Paper detail

Supersymmetric type-III seesaw: lepton flavour violation and LHC phenomenology

We study a supersymmetric version of the seesaw mechanism type-III considering two variants of the model: a minimal version for explaining neutrino data with only two copies of 24-plet superfields and a model with three generations of 24-plets. The latter predicts in general rates for $μ\to eγ$ inconsistent with experimental data. However, this bound can be evaded if certain special conditions within the neutrino sector are fulfilled. In case of two 24-plets lepton flavour violation constraints can be satisfied much easier. After specifying the corresponding regions in the CMSSM parameter space we show that under favorable conditions one can test the corresponding flavour structures in the leptonic sector at the LHC. For this we perform Monte Carlo studies for the signals taking also into account the SUSY background. We find that it is only of minor importance for the scenarios studied here.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 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.