Charged Higgs phenomenology in the flipped two-Higgs-doublet model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the phenomenology of the charged Higgs boson in the flipped two-Higgs-doublet model, in which one doublet gives mass to up-type quarks and charged leptons, and the other gives mass to down-type quarks. We present the charged Higgs branching ratios and summarize the indirect constraints. We extrapolate existing LEP searches for ${H}^{+}{H}^{\ensuremath{-}}$ and Tevatron searches for $t\overline{t}$ with $t\ensuremath{\rightarrow}{H}^{+}b$ into the flipped model and extract constraints on ${M}_{{H}^{+}}$ and the parameter $\mathrm{tan}\ensuremath{\beta}$. We finish by reviewing existing LHC charged Higgs searches and suggest that the LHC reach in this model could be extended for charged Higgs masses below the $tb$ threshold by considering $t\overline{t}$ with $t\ensuremath{\rightarrow}{H}^{+}b$ and ${H}^{+}\ensuremath{\rightarrow}q{\overline{q}}^{\ensuremath{'}}$, as has been used in Tevatron searches.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".