new model implementation fails to be processed to spheno

[rruiz]

Hi,


I can confirm it, it's a mathematica problem since I have checked other already implemented models and all
give the same problem.


Rbt

[rruiz]

Hi,


I have tried with your proposal and the problems in the two-loop calculations have gone

So now there a few remaining ones that I don't know I should worry about:

1. Vertex::ChargeViolating: Non-zero result for {PsiC,PsiC,VP} vertex which violates charge. (This might just be a problem with simplifying the vertex, but could also point towards a mistake in the implementation.)

2 Transpose::nmtx: The first two levels of {} cannot be transposed in "Writing SPheno two loop diagrammatic Higgs mass"

3. In Writing Routines for 1-Loop Decays, getGBCoup1 cplsscVWpVWp!: Part::partw: Part 1 of {} does not exist. >>


Rbt

[FStaub]

1. Vertex::ChargeViolating: Non-zero result for {PsiC,PsiC,VP} vertex which violates charge. (This might just be a problem with simplifying the vertex, but could also point towards a mistake in the implementation.)

You should check if the vertex looks okay or not (Vertex[{PsiC,PsiC,VP}]) in SARAH

2 Transpose::nmtx: The first two levels of {} cannot be transposed in "Writing SPheno two loop diagrammatic Higgs mass"

Seems still to be a problem with your Mathematica version. I tend to say: if SPheno compiles,this doesn't cause trouble

3. In Writing Routines for 1-Loop Decays, getGBCoup1 cplsscVWpVWp!: Part::partw: Part 1 of {} does not exist. >>

Do you need the loop decays at all? In that case, this problem needs to be resolved. If not, use

Code: Select all

MakeSPheno[IncludeLoopDecays->False]

Cheers,
Florian

[rruiz]

Hi Florian,


I have been investigating the charge violation issue and I have two questions:

1. I have defined:

FermionFields[[10]] = {psiL, 1, {psiLn,psiLc}, -1/2, 2, 1,-3/2};
FermionFields[[11]] = {psiR, 1, {conj[psiRc],conj[psiRn]}, 1/2, 2, 1,-3/2};

ScalarFields[[2]] = {SB, 1, SB, 0, 1, 1, -3};

And then a term in the Lagrangian like this:

lamChi psiR.psL.S

This term violates electrical charge if there is not SU(2) index contraction
with the anti-symmetric tensor.

Then there are SM Yukawa terms like this:

Ye conj[H].e.l

which don't use any SU(2) contraction. It means that the term above is not allowed !!


2. Digging out about how SARAH checks the charge violation I have seen that
the Dirac spinor "pc" defined as

{psiLc,psiRc,etaL,etaR},{pc,RPC}

never is hermitian conjugated (ie in the vertices there is not bar(pc) term).

This leads to the charge violation. Maybe there is something SARAH does not
like in terms of names for the field ?


Best,
Rbt

[FStaub]

Hi,

yes, you need to be careful with the SU(2) contractions. SARAH contracts 2,2 with epsilon and -2,2 with Delta.
You can check the contraction via

Code: Select all

SA`LagrangianContractions

Scrolling through your file, I guess you need also be careful with thsi definition:

Code: Select all

 {{psiLc,psiRc,etaL,etaR},{pc,RPC}}

which I think should read

Code: Select all

 {{psiLc,conj[psiRc],etaL,conj[etaR]},{pc,RPC}}

You can check that by looking at the mass matrix via

Code: Select all

MassMatrix[pc]

2) Concerning your second question: pc is a Weyl spinor, therefore only conj[pc] can show up. The Dirac Spinor PsiC is defined as Majorana state, therefore no bar(PsiC) appears. It's the same as in SUSY models with the neutralino.

Cheers,
Florian

[rruiz]

Hi,


Ok, thanks for the advise.

In any case the changes don't solve the issue with charge violation.
I have checked that when I apply AntiField to the Psi field it does not
change. That is the problem since I have vertex like:

Psi Psi Ah or Psi Psi VZ.

One of the Psi shall be bar(Psi)

I really don't know why the operator AntiField does not work
with Psi. Any idea ?


Best,
Rbt

[FStaub]

As I said, that field is a majorana state ( at least you defined the Dirac spinor in that way), ie bar(Psi)=Psi.

I can try to take a closer look at your model next week when I'm back at the institute.

Cheers
Florian

[rruiz]

Hi Florian,


I have realized that the implementation of the Chi and Psi fields is not correct since
I want Dirac fields not Majorana and don't know how to do it. I have tried several
things but no one works !!!


For Psi I have tried in the Mattersector:

{{{psiLc,etaL}, {psiRc,etaR}}, {{Lm,RCm}, {Lp,RCp}}}

Psi ->{ Lm, conj[Lp]}

But the mass matrix is null.

For Chi,

{{chiL,conj[chiR],psiLn,conj[psiRn]}, {L0,RDM}},
{{chiR,conj[chiL],psiRn,conj[psiLn]}, {L0c,RDM}},

Chi ->{ L0, conj[L0c]}


SARAH complains.



Best,
Rbt

[FStaub]

Hi,

here is a modified version of your model.

Cheers,
Florian

[rruiz]

Hi Florian,


Many thanks for this !!

I have installed mathematica 11 and all the issues I had before have gone, including
the problems with the 1-loop decays.

Now I'm trying to compile the resulting spheno but I get some problems:

TwoLoopMasses/2LPole_Anomalyfree.f90(184): error #6404: This name does not have a type, and must have an explicit type. [HIGGSMIXINGMATRIX]
tad1LG=matmul(temptad*oo16Pi2,HiggsMixingMatrix)

Do you have any clue why SARAH does not define it ?

Best,
Rbt