The last gasp of dark matter effective theory

Journal of High Energy Physics

Volumn 2016, Issue 11, 2016, Pages

  Bruggisser, Sebastian ^a   Riva, Francesco ^b   Urbano, Alfredo ^b  

^a DESY   (Germany)

^b CERN   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Cosmology of Theories beyond the SM; Effective field theories; Global Symmetries; Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking

Indexed keywords

EID: 84994877267     PISSN: 11266708     EISSN: 10298479     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/JHEP11(2016)069     Document Type: Article

References (101)

1. Q.-H. Cao, C.-R. Chen, C.S. Li and H. Zhang, Effective dark matter model: relic density, CDMS II, Fermi LAT and LHC, JHEP 08 (2011) 018 [arXiv:0912.4511] [INSPIRE].
2. M. Beltrán, D. Hooper, E.W. Kolb, Z.A.C. Krusberg and T.M.P. Tait, Maverick dark matter at colliders, JHEP 09 (2010) 037 [arXiv:1002.4137] [INSPIRE].
3. Y. Bai, P.J. Fox and R. Harnik, The Tevatron at the frontier of dark matter direct detection, JHEP 12 (2010) 048 [arXiv:1005.3797] [INSPIRE].
4. P.J. Fox, R. Harnik, J. Kopp and Y. Tsai, Missing energy signatures of dark matter at the LHC, Phys. Rev. D 85 (2012) 056011 [arXiv:1109.4398] [INSPIRE].
5. J. Goodman, M. Ibe, A. Rajaraman, W. Shepherd, T.M.P. Tait and H.-B. Yu, Constraints on light Majorana dark matter from colliders, Phys. Lett. B 695 (2011) 185 [arXiv:1005.1286] [INSPIRE].
6. N. Arkani-Hamed et al., MARMOSET: the path from LHC data to the new Standard Model via on-shell effective theories, hep-ph/0703088 [INSPIRE].
7. J. Alwall, P. Schuster and N. Toro, Simplified models for a first characterization of new physics at the LHC, Phys. Rev. D 79 (2009) 075020 [arXiv:0810.3921] [INSPIRE].
8. A. De Simone, G.F. Giudice and A. Strumia, Benchmarks for dark matter searches at the LHC, JHEP 06 (2014) 081 [arXiv:1402.6287] [INSPIRE].
9. G. Busoni et al., Recommendations on presenting LHC searches for missing transverse energy signals using simplified s-channel models of dark matter, arXiv:1603.04156 [INSPIRE].
10. A. De Simone and T. Jacques, Simplified models vs. effective field theory approaches in dark matter searches, Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016) 367 [arXiv:1603.08002] [INSPIRE].
11. F. Kahlhoefer, K. Schmidt-Hoberg, T. Schwetz and S. Vogl, Implications of unitarity and gauge invariance for simplified dark matter models, JHEP 02 (2016) 016 [arXiv:1510.02110] [INSPIRE].
12. C. Englert, M. McCullough and M. Spannowsky, S-channel dark matter simplified models and unitarity, Phys. Dark Univ. 14 (2016) 48 [arXiv:1604.07975] [INSPIRE].
13. J. Abdallah et al., Simplified models for dark matter and missing energy searches at the LHC, arXiv:1409.2893 [INSPIRE].
14. A. Manohar and H. Georgi, Chiral quarks and the nonrelativistic quark model, Nucl. Phys. B 234 (1984) 189 [INSPIRE].
15. H. Georgi and L. Randall, Flavor conserving CP-violation in invisible axion models, Nucl. Phys. B 276 (1986) 241 [INSPIRE].
16. A.G. Cohen, D.B. Kaplan and A.E. Nelson, Counting 4π’s in strongly coupled supersymmetry, Phys. Lett. B 412 (1997) 301 [hep-ph/9706275] [INSPIRE].
17. M.A. Luty, Naive dimensional analysis and supersymmetry, Phys. Rev. D 57 (1998) 1531 [hep-ph/9706235] [INSPIRE].
18. G.F. Giudice, C. Grojean, A. Pomarol and R. Rattazzi, The strongly-interacting light Higgs, JHEP 06 (2007) 045 [hep-ph/0703164] [INSPIRE].
