Paper detail

Toward the Natural and Realistic NMSSM with and without R-Parity

From the current ATLAS and CMS results on Higgs boson mass and decay rates, the NMSSM is obviously better than the MSSM. To explain the fine-tuning problems such as gauge hiearchy problem and strong CP problem in the SM, we point out that supersymmetry does not need to provide a dark matter candidate, i.e., R-parity can be violated. Thus, we consider three kinds of the NMSSM scenarios: in Scenarios I and II R-parity is conserved and the lightest neutralino relic density is respectively around and smaller than the observed value, while in Scenario III R-parity is violated. To fit all the experimental data, we consider the χ^2 analyses, and find that the Higgs boson mass and decay rates can be explained very well in these Scenarios. Considering the small χ^2 values and fine-tuning around 2-3.7% (or 1-2%), we obtain the viable parameter space with light (or relatively heavy) supersymmetric particle spectra only in Scenario III (or in Scenarios I and II). Because the singlino, Higgsinos, and light stop are relatively light in general, we can relax the LHC supersymmetry search constraints but the XENON100 experiment gives a strong constraint in Scenarios I and II. In all the viable parameter space, the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon (g_μ - 2)/2 are generically small. With R-parity violation, we can increase (g_μ - 2)/2, and avoid the contraints from the LHC supersymmetry searches and XENON100 experiment. Therefore, Scenario III with R-parity violation is more natural and realistic than Scenarios I and II.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 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.