1 / 23

Review of MSSM Higgs boson searches at LEP

Review of MSSM Higgs boson searches at LEP. MSSM with CP conservation MSSM with CP violation Conclusions. 3 neutral Higgs bosons: h, H, A CP-eigenstates at tree level, 2 parameters : tan , m A. CP-conserving MSSM scenarios. hZ: low tan  large tan & m A

nell
Télécharger la présentation

Review of MSSM Higgs boson searches at LEP

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Review of MSSM Higgs boson searches at LEP MSSM with CP conservation MSSM with CP violation Conclusions 3 July 2006

  2. 3 neutral Higgs bosons: h, H, A CP-eigenstates at tree level, 2 parameters : tan, mA CP-conserving MSSM scenarios hZ: low tan large tan & mA HZ: large tan & low mA hA: interm./large tan & low mA Higgsdecays: invisible, , ee, , , KK, cc, , bb, AA, hadrons 3 July 2006

  3. The MSSM underlying parameters at higher order mtopand the SUSY breaking parameters, assumed to be unified at some scale : SU(2), U(1) gaugino mass terms unified at MGUT  M2 at MEW sfermion mass terms : unified at MEW  Msusyat MEW squark trilinear couplings : unified at MEW  A at MEW  mixing parameter in the stop sector :  X = A -  cot gluino mass and Higgs mixing parameter  Mğand Total: 8 parameters mtop is measured ; M2, Msusy, Mğ,  et X are chosen to define a “scenario”; tan and mA are free to vary (tan[0.4, 50] and mA[0.02, 1000] GeV). NB: radiative corrections in the Feynman-diagrammatic approach (the most complete at two-loop order) 3 July 2006

  4. mhmax: sparticules at high mass (M2, Msusy, Mğ large),  et X such that mh range is maximal (mtop=174.3 GeV: mh < 132.9 GeV). LHC variants: 1)   -, 2)   - & X  -X • No mixing: counterpart of mhmax with X=0;mh range reduced (mtop=174.3 GeV: mh < 115.5 GeV). LHC variant: 1)   -, Msusy  2 Msusy • Large : at least one Higgs (h, A or H) kinematically accessible (mtop=174.3 GeV: mh < 108.0 GeV) but Br(bb, ) vanish at large tan. • Gluophobicscenario:ggh (strongly) suppressed  tan, mA • Small eff: Brh(bb, ) suppressedat large tan, moderate mA The scenarios : 3 LEP / 5 LHC scenarios 3 July 2006

  5. mtop 95%CL 99.7%CL The mhmax scenario(s) mtop=174.3 GeV,95% CL limits: mh > 92.8 GeV, mA > 93.4 GeV insensitive to mtop tan exclusion : 0.7 – 2.0 sensitive to mtop LHC variants:~identical mass limits, looser tan constraints 3 July 2006

  6. unexcluded holes: hAA, mA<3GeV, mh~80GeV lack of searches at LEP2 The no mixing scenario(s) mtop=174.3 GeV,95% CL limits: mh, mA > 93.6 GeV (tan>0.7)tan exclusion : 0.4 – 10.2 (mA>3GeV) very sensitive to mtop: scenario fully excluded at mtop=169.3 GeV (H within reach) LHC variant: tighter mass and tan limits 3 July 2006

  7. The large  scenario • excluded at 95% CL, not at 99.7% CL: • hZ only remaining process • BR(hbb) suppressed • mh~108GeV close to the sensitivity of the flavour-blind searches This strip grows with increasing mtop theoretically forbidden mtop=174.3 GeV or smaller: scenario fully excluded at 95%CL thanks to: H searches and flavour-blind analyses 3 July 2006

  8. The gluophobic and small  scenarios mtop=174.3 GeV , 95% CL limits: mh > 90.5 GeV, mA > 96.3 GeV mh > 87.3 GeV, mA > 98.8 GeV tan exclusion : 0.4 – 5.4 tan exclusion : 0.4 – 4.2 moderately sensitive to mtop NB: h, A not degenerate in mass at large tan 3 July 2006

  9. CP-conserving MSSM scenarios, conclusions: • 8 representative scenarios scanned with ADLO results on neutral Higgs boson searches at LEP1 & LEP2 ; • improved sensivitivity thanks to H searches and flavour-blind analyses (esp. for low mtop) • mass limits are set atlarge tan and ~ O(90) GeV in mh,mA • tan limits are set by the LEP mhmax scenario : tan exclusion (95%CL) : 0.7 – 2.0 for mtop=174.3 GeV 3 July 2006

  10. 3 neutral Higgs bosons: H1,H2,H3mixtures ofCP-eigenstates at tree level, 2 parameters : tan, mH CP-violating MSSM scenarios H1H2: interm./large tan & low mH1 H1Z: low tan, large tan & mH1 H2Z: low/interm. tan & low mH1 wrt CPC case: more processes a priori, but some ZZHi couplings can be suppressed similar decays, but Hj HiHi is enhanced 3 July 2006

  11. The MSSM underlying parameters • The usual eight MSSM underlying parameters: • at tree level: tan, mH± • through radiative corrections : mtop and the SUSY breaking parameters: M2, Msusy, Mğ,  andAt,b • Additional CPV parameters : • two CPV phases : arg(At,b) and arg(Mğ) • Dominant CPV effects scale as: mtop4 Im(At,b)/(v12+v22)322Msusy2  low Msusy, large  and arg(At,b)~90o  the CPX scenario: Msusy=500GeV, =4Msusy=2TeV, |At,b|=Mğ=2Msusy=1TeV,M2=200GeV andarg(At,b)=arg(Mğ)=90o + 10 variants to study the dependence with arg(At,b),  and Msusy. NB: radiative corrections in the renormalization group and Feynman-diagrammaticapproaches(presently at the same stage of developpement) 3 July 2006

  12. 60° CPC ! 0° 90° slight excess of data lack of sensitivity Dependence with the CP-violating phases Phases ~90°:H1Z suppressed large tan: H1H2 interm.tan: H2Z, esp. H2 H1H1 3 July 2006

  13. 2TeV 1TeV 4TeV Dependence with  At intermediate tan: =1TeV: two processes left =2TeV: one process left =4TeV: no process left 3 July 2006

  14. 174.3GeV 169.2GeV 179.4GeV Dependence with mtop At intermediate tan: H1Z, H2Z and H1H2 suppression gets stronger with increasing mtop 3 July 2006

  15. CP-violating MSSM scenarios, conclusions: • 11 representative scenarios scanned with ADLO results on neutral Higgs boson searches at LEP1 & LEP2 ; • Significant effects require arg(At,b)=90°,135°, mtop174GeV, and |At,b|/ Msusy2 8 ; • CPV = redundancy lost reduced sensitivity of LEP at intermediate tan down to the lowest massesNo absolute mass limits! • tan limits are set by the CPX scenario : tan > 2.9 (95% CL) for mtop=174.3 GeV • Results are qualitatively the same in the renormalization group and Feynman-diagrammatic approaches. 3 July 2006

  16. Conclusions From the neutral Higgs boson searches at LEP applied to a set of representative MSSM scenarios : • If CP is conserved in the Higgs sector: • absolute mass limits around 90 GeV in mh,mA; • low tan region not favoured (0.7 – 2.0 excluded in theLEP mhmax scenariofor mtop=174.3 GeV). • If CP is not conserved in the Higgs sector: • No absolute mass limits (at intermediate tan) ! • low tan region still not favoured (tan<2.9 excluded in theCPX scenariofor mtop=174.3 GeV); • Calculations of radiative corrections not yet as complete as in the CP-conserving case. 3 July 2006

  17. Higgsstrahlung Pair-production (+ WW, ZZ fusion) Yukawa production Introduction Higgs boson searches at LEP: • Direct searches : • Only 3 production processes • Almost all decays can be exploited • model-independentconstraints on  x Br • model scans : SM, MSSM, 2HDM • Indirect constraints through EW precision measurements In this talk: SM + MSSM neutral Higgs boson direct searches published in April 2006 3 July 2006

  18. Current summary about the SM Higgs boson: EW precise measurements: MH ≤ 175 GeV (95% CL) Direct searches : MH ≥ 114.4 GeV (95% CL) MH [115,118] GeV ? (status as of spring 2006) 3 July 2006

  19. The Standard Model after LEP LEP results: New physics scale 3 July 2006

  20. 95% CL upper bounds on  x Br dominant decays : direct decays in bb or  H1Z H2H1 3 July 2006

  21. 95% CL upper bounds on  x Br non dominant decays : the example of the H2H1H1 cascade H2Z H2H1 3 July 2006

  22. The gluophobic and small  scenarios gluo. scen. small   Br(MSSM)/ Br(SM) predictions NB: tthttbb and WW fusion channels enhanced NB: h channel unsuppressed 3 July 2006

  23. weaker exclusion weaker exclusion CPH FeynHiggs CPH vs FeynHiggs more one-loop and two-loop order corrections in FeynHiggs phase dependence more complete in CPH than in FeynHiggs 3 July 2006

More Related