Debugging new model from feynrules

Asked by Giorgio Busoni

I implemented a Toy model made of one broken U(1) gauge group with vector boson V, with 1 fermion F and 1 complex scalar S that acts as higgs + goldstone to give mass to the U(1). Making the usual checks with feynrules gives no error (hermicity, mass diagonalization).
But if I import the model in madgraph some cheks fail

In particolar:

All All > All All is ok

All > All All gives error and don't finish the check:
RAMBOError : Not enough energy in this case
Please report this bug on https://bugs.launchpad.net/madgraph5
More information is found in 'MG5_debug'.
Please attach this file to your report.

All All > All can finish the check but gives many failures for the Lorentz invariance test. More specifically, I checked that for every selection (X,Y,Z) such that X Y > Z gives failure, X > Y Z gives error

Moreover, in the final summary of the check, the MIN elements of the failed processes have a ratio of
6 if the initial state contains a spin 1/2 fermion and a spin1 particle
9 if the initial state contains 2 spin 1 particles
3 if the initial stats contains 1 spin 0 particle and 1 spin 1 particle
2 if the initial state contains 1 spin 0 particle and 1 spin 1/2 particle

And that the processes containing only scalars are all passing the test.

From this, looks like a spin average problem...plus the fact that it does not discard automatically processes like V > V S that cannot happen as both S and V are massive

Question information

Language:
English Edit question
Status:
Solved
For:
MadGraph5_aMC@NLO Edit question
Assignee:
No assignee Edit question
Solved by:
Giorgio Busoni
Solved:
Last query:
Last reply:
Revision history for this message
Olivier Mattelaer (olivier-mattelaer) said :
#1

Hi,

Concerning the RAMBOERROR:
This is just a phase-space problem since you scan for all particles in a 1 > 2 processes many of them will have
M_1 > M_2 + M_3 which means that the process is invalid and then the code has some problem with finding a valid PS point.

> All All > All can finish the check but gives many failures for the Lorentz invariance test.

It can not be a problem of spin average. Indeed to be a problem of spin-average you would need to have it done correctly for (at least) one of the computation and wrong for (at least) one of the computation. Since this is the same code evaluating the matrix element, this can not be the case.

This kind of lorentz invariance failing are typically related to a gauge invariance problem in the model.

Cheers,

Olivier

Revision history for this message
Giorgio Busoni (giorgiobusoni) said :
#2

I was trying this also with the standard models, and I saw that also in that case is giving failures. So maybe this is normal to happen and the model might be ok....