arxiv: 2604.24924 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-27 · ✦ hep-ph · hep-ex

Recognition: unknown

Forward backward CP asymmetry in τ^- to K π ν_{τ} in the Left-Right Inverse seesaw model

David Delepine , Shaaban Khalil

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 02:45 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph hep-ex

keywords CP violationtau lepton decaysLeft-Right Inverse Seesawflavor changing neutral currentsdifferential asymmetriesBelle II experiment

0 comments

The pith

In the Left-Right Inverse Seesaw model, a non-decoupling scalar operator generates a pronounced differential forward-backward CP asymmetry in tau to K pi nu_tau decays.

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

The paper investigates CP violation in the decay tau^- to K pi nu_tau within the Left-Right Inverse Seesaw model to address a reported deviation in integrated asymmetry from BaBar. It finds that while the integrated CP asymmetry remains too small to explain the observation, the differential forward-backward asymmetry A_CP^FB(s) exhibits a significant enhancement. This enhancement stems from the interference of the standard model vector current with a new scalar operator arising from box diagrams involving heavy neutrinos. The effect produces distinctive features around specific resonances, making it observable at experiments like Belle II and providing a test of the model's scalar sector.

Core claim

The effective Hamiltonian for Delta S = 1 processes includes a dominant scalar operator g_S generated by a top-quark flavor-changing neutral current box diagram with heavy neutrinos and scalar exchange. This operator leads to a large differential forward-backward CP asymmetry through interference with the SM, while contributions largely cancel in the integrated asymmetry, resulting in kinematic-dependent signals near the K^*(892) and K_0^*(1430) resonances.

What carries the argument

The non-decoupling scalar operator g_S from the top FCNC box diagram, which dominates new physics effects and enables the differential CP violation via interference.

If this is right

The differential asymmetry A_CP^FB(s) displays pronounced signals near the K*(892) and K0*(1430) resonances.
These angular observables serve as sensitive probes for the LRIS scalar sector at flavor factories.
The model predicts testable patterns in differential distributions that integrated measurements miss.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Similar differential CP effects might be searched for in other semileptonic tau decays to constrain the same parameters.
Confirmation would connect low-energy flavor CP violation directly to the inverse seesaw mechanism for neutrino masses.
Future precision data on these asymmetries could bound the heavy neutrino masses and mixings independently of collider searches.

Load-bearing premise

The non-decoupling scalar operator g_S dominates the new physics contribution and its interference with the SM vector current produces a large differential enhancement while canceling in the integrated asymmetry, consistent with existing bounds.

What would settle it

Precise measurements of the differential forward-backward CP asymmetry showing no significant peaks or enhancements near the K* and K0* resonance regions would rule out the predicted signal from the model.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.24924 by David Delepine, Shaaban Khalil.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: FIG. 1. Tree-level SM contribution to view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2. Tree-level charged Higgs contribution to view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3 view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. The differential forward-backward CP asymmetry, view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Recent measurements of the integrated CP asymmetry in $\tau \to K\pi\nu_\tau$ decays by the BaBar collaboration exhibit a $2.8\sigma$ deviation from the Standard Model (SM) prediction. In this work, we investigate CP-violating effects in $\tau \to K\pi\nu_\tau$ within the model of the Left--Right Inverse Seesaw (LRIS) model. We show that, although the integrated asymmetry remains too small to account for the BaBar result, the model nevertheless predicts a pronounced signal in the \emph{differential} forward--backward CP asymmetry, $A_{\rm CP}^{\rm FB}(s)$. We derive the effective $|\Delta S| = 1$ Hamiltonian relevant for these decays and identify a dominant non-decoupling scalar operator, $g_S$, generated by a top-quark flavor-changing neutral current box diagram involving heavy neutrinos and scalar exchange. Our numerical analysis demonstrates that, while this contribution largely cancels in the integrated $A_{\rm CP}$, it significantly enhances $A_{\rm CP}^{\rm FB}(s)$ through interference with the SM vector current, leading to distinctive kinematic features near the $K^*(892)$ and $K_0^*(1430)$ resonances. These angular and differential observables provide a sensitive probe of the LRIS scalar sector at current and future flavor experiments, in particular Belle~II.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

LRIS model predicts a differential forward-backward CP asymmetry in tau to K pi nu that survives integration cancellation, but the size depends on whether the scalar operator stays viable under the full set of model bounds.

read the letter

The paper's core result is that the Left-Right Inverse Seesaw produces a visible differential A_CP^FB(s) with resonance structure near the K* and K0* poles, even though the integrated asymmetry stays too small to explain the BaBar measurement. They trace this to a non-decoupling scalar Wilson coefficient g_S from a top-quark FCNC box diagram with heavy neutrinos and scalars, which interferes with the SM vector current in a way that cancels on integration but shows up differentially.

