Natural Little Hierarchy from Partially Goldstone Twin Higgs

By Z. Chacko, Y. Nomura, G. Perez. 2005

159 citations recorded by the source corpus.

UCB-PTH-05/35 LBNL-59022 Natural Little Hierarchy from a Partially Goldstone Twin Higgs arXiv:hep-ph/0510273v1 20 Oct 2005 Z. Chacko a , Yasunori Nomura b,c , Michele Papucci b,c and Gilad Perez c Department of Physics, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721 Department of Physics, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720 Theoretical Physics Group, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA 94720 b a c Abstract We construct a simple theory in which the fine-tuning of the standard model is sig- nificantly reduced. Radiative corrections to the quadratic part of the scalar potential are constrained to be symmetric under a global U (4) × U (4) ′ symmetry due to a discrete Z 2 “twin” parity, while the quartic part does not possess this symmetry. As a consequence, when the global symmetry is broken the Higgs fields emerge as light pseudo-Goldstone bosons, but with sizable quartic self-interactions. This structure allows the cutoff scale, Λ, to be raised to the multi-TeV region without significant fine-tuning. In the minimal version of the theory, the amount of fine-tuning is about 15% for Λ = 5 TeV, while it is about 30% in an extended model. This provides a solution to the little hierarchy problem. In the minimal model, the “visible” particle content is exactly that of the two Higgs doublet standard model, while the extended model also contains extra vector-like fermions with masses ≈ (1 ∼ 2) TeV. At the LHC, our minimal model may appear exactly as the two Higgs doublet standard model, and new physics responsible for cutting off the divergences of the Higgs mass-squared parameter may not be discovered. Several possible processes that may be used to discriminate our model from the simple two Higgs doublet model are discussed for the LHC and for a linear collider.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Nuclear and High Energy Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ee53ea821e9fe30faeddbbff15a1e8d371ba626e

How researchers see this paper

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

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

  1. R. Barbieri
  2. N. Craig
  3. R. Rattazzi
  4. A. Wulzer
  5. D. Greco
  6. A. Boveia
  7. J. A. Aguilar-Saavedra
  8. F. Bauer

In Nuclear and High Energy Physics

  1. A. Wulzer
  2. R. Rattazzi
  3. N. Craig
  4. R. Barbieri
  5. D. Greco
  6. S. Thomas
  7. A. Boveia
  8. K. Bauer

Citations in the corpus