Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 5 minor 120 references

Combination of Higgs boson measurements at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13 TeV and their interpretations by the ATLAS experiment

T0 review · 1 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 ATLAS's combined Run 2 Higgs measurements all agree with the Standard Model, down to the self-coupling, total width, and b-quark running mass.

desk verdict Solid, checkable ATLAS combination that becomes the reference Higgs dataset at 13 TeV; the width result is model-dependent but explicitly so, and the central SM-consistency claim holds up. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.07332 v1 pith:ZE3NRCPA submitted 2026-08-07 hep-ex

ATLAS Collaboration This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ex PACS 14.80.Bn
keywords HiggsbosonATLASLHCRun2signalstrengthcouplingmodifiersself-couplingb-quarkrunningmassSMEFT
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

This paper answers a single question: does the Higgs boson behave exactly as the Standard Model requires? ATLAS combines 26 separate measurements of Higgs boson production and decay from the full 13 TeV Run 2 dataset (up to $140~\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$) and finds the inclusive event rate at $\mu = 0.990^{+0.053}_{-0.051}$ relative to the Standard Model prediction, with a compatibility of 77%. The combination goes beyond the inclusive rate: it extracts a modifier of the Higgs self-coupling $\kappa_\lambda = 1.3^{+3.1}_{-1.6}$, a total width $\Gamma_H = 3.6^{+2.1}_{-1.6}$ MeV from the ratio of off-shell to on-shell production, and the first ATLAS measurement of the $b$-quark running mass at the Higgs scale, $m_b(m_H) = 2.73^{+0.27}_{-0.25}$ GeV. If the paper is right, no measured Higgs property shows a statistically significant departure from the Standard Model, which matters because these three quantities are among the hardest Higgs observables to measure and would be natural places for new physics to show up first.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the combined profile-likelihood model: 26 input analyses, up to 663 analysis regions, and about 6300 nuisance parameters, built by multiplying the per-category likelihoods of every input analysis with correlated systematic uncertainties shared across channels and constraints for each nuisance parameter (Eq. 1). Four constructions run on top of it. The $\kappa$ framework expresses every production cross-section and partial width as combinations of coupling modifiers (for example $\sigma(ggF) \propto 1.040\kappa_t^2 + 0.002\kappa_b^2 - 0.038\kappa_t\kappa_b$), converting all rate measurements into constraints on the modifiers. The narrow-width approximation $\sigma_i^f = \sigma_i^{ZZ} \times \Gamma_f/\Gamma_{ZZ}$ separates production from decay, which is what lets the fit turn the ratio $\Gamma_{bb}/\Gamma_{ZZ}$ into $m_b(m_H)$ through a fifth-order polynomial parameterisation computed with HDECAY. The total width measurement uses the ratio of off-shell ($m_{VV} \gg m_H$) to on-shell Higgs production in $H^*\to ZZ^*$ and $H^*\to WW^*$, under the assumption that the vector-boson coupling modifier $\kappa_V$ is identical in the two regimes and that off-shell kinematics match the Standard Model. Finally, the self-coupling result merges the single-Higgs likelihood with six Higgs-pair analyses, using the process-dependent $C_1$ coefficients and $K_{\mathrm{EW}}$ factors to encode the NLO electroweak dependence of single-Higgs rates on $\kappa_\lambda$; the STXS Stage 1.2 binning (44 measured regions) and the Warsaw-basis SMEFT parameterisation (46 operators reduced by principal component analysis to 20 measured combinations) carry the kinematic and effective-field-theory interpretations.

What would settle it

Measure the differential gg->ZZ and gg->WW production spectra in the far-off-shell region, for instance the m_4l and m_lnu ln invariant-mass tails above about 500 GeV, with the larger datasets expected at Run 3 and the HL-LHC; if the measured tail departs from the Standard Model prediction at a level beyond the present 3.7 sigma significance of off-shell Higgs production, the extracted width of 3.6 (+2.1/-1.6) MeV would be an artifact of the assumption that the vector-boson coupling is the same on and off shell, and the width claim would collapse even though every on-shell measurement remains compatible. A positive control is an independent width determination, such as a line-shape scan of the s-channel Higgs resonance at a future lepton collider, which should return a width near 4.1 MeV if the paper is right.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that the complete set of Higgs boson production and decay rates measurable at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV is described by the Standard Model within uncertainties, and that this holds not only for the inclusive rate but also for derived quantities that almost no single measurement can reach. Production cross-sections for gluon fusion, vector-boson fusion, $WH$, $ZH$, $t\bar{t}H$, and $tH$ and branching ratios to $b\bar{b}$, $WW^*$, $\tau\tau$, $c\bar{c}$, $ZZ^*$, $\gamma\gamma$, $Z\gamma$, and $\mu\mu$ all match Standard Model expectations, with the inclusive signal strength $\mu = 0.990^{+0.053}_{-0.051}$ and signal theory uncertainty now the dominant error component. Within the $\kappa$ coupling framework, the bosonic and fermionic coupling modifiers are $\kappa_V = 1.002^{+0.027}_{-0.026}$ and $\kappa_F = 0.945^{+0.043}_{-0.041}$. The paper's headline results are three derived quantities: the trilinear self-coupling modifier $\kappa_\lambda = 1.3^{+3.1}_{-1.6}$ (95% CL interval $[-1.5, 6.5]$) obtained by combining single-Higgs and Higgs-pair production; the total width $\Gamma_H = 3.6^{+2.1}_{-1.6}$ MeV extracted from the on-shell/off-shell production ratio; and $m_b(m_H) = 2.73^{+0.27}_{-0.25}$ GeV, the first ATLAS determination of the running $b$-quark mass at the Higgs mass scale in the $\overline{\mathrm{MS}}$ scheme. Kinematic cross-sections in 44 STXS regions and 20 SMEFT parameter combinations are likewise consistent with the Standard Model, with compatibility $p$-values between 47% and 81%. In short, the paper claims that the Standard Model describes every Higgs property ATLAS can currently measure.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the Higgs boson's coupling to W and Z bosons is exactly the same whether the boson is produced through a Higgs of normal mass or through a far heavier virtual one, and that the rate of that far-heavy production matches the Standard Model's prediction; if new physics changed that high-mass production region, the quoted Higgs width of about 3.6 MeV would shift even if every normal-mass measurement stayed exactly as reported.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Every coupling modifier measured by ATLAS is within uncertainties of unity: $\kappa_V = 1.002^{+0.027}_{-0.026}$, $\kappa_F = 0.945^{+0.043}_{-0.041}$, per-coupling uncertainties of 4-10% for $W$, $Z$, $t$, $b$, and $\tau$, about 25% for $\mu$, and $|\kappa_c| < 4.1$ at 95% CL.
  • The self-coupling constraint $\kappa_\lambda = 1.3^{+3.1}_{-1.6}$ with 95% CL interval $[-1.5, 6.5]$ is the tightest ATLAS statement on the trilinear Higgs coupling to date, and single-Higgs data resolve the degeneracy between $\kappa_\lambda$ and $\kappa_t$ that afflicts Higgs-pair production alone.
  • The total width $\Gamma_H = 3.6^{+2.1}_{-1.6}$ MeV agrees with the Standard Model prediction of about 4 MeV; adding the $H^*\to WW^*$ off-shell channel tightens the interval by 17% relative to the $ZZ$-only result and yields the most sensitive determination in this scenario.
  • The measured $m_b(m_H) = 2.73^{+0.27}_{-0.25}$ GeV, combined with $m_b(m_Z)$ from LEP and SLC and $m_b(m_b)$ from the PDG, excludes the no-running scenario by more than 8 standard deviations, confirming the QCD renormalisation-group running of the $b$-quark mass across two orders of magnitude in scale.
  • Bounds on non-standard decays tighten to $B_{\mathrm{inv}} < 12\%$ and $B_{\mathrm{u}} < 32\%$ at 95% CL, and all 44 STXS kinematic regions plus the 20 SMEFT parameters agree with the Standard Model (EFT compatibility $p = 81\%$).

