PatiSalam and lepton universality in B decays Julian Heeck Moriond - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶

Aug 16, 2023 187 likes •429 views

PatiSalam and lepton universality in B decays Julian Heeck Moriond - EW Session - 3/22/2019 based on JHEP 1812 (2018) 103 with Daniele Teresi Neutral current, loop-level SM. LHCb anomaly. C 9 = C 10 Good operator (C 9 = C 10

SLIDE 1

Pati–Salam and lepton universality in B decays

Julian Heeck Moriond - EW Session - 3/22/2019 based on JHEP 1812 (2018) 103 with Daniele Teresi

SLIDE 2

Moriond 2019 Julian.Heeck@uci.edu 2

Neutral current,

loop-level SM.

LHCb anomaly.
Good operator (C9 = −C10)
Tree-level UV: Z’ or leptoquark.
High NP scale = heavy new boson = easy to have.
Also look for and di-muons at LHC.

[Capdevila+, ‘17; Altmannshofer+, ‘17; Geng+, ‘17; Ciuchini+, ‘17; D’Amico+, ‘17;...] [Aebischer+, 1810.07698; Altmannshofer+, 1704.05435]

[see David’s talk!]

C9 = −C10

[arxiv.org/list/hep-ph/]

SLIDE 3

Moriond 2019 Julian.Heeck@uci.edu 3

Charged current,

tree-level SM.

LHCb, BaBar, Belle.
Good operator
H+, W’ or leptoquark.
Low scale, many constraints: B→Kνν, Bc→τν.

[HFLAV; Bernlochner+, ‘17; Di Luzio+, ‘17;...] [Li+, 1605.09308; Alonso+, 1611.06676]

SLIDE 4

Moriond 2019 Julian.Heeck@uci.edu 4

Charged current,

tree-level SM.

LHCb, BaBar, Belle.
Good operator
H+, W’ or leptoquark.
Low scale, many constraints: B→Kνν, Bc→τν.
Light (< 100 MeV) sterile neutrino? Evades B→Kνν.
r right-handed neutrino!

[He, Valencia, ‘12/’17; Greljo+, ‘18; Asadi+, ‘18; Robinson+, ’18; Bečirević+, ‘16; Azatov+, ‘18] [HFLAV; Bernlochner+, ‘17; Di Luzio+, ‘17;...]

SLIDE 5

Moriond 2019 Julian.Heeck@uci.edu 5

Leptoquarks?

Bosons that couple to

quarks & leptons, e.g.

Leads to proton decay!

Impose U(1)B or U(1)e,μ,τ?

For B anomalies:
Too ad hoc?

Leptoquarks part of GUTs as multiplet partners!

[Review: Doršner+, ‘16] [Barr, Freire ‘90; JH, Hambye, PRL 2018]

L

[see Andrei’s talk!]

SLIDE 6

Moriond 2019 Julian.Heeck@uci.edu 6

Leptoquarks?

Bosons that couple to

quarks & leptons, e.g.

Leads to proton decay!

Impose U(1)B or U(1)e,μ,τ?

For B anomalies:
Too ad hoc?

Leptoquarks part of GUTs as multiplet partners!

[Angelescu+, 1808.08179] [Barr, Freire ‘90; JH, Hambye, PRL 2018] [see Andrei’s talk!]

L

SLIDE 7

Moriond 2019 Julian.Heeck@uci.edu 7

Pati-Salam

Fermions:
generates massive
sets bound
Need extra work to lower and get LFUV.

How about scalar leptoquarks?

[Calibbi+, ‘17; Di Luzio+, ‘17; Blanke, Crivellin, ‘18; Bordone+, ‘18] [Valencia, Willenbrock, ‘94; Smirnov, ‘07/’18] [Pati, Salam, ‘74]

SLIDE 8

Moriond 2019 Julian.Heeck@uci.edu 8

Pati-Salam

Breaking (and NR mass!) via scalars
Parity requires and sets
Only one (symmetric) coupling matrix!

