Paper detail

Implication of the $W$ boson mass anomaly at CDF II in the Higgs triplet model with a mass difference

A new report for the measurement of the W boson mass has been provided by the CDF II experiment. The measured value of the W boson mass is given to be $m_W^{\text{CDF II}} = 80.4335 \pm 0.0094$ GeV which shows $7σ$ deviation from the standard model prediction, while the other groups of high energy experiments, e.g., ATLAS and D0 II, show consistent results with the latter. Assuming that the measurement at CDF II is correct, we discuss the possibility to explain the anomaly in the Higgs triplet model. We find that the anomaly can be explained under the constraints from the electroweak rho parameter, the effective weak mixing angle, the partial width of the leptonic $Z$ decay and current direct searches at LHC when non-zero mass differences among the triplet-like Higgs bosons and the vacuum expectation value of the triplet Higgs field are taken to be ${\cal O}(100)$ GeV and ${\cal O}(1)$ GeV, respectively.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

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 map preview

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.