“Higgs Boson Discovery” and Supersymmetry at the LHC Marcela Carena Fermilab, Univ. of Chicago.
Higgs Hunting 2012, Orsay, July 2012
Wednesday, July 18, 2012 The LHC experiments have discovered a new particle • The evidence is strong that the new particle decays to γγ and ZZ with rates roughly consistent with those predicted for the SM Higgs boson.
• Τhere are also indications that the new particle decays to W+W− • The observed decay modes indicate that the new particle is a boson.
Wednesday, July 18, 2012 The low-mass region
2011 data m4l <160 GeV: 2012 data Observed: 39 Expected: 34± 3 The LHC experiments have discovered a new particle • The evidence is strong that the new particle decays to γγ and ZZ with rates roughly consistent with those predicted for the SM Higgs boson. 2011+2012 data
Total after selections: 59059 events
mγγ spectrum fit, for each category, with Crystal Ball + Gaussian for signal plus background model optimised (with MC) to minimize biases Max deviation of background model from expected background distribution taken as systematic uncertainty
Main systematic uncertainties 34 • Τhere are also indications that the new particle decays to W+W− • The observed decay modes indicate that the new particle is a boson.
Wednesday, July 18, 2012 The Signal strength may be computed in all different production and decay channels and is consistent with SM
mH = 126.5 GeV
However, A di-photon rate enhancement is the most visible feature at both experiments. The WW rates look/ed somewhat small There is an apparent suppression of tau production in VBF.
Present experimental uncertainties allow for a wide variety of new physics alternatives.
Wednesday, July 18, 2012 From the Tevatron: Combined TevatronCombination Result of searches for Higgs decaying to WW and bb shows a clear excess inSignal the 115 GeV Strength to 135 GeV mass region Background p-values 95% CL Upper Limits / SM
-1 Tevatron Run II Preliminary, L ) 10.0 fb Tevatron Run II Preliminary Observed Perform fit of S+B model -1 • Tevatron Exclusion L ) 10.0 fb Expected w/o Higgs 10 to data !1 s.d. Expected 2 mH = 125 GeV/c !2 s.d. Expected + - • Compare combined best HA W W Combined (68%) fit Higgs production cross Tevatron Exclusion
95% CL Limit/SM Single Channel section to result from individual production HA aa 1 modes SM=1 • Consistent with SM HA bb values within the June 2012 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 uncertainties 2 01234567 mH (GeV/c ) June 2012 Best Fit m/mSM For a Higgs mass of 125 GeV, the combined production rates
28 are consistent with the SM ones within1σ, S.Z. Shalhout [UC Davis] ICHEP 2012 • max significance (local) 3 σ but the bb rate appears to be enhanced max significance (global) 2.5 σ after LEE of 4 • Wednesday, July 18, 2012
27 S.Z. Shalhout [UC Davis] ICHEP 2012 What does a 125 GeV Higgs mean for the different BSM frameworks?
For No Higgs models these are bad news.
For Composite Higgs/Pseudo-Goldstone Higgs models it depends on the scenario
What about SUSY?
Also, many recent studies consider effective theory approaches and investigate the best fit to the data in a more model independent way see Espinosa’s talk
Wednesday, July 18, 2012 What about the Higgs in Supersymmetry?
Minimal Higgs Sector: Two Higgs doublets • tan! = v2 v1
2 2 2 CP-even h (SM-like), H with mixing angle α ! v= v1 +v2 = 246 GeV + 1 CP-odd A + 1 charged pair H+-
• One Higgs doublet couples to up quarks, the other to down quarks/leptons only Higgs interactions flavor diagonal if SUSY preserved
• Quartic Higgs couplings determined by SUSY as a function of the gauge couplings -- lightest (SM-like) Higgs strongly correlated to Z mass ( naturally light!) -- other Higgs bosons can be as heavy as the SUSY breaking scale
• Important quantum corrections to the lightest Higgs mass due to incomplete cancellation of top and stop contributions in the loops -- also contributions from sbottoms and staus for large tan beta --
Wednesday, July 18, 2012 Lightest SM-like Higgs mass strongly depends on:
* CP-odd Higgs mass mA * tan beta *the top quark mass
* the stop masses and mixing
Mh depends logarithmically on the averaged stop mass scale MSUSY and has a quadratic and quartic dep. on the stop mixing parameter Xt. [and on sbottom/stau sectors for large tan beta]
For moderate to large values of tan beta and large non-standard Higgs masses
4 - ' 2 * 0 2 2 2 3 mt 1 ˜ 1 3 mt ˜ 2 mh " MZ cos 2# + 2 2 / X t + t + 2 ) 2 % 32$&3,( X t t + t )2 4$ v . 2 16$ ( 2 v + 1
2 # 2 & 2 2 2X t X t X = A " µ /tan# $LR stop mixing t = log(M m ) X˜ = %1 " ( t t SUSY t t M 2 12M 2 ! SUSY $ SUSY '
! M.C. Espinosa, Quiros, Wagner ’95 Analytic expression valid for MSUSY~ mQ ~ mU ! ! M.C. Quiros, Wagner ’95
Wednesday, July 18, 2012 Additional effects at large tan beta from sbottoms:
with
receiving one loop corrections that depend on the sign of µMg˜
and staus: ! with Dep. on the sign of µ M2
Both corrections give negative contributions to the Higgs mass
hence smaller values of µ and positive values of µ M 2 and µ M g˜ enhance the value of the Higgs mass !
