Dark matter physics in neutrino specific two Higgs doublet model

Journal of High Energy Physics, Mar 2017

Although the seesaw mechanism is a natural explanation for the small neutrino masses, there are cases when the Majorana mass terms for the right-handed neutrinos are not allowed due to symmetry. In that case, if neutrino-specific Higgs doublet is introduced, neutrinos become Dirac particles and their small masses can be explained by its small VEV. We show that the same symmetry, which we assume a global U(1) X , can also be used to explain the stability of dark matter. In our model, a new singlet scalar breaks the global symmetry spontaneously down to a discrete Z 2 symmetry. The dark matter particle, lightest Z 2-odd fermion, is stabilized. We discuss the phenomenology of dark matter: relic density, direct detection, and indirect detection. We find that the relic density can be explained by a novel Goldstone boson channel or by resonance channel. In the most region of parameter space considered, the direct detections is suppressed well below the current experimental bound. Our model can be further tested in indirect detection experiments such as FermiLAT gamma ray searches or neutrinoless double beta decay experiments.

A PDF file should load here. If you do not see its contents the file may be temporarily unavailable at the journal website or you do not have a PDF plug-in installed and enabled in your browser.

Alternatively, you can download the file locally and open with any standalone PDF reader:

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2FJHEP03%282017%29059.pdf

Dark matter physics in neutrino specific two Higgs doublet model

Received: December matter physics in neutrino specific two Higgs 0 Open Access , c The Authors 1 85 Hoegiro , Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul 02455 , Republic of Korea 2 School of Physics, Korea Institute for Advanced Study Although the seesaw mechanism is a natural explanation for the small neutrino masses, there are cases when the Majorana mass terms for the right-handed neutrinos are not allowed due to symmetry. In that case, if neutrino-specific Higgs doublet is introduced, neutrinos become Dirac particles and their small masses can be explained by its small VEV. We show that the same symmetry, which we assume a global U(1)X , can also be used to explain the stability of dark matter. In our model, a new singlet scalar breaks the global symmetry spontaneously down to a discrete Z2 symmetry. The dark matter particle, lightest Z2-odd fermion, is stabilized. We discuss the phenomenology of dark matter: relic density, direct detection, and indirect detection. We find that the relic density can be explained by a novel Goldstone boson channel or by resonance channel. In the most region of parameter space considered, the direct detections is suppressed well below the current experimental bound. Our model can be further tested in indirect detection experiments such as FermiLAT gamma ray searches or neutrinoless double beta decay experiments. ArXiv ePrint: 1611.09145 Beyond Standard Model; Cosmology of Theories beyond the SM; Global 1 Introduction The model Dark matter physics 3.1 Direct detection 3.3 Indirect detection 4 Conclusions and discussions Introduction A natural scenario to explain the sub-eV neutrino masses is type-I seesaw mechanism in which very heavy standard model (SM) singlet right-handed neutrinos are introduced. In this case the light-neutrinos become Majorana particles and the scenario can be tested at neutrinoless double beta decay experiments. A more straightforward way for the generation of neutrino masses in parallel with the generation of quark or charged lepton masses is just to introduce right-handed neutrinos to get Dirac neutrino masses with the assumption of lepton number conservation to forbid the Majorana mass terms of the right-handed neutrinos. The problem in this case is coupling