Electroweak baryogenesis as a probe of new physics

Transcription

1 Electroweak baryogenesis as a probe of new physics Eibun Senaha (Nagoya U) HPNP25@Toyama U. February 3, 25

2 Outline Introduction Overview of electroweak baryogenesis (EWBG) Current status EWBG in SUSY models EWBG in non-susy models Summary

3 Higgs and cosmology Higgs boson was discovered. m H = ±.37(stat) ±.8(syst) GeV, m H = 25.3 ±.3 h +.26 (ATLAS).27 (stat)+.3.5 (syst) i GeV, (CMS) What is the implication of Higgs physics for cosmology? - cosmic baryon asymmetry EW baryogenesis - dark matter inert Higgs, Higgs portal etc. - inflation Higgs inflation. - etc We discuss EW baryogenesis in connection with Higgs physics.

4 Higgs and cosmology Higgs boson was discovered. m H = ±.37(stat) ±.8(syst) GeV, m H = 25.3 ±.3 h +.26 (ATLAS).27 (stat)+.3.5 (syst) i GeV, (CMS) What is the implication of Higgs physics for cosmology? - cosmic baryon asymmetry EW baryogenesis - dark matter inert Higgs, Higgs portal etc. - inflation Higgs inflation. - etc We discuss EW baryogenesis in connection with Higgs physics.

5 Baryon Asymmetry of the Universe (BAU) Our Universe is baryon-asymmetric He Baryon density Ω b h CMB = n B n =6.23(7), [CMB], BBN = n B n =(5. 6.5), [BBN]. Y p D H D/H p BBN CMB If the BAU is generated before T O() MeV, the light element abundances (D, 3 He, 4 He, 7 Li) can be explained by the standard Big-Bang cosmology. Baryogenesis = generate right 7 Li/H p He/H p Baryon-to-photon ratio η gure 2.: The abundances of He, D, He, and Li as predicted by the standa

6 Electroweak baryogenesis B violation: anomalous process [Kuzmin, Rubakov, Shaposhnikov, PLB55,36 ( 85) ] Sakharov s criteria C violation: chiral gauge interaction $ X i=,2,3 (3q i L + l i L) (LH fermions) CP violation: Kobayashi-Maskawa (KM) phase and other complex phases in the beyond the SM Out of equilibrium: st -order EW phase transition (EWPT) with expanding bubble walls symmetric phase average bubble radius O( 6 )m [Carrington, Kapusta, PRD47, ( 93) 534] broken phase BAU can arise by the growing bubbles.

7 EW Baryogenesis mechanism symmetric phase H: Hubble constant broken phase f, f $ f, f CP

8 EW Baryogenesis mechanism symmetric phase H: Hubble constant broken phase () f, f $ f, f CP () Asymmetries arise ( CPV) but no BAU. n B = n L b n L b = + n R b n R b = =

9 EW Baryogenesis mechanism symmetric phase H: Hubble constant broken phase () (2) f, f $ f, f CP () Asymmetries arise ( CPV) but no BAU. n B = n L b n L b (2) LH part changes ( sphaleron) -> BAU n B = n L b n L b + n R b n R b = = = changed + n R b n R b n B =

10 EW Baryogenesis mechanism symmetric phase H: Hubble constant broken phase (3) () (2) f, f $ f, f CP () Asymmetries arise ( CPV) but no BAU. n B = n L b n L b (2) LH part changes ( sphaleron) -> BAU n B = n L b n L b + n R b n R b = = = + n R b n R b n B = (3) If (b) B <H the BAU can survive. changed

11 EW Baryogenesis mechanism symmetric phase How do we test this scenario? H: Hubble constant broken phase (3) () (2) f, f $ f, f CP () Asymmetries arise ( CPV) but no BAU. n B = n L b n L b (2) LH part changes ( sphaleron) -> BAU n B = n L b n L b + n R b n R b = = = + n R b n R b n B = (3) If (b) B <H the BAU can survive. changed

12 EW Baryogenesis mechanism symmetric phase H: Hubble constant How do we test this scenario? -> cannot redo EWPT in lab. exp. So, test Sakharov criteria instead. broken phase (3) () (2) f, f $ f, f CP () Asymmetries arise ( CPV) but no BAU. n B = n L b n L b (2) LH part changes ( sphaleron) -> BAU n B = n L b n L b + n R b n R b = = = + n R b n R b n B = (3) If (b) B <H the BAU can survive. changed

