Constraints on BSM physics through the Higgs couplings J er emie - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Constraints on BSM physics through the Higgs couplings J er emie Quevillon LPT Orsay Frontiers of Fondamental Physics 2014, Marseille, 17 July 2014 LPT Orsay J er emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model
J´ er´ emie Quevillon
LPT Orsay
Frontiers of Fondamental Physics 2014, Marseille, 17 July 2014
LPT Orsay
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 1 / 28
Crucial problem in particle physics: how to generate particle masses in an SU(2) × U(1) gauge invariant way? Take an SU(2)-doublet of scalar fields Φ = φ+ φ0
with a Lagrangian invariant under SU(2)L × U(1)Y : LS = (DµΦ)† DµΦ − V (Φ), V (Φ) = µ2Φ†Φ + λ
2, Dµ = ∂µ − igTaW a
µ − ig
′ Y
2 Bµ
Ta are the SU(2) generators & W a
µ are the SU(2) gauge bosons
Y is the hypercharge & Bµ is the U(1) gauge boson µ2 > 0: 4 scalar particles & µ2 < 0: Φ gets a V.E.V. 0|Φ|0 =
v √ 2
λ
= 246 GeV ⇒ Φ(x) =
√ 2
Fermion masses: LYuk = −fe(¯ e, ¯ ν)LΦeR + ... ⇒ one residual scalar boson= the Higgs (MH = 2λv2)
[Higgs (1964); Brout, Englert (1964); Hagen,Kibble,Guralnik (1964)]
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 2 / 28
After EWSB, the Higgs boson couples to fermions, gauge bosons and itself as: gHff = mf
v × (−i)
gHVV = 2 M2
V
v
× (igµν) gHHVV = 2 M2
V
v2 × (igµν)
gHHH = 3 M2
H
v
× (−i) gHHHH = 3 M2
H
v2 × (−i)
gHff ∝ mf : Higgs couples mostly to top and bottom quarks fermion ggH and γγH couplings arise at one-loop level − → Since v is known, the only free parameter in the SM is MH (or λ)
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 3 / 28
100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Events / 2 GeV 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
γ γ → H
Data Sig+Bkg Fit Bkg (4th order polynomial)
Ldt=4.8fb
∫
=7 TeV, s
Ldt=5.9fb
∫
=8 TeV, s
ATLAS
=126.5 GeV)
H
(m [GeV]
γ γ
m 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 Events - Bkg
100 200
) µ Signal strength (
0.5 1 1.5 2
ATLAS Prelim.
Ldt = 4.6-4.8 fb
∫
= 7 TeV s
Ldt = 20.3 fb
∫
= 8 TeV s
= 125.5 GeV
H
m
0.28
+
= 1.57 µ γ γ → H
0.12
+ 0.18
+ 0.22
+
0.35
+
= 1.44 µ 4l → ZZ* → H
0.10
+ 0.13
+ 0.32
+
0.29
+
= 1.00 µ ν l ν l → WW* → H
0.08
+ 0.19
+ 0.21
+
0.20
+
= 1.35 µ
, ZZ*, WW* γ γ → H Combined
0.11
+ 0.14
+ 0.14
+
0.6
+
= 0.2 µ b b → W,Z H
<0.1 0.4 ± 0.5 ± 0.4
+
= 1.4 µ
(8 TeV data only)
τ τ → H
0.1
+ 0.3
+ 0.3
+
0.32
+
= 1.09 µ τ τ , b b → H Combined
0.04
+ 0.21
+ 0.24
+
0.17
+
= 1.30 µ
Combined
0.08
+ 0.11
+ 0.12
+
Total uncertainty µ
σ 1 ±
(stat.) σ
)
theory sys inc.
