Triple Higgs Boson Production with Two Heavy Scalars at the LHC via a Simplified Approach

Andreas Papaefstathiou; Gilberto Tetlalmatzi-Xolocotzi

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 130 references

Triple Higgs Boson Production with Two Heavy Scalars at the LHC via a Simplified Approach

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that double-resonant triple Higgs production factorizes into a mass-only grid times one rescaling parameter, so a single LHC analysis can constrain any model with two narrow scalars.

desk verdict Useful universal grid for double-resonant triple Higgs production in singlet-like scalar sectors; the 'any model' claim overreaches because the grid bakes in an SM-like gg→h3 loop. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.14866 v2 pith:GP7Y6BMV submitted 2025-01-24 hep-ph hep-ex

Andreas Papaefstathiou , Gilberto Tetlalmatzi-Xolocotzi This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-phhep-ex

keywords tripleHiggsbosonproductiondouble-resonanttwo-real-singletmodelnarrow-widthapproximationscalarresonancesearchsixb-jetfinalstateHL-LHCprojectionsextendedsector

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Two new scalar particles, $h_2$ and $h_3$, heavier than the 125 GeV Higgs boson $h_1$, can make triple Higgs production at the LHC observable through the chain $gg \to h_3 \to h_2 h_1 \to h_1 h_1 h_1$ when $m_3 > m_2 + m_1$ and $m_2 > 2m_1$. The paper argues that in the narrow-width approximation this double-resonant cross section factorizes into a 'unity' cross section depending only on $m_2$ and $m_3$, times one rescaling parameter $\rho_2 = \kappa_3^2 \lambda_{123}^2 \lambda_{112}^2 / (\Gamma_2 \Gamma_3)$. Because the kinematics are independent of $\rho_2$, one optimized 6 b-jet analysis can be computed once and rescaled to yield 95% CL projected limits on $\rho_2$ over the whole $(m_2,m_3)$ plane at the HL-LHC. The authors test the approximation for benchmark points of the two-real-singlet model and find that non-resonant and off-shell pieces shift the expected significance by only about ten percent. If the factorization holds, triple Higgs production becomes a reusable probe of any extended scalar sector containing two narrow resonances.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the narrow-width replacement of each Breit-Wigner propagator by a delta function, valid when $\Gamma_i \ll m_i$, which makes the double-resonant production factorize into on-shell production times decay. The named quantity that carries all model dependence is $\rho_2$, the single rescaling factor combining the $h_3$ mixing strength, the two scalar trilinear couplings, and the two widths; the companion object is the unity cross section $\hat\sigma_u(m_2,m_3)$, computed once with reference parameters. The cut optimization uses the product of per-point significances, $E_\Pi = \prod_i \varepsilon_i/\sqrt{\varepsilon_{B,i}}$, to choose one universal set of six $b$-jet kinematic cuts, so the same selection applies across the mass plane.

What would settle it

Compute the full leading-order $gg\to h_1h_1h_1$ amplitude, including non-resonant diagrams, the off-shell $h_3^*\to h_3 h_1$ piece, and interference, for a model point with $\Gamma_2/m_2$ or $\Gamma_3/m_3$ of order a few percent, then apply the paper's universal cuts and compare the resulting 95% CL limit on $\rho_2$ with the double-resonant-only prediction; a shift much larger than the paper's observed 10% significance change would show the factorization is not universal. A simpler experimental check is to fit the $m_{6b}$ distribution at the HL-LHC and look for sideband events that the narrow double-resonant template cannot reproduce.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the double-resonant process, rather than the full set of triple Higgs diagrams, is the right object to compute for LHC searches, and that within the narrow-width approximation its cross section is $\sigma(m_2,m_3) = \hat\sigma_u(m_2,m_3)\, \rho_2$, where $\hat\sigma_u$ is the cross section at reference values $\kappa_3=1$, $\lambda_{123}=\lambda_{112}=1$ GeV, $\Gamma_2=\Gamma_3=1$ GeV, and $\rho_2 = \kappa_3^2\lambda_{123}^2\lambda_{112}^2/(\Gamma_2\Gamma_3)$. Since $\rho_2$ rescales the overall rate but not the event shapes, a single set of universal cuts optimized over 280 grid points in $(m_2,m_3)$ suffices for the entire plane, and dividing the resulting 95% CL cross-section limits by $\hat\sigma_u$ gives limits on $\rho_2$. For the TRSM benchmarks examined, the double-resonant piece reproduces the dominant features of the full $gg\to h_1h_1h_1$ process, and the full-versus-resonant comparison changes the expected significance by about 10%, so the paper concludes that non-resonant components will not play a crucial role at the LHC.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the full $gg\to h_1h_1h_1$ signal is well approximated by the double-resonant narrow-width chain, so non-resonant diagrams, the off-shell $h_3^*\to h_3 h_1$ contribution, and interference effects can be ignored; the paper checks this only for selected two-real-singlet benchmark points, and the narrow-width derivation itself requires $\Gamma_i\ll m_i$.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Any model with two narrow scalars satisfying $m_3>m_2+m_1$ and $m_2>2m_1$ can be tested against the paper's $\rho_2$ limits by rescaling one grid, with no new Monte Carlo analysis per model.
At the HL-LHC with 3000 fb$^{-1}$, projected 95% CL limits on $\rho_2$ reach the $10^7$ GeV$^2$ level across much of the allowed plane, which is safely above the scalar-width-dominated region of the TRSM benchmarks.
Within the TRSM, the scan indicates that triple Higgs production is unlikely to be a discovery channel: no parameter point that evades single-scalar searches is visible in this process, and single-scalar production excludes most of the viable points.
The non-resonant and off-shell components change the expected significance by around ten percent for the excludable points, so the double-resonant template captures the LHC-relevant physics.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Beyond the paper, the same factorization could be turned into a published grid of $\sigma_{95\%\mathrm{CL}}(m_2,m_3)$ values, letting experimentalists and theorists recast any two-scalar model without rerunning a full analysis.
If the method is extended to non-narrow widths, one could compute a generalization of $\hat\sigma_u$ including off-shell effects once per mass point, keeping the rescaling idea while dropping the strict narrow-width requirement.
The paper's conclusion that triple Higgs production is not a discovery channel for the TRSM may not transfer to models where single-scalar production is suppressed but the $h_3h_2h_1$ coupling is large; testing such a model would require verifying the 10% approximation there.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

First, what's genuinely useful: the ρ2 factorization is standard NWA bookkeeping, but the paper turns it into a practical tool—a 280-point grid of unity cross sections, one optimized cut set, and projected 95% limits on ρ2 over (m2,m3) at 300 and 3000 fb^-1. That is a reusable output for the HL-LHC, and the TRSM case study credibly shows that non-resonant and off-shell pieces shift the expected significance by only ~10%. The authors are also honest about the analysis being simplified: no detector simulation, no mistag rates, no systematics, flat k=2 everywhere. Good.

