Study of Dark Matter Physics in Non-Universal Gaugino Mass Scenario

Home , PICO

JHEP08(2017)072 Springer July 27, 2017 April 10, 2017 August 4, 2017 : : August 18, 2017 : : Revised Received Accepted Published Published for SISSA by https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2017)072 [email protected] , b and Yuji Omura . 3 a 1703.10379 The Authors. c Supersymmetry Phenomenology

We study dark matter physics in the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model , [email protected] Department of Physics, WasedaTokyo University, 169-8555, Japan Kobayashi-Maskawa Institute for theNagoya Origin University, of Nagoya Particles 464-8602, and Japan the UniverseE-mail: (KMI), b a Open Access Article funded by SCOAP higgsino gives sizable contribution to the dark matter abundance. Keywords: ArXiv ePrint: dark matter candidate. Thehiggsino direct mass but detection also of gaugino theexcludes masses dark significantly. the The matter parameter upcoming is XENON1T region sensitivehiggsino experiment and to where the not gaugino bino mass only or parameters a of have gluino same dark signs. is matter We see lighter gives that stronger than the direct bound about detection than 2.5 TeV the if direct the search at the LHC experiment when Abstract: with non-universal gaugino massesratio at of the wino unification125 scale. and GeV Higgs gluino In boson this massesneutral mass. scenario, realizes particle, the that Then, the specific is relatively electro-weak dominantly light given scale by higgsino the naturally is neutral and predicted component and of achieves higgsino, the is lightest a good Junichiro Kawamura Study of dark mattermass physics scenario in non-universal gaugino JHEP08(2017)072 ]. There 3 -parameter, µ ], however, constrain 4 ]. In this scenario, a suitable ratio of the 6 , In the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard 5 1 – 1 – 4 6 6 2 10 6 7 ]. 12 2 2 -parameter should be EW-scale. Besides, the lightest particle in the , 5 1 µ 1 15 In the MSSM, there are a lot of parameters, so that we can consider many possibilities See for reviews e.g. [ 3.2 Thermal relic3.3 abundance Direct detection 3.4 Indirect detection 2.1 Review of2.2 NUGM Mass spectrum2.3 of NUGM LHC bounds 3.1 Neutralino sector 1 as well as the 125the GeV parameter Higgs space boson strictly. mass It measurementas is at the getting the explanation very LHC of difficult [ the to the 125 construct GeV EW SUSY Higgs scale models, boson isUniversal as mass Gaugino not long and Masses discarded. the (NUGM) explanation scenario One of [ possible the setup EW to scale is achieve known both as the Non- the SUSY search inare the no collider decisive experiments signals andattractive of the DM dark the candidates matter SUSY that observations particles, reveal [ but the higgsino origin is of still theof EW one the scale. of mass the spectrum possible for and the SUSY particles. The direct searches for the SUSY particles Model (MSSM), there isfor a higgsino supersymmetric that mass iswithout parameter, the fine-tuning, what superpartner is of called MSSM Higgs becomes bosons. stable because(DM) In of candidate order R-parity, if so to there that realize is higgsino no the becomes lighter EW a SUSY good scale particle. dark So matter far, a lot of efforts are devoted to 1 Introduction Supersymmetry (SUSY) is a(SM). promising The candidate for supersymmetric physics extensionthe beyond predicts masses the the of Standard superpartners the Model SUSY ofthe particles the are origin SM expected particles, of to and be the at electroweak least TeV-scale, (EW) in order scale. to explain 5 Conclusion 4 Numerical results 3 Dark matter physics Contents 1 Introduction 2 NUGM scenario JHEP08(2017)072 ] and 19 – -parameter -parameter 17 ]. There are µ µ 40 – ] and superstring 34 2 41 ]. ]. 12 13 – 10 In our scenario, the gauginos are 3 gauge bosons, respectively. Y ] and after that in refs. [ 33 and U(1) – L – 2 – 22 ]. Then, higgsino is hard to be detected at the LHC 8 , 7 ], that is a mixture of the moduli mediation [ 16 – ]. The phenomenology of the mirage mediation is discussed 14 21 , 20 ]. We find that the superpartners of top quark and gluon, what are called 9 – 7 -parameter is predicted to be close to the EW scale. The current status and the ]. µ ]. We explicitly show the exclusion limit and the future prospect on the plane of 42 9 – 7 This paper is organized as follows. The NUGM scenario is reviewed in section 2, and In this paper, we study dark matter physics in the NUGM scenario. Direct detection In this kind of SUSY models, higgsino is light because of the explanation of the origin of Note that there are some models that lead such a ratio of the gauginos. One possibility Wino and bino are the superpartners of SU(2) There is also a study for the muon g-2 with non-universal gaugino masses [ 3 2 2.1 Review of NUGM The NUGM scenario is known asnear one the of EW the attractive scale SUSY and models to the realize 125 GeV Higgs boson mass simultaneously. The we discuss dark matter physics inin section section 3. 4. The results Section of 5 numerical calculations is are devoted shown to conclusion. 2 NUGM scenario rate. We also discussrefs. the [ constraints from thethe LHC higgsino experiments, and based thecovered on gaugino by the masses. the results future In in experiments,parameter the as set. end, far we as find the gluino that mass this is scenario below can 2.5 TeV be in fully a certain our DM mass, that mainlybe comes between the from EW the scale neutral and component 1 of TeV. higgsino, isexperiments predicted are sensitive to to notbecause only the the higgsino-gaugino higgsino mixing gives mass the itself, most but significant contribution also to the the gaugino detection masses, the mass difference is adue to few the GeV certainly small [ massexperiments differences. can On efficiently the observe other hand, higgsinos,mixes dark if matter with the direct the neutral detection component gauginoshiggsino of and mass higgsino should dominates slightly be over lighter our than about universe. 1 TeV, It if higgsino is is also thermally interesting produced. that Then, the the EW scale, and the SUSYneutral particle is and expected charged to components be discovered inand in wino, higgsino, experiments. and and There the the are chargedrelatively neutral component heavy, component so mixes that mixes with all wino. with components bino of higgsino are light and almost degenerate; in fact, is the mirage mediationanomaly [ mediation [ before the Higgs bosonsome discovery in works refs. to [ realizemodels the [ ratio of the gauginos in the GUT models [ Then, the future prospect of the discovery ofthis the scenario SUSY [ particles at thetop LHC have squark been and investigated in gluino,these are SUSY promising particles particles decaying to to higgsinos test are this studied scenario. in refs. Expected [ reaches of wino mass to the gluino mass achieves the EW scale and the 125 GeV Higgs boson mass. JHEP08(2017)072 2 2 = i M d (2.1) (2.2) 3 GeV). H h M / 16 2 i (2.3) u 10 -parameter ) M 0 H µ ' A 135 . ≡ h , while the gaug- 0 099 ]. We proceed to 0 is satisfied. Thus β . − 0 A 0 3 44 ) corresponds to the M , − 3-4. Similarly, the top 9 M = 1 TeV relates to the 3 ∆ 1 2.1 . In particular, the ' M 2 ' M , 3 1 µ SUSY 243 M . 021 /M . , to measure the sensitivity of m 2 1000 GeV, respectively. 0 x and A-term -parameter is an unique SUSY- . + 0 , M should be around the EW scale ) µ 0 at − 0 2 | 2 m 2 u u , 650 M 2 2 H = 1 TeV are related to the boundary 2 H | M , µ, M µ m m | | 065 . 2 201 = ), the tuning measure of the satisfies 200 . SUSY x 3 ∼ ( + 0 | − 2.1 m and + 0 u 1

µ /M 2 2 2 H | 2 at 2 Z 2 – 3 – M is the soft scalar mass squared for the up-type µ m M t x | | M m 1 u 2 A 011 ], the parameter, ∆ ln 2 H . ln M . In this assumption, eq. ( ' ∂ m 0 43 ∂ (0 up to radiative corrections to the condition, so that

0 2 Z and 005 M = 1 at the tree-level and ∆ . 2 Z A m = 0 R 0 ˜ 2 t . x + M /m − 2 0 m 2 2 3 ∆ 2 | 1 , m µ L M . In ref. [ | ˜ 2 t M + ∆ 0 250 correspond to 57 075 m µ . . M , 1 0 005 = 2 . − − 0 term if the ratio of µ 100 and 2 3 ' -parameter represents the degree of tuning to realize the EW symmetry , ) is expressed as a quadratic polynomial function of the boundary con- are non-universal at the gauge coupling unification scale ( µ µ ) M to the EW scale is introduced: 3 , 2 x , = 10 1 SUSY SUSY µ m M is the Z-boson mass and ( m is simply required to avoid the fine-tuning in this assumption. The details of ( u Z u | 2 H 2 H µ m | m m In this paper, we assume universal soft scalar mass This relation shows thatrenormalization the group (RG) contribution effects, from butcanceled the we by gluino find the that mass RG theterm is effects cancels gluino dominant the mass from among contribution the cansquark the other be mass gaugino parameters masses ino masses We assume the ratio of two10 Higgs vacuum throughout expectation this values (VEVs) paper. tan boundary conditions The at soft the mass unification squared scale as breaking in the model.can From the be relation eq. written ( assmall ∆ this kind of discussionsstudy in collider the and NUGM dark scenarioreference, matter are ∆ phenomenology shown with in the refs. NUGM [ in this assumption. For Since ditions, we can derivethe ∆ tuning of the and the overall scalerelation between is given by the parameter to avoid the fine-tuning betweenpreserving those parameter parameters. in the The softly MSSM. On break the SUSY other andbreaking: hand, would all i.e., other be the dimensional soft originatedthe parameters SUSY from all breaking some ratios terms of mediation would soft have mechanisms same SUSY of origin. breaking SUSY parameters Let are us fixed assume by that some mediation mechanisms Higgs potential as where Higgs boson. This relation shows that is related to the EW symmetry breaking scale through the minimization condition for the JHEP08(2017)072 (2.4) (2.5) (2.6) 3 3 M 2 M increases. 2 ]. M 2 0 0 8 M , M A A 051 7 . ) ) 0 090 0 0 . A A 0 − 3 − 039 066 3 . . M 0 0 1 M -parameter and also en- 1 − − M µ 3 3 M . 0 ]. This small mass difference 007 M M . 7 A 0 014 . 0 094 162 − . . 277 . 2 2 − 2 2 + 0 + 0 M + 0 2 2 M 3 354 M M . ) decreases as the wino mass M 158 . 42 025 044 0 + 0 . . . 1 2 − SUSY 2 – 4 – − + 0 + 0 M m 1 ( 2 1 1 M R 1 ˜ 2 t M M M M M m 002 237 008 004 . . . . 003 0 0 . 0 − − , , + (0 + (0 2 1 1 − 2 0 2 0 2 2 3 3 2 1 m m M M M M M (1) TeV. 622 76 283 032 007 25 ...... O 044 0 0 ) increases and . +0 0 +2 +0 +3 ' ' − ' − SUSY ) ) ) m increases and the SM-like Higgs boson mass around 125 GeV can be achieved ( t This feature also indicates that we can treat all of the particles from higgsino R ˜ 2 t A SUSY SUSY SUSY 4 m ]. ]. m m m L ( ( ( ˜ 2 t (1) GeV. t 47 45 L R , ˜ 2 t ˜ 2 t m A The higgsino mass is betweenO the EW scale and 1 TeV, andRight-handed the top mass squark differences is are relatively light. All gauginos are 46 m m Let us summarize the important features of our mass spectrum discussed below: Another important point derived from the relatively heavy bino and wino is that the When the wino mass is large, left-handed sparticles become heavy due to the RG q There are recent works to study searching for charged higgsinos that exploit their relatively long life- • • • / 4 2 t time [ be recognized as charged(LSP) [ tracks unlike theas case invisible particles that at wino the is LHC. the lightest SUSY particle are induced by the mixingbino with and higgsino wino and masses gauginos, as socomponents explicitly that of shown these higgsino in are are next suppressed typicallymakes section. 2 by GeV it the The as difficult mass shown to differences inare detect among ref. the higgsino [ too directly soft at the to LHC, be because distinguished their daughter from particles backgrounds and their lifetimes are too short to mass plays a crucial rolemass in have shifting to the top be squark sothe mass, heavy LHC as that results. well. the This top means squark that mass the is bino enoughmass heavy differences to among be consistent the with components of higgsino become small. The mass differences We see that thehances suitable the wino-to-gluino Higgs mass boson ratioLHC mass. reduces experiment Besides, the thanks some to of the sparticle sizable masses left-right mixing are of withinevolution. the reaches top The of squarks the right-handed [ sleptonright-handed squark masses masses are mainly determined depend by on both the the bino gluino mass, and while bino masses. the The bino Note that the latterA effect is induced bydue the to top the Yukawa relatively coupling. large As wino. a2.2 result, the ratio Mass spectrum of NUGM We see that conditions as JHEP08(2017)072 ]. 9 – 7 ] aims 50 is greater µ ]. The former 49 ]. Gluino lighter 9 . This gives same 0 ˜ χ b where each branching 0 ˜ χ 1 . Hence, the signal from b ˜ χ ] and ref. [ ˜ χ ], the signal regions require /b → 48 2 , /b 1 49 0 1 0 b ˜ ˜ ˜ χ 1 χ t t b ˜ + → t 1 ˜ t → . In ref. [ 0 1 , that is induced by the top squark loop. ˜ ˜ t χ 0 t ˜ χ bjj g → 0 ˜ g χ – 5 – → g ], top squark lighter than 800 GeV is excluded if bjj 9 → in the NUGM scenario, although this analysis is not 0 ˜ χ t -parameter is less than 800 GeV. The bound is relaxed if 0 ˜ χ µ ˜ b χ t 0 χ → ) ˜ in the NUGM scenario. The latter analysis aims to hadronically 1 ˜ t 1 bjj ˜ t ˜ 270 GeV. There is no exclusion limit for top squarks if χ b → . ( t ˜ χ µ b → . → 1 ˜ t 1 ˜ t 1 ˜ t 1 ], but it is beyond the scope of this paper. ˜ t 51 200 GeV is satisfied, and top squark lighter than 600 GeV is excluded in the range Let us comment on the case with light bino. If gluino is enough heavy, bino can be Note that there is another channel, ˜ In present scenario, a gluino decays as ˜ In the NUGM scenario, a top squark decays as . coupling. Such a lightbino bino mass is is less light,to attractive gluino from shift has the the experimental to topnaturalness point be squark point of of much mass. view. view. heavieruniverse Then, than If Furthermore, and it the the the some is experimental light dilution known mechanisms bino reach that are in case bino necessary. LSP order would tends be to unfavorable overclose from the the as ref. [ as light as higgsino andsuppressed top unless squark bino can is alsowith decay significantly top to lighter bino. than squark The higgsino is decay because much is, the however, weaker usually coupling than of the bino one of higgsinos because of the top Yukawa than 1.8 TeV is excludedthe if mass the difference is smaller than about 300 GeV. If the mass difference betweenthis gluino decay and channel higgsino becomes is important. near or We need less to than consider the the top limits quark based mass, on data such than 270 GeV. the gluino pair production2-4 is W-bosons expected and to largeto have missing 4 this energies type b-tagged in of jets, the signals, jets/leptons final and coming state. we from refer The the analysis exclusion in limit ref. obtained [ in ref. [ sitive to the large masssquarks difference decaying region, to while a theregion. bottom former quark channel Referring and that the targets aµ analysis to neutralino bottom in is sensitive ref. to [ with the 200 GeV mass degenerate decaying top squarks, more than 4 jets, whereto 2 of events these should becompletely b-tagged. optimized. Such This signal decay regionspair pattern will produced is be realized top sensitive in squarksenough almost if large. half the Thus of this mass the channel that events difference targets with between to the the the hadronically top decaying top squark squark and is sen- higgsino is higgsino-like particles is significantlytralinos larger than consist the of top higgsinorelevant quark top that mass. squark slightly searches Note mixes atanalysis that the with LHC the aims wino are neu- to and discussed a in binosignal pair ref. in as [ of our bottom scenario. squarks that The decay as In our scenario, the top squarkLHC. and The the current gluino exclusion are the limit good and candidates the to future be prospect detected at havefraction the been studied is in 50% refs. as [ long as the mass difference between the top squark and each of the 2.3 LHC bounds JHEP08(2017)072 (3.3) (3.4) (3.5) (3.6) (3.7) (3.1) (3.2) is the , , W θ ) ) , 1 2 , M M 1 β β − 1 s s 2 2 in the limit that is a mixing angle , , µ µ . + 1 1 + , ) α µ , , 4 − as µ − µ ˜ −      ) ) χ β β 2 2 1 2 β β , is given by Z c c N Z s s ( ( n M , m M m ˜ χ 3 m W W µ µ + − , ˜ µ n χ s W c are defined and ) 0 , and β β W ˜ c χ − n − + Z Z c c s µ β 1 h ( ( , m 2 2 W β s m m , 2 θ N s 2 ˜ W W χ − , M M − c c hnn ) becomes the lightest one if the W ) M 4 , t , respectively. λ Z Z Z µ , m ) Z χ , α β 1 2) m m (˜ − m 1 µ ˜ s χ = sin m / β 3 µ n − − W . M 0 s 2 m 2 + W (1 χ 2 s , , − W c µ β 1 N ) ) 2 + s β c β β µ c )( 2 ,M ]. If we assume that there is no dilution − M s s and cos − 1 n L 3 β 2 1 4 − M c + − µ µ α Z and 53 β ( 2 2 N = diag( , Z M c β β − + α m ( W c c – 6 – < M M m W c 52 2 ( ( s 1 1 N | θ W W , sin 0 ˜ χ Z W c c W W + µ M M M | approach to c β s s W Z m n M β s θ Z Z 4 3 † c m ˜ − χ − N m m = sin N , , m α Z 0 1 s Z , , W ( m 2 2 c 1 0 g m 1 1 1 and W √ √ , and 0 W s = M β s 3 β j ˜ β χ c ˜ χ s ) = ) = ) = ) = hnn − m is assumed. ij λ 41 42 43 44 | ,      N = sin 2 µ ˜ are short for tan χ ,N ,N ,N ,N = = β ) is given by s α m i ˜ 31 32 33 34 χ 0 c u 2 , , ψ , ˜ 1 1 M β H ,N ,N ,N ,N ˜ χ , M 0 d and 21 22 23 24 m -parameter is either negative or positive. After the EW symmetry breaking, ˜ H α µ ,N ,N ,N ,N s | = cos , ˜ 14 12 13 11 Z W, β W N N N N c m t ( ( ( ( ˜ B, The neutralino-neutralino-Higgs coupling, is vanishing, respectively. The mass eigenstate ˜ = ( Z -parameter is positive (negative) and when the higgsino masseffect is after about the thermal 1 TeVovercloses production [ the of universe the LSP, andsparticle, the such is higgsino-like as cosmologically LSP a heavierthem excluded top than reduce unless squark, the 1 TeV are the relic so density. higgsino degenerate and that another co-annihilation processes between where 3.2 Thermal relicIt abundance is known that the thermal relic density of the purely higgsino LSP saturates the universe where of the Higgs boson. The mixing matrix is given by The masses, m µ where Weinberg angle. This matrix is diagonalized by an unitary matrix ψ 3.1 Neutralino sector In our study, wesign of assume the that thegauginos signs and higgsino of are all mixed the each gaugino other. masses are The positive neutralino and mass the matrix in a basis of 3 Dark matter physics JHEP08(2017)072 ], . . ]. th 54 µ ξ 60 – ≡ 57 obs is satisfied Ω 2 / h th obs ]. Ω = Ω . The difference of 55 2 th ≤ ξ obs 2 Ω 1 corresponding to h / = 1. χ th ≤ Ω obs th -parameter to realize the EW Ω ≡ ξ = Ω µ / ξ χ 2 h Ω χ ≡ ξ – 7 – 1 is not truly excluded in the case (B), but such ≥ th ξ ]: 250 corresponding to 0.4 % tuning. 56 & µ is always satisfied, assuming non-thermal production of LSP works. 0001 [ . 2 , we can simply consider two possibilities to saturate the observed value, 0 and the indirect detection rate is suppressed by h 2 is the thermal relic density of the LSP. Detection rates for the LSP at h th obs χ 5 ξ th is given by the thermal production and Ω = Ω 1188 . 2 2 h h χ χ = 0 Detection rates forprocesses the and LSP the are suppression factor simply is determined unity: by cross sections for relevant where Ω dark matter detections are suppressed by a fraction 2 Ω Ω h Throughout this paper, we focus on the region where In the case (B), we simply assume that the LSP dominates our universe and satisfies In the case (A), the LSP may not saturate our universe, depending on the parameter In our scenario, the relic DM abundance thermally produced may not be sufficient to Let us comment on possibilities that gauginos contribute to dark matter considerably. There are narrow regions where the thermal bino-higgsino LSP explains the abundance by the Higgs- 5 = 1. We do not explicitly calculate the relic abundance, but several mechanisms for 0 TeV. We note that region with obs (B) . (A) 3.3 Direct detection The direct detection forthe dark MSSM. matter is The a current limits promising on way the to spin-independent probe and the spin-dependentor neutralino cross Z-boson sector sections resonances of without tension with the DM direct detection experiments [ 1 region is less attractive becausescale the is degree severer of than tuning ∆ of the ξ the non-thermal productions havethe been decays proposed of so long-livedsignificantly far. heavy produce particles, the For LSP such instance, after as the it gravitino, LSP is is saxion known frozen and that out moduli from field, the thermal can bath [ changed by introducing othersuppressed DM by candidates to thethe MSSM. scalings comes The from direct thenucleons detection fact in rate that the is the direct relevantin detection, process the is while indirect scattering it detection. of is the coannihilation LSP of against two LSPs into SM particles region. Then, weabundance need of other the DM DM. candidates such We as also axion assume to that achieve the the thermal observed relic relic density of the LSP is not discussed later. satisfy the observed DM abundanceof in the LSP our as universe. Ω WhenΩ we denote the relic abundance In our scenario, the winohardly mass contributes should to be the as dark large matter.the as gluino The the mass bino gluino is mass mass enough can at large betempered to the as keep TeV bino-higgsino the light scale LSP top as and squark explains the it mass. higgsino thebut mass observed It most if was abundance interesting of in that parameter the the well- thermal space scenario has [ been already excluded by the direct detections as will be JHEP08(2017)072 , ]. β and . In 69 A (3.8) (3.9) , 1 µ m sin 2 68 ), the mixing 3.5 ), the LSP-LSP- , 3.7 ] and PICO [ 2 hχχ , λ 67 ) and ( , -parameter cases in the 2 , the mixing effects are | | µ   66 3.4 µ µ q ) and ( N T Z f − | ), ( ). 