WIMPs: An Introduction

Manuel Drees
Bonn University & Bethe Center for Theoretical Physics

Introduction to WIMPs p. 1/59

Contents
1 The WIMP Miracle

Introduction to WIMPs p. 2/59

Contents
1 The WIMP Miracle
2 Have WIMPS been Detected (Directly)?

Introduction to WIMPs p. 2/59

Contents
1 The WIMP Miracle
2 Have WIMPS been Detected (Directly)?
3 Asymmetric Dark Matter?

Introduction to WIMPs p. 2/59

Contents
1 The WIMP Miracle
2 Have WIMPS been Detected (Directly)?
3 Asymmetric Dark Matter?
4 WIMPs and Colliders

Introduction to WIMPs p. 2/59

Contents
1 The WIMP Miracle
2 Have WIMPS been Detected (Directly)?
3 Asymmetric Dark Matter?
4 WIMPs and Colliders
5 Summary

Introduction to WIMPs p. 2/59

Conditions for Dark Matter Candidates

Requirements for a good DM candidate :
Must have lifetime U

Introduction to WIMPs p. 3/59

Conditions for Dark Matter Candidates

Requirements for a good DM candidate :
Must have lifetime U
Must be electrically neutral (otherwise not dark)

Introduction to WIMPs p. 3/59

Conditions for Dark Matter Candidates

Requirements for a good DM candidate :
Must have lifetime U
Must be electrically neutral (otherwise not dark)
Must have correct relic density: 0.22

Introduction to WIMPs p. 3/59

Conditions for Dark Matter Candidates

Requirements for a good DM candidate :
Must have lifetime U
Must be electrically neutral (otherwise not dark)
Must have correct relic density: 0.22
If DM consists of thermally produced elementary particles:
Leads to events with missing ET at colliders!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 3/59

Conditions for Dark Matter Candidates

Requirements for a good DM candidate :
Must have lifetime U
Must be electrically neutral (otherwise not dark)
Must have correct relic density: 0.22
If DM consists of thermally produced elementary particles:
Leads to events with missing ET at colliders!
Counterexamples: axions; dark atoms; primordial black holes; keV
neutrinos: not covered in this talk. Note: Proves that LHC does not recreate
conditions of the early universe!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 3/59

The WIMP Miracle

Assume was in full thermal equilibrium with SM
particles at sufficiently high temperature T :
production rate n h( SM)v i > expansion rate H

Introduction to WIMPs p. 4/59

The WIMP Miracle

Assume was in full thermal equilibrium with SM
particles at sufficiently high temperature T :
production rate n h( SM)v i > expansion rate H

n em /T , h( SM)vi T 0 or2 , H T 2 /MPlanck

Introduction to WIMPs p. 4/59

The WIMP Miracle

Assume was in full thermal equilibrium with SM
particles at sufficiently high temperature T :
production rate n h( SM)v i > expansion rate H

n em /T , h( SM)vi T 0 or2 , H T 2 /MPlanck

= equality (freeze-out) reached at TF m /20

Introduction to WIMPs p. 4/59

The WIMP Miracle

Assume was in full thermal equilibrium with SM
particles at sufficiently high temperature T :
production rate n h( SM)v i > expansion rate H

n em /T , h( SM)vi T 0 or2 , H T 2 /MPlanck

= equality (freeze-out) reached at TF m /20

0.1 pb c
= h
h( SM)vi
2

Introduction to WIMPs p. 4/59

The WIMP Miracle

Assume was in full thermal equilibrium with SM
particles at sufficiently high temperature T :
production rate n h( SM)v i > expansion rate H

n em /T , h( SM)vi T 0 or2 , H T 2 /MPlanck

= equality (freeze-out) reached at TF m /20

0.1 pb c
= h
h( SM)vi
2

Indicates weakscale annihilation cross section:

h( any)vi 3 1026 cm3 s1
Introduction to WIMPs p. 4/59

WIMPs and Early Universe

h2 can be changed a lot in nonstandard cosmologies
(involving T TBBN ):

Increased: Higher expansion rate H(T TF );

additional nonthermal production at T < TF ; . . .

Introduction to WIMPs p. 5/59

WIMPs and Early Universe

h2 can be changed a lot in nonstandard cosmologies
(involving T TBBN ):

Increased: Higher expansion rate H(T TF );

additional nonthermal production at T < TF ; . . .
Decreased: Reduced expansion rate H(T TF );
entropy production at T < TF ; . . .

Introduction to WIMPs p. 5/59

WIMPs and Early Universe

h2 can be changed a lot in nonstandard cosmologies
(involving T TBBN ):

Increased: Higher expansion rate H(T TF );

additional nonthermal production at T < TF ; . . .
Decreased: Reduced expansion rate H(T TF );
entropy production at T < TF ; . . .
Determining ( SM) allows probe of very early
Universe, once has been established to be the DM
particle! e.g. MD, Iminniyaz, Kakizaki, arXiv:0704.1590

Introduction to WIMPs p. 5/59

HighT Production of DM Particles

Sometimes production from thermalized SM particles is
called thermal production even if never was in thermal
equilibrium:

Introduction to WIMPs p. 6/59

HighT Production of DM Particles

Sometimes production from thermalized SM particles is
called thermal production even if never was in thermal
equilibrium:
If ( SM) 1/s: Production maximal at T m
(freezein, Hall et al., arXiv:0911.1120)

Introduction to WIMPs p. 6/59

HighT Production of DM Particles

Sometimes production from thermalized SM particles is
called thermal production even if never was in thermal
equilibrium:
If ( SM) 1/s: Production maximal at T m
(freezein, Hall et al., arXiv:0911.1120)
If ( SM) s/4 : Produced dominantly at highest
possible temperature, TR .

Introduction to WIMPs p. 6/59

HighT Production of DM Particles

Sometimes production from thermalized SM particles is
called thermal production even if never was in thermal
equilibrium:
If ( SM) 1/s: Production maximal at T m
(freezein, Hall et al., arXiv:0911.1120)
If ( SM) s/4 : Produced dominantly at highest
possible temperature, TR .
Either way, interactions with SM particles are too weak to
give missing ET signal, unless has partners that can be
, axino a
produced via gauge interactions (ex.: gravitino G
)

Introduction to WIMPs p. 6/59

HighT Production of DM Particles

Sometimes production from thermalized SM particles is
called thermal production even if never was in thermal
equilibrium:
If ( SM) 1/s: Production maximal at T m
(freezein, Hall et al., arXiv:0911.1120)
If ( SM) s/4 : Produced dominantly at highest
possible temperature, TR .
Either way, interactions with SM particles are too weak to
give missing ET signal, unless has partners that can be
, axino a
produced via gauge interactions (ex.: gravitino G
)
Interactions are too weak for direct detection; indirect
detection is possible only for unstable DM candidates.
Introduction to WIMPs p. 6/59

Have WIMPs Been Detected Directly?

Direct detection search for elastic WIMPnucleon
scattering

Introduction to WIMPs p. 7/59

Have WIMPs Been Detected Directly?

Direct detection search for elastic WIMPnucleon
scattering
Kinematics: v vSun 103 c

Introduction to WIMPs p. 7/59

Have WIMPs Been Detected Directly?

