Changes between Version 16 and Version 17 of ComplexMassScheme


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Aug 13, 2015, 3:15:49 AM (9 years ago)
Author:
Valentin Hirschi
Comment:

--

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • ComplexMassScheme

    v16 v17  
    2424[[Image(gg_epvemumvmxbbx.jpg,500)]] [[Image(gg_epvemumvmxbbx_inverted_logs.jpg,500)]]
    2525
    26 In the upper inset, we clearly see the finite width effects for large values of $\lambda$. These become progressively smaller and indiscernible below $10^{-3}$. When dividing this difference by lambda, as done in the lower inset, we only see a mild deviation with respect to a constant. Changing the LO width used for the test by as little as 0.1 % already yields a larger $\kappa^{\text{NLO}}_0$ than the residual one stemming from numerical inaccuracies. The figure on the left shows that incorrectly setting the analytical continuation of UV wavefunctions counterterms logarithms yields an asymptotic value of several thousands in the $\Delta^{NLO}/\lambda$ plot. This clearly establishes the sensitivity of the test towards any incorrect CMS implementation at NLO.
     26In the upper inset, we clearly see the finite width effects for large values of $\lambda$. These become progressively smaller and indiscernible below $10^{-3}$. When dividing this difference by lambda, as done in the lower inset, we only see a mild deviation with respect to a constant. Changing the LO width used for the test by as little as 0.1 % already yields a larger $\kappa^{\text{NLO}}_0$ than the residual one stemming from numerical inaccuracies. The figure on the right shows that incorrectly setting the analytical continuation of UV wavefunctions counterterms logarithms yields an asymptotic value of several thousands in the $\Delta^{NLO}/\lambda$ plot. This clearly establishes the sensitivity of the test towards any incorrect CMS implementation at NLO.
    2727
    2828We now focus on the description of the command for this check, whose main syntax is