Paper detail

Supersymmetry With Prejudice: Fitting the Wrong Model to LHC Data

We critically examine interpretations of hypothetical supersymmetric LHC signals, fitting to alternative wrong models of supersymmetry breaking. The signals we consider are some of the most constraining on the sparticle spectrum: invariant mass distributions with edges and end-points from the golden cascade decay chain \tilde{q}_L -> q χ_2^0 (-> \tilde{l}^{\pm} l^{\mp} q) -> χ_1^0 l^+ l^- q. We assume a CMSSM point to be the `correct' one, and fit the signals instead to minimal gauge mediated supersymmetry breaking models (mGMSB) with a neutralino quasi-stable lightest supersymmetric particle, minimal anomaly mediation (mAMSB) and large volume string compactification models (LVS). mAMSB and LVS can be unambiguously discriminated against the CMSSM for the parameter point assumed and 1 inverse femtobarn of LHC data at 14 TeV. However, mGMSB would not be discriminated on the basis of the kinematic end-points alone, and would require further, more detailed investigation. The best-fit points of mGMSB and CMSSM look remarkably similar, making experimental discrimination at the LHC appear unlikely by any means.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors2 topics

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.