -shell but they coincide for on-shell legs to guarantee that the corresponding S matrix elements are parametrization independent. Notice that in particular the vertex with four neutral WBGBs zzzz vanishes in the exponential coordinates case but it does not vanish in the spherical ones (o -shell). Therefore, this vertex will contribute to one-loop diagrams in one case but not in the other one. This shows that the independence of the S matrix elements on the particular parametrization at the one-loop level is not a trivial result at all (see [58] and references therein). This fact was observed for the rst time in [63, 64] in the context of SU(2) ChPT for the process 00 to one loop and in the chiral limit. In

this case the on-shell one-loop amplitude requires the computation of four diagrams using the exponential coordinates (see for example [65]) but only two diagrams when one uses the spherical parametrization.

Besides, the vertices with four WBGBs and one photon are also di erent in both parametrizations, even for on-shell legs but this is not a problem since the corresponding physical process (S matrix elements) have other contributions at the tree level.

+ ieF(h)A + +

5 Analytical results for the one-loop ! wawb scattering amplitudes

Following the procedure described in detail in the previous sections, we proceed now to perform the computation of the wawb amplitudes up to NLO in the chiral expansion.

In the charge basis for the WBGBs, this corresponds to the computation of the zz

and w+w amplitudes, respectively related to ZLZL and W +LW L

amplitudes through the Equivalence Theorem.

In addition, under the assumptions and approximations taken in the present article, many Feynman diagrams su er important simplications. First, we are left just with the one-loop diagrams with only scalar elds, h, w and z, in the internal lines. Second, in the massless case considered here, namely, in the Landau gauge with WBGBs poles at zero and negligible Higgs mass, mh s 4v, all the one point Feynman integrals A0(m2)

with m = mh,w,z vanish in dimensional regularization. Since this type of diagrams do not contribute in our case they have not been included in our plots together with the remaining one-loop graphs for zz and w+w. Likewise, there is no wave-

function renormalization in the massless case (Z = 1) and there is no need for a separate study of the self-energies. Nonetheless, we would like to emphasize that the three eliminated contributions (Feynman diagrams with one-point scalar Feynman integrals, diagrams with internal EW gauge bosons and the wave-functions renormalization) must be included if the calculation is required to account also for subleading corrections, like O

corrections.2

The present computation has been performed with the help of FeynRules, FeynArts and FormCalc [6669] and has also been double-checked through two independent computations, one in the exponential parametrization of U(x) and the other with U(x) expressed in spherical coordinates. We found full agreement in the nal results from both parametrizations when the two external WBGBs and the two external photons were set on-shell, as expected [58].

We present the results for the scattering amplitudes by using the compact form that is determined by electromagnetic gauge invariance. Thus, the results for the (k1, 1)(k2, 2) w+(p1)w(p2) and (k1, 1)(k2, 2) z(p1)z(p2) amplitudes will be

given (as in the analogous case of scattering of photons into pions) by the general decomposition [28, 63, 64, 7073]

M= ie2 12T (1)

12T (2)

B(s, t, u) , (5.1)

that is written in terms of the two independent Lorentz structures,

12T (1) = s2(12) (1k2)(2k1), (5.2)

12T (2) = 2s(1 )(2 ) (t u)2(12) 2(t u)[(1 )(2k1) (1k2)(2 )], (5.3)

2For instance, if we had considered mh 6= 0 in our analysis the WBGB wave-function renormalization

would have received corrections as Z = 1 + (

a2m2

322v2 [3941], with A0 m2h

JHEP07(2014)149

m2W,Z,h/ 162v2

A(s, t, u) + ie2

ba2)

162v2 A0 m2h

[parenrightbig]

the one-point

Feynman integral.

with the Mandelstam variables dened as usual, s = (p1 + p2)2, t = (k1 p1)2 and u = (k1 p2)2, the relevant momentum combination is dened as p1 p2, and the is

are the polarization vectors of the external photons.

As for the separate contributions to the scattering amplitudes we will follow the steps and notation that we have introduced in section 3. Thus, the results for the total amplitudes will be reported into two parts, correspondingly to the explained LO and NLO contributions:

M= MLO + MNLO , and A = ALO + ANLO, B = BLO + BNLO . (5.4)

MLO involves the computation of the tree graphs from L2 which are indeed none for the

zz case and those illustrated in gure 3a for the w+w case. MNLO includes

the two contributions: from the one-loop diagrams and from the tree graphs, as explained in eq. (3.6). The tree graphs contributing to MNLO are displayed in gure 1 for zz

and in gure 3b for w+w. Finally, the contributing one-loop diagrams are dis

played in gure 2 for zz and in gure 4 for w+w. Although, for shortness,

we report in the following on the total result for the sum of all the one-loop diagrams, i.e,

M1loop( zz) =

P10i=1Mi( zz) and M1loop( w+w) =

P39i=1

Mi( w+w), the individual analytical results for each diagram are also provided, for completeness, in the appendix B.

Before presenting the nal results, there are some subtleties/curiosities in the calculation of the loop diagrams that we nd interesting to comment:

The diagrams 5 and 7 in zz (gure 2) and 26 and 27 in w+w (gure 4)

are always absent in the spherical parametrization of U(x), even o -shell, as there is no vertex with one photon and four WBGBs in these coset coordinates. In the exponential parametrization this di erence is compensated by the diagrams which contain vertices with four WBGBs (diagrams 1, 2 and 6 in gure 2 and 1, 2, 16, 28, 29, 30 and 31 in gure 4, in addition to some diagrams with one-point Feynman integrals not plotted therein), which are di erent in spherical and exponential coordinates.

Nevertheless, in the Landau gauge considered here, where the WBGBs are massless, the diagrams 5 and 7 in gure 2 and 26 and 27 in gure 4 happen to be zero in both parametrizations of U(x). Likewise, diagrams 1, 2 and 6 in gure 2 and 1, 2, 16, 28, 29, 30 and 31 in gure 4 turn out to be respectively identical in the two coset coordinates.

In the Landau gauge, the diagrams 8 and 9 in zz (gure 2) and 2835 in

w+w (gure 4) are zero in both parametrizations, exponential and spherical.

For the Landau gauge and for negligible Higgs mass, the diagrams 3639 in

w+w (gure 4) are zero in both parametrizations, exponential and spherical.

5.1 Analytical results for ! zz

The scattering amplitude into a pair of neutral WBGBs is found to be zero at lowest order in the chiral expansion i.e. at O(e2) (in agreement with [28] and also with the

JHEP07(2014)149

The vertex with a shaded box stands for an interaction from L4 and the normal vertex is for one from L2.

Figure 1. Single tree-level diagram contributing to zz at O e2p2

JHEP07(2014)149

z z

w 7

Figure 2. One-loop diagrams for zz.

analogous scattering amplitudes for the pions case [65, 70]):

M( zz)LO = 0 . (5.5)

At NLO, i.e at O e2p2

one has one-loop and tree-level contributions to A(s, t, u) and B(s, t, u), which depend only on the kinematical variable s at this order. After adding all the contributions we nd the following extremely simple result:

A( zz)NLO =

2acr

v2 +

a2 1

42v2 , (5.6)

B( zz)NLO = 0, (5.7)

where the term proportional to cr comes from the tree-level O e2p2

contributions (gure 1) and the term proportional to (a2 1) comes from the one-loop diagrams (gure 2).

Independent diagrams (e.g. diagram 6) are in general divergent. However, in dimensional regularization, the nal one-loop amplitude turns out to be UV nite when all the contributions are put together. Therefore the L4 chiral parameter cr does not need to be

renormalized to cancel the UV-divergences and, in consequence,

cr = c . (5.8)

Notice also that by setting a = c = 0 in our formulas above we recover exactly the result found in [28] for the case of Higgsless ECL, which in turn agreed with the analogous result for the amplitude in the pions case [65, 70].

JHEP07(2014)149

Figure 3. Tree-level diagrams for w+w at O(e2) (a) and O e2p2

(b).