The soft spot that matters is the universality claim. The factorization σ = σ_u ρ2 implicitly assumes the gg→h3 amplitude in the target model is κ3 times the SM amplitude. That holds in the TRSM because all h3 couplings to SM fermions and gauge bosons share one mixing factor. In a 2HDM, the heavy scalar's couplings to up- and down-type quarks are independent parameters, so the loop is not proportional to the SM loop and the m3-dependence of σ_u changes. Models with new colored states change it further. So the statement in the abstract and conclusions that the method applies to 'any model with two new narrow scalar resonances' is too strong. The grid is universal for models with singlet-like universal rescaling; for others it is an approximation that needs validation. The authors check the NWA only within the TRSM, and the paper's own Section 3 notes the Γ≪m requirement but doesn't test the loop-structure assumption. This should be fixed by either restricting the claim or adding a short discussion of when σ_u is model-independent.

Also minor: the 'unity' grid and cut optimization are described but the grid isn't public—no code or data files—so the 'once-and-for-all' promise is hard to reuse. The k-factor and b-tag efficiency are flat, which is fine for a sensitivity study but should be stated more prominently than the current text does.

Bottom line: the math and MC work are sound for the singlet-like class, the paper is clearly written, and it deserves a serious referee. I would send it to review with a request to temper the 'any model' claim and make the grid available. It is a solid phenomenological projection paper, not a discovery paper.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a simplified, factorized description of double-resonant triple Higgs boson production, gg -> h3 -> (h2 -> h1 h1) h1, in extensions of the Standard Model with two new narrow scalars that mix with the SM-like Higgs boson. The central object is the rescaling factor rho2 = kappa3^2 lambda123^2 lambda112^2 / (Gamma2 Gamma3), so that the cross section factorizes as sigma = sigma_hat_u(m2,m3) x rho2, with a universal 'unity' cross section computed for kappa3=1, lambda=1 GeV, and Gamma2=Gamma3=1 GeV. The authors generate Monte Carlo samples, optimize a single set of six-b-jet selection cuts over 280 grid points in the (m2,m3) plane, and derive projected 95% CL limits on the rescaling factor at the HL-LHC for 300 and 3000 fb^-1. The method is validated within the two-real-singlet model (TRSM) using benchmark points from prior work, including a comparison of the double-resonant signal with the full gg -> h1h1h1 process. The paper concludes that the double-resonant contribution captures the dominant features of the signal in the TRSM and that the approach can be applied to any model with two new narrow scalar resonances.

Significance. If the factorization and its domain of validity are properly circumscribed, the paper provides a useful fast approximate framework for estimating LHC sensitivity to double-resonant triple Higgs production without repeating a full analysis for every model. The definition of rho2 is transparent and does not involve fitting any parameter to data; the unity cross-section grids and the cut set are concrete deliverables that other authors can rescale. The paper also gives a useful, if limited, check that non-resonant contributions have a small impact for the considered TRSM benchmark regions. However, the advertised universality of the grid for 'any model with two new narrow scalar resonances' exceeds what is demonstrated, because the unity production amplitude assumes that the gg -> h3 vertex is proportional to the SM Higgs boson production amplitude. The paper is therefore best seen as a validated method for singlet-type extensions or other models with universally rescaled SM-like couplings, rather than a truly model-independent tool.

major comments (3)

[Section 3, Eq. (3.4); Section 5] The universal-grid claim is broader than the evidence. The unity cross section sigma_hat_u(m2,m3) is computed with kappa3=1, which means the gg -> h3 amplitude is assumed to be the SM-like gg -> hSM amplitude evaluated at mass m3, with all SM couplings uniformly rescaled by a single factor. This is true in the TRSM, where all h3 couplings to SM particles share the factor kappa3 (Eq. 2.13), but it is not true for generic extended scalar sectors. In a Type-II 2HDM, for example, the couplings of the heavy CP-even scalar to up-type and down-type quarks are independent parameters, so the gluon-fusion loop amplitude is not proportional to the SM one and has a different mass dependence; new colored states would change the loop further. Since the abstract and conclusions state that the method can be applied to 'any model with two new narrow scalar resonances,' the central claim needs to be restricted to models in which the h3 couplings to the SM particles are universally rescaled relative to the SM, or the paper must provide a recipe for replacing the SM-like production factor with a model-specific one.
[Section 4.1, Eq. (4.5); Figs. 4-6] The projected 95% CL limits are computed with a purely statistical significance S/sqrt(B), a flat k-factor of 2 applied to the signal and to all backgrounds, a flat 85% b-tagging efficiency, and no mis-tag rates, detector simulation, or systematic/PDF/scale uncertainties. These choices directly affect the quantitative limit maps in Figs. 4-6 and the conclusions drawn from the TRSM scan in Fig. 6. The paper should either label these results explicitly as an idealized fast projection and assess the sensitivity of the rho2 limits to the k-factor and background normalization assumptions, or provide a more complete uncertainty treatment. This does not undermine the factorization itself, but it is load-bearing for the claimed constraints.
[Section 4.2, Figs. 7-8] The validation that the double-resonant piece captures the dominant features of the signal is performed only within the TRSM and only for the set of parameter-space points that the analysis would exclude. Non-resonant diagrams, the off-shell h3* -> h3 h1 contribution, and interference effects may be larger in other models or in other regions of the (m2,m3) plane. The statement in Section 5 that the non-resonant part 'will not contribute meaningfully to the signal' should therefore be restricted to the studied TRSM benchmark regions, or supplemented by a demonstration that the relative size of non-resonant contributions is small across a broader class of models. As written, the conclusion overgeneralizes the numerical evidence.

minor comments (5)

