Can Effective $4-$Quark Operators Describe Signals of a Supersymmetric Diquark Model at the LHC?

TL;DR

This study assesses whether four-quark operators in SMEFT can effectively represent signals from a specific supersymmetric diquark model at the LHC, finding limitations in their applicability for current experimental sensitivities.

Contribution

The paper demonstrates that four-quark operators only accurately describe the RPV supersymmetric model effects for very heavy sbottoms, highlighting limitations of SMEFT in this context.

Findings

Four-quark operators match the RPV model only for very heavy sbottoms.

Current LHC sensitivities are insufficient to detect effects for most parameter ranges.

SMEFT constraints cannot reliably bound the RPV model with present data.

Abstract

The Standard Model Effective Field Theory (SMEFT) is constrained by current LHC data. Supposedly extensions of the Standard Model (SM) involving heavy particles can be constrained by matching onto the SMEFT. However, the reliability of these indirect constraints compared to those derived directly from the UV model remains an open question. In this paper, we investigate whether $4-$quark operators can accurately capture the effects of an $R-$parity-violating (RPV) supersymmetric model on the production of pairs of top quarks, for parameters that satisfy all known constraints and lead to measurable effects. We assume that the sbottom is the lightest supersymmetric particle and focus on its interaction with a light quark and a top quark; the sbottom thus acts like a specific diquark. The $4-$quark operators arise by integrating out the sbottom at tree level. We analyze measurements of inclusive top pair production by the CMS and ATLAS collaborations. We find that the $4-$quark operators can accurately describe the RPV model's effects only for very heavy sbottom squarks, where the effects are well below the sensitivity of LHC experiments for all values of the RPV coupling that satisfy unitarity constraints. Therefore present or near-future bounds on this RPV model can not be derived from SMEFT analyses.