4.8 Article

750 GeV Diphoton Excess May Not Imply a 750 GeV Resonance

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS
卷 116, 期 15, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.151805

关键词

-

资金

  1. DOE [DE-SC0010296, DE-FG02-12ER41809, DE-SC0007863]
  2. IBS [IBS-R018-D1]
  3. Korean Ministry of Education [NRF-2013R1A1A2061561, NRF-2015R1A4A1042542]
  4. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) [DE-SC0007863] Funding Source: U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
  5. Ministry of Science, ICT & Future Planning, Republic of Korea [IBS-R018-D1-2016-A00] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)
  6. National Research Foundation of Korea [2015R1A4A1042542, 2013R1A1A2061561] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We discuss nonstandard interpretations of the 750 GeV diphoton excess recently reported by the ATLAS and CMS Collaborations which do not involve a new, relatively broad resonance with a mass near 750 GeV. Instead, we consider the sequential cascade decay of a much heavier, possibly quite narrow, resonance into two photons along with one or more additional particles. The resulting diphoton invariant mass signal is generically rather broad, as suggested by the data. We examine three specific event topologies-the antler, the sandwich, and the two-step cascade decay-and show that they all can provide a good fit to the observed published data. In each case, we delineate the preferred mass parameter space selected by the best fit. In spite of the presence of extra particles in the final state, the measured diphoton p(T) spectrum is moderate due to its anticorrelation with the diphoton invariant mass. We comment on the future prospects of discriminating with higher statistics between our scenarios, as well as from more conventional interpretations.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据