is of order 1. To give Dirac masses to neutrinos, while avoiding this large hierarchy the small neutrino masses are explained by the small VEV of a second Higgs doublet (v1 = √ authors in ref. [1] introduced global U(1) symmetry, U(1)X , which is softly broken to forbid Majorana mass terms of the right-handed neutrinos. In their model, all the SM fermions except neutrinos obtain masses via Yukawa interactions with the SM-like Higgs doublet, the small VEV is obtained by seesaw-like formulas v1 = 1 eV can be obtained by m12 ∼ O(100) keV. model the global symmetry, U(1)X , is spontaneously broken down to discrete Z2 symmetry by VEV of a new singlet scalar, S. The remnant Z2 symmetry makes the dark matter candidate stable. The resulting Goldstone boson provides a new annihilation channel for the DM relic density. It is feebly coupled to the SM particles due to tiny v1, avoiding experimental constraints. We also study the DM direct detection and indirect detection. They are typically well below the current experimental sensitivity. The paper is organized as follows. In section 2, we introduce our model. In section 3, we study DM phenomenology in our model: relic abundance, direct and indirect detection of the DM. In section 4, we conclude. The model In this section, we introduce our model which is an extension of the model given in ref. [1]. The scalar field contents and new fermions are summarized in table. 1 where we also show the charge assignments under global U(1)X symmetry. We can write U(1)X -invariant as well as the SM-gauge invariant scalar potential, Yukawa interactions for the leptons and new fields as L ⊃ −yiej L¯iΦ2eRj − yiνj L¯i Φ˜1νRj + h.c, L ⊃ ψ¯iγμ∂μψ − mψψ¯ψ − 2 much smaller than electroweak scale to obtain tiny neutrino mass [1, 2]. In addition, a Z2 odd particle while other particles including those in SM sector are even under the Z2, Here we note that a global symmetry is considered to be broken by quantum effect at Planck scale, Mpl. In such a case we would have a Planck suppressed effective opernot suppressed by very small dimensionless coupling. This instability could be avoided assuming our global U(1)X is a subgroup of some gauge symmetry broken at scale higher we just assume our DM candidate is stabilized by the Z2 from U(1)X . On the other hand, the breaking of the global U(1)X at Planck scale does not affect neutrino mass since such The scalar fields can be written by Φ1 =  √12 (v1 + h1 + ia1)  , Φ2 =  √12 (v2 + h2 + ia2) since aS becomes physical Goldstone boson as shown below. The VEVs of the scalar fields −2m121v1 + 2λ1v13 + v1(λ1SvS2 + λ3v22 + λ4v22) − −2m222v2 + 2λ2v23 + v2(λ2SvS2 + λ3v12 + λ4v12) − −2m2SSvS + 2λSvS3 + vS(λ1Sv12 + λ2Sv22) − √2µv 2vS = 0, √2µv 1vS = 0, √2µv 1v2 = 0. the same order with µ : √2µv 2vS v1 ≃ λ1SvS2 + (λ3 + λ4)v22 − 2m211 . Yukawa coupling Y ν is O(1)[O(10−6)(∼ me/v2)]. We note, however, that small µ (≪ v) to additional U(1) under which only the S field is charged while all the others are neutral. Here we consider masses and mass eigenstate of the scalar sector by analyzing the scalar potential with v1 ∼ µ ≪ {v2, vS}. Pseudo-scalar. Mass matrix for pseudo-scalars is given, in the basis of (a1, a2, aS), by −vS −v2 −v2 v1 less Nambu-Goldstone (NG) boson which is absorbed by Z boson. The mass of A is given by m2A = µ (v12v22 + v12vS2 + v22vS2) √2v1v2vS ≃ √2v1 Note that the existence of physical Goldstone boson a does not lead to serious problems in particle physics or cosmology since it does not couple to SM particles directly except to SM Higgs. Invisible decay width of Z-boson strongly constrains the Z → Hia decay.1 Since heavier than the Z-boson mass to evade the problem [7]. In our model, a can couple also Our model can also contribute about 0.39 to the effective number of neutrino species discrepancy between Hubble Space Telescope [9] and Plank [11] in the measurement of Hubble constant. Since the mechanism is almost