19. D. Liu, A. Pomarol, R. Rattazzi and F. Riva, Patterns of strong coupling for LHC searches, arXiv:1603.03064 [INSPIRE].
20. R. Contino, A. Falkowski, F. Goertz, C. Grojean and F. Riva, On the validity of the effective field theory approach to SM precision tests, JHEP 07 (2016) 144 [arXiv:1604.06444] [INSPIRE].
21. G.D. Kribs and E.T. Neil, Review of strongly-coupled composite dark matter models and lattice simulations, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 31 (2016) 1643004 [arXiv:1604.04627] [INSPIRE].
22. S. Bruggisser, F. Riva and A. Urbano, Strongly interacting light dark matter, arXiv:1607.02474 [INSPIRE].
23. D. Racco, A. Wulzer and F. Zwirner, Robust collider limits on heavy-mediator dark matter, JHEP 05 (2015) 009 [arXiv:1502.04701] [INSPIRE].
24. F. D’Eramo, B.J. Kavanagh and P. Panci, You can hide but you have to run: direct detection with vector mediators, JHEP 08 (2016) 111 [arXiv:1605.04917] [INSPIRE].
25. S.R. Coleman, J. Wess and B. Zumino, Structure of phenomenological Lagrangians. 1, Phys. Rev. 177 (1969) 2239 [INSPIRE].
26. C.G. Callan Jr., S.R. Coleman, J. Wess and B. Zumino, Structure of phenomenological Lagrangians. 2, Phys. Rev. 177 (1969) 2247 [INSPIRE].
27. R. Casalbuoni, S. De Curtis, D. Dominici, F. Feruglio and R. Gatto, Nonlinear realization of supersymmetry algebra from supersymmetric constraint, Phys. Lett. B 220 (1989) 569 [INSPIRE].
28. T.E. Clark and S.T. Love, Goldstino couplings to matter, Phys. Rev. D 54 (1996) 5723 [hep-ph/9608243] [INSPIRE].
29. A. Brignole, F. Feruglio and F. Zwirner, Aspects of spontaneously broken N = 1 global supersymmetry in the presence of gauge interactions, Nucl. Phys. B 501 (1997) 332 [hep-ph/9703286] [INSPIRE].
30. Z. Komargodski and N. Seiberg, From linear SUSY to constrained superfields, JHEP 09 (2009) 066 [arXiv:0907.2441] [INSPIRE].
31. C. Cheung, Y. Nomura and J. Thaler, Goldstini, JHEP 03 (2010) 073 [arXiv:1002.1967] [INSPIRE].
32. C. Cheung, J. Mardon, Y. Nomura and J. Thaler, A definitive signal of multiple supersymmetry breaking, JHEP 07 (2010) 035 [arXiv:1004.4637] [INSPIRE].
33. T.E. Clark, T. Lee, S.T. Love and G.-H. Wu, On the interactions of light gravitinos, Phys. Rev. D 57 (1998) 5912 [hep-ph/9712353] [INSPIRE].
34. A. Monin and F. Riva, N non-linear supersymmetries, in preparation.
35. S. Weinberg, Goldstone bosons as fractional cosmic neutrinos, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 (2013) 241301 [arXiv:1305.1971] [INSPIRE].
36. C. Kilic, T. Okui and R. Sundrum, Vectorlike confinement at the LHC, JHEP 02 (2010) 018 [arXiv:0906.0577] [INSPIRE].
37. O. Antipin, M. Redi and A. Strumia, Dynamical generation of the weak and dark matter scales from strong interactions, JHEP 01 (2015) 157 [arXiv:1410.1817] [INSPIRE].
38. A. Belyaev, M.T. Frandsen, S. Sarkar and F. Sannino, Mixed dark matter from technicolor, Phys. Rev. D 83 (2011) 015007 [arXiv:1007.4839] [INSPIRE].
39. A. Hietanen, R. Lewis, C. Pica and F. Sannino, Composite Goldstone dark matter: experimental predictions from the lattice, JHEP 12 (2014) 130 [arXiv:1308.4130] [INSPIRE].
40. A. Carmona and M. Chala, Composite dark sectors, JHEP 06 (2015) 105 [arXiv:1504.00332] [INSPIRE].
41. S. Bhattacharya, B. Melić and J. Wudka, Pionic dark matter, JHEP 02 (2014) 115 [arXiv:1307.2647] [INSPIRE].
42. B. Gripaios, A. Pomarol, F. Riva and J. Serra, Beyond the minimal composite Higgs model, JHEP 04 (2009) 070 [arXiv:0902.1483] [INSPIRE].
43. M. Frigerio, A. Pomarol, F. Riva and A. Urbano, Composite scalar dark matter, JHEP 07 (2012) 015 [arXiv:1204.2808] [INSPIRE].
44. D. Marzocca and A. Urbano, Composite dark matter and LHC interplay, JHEP 07 (2014) 107 [arXiv:1404.7419] [INSPIRE].
45. M. Chala, h → γγ excess and dark matter from composite Higgs models, JHEP 01 (2013) 122 [arXiv:1210.6208] [INSPIRE].
46. M. Chala, G. Nardini and I. Sobolev, Unified explanation for dark matter and electroweak baryogenesis with direct detection and gravitational wave signatures, Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) 055006 [arXiv:1605.08663] [INSPIRE].
47. D.B. Kaplan, Flavor at SSC energies: a new mechanism for dynamically generated fermion masses, Nucl. Phys. B 365 (1991) 259 [INSPIRE].
48. R. Contino, Y. Nomura and A. Pomarol, Higgs as a holographic pseudo-Goldstone boson, Nucl. Phys. B 671 (2003) 148 [hep-ph/0306259] [INSPIRE].
49. K. Agashe, R. Contino and A. Pomarol, The minimal composite Higgs model, Nucl. Phys. B 719 (2005) 165 [hep-ph/0412089] [INSPIRE].
50. J. Mrazek, A. Pomarol, R. Rattazzi, M. Redi, J. Serra and A. Wulzer, The other natural two Higgs doublet model, Nucl. Phys. B 853 (2011) 1 [arXiv:1105.5403] [INSPIRE].
51. A. Pomarol and F. Riva, The composite Higgs and light resonance connection, JHEP 08 (2012) 135 [arXiv:1205.6434] [INSPIRE].
52. A. Pomarol and J. Serra, Top quark compositeness: feasibility and implications, Phys. Rev. D 78 (2008) 074026 [arXiv:0806.3247] [INSPIRE].
53. U. Haisch and E. Re, Simplified dark matter top-quark interactions at the LHC, JHEP 06 (2015) 078 [arXiv:1503.00691] [INSPIRE].
54. M. Duch, B. Grzadkowski and J. Wudka, Classification of effective operators for interactions between the Standard Model and dark matter, JHEP 05 (2015) 116 [arXiv:1412.0520] [INSPIRE].
55. R. Foadi, M.T. Frandsen and F. Sannino, Technicolor dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 80 (2009) 037702 [arXiv:0812.3406] [INSPIRE].
56. M. Chala, F. Kahlhoefer, M. McCullough, G. Nardini and K. Schmidt-Hoberg, Constraining dark sectors with monojets and dijets, JHEP 07 (2015) 089 [arXiv:1503.05916] [INSPIRE].
57. R.C. Cotta, J.L. Hewett, M.P. Le and T.G. Rizzo, Bounds on dark matter interactions with electroweak gauge bosons, Phys. Rev. D 88 (2013) 116009 [arXiv:1210.0525] [INSPIRE].
58. J. Brooke, M.R. Buckley, P. Dunne, B. Penning, J. Tamanas and M. Zgubic, Vector boson fusion searches for dark matter at the LHC, Phys. Rev. D 93 (2016) 113013 [arXiv:1603.07739] [INSPIRE].
59. S. Davidson, Including the Z in an effective field theory for dark matter at the LHC, JHEP 10 (2014) 084 [arXiv:1403.5161] [INSPIRE].
60. A. Crivellin, U. Haisch and A. Hibbs, LHC constraints on gauge boson couplings to dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 91 (2015) 074028 [arXiv:1501.00907] [INSPIRE].
61. A. Biekötter, A. Knochel, M. Krämer, D. Liu and F. Riva, Vices and virtues of Higgs effective field theories at large energy, Phys. Rev. D 91 (2015) 055029 [arXiv:1406.7320] [INSPIRE].
62. G. Busoni, A. De Simone, E. Morgante and A. Riotto, On the validity of the effective field theory for dark matter searches at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B 728 (2014) 412 [arXiv:1307.2253] [INSPIRE].
63. G. Busoni, A. De Simone, J. Gramling, E. Morgante and A. Riotto, On the validity of the effective field theory for dark matter searches at the LHC, part II: complete analysis for the s-channel, JCAP 06 (2014) 060 [arXiv:1402.1275] [INSPIRE].