Reading between the lines

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

  • A consequence the paper leaves implicit: the measured $\mu = 0.990$ sits slightly below 1 while signal theory uncertainty is the dominant error component, so further progress on the inclusive-rate test will be driven mainly by higher-order QCD calculations for gluon fusion (about 90% of that component) rather than by larger datasets.
  • Because the off-shell signal that carries $\Gamma_H$ is significant at only $3.7\sigma$, the width constraint is statistically loose: a future dataset that pins down the far-off-shell $m_{VV}$ spectrum could move the central value by more than the quoted uncertainty even if every on-shell measurement stayed exactly the same.
  • The $m_b(m_H)$ determination can be read as a first step toward testing the linear Higgs-fermion coupling relation itself; if future data tighten it to a few percent, it would begin to distinguish the Standard Model Yukawa hypothesis from alternatives rather than merely confirming the running of a quark mass.
  • The single-Higgs plus Higgs-pair strategy for $\kappa_\lambda$ is a natural template for the HL-LHC: the paper shows the combined interval is already competitive with pair-production alone, and the gap should widen as $HH$ statistics grow.
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.

Referee Report

1 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper reports a combination of 26 ATLAS Run 2 Higgs boson measurements at sqrt(s) = 13 TeV with up to 140 fb^-1 of data, using a profile-likelihood model with about 6300 nuisance parameters. The inclusive signal strength is measured to be mu = 0.990 +0.053/-0.051, with a decomposition into statistical, experimental, signal-theory and background-theory components; production cross-sections, branching ratios, 32 combinations of sigma_i x B_f, kappa-framework coupling modifiers, m_b(m_H) = 2.73 +0.27/-0.25 GeV, Gamma_H = 3.6 +2.1/-1.6 MeV from on/off-shell production, kappa_lambda = 1.3 +3.1/-1.6 from single-H plus HH production, 44 STXS regions, and a 20-parameter SMEFT interpretation are also reported. All reported p-values indicate compatibility with the Standard Model.

Significance. If the results hold, this is the most comprehensive Higgs properties combination published by ATLAS to date and a reference point for Higgs coupling studies. The paper is unusually complete: every block of results reports p-values, expected and observed uncertainties, uncertainty decompositions, and correlation matrices; derived quantities use external tools (HDECAY, REvolver, SMEFT@NLO); and the on/off-shell width analysis includes a Neyman-construction validation of the asymptotic approximation. The new m_b(m_H) determination and the single-H plus HH combination for kappa_lambda are notable results. The main caveat is the model dependence of the total width extraction, which is stated in the text but not stress-tested by the data.

major comments (1)
  1. [Section 6.6, Eq. (6)] The total width result Gamma_H = 3.6 +2.1/-1.6 MeV is obtained under two premises that are load-bearing but not validated by a data-driven parameter in the fit: (i) kappa_V is identical on-shell and off-shell, and (ii) the off-shell kinematic distributions, in particular the production fraction at m_VV >> m_H, are exactly as in the SM. The text states these premises, but the off-shell excess has only 3.7 sigma significance and no independent off-shell normalization or shape parameter is fitted, so a BSM contribution to the off-shell gg->ZZ/WW amplitude could shift Gamma_H without being flagged by the fit. I request a robustness interpretation in which the off-shell rate is allowed to float independently (or a shape parameter is introduced), reporting the resulting change in Gamma_H; if this is not feasible, the abstract and conclusion should explicitly label Gamma_H as an assumption-dependent constraint within the kappa framework rather than as a direct measurement.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 4, Figures 2-5] The figures have very dense labels and some numerical values overlap; please provide higher-resolution vector graphics with readable labels or move the detailed values to tables.
  2. [Section 6.5, Eq. (3)] The multiplicative correction applied to Gamma_bb to match the recommendation of Ref. [12] at m_b(m_H) = 2.787 GeV is not quantified in the text; reporting the correction factor relative to unity would improve transparency.
  3. [Section 6.6, Eq. (7)] The expected result is quoted as 4.1 +/- 3.0 MeV while the breakdown shows asymmetric statistical and systematic components; please state the total uncertainty in a way that is consistent with the asymmetric decomposition.
  4. [Section 6.7, Table 10] The abstract and conclusion quote kappa_lambda = 1.3 +3.1/-1.6 from the model with other coupling modifiers fixed; since the generic model with kappa_V, kappa_t, kappa_b and kappa_tau profiled shifts the best-fit value to 0.6, please state this model dependence explicitly when quoting the result.
  5. [Appendix F, Table 21] The polynomial coefficients are given without uncertainties; a short validation of the interpolation against HDECAY at intermediate points would be helpful.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the headline results are fits to external collision data using independent theoretical mappings, and none of the derived quantities is defined in terms of its own output.

