2016/02/29 by Howard Baer, V. Barger, Vernon Barger +2 · 37 citations
Physics and Astronomy · #Cosmology and Gravitation Theories #Dark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena #Electroweak interaction #Higgs boson #Higgsino #Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model #Particle physics #Particle physics theoretical and experimental studies #Physics #Superpartner #Superpotential #Supersymmetry #Supersymmetry breaking #Symmetry breaking #hep-ph
paper · pdf · open access · doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2016.05.010
published in Physics Letters B 758, 113-117 (Elsevier BV) · 5 pages plus 3 figures; version 2 coincides with published version, some references added
openalex publication_date 2016/05/07 · arxiv created 2016/05/10 · arxiv updated 2016/06/22 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/05
In supersymmetric models where the superpotential μ term is generated with μ≪msoft (e.g. from radiative Peccei–Quinn symmetry breaking or compactified string models with sequestration and stabilized moduli), and where the string landscape 1. favors soft supersymmetry (SUSY) breaking terms as large as possible and 2. where the anthropic condition that electroweak symmetry is properly broken with a weak scale mW,Z,h∼100 GeV (i.e. not too weak of weak interactions), then these combined landscape/anthropic requirements act as an attractor pulling the soft SUSY breaking terms towards values required by models with radiatively-driven naturalness: near the line of criticality where electroweak symmetry is barely broken and the Higgs mass is ∼125 GeV. The pull on the soft terms serves to ameliorate the SUSY flavor and CP problems. The resulting sparticle mass spectrum may barely be accessible at high-luminosity LHC while the required light higgsinos should be visible at a linear e+e− collider with s>2m(higgsino).