Charged 2014

CHARGED 2014

Eilam Gross, Weizmann Institute of Science

1cHarged 2014 Summary Talk, Eilam Gross, Weizmann

Apologies:There were many great talks.I have learnt a lot.There is no way to cover it all in 30 minutes.So I concentrated on the mutual experimentalist/theorist lessons learntIf I did not include your presentation in my summary it does not mean it was not important or excellent…..I had to choose what suits the talk agenda.

Introductory RemarkscHarged’12 was right after the Higgs discovery

cHarged’14 is two years after Higgs discovery… Run 1 is over. We know a lot more… In particular about mass and couplings

The cHarge for this conference summary talk is an experimentalist cHarge :• Can we expect to discover a cHarged Higgs before any

other BSM (in particular SUSY)? or How light can HPLus be?

• Alignment vs Decoupling – an Important subtlety• What can we tell on heavy scalars prospects from the

hitherto measurements of the Higgs @ the LHC (Precision vs Direct)

• The experimental frontier and its readinesscHarged 2014 Summary Talk, Eilam Gross, Weizmann 2

A Wealth of SignaturesThere can be many signatures when searching for cHarged Higgs

cHarged 2014 Summary Talk, Eilam Gross, Weizmann 3

Don’t disregard searches that appear to have low sensitivity(nicely said, but I am afraid won’t work….)

LESSONO. Stal

Direct Experimental Searches

&MC Tools


The Interplay• Experimentalists cannot produce reliable results without a

precise understanding of the expected background (for discovery) and the expected signal (when limits are produced)

• Theorists cannot fully explore their ideas without the input from the experimentalists.

• What about 160<mH+<200 GeV?

• This is the overlap region (“Its difficult to tell theories what to do, you must motivate them” S. Heinemeyer) What can be more motivating then such an empty playground?

• One needs to do a full 23 process calculation @ NLO• Who’s the One?


Karol Kovarik

The Tools• The goal is automation, be it 4f or 5f scheme.• However, sometimes you prefer the 4f scheme (say you

tag a b in the final state) and sometimes 5f scheme is the only acceptable one (if the b is included in the pdf)…

• The problem is not only to match between the 4f and 5f scheme (one scheme exists, the Santander matching) but the systematics applied to the prediction, which can affect the experimental result (in particular the exclusion sensitivity) in a dramatic way.

• Work is going on in all frontiers to automate the processes in NLO targetting 2HDM


Karol KovarikOlivier MattelaerCeline Degrande

This is not easier than NNLO

A lot of emphasis was put on BG modeling from data.Here, to estimate the Z 𝝉𝝉BG, ATLAS and CMS use embedding. It reduces the systematics due to normalization, pile up, jets or simulation. Yet embedding is a very delicate issue that should be handled with care due to potential biases.


Matti Kortelainen

A. McCarn

A. Kopp


A. KoppPietro VischiaA. Zucchetta

Direct Searc for Charged Higgs

H+tb• CMS just published an

analysis on H+tb• The production of signal is

using Pythia, they will “check everything for the paper…..”

• No systematics for 4f vs 5f (might change the distribution of the discriminator )


P. Vischia

H+cs

Big mystery…How come the results are comparable? We will probably never know….


G. Kole C. Sandoval

NO LESSON

LESSON Now that we have cs, tb and v, its probably a good idea to interpret results 𝝉within various models using the BR sum rule. IN short, increase sensitivityvia combining!

H+Wh A New Explored SignatureSensitivity is very weak


C. SandovalWilliam Keller

More such cascades should be searched for and explored to cover these specific cHarged Higgs decay modes

LESSON

A. McCarn

Constraints from Precision Measurements


Discovered Particle Measurements• The discovered particle is perfectly consistent with

Jp=0+

• Mass~125 GeV ATLAS m=124.5±0.5(stat)±0.06(sys) CMS m=125.6±0.4(stat)±0.2(syst)

• The mass is known to high accuracy (limited by statistics) and it is essential for both the decay mode BRs and the couplings measurements.

• The mass is miraculous , we were lucky to have a Higgs with a mass allowing a rich decay spectrum and is compatible with SUSY.

