REVIEW 2 cited by
Is the light neutralino thermal dark matter in the pMSSM ruled out?
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
abstract
We explore the parameter space of the phenomenological Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (pMSSM) with a light neutralino thermal dark matter ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_1^0} \leq m_h/2$) that is consistent with current collider and astrophysical constraints. We consider both positive and negative values of the higgsino mass parameter ($\mu$). Our investigation shows that the recent experimental results from the LHC as well as from direct detection searches for dark matter by the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) collaboration rule out the $Z$-funnel region for the $\mu>0$ scenario. The same results severely restrict the $h$-funnel region for positive $\mu$, however, the allowed points can be probed easily with few more days of data from the LZ experiment. In the $\mu<0$ scenario, we find that very light higgsinos in both the $Z$ and $h$ funnels might survive the present constraints from the electroweakino searches at the LHC, and dedicated efforts from experimental collaborations are necessary to make conclusive statements about their present status.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Deciphering compressed electroweakino excesses with MadAnalysis 5
MadAnalysis 5 v1.11 adds validated recasting of two ATLAS compressed-electroweakino searches and shows that a proposed NMSSM scenario fits the soft-lepton and monojet excesses less well than simpler models.
-
The Light Neutralino Dark Matter in the Generalized Minimal Supergravity (GmSUGRA)
In GmSUGRA, a light Higgsino-like neutralino dark matter at the Z and Higgs poles survives the LHC and LZ constraints only when the Higgsino mass parameter μ is negative.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.