https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-4810-0
Regular Article - Theoretical Physics
Likelihood analysis of the minimal AMSB model
1
DESY, Notkestraße 85, 22607, Hamburg, Germany
2
Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, 15706, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
3
Science Laboratories, Department of Physics, Institute for Particle Physics Phenomenology, University of Durham, South Road, Durham, DH1 3LE, UK
4
Faculty of Physics, Institute of Theoretical Physics, University of Warsaw, ul. Pasteura 5, 02-093, Warsaw, Poland
5
High Energy Physics Group, Blackett Laboratory, Imperial College, Prince Consort Road, London, SW7 2AZ, UK
6
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, P.O. Box 500, Batavia, IL, 60510, USA
7
Physics Department, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, 60607-7059, USA
8
Experimental Physics Department, CERN, 1211, Geneva 23, Switzerland
9
Antwerp University, 2610, Wilrijk, Belgium
10
ARC Centre of Excellence for Particle Physics at the Terascale, School of Physics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, 3010, Australia
11
Theoretical Particle Physics and Cosmology Group, Department of Physics, King’s College London, London, WC2R 2LS, UK
12
Theoretical Physics Department, CERN, 1211, Geneva 23, Switzerland
13
H.H. Wills Physics Laboratory, University of Bristol, Tyndall Avenue, Bristol, BS8 1TL, UK
14
Campus of International Excellence UAM+CSIC, Cantoblanco, 28049, Madrid, Spain
15
Instituto de Física Teórica UAM-CSIC, C/ Nicolas Cabrera 13-15, 28049, Madrid, Spain
16
Instituto de Física de Cantabria (CSIC-UC), Avda. de Los Castros s/n, 39005, Cantabria, Spain
17
Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, 8057, Zurich, Switzerland
18
Kavli IPMU (WPI), UTIAS, The University of Tokyo, Kashiwa, Chiba, 277-8583, Japan
19
William I. Fine Theoretical Physics Institute, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, 55455, USA
* e-mail: martino.borsato@cern.ch
Received:
21
December
2016
Accepted:
5
April
2017
Published online:
27
April
2017
We perform a likelihood analysis of the minimal anomaly-mediated supersymmetry-breaking (mAMSB) model using constraints from cosmology and accelerator experiments. We find that either a wino-like or a Higgsino-like neutralino LSP, 
, may provide the cold dark matter (DM), both with similar likelihoods. The upper limit on the DM density from Planck and other experiments enforces 
after the inclusion of Sommerfeld enhancement in its annihilations. If most of the cold DM density is provided by the , the measured value of the Higgs mass favours a limited range of 
(and also for 
if 
) but the scalar mass 
is poorly constrained. In the wino-LSP case, 
is constrained to about 
and 
to 
, whereas in the Higgsino-LSP case has just a lower limit 
(
) and is constrained to 
in the 
(
) scenario. In neither case can the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon, 
, be improved significantly relative to its Standard Model (SM) value, nor do flavour measurements constrain the model significantly, and there are poor prospects for discovering supersymmetric particles at the LHC, though there are some prospects for direct DM detection. On the other hand, if the contributes only a fraction of the cold DM density, future LHC [see pdf] -based searches for gluinos, squarks and heavier chargino and neutralino states as well as disappearing track searches in the wino-like LSP region will be relevant, and interference effects enable 
to agree with the data better than in the SM in the case of wino-like DM with .
© The Author(s), 2017
