Arxiv:2007.15059V1 [Hep-Ph] 29 Jul 2020 GUT Successful Solutions Available in Literatures, for Exam- Uniﬁed Gauge Coupling, and MGUT Is the GUT Scale

Probing the Supersymmetric Grand Uniﬁed Theories at the Future Proton-Proton Colliders and Hyper-Kamiokande Experiment

Waqas Ahmed,1, ∗ Tianjun Li,2, 3, † Shabbar Raza,4, ‡ and Fang-Zhou Xu5, § 1a School of Physics, Nankai University, No.94 Weijin Road, Nankai District, Tianjin, China 2CAS Key Laboratory of Theoretical Physics, Institute of Theoretical Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China 3School of Physical Sciences, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, No. 19A Yuquan Road, Beijing 100049, China 4Department of Physics, Federal Urdu University of Arts, Science and Technology, Karachi 75300, Pakistan 5Institute of Modern Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China Gauge coupling unification in the Supersymmetric Standard Models strongly implies the Grand Unified Theories (GUTs). With the grand desert hypothesis, we show that the supersymmetric GUTs can be probed at the future proton-proton (pp) colliders and Hyper-Kamiokande experiment. 16 For the GUTs with the GUT scale MGUT ≤ 1.0 × 10 GeV, we can probe the dimension-six proton decay via heavy gauge boson exchange at the Hyper-Kamiokande experiment. Moreover, for the 16 GUTs with MGUT ≥ 1.0 × 10 GeV, we for the first time study the upper bounds on the gaugino and sfermion masses. We show that the GUTs with anomaly and gauge mediated supersymmetry breakings are well within the reaches of the future 100 TeV pp colliders such as the FCChh and SppC, and the supersymmetric GUTs with gravity mediated supersymmetry breaking can be probed at the future 160 TeV pp collider.

Introduction.–Supersymmetry (SUSY) provides a Higgsino, stop, gluino, and sleptons, which can be tested natural solution to the gauge hierarchy problem in at the future proton-proton (pp) colliders such as the the Standard Model (SM). In the supersymmetric SMs FCChh [33] and SppC [34]. (SSMs) with R-parity, gauge coupling unification can Because the gauge coupling unification in the SSMs be achieved [1], the Lightest Supersymmetric Particle strongly suggests GUTs, the interesting and challeng- (LSP) such as the lightest neutralino can be a dark ing question is: can we probe the supersymmetric GUTs matter (DM) candidate [2], and the electroweak (EW) at the future pp colliders and other experiments even gauge symmetry can be broken radiatively due to the if there does exist the SUSY EWFT problem? If yes, large top quark Yukawa coupling, etc. In particular, what is the center-of-mass energy of the future pp collider gauge coupling unification strongly suggests Grand Uni- needed? We shall study it in this paper. In the GUTs, fied Theories (GUTs) [3–7], which may be constructed the well-know prediction is the dimension-six proton de- from superstring theory. Therefore, supersymmetry is a cay p → e+π0 via heavy gauge boson exchange, and the bridge between the low energy phenomenology and high- proton lifetime is given by [35] energy fundamental physics, and thus is the promising 2 2 new physics beyond the SM. + 0 34 2.5 0.04 τp(e π ) ' 1.0 × 10 × × However, after the LHC Run 2, the null results of AR αGUT the SUSY searches have given strong constraints on the 4 M SSMs. For example, the low mass bounds on the gluino, GUT × 16 years , (1) first-two generation squarks, stop, and sbottom are about 1.0 × 10 GeV 2.3 TeV, 1.9 TeV, 1.25 TeV, and 1.5 TeV, respectively [8– where AR is the dimensionless one-loop renormalization 12]. Thus, there might exist SUSY EW fine-tuning factor associated with anomalous dimension of the rel- (EWFT) problem. And there are some promising and evant baryon-number violating operators, α is the arXiv:2007.15059v1 [hep-ph] 29 Jul 2020 GUT successful solutions available in literatures, for exam- unified gauge coupling, and MGUT is the GUT scale. The ple, Refs. [13–27]. In particular, in the Super-Natural current lower limit on the proton lifetime from the Super- SUSY [28–30], it was shown that the fine-tuning mea- 34 Kamiokande experiment is τp > 1.6 × 10 years [36]. sure defined by Ellis-Enqvist-Nanopoulos-Zwirner [31] 16 Thus, we obtain MGUT ≥ 1.0 × 10 GeV. At the future and Barbieri-Giudice [32] is at the order of one naturally, Hyper-Kamiokande experiment, we can probe the proton despite having relatively heavy supersymmetric particle lifetime at least above 1.0 × 1035 years [37]. Therefore, (sparticle) spectra. The previous natural SSMs generi- 16 the GUTs with MGUT ≤ 1.0 × 10 GeV is within the cally predict some relatively light sparticles, for instance, reach of the future Hyper-Kamiokande experiment. In the following, with the grand desert hypothesis from the EW scale to the GUT scale, we shall show that the 16 ∗ [email protected] supersymmetric GUTs with MGUT ≥ 1.0×10 GeV can † [email protected] be probed at the future pp colliders. The supersymme- ‡ [email protected] try searches at the 100 TeV pp colliders have been stud- § [email protected] ied previously [33, 38–41]. For the integrated luminosity 2

LSP for gravity and anomaly mediations, SM-like Higgs boson mass mh ⊂ [123, 127] GeV, and gluino mass mg˜ ≥ 2.2 TeV. After collecting the data, we impose the + − constraints from rare decay processes Bs → µ µ [53], b → sγ [54], and Bu → τντ [55]. To be general, we do not require the relic abundance of the LSP neutralino to satisfy the Planck bound within 5σ 0.114 ≤ 2 ΩCDMh (Planck) ≤ 0.126 [56]. Gravity Mediated Supersymmetry Breaking: mSUGRA/CMSSM.–The mSUGRA/CMSSM [42– 44] is based on the GUTs and N = 1 supergravity where supersymmetry breaking is communicated through the supergravity interaction. It is one of the most widely studied SUSY scenarios, and has three supersymmetry breaking soft terms at the GUT scale: the universal gaugino mass M1/2, universal scalar mass M0, and universal trilinear coupling A0. The other free parameter tan β is the ratio of vacuum expectation values (VEVs) of two Higgs-doublets, and a discrete parame- FIG. 1. Gray points are consistent with the REWSB and LSP ter sign(µ) = ±1. We perform the random scans for the neutralino. Orange points satisfy the mass bounds and the following mSUGRA/CMSSM parameter space constraints from rare B−meson decays. Green points are a subset of orange points and satisfy M 1 × 1016 GeV. GUT & 0 ≤ M0 ≤ 90 TeV,

0 ≤ M1/2 ≤ 30 TeV, −1 30 ab , Wino via Bino decay, gluinog ˜ via heavy flavor −3 ≤ A0/M0 ≤ 3, decay, gluino via light flavor decay, first-two generation 2 ≤ tan β ≤ 60 (2) squarksq ˜, and stop can be discovered for their masses up to about 6.5 TeV, 11 TeV, 17 TeV, 14 TeV, and 11 TeV, with µ > 0 and mt = 173.2 GeV [57]. The results are not respectively. Moreover, if the gluino and first-two gener- too sensitive to one or two sigma variations in the value DR ation squark masses are similar, they can be probed up of mt [58]. We use mb (MZ) = 2.83 GeV as well which to 20 TeV. is hard-coded into the ISAJET. Moreover, in the SSMs, supersymmetry is broken in Because the sfermions in the SSMs form the com- the hidden sector, and then supersymmetry breaking is plete GUT multiplets while gauginos do not, the uni- mediated to the SM observable sector via gravity media- versal guagino mass M1/2 has big effects on gauge cou- tion [42–44], gauge mediation [45–47], or anomaly me- pling unification. We present the plot MGUT vs M1/2 diation [48, 49]. For the supersymmetric GUTs with in Fig. 1. In our figures, gray points are consistent with 16 MGUT ≥ 1.0 × 10 GeV, we for the first time study the the REWSB and LSP neutralino. Orange points satisfy upper bounds on the gaugino and sfermion masses. We the mass bounds and the constraints from rare B−meson show that the GUTs with anomaly and gauge mediated decays. Green points are a subset of orange points and 16 supersymmetry breakings are well within the reaches of satisfy MGUT & 1 × 10 GeV. Thus, we obtain that the the future 100 TeV pp colliders such as the FCChh and upper bound on M1/2 is about 7 TeV. This bound can be SppC, and the supersymmetric GUTs with gravity me- translated into the upper bound 15 TeV on gluino mass, diated supersymmetry breaking can be probed at the fu- as shown below. ture 160 TeV pp collider. The interesting viable parame- In the left panel of Fig. 2, we show results of our scans ter spaces for gravity mediation, which can be probed at in M1/2 − mg˜ plane. We first find that the upper bound the FCChh and SppC, have been discussed as well. on the gluino mass is 15 TeV. In addition, the red points Scanning Codes and Constraints.–We use the (tan β > 7.5) and blue points (tan β < 7.5) are the ISAJET 7.85 package [50] to perform random scans over subsets of green points and satisfy the Planck 2018 5σ the parameter space of gravity mediated SUSY breaking bounds on dark matter relic density. Interestingly, glu- via the minimal supergravity (mSUGRA) [42, 43] or Con- nio masses for the red points are lighter than 11 TeV, strained MSSM (CMSSM) [44], as well as the anomaly and thus the glunio for the red points is within the reach mediated SUSY breaking [48, 49]. To study the gauge of the FCChh and SppC [38, 40]. mediated SUSY breaking [45–47], we also employ the In the right panel of Fig. 2, we present the scan re- SPheno 4.0.4 package [51] generated with SARAH 4.14.3 sults in the first-two generation squark mass mq˜ and [52]. M0 plane. In particular, M0 can be very heavy up to The collected data points all satisfy the require- 65 TeV. Similarly, the red points (tan β > 9) and blue ment of the Radiative Electroweak Symmetry Break- points ((tan β < 9)) are also the subsets of green points ing (REWSB), has the lightest neutralino being the and satisfy the Planck 2018 5σ bounds on dark mat- 3

FIG. 2. The color coding for gray, orange, and green points is the same as the Fig. 1. Left: plot in the mg˜ and M1/2 plane. Red (tan β > 7.5) and blue (tan β < 7.5) points are subset of green points and represent solutions which satisfy the Planck 5σ bound. Right: plot in the first two generation squark mass mq˜ and M0 plane. Red (tan β > 9) and blue (tan β < 9) points are subset of green points and represent solutions which satisfy the Planck 5σ bound. ter relic density. We see that the maximum value of scans over the following parameter space of the minimal M0 for most of red points is about 20 TeV. Because AMSB 2 2 2 mq˜ ' M0 + (5 − 6)M1/2 [59] and the maximum value 1 TeV , ≤ M ≤ 75 TeV, of M1/2 ∼ 7 TeV, we obtain that the maximum value 0 of the first-two generation squark masses for most of red 100 TeV ≤ M3/2 ≤ 30 TeV, points is about mq˜ ' 20 TeV, as shown clearly in mq˜−M0 2 ≤ tan β ≤ 60 (3) plot. Thus, most of the red points can be probed at the FCC and SppC [38, 41] hh with µ > 0 and mt = 173.2 GeV [57]. In the left panel of Because M0 can be very large up to 65 TeV, it will Fig. 3, we present the results of our scan in the mq˜ − mg˜ be difficult to search for the squarks and sleptons at the plane. All the points, which satisfy the current exper- 16 FCChh and SppC in general. Thus, we can look for the imental constraints and have MU > 1 × 10 GeV, are gauginos at the future pp colliders. For the integrated shown in green color. We obtain that the upper bounds −1 luminosity 30 ab at the FCChh and SppC, gluino via on the masses of both the first-two generation squarks heavy and light flavor decays can be discovered for the and gluino are around 5 TeV, and thus they are well masses up to about 11 TeV and 17 TeV, respectively. within the reaches of the FCChh and SppC [38, 41]. Thus, if gluino decays via light flavor squarks, it can be Moreover, the neutralinos, charginos, and sleptons can discovered at the FCChh and SppC. However, in our vi- be discovered at the FCChh and SppC as well. able parameter space, the lightest squark is generically Gauge Mediated Supersymmetry Breaking.– to be light stop, and thus we do have gluino via heavy Finally, we study the Gauge Mediated Supersymmetry flavor decay. To probe such gluino with mass up to 15 Breaking (GMSB) [45–47]. The GMSB is a method TeV, we find that the center-of-mass energy of the fu- of communicating SUSY breaking to the SSMs from ture pp collider needs to be about 160 TeV. And we can the hidden sector through the SM gauge interactions. discover Wino at this energy as well. The basic parameters of the minimal GMSB are: tan β, Anomaly Mediated Supersymmetry Breaking.– sign(µ), the messenger field mass scale Mmess, the num- Anomaly mediated supersymmetry breaking (AMSB) is ber of SU(5) representations of the messenger fields a special type of gravity mediated SUSY breaking. In Nmess, and the SUSY breaking scale in the visible sector this case, SUSY breaking is communicated to the vis- Λ. The messenger fields induce the gaugino masses at one ible sector from the hidden sector via a super-Weyl loop and then they are transmitted on to the squark and anomaly [48, 49]. In the minimal AMSB, there are three slepton masses at two loops. To preserve the gauge cou- basic parameters in addition to sign(µ): tan β, the uni- pling unification, we consider the messenger fields which versal scalar mass M0 at the GUT scale which is intro- form the complete GUT multiplets. For simplicity, we duced to solve the tachyonic slepton mass problem, and introduce one pair of the messenger fields in the 5 and 5 gravitino mass M3/2. We have performed the random representations of SU(5), i.e., Nmess = 1. Also, we take 4

FIG. 3. Plots in the gluino mass and ﬁrst-two generation squarks mass plane. Left and right panels are for the minimal AMSB scenario and minimal GMSB scenario, respectively. Color coding is same as the Fig. 1.

