is supersymmetry alive? status from theory and experiment · is supersymmetry alive? status from...
TRANSCRIPT
Is supersymmetry alive?Status from theory and experiment
A. P. Morais1,2
1Center for Research and Development in Mathematics and Applications (CIDMA)Aveiro University, Aveiro, Portugal
2Theoretical High Energy Physics (THEP)Lund University, Lund, Sweden
September 30, 2015
V NRHEP Network MeetingFederal University of Pará, Belem, Brazil
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 1 / 43
Suggested Literature
1 S. P. Martin, A Supersymmetry primer , Adv.Ser.Direct.High EnergyPhys. 21 (2010) 1-153, [hep-ph/9709356]
2 D. Bailin and A. Love, Supersymmetric gauge field theory and stringtheory , Bristol, UK: IOP (1994) 322 p. (Graduate student series inphysics)
3 I. J. R. Aitchison, Supersymmetry in Particle Physics. An ElementaryIntroduction, Cambridge, UK: Univ. Pr. (2007) 222 p
4 K. A. Intriligator and N. Seiberg, Lectures on Supersymmetry BreakingClass. Quant. Grav. 24 (2007) S741 [hep-ph/0702069]
5 I. J. R. Aitchison, Supersymmetry and the MSSM: An Elementaryintroduction, [hep-ph/0505105]
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 2 / 43
Outline
1 IntroductionMotivationThe Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model - MSSM
2 Experimental resultsExclusion limitsExcesses
3 Theory and PhenomenologyImplications from the Higgs boson massBeyond the MSSM
4 Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F-flavourRevisiting TrinificationDescription of the modelTree-level results
5 Concluding Remarks
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 3 / 43
Introduction Motivation
Outline
1 IntroductionMotivationThe Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model - MSSM
2 Experimental resultsExclusion limitsExcesses
3 Theory and PhenomenologyImplications from the Higgs boson massBeyond the MSSM
4 Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F-flavourRevisiting TrinificationDescription of the modelTree-level results
5 Concluding Remarks
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 4 / 43
Introduction Motivation
IntroductionMotivations for physics beyond the Standard Model (BSM)
For many years the Standard Model (SM) proved to be the most accuratedescription of Particle Physics, however theoretical and experimentaldisagreements:
The SM does not provide a dark matter (DM) particle
No explanation for the origin of electric and color charges (gauge structureof the SM)
No explanation for fermion masses and mixings and flavour structure
Observation of neutrino oscillations requires mass eigenstates→ notpredicted in the SM
Anomalous magnetic moment of the muon
The SM suffers from the Hierarchy Problem
Hard to reconcile with the theory of General Relativity
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 5 / 43
Introduction Motivation
IntroductionMotivations for physics beyond the Standard Model (BSM)
For many years the Standard Model (SM) proved to be the most accuratedescription of Particle Physics, however theoretical and experimentaldisagreements:
The SM does not provide a dark matter (DM) particle
No explanation for the origin of electric and color charges (gauge structureof the SM)
No explanation for fermion masses and mixings and flavour structure
Observation of neutrino oscillations requires mass eigenstates→ notpredicted in the SM
Anomalous magnetic moment of the muon
The SM suffers from the Hierarchy Problem
Hard to reconcile with the theory of General Relativity
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 5 / 43
Introduction Motivation
Features of supersymmetry (SUSY)
A possible cold dark matter particle
Unification of the gauge couplings (SUSY GUT theories)
Possible solution for the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon
Connection to gravity in the limit of Local SUSY a.k.a supergravity(SUGRA)
Mathematical beauty
However the one really good feature in favour os supersymmetry is
The Hierarchy Problem (Planck scale vs electroweak scale)
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 6 / 43
Introduction Motivation
Features of supersymmetry (SUSY)
A possible cold dark matter particle
Unification of the gauge couplings (SUSY GUT theories)
Possible solution for the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon
Connection to gravity in the limit of Local SUSY a.k.a supergravity(SUGRA)
Mathematical beauty
However the one really good feature in favour os supersymmetry is
The Hierarchy Problem (Planck scale vs electroweak scale)
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 6 / 43
Introduction The Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model - MSSM
Outline
1 IntroductionMotivationThe Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model - MSSM
2 Experimental resultsExclusion limitsExcesses
3 Theory and PhenomenologyImplications from the Higgs boson massBeyond the MSSM
4 Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F-flavourRevisiting TrinificationDescription of the modelTree-level results
5 Concluding Remarks
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 7 / 43
Introduction The Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model - MSSM
Particle ContentChiral Supermultiplets
Chiral Supermultiplet Fields in the MSSMNames Spin 0 Spin 1/2 SU(3)c× SU(2)L×U(1)y
Squarks, Quarks(× 3) QL (uL, dL) (uL, dL) 3, 2, 1/3
ˆuR ˜uL = u∗R uL = (uR)c 3, 1, -4/3
ˆdR˜dL = d∗R dL = (dR)
c 3, 1, 2/3Sleptons, Leptons
(× 3) LL (νeL, eL) (νeL, eL) 1, 2, -1
ˆeR ˜eL = e∗R eL = (eR)c 1, 1, 2
Higgs, Higgsinos Hu (H+u , H0
u) (H+u , H0
u) 1, 2, 1Hd (H0
d , H−d ) (H0
d , H−d ) 1, 2, -1
Table : Chiral supermultiplet fields in the MSSM. The leftmost column provides theusual designation for the fundamental particles, the two middle ones the spin and therightmost the gauge charges.
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 8 / 43
Introduction The Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model - MSSM
Particle ContentGauge Supermultiplets
Gauge Supermultiplet Fields in the MSSMNames Spin 1/2 Spin 1 SU(3)c× SU(2)L×U(1)y
Gluinos, Gluons Ga g g 8, 1, 0Winos, W bosons Wa W±, W0 W±, W0 1, 3, 0
Bino, B Boson B B B 1, 1, 0
Table : Gauge supermultiplet fields in the MSSM. The left column provides the usualdesignation for the gauge fields, the middle one the spin and the right one the gaugecharges.
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 9 / 43
Introduction The Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model - MSSM
The Superpotential and Soft Lagrangian
The MSSM has the same gauge structure as the SM for the strong andelectroweak interactions
SU(3)c × SU(2)L × U(1)y
Superpotential
WMSSM = εαβ
[(yu)ij uRixQαx
Lj Hβu − (yd)ij dRixQαxLj Hβd − (ye)ij eRiLαLjH
βd + µHαu Hβd
](1)
Soft SUSY-breaking Lagrangian
−Lsoft = m2Hd
|Hd |2 + m2
Hu|Hu|
2 + Q αxLi
(m2
QL
)i
jQ∗ j
Lαx + L αLi
(m2
LL
)i
jL∗ j
Lα
+ u∗ xRi
(m2
uR
)ij u j
Rx + d∗ xRi
(m2
dR
)i
jd j
Rx + e∗Ri
(m2
eR
)ij e j
R
+ εαβ
[auijHαu uRixQβx
Lj − adijHαd dRixQβxLj − aeijHαd eRiL
βLj + bHαd Hβu + h.c.
]+
12[M1B · B + M2Wa · Wa + M3ga · ga + h.c.
], (2)
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 10 / 43
Introduction The Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model - MSSM
The Superpotential and Soft Lagrangian
The MSSM has the same gauge structure as the SM for the strong andelectroweak interactions
SU(3)c × SU(2)L × U(1)y
Superpotential
WMSSM = εαβ
[(yu)ij uRixQαx
Lj Hβu − (yd)ij dRixQαxLj Hβd − (ye)ij eRiLαLjH
βd + µHαu Hβd
](1)
Soft SUSY-breaking Lagrangian
−Lsoft = m2Hd
|Hd |2 + m2
Hu|Hu|
2 + Q αxLi
(m2
QL
)i
jQ∗ j
Lαx + L αLi
(m2
LL
)i
jL∗ j
Lα
+ u∗ xRi
(m2
uR
)ij u j
Rx + d∗ xRi
(m2
dR
)i
jd j
Rx + e∗Ri
(m2
eR
)ij e j
R
+ εαβ
[auijHαu uRixQβx
Lj − adijHαd dRixQβxLj − aeijHαd eRiL
βLj + bHαd Hβu + h.c.
]+
12[M1B · B + M2Wa · Wa + M3ga · ga + h.c.
