Technicolor in Lightof LHC Data
R. Sekhar ChivukulaMichigan State University

ATLAS Higgs Results

Moriond 2012

CMS Higgs Results

Moriond 2012

Last Summer

Now ... Great Relief?!

http://www.thebookofbiff.com/shirts/

http://www.oufusion.org.uk“Don’t sell the skin until you have caught the bear”
Fabiola Gianotti, via @seancarroll

With or Without a Higgs Boson

ATLAS/CMS are exploring awhole new world!

LHC Higgs Sensitivity
σ(pp → H)

λt

BR(H → X)

W +, Zf

HHf¯λfReach Extends to non-standard models
including models of DEWSB!

λV V W − , ZDynamical Electroweak
Symmetry BReaking

Technicolor• Use scaled-up QCD to break electroweak
symmetry

No hierarchy
problem!
S?
Gauge Symmetry + SSB =Higgs Mechanism

But: difficult to accommodate top-quark!

Walking Technicolor

If βTC∼0, we expectγm∼1, enhancing
fermion masses.

A realistic (E)TC model will not be like QCD!
Holdom, Yamawaki et. al., Appelquist and Wijewardana

Low/Multi-Scale technicolorOr, minimal SU(2) theory... Sannino, et. al.
Eliminated by Lattice Calculations!

Our interest: π0TCe.g.The “Technicolor” Straw Man
Eichten, Lane, Womersley

Lane and Mrenna, Phys. Rev. D67:115011,2003

Top Quark Mass Generation

Challenge: ETC must violate custodial symmetry tomake mt >> mb. But how to keep this from causing
additional large contributions to ∆ρ ?
Are new interactions required to explain top-quark mass?

TopColor Assisted Technicolor

1= ft2 + FT2 C ≈ (246 GeV)2 ,v =√2GF
2Hill, hep-ph/9411426

ft = O(60 GeV) � v

See talk by Simmons

Technicolor in the LHC
Era

RSC, EHS, P. Ittisamai, J. Ren, Phys. Rev. D84 (2011) 115025

LHC Technipion Sensitivity
gtgtPQPQgmb∝
FPbQPtg

ε t mt∝FPb̄

g1 g2A(P → V1 V2 ) = NT C AV1 V2 2 �µνλσ k1µ k2ν �λ1 �σ28π FPModels with Colored Technifermions
TC models
FS one family (Farhi:1980)

P1

Variant one family (Casalbuoni:1998)

P0

LR multiscale (Lane:1991)

P

0

TCSM low scale (Lane:1999)
MR Isotriplet (Manohar:1990)

0�πT
1P

PNGB and content1√(3L̄γ5 L − Q̄γ5 Q)
4 3v/FP21√(3Ēγ5 E − D̄γ5 D)2 611√

4(L̄� γ5 L� − 2Q̄γ5 Q)
6 21√(3L̄γ5 L − Q̄γ5 Q)
4 31√(3L̄γ5 L − Q̄γ5 Q)
6 2√
ND4Agg− √13− √16√
2 2− 3− √13− √12Aγγ
4
√

3 316
√
3√ 68 29100√
27√324 2y 2λl1
√
61λf1
�

1
11
1

2
31

(... or build models w/o colored technifermions - Shrock)Technipion Properties
130 GeVDecay
Channelbb̄cc̄τ +τ −ggγγ
W +W −OneFamily
NT CNT C=2=47756
75.1
4.5
3.3
1235
0.011 0.033
00Variantone family
NT C N T C=2=46150003226
7230.11 0.3500Multiscale
NT C
=264
5.8
3.8260.0250NT C
=436
3.2
2.1
59
0.056
0TCSM
low-scale
NT C NT C=2=47756
75.1
4.5
3.3
12350.088 0.26
00Isotriplet
NT C
=260
5.4
3.5
14170NT C=431
2.8
1.829360SM
Higgs
49
2.3
5.5
7.90.2331350 GeVDecay
Channelbb̄cc̄τ +τ −ggγγ+W W−OneFamily
NT CNT C=2=44418
41.6
2.6
14979
0.047 0.076
00Variantone family
NT C N T C=2=442200022
1135680.54
100Multiscale
NT C
=224
2.2
1.4
72
0.069
0NT C
=47.70.69
0.45
91
0.087
0TCSM
low-scale
NT C N T C=2=44418
4
1.6
2.6
149
79
0.36 0.58
00Isotriplet
NT C
=220
1.8
1.2
34420NT C
=46.2
0.56
0.36
41510SM
Higgs
0.036
0.00170.00480.085∼068

