search for eXtra-Dimensions (XD) and Black Holes at the LHC CMS Mini-review: search for eXtra-Dimensions (XD) and Black Holes at the LHC Samir FERRAG University of Oslo, Norway ATLAS Universitetet i Oslo 32nd International Conference on High Energy Physics Beijing, China, 2004 S. Ferrag, OSLO

maximum of approachesand models Introduction: motivations for eXtra-Dimensions (XD) Hierarchy problem: EW scale << GUT scale << Planck scale (~102 GeV, ~1016 GeV, ~1019 GeV) Alternative: 1 fundamental scale (~ tens TeV) with 1+3+d time-space structure New parameters: number of XD: d, size of each XD MC=1/RC , new Planck scale MP (or MD)… Existing models classified by: - Space-time geometry: factorized (flat) or warped[1][2] - Size of compactified XD: large (eV to keV) or small (TeV), same or different size… - propagating particles into XDs: gravitons, gauge bosons or all (UXD) [3] Phenomenological aspects at LHC: - Low MP : production of gravitons and black holes - Low GUT scale: violation of the logarithmic behaviour of coupling running (aem.w.S) [4] - Compactification: every particle allowed in the XD presents Kaluza Klein excitations in 4D - Strongly warped geometry: new scalar to stabilize the geometry In flat geometry: Goal: sensitivity to XD parameters (signatures and results) following a maximum of approachesand models S. Ferrag, OSLO

Corresponding selection of items -Flat extra-dimensions: -Large extra-dimensions: direct and virtual graviton exchange -TeV-1 extra-dimensions: gauge KK excitations -Low MP effects: black hole production -Warped extra-dimensions: -Randall-Sundrum model: Radion, narrow graviton resonances Also: -Higgs boson in the black hole decay -Gravity-matter interaction in fat brane -Summary and Conclusion Abstract: 12-0852 Abstract: 12-0842 N.Akchurin, et al Fermilab-FN-0752 Abstract: 12-0825 C. Macesano, S. Nandi and M.Rujoiu, hep-ph/0407253 C. Macesano, A. Mitov and S. Nandi, hep-ph/0305029 S. Ferrag, OSLO

Source of uncertainties Results on gG are also available Large XD: direct graviton production Only gravity in n extra-dimensions of eV size (mm) [5] Signals [6] Jets + Et, g + Et Backgrounds 100 fb-1 Sensitivity Source of uncertainties Uncertainty in s(Z+jets) affects the sensitivity Results on gG are also available S. Ferrag, OSLO

Large XD: Virtual graviton exchange GKK Signals:[7] Excess in di-leptons and di-photons mass distribution Forward-backward asymmetry Event shape: distribution of gg more central (s-channel) Sensitivity PT > 800 GeV S. Ferrag, OSLO

TeV-1 XD: Kaluza Klein (KK) excitations Gauge bosons allowed in 1 small XD MC~ TeV-1 (2x10-4 fm) [8] Corresponding KK excitations spectrum in 4D: 4TeV Z and g KK excitations:[9] invariant mass reconstruction  up to MC~5.8 TeV interference with Drell-Yan  up to MC~9.5 TeV differentiate with Z’  Forward-Backward asymmetry W KK excitations:[10] direct observation  up to MC~6 TeV indirect observation  up to MC~9 TeV difficult to distinguich from W’ gluon KK excitations:[11] Excess in the dijet Pt distribution  up to MC~15 TeV S. Ferrag, OSLO

TeV scale gauge unification MSSM+XD MGUT~30TeV (4+2)D, R=1/10 Tev-1 Low GUT scale: Violation of the expected (MS)SM logarithmic behaviour of couplings (aem,w,s) [4] Measurement of aS on a large Pt range by measuring dijets cross section Mc= 4 TeV From: [12] Sensitivity to XD is masked by the uncertainties on the proton structure (PDF) [13] From Mc~5 TeV (without PDF uncertainties) to less than Mc~2 TeV S. Ferrag, OSLO

Black Holes (BH) Object confined in radius R < RS [14] ~1Hz  LHC is a Black Hole (BH) factory Development of a Monte Carlo generator: CHARYBDIS [15] - evaporation and time evolution - “grey body” factors (transmission of particles through curved space-time outside horizon) - Planck phase: few hard jets Simulation in ATLAS: [16] - cut on the event shape (sphericity) - mBH reconstructed for each event - #XD deduced from TH, mBH and MP (Hawking formula) S. Ferrag, OSLO

Warped geometry: radion in Randall-Sundrum model Planck brane SM brane 1 XD with non factorizable geometry: [1] 5-D Planck scale New physics scale in SM brane: , Phenomenology: (Radion) [17] -scalar field to stabilize the distance between branes [18] -coupling similar to Higgs, mixes with Higgs ( parameter) -narrow width Analysis in ATLAS: [19] -signal and -background: Sensitivity: (30 fb-1) -1st channel: 1.0 TeV for mf = 600 GeV -2nd channel: 2.2 TeV (0.6 TeV) for mf = 300 (600 GeV) S. Ferrag, OSLO

Warped Geometry: narrow graviton resonance KK graviton excitations G(k) -scale  -coupling & width: c = k/MPl -0.01 < k/MPl < 0.1 -mass spectrum: Golden channel: G(1)  e+e- [20] Signal: from gluon fusion 1 – cos4* from quark annihilation 1 – 3cos2* + 4cos4* Spin-1 (Z ‘): 1 + cos2* 100 fb-1, mG= 1.5 TeV, c = 0.01 Drell-Yan SM S. Ferrag, OSLO