], (2)
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 10 / 43
Introduction The Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model - MSSM
The Superpotential and Soft Lagrangian
The MSSM has the same gauge structure as the SM for the strong andelectroweak interactions
SU(3)c × SU(2)L × U(1)y
Superpotential
WMSSM = εαβ
[(yu)ij uRixQαx
Lj Hβu − (yd)ij dRixQαxLj Hβd − (ye)ij eRiLαLjH
βd + µHαu Hβd
](1)
Soft SUSY-breaking Lagrangian
−Lsoft = m2Hd
|Hd |2 + m2
Hu|Hu|
2 + Q αxLi
(m2
QL
)i
jQ∗ j
Lαx + L αLi
(m2
LL
)i
jL∗ j
Lα
+ u∗ xRi
(m2
uR
)ij u j
Rx + d∗ xRi
(m2
dR
)i
jd j
Rx + e∗Ri
(m2
eR
)ij e j
R
+ εαβ
[auijHαu uRixQβx
Lj − adijHαd dRixQβxLj − aeijHαd eRiL
βLj + bHαd Hβu + h.c.
]+
12[M1B · B + M2Wa · Wa + M3ga · ga + h.c.
], (2)
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 10 / 43
Experimental results Exclusion limits
Outline
1 IntroductionMotivationThe Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model - MSSM
2 Experimental resultsExclusion limitsExcesses
3 Theory and PhenomenologyImplications from the Higgs boson massBeyond the MSSM
4 Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F-flavourRevisiting TrinificationDescription of the modelTree-level results
5 Concluding Remarks
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 11 / 43
Experimental results Exclusion limits
Experimental resultsExclusion limits strong sector
ATLAS searches for the strong sector in the cMSSM/mSUGRA
[GeV]0
m
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
[G
eV
]1
/2m
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
(2400 G
eV
)q ~
(1600 G
eV
)q ~
(1000 GeV)g~
(1400 GeV)g~
h (1
22 G
eV
)
h (1
24 G
eV
)
h (1
26 G
eV
)
> 0µ, 0 = 2m0
) = 30, AβMSUGRA/CMSSM: tan(
ATLAS1 = 8 TeV, L = 20 fbs
τ∼
LSP
All limits at 95% CL.
)expσ1 ±Expected (
)theory
SUSYσ1 ±Observed (
Expected
Observed
Expected
Observed
Expected
Observed
Expected
Observed
Expected
Observed
Expected
Observed
(0+1)lepton combination
miss
T0lepton + 710 jets + E
miss
T0/1lepton + 3 bjets + E
miss
TTaus + jets + E
miss
TSS/3L + jets + E
miss
T1lepton (hard) + 7 jets + E
cMSSM high scale softparameters
Common scalarmass m0
Common trilinearcoupling A0
Common gauginomasss M1/2
cMSSM by itself suffers from several theoretical problems such as vacuumstability, dark matter relic density, lack of high scale motivation and ishighly fine tuned
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 12 / 43
Experimental results Exclusion limits
Experimental resultsExclusion limits strong sector
ATLAS searches for the strong sector in the cMSSM/mSUGRA
[GeV]0
m
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
[G
eV
]1
/2m
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
(2400 G
eV
)q ~
(1600 G
eV
)q ~
(1000 GeV)g~
(1400 GeV)g~
h (1
22 G
eV
)
h (1
24 G
eV
)
h (1
26 G
eV
)
> 0µ, 0 = 2m0
) = 30, AβMSUGRA/CMSSM: tan(
ATLAS1 = 8 TeV, L = 20 fbs
τ∼
LSP
All limits at 95% CL.
)expσ1 ±Expected (
)theory
SUSYσ1 ±Observed (
Expected
Observed
Expected
Observed
Expected
Observed
Expected
Observed
Expected
Observed
Expected
Observed
(0+1)lepton combination
miss
T0lepton + 710 jets + E
miss
T0/1lepton + 3 bjets + E
miss
TTaus + jets + E
miss
TSS/3L + jets + E
miss
T1lepton (hard) + 7 jets + E
cMSSM high scale softparameters
Common scalarmass m0
Common trilinearcoupling A0
Common gauginomasss M1/2
cMSSM by itself suffers from several theoretical problems such as vacuumstability, dark matter relic density, lack of high scale motivation and ishighly fine tuned
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 12 / 43
Experimental results Exclusion limits
Experimental resultsExclusion limits electroweak sector
ATLAS searches for the electroweak sector
) [GeV]2
0χ∼ (=m1
±χ∼ m
100 200 300 400 500 600 700
[GeV
]0 1χ∼
m
0
100
200
300
400
500
600Expected limits
Observed limits
arXiv:1402.7029 3L, , ν∼/ LL~
via 02
χ∼±1
χ∼
arXiv:1403.5294 2l, , ν∼/ LL~
via −1
χ∼ +1
χ∼
arXiv:1402.7029 3L, , τν∼/ Lτ∼ via 02
χ∼±1
χ∼
arXiv:1407.0350, τ2≥ , τν∼/ Lτ∼ via 02
χ∼±1
χ∼
arXiv:1407.0350, τ2≥ , τν∼/ Lτ∼ via −1
χ∼ +1
χ∼
arXiv:1403.5294 2l+3L, via WZ, 02
χ∼±1
χ∼
arXiv:1501.07110 +3L,±l±+lγγlbb+l via Wh, 02
χ∼±1
χ∼
arXiv:1403.52942l, via WW, −1
χ∼ +1
χ∼
All limits at 95% CL
=8 TeV Status: Feb 2015s, -1 Preliminary 20.3 fbATLAS
)2
0χ∼ + m 1
0χ∼ = 0.5(m ν∼/ L
τ∼/ Ll~m
τ/µL = e/
µl = e/
10χ∼
= m
20χ∼m
Z
+ m
10χ∼
= m
20χ∼m
h
+ m
10χ∼
= m
20χ∼m
1
0χ∼ = 2m
2
0χ∼m
A lot to explore in the electroweak sector→ focus have been the strong sector
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 13 / 43
Experimental results Exclusion limits
Experimental resultsExclusion limits electroweak sector
ATLAS searches for the electroweak sector
) [GeV]2
0χ∼ (=m1
±χ∼ m
100 200 300 400 500 600 700
[GeV
]0 1χ∼
m
0
100
200
300
400
500
600Expected limits
Observed limits
arXiv:1402.7029 3L, , ν∼/ LL~
via 02
χ∼±1
χ∼
arXiv:1403.5294 2l, , ν∼/ LL~
via −1
χ∼ +1
χ∼
arXiv:1402.7029 3L, , τν∼/ Lτ∼ via 02
χ∼±1
χ∼
arXiv:1407.0350, τ2≥ , τν∼/ Lτ∼ via 02
χ∼±1
χ∼
arXiv:1407.0350, τ2≥ , τν∼/ Lτ∼ via −1
χ∼ +1
χ∼
arXiv:1403.5294 2l+3L, via WZ, 02
χ∼±1
χ∼
arXiv:1501.07110 +3L,±l±+lγγlbb+l via Wh, 02
χ∼±1
χ∼
arXiv:1403.52942l, via WW, −1
χ∼ +1
χ∼
All limits at 95% CL
=8 TeV Status: Feb 2015s, -1 Preliminary 20.3 fbATLAS
)2
0χ∼ + m 1
0χ∼ = 0.5(m ν∼/ L
τ∼/ Ll~m
τ/µL = e/
µl = e/
10χ∼
= m
20χ∼m
Z
+ m
10χ∼
= m
20χ∼m
h
+ m
10χ∼
= m
20χ∼m
1
0χ∼ = 2m
2
0χ∼m
A lot to explore in the electroweak sector→ focus have been the strong sectorMorais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 13 / 43
Experimental results Exclusion limits
Experimental resultsExclusion limits summary
Model e, µ, τ, γ Jets Emiss
T
∫L dt[fb−1] Mass limit Reference
Inclu
siv
eS
ea
rch
es
3rd
ge
n.
gm
ed
.3rd
gen.