[Section 3, Eqs. (3.1) and (3.4)] The notation sigma_u in Eq. (3.1) and sigma_hat_u in Eq. (3.4) is confusing: Eq. (3.1) defines sigma_u for kappa3=1 and lambda=1 GeV without mentioning the widths, while Eq. (3.4) defines sigma_hat_u also for Gamma2=Gamma3=1 GeV. The units of sigma_u and sigma_hat_u differ accordingly, and the two equations appear inconsistent unless the reader infers that Eq. (3.1) omits the width factors. Please clarify the definitions in both equations.
[Section 4.1, paragraph containing Eq. (4.3)] The sampling interval for pT_min,b is written as 'pT_min,b P r 25, 20s GeV', which has the lower and upper bounds reversed. This should read [20, 25] GeV or be corrected to the intended range.
[Table 3 and the paragraph preceding it] The notation for the minv_6b window, 'Delta minv_6b [+38, -50]', is unclear: the caption says the cut should be understood as minv_6b in m3 + Delta minv_6b, but it is not obvious whether the asymmetric interval is [-50, +38] and how the window is applied. Please spell out the exact interval. The entry 'pT(phi,1) er 50, 50, 0s' is also cryptic and should be defined.
[Section 1 and Section 4.1] There are several typos and minor language issues, e.g. 'the dominant bkacground by far' and 'Furtheremore' in Section 4.1, and 'which we shown in table 1' in Section 3. These should be corrected in a revised version.
[Figure 6] The legend of Fig. 6 uses symbols (green crosses, red circles, blue circles) with a prose description in the caption. It would be much easier to read if the meaning of each symbol were listed explicitly in the caption, since the combination of cross-hatching and color is not self-explanatory in print.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the factorized NWA signal model defines rho2 from model inputs, and the projected limits rescale an MC benchmark rather than fitting a parameter to the constrained quantity.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. In Eqs. (3.3)-(3.5) the paper starts from a standard narrow-width-approximation substitution and defines the 'unity' cross section with kappa3=1, lambda123=lambda112=1 GeV, and Gamma2=Gamma3=1 GeV; rho2 is then introduced as the rescaling factor kappa3^2 lambda123^2 lambda112^2/(Gamma2 Gamma3). No parameter appearing in the predicted signal rate is fitted to the data or to the quantity that is later constrained: rho2 is composed of model parameters (masses, mixing angles, scalar couplings, widths) taken from the TRSM Lagrangian or from the authors' previous published scans. The 95% CL constraint is obtained by dividing the MC-derived cross-section limit by the independently computed unity cross section (Eq. 4.6); this is a change of variable, not a self-justifying fit. The claim that kinematic distributions are independent of rho2 follows from the NWA delta-function replacement and is checked explicitly in Figs. 2, 7 and 8. Self-citations to Refs. [109-111] supply benchmark points and TRSM couplings, but these are prior, published external results and are not used to define the simplified approach's central factorization. The 'any model' generalization rests on a stated assumption (an SM-like kappa3-scaled gg to h3 vertex), which is an applicability condition rather than a circular reduction. No step was found in which a prediction is equivalent to its input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

All quantities entering rho2 are model inputs from prior literature, not fitted here. The paper's own contributions are a chosen k-factor, an assumed b-tagging efficiency, an optimized cut set, and a scan grid. The main axioms are the narrow-width approximation, dominance of the double-resonant topology, and SM-like backgrounds. No new entities are invented; h2 and h3 are pre-existing scalars in the TRSM or in the simplified setup.

free parameters (3)

k_factor = 2
A flat k-factor of 2 is applied to all signal and background processes to approximate higher-order QCD corrections; the value is chosen by hand and directly scales the projected limits.
b_tagging_efficiency = 0.85
b-tagging efficiency is set to 85% for true b-jets with no mistag rates; this is a chosen input affecting signal and background yields.
universal cut set (Table 3) = pT_min,b=37, eta_b,max=2.95, etc.
A single set of cuts is optimized over 280 generated (m2,m3) points by maximizing log E_Pi; the specific cut values influence all derived limits.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Narrow-width approximation for h2 and h3
Invoked before eq. 3.3: Breit-Wigner factors are replaced by delta functions, requiring Gamma_i << m_i; validity is assumed for all models and checked only for TRSM widths around 0.001-5.8 GeV.
domain assumption Double-resonant process dominates full triple Higgs production
Eqs. 3.1 and 3.4 neglect non-resonant diagrams, off-shell h3* contributions, and interference; this is tested for TRSM benchmarks in Fig. 2 and Section 4.2, not for generic models.
domain assumption SM-like backgrounds
Section 4.1 assumes backgrounds are unmodified by new physics; the authors argue the dominant QCD 6b background makes this safe.
ad hoc to paper Flat k-factor universality
A k-factor of 2 is applied to all signals and backgrounds as a uniform higher-order correction; it is chosen by hand and not derived.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Triple Higgs Boson Production with Two Heavy Scalars at the LHC via a Simplified Approach." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GP7Y6BMV

@misc{pith2026250114866,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Triple Higgs Boson Production with Two Heavy Scalars at the LHC via a Simplified Approach},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GP7Y6BMV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.14866}
}

abstract

We investigate triple Higgs boson production at the CERN LHC, in models containing two new heavy neutral scalar particles. We apply a simplified factorized approach in the narrow-width approximation to double-resonant triple Higgs boson production, and demonstrate that relevant constraints can be derived on models with extended scalar sectors, during the high-luminosity phase of the LHC. We also find, within an explicit two-real-singlet model and for the cut-based 6 $b$-jet analysis considered here, that the double-resonant contribution captures the dominant features of the signal, while non-resonant components have a limited impact on the expected sensitivity. The method therefore provides a fast approximate framework for models in which triple Higgs boson production is dominated by a narrow double-resonant topology.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

130 extracted references · 25 canonical work pages

[1]

ATLAScollaboration, Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B716 (2012) 1 [1207.7214]

arXiv 2012
[2]

CMS collaboration, Observation of a New Boson at a Mass of 125 GeV with the CMS Experiment at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B716 (2012) 30 [1207.7235]

arXiv 2012
[3]

Higgs,Broken Symmetries and the Masses of Gauge Bosons, Phys

P.W. Higgs,Broken Symmetries and the Masses of Gauge Bosons, Phys. Rev. Lett.13 (1964) 508

1964
[4]

Englert and R

F. Englert and R. Brout,Broken Symmetry and the Mass of Gauge Vector Mesons, Phys. Rev. Lett.13 (1964) 321

1964
[5]

Guralnik, C.R

G.S. Guralnik, C.R. Hagen and T.W.B. Kibble,Global Conservation Laws and Massless Particles, Phys. Rev. Lett.13 (1964) 585

1964
[6]

CMS collaboration, Search for Higgs boson pair production in thebbτ τfinal state in proton-proton collisions at a psq“ 8 TeV , Phys. Rev. D96 (2017) 072004 [1707.00350]

arXiv 2017
[7]