(
σ (theory) σ
(GeV)
γ γ
m
110 120 130 140 150
S/(S+B) Weighted Events / 1.5 GeV
500 1000 1500
Data S+B Fit B Fit Component σ 1 ± σ 2 ±
= 8 TeV, L = 5.3 fb s
= 7 TeV, L = 5.1 fb s CMS (GeV)
γ γ
m 120 130 Events / 1.5 GeV 1000 1500 Unweighted SM
σ / σ Best fit
2 4 ZZ (2 jets) → H ZZ (0/1 jet) → H (VH tag) τ τ → H (VBF tag) τ τ → H (0/1 jet) τ τ → H WW (VH tag) → H WW (VBF tag) → H WW (0/1 jet) → H (VH tag) γ γ → H (VBF tag) γ γ → H (untagged) γ γ → H bb (ttH tag) → H bb (VH tag) → H
0.14 ± = 0.80 µ
Combined
19.6 fb ≤ = 8 TeV, L s
5.1 fb ≤ = 7 TeV, L s
CMS Preliminary = 0.94
SM
p = 125.7 GeV
H
m J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 4 / 28
Higgs couplings as predicted by Higgs mechanism couplings proportional to masses as expected couplings to WW , ZZ, γγ roughly as expected Is it a spin 0? state decays into γγ ⇒ not spin-1 (Landau–Yang th.) is it a spin–2 like graviton? A priori no: cg = cγ, cV ≫ 35cγ Is it CP-even? HVµVµ vs HǫµνρσZµνZρσ ⇒ dΓ(H→ZZ∗)
dM∗
and dΓ(H→ZZ)
dΦ
ATLAS/CMS: ∼ 3σ for CP-even ⇒ It is THE-A Higgs boson!
with Djouadi et al. (2013) Ellis et al. (2012)
10 20 30 Pseudoexperiments 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 0+ 0- Observed
CMS
= 7 (8) TeV, L = 5.1 (12.2) fb s
+
L
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 5 / 28
1 Constraints on SUSY models through the Higgs sector 2 Constraints on Dark-Matter models through the Higgs
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 6 / 28
The hierarchy problem: why MH ≪ MPl?
◮ The fermion 1-loop correction to the Higgs
mass: δ(f)m2
H ⊃ λ2 F 8π2
F ln Λ mF
δ(s)m2
H ⊃ λS 16π2
S − 2λSv 2)ln
mS
λS = −λ2
F ⇒ the quadratic divergences vanish
(remain the logarithmic ones): δ(f+s)m2
H = λ2 S 4π2
F − m2 S)ln
mS
F ln
mF
H ∼
Λ d4k 1
k2 ∼ Λ2 + m2 loop ln Λ mloop
f H H s H H
⇒ the hierarchy and naturalness problems solved if mF = mS ⇒ MH is protected by SUSY ⇒ SUSY must be broken, mS ≫ mF The gauge coupling unification A dark matter candidate (relies on R-parity)
U1Y SU3c SU2L
SM
5 10 15 10 20 30 40 50 60Log Q 1 GeV
1
U1Y SU2L SU3c
MSSM
5 10 15 10 20 30 40 50 60Log Q 1 GeV
1
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 7 / 28
Defined by 4 assumptions : (a) Minimal gauge group: the MSSM is based on the group SU(3)C × SU(2)L × U(1)Y, i.e. the SM gauge symmetry. (b) Minimal particle content: gauge bosons + spin 1/2 SUSY partners : ˆ G a, ˆ W a, ˆ B (vector superfileds) quarks and leptons + squarks and sleptons: ˆ Q, ˆ UR, ˆ DR, ˆ L, ˆ
2 Higgs doublets + spin 1/2 SUSY partners: ˆ H1, ˆ H2 (c) Minimal Yukawa interactions and R–parity conservation: a discrete symmetry called R–parity is imposed (enforce lepton and baryon number conservation) Rp = (−1)2s+3B+L; Rp = ±1 for SM/SUSY particule (d) Minimal set of soft SUSY–breaking terms:
2
B ˜ B + M2 3
a=1 ˜
W a ˜ Wa + M3 8
a=1 ˜
G a ˜ Ga + h.c.
i=gen m2 ˜ Qi
˜ Q†
i ˜
Qi + m2
˜ Li
˜ L†
i ˜
Li + m2
˜ ui |˜
uRi |2 + m2
˜ di |˜
dRi |2 + m2
˜ ℓi |˜
ℓRi |2
H2H† 2 H2 + m2 H1H† 1 H1 + Bµ(H2·H1 + h.c.)
i,j=gen
ijY u ij ˜
u∗
Ri H2· ˜
Qj + Ad
ijY d ij ˜
d∗
Ri H1· ˜
Qj + Al
ijY ℓ ij ˜
ℓ∗
Ri H1· ˜
Lj + h.c.