5.2 Analytical results for w+w

At LO, i.e. at O(e2), the contributing diagrams are displayed in gure 3a. We nd the

following result (in agreement with [28] and also with the analogous scattering amplitude for the pions case [71]):

A( w+w)LO = 2sB( w+w)LO =

1u , (5.9)

where one can observe the contributions from the t and u-channel w+ exchanges.For the NLO contributions, i.e., those of O e2p2

, we obtain again an extremely simple result after combining all the various tree-level (gure 3) and one-loop diagrams (gure 4) (see the appendix B for the separate contributions from each diagram):

A w+w

NLO =8 (ar1 ar2 + ar3)v2 +2acrv2 +

a2 1

82v2 , (5.10)

NLO = 0. (5.11)

While B does not su er corrections of O e2p2

, one has that at this order there are tree-level contributions to A and these are proportional to the combination of parameters (a1 a2 + a3) and to ac. The total one-loop contribution is given by the term (a2 1)

in the right-hand side in eq. (5.10). Surprisingly, we nd that again the one-loop UV divergences exactly cancel out when all diagrams are put together and, in consequence, no renormalization of the combination of L4 chiral parameters in (5.10) is required. Therefore,

from eqs. (5.10) and (5.11) and using eq. (5.8), we nd:

(ar1 ar2 + ar3) = (a1 a2 + a3) . (5.12)

This result is highly non-trivial and comes after subtle cancelations of the various contributions. For instance, the box diagrams 14 and 15 yield a complicate Lorentz structure and depend on the scalar two-point Feynman integrals B0(s, 0, 0), B0(t, 0, 0) and B0(u, 0, 0).

B w+w

w h

JHEP07(2014)149

w h

h w

w w

h w

w w

w h

h w

w w

w h

Figure 4. One-loop diagrams for w+w.

See appendix B for more details. Finally, notice also that, as in the previous scattering process, if we set a = c = 0 we recover exactly the result found in [28] for the case of

Higgsless ECL, which in turn agreed with the analogous result for the amplitude in the pions case [71].

6 Discussion

First of all, we would like to remark again that our results for the one-loop scattering amplitudes M( w+w) and M( zz), presented in the previous sections, con

verge to the corresponding results of the Higgsless ECL case in [28] if we set properly the Higgs-like parameters, namely, if we set a = c = 0. In particular, it is interesting to notice that the combination of EW chiral parameters ai that enters in w+w, given

in eq. (5.12), which we have found to be renormalization group invariant, is the same in both cases, the ECLh and ECL. This nding, apart of being a convenient check of our computation, it is by itself a quite interesting result, since the dynamical Higgs boson is contributing non-trivially in the loop diagrams of the present ECLh case and therefore it is contributing to the renormalization of each of the ais. In contrast, the Higgs eld is totaly absent in the ECL case. The fact that we have found the same renormalization group invariant combination (a1 a2 + a3) for this scattering process in the ECLh case as in

the ECL could be just a coincidence for this particular case, or it could be a more general result. In other words, one can wonder if there are other renormalization group invariant combinations of the ais that are common to the ECLh and ECL cases and if there is any fundamental explanation for this. Obviously to give a complete answer to this question one should compute the full one-loop action (in both the ECLh and the ECL) and set the proper renormalization of all the parameters involved in these chiral Lagrangians, but this is clearly beyond the scope of this work.

Secondly, we would like to point out some other interesting aspects that are suggested by the simple nal formulas that we have found in the ECLh case for the M( w+w)

and M( zz) one-loop amplitudes. We believe that this simplicity of the nal results

seems to be hinting some important underlying features in these ECLh models. A possible explanation could be the existence of a more appropriate choice of the degrees of freedom describing the WBGBs and the Higgs boson together in the massless Higgs limit, which could point towards a larger symmetry, as it is indeed the case of the SO(5)/SO(4) model. As commented above this massless Higgs limit is appropriate at high energies where the Equivalence Theorem applies because of the phenomenological fact that the boson masses are relatively light and close to each other, mh mW mZ O(100 GeV). For illustration

and comparison with the present ECLh case, in appendix C we have computed the one-loop amplitude, for wawb scattering, in the context of the SO(5)/SO(4) model.

There it is shown that, by using an appropriate parametrization of the S4 coset relevant for these models, which reduces the number of contributing one-loop diagrams drastically, the computation can be greatly simplied and, indeed, we get the same result as we got previously for M( zz)1loop and M( w+w)1loop after a tedious calculation

and by setting the parameter a to the corresponding value in the SO(5)/SO(4) MCHM (see

JHEP07(2014)149

eq. (2.16)). In this way, we understand the simplicity of the results because the processes considered here are independent of the b parameter at the one-loop level, thus making the prediction of the SO(5)/SO(4) MCHM for the M( wawb)1loop scattering amplitudes

to be a universal prediction.

Furthermore, in the computation of the previous section, one can see that the loop suppression in the full amplitudes is actually stronger than that provided by naive dimensional analysis, as we nd strong cancellations between diagrams such that the suppression of the loop contributions is not the usual in chiral Lagrangians, O E2/(162v2)

. This can be immediately understood thanks to the computation in the SO(5)/SO(4) context (appendix C), where there are just two contributing one-loop topologies (see gure 5) and each of them is suppressed by E2/(162f2)

, with ECLh 4f > 4v the true characteristic cut-o scale of the ECLh. Finally, motivated by a future phenomenological analysis of our results presented here, we propose to study these scattering w+w and zz processes together with

other observables that involve the same subset of chiral parameters, such that one can perform in the future a global analysis of all these observables together, compare them with data, and get useful information from this analysis on the values preferred by data for these chiral parameters. With this purpose in mind, we have considered a set of four additional observables: the h decay width, the EW precision S parameter, the w+w

vector form-factor and the h transition form-factor, whose detailed formulas are

collected in appendix D. As one can see in table 1, putting everything together, the whole system of six observables is over-constrained. By means of these additional four appropriate observables it is possible to x the four relevant combinations of chiral parameters in the considered amplitudes, for instance, a, cr, ar1 and (ar2 ar3), and then predict from them the

remaining ones. Besides, we nd that even though cr and the combination (ar1ar2+ar3) are

renormalization group invariant, if one looks into the separate contributions, the parameter a1 and the combination (a2 a3) need to be renormalized.

One can also learn from our study about the specic running of the involved chiral parameters. Generically, the relation between a given renormalized chiral parameter Cr()

and the corresponding bare parameter C(B) from the L4 Lagrangian (e.g. a1) is given by

Cr() = C(B) + C

322

dened in eq. (3.11), with D = 4 2. The running of the renormalized couplings are, in consequence, given by: dCrd ln =

162 . (6.2)

The relevant L4 parameters in our wawb analysis are C = a1, a2, a3, c and their

running is shown in table 2. One can see that cr and the combination ar1 ar2 + ar3 are

renormalization group invariant. The latter combination is renormalization group invariant, as it happened in the case of the Higgsless Electroweak Chiral Lagrangian (ECL) [33]. This is also trivially true in the SM, where the c and the ai are absent. Indeed, since

, with

E2 = s, t, u, but rather O (1 a2)E2/(162v2)

1 , (6.1)

where we have performed the MS subtraction of the UV divergence 1/

JHEP07(2014)149

Observables Relevant combinations of parameters from L2 from L4

M( zz) a cr

M( w+w) a (ar1 ar2 + ar3) , cr

(h ) a cr S-parameter a ar1

Fww a (ar2 ar3)

Fh cr

Table 1. Set of six observables studied in this article with the ECLh at one-loop and their corresponding relevant combinations of chiral parameters. The six of them can be given in terms of the O(p2) chiral parameter a and three independent combinations of O(p4) parameters, cr , ar1 and

(ar2 ar3).

a = b = 1 for all the linear models where the Higgs is introduced through a complex doublet [4648, 75], the renormalized couplings cr, ar1 and the combination (ar2 ar3) do not run

in those cases. Our result for the running of (ar2 ar3) in table 2 also agrees with the QCD

determination for the analogous chiral parameter in ref. [74].

In addition, although they do not play any role in the present article, we have also included for completeness in this table the running of ar4 and ar5. These two chiral parameters enter in the W +W , ZZ and hh scattering and therefore they will play a very relevant role in the future analysis of LHC data at s = 13 TeV. Their running have been recently determined in the one-loop analyses from refs. [3943]. We have also included them, for completeness, in the last two rows of table 2.

Regarding the second column in table 1, we wish to emphasize once again that the parameters of the L2 Lagrangian (a in this case) do not get renormalized in dimensional

regularization, as it happens in Chiral Perturbation theory [1416]: the loops arise always at O(p4) or higher (O e2p2

in the wawb scattering studied here) and operators of

that chiral dimension are then required to absorb the UV divergences. In our case, a and v are the only relevant L2 parameters for the wawb scattering amplitude and the

related observables studied in this section.

