ˊ

Equipe de Recherche en Physique Thˊeorique et Matˊeriaux

(RTTPM)
Facultˊe Polydisciplinaire de Bˊeni Mellal, Universitˊe Sultan Moulay Slimane, Bˊeni
Mellal, Maroc

Soutenance de thˋese de doctorat

Spˊecialitˊe : Physique thˊeorique et physique atomique

Contribution aˋ l’ˊetude thˊeorique de la diffusion de l’atome d’hydrogˋene

et des ions hydrogˊenoı̈des par impact de particules chargˊees, en tenant
compte de l’effet coulombien, dans un champ laser bichromatique
intense

Mouloud ABARAGH

Directeur de thˋese: Pr. Elmostafa HROUR

06 Juin 2026
Plan

1 Two Higgs Doublet Model -2HDM-

2 Associated charged Higgs production within the 2HDM: e− e+ versus µ− µ+ colliders

3 Searching for charged Higgs bosons via e+ e− → H ±W ∓ S at the ILC

4 Singlet-Triplet Higgs Model -123-

5 Conclusion

6 Perspectives

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 2

Introduction
Schˊema d’une diffusion
Particule diffusˊee
Dˊetecteur
dΩ
θ

Cible
Particules incidentes
(ˊelectrons, . . . )
Direction du faisceau incident

dσ nombre de particules diffusˊees par unitˊe de temps dans dΩ

=
dΩ flux incident × dΩ

Les processus de collision occupent une place centrale aussi bien en physique des hautes eˊ nergies qu’en physique
atomique.
En physique atomique, on distingue deux cadres d’ˊetude :
physique atomique non relativiste ;
physique atomique relativiste.
En prˊesence d’un champ laser, les processus se rˊepartissent en deux catˊegories :
• processus induits par laser : le champ laser est aˋ l’origine directe du phˊenomˋene ; exemple : ionisation multiphotonique.
• processus assistˊes par laser : le processus fondamental existe dˊejˋa, mais ses caractˊeristiques sont modifiˊees par le
laser ; exemples : diffusion de Mott, collision eˊ lectron–atome en prˊesence de laser.

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 3

Introduction
Diffusion eˊ lectron–atome : processus et interprˊetation physique
L’ˊetude de la collision eˊ lectron–atome constitue un outil essentiel pour sonder la structure atomique et dˊecrire les
mˊecanismes de transfert d’ˊenergie. Selon l’ˊetat final de la cible, on distingue la diffusion eˊ lastique et la diffusion inˊelastique,
qui regroupe notamment l’excitation et l’ionisation.

e− + A(1s) −→ e− + A(1s) ⃗k f
eˊ lectron liˊe
Diffusion eˊ lastique ⃗k i θ
e− Noyau

e− + A(1s) −→ e− + A∗ (nℓ)
Schˊema reprˊesentatif d’une collision eˊ lectron–atome
Excitation
Interprˊetation physique
e− + A(1s) −→ e− + A+ + e−
Diffusion eˊ lastique : l’atome conserve son eˊ tat interne.
Ionisation Diffusion inˊelastique : l’atome subit une excitation ou une ioni-
sation.
nℓ L’observable principale est la section efficace diffˊerentielle, qui
dˊecrit la dynamique de collision.
2s, 2p
excitation

1s
eˊ tat fondamental

La diffusion eˊ lectron–atome permet de dˊeterminer les sections efficaces et d’analyser la dynamique collisionnelle.
Les observables dˊependent notamment de l’ˊenergie incidente et de l’angle de diffusion.
Les rˊesultats thˊeoriques sont confrontˊes aux donnˊees expˊerimentales ou aˋ d’autres approches de calcul.

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 4

Introduction
Les unitˊes atomiques : un cadre naturel en physique atomique
En physique atomique, la prˊesence simultanˊee de plusieurs constantes fondamentales rend souvent les eˊ quations longues
et peu maniables. L’introduction du systˋeme des unitˊes atomiques permet de simplifier leur eˊ criture et d’obtenir une
formulation mieux adaptˊee aux phˊenomˋenes microscopiques.

Dˊefinition du systˋeme Quelques grandeurs usuelles

Dans ce systˋeme, on adopte l’unitˊe pour les constantes
fondamentales suivantes : Longueur a0 = 0.529 × 10−10 m
me = e = h̄ = 4πε 0 = 1 ˊ
Energie 1 Ha = 27.21 eV
oˋu : Temps t0 = 2.42 × 10−17 s
• me dˊesigne la masse de l’ˊelectron ; Vitesse v0 = αc
• e la charge eˊ lˊementaire ; Impulsion p0 = h̄/a0
• h̄ la constante de Planck rˊeduite ;
• ε 0 la permittivitˊe du vide. Idˊee clˊe :
Intˊerêt physique l’usage des unitˊes atomiques conduit aˋ une eˊ criture
plus simple et plus lisible des eˊ quations, ce qui facilite
• Elles simplifient considˊerablement les expressions analytiques. l’analyse des interactions eˊ lectron–atome.
• Elles offrent une description naturelle des phˊenomˋenes aˋ
l’ˊechelle atomique.
• Elles facilitent l’ˊetude des amplitudes de diffusion, des sections
efficaces et des observables physiques.
• Elles rendent les calculs thˊeoriques et numˊeriques plus clairs et
plus compacts.