Only 22 for the pMSSM: M1, M2, M3, m˜
q, m˜ uR , m˜ dR , Au, Ad, Ae, m˜ l, m˜ eR , m ˜ Q, m˜ tR , m˜ bR , m˜ L, m˜ τR , Aτ, Ab, At, tan β, m2 H1, m2 H2
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 8 / 28
One needs 2 complex scalar doublets: H1 = H0
1
H−
1
2
H0
2
cancel the chiral anomalies After EWSB: 3 d.o.f. to make W ±
L , ZL ⇒ 5 physical states left out: h, H, A, H±
At tree-level only 2 free parameters tan β, MA : M2
h,H = 1 2
A + M2 Z ∓
A + M2 Z )2 − 4M2 AM2 Z cos2 2β
tan 2α = tan2β M2
A+M2 Z
M2
A−M2 Z
M2
H± = M2 A + M2 W
Important constraint on the MSSM Higgs boson masses: Mh ≤ min(MA, MZ ) · | cos 2β| ≤ MZ , MH > max(MA, MZ ), MH± > MW MA ≫ MZ : decoupling regime, all Higgses heavy except h: Mh ∼ MZ |cos 2β| ≤ MZ , MH ∼ M±
H ∼ MA,
α ∼ π − β ⇒ Inclusion of radiative corrections to Mh are essential to explain Mh ≈ 125 GeV > MZ
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 9 / 28
Dominant corrections are due to top (s)quark, at the one-loop level: Mh
MA≫MZ
− − − − − − → MZ |cos 2β| + 3 ¯ m4
t
2π2v2sin2 β
S
¯ m2
t
+ X 2
t
2M2
S
t
6M2
S
depending on tan β, MS =
mt1 ˜ mt2, Xt = At −
µ tan β : Mmax h
→ MZ + 30 − 50 GeV The mass value 125 GeV is near the upper limit for the MSSM h boson Increase Mh ⇒ increase R.C. : decoupling regime with MA ∼ O (TeV) large values of tan β 10 to maximize tree-level value maximal mixing scenario: Xt = √ 6MS heavy stops, i.e. large MS =
mt1 ˜ mt2 Perform a full scan of the pMSSM with 22+19 free parameters calculate the Higgs and SUSY spectrum in the MSSM with the full one–loop + dominant two–loop corrections. determine the regions of parameter space where 123 ≤ Mh ≤ 129 GeV (3 GeV uncertainty includes both “experimental” and “theoretical” error)
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 10 / 28
[A. Arbey, M. Battaglia, A. Djouadi, F.Mahmoudi, J. Q., Phys.Lett. B708 (2012) 162]
Large MS values required:
◮ MS ∼ 1 TeV: only for maximal mixing ◮ MS ∼ 3 TeV: only for typical mixing
⇒ no-mixing scenario excluded (unless MS ≫ 1 TeV) Large tan β values favored but tan β ∼ 3 allowed if MS ∼ 3 TeV Constraints on sparticles: m˜
t1 ∼ 500 GeV
still possible! ⇒ maximal mixing disfavored for large MS and tan β
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 11 / 28
Concrete schemes: SSB occurs in hidden sector Parameters obey boundary conditions ⇒ small number of inputs: mSUGRA: tan β, m1/2, m0, A0, sign(µ) GMSB: tan β, sign(µ), Mmess, ΛSSB, Nmess AMSB: m0, m3/2, tan β, sign(µ)
β tan 10 20 30 40 50 (GeV)
max h
M 110 115 120 125 130 135 140
NUHM mSUGRA VCMSSM NMSSM no scale GMSB AMSB
Full scans of the model parameters with 123 GeV ≤ Mh ≤ 129 GeV
[ A. Arbey, M. Battaglia, A. Djouadi, F.Mahmoudi, J. Q., Phys.Lett. B708 (2012) 162]
model AMSB GMSB mSUGRA no-scale cNMSSM VCMSSM NUHM Mmax
h
121.0 121.5 128.0 123.0 123.5 124.5 128.5 End of AMSB and GMSB in their minimal versions!