Finally, we would like to mention that one could alternatively extract the running of the

L4 chiral parameters by computing the one-loop UV divergences in the ECLh path integral by means of the heat-kernel method commonly used in Chiral Perturbation Theory [1416]. However, this ambitious and interesting full computation, is clearly beyond the scope of this work.

7 Conclusions

In this paper we have studied the W +LW L and ZLZL scattering processes

within the e ective chiral Lagrangian approach, including a light Higgs-like scalar as a dynamical eld together with the would-be-Goldstone bosons w and z associated to the electroweak symmetry breaking. We are proposing here the use of these processes as an optimal tool to discern possible new physics related to the EWSB in the future collider

JHEP07(2014)149

ECLh ECL(Higgsless)

a1a2+a3 0 0

c 0 -

a116 1 a2

16 1 a2

a4 16 1 a2

2 + 1 12

a2a3

2 1 6

JHEP07(2014)149

2 1 12

Table 2. Running of the relevant ECLh parameters and their combinations appearing in the six selected observables. For completeness, we also provide the running of ar4 and ar5 which participate in ZZ and W +W scattering [3943]. The third column provides the corresponding running for the Higgsless ECL case [33].

data. We have presented a full one-loop computation of the related amplitudes, by means of the Equivalence Theorem, for the scattering processes w+w and zz, which

provide a good description of the physical processes of interest here in the kinematic regime mW,Z,h E 4v.

The computation has been performed up to NLO, which in this chiral Lagrangian context means taking into account all contributing one-loop diagrams generated from L2

in addition to the tree level contributions from both L2 and L4. That means that we have

computed for the rst time the quantum e ects introduced by the light Higgs-like scalar and the would-be-Goldstone bosons w and z altogether as dynamical elds in the loops of these radiative processes. As part of this computation we have also set clearly here the proper chiral counting rules that are needed to reach a complete NLO result and we have also illustrated the details of the renormalization procedure involved. For a further check (this, highly non trivial) of our computation we have done the same exercise with two di erent parametrizations of the SU(2)L SU(2)R/SU(2)L+R coset, the exponential

and the spherical ones, and we have found the same results, as expected.

Our nal analytical results, summarized in the equations from eq. (5.5) through eq. (5.12), are surprisingly very short and extremely simple. The case of zz de

pends just on a and c, and these ECLh parameters appear in the simple form given in eq. (5.6). The case of w+w depends on a, c, a1, a2 and a3, and they also enter in

a very simple way given in eq. (5.10). In our opinion, one of the most relevant features in these simple results, is the fact that these two amplitudes are found to be given by ECLh parameters or combinations of them that are renormalization group invariant. This is a very interesting result and is a consequence of our ndings in the computation of all the one-loop diagrams from the ECLh that when added together yield a total contribution that is ultraviolet nite, in both zz and w+w cases. Specically, we have

found our results in terms of a, c and the combination (a1 a2 + a3) that do not get

renormalized, as it happens in the Higgs-less ECL case.

a5 18 b a2

1 a2

It is also worth to remark that the one-loop contributions in our nal results show up in the form (1a2)E2/(162v2). Since the present ts to LHC data [37, 38] suggest a value

of a close to one, these corrections are surprisingly suppressed with respect to the naively expected E2/(162v2) contributions, typically occurring from chiral loops of chiral e ective eld theories. We have tried to understand the origin of this suppression by redoing the computation in the context of the SO(5)/SO(4) MCHM (appendix C), where we have found just two contributing one-loop topologies. Each diagram was suppressed by E2/(162f2), with f being the unique mass-dimension parameter of the MCHM L2 Lagrangian, being

related with a and b of the ECLh by v2/f2 = (1 a2) = (1 b)/2. This comparison with

the SO(5)/SO(4) MCHM therefore suggests the existence of a scale ECLh 4f > 4v which is the true characteristic cut-o scale of the ECLh. We also believe that the origin of the simplicity of our results could be relying on the custodial symmetry invariant structure of the theory and an enlarged symmetry of the dynamical bosons sector (h, w, z) that

arises in the relevant Lagrangian for wawb in the massless Higgs limit.

Finally, regarding the phenomenological relevance of our results, we have selected and studied in this work a set of four additional related observables: the h decay width,

the EW precision S parameter, the w+w vector form-factor and the h

transition form-factor, that involve the same subset of chiral parameters as those studied through these work, and whose detailed predictions are collected in tables 1, 2 and in appendix D. Our proposal for a future phenomenological study is to perform a global analysis of all these four observables together with the two scattering processes explored here, w+w and zz. From a future comparison with data, and since these set

of six observables provide an overconstrained system, one could extract the values preferred by data for these involved chiral parameters. Consequently, this phenomenological analysis could conclude on the most/least favorable scenarios for the EWSB.

Acknowledgments

A. Dobado would like to thank useful conversations with D. Espriu and F.J. Llanes-Estrada. J.J. Sanz-Cillero thanks A. Pich for useful discussions on the power counting and previous results both in EW theories and QCD. This work is partially supported by the European Union FP7 ITN INVISIBLES (Marie Curie Actions, PITN-GA-2011-289442), by the CICYT through the projects FPA2012-31880, FPA2010-17747, CSD2007-00042 and FPA2011-27853-C02-01, by the CM (Comunidad Autonoma de Madrid) through the project HEPHACOS S2009/ESP-1473, by the Spanish Consolider-Ingenio 2010 Programme CPAN (CSD2007-00042) and by the Spanish MINECOs Centro de Excelencia Severo Ochoa Programme under grant SEV-2012-0249. The work of R.L. Delgado is supported by the Spanish MINECO under grant BES-2012-056054.

JHEP07(2014)149

A Feynman rules

In this appendix we present the Feynman rules of the ECLh in the two parametrizations, exponential and spherical. We assume all momenta incoming.

A.1 Vertices from L2

Vertex Exponential Spherical

w+, p2

w, p3

JHEP07(2014)149

A, p1

ie(p2 p3)

w+, p2

w, p3

h, p1

2ia

v p2p3

2ia

v p2p3

z, p2

z, p3

h, p1

2ia

v p2p3

2ia

v p2p3

A, p1 w+, p3

w, p4

2ie2g

A , p2

A, p1 w+, p3

w, p4

2iaev (p3 p4)

h, p2

h, p1 w+, p3

w, p4

2ib

v2 p3p4

2ib

v2 p3p4

h, p2

Vertex Exponential Spherical

w+, p1 w+, p2

w, p4

3v2

2(p1p2+p3p4)+(p1+p2)2[bracketrightbig] i

2(p1p2+p3p4)(p1+p2)2

[bracketrightbig]

w, p3

z, p2 w+, p1

w, p4

v2 (p1 + p4)2

JHEP07(2014)149

i 3v2

2(p1p4+p2p3) + (p1+p4)2

[bracketrightbig]

z, p3

z, p1 z, p3

z, p4

p1p4+p2p3 (p1+p4)2

[bracketrightbig]

z, p2

h, p1 z, p3

z, p4

2ib

v2 p3p4

2ib

v2 p3p4

h, p2

w+, p4 A, p1

A , p2

h, p3

4iae2v g

w, p5

w+, p4 A, p1

h, p2

h, p3

2ibe

v2 (p4 p5)

2ibe

v2 (p4 p5)

w, p5

w+, p2 A, p1

z, p3

z, p4

2ie

3v2 (p5 p2)

w, p5

Vertex Exponential Spherical

w+, p2 A, p1

w+, p3

w, p4

4ie3v2 (p5 + p4 p3 p2)

w, p5

A, p1

w+, p5

w, p6

4ibe2

v2 g

4ibe2

v2 g

JHEP07(2014)149

A , p2

h, p3

h, p4

A.2 Vertices from L4

Vertex Exponential Spherical

w+, p2

w, p3

A, p1

4ie(a3a2) v2

(p1p3)p2 (p1p2)p3

[parenrightbigg] 4ie(a3a2)

(p1p3)p2 (p1p2)p3

[parenrightbigg]

A, p1 w+, p3

w, p4

8ie2a1

(p1p2)g p2 p1

[parenrightbigg]