squark
sdir
ect
pro
duction
EW
dir
ect
Lo
ng
-liv
ed
pa
rtic
les
RP
V
Other
MSUGRA/CMSSM 0-3 e, µ /1-2 τ 2-10 jets/3 b Yes 20.3 m(q)=m(g) 1507.055251.8 TeVq, g
qq, q→qχ01 0 2-6 jets Yes 20.3 m(χ
01)=0 GeV, m(1st gen. q)=m(2nd gen. q) 1405.7875850 GeVq
qq, q→qχ01 (compressed) mono-jet 1-3 jets Yes 20.3 m(q)-m(χ
01 )<10 GeV 1507.05525100-440 GeVq
qq, q→q(ℓℓ/ℓν/νν)χ01
2 e, µ (off-Z) 2 jets Yes 20.3 m(χ01)=0 GeV 1503.03290780 GeVq
gg, g→qqχ01 0 2-6 jets Yes 20.3 m(χ
01)=0 GeV 1405.78751.33 TeVg
gg, g→qqχ±1→qqW±χ01 0-1 e, µ 2-6 jets Yes 20 m(χ
01)<300 GeV, m(χ
±)=0.5(m(χ
01)+m(g)) 1507.055251.26 TeVg
gg, g→qq(ℓℓ/ℓν/νν)χ01
2 e, µ 0-3 jets - 20 m(χ01)=0 GeV 1501.035551.32 TeVg
GMSB (ℓ NLSP) 1-2 τ + 0-1 ℓ 0-2 jets Yes 20.3 tanβ >20 1407.06031.6 TeVg
GGM (bino NLSP) 2 γ - Yes 20.3 cτ(NLSP)<0.1 mm 1507.054931.29 TeVg
GGM (higgsino-bino NLSP) γ 1 b Yes 20.3 m(χ01)<900 GeV, cτ(NLSP)<0.1 mm, µ<0 1507.054931.3 TeVg
GGM (higgsino-bino NLSP) γ 2 jets Yes 20.3 m(χ01)<850 GeV, cτ(NLSP)<0.1 mm, µ>0 1507.054931.25 TeVg
GGM (higgsino NLSP) 2 e, µ (Z) 2 jets Yes 20.3 m(NLSP)>430 GeV 1503.03290850 GeVg
Gravitino LSP 0 mono-jet Yes 20.3 m(G)>1.8 × 10−4 eV, m(g)=m(q)=1.5 TeV 1502.01518865 GeVF1/2 scale
gg, g→bbχ01 0 3 b Yes 20.1 m(χ
01)<400 GeV 1407.06001.25 TeVg
gg, g→ttχ01 0 7-10 jets Yes 20.3 m(χ
01) <350 GeV 1308.18411.1 TeVg
gg, g→ttχ01
0-1 e, µ 3 b Yes 20.1 m(χ01)<400 GeV 1407.06001.34 TeVg
gg, g→btχ+1 0-1 e, µ 3 b Yes 20.1 m(χ
01)<300 GeV 1407.06001.3 TeVg
b1b1, b1→bχ01 0 2 b Yes 20.1 m(χ
01)<90 GeV 1308.2631100-620 GeVb1
b1b1, b1→tχ±1 2 e, µ (SS) 0-3 b Yes 20.3 m(χ
±1 )=2 m(χ
01) 1404.2500275-440 GeVb1
t1 t1, t1→bχ±1 1-2 e, µ 1-2 b Yes 4.7/20.3 m(χ
±1 ) = 2m(χ
01), m(χ
01)=55 GeV 1209.2102, 1407.0583110-167 GeVt1 230-460 GeVt1
t1 t1, t1→Wbχ01 or tχ
01
0-2 e, µ 0-2 jets/1-2 b Yes 20.3 m(χ01)=1 GeV 1506.0861690-191 GeVt1 210-700 GeVt1
t1 t1, t1→cχ01 0 mono-jet/c-tag Yes 20.3 m(t1)-m(χ
01 )<85 GeV 1407.060890-240 GeVt1
t1 t1(natural GMSB) 2 e, µ (Z) 1 b Yes 20.3 m(χ01)>150 GeV 1403.5222150-580 GeVt1
t2 t2, t2→t1 + Z 3 e, µ (Z) 1 b Yes 20.3 m(χ01)<200 GeV 1403.5222290-600 GeVt2
ℓL,R ℓL,R, ℓ→ℓχ01 2 e, µ 0 Yes 20.3 m(χ01)=0 GeV 1403.529490-325 GeVℓ
χ+1χ−1 , χ
+1→ℓν(ℓν) 2 e, µ 0 Yes 20.3 m(χ
01)=0 GeV, m(ℓ, ν)=0.5(m(χ
±1 )+m(χ
01)) 1403.5294140-465 GeVχ±
1
χ+1χ−1 , χ
+1→τν(τν) 2 τ - Yes 20.3 m(χ
01)=0 GeV, m(τ, ν)=0.5(m(χ
±1 )+m(χ
01)) 1407.0350100-350 GeVχ±
1
χ±1χ02→ℓLνℓLℓ(νν), ℓνℓLℓ(νν) 3 e, µ 0 Yes 20.3 m(χ
±1 )=m(χ
02), m(χ
01)=0, m(ℓ, ν)=0.5(m(χ
±1 )+m(χ
01)) 1402.7029700 GeVχ±
1, χ
0
2
χ±1χ02→Wχ
01Zχ
01
2-3 e, µ 0-2 jets Yes 20.3 m(χ±1 )=m(χ
02), m(χ
01)=0, sleptons decoupled 1403.5294, 1402.7029420 GeVχ±
1, χ
0
2
χ±1χ02→Wχ
01h χ
01, h→bb/WW/ττ/γγ e, µ, γ 0-2 b Yes 20.3 m(χ
±1 )=m(χ
02), m(χ
01)=0, sleptons decoupled 1501.07110250 GeVχ±
1, χ
0
2
χ02χ03, χ
02,3 →ℓRℓ 4 e, µ 0 Yes 20.3 m(χ
02)=m(χ
03), m(χ
01)=0, m(ℓ, ν)=0.5(m(χ
02)+m(χ
01)) 1405.5086620 GeVχ0
2,3
GGM (wino NLSP) weak prod. 1 e, µ + γ - Yes 20.3 cτ<1 mm 1507.05493124-361 GeVW
Direct χ+1χ−1 prod., long-lived χ
±1 Disapp. trk 1 jet Yes 20.3 m(χ
±1 )-m(χ
01)∼160 MeV, τ(χ
±1 )=0.2 ns 1310.3675270 GeVχ±
1
Direct χ+1χ−1 prod., long-lived χ
±1 dE/dx trk - Yes 18.4 m(χ
±1 )-m(χ
01)∼160 MeV, τ(χ
±1 )<15 ns 1506.05332482 GeVχ±
1
Stable, stopped g R-hadron 0 1-5 jets Yes 27.9 m(χ01)=100 GeV, 10 µs<τ(g)<1000 s 1310.6584832 GeVg
Stable g R-hadron trk - - 19.1 1411.67951.27 TeVg
GMSB, stable τ, χ01→τ(e, µ)+τ(e, µ) 1-2 µ - - 19.1 10<tanβ<50 1411.6795537 GeVχ0
1
GMSB, χ01→γG, long-lived χ
01
2 γ - Yes 20.3 2<τ(χ01)<3 ns, SPS8 model 1409.5542435 GeVχ0
1
gg, χ01→eeν/eµν/µµν displ. ee/eµ/µµ - - 20.3 7 <cτ(χ
01)< 740 mm, m(g)=1.3 TeV 1504.051621.0 TeVχ0
1
GGM gg, χ01→ZG displ. vtx + jets - - 20.3 6 <cτ(χ
01)< 480 mm, m(g)=1.1 TeV 1504.051621.0 TeVχ0
1
LFV pp→ντ + X, ντ→eµ/eτ/µτ eµ,eτ,µτ - - 20.3 λ′311
=0.11, λ132/133/233=0.07 1503.044301.7 TeVντ
Bilinear RPV CMSSM 2 e, µ (SS) 0-3 b Yes 20.3 m(q)=m(g), cτLS P<1 mm 1404.25001.35 TeVq, g
χ+1χ−1 , χ
+1→Wχ
01, χ
01→eeνµ, eµνe 4 e, µ - Yes 20.3 m(χ
01)>0.2×m(χ
±1 ), λ121,0 1405.5086750 GeVχ±
1
χ+1χ−1 , χ
+1→Wχ
01, χ
01→ττνe, eτντ 3 e, µ + τ - Yes 20.3 m(χ
01)>0.2×m(χ
±1 ), λ133,0 1405.5086450 GeVχ±
1
gg, g→qqq 0 6-7 jets - 20.3 BR(t)=BR(b)=BR(c)=0% 1502.05686917 GeVg
gg, g→qχ01, χ
01 → qqq 0 6-7 jets - 20.3 m(χ
01)=600 GeV 1502.05686870 GeVg
gg, g→t1t, t1→bs 2 e, µ (SS) 0-3 b Yes 20.3 1404.250850 GeVg
t1 t1, t1→bs 0 2 jets + 2 b - 20.3 ATLAS-CONF-2015-026100-308 GeVt1
t1 t1, t1→bℓ 2 e, µ 2 b - 20.3 BR(t1→be/µ)>20% ATLAS-CONF-2015-0150.4-1.0 TeVt1
Scalar charm, c→cχ01 0 2 c Yes 20.3 m(χ
01)<200 GeV 1501.01325490 GeVc
Mass scale [TeV]10−1 1
√s = 7 TeV
√s = 8 TeV
ATLAS SUSY Searches* - 95% CL Lower LimitsStatus: July 2015
ATLAS Preliminary√s = 7, 8 TeV
*Only a selection of the available mass limits on new states or phenomena is shown. All limits quoted are observed minus 1σ theoretical signal cross section uncertainty.
