Exploring the supersymmetric <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">U</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="bold" stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mo mathvariant="bold" stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mo>−</mml:mo><mml:mi>L</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">U</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="bold" stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mo mathvariant="bold" stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:math> model with dark matter, muon <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:mi>−</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math>, and <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math> mass limits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the low scale predictions of the supersymmetric standard model extended by $U(1{)}_{B\ensuremath{-}L}\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}U(1{)}_{R}$ symmetry, obtained from $SO(10)$ breaking via a left-right supersymmetric model, imposing universal boundary conditions. Two singlet Higgs fields are responsible for the radiative $U(1{)}_{B\ensuremath{-}L}\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}U(1{)}_{R}$ symmetry breaking, and a singlet fermion $S$ is introduced to generate neutrino masses through an inverse seesaw mechanism. The lightest neutralino or sneutrino emerge as dark matter candidates, with different low scale implications. We find that the composition of the neutralino lightest supersymmetric particle (LSP) changes considerably depending on the neutralino LSP mass, from roughly half $U(1{)}_{R}$ bino, half minimal supersymmetric model (MSSM) bino, to a singlet higgsino, or completely dominated by the MSSM higgsino. The sneutrino LSP is statistically much less likely, and when it occurs it is a 50-50 mixture of right-handed sneutrino and the scalar $\stackrel{\texttildelow{}}{S}$. Most of the solutions consistent with the relic density constraint survive the XENON 1T exclusion curve for both LSP cases. We compare the two scenarios and investigate parameter space points and find consistency with the muon anomalous magnetic moment only at the edge of a $2\ensuremath{\sigma}$ deviation from the measured value. However, we find that the sneutrino LSP solutions could be ruled out completely by the strict reinforcement of the recent ${Z}^{\ensuremath{'}}$ mass bounds. We finally discuss collider prospects for testing the model.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.099 | 0.028 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".