3.6 m 2 1 , 1 3.3 . In the decoupling limit 3.7 M u,d,s i X M = ). Since the mixing is proportional 2 W N q 1 are satisfied. Thus the blind spot | t 7 9 3.7 ¯ & | qq + q ) and ( | + β Z µ m ], PANDAX-II [ 2 9 | ] to calculate the RG effects and the mass 3.6 m Z   N − | 88 65 ) and ( h 2 , m 2 − ): = 64 3.6 M – 8 – and tan q 3.3 χ N | N T ]. As we see eqs. ( f µ -parameter. m | m W 72 N µ c ) . m β ], LUX [ | ]. Note that the dark matter observables are calculated 1 + 2 2 , so that the mixing vanishes when the relative signs of , s 63 1 91 β ] will cover wider range in near future. – – M 2 W as shown in eqs. ( | 71 61 89 4 N | (1 m sin 2 ]. We can see that the A-term is same order as other input µ 2 g 4 h m µ induces larger enhancement (suppression) for the same (opposite) 75 10 in order to realize the SM-like Higgs boson mass unless the m = – β + 2 2 π , 2 & g 1 73 4 , is derived from eq. ( 1 hχχ M β ] and LZ [ = | λ M / 70 SI N hχχ Z σ λ m are opposite, and , smaller tan is the nucleon mass and β µ corresponds to a sign of the N m sin 2 and are opposite, as we can see from eqs. ( that is a good approximation for our case, using eqs. ( We list the explicit values of masses and observables at the sample points in table The spin-independent cross section per nucleon at the tree-level can be written as Note that the mixing is suppressed when the LSP is higgsino-like and signs of It has been shown that there is a parameter set to lead vanishing gaugino-higgsino Let us discuss spin-independent cross section of neutralino scattering with nucleons. At tree-level, spin-independent scatterings are induced by the t-channel Higgs boson 2 2 , , 1 1 Z our numerical analysis, We usespectrum softsusy-3.5.1 [ of sparticles andby Higgs SDECAY bosons. and Their HDECAY [ widthby and micrOmega-4.2.5 branching ratios [ are calculated Higgs coupling where where m Thus we conclude thatleads the significant gaugino-higgsino difference mixing between the isDM positive scattering sizable and cross and the section. the negative factor, 1 M to 1 sign. We needsparticle tan masses are much heavier than 1 TeV, so that such effect is at most 20%-level. mixing, what is called theis blind proportional spot to [ M appears only in the gaugino-like LSP scenario. exchange and the s-channelNUGM squark scenario, the exchange. latter contributionand Since is higgsino only negligibly are important small. one in Thepling top the mixing in Higgs squark between the boson is gauginos mass exchange, light because eigenstatein the basis in the LSP-LSP-Higgs is the gauge cou- originated eigenstate fromsuppressed the by basis. gaugino-higgsino-Higgs couplings In the limit of The XENON1T [ Note that the limitsstronger on than those the from gaugino the masses spin-dependent from cross section the in spin-independent most cross cases. section are are given by the XENON100 [ JHEP08(2017)072 µ 1 − 10 × 1657 − 1.16 1 − ] and they are dominantly 10 , Higgs boson masses, sparticle /s × 1916 1000 1000 (c) (d) U 3 3840 3682 1018 1015 3839 3682 2239 2237 1019 1017 1016 1013 3225 3223 3582 3520 1431 1581 3351 3248 4698 4504 1000 1000 1500 1500 5000 5000 7.853 19.50 8.918 22.37 0.408 0.407 0.488 0.489 0.104 0.105 125.0 125.0 0.1677 0.1757 − − M 1.14 [cm 25 − 3 − 10 10 × × 2325 0) − . 1 7.58 – 9 – − 1 3 . − (0 10 O 250 250 × 2378 (a) (b) 1.39 1.42 3439 3400 4455 4454 3438 3400 2250 2250 2780 2762 1606 1636 3349 3326 4223 4175 1000 1000 1000 1000 3.302 7.793 3.499 8.505 1.096 1.138 0.436 0.435 0.533 0.535 260.5 257.1 260.5 258.3 258.8 255.7 125.0 125.0 − 10000 10000 − , is 0 7.82 i 1). The self-annihilation rate of the neutralinos in the zero- . σv ) s] h / − ) 3 01(0 W . [pb] [pb] [pb] ) ) ) ) 0 ) = 250(1000) GeV in the samples (a), (b), (c) and (d), the thermal + ZZ 6 [cm U U U 11 11 U U 2 | − 0 4 0 3 0 2 0 1 2 1 2 1 25 ∼ ˜ − − W g h A h ˜ ˜ t t ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ µ χ χ χ χ ˜ ˜ → M M M χ χ M M | µ χ 10 ( ( ( ( ( m m 10 m 10 10 m m m m m m 2 3 1 0 m m 0 → Ω × χχ × × × A m M M M 0 observables mass [GeV] χχ input [GeV] SD h SI SI i output [GeV] Br( σ σ σ σv Br( h . Values of boundary conditions at the unification scale From the naturalness point of view, we are especially interested in the low-scale itself. These are important for the indirect detections as discussed below. scenarios. When relic abundance is velocity limit, denoted by annihilating in pairs into weak gaugeneutralino bosons. or These chargino processes exchange, are induced and by the then t-channel the rate is determined by the higgsino mass parameters, but the Higgsgluino mass boson ratio. mass The isso top about that squark they 125 mass GeV could be is owing2 TeV in about to and the 1.5 5 TeV the reach TeV and of and suitable the the they wino-to- HL-LHC. gluino are mass The far is bino beyond and 2-3 the TeV, wino experimental masses reach are of between the LHC experiment. Table 1 masses and dark matter observables at several sample points. JHEP08(2017)072 ] ) 78 3.8 ]. ]. We can 79 76 ] as shown in /s 3 )[cm 25 − is obtained from eqs. ( (10 within several %-level after h O SI pb when the dark matter mass σ 1 5 The Fermi-LAT experiment also − ]. ]. This limit is comparable to the 6 10 75 80 ]. – × 83 73 76 . – 10 – , is proportional to the size of non-trivial mixing of 2 t ]. We will see that exclusion limits for the parameter m 61 ) ˜ 2 χ ]. m 84 − is small. However, it is known that the leading contribution, ]. The former observes gamma rays coming from the dwarf 1 ˜ ˜ 2 t 2 χ 82 m m − are taken same as the values adopted in micrOMEGA [ 1 ], which enhance the cross section about 10% against the tree-level ˜ 2 t q ]. The top squark is almost right-handed in our scenario and thus such ] and the parameter region discussed in present paper is competing p T m 77 f /s 78 with the zero-velocity cross section: that is 3 ZZ )[cm 25 or , calculated by using micrOMEGA-4.2.5 [ ] and AMS-02 [ ), where − SI . − 81 3.9 (10 1 Cosmic ray observations such as photons, positrons and anti-protons could be powerful One of the most promising observables may be the neutrino flux from the sun. The cap- A dominant source for the deviation come from the QCD corrections to the heavy quark We also show the spin-dependent and spin-independent LSP-proton cross sections, W , σ Similar analysis is done in ref. [ O 6 + SD LAT [ spheroidal satellite galaxies (dSphs) ofcoming the from Milky dark Way matter and annihilations the inthe latter the AMS-02 observes Milky anti-protons Way. experiment We refer obtained the in exclusion limit the from analysis [ section, so that the current limit from IceCube experimenttools can to not detect be important darkto one. matter. Thesewith limits these of bounds. the annihilation We cross consider section the of recent DM experimental reach results obtained by the Fermi- The weak bosons produced byserved the limit annihilation of of neutrinos dark given matter byis the decay 500 IceCube to GeV is neutrinos. and 3 The theyexpected ob- decay limit to at W-bosons thespace XENON1T exclusively [ [ from the XENON1T are much weaker than limits from the spin-independent cross table ture rate of neutralino bynucleons. the Since sun the is spin-dependent determined cross byone, the section the interaction is observations between much neutralino would larger and than give the significant spin-independent bounds on the spin-dependent cross section. higgsino-like, but these are almost canceled out among3.4 them as shown in Indirect ref. detection [ Let us comment on indirectW detections for the dark matter. A pair of neutralinos decay to into account, and confirm thatthe these sample are (d) about andagree 1% fewer against with for the the the tree-level other resultsincluding countribution sample these at of effects. points. micrOMEGA There exhibited Weand are have in chargino/W-boson checked potentially table mediated that sizable our corrections loop results from diagrams, neutralino/Z-boson where the neutralino and chargino are matrix elements [ contribution. Besides, the topa squarks mass could difference give contributionwhich is to suppressed the by crossthe ( section, top when squarks [ contribution can not be sizable. We take the top squark corrections derived in ref. [ σ and ( see the SI crossthere section are is small deviations well from described the by results the of tree-level micrOMEGA. Higgs-exchanging process, but JHEP08(2017)072 1000 800 GeV if the LSP saturates ). th = 1, while there is no bound ]. 300 ξ ξ − +200 87 600 = ξ

