User Tools

Site Tools


2015:groups:higgs:dmhiggs:eftdm

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
Last revision Both sides next revision
2015:groups:higgs:dmhiggs:eftdm [2015/06/19 09:28]
bjoern.herrmann
2015:groups:higgs:dmhiggs:eftdm [2015/08/11 11:45]
michele.frigerio
Line 1: Line 1:
 **Chair:** Andreas Goudelis  **Chair:** Andreas Goudelis
  
-**Members:​** ​ Benjamin Fuks, Nishita Desai, Giacomo Polesello, Sanjoy Biswas, Suchita Kulkarni, Dipan Sengupta, Björn Herrmann, Daniel Schmeier, Daniele Barducci, Michele Frigerio+**Members:​** ​ Benjamin Fuks, Nishita Desai, Giacomo Polesello, Sanjoy Biswas, Suchita Kulkarni, Dipan Sengupta, Björn Herrmann, Daniel Schmeier, Daniele Barducci, Michele Frigerio, Aoife Bharucha, Genevieve Belanger 
 + 
 +** Main idea: ** 
 +Would an observed excess of j+MET events allow for a distinction of the underlying model? Can the monojet pT distribution differentiate among different SM-DM couplings? An enhancement of the signal for large pT occurs if the coupling is proportional to the exchanged momentum; this happens for a derivative coupling, typically encountered,​ e.g., in compositeness models.  
 + 
 +** Simplest example: ** 
 +The SM plus one singlet scalar DM, including a dim-6 operator coupling the Higgs doublet to the DM. 
 +A recent reference on this model: http://​inspirehep.net/​record/​1341060?​ln=en , see section 3.1.1, in particular eq.(3.3) for the Higgs-DM-DM coupling, if somebody is interested to generate the related pT distribution... 
 +  
 +A preliminary study of the monojet signature in this model was performed in the master thesis by Sylvain Lacroix (2013, in French): see section 3.9 for the case without derivative coupling, and section 4.3 for the addition of the derivative operator. 
 + 
 +Notes by M.Frigerio including motivations,​ the simplest model, and two non-minimal models are available below.
  
-** Ideas ** 
-  * Do existing EFT-versus-Model studies cover **all** interesting EFT operators? (What about t-channel, glu-glu-chi-chi) ​ 
-  * Allow observed excesses in monoX studies at the LHC distinction of the underlying EFT models? 
  
 **Useful references** **Useful references**
-  * A simple comparison of Monojet qqXX vs Dijet qqqq and Dilepton qqll limits on purely effective contact interactions 
-http://​arxiv.org/​abs/​1303.3348 
  
-  * A study of the complementarity among monojet ​and dilepton searches for a variety of Z' - mediated simplified models: +  * Composite Dark Matter ​and LHC Interplay 
-http://​arxiv.org/​abs/​1401.0221 +http://​arxiv.org/​abs/​1404.7419 
-  * An EFT "​cutting"​ method in order to obtain consistent constraints in EFT frameworks, that is likely to be adopted by ATLAS/CMS in their analyses: + 
-http://​arxiv.org/​abs/​1502.04701 +  * Dark Matter Constraints on Composite Higgs Models 
-  * A study of the complementarity among monojet and dijet searches for a variety of Z' - mediated simplified models (so no couplings to leptons assumed): +http://​arxiv.org/​abs/​1501.05957 
-http://​arxiv.org/​abs/​1503.05916+
   * A rather inclusive summary on signatures of various EFT DM models   * A rather inclusive summary on signatures of various EFT DM models
 http://​arxiv.org/​abs/​1506.03116 http://​arxiv.org/​abs/​1506.03116
 +
 +  * The ATLAS/CMS Dark Matter forum summary
 +http://​arxiv.org/​abs/​1507.00966
 +
 +  * A relevant MSc thesis from a student of Michele'​s (in French)
 +{{:​2015:​groups:​higgs:​dmhiggs:​rapport.pdf|}}
  
 **Tools** **Tools**
Line 24: Line 36:
 https://​feynrules.irmp.ucl.ac.be/​wiki/​DMsimp https://​feynrules.irmp.ucl.ac.be/​wiki/​DMsimp
  
-==== Contributions from DM LHC forum conveners ==== +  * FeynRules ​(with corresponding CalcHEP ​and UFOmodel files for the singlet modelwith an effective ​g-g-h vertex implemented ​for h production 
-=== Combination of results from mediator (dijet/​dilepton...) and WIMP searches, in the context of simplified models=== +{{:​2015:​groups:​higgs:​dmhiggs:​compositedmleshouches.tar|}}
-==Presentation of results:​== +
-   * Dijet: only “certain” constraint at the LHC (if we make the DM through a mediator produced through quarks and gluons, then the mediator needs to decay into quarks ​and gluons). We can use gDM/gSM planes ​for the combinationsee e.g. http://​arxiv.org/​abs/​1503.05916 +
-   * Do dilepton resonances need a specific theory and specific assumptions to be considered?​ +
-   * Can we build a specific mapping between existing theories (e.g. RS gravitons) and DM theories, for spin-2 mediators?​ +
-== Design of searches == +
-   * Is there any particular way of searching ​for mediators at the LHC that we missed? +
-   * Are there other general possibilities for DM-SM interaction that would produce non-MET signatures, or otherwise not be found by looking for the two-body decay of a mediator? +
-   * By ignoring gauge invariance and other considerations of a full theory, are any of the simplified models missing important, unavoidable details?+
  
-=== Benchmark models === +**Micromegas results** 
-== Non-monojet signatures can be interesting due to their lower backgrounds (and the possibility of different triggering) == +{{:2015:groups:higgs:dmhiggs:scdm-micro.tar.gz|}}
-  * Example #1mono-EW-boson. How to find a simplified model signal to use as a benchmark, where monojet constraints aren’t dominating? One possible leadVVChiChi EFT operators from http://​arxiv.org/​abs/​1307.5064 or http://​arxiv.org/​abs/​1501.00907. The completion proceeds through loops so it has not been fully fleshed out. Is there any interest from the theoretical community to develop those models? +
-  * Example #2is there any Simplified DM models predicting distinctly VBF-like signal kinematics? (vs models corresponding to, say,  VVchichi EFT operators) +
-== Any other classes of important classes of DM mediation left out by the current approaches? (E.gLepton portal?)==+
  
-=== More general questions on the assumptions we usually make for WIMP DM at colliders (only two of many…ATLAS/​CMS DM Forum report soon to be published will contain more): === 
-  * what are we missing out on, if we only look for Dirac DM? Side question, why are theorists more interested in that wrt Majorana/​scalar/​complex scalar/​vector?​ 
-  * what are the implications of the MFV assumption? Alternative way to phrase this question: how do we link better the theory of flavor and DM theories, in a way that we can respect those constraints without necessarily making the MFV assumption as a whole? ​ 
2015/groups/higgs/dmhiggs/eftdm.txt · Last modified: 2015/08/11 11:52 by michele.frigerio