Top and Higgs: Recent Theory developments
Extracted source text · arXiv 1712.09931
% sample eprint article in LaTeX --- M. Peskin, 9/7/00
\documentclass[12pt]{article}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{dsfont}
\usepackage{cite}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
% basic data for the eprint:
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\textwidth=6.0in \textheight=8.25in
%% Adjust these for your printer:
\leftmargin=-0.3in \topmargin=-0.20in
%% preprint number data:
\newcommand\pubnumber{}
\newcommand\pubdate{\today}
\newcommand{\lag}{{\cal L}}
\newcommand{\FDF}{\left(\varphi^\dagger\overleftrightarrow{D}_\mu\varphi\right)}
\newcommand{\FDFI}{\left(\varphi^\dagger\overleftrightarrow{D}^I_\mu \varphi\right)}
\newcommand{\ttz}{t \bar t Z/\gamma^*}
\newcommand{\ctg}{\mathcal C_{tG}}
\newcommand{\cft}{\mathcal C_{\phi t}}
\newcommand{\cfb}{\mathcal C_{\phi b}}
\newcommand{\cfQt}{\mathcal C_{\phi Q^{(3)}}}
\newcommand{\cfQo}{\mathcal C_{\phi Q^{(1)}}}
\newcommand{\dcfQ}{\Delta \mathcal C_{\phi Q}}
%% address and funding acknowledgement data:
\def\institute{CERN Theory Department, 1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland\\
and\\
Nikhef Theory Group, Science Park 105, 1098 XG Amsterdam, The Netherlands}
\def\support{\footnote{Work supported by a Marie Slodowska-Curie Individual Fellowship of the
European Commission's Horizon 2020 Programme under contract number 704187.}}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
% document style macros
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\def\Title#1{\begin{center} {\Large #1 } \end{center}}
\def\Author#1{\begin{center}{ \sc #1} \end{center}}
\def\Address#1{\begin{center}{ \it #1} \end{center}}
\def\andauth{\begin{center}{and} \end{center}}
\def\submit#1{\begin{center}Submitted to {\sl #1} \end{center}}
\newcommand\pubblock{\rightline{\begin{tabular}{l} \pubnumber\\
\pubdate \end{tabular}}}
\newenvironment{Abstract}{\begin{quotation} }{\end{quotation}}
\newenvironment{Presented}{\begin{quotation} \begin{center}
PRESENTED AT\end{center}\bigskip
\begin{center}\begin{large}}{\end{large}\end{center} \end{quotation}}
\def\Acknowledgements{\bigskip \bigskip \begin{center} \begin{large}
\bf ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS \end{large}\end{center}}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
% personal abbreviations and macros
% the following package contains macros used in this document:
\input econfmacros.tex
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{document}
\begin{titlepage}
\pubblock
\vfill
\Title{Top and Higgs: Recent Theory developments}
\vfill
\Author{Eleni Vryonidou\support}
\Address{\institute}
\vfill
\begin{Abstract}
In this talk I review recent theory developments in the computation of Higgs production in association with top quarks, as well as the modelling of the corresponding backgrounds. In addition to progress within the Standard model I discuss higher-order corrections for the $t\bar{t}H$ process in the presence of new interactions.
\end{Abstract}
\vfill
\begin{Presented}
$10^{th}$ International Workshop on Top Quark Physics\\
Braga, Portugal, September 17--22, 2017
\end{Presented}
\vfill
\end{titlepage}
\def\thefootnote{\fnsymbol{footnote}}
\setcounter{footnote}{0}
%
\section{Introduction}
\vspace{-0.1cm}
The measurement of Higgs production in association with top quarks is expected to provide information about the top Yukawa coupling, which in turn can be a window to new physics. The LHC is already providing measurements of $t\bar{t}H$ production for different Higgs decay channels, and these are expected to become more precise as more luminosity is collected. Work is also needed on the theory side to provide accurate predictions. Next-to-leading order (NLO) QCD corrections for the $t\bar tH$ process have been computed in \cite{Beenakker:2002nc,Dawson:2003zu,Frederix:2011zi,Garzelli:2011vp},
with off-shell effects in \cite{Denner:2015yca}, whilst NLO electroweak (EW) results are given
in \cite{Frixione:2015zaa,Hartanto:2015uka,Biedermann:2017yoi}. Recently results for resummation at NLL \cite{Kulesza:2015vda,Broggio:2015lya} have been promoted to NNLL \cite{Kulesza:2017ukk,Broggio:2016lfj}. Finally, the combination of QCD and EW corrections including off-shell effects has been discussed in \cite{Denner:2016wet}. Significant progress has been made also related to the modelling of the $t\bar{t}bb$ background, in particular in assessing the uncertainties in relation to matching to the parton shower.