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript investigates CP-violating effects in the decay τ⁻ → Kπν_τ within the Left-Right Inverse Seesaw (LRIS) model. It derives the effective |ΔS|=1 Hamiltonian, identifies a dominant non-decoupling scalar operator g_S arising from a top-quark flavor-changing neutral current box diagram with heavy neutrinos and scalar exchange, and through numerical analysis shows that while the integrated CP asymmetry is too small to account for the BaBar 2.8σ deviation, the differential forward-backward CP asymmetry A_CP^FB(s) exhibits pronounced signals near the K*(892) and K_0*(1430) resonances due to interference with the SM vector current.

Significance. If the central result holds, this work is significant for providing a distinctive, falsifiable prediction for differential angular observables in tau decays that could be measured at Belle II, offering a probe of the LRIS scalar sector. The strength lies in the explicit derivation of the effective Hamiltonian and the insight that new physics effects can cancel in integrated quantities but appear prominently in differential distributions. This adds to the literature on NP in tau decays by focusing on a specific model and observable.

major comments (1)

§4 (Numerical Analysis): The claim that LRIS parameters can be chosen to yield a sufficiently large g_S for a visible differential enhancement in A_CP^FB(s) near the resonances, while keeping the integrated asymmetry below the BaBar limit and satisfying all other bounds (right-handed W mass, heavy-neutrino mixings, B-decay constraints, μ→eγ), is load-bearing for the central prediction. The manuscript must explicitly document the parameter ranges or benchmark points used in the scan and confirm that the box-diagram dominance persists under the full constraint set; without this, the viability of the reported signal cannot be assessed.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the constructive comment on the numerical analysis. We address the point below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate the requested documentation.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [—] §4 (Numerical Analysis): The claim that LRIS parameters can be chosen to yield a sufficiently large g_S for a visible differential enhancement in A_CP^FB(s) near the resonances, while keeping the integrated asymmetry below the BaBar limit and satisfying all other bounds (right-handed W mass, heavy-neutrino mixings, B-decay constraints, μ→eγ), is load-bearing for the central prediction. The manuscript must explicitly document the parameter ranges or benchmark points used in the scan and confirm that the box-diagram dominance persists under the full constraint set; without this, the viability of the reported signal cannot be assessed.

Authors: We agree that explicit documentation of the parameter choices and constraint satisfaction is necessary to substantiate the viability of the predicted signal. In the revised manuscript we have expanded §4 with a new subsection that specifies the scanned ranges for the LRIS parameters (right-handed W mass, heavy-neutrino masses and mixings, scalar vevs and couplings) and presents two explicit benchmark points. For these points we confirm that all listed experimental bounds are satisfied, the integrated A_CP remains below the BaBar limit, and the top-quark FCNC box diagram continues to dominate the scalar operator g_S (other contributions are suppressed by at least an order of magnitude). The differential enhancement in A_CP^FB(s) near the K* and K0* resonances is preserved under these constraints. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: g_S and differential A_CP^FB(s) derived from LRIS box diagrams without fitting to BaBar integrated asymmetry

full rationale

The paper derives the effective |ΔS|=1 Hamiltonian and identifies the non-decoupling scalar operator g_S from explicit top-quark FCNC box diagrams involving heavy neutrinos and scalar exchange in the LRIS model. It then performs a numerical scan over LRIS parameters (subject to external flavor, collider, and precision bounds) to show that the integrated asymmetry stays small while the differential forward-backward asymmetry A_CP^FB(s) receives a visible enhancement near resonances. This is a genuine model prediction, not a fit to the BaBar datum (which the paper states it fails to explain). No self-definitional steps, no fitted inputs renamed as predictions, no load-bearing self-citations that collapse the central claim, and no ansatz smuggled via citation. The derivation chain is self-contained against external benchmarks and does not reduce to its inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the LRIS model particle content and the assumption that loop-induced scalar operators dominate the new-physics contribution to this decay.

free parameters (2)

