Download PDF

Fundamental composite 2HDM: SU(N) with 4 flavours

Open Access
Regular Article - Theoretical Physics
First Online:
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:

Abstract

We present a new model of composite Higgs based on a gauged SU(N) group with 4 Dirac fermions in the fundamental representation. At low energy, the model has a global symmetry SU(4)×SU(4) broken to the diagonal SU(4), containing 2 Higgs doublets in the coset. We study in detail the issue of the vacuum alignment. In particular, we prove that, without loss of generality, the vacuum can always be aligned with one doublet. Under certain conditions on the top pre-Yukawas, the second doublet, together with the additional triplets, is stable and can thus play the role of Dark Matter. This model can therefore be an example of composite inert-2HDM model.

Keywords

Beyond Standard Model Technicolor and Composite Models 
Download to read the full article text

Notes

Open Access

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits any use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.

References

  1. [1]
    F. Englert and R. Brout, Broken symmetry and the mass of gauge vector mesons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 13 (1964) 321 [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    P.W. Higgs, Broken symmetries, massless particles and gauge fields, Phys. Lett. 12 (1964) 132 [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    P.W. Higgs, Broken symmetries and the masses of gauge bosons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 13 (1964) 508 [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    ATLAS collaboration, Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B 716 (2012) 1 [arXiv:1207.7214] [INSPIRE].
  5. [5]
    CMS collaboration, Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B 716 (2012) 30 [arXiv:1207.7235] [INSPIRE].
  6. [6]
    ATLAS, CMS collaboration, G. Aad et al., Combined measurement of the Higgs boson mass in pp collisions at \( \sqrt{s}=7 \) and 8 TeV with the ATLAS and CMS experiments, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 (2015) 191803 [arXiv:1503.07589] [INSPIRE].
  7. [7]
    CMS collaboration, Precise determination of the mass of the Higgs boson and tests of compatibility of its couplings with the standard model predictions using proton collisions at 7 and 8 TeV, Eur. Phys. J. C 75 (2015) 212 [arXiv:1412.8662] [INSPIRE].
  8. [8]
    ATLAS collaboration, Measurements of the Higgs boson production and decay rates and coupling strengths using pp collision data at \( \sqrt{s}=7 \) and 8 TeV in the ATLAS experiment, ATLAS-CONF-2015-007 (2015).
  9. [9]
    SLD Electroweak Group, DELPHI, ALEPH, SLD, SLD Heavy Flavour Group, OPAL, LEP Electroweak Working Group, L3 collaboration, S. Schael et al., Precision electroweak measurements on the Z resonance, Phys. Rept. 427 (2006) 257 [hep-ex/0509008] [INSPIRE].
  10. [10]
    DELPHI, OPAL, LEP Electroweak, ALEPH, L3 collaboration, S. Schael et al., Electroweak measurements in electron-positron collisions at W-boson-pair energies at LEP, Phys. Rept. 532 (2013) 119 [arXiv:1302.3415] [INSPIRE].
  11. [11]
    S. Dimopoulos and L. Susskind, Mass without scalars, Nucl. Phys. B 155 (1979) 237 [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    M.E. Peskin and T. Takeuchi, A new constraint on a strongly interacting Higgs sector, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65 (1990) 964 [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    D.B. Kaplan and H. Georgi, SU(2) × U(1) breaking by vacuum misalignment, Phys. Lett. B 136 (1984) 183 [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    D.B. Kaplan, H. Georgi and S. Dimopoulos, Composite Higgs scalars, Phys. Lett. B 136 (1984) 187 [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    R. Contino, Y. Nomura and A. Pomarol, Higgs as a holographic pseudo-Goldstone boson, Nucl. Phys. B 671 (2003) 148 [hep-ph/0306259] [INSPIRE].