. Exclusion limits on the higgsino

) ( ) ( dSph FermiLAT dSph FermiLAT 2 th ξ = 1 ( 400 ξ [GeV] for the red dots corresponding to the case χ 2

)

- - 02 02AMS AMS m obs – 11 – Ω / th 200 (Ω ], so that we do not discuss about this in present paper. ≡ 85 . 2 th ] have been discussed in ref. [ ξ th ξ = 1, the higgsino lighter than about 500 GeV has been excluded 86 ξ = 1 ξ 10 = 1. On the other hand, the indirect detections do not give limits 5 TeV at the uniﬁcation scale. The blue dots indicate the lightest

0.100 0.010 0.001

2 × > σ < ξ ] / [ 10 v s cm

3 25 2 ≥ 1 shows the upper limits on the annihilation cross section from the recent M 1 . Exclusion limits and expected values in the NUGM scenario of the dark matter annihi- -parameter is worse than a few %-level. Note that this limit is independent of other In the case (B), where Figure µ = 1, but it is multiplied by the parameters as long as thewe higgsino will is not the draw dominant the componentconservative limits limit of from for the the LSP. the indirect For higgsino this detectionsfor mass reason, on the is figures higgsino about in mass 500 the GeV if next if section. The if the annihilation ratedark is matter suppressed produced from byplanned some the CTA non-thermal factor experiments processes [ at the Fermi-LAT and the future even in the loosest case within the uncertainty. This means that the degree of tuning of (A). Since the higgsino-like dark matterthe dominantly t-channel annihilate exchange to of W-bosons the ormostly Z-bosons higgsino-like determined by by chargino the or higgsino neutralino, massWe the itself see and annihilation that almost rate the independent Fermi-LAT is of resultthe other excludes AMS-02 parameters. the excludes neutralino the lighterthe neutralino than dark about lighter matter 300 than GeV and about and 800 experiment still has largeand uncertainty. The obtained dots by are thepoints predictions from with parameter the scanning NUGMneutralino to scenario mass draw and figures the inξ annihilation next rate section. itself and We are plot predicted the in the case (B) where constraints on the dark matter annihilationon rate. dark However, matter the density results are profiles highly [ dependent results of the Fermi-LAT (black line)limit and from the the AMS-02 (green AMS-02 line). is The shown uncertainty by of the the green band, because the limit from the AMS-02 Figure 1 lation cross section. The blue (red) dots correspond to observes gamma-rays coming from the galactic center and this potentially gives significant JHEP08(2017)072 ]. ). ] th 92 ξ 5 TeV = 1 is . 1188 = 1 and . GeV [ ξ = 1 ( 2000 1750 1500 1250 1000 2250 obs = 1 ξ 100 GeV is Ω 3 = 10. = 0 / stop β M th 2 m h ' − Ω µ obs ≡ th ξ = Ω = 1 TeV, (100) GeV, as discussed 2 0 O h m χ 5 TeV. 0 TeV and . . 2 , in the light gray region. If we at the unification scale. The gray 1) on the solid (dashed) red lines. 2 . 3 = 1 h . 1). Ω . 3 1 5 (0 /M obs 1 TeV. The thermal relic density of . should be 2 M Ω M | 5 (0 M . µ = 0 | | ' > ≡ µ 2 th | 2 ξ h = 0 r χ 1) in the case (A) and some mechanisms to . obs – 12 – Ω (0 . The region below the dark solid (dashed) blue lines 90 GeV is excluded by the LEP experiment [ / th O ξ th Ω = = | ≤ are chosen to realize the SM-like Higgs boson mass and ξ µ = 1 TeV, and | ≡ th 2 | ξ µ | th ξ ,M 0 A 90 GeV is excluded by the LEP experiment. < in the light gray region. The LUX experiment excludes the blue bands if ]. | . In such region, 2 (10) % fine-tuning for the EW scale, µ 61 shows the allowed region for the dark matter observables, the top squark mass | h O 2 ] is achieved in the red bands around 2.1 obs . Values of the dark matter observables with Ω 56 > -parameter at each point. We take the ratio of the Higgs VEVs as tan 2 Note that the gray region at The red lines represent the thermal relic density of the neutralino, where the solid Figure µ h 0001 [ th . Although the charged andcan neutral be components of probed higgsino byof are the the certainly lightest mono-photon degenerate, top channel.the they squark. expected The The exclusion background purpleexperiment limits color line [ for represent around the the spin-dependent mass cross section from the XENON1T 0 the dark matter exceeds theallow observed only value, Ω in section compensate the DM relic density are required. and exclusion limits from theat collider the experiments. unification scale We assume and the (dashed) lines correspond to 4 Numerical results Based on theallowed above region. discussion, we summarize the experimental bounds and show the Ω region below the white dashedwhere lines is if the transparentThe blue gray region lines will show beregion the covered where wino-to-gluino by mass the ratio XENON1T experiment if Figure 2 achieved in the red bands around Out[416]= JHEP08(2017)072 ] ] ] 65 GeV GeV [ [ 2200 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1500 1250 1000 750 500 1750 stop stop m m 0 TeV. Meanings of the lines and . = 10 TeV. Meanings of lines and 1 = 1 M 3 M = 1 is satisfied on all parameter points. The obs – 13 – Ω / χ Ω ≡ ξ . In addition, the brown region is excluded by the top squark search . In addition, the dark brown region is excluded by the gluino search 2 2 -parameter decreases. The reason is that the experimental limits for µ . Values of the dark matter observables with . Values of the dark matter observables with Next, let us discuss the exclusion lines from the spin-independent direct detection. The in the blue band, assumingblue that shaded region covered byexperiment the solid in blue this line case. iscomes the stronger The expected as limit exclusion the from limit thethe from XENON1T cross the section becomes spin-independent tighter cross for section lighter dark be- matter masses as long as the dark matter Figure 4 regions are same as inat figure the LHC. spin-independent cross section exceeds the current limit given by the LUX experiment [ Figure 3 regions are same as inat figure the LHC and the top squark becomes LSP in the dark gray region. Out[390]= Out[415]= JHEP08(2017)072 ] at as 3 2 ) β /M GeV 2 [ 1250 1000 750 500 1500 M ) sin 2 stop ≡ µ 2 m r . Taking into account the obs Ω / 0 TeV. Meanings of lines and regions . th = 5 = Ω 1 M th plane are severer than the ones derived in ξ 1 -parameter decreases in the case (A) because µ -parameter smaller than 1 TeV motivated by ], could cover our parameter region as far as M µ - 71 µ – 14 – -parameter compared with the case of the negative µ is only thermally produced, the bound from the direct χ ] and the LZ [ ). 70 . 4 3.9 – 2 pb in all figures in this paper. Then, we expect that the future exper- 10 ) are about (4 TeV, 1.5 TeV) at the unification scale and it enhances the − 3 10 M × , 2 1. The region below the white dashed line is excluded by the LUX in this case. . Values of the dark matter observables with 25 ]. The difference comes from the fact that wino does not decouple completely in the M . < 72 When we assume that Ω Note that the cross section of the spin-independent direct detection is always larger Note that the exclusion limits on the th ξ = 1 is satisfied. On the other hand, the current limit from the spin-dependent cross -parameter. This is because the cross section is proportional to (1 + sign( detection should include thesuppression, the suppression limit would from be relaxedof as the The dashed blue line corresponds to the future prospect of the XENON1T experiment than 0 iments, the XENON1T [ ξ section is fully covered by the spin-independent one. the unification scale. Inthe naturalness order problem, to the keep winothan the mass the at gluino the mass. unificationsparticle scale scale has The which to higher is becase, defined wino-to-gluino 3-4 ( as ratio times the larger is geometricspin-independent required cross mean for section. of the the lower top typical squark masses. In this µ can be read from eq. ( ref. [ NUGM scenario. The gray lines represent the ratio of wino to gluino mass mass is heavier thandue about to 40 the GeV. large bino-higgsinocluded The mixing, by light especially bino the the mass current well-temperedsignificantly region region LUX large has is limit for already easier as ex- the to well positive be known. excluded The spin-independent cross section is Figure 5 are same as in figures Out[379]= JHEP08(2017)072 ]. 