the same with that detailed in [4] we do M H2± = − 2 ( imately G±, the NG boson absorbed by W ± boson. We obtain the charged Higgs mass as m2H± = (v12 + v22)(√2µv S − λ4v1v2) CP-even scalar. In the case of CP-even scalar, all three components are physical, and M H2 = (λ3 + λ4)v1v2 − √ ≃  √2v1 1Hi(i = 1, 2, 3) are neutral scalars defined below. scale and the mixings between h1 and other components are negligibly small while the h2 are given by m2H2,H3 = m−2222−mm223233 , m222 + m323 ∓ (m222 − m233)2 + 4m423 , L ⊃ ψ¯′iγμ∂μψ′ − mψψ¯′ψ′ − 2vS a pair of self-charge-conjugate fields; − = √−i 2The numerical analyses on the Higgs decays are performed using the program HDECAY, see refs. [12, 13]. Then mass eigenstates are obtained as Higgs doublet sector which is consistent with current SM Higgs analysis [17]. In addition, we take into account constraint from h → aa decay which is induced by interaction term and we require upper limit of the branching ratio as BR(h → aa) < 0.23 based on constraint of invisible decay of SM Higgs [18–20]. The phenomenology of two Higgs doublet sector and constraints are discussed in refs. [1, 21, 22] in detail. We thus focus on DM physics in the following analysis. which satisfy Majorana conditions ψ±c = ψ ± and have mass eigenvalues mass eigenstates is given by − 2 2 L ⊃ 2 1 X ψ¯α [iγμ∂μ − m±] ψα − 4vS Dark matter physics In this section, we discuss DM physics such as relic density, direct detection and indirect − which is stable due to Z2 symmetry as a remnant of the global U(1)X symmetry. Interactions relevant to DM physics are obtained from the kinetic term of S, terms in eq. (2.1), and (2.20): L ⊃ − 2√2 ρ(ψ¯+ψ+ − ψ¯−ψ−) − 4vS ρ∂μa∂μa − µ 1S ρ φ1+φ1− + (h12 + a12) terms of mass eigenstates via eq. (2.17). In the following analysis, we consider four different scenarios for the coupling constants: (I) f ≤ f as figure 1-(A) [4, 23–25] and aa via process in figure 1-(B). In the scenario (II), final − − → H3 → H3H3 mode in figure 1-(B) is added. In the scenarios (III) and (IV), a DM pair dominantly and (D), and aa channel in figure 1-(B) which contributes to both scenarios. Note that, µ 2S into account Higgs portal interaction [26–32] with the mixing effect for scenario (III). √4π and µ 1S,2S,SS ≪ 0.1 GeV, (II) f ≤ Relic density We estimate the thermal relic density of DM numerically using micrOMEGAs 4.3.1 [33] to solve the Boltzmann equation by implementing relevant interactions inducing the DM pair annihilation processes. Then we search for parameter sets which satisfy the approximate region for the relic density [34] In numerical calculations random parameter sets are prepared in the following parameter ranges for each scenario: For all scenario : − ∈ [50, 1100] GeV, mH3 ∈ [30, 2200], vS = 1000 GeV, scenario (I) : f ∈ [0.1, √4π], µ 1S = µ 2S = µ SS = 10−3 GeV, mH1 = mH± = mA ∈ [70, mψ] GeV, In figure 2, we show parameter points which explain the observed relic density of DM for scenario (I) where red and blue points correspond to the case of (a) m − + m+ > mH3 > m relic density with f < √4π since only ψ ψ − > mH3 . We find that the case of mH3 > m − + m+ cannot provide observed ± → aa channel is allowed. In the case (a), H3a is enhanced near threshold mH3 ≃ m − + m+ due to the t-channel propagator of ψ − → H3H3, aa, shown in figure 1-(A),(B). The resonance dominance in the case (a). We find that the allowed parameter points for scenario (II) is similar to scenario (I) − → H3 → H3H3 is subdominant. The allowed − > mH3 while most of µ SS region can be allowed. Since the result is similar to that of scenario (I) we omit the plot for scenario (II). The allowed parameter points for scenario (III) and (IV) are given in figure 3 in − as can be seen from figure 1-(C) and (D) can explain the relic density since resonant enhance10% is required. For the resonant region, wide range of µ 2S(1S) is allowed as shown in left plots of figure 3. For scenario (III), parameter