arXiv:1109.2110v1 [hep-ph] 9 Sep 2011 tacne-fms emeeg of energy beam center-of-mass a at aeu o23fb 2.3 to up date TA 1–6,s htoemyssetteLCsbest LHC’s or the [5–11] suspect CMS may super- one by of that detected so Col- signal been [12–16], DØ ATLAS suggestive far and thus equally CDF has No the symmetry by [4]. Higgs laborations from the constraints for established searches newly these with mass in Moreover, agreement also and good are imminent. existence expectations be background the could beyond observations boson of reso- Higgs questions definitive the dual a of the that to amassed swiftly data lution new sufficiently of be quantities to large allowed the has of severe. luminosity up LHC ramping particularly rapid extraordinarily is the Nevertheless, observation background where against location a competition at 120 directly about positioned at GeV, estimation above background events observed Model of Standard surplus the a reported five has the discov- CMS conclusive approaching ery. a claim yet Model to essential not Standard deviations the though standard of boson, properties 3] Higgs the [2, (SM) of ex- ATLAS hint statistical and that appealing [1] cesses uncovered CMS lightest have The the Collaborations of boson. mass Higgs the CP-even on constraints firm establishing 3 srpril hsc ru,HutnAvne eerhCe Research Advanced Houston Group, Physics Astroparticle h ag arnclie LC a cuuae to accumulated has (LHC) collider Large The ASnmes 11.k 12.j 12.w 12.60.Jv 11.25.-w, 11.25.Mj, 11.10.Kk, ph numbers: the PACS at measurements precision all with consistent deeply eodr oa iiiaino h iiu fteHgspo Higgs the of minimum the of minimization local secondary a lblpril asnraiain h agn onaym boundary the normalization, mass global 2. e ntecneto No-Scale of context the in GeV 123.5 etrsahgl aoal gle”sbpc hc a sim ( moment may magnetic which anomalous subspace the on “golden” m limits favorable process CMS the highly in a reported features recently excesses fb small 1.1 the first explaining the the of analysis ero prto,aot8%o h rgnlNo-Scale original the of 80% about par viable operation, in of reductions year overwhelming suffered construct already Col supersymmetric have DØ basic Standa the While and for discovery. CDF, searches imminent in ATLAS, GeV CMS, 120 near the excesses by statistical reports With Supergravity. lipped utpeswt rgn in origins with multiplets hnignurlcretdecay current neutral changing epeitta h ihetC-vnHgsbsnms iswi lies mass boson Higgs CP-even lightest the birthday... that 65th predict his We of celebration the on Ellis John For inu Li, Tianjun .INTRODUCTION I. − 2 aua rdcinfrteHgsBsnMs:120 Mass: Boson Higgs the for Prediction Natural A ereP n yti .Mthl nttt o Fundamental for Institute Mitchell W. Cynthia and P. George 1 1 5 SU e aoaoyo rnir nTertclPyis Instit Physics, Theoretical in Frontiers of Laboratory Key eateto hsc,SmHutnSaeUiest,Hunts University, State Houston Sam Physics, of Department fdt rmpoo-rtncollisions -proton from data of 5 rn nfidTer,topiso yohtclTVscale TeV hypothetical of pairs two Theory, Unified Grand (5) ,2 1, hns cdm fSine,Biig109,P .China R. P. 100190, Beijing Sciences, of Academy Chinese ea A Texas ae .Maxin, A. James 4 cdm fAhn,Dvso fNtrlSciences, Natural of Division Athens, of Academy 8PnpsiiuAeu,Ahn 07,Greece 10679, Athens Avenue, Panepistimiou 28 √ F s ter,adtednmclyetbihdbudr conditi boundary established dynamically the and -theory, & e,already TeV, 7 = − nvriy olg tto,T 74,USA 77843, TX Station, College University, M 1 b fitgae uioiy hsmdli oevrcpbeof capable moreover is model This luminosity. integrated of → sγ nadto,teioae asprmtrrsosbefrt for responsible parameter mass isolated the addition, In . 2 F iir .Nanopoulos, V. Dimitri - SU 5,amdldfie ytecnegneo the of convergence the by defined model a (5), tr(AC,Mthl aps odad,T 78,USA 77381, TX Woodlands, Campus, Mitchell (HARC), nter nta hnet aeakydsoeyrssi l proba- all in boson. rests Higgs discovery the key with a bility make to chance initial iil oteeryoeaino h LHC. the of operation potentially early remaining the while to 120 and visible mass, derived boson naturally Higgs a GeV providing constraints simultaneously advancing rapidly while the super- the counter continue and/or can successfully fuels that to SUSY This extensions endure Model favor. post-Standard there of string this whether out survive of fallen to now failed question pa- has has viable and models experimentally testing, these of formerly space the rameter of majority the ing fb against 1.1 assessed exhaustively first been Model the have Standard and (CMSSM), Supersymmetric (mSUGRA) Supergravity Minimal vari- minimal Constrained simplest as their as in mediated ations gravity known Supersymmetric with solu- breaking, (GUTs) natural problem. Theories hierarchy a extension Unified gauge (SUSY), an Grand the Supersymmetry for neighborhood to is contender tion the SM foremost in the The to boson GeV. Higgs 120 ex- perhaps a of even models or predict, physics accommodate, uniquely naturally particle the can on what which attention ists ascertaining heightening fervent, of is task LHC the at SM natatv addt ouint hsdlmamay dilemma this to solution candidate attractive An the beyond physics of discovery for anticipation The F g dMdlHgsbsn l in on oan to point signs all boson, Higgs Model rd - − SU ossc smUR n h CMSSM the and mSUGRA as such ions 2) scleetoekscale. electroweak ysical ass mtrzto uigteLCsinitial LHC’s the during ameterization lie uesmer erh n also and search, supersymmetry ultijet µ 5 oe pc ean ibeafter viable remains space model (5) laeul con o h e rare key the for account ultaneously n h rnhn ai fteflavor- the of ratio branching the and M − tential 1 1 t fTertclPhysics, Theoretical of ute ,3 4 3, 2, / hnterneo 1. e to GeV 119.0 of range the thin fitgae uioiy noverwhelm- an luminosity; integrated of 2 sdnmclydtrie at determined dynamically is , aoain ealn enticing detailing laborations hsc n Astronomy, and Physics il,T 74,USA 77341, TX ville, V etrlk supersymmetric vector-like n olW Walker W. Joel and min namne hc is which manner a in , +3 − 1 n fNo-Scale of ons . 