Maximal effect: lower mh by several GeV ! ! ! Wednesday, July 18, 2012 SM-like MSSM Higgs Mass:
M.C, Haber, Heinemeyer, Hollik,Weiglein,Wagnerʼ00 Arbeya, Battaglia, Djouadi, Mahmoudi, Quevillonʼ11
Figure(for 1: sparticlesThe maximal of ~ 1 TeV) value of the h boson mass as a function of Xt/MS in the pMSSM when mh "130 GeVall other soft SUSY–breaking parameters and tan β are scanned in the range Eq. (4) (left) and the contours for 123 The right–hand side of Fig. 1 shows the contours in the [MS,Xt] plane where we obtain the mass range 123 GeV 3. Implications for constrained MSSM scenarios In constrained MSSM scenarios (cMSSM)5, the various soft SUSY–breaking parameters obey a number of universal boundary conditions at a high energy scale such as the GUT scale, thus reducing the number of basic input parameters to a handful. These inputs are evolved via the MSSM renormalisation group equations down to the low energy scale MS where the conditions of proper electroweak symmetry breaking (EWSB) are imposed. The Higgs and superparticle 3 We have checked that the program FeynHiggs [18] gives comparable values for Mh within 2 GeV which we consider to be our uncertainty as in Eq. (5). ≈ 4 max Note that the Mh values given above are obtained with a heavy superparticle spectrum, for which the constraints from flavour physics and sparticle searches are evaded, and in the decoupling limit in which the h production cross sections and the decay branching ratios are those of the SM Higgs boson. However, we also searched for points in the parameter space in which the boson with mass 125 GeV is the heavier CP–even 0 6 H boson which corresponds to values of MA of order 100 GeV. Among the 10 valid MSSM points of the 4 ≈ 0 scan, only 1.5 10− correspond to this scenario. However, if we impose that the H cross sections times branching ratios≈ are× compatible with the SM values within a factor of 2 and include the constraints from MSSM + 5 Higgs searches in the τ τ − channel, only 4 10− of the points survive. These are all excluded once the + ≈ × b sγ and Bs µ µ− constraints are imposed. A detailed study of the pMSSM Higgs sector including the dark→ matter and→ flavour constraints as well as LHC Higgs and SUSY search limits is presented in Ref. [19]. 5In this paper cMSSM denotes all constrained MSSM scenarios, including GMSB and AMSB. 4 Soft supersymmetry Breaking Parameters Large stop sector mixing At > 1 TeV Similar results from Arbey, Battaglia, Djouadi, Mahmoudi, Quevillon ’11 Draper Meade, Reece, Shih’11 No lower bound on the lightest stop One stop can be light and the other heavy or in the case of similar stop soft masses. both stops can be below 1TeV Intermediate values of tan beta lead to the largest values of mh for the same values of stop mass parameters M. C., S. Gori, N. Shah, C. Wagner ’11 +L.T.Wang ‘12 At large tan beta,light staus/sbottoms can decrease mh by several GeV’s via Higgs mixing effects and compensate tan beta enhancement Wednesday, July 18, 2012 Can departures in the production/decay rates at the LHC disentangle among different SUSY spectra? The event rate depends on three quantities: •The three of them may be affected by new physics. • If one partial width is modified, then the total width is modified as well, producing modifications of all BR’s. Main production channel: Gluon Fusion Main/first search modes: decay into γγ/ZZ/WW How much can we perturb the gluon production mode? Is it possible to change WW and ZZ decay rates independently? Can we vary the Higgs rate into di-photons independently from the rate into WW/ZZ? Can we change the ratio of b-pair to tau pair decay rates? Wednesday, July 18, 2012 Departures in the production and decay rates at the LHC ! Through SUSY particle effects in loop induced processes squarks squarks and sleptons ~ ~ charginos ~ ! Through enhancement/suppression of the Higgs-bb and Higgs-di-tau coupling strength via mixing in the Higgs sector : This affects in similar manner BR’s into all other particles ❖Through vertex corrections to Yukawa couplings: different for bottoms and taus 2 2 This destroys the SM relation BR(h bb)/BR(h ττ) ~ mb /mτ Wednesday, July 18, 2012 ----- contours of "(gg #h)/"(gg #h) Gluon FusionSM in the MSSM rd ----- contours of "(gg #h)/"(gg #h)SM Light 3 gen. squarks ! [stops and sbottoms] Light 3rd gen. squarks can increase the gluon fusion rate, ! [stops and sbottoms] but for stop mixing Xt as required for can increase the gluon fusion rate, mh values of interest, but for stop mixing X as required for tend to lead to suppressiont mh values of interest, tend to lead to suppression Squark suppression effects in gluon fusion yield small enhancement in mh ~ 124-126 GeV range Squarkdi suppression-photon decay effects rate butin gluon fusion yield small enhancement in . Dermisek,Low "(gg #h) BR(h #$$) mh ~ 124-126 GeV range di-photon decay rate but% 1 "(gg #h)SM BR(h #$$)SM . Dermisek,Low "(gg #h) BR(h #$$) Dermisek, Low’07 %1 "(gg #h)SM BR(h #$$)SM Wednesday, July 18, 2012 ! ! Higgs Production in the di-photon channel in the MSSM Charged scalar particles with no color charge can change di-photon rate without modification of the gluon production process Light staus with large mixing [sizeable µ and tan beta]: ! enhancement of the Higgs to di-photon decay rate Contours of constant "(gg #h)Br(h #$$) "(gg #h)SM Br(h #$$)SM for Mh ~ 125 GeV ! . M. M.C, C, S.Gori Gori,, Shah, N. Shah, Wagner C. Wagner,’11 +L.T.Wang’12 For a generic discussion of modified γγ and Zγ widths by new charged particles, see M. C. ,Low and C. Wagner’12 Recent MSSM scan: Benbrik, Gomez Bock, Heinemeyer, Stal, Weigein, Zeune’12 Wednesday, July 18, 2012 Higgs into di-photon rate can be enhanced via Staus without changing the Higgs into WW/ZZ rates Contours of constant "(gg #h)Br(h #ZZ) "(gg #h)SM Br(h #ZZ)SM for Mh ~ 125 GeV ! M. C., Gori, Shah, Wagner’11 + Wang’12 Wednesday, July 18, 2012 Mixing Effects in the CP- even Higgs Sector can have relevant effects in the production and decay rates effects through radiative corrections to the CP-even mass matrix 2 2 2 2 sin! cos! = M12 / Tr M " 4 det M which defines the mixing angle alpha ( ) m sin destroy basic relation # b $ ghbb " (1# %b /tan$ tan &) (1+ %b ) v cos& gh,H,Abb gh,H,A "" # mb m" mb cos# g Hbb " (1& $b tan# /tan %) 1+ $ v cos% ( b ) M.C. Mrenna, Wagner ʼ98 ! Haber,Herrero,! Logan, Penaranda, Rigolin, Temes ʼ00 mb tan # gAbb " (1+ $b )v ! Radiative corrections ==> main decay modes of the SM-like MSSM Higgs into b- and tau-pairs can be drastically changed ! Wednesday, July 18, 2012 Additional modifications of the Higgs rates into gauge bosons via stau induced mixing effects in the Higgs sector Important Aτ induced radiative corrections to the mixing angle α together with loop vertex corrections to hbb coupling, Δb mStau~ 90 GeV; mh~ 125 GeV me3= mL3 Small variations in BR [Hbb] induce significant variations in the other Higgs BR’s M. C. Gori, Shah, Wagner,’11 + Wang’12 Similar results for example within pMSSM/MSSM fits: Arbey, Battagllia, Djouadi,Mahmoudi ’12 Benbrik, Gomez Bock, Heinemeyer, Stal, Weigein, Zeune’12 Wednesday, July 18, 2012 Scenario with suppression of gluon fusion and enhancement of diphoton rate + suppression of the h to taus to h to b’s ratio due to different radiative SUSY corrections to higgs-fermion couplings m 90 GeV, tanΒ 60 Τ mΤ 90 GeV, tanΒ 60 2000 2000 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.95 0.97 0.87 1 1000 1000 1 1.05 Br h bb Br h ΤΤ GeV GeV 0 0 Τ Br h bb SM Τ Br h ΤΤ SM A A 1.1 1.02 1000 1000 1.1 1.05 1.03 1.5 1.15 1.4 1.3 1.2 2000 600 800 1000 1200 1400 2000 600 800 1000 1200 1400 mA GeV mA GeV futher suppression of gluon fusion is possible due to light stops, with mass ~150 GeV M. C., S. Gori, N. Shah, C. Wagner Wednesday, July 18, 2012 has been studied, and refs. therein). It is well known that, for small values of tan β, the coupling λSHuHd in the superpo- tential leads to a positive contribution to the mass squared of the SM-like Higgs boson HSM