Bare Higgs mass at Planck scale
Open accessAbstract
We compute one- and two-loop quadratic divergent contributions to the bare Higgs mass in terms of the bare couplings in the Standard Model. We approximate the bare couplings, defined at the ultraviolet cutoff scale, by the $\overline{\mathrm{MS}}$ ones at the same scale, which are evaluated by the two-loop renormalization group equations for the Higgs mass around 126 GeV in the Standard Model. We obtain the cutoff scale dependence of the bare Higgs mass, and examine where it becomes zero. We find that when we take the current central value for the top quark pole mass, 173 GeV, the bare Higgs mass vanishes if the cutoff is about ${10}^{23}\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{GeV}$. With a $1.3\text{ }\text{ }\ensuremath{\sigma}$ smaller mass, 170 GeV, the scale can be of the order of the Planck scale.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The measured value of the Higgs mass implies, in addition to the electroweak vacuum, the existence of a new vacuum where the Higgs field value is around the Planck scale.
“The measured value of the Higgs mass implies, in addition to the electroweak vacuum, the existence of a new vacuum where the Higgs field value is around the Planck scale.”
From Weak gravity conjecture, multiple point principle and the standard model landscape (2017) · cites this paper as [9]
Section IV (page unavailable) says the metastability argument does not assume a true stable vacuum at very high field values. Section V describes an almost flat potential near the Planck scale as a possibility, not an additional vacuum implied by the measured Higgs mass. (LLM, conf=0.78)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
The cosmological constant problem
Weinberg, S. (1989) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.61.1 · Cited by 7,341 · see citing works
Higgs mass and vacuum stability in the Standard Model at NNLO
Degrassi, G., Di Vita, S., Elias-Miró, J., Espinosa, J. R., Giudice, G. F., Isidori, G., & Strumia, A. (2012) · Journal of High Energy Physics · doi:10.1007/jhep08(2012)098 · Cited by 1,524 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 32
- G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 716, 1 (2012). · DOI
- S. Chatrchyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 716, 30 (2012). · DOI
- J. Beringer et al. (Particle Data Group Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 86, 010001 (2012). · DOI
- M. Holthausen, K. S. Lim, and M. Lindner, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2012) 037; · DOI
- F. Bezrukov, M. Y. Kalmykov, B. A. Kniehl, and M. Shaposhnikov, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2012) 140; I. Masina, arXiv:1209.0393. · DOI
- S. Alekhin, A. Djouadi, and S. Moch, Phys. Lett. B 716, 214 (2012). · DOI
- S. P. Martin, in Perspectives on Supersymmetry II, edited by G. L. Kane (World Scientific, Singapore, 2010), pp. 1-153.
- H. Baer, V. Barger, P. Huang, and X. Tata, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2012) 109. · DOI
- S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 59, 2607 (1987). · DOI · Paper page
- L. J. Hall and Y. Nomura, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2010) 076. · DOI
- A. D. Linde, Phys. Lett. B 200, 272 (1988); · DOI
- S. R. Coleman, Nucl. Phys. B310, 643 (1988); · DOI
- H. Kawai and T. Okada, Prog. Theor. Phys. 127, 689 (2012). · DOI
- C. D. Froggatt and H. B. Nielsen, Phys. Lett. B 368, 96 (1996); · DOI · Paper page
- B. Stech, in Proceedings to the Workshop at Bled, Slovenia, 1998 (DMFA, Ljubljana, Slovenia, 1999), p. 73;
- K. A. Meissner and H. Nicolai, Phys. Lett. B 648, 312 (2007); · DOI
- Phys. Lett. B 660, 260 (2008); · DOI
- S. Iso, N. Okada, and Y. Orikasa, Phys. Lett. B 676, 81 (2009); · DOI
- Phys. Rev. D 80, 115007 (2009); · DOI
- M. Shaposhnikov and C. Wetterich, Phys. Lett. B 683, 196 (2010). · DOI
- M. J. G. Veltman, Acta Phys. Pol. B 12, 437 (1981).
- M. B. Einhorn and D. R. T. Jones, Phys. Rev. D 46, 5206 (1992); · DOI
- C. F. Kolda and H. Murayama, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2000) 035; · DOI
- J. A. Casas, J. R. Espinosa, and I. Hidalgo, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2004) 057. · DOI
- A. Drozd, arXiv:1202.0195. · arXiv
- H. Kawai, D. C. Lewellen, and S. H. H. Tye, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 1832 (1986); 58, 429(E) (1987). · DOI
- K. Fujikawa, Phys. Rev. D 83, 105012 (2011). · DOI
- H. Arason, D. J. Castano, B. Keszthelyi, S. Mikaelian, E. J. Piard, P. Ramond, and B. D. Wright, Phys. Rev. D 46, 3945 (1992). · DOI
- C. Ford, I. Jack, and D. R. T. Jones, Nucl. Phys. B387, 373 (1992); B504, 551 (1997). · DOI
- R. Foot, A. Kobakhidze, and R. R. Volkas, Phys. Lett. B 655, 156 (2007); · DOI
- R. Foot, A. Kobakhidze, K. L. McDonald, and R. R. Volkas, Phys. Rev. D 77, 035006 (2008). · DOI
- N. Arkani-Hamed and S. Dimopoulos, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2005) 073. · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Weak gravity conjecture, multiple point principle and the standard model landscape
Hamada, Y., & Shiu, G. (2017) · Journal of High Energy Physics · doi:10.1007/jhep11(2017)043 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Self-citationWeak scale from the maximum entropy principle
Hamada, Y., Kawai, H., & Kawana, K. (2015) · Progress of Theoretical and Experimental Physics · doi:10.1093/ptep/ptv011 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Hamada, Y., Kawai, H., & Oda, K.-Y.
- Affiliations
- Kyoto University (JP)
- Venue
- Physical Review D
- Publisher
- American Physical Society (APS)
- Published
- 2013-03-15
- Volume
- 87
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 053009
- ISSN
- 0556-2821 (ISSN-L)
- 1550-7998
- 1550-2368
- OpenAlex
- W2103282377
- Cited by
- 104
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 10
- FWCI
- 8.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Physical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D. Particles and fields (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- Institutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) (submittedVersion)
- OUKA (Osaka University Knowledge Archive) (Osaka University) (submittedVersion)
- Kyoto University Research Information Repository (Kyoto University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Funders
- Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (23104009, 23740192, 22540277, 20244028)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Nuclear and High Energy Physics › Particle physics theoretical and experimental studies
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Nuclear and High Energy Physics › Quantum Chromodynamics and Particle Interactions
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Advanced Mathematical Theories and Applications
- Keywords
- quadratic divergences, one-loop corrections, two-loop corrections, renormalization group equations, Planck scale, top quark pole mass, Higgs boson mass, Standard Model
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