8ie2a1

(p1p2)g p2 p1

[parenrightbigg]

+ 4ie2(a3 a2) v2

(p1 + p2)2g

(p1 + p2 )p1

p2 (p1 + p2 ) [parenrightbigg]

+ 4ie2(a3 a2) v2

(p1 + p2)2g

(p1 + p2 )p1

p2 (p1 + p2 )

[parenrightbigg]

A , p2

A, p1

h, p3

2ic v ((p1p2)g p2

p1 )

2ic v ((p1p2)g p2

p1 )

A , p2

B Contribution from each diagram to the ! wawb amplitudes

B.1 ! zz scattering amplitude

In both the exponential and spherical parametrizations the non-vanishing diagrams in our one-loop (k1, 1)(k2, 2) z(p1)z(p2) computation yield

M1 =

ie2(sB0(s,0,0) (12) + s (12) 2 (1k2) (2k1))

162v2 , (B.1)

M2 =

ie2(sB0(s,0,0) (12) + s (12) 2 (1k2) (2k1))

162v2 , (B.2)

M3 =

ia2e2(B0(s,0,0) (12) (t + u) + 2 (1k2) (2k1) + (12) (t + u))162v2 , (B.3)

M4 =

JHEP07(2014)149

ia2e2(B0(s,0,0) (12) (t + u) + 2 (1k2) (2k1) + (12) (t + u))162v2 , (B.4)

M6 =

ie2sB0(s,0,0) (12)82v2 , (B.5)

M10 =

ia2e2sB0(s,0,0) (12)

82v2 , (B.6)

with the Mandelstam variables dened as usual, s = (p1 + p2)2, t = (k1 p1)2 and u = (k1 p2)2, the relevant momentum combination is dened as p1 p2, and the is

are the polarization vectors of the external photons. The vanishing of the diagrams 5, 7, 8 and 9 is implied by the fact that we work in the Landau gauge, the Higgs mass is taken to be zero and the incoming photons are set on-shell. Furthermore, in the spherical parametrization, the diagrams 5 and 7 are always absent as there is no vertex in these coordinates. In order to reach our nal expression for the total amplitude we used the on-shell kinematical condition s + t + u = 0. For the relevant massless Feynman integral here we follow the notation

B0 q2, 0, 0

ddk

= i2

1k2 (q k)2

. (B.7)

We would like also to notice that the total result of the one-loop contributions to the zz is in agreement with the recent result in ref. [74] within the QCD context for

00 including both the pions and a light scalar singlet S1 when their masses m

and mS1 are set to zero and c = 0.

B.2 ! w+w scattering amplitude

In both the exponential and spherical parametrizations the non-vanishing diagrams in our one-loop (k1, 1)(k2, 2) w+(p1)w(p2) computation yield

M1 =

ie2 1442sv2

3B0(s,0,0)(t + u)( (1 ) (2k1) + (1k2) (2 ) + (12) t (B.8) + 2 (12) u) + 2 (1k2) ((2 ) (t + u)

+ 3 (2k1) (t + 2u)) + (t + u)(2 (1 ) (2k1) + 2 (12) t + 7 (12) u)

3B0(s,0,0)(t + u)((1 ) (2k1) (1k2) (2 ) + 2 (12) t + (12) u)

2 (1k2) ((2 ) (t + u) 3 (2k1) (2t + u)) + (t + u)(2 (1 ) (2k1) + 7 (12) t + 2 (12) u)

, (B.9)

M2 =

ie2 1442sv2

M3 =

ia2e2

2882v2

3B0(t,0,0)(2 (12) t 5((1 ) + (1k2))((2 ) (2k1)))

+ ( (1 ) (1k2))((2 ) (2k1)) + 4 (12) t

, (B.10)

M4 =

ia2e2

2882v2

JHEP07(2014)149

3B0(u,0,0)(2 (12) u 5((1 ) (1k2))((2 ) + (2k1)))

(1 ) ((2 ) + (2k1)) + (1k2) ((2 ) + (2k1)) + 4 (12) u

, (B.11)

M5 =

ia2e2

2882v2

3B0(u,0,0)(2 (12) u 5((1 ) (1k2))((2 ) + (2k1)))

(1 ) ((2 ) + (2k1)) + (1k2) ((2 ) + (2k1)) + 4 (12) u

, (B.12)

3B0(t,0,0)(2 (12) t 5((1 ) + (1k2))((2 ) (2k1)))

+ ( (1 ) (1k2))((2 ) (2k1)) + 4 (12) t

, (B.13)

M6 =

ia2e2

2882v2

M7 =

ia2e2sB0(s,0,0) (12)

162v2 , (B.14)

M8 =

ia2e2B0(t,0,0)((1 ) + (1k2))((2 ) (2k1))

322v2 , (B.15)

M9 =

ia2e2B0(u,0,0)((1 ) (1k2))((2 ) + (2k1))

322v2 , (B.16)

M10 =

ia2e2B0(u,0,0)((1 ) (1k2))((2 ) + (2k1))

322v2 , (B.17)

M11 =

ia2e2B0(t,0,0)((1 ) + (1k2))((2 ) (2k1))

322v2 , (B.18)

M12 =

ia2e2(B0(s,0,0) (12) (t + u) + 2 (1k2) (2k1) + (12) (t + u))

162v2 , (B.19)

M13 =

ia2e2(B0(s,0,0) (12) (t + u) + 2 (1k2) (2k1) + (12) (t + u))

162v2 , (B.20)

M14 =

ia2e2(t + u)

2882s2v2

6(t + u)(B0(s,0,0)((1 ) (2k1) (1k2) (2 ) + 2 (12) t + (12) u) + B0(t,0,0)(((1 ) + (1k2))((2 ) (2k1)) (12) t))

+ (1 ) ((2 ) + 3 (2k1))(t + u) + (1k2) ((2k1) (23t + 11u)

3 (2 ) (t + u)) + 2 (12) (5t + 2u)(t + u)

, (B.21)

ia2e2(t + u)

2882s2v2

6(t + u)(B0(s,0,0)( (1 ) (2k1) + (1k2) (2 ) + (12) t + 2 (12) u) + B0(u,0,0)(((1 ) (1k2))((2 ) + (2k1)) (12) u))

+ (1 ) ((2 ) 3 (2k1))(t + u) + (1k2) (3 (2 ) (t + u) + (2k1) (11t + 23u)) + 2 (12) (2t + 5u)(t + u)

ie2sB0(s,0,0) (12)162v2 , (B.23)

M15 =

M16 =

M17 =

M18 =

M19 =

M20 =

M21 =

M22 =

M23 =

M24 =

M25 =

, (B.22)

ia2e2

2882v2

6B0(t,0,0)(7((1 ) + (1k2))((2 ) (2k1)) (12) t)

+ ((1 ) + (1k2))((2 ) (2k1)) 4 (12) t

ia2e2

2882v2

JHEP07(2014)149

, (B.24)

6B0(u,0,0)(7((1 ) (1k2))((2 ) + (2k1)) (12) u)

+ ((1 ) (1k2))((2 ) + (2k1)) 4 (12) u

3ia2e2B0(t,0,0)((1 ) + (1k2))((2 ) (2k1))

322v2 , (B.26)

, (B.25)

3ia2e2B0(u,0,0)((1 ) (1k2))((2 ) + (2k1))

322v2 , (B.27)

3ia2e2B0(u,0,0)((1 ) (1k2))((2 ) + (2k1))

322v2 , (B.28)

3ia2e2B0(t,0,0)((1 ) + (1k2))((2 ) (2k1))

322v2 , (B.29)

ia2e2sB0(s,0,0) (12)

82v2 , (B.30)

ia2e2B0(t,0,0)((1 ) + (1k2))((2 ) (2k1))

162v2 , (B.31)

ia2e2B0(u,0,0)((1 ) (1k2))((2 ) + (2k1))

162v2 , (B.32)

with s, t, u, and the is dened as in the previous section. The remaining diagrams are zero in both coset coordinates when we work in the Landau gauge, the Higgs mass is taken to be zero and the incoming photons are set on-shell. Furthermore, in the spherical parametrization, the diagrams 26 and 27 are always absent as there is no vertex in these coordinates. In order to reach our nal expression for the total amplitude we used the on-shell kinematical condition s + t + u = 0.

