Fermionic decay of charged Higgs boson in low mass region in Georgi Machacek Model

Extracted source text · arXiv 2205.03896

\documentclass[11pt]{article}
\textheight=24 true cm
\textwidth=17.2 true cm
\topmargin=-0.75in
\oddsidemargin=-0.15in
\usepackage[colorlinks=true, citecolor=blue, urlcolor=blue, linkcolor=blue, breaklinks=true, pdfpagelabels=false]{hyperref}
\usepackage{cite}

\textheight=24 true cm
\textwidth=17.2 true cm
\topmargin=-0.75in
\oddsidemargin=-0.15in
\usepackage{hyperref}

\usepackage{amsmath,amsfonts,amssymb}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{epsfig,epsf}
\usepackage{bm}


\def\a {\alpha}
\def\b {\beta}
\def\g {\gamma}
\def\d {\delta}
\def\e {\epsilon}
\def\ve {\varepsilon}
\def\l {\lambda}
\def\L {\Lambda}
\def\lag {\cal{L}}
\def\o {\omega}
\def\bar {\overline}
\def\bbar {{\bar{B}}{}^0}
\def\bbbar {B^0-\bbar}
\def\bs {B_s}
\def\bsbar {\bar{B_s}}
\def\slash {\!\!\!/}
\def\delgs {\Delta\Gamma_s}
\def\delms {\Delta M_s}
\def\delgd {\Delta\Gamma_d}
\def\delmd {\Delta M_d}

\def\p {\partial}
\def\pl {\parallel}
\def\na {\nabla}
\def\r {\rightarrow}
\def\lr {\longrightarrow}
\def\Lr {\Longrightarrow}

\def\be {\begin{equation}}
\def\ee {\end{equation}}
\def\bea {\begin{eqnarray}}
\def\eea {\end{eqnarray}}
\def\n {\nonumber}
\def\mat {\pmatrix}
\def\bra {\langle}
\def\ket {\rangle}

\def\bsbsbar{B_s$--$\bar{B}_s}
\def\bdbdbar{B_d$--$\bar{B}_d}
\def\bqbqbar{B_q$--$\bar{B}_q}
\def\dgd{\Delta \Gamma_d}
\def\dgs{\Delta \Gamma_s}
\def\dgq{\Delta \Gamma_q}
\def\g{\Gamma}
\def\gd{\Gamma_d}
\def\gs{\Gamma_s}
\def\gq{\Gamma_q}
%\def\beq{\begin{equation}}
%\def\eeq{\end{equation}}
\def\barr{\begin{array}}
\def\earr{\end{array}}
\def\dis{\displaystyle}
\def\ltap{\raisebox{-.4ex}{\rlap{$\sim$}} \raisebox{.4ex}{$<$}} 
\def\gtap{\raisebox{-.4ex}{\rlap{$\sim$}} \raisebox{.4ex}{$>$}} 
%-----------------------------------------------
\def\opcit(#1){ {\em op. cit.}, #1}
\def\etal {\em et al.}

% Reference Macros:  Enter parameters in order Vol, Page, Year
%\def\issue(#1,#2,#3){{\bf{#1}}, #2 (#3)} % AIP format
\def\issue(#1,#2,#3){#1, #2 (#3)} % AIP format
%\def\issue(#1,#2,#3){#1 (#3) #2} % PLB format



\def\imp{\marginpar{$\Rightarrow$}}

% autoref config
\renewcommand{\figureautorefname}{Fig.}
\renewcommand{\AMSautorefname}{Eq.}
\def\equationautorefname~#1\null{Eq.\,(#1)\null}
\def\pageautorefname\nobreakspace{p.}
\renewcommand{\sectionautorefname}{Section}
\makeatletter\renewcommand{\p@subsection}{\thesection.}\makeatother%
%\makeatletter\renewcommand{\p@subsubsection}{\thesection}\makeatother%
 
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

\begin{document}

\renewcommand*{\thefootnote}{\fnsymbol{footnote}}

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

\begin{center}
{\Large\bf{Fermionic decay of charged Higgs boson in low mass 
region in Georgi Machacek Model}}

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

\vspace{5mm}

{\bf Swagata Ghosh}$^{a,b,}$\footnote{swgtghsh54@gmail.com}

\vspace{3mm}
{\em{${}^a$\ \ \ Department of Physics and Astrophysics, University of 
Delhi, Delhi, India.
}}

{\em{${}^b$\ \ \ SGTB Khalsa College, University of Delhi, Delhi, India.}}

\end{center}


%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{abstract}

At the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), ATLAS and CMS collaborations 
observed various decay modes of the light charged Higgs bosons 
produced by top (anti)quark decays. In this paper, we are 
interested in the subsequent decay of the light charged Higgs 
boson into a charm and a strange quark-antiquark pair and 
into a tau and a tau-neutrino pair, separately, in the context 
of the Georgi-Machacek model, which offers a large triplet 
vacuum expectation value (vev) preserving custodial symmetry. 
We show that these experimental observations constrain the 
triplet vev from above. We explore the model parameter space 
consistent with the theoretical constraints, the latest Higgs 
data and the experimental data for light charged Higgs decaying 
to $cs$ and $\tau\nu_{\tau}$.

\end{abstract}

%\small{PACS no.: {12.60.Fr, 14.80.Ec}}

%\maketitle

\setcounter{footnote}{0}
\renewcommand*{\thefootnote}{\arabic{footnote}}

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

The discovery of the Higgs boson with a mass around 125 GeV 
at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) experiment 
\cite{ATLAS:2012yve,CMS:2012qbp} in the year of 
2012 let the Standard Model (SM) have great success. The 
possibility of having new exotic particles still cannot be 
thrown away. It is always possible that the discovered 
125 GeV scalar resonance is a part of a non-minimal Higgs 
sector accommodating one or more non-standard scalar 
multiplets. Besides, the new beyond Standard Model (BSM) 
scalar can be neutral or charged. 

With an appealing phenomenology, the physical charged scalars 
got searched at LHC prolongedly. 
These charged scalars can be lighter as well as heavier than 
the top quark mass $(m_t)$. 
At LHC, light charged scalar decaying to $cb$ 
\cite{Ivina:2022tfm, ATLAS:2021zyv}, $cs$
\cite{CMS:2020osd, ATLAS:2013uxj, ATLAS:2010ofa}, 
and $\tau\nu_{\tau}$ \cite{CMS:2019bfg, Abbaspour:2018ysj, ATLAS:2016avi, ATLAS:2011pka, ATLAS:2012nhc, Ali:2011qf, CMS:2012fgz} is searched. 
Besides, light charged scalars decay in different multi-Higgs 
doublet models \cite{Cheung:2022ndq, Akeroyd:2016ymd, Benbrik:2021wyl, Akeroyd:2016ssd, Akeroyd:2012yg, Akeroyd:2022ouy} and in other colliders 
\cite{Hou:2021qff, Akeroyd:2019mvt, Akeroyd:2018axd} 
are also searched and studied.

Most of the BSM models with 
extended scalar sectors commit singly charged scalar particle, 
through which one can explore the model parameter space. In 
this paper, we consider the Georgi-Machacek (GM) Model 
\cite{Georgi:1985nv}, 
where both of the singly and doubly charged scalars are present, 
though we focus only on the decay of the singly charged scalar 
when its mass is in the range of 80-160 GeV. 

The GM model is atypical of the other triplet extensions of 
the SM as it preserves the custodial symmetry in the tree level, 
i.e., the $\rho$-parameter is equal to unity in this model, 
hence resulting in a sizeable triplet vacuum expectation value 
(VEV), $v_2$. In the GM model, the extended scalar sector 
contains one real triplet and one complex triplet, neutral 
components of both possessing the same VEV. The physical scalar 
sector includes ten scalars ordered as two singlets, one 
triplet, and one quintuplet. Out of these ten scalars, 4 scalars 
are charge-neutral ($h$, $H$, $H_3^0$, $H_5^0$), another 4 are 
singly-charged ($H_3^{\pm}$, $H_5^{\pm}$), and the rest 
2 scalars are doubly-charged ($H_5^{\pm\pm}$). The two 
singly-charged scalars $H_5^{\pm}$ do not couple to the SM 
fermions, whereas, the other two singly-charged scalars 
$H_3^{\pm}$ couple to the SM fermions, and the strength of 
coupling is directly proportional to the triplet VEV $v_2$, 
which is sizeable enough in the GM model. We will focus on the 
decay of the $H_3^{\pm}$ in this paper.

Decay of charged scalar, heavier than the top quark mass, is 
studied in the context of the Georgi-Machacek model \cite{Ghosh:2019qie, Logan:2018wtm}. 
The theoretical limits \cite{Ismail:2020zoz, Hartling:2014zca, Krauss:2017xpj, Moultaka:2020dmb, Aoki:2007ah} 
on the Lagrangian 
parameters, the indirect constraints \cite{Hartling:2014aga}, 
Higgs boson pair productions at the LHC \cite{Chang:2017niy}, 
electroweak phase transition \cite{Chiang:2014hia, Zhou:2018zli}, 
impacts of higher dimensional operators \cite{Banerjee:2019gmr} 
in the Georgi-Machacek model are well scrutinized. 
For phenomenological studies of this model at the LHC 
\cite{Chiang:2014bia}, 
electron-positron collider \cite{Chiang:2015rva}, 
the reader may also consult the literature. 
There are also some variants of the GM model \cite{Logan:2015xpa, Kundu:2021pcg}. One can scan the parameter space of this model 
using the calculator \cite{Hartling:2014xma}. For the global 
fits in the GM model, see \cite{Chiang:2018cgb}. 
It is to be mentioned here that, inspite of the extensive 
phenomenological study of the GM model, the exploration of 
the parameter space in case of the light charged scalar 
together with the LHC data has not been examined as yet. 

This paper is organized as follows. 
In Sec. 2 we describe the model in brief. 
We enlist the theoretical constraints and LHC data, with their 
effects on the parameter space of the GM model in Sec. 3. 
The results are given in Sec. 4. 
Finally we conclude in Sec. 5.
% 
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\section{The Georgi-Machacek Model}
\label{model}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

One $SU(2)_L$ real triplet $\left(\xi^{+},\xi^0,\xi^{-}\right)^T$ 
with hyperchage $Y=0$ and one $SU(2)_L$ complex triplet 
$\left(\chi^{++},\chi^{+},\chi^0\right)^T$ with $Y = 2$ 
are appended to the particle contents of the scalar sector of 
the Standard Model to obtain the Georgi-Machacek model. 
We mostly persue the notations followed in 
\cite{Hartling:2014zca} throughout this paper. 

The SM doublet $\left(\phi^{+},\phi^{0}\right)^T$ with $Y = 1$ 
and the non-standard triplets can be expressed in terms of 
bi-doublet and bi-triplet respectively, as, 

\be
\Phi =
\begin{pmatrix}
 \phi^{0*} & \phi^{+}\cr
 \phi^{-} & \phi^0
\end{pmatrix}\,
,\quad
X =
\begin{pmatrix}
 \chi^{0*} & \xi^{+} & \chi^{++}\cr
 \chi^{-} & \xi^0 & \chi^{+}\cr
 \chi^{--} & \xi^{-} & \chi^0
\end{pmatrix}\,.
\ee

The most general scalar potential is given by,  
\bea
V\left(\Phi,X\right) &=& \frac{{\mu_2}^2}{2}\, {\rm Tr}\left(\Phi^\dag\Phi\right) 
+ \frac{{\mu_3}^2}{2}\, \rm{Tr}\left(X^\dag X\right)
+ {\l_1}\left[{\rm Tr}\left(\Phi^\dag\Phi\right)\right]^2  
+ {\l_2}\, {\rm Tr}\left(\Phi^\dag\Phi\right)\, {\rm Tr}\left(X^\dag X\right) \n\\
&& + {\l_3}\, {\rm Tr}\left(X^\dag X X^\dag X\right)
 + {\l_4}\left[{\rm Tr}\left(X^\dag X\right)\right]^2 
- {\l_5}\, {\rm Tr}\left(\Phi^\dag \tau^a \Phi\tau^b\right)\, {\rm Tr}\left(X^\dag t^a X t^b\right) \n\\
&& - {M_1} \, {\rm Tr}\left(\Phi^\dag \tau^a \Phi\tau^b\right) {\left(U X U^\dag\right)_{ab}} 
- {M_2} \, {\rm Tr}\left(X^\dag t^a X t^b\right) {\left(U X U^\dag\right)_{ab}}\, ,
\label{eq:genPot} 
\eea
with $\tau^a = \sigma^a/2$, where $\sigma^a$ are the three Pauli matrices, and the $t^a$s as,
\be
t^1=\frac{1}{\sqrt2}
\begin{pmatrix}
 0 & 1 & 0\cr
 1 & 0 & 1\cr
 0 & 1 & 0
\end{pmatrix}
\,,
t^2=\frac{1}{\sqrt2}
\begin{pmatrix}
 0 & -i & 0\cr
 i & 0 & -i\cr
 0 & i & 0
\end{pmatrix}
\,,
t^3=
\begin{pmatrix}
 1 & 0 & 0\cr
 0 & 0 & 0\cr
 0 & 0 & -1
\end{pmatrix}\,.
\ee
The matrix $U$ in the trilinear terms of the GM potential is 
given by,
\be
U=
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\begin{pmatrix}
 -1 & 0 & 1\cr
 -i & 0 & -i \cr
 0 & \sqrt{2} & 0
\end{pmatrix}\,.
\ee
 
After the electroweak symmetry breaking (EWSB), the neutral 
components of the bi-doublet and the bi-triplet acquire the 
VEVs, as,
\be
\bra\phi^0\ket = \frac{v_1}{\sqrt{2}}\,,\ \ \bra \chi^0 \ket = \bra \xi^0 \ket = {v_2}\,.
\label{eq:vevs}
\ee

Note that, the equality of the real and complex triplet VEVs 
corresponds to the preservation of the custodial symmetry of 
the potential at the tree level leading to 
$\rho_{\rm tree} = 1$.

