# Changes between Version 11 and Version 12 of ThreeSiteModel

Ignore:
Timestamp:
03/03/10 22:16:05 (10 years ago)
Comment:

--

Unmodified
Removed
Modified
• ## ThreeSiteModel

 v11 === Instructions === The 3-Site Model is implemented in both Feynman and unitary gauge. A switch ' {{{FeynmanGauge}}} ' has been created. To switch between the two simply set {{{FeynmanGauge }}} True/False= inside your Mathematica notebook after loading the model but before doing any calculations with it (finding vertices for example.) {{{FeynmanGauge}}} is set to {{{False}}} by default. The 3-Site Model is implemented in both Feynman and unitary gauge. A switch ' {{{FeynmanGauge}}} ' has been created. To switch between the two simply set {{{FeynmanGauge = True/False }}} inside your Mathematica notebook after loading the model but before doing any calculations with it (finding vertices for example.) {{{FeynmanGauge}}} is set to {{{False}}} by default. === Examples === We provide a basic notebook giving examples of how to run the interfaces on this model: * [attachment:Example-v1.0.nb.tgz Example-v1.0.nb.tgz] * [/raw-attachment/wiki/ThreeSiteModel/Example-v1.0.nb.tar.gz Example-v1.0.nb.tar.gz] === Interfaces === === Validation === Over 200 2→2 processes were run in a variety of ways. First, each process was compared between the original !LanHEP implementation and the current !FeynRules implementation. Second, each process was run across multiple monte-carlos including !CalcHEP, !CompHEP, !MadGraph and Sherpa. Third, each process was run in two different gauges, namely Feynman gauge (in !CalcHEP and !CompHEP) and in unitary gauge (in !CalcHEP, !MadGraph and Sherpa). The cross section was computed for each process and compared to one another. Agreement to better than 1% was found for all processes. The parameters for these calculations were taken as in the model files above. The energies and cuts for these calculations were: Over 200 2->2 processes were run in a variety of ways. First, each process was compared between the original !LanHEP implementation and the current !FeynRules implementation. Second, each process was run across multiple monte-carlos including !CalcHEP, !CompHEP, !MadGraph and Sherpa. Third, each process was run in two different gauges, namely Feynman gauge (in !CalcHEP and !CompHEP) and in unitary gauge (in !CalcHEP, !MadGraph and Sherpa). The cross section was computed for each process and compared to one another. Agreement to better than 1% was found for all processes. The parameters for these calculations were taken as in the model files above. The energies and cuts for these calculations were: ||'''Particles involved'''||'''sqrt(s)'''||'''p_T'''|| ||Only SM||600GeV||20GeV|| ||W',Z'||1200GeV||200GeV|| ||Heavy Fermion Partners||10TeV||2TeV|| where "Particles" refers to what particles are involved in the process. The results of these validations can be seen in the following images:
'''Particles involved''' √s
pT>
Only SM
600GeV 20GeV
W',Z'
1200GeV
200GeV
Heavy Fermion Partners 10TeV
2TeV
[attachment:CS-strong.jpg Strong Processes]
[attachment:CS-ffAW.jpg ff→AW Processes]
where "Particles" refers to what particles are involved in the process. The results of these validations can be seen in the following images: {{{ #!html
[attachment:CS-strong.jpg Strong Processes]
[attachment:CS-ffAW.jpg ff→AW Processes]
[attachment:CS-llll.jpg ll→ll Processes] [attachment:CS-VVVV-neutral.jpg Neutral VV→VV Processes]
}}} Each of these processes was also run at a single phase space point of the squared amplitude. In this test, only !CalcHEP in Feynman and unitary gauge and !MadGraph were used. It is planned to include Sherpa at a later date. The energies were chosen as in the cross section comparison. The angle was chosen to be 73.3 degrees. Agreement to better than 0.1% was found in all cases. Here are images of the results: Each of these processes was also run at a single phase space point of the squared amplitude. In this test, only !CalcHEP in Feynman and unitary gauge and !MadGraph were used. It is planned to include Sherpa at a later date. The energies were chosen as in the cross section comparison. The angle was chosen to be 73.3 degrees. Agreement to better than 0.1% was found in all cases. Here are images of the results: {{{ #!html
[attachment:PS-strong.jpg Strong Processes]
[attachment:PS-ffAW.jpg ff→AW Processes]
}}} These tests were performed with the following versions of the software:
'''Software''' '''Version'''
!Mathematica7.0.0
!FeynRules
1.4.0
!CalcHEP
2.5.3
!CompHEP4.4.104
!Sherpa
Private development version
These tests were performed with the following versions of the software: {{{ #!html
'''Software''' '''Version'''
!Mathematica7.0.0
!FeynRules
1.4.0
!CalcHEP
2.5.3
!CompHEP4.4.104