1 / 24

The Flavor of a Little Higgs with T-parity

PHENO 06. The Flavor of a Little Higgs with T-parity. Seung J. Lee Cornell University With Jay M. Hubisz and Gil Paz. Outline. T-Parity and the Littlest Higgs model T-odd Flavor Mixing Neutral Meson Mixing Results and Constraints Conclusions.

temima
Download Presentation

The Flavor of a Little Higgs with T-parity

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. PHENO 06 The Flavor of a Little Higgs with T-parity Seung J. Lee Cornell University With Jay M. Hubisz and Gil Paz

  2. Outline • T-Parity and the Littlest Higgs model • T-odd Flavor Mixing • Neutral Meson Mixing • Results and Constraints • Conclusions

  3. Little Higgs Model (Arkani-Hamed, Cohen, Georgi) • Addressing “Little hierarchy problem” • Hierarchy problem: Radiative corrections to the Higgs mass become divergent at one-loop, but the Higgs mass should be light. New physics should be introduced at around ~1 TeV. • At energies below the cutoff scale of new physics, the effective theory contains a set of higher-dimensional non-renormalizable operators made up of SM particles, i.e. or • But these operators have been constrained by experiments, which indicate that there should be no new physics up to L ~5 TeV • However, this constraint is in conflict with the naturalness requirement that new physics must enter ~1 TeV. “little hierarchy”

  4. Little Higgs Model • Idea: The Higgs as a pseudo-Goldstone boson. -This idea has been pursued for ~30 years. -Problem: To give a mass to the Higgs, explicit symmetry breaking terms are necessary, but quadratic divergences at one-loop are reintroduced. -Solutions: “Collective symmetry breaking” • Written in the language of a non-linear sigma model: -New particles appear around the global symmetry breaking scale f~1Tev, but the cutoff of the model can be as large as L ~4f~10TeV . Two or more explicit symmetry breaking terms are needed to break all symmetries protecting the Higgs mass. No quadratic divergences at one-loop.

  5. The Littlest Higgs(Arkani-Hamed, Cohen, Katz, Nelson) • Based on an SU(5)/SO(5) non-linear sigma model. Symmetry breaking by the VEV of a symmetric tensor : describes GSB. • Structure of gauge symmetry breaking: g1: g2: • Higgs is an exact GSB under either SU(3)1 or SU(3)2. It gets mass only when both g1 and g2 are turned on (two copies of SU(2) U(1) are gauged ) to break both SU(3)1 and SU(3)2.

  6. T-Parity and Littlest Higgs Cheng & Low hep-ph/0308199 hep-ph/0405253 Low hep-ph/0409025 • Little Higgs models have stringent EWP bounds. (In most models, the symmetry breaking scale, f, needs to be ~4TeV to satisfy EWP constraints.) • Analogous to the role of R-parity in the MSSM, T-parity is a discrete symmetry added to solve the problems of the original Little Higgs model. • There are other models that solve these problems by extending gauge/global symmetry structures. • Introducing a discrete symmetry (T-parity) provides a weak scale dark matter candidate. • Except for the T-even top partner, all other BSM particles (i.e. WH, ZH, AH,…) introduced in the model are odd under T-parity.

  7. T-Parity and the Littlest Higgs • T-parity exchanges the two gauge groups, [SU(2)  U(1)]1 and [SU(2)  U(1)]2 WL~ (W1+W2) (T-even),WH~(W1-W2) (T-odd) • T-parity enforces relations between couplings. (i.e. g1 = g2) • However, to implement T-parity consistently in a phenomenologically viable way, we need to enlarge the fermion sector. (in order to cut off otherwise large four-fermion operators constrained by LEP and Drell-Yan processes) Opens up a new flavor structure in the model.

  8. T-Parity and Littlest Higgs T-parity Eigenstates SU(2)1 SU(2)2 T-even T-odd Royal SU(3) triplet New fermion partners of top quark Hubisz & Meade Hubisz, Meade, Noble, Perelstein T-odd “mirror fermion” mass has an upper-bound due to compositeness constraints. (in order to cut off dangerous four-fermion operators arising at one-loop.)

  9. T-odd Flavor Mixing Interactions Gauge basis T-parity basis Yukawa for T-odd fermions Dirac masses function of SU(5) Goldstone modes

  10. T-odd Flavor Mixing: Mass eigenbasis • Diagonalization of new Yukawa terms introduces new CKM-like matrices: In analogy with the CKM transformation, the mass matrix is diagonalized by two U(3) matrices. VH =UH, since SU(2)L symmetric • In the mass eigenbasis, interactions of SM fermions and T-odd fermions involve another T-odd gauge boson: Recall: New CKM type matrix: • These matrices are related through the SM CKM matrix:

  11. T-odd Flavor Mixing: Relevant Feynman rules

  12. T-odd Flavor Mixing: New Parameterization • Beyond SM, there are three new rotation angles, and one new CP violating phase: - 2 unitary matrices, VHu and VHd: 3 rotations each, and 6 phases each. - 6 quark fields which transform under SU(2)1, and 6 under SU(2)2. Each set of 6 quark absorb 5 phases. - 2 unobservable overall phases (1 for each sector) - 1 combination of VHu and VHd gives the SM CKM matrix, which has 3 rotations and 1 phase.