Direct detection search for elastic WIMPnucleon
scattering
Kinematics: v vSun 103 c
= energy transfer to nculeus A:


2
m
< min 106 , 106 mA < 100 keV
Q
mA

Introduction to WIMPs p. 7/59

Have WIMPs Been Detected Directly?

Direct detection search for elastic WIMPnucleon
scattering
Kinematics: v vSun 103 c
= energy transfer to nculeus A:


2
m
< min 106 , 106 mA < 100 keV
Q
mA

= Cannot excite (most) nuclei!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 7/59

Have WIMPs Been Detected Directly?

Direct detection search for elastic WIMPnucleon
scattering
Kinematics: v vSun 103 c
= energy transfer to nculeus A:


2
m
< min 106 , 106 mA < 100 keV
Q
mA

= Cannot excite (most) nuclei!

< 100 MeV = may need to worry
Momentum transfer
about elastic form factors; quite well understood (for spinindep.
scattering)

Introduction to WIMPs p. 7/59

Recoil Spectrum
dR
dQ

2 R vmax dv
|F (Q)| vmin v f1 (v)

Introduction to WIMPs p. 8/59

Recoil Spectrum
dR
dQ

2 R vmax dv
|F (Q)| vmin v f1 (v)

f1 (v) : WIMP velocity distribution. Usually assumed

Maxwellian in rest frame of the galaxy, cut off at
vesc = vmax . Gives roughly exponentially falling spectrum.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 8/59

Normalized Recoil Spectra

1
m=100 GeV, A=73
m=100 GeV, A=136
m=10 GeV, A=73

1/R dR/dQ [1/keV]

0.1

m=10 GeV, A=16

0.01

0.001

0.0001
0

20

40

60

80

100

Q [keV]
Introduction to WIMPs p. 9/59

Experimental Challenges
Spectrum backed up against instrumental threshold
Qmin

Introduction to WIMPs p. 10/59

Experimental Challenges
Spectrum backed up against instrumental threshold
Qmin
Rates of current interest background rate, e.g. from
radioactive decay (for most materials)
= try to discriminate between nuclear recoil (signal)
and e/ induced events (background)!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 10/59

Experimental Challenges
Spectrum backed up against instrumental threshold
Qmin
Rates of current interest background rate, e.g. from
radioactive decay (for most materials)
= try to discriminate between nuclear recoil (signal)
and e/ induced events (background)!
Will go through three claimed signals: DAMA(/LIBRA),
CoGeNT, CRESST.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 10/59

DAMA
Pure scintillation detectors (doped NaI) in Gran Sasso:
6 years with 100 kg (DAMA)
6 years with 250 kg (DAMA/LIBRA)

Introduction to WIMPs p. 11/59

DAMA
Pure scintillation detectors (doped NaI) in Gran Sasso:
6 years with 100 kg (DAMA)
6 years with 250 kg (DAMA/LIBRA)
All events are counted.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 11/59

DAMA
Pure scintillation detectors (doped NaI) in Gran Sasso:
6 years with 100 kg (DAMA)
6 years with 250 kg (DAMA/LIBRA)
All events are counted.
Observe few percent modulation of total rate

Introduction to WIMPs p. 11/59

DAMA
Pure scintillation detectors (doped NaI) in Gran Sasso:
6 years with 100 kg (DAMA)
6 years with 250 kg (DAMA/LIBRA)
All events are counted.
Observe few percent modulation of total rate
Compatible with 50 GeV WIMP scattering off I, or 10
GeV WIMP scattering off Na.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 11/59

DAMA Results
Residuals (cpd/kg/keV)

2-6 keV
DAMA/NaI (0.29 tonyr)
(target mass = 87.3 kg)

DAMA/LIBRA (0.53 tonyr)

(target mass = 232.8 kg)

Time (day)
Residuals (cpd/kg/keV)

2-6 keV
DAMA/LIBRA 250 kg (0.87 tonyr)

Time (day)
Introduction to WIMPs p. 12/59

DAMA: Problems
No e/ discrimination is attempted, although some (statistical)
discrimination should be possible using light curve

Introduction to WIMPs p. 13/59

DAMA: Problems
No e/ discrimination is attempted, although some (statistical)
discrimination should be possible using light curve

Deduced shape of spectrum weird: Falls towards small

Q! (Depends on 3dimensional WIMP velocity distribution.)

Introduction to WIMPs p. 13/59

DAMA: Problems
No e/ discrimination is attempted, although some (statistical)
discrimination should be possible using light curve

Deduced shape of spectrum weird: Falls towards small

Q! (Depends on 3dimensional WIMP velocity distribution.)
Amplitude of modulation is getting smaller!
E.g. in 26 keVee bin (in units of 103 /kg day keVee ):
DAMA 19952001: 20.0 3.2
LIBRA 20032007: 10.7 1.9
LIBRA 20072009: 8.5 2.2
Ratio LIBRAII
DAMA = 0.43 0.13
More than 4 away from 1! Results for 24, 25 keVee bins similar.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 13/59

DAMA: Problems
No e/ discrimination is attempted, although some (statistical)
discrimination should be possible using light curve

Deduced shape of spectrum weird: Falls towards small

Q! (Depends on 3dimensional WIMP velocity distribution.)
Amplitude of modulation is getting smaller!
E.g. in 26 keVee bin (in units of 103 /kg day keVee ):
DAMA 19952001: 20.0 3.2
LIBRA 20032007: 10.7 1.9
LIBRA 20072009: 8.5 2.2
Ratio LIBRAII
DAMA = 0.43 0.13
More than 4 away from 1! Results for 24, 25 keVee bins similar.
No convincing nonWIMP interpretation of modulation
known.
Introduction to WIMPs p. 13/59

CoGeNT: TimeAveraged Analysis

Operate cryogenic Ge detectors with very low threshold
Qmin .

Introduction to WIMPs p. 14/59

CoGeNT: TimeAveraged Analysis

Operate cryogenic Ge detectors with very low threshold
Qmin .
Originally: Found excess relative to simple bckgd model at
very low Q = small m ;

Introduction to WIMPs p. 14/59

CoGeNT: TimeAveraged Analysis

Operate cryogenic Ge detectors with very low threshold
Qmin .
Originally: Found excess relative to simple bckgd model at
very low Q = small m ;
2 fit with signal not significantly better than with pure
background: no claim of signal in published paper!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 14/59

CoGeNT: TimeAveraged Analysis

Operate cryogenic Ge detectors with very low threshold
Qmin .
Originally: Found excess relative to simple bckgd model at
very low Q = small m ;
2 fit with signal not significantly better than with pure
background: no claim of signal in published paper!
This September: More data, reevaluateed background =
size of possible signal reduced by factor 5!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 14/59

CoGeNT: Results

Introduction to WIMPs p. 15/59

CoGeNT: Results

Introduction to WIMPs p. 15/59

CoGeNT: Modulation
After 15 months of data taken: Find 2.8 evidence for
annual modulation

Introduction to WIMPs p. 16/59

CoGeNT: Modulation
After 15 months of data taken: Find 2.8 evidence for
annual modulation
Much too large to be compatible with timeaveraged
signal, for standard halo

