arxiv: v1 [hep-ph] 26 Aug 2016

Transcription

1 Vacuum alignment without elementary scalars Tommi Alanne Helene Gertov Aurora Meroni and Francesco Sannino CP 3 -Origins & the Danish Institute for Advanced Study Danish IAS University of Southern Denmark Campusvej 55 DK-53 Odense M Denmark. We systematically elucidate differences and similarities of the vacuum alignment issue in composite and renormalizable elementary extensions of the Standard Model featuring a pseudo-goldstone Higgs. We also provide general conditions for the stability of the vacuum in the elementary framework thereby extending previous studies of the vacuum alignment. Preprint: CP 3 -Origins DNRF9 arxiv: v1 hep-ph 6 Aug 16 I. INTRODUCTION Theories in which the gauge group is only a part of the original global symmetry can undergo a vacuum misalignment phenomenon via quantum corrections. In two pioneering papers in the context of technicolor Peskin 1 and Preskill recognized that quantum corrections stemming from the electroweak EW sector can destabilize the original vacuum endangering the EW stability. Later Kaplan and Georgi 3 4 turned the technicolor misalignment problem into a feature by realising that the Higgs doublet of the Standard Model SM can be identified with a doublet of dynamically generated Goldstone bosons GBs. The final vacuum of the theory depends heavily on the details of the dynamics responsible for generating the SM fermion masses which for purely fermionic composite extensions is unknown. We start with reviewing well-known results in the composite framework and then show how the analysis modifies when considering elementary scalars. In the elementary case we start from the general form of the Coleman Weinberg CW effective potential 5 and then deduce general conditions that once satisfied lead to the proper vacuum alignment. The paper is organized as follows: In Sec. II we review the general framework for composite realizations of the pseudo-goldstone Higgs scenario and associated vacuum alignment conditions. The elementary counterpart is investigated in Sec. III. There we setup the framework and provide the general form of the quantum corrections along with deriving relevant conditions for the vacuum alignment. We then apply our results to relevant phenomenological examples in Sec. IV. We finally conclude in Sec. V. alanne@cp3.sdu.dk gertov@cp3.sdu.dk meroni@cp3.sdu.dk sannino@cp3.dias.sdu.dk II. REVIEW OF THE VACUUM ALIGNMENT IN COMPOSITE SCENARIOS Let us consider underlying composite framework with global chiral-symmetry-breaking pattern SON SON 1. The corresponding coset space is parameterized by i Σ = exp f Πa X a E 1 where the Π a are the GBs corresponding to the broken generators X a f is the pion decay constant and E gives the vacuum orientation inside SON. A. The gauged subsector and fermion embedding Let K SON be gauged and assume that the vacuum alignment E preserves K whereas E B breaks it maximally to K B. In the following we investigate the alignment of the vacuum with respect to the gauged subgroup K. To this end we parameterise E as: E E = cos E + sin E B where the angle is a priori a free parameter in the range π/. Let us start by defining the basis with respect to the gauge-breaking vacuum E B. Let {τ a } be the set of generators of the gauge group K which can be divided into the broken {χ a } and unbroken generators {σ a }. Since E preserves the full gauge group both σ a and χ a leave the vacuum E invariant. Furthermore the unbroken σ a also leaves E B invariant i.e. σ a E = σ a E B = χ a E = χ a E B 3 where the notation represents the generators acting on the vacuum. Thus the only non-zero contribution to the gauge boson masses are the χ a E B

2 terms. Concretely the gauge boson masses arise from the kinetic terms L kin =f TrD µ Σ D µ Σ = + g f Tr χ a Σ χ b Σ A a µa b µ where 4 D µ Σ = µ Σ ig A a µ τ a Σ. 5 Thus the gauge boson masses are given by µ ab =g f Tr χ a E χ b E =g f sin Tr χ a E B χ b E B g CE B ab f sin. 6 The CE B ab factor encodes the group theoretical embedding of the gauge group and as expected it depends only on the broken generators. Furthermore we assume that the fermions acquire their masses fully from the composite condensate via four-fermion operators induced e.g. by extended strong dynamics and the induced effective operators are only invariant under the gauged subgroup K. This yields the following fermion masses m F = y F f sin. 7 B. Quantum corrections The gauge contribution has a minimum at = meaning that the gauge sector prefers to be unbroken in agreement with Peskin 1 and Preskill. However the top sector prefers the minimum to be at = π/. This contribution was not considered in 1 and was analysed only later in recent models of technicolor and composite-higgs dynamics see e.g Given the large top contribution it will dominate the potential and try to align the vacuum in the direction where the electroweak symmetry is fully broken. This means that in the composite limit we need new sources of vacuum misalignment to achieve a pseudo-goldstoneboson pgb Higgs scenario. We will discuss such a source in the next subsection. C. Explicit symmetry breaking To achieve the desired vacuum alignment one can add an ad hoc explicit symmetry breaking operator taking the form: V B = ± C B f 4 TrE Σ = ±C Bf 4 cos where C B is just a positive dimensionless constant and the sign depends on whether the trivial minimum is at = positive sign or = π/ negative sign. Since the minimum without the explicit-breaking term is at = π/ a negative sign is needed to achieve a pgb vacuum. The method of adding an ad hoc operator is well known in the literature 7 8. Within the composite framework the leading corrections in the EW and fermion-yukawa couplings to the effective potential are given by: III. VACUUM ALIGNMENT WITH ELEMENTARY SCALARS with Ṽ gauge 1 = 3 Ṽ ferm 1 = 4 Ṽ eff = Ṽ gauge 1 + Ṽ ferm π C KTr µ Λ and 64π C F Tr m F m F F Λ 9 where Λ is identified with the compositeness scale Λ 4πf and C K C F are the form factors related to the gauge group K and the fermion F respectively. For the SM gauge group and top quark embedding the contributions to the potential on the vacuum read: Ṽ gauge 1 Ṽ top 1 = 3 3g C g + g C g sin f 4 1 vac 16 = 3 vac y t C t sin f We consider an SON invariant scalar potential for a scalar field Φ: V = m Φ Φ + λ 4! Φ Φ. 13 If m is negative SON breaks spontaneously to SON 1 leaving behind N 1 GBs. We parameterise the scalar field as Φ = σ + iπ a X a E 14 where Π a are the GBs corresponding to the broken generators X a and E gives the vacuum alignment. The gauging of the subgroup K and adding fermion-yukawa interactions breaks the global symmetry explicitly and thus an interesting part of the dynamics arises via quantum corrections. For N > 4 it is always possible to decompose the N multiplet into a 4 of the SO4 =

3 3 SU L SU R and N 4 singlets. The EW interactions are embedded in such a way that the SO4 is a subgroup of the unbroken SON 1. In this way the electroweak symmetry is intact at tree-level and the Higgs doublet is massless. A. The gauged subsector Similarly as in the composite framework Sec. II we gauge K SON by introducing the covariant derivative D µ Φ = µ Φ ig A a µ τ a Φ 15 and parameterise the vacuum as in Eq. E E = cos E +sin E B where E preserves K and E B breaks it to K B. Thus when Φ acquires a vev Φ = fe the gauge bosons obtain masses µ ab =g CE B ab f sin. 16 The CE B ab factor encodes the group theoretical embedding of the gauge group as in the composite case. B. Adding fermions For simplicity we consider the usual SM-type fermions i.e. a Yukawa sector invariant only under the gauge group K and not the full global symmetry. Further we assume that the fermions obtain their masses fully via the vev of Φ. Then we can write the fermion mass-squared matrix as m m = ab y DE B ab f sin. 17 Also in this case the factor DE B ab contains information about the fermion embedding and is independent of the angle. C. The Coleman Weinberg potential and the renormalisation procedure To illustrate the different UV structure and to relate to the composite case let us first write down the one-loop effective potential regulated with hard cut-off Λ: V 1 ϕ = 1 Λ 64π Str 4 log Λ 1 + M ϕλ 18 +M 4 ϕ log M ϕ Λ 1 + c.t. where ϕ is the background choice and Mϕ is the tree-level mass matrix evaluated on the given background. The supertrace is defined as Str scalars Weyl fermions +3 vectors. 19 In the composite framework with a physical cut-off the leading contributions to the effective potential below the cut-off are of the same form as the second term in Eq. 18. In the renormalizable framework we cancel these divergent contributions via counter terms and the dominant contribution assumes the form of the last term in squared brackets of Eq. 18. We choose to work in the MS scheme in which the one-loop CW potential can be written as with V eff = V + V scalar 1 + V gauge 1 + V fermion 1 V1 scalar = 1 64π Tr M 4 ϕ log M ϕ V gauge 1 = 3 64π Tr µ 3 µ 4 ϕ log µ ϕ µ V1 fermion = 4 64π Tr m ϕmϕ log m ϕmϕ µ 3 where Mϕ µϕ and mϕ are the backgrounddependent scalar gauge boson and fermion mass matrices respectively. We fix the renormalisation scale such that the vev remains at the tree-level value i.e. the oneloop tadpole contributions in the σ direction vanish V1 scalar + V gauge 1 + V fermion σ 1 =. σ=f D. The scalar and gauge contributions The background-dependent masses of σ and the gauge bosons respectively read M σ = λ 6 3σ f µ ab = g CE B ab σ sin. 3