space with large value of µ 2S is constrained Higgs. In addition, larger resonant enhancement is required to obtain sufficient annihilation cross section. In scenario (IV), also dependence on the value of mH1 is small unless it is not very close to that of m . Direct detection Here we discuss direct detection of DM in our model focusing on our scenario (III) since by the SM Higgs exchanging process via mixing effect in scalar sector in our model, which is calculated in non-relativistic limit. We obtain the following effective Lagrangian by integrating out h and H3; Leff = 2√2v m2h − m2H3 where the effective coupling constant fN is obtained by Here we replace the heavy quark contribution by the gluon contributions such that [30] Leff = 2√2v m2h − m2H3 − − fN = X fqN = hN |q¯q|N i. fqN = mN q=c,b,t mass respectively, and the sum is over all quark flavors. The effective Lagrangian can be which is obtained by calculating the triangle diagram. The trace of the stress energy tensor is written as follows by considering the scale anomaly; Combining eqs. (3.11) and (3.12), we obtain fqN = 9 1 − fN = m2h − m2H3 nucleon and DM. For simplicity, we estimate DM-neutron scattering cross section since of neutron [36]. The figure 4 shows the DM-nucleon scattering cross section for the allowed parameter sets in scenario (III); for other scenarios the cross section is negligibly small constraint from LUX [37] (few parameter space is excluded), and some parameter sets would be tested in future direct detection experiments [38]. Indirect detection Here we discuss possibility of indirect detection in our model. The thermally averaged cross section in current Universe is estimated with micrOMEGAs 4.3.1 applying allowed parameter sets. The figure 5 shows the cross section for scenario (I) and scenarios (III,IV) in left and right panel respectively; the scenario (II) provide same feature as scenario (I) and the corresponding plot is omitted here. For scenario (I), colors of points correspond to that of in figure 2. We find that the cross section is suppressed since the amplitude of the process decreases as momentum of − → H3H3 does not change much while that for − is required in the latter case and the current cross section can be much different from that in freeze out era; the case of mH3 ≃ (.)2m mH3 & 2m amplitude decreases as DM momentum. The H3 further decays into hh and SM particles current constraint by LUX [37] and future prospect by XENON 1t [38]. ScenarioHIII, IVL sets which provides observed relic density. In the left plot, colors of points correspond to that in figure 2. In the right plot, red and blue points correspond to scenario (III) and (IV) respectively. pattern of H3 and detailed analysis is beyond the scope of this paper. The scenario (II) provide same result as scenario (I) since annihilation processes are almost same. For scenario (III) and (IV), the s-channel processes with µ 2S and µ 1S can be also − − → µ 2S from mixing with H3 and SM Higgs. Note that due to resonant enhancement the cross section can be ∼ 10−27cm2/s for the processe ψ−ψ − → H3 → {H1H1, AA, H+H−} such as Fermi-LAT [39] since H± decay into charged leptons. The decays of {H1, A, H±} also provide neutrino flux, which is much smaller than current constraint by High energy neutrino search such as IceCube [40, 41], and It would be tested in future observation. Conclusions and discussions We have studied a dark matter model in which neutrinos get Dirac masses. The global U(1)X symmetry forbids the Majorana mass terms of the right-handed neutrinos, thereby allowing the Dirac masses for the neutrinos. The same symmetry, broken down to a discrete Z2 symmetry, guarantees the stability of a dark matter candidate which is a hidden sector fermion charged under the global U(1)X . The spontaneous symmetry breaking of U(1)X occurs due to VEV, vS, of a hidden sector scalar S whose pseudo-scalar component becomes Goldstone