The EW VEV $v$ relates to the doublet and triplet VEVs as,
\be
\sqrt{{v_1}^2+8{v_2}^2}=v\approx246~\text{GeV}\,.
\ee

The doublet-triplet mixing angle may be expressed as,
\be
\tan {\b} = \frac{2\sqrt{2}{v_2}}{v_1}\,,
\ee

In terms of VEVs given in Eq.\ (\ref{eq:vevs}), the potential 
(\ref{eq:genPot}) becomes 
\bea
V\left({v_1},{v_2}\right)&=&\frac{{\mu_2}^2}{2}{v_1}^2+3 \frac{{\mu_3}^2}{2}{v_2}^2+{\l_1}{v_1}^4
+ \frac32 \left(2{\l_2}-{\l_5}\right){v_1}^2{v_2}^2\, \n\\
&& +3\left({\l_3}+3{\l_4}\right){v_2}^4
-\frac34{M_1}{v_1}^2{v_2}-6{M_2}{v_2}^3\,,
\label{eq:vevgenPot}
\eea
  
Hence, using the extremisation conditions one can easily extract 
the bilinear coefficients of the potential as,
\bea
{\mu_2}^2=-4{\l_1}{v_1}^2-3\left(2{\l_2}-{\l_5}\right){v_2}^2
+\frac32{M_1}{v_2} \,,\n\\
{\mu_3}^2=-\left(2{\l_2}-{\l_5}\right){v_1}^2-4\left({\l_3}+3{\l_4}\right){v_2}^2
+\frac{M_1 {v_1}^2}{4 v_2}+6{M_2}{v_2} \,.
\label{eq:mu}
\eea

The scalar sector of the GM model consists of ten physical 
fields of which five are part of a custodial quintuplet 
${H_5}=\left(H_5^{++},H_5^{+},H_5^0,H_5^{-},H_5^{--}\right)^T$, 
three are part of a custodial triplet 
${H_3}=\left(H_3^{+},H_3^0,H_3^{-}\right)^T$, and the rest two 
are custodial singlets $H_1^0$ and $H_1^{0'}$. 
These ten physical fields may be expressed in terms of the 
component fields and the angle $\beta$ as,
\bea
&&H_5^{++}=\chi^{++}\,, \ \ \ 
H_5^{+}=\frac{\left(\chi^{+}-\xi^{+}\right)}{\sqrt{2}}\,, \ \ \ 
H_5^0=\sqrt{\frac23}\xi^0-\sqrt{\frac13}\chi^{0R}\,, \n\\
&&H_3^{+}=-\sin {\b}\, \phi^{+}+\cos {\b}\, \frac{\left(\chi^{+}+\xi^{+}\right)}{\sqrt{2}}\,, \ \ \ 
H_3^0=-\sin {\b}\, \phi^{0I}+\cos {\b}\, \chi^{0I}\,, \n\\
&&H_1^0=\phi^{0R}\,, \ \ \ 
H_1^{0'}=\sqrt{\frac13}\xi^0+\sqrt{\frac23}\chi^{0R}\,.
\label{eq:fields}
\eea

The physical fields of the multiplets are mass degenerate. 
The square of the common mass of the quintuplet $H_5$ and 
the triplet $H_3$ are given by,
\bea
{m_5}^2&=&\frac{M_1}{4{v_2}}{v_1}^2+12{M_2}{v_2}+\frac32{\l_5}{v_1}^2+8{\l_3}{v_2}^2\,, \n\\
{m_3}^2&=&\left(\frac{M_1}{4{v_2}}+\frac{\l_5}{2}\right)v^2\,,
\eea
respectively.

The custodial singlets $H_1^0$ and $H_1^{0'}$ mix to yield 
the mass eigenstates $h$ and $H$ as,
\bea
h &=& \cos {\a}\,\, H_1^0-\sin {\a}\,\, H_1^{0'}\,, \n\\ 
H &=& \sin {\a}\,\, H_1^0+\cos {\a}\,\, H_1^{0'}\,,
\eea
with the mass squared matrix
\be
{\cal M}^2=
\begin{pmatrix}
 {{\cal M}_{11}}^2 & {{\cal M}_{12}}^2\cr
 {{\cal M}_{21}}^2 & {{\cal M}_{22}}^2
\end{pmatrix}\,,
\ee
where
\bea
{\cal M}_{11}^2 &=& 8 {\l_1}{v_1}^2\,, \n\\
{\cal M}_{12}^2 &=& {\cal M}_{21}^2 = \frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}\left[-M_1+4\left(2\l_2-\l_5\right)v_2\right]v_1\,, \n\\
{\cal M}_{22}^2 &=& \frac{M_1 v_1^2}{4 v_2}\,.
\eea
The neutral scalar mixing angle $\alpha$ can be parametrised 
in terms of the components of the mass-squared matrix as,
\be
\tan{2\a}=\frac{2 {{\cal M}_{12}}^2}{{{\cal M}_{22}}^2-{{\cal M}_{11}}^2}\,.
\ee
The mass-squared of the physical neutral scalars are,
\be
{m_{h,H}}^2=\frac12 \left[{{\cal M}_{11}}^2+{{\cal M}_{22}}^2\mp\sqrt{\left({{\cal M}_{11}}^2-
{{\cal M}_{22}}^2\right)^2
+4\left({{\cal M}_{12}}^2\right)^2}\right]\,.
\ee
We assume here that $m_H > m_h$ and consider the CP-even neutral 
scalar with smaller mass as the SM-like Higgs boson, such that 
$m_h\approx125~\text{GeV}$.

The bilinear couplings ($\mu_2^2$ and $\mu_3^2$) present in 
the scalar potential are alredy traded in terms of the VEVs 
$v_1$ and $v_2$ in the Eq.\ (\ref{eq:mu}).
The quartic couplings $\l_i$ ($i=1$ to 5) in the potential 
(\ref{eq:genPot}) can be expressed in terms of the four physical 
masses, $m_h$, $m_H$, $m_3$, $m_5$, and the mixing angle $\a$ 
as,
\bea
\l_1 &=& \frac{1}{8 v_1^2}\left(m_h^2\,\cos^2{\a} + m_H^2\,\sin^2{\a}\right)\,, \n\\
\l_2 &=& \frac{1}{8 v_2}\left[-\left(m_H^2-m_h^2\right)\,\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}v_1}\sin{2\a}
-M_1 +8 m_3^2 \frac{v_2}{v^2} \right]\,, \n\\
\l_3 &=& \frac{1}{8 v_2^2} \left( m_5^2 -3 m_3^2 \frac{v_1^2}{v^2} 
+\frac{M_1 v_1^2}{2 v_2} - 12 M_2 v_2 \right)\,, \n\\
\l_4 &=& \frac{1}{24 v_2^2} \left( m_h^2\,\sin^2 {\a} + m_H^2\,\cos^2 {\a} - m_5^2
+ 3 m_3^2 \frac{v_1^2}{v^2} - 3 M_1 \frac{v_1^2}{4 v_2} + 18 M_2 v_2 \right)\,, \n\\
\l_5 &=& 2 \left( \frac{m_3^2}{v^2} - \frac{M_1}{4 v_2} \right)\,.
\label{eq:lamda}
\eea
% 
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\section{Theoretical constraints and LHC data}
\label{constraints}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
% 
The theoretical constraints, mainly resulting from the 
perturbative unitarity and electroweak vacuum stability, and 
the experimental constraints, typically 
following the LHC data put the limit on the parameters of 
the GM potential. 
Here, we write down the theoretical constraints already 
available in the literature. 
The reader may follow \cite{Hartling:2014zca, Hartling:2014aga} 
for the detailed knowledges of the theoretical constraints. 

