A SUSY SO(10) GUT with 2 Intermediate Scales



Similar documents
SUSY Breaking and Axino Cosmology

ffmssmsc a C++ library for spectrum calculation and renormalization group analysis of the MSSM

How To Find The Higgs Boson

Mass spectrum prediction in non-minimal supersymmetric models

Axion/Saxion Cosmology Revisited

Theoretical Particle Physics FYTN04: Oral Exam Questions, version ht15

Measurement of Neutralino Mass Differences with CMS in Dilepton Final States at the Benchmark Point LM9

Search for supersymmetric Dark Matter with GLAST!!

Selected Topics in Elementary Particle Physics ( Haupt-Seminar )

Physics Department, Southampton University Highfield, Southampton, S09 5NH, U.K.

Vector-like quarks t and partners

Mini-Split. Stanford University, Stanford, CA USA. and Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, NJ USA

How To Teach Physics At The Lhc

The Higgs sector in the MSSM with CP-phases at higher orders

FINDING SUPERSYMMETRY AT THE LHC

Extensions of the Standard Model (part 2)

STRING THEORY: Past, Present, and Future

Standard Model of Particle Physics

Bounding the Higgs width at the LHC

GRAVITINO DARK MATTER

Top rediscovery at ATLAS and CMS

Implications of CMS searches for the Constrained MSSM A Bayesian approach

Higgs and Electroweak Physics

Gamma-rays from Dark Matter Mini-Spikes in Andromeda Galaxy M31. Mattia Fornasa Dipartimento di Fisica G. Galilei I.N.F.N. Padova

Introduction to SME and Scattering Theory. Don Colladay. New College of Florida Sarasota, FL, 34243, U.S.A.

Highlights of Recent CMS Results. Dmytro Kovalskyi (UCSB)

High Energy Physics. Lecture 4 More kinematics and a picture show of particle collisions

Search for Dark Matter at the LHC

arxiv:hep-ph/ v1 17 Oct 1993

Calorimetry in particle physics experiments

The Compact Muon Solenoid Experiment. CMS Note. Mailing address: CMS CERN, CH-1211 GENEVA 23, Switzerland. D. J. Mangeol, U.

arxiv: v1 [hep-ph] 28 Jun 2010

Physik des Higgs Bosons. Higgs decays V( ) Re( ) Im( ) Figures and calculations from A. Djouadi, Phys.Rept. 457 (2008) 1-216

Risultati recenti dell'esperimento CMS ad LHC e prospettive per il run a 14 TeV

Monodromies, Fluxes, and Compact Three-Generation F-theory GUTs

Particle Physics. Michaelmas Term 2011 Prof Mark Thomson. Handout 7 : Symmetries and the Quark Model. Introduction/Aims

Channels & Challenges New Physics at LHC

Looking for Magnetic Monopoles AT The Large Hadron Collider. Vicente Vento Universidad de Valencia-IFIC

Open access to data and analysis tools from the CMS experiment at the LHC

Three-nucleon interaction dynamics studied via the deuteron-proton breakup. Elżbieta Stephan Institute of Physics, University of Silesia

Scalar Mediated Fermion Masses for Technicolor

Validation of the MadAnalysis 5 implementation of ATLAS-SUSY-13-05

Basic Nuclear Concepts

The Higgs Boson. Linac08 Victoria BC, Canada CANADA S NATIONAL LABORATORY FOR PARTICLE AND NUCLEAR PHYSICS

Middle East Technical University. Studying Selected Tools for HEP: CalcHEP

0.33 d down c charm s strange t top b bottom 1 3

arxiv:hep-ph/ v1 31 Dec 2001

Gauge theories and the standard model of elementary particle physics

From Jet Scaling to Jet Vetos

Weak Interactions: towards the Standard Model of Physics

1 Introduction. 1 There may, of course, in principle, exist other universes, but they are not accessible to our

arxiv:hep-ph/ v2 4 Oct 2003

A Study of the Top Quark Production Threshold at a Future Electron-Positron Linear Collider

FLAVOUR OVERVIEW. Luca Silvestrini. INFN, Rome. M. SUSY2013. Special thanks to D. Derkach & M. Bona

Physics Department Phone: (541) Center of High Energy Physics Fax: (541)

Study of the B D* ℓ ν with the Partial Reconstruction Technique

Conservative Day Trading Strategy for Forex

Low- and high-energy neutrinos from gamma-ray bursts

Lepton Flavour LHC?