Precise predictions for beyond the SM scenarios are equally
important at the LHC Run II. The Standard Model Effective Field Theory (SMEFT) provides a model-independent
framework to parametrise deviations from the SM via higher-dimension operators modifying the SM Lagrangian as follows:
\begin{equation} \mathcal{L}= \mathcal{L}_{SM}+\sum_i \frac{C_i}{\Lambda^2} O_i + \mathcal{O}(\Lambda^{-4}).
\end{equation}
Fully differential NLO QCD corrections for top-quark production in the EFT have started to become
available. These include top-quark pair production, single top production and associated production \cite{Franzosi:2015osa,Zhang:2016omx,Bylund:2016phk,Maltoni:2016yxb}. QCD corrections can have a large impact on both the total cross sections and the differential distributions. NLO predictions come with reduced theoretical uncertainties and can provide more reliable information for EFT fits.
In this talk I focus on some recent developments in precise computations of the $t\bar{t}H$ process and the $t\bar{t}bb$ background, as well as the computation of higher order corrections for $t\bar{t}H$ in the presence of new interactions.
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\section{Precision calculations for $t\bar{t}H$ and $t\bar{t}bb$}
Results for $t\bar{t}H$ production at NLO+NNLL have been obtained by two independent computations, one in the traditional resummation framework \cite{Kulesza:2017ukk} and one within SCET \cite{Broggio:2016lfj}. Both computations perform a soft gluon resummation, leading to improved predictions with reduced uncertainties as shown in fig. \ref{fig:resummation}. Differential results are also provided showing small changes in the distribution shapes, but a significant reduction of the scale uncertainties.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{minipage}[h]{0.5\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[trim=1cm 0.6cm 0 0, scale =0.8]{7-point-uncertainty_13TeV.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\hspace{0.5cm}
\begin{minipage}[h]{0.5\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[trim=5cm 0cm 2cm 3cm,scale=0.4]{TOTCScomp.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{\label{fig:resummation} Scale dependence of the $t\bar{t}H$ cross-section at 13 TeV at different orders for different scale choices. Left: results from \cite{Kulesza:2017ukk}. Right: results from \cite{Broggio:2016lfj}. For more details see the corresponding publications.}
\end{figure}
In addition to QCD corrections, significant progress has been made for EW corrections computed in \cite{Frixione:2015zaa,Hartanto:2015uka,Biedermann:2017yoi}. Whilst the impact of EW corrections is small at the total cross-section level, these are important in the high $p_T$ tails due to the Sudakov logs as shown in fig.~\ref{fig:ptHew} (left). Electroweak corrections have been also obtained for off-shell top quarks, taking also interference effects into account in \cite{Denner:2016wet}. These results are in agreement with the results for stable top quarks, and also show good agreement with the double pole approximation as shown in fig. \ref{fig:ptHew} (right). Finally a combination of EW and QCD corrections shows that additive and multiplicative combinations give almost identical results~\cite{Denner:2016wet}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.5\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.85\linewidth,trim=1.5cm 0cm 0cm 0cm]{TTH_h_pt_13tev.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\hspace{0.5cm}
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.5\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[trim=6cm 0cm 2cm 5cm,scale=0.65]{histogram_transverse_momentum_higgs_DPA.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{\label{fig:ptHew}
