Ok! Thank you for your help.
Also I have a problem, that I can not to understand a long time.
We have some good bench mark points. We compare results in 2 programs  NMSSMTools5.2.0 and SPheno4.0.3. NMSSMTools give us good results, but SPheno write different problems. I attached the list of problems below (Messages.out). In this file wrote that the problems with B0, C0 functions. So we improved the problem with B0 (put this function equal to zero), but we do not know how right this is. And this is not help us.
Also it is very strange that from two good points of the SPheno misses only one, despite the fact that they both have a large tan_beta. I attached this files (bmp13, bmp14  is working). This is strange as we think, because in both points we must get big higgs masses. So we can not understand this problem.
dependence branching ratious on tan_beta in NMSSM
Re: dependence branching ratious on tan_beta in NMSSM
 Attachments

 SPheno.tar.gz
 (191.77 KiB) Downloaded 8 times
Re: dependence branching ratious on tan_beta in NMSSM
Hi,
the problems with B0/C0 functions appear usually in the loop corrected decays which you can turn off via flag 16 if you don't need them.
Concerning your points: SPhenoo get's a negative mass squared for bmp13 already at treelevel. That's something what you can easily check (and confirm) yourself. In particular, the expression for the charged Higgs mass at treelevel is rather simple:
and that's negative for your numbers. So, again, I think that the SARAH/SPheno results are totally fine.
Cheers,
Florian
the problems with B0/C0 functions appear usually in the loop corrected decays which you can turn off via flag 16 if you don't need them.
Concerning your points: SPhenoo get's a negative mass squared for bmp13 already at treelevel. That's something what you can easily check (and confirm) yourself. In particular, the expression for the charged Higgs mass at treelevel is rather simple:
Code: Select all
mHpm2 = =(4 mueff^2 (1 + TB^2) \[Kappa] + 4 Alambda mueff (1 + TB^2) \[Lambda] + TB v^2 \[Lambda] (g2^2  2 \[Lambda]^2))/(4 TB \[Lambda])
and that's negative for your numbers. So, again, I think that the SARAH/SPheno results are totally fine.
Cheers,
Florian
Re: dependence branching ratious on tan_beta in NMSSM
Hi!
Ok, I understand. But I have another bench mark point. I counted manually by the expression that you wrote above, the mass is positive. But SPheno writes that it is negative.
Best wishes,
Alya
Ok, I understand. But I have another bench mark point. I counted manually by the expression that you wrote above, the mass is positive. But SPheno writes that it is negative.
Best wishes,
Alya
 Attachments

 LesHouches.in.NMSSM.tar.gz
 (1.74 KiB) Downloaded 8 times
Re: dependence branching ratious on tan_beta in NMSSM
Are you sure that you use the correct parameters in your calculation? With your settings, the soft masses are input at the GUT scale, not at the SUSY scale.
Cheers,
Florian
Cheers,
Florian
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest