Arxiv:2101.00607V1 [Hep-Ph] 3 Jan 2021

Muon g-2 Anomaly in the Mirror Twin Higgs Models Guo-Li Liu1∗, Ping Zhou2,3,4† 1School of Physics and Microelectronics, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, Henan, China 2 National Space Science Center, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China 3University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100140, China 4Beijing Key Lab of Space Environment Exploration, Beijing 100140, China Abstract We examine the muon g 2 anomaly of the mirror twin Higgs models with the joint constraints − of the Higgs global fit data, the precision electroweak data, the leptonic flavor changing decay µ eγ decays, and the mass requirement of the heavy gauge bosons. It is concluded that the → muon g-2 anomaly is very sensitive to two parameters: 0.03 yνl 0.09 and 0.4 yt 0.8, while ≤ ≤ ≤ ≤ other parameters are almost irrelevant. PACS numbers: 12.60.-i, 12.60.Fr arXiv:2101.00607v1 [hep-ph] 3 Jan 2021 ∗ Email address: [email protected] † Email address: [email protected] 1 I. INTRODUCTION Since the announcement was made by the E821 experiment in 2001 [1], the muon anomalous magnetic moment g 2 has been a long-standing puzzle. As a very precisely measured − observable, it is expected to shed light on ”new physics”. The current world-averaged result[2] of the precision measurement of a =(g 2)/2, which has been performed by the µ − E821 experiment at Brookhaven National Laboratory [3], is given by aexp = 116592091( 54)( 33) 10−11, (1) µ ± ± × and the discrepancy with the standard model (SM) prediction [4] is 3.7σ, ∆a = aexp aSM = (281 76) 10−11. (2) µ µ − µ ± × It may hint the existing of the new physics beyond the SM. The difference between the experimental data and the SM prediction determines there is room for the possible new physics to live in. Various new physics scenarios try to explain the muon g 2 excess, for recent reviews, see − e.g. Refs. [5–9]. Among these new physics models, the left-right twin Higgs model may also accommodate the possibilities for the muon g 2 anomaly[10], in which the extra scalars − can give positive contributions to muon g 2 via the two-loop Barr-Zee diagrams. − The so called mirror twin Higgs (MTH) models can be realized by extending the SM with the mirror symmetry[11], and in these models, via the extending group, we have the flavor changing couplings of the leptons and the quarks through the charged extra gauge bosons and the scalars[12–14], which will contribute to the two-loop Barr-Zee diagrams of the muon anomaly magnetic moment. From Ref.[14], we can see that the one-loop contributions to the muon anomalous mag- −11 netic moment are too small, about 10 for mν = 10 TeV, and it is too small to remedy the discrepancy between the experiments and the theoretical calculation in Eq.(2). That is to say, it is far beyond the scope of the detectable level, as long as the heavy neutrino mass is not too far great. So we will in the following turn to the two-loop level contribution. As we know, in some case, since the quarks are much heavier than the leptons, the phase space depression may be surpassed by the mass enhancement, so the two-loop Barr-Zee diagrams may contribute much more largely than that from the one-loop ones, if the Higgs bosons are not too light[15, 16]. 2 In this work we will examine the parameter space of MTH by considering the joint ts from the theory, the precision electroweak data, the 125 GeV Higgs signal data, the muon g 2 anomaly, the lepton rare decay of µ eγ, as well as the direct search limits from the − → LHC. This work is organized as follows. In Sec. II we recapitulate the effective couplings of the MTH model. In Sec. III the two-loop muon g 2 anomaly and other relevant constraints − are discussed. In Sec. IV, we will use the direct search limits from the LHC, especially the Higgs global fit to constrain the model parameters. Finally, Sec. VI gives the conclusion. II. THE MTH MODELS AND THE RELEVANT COUPLINGS A. The models with a mirror symmetry–mirror twin Higgs models The hierarchy problem [17–19], which is induced by the disparity between the electroweak scale and the Planck scale, is one of the most outstanding problems in particle physics (see, e.g., [20]). Both supersymmetry [21] and the compositeness of the Higgs[22], even the strong breaking models[23], where the electroweak scale originates from a supersymmetry breaking scale or a composite scale, or even abandoning the idea of the Higgs as the origin of the electroweak symmetry breaking, have attempted to address the issue. Without the fine- tuning parameters, however, these classes of solutions in the new physics models mentioned above generically contain the top quark partners which have SM colored charge with the mass at the electroweak scale. Such particles have very rich phenomenological possibilities which are easily found at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), while, so far, there is not any signal of this kind of particles, which constrains the their masses severely: typically larger than 1 TeV [24, 25]. To satisfy the bounds of this kind, the parameters in these theories need to be fine-tuned to fix the electroweak scale. This fine-tuning is called the little hierarchy problem. One solution to the little hierarchy problem is to assume that the Higgs mass is protected by a discrete symmetry, so the new particles associated with this symmetry do not have the SM color charge. This situation makes the new particle states much more difficult to be produced and detected at the large hadron colliders. To stabilize the Higgs mass up to scales of order 5 10 TeV, a lot of theories of this − 3 kind [11, 26–34], have been proposed. The MTH [11] model is one of the best known examples, in which the symmetry mechanism avoids the little hierarchy via introducing a Z2 symmetry that copies the SM particles and introduces an approximate global symmetry of the Higgs potential. After the twin Higgs obtains a vacuum expectation value f, the SM Higgs has become into a pseudo-Nambu-Goldstone (pNG) boson, preventing the Higgs mass from quantum corrections up to the scale Λ 4πf because of the mirror symmetry TH ∼ between the top and the top partner. Now, the top quark partner is not SM colored, but twin colored, so does not have rich phenomenologies and is not easily produced and probed at the LHC, thereby the little hierarchy problem settled down. Since it has been discussed in the left-right twin Higgs models[10], the reason that we reconsider the g 2 in this model is as follow. After realizing the natural electroweak − breaking, the pNG mass is at most logarithmically divergent. Thus corrections to precision electroweak observables can be naturally small, which provides a resolution to the LEP paradox. The MTH models are quite appealing, since, firstly, the discrete mirror symmetry in them corresponds the extended fields with the SM ones. Secondly, the extended fields are uncharged under the SM gauge groups, that is to say, they will appear as singlets, and ”show” in upcoming experiments purely as missing energy, escaping from the current constraints of the LHC to the new particles. The left-right symmetric models [35] with lighter gauge bosons and the vector-like fermions, however, lead to rich detectable phenomenology for upcoming experiments, and are in challenge with nowadays stringent experimental constraints. B. The general form of the flavor changing couplings among leptons and quarks in the MTH models [12, 13] Since the minimal coset U(4)/U(3) does not contain a residual custodial symmetry, and in the non-linear case the twin mechanism is not realized in the gauge sector within this global group, while SO(8)/SO(7) prevents a large custodial breaking in composite models of the twin mechanism, the global symmetry breaking pattern of the simplest MTH model can be SO(8)/SO(7) case[12, 13, 36, 37]. The 7 pNGBs after the breaking are encoded in the field U obtained by the exponentiation of the fluctuations associated with the broken generators, Π U = exp i . (3) f 4 Defining the pNGB matrix Π containing the 7 goldstones as Π= √2πaˆT aˆ, aˆ =1,..., 7, (4) where T aˆ are the broken generators, defined as i T aˆ = taˆ8, aˆ =1,..., 7. (5) ij −√2 ij here tab = δaδb δaδb, and πaˆ are the goldstone fields in the 7 of SO(7). ij i j − j i Giving Σ U 8, i ≡ i T 2 Σ= U(π)Σ0 = π1 π2 π3 π4 π5 π6 π7 σ , σ = 1 πaˆ , (6) q − But, actually, these are not the only global symmetries, and to realize the twin Higgs mechanism we have to include a mirror copy of QCD, which means having an unbroken SU(3) SU(3)′ Z . So the global symmetry is actually c × c × 2 G SU(3) SU(3)′ Z SO(8) = c × c × 2 × . (7) H SU(3) SU(3)′ Z SO(7) c × c × 2 × We parameterize the Higgs and its twin via the decomposition 8 = (2, 1, 2)+(1, 2, 2) under SU(2) SU(2)e SU(2) b as L × L × R f π2 + iπ1 f π6 + iπ5 (2, 1, 2): H = , (1, 2, 2): H = , (8) √ √ 2 h iπ3 2 σ iπ7 − e − where π + iπ can identified as the charged scalar, andω ˜± f(π iπ )/√2 andω ˜ fπ 2 1 ≡ 6 ± 5 0 ≡ 7 are eaten by the gauge bosons.

Load more