Benchmarking the NMSSM with NMSSMTools 2.0 __________________ GDR - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
benchmarking the nmssm with nmssmtools 2 0
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Benchmarking the NMSSM with NMSSMTools 2.0 __________________ GDR - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jan 21, 2023 130 likes •485 views

Benchmarking the NMSSM with NMSSMTools 2.0 __________________ GDR SUSY, Strasbourg April 2008 Cyril Hugonie Cyril.Hugonie@univ-montp2.fr LPTA, Montpellier C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY08 p.1/21 Why The NMSSM? No Higgs observed at LEP High

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Benchmarking the NMSSM with NMSSMTools 2.0 __________________

GDR SUSY, Strasbourg April 2008

Cyril Hugonie

Cyril.Hugonie@univ-montp2.fr

LPTA, Montpellier

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.1/21
slide-2
SLIDE 2

Why The NMSSM?

No Higgs observed at LEP ⇒ High fine tuning in the MSSM

µ-problem of the MSSM: µ ? ∼ Msusy ∼ Mweak µ = 0 experimentally excluded µ = MPl hierarchy problem

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.2/21
slide-3
SLIDE 3

Why The NMSSM?

No Higgs observed at LEP ⇒ High fine tuning in the MSSM

µ-problem of the MSSM: µ ? ∼ Msusy ∼ Mweak µ = 0 experimentally excluded µ = MPl hierarchy problem

Solution: add a singlet S coupled to Hu, Hd

WNMSSM = µHuHd + λSHuHd + κ 3S3 (+ Yukawas)

After minimisation of the potential: µeff ≡ λS ∼ Msusy

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.2/21
slide-4
SLIDE 4

Why The NMSSM?

No Higgs observed at LEP ⇒ High fine tuning in the MSSM

µ-problem of the MSSM: µ ? ∼ Msusy ∼ Mweak µ = 0 experimentally excluded µ = MPl hierarchy problem

Solution: add a singlet S coupled to Hu, Hd

WNMSSM = µHuHd + λSHuHd + κ 3S3 (+ Yukawas)

After minimisation of the potential: µeff ≡ λS ∼ Msusy Simplest SUSY extension of the SM where the EW scale

  • riginates from the SUSY breaking scale only

λ → 0, µeff = 0: MSSM + decoupled singlet sector ⇒ The parameter space of the NMSSM includes the

physics of the MSSM and more

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.2/21
slide-5
SLIDE 5

What’s the NMSSM?

Particle content:

  • S: one more neutralino

χ0

i=1..5

SR: one more neutral CP even hi=1,2,3 SI: one more neutral CP odd ai=1,2 ⇒ New Physics beyond the MSSM ( S LSP

, light h → aa)

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.3/21
slide-6
SLIDE 6

What’s the NMSSM?

Particle content:

  • S: one more neutralino

χ0

i=1..5

SR: one more neutral CP even hi=1,2,3 SI: one more neutral CP odd ai=1,2 ⇒ New Physics beyond the MSSM ( S LSP

, light h → aa) Parameters:

VHiggs = VF + VD + Vsoft Vsoft =

  • λAλHuHdS + κ

3AκS3 + h.c.

  • +m2

Hu|Hu|2+m2 Hd|Hd|2+m2 S|S|2

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.3/21
slide-7
SLIDE 7

What’s the NMSSM?

Particle content:

  • S: one more neutralino

χ0

i=1..5

SR: one more neutral CP even hi=1,2,3 SI: one more neutral CP odd ai=1,2 ⇒ New Physics beyond the MSSM ( S LSP

, light h → aa) Parameters:

VHiggs = VF + VD + Vsoft Vsoft =

  • λAλHuHdS + κ

3AκS3 + h.c.

  • +m2

Hu|Hu|2+m2 Hd|Hd|2+m2 S|S|2

+ 3 minimisation conditions:

µeff = λS, tanβ = Hu Hd, M 2

Z = ¯

g2 Hu2 + Hd2 ⇒ 6 free parameters: λ, κ, Aλ, Aκ, µeff, tanβ

Recall: in the MSSM, 2 free parameters (mA, tanβ)

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.3/21
slide-8
SLIDE 8

Constraining the parameters

mSUGRA: M1/2, m0, A0 (MGUT), λ, κ, tanβ, sgn(µeff) (Mweak)?

