2013:groups:higgs:ehd
Differences
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 [2013/06/19 15:27] john.gunion |
2013:groups:higgs:ehd [2013/06/30 22:13] (current) lorenzo.basso |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| **Exotic Higgs Decays** | **Exotic Higgs Decays** | ||
| - | Interested people: Adam, Roberto, Filip, Jack Gunion, Sabine, Grégory, Beranger, Kirtimaan, Yun Jiang... (please add your name!) | + | Interested people: Adam, Roberto, Filip, Jack Gunion, Sabine, Grégory, Beranger, Kirtimaan, Yun Jiang, Aoife, Lorenzo, Alex A., Nazila, Andreas-1, Andreas-2, Giacomo, Aldo... (please add your name!) |
| Finding exotic (not predicted by the SM) Higgs decays could be the shortest route to new physics. | Finding exotic (not predicted by the SM) Higgs decays could be the shortest route to new physics. | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
| The goal of this project is to 1) classify possible exotic Higgs decays, 2) Check existing constraints on the couplings mediating exotic decays, so as to see whether they leave room a non-negligible branching fraction, 3) Prompt experimental searches for the motivated decays that are not being searched for by experiments | The goal of this project is to 1) classify possible exotic Higgs decays, 2) Check existing constraints on the couplings mediating exotic decays, so as to see whether they leave room a non-negligible branching fraction, 3) Prompt experimental searches for the motivated decays that are not being searched for by experiments | ||
| - | To facilitate a systematic exploration one can classify the decays according to the number of SM particles the Higgs decays to. Below are some examples, you're welcome to add more. | + | To facilitate a systematic exploration one can classify the decays according to the number of visible SM particles the Higgs decays to. Below are some examples, you're welcome to add more. |
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
| 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 (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 | ||
| + | |||
| + | __Interested people:__ Adam, Lorenzo, ... | ||
| - | 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. | ||
| --------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------- | ||
| Line 36: | 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. | ||
| Note that this decay cannot be realized in the 2HDM+singlet models in which we require X to be a single additional singlet that is a stable DM candidate by means of imposing Z_2 symmetry so that single S terms are absent in the Lagrangian. In this case, X would have to be two S states, i.e. H->SS h or something of the sort. This would yield invisible + 2 SM particles. A related scenario is H->h h where one h decays to f fbar and the other h decays to SS, i.e. h has a mixture of regular and invisible decays. | Note that this decay cannot be realized in the 2HDM+singlet models in which we require X to be a single additional singlet that is a stable DM candidate by means of imposing Z_2 symmetry so that single S terms are absent in the Lagrangian. In this case, X would have to be two S states, i.e. H->SS h or something of the sort. This would yield invisible + 2 SM particles. A related scenario is H->h h where one h decays to f fbar and the other h decays to SS, i.e. h has a mixture of regular and invisible decays. | ||
| - | To do: concrete models, existing constraints and experimental strategies. | + | 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, Lorenzo | ||
| --------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------- | ||
| 3 particle: | 3 particle: | ||
| - | - h -> f1 F(*) -> Z f1 f2, where f1 f2 are SM fermions, and F is a heavy BSM fermion with couplings y h F f1, g F \gamma_\mu f2 Z_\mu. F could be charged or not charged, colored or not charged (several possibilities with different f1 f2). | + | - h -> f1 F(*) -> Z f1 f2, where f1 f2 are SM fermions, and F is a heavy BSM fermion with couplings y h F f1, g F \gamma_\mu f2 Z_\mu. F could be charged or not charged, colored or not charged (several possibilities with different f1 f2). For this case must check LEP limits on Z^(*)-> f F. If F must be very heavy then BR for such decay would be very small. |
| - | - for this case must check LEP limits on Z^(*)-> f F. If F must be very heavy then BR for such decay would be very small. | ||
| + | To do: existing constraints, e.g. from h->ZZ*4l; limits on F from direct searches (LEP and LHC), precision contraints on F, collider strategies | ||
| - | To do: existing constraints, e.g. from h->ZZ*4l; limits on F from direct searches, precision contraints on F, collider strategies | + | __Interested people:__ Aldo, Giacomo, Aldo |
| - h -> Z/A X - > Z/A f fbar where X is an intermediate boson , and f could be b, tau, mu, e, etc. | - h -> Z/A X - > Z/A f fbar where X is an intermediate boson , and f could be b, tau, mu, e, etc. | ||
2013/groups/higgs/ehd.1371648478.txt.gz · Last modified: 2013/06/19 15:27 by john.gunion
Page Tools
Except where otherwise noted, content on this wiki is licensed under the following license: Public Domain