5 C-41,MIFPA-11-43 ACT-14-11, GeV handily 5 F he - 2 be found in a class of models named No-Scale - posed upon the viable model space is the unification scale F SU(5) [17–27]. It has been demonstrated that a majority boundary on Bµ = 0. Furthermore, through applica- of the bare-minimally constrained [23] parameter space tion of a “Super No-Scale” condition for the dynamic of No-Scale -SU(5), as defined by consistency with the stabilization of the stringy modulus related to the M F 1/2 world average top- mass mt, the dynamically es- boundary gaugino mass [19, 20, 23], this mass along with tablished boundary conditions of No-Scale supergravity, the ratio of the Higgs vacuum expectation values (VEVs) radiative electroweak symmetry breaking, the centrally tan β [19, 20, 23] were dynamically determined. observed WMAP7 CDM relic density [28], and precision The complete collection of supersymmetry breaking LEP constraints on the lightest CP-even soft terms evolve from the single parameter M1/2 in mh [29, 30] and other light SUSY and the simplest No-Scale supergravity, and consequently the mass content, remains viable even after careful compar- particle spectra are proportionally comparable up to an −1 ison against the first 1.1 fb [27] of LHC data. We overall rescaling on M1/2, leaving the majority of the shall show that the light Higgs mass is stably predicted “internal” physical properties invariant. This rescaling within this region to take a value between 119.0-123.5 capability on M1/2 is not generally expected in compet- GeV, consistent with the surplus of observed events in ing supersymmetry models, due to the presence of larger the analyses presented by the CMS, CDF, and DØ Col- parameterization freedom, particularly with respect to a laborations. Significantly, the most promising subspace second independent boundary mass M0 for scalar fields. of this region includes secondary bounds on the flavor This rescaling symmetry can be broken to a slight degree changing neutral current (b sγ) process, contributions by the vector-like mass parameter, although the depen- → to the muon anomalous magnetic moment (g 2)µ, and dence is rather weak. the rare decay process B0 µ+µ− [31], all of− which co- s → here with spin-independent σSI [32] and spin-dependent σSD [33] scattering cross-section bounds on Weakly Inter- III. THE GOLDEN STRIP acting Massive (WIMPs), in addition to fresh limits established by the Fermi-LAT Collaboration [34] The Golden Strip is strictly defined by the mutual on the annihilation cross-section σv of WIMPs us- γγ intersection of the bare-minimal constraints outlined in ing gamma-rays. This condensed subspace,h i an updating Ref. [23] with the rare-decay processes b sγ, B0 of our previously advertised “Golden Strip” [18], offers s µ+µ−, and the muon anomalous magnetic→ moment,→ as a more focused prediction of the Higgs mass of around depicted in Fig. 1. The outermost borders of the large 120-121 GeV. We emphasize that the prediction of the yellow region in Fig. 1 are circumscribed from the bare- Higgs in the vicinity of 120 GeV has been an exceedingly minimal constraints. To summarize, the bare-minimal natural and robust prediction of No-Scale -SU(5), sta- constraints are defined by compatibility with the world ble across the full model space, which weF have consis- average mass m = 173.3 1.1 GeV [49], the tently advertised over the course of a growing body of t prediction of a suitable candidate source± of cold dark work [17–27]. The recent embellishments to the exper- (CDM) relic density matching the upper and imental support for this standing correlation furnish it lower thresholds 0.1088 Ω 0.1158 set by the with a greatly enhanced immediacy and interest. CDM WMAP7 measurements [28],≤ a rigid≤ prohibition against a charged lightest supersymmetric particle (LSP), con- formity with the precision LEP constraints on the light- II. THE -SU(5) MODEL F est CP-even Higgs boson (mh 114 GeV [29, 30]) and other light SUSY chargino, stau,≥ and neutralino mass The study launched here is built upon the framework content, and a self-consistency specification on the dy- of an explicit model, dubbed No-Scale -SU(5) [17– namically evolved value of B measured at the boundary F µ 24], uniting the -lipped SU(5) Grand Unified Theory scale MF . An uncertainty of 1 GeV on Bµ = 0 is (GUT) [35–37] withF two pairs of hypothetical TeV scale allowed, consistent with the induced± variation from fluc- vector-like supersymmetric multiplets with origins in - tuation of the strong coupling within its error bounds theory [38–42] and the dynamically established bound-F and the expected scale of radiative electroweak (EW) ary conditions of No-Scale Supergravity [43–47]. A more corrections. The cumulative result of the bare-minimal complete review of this model is available in the appendix constraints shapes the parameter space into the uniquely of Ref. [22]. formed profile situated in the M1/2,MV plane exhibited Utilizing the dynamically established boundary condi- in Fig. 1, from a tapered light mass region with a lower tions of No-Scale Supergravity at the -SU(5) unifica- bound of tan β = 19.4 into a more expansive heavier re- tion scale, we have previously delineatedF the extraordi- gion that ceases sharply with the charged stau LSP ex- narily constrained Golden Point [17] and aforementioned clusion around tanβ 23. ≃ earliest derived incarnation of the Golden Strip [18] which The condensed vertical slice embossed with gold in satisfied all current experimental constraints while addi- both plot spaces of Fig. 1 identifies the confluence of the tionally featuring an imminently observable proton de- bare-minimal constraints with the b sγ, B0 µ+µ−, → s → cay rate τp [48]. The most constrictive constraint im- and muon anomalous magnetic moment processes. For 3