Transverse momentum distribution of the Higgs boson in $t\bar{t}H$ at 13 TeV. Left: Impact of EW corrections from \cite{Frixione:2015zaa}. Right: Comparison with double pole approximation for top decays, taken from \cite{Denner:2016wet}. For more details see the corresponding publications.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.5\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.97\linewidth,trim=0 0 1cm 0]{2B_M_B1B2.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\hspace{0.5cm}
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.5\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.95\linewidth]{2_M_B1B2.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=.95\linewidth]{2_M_B1B2ratio.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{\label{fig:mbb}
Invariant mass of the first two b-jets in $t\bar{t}bb$ at 13 TeV. Left: Comparison of NLO+PS to fixed order taken from \cite{Cascioli:2013era}. Right: Comparison of different generators and matching algorithms, taken from \cite{deFlorian:2016spz}.}
\end{figure}
As measurements at the LHC improve in terms of statistics, it is also important to reduce the systematic uncertainties. One systematic uncertainty for $t\bar{t}H$ is the one coming from the modelling of the $t\bar{t}bb$ background. Several aspects enter the modelling of $t\bar{t}bb$ such as the use of the 4 or 5-flavour scheme, matching and merging of different jet multiplicities as well as parton-shower effects. The need to include the $t\bar{t}bb$ matrix elements to describe the process has motivated the computation of $t\bar{t}bb$ at NLO+PS in \cite{Cascioli:2013era}. The invariant mass distribution of the two hardest b-jets is shown in fig.~\ref{fig:mbb} (left). This study has shown that there is a large enhancement compared to the fixed-order results, due to secondary gluon splittings into $b\bar{b}$ pairs in the shower. These findings have also motivated a systematic comparison between Monte Carlo generators, as well as parton showers within the LHCHXSWG $t\bar{t}H$ subgroup \cite{deFlorian:2016spz}, as shown in fig.~\ref{fig:mbb} (right). Differences have been found between generators, with MG5\_aMC \cite{Alwall:2014hca} showing a larger enhancement over the fixed order results compared to Sherpa+Openloops \cite{Cascioli:2013era} and Powhel \cite{Garzelli:2014aba}. To provide a better understanding of the differences, further comparisons are ongoing, including a new implementation in PowHeg and a detailed comparison of different parton shower codes with MC@NLO matching.
\section{$t\bar{t}H$ in the EFT}
\begin{figure}
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.5\linewidth}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.8}
\newcommand{\xs}[7]{$#1^{+#2+#6+#4}_{-#3-#7-#5}$}
\vspace{0pt}
\scriptsize
\begin{tabular}{llllll}
\hline
13 TeV &$\sigma$ NLO &$K$-factors
\\\hline
$\sigma_{SM}$& \xs{0.507}{0.030}{0.048}{0.007}{0.008}{0.000}{0.000}&1.09\\
$\sigma_{t\phi}$& \xs{-0.062}{0.006}{0.004}{0.001}{0.001}{0.001}{0.001}&1.13\\
$\sigma_{\phi G}$& \xs{0.872}{0.131}{0.123}{0.013}{0.016}{0.037}{0.035}&1.39\\
$\sigma_{tG}$&\xs{0.503}{0.025}{0.046}{0.007}{0.008}{0.001}{0.003}&1.07\\
$\sigma_{t\phi,t\phi} $&\xs{0.0019}{0.0001}{0.0002}{0.000}{0.000}{0.0001}{0.000}&1.17\\
$\sigma_{\phi G,\phi G} $&\xs{1.021}{0.204}{0.178}{0.024}{0.029}{0.096}{0.085}&1.58\\
$\sigma_{tG,tG}$& \xs{0.674}{0.036}{0.067}{0.016}{0.019}{0.004}{0.007}&1.04\\
$\sigma_{t\phi,\phi G}$ &\xs{-0.053}{0.008}{0.008}{0.001}{0.001}{0.003}{0.004}&1.42\\
$\sigma_{t\phi,tG}$& \xs{-0.031}{0.003}{0.002}{0.000}{0.000}{0.000}{0.000}&1.10\\
$\sigma_{\phi G,tG}$& \xs{0.859}{0.127}{0.126}{0.017}{0.022}{0.021}{0.020}&1.37\\
\hline
\label{table:tth}
\end{tabular}
\caption{NLO cross sections in pb for $ttH$ at 13 TeV and corresponding $K$-factors. Scale, EFT scale and
PDF uncertainties are also included.}
\end{minipage}
\hspace{0.5cm}
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.5\linewidth}
\vspace{0pt}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth, trim=0 0 2 0]{dependence.pdf}
\caption{Dependence of the $t\bar{t}H$ cross-section on the mixing angle at NLO+NLL from
\cite{Broggio:2017oyu} at 13 TeV with the corresponding scale uncertainties.
