One-loop pseudo-goldstone masses in the minimal SO10 Higgs model Lukáš Gráf Department of Physics & Astronomy, University College London, Gower Street, WC1E 6BT London, United Kingdom Michal Malinský Institute of Particle and Nuclear Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University in Prague, V Holešovičkách, 180 00 Praha 8, Czech Repulic CETUP016-005 Timon Mede Department of Physics, Faculty of Science, University of Zagre, Bijenička cesta 3, HR-10000 Zagre, Croatia arxiv:1611.0101v1 [hep-ph] 3 Nov 016 Vasja Susič Department of Physics, University of Basel, Klingelergstrasse 8, CH-4056 Basel, Switzerland We calculate the prominent perturative contriutions shaping the one-loop scalar spectrum of the minimal non-supersymmetric renormalizale SO10 Higgs model whose unified gauge symmetry is spontaneously roken y an adjoint scalar. Focusing on its potentially realistic 45 16 variant in which the rank is reduced y a VEV of the 5-index self-dual antisymmetric tensor, we provide a thorough analysis of the corresponding one-loop Coleman-Weinerg potential, paying particular attention to the masses of the potentially tachyonic pseudo-goldstone osons PGBs transforming as 8, 1, 0 and 1, 3, 0 under the Standard Model gauge group. The results confirm the assumed existence of extended regions in the parameter space supporting a locally stale SM-like quantum vacuum inaccessile at the tree-level. The effective potential EP tedium is compared to that encountered in the previously studied 45 16 SO10 Higgs model where the polynomial corrections to the relevant pseudo-goldstone masses turn out to e easily calculale within a very simplified purely diagrammatic approach. PACS numers: 1.10.Dm, 11.15.Ex, 11.30.Qc Contents I. Introduction II. The minimal SO10 Higgs model 3 A. The SO10 symmetric Lagrangian in the unroken phase 4 B. Spontaneous SO10 symmetry reaking 5 C. The tree-level spectrum 6 1. The masses of the 1, 3, 0 and 8, 1, 0 pseudo-goldstone osons 7 III. One-loop pseudo-goldstone masses in the minimal SO10 Higgs model 7 A. One-loop scalar masses from the effective potential 7 1. Scalar mass matrix at the one-loop level 7. Dealing with the nested commutators 8 3. One-loop masses of the 1, 3, 0 and 8, 1, 0 scalars in the 45 16 Higgs model 9 4. Going to the mass shell 10 B. Consistency checks 11 1. Limits 11. Exact Goldstone osons 13 3. Diagrammatics 13 Electronic address: lukas.graf.14@ucl.ac.uk Electronic address: malinsky@ipnp.troja.mff.cuni.cz Electronic address: tmede@phy.hr Electronic address: vasja.susic@unias.ch
C. Viaility of the minimal SO10 Higgs model at the one-loop level 15 IV. Conclusions and outlook 15 Future prospects 16 Acknowledgments 16 A. The tree-level spectrum 16 1. Gauge osons 16. Scalars 18 B. The one-loop contriutions to the pseudo-goldstone oson masses 0 1. Gauge oson contriutions 0. Scalar contriutions 0 C. Evaluating the nested commutators further details 4 References 5 I. INTRODUCTION The upcoming generation of very large volume detectors such as Hyper-K [1] and/or DUNE [] is not only a lessing for the neutrino community ut it is also likely to provide a great deal of information to other ranches of particle physics research. Concerning, in particular, the possile aryon numer non-conservation signals such as proton decay, the sensitivity of the current searches may e improved y as much as one order of magnitude, reaching up to aout 10 35 years for the proton lifetime. Unfortunately, this steady progress is not matched y any significant developments on the theory side. As a matter of fact, the existing proton lifetime estimates usually made in the context of grand unified theories GUTs [3], the most economical scheme for addressing these issues in the standard quantum field theory context are typically plagued y theoretical uncertainties stretching over many orders of magnitude, see, for instance, Tale II in [4] and references therein. Needless to say, this is way too poor to make any real enefit from the expected experimental sensitivity improvements unless we were lucky and a clear signal of aryon numer violation was oserved; however, even in such a case it would e extremely difficult to distinguish among even the simplest models, let alone more complicated settings. There are two general reasons ehind this unsatisfactory situation: 1. The main quantities governing the proton lifetime estimates in GUTs, in particular, the unification scale M GUT which, in the non-supersymmetric context enters the rates quartically and the flavour structure of the relevant aryon and lepton numer violating currents, are very difficult to estimate with good-enough accuracy from just the low-energy data we have an access to. As for the former, at least a two-loop renormalization-group-equation RGE analysis is necessary to keep the error in M GUT at a reasonale level which, however, assumes a detailed knowledge of the relevant threshold corrections and, hence, the theory spectrum; for the latter one often needs information that is inaccessile even in principle at the electroweak scale, such as, for instance, the shape of the right-handed RH rotations in flavour space.. Since the unification scale turns out to e only a few orders of magnitude elow the Planck scale M Pl, the a-priori unknown effects of the M Pl -suppressed higher-dimensional operators need not e negligile [5 7]; in practice, they often turn out to e comparale in size to those of the one-loop thresholds and, as such, the associated uncertainties tend to ruin the efforts to go eyond the leading order in precision anyway. Nevertheless, there seems to exist an exception to these empirical rules, namely, the minimal renormalizale SO10 grand unified theory [8 10] in which the unified gauge symmetry is spontaneously roken y the 45-dimensional scalar. This choice turns out to e rather special as it inhiits the most dangerous class of the leading order i.e., d = 5 gravity-induced operators and, hence, also the corresponding theoretical uncertainties in the determination of M GUT. Remarkaly enough, as interesting as it sounds, this scenario has not een considered for more than 30 years since its first formulation at the eginning of 1980 s due to notorious tachyonic instailities [11 13] appearing in its scalar sector along essentially all potentially realistic symmetry reaking chains; it was only in 010 that these were shown to e just artefacts of the tree-level approach [14] and that the theory may e fully consistent at the quantum level.
