Abstract
We revisit the next-to-next-to-leading order (NNLO) calculation of the Higgs boson+1 jet production process, calculated in the mt → ∞ effective field theory. We perform a detailed comparison of the result calculated using the jettiness slicing method, with published results obtained using subtraction methods. The results of the jettiness calculation agree with the two previous subtraction calculations at benchmark points. The performance of the jettiness slicing approach is greatly improved by adopting a definition of 1-jettiness that accounts for the boost of the Born system. Nevertheless, the results demonstrate that power corrections in the jettiness slicing method remain significant. At large transverse momentum the effect of power corrections is much reduced, as expected.
Highlights
CalculationOur N -jettiness calculation of Higgs+jet production is embedded in the MCFM code [13, 14], with many ingredients in common with previous next-to-next-to-leading order (NNLO) calculations of color-singlet production [15] and inclusive photon and photon+jet processes [16, 17]
JHEP10(2019)136 steps have been taken to account for the effect of the resummation of next-to-nextto-next-to-leading logarithms (N3LL) to enable a better description at small transverse momenta [7, 8]
In this paper we have presented a calculation of H+jet production at next-to-next-to-leading order (NNLO) using the N -jettiness procedure
Summary
Our N -jettiness calculation of Higgs+jet production is embedded in the MCFM code [13, 14], with many ingredients in common with previous NNLO calculations of color-singlet production [15] and inclusive photon and photon+jet processes [16, 17]. In order to provide a more stringent check on the calculation we computed the α-dependence for each partonic initial state and for each possible α parameter individually These checks revealed a small inconsistency in the subtraction of singularities in the qq → Hggg channel, and an even smaller discrepancy in qg → Hqqq (identical-quark) contributions. The results in figure 1 show that the crosssection is independent of the choice of α parameters, over a wide range, to within the Monte Carlo statistics indicated for each channel This corresponds to a check at the 0.1% level or better for all channels except qq, where the size of the cross-section is so small that the check is slightly less strict, at the 0.3% level. The evaluation of the real corrections probes partonic configurations that can become highly singular, for very small values of the 1-jettiness cut This means that special attention must be paid to generating phase-space points in this region. The NLO code must be modified trivially in order to properly account for all higher-order corrections to the Wilson coefficient that couples the Higgs field to two gluons in the effective field theory [34, 35]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
