Dark Matter in a twisted bottle!

Giacomo Cacciapaglia
IPN Lyon (France)

With: A.Arbey, A.Deandrea, B.Kubik, J.Llodra-Perez, L.Panizzi

University of the Witwatersrand Johannesburg, 12-11-2013

Why do we need BSM?

The Higgs boson has been discovered. The Standard Model is now complete!

Ian MacNicol / AFP - Getty Images

The discovery of the Higgs boson has brought the Naturalness problem to reality! New Physics at the TeV scale needed more than before! There are other unresolved puzzles: what is Dark Matter made of?
2

Dark Matter evidences:

Cosmic Microwave Background:

Observations both in Astrophysics and Cosmology suggest the presence of Dark Matter, not explained in the Standard Model!
Astrophysical measurements: WMAP science team

The Universe contains 4.6% of baryons, and 23.3% of unknown matter. The at rotation curves of spiral galaxies can be explained by the presence of extra non-luminous matter.
3

WIMP paradigm
A stable neutral particle:

Extra dimensions?

A
A A

Forbidden by symmetry!

Thermally produced in the early universe:

A A
Gravity!

Left as a relic when the annihilations become ineffective!

A A

A A A

A A A

A A A A

CfA survey

A closer look to Extra Dimensions

Action for a massless scalar in D-dimensions

S=

Expansion in 4-dim elds on compact extra space:

(x , xj ) =

D 4 dD x j j
j =5

d4 p ip x e 4 (2 )

k (p )fk (xj )

D-dim elds correspond to tower of massive 4-dim elds

A closer look to Extra Dimensions

Action for a massless scalar in D-dimensions

S=

1.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 0

Expansion in 4-dim elds on compact extra space:

R6 x5 2 R5 0

2 x6

(x , xj ) =

D 4 dD x j j The extra space is

like a vibrating membrane, d4 p a drum!
ip x e (2 )4 k j =5

k (p )fk (xj )

D-dim elds correspond to tower of massive 4-dim elds

A closer look to Extra Dimensions

Action for a massless scalar in D-dimensions

S=
1.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 0

1.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 0

Expansion in 4-dim elds on compact extra space:

R6 x5 2 R5 0

2 x6

(x , xj ) =
x5 2 R5

D 4 dD x j j Transferring

d4 p ip x e 4 (2 )
2 x6 R6

energy can excite a vibration.

j =5

k (p )fk (xj )

D-dim elds correspond to tower of massive 4-dim elds ks are like frequencies of vibrating membrane!

A closer look to Extra Dimensions

Action for a massless scalar in D-dimensions

S=
1.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 0

1.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 0

R Expansion in 4-dim elds 2 x on compact extra space:

6 5

2 x6

(x , xj ) =
x5 2 R5

D 4 dD x Increasing j j energy:
0

j =5 more massive mode!

R5

d p ip x e 4 (2 )
2 x6 R6

E = mc2 ! k (p )fk (xj )

D-dim elds correspond to tower of massive 4-dim elds ks are like frequencies of vibrating membrane!
(xi ) ! Masses and interactions determined by the wave functions f k

A closer look to Extra Dimensions

Action for a massless scalar in D-dimensions

S=
1.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 0

1.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 0

Expansion in 4-dim elds R 2 on compact extra space: x

6 5

2 x6

(x , xj ) =
x5 2 R5

D 4 dD x j j Symmetries

j =5

R5

d4 p ip x e 4 (2 )
2 x6 R6

= geometry of the membrane!

k

k (p )fk (xj )

D-dim elds correspond to tower of massive 4-dim elds ks are like frequencies of vibrating membrane!
(xi ) ! Masses and interactions determined by the wave functions f k

Symmetries of the compact space = global symmetries of 4-dim elds: transformation properties of the wave functions! Can such symmetry stabilise the Dark Matter?
9

Stability of the Dark Matter requires a symmetry!

Can it arise ``naturally from extra dimensions? Symmetries of the compact space ARE parities for the Kaluza-Klein modes! The physics is in the wave functions: for instance
! R/2

Orbifold

S /Z2

x5 R x5
0 !R

x5 cos k R

x5 (1) cos k . R
k

However, xed points (in red) are NOT invariant!

10

Stability of the Dark Matter requires a symmetry!

Can it arise ``naturally from extra dimensions? Symmetries of the compact space ARE parities for the Kaluza-Klein modes! The physics is in the wave functions: for instance
! R/2

Orbifold

S /Z2

x5 R x5
0 !R

x5 cos k R

x5 (1) cos k . R
k

However, xed points (in red) are NOT invariant!

KK-parity is ad-hoc symmetry! 11

Stability of the Dark Matter requires a symmetry!

Can it arise ``naturally from extra dimensions? Symmetries of the compact space ARE parities for the Kaluza-Klein modes! In Gauge-Higgs Unication models, or models of avour, fermion is essential! The physics is in the wavelocalisation functions: for instance
eL

! R/2
Higgs

eR

Orbifold S 1 /Z2 Bulk fermion masses break the KK parity!

x5 R x5

0
0 2R

!R
R

Already pointed out by x5 x5 k Barbieri, Creminelli, cos k Contino, (1)Rattazzi, cos Scrucca k . R hep-th/0203039 R

However, xed points (in red) are NOT invariant!

KK-parity is ad-hoc symmetry! 12 KK-parity absent in interesting models!

Do orbifolds exist without xed points and with chiral fermions?

G.C., A.Deandrea, J.Llodra-Perez 0907.4993

There is none in 5D... In 6D there are 17 orbifolds (characterised by the discrete symmetry groups of the at plane)... only ONE has chirality and no xed points/lines! Unique candidate!

Requiring an exact parity and chirality is rather restrictive!

13

The at real projective plane

pgg = r, g |r2 = (g 2 r)2 = 1
G.C., A.Deandrea, J.Llodra-Perez 0907.4993

r:

x5 x5 x6 x6

g:

x5 x5 + R5 x6 x6 + R6

Translations dened as:

Two singular points:

t5 t6

= g2 = (gr)
2

(0, 0) ( , )

(0, ) ( , 0)

2 R6

KK parity is an exact symmetry of the space!

Spectrum and interactions determined by these symmetries! 14

R6
!

R5

2 R5

The at real projective plane

pgg = r, g |r2 = (g 2 r)2 = 1
r :
G.C., B.Kubik 1209.6556

Fundamental domain invariant under:

2 R6

x5 x5 + R5 x6 x6 + R6

Can be redened as a translation, which commutes with orbifold symmetries:

R6
!

pKK = r r :

R5 2 R5

x5 x5 + R5 x6 x6 + R6

Modes (k, l) : pKK = (1)k+l

This is an exact symmetry!

15

The at real projective plane

pgg = r, g |r2 = (g 2 r)2 = 1
G.C., B.Kubik 1209.6556

Fundamental domain invariant under:

2 R6

m4 :

x5 x5 + R5 x6 x6

Can be redened as a translation, which commutes with orbifold symmetries:

R6

m4 g r :

R5 2 R5

x5 x5 x6 x6 + R6

Modes (k, l) : pKK = (1)l

This symmetry is respected by bulk interactions! Violated by localised interactions!

16

The at real projective plane

pgg = r, g |r2 = (g 2 r)2 = 1
G.C., B.Kubik 1209.6556

Case of symmetric radii:

Fundamental domain invariant under:
2 R

md :

x5 x6 x6 x5

However, it is not a good symmetry, because it does NOT commute with the glide:

md g md = g r :
2 R

x5 x5 + R5 x6 x6 + R6

It does not respect orbifold projections: e.g., a (-+) eld mapped into a (--) eld!

17

Spectrum of the SM
+
pKK = (1)
k+l

(1,0) & (0,1) m=1

+
(1,1) m = 1.41

(0,0) m=0

(2,0) & (0,2) (2,1) & (1,2) m=2 m = 2.24

Gauge bosons G, A, Z, W Gauge scalars G, A, Z, W Higgs boson(s) Fermions

! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! (x2)

! !

! !

! ! (x2)

DM candidate here!
18

Spectrum of the SM
+
pKK = (1)
k+l

(1,0) & (0,1) m=1

+
(1,1) m = 1.41

(0,0) m=0

(2,0) & (0,2) (2,1) & (1,2) m=2 m = 2.24

Gauge bosons G, A, Z, W Gauge scalars G, A, Z, W Higgs boson(s) Fermions

! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! (x2)

! !

! !

! ! (x2)

One-loop corrections are crucial to determine spectrum and decays!

G.C., A.Deandrea, J.Llodra-Perez 1104.3800

19

G.C., B.Kubik 1209.6556

Spectrum of the SM
Localised: KK number violating! Bulk: KK number conserving!

2 Lloc = (y5 ) (y6 ) m2 H + loc

! R6

1 + 2

1 2 F + ... 4
Higher order operators! Counter-terms for 1-loop log divergences!