\label{fig:tthcp}}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
For $t\bar{t}H$ production the following operators contribute at dimension-6 \cite{Maltoni:2016yxb}:
\begin{eqnarray}\nonumber
&O_{t\phi} = y_t^3 \left( \phi^\dagger\phi \right)\left( \bar Qt \right)
\tilde\phi \,,\,\,O_{\phi G} = y_t^2 \left( \phi^\dagger\phi \right) G_{\mu\nu}^A G^{A\mu\nu}\,,
\\
&O_{tG} = y_t g_s (\bar Q\sigma^{\mu\nu}T^A t)\tilde\phi G_{\mu\nu}^A\,.
\label{operators}
\end{eqnarray}
Four fermion operators and the triple gluon operator also contribute but these are expected to be constrained from top pair production and multijet processes respectively.
The three operators above mix under RG flow, ~$O_{tG}$ mixes into $O_{\phi G}$, and both of them
mix into $O_{t \phi}$. Their contribution to the cross-section is parametrised as:
\begin{equation}
\sigma=\sigma_{SM}+\sum_i
\frac{C_i}{(\Lambda/1\textrm{TeV})^2}\sigma_i^{(1)}+\sum_{i\le j}
\frac{C_i C_j}{(\Lambda/1\textrm{TeV})^4}\sigma_{ij}^{(2)}\,.
\label{sigma}
\end{equation}
Results for the cross sections at 13 TeV are summarised in fig.~4 using the notation of Eq.~\eqref{sigma}. The renormalisation and factorisation scale,
EFT scale and PDF uncertainties are also shown. The EFT scale uncertainty is obtained by computing the EFT cross section at a different EFT scale taking mixing and running effects into account. A detailed discussion of the relevant uncertainties, RG effects and a comparison between full NLO and RG corrections is presented in \cite{Maltoni:2016yxb}.
CP-violating couplings can also be searched for in $t\bar{t}H$ production. Ref. \cite{Broggio:2017oyu} computes the $t\bar{t}H$ cross-section in the presence of pseudoscalar couplings as described by:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}=-\dfrac{m_t}{v}\,\bar{\psi}(\textrm{cos}\,\alpha+i \,\textrm{sin}\,\alpha\,\,\gamma_5)\psi X_0.
\end{equation} The dependence of the cross section at NLO+NLL as a function of the mixing angle $\alpha$ is shown in fig. \ref{fig:tthcp}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.5\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.99\linewidth]{tth_2_pth.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\hspace{0.5cm}
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.5\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.92\linewidth]{X013cos0ptH.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=.92\linewidth]{X013cosPi2ptH.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{\label{fig:pt1}
Transverse momentum distributions of the Higgs boson in $t\bar{t}H$ at 13 TeV. Left: SMEFT for different operators from \cite{Maltoni:2016yxb}. Lower panels give the $K$ factors and $\mu_{R,F}$ uncertainties. Right: distributions for the CP-even and CP-odd couplings from \cite{Broggio:2017oyu}. }
\end{figure}
Differential distributions are also obtained with higher-order corrections. Figure \ref{fig:pt1} (left) shows the $p_T$ of the Higgs in $t\bar{t}H$ at 13 TeV at LO and NLO (fixed-order) for the three operators of Eq.~\ref{operators}, demonstrating different shapes between different operators and non-flat $K$-factors~\cite{Maltoni:2016yxb}. Similarly the same distribution at NLO+NLL is shown for two different values of the mixing angle $\alpha$ in fig.~\ref{fig:pt1} (right) as obtained in \cite{Broggio:2017oyu}.
\section{Summary}
In these proceedings I summarised recent developments in the computation of $t\bar{t}H$ in the SM, including resummation, QCD and EW corrections. I reviewed also recent progress in the modelling of the $t\bar{t}bb$ background and progress in studying new top-Higgs interactions including higher order QCD corrections.