= ⇒ 1 free parameter (µeff) for 3 min. conditions at Mweak

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.4/21
slide-9
SLIDE 9

Constraining the parameters

mSUGRA: M1/2, m0, A0 (MGUT), λ, κ, tanβ, sgn(µeff) (Mweak)?

= ⇒ 1 free parameter (µeff) for 3 min. conditions at Mweak

Solution: non-universal singlet soft terms at MGUT Parameters: λ, tanβ, sgn(µeff), M1/2, m0, A0, [Aκ] Minimisation conditions =

⇒ µeff, κ, m2

S at Mweak

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.4/21
slide-10
SLIDE 10

Constraining the parameters

mSUGRA: M1/2, m0, A0 (MGUT), λ, κ, tanβ, sgn(µeff) (Mweak)?

= ⇒ 1 free parameter (µeff) for 3 min. conditions at Mweak

Solution: non-universal singlet soft terms at MGUT Parameters: λ, tanβ, sgn(µeff), M1/2, m0, A0, [Aκ] Minimisation conditions =

⇒ µeff, κ, m2

S at Mweak

Guess MGUT and κ, m2

S at this scale

Run the RGEs down to Mweak, compute µeff, κ, m2

S

Run the RGEs up to MGUT, distance from universality

= ⇒ For the true CNMSSM see talk by A. Teixeira

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.4/21
slide-11
SLIDE 11

Constraining the parameters

mSUGRA: M1/2, m0, A0 (MGUT), λ, κ, tanβ, sgn(µeff) (Mweak)?

= ⇒ 1 free parameter (µeff) for 3 min. conditions at Mweak

Solution: non-universal singlet soft terms at MGUT Parameters: λ, tanβ, sgn(µeff), M1/2, m0, A0, [Aκ] Minimisation conditions =

⇒ µeff, κ, m2

S at Mweak

Guess MGUT and κ, m2

S at this scale

Run the RGEs down to Mweak, compute µeff, κ, m2

S

Run the RGEs up to MGUT, distance from universality

= ⇒ For the true CNMSSM see talk by A. Teixeira

GMSB: messenger scale Mmess and Msusy ≡ m2/(16π2Mmess)

∆Vsoft =

  • λAλHuHdS + κ

3AκS3 + m

′2

S S2 + ξSS + h.c.

  • +m2

S|S|2

+∆m2

HU = ∆m2 HD= −

λ2 (16π2)2 ∆HM 2

susy and ∆W = µ′S2 + ξF S = ⇒ See talk by U. Ellwanger

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.4/21
slide-12
SLIDE 12

NMSSMTools 2.0

Package that contains 3 programs: NMHDECAY for general NMSSM NMSPEC for mSUGRA (with some non-universality) NMGMSB for GMSB (new in v2.0) each in 3 versions: 1point, random scan, grid scan

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.5/21
slide-13
SLIDE 13

NMSSMTools 2.0

Package that contains 3 programs: NMHDECAY for general NMSSM NMSPEC for mSUGRA (with some non-universality) NMGMSB for GMSB (new in v2.0) each in 3 versions: 1point, random scan, grid scan For a given set of free parameters, it computes: Sparticle/Higgs masses and mixings Higgs decay widths (as in HDECAY) DM relic density (using MicrOMEGAs 2.0)

= ⇒ See talk by G. Bélanger

b → sγ, Bs → µµ, B+ → τν, ∆md, ∆ms and aµ

= ⇒ See talk by F . Domingo

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.5/21
slide-14
SLIDE 14

NMSSMTools 2.0

Package that contains 3 programs: NMHDECAY for general NMSSM NMSPEC for mSUGRA (with some non-universality) NMGMSB for GMSB (new in v2.0) each in 3 versions: 1point, random scan, grid scan For a given set of free parameters, it computes: Sparticle/Higgs masses and mixings Higgs decay widths (as in HDECAY) DM relic density (using MicrOMEGAs 2.0)

