Paper detail

LHC and lepton flavour violation phenomenology of a left-right extension of the MSSM

We study the phenomenology of a supersymmetric left-right model, assuming minimal supergravity boundary conditions. Both left-right and (B-L) symmetries are broken at an energy scale close to, but significantly below the GUT scale. Neutrino data is explained via a seesaw mechanism. We calculate the RGEs for superpotential and soft parameters complete at 2-loop order. At low energies lepton flavour violation (LFV) and small, but potentially measurable mass splittings in the charged scalar lepton sector appear, due to the RGE running. Different from the supersymmetric 'pure seesaw' models, both, LFV and slepton mass splittings, occur not only in the left- but also in the right slepton sector. Especially, ratios of LFV slepton decays, such as Br(${\tildeτ}_R \to μχ^0_1$)/Br(${\tildeτ}_L \to μχ^0_1$) are sensitive to the ratio of (B-L) and left-right symmetry breaking scales. Also the model predicts a polarization asymmetry of the outgoing positrons in the decay $μ^+ \to e^+ γ$, A ~ [0,1], which differs from the pure seesaw 'prediction' A=1$. Observation of any of these signals allows to distinguish this model from any of the three standard, pure (mSugra) seesaw setups.

preprint2010arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.