LSM

1 2 = F + i 4 H yf

+ (DH )2 V (H )
! R5
20

6D loops from 4D
(k,l) (2k,2l) (0,0) (2k,2l) (k,l)

G.C., A.Deandrea, J.Llodra-Perez 1104.3800

(0,0)

(0,0)

= =

g 2 C2 (G) ab i 2 2 2 2 M ( + 3) g ( 5)( q g q q ) 4 16 2 g 2 C2 (G) ab 4i 2 2 q g q q 4 1 16 = log R

g 2 C2 (G) ab i 2 i = [ iM ( + 3) q )] = 0 4 16 2

iV

= =

ig 3 f abc C2 (G) i 2 ( 3 + 7) O 16 4 4 ig 3 f abc C2 (G) 4i 2 O 4 16

In red = 3 gauge

6D loops from 4D
(k,l) (2k,2l) (0,0) (2k,2l) (k,l)

G.C., A.Deandrea, J.Llodra-Perez 1104.3800

(0,0)

(0,0)

g 2 C2 (G) ab i 2 2 2 = 2 M ( + 3) g ( 5)( q g q q ) 4 3 In =16 gauge the divergences match with 2 2 the ggauge-invariant C2 (G) ab 4i 2 counterterms! 2 = q g q q 4 1 16 = log R r10 r1 g 2 C (G) = log R 22 = ab 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 R C2 (G 4) iR 16 g i = [ iM ( + 3) q )] = 0 4 16 2

iV

= =

ig 3 f abc C2 (G) i 2 ( 3 + 7) O 16 4 4 ig 3 f abc C2 (G) 4i 2 O 4 16

In red = 3 gauge

Spectrum of the SM
The model has 4 free parameters:
The two radii R5 and R6 The effective cut-off ", entering logarithmically in the loop corrections The localised Higgs mass mloc

Spectrum of the SM
We focus on two different limits:
asymmetric radii R5 > R6
only (1,0) and (2,0) modes relevant

symmetric radii R5 = R6
(1,0) and (0,1) exactly degenerate (up to higher order ops) only states (2,0) + (0,2) relevant: mass splitting nearly doubled, couplings to SM pair tier (2,0) - (0,2) decouples (up to higher order operators)
24

WMAP bounds!
There are several equally relevant contributions:
A.Arbey, G.C., A.Deandrea, B.Kubik 1210.0384

Annihilation

Co-annihilation
(small mass splitting)

Resonant annihilation
(s-channel level 2 states!)

5 G.Belanger, M.Kakizaki, A.Phukov 1012.2577

Level 2 annihilation
(level 2 decaying into SM pair!)

25

WMAP bounds: tier (2) effect

Numerical results from MICROMEGAS
0.4
Only SM Includes level 2

0.4 0.3

0.3 h2 0.2
WMAP 200

h2

0.2 0.1 0.0 200

WMAP

300

0.1 0.0 200

100 200 300

mloc = 100

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

m_KK GeV

m_KK GeV

R5 > R 6
Annihilation into level-2 increased cross-sections higher mKK mloc controls H(2,0) resonance! H(2,0) opens resonant funnel!
26

WMAP bounds: H resonance

(2)

Numerical results from MICROMEGAS

0.4
Includes level 2 H(2,0) resonance

500 450

0.3 h2 0.2
WMAP

mloc

Disfavoured by T parameter! 350

400 300 250 200 200 400 600 800 1000

0.1 0.0 200

100 200 300

1200

1400

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

m_KK GeV

m_KK GeV

R5 > R 6
Annihilation into level-2 increased cross-sections higher mKK mloc controls H(2,0) resonance! H(2,0)

WMAP preferred range: 700 < mKK < 1000 opens resonant funnel up to 1200!
27

WMAP bounds: R > R vs. R = R

5 6 5
0.4

Numerical results from MICROMEGAS

0.4

Asymmetric
0.3 h2

Symmetric
0.3 h2 0.2 0.1 0.0 200
WMAP

0.2
WMAP

0.1 0.0 200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

m_KK GeV

m_KK GeV

R5 > R 6

R5 = R 6

In the symmetric case, we have typically smaller mKK The reason is that two tiers contribute to the relic abundance!

28

WMAP bounds: cut-off dependence

Numerical results from MICROMEGAS
0.4

0.4

"R
0.3 h2 0.2
WMAP

Annihilation only
h2

0.3 0.2

Co-annihilations

WMAP

0.1 0.0 200

0.1 0.0 200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

m_KK GeV

m_KK GeV

R5 > R 6
In the annihilation case, larger mass splitting suppressed cross sections (t-channel exchange of massive states) ! mKK decreases For co-annihilation, larger mass splitting implies the other states contribute less, thus less degrees of freedom available!
29

! mKK increases

Direct detection bounds

Numerical results from MICROMEGAS

Relevant processes: crucial the loop corrections to level-1 masses! The Spin-Independent cross section is enhanced by the small splittings!
WIMP nucleon cross section cm2 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
40
! R = 2

Bound sensitive to cut-off " via log-div. loops!