Constraints obtained from perturbative unitarity are given by,
\bea
\sqrt{\left( 6\l_1-7\l_3-11\l_4 \right)^2+36\l_2^2}+\mid 6\l_1+7\l_3+11\l_4\mid &<& 4\pi\,, \n\\
\sqrt{\left( 2\l_1+\l_3-2\l_4 \right)^2+\l_5^2}+\mid 2\l_1-\l_3+2\l_4\mid &<& 4\pi\,, \n\\
\mid 2\l_3+\l_4\mid &<& \pi\,, \n\\
\mid \l_2-\l_5\mid &<& 2\pi\,,
\eea
and the constraints obtained from electroweak vacuum stability 
are given by,
\bea
\l_1\, &>&\, 0\,,\n\\
\l_2+\l_3\,&>&\,0\,,\n\\
\l_2+\frac12\l_3\,&>&\,0\,,\n\\
-\mid\l_4\mid +2\sqrt{\l_1\left(\l_2+\l_3\right)}\,&>&\,0\,,\n\\
\l_4-\frac14 \mid\l_5\mid +\sqrt{2\l_1\left(2\l_2+\l_3\right)}\,&>&\,0\,.
\eea

For the constraints coming from the LHC data, we consider 
the Higgs data at $\sqrt{s}=$13 TeV 
\cite{CMS:2018lkl,ATLAS:2019slw}. Here, we contemplate the 
lightest CP-even scalar $h$ as the SM-like Higgs with mass 
$m_h\approx125$ GeV. Therefore, we require to know the couplings 
of $h$ with the SM fermions and the vector bosons, which we 
enlist below :
\be
g_{h{\bar{f}}f} = -i\frac{m_f}{v}\frac{c_{\a}}{c_{\b}}\,,\quad
i g_{hWW}\eta_{\mu\nu} = i c_W^2 g_{hZZ}\eta_{\mu\nu} = -i \frac{e^2}{6 s_W^2} (8\sqrt{3}s_{\a}v_2\,-\,
3 c_{\a}v_1) \eta_{\mu\nu}\,.
\ee
The ratio of the fermionic and bosonic couplings with $h$ in 
the GM model to that in the SM model are given by,
\be
\kappa_f^h = \frac{v}{v_1}c_{\a}\,,\quad
\kappa_V^h = -\frac{1}{3v}(8\sqrt{3}s_{\a}v_2\,-\,3 c_{\a}v_1)\,.
\ee
For the decay $h\rightarrow\gamma\gamma$, the charged scalars 
coming from the triplet and quintuplet contribute in the loop. 
So, we need the corresponding couplings :
\bea
-i g_{h{H_3^+}{H_3^-}} &=&
-i (64\l_1 c_{\a}\frac{v_2^2 v_1}{v^2}\,-\frac{8}{\sqrt{3}}
\frac{v_1^2 v_2}{v^2}s_{\a}(\l_3+3\l_4)\,- \frac{4}{\sqrt{3}} \frac{v_2 M_1}{v^2} (s_{\a}v_2-\sqrt{3}c_{\a}v_1)\, \n\\
&&-\frac{16}{\sqrt{3}}\frac{v_2^3}{v^2}s_{\a} (6\l_2+\l_5)\, -\,c_{\a}\frac{v_1^3}{v^2}(\l_5-4\l_2)\,+\,
2\sqrt{3}M_2\frac{v_1^2}{v^2}s_{\a}\, \n\\
&& -\,\frac{8}{\sqrt{3}}\l_5\frac{v_1 v_2}{v^2} (s_{\a}v_1\,-\,\sqrt{3}c_{\a}v_2))\,, \n \\
-i g_{h{H_5^+}{H_5^-}} &=& -i g_{h{H_5^{++}}{H_5^{--}}} = 
-i( -8\sqrt{3}(\l_3+\l_4) s_{\a} v_2\,+\,(4\l_2+\l_5)c_{\a}v_1
-\,2\sqrt{3}M_2 s_{\a} )\,.
\label{eq:chargedcoupling}
\eea
One can replace the $\l_i$s present in the Eq.\ 
(\ref{eq:chargedcoupling}) with the help of the expressions given 
in (\ref{eq:lamda}) to get the couplings in terms of the physical 
masses, mixing angle, VEVs, and the trilinear coefficients. 

Considering the Eq.\ (\ref{eq:mu}) and (\ref{eq:lamda}), we 
have nine independent parameters ($m_h$, $m_H$, $m_3$, $m_5$, 
$\sin{\a}$, $v_2$, $v$, $M_1$, $M_2$) and we choose $m_h$ as 
identical to the SM-like Higgs mass.
To scan the parameter space, we choose the mass of the heavier 
CP-even neutral scalar $H$ starting from $150$ GeV and that 
of the members of the multiplets starting from $80$ GeV. 
The upper limit of $m_H$ and $m_5$ are set to $1000$ GeV. 
We vary the triplet VEV $v_2$ in between $0-60$ GeV. 
$v$ is the electroweak VEV as usual. 
Since our purpose is to study the low mass phenomenology of 
$H_3^+$, we consider $m_3$ in between $80-160$ GeV. 
Finally, we consider $M_1$ and $M_2$ in 
between $[-2000,2000]$ GeV. 

Now, in Fig.\ (\ref{fig:overlapped}) we present the plots 
in the $m_3-v_2$, $m_5-v_2$, $m_3-m_5$, $m_H-v_2$, $v_2-M_1$, 
$v_2-M_2$, $M_1-M_2$, $\sin{\a}-v_2$ plane, where the region 
allowed by the theoretical constraints, and the LHC data at 
$\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV are shown by blue and violet points 
respectively. 

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{figure}
 \begin{center}
 \includegraphics[width= 7.5cm]{GM_v2_m3.pdf} \ \ 
  \includegraphics[width= 7.5cm]{GM_v2_m5.pdf} \\
 \includegraphics[width= 7.5cm]{GM_m5_m3.pdf} \ \ 
  \includegraphics[width= 7.5cm]{GM_v2_mH.pdf} \\
 \includegraphics[width= 7.5cm]{GM_v2_M1.pdf} \ \ 
  \includegraphics[width= 7.5cm]{GM_v2_M2.pdf} \\
 \includegraphics[width= 7.5cm]{GM_M1_M2.pdf} \ \ 
  \includegraphics[width= 7.5cm]{GM_v2_sa.pdf} \\
 \end{center}
 \caption{\small Allowed parameter space in the $m_3-v_2$, 
 $m_5-v_2$, $m_3-m_5$, $m_H-v_2$, $v_2-M_1$, $v_2-M_2$, 
 $M_1-M_2$, $\sin{\a}-v_2$ plane from theoretical constraints 
 and LHC data at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV, are shown by blue and 
 violet points respectively.}
 \label{fig:overlapped}
 \end{figure}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

First, we consider the theoretical constraints that restrict 
the quartic couplings $\l_i$s of the scalar potential, which 
are shown by the blue points in the Fig.\ (\ref{fig:overlapped}). 
It is clear from the plots that, we have a lower limit on the 
triplet VEV $v_2$, which must be greater than $5$ GeV. 
We also have an upper limit on $m_5$ as well as on $m_H$. 
The theoretical constraints ensure that, the mass of the members 
of the quintuplet and the mass of the heavier CP-even neutral 
scalar must be less than $600$ GeV and $720$ GeV respectively. 
With increasing $m_H$ and $m_5$, lesser region for $v_2$ is 
allowed. 
When the value of $m_5$ is approximately in between $80-200$ GeV, 
almost all values of $v_2$ ranging approximately from $6-60$ GeV 
are allowed. But after that, the allowed region for $v_2$ becomes 
more and more shortened as the minimum allowed value for $v_2$ 
is gradually shifted to the higher values. 
As $v_2$ increases, absolute value of $M_1$ also increases 
sharply, while that of $M_2$ decreases. 
There are also correlation between the trilinear coefficients 
$M_1$ and $M_2$ which can be seen from the plot.
Also, there is no preferred value of $\sin{\a}$ with changing 
$v_2$.