13 EW Baryogenesis mechanism symmetric phase H: Hubble constant How do we test this scenario? -> cannot redo EWPT in lab. exp. So, test Sakharov criteria instead. broken phase (3) () (2) f, f $ f, f CP probe by collider physics Higgs physics etc () Asymmetries arise ( CPV) but no BAU. n B = n L b n L b (2) LH part changes ( sphaleron) -> BAU n B = n L b n L b + n R b n R b = = = + n R b n R b n B = (3) If (b) B <H the BAU can survive. changed

14 EW Baryogenesis mechanism symmetric phase H: Hubble constant How do we test this scenario? -> cannot redo EWPT in lab. exp. So, test Sakharov criteria instead. broken phase (3) () (2) f, f $ f, f CP probe by CPV physics Electric Dipole Moment etc probe by collider physics Higgs physics etc () Asymmetries arise ( CPV) but no BAU. n B = n L b n L b (2) LH part changes ( sphaleron) -> BAU n B = n L b n L b + n R b n R b = = = + n R b n R b n B = (3) If (b) B <H the BAU can survive. changed

15 EW Baryogenesis mechanism symmetric phase H: Hubble constant How do we test this scenario? -> cannot redo EWPT in lab. exp. So, test Sakharov criteria instead. broken phase (3) () (2) f, f $ f, f CP probe by CPV physics Electric Dipole Moment etc Relevant particles are light (<TeV) probe by collider physics Higgs physics etc () Asymmetries arise ( CPV) but no BAU. n B = n L b n L b (2) LH part changes ( sphaleron) -> BAU n B = n L b n L b + n R b n R b = = = + n R b n R b n B = (3) If (b) B <H the BAU can survive. changed

16 (b) B <H B-changing rate in the broken phase is (b) B (T ) (prefactor)e E sph/t Esph Energy sphaleron instanton E sph is proportional to the Higgs VEV - Ncs what we need is E sph v Veff large Higgs VEV after the EWPT EWPT has to be strong st order!! (b) B (T C) <H(T C ) v C T C > sph (T C ) v C T>Tc T=Tc T<Tc (GeV)

17 (b) B <H B-changing rate in the broken phase is (b) B (T ) (prefactor)e E sph/t E sph Esph Energy sphaleron instanton E sph is proportional to the Higgs VEV - B = 3 N CS Ncs what we need is E sph v Veff large Higgs VEV after the EWPT EWPT has to be strong st order!! (b) B (T C) <H(T C ) v C T C > sph (T C ) v C T>Tc T=Tc T<Tc (GeV)

18 (b) B (T ) (prefactor)e E sph/t <H(T ).66 g T 2 /m P E sph =4 ve/g 2 (g 2 : SU(2) gauge coupling), v T > g h i log corrections 4 E = sph dominant effect = sphaleron energy. sphaleron energy depends on the Higgs mass etc. [F.R.Klinkhamer and N.S.Manton, PRD3, 222 (984)] <m h < TeV, SM case.54 < E < 2.44,.45 < sph <.92 SM case

19 (b) B (T ) (prefactor)e E sph/t <H(T ).66 g T 2 /m P E sph =4 ve/g 2 (g 2 : SU(2) gauge coupling), v T > g h i log corrections 4 E = sph dominant effect = sphaleron energy. sphaleron energy depends on the Higgs mass etc. [F.R.Klinkhamer and N.S.Manton, PRD3, 222 (984)] <m h < TeV, SM case.54 < E < 2.44,.45 < sph <.92 SM case m h = 25 GeV! v T > sph =.6

20 How do we get st -order EWPT? st(2nd) order PT = discontinuities in st(2nd) derivatives of free energy 2 nd order PT st order PT

21 How do we get st -order EWPT? st(2nd) order PT = discontinuities in st(2nd) derivatives of free energy 2 nd order PT st order PT st -order PT Negative contributions in V eff.

22 How do we get st -order EWPT? st(2nd) order PT = discontinuities in st(2nd) derivatives of free energy 2 nd order PT st order PT st -order PT Negative contributions in V eff. From where?

23 Origins of the negative contributions in V eff. 2 representative cases.

24 Origins of the negative contributions in V eff. 2 representative cases.. Thermal loop driven case e.g. SM, MSSM. doublet Higgs boson loop V (boson) = T 2 3 n= X n= Z T (m 2 (')) 3/2 2 d 3 k h i (2 ) 3 ln (2n T ) 2 + k 2 + m 2 (') = m 2 =g 2 ' 2 Tg 3 ' 3 2

25 Origins of the negative contributions in V eff. 2 representative cases.. Thermal loop driven case e.g. SM, MSSM. doublet Higgs boson loop V (boson) = T 2 [N.B.] 3 n= X n= Z T (m 2 (')) 3/2 2 d 3 k h i (2 ) 3 ln (2n T ) 2 + k 2 + m 2 (') Tg 3 ' 3 = m 2 =g 2 ' 2 2 If m 2 (') =g 2 ' 2 + M 2 ' M 2,no ' 3 term!!

26 Origins of the negative contributions in V eff. 2 representative cases.. Thermal loop driven case e.g. SM, MSSM. doublet Higgs boson loop V (boson) = T 2 [N.B.] 3 n= X n= Z T (m 2 (')) 3/2 2 d 3 k h i (2 ) 3 ln (2n T ) 2 + k 2 + m 2 (') Tg 3 ' 3 = m 2 =g 2 ' 2 2 If m 2 (') =g 2 ' 2 + M 2 ' M 2,no ' 3 term!! Typical signals Deviations of hgg and/or hγγ and/or hhh couplings

27 Origins of the negative contributions in V eff. 2 representative cases.. Thermal loop driven case e.g. SM, MSSM. doublet Higgs boson loop V (boson) = T 2 [N.B.] 3 n= X n= Z T (m 2 (')) 3/2 2 d 3 k h i (2 ) 3 ln (2n T ) 2 + k 2 + m 2 (') Tg 3 ' 3 = m 2 =g 2 ' 2 2 If m 2 (') =g 2 ' 2 + M 2 ' M 2,no ' 3 term!! Typical signals Deviations of hgg and/or hγγ and/or hhh couplings 2. Tree driven case e.g. rsm, NMSSM. singlet Higgs V 3 µ HS ' 2 H' S + µ S ' 3 S 3 M(µ HS,µ S )(' 2 H + ' 2 S) 3/2

28 Origins of the negative contributions in V eff. 2 representative cases.. Thermal loop driven case e.g. SM, MSSM. doublet Higgs boson loop V (boson) = T 2 [N.B.] 3 n= X n= Z T (m 2 (')) 3/2 2 d 3 k h i (2 ) 3 ln (2n T ) 2 + k 2 + m 2 (') Tg 3 ' 3 = m 2 =g 2 ' 2 2 If m 2 (') =g 2 ' 2 + M 2 ' M 2,no ' 3 term!! Typical signals Deviations of hgg and/or hγγ and/or hhh couplings 2. Tree driven case e.g. rsm, NMSSM. singlet Higgs V 3 µ HS ' 2 H' S + µ S ' 3 S 3 M(µ HS,µ S )(' 2 H + ' 2 S) 3/2 can be negative!

29 Origins of the negative contributions in V eff. 2 representative cases.. Thermal loop driven case e.g. SM, MSSM. doublet Higgs boson loop V (boson) = T 2 [N.B.] 3 n= X n= Z T (m 2 (')) 3/2 2 d 3 k h i (2 ) 3 ln (2n T ) 2 + k 2 + m 2 (') Tg 3 ' 3 = m 2 =g 2 ' 2 2 If m 2 (') =g 2 ' 2 + M 2 ' M 2,no ' 3 term!! Typical signals Deviations of hgg and/or hγγ and/or hhh couplings 2. Tree driven case e.g. rsm, NMSSM. singlet Higgs V 3 µ HS ' 2 H' S + µ S ' 3 S 3 M(µ HS,µ S )(' 2 H + ' 2 S) 3/2 can be negative! Typical signals Deviations of HVV and/or Hff and/or hhh couplings.