= ⇒ See talk by G. Bélanger

b → sγ, Bs → µµ, B+ → τν, ∆md, ∆ms and aµ

= ⇒ See talk by F . Domingo

I/O files in SLHA2 conventions + script run PATH/PinpS:

⇒ PATH/PspectrS, PdecayS, PomegaS (1point) ⇒ PATH/PoutS, PerrS (scan)

new in v2.0

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.5/21
slide-15
SLIDE 15

Input file (1) mSUGRA

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.6/21
slide-16
SLIDE 16

Input file (2) Grid scan

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.7/21
slide-17
SLIDE 17

Experimental constraints

For each point in the parameter space, NMSSMTools checks:

  • χ0

1 is the LSP

LEP limits on

χ±’s and χ0’s (direct search + Γinv(Z))

Tevatron + LEP constraints on squarks/gluino LEP limit on the charged Higgs mass mh± > 78.6 GeV LEP constraints from neutral Higgs searches:

e+e− → hZ with h → b¯ b, τ+τ−, jj, γγ, invisible, "any" e+e− → hZ with h → aa and a → b¯ b or τ+τ− e+e− → ha with h/a → b¯ b or τ+τ− e+e− → ha with h → aa and a → b¯ b or τ+τ−

WMAP constraints: .094 < Ωh2 < .136 BABAR and BELLE limits on B physics BNL constraints on aµ from e+e− data (3σ from SM)

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.8/21
slide-18
SLIDE 18

Results with semi-universality

If λ ≪ 1,

S can be the LSP = ⇒ additional cascades at LHC

Can this scenario be compatible with WMAP? YES! ... modulo some fine tuning (me

S − mNSLP <

∼ 1 GeV)

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.9/21
slide-19
SLIDE 19

Results with semi-universality

If λ ≪ 1,

S can be the LSP = ⇒ additional cascades at LHC

Can this scenario be compatible with WMAP? YES! ... modulo some fine tuning (me

S − mNSLP <

∼ 1 GeV) µAκ < 0: singlet masses ր with m0 and/or M1/2 = ⇒ S LSP for small values of m0 and/or M1/2

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.9/21
slide-20
SLIDE 20

Singlino LSP (1) λ = .01, µAκ < 0

100 200 300 400 500 600 m0 [GeV] 100 300 500 700 900 1100 M1/2 [GeV]

tanβ = 10, A0 = -20 GeV, Aκ = -50 GeV

100 200 300 400 500 600 m0 [GeV] 100 300 500 700 900 1100 S ∼ LSP Ωh

2(B

∼) < .136 Ωh

2(S

∼) < .136 aµ from e

+e −

LEP Higgs + λ=.001 + mt=175 GeV τ ∼ LSP excluded

tanβ = 5, A0 = 200 GeV, Aκ = -10 GeV

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.10/21
slide-21
SLIDE 21

Results with semi-universality

If λ ≪ 1,

S can be the LSP = ⇒ additional cascades at LHC

Can this scenario be compatible with WMAP? YES! ... modulo some fine tuning (me

S − mNSLP <

∼ 1 GeV) µAκ < 0: singlet masses ր with m0 and/or M1/2 = ⇒ S LSP for small values of m0 and/or M1/2 µAκ > 0: singlet masses ց with m0 and M1/2 = ⇒ S LSP for large values of m0 and M1/2

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.11/21
slide-22
SLIDE 22

Singlino LSP (2) λ = .01, µAκ > 0

100 200 300 400 m0 [GeV] 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 M1/2 [GeV]

tanβ = 10, A0 = 250 GeV, Aκ = 270 GeV

200 400 600 800 1000 m0 [GeV] 100 300 500 700 900 1100 S ∼ LSP Ωh

2(B

∼) < .136 Ωh

2(S

∼) < .136 aµ from e

+e −

LEP Higgs τ ∼ LSP excluded

tanβ = 5, A0 = 750 GeV, Aκ = 10 GeV

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.12/21
slide-23
SLIDE 23

Results with semi-universality

If λ ≪ 1,

S can be the LSP = ⇒ additional cascades at LHC

Can this scenario be compatible with WMAP? YES! ... modulo some fine tuning (me

S − mNSLP <

∼ 1 GeV) µAκ < 0: singlet masses ր with m0 and/or M1/2 = ⇒ S LSP for small values of m0 and/or M1/2 µAκ > 0: singlet masses ց with m0 and M1/2 = ⇒ S LSP for large values of m0 and M1/2

large tanβ: singlet masses independent of m0, M1/2

= ⇒ S LSP for large values of M1/2 (where B is heavy)