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 5

Les unitˊes atomique
Discovery of the Higgs Boson

• Main Channels: Total Stat. only

ATLAS
Run 1: s = 7-8 TeV, 25 fb-1, Run 2: s = 13 TeV, 36.1 fb-1
◦ Diphoton (h → γγ): Clean signature, excellent Total (Stat. only)
Run 1 H → 4l 124.51 ± 0.52 ( ± 0.52) GeV
mass resolution.
Run 1 H → γ γ 126.02 ± 0.51 ( ± 0.43) GeV
◦ Four leptons (h → ZZ ∗
→ 4ℓ): Low background, Run 2 H → 4l 124.79 ± 0.37 ( ± 0.36) GeV
precise mass measurement.
Run 2 H → γ γ 124.93 ± 0.40 ( ± 0.21) GeV

Run 1+2 H → 4l 124.71 ± 0.30 ( ± 0.30) GeV

• Consistency with experimental measurements:
Run 1+2 H → γ γ 125.32 ± 0.35 ( ± 0.19) GeV

◦ Results from phases 1 and 2 show very good Run 1 Combined 125.38 ± 0.41 ( ± 0.37) GeV
agreement with SM predictions. Run 2 Combined 124.86 ± 0.27 ( ± 0.18) GeV

124.97 ± 0.24 ( ± 0.16) GeV

◦ Measurements of production and decay rates are Run 1+2 Combined

consistent with SM expectations. ATLAS + CMS Run 1 125.09 ± 0.24 ( ± 0.21) GeV

123 124 125 126 127 128

mH [GeV]

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 6

In a Nutshell

Unify EM Gravitation
and Weak Int.

Dark matter
Mass
Generation

Success
SM Flaws

Tested in ν-mass
Collider:
LEP → LHC

Higgs ···
discovery

non-SuSY Beyond SM SuSY

Extensions Extensions

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 7

In a Nutshell

Unify EM Gravitation
and Weak Int.

Dark matter
Mass
Generation

Success
SM Flaws

Tested in ν-mass
Collider:
LEP → LHC

Higgs ···
discovery

non-SuSY Beyond SM SuSY

Extensions Extensions

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 7

In a Nutshell

Unify EM Gravitation
and Weak Int.

Dark matter
Mass
Generation

Success
SM Flaws

Tested in ν-mass
Collider:
LEP → LHC

Higgs ···
discovery

non-SuSY Beyond SM SuSY

Extensions Extensions

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 7

In a Nutshell

Unify EM Gravitation
and Weak Int.

Dark matter
Mass
Generation

Success
SM Flaws

Tested in ν-mass
Collider:
LEP → LHC

Higgs ···
discovery

non-SuSY Beyond SM SuSY

Extensions Extensions

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 7

In a Nutshell

Unify EM Gravitation
and Weak Int.

Dark matter
Mass
Generation

Success
SM Flaws

Tested in ν-mass
Collider:
LEP → LHC

Higgs ···
discovery

non-SuSY Beyond SM SuSY

Extensions Extensions

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 7

In a Nutshell

Unify EM Gravitation
and Weak Int.

Dark matter
Mass
Generation

Success
SM Flaws

Tested in ν-mass
Collider:
LEP → LHC

Higgs ···
discovery

non-SuSY Beyond SM SuSY

Extensions Extensions

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 7

In a Nutshell

Unify EM Gravitation
and Weak Int.

Dark matter
Mass
Generation

Success
SM Flaws

Tested in ν-mass
Collider:
LEP → LHC

Higgs ···
discovery

non-SuSY Beyond SM SuSY

Extensions Extensions

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 7

In a Nutshell

Unify EM Gravitation
and Weak Int.

Dark matter
Mass
Generation

Success
SM Flaws

Tested in ν-mass
Collider:
LEP → LHC

Higgs ···
discovery

non-SuSY Beyond SM SuSY

Extensions Extensions

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 7

In a Nutshell

Unify EM Gravitation
and Weak Int.

Dark matter
Mass
Generation

Success
SM Flaws

Tested in ν-mass
Collider:
LEP → LHC

Higgs ···
discovery

non-SuSY Beyond SM SuSY

Extensions Extensions

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 7

In a Nutshell

Unify EM Gravitation
and Weak Int.

Dark matter
Mass
Generation

Success
SM Flaws

Tested in ν-mass
Collider:
LEP → LHC

Higgs ···
discovery

non-SuSY Beyond SM SuSY

Extensions Extensions

So that
Extensions such as the 2HDM and the 123-Model may help address these limitations and offer new experi-
mental signatures.

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 7

Motivation for choosing the 2HDM:
− Addresses the origin of CP violation.
−
−
Physics Beyond Standard Model -BSM-
Natural framework for flavor physics.
Predicts rich Higgs phenomenology.
− A low-energy limit of more fundamental theories (e.g., SUSY -MSSM-).
− 2HDM as a Prototype
Accommodates dark-matter candidates (2HDM → IDM).
2HDM -Scalar Potential-

❍ The most general scalar potential of the 2HDM [Branco, G. et al., Phys. Rept. 516 (2012)]:
h i
V ( Φ1 Φ2 ) = m211 Φ1† Φ1 + m222 Φ2† Φ2
− m212 Φ1† Φ2 + h.c.
λ1  † 2 λ2  † 2 
†

†
 
†

†

+ Φ1 Φ1 + Φ2 Φ2 + λ3 Φ1 Φ1 Φ2 Φ2 + λ4 Φ1 Φ2 Φ2 Φ1
2
 2 
λ5   2 h    i
+ Φ1† Φ2 + λ6 Φ1† Φ1 + λ7 ϕ2† Φ2 Φ1† Φ2 + h.c.
2

with :
+ +
 
ϕ1,2 + iφ1,2
Φ1,2 =  
√1 (v1,2 + ρ1,2 + iη1,2 )
2
❍ The 10 independent parameters (m211, m222, m212, λ1,...,7) are assumed to be real (with λ6 = λ7 = 0).

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 9

2HDM -Yukawa Sector-
Symmetries Z2 and Types of the 2HDM

● Introduced to avoid tree-level Flavor Changing Neutral Currents (FCNC).