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 12 / 28
[A. Arbey, M. Battaglia, A. Djouadi, F.Mahmoudi, J. Q., Phys.Lett. B708 (2012) 162]
As the scale MS seems to be large, we can consider 2 extreme possibilities: Split SUSY: allow fine–tuning
◮ The SSB scalar mass terms at high scale
(except 1 Higgs doublet)
◮ Gauginos and higgsinos, are left at the
EWSB scale (unification+DM still OK)
◮ The parameters : MS, 1 Higgs mass,
M1, M2, M3, µ and tan β
◮ Boundary condition on the quartic Higgs
coupling : λ(MS) = 1
4
◮ Heavy scalars ⇒ R.C. in the Higgs sector
enhanced by ln(MEWSB/MS)
SUSY broken at the GUT scale:
◮ Abandon fine-tuning, DM, unification ◮ SUSY/EWSB matching encoded in the
Higgs quartic coupling λ ∝ M2
h related to
gauge couplings
In both cases small tan β needed!
110 120 125 130 140 150 160 104 106 108 1010 1012 1014 1016 Mh (GeV) MS (GeV) Split SUSY
tan β = 1 tan β = 2 tan β = 5 tan β = 50
110 120 125 130 140 150 160 10
4
10
6
10
8
10
10
10
12
10
14
10
16
M h (GeV ) M S (GeV ) High-scale SUSY
tanβ = 1 tanβ = 2 tanβ = 5 tanβ = 50
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 13 / 28
In the basis (Hd, Hu), the CP–even Higgs mass matrix can be written as: M2
S = M2 Z
β
−sβcβ −sβcβ s2
β
A
β
−sβcβ −sβcβ c2
β
∆M2
11
∆M2
12
∆M2
12
∆M2
22
ij: radiative corrections
One derives the neutral CP-even Higgs boson masses and the mixing angle α: M2
h/H
= fh/H(MA, tan β, ∆M11, ∆M12, ∆M22) tan α = fα(MA, tan β, ∆M11, ∆M12, ∆M22) Mh should be an input now... The post-Higgs MSSM scenario:
non-observation of superparticles at the LHC MSSM ⇒ SUSY–breaking scale rather high, MS > ∼ 1 TeV. ∆M2
22 involves the by far dominant stop–top sector correction: ∆M2 22 ≫ ∆M2 11, ∆M2 12
→ One can trade ∆M2
22 (MS) for the by now known Mh
In this case, one can simply describe the Higgs sector in terms of MA, tan β and Mh: hMSSM : M2
H = (M2
A+M2 Z −M2 h)(M2 Z c2 β+M2 As2 β)−M2 AM2 Z c2 2β
M2
Z c2 β+M2 As2 β−M2 h
α = − arctan
Z +M2 A)cβsβ
M2
Z c2 β+M2 As2 β−M2 h
er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 14 / 28
Knowing [tan β, MA] and fixing Mh = 125 GeV, the couplings of the Higgs bosons can be derived, including the dominant radiative corrections that enter in the MSSM Higgs masses : c0
V = sin(β − α) ,
c0
t = cos α
sin β , c0
b = − sin α
cos β However, there are also direct/vertex radiative corrections to the Higgs couplings not contained in the mass matrix. These can alter this simple picture! The two important SUSY (QCD) corrections affect the t,b couplings:
cb ≈ c0
b × [1 − ∆b/(1 + ∆b) × (1 + cot α cot β)]
ct ≈ c0
t ×
m2 t 4m2 ˜ t1 m2 ˜ t2
(m2
˜ t1 + m2 ˜ t2 − (At − µ cot α)(At + µ tan α))
t) do not involve same vertex corrections gg → h process has ˜ t, ˜ b loops and h → γγ has also ˜ τ and χ±
i