boson, providing a new channel to the DM annihilations. S, SM Higgs and S, and scalar doublet for neutrinos and S, respectively. In scenario (I), In scenarios (I) and (II), depending on the DM mass, coupling f & 0.05 can explain the current DM relic abundance. In scenarios (III) and (IV), the DM relic density can be accommodated near the resonance, 2m − ≈ mH3 , where the DM annihilation cross section Only scenario (III) has tree-level contribution to the direct detection via dark-scalar mixing with the SM Higgs boson. Even in this case the direct detection cross section is marginal or well below the current LUX bound due to small mixing as observed at the LHC. We also investigated the implications of our model on the indirect detection of DM. − → {aH3, H3H3}, are suppressed because the − → aa can be sizable due to Breit-Wigner enhancement. However, aa channel can not be detected by the observation. In scenario (III), the cross section for hh channel is suppressed due to constraint from H3 and SM mixing. On the other hand, In scenario (IV), with resonant enhancement the when scalar bosons decay into charged fermions. Acknowledgments This work is supported in part by National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) Research Grant NRF-2015R1A2A1A05001869 (SB). Open Access. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits any use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited. Phys. Rev. D 80 (2009) 095008 [arXiv:0906.3335] [INSPIRE]. condensation, Europhys. Lett. 76 (2006) 388 [hep-ph/0601018] [INSPIRE]. Phys. Lett. B 760 (2016) 807 [arXiv:1508.06635] [INSPIRE]. Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 (2013) 241301 [arXiv:1305.1971] [INSPIRE]. Proceedings of the 1979 Carg`ese Institute on Recent Developments in Gauge Theories, G. ’t Hooft et al. eds., Plenum Press, New York U.S.A., (1980) [NATO Sci. Ser. B 59 (1980) 135] [INSPIRE]. Zee-Babu model, JHEP 08 (2015) 023 [arXiv:1410.1992] [INSPIRE]. [7] P.H. Frampton, M.C. Oh and T. Yoshikawa, Majorana mass zeroes from triplet VEV without majoron problem, Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002) 033007 [hep-ph/0204273] [INSPIRE]. scale, Phys. Rev. Lett. 61 (1988) 2420 [INSPIRE]. [9] A.G. Riess et al., A 2.4% determination of the local value of the Hubble constant, Astrophys. J. 826 (2016) 56 [arXiv:1604.01424] [INSPIRE]. and the structure formation, Phys. Lett. B 762 (2016) 462 [arXiv:1608.01083] [INSPIRE]. parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 594 (2016) A13 [arXiv:1502.01589] [INSPIRE]. [12] A. Djouadi, J. Kalinowski and M. Spira, HDECAY: a program for Higgs boson decays in the Standard Model and its supersymmetric extension, Comput. Phys. Commun. 108 (1998) 56 [hep-ph/9704448] [INSPIRE]. program SUSY-HIT (SUspect-SdecaY-HDECAY-InTerface), Acta Phys. Polon. B 38 (2007) 635 [hep-ph/0609292] [INSPIRE]. [14] S. Choi, S. Jung and P. Ko, Implications of LHC data on 125 GeV Higgs-like boson for the Standard Model and its various extensions, JHEP 10 (2013) 225 [arXiv:1307.3948] Higgs data, JHEP 10 (2015) 057 [arXiv:1507.06158] [INSPIRE]. diphoton resonance and the 125 GeV Standard Model Higgs boson with Higgs-singlet mixing, Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) 033010 [arXiv:1512.07853] [INSPIRE]. ) in generic two-Higgs-doublet models, Phys. Rev. D 93 (2016) 095004 [arXiv:1511.08544] [INSPIRE]. in pp collisions at √ [arXiv:1508.07869] [INSPIRE]. [18] ATLAS collaboration, Search for invisible decays of a Higgs boson using vector-boson fusion [19] ATLAS collaboration, Constraints on new phenomena via Higgs boson couplings and invisible decays with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 11 (2015) 206 [arXiv:1509.00672] [20] CMS collaboration, Searches for invisible decays of the Higgs boson in pp collisions at minimal neutrinophilic two-Higgs-doublet models, JHEP 12 (2015) 160 [arXiv:1507.07550] neutrinophilic two-Higgs-doublet models from