relative to the MSSM [15,16,19]. However, HSM − S mixing has an additional impact 2 on the physical spectrum: if the diagonal mass term mSS is larger than the one of HSM, 2 the mixing reduces the mass of HSM; if the diagonal mass term mSS is smaller than the one of HSM, the mixing leads to an additional increase of the mass of HSM. In this latter case, the mass of the lighter eigenstate H1 can be well below 114 GeV and compatible with 2 2 constraints from LEP [31], if its reduced signal strength ξ1 ≡ g¯1 × BR(H1 → b¯b) is small enough. (Hereg ¯1 is the reduced coupling of H1 to the Z boson normalized with respect to the SM, and BR(H1 → b¯b) is the branching ratio into b¯b normalized with respect to the SM.) In addition, HSM−S mixing can lead to an increase of the branching ratio BR(Hi → γγ) ¯ of one of the eigenstates Hi with respect to the SM: if the coupling to b b and hence the ¯ partial decay width into bMSSMb (whichHiggs is closeMass to the total width ΓTot) is strongly reduced with respect to the SM, BR(Hi → γγ)=Γ(Hi → γγ)/ΓTot is correspondingly enhanced. This phenomenon140 has been discussed in the context of the lighter eigenstate H1 in [32], but is equally possible for the heavier eigenstate as will be discussed below. In view of the Xt 6 mt latest LHC130 results, the possible enhancement of BR(Hi → γγ) in the NMSSM was also mh 124126 GeV discussed in [13], and a Higgs mass near 125 GeV in the constrained NMSSM – but without enhancement120 of BR(Hi → γγ) – in [33]. GeV In the next Section we will study a region of the parameter space of the NMSSM with h ΛSUSY Higgs Mass a scale invariant110 superpotential, which leads naturally to an eigenstate H2 after HSM − S m mixing with a mass1000 in the 124 − 127 GeV range. Its BR(H2 → γγ) is always enhanced Xt 0 s with respect to the SM. The lighter eigenstate H1 hasSuspect a mass in the 70 − 120 GeV range, 100 500 compatible with LEP constraints, and is potentiallyFeynHiggs also observable at the LHC. In Section 3 we conclude90 and summarize the possibilities allowing to distinguish this scenario from the GeV 200 SM and/or200 the MSSM. 300 500 700 h1000 1500 2000 3000 100 mt1 GeV mh 124126 GeV Mass 2Implicationsof50 HSM − S mixing in the NMSSM in Figure 1: The Higgs mass in the MSSM as a function of the lightest top squark mass, mt˜1 , with red/blue solidthe lines computed light20 using of recent Suspect/FeynHiggs. and future The two upper LHC lines are results for maximal top squark mixing assuming degenerate300 stop soft masses500 and yield700 a 124 (126)1000 GeV Higgs mass The NMSSM differs from the MSSM duem toGeV the presence of the gauge singlet superfield S. for mt˜1 in the range of 350–600 (500–800) GeV, whileS the two lower lines are for zero top squark In the simplest Z3 invariant realisationMany ofminimal the NMSSM, SUSY models the Higgs can produce mass term mh=125µHu HGEVd in the mixing and do not yield a 124 GeV Higgs mass for mt˜1 below 3 TeV. Here we have taken tan β =superpotential 20. The shadedW regionsMSSM highlightof the MSSM the diff iserence replaced between by the the coupling Suspect andλ of FeynHiggsS to Hu and Hd and Figure 3: The Higgs3 mass in λ-SUSY, as a function of the singlet soft mass mS. Here, λ =2, Tan Β 2 Tan Β 5 Tan Β 10 results,a and self-couplingtan mayβ = be 2, taken andκ theS asNMSSM: other. an Hence, estimate parameters extra in of this arethesinglet as uncertainties simplest described S with version inextra Table in the parameter 1, the two-loop which superpotential gives λ calculation. the light3000 HiggsWNMSSM a is scale 3000 3000 invariant,mass of m andh = given 280 GeV by: in the limit of heavy singlet mass. However, we see that lowering the the Higgs doublets,singlet massλSHmSHresults, that in is a lighter perturbative Higgs due to to unified mixing scales, of the singlet thereby with constraining the Higgs.2500 λ 0.7 2500 2500 u d ˆ ˆ ˆ κ ˆ3 (everywhere in this paper λ refers to theWNMSSM weak scale= λ valueSHu of· H thed + coupling).S + ... The , maximum mass (1) cations of a 3 3 mass matrix for the CP even Higgs scalars. However,3 this decoupling2000 is itself 2000 2000 of the lightest Higgs boson× is whereunnatural hatted since letters the soft denote Higgs doublet superfields, mass parameter and the is generated dots denote by one-loop the renormalization MSSM-like Yukawa cou- 2 2 GeV 1500 GeV 1500 GeV 1500 ˆ ˆ 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 plingsgroup of scalingHu and at orderHmd toλ=m theSM.For quarkcosλ =2,avoidingadditionaltuningatthe20%levelrequires2β and+ λ leptonv sin 2 superfields.