Can the two-Higgs-doublet model survive the constraint from the muon anomalous magnetic moment, as suggested?

Physical Review D

Volumn 68, Issue 5, 2003, Pages

  Cheung, Kingman ^a   Kong, Otto C W ^b  

^a NATIONAL CENTER FOR THEORETICAL SCIENCES   (Taiwan)

^b NATIONAL CENTRAL UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; ATOMIC PARTICLE; MAGNETISM; MODEL; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; PHYSICS;

EID: 0142244631     PISSN: 05562821     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.68.053003     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. H.N. Brown et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 2227 (2001);
2. G.W. Bennett et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. ibid. 89, 101804 (2002);
3. G.W. Bennett et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. ibid. 89, 129903 E (2002).
4. M. Davier, S. Eidelman, A. Hocker, and Z. Zhang, Eur. Phys. J. C 27, 497 (2003);
5. E. de Rafael, hep-ph/0208251 ;
6. K. Hagiwara, A.D. Martin, D. Nomura, and T. Teubner, Phys. Lett. B 557, 69 (2003).
7. The exact numbers in Eq. (15) are taken from version 1 of Davier et al. In their subsequent versions, they changed it to 33.7±11.2, which, however, has negligible effects on the results presented in this work.
8. J. Gunion et al., The Higgs Hunter's Guide (Addison-Wesley, New York, 1990).
9. S. Glashow and S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. D 15, 1958 (1977).
10. M. Ciuchini, G. Degrassi, P. Gambino, and G.F. Giudice, Nucl. Phys. B527, 21 (1998).
11. K. Chetyrkin, M. Misiak, and M. Münz, Phys. Lett. B 400, 206 (1997);
12. K. Chetyrkin, M. Misiak, and M. Münz, Phys. Lett. B 425, 414 E (1998);
13. A. Kagan and M. Neubert, Eur. Phys. J. C 7, 5 (1999)
14. . [7] P. Gambino and M. Misiak, Nucl. Phys. B611, 338 (2001).
15. D. Chang, W. Chang, C. Chou, and W. Keung, Phys. Rev. D 63, 091301 R (2001).
16. K. Cheung, C. Chou, and O.C.W. Kong, Phys. Rev. D 64, 111301 R (2001).
17. OPAL Collaboration, P. Ferrari et al., Physics Note No. PN475, 2001.
18. DELPHI Collaboration, DELPHI Report No. 2002-037-CONF-571.
19. P. Chankowski, M. Krawczyk, and J. Zochowski, Eur. Phys. J. C 11, 661 (1999).
20. P. Chankowski et al., Phys. Lett. B 496, 195 (2000).
21. M. Krawczyk, Acta Phys. Pol. B 33, 2621 (2002).
22. G. Buchalla, A. Buras, and M. Lautenbacher, Rev. Mod. Phys. 68, 1125 (1996);
23. A.J. Buras, M. Misiak, M. Münz, and S. Pokorski, Nucl. Phys. B424, 374 (1994).
24. B. Grinstein, R. Springer, and M. Wise, Nucl. Phys. B339, 269 (1990).
25. P. Gambino and U. Haisch, J. High Energy Phys. 10, 020 (2001).
26. A. Buras, A. Czarnecki, M. Misiak, and J. Urban, Nucl. Phys. B631, 219 (2002).
27. T. Inami and C.S. Lim, Prog. Theor. Phys. 65, 297 (1981);
28. T. Inami and C.S. Lim, Prog. Theor. Phys. 65, 1772 E (1981).
29. A. Stocchi, Plenary talk ICHEP2002, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2002;
30. A.M. Eisner, talk at the XXXVIII Rencontres de Moriond, Electroweak Interaction and Unified Theories, 2003.
31. M. Neubert, Plenary talk at SUSY02, DESY, Hamburg, Germany, 2002.
32. L.F. Abbott, P. Sikivie, and M. B. Wise, Phys. Rev. D 21, 1393 (1980);
33. G.G. Athanasiu, P.J. Franzini, F.J. Oilman, S.L. Glashow, and E.E. Jenkins, Phys. Lett. B 196, 233 (1987);
34. Phys. Rev. D 32, 3010 (1985);
35. C.Q. Geng and J.N. Ng, Phys. Rev. D ibid. 38, 2857 (1988).
36. Particle Data Group, K. Hagiwara et al., Phys. Rev. D 66, 010001 (2002).
37. S. Barr and A. Zee, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 21 (1990);
38. see also J. Bjorken and S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. ibid. 38, 622 (1977).
39. The available literature on the class of contributions is mainly on the closely related electric dipole moment calculations. A partial list is given by D. Chang, W.-Y. Keung, and T.C. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D 43, R14 (1991);
40. R.G. Leigh, S. Paban, and R.-M. Xu, Nucl. Phys. B352, 45 (1991);
41. C. Kao and R.-M. Xu, Phys. Lett. B 296, 435 (1992);
42. D. Chang, W.S. Hou, and W.-Y. Keung, Phys. Rev. D 48, 217 (1993).
43. There are complicated gauge dependence notions when some of the class of diagrams are calculated separately. The photon Barr-Zee diagrams with fermions running in the second loop form a gauge invariant set on their own. We thank Wai-Yee Keung for comments on the issue.
44. See, for example, A. Czarnecki and W.J. Marciano, Phys. Rev. D 64, 013014 (2001).
45. CDF and DO Collaborations, M. Roco, in Proceedings ofICHEP 2000, Osaka, Japan, 2000, Report No. FERMILAB-CONF-00-203-E.
46. LEP Collaboration Electroweak Working Group, D. Abbaneo et al. Report No. LEPEWWG/2002-01, hep-ex/0212036.
47. A. Denner et al., Z. Phys. C 51, 695 (1991).
48. Further update or improved results may soon be available; Ferrari (private communication).
49. P. Ferrari (private communication).
50. J. Erler and P. Langacker, in Particle Data Group [23].