loops ⇒ in general, we need (at least) 7 couplings ct, cb, cc, cτ, cV , cg, cγ + invisible decays? [Djouadi,Falkowski,Mambrini,JQ, arXiv:1205.3169] 8 parameters fit difficult! Simpler to make reasonable approximations: low sensitivity on h → c¯ c, h → ττ and pp → t¯ tH at the LHC in h → γγ additional contributions (˜ b, ˜ τ, χ±
i ) smaller than those of ˜
t ⇒ assume cc = ct, cτ = cb and ct(ttH) = ct(ggF), cγ ≃ cg ≃ ct reduce the problem to a fit of three couplings: ct, cb, cV
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 15 / 28
If large direct corrections ⇒ 3 independent h couplings : cc = ct, cτ = cb and cV = c0
V
To study the h state at the LHC, we define the effective Lagrangian : Lh = cV ghWW h W +
µ W −µ + cV ghZZ h Z 0 µZ 0µ
−ct yt h¯ tLtR − ct yc h¯ cLcR −cb yb h¯ bLbR − cb yτ h¯ τLτR + h.c. We fit the Higgs signal strengths : µX ≃
σ(pp→h)×BR(h→XX) σ(pp→h)SM×BR(h→XX)SM
Best-fit value : ct = 0.89, cb = 1.01 and cV = 1.02 (ATLAS & CMS data) If we neglect direct corrections → 2 parameter fits :
SM 99 CL 99 CL 68 CL 68 CL 68 CL 99 CL
Fit of Μ ratios MSSM Higgs fit
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
ct cV
99 CL
99 CL
68 CL
68 68 CL
Fit of Μ ratios MSSM Higgs fit
0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
cb cV
SM 99 CL 68 CL 68 CL 99 CL 68 CL
Fit of Μ ratios MSSM Higgs fit
0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
ct cb
best-fit points : (ct = 0.88, cV = 1.0), (cb = 0.97, cV = 1.0) and (ct = 0.88,cb = 0.97)
Djouadi, Maiani, Moreau, Polosa, JQ, Riquer, arXiv:1307.5205
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 16 / 28
Using the expressions defining the hMSSM one can perform a fit in the plane [tan β, MA]: The best-fit point : (tan β =1 and MA =557 GeV) or (MH = 580 GeV, MH± = 563 GeV, α = −0.837 rad). MSSM Higgs fit
95 CL 68 CL
Fit of Μ ratios
99 CL 68 CL 95 CL 155 200 250 350 500 750 1 2.5 5 7.5 10 25 50
MAGeV tanΒ
[GeV]
A
m 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 β tan 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Preliminary ATLAS
Ldt = 4.6-4.8 fb
= 7 TeV, s
Ldt = 20.3 fb
= 8 TeV, s b , b τ τ , ZZ*, WW*, γ γ → Combined h
]
d
κ ,
u
κ ,
V
κ Simplified MSSM [
Djouadi, Maiani, Moreau, Polosa, JQ, Riquer, arXiv:1307.5205
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 17 / 28
tan β < ∼ 3 usually thought to be “excluded” by LEP2 (Mh > ∼ 114 GeV) but it assumes MS ∼ 1TeV! Caveat : ATLAS & CMS constraint apply for a specific benchmark : Xt/MS = √ 6 and MS = 1 TeV (the mmax
h
scenario). But we can be more relaxed: with MS ≫ MZ , tan β ≈ 1 could be allowed! ⇒ Let’s reopen the low tan β regime and heavy Higgs searches, but in a benchmark independent approach (hMSSM)
[GeV]
A
m
100 200 300 400 1000
β tan 1 10
scenario
max h
MSSM m = 1 TeV
SUSY
M
95% CL Excluded:
SM H injected expected expected σ 1 ± expected σ 2 ± LEP at 8 TeV
at 7 TeV, 19.7 fb
