sign in sign up
<<
Home , Superpartner

arXiv:hep-ph/0102145v4 8 Mar 2001 ucsflmcaimfrrdaieeetoeksymmetry electroweak radiative the for and mechanism of unification, successful resolution the- coupling gauge its strong problem, to the hierarchy due as gauge SUSY well for as motivation ranges. hand oretical parameter in typical information extra ef- for this large With possible models to to SUSY due compared within effects fects small the generally that are [10] dimensions argued been has value (SM) Model oe uha o nrysprymty(UY [3–9] (SUSY) (TeV) energy or low as such Model rei un tLP EA n h earn Effects Tevatron. the and on HERA, LEP, en- already at highly would more ergetic involving effects processes in as observed substructure been disfavored have immediately of elec- be possibility can precision the con- Presumably and to possibilities searches sider. logical several are direct there tests, troweak both and from mass physics Z, comparable of and W to larger [2]. due or gauge strength be interaction known as must large the it as of scale so is effects the contribution the on Their exists than GeV. that 100 structure or of of particles phe- value virtual SM distance the to short from deviation explanations), very a supersymmetric or but have cosmological all could (though to the masses) nomena due of asymmetry and imply be , that matter all dark data (the cold Other SM universe, the scale. must beyond that electroweak physics physics the new by on Stan- extended the exist be that must evidence theory Model first SM the dard and is experiment developed, the further as are confirmed is it suming eot[]o . tnaddvainvleo h muon the of recent value deviation The standard moment 2.6 physics. anomalous a basic histori- of of roles [1] development major report the played have for muon cally the and Introduction. aigit con h tign osrit nnew on constraints stringent the account into Taking unu orcin otemgei oet fthe of moments magnetic the to corrections Quantum g µ − aebe tde netnin fteStandard the of extensions in studied been have 2 MLCTOSO MUON OF IMPLICATIONS − 1 cl xr iesos[01] oee,it However, [10,11]. dimensions extra scale AS 26.v 34.mMT-10 hep-ph/0102145 MCTP-01-02 13.40.Em 12.60.Jv, PACS: 5 e frtetertclypeerdvleo tan of value lea preferred at theoretically masses: the on (for limits constraints. GeV upper relevant 350 are all there errors, with smaller consistent ver with are with and superpartners, phases virtual of for evidence as prediction earni h poigrn n hr utb hrio neu , tan be addition, must In there GeV. and 600 run, about upcoming the in Tevatron esuyteipiain fitrrtn h eetmuon recent the interpreting of implications the study We ihgnCne o hoeia hsc,Uiest fMic of University Physics, Theoretical for Center Michigan a a µ exp µ ≡ − iaEeet odnL ae tfn ioi,adLa-a Wang Lian-Tao and Rigolin, Stefano Kane, L. Gordon Everett, Lisa ICVRN UEPRNR DIRECTLY SUPERPARTNERS DISCOVERING ( a g µ SM µ − 426(165) = 2) / rmisStandard its from 2 g µ − utb due be must 2 β × utb agrta bu 8. about than larger be must 10 − g Otbr3,2018) 30, (October 11 − as- , 2 O UESMER N FOR AND SUPERSYMMETRY FOR 1 tan oteVEV the to h assadteVV r rprinlsc htthe VEV that such the proportional of are then VEVs ratio [12], the SU(5) and than masses larger the theories approaches same unified string grand the certain in in about cou- and naturally Yukawa are bottom happen that have can the as couplings , size, gauge , charged order top of the plings the type, and each quark, of particles iest si hsrne[3 ti fcus stercnl re- recently the [16]). is tan LEP from course if evidence of tan is larger (this there Higgs At which [13] a for value of range is ported mass this GeV the in 115 for is that value the also natural of and a given, unification just the couplings from Yukawa both motivation theoretical hi uaacouplings Yukawa their e ftan tan of of ues value any for tent ig erhsa E 1] au ftan of value A [15]. LEP at searches Higgs n h ursadlposgtmasses get (VEVs), and values expectation transition the vacuum phase and get electroweak fields the par- Higgs At all the La- written massless. At is effective are theory basic dimensional ticles four breaking. a a for where supersymmetry grangian scale from unification/string as these the well from mass as the get to also sources superpartners masses the give particles; and SM symmetry electroweak the break raig epeueta the that presume we breaking, setal rprinlt tan to proportional