• This scalar can be taken as the light or heavy Higgs (depends on the scenario) in searches for Higgs multiplets BSM

• Unfortunately, so far, the discovered particle shows no deviation from the SM Higgs


C.KourkoumelisP. Jez

An Immediate Implication of PM


P. Sales de Bruin

An Immediate Implication of PM


P. Sales de Bruin

The light (heavy)125 GeV ScalarShould be takenInto accountAs a Constraint and conclusions shouldbe drawn in accordance

Benchmarks have indeedChanged, butExperiments still stick toold benchmarks

LESSON

CouplingsThe couplings to Vectors and Fermions is a probe to physics BSM.In 2HDM, for example

Here , kV is measure to within 15%(assuming SM Higgs width)

Couplings can be used as precisionmeasurements and set constraints on variousBSM models (or benchmarks)

This is incredible!

What can we learn from it?


P. Jez

Decoupling vs AlignmentIndeed but this does not imply automatically that H,A and H+ are Heavy, degenerate and decoupled in the MSSM.

Z1 and Z6 are coefficients of terms in the 2HDM Lagrangian in the Higgs basis.mH>>Z1v2 Decoupling Z6~0Alignement

At tree level alignment is impossible (tgβ values make no sense)However with MSSM and radiative corrections, an accidental cancellation can occur such that the numerator is ~0


Private CommunicationH. Haber and O. Stal

Decoupling vs AlignmentAlignment in MSSM allows 3 mass scalesSM<2HDM<SUSY SUSY exist , yet, charged Higgs discovered first. Isn't that cute?


Private CommunicationH. Haber and O. Stal

Precision measurements anddirect searches complementeach other

ALIGNMENTAt tgβ~16

Direct

In this specific scenario(mh

alt) precisionallows light mA whileDirect searches exclude itmA>350 GeV

LESSON

LESSON

B-Physics Precision Constraints


Andreas CrivellinValery Pugatch

B-Physics Precision Constraints


Andreas CrivellinValery Pugatch

These are 95% Confidence Intervals, one should do a fit to take into account a possible fluctuation in one measurement

LESSON

B-Physics Constraints


Andreas Crivellin

Valery Pugatch

These measurements should be taken into accountBut, with lots of careNever give up a direct measurementJust because some B decay precision measurementdoes not motivate it

LESSON

Is SUSY in Agony?


T. Serre

M.J. Ramsey-Musolf

What’s the 2HDM MotivationExperimentalists also like to be motivated!

But… Somebody has already said that “all well motivated models have been excluded by now”

Why 2HDM?The sort answer: “Because”The long answer: “Why Not?” (Why not 3HDM?)

But perhaps it is more serious than that


Stefano Moretti

What’s the 2HDM Motivation2HDM can explain much better the CP violationSome theorists claim a lack of cut-clear motivation for 3 generations in the SM

Lack of FCNC motivate the softly broken Z2 symmetryWhich, when drafted to give mass to fermions give rise to various 2HDM types, and in particular the famous type I,II,LS and FLIPPEDAnd that makes life in 2HDM extremely interesting.

MSSM is just one implication of type II, but other types give us, the experimentalists, a rich possible spectrum of particles to search for, which maybe no less appealing than “sad Susy” and other exotic animals. And they allow for accessible low mass Higgs Bosons


M.J. Ramsey-Musolf

Stefano Moretti

LESSON

Type II and MSSMType II ⇒MSSMBut

MSSM ⇏ Type 2

Type 2 2HDM does not contain SUSY particles in the loops.This is a delicate distinction

As a result: 2HDM type II is more constrained than MSSM

Yet, when interpreting results, both are important


O. Stal

LESSON

Charm and Bottom Tag will HelpThe various types behave in a complementary way, a real

coverage can only be achieved if we use heavy flavour tags


For type 2 and FLIPPED cb dominates over csat high tg beta(also true for 3HDM)

Stefano Moretti

cb/cs

Typ2

,FLIP

Type 1,LS

G. Kole

Oscar Stal

LESSON

Interpretations


Killing the Wrong SignIn type II and type FLIPPED , taking α to –α, we get an agreement with sin(α-β)~1 also for the wrong sign of αsin(α+β)~1(kukV<1 or kdkV<1)

If we measured kγ to 5% the wrongsign might be excluded.


sin(β + α) = 1

sin(β - α) = 1

R. Santos

I think it is no problem to doIt already now, combining allchannels to exclude kukV<1 or kdkV<1

MSSM (type II)Need to take SUSY decays of the Higgs into account


LESSON Oscar Stal

MSSM InterpretationsRecently every model gets its benchmarksThe pioneer of benchmarks was MSSMBut why do we still use irrelevant benchmarks

Here (mod) the light Higgs is filling the whole parameter space cHarged 2014 Summary Talk, Eilam Gross, Weizmann 30

Sven Heinemyer

Low mH (Heavy Higgs=125)RIP low mH scenario. Low mH Scenario

severely challenged, BUT that is a theoretician’s fitand he himself casted a doubt on it …..


Sven HeinemyerPietro Slavich

LESSON

Deep Exclusion for Light Charged HiggsmH+=130 excluded in mhmax but BRs do not strongly

depend on scenario


LESSON

Pietro Slavich

Go Wild


Doubly Charged Higgs Every model should be explored.A doubly charged Higgs (DCH) is a smoking gun for exotic BSM models, LR symmetric models and more.

A fine example of presenting results so various interpretations can be done in your favorite model, is a fiducial upper limit on the cross section differeniated with respect to the same sign di-lepton pair masscHarged 2014 Summary Talk, Eilam Gross, Weizmann 34

F. Nutti

Resurrect SUSY • MSSM does not work?• You do not like 2HDM, 3HDM, NHDM?• No problem, add degrees of freedom!• Extend…. Add CPV, add singlets (NMSSM….),

Triplets(TMSSM…)• Just obey the rules of the game

• Go beyond Tree Level• Make sure your model agrees with the data

( mh=125 at the one loop…..)• Do not patch good and old, yet, unfit MC, there are

plenty of modern possibilities in the market (or write your own one that suits best your model)

• Check vacuum stability• Watch the flavour


Florian Staub

Request from TheoreticiansAnd…….• If you want us, the experimentalists to spend

resources, make us curious, motivate us in our language• Theoretical motivations are not intriguing enough.

Tell us where and what to look for and convince us it might not be completely useless.

• Spend time on studying and suggesting detailed signatures and convince us they are well motivated, feasible and will take science a small step forward….Some examples: • Higgs Portal (ATLAS studied DM within the Higgs portal)

τυ, bb𝛄𝛄 𝛄𝛄• ATHDM: H+Wbb, W 𝛄 Victor Iiisie• NMSSM: hAA/HH4b,2b2 ,4 𝝉 𝝉 Florian Staub

• CPV 2HDM: ppH3H+W- vW𝝉 Giovanni Marco Pruna


LESSON

Shoaib Munir

M.J. Ramsey-Musolf

Finally• We have learnt many lessons in this conference• cHarged Higgs is one of THE smoking gunn for physics

BSM.• It appears naturally in multiplet extensions of the SM,

triplets, doublets.• Its most motivated appearance is within type 2, 2HDM,

MSSM• But alas…. We might have to give up the main motivation

for SUSY, naturality.• And then, in a natural way, everything goes

(as long as it agrees with the data), “why not?”.


and Finally• It will be much easier to convince the funding agencies to

support new machines, if this machine does more than setting limits and strengthen the SM nature of the discovered Higgs Boson.

• Unfortunately, nature wrote the book of creation , not us.• However, we already have signs for BSM physics (CPV,

Neutrino masses, DM), we just need not to give up, strengthen and enrich them and make the case.

• Our time, luminosity, and center of mass energy are limited.

• Let theoreticians suggest the signatures, help with the tools and calculations, and let experimentalists design sophisticated analyses to increase the sensitivities…. Why not? Who knows?

• After all, HE-HL LHC is an ideal probe, to test physics at the TeV scale. And as we saw today, its coming.


Lucio RossiSusan Gascon ShotkinFlera RIZATDINOVA

Charged 2014

Documents

Transcript of Charged 2014