Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Toward a refined understanding of nonholomorphic soft SUSY-breaking effects on the Higgs boson mass spectra

M. Rehman1,* and S. Heinemeyer2,†

  • *Contact author: m.rehman@comsats.edu.pk
  • †Contact author: Sven.Heinemeyer@cern.ch

Phys. Rev. D 111, 115027 – Published 25 June, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/n5tq-1h1y

Abstract

We study the impact of the non-holomorphic (NH) soft supersymmetry-breaking terms T33′D and μ′, which introduce additional supersymmetry-breaking effects beyond the holomorphic structure of the superpotential, on the Higgs boson mass spectrum in the NH Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model. The term T33′D modifies the scalar bottom-quark mass matrix and Higgs couplings, while μ′ affects the mass matrices of charginos and neutralinos. In our analysis, we incorporate constraints from charge- and color-breaking minima where we find that a portion of the parameter space is excluded by these constraints. Focusing on the allowed parameter space, the NH contributions to the light CP-even Higgs boson mass Mh from μ′ and T33′D can reach up to 1.4 GeV and 90 MeV, respectively. For the heavy CP-even Higgs boson mass MH and the charged Higgs boson mass MH±, these contributions can be substantially larger in certain regions of the parameter space, reaching up to 44 GeV for MH and 42 GeV for MH± due to μ′ and up to 60 GeV due to T33′D for both MH and MH±. These corrections are significantly larger than the expected future experimental precision for Higgs boson masses and should therefore be considered in precision analyses for future experiments.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (54)

  1. P. Fayet, Nucl. Phys. B90, 104 (1975).
  2. P. Fayet, Phys. Lett. 64B, 159 (1976).
  3. P. Fayet, Phys. Lett. 69B, 489 (1977).
  4. H. P. Nilles, Phys. Rep. 110, 1 (1984).
  5. H. E. Haber and G. L. Kane, Phys. Rep. 117, 75 (1985).
  6. R. Barbieri, Riv. Nuovo Cimento 11N4, 1 (1988).
  7. S. Sekmen (ATLAS, CMS and LHCb Collaborations), arXiv:2204.03053.
  8. L. Girardello and M. T. Grisaru, Nucl. Phys. B194, 65 (1982).
  9. J. Bagger and E. Poppitz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 2380 (1993).
  10. U. Chattopadhyay, D. Das, and S. Mukherjee, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2018) 158.
  11. C. S. Un, Turk. J. Phys. 48, 1 (2024).
  12. U. Chattopadhyay, A. Datta, S. Mukherjee, and A. K. Swain, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2018) 202.
  13. U. Chattopadhyay, D. Das, and S. Mukherjee, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2020) 015.
  14. U. Chattopadhyay, A. Datta, S. Mukherjee, and A. K. Swain, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2022) 113.
  15. J. Chakrabortty and S. Roy, Phys. Rev. D 85, 035014 (2012).
  16. S. Israr and M. Rehman, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 140, 397 (2025).
  17. M. Rehman and S. Heinemeyer, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 638 (2025).
  18. S. Israr, M. E. Gómez, and M. Rehman, Particles 8, 30 (2025).
  19. I. Jack and D. Jones, Phys. Lett. B 457, 101 (1999).
  20. I. Jack and D. Jones, Phys. Rev. D 61, 095002 (2000).
  21. I. Jack, D. Jones, and A. Kord, Phys. Lett. B 588, 127 (2004).
  22. M. Cakir, S. Mutlu, and L. Solmaz, Phys. Rev. D 71, 115005 (2005).
  23. A. Sabanci, A. Hayreter, and L. Solmaz, Phys. Lett. B 661, 154 (2008).
  24. C. S. Un, S. H. Tany𝚤ld𝚤z𝚤, S. Kerman, and L. Solmaz, Phys. Rev. D 91, 105033 (2015).
  25. U. Chattopadhyay and A. Dey, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2016) 027.
  26. M. Rehman and S. Heinemeyer, Phys. Rev. D 107, 095033 (2023).
  27. W. Porod, Comput. Phys. Commun. 153, 275 (2003).
  28. F. Staub, Comput. Phys. Commun. 181, 1077 (2010).
  29. F. Staub, Comput. Phys. Commun. 182, 808 (2011).
  30. F. Staub, Comput. Phys. Commun. 184, 1792 (2013).
  31. F. Staub, Comput. Phys. Commun. 185, 1773 (2014).
  32. F. Staub, Adv. High Energy Phys. 2015, 840780 (2015).
  33. P. Draper and H. Rzehak, Phys. Rep. 619, 1 (2016).
  34. E. Bagnaschi, H. Bahl, M. Goodsell, H. E. Haber, T. Hahn, R. Harlander, W. Hollik, G. Lee et al., Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 450 (2021).
  35. S. Heinemeyer, O. Stal, and G. Weiglein, Phys. Lett. B 710, 201 (2012).
  36. S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024).
  37. M. Cepeda, S. Gori, P. Ilten, M. Kado, F. Riva, R. Abdul Khalek, A. Aboubrahim, J. Alimena, S. Alioli, A. Alves et al., CERN Yellow Rep. Monogr. 7, 221 (2019).
  38. P. Bambade, T. Barklow, T. Behnke, M. Berggren, J. Brau, P. Burrows, D. Denisov, A. Faus-Golfe, B. Foster, K. Fujii et al., arXiv:1903.01629.
  39. J. de Blas, M. Cepeda, J. D’Hondt, R. K. Ellis, C. Grojean, B. Heinemann, F. Maltoni, A. Nisati, E. Petit, R. Rattazzi et al., J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2020) 139.
  40. S. Gennai, S. Heinemeyer, A. Kalinowski, R. Kinnunen, S. Lehti, A. Nikitenko, and G. Weiglein, Eur. Phys. J. C 52, 383 (2007).
  41. M. Frank, L. Galeta, T. Hahn, S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, H. Rzehak, and G. Weiglein, Phys. Rev. D 88, 055013 (2013).
  42. J. Beuria and A. Dey, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2017) 154.
  43. F. Staub, T. Ohl, W. Porod, and C. Speckner, Comput. Phys. Commun. 183, 2165 (2012).
  44. E. Bagnaschi, H. Bahl, E. Fuchs, T. Hahn, S. Heinemeyer, S. Liebler, S. Patel, P. Slavich, T. Stefaniak, C. E. Wagner, and G. Weiglein, Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 617 (2019).
  45. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 051801 (2020).
  46. CMS Collaboration, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2023) 073.
  47. S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, and G. Weiglein, Eur. Phys. J. C 9, 343 (1999).
  48. G. Degrassi, S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, P. Slavich, and G. Weiglein, Eur. Phys. J. C 28, 133 (2003).
  49. M. Frank, T. Hahn, S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, R. Rzehak, and G. Weiglein, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2007) 047.
  50. M. Frank, T. Hahn, S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, H. Rzehak, and G. Weiglein, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2007) 047.
  51. T. Hahn, S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, H. Rzehak, and G. Weiglein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 141801 (2014).
  52. H. Bahl and W. Hollik, Eur. Phys. J. C 76, 499 (2016).
  53. H. Bahl, S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, and G. Weiglein, Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 57 (2018).
  54. H. Bahl, T. Hahn, S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, S. Paßehr, H. Rzehak, and G. Weiglein, Comput. Phys. Commun. 249, 107099 (2020).

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation