Summary and Outlook Graham Kribs IAS / Oregon SUSY at the Near Energy Frontier Fermilab
Workshop • 35 fantastic talks (plus this summary) • large th/ex interaction • ex: amazingly thorough, detailed work • th: remarkably upbeat; innovative ideas I will touch on only small sample of work presented. My biases -- apologies to everyone.
Summary SUSY does not exist in nature
Summary (after 20 fb -1 LHC @ 8 TeV) SUSY does not exist in nature
Higgs Yet: Higgs boson discovered ≈ 125 GeV
Higgs arXiv:hep-ph/9709356v1 16 Sep 1997 A SUPERSYMMETRY PRIMER STEPHEN P. MARTIN a Randall Physics Laboratory, University of Michigan Ann Arbor MI 48109-1120 USA � � 97 , 98 one can obtain only a considerably weaker, but still very Including this and other corrections, interesting, bound m h 0 < ∼ 130 GeV (7.42)
125 GeV “tension” Reece 125 GEV HIGGS AND SUSY ˜ ˜ t t MSSM must be tuned h h + to fit 125 GeV: h h Haber, Hempfling ’91 m 2 h = m 2 Z c 2 2 β + 3 m 4 � M 2 + X 2 X 2 � ⇥ � ⇥⇥ t t t S log 1 − m 2 M 2 12 M 2 4 ⌅ 2 v 2 t S S more: Haber, Hempfling, Hoang, Ellis, Ridolfi, Zwirner, Casas, Espinosa, Quiros, Riotto, Carena, Wagner, Degrassi, Heinemeyer, Hollik, Slavich, Weiglein Higgs at 125 GeV MSSM, tuned Beyond MSSM, natural : with heavy new D-terms? NMSSM? scalars
SUSY possibilities Dead Hospital Hiding
SUSY possibilities Dead* Hospital Hiding *SM all the way up to Planck scale
SUSY possibilities Dead Hospital* Hiding *Varying degrees of seriousness
SUSY possibilities Dead Hospital Hiding* *Nature’s SUSY is not your advisor’s SUSY
Dead measurements th of m h , m t , α s 1205.6497 precise meta-stability ex Universe 180 10 7 10 10 Instability Instability Meta - stability Pole top mass M t in GeV 175 1,2,3 s 170 10 9 10 12 Stability 165 115 120 125 130 135 Higgs mass M h in GeV
Dead th ex DM is (obviously) non-supersymmetric ISR tagging e.g., monojet Martinez Perez talk Mo NEW! &&&&&8& HCP2012& Mo Same&strategy&as&& in&the&&7&TeV&analysis&
Dead e.g., monojet Martinez Perez th talk ISR tagging non-supersymmetric DM is (obviously) ex Mo NEW! &&&&&8& HCP2012& Mo Mono$X&final&states&demonstrated&to&be&rather& • sensi;ve&channels&in&several&searches&for&physics& beyond&SM&&including& – Dark$Ma\er,$Extra$Dimensions,$SUSY,$Higgs…$ Same&strategy&as&& in&the&&7&TeV&analysis&
Tools to Make Progress Maltoni PREDICTIVE MC (SIMPLIFIED) PROGRESS Fully Automatic NLOwPS BSM framework Merging at NLO Merging and New Loop matching: techniques ME+PS NLOwPS 2012 2011 2008 2009 2002
Hospital ex (minor) pMSSM Ismail th LHC searches Light squark pathology Lightest 1 st /2 nd generation squark mass (GeV) t 1 at 999 GeV, all other colored d R (498 GeV) Simplified model limit sparticles above 1.8 TeV ATLAS-CONF-2013-047 20 fb -1 jets + MET d (84%) Production cross section lower than with 8 degenerate squarks 0 (434 GeV) Bino χ 3 Squark prefers compressed decay due to gaugino d (3%) composition! 0 (164 GeV) χ 2 Bino decays to Higgsinos through W (29%), Z (14%), h (12%), stau + (161 GeV) χ 1 (22%), stau neutrino (23%) Higgsinos d (13%) Model 2762364 0 (156 GeV) χ 1 10 Gluino mass (GeV) Models survive due to non-degenerate squarks, massive LSPs
Hospital th ex (minor) pMSSM Gunion • CMS data (and ATLAS also) is significantly impacting the pMSSM parameter space, excluding most, but certainly not all, of the high σ models. • In the case of unexcluded high- σ models, small mass splittings are primarily to blame for lack of sensitivity. ⇒ might gain sensitivity using more refined analyses of current data. But, there are many low- σ models that can only be explored with more energy and luminosity at the LHC. ⇒ both are coming!
