Changes between Version 16 and Version 17 of ComplexMassScheme
- Timestamp:
- Aug 13, 2015, 3:15:49 AM (9 years ago)
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
- Modified
-
ComplexMassScheme
v16 v17 24 24 [[Image(gg_epvemumvmxbbx.jpg,500)]] [[Image(gg_epvemumvmxbbx_inverted_logs.jpg,500)]] 25 25 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.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 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. 27 27 28 28 We now focus on the description of the command for this check, whose main syntax is