This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
2013:groups:higgs:ehd [2013/06/24 17:02] adam.falkowski |
2013:groups:higgs:ehd [2013/06/30 22:13] (current) lorenzo.basso |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
E.g these decays could be induced by the operator -c|H|^2/v^2 F_{\mu \nu} X_{\mu \nu} where | E.g these decays could be induced by the operator -c|H|^2/v^2 F_{\mu \nu} X_{\mu \nu} where | ||
X_\mu is a dark vector boson that subsequently decays to the DM particles. gamma+MET decays could also arise from the cascade decays in h-> neutralino+gravitino -> 2xgravitino+gamma in SUSY, see 1203.4563. | X_\mu is a dark vector boson that subsequently decays to the DM particles. gamma+MET decays could also arise from the cascade decays in h-> neutralino+gravitino -> 2xgravitino+gamma in SUSY, see 1203.4563. | ||
- | Z+MET decays can occur e.g. in inverse see-saw models (ref?) as a cascade decay h-> nu N -> nu Z nu. | + | Z+MET decays can occur e.g. in inverse see-saw models (see e.g., 1209.4803) as a cascade decay h-> nu N -> nu Z nu. |
To do: check the constraints on the effective operator, find the maximum allowed branching fraction, check whether some LHC searches (monophotons? mono-Z?) could pick up this decay, devise experimental strategy. Check contraints from existing H-> ZZ | To do: check the constraints on the effective operator, find the maximum allowed branching fraction, check whether some LHC searches (monophotons? mono-Z?) could pick up this decay, devise experimental strategy. Check contraints from existing H-> ZZ | ||
- | __Interested people:__ Adam, ... | + | __Interested people:__ Adam, Lorenzo, ... |
Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
- flavor violating decays to quarks, probably hopeless given the constraints from flavor violation, see e.g. 1209.1397 | - flavor violating decays to quarks, probably hopeless given the constraints from flavor violation, see e.g. 1209.1397 | ||
- | - lepton flavor violating decays (h->tau mu, h-> tau e, h-> mu e), the first two are promising, see e.g. 1209.1397. These decays are searched for by experiment and has been quite thoroughly studied theoretically, so probably nothing to do. | + | - lepton flavor violating decays (h->tau mu, h-> tau e, h-> mu e), the first two are promising, see e.g. 1209.1397. Also, as before, lepton flavour violating decays can occur in inverse see-saw models (see e.g., 1209.4803) as a cascade decay h-> nu N -> nu l W -> nu l l' nu', where the flavour of l and l' are not related. These decays are searched for by experiment and has been quite thoroughly studied theoretically, so probably nothing to do. |
- cascade decays h->X a -> X f fbar, where X is invisible. | - cascade decays h->X a -> X f fbar, where X is invisible. | ||
Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
To do: concrete models, existing constraints and experimental strategies. In particular, interesting to recast the SUSY dilepton+MET searches in this context. | To do: concrete models, existing constraints and experimental strategies. In particular, interesting to recast the SUSY dilepton+MET searches in this context. | ||
- | __Interested people:__ Jack, Aoife, Andreas | + | __Interested people:__ Jack, Aoife, Andreas, Lorenzo |
--------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------- |