\Acknowledgements
I would like to thank F. Maltoni, M. Zaro and C. Zhang for their collaboration and useful discussions.
\begin{thebibliography}{99}
%\cite{Beenakker:2002nc}
\bibitem{Beenakker:2002nc}
W.~Beenakker, S.~Dittmaier, M.~Kramer, B.~Plumper, M.~Spira and P.~M.~Zerwas,
%``NLO QCD corrections to t anti-t H production in hadron collisions,''
Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 653}, 151 (2003)
doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(03)00044-0
[hep-ph/0211352].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(03)00044-0;%%
%405 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 28 Dec 2017
%\cite{Dawson:2003zu}
\bibitem{Dawson:2003zu}
S.~Dawson, C.~Jackson, L.~H.~Orr, L.~Reina and D.~Wackeroth,
%``Associated Higgs production with top quarks at the large hadron collider: NLO QCD corrections,''
Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 68}, 034022 (2003)
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.68.034022
[hep-ph/0305087].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.68.034022;%%
%272 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 28 Dec 2017
%\cite{Frederix:2011zi}
\bibitem{Frederix:2011zi}
R.~Frederix, S.~Frixione, V.~Hirschi, F.~Maltoni, R.~Pittau and P.~Torrielli,
%``Scalar and pseudoscalar Higgs production in association with a top?antitop pair,''
Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 701}, 427 (2011)
doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2011.06.012
[arXiv:1104.5613 [hep-ph]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2011.06.012;%%
%140 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 28 Dec 2017
%\cite{Garzelli:2011vp}
\bibitem{Garzelli:2011vp}
M.~V.~Garzelli, A.~Kardos, C.~G.~Papadopoulos and Z.~Trocsanyi,
%``Standard Model Higgs boson production in association with a top anti-top pair at NLO with parton showering,''
EPL {\bf 96}, no. 1, 11001 (2011)
doi:10.1209/0295-5075/96/11001
[arXiv:1108.0387 [hep-ph]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1209/0295-5075/96/11001;%%
%107 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 28 Dec 2017
%\cite{Denner:2015yca}
\bibitem{Denner:2015yca}
A.~Denner and R.~Feger,
%``NLO QCD corrections to off-shell top-antitop production with leptonic decays in association with a Higgs boson at the LHC,''
JHEP {\bf 1511}, 209 (2015)
doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2015)209
[arXiv:1506.07448 [hep-ph]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2015)209;%%
%52 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 28 Dec 2017
%\cite{Frixione:2015zaa}
\bibitem{Frixione:2015zaa}
S.~Frixione, V.~Hirschi, D.~Pagani, H.-S.~Shao and M.~Zaro,
%``Electroweak and QCD corrections to top-pair hadroproduction in association with heavy bosons,''
JHEP {\bf 1506}, 184 (2015)
doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2015)184
[arXiv:1504.03446 [hep-ph]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2015)184;%%
%96 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 28 Dec 2017
%\cite{Hartanto:2015uka}
\bibitem{Hartanto:2015uka}
H.~B.~Hartanto, B.~Jager, L.~Reina and D.~Wackeroth,
%``Higgs boson production in association with top quarks in the POWHEG BOX,''
Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 91}, no. 9, 094003 (2015)
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.094003
[arXiv:1501.04498 [hep-ph]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.094003;%%
%27 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 28 Dec 2017
%\cite{Biedermann:2017yoi}
\bibitem{Biedermann:2017yoi}
B.~Biedermann, S.~Bräuer, A.~Denner, M.~Pellen, S.~Schumann and J.~M.~Thompson,
%``Automation of NLO QCD and EW corrections with Sherpa and Recola,''
Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 77}, 492 (2017)
doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5054-8
[arXiv:1704.05783 [hep-ph]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5054-8;%%
%11 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 28 Dec 2017
%\cite{Kulesza:2015vda}
\bibitem{Kulesza:2015vda}
A.~Kulesza, L.~Motyka, T.~Stebel and V.~Theeuwes,
%``Soft gluon resummation for associated $t \bar{t} H$ production at the LHC,''
JHEP {\bf 1603}, 065 (2016)
doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2016)065
[arXiv:1509.02780 [hep-ph]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2016)065;%%
%17 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 28 Dec 2017
%\cite{Broggio:2015lya}
\bibitem{Broggio:2015lya}
A.~Broggio, A.~Ferroglia, B.~D.~Pecjak, A.~Signer and L.~L.~Yang,
%``Associated production of a top pair and a Higgs boson beyond NLO,''
JHEP {\bf 1603}, 124 (2016)
doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2016)124
[arXiv:1510.01914 [hep-ph]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2016)124;%%
%24 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 28 Dec 2017
%\cite{Kulesza:2017ukk}
\bibitem{Kulesza:2017ukk}
A.~Kulesza, L.~Motyka, T.~Stebel and V.~Theeuwes,
%``Associated $t \bar{t} H$ production at the LHC: theoretical predictions at NLO+NNLL accuracy,''
arXiv:1704.03363 [hep-ph].
