Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 50 references

Neutralino dark matter in gauge mediation

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Neutralino dark matter can work in gauge-mediated supersymmetry if the gravitino is heavy, and four scenarios survive current limits.

desk verdict Useful but incomplete mapping of known neutralino DM scenarios onto a 5D heavy-gravitino gauge mediation model; the relic abundance is imported rather than computed and the B-term realization is unshown, but the paper is honest and deserves a serious referee. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.07539 v1 pith:ZZRH32I5 submitted 2025-02-11 hep-ph hep-ex

Michihisa Takeuchi , Norimi Yokozaki , Junhao Zhu This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phhep-ex
keywords neutralinodarkmattergauge-mediatedsupersymmetrybreakinggravitinofive-dimensionalorbifoldbino-winocoannihilationhiggsinowinoentropydilution
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper asks whether the lightest neutralino can be the dark matter in gauge-mediated supersymmetry breaking, in which the gravitino would normally be the lightest supersymmetric particle and suffer from overproduction. It argues yes, provided the gravitino is made heavy, of order 100 TeV, by placing the SUSY-breaking and matter sectors on separate branes in a five-dimensional setup so that flavor and CP problems are suppressed. Four scenarios are explored: bino-wino coannihilation, higgsino-like dark matter near 1.1 TeV, wino-like dark matter near 2.8 TeV, and entropy-diluted bino dark matter. For each, the paper identifies parameter regions whose spin-independent cross sections fall below the current LUX-ZEPLIN bound but remain above the neutrino floor, and whose collider signatures are consistent with existing searches. If the construction is right, these are concrete targets for the High-Luminosity LHC and next-generation direct detection.

What carries the argument

The key machinery is the five-dimensional $S^1/Z_2$ orbifold with the SUSY-breaking field on one brane and the matter and messenger fields on another, together with the messenger-sector B-terms $B_1$, $B_3$, $B_5$. After integrating out the messenger fields, the gaugino masses are approximately $\tilde{M}_b \simeq (g_1^2/16\pi^2)(B_5+B_1)$, $\tilde{M}_w \simeq (g_2^2/16\pi^2)B_5$, and $\tilde{M}_g \simeq (g_3^2/16\pi^2)(B_5+B_3)$. Taking $|B_1|\gg|B_5|$ with $B_1/B_5<0$ makes the bino nearly degenerate with the wino, $M_1\simeq -1.05\,M_2$, while lifting the stau mass above the neutralino, enabling coannihilation. The heavy gravitino scale comes from gravitational SUSY breaking with an enhanced $\langle F_Z\rangle \simeq -(M_P^2/M_*^2)\,3m_{3/2}/\langle g'(\rho)\rangle$, and the gravitino lifetime $\tau_{3/2}\simeq 2.4\times10^{-2}\,\mathrm{s}\,(100\,\mathrm{TeV}/m_{3/2})^3$ is short enough that no BBN constraint arises. For the entropy-diluted scenario, a late-decaying messenger with decay rate $\Gamma_{\mathrm{mess}}\simeq (1/8\pi)y_\tau^2(\tilde{m}/M_{\mathrm{mess}})^2 M_{\mathrm{mess}}$ produces a dilution factor $\Delta = (4/3)M_{\mathrm{mess}}Y_{\mathrm{mess}}/T_d \sim \mathcal{O}(100)$.

What would settle it

A full numerical scan of the SUSY-breaking sector in Eq. (2) under the conditions $g''=g'''=0$ and $g^{(4)}<0$ that fails to find any choice reproducing $B_1/B_5<0$ with $|B_1|\gg|B_5|$, or a relic-density computation at the benchmark points P1 and P2 that gives $\Omega h^2$ away from $0.12$ by more than the quoted uncertainty, would refute the central claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that in gauge-mediated supersymmetry breaking with a gravitino mass of order $100$~TeV, the lightest neutralino, as the lightest supersymmetric particle (LSP), can be a viable dark matter candidate, provided the model is embedded in a five-dimensional $S^1/Z_2$ orbifold with SUSY breaking and matter on separate branes. It establishes this by deriving a messenger sector whose B-terms can be arranged to give $M_1 \simeq -1.05\,M_2$ at the messenger scale, and by checking four dark matter scenarios: bino-wino coannihilation with a mass splitting of 20--30 GeV, higgsino-like dark matter at about 1.1 TeV, wino-like dark matter at about 2.8 TeV, and bino dark matter diluted by entropy from late-decaying messengers. The paper reports spin-independent cross sections of $(2\text{--}4)\times10^{-12}$~pb for the bino scenarios and around $10^{-11}$~pb for the higgsino and wino scenarios, in each case below the current LZ bound $\sigma_{\mathrm{SI}}\lesssim3\times10^{-11}\,\mathrm{pb}(m_{\chi_1^0}/1\,\mathrm{TeV})$ and above the neutrino floor. It also gives benchmark spectra P1 and P2 whose sleptons and heavy Higgs bosons would be targets for the HL-LHC. The heavy gravitino decays before Big Bang nucleosynthesis, so the usual gravitino-overproduction problem is avoided.

Load-bearing premise

The whole construction assumes that some choice of the hidden-sector functions and field values in the SUSY-breaking Lagrangian produces the required messenger B-term pattern (|B1| much larger than |B5| and of opposite sign), and that the relic abundances quoted from earlier thermal and coannihilation calculations are accurate for the paper's own spectra.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If bino-wino coannihilation is the right scenario, the left-handed sleptons can weigh only a few hundred GeV, so dilepton-plus-missing-transverse-energy searches at the HL-LHC should eventually see them.
  • If the higgsino or wino scenario is right, spin-independent cross sections around $10^{-11}$~pb put both within reach of next-generation direct detection, with the wino case also testable through indirect detection depending on the halo profile.
  • If entropy-diluted bino dark matter is the right scenario, the model predicts a heavy Higgs sector with $m_A$ up to several TeV and a specific $\tan\beta$, testable through $H/A\to\tau^+\tau^-$ searches.
  • In all four scenarios the gravitino decays before Big Bang nucleosynthesis, removing the usual upper bound on the reheating temperature and allowing high-scale cosmology consistent with these models.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The assumed B-term pattern could in principle be checked by scanning the hidden-sector functions $g(\rho)$ and $h_i(\rho)$ under the shift symmetry; the paper leaves that scan as an open exercise, and its outcome is decisive.
  • The same neutralino mass windows could be transplanted into non-thermal production histories, for example with a modulus or saxion decaying later, without changing the collider signatures.
  • If future detectors rule out all four cross-section windows, that would not disprove gauge mediation generally; it would only constrain this specific heavy-gravitino brane-separated realization.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a five-dimensional gauge-mediated supersymmetry breaking model in which the gravitino has mass O(100) TeV and is not the LSP, so the lightest neutralino can be dark matter. The SUSY-breaking field and MSSM matter are placed on separate branes to suppress flavor and CP violation. Messenger B-terms B1, B3, B5 generate gaugino and sfermion masses through loop formulas, and four neutralino scenarios are studied: bino-wino coannihilation, higgsino-like DM near 1.1 TeV, wino-like DM near 2.8 TeV, and entropy-diluted bino DM. The authors scan the soft parameters, estimate spin-independent cross sections with micrOMEGAs 6.1.15, and compare with LZ and LHC constraints.