full rationale

The paper is a combination of measurements rather than a first-principles derivation, so the central claims are parameter estimates obtained from data. The inclusive signal strength μ=0.990 and the production and decay rates are profile-likelihood fits to 26 published ATLAS analyses, compared against SM predictions that carry independent theory uncertainties; a fit compared with an external benchmark is not circular. The κ-framework interpretations re-express the fitted rates in terms of coupling modifiers, and no modifier is constructed so that it automatically equals the quantity it is said to determine. The b-quark mass result maps the measured Γ_bb/Γ_ZZ through HDECAY 6.61 via Eq. (3), an external N4LO/NLO code, with the polynomial interpolation checked for stability under order changes (Section 6.5 and Appendix F); the mapping only equals the input at the reference point m_ref=2.787 GeV, while the fitted value 2.73 GeV differs from that point by more than the quoted uncertainty, so the result carries independent data content. The total width Γ_H=3.6 MeV is obtained from the on-shell versus off-shell rate comparison under explicitly stated assumptions about κ_V equality and SM off-shell kinematics in Section 6.6; those are physical assumptions, not fitted parameters that force the result, and the reported 3.7σ off-shell significance is an independently observable input. The self-coupling constraint κ_λ=1.3 combines single-H and HH analyses using LHC Higgs Working Group coefficients and previously published ATLAS HH measurements; it is a fit, not a self-fulfilling prediction. Self-citations to input analyses and to Ref. [3] are standard use of previously published experimental results and are not load-bearing substitutes for evidence; the theoretical tools used (HDECAY, REvolver, SMEFT@NLO, the κ-framework, and the STXS scheme) are external or community-defined benchmarks. No step in the derivation chain reduces to its own input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 9 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's central claims rest on standard, disclosed domain assumptions rather than hidden free parameters. The fitted quantities (coupling modifiers, cross-sections, branching ratios) are the measurement output, and the only auxiliary fitted numbers are the Eq. (3) interpolation coefficients (fitted to an external code, robustness-checked) and the running-strength parameter x in the m_b test. The SMEFT basis is set by a hand-chosen PCA threshold of 0.01, disclosed in Section 8. No invented entities appear: no new particles, mediators, forces, dimensions, or conserved quantities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • a_1 to a_5, Gamma_bb/Gamma_ZZ polynomial coefficients = -0.07086, 1.144, -0.1361, 0.06038, -0.01167 (Table 21)
    Fifth-order polynomial in Eq. (3) fitted to HDECAY 6.61 output to map m_b(m_H) into Gamma_bb/Gamma_ZZ. It is an empirical interpolation of an external code, not a fit to LHC data, and the paper shows the m_b(m_H) result is stable for polynomial orders 3 to 6.
  • x, b-quark running-strength parameter = 1.04 +/- 0.12 (exp.) +/- 0.05 (alpha_s)
    Fit parameter in Section 6.5 interpolating between full QCD running (x = 1, SM) and no running (x = 0). It is the physics result of the running test, not a hidden input, but it is a fitted quantity whose 8-sigma exclusion of x = 0 is a headline claim.
  • SMEFT PCA eigenvalue retention threshold = 0.01
    Eigenvectors with eigenvalue below 0.01 in each sector are fixed to zero (Section 8) to remove flat directions. It is a hand-chosen threshold that defines which 20 linear combinations are measured; it does not bias central values but sets the effective parameter basis.
assumptions (9)
  • domain assumption SM reference predictions for production cross-sections and branching ratios with the LHC Higgs Working Group uncertainty scheme (Section 3.2)
    All signal strengths are ratios to these predictions, and the signal and background theory uncertainties in them are part of the quoted uncertainties.
  • domain assumption kappa-framework parameterizations, including resolved leading-order loop expressions for sigma(ggF), Gamma_gg, Gamma_gamma gamma and Gamma_Z gamma (Table 14, Ref. [56])
    The coupling-interpretation sections inherit the accuracy of these expressions, e.g. sigma(ggF) = 1.040 kappa_t^2 + 0.002 kappa_b^2 - 0.038 kappa_t kappa_b - 0.005 kappa_t kappa_c.
  • standard math Narrow-width approximation in Eqs. (2) and (8)
    The event rate factorizes as sigma_i times Gamma_f / Gamma_ZZ; this is valid since Gamma_H / m_H is about 3 times 10^-5.
  • standard math Asymptotic profile-likelihood approximation for confidence intervals
    Used throughout per Ref. [89]; explicitly validated in Section 6.6 by a Neyman construction showing at most 2% difference for the Gamma_H intervals.
  • domain assumption Equality of on-shell and off-shell kappa_V and SM off-shell kinematics (Section 6.6)
    Load-bearing for Gamma_H: it turns the 3.7-sigma off-shell excess into a width constraint, and any BSM effect in the m_VV >> m_H region would bias the result.
  • domain assumption All unprobed Higgs production and decay rates are SM (Sections 6.5 and 6.7)
    Used for the m_b(m_H) extraction and the kappa_lambda fit; for example, m_b(m_H) assumes the H to bb partial width is SM except through m_b(m_H), so a BSM contribution to the b-Yukawa coupling would be absorbed into the mass.
  • domain assumption Single-H sensitivity to kappa_lambda enters only through NLO electroweak C1 and K_EW corrections from the LHC Higgs Working Group (Section 6.7)
    These corrections are a few percent for order-unity kappa_lambda; if they were wrong, the single-H part of the kappa_lambda combination would shift.
  • domain assumption SMEFT truncation: Warsaw basis, CP-even operators, at most one operator insertion, top-flavor scheme (Section 8)
    Standard SMEFT setup; the linear versus linear-plus-quadratic comparison probes truncation effects, and d greater than 6 operators are omitted.
  • domain assumption STXS yields outside |y_H| < 2.5 and merged-bin fractions follow SM predictions (Section 7)
    The 44 measured regions assume SM behavior in unmeasured phase space, which affects the normalization interpretation of the STXS cross-sections.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Combination of Higgs boson measurements at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13 TeV and their interpretations by the ATLAS experiment." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZE3NRCPA

@misc{pith2026260807332,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Combination of Higgs boson measurements at $\sqrts =$ 13 TeV and their interpretations by the ATLAS experiment},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZE3NRCPA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.07332}
}
abstract

This paper presents combined measurements of Higgs boson production and decay using up to 140 fb$^{-1}$ of proton--proton collision data collected by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV. The inclusive Higgs boson event rate relative to its Standard Model prediction is determined to be $0.990 ^{+0.053}_{-0.051} = 0.990 \pm 0.027 \text{ (stat.) } \pm 0.024 \text{ (exp.) } ^{+0.037}_{-0.035} \text{ (sig. theo.) } ^{+0.016}_{-0.015} \text{ (bkg. theo.)}$, separating statistical, experimental, signal-theory and background-theory uncertainty components. The signal theory uncertainty is the largest contribution, dominated by missing higher-order terms in QCD and the modelling of parton shower effects. Inclusive production cross-sections and decay branching ratios are measured, with sensitivities improved by up to 35% relative to the previous ATLAS publication. Production cross-sections for individual decay channels are also reported. The results are interpreted in terms of modifiers to Higgs boson couplings. The combination of single Higgs boson and Higgs boson pair production measurements yields $\kappa_\lambda = 1.3^{+3.1}_{-1.6}$ for the modifier to the Higgs boson self-coupling, with an interval of $[-1.5, 6.5]$ at 95% confidence level. The partial width in the $H\to b\bar{b}$ decay channel is used to obtain the first ATLAS determination of the running mass of the $b$-quark at the Higgs boson mass scale in the modified minimal subtraction scheme, found to be $m_b(m_H) = 2.73^{+0.27}_{-0.25}$ GeV. The total width of the Higgs boson is measured to be $\Gamma_H = 3.6^{+2.1}_{-1.6}$ MeV based on its on- and off-shell production rates. The kinematics of Higgs boson production are probed within the framework of Simplified Template Cross-sections in 44 kinematic regions, and the results are interpreted in the context of Standard Model Effective Field Theory models.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

120 extracted references · 12 canonical work pages

  1. [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. B716(2012) 1, arXiv:1207.7214 [hep-ex]

    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, arXiv:1207.7235 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2012

  3. [3]

    ATLAS Collaboration, A detailed map of Higgs boson interactions by the ATLAS experiment ten years after the discovery, Nature607(2022) 52, arXiv:2207.00092 [hep-ex], Erratum: Nature612(2022) E24

    arXiv 2022

  4. [4]

    CMS Collaboration,Combined measurements and interpretations of Higgs boson production and decay in proton–proton collisions at√𝑠=13TeV, (2026), arXiv:2602.18611 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2026

  5. [5]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Measurements of Higgs bosons decaying to bottom quarks from vector boson fusion production with the ATLAS experiment at√𝑠=13TeV , Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) 537, arXiv:2011.08280 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2021

  6. [6]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Search for nonresonant pair production of Higgs bosons in the𝑏 ¯𝑏𝑏 ¯𝑏 final state in𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 052003, arXiv:2301.03212 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2023

  7. [7]

    ATLAS and CMS Collaborations,Combined Measurement of the Higgs Boson Mass in𝑝𝑝 Collisions at√𝑠=7and8TeV with the ATLAS and CMS Experiments, Phys. Rev. Lett.114(2015) 191803, arXiv:1503.07589 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2015

  8. [8]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Combined Measurement of the Higgs Boson Mass from the𝐻→𝛾𝛾 and𝐻→𝑍𝑍 ∗→4ℓ Decay Channels with the ATLAS Detector Using√𝑠=7,8,and13TeV𝑝𝑝Collision Data, Phys. Rev. Lett.131(2023) 251802, arXiv:2308.04775 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2023

Show all 120 references
  1. [9]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Measurement of the Higgs boson mass in the𝐻→𝑍𝑍∗→4ℓdecay channel using139fb−1 of√𝑠=13TeV𝑝𝑝 collisions recorded by the ATLAS detector at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B843(2023) 137880, arXiv:2207.00320 [hep-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  2. [10]

    CMS Collaboration,A measurement of the Higgs boson mass in the diphoton decay channel, Phys. Lett. B805(2020) 135425, arXiv:2002.06398 [hep-ex]

    2020 arXiv

  3. [11]

    CMS Collaboration,Measurement of the Higgs boson mass and width using the four-lepton final state in proton–proton collisions at√𝑠=13TeV, Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 092014, arXiv:2409.13663 [hep-ex]

    2025 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Deciphering the Nature of the Higgs Sector, (2017), arXiv:1610.07922 [hep-ph]

    LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, Handbook of LHC Higgs Cross Sections: 4. Deciphering the Nature of the Higgs Sector, (2017), arXiv:1610.07922 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  5. [13]

    J. R. Andersen et al., ‘Les Houches 2015: Physics at TeV Colliders Standard Model Working Group Report’, 9th Les Houches Workshop on Physics at TeV Colliders, 2016, arXiv:1605.04692 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Berger et al.,Simplified template cross sections – Stage 1.1 and 1.2, SciPost Phys

    N. Berger et al.,Simplified template cross sections – Stage 1.1 and 1.2, SciPost Phys. Comm. Rep. (2026), arXiv:1906.02754 [hep-ph]. 92

    2026

  7. [15]

    S. Amoroso et al., ‘Les Houches 2019: Physics at TeV Colliders: Standard Model Working Group Report’, 11th Les Houches Workshop on Physics at TeV Colliders: PhysTeV Les Houches, 2020, arXiv:2003.01700 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Nason,A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms, JHEP11(2004) 040, arXiv:hep-ph/0409146

    P. Nason,A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms, JHEP11(2004) 040, arXiv:hep-ph/0409146

    2004 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Frixione, P

    S. Frixione, P. Nason and C. Oleari, Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: the POWHEG method, JHEP11(2007) 070, arXiv:0709.2092 [hep-ph]

    2007 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Alioli, P

    S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari and E. Re,A general framework for implementing NLO calculations in shower Monte Carlo programs: the POWHEG BOX, JHEP06(2010) 043, arXiv:1002.2581 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Alioli, P

    S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari and E. Re, NLO Higgs boson production via gluon fusion matched with shower in POWHEG, JHEP04(2009) 002, arXiv:0812.0578 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Hamilton, P

    K. Hamilton, P. Nason, E. Re and G. Zanderighi,NNLOPS simulation of Higgs boson production, JHEP10(2013) 222, arXiv:1309.0017 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Hamilton, P

    K. Hamilton, P. Nason and G. Zanderighi, Finite quark-mass effects in the NNLOPS POWHEG+MiNLO Higgs generator, JHEP05(2015) 140, arXiv:1501.04637 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Catani and M

    S. Catani and M. Grazzini,Next-to-Next-to-Leading-Order Subtraction Formalism in Hadron Collisions and its Application to Higgs-Boson Production at the Large Hadron Collider, Phys. Rev. Lett.98(2007) 222002, arXiv:hep-ph/0703012

    2007 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Hamilton, P

    K. Hamilton, P. Nason, C. Oleari and G. Zanderighi,Merging H/W/Z + 0 and 1 jet at NLO with no merging scale: a path to parton shower + NNLO matching, JHEP05(2013) 082, arXiv:1212.4504 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Anastasiou, C

    C. Anastasiou, C. Duhr, F. Dulat, F. Herzog and B. Mistlberger, Higgs Boson Gluon-Fusion Production in QCD at Three Loops, Phys. Rev. Lett.114(2015) 212001, arXiv:1503.06056 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Anastasiou et al., High precision determination of the gluon fusion Higgs boson cross-section at the LHC, JHEP05(2016) 058, arXiv:1602.00695 [hep-ph]

    C. Anastasiou et al., High precision determination of the gluon fusion Higgs boson cross-section at the LHC, JHEP05(2016) 058, arXiv:1602.00695 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Actis, G

    S. Actis, G. Passarino, C. Sturm and S. Uccirati, NLO electroweak corrections to Higgs boson production at hadron colliders, Phys. Lett. B670(2008) 12, arXiv:0809.1301 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Anastasiou, R

    C. Anastasiou, R. Boughezal and F. Petriello, Mixed QCD-electroweak corrections to Higgs boson production in gluon fusion, JHEP04(2009) 003, arXiv:0811.3458 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Grazzini and H

    M. Grazzini and H. Sargsyan,Heavy-quark mass effects in Higgs boson production at the LHC, JHEP09(2013) 129, arXiv:1306.4581 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Nason and C

    P. Nason and C. Oleari, NLO Higgs boson production via vector-boson fusion matched with shower in POWHEG, JHEP02(2010) 037, arXiv:0911.5299 [hep-ph]. 93

    2010 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Hamilton, P

    K. Hamilton, P. Nason and G. Zanderighi,MINLO: multi-scale improved NLO, JHEP10(2012) 155, arXiv:1206.3572 [hep-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Ciccolini, A

    M. Ciccolini, A. Denner and S. Dittmaier,Strong and Electroweak Corrections to the Production of a Higgs Boson + 2 Jets via Weak Interactions at the Large Hadron Collider, Phys. Rev. Lett.99(2007) 161803, arXiv:0707.0381 [hep-ph]

    2007 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Ciccolini, A

    M. Ciccolini, A. Denner and S. Dittmaier, Electroweak and QCD corrections to Higgs production via vector-boson fusion at the CERN LHC, Phys. Rev. D77(2008) 013002, arXiv:0710.4749 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Bolzoni, F

    P. Bolzoni, F. Maltoni, S.-O. Moch and M. Zaro, Higgs Boson Production via Vector-Boson Fusion at Next-to-Next-to-Leading Order in QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett.105(2010) 011801, arXiv:1003.4451 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Brein, A

    O. Brein, A. Djouadi and R. Harlander, NNLO QCD corrections to the Higgs-strahlung processes at hadron colliders, Phys. Lett. B579(2004) 149, arXiv:hep-ph/0307206

    2004 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Denner, S

    A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, S. Kallweit and A. Mück,Electroweak corrections to Higgs-strahlung off W/Z bosons at the Tevatron and the LHC with HAWK, JHEP03(2012) 075, arXiv:1112.5142 [hep-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Altenkamp, S

    L. Altenkamp, S. Dittmaier, R. V. Harlander, H. Rzehak and T. J. E. Zirke, Gluon-induced Higgs-strahlung at next-to-leading order QCD, JHEP02(2013) 078, arXiv:1211.5015 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  29. [38]

    Beenakker, S

    W. Beenakker, S. Dittmaier, M. Krämer, B. Plumper, M. Spira et al., NLO QCD corrections to𝑡¯𝑡𝐻production in hadron collisions, Nucl. Phys. B653(2003) 151, arXiv:hep-ph/0211352 [hep-ph]

    2003 arXiv

  30. [39]

    Dawson, C

    S. Dawson, C. Jackson, L. Orr, L. Reina and D. Wackeroth,Associated Higgs boson production with top quarks at the CERN Large Hadron Collider: NLO QCD corrections, Phys. Rev. D68(2003) 034022, arXiv:hep-ph/0305087 [hep-ph]

    2003 arXiv

  31. [40]

    Zhang, W.-G

    Y. Zhang, W.-G. Ma, R.-Y. Zhang, C. Chen and L. Guo, QCD NLO and EW NLO corrections to𝑡¯𝑡𝐻production with top quark decays at hadron collider, Phys. Lett. B738(2014) 1, arXiv:1407.1110 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  32. [41]

    Frixione, V

    S. Frixione, V. Hirschi, D. Pagani, H.-S. Shao and M. Zaro, Weak corrections to Higgs hadroproduction in association with a top-quark pair, JHEP09(2014) 065, arXiv:1407.0823 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  33. [42]

    Frixione, V

    S. Frixione, V. Hirschi, D. Pagani, H.-S. Shao and M. Zaro, Electroweak and QCD corrections to top-pair hadroproduction in association with heavy bosons, JHEP06(2015) 184, arXiv:1504.03446 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  34. [43]

    Demartin, F

    F. Demartin, F. Maltoni, K. Mawatari and M. Zaro, Higgs production in association with a single top quark at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C75(2015) 267, arXiv:1504.00611 [hep-ph]. 94

    2015 arXiv

  35. [44]

    Dawson, S

    S. Dawson, S. Dittmaier and M. Spira, Neutral Higgs-boson pair production at hadron colliders: QCD corrections, Phys. Rev. D58(1998) 115012, arXiv:hep-ph/9805244

    1998 arXiv

  36. [45]

    Borowka et al.,Higgs Boson Pair Production in Gluon Fusion at Next-to-Leading Order with Full Top-Quark Mass Dependence, Phys