● Each Higgs doublet transforms under Z2: Φ1 → Φ1, Φ2 → −Φ2.

Types of 2HDM:

❍ Type I: One doublet couples to all fermions.

❍ Type II: One doublet couples to up-type quarks, the other to down-type quarks and leptons.
❍ Lepton-specific (Type X): One doublet couples to quarks, the other to leptons.
❍ Flipped (Type Y): One doublet couples to up-type quarks and leptons, the other to down-type quarks.

Type Φ1 couples to Φ2 couples to

Type I None All fermions
Type II Down-type quarks, leptons Up-type quarks
Type X Quarks Leptons
Type Y Down-type quarks Up-type quarks, leptons

❍ Minimization conditions and the relation v21 + v22 =⇒ 7 free parameters :

v2
mh , m H , m A , m H ± , α, tan β = v1 and m212.

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 10

2HDM -Phenomenological Requirements-

As with any BSM extension, the parameter space of the 2HDM is subject to both theoretical and experimental constraints.
In this context, the following requirements must be satisfied.

Theoretical Experimental

● Unitarity: Scattering processes must remain unitary. ❍ EWPOs: Implemented via the oblique EW parameters
● Perturbativity: Constraints impose the following condition S, T; we require ∆χ2 (S2HDM , T 2HDM ) ≤ 6.18.
on the quartic couplings of the scalar potential: |λi | < 8π. ❍ Discovery of the SM-like Higgs boson: Compatibility
● Vacuum Stability: The potential must be bounded from between selected parameter space points and current
below and positive in any field direction Φi . Therefore, the measurements of the properties of the 125 GeV Higgs
parameter space must satisfy the following conditions: boson is checked using the public code HiggsSignals-3
p via HiggsTools.
λ1 > 0, λ2 > 0, λ3 > − λ1 λ2, ❍ Exclusion of non-SM Higgs bosons: Parameter space
p
λ3 + λ4 − | λ5 | > − λ1 λ2 . points are tested against exclusion limits from Higgs
searches at LEP, Tevatron, and especially the LHC, using
2HDMC-1.8.0 (D. Eriksson, J. Rathsman and O. Stål the public code HiggsBounds-6 via HiggsTools.
[0902.0851])
❍ B-physics observables: Confronted with experimental
data using the public code SuperIso v4.1,
(mainly b → sγ, Bs,d → µ+ µ− and Bs → τν).

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 11

2HDM -Mass Correlations (Type X)-

❍ For m H ± ≤ 600 GeV, the mass splitting

between A and H could be quite large.
❍ For m H ± ≥ 600 GeV, the mass splitting
between the charged Higgs and the neutral
heavy states H and A becomes rather
small.
❍ Fig.(c) we show the correlation between
m H and m212, as we know the mass of the
heavy states H, A and H ± are driven by
m212:
m212
m2H,A,H ± ≈ + λi v2 + O(v4 /m212 ) .
sβcβ

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 12

Single and Pair production of H ± @t −
µ µ + and −
e e +
colliders
based on
Charged Higgs pair production @t µ− µ+ and e− e+ colliders
Process: µ+ µ− → H + H −

Relevant Feynman Diagrams

● Tree-level Feynman diagrams for H + H − at muon collider in the 2HDM.

● Drell–Yan mechanism µ+ µ− → γ∗ , Z ∗ → H + H − ,
● The s-channel neutral-Higgs exchange µ+ µ− → h∗ , H ∗ → H + H − ,
● The neutrino-exchange diagram in the t channel,
√
● The s-channel Higgs diagrams would be largely enhanced near the resonance region s ≈ mH

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 14

Charged Higgs pair production @t µ− µ+ and e− e+ colliders
Production cross section for µ+ µ− → H + H − in Type-X

● Can reach a maximum value - up to ∼ 3.2 fb for low m H ± however large tan β.
● The most of the time, there is constructive interference between the (γ, Z) s-channel and (h, H) s-channel contributions,
since the cross section for µ+ µ− → H + H − is greater than e+ e− → H + H − .

❍ branching fractions of H ± . For m H + ≡ 86 ∼ 120 GeV, the decay mode H + → τντ dominates. However, as m H + gets
larger, e.g. m H + ≥ 175 GeV, a significant competition arises among the decay modes H + → tb̄, H + → W + A,
H + → W + h, and H + → W + H.

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 15

Charged Higgs pair production @t µ− µ+ and e− e+ colliders
Benchmark Points

❍ Description of our benchmark points, with h being the SM-like Higgs boson.

Parameters BP1 BP2 BP3

(Masses are in GeV)
mh 125.09 125.09 125.09
mH 590.5 622.39 608.51
mA 234.04 267.96 166.7
mH± 207.28 248.14 162.7
tan β 44.63 32.18 28.57
sin( β − α) 0.999 0.9981 0.9977
m212 7808.71 12025.25 12942.8

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 16

Monte Carlo Simulation
Computational Tools

MadGraph5@NLO
To generate signal and background events. ✯ J. Alwall et al., JHEP 07 (2014) 079

Pythia8 ✯ T. Sjöstrand et al., Comput. Phys.