To this end, the simplest version of the relevant Higgs model in which the rank of the gauge group is reduced y a 16-dimensional scalar field has een thoroughly studied in the same work. However, it turns out that the 45 16 scenario can hardly support a potentially realistic theory ecause it is unclear how it could accommodate the electroweak data namely, the weak mixing angle together with a variant of the seesaw mechanism for the neutrino masses. This is namely due to the fact that the seesaw requires two B L reaking vacuum expectation value VEV insertions recall that the Standard Model singlet in 16 carries only one unit of B L; this, however, calls for the B L reaking to occur at a relatively large scale in the 10 14 GeV allpark which is generically difficult to reconcile with the gauge unification constraints 1. For the same reason, the renormalizale alternative due to Witten [15] does not work either due to the extra two-loop suppression. Furthermore, it is very prolematic to get any firm grip on the flavour structure of this model as any potentially realistic variant of its Yukawa sector relies on a numer of contriutions from non-renormalizale operators. Therefore, the most promising scenario of this kind includes one copy of the 16-dimensional representation in the scalar sector instead of the spinorial 16; its main virtue is that it can support the standard seesaw mechanism, as well as a potentially realistic yet simple Yukawa pattern at the renormalizale level and, thus, avoid most of the aforementioned complications. The first attempt to study the quantum version of the 45 16 model was undertaken in the works [10, 16, 17] where it was shown that, under several simplifying assumptions, there are extended regions in its parameter space that can support a stale Standard Model SM vacuum, accommodate all the SM data and, at the same time, maintain compatiility with the existing proton lifetime constraints. Remarkaly, this can all e attained with only a single fine-tuning of the model parameters ensuring one specific heavy scalar in the desert [16, 17]. The main drawack of these early studies lies in the fact that, out of all relevant quantum corrections emerging at one loop, only the simplest universal type has een taken into account in order to stailize the scalar sector of the theory with minimum efforts. Hence, those results should e regarded as only approximate and the situation clearly calls for a more complete treatment. In the current paper we partly fill this gap y calculating in great detail the leading one-loop corrections to the masses of the scalar multiplets transforming as 8, 1, 0 and 1, 3, 0 under the SU3 c SU L U1 Y SM gauge group in the 45 16 Higgs model. We focus our attention solely on these two fields as they are the principal culprits causing the notorious tree-level tachyonic instailities mentioned aove and, thus, their quantum-level ehaviour is of our primary concern. In this sense, a thorough analysis of the relevant radiative corrections represents the first and minimal step towards any future reliale phenomenological analysis of this scenario. The work is structured as follows: after a short recapitulation of the tree-level shape of the scalar spectrum of the model in Section II we use the effective potential techniques to calculate the zero-momentum one-loop corrections to the masses of 8, 1, 0 and 1, 3, 0 Section III and cross-check our results y means of two asic methods: first, y inspecting the relevant formulae in various limits where the spectrum takes specific known shapes and, second, y cross-checking the coefficient of the simplest SO10-invariant contriution against the direct diagrammatic calculation which, for this term, is relatively easy. Furthermore, we use these results to provide a sample point in the parameter space that is not only free from all the aforementioned pathologies ut, at the same time, may even support a potentially realistic GUT scenario; we also add several comments on the methods of implementation of the results in a future numerical analysis. Most of the technicalities are deferred to a set of Appendices. Then we conclude. 3 II. THE MINIMAL SO10 HIGGS MODEL In what follows, we shall use the symols φ ij and Σ ijklm with all Latin indices running from 1 to 10 for the components of the 45-dimensional adjoint and the 16-dimensional self-dual 5-index antisymmetric tensor irreducile representations of the SO10 gauge group, respectively. Note that in the real asis of the SO10 oth these structures are fully antisymmetric in all their indices and that Σ oeys Σ ijklm = i 5! ε ijklmnopqrσ nopqr provided ε 1345678910 = +1. Unlike φ, Σ is a complex representation and we shall denote the complex conjugated oject y Σ. For more on the notation regarding these representations see Appendix A. The decompositions of φ and Σ into irreducile representations of the SM gauge group are listed in Tale I. 1 This is almost ovious in the minimally fine-tuned scenarios; however, admitting accidentally light extra scalars in the 45 16 model does not seem to work either as there are simply no fields around that may affect significantly the running of the strong coupling to the extent achieved, e.g., y the 8,, + 1 scalar in the 45 16 setting. Given that the seesaw scale σ in all identified potentially realistic settings turns out to e relatively close to M GUT one may even view the situation with the accidentally light scalar S as if the usual fine-tuning in σ was traded for that in its mass m S.
