scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

David L. Rainwater

Bio: David L. Rainwater is an academic researcher from University of Rochester. The author has contributed to research in topics: Large Hadron Collider & Higgs boson. The author has an hindex of 31, co-authored 63 publications receiving 5481 citations. Previous affiliations of David L. Rainwater include University of Texas at Austin & University of Wisconsin-Madison.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: MadGraph/MadEvent Monte Carlo as mentioned in this paper is a Monte Carlo event generator for hadron collider physics that can be used to generate events at the parton, hadron and detector level from a web interface.
Abstract: We present the latest developments of the MadGraph/MadEvent Monte Carlo event generator and several applications to hadron collider physics. In the current version events at the parton, hadron and detector level can be generated directly from a web interface, for arbitrary processes in the Standard Model and in several physics scenarios beyond it (HEFT, MSSM, 2HDM). The most important additions are: a new framework for implementing user-defined new physics models; a standalone running mode for creating and testing matrix elements; generation of events corresponding to different processes, such as signal(s) and backgrounds, in the same run; two platforms for data analysis, where events are accessible at the parton, hadron and detector level; and the generation of inclusive multi-jet samples by combining parton-level events with parton showers. To illustrate the new capabilities of the package some applications to hadron collider physics are presented: 1) Higgs search in pp \to H \to W^+W^-: signal and backgrounds. 2) Higgs CP properties: pp \to H jj$in the HEFT. 3) Spin of a new resonance from lepton angular distributions. 4) Single-top and Higgs associated production in a generic 2HDM. 5) Comparison of strong SUSY pair production at the SPS points. 6) Inclusive W+jets matched samples: comparison with the Tevatron data. Comment: 38 pages, 15 figures

1,183 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Georg Weiglein1, Sami Lehti2, Geneviève Bélanger, Tao Han3, David L. Rainwater4, Massimiliano Chiorboli5, Michael Ratz, M. Schumacher6, P. Niezurawski7, Stefano Moretti8, Filip Moortgat9, S. J. Asztalos10, Rohini M. Godbole11, Abdelhak Djouadi12, G. Polesello9, Werner Porod13, Werner Porod14, A.A. Giolo-Nicollerat15, Alessia Tricomi5, J.L. Hewett16, M. Szleper17, L. Zivkovic18, Stephen Godfrey19, Maria Krawczyk7, Klaus Desch20, Alexander Sherstnev21, Dimitri Bourilkov22, A. G. Akeroyd, Dirk Zerwas, M. Muhlleitner23, T. Binoth24, Maria Spiropulu9, Alexander Nikitenko25, A. Krokhotine, V. Bunichev21, Tadas Krupovnickas26, Peter Wienemann, T. Hurth16, T. Hurth9, A. De Roeck9, S. De Curtis27, Ritva Kinnunen2, D. Grellscheid28, U. Baur29, J. Kalinowski7, Gudrid Moortgat-Pick1, Gudrid Moortgat-Pick9, H. U. Martyn30, Alexander Pukhov21, C. Hugonie14, U. Ellwanger, Daniel Tovey31, Aleksander Filip Zarnecki7, Thomas G. Rizzo16, S. Slabospitsky, Jonathan L. Feng32, Remi Lafaye33, Sally Dawson34, Diaz23, Philip Bechtle20, I.F. Ginzburg, Hooman Davoudiasl, Andreas Redelbach24, J. Jiang35, W. J. Stirling1, Reinhold Rückl24, Per Osland36, S. Weinzierl37, Fernando Quevedo38, Laura Reina26, Timothy Barklow16, H. J. Schreiber, Andre Sopczak39, Wilfried Buchmuller, Howard E. Haber40, H. Pas24, E. Lytken41, Xerxes Tata, Howard Baer26, Tsutomu T. Yanagida42, Sabine Kraml43, Sabine Kraml9, Mayda Velasco17, Francois Richard, E. K. U. Gross6, A.F. Osorio44, J. Guasch23, Fawzi Boudjema, Stewart Boogert45, Sven Heinemeyer9, Sabine Riemann, D. Asner18, Daniele Dominici27, Victoria Jane Martin46, J.F. Gunion47, Marco Battaglia48, Michael Spira23, Doreen Wackeroth29, David J. Miller46, David J. Miller49, Joan Sola50, J. Gronberg10, Zack Sullivan, A. Juste, Lynne H. Orr4, Wolfgang Hollik51, Heather E. Logan3, Benjamin C. Allanach38, Junji Hisano42, Carlos E. M. Wagner35, Carlos E. M. Wagner52, Frank F. Deppisch24, Tilman Plehn9, F. Gianotti9, Gianluca Cerminara53, G.A. Blair54, Wolfgang Kilian, Michael Dittmar15, E. E. Boos21, Kiyotomo Kawagoe55, Alexander Belyaev26, Koichi Hamaguchi, Børge Kile Gjelsten56, Tim M. P. Tait, Klaus Mönig, Edmond L. Berger35, P.M. Zerwas, Mihoko M. Nojiri57 
Durham University1, University of Helsinki2, University of Wisconsin-Madison3, University of Rochester4, University of Catania5, Weizmann Institute of Science6, University of Warsaw7, University of Southampton8, CERN9, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory10, Indian Institute of Science11, University of Montpellier12, University of Zurich13, Spanish National Research Council14, ETH Zurich15, Stanford University16, Northwestern University17, University of Pittsburgh18, Carleton University19, University of Hamburg20, Moscow State University21, University of Florida22, Paul Scherrer Institute23, University of Würzburg24, Imperial College London25, Florida State University26, University of Florence27, University of Bonn28, University at Buffalo29, RWTH Aachen University30, University of Sheffield31, University of California, Irvine32, Laboratoire d'Annecy-le-Vieux de physique des particules33, Brookhaven National Laboratory34, Argonne National Laboratory35, University of Bergen36, University of Mainz37, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services38, Lancaster University39, University of California, Santa Cruz40, University of Copenhagen41, University of Tokyo42, Austrian Academy of Sciences43, University of Manchester44, University College London45, University of Edinburgh46, University of California, Davis47, University of California, Berkeley48, University of Glasgow49, University of Barcelona50, Max Planck Society51, University of Chicago52, University of Turin53, Royal Holloway, University of London54, Kobe University55, University of Oslo56, Kyoto University57
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors discuss the possible interplay between the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) and the International e(+)e(-) Linear Collider (ILC) in testing the Standard Model and in discovering and determining the origin of new physics.