C One-loop ! zz and ! w+w scattering in MCHM

This appendix is devoted to the computation of the one-loop amplitudes considered in this work for the zz and w+w processes in the context of the so called

SO(5)/SO(4) MCHM [69]. In this model it is assumed that some global symmetry breaking takes place at some scale 4f > 4v so that the group G = SO(5) is spontaneously

broken to the subgroup H = SO(4). Therefore the corresponding Goldstone bosons (GBs) live in the coset K = G/H = S4. These four GBs will be identied with the Higgs-like boson h and the three WBGBs needed for giving masses to the W and Z. The G group contains also the subgroup H = SO(4) = SU(2)L SU(2)R in such a way that the gauge

group Hg = SU(2)L U(1)Y is a subgroup of H. Notice however that H 6= H. In fact

G = SO(5) has many SO(4) subgroups which can be dened by giving a xed ve dimensional vector belonging to the G fundamental representation which is invariant under the action of the G subgroup. For example the H group is dened by the invariant vector 0 and similarly H is dened by 0:

0 = f

JHEP07(2014)149

, (C.1)

with s = sin , c = cos and being the misalignment angle. Thus the H group acts only on the rst four components of any ve dimensional vector belonging to the G fundamental representation. The SU(2)L subgroup has generators T kL = iMkL/2 (k = 1, 2, 3):

M1L =

0 0 0 0 1

, 0 = f

0 0 0 s c

0 0 0 0

0 + 0 0 0 + 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0

, M2L =

0 0 + 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 + 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

M3L =

0 0 0 0

+ 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0

0 0 + 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

, (C.2)

and the U(1)Y is generated by the third SU(2)R generator which is given by T 3R = iM3R/2 = iMY /2 with:

MY =

0 0 0 0

+ 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 + 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0

. (C.3)

Clearly these generators fulll [T iL, T jL] = iijkT kL and [T kL, TY ] = 0. The expressions for all the SO(5) generators can be found in the appendices of refs. [69].

Now the low energy dynamics of the system can be described by the non-linear sigma model (NLM) given by the Lagrangian:

LMCHM2 =

2 |S

4 , (C.4)

with the G fundamental representation vector parametrized as:

123 c4 + s

s4 + c

. (C.5)

The condition for being in S4 is just T = f2 from which we can obtain the fth coordinate as a function of the rst four ( = 1, 2, 3, 4):

= f2 X ()2

!1/2. (C.6)

Therefore we have the G/H = SO(5)/SO(4) = S4 NLM Lagrangian:

LMCHM2() =

2g (C.7)

with the S4 metric being given in our coordinates by:

g = + f2

JHEP07(2014)149

P()2. (C.8)

Now we can introduce SU(2)L U(1)Y gauge interactions by introducing the covariant

derivative:

D = igT kLW k igTY B (C.9) where W k and B are the SU(2)L and U(1)Y gauge bosons respectively. The photon eld is then given as usual by

A = sin W W 3 + cos W B , (C.10)

with W being the Weinberg angle: sin W = g/

pg2 + g2. Then, if we are interested only in electromagnetic interactions the covariant derivative becomes:

D = ie T 3L + TY

A = + eMQA (C.11)

where e = g sin W = g cos W is the electromagnetic coupling and T 3L + TY = iMQ/2 is the electromagnetic group U(1)EM generator given by:

MQ =

0 0 0 0

+ 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

. (C.12)

Thus the photon eld A only couples to 1 and 2 or the complex combination:

= 1

2 1 i2

(C.13)

w w

Figure 5. MCHM one-loop diagrams for wawb.

and by using this covariant derivative the U(1)EM gauge NLM Lagrangian takes the form:

LMCHM2(, ) =

JHEP07(2014)149

2 g() D D (C.14)

= 1

2 g() + ieA + +

+ e2A2+.

Thus the Higgsless electromagnetic interactions are exactly the same we found in this work for the ECLh Lagrangian L2 in the spherical parametrization of the S3 coset, i.e., keeping

just the constant term F(0) in the function F(h) and dropping terms with Higgs elds.

Making the identication h = 4 and a as in the main text for a = 1, 2, 3 (see section 4), with 2 =

Pa(a)2, the Lagrangian becomes

LMCHM2(, ) =

2a a +

+ + + + 00 + hh

2hh +

f2 2 h2

+ ieA + +

+ e2A2+

= 1

2a a +

2hh +

2f2 + + + + 00 + hh

+ e2A2+ + . . . (C.15)

where the dots stand for terms with six or more boson elds, irrelevant for the one-loop calculation of the photon-photon scattering amplitudes.

Now the point is that for the computation of the one-loop zz and w+w amplitudes we can use the S4 gauged NLM Lagrangian above which has a much simpler structure than the ones used in the main text. Then according to [63, 64], where these processes were considered in the framework of general SO(N +1)/SO(N) gauged NLM for low-energy QCD, the one-loop computation only involves the bubble and triangle diagrams (gure 5) which are very easy to compute. The result is simply

A(s, t, u)zz =

142f2 =

+ ieA + +

1 a2

4 2v2 ,

A(s, t, u)w+w =

182f2 =

1 a2

82v2 , (C.16)

where we have used the relation (1 a2) = v2/f2 between f, v and a from SO(5)/SO(4)

MCHM [69].

If instead of using the vector representation in eq. (C.4) for the SO(5)/SO(4) Gold-stone bosons we employ the exponential parametrization in ref. [69] it is not di cult to

check that LMHCM2 has the same structure and produces the same one-loop photon-photon

amplitudes as the general ECLh Lagrangian L2 considered in the main text provided

a2 = cos2 = 1

v2f2 , b = cos(2) = 1 2

v2f2 . (C.17)

That means that if we are interested only in processes which do not depend on the b parameter appearing in F(h), the results obtained from the SO(5)/SO(4) MCHM are

universal (we only need to tune f and sin to get the required a parameter according to the previous equation). This is in particular the case of the processes considered in this work, w+w and zz. However this is not the case for other kind of processes

as for example wawb wcwd, wawb hh or hh hh considered in [42, 43].

D Related observables: Sparameter and other photon transitions

In this work we computed the zz and w+w scattering amplitudes up to

NLO in the chiral expansion. It is not di cult to nd other simple observables where the bosonic contribution is determined by the same e ective parameters. We remind the reader that the fermionic contributions is not considered here. It must be eventually taken into account in a realistic phenomenological analysis of the experimental data. In this appendix we discuss six of these observables described in terms of four independent combinations of couplings, a, ar1, (ar2 ar3), cr (see table 1 for a summary).

! zz and ! w+w scattering amplitudes. These are the main results of this work (eqs. (5.6)(5.7) and (5.10)(5.11)). The total one-loop amplitude has been found here to be UV nite and the relevant O(p4) ECLh parameters involved in these processes

are found to be renormalization group invariant.

(h ! ). We have computed the one-loop bosonic contribution to the h(q)

(k1, 1)(k2, 2) decay width from the ECLh. Under the same approximations considered in the text this is given by the amplitude (fermion loops are absent),

Mh = ie2v m2h(12) 2(k21)(k12)

cr + a

JHEP07(2014)149

. (D.1)

If the fermionic contributions are dropped one has the following modication with respect to the SM result,

(h ) = (h )SM

a + 82cr

2 , (D.2)

2m3h643v2 . Higher order terms in the m2h/(162v2) expansion have been dropped in the latter and previous two equations. Likewise, we are just keeping the lowest order in the g() expansion (O() in eq. (D.1) and O(2) in eq. (D.2)) and not including

with (h )SM =

higher order corrections (for v xed). The total one-loop amplitude is found again to be UV-nite and hence no renormalization is needed for the O(p4) ECLh parameter c. It is

then trivial to check that for a = 1 and cr = 0 one recovers the SM result for 2 (h )

in the limit g, g 0 and without the fermion loop contributions [76].

Oblique S-parameter. The rst non-vanishing contribution appears at NLO. Likewise, we nd that the one-loop amplitude is UV-divergent and needs to be renormalized by means of the ECLh parameter a1. In the MS scheme we nd

S = 16ar1 +

(1 a2) 12

56 + ln2 m2h

, (D.3)

with ar1 being the renormalized coupling at the renormalization scale , and absorbing the UV-divergences from the one-loop diagrams. In this expression, the oblique parameter is dened with the reference value mRefh set to the physical Higgs mass [29, 30]. Notice that the NLO from the Higgsless ECL [27] is again recovered for a = 0. Likewise, we recover the (1 a2) coe cient of the logarithm from the one-loop computation [44, 45] with a Chiral

Lagrangian including also vector and axial-vector resonances.