Significance. The paper's framework is timely: it offers a route to neutralino DM in gauge mediation without the usual gravitino overproduction problem, and the brane-separation construction is a clean way to address flavor and CP constraints. The mass formulas in Eqs. (16)-(17) and (29)-(31) are standard, and the numerical SI cross sections appear to use a credible tool. If the missing model-realization and relic-density steps are supplied, the four scenarios would give concrete, testable predictions (SI cross sections of 10^-11 to 10^-12 pb and light sleptons or heavy Higgses at the HL-LHC). At present, however, the central viability claims are not fully demonstrated for the paper's own spectra.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 2, Eqs. (14)-(16), Fig. 1] The bino-wino coannihilation region assumes that B1, B3, B5 can take the scanned values, in particular |B1| >> |B5| and B1/B5 < 0 to obtain M1 approximately -1.05 M2 at the messenger scale. In the model these B_i are not free inputs: Eq. (15) defines B_i = -k_i <X_i> - A_i, while A_i and m_i^2 are fixed by h_i(rho) and F_Z through Eq. (14). The paper never exhibits a choice of h_i(rho), k_i, and <X_i> that satisfies these relations with m_i^2 > 0 and with lambda_i <X_i> equal for all three messengers. Consequently, the stau LSP/tachyonic constraint and the coannihilation window in Fig. 1 are statements about an assumed spectrum, not about a demonstrated region of the model's parameter space. An explicit embedding or a scan over the underlying h_i and k_i parameters is needed.
  2. [Sections 2 and 3, Table 1] The dark matter abundance is not computed for the paper's own spectra. The bino-wino scenario cites Ref. [26] for the coannihilation result but does not evaluate Omega h^2 at the points plotted in Fig. 1, and the higgsino and wino scenarios identify the benchmark points in Table 1 with the pure-state thermal targets (1.1 TeV and 2.8 TeV) without a relic density calculation. Because the observed abundance is the central selection criterion, the authors should report micrOMEGAs relic densities for the benchmark points and for representative coannihilation points, and verify that the messenger-scale condition M1 = -1.05 M2 produces the required low-energy mass splittings after RGE running.
  3. [Section 4, Eqs. (22)-(26)] In the entropy-diluted bino scenario, the dilution factor Delta is imposed as a requirement and contours of required Delta are plotted, but the pre-dilution abundance Omega_{chi_1^0} is not computed for those parameter points, and no concrete realization of W_mix with a specific value of tilde m / M_mess is given to show that the required Delta is achievable with T_d in the stated range. The existence of a consistent point satisfying Eq. (26) is therefore not demonstrated; presenting one benchmark with the full bino yield, messenger yield, and decay temperature would complete the scenario.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 2, Fig. 1] The text states B3 = 1.3 x 10^6 GeV, while the caption of Fig. 1 gives B3 = 1200 TeV; these values should be made consistent.
  2. [Section 2 vs. Section 4] The modulus mass for rho is given as m_{3/2} M_P^3 / M_*^3 in Section 2 but as (M_*^3 / M_P^3) m_{3/2} in Section 4; one of these expressions is inverted and should be corrected.
  3. [Table 1] The entry 'Mmess 107' should be written as 10^7 GeV, and the units of the columns should be specified unambiguously in the caption.
  4. [Eq. (5)] The normalization entering Eq. (5) for <F_Z> is not specified; please state how g'(rho) is normalized and how the canonically normalized F_Z relates to the expression in Eq. (5).
  5. [Eq. (16)] The sign convention for M1 should be stated explicitly: the paper uses M1 approximately -1.05 M2 with M2 > 0, but the physical bino mass is |M1|.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the B-term ratios, mass benchmarks, and dilution factors are used as inputs or consistency conditions, not as derived predictions.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain does not reduce to its own inputs. The bino-wino coannihilation scenario sets M1 = -1.05 M2 by choosing messenger-scale B-terms, and this is explicitly a parameter choice used to enter the known coannihilation window, not a quantity derived from the dark matter abundance. The 1.1 TeV higgsino and 2.8 TeV wino masses are imported from independent thermal-relic calculations in Refs. [35-39] and are used as benchmark inputs; the paper does not claim to derive these masses from its own model, so they are not 'predictions' made circular by fitting. The entropy-dilution scenario uses Eq. (26) as a consistency equation to determine the required dilution factor, which is a standard inverse-problem procedure rather than a self-definitional step. The self-citations to Refs. [16], [18], [24], [25], and [28] supply F-term formulas, fine-tuning relief, or previously derived model features, but none are invoked as a uniqueness theorem or as the sole justification for a result that is then presented as an independent prediction. The main weakness, namely that explicit Kähler functions h_i(ρ), couplings κ_i, and VEVs 〈X_i〉 realizing the chosen |B1| ≫ |B5| relation are not exhibited, is an incompleteness or model-realization concern rather than a circular one. Accordingly, no circular step meets the evidentiary standard of this review.