4 TABLE I: All types of the SM representations R of scalar fields in the 45 16 Higgs model. The R/C column denotes whether the representation is real or complex implicitly, for a complex R, there is an inequivalent conjugate representation R, the hash sign # denotes the multiplicity of R and consequently the dimension of the corresponding lock in the full scalar mass matrix and the dagger indicates the presence of a would-e Goldstone mode. There are in general 33 Goldstones contained in 5 different SM multiplets corresponding to the same numer of roken SO10 generators. The size column enumerates the real degrees of freedom in the representation R reflected in the numer of equivalent locks with identical eigenvalues in the properly reordered full mass matrix. Summing the size multiplicity over all locks yields s i=a #i sizei = 45 + 16 + 16 = 97 real degrees of freedom in total. There are 19 different SM representations, out of which 11 appear only in one copy, 5 are -fold degenerate, are 3-fold degenerate and 1 appears even 4 times the singlet lock is 4 4; two real singlets and one complex, which can acquire non-zero vevs 3ω, ω r and σ, respectively. Hence, there are in principle 31 different eigenvalues; since 5 of them are Goldstone osons, one is left with only 6 non-vanishing and different eigenvalues. The G 4 column denotes the origin of the relevant SM representations within the corresponding representations of the Pati-Salam SU4 c SU L SU R sugroup of SO10. Note however, that none of the representations actually contains a singlet under Pati-Salam, so there can e no physical phase characterized y the Pati-Salam G 4 gauge symmetry. lael R G 31 R/C # size R G 4 SO10 a 1, 3, 0 R 1 3 1, 3, 1 φ 8, 1, 0 R 1 8 15, 1, 1 φ c 3,, 5 6 C 1 1 6,, φ d 1, 1, + C 1 10, 1, 3 Σ e 1, 3, 1 C 1 6 10, 3, 1 Σ f 3, 1, + 4 3 C 1 6 10, 1, 3 Σ g 3, 3, 1 3 C 1 18 10, 3, 1 Σ h 6, 3, + 1 3 C 1 36 10, 3, 1 Σ i 6, 1, 4 3 C 1 1 10, 1, 3 Σ j 6, 1, 1 3 C 1 1 10, 1, 3 Σ k 6, 1, + 3 C 1 1 10, 1, 3 Σ l 1,, + 1 C 4 15,,, 15,, Σ, Σ m 3,, + 7 6 C 1 15,,, 15,, Σ, Σ n 8,, + 1 C 3 15,,, 15,, Σ, Σ o 3, 1, + 1 3 C 3 6 6, 1, 1, 6, 1, 1, 10, 1, 3 Σ, Σ, Σ p 1, 1, +1 C 1, 1, 3, 10, 1, 3 φ, Σ q 3, 1, 3 C 6 15, 1, 1, 10, 1, 3 φ, Σ r 3,, + 1 C 6 3 1 6,,, 15,,, 15,, φ, Σ, Σ s 1, 1, 0 R } 4 1 15, 1, 1, 1, 1, 3, φ, φ C 1 10, 1, 3 Σ A. The SO10 symmetric Lagrangian in the unroken phase The normalization of the component fields in φ and Σ follows the usual convention which fixes the kinetic part of the relevant Lagrangian, L = L kin V 0, to the form where L kin = 1 4 F µν ij F µν ij + 1 4 D µφ ij Dµ φ ij + 1 5! D µσ ijklm Dµ Σ ijklm, 1 F µν ij = µ A ν ij ν A µ ij i g [A µ, A ν ] ij, and a summation over the repeated Latin indices is implicit. This yields the standard kinetic terms for the relevant SM components including coefficients 1 and 1 for real and complex fields, respectively. With this at hand, the renormalizale scalar potential reads V 0 φ, Σ, Σ = V 45 φ + V 16 Σ, Σ + V mix φ, Σ, Σ, 3
5 provided V 45 = µ 4 φφ 0 + a 0 4 φφ 0φφ 0 + a 4 φφ φφ, 4 V 16 = ν 5! ΣΣ 0 + λ 0 5! ΣΣ 0 ΣΣ 0 + λ 4! ΣΣ ΣΣ + + λ 4 3!! ΣΣ 4 ΣΣ 4 + λ 4 3! ΣΣ 4 ΣΣ 4 + η 4! ΣΣ ΣΣ + η 4! Σ Σ Σ Σ, 5 V mix = iτ 4! φ ΣΣ + α 5! φφ 0ΣΣ 0 + β 4 4 3! φφ 4ΣΣ 4 + β 4 3! φφ 4 ΣΣ 4 + + γ 4! φφ ΣΣ + γ 4! φφ Σ Σ, 6 where φφ 0 φ ij φ ij, φφ φφ jk φ ij φ ik, ΣΣ 0 Σ ijklm Σ ijklm, ΣΣ ΣΣ mn Σ ijklm Σ ijkln, ΣΣ 4 ΣΣ lmno Σ ijklm Σ ijkno, and analogously if Σ or Σ is replaced with its conjugate. The invariant contractions among these expressions read ΣΣ ΣΣ = ΣΣ mn ΣΣ mn, ΣΣ 4 ΣΣ 4 = ΣΣ lmno ΣΣ lmno, ΣΣ 4 ΣΣ 4 = ΣΣ lmno ΣΣ lnmo, φ ΣΣ = φ mn ΣΣ mn, 7 φφ 4 ΣΣ 4 = φ lm φ no ΣΣ lmno, φφ 4 ΣΣ 4 = φ lm φ no ΣΣ lnmo, φφ ΣΣ = φφ jk ΣΣ jk. Note that there are 3 parameters with a positive dimension of mass {µ, ν, τ} in V 0, 9 dimensionless real parameters {a 0, a, λ 0, λ, λ 4, λ 4, α, β 4, β 4} and dimensionless complex parameters {η, γ }. The minus signs in front of µ and ν and the various symmetry factors in other terms are mere convenience. Note also that the coefficient of the µ term has een fixed in a different way than in [10, 16 18]; the slight advantage of the current notation is the fact that in the symmetric phase µ and ν are exactly the squares of the tree-level physical masses of the SM fields in φ and Σ, respectively. In what follows, we shall use Φ as a generic symol denoting all scalar components at play, i.e., Φ φ, Σ, Σ. B. Spontaneous SO10 symmetry reaking There are 3 SM singlets in the scalar sector: real in φ and 1 complex in Σ. In what follows, we shall denote their potentially non-vanishing VEVs y for etter reading experience concerning, especially, the lengthy formulae in the Appendices we shall use the red color for the VEVs and their simple cominations and lue for the laels of different scalar sector eigenstates, cf. Tale I. 1, 1, 1, 0 φ 3 ω, 1, 1, 3, 0 φ ω r, 1, 1, 3, + Σ = 1, 1, 3, Σ σ. 8 The multiplets aove were written in the SU3 c SU L SU R U1 B L language and the corresponding fields are assumed to e canonically normalized. The VEVs ω and ω r are real while σ is a VEV of a complex scalar singlet and, hence, it can e complex. Note that there is a freedom to redefine the overall phase of Σ in such a way that σ can e made real; alternatively, the same transformation can e used to asor the phase of γ in equation 6, thus reducing γ to a real parameter. In the latter case σ can e complex and, hence, it may e convenient to keep track of the relevant complex conjugation as we shall do in what follows. Assuming no correlations among the VEVs aove, the SO10 gauge symmetry gets spontaneously roken down to the SM group SU3 c SU L U1 Y. Special symmetry reaking patterns can e attained in various limits as listed in Tale II. From the phenomenology perspective, however, it is sensile to consider predominantly the case with σ max{ ω, ω r } in which σ plays the role of an intermediate seesaw scale, while the dominant ω r, corresponds to the unification scale.
