Figure 1

The one-loop and two-loop Feynman diagram topologies in this paper, by order of first appearance. Dashed lines are for scalars, solid lines for fermions, wavy lines for electroweak vector bosons and ghosts, and curly lines for gluons. The label on each diagram refers to a corresponding renormalized integral function, as defined in Ref. 39. There are 7 one-loop and 40 two-loop distinct topologies here, accounting for fermion mass insertions (indicated below with a bar over the appropriate subscript $F$), but not counting separately diagrams obtained by exchanging external lines or reversing all fermion chiralities.Reuse & Permissions

Figure 2

The two-loop contributions to $\mathrm{R}\mathrm{e}[{\Pi }_{h^0{h}^0}(s)]-{\Pi }_{h^0{h}^0}(0)$ found in Sec. 4, for the model described in the text, as a function of the momentum invariant $s$.Reuse & Permissions

Figure 3

The pole mass of $h^0$, computed in various approximations, for the model described in the text, as a function of the renormalization scale $Q$. In each case, the full one-loop self-energy is used in the computation. The dashed line also includes the contributions of the two-loop self-energy in the effective potential approximation, neglecting electroweak couplings. The dot-dashed line includes the contributions of the full two-loop self-energy in the effective potential approximation. The solid line also includes momentum-dependent contributions to the self-energy, as found in Sec. 4.Reuse & Permissions

Figure 4

The dependence of the $h^0\to b\overline{b}(g)$ width, obtained from the corresponding contributions to the imaginary part of the pole mass, as a function of the renormalization scale $Q$, in various approximations.Reuse & Permissions

Figure 5

The dependence of the computed $h^0$ pole mass on the parameter $a_t$, for the model described in the text. The left panel is the same approximation as the solid line of Fig. 3. The right panel shows the change in the $h^0$ pole mass induced by including the momentum-dependent self-energy, compared to the full two-loop effective potential approximation.Reuse & Permissions

Figure 6

The Goldstone boson mass quantity $m_G^2/\sqrt{|m_G^2|}$ in GeV, in the tree-level, one-loop, and partial two-loop approximations, for the model described in the text, as a function of the choice of renormalization scale $Q$. The $G^0$ and $G^{\pm }$ lines are not visually distinguishable at tree-level (dashed line) and one-loop (dot-dashed line) order. The partial two-loop result for $G^0$ is the upper solid line and for $G^{\pm }$ is the lower solid line. The full two-loop result for both $G^0$ and $G^{\pm }$ should be exactly 0 by construction, since the fields are expanded around the minimum of the Landau gauge two-loop effective potential.Reuse & Permissions

Figure 7

The two-loop contributions to the real parts of the self-energy functions ${\Pi }_{H^0{H}^0}(s)$ and ${\Pi }_{A^0{A}^0}(s)$ (found in Sec. 4) and ${\Pi }_{H^{+}{H}^{-}}(s)$ (found in Sec. 5), for the model described in the text, as a function of the momentum invariant $s$.Reuse & Permissions

Figure 8

The computed $H^{\pm }$ pole mass for the model described in the text, in various approximations, as a function of the renormalization scale $Q$. The dashed line uses the one-loop effective potential minimization conditions to determine parameters used in the one-loop self-energy. The dot-dashed line uses the two-loop effective potential minimizations condition, and the one-loop self-energy. The solid line uses the two-loop effective potential minimization conditions, and the partial two-loop self-energy as found in Sec. 5.Reuse & Permissions

Figure 9

The computed pole masses of $A^0$ (lower pair of lines) and $H^0$ (upper pair of lines), for the model described in the text, as a function of the renormalization scale $Q$. The approximations are as in Fig. 8.Reuse & Permissions