Electromagnetic vector form-factor ( ! w+w). The electromagnetic transition w+w from a virtual photon with momentum q = p1 + p2 is described through the

matrix element

h w+(p1) w(p2)| JEM |0 i = e (p1 p2) F

ww(q2) . (D.4)

The electromagnetic vector form-factor (VFF) can be computed with the ECLh up to NLO. We nd

Fww = 1 + 2q2(ar3 ar2)v2 + (1 a2)

q2 962v2

JHEP07(2014)149

83 ln q2 2

, (D.5)

with the O(p4) chiral couplings given in the MS scheme at the scale and renormalizing

the one-loop UV-divergences.

Higgs transition form-factor ( ! h). An interesting observable in order to pin down the h coupling cr is the Higgs transition form-factor (HTFF), which describes the process (k1)(k2) h(p) [7780]. This transition is given by the matrix element,

d4xeik1xh h(p)|T

JEM(x)JEM(0)

, (D.6)

where in the case when one of the photons is on-shell we nd that the O(p4) HTFF is

given by

Fh(k2, 0) = 2cr , (D.7) with no contribution present at O(p2) nor coming from loops at O(p4). Here again we

provide the result in the mh 0 limit and higher correction of O(m2h/(162v2)) have

been dropped. Notice that this result does not correspond to the same kinematical regime as (h ), since here we are considering m2h k2 162v2. The one-loop O(p4)

diagrams cancel out completely in this energy range and, therefore, there are no UV-divergences and again c does not need to be renormalized.

Open Access. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits any use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.

|0 i=ie2 [(k1k2)g k2k1] Fh k21, k22

References

[1] ATLAS collaboration, Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2012.08.020

Web End =Phys. Lett. B 716 (2012) 1 [arXiv:1207.7214] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1207.7214

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[2] CMS collaboration, Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2012.08.021

Web End =Phys. Lett. B 716 (2012) 30 [arXiv:1207.7235] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1207.7235

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[3] ATLAS collaboration, Measurements of Higgs boson production and couplings in diboson nal states with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2013.08.010

Web End =Phys. Lett. B 726 (2013) 88 [arXiv:1307.1427] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1307.1427

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[4] CMS collaboration, Observation of a new boson with mass near 125 GeV in pp collisions at s = 7 and 8 TeV, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2013)081

Web End =JHEP 06 (2013) 081 [arXiv:1303.4571] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1303.4571

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[5] CMS Collaboration, Constraints on the Higgs boson width from o -shell production and decay to ZZ to llll and llvv, http://cds.cern.ch/record/1670066

Web End =CMS-PAS-HIG-14-002 .

[6] K. Agashe, R. Contino and A. Pomarol, The minimal composite Higgs model, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2005.04.035

Web End =Nucl. Phys. B 719 (2005) 165 [http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0412089

Web End =hep-ph/0412089 ] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+hep-ph/0412089

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[7] R. Contino, L. Da Rold and A. Pomarol, Light custodians in natural composite Higgs models, http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.75.055014

Web End =Phys. Rev. D 75 (2007) 055014 [http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0612048

Web End =hep-ph/0612048 ] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+hep-ph/0612048

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[8] R. Contino, D. Marzocca, D. Pappadopulo and R. Rattazzi, On the e ect of resonances in composite Higgs phenomenology, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP10(2011)081

Web End =JHEP 10 (2011) 081 [arXiv:1109.1570] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1109.1570

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[9] D. Barducci et al., The 4-Dimensional Composite Higgs Model (4DCHM) and the 125 GeV Higgs-like signals at the LHC, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP09(2013)047

Web End =JHEP 09 (2013) 047 [arXiv:1302.2371] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1302.2371

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[10] E. Halyo, Technidilaton or Higgs?, http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/S0217732393000271

Web End =Mod. Phys. Lett. A 8 (1993) 275 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Mod.Phys.Lett.,A8,275

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[11] W.D. Goldberger, B. Grinstein and W. Skiba, Distinguishing the Higgs boson from the dilaton at the Large Hadron Collider, http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.111802

Web End =Phys. Rev. Lett. 100 (2008) 111802 [arXiv:0708.1463] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:0708.1463

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[12] R. Contino, The Higgs as a Composite Nambu-Goldstone Boson, arXiv:1005.4269 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1005.4269

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[13] S. Weinberg, Phenomenological Lagrangians, Physica A 96 (1979) 327 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Physica,A96,327

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[14] J. Gasser and H. Leutwyler, Chiral Perturbation Theory to One Loop, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0003-4916(84)90242-2

Web End =Annals Phys. 158 (1984) 142 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+AnnalsPhys.,158,142

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[15] J. Gasser and H. Leutwyler, Chiral Perturbation Theory: Expansions in the Mass of the Strange Quark, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(85)90492-4

Web End =Nucl. Phys. B 250 (1985) 465 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Nucl.Phys.,B250,465

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[16] J. Gasser and H. Leutwyler, Low-Energy Expansion of Meson Form-Factors, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(85)90493-6

Web End =Nucl. Phys. B 250 (1985) 517 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Nucl.Phys.,B250,517

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[17] T. Appelquist and C.W. Bernard, Strongly Interacting Higgs Bosons, http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.22.200

Web End =Phys. Rev. D 22 (1980) 200 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Phys.Rev.,D22,200

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[18] A.C. Longhitano, Heavy Higgs Bosons in the Weinberg-Salam Model, http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.22.1166

Web End =Phys. Rev. D 22 (1980) 1166 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Phys.Rev.,D22,1166

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[19] A.C. Longhitano, Low-Energy Impact of a Heavy Higgs Boson Sector, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(81)90109-7

Web End =Nucl. Phys. B 188 (1981) 118 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Nucl.Phys.,B188,118

Web End =INSPIRE ].

JHEP07(2014)149

[20] M.S. Chanowitz and M.K. Gaillard, The TeV Physics of Strongly Interacting Ws and Zs, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(85)90580-2

Web End =Nucl. Phys. B 261 (1985) 379 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Nucl.Phys.,B261,379

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[21] O. Cheyette and M.K. Gaillard, The E ective One Loop Action in the Strongly Interacting Standard Electroweak Theory, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(87)90369-8

Web End =Phys. Lett. B 197 (1987) 205 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Phys.Lett.,B197,205

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[22] A. Dobado and M.J. Herrero, Phenomenological Lagrangian Approach to the Symmetry Breaking Sector of the Standard Model, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(89)90981-7

Web End =Phys. Lett. B 228 (1989) 495 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Phys.Lett.,B228,495

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[23] A. Dobado and M.J. Herrero, Testing the Hypothesis of Strongly Interacting Longitudinal Weak Bosons in Electron-Positron Collisions at TeV Energies, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(89)91349-X

Web End =Phys. Lett. B 233 (1989) 505 [ http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Phys.Lett.,B233,505

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[24] A. Dobado, M.J. Herrero and T.N. Truong, Study of the Strongly Interacting Higgs Sector, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(90)90108-I

Web End =Phys. Lett. B 235 (1990) 129 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Phys.Lett.,B235,129

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[25] A. Dobado, M.J. Herrero and J. Terron, The Role of Chiral Lagrangians in Strongly Interacting W (l) W (l) Signals at pp Supercolliders, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01474075

Web End =Z. Phys. C 50 (1991) 205 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Z.Physik,C50,205

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[26] A. Dobado, M.J. Herrero, J.R. Pelaez, E. Ruiz Morales and M.T. Urdiales, Learning about the strongly interacting symmetry breaking sector at LHC, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(95)00431-J

Web End =Phys. Lett. B 352 (1995) 400 [http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9502309

Web End =hep-ph/9502309 ] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+hep-ph/9502309

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[27] A. Dobado, M.J. Herrero, J.R. Pelaez and E. Ruiz Morales, CERN LHC sensitivity to the resonance spectrum of a minimal strongly interacting electroweak symmetry breaking sector, http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.62.055011

Web End =Phys. Rev. D 62 (2000) 055011 [http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9912224

Web End =hep-ph/9912224 ] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+hep-ph/9912224

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[28] M. Herrero and E. Ruiz-Morales, Study of W +LW L and ZLZL reactions with

chiral Lagrangians, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(92)91339-B

Web End =Phys. Lett. B 296 (1992) 397 [http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9208220

Web End =hep-ph/9208220 ] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+hep-ph/9208220

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[29] M.E. Peskin and T. Takeuchi, Estimation of oblique electroweak corrections, http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.46.381

Web End =Phys. Rev. D 46 (1992) 381 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Phys.Rev.,D46,381

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[30] M.E. Peskin and T. Takeuchi, A new constraint on a strongly interacting Higgs sector, http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.65.964

Web End =Phys. Rev. Lett. 65 (1990) 964 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Phys.Rev.Lett.,65,964

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[31] A. Dobado, D. Espriu and M.J. Herrero, Chiral Lagrangians as a tool to probe the symmetry breaking sector of the SM at LEP, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(91)90786-P

Web End =Phys. Lett. B 255 (1991) 405 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Phys.Lett.,B255,405

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[32] D. Espriu and M.J. Herrero, Chiral Lagrangians and precision tests of the symmetry breaking sector of the Standard Model, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(92)90452-H

Web End =Nucl. Phys. B 373 (1992) 117 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Nucl.Phys.,B373,117

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[33] M.J. Herrero and E. Ruiz Morales, The Electroweak chiral Lagrangian for the Standard Model with a heavy Higgs, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(94)90525-8

Web End =Nucl. Phys. B 418 (1994) 431 [http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9308276

Web End =hep-ph/9308276 ] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+hep-ph/9308276

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[34] M.J. Herrero and E. Ruiz Morales, Nondecoupling e ects of the SM Higgs boson to one loop, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(94)00589-7

Web End =Nucl. Phys. B 437 (1995) 319 [http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9411207

Web End =hep-ph/9411207 ] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+hep-ph/9411207

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[35] R. Alonso, M.B. Gavela, L. Merlo, S. Rigolin and J. Yepes, The E ective Chiral Lagrangian for a Light Dynamical Higgs Particle, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2013.04.037

Web End =Phys. Lett. B 722 (2013) 330 [Erratum ibid. B 726 (2013) 926] [arXiv:1212.3305] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1212.3305

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[36] I. Brivio et al., Disentangling a dynamical Higgs, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2014)024

Web End =JHEP 03 (2014) 024 [arXiv:1311.1823] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1311.1823

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[37] J. Ellis and T. You, Updated Global Analysis of Higgs Couplings, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2013)103

Web End =JHEP 06 (2013) 103 [arXiv:1303.3879] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1303.3879

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[38] J.R. Espinosa, C. Grojean, M. Muhlleitner and M. Trott, First Glimpses at Higgs face, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2012)045

Web End =JHEP 12 (2012) 045 [arXiv:1207.1717] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1207.1717

Web End =INSPIRE ].

JHEP07(2014)149

[39] D. Espriu and B. Yencho, Longitudinal WW scattering in light of the Higgs boson discovery, http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.87.055017

Web End =Phys. Rev. D 87 (2013) 055017 [arXiv:1212.4158] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+Phys.Rev,D87,055017

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[40] D. Espriu, F. Mescia and B. Yencho, Radiative corrections to WL WL scattering in composite Higgs models, http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.88.055002

Web End =Phys. Rev. D 88 (2013) 055002 [arXiv:1307.2400] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+Phys.Rev,D88,055002

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[41] D. Espriu and F. Mescia, Unitarity and causality constraints in composite Higgs models, arXiv:1403.7386 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1403.7386

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[42] R.L. Delgado, A. Dobado and F.J. Llanes-Estrada, Light Higgs, yet strong interactions,http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/41/2/025002

Web End =J. Phys. G 41 (2014) 025002 [arXiv:1308.1629] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1308.1629

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[43] R.L. Delgado, A. Dobado and F.J. Llanes-Estrada, One-loop WLWL and ZLZL scattering from the electroweak Chiral Lagrangian with a light Higgs-like scalar, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP02(2014)121

Web End =JHEP 02 (2014) 121 [arXiv:1311.5993] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1311.5993

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[44] A. Pich, I. Rosell and J.J. Sanz-Cillero, Viability of strongly-coupled scenarios with a light Higgs-like boson, http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.181801

Web End =Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 (2013) 181801 [arXiv:1212.6769] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1212.6769

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[45] A. Pich, I. Rosell and J.J. Sanz-Cillero, Oblique S and T Constraints on Electroweak Strongly-Coupled Models with a Light Higgs, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2014)157

Web End =JHEP 01 (2014) 157 [arXiv:1310.3121] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1310.3121

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[46] E.E. Jenkins, A.V. Manohar and M. Trott, Renormalization Group Evolution of the Standard Model Dimension Six Operators I: Formalism and lambda Dependence, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP10(2013)087

Web End =JHEP 10 (2013) 087 [arXiv:1308.2627] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1308.2627

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[47] E.E. Jenkins, A.V. Manohar and M. Trott, Renormalization Group Evolution of the Standard Model Dimension Six Operators II: Yukawa Dependence, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2014)035

Web End =JHEP 01 (2014) 035 [arXiv:1310.4838] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1310.4838

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[48] R. Alonso, E.E. Jenkins, A.V. Manohar and M. Trott, Renormalization Group Evolution of the Standard Model Dimension Six Operators III: Gauge Coupling Dependence and Phenomenology, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2014)159

Web End =JHEP 04 (2014) 159 [arXiv:1312.2014] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1312.2014

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[49] J.M. Cornwall, D.N. Levin and G. Tiktopoulos, Derivation of Gauge Invariance from High-Energy Unitarity Bounds on the s Matrix, http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.10.1145

Web End =Phys. Rev. D 10 (1974) 1145 [Erratum ibid. D 11 (1975) 972] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Phys.Rev.,D10,1145

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[50] C.E. Vayonakis, Born Helicity Amplitudes and Cross-Sections in Nonabelian Gauge Theories, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02746538

Web End =Lett. Nuovo Cim. 17 (1976) 383 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Lett.NuovoCim.,17,383

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[51] B.W. Lee, C. Quigg and H.B. Thacker, Weak Interactions at Very High-Energies: The Role of the Higgs Boson Mass, http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.16.1519

Web End =Phys. Rev. D 16 (1977) 1519 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Phys.Rev.,D16,1519

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[52] G.J. Gounaris, R. Kogerler and H. Neufeld, Relationship Between Longitudinally Polarized Vector Bosons and their Unphysical Scalar Partners, http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.34.3257

Web End =Phys. Rev. D 34 (1986) 3257 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Phys.Rev.,D34,3257

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[53] A. Dobado and J.R. Pelaez, On the equivalence theorem in the chiral perturbation theory description of the symmetry breaking sector of the standard model,http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(94)90174-0

Web End =Nucl. Phys. B 425 (1994) 110 [Erratum ibid. B 434 (1995) 475] [http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9401202

Web End =hep-ph/9401202 ] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+hep-ph/9401202

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[54] A. Dobado and J.R. Pelaez, The equivalence theorem for chiral lagrangians,http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(94)91092-8

Web End =Phys. Lett. B 329 (1994) 469 [Addendum ibid. B 335 (1994) 554] [http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9404239

Web End =hep-ph/9404239 ] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+hep-ph/9404239

Web End =INSPIRE ].

JHEP07(2014)149

[55] C. Grosse-Knetter and I. Kuss, The equivalence theorem and e ective Lagrangians,http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01496584

Web End =Z. Phys. C 66 (1995) 95 [http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9403291

Web End =hep-ph/9403291 ] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+hep-ph/9403291

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[56] H.-J. He, Y.-P. Kuang and X.-y. Li, Proof of the equivalence theorem in the chiral Lagrangian formalism, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(94)90772-2

Web End =Phys. Lett. B 329 (1994) 278 [http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9403283

Web End =hep-ph/9403283 ] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+hep-ph/9403283

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[57] R. Urech, Virtual photons in chiral perturbation theory, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(95)90707-N

Web End =Nucl. Phys. B 433 (1995) 234 [http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9405341

Web End =hep-ph/9405341 ] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+hep-ph/9405341

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[58] A. Dobado, A. Gmez-Nicola, A.L. Maroto and J.R. Pelez, E ective Lagrangians for the Standard Model, Springer Verlag, (1997).

[59] G. Buchalla, O. Cat and C. Krause, Complete Electroweak Chiral Lagrangian with a Light Higgs at NLO, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2014.01.018

Web End =Nucl. Phys. B 880 (2014) 552 [arXiv:1307.5017] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1307.5017

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[60] G. Buchalla, O. Cat and C. Krause, On the Power Counting in E ective Field Theories, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2014.02.015

Web End =Phys. Lett. B 731 (2014) 80 [arXiv:1312.5624] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1312.5624

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[61] J. Hirn and J. Stern, Lepton-number violation and right-handed neutrinos in Higgs-less e ective theories, http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.73.056001

Web End =Phys. Rev. D 73 (2006) 056001 [http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0504277

Web End =hep-ph/0504277 ] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+hep-ph/0504277

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[62] G. Buchalla and O. Cat, E ective Theory of a Dynamically Broken Electroweak Standard Model at NLO, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2012)101

Web End =JHEP 07 (2012) 101 [arXiv:1203.6510] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1203.6510

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[63] A. Dobado and J. Morales, A Note on the 00 reaction in the 1/N expansion of

(PT), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(95)01240-0

Web End =Phys. Lett. B 365 (1996) 264 [http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9511244

Web End =hep-ph/9511244 ] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+hep-ph/9511244

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[64] A. Dobado and J. Morales, Pion mass e ects in the large-N limit of chi(PT), http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.52.2878

Web End =Phys. Rev. D 52 (1995) 2878 [http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9407321

Web End =hep-ph/9407321 ] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Phys.Rev.,D52,2878

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[65] J.F. Donoghue, B.R. Holstein and Y.C. Lin, The reaction 00 and Chiral Loops,

http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.37.2423

Web End =Phys. Rev. D 37 (1988) 2423 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Phys.Rev.,D37,2423

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[66] J. Kublbeck, M. Bhm and A. Denner, Feyn Arts: Computer Algebraic Generation of Feynman Graphs and Amplitudes, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0010-4655(90)90001-H

Web End =Comput. Phys. Commun. 60 (1990) 165 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Comput.Phys.Commun.,60,165

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[67] T. Hahn, Generating Feynman diagrams and amplitudes with FeynArts 3, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0010-4655(01)00290-9

Web End =Comput. Phys. Commun. 140 (2001) 418 [http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0012260

Web End =hep-ph/0012260 ] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Comput.Phys.Commun.,140,418

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[68] T. Hahn and M. Prez-Victoria, Automatized one loop calculations in four-dimensions and D-dimensions, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0010-4655(98)00173-8

Web End =Comput. Phys. Commun. 118 (1999) 153 [http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9807565

Web End =hep-ph/9807565 ] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Comput.Phys.Commun.,118,153

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[69] A. Alloul, N.D. Christensen, C. Degrande, C. Duhr and B. Fuks, FeynRules 2.0 A complete toolbox for tree-level phenomenology, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2014.04.012

Web End =Comput. Phys. Commun. 185 (2014) 2250 [arXiv:1310.1921] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1310.1921

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[70] J. Bijnens, S. Dawson and G. Valencia, 00 and KL 0 in the chiral quark

model, http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.44.3555

Web End =Phys. Rev. D 44 (1991) 3555 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Phys.Rev.,D44,3555

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[71] J. Bijnens and F. Cornet, Two Pion Production in Photon-Photon Collisions, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(88)90032-6

Web End =Nucl. Phys. B 296 (1988) 557 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+J+Nucl.Phys.,B296,557

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[72] U. Burgi, Charged pion pair production and pion polarizabilities to two loops, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(96)00454-3

Web End =Nucl. Phys. B 479 (1996) 392 [http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9602429

Web End =hep-ph/9602429 ] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+hep-ph/9602429

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[73] U. Burgi, Charged pion polarizabilities to two loops, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(96)00304-8

Web End =Phys. Lett. B 377 (1996) 147 [http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9602421

Web End =hep-ph/9602421 ] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+hep-ph/9602421

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[74] L. Ametller and P. Talavera, The lowest resonance in QCD from low-energy data, arXiv:1402.2649 [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1402.2649

Web End =INSPIRE ].

JHEP07(2014)149

[75] G.F. Giudice, C. Grojean, A. Pomarol and R. Rattazzi, The Strongly-Interacting Light Higgs, http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2007/06/045

Web End =JHEP 06 (2007) 045 [http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0703164

Web End =hep-ph/0703164 ] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+hep-ph/0703164

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[76] A. Djouadi, The anatomy of electro-weak symmetry breaking. II. The Higgs bosons in the minimal supersymmetric model, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2007.10.005

Web End =Phys. Rept. 459 (2008) 1 [http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0503173

Web End =hep-ph/0503173 ] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+hep-ph/0503173

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[77] N. Watanabe, Y. Kurihara, K. Sasaki and T. Uematsu, Higgs Production in Two-Photon Process and Transition Form Factor, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2013.11.051

Web End =Phys. Lett. B 728 (2014) 202 [arXiv:1311.1601] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1311.1601

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[78] A. Alloul, B. Fuks and V. Sanz, Phenomenology of the Higgs E ective Lagrangian via FeynRules, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2014)110

Web End =JHEP 04 (2014) 110 [arXiv:1310.5150] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1310.5150

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[79] G. Isidori, A.V. Manohar and M. Trott, Probing the nature of the Higgs-like Boson via h V F decays, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2013.11.054

Web End =Phys. Lett. B 728 (2014) 131 [arXiv:1305.0663] [

http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1305.0663

Web End =INSPIRE ].

[80] G. Isidori and M. Trott, Higgs form factors in Associated Production, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP02(2014)082

Web End =JHEP 02 (2014) 082 [arXiv:1307.4051] [http://inspirehep.net/search?p=find+EPRINT+arXiv:1307.4051

Web End =INSPIRE ].

JHEP07(2014)149

Word count: 17398

Show less

SISSA, Trieste, Italy 2014

Abstract

Translate

Abstract

In this work we study the γγ [arrow right]W ^sub L^^sup +^ W ^sub L^^sup -^ and γγ [arrow right] Z ^sub L^ Z ^sub L^ scattering processes within the effective chiral Lagrangian approach, including a light Higgs-like scalar as a dynamical field together with the would-be-Goldstone bosons w ^sup ±^ and z associated to the electroweak symmetry breaking. This approach is inspired by the possibility that the Higgs-like boson be a composite particle behaving as another Goldstone boson, and assumes the existence of a mass gap between m ^sub h^, m ^sub W^ , m ^sub Z^ and the potential new emergent resonances, setting an intermediate energy region (above m ^sub h,W,Z^ and below the resonance masses) where the use of these effective chiral Lagrangians are the most appropriate tools to compute the relevant observables. We analyse in detail the proper chiral counting rules for the present case of photon-photon scattering and provide the computation of the one-loop γγ [arrow right]W ^sub L^^sup +^ W ^sub L^^sup -^ and γγ [arrow right] Z ^sub L^ Z ^sub L^ scattering amplitudes within this Effective Chiral Lagrangian approach and the Equivalence Theorem, including a discussion on the involved renormalization procedure. We also propose here a joint analysis of our results for the twophoton scattering amplitudes together with other photonic processes and electroweak (EW) precision observables for a future comparison with data. This could help to disentangle the nature of the light Higgs-like particle.

Details

Title

One-loop [gamma][gamma] [arrow right]W ^sub L^^sup +^ W ^sub L^^sup -^ and [gamma][gamma] [arrow right] Z ^sub L^ Z ^sub L^ from the Electroweak Chiral Lagrangian with a light Higgs-like scalar

Author

Delgado, R L; Dobado, A; Herrero, M J; Sanz-cillero, J J

Pages

1-41

Publication year

2014

Publication date

Jul 2014

Publisher

Springer Nature B.V.

e-ISSN

10298479

Source type

Scholarly Journal

Language of publication

English

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2014)149

ProQuest document ID

1708015836

SISSA, Trieste, Italy 2014

One-loop [gamma][gamma] [arrow right]W ^sub L^^sup +^ W ^sub L^^sup -^ and [gamma][gamma] [arrow right] Z ^sub L^ Z ^sub L^ from the Electroweak Chiral Lagrangian with a light Higgs-like scalar

Jump to:

Full Text

Abstract

Details

Suggested sources