CMS collaboration, Search for Higgs boson pair production in events with two bottom quarks and two tau leptons in proton–proton collisions at?s =13TeV, Phys. Lett. B778 (2018) 101 [1707.02909]

arXiv 2018
[8]

CMS collaboration, Search for resonant and nonresonant Higgs boson pair production in the bbℓνℓν final state in proton-proton collisions at?s“ 13 TeV, JHEP 01 (2018) 054 [1708.04188]

arXiv 2018

Show all 130 references

[9]

CMS collaboration, Search for Higgs boson pair production in theγγ bb final state in pp collisions at?s“ 13 TeV, Phys. Lett. B788 (2019) 7 [1806.00408]

2019 arXiv
[10]

CMS collaboration, Search for production of Higgs boson pairs in the four b quark final state using large-area jets in proton-proton collisions at?s“ 13 TeV, JHEP 01 (2019) 040 [1808.01473]. – 17 –

2019 arXiv
[11]

CMS collaboration, Search for nonresonant Higgs boson pair production in thebbbb final state at?s“ 13 TeV, JHEP 04 (2019) 112 [1810.11854]

2019 arXiv
[13]

CMS collaboration, Search for nonresonant Higgs boson pair production in final states with two bottom quarks and two photons in proton-proton collisions at?s = 13 TeV, JHEP 03 (2021) 257 [2011.12373]

2021 arXiv
[14]

CMS collaboration, Search for Higgs Boson Pair Production in the Four b Quark Final State in Proton-Proton Collisions at s=13 TeV, Phys. Rev. Lett.129 (2022) 081802 [2202.09617]

2022 arXiv
[15]

CMS collaboration, Search for nonresonant Higgs boson pair production in final state with two bottom quarks and two tau leptons in proton-proton collisions at s=13 TeV, Phys. Lett. B 842 (2023) 137531 [2206.09401]

2023 arXiv
[16]

CMS collaboration, Search for Higgs boson pairs decaying to WW*WW*, WW*τ τ, and τ τ τ τin proton-proton collisions at?s = 13 TeV, JHEP 07 (2023) 095 [2206.10268]

2023 arXiv
[17]

CMS collaboration, Search for nonresonant Higgs boson pair production in the four leptons plus twob jets final state in proton-proton collisions at?s = 13 TeV, JHEP 06 (2023) 130 [2206.10657]

2023 arXiv
[18]

ATLAScollaboration, Search For Higgs Boson Pair Production in theγγb¯b Final State using pp Collision Data at?s“ 8 TeV from the ATLAS Detector, Phys. Rev. Lett.114 (2015) 081802 [1406.5053]

2015 arXiv
[19]

ATLAScollaboration, Search for Higgs boson pair production in theb¯bb¯b final state from pp collisions at?s“ 8 TeVwith the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C75 (2015) 412 [1506.00285]

2015 arXiv
[20]

ATLAScollaboration, Searches for Higgs boson pair production in the hhÑ bbτ τ, γγW W˚, γγbb, bbbbchannels with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D92 (2015) 092004 [1509.04670]

2015 arXiv
[21]

ATLAScollaboration, Search for pair production of Higgs bosons in theb¯bb¯b final state using proton–proton collisions at?s“ 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D94 (2016) 052002 [1606.04782]

2016 arXiv
[22]

ATLAScollaboration, Search for pair production of Higgs bosons in theb¯bb¯b final state using proton-proton collisions at?s“ 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 01 (2019) 030 [1804.06174]

2019 arXiv
[23]

ATLAScollaboration, Search for Higgs boson pair production in theγγb¯b final state with 13 TeV pp collision data collected by the ATLAS experiment, JHEP 11 (2018) 040 [1807.04873]

2018 arXiv
[24]

ATLAScollaboration, Search for Higgs boson pair production in theγγW W˚ channel using pp collision data recorded at?s“ 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C 78 (2018) 1007 [1807.08567]

2018 arXiv
[25]

ATLAScollaboration, Search for resonant and non-resonant Higgs boson pair production in the b¯bτ`τ´ decay channel inpp collisions at?s“ 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. Lett.121 (2018) 191801 [1808.00336]. – 18 –

2018 arXiv
[26]

ATLAScollaboration, Search for Higgs boson pair production in theb¯bW W˚ decay mode at?s“ 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 04 (2019) 092 [1811.04671]

2019 arXiv
[27]

ATLAScollaboration, Search for Higgs boson pair production in theW Wp˚qW Wp˚q decay channel using ATLAS data recorded at?s“ 13 TeV, JHEP 05 (2019) 124 [1811.11028]

2019 arXiv
[29]

ATLAScollaboration, Search for non-resonant Higgs boson pair production in thebbℓνℓν final state with the ATLAS detector inpp collisions at?s“ 13 TeV, Phys. Lett. B801 (2020) 135145 [1908.06765]

2020 arXiv
[30]

ATLAScollaboration, Search for theHH Ñ b¯bb¯b process via vector-boson fusion production using proton-proton collisions at?s“ 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 07 (2020) 108 [2001.05178]

2020 arXiv
[31]

ATLAScollaboration, Search for Higgs boson pair production in the two bottom quarks plus two photons final state inpp collisions at?s“ 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022) 052001 [2112.11876]

2022 arXiv
[32]

ATLAScollaboration, Search for resonant and non-resonant Higgs boson pair production in the bbτ`τ´ decay channel using 13 TeV pp collision data from the ATLAS detector, JHEP 07 (2023) 040 [2209.10910]

2023 arXiv
[33]

ATLAScollaboration, Constraints on the Higgs boson self-coupling from single- and double-Higgs production with the ATLAS detector using pp collisions at s=13 TeV, Phys. Lett. B 843 (2023) 137745 [2211.01216]

2023 arXiv
[34]

ATLAScollaboration, Search for nonresonant pair production of Higgs bosons in the bb¯bb¯ final state in pp collisions at s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023) 052003 [2301.03212]

2023 arXiv
[35]

ATLAScollaboration, Studies of new Higgs boson interactions through nonresonantHH production in theb¯bγγ final state inpp collisions at?s“ 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, 2310.12301

arXiv
[36]

U. Baur, T. Plehn and D.L. Rainwater,Measuring the Higgs Boson Self Coupling at the LHC and Finite Top Mass Matrix Elements, Phys. Rev. Lett.89 (2002) 151801 [hep-ph/0206024]