10000

3.20

-10

3.5

a ( 10 )

3.10

-4

Br(b s ) ( 10 )

0 + - -9 3.00

8000 Br(B ) ( 10 )

s

3.6

2.86

3.7

Region of the F-SU(5) parameter space

6000 estimated to be excluded by the CMS

3.8

Multijet Constraints

2.60

3.9

(GeV) V

4.0 M

4000

7

9

Golden Strip

2000

11

20

14

2.30

17

(M ,M ,m ,tan ) = (570,4000,173.2,21.5)

1/2 V t

0

0 200 400 600 800 1000

M (GeV)

1/2

10000

1500

900

m lightest CP-even Higgs Boson Mass (GeV)

h 1400

800

t Squark Mass (GeV)

1 1300

Gluino Mass (GeV)

u Squark Mass (GeV)

R

1200 1600

8000

700

1100

600

Region of the F-SU(5) parameter space

1000

6000 estimated to be excluded by the CMS

1200 Multijet Constraints

500

900

1100

(GeV) V

800 M

4000

1000

123

900

118 Golden Strip 122

800

2000

119

700

121

120

600

(M ,M ,m ,tan ) = (570,4000,173.2,21.5)

1/2 V t

0

0 200 400 600 800 1000

M (GeV)

1/2

FIG. 1: The bare-minimally constrained parameter space of No-Scale -SU(5) is depicted as a function of the gaugino boundary F mass M1/2, the vector-like mass MV, and via the solid, dashed, and dotted contour lines, the (b sγ), muon anomalous 0 + − → magnetic moment (g 2)µ, and the B µ µ processes in the upper plot space, with the mass gradients in GeV of the light e − s → stop squark t1, ge, right-handed up squark ueR, and light Higgs mass mh in the lower plot space. The region estimated to be disfavored by the first inverse femtobarn of integrated LHC luminosity is marked out with the crosshatch pattern. The vertical strip embossed in gold, referred to as the Golden Strip, represents an experimentally favored region consistent with the bare-minimal experimental constraints of [23] and both the (b sγ) process and contributions to the muon anomalous →0 + − magnetic moment (g 2)µ. The Golden Strip also includes the Bs µ µ decay, however this constraint is satisfied by the entire viable model− space. The expanded region adorned in silver imposes→ these identical constraints, though with a more −10 conservative estimate of ∆aµ = 27.5 18.5 10 . The labeled point is the benchmark of Table II. ± × 4 the experimental limits on the flavor changing neutral current process b sγ, we draw on the two standard de- TABLE I: Conformity with all the measured constraints for the Table II benchmark point M = 570 GeV, M = 4 TeV, viation limits Br(→b sγ)=3.52 0.66 10−4, where the 1/2 V → ± × mt = 173.2 GeV, tanβ = 21.5. Here MM is used to designate theoretical and experimental errors are added in quadra- the minimum minimorum of our universe. ture [50, 51]. We likewise apply the two standard de- Constraint SU(5) Value viation boundaries ∆a = 27.5 16.5 10−10 [52] for F− µ ± × the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon, (g 2) . mh > 114 GeV 120.5 GeV − µ Lastly, we use the recently published upper bound of mt = 173.3 1.1 GeV 173.2 GeV 0 + − −8 0 ± 0 Br(Bs µ µ ) < 1.9 10 [31] for the process Bs Ωχe = 0.1123 0.0035 0.1100 + − → × → 1 ± µ µ . The more spacious vertical segment adorned in Br(b sγ) = 3.52 0.66 10−4 2.88 10−4 silver in Fig. 1 equally consists of all the above con- → ± ×−10 × −10 ∆aµ = 27.5 16.5 10 11.5 10 straints, though adopting a more conservative estimate 0 + ±− × −8 × −9 of the 2σ lower bound of ∆a 9.0 10−10. This shift is Br(Bs µ µ ) 1.9 10 3.7 10 µ → ≤ 34 × × 34 supported by a more recent experiment≥ × which suggests a τp 1.0 10 yr 5.1 10 yr ≥ × −9 × −10 downward shift of the central value [53]. Moreover, we σSI < 7 10 pb 1.5 10 pb × −3 × −7 remark that our greater confidence between these two σSD < 4.5 10 pb 1 10 pb × × experimental metrics is with those referencing b sγ, −26 3 −28 3 σv γγ < 10 cm /s 2 10 cm /s and that since the two key rare process constraints→ oper- h i × MZ = 91.187 0.001 GeV 91.188 GeV(MM) ate in overlapping opposition, the silver region actually ± comes closer to the central value of this branching ratio. We note that the entire Gold and Silver Strips remain − the -theory model building [38–42] context, are in turn unblemished by the first 1.1 fb 1 of LHC data, repre- necessaryF in order to achieve a substantial separation be- senting optimum candidate regions for the discovery of tween the initial gauge unification of SU(3) SU(2)L supersymmetry. 16 × at M32 10 GeV, and the secondary unification of ≃ 17 The intricate evasion of the full company of indepen- SU(5) U(1)X at MF 7 10 GeV. This elevation dent experimental constraints cataloged in the body of of the× final GUT scale,≃ which× is possible only within Table (I) may appear serendipitous, but it is certainly the context of a model with a two-stage unification like not accidental. The definitive phenomenological signa- Flipped SU(5), appears likewise to be necessary in or- ture of No-Scale -SU(5) which facilitates this dexterity der to successfully implement the the No-Scale boundary F e e e is the rather unique encoding M(t1) < M(g) < M(q) conditions, and in particular, the vanishing of the Higgs of the SUSY particle mass hierarchy. This pattern of a bilinear soft term Bµ. Crucially, this scenario appears stop lightest supersymmetric quark, followed by a gluino to comes into its own only when applied at a unification which is likewise lighter than the remaining squarks, is scale approaching the Planck mass [55]. The dynamics stable across the full model space, and has not been ob- of No-Scale Supergravity may themselves play an indis- served to be precisely replicated in any benchmark con- pensable role in establishing the cosmological flatness of trol sample of the MSSM, and in particular not by any our Universe, and possibly even in allowing for the shep- of the “Snowmass Points and Slopes” benchmarks [54]. herding of a vast multitude of sister universes out of the This hierarchy allows No-Scale -SU(5) to bypass col- primordial quantum “nothingness”, while maintaining a F lider limits on light squark masses much more adroitly zero balance of some suitably defined energy function. than CMSSM constructions with comparably light Light- We select a benchmark from the Golden Strip repre- est Supersymmetric Particles (LSPs). It is moreover di- senting what we believe to be the most optimum point to rectly responsible for a smoking-gun signal of ultra-high be assessed against experiment, as identified in Fig. 1 by ( 9) jet multiplicity events, which is expected to be ≥ the model parameters, with the spectrum of supersym- prominently visible in LHC searches, given suitable data metric masses given in Table II. At the benchmark, the selection cuts [21, 22, 27]. isolated mass parameter responsible for the global par- The mechanism of this distinctive signature may be ticle mass normalization, namely the gaugino boundary traced to the fact that the one-loop β-function b3 of mass M1/2, is dynamically determined at a secondary the SU(3)C gauge symmetry is zero due to the ex- local minimization of the minimum of the Higgs po- tra vector-like particle contributions [38]. The effect tential Vmin [20, 23] in a manner which is deeply con- on the colored gaugino is direct in the running down sistent with all precision measurements at the physical from the high energy boundary, leading to the relation electroweak scale, and in particular, the Z-boson mass M3/M1/2 α3(MZ)/α3(M32) (1) and precipitat- MZ itself [56]. Supplementing experimental constraints ing the conspicuously≃ light gluino≃ mass O assignment. The with the dynamical determination of this minimum min- e lightness of the stop squark t1 is likewise attributed to imorum of our universe, this point fulfills the inclusive the large mass splitting expected from the heaviness of group of well-established experimental and theoretical the top quark, via its strong coupling to the Higgs. The constraints, as summarized in Table I, merging a bottom- vector-like particles, with a multiplet structure almost up experimentally driven analysis with a theoretically uniquely mandated by avoidance of a Landau pole within motivated top-down approach. 5

