Independent simulation of EFT terms don't match the cross sections of full process
Dear authors,
I have generated same-sign WW process as following:
generate p p > l+ l+ vl vl j j QCD=0 SMHLOOP=0 @1
add process p p > l- l- vl~ vl~ j j QCD=0 SMHLOOP=0 @2
The model I used is:
SMEFTsim_
https:/
When I tested operators whose Wilson coefficients are cqq3, cqq31, cqq1, cqq11. Those operators are all four-quark operators.
I generated processes with only one of those coefficients are 1. I used following settings:
1. Independent simulation:
simulate interference terms and quadratic terms by adding "NP=1 NP^2==1", "NP=1 NP^2==2"seperately. Then the total cross sections are xs_sm+xs_
2. Full process:
Just set "NP=1", the cross sections are xs_full
Then I got the cross sections of all the processes:
a. For cqq3
xs_
xs_full: 0.1898 pb
b. For cqq31
xs_
xs_full: 0.2017 pb
c. For cqq1
xs_
xs_full: 0.08374 pb
d. For cqq11
xs_
xs_full: 0.08261 pb
So I found the total cross sections are all small than full processes, and those operators' quadratic term cross sections are large than SM cross sections.
Also the variables distributions are different. For example, for cqq3, you can find the mjj distributions here: http://
But except those four operators, other operators have good agreement.
Do you know why such four-quark operators are not consistent? And what kind of settings we should trust, independent simulation or full process.
Thanks,
Jie
Question information
- Language:
- English Edit question
- Status:
- Answered
- Assignee:
- No assignee Edit question
- Last query:
- Last reply:
Can you help with this problem?
Provide an answer of your own, or ask xiao jie for more information if necessary.