probing supersymmetry through higgs, flavor violation and dark matter searches marcela carena...

Probing Supersymmetry through Higgs, Flavor Violation and Dark Matter Searches

Marcela CarenaTheoretical Physics Department, Fermilab

Joint Experimental-Theoretical Seminar Fermilab, May 19, 2006

D. Garcia, U. Nierste and C. Wagner, Nucl. Phys. B577, 2000; Phys. Lett. B499, 2001S.Heinemeyer, C. Wagner and G. Weiglein, Eur.Phys. J.C45, 2006A.Menon, R. Noriega, A Szynkman and C. Wagner, hep-ph/0603106C. Balazs and C. Wagner, Phys. Rev. D70, 2004A. Finch, A Freitas, C. Milstene, H. Novak and A. Sopczak, Phys. Rev. D72, 2005D. Hooper and P. Skands, hep-ph/0603180

Based on works done in collaboration with:

Outline

-- enhanced loop corrections to neutral Higgs-fermion couplings

==> Flavor conserving processes :

Non-Standard MSSM Higgs production at the Tevatron and LHC

==> Flavor Changing Neutral Currents (FCNC)

• Introduction ==> Higgs and Flavor in the Standard Model

• The Flavor Issue in Supersymmetry ==> Minimal Flavor Violation (MFV)

€

tanβ

€

BS Mixing and the rare decay rate BS → μ +μ−

• Other Examples ==> MFV from GUT’s and General Flavor SUSY Models

-- -- Loop FC effects in the Charged Higgs-fermion couplingsLoop FC effects in the Charged Higgs-fermion couplings ==> ==> Probing SUSY parameters through B and Higgs Physics at the Tevatron and LHC

• Direct SUSY Dark Matter detection <==> Higgs searches at the Tevatron

• Conclusions

€

BR(b → sγ) and BR(Bu → τν )

• Standard Model works well ! Successfully describes processes up to energies a few hundred GeV

• What is Beyond the SM is certainly very exciting!

€

≈

Some of the key open questions:The origin of Electroweak Symmetry breaking: The Higgs Mechanism? How to stabilize the Higgs quantum corrections: The nature of Dark MatterThe explanation for the observed matter-antimatter asymmetryThe connection of electroweak and strong interactions with gravity

Collider Experiments Tevatron, LHC, ILC + Dark Matter Detection Experiments CDMS

==> our most promising avenues to discover the new physics that will answer these questions

?M Why v Pl<<

Are there New Symmetries in Nature, such as SUPERSYMMETRY, which can provide the answers?

In the Standard Model: The Higgs Mechanism

a self interacting complex scalar doublet with no trivial quantum numbers under SU(2)L x U(1)Y

The Flavor Structure in the SM

• The fermion part of the SM Lagrangian

In the mass eigenstate basis, the interactions of the Higgs field are also flavor diagonal

Flavor Changing effects arise from charged currents, which mix left-handed up and down quarks: where

• The CKM matrix is almost the identity ==> transitions between different flavors are suppressed in the SM • The Higgs sector and the neutral gauge interactions do not lead to FCNC

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (LZW) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.





FC effects in B observables in the SM



€

BH = pBs0 + qB s

0 €

Bs0 = b s( ) B s

0 = bs ( )

Flavor eigenstates mix via weak interactions

BBHH and B and BL L differ from CP eigenstates:differ from CP eigenstates:

€

ΔMs = MB H− MBL

= 2 |M12| =GF

2

6π 2η B mBS

ˆ B BSfBS

2

lattice

1 2 3 MW

2 S0 mt( ) |Vts|2

€

BL = pBs0 − qB s

0

Mass eigenstates:

€

q p = e−i2β S with βS = O 10−2( )

The B meson mass matrix

€

M =M − iΓ 2 M12 − iΓ12 2

M12* − iΓ12

* 2 M − iΓ 2

⎡

⎣ ⎢

⎤

⎦ ⎥

€

Γ12 << M12

A) Bs mixing

Short distance QCD corrections Box-diagram

Direct Measurement and Global CKM Fit

€

ΔMS

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor


€

ΔMSCDF. =17.33−0.21

+0.42 ± 0.07ps−1



Using ratioUsing ratio

Minimize QCD lattice Minimize QCD lattice uncertainty providing auncertainty providing ameasurement ofmeasurement of

€

Vts Vtd

• SM fit:SM fit:

€

CMK fit ⇒ ΔMS = 21.7−4.2(−6.8)+5.9(+9.7) ps−1

at 1(2) σ C.L.

