DISCRETE 2014 London, 4.12. 2014
Maria Krawczyk U. of Warsaw
Plan Higgs: LHC data SM-like scenarios at LHC Z2 symmetric 2HDM Higgs-portal to dark matter Inert Doublet Model (IDM) LHCDM ILC
Discoveries of elementary particles - ‚flood' in years 1950-60
Foton γ
Neutrino ν
hadrons
1964 !! Quark Model CP violation mass generation … Standard Model
Fundamental particles in SM
Masses: 0 - 175 GeV
spin 1/2 ħ
spin 0
1 ħ
Year 1964 LHC 4.07.2012 Higgs-like particle with mass125 -126 GeV observed by ATLAS+CMS (+Tevatron) 26.06.1964 27.07.1964
12.10.1964
Yoichiro Nambu NOBEL 2008 Za wprowadzenie spontanicznego łamania
symetrii do fizyki cząstek elementarnych
Nambu, Nobel 2008 For introducing SSB to elementary particle physics
Brout-Englert-Higgs mechanism Spontaneous breaking of EW symmetry SU(2) x U(1) → U(1) QED
Standard Model Doublet of SU(2): Φ = ϕ+ v+h+iζ V = ½λ(Φ†Φ)²- ½m²(Φ†Φ), v2= m² /λ (vev)
Masses for W+/−, Z (tree ρ =1), no mass for the photon generation of mass of gauge boson: MW = g v Fermion masses via Yukawa int. (add. parameters) Higgs particle HSM - spin 0, neutral, CP even h couples prop. to masses to W/Z and fermions only unknown Higgs mass ↔ selfinteraction
Higgs particle-the missing particle of SM The discovered ~125 GeV scalar has properties very close to predicted by the SM. But how close? Loop couplings ggh, γγh, γZh sensitive to new physics (new, even very heavy particles nondecoupling effects) Beyond SM (BSM) - only SM-like scenarios: SM-like h and no other new particle seen
deRoeck, Corfu 2014, 13.09.2014
Production and decay of Higgs particle at LHC
main decays decay to γγ loop t,b,W…
deRoeck, 13.09.2014
deRoeck, 13.09.2014
SM-like Higgs
In addition: total width 4-5 x SM (in SM - 4.2 MeV) decay to invisible particles
BR (inv) < 0.37
old
Morsolli, Corfu 2014, Sept. 2014
Relic density - WMAP, Planck WMAP
PLANCK
3 sigma:
Higgs portal models SM-like h
DM DATA?
DM DM
N N
direct exp.
and …LUX
10-45 cm2
Brout-Englert-Higgs mechanism Spontaneous breaking of EW symmetry SU(2) x U(1) → ?
Two Higgs Doublet Models Two doublets of SU(2) (Y=1; ρ =1) - Φ₁ , Φ₂ Masses for W+/−, Z ; mass for photon possible Fermion masses via Yukawa interaction – various models: Model I, II, III, IV,X,Y,...
5 scalars: H+ and H- and neutrals: - CP conservation: CP-even h, H & CP-odd A - CP violation: h1,h2,h3 with undefinite CP parity* Sum rules hold (for relative couplings to SM χ)
T.D. Lee 1973
2HDM's
Potential Yukawa
Vacuum
SYMMETRIES!!!
2HDM Lagrangian L= LSM+LHiggs+LY Potential (14 parameters)
V = ½λ1(Φ₁†Φ₁)²+½λ₂(Φ₂†Φ₂)²
+λ₃(Φ₁†Φ₁)(Φ₂†Φ₂)+λ₄(Φ₁†Φ₂)(Φ₂†Φ₁)+½[λ₅(Φ₁†Φ₂)²+h.c]
+ [(λ₆(Φ₁† Φ₁)+λ₇(Φ₂†Φ₂))(Φ₁†Φ₂)+h.c]
- ½m²₁₁(Φ₁†Φ₁)- ½m²₂₂(Φ†Φ₂)- ½[m²₁₂(Φ₁†Φ₂)+h.c.]
