4.7 Article

Consistency and interpretation of the LHC dijet excesses

Journal

PHYSICAL REVIEW D
Volume 107, Issue 5, Pages -

Publisher

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.107.054045

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

ATLAS observed a weaker-than-expected cross section for dijet resonances with a mass slightly below 1 TeV. CMS reported hints for non-resonant pair production of dijet resonances with a particle Y at a similar mass range. By reinterpreting CMS analysis using the ATLAS preferred mass range, a resonant search was conducted, finding excesses for a mass of Y around 3.6 TeV.
ATLAS observed a limit for the cross section of dijet resonances, which is weaker than expected for a mass slightly below approximate to 1 TeV. In addition, CMS reported hints for the (nonresonant) pair production of dijet resonances X via a particle Y at a very similar mass range with a local (global) significance of 3.6u (2.5u) at mX approximate to 950 GeV. In this article, we show that, using the preferred range for mX from the ATLAS analysis, one can reinterpret the CMS analysis of didijets in terms of a resonant search with Y -> XX, with a significantly reduced look-elsewhere effect, finding an excess for mY approximate to 3.6 TeV with a significance of 4.0u (3.2u) locally (globally). We present two possible UV completions capable of explaining the (di)dijet excesses, one containing two scalar diquarks, the other one involving heavy gluons based on an SU(3)1 x SU(3)2 x SU(3)3 gauge symmetry, spontaneously broken to SU(3) color. In the latter case, non-perturbative couplings are required, pointing toward a composite or extradimensional framework. In fact, using 5D anti-de Sitter space-time, one obtains the correct mass ratio for mX/mY, assuming the X is the lowest-lying resonance, and predicts a third (di)dijet resonance with a mass around approximate to 2.2 TeV.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available