Hospital th ex (disease) Amputate -- “natural supersymmetry” Higgsinos stops,sbottoms gluinos
Luty Natural Supersymmetry Crucial to test... Requirements: EWino searches, stop, sbottom searches But also: Higgs sector beyond MSSM
Natural Supersymmetry Strassler The Natural Sparticles (though not the only ones to think about) 1000 events
Natural Supersymmetry stops ⇒ Pataraia ATLAS a Sto LSP G W
Natural Supersymmetry stops Martinez CMS 1 500 LSP mass [GeV] CMS Preliminary LSP mass [GeV] 450 Observed s = 8 TeV SUSY 2013 Expected 400 -1 SUS-13-004 0-lep+1-lep (Razor) 19.3 fb 350 -1 SUS-13-011 1-lep (leptonic stop)19.5 fb ~ ~ ~ ∼ 300 0 pp t t *, t t → → χ 1 W = m = m = m BDT analysis t t 250 0 0 0 - m ∼ - m - m ∼ ∼ χ χ χ 1 1 1 ~ ~ ~ 200 m m m t t t 150 100 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 stop mass [GeV] stop mass [GeV]
Natural Supersymmetry gluinos Thompson ATLAS g->bb CMS g->tt ATLAS CONF-2013-061
Razor Rogan Razor kinematic variables mega-jet mega-jet invisible? invisible? ! Assign every reconstructed object to one of two mega-jets ! Analyze the event as a ‘canonical’ open final state: • two variables: M R (mass scale) , R (scale-less event imbalance) ! An inclusive approach to searching for a large class of new R = M R ∼ M ∆ √ physics possibilities with open final states T M R ∼ s ˆ √ M R s ˆ Two distinct mass scales in event Two pieces of complementary information
Reece Natural Supersymmetry HIGGSINOS A natural spectrum should have light higgsinos, but the wino and bino might be significantly heavier. It’s important to try to directly probe the higgsino states. g H 0 ˜ H 0 ˜ 1 H 0 ˜ q 2 W ∗ m 2 2 Z ⇤ H ± ˜ } δ m ∼ Z Z ∗ µ W ∗ M 2 H 0 ˜ γ / Z ⇤ ˜ H 0 ¯ q 1 1 Slightly different masses: split by a dim-5 operator. Monojet or VBF to tag the event, plus soft leptons from off- shell Z or W could be useful. No strong constraints so far. Important to fill in!
Natural Supersymmetry Higgsinos m c 2 0 - m c 1 ± : m= 110 GeV, t b = 10 m c 1 ± - m c 1 0 : m= 110 GeV, t b = 10 1000 1000 900 900 7.5 GeV 800 800 M 2 H GeV L M 2 H GeV L 5 GeV 700 700 10 GeV 1 5 G e V 1 0 G 600 600 e V 500 500 12.5 GeV LEP Excluded LEP Excluded 400 400 200 400 600 800 1000 200 400 600 800 1000 [Han, GK, Martin, Menon in progress] M 1 H GeV L M 1 H GeV L m 0 - m : m= 150 GeV, t = 10 m - m 0 : m= 150 GeV, t = 10 1000 1000 800 800 20 1 10 5 eV L eV L 600 600 eV 400 400 eV eV 200 200 eV Excluded Excluded 200 400 600 800 1000 200 400 600 800 1000 eV L eV L
Ismail Natural Supersymmetry Sources of fine-tuning Higgsino mass term is dominant contribution to fine-tuning Number of models Largest source of fine-tuning Stop mass terms also important, but even with strong coupling, loop-induced gluino contribution is less than wino FT 27
Natural Supersymmetry interpretations involving Higgsinos (with gluinos) Strassler
Natural Supersymmetry interpretations involving Higgsinos (without gluinos) 500 400 m c 1 H GeV L 300 200 100 [GK, Martin, Menon] 400 600 800 1000 m t 1 H GeV L é
Reece Natural Supersymmetry SUMMARY Searches for stops & gluinos have put strong bounds on natural SUSY. Higgs coupling measurements are also beginning to be important constraints. Various things I’d like to see more of: • Strong effort to find Higgsino LSPs. • Set limits on simplified models with hidden sectors (e.g.
mass splitting 10 GeV 1 GeV 0.1 GeV standard searches long-lived searches splitting is too small to give enough energy into intra-decay objects ... and too large to find displaced vertices Narrow Splittings?
Among the “harder” SUSY particles to find due to lower (EW) production rates. Most searches look for leptons from on-shell Gaugino Bounds W/Z (or require high BRs to leptons, i.e., light sleptons). -1 CMS Preliminary L = 19.5 fb , s = 8 TeV int 95% C.L. upper limit on cross section (fb) (GeV) ∼ ∼ ± 0 → χ χ pp 95% C.L. CLs NLO Exclusions 2 1 Observed 3 only l ∼ ∼ 0 0 χ → χ Z 200 ± σ Expected 3 l 1 0 1 2 1 experiment ∼ χ m ∼ ∼ σ ± 0 Expected 3 l -2 χ → χ 3 W experiment 10 1 1 150 m Z 100 < ∼ 0 m χ 1 - ∼ 0 m χ 2 50 2 10 0 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 m =m (GeV) ∼ ∼ ± χ 0 χ 1 2
Gori Smallest invariant mass [GeV] 150 50 GeV 20 GeV of SFOS lepton combination Small (gaugino) splittings 0.25 150 - 130 0.20 150 - 100 ˜ W + , 0 , − WZ bkgd 0.15 fraction 0.10 ˜ B 0.05 0.00 20 40 60 80 min H mSFOS LH GeV L
Gori 140 Tight p T cuts 1.5 2.3 120 m LSP H GeV L 1.1 L 1.5 100 2.2 1.0 80 LHC8 21 ê fb 60 100 120 140 160 180 m Χ H GeV L
Han More EWinos Decay of heavy neutralino and chargino - χ 1± χ 20 χ 10 h χ 10 Z χ 10 W ± A rich mixture of (W/Z/h)(W/Z/h)+MET final states! χ 10 χ 30 χ 20 χ 2± χ 20 χ 1± W χ 10 h χ 10 Z χ 1± W χ 1± Z χ 1± h χ 10 h χ 10 Z χ 10 W χ 10 χ 1± χ 10 χ 1± 5 !
Recommend
More recommend