For parton showering and hadronization. Commun. 191
(2015) 159-177

Delphes ✯ J. de Favereau et al., JHEP 02 (2014)

For detector simulation. 057

FastJet ✯ M. Cacciari et al., Eur. Phys. J. C

For jet reconstruction using the specified clustering algorithm and ∆R.
72 (2012) 1896

MadAnalysis5
To apply cuts and perform analyses. ✯ E. Conte et al., Comput. Phys.
Commun. 184 (2013) 222-256

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 17

Signal vs Background Analysis

● Signal: µ+ µ− → H + H − → τh+ ντh− ν

Events ( scaled to one )

Events ( scaled to one )

0.2 BP1 0.14

0.18 ZZ
tt 0.12
0.16
Zjj ● Backgrounds: tt̄, VV, Z/γ jj and W jj
0.14 WW 0.1
0.12
Wjj ● Summary of the cut as follow:
0.08
0.1 • Trigger: N (b) ≤ 1
0.08 0.06
• Cut-1: PT [τ1 ] > 60 GeV and −0.5 < η [τ1 ] < 0.5
0.06

0.04
0.04 • Cut-2: E/T > 600 GeV
0.02
0.02 • Cut-3: MT [τ1 ] > 600 GeV
0 0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 −4 −3 −2 −1 0 1 2 3 4
p [ ta1 ] (GeV) η [ ta ] Signal Backgrounds
T 1 Cuts
BP1 tt̄ WW ZZ W jj Z/γ jj
Events ( scaled to one )

Events ( scaled to one )

0.12
1 Basic cut 2.98 0.2 1.54 0.014 7.04 0.74
Tagger 2.97 0.09 1.53 0.014 6.39 0.68
10−1
0.1 Cut-1 0.72 0.04 0.052 0.00010.048 0.02
0.08 10−2
Cut-2 0.31 0.0090.018 9.10−5 0.021 0.006
Cut-3 0.30 0.0080.017 9.10−5 0.0014 0.005
0.6% 2.10−2% 0.6%
0.06
10−3 T.E 10.4% 4% 1.1%
0.04
10−4
0.02 ● Significante (BP1)
−5
10
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000

ET (GeV) MT [ta1] (GeV) Luminosities L 500 f b−1 1000 f b−1 1500 f b−1
Significante Σ 11.6 16.4 20

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 18

Charged Higgs pair production @t µ− µ+ and e− e+ colliders
Process: e+ e− → νe νe H + H −
It is a Production through Vector Boson Fusion (VBF): a 2 → 4 process.
Relevant Feynman Diagrams

❍ e+ e− → νν̄H + H − hold significant potential for producing charged Higgs bosons at electron-positron colliders.
❍ The production of charged Higgs bosons alongside neutrinos via VBF in electron-positron collisions could occur at
significant rates, depending on factors like collider energy and luminosity.

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 19

Charged Higgs pair production @t µ− µ+ and e− e+ colliders
Production cross section

❍ A significant variation in the production cross-section may occur, especially when the charged Higgs boson is relatively
light and decays mainly to τ ± ν̄τ .
❍ The CP-even H-exchange, contributes significantly for m H around 600 GeV.
❍ The CP-odd A-exchange, may improve the cross section and give rise to τ + τ − for m A ≤ 200 GeV.
❍ The cross section raise and is of the order of 2.2 fb.

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 20

Signal vs Background Analysis
[τ + ν][τ − ν] + /
E T Signature
Events ( scaled to one )

BP2
0.16
ZZ ❍ Signal: e+ e− → ννH ± H ∓ → [τ + ν][τ − ν] + /
ET
0.14 tt
Zjj
0.12 WW ❍ Backgrounds: tt̄, VV, Z/γ jj and W jj
Wjj
0.1 ❍ Summary of the cut as follow:
0.08 • Trigger: N (b) ≤ 1
0.06
• Cut-1: E/T < 180 GeV
• Cut-2: ET < 300 GeV
0.04

0.02 Cuts Signal Backgrounds

BP2 tt̄ WW ZZ W jj Z/γ jj
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Basic cut 2.35 0.2 1.54 0.014 7.01 0.743
ET (GeV) Tagger 2.34 0.09 1.53 0.014 6.38 0.68
Cut-1 1.85 0.03 0.94 0.005 2.44 0.2
Cut-2 1.66 0.00090.52 0.005 0.23 0.024
Events ( scaled to one )

0.25 T.E 70% 0.45% 33% 35% 3.2% 3.2%

0.2
● Significante (BP2)
0.15

Luminosities L 500 f b−1 1000 f b−1 1500 f b−1

0.1
Significante Σ 23 33 41
0.05

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
ET (GeV)

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 21

Single production of H ± @t µ− µ+ and e− e+ colliders
Process: µ+ µ− → H +W −
It is an Associated Production.
Relevant Feynman Diagrams

❍ The process µ+ µ− → H ±W ∓ can provide information on the underlying Yukawa textures.

❍ The process may also experience resonance enhancement from the s-channel heavy-Higgs exchanges of H and A along
the following patheways: µ+ µ− → H ∗ , A∗ → H ±W ∓ .
❍ Could be significant given that the coupling W ± H ∓ A is a gauge coupling without any mixing suppression and W ± H ∓ H
is proportional to sin( β − α), which is driven by the LHC data to its maximum value sin( β − α) ≈ 1

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 22

Single production of H ± @t µ− µ+ and e− e+ colliders
Production cross section

● The s-channel diagram with the exchange of h is suppressed by hW ± H ∓ ∝ cos( β − α) ≈ 0

● The s-channel diagrams with H and A exchanges will benefit from an enhancement since HW ± H ∓ is proportional to
sin( β − α) ≈ 1 while AW ± H ∓ is a pure gauge coupling without any mixing factor.
● Both the t- and s-channel contributions are proportional to tan β in the large tan β limit, since both
Hµ+ µ− ∝ cα /c β ≈ c β−α + tan βs β−α ≈ tan β.

✯ The cross section raise and is of the order of 0.63 fb for large value of tan β.