422 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the LHC Higgs boson production and decay data can be used to extract gauge and fermion couplings of Higgs Bosons, and very mild theoretical assumptions, which are valid in general multi-Higgs doublet models, are sufficient to allow the extraction of absolute values for couplings rather than just ratios of the couplings.
Abstract: We show how LHC Higgs boson production and decay data can be used to extract gauge and fermion couplings of Higgs bosons. We show that very mild theoretical assumptions, which are valid in general multi-Higgs doublet models, are sufficient to allow the extraction of absolute values for the couplings rather than just ratios of the couplings. For Higgs masses below 200 GeV we find accuracies of 10−40% for the Higgs boson couplings and total width after several years of LHC running. Slightly stronger assumptions on the Higgs gauge couplings even lead to a determination of couplings to fermions at the level of 10 −20%. We also study the sensitivity to deviations from SM predictions in several supersymmetric benchmark scenarios as a subset of the analysis.

276 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors investigated Higgs boson pair production at hadron colliders for Higgs masses mH ≤ 140 GeV and rare decay of one of the two Higgs particles.
Abstract: We investigate Higgs boson pair production at hadron colliders for Higgs boson masses mH ≤ 140 GeV and rare decay of one of the two Higgs bosons. While in the Standard Model the number of events is quite low at the LHC, a first, albeit not very precise, measurement of the Higgs self-coupling is ˜

257 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Juan Antonio Aguilar-Saavedra1, Ahmed Ali, Benjamin C. Allanach2, Richard L. Arnowitt3, Howard Baer4, Jonathan Bagger5, Csaba Balázs6, Vernon Barger7, Michael Barnett8, A. Bartl9, Marco Battaglia8, Philip Bechtle10, Geneviève Bélanger, Alexander Belyaev11, Edmond L. Berger6, G.A. Blair12, Edouard Boos13, Marcela Carena14, S.Y. Choi15, Frank F. Deppisch, A. De Roeck16, Klaus Desch17, Marco Aurelio Diaz18, Abdelhak Djouadi19, Bhaskar Dutta3, S. Dutta10, S. Dutta20, Helmut Eberl21, John Ellis16, Jens Erler22, H. Fraas23, Ayres Freitas24, T. Fritzsche25, Rohini M. Godbole26, G. Gounaris27, Jaume Guasch28, John F. Gunion29, Naoyuki Haba30, Howard E. Haber31, K. Hagiwara, Liyuan Han32, Tao Han7, Hong-Jian He33, Sven Heinemeyer16, S. Hesselbach34, Keisho Hidaka35, I. Hinchliffe8, Martin Hirsch36, K. Hohenwarter-Sodek9, Wolfgang Hollik25, W. S. Hou37, Tobias Hurth16, Tobias Hurth10, I. Jack38, Yi Jiang32, D.R.T. Jones38, J. Kalinowski39, T. Kamon3, Gordon L. Kane40, Sin Kyu Kang41, Thomas Kernreiter9, Wolfgang Kilian, Choong Sun Kim42, Stephen F. King43, O. Kittel44, Michael Klasen, J. L. Kneur45, K. Kovarik21, Michael Kramer46, Sabine Kraml16, Remi Lafaye47, Paul Langacker48, Heather E. Logan49, W. G. Ma32, W. Majerotto21, H. U. Martyn46, Konstantin Matchev50, David J. Miller51, Myriam Mondragón22, Gudrid Moortgat-Pick16, Stefano Moretti43, Takehiko Mori52, Gilbert Moultaka45, Steve Muanza53, M. M. Mühlleitner, Biswarup Mukhopadhyaya54, U. Nauenberg55, Mihoko M. Nojiri56, D. Nomura11, H. Nowak, N. Okada, Keith A. Olive57, W. Oller21, Michael E. Peskin10, Tilman Plehn25, Giacomo Polesello, Werner Porod24, Werner Porod36, Fernando Quevedo2, David L. Rainwater58, Jürgen Reuter, Peter J. Richardson59, Krzysztof Rolbiecki39, Probir Roy60, Reinhold Rückl23, Heidi Rzehak61, P. Schleper62, Kim Siyeon63, Peter Skands14, P. Slavich, Dominik Stöckinger59, Paraskevas Sphicas16, Michael Spira61, Tim M. P. Tait6, Daniel Tovey64, José W. F. Valle36, Carlos E. M. Wagner6, Carlos E. M. Wagner65, Ch. Weber21, Georg Weiglein59, Peter Wienemann17, Z.-Z. Xing, Y. Yamada66, Jin Min Yang, D. Zerwas19, P.M. Zerwas, Ren-You Zhang32, X. Zhang, S.-H. Zhu67 
University of Lisbon1, University of Cambridge2, Texas A&M University3, Florida State University4, Johns Hopkins University5, Argonne National Laboratory6, University of Wisconsin-Madison7, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory8, University of Vienna9, Stanford University10, Michigan State University11, Royal Holloway, University of London12, Moscow State University13, Fermilab14, Chonbuk National University15, CERN16, University of Freiburg17, Pontifical Catholic University of Chile18, University of Paris19, University of Delhi20, Austrian Academy of Sciences21, National Autonomous University of Mexico22, University of Würzburg23, University of Zurich24, Max Planck Society25, Indian Institute of Science26, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki27, University of Barcelona28, University of California, Davis29, University of Tokushima30, University of California, Santa Cruz31, University of Science and Technology of China32, Tsinghua University33, Uppsala University34, Tokyo Gakugei University35, Spanish National Research Council36, National Taiwan University37, University of Liverpool38, University of Warsaw39, University of Michigan40, Seoul National University41, Yonsei University42, University of Southampton43, University of Bonn44, University of Montpellier45, RWTH Aachen University46, Laboratoire d'Annecy-le-Vieux de physique des particules47, University of Pennsylvania48, Carleton University49, University of Florida50, University of Glasgow51, University of Tokyo52, University of Lyon53, Harish-Chandra Research Institute54, University of Colorado Boulder55, Kyoto University56, University of Minnesota57, University of Rochester58, Durham University59, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research60, Paul Scherrer Institute61, University of Hamburg62, Chung-Ang University63, University of Sheffield64, University of Chicago65, Tohoku University66, Peking University67
TL;DR: In this article, a supersymmetry Parameter Analysis SPA (SPA) scheme is proposed based on a consistent set of conventions and input parameters, which connect parameters in different schemes and relate the Lagrangian parameters to physical observables at LHC and high energy e+e-linear collider experiments.
Abstract: High-precision analyses of supersymmetry parameters aim at reconstructing the fundamental supersymmetric theory and its breaking mechanism. A well defined theoretical framework is needed when higher-order corrections are included. We propose such a scheme, Supersymmetry Parameter Analysis SPA, based on a consistent set of conventions and input parameters. A repository for computer programs is provided which connect parameters in different schemes and relate the Lagrangian parameters to physical observables at LHC and high energy e+e- linear collider experiments, i.e., masses, mixings, decay widths and production cross sections for supersymmetric particles. In addition, programs for calculating high-precision low energy observables, the density of cold dark matter (CDM) in the universe as well as the cross sections for CDM search experiments are included. The SPA scheme still requires extended efforts on both the theoretical and experimental side before data can be evaluated in the future at the level of the desired precision. We take here an initial step of testing the SPA scheme by applying the techniques involved to a specific supersymmetry reference point.