Introduction to WIMPs p. 16/59

CoGeNT: Modulation
After 15 months of data taken: Find 2.8 evidence for
annual modulation
Much too large to be compatible with timeaveraged
signal, for standard halo
No eventbyevent e/ rejection at these low energies

Introduction to WIMPs p. 16/59

CoGeNT: Summary
No signal claimed in timeaveraged analysis!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 17/59

CoGeNT: Summary
No signal claimed in timeaveraged analysis!
There is a large, poorly understood background

Introduction to WIMPs p. 17/59

CoGeNT: Summary
No signal claimed in timeaveraged analysis!
There is a large, poorly understood background
Modulation signal statistically very weak, and way too
large

Introduction to WIMPs p. 17/59

CRESST
Uses cryogenic CaWO4 crystals; detect scintillation light
and heat: Allows eventbyevent discrimination! See 67
events after cuts.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 18/59

CRESST
Uses cryogenic CaWO4 crystals; detect scintillation light
and heat: Allows eventbyevent discrimination! See 67
events after cuts.
Unfortunately, quite large backgrounds (rough estimates, not final fit):
e/ events: 8
background: 9.2
n background: 1.5 to 11.4

Pb recoil (from 210 Po decay): 17

Introduction to WIMPs p. 18/59

CRESST
Uses cryogenic CaWO4 crystals; detect scintillation light
and heat: Allows eventbyevent discrimination! See 67
events after cuts.
Unfortunately, quite large backgrounds (rough estimates, not final fit):
e/ events: 8
background: 9.2
n background: 1.5 to 11.4

Pb recoil (from 210 Po decay): 17

Much of fitted excess has essentially no light: only half a
signal

Introduction to WIMPs p. 18/59

CRESST
Uses cryogenic CaWO4 crystals; detect scintillation light
and heat: Allows eventbyevent discrimination! See 67
events after cuts.
Unfortunately, quite large backgrounds (rough estimates, not final fit):
e/ events: 8
background: 9.2
n background: 1.5 to 11.4

Pb recoil (from 210 Po decay): 17

Much of fitted excess has essentially no light: only half a
signal
No. of events is correlated with no. of signal events after
subtraction.
Introduction to WIMPs p. 18/59

CRESST: Results

Introduction to WIMPs p. 19/59

CRESST: Results

Introduction to WIMPs p. 19/59

CRESST: Results

What is negative light yield?

Introduction to WIMPs p. 19/59

events in signal region ( subtracted)

CRESST: Correlation
20
2

y = 0.44x + 2.1 ( = 7.3 / 6 d.o.f.)

Data
2
y = 7.2 ( = 11.4 / 7 d.o.f.)

15

10

10

15

events in reference region

20

Introduction to WIMPs p. 20/59

Exclusion Limits from Other Expts

Best limit for larger masses from Xenon100. Uses ionization
and scintillation. Very few events after cuts. Alas, not safe for
m 12 GeV: bound strongly depends on highv tail of f1 (v),
and on experimental energy resolution.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 21/59

Exclusion Limits from Other Expts

Best limit for larger masses from Xenon100. Uses ionization
and scintillation. Very few events after cuts. Alas, not safe for
m 12 GeV: bound strongly depends on highv tail of f1 (v),
and on experimental energy resolution.
Xenon10 more robust at small Q; excludes DAMA, CRESST,
original CoGeNT signal for usual WIMP

Introduction to WIMPs p. 21/59

Exclusion Limits from Other Expts

Best limit for larger masses from Xenon100. Uses ionization
and scintillation. Very few events after cuts. Alas, not safe for
m 12 GeV: bound strongly depends on highv tail of f1 (v),
and on experimental energy resolution.
Xenon10 more robust at small Q; excludes DAMA, CRESST,
original CoGeNT signal for usual WIMP
CDMS (+ EDELWEISS) second best for not too small m .
Uses phonons and ionization. Very few events after cuts. Not
safe below 12 GeV.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 21/59

Exclusion Limits from Other Expts

Best limit for larger masses from Xenon100. Uses ionization
and scintillation. Very few events after cuts. Alas, not safe for
m 12 GeV: bound strongly depends on highv tail of f1 (v),
and on experimental energy resolution.
Xenon10 more robust at small Q; excludes DAMA, CRESST,
original CoGeNT signal for usual WIMP
CDMS (+ EDELWEISS) second best for not too small m .
Uses phonons and ionization. Very few events after cuts. Not
safe below 12 GeV.
CDMS lowQ analysis uses phonons only; sizable number of
events. Excludes DAMA, original CoGeNT for usual WIMP.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 21/59

Exclusion Limits from Other Expts

Best limit for larger masses from Xenon100. Uses ionization
and scintillation. Very few events after cuts. Alas, not safe for
m 12 GeV: bound strongly depends on highv tail of f1 (v),
and on experimental energy resolution.
Xenon10 more robust at small Q; excludes DAMA, CRESST,
original CoGeNT signal for usual WIMP
CDMS (+ EDELWEISS) second best for not too small m .
Uses phonons and ionization. Very few events after cuts. Not
safe below 12 GeV.
CDMS lowQ analysis uses phonons only; sizable number of
events. Excludes DAMA, original CoGeNT for usual WIMP.
SIMPLE heated droplet detector: Challenges DAMA.
Introduction to WIMPs p. 21/59

Theory of WIMPNucleus Scattering

N
N
5 N
Leff = cN N
+ aN N
+ bN N
5

For scalar : i in 2nd term; 3rd term absent

For Majorana : 2nd term absent
1st , 2nd term give spinindependent (s.i.) interaction, 3rd
term gives spindependent (s.d.) interaction.
Usual WIMP: same s.i. scattering on p and n!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 22/59

Isospin violation in s.i. interaction?

s.i. s.i. true for Higgs exchange (in particular, in
p
n
(N)MSSM): massive quarks are same for p, n!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 23/59

Isospin violation in s.i. interaction?

s.i. s.i. true for Higgs exchange (in particular, in
p
n
(N)MSSM): massive quarks are same for p, n!

Not true for q, q (1) exchange: quark charges matter!

But: M(q q) has same sign for all quarks: no
cancellations = isospin violation in praxis not
important, since all nuclei have similar n/p ratio.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 23/59

Isospin violation in s.i. interaction?

s.i. s.i. true for Higgs exchange (in particular, in
p
n
(N)MSSM): massive quarks are same for p, n!

Not true for q, q (1) exchange: quark charges matter!

But: M(q q) has same sign for all quarks: no
cancellations = isospin violation in praxis not
important, since all nuclei have similar n/p ratio.
Gauge boson exchange can break isospin: coefficients
ap , an may differ in sign! M(q q) is now linear in
(new) quark charges.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 23/59

Large isospin violation in s.i. interaction?

|M(A A)|2 |Zap + (A Z)an |2
= need ap an < 0 for significant isospin violation:
arrange for cancellation in unwanted nuclei (e.g. Xe).

Introduction to WIMPs p. 24/59

Large isospin violation in s.i. interaction?

|M(A A)|2 |Zap + (A Z)an |2
= need ap an < 0 for significant isospin violation:
arrange for cancellation in unwanted nuclei (e.g. Xe).

Does not work for CDMS vs. CoGeNT: same target!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 24/59

Large isospin violation in s.i. interaction?

|M(A A)|2 |Zap + (A Z)an |2
= need ap an < 0 for significant isospin violation:
arrange for cancellation in unwanted nuclei (e.g. Xe).

Does not work for CDMS vs. CoGeNT: same target!

Increases required |ap | even more, to describe claimed
signals
= Need new light gauge bosons!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 24/59

Large isospin violation in s.i. interaction?

|M(A A)|2 |Zap + (A Z)an |2
= need ap an < 0 for significant isospin violation:
arrange for cancellation in unwanted nuclei (e.g. Xe).

Does not work for CDMS vs. CoGeNT: same target!

Increases required |ap | even more, to describe claimed
signals
= Need new light gauge bosons!
Combined analyses: (e.g. Kopp, Schwetz, Zupan, arXiv:1110.2721
[hep-ph]) Still cannot explain all data consistently!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 24/59

Weisskopfs (?) Theorem

A theory that explains all data must be wrong, since at any
given point some data are wrong.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 25/59

Weisskopfs (?) Theorem

A theory that explains all data must be wrong, since at any
given point some data are wrong.
Competition between null experiments with few
(background) events after cuts, and claimed signals with
large, not always well understood backgrounds!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 25/59

Asymmetric Dark Matter?

Cosmology: DM 5baryon : strange coincidence?

Introduction to WIMPs p. 26/59

Asymmetric Dark Matter?

Cosmology: DM 5baryon : strange coincidence?
baryon determined by baryonantibaryon asymmetry,
not by thermal decoupling of baryons: try same thing for
WIMPs?

Introduction to WIMPs p. 26/59

Asymmetric Dark Matter?

Cosmology: DM 5baryon : strange coincidence?
baryon determined by baryonantibaryon asymmetry,
not by thermal decoupling of baryons: try same thing for
WIMPs?

Most attractive: asymmetry related to baryon

asymmetry [O(50) papers]
= number density n np after annihilating away
symmetric component

Introduction to WIMPs p. 26/59

Asymmetric Dark Matter?

Cosmology: DM 5baryon : strange coincidence?
baryon determined by baryonantibaryon asymmetry,
not by thermal decoupling of baryons: try same thing for
WIMPs?

Most attractive: asymmetry related to baryon

asymmetry [O(50) papers]
= number density n np after annihilating away
symmetric component
Needs 2 to 3 times larger annihilation cross section
than for thermal WIMPs!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 26/59

Explaining DM/baryon
Follows if m 5mp !

Introduction to WIMPs p. 27/59

Explaining DM/baryon
Follows if m 5mp !
Alas: m has no known relation to mp . m 5mp just as
mysterious as DM 5baryon
= Havent explained anything!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 27/59

Explaining DM/baryon
Follows if m 5mp !
Alas: m has no known relation to mp . m 5mp just as
mysterious as DM 5baryon
= Havent explained anything!
Circular logic: ADM with m 5 GeV interesting
because there are signals for lowmass WIMPs;
lowmass WIMPs interesting because ADM explains
DM /baryon ??

Introduction to WIMPs p. 27/59

WIMPs and Colliders

1 Generalities: WIMP DM Production and Missing ET

Introduction to WIMPs p. 28/59

WIMPs and Colliders

1 Generalities: WIMP DM Production and Missing ET
2 Light Gauge Bosons

Introduction to WIMPs p. 28/59

WIMPs and Colliders

1 Generalities: WIMP DM Production and Missing ET
2 Light Gauge Bosons
3 SUSY DM and the LHC Inverse Problem

Introduction to WIMPs p. 28/59

WIMPs and Colliders

1 Generalities: WIMP DM Production and Missing ET
2 Light Gauge Bosons
3 SUSY DM and the LHC Inverse Problem
4 Higgs Searches and Direct DM Detection

Introduction to WIMPs p. 28/59

Cannot predict missing ET from production

Thermal WIMP: Only know total SM cross
section; contribution of specific final states
(e+ e , u
u + dd) not known

Introduction to WIMPs p. 29/59

Cannot predict missing ET from production

Thermal WIMP: Only know total SM cross
section; contribution of specific final states
(e+ e , u
u + dd) not known
h2 determined from ( SM) near threshold
(TF m /20 = s 4m2 ). At colliders need 3 body
final state to get signature (e.g. e+ e , q q g )
= typically need ( SM) at s 6 to 10m2 !

Introduction to WIMPs p. 29/59

Model-independent approach
Goodman et al., arXiv:1005.1286 and 1008.1783; Bai, Fox, Harnik, arXiv:1005.3797; Wang,
Li, Shao, Zhang, arXiv:1107.2048; Fox, Harnek, Kopp, Tsai, arXiv:1103.0240

Parameterize interaction with relevant SM fermion

through dim6 operator; e.g. for hadron colliders:
Leff = G

q q q

Introduction to WIMPs p. 30/59

Model-independent approach
Goodman et al., arXiv:1005.1286 and 1008.1783; Bai, Fox, Harnik, arXiv:1005.3797; Wang,
Li, Shao, Zhang, arXiv:1107.2048; Fox, Harnek, Kopp, Tsai, arXiv:1103.0240

Parameterize interaction with relevant SM fermion

through dim6 operator; e.g. for hadron colliders:
Leff = G

q q q
Majorana = {1, 5 , 5 }
q {1, 5 , , 5 }

If , q {1, 5 } : G = mq /(2M3 ) (chirality violating!), else

= 1/(2M2 ) Rajamaran, Shepherd, Tait, Wijango, arXiv:1108.1196.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 30/59

Model-independent approach
Goodman et al., arXiv:1005.1286 and 1008.1783; Bai, Fox, Harnik, arXiv:1005.3797; Wang,
Li, Shao, Zhang, arXiv:1107.2048; Fox, Harnek, Kopp, Tsai, arXiv:1103.0240

Parameterize interaction with relevant SM fermion

through dim6 operator; e.g. for hadron colliders:
Leff = G

q q q
Majorana = {1, 5 , 5 }
q {1, 5 , , 5 }

If , q {1, 5 } : G = mq /(2M3 ) (chirality violating!), else

= 1/(2M2 ) Rajamaran, Shepherd, Tait, Wijango, arXiv:1108.1196.
Compute monojet signal from q q g , compare with
monojet limits (current bound) and background (ultimate
reach)!
Introduction to WIMPs p. 30/59

 = 5 (corr. to spin-dep. interact.)

Introduction to WIMPs p. 31/59

 = 1 (corr. to spin-indep. interact.)

