{"id":"7be94927-8d3e-41dc-91d2-1cc0d7702b0b","arxiv_id":"1512.05723","paper_version":2,"verdict":"CONDITIONAL","confidence":"HIGH","novelty_score":3.0,"correctness_risk":"medium","formal_verification":"none","parameter_count":4,"one_line_summary":"A 750 GeV sgoldstino in low-scale supersymmetry breaking can account for the LHC diphoton excess and predicts correlated WW, ZZ, and Z-photon resonances at the same mass.","lead":"Physicists proposed that a particle called the sgoldstino, a partner of the goldstino in models where supersymmetry breaks at low energy, could produce the 750 GeV diphoton bump seen at the LHC in 2015. The paper maps out correlated signals in W, Z, and photon pairs that would confirm or rule out the idea.","discovery_kind":"unclear","skeptic_critique":{"model":"selfhosted/deepseek-v4.1-flash","headline":"The paper's viability claim rests on the 8 TeV CMS diphoton bound, which is checked only qualitatively; a full recast is needed to confirm that any parameter point satisfying the 13 TeV excess survives.","rationale":"The reader correctly identifies the 8 TeV CMS diphoton bound as the weakest assumption. The paper is a short, honest phenomenological note that credits Refs. [5] and [6] for the original sgoldstino proposal and adds a scan plus a diboson correlation map. The calculation is standard effective field theory with formulas drawn from published sources, and the authors openly acknowledge the width tension with the ATLAS preference for a broad resonance. The main weakness is that the 8 TeV compatibility is checked only qualitatively: the paper states the effective cut at σγγ >~ 7.6 fb but does not show the exclusion contour or quantify the surviving parameter space. The cross sections also carry no uncertainty bands, and the diphoton window in Eq. (3) is broader than the effective window after the 8 TeV cut. These are proportionate weaknesses for a plausibility argument, not fatal flaws. The central claim is conditional on the excess being real, which later LHC data did not confirm, so the immediate stakes are historical. The method, tying several diboson channels to one coupling structure, remains a useful template. The reader's CONDITIONAL verdict is appropriate, and no change is needed.","tokens_in":8069,"tokens_out":18509,"duration_ms":327296,"concrete_test":"Perform a full recast of the CMS 8 TeV diphoton search (arXiv:1506.02301) in the sgoldstino model, using the exact gg luminosity ratio from a modern PDF set (e.g., NNPDF3.0) with uncertainties and the full sgoldstino width, and determine the 95% CL excluded region in the (M1, M2, M3, √F) plane. If no parameter point satisfying Eq. (3) at 13 TeV survives, the central claim is excluded; if a significant region survives, the concern is resolved.","verdict_should_be":"UNCHANGED","load_bearing_attack":"The central claim is that a 750 GeV sgoldstino can reproduce the diphoton excess while passing existing bounds. The most fragile link is the 8 TeV CMS diphoton constraint. The paper states the target window as 3 fb < σγγ(13 TeV) < 13 fb in Eq. (3), but then notes that the CMS 8 TeV bound of about 1.5 fb, combined with the asserted ratio σ(13)/σ(8) ≈ 5, 'effectively cuts all the models with σγγ >~ 7.6 fb' (Fig. 2 discussion). The effective viable window is therefore 3–7.6 fb, not 3–13 fb. The paper acknowledges this tension ('seems to be still allowed partly') but does not show an exclusion contour, does not quantify the surviving parameter volume, and does not propagate PDF uncertainties on the ratio 5. If the true ratio is larger than 5, or if the CMS bound is slightly stronger than quoted, the surviving window could shrink to the point where it no longer accommodates even the lower end of the observed excess. The paper's scan does apply the 8 TeV cut, so the concern is not that the bound is ignored, but that the robustness of the surviving region is not demonstrated. A full recast would settle whether any viable parameter point remains.","agreement_with_reader":"agree"},"referee_report":{"model":"selfhosted/deepseek-v4.1-flash","summary":"The manuscript proposes that the 750 GeV diphoton excess reported by ATLAS and CMS at 13 TeV can be explained by a scalar sgoldstino in a supersymmetric model with low-scale breaking. The sgoldstino couples to gluons and photons through the soft gaugino masses M1, M2, M3 suppressed by the supersymmetry breaking scale √F (Eqs. 1–2), so its production is dominated by gluon fusion and its diphoton branching ratio is fixed by the ratio of these couplings. The authors scan M1, M2, M3 for √F = 5 and 7 TeV, apply the 13 TeV diphoton window of Eq. (3) together with the 8 TeV dijet, diphoton, WW and ZZ bounds, and present scatter plots of the surviving models in the (M1, M2), (σγγ, σZZ), (σZZ, σWW) and (σZZ, σZγ) planes. They argue that the same couplings force correlated WW, ZZ and Zγ signals at 750 GeV that are within reach of Run-II, and that the scenario can therefore be tested by diboson searches and by direct gaugino searches.","tokens_in":8432,"tokens_out":9708,"duration_ms":189174,"significance":"If the diphoton excess is real, the paper offers a well-motivated and economical interpretation: the sgoldstino is the lightest state of the supersymmetry breaking sector, its couplings to gauge bosons are fixed by the gaugino masses, and the model makes a falsifiable prediction of correlated diboson resonances at the same mass. The use of standard effective-lagrangian formulas from Refs. [12, 20] and the explicit statement of the scan ranges make the analysis reproducible. The main strength is the falsifiability: the ratios among σγγ, σZZ, σWW and σZγ are not free parameters but follow from M1, M2, M3, so a measurement of any two channels would test the hypothesis. The main weakness is that the viability of the scenario rests on the 8 TeV CMS diphoton bound, which is treated only semi-quantitatively.","major_comments":[{"comment":"The stated target window 3 fb < σγγ < 13 fb in Eq. (3) is not the effective window after the 8 TeV CMS diphoton bound is applied. The text itself derives that the 13 TeV excess corresponds to 0.6–2.6 fb at 8 TeV, and that the 1.5 fb CMS bound therefore cuts all models with σγγ ≳ 7.6 fb at 13 TeV. The effective viable window is thus 3–7.6 fb, not 3–13 fb. Eq. (3) and the abstract should be updated to reflect this, and the ratio σ(13 TeV)/σ(8 TeV) ≈ 5 should be quoted with a PDF and scale uncertainty rather than as a parameter-independent number. The scan does apply the 8 TeV cut, so the surviving models are by construction consistent with the quoted bound; the concern is that the robustness of the surviving window is not demonstrated, and that the abstract and Eq. (3) present a wider window than the analysis actually supports.","section":"§2, Eq. (3) and the paragraph following it","authors_acknowledge":null,"authors_acknowledge_p":null},{"comment":"The text states that the scan selects models satisfying the 8 TeV constraints, but the plotted ranges extend beyond those cuts: Fig. 2 shows σγγ up to 30 fb, well above the 7.6 fb effective cut, and Fig. 3 shows σWW up to 160 fb, which at the stated ratio of 5 corresponds to about 32 fb at 8 TeV, marginally above the 30 fb bound of Eq. (6). The reader cannot tell whether the figures show the post-cut sample or the pre-cut scan. Please clarify, and if the figures show the post-cut sample, restrict the axes to the allowed ranges; if they show the pre-cut scan, relabel them and state which points survive. In addition, the paper does not report the number of surviving models or the fraction of the scanned parameter space that survives, so the reader cannot judge whether the diboson predictions in Figs. 2–4 are typical or confined to a corner of parameter space. A short table of the surviving fraction, or a density