diffrent result from CalcHEP and MadGraph !!!!!!!!!!

Dear Ahmed,

Did you generate your model with FeynRules?
If so I would advise to contact Neil Christensen (a FeynRules/CalChep author)
He creates a online tool to compare automatically various generator for the same FR model.
(including MG5 and CH)

Comparing tools is not always easy, so using this tools might confirm/infirm your problem.

Cheers,

Olivier

hi olivier-mattelaer
no , i just generate it using lan hep , but both the same decleration " lanhep file and FeynRules one "
do ypu think it differ ???????????????
second question :
i generate aprocess p,p -> zprime -> 2 neutrino right -> W e
the coupling between nu-R and W O(-6), which means nutrino decay ~ O(-12) Gev .
CalcHEP unaple to pick up such avery small resonance according to that , i obligated to do the process like
cross section ( p,p-> 2 nu-R)* BR (2 nu-R -> W ,e)
isnt there any way in madgarph too calculate cross section (p,p-> 2W ,2 lepton)?????????
Cheers
Ahmed

Hi Ahmed,

>no , i just generate it using lan hep , but both the same decleration " lanhep file and FeynRules one "
>do ypu think it differ ???????????????

Could you clarify what is your question?
So is your UFO model generated by LanHep?
If yes, please contact the LanHep author. To my knowledge the UFO output of LanHep is not yet fully validated.

> isnt there any way in madgarph too calculate cross section (p,p-> 2W ,2 lepton)

Like this, I don't see any reason why MG will not be able to generate such process.

Cheers,

Olivier