Assumptions & free parameters 8 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 3 invented entities

The model rests on standard gauge-mediation machinery (Eqs 16-17, 29-31) plus a 5D brane-separated SUSY-breaking sector taken from the same group's Refs [16, 18]. The phenomenological results are obtained by scanning three messenger B-terms, the messenger scale, tan beta, and mu; these are free parameters in the sense that the paper does not derive them from the underlying superpotential or geometry. The relic abundance, the central target, is imported from Ref [26] for bino-wino coannihilation and Refs [35-39] for higgsino and wino, and the dilution factor in Section 4 is asserted without showing the pre-dilution bino abundance. No new particles beyond the 5D framework and known messenger fields are required, but the fifth dimension and the heavy gravitino regime are assumed rather than derived.

free parameters (8)
  • B5 (messenger B-term for the SU(2) and U(1) messengers) = 1050 TeV (P2), 2335 TeV (P1); scan range 800-1500 TeV in Fig. 2
    Sets the wino and bino mass scale via Eq. (16); chosen so the LSP mass lands on the thermal relic value for each scenario.
  • B1 (messenger B-term for the U(1)_Y messenger) = 2000 TeV (P2), 8335 TeV (P1); ratio B1/B5 around -4.8 in the coannihilation case
    Must satisfy |B1| >> |B5| to keep the stau from being the LSP (Eq. 17); its sign and magnitude fix the bino-wino mass relation M1 approximately -1.05 M2.
  • B3 (messenger B-term for the color messenger) = 0 TeV (P1), 2000 TeV (P2); 1300 TeV in the bino-wino scan per the text, 1200 TeV per Fig. 1
    Controls the gluino mass through Eq. (16); treated as a free input in the scans.
  • Mmess (messenger scale) = 3 x 10^6 GeV to 10^10 GeV depending on the scenario
    Set by lambda_i times the VEV of X_i; bounded above by the gravitational-loop condition Eq. (7) and, in the entropy case, set by the required decay temperature range.
  • tan beta = 7-8 in Table 1; scanned up to 70 in Fig. 1
    Free parameter in the coannihilation, higgsino, and wino cases; only in the entropy-diluted model is tan beta radiatively predicted (Section 4).
  • mu (higgsino mass parameter) = 1046 GeV (P1), 8273 GeV (P2)
    Generated by the r_ud h_tilde'(rho) term (Eq. 19); chosen by hand to make the LSP higgsino-like or wino-like as needed for each scenario.
  • M1/M2 ratio at the messenger scale = -1.05
    Hand-tuned to produce the 20-30 GeV bino-wino mass splitting required for coannihilation to match the observed dark matter abundance (Section 2).
  • m_tilde (messenger-Higgs mixing strength) = Not quoted directly; chosen so the decay temperature T_d lies in 10 MeV to 100 GeV
    Sets the messenger decay width (Eq. 23) and hence the dilution factor (Eq. 25); the smallness is attributed to messenger parity but no explicit value is derived.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Gravitational SUSY breaking with vanishing cosmological constant and a shift symmetry Z -> Z + iR yields F_Z approximately (M_P^2/M_*^2) x 3 m_3/2 g'(rho) and F_Phi = 0
    Invoked in Section 2 (Eqs 2-5) from Refs [17, 18], including a co-author of this paper; the suppression of anomaly mediation depends on F_Phi = 0.
  • domain assumption MSSM and messenger fields on the y = L brane, SUSY breaking on the y = 0 brane, suppresses flavor and CP violation
    Central model setup from Eq. (1); the flavor and CP safety is asserted from brane separation, not derived in this paper.
  • domain assumption Gravitational loop contributions to scalar masses are bounded by Eq. (6), requiring L^-1 at or below (2-3) x 10^15 GeV times 10^6 GeV / M_mess
    Used in Section 2 to constrain the compactification scale; formula taken from Ref [19].
  • domain assumption The gravitino with m_3/2 = O(100) TeV decays before BBN with lifetime about 2.4 x 10^-2 s
    Eqs (8-9) use the decay width of Ref [20] and the BBN bound of Ref [21]; the conclusion that BBN is unaffected rests on these cited results.
  • domain assumption Standard thermal freeze-out cosmology with the observed abundance matched by bino-wino coannihilation (Ref [26]) or by the known 1.1 TeV and 2.8 TeV thermal masses (Refs [35-39])
    The relic density is imported from the literature rather than recomputed for the paper's own spectra in Sections 2 and 3.
  • standard math Messenger freeze-out abundance Y_mess about 3.7 x 10^-8 times (M_mess / 10^8 GeV) and the entropy dilution formula Delta = (4/3) M_mess Y_mess / T_d
    Eqs (24-25) from Refs [43, 44]; assumes the scalar messenger is thermal, freezes out, then dominates and decays late.
invented entities (3)
  • Fifth dimension with S1/Z2 orbifold and two separated branes at y = 0 and y = L
    purpose: Separates the SUSY-breaking field from the MSSM matter to suppress flavor and CP violation, and enables a heavy gravitino with enhanced F_Z
    The extra dimension is not directly observable and is inherited from the same group's Refs [16, 18]; no falsifiable handle on the extra dimension itself is provided.
  • Bulk messenger hypermultiplets X_i and X_i^c for i = 1, 3, 5
    purpose: Generate messenger masses and the B_i terms that set the gaugino mass pattern through Eq. (16)
    Standard gauge-mediation messenger fields embedded in 5D; the zero-mode structure and Z2 parities are assumed. The predicted sparticle spectra would be testable, but the bulk structure itself has no independent evidence.
  • Heavy gravitino regime with mass O(100) TeV
    purpose: Avoids gravitino overproduction, makes the neutralino the LSP, and ensures the gravitino decays before BBN
    The gravitino mass is an assumed boundary condition of the model, not derived from more basic inputs in this paper; at this mass it decays before BBN, so it leaves no direct observable handle.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Neutralino dark matter in gauge mediation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZZRH32I5