essentially uesmer n rce osuyi nta context. that in it study to proceed and supersymmetry aumepcainvalues expectation vacuum eie assi aldtan involved not called quantity is is important itself masses most mass besides The muon pre- the compellingly as understood. yet just yet theory, not masses any are by superpartner that dicted the quantities on other depends and It large. matically β uesmerctere r prubtvl)consis- (perturbatively) are theories Supersymmetric h uesmer otiuinto contribution supersymmetry The 5 n a epoue tteFermilab the at produced be may and 35) = β eea acltosta nld effects include that calculations general y g ≡ suigtecnrlvlei confirmed is value central the Assuming µ toesprate asi eo about below is mass superpartner one st − v 2 eito rmteSadr Model Standard the from deviation 2 β /v ia,AnAbr I 48109 MI, Arbor, Ann higan, eyna r led ue u rmdirect from out ruled already are 1 near very rln,adsetnmse below masses slepton and tralino, 1 v β 1 ≃ h uesmerccnrbto to contribution supersymmetric the htgvsms otebto ur is quark bottom the to mass gives that m top v 2 /m htgvsms otetpquark top the to mass gives that Y bottom i β oteHgsfils fteheav- the If fields. Higgs the to ewe bu n 0 val- 50; and 1 about between v β. 1 , 2 β, g ≃ ti h ai ftetwo the of ratio the is It µ fteHgsfilsthat fields Higgs the of 35 sepandblw In below. explained as − . eito sdeto due is deviation 2 g µ m − i sntauto- not is 2 = β Y ≃ i v 5has 35 1 , 2 a µ via is β minimal supersymmetric theories it is very difficult to get SUSY parameters. In particular, it is well known that for a mass as large as 115 GeV, so we think the large tan β the chargino diagram dominates over the neu- correlation between the Higgs mass and gµ 2 is signif- tralino diagram over most of the parameter space [4–6], icant. Since supersymmetry is a decoupling− theory, i.e. and is linear in tan β. This effect can be seen most eas- its contributions decrease as the superpartner masses in- ily in the mass insertion approximation, where the main crease (see e.g. [17]), a nonzero contribution to gµ 2 puts contribution arises from the chargino diagram in which an upper limit on the superpartner masses that give− the the required chirality flip takes place via - main contributions, the sleptons (the smuon and muon mixing rather than by an explicit mass insertion on the sneutrino) and the lighter chargino and/or . external muon [4–6]. In this case, the chargino contribu- In the following we study the one-loop supersymmetric tion to gµ 2 can be written as proportional to: − contributions to gµ 2 with general amplitudes, allowing − χ˜+ SUSY 2 2 in particular the full phase structure of the theory, and aµ aµ (mµ/m˜ ) tan β cos(ϕµ + ϕ2), (1) ≃ ∝ we check that the results are consistent with all relevant in which ϕ is the phase of the supersymmetric Higgs constraints. Although g 2 in the context of super- µ µ mass parameter µ, and ϕ is the phase of the SU(2) symmetry has been studied− extensively in the previous 2 gaugino mass parameter M ; the reparameterization in- literature, if we assume the new experimental results will 2 variant quantity isϕ ˜ ϕµ + ϕ2 (note in the case of zero be confirmed and have errors 2-3 times smaller soon, an SUSY≡ phases the sign of aµ is given in this limit by the analysis of the data yields the first independent upper SUSY limits on slepton and chargino/neutralino masses, along relative sign of µ and M2 [4–6].) Also note that aµ 2 with a lower bound on tan β. We also demonstrate ex- depends on mµ because this diagram involves one power plicitly the effects of the relevant phase combination on of the muon Yukawa coupling due to the coupling of the g 2 in the large tan β regime (shown later in Eq. (1)). right-handed external muon with the higgsino, and the µ 2 − definition of aµ is aµ = F2(0)/2mµ (where F2(q ) is In much of the parameter space, gµ 2 only constrains the − combination tan β cosϕ ˜ (giving the− previously unknown the form factor). This expression can be compared with result that a nonzero value for this phase can only de- the expression for the chargino contribution to the elec- crease the SUSY effect for a given tan β). tron EDM in the mass insertion approximation [23], as the electric dipole moment is given by the imaginary part Theoretical Framework. of M2µ while the anomalous magnetic dipole moment is The one-loop contributions to aµ = (gµ 2)/2 in super- given by the real part. Therefore, the electron EDM can − + be obtained from Eq. (1) after replacing mµ me and symmetric models include chargino–sneutrino (˜χ ν˜µ) → 0 − cos(ϕµ + ϕ2) sin(ϕµ + ϕ2). Similar expressions hold and neutralino–smuon (˜χ µ˜) loop diagrams in which → the initial and final muons have− opposite chirality. Other for the neutralino sector [23,6]; while they are generally contributions are suppressed by higher powers of the lep- suppressed due to the smaller neutral current coupling, ton masses and are negligible. As previously stated, the they can be relevant for cases in which m˜l,M1 M2,µ. SUSY ≪ SUSY contributions to aµ have been studied extensively The fact that aµ may have either sign at first by a number of authors [3–8], where the expressions for may seem counterintuitive, given the well-known result SUSY SM these amplitudes can be found. [18,19,8] that aµ exactly cancels aµ in the unbro- Note that the majority of these studies assume simpli- ken SUSY limit, with the cancellations taking place be- fied sets of soft breaking Lagrangian parameters based tween the chargino and the W, the massless neutrali- on the framework of minimal . However, in nos and the , and the massive and more general SUSY models the soft breaking parame- the Z. (The general statement [18] is that any magnetic- ters and the supersymmetric mass parameter µ may be transition operator vanishes in this limit, due to the complex. Several of the relevant phases are severely con- usual cancellation between fermionic and bosonic loops SM strained by the experimental upper limits on the electric in SUSY theories.) As aµ is known to be positive SUSY dipole moments (EDMs) of the electron and , al- [20], aµ is negative in this limit. However, the limit though the constraints can be satisfied by cancellations with unbroken SUSY but broken electroweak symme- [21–23]. The phases, if nonnegligible, not only affect try requires the supersymmetric Higgs mass parameter CP-violating observables but also can have important µ = 0 and tan β = 1, as can be seen from the Higgs consequences for the extraction of the MSSM parame- potential when the soft breaking parameters are zero: ters from experimental measurements of CP- conserving V = µ 2(v2 + v2) + (g2 + g′2)(v2 v2)2/2. At low (but | | 1 2 2 − 1 quantities, since almost none of the Lagrangian parame- ∼> 1) values of tan β and nonzero µ, the chargino and neu- ters are directly measured [14]. The effects on gµ 2 due tralino contributions are comparable in magnitude but to the phases have recently been studied in [8], where− the opposite in sign; however the neutralino diagram domi- general expressions for the amplitudes including phases nates as the parameters deviate from the unbroken SUSY are presented (but analyzed mainly for small tan β). limit since the contribution from the (nearly) massless The general results of these studies have shown that neutralinos is much larger than that of the massive neu- the SUSY contributions to aµ can be large for large tan β tralinos and (recall this contribution cancels and have either sign, depending on the values of the the much larger photon contribution in the exact SUSY

2 limit). At larger values of tan β the chargino diagram when the data already in hand is analyzed (including SUSY begins to dominate and the sign of aµ can flip de- data on the hadronic contribution), we present results pending on the relative sign (or phase) of µ and M2. In allowing 1 σ deviations from the present central values. the traditional convention in which M2 is chosen to be Thus these are the strongest results that could be im- real and positive, the sign of gµ 2 is given by the sign plied by the data (unless the central value increases even of µ. We pause here to comment− on the sign of µ as it more). The region above the lines is excluded because relates to the b sγ decay [19,25]. In the literature it the masses are too heavy to account for the experimen- → is often claimed that the constraints on the SUSY pa- tally observed δaµ difference. These regions are obtained rameter space due to the requirement of cancelling the for zero phases. In the regions of parameter space in various SUSY contributions to the b sγ branching ra- which the chargino diagram dominates, gµ 2 depends → − tio place a strong constraint on the sign of µ. In SUSY on tan β cos(ϕµ + ϕ2) (see Eq. (1)), such that nonzero models with general phases, the branching ratio actu- phases only decrease gµ 2 for a given