Rambling Thoughts on Further Photon(s) + MET Analysis SUSY EtMiss Subgroup Meeting 17 February 2011 Bruce Schumm, SCIPP/UCSC, For the SUSY Photon + MET Group

Neutralino NLSP Signatures For Bino, branching is 77% , 23% Z. For Wino, branching properties are switched. For Higgsino, no photonic decay, but actual NLSP may be Higgsino/Bino/Wino admixture All can be prompt or metastable (“non-pointing” photons)

No visible jet activity when M g ~ M  Tevatron Limit Current state-of-the-art: (Semi-) Generalized GMSB MGM Trajectory Generalized by decoupling neutralino and gluino mass scales, but… Neutralino purely Bino- like Prompt neutralino decay

CMS limits: “simplified model” approach identical in spirit to ours; adds third dimension (squark mass) to parameter space I’d guess: up to color factors (that favor gluinos), squark and gluino channels essentially identical. Convert from one to another via net color factor.

2011 Data Sentiment (?) Likelihood of SUSY discovery much higher in 2011 than ever before Most important question: what can we do to baseline analysis to ensure that a discovery would be convincing Re-evaluate background estimation techniques, think about independent modes of confirmation Next priorities: improve model-independence (see photon+MET trigger), think of clever ways to extend reach That said…

2011 Wish List (probably partial… just some things that have occurred to me over the past few months) Use photon+MET trigger to look for non-pointing signatures and Higgsino/Bino admixture Explore photon+lepton signature for Wino-like case Fit to MET distribution rather than simple cut to improve sensitivity Explore additional selection variables (HT, m , , etc) Explore ISR as model-independent tag (SLAC theory development) Explore further ways to suppress backgrounds (brehmstrahlung veto…) Parameter-space dependent optimization

There is much to do, much opportunity for additional people to contribute Note that much of this is signature-related, and not a matter of physics-model interpretation  Joining forces with UED 2  +MET group would make a lot of sense. We should make sure this conversation continues to unfold