  16. [16]
    K. Agashe, R. Contino and A. Pomarol, The minimal composite Higgs model, Nucl. Phys. B 719 (2005) 165 [hep-ph/0412089] [INSPIRE].
  17. [17]
    K. Agashe and R. Contino, The minimal composite Higgs model and electroweak precision tests, Nucl. Phys. B 742 (2006) 59 [hep-ph/0510164] [INSPIRE].
  18. [18]
    B. Bellazzini, C. Csáki and J. Serra, Composite Higgses, Eur. Phys. J. C 74 (2014) 2766 [arXiv:1401.2457] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    G. Panico and A. Wulzer, The composite Nambu-Goldstone Higgs, Lect. Notes Phys. 913 (2016) pp.1-316 [arXiv:1506.01961] [INSPIRE].
  20. [20]
    G. Cacciapaglia and F. Sannino, Fundamental composite (Goldstone) Higgs dynamics, JHEP 04 (2014) 111 [arXiv:1402.0233] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    T.A. Ryttov and F. Sannino, Ultra minimal technicolor and its dark matter TIMP, Phys. Rev. D 78 (2008) 115010 [arXiv:0809.0713] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    J. Galloway, J.A. Evans, M.A. Luty and R.A. Tacchi, Minimal conformal technicolor and precision electroweak tests, JHEP 10 (2010) 086 [arXiv:1001.1361] [INSPIRE].MATHGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    A. Hietanen, R. Lewis, C. Pica and F. Sannino, Fundamental composite Higgs dynamics on the lattice: SU(2) with two flavors, JHEP 07 (2014) 116 [arXiv:1404.2794] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    A. Arbey et al., Fundamental composite electroweak dynamics: status at the LHC, arXiv:1502.04718 [INSPIRE].
  25. [25]
    M. Frigerio, A. Pomarol, F. Riva and A. Urbano, Composite scalar dark matter, JHEP 07 (2012) 015 [arXiv:1204.2808] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    D. Marzocca and A. Urbano, Composite dark matter and LHC interplay, JHEP 07 (2014) 107 [arXiv:1404.7419] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    J. Wess and B. Zumino, Consequences of anomalous Ward identities, Phys. Lett. B 37 (1971) 95 [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. [28]
    E. Witten, Global aspects of current algebra, Nucl. Phys. B 223 (1983) 422 [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. [29]
    B. Gripaios, A. Pomarol, F. Riva and J. Serra, Beyond the minimal composite Higgs model, JHEP 04 (2009) 070 [arXiv:0902.1483] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. [30]
    M. Schmaltz, D. Stolarski and J. Thaler, The bestest little Higgs, JHEP 09 (2010) 018 [arXiv:1006.1356] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. [31]
    J. Mrazek, A. Pomarol, R. Rattazzi, M. Redi, J. Serra and A. Wulzer, The other natural two Higgs doublet model, Nucl. Phys. B 853 (2011) 1 [arXiv:1105.5403] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. [32]
    E. Bertuzzo, T.S. Ray, H. de Sandes and C.A. Savoy, On composite two Higgs doublet models, JHEP 05 (2013) 153 [arXiv:1206.2623] [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. [33]
    E. Eichten and K.D. Lane, Dynamical breaking of weak interaction symmetries, Phys. Lett. B 90 (1980) 125 [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. [34]
    D.B. Kaplan, Flavor at SSC energies: a new mechanism for dynamically generated fermion masses, Nucl. Phys. B 365 (1991) 259 [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. [35]
    T. Gherghetta and A. Pomarol, Bulk fields and supersymmetry in a slice of AdS, Nucl. Phys. B 586 (2000) 141 [hep-ph/0003129] [INSPIRE].
  36. [36]
    S.J. Huber and Q. Shafi, Fermion masses, mixings and proton decay in a Randall-Sundrum model, Phys. Lett. B 498 (2001) 256 [hep-ph/0010195] [INSPIRE].
  37. [37]
    G. Ferretti and D. Karateev, Fermionic UV completions of Composite Higgs models, JHEP 03 (2014) 077 [arXiv:1312.5330] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. [38]
    J. Barnard, T. Gherghetta and T.S. Ray, UV descriptions of composite Higgs models without elementary scalars, JHEP 02 (2014) 002 [arXiv:1311.6562] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. [39]