2002 arXiv
[37]

U. Baur, T. Plehn and D.L. Rainwater,Determining the Higgs Boson Selfcoupling at Hadron Colliders, Phys. Rev. D67 (2003) 033003 [hep-ph/0211224]

2003 arXiv
[38]

U. Baur, T. Plehn and D.L. Rainwater,Probing the Higgs selfcoupling at hadron colliders using rare decays, Phys. Rev. D69 (2004) 053004 [hep-ph/0310056]

2004 arXiv
[39]

Dolan, C

M.J. Dolan, C. Englert and M. Spannowsky,New Physics in LHC Higgs boson pair production, Phys. Rev. D87 (2013) 055002 [1210.8166]

2013 arXiv
[40]

Papaefstathiou, L.L

A. Papaefstathiou, L.L. Yang and J. Zurita,Higgs boson pair production at the LHC in the b¯bW`W´ channel, Phys. Rev. D87 (2013) 011301 [1209.1489]

2013 arXiv
[41]

J. Cao, Z. Heng, L. Shang, P. Wan and J.M. Yang,Pair Production of a 125 GeV Higgs Boson in MSSM and NMSSM at the LHC, JHEP 04 (2013) 134 [1301.6437]

2013 arXiv
[42]

Goertz, A

F. Goertz, A. Papaefstathiou, L.L. Yang and J. Zurita,Higgs Boson self-coupling measurements using ratios of cross sections, JHEP 06 (2013) 016 [1301.3492]. – 19 –

2013 arXiv
[43]

Arbey, M

A. Arbey, M. Battaglia and F. Mahmoudi,Supersymmetric Heavy Higgs Bosons at the LHC, Phys. Rev. D88 (2013) 015007 [1303.7450]

2013 arXiv
[44]

de Florian and J

D. de Florian and J. Mazzitelli,Two-loop virtual corrections to Higgs pair production, Phys. Lett. B 724 (2013) 306 [1305.5206]

2013 arXiv
[45]

Gupta, H

R.S. Gupta, H. Rzehak and J.D. Wells,How well do we need to measure the Higgs boson mass and self-coupling?, Phys. Rev. D88 (2013) 055024 [1305.6397]

2013 arXiv
[46]

Ellwanger,Higgs pair production in the NMSSM at the LHC, JHEP 08 (2013) 077 [1306.5541]

U. Ellwanger,Higgs pair production in the NMSSM at the LHC, JHEP 08 (2013) 077 [1306.5541]

2013 arXiv
[47]

Barr, M.J

A.J. Barr, M.J. Dolan, C. Englert and M. Spannowsky,Di-Higgs final states augMT2ed – selecting hh events at the high luminosity LHC, Phys. Lett. B728 (2014) 308 [1309.6318]

2014 arXiv
[48]

Maierhöfer and A

P. Maierhöfer and A. Papaefstathiou,Higgs Boson pair production merged to one jet, JHEP 03 (2014) 126 [1401.0007]

2014 arXiv
[49]

de Florian and J

D. de Florian and J. Mazzitelli,Higgs Boson Pair Production at Next-to-Next-to-Leading Order in QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett.111 (2013) 201801 [1309.6594]

2013 arXiv
[50]

Dolan, C

M.J. Dolan, C. Englert, N. Greiner and M. Spannowsky,Further on up the road:hhjj production at the LHC, Phys. Rev. Lett.112 (2014) 101802 [1310.1084]

2014 arXiv
[51]

Goertz, A

F. Goertz, A. Papaefstathiou, L.L. Yang and J. Zurita,Measuring the Higgs boson self-coupling at the LHC using ratios of cross sections, in25th Rencontres de Blois on Particle Physics and Cosmology, 9, 2013 [1309.3805]

2013 arXiv
[52]

Goertz, A

F. Goertz, A. Papaefstathiou, L.L. Yang and J. Zurita,Higgs boson pair production in the D=6 extension of the SM, JHEP 04 (2015) 167 [1410.3471]

2015 arXiv
[53]

Azatov, R

A. Azatov, R. Contino, G. Panico and M. Son,Effective field theory analysis of double Higgs boson production via gluon fusion, Phys. Rev. D92 (2015) 035001 [1502.00539]

2015 arXiv
[54]

Frederix, S

R. Frederix, S. Frixione, V. Hirschi, F. Maltoni, O. Mattelaer, P. Torrielli et al.,Higgs pair production at the LHC with NLO and parton-shower effects, Phys. Lett. B732 (2014) 142 [1401.7340]

2014 arXiv
[55]

Baglio, O

J. Baglio, O. Eberhardt, U. Nierste and M. Wiebusch,Benchmarks for Higgs Pair Production and Heavy Higgs boson Searches in the Two-Higgs-Doublet Model of Type II, Phys. Rev. D90 (2014) 015008 [1403.1264]

2014 arXiv
[56]

Ferreira de Lima, A

D.E. Ferreira de Lima, A. Papaefstathiou and M. Spannowsky,Standard model Higgs boson pair production in thepb¯bqpb¯bq final state, JHEP 08 (2014) 030 [1404.7139]

2014 arXiv
[57]

de Florian and J

D. de Florian and J. Mazzitelli,Next-to-Next-to-Leading Order QCD Corrections to Higgs Boson Pair Production, PoS LL2014 (2014) 029 [1405.4704]

2014 arXiv
[58]

Hespel, D

B. Hespel, D. Lopez-Val and E. Vryonidou,Higgs pair production via gluon fusion in the Two-Higgs-Doublet Model, JHEP 09 (2014) 124 [1407.0281]

2014 arXiv
[59]

Barger, L.L

V. Barger, L.L. Everett, C.B. Jackson, A.D. Peterson and G. Shaughnessy,New physics in resonant production of Higgs boson pairs, Phys. Rev. Lett.114 (2015) 011801 [1408.0003]

2015 arXiv
[60]

Godunov, M.I

S.I. Godunov, M.I. Vysotsky and E.V. Zhemchugov,Double Higgs production at LHC, see-saw type II and Georgi-Machacek model, J. Exp. Theor. Phys.120 (2015) 369 [1408.0184]

2015 arXiv
[61]

N. Liu, S. Hu, B. Yang and J. Han,Impact of top-Higgs couplings on Di-Higgs production at future colliders, JHEP 01 (2015) 008 [1408.4191]. – 20 –

2015 arXiv
[62]

