Page 1 of 1
type II seesaw RGEs
Posted: 17. May 2017, 17:13
by jgeilson
Hi Florian,
I was trying to make the RGEs of the non-susy type II SeeSaw but when this three interactions
lambda1 conj[trip].trip.conj[H].H + lambda4 conj[H].conj[trip].trip.H + lambda5 conj[H].trip.conj[trip].H
are present I get this issue: RGEs::StillEntangled: Can't disentangle the contributions to the running lambda1/lambda4/lambda5. If I comment one of those interactions the RGEs output works fine.
Am I making some simple mistake?
Kind regards
Geilson
Re: type II seesaw RGEs
Posted: 18. May 2017, 09:15
by FStaub
Hi,
no, this is not necessarily a problem of your implementation. The origin of this message is explained here:
http://stauby.de/sarah_userforum/viewto ... angle#p699
I seems that I really need to think about a better approach to get the contributions to the running separately. However, I'm travelling the next two weeks, i.e. I can't say when I'll have time to work on that.
Cheers,
Florian
Re: type II seesaw RGEs
Posted: 8. Aug 2017, 20:09
by FStaub
Hi there,
first of all, sorry, it took very long time until I found some time to take a closer look into this problem. So, I'm not sure, if you already solved the problem or if you by passed it. Just in case, that you are still interested in a general solution:
As explained in
http://stauby.de/sarah_userforum/viewto ... angle#p699, the origin of this problem is that one needs to take superpositions of different field combinations to get the RGEs for a single coupling. So, I have in mind that I write some algorithm which checks for the correct superposition of fields in a smarter way than it's done so far. Right now, only a combination of two terms is checked.
However, I encounter he problem that for your couplings, no solution exist. Because the individual terms have the form
Code: Select all
a=\[Lambda]1/4+\[Lambda]5/4
b=\[Lambda]1/4+\[Lambda]4/4
c=\[Lambda]1/4+\[Lambda]4/8+\[Lambda]5/8
d=\[Lambda]4-\[Lambda]5
So, no linear combination exists which only results in a single lambda. Are you sure that your contractions are correct?
Cheers,
Florian
PS: If you are no longer interested in this issue, just let me know.