Reparametrization freedom: 11-2=9 parameters Ginzburg, MK’;Gunion,Haber’04) Z₂ symmetry transf.: Φ₁→Φ₁ Φ₂→ - Φ₂ (or vice versa) Hard Z₂ symmetry violation: λ₆, λ₇ terms Branco,Rebelo’85 Soft Z₂ symmetry violation: m²₁₂ term (Re m²₁₂=µ²) Explicit Z₂ symmetry in V: λ₆, λ₇, m²₁₂=0 (NO CP violation)
LHiggs=T-V
Various models of Yukawa inter. typically with some Z2 type symmetry to avoid FCNC Glashow-Weinberg,Paschos77
Model I - only one doublet interacts with fermions Model II – one doublet with down-type fermions d , l other with up-type fermions u Model III - both doublets interact with fermions Model IV (X) - leptons interacts with one doublet, quarks with the other Top 2HDM – top only with one doublet Fermiophobic 2HDM – no coupling of fermions to the lightest Higgs – ruled out by LHC and others
Inert Doublet Model a model with exact Z2 symmetry Higgs and Dark Matter in agreement with data
LHC: strong constraints on DM from Higgs data
Strong enough first-order phase transition needed for baryogenesis (G. Gil Msc'2011, G.Gil, P.Chankowski, MK PL.B 2012
Various type of evolution from EWs to Inert phase possible in one, two or three steps, with 1st or 2nd order phase transitions (T2 evolution, Ginzburg et al..PRD 2010)
Types of extrema (vacuua) Ma78,Velhinho,Santos,Barroso.94
The most general extremum state vS, vD, u - real vS, u ≥ 0
v2 =vS2 +vD
2 +u2
----------------- u=0 --------------------------------------
EWs EWs vD =vS = 0 Inert I1 vD = 0 Inert-like I2 vS = 0 Mixed (Normal, MSSM like) M vD ,vS ≠0 ---------------- u≠0 --------------------------------------- Charge Breaking CB vD =0
for real V with Z2 symmetry Φ₁→Φ₁, Φ₂→ - Φ₂ notation: Φ1→ΦS & Φ2→ ΦD (D symmetry)
D-symmetric potential – vacua Stable vacuum (positivity)
Neutral vacua Mixed M [vS and vD ≠ 0] Inert I1 (I2) [vS or vD ≠ 0] Charged breaking vacuum CB
Y = MH+2 2/v2| Inert
λ4 ± λ5 >- X, X=√λ1λ2+λ3>0
Phase diagrams for D-sym. V
Inert (I1) vacuum for Mh=125 GeV fixed 1
coexistence of I1 and I2 minima
Inert phase for TODAY
Inert Doublet Model Exact Z2 (D) symmetry under transf. ΦS → ΦS ΦD→- ΦD in L (V and Yukawa interaction = Model I only ΦS) and in the vacuum:
Ma,…'78 Barbieri..'06
6 parameters , eg 4 masses + 2 couplings
Higgs boson h (SM-like)
ϕ+
V+h+i ζ ΦS =
(no Higgses!) 4 scalars H+,H-,H, Α no interaction with fermions
Η+
H+i A ΦD =
ΦS as in SM (BEH)
ΦD – no vev
D symmetry ΦS → ΦS ΦD→- ΦD exact → D parity only ΦD has odd D-parity the lightest scalar stable - DM candidate (H) (ΦD dark doublet with dark scalars) IDM: An Archetype for Dark Matter, Lopez Honorez,..Tytgat..07 LHC phenomenology (Barbieri., Ma.. 2006,…)
√2
Inert Doublet Model
Testing Inert Doublet Model Detailed study of - the SM-like h M2
h= m112 = λ1 v2
Study of dark scalars D - masses depend on - the dark scalars D interact always in pairs!
D couple to V = W/Z (eg. AZH, H⁻ W⁺H), not DVV! Quartic selfcouplings D4 proportional to λ2
hopeless to be measured at colliders! Couplings with Higgs: hHH ~ λ345 h H+H- ~ λ3
λ345
Ma'2006,.Barbieri 2006, Dolle,Su, Gorczyca(Świeżewska), MSc T2011, 1112.4356, ...5086, ..1305. Posch 2011, Arhrib..2012, Chang, Stal ..2013
Constraints vacuum stability, perturbative unitarity eg. (full scattering matrix (25x25) for scalars) < 8.38 Kanemura et al. 93; 2001 Akeroyd,Arhrib,Naimi,2000…, Swaczyna 2013
*condition for Inert vacuum* < 9 x104GeV2 Data: EWPT (S and T) LEP, LHC (Higgs), WMAP data New analyses 2013, 2014
LEP exclusion
IDM DM=H
mass of H+ > 70 GeV (model independent) masses H vs A
Lundstrom...
hep-ph/0810.3924
IDM – scan (B. Świeżewska 2012)
H = dark matter 0 > λ45=λ4 + λ5
narrow (wide) range condition for Inert
Inert Doublet Model with Mh=125 GeV
m222 =0
m222= - 106
GeV2
valid up to |m222|= 104GeV2
heavy H/H+
narrow width approx.
Swiezewska
signal strength μ
λ3
Rγγ as a function of mass H and H + Invisible decays makes enhancement impossible
Light H+ with proper sign of hH+H- coupling (λ3 <0) makes enhancement possible
narrow m222 range
Rγγ(2sigma)
Very heavy DM
Rγγ(2sigma)
Invisible decay in IDM constraining coupling hHH
Relic density constraints on masses and couplings of DM
Coannihilation possible for small (AH) splitting
WMAP window for light H (DM)
Relict density for DM with mass 62,64,…,80 GeV
D. Sokołowska, 2013
HA coannihilation ∆ [50,8]
above 76 GeV asymmetry due to annihilation to gauge bosons
70 GeV
Relict DM density
LHC data
hep-ph/ 1305.6266 JHEP 2013
Rγγ > 1 possible DM mass only above 62.5 GeV allowed
DM mass below 62.5 GeV allowed only if Rγγ < 1
Low mass H – excluded by LHC!
Sokołowska/Świeżewska
Rγγ >0.7
New (Planck)
Direct detection – comparison with LHC, Xenon 100 and LUX
… stronger than the dedicated DM experiments
IDM
Heavy DM (Rγγ and Planck)
IDM- for f_N = 0.326
DM production at LHC LHC at 8 TeV P. Swaczyna MSc, May 2013
SM background WW,ZZ, tt Pythia, 2HDMC
above 2
M_H+M_A< 145 GeV M_A>100 GeV
work in progress
Evolution of the Universe in 2HDM– through different vacua in the past
We consider 2HDM with an explicit D symmetry assuming that today the Inert Doublet Model describes reality. In the simplest approximation only mass terms in V vary with temperature like T2, while 𝜆’s are fixed
Various evolution from EWs to Inert phase possible in one, two or three steps, with 1st or 2nd order phase transitions...
Ginzburg, Ivanov, Kanishev 2009 Ginzburg, Kanishev,MK, Sokołowska PRD 2010, Sokołowska 2011
Evolution of vacua on phase diagram (μ1,μ2) μi=mii
2/√λi
stability condition T2 corrections → rays from EWs phase to Inert phase one, two or three stages of Universe (II order phase transitions, one I order)
three regions of R
Nonrestoration of EW symmetry: R <0
c1 or c2 < 0
Only one ray with EW restoration in the past (in one step and Rγγ >1!)
Charged breaking phase
Conclusions Intert Doublet Model in agreement with data Inert phase today - what was in the Past ? Various evolution scenarios : - Ch breaking in the past?-excluded if DM neutral - DM matter may appear later - Inert phase today: Rγγ >1 M_DM>62.5 GeV, and EW symmetry breaking in one step (if Rγγ >1.2 M_H+< 160 GeV) - Strong 1st order PT H+ and A: mass 275-380 GeV
Are we approaching a new era?
Spring 2015 at LHC… Higgs data Dark Matter Dedicated DM analysis at LHC What about ILC ?
International Linear Collider ILC
2007
ILC - options
K. Monig
PLC
9 good reasons to build PLC
1. Precision measurements of the light Higgs boson production
(->bb) and distinguishing SM-like scenarios 2. Testing Higgs selfinteraction 3. Higher mass reach and covering LHC wedge 4. Establishing CP property of Higgs bosons 5. Search for SUSY particles 6. Complementarity to ILC and LHC 7. Photon structure and QCD tests 8. Anomalous W and t couplings 9. New physics in γ γ γ γ
SM Higgs-resonance decaying in bb extracting Γγ γ Studies (simulations) for Mh=120 GeV:
Ohgaki, Takahashi, Watanabe 1997 Jikia, Soldner-Rembold 1999 Asner, Gronberg, Gunion 2001 Niezurawski, Zarnecki, MK 2002 Moenig, Rosca 2003 Cross section x Br ~ 2 % (+Br to bb from e+e- ) → 3 % accuracy for Γγγ
Γγ γ sensitive to SUSY particles, charged Higgs bosons, charged new particles (new generations..).
Distinguishing SM-like scenarios possible Note that hγγ vertex has a phase !!
h
γ
γ
125 GeV H at PLC ? Г (h → γ γ) ~ 3 %
Niezurawski et al.,
Monig, Rosca
MSSM Higgs searches/overall discovery potential (300 fb-1) at LHC
• in some parts >1 Higgs bosons observable • but large area in which only one Higgs boson h (SM-like) observable
LHC wedge
heavy A and H degenerate
Basic question: Could we distinguish SM and MSSM Higgs sector - e.g via rate measurements?
Covering the LHC wedge at PLC
Spira et al Niezurawski et al.,- simulation
Using lin.polarisation -> A,H separation
Zarnecki, Niezurawski, MK
γγ→HH at PLC.
Superior? Comparable? Complement?
Comparing with ILC,
seem-to-be advantage 2 body final state Polarization (JZ=0)
seem-to-be disadvantage Large contribution from box diagrams Luminosity
And we try to answer a question: λHHH
λHHH
Measurement of Higgs self-coupling E. Asakawa D. Harada S. Kanemura,Y. Okada , K. Tsumura LEI 2007 Dec2007,Hiroshima
For 2HDM - Cornet, Hollik 0808.0719[hep-ph] Asakawa at al. 0809.0094[hep-ph]
From the sensitivity to the anomalous selfcoupling of Higgs, the optimum γγ collision energy was found ~ 270 GeV for a Higgs mass of 120 GeV
Large backgrounds γγ→WW,ZZ , bb can be suppressed if correct assignment of tracks to parent partons is achieved and Higgs pair events can be observed with a statistical significance of ∼5σ by operating PLC for 5 y
Earlier study Jikia, Beluscovic, Asakawa at al., Cornet et al..
May 2012
Stat.sensitivity
e+e- 44 % integrated lum. of 2 ab-1 at 500 GeV
M.Peskin (SLAC) in 2010
Final conclusion
Near future 2015-16 looks very interesting