KIT – Universität des Landes Baden-Württemberg undnationales Forschungszentrum in der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft
Institut für Experimentelle Kernphysik
www.kit.edu
C. Beskidt, W. de Boer, D. Kazakov, F. Ratnikov
LHC and direct DM searches
Outline
CMSSM Constraints: LHC, WMAP, XENON100, Electroweak, heavy flavour
Fitting problems: highly correlated parameters -> multistep fitting technique
Results (Beskidt, WdB, Kazakov,Ratnikov, arxiv.org/1202.3366)
2Wim de Boer, DM2012, Marina del Rey, Feb. 23, 2012
Constraints considered
Variables calculated withMicrOMEGAs 2.4.1
Minuit for minimization
LHC limits on pseudoscalar Higgs and squarks and gluinos.
3Wim de Boer, DM2012, Marina del Rey, Feb. 23, 2012
CMSSM – PRE-LHC CONSTRAINTS
Higgs Mass mh mh > 114,4 GeVMuon g-2b→sγ BRexp(b→sγ) = (3,55 ± 0,24)·10-4
Bs→μμ BRexp(Bs→μμ) < 1,1·10-8
B→τν BRexp(B→τν) = (1,68 ± 0,31)·10-4
Relic Density Ωh2 Ωh2 = 0,1131 ± 0,0034CMSSM: 4 Parameter m0, m1/2, A0, tanβ and sign of μ
Fitting problem: STRONG correlations between 3 of 4 free parameters
10exp 104,122,30 theoaaa
Solution: multistep fitting technique, i.e. fit parameters with strongest correlation (A0, tanβ) first for every pair of m0, m1/2
4Wim de Boer, DM2012, Marina del Rey, Feb. 23, 2012
EXAMPLES OF HIGH CORRELATION
χ2 for Bs → μμ and Ωh2
co-annihilation region
mA exchange
focus point region
Origin of correlation:Both strongly dependent ontanβ
Bs → μμ Ωh2
For given m0 only very specific values of tan
For given tan only very specific values of A0
5Wim de Boer, DM2012, Marina del Rey, Feb. 23, 2012
Excluded regions (95% C.L.) pre-LHC
WHITE = ALLOWED
6Wim de Boer, DM2012, Marina del Rey, Feb. 23, 2012
Why CMSSM?
CMSSM provides UNIFICATION of gauge couplings
CMSSM provides UNIFICATION of Yukawa couplings
CMSSM assumes UNIFICATION of gaugino masses m1/2
Mgluino=2.7 m1/2, MWIMP=0.4 m1/2
CMSSM predicts EWSB with 114 < Mhiggs < 130 GeV LHC: 116<Mhiggs<131 GeV
CMSSM provides WIMP Miracle: annihilation x-section a few pb-> correct relic density scattering cross section < 10-8 pb consistent with xenon100
7Wim de Boer, DM2012, Marina del Rey, Feb. 23, 2012
Why CMSSM?
CMSSM provides UNIFICATION of gauge couplings
CMSSM provides UNIFICATION of Yukawa couplings
CMSSM assumes UNIFICATION of gaugino masses m1/2
Mgluino=2.7 m1/2, MWIMP=0.4 m1/2
CMSSM predicts EWSB with 114 < Mhiggs < 130 GeV LHC: 116<Mhiggs<131 GeV
CMSSM provides WIMP Miracle: annihilation x-section a few pb-> correct relic density scattering cross section < 10-8 pb consistent with xenon100
U. A
mal
di, W
dB, H
. Für
sten
au, P
LB, 1
991,
w
db. C
, San
der,
PLB
200
4, h
ep-p
h/03
0704
9
Yukawa coupling Unificationwdb et al, PLB 2001,arXiv:hep-ph/0106311
WIMP largely Bino DM may be supersymmetric partner of CMB
LHC: 116<Mh<131 GeV
8Wim de Boer, DM2012, Marina del Rey, Feb. 23, 2012
NO CONSTRAINT FROM RELIC DENSITY ALONE!
f
f
A
χ
χ
~
~
tan(β)·mfd
mW
8
N1N3(4)
tan(β)·mfd ↔ tan(β)mfu
f
f
A
χ
χ
~
~
tan(β)·mfd
mWmW
88
N1N3(4)
tan(β)·mfd ↔ tan(β)mfu4
2tan
Am
Relic density Ωh2 inversely proportional to annihilation x-section σ Main annihilation diagram via pseudo-scalar Higgs A
Dial tanβ for correct mA → tanβ ≈ 50 in most of parameter range
2/12 mmmA
Large enough annih. Cross sectionnear resonance, i.e . 2mmA
9Wim de Boer, DM2012, Marina del Rey, Feb. 23, 2012
tan 50
Koannihilation
WITH LHC: RELIC DENSITY BECOMES CONSTRAINT
mAm1/2
Beskidt, wdb, Kazakov, arXiv:1008.2150
10Wim de Boer, DM2012, Marina del Rey, Feb. 23, 2012
mA cross sections tan2
Beskidt, dB et al.1008.2150, PLB 2011
tanβ ≈ 50
mA > 400 GeVfor tan50
11Wim de Boer, DM2012, Marina del Rey, Feb. 23, 2012
LHC DIRECT SEARCHES
qqqgggpp ~~,~~,~~
qq~~ qg~~gg~~
95% CL exclusion by CMS + ATLAS follows tot0.1-0.2 pb
2=tot2/σeff
2 , Δ2 = 2 –2min = 5,99 for 95% C.L:
12Wim de Boer, DM2012, Marina del Rey, Feb. 23, 2012
LHC DIRECT SEARCHES
Excluded:(95% C.L:
GeV620~ gmGeV1000~ qm
Expected sensitivityat 14 TeV: almost 2x
13Wim de Boer, DM2012, Marina del Rey, Feb. 23, 2012
Cross section limits WIMP-Nucleon scattering
from rotation curve 0.3-1.3 GeV/cm3
Scattering rate R:
X-section dominated by Higgs exchange
Quark mass and Higgsino comp. of Neutralino
14Wim de Boer, DM2012, Marina del Rey, Feb. 23, 2012
=
Change of slope precisely measured by VLBI measurementsCan ONLY be explained by local ringlike substructure in DM,e.g. from disruption of Canis Major satellite.Supported by magic ring of stars and gas flaring
WdB, Weber, arXiv:1011.6323
=0.3 GeV/cm3
=1.3 GeV/cm3
Can local DM density be as large as 1.3 GeV/cm3?