64. G. Busoni, A. De Simone, T. Jacques, E. Morgante and A. Riotto, On the validity of the effective field theory for dark matter searches at the LHC part III: analysis for the t-channel, JCAP 09 (2014) 022 [arXiv:1405.3101] [INSPIRE].
65. M. Papucci, A. Vichi and K.M. Zurek, Monojet versus the rest of the world I: t-channel models, JHEP 11 (2014) 024 [arXiv:1402.2285] [INSPIRE].
66. ATLAS collaboration, Search for new phenomena with the monojet and missing transverse momentum signature using the ATLAS detector in s=7 TeV proton-proton collisions, Phys. Lett. B 705 (2011) 294 [arXiv:1106.5327] [INSPIRE].
67. ATLAS collaboration, Search for dark matter candidates and large extra dimensions in events with a jet and missing transverse momentum with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 04 (2013) 075 [arXiv:1210.4491] [INSPIRE].
68. −1 of pp collisions at s=8 TeV with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, ATLAS-CONF-2012-147, CERN, Geneva Switzerland (2012).
69. ATLAS collaboration, Search for new phenomena in final states with an energetic jet and large missing transverse momentum in pp collisions at s=8 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C 75 (2015) 299
70. [Erratum ibid. C 75 (2015) 408] [arXiv:1502.01518] [INSPIRE].
71. CMS collaboration, Search for new physics with a mono-jet and missing transverse energy in pp collisions at s=7 TeV, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107 (2011) 201804 [arXiv:1106.4775] [INSPIRE].
72. CMS collaboration, Search for dark matter and large extra dimensions in monojet events in pp collisions at s=7 TeV, JHEP 09 (2012) 094 [arXiv:1206.5663] [INSPIRE].
73. CMS collaboration, Search for dark matter, extra dimensions and unparticles in monojet events in proton-proton collisions at s=8 TeV, Eur. Phys. J. C 75 (2015) 235 [arXiv:1408.3583] [INSPIRE].
74. Planck collaboration, P.A.R. Ade et al., Planck 2013 results. XVI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 571 (2014) A16 [arXiv:1303.5076] [INSPIRE].
75. J. Kumar and D. Marfatia, Matrix element analyses of dark matter scattering and annihilation, Phys. Rev. D 88 (2013) 014035 [arXiv:1305.1611] [INSPIRE].
76. XENON100 collaboration, E. Aprile et al., Limits on spin-dependent WIMP-nucleon cross sections from 225 live days of XENON100 data, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111 (2013) 021301 [arXiv:1301.6620] [INSPIRE].
77. LUX collaboration, D.S. Akerib et al., First results from the LUX dark matter experiment at the Sanford Underground Research Facility, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112 (2014) 091303 [arXiv:1310.8214] [INSPIRE].
78. LUX collaboration, D.S. Akerib et al., Results on the spin-dependent scattering of weakly interacting massive particles on nucleons from the run 3 data of the LUX experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) 161302 [arXiv:1602.03489] [INSPIRE].
79. SuperCDMS collaboration, R. Agnese et al., New results from the search for low-mass weakly interacting massive particles with the CDMS low ionization threshold experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) 071301 [arXiv:1509.02448] [INSPIRE].
80. CRESST collaboration, G. Angloher et al., Results on light dark matter particles with a low-threshold CRESST-II detector, Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016) 25 [arXiv:1509.01515] [INSPIRE].
81. J. Fan, M. Reece and L.-T. Wang, Non-relativistic effective theory of dark matter direct detection, JCAP 11 (2010) 042 [arXiv:1008.1591] [INSPIRE].