, 4.9 fb τ τ → CMS Preliminary, H
1 3 5 10 50 103 104 105 106 107 tanβ MS [GeV]
Mh = 114 GeV Mh = 120 GeV Mh = 123 GeV Mh = 126 GeV Mh = 129 GeV Mh = 132 GeV
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 18 / 28
Φ gΦ¯
uu
gΦ¯
dd
gΦVV gΦAZ /gΦH+W − h cos α/ sin β − sin α/ cos β sin(β − α) ∝ cos(β − α) H sin α/ sin β cos α/ cos β cos(β − α) ∝ sin(β − α) A cotβ tan β ∝ 0/1 The decoupling limit is controlled by gHVV = cos(β − α) : gHVV
MA≫MZ
− → χ ≡ 1 2 M2
Z
M2
A
sin 4β − 1 2 M2
22
M2
A
sin 2β → 0 Tree–level part: doubly suppressed in both the tan β ≫ 1 and tan β ∼ 1 cases. sin 4β = 4 tan β(1 − tan2 β) (1 + tan2 β)2 →
1 − tan2 β for tan β ∼ 1 → 0 The radiative part : behave as −M2
22/M2 A × cot β, also vanishes at high
tan β values ⇒ the decoupling limit gHVV → 0 is reached very quickly at high tan β, as soon as MA > ∼ Mmax
h
. Instead, for tan β ≈ 1, this radiatively generated component is maximal. Departure from the decoupling limit! ghuu
MA≫MZ
− → 1 + χ cot β → 1 ghdd
MA≫MZ
− → 1 − χ tan β → 1 gHuu
MA≫MZ
− → − cot β + χ → − cot β gHdd
MA≫MZ
− → + tan β + χ → + tan β At low tan β : gHVV is non–zero, gHtt and gAtt are significant. ⇒ H/A/H± bosons can have sizable couplings to top quarks and massive gauge bosons if tan β ∼ 3 .
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 2 5 10 1 g2
HXX
tanβ MA = 300 GeV Mh = 126 GeV Hdd Huu HVV J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 19 / 28
The main search channels for the H/A states : The H/A → ττ channels The H → WW, ZZ channels The A → Zh channel The H → hh channel (estimation) The H/A → tt channels (estimation)
1 3 5 10 50 160 200 400 600 800 1000 tanβ MA [GeV] LHC sensitivity 7 + 8 TeV/ 25 fb−1
H/A → ττ H → VV A → hZ H → hh H/A → t¯ t A.Djouadi, J.Q.,arXiv:1304.1787
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 20 / 28
1 Constraints on SUSY models through the Higgs sector 2 Constraints on Dark-Matter models through the Higgs
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 21 / 28
Galactic rotation curves: Gravitational lensing of the Bullet cluster: Friedmann law (PLANCK):
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 22 / 28
Does the Higgs boson interact with a Hidden-Sector? Motivation: |H|2 is lowest dimension SM singlet, so SM singlet dark matter may naturally couple to SM via this operator Higgs-portal models : [Silveira,Zee(1985); Shabinger,Wells(2005);Patt,Wilczek(2006)] Scalar DM: ∆LS = − 1
2 m2 SS2 − 1 4 λSS4 − 1 4 λhSSH†HS2
Vectorial DM: ∆LV = 1
2 m2 V VµV µ+ 1 4 λV (VµV µ)2+ 1 4 λhVV H†HVµV µ
Fermion DM (not renormalizable): ∆Lf = − 1
2 mf ¯
χχ − 1
4 λhff Λ H†H ¯
χχ (DM stability ensured by a Z2 parity) → 2 parameter model: phenomenology fully determined by the mass mDM and coupling λDM What is the implication of a 125 GeV Higgs for the Higgs-portal models?