Maltoni, E

F. Maltoni, E. Vryonidou and M. Zaro,Top-quark mass effects in double and triple Higgs production in gluon-gluon fusion at NLO, JHEP 11 (2014) 079 [1408.6542]

2014 arXiv
[63]

C.-Y. Chen, S. Dawson and I.M. Lewis,Exploring resonant di-Higgs boson production in the Higgs singlet model, Phys. Rev. D91 (2015) 035015 [1410.5488]

2015 arXiv
[64]

Barr, M.J

A.J. Barr, M.J. Dolan, C. Englert, D.E. Ferreira de Lima and M. Spannowsky,Higgs Self-Coupling Measurements at a 100 TeV Hadron Collider, JHEP 02 (2015) 016 [1412.7154]

2015 arXiv
[65]

Martín Lozano, J.M

V. Martín Lozano, J.M. Moreno and C.B. Park,Resonant Higgs boson pair production in the hhÑ bb W WÑ bbℓ`νℓ´ν decay channel, JHEP 08 (2015) 004 [1501.03799]

2015 arXiv
[66]

Papaefstathiou,Discovering Higgs boson pair production through rare final states at a 100 TeV collider, Phys

A. Papaefstathiou,Discovering Higgs boson pair production through rare final states at a 100 TeV collider, Phys. Rev. D91 (2015) 113016 [1504.04621]

2015 arXiv
[67]

Dawson, A

S. Dawson, A. Ismail and I. Low,What’s in the loop? The anatomy of double Higgs production, Phys. Rev. D91 (2015) 115008 [1504.05596]

2015 arXiv
[68]

Kotwal, S

A.V. Kotwal, S. Chekanov and M. Low,Double Higgs Boson Production in the 4τ Channel from Resonances in Longitudinal Vector Boson Scattering at a 100 TeV Collider, Phys. Rev. D 91 (2015) 114018 [1504.08042]

2015 arXiv
[69]

C.-T. Lu, J. Chang, K. Cheung and J.S. Lee,An exploratory study of Higgs-boson pair production, JHEP 08 (2015) 133 [1505.00957]

2015 arXiv
[70]

Carvalho, M

A. Carvalho, M. Dall’Osso, T. Dorigo, F. Goertz, C.A. Gottardo and M. Tosi,Higgs Pair Production: Choosing Benchmarks With Cluster Analysis, JHEP 04 (2016) 126 [1507.02245]

2016 arXiv
[71]

Q.-H. Cao, Y. Liu and B. Yan,Measuring trilinear Higgs coupling in WHH and ZHH productions at the high-luminosity LHC, Phys. Rev. D95 (2017) 073006 [1511.03311]

2017 arXiv
[72]

Batell, M

B. Batell, M. McCullough, D. Stolarski and C.B. Verhaaren,Putting a Stop to di-Higgs Modifications, JHEP 09 (2015) 216 [1508.01208]

2015 arXiv
[73]

Dawson and I.M

S. Dawson and I.M. Lewis,NLO corrections to double Higgs boson production in the Higgs singlet model, Phys. Rev. D92 (2015) 094023 [1508.05397]

2015 arXiv
[74]

Q.-H. Cao, B. Yan, D.-M. Zhang and H. Zhang,Resolving the Degeneracy in Single Higgs Production with Higgs Pair Production, Phys. Lett. B752 (2016) 285 [1508.06512]

2016 arXiv
[75]

Kanemura, K

S. Kanemura, K. Kaneta, N. Machida, S. Odori and T. Shindou,Single and double production of the Higgs boson at hadron and lepton colliders in minimal composite Higgs models, Phys. Rev. D94 (2016) 015028 [1603.05588]

2016 arXiv
[76]

Contino et al.,Physics at a 100 TeV pp collider: Higgs and EW symmetry breaking studies, 1606.09408

R. Contino et al.,Physics at a 100 TeV pp collider: Higgs and EW symmetry breaking studies, 1606.09408

arXiv
[77]

Q.-H. Cao, G. Li, B. Yan, D.-M. Zhang and H. Zhang,Double Higgs production at the 14 TeV LHC and a 100 TeVpp collider, Phys. Rev. D96 (2017) 095031 [1611.09336]

2017 arXiv
[78]

Banerjee, B

S. Banerjee, B. Batell and M. Spannowsky,Invisible decays in Higgs boson pair production, Phys. Rev. D95 (2017) 035009 [1608.08601]

2017 arXiv
[79]

Huang, J.M

T. Huang, J.M. No, L. Pernié, M. Ramsey-Musolf, A. Safonov, M. Spannowsky et al., Resonant di-Higgs boson production in theb¯bW Wchannel: Probing the electroweak phase transition at the LHC, Phys. Rev. D96 (2017) 035007 [1701.04442]. – 21 –

2017 arXiv
[80]

Nakamura, K

K. Nakamura, K. Nishiwaki, K.-y. Oda, S.C. Park and Y. Yamamoto,Di-higgs enhancement by neutral scalar as probe of new colored sector, Eur. Phys. J. C77 (2017) 273 [1701.06137]

2017 arXiv
[81]

Lewis and M

I.M. Lewis and M. Sullivan,Benchmarks for Double Higgs Production in the Singlet Extended Standard Model at the LHC, Phys. Rev. D96 (2017) 035037 [1701.08774]

2017 arXiv
[82]

Di Luzio, R

L. Di Luzio, R. Gröber and M. Spannowsky,Maxi-sizing the trilinear Higgs self-coupling: how large could it be?, Eur. Phys. J. C77 (2017) 788 [1704.02311]

2017 arXiv
[83]

Grober, M

R. Grober, M. Muhlleitner and M. Spira,Higgs Pair Production at NLO QCD for CP-violating Higgs Sectors, Nucl. Phys. B 925 (2017) 1 [1705.05314]

2017 arXiv
[84]

Zurita,Di-Higgs production at the LHC and beyond, in5th Large Hadron Collider Physics Conference, 8, 2017 [1708.00892]

J. Zurita,Di-Higgs production at the LHC and beyond, in5th Large Hadron Collider Physics Conference, 8, 2017 [1708.00892]

2017 arXiv
[85]

Arganda, J.L

E. Arganda, J.L. Díaz-Cruz, N. Mileo, R.A. Morales and A. Szynkman,Search strategies for pair production of heavy Higgs bosons decaying invisibly at the LHC, Nucl. Phys. B 929 (2018) 171 [1710.07254]

2018 arXiv
[86]

Adhikary, S

A. Adhikary, S. Banerjee, R.K. Barman, B. Bhattacherjee and S. Niyogi,Revisiting the non-resonant Higgs pair production at the HL-LHC, JHEP 07 (2018) 116 [1712.05346]