Introduction to WIMPs p. 32/59

Remarks
For = 1 (spin-indep. interact.): Current bound poor;
ultimate LHC reach interesting only for m 5 GeV.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 33/59

Remarks
For = 1 (spin-indep. interact.): Current bound poor;
ultimate LHC reach interesting only for m 5 GeV.
For = 5 (spin-dep. interact.): LHC bound better
than (comparable to) direct search limit for m () 20
GeV; future reach factor 103 better, if no other BSM
source of missing ET exists.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 33/59

Remarks
For = 1 (spin-indep. interact.): Current bound poor;
ultimate LHC reach interesting only for m 5 GeV.
For = 5 (spin-dep. interact.): LHC bound better
than (comparable to) direct search limit for m () 20
GeV; future reach factor 103 better, if no other BSM
source of missing ET exists.
= 5 similar to first case; cannot be probed in direct
WIMP detection (rate v2 )

Introduction to WIMPs p. 33/59

Remarks
For = 1 (spin-indep. interact.): Current bound poor;
ultimate LHC reach interesting only for m 5 GeV.
For = 5 (spin-dep. interact.): LHC bound better
than (comparable to) direct search limit for m () 20
GeV; future reach factor 103 better, if no other BSM
source of missing ET exists.
= 5 similar to first case; cannot be probed in direct
WIMP detection (rate v2 )

Bound does not hold if mass of mediator particle

max(m , E
/ T )!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 33/59

Remarks
For = 1 (spin-indep. interact.): Current bound poor;
ultimate LHC reach interesting only for m 5 GeV.
For = 5 (spin-dep. interact.): LHC bound better
than (comparable to) direct search limit for m () 20
GeV; future reach factor 103 better, if no other BSM
source of missing ET exists.
= 5 similar to first case; cannot be probed in direct
WIMP detection (rate v2 )

Bound does not hold if mass of mediator particle

max(m , E
/ T )!
Altogether: very limited usefulness for most actual WIMP
models.
Introduction to WIMPs p. 33/59

2 DM and Light (Gauge) Bosons

(At least) 3 kinds of WIMP models require light (m few
GeV) (gauge) bosons U :
MeV DM: Suggested as explanation of 511 keV line
(= slow e+ ) excess from central region of our galaxy
(Boehm et al., astro-ph/0309686). Should have m 10 MeV (
constraints)
= m mU 200 MeV to mediate e+ e ; fixes
gU gU e+ e /m2U ! (Unless 2m mU .)

Introduction to WIMPs p. 34/59

2 DM and Light (Gauge) Bosons

(At least) 3 kinds of WIMP models require light (m few
GeV) (gauge) bosons U :
MeV DM: Suggested as explanation of 511 keV line
(= slow e+ ) excess from central region of our galaxy
(Boehm et al., astro-ph/0309686). Should have m 10 MeV (
constraints)
= m mU 200 MeV to mediate e+ e ; fixes
gU gU e+ e /m2U ! (Unless 2m mU .)
PAMELA/FermiLAT inspired TeV DM: Needs light
boson for Sommerfeld enhancement (e.g. Arkani-Hamed et al.,
arXiv:0810.0713(4)) ( U U 4l is also somewhat less
constrained by spectrum than 2l.)
Introduction to WIMPs p. 34/59

DAMA/CoGeNT inspired few GeV DM: Needs light

mediator to achieve sufficiently large p . (2 different
mediators for isospin violation to evade bounds:

Cline, Frey,

arXiv:1108.1391)

Introduction to WIMPs p. 35/59

Light Gauge Bosons (contd)

In all cases: U couplings to (most) SM particles must be
1 to evade bounds! (g 2, meson decays, cross
sections, APV, . . . ).

Introduction to WIMPs p. 36/59

Light Gauge Bosons (contd)

In all cases: U couplings to (most) SM particles must be
1 to evade bounds! (g 2, meson decays, cross
sections, APV, . . . ).
Possible explanation: kinetic mixing with /B boson! Is
1-loop effect = squared U f f coupling is O(3 ).

Introduction to WIMPs p. 36/59

Light Gauge Bosons (contd)

In all cases: U couplings to (most) SM particles must be
1 to evade bounds! (g 2, meson decays, cross
sections, APV, . . . ).
Possible explanation: kinetic mixing with /B boson! Is
1-loop effect = squared U f f coupling is O(3 ).
U coupling may well be large.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 36/59

Signatures of light gauge bosons

If mU > 2m : U dominant! Is invisible = need extra
tag, e.g. e+ e U + nothing.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 37/59

Signatures of light gauge bosons

If mU > 2m : U dominant! Is invisible = need extra
tag, e.g. e+ e U + nothing.
Physics background s = lower energy is better!
Borodatchenkova, Choudhury, MD, hep-ph/0510147

Introduction to WIMPs p. 37/59

Signatures of light gauge bosons

If mU > 2m : U dominant! Is invisible = need extra
tag, e.g. e+ e U + nothing.
Physics background s = lower energy is better!
Borodatchenkova, Choudhury, MD, hep-ph/0510147

Instrumental backgrounds (not from e+ e annihilation)

seem large

Introduction to WIMPs p. 37/59

Sensitivity at Bfactories (100 fb 1)

1

0.01

g g e

m > MU/2
0.0001

max. sensitivity
+ (e e channel)

upper bound
from ge-2

max. sensitivity
(invisible channel)

1e-06
m < MU/2
1e-08

0.001

0.01

0.1

MU [GeV]

Red, black: Regions allowed by , ( e+ e ).

Introduction to WIMPs p. 38/59

Signatures of light gauge bosons (cont.d)

If mU < 2m : U +

Introduction to WIMPs p. 39/59

Signatures of light gauge bosons (cont.d)

If mU < 2m : U +
Sufficiently light U can even be produced in fixedtarget
experiments: e N e e+ e N (tridents), with peak in
Me+ e

Introduction to WIMPs p. 39/59

Signatures of light gauge bosons (cont.d)

If mU < 2m : U +
Sufficiently light U can even be produced in fixedtarget
experiments: e N e e+ e N (tridents), with peak in
Me+ e
First exptl. results from MAMI A1 arXiv:1101.4091 and JLAB
APEX arXiv:1108.2750 Excludes new mass ranges around 200
to 300 MeV for A U kinetically mixed with photon.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 39/59

Signatures of light gauge bosons (cont.d)

If mU < 2m : U +
Sufficiently light U can even be produced in fixedtarget
experiments: e N e e+ e N (tridents), with peak in
Me+ e
First exptl. results from MAMI A1 arXiv:1101.4091 and JLAB
APEX arXiv:1108.2750 Excludes new mass ranges around 200
to 300 MeV for A U kinetically mixed with photon.
Also, KLOE-2 performed search, mostly for U : no
signal. arXiv:1107.2531

Introduction to WIMPs p. 39/59

A1 and APEX results

Introduction to WIMPs p. 40/59

3 SUSY DM and LHC Inverse Problem

Saw above: WIMP searches at colliders not promising, if
WIMP is only accessible new particle. Fortunately, in many
cases the WIMP is the lightest of many new particles! True
in SUSY. (Also in Little Higgs.)