82. A.L. Fitzpatrick, W. Haxton, E. Katz, N. Lubbers and Y. Xu, The effective field theory of dark matter direct detection, JCAP 02 (2013) 004 [arXiv:1203.3542] [INSPIRE].
83. M. Cirelli, E. Del Nobile and P. Panci, Tools for model-independent bounds in direct dark matter searches, JCAP 10 (2013) 019 [arXiv:1307.5955] [INSPIRE].
84. M. Drees and M. Nojiri, Neutralino-nucleon scattering revisited, Phys. Rev. D 48 (1993) 3483 [hep-ph/9307208] [INSPIRE].
85. J. Hisano, K. Ishiwata and N. Nagata, QCD effects on direct detection of wino dark matter, JHEP 06 (2015) 097 [arXiv:1504.00915] [INSPIRE].
86. J.M. Cornwall, D.N. Levin and G. Tiktopoulos, Derivation of gauge invariance from high-energy unitarity bounds on the S matrix, Phys. Rev. D 10 (1974) 1145
87. [Erratum ibid. D 11 (1975) 972] [INSPIRE].
88. N. Bell, G. Busoni, A. Kobakhidze, D.M. Long and M.A. Schmidt, Unitarisation of EFT amplitudes for dark matter searches at the LHC, JHEP 08 (2016) 125 [arXiv:1606.02722] [INSPIRE].
89. Y. Hochberg, E. Kuflik, T. Volansky and J.G. Wacker, Mechanism for thermal relic dark matter of strongly interacting massive particles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113 (2014) 171301 [arXiv:1402.5143] [INSPIRE].
90. N.F. Bell, Y. Cai and R.K. Leane, Mono-W dark matter signals at the LHC: simplified model analysis, JCAP 01 (2016) 051 [arXiv:1512.00476] [INSPIRE].
91. N.F. Bell, J.B. Dent, A.J. Galea, T.D. Jacques, L.M. Krauss and T.J. Weiler, Searching for dark matter at the LHC with a mono-Z, Phys. Rev. D 86 (2012) 096011 [arXiv:1209.0231] [INSPIRE].
92. L. Carpenter, A. DiFranzo, M. Mulhearn, C. Shimmin, S. Tulin and D. Whiteson, Mono-Higgs-boson: a new collider probe of dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 89 (2014) 075017 [arXiv:1312.2592] [INSPIRE].
93. P.J. Fox, R. Harnik, J. Kopp and Y. Tsai, LEP shines light on dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 84 (2011) 014028 [arXiv:1103.0240] [INSPIRE].
94. B. Grzadkowski, M. Iskrzynski, M. Misiak and J. Rosiek, Dimension-six terms in the Standard Model Lagrangian, JHEP 10 (2010) 085 [arXiv:1008.4884] [INSPIRE].
95. 8 bubble chamber, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 (2015) 231302 [arXiv:1503.00008] [INSPIRE].
96. Super-Kamiokande collaboration, K. Choi et al., Search for neutrinos from annihilation of captured low-mass dark matter particles in the sun by Super-Kamiokande, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 (2015) 141301 [arXiv:1503.04858] [INSPIRE].
97. IceCube collaboration, M.G. Aartsen et al., Improved limits on dark matter annihilation in the sun with the 79-string IceCube detector and implications for supersymmetry, JCAP 04 (2016) 022 [arXiv:1601.00653] [INSPIRE].
98. A. Alloul, N.D. Christensen, C. Degrande, C. Duhr and B. Fuks, FeynRules 2.0 — a complete toolbox for tree-level phenomenology, Comput. Phys. Commun. 185 (2014) 2250 [arXiv:1310.1921] [INSPIRE].
99. J. Alwall et al., The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections and their matching to parton shower simulations, JHEP 07 (2014) 079 [arXiv:1405.0301] [INSPIRE].
100. T. Sjöstrand, S. Mrenna and P.Z. Skands, PYTHIA 6.4 physics and manual, JHEP 05 (2006) 026 [hep-ph/0603175] [INSPIRE].
101. E. Conte, B. Fuks and G. Serret, MadAnalysis 5, a user-friendly framework for collider phenomenology, Comput. Phys. Commun. 184 (2013) 222 [arXiv:1206.1599] [INSPIRE].