H→γγ Limits

Constrains generic scalar decaying
to two photons
ATLAS-CONF-2011-161
CMS arxiv:1202.1487

(a) Traditional one-family model [3].

Limits(b) Variant one-(b) Variant one-family
Light Technipion Limits:
γγ model [4].

(a) Traditional one-family model [3].
2104"" channel

010"" channel

TCSM Low-Scale (Lane)ATLAS (4.9 fb-1)+ CMS (4.76 fb-1)-1-1
ATLAS (1.08 fb ) + CMS (1.66 fb )NTC=4, ND=10
NTC=3, ND=8
NTC=2, ND=5103(! x BR)P / (! x BR)SM101

Variant One Family (Casalbuoni et al)-1-1
ATLAS (4.9 fb )+ CMS (4.76 fb )ATLAS (1.08 fb-1) + CMS (1.66 fb-1)
NTC=4
NTC=3
NTC=2102

1

10

100
10-1
110

ATLAS/CMS Aug vs Dec 2011 Data
115120ATLAS/CMS Aug vs Dec 2011 Data

10-1
110

125
130
135140145
115
120
MP [GeV] (c) Multiscale walking technicolor model [5].

(b) Variant
one-familymodel[4]. [5].
(c) Multiscalewalking
technicolor
model

LHC excludes orange region
Model curves are for
NTC = 2, 3, 4
Minimum value is 2 ...

125
130135140145(d)Technicolor
StrawManMP [GeV]6(d) 10Technicolor
Straw Man (TCSM) low-scalemodel [6].
Isotriplet (Manohar-Randall)"" channel
105(! x BR)P / (! x BR)SM(! x BR)P / (! x BR)SM

10104
103
102101ATLAS (4.9 fb-1)+ CMS (4.76 fb-1)
ATLAS (1.08 fb-1) + CMS (1.66 fb-1)
NTC=4
NTC=3
NTC=2100

Chivukula, Ittisamai, Ren, SimmonsPhys. Rev. D84 (2011) 115025

10ATLAS/CMS Aug vs Dec 2011 Data-1110115120125130
MP [GeV]135140145

H→ττ Limits

Constrains generic scalar decayingto two taus

ATLAS arxiv:1107.5003

Heavy Technipion Limits: ττ310310ττ channel

One Family (Farhi-Susskind)ττ channel

Multiscale (Lane-Ramana)

εt=0.5ATLAS (1.06 fb-1)
NTC=4
NTC=3
NTC=2Top-loop (NTC=2)

101

ATLAS (1.06 fb-1)
NTC=6
NTC=4
NTC=3
NTC=2Top-loop (NTC=2)102σgg x BR(ττ) [pb]σgg x BR(ττ) [pb]102εt=0.5100

1100

1010-1

10-2150200

250
MP [GeV]g

300g

350

PQ200gQQ

10-1150+/-300t
Ptg

250
MP [GeV]tε t mt
FP
Chivukula, Ittisamai, Ren, SimmonsPhys. Rev. D84 (2011) 115025

350

Conclusions: Part I• ATLAS/CMS results are strongly

constraining technipions in models withcolored technifermions.

• We are (finally!) at the TeV frontier.

No Higgs?