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 23

Signal vs Background Analysis
[τh+ ν][τh− ν] Signature
Events ( scaled to one )

BP3
ZZ
❍ Signal: µ+ µ− → H ±W ∓ → τh+ ντh− ν
tt
10−1 Zjj ❍ Backgrounds: tt̄, VV, Z/γ jj and W jj
WW
Wjj ❍ Summary of the cut as follow:
10−2
• Trigger: N (b) < 1
• Cut-1: /E T < 75 GeV
• Cut-2: ET < 250 GeV
10−3

Cuts Signal Backgrounds

BP3 tt̄ WW ZZ W jj Z/γ jj
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Basic cut 0.064 0.2 1.54 0.014 7.04 0.74
ET (GeV) Tagger 0.064 0.09 1.53 0.014 6.39 0.68
Cut-1 0.043 0.01 0.45 0.0014 0.77 0.073
Cut-2 0.0416 0.0004 0.24 0.00140.068 0.002
Events ( scaled to one )

T.E 64% 0.2% 15% 10% 9.6% 0.27%

10−1

10−2
❍ Significante (BP3)

10−3 Luminosities L 500 f b−1 1000 f b−1 1500 f b−1

10−4
Significante Σ 1.56 2.2 2.7

10−5
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
ET (GeV)

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 24

 ¯ +
f 1 f 2 H associated production in the 2HDM
− + − +
Comparison between e e and µ µ colliders
based on
 ¯ + − + − +
f 1 f 2 H associated production: e e versus µ µ colliders
Generic Feynman Diagrams

● Tree level generic Feynman diagrams for ℓ− ℓ+ → f 2 f¯1 H + where ℓ = e, µ and ( f¯1, f 2 ) = (τ + , ντ ) or (t̄, b) at muon
collider in the 2HDM. The Si , Sk , V and F propagators stand for (h, H, A), (H ± , G ± ), (γ, Z, W ± ) and (τ, νℓ ) respectively.
● diagram (d8 ) is absent for the τ − ν¯τ H + production
● At the ILC/CLIC:
- The s-channel neutral Higgs bosons (h, H, A) contributions would be suppressed by the small electron mass.
- The contribution from t-channel diagrams with ν exchange is also suppressed by the electron mass.
- the dominant contributing diagrams are (d1), (d2) and (d3).

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 26

 ¯ + − + − +
f 1 f 2 H associated production: e e versus µ µ colliders
Process: e+ e− → τ + ντ H −

❍ The cross section for e+ e− → τ + ντ H − is only sensitive to tan β and

m H± .
❍ The cross section is primarily dominated by the s-channel diagrams
e+ e− → γ, Z → τ + ντ H − .
❍ As the center-of-mass energy increases, the cross section decreases
significantly, which exhibits the 1s behavior.
√
❍ At s = 0.5, 1.5 TeV, pair production of charged Higgs is allowed for
m H ± < 250, 750 GeV, respectively, we have checked that
σ(e+ e− → τ + ντ H − ) mainly comes from
σ(e+ e− → H + H − ) × Br ( H + → τ + ν)

❍ As the charged-Higgs mass increases from 80 GeV √ to 250 GeV, the

cross section decreases from 170 f b to 1 f b for s = 500 GeV.

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 27

 ¯ + − + − +
f 1 f 2 H associated production: e e versus µ µ colliders
Process: e+ e− → tb̄H +

❍ The cross section increases significantly as m H + approaches mt + mb ,

primarily due to the production via
σ(e+ e− → H + H − ) × BR( H + → tb̄).
❍ In type X, the coupling H + tb̄ ∝ 1/ tan β then the production
suppressed for large tan β.
❍ σ(e+ e− → tb̄H − ) is a bit higher than the pair production of charged
Higgs σ (e+ e− → H + H − ).

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 28

 ¯ + − + − +
f 1 f 2 H associated production: e e versus µ µ colliders
Process: µ+ µ− → τ + ντ H −

❍ The Feynman diagram like (d8 ) behaves like tan3 β which could lead to
a factor of tan6 β in the square of amplitude.
❍ This tan6 β factor could also originate from diagram (d6 ).
❍ Both hH + H − and HH + H − couplings contains respectively :
m212 c β+α m212 c β+α
 
2 2
(mh − 2 s2β s β c β and (m H − 2 s2β s β c β which both scales like tan β at
large tan β limit

❍ The cross section shows an increase for tan β in the range 60 to 150,
reaching 117 fb.

❍ The cross section µ+ µ− → τ + ντ H − is ten times greater than the

corresponding cross section e+ e− → τ + ντ H − at e+ e− colliders
√
for the same center-of-mass s and for large tan β.

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 29

 ¯ + − + − +
f 1 f 2 H associated production: e e versus µ µ colliders
Process: µ+ µ− → tb̄H +

❍ This process is primarily governed by two prominent Feynman

diagrams: (d6) that involves the particles S = h, H, A, and (d9), where
Sk = H ± .
❍ The coupling tb̄H − , we have tan β enhancement for the bottom mass
and 1/ tan β suppression for the top mass.
❍ for m H + ≲ 170 GeV, the cross section is distinctly lower. This
production primarily arises σ (µ+ µ− → tt̄) × Br (t → H − b).
❍ For m H + ∼ 171 GeV the cross section is starts to rise, reaching values
of 5.8 f b. This increase is due to the opening of channels involving:
either H → W ±∗ H ∓ followed by W +∗ → tb̄ or
µ+ µ− → {γ, Z, H, h} → H + H − followed by H + → tb̄.
❍ The decay H → W ± H ∓ has more phase space and the coupling
HH ±W ∓ is maximized when sin( β − α) ≈ 1 leads to a significant
branching ratio for the decay H → H ±W ∓ .

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 30

Probing H ± with a W ± Boson and a Scalar S at the ILC
Probing H ± with a W ± Boson and a Scalar S at e+ e− Colliders
Process: e+ e− → H ±W ∓ S (S = h, H, A)

❍ Except d6 that involves t-channel

mediation by neutrino exchange,
the majority of the diagrams for
the e+ e− → H ±W ∓ S process are
mediated by the s-channel
photon or Z exchange.
❍ d7,8,9,10,11,13,18 are proportional to
tan β while d12,14,15,16,17 are
proportional to tan2 β.