4 4 Thus in the σ direction where V scalar 1 = 1 64π V gauge 1 = 3g4 λ 6 3σ f log λ3σ f 6µ 3 64π σ4 sin 4 A log g σ sin µ + B A = TrCE B and B = Tr CE B log CE B Fixing the renormalisation scale using Eq. leads to log µ 1 = 18Ag 4 sin 4 + λ 9g 4 sin 4 A logg f sin +A + B + λ log λf. 3e 6 Substituting this in Eq. we get the renormalised effective potential V R eff. E. The vacuum structure The vacuum energy depends on the angle. Therefore to find the true minimum we need to further minimize with respect to i.e. Veff R =. 7 σ=f This yields the following condition: g 4 f 4 sin 3 cos = 3π 18A g 4 sin 4 + λ 97A 3 g 8 sin 8 + 9A g 4 λ sin 4 λ 4 A log 3g sin + A + B. λ 8 The potential has trivial critical points at = and = π/. Studying the second derivative we find that the critical point at = is a maximum and = π/ is a minimum. In this work we are mainly interested in whether it is possible to determine a non-trivial minimum without adding further ingredients to the model. This can only exist if where we defined f = 9 f 97A 3 g 8 sin 8 + 9A g 4 λ sin 4 λ 4 A log 3g sin + A + B. 3 λ We find that f has a minimum at for which and at this minimum sin 4 = λ 18A g 4 31 f = 1 1 λ4 1A log1a A 4B. 3 In order to have a non-trivial minimum for the model Eq. 3 has to be zero for some value of. Since f as this is only possible if f <. Thus we obtain a condition for the desired minimum depending only on the gauge group structure: 1A log1a A 4B <. 33 We obtain more insight if we write down A and B in the mass eigenbasis of the gauge bosons. To this end we write Then and CE B ab = U 1 CE B U ab c aδ ab. 34 A = a B = a c a c a and log c a 5 6 1A log1a A 4B = 1c a log 1c b c a a b 4c a log c a 5 6 = 1c a log c b c a b a a + 19c a

5 5 All the terms in the sum are positive so we conclude that the condition of Eq. 33 can never be fulfilled and thus there is no solution with nonvanishing vacuum alignment. There is still one possible caveat to be checked: If λ > 18A g 4 Eq. 31 does not have a solution and we have to see whether fπ/ can be negative in this case. To do that let λ = αg 18A with α > 1. Then π f =97A g 8 α 4 1A log1a A 4B B 1 5 SM +A 1α 4 log α 11α 4 + 1α where the first line is positive by Eq. 36 and the second line is always non-negative for α > 1 and zero at α = 1. Therefore the previous conclusion holds. F. The fermion contribution The same procedure used in the previous section can be applied without loss of generality to the Yukawa sector and in particular to the top quark. We define similarly to the gauge boson sector: A f = TrDE B and B f = Tr DE B log DE B 3 38 such that we can write the combined gauge and fermion contributions as V gauge 1 = 1 + V ferm 3g 4 64π σ4 sin 4 where we set à = A 4y4 3g 4 A f à log g σ sin µ + B and B = B 4y4 3g 4 B f 4y4 3g 4 A f log y g This shows that we get the same condition for nontrivial solution as in Eq. 33 for à and B if à >. However in this case there is also the possibility to have negative Ã. Then following the procedure in the previous section we obtain à log à 3à B >. 41 The regions where these conditions are fulfilled in the à B plane are shown in Fig. 1. We note FIG. 1. The figure shows the parameter space of the theory allowing for a pseudo-goldstone Higgs vacuum solution shaded region occurring for < < π/. The plot is obtained in the minimal scenario with only the σ field and the one loop contributions coming from the gauge and the fermion sectors. The star represents the SM embedding in this scenario with the three massive gauge bosons and the top mass see Sec. IV for details. that in the case of dominant fermion contributions or neglecting gauge contributions as in the SMlike gauge fermiontop sector it is not possible to find a non-trivial solution. Different gauge fermion realisations are not discussed in this work. In the following section we will show using the simplest elementary SO5 SO4 framework that it is possible to stabilize the vacuum at a non-vanishing value of by extending the scalar sector with a gauge singlet field. In this case no explicit breaking terms are needed. Alternatively one can still add explicit symmetry breaking terms to stabilize the vacuum for a non-vanishing. IV. à THE SO5 SO4 ELEMENTARY TEMPLATE The simplest breaking pattern enabling to embed the entire Higgs doublet of the SM as GB is SO5 SO4. This breaking pattern produces four GBs and it has been extensively used in composite Higgs models first considered in 9 1. Here we are interested in elementary scalar degrees of freedom where the underlying scalar potential is renormalisable. We emphasize that our treatment is different from that of 11 since we consistently calculate the full one-loop potential and determine the vacuum alignment based on these corrections.