Higgsless Models

General Principles
Higgsless models are low-energy effective theories ofDynamical Electroweak Symmetry Breaking with. They
include:• massive 4-d gauge bosons arise in the context ofa 5-d gauge theory with appropriate boundaryconditions• WW scattering is unitarized through exchange of
KK modes (instead of scalar bosons)• the language of Deconstruction allows a 4-d“Moose” representation of the modelCsaki, Grojean, Murayama, Pilo, Terning hep-ph/0305237; Chivukula& He hep-ph/0201164

R13-Site Model: Basic Structure
SU (2) × SU (2) × U (1)g0 , g2 ! g1ψR1 tR2 , bR2
Rgf1
0

gf2
1

g2

L

ψL0

ψL1

Gauge boson spectrum: photon, Z, Zʼ, W, Wʼ (as in BESS)
Fermion spectrum: t, T, b, B (ψis an SU(2) doublet)and also c,C, s,S, u,U, d,D plus the leptons
RSC, Coleppa, DiChiara, He, Kurachi, EHS, Tanabashi hep-ph/0607124

3-Site Fermion masses
SU (2) × SU (2) × U (1)Rgf10gf2
1g0 , g2 ! g1g2

LLH Boundary Fermion“Bulk Fermion”

���uRM �L ψ̄L0 Σ01 ψR1 + ψ̄R1 ψL1 + ψ̄L1 Σ120

RH Boundary Fermion

0�dR

��

uR2
dR2

degree of delocalization

ordinary fermion masses are of the form mf ≈ M �L �f R
each ordinary fermion mass value is tied to �f Rflavor structure same as in standard model
heavy “KK” fermion masses are ~ M��3-Site Ideal Delocalization
f 2wgi (ψi ) = gW vi

General ideal delocalization condition
f 20g0 (ψL0 )vW= 1f 2vW
g1 (ψL1 )is realized asin 3-site model

From the W, fermion eigenvectors, one solves for�2L → (1 + �2f R )2

�

2x+2

�

�2f R

1−82

�

x + ···
4�x2 ≡For all but top quark, !f R ! 1 so the choice

�

g0
g1

�2

�2L ≈ 2≈4��MW�
MW2MW2MW��makes Wʼ fermiophobic and Zʼ nearly soŜ = T̂ = W = 02(ΣW − ΣZ )Y = MW

Use WW scattering to see Wʼ: Birkedal, Matchev, Perelstein hep-ph/0412278

�23-Site Parameter SpaceKK fermion
mass (GeV)

Chivukula et al. hep-ph/0607124

M T,B

25000

Allowed Region
20000

Unitarity
violated

MW � << MT,B15000
10000

M 2 �4tR∆ρ =16 π 2 v 25000
0WWZ vertex
visibly altered

400

600

800

1000

1200

MW’Wʼ mass (GeV)

1-loop fermionic EW
precision corrections too large

LHC PhenomenologyRSC, EHS, H.-J. He, Y.-P. Kuang, et. al., Phys. Rev. D78 (2008) 031701
and work in progress

LHCW’,Z’Signatures:
Production and Decay at LHCννReferences

W’ production at LHC
Two processes with large rates and clear signatures!
Vector Boson
FusionAssociatedProduction

LHC @14 TeV

Associated Production (WZZ channel)
500 GeV Wʼ boson

References

Vector Boson Fusion(WZjj channel)

500 GeV Wʼ boson

Background is
10x larger thanestimated in
Birkedal, Matchev& Perelstein (2005)

forward jet tag removes WZ backgroundIntegrated Luminosity for W’ Discovery
LHC at14 TeV

AssociatedFusion

Integrated Luminosity for W’ Discovery
Associated Production

LHC at 8 TeVPreliminary

5σ3σ
3σ “evidence” up
to ~400 GeV

Conclusions: Part II• ATLAS/CMS will have substantial reach in
Higgsless models as well, at 14 TeV.

• Investigations at 8 TeV are underway.

Backup Slides

Z’ Search at LHC
Ohl & Speckner predict that the 3site Zʼ boson (at or near idealdelocalization) should be visible in
100 fb-1 of LHC datapT ≥ 50 GeV| cos θ| ≤ 0.95

75 GeV ≤ mjj ≤ 85 GeV

MW � = 500 GeV
Ohl & Speckner arXiv:0809.0023