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 32

Searching for charged Higgs bosons via e+ e− → H ±W ∓ S at the ILC
Production cross section for e+ e− → H +W − h

❍ e+ e− → W ± H ∓ h is proportional to c2β−α which is rather small.

√
❍ At s = 500 GeV, for m H ± < 205 GeV, where H + → Wh is closed, σ(e+ e− → W ± H ∓ h) is at the level of 0.1 f b.
❍ The bump on the cross section is due to the on-shell production:
σ (e+ e− → W ± H ∓ h) ≈ σ (e+ e− → H + H − ) × Br ( H + → W + h).
❍ For m H ± > 250 GeV, the cross section dramatically decreases to 10−3 f b.
√
❍ At s = 3 TeV, the cross section less than 0.3 f b. In the region where Br ( H + → W + h) is sizable.
06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 33
Searching for charged Higgs bosons via e+ e− → H ±W ∓ S at the ILC

Production cross section for e+ e− → H +W − H

❍ e+ e− → W ± H ∓ H is proportional to s2β−α .
❍ Once we cross the H + → W + H threshold, one can see an enhancement of the cross section coming from the resonant
production originating from H + → W + H: σ (e+ e− → W ± H ∓ H ) ≈ σ (e+ e− → H + H − ) × Br ( H + → W + H ).
❍ The cross section may reach 10 f b before the opening of H + → W + H.
p
❍ For (s) = 3 TeV, it is evident that the total cross section is larger than 0.1 f b throughout the whole range of m H + .

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 34

Searching for charged Higgs bosons via e+ e− → H ±W ∓ S at the ILC
Production cross section for e+ e− → H +W − A

❍ The majority of Feynman diagrams in the e+ e− → W ± H ∓ A scenario lack both the s β−α and c β−α mixing factors.
❍ AW ± H ∓ is proportional to g/2.
❍ Only Feynman diagram d5 would have c β−α (resp s β−α ) factor coming from e+ e− → Ah∗ → AW ± H ∓ (resp
e+ e− → AH ∗ → AW ± H ∓ ).
❍ The resonant production in this case would come from the H + → W + A decay:
σ (e+ e− → W ± H ∓ A) ≈ σ (e+ e− → H + H − ) × Br ( H + → W + A).
❍ σ(e+ e− → W ± H ∓ A), size and behavior, are rather similar to those of σ(e+ e− → W ± H ∓ H ).
06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 35
Searching for charged Higgs bosons via e+ e− → H ±W ∓ S at the ILC

Signals & Backgroud

❍ Signal :

e+ e− → W ± H ∓ S → W ±W ∓ SS
→ Wqq′ Wlνl τh+ τl− τh+ τl−
→ 3l + τh+ τh+ + jj + /
ET

❍ Background : tt̄, tt̄jj, Zjj et W +W − jj .

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 36

Searching for charged Higgs bosons via e+ e− → H ±W ∓ S at the ILC

Benchmark Points
❍ Description of our Benchmarks Points

Parameters BP1 BP2 BP3

(Masses are in GeV)
mh 125.09 125.09 125.09
mH 139.6 188.9 417.4
mA 103.3 259.3 109.1
mH± 201.5 318.1 410.6
tan β 9 21.5 14.8
sin( β − α) 0.999 0.999 0.991
m212 2138.14 1652.63 11717.46

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 37

Signal vs Background Analysis
3ℓ + τh+ τh+ + jj + /
E T signature

√
❍ s = 500 GeV
Events ( scaled to one )

Events ( scaled to one )

0.12 0.16
BP1

0.1
tt 0.14 ❍ Summary of the cut as follow:
ttjj
Zjj
0.12 • Tagger:N (b) ≤ 1 and N (l ) ≥ 3
0.08
WWjj 0.1 • Cut-1: PT [ j1 ] ≤ 80 and −0.6 < η [ j1 ] < 0.6
0.06 0.08 • Cut-2: M( j j) ≤ 130 GeV
0.04
0.06
Signal Backgrounds
Cuts
0.04
BP1 tt̄ tt̄jj Zjj W +W − jj
0.02
0.02
Basic cut 0.63 74.2 0.29 14.1 2.99
0
0 50 100 150 200 250
0
−4 −3 −2 −1 0 1 2 3 4
Tagger 0.266 0.02 0.004 0.005 0.0003
pT [ j1 ] (GeV) η [ j1 ] Cut-1 0.133 0.0080.0018 0.0004 9.10−5
Cut-2 0.1 0.0070.001 0.0001 9.10−5
Events ( scaled to one )

9.10−33.10−1 7.10−6 3.10−5

0.18
T.E 15.8%
0.16

0.14

0.12 ❍ Result
0.1

0.08
BP1
0.06

0.04
Processes e+ e− → H ±W ∓ A → [ττ ][ττ ]WW
0.02
Luminosity L=500 fb−1 L=1000 fb−1 L=1500 fb−1
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

M(j j) (GeV)
400
Significante Σ 6.79 9.61 11.77

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 38

Signal vs Background Analysis
3ℓ + τh+ τh+ + jj + /
E T signature

√
❍ s = 1 TeV
Events ( scaled to one )

Events ( scaled to one )

0.16
0.1 BP2
tt
ttjj
0.14 ❍ Summary of the cut as follow:
0.08
Zjj 0.12 • Trigger: N (l ) ≥ 3
WWjj
0.1 • Cut-1: PT [ j1 ] ≤ 170 and −0.6 < η [ j1 ] < 0.6
0.06