@misc{pith2026250207539,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Neutralino dark matter in gauge mediation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZZRH32I5}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.07539}
}
abstract

We explore the potential of neutralino dark matter within the framework of gauge-mediated supersymmetry (SUSY) breaking. In our models, the lightest neutralino, as the lightest SUSY particle (LSP), is a viable dark matter candidate, assuming a gravitino mass of $\mathcal{O}(100)~\mathrm{TeV}$. The models are formulated in five-dimensional space-time, where the SUSY breaking field and the matter fields are placed on separate branes to avoid issues related to flavor and CP violation. Four distinct neutralino dark matter scenarios are studied: bino-wino coannihilation, higgsino dark matter, wino dark matter, and entropy-diluted bino dark matter. For each case, we determine the allowed parameter spaces and evaluate their consistency with existing experimental limits. Additionally, we examine the potential for testing these models through future investigations at the High-Luminosity Large Hadron Collider (HL-LHC) and through dark matter direct detection experiments.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.07539 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The mχ 0 1 - tan β plane for B3 = 1200 TeV. The black and red lines are contours of mν˜e (≃ me˜L ≃ mµ˜L ) and mA in units of GeV. The gray region is not consistent for our purpose since the stau is the LSP or tachyonic. Bino-wino coannihilation In the case where the bino-like LSP with wino-like NLSP and the mass splitting is around 20-30 GeV, it is possible to explain the observed dark matter abundance [26]. The bin… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The required dilution factor ∆ (black solid) and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The predicted tan β (black dashed) and mA in units of GeV (red solid). 9 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 31 canonical work pages

  1. [26]

    Gaugino coannihilations

    K. Harigaya, K. Kaneta, and S. Matsumoto, “Gaugino coannihilations,” Phys. Rev. D89 no. 11, (2014) 115021, arXiv:1403.0715 [hep-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2014

  2. [1]

    Delta M(K) and epsilon(K) in SUSY at the next-to-leading order,

    M. Ciuchini et al., “Delta M(K) and epsilon(K) in SUSY at the next-to-leading order,” JHEP 10 (1998) 008, arXiv:hep-ph/9808328

    arXiv 1998

  3. [2]

    Supersymmetric Technicolor,

    M. Dine, W. Fischler, and M. Srednicki, “Supersymmetric Technicolor,” Nucl. Phys. B 189 (1981) 575–593

    work page 1981

  4. [3]

    Supercolor,

    S. Dimopoulos and S. Raby, “Supercolor,” Nucl. Phys. B192 (1981) 353–368

    work page 1981

  5. [4]

    A Phenomenological Model of Particle Physics Based on Supersymmetry,

    M. Dine and W. Fischler, “A Phenomenological Model of Particle Physics Based on Supersymmetry,” Phys. Lett. B110 (1982) 227–231

    work page 1982

  6. [5]

    Supersymmetric Extension of the SU(3) x SU(2) x U(1) Model,

    C. R. Nappi and B. A. Ovrut, “Supersymmetric Extension of the SU(3) x SU(2) x U(1) Model,” Phys. Lett. B113 (1982) 175–179

    work page 1982

  7. [6]