plot, would make the viability claim quantitative.","section":"§2, Figs. 1–4","authors_acknowledge":null,"authors_acknowledge_p":null}],"minor_comments":[{"comment":"The abstract says the excess was 'recently discovered', but the introduction itself quotes local significances of 3.9σ (ATLAS) and 2.6σ (CMS), which do not constitute a discovery. The abstract and the concluding paragraph should say 'observed excess' or 'hint' to match the introduction's own characterization.","section":"Abstract and §1","authors_acknowledge":null,"authors_acknowledge_p":null},{"comment":"The sentence 'The excess (3) requires 0.6 fb <~ σγγ(√s = 13 TeV) <~ 2.6 fb' mislabels the collision energy: these are the 8 TeV-equivalent values obtained by dividing the 13 TeV window by the ratio 5. The label should read √s = 8 TeV, otherwise the sentence contradicts Eq. (3).","section":"§2, paragraph after Eq. (6)","authors_acknowledge":null,"authors_acknowledge_p":null},{"comment":"The branching ratio is written as Br(S → γγ) = Γ(S → γγ)/Γ(S → gg), which neglects the WW, ZZ, Zγ and fermion channels. The text justifies this by 'gg decay mode is dominant', but for parameter points with M1, M2 ≫ M3 the electroweak channels are not negligible. Please state the approximation explicitly and give the range of M1, M2, M3 over which it holds, or use the full width in Eq. (5).","section":"§2, Eq. (5)","authors_acknowledge":null,"authors_acknowledge_p":null},{"comment":"The text states that 'larger √F require an increase of gaugino masses M1,2', but the green (5 TeV) and red (7 TeV) points in Fig. 1 overlap substantially, so the correlation is not visually obvious. A contour or a separate panel showing the two samples would make the statement checkable.","section":"§2, Fig. 1","authors_acknowledge":null,"authors_acknowledge_p":null},{"comment":"The paper quotes the 8 TeV dijet bound σS × Br(S → gg) <~ 30 pb but does not quote the corresponding 13 TeV bound or state explicitly that the dijet channel is not constraining for the selected models. Since σS is much larger than σγγ, a one-line estimate of σS at 13 TeV for the benchmark points would reassure the reader that the dijet constraint is satisfied.","section":"§2, dijet bound","authors_acknowledge":null,"authors_acknowledge_p":null},{"comment":"The pseudoscalar sgoldstino and scalar–pseudoscalar mixing are mentioned but not analyzed. The paper should state explicitly that the quantitative results of Figs. 1–4 apply only to the scalar case, and that the pseudoscalar case requires a separate scan.","section":"§2, last paragraph","authors_acknowledge":null,"authors_acknowledge_p":null},{"comment":"The conclusion states that 'typical values of supersymmetry breaking scale and soft gaugino masses required for this explanation are found to be below 10 TeV', but the scan only uses √F = 5 and 7 TeV. Either extend the scan to 8–10 TeV or soften the claim to the range actually scanned.","section":"§3, conclusions","authors_acknowledge":null,"authors_acknowledge_p":null},{"comment":"The gravitino mass estimate m3/2 = √(8π/3) F/MPl is consistent with the quoted range only if MPl is the unreduced Planck mass (1.2 × 10^19 GeV); with the reduced mass the number would differ by a factor of about 5. Please state which convention is used.","section":"§3, gravitino mass","authors_acknowledge":null,"authors_acknowledge_p":null},{"comment":"The citation list in Ref. [4] is long but not exhaustive; by the time of publication there were many additional sgoldstino and diphoton papers. This is not a blocker, but a short note that the list is illustrative rather than complete would be appropriate.","section":"References","authors_acknowledge":null,"authors_acknowledge_p":null}],"recommendation":"minor_revision","confidential_remarks":"The paper is a short, timely note on a topical subject. The central claim is defensible and the scan does apply the 8 TeV cuts, so the main issues are presentation and the quantification of the 8 TeV compatibility rather than a flaw in the derivation. The figures' axis ranges versus the stated cuts should be clarified before publication, and the abstract's 'discovered' should be softened. I would be happy to see a revised version."