flavor physics, JHEP 01 (2016) 018 [arXiv:1510.04284] [INSPIRE]. [23] M. Lindner, D. Schmidt and T. Schwetz, Dark matter and neutrino masses from global JHEP 09 (2014) 153 [arXiv:1209.1685] [INSPIRE]. [25] S. Baek and H. Okada, Hidden sector dark matter with global U(1)X -symmetry and [arXiv:0803.2932] [INSPIRE]. JHEP 05 (2013) 036 [arXiv:1212.2131] [INSPIRE]. [arXiv:1405.3530] [INSPIRE]. Phys. Lett. B 746 (2015) 351 [arXiv:1501.07413] [INSPIRE]. Phys. Lett. B 759 (2016) 91 [arXiv:1604.03738] [INSPIRE]. from milky way dwarf spheroidal galaxies with six years of Fermi Large Area Telescope data, [40] IceCube collaboration, R. Abbasi et al., Search for dark matter from the galactic halo with the IceCube neutrino observatory, Phys. Rev. D 84 (2011) 022004 [arXiv:1101.3349] searches for dark matter and exotic particles, arXiv:1309.7007 [INSPIRE]. [1] S.M. Davidson and H.E. Logan , Dirac neutrinos from a second Higgs doublet , [2] F. Wang , W. Wang and J.M. Yang , Split two-Higgs-doublet model and neutrino [3] Y . Mambrini , S. Profumo and F.S. Queiroz , Dark matter and global symmetries , [4] S. Weinberg , Goldstone bosons as fractional cosmic neutrinos , [5] G. 't Hooft, Naturalness, chiral symmetry, and spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking , in [21] P.A.N. Machado , Y.F. Perez , O. Sumensari , Z. Tabrizi and R.Z. Funchal , On the viability of [22] E. Bertuzzo , Y.F. Perez G. , O. Sumensari and R. Zukanovich Funchal , Limits on [24] S. Baek , P. Ko , H. Okada and E. Senaha , Can Zee-Babu model implemented with scalar dark [26] Y.G. Kim , K.Y. Lee and S. Shin , Singlet fermionic dark matter , JHEP 05 ( 2008 ) 100 [27] S. Baek , P. Ko and W.-I. Park , Search for the Higgs portal to a singlet fermionic dark matter at the LHC , JHEP 02 ( 2012 ) 047 [arXiv:1112. 1847 ] [INSPIRE]. [28] S. Baek , P. Ko and W.-I. Park , Singlet portal extensions of the standard seesaw models to a dark sector with local dark symmetry , JHEP 07 ( 2013 ) 013 [arXiv:1303.4280] [INSPIRE]. [29] S. Baek , P. Ko , W.-I. Park and E. Senaha , Higgs portal vector dark matter: revisited , [30] S. Baek , P. Ko and W.-I. Park , Invisible Higgs decay width vs. dark matter direct detection cross section in Higgs portal dark matter models , Phys. Rev. D 90 (2014) 055014 [31] C.- H. Chen and T. Nomura , SU(2)X vector DM and galactic center γ-ray excess , [32] S. Baek , T. Nomura and H. Okada , An explanation of one-loop induced h → µτ decay , [33] G. B´elanger, F. Boudjema , A. Pukhov and A. Semenov , MicrOMEGAs4 .1: two dark matter candidates , Comput. Phys. Commun . 192 ( 2015 ) 322 [arXiv:1407.6129] [INSPIRE]. [34] Planck collaboration , P. A.R. Ade et al., Planck 2013 results. XVI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 571 ( 2014 ) A16 [arXiv:1303 .5076] [INSPIRE]. [35] J. Hisano , R. Nagai and N. Nagata , Effective theories for dark matter nucleon scattering , JHEP 05 ( 2015 ) 037 [arXiv:1502.02244] [INSPIRE]. [36] G. B´elanger, F. Boudjema , A. Pukhov and A. Semenov , MicrOMEGAs3: a program for calculating dark matter observables , Comput. Phys. Commun . 185 ( 2014 ) 960 [arXiv:1305.0237] [INSPIRE]. [37] LUX collaboration, D.S. Akerib et al., Results from a search for dark matter in the complete LUX exposure , Phys. Rev. Lett . 118 ( 2017 ) 021303 [arXiv:1608.07648] [INSPIRE]. [38] XENON collaboration, E. Aprile et al., Physics reach of the XENON1T dark matter experiment , JCAP 04 ( 2016 ) 027 [arXiv:1512.07501] [INSPIRE]. [39] Fermi-LAT collaboration , M. Ackermann et al., Searching for dark matter annihilation [41] IceCube collaboration , M.G. Aartsen et al., The IceCube neutrino observatory part IV:


This is a preview of a remote PDF: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2FJHEP03%282017%29059.pdf

Seungwon Baek, Takaaki Nomura. Dark matter physics in neutrino specific two Higgs doublet model, Journal of High Energy Physics, 2017, 59, DOI: 10.1007/JHEP03(2017)059