    S. Borowka et al.,Higgs Boson Pair Production in Gluon Fusion at Next-to-Leading Order with Full Top-Quark Mass Dependence, Phys. Rev. Lett.117(2016) 079901, arXiv:1604.06447 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  37. [46]

    Baglio et al.,Gluon fusion into Higgs pairs at NLO QCD and the top mass scheme, Eur

    J. Baglio et al.,Gluon fusion into Higgs pairs at NLO QCD and the top mass scheme, Eur. Phys. J. C79(2019) 459, arXiv:1811.05692 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  38. [47]

    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, arXiv:1309.6594 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  39. [48]

    D. Y. Shao, C. S. Li, H. T. Li and J. Wang, Threshold resummation effects in Higgs boson pair production at the LHC, JHEP07(2013) 169, arXiv:1301.1245 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  40. [49]

    de Florian and J

    D. de Florian and J. Mazzitelli, Higgs pair production at next-to-next-to-leading logarithmic accuracy at the LHC, JHEP09(2015) 053, arXiv:1505.07122 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  41. [50]

    Grazzini et al.,Higgs boson pair production at NNLO with top quark mass effects, JHEP05(2018) 059, arXiv:1803.02463 [hep-ph]

    M. Grazzini et al.,Higgs boson pair production at NNLO with top quark mass effects, JHEP05(2018) 059, arXiv:1803.02463 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  42. [51]

    Baglio et al.,𝑔𝑔→𝐻𝐻: Combined uncertainties, Phys

    J. Baglio et al.,𝑔𝑔→𝐻𝐻: Combined uncertainties, Phys. Rev. D103(2021) 056002, arXiv:2008.11626 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  43. [52]

    Frederix et al.,Higgs pair production at the LHC with NLO and parton-shower effects, Phys

    R. Frederix et al.,Higgs pair production at the LHC with NLO and parton-shower effects, Phys. Lett. B732(2014) 142, arXiv:1401.7340 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  44. [53]

    Ling et al., NNLO QCD corrections to Higgs pair production via vector boson fusion at hadron colliders, Phys

    L.-S. Ling et al., NNLO QCD corrections to Higgs pair production via vector boson fusion at hadron colliders, Phys. Rev. D89(2014) 073001, arXiv:1401.7754 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  45. [54]

    F. A. Dreyer and A. Karlberg,Vector-Boson Fusion Higgs Pair Production at N3LO, Phys. Rev. D98(2018) 114016, arXiv:1811.07906 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  46. [55]

    F. A. Dreyer and A. Karlberg, Fully differential Vector-Boson Fusion Higgs Pair Production at Next-to-Next-to-Leading Order, Phys. Rev. D99(2019) 074028, arXiv:1811.07918 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  47. [56]

    Higgs Properties, (2013), arXiv:1307.1347 [hep-ph]

    LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, Handbook of LHC Higgs Cross Sections: 3. Higgs Properties, (2013), arXiv:1307.1347 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  48. [57]

    Brivio and M

    I. Brivio and M. Trott,The Standard Model as an Effective Field Theory, Phys. Rept.793(2019) 1, arXiv:1706.08945 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  49. [58]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Methodology for EFT interpretation of Higgs boson simplified template cross-section results in ATLAS, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2019-042, 2019, url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/2694284

    2019

  50. [59]

    ATLAS Collaboration,The ATLAS Experiment at the CERN Large Hadron Collider, JINST3(2008) S08003. 95

    2008

  51. [60]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Operation of the ATLAS trigger system in Run 2, JINST15(2020) P10004, arXiv:2007.12539 [physics.ins-det]

    2020 arXiv

  52. [61]

    ATLAS Collaboration,The ATLAS Collaboration Software and Firmware, ATL-SOFT-PUB-2021-001, 2021,url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/2767187

    2021

  53. [62]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Luminosity determination in𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV using the ATLAS detector at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C83(2023) 982, arXiv:2212.09379 [hep-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  54. [63]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Measurement of off-shell Higgs boson production in the𝐻∗→𝑍𝑍→4ℓdecay channel using a neural simulation-based inference technique in13TeV𝑝𝑝collisions with the ATLAS detector, Rept. Prog. Phys.88(2025) 057803, arXiv:2412.01548 [hep-ex]

    2025 arXiv

  55. [64]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Constraining off-shell Higgs boson production and the Higgs boson total width using𝑊𝑊→ℓ𝜈ℓ𝜈final states with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Lett. B870(2025) 139898, arXiv:2504.07710 [hep-ex]

    2025

  56. [65]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Search for invisible Higgs-boson decays in events with vector-boson fusion signatures using139fb−1 of proton–proton data recorded by the ATLAS experiment, JHEP08(2022) 104, arXiv:2202.07953 [hep-ex]

    2022 arXiv

  57. [66]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Search for associated production of a𝑍boson with an invisibly decaying Higgs boson or dark matter candidates at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Lett. B829(2022) 137066, arXiv:2111.08372 [hep-ex]

    2022 arXiv

  58. [67]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Constraints on spin-0 dark matter mediators and invisible Higgs decays using ATLAS13TeV𝑝𝑝 collision data with two top quarks and missing transverse momentum in the final state, Eur. Phys. J. C83(2023) 503, arXiv:2211.05426 [hep-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  59. [68]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Observation of electroweak production of two jets in association with an isolated photon and missing transverse momentum, and search for a Higgs boson decaying into invisible particles at13TeV with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C82(2022) 105, arXiv:2109...

    2022 arXiv

  60. [69]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Constraints on Higgs boson production with large transverse momentum using𝐻→𝑏 ¯𝑏decays in the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D105(2022) 092003, arXiv:2111.08340 [hep-ex]

    2022 arXiv

  61. [70]

    ATLAS Collaboration,A search for the𝑍𝛾decay mode of the Higgs boson in𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Lett. B809(2020) 135754, arXiv:2005.05382 [hep-ex]

    2020 arXiv

  62. [71]

    ATLAS Collaboration, A search for the dimuon decay of the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Lett. B812(2021) 135980, arXiv:2007.07830 [hep-ex]

    2021 arXiv

  63. [72]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Measurement of the𝑉𝐻,𝐻→𝜏𝜏process with the ATLAS detector at13TeV, Phys. Lett. B855(2024) 138817, arXiv:2312.02394 [hep-ex]. 96

    2024 arXiv

  64. [73]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Higgs boson production cross-section measurements and their EFT interpretation in the4ℓdecay channel at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C80(2020) 957, arXiv:2004.03447 [hep-ex], Erratum: Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) 29, Erratum: Eur. Phys. J. C81(...