6 TABLE II: Residual gauge symmetries in a self-explanatory notation attained for various configurations of the VEVs defined in eq. 8. The last column corresponds to the alternative flipped emedding of the SM hypercharge into the SU5 U1 Z sugroup of the SO10, cf. [19, 0]. ω 0, ω r 0 ω = 0, ω r 0 ω 0, ω r = 0 ω = ω r 0 ω = ω r 0 σ = 0 3 c L 1 R 1 B L 4 c L 1 R 3 c L R 1 B L 5 1 Z 5 1 Z σ 0 3 c L 1 Y 3 c L 1 Y 3 c L 1 Y 5 3 c L 1 Y The tree-level vacuum staility conditions translating among these VEVs and the massive parameters of the potential read see also [10] µ = 1a 0 + a ω + 8a 0 + a ω r + a ω ω r + 4α + β 4 σ, 9 ν = 3α + 4β 4ω + α + 3β 4ω r + 1β 4ω ω r + 4λ 0 σ + a ω ω r σ ω + ω r 3ω + ω r, 10 τ = β 43ω + ω r + a ω ω r σ ω + ω r. 11 Note that there are potentially prolematic terms in the latter two conditions containing σ in denominators that may 3 ruin the perturative expansion whenever the relevant expression exceeds significantly the GUT scale i.e., the maximum of ω,r. Hence, in realistic settings one should assume that a ω ω r σ ω + ω r M Pl. 1 C. The tree-level spectrum With this information at hand, the tree-level scalar and gauge spectra of the 45 16 SO10 Higgs model under consideration can e readily otained. Since 45 is a real representation and 16 is complex, the total numer of real degrees of freedom in the scalar sector is 97. For later convenience, it is useful to arrange the second derivatives of V 0 into a 97-dimensional Hermitian matrix M SΦ M Sφ, Σ, Σ = V 0 φ, Σ, Σ = V φφ V φσ V φσ V Σφ V ΣΣ V ΣΣ, 13 V Σ φ V Σ Σ V Σ Σ with su-locks indicating the types of fields with respect to which the relevant derivatives are taken. In the SM vacuum characterized y one of the four relevant VEV configurations in the nd row of Tale II this matrix encodes the tree-level scalar spectrum of the model and, as such, it may e rought into a lock-diagonal form with the non-zero clusters corresponding to the suspaces spanning the irreducile SM representations listed in Tale I. Note that the fields of our main interest, i.e., the pseudo-goldstones 1, 3, 0 and 8, 1, 0, are then fully contained in the V φφ sector of M S Φ. The complete structure of M S Φ in the lock-diagonal SM asis evaluated at the SM vacuum is given in Appendix A, see also [10]. In order to conform to the needs of the susequent quantum-level analysis the notation here has een slightly amended 4 with respect to that used in [10]; see, in particular, definitions A38 A44. In a similar manner one can define the 45-dimensional field-dependent mass matrix for gauge osons M G Φ, see Appendix A 1. Since we do not consider the reaking of the Standard Model gauge group, this matrix evaluated at the SM vacuum has 1 massless modes corresponding to the gluons, the W ±, Z 0 and the photon. 3 To this end, let us note that some of the tree-level scalar sector mass-squares calculated in Appendix A are linear in the comination 11 so the scalar spectrum would e adly distorted if the condition 1 was not satisfied. 4 Besides the overall compactness of the results otained in Sect. III the new notation facilitates their cross-checking in various limits corresponding to enhanced gauge symmetries, in particular, those listed in Tale II.
7 1. The masses of the 1, 3, 0 and 8, 1, 0 pseudo-goldstone osons The multiplets of our main interest in the current study are the two scalar pseudo-goldstone osons cf. [14] transforming as 1, 3, 0 and 8, 1, 0 under the SU3 c SU L U1 Y of the SM. Their masses, at the tree level, are see Appendix A for the notation and thus the scalar spectrum can e non-tachyonic if and only if M a = a ω r ω ω + ω r +a ω w 1 [1,], 14 M = a ω ω r ω r + ω a ω w 1 [,1], 15 a > 0 and < ω ω r < 1, 16 i.e., in the vicinity of the flipped SU5 limit the 5th column in Tale II. This means, however, that the symmetryreaking chains supporting, at the tree level, a locally convex minimum i.e., a potentially stale SM-like vacuum all feature an approximate SU5 U1 Z -symmetric scalar spectrum clustering around the superheavy reaking scale ω r ω, at odds with the gauge unification constraints at least in the minimally fine-tuned scenarios, i.e., those oeying the minimal survival hypothesis, cf. [8, 1 3]. This, oviously, disqualifies the minimal and minimally fine-tuned setting from any potentially realistic model uilding, at least at the lowest order in perturation theory 5. Barring, for the sake of this study, the option of non-minimally fine-tuned settings, the only chance to ring the current scenario ack from olivion seems to e a careful inspection of its quantum structure. The hope is that higher order effects may disentangle the overly strong correlation etween the two pseudo-goldstone masses aove, at least in case that the tree-level contriutions happen to e accidentally small; this option has een identified ut never inspected in detail in previous studies like [14]. A detailed calculation of the relevant radiative contriutions to the tree-level mass relations 14 and 15 is the scope of the next section. III. ONE-LOOP PSEUDO-GOLDSTONE MASSES IN THE MINIMAL SO10 HIGGS MODEL A. One-loop scalar masses from the effective potential In this section we review some of the technical aspects of the effective potential formalism we adopt for the computation of the desired scalar masses at the 1-loop level. 1. Scalar mass matrix at the one-loop level In the effective potential approach there are in general two types of effects contriuting to the scalar masses at the one-loop level i.e., at the order characterized y one power of the generic /16π suppression factor, namely: 1. The usual one-loop corrections to the two-point 1PI Green s functions whose roots in the true vacuum define the pole masses of the scalar excitations.. The quantum shift of the vacuum which justifies the use of a simplified perturation theory in which there are no degenerate one-point vertices in the interaction part of the Lagrangian density aka tadpole cancellation. Up to the first power in, the relevant comination of the two effects governing the -expansion of the one-loop scalar mass matrix m in the zero-momentum scheme implicitly assumed within the effective potential approach reads formally m a a V v = a V 0 v0+ v 1 + a V 1 v0 + O, 17 5 To this end, let us reiterate that this conclusion applies even to the situation when the minimal Higgs model is further extended y an extra 10-dimensional scalar multiplet in order to support a viale Yukawa sector with at least two different complex symmetric matrices of Yukawa couplings the extra 10 H does not alter the symmetry reaking pattern y more than just an admixture of its weak doulet component within the electroweak Higgs and an extra set of superheavy doulets and color triplets clustered around the SO10 reaking scale.
where V = i=0 V i i = V 0 + V 1 + O is the Coleman-Weinerg effective potential [4] and v = i=0 v i i = v 0 + v 1 + O denotes the true quantum vacuum of the theory determined from the stationary point condition a V v = a V 0 v + a V 1 v = 0. 18 Beside the tree-level contriution V 0 discussed at length in the previous section, c.f. 3, the one-loop scalar potential in the zero-momentum scheme is given y V 1 Φ, µ r = 1 [ 64π Tr M 4 SΦ log M S Φ µ 3 + 3M 4 r GΦ log M G Φ µ 5 ], 19 r 6 where M S Φ and M G Φ are the tree-level field-dependent scalar and gauge mass matrices introduced in Sect. II C with oldface always denoting matrix structures and µ r is the relevant renormalization scale. The quantum-level contriution to the stationary point condition 18 is then given y a V 1 = 1 3π Tr [ M S a M S + M G a M ] 1 G + 64π [ {M Tr S, a M } M S log S µ + 3 { M G, a M M G} ] log G r µ ; 0 r note that we have dropped all the rackets denoting the implicit dependence of the mass matrices on the scalar fields of the model. Due to the general non-commutativity of M S,G with their own first derivatives the second derivative of the formula 19 is far more involved: a V 1 = 1 3π Tr [ a M S M S + M S a M S + a M G M G + M G a M ] G + 1 [ { a 64π Tr M S, M { S} + M S, a M } M ] S log S + S a + 3 64π Tr [ { a M G, M { G} + M G, a M } M ] G log G µ + G a. 1 r µ r 8 Here M S a = Υ S M µ, a M S, M S, G a = Υ G r µ, a M G, M G, r are expressed via a matrix function Υ including an infinite series of nested commutators ΥA, A a, A = 1 m+1 1 m m=1 m k=1 m {A, A a } [A,... [A, A ]...]A 1 m k, 3 k }{{} k 1 commutator where the first commutator racket is just A, the second is [A, A ], the third [A, [A, A ]] and so on. The general strategy for dealing with the formula 3, together with a rief discussion of the shape of the results it yields, is given in Section III A. Let us also remark that there are no such issues in the expression 0 ecause of the cyclic property of the overall trace which admits a resummation of the raw expression into the simplified matrix logarithm representation.. Dealing with the nested commutators In this section we descrie several tricks that facilitate dealing with the nested commutators 6, focusing mainly on their numerical evaluation; as it turns out, a full analytic account is tractale only in special cases as, for instance, the one discussed in Section III A 3. For all the derivations and proofs of the expressions in use see Appendix C. 6 This concerns namely the S a structure defined in eq. coming from the huge scalar sector; the gauge contriution proportional to Tr G a turns out to e very simple since the 45 45 gauge oson mass matrix evaluated in the vacuum is almost diagonal, see Tale V.
The oject of our main interest, i.e., the trace of Υ evaluated in the tree-level vacuum, cf. 1, may e further simplified using the identity see Appendix C Tr ΥA, A a, A = i,j; λ i λ j M a jim ij λ i + λ j λ i λ j log λ i λ j + i,j; λ i=λ j M a jim ij, 4 where λ i are eigenvalues of the matrix A with corresponding orthonormal eigenvectors v i, while M a and M are the matrices A a and A rotated into the orthonormal eigenasis of A: M a ij = v i A av j, 5 M ij = v i A v j. 6 Let us note that this approach is fully general and applicale at least numerically for any form of the A, A a and A matrices. In that sense, it is superior to the method used previously in, e.g., ref. [5] which assumed a simple geometric ehaviour of the nested commutators from a certain value of the k index in eq. 3 onwards unfortunately, unlike in the case of the simpler 45 16 model studied previously in [14] or the Aelian Higgs model, cf. [5] where this was indeed the case, the situation in the 45 16 Higgs model is more complicated. Another point worth making here concerns the visual difference etween the two contriutions in eq. 4 the former structure, elonging to a set of non-degenerate eigenvalues, suggests a log-type ehaviour while the latter tends to yield non-log terms in fact, in most cases even polynomials. Since the same two types of terms emerge also from the non-commutator parts of the asic formula 1, the distinction etween log and non-log terms is in fact very handy and we shall use it in the next section. However, it ecomes rather fuzzy when it comes to limits in which the character of the spectrum changes qualitatively, i.e., when the degeneracies increase. Indeed, if two formerly non-degenerate eigenvalues λ i,j ecome equal in a certain limit, one has lim λ i + λ j log λ i log λ j =, 7 λ i λ j λ i λ j and hence a term of the first type ecomes formally a second-type contriution, cf. Section III B 1. 9 3. One-loop masses of the 1, 3, 0 and 8, 1, 0 scalars in the 45 16 Higgs model The one-loop zero-momentum-scheme masses of the 1, 3, 0 and 8, 1, 0 scalars can e written as M a,1-loop = M a + G[poly] a M,1-loop = M + G[poly] + G[log] a + G[log] + S F IN [poly] a + S F IN [poly] + S INF [poly] a + S INF [poly] + S[log] a, 8 + S[log], 9 where the symols correspond to different types of the one-loop contriutions calculated from the formulae 1 3. These are clustered with respect to their origin gauge with superscript G and scalar with superscript S and their mathematical form polynomial [poly] and logarithmic [log] as follows: 1. The G[poly] contriutions contain all the polynomial-type terms from the graphs with gauge osons running in the loops. As such, these contriutions are all proportional to g 4, where g is the SO10 gauge coupling constant. They generally come from oth terms on the RH side of eq. 17, including the polynomial part of the 1-loop vacuum sustituted into V 0, the polynomial terms of V 1 given in eq. 1 and also the second type of terms in the expression for the nested commutator series 4 corresponding to degenerate eigenvalues of M G.. The G[log] terms contain all the logarithmic terms from the diagrams with gauge osons running in the loops. As efore, there are g 4 proportionality factors in front of the logs whose arguments are the masses of the massive gauge osons corresponding to the roken generators of SO10. Again, these come from oth parts of expression 17 including, in this case, the non-degenerate contriutions from eq. 4. 3. The S F IN [poly] terms contain all polynomial contriutions from the scalars running in the loop, except for those coming from the nested commutator series i.e., they are fully contained in the V 0 factor in 17 and the finite part of the formula 1. These terms are homogenous quadratic polynomials in the parameters of the scalar potential 3.
4. The S INF [poly] pieces denote the polynomial scalar contriutions coming solely from the infinite series terms S a in eq. 1 where they emerge from the scalar spectrum degeneracies due to the residual Standard Model gauge symmetry. 5. Finally, the S[log] structure laels all the logarithmic contriutions associated to the graphs with scalars running in the loop. These again come from oth parts of the expression 17, including the non-degenerate contriutions from eq. 4. The coefficients in front of the logs are homogenous quadratic polynomials of the tree-level scalar potential parameters, while their arguments contain the squared tree-level masses of the relevant scalars in the loops. Note that the S INF [poly] terms have een singled out ecause these are rather difficult to calculate analytically and the results in a closed form are cumersome; the same applies also to S[log]. For this reason, we shall not present them in their full complexity ut rather in a simplified form that they attain in the limit 7 10 σ 0, a 0, γ 0, a = const. 30 σ Let us also remark that this setting is not an aritrary choice ut rather a physically well-motivated approximation to the general case: as far as the σ 0 limit is concerned, the delayed reaking of the U1 B L otained in such situation corresponds to the potentially realistic seesaw scale with the RH neutrino masses well elow M GUT ; the a 0 and γ 0 limits are, on the contrary, suggested y the simplified preceding studies [16, 17] as the only situation in which a fully non-tachyonic spectrum compatile with the gauge unification constraints seems to e attainale. The full analytic form modulo the aforementioned limit 30 adopted for simplicity reasons for the S INF [poly] and S[log] pieces of the one-loop corrections entering formulae 8 9 is given in Appendix B. 4. Going to the mass shell As we have already mentioned, the formulae 8 9 with the factors given in Appendix B encode the masses of the two pseudo-goldstone osons of our interest in the zero-momentum renormalization scheme. This, however, is potentially prolematic for at least two reasons: 1. There are peculiar infra-red IR divergences due to a certain numer of zero eigenvalues in the arguments of logs in the S,G[log] terms aove when the tree-level field-dependent mass matrix M S Φ in 1 is evaluated at the tree-level vacuum 8. Oviously, these are associated with the Goldstone modes whose propagators, in the Landau gauge, have poles at p = 0.. On the practical side, these masses should e eventually used as inputs of a dedicated phenomenological analysis including constraints from two-loop gauge unification requirements. The relevant calculations are, however, most conveniently performed in different schemes such as the MS and, hence, their inputs should e adopted to the same scheme for consistency reasons. A minimal and natural solution to oth these issues is provided y the transition from the zero-momentum to the on-shell scheme in which the physical masses are given as a solution of the secular equation det [ p m Σp + Σ0 ] = 0, 31 where m is the matrix of the second derivatives of the effective potential in the vacuum calculated aove and Σp denotes the corresponding matrix of the scalar fields self-energies in any scheme; the scheme dependence of Σ drops out of the difference aove. Note also that, y definition, Σ0 is nothing ut the loop part of m. In principle, the transition from the zero-momentum to the on-shell masses is highly non-trivial as it includes the full structure of Σp. However, given the scope of this study, i.e., to provide a roust description of the heavy spectrum 7 Note that in the σ 0, γ 0 limit the Σ-self interaction terms do not contriute to the1-loop masses of the fields coming solely from φ. Hence, one can neglect the λ 0, λ, λ 4, λ 4 and η terms in the potential V 0 from the eginning in fact, η is asent from Ma and M even at the level of field dependent tree-level mass matrices. The reason is that all the off-diagonal locks in the mass matrix 13 in vacuum vanish in this limit. Then the only mixing within the 16-dimensional V ΣΣ lock is among the states in Mo elonging either to 6, 1, 1 or 10, 1, 3 of SU4 c SU L SU R. 8 Remarkaly, all the spurious IR divergences happen to disappear from the triplet and octet factors in the limit 30.
for a future two-loop RG analysis 9, the effects of m + Σp Σ0 in the calculation of the masses of the fields of our main interest, i.e., the tree-level-tachyonic pseudo-goldstone osons, may e still reasonaly approximated y the contriutions from m only if their pole masses stay somewhat elow those of the heavy fields M circulating in the relevant loops. This may e readily seen from the momentum expansion of the typical scalar-field contriution to Σp Σ0: Σp Σ0 = 1 c 16π 1 p p 4 + c M +..., 3 where c i are numerical O1 coefficients with i denoting the power of p in the numerators of the corresponding terms. Sustituting this into 31 and solving for p in the regime in which the tree-level contriution to m is asent or strongly suppressed with respect to the dominant 1-loop contriution of the order of M /16π the on-shell mass, i.e., the physical root of 31, oeys m phys = OM /16π. Hence, Σp Σ0 = O[M /16π ] = Om 4 phys /M which is clearly suleading with respect to the leading contriution from m. The only exception to this simple reasoning is the case when some of the su-locks of the tree-level scalar mass matrix in the arguments of the log terms contain Goldstone-mode zeros which are not regulated y the corresponding zero pre-factors. Such an IR divergence is then compensated only y the Σ0 term in eq. 31 which, however, is much easier to calculate than the full-fledged Σp ; alternatively, one can just discard such IR divergences at the leading order in the perturative expansion. In summary, for those fields whose masses are dominated y the one-loop corrections, there is no need to deal with the self-energy at the leading order and the IR-regulated zero-momentum mass expressions derived from the effective potential are sufficient as inputs of a two-loop RGE analysis. 11 B. Consistency checks Given the high complexity of the results presented in Appendix B we find it convenient to supply a set of their consistency checks concerning their ehaviour in several limits corresponding to an enhanced gauge symmetry when the character of the spectrum changes qualitatively. 1. Limits There are two specific limits in which one can anticipate the form of the one-loop results 8 and 9 on the symmetry asis corresponding to the standard and the flipped SU5 U1 scenarios, respectively, attained in the regimes ω = ±ω r, see Tale II. The standard SU5 U1 limit ω r ω : In this limit, the one-loop triplet and octet masses 8 and 9 should vanish as they do at the tree level, see 14 and 15; the reason is that they ecome memers of an SU5 U1 multiplet which, in the SM vacuum, contains a Goldstone mode 3,, 5 6 + h.c., cf. Sect. III B. In order to see this, it is convenient to sustitute ω r = ω + κ into the relevant formulae in Appendix B and then take the κ 0 limit. Note that the contriutions of the logarithmic and polynomial type in 8 and 9 do not need to vanish separately due to the aforementioned metamorphosis 7 of some of the logarithmic terms into polynomial form. The ehaviour of the individual contriutions to m a,,1-loop is sketched in the following scheme: G[poly] a S INF [poly] a m a,tree, m,tree κ 0 0, S F IN [poly] a, S F IN [poly] κ 0 0, + G[log] a, G[poly] + G[log] κ 0 0, 33 + S[log] a, S INF [poly] + S[log] κ 0 0. 9 This, in the usual situation, requires just the tree-level masses inserted into the relevant one-loop matching formulae [6, 7]; however, in models which possess a metastale vacuum supporting a non-tachyonic spectrum only at the loop level, the critical i.e., potentially tachyonic sectors of the spectrum require regularization y means of radiative corrections.
The proof of these equalities is slightly complicated y the fact that all the pre-factors of the log terms tend to low in the κ 0 limit, see Appendices B 1 and B, which renders the individual log-type contriutions divergent. The ovious trick is to group the logs whose arguments converge to the same limit and use the identity lim κ 0 [ x A x κ κ log m 0 + c x κ + Oκ ] = lim κ 0 [ x A xκ κ ] log m 0 + x 1 c x A x 0 m 0, 34 where x sums over a group of indices with the same argument m 0 for κ 0 in the logarithm which, for instance, for the scalar contriutions 10 are {x} : {l, o 1 }; {p, q, r 1 }; {e, k, r }; {d, h, i, m 1, n, o 3 }; {f, g, j, l 1, m, n 1, o }, 35 A x κ are analytic functions of κ and c x is the first expansion coefficient in κ of the logarithm arguments. Only terms with a non-zero constant part in A x κ give non-vanishing polynomial pieces in the κ 0 limit, i.e. only the logs with divergent prefactors can give rise to a polynomial contriution. The ehaviour 33 can e viewed as a rather non-trivial consistency check of the results ecause the constant and linear terms in κ in the sums x A xκ must in all cases drop, as they indeed do. The flipped SU5 U1 limit ω r ω : In this case, the symmetry group is SU5 U1, cf. Tale II, the hypercharge is a linear comination of one of the Cartans of SU5 and the extra U1 charge. The triplet 1, 3, 0 and the octet 8, 1, 0 again ecome part of the same 4-dimensional gauge multiplet this time together with representations 3,, + 1 6 +h.c.. This is easily seen from the form of the M r matrix A36 which ecomes diagonal in this limit, with the [11] entry therein reducing to the same expression as Ma and M in the same limit. In contrast with the standard SU5 case aove, the 3,, + 1 6 + h.c. multiplet is not a would-e Goldstone oson in the SM vacuum, so the octet and triplet masses should e equal ut non-vanishing. As efore, it is convenient to implement this limit y means of the κ parameter ω r = ω + κ with κ 0 and, for the scalar contriutions, it is useful to group the logarithmic terms according to the scheme 11 {x} : {s}; {d}; {l 1, o 1 }; {f, m 1, p}; {e, i, m }; {g, j, l, n, o, q, r }; {h, k, n 1, o 3, r 1 }. 36 The results assume the following form: m a,tree, m,tree 5 1 Z 4a ω, 37 G[poly] a, G[poly] a G[log], G[log] S F IN [poly], S F IN [poly] + S[log] S INF [poly] a S INF [poly] a, + S[log] 5 1 Z 17 3π g 4 ω, 38 5 1 Z 3 3π g 4 ω log [ g ω /µ r], 39 5 1 Z 1 8π 96a0 a + 76a + 560 γ 5β 4 + 60β 4 β 4 100β 4 ω. 40 5 1 Z 5 8π F 7; 0, 0; 9ω, 1ω, 60ω + 1 16π F 4; 0, 64ω ; 0, 0, 40ω log [ 4ω f1; 0, 6ω /µ ] r + F 1; 1ω, 4ω ; 51ω, 1ω, 4ω log [ 6β 4 ω /µ ] r + F 9; 34ω, 7ω ; ω, 17ω, 13ω log [ ω f1; ω, 4ω /µ ] r + F 9; 0ω, 148ω ; 0, 40ω, 68ω log [ 4ω f1; 0, ω /µ ] r + F 6; 66ω, 156ω ; 39ω, 4ω, 96ω log [ ω f1; ω, 0/µ ] r + IR divergent log terms, 41 where the F function is defined in eq. A44. Let us note that the log-to-polynomial metamorphosis is less frequent here than in the previous case ecause only few exclusively scalar log prefactors low up in the flipped SU5 limit. In fact, only the O j, O l, O n, O o, T g, T o terms see Appendix B contriute to the polynomial part of eq. 41. 10 Note that there are different log terms in the scalar sector while only 4 of them are generated y the gauge interactions, cf. Appendices B 1 and B. 11 These groupings are listed in the same ordering as the log terms in equation 41, with all IR divergences coming from the last grouping of indices. As we have argued in Sect. III A 4 these divergences disappear in the on-shell formula 31.
13. Exact Goldstone osons There is another relatively cheap consistency check of the method used for the calculation of the various a, factors governing the leading one-loop contriutions to the PGB masses of our interest: all would-e Goldstone modes associated to the gauge fields from the SO10/SU3 SU U1 coset should e massless to all orders in perturation theory. Let us demonstrate that this is indeed the case at least for the most accessile of these fields, namely, the 3,, 5 6 + h.c. scalar which is contained solely in the scalar 45 of the SO10 and, hence, no mixing with the scalar 16 needs to e considered. We have indeed checked that its one-loop mass m c remains massless even at the 1-loop level, i.e., that each of its c -contriutions defined along the lines of eqs. 8 and 9 individually vanishes: the log and the polynomial terms of the gauge contriution, as well as the polynomial terms and log terms of the scalar contriution. In this case, the polynomial parts from scalars S F IN [poly] c and S INF [poly] c vanish separately. 1 Moreover, the structure of all the c contriutions is such that it admits for a simple numerical check even outside the analytic simplification domain 30 which indeed yields zero for all randomly chosen values of σ, γ and a. 3. Diagrammatics Last, ut not least, it is relatively straightforward to calculate some of the the leading polynomial parts of the one-loop corrections to the masses of the 8, 1, 0 and 1, 3, 0 PGBs y means of the standard perturative expansion. This applies, in particular, to the τ -proportional i.e., SO10 invariant contriution, cf. eqs. B7 and B8; the other leading polynomial terms, namely, those proportional to ω r, ω and/or ω r ω turn out to e easily accessile only in the simplified version of the minimal model with 16 instead of 16 in the Higgs sector. In what follows, we shall first comment riefly on the salient points of the corresponding calculation in the sample 45 16 Higgs model and then turn our attention to the 45 16 scenario of our current interest. The method: In the simplest scalar theory context with a pair of scalar fields Φ and φ with only the latter developing a VEV it is straightforward to show that the leading order one-loop contriution to the mass squared of Φ can e formally written as [8] Φ = 1 φ, 4 where the graphs denote the sums of the one-loop contriutions to the two-point and one-point functions with appropriate external legs Φ, respectively, while the dots etween the crossed lines correspond to all possile insertions 13 of the VEVs of φ. In the classical λϕ 4 context these structures can e formally expanded as 1-point:, 43 -point:, 44 where the symols with empty los stand for the usual Feynman diagrams of a given topology. There are a few points worth making here: 1. Only some of the one-loop topologies aove will generate a polynomial contriution to Φ ; for example, the first two displayed contriutions to the -point function 44 yield a polynomial contriution, while the third does not. 1 If one expresses the scalar mass matrix in a reordered asis, in which M S acquires a lock diagonal form, where each lock consists of states with degenerate mass, it is easy to see explicitly that S INF [poly] c = 0. The lock structure alone then allows us to avoid the computation of complicated analytical forms of eigenvectors modulo those of Goldstone modes, which are relatively simple and automatically discards the polynomial contriution to the 1-loop mass of the would-e Goldstone pair 3,, 5 6 + 3,, 5 from the 6 nested commutator term. 13 Oviously, the calculation is performed in the unroken phase formalism in which the VEV is kept in the interaction part of the Lagrangian.
14 TABLE III: β -proportional parts of the polynomial corrections to the masses of the pseudo-goldstone osons in the simplified 45 16 scenario in various limits. 4π m Φ ω r = 0 ω = 0 ω r = ω ω Φ = 8, 1, 0 3β ω Φ = 1, 3, 0 β ω β ω r β ω r 5β ω 5β ω. The undisplayed terms denoted y the ellipses aove correspond to the graphs with higher and higher numer of insertions of the pairs of VEVs and, as such, they may generate a power-series-like structure of similar polynomial contriutions; if the interactions are simple enough, the quotients of such power series may e identified and the series themselves may e eventually summed up in a closed form. 3. Note that if there is simultaneously a trilinear vertex at play, many more topologies ecome availale; this will lead to mixed contriutions proportional not only to the VEVs ut also to the dimensionful trilinear vertex coupling such as τ in the SO10 context of our interest. However, as long as one is interested in either the pure VEV-squared or the pure τ contriution to Φ, it is sufficient to focus on the relevant su-series with only one kind of interactions trilinear or quartic, respectively connecting the VEV legs to the main loop. Diagrammatics in the 45 16 scenario, the β -proportional polynomial piece: This all said, let us first turn our attention to the SO10 Higgs model featuring a simplified set of scalars transforming as 45 16, see, e.g., reference [14]. There are again three convenient limits in this setting corresponding to the assumed single VEV situation, namely ω r = 0 the 3 c L R 1 B L limit, ω = 0 the 4 c L 1 R limit and ω r = ω the flipped SU5 limit, in which the formalism aove may e quite easily applied and clusters of graphs with contriutions ehaving as a power series identified in the 1-point and -point Green s function expansions. For instance, focusing solely at the quartic interaction governed y the β coupling see [14] for its structure, the power-like ehaviour of the polynomial contriutions of the RHS of eqs. 43 and 44 may e readily inferred. The cominations 4 of the sums of the corresponding power series are given in Tale III. Remarkaly, the information thus otained in the three different limits aove is just enough to reconstruct all three coefficients c Φ i of the expected form of the β -proportional polynomial one-loop contriution to Φ, namely Φ = β c Φ 1 ω r + c Φ ω r ω + c Φ 3 ω. Putting all this together, the polynomial pieces of the scalar-loop-generated corrections to the masses of the pseudo- Goldstone osons 1, 3, 0 and 8, 1, 0 in the simplified 45 16 scenario read in the same notation as efore S[poly],β a = 1 4π β ω r ω r ω + ω, which, indeed, coincides with the results of the existing effective potential analysis [14]. S[poly],β = 1 4π β ω r ω r ω + 3ω, 45 Diagrammatics in the 45 16 scenario, the τ -proportional polynomial piece: Since the interaction of our interest here is trilinear, there are no τ-proportional polynomial contriutions popping up from the two-point part 43 of formula 4 and, hence, it is sufficient to consider only the τ-proportional tadpoles 43. The summation of the relevant parts of the corresponding power series yields a universal i.e., SO10 invariant contriution S[poly],τ a = S[poly],τ = τ 4π, 46 which, as efore, coincides with that otained in the effective potential approach [14]. Hence, at least for the one-loop polynomial corrections to the PGB triplet and octet masses, the purely diagrammatic approach admits an efficient cross-check of the EP results. Diagrammatics in the 45 16 scenario, the τ -proportional polynomial piece: Finally, let us attempt to evaluate some of the S[poly] a and S[poly] terms in the 45 16 model of our main interest. Unfortunately, the presence of two types of quartic self-interactions etween a pair of 45 s and two 16 s, i.e., the β 4 and β 4 terms in the scalar potential 6, complicates the cominatorics of the VEV insertions in diagrams 4 to such an extent that here we have managed to calculate just the universal τ -proportional factor S[poly],τ a = S[poly],τ = 35τ 8π, 47