首页> 外文期刊>Physics letters >Erratum to “The Tevatron Higgs exclusion limits and theoretical uncertainties: A critical appraisal” [Phys. Lett. B 699 (2011) 368]
【24h】

Erratum to “The Tevatron Higgs exclusion limits and theoretical uncertainties: A critical appraisal” [Phys. Lett. B 699 (2011) 368]

机译:对“ Tevatron Higgs排除极限和理论不确定性:严格评估”的勘误。来吧B 699(2011)368]

获取原文
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

After our paper [1] had appeared in Physics Letters B, we realised that an error occurred in the numerical analysis which had led to Fig. 1 for theproduction cross section when the four NNLO PDF sets are adopted. In the plot with the two HERAPDF sets, the central scales at whichhas been evaluated were not set toas it should have been, but atwhich gives the minimal cross section once the scale uncertainty is included. This explains the large difference in the cross section,1 up to 40%, between the MSTW and HERAPDF predictions. We thus present our mea culpa and produce in Fig. 1 the correct figure where all scales are consistently set to. The difference between the MSTW and HERAPDF predictions reduces now toat most, which is indeed much more reasonable. In this case, the smallest value of the cross section is given when using the ABKM set and amounts toin the considered Higgs mass range as noticed in Ref. [2] (this difference is slightly larger if the new ABM10 PDF set is used [3]). Note that the same analysis presented for the LHC in Ref. [4] is not affected by this problem.
机译:在我们的论文[1]出现在Physics Letters B中之后,我们意识到当采用四个NNLO PDF集时,数值分析中出现了错误,导致生产横截面出现图1。在具有两个HERAPDF集的绘图中,被评估的中心比例尺未设置为应有的水平,但是一旦包含比例尺不确定性,该中心比例尺将提供最小的横截面。这解释了MSTW和HERAPDF预测之间的横截面差异很大,高达40%。因此,我们介绍了测量值,并在图1中生成了正确设置所有刻度的正确图形。 MSTW和HERAPDF预测之间的差异现在最多已减小,这确实是更加合理的。在这种情况下,横截面的最小值在使用ABKM设置时给出,并且在参考文献中提到的希格斯质量范围内。 [2](如果使用新的ABM10 PDF集,则此差异会稍大[3])。请注意,参考文献中针对LHC的分析也相同。 [4]不受此问题的影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号