PS relates couplings of different LQs & to neutrinos!

type-I seesaw no proton decay! type-II seesaw

SLIDE 9

Moriond 2019 Julian.Heeck@uci.edu 9

Type-II seesaw ↔

type-II seesaw

[JH, Teresi, 1808.07492]

SLIDE 10

Moriond 2019 Julian.Heeck@uci.edu 10

Type-II seesaw ↔

can give R(K)!

type-II seesaw [JH, Teresi, 1808.07492]

SLIDE 11

Moriond 2019 Julian.Heeck@uci.edu 11

Type-II seesaw ↔

can give R(K)!
μ→e conversion too large, use CP phases to suppress.

type-II seesaw [JH, Teresi, 1808.07492]

SLIDE 12

Moriond 2019 Julian.Heeck@uci.edu 12

& type-II seesaw

R(K) and μ→e fix

neutrino parameters!

Fixing :

Should show up in next-gen μ→e!

1σ from nu-fit [JH, Teresi, 1808.07492] normal ordering

SLIDE 13

Moriond 2019 Julian.Heeck@uci.edu 13

& type-II seesaw

R(K) and μ→e fix

neutrino parameters!

Fixing :

Should show up in next-gen μ→e!

1σ from nu-fit [JH, Teresi, 1808.07492] normal ordering

Non-trivial, only works for type-II seesaw with normal ordering!

SLIDE 14

Moriond 2019 Julian.Heeck@uci.edu 14

What about ?

Difficult, our S1 LQs couple to NR, not νL.
Could use the R2 LQs from the EWSB, but too flexible.
Forget neutrino connection and assume one light NR.
S3 gives R(K), S1 gives R(D),

same coupling matrix

Fixing :

SLIDE 15

Moriond 2019 Julian.Heeck@uci.edu 15

Difficult, our S1 LQs couple to NR, not νL.
Could use the R2 LQs from the EWSB, but too flexible.
Forget neutrino connection and assume one light NR.
S3 gives R(K), S1 gives R(D),

same coupling matrix

Fixing :

R(K) R(D)

What about ?

SLIDE 16

Moriond 2019 Julian.Heeck@uci.edu 16

S1 testable in Belle-II:

and at the LHC:

here.

Belle II

SLIDE 17

Moriond 2019 Julian.Heeck@uci.edu 17

R(K) & R(D) R(K) & R(D) pp → τν pp → S1S1 → tμtμ

[Azatov+, 1807.10745]

pp → ννj

LHC

[CMS-PAS-B2G-16-027] [ATLAS, 1801.06992]

largest LQ coupling

SLIDE 18

Moriond 2019 Julian.Heeck@uci.edu 18

Conclusions

Lepton non-universality in B decays very intriguing.
New physics in the form of Z’, W’ or leptoquarks!
LQ explanation fits surprisingly nicely into Pati-Salam:

– Required for symmetry breaking & seesaw. – Automatically chiral & no proton decay. – Pati-Salam relates couplings of LQs and seesaw. – Parity relates S3 and S1 couplings.

Testable:

L

SLIDE 19

Moriond 2019 Julian.Heeck@uci.edu 19

Backup

SLIDE 20

Moriond 2019 Julian.Heeck@uci.edu 20

Fermion masses

Just complex
Diagonalization:

with parity relation

Adding gives freedom (4HDM) and R2 LQs.

[JH, Teresi, 1808.07492]

[Volkas, ‘95] [Maiezza+, ‘10]

SLIDE 21

Moriond 2019 Julian.Heeck@uci.edu 21

RGEs

The Pati-Salam relations and are broken!
RGEs depend strongly on all other particle masses.
Heavy NR:

[JH, Teresi, 1808.07492]

SLIDE 22

Moriond 2019 Julian.Heeck@uci.edu 22

RGEs

The Pati-Salam relations and are broken!
RGEs depend strongly on all other particle masses.
Light NR:

[JH, Teresi, 1808.07492]

SLIDE 23

Moriond 2019 Julian.Heeck@uci.edu 23

Unification

Parity requires at the PS scale. Possible?
RGEs depend strongly on all other particle masses.
Lowest order:
More light states

change this.

[JH, Teresi, 1808.07492]