0.08 • Cut-2: M( j j) ≤ 140 GeV

0.04 0.06
Signal Backgrounds
Cuts
0.02
0.04
BP2 tt̄ tt̄jj Zjj W +W − jj
0.02
Basic cut 0.25 22.5 1.27 2.67 2.71
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
0
−4 −3 −2 −1 0 1 2 3 4
Tagger 0.12 0.0120.021 0.001 0.001
pT [ j1 ] η [ j1 ] Cut-1 0.079 0.0040.005 0.0 0.0002
Cut-2 0.058 0.0020.003 0.0 0.0
8.10−50.23%
Events ( scaled to one )

0.25
T.E 23% ... ...
0.2

❍ Result
0.15

0.1
BP2
Processes e+ e− → H ±W ∓ H → [ττ ][ττ ]WW
0.05

Luminosity L=500 fb−1 L=1000 fb−1 L=1500 fb−1

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Significante Σ 5.12 7.25 8.87
M ( j j ) (GeV)

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 39

Signal vs Background Analysis
3ℓ + τh+ τh+ + jj + /
E T signature

√
❍ s = 1.5 TeV
Events ( scaled to one )

Events ( scaled to one )

0.1 BP3
0.14
tt ❍ Summary of the cut as follow:
0.08 ttjj 0.12
• Trigger: N (b) ≤ 1 and N (l ) ≥ 3
Zjj
WWjj
0.1
• Cut-1: 130 < / E T < 500 GeV
0.06
0.08 • Cut-2: −0.6 < η [ j1 ] < 0.6
0.04 0.06 • Cut-3: H/ T > 290 GeV
0.04
Signal Backgrounds
0.02 Cuts
0.02 BP3 tt̄ tt̄jj Zjj W +W − jj
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
0
−4 −3 −2 −1 0 1 2 3 4
Basic cut 0.22 6.9 0.9 0.91 3.29
ET (GeV) η [ j1 ] Tagger 0.12 0.003 0.01 0.0007 0.0003
Cut-1 0.08 0.0020.004 0.0001 0
Cut-2 0.06 0.05 0.002 0 0
Events ( scaled to one )

0.045

0.04
Cut-3 0.03 0 0.001 0 0
0.035
T.E 13.6% ... 0.1% ... ...
0.03

0.025
❍ Result
0.02

0.015

0.01
BP3
0.005
Processes e+ e− → H ±W ∓ A → [ττ ][ττ ]WW
0

Luminosity L=500 fb−1 L=1000 fb−1 L=1500 fb−1

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000

HT (GeV)

Significante Σ 3.8 5.38 6.59

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 40

Motivation for choosing the 123 Model:
−
−
Physics Beyond Standard Model -BSM-
Explaining mν (Type-II Seesaw).
Provide rich EWSB and Higgs Pheno.
− Test the ρ-parameter.
− Singlet-Triplet Higgs Model -123-
DM candidates (if σ and/or ∆ are inert).
123-model
Involved Multiplets

Events ( scaled to one )

0.1 BP3
tt
0.08 ttjj
Zjj
0.06
WWjj

0.04

0.02

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600

ET (GeV)

Higgs potential
The most general scalar potential of the 123-model:
V (σ, ϕ, ∆) = µ2σ σ† σ + µ2ϕ ϕ† ϕ + µ2∆ Tr(∆† ∆) + λ1 (ϕ† ϕ)2
 2
+ λ2 Tr(∆† ∆) + λ3 (ϕ† ϕ)Tr(∆† ∆) + λ4Tr(∆† ∆∆† ∆) + λ5 (ϕ† ∆† ∆ϕ)
+ β 1 (σ† σ)2 + β 2 (ϕ† ϕ)(σ† σ) + β 3Tr(∆† ∆)(σ† σ) − κ(ϕ T ∆ϕσ + h.c.)
with :
!
1 1 + Rϕ + iIϕ )√1 (vϕ
σ (1, 1, +0) = √ (vσ + Rσ + iIσ ), ϕ(1, 2, + ) = 2 ,
2 2 ϕ−
√ !
√ ( v∆ + R∆ + iI∆ ) ∆ / 2
1 +
∆(1, 3, +1) = 2 √
∆ / 2
+ ∆++
❍ 9 physical states: three neutral scalars h1, h2 and h3, a pseudoscalar A, two charged Higgs boson H ± , two double
charged Higgs boson H ±± , and the majoran J (massless particle).
❍ Our model can be expressed either by:: mh1 , m A , λ j (i = 2, 4, 5) , m H ± , β3 , αi (i=1,2,3) , vσ , v∆ .

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 42

CDF W mass anomaly

• CDF-II reported value:

mCDF-II
W = 80433.5 ± 9.4 MeV.
• SM value:
mSM
W = 80357 ± 6 MeV.
• This measurement is in significant
tension with the standard model
expectation by 7σ.

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 43

Consistency of CDF W mass anomaly with 123-Model.
Consistency of CDF W mass anomaly with 123-Model.
2 and sin2 θ
Corrections to the mW e f f : Implications

❍ The corrections of 123-model to the mass of the W boson and the effective weak mixing angle, sin2 θeff, can be
parameterized by the formalism S, T, and U:
" #
2 m2
2 123 2 SM 2 α 0 cW Z 1 2 c2w− s2w
∆mW



= mW − mW = 2 − s2
− S + cW T+ 2
U ,
cW W
2 4sW
 
α 1
∆ sin2 θeff = sin2 θeff − sin2 θ = 2 0 2 2 2
S − sW cW T ,
123 SM cW − sW 4
❍ 123-model parameter space scan (all masses and vev’s are in GeV). ❍ Parameters S and T.
PDG CDF
m h1 125 S = 0.05 ± 0.08 S = 0.15 ± 0.08
λ2 [-6,8π] T = 0.09 ± 0.07 T = 0.27 ± 0.06
λ4 [-9,8π] ρST = 0.92 ρST = 0.93
λ5 [-15,14]
β3 [-8π,8π]
κ [0,0.1]
v∆ [0,1]
vs [10,1000]
α1 [-π/2,π/2]
α2 [-0.5,0.5]
α3 [-π/2,π/2]