CMS post-processing cuts of Ref. [11] though only retain- TABLE II: Spectrum (in GeV) for M1/2 = 570 GeV, MV = ing those events with nine jets or more, requires 8.5fb−1 4 TeV, mt = 173.2 GeV, tanβ = 21.5. Here, Ωχ = 0.11 and the lightest neutralino is 99.8% bino. of LHC data in order to achieve a five standard devia- tion discovery of supersymmetry. This can be improved e0 e± e e e − χ1 115 χ1 247 eR 214 t1 623 uR 1112 mh 120.5 to only 1-4fb 1 by adoption of the ultra-high jet cut- e0 e± e e e χ2 247 χ2 925 eL 602 t2 1039 uL 1209 mA,H 1001 ting strategy of [21, 22, 25–27], the key difference being e0 e e e e χ3 921 νe/µ 596 τ1 123 b1 995 dR 1153 mH± 1004 a lowering of the pT cut on jets from 50 GeV to 20 GeV. 0 e e −1 −1 χe4 924 νeτ 581 τe2 590 b2 1101 dL 1211 ge 783 We offer the range from 1fb to 4fb in order to give consideration to alternate estimations of a comprehensive background sample. Nonetheless, with −1 The distinctive -SU(5) sparticle mass hierarchy re- projections of the LHC to possibly attain 10fb by the sponsible for a preponderanceF of the robust model char- end of the year 2012, a five standard deviation discov- ery of an -SU(5) supersymmetry signal using the CMS acteristics summarized in this work is graphically illus- F trated in the lower plot space of Fig. 1. For direct cor- cuts is certainly achievable. However, a prerequisite of e the utmost importance for this irrefutable discovery is relation, in addition to the light stop t1, gluino ge, and that only those events with nine or more jets can be re- ueR squark mass contours, we also demarcate the smooth Higgs mass gradient. The total model space beyond the tained. For instance, if all events with 6 or more jets − hashed over region is not excluded by the CMS 1.1 fb 1 are retained while maintaining the CMS post-processing constraints, and assertively predicts a Higgs mass of 119.0 cutting strategy of [11], then the discovery threshold for -SU(5) supersymmetry elevates to about 14fb−1. Yet to 123.5 GeV, linked to a top quark mass within the F world average 173.3 1.1 GeV. This inclusive span of even more grave will be preserving all events with three Higgs masses is in precise± agreement with the excess of jets or greater while implementing the CMS cuts of [5], where in this extremely detrimental scenario a massive data events observed by the CMS [1], CDF and DØ [4] −1 Collaborations. Observe also that the Higgs mass in the 100fb of luminosity at the LHC will be required for a five standard deviation discovery of an -SU(5) su- entire model space is comfortably below the recently de- F rived upper bounds of 145 GeV by CMS [1] and 146 GeV persymmetric signal. Therefore, we would implore the by ATLAS [2]. More specifically, notice that the Higgs CMS and ATLAS Collaborations not exclude the exam- mass in the Golden Strip is right about 120 GeV, in ex- ination of events with nine or more jets from their anal- act accord with the overall combined contributions of all ysis of the LHC data, or risk the not at all implausible circumstances of a masked and undetectable -SU(5) individual Higgs decay channels observed by CMS above F the Standard Model expectations [1]. supersymmetry signal. We stress that exclusion of the -SU(5) model space in this respect is highly inadvis- In Fig. (2), we augment the analysis of Ref. [27] by su- able,F particularly considering all the very desirable phe- perimposing the number of events generated in Monte nomenological attributes we have highlighted in this work Carlo simulation of our M = 570 GeV benchmark 1/2 that endorse the No-Scale -SU(5) as a principal candi- point from Table (II) onto a reprinting of the CMS date for the SupersymmetricF Grand Unified Theory. Preliminary Standard Model background statistics from − Ref. [11], featuring 1.1 fb 1 of collision data and a √s = Our simulation was performed using the MadGraph [57, 7 TeV beam energy. We impose upon the -SU(5) sig- 58] suite, including the standard MadEvent [59], nal a set of post-processing cuts designed toF mimic those PYTHIA [60] and PGS4 [61] chain, with post-processing described in the CMS report. We emphasize that the performed by a custom script CutLHCO [62] (available for -SU(5) benchmark is quite capable of accounting for download) which executes the desired cuts, and counts theF observed event excesses, including most compellingly and compiles the associated net statistics. All 2-body at the nine jet count, while avoiding any conspicuous SUSY processes have been included in our simulation, overproduction. Although we do here attempt to con- which follows in all regards the procedure detailed in form with the -SU(5) CMS post-processing cuts pre- Ref. [22]. Our SUSY particle mass calculations have been sented in Ref. [11],F we maintain aggressive advocacy of performed using MicrOMEGAs 2.1 [63], employing a pro- the ultra-high jet cutting strategy described extensively prietary modification of the SuSpect 2.34 [64] codebase in Refs. [21, 22, 25–27]. We believe that the discovery of to run the RGEs. The Monte Carlo is typically oversam- a supersymmetry signal will most likely manifest itself in pled and scaled down to the requisite luminosity, which the data observations for nine or more jets; hence, a jet can have the effect of suppressing statistical fluctuations. cutting strategy optimized for extracting supersymmetry from ultra-high jet events could prove to be more efficient at the LHC by one order of magnitude [27]. IV. CONCLUSIONS Furthermore, to emphasize the significance of the ultra-high jet cutting strategy in extracting a No-Scale While the search for supersymmetry progresses at the -SU(5) supersymmetry signal, we use the Discovery LHC with no conclusive signal observed as of this date, IndexF first presented in Ref. [25] and find that by im- the quest for the Higgs boson is rapidly accelerating. All plementing upon the benchmark point of Table (II) the indications from the CMS, ATLAS, CDF, and DØ Col- 6

