Two-loop SUSY corrections to the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon

By Sven Heinemeyer, D. Stöckinger, Georg Weiglein. 2003

320 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Abstract We calculate supersymmetric two-loop corrections to the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon, consisting of diagrams with a closed scalar fermion or fermion loop and gauge and/or Higgs boson exchange. We discuss the numerical impact of each subclass of diagrams and determine the leading contributions. We analyze in detail constraints from experimental information on the Higgs boson mass, Δ ρ , and the branching ratios of B → X s γ and B s → μ + μ − . If these constraints are taken into account, the largest possible effect of our two-loop corrections is reduced from more than 3 σ (in terms of the current experimental error) to ∼0.5 σ , such that the influence on the total supersymmetric prediction is smaller than previously estimated. However, exceptions arise in rather extreme parameter scenarios with a strong non-universality between the soft breaking parameters in the stop and sbottom sectors.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Nuclear and High Energy Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/36239949369f17b074841fc79ccbef7b3f243789

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

In Electrical and Electronic Engineering

In Nuclear and High Energy Physics

Citations in the corpus

Fitting the Phenomenological MSSM (2009, unknown): “oducts [106, 24]. The – 21 – Observable Constraint Th. Source Ex. Source mW [GeV] 80.399± 0.027 [63] [95] ΓZ [GeV] 2.4952± 0.0025 [62] [65] sin2 θlep eff 0.2324± 0.0012 [63] [65] δaµ (30.2±9.0)× 1010 [96, 97, 98, 99] [66, 67, 69] R0 l 20.767± 0.025 [62] [65] R0 b 0.21629± 0.00066 [62] [65] R0 c 0.17”
A new approach to evaluate the leading hadronic corrections to the muon g-2 (2015, background): “The leading-order hadronic contribution to the muon g-2 is given by the well-known formula [4, 15]”
The Muon Magnetic Moment and Supersymmetry (2006, background): “Figure 11 (a), taken from [48], shows these largest possible values depending on which experimental constraints are taken into account.”
A Call for New Physics : The Muon Anomalous Magnetic Moment and Lepton Flavor Violation (2016, unknown): “001 13 +(16) −(12) CERN (1961) [86, 87] μ 0.”
ρ0–γ mixing in the neutral channel pion form factor $F^{(e)}_{\pi}(s)$ and its role in comparing e+e− with τ spectral functions (2011, background): “in terms of the standard scalar one-loop integrals A0(m) and B0(m,m; s) [23].”
The bases of effective field theories (2013, background): “One familiar application is to low-energy consequences of the SM, in which one expands in inverse powers of the electroweak scale v ≈ 250 GeV to determine weak interaction effects on quantities such as gμ − 2, the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon [11], weak decay amplitudes such as beta-decay o”
Measurement of the Positive Muon Anomalous Magnetic Moment to 0.46 ppm. (2021, background): “1, include electromagnetic, strong, and weak interactions that arise from virtual effects involving photons, leptons, hadrons, and the W , Z, and Higgs bosons [11].”
Quest for precision in hadronic cross sections at low energy: Monte Carlo tools vs. experimental data (2009, methodology): “4]. This value is in good agreement with those from SND [298] and CMD-2 [392], aππ µ = (361.0±5.1stat+syst)· 10−10 and aππ µ = (361.5±3.4stat+syst)·10−10, respectively, leading to an evaluation of aµ [380,381,382,26,383,37] which diﬀers by about three standard deviations from the BNL experiment [31]”
Measuring the leading hadronic contribution to the muon g-2 via $$\mu e$$μe scattering (2016, methodology): “With the help of dispersion relations and the optical theorem, the LO hadronic contribution to the muon g-2 is given by the well-known formula [3, 16]”
Short-distance constraints for the HLbL contribution to the muon anomalous magnetic moment (2019, unknown): “Reviews of the theory are [5, 6].”