41 42 43

! R = 5 ! R = 10

XENON 2012

Independent on radii cong.

44 45 46

200
30

300

500

700

1000

1500 2000

mKK GeV

Direct detection bounds

Numerical results from MICROMEGAS

Relevant processes: crucial the loop corrections to level-1 masses! The Spin-Independent cross section is enhanced by the small splittings!

1000 800 mKK GeV 600 Excluded! 400 200

mKK GeV
Xenon2012

1000 800
Xenon2012

600 400 200

Excluded!

6 R

10

6 R

10

R5 > R 6

31

R5 = R 6

LHC signatures without MET:

tiers (2,0) and (0,2)
G.C., B.Kubik 1209.6556

Cleanest channels are di-lepton (Z) and single lepton + MET (W):
q(2,0)

l+

Z(2,0), A(2,0) -> l l

BR: 0.2% !!

q(2,0)

Z(2,0) loop l-

W(2,0) -> l #

100 ATLAS 20 fb 10 fb

100

10

We assume here same efciencies as the Z model in the analysis. The di-electron channel may be able to see two peaks!

CMS 20 fb Z' l l 8 TeV

0.1 300

0.1 400 500 mKK 600 700 800

32

LHC signatures with MET:

MET signatures from (1,0) and (0,1): lighter, but relying on ISR!
G.C., A.Deandrea, J.Ellis, L.Panizzi, J.Marrouche 1302.4750
q(1,0) q(1,0)

MET
A(1,0) _ t

Bound between 600 and 700 GeV!

The second tier has a strong impact!

33

Other LHC bounds

4-top nal state: search in same-sign dileptons
q(1,1)

Tier (1,1) cannot decay at loop level into SM, nor into a pair of (1,0) + (0,1)! Chain decay into lightest state A(1,1)

q(1,1)

A(1,1) H.O. _ t

A(1,1) can decay into t tbar! HUGE production cross sections: all KK states contribute to it!

G.C., R.Chierici, A.Deandrea, L.Panizzi, S.Perries, S.Tosi 1107.4616

! ! BR [pb]

Dedicated ATLAS search in same-sign dilepton nal states.

900 850 800 mKK GeV 750 700 650 600 1.0 1.2 1.4 R6 R5

1 10-1 10-2

ATLAS

Preliminary
-1

4 tops (8 TeV)

XENON ("R=4) Z (8 TeV)

"Ldt = 14.3 fb ,

s = 8 TeV

Expected limit at 95% CL Expected limit " 1 !

XENON ("R=10) MET (7 TeV)

1.6 1.8 2.0

10

-3

Expected limit " 2 ! Theory approx. LO Observed limit at 95% CL

34

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.1

1.2 mKK [TeV]

Conclusions and outlook

Exact KK parity is a very selective requirement on XDs: RPP in 6D at! SM on the RPP: rich pheno, very nice interplay of LHC, WMAP/Planck and Direct Detection experiments! Case R5 = R6 excluded by Direct Detection + WMAP. Case R5 > R6 preferred range 700 < mKK < 1000 GeV. LHC bounds @ mKK > 750 GeV level (leptonic Z and susy-MET)

35

Conclusions and outlook

The phenomenology depends crucially on the geometry: spherical RPP
KK modes labelled by angular momentum (l,m)

m2 (l,n)

l(l + 1) = R2

No xed points: tiny nite loop corrections Angular momentum is conserved on the orbifold! Each KK tier contains a stable DM candidate!

For the levels (1,0) and (0,1):

m = mKK + m
100

WMAP tops quarks gluon Z, W

80

60 m GeV

40

20

leptons
0 0 500 1000 m KK GeV 1500

photon

Dark Matter candidate!

2000

37

LHC: the Higgs discovery!

G.C., A.Deandrea, J.Llodra-Perez 0901.0927 G.C., A.Deandrea, G.Drieu La Rochelle, J.B.Flament 1210.8120

The KK resonances of W and top contribute to H$gg and H $%% loops!

2.0

0.5 1.5

1.5

CMS data (HCP12)

kgg

B A
0.5

1.5

mKK = 600 GeV kgg, k%% ! 1/mKK

2

1.0

H $%% H $ZZ

0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0 2 1 0 1 2

k
38