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 14 / 43
Experimental results Excesses
Outline
1 IntroductionMotivationThe Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model - MSSM
2 Experimental resultsExclusion limitsExcesses
3 Theory and PhenomenologyImplications from the Higgs boson massBeyond the MSSM
4 Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F-flavourRevisiting TrinificationDescription of the modelTree-level results
5 Concluding Remarks
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 15 / 43
Experimental results Excesses
Experimental resultsJets plus dilepton extracted signal (1502.06031)
Opposite-sign same flavour leptonsare looked for (e+e−, µ+µ−)
Fit to data is not explained with justDrell-Yan and flavour-symmetricbackground
Extracted signal componentneeded to justify data
Typical kinematical edge SUSYsignature
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 16 / 43
Experimental results Excesses
Experimental resultsJets plus dilepton extracted signal (1502.06031)
Opposite-sign same flavour leptonsare looked for (e+e−, µ+µ−)
Fit to data is not explained with justDrell-Yan and flavour-symmetricbackground
Extracted signal componentneeded to justify data
Typical kinematical edge SUSYsignature
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 16 / 43
Experimental results Excesses
Experimental resultsDiboson excess (1506.00962)
1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Eve
nts
/ 100
GeV
1−10
1
10
210
310
410DataBackground model1.5 TeV EGM W', c = 12.0 TeV EGM W', c = 12.5 TeV EGM W', c = 1Significance (stat)Significance (stat + syst)
ATLAS-1 = 8 TeV, 20.3 fbs
WZ Selection
[TeV]jjm1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Sig
nific
ance
2−1−0123
Signal not directly interpreted in thecontext of SUSY
Interpreted as a W ′ candidate froma new SU(2)R gauge symmetry
[TeV]W' m1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3
WZ
) [fb
]→
BR
(W'
× W
') →
(pp
σ
1−10
1
10
210
310
410 Observed 95% CL
Expected 95% CL
uncertaintyσ 1±
unceirtaintyσ 2±
EGM W', c = 1
ATLAS-1 = 8 TeV, 20.3 fbs
No signal from semi-leptonic channelsW → jj, lνl
Z → jj, l+l−, νν
Possible to accommodate in SUSY models with Left-Right (LR) symmetry
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 17 / 43
Experimental results Excesses
Experimental resultsDiboson excess (1506.00962)
1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Eve
nts
/ 100
GeV
1−10
1
10
210
310
410DataBackground model1.5 TeV EGM W', c = 12.0 TeV EGM W', c = 12.5 TeV EGM W', c = 1Significance (stat)Significance (stat + syst)
ATLAS-1 = 8 TeV, 20.3 fbs
WZ Selection
[TeV]jjm1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Sig
nific
ance
2−1−0123
Signal not directly interpreted in thecontext of SUSY
Interpreted as a W ′ candidate froma new SU(2)R gauge symmetry
[TeV]W' m1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3
WZ
) [fb
]→
BR
(W'
× W
') →
(pp
σ
1−10
1
10
210
310
410 Observed 95% CL
Expected 95% CL
uncertaintyσ 1±
unceirtaintyσ 2±
EGM W', c = 1
ATLAS-1 = 8 TeV, 20.3 fbs
No signal from semi-leptonic channelsW → jj, lνl
Z → jj, l+l−, νν
Possible to accommodate in SUSY models with Left-Right (LR) symmetry
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 17 / 43
Experimental results Excesses
Experimental resultsDiboson excess (1506.00962)
1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Eve
nts
/ 100
GeV
1−10
1
10
210
310
410DataBackground model1.5 TeV EGM W', c = 12.0 TeV EGM W', c = 12.5 TeV EGM W', c = 1Significance (stat)Significance (stat + syst)
ATLAS-1 = 8 TeV, 20.3 fbs
WZ Selection
[TeV]jjm1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Sig
nific
ance
2−1−0123
Signal not directly interpreted in thecontext of SUSY
Interpreted as a W ′ candidate froma new SU(2)R gauge symmetry
[TeV]W' m1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3
WZ
) [fb
]→
BR
(W'
× W
') →
(pp
σ
1−10
1
10
210
310
410 Observed 95% CL
Expected 95% CL
uncertaintyσ 1±
unceirtaintyσ 2±
EGM W', c = 1
ATLAS-1 = 8 TeV, 20.3 fbs
No signal from semi-leptonic channelsW → jj, lνl
Z → jj, l+l−, νν
Possible to accommodate in SUSY models with Left-Right (LR) symmetry
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 17 / 43
Theory and Phenomenology Implications from the Higgs boson mass
Outline
1 IntroductionMotivationThe Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model - MSSM
2 Experimental resultsExclusion limitsExcesses
3 Theory and PhenomenologyImplications from the Higgs boson massBeyond the MSSM
4 Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F-flavourRevisiting TrinificationDescription of the modelTree-level results
5 Concluding Remarks
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 18 / 43
Theory and Phenomenology Implications from the Higgs boson mass
Theory and PhenomenologyImplications from the Higgs boson mass
The Higgs boson discovery gave us the effective self interaction term λ in theStandard Model with accuracy better than 1%
V(H†H
)= m2H†H + λ(H†H)2
Minimization −→ 〈H〉 = m√2λ≡ v√
2
H =1√2
(G+
v + h + iG0
), v = 246 GeV
Radial oscillations around vacuum generate a bare Higgs mass term
Lmass,h =12(2m2
)︸ ︷︷ ︸m2
h
h2 and λ =m2
h
2v2 = 0.126
This value for λ seems to be a success for electroweak scale supersymmetry as itstrongly agrees with theoretical predictions within the MSSM
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 19 / 43
Theory and Phenomenology Implications from the Higgs boson mass
Theory and PhenomenologyImplications from the Higgs boson mass
The Higgs boson discovery gave us the effective self interaction term λ in theStandard Model with accuracy better than 1%
V(H†H
)= m2H†H + λ(H†H)2
Minimization −→ 〈H〉 = m√2λ≡ v√
2
H =1√2
(G+
v + h + iG0
), v = 246 GeV
Radial oscillations around vacuum generate a bare Higgs mass term
Lmass,h =12(2m2
)︸ ︷︷ ︸m2
h
h2 and λ =m2
h
2v2 = 0.126
This value for λ seems to be a success for electroweak scale supersymmetry as itstrongly agrees with theoretical predictions within the MSSM
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 19 / 43
Theory and Phenomenology Implications from the Higgs boson mass
Theory and PhenomenologyImplications from the Higgs boson mass
However mh = 125 GeV suggests heavier superpartners within the MSSM(heavy stops or highly mixed)
Mass scale of the Higgs potential becomeslarger which is claimed to be problematic dueto the little hierarchy problemm2
Z = −2(|µ|
2+ m2
Hu
)+ higher order terms
1. µ is the Higgsino mass parameter2. mHu is the supersymmetric version of m,
and is typically negative3. mZ = 91 GeV is the Z-boson mass4. µ is a SUSY preserving parameter and
mHu is a SUSY breaking parameter
It is often claimed that if there are no light Higgsinos, natural SUSY is dead!
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 20 / 43
Theory and Phenomenology Implications from the Higgs boson mass
Theory and PhenomenologyImplications from the Higgs boson mass
However mh = 125 GeV suggests heavier superpartners within the MSSM(heavy stops or highly mixed)
Mass scale of the Higgs potential becomeslarger which is claimed to be problematic dueto the little hierarchy problemm2
Z = −2(|µ|
2+ m2
Hu
)+ higher order terms
1. µ is the Higgsino mass parameter2. mHu is the supersymmetric version of m,
and is typically negative3. mZ = 91 GeV is the Z-boson mass4. µ is a SUSY preserving parameter and
mHu is a SUSY breaking parameter
It is often claimed that if there are no light Higgsinos, natural SUSY is dead!
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 20 / 43
Theory and Phenomenology Implications from the Higgs boson mass
Theory and PhenomenologyImplications from the Higgs boson mass
However mh = 125 GeV suggests heavier superpartners within the MSSM(heavy stops or highly mixed)
Mass scale of the Higgs potential becomeslarger which is claimed to be problematic dueto the little hierarchy problemm2
Z = −2(|µ|
2+ m2
Hu
)+ higher order terms
1. µ is the Higgsino mass parameter2. mHu is the supersymmetric version of m,
and is typically negative3. mZ = 91 GeV is the Z-boson mass4. µ is a SUSY preserving parameter and
mHu is a SUSY breaking parameter
It is often claimed that if there are no light Higgsinos, natural SUSY is dead!