Heavy neutrino masses and mixings
Chosen to produce a sizable g_S while keeping the integrated asymmetry small.
Scalar sector couplings and vacuum expectation values
Determine the strength of the non-decoupling scalar operator g_S.

axioms (2)

standard math Standard Model effective field theory for |ΔS|=1 non-leptonic transitions
Basis for constructing the effective Hamiltonian that includes the new scalar operator.
domain assumption Dominance of the top-quark FCNC box diagram for the scalar operator g_S
Invoked to identify the leading new-physics contribution in the LRIS model.

invented entities (1)

Heavy right-handed neutrinos and additional scalar fields of the LRIS model no independent evidence
purpose: Generate the inverse seesaw mechanism for neutrino masses and induce the flavor-changing neutral currents that produce g_S
Postulated by the model to address neutrino masses; no independent evidence supplied in this paper.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5558 in / 1700 out tokens · 84412 ms · 2026-05-08T02:45:13.249535+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

84 extracted references · 50 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

[1]

Neutral Higgs exchange betweensanddquarks generates a contribution to∆mK proportional to [62, 63] ∆m K∝f2 KmK M2 H 0 |yH sd|2,(38) wheref K≈156MeV is the kaon decay constant

Constraints fromK 0–¯K 0 Mixing To evade tree-level contributions to the∆S= 2mass difference∆m K, the scalar Yukawa couplings must be suppressed. Neutral Higgs exchange betweensanddquarks generates a contribution to∆mK proportional to [62, 63] ∆m K∝f2 KmK M2 H 0 |yH sd|2,(38) wheref K≈156MeV is the kaon decay constant. The experimental value∆mK = (3.484±0...
[2]

Constraints from Neutrino Non-Unitarity A very largeyH τνinduces mixing between the active and sterile neutrinos, leading to non-unitarity in the active 3×3PMNS matrix [33, 65]. Precision measurements of tau decays (τ→µν¯νvs.µ→eν¯ν) restrict this active-sterile mixing to [33] ηττ≲O(10−3).(41) The mixing parameterηττis related to the Dirac Yukawa coupling ...

2000
[3]

Resulting Tree-Level Suppression Combining the bounds in Eqs. (40) and (44), and usingG−1/2 F = 246GeV,V us≈0.22, andMH±= 1TeV, we find |gtree S |≲ √ 2 GF×0.22×0.26×6×10−5 (103 GeV)2 ≈1.5×10−5.(45) This severe suppression motivates the search for loop-induced contributions that can evade the light-quark mass suppression inherent in Eq. (39). 12 C. Box Dia...
[4]

(46), one finds that the1/M2 Ni suppression from the loop integral isexactly compensatedby theMNi factor hidden inYτi NG [Eq

= ∫ ∞ 0 xdx (x+m 2 1)(x+m 2 2)(x+m 2 3)(x+m 2 4).(48) 13 In the heavy neutrino limitMNi→∞, this integral simplifies to [34] I4 MNi→∞ −−−−−−→1 M2 Ni [M2 H 0 ln(M 2 H 0)−M2 G±ln(M 2 G±) M2 H 0−M2 G± +··· ] .(49) Crucially, taking this limit and substituting into Eq. (46), one finds that the1/M2 Ni suppression from the loop integral isexactly compensatedby t...
[5]

Following Ref

Vector Form FactorF +(s) The vector form factor is dominated by theK∗(892)vector resonance and receives additional contributions from the excitedK∗(1410)state [38, 69]. Following Ref. [39], we parameterizeF+(s)as a coherent sum: F+(s) = m2 K∗ m2 K∗−s−imK∗ΓK∗ +β m2 K∗′ m2 K∗′−s−imK∗′ΓK∗′ ,(58) wherem K∗= 0.89166GeV,Γ K∗= 0.0508GeV,m K∗′= 1.414GeV,Γ K∗′= 0....
[6]

Scalar Form FactorF 0(s) The scalar form factor receives contributions from theK ∗ 0(1430)scalar resonance and a non-resonantS-wave background [38, 71]. We employ the LASS (Los Alamos Scattering Studies) parameterization [41], which accurately 15 describes elasticKπscattering in theS-wave: F0(s) = √s qcotδ0−iq+ m2 K∗ 0 ΓK∗ 0/q0 m2 K∗ 0 −s−imK∗ 0 ΓK∗ 0 (s)...
[7]