15Wim de Boer, DM2012, Marina del Rey, Feb. 23, 2012
CM
Sgt
Sun
From David Law, CaltechTidal force ΔFG 1/r3
no ring
with outer ring
Kalberla, et al-. arXiv:0704.3925
Gas flaring needs outer ring with mass of 2.1010M☉!
R [kpc]
FWH
M g
as la
yer
[kpc
]
Canis Major disruption suggested by magic ring of stars
(SDSS)
Evidence for local DM Substructure
16Wim de Boer, DM2012, Marina del Rey, Feb. 23, 2012
LARGE UNCERTAINTY FROM VIRTUAL STRANGE QUARKS
Effective couplings
Consider conservatively much lower s-quark density from lattice calculations(and distrust N scattering in non-perturbative regime)Also considered lowest possible local DM density of 0.3 GeV/cm3
17Wim de Boer, DM2012, Marina del Rey, Feb. 23, 2012
HIGGSINO COMP. LARGE FOR LARGE M0
Higgs exchange becomeslarge, if Higgsino componentof WIMP becomes large
EWSB requiressmall andlarge N13 for large m0
Large x-section Easy to exclude
18Wim de Boer, DM2012, Marina del Rey, Feb. 23, 2012
COMBINED EXCLUSION PLOT
19Wim de Boer, DM2012, Marina del Rey, Feb. 23, 2012
INFLUENCE FROM G-2
Preferred region from g-2 excluded largely by LHCWithout g-2 no preferred region above exclusion (red), i.e. flat, but it helps exclusion at large m0
20Wim de Boer, DM2012, Marina del Rey, Feb. 23, 2012
The main players
LHCdirectsearches:
f
f
A
χ
χ
~
~
tan(β)·mfd
mW
8
N1N3(4)
tan(β)·mfd ↔ tan(β)mfu
f
f
A
χ
χ
~
~
tan(β)·mfd
mWmW
88
N1N3(4)
tan(β)·mfd ↔ tan(β)mfu
LHCHiggssearches+h2:
Direct DMsearches+h2:
LightSUSYmasses
Inter-MediateSUSYmasses
HeavySUSYmasses
Sensitive region
Combination: in CMSSM WIMP > 160 GeV, gluino > 1 TeV
Summary (arxiv1202.3366)
21Wim de Boer, DM2012, Marina del Rey, Feb. 23, 2012
Backup
22Wim de Boer, DM2012, Marina del Rey, Feb. 23, 2012
BEST-FIT POINT
Point 1: electroweak + cosmological constraints
Point 2: electroweak + cosmological + LHC (direct searches and mA+Ωh2) + DDMS
23Wim de Boer, DM2012, Marina del Rey, Feb. 23, 2012
COMPARISON TO OTHER GROUPS
Strong correlation between A0 und tanβ
Buchmueller et al. arXiv: 1110.3568
24Wim de Boer, DM2012, Marina del Rey, Feb. 23, 2012
HOW TO TREAT THEORETICAL ERRORS?
Theoretical errors can be treated as nuisance parameters and integrated over in the probability distribution (=convolution for symm. distr.) If errors Gaussian, this corresponds to adding the experimental and theoretical errors in quadratureAssume σtheo ~ σexp (only then important)
Convolution of 2 Gaussians Convolution of Gaussian + “flat top Gaussian”
Adding errors linearly more conservative approach for theory errors.
2exp
22 theo exp~ theo
25Wim de Boer, DM2012, Marina del Rey, Feb. 23, 2012
CP-even lightest Higgs <130 GeVCP-even neutral heavy Higgs HCP-odd neutral Higgs ACP-even charged Higgses H
mA2=m1
2+m22 becomes ALWAYS
small at large tan
EWSB and Pseudoscalar Higgs Mass mA
Higgs potential:
m2mt
m1mb tan
EWSB wenn m2 <0, possible byrad. corr. AND 140 < mt < 200 GeV(pred. from SUSY, Inoue et al, 1982,wdb et al., hep-ph/9805378)
At large m0: should become smallin order to reach m2<0 before mZ