Choose timezone
Your profile timezone:
2023 LHC DM WG Autumn Meeting
Description
Plenary meeting of the LHC Dark Matter Working Group.
Useful links:
LHC DM WG workshop
Zoom Meeting ID
68024266716
Host
Oleg Brandt
Alternative hosts
Spyros Argyropoulos, James Frost
Useful links
Join via phone
Zoom URL
Luca:
———
You said that CMS people are preparing code for simulation. Is that based on public software?
=> Yes
In the top-philic section is the plan to use existing searches? We heard that the team does not have personpower to generate t-channel signals and do a reinterpretation.
=> This will depend on the personpower. If there's not enough that section will only focus on providing benchmarks.
How different is the lepton-philic model from the SUSY slepton search?
=> slepton searches can be used to recast these, however there are kinematical differences since the mediator has different spin. This difference will become larger as the width of the mediator increases.
Are there additional signatures that have not been previously explored in lepto-philic models?
=> Benjamin: I don't think there are such signatures, but the topic is interesting because of the existing CMS and ATLAS excesses in the LLP context (small mass splitting)
Sukanya
———
Is there any plan for having common benchmarks between ATLAS and CMS?
=> some of the signatures that arise in dark showers have been suggested in theory papers and in that case there are some benchmark suggestions but so far there is no common benchmark. This should be addressed in the DM workshop next year.
was there any discussion about how the phenomenology depends on the number of flavours/colours etc?
=> there are some studies that show that rinv might/might not depent on the choice of flavours/colours. This is important when rinv is treated as an output parameters, since the choice of flavours/colours change the branching ratios. If rinv is set by hand the choice of flavours/colours
If the number of dark flavours change wouldn’t that affect the runnning of the dark alpha_s and therefore the evolution of the shower?
=> no, once rinv is fixed it effectively selects how the shower evolution is performed
Dark Higgs session:
Even
————
has it been checked that for the benchmark points chosen there are no constraints from dileptons or dijets?
e.g. https://atlas.web.cern.ch/Atlas/GROUPS/PHYSICS/PUBNOTES/ATL-PHYS-PUB-2023-018/fig_07.png
this could rule out all solutions for the RD in the off-shell region.
This should be checked
=> Will need to check check constraints from dijet/dilepton searches.
it seems that most of the points satisfying the RD are in the off-shell region, which means that the met would be low.
Once the above constraints have been checked, one should check if there is remaining parameter space that satisfies the RD constraints and check how the signal kinematics change.
A different analysis strategy might be necessary to target such benchmarks.
low z’ masses - are there any existing theory or experimental constraints?
=> one should check the constraints from LEP at least for the dark Higgs model. There might also be constraints from electroweak precision. To check this one would need a full realisation of the model. Generally such models are quite constrained.
are there any better theory benchmark to use?
=> models with more scalars including a lepto-philic scalar. Uli will have a look for concrete models and report back
Alicia
Where does the better obs limit come from?
=> The data deficit has been seen in the 2lqq channel SR, with time-dependency. Right plot on p9
is there any benchmark for which dark Higgs would reach higher mZ’ than dijets?
=> probably in the s->bb final state. it’s being explored.
Kun
What is the reason 2-body and 3-body has different trend in terms of the final limit?
=> Mainly from the BR that 3-body decay only opens at high mW’.
Is the model compatible with RD?
=> Thhis has not been checked
Is the W’ coupling flavour-universal?
=> Yes. in the left-right symmetric model that is used the couplings are flavour universal but one can make an implementation where the W’ couples preferentially to 3rd generation
if it couples flavour universally aren’t there flavour constraints from off-diagonal couplings e.g. b->s transitions? FCNC could arise at loop order
=> this hasn’t been studied yet
Could charged Higgs results constraining this model?
=> Charged Higgs searches have high b-jet multiplicity since the production goes through pp->tbH+, H+->tb, unlike this signature
are there constraints from W’->WZ/WH
=> this depends on the mixing between the W’ and W, they can be tuned away
There are minutes attached to this event.
Show them.
