Paper detail

Bayesian Model comparison of Higgs couplings

We investigate the possibility of contributions from physics beyond the Standard Model (SM) to the Higgs couplings, in the light of the LHC data. The work is performed within an interim framework where the magnitude of the Higgs production and decay rates are rescaled though Higgs coupling scale factors. We perform Bayesian parameter inference on these scale factors, concluding that there is good compatibility with the SM. Furthermore, we carry out Bayesian model comparison on all models where any combination of scale factors can differ from their SM values and find that typically models with fewer free couplings are strongly favoured. We consider the evidence that each coupling individually equals the SM value, making the minimal assumptions on the other couplings. Finally, we make a comparison of the SM against a single "not-SM" model, and find that there is moderate to strong evidence for the SM.

preprint2015arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.