β + rad.δ , corrections Once the real scalar(2) component t t t h Z t of SˆmdevelopsS 1TeV[15].Once a vev s, thes is first no longer term decoupled, in WNMSSM it is crucialgenerates to include an doublet-singlet effectivem µ-term Higgs m m where heremixing. and throughout In the limit the of decoupling paper we one use Higgsv = doublet, 174 GeV.s mixes For withλ thev>M remainingZ , the1000 light tree-level neutral 1000 1000 µeff = λ s. (2) contributionsdoublet to m Higgsh areh maximizedat tree-level via for the tan massβ = matrixSM 1, + as singlet shown limit by the solid lines in Figure 2, Λ 0, 0.3, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7 Λ 0, 0.3, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7 Λ 0, 0.3, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7 500 500 500 rather than by large values of tan β as2 in2 the2 MSSM.2 However,2 even for λ taking its maximal 2 λ v sin 2β + MZ cos 2βλv(µ, MS,Aλ) = 2 . (3) m 100 GeV m 100 GeV m 100 GeV λv(µ, M ,A ) 2 m t1 t1 t1 value of 0.7, these tree-level contributionsM cannotS raiseλ the HiggsS mass above 122 GeV,0 and 0 0 4 2 0 2 4 4 2 0 2 4 4 2 0 2 4 δt 28 GeV is required. Adding the top loop contributions allows the Higgs mass to reach In general there are several contributions to the off-diagonal entry and these will be discussed Xt mt Xt mt Xt mt 125 GeV, asin shown section by 4; the but shaded all• areLarge proportional bands effect of Figureon to theλv, 2,mass which at least isonly large for for low in lowλ-SUSY, values tan beta of so tan that β mixingin the cannot region 2 Hall, Pinner, Ruderman’11 of 1–2. In thisbe neglected case, unlike even for the rather MSSM, large maximal values of m stopS. This mixing is illustrated is not required in Figure to 3 where, get the for Higgs a set • More freedom in gluon fusion production Figure 6: Contours of m = 125 GeV in the NMSSM, taking m = m = m ˜ and varying heavy enough.of reference In section parameters 3 we demonstrate of the model discussed that, for later, a 125 the GeV two Higgs eigenvalues mass, of the this fine-tuning mixing matrix of h Q3 u3 t are shown as a function• Higgs of m mixing. At the effects reference can point beλ also=2andtan triggeredβ =2,sothatinthe bytan extraβ =2 new, parameter5, 10 from λ left to right, and varying λ within each plot. We add the tree-level Higgs the NMSSM is significantly improvedS relative to the MSSM, but only for .6 λ .7, near the absence of mixing the Light Higgs staus mass wouldwould be not 280 enhance GeV, but thisdi-photon is reduced rate to 125since GeV at for lowm Stan beta there is negligible boundary of perturbativity at• the GUT scale. mass (with∼ NMSSM parameters chosen to maximize it) to the two-loop stop contribution from 500 GeV. As the bluemixing curve of in Figure the stau 3 crosses sector. 125 GeV its slope is quite modestSuspect. – a central The tree-level Higgs mass is largest at lower values of tan β and larger values of λ, claim of this paper is that a 125 GeV Higgs from doublet-singlet mixing in λ-SUSY is highly where only modestly heavy stops, mt˜ 300 GeV, are needed to raise the Higgs to 125 GeV. natural. However,Wednesday, moving July 18, along 2012 the blue curve of Figure 3, the tuning rapidly increases as the 2 Heavy stops are still required for lower∼ values of λ and larger values of tan β. 4 to many studies of the NMSSM which focus on the scenario with no dimensionful terms in