The CMSSM and NUHM1 after LHC Run 1

Abstract

We analyze the impact of data from the full Run 1 of the LHC at 7 and 8 TeV on the CMSSM with and and the NUHM1 with , incorporating the constraints imposed by other experiments such as precision electroweak measurements, flavour measurements, the cosmological density of cold dark matter and the direct search for the scattering of dark matter particles in the LUX experiment. We use the following results from the LHC experiments: ATLAS searches for events with accompanied by jets with the full 7 and 8 TeV data, the ATLAS and CMS measurements of the mass of the Higgs boson, the CMS searches for heavy neutral Higgs bosons and a combination of the LHCb and CMS measurements of and . Our results are based on samplings of the parameter spaces of the CMSSM for both and and of the NUHM1 for with 6.8, 6.2 and 1.6 points, respectively, obtained using the MultiNest tool. The impact of the Higgs-mass constraint is assessed using FeynHiggs 2.10.0, which provides an improved prediction for the masses of the MSSM Higgs bosons in the region of heavy squark masses. It yields in general larger values of than previous versions of FeynHiggs, reducing the pressure on the CMSSM and NUHM1. We find that the global functions for the supersymmetric models vary slowly over most of the parameter spaces allowed by the Higgs-mass and the searches, with best-fit values that are comparable to the for the best Standard Model fit. We provide 95 % CL lower limits on the masses of various sparticles and assess the prospects for observing them during Run 2 of the LHC.

How light a higgsino or a wino dark matter can become in a compressed scenario of MSSM

“…In this case the lightest chargino χ ± 1 and the second lightest neutralino χ 0 2 are almost mass degenerate with χ 0 1 with their masses are close to µ. For a thermally generated single component dark matter, it has been typically accepted that the LSP mass for obtaining the right DM abundance is around 1 TeV for a higgsino-like LSP [27,28,[36][37][38][39]. Below this limit the annihilation and coannihilations among χ 0 1 , χ 0 2 and χ ± 1 are too strong causing the DM relic density to become underabundant.…”

“…It is however possible to have a bino-LSP giving the correct abundance of DM in some specific regions of parameter space of mSUGRA, like the stau coannihilation, funnel (resonant Higgs annihilation) or hyperbolic branch (HB) [26][27][28]/ focus point (FP) [29][30][31][32][33][34][35] regions. While most of the former two regions of parameter space are ruled out by the Higgs data [17][18][19], a large part of the HB/FP region, which corresponds to a significant degree of bino-higgsino mixing, is disfavored by DM direct detection experiments [36][37][38][39]. There is also a higgsino LSP region in mSUGRA but this comes with a baggage of a very large gluino mass and a…”

Constraints on the CP-Violating MSSM

“…For this purpose, we focus on the CP-conserving CMSSM best-fit point found in a global analysis [20]: and vary the phases subsequently. To test the efficiency of the geometric approach, we vary the phases randomly, then employ the geometric approach and finally apply the constraints.…”

Hadronic uncertainties and isospin violation in supersymmetric dark matter models

“…Although still employed in the literature (see e.g. [24,25]), such large values are incompatible with modern lattice QCD calculations, which yield a much smaller and more reliable determination of f N s [26]:…”