2018 arXiv
[87]

Bauer, M

M. Bauer, M. Carena and A. Carmona,Higgs Pair Production as a Signal of Enhanced Yukawa Couplings, Phys. Rev. Lett.121 (2018) 021801 [1801.00363]

2018 arXiv
[88]

Maltoni, D

F. Maltoni, D. Pagani and X. Zhao,Constraining the Higgs self-couplings at e+e- colliders, JHEP 07 (2018) 087 [1802.07616]

2018 arXiv
[89]

Borowka, C

S. Borowka, C. Duhr, F. Maltoni, D. Pagani, A. Shivaji and X. Zhao,Probing the scalar potential via double Higgs boson production at hadron colliders, JHEP 04 (2019) 016 [1811.12366]

2019 arXiv
[90]

Gonçalves, T

D. Gonçalves, T. Han, F. Kling, T. Plehn and M. Takeuchi,Higgs boson pair production at future hadron colliders: From kinematics to dynamics, Phys. Rev. D97 (2018) 113004 [1802.04319]

2018 arXiv
[91]

Chang, K

J. Chang, K. Cheung, J.S. Lee, C.-T. Lu and J. Park,Higgs-boson-pair production H(→bb¯)H(→γγ) from gluon fusion at the HL-LHC and HL-100 TeV hadron collider, Phys. Rev. D100 (2019) 096001 [1804.07130]

2019 arXiv
[92]

Basler, S

P. Basler, S. Dawson, C. Englert and M. Mühlleitner,Showcasing HH production: Benchmarks for the LHC and HL-LHC, Phys. Rev. D99 (2019) 055048 [1812.03542]

2019 arXiv
[93]

Adhikary, S

A. Adhikary, S. Banerjee, R. Kumar Barman and B. Bhattacherjee,Resonant heavy Higgs searches at the HL-LHC, JHEP 09 (2019) 068 [1812.05640]

2019 arXiv
[94]

Alison et al.,Higgs boson potential at colliders: Status and perspectives, Rev

J. Alison et al.,Higgs boson potential at colliders: Status and perspectives, Rev. Phys. 5 (2020) 100045 [1910.00012]

2020 arXiv
[95]

Li, L.-X

G. Li, L.-X. Xu, B. Yan and C.P. Yuan,Resolving the degeneracy in top quark Yukawa coupling with Higgs pair production, Phys. Lett. B800 (2020) 135070 [1904.12006]

2020 arXiv
[96]

Cheung, A

K. Cheung, A. Jueid, C.-T. Lu, J. Song and Y.W. Yoon,Disentangling new physics effects on nonresonant Higgs boson pair production from gluon fusion, Phys. Rev. D103 (2021) 015019 [2003.11043]

2021 arXiv
[97]

Bhattiprolu and J.D

P.N. Bhattiprolu and J.D. Wells,Sensitivity target for an impactful Higgs boson self coupling measurement, 2407.11847. – 22 –

arXiv
[98]

Plehn and M

T. Plehn and M. Rauch,The quartic higgs coupling at hadron colliders, Phys. Rev. D72 (2005) 053008 [hep-ph/0507321]

2005 arXiv
[99]

Papaefstathiou and K

A. Papaefstathiou and K. Sakurai,Triple Higgs boson production at a 100 TeV proton-proton collider, JHEP 02 (2016) 006 [1508.06524]

2016 arXiv
[100]

Chen, Q.-S

C.-Y. Chen, Q.-S. Yan, X. Zhao, Y.-M. Zhong and Z. Zhao,Probing triple-Higgs productions via 4b2γ decay channel at a 100 TeV hadron collider, Phys. Rev. D93 (2016) 013007 [1510.04013]

2016 arXiv
[101]

Fuks, J.H

B. Fuks, J.H. Kim and S.J. Lee,Probing Higgs self-interactions in proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 100 TeV, Phys. Rev. D93 (2016) 035026 [1510.07697]

2016 arXiv
[102]

Papaefstathiou,Multi-Higgs Boson Production and Self-coupling Measurements at Hadron Colliders, Acta Phys

A. Papaefstathiou,Multi-Higgs Boson Production and Self-coupling Measurements at Hadron Colliders, Acta Phys. Polon. B48 (2017) 1133

2017
[103]

Fuks, J.H

B. Fuks, J.H. Kim and S.J. Lee,Scrutinizing the Higgs quartic coupling at a future 100 TeV proton–proton collider with taus and b-jets, Phys. Lett. B771 (2017) 354 [1704.04298]

2017 arXiv
[104]

Liu, K.-F

T. Liu, K.-F. Lyu, J. Ren and H.X. Zhu,Probing the quartic Higgs boson self-interaction, Phys. Rev. D98 (2018) 093004 [1803.04359]

2018 arXiv
[105]

Papaefstathiou, G

A. Papaefstathiou, G. Tetlalmatzi-Xolocotzi and M. Zaro,Triple Higgs boson production to six b-jets at a 100 TeV proton collider, Eur. Phys. J. C79 (2019) 947 [1909.09166]

2019 arXiv
[106]

de Florian, I

D. de Florian, I. Fabre and J. Mazzitelli,Triple Higgs production at hadron colliders at NNLO in QCD, JHEP 03 (2020) 155 [1912.02760]

2020 arXiv
[107]

Chiesa, F

M. Chiesa, F. Maltoni, L. Mantani, B. Mele, F. Piccinini and X. Zhao,Measuring the quartic Higgs self-coupling at a multi-TeV muon collider, JHEP 09 (2020) 098 [2003.13628]

2020 arXiv
[108]

Abdughani, D

M. Abdughani, D. Wang, L. Wu, J.M. Yang and J. Zhao,Probing the triple Higgs boson coupling with machine learning at the LHC, Phys. Rev. D104 (2021) 056003 [2005.11086]

2021 arXiv
[109]

Robens, T

T. Robens, T. Stefaniak and J. Wittbrodt,Two-real-scalar-singlet extension of the SM: LHC phenomenology and benchmark scenarios, Eur. Phys. J. C80 (2020) 151 [1908.08554]

2020 arXiv
[110]

Papaefstathiou, T

A. Papaefstathiou, T. Robens and G. Tetlalmatzi-Xolocotzi,Triple Higgs Boson Production at the Large Hadron Collider with Two Real Singlet Scalars, JHEP 05 (2021) 193 [2101.00037]