parameter cgrav = 1. the FCChh and SppC [38, 41]. Moreover, the neutrali- We perform random scans over the following minimal nos, charginos, and sleptons might be discovered at the GMSB parameter space FCChh and SppC as well. Summary and Conclusions.–Gauge coupling unifi- 5 × 105 GeV ≤ Λ ≤ 107 TeV, cation in the SSMs strong suggests the GUTs. Consid- 15 ering the grand desert hypothesis from the EW scale to 2 × Λ ≤ Mmess ≤ 10 GeV, GUT scale, we showed that the supersymmetric GUTs 2 ≤ tan β ≤ 60 (4) can be probed at the future pp colliders and Hyper- Kamiokande experiment. For the GUTs with MGUT ≤ with µ > 0 and mt = 173.2 GeV [57]. Because MGUT 16 is not calculated in all the current codes, we esti- 1.0×10 GeV, the dimension-six proton decay via heavy mate M indirectly by the following way. We take gauge boson exchange can be probed at the Hyper- GUT Kamiokande experiment. Moreover, for the GUTs with a benchmark point from the mSUGRA/CMSSM sce- 16 16 MGUT ≥ 1.0 × 10 GeV, we for the first time studied nario with MGUT very close to 1 × 10 GeV. With a specially modified version of the ISAJET, we define the upper bounds on the gaugino and sfermion masses. −1 −1 −1 −1 We showed that the supersymmetric GUTs with anomaly α12 (Q) ≡ α1 (Q) − α2 (Q), and make a plot of α12 (Q) from the Renormalization Group Equation (RGE) run- and gauge mediated supersymmetry breakings are well within the reaches of the future 100 TeV pp colliders ning of three guage couplings from MGUT to the weak such as the FCChh and SppC, and the supersymmetric scale MW as functions of renormalization scale Q. We −1 GUTs with gravity mediated supersymmetry breaking then fit the α12 (Q) curve by a polynomial function f(Q) via Mathematica. For any point at the messenger can be probed at the future 160 TeV pp collider. The in- −1 −1 teresting viable parameter spaces for gravity mediation, scale Mmess, we calculate α1 (Mmess) and α2 (Mmess) via the codes SARAH 4.14.3 and Sphenov4.0.4. We which can be probed at the FCChh and SppC, have been use Spheno to do these calculations since it can com- discussed as well. pute and output the SM gauge couplings at the Mmess. −1 −1 Acknowledgments.–We would like to thank Jinmian Moreover, for α1 (Mmess) − α2 (Mmess) > f(Mmess) −1 −1 Li and Qi-Shu Yan for helpful discussions. SR is also and α1 (Mmess) − α2 (Mmess) < f(Mmess), we obtain like to thank Howard Bare for useful discussion. This 16 16 MGUT > 1 × 10 GeV and MGUT < 1 × 10 GeV, re- research was supported by the Projects 11875062 and spectively. Similarly, all the points, which satisfy the 11947302 supported by the National Natural Science current experimental constraints and have MGUT > 1 × Foundation of China, and by the Key Research Program 16 10 GeV, are shown in green color in the right panel of of Frontier Science, CAS. The numerical results described Fig. 3. We see that the upper bounds on the masses in this paper have been obtained via the HPC Cluster of of the first-two generation squarks and gluino are 8 TeV, ITP-CAS, Beijing, China. and 6 TeV, respectively. Therefore, the first-two generation squarks and gluino are well within the reaches of . 5