tan β. In addi- ally involves a reparameterization invariant combination tion, our combined analysis− for the electron EDM shows of phases ϕµ + ϕAt (which reduces to the relative sign that in this region ϕµ + ϕ2 is severely constrained to be for zero phases). The relative sign from b sγ thus is less than 10−2, due to the fact that cancellations are more → not the same combination as that constrained by gµ 2 ; difficult to achieve for large tan β (and two-loop contri- − however, in the usual conventions with M2 and At real butions which we have neglected here may become im- and positive, both processes favor positive µ. portant [27]). In certain exceptional points of parameter space in which the neutralino and chargino diagrams are Results and Discussion. comparable (i.e. with light sleptons and M1 m2,µ), We calculated the complete one–loop MSSM contribu- the EDM cancellations must be reconsidered taking≪ large tion to gµ 2, taking into account the possibility of non- tan β into account, which we defer to a future study. trivial CP-violating− phases for the µ term and the soft From Figure 1, important constraints on the MSSM breaking parameters (see [26] for general formulae and parameter space can be obtained. There is a maximum conventions). We have made a few simplifying assump- range allowed for the lightest chargino, neutralino, and tions which do not significantly impact our general con- slepton masses. For perhaps the most interesting case of clusions. First, we have assumed that the masses of the tan β = 35, values of mχ˜1 > 550 GeV and m˜l > 650 GeV charginos and neutralinos are heavier than 100 GeV. This are disfavored by gµ 2 measurements (note if one is assumption will be easily verified for the charginos as near the limit the other− is much lighter). For lower tan β soon as LEPII will report its final results on new searches allowed masses are always smaller. “Effective supersym- at √s = 208 GeV. LEPII will not be able to provide such metry” scenarios [28], with TeV mass first and second a limit on the neutralinos, but the neutralino contribu- generation squarks and sleptons, are ruled out. tion is usually small compared to the charginos so the Further, the gµ 2 measurement implies a lower bound − assumption that neutralinos are not very light does not for tan β ∼> 8 (note nonzero phases do not affect this affect the upper bounds we put on superpartner masses lower bound). Lower values of tan β give too small a (it does affect the tan β bound, as explained below). In contribution to gµ 2 ; however, there is a small cor- − addition, we assumed a common slepton mass m˜l > 100 ner of parameter space for ultralight neutralinos (with GeV for the left and right smuons and for the muon sneu- masses of O(50 GeV)) where tan β can be as little trino. For very light masses that isn’t a good approxima- as about half≈ of our limit. As improved measurements tion, but it does not change our numerical results. We become available, gµ 2 will determine tan β with in- − assumed also that µ tan β >> Aµ , which is a reason- creased precision. Measuring tan β is extremely difficult able assumption for| tan| β > 3. Moreover,| | as the smuon at colliders [14], yet tan β is an extremely impor- mass matrix enters only in the suppressed neutralino con- tant parameter for supersymmetry predictions and tests. tribution, the details of the charged slepton mass matrix To obtain a large gµ 2 large tan β is necessary, and since are almost irrelevant in the numerical analysis (except the size is essentially− proportional to tan β it is immedi- at certain exceptional points in parameter space). Thus, ately approximately known. It can then be determined the most important parameter in the slepton sector is accurately when a few superpartner masses and the soft the sneutrino mass, which is likely to have a LEPII lower phases (which are constrained from EDMs) are known. limit. However, as the sneutrino mass enters only in the loop integrals as a suppression, relaxing this assumption Summary. is not going to change our general conclusions. Because the reported gµ 2 number is larger than the − In Figure 1 we show the mχ˜ mslepton range allowed prediction by an amount larger than the 1 − at 1 σ by the gµ 2 measurement for four different values W and Z contributions, it implies several significant re- − of tan β (tan β= 10, 20, 35 and 50), where mχ˜1 denotes sults. We presume the effect arises from superpartner the lightest chargino or neutralino, and mslepton denotes loops; the chargino–(muon)sneutrino loop typically dom- the smuon or muon sneutrino. The gµ 2 data will pro- inates, with the neutralino–smuon relevant in certain re- vide the first phenomenological upper limit− on superpat- stricted regions of parameter space. Then, in approxi- ner masses. In order to learn what limits could arise mately decreasing order of interest,