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.13/21
slide-24
SLIDE 24

Singlino LSP (3) λ = .01, large tanβ

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 m0 [GeV] 500 1000 1500 2000 M1/2 [GeV]

tanβ = 50, A0 = -1000 GeV, Aκ = -50 GeV

1000 2000 3000 4000 m0 [GeV] 500 1000 1500 2000 S ∼ LSP Ωh

2(B

∼/Η ∼) < .136 Ωh

2(S

∼) < .136 aµ from e

+e −

B physics LEP Higgs τ ∼ LSP excluded

tanβ = 50, A0 = 0 GeV, Aκ = 50 GeV

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.14/21
slide-25
SLIDE 25

Results with semi-universality

If λ ≪ 1,

S can be the LSP = ⇒ additional cascades at LHC

Can this scenario be compatible with WMAP? YES! ... modulo some fine tuning (me

S − mNSLP <

∼ 1 GeV) µAκ < 0: singlet masses ր with m0 and/or M1/2 = ⇒ S LSP for small values of m0 and/or M1/2 µAκ > 0: singlet masses ց with m0 and M1/2 = ⇒ S LSP for large values of m0 and M1/2

large tanβ: singlet masses independent of m0, M1/2

= ⇒ S LSP for large values of M1/2 (where B is heavy)

If λ ∼ .1: the pseudoscalar singlet a could be responsible for the (

B) LSP annihilation through B B → a resonance

Would this a be visible at the LHC? YES... if tanβ is large

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.15/21
slide-26
SLIDE 26

Extra resonance (1) λ = .1, tanβ = 5 − 10

500 1000 1500 m0 [GeV] 100 200 300 400 500 600 M1/2 [GeV]

tanβ = 5, A0 = -1500 GeV, Aκ = -50 GeV

500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 m0 [GeV] 100 200 300 400 500 600 Ωh

2 < .136

aµ from e

+e −

B physics LEP Higgs τ ∼ LSP excluded bba, a −− > ττ > 5σ at LHC

tanβ = 10, A0 = -1500 GeV, Aκ = -50 GeV

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.16/21
slide-27
SLIDE 27

Extra resonance (2) λ = .1, tanβ = 50

500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 m0 [GeV] 100 200 300 400 500 600 M1/2 [GeV]

tanβ = 50, A0 = -1500 GeV, Aκ = -50 GeV

500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 m0 [GeV] 100 300 500 700 900 1100 Ωh

2 < .136

aµ from e

+e −

B physics LEP Higgs τ ∼ LSP excluded bba, a −− > ττ > 5σ at LHC

tanβ = 50, A0 = 1500 GeV, Aκ = 250 GeV

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.17/21
slide-28
SLIDE 28

Large λ (1) Small tanβ

Large values of λ ⇒ light h (from singlet/doublet mixing)

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.18/21
slide-29
SLIDE 29

Large λ (1) Small tanβ

Large values of λ ⇒ light h (from singlet/doublet mixing) small tanβ (max. mh)

100 200 300 400 m0 [GeV] 200 400 600 800 1000 M1/2 [GeV] Ωh

2< .136

aµ from e

+e −

LEP Higgs τ ∼ LSP excluded

λ = .5, tanβ = 2, A0 = -1300 GeV, Aκ = -1400 GeV

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.18/21
slide-30
SLIDE 30

Large λ (1) Small tanβ

Large values of λ ⇒ light h (from singlet/doublet mixing) small tanβ (max. mh)

100 200 300 400 m0 [GeV] 200 400 600 800 1000 M1/2 [GeV] Ωh

2< .136

aµ from e

+e −

LEP Higgs τ ∼ LSP excluded

λ = .5, tanβ = 2, A0 = -1300 GeV, Aκ = -1400 GeV

Aκ such that h → aa

LEP limits: if a → bb, mh >

∼ 106 GeV

if a → ττ, mh >

∼ 90 GeV = ⇒ difficult to see at LHC

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.18/21
slide-31
SLIDE 31

Large λ (2) h → aa

0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 λ

  • 700
  • 600
  • 500
  • 400
  • 300
  • 200
  • 100

Aκ 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 λ 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 mh 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 λ 0.1 0.105 0.11 0.115 0.12 0.125 0.13 Ωh