[1] S. Dimopoulos, S. Raby and F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. D Mod. Phys. Lett. A 1, 57 (1986). 24 (1981) 1681; U. Amaldi, W. de Boer and H. Furste- [32] R. Barbieri and G. F. Giudice, Nucl. Phys. B 306, 63-76 nau, Phys. Lett. B 260, 447 (1991); J. R. Ellis, S. Kelley (1988). and D. V. Nanopoulos, Phys. Lett. B 260 (1991) 131; [33] A. Abada et al. [FCC], Eur. Phys. J. ST 228, no.4, 755- P. Langacker and M. X. Luo, Phys. Rev. D 44 (1991) 1107 (2019) 817. [34] M. Ahmad et al., IHEP-CEPC-DR-2015-01. [2] G. Jungman, M. Kamionkowski, and K. Griest, [35] B. Dutta, Y. Gao, T. Ghosh, I. Gogoladze, T. Li, Q. Shaﬁ Phys.Rept. 267, 195 (1996). and J. W. Walker, [arXiv:1601.00866 [hep-ph]]. [3] H. Georgi and S. L. Glashow, Phys. Rev. Lett. 32 (1974). [36] K. Abe et al. [Super-Kamiokande], Phys. Rev. D 95, no.1, [4] J. C. Pati and A. Salam, Phys. Rev. D10, 275 (1974), 012004 (2017) [arXiv:1610.03597 [hep-ex]]. [Erratum: Phys. Rev.D11,703(1975)]. [37] K. Abe et al. [Hyper-Kamiokande], [arXiv:1805.04163 [5] R. N. Mohapatra and J. C. Pati, Phys. Rev. D11, 566 [physics.ins-det]]. (1975). [38] T. Cohen, T. Golling, M. Hance, A. Henrichs, K. Howe, [6] H. Fritzsch and P. Minkowski, Annals Phys. 93 (1975). J. Loyal, S. Padhi and J. G. Wacker, JHEP 04, 117 [7] H. Georgi, AIP Conf. Proc. 23, 575 (1975). (2014). [arXiv:1311.6480 [hep-ph]]. [8] ATLAS Collaboration, ATLAS-CONF-2019-040. [39] N. Arkani-Hamed, T. Han, M. Mangano and L. T. Wang, [9] G. Aad et al. [ATLAS], [arXiv:2004.14060 [hep-ex]]. Phys. Rept. 652, 1-49 (2016) [arXiv:1511.06495 [hep- [10] G. Aad et al. [ATLAS], JHEP 12, 060 (2019) ph]]. [arXiv:1908.03122 [hep-ex]]. [40] J. Fan, P. Jaiswal and S. C. Leung, Phys. Rev. D 96, [11] CMS Collaboration, CMS PAS SUS-19-005. no.3, 036017 (2017). [arXiv:1704.03014 [hep-ph]]. [12] CMS Collaboration, CMS PAS SUS-19-006. [41] T. Golling et al., CERN Yellow Rep., no.3, 441-634 [13] S. Dimopoulos and G. F. Giudice, Phys. Lett. B 357, (2017) [arXiv:1606.00947 [hep-ph]]. 573-578 (1995) [arXiv:hep-ph/9507282 [hep-ph]]. [42] A. H. Chamseddine, R. L. Arnowitt and P. Nath, Phys. [14] A. G. Cohen, D. B. Kaplan and A. E. Nelson, Phys. Lett. Rev. Lett. 49 (1982) 970. B 388, 588-598 (1996) [arXiv:hep-ph/9607394 [hep-ph]]. [43] V. Barger, M. Berger, and P. Ohmann, Phys. Rev. [15] R. Kitano and Y. Nomura, Phys. Lett. B 631, 58-67 D4719931093. (2005) [arXiv:hep-ph/0509039 [hep-ph]]. [44] G. Kane, C. Kolda, L. Roszkowski and J. Wells, Phys. [16] R. Kitano and Y. Nomura, Phys. Rev. D 73, 095004 Rev. D4919946173. (2006) [arXiv:hep-ph/0602096 [hep-ph]]. [45] M. Dine and A. E. Nelson, Phys. Rev. D 48 (1993), [17] T. J. LeCompte and S. P. Martin, Phys. Rev. D 84, 1277-1287 [arXiv:hep-ph/9303230 [hep-ph]]; M. Dine, 015004 (2011) [arXiv:1105.4304 [hep-ph]]. A. E. Nelson and Y. Shirman, Phys. Rev. D 51 (1995), [18] T. J. LeCompte and S. P. Martin, Phys. Rev. D 85, 1362-1370 [arXiv:hep-ph/9408384 [hep-ph]]; Phys. Rev. 035023 (2012) [arXiv:1111.6897 [hep-ph]]. D 53 (1996), 2658-2669 [arXiv:hep-ph/9507378 [hep-ph]]. [19] J. Fan, M. Reece and J. T. Ruderman, JHEP 11, 012 [46] S. Dimopoulos, S. D. Thomas and J. D. Wells, Nucl. (2011) [arXiv:1105.5135 [hep-ph]]. Phys. B 488, 39 (1997); G. F. Giudice and R. Rat- [20] G. D. Kribs and A. Martin, Phys. Rev. D 85, 115014 tazzi, Phys. Rept. 322, 419 (1999) and original references (2012) [arXiv:1203.4821 [hep-ph]]. therein. [21] H. Baer, V. Barger, P. Huang, D. Mickelson, [47] P. Meade, N. Seiberg and D. Shih, Prog. Theor. Phys. A. Mustafayev and X. Tata, Phys. Rev. D 87, no.3, Suppl. 177, 143 (2009). 035017 (2013) [arXiv:1210.3019 [hep-ph]]. [48] L. Randall and R. Sundrum, Nucl. Phys. B 557, 79-118 [22] H. Baer, V. Barger, P. Huang, D. Mickelson, (1999) [arXiv:hep-th/9810155 [hep-th]]. A. Mustafayev and X. Tata, Phys. Rev. D 87, no.11, [49] G. F. Giudice, M. A. Luty, H. Murayama and R. Rat- 115028 (2013) [arXiv:1212.2655 [hep-ph]]. tazzi, JHEP 12, 027 (1998) [arXiv:hep-ph/9810442 [hep- [23] M. Drees and J. S. Kim, Phys. Rev. D 93, no. 9, 095005 ph]]. (2016). [50] H. Baer, F. E. Paige, S. D. Protopopescu and X. Tata, [24] R. Ding, T. Li, F. Staub and B. Zhu, Phys. Rev. D 93, arXiv:hep-ph/0001086. no. 9, 095028 (2016). [51] W. Porod, Comput. Phys. Commun. 153, 275 [25] H. Baer, V. Barger and M. Savoy, Phys. Rev. D 93, no. (2003) [hep-ph/0301101]; W. Porod and F. Staub, 3, 035016 (2016). Comput. Phys. Commun. 183, 2458 (2012) [26] B. Batell, G. F. Giudice and M. McCullough, JHEP doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2012.05.021 [arXiv:1104.1573 [hep- 1512, 162 (2015). ph]]. [27] J. Fan, M. Reece and L. T. Wang, JHEP 1508, 152 [52] F. Staub, arXiv:0806.0538 [hep-ph]; F. Staub, Comput. (2015) Phys. Commun. 182, 808 (2011) [arXiv:1002.0840 [hep- [28] T. Leggett, T. Li, J. A. Maxin, D. V. Nanopoulos and ph]]. J. W. Walker, arXiv:1403.3099 [hep-ph]; Phys. Lett. B [53] R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 740, 66 (2015). 110, no. 2, 021801 (2013) [arXiv:1211.2674 [hep-ex]]. [29] G. Du, T. Li, D. V. Nanopoulos and S. Raza, Phys. Rev. [54] Y. Amhis et al. [Heavy Flavor Averaging Group], D 92, no. 2, 025038 (2015) [arXiv:1502.06893 [hep-ph]]. arXiv:1207.1158 [hep-ex]. [30] T. Li, S. Raza and X. C. Wang, Phys. Rev. D 93, no.11, [55] D. Asner et al. [Heavy Flavor Averaging Group], 115014 (2016) [arXiv:1510.06851 [hep-ph]]. arXiv:1010.1589 [hep-ex]. [31] J. R. Ellis, K. Enqvist, D. V. Nanopoulos and F. Zwirner, [56] Y. Akrami et al. [Planck Collaboration], 6

arXiv:1807.06205 [astro-ph.CO]. [58] I. Gogoladze, R. Khalid, S. Raza and Q. Shaﬁ, JHEP [57] [Tevatron Electroweak Working Group and CDF Collab- 1106 (2011) 117. oration and D0 Collab], arXiv:0903.2503 [hep-ex]. [59] H. Baer and X. Tata, Cambridge, UK: Univ. Pr. (2006) 537 p.