30 What are possible models? - SM EWBG was excluded. No st -order PT for m h =25 GeV. v C SUSY & T C not satisfied MSSM W MSSM = f (e) H d LE + f (d) H d QD f (u) H u QU + µh u H d Next-to-MSSM (NMSSM) W NMSSM = W MSSM µ= + SH u H d + apple 3 S3 U() -extended-mssm (UMSSM) W UMSSM = W MSSM µ= + SH u H d 4 Higgs doublets+singlets-extended MSSM W = H d u + H u d H u u H d d + + n u d + n ( + ) etc. µ(h u H d n n ) µ u d µ ( + ). [S. Kanemura, T. Shindou, T. Yamada, PRD86, 5523 (22)] non-susy SM + SU(2) n-plet Higgs, n=,2,3,

31 light stop scenario m 2 t (') ' y2 t sin 2 2 MSSM EWBG ' 2 (m 2 q L m 2 t R, A t µ/ tan 2 ' ) Strong st -order EWPT is driven by the light stop with a mass below 2 GeV. [M. Carena et al, NPB82, (29) 243]. Prediction: (gg -> H -> VV)/ (gg -> H -> VV) SM (2-3) t t t

32 light stop scenario m 2 t (') ' y2 t sin 2 2 MSSM EWBG ' 2 (m 2 q L m 2 t R, A t µ/ tan 2 ' ) Strong st -order EWPT is driven by the light stop with a mass below 2 GeV. [M. Carena et al, NPB82, (29) 243]. Prediction: (gg -> H -> VV)/ (gg -> H -> VV) SM (2-3) t t t Confronting this scenario with LHC data, MSSM EWBG is ruled out at greater than 98% CL (ma> TeV), at least 9% CL for light value of ma (~3 GeV) [D. Curtin, P. Jaiswall, P. Meade., JHEP8(22)5] σ(gg -> H -> VV) is inconsistent.

33 light stop scenario m 2 t (') ' y2 t sin 2 MSSM EWBG Strong st ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W b χ / t -order EWPT is driven by the light 5 stop with a c χ b f f χ t / t / t mass below 2 t χ t production, t Status: ICHEP 24 GeV. [M. Carena et al, NPB82, (29) 243]. 2 ' 2 (m 2 q L m 2 t R, A t µ/ tan 2 ' ) t W b χ L [47.583], 2L [ ] - ~ t χ Prediction: (gg -> H -> VV)/ (gg c L [47.68] - b f f χ L [47.68], L [47.583] 35 -> H -> VV) SM - (2-3) [GeV] m χ ATLAS Preliminary ~ t t χ ~ t t χ ~ t t χ ~ Observed limits All limits at 95% CL - L int = 2 fb L [46.22] L [47.583] 2L [ ] Expected limits s=8 TeV - = 4.7 fb L int L [28.447] L [28.259] 2L [29.486] s=7 TeV t 25 2 m ~ L int t < m b /m c + m χ c χ = 2.3 fb - m ~ t < m b + m W + m χ m ~ t < m t +m χ t 5 b f f χ t 5 L int W b χ = 2.3 fb - - = 4.7 fb L int - = 2 fb L int m~ t [GeV] Confronting this scenario with LHC data, MSSM EWBG is ruled out at greater than 98% CL (ma> TeV), at least 9% CL for light value of ma (~3 GeV) [D. Curtin, P. Jaiswall, P. Meade., JHEP8(22)5] σ(gg -> H -> VV) is inconsistent.

34 light stop scenario m 2 t (') ' y2 t sin 2 MSSM EWBG Strong st ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W b χ / t -order EWPT is driven by the light 5 stop with a c χ b f f χ t / t / t mass below 2 t χ t production, t Status: ICHEP 24 GeV. [M. Carena et al, NPB82, (29) 243]. 2 ' 2 (m 2 q L m 2 t R, A t µ/ tan 2 ' ) t W b χ L [47.583], 2L [ ] - ~ t χ Prediction: (gg -> H -> VV)/ (gg c L [47.68] - b f f χ L [47.68], L [47.583] 35 -> H -> VV) SM - (2-3) [GeV] m χ ATLAS Preliminary ~ t t χ ~ t t χ ~ t t χ ~ Observed limits All limits at 95% CL - L int = 2 fb L [46.22] L [47.583] 2L [ ] Expected limits s=8 TeV - = 4.7 fb L int L [28.447] L [28.259] 2L [29.486] s=7 TeV t 25 2 m ~ L int t < m b /m c + m χ c χ = 2.3 fb - m ~ t < m b + m W + m χ m ~ t < m t +m χ t 5 b f f χ t 5 L int W b χ = 2.3 fb - - = 4.7 fb L int - = 2 fb L int m~ t [GeV] Confronting this scenario with LHC data, MSSM EWBG is ruled out at greater than 98% CL (ma> TeV), at least 9% CL for light value of ma (~3 GeV) [D. Curtin, P. Jaiswall, P. Meade., JHEP8(22)5] σ(gg -> H -> VV) is inconsistent. v C & not satisfied T C