    Dynamical Supersymmetry Breaking at Low Energies

    M. Dine and A. E. Nelson, “Dynamical supersymmetry breaking at low-energies,” Phys. Rev. D 48 (1993) 1277–1287, arXiv:hep-ph/9303230

    work page Pith review arXiv 1993

  8. [7]

    Dynamical Supersymmetry Breaking Simplified

    M. Dine, A. E. Nelson, and Y. Shirman, “Low-energy dynamical supersymmetry breaking simplified,” Phys. Rev. D51 (1995) 1362–1370, arXiv:hep-ph/9408384. 11

    work page Pith review arXiv 1995

Show all 50 references
  1. [8]

    New tools for low-energy dynamical supersymmetry breaking,

    M. Dine, A. E. Nelson, Y. Nir, and Y. Shirman, “New tools for low-energy dynamical supersymmetry breaking,” Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) 2658–2669, arXiv:hep-ph/9507378

    1996 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Large tan Beta in gauge mediated SUSY breaking models,

    R. Rattazzi and U. Sarid, “Large tan Beta in gauge mediated SUSY breaking models,” Nucl. Phys. B501 (1997) 297–331, arXiv:hep-ph/9612464

    1997 arXiv

  3. [10]

    Low-energy signals for a minimal gauge mediated model,

    E. Gabrielli and U. Sarid, “Low-energy signals for a minimal gauge mediated model,” Phys. Rev. Lett.79 (1997) 4752–4755, arXiv:hep-ph/9707546

    1997 arXiv

  4. [11]

    A CP-safe solution of the µ/Bµ problem of gauge mediation,

    J. L. Evans, M. Sudano, and T. T. Yanagida, “A CP-safe solution of the µ/Bµ problem of gauge mediation,” Phys. Lett. B696 (2011) 348–351, arXiv:1008.3165 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  5. [12]

    SUSY CP Problem in Gauge Mediation Model,

    T. Moroi and N. Yokozaki, “SUSY CP Problem in Gauge Mediation Model,” Phys. Lett. B 701 (2011) 568–575, arXiv:1105.3294 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Flavor- and CP-safe explanation of g µ − 2 anomaly,

    J. L. Evans, T. T. Yanagida, and N. Yokozaki, “Flavor- and CP-safe explanation of g µ − 2 anomaly,” JHEP 03 (2023) 024, arXiv:2205.14906 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  7. [14]

    Cosmological constraints on the light stable gravitino,

    T. Moroi, H. Murayama, and M. Yamaguchi, “Cosmological constraints on the light stable gravitino,” Phys. Lett. B303 (1993) 289–294

    1993

  8. [15]

    Thermal production of gravitinos,

    M. Bolz, A. Brandenburg, and W. Buchmuller, “Thermal production of gravitinos,” Nucl. Phys. B 606 (2001) 518–544, arXiv:hep-ph/0012052. [Erratum: Nucl.Phys.B 790, 336–337 (2008)]

    2001 arXiv

  9. [16]

    Low-Scale Gauge Mediation with a 100 TeV Gravitino,

    M. Asano, Y. Nakai, and N. Yokozaki, “Low-Scale Gauge Mediation with a 100 TeV Gravitino,” Phys. Rev. D93 no. 5, (2016) 055023, arXiv:1512.02201 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  10. [17]

    Gravitational Supersymmetry Breaking,

    K. I. Izawa, T. Kugo, and T. T. Yanagida, “Gravitational Supersymmetry Breaking,” Prog. Theor. Phys.125 (2011) 261–264, arXiv:1008.4641 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  11. [18]

    Axion induced SUSY breaking and focus point gaugino mediation,

    K. Harigaya, T. T. Yanagida, and N. Yokozaki, “Axion induced SUSY breaking and focus point gaugino mediation,” Phys. Lett. B833 (2022) 137386, arXiv:1710.02204 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Gravity mediated supersymmetry breaking in the brane world,

    T. Gherghetta and A. Riotto, “Gravity mediated supersymmetry breaking in the brane world,” Nucl. Phys. B623 (2002) 97–125, arXiv:hep-th/0110022

    2002 arXiv

  13. [20]

    Effects of the gravitino on the inflationary universe,

    T. Moroi, “Effects of the gravitino on the inflationary universe,” other thesis, 3, 1995

    1995

  14. [21]