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 20 / 43
Theory and Phenomenology Implications from the Higgs boson mass
Theory and PhenomenologyImplications from the Higgs boson mass
Taking this at face value one needs small µ and small mHu , where, in terms of highscale parameters {Pi} (leading contributions)
m2Hu
(Pi) = 1.82M23 − 0.21M2
2 + 0.16M3M2 − 0.64m2Hu
+ 0.36m2Q3
+ 0.28m2u3+ · · ·
m2Z (Pi) ≈ −2
(|µ|
2+ m2
Hu(Pi)
)
If gluinos are heavy
1 M3 is large2 then m2
Huis also large
3 which requires large µ⇔ heavy higgsinos4 fine-tuning
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 21 / 43
Theory and Phenomenology Implications from the Higgs boson mass
Theory and Phenomenologym2
Hu= 1.82M2
3 − 0.21M22 + 0.16M3M2 − 0.64m2
Hu+ 0.36m2
Q3+ 0.28m2
u3+ · · ·
Choose parameters in order to arrange for natural cancellations
Phenomenological Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model→ pMSSM#
# is the number of independent parametersvery popular/main-stream within phenomenologists
I personally don’t like it as there is no UV motivation (embeddingsymmetry)
Non-Universal Higgs Mass→ NUHM m2Hu6= m0 = m2
Q3= m2
u3+ · · ·
compatible with SO(10)-GUTs
Non universal gaugino masses, in particular M3 = 0.3M2
a) Is there any objective measure of fine-tuning/naturalness?b) µ and mHu have completely different origins... why combing them in this
measure?c) Regard fine-tuning as an indication that the model is not complete
Need to go beyond the MSSM
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 22 / 43
Theory and Phenomenology Implications from the Higgs boson mass
Theory and Phenomenologym2
Hu= 1.82M2
3 − 0.21M22 + 0.16M3M2 − 0.64m2
Hu+ 0.36m2
Q3+ 0.28m2
u3+ · · ·
Choose parameters in order to arrange for natural cancellations
Phenomenological Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model→ pMSSM#
# is the number of independent parametersvery popular/main-stream within phenomenologistsI personally don’t like it as there is no UV motivation (embeddingsymmetry)
Non-Universal Higgs Mass→ NUHM m2Hu6= m0 = m2
Q3= m2
u3+ · · ·
compatible with SO(10)-GUTs
Non universal gaugino masses, in particular M3 = 0.3M2
a) Is there any objective measure of fine-tuning/naturalness?b) µ and mHu have completely different origins... why combing them in this
measure?c) Regard fine-tuning as an indication that the model is not complete
Need to go beyond the MSSM
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 22 / 43
Theory and Phenomenology Implications from the Higgs boson mass
Theory and Phenomenologym2
Hu= 1.82M2
3 − 0.21M22 + 0.16M3M2 − 0.64m2
Hu+ 0.36m2
Q3+ 0.28m2
u3+ · · ·
Choose parameters in order to arrange for natural cancellations
Phenomenological Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model→ pMSSM#
# is the number of independent parametersvery popular/main-stream within phenomenologistsI personally don’t like it as there is no UV motivation (embeddingsymmetry)
Non-Universal Higgs Mass→ NUHM m2Hu6= m0 = m2
Q3= m2
u3+ · · ·
compatible with SO(10)-GUTs
Non universal gaugino masses, in particular M3 = 0.3M2
a) Is there any objective measure of fine-tuning/naturalness?b) µ and mHu have completely different origins... why combing them in this
measure?c) Regard fine-tuning as an indication that the model is not complete
Need to go beyond the MSSM
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 22 / 43
Theory and Phenomenology Implications from the Higgs boson mass
Theory and Phenomenologym2
Hu= 1.82M2
3 − 0.21M22 + 0.16M3M2 − 0.64m2
Hu+ 0.36m2
Q3+ 0.28m2
u3+ · · ·
Choose parameters in order to arrange for natural cancellations
Phenomenological Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model→ pMSSM#
# is the number of independent parametersvery popular/main-stream within phenomenologistsI personally don’t like it as there is no UV motivation (embeddingsymmetry)
Non-Universal Higgs Mass→ NUHM m2Hu6= m0 = m2
Q3= m2
u3+ · · ·
compatible with SO(10)-GUTs
Non universal gaugino masses, in particular M3 = 0.3M2
a) Is there any objective measure of fine-tuning/naturalness?b) µ and mHu have completely different origins... why combing them in this
measure?c) Regard fine-tuning as an indication that the model is not complete
Need to go beyond the MSSM
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 22 / 43
Theory and Phenomenology Implications from the Higgs boson mass
Theory and Phenomenologym2
Hu= 1.82M2
3 − 0.21M22 + 0.16M3M2 − 0.64m2
Hu+ 0.36m2
Q3+ 0.28m2
u3+ · · ·
Choose parameters in order to arrange for natural cancellations
Phenomenological Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model→ pMSSM#
# is the number of independent parametersvery popular/main-stream within phenomenologistsI personally don’t like it as there is no UV motivation (embeddingsymmetry)
Non-Universal Higgs Mass→ NUHM m2Hu6= m0 = m2
Q3= m2
u3+ · · ·
compatible with SO(10)-GUTs
Non universal gaugino masses, in particular M3 = 0.3M2
a) Is there any objective measure of fine-tuning/naturalness?b) µ and mHu have completely different origins... why combing them in this
measure?c) Regard fine-tuning as an indication that the model is not complete
Need to go beyond the MSSMMorais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 22 / 43
Theory and Phenomenology Beyond the MSSM
Outline
1 IntroductionMotivationThe Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model - MSSM
2 Experimental resultsExclusion limitsExcesses
3 Theory and PhenomenologyImplications from the Higgs boson massBeyond the MSSM
4 Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F-flavourRevisiting TrinificationDescription of the modelTree-level results
5 Concluding Remarks
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 23 / 43
Theory and Phenomenology Beyond the MSSM
Theory and PhenomenologyBeyond the MSSM
One of the problems of the MSSM is the origin of the Higgsino mass term µHuHd
Singlet superfield extension λSHuHd → Next-to-Minimal SSM (NMSSM)µ parameter generated by an electroweak scale vacuum expectation value(vev) of the singlet scalar component λ〈S〉HuHd
Gauginos are commonly described by Majorana spinors ΨM = Ψ†M
Origin of µ-parameter(s) can also be explained in Dirac-gaugino models
Scenario not yet realized in any UV completion!!
In conventional SUSY models there is a Z2 symmetry, R-parity, implying that inany SUSY interaction one has to have an even number of sparticles
lightest susy particle (LSP) kinematically forbidden to decay (stable)→dark matter candidate.
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 24 / 43
Theory and Phenomenology Beyond the MSSM
Theory and PhenomenologyBeyond the MSSM
One of the problems of the MSSM is the origin of the Higgsino mass term µHuHd
Singlet superfield extension λSHuHd → Next-to-Minimal SSM (NMSSM)µ parameter generated by an electroweak scale vacuum expectation value(vev) of the singlet scalar component λ〈S〉HuHd
Gauginos are commonly described by Majorana spinors ΨM = Ψ†M
Origin of µ-parameter(s) can also be explained in Dirac-gaugino modelsScenario not yet realized in any UV completion!!
In conventional SUSY models there is a Z2 symmetry, R-parity, implying that inany SUSY interaction one has to have an even number of sparticles
lightest susy particle (LSP) kinematically forbidden to decay (stable)→dark matter candidate.
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 24 / 43
Theory and Phenomenology Beyond the MSSM
Theory and PhenomenologyBeyond the MSSM
One of the problems of the MSSM is the origin of the Higgsino mass term µHuHd
Singlet superfield extension λSHuHd → Next-to-Minimal SSM (NMSSM)µ parameter generated by an electroweak scale vacuum expectation value(vev) of the singlet scalar component λ〈S〉HuHd
Gauginos are commonly described by Majorana spinors ΨM = Ψ†M
Origin of µ-parameter(s) can also be explained in Dirac-gaugino modelsScenario not yet realized in any UV completion!!
In conventional SUSY models there is a Z2 symmetry, R-parity, implying that inany SUSY interaction one has to have an even number of sparticles
lightest susy particle (LSP) kinematically forbidden to decay (stable)→dark matter candidate.