35 4 Higgs doublets+singlets-extended MSSM Strong st -order EWPT is driven by the charged Higgs bosons. 4 hγγ 4 hhh m Φ ± [GeV] v c /T c =. µ γγ =.78 strong st -order EWPT m Φ ± [GeV] % v c /T c =. +4% +3% strong st -order EWPT +2% λ hhh λ hhh SM =+% m Φ [GeV] m Φ [GeV] If the EWPT is strong st order, [S. Kanemura, E.S., T. Shindou, T. Yamada, JHEP5 (23) 66] - μγγ is reduced by more than 2%, - hhh coupling is enhanced by more than 2%.

36 4 Higgs doublets+singlets-extended MSSM Strong st -order EWPT is driven by the charged Higgs bosons. 4 hγγ 4 hhh m Φ ± [GeV] v c /T c =. µ γγ =.78 strong st -order EWPT m Φ ± [GeV] % µ +3% 34 γγ =.7 ±.27 (ATLAS) 32 µ 3 γγ = % strong st -order EWPT v c /T c =. +2%.23 (CMS) λ hhh λ hhh SM =+% m Φ [GeV] m Φ [GeV] If the EWPT is strong st order, [S. Kanemura, E.S., T. Shindou, T. Yamada, JHEP5 (23) 66] - μγγ is reduced by more than 2%, - hhh coupling is enhanced by more than 2%.

37 Non-SUSY models SM + SU(2) n-plet Higgs, n=,2,3, - Colored particles (squarks) may not play a role in realizing strong st -order PT. (due to severe LHC bounds) - EWPT may be simply described by extended Higgs sector. [N.B.] CP violation comes from (chargino, neutralino)-sector which would not be relevant in studying EWPT. (bosons are more important than fermions)

38 Singlet Higgs extended SM [Fuyuto, E.S., PRD9, 55 (24)] - real singlet Higgs is added. apple = g H VV g SM hv V = cos = g H ff g SM hff - st order EWPT is driven by the doublet-singlet Higgs mixing effects % % Metastable vacuum [GeV] 2% 3% v C T C > sph (T C ) - HVV, Hff, hhh couplings can deviate from their SM values.

39 κ F ) -2 lnλ(κ Singlet Higgs extended SM - 3real singlet Higgs is 2.5 added. s V ATLAS Preliminary - = 7 TeV, Ldt = fb - s = 8 TeV, Ldt = 2.3 fb Combined H γγ,zz*,ww*,ττ,bb apple = g H VV ghv SM V = cos = g H ff ghff SM st order EWPT is driven by the doublet-singlet Higgs mixing effects. SM Best fit 68% CL 95% CL κ V [Fuyuto, E.S., PRD9, 55 (24)] [GeV] - HVV, Hff, hhh couplings Observed can deviate from their SM Observed values. - - s Ldt = 2.3 fb s Ldt = 2.3 fb 8 predictions of rsm ATLAS Preliminary - s = 7 TeV, Ldt = fb = 8 TeV, Combined H γγ,zz*,ww*,ττ,bb [κ V,κ F ] SM expected ) -2 lnλ(κ F ATLAS Preliminary - s = 7 TeV Ldt = fb s = 8 TeV Ldt = 2.3 fb 5% % Metastable vacuum - H bb H 4l H γγ SM 2% H τ 3% τ H lνlν Combined Best Fit v C T C > sph (T C ) (b) ATLAS Preliminary - s = 7 TeV, Ldt = fb = 8 TeV, Combined H γγ,zz*,ww*,ττ,bb [κ V,κ F ] SM expected