the superpotential. We define the parameter µ =ˆµ + λ S , which acts as the effective µ-term and sets the mass of the charged Higgsino. We also include the following soft supersymmetry breaking terms, 2 2 2 2 2 2 Vsoft m Hu + m Hd + m S +(BµHuHd + λAλ SHuHd +h.c.) . (9) ⊃ Hu | | Hd | | S| | For simplicity, we have not included the trilinear interaction S3 in the superpotential or scalar potential because we do not expect its presence to qualitatively change our results. We neglect CP phases in this work and take all parameters in equations 8 and 9 to be real. In this section, we focus on the scenario where the lightest CP-even scalar is mostly doublet, with doublet-singlet mixing not too large. The lightest CP-even scalar mass that results from the above potential is bounded from above at tree-level [14], (m 2) m2 cos2 2β + λ2v2 sin2 2β. (10) h tree ≤ Z Since we take the lightest scalar to be dominantly doublet, this is a bound on the Higgs mass.1 The first term is the upper bound in the MSSM, while the second term is the contribution from the interaction involving the singlet. The above bound is saturated when the singlet is 2 2 integrated out with a large supersymmetry breaking mass, mS >MS [19], which, in practice, 1It is also interesting to consider the case where the lightest eigenstate is dominantly singlet. Then, singlet- doublet mixing can increase the mass of the dominantly doublet eigenstate [29]. 10 Analogous to MSSM, modifications of the Higgs rates into gauge bosons via mixing effects in the Higgs sector 2 Above, we did not mention imposing a constraint on aµ. Rough consistency with the measured value of aµ requires genuine ΝMSSM effect from doublet-singlet mixing induced by λ 10 that the extra NMSSM contribution, δaµ, falls into the window defined2 in NMSSMTools of 8.77 10− < δaµ < 9 10 9 × 4.61 10− expanded to 5.77 10− < δaµ < 4.91 10− after allowing for a 1σ theoretical error in the NMSSM × 10 Ellwanger.× 12 × 5 Above, we did not mention imposing a constraintcalculation on aµ. of Rough3 consistency10− . In fact, with given the measured the previously value defined of aµ requires constraints and focusing on λ 0.1, δaµ is always too small, beingBenbrik, at± most× Bock, 2Heinemeyer,10 10. DemandingStal, Weiglein, δZeune’12a large enough10 to fall into the above window,≥ or even come close to that the extra NMSSM contribution, δaµ, falls into the window definedGunion, in NMSSMTools− Jiang, Kraml ’12 of 8.77µ 10− < δaµ < 9 10 123 VV∗ (V = W, Z) final states for Higgs) in the 123–128for which GeV Tevatron window data is very is relevant, SM-like.) and WW Higgs with Higgs τ τ −. For the cases studied, where there are γγ γγ → → The main production/decay channels ( 1.5 relevanttwo for nearly current degenerate LHC data Higgs are gluon-gluon bosons, ( 1.5 we and willWW combinefusion their to Higgs signals with as follows in defining the mass and signal for the h gg h gg R effective Higgs, h. First, for the individualR Higgs we compute the ratio of the gg or WW-fusion (VBF) induced Higgs Higgs decay to γγ or ZZ∗ 4. The1 LHC is also beginning to probe W, Z+Higgs with1 Higgs decay to bb, a channel → + for which Tevatron data is relevant, and WW crossHiggs section with times Higgs theτ Higgsτ −. branching For the cases ratio studied, to a given where final there state, areX, relative to the corresponding value for the SM two nearly degenerate Higgs bosons,0.5 we will combineHiggs→ boson: their signals→ as follows in defining0.5 the mass and signal for the effective Higgs, h. First, for the individual0 Higgs we compute the ratio of the gg or WW0 -fusion (VBF) induced Higgs Γ(gg hi)BR(hi X) cross section times the Higgs branching0 ratio0.2 to0.4 a0.6 given0.8 final1 1.2 state,1.4 X1.6, relative1.8 2 to the0 correspondinghi 0.2 0.4 value0.6 for0.8 the SM1 1.2 h Rgg(X) h → → , (1) R (VV) ≡ Γ(gg R h(bbSM) )BR(hSM X) Higgs boson: gg →VBF → Γ(gg hi)BR(hi X) Γ(WW hi)BR(hi X) hi Rhi (X) , (2) FIG. 3.R Left:gg(X correlation) between→ the gluon