• For scalar and pseudoscalar, make equivalent plots to Andreas’s but with totally different couplings, e.g. up to 0.1
• Doing fraction of width instead of coupling could put these plots on the same footing?
• Scanning mediator mass axis with an LO cross section isn’t necessarily good (Phil) - but then no one really scans in that direction anyway. We could state it explicitly though.
• Should make 1D with fixed mDM/mMED ratio
  • Convention from light dark matter people is a ratio instead of mDM=1, we should do that. Z axis is mu, y axis is coupling. This is a nice way of showing a scan of all the interesting quantities at once.
  • Fig 6 here: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1608.08632.pdf release something in this format for comparison
  • Why the 1/3 ratio? Didn’t want to focus on on-shell effects bc if you get too close to resonance the relic line moves (and there would be physics consequences)
• Do we want to do something with NLO?
  • ATLAS results I’m comparing to are NLO * (LO/LO). Phil: this is probably good enough, we can follow up with Priscilla and/or Debora Pinna
  • Standardise the approach? Both collaborations have agreed to do the same thing, we need to check what it is.
  • Write down a list of cases where we think it can break down and do a few checks

Document conclusions

• Show the method works
• Show validation
• End with some nice plots showing how we use it. These can include:
  • Light-DM style plots described by Phil above (diagonal below + above off-shell, visible and MET+X)
  • “Combined” LHC style plots with visible and MET+X both

Physics beyond colliders report has most recent version of the draft: https://arxiv.org/abs/1901.09966