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 45

Consistency of CDF W mass anomaly with 123-Model.
2 and sin2 θ
Corrections to the MW e f f : Implications

❍ by considering the PDG values, it seems

clear that the MW value predicted by the
123-model is in line with the SM prediction,
requiring T ∈ [0.02, 0.10] and S ∈[0, 0.15],
while are so far from the new CDF region at
the 1σ level.
❍ After considering the CDF S, T result, the
parameter points are in good compliance
with only SLD measurement for sin2 θeff
within the 1–1.5 σ level which is not the case
when using the PDG values, where the
measured value matches well both
experiment predictions.

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 46

Consistency of CDF W mass anomaly with 123-Model.
2 and sin2 θ
Corrections to the mW e f f : Implications

❍ It is evident that a consistent prediction of

the W boson mass in the range measured by
the CDF Collaboration requires sizable mass
splittings m H ± − m A and m H ±± − m H ±
suggesting that such a mW anomaly can be
explained when there is a non-zero mass
splitting among the H ±± , H ± , A.

∆m2 ≈ m2H ±± − m2H ± ≈ m2H ± − m2A

1 λ
≈ (m2H ±± − m2A ) ≈ − 5 v2ϕ .
2 4
❍ The values of −0.82 ≲ λ5 ≲ 2.41 are
excluded, which therefore explains the not
allowed mass splittings between roughly -75
GeV and 50 GeV.

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 47

Conclusion

❍ The Standard Model has several limitations.

❍ The 2HDM extend the scalar sector and the fermionic sector
❍ The 2HDM leads to the appearance of relevant signatures.
❍ We demonstrated that one may obtain significant improvement for µ+ µ− → H + H − compared to what we can obtain
for e+ e− → H + H − , which is achieved by large tan β amplification in the case of Type X.
❍ We have shown that in this region one can still have a significant cross section for µ+ µ− → W ± H ∓ .
❍ We report results for all processes at the e+ e− collider with a center of mass energy of 500 GeV, 1 TeV, and 3 TeV, and at
the muon collider with a center of mass energy of 3 TeV.
- ℓ+ ℓ− → τ + νH −
- ℓ+ ℓ− → tb̄H −
- ℓ+ ℓ− → W ∓ H ± S, S = h, H, A
- ℓ+ ℓ− → W ± H ∓ Z.
❍ The 123-model are consistent with the new measurement of the W boson mass (MW) conducted by CDFII at Fermilab.

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 48

Perspectives

❍ Comparison with MuC and sensitivity reach at the HL-LHC.

❍ Search strategies for exotic Higgs signatures in 4γ and 4ℓ final states.
❍ Multi-boson signatures and heavy-scalar searches.
❍ NLO improvements and beam-polarization studies at future colliders (ILC, CLIC).

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 49

Publications & Talks
✦ Publications :
❍ B. Ait Ouazghour, R. Benbrik, E. Ghourmin, M. Ouchemhou, and L. Rahili ”Consistency of New CDF-II W Boson Mass
with 123-Model,” Phys. Lett. B, vol. 843, p. 138 009, 2023. DOI: 10.1016/[Link].2023.116143.
arXiv:2302.01641[hep-ph].
❍ R. Benbrik, M. Berrouj, M. Boukidi, A. Habjia, E. Ghourmin, and L. Rahili ”Search for single production of vector-like top
partner T → H + b and H ± → tb̄ at the LHC Run-III,” Phys. Lett. B 843, 138024 (2023)
DOI:10.1016/[Link].2023.138024
❍ Brahim Ait Ouazghour, Abdesslam Arhrib, Kingman Cheung, Es-said Ghourmin, and Larbi Rahili ”Comparison between
µ− µ+ and e− e+ colliders for charged Higgs production in 2HDM,” [Link].D 109 (2024) 11, 115009. DOI:
10.1103/PhysRevD.109.115009. arXiv:2308.15664[hep-ph].
❍ Brahim Ait Ouazghour, Abdesslam Arhrib, Kingman Cheung, Es-said Ghourmin, and Larbi Rahili ”Associated charged
Higgs production within the 2HDM: e− e+ versus µ− µ+ colliders,” [Link].D 110 (2024) 9, 095026 DOI:
[Link] arXiv:2408.13952[hep-ph].
❍ Brahim Ait Ouazghour, Abdesslam Arhrib, Kingman Cheung, Es-said Ghourmin, Mohamed Krab, and Larbi Rahili
”Searching for charged Higgs bosons via e+ e− → H ±W ∓ Sat the ILC” Phys. Rev. D 112, 055022 DOI:
[Link] [Link]

✦ Talks :
√
❍ March 18th -19th ,
2022”Probing double charged Higgs boson at pp collider LHC with s = 27 TeV: THDMCT Model”.
Poster presented in in CNPFA22, Safi, Morocco.
❍ October 23th 27th , 2023”Consistency of New CDF-II W Boson Mass with 123-Model”. The talk was given in ACHEP,
Rabat-Knetra, Morocco.
❍ December 6th -8th , 2023”Comparison between µ− µ+ and e− e+ colliders for charged Higgs production in 2HDM”. The
talk was given in INTERNATIONAL APPLIED PHYSICS MEETING, UM6P Campus - Benguerir, Morocco.
 Thank you for your attention

06 Juin 2026 PhD defense Mouloud ABARAGH 51