For our numerical analysis, we adopt the dispersive parameterization of Ref

Tensor Form FactorF T (s) The tensor form factor has been computed using chiral perturbation theory and dispersion relations [36, 39]. For our numerical analysis, we adopt the dispersive parameterization of Ref. [39], which ensures consistency with analyticity and unitarity constraints. B. Integrated CP Asymmetry The integrated CP asymmetryACP [Eq. (11)] ...
[8]

(17)], which grows with|⃗ pK|but is suppressed near threshold and endpoint

The kinematic weightκVS (s)∝mτ|⃗ pK|/√s[Eq. (17)], which grows with|⃗ pK|but is suppressed near threshold and endpoint
[9]

The strong phase differenceδ+(s)−δ0(s)between the vector and scalar form factors, which is maximal near the K∗ 0(1430)resonance whereδ0(s)varies rapidly
[10]

The integrated asymmetry in Eq

The magnitude of the form factor product|F+(s)F0(s)|, which peaks at the resonance positions. The integrated asymmetry in Eq. (65) is dominated by the region1.2 GeV<√s <1.6 GeV, where the scalar resonance enhancement is strongest. This kinematic concentration provides a clear experimental signature that can be exploited by Belle II to distinguish the LRIS...
[11]

Grossman and Y

Y. Grossman and Y. Nir, JHEP04, 002, arXiv:1110.3790 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv
[12]

J. P. Leeset al.(BaBar), Phys. Rev. D85, 031102 (2012), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 85, 099904 (2012)]

2012
[13]

I. I. Bigi and A. I. Sanda, Phys. Lett. B625, 47 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0506037 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2005
[14]

Devi and D

N. Devi and D. Dhargyal, Phys. Rev. D90, 013016 (2014)

2014
[15]

A no-go theorem for non-standard explanations of the $\tau\to K_S\pi\nu_\tau$ CP asymmetry

V. Cirigliano, A. Crivellin, and M. Hoferichter, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 141803 (2018), arXiv:1712.06595 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2018
[16]

Dhargyal, Springer Proc

L. Dhargyal, Springer Proc. Phys. , 329 (2018), arXiv:1610.06293 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2018
[17]

J. H. Christenson, J. W. Cronin, V. L. Fitch, and R. Turlay, Phys. Rev. Lett.13, 138 (1964)

1964
[18]

Aubertet al.(BaBar), Phys

B. Aubertet al.(BaBar), Phys. Rev. Lett.87, 091801 (2001), arXiv:hep-ex/0107013

work page arXiv 2001
[19]

Aaijet al.(LHCb), Phys

R. Aaijet al.(LHCb), Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 101801 (2013), arXiv:1306.1246 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2013
[20]

Aaijet al.(LHCb), Phys

R. Aaijet al.(LHCb), Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 211803 (2019), arXiv:1903.08726 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2019
[21]

Fukuda et al

Y. Fukudaet al.(Super-Kamiokande), Phys. Rev. Lett.81, 1562 (1998), arXiv:hep-ex/9807003

work page arXiv 1998
[22]

Q. R. Ahmadet al.(SNO), Phys. Rev. Lett.89, 011301 (2002), arXiv:nucl-ex/0204008

work page arXiv 2002
[23]

Abeet al.(T2K), Nature580, 339 (2020), [Erratum: Nature 583, E16 (2020)], arXiv:1910.03887 [hep-ex]

K. Abeet al.(T2K), Nature580, 339 (2020), [Erratum: Nature 583, E16 (2020)], arXiv:1910.03887 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2020
[24]

M. A. Aceroet al.(NOvA), Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 151803 (2019), arXiv:1906.04907 [hep-ex]. 20

work page arXiv 2019
[25]

Measurement of the Mass and Width and Study of the Spin of the Xi(1690)0 Resonance from Lambdac+ --> Lambda anti-K0 K+ Decay at Babar

E. Abouzaidet al.(KTeV), Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 101801 (2006), arXiv:hep-ex/0607043

work page Pith review arXiv 2006
[26]

Calderon, D

G. Calderon, D. Delepine, and G. L. Castro, Phys. Rev. D75, 076001 (2007), arXiv:hep-ph/0702282

work page arXiv 2007
[27]

Dhargyal, Lett

L. Dhargyal, Lett. High Energy Phys.1, 9 (2018), arXiv:1605.00629 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2018
[28]