    2020 arXiv

  65. [74]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Measurements of Higgs boson production via gluon–gluon fusion and vector-boson fusion using𝐻→𝑊𝑊 ∗→ℓ𝜈ℓ𝜈decays in𝑝𝑝collisions with the ATLAS detector and their effective field theory interpretations, Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) 1403, arXiv:2504.07686 [hep-ex]

    2025

  66. [75]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Measurements of the production cross-sections of a Higgs boson in association with a vector boson and decaying into𝑊𝑊∗ with the ATLAS detector at√𝑠=13TeV , JHEP08(2025) 034, arXiv:2503.19420 [hep-ex]

    2025 arXiv

  67. [76]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Measurement of the properties of Higgs boson production at√𝑠=13TeV in the𝐻→𝛾𝛾channel using139fb −1 of𝑝𝑝collision data with the ATLAS experiment, JHEP07(2023) 088, arXiv:2207.00348 [hep-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  68. [77]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Differential cross-section measurements of Higgs boson production in the 𝐻→𝜏 +𝜏− decay channel in𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP03(2025) 010, arXiv:2407.16320 [hep-ex]

    2025 arXiv

  69. [78]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Measurements of𝑊𝐻 and𝑍𝐻 production with Higgs boson decays into bottom quarks and direct constraints on the charm Yukawa coupling in13TeV𝑝𝑝collisions with the ATLAS detector, JHEP04(2025) 075, arXiv:2410.19611 [hep-ex]

    2025 arXiv

  70. [79]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Measurement of the Higgs boson production in association with top quarks in multilepton final states in𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP05(2026) 183, arXiv:2510.23755 [hep-ex]

    2026 arXiv

  71. [80]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Measurement of the associated production of a top-antitop-quark pair and a Higgs boson decaying into a𝑏 ¯𝑏pair in𝑝𝑝collisions at √𝑠=13TeV using the ATLAS detector at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) 210, arXiv:2407.10904 [hep-ex]

    2025 arXiv

  72. [81]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Search for the production of a Higgs boson in association with a single top quark in𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP10(2025) 093, arXiv:2508.14695 [hep-ex]

    2025

  73. [82]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Search for pair production of boosted Higgs bosons via vector-boson fusion in the𝑏¯𝑏𝑏 ¯𝑏final state using𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Lett. B858(2024) 139007, arXiv:2404.17193 [hep-ex]

    2024 arXiv

  74. [83]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Search for the non-resonant production of Higgs boson pairs via gluon fusion and vector-boson fusion in the𝑏¯𝑏𝜏+𝜏− final state in proton–proton collisions at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 032012, arXiv:2404.12660 [hep-ex]

    2024 arXiv

  75. [84]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Studies of new Higgs boson interactions through nonresonant𝐻𝐻 production in the𝑏¯𝑏𝛾𝛾final state in𝑝𝑝collisions at √𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP01(2024) 066, arXiv:2310.12301 [hep-ex]. 97

    2024 arXiv

  76. [85]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Search for non-resonant Higgs boson pair production in the 2𝑏+2ℓ+𝐸 miss T final state in𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP02(2024) 037, arXiv:2310.11286 [hep-ex]

    2024 arXiv

  77. [86]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Search for non-resonant Higgs boson pair production in final states with leptons, taus, and photons in𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP08(2024) 164, arXiv:2405.20040 [hep-ex]

    2024 arXiv

  78. [87]

    ATLAS Collaboration, CMS Collaboration and LHC Higgs Combination Group, Procedure for the LHC Higgs boson search combination in Summer 2011, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2011-011, 2011,url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/1375842

    2011

  79. [88]

    Verkerke and D

    W. Verkerke and D. Kirkby,The RooFit toolkit for data modeling, (2003) MOLT007, arXiv:physics/0306116

    2003 arXiv

  80. [89]

    Cowan, K

    G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross and O. Vitells, Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics, Eur. Phys. J. C71(2011) 1554, arXiv:1007.1727 [physics.data-an], Erratum: Eur. Phys. J. C73 (2013) 2501

    2011 arXiv

  81. [90]

    Pinto et al.,Uncertainty components in profile likelihood fits, Eur

    A. Pinto et al.,Uncertainty components in profile likelihood fits, Eur. Phys. J. C84(2024) 593, arXiv:2307.04007 [physics.data-an]

    2024 arXiv

  82. [91]

    ATLAS and CMS Collaborations, Measurements of the Higgs boson production and decay rates and constraints on its couplings from a combined ATLAS and CMS analysis of the LHC𝑝𝑝collision data at√𝑠=7and8TeV, JHEP08(2016) 045, arXiv:1606.02266 [hep-ex]

    2016 arXiv

  83. [92]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Determination of the Relative Sign of the Higgs Boson Couplings to𝑊 and 𝑍Bosons Using𝑊𝐻Production via Vector-Boson Fusion with the ATLAS Detector, Phys. Rev. Lett.133(2024) 141801, arXiv:2402.00426 [hep-ex]

    2024 arXiv

  84. [93]

    CMS Collaboration, Study of𝑊𝐻 production through vector boson scattering and extraction of the relative sign of the 𝑊and𝑍couplings to the Higgs boson in proton–proton collisions at√𝑠=13TeV, Phys. Lett. B860(2025) 139202, arXiv:2405.16566 [hep-ex]

    2025 arXiv

  85. [94]

    Djouadi, J

    A. Djouadi, J. Kalinowski and M. Spira,HDECAY: a program for Higgs boson decays in the Standard Model and its supersymmetric extension, Comput. Phys. Commun.108(1998) 56, arXiv:hep-ph/9704448

    1998 arXiv

  86. [95]

    Spira,QCD Effects in Higgs Physics, Fortsch

    M. Spira,QCD Effects in Higgs Physics, Fortsch. Phys.46(1998) 203, arXiv:hep-ph/9705337

    1998 arXiv

  87. [96]

    Djouadi, M

    A. Djouadi, M. M. Mühlleitner and M. Spira, Decays of Supersymmetric Particles: the Program SUSY-HIT (SUspect-SdecaY-Hdecay-InTerface), Acta Phys. Polon. B38(2007) 635, arXiv:hep-ph/0609292

