Testing Yukawa-unified SUSY during year 1 of LHC: the role of multiple b-jets, dileptons and missing E_T

We examine the prospects for testing SO(10) Yukawa-unified supersymmetric models during the first year of LHC running at \sqrt{s}= 7 TeV, assuming integrated luminosity values of 0.1 to 1 fb^-1. We consider two cases: the Higgs splitting (HS) and the D-term splitting (DR3) models. Each generically predicts light gluinos and heavy squarks, with an inverted scalar mass hierarchy. We hence expect large rates for gluino pair production followed by decays to final states with large b-jet multiplicity. For 0.2 fb^-1 of integrated luminosity, we find a 5 sigma discovery reach of m(gluino) ~ 400 GeV even if missing transverse energy, E_T^miss, is not a viable cut variable, by examining the multi-b-jet final state. A corroborating signal should stand out in the opposite-sign (OS) dimuon channel in the case of the HS model; the DR3 model will require higher integrated luminosity to yield a signal in the OS dimuon channel. This region may also be probed by the Tevatron with 5-10 fb^-1 of data, if a corresponding search in the multi-b+ E_T^miss channel is performed. With higher integrated luminosities of ~1 fb^-1, using E_T^miss plus a large multiplicity of b-jets, LHC should be able to discover Yukawa-unified SUSY with m(gluino) up to about 630 GeV. Thus, the year 1 LHC reach for Yukawa-unified SUSY should be enough to either claim a discovery of the gluino, or to very nearly rule out this class of models, since higher values of m(gluino) lead to rather poor Yukawa unification.Comment: 32 pages including 31 EPS figure

Neutralino versus axion/axino cold dark matter in the 19 parameter SUGRA model

We calculate the relic abundance of thermally produced neutralino cold dark matter in the general 19 parameter supergravity (SUGRA-19) model. A scan over GUT scale parameters reveals that models with a bino-like neutralino typically give rise to a dark matter density \Omega_{\tz_1}h^2\sim 1-1000, i.e. between 1 and 4 orders of magnitude higher than the measured value. Models with higgsino or wino cold dark matter can yield the correct relic density, but mainly for neutralino masses around 700-1300 GeV. Models with mixed bino-wino or bino-higgsino CDM, or models with dominant co-annihilation or A-resonance annihilation can yield the correct abundance, but such cases are extremely hard to generate using a general scan over GUT scale parameters; this is indicative of high fine-tuning of the relic abundance in these cases. Requiring that m_{\tz_1}\alt 500 GeV (as a rough naturalness requirement) gives rise to a minimal probably dip in parameter space at the measured CDM abundance. For comparison, we also scan over mSUGRA space with four free parameters. Finally, we investigate the Peccei-Quinn augmented MSSM with mixed axion/axino cold dark matter. In this case, the relic abundance agrees more naturally with the measured value. In light of our cumulative results, we conclude that future axion searches should probe much more broadly in axion mass, and deeper into the axion coupling.Comment: 23 pages including 17 .eps figure

Non-standard interactions versus non-unitary lepton flavor mixing at a neutrino factory

The impact of heavy mediators on neutrino oscillations is typically described by non-standard four-fermion interactions (NSIs) or non-unitarity (NU). We focus on leptonic dimension-six effective operators which do not produce charged lepton flavor violation. These operators lead to particular correlations among neutrino production, propagation, and detection non-standard effects. We point out that these NSIs and NU phenomenologically lead, in fact, to very similar effects for a neutrino factory, for completely different fundamental reasons. We discuss how the parameters and probabilities are related in this case, and compare the sensitivities. We demonstrate that the NSIs and NU can, in principle, be distinguished for large enough effects at the example of non-standard effects in the $\mu$-$\tau$-sector, which basically corresponds to differentiating between scalars and fermions as heavy mediators as leading order effect. However, we find that a near detector at superbeams could provide very synergistic information, since the correlation between source and matter NSIs is broken for hadronic neutrino production, while NU is a fundamental effect present at any experiment.Comment: 32 pages, 5 figures. Final version published in JHEP. v3: Typo in Eq. (27) correcte

Beyond the standard seesaw: neutrino masses from Kahler operators and broken supersymmetry

We investigate supersymmetric scenarios in which neutrino masses are generated by effective d=6 operators in the Kahler potential, rather than by the standard d=5 superpotential operator. First, we discuss some general features of such effective operators, also including SUSY-breaking insertions, and compute the relevant renormalization group equations. Contributions to neutrino masses arise at low energy both at the tree level and through finite threshold corrections. In the second part we present simple explicit realizations in which those Kahler operators arise by integrating out heavy SU(2)_W triplets, as in the type II seesaw. Distinct scenarios emerge, depending on the mechanism and the scale of SUSY-breaking mediation. In particular, we propose an appealing and economical picture in which the heavy seesaw mediators are also messengers of SUSY breaking. In this case, strong correlations exist among neutrino parameters, sparticle and Higgs masses, as well as lepton flavour violating processes. Hence, this scenario can be tested at high-energy colliders, such as the LHC, and at lower energy experiments that measure neutrino parameters or search for rare lepton decays.Comment: LaTeX, 34 pages; some corrections in Section

Decoupling property of the supersymmetric Higgs sector with four doublets

In supersymmetric standard models with multi Higgs doublet fields, selfcoupling constants in the Higgs potential come only from the D-terms at the tree level. We investigate the decoupling property of additional two heavier Higgs doublet fields in the supersymmetric standard model with four Higgs doublets. In particular, we study how they can modify the predictions on the quantities well predicted in the minimal supersymmetric standard model (MSSM), when the extra doublet fields are rather heavy to be measured at collider experiments. The B-term mixing between these extra heavy Higgs bosons and the relatively light MSSM-like Higgs bosons can significantly change the predictions in the MSSM such as on the masses of MSSM-like Higgs bosons as well as the mixing angle for the two light CP-even scalar states. We first give formulae for deviations in the observables of the MSSM in the decoupling region for the extra two doublet fields. We then examine possible deviations in the Higgs sector numerically, and discuss their phenomenological implications.Comment: 26 pages, 24 figures, text sligtly modified,version to appear in Journal of High Energy Physic

Validity of self-assessment of hallux valgus using the Manchester scale

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Hallux valgus (HV) is a common condition involving the progressive subluxation of the first metatarsophalangeal joint due to lateral deviation of the hallux and medial deviation of the first metatarsal. The objective of this study was to evaluate the re-test reliability and validity of self-assessment of HV using a simple clinical screening tool involving four standardised photographs (the Manchester scale), in order to determine whether this tool could be used for postal surveys of the condition.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>HV was assessed with the Manchester scale in 138 people aged 65 to 93 years of age (102 women and 36 men) as part of a larger randomised controlled trial. At the six month follow-up assessment, HV was reassessed to determine re-test reliability, and participants were asked to self-assess their degree of HV independent of the examiners. Associations between (i) baseline and follow-up assessments of the examiners and (ii) participant and examiner assessments were performed using weighted kappa statistics. Analyses were then repeated after HV was dichotomised as present or absent using unweighted kappa, and sensitivity and specificity of self-assessment of HV was determined.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Re-test reliability of the examiners was substantial to almost perfect (weighted kappa = 0.78 to 0.90), and there was a substantial level of agreement between observations of the participants and the examiners (weighted kappa = 0.71 to 0.80). Overall, there was a slight tendency for participants to rate their HV as less severe than the examiners. When the Manchester scale scores were dichotomised, agreement was substantial to almost perfect for both re-test comparisons (kappa = 0.80 to 0.89) and substantial for comparisons between participants and examiners (kappa = 0.64 to 0.76). The sensitivity and specificity of self-assessment of HV using the dichotomous scale were 85 and 88%, respectively.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The Manchester scale demonstrates high re-test reliability, and self-assessment scores obtained by participants are strongly associated with scores obtained by examiners. These findings indicate that the tool can be used with confidence in postal surveys to document the presence and severity of HV.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ACTRN12608000065392</p

Peccei-Quinn extended gauge-mediation model with vector-like matter

We construct a gauge-mediated SUSY breaking model with vector-like matters combined with the Peccei-Quinn mechanism to solve the strong CP problem. The Peccei-Quinn symmetry plays an essential role for generating sizable masses for the vector-like matters and the $\mu$-term without introducing dangerous CP angle. The model naturally explains both the 125GeV Higgs mass and the muon anomalous magnetic moment. The stabilization of the Peccei-Quinn scalar and the cosmology of the saxion and axino are also discussed.Comment: 33 pages, 5 figures; version to be published (JHEP

Constrained SUSY seesaws with a 125 GeV Higgs

Motivated by the ATLAS and CMS discovery of a Higgs-like boson with a mass around 125 GeV, and by the need of explaining neutrino masses, we analyse the three canonical SUSY versions of the seesaw mechanism (type I, II and III) with CMSSM boundary conditions. In type II and III cases, SUSY particles are lighter than in the CMSSM (or the constrained type I seesaw), for the same set of input parameters at the universality scale. Thus, to explain $m_{h^0} \simeq 125 GeV$ at low energies, one is forced into regions of parameter space with very large values of $m_0$, $M_{1/2}$ or $A_0$. We compare the squark and gluino masses allowed by the ATLAS and CMS ranges for $m_{h^0}$ (extracted from the 2011-2012 data), and discuss the possibility of distinguishing seesaw models in view of future results on SUSY searches. In particular, we briefly comment on the discovery potential of LHC upgrades, for squark/gluino mass ranges required by present Higgs mass constraints. A discrimination between different seesaw models cannot rely on the Higgs mass data alone, therefore we also take into account the MEG upper limit on BR$(\mu \to e \gamma)$ and show that, in some cases, this may help to restrict the SUSY parameter space, as well as to set complementary limits on the seesaw scale.Comment: 28 pages, 7 figures. v2: comments and references added. Final version to appear in JHE

Search for relativistic magnetic monopoles with five years of the ANTARES detector data

[EN] A search for magnetic monopoles using five years of data recorded with the ANTARES neutrino telescope from January 2008 to December 2012 with a total live time of 1121 days is presented. The analysis is carried out in the range b>0.6 of magnetic monopole velocities using a strategy based on run-by-run Monte Carlo simulations. No signal above the background expectation from atmospheric muons and atmospheric neutrinos is observed, and upper limits are set on the magnetic monopole flux ranging from 5.7x10-16 to 1.5x10-18 cm-2 . s-1.sr-1.The authors acknowledge the financial support of the funding agencies: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Commissariat a l'energie atomique et aux energies alternatives (CEA), Commission Europeenne (FEDER fund and Marie Curie Program), Institut Universitaire de France (IUF), IdEx program and UnivEarthS Labex program at Sorbonne Paris Cite (ANR-10-LABX-0023 and ANR-11-IDEX-0005-02), Labex OCEVU (ANR-11-LABX-0060) and the A*MIDEX project (ANR-11-IDEX-0001-02), Region Ile-de-France (DIM-ACAV), Region Alsace (contrat CPER), Region Provence-Alpes-Cote d'Azur, Departement du Var and Ville de La Seyne-sur-Mer, France; Bundesministerium fur Bildung und Forschung (BMBF), Germany; Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare (INFN), Italy; Stichting voor Fundamenteel Onderzoek der Materie (FOM), Nederlandse organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (NWO), the Netherlands; Council of the President of the Russian Federation for young scientists and leading scientific schools supporting grants, Russia; National Authority for Scientific Research (ANCS), Romania; Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad (MINECO): Plan Estatal de Investigacion (refs. FPA2015-65150-C3-1-P, -2-P and -3-P, (MINECO/FEDER)), Severo Ochoa Centre of Excellence and MultiDark Consolider (MINECO), and Prometeo and Grisolia programs (Generalitat Valenciana), Spain; Ministry of Higher Education, Scientific Research and Professional Training, Morocco. We also acknowledge the technical support of Ifremer, AIM and Foselev Marine for the sea operation and the CC-IN2P3 for the computing facilitiesAlbert, A.; Andre, M.; Anghinolfi, M.; Anton, G.; Ardid Ramírez, M.; Aubert, J.; Avgitas, T.... (2017). Search for relativistic magnetic monopoles with five years of the ANTARES detector data. Journal of High Energy Physics (Online). (7):1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2017)054S1167P.A.M. Dirac, Quantized Singularities in the Electromagnetic Field, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 133 (1931) 60 [ INSPIRE ].G. ’t Hooft, Magnetic Monopoles in Unified Gauge Theories, Nucl. Phys. B 79 (1974) 276 [ INSPIRE ].A.M. Polyakov, Particle Spectrum in the Quantum Field Theory, JETP Lett. 20 (1974) 194 [ INSPIRE ].G. Lazarides, C. Panagiotakopoulos and Q. Shafi, Magnetic Monopoles From Superstring Models, Phys. Rev. Lett. 58 (1987) 1707 [ INSPIRE ].Y.M. Cho and D. Maison, Monopoles in Weinberg-Salam model, Phys. Lett. B 391 (1997) 360 [ hep-th/9601028 ] [INSPIRE].Particle Data Group collaboration, C. Patrignani et al., Review of Particle Physics, Chin. Phys. C 40 (2016) 100001 [ INSPIRE ].L. Patrizii and M. Spurio, Status of Searches for Magnetic Monopoles, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 65 (2015) 279 [ arXiv:1510.07125 ] [INSPIRE].ATLAS collaboration, Search for magnetic monopoles and stable particles with high electric charges in 8 TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D 93 (2016) 052009 [ arXiv:1509.08059 ] [ INSPIRE ].MoEDAL collaboration, B. Acharya et al., Search for magnetic monopoles with the MoEDAL prototype trapping detector in 8 TeV proton-proton collisions at the LHC, JHEP 08 (2016) 067 [ arXiv:1604.06645 ] [INSPIRE].MoEDAL collaboration, B. Acharya et al., Search for Magnetic Monopoles with the MoEDAL Forward Trapping Detector in 13 TeV Proton-Proton Collisions at the LHC, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118 (2017) 061801 [ arXiv:1611.06817 ] [INSPIRE].T.W.B. Kibble, Topology of Cosmic Domains and Strings, J. Phys. A 9 (1976) 1387 [ INSPIRE ].J. Preskill, Cosmological Production of Superheavy Magnetic Monopoles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 43 (1979) 1365 [ INSPIRE ].A.H. Guth, The Inflationary Universe: A Possible Solution to the Horizon and Flatness Problems, Phys. Rev. D 23 (1981) 347 [ INSPIRE ].D. Ryu, H. Kang and P.L. Biermann, Cosmic magnetic fields in large scale filaments and sheets, Astron. Astrophys. 335 (1998) 19 [ astro-ph/9803275 ] [ INSPIRE ].E.N. Parker, The Origin of Magnetic Fields, Astrophys. J 160 (1970) 383.ANTARES collaboration, M. Ageron et al., ANTARES: the first undersea neutrino telescope, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 656 (2011) 11 [ arXiv:1104.1607 ] [INSPIRE].ANTARES collaboration, S. Adrian-Martinez et al., Search for Relativistic Magnetic Monopoles with the ANTARES Neutrino Telescope, Astropart. Phys. 35 (2012) 634 [ arXiv:1110.2656 ] [ INSPIRE ].IceCube collaboration, M.G. Aartsen et al., Searches for Relativistic Magnetic Monopoles in IceCube, Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016) 133 [ arXiv:1511.01350 ] [INSPIRE].ANTARES collaboration, J.A. Aguilar et al., The data acquisition system for the ANTARES Neutrino Telescope, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 570 (2007) 107 [ astro-ph/0610029 ] [INSPIRE].D.R. Tompkins, Total energy loss and Čerenkov emission from monopoles, Phys. Rev. 138 (1965) B248.Y. Kazama, C.N. Yang and A.S. Goldhaber, Scattering of a Dirac Particle with Charge Ze by a Fixed Magnetic Monopole, Phys. Rev. D 15 (1977) 2287 [ INSPIRE ].S.P. Ahlen, Monopole Track Characteristics in Plastic Detectors, Phys. Rev. D 14 (1976) 2935 [ INSPIRE ].S.P. Ahlen, Stopping Power Formula for Magnetic Monopoles, Phys. Rev. D 17 (1978) 229 [ INSPIRE ].J. Derkaoui et al., Energy losses of magnetic monopoles and of dyons in the earth, Astropart. Phys. 9 (1998) 173 [ INSPIRE ].CERN Application Software Group, GEANT 3.21 Detector Description and Simulation Tool, CERN Program Library Long Writeup W5013 (1993).G. Carminati, A. Margiotta and M. Spurio, Atmospheric MUons from PArametric formulas: A fast GEnerator for neutrino telescopes (MUPAGE), Comput. Phys. Commun. 179 (2008) 915 [ arXiv:0802.0562 ] [INSPIRE].Y. Becherini, A. Margiotta, M. Sioli and M. Spurio, A parameterisation of single and multiple muons in the deep water or ice, Astropart. Phys. 25 (2006) 1 [ hep-ph/0507228 ] [INSPIRE].J. Brunner, ANTARES simulation tools, in proceedings of The VLVnT workshop, Amsterdam (2003), http://www.vlvnt.nl/proceedings.pdf .ANTARES collaboration, A. Margiotta, Common simulation tools for large volume neutrino detectors, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 725 (2013) 98 [ INSPIRE ].V. Agrawal, T.K. Gaisser, P. Lipari and T. Stanev, Atmospheric neutrino flux above 1-GeV, Phys. Rev. D 53 (1996) 1314 [ hep-ph/9509423 ] [INSPIRE].G.D. Barr, T.K. Gaisser, S. Robbins and T. Stanev, Uncertainties in Atmospheric Neutrino Fluxes, Phys. Rev. D 74 (2006) 094009 [ astro-ph/0611266 ] [INSPIRE].L. Fusco and A. Margiotta, The Run-by-Run Monte Carlo simulation for the ANTARES experiment, EPJ Web Conf. 116 (2016) 02002.ANTARES collaboration, J.A. Aguilar et al., A fast algorithm for muon track reconstruction and its application to the ANTARES neutrino telescope, Astropart. Phys. 34 (2011) 652 [ arXiv:1105.4116 ] [INSPIRE].ANTARES collaboration, S. Adrian-Martinez et al., Searches for Point-like and extended neutrino sources close to the Galactic Centre using the ANTARES neutrino Telescope, Astrophys. J. 786 (2014) L5 [ arXiv:1402.6182 ] [INSPIRE].G.J. Feldman and R.D. Cousins, A unified approach to the classical statistical analysis of small signals, Phys. Rev. D 57 (1998) 3873 [ physics/9711021 ] [INSPIRE].G.C. Hill and K. Rawlins, Unbiased cut selection for optimal upper limits in neutrino detectors: The model rejection potential technique, Astropart. Phys. 19 (2003) 393 [ astro-ph/0209350 ] [ INSPIRE ].ANTARES collaboration, J.A. Aguilar et al., Zenith distribution and flux of atmospheric muons measured with the 5-line ANTARES detector, Astropart. Phys. 34 (2010) 179 [ arXiv:1007.1777 ] [ INSPIRE ].ANTARES collaboration, S. Adrian-Martinez et al., Measurement of the atmospheric ν μ energy spectrum from 100 GeV to 200 TeV with the ANTARES telescope, Eur. Phys. J. C 73 (2013) 2606 [ arXiv:1308.1599 ] [INSPIRE].ANTARES collaboration, S. Adrian-Martinez et al., First Search for Point Sources of High Energy Cosmic Neutrinos with the ANTARES Neutrino Telescope, Astrophys. J. 743 (2011) L14 [ arXiv:1108.0292 ] [INSPIRE].ANTARES collaboration, P. Amram et al., The ANTARES optical module, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 484 (2002) 369 [ astro-ph/0112172 ] [INSPIRE].ANTARES collaboration, J.A. Aguilar et al., Transmission of light in deep sea water at the site of the ANTARES Neutrino Telescope, Astropart. Phys. 23 (2005) 131 [ astro-ph/0412126 ] [ INSPIRE ].MACRO collaboration, M. Ambrosio et al., Final results of magnetic monopole searches with the MACRO experiment, Eur. Phys. J. C 25 (2002) 511 [ hep-ex/0207020 ] [INSPIRE].BAIKAL collaboration, K. Antipin et al., Search for relativistic magnetic monopoles with the Baikal Neutrino Telescope, Astropart. Phys. 29 (2008) 366 [ INSPIRE ].KM3Net collaboration, S. Adrian-Martinez et al., Letter of intent for KM3NeT 2.0, J. Phys. G 43 (2016) 084001 [ arXiv:1601.07459 ] [INSPIRE]