€

17ps−1 < ΔMSD0@90%C.L. < 21ps−1

€

UT fit ⇒ ΔMS = 21.5 ± 2.6 ps−1 at 1 σ C.L.

€

⇒ −14.1< ΔMBs

NP[ ps−1] < 2.4

€

⇒ −9.4 < ΔMBs

NP[ ps−1] <1 at 2σ

B) Rare decay rate


are needed to see this picture.€

BS → μ +μ−

Wts M

mV amplitude SM μ∝

€

BR(Bs → μ +μ−)SM ≈ (3.8 ±1.0) × 10−9

• Present CDF limit:

€

BR(Bs → μ +μ _ ) <1. 10−7

C) Rare decay rate

€

B → XSγ

€

BR(B → XSγ)Eγ >1.8GeVSM = (3.38 -0.42

+0.31 -0.30+0.32) × 10−4

Estimated bound on New PhysicsEstimated bound on New Physicsusing Belle results ==> Neubert 05using Belle results ==> Neubert 05

€

| BR(B → XSγ)exp - BR(B → XSγ)SM |< 1.3 × 10−4

D) transition

€

Bu → τν

€

BR(Bu → τν )SM =GF

2 mB mτ2

8π1−

mτ2

mB2

⎛

⎝ ⎜

⎞

⎠ ⎟fB

2 Vub

2τ B

€

=(1.59 ± 0.40) ×10−4

€

BR(Bu → τν )exp = (1.06 −0.28+0.34 −0.16

+0.18) 10−4

In agreement with SM within errors

Flavor Beyond the Standard Model

• Two Higgs doublet Models:

Yukawa interactions ==>

The Higgs doublets acquire different v.e.v.’s and the mass matrix reads ==>

Diagonalization of the mass matrix will not give diagonal Yukawa couplings ==> will induce large, usually unacceptable FCNC in the Higgs sector

Easiest solution: One Higgs doublet couples only to down quarks and the other couples to up quarks only

Supersymmetry, at tree level

Since the up and down sectors are diagonalized independently, the HiggsInteractions remain flavor diagonal at tree level.

€

d R ,i(hd ,1ij φ1 + hd ,2

ij φ2) dL , j

€

mdij = hd ,1

ij v1 + hd ,2ij v2

€

−L =ψ Li hd

ijφ1dRJ + hu

ijφ2uRj

( ) + h.c.

The flavor problem in SUSY Theories SUSY breaking mechanisms ==> also can give rise to large FCNC effects

• Novel sfermion-gaugino-fermion interactions, e.g. for the down sector

where come from the block diagonalization of the squark mass matrix

• The diagonal entries are 3x3 matrices with the soft SUSY breaking mass matrices and the rest proportional to the Yukawa or

• The off-diagonal matrices are proportional to the Yukawa and to the soft SUSY breaking matrices Ad coming from the trilinear interactions of the Higgs doublets with the sfermions

€

d L ,Ri ˜ λ ˜ d L ,R

j → d L ,R DL,R+ ˜ D L ,R

˜ λ ˜ d L ,R

€

˜ D L,R

€

˜ d Li * ˜ d R

i *

( ) MQ

2 + v12hd

+hd + D ˜ d Lv1 Ad − μ* tanβ( )hd

v1 Ad* − μ tanβ( )hd

+ MD2 + v1

2hd+hd + D ˜ d R

⎛

⎝ ⎜ ⎜

⎞

⎠ ⎟ ⎟

˜ d Li

˜ d Ri

⎛

⎝ ⎜

⎞

⎠ ⎟

€

MQ2 , MD

2

€

Ι

€

recall VCKM = UL+DL

€

˜ u L* hu Auφ2 − μ*φ1( ) ˜ u R + ˜ d L

* hd Adφ1 − μ*φ2( ) ˜ d R + h.c.