    G. Ferretti, UV completions of partial compositeness: the case for a SU(4) gauge group, JHEP 06 (2014) 142 [arXiv:1404.7137] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. [40]
    A. Hasenfratz, Investigating the critical properties of beyond-QCD theories using Monte Carlo Renormalization Group matching, Phys. Rev. D 80 (2009) 034505 [arXiv:0907.0919] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
  41. [41]
    Z. Fodor, K. Holland, J. Kuti, D. Nogradi and C. Schroeder, Nearly conformal gauge theories in finite volume, Phys. Lett. B 681 (2009) 353 [arXiv:0907.4562] [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. [42]
    Y. Aoki et al., Lattice study of conformality in twelve-flavor QCD, Phys. Rev. D 86 (2012) 054506 [arXiv:1207.3060] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
  43. [43]
    LatKMI collaboration, Y. Aoki et al., Walking signals in N f = 8 QCD on the lattice, Phys. Rev. D 87 (2013) 094511 [arXiv:1302.6859] [INSPIRE].
  44. [44]
    D.D. Dietrich and F. Sannino, Conformal window of SU(N ) gauge theories with fermions in higher dimensional representations, Phys. Rev. D 75 (2007) 085018 [hep-ph/0611341] [INSPIRE].
  45. [45]
    T.W. Appelquist, D. Karabali and L.C.R. Wijewardhana, Chiral hierarchies and the flavor changing neutral current problem in technicolor, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57 (1986) 957 [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. [46]
    L. Vecchi, A “dangerous irrelevant” UV-completion of the composite Higgs, arXiv:1506.00623 [INSPIRE].
  47. [47]
    S. Samuel, Bosonic technicolor, Nucl. Phys. B 347 (1990) 625 [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. [48]
    A. Kagan and S. Samuel, Renormalization group aspects of bosonic technicolor, Phys. Lett. B 270 (1991) 37 [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. [49]
    E. Katz, A.E. Nelson and D.G.E. Walker, The intermediate Higgs, JHEP 08 (2005) 074 [hep-ph/0504252] [INSPIRE].
  50. [50]
    O. Matsedonskyi, G. Panico and A. Wulzer, Light top partners for a light composite Higgs, JHEP 01 (2013) 164 [arXiv:1204.6333] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. [51]
    R. Barbieri, A. Pomarol, R. Rattazzi and A. Strumia, Electroweak symmetry breaking after LEP-1 and LEP-2, Nucl. Phys. B 703 (2004) 127 [hep-ph/0405040] [INSPIRE].
  52. [52]
    G. Cacciapaglia, C. Csáki, G. Marandella and A. Strumia, The minimal set of electroweak precision parameters, Phys. Rev. D 74 (2006) 033011 [hep-ph/0604111] [INSPIRE].
  53. [53]
    R. Foadi and F. Sannino, S and T parameters from a light nonstandard Higgs particle, Phys. Rev. D 87 (2013) 015008 [arXiv:1207.1541] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
  54. [54]
    R. Barbieri, B. Bellazzini, V.S. Rychkov and A. Varagnolo, The Higgs boson from an extended symmetry, Phys. Rev. D 76 (2007) 115008 [arXiv:0706.0432] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
  55. [55]
    N. Maekawa, Vector-like strong coupling theory with small S and T parameters, Prog. Theor. Phys. 93 (1995) 919 [hep-ph/9406375] [INSPIRE].
  56. [56]
    Gfitter Group collaboration, M. Baak et al., The global electroweak fit at NNLO and prospects for the LHC and ILC, Eur. Phys. J. C 74 (2014) 3046 [arXiv:1407.3792] [INSPIRE].
  57. [57]
    G. Cacciapaglia, A. Deandrea and J. Llodra-Perez, Higgs → γγ beyond the standard model, JHEP 06 (2009) 054 [arXiv:0901.0927] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. [58]
    G. Cacciapaglia, A. Deandrea, G.D. La Rochelle and J.-B. Flament, Higgs couplings beyond the Standard Model, JHEP 03 (2013) 029 [arXiv:1210.8120] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. [59]
    J.-B. Flament, Higgs couplings and BSM physics: Run I legacy constraints, arXiv:1504.07919 [INSPIRE].
  60. [60]
    M.A. Luty and T. Okui, Conformal technicolor, JHEP 09 (2006) 070 [hep-ph/0409274] [INSPIRE].
  61. [61]
    R. Rattazzi, V.S. Rychkov, E. Tonni and A. Vichi, Bounding scalar operator dimensions in 4D CFT, JHEP 12 (2008) 031 [arXiv:0807.0004] [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  62. [62]
    V.S. Rychkov and A. Vichi, Universal constraints on conformal operator dimensions, Phys. Rev. D 80 (2009) 045006 [arXiv:0905.2211] [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  63. [63]
    B.A. Dobrescu, Fermion masses without Higgs: a supersymmetric technicolor model, Nucl. Phys. B 449 (1995) 462 [hep-ph/9504399] [INSPIRE].
  64. [64]
    A. Azatov, J. Galloway and M.A. Luty, Superconformal technicolor: models and phenomenology, Phys. Rev. D 85 (2012) 015018 [arXiv:1106.4815] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
  65. [65]
    D.F. Litim and F. Sannino, Asymptotic safety guaranteed, JHEP 12 (2014) 178 [arXiv:1406.2337] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. [66]
    D.F. Litim, M. Mojaza and F. Sannino, Vacuum stability of asymptotically safe gauge-Yukawa theories, JHEP 01 (2016) 081 [arXiv:1501.03061] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. [67]
    S. Chang, J. Galloway, M. Luty, E. Salvioni and Y. Tsai, Phenomenology of induced electroweak symmetry breaking, JHEP 03 (2015) 017 [arXiv:1411.6023] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. [68]
    O. Antipin and M. Redi, The half-composite two Higgs doublet model and the relaxion, JHEP 12 (2015) 031 [arXiv:1508.01112] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. [69]
    M. Redi and A. Weiler, Flavor and CP invariant composite Higgs models, JHEP 11 (2011) 108 [arXiv:1106.6357] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  70. [70]
    R. Barbieri, D. Buttazzo, F. Sala, D.M. Straub and A. Tesi, A 125 GeV composite Higgs boson versus flavour and electroweak precision tests, JHEP 05 (2013) 069 [arXiv:1211.5085] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. [71]
    R. Barbieri, D. Buttazzo, F. Sala and D.M. Straub, Flavour physics from an approximate U (2)3 symmetry, JHEP 07 (2012) 181 [arXiv:1203.4218] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. [72]
    G. Cacciapaglia et al., Anarchic Yukawas and top partial compositeness: the flavour of a successful marriage, JHEP 06 (2015) 085 [arXiv:1501.03818] [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. [73]
    O. Matsedonskyi, On flavour and naturalness of composite Higgs models, JHEP 02 (2015) 154 [arXiv:1411.4638] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. [74]
    O. Kaymakcalan, S. Rajeev and J. Schechter, Nonabelian anomaly and vector meson decays, Phys. Rev. D 30 (1984) 594 [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
  75. [75]
    P. Langacker and G. Steigman, Requiem for an FCHAMP? Fractionally CHArged, Massive Particle, Phys. Rev. D 84 (2011) 065040 [arXiv:1107.3131] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
  76. [76]
    D. Pappadopulo, A. Thamm, R. Torre and A. Wulzer, Heavy vector triplets: bridging theory and data, JHEP 09 (2014) 060 [arXiv:1402.4431] [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. [77]
    D. Becciolini et al., Custodial vector model, Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) 015013 [arXiv:1410.6492] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
  78. [78]
    Z. Fodor, K. Holland, J. Kuti, D. Nogradi and C. Schroeder, Chiral symmetry breaking in nearly conformal gauge theories, PoS(LAT2009)055 [arXiv:0911.2463] [INSPIRE].

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhysicsTsinghua UniversityBeijingChina
  2. 2.Center for High Energy PhysicsTsinghua UniversityBeijingChina
  3. 3.Univ. Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1VilleurbanneFrance
  4. 4.Institut de Physique Nucléaire de Lyon (UMR5822), CNRS/IN2P3Villeurbanne CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations