Type-I 2HDM under the Higgs and electroweak precision measurements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We explore the extent to which future precision measurements of the Standard Model (SM) observables at the proposed Z-factories and Higgs factories may have impacts on new physics beyond the Standard Model, as illustrated by studying the Type-I Two-Higgs-doublet model (Type-I 2HDM). We include the contributions from the heavy Higgs bosons at the tree-level and at the one-loop level in a full model-parameter space. While only small tan β region is strongly constrained at tree level, the large tan β region gets constrained at loop level due to tan β enhanced tri-Higgs couplings. We perform a multiple variable χ2 fit with non-alignment and non-degenerate masses. We find that the allowed parameter ranges could be tightly constrained by the future Higgs precision measurements, especially for small and large values of tan β. Indirect limits on the masses of heavy Higgs bosons can be obtained, which can be complementary to the direct searches of the heavy Higgs bosons at hadron colliders. We also find that the expected accuracies at the Z-pole and at a Higgs factory are quite complementary in constraining mass splittings of heavy Higgs bosons. The typical results are | cos(β − α)| < 0.05, |∆mΦ| < 200 GeV, and tan β ≳ 0.3. The reaches from CEPC, Fcc-ee and ILC are also compared, for both Higgs and Z-pole precision measurements. Comparing to the Type-II 2HDM, the 95% C.L. allowed range of cos(β − α) is larger, especially for large values of tan β.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".