Search for low-cal bosons inwards decays of the \(125\GeV\) Higgs boson inwards proton-proton collisions at \(\sqrt{s} = 8\TeV\) (by Aaallah too 2000+ co-authors)They alone await at events inwards which the Higgs boson discovered inwards 2012 is produced – the issue of collisions of this type (which were non known at all earlier belatedly 2011) is too so high that the experimenters may await at little exceptional subsets too nevertheless order something interesting near these subsets.
Off-topic simply fun nautical chart of the day. Source.
So they focus on events inwards which the \(125\GeV\) Higgs decays to 4 fermions, every bit if it were commencement decaying to 2 lighter bosons, \(h\to aa\). The in conclusion states they probe include "four taus", "two muons addition 2 taus", too "two muons too 2 bottom quarks". It's non quite clear to me why they omit the other combinations, e.g. "two taus too 2 bottom quarks" etc. (except that I know that "four muons" was focused on inwards a exceptional paper), simply at that topographic point may survive some mysterious explanation.
They order that there's no statistical excess anywhere. But what this disceptation way should survive interpreted a chip carefully because it potentially understates the deviations from the Standard Model they are seeing. By "no statistical excesses", they hateful that there's no excess whose global significance, i.e. significance reduced past times the look-elsewhere correction, exceeds 2 sigma.
In other words, the disceptation "nothing tin survive seen here" is compatible alongside the beingness of to a greater extent than than 2-sigma – too perchance a chip higher – excesses if evaluated locally, i.e. without whatever look-elsewhere reduction of the confidence level. And yes, those are seen.
Click to zoom in.
This nautical chart – Figure six on Page xviii (page xx of 48 according to the PDF file) – shows the Brazil bands for the in conclusion nation alongside \(\mu\mu\tau\tau\). The tau leptons speedily decay too they carve upward the in conclusion channels according to the decay products of these \(\tau\) every bit good – although, fifty-fifty inwards this case, it doesn't quite seem to me that they accept listed all the options. ;-)
You run across that the black, observed curves are sometimes smooth, sometimes rattling wiggly. The wiggles are sometimes unusually periodic – similar inwards the upper left channel. But the most remarkable excess is seen inwards the upper right channel inwards which the 2 \(\tau\) leptons decay to 1 electron too 1 muon, respectively (plus neutrinos – missing energy).
You run across that the distance from the Brazil band – for the volume \(m_a\) of the novel low-cal bosons depicted on the \(x\)-axis that is unopen to \(20\GeV\) – is substantial. If a Brazilian soccer instrumentalist deviated from the Brazilian Blue Planet this severely, he would sure enough larn drowned inwards the Atlantic Ocean. It looks similar a "many sigma" difference locally too I am a chip surprised that it doesn't larn inwards to 2 sigma globally.
Four other channels exhibit null interesting unopen to \(m_a\sim 20\GeV\) simply the in conclusion one, the lower left channel alongside both \(\tau\) decaying hadronically – shows a little local (and inwards this case, much narrower – the release energy is measured accurately because no release energy is lost to ghostly neutrinos inwards hadronic decays) excess for \(m_a\sim 19\GeV\). When these 2 excesses (and the apartment graphs from the other channels) are added, nosotros run across the combined graph inwards the lower right corner which shows something similar a locally 3-sigma excess for \(m_a\sim 19\GeV\).
It's almost certainly a fluctuation. If it weren't one, it should survive interpreted every bit the "second Higgs boson" inwards a full general 2HDM (two-Higgs-doublet model) which is ugly too unmotivated past times itself. But such models may survive typically represented every bit the Higgs utilization of the NMSSM (next-to-minimal supersymmetric touchstone model) which is rattling overnice too explains the hierarchy occupation to a greater extent than satisfactorily than MSSM. Even though it likewise has 2 Higgs doublets too thus 2 CP-even neutral Higgs bosons inwards them, MSSM itself cannot reproduce these rather full general 2HDM models.
It would survive of flat exciting if the LHC could of a precipitous uncovering a novel \(20\GeV\) Higgs-like boson too potentially opened upward the gates to genuinely novel physics similar supersymmetry simply similar inwards too so many cases, I would bet on "probably not" when it comes to this pocket-size excess.
Don't yous uncovering it a chip surprising that now, inwards early on 2017, nosotros are nevertheless getting preprints based on the evaluation of the 2012 LHC data? The yr was called "now" some 5 years ago. Are they hiding something? And when they consummate an analysis similar that, why don't they straight pose out the same analysis including all the 2015+2016 = 4031 information every bit well? Surely the analysis of the same channel applied to the newer, \(13\TeV\) information is basically the same work.
Maybe they're trying to pretend that they're writing to a greater extent than papers, too thus doing to a greater extent than work? I don't purchase it too neither should the sponsors too others. Things that may survive done efficiently should survive done efficiently. If it leads to the people's having to a greater extent than fourth dimension to bask their lives instead of writing rattling similar long papers that almost no 1 reads, they should accept to a greater extent than fourth dimension to bask their life – too to collect release energy needed to brand their move ameliorate too to a greater extent than happily.
Another novel CMS newspaper searching for SUSY alongside summit tagging shows no excess, non fifty-fifty 2-sigma excess locally, simply there's a overnice to a greater extent than than 1-sigma repulsion from the indicate alongside a \(600\GeV\) summit squark too a \(300\GeV\) neutralino or so.