Beyond Effective Field Theory for Dark Matter Searches at the LHC

TL;DR

This paper critically examines the validity of effective field theory interpretations for dark matter searches at the LHC, highlighting the conditions under which EFT is applicable and comparing it with direct detection methods.

Contribution

It provides criteria for EFT validity in dark matter searches, analyzes the impact of mediator mass on limits, and offers practical rules of thumb for interpreting experimental results.

Findings

EFT is valid for mediator mass > 2.5 TeV.

Current limits apply to perturbative theories with m_DM < 800 GeV.

EFT limits can misestimate true sensitivities depending on mediator mass.

Abstract

We study the validity of effective field theory (EFT) interpretations of monojet searches for dark matter at the LHC for vector and axial-vector interactions. We show that the EFT approach is valid when the mediator has mass m_med greater than 2.5 TeV. We find that the current limits on the contact interaction scale Lambda in the EFT apply to theories that are perturbative for dark matter mass m_DM < 800 GeV. However, for all values of m_DM in these theories, the mediator width is larger than the mass, so that a particle-like interpretation of the mediator is doubtful. Furthermore, consistency with the thermal relic density occurs only for 170 <m_DM < 520 GeV. For lighter mediator masses, the EFT limit either under-estimates the true limit (because the process is resonantly enhanced) or over-estimates it (because the missing energy distribution is too soft). We give some `rules of thumb' that can be used to estimate the limit on Lambda (to an accuracy of about 50%) for any dark matter and mediator masses from knowledge of the EFT limit. We also compare the relative sensitivities of monojet and dark matter direct detection searches finding that both dominate in different regions of the m_DM-m_med plane. Comparing only the EFT limit with direct searches is misleading and can lead to incorrect conclusions about the relative sensitivity of the two search approaches.