[go: up one dir, main page]

Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Account
Menu
Find a journal Publish with us Track your research
Search
Cart
  1. Home
  2. Journal of High Energy Physics
  3. Article

Matching for FCNC effects in the flavour-symmetric SMEFT

  • Regular Article - Theoretical Physics
  • Open access
  • Published: 10 June 2019
  • Volume 2019, article number 29, (2019)
  • Cite this article
Download PDF

You have full access to this open access article

Journal of High Energy Physics Aims and scope Submit manuscript
Matching for FCNC effects in the flavour-symmetric SMEFT
Download PDF
  • Tobias Hurth1,
  • Sophie Renner1 &
  • William Shepherd1,2 
  • 515 Accesses

  • 34 Citations

  • 1 Altmetric

  • Explore all metrics

A preprint version of the article is available at arXiv.

Abstract

We calculate the complete tree and one-loop matching of the dimension-six Standard Model Effective Field Theory (SMEFT) with unbroken U(3)5 flavour symmetry to the operators of the Weak Effective Theory (WET) which are responsible for flavour changing neutral current effects among down-type quarks. We also explicitly calculate the effects of SMEFT corrections to input observables on the WET Wilson coefficients, a necessary step on the way to a well-defined, complete prediction. These results will enable high-precision flavour data to be incorporated into global fits of the SMEFT at high energies, where the flavour symmetry assumption is widespread.

Article PDF

Download to read the full article text

Similar content being viewed by others

The impact of flavour data on global fits of the MFV SMEFT

Article Open access 17 December 2020

Leading directions in the SMEFT

Article Open access 04 September 2023

Flavour symmetries in the SMEFT

Article Open access 31 August 2020

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, books and news in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.
  • Convention Theory
  • Crystal Field Theory
  • Particle Physics
  • Quantum Correlation and Entanglement
  • Structural Variation
  • Valence-Bond Theory
Use our pre-submission checklist

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

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, Phys. Lett. B 716 (2012) 1 [arXiv:1207.7214] [INSPIRE].

  2. CMS collaboration, Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B 716 (2012) 30 [arXiv:1207.7235] [INSPIRE].

  3. ATLAS collaboration, Combined measurements of Higgs boson production and decay using up to 80 fb −1 of proton-proton collision data at \( \sqrt{s} \) = 13 TeV collected with the ATLAS experiment, ATLAS-CONF-2018-031, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland (2018).

  4. CMS collaboration, Combined measurements of Higgs boson couplings in proton-proton collisions at \( \sqrt{s} \) = 13 TeV, Eur. Phys. J. C 79 (2019) 421 [arXiv:1809.10733] [INSPIRE].

  5. I. Brivio and M. Trott, The Standard Model as an effective field theory, Phys. Rept. 793 (2019) 1 [arXiv:1706.08945] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. J.C. Criado, MatchingTools: a Python library for symbolic effective field theory calculations, Comput. Phys. Commun. 227 (2018) 42 [arXiv:1710.06445] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  7. S. Das Bakshi, J. Chakrabortty and S.K. Patra, CoDEx: Wilson coefficient calculator connecting SMEFT to UV theory, Eur. Phys. J. C 79 (2019) 21 [arXiv:1808.04403] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  8. J. Aebischer et al., WCxf: an exchange format for Wilson coefficients beyond the Standard Model, Comput. Phys. Commun. 232 (2018) 71 [arXiv:1712.05298] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  9. B. Grzadkowski, M. Iskrzynski, M. Misiak and J. Rosiek, Dimension-six terms in the Standard Model Lagrangian, JHEP 10 (2010) 085 [arXiv:1008.4884] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  10. E.E. Jenkins, A.V. Manohar and M. Trott, Renormalization group evolution of the Standard Model dimension six operators I: formalism and lambda dependence, JHEP 10 (2013) 087 [arXiv:1308.2627] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  11. E.E. Jenkins, A.V. Manohar and M. Trott, Renormalization group evolution of the Standard Model dimension six operators II: Yukawa dependence, JHEP 01 (2014) 035 [arXiv:1310.4838] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  12. 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, JHEP 04 (2014) 159 [arXiv:1312.2014] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  13. Z. Han and W. Skiba, Effective theory analysis of precision electroweak data, Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) 075009 [hep-ph/0412166] [INSPIRE].

  14. L. Berthier and M. Trott, Towards consistent electroweak precision data constraints in the SMEFT, JHEP 05 (2015) 024 [arXiv:1502.02570] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  15. L. Berthier and M. Trott, Consistent constraints on the Standard Model effective field theory, JHEP 02 (2016) 069 [arXiv:1508.05060] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  16. M. Bjørn and M. Trott, Interpreting W mass measurements in the SMEFT, Phys. Lett. B 762 (2016) 426 [arXiv:1606.06502] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  17. L. Berthier, M. Bjørn and M. Trott, Incorporating doubly resonant W ± data in a global fit of SMEFT parameters to lift flat directions, JHEP 09 (2016) 157 [arXiv:1606.06693] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  18. J. Ellis, C.W. Murphy, V. Sanz and T. You, Updated global SMEFT fit to Higgs, diboson and electroweak data, JHEP 06 (2018) 146 [arXiv:1803.03252] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  19. E. da Silva Almeida, A. Alves, N. Rosa Agostinho, O.J.P. É boli and M.C. Gonzalez-Garcia, Electroweak sector under scrutiny: a combined analysis of LHC and electroweak precision data, Phys. Rev. D 99 (2019) 033001 [arXiv:1812.01009] [INSPIRE].

  20. C. Zhang and F. Maltoni, Top-quark decay into Higgs boson and a light quark at next-to-leading order in QCD, Phys. Rev. D 88 (2013) 054005 [arXiv:1305.7386] [INSPIRE].

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  21. R. Gauld, B.D. Pecjak and D.J. Scott, One-loop corrections to h → \( b\overline{b} \) and h → \( \tau \overline{\tau} \) decays in the Standard Model dimension-6 EFT: four-fermion operators and the large-m t limit, JHEP 05 (2016) 080 [arXiv:1512.02508] [INSPIRE].

  22. C. Hartmann and M. Trott, On one-loop corrections in the Standard Model effective field theory; the Γ(h → γγ) case, JHEP 07 (2015) 151 [arXiv:1505.02646] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  23. R. Gauld, B.D. Pecjak and D.J. Scott, QCD radiative corrections for h → \( b\overline{b} \) in the Standard Model dimension-6 EFT, Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) 074045 [arXiv:1607.06354] [INSPIRE].

  24. F. Maltoni, E. Vryonidou and C. Zhang, Higgs production in association with a top-antitop pair in the Standard Model effective field theory at NLO in QCD, JHEP 10 (2016) 123 [arXiv:1607.05330] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  25. C. Zhang, Single top production at next-to-leading order in the Standard Model effective field theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) 162002 [arXiv:1601.06163] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  26. C. Hartmann, W. Shepherd and M. Trott, The Z decay width in the SMEFT: y t and λ corrections at one loop, JHEP 03 (2017) 060 [arXiv:1611.09879] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  27. J. Baglio, S. Dawson and I.M. Lewis, An NLO QCD effective field theory analysis of W + W − production at the LHC including fermionic operators, Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017) 073003 [arXiv:1708.03332] [INSPIRE].

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  28. S. Dawson and P.P. Giardino, Higgs decays to ZZ and Zγ in the Standard Model effective field theory: an NLO analysis, Phys. Rev. D 97 (2018) 093003 [arXiv:1801.01136] [INSPIRE].

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  29. S. Dawson and A. Ismail, Standard Model EFT corrections to Z boson decays, Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018) 093003 [arXiv:1808.05948] [INSPIRE].

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  30. E. Vryonidou and C. Zhang, Dimension-six electroweak top-loop effects in Higgs production and decay, JHEP 08 (2018) 036 [arXiv:1804.09766] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  31. S. Dawson and P.P. Giardino, Electroweak corrections to Higgs boson decays to γγ and W + W − in Standard Model EFT, Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018) 095005 [arXiv:1807.11504] [INSPIRE].

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  32. S. Dawson, P.P. Giardino and A. Ismail, Standard Model EFT and the Drell-Yan process at high energy, Phys. Rev. D 99 (2019) 035044 [arXiv:1811.12260] [INSPIRE].

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  33. S. Alte, M. König and W. Shepherd, Consistent searches for SMEFT effects in non-resonant dijet events, JHEP 01 (2018) 094 [arXiv:1711.07484] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  34. S. Alte, M. König and W. Shepherd, Consistent searches for SMEFT effects in non-resonant dilepton events, arXiv:1812.07575 [INSPIRE].

  35. B. Grzadkowski and M. Misiak, Anomalous Wtb coupling effects in the weak radiative B-meson decay, Phys. Rev. D 78 (2008) 077501 [Erratum ibid. D 84 (2011) 059903] [arXiv:0802.1413] [INSPIRE].

