MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134494815 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.104.055033

Muon <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:mo>−</mml:mo><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math> in two-Higgs-doublet models with vectorlike leptons

2021· article· lv· W3134494815 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Radovan Dermíšek, Keith Hermanek, Navin McGinnis

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2021
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersArgonne National LaboratoryNational Research Council CanadaTRIUMFU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsMuonPhysicsParticle physicsLeptonHiggs bosonAnomalous magnetic dipole momentStandard Model (mathematical formulation)Physics beyond the Standard ModelSupersymmetryAnomaly (physics)Minimal Supersymmetric Standard ModelFermionBosonNuclear physicsElectronQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We calculate contributions to the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon from heavy neutral and charged Higgs bosons and new leptons in two-Higgs-doublet models extended by vectorlike leptons. We present detailed predictions of two models with type-II couplings to standard model fermions, motivated by a ${Z}_{2}$ symmetry and supersymmetry. In addition, we compare the results with the standard model extended by vectorlike leptons. We find that the model motivated by a ${Z}_{2}$ symmetry can generate much larger contributions to the magnetic moment compared to the standard model, even by two orders of magnitude due to ${\mathrm{tan}}^{2}\ensuremath{\beta}$ enhancement, while satisfying current constraints. As a consequence, the standard model explanation of the anomaly requires much larger corrections to muon couplings making this model easier to probe at future precision machines. Additionally, we find that the model with couplings motivated by supersymmetry typically leads to much smaller contributions to the magnetic moment as a result of cancellations. We also identify interesting scenarios where contributions from the charged Higgs boson can fully explain the anomaly.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.301 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations46
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.Same topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesFrench-language works237,207