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 24 / 43
Theory and Phenomenology Beyond the MSSM
SO(10) GUT with dark matterImpose SO(10) symmetry among the free parameters of the MSSM+νR (MSSM extendedwith right-handed neutrinos)
1. Fermions and sfermions in 16 irreps of SO(10)2. Higgs and Higgsinos in 10⊕ 126 irreps of SO(10)3. Gauge and gauginos (binos and winos) in 45 adjoint irreps of SO(10)
Recall that µ and mHu have completely different originLet us try to stabilize just mHu upon infinitesimal fluctuations of input parameters
∆i = 2
∣∣∣∣∣Pi
m2Z
∂m2Hu
∂Pi
∣∣∣∣∣∆ = max{∆i}
Pi → theoryparameters
(1) Dark green points: Preferred DM and∆ < 10
(2) Light green points: Preferred DM and10 < ∆ < 100
(3) Dark blue points: little DM and ∆ < 10
(4) Light blue points: little DM and10 < ∆ < 100
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 25 / 43
Theory and Phenomenology Beyond the MSSM
SO(10) GUT with dark matterImpose SO(10) symmetry among the free parameters of the MSSM+νR (MSSM extendedwith right-handed neutrinos)
1. Fermions and sfermions in 16 irreps of SO(10)2. Higgs and Higgsinos in 10⊕ 126 irreps of SO(10)3. Gauge and gauginos (binos and winos) in 45 adjoint irreps of SO(10)
Recall that µ and mHu have completely different originLet us try to stabilize just mHu upon infinitesimal fluctuations of input parameters
∆i = 2
∣∣∣∣∣Pi
m2Z
∂m2Hu
∂Pi
∣∣∣∣∣∆ = max{∆i}
Pi → theoryparameters
(1) Dark green points: Preferred DM and∆ < 10
(2) Light green points: Preferred DM and10 < ∆ < 100
(3) Dark blue points: little DM and ∆ < 10
(4) Light blue points: little DM and10 < ∆ < 100
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 25 / 43
Theory and Phenomenology Beyond the MSSM
Red points: Higgsino dark matter
Green points: Wino dark matter
Filled squares: Chargino NLSP
Diamonds: Neutralino NLSP
Circles: Stau NLSP
Observations
1. Considered non-universal gaugino masses
2. mHu and all SUSY breaking sector becomes natural (small fine-tuning)
3. compatible with large SUSY scale, Msusy ∼ 4 TeV for 125 GeV Higgs bosonmass
4. µ is fine-tuned→ interpret this as an indication that the origin of thisparameter is not understood
5. Considered R-Parity, which is an ad hoc symmetry. Is it really there?
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 26 / 43
Theory and Phenomenology Beyond the MSSM
Red points: Higgsino dark matter
Green points: Wino dark matter
Filled squares: Chargino NLSP
Diamonds: Neutralino NLSP
Circles: Stau NLSP
Observations
1. Considered non-universal gaugino masses
2. mHu and all SUSY breaking sector becomes natural (small fine-tuning)
3. compatible with large SUSY scale, Msusy ∼ 4 TeV for 125 GeV Higgs bosonmass
4. µ is fine-tuned→ interpret this as an indication that the origin of thisparameter is not understood
5. Considered R-Parity, which is an ad hoc symmetry. Is it really there?
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 26 / 43
Theory and Phenomenology Beyond the MSSM
Supersymmetry can well be hiding from detection in various ways:
It can be just heavy, beyond LHC14 reach
It can be completely decoupled from the (few)-TeV scale (split SUSY)
If R-parity is violated we lose the missing energy typical signatures to detectSUSY, becoming challenging for accelerators
Dirac gaugino models predict heavy gluinos and squark pair-production is highlysuppressed
So far SUSY is the best surviving theory explaining the hierarchy betweenweak and Planck scales
Most of its competitors are now dead or at least as challenged as SUSY byLHC data (E.g. Technicolor, Higgsless models)
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 27 / 43
Theory and Phenomenology Beyond the MSSM
Supersymmetry can well be hiding from detection in various ways:
It can be just heavy, beyond LHC14 reach
It can be completely decoupled from the (few)-TeV scale (split SUSY)
If R-parity is violated we lose the missing energy typical signatures to detectSUSY, becoming challenging for accelerators
Dirac gaugino models predict heavy gluinos and squark pair-production is highlysuppressed
So far SUSY is the best surviving theory explaining the hierarchy betweenweak and Planck scales
Most of its competitors are now dead or at least as challenged as SUSY byLHC data (E.g. Technicolor, Higgsless models)
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 27 / 43
Theory and Phenomenology Beyond the MSSM
Supersymmetry can well be hiding from detection in various ways:
It can be just heavy, beyond LHC14 reach
It can be completely decoupled from the (few)-TeV scale (split SUSY)
If R-parity is violated we lose the missing energy typical signatures to detectSUSY, becoming challenging for accelerators
Dirac gaugino models predict heavy gluinos and squark pair-production is highlysuppressed
So far SUSY is the best surviving theory explaining the hierarchy betweenweak and Planck scales
Most of its competitors are now dead or at least as challenged as SUSY byLHC data (E.g. Technicolor, Higgsless models)
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 27 / 43
Theory and Phenomenology Beyond the MSSM
Supersymmetry can well be hiding from detection in various ways:
It can be just heavy, beyond LHC14 reach
It can be completely decoupled from the (few)-TeV scale (split SUSY)
If R-parity is violated we lose the missing energy typical signatures to detectSUSY, becoming challenging for accelerators
Dirac gaugino models predict heavy gluinos and squark pair-production is highlysuppressed
So far SUSY is the best surviving theory explaining the hierarchy betweenweak and Planck scales
Most of its competitors are now dead or at least as challenged as SUSY byLHC data (E.g. Technicolor, Higgsless models)
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 27 / 43
Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F -flavour Revisiting Trinification
Outline
1 IntroductionMotivationThe Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model - MSSM
2 Experimental resultsExclusion limitsExcesses
3 Theory and PhenomenologyImplications from the Higgs boson massBeyond the MSSM
4 Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F-flavourRevisiting TrinificationDescription of the modelTree-level results
5 Concluding Remarks
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 28 / 43
Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F -flavour Revisiting Trinification
Trinification (Glashow, Georgi and De Rujula 1984)J. E. Camargo-Molina, R. Pasechnik, M. O. P. Sampaio, J. Wessen
Why trinification?
SU(3)L ⊗ SU(3)R ⊗ SU(3)C with Z3 → gauge unification
All matter can be arranged elegantly in bi-fundamental representations.
No Adjoint Higgses needed to break the symmetry down to the SM.
Gauge symmetry preserves baryon number→ Proton decay through gaugeboson exchange is suppressed.(Achiman and Stech, 1978) (Glashow and Kang 1984)
The model can be motivated as low energy versions of E8 ⊗ E8 heterotic stringtheory (Gross et al. 1985), E6 orbifold (Braam et al. 2010) and N = 8supergravity(Cremmer et al. 1979).
Trinification models can account for baryon-antibaryon assymetry through heavyHiggs decays at one-loop(He and Pakvasa, 1986).
The model can accomodate any quark and lepton masses and mixing angles(Sayre et al. 2006)
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 29 / 43
Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F -flavour Revisiting Trinification
Revisiting Trinification
Issues of this class of models
Unmotivated Hierarchy between the breaking of trinification to the SM gaugegroup and Electroweak Symmetry Breaking.
Difficult to avoid TeV-scale lepton masses without higher-dimensional operatorsor large Higgs representations within minimal SUSY trinification. (Cauet et al.2011)
Poses a problem for proton decay and adds a lot of free parametersFine tuning (in order to suppress large masses)
Due to the high number of particles, loop calculations are cumbersome. One-loopscalar spectrum has not been calculated.
Vacuum stability not studied (technically challenging)
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 30 / 43
Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F -flavour Revisiting Trinification
Revisiting Trinification
We propose several ways of addressing the issues present in trinification models.
Features
We add a global SU(2)flavour symmetry inspired by SU(3)flavour (not unique).
The potentials are engineered so that it allows a tree level local-minima with onenon-zero VEV −→ trinification symmetry broken down to Left-Rightsymmetry
Higgs sector shares gauge and flavour quantum numbers with the lepton sector−→ Higgs-lepton unification.
A possibility to EWSB at the quantum level.
In this talk we will only report on the tree level breaking
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 31 / 43
Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F -flavour Revisiting Trinification
Revisiting Trinification
We propose several ways of addressing the issues present in trinification models.
Features
We add a global SU(2)flavour symmetry inspired by SU(3)flavour (not unique).
The potentials are engineered so that it allows a tree level local-minima with onenon-zero VEV −→ trinification symmetry broken down to Left-Rightsymmetry
Higgs sector shares gauge and flavour quantum numbers with the lepton sector−→ Higgs-lepton unification.
A possibility to EWSB at the quantum level.