J. H. Kuhn and E. Mirkes, Phys. Lett. B398, 407 (1997), arXiv:hep-ph/9609502

work page arXiv 1997
[29]

Y. S. Tsai, Nuclear Physics B - Proceedings Supplements55, 293 (1997)

1997
[30]

S. Y. Choi, J. Lee, and J. Song, Phys. Lett. B437, 191 (1998), arXiv:hep-ph/9804268 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 1998
[31]

Delepine, G

D. Delepine, G. Faisel, S. Khalil, and M. Shalaby, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A22, 6011 (2007)

2007
[32]

Delepine, G

D. Delepine, G. Faisel, and S. Khalil, Phys. Rev. D77, 016003 (2008), arXiv:0710.1441 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2008
[33]

Delepine, G

D. Delepine, G. Faisel, and C. A. Ramirez, Eur. Phys. J. C81, 368 (2021), arXiv:1806.05090 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2021
[34]

Kimura, K

D. Kimura, K. Y. Lee, and T. Morozumi, PTEP2013, 053B03 (2013), [Erratum: PTEP 2013, 099201 (2013), Erratum: PTEP 2014, 089202 (2014)], arXiv:1201.1794 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2013
[35]

Khalil and O

S. Khalil and O. Seto, JCAP10, 024, arXiv:0705.4433 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv
[36]

P. S. B. Dev, R. Franceschini, and R. N. Mohapatra, Phys. Rev. D86, 093010 (2012)

2012
[37]

Barry and W

J. Barry and W. Rodejohann, JHEP09, 153, arXiv:1303.6324 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv
[38]

R. N. Mohapatra and J. W. F. Valle, Phys. Rev. D34, 1642 (1986)

1986
[39]

Wyler and L

D. Wyler and L. Wolfenstein, Nucl. Phys. B218, 205 (1983)

1983
[40]

M. Bona, M. Ciuchini, E. Franco, V. Lubicz, G. Martinelli, F. Parodi, M. Pierini, P. Roudeau, C. Schiavi, L. Silvestrini, V. Sordini, A. Stocchi, and V. Vagnoni, Journal of High Energy Physics2008, 049 (2008)

2008
[41]

Artuso, G

M. Artuso, G. Borissov, and A. Lenz, Rev. Mod. Phys.88, 045002 (2016), [Erratum: Rev.Mod.Phys. 91, 049901 (2019)], arXiv:1511.09466 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2016
[42]

Restoration of Parity and the Right-Handed Analog of the CKM Matrix

G. Senjanović and V. Tello, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 071801 (2015), arXiv:1502.05704 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2015
[43]

Antusch, C

S. Antusch, C. Biggio, E. Fernandez-Martinez, M. B. Gavela, and J. Lopez-Pavon, JHEP10, 084, arXiv:hep-ph/0607020 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv
[44]

Pilaftsis, Z

A. Pilaftsis, Z. Phys. C55, 275 (1992), arXiv:hep-ph/9901206

work page arXiv 1992
[45]

Ferber,Towards First Physics at Belle II,Acta Phys

E. Kouet al.(Belle-II), Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys.2019, 123C01 (2019), [Erratum: PTEP 2020, 029201 (2020)], arXiv:1808.10567 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2019
[46]

González-Alonso and J

M. González-Alonso and J. Martin Camalich, JHEP12, 052, arXiv:1605.07114 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv
[47]

Rendón, P

J. Rendón, P. Roig, and G. Toledo, Phys. Rev. D99, 093005 (2019)

2019
[48]

Jamin, J

M. Jamin, J. A. Oller, and A. Pich, Nucl. Phys. B622, 279 (2002), arXiv:hep-ph/0110193

work page arXiv 2002
[49]

Bernard, S

V. Bernard, S. Descotes-Genon, and M. Knecht, Eur. Phys. J. C73, 2478 (2013), arXiv:1305.3843 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2013
[50]

P. A. Zylaet al.(Particle Data Group), PTEP2020, 083C01 (2020)

2020
[51]

Astonet al., Nucl

D. Astonet al., Nucl. Phys. B296, 493 (1988)

1988
[52]

Chen, X.-Q

F.-Z. Chen, X.-Q. Li, S.-C. Peng, Y.-D. Yang, and H.-H. Zhang, JHEP01, 108, arXiv:2107.12310 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv
[53]

K. M. Watson, Phys. Rev.95, 228 (1954)

1954
[54]