40 κ F ) -2 lnλ(κ Singlet Higgs extended SM - 3real singlet Higgs is 2.5 added. s V ATLAS Preliminary - = 7 TeV, Ldt = fb - s = 8 TeV, Ldt = 2.3 fb Combined H γγ,zz*,ww*,ττ,bb apple = g H VV ghv SM V = cos = g H ff ghff SM st order EWPT is driven by the doublet-singlet Higgs mixing effects. SM Best fit 68% CL 95% CL κ V [Fuyuto, E.S., PRD9, 55 (24)] [GeV] - HVV, Hff, hhh couplings Observed can deviate from their SM Observed values. - - s Ldt = 2.3 fb s Ldt = 2.3 fb 8 predictions of rsm ATLAS Preliminary - s = 7 TeV, Ldt = fb = 8 TeV, Combined H γγ,zz*,ww*,ττ,bb [κ V,κ F ] SM expected ) -2 lnλ(κ F ATLAS Preliminary - s = 7 TeV Ldt = fb s = 8 TeV Ldt = 2.3 fb 5% % Metastable vacuum - H bb H 4l H γγ SM 2% H τ 3% τ H lνlν Combined Best Fit v C T C > sph (T C ) (b) ATLAS Preliminary - s = 7 TeV, Ldt = fb = 8 TeV, Combined H γγ,zz*,ww*,ττ,bb [κ V,κ F ] SM expected

41 2 Higgs doublet model [Kanemura, Okada, E.S., PLB66,(25)36] - Extra Higgs doublet is added strong st -order EWPT - Strong st -order EWPT is driven by the heavy Higgs boson loops. - hhh can significantly deviate even when hvv/hff couplings are SM-like. - More than +2% deviation if v C /T C >.2.

42 [arxiv:28.552, M. Peskin] Higgs coupling LHC/ILC can probe EWBG-favored region. hhh/ hhh = [ILC white paper, 3.763]

43 Summary MSSM EWBG was excluded by the Higgs signal strengths and light stop searches. EWBG in other models (NMSSM, 2HDM etc) are still viable. In most cases, strong st -order EWPT leads to the significant deviations of the Higgs boson couplings from the SM values. symmetric phase broken phase Deviations of the Higgs boson couplings: HVV, Hff, hγγ, hhh st -order EWPT Higgs coupling measurements are the crucial tests of EWBG.

44 Backup

45 NMSSM EWPT in a nutshell Diverse patterns of the phase transitions. [K.Funakubo, S. Tao, F. Toyoda., PTP4,369 (25)] B A: SYM I EW B: SYM I EW C: SYM II EW D: SYM EW I A D EW C Type B SYM II v S changes a lot during the PT. v S (I ) >> v S (EW) v (246 GeV) κ. ( v S (I ) is scaled by /κ) λ.75 ( chargino > 4 GeV) tan = 5, v S = 2 GeV -> resonance condition ( =2 ) cannot be realized. light stop.(<mt) is not required. (cf. such a light stop is needed in the MSSM.)

46 Singlino-driven EWBG in the NMSSM [K. Cheung, TJ. Hou, JS. Lee, E.S., PLB7 (22) 88] Strong st -order EWPT is driven by the doublet-singlet mixing effects. CP-violation relevant to the BAU comes from Higgsino-singlino int

47 Singlino-driven EWBG in the NMSSM [K. Cheung, TJ. Hou, JS. Lee, E.S., PLB7 (22) 88] Strong st -order EWPT is driven by the doublet-singlet mixing effects. CP-violation relevant to the BAU comes from Higgsino-singlino int

48 Singlino-driven EWBG in the NMSSM [K. Cheung, TJ. Hou, JS. Lee, E.S., PLB7 (22) 88] Strong st -order EWPT is driven by the doublet-singlet mixing effects. CP-violation relevant to the BAU comes from Higgsino-singlino int. [GeV] m ~ Sbottom pair production, b ATLAS - Ldt = 2. fb, All limits at 95% CL s=8 TeV b Observed limit (± - CDF 2.65 fb - D 5.2 fb - ATLAS 2.5 fb, SUSY theory Expected limit (± exp ) s=7 TeV ). 3 2 ~ b b forbidden [GeV] m b ~