Next, we consider the LHC data at $\sqrt{s}=$13 TeV, which are 
depicted by the violet points in the plots of the 
Fig.\ (\ref{fig:overlapped}). 
No limit is offered on the masses and the trilinear coefficients 
$M_1$ and $M_2$ by the LHC data. 
But, we get a prominent allowed region in the $\sin{\a}-v_2$ 
plane from these data, which is mainly due to the inclusion of 
the charged scalars in the loop for the decay channel 
$h\rightarrow \gamma \gamma$. 
Mainly negative values and some small positive values ($<0.15$) 
of $\sin{\a}$ are admitted by the LHC data. 
For $v_2>10$ GeV, no positive values od $\sin{\a}$ is allowed 
and for $v_2>20$ GeV, a further narrow region is allowed in 
this plane.

It should be clear from the above discussion, that, the  theoretical constraints or the LHC data alone cannot curb the 
parameter space, and hence we are to consider both of them 
simultaneously, which we show in the plots of the 
Fig.\ \ref{fig:overlapped} by the points in the region 
overlapped by both of the blue and violet points. 
For instance, consider the $v_2-m_H$ plane, where, though the 
LHC data do not put any limit on $m_H$, the theoretical 
constraints admit the value of $m_H$ upto $700$ GeV. 
The plots in the Fig.\ \ref{fig:overlapped} clearly admit that, 
though the limits on the masses ($m_H, m_3, m_5$) and the 
trilinear couplings ($M_1, M_2$) are mainly arising due to 
the adoption of the theoretical constraints, the limits on 
the triplet VEV $v_2$ and $\sin {\a}$ are direct consequence 
of the application of the LHC data. 

%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\section{Results}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%
We have already mentioned that, in the GM model, there are two 
pairs of singly charged scalars; $H_3^{\pm}$ coming from 
the triplet and $H_5^{\pm}$ coming from the quintuplet. 
But, due to its pure triplet origin, $H_5^{\pm}$ do not couple 
to the SM fermions, while $H_3^{\pm}$ couple to the fermions 
via the doublet mixing, which can also be observed from the 
Eq.\ (\ref{eq:fields}). 
In this paper, we are interested only in fermionic decay of the 
singly charged scalars, and therefore, we will talk about the 
branching ratios of $H_3^{\pm}$. 
Since we focus only on the decays of the light charged scalar, 
in this paper, the production process of $H_3^{\pm}$ we consider 
is through the decay of t (or $\bar{t}$) to $H_3^+b$ 
($H_3^-\bar{b}$). 

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{figure}
 \begin{center}
 \includegraphics[width= 9.5cm]{BRtTOh3pb.pdf}
 \end{center}
 \caption{\small Branching ratio of $t\rightarrow H_3^{+}b$ 
 as a function of mass $m_3$ in GeV, for $v_2=$10,15,20 GeV. 
 The other parameters chosen as mentioned in the Eq.\ (\ref{eq:BP}).}
 \label{fig:BRtTOh3pb}
 \end{figure}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

First, in the Fig.\ \ref{fig:BRtTOh3pb} we depict the branching 
ratio (BR) of $t\rightarrow H_3^+b$ for varying $v_2$ and 
show that, for a particular mass of $H_3^+$, BR increases with 
increasing $v_2$, while it decreases with increasing mass at 
any fixed triplet VEV. 
Here, we consider three values of $v_2$; $10, 15, 20$ GeV. 
Though the BR of the decay $t\rightarrow W^+b$ is maximum, 
that of $t\rightarrow H_3^+b$ is still sizeable in the GM model. 
In the Fig.\ \ref{fig:h3pBR}, we show the BR of $H_3^{\pm}$ 
as the function of mass $m_3$. 
We only depict the decays of $H_3^{\pm}$ for which the 
corresponding BR is greater than $0.0001$. 
To generate these plots (Fig.\ \ref{fig:BRtTOh3pb}, 
\ref{fig:h3pBR}), we choose, 
\be
m_H = 200\,~\text{GeV}\,,\,\,m_5 = 80\,~\text{GeV}\,,\,\,
\sin{\a} = -0.2\,,\,\,M_1 = M_2 = 100\,~\text{GeV}\,,\,\,
\label{eq:BP}
\ee
such that, the selection of the parameters satisfy the 
theoretical constraints given in the Sec.\ \ref{constraints}. 
To plot the Fig.\ \ref{fig:h3pBR}, we choose a particular value 
of the triplet VEV $v_2=$20 GeV, as the nature of this plot is 
independent of the value of $v_2$. 

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{figure}
 \begin{center}
 \includegraphics[width= 9.5cm]{h3pBR.pdf}
 \end{center}
 \caption{\small Branching ratios of $H_3^{\pm}$ as a function 
 of mass $m_3$ in GeV at $v_2=20$ GeV. The other independent 
 parameters are chosen as mentioned in the Eq.\ (\ref{eq:BP}).}
 \label{fig:h3pBR}
 \end{figure}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

The plots in this Fig. show that, the BR is maximum for the 
process $H_3^{\pm}\rightarrow cs$ followed by the process 
$H_3^{\pm}\rightarrow \tau^{\pm}\nu_{\tau}$ with an approximate 
value of $0.57$ and $0.39$ respectively. 
Therefore, we are interested in probing the parameter space 
of the GM model for the light (within the mass range $80-160$ 
GeV) singly charged scalar $H_3^{\pm}$ produced by the mechanism 
$t\rightarrow H_3^{\pm}b$, with the subsequent decays 
$H_3^{\pm}\rightarrow cs$ and $H_3^{\pm}\rightarrow \tau^{\pm} \nu_{\tau}$. 

Light charged Higgs boson decaying via $H^{\pm}\rightarrow cs$ 
has already been searched in CMS with $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV 
\cite{CMS:2020osd}. 
Also, search for light charged Higgs boson in the $H^{\pm}\rightarrow \tau^{\pm}\nu_{\tau}$ decay is alredy carried out 
in ATLAS \cite{ATLAS:2018gfm} and CMS \cite{CMS:2019bfg} with 
$\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV. 
We use these experimental results to provide an upper limit on 
the triplet VEV $v_2$ in the GM model. 

