Changes between Version 14 and Version 15 of ThreeSiteModel
 Timestamp:
 03/03/10 22:42:50 (10 years ago)
Legend:
 Unmodified
 Added
 Removed
 Modified

ThreeSiteModel
v14 v15 13 13 === References === 14 14 * [http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?eprint=hepph/0607124 Phys.Rev.D74:075011,2006]: This is the first description of the 3Site Model. 15 * [http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?eprint=arXiv:0708.2588 Phys.Rev.D78:031701,2008] : This is a study of the LHC collider phenomenology of the 3Site Model that uses the earlier !LanHEP version that this implementation was based on.15 * [http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?eprint=arXiv:0708.2588 Phys.Rev.D78:031701,2008] : This is a study of the LHC collider phenomenology of the 3Site Model that uses the earlier LanHEP version that this implementation was based on. 16 16 * [http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?eprint=arXiv:0906.2474 arXiv:0906.2472] : This is the 2nd !FeynRules paper where this implementation was published. It contains a shortened version of the notes below. 17 17 === Model Files === … … 21 21 Details about the Minimal Higgsless Model can be found in the reference above. This implementation goes beyond that reference in two ways. It uses exact formulas for all the internal parameters and wavefunctions and the Goldstone bosons and ghosts are worked out in complete detail as is necessary for Feynman gauge. Full details about this implementation can be found in: 22 22 * [/attachment/wiki/ThreeSiteModel/3Site.pdf 3SiteNotes.pdf]: Notes giving the details of the model implementation. 23 * [/attachment/wiki/ThreeSiteModel/3SiteModel.pdf 3SiteTeX.pdf]: Automatic !LaTeX output from this model.23 * [/attachment/wiki/ThreeSiteModel/3SiteModel.pdf 3SiteTeX.pdf]: Automatic LaTeX output from this model. 24 24 25 25 === Instructions === … … 39 39 === Validation === 40 40 41 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 montecarlos 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:41 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 montecarlos 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: 42 42 '''Particles involved''''''sqrt(s)''''''p_T''' 43 43 Only SM600GeV20GeV … … 52 52 [/attachment/wiki/ThreeSiteModel/CSVVVVneutral.jpg VV>VV Processes (Neutral)] 53 53 54 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:54 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: 55 55 [/attachment/wiki/ThreeSiteModel/PSstrong.jpg Strong Processes][/attachment/wiki/ThreeSiteModel/PSffAW.jpg ff>AW Processes][/attachment/wiki/ThreeSiteModel/PSllll.jpg ll>ll Processes] 56 56 [/attachment/wiki/ThreeSiteModel/PSffAA.jpg ff>AA Processes][/attachment/wiki/ThreeSiteModel/PSffZW.jpg ff>ZW Processes][/attachment/wiki/ThreeSiteModel/PSllqq.jpg ll>qq Processes] … … 62 62 These tests were performed with the following versions of the software: 63 63  '''Software''''''Version''' 64  !Mathematica7.0.064 Mathematica7.0.0 65 65 !FeynRules1.4.0 66  !CalcHEP2.5.367  !CompHEP4.4.10466 CalcHEP2.5.3 67 CompHEP4.4.104 68 68 !MadGraph4.4.21 69  !SherpaPrivate development version69 SherpaPrivate development version 70 70