  36. J.P. Lee and K.Y. Lee, B d - \( {\overline{B}}_d \) mixing versus B s - \( {\overline{B}}_s \) mixing with the anomalous Wtb couplings, arXiv:0809.0751 [INSPIRE].

  37. J. Drobnak, S. Fajfer and J.F. Kamenik, Interplay of t → bW decay and B q meson mixing in minimal flavor violating models, Phys. Lett. B 701 (2011) 234 [arXiv:1102.4347] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  38. J.F. Kamenik, M. Papucci and A. Weiler, Constraining the dipole moments of the top quark, Phys. Rev. D 85 (2012) 071501 [Erratum ibid. D 88 (2013) 039903] [arXiv:1107.3143] [INSPIRE].

  39. J. Drobnak, S. Fajfer and J.F. Kamenik, Probing anomalous tWb interactions with rare B decays, Nucl. Phys. B 855 (2012) 82 [arXiv:1109.2357] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  40. R. Alonso, B. Grinstein and J. Martin Camalich, SU(2) × U(1) gauge invariance and the shape of new physics in rare B decays, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113 (2014) 241802 [arXiv:1407.7044] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  41. J. Brod, A. Greljo, E. Stamou and P. Uttayarat, Probing anomalous \( t\overline{t}Z \) interactions with rare meson decays, JHEP 02 (2015) 141 [arXiv:1408.0792] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  42. C. Bobeth and U. Haisch, Anomalous triple gauge couplings from B-meson and kaon observables, JHEP 09 (2015) 018 [arXiv:1503.04829] [INSPIRE].

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. J. Aebischer, A. Crivellin, M. Fael and C. Greub, Matching of gauge invariant dimension-six operators for b → s and b → c transitions, JHEP 05 (2016) 037 [arXiv:1512.02830] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  44. V. Cirigliano, W. Dekens, J. de Vries and E. Mereghetti, Constraining the top-Higgs sector of the Standard Model effective field theory, Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) 034031 [arXiv:1605.04311] [INSPIRE].

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  45. M. González-Alonso and J. Martin Camalich, Global effective-field-theory analysis of new-physics effects in (semi)leptonic kaon decays, JHEP 12 (2016) 052 [arXiv:1605.07114] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  46. F. Feruglio, P. Paradisi and A. Pattori, Revisiting lepton flavor universality in B decays, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118 (2017) 011801 [arXiv:1606.00524] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  47. F. Feruglio, P. Paradisi and A. Pattori, On the importance of electroweak corrections for B anomalies, JHEP 09 (2017) 061 [arXiv:1705.00929] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  48. M. Bordone, G. Isidori and S. Trifinopoulos, Semileptonic B-physics anomalies: a general EFT analysis within U(2)n flavor symmetry, Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017) 015038 [arXiv:1702.07238] [INSPIRE].

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  49. C. Bobeth, A.J. Buras, A. Celis and M. Jung, Yukawa enhancement of Z-mediated new physics in ΔS = 2 and ΔB = 2 processes, JHEP 07 (2017) 124 [arXiv:1703.04753] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  50. A. Celis, J. Fuentes-Martin, A. Vicente and J. Virto, Gauge-invariant implications of the LHCb measurements on lepton-flavor nonuniversality, Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017) 035026 [arXiv:1704.05672] [INSPIRE].

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  51. D. Buttazzo, A. Greljo, G. Isidori and D. Marzocca, B-physics anomalies: a guide to combined explanations, JHEP 11 (2017) 044 [arXiv:1706.07808] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  52. C. Cornella, F. Feruglio and P. Paradisi, Low-energy effects of lepton flavour universality violation, JHEP 11 (2018) 012 [arXiv:1803.00945] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  53. D.M. Straub, flavio: a Python package for flavour and precision phenomenology in the Standard Model and beyond, arXiv:1810.08132 [INSPIRE].

  54. M. Endo, T. Kitahara and D. Ueda, SMEFT top-quark effects on ΔF = 2 observables, arXiv:1811.04961 [INSPIRE].

  55. L. Silvestrini and M. Valli, Model-independent bounds on the Standard Model effective theory from flavour physics, arXiv:1812.10913 [INSPIRE].

  56. S. Descotes-Genon, A. Falkowski, M. Fedele, M. González-Alonso and J. Virto, The CKM parameters in the SMEFT, arXiv:1812.08163 [INSPIRE].

  57. J. Aebischer, J. Kumar, P. Stangl and D.M. Straub, A global likelihood for precision constraints and flavour anomalies, arXiv:1810.07698 [INSPIRE].