    2007 arXiv

  88. [97]

    Aparisi et al.,mb at mH: The Running Bottom Quark Mass and the Higgs Boson, Phys

    J. Aparisi et al.,mb at mH: The Running Bottom Quark Mass and the Higgs Boson, Phys. Rev. Lett.128(2022) 122001, arXiv:2110.10202 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  89. [98]

    CMS Collaboration,Running of the top quark mass from proton–proton collisions at√𝑠=13TeV , Phys. Lett. B803(2020) 135263, arXiv:1909.09193 [hep-ex]

    2020 arXiv

  90. [99]

    A. H. Hoang, C. Lepenik and V. Mateu, REvolver: Automated running and matching of couplings and masses in QCD, Comput. Phys. Commun.270(2021) 108145, arXiv:2102.01085 [hep-ph]. 98

    2021 arXiv

  91. [100]

    ALEPH Collaboration,A measurement of the b-quark mass from hadronic Z decays, Eur. Phys. J. C18(2000) 1, arXiv:hep-ex/0008013 [hep-ex]

    2000 arXiv

  92. [101]

    DELPHI Collaboration, Study of b-quark mass effects in multijet topologies with the DELPHI detector at LEP, Eur. Phys. J. C55(2008) 525, arXiv:0804.3883 [hep-ex]

    2008 arXiv

  93. [102]

    OPAL Collaboration,Determination of the b quark mass at the Z mass scale, Eur. Phys. J. C21(2001) 411, arXiv:hep-ex/0105046 [hep-ex]

    2001 arXiv

  94. [103]

    Brandenburg, P

    A. Brandenburg, P. N. Burrows, D. Muller, N. Oishi and P. Uwer, Measurement of the running b quark mass using e+ e-→b anti-b g events, Phys. Lett. B468(1999) 168, arXiv:hep-ph/9905495 [hep-ph]

    1999 arXiv

  95. [104]

    Zyla et al.,Review of Particle Physics, Prog

    Particle Data Group, P. Zyla et al.,Review of Particle Physics, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys.2020(2020) 083C01

    2020

  96. [105]

    Caola and K

    F. Caola and K. Melnikov,Constraining the Higgs boson width with ZZ production at the LHC, Phys. Rev. D88(2013) 054024, arXiv:1307.4935 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  97. [106]

    J. M. Campbell, R. K. Ellis and C. Williams, Bounding the Higgs Width at the LHC Using Full Analytic Results for𝑔𝑔→𝑒−𝑒+𝜇−𝜇+, JHEP04(2014) 060, arXiv:1311.3589 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  98. [107]

    Degrassi, P

    G. Degrassi, P. P. Giardino, F. Maltoni and D. Pagani, Probing the Higgs self coupling via single Higgs production at the LHC, JHEP12(2016) 080, arXiv:1607.04251 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  99. [108]

    Maltoni, D

    F. Maltoni, D. Pagani, A. Shivaji and X. Zhao, Trilinear Higgs coupling determination via single-Higgs differential measurements at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C77(2017) 887, arXiv:1709.08649 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  100. [109]

    C. Pandini et al., LHC Higgs Working Group, Public Note: Modelling of the single-Higgs simplified template cross-sections (STXS 1.2) for the determination of the Higgs boson trilinear self-coupling, (2022), url:http://cds.cern.ch/record/2803606

    2022

  101. [110]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Combination of Searches for Higgs Boson Pair Production in pp Collisions at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS Detector, Phys. Rev. Lett.133(2024) 101801, arXiv:2406.09971 [hep-ex]

    2024 arXiv

  102. [111]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Evaluation of theoretical uncertainties for simplified template cross section measurements of𝑉-associated production of the Higgs boson, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2018-035, 2018, url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/2649241

    2018

  103. [112]

    Grzadkowski, M

    B. Grzadkowski, M. Iskrzyński, M. Misiak and J. Rosiek, Dimension-Six Terms in the Standard Model Lagrangian, JHEP10(2010) 085, arXiv:1008.4884 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  104. [113]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Interpretations of the ATLAS measurements of Higgs boson production and decay rates and differential cross-sections in𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV, JHEP11(2024) 097, arXiv:2402.05742 [hep-ex]

    2024 arXiv

  105. [114]

    Degrande et al.,Standard Model Effective Theory at Next-to-Leading-Order in QCD, url:http://feynrules.irmp.ucl.ac.be/wiki/SMEFTatNLO

    C. Degrande et al.,Standard Model Effective Theory at Next-to-Leading-Order in QCD, url:http://feynrules.irmp.ucl.ac.be/wiki/SMEFTatNLO. 99

  106. [115]

    Brivio, Y

    I. Brivio, Y. Jiang and M. Trott,The SMEFTsim package, theory and tools, JHEP12(2017) 070, arXiv:1709.06492 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  107. [116]

    J. Alwall et al.,The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations, JHEP07(2014) 079, arXiv:1405.0301 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  108. [117]

    Sjöstrand, S

    T. Sjöstrand, S. Mrenna and P. Skands,A brief introduction to PYTHIA 8.1, Comput. Phys. Commun.178(2008) 852, arXiv:0710.3820 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  109. [118]

    ATLAS Collaboration,ATLAS Pythia 8 tunes to7TeV data, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2014-021, 2014, url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/1966419

    2014

  110. [119]

    Dedes, M

    A. Dedes, M. Paraskevas, J. Rosiek, K. Suxho and L. Trifyllis, The decayℎ→𝛾𝛾in the Standard-Model Effective Field Theory, JHEP08(2018) 103, arXiv:1805.00302 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  111. [120]

    Dedes, K

    A. Dedes, K. Suxho and L. Trifyllis, The decayℎ→𝑍𝛾in the Standard-Model Effective Field Theory, JHEP06(2019) 115, arXiv:1903.12046 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  112. [121]

    Demokritos

    ATLAS Collaboration,ATLAS Computing Acknowledgements, ATL-SOFT-PUB-2026-001, 2026, url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/2952666. 100 The ATLAS Collaboration G. Aad 102, E. Aakvaag 17, B. Abbott 121, S. Abdelhameed 83b, K. Abeling 54, N.J. Abicht 48, S.H. Abidi 30, M. Aboelela 44, A....

    2026

Pith tools

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