2 9 0 TeV . 2 GeV. ∼ ] and the region . We see that the 93 0 TeV and 10 . th ξ -parameter is severer µ pb everywhere in all of is 5 1 11 0 TeV. The different value − M . 10 = 1 = 1 is assumed on all parame- × 3 . We can see that experimental ξ 5 where 0. . 3 M 3 . M at µ and 1 2 M and 0 or µ and µ > µ – 15 – -parameter below 1 TeV, that naturally explain the µ 0 in the case (B) that = 1, and ξ µ > show the allowed region for 5 and shows the allowed region for ] study the current status and the future prospect on the direct search for top 4 3 8 4% if the higgsino is heavier than 1 TeV. , . 7 0 influences to the direct detection rate and the top squark mass. Top squark becomes . The constraint from the gluino search at the LHC is also applied to these figures ∼ 3 Indirect detections for dark matter gives the limits on the higgsino mass independent of Although the higgsino mass is the most important from the naturalness point of view, The wino-higgsino mixing is reduced as gluino becomes heavy. The mixing, however, The lighter gluino mass leads the lighter wino mass and the spin-independent cross Figures Figure 3 M after the LSP isthan frozen out. Furthermore, the degree of tuning the other parameters. If the LSPexcluded saturates the our higgsino universe, lighter than the about AMS-02 experiment 500 GeV have even already in the most conservative case. This squark and gluino at the LHC. higgsino can not beOn probed the other by hand, thecan the LHC be higgsino due tested mass by to is the1 their critically TeV dark in important suitable matter order for mass observations. dark not difference The matter to higgsino physics overclose mass and the can universe not if be we larger assume than that there is no dilution effect In this paper, wenario. study the dark The matter NUGM125 physics GeV scenario in Higgs is the boson Non-Universal one massorigin Gaugino of and of Mass the the the sce- EW scale. possiblein Since refs. setups one [ top of squark the is relatively MSSM light to in our achieve scenario, the the authors in our analysisXENON-nT, would LZD, be PandaX-4T and fully so covered on. by the future5 planned observations such Conclusion as the the LHC experiment, assuming is not vanishing in our model-dependentpredicts analysis. the spin-independent We see cross that sectionthe the larger gaugino-higgsino four than mixing figures. 2 Thus the parameter region is on the neutrino floor [ at the unification scale, respectively. Otherand parameters are set to beand the it same as excludes in the figures so dark that brown region. there was Thereaches no gluino from exclusion mass direct bounds lower detections bound in for is figures the around 800 gluino GeV, mass can be much severer than those from The bino mass has to be so large thatsection top is squark enhanced mass by is thecovers larger the wino-higgsino than mixing. whole the region We higgsinoter see with mass. points. that the XENON1T experiment exclusion limit is significantly relaxed by this suppression. of the lightest SUSY particle inexcludes the the dark brown gray region. region, and The the LHC top bounds squark search are at projected the from LHC the analysis in ref. [ when the spin-independent direct detection rate is suppressed from JHEP08(2017)072 , 114 pp -parameter µ Phys. Rept. , , G.L. Kane ed., Phys. Rev. Lett. , ]. -parameter and the higgsino-like SPIRE µ IN ]. [ Supersymmetric dark matter SPIRE IN ]. ]. ][ Perspectives on supersymmetry II – 16 – SPIRE , in SPIRE IN hep-ph/9709356 IN Combined measurement of the Higgs boson mass in ][ ][ ), which permits any use, distribution and reproduction in TeV with the ATLAS and CMS experiments hep-ph/0312378 [ 8 The soft supersymmetry breaking Lagrangian: theory and applications and CC-BY 4.0 (2005) 1 hep-ph/9506380 = 7 arXiv:1503.07589 [ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons s [ A supersymmetry primer √ 407 and CMS collaborations, ], light bino and wino are severely constrained by the direct detections. The (1996) 195 95 , 94 267 ATLAS collisions at (2015) 191803 World Scientific, Singapore (1997), Phys. Rept. The universal gaugino masses are clearly disfavored by the recent dark matter obser- If the neutralino density is determined by the standard thermal process, the direct Direct detections for dark matter are powerful tool to probe the neutralino sector of the G. Jungman, M. Kamionkowski and K. Griest, S.P. Martin, D.J.H. Chung et al., [3] [4] [1] [2] References (MEXT), Japan, No. 17H05404. Open Access. Attribution License ( any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited. Acknowledgments The work of J.for K. the was Promotion supported of ScienceAid by No. for Grant-in-Aid Scientific 16J04215. for research Research The from work Fellow of of the Y. Japan Ministry O. Society of is Education, supported Science, by Grant-in- Sports, and Culture direct detection constraints push upsuch the a gluino heavy mass gluino far indicatesin above all the some other experimental special sparticles reach cases. and areand also wino Thus hopeless masses the to seems non-universal be to gaugino discovered be masses except more with interesting relatively than heavy the bino universal gaugino masses. higgsino. Thus the direct detection complement the direct searchvations. at The the LSP LHC. isthe either bino universe. or higgsino Even inrefs. this if [ case, the but higgsino the bino LSP LSP is easily realized overclose in some ways such as considered in space can be covered bywino-to-gluino the mass direct ratio detection than isLSP the fixed dominates gluino the to search relic at realize density the the of LHC, small dark when matter. the detection is sensitive towhile the the top parameter squark region and where the the gluino higgsino searches at mass the is LHC around are 1 generally TeV, sensitive to lighter and very heavy gauginos.the On LSP the relic density other is hand, determined there by is the no thermalMSSM. limit production Even of mechanism. the the bino and parameterbetween the higgsino space wino and masses if nucleon are is 3-4 in TeV, the the observational spin-independent reach. cross section Therefore, the wider parameter limit is tighter than the limits from direct detections especially for negative JHEP08(2017)072 , 2, ]. ]. − , ]. ]. g B 557 SPIRE SPIRE IN ]. IN SPIRE SPIRE ][ ]. IN ][ IN ][ (1998) 125 ][ ]. SPIRE , 18 IN SPIRE (2005) 039 Nucl. Phys. (2004) 076 IN ][ , SPIRE 09 ][ ]. 11 IN Stability of flux . ][ (2015) 089 hep-ph/0612258 JHEP SPIRE hep-ph/9508258 [ JHEP (2013) 013B02 , 08 ]. [ IN hep-th/0503216 , Nonuniversal soft scalar masses hep-ph/0508029 [ ][ [ Gaugino mass without singlets TeV scale mirage mediation and Little SUSY hierarchy in mixed 2013 Soft supersymmetry breaking in SPIRE hep-ph/9408322 JHEP (2017) 055012 [ IN , Some issues in soft SUSY breaking ][ (1997) 157 arXiv:1601.03484 hep-ph/0703044 ]. [ (2005) 113 [ (2006) 355 PTEP (2007) 095012 Phenomenological profile of top squarks from D 95 , A top-squark hunter’s guide Nonuniversal gaugino masses and muon C 74 SPIRE (1995) 402 D 75 B 718 Phenomenology of mixed modulus-anomaly IN Soft supersymmetry breaking terms from B 633 – 17 – arXiv:1612.00795 ][ The Higgs boson mass in a natural MSSM with Relaxed fine-tuning in models with non-universal LHC phenomenology of natural MSSM with [ ]. Adv. Ser. Direct. High Energy Phys. Phys. Rev. , Z. Phys. B 348 (2016) 055019 , (2007) 015002 , arXiv:1403.2337 [ SPIRE Phys. Rev. ]. Constraints on nonuniversal gaugino mass scenario using the IN Out of this world supersymmetry breaking Phys. Lett. Nucl. Phys. , ]. ]. D 93 D 76 , (2017) 499 , ]. ]. ]. ][ SPIRE Phys. Lett. SPIRE SPIRE hep-ph/9810442 , IN C 77 SPIRE SPIRE SPIRE [ IN IN [ ][ IN IN IN ][ (2014) 035008 ][ ][ ][ Phys. Rev. Phys. Rev. , , Gluino reach and mass extraction at the LHC in radiatively-driven natural Phenomenology of natural supersymmetry with non-universal gaugino masses D 90 hep-th/9810155 (1998) 027 [ Eur. Phys. J. 12 , hep-ph/9707209 hep-ph/0504037 hep-th/0411066 arXiv:1505.03729 arXiv:1208.5328 JHEP modulus-anomaly mediation natural little SUSY hierarchy supergravity and superstring models [ (1999) 79 [ in superstring theories terms from dilaton/moduli sectors [ KKLT flux compactification mediation in fluxed string compactifications and brane models SUSY Phys. Rev. compactifications and the pattern of supersymmetry breaking arXiv:1611.08511 natural supersymmetry at the LHC [ latest LHC data Ph.D. thesis, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan (2017). gaugino masses nonuniversal gaugino masses at[ the GUT scale non-universal gaugino masses at the unification scale K. Choi, K.S. Jeong, T. Kobayashi and K.-i. Okumura, K. Choi, K.S. Jeong, T. Kobayashi and K.-i. Okumura, A. Brignole, L.E.C. Ibáñezand Muñoz, L. Randall and R. Sundrum, G.F. Giudice, M.A. Luty, H. Murayama and R. Rattazzi, T. Kobayashi, D. Suematsu, K. Yamada and Y. Yamagishi, A. Brignole, L.E.Muñozand C. Ibáñez,C. Scheich, K. Choi, A. Falkowski, H.P. Nilles and M. Olechowski, K. Choi, K.S. Jeong and K.-i. Okumura, I. Gogoladze, F. Nasir, Q. Shafi and C.S. Un, K. Choi, A. Falkowski, H.P. Nilles, M. Olechowski and S. Pokorski, H. Baer, V. Barger, N. Nagata and M. Savoy, H. Baer, V. Barger, N. Nagata and S. Michael, H. Baer et al., J. Kawamura and Y. Omura, J. Kawamura, H. Abe, J. Kawamura and H. Otsuka, H. Abe, J. Kawamura and Y. Omura, H. Abe, T. Kobayashi and Y. Omura, [8] [9] [6] [7] [5] [22] [23] [19] [20] [21] [17] [18] [15] [16] [13] [14] [10] [11] [12] JHEP08(2017)072 ]. 07 D D 76 ] 05 ] ] SPIRE JCAP IN Phys. Rev. , Phys. Rev. ]. , , ][ JHEP ]. , Phys. Rev. TeV scale Phenomenology Phys. Rev. , SPIRE , ]. (2007) 1 (2008) 101803 IN SPIRE Sparticle masses in ][ IN ]. arXiv:1201.2989 445 101 Phenomenological ][ ]. [ SPIRE arXiv:1509.05327 arXiv:1510.05692 IN ]. [ [ ][ Neutralino dark matter in SPIRE arXiv:0806.2330 SPIRE IN [ ]. LHC signature of mirage IN ][ SPIRE ][ Mirage models confront the LHC: IN Phys. Rept. , ][ (2016) 089 Four-dimensional string Deflected mirage mediation: a SPIRE (2012) 055028 Moduli stabilization and supersymmetry arXiv:1204.3561 IN Phys. Rev. Lett. [ ]. 02 (2016) 055031 ][ arXiv:0901.0052 , (2008) 102 Axionic mirage mediation ]. [ D 85 ]. 08 SPIRE arXiv:1512.05011 D 93 JHEP ]. SPIRE Natural generalized mirage mediation IN [ , IN Electroweak naturalness and deflected mirage hep-ph/0609132 (2013) 081 arXiv:1405.0779 ][ – 18 – SPIRE ]. ]. [ ][ JHEP [ IN (2009) 107 , hep-ph/0509039 01 SPIRE ][ [ Phys. Rev. GeV Higgs boson mass and naturalness in (deflected) IN 04 , SPIRE SPIRE hep-ph/0703163 ][ Phys. Rev. [ IN IN 126 Non-universal gaugino masses, the supersymmetric little , JHEP ][ ][ Dark matter prospects in deflected mirage mediation Nonthermal dark matter in mirage mediation , (2006) 017 (2014) 077 ]. (2016) 075024 JHEP ]. A solution to the supersymmetric fine-tuning problem within the (2005) 58 The , Natural supersymmetric spectrum in mirage mediation 12 07 D 93 SPIRE arXiv:1610.06205 arXiv:1204.0508 (2007) 054 SPIRE IN [ [ B 631 IN arXiv:0803.3725 JHEP JCAP ][ 04 ][ [ , , arXiv:0709.3918 [ arXiv:1001.5261 arXiv:0905.0674 Phys. Rev. JHEP [ [ , , ]. ]. ]. Phys. Lett. , (2016) 115017 (2012) 035020 (2008) 115027 SPIRE SPIRE SPIRE IN hep-th/0610327 IN IN arXiv:0804.0592 hierarchy problem and dark matter [ compactifications with D-branes, orientifolds and[ fluxes [ mediation D 94 of NMSSM in TeV[ scale mirage mediation III. Deflected mirage mediation D 86 mirage mediation in NMSSM mirage mediation breaking in deflected mirage mediation framework for generalized supersymmetry breaking [ (2009) 019 implications of deflected mirage mediation:(2010) comparison 054 with mirage mediation (2007) 123501 77 deflected mirage mediation MSSM mirage mediation mediation J.E. Younkin and S.P. Martin, R. Blumenhagen, B. Körs,D. Lüstand S. Stieberger, V. Barger, L.L. Everett and T.S. Garon, H. Baer, V. Barger, H. Serce and X. Tata, K. Hagimoto, T. Kobayashi, H. Makino, K.-i. Okumura and T. Shimomura, L.L. Everett, T. Garon, B.L. Kaufman and B.D. Nelson, M. Asano and T. Higaki, T. Kobayashi, H. Makino, K.-i. Okumura, T. Shimomura and T.H. Takahashi, Abe and J. Kawamura, L.L. Everett, I.-W. Kim, P. Ouyang and K.M. Zurek, L.L. Everett, I.-W. Kim, P. Ouyang and K.M. Zurek, M. Holmes and B.D. Nelson, B. Altunkaynak, B.D. Nelson, L.L. Everett, I.-W. Kim and Y. Rao, S. Nakamura, K.-i. Okumura and M. Yamaguchi, K. Choi, K.S. Jeong, S. Nakamura, K.-I. Okumura and M. Yamaguchi, K. Choi, K.Y. Lee, Y. Shimizu, Y.G. Kim andW.S. K.-i. Cho, Okumura, Y.G. Kim, K.Y. Lee, C.B. Park and Y.M. Shimizu, Nagai and K. Nakayama, R. Kitano and Y. Nomura, [41] [42] [39] [40] [37] [38] [34] [35] [36] [32] [33] [30] [31] [28] [29] [25] [26] [27] [24] JHEP08(2017)072 ] , , ]. ]. ]. SPIRE (2006) 178 IN Nucl. Phys. [ Nucl. Phys. , ]. SPIRE , ]. (2012) 036 SPIRE IN collisions at B 753 IN ][ 01 arXiv:1407.0017 ][ SPIRE [ , pp SPIRE IN IN ][ ][ ]. JCAP ]. ]. , (2015). (2016). (2015) 1 (2016). Nucl. Phys. ]. , SPIRE ]. SPIRE arXiv:1703.09675 SPIRE 555 IN IN , IN ][ ][ ][ SPIRE arXiv:1703.05327 arXiv:1207.5988 SPIRE [ IN [ IN ][ Dark matter production in the early arXiv:1307.5086 ][ [ The well-tempered neutralino Nonthermal dark matter in string arXiv:1502.01589 Higgsino dark matter or not: role of Phys. Rept. [ , ]. Dark matter results from 225 live days of Neutralino dark matter from heavy gravitino (2017) 119 On the spin-dependent sensitivity of XENON100 Closing the window for compressed dark sectors TeV with the ATLAS detector Cosmology and astrophysics of minimal dark Planck 2015 results. XIII. Cosmological ATLAS-CONF-2015-066 Minimal dark matter – 19 – Coupled Boltzmann calculation of mixed 06 , hep-ph/0610277 SPIRE (2012) 181301 ATLAS-CONF-2016-052 hep-ph/0502211 arXiv:0706.4071 , [ ATLAS-CONF-2016-077 [ [ Possible signals of Wino LSP at the Large Hadron , IN = 13 (2016) A13 TeV ][ (2013) 095015 s 109 TeV √ JHEP arXiv:1211.4573 arXiv:1510.05378 Prospects for Higgs- and Z-resonant neutralino dark matter , 594 [ [ Upper bounds on supersymmetric particle masses = 13 D 88 s ]. = 13 (2007) 355 (2007) 152 ]. √ s ]. √ (2016). (2005) 083510 -jets and large missing transverse momentum in b Further searches for squarks and gluinos in final states with jets and Search for bottom squark pair production with the ATLAS detectorSearch in for the supersymmetric partner of the top quark inSearch for the pair production of gluinos decaying via top or bottom SPIRE SPIRE B 644 IN B 787 SPIRE IN hep-ph/0601041 ][ Phys. Rev. Lett. Phys. Rev. IN D 72 [ (2013) 056002 (2016) 055009 ][ , , [ collaboration, E. Aprile et al., Astron. Astrophys. D 87 D 93 , Phys. Lett. collaboration, P.A.R. Ade et al., TeV with the ATLAS detector ]. , Nucl. Phys. (2006) 108 (1988) 63 Phys. Rev. , , = 13 SPIRE s arXiv:1110.2491 IN hep-ph/0512090 compactifications Phys. Rev. XENON100 XENON100 data axion/neutralino cold dark matter[ production in the early universe Universe: beyond the thermal[ WIMP paradigm Planck parameters decay matter B 741 Phys. Rev. missing transverse momentum at ATLAS-CONF-2016-078 [ jets+emiss final state at squarks in√ events with with disappearing charged tracks disappearing track searches at the LHC and future colliders proton-proton collisions at B 306 Collider M. Garny, A. Ibarra, M. Pato and S. Vogl, H. Baer, K.