  58. A. Celis, J. Fuentes-Martin, A. Vicente and J. Virto, DsixTools: the Standard Model effective field theory toolkit, Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) 405 [arXiv:1704.04504] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  59. J. Aebischer, J. Kumar and D.M. Straub, Wilson: a Python package for the running and matching of Wilson coefficients above and below the electroweak scale, Eur. Phys. J. C 78 (2018) 1026 [arXiv:1804.05033] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  60. G. D’Ambrosio, G.F. Giudice, G. Isidori and A. Strumia, Minimal flavor violation: an effective field theory approach, Nucl. Phys. B 645 (2002) 155 [hep-ph/0207036] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  61. I. Brivio and M. Trott, Scheming in the SMEFT. . . And a reparameterization invariance!, JHEP 07 (2017) 148 [Addendum ibid. 05 (2018) 136] [arXiv:1701.06424] [INSPIRE].

  62. C.P. Burgess, S. Godfrey, H. Konig, D. London and I. Maksymyk, Model independent global constraints on new physics, Phys. Rev. D 49 (1994) 6115 [hep-ph/9312291] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  63. A. Falkowski and F. Riva, Model-independent precision constraints on dimension-6 operators, JHEP 02 (2015) 039 [arXiv:1411.0669] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  64. A. Dedes, W. Materkowska, M. Paraskevas, J. Rosiek and K. Suxho, Feynman rules for the Standard Model effective field theory in R ξ -gauges, JHEP 06 (2017) 143 [arXiv:1704.03888] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  65. G. Buchalla, A.J. Buras and M.E. Lautenbacher, Weak decays beyond leading logarithms, Rev. Mod. Phys. 68 (1996) 1125 [hep-ph/9512380] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  66. T. Inami and C.S. Lim, Effects of superheavy quarks and leptons in low-energy weak processes K L → \( \mu \overline{\mu} \) , K + → π + \( \nu \overline{\nu} \) and K 0 ↔ \( {\overline{K}}^0 \), Prog. Theor. Phys. 65 (1981) 297 [Erratum ibid. 65 (1981) 1772] [INSPIRE].

  67. E.E. Jenkins, A.V. Manohar and P. Stoffer, Low-energy effective field theory below the electroweak scale: anomalous dimensions, JHEP 01 (2018) 084 [arXiv:1711.05270] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  68. J. Aebischer, M. Fael, C. Greub and J. Virto, B physics beyond the Standard Model at one loop: complete renormalization group evolution below the electroweak scale, JHEP 09 (2017) 158 [arXiv:1704.06639] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  69. I. Brivio, Y. Jiang and M. Trott, The SMEFTsim package, theory and tools, JHEP 12 (2017) 070 [arXiv:1709.06492] [INSPIRE].

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

Download references

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.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. PRISMA+ Cluster of Excellence & Mainz Institute of Theoretical Physics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, 55099, Mainz, Germany

    Tobias Hurth, Sophie Renner & William Shepherd

  2. Physics Department, Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, TX, 77431, U.S.A.

    William Shepherd

Authors
  1. Tobias Hurth
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sophie Renner
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. William Shepherd
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sophie Renner.

Additional information

ArXiv ePrint: 1903.00500

Rights and permissions

Open Access  This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

To view a copy of this licence, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hurth, T., Renner, S. & Shepherd, W. Matching for FCNC effects in the flavour-symmetric SMEFT. J. High Energ. Phys. 2019, 29 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2019)029

Download citation

  • Received: 27 March 2019

  • Revised: 18 May 2019

  • Accepted: 21 May 2019

  • Published: 10 June 2019

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2019)029

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Keywords

  • Beyond Standard Model
  • Effective Field Theories
  • Heavy Quark Physics
Use our pre-submission checklist

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Advertisement

Search

Navigation

  • Find a journal
  • Publish with us
  • Track your research

Discover content

  • Journals A-Z
  • Books A-Z

Publish with us

  • Journal finder
  • Publish your research
  • Language editing
  • Open access publishing

Products and services

  • Our products
  • Librarians
  • Societies
  • Partners and advertisers

Our brands

  • Springer
  • Nature Portfolio
  • BMC
  • Palgrave Macmillan
  • Apress
  • Discover
  • Your US state privacy rights
  • Accessibility statement
  • Terms and conditions
  • Privacy policy
  • Help and support
  • Legal notice
  • Cancel contracts here

Not affiliated

Springer Nature

© 2025 Springer Nature