3 One superpartner, either a chargino, neutralino, or [5] U. Chattopadhyay and P. Nath, Phys. Rev. D 53, 1648 • a slepton, has to be lighter than about 350 GeV (for (1996). the theoretically motivated value of tan β = 35; see [6] T. Moroi, Phys.Rev.D 53, 6565 (1996). Figure 1 for a more precise number). [7] M. Carena, G. Giudice and C. Wagner, Phys. Lett. B390, 234 (1997). The heavier one of the lightest chargino or sneu- D 61 • [8] T. Ibrahim and P. Nath, Phys. Rev. , 095008 (2000), trino has to be lighter than about 600 GeV, so Phys. Rev. D 62, 015004 (2000). models with heavier sleptons are disfavored. [9] A. Brignole et al., JHEP9909, 002 (1999). D 60 tan β has to be larger than about 8 (in corners of [10] P. Nath, M. Yamaguchi, Phys. Rev. , 116006 (1999). [11] M. Graesser, Phys. Rev. D 61, 074019 (2000); R. Casadio • parameter space with ultralight neutralinos, tan β et al., Phys. Lett. B 495, 378 (2000). can be lower). This large tan β is sufficient to ob- [12] P. Langacker and N. Polonsky, Phys. Rev. D 47, 4028 tain a Higgs boson mass of about 115 GeV, and also (1993), Phys. Rev. D 49, 1454 (1994); S. Kelley, J. Lopez implies a number of interesting phenomenological and D. Nanopoulos, Phys. Lett. B274, 387 (1992); consequences (e.g. [24]). M. Carena, S. Pokorski and C. Wagner, Nucl. Phys. B406 D 47 The gµ 2 measurement is the first data to establish a , 59 (1993); H. Arason et al., Phys. Rev. , firm upper−limit on any superpartner masses. Over most 232 (1993); B. Allanach and S. King, Phys. Lett. B353, of the allowed masses, the superpartners will be produced 477 (1995); S. King and M. Oliveira, Phys. Rev. D 63, at Fermilab in the upcoming run. 015010 (2001). [13] G. Kane, S.King and Lian-Tao Wang, hep-ph/0010312. B437 600 [14] M. Brhlik and G. Kane, Phys. Lett. , 331 (1998). [15] P. Igo-Kemenes, LEPC open session talk, Nov. 2000. [16] ALEPH collaboration, Phys. Lett. B495, 1 (2000); DEL- tanβ=50 β PHI collaboration, delphi.web..ch/Delphi/; L3 500 tan =35 tanβ=20 collaboration, Phys. Lett. B495, 18 (2000); OPAL col- tanβ=10 laboration, opal.web.cern.ch/Opal/PPwelcome.html. [17] A. Dobado et al., Eur. Phys. J. C 7, 313 (1999), Eur. 400 Phys. J. C 17, 487 (2000). [18] S. Ferrara and E. Remiddi, Phys. Lett. 53B, 347 (1974). (GeV) [19] R. Barbieri and G. Giudice, Phys. Lett. B309, 86 (1993). slepton 300 [20] See e.g. A. Czarnecki and W. Marciano, hep-ph/0010194. M [21] T. Ibrahim and P. Nath, Phys. Rev. D 57, 478 (1998); T. Ibrahim and P. Nath, Phys. Rev. D 58, 111301 (1998). 200 [22] M. Brhlik, G. Good and G. Kane, Phys. Rev. D 59, 115004 (1999). [23] S. Pokorski et al., Nucl. Phys. B570, 81 (2000). 100 [24] R. Akhoury, H. Wang and O. Yakovlev, hep-ph/0102105. 100 200 300 400 500 600 [25] See e.g. S. Bertolini et al., Nucl. Phys. B 353, 591 Mχ (GeV) 1 (1991); H. Baer et al., Phys. Rev. D 58, 015007 (1998); M. Carena et al., hep-ph/0010003; G. Degrassi, P. Gam- In this figure m denotes the lightest chargino or neu- FIG. 1. χ1 bino and G. Giudice, JHEP0012, 009 (2000). tralino, and mslepton the lightest smuon or muon sneutrino. The [26] W. Hollik et al., Nucl. Phys. B 551, 3 (1999). regions above a given tan β line are excluded. We require agreement [27] D. Chang et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 900 (1999). ≈ with experiment within 1σ (see text). Below tan β 8 no allowed [28] A. Cohen, D. Kaplan and A. Nelson, Phys. Lett. B 388, region remains. tan β, the ratio of the two Higgs vacuum expec- 588 (1996). tation values, is defined in the text; approximate Yukawa coupling unification suggests tan β ∼ 35. Thus the figure implies related up- per limits on the lightest chargino/neutralino and slepton masses.

[1] H. N. Brown [Muon g-2 Collaboration], hep-ex/0102017. [2] A. Czarnecki and W. Marciano, hep-ph/0102122. [3] R. Barbieri and L. Maiani, Phys. Lett. B117, 203 (1982); D. Kosower et al., Phys. Lett. B133, 305 (1983); C. Arzt, M. Einhorn, J. Wudka, Phys. Rev. D 49, 1370 (1994). [4] J. Lopez, D. Nanopoulos and X. Wang, Phys. Rev. D 49, 366 (1994).

4