FIG. 2: The CMS Preliminary 2011 signal and background statistics for 1.1 fb−1 of integrated luminosity at √s = 7 TeV, as presented in [11], are reprinted with an overlay consisting of a Monte Carlo collider-detector simulation of the No-Scale -SU(5) model space benchmark of Table II. The plot counts events per jet multiplicity, with no cut on αT. F laborations suggest that a statistically significant obser- viable for supersymmetry discovery. We found that the vation of the Higgs boson at about 120 GeV could be on entire surviving model space naturally generates a Higgs the near-term horizon, possibly by the end of 2011. It mass of 119.0-123.5 GeV; the Golden Strip pinpoints the is thus imperative that we begin to spotlight those su- Higgs boson at about 120-121 GeV, in unconditional ac- persymmetric models capable of engendering a natural cord with the overall combined contributions of all indi- prediction for a 120 GeV Higgs boson mass. We have vidual Higgs decay channels observed by CMS above the focused on one such model here by the name of No-Scale expected Standard Model background. Selecting a rep- -SU(5). resentative point from a location within the Golden Strip F where the dynamical determination of the secondary min- Applying only a set of bare-minimal experimental con- imization of the minimum Vmin of the Higgs potential straints, more than 80% of the resulting model space of − agrees to high-precision with precision measurements at the -SU(5) remains viable after the first 1.1 fb 1 of F the electroweak scale, we assessed this benchmark for its luminosity at the LHC. Exposing a condensed subspace ability to fit the CMS multijet data points and elucidate − of this larger region where the bare-minimal constraints any unexplained statistical excesses in the first 1.1 fb 1 of intersect the thresholds of the b sγ, B0 µ+µ−, → s → LHC data reported by the CMS collaboration. The out- and muon anomalous magnetic moment processes, we come was positive, with an interesting surplus of events have uncovered the most experimentally favorable region, at nine jets perfectly explicable within the realm of the dubbed the Golden Strip, which continues untouched by No-Scale -SU(5) Golden Strip. the rapidly advancing LHC constraints, remaining wholly F 7

For those physicists and non-physicists alike who have ory in general. been patiently awaiting a categorical discovery of the Higgs boson for decades, the time may be at hand, as an exceedingly plausible prospect of a discovery near 120 GeV looms large over the coming months. Certainly, the Acknowledgments first major discovery of the LHC era will generate war- ranted enthusiasm throughout the high-energy physics community, but we close with a brief suggestion of what This research was supported in part by the DOE the determination of a 120 GeV Higgs boson discovery grant DE-FG03-95-Er-40917 (TL and DVN), by the Nat- might further disclose as to the structure of a more fun- ural Science Foundation of China under grant numbers damental theory at high energy scales. In this respect, 10821504 and 11075194 (TL), by the Mitchell-Heep Chair with the recent exclusion of mSUGRA and the CMSSM, in High Energy Physics (JAM), and by the Sam Houston a 120 GeV Higgs boson might be interpreted as a rather State University 2011 Enhancement Research Grant pro- strongly suggestive piece of evidence to bolster the No- gram (JWW). We also thank Sam Houston State Univer- Scale -SU(5) framework in particular, and string the- sity for providing high performance computing resources. F