We depict $BR(t\rightarrow H_3^+b)\times BR(H_3^+\rightarrow c\bar{s})$ as a function of the charged scalar mass $(m_3)$ 
for three choices of triplet VEV $v_2$ in the Fig.\ \ref{fig:cs}. 
From the plot, one can see that, for $v_2=20$ GeV, a very narrow 
region of mass, $m_3>147$ GeV, is only allowed. 
The scenerio becomes better with decreasing $v_2$. 
For $v_2=15$ GeV, the charged scalar mass less than $85$ GeV and 
greater than $137$ GeV is allowed. 
For $v_2=10$ GeV, only the region with mass in between $95-118$ 
GeV, approximately, is excluded. 
The full mass region is available for further decrease in $v_2$, 
which is not shown in this plot, but can easily be understood. 

Next, we depict the plots for the decay of $H_3^{\pm}$ into 
$\tau^{\pm}\nu_{\tau}$ but in two different manners to apply 
the bound obtained from the data by ATLAS and CMS, separately. 
In the left plot of the Fig.\ \ref{fig:taunu}, we show 
production cross section $(\sigma_{H_3^{\pm}})$ times branching 
ratio of $H_3^{\pm}$ decaying into $\tau^{\pm}\nu_{\tau}$ as a function of mass $m_3$ in GeV, for $v_2=15,20$ GeV. Following 
\cite{CMS:2019bfg}, we consider $\sigma_{H_3^{\pm}}=2\sigma_{t\bar{t}}BR(t\rightarrow H_3^{\pm}b)(1-BR(t\rightarrow H_3^{\pm}b))$. 
Here, the shaded region is excluded by CMS data. 
From the plot, one can see that, for $v_2=20$ GeV, the region 
with mass greater than $130$ GeV is only allowed. 
For $v_2=15$ GeV, the full mass range is allowed. 
In the right plot of the Fig.\ \ref{fig:taunu}, we show 
BR of the top quark decaying into $H_3^{\pm}b$ times BR of 
$H_3^{\pm}$ decaying into $\tau^{\pm}\nu_{\tau}$ as a function 
of mass $m_3$ in GeV, for $v_2=10,15,20$ GeV. 
Here, the black line represnts the limit from ATLAS experiment 
\cite{ATLAS:2018gfm}. 
From the plot, one can see that, a very narrow region is allowed 
by the experimental data. 
The region with $m_3>146$ GeV, approximately, is allowed for this 
decay for $v_2=10$ GeV. 
For $v_2=15$ and $20$ GeV, this allowed mass region is above 
$157$ and $158$ GeV respectively. 
Therefore, for this decay channel, ATLAS provides a more 
stringent bound on the triplet VEV than CMS. 

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{figure}
 \begin{center}
 \includegraphics[width= 9.5cm]{csCMS.pdf}
 \end{center}
 \caption{\small Branching ratio of the top quark decaying into 
 $H_3^+$ and $b$ times the branching ratio of $H_3^+$ 
 decaying into $c$ and $\bar{s}$ as a function of mass $m_3$ in 
 GeV, for $v_2=10,15,20$ GeV with red, blue and violet coloured 
 lines respectively. The black line represnts the limit from 
 CMS experiment \cite{CMS:2020osd}. The shaded region is 
 excluded by CMS data.}
 \label{fig:cs}
 \end{figure}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{figure}
 \begin{center}
 \includegraphics[width= 8.2cm]{taunuCMS.pdf} \ \
 \includegraphics[width= 8.2cm]{taunuATLAS.pdf}
 \end{center}
 \caption{\small Left : Production cross section times 
 branching ratio of $H_3^{\pm}$ decaying into $\tau^{\pm}\nu_{\tau}$ as a function of mass $m_3$ in GeV, for 
 $v_2=15,20$ GeV. The black line represnts the limit from CMS 
 experiment \cite{CMS:2019bfg}.\\ 
 Right : Branching ratio of the top quark decaying into $H_3^{\pm}$ and $b$ times the branching 
 ratio of $H_3^{\pm}$ decaying into $\tau^{\pm}\nu_{\tau}$ as a 
 function of mass $m_3$ in GeV, for $v_2=10,15,20$ GeV. The 
 black line represnts the limit from ATLAS experiment 
 \cite{ATLAS:2018gfm}.\\ 
 The red, blue and violet lines correspond 
 to $v_2=10,15,20$ GeV respectively. The shaded region is 
 excluded by the experimental data.}
 \label{fig:taunu}
 \end{figure}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

To generate the plots, we first implement the model in 
Feynrules \cite{Alloul:2013bka} to obtain the UFO file required 
to generate events using MadGraph5 (v2.8.2) \cite{Alwall:2014hca}. 
%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\section{Conclusions}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Recent searches at the LHC for light singly-charged scalar 
decaying into either $cs$ or $\tau^{\pm}\nu_{\tau}$ encourage 
us to investigate these decay channels in BSM model with 
triplets. 
We choose the Georgi-Machacek model, where the scalar sector 
of SM is added by a real and a complex triplet, such that, 
the custodial symmetry is preserved at the tree level. 
Besides two doubly charged scalars, there are four singly-
charged scalars in this model, out of which two ($H_5^{\pm}$) 
do not have any couplings with the SM fermions. 
Therefore, we are interested in the production and decay of 
the other two singly-charged scalars ($H_3^{\pm}$). 
Since, we consider only the decay of light charged scalars, 
within the mass range of $80-160$ GeV, the production mechanism 
we contemplate is $t\rightarrow H_3^{\pm}b$. 
We get an upper bound on the triplet VEV by considering the 
experimental limits provided by ATLAS and CMS at the LHC with 
$\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV, for the decay channels 
$H_3^{\pm}\rightarrow cs$ and 
$H_3^{\pm}\rightarrow\tau^{\pm}\nu_{\tau}$, separately. 
For $H_3^{\pm}\rightarrow cs$, the full mass range of $m_3$ is  
not available even for $v_2=10$ GeV, and we must lower the 
triplet VEV further to employ the full range of $m_3$ (i.e., 
$80-160$ GeV), while in the case of 
$H_3^{\pm}\rightarrow\tau^{\pm}\nu_{\tau}$, lowering $v_2$ below 
$10$ GeV may give the full access of the lower range of $m_3$. 
It is also to be noted that, for the former case, data from the 
CMS experiment are only available, whereas, for the later, 
though the data are available from ATLAS and CMS both, we get 
a more stringent bound from the ATLAS. 
On top of this, we also considered the restrictions on the 
parameter space arising from the theoretical constraints and 
Higgs data. 
We showed that, simultaneous adoption of these constraints 
also curb the parameter space of the GM model. 

\vspace{0.5cm}
{\em{\bf Acknowledgements}} --- The author would like to 
acknowledge the SERB grant CRG/2018/004889. 
SG also thanks Prof. Anirban Kundu for useful discussions 
and Dr. Suman Chatterjee for technical help in MadGraph5. 
This work is done independently, without any financial support, 
as the author is an honorary fellow.

  

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{thebibliography}{99}
%

\bibitem{ATLAS:2012yve}
G.~Aad \textit{et al.} [ATLAS],
%``Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC,''
Phys. Lett. B \textbf{716}, 1-29 (2012)
doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2012.08.020
[arXiv:1207.7214 [hep-ex]].
%
\bibitem{CMS:2012qbp}
S.~Chatrchyan \textit{et al.} [CMS],
%``Observation of a New Boson at a Mass of 125 GeV with the CMS Experiment at the LHC,''
Phys. Lett. B \textbf{716}, 30-61 (2012)
doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2012.08.021
[arXiv:1207.7235 [hep-ex]].
%
\bibitem{Ivina:2022tfm}
A.~Ivina [ATLAS],
%``Search for light charged Higgs boson in $t\to H^\pm + b (H^\pm\to cb)$ decays with the ATLAS detector at LHC,''
PoS \textbf{EPS-HEP2021}, 631 (2022)
doi:10.22323/1.398.0631
%
\bibitem{ATLAS:2021zyv}
 [ATLAS],
%``Search for a light charged Higgs boson in $t \to H^{\pm} b$ decays, with $H^{\pm} \to c b$, in the lepton+jets final state in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector,''
ATLAS-CONF-2021-037.
%
\bibitem{CMS:2020osd}
A.~M.~Sirunyan \textit{et al.} [CMS],
%``Search for a light charged Higgs boson in the H$^\pm$ $\to $ cs channel in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13 TeV,''
Phys. Rev. D \textbf{102}, no.7, 072001 (2020)
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.102.072001
[arXiv:2005.08900 [hep-ex]].
%
\bibitem{ATLAS:2013uxj}
G.~Aad \textit{et al.} [ATLAS],
%``Search for a light charged Higgs boson in the decay channel $H^+ \to c\bar{s}$ in $t\bar{t}$ events using pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 7 TeV with the ATLAS detector,''
Eur. Phys. J. C \textbf{73}, no.6, 2465 (2013)
doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-013-2465-z
[arXiv:1302.3694 [hep-ex]].
%
\bibitem{ATLAS:2010ofa}
 [ATLAS],
%``Expected Sensitivity in Light Charged Higgs Boson Searches for $H^+ \to \tau^+\nu$ and $H^+ \to c\bar{s}$ with Early LHC Data at the ATLAS Experiment,''
ATL-PHYS-PUB-2010-006.
%
\bibitem{ATLAS:2018gfm}
M.~Aaboud \textit{et al.} [ATLAS],
%``Search for charged Higgs bosons decaying via $H^{\pm} \to \tau^{\pm}\nu_{\tau}$ in the $\tau$+jets and $\tau$+lepton final states with 36 fb$^{-1}$ of $pp$ collision data recorded at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV with the ATLAS experiment,''
JHEP \textbf{09}, 139 (2018)
doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2018)139
[arXiv:1807.07915 [hep-ex]].
%
\bibitem{CMS:2019bfg}
A.~M.~Sirunyan \textit{et al.} [CMS],
%``Search for charged Higgs bosons in the H$^{\pm}$ $\to$ $\tau^{\pm}\nu_\tau$ decay channel in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13 TeV,''
JHEP \textbf{07}, 142 (2019)
doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2019)142
[arXiv:1903.04560 [hep-ex]].
%
\bibitem{Abbaspour:2018ysj}
S.~Abbaspour, S.~M.~Moosavi Nejad and M.~Balali,
%``Indirect search for light charged Higgs bosons through the dominant semileptonic decays of top quark $t\to b(\to B/D+X)+H^+(\to \tau^+\nu_\tau)$,''
Nucl. Phys. B \textbf{932}, 505-528 (2018)
doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2018.05.023
[arXiv:1806.02546 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{ATLAS:2016avi}
M.~Aaboud \textit{et al.} [ATLAS],
%``Search for charged Higgs bosons produced in association with a top quark and decaying via $H^{\pm} \rightarrow \tau\nu$ using $pp$ collision data recorded at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV by the ATLAS detector,''
Phys. Lett. B \textbf{759}, 555-574 (2016)
doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2016.06.017
[arXiv:1603.09203 [hep-ex]].
%
\bibitem{ATLAS:2011pka}
 [ATLAS],
%``Search for a charged Higgs boson decaying via H+ to tau(lep)+nu in ttbar events with one or two light leptons in the final state using 1.03/fb of pp collision data recorded at sqrt(s) = 7 TeV with the ATLAS detector,''
ATLAS-CONF-2011-151.
%
\bibitem{ATLAS:2012nhc}
G.~Aad \textit{et al.} [ATLAS],
%``Search for charged Higgs bosons decaying via $H^{+} \to \tau \nu$ in top quark pair events using $pp$ collision data at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV with the ATLAS detector,''
JHEP \textbf{06}, 039 (2012)
doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2012)039
[arXiv:1204.2760 [hep-ex]].
%
\bibitem{Ali:2011qf}
A.~Ali, F.~Barreiro and J.~Llorente,
%``Improved sensitivity to charged Higgs searches in Top quark decays $t \to bH^+ \to b (\tau^+\nu_\tau)$ at the LHC using $\tau$ polarisation and multivariate tecnniques,''
Eur. Phys. J. C \textbf{71}, 1737 (2011)
doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1737-8
[arXiv:1103.1827 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{CMS:2012fgz}
S.~Chatrchyan \textit{et al.} [CMS],
%``Search for a light charged Higgs boson in top quark decays in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV,''
JHEP \textbf{07}, 143 (2012)
doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2012)143
[arXiv:1205.5736 [hep-ex]].
%
\bibitem{Cheung:2022ndq}
K.~Cheung, A.~Jueid, J.~Kim, S.~Lee, C.~T.~Lu and J.~Song,
%``Comprehensive study of the light charged Higgs boson in the type-I two-Higgs-doublet model,''
[arXiv:2201.06890 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Akeroyd:2016ymd}
A.~G.~Akeroyd, M.~Aoki, A.~Arhrib, L.~Basso, I.~F.~Ginzburg, R.~Guedes, J.~Hernandez-Sanchez, K.~Huitu, T.~Hurth and M.~Kadastik, \textit{et al.}
%``Prospects for charged Higgs searches at the LHC,''
Eur. Phys. J. C \textbf{77}, no.5, 276 (2017)
doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-4829-2
[arXiv:1607.01320 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Benbrik:2021wyl}
R.~Benbrik, M.~Boukidi, B.~Manaut, M.~Ouchemhou, S.~Semlali and S.~Taj,
%``New charged Higgs boson discovery channel at the LHC,''
[arXiv:2112.07502 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Akeroyd:2016ssd}
A.~G.~Akeroyd, S.~Moretti, K.~Yagyu and E.~Yildirim,
%``Light charged Higgs boson scenario in 3-Higgs doublet models,''
Int. J. Mod. Phys. A \textbf{32}, no.23n24, 1750145 (2017)
doi:10.1142/S0217751X17501457
[arXiv:1605.05881 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Akeroyd:2012yg}
A.~G.~Akeroyd, S.~Moretti and J.~Hernandez-Sanchez,
%``Light charged Higgs bosons decaying to charm and bottom quarks in models with two or more Higgs doublets,''
Phys. Rev. D \textbf{85}, 115002 (2012)
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.115002
[arXiv:1203.5769 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Akeroyd:2022ouy}
A.~G.~Akeroyd, S.~Moretti and M.~Song,
%``Slight excess at 130 GeV in search for a charged Higgs boson decaying to a charm quark and a bottom quark at the Large Hadron Collider,''
[arXiv:2202.03522 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Hou:2021qff}
W.~S.~Hou, R.~Jain and T.~Modak,
%``Searching for Charged Higgs Bosons via $e^+ e^- \to H^+ H^- \to c\bar{b} \bar{c}b $ at Linear Colliders,''
[arXiv:2111.06523 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Akeroyd:2019mvt}
A.~G.~Akeroyd, S.~Moretti and M.~Song,
