# Is it always possible to discover supersymmetry broken at TeV scale at LHC?

## Abstract

We show that the search for supersymmetry at LHC will be very problematic for the particular case of nonuniversal relations among gaugino masses. Namely, if gluino, first chargino and LSP masses are closed to each other it would be very difficult to discover supersymmetry even if sparticle masses are lighter than 1 TeV.

Supersymmetric electroweak models offer the simplest solution of the gauge hierarchy problem  -. In real life supersymmetry has to be broken, and the masses of superparticles must be lighter than $`O(1)`$ TeV . The scientific program at the large hadron collider (LHC) - which will be the largest particle-accelerator complex ever built in the world has many goals. Among them the discovery of the supersymmetry broken at TeV scale with sparticle masses less than $`O(1)`$ TeV is the most important one. For the supersymmetric extension of the Weinberg-Salam model, soft supersymmetry breaking terms usually consist of the gaugino mass terms , squark and slepton masses and trilinear soft scalar terms. In general soft supersymmetry breaking terms are arbitrary. Within the minimal SUGRA-MSSM framework  it would be possible to discover supersymmetry with squark and gluino masses up to (2 - 2.5) TeV . The standard signatures proposed for the search for squarks and gluino at LHC are  -

$$jets+E_{miss}^T,$$
(1)   
$$jets+(n1)leptons+E_{miss}^T$$
(2)   
In SUGRA-MSSM framework all sparticle masses are determined mainly by two parameters: $`m_0`$(common squark and slepton mass at GUT scale) and $`m_{\frac{1}{2}}`$(common gaugino mass at GUT scale). However, in general, due to many reasons we can expect that real sparticle masses can differ in a drastic way from sparticle masses pattern of SUGRA-MSSM model \- . Therefore, it is more appropriate to investigate LHC SUSY discovery potential in a model-independent way. Some prelimenary results in this direction have been obtained in refs. . In particular it is very important to answer the question: is it always possible to discover supersymmetry broken at TeV scale at LHC for the case of arbitrary sparticle masses.

In this paper we show that the search for supersymmetry at LHC will be very problematic for the particular case of nonuniversal relations among gaugino masses. Namely, for the case when gluino, first chargino and LSP masses are closed to each other it would be very difficult or even impossible to discover supersymmetry at LHC even if sparticle masses are lighter than 1 TeV. We assume that R-parity is conserved.

To be concrete consider the case when gluino, first chargino, second neutralino, LSP(lightest stable particle $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$) , squark and slepton masses are $`m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}=500`$ GeV, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm }=m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_2^0}=480`$ GeV, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0}=450`$ GeV, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{q}}=m_{\stackrel{~}{l}}=600`$ GeV. For such sparticle masses the search for direct slepton pair and gaugino $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm \stackrel{~}{\chi _2^0}`$ productions is hopeless at LHC due to small cross sections. So we can expect to detect only strongly interacting particles(squarks, gluino) production using signatures (1,2). Consider gluino pair production $`pp\stackrel{~}{g}\stackrel{~}{g}+\mathrm{}`$ . Gluino decays $`\stackrel{~}{g}\overline{q}q\stackrel{~}{\chi }_2^0`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{g}\overline{q}q^{^{}}\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm `$ are suppresed in comparison with gluino decay into quark-antiquark pair and LSP $`\stackrel{~}{g}\overline{q}q\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$. Hence the signature (2) which arises as a result of leptonic decays $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_2^0l^+l^{}\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm l^\pm \nu \stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ is useless for the search for supersymmetry at LHC. The gluino decay mode $`\stackrel{~}{g}\overline{q}q\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ leads to the signature (1). However for such values of gluino and LSP masses LSP particle is soft in gluino centre of mass frame. In parton model gluino are pair produced with small total value of transverse momentum $`p_T`$, therefore in our case the average missing transverse energy $`E_{miss}^T`$ is rather small and it is determined by the mass difference $`m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0}=50`$ GeV. For such small values of $`E_{miss}^T`$ SM background is much bigger than signal that prevents the use of the signature (1) for gluino detection. For the squark pair production $`pp\stackrel{~}{q}\stackrel{~}{q}^{^{}}+\mathrm{}`$ the main squark decay mode is $`\stackrel{~}{q}\stackrel{~}{g}q`$ with soft gluino. Again in this case the signature (2) is not useful. For the signature (1) the typical $`E_{miss}^T`$ is less than 100 GeV that prevents SUSY discovery due to huge SM background.

We have made simulations at the particle level with parametrised detector responses based on a detailed detector simulation. We have made our concrete calculations for CMS detector . The CMS detector simulation program CMSJET 3.2  has been used. It incorporates the full electro-magnetic(ECAL) and hadronic (HCAL) calorimeter granularity, and includes main calorimeter system cracks in rapidity and azimuth. The energy resolutions for muons, electrons(photons), hadrons and jets are parametrised. Transverse and longitudinal shower profiles are also included through appropriate parametrisations. All SUSY processes have been generated with ISAJET7.32, ISASUSY  In our paper we have used the results of the background simulations of refs. . The main results of our simulations is that SM background dominates for both the signatures (1) and (2) and prevents SUSY observation.

For the second example with $`m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}=800`$ GeV, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_2^0}=m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm }=690`$ GeV, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0}=650`$ GeV, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{q}}=m_{\stackrel{~}{l}}=700`$ GeV the main gluino and squark decay modes are $`\stackrel{~}{g}\overline{q}\stackrel{~}{q}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{q}q\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$. Again in this case for signatures (1,2) SM background dominates.

For the third example with $`m_{\stackrel{~}{g}}=700`$ GeV, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_2^0}=m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^\pm }=750`$ GeV, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0}=650`$ GeV $`m_{\stackrel{~}{q}}=m_{\stackrel{~}{l}}=670`$ GeV the decays of squarks and gluino into the first chargino and second neutralino are prohibited by kinematics and the main gluino and squark modes are $`\stackrel{~}{g}\overline{q}\stackrel{~}{q}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{q}q\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$. Again in this case for the signature (1) SM background dominates.

Let us state the main results of this paper: standard signatures (1,2) used for the search for supersymmetry at LHC not always allow to discover supersymmetry at LHC even if sparticle masses are lighter than 1 TeV. Namely, the search for supersymmetry will be very problematic for the particular case when gluino, first chargino and LSP masses are closed to each other. Probably $`e^+e^{}`$ Next Linear Coillider with total energy $`E_{cm}=2`$ TeV will have better perspectives to discover supersymmetry with such sparticle masses by the measurement of cross section of $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation into hadrons.

I am indebted to the collaborators of INR Theoretical Division for useful discussions and comments.