  13. T-odd Flavor Mixing: Summary • T-odd fermion masses have an upper limit from four fermion operators- could be light. (MTeV <4.8 TeV) • New flavor physics. • Interesting phenomenology. • Many new parameters. • BSM, there are 3 new rotation angles, and one new CP violating phase. • Model dependent.

  14. Neutral Meson Mixing • Two different mass scales: • -Electro weak scale v: MWL=gv/2, v=246 GeV -LH global symmetry breaking scale f: MWH=gf, f=TeV • New interactions involving T-odd fermions lead to effective Hamiltonians for processes such as neutral meson mixing and rare decays. • We first focused on neutral meson mixing. (Taking account of rare decays and EDM is under preparation now.) s d Integrate out heavy particles Effective Hamiltonian d s

  15. Neutral Meson Mixing • SM contribution to the Heffthat governs neutral meson mixing: Inami-Lim function-gauge dependent where and the mi are the masses of the quarks in the loop When summing over the different flavors, the gauge dependence cancels due to the unitarity of the CKM matrix. QCD correction gauge-independent • In the limit of quark mass degeneracy, Heff=0 (GIM). • Expect GIM for T-odd fermions from flavor constraints. -Take T-odd Yukawa eigenstates to be nearly degenerate.

  16. Neutral Meson Mixing Box diagrams involving T-odd gauge bosons and scalars that contribute to the neutral meson mixing.

  17. Neutral Meson Mixing • T-odd sector contribution to the Heffthat governs neutral meson mixing (using unitarity): Gauge-independent function QCD correction Since off-diagonal CKM elements are extremely small, this can be large compared to the SM contribution Naively suppressed • Heff for the neutral meson mixing is basically the same for the D, K, and B meson mixing. • From Heff , can be calculated, so that comparison with experimental data can constrain the T-odd fermion masses.

  18. Results and Constraints • Too many unknown parameters compared to the number of observables we have from neutral meson mixing. • Instead of VHd or VHu, Vd and Vu are physical in the T-parity model, while in the SM their combination is physical. • For the case that Vd and Vu are nearly diagonal, one universal feature is that GIM mechanism is working for the first two generations: Their masses are nearly degenerate, but neutral meson mixing is nearly independent of the mass of the third generation T-odd fermion due to the smallness of off-diagonal elements. • For the case of having large off-diagonal elements, the entire T-odd vector-like quarks must be degenerate within a few percent. • In the absence of any guiding mechanism, no particular texture is preferred.

  19. Results and Constraints • m12 is the average mass of the first two generations of T-odd fermions • m12 is the mass splitting of the first two generations • In order of the darkest contours to lightest, m12 =500, 1000, 2000, 3000 GeV • Vu=1, Vd=VCKM , f=1 TeV • All constraints arise from neutral K and B mixing, while D system is unaffected. • Experimental constraint: for B and K system, contribution from T-odd fermions not exceed 30% of the SM contribution to the mass splittings and K. • m3 is not constrained. (due to smallness of Vti.

  20. Results and Constraints • Vd=1, Vu=VCKM • f=1 TeV • The only constraints arise from D system mass splitting. • Experimental constraint: m12 < 4.6 10-14 GeV

  21. Results and Constraints • Going away from the diagonal: One large angle d13= 0, put CP phase entirely into up-type relax the constraint. d13= SM13 , degeneracy for all three generations.

  22. Results and Constraints • Going away from the diagonal: all angles large d13= 0, put CP phase entirely into up-type relax the constraint. d13= SM13 , sharp degeneracy for all three generations.

  23. Results and Constraints f=1 TeV, after taking BS mixing bound into account: become more constraining f=1 TeV, d13= 0, before BS mixing bound was imposed

  24. Conclusions • The Littlest Higgs with T-parity necessarily introduces new fermions. (It becomes more like SUSY) • These fermions add a new flavor structure to the model. • CP violation is a major source of constraints • For order one mixing parameters, we found that the T-odd fermion spectrum must be degenerate to within a few percent. • In certain cases, this constraint can be alleviated for the third generation. • However, a more detailed study taking into account flavor changing processes such as rare decays would be necessary to confirm that these regions of parameter space are indeed allowed. (under preparation now)

More Related