In this talk we will only report on the tree level breaking
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 31 / 43
Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F -flavour Description of the model
Outline
1 IntroductionMotivationThe Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model - MSSM
2 Experimental resultsExclusion limitsExcesses
3 Theory and PhenomenologyImplications from the Higgs boson massBeyond the MSSM
4 Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F-flavourRevisiting TrinificationDescription of the modelTree-level results
5 Concluding Remarks
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 32 / 43
Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F -flavour Description of the model
Supersymmetric trinificationDescription of the model
Left-Right-Color gauge symmetry augmented by global flavour and adiscrete permutation group
G3 = [SU(3)C ⊗ SU(3)L ⊗ SU(3)R]⊗ SU(3)F n Z3 .
Unification of gauge couplings due to Z3 (permutes the gauge fields)
The superpotential
W3=λ3εαβγQ l,αx Q
x,βr L r,γ
l
λ3 → Universal Yukawa couplingα, β and γ→ flavour indicesx, l and r → colour, left-chirality and right-chirality respectively
L r,γl =
H0u H−
d νH+
u H0∗d e
νc ec φ
γ , Qx,β
r =
uc1 uc
2 uc3
dc1 dc
2 dc3
Dc1 Dc
2 Dc3
β , Q l,αx =
u1 d1 D1u2 d2 D2u3 d3 D3
α ,
Higgs-Lepton unification in L r,γl
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 33 / 43
Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F -flavour Description of the model
Supersymmetric trinificationDescription of the model
Left-Right-Color gauge symmetry augmented by global flavour and adiscrete permutation group
G3 = [SU(3)C ⊗ SU(3)L ⊗ SU(3)R]⊗ SU(3)F n Z3 .
Unification of gauge couplings due to Z3 (permutes the gauge fields)
The superpotential
W3=λ3εαβγQ l,αx Q
x,βr L r,γ
l
λ3 → Universal Yukawa couplingα, β and γ→ flavour indicesx, l and r → colour, left-chirality and right-chirality respectively
L r,γl =
H0u H−
d νH+
u H0∗d e
νc ec φ
γ , Qx,β
r =
uc1 uc
2 uc3
dc1 dc
2 dc3
Dc1 Dc
2 Dc3
β , Q l,αx =
u1 d1 D1u2 d2 D2u3 d3 D3
α ,
Higgs-Lepton unification in L r,γl
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 33 / 43
Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F -flavour Description of the model
Supersymmetric trinificationDescription of the model
Left-Right-Color gauge symmetry augmented by global flavour and adiscrete permutation group
G3 = [SU(3)C ⊗ SU(3)L ⊗ SU(3)R]⊗ SU(3)F n Z3 .
Unification of gauge couplings due to Z3 (permutes the gauge fields)
The superpotential
W3=λ3εαβγQ l,αx Q
x,βr L r,γ
l
λ3 → Universal Yukawa couplingα, β and γ→ flavour indicesx, l and r → colour, left-chirality and right-chirality respectively
L r,γl =
H0u H−
d νH+
u H0∗d e
νc ec φ
γ , Qx,β
r =
uc1 uc
2 uc3
dc1 dc
2 dc3
Dc1 Dc
2 Dc3
β , Q l,αx =
u1 d1 D1u2 d2 D2u3 d3 D3
α ,
Higgs-Lepton unification in L r,γl
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 33 / 43
Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F -flavour Description of the model
Charges of the supermultiplets
Chiral Supermultiplet FieldsSuperfield SU(3)C SU(3)L SU(3)R SU(3)F
Lepton L r,γl 1 3l 3r 3γ
Left-Quark Q l,αx 3x 3l 1 3α
Right-Quark Qx,β
r 3x 1 3r 3β
Gauge Supermultiplet FieldsSuperfield SU(3)C SU(3)L SU(3)R SU(3)F
Gluon Caµ, λa
3 8 x2x1
1 1 1Left-Gluon Aa
µ, λaL 1 8 l2
l11 1
Right-Gluon Baµ, λa
R 1 1 8 r2r1
1
All together we have 162 real scalars, 81 chiral fermions + 24 gauginosand 24 gauge bosons
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 34 / 43
Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F -flavour Description of the model
Charges of the supermultiplets
Chiral Supermultiplet FieldsSuperfield SU(3)C SU(3)L SU(3)R SU(3)F
Lepton L r,γl 1 3l 3r 3γ
Left-Quark Q l,αx 3x 3l 1 3α
Right-Quark Qx,β
r 3x 1 3r 3β
Gauge Supermultiplet FieldsSuperfield SU(3)C SU(3)L SU(3)R SU(3)F
Gluon Caµ, λa
3 8 x2x1
1 1 1Left-Gluon Aa
µ, λaL 1 8 l2
l11 1
Right-Gluon Baµ, λa
R 1 1 8 r2r1
1
All together we have 162 real scalars, 81 chiral fermions + 24 gauginosand 24 gauge bosons
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 34 / 43
Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F -flavour Description of the model
Charges of the supermultiplets
Chiral Supermultiplet FieldsSuperfield SU(3)C SU(3)L SU(3)R SU(3)F
Lepton L r,γl 1 3l 3r 3γ
Left-Quark Q l,αx 3x 3l 1 3α
Right-Quark Qx,β
r 3x 1 3r 3β
Gauge Supermultiplet FieldsSuperfield SU(3)C SU(3)L SU(3)R SU(3)F
Gluon Caµ, λa
3 8 x2x1
1 1 1Left-Gluon Aa
µ, λaL 1 8 l2
l11 1
Right-Gluon Baµ, λa
R 1 1 8 r2r1
1
All together we have 162 real scalars, 81 chiral fermions + 24 gauginosand 24 gauge bosons
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 34 / 43
Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F -flavour Description of the model
Tree-level potential for the model with SU(3)F does not allow for any stableminimum
Explicitly break SU(3)F → SU(2)F and add soft SUSY breaking terms withparameters inspired by the original SU(3)F model
first and second generations form SU(2)F doublets
third generation is a singlet under SU(2)F
Superpotential with SU(2)F flavour
W2 = λ3εαβ
(Q l,α
x Qx,β
r L rl + Q
x,α
r L r,βl Q l
x + L r,αl Q l,β
x Qx
r
)+ λ2Q l
x Qx
r L rl
+λQ
3!εl1l2l3ε
x1x2x3 Q l1x1
Q l2x2
Q l3x3+λQ
3!εx1x2x3ε
r1r2r3 Qx1
r1Q
x2r2
Qx3
r3
+λL
3!εr1r2r3ε
l1l2l3 L r1l1
L r2l2
L r3l3
For the SU(3)F model only D-terms contributed to the vacuum of the scalarpotential
With reduced flavour we also allow F-term contributions coming from thelast term of W2
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 35 / 43
Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F -flavour Description of the model
Tree-level potential for the model with SU(3)F does not allow for any stableminimum
Explicitly break SU(3)F → SU(2)F and add soft SUSY breaking terms withparameters inspired by the original SU(3)F model
first and second generations form SU(2)F doublets
third generation is a singlet under SU(2)F
Superpotential with SU(2)F flavour
W2 = λ3εαβ
(Q l,α
x Qx,β
r L rl + Q
x,α
r L r,βl Q l
x + L r,αl Q l,β
x Qx
r
)+ λ2Q l
x Qx
r L rl
+λQ
3!εl1l2l3ε
x1x2x3 Q l1x1
Q l2x2
Q l3x3+λQ
3!εx1x2x3ε
r1r2r3 Qx1
r1Q
x2r2
Qx3
r3
+λL
3!εr1r2r3ε
l1l2l3 L r1l1
L r2l2
L r3l3
For the SU(3)F model only D-terms contributed to the vacuum of the scalarpotential
With reduced flavour we also allow F-term contributions coming from thelast term of W2
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 35 / 43
Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F -flavour Description of the model
As SUSY is protected against quantum corrections one has to softly break it atleading order
Vsoft = m20
{α′L r,α
l L†lr,α + α3L rl L†lr
}+ A0εr1r2r3ε
l1l2l3 L r1l1
L r2l2
L r3l3
+ h.c.
+ m20
{β′Q
x,α
r Q†rx,α + β3Q
x
r Q†rx
}+ B0εx1x2x3ε
r1r2r3 Qx1
r1Q
x2
r2Q
x3
r3+ h.c.
+ m20
{γ′Q l,α
x Q†xl,α + γ3Q l,3x Q†xl,3
}+ C0εl1l2l3ε
x1x2x3 Q l1x1
Q l2x2
Q l3x3+ h.c.
with the first line contributing to the vacuum of the tree-level potential.