[1] CMS, “Search for standard model Higgs boson in pp using final states with jets and missing transverse collisions at √s = 7 TeV and integrated luminosity momentum with the ATLAS detector in √s = 7 TeV up to 1.7 fb−1,” (2011), CMS-PAS-HIG-11-022, URL proton-proton collisions,” (2011), 1102.5290. http://cdsweb.cern.ch/. [14] G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), “Search for super- [2] ATLAS, “Update of the Combination of Higgs Bo- symmetry in pp collisions at √s = 7 TeV in final states son Searches in 1.0 to 2.3 fb−1 of pp Collisions Data with missing transverse momentum and b-jets,” Phys. Taken at √s = 7 TeV with the ATLAS Experiment Lett. B B 701, 398 (2011), arXiv:1103.4344. at the LHC,” (2011), ATLAS-CONF-2011-135, URL [15] G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), “Search for su- https://atlas.web.cern.ch/. persymmetric particles in events with pairs and [3] ATLAS, “Search for the Standard Model Higgs boson in large missing transverse momentum in √s = 7 TeV the two decay channel with the ATLAS detector proton-proton collisions with the ATLAS experiment,” at the LHC,” (2011), 1108.5895. Eur. Phys. J. C C 71, 1682 (2011), arXiv:1103.6214. [4] CDF/D0, “Combined CDF and D0 Searches for the Stan- [16] ATLAS, “Measurement of dijet production with a veto dard Model Higgs Boson Decaying to Two with on additional central jet activity in pp collisions at √s = up to 8.2 fb−1,” (2011), 1107.4960. 7 TeV using the ATLAS detector,” (2011), 1107.1641. [5] V. Khachatryan et al. (CMS Collaboration), “Search for [17] T. Li, J. A. Maxin, D. V. Nanopoulos, and J. W. Walker, Supersymmetry in pp Collisions at 7 TeV in Events with “The Golden Point of No-Scale and No-Parameter - Jets and Missing Transverse Energy,” Phys.Lett. B698, SU(5),” Phys. Rev. D83, 056015 (2011), 1007.5100. F 196 (2011), 1101.1628. [18] T. Li, J. A. Maxin, D. V. Nanopoulos, and J. W. Walker, [6] S. Chatrchyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), “Search for “The Golden Strip of Correlated Top Quark, Gaug- Physics Beyond the Standard Model in Opposite-Sign ino, and Vectorlike Mass In No-Scale, No-Parameter F- Dilepton Events at √s = 7 TeV,” JHEP 1106, 026 SU(5),” Phys. Lett. B699, 164 (2011), 1009.2981. (2011), arXiv:1103.1348. [19] T. Li, J. A. Maxin, D. V. Nanopoulos, and J. W. Walker, [7] S. Chatrchyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), “Search for “Super No-Scale -SU(5): Resolving the Gauge Hier- F Supersymmetry in Events with b Jets and Missing Trans- archy Problem by Dynamic Determination of M1/2 and verse Momentum at the LHC,” (2011), 1106.3272. tan β,” Phys. Lett. B in press (2010), 1010.4550. [8] S. Chatrchyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), “Search for [20] T. Li, J. A. Maxin, D. V. Nanopoulos, and J. W. Walker, New Physics with Jets and Missing Transverse Momen- “Blueprints of the No-Scale Multiverse at the LHC,” tum in pp collisions at √s = 7 TeV,” (2011), 1106.4503. (2011), 1101.2197. [9] S. Chatrchyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), “Inclusive [21] T. Li, J. A. Maxin, D. V. Nanopoulos, and J. W. Walker, search for squarks and gluinos in pp collisions at √s = 7 “Ultra High Jet Signals from Stringy No-Scale Super- TeV,” (2011), 1107.1279. gravity,” (2011), 1103.2362. [10] CMS, “Search for supersymmetry in pp collisions at √s [22] T. Li, J. A. Maxin, D. V. Nanopoulos, and J. W. Walker, = 7 TeV in events with a single lepton, jets, and missing “The Ultra-High Jet Multiplicity Signal of Stringy No- transverse momentum,” (2011), 1107.1870. Scale F-SU(5) at the √s = 7 TeV LHC,” (2011), [11] “Search for supersymmetry in all-hadronic events 1103.4160. with αT,” (2011), CMS PAS SUS-11-003, URL [23] T. Li, J. A. Maxin, D. V. Nanopoulos, and J. W. Walker, http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1370596. “The Unification of Dynamical Determination and Bare [12] J. B. G. da Costa et al. (Atlas), “Search for supersymme- Minimal Phenomenological Constraints in No-Scale F- try using final states with one lepton, jets, and missing SU(5),” (2011), 1105.3988. transverse momentum with the ATLAS detector in √s [24] T. Li, J. A. Maxin, D. V. Nanopoulos, and J. W. = 7 TeV pp,” (2011), 1102.2357. Walker, “The Race for Supersymmetric Dark Matter at [13] J. B. G. da Costa et al. (Atlas), “Search for squarks and XENON100 and the LHC: Stringy Correlations from No- 8