},"author_rebuttal":null,"desk_editor":{"model":"selfhosted/deepseek-v4.1-flash","letter":"Short version: this is a follow-up, not a new idea. The sgoldstino explanation of the 750 GeV diphoton bump was already put forward by Bellazzini-Franceschini-Sala-Serra and by Petersson-Torre, and the authors say so plainly in the introduction. What they add is a scan over gaugino masses and √F, and the resulting correlation maps between the diphoton rate and the WW, ZZ and Zγ cross sections at 13 TeV (Figs. 2-4). That is genuinely useful: it turns a plausibility argument into a set of correlated channels an experimentalist can go after, and the shared M1, M2, M3 structure means the correlations are not free. The scan ranges are stated, the widths come from Spira and from their own earlier work, and the width tension with the ATLAS preference for ~46 GeV is acknowledged rather than buried. Credit for that. On the stress-test concern: the scan does apply the 8 TeV CMS cut, and the text says it kills everything above about 7.6 fb, so the effective window is 3-7.6 fb, not 3-13. The bound is not ignored. What is missing is robustness: no uncertainty band on the 13/8 ratio of about 5, no PDF error propagation, no exclusion contour, no statement of how much parameter volume actually survives. 'Seems to be still allowed partly' is doing real work there, and it should not have to. The other soft spot is the pseudoscalar partner, mentioned in a paragraph and then dropped; if mixing is small you get a second peak, and that is a concrete prediction the paper could have pushed harder on. Neither of these is fatal, and neither undermines the central point, which is a plausibility argument conditional on the excess being real. Given that the excess has since faded, the immediate stakes are historical, but the coupling-correlation template outlives the bump. Who should read it: phenomenologists working on low-scale SUSY breaking, and anyone building a diboson search at 750 GeV. Worth a referee's time, with a request for error bars and a quantified surviving region.","headline":"A competent follow-up that maps diboson correlations for the sgoldstino explanation, but the viability check on the 8 TeV bound is asserted rather than demonstrated.","tokens_in":9058,"tokens_out":1010,"would_cite":false,"duration_ms":21788,"reading_group":"maybe","serious_thinker":"yes","would_accept_peer_review":true},"pith_extraction":{"msc":[],"pacs":["12.60.Jv","14.80.-j"],"model":"selfhosted/deepseek-v4.1-flash","headline":"The 750 GeV diphoton bump could be the sgoldstino, the scalar partner of the goldstino in low-scale broken supersymmetry, and its couplings would force correlated WW, ZZ and Z-photon peaks at the same mass.","keywords":["sgoldstino","low-scale supersymmetry breaking","diphoton excess","750 GeV resonance","gluon-gluon fusion","diboson resonances","gaugino masses","LHC Run-II"],"falsifier":"A dedicated recast of the 8 TeV diphoton and diboson searches over the scanned parameter space, or a Run-II measurement showing no $ZZ$, $WW$ or $Zgamma$ excess at 750 GeV at the tens-of-fb level, would settle the hypothesis.","tokens_in":9447,"feed_emoji":"⚛️","tokens_out":3364,"duration_ms":63117,"temperature":0.7,"pith_summary":"Two LHC experiments reported a small excess of photon pairs around 750 GeV of invariant mass. This paper argues that the excess is naturally explained by a sgoldstino: the scalar partner of the goldstino, the Goldstone fermion of spontaneously broken supersymmetry, in models where supersymmetry breaks at a low scale $M_{SUSY} = 4.7$ TeV, so that the breaking sector is