• At loop level: FCNC generated by two main effects: 1) Both Higgs doublets couple to the up and down sectors ==> important effects in the B system at large tan beta 2) Soft SUSY breaking parameters obey Renormalization Group equations: given their values at the SUSY scale, they change significantly at low energies ==> RG evolution adds terms prop. to

In both cases the effective coupling governing FCNC processes

Minimal Flavor Violation (MFV)

• At tree level: the quarks and squarks

diagonalized by the same matrices

Hence, in the quark mass eigenbasis the only

FC effects arise from charged currents via VCKM

as in the SM .€

˜ D L,R = DL ,R ; ˜ U L ,R = UL,R

€

€

hd hd+ and huhu

+

€

(XFC )ij = (huhu+)ij ∝mt

2 V3iCKM*V3j

CKM for i ≠ j





enhanced loop corrections to neutral Higgs-fermion couplings

The factors correspond to the diagrams:

€

ε

€

hd

€

hu

€

hu+

€

hd

The loop factors are intimately connected to the assumed structure of The loop factors are intimately connected to the assumed structure of the squark mass matrices the squark mass matrices

€

ε

€

tanβ

€

−Leff . = d R0 ˆ h d φ1

0*+ φ2

0*ˆ ε 0 + ˆ ε Y

ˆ h u+ ˆ h u( )[ ]dL

o + φ20u R

0 ˆ h uuL0 + h.c.

€

ˆ h d ˆ ε Yˆ h u

+ ˆ h u

€

ˆ h d ˆ ε 0

In terms of the quark mass eigenstates:

where Mu, Md are the physical quark mass matrices,

V is the physical CKM matrix and the matrix R:

• Considering the squark masses flavour diagonal R diagonal

€

−Leff

= 1v2

tanβ Φ10*

− Φ20*

( ) d RMd V+R -1V[ ]dL + 1v2

Φ20*

d RMddL + Φ20u RhuuL + h.c.

€

hu = Mu v2

€

R = 1 + ε0 tanβ + εY tanβ hu

2

€

ε0i ≈

2α s

3π

μM ˜ g

max m ˜ d 1i

2 ,m ˜ d 2i

2 ,M ˜ g 2

[ ] → gluino contribution

Dependence on the SUSY parametersDependence on the SUSY parameters

€

εY ≈μAt

16π 2 max m ˜ t 1i

2 ,m ˜ t 2i

2 ,μ 2[ ]

→ higgsino contribution

Neglecting hu and hc compared with ht one can define

€

→ εJ = ε0j + εY ht

2δ j 3

Flavor Conserving Higgs-fermion couplings

€

−Leff

= 1v2

tanβ Φ10*

− Φ20*

( ) d RMd

1

R33dL + 1

v2

Φ20*

d RMddL + h.c.

€

R33 =1+ ε3 tanβ ≡1+ Δb

2 Higgs SU(2) doublets and : after Higgs Mechanism ==> 5 physical states: 2 CP-even h, H with mixing angle 1 CP-odd A and a charged pair

such that :

Hence:

€

α

€

H ±

€

φ10 = −sinα h +cosα H +i sinβ A

φ20 = cosα h +sinα H - i cosβ A

€

and at large tanβ, mA > mhmax :

cosα ≈ sinβ; sinα ≈ −cosβ

€

−Leff

=mb tanβ

(1+Δb )vφ1

0*d RdL + h.c.

€

H + iA ≅ sinβ φ10 − cosβ φ2

0

€

gAbb ≅ gHbb ≅mb tanβ

1+ Δb( )v

€

Δτ << Δ b ⇒

€

destroy basic relation

gA / H bb gA / H ττ ≠ mb mτ

€

φ1

€

φ2

€

gAττ ≅ gHττ ≅ mτ tanβ v

€

Looking at VCKM ≅ I

Non-Standard Higgs Production at the Tevatron and LHC



• Enhanced couplings to b quarks and tau-leptonsEnhanced couplings to b quarks and tau-leptons• Considering value of running bottom mass and 3 quark colorsConsidering value of running bottom mass and 3 quark colors

€

BR(A → bb ) ≅9

9 + 1+ Δb( )2

€

BR(A → τ +τ −) ≅1+ Δb( )

2

9 + 1+ Δb( )2



There may be a strong dependence on the SUSY parameters in the bb search channel. This dependence is much weaker in the tau-tau channel

€

σ bb A( ) × BR A → bb ( ) ≅ σ bb A( )SM

×tanβ 2

1+ Δb( )2 ×

9

1+ Δb( )2

+ 9

€

σ bb ,gg → A( ) × BR A → ττ( ) ≅ σ bb ,gg → A( )SM

×tanβ 2

1+ Δb( )2

+ 9

Searches for Non-Standard Higgs bosons at the Tevatron

€

pp → bb φ, φ → bb

• Enhanced reach for negative values of Enhanced reach for negative values of • Strong dependence on SUSY parametersStrong dependence on SUSY parameters

€

σ(bb φ)BR φ → bb ( )∝1 1+ Δb( )2⇒ enhanced for Δb < 0 ⇔ μ < 0 (if A t and M ˜ g > 0)

A) In the bb mode ==> probe large region of plane

€

tanβ − mA

M. C. et al. hep-ph/0511023

€

μ

€

Stop mixing param.: X t = At − μ tanβ



€

μ =−1000 GeV

€

μ =−500 GeV

€

μ =−200 GeV€

μ =200 GeV

€

μ =500 GeV

€

mhno−mixing ⇔ X t = 0



€

μ =−1000 GeV

€

μ =−500 GeV

€

μ =200 GeV

€

μ =−200 GeV

€

mhmax ⇔ X t = 6 MSUSY

€

⇒ based on D0 → 200pb-1

B) In the tau tau inclusive mode

€

pp → Xφ, φ → τ +τ −

€

⇒ based on CDF : 200pb-1

• Important reach for large tanb, small mA

• Weaker dependence on SUSY parameters via radiative corrections




€

μ =−200 GeV

€

mhmax ⇔ X t = 6 MSUSY

€

μ =200 GeV

€

μ =500 GeV

€

μ =1000 GeV

€

μ =−300 GeV



€

mhno−mixing ⇔ X t = 0

€

μ → (−300 - - 1000) GeV range

Loop-induced Higgs mediated FCNC in the down-quark sector

• In the MFV scenario, the neutral Higgs flavor changing Lagrangian

€

−LFCNC = d Rj XRL

S( )

jidL

i φS + h.c. with i ≠ j φS = h,H, A

€

and XRLS

( )ji

=m d J ht

2 εY x2S − x1

S tanβ( )tanβ

v 1+ε0j tanβ( ) 1+ Δb( )

VCKM3j* VCKM

3i

Example: case of universal soft SUSY squark mass parameters

are the components of the h, H and A in ==> enhanced coupling for H/A or h/A, depending on value of mA

€

x1S, x2

S

€

tanβ 2

€

φ10,φ2

0

• Effects of RG evolution proportional to

€

huhu+ in MQ

L-H. squarks are not diagonalized by the same rotation as L-H. quarksL-H. squarks are not diagonalized by the same rotation as L-H. quarks ==> ==> induces FC in the left-handed quark-squark-gluino vertex prop Vinduces FC in the left-handed quark-squark-gluino vertex prop VCKMCKM

€

⇒ XRLS

( )ji∝Δb −ε0

1,2

Correlation between Bs mixing and due to enhanced Higgs mediated flavor violating effects

€

BR(BS → μ +μ−)QuickTime™ and a

TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressorare needed to see this picture.

€

32

€

23*

€

tanβ

€

BR(BS → μ +μ−)SUSY ∝XRL

32 2tanβ 2

mA4

€

ΔMBS( )SUSY

∝ − XRL

32 XLR32

mA2

• SUSY contributions strongly correlated, and for universal squark masses

Negative sign with respect to SM

€

ΔMBS

BR(BS → μ +μ−)∝

mA2

tanβ 2

€

to maximize ΔMBS for a given value of BR(BS → μ +μ _ ) ⇔ minimize tanβ (for fixed mA)

⇒ choose large, negative values of ε0 and εY (large implies μ ≈ M ˜ g ≈ 2M ˜ q ≈23

At)


are needed to see this picture.€

32

€

tanβ

• What can we learn from Bs-mixing?

€

CDF limit

Using CKM fitter

Using UT fit

Upper bound on new physics from CDF measurement

How strong is the bound on ?

€

BR(Bs → μ +μ−)

€

large ε factors implies heavy squark mass and trilinear terms

• For natural values of mA< 1000 GeV ==> largest contributions at most a few ps-1


€

ΔMBS DP

SUSY≈ 3ps−1 ⇒ resolve the "discrepancy" between the SM and experiment

⇒ imply that BR(BS → μ +μ−) should be at the Tevatron reach





CKM fit

UT fit Consistent with CKM fit

€

εK

exp= (2.282 ± 0.014) 10−3

€



Light stop scenario ==> compatible with Electroweak Baryogenesis



Within this scenario, small values of mu (< 250 GeV) are Within this scenario, small values of mu (< 250 GeV) are strongly disfavor by bounds from Bs-mixing strongly disfavor by bounds from Bs-mixing

Flavor Changing in the charged Higgs coupling

• Similar to the neutral Higgs case, we have enhanced loop corrections which depend on SUSY parameters

€

€

hd

€

tR

€

dL

€

˜ d L

€

˜ t R

€

φ1±

€

ht €

tanβ

€

ˆ h u ε0'

€

−LeffH ±

= u Rj PRL

ji dLi H + + u L

j PLRji dR

i H + + h.c.

€

PLRj 3 =

2

v

m b tanβ

1+ ε03*

tanβ( )

VCKMj 3

€

PRL3i ≈

2

vm t cot β VCKM

3i 1− tanβ ε0' −εY

' hb2

( )( )

€

ˆ h u εY' ˆ h d

+ ˆ h d

This type of corrections are most important in constraining new physics from and

€

B → XSγ

€

Bu → τν€

PLR33 = PLR

j 3(J → 3, ε03*

→ Δb* )

€

hu

€

hd

€

hd+

€

dL

€

tR

€

˜ t L

€

˜ d R

€

φ1±

Important SUSY contributions to

€

BR(B → XSγ )



€

tR

€

tL

€

bR

€

sL

€

H +

€

PRL32

€

PLR33

€

A(b → sγ)χ + ∝

μAt tanβ mb

1+ Δb( ) ht

2 f [m ˜ t 1,m ˜ t 2

,μ] Vts

• Chargino-Stop amplitudeChargino-Stop amplitude

• Charged Higgs amplitude Charged Higgs amplitude

in the large tanb limitin the large tanb limit



€

tR

€

tL

€

bR

€

sL

€

˜ h 1+

€

˜ h 2+

€

×€

__

€

μ

€

At

€

~

€

~

€

A(b → sγ)H + ∝

(ht −δht tanβ ) mb

1+ Δb( )g[mt ,mH + ] Vts

€

with δht = ht ε0' −εY

' hb2

( )∝ ht

2α S

3πμM ˜ g

If: At ~0 (==> small stop mixing ==> light SM-like Higgs at Tevatron reach!)==>small contributions to from chargino-stops

+ large ==> cancellation of charged Higgs contribution NO constraint on tanb-ma plane from

€

b → sγ

€

μ M ˜ g > 0

€

b → sγ

B and Higgs Physics at the Tevatron explore complementary regions of SUSY parameter space

Large to moderate values of Xt ==> SM like Higgs heavier than 120 GeV

€

BR(BS → μ +μ−)∝ μAt

2⇒

€

μ and X t ≤ 500 GeV





Tevatron Higgs reach with 1fb-1

€

Br(b → sγ )

€

allowed

Br(b → sγ )


€

CDF limit : BR(BS → μ +μ−) <1×10−7

€

μ =−100 GeV

€

μ =−200 GeV

€

pp → H / A → τ +τ − ⇒

Experimental bound ==> small

€

Small μ < 0 ==> ≅ constant H+ and enhanced negative χ + − ˜ t contributions to BR(b → sγ )

Tevatron Non-Standard Higgs searches at small Xt • Interesting region since light SM-like Higgs lighter than 125 GeV

• No constraints from

• Mild constraints from

€

BR(Bs → μ +μ _ )

€

BR(b → sγ) if large μ M ˜ g > 0

BUT, important constraint from recent measurement of BUT, important constraint from recent measurement of

€

BR(Bu → τν )





€

BR(Bu → τν )

€

BR(Bu → τν )

Tevatron Higgs reach with 1fb-1

€

pp → H / A → τ +τ − ⇒ M. C. et al. hep-ph/0603106

€

BR(b → sγ)

€

BR(b → sγ)

€

BR(Bu → τν )SUSY

BR(Bu → τν )SM= 1−

mB2

mH ±2

⎛

⎝ ⎜ ⎜

⎞

⎠ ⎟ ⎟tanβ 2

(1+ Δb )

⎡

⎣ ⎢ ⎢

⎤

⎦ ⎥ ⎥

€

⇔ BR(Bu → τν )exp

BR(Bu → τν )SM= 0.67−0.27

+0.30

LHC Non-Standard Higgs searches

in the large to moderate Xt region





€

pp → H / A → τ +τ −with 30 fb-1 at the LHC

€

BR(Bs → μ−μ +) < 5.5 10-9 with 10 fb-1 at LHC€

BR(b → sγ )

€

BR(b → sγ )

• A relatively large region of SUSY parameter space can be probed at the LHC for these “low” luminosities

• For small stop mixing parameter Xt and sizeable mu, H/A Higgs searchescan make discoveries in a very large region of parameter space

€

•

€

•

€

•

€

•

• Consider effects of renormalization group evolution of SUSY parameters defined at the GUT scale-- gauge coupling and gaugino mass unification-- Non-universal squark and trilinear mass parameters

Lunghi, Vives, Porod, hep-ph/0605177Lunghi, Vives, Porod, hep-ph/0605177

MFV Models with Grand Unification

Large contributions to Bs-mixing strongly constrained by

€


€

ΔMBS

€

and direct searches from colliders

€

Includes contraints from b → sγ,(g − 2)μ , ΩDM

General Flavor Violation Models in SUSY (GFVM)

In GFVM ==> flavor violating entries of the squarksand trilinear mass parameters treated as being arbitrary

€

δRRd

( )ij

= (md ,RR2 )ij (md ,RR

2 )ii(md ,RR2 ) jj ⇒





• Strict new constraints on general models of SUSY flavor violation arise form recent data on

€

ΔMBS and BR(Bs → μ +μ _ )

Tevatron measurement of==> RR insertions are forbidden or, At and/or tanb must be very small €


• Most suitable candidates beyond the Standard Model:

==> Weakly interacting particles (WIMPS) with masses and interaction cross sections of order of the electroweak scale

SUSY with R-parity discrete symmetry conserved SUSY with R-parity discrete symmetry conserved

==> naturally provides a neutral stable DM candidate: LSP ==>==> naturally provides a neutral stable DM candidate: LSP ==>

€

RP = (−1)3B +L +2S

€

˜ χ 0

• Collider experiments will find evidence of DM through signature

and knowledge of new physics particle masses and couplings will allow to compute DM-annihilation cross sections and elastic scattering WIMP -proton cross sections

€

/ E T

But only Direct Detection Experiments will confirm the existence of Dark Matter particles

Dark Matter: one of the fundamental open questions ==> it demands new physics and it may be intimately related to EWSB

Direct detection has two big uncertainties:

• The local halo density, inferred by fitting to models of galactic halo: assumed ==>

Direct Detection of WIMPs

• WIMPs elastically scatter off nuclei in

targets,producing nuclear recoils with

Main Ingredients to calculate signal:Local density & velocity distribution of WIMPs and ==> rate per unit time, per unit detector material mass

€

R = N i

i

∑ η χ σ iχ

Number of target nuclei in the detector prop.toDetector mass/Atomic mass

local WIMP density

Scattering Cross section off nuclei

€

σ nχ

≈ 0.3 GeV / cm3

€

ηχ

€

σ nχ ⇒H,h,Z

q q

€

˜ χ 0

€

˜ χ 0

q q

q~

€

˜ χ 0

€

˜ χ 0

averaged over relative wimp velocity

• The galactic rotation velocity ≈ (230 +- 20) km/sec

Current and near future experiments sensitive only to spin-independent scattering

Neutralino Elastic Scattering Cross Section -- CDMS Reach

==> dominated by t-channel exchange of H and h, coupling to strange quarks and to gluons via bottom loops

€

tanβ

€

tanβ

€

tanβ enhanced couplings

€

σ SI ≤10−8 pb

€

σ SI ≈ 4 ×10−7 N11

2

0.9

⎛

⎝ ⎜

⎞

⎠ ⎟

N132

0.1

⎛

⎝ ⎜

⎞

⎠ ⎟

300GeV

mA

⎛

⎝ ⎜

⎞

⎠ ⎟

4tanβ

50

⎛

⎝ ⎜

⎞

⎠ ⎟2

Bino-like Neutralino example:Bino-like Neutralino example:

If are within Tevatron reach, a substantial elastic cross section ,If are within Tevatron reach, a substantial elastic cross section ,at the reach of CDMS , is expected at the reach of CDMS , is expected

€

mA and tanβ

==>Evidence for H/A at the Tevatron without a CDMS signal would suggest a large value of

CDMS DM searches Vs the Tevatron H/A searches

Current exclusion ComparisonCurrent exclusion Comparison

==> CDMS current limits disfavor discovery of H/A at the Tevatron, unless the neutralino has a large higgsino component

2007 Projection2007 Projection





€

⇒ μ >> M2

€

Tevatron reach in pp → A/H → τ +τ −

M.C, Hooper, Skands, hep-ph/0603180

€

μ

==> a positive signal at CDMS will be very encouraging for Higgs searches

•If the lightest neutralino makes up the DM of the universeIf the lightest neutralino makes up the DM of the universe

Direct Detection and Collider Searches

Constrained H/A discovery potential at the Tevatron (4 fb-1)

Current CDMSCurrent CDMS

2007 CDMS2007 CDMS projectionprojection

LEP excludedLEP excluded

M.C, Hooper, Skands, hep-ph/0603180

The LHC will probably find evidence of DM particles through

missing momentum and missing energy analyses

The ILC will determine its properties extremely accurately, allowing to

compute which fraction of the total DM density of the universe it makes

Dark Matter at Colliders

SUSY models which explain DM and Matter-Antimatter Asymmetry

ILC sensitivity to DM density

WMAP

Fra

ctio

n o

f D

ark

Ma

tte

r D

en

sity

stop mass= (neutralino mass + 15) [GeV]

A particle physics understanding of cosmological questions!

€

˜ t → ˜ χ +c

(assumming BR =1)

ILC (500 GeV)


• Small stop mixing (Xt≈0) and large Higgsino mass parameter are promising for the Tevatron ==> has sensitivity to discover all 3 MSSM neutral Higgs bosons

• Bs-mixing measurement ==> consistent with the SM, within errors. ==> in MFV SUSY models, with large tanb, consistent with bound. However, it imposes strict constraints on General Flavor Violation SUSY Models.

Conclusions

• Non-Standard MSSM Higgs searches at the Tevatron are highly constrained ----- for large stop mixing ==> from B physics measurements

-- for small higgsino mass parameter ==> from Direct DM detection searches

• “discrepancy” between theory and experiment

can be accomodated in MFV via large tanb effects, and can be probed by

improving the reach on

€

The ΔMBS and BR(Bu → τν ) ≈ 2σ

€

BR(Bs → μ +μ _ )

€

BR(Bs → μ +μ _ )

€

μ

• Discovery of H/A at the Tevatron together with discovery at CDMS will shed light to the composition of SUSY DM.• Discovery of H/A at the Tevatron, without positive results from leptonic rare Bs decay and from CDMS ==> small Xt an large or Deviations from MFV together with a different Nature of DM than usually assumed

€

μ

probing supersymmetry through higgs, flavor violation and dark matter searches marcela carena...

Documents