Energy limits on SM(+hgg+h4G) model

As a follow up question I was wondering, due to the fact that the cross sections appear parallel as a function of sqrt(s), if the running of the coupling constants (alpha_em, weak and alpha_s) is implemented by default in calchep 3.7, or if one needs to select that somehow in the code. Thanks again.

Thank you for your mail.

Indeed   dimension of  hGG and hAA  operators is larger than 4 and they
have to lead to increasing cross section.

But for case of s-channel  Higgs diagram I expected a   failing cross
section ifam one substitute   scale of reaction sqrt(s) instead of
Higgs  mass  in

     lAAHiggs(Mh,"h")

I  use     lAAHiggs(Q,"h")  and set Q =2*Pcm for testing.

I am surprised  that this trick does not work. For instance, W+,W- > A,
A  increases nevertheless. I'll think what is a reason and write you.
For the current moment no ideas.

Best

    Alexander Pukhov

On 04/27/2018 07:16 PM, chris wrote:
> New question #668324 on CalcHEP:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/calchep/+question/668324
>
> Hello,
>
> I am currently studying the asymptotic behavior of various 2 particle interactions, and I am noticing some strange behavior in interactions involving the effective coupling of the higgs to massless particle in the SM(+hgg+h4G) model. At around a center of mass energy of 10^3 I've found that boson scattering processes with diagrams involving the h/GG or h/AA coupling start rising proportionally to s. I am assuming that this is because the effective field theory fails to be accurate at higher energies, and I was wondering if you had more specific values for the energies at which this model is accurate. I've linked to a plot bellow that shows the exact results I'm observing, all processes where run with a cutoff of 2 GeV on the transverse momentum of photons and gluons in calchep 3.7 using the SM(+hgg+h4G) model as stated above.
>
> plot: https://postimg.cc/image/rrosx91jx/
>
> Thank you,
>
> Chris
>

Just to be clear, are you saying the increasing results from the hGG and hAA operators are to be trusted? If so up to which do you believe them to be reliable.

Thank you,

Chris

*up to which energy

my apologies

This question was expired because it remained in the 'Open' state without activity for the last 15 days.

These operators can be trusted if the energy scale of the process is not much higher than the Higgs boson mass and/or top quark mass )in the loop).