2021 arXiv
[111]

Karkout, A

O. Karkout, A. Papaefstathiou, M. Postma, G. Tetlalmatzi-Xolocotzi, J. van de Vis and T. du Pree,Triple Higgs boson production and electroweak phase transition in the two-real-singlet model, 2404.12425
[112]

Stylianou and G

P. Stylianou and G. Weiglein,Constraints on the trilinear and quartic Higgs couplings from triple Higgs production at the LHC and beyond, Eur. Phys. J. C84 (2024) 366 [2312.04646]

2024 arXiv
[113]

Papaefstathiou and G

A. Papaefstathiou and G. Tetlalmatzi-Xolocotzi,Multi-Higgs boson production with anomalous interactions at current and future proton colliders, JHEP 06 (2024) 124 [2312.13562]

2024 arXiv
[114]

ATLAScollaboration, A search for triple Higgs boson production in the6b final state using pp collisions at?s“ 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, 2411.02040. – 23 –

arXiv
[115]

Theoretical Particle Physics Lecture Notes

Bijnens, Johan and Lönnblad, Leif and Sjöstrand, Torbjörn, “Theoretical Particle Physics Lecture Notes.” http://home.thep.lu.se/~bijnens/fytn04/notes.pdf
[116]

Alwall, M

J. Alwall, M. Herquet, F. Maltoni, O. Mattelaer and T. Stelzer,MadGraph 5 : Going Beyond, JHEP 06 (2011) 128 [1106.0522]

2011 arXiv
[117]

Bahr et al.,Herwig++ Physics and Manual, Eur

M. Bahr et al.,Herwig++ Physics and Manual, Eur. Phys. J.C58 (2008) 639 [0803.0883]

2008 arXiv
[118]

Bellm et al.,Herwig 7.1 Release Note, 1705.06919

J. Bellm et al.,Herwig 7.1 Release Note, 1705.06919

arXiv
[119]

Gieseke et al.,Herwig++ 2.5 Release Note, 1102.1672

S. Gieseke et al.,Herwig++ 2.5 Release Note, 1102.1672

arXiv
[120]

Arnold et al.,Herwig++ 2.6 Release Note, 1205.4902

K. Arnold et al.,Herwig++ 2.6 Release Note, 1205.4902

arXiv
[121]

Bellm et al.,Herwig++ 2.7 Release Note, 1310.6877

J. Bellm et al.,Herwig++ 2.7 Release Note, 1310.6877

arXiv
[122]

Bellm et al.,Herwig 7.2 release note, Eur

J. Bellm et al.,Herwig 7.2 release note, Eur. Phys. J. C80 (2020) 452 [1912.06509]

2020 arXiv
[123]

Bewick et al.,Herwig 7.3 Release Note, 2312.05175

G. Bewick et al.,Herwig 7.3 Release Note, 2312.05175

arXiv
[124]

Cacciari, G.P

M. Cacciari, G.P. Salam and G. Soyez,The anti-kt jet clustering algorithm, JHEP 04 (2008) 063 [0802.1189]

2008 arXiv
[125]

Papaefstathiou and G

A. Papaefstathiou and G. White,The electro-weak phase transition at colliders: confronting theoretical uncertainties and complementary channels, JHEP 05 (2021) 099 [2010.00597]

2021 arXiv
[126]

CMS collaboration, Combination of searches for Higgs boson pair production in proton-proton collisions at?s“ 13 TeV, Phys. Rev. Lett.122 (2019) 121803 [1811.09689]

2019 arXiv
[127]

ATLAScollaboration, Combination of searches for Higgs boson pairs inpp collisions at?s“13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Lett. B800 (2020) 135103 [1906.02025]

2020 arXiv
[128]

CMS collaboration, Search for a new scalar resonance decaying to a pair of Z bosons in proton-proton collisions at?s“ 13 TeV, JHEP 06 (2018) 127 [1804.01939]

2018 arXiv
[129]

Cepeda et al.,Report from Working Group 2, CERN Yellow Rep

M. Cepeda et al.,Report from Working Group 2, CERN Yellow Rep. Monogr.7 (2019) 221 [1902.00134]

2019 arXiv
[130]

ATLAScollaboration, Search for heavy resonances decaying intoW Win the eνµν final state in pp collisions at?s“ 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J.C78 (2018) 24 [1710.01123]

2018 arXiv
[131]

ATLAScollaboration, HL-LHC prospects for diboson resonance searches and electroweak vector boson scattering in theW W{W ZÑ ℓνqq final state, Tech. Rep. ATL-PHYS-PUB-2018-022, CERN, Geneva (Oct, 2018)

2018
[132]

Lane, I.M

S.D. Lane, I.M. Lewis and M. Sullivan,Resonant multiscalar production in the generic complex singlet model in the multi-TeV region, Phys. Rev. D110 (2024) 055017 [2403.18003]. – 24 –

2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

ATLAScollaboration, Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B716 (2012) 1 [1207.7214]

arXiv 2012

[2] [2]

CMS collaboration, Observation of a New Boson at a Mass of 125 GeV with the CMS Experiment at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B716 (2012) 30 [1207.7235]

arXiv 2012

[3] [3]

Higgs,Broken Symmetries and the Masses of Gauge Bosons, Phys

P.W. Higgs,Broken Symmetries and the Masses of Gauge Bosons, Phys. Rev. Lett.13 (1964) 508

1964

[4] [4]

Englert and R

F. Englert and R. Brout,Broken Symmetry and the Mass of Gauge Vector Mesons, Phys. Rev. Lett.13 (1964) 321

1964

[5] [5]

Guralnik, C.R

G.S. Guralnik, C.R. Hagen and T.W.B. Kibble,Global Conservation Laws and Massless Particles, Phys. Rev. Lett.13 (1964) 585

1964

[6] [6]

CMS collaboration, Search for Higgs boson pair production in thebbτ τfinal state in proton-proton collisions at a psq“ 8 TeV , Phys. Rev. D96 (2017) 072004 [1707.00350]

arXiv 2017

[7] [7]

CMS collaboration, Search for Higgs boson pair production in events with two bottom quarks and two tau leptons in proton–proton collisions at?s =13TeV, Phys. Lett. B778 (2018) 101 [1707.02909]

arXiv 2018

[8] [8]

CMS collaboration, Search for resonant and nonresonant Higgs boson pair production in the bbℓνℓν final state in proton-proton collisions at?s“ 13 TeV, JHEP 01 (2018) 054 [1708.04188]

arXiv 2018