    Big-Bang Nucleosynthesis and Gravitino,

    M. Kawasaki, K. Kohri, T. Moroi, and A. Yotsuyanagi, “Big-Bang Nucleosynthesis and Gravitino,” Phys. Rev. D78 (2008) 065011, arXiv:0804.3745 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Naturally light Higgs doublets in the supersymmetric grand unified theories with dynamical symmetry breaking,

    T. Yanagida, “Naturally light Higgs doublets in the supersymmetric grand unified theories with dynamical symmetry breaking,” Phys. Lett. B344 (1995) 211–216, arXiv:hep-ph/9409329

    1995 arXiv

  16. [23]

    Dynamical models for light Higgs doublets in supersymmetric grand unified theories,

    T. Hotta, K. I. Izawa, and T. Yanagida, “Dynamical models for light Higgs doublets in supersymmetric grand unified theories,” Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) 3913–3919, arXiv:hep-ph/9509201

    1996 arXiv

  17. [24]

    Light Higgsino as the tail of the µ-Bµ solution,

    M. Asano and N. Yokozaki, “Light Higgsino as the tail of the µ-Bµ solution,” Phys. Rev. D 93 no. 9, (2016) 095002, arXiv:1601.00652 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  18. [25]

    Light Higgsino and Gluino in R-invariant Direct Gauge Mediation,

    R. Nagai and N. Yokozaki, “Light Higgsino and Gluino in R-invariant Direct Gauge Mediation,” Phys. Lett. B778 (2018) 309–315, arXiv:1711.04431 [hep-ph]. 12

    2018 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Search for heavy Higgs bosons decaying into two tau leptons with the ATLAS detector using pp collisions at √s = 13 TeV,

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al., “Search for heavy Higgs bosons decaying into two tau leptons with the ATLAS detector using pp collisions at √s = 13 TeV,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 125 no. 5, (2020) 051801, arXiv:2002.12223 [hep-ex]

    2020 arXiv

  20. [28]

    The Upper Bound of the Second Higgs Boson Mass in Minimal Gauge Mediation with the Gravitino Warm Dark Matter,

    G. Choi, T. T. Yanagida, and N. Yokozaki, “The Upper Bound of the Second Higgs Boson Mass in Minimal Gauge Mediation with the Gravitino Warm Dark Matter,” JHEP 04 (2021) 024, arXiv:2012.03266 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  21. [29]

    The quest to discover supersymmetry at the ATLAS experiment,

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al., “The quest to discover supersymmetry at the ATLAS experiment,” arXiv:2403.02455 [hep-ex]

    arXiv

  22. [30]

    Search for displaced leptons in √s = 13 TeV and 13.6 TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS detector,

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al., “Search for displaced leptons in √s = 13 TeV and 13.6 TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS detector,” arXiv:2410.16835 [hep-ex]

    arXiv

  23. [31]

    MicrOMEGAs: A Program for calculating the relic density in the MSSM,

    G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, A. Pukhov, and A. Semenov, “MicrOMEGAs: A Program for calculating the relic density in the MSSM,” Comput. Phys. Commun.149 (2002) 103–120, arXiv:hep-ph/0112278

    2002 arXiv

  24. [32]

    micrOMEGAs: Version 1.3

    G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, A. Pukhov, and A. Semenov, “micrOMEGAs: Version 1.3” Comput. Phys. Commun.174 (2006) 577–604, arXiv:hep-ph/0405253

    2006 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Dark Matter Search Results from 4.2 Tonne-Years of Exposure of the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment,

    LZ Collaboration, J. Aalbers et al., “Dark Matter Search Results from 4.2 Tonne-Years of Exposure of the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment,” arXiv:2410.17036 [hep-ex]

    arXiv

  26. [34]

    New Definition of the Neutrino Floor for Direct Dark Matter Searches,

    C. A. J. O’Hare, “New Definition of the Neutrino Floor for Direct Dark Matter Searches,” Phys. Rev. Lett.127 no. 25, (2021) 251802, arXiv:2109.03116 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Non-perturbative effect on thermal relic abundance of dark matter,

    J. Hisano, S. Matsumoto, M. Nagai, O. Saito, and M. Senami, “Non-perturbative effect on thermal relic abundance of dark matter,” Phys. Lett. B646 (2007) 34–38, arXiv:hep-ph/0610249

    2007 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Relic densities including Sommerfeld enhancements in the MSSM,

    A. Hryczuk, R. Iengo, and P. Ullio, “Relic densities including Sommerfeld enhancements in the MSSM,” JHEP 03 (2011) 069, arXiv:1010.2172 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  29. [37]

    The one-loop and Sommerfeld electroweak corrections to the Wino dark matter annihilation,

    A. Hryczuk and R. Iengo, “The one-loop and Sommerfeld electroweak corrections to the Wino dark matter annihilation,” JHEP 01 (2012) 163, arXiv:1111.2916 [hep-ph]. [Erratum: JHEP 06, 137 (2012)]

    2012 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Closing the window on WIMP Dark Matter,

    S. Bottaro, D. Buttazzo, M. Costa, R. Franceschini, P. Panci, D. Redigolo, and L. Vittorio, “Closing the window on WIMP Dark Matter,” Eur. Phys. J. C82 no. 1, (2022) 31, arXiv:2107.09688 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  31. [39]

    The last complex WIMPs standing,

    S. Bottaro, D. Buttazzo, M. Costa, R. Franceschini, P. Panci, D. Redigolo, and L. Vittorio, “The last complex WIMPs standing,” Eur. Phys. J. C82 no. 11, (2022) 992, arXiv:2205.04486 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Snowmass 2021 Dark Matter Complementarity Report,

    A. Boveia et al., “Snowmass 2021 Dark Matter Complementarity Report,” arXiv:2211.07027 [hep-ex]

    2021 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Natural gravitino dark matter and thermal leptogenesis in gauge mediated supersymmetry breaking models,

    M. Fujii and T. Yanagida, “Natural gravitino dark matter and thermal leptogenesis in gauge mediated supersymmetry breaking models,” Phys. Lett. B549 (2002) 273–283, arXiv:hep-ph/0208191. 13

    2002 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Testing the Minimal Direct Gauge Mediation at the LHC,

    K. Hamaguchi, M. Ibe, T. T. Yanagida, and N. Yokozaki, “Testing the Minimal Direct Gauge Mediation at the LHC,” Phys. Rev. D90 no. 1, (2014) 015027, arXiv:1403.1398 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Dark matter in theories of gauge mediated supersymmetry breaking,

    S. Dimopoulos, G. F. Giudice, and A. Pomarol, “Dark matter in theories of gauge mediated supersymmetry breaking,” Phys. Lett. B389 (1996) 37–42, arXiv:hep-ph/9607225

    1996 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Messenger sneutrinos as cold dark matter,

    T. Han and R. Hempfling, “Messenger sneutrinos as cold dark matter,” Phys. Lett. B415 (1997) 161–169, arXiv:hep-ph/9708264

    1997 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Relaxing the cosmological moduli problem,

    A. D. Linde, “Relaxing the cosmological moduli problem,” Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) R4129–R4132, arXiv:hep-th/9601083

    1996 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Cosmological Moduli Problem in Low Cutoff Theory,

    K. Nakayama, F. Takahashi, and T. T. Yanagida, “Cosmological Moduli Problem in Low Cutoff Theory,” Phys. Rev. D86 (2012) 043507, arXiv:1112.0418 [hep-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Gravity mediation without a Polonyi problem,

    K. Nakayama, F. Takahashi, and T. T. Yanagida, “Gravity mediation without a Polonyi problem,” Phys. Lett. B714 (2012) 256–261, arXiv:1203.2085 [hep-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Extracting supersymmetry breaking effects from wave function renormalization,

    G. F. Giudice and R. Rattazzi, “Extracting supersymmetry breaking effects from wave function renormalization,” Nucl. Phys. B511 (1998) 25–44, arXiv:hep-ph/9706540

    1998 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Supersymmetry breaking loops from analytic continuation into superspace,

    N. Arkani-Hamed, G. F. Giudice, M. A. Luty, and R. Rattazzi, “Supersymmetry breaking loops from analytic continuation into superspace,” Phys. Rev. D58 (1998) 115005, arXiv:hep-ph/9803290

    1998 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Generalized messengers of supersymmetry breaking and the sparticle mass spectrum,

    S. P. Martin, “Generalized messengers of supersymmetry breaking and the sparticle mass spectrum,” Phys. Rev. D55 (1997) 3177–3187, arXiv:hep-ph/9608224. 14

    1997 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.