%%CITATION = ARXIV:1704.03363;%%
%6 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 28 Dec 2017
%\cite{Broggio:2016lfj}
\bibitem{Broggio:2016lfj}
A.~Broggio, A.~Ferroglia, B.~D.~Pecjak and L.~L.~Yang,
%``NNLL resummation for the associated production of a top pair and a Higgs boson at the LHC,''
JHEP {\bf 1702}, 126 (2017)
doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2017)126
[arXiv:1611.00049 [hep-ph]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2017)126;%%
%11 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 28 Dec 2017
%\cite{Denner:2016wet}
\bibitem{Denner:2016wet}
A.~Denner, J.~N.~Lang, M.~Pellen and S.~Uccirati,
%``Higgs production in association with off-shell top-antitop pairs at NLO EW and QCD at the LHC,''
JHEP {\bf 1702}, 053 (2017)
doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2017)053
[arXiv:1612.07138 [hep-ph]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2017)053;%%
%11 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 28 Dec 2017
%\cite{Franzosi:2015osa}
\bibitem{Franzosi:2015osa}
D.~Buarque Franzosi and C.~Zhang,
%``Probing the top-quark chromomagnetic dipole moment at next-to-leading order in QCD,''
Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 91}, no. 11, 114010 (2015)
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.114010
[arXiv:1503.08841 [hep-ph]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.114010;%%
%30 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 28 Dec 2017
%\cite{Zhang:2016omx}
\bibitem{Zhang:2016omx}
C.~Zhang,
%``Single Top Production at Next-to-Leading Order in the Standard Model Effective Field Theory,''
Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 116}, no. 16, 162002 (2016)
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.162002
[arXiv:1601.06163 [hep-ph]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.162002;%%
%19 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 28 Dec 2017
%\cite{Bylund:2016phk}
\bibitem{Bylund:2016phk}
O.~Bessidskaia Bylund, F.~Maltoni, I.~Tsinikos, E.~Vryonidou and C.~Zhang,
%``Probing top quark neutral couplings in the Standard Model Effective Field Theory at NLO in QCD,''
JHEP {\bf 1605}, 052 (2016)
doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2016)052
[arXiv:1601.08193 [hep-ph]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2016)052;%%
%47 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 28 Dec 2017
%\cite{Maltoni:2016yxb}
\bibitem{Maltoni:2016yxb}
F.~Maltoni, E.~Vryonidou and C.~Zhang,
%``Higgs production in association with a top-antitop pair in the Standard Model Effective Field Theory at NLO in QCD,''
JHEP {\bf 1610}, 123 (2016)
doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2016)123
[arXiv:1607.05330 [hep-ph]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2016)123;%%
%27 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 28 Dec 2017
%\cite{Cascioli:2013era}
\bibitem{Cascioli:2013era}
F.~Cascioli, P.~Maierhöfer, N.~Moretti, S.~Pozzorini and F.~Siegert,
%``NLO matching for $t\bar t b \bar b$ production with massive $b$-quarks,''
Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 734}, 210 (2014)
doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2014.05.040
[arXiv:1309.5912 [hep-ph]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2014.05.040;%%
%72 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 28 Dec 2017
%\cite{deFlorian:2016spz}
\bibitem{deFlorian:2016spz}
D.~de Florian {\it et al.} [LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group],
%``Handbook of LHC Higgs Cross Sections: 4. Deciphering the Nature of the Higgs Sector,''
doi:10.23731/CYRM-2017-002
arXiv:1610.07922 [hep-ph].