249 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Georges Aad1, T. Abajyan2, Brad Abbott3, Jalal Abdallah4  +2964 moreInstitutions (200)
TL;DR: In this article, a search for the Standard Model Higgs boson in proton-proton collisions with the ATLAS detector at the LHC is presented, which has a significance of 5.9 standard deviations, corresponding to a background fluctuation probability of 1.7×10−9.

9,282 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, results from searches for the standard model Higgs boson in proton-proton collisions at 7 and 8 TeV in the CMS experiment at the LHC, using data samples corresponding to integrated luminosities of up to 5.8 standard deviations.

8,857 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: MadGraph5 aMC@NLO as discussed by the authors is a computer program capable of handling all these computations, including parton-level fixed order, shower-matched, merged, in a unified framework whose defining features are flexibility, high level of parallelisation and human intervention limited to input physics quantities.
Abstract: We discuss the theoretical bases that underpin the automation of the computations of tree-level and next-to-leading order cross sections, of their matching to parton shower simulations, and of the merging of matched samples that differ by light-parton multiplicities. We present a computer program, MadGraph5 aMC@NLO, capable of handling all these computations — parton-level fixed order, shower-matched, merged — in a unified framework whose defining features are flexibility, high level of parallelisation, and human intervention limited to input physics quantities. We demonstrate the potential of the program by presenting selected phenomenological applications relevant to the LHC and to a 1-TeV e + e − collider. While next-to-leading order results are restricted to QCD corrections to SM processes in the first public version, we show that from the user viewpoint no changes have to be expected in the case of corrections due to any given renormalisable Lagrangian, and that the implementation of these are well under way.

6,509 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The Pythia program as mentioned in this paper can be used to generate high-energy-physics ''events'' (i.e. sets of outgoing particles produced in the interactions between two incoming particles).
Abstract: The Pythia program can be used to generate high-energy-physics ''events'', i.e. sets of outgoing particles produced in the interactions between two incoming particles. The objective is to provide as accurate as possible a representation of event properties in a wide range of reactions, within and beyond the Standard Model, with emphasis on those where strong interactions play a role, directly or indirectly, and therefore multihadronic final states are produced. The physics is then not understood well enough to give an exact description; instead the program has to be based on a combination of analytical results and various QCD-based models. This physics input is summarized here, for areas such as hard subprocesses, initial- and final-state parton showers, underlying events and beam remnants, fragmentation and decays, and much more. Furthermore, extensive information is provided on all program elements: subroutines and functions, switches and parameters, and particle and process data. This should allow the user to tailor the generation task to the topics of interest.

6,300 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: FeynRules is a Mathematica-based package which addresses the implementation of particle physics models, which are given in the form of a list of fields, parameters and a Lagrangian, into high-energy physics tools.

2,719 citations