PoS(LHCPP2013)033. Rare B meson decays at LHC. Francesco Dettori Nikhef and Vrij Universiteit, Amsterdam fdettori@nikhef.nl.

FCC JGU WBS_v0034.xlsm

Investigation of a dark matter particle in the Higgs Portal model. Alicia Wongel

The degree of a polynomial function is equal to the highest exponent found on the independent variables.

Particle Physics. The Standard Model. A New Periodic Table

THREE QUARKS: u, d, s. Precursor 2: Eightfold Way, Discovery of Ω - Quark Model: first three quarks and three colors

The future of string theory

Cross section, Flux, Luminosity, Scattering Rates

variables to investigate Monte Carlo methods of t t production

Aggressive Day Trading Strategy for Forex

Supersymmetric electroweak models oer the simplest solution of the gauge hierarchy problem [1]-[4]. In real life supersymmetry has to be broken and th

Spatially separated excitons in 2D and 1D

REALIZING EINSTEIN S DREAM Exploring Our Mysterious Universe

About the Author. journals as Physics Letters, Nuclear Physics and The Physical Review.

Measurement of the Mass of the Top Quark in the l+ Jets Channel Using the Matrix Element Method

DOING PHYSICS WITH MATLAB COMPUTATIONAL OPTICS RAYLEIGH-SOMMERFELD DIFFRACTION INTEGRAL OF THE FIRST KIND

Decays of the Higgs Bosons

Transcription:

A SUSY SO(10) GUT with 2 Intermediate Scales Manuel Drees Bonn University & Bethe Center for Theoretical Physics SUSY SO(10) p. 1/25

Contents 1 Motivation: SO(10), intermediate scales SUSY SO(10) p. 2/25

Contents 1 Motivation: SO(10), intermediate scales 2 The Model SUSY SO(10) p. 2/25

Contents 1 Motivation: SO(10), intermediate scales 2 The Model 3 Neutralino Dark Matter SUSY SO(10) p. 2/25

Contents 1 Motivation: SO(10), intermediate scales 2 The Model 3 Neutralino Dark Matter 4 LHC Phenomenology SUSY SO(10) p. 2/25

Contents 1 Motivation: SO(10), intermediate scales 2 The Model 3 Neutralino Dark Matter 4 LHC Phenomenology 5 Summary SUSY SO(10) p. 2/25

Contents 1 Motivation: SO(10), intermediate scales 2 The Model 3 Neutralino Dark Matter 4 LHC Phenomenology 5 Summary Based on: MD, Ju Min Kim, arxiv:0810.1875v1 (JHEP); MD, Ju Min Kim, Eun-Kyung Park, to appear very soon SUSY SO(10) p. 2/25

Introduction: Why SO(10)? 3 gauge couplings of SM unify quite nicely in MSSM SUSY SO(10) p. 3/25

Introduction: Why SO(10)? 3 gauge couplings of SM unify quite nicely in MSSM Minimal unified group has rank 4: SU(5). SUSY SO(10) p. 3/25

Introduction: Why SO(10)? 3 gauge couplings of SM unify quite nicely in MSSM Minimal unified group has rank 4: SU(5). In SU(5), ν R would have to be gauge singlet. SUSY SO(10) p. 3/25

Introduction: Why SO(10)? 3 gauge couplings of SM unify quite nicely in MSSM Minimal unified group has rank 4: SU(5). In SU(5), ν R would have to be gauge singlet. Instead, in SO(10): ν R required to fill 16 with matter (s)fermions! SUSY SO(10) p. 3/25

Introduction: Why SO(10)? 3 gauge couplings of SM unify quite nicely in MSSM Minimal unified group has rank 4: SU(5). In SU(5), ν R would have to be gauge singlet. Instead, in SO(10): ν R required to fill 16 with matter (s)fermions! Naturally allows to implement see saw mechanism! SUSY SO(10) p. 3/25

Introduction: Why intermediate scales? SO(10) has rank 5 SUSY SO(10) p. 4/25

Introduction: Why intermediate scales? SO(10) has rank 5 Usually need several Higgs reps to break it to SM gauge group SUSY SO(10) p. 4/25

Introduction: Why intermediate scales? SO(10) has rank 5 Usually need several Higgs reps to break it to SM gauge group No reason why the corresponding vevs should be the same SUSY SO(10) p. 4/25

Introduction: Why intermediate scales? SO(10) has rank 5 Usually need several Higgs reps to break it to SM gauge group No reason why the corresponding vevs should be the same See saw: m ν = m2 ν D M νr < 3 mev, if m νd m t = 170 GeV, M νr M X 10 16 GeV! SUSY SO(10) p. 4/25

Introduction: Why intermediate scales? SO(10) has rank 5 Usually need several Higgs reps to break it to SM gauge group No reason why the corresponding vevs should be the same See saw: m ν = m2 ν D M νr < 3 mev, if m νd m t = 170 GeV, M νr M X 10 16 GeV! Need m ν3 > 50 mev! SUSY SO(10) p. 4/25

Introduction: Why intermediate scales? SO(10) has rank 5 Usually need several Higgs reps to break it to SM gauge group No reason why the corresponding vevs should be the same See saw: m ν = m2 ν D M νr < 3 mev, if m νd m t = 170 GeV, M νr M X 10 16 GeV! Need m ν3 > 50 mev! = need M νr 5 10 14 GeV! SUSY SO(10) p. 4/25

The model Ref: al. et Senjanovic, Nucl. Phys B597 (2001) 89 SO(10) SU(4) SU(2) L SU(2) R D at M X using 54 SU(3) C U(1) B L SU(2) L SU(2) R at M C using 45 SU(3) C SU(2) L U(1) Y at M R using 126,126 D: Discrete symmetry, ensures parity (same L and R couplings) SUSY SO(10) p. 5/25

Higgs fields Most general renormalizable superpotential = light Higgs states: SUSY SO(10) p. 6/25

Higgs fields Most general renormalizable superpotential = light Higgs states: 54 = (1,1,1) (20,1,1) (1,3,3) (6,2,2); 45 = (15,1,1) (1,1,3) (1,3,1) (6,2,2); 126 = (10,1,3) (10,3,1) (15,2,2) (6,1,1); 126 = (10,1,3) (10,3,1) (15,2,2) (6,1,1). Decomposition under SU(4) SU(2) L SU(2) R ; components obtaining vev are written first. SUSY SO(10) p. 6/25

Higgs spectrum all of 54 State Mass all of 45, except (15,1,1) 45 all of 126 and 126, except 10, 10 of SU(4) M X (10,3,1) 126 and (10,3,1) 126 3, 6 of SU(3) C in (10,1,3) 126 and (10,1,3) 126 M C color triplets of (15,1,1) 45 (δ 0 δ 0 ), δ +, δ M R [ ] M 2 color octet and singlet of (15,1,1) A M 1 max R M C, M2 C M X (δ 0 + δ 0 ), δ ++, δ M2 M 2 R /M X δ = (1,1,3) 126 ; δ = (1,1,3) 126 SUSY SO(10) p. 7/25

Running gauge couplings Existence of states with mass < M R is crucial for allowing intermediate scales, given that single step unification works. SUSY SO(10) p. 8/25

Running gauge couplings Existence of states with mass < M R is crucial for allowing intermediate scales, given that single step unification works. From RGE: Can compute M C and M R for given M X (and given weak scale parameters): No prediction for M X or ratios of weak scale couplings. SUSY SO(10) p. 8/25

Running gauge couplings Existence of states with mass < M R is crucial for allowing intermediate scales, given that single step unification works. From RGE: Can compute M C and M R for given M X (and given weak scale parameters): No prediction for M X or ratios of weak scale couplings. In particular, M X = M C = M R remains possible: allows smooth transition to Grand Desert SUSY SO(10) p. 8/25

Running gauge couplings Existence of states with mass < M R is crucial for allowing intermediate scales, given that single step unification works. From RGE: Can compute M C and M R for given M X (and given weak scale parameters): No prediction for M X or ratios of weak scale couplings. In particular, M X = M C = M R remains possible: allows smooth transition to Grand Desert Introduce second pair of 10, 10 with mass M 2, to allow more realistic fermion masses (see below). SUSY SO(10) p. 8/25

Relation between scales 16.5 16 log(q/gev) 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 log(m X /GeV) log(m C /GeV) log(m R /GeV) 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 1/α U SUSY SO(10) p. 9/25

Superpotential above M C W = Y 1 F c FΦ 1 + 1 2 Y N ( F c ΣR F c + F Σ L F ) F = (4, 2, 1): left handed matter fields F c = ( 4, 1, 2): right handed matter fields Φ 1,2 = (1, 2, 2): Higgs bi doublets Σ R = (10, 1, 3) of 126 Σ L = (10, 3, 1) of 126 SUSY SO(10) p. 10/25

Superpotential above M C W = Y 1 F c FΦ 1 + 1 2 Y N ( F c ΣR F c + F Σ L F ) F = (4, 2, 1): left handed matter fields F c = ( 4, 1, 2): right handed matter fields Φ 1,2 = (1, 2, 2): Higgs bi doublets Σ R = (10, 1, 3) of 126 Σ L = (10, 3, 1) of 126 Have set coupling Y 2 of Φ 2 to zero: can always be done via field re definition SUSY SO(10) p. 10/25

Superpotential above M C W = Y 1 F c FΦ 1 + 1 2 Y N ( F c ΣR F c + F Σ L F ) F = (4, 2, 1): left handed matter fields F c = ( 4, 1, 2): right handed matter fields Φ 1,2 = (1, 2, 2): Higgs bi doublets Σ R = (10, 1, 3) of 126 Σ L = (10, 3, 1) of 126 Have set coupling Y 2 of Φ 2 to zero: can always be done via field re definition Y N generates ν R mass! SUSY SO(10) p. 10/25

Superpotential between M R and M C W = Y q1 Q c QΦ 1 + Y l1 L c LΦ 1 + 1 2 Y NL c δl c Q c = ( 3, 1, 2, 1/3): right handed quarks Q = (3, 2, 1, 1/3): left handed quarks L c = (1, 1, 2, 1): right handed leptons L = (1, 2, 1, 1): left handed leptons δ = (1, 1, 3, 2): breaks SU(2) R U(1) B L U(1) Y. SUSY SO(10) p. 11/25

Superpotential between M R and M C W = Y q1 Q c QΦ 1 + Y l1 L c LΦ 1 + 1 2 Y NL c δl c Q c = ( 3, 1, 2, 1/3): right handed quarks Q = (3, 2, 1, 1/3): left handed quarks L c = (1, 1, 2, 1): right handed leptons L = (1, 2, 1, 1): left handed leptons δ = (1, 1, 3, 2): breaks SU(2) R U(1) B L U(1) Y. Matching condition at E = M C : Y q1 = Y l1 = Y 1 SUSY SO(10) p. 11/25

Superpotential between M R and M 2 W = Y u1 U c QH u1 + Y d1 D c QH d1 + Y l1 E c LH d1 + 1 2 Y NE c δ E c SUSY SO(10) p. 12/25

Superpotential between M R and M 2 W = Y u1 U c QH u1 + Y d1 D c QH d1 + Y l1 E c LH d1 + 1 2 Y NE c δ E c Matching condition at E = M R : Y u1 = Y d1 = Y q1 SUSY SO(10) p. 12/25

Superpotential below M 2 As in MSSM: W = Y u U c QH u + Y d D c H d + Y l E c LH d SUSY SO(10) p. 13/25

Superpotential below M 2 As in MSSM: W = Y u U c QH u + Y d D c H d + Y l E c LH d Matching: H u,d = cosϕ u,d H (u,d)1 +sin ϕ u,d H (u,d)2 = Y u,d = Y (u,d)1 cosϕ u,d SUSY SO(10) p. 13/25

Superpotential below M 2 As in MSSM: W = Y u U c QH u + Y d D c H d + Y l E c LH d Matching: H u,d = cosϕ u,d H (u,d)1 +sin ϕ u,d H (u,d)2 = Y u,d = Y (u,d)1 cosϕ u,d = need cos ϕ u 1, since Y t already near maximal SUSY SO(10) p. 13/25

Superpotential below M 2 As in MSSM: W = Y u U c QH u + Y d D c H d + Y l E c LH d Matching: H u,d = cosϕ u,d H (u,d)1 +sin ϕ u,d H (u,d)2 = Y u,d = Y (u,d)1 cosϕ u,d = need cos ϕ u 1, since Y t already near maximal = cosϕ d = Y d(m 2 ) Y u (M R ) [ g 2 1 (M R ) g 2 1 (M 2) ] 1/60 = Y d1 Y u,1 : always in large tanβ scenario for E M 2! SUSY SO(10) p. 13/25

Gaugino masses Assume unified boundary conditions: scalar mass m 0, gaugino mass M 1/2, single parameter A 0. SUSY SO(10) p. 14/25

Gaugino masses Assume unified boundary conditions: scalar mass m 0, gaugino mass M 1/2, single parameter A 0. Gauge β functions increase for E > M 2 = ratios M i /M 1/2 decrease (M i, i = 1, 2, 3: weak scale gaugino masses) SUSY SO(10) p. 14/25

Gaugino masses Assume unified boundary conditions: scalar mass m 0, gaugino mass M 1/2, single parameter A 0. Gauge β functions increase for E > M 2 = ratios M i /M 1/2 decrease (M i, i = 1, 2, 3: weak scale gaugino masses) E.g. for M X = 3 10 15 GeV (minimal value): M 1 = 0.23M 1/2 M 2 = 0.46M 1/2 M 3 = 1.4M 1/2 Coefficients nearly two times smaller than in msugra. SUSY SO(10) p. 14/25

Gaugino masses Assume unified boundary conditions: scalar mass m 0, gaugino mass M 1/2, single parameter A 0. Gauge β functions increase for E > M 2 = ratios M i /M 1/2 decrease (M i, i = 1, 2, 3: weak scale gaugino masses) E.g. for M X = 3 10 15 GeV (minimal value): M 1 = 0.23M 1/2 M 2 = 0.46M 1/2 M 3 = 1.4M 1/2 Coefficients nearly two times smaller than in msugra. Ratios M 1 : M 2 : M 3 same as in msugra! SUSY SO(10) p. 14/25

Sfermion masses (1 st generation) For fixed M i, get larger gaugino loop contributions to sfermion masses; partly cancels previous effect when expressed in terms of M 1/2 : SUSY SO(10) p. 15/25

Sfermion masses (1 st generation) For fixed M i, get larger gaugino loop contributions to sfermion masses; partly cancels previous effect when expressed in terms of M 1/2 : m 2 f(m SUSY ) = m 2 0 + c fm 2 1/2 cẽr = 0.15 (as in msugra); cẽl = 0.21 (smaller than in msugra); c q = 1.15 (smaller than in msugra). SUSY SO(10) p. 15/25

Sfermion masses (1 st generation) For fixed M i, get larger gaugino loop contributions to sfermion masses; partly cancels previous effect when expressed in terms of M 1/2 : m 2 f(m SUSY ) = m 2 0 + c fm 2 1/2 cẽr = 0.15 (as in msugra); cẽl = 0.21 (smaller than in msugra); c q = 1.15 (smaller than in msugra). mẽr 1.68 M 1 : No co annihilation of χ 0 1 with ẽ R, µ R! mẽl M 2 : No W l L decays! m q 0.75m g : Similar to msugra SUSY SO(10) p. 15/25

3 rd generation sfermions & Higgs Y N reduces m τl,r, m t L,R, m br SUSY SO(10) p. 16/25

3 rd generation sfermions & Higgs Y N reduces m τl,r, m t L,R, m br = increases m 2 H u (M SUSY ) (and hence m A ) SUSY SO(10) p. 16/25

3 rd generation sfermions & Higgs Y N reduces m τl,r, m t L,R, m br = increases m 2 H u (M SUSY ) (and hence m A ) = reduces µ(m SUSY ) via EWSB condition SUSY SO(10) p. 16/25

3 rd generation sfermions & Higgs Y N reduces m τl,r, m t L,R, m br = increases m 2 H u (M SUSY ) (and hence m A ) = reduces µ(m SUSY ) via EWSB condition m ν3 m2 t Y N M R = smaller m ν3 implies larger Y N! SUSY SO(10) p. 16/25

Effect on the spectrum 2e+06 (a) m 0 = 1500GeV, M 12 = 900GeV, A 0 = 0, tanb = 40 1.4 1.3 (b) m 0 = 700GeV, A 0 = 0, tanb = 50, m ν = 0.4eV M 12 = 700GeV M 12 = 1400GeV m 2 sf (M S ) 1.5e+06 1e+06 500000 m A0 /2mχ 0 1.2 1.1 m 2 t m 2 L τ m 2 L 0.9 t m 2 R τ R 0.8 1 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 m ν (ev) 15.6 15.7 15.8 15.9 16 16.1 16.2 log (M X /GeV) SUSY SO(10) p. 17/25

Survey of parameter space (a) tanb=40, A 0 =0, m ν =0.4eV (a) tanb=40, A 0 =0, m ν =0.2eV 2000 2000 1500 1500 m 0 (GeV) 1000 m 0 (GeV) 1000 500 500 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 M 1/2 (GeV) M 1/2 (GeV) Grey: no ESWB or tachyonic sfermion; red: mass bounds; pink: b sγ excluded; blue: favored by g µ ; green: DM allowed; black: all ok SUSY SO(10) p. 18/25

Survey of parameter space (a) tanb=40, A 0 =0, m ν =0.4eV (a) tanb=40, A 0 =0, m ν =0.2eV 2000 2000 1500 1500 m 0 (GeV) 1000 m 0 (GeV) 1000 500 500 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 M 1/2 (GeV) M 1/2 (GeV) Grey: no ESWB or tachyonic sfermion; red: mass bounds; pink: b sγ excluded; blue: favored by g µ ; green: DM allowed; black: all ok In msugra: don t find allowed region (DM & g µ ) with m 2 0 M2 1/2! SUSY SO(10) p. 18/25

Same for tanβ = 50 (a) tanb=50, A 0 =0, m ν =0.4eV (a) tanb=50, A 0 =0, m ν =0.2eV 2000 2000 1500 1500 m 0 (GeV) 1000 m 0 (GeV) 1000 500 500 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 M 1/2 (GeV) M 1/2 (GeV) SUSY SO(10) p. 19/25

Same for tanβ = 50 (a) tanb=50, A 0 =0, m ν =0.4eV (a) tanb=50, A 0 =0, m ν =0.2eV 2000 2000 1500 1500 m 0 (GeV) 1000 m 0 (GeV) 1000 500 500 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 M 1/2 (GeV) M 1/2 (GeV) In right frame, DM relic density too small everywhere SUSY SO(10) p. 19/25

Same for tanβ = 50 (a) tanb=50, A 0 =0, m ν =0.4eV (a) tanb=50, A 0 =0, m ν =0.2eV 2000 2000 1500 1500 m 0 (GeV) 1000 m 0 (GeV) 1000 500 500 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 M 1/2 (GeV) M 1/2 (GeV) In right frame, DM relic density too small everywhere 50% of plane DM allowed for tan β = 49! SUSY SO(10) p. 19/25

Impact on DM searches For m 0 M 1/2 : ( focus point, but no focussing in this scenario!) Very similar to msugra, if m χ 0 1, Ω χ 0 1 are fixed. SUSY SO(10) p. 20/25

Impact on DM searches For m 0 M 1/2 : ( focus point, but no focussing in this scenario!) Very similar to msugra, if m χ 0 1, Ω χ 0 1 are fixed. τ 1 co annihilation region: More promising, due to reduced µ = more higgsino gaugino mixing = enhanced couplings of χ 0 1 to Higgs bosons and Z0! SUSY SO(10) p. 20/25

Impact on DM searches For m 0 M 1/2 : ( focus point, but no focussing in this scenario!) Very similar to msugra, if m χ 0 1, Ω χ 0 1 are fixed. τ 1 co annihilation region: More promising, due to reduced µ = more higgsino gaugino mixing = enhanced couplings of χ 0 1 to Higgs bosons and Z0! cross section[*10-36 cm 2 ] 1e-05 1e-06 1e-07 1e-08 1e-09 tanβ=40, A 0 =0, m ν =0.2eV, M 1/2 =1000GeV FP CO CDMS II XENON100 (projected) 1e-10 15.6 15.8 16 16.2 16.4 log M X [GeV] SUSY SO(10) p. 20/25

LHC signals: large m 0 region In SO(10) model: can get large bino higgsino mixing for relatively modest m 0, where q can be produced at LHC. This is not possible in msugra. SUSY SO(10) p. 21/25

LHC signals: large m 0 region In SO(10) model: can get large bino higgsino mixing for relatively modest m 0, where q can be produced at LHC. This is not possible in msugra. To get correct DM density in msugra for same m q, m g : have to increase tan β quite a lot (to reach A funnel ) SUSY SO(10) p. 21/25

LHC signals: large m 0 region In SO(10) model: can get large bino higgsino mixing for relatively modest m 0, where q can be produced at LHC. This is not possible in msugra. To get correct DM density in msugra for same m q, m g : have to increase tan β quite a lot (to reach A funnel ) = msugra has much smaller heavy Higgs masses: can be detected in τ + τ channel! SUSY SO(10) p. 21/25

LHC signals: large m 0 region In SO(10) model: can get large bino higgsino mixing for relatively modest m 0, where q can be produced at LHC. This is not possible in msugra. To get correct DM density in msugra for same m q, m g : have to increase tan β quite a lot (to reach A funnel ) = msugra has much smaller heavy Higgs masses: can be detected in τ + τ channel! msugra has much larger µ :changes χ 0, χ ± spectrum; can be checked via l + l invariant mass distribution! SUSY SO(10) p. 21/25

M l + l distribution (m 0 M 1/2 ) 40 35 SO(10) msugra Events/10 GeV/300fb -1 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Invariant mass (GeV) Only msugra has Z 0 peak; SO(10) model has softer spectrum SUSY SO(10) p. 22/25

LHC signals: co annihilation region In msugra: either slightly change A 0 (option a) or slightly increase tanβ (option b) to match Ω χ 0 1 for fixed m q, m g. SUSY SO(10) p. 23/25

LHC signals: co annihilation region In msugra: either slightly change A 0 (option a) or slightly increase tanβ (option b) to match Ω χ 0 1 for fixed m q, m g. In SO(10): smaller m t 1,2, m b1 SUSY SO(10) p. 23/25

LHC signals: co annihilation region In msugra: either slightly change A 0 (option a) or slightly increase tanβ (option b) to match Ω χ 0 1 for fixed m q, m g. In SO(10): smaller m t 1,2, m b1 Smaller µ = smaller m χ 0 3,4, m χ ± 2 SUSY SO(10) p. 23/25

LHC signals: co annihilation region In msugra: either slightly change A 0 (option a) or slightly increase tanβ (option b) to match Ω χ 0 1 for fixed m q, m g. In SO(10): smaller m t 1,2, m b1 Smaller µ = smaller m χ 0 3,4, m χ ± 2 = more g χ 0 3,4, χ± 2 decays SUSY SO(10) p. 23/25

LHC signals: co annihilation region In msugra: either slightly change A 0 (option a) or slightly increase tanβ (option b) to match Ω χ 0 1 for fixed m q, m g. In SO(10): smaller m t 1,2, m b1 Smaller µ = smaller m χ 0 3,4, m χ ± 2 = more g χ 0 3,4, χ± 2 decays = more g Z 0 on shell in SO(10)! SUSY SO(10) p. 23/25

ubtracted M l + l distribution (m 0 M 1/2 ) Events/10 GeV/300fb -1 50 40 30 20 10 0-10 -20 SO(10) msugra 2b msugra 2a -30 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Invariant mass (GeV) SO(10) has significantly more pronounced Z 0 peak SUSY SO(10) p. 24/25

ubtracted M l + l distribution (m 0 M 1/2 ) Events/10 GeV/300fb -1 50 40 30 20 10 0-10 -20 SO(10) msugra 2b msugra 2a -30 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Invariant mass (GeV) SO(10) has significantly more pronounced Z 0 peak SO(10) model also has more like sign di lepton events: 492 vs. 422 (434). SUSY SO(10) p. 24/25

Summary and Outlook SO(10) model natural if ν R state! SUSY SO(10) p. 25/25

Summary and Outlook SO(10) model natural if ν R state! Allows intermediate scale; required for see saw. SUSY SO(10) p. 25/25

Summary and Outlook SO(10) model natural if ν R state! Allows intermediate scale; required for see saw. This modifies the RG running below M X. SUSY SO(10) p. 25/25

Summary and Outlook SO(10) model natural if ν R state! Allows intermediate scale; required for see saw. This modifies the RG running below M X. For fixed boundary condition at M X : reduced µ tends to make DM detection easier! SUSY SO(10) p. 25/25

Summary and Outlook SO(10) model natural if ν R state! Allows intermediate scale; required for see saw. This modifies the RG running below M X. For fixed boundary condition at M X : reduced µ tends to make DM detection easier! Points with same m q, m g, m χ 0 1, Ω χ 0 1 can be distinguished at LHC, using di lepton events and heavy Higgs searches SUSY SO(10) p. 25/25

Summary and Outlook SO(10) model natural if ν R state! Allows intermediate scale; required for see saw. This modifies the RG running below M X. For fixed boundary condition at M X : reduced µ tends to make DM detection easier! Points with same m q, m g, m χ 0 1, Ω χ 0 1 can be distinguished at LHC, using di lepton events and heavy Higgs searches Results should be qualitatively same in other models where M R < M X. SUSY SO(10) p. 25/25

Summary and Outlook SO(10) model natural if ν R state! Allows intermediate scale; required for see saw. This modifies the RG running below M X. For fixed boundary condition at M X : reduced µ tends to make DM detection easier! Points with same m q, m g, m χ 0 1, Ω χ 0 1 can be distinguished at LHC, using di lepton events and heavy Higgs searches Results should be qualitatively same in other models where M R < M X. To fix high scale physics: need to know m ν, proton lifetime! SUSY SO(10) p. 25/25