Higgs boson from the black hole decay[21] High production rate of BH + democratic decay of BH: MP ~ 2 TeV and n=3 XDs  sBH = 450 pb  1 light Higgs every 3 sec Event samples: 50k (100k) of Higgsbb with mH=130 (150) GeV/c2 (Truenoir/Pythia) CMS full simulation and reconstruction programmes (OSCAR/ORCA) Unusual kinematics of the BH event: (large total energy, large total Et, high multiplicity of hard jets, high multiplicity of large Et leptons and large Et Higgs) b-tagging efficiency decreases with increasing jet energy + Calorimeter resolution  Additional cuts were developed: From Higgs decay Any dijet system polar angle in Higgs center of mass: scattering angle for parton subprocess: separation between the two jets: S. Ferrag, OSLO

Higgs boson in the black hole decay: results Significance: mH=130GeV W/Z mH=150GeV mH=130 GeV and For 100 pb-1: S=8.4s with b-tagging 100% efficient S=7.4s without b-tagging mH=150 GeV: (Br(Hbb) = 17% only) needs 4.8 fb-1 of integrated luminosity for the same significance S. Ferrag, OSLO

Universal eXtra-Dimensions (UXD) in fat brane Universal extra-dimensions in fat brane: -gravity in n large XDs of size ~eV to ~keV (~mm to ~mm) -standard matter in small fraction of size ~TeV of a large XD Gravity-matter interaction rules in UXD with fat brane: [22] -KK number is violated in gravity-matter interaction -gravitation coupling is reduced by the fat brane -fat brane reduces the dependence on cut-off (MP) in calculations (KK summations) -the results are valid for a large class of models Single KK Pair of KK MP=5TeV Phenomenology from KK number violation: [23] -decay of 1st KK level (stable in universal extra-dimensions) gravitationnal decay width was computed -single KK production Large phase space s^ >2M Constraint: MP close to M S. Ferrag, OSLO

Universal extra-dimensions in fat brane: single KK Signal: KK  2 jets+Et [23] parton+parton parton+ parton*Graviton+parton MP (TeV) Ptcut=600 GeV k=3 100 evts N=2 N=6 20 evts Background: W+2jets, Z+2jets, , multijet+Et Cuts: large Pt and Et Ptjet1 ,Ptjet2 > Ptcut and Et > k . Ptcut k=1,2 or 3 Sensitivity: up-to 7 TeV in KK mass (or MC) Drop fastly with Mp S. Ferrag, OSLO

Summary and Conclusion Hierarchy problem: eXtra-Dimensions provide a possible solution and bring down the Planck scale Sensitivity reach: invariant mass: ~6 TeV interference: ~9 TeV Et: ~9 TeV ... If they exist at the LHC energies and are like we understand them today (flat or warped geometry, large or small size XDs,black holes, universal extra-dimensions, dark matter....) LHC experiments are able to probe them, or put a limit on them at least. S. Ferrag, OSLO

References [1] L. Randall and R. Sundrum, Phys.Rev.Lett. 83 (1999) 3370 (hep-ph/9905221) [2] Arkani-Hamed, Dimopoulos and Dvali Phys.Lett. B429 (1998) 263; I. Antoniadis, PL B246 (1990) 377 [3] C. Macesanu, CD McMullen and S. Nandi PR D66 (2001) 015009 [4] K.R. Dienes, E. Dudas and T. Gherghetta, Nucl.Phys. B537 (1999) 47 [5] Giudice, Rattazzi & Wells, Nucl.Phys. B544 (1999) 3 (hep-ph/9811291) [6] L. Vacavant and I. Hinchliffe, J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 27 (2001) 1839 [7] V. Kabachenko, A. Miagkov, A. Zenin ATL-PHYS-2001-012, O.J.P. Éboli et al., Phys. Rev. D61 094007 (2000) [8] I. Antoniadis, PL B246 (1990) 377;J. Lykken and S. Nandi, PL B485 (2000) 224 [9] G. Azuelos and G. Polesello BSM report, Proceedings of Les Houches 2001 [10] G. Polesello et M. Prata EPJDirect (SN-ATLAS-2003-036) [11] C.Balazs, M.Escalier, S. Ferrag, B. Laforge, G.Polesello, BSM report, Proceedings of Les Houches 2003 [12] C. Balázs, B. Laforge, Phys.Lett. B525 (2002) 219 (hep-ph/0110217) [13] S. Ferrag, Compte rendu des rencontres de Moriond 2003, hep-ph/0407303 [14] Dimopoulos and Landsberg, hep-ph/0106295 [15] CM Harris, P. Richardson and BR Webber, JHEP 0308 (2003) 033 (hep-ph/0307305: [16] T. Yamamura, J. Tanaka, S.Asai, J.Kanzaki ATL-PHYS-2003-037 [17] G. Giudice, R. Rattazzi, J.D. Wells hep-ph/0002178 [18] Goldberger and Wise (PRL 83 (1999) 4922) [19] G.Azuelos, D. Cavalli, H. Przysiezniak, L. Vacavant SN-ATLAS-2002-019 [20] B.C. Allanach, K.Odigari, A. Parker, B. Webber JHEP 9 19 (2000) [21] N.Akchurin, J.Damgov, D.Green, S.Kunori, G.Landsberg, J.Marrafino, R.Vidal, H.Wenzel, W.Wu, Fermilab-FN-0752 [22] C. Macesano, A. Mitov and S. Nandi, hep-ph/0305029 [23] C. Macesano, S. Nandi and M.Rujoiu, hep-ph/0407253 S. Ferrag, OSLO