U(2) and minimal flavour violation in supersymmetry

By R. Barbieri, G. Isidori, J. Jones-Pérez, P. Lodone, David M. Straub. 2011

308 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Rather than sticking to the full U(3)3 approximate symmetry normally invoked in Minimal Flavour Violation, we analyze the consequences on the current flavour data of a suitably broken U(2)3 symmetry acting on the first two generations of quarks and squarks. A definite correlation emerges between the ΔF=2 amplitudes $\mathcal{M}( K^{0} \to \bar{K}^{0} )$, $\mathcal{M}( B_{d} \to \bar{B}_{d} )$ and $\mathcal{M}( B_{s} \to \bar{B}_{s} )$, which can resolve the current tension between $\mathcal{M}( K^{0} \to \bar{K}^{0} )$ and $\mathcal{M}( B_{d} \to \bar{B}_{d} )$, while predicting $\mathcal{M}( B_{s}\to \bar{B}_{s} )$. In particular, the CP violating asymmetry in Bs→ψφ is predicted to be positive Sψφ=0.12±0.05 and above its Standard Model value (Sψφ=0.041±0.002). The preferred region for the gluino and the left-handed sbottom masses is below about 1÷1.5 TeV. An existence proof of a dynamical model realizing the U(2)3 picture is outlined.

Subfields: Nuclear and High Energy Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/328f10a61461e67ead722b03ea3b491a1d7707a3

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Nuclear and High Energy Physics

Citations in the corpus

Electroweak phase transition and baryogenesis in composite Higgs models (2018, background): “One may also investigate whether U(2) symmetric constructions [46,60,61] can be incorporated into our scenario, or a proposal [62] to impose a CP symmetry on the strong sector and most of the elementary-composite mixings, with the exception of those of the third generation.”
The anatomy of quark flavour observables in 331 models in the flavour precision era (2012, methodology): “Recent sophisticated Monte-Carlo analyses in the context of other models and model independent studies [7, 8, 10, 100] that in particular used some kind of an average between inclusive and exclusive values of |Vub|, while certainly interesting, do not allow often for a transparent presentation of su”
Revisiting the vector leptoquark explanation of the B-physics anomalies (2019, background): “eir mass-eigenbasis is needed. The Yukawa interactions involving the Higgsses introduce new sources of breaking of the avor symmetry in (3.5), whose structure ts well with the minimal U(2) picture in [92]. A detailed discussion of these symmetry-breaking terms and their connection to the SM fermion ”
Addressing the B-physics anomalies in a fundamental Composite Higgs model (2018, background): “At leading order in the spurions and up to possible O(1) factors multiplying each term one has [105] (in L̄R notation):”
What is the scale of new physics behind the B-flavour anomalies? (2017, background): “[28]) that the the typical size of | X | is of O(λ2), where λ ∼ 0.”
Model-independent constraints on new physics in b → s transitions (2011, methodology): “For example, in the MSSM with MFV and flavour blind phases [81], in effective SUSY with flavour blind phases [82] and in effective SUSY with a U(2)3 symmetry [83, 84], NP effects in ∆B = ∆S = 1 processes arise almost exclusively through complex contributions to C7 (and C8).”
On the validity of the effective field theory for dark matter searches at the LHC part III: analysis for the t-channel (2013, background): “For example, if the effective operators come from a Naturalness-motivated new physics theory like Supersymmetry or Composite Higgs Models, assuming a U(2) flavour symmetry [36, 37] the normalization would be”
On the breaking of lepton flavor universality in B decays (2015, background): “3), the R∆F=2 Bq terms should respect the U(2) 3 prediction [32]”
Implications of LHCb measurements and future prospects - eScholarship (2013, methodology): “4 In the SM, models with minimal flavour violation (MFV) [35, 36] and models with a flavour symmetry relating the first two generations [37], the Wilson coefficients appearing in Eq.”