accessible to the LHC. The appeal of the idea is that the sgoldstino's couplings are not free parameters: they are fixed by the soft gaugino masses $M_1, M_2, M_3$ and suppressed by the supersymmetry-breaking scale $M_{SUSY}$. The same couplings that generate the diphoton rate through gluon fusion also generate decays into $WW$, $ZZ$ and $Zgamma$, so the hypothesis is not a one-number fit but a set of linked predictions. If the authors are right, the 750 GeV bump is the first collider handle on the sector that breaks supersymmetry, and Run-II should see companion resonances in diboson channels at the same mass.","feed_headline":"750 GeV bump could be the sgoldstino of broken supersymmetry","feed_subtitle":"If the diphoton excess is a sgoldstino, the same couplings predict linked WW, ZZ and Z-photon peaks at 750 GeV.","key_machinery":"The sgoldstino is the scalar superpartner of the goldstino, the Goldstone fermion of spontaneously broken supersymmetry. Its interactions with gauge bosons are fixed by the soft gaugino masses and the supersymmetry-breaking scale: the effective Lagrangian couples $S$ to $G^a_{munu}G^{a munu}$ with strength $M_3/(sqrt{2}F)$ and to $F_{munu}F^{munu}$ with strength $M_{gammagamma}/(sqrt{2}F)$, where $M_{gammagamma} = M_1 cos^2 theta_W + M_2 sin^2 theta_W$ and $F$ is the supersymmetry-breaking order parameter. Similar terms with $M_{ZZ} = M_1 sin^2 theta_W + M_2 cos^2 theta_W$ and $M_{Zgamma} = (M_2 - M_1) sin theta_W cos theta_W$ generate the $ZZ$ and $Zgamma$ channels. That shared structure is what carries the argument: a single set of three gaugino masses and one scale $F$ fixes production, the diphoton branching ratio, and every diboson rate at once, so the model makes a joint prediction rather than a single-point fit.","core_discovery":"The paper's claim is that a scalar sgoldstino of mass 750 GeV, in a supersymmetric extension of the Standard Model with low-scale breaking, reproduces the observed diphoton excess while surviving existing collider bounds. The production is gluon-gluon fusion, dominant because the gluino is taken to be the heaviest gaugino, and the diphoton branching ratio reduces to the ratio of effective couplings, $Br(S to gammagamma) = (M_{gammagamma}/M_3)^2$ up to the appropriate phase-space factor. The authors scan $M_1$ and $M_2$ between 0.2 TeV and $M_{SUSY}$, and $M_3$ between 1.7 TeV and $M_{SUSY}$, for $M_{SUSY} = 5$ and 7 TeV, keeping only models with $3 fb < sigma_{gammagamma} < 13 fb$ at 13 TeV that also pass the 8 TeV diphoton, dijet and diboson limits. They find that the surviving models predict $ZZ$ cross sections up to about 17 fb ($M_{SUSY} = 5$ TeV) and 26 fb ($M_{SUSY} = 7$ TeV), with $WW$ and $Zgamma$ rates of comparable or larger size, all correlated because the couplings share the same gaugino masses and the same $1/F$ suppression. They also note that the resonance width in this minimal setup stays below the GeV scale, so the large width ATLAS somewhat prefers would require an extension with a light singlet scalar, such as in NMSSM-type models, where the sgoldstino can also decay into scalar pairs without disturbing the diboson branching pattern.","pith_inferences":["The real fingerprint is the correlation among $sigma_{ZZ}$, $sigma_{WW}$ and $sigma_{Zgamma}$: measuring any two of them at 750 GeV would over-determine $M_1$, $M_2$ and $sqrt{F}$, making the hypothesis far easier to confirm or kill than the diphoton rate alone.","Because the same $1/F$ suppression controls production, decay and the gravitino mass, any tightening of cosmological or astrophysical bounds on light gravitinos feeds back directly on the collider window this paper carves out.","A confirmed width near 46 GeV would push the minimal sgoldstino out and point to an extended breaking sector with a light singlet, so the width measurement is a discriminator between the minimal and non-minimal versions of this explanation.","If Run-II accumulates enough data to see the diphoton line but finds no accompanying $ZZ$ or $WW$ structure at 750 GeV at the tens-of-fb level, the sgoldstino reading loses its main advantage over generic spin-0 interpretations."],"forward_implications":["Run-II should show resonances at 750 GeV in $ZZ$, $WW$ and $Zgamma$ with rates up to tens of fb, and the pattern among the three channels is fixed by the same two gaugino masses that set the diphoton rate.","The dominant decay into gluon pairs produces a dijet resonance at 750 GeV, already constrained below about 30 pb by 8 TeV searches.","Small predicted diboson cross sections correspond to small gaugino masses, so the low-rate corner of parameter space is reachable by direct searches for light gauginos rather than by resonance searches.","If a pseudoscalar sgoldstino partner exists with a different mass, a second diphoton peak should appear at that mass, with matching diboson peaks, and any scalar-pseudoscalar mixing would alter the angular distributions of the decay products.","Soft trilinear couplings can carry flavour structure, so virtual sgoldstino exchange gives flavour-changing top and heavy-meson decays and possibly fermion-antifermion resonances at 750 GeV, including pairs of different flavour.","The gravitino mass in this window is $10^{-3}$ to $10^{-2}$ eV, consistent with supernova and Big Bang nucleosynthesis bounds."],"supporting_citations":[{"why":"ATLAS 13 TeV diphoton resonance search supplying the excess this paper sets out to explain.","marker":"[2]"},{"why":"CMS 13 TeV diphoton search, the second half of the excess the model must reproduce.","marker":"[3]"},{"why":"Source of the sgoldstino couplings, decay widths and production cross sections used throughout the scan.","marker":"[12]"},{"why":"Establishes gluon-gluon fusion as the dominant sgoldstino production mechanism at hadron colliders.","marker":"[11]"},{"why":"Supplies the Higgs-like production cross-section machinery used to compute the sgoldstino rate.","marker":"[20]"},{"why":"CMS 8 TeV diphoton bound of about 1.5 fb, the constraint that cuts the allowed parameter space.","marker":"[21]"},{"why":"ATLAS dijet resonance limit, about 30 pb, applied to the dominant gluon-gluon decay channel.","marker":"[23]"},{"why":"ATLAS 8 TeV $H to ZZ$ search giving the $sigma_{ZZ}$ limit used to filter models.","marker":"[24]"},{"why":"ATLAS 8 TeV $H to WW$ search giving the $sigma_{WW}$ limit used to filter models.","marker":"[25]"},{"why":"Effective sgoldstino Lagrangian and simulation package underlying the interaction terms in Eqs. (1) and (2).","marker":"[19]"}],"fun_headline_variants":["The 750 GeV diphoton bump could be a low-scale SUSY sgoldstino","Low-scale SUSY sgoldstino matches the 750 GeV diphoton excess","Sgoldstino models predict linked WW, ZZ and Z-photon peaks at 750 GeV","A minimal sgoldstino fits the diphoton excess but keeps width under a GeV","The minimal sgoldstino keeps width under a GeV, so a large width needs a singlet"],"cache_read_input_tokens":0,"weakest_assumption_plain":"The scenario survives only if the 8 TeV diphoton bound does not already exclude the 13 TeV window it needs; the paper addresses this qualitatively, noting the required rate of 0.6 to 2.6 fb at 13 TeV is 'still allowed partly' and asserting the 13-to-8 TeV cross-section ratio is about 5 and nearly parameter-independent, without a full recast or an uncertainty on that ratio.","fun_headline_variants_meta":{"raw":{"variants":["The 750 GeV diphoton bump could be a low-scale SUSY sgoldstino","Low-scale SUSY sgoldstino matches the 750 GeV diphoton excess","Sgoldstino models predict linked WW, ZZ and Z-photon peaks at 750 GeV","A minimal sgoldstino fits the diphoton excess but keeps width under a GeV","The minimal sgoldstino keeps width under a GeV, so a large width needs a singlet"]},"model":"selfhosted/deepseek-v4.1-flash","effort":"low","attempts":1,"cost_usd":0.0,"raw_usage":{"total_tokens":3222,"prompt_tokens":958,"completion_tokens":2264,"prompt_tokens_details":null,"completion_tokens_details":{"reasoning_tokens":2158}},"tokens_in":958,"tokens_out":2264,"duration_ms":45375,"image_pages":[],"temperature":1.0,"reasoning_budget":50,"reasoning_tokens":2158,"transport_provider":"selfhosted","cache_read_input_tokens":0,"cache_creation_input_tokens":0},"cache_creation_input_tokens":0},"created_at":"2026-11-09T15:38:47.991659+00:00","model_set":{"reader":"selfhosted/deepseek-v4.1-flash"},"falsifier":"A dedicated recast of the 8 TeV diphoton and diboson searches over the scanned parameter space, or a Run-II measurement showing no $ZZ$, $WW$ or $Zgamma$ excess at 750 GeV at the tens-of-fb level, would settle the hypothesis.","supporting_citations":[{"cited_title":"Search for resonances decaying to photon pairs in 3.2 fb −1 of pp collisions at √s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector","cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"ATLAS 13 TeV diphoton resonance search supplying the excess this paper sets out to explain."},{"cited_title":"Search for new physics in high mass diphoton events in proton-p roton collisions at 13 TeV","cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"CMS 13 TeV diphoton search, the second half of the excess the model must reproduce."},{"cited_title":"Prospects for sgoldstino search at the LHC","cited_arxiv_id":"hep-ph/0203078","evidence_quote":"Source of the sgoldstino couplings, decay widths and production cross sections used throughout the scan."},{"cited_title":"Signatures of massive sgoldstinos at hadron colliders","cited_arxiv_id":"hep-ph/0005076","evidence_quote":"Establishes gluon-gluon fusion as the dominant sgoldstino production mechanism at hadron colliders."},{"cited_title":"QCD Effects in Higgs Physics","cited_arxiv_id":"hep-ph/9705337","evidence_quote":"Supplies the Higgs-like production cross-section machinery used to compute the sgoldstino rate."},{"cited_title":"Search for diphoton resonances in the mass range from 150 to 850 GeV in pp collisions at sqrt(s) = 8 TeV","cited_arxiv_id":"1506.02301","evidence_quote":"CMS 8 TeV diphoton bound of about 1.5 fb, the constraint that cuts the allowed parameter space."},{"cited_title":"Search for new phenomena in the dijet mass distribution using<mml:math xmlns:mml=\"http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML\" display=\"inline\"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math>collision data at<mml:math xmlns:mml=\"http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML\" display=\"inline\"><mml:mrow><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>8</mml:mn><mml:mtext> </mml:mtext><mml:mtext> </mml:mtext><mml:mi>TeV</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math>with the ATLAS detector","cited_arxiv_id":"1407.1376","evidence_quote":"ATLAS dijet resonance limit, about 30 pb, applied to the dominant gluon-gluon decay channel."},{"cited_title":"Search for an additional, heavy Higgs boson in the $$H\\rightarrow ZZ$$ H → Z Z decay channel at $$\\sqrt{s} = 8\\;\\text{ TeV }$$ s = 8 TeV in $$pp$$ p p collision data with the ATLAS detector","cited_arxiv_id":"1507.05930","evidence_quote":"ATLAS 8 TeV $H to ZZ$ search giving the $sigma_{ZZ}$ limit used to filter models."},{"cited_title":"Search for a high-mass Higgs boson decaying to a $W$ boson pair in $pp$ collisions at $\\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV with the ATLAS detector","cited_arxiv_id":"1509.00389","evidence_quote":"ATLAS 8 TeV $H to WW$ search giving the $sigma_{WW}$ limit used to filter models."},{"cited_title":"CompHEP Package with Light Gravitino and Sgoldstinos","cited_arxiv_id":"hep-ph/0111291","evidence_quote":"Effective sgoldstino Lagrangian and simulation package underlying the interaction terms in Eqs. (1) and (2)."}],"review_version":1}