- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review D

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

Does finetuning make D-term contributions smaller in natural grand unified theories with spontaneous supersymmetry breaking?

Nobuhiro Maekawa1,2,* and Taiju Tanii1,†

  • 1Department of Physics, Nagoya University, Nagoya 464-8602, Japan
  • 2Kobayashi-Maskawa Institute for the Origin of Particles and the Universe, Nagoya University, Nagoya 464-8602, Japan

  • *Contact author: maekawa@eken.phys.nagoya-u.ac.jp
  • †Contact author: tanii.t@eken.phys.nagoya-u.ac.jp
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 112, 055016 – Published 12 September, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/qftw-p3tz

Abstract

In this paper, we explore the natural grand unified theory (GUT) with spontaneous supersymmetry (SUSY) breaking, focusing on the contribution to sfermion and Higgs masses. Natural GUTs solve various problems in SUSY GUTs with the natural assumption that all terms allowed by SO(10)×U(1)A symmetry are introduced with O(1) coefficients. It is also possible to introduce spontaneous SUSY breaking in the natural GUT. This scenario predicts that D-term contribution to sfermion and Higgs masses dominates the F-term contribution, which potentially leads to the SUSY flavor problem. Fortunately, it also predicts high-scale SUSY, which avoids the SUSY flavor problem but leads to the instability of the electroweak scale. The D-term domination results in the superheavy Higgsino, unless the D-term contribution becomes comparable with the F-term contribution. We discuss whether it is possible to suppress the D-term contribution while maintaining the F-term contribution through the tuning of O(1) coefficients in the natural GUT with spontaneous SUSY breaking. Our results indicate that it is impossible. This also suggests that the mass spectrum of the sfermions can be predicted by the D-term contributions and that the Higgsino is not a candidate for dark matter in the scenario.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (20)

  1. H. Georgi and S. L. Glashow, Phys. Rev. Lett. 32, 438 (1974).
  2. J. Wess and B. Zumino, Nucl. Phys. B70, 39 (1974); E. Witten, B188, 513 (1981).
  3. S. Dimopoulos and H. Georgi, Nucl. Phys. B193, 150 (1981); N. Sakai, Z. Phys. C 11, 153 (1981).
  4. H. Georgi, H. R. Quinn, and S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 33, 451 (1974); S. Dimopoulos, S. Raby, and F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. D 24, 1681 (1981); P. Langacker and N. Polonsky, 47, 4028 (1993).
  5. For the review see L. Randall and C. Csaki, arXiv:hep-ph/9508208.
  6. N. Maekawa, Prog. Theor. Phys. 106, 401 (2001); 107, 597 (2002); N. Maekawa and T. Yamashita, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 121801 (2003).
  7. M. Bando and N. Maekawa, Prog. Theor. Phys. 106, 1255 (2001); N. Maekawa and T. Yamashita, 107, 1201 (2002).
  8. P. Fayet and J. Iliopoulos, Phys. Lett. 51B, 461 (1974).
  9. S. G. Kim, N. Maekawa, H. Nishino, and K. Sakurai, Phys. Rev. D 79, 055009 (2009).
  10. N. Maekawa, Y. Omura, Y. Shigekami, and M. Yoshida, Phys. Rev. D 97, 055015 (2018).
  11. N. Maekawa, Y. Omura, Y. Shigekami, and M. Yoshida, Phys. Rev. D 100, 115030 (2019).
  12. N. Arkani-Hamed, A. Gupta, D. E. Kaplan, N. Weiner, and T. Zorawski, arXiv:1212.6971.
  13. E. Witten, Phys. Lett. 149B, 351 (1984); M. Dine, N. Seiberg, and E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B289, 589 (1987); J. J. Atick, L. J. Dixon, and A. Sen, B292, 109 (1987); M. Dine, I. Ichinose, and N. Seiberg, B293, 253 (1987).
  14. M. B. Green and J. H. Schwarz, Phys. Lett. 149B, 117 (1984); M. Paraskevas and K. Tamvakis, Phys. Rev. D 86, 015009 (2012).
  15. C. D. Froggatt and H. B. Nielsen, Nucl. Phys. B147, 277 (1979); L. E. Ibanez and G. G. Ross, Phys. Lett. B 332, 100 (1994); P. Binetruy and P. Ramond, 350, 49 (1995).
  16. J. R. Ellis, A. D. Linde, and D. V. Nanopoulos, Phys. Lett. 118B, 59 (1982).
  17. J. R. Ellis, J. E. Kim, and D. V. Nanopoulos, Phys. Lett. 145B, 181 (1984).
  18. T. Asaka and T. Yanagida, Phys. Lett. B 494, 297 (2000).
  19. N. Maekawa and T. Tanii, Phys. Rev. D 109, 095001 (2024).
  20. N. Maekawa, Phys. Lett. B 521, 42 (2001).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 112, 055016– Published 12 September, 2025
  • Received 1 April 2025
  • Accepted 25 June 2025
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI. Funded by SCOAP3.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation