Differences

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

--- 2015:groups:higgs:dmhiggs:eftdm [2015/06/19 09:28]
bjoern.herrmann
+++ 2015:groups:higgs:dmhiggs:eftdm [2015/08/11 11:52] (current)
michele.frigerio
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 **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 here: {{:2015:groups:higgs:dmhiggs:monojetpt.pdf|}}
-** 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**
-  * 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
 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**
@@ Line 24: / Line 36: @@
 https://feynrules.irmp.ucl.ac.be/wiki/DMsimp
-==== Contributions from DM LHC forum conveners ====
+  * FeynRules (with corresponding CalcHEP and UFO) model files for the singlet model, with 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 combination, see 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 #1: mono-EW-boson. How to find a simplified model signal to use as a benchmark, where monojet constraints aren’t dominating? One possible lead: VVChiChi 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 #2: is 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.g. Lepton 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?

Les Houches

User Tools

Site Tools

Differences

Page Tools