Scale F-SU(5),” (2011), 1106.1165. Model,” Phys. Lett. B134, 429 (1984). [25] T. Li, J. A. Maxin, D. V. Nanopoulos, and J. W. Walker, [45] J. R. Ellis, C. Kounnas, and D. V. Nanopoulos, “A Two-Tiered Correlation of Dark Matter with Missing “Phenomenological SU(1, 1) Supergravity,” Nucl. Phys. Transverse Energy: Reconstructing the Lightest Super- B241, 406 (1984). symmetric Particle Mass at the LHC,” (2011), 1107.2375. [46] J. R. Ellis, C. Kounnas, and D. V. Nanopoulos, “No Scale [26] T. Li, J. A. Maxin, D. V. Nanopoulos, and J. W. Walker, Supersymmetric Guts,” Nucl. Phys. B247, 373 (1984). “Prospects for Discovery of Supersymmetric No-Scale F- [47] A. B. Lahanas and D. V. Nanopoulos, “The Road to No SU(5) at The Once and Future LHC,” (2011), 1107.3825. Scale Supergravity,” Phys. Rept. 145, 1 (1987). [27] T. Li, J. A. Maxin, D. V. Nanopoulos, and J. W. Walker, [48] T. Li, D. V. Nanopoulos, and J. W. Walker, “Fast Proton “Has SUSY Gone Undetected in 9-jet Events? A Ten- Decay,” Phys. Lett. B693, 580 (2010), 0910.0860. Fold Enhancement in the LHC Signal Efficiency,” (2011), [49] “Combination of CDF and D0 Results on the Mass of the 1108.5169. Top Quark using up to 5.6 fb−1 of data (The CDF and [28] E. Komatsu et al. (WMAP), “Seven-Year Wilkinson Mi- D0 Collaboration),” (2010), 1007.3178. crowave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Cos- [50] E. Barberio et al. (Heavy Flavor Averaging Group mological Interpretation,” Astrophys.J.Suppl. 192, 18 (HFAG)), “Averages of b hadron properties at the end (2010), 1001.4538. of 2006,” (2007), 0704.3575.− [29] R. Barate et al. (LEP Working Group for Higgs boson [51] M. Misiak et al., “The first estimate of Br(B Xsγ) 2 → searches), “Search for the standard model Higgs boson at (αs),” Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 022002 (2007), hep- at LEP,” Phys. Lett. B565, 61 (2003), hep-ex/0306033. ph/0609232.O [30] W. M. Yao et al. (Particle Data Group), “Review of Par- [52] G. W. Bennett et al. (Muon g-2), “Measurement of ticle physics,” J. Phys. G33, 1 (2006). the negative muon anomalous magnetic moment to [31] S. Chatrchyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), “Search for 0.7-ppm,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 161802 (2004), hep- 0 + − 0 + − Bs µ µ and B µ µ decays in pp collisions at ex/0401008. √s →= 7 TeV,” (2011),→ 1107.5834. [53] K. Hagiwara, R. Liao, A. D. Martin, D. Nomura, and 2 [32] E. Aprile et al. (XENON100), “Dark Matter Results from T. Teubner, “(g 2)µ and α(MZ ) re-evaluated using new 100 Live Days of XENON100 Data,” (2011), 1104.2549. precise data,” J.Phys.G− G38, 085003 (2011), 1105.3149. [33] T. Tanaka et al. (Kamiokande), “An Indirect Search for [54] B. C. Allanach et al., “The Snowmass points and slopes: WIMPs in the Sun using 3109.6 days of upward-going Benchmarks for SUSY searches,” Eur. Phys. J. C25, 113 in Super-Kamiokande,” (2011), 1108.3384. (2002), hep-ph/0202233. [34] M. Ackermann et al. (Fermi-LAT Collaboration), “Con- [55] J. Ellis, A. Mustafayev, and K. A. Olive, “Resurrecting straining dark matter models from a combined analy- No-Scale Supergravity Phenomenology,” Eur. Phys. J. sis of Milky Way satellites with the Fermi-LAT,” (2011), C69, 219 (2010), 1004.5399. 1108.3546. [56] T. Li, J. A. Maxin, D. V. Nanopoulos, and J. W. Walker [35] S. M. Barr, “A New Symmetry Breaking Pattern for (2011), in Preparation. SO(10) and Proton Decay,” Phys. Lett. B112, 219 [57] T. Stelzer and W. F. Long, “Automatic generation of tree (1982). level helicity amplitudes,” Comput. Phys. Commun. 81, [36] J. P. Derendinger, J. E. Kim, and D. V. Nanopoulos, 357 (1994), hep-ph/9401258. “Anti-SU(5),” Phys. Lett. B139, 170 (1984). [58] J. Alwall et al., “MadGraph/MadEvent Col- [37] I. Antoniadis, J. R. Ellis, J. S. Hagelin, and D. V. lider Event Simulation Suite,” (2011), URL Nanopoulos, “Supersymmetric Flipped SU(5) Revital- http://madgraph.hep.uiuc.edu/. ized,” Phys. Lett. B194, 231 (1987). [59] J. Alwall et al., “MadGraph/MadEvent v4: The New [38] J. Jiang, T. Li, and D. V. Nanopoulos, “Testable Flipped Web Generation,” JHEP 09, 028 (2007), 0706.2334. SU(5) U(1)X Models,” Nucl. Phys. B772, 49 (2007), [60] T. Sjostrand, S. Mrenna, and P. Z. Skands, “PYTHIA hep-ph/0610054.× 6.4 Physics and Manual,” JHEP 05, 026 (2006), hep- [39] J. Jiang, T. Li, D. V. Nanopoulos, and D. Xie, “F- ph/0603175. SU(5),” Phys. Lett. B677, 322 (2009). [61] J. Conway et al., “PGS4: Pretty Good [40] J. Jiang, T. Li, D. V. Nanopoulos, and D. Xie, “Flipped (Detector) Simulation,” (2009), URL SU(5) U(1)X Models from F-Theory,” Nucl. Phys. http://www.physics.ucdavis.edu/~conway/research/. B830,× 195 (2010), 0905.3394. [62] T. Li, J. A. Maxin, D. V. Nanopoulos, [41] T. Li, D. V. Nanopoulos, and J. W. Walker, “Elements and J. W. Walker, “CutLHCO: A Tool of F-ast Proton Decay,” Nucl. Phys. B846, 43 (2011), For Detector Selection Cuts,” (2011), URL 1003.2570. http://www.joelwalker.net/code/cut_lhco.tar.gz. [42] T. Li, J. A. Maxin, D. V. Nanopoulos, and J. W. Walker, [63] G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, A. Pukhov, and A. Semenov, “Dark Matter, Proton Decay and Other Phenomeno- “Dark matter direct detection rate in a generic model logical Constraints in -SU(5),” Nucl.Phys. B848, 314 with micrOMEGAs2.1,” Comput. Phys. Commun. 180, (2011), 1003.4186. F 747 (2009), 0803.2360. [43] E. Cremmer, S. Ferrara, C. Kounnas, and D. V. [64] A. Djouadi, J.-L. Kneur, and G. Moultaka, “SuSpect: A Nanopoulos, “Naturally Vanishing Cosmological Con- Fortran code for the supersymmetric and Higgs particle stant in N = 1 Supergravity,” Phys. Lett. B133, 61 spectrum in the MSSM,” Comput. Phys. Commun. 176, (1983). 426 (2007), hep-ph/0211331. [44] J. R. Ellis, A. B. Lahanas, D. V. Nanopoulos, and K. Tamvakis, “No-Scale Supersymmetric Standard