Introduction to WIMPs p. 41/59

3 SUSY DM and LHC Inverse Problem

Saw above: WIMP searches at colliders not promising, if
WIMP is only accessible new particle. Fortunately, in many
cases the WIMP is the lightest of many new particles! True
in SUSY. (Also in Little Higgs.)
Recall: Primary motivation for SUSY not related to DM!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 41/59

3 SUSY DM and LHC Inverse Problem

Saw above: WIMP searches at colliders not promising, if
WIMP is only accessible new particle. Fortunately, in many
cases the WIMP is the lightest of many new particles! True
in SUSY. (Also in Little Higgs.)
Recall: Primary motivation for SUSY not related to DM!
2
Stabilizes hierarchy m2Higgs MPlanck

Introduction to WIMPs p. 41/59

3 SUSY DM and LHC Inverse Problem

Saw above: WIMP searches at colliders not promising, if
WIMP is only accessible new particle. Fortunately, in many
cases the WIMP is the lightest of many new particles! True
in SUSY. (Also in Little Higgs.)
Recall: Primary motivation for SUSY not related to DM!
2
Stabilizes hierarchy m2Higgs MPlanck

Allows unification of gauge couplings

Introduction to WIMPs p. 41/59

3 SUSY DM and LHC Inverse Problem

Saw above: WIMP searches at colliders not promising, if
WIMP is only accessible new particle. Fortunately, in many
cases the WIMP is the lightest of many new particles! True
in SUSY. (Also in Little Higgs.)
Recall: Primary motivation for SUSY not related to DM!
2
Stabilizes hierarchy m2Higgs MPlanck

Allows unification of gauge couplings

In scenarios with unified Higgs masses: EWSB requires
sizable hierarchy! (Not in NUHM2.)

Introduction to WIMPs p. 41/59

3 SUSY DM and LHC Inverse Problem

Saw above: WIMP searches at colliders not promising, if
WIMP is only accessible new particle. Fortunately, in many
cases the WIMP is the lightest of many new particles! True
in SUSY. (Also in Little Higgs.)
Recall: Primary motivation for SUSY not related to DM!
2
Stabilizes hierarchy m2Higgs MPlanck

Allows unification of gauge couplings

In scenarios with unified Higgs masses: EWSB requires
sizable hierarchy! (Not in NUHM2.)
HLS theorem, relation to superstrings: dont single out weak
scale.
Introduction to WIMPs p. 41/59

Features of SUSY
Need superpartner for each SM particle: Same rep. of gauge
group, spin differs by 1/2

Introduction to WIMPs p. 42/59

Features of SUSY
Need superpartner for each SM particle: Same rep. of gauge
group, spin differs by 1/2
Need at least 2 Higgs doublets (anomalies, mt mb 6= 0)

Introduction to WIMPs p. 42/59

Features of SUSY
Need superpartner for each SM particle: Same rep. of gauge
group, spin differs by 1/2
Need at least 2 Higgs doublets (anomalies, mt mb 6= 0)
SUSY implies equal masses for partners = SUSY must be
broken

Introduction to WIMPs p. 42/59

Features of SUSY
Need superpartner for each SM particle: Same rep. of gauge
group, spin differs by 1/2
Need at least 2 Higgs doublets (anomalies, mt mb 6= 0)
SUSY implies equal masses for partners = SUSY must be
broken
Naturalness: sparticle masses should be at weak scale (strictly
true only for 3rd generation, elw gauginos)

Introduction to WIMPs p. 42/59

Features of SUSY
Need superpartner for each SM particle: Same rep. of gauge
group, spin differs by 1/2
Need at least 2 Higgs doublets (anomalies, mt mb 6= 0)
SUSY implies equal masses for partners = SUSY must be
broken
Naturalness: sparticle masses should be at weak scale (strictly
true only for 3rd generation, elw gauginos)
In simplest, Rparity invariant scenario: lightest superparticle
LSP is stable: satisfies one condition for DM candidate!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 42/59

SUSY DM candidate: sneutrino

Disfavored theoretically: not LSP in constrained models

Introduction to WIMPs p. 43/59

SUSY DM candidate: sneutrino

Disfavored theoretically: not LSP in constrained models
Excluded experimentally by direct searches

Introduction to WIMPs p. 43/59

SUSY DM candidate: sneutrino

Disfavored theoretically: not LSP in constrained models
Excluded experimentally by direct searches
R can be candidate in extended theories, e.g. with
gauged U (1)BL at TeV scale

Introduction to WIMPs p. 43/59

SUSY DM candidate: neutralino 01

0
0 , h
W
f3 , h
Mixture of B,
u
d

Introduction to WIMPs p. 44/59

SUSY DM candidate: neutralino 01

0
0 , h
W
f3 , h
Mixture of B,
u
d

In constrained models: often is lightest sparticle in

visible sector! (Other possibility: lightest stau 1 )

Introduction to WIMPs p. 44/59

SUSY DM candidate: neutralino 01

0
0 , h
W
f3 , h
Mixture of B,
u
d

In constrained models: often is lightest sparticle in

visible sector! (Other possibility: lightest stau 1 )
In most of parameter space: 0 B , and predicted
1

01 h2 too large! O(1 to 10) rather than O(0.1) in

standard cosmology,

Introduction to WIMPs p. 44/59

SUSY DM candidate: neutralino 01

0
0 , h
W
f3 , h
Mixture of B,
u
d

In constrained models: often is lightest sparticle in

visible sector! (Other possibility: lightest stau 1 )
In most of parameter space: 0 B , and predicted
1

01 h2 too large! O(1 to 10) rather than O(0.1) in

standard cosmology,

but DMallowed regions of parameter space do exist

even in constrained models!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 44/59

Regions with correct 01 h2

Coannihilation region: m01 m1

Introduction to WIMPs p. 45/59

Regions with correct 01 h2

Coannihilation region: m01 m1
Higgs funnel(s): m01 mh /2, mA /2

Introduction to WIMPs p. 45/59

Regions with correct 01 h2

Coannihilation region: m01 m1
Higgs funnel(s): m01 mh /2, mA /2
Welltempered neutralino: M1 MZ = 01 is
0 mixture. (Requires mq mg in cMSSM; can be
h
B
arranged anywhere in NUHM.)

Introduction to WIMPs p. 45/59

Regions with correct 01 h2

Coannihilation region: m01 m1
Higgs funnel(s): m01 mh /2, mA /2
Welltempered neutralino: M1 MZ = 01 is
0 mixture. (Requires mq mg in cMSSM; can be
h
B
arranged anywhere in NUHM.)
Note: DMallowed region of (m0 , m1/2 ) plane of cMSSM
depends on A0 , tan !

Introduction to WIMPs p. 45/59

Impact of LHC searches

Is model dependent: Only probe g, q sector so far! Here:
Assume cMSSM for defineteness.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 46/59

Impact of LHC searches

Is model dependent: Only probe g, q sector so far! Here:
Assume cMSSM for defineteness.
Welltempered neutralino, Apole need large mq: limits
still fairly weak: mg,min increased from 400 GeV to
550 GeV

Introduction to WIMPs p. 46/59

Impact of LHC searches

Is model dependent: Only probe g, q sector so far! Here:
Assume cMSSM for defineteness.
Welltempered neutralino, Apole need large mq: limits
still fairly weak: mg,min increased from 400 GeV to
550 GeV
1 coannihilation requires mq mg: good for LHC
searches; still plenty of allowed region left.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 46/59

Impact of Indirect DM Searches

No halo signal in coannihilation region; from Sun
small

Introduction to WIMPs p. 47/59

Impact of Indirect DM Searches

No halo signal in coannihilation region; from Sun
small
Signals very small in Afunnel