fusion→ induced γγ, and VVVBFrates relative to the SM. Right:→ correlation(1) between→ ≡ Γ(gg hSM)BR(hSM X) ≡ Γ(WW hSM)BR(hSM X) the gluon fusion induced γγ rate and the WW fusion induced bb rates relative to the SM; the relative rate for W ∗ Wh with → → → → → h bb (relevant for the Tevatron) is equalth to the latter. → where hi is the i NMSSM scalar Higgs, and hSM is the SM Higgs boson. Note that the corresponding ratio for hi Γ(WW hi)BR(hi X) R (X) → → , hi (2) VBF V ∗ Vh (V =SuppressionW, Z)withh in BRX is [Hbb] equal induce to R (X). These ratios are computed in a self-consistent manner (that ≡ Γ(→WW i hSM)BR(hSM iX→) VBF is,significant treating123 ( h1 h2 h Y andR defineY (X)m theh1 net+ R signalY (X)m toh2 simply be1 m mh (X) (3) 124 ≡ h1 h2 RY (X)+RY (X) 0.5 h h1 h2 RY (X)=RY (X)+RY (X) . (4) and define the net signal to simply be123 0 123 124Of course,125 the126 extent127 to which128 it is appropriate0 0.2 0.4 to combine0.6 0.8 the rates1 1.2 from1.4 the h1 and h2 depends upon the degree of h h m h1 h2 2 1 R (degeneracyX)=Rh (γγ)( [GeV]X and)+ theR experimental(X) . resolution. For the latter,(Cbb) we assume(4) σ 1.5 GeV [12]. It should be noted that Y Y Y res ∼ the widths of the h1 and h2 are of the same order of magnitude as the width of a 125 GeV SM Higgs boson, i.e. they Of course, the extent to which it is appropriate to combine the rates from the h1 and h2 depends upon the degree of are very much smaller than this resolution.gg gg FIG. 4. Left: effective Higgs masses obtained from different channels: m (γγ1) versus m (VV). Right: γγ signal strength degeneracy and the experimental resolution. For the latter, we assume σ 1.5 GeV [12].h It shouldh be noted that res 2 2 2 Rh (γγ) versus effectiveWe coupling perform to b¯b quarks scans (Ch covering)2. Here,∼C theh followingRh1 (γγ)Ch1 parameter+ Rh2 (γγ)Ch2 ranges,/ Rh1 (γγ which)+Rh2 correspond(γγ) . to an expanded version of those the widths of the h1 and h2 are ofgg the same order of magnitude as theb¯b width ofb¯b a≡ 125gg GeVb SM¯b Higgsgg boson,b¯b i.e.gg they gg considered in [6]: 0 m0 3000; 100 m1/2 3000; 1 tan β 40; 6000 A0 6000; 0.1 λ 0.7; are very much smaller than this resolution. ≤ ≤ ≤ ≤ ≤ ≤ − ≤ ≤ ≤ ≤ 0.05 κ 0.5; 1000 Aλ 1000; 1000 Aκ 1000; 100 µeff 500. In the figures shown in the following, We perform scans covering the following parameterwe only≤ display ranges,≤ − points which≤ which correspond≤ pass the to− an basic expanded constraints,≤ ≤ version satisfy of those≤B-physics≤ constraints, have Ωh2 < 0.136, obey the considered in [6]: 0 m 3000;are mixed 100 higgsino–singlino,m 3000; with 1 a singlingtan componentβ 40; of the6000 order ofA 20%, see6000; the bottom-row 0.1 λ plots0. of7; Fig. 8. 0 It is interesting1XENON100/ to2 note a few points limit regarding on the LSP the GUT-scale scattering parameters cross-section0 associated off withprotons the pointsand plottedhave both in h and h in the desired mass range: 0.05 κ 0.5; 1000≤ A≤ 1000; 1000≤ A ≤ 1000; 100≤ µ ≤ 500.− In the≤ figures≤ shown in the≤ following,≤ 1 2 λ previous figures. Forκ the WMAP-window diamondeff points, m0 [0.9, 1.3] TeV, m1/2 [500, 700] GeV, A0 ≤ ≤ − ≤ ≤ − ≤123 GeV≤ Dine, Seiberg, Thomas; Antoniadis, Dudas, Ghilencea, Tziveloglou M.C, Kong, Ponton, Zurita Scan over parameters including all possible dimension 5 and 6, SUSY Higgs operators Higgs mass = 125 GeV easy to achieve for light stops, small mixing Enhancement of h to di-photons due to bb suppression or light staus Higgs cascade decays from large splitting in masses : h/H to AA If the new physics is seen only indirectly via deviations from the SM Higgs properties, it will be hard to disentangle among new singlets, triplets, extra Z’, W’, a given mixture of the above Wednesday, July 18, 2012 Higgs Phenomenology in models of Warped Extra Dimensions Large number of new fermionic fields in the 5D theory induce large loop effects in hγγ & hgg couplings Effect even more pronounced in models with custodial protection MC, Casagrande, Goertz, Haisch, Neubert’12 ymax = 0.5 Spectacular effects on Higgs production via gluon fusion, even for new particle masses well beyond direct LHC reach ymax = 1.5 Suppression Rh= !(gg!h)WED/!(gg!h)SM ymax = 3 Significant enhancement of the BR (h→γγ) also possible depending on the values of leptonic 5D Yukawas Wednesday, July 18, 2012 Higgs Phenomenology in Minimal RS model: Decay Goertz, Haisch, Neubert Higgs to diphotons can be larger than HZZ but below SM value A measurement of RZZ ≈ 0.7 along with a slight enhancement of the di-photon over the ZZ channel would then imply (for ymax =3) KK masses ≈ 8 TeV, far outside direct reach of LHC A lower bound RZZ > 0.7 would imply very strong bounds Wednesday, July 18, 2012 Conclusions: The Higgs discovery is of paramount importance but We need more precise measurements of Higgs properties and/or direct observation of new physics to further advance in our understanding of EWSB Wednesday, July 18, 2012 Mh ~ 125 GeV and flavor in the MSSM • Bu ! "# transition MSSM charged Higgs & SM contributions interfere destructively 2 BR(B ! "#)MSSM - % m2 ( tan+ 2 0 ± R u /1 B 2 (H ) Bu !"# = SM = $ ' 2 * 3 BR(Bu ! "#) / m (1+ ,0 tan+)2 . & H ± ) 1 3 Vub inclexcl 3.890.44 10 60 Important radiative corrections 50 B h • u ! "# * * hd d 2$ µ Mg˜ mu = 4, 1, -1.5 TeV i s "0 # 40 2 2 2 3% max m i ,m i ,M d˜ d˜ g˜ ! [ 1 2 ] ! Β tan 30 A/H → ττ) ε loop factors intimately connected to the structure of the squark mass matrices 20 ! Independent on stop mixing 10 Almost independent of RG evolution 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 more powerful than Higgs searches MA GeV See Isidori’s talk Altmannshofer, MC, Shah,Yu Wednesday, July 18, 2012 Mh ~ 125 GeV and Minimal Flavor Violation in the MSSM 2 • Loop-induced A/H X 32 tan 2 2 6 + # SUSY RL % µAt tan" + " contributions to BR(BS " µ µ ) $ 4 ! 4 Bs ! µ µ mA mA 32 2 2 bs m h # tan$ * tan" with XH/A b t Y Vtb Vts ( RL ) ! " 3 CKM CKM v (1+#0 tan$)(1+ %b ) ! ! ! * A* µ t 3 2 "Y # " = # +# h tan$ 16 2 max m2 ,m2 , 2 b ( 0 y t ) $ t˜ t˜ µ [ 1 2 ] • Charged Higgs and chargino-stop contributions to BR(B " X S#) ! ! µ tR tL + 32 33 h˜ ˜ + PRL P 2 h1 LR 2# S * + ! __ sL H b !ht " ht µ M g! ! ~ " ~ R sL t t b 3$ R At L R ! ! ! ! ! ! ! (ht " #ht tan$) mb µA tan# m ! ! t b 2 A + ! g[mt ,m + ] Vts A + " ! ht f [m! ,m! ,µ] Vts ! H ! H ! t1 t2 (1+ %b ) !! ! 1 +! $ ! ( b ) Wednesday, July 18, 2012 FCNC and the scale of SUSY Breaking • FCNC’s induced by Higgs-squark loops depend on the flavor structure of the squark soft SUSY breaking parameters • If SUSY is transmitted to the observable sector at high energies M~MGUT even starting with universal masses (MFV) in the supersymmetric theory: Ellis, Heinemeyer, Olive, Weiglein Due to RG effects: M.C, Menon, Wagner + " 1) The effective FC strange-bottom-neutral Higgs is modified: Bs ! µ µ 3 1,2 2 2 bs m ( # " # + h # ) tan$ * ! 3 " !1,2 > 0 and proportional to µM XH/A ! " b 0 0 t Y Vtb Vts 0 0 g! ( RL ) 3 CKM CKM If µA < 0 and µM > 0 v (1+#0 tan$)(1+ %b ) t g! possible cancellation of effects 2) Flavor violation in the gluino sector induces relevant contributions to b ! s" 2 2 Borzumati, Bertolini, Ag! ! " S (m0 # mQ )M g! µ tan$ F(m0 ,mR ,m ! ,m ! , M g! ) 3 bi di Masiero,Ridolfi • If SUSY is transmitted at low energies: M~ MSUSY, Squark mass matrices approx. block diag, only FC effects in the chargino-stop& H+ loops Wednesday, July 18, 2012 Mh ~ 125 GeV and flavor in the MSSM + Low Energy Vs High Energy SUSY breaking effects Bs →mu mu- tan beta=20 MA=400 GeV Altmannshofer, MC, Shah,Yu + - Red solid line: Bs → mu mu with low energy SUSY breaking effects Red dashed (dotted) line has 25% (50%) splitting from RG Wednesday, July 18, 2012 Mh ~ 125 GeV and flavor in the MSSM Low Energy Vs High Energy SUSY breaking effects on B !Xs gamma Altmannshofer, MC, Shah,Yu tan beta=20 MA=400 GeV Orange solid line from B Xs gamma with low energy SUSY breaking effects Orange dashed (dotted) line has 25% (50%) splitting from RG Wednesday, July 18, 2012