6 6 Here and in the following X a and S a are respectively the broken and unbroken generators normalized as TrS a S b = TrX a X b = δ ab TrS a X b = the explicit expressions for the SO5 generators can be found in Appendix A. We again identify the vacuum of the theory as a superposition of a vacuum preserving the EW group E and a vacuum E B which breaks the EW group SU L U1 Y U1 Q as E = cos E + sin E B where the two vacua can be explicitly written as E = 1 T E B = 1 T. 4 We parameterise the SO5 scalar multiplet similarly as in Eq. 14 Φ = σ + iπ a X a E. The masses for the W ± and Z bosons are: µ W = 1 4 g f sin µ Z = 1 4 g + g f sin. 43 Therefore in order to produce the correct EW spectrum we identify v w = f sin. 44 Finally we couple the top quark to the left doublet of Φ such that the top quark acquires a mass m t = 1 y t f sin. 45 Both the gauge bosons and fermions masses are proportional to f sin. A. Quantum corrections The quantum corrections are given in Eqs. 3 and 39 where à and B now are à = g 16 g y4 t g 4 B = g log g + g 16 g 4g log + y4 t 3 g 4 + log y4 t g 4 log y t g. Making use of the SM values for the gauge and Yukawas couplings we obtain: à 5. B Note that this coincides with the star in Fig. 1 showing that the EW does not break in this case and it further illustrates the usefulness of the general results presented in the previous Section. B. Vacuum stabilization mechanisms As shown above for the SM gauge and fermion embeddings the vacuum is never stabilized for a away from. In the following we present an alternative mechanism for stabilising the vacuum in the elementary framework such that a pgb Higgs appears without adding further explicit symmetry breaking operators: We extend the theory with a singlet scalar state. We will see that the vacuum dynamically orients itself in a direction supporting a pgb Higgs with non-vanishing value of. Alternatively we could choose to break explicitly the SO5 symmetry to SO4 via a minimal operator that forces the vacuum to align in the desired direction. We will briefly discuss this alternative after discussing the singlet-scalar case. 1. Adding a singlet In the following we show that it is possible to have a dominantly pgb Higgs with mass 15 GeV by adding a scalar singlet S to the theory. For simplicity we take this new scalar to be Z symmetric and real. The scalar potential then reads: V = 1 m Φ Φ + 1 m SS + λ 4! Φ Φ + λ σs 4 Φ ΦS + λ S 4! S4. The stability of the potential requires: 48 λ λ S and 3λ σs + λ λ S. 49 Assuming for simplicity that S does not acquire a vev the background-dependent mass of the new scalar S reads M Sσ =m S + λ σs σ. 5 The singlet contributes to the one-loop effective potential with a term V1 S = 1 64π M Sσ 4 log M S σ µ We then fix the renormalization scale similarly as in Eq. and minimize again the vacuum energy with respect to the alignment angle. Finally we search for solutions for π/. To this end it is convenient to express the physical mass of S as M S = βm σ. Then the function f modifies to:

7 7 f =97Ã3 g 8 sin à g 4 λ sin 4 5λ + β 4 λ + 3β λ S + λ λ + β λ S β 4 λ λ 3β λ S B + à log 3g sin 5 λ + Ãλ λ + β λ S 8β 4 λ λ 9β λ S +β λ S λ β 4 λ + 3β λ S log β where λ is proportional to the mass squared of σ λ = 6 M σ. Finding a vacuum requires f to vanish under the constraints that the Higgs mass is f properly reproduced. This leaves us with two free parameters besides in addition to λ S which does not affect the vacuum alignment and the Higgs mass constraint which we choose to be the treelevel masses of σ and S M σ and M S respectively. We further fix the mass of S to.5m σ or M σ as benchmark values. The parameter space is further constrained by the requirement of tree-level vacuum stability and perturbativity of the quartic couplings λ 4π. We show the results in Fig.. We observe that along the continuous red line in the M σ space there is a ground state. It is useful to note that using Eqs. 3 and 44 one roughly expects M σ λ/ sin on the ground state. In addition we require overall stability of the potential expressed in Eq. 49. It is clear that for small or negative λ σs one needs to have a sufficiently large λ S as it is clear from the top panel of Fig.. We are guaranteed that the overall solution occurs for perturbative values of λ since large values of this coupling the light blue region in the top corner of the plots do not admit a ground state. The same analysis is repeated for M S = M σ in the bottom panel of Fig.. The numerical result shows that the introduction of a singlet dynamically misaligns the vacuum to a value of. Last it is instructive to investigate the decoupling limit for the singlet S i.e. M S v. In this limit we obtain: vw 3A + B + A log g v w sin MS =λ σs 4MS A + B + A log g vw 53 MS + O f/m S 4. As expected in the exact decoupled limit the EW symmetry remains intact. For finite values of the S mass the portal coupling is directly responsible for a non-vanishing vacuum value of. In this sense this mechanism has a dynamical origin. M σ GeV M σ GeV M S =.5 M σ Unstable λ S = 1 Unstable λ S = 1 λ > M S = M σ Unstable λ S = 1 λ > 1 Unstable λ S = FIG.. The red curve gives the minimum with respect to and yellow blue area is excluded by tree-level vacuum stability perturbativity. We fix respectively M S =.5M σ β =.5 and M S = M σ β = in the upper and lower panels.. Explicit symmetry breaking Adding an ad hoc explicit symmetry-breaking term can be done similarly as in the composite case by adding the operator of the form: V B = ± C B f 3 E Φ 54 where C B is again a positive dimensionless constant. Contrary to the composite case we are now interested in moving the minimum away from zero so the ad hoc operator has to be positive. In the σ background V B reads V B = C B f 3 σ cos. 55

8 8 Mσ GeV log 1 C B FIG. 3. The plot shows the stationary points of the potential with respect to blue solid curve when the explicit symmetry-breaking term V B is introduced. The coloured region corresponds to positive C B and the colour gradient indicates the value of log 1 C B. Imposing the correct mass of the Higgs and minimizing the full potential as previously we find that there are now solutions for different from zero. In Fig. 3 we plot the solution of the minimum of the potential with respect to as function of and of the mass of the heavy state σ M σ. The coloured region of the plot corresponds to positive C B and the colour gradient indicates the value of log 1 C B. From the plot we can see that for M σ > 5 GeV the value of is smaller than.5. We observe also that M σ and are inversely proportional. C. Minimal elementary Goldstone Higgs and dark matter: SU4 = SO6 Sp4 = SO5 This scenario was studied in detail in 1 13; here we just summarise the main results. The breaking pattern is achieved with a scalar multiplet M transforming under 6 A of SU4. However since 6 A is real and the breaking pattern is locally isomorphic to SO6 SO5 we know that non-trivial vacuum alignment cannot be achieved with minimal scalar degrees of freedom. However we can start from the sixdimensional complex representation of U4 and break the U4-invariant potential to SU4 by introducing Pfaffian terms. This gives 1 scalar decrees of freedom and the spectrum consists of two Sp4 singlets σ and its pseudoscalar partner Θ and two Sp4 quintuplets the pions Π i and their massive scalar partners Π i. The left and right generators of SU L SU R embedded in the SU4 are identified with T i L = 1 σi T R i = 1 σi T 56 where σ i are the Pauli matrices. The generator of the hypercharge is then identified with the third generator of the SU R group T Y = TR 3. Further the vacuum that leaves EW intact is given by 1 iσ E = 57 iσ while the alignment that breaks the EW symmetry to U1 Q is given by 1 E B = Following the discussion in the previous sections we define the vacuum of the theory following Eq. such that E E = 1. The EW group is gauged by introducing the covariant derivative where D µ M = µ M i G µ M + MG T µ 59 G µ = gw i µt i L + g B µ T 3 R 6 and the generators TL i and T R 3 are given by Eq. 56. When σ acquires a vacuum expectation value f the weak gauge bosons acquire masses m W = 1 4 g f sin and m Z = 1 4 g + g f sin. 61 Further we couple the SM fermions in particular the top quark to the EW doublet within M. The Yukawa term is then given by 6 L Yuk = y t Qt c αtrp α M + h.c. 6 where P 1 pick the components of the SU L doublet. The top quark then acquires the following mass: m t = y t f sin. 63 In the simplest case where all the massive scalars have equal tree-level masses the vacuum 1 As discussed in 6 there are actually two inequivalent vacua of this kind but with either choice the physical properties of the pgbs are the same.

9 9 f GeV the vacuum stabilization mechanisms work. We provided sufficiently general conditions showing for example that renormalizable theories with a single massive scalar singlet cannot radiatively stabilize the vacuum. However when generalizing the theory by including at least one more massive scalar state the vacuum can be made stable without the aid of other mechanisms such as the introduction of new global-symmetry-breaking operators often invoked in composite extensions. We then applied our results to phenomenologically relevant examples FIG. 4. The blue contour shows the stationary points with respect to and on the blue regions the second derivative with respect to is positive so the blue contour on a blue region represents a minimum. The red contour represents the points giving the correct EW gauge boson and top quark masses. For details see 1. alignment depends on one effective quartic coupling λ and we find phenomenologically viable solutions with 1 i.e. f being in the multi- TeV range Furthermore the DM candidate can account for the full observed DM abundance and be consistent with the experimental constraints in the region m DM > 15 GeV. A benchmark scenario for the vacuum alingment with λ =.1 is shown in Fig. 4. In practice the dynamics for this example is similar to the case in which we added a singlet state. In other words the potential of the theory is sufficiently rich to allow for a ground state with a non-vanishing. V. CONCLUSIONS We have investigated the vacuum alignment problem in renormalizable extensions of the SM that can feature a pgb Higgs. We have shown that the structure of the calculable radiative corrections differs from the composite-goldstone- Higgs paradigm yielding different ways in which ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The CP3-Origins centre is partially funded by the Danish National Research Foundation grant number DNRF9. TA acknowledges partial funding from a Villum foundation grant. Appendix A: SO5/SO4 generators We first identify the SU L SU R subgroup of SO5 by fixing the left and right generators as T LR a ij = i 1 ɛabc δi b δj c δjδ b i c ± A1 δi a δj 4 δj a δi 4 where a = 1 3 and i j = The generator TR 3 is then identified as the generator of hypercharge. We list here the SO5 generators adopted in this work. Xij 1 = i sin δi 1 δj 3 δi 3 δj 1 + cos δi 1 δj 5 δi 5 δj 1 Xij = i sin δi δj 3 δi 3 δj + cos δi δj 5 δi 5 δj Xij 3 = i sin δi 3 δj 4 δi 4 δj 3 + cos δi 4 δj 5 δi 5 δj 4 X 4 ij = i δ 3 i δ 5 j δ 5 i δ 3 j. A The generators are normalised such that TrX a Xb = δab. 1 M. E. Peskin Nucl. Phys. B doi:1.116/ J. Preskill Nucl. Phys. B doi:1.116/ D. B. Kaplan and H. Georgi Phys. Lett. B doi:1.116/ D. B. Kaplan H. Georgi and S. Dimopoulos Phys. Lett. B doi:1.116/ x

10 1 5 S. R. Coleman and E. J. Weinberg Phys. Rev. D doi:1.113/physrevd J. Galloway J. A. Evans M. A. Luty and R. A. Tacchi JHEP doi:1.17/jhep1186 arxiv: hep-ph. 7 G. Cacciapaglia and F. Sannino JHEP doi:1.17/jhep arxiv:14.33 hep-ph. 8 E. Katz A. E. Nelson and D. G. E. Walker JHEP doi:1.188/ /5/8/74 hep-ph/ K. Agashe R. Contino and A. Pomarol Nucl. Phys. B doi:1.116/j.nuclphysb hepph/ R. Contino L. Da Rold and A. Pomarol Phys. Rev. D doi:1.113/physrevd hepph/ F. Feruglio B. Gavela K. Kanshin P. A. N. Machado S. Rigolin and S. Saa JHEP doi:1.17/jhep61638 arxiv: hep-ph. 1 T. Alanne H. Gertov F. Sannino and K. Tuominen Phys. Rev. D 91 no doi:1.113/physrevd arxiv: hep-ph. 13 H. Gertov A. Meroni E. Molinaro and F. Sannino Phys. Rev. D 9 no doi:1.113/physrevd arxiv: hep-ph.