Introduction to WIMPs p. 47/59

Impact of Indirect DM Searches

No halo signal in coannihilation region; from Sun
small
Signals very small in Afunnel
Well-tempered neutralino most promising, especially
from Sun, but present limits not constraining

Introduction to WIMPs p. 47/59

Impact of direct WIMP Searches

XENON, CDMSEDELWEISS begin to probe
welltempered neutralino

Introduction to WIMPs p. 48/59

Impact of direct WIMP Searches

XENON, CDMSEDELWEISS begin to probe
welltempered neutralino
Signals in other regions very small

Introduction to WIMPs p. 48/59

Impact of Future WIMP Discovery at Collider

Generically: could determine:
WIMP mass: Very useful for indirect searches (greatly
reduced look elsewhere problem); less so for direct
searches, once m mN

Introduction to WIMPs p. 49/59

Impact of Future WIMP Discovery at Collider

Generically: could determine:
WIMP mass: Very useful for indirect searches (greatly
reduced look elsewhere problem); less so for direct
searches, once m mN
WIMP couplings: Determine cross sections and final
states in indirect searches; determine cross sections in
direct searches

Introduction to WIMPs p. 49/59

Impact of Future WIMP Discovery at Collider

Generically: could determine:
WIMP mass: Very useful for indirect searches (greatly
reduced look elsewhere problem); less so for direct
searches, once m mN
WIMP couplings: Determine cross sections and final
states in indirect searches; determine cross sections in
direct searches
Most interesting to me: Predict h2 , compare with
observation: Constrain very early universe!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 49/59

Fitting SUSY parameters at LHC (inverse problem)

Feasibility (resulting errors) very strongly depend on where
we are in parameter space!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 50/59

Fitting SUSY parameters at LHC (inverse problem)

Feasibility (resulting errors) very strongly depend on where
we are in parameter space!
Good: Low sparticle masses, many leptons e, in final
states.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 50/59

Fitting SUSY parameters at LHC (inverse problem)

Feasibility (resulting errors) very strongly depend on where
we are in parameter space!
Good: Low sparticle masses, many leptons e, in final
states.
Not so good: Large masses, mostly hadronic final
states.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 50/59

Fitting SUSY parameters at LHC (inverse problem)

Feasibility (resulting errors) very strongly depend on where
we are in parameter space!
Good: Low sparticle masses, many leptons e, in final
states.
Not so good: Large masses, mostly hadronic final
states.
Two approaches: Case studies, broad scans of parameter
space

Introduction to WIMPs p. 50/59

Case study: 1 coannihilation region in cMSSM

Arnowitt et al., arXiv:0802.2968

Needs m1 m01 15 GeV

= 02 1 ,
1 have nearly unit branching
1
ratio
= no dilepton edges!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 51/59

Case study: 1 coannihilation region in cMSSM

Arnowitt et al., arXiv:0802.2968

Needs m1 m01 15 GeV

= 02 1 ,
1 have nearly unit branching
1
ratio
= no dilepton edges!
1 01 gives rather soft : Difficult to detect!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 51/59

Case study: 1 coannihilation region in cMSSM

Arnowitt et al., arXiv:0802.2968

Needs m1 m01 15 GeV

= 02 1 ,
1 have nearly unit branching
1
ratio
= no dilepton edges!
1 01 gives rather soft : Difficult to detect!

Study three classes of final states:

(i) 2 + 2j + E
/T
(ii)4 non b j + E
/T
(iii) leading b + 3j + E
/T

Introduction to WIMPs p. 51/59

Case study: 1 coannihilation region in cMSSM

Arnowitt et al., arXiv:0802.2968

Needs m1 m01 15 GeV

= 02 1 ,
1 have nearly unit branching
1
ratio
= no dilepton edges!
1 01 gives rather soft : Difficult to detect!

Study three classes of final states:

(i) 2 + 2j + E
/T
(ii)4 non b j + E
/T
(iii) leading b + 3j + E
/T
Fit many kinematical distributions simultaneously,
including slope of softer pT spectrum in sample (i) =
predict 01 h2 to 10%!
Introduction to WIMPs p. 51/59

Result of fit

0.12

~ 0h

0.11
0.1
0.09
0.08
8

10

11

M (GeV)

12

13

Introduction to WIMPs p. 52/59

Result of fit

0.12

~ 0h

0.11
0.1
0.09
0.08
8

10

11

M (GeV)

12

13

Unfortunately, chosen benchmark point (mg = 830 GeV,

mq 750 GeV) is most likely excluded!
Introduction to WIMPs p. 52/59

Scan of Parameter Space

Arkani-Hamed et al., hep-ph/0512190

15 parameter description of weakscale MSSM

Introduction to WIMPs p. 53/59

Scan of Parameter Space

Arkani-Hamed et al., hep-ph/0512190

15 parameter description of weakscale MSSM

Fix mA = 850 GeV, A3 = 800 GeV

Introduction to WIMPs p. 53/59

Scan of Parameter Space

Arkani-Hamed et al., hep-ph/0512190

15 parameter description of weakscale MSSM

Fix mA = 850 GeV, A3 = 800 GeV
Randomly choose mq,g [600, 1000] GeV,
other masses [100, 1000] GeV, tan [2, 50]

Introduction to WIMPs p. 53/59

Scan of Parameter Space

Arkani-Hamed et al., hep-ph/0512190

15 parameter description of weakscale MSSM

Fix mA = 850 GeV, A3 = 800 GeV
Randomly choose mq,g [600, 1000] GeV,
other masses [100, 1000] GeV, tan [2, 50]
Consider 1808 observables, both counting rates and binned
distributions

Introduction to WIMPs p. 53/59

Scan of Parameter Space

Arkani-Hamed et al., hep-ph/0512190

15 parameter description of weakscale MSSM

Fix mA = 850 GeV, A3 = 800 GeV
Randomly choose mq,g [600, 1000] GeV,
other masses [100, 1000] GeV, tan [2, 50]
Consider 1808 observables, both counting rates and binned
distributions
Introduce 2 like variable
2
nsig  A
B
X
si si
1
2
(SAB ) =
AB
nsig

i
i=1

Only significant signatures included

Introduction to WIMPs p. 53/59

Scan of Parameter Space

Arkani-Hamed et al., hep-ph/0512190

15 parameter description of weakscale MSSM

Fix mA = 850 GeV, A3 = 800 GeV
Randomly choose mq,g [600, 1000] GeV,
other masses [100, 1000] GeV, tan [2, 50]
Consider 1808 observables, both counting rates and binned
distributions
Introduce 2 like variable
2
nsig  A
B
X
si si
1
2
(SAB ) =
AB
nsig

i
i=1

Only significant signatures included

Allow 1% syst. error (15% on total signal rate), 10 fb1 of
14 TeV data, no background
Introduction to WIMPs p. 53/59

Scan of Parameter Space

Arkani-Hamed et al., hep-ph/0512190

15 parameter description of weakscale MSSM

Fix mA = 850 GeV, A3 = 800 GeV
Randomly choose mq,g [600, 1000] GeV,
other masses [100, 1000] GeV, tan [2, 50]
Consider 1808 observables, both counting rates and binned
distributions
Introduce 2 like variable
2
nsig  A
B
X
si si
1
2
(SAB ) =
AB
nsig

i
i=1

Only significant signatures included

Allow 1% syst. error (15% on total signal rate), 10 fb1 of
14 TeV data, no background
MC: (SAB )2 > 0.285 = models differ at > 95% c.l.
Introduction to WIMPs p. 53/59

Results and Remarks

Found 283 degenerate pairs, with (SAB )2 < 0.285, for
43,026 models (i.e., sets of parameters)

Introduction to WIMPs p. 54/59

Results and Remarks

Found 283 degenerate pairs, with (SAB )2 < 0.285, for
43,026 models (i.e., sets of parameters)
Note
Their observables are correlated
= (SAB )2 is no true 2
= need MC to intepret it, from comparing runs with
different random no. seed: is this reliable estimator for
comparing different parameter sets?

Introduction to WIMPs p. 54/59

Results and Remarks

Found 283 degenerate pairs, with (SAB )2 < 0.285, for
43,026 models (i.e., sets of parameters)
Note
Their observables are correlated
= (SAB )2 is no true 2
= need MC to intepret it, from comparing runs with
different random no. seed: is this reliable estimator for
comparing different parameter sets?
Statistics looks weird! Comparing two simulations of
same model, get 611 (out of 2600) cases where some
2 observable has > 5 discrepancy: way too many!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 54/59

Simpler approach
Bornhauser and MD, in progress

Define 12 disjunct event classes, depending on no.,

charge, flavor of leptons

Introduction to WIMPs p. 55/59

Simpler approach
Bornhauser and MD, in progress

Define 12 disjunct event classes, depending on no.,

charge, flavor of leptons
Consider 7 mostly uncorrelated observables for each
class: No. of events; hn i; hnb i; hnj i; hn2j i; hHT i

Introduction to WIMPs p. 55/59

Simpler approach
Bornhauser and MD, in progress

Define 12 disjunct event classes, depending on no.,

charge, flavor of leptons
Consider 7 mostly uncorrelated observables for each
class: No. of events; hn i; hnb i; hnj i; hn2j i; hHT i
Define proper 2 , incl. corr. between hnj i, hn2j i, only
including significant observables: test with MC.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 55/59

Results of simpler approach

W/o syst. error: only one of 283 degenerate pairs has
p > 0.05, and two parameter sets really are very similar!
(Except for heavy sleptons.)

Introduction to WIMPs p. 56/59

Results of simpler approach

W/o syst. error: only one of 283 degenerate pairs has
p > 0.05, and two parameter sets really are very similar!
(Except for heavy sleptons.)
Introducing syst. errors as Arkani-Hamed et al.: 41 out
of 283 pairs have p > 0.05; still are pretty similar
physically

Introduction to WIMPs p. 56/59

Results of simpler approach

W/o syst. error: only one of 283 degenerate pairs has
p > 0.05, and two parameter sets really are very similar!
(Except for heavy sleptons.)
Introducing syst. errors as Arkani-Hamed et al.: 41 out
of 283 pairs have p > 0.05; still are pretty similar
physically
Introducing SM background, but no syst. error: 12 pairs
have p > 0.05

Introduction to WIMPs p. 56/59

Results of simpler approach

W/o syst. error: only one of 283 degenerate pairs has
p > 0.05, and two parameter sets really are very similar!
(Except for heavy sleptons.)
Introducing syst. errors as Arkani-Hamed et al.: 41 out
of 283 pairs have p > 0.05; still are pretty similar
physically
Introducing SM background, but no syst. error: 12 pairs
have p > 0.05
With systematic errors and background: 71 pairs have
p > 0.05.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 56/59

4 Impact of Higgs Searches

In many WIMP models, Higgs exch. dominates p
scattering, in which case p 1/m4H : crucial to know
Higgs mass!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 57/59

4 Impact of Higgs Searches

In many WIMP models, Higgs exch. dominates p
scattering, in which case p 1/m4H : crucial to know
Higgs mass!
In SUSY at large tan : 01 p tan2 /m4A : need info on
heavy Higgses!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 57/59

4 Impact of Higgs Searches

In many WIMP models, Higgs exch. dominates p
scattering, in which case p 1/m4H : crucial to know
Higgs mass!
In SUSY at large tan : 01 p tan2 /m4A : need info on
heavy Higgses!
TeVatron and CMS searches for H, A +
significantly increase lower bound on DMallowed m01
in general MSSM (Aborno Vasquez, Belanger, Boehm, arXiv:1108.1338);
exclude scenarios with very large 01 p .

Introduction to WIMPs p. 57/59

4 Impact of Higgs Searches

In many WIMP models, Higgs exch. dominates p
scattering, in which case p 1/m4H : crucial to know
Higgs mass!
In SUSY at large tan : 01 p tan2 /m4A : need info on
heavy Higgses!
TeVatron and CMS searches for H, A +
significantly increase lower bound on DMallowed m01
in general MSSM (Aborno Vasquez, Belanger, Boehm, arXiv:1108.1338);
exclude scenarios with very large 01 p .
Higgs searches can also be used to distinguish
between WIMP models and to help determine
parameters. E.g. mh in MSSM constrains stop sector.
Introduction to WIMPs p. 57/59

Summary 1
Rumours of the direct detection of WIMPs are greatly
exaggerated

Introduction to WIMPs p. 58/59

Summary 1
Rumours of the direct detection of WIMPs are greatly
exaggerated
Asymmetric Dark Matter doesnt explain
DM 5baryon

Introduction to WIMPs p. 58/59

Summary 2
Wellmotivated WIMP models can be tested at
colliders!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 59/59

Summary 2
Wellmotivated WIMP models can be tested at
colliders!
Scenarios with new light gauge bosons with
suppressed couplings to SM fermions are now being
probed at lowE colliders, fixedtarget expts.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 59/59

Summary 2
Wellmotivated WIMP models can be tested at
colliders!
Scenarios with new light gauge bosons with
suppressed couplings to SM fermions are now being
probed at lowE colliders, fixedtarget expts.
LHC not very good for modelindependent WIMP
search. (Signal is O(2 S ), background is O(S ).)

Introduction to WIMPs p. 59/59

Summary 2
Wellmotivated WIMP models can be tested at
colliders!
Scenarios with new light gauge bosons with
suppressed couplings to SM fermions are now being
probed at lowE colliders, fixedtarget expts.
LHC not very good for modelindependent WIMP
search. (Signal is O(2 S ), background is O(S ).)
If WIMP signal is found at LHC, LHC experiments will
be better at extracting parameters than indicated by
theory analyses that have been published so far; many
avenues remain to be explored.

Introduction to WIMPs p. 59/59

Summary 2
Wellmotivated WIMP models can be tested at
colliders!
Scenarios with new light gauge bosons with
suppressed couplings to SM fermions are now being
probed at lowE colliders, fixedtarget expts.
LHC not very good for modelindependent WIMP
search. (Signal is O(2 S ), background is O(S ).)
If WIMP signal is found at LHC, LHC experiments will
be better at extracting parameters than indicated by
theory analyses that have been published so far; many
avenues remain to be explored.
Higgs sector also very important for WIMP physics!

Introduction to WIMPs p. 59/59