%``Light charged Higgs boson with dominant decay to a charm quark and a bottom quark and its search at LEP2 and future $e^+e^-$ colliders,''
Phys. Rev. D \textbf{101}, no.3, 035021 (2020)
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.101.035021
[arXiv:1908.00826 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Akeroyd:2018axd}
A.~G.~Akeroyd, S.~Moretti and M.~Song,
%``Light charged Higgs boson with dominant decay to quarks and its search at the LHC and future colliders,''
Phys. Rev. D \textbf{98}, no.11, 115024 (2018)
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.115024
[arXiv:1810.05403 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Georgi:1985nv}
H.~Georgi and M.~Machacek,
%``DOUBLY CHARGED HIGGS BOSONS,''
Nucl. Phys. B \textbf{262}, 463-477 (1985)
doi:10.1016/0550-3213(85)90325-6
%
\bibitem{Ghosh:2019qie}
N.~Ghosh, S.~Ghosh and I.~Saha,
%``Charged Higgs boson searches in the Georgi-Machacek model at the LHC,''
Phys. Rev. D \textbf{101}, no.1, 015029 (2020)
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.101.015029
[arXiv:1908.00396 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Logan:2018wtm}
H.~E.~Logan and Y.~Wu,
%``Searching for the $W\gamma$ decay of a charged Higgs boson,''
JHEP \textbf{11}, 121 (2018)
doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2018)121
[arXiv:1809.09127 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Ismail:2020zoz}
A.~Ismail, H.~E.~Logan and Y.~Wu,
%``Updated constraints on the Georgi-Machacek model from LHC Run 2,''
[arXiv:2003.02272 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Hartling:2014zca}
K.~Hartling, K.~Kumar and H.~E.~Logan,
%``The decoupling limit in the Georgi-Machacek model,''
Phys. Rev. D \textbf{90}, no.1, 015007 (2014)
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.015007
[arXiv:1404.2640 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Krauss:2017xpj}
M.~E.~Krauss and F.~Staub,
%``Perturbativity Constraints in BSM Models,''
Eur. Phys. J. C \textbf{78}, no.3, 185 (2018)
doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-5676-5
[arXiv:1709.03501 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Moultaka:2020dmb}
G.~Moultaka and M.~C.~Peyran\`ere,
%``Vacuum stability conditions for Higgs potentials with $SU(2)_L$ triplets,''
Phys. Rev. D \textbf{103}, no.11, 115006 (2021)
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.103.115006
[arXiv:2012.13947 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Aoki:2007ah}
M.~Aoki and S.~Kanemura,
%``Unitarity bounds in the Higgs model including triplet fields with custodial symmetry,''
Phys. Rev. D \textbf{77}, no.9, 095009 (2008)
[erratum: Phys. Rev. D \textbf{89}, no.5, 059902 (2014)]
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.095009
[arXiv:0712.4053 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Hartling:2014aga}
K.~Hartling, K.~Kumar and H.~E.~Logan,
%``Indirect constraints on the Georgi-Machacek model and implications for Higgs boson couplings,''
Phys. Rev. D \textbf{91}, no.1, 015013 (2015)
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.015013
[arXiv:1410.5538 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Chang:2017niy}
J.~Chang, C.~R.~Chen and C.~W.~Chiang,
%``Higgs boson pair productions in the Georgi-Machacek model at the LHC,''
JHEP \textbf{03}, 137 (2017)
doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2017)137
[arXiv:1701.06291 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Chiang:2014hia}
C.~W.~Chiang and T.~Yamada,
%``Electroweak phase transition in Georgi\textendash{}Machacek model,''
Phys. Lett. B \textbf{735}, 295-300 (2014)
doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2014.06.048
[arXiv:1404.5182 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Zhou:2018zli}
R.~Zhou, W.~Cheng, X.~Deng, L.~Bian and Y.~Wu,
%``Electroweak phase transition and Higgs phenomenology in the Georgi-Machacek model,''
JHEP \textbf{01}, 216 (2019)
doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2019)216
[arXiv:1812.06217 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Banerjee:2019gmr}
A.~Banerjee, G.~Bhattacharyya and N.~Kumar,
%``Impact of Yukawa-like dimension-five operators on the Georgi-Machacek model,''
Phys. Rev. D \textbf{99}, no.3, 035028 (2019)
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.99.035028
[arXiv:1901.01725 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Chiang:2014bia}
C.~W.~Chiang, S.~Kanemura and K.~Yagyu,
%``Novel constraint on the parameter space of the Georgi-Machacek model with current LHC data,''
Phys. Rev. D \textbf{90}, no.11, 115025 (2014)
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.115025
[arXiv:1407.5053 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Chiang:2015rva}
C.~W.~Chiang, S.~Kanemura and K.~Yagyu,
%``Phenomenology of the Georgi-Machacek model at future electron-positron colliders,''
Phys. Rev. D \textbf{93}, no.5, 055002 (2016)
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.055002
[arXiv:1510.06297 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Logan:2015xpa}
H.~E.~Logan and V.~Rentala,
%``All the generalized Georgi-Machacek models,''
Phys. Rev. D \textbf{92}, no.7, 075011 (2015)
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.075011
[arXiv:1502.01275 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Kundu:2021pcg}
A.~Kundu, P.~Mondal and P.~B.~Pal,
%``Custodial symmetry, the Georgi-Machacek model, and other scalar extensions,''
[arXiv:2111.14195 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Hartling:2014xma}
K.~Hartling, K.~Kumar and H.~E.~Logan,
%``GMCALC: a calculator for the Georgi-Machacek model,''
[arXiv:1412.7387 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Chiang:2018cgb}
C.~W.~Chiang, G.~Cottin and O.~Eberhardt,
%``Global fits in the Georgi-Machacek model,''
Phys. Rev. D \textbf{99}, no.1, 015001 (2019)
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.99.015001
[arXiv:1807.10660 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{CMS:2018lkl}
 [CMS],
%``Combined measurements of the Higgs boson's couplings at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV,''
CMS-PAS-HIG-17-031.
%
\bibitem{ATLAS:2019slw}
 [ATLAS],
%``Combined measurements of Higgs boson production and decay using up to $80$ fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collision data at $\sqrt{s}=$ 13 TeV collected with the ATLAS experiment,''
ATLAS-CONF-2019-005.
%
\bibitem{Alloul:2013bka}
A.~Alloul, N.~D.~Christensen, C.~Degrande, C.~Duhr and B.~Fuks,
%``FeynRules  2.0 - A complete toolbox for tree-level phenomenology,''
Comput. Phys. Commun. \textbf{185}, 2250-2300 (2014)
doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2014.04.012
[arXiv:1310.1921 [hep-ph]].
%
\bibitem{Alwall:2014hca}
J.~Alwall, R.~Frederix, S.~Frixione, V.~Hirschi, F.~Maltoni, O.~Mattelaer, H.~S.~Shao, T.~Stelzer, P.~Torrielli and M.~Zaro,
%``The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations,''
JHEP \textbf{07}, 079 (2014)
doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2014)079
[arXiv:1405.0301 [hep-ph]].
%

 \end{thebibliography}

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% 
 
\end{document}