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 23 / 28
σS
fermvr = λ2
hSS m2 ferm
16π 1 (4M2
S −m2 h)2 (WMAP)
Γinv
h→SS = λ2
hSS v2βS
64πmh
(LHC) ∆LS ⊃ − 1
2 m2 SS2 − 1 4 λhSSH†HS2
σSI
S−N = λ2
hSS
16πm4
h
m4
Nf 2 N
(MS +mN)2
(XENON)
DM
1 50 XENON100
−2
WMAP 10
−3
λ hSS
Br = 10%
inv
10 10
−1
XENON1T XENONUP Max Min Lattice 150 100 200
M (GeV)
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 24 / 28
DM
1 50 XENON100
−2
WMAP 10
−3
λ hSS
Br = 10%
inv
10 10
−1
XENON1T XENONUP Max Min Lattice 150 100 200
M (GeV)
WMAP Br = 10% hVV
λ
−3
10
−2
10
−1
10 XENON1T XENONUP Max Min Lattice 150 100 200
M (GeV)
DM
1 50 XENON100
inv
[Djouadi, Lebedev, Mambrini, JQ (2012)]
10
−3
λ /Λ
hff 10
−1
Min Lattice 150 100 200
M (GeV)
DM
1 XENON100 WMAP 50 10
inv −2
Br = 10%
DM
σ XENON100
M (GeV)
VECTOR SCALAR 150 200 100
(pb)
SI
inv
Br < 10% h
m =125 GeV
−7
10
−8
10
−9
10
−10
10
−11
10 50 1 3 2 3 2 1 FERMION XENON1T XENON100UP J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 25 / 28
[Djouadi, Falkowski, Mambrini, JQ (2012)]
Direct & Indirect Higgs width constraints: ∆L = cgg
4 HG a µνG µν,a
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
0.000 0.005 0.010
Brinv cgg
95% 95% 99% 99%
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2 4 6 8 20 40 60 dGhêGh,SM Dc2 Brinvisible@%D
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 26 / 28
[Djouadi, Falkowski, Lebedev, Mambrini, JQ (2012)]
MDM < Mh/2 rχ(Mχ) = Γ(H → χχ)/σSI
χp
40 60
(pb)
SI
XENON 2012 Scalar
10
11
10
9
Vector Fermion 10
7
inv
20 LHC: most sensible light DM detector MS,F,V < 60 GeV: excluded by both LHC and D.D. Light Higgs-portal DM should be non-thermal. MDM > Mh/2
10−4 10−3 10−2 10−1 100 101 102 103 65 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 σ (fb) Mi (GeV) mh = 125 GeV λhii = 1 √s = 14 TeV
σ(pp → VVqq′) σ(pp → WVV) σ(pp → ZVV) σ(pp → SSqq′) σ(pp → WSS) σ(pp → ZSS) σ(pp → χχqq′) σ(pp → Wχχ) σ(pp → Zχχ)
10−4 10−3 10−2 10−1 100 101 102 65 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 σ (fb) Mi (GeV) mh = 125 GeV λhii = 1 √s = 3 TeV
σ(e+e− → VVe+e−) σ(e+e− → ZVV) σ(e+e− → SSe+e−) σ(e+e− → ZSS) σ(e+e− → χχe+e−) σ(e+e− → Zχχ)
MDM = Mh/2 and MDM 100 GeV will be probed by D.D and L.C. in near future.
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 27 / 28
Mh ≈ 125 GeV and the non–observation of SUSY particles, seems to indicate that the soft–SUSY breaking scale might be large We have discussed the hMSSM, i.e. the MSSM that we seem to have after the discovery of the Higgs boson at the LHC ⇒ the MSSM Higgs sector can be described by only (tan β, MA) H/A/H± searches at the LHC are becoming very constraining Some search channels at low tan β still relevant: H → ττ, WW , ZZ, hZ, hh, tt ⇒ need to continue/adapt the SM Higgs searches at high masses! 7–8 TeV LHC for the lightest h and 13–14 TeV LHC for H/A/H±? and maybe some SUSY particles will show up? Light Higgs-portal DM, MDM ≤ 60 GeV is excluded by both LHC and Direct Detection MDM ≥ 60 GeV will be probed by D.D and future e+e− Linear Colliders
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 28 / 28
J´ er´ emie Quevillon (LPT Orsay) Higgs Physics Beyond the Standard Model FFP 2014, Marseille, 15 July 2014 28 / 28