2

0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 λ 10 20 30 40 50 60 ma

tanβ = 10, m0 = 174 GeV, M1/2 = 500 GeV, A0 = -1500 GeV

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.19/21
slide-32
SLIDE 32

Benchmark points for the LHC

  • A. Djouadi & al., arXiv:hep-ph/0801.4321

BMP1: mh1 = 120 GeV, ma1 = 40 GeV, rest heavy

Br(h1 → a1a1) = 90%, Br(a1 → bb) = 90%

BMP2: mh1 = 120 GeV, ma1 = 9 GeV, rest heavy

Br(h1 → a1a1) = 92%, Br(a1 → ττ) = 88%

BMP3: mh1 = 90 GeV, ma1 = 9 GeV, rest heavy

Br(h1 → a1a1) = 99.9%, Br(a1 → ττ) = 88%

BMP1-3:

B LSP coannihilating with τ NSLP

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.20/21
slide-33
SLIDE 33

Benchmark points for the LHC

  • A. Djouadi & al., arXiv:hep-ph/0801.4321

BMP1: mh1 = 120 GeV, ma1 = 40 GeV, rest heavy

Br(h1 → a1a1) = 90%, Br(a1 → bb) = 90%

BMP2: mh1 = 120 GeV, ma1 = 9 GeV, rest heavy

Br(h1 → a1a1) = 92%, Br(a1 → ττ) = 88%

BMP3: mh1 = 90 GeV, ma1 = 9 GeV, rest heavy

Br(h1 → a1a1) = 99.9%, Br(a1 → ττ) = 88%

BMP1-3:

B LSP coannihilating with τ NSLP

BMP4: mh2 = 123 GeV, mh1 = 32 GeV, rest heavy

Br(h2 → h1h1) = 88%, Br(h1 → bb) = 92%

Mixed

H/ S LSP annihilating to WW, Zh1

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.20/21
slide-34
SLIDE 34

Benchmark points for the LHC

  • A. Djouadi & al., arXiv:hep-ph/0801.4321

BMP1: mh1 = 120 GeV, ma1 = 40 GeV, rest heavy

Br(h1 → a1a1) = 90%, Br(a1 → bb) = 90%

BMP2: mh1 = 120 GeV, ma1 = 9 GeV, rest heavy

Br(h1 → a1a1) = 92%, Br(a1 → ττ) = 88%

BMP3: mh1 = 90 GeV, ma1 = 9 GeV, rest heavy

Br(h1 → a1a1) = 99.9%, Br(a1 → ττ) = 88%

BMP1-3:

B LSP coannihilating with τ NSLP

BMP4: mh2 = 123 GeV, mh1 = 32 GeV, rest heavy

Br(h2 → h1h1) = 88%, Br(h1 → bb) = 92%

Mixed

H/ S LSP annihilating to WW, Zh1

BMP5: mh1 = 91 GeV, mh2 = 118 GeV, mh3 = 174 GeV,

ma1 = 100 GeV, ma2 = 170 GeV, mh± = 188 GeV

  • B LSP annihilating through h/a resonances

BMP4-5: Need non-universal mHu, mHd and Aλ

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.20/21
slide-35
SLIDE 35

Conclusions

The NMSSM is a SUSY extension of the SM more general (and more coherent) than the MSSM which phenomenology deserves to be studied (at least) at the same level It could be much richer and more complex than the MSSM Singlino LSP giving extra cascades at LHC Pseudoscalar singlet visible at LHC for large tanβ Light h might escape LHC if it decays through h → aa NMSSMTools 2.0 is a dedicated package to study it

= ⇒ KEEP POSTED (AND DOWNLOAD) ON:

http://www.th.u-psud.fr/NMHDECAY/nmssmtools.html

  • C. Hugonie, GDR SUSY’08 – p.21/21