Vtot = VF + VD + Vsoft
1 Yukawa interactions VF (F-terms) come from the superpotential
VF =
∣∣∣∣∂W∂Φ
∣∣∣∣22 VD are scalar interactions of the form
VD =12
∑G
∑a
g2GTr
[Φ†Ta
GΦ]2
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 36 / 43
Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F -flavour Description of the model
As SUSY is protected against quantum corrections one has to softly break it atleading order
Vsoft = m20
{α′L r,α
l L†lr,α + α3L rl L†lr
}+ A0εr1r2r3ε
l1l2l3 L r1l1
L r2l2
L r3l3
+ h.c.
+ m20
{β′Q
x,α
r Q†rx,α + β3Q
x
r Q†rx
}+ B0εx1x2x3ε
r1r2r3 Qx1
r1Q
x2
r2Q
x3
r3+ h.c.
+ m20
{γ′Q l,α
x Q†xl,α + γ3Q l,3x Q†xl,3
}+ C0εl1l2l3ε
x1x2x3 Q l1x1
Q l2x2
Q l3x3+ h.c.
with the first line contributing to the vacuum of the tree-level potential.
Vtot = VF + VD + Vsoft
1 Yukawa interactions VF (F-terms) come from the superpotential
VF =
∣∣∣∣∂W∂Φ
∣∣∣∣22 VD are scalar interactions of the form
VD =12
∑G
∑a
g2GTr
[Φ†Ta
GΦ]2
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 36 / 43
Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F -flavour Tree-level results
Outline
1 IntroductionMotivationThe Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model - MSSM
2 Experimental resultsExclusion limitsExcesses
3 Theory and PhenomenologyImplications from the Higgs boson massBeyond the MSSM
4 Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F-flavourRevisiting TrinificationDescription of the modelTree-level results
5 Concluding Remarks
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 37 / 43
Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F -flavour Tree-level results
Tree-level results
Only the splepton sector contributes to the vacuum of the scalar potential attree-level
1. Choose a vacuum that breaks SU(3)L ⊗ SU(3)R → SU(2)L ⊗ SU(2)R ⊗ U(1)x
〈L〉 rl =
0 0 00 0 00 0 v√
2
2. Calculate minimum conditions with gU the unified gauge coupling of [SU(3)]3
α3 = −g2
Uv2
3m20
3. Calculate the Hessian matrix and apply minimum conditions
4. Calculate eigenvalues
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 38 / 43
Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F -flavour Tree-level results
Tree-level results
Only the splepton sector contributes to the vacuum of the scalar potential attree-level
1. Choose a vacuum that breaks SU(3)L ⊗ SU(3)R → SU(2)L ⊗ SU(2)R ⊗ U(1)x
〈L〉 rl =
0 0 00 0 00 0 v√
2
2. Calculate minimum conditions with gU the unified gauge coupling of [SU(3)]3
α3 = −g2
Uv2
3m20
3. Calculate the Hessian matrix and apply minimum conditions
4. Calculate eigenvalues
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 38 / 43
Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F -flavour Tree-level results
Tree-level results
Only the splepton sector contributes to the vacuum of the scalar potential attree-level
1. Choose a vacuum that breaks SU(3)L ⊗ SU(3)R → SU(2)L ⊗ SU(2)R ⊗ U(1)x
〈L〉 rl =
0 0 00 0 00 0 v√
2
2. Calculate minimum conditions with gU the unified gauge coupling of [SU(3)]3
α3 = −g2
Uv2
3m20
3. Calculate the Hessian matrix and apply minimum conditions
4. Calculate eigenvalues
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 38 / 43
Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F -flavour Tree-level results
Tree-level results
After requiring the eigenvalues of the Hessian matrix to be positive semi-definite (minimum) oneobtains the conditions
α′ >g2
U v2
6m20∧
{(0 < gU < λL ∧
(g2U−λ2)v
6√
26 A0 6
(−g2U+λ2)v
6√
2
)∨ (λL = gU ∧ A0 = 0)
}General slepton mass spectrum
# of real d.o.f.’s (mass)2 Scalar components9 0 νc,3, ec,3, ν3, e3, Im
[φ3]
1 2g2U v2
3Re[φ3]
4 12
(6√
2A0v − g2uv2 + v2λL
)H3
u, H3d
4 12
(−6√
2A0v − g2uv2 + v2λL
)H3
u, H3d
16 16
(6α′m2
0 − g2Uv2)
H(1,2)u , H(1,2)
d16 1
12
(12α′m2
0 + g2Uv2)
νc,(1,2), ec,(1,2), ν(1,2), e(1,2)
4 13
(3α′m2
0 + g2Uv2)
φ(1,2)
H0u H−
d ν
H+u H0∗
d eνc ec φ
γ 9 Goldstone bosons→ longitudinal modes of new (heavy) gauge bosons
Possible runaway directions reside in the Higgs sector
α′ and λL crucial for vacuum stability→ absent in SU(3)F
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 39 / 43
Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F -flavour Tree-level results
Tree-level resultsFor the particular solution with gauge-lepton Yukawa unification
α′ > g2U v2
6m20∧ λL = gU ∧ A0 = 0
Slepton mass spectrum# of real d.o.f.’s (mass)2 Scalar components
9 0 νc,3, ec,3, ν3, e3, Im[φ3]
1 2g2U v2
3Re[φ3]
4 0 H3u, H3
d4 0 H3
u, H3d
16 16
(6α′m2
0 − g2Uv2)
H(1,2)u , H(1,2)
d16 1
12
(12α′m2
0 + g2Uv2)
νc,(1,2), ec,(1,2), ν(1,2), e(1,2)
4 13
(3α′m2
0 + g2Uv2)
φ(1,2)
Furthermore in the limit α′= g2Uv2
6m20
, first and second generation Higgses becomemassless at tree-level
Quantum corrections will (re)generate masses for the Higgs sector
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 40 / 43
Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F -flavour Tree-level results
Tree-level results
Our vacuum choice is the only single one allowing for a stable tree-levelminimum with spontaneous gauge symmetry breaking
Good motivation for L-R models
Squarks acquire tree-level (heavy) masses which is compatible with lack of SUSYobservation at the LHC
SM fermions are massless at tree-level and their masses will only be generatedonce the Higgs fields develop vevs by means of Coleman-Weinberg dimensionaltransmutation [Phys. Rev. D 7, 1888 (1973), Phys. Rev. D 13, 12, (1976)]
> Quantum effects generate exponentially suppressed mass scale
〈H0,(1,2,3)u 〉 ∼ 〈H0,(1,2,3)
d 〉 . 〈νc,(1,2)〉 � v
Radiative see-saw mechanism may be naturally present in the model due toheavy R-H neutrinos
Compatible with LHC diboson excess?
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 41 / 43
Supersymmetric Trinification with SU(2)F -flavour Tree-level results
Tree-level results
Our vacuum choice is the only single one allowing for a stable tree-levelminimum with spontaneous gauge symmetry breaking
Good motivation for L-R models
Squarks acquire tree-level (heavy) masses which is compatible with lack of SUSYobservation at the LHC
SM fermions are massless at tree-level and their masses will only be generatedonce the Higgs fields develop vevs by means of Coleman-Weinberg dimensionaltransmutation [Phys. Rev. D 7, 1888 (1973), Phys. Rev. D 13, 12, (1976)]
> Quantum effects generate exponentially suppressed mass scale
〈H0,(1,2,3)u 〉 ∼ 〈H0,(1,2,3)
d 〉 . 〈νc,(1,2)〉 � v
Radiative see-saw mechanism may be naturally present in the model due toheavy R-H neutrinos
Compatible with LHC diboson excess?
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 41 / 43
Concluding Remarks
Concluding Remarks
Part I
SUSY searches at the LHC are putting significant constraints on the stronginteracting sector but weak sector is still widely unexplored
Recently reported excesses, are tantalizing hints towards BSM models such asSUSY
The often claimed death of natural SUSY (and MSSM) may instead mean that,before putting SUSY to grave, we need to deepen our understanding, developnovel approaches and come up with new ideas!
The LHC has just started exploring a new world and, so far, supersymmetryis by no means excluded
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 42 / 43
Concluding Remarks
Concluding Remarks
Part II
Considered a trinification model with two main features
(1) Higgs-lepton unification (same supermultiplet)(2) Global flavour SU(2) symmetry
We have obtained a stable minimum at tree-level with one single vev
Only allowed vacuum setting (up to rotations in flavour space)Spontaneously break trinification down to a SU(2)L ⊗ SU(2)R ⊗ U(1)x model
Electroweak scale generated by dimensional transmutation (work inprogress)
Morais (L.U. & A.U.) Is supersymmetry alive? Status from theory and experiment September 30, 2015 43 / 43