49 Singlino-driven EWBG in the NMSSM [K. Cheung, TJ. Hou, JS. Lee, E.S., PLB7 (22) 88] Strong st -order EWPT is driven by the doublet-singlet mixing effects. CP-violation relevant to the BAU comes from Higgsino-singlino int. [GeV] m ~ Sbottom pair production, b ATLAS - Ldt = 2. fb, All limits at 95% CL s=8 TeV b Observed limit (± - CDF 2.65 fb - D 5.2 fb - ATLAS 2.5 fb, SUSY theory Expected limit (± exp ) s=7 TeV ). 3 2 ~ b b forbidden [GeV] m b ~ This specific scenario is disfavored by sbottom searches.

50 Singlino-driven EWBG in the NMSSM [K. Cheung, TJ. Hou, JS. Lee, E.S., PLB7 (22) 88] Strong st -order EWPT is driven by the doublet-singlet mixing effects. CP-violation relevant to the BAU comes from Higgsino-singlino int. [GeV] m ~ Sbottom pair production, b ATLAS - Ldt = 2. fb, All limits at 95% CL s=8 TeV b Observed limit (± - CDF 2.65 fb - D 5.2 fb - ATLAS 2.5 fb, SUSY theory Expected limit (± exp ) s=7 TeV ). 3 2 ~ b b forbidden [GeV] m b ~ This specific scenario is disfavored by sbottom searches. However, successful scenario still remain, e.g. bino-driven scenario.

51 Z -ino-driven EWBG in the UMSSM [E.S., PRD88, 554 (23)] Strong st -order EWPT is driven by the doublet-singlet mixing effects. CP-violation relevant to the BAU comes from Higgsino-Z -ino int. BAU can be explained if the Higgsino and Z -ino are nearly degenerate. Predictions: g HVV =(.8-.9) and light leptophobic Z (<25 GeV)

52 Z -ino-driven EWBG in the UMSSM [E.S., PRD88, 554 (23)] Strong st -order EWPT is driven by the doublet-singlet mixing effects. CP-violation relevant to the BAU comes from Higgsino-Z -ino int. BAU can be explained if the Higgsino and Z -ino are nearly degenerate. Predictions: g HVV =(.8-.9) and light leptophobic Z (<25 GeV)

53 Z -ino-driven EWBG in the UMSSM [E.S., PRD88, 554 (23)] Strong st -order EWPT is driven by the doublet-singlet mixing effects. CP-violation relevant to the BAU comes from Higgsino-Z -ino int. BAU can be explained if the Higgsino and Z -ino are nearly degenerate. Predictions: g HVV =(.8-.9) and light leptophobic Z (<25 GeV)

54 Z -ino-driven EWBG in the UMSSM [E.S., PRD88, 554 (23)] Strong st -order EWPT is driven by the doublet-singlet mixing effects. CP-violation relevant to the BAU comes from Higgsino-Z -ino int BAU can be explained if the Higgsino and Z -ino are nearly degenerate. Predictions: g HVV =(.8-.9) and light leptophobic Z (<25 GeV)

55 Z -ino-driven EWBG in the UMSSM [E.S., PRD88, 554 (23)] Strong st -order EWPT is driven by the doublet-singlet mixing effects. CP-violation relevant to the BAU comes from Higgsino-Z -ino int BAU can be explained if the Higgsino and Z -ino are nearly degenerate. Predictions: g HVV =(.8-.9) and light leptophobic Z (<25 GeV)

56 Experimental constraints on light leptophobic Z Electroweak precision tests (see e.g. Umeda,Cho,Hagiwara, PRD58 (998) 58) -> In our case, no constraint since Z-Z mixing is assumed to be small. All dijet-mass searches at Tevatron/LHC are limited to M jj >2 GeV. Z boson (<2 GeV) is constrained by the UA2 experiment. UA2 bounds on m Z UA2 Collaborations,NPB4: (993) 3 M. Buckley et al,prd83:53 (2).8 ~ UA g ffz fl,r µ f L,R Z µ I,,,,I,,,H I,, M~/(GeV) Fig. 5. Excluded region to 9% for Z. ~q, (excluded region is hatched). The branching ratio is given as a fraction of standard model branching ratio. The solid line shows a branching ratio of for Z ~c~qwhilst the dashed line shows a branching ratio of.7.