%%CITATION = doi:10.23731/CYRM-2017-002;%%
%272 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 28 Dec 2017
%\cite{Alwall:2014hca}
\bibitem{Alwall:2014hca}
J.~Alwall {\it et al.},
%``The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations,''
JHEP {\bf 1407}, 079 (2014)
doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2014)079
[arXiv:1405.0301 [hep-ph]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2014)079;%%
%2441 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 28 Dec 2017
%\cite{Garzelli:2014aba}
\bibitem{Garzelli:2014aba}
M.~V.~Garzelli, A.~Kardos and Z.~Trócsányi,
%``Hadroproduction of $t\bar{t}b\bar{b}$ final states at LHC: predictions at NLO accuracy matched with Parton Shower,''
JHEP {\bf 1503}, 083 (2015)
doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2015)083
[arXiv:1408.0266 [hep-ph]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2015)083;%%
%11 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 28 Dec 2017
%\cite{Broggio:2017oyu}
\bibitem{Broggio:2017oyu}
A.~Broggio, A.~Ferroglia, M.~C.~N.~Fiolhais and A.~Onofre,
%``Pseudoscalar couplings in $t \bar{t} H$ production at NLO+NLL accuracy,''
Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 96}, no. 7, 073005 (2017)
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.073005
[arXiv:1707.01803 [hep-ph]].
%%CITATION = doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.073005;%%
\end{thebibliography}
\end{document}
%%% useful macros for econf proceedings articles:
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%% basic formatting macros:
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%% single-line equations:
\def\beq{\begin{equation}}
\def\eeq#1{\label{#1}\end{equation}}
\def\eeqn{\end{equation}}
%% multiple-line equations (use \CR as the carriage return):
\def\beqa{\begin{eqnarray}}
\def\eeqa#1{\label{#1}\end{eqnarray}}
\def\eeqan{\end{eqnarray}}
\def\CR{\nonumber \\ }
%% reference to an equation number:
\def\leqn#1{(\ref{#1})}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%% bibliographic entries (use this or the SPIRES LaTeX output)
%% Journal or bibliographic formatting macros are obsolete!
%% The SLAC/SPIRES database supplies properly formatted citations;
%% click on LaTeX(US) or LaTeX(EU)
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%% sizing and bars
\def\st{\scriptstyle}
\def\sst{\scriptscriptstyle}
\def\overbar#1{\overline{#1}}
\let\littlebar=\bar
\let\bar=\overbar
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%% text-mode macros:
\def\etal{{\it et al.}}
\def\ie{{\it i.e.}}
\def\eg{{\it e.g.}}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%% expectation values:
\def\VEV#1{\left\langle{ #1} \right\rangle}
\def\bra#1{\left\langle{ #1} \right|}
\def\ket#1{\left| {#1} \right\rangle}
\def\vev#1{\langle #1 \rangle}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%% caligraphic letters (for matrix elements, luminosity, etc.)
\def\D{{\cal D}}
\def\L{{\cal L}}
\def\M{{\cal M}}
\def\O{{\cal O}}
\def\W{{\cal W}}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%% matrix operations and fractions:
\def\One{{\bf 1}}
\def\hc{{\mbox{\rm h.c.}}}
\def\tr{{\mbox{\rm tr}}}
\def\half{\frac{1}{2}}
\def\thalf{\frac{3}{2}}
\def\third{\frac{1}{3}}
\def\tthird{\frac{2}{3}}
\def\Dslash{\not{\hbox{\kern-4pt $D$}}}
\def\dslash{\not{\hbox{\kern-2pt $\del$}}}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%% high-energy physics terminology:
\def\Pl{{\mbox{\scriptsize Pl}}}
\def\eff{{\mbox{\scriptsize eff}}}
\def\CM{{\mbox{\scriptsize CM}}}
\def\BR{\mbox{\rm BR}}
\def\ee{e^+e^-}
\def\sstw{\sin^2\theta_w}
\def\cstw{\cos^2\theta_w}
\def\mz{m_Z}
\def\gz{\Gamma_Z}
\def\mw{m_W}
\def\mt{m_t}
\def\gt{\Gamma_t}
\def\mh{m_h}
\def\gmu{G_\mu}
\def\GF{G_F}
\def\alphas{\alpha_s}
\def\msb{{\bar{\ssstyle M \kern -1pt S}}}
\def\lmsb{\Lambda_{\msb}}
\def\ELER{e^-_Le^+_R}
\def\EREL{e^-_Re^+_L}
\def\ELEL{e^-_Le^+_L}
\def\ERER{e^-_Re^+_R}
\def\eps{\epsilon}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%% supersymmetry:
\def\ch#1{\widetilde\chi^+_{#1}}
\def\chm#1{\widetilde\chi^-_{#1}}
\def\neu#1{\widetilde\chi^0_{#1}}
\def\s#1{\widetilde{#1}}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%5