A. J. Buras (1998) pp. 281–539, lecture notes from Les Houches Summer School, arXiv:hep-ph/9806471

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 1998
[55]

Weak Decays Beyond Leading Logarithms

G. Buchalla, A. J. Buras, and M. E. Lautenbacher, Rev. Mod. Phys.68, 1125 (1996), arXiv:hep-ph/9512380

work page Pith review arXiv 1996
[56]

Jarlskog, Phys

C. Jarlskog, Phys. Rev. Lett.55, 1039 (1985)

1985
[57]

S. L. Glashow, J. Iliopoulos, and L. Maiani, Phys. Rev. D2, 1285 (1970)

1970
[58]

J. C. Pati and A. Salam, Phys. Rev. D10, 275 (1974), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 11, 703–703 (1975)]

1974
[59]

R. N. Mohapatra and J. C. Pati, Phys. Rev. D11, 566 (1975)

1975
[60]

Senjanović and R

G. Senjanović and R. N. Mohapatra, Phys. Rev. D12, 1502 (1975)

1975
[61]

Senjanović, Nucl

G. Senjanović, Nucl. Phys. B153, 334 (1979)

1979
[62]

N. G. Deshpande, J. F. Gunion, B. Kayser, and F. I. Olness, Phys. Rev. D44, 837 (1991)

1991
[63]

Theory and phenomenology of two-Higgs-doublet models

G. C.Branco, P.M.Ferreira, L.Lavoura, M.N. Rebelo, M. Sher,andJ. P.Silva, Phys. Rept.516,1 (2012),arXiv:1106.0034 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2012
[64]

Ezzat, G

K. Ezzat, G. Faisel, and S. Khalil, Eur. Phys. J. C83, 731 (2023), arXiv:2204.10922 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2023
[65]

Minkowski, Phys

P. Minkowski, Phys. Lett. B67, 421 (1977)

1977
[66]

Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC

G. Aadet al.(ATLAS), Phys. Lett. B716, 1 (2012), arXiv:1207.7214 [hep-ex]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2012
[67]

Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC

S. Chatrchyanet al.(CMS), Phys. Lett. B716, 30 (2012), arXiv:1207.7235 [hep-ex]

work page Pith review arXiv 2012
[68]

Kiers, J

K. Kiers, J. Kolb, J. Lee, A. Soni, and G. H. Wu, Phys. Rev. D66, 095002 (2002), arXiv:hep-ph/0205082

work page arXiv 2002
[69]

Zhang, H

Y. Zhang, H. An, X. Ji, and R. N. Mohapatra, Phys. Rev. D76, 091301 (2007), arXiv:0704.1662 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2007
[70]

Maiezza, M

A. Maiezza, M. Nemevšek, F. Nesti, and G. Senjanović, Phys. Rev. D82, 055022 (2010), arXiv:1005.5160 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2010
[71]

Sakaki, M

Y. Sakaki, M. Tanaka, A. Tayduganov, and R. Watanabe, Phys. Rev. D88, 094012 (2013), arXiv:1309.0301 [hep-ph]. 21

work page arXiv 2013
[72]

S. L. Glashow and S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. D15, 1958 (1977)

1958
[73]

T. P. Cheng and M. Sher, Phys. Rev. D35, 3484 (1987)

1987
[74]

D’Ambrosio, G

G. D’Ambrosio, G. F. Giudice, G. Isidori, and A. Strumia, Nucl. Phys. B645, 155 (2002), arXiv:hep-ph/0207036

work page arXiv 2002
[75]

Fernandez-Martinez, J

E. Fernandez-Martinez, J. Hernandez-Garcia, and J. Lopez-Pavon, JHEP08, 033, arXiv:1605.08774 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv
[76]

Passarino and M

G. Passarino and M. J. G. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B160, 151 (1979)

1979
[77]

A. M. Sirunyanet al.(CMS), JHEP07, 003, arXiv:1712.02825 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv
[78]

Crivellin and U

A. Crivellin and U. Nierste, Phys. Rev. D81, 095007 (2010), arXiv:0908.4404 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2010
[79]

D. R. Boito and R. Escribano, Phys. Rev. D80, 054007 (2009), arXiv:0907.0189 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2009
[80]

Epifanovet al.(Belle), Phys

D. Epifanovet al.(Belle), Phys. Lett. B654, 65 (2007), arXiv:0706.2231 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2007

Showing first 80 references.