-Y. Choi, J.E. Kim and L. Roszkowski, R. Allahverdi, M. Cicoli, B. Dutta and K. Sinha, K. Kohri, M. Yamaguchi and J. Yokoyama, H. Baer, A. Lessa and W. Sreethawong, N. Arkani-Hamed, A. Delgado and G.F. Giudice, K. Hamaguchi and K. Ishikawa, M. Cirelli, N. Fornengo and A. Strumia, M. Cirelli, A. Strumia and M. Tamburini, ATLAS collaboration, ATLAS collaboration, ATLAS collaboration, H. Fukuda, N. Nagata, H. Otono and S. Shirai, ATLAS collaboration, J. Kawamura and Y. Omura, inM. preparation. Ibe, T. Moroi and T.T. Yanagida, R. Mahbubani, P. Schwaller and J. Zurita, R. Barbieri and G.F. Giudice, [61] [62] [59] [60] [56] [57] [58] [54] [55] [52] [53] [49] [50] [51] [47] [48] [44] [45] [46] [43] JHEP08(2017)072 ]. ] I 3 ]. SPIRE , IN ]. (1993) ]. , ][ SPIRE ]. IN Phys. Rev. , ][ days of data SPIRE D 48 SPIRE IN (2016) 161301 7 . IN (2002) 103 SPIRE ][ 3: a program for (2009) 747 98 ][ IN (2013) 021301 ]. ]. 116 arXiv:1607.07400 149 ][ [ 180 (2014) 960 111 Phys. Rev. ]. ]. SPIRE SPIRE , 185 arXiv:1612.05949 IN IN [ ][ ][ arXiv:1104.0228 SPIRE [ SPIRE MicrOMEGAs MicrOMEGAs: version 1.3 MicrOMEGAs: a program for MicrOMEGAs4.1: two dark matter Dark matter direct detection rate in IN IN ]. arXiv:1407.6129 (2016) 121303 ][ Prospects and blind spots for neutralino ][ [ Phys. Rev. Lett. Direct detection of arXiv:1608.07648 , [ (2017) 146 117 arXiv:1510.07754 Phys. Rev. Lett. SPIRE [ , (2011) 005 IN Search for annihilating dark matter in the Sun ][ Limits on spin-dependent WIMP-nucleon cross C 77 07 hep-ph/0405253 Comput. Phys. Commun. (2015) 322 [ , Comput. Phys. Commun. Dark matter results from first Physics reach of the XENON1T dark matter – 20 – arXiv:1601.03729 , Spin-dependent weakly-interacting-massive- Improved limits on scattering of weakly interacting Results from a search for dark matter in the complete [ Dark matter search results from the PICO-60 CF Improved dark matter search results from PICO-2L 192 LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) conceptual design report (2017) 021303 JHEP Comput. Phys. Commun. arXiv:1211.4873 , , arXiv:1512.07501 (2016) 052014 [ [ ]. Phys. Rev. Lett. 118 , (2006) 577 ]. Eur. Phys. J. ]. ]. ]. ]. , D 93 ]. SPIRE 174 arXiv:1611.06553 (2016) 061101 Neutralino-nucleon scattering revisited IN [ SPIRE (2013) 100 ][ (2016) 027 SPIRE SPIRE SPIRE SPIRE IN SPIRE IN IN IN IN 05 [ ][ IN 04 D 93 ][ ][ ][ ][ Phys. Rev. Phys. Rev. Lett. , , collaboration, E. Aprile et al., JHEP collaboration, A. Tan et al., collaboration, C. Fu et al., JCAP , Comput. Phys. Commun. , , collaboration, M.G. Aartsen et al., (2017) 071301 collaboration, E. Aprile et al., ]. Phys. Rev. collaboration, C. Amole et al., collaboration, C. Amole et al., , collaboration, D.S. Akerib et al., collaboration, D.S. Akerib et al., hep-ph/9307208 118 [ collaboration, D.S. Akerib et al., SPIRE arXiv:0803.2360 hep-ph/0112278 arXiv:1305.0237 IN arXiv:1301.6620 arXiv:1512.03506 3483 electroweak-interacting dark matter Comput. Phys. Commun. IceCube with 3 years of IceCube data candidates a generic model with[ MicrOMEGAs 2.2 calculating the relic density[ in the MSSM dark matter calculating dark matter observables [ Run 2 XENON experiment LZ arXiv:1509.02910 particle–nucleon cross section limits fromLett. first data of PandaX-II experiment PICO bubble chamber PICO LUX exposure PandaX-II from the PandaX-II experiment [ PandaX-II sections from 225 live[ days of XENON100 data LUX massive particles from reanalysis of[ 2013 LUX data LUX XENON100 J. Hisano, K. Ishiwata, N. Nagata and T. Takesako, G. Bélanger,F. Boudjema, A. Pukhov and A. Semenov, G. Bélanger,F. Boudjema, A. Pukhov and A. Semenov, M. Drees and M. Nojiri, G. Bélanger,F. Boudjema, A. Pukhov and A. Semenov, G. Bélanger,F. Boudjema, A. Pukhov and A. Semenov, C. Cheung, L.J. Hall, D. Pinner and J.T. Ruderman, G. Bélanger,F. Boudjema, A. Pukhov and A. Semenov, [79] [80] [76] [77] [78] [74] [75] [72] [73] [70] [71] [68] [69] [66] [67] [64] [65] [63] JHEP08(2017)072 . , ]. ]. ]. ]. ] (2007) SPIRE (2014) ]. SPIRE IN IN SPIRE (1998) 56 ][ SPIRE IN B 38 ][ Comput. IN (2016) 091103 , D 89 ][ SPIRE ][ 108 ]. IN 117 ][ ]. (2005) 46 SPIRE IN Phys. Rev. arXiv:1610.03840 ]. 168 ][ SPIRE , [ IN arXiv:1205.2372 [ [ arXiv:1308.3515 Acta Phys. Polon. ]. [ Radiative natural SUSY with a SPIRE Light Higgsino dark matter from arXiv:1207.3343 , [ IN arXiv:1508.06128 Phys. Rev. Lett. [ , ][ arXiv:1610.03071 SPIRE [ IN (2017) 191101 Comput. Phys. Commun. ][ Searching for dark matter annihilation Possible dark matter annihilation signal in (2013) 029 , Implication of neutrino backgrounds on the (2012) 055015 SDECAY: a Fortran code for the decays of the arXiv:1607.00004 118 10 Decays of supersymmetric particles: the hep-ex/0107084 [ (2012) 161802 , Novel dark matter constraints from antiprotons in D 86 GeV Higgs boson in the MSSM from focus point HDECAY: a program for Higgs boson decays in the – 21 – Comput. Phys. Commun. 109 JCAP (2017) 191102 , Antiproton flux, antiproton-to-proton flux ratio, and , 125 arXiv:1503.02641 ]. PoS(ICRC2015)1203 [ Prospects for Indirect Dark Matter Searches with the (2016) 038 , 118 hep-ph/0104145 [ ]. 11 Phys. Rev. SPIRE Phys. Rev. Lett. , IN , ]. ]. Constraints on WIMP annihilation for contracted dark matterin A natural ][ SPIRE JHEP IN , Phys. Rev. Lett. ][ (2015) 231301 (2002) 305 , SPIRE SPIRE IN IN ][ ][ Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 143 , SOFTSUSY: a program for calculating supersymmetric spectra collaboration, M. Ackermann et al., MSSM SUSY searches at LEP-2 ]. arXiv:1307.5458 [ collaboration, J. Carr et al., hep-ph/0609292 GeV Higgs boson SPIRE hep-ph/0311167 hep-ph/9704448 IN supersymmetry with A-terms 125 reach of next generation dark023524 matter direct detection experiments supersymmetric particles in the[ MSSM standard model and its[ supersymmetric extension Phys. Commun. program SUSY-HIT (SUspect-SdecaY-HDECAY-InTerface) 635 [ the inner Galaxy with theCTA Fermi-LAT Cherenkov Telescope Array (CTA) non-thermal cosmology light of AMS-02 the AMS-02 antiproton data [ from Milky Way dwarfPhys. spheroidal Rev. galaxies Lett. with six years of Fermi Large Area Telescopeproperties data of elementary particle fluxesmagnetic in spectrometer on primary the cosmic international rays space measured station with the alpha Fermi-LAT H. Baer, V. Barger, P. Huang, A. Mustafayev and X. Tata, K. Jakobs, J. Billard, L. Strigari and E. Figueroa-Feliciano, J.L. Feng and D. Sanford, M. Muhlleitner, A. Djouadi and Y. Mambrini, A. Djouadi, J. Kalinowski and M. Spira, B.C. Allanach, A. Djouadi, M.M. Muhlleitner and M. Spira, L. Aparicio, M. Cicoli, B. Dutta, F. Muia and F. Quevedo, M.-Y. Cui, Q. Yuan, Y.-L.S. Tsai and Y.-Z. Fan, G.A. et Gómez-Vargas al., AMS collaboration, M. Aguilar et al., A. Cuoco, M. Krämerand M. Korsmeier, [95] [92] [93] [94] [90] [91] [88] [89] [86] [87] [84] [85] [82] [83] [81]