1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%% THE SKELETON FILE FOR JHEP PROCEEDINGS %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Look at the documentation for syntax %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
3: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% http://jhep/JOURNAL/tex.html %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
4:
5: \documentclass[proceedings]{JHEP3}
6:
7: \PrHEP{PrHEP hep2001}
8: \conference{International Europhysics Conference on HEP}
9: \usepackage{epsfig}
10:
11: \title{How Neutrino and Charged Fermion
12: Masses Are Connected Within Minimal Supersymmetric SO(10)}
13:
14: \author{Borut Bajc\\
15: J. Stefan Institute, Ljubljana, Slovenia\\
16: E-mail: \email{Borut.Bajc@ijs.si}}
17: \author{Goran Senjanovi\'c\\
18: International Centre for Theoretical Physics, Trieste, Italy\\
19: E-mail: \email{goran@ictp.trieste.it}}
20: \author{\speaker{Francesco Vissani}\\
21: INFN, Laboratori Nazionali del Gran Sasso, Theory Group, Italy\\
22: E-mail: \email{vissani@lngs.infn.it}}
23:
24: \abstract{Massive neutrinos are a generic prediction of SO(10),
25: and models of unification cry for supersymmetry. Since we have
26: a rather detailed information on neutrino and charged fermion masses,
27: the real question is: how/whether it is possible to build a
28: SO(10) supersymmetric model, that correctly
29: incorporates fermion masses. We show that
30: a {\em simple construction} is possible in the context
31: of a minimal theory.
32: We concentrate on the two heaviest generations,
33: discuss the predictions of the model, and briefly
34: comment on open questions.}
35:
36: \begin{document}
37: \section{Yukawa Couplings at $M_{\sf GUT}$}
38: In order to avoid unacceptably big
39: Dirac neutrino masses in SO(10) \cite{gfm},
40: one introduces ${\bf \underline{126}}$-plets scalars.
41: These produce huge Majorana masses for
42: $\nu^c$ \cite{gsr}, and decouple them from
43: the light spectrum:
44: \begin{equation}
45: {\cal L}=-{{\bf 16}_i}\left[
46: Y^{(10)}_{ij} {\underline{\bf 10}}\, +\,
47: Y^{(126)}_{ij} {\underline{\bf 126}}\,
48: \right] {{\bf 16}_j}+h.c.
49: \end{equation}
50: The ${\bf \underline{10}}$-plet contains two Higgs doublets,
51: that we call $\varphi_u$ and $\varphi_d,$ while the
52: ${\bf \underline{126}}$-plet
53: contains one singlet $S$ (needed for $\nu^c$),
54: one triplet $\Delta$ (which may contribute to light
55: neutrino masses \cite{ms})
56: and two doublets $\varphi_u'$ and $\varphi_d'$
57: (useful to make up for wrong SO(10) mass relations
58: \cite{bm}). Indeed, with a self-explanatory notation for the
59: Weyl fermions \cite{barb}:
60: $$
61: \left\{
62: \begin{array}{l}
63: {\bf 16}_i\ {\underline{\bf 10}}\ {\bf 16}_j
64: \ni
65: {\varphi_u}\ ({u^c_i u_j} + {\nu^c_i \nu_j})+
66: {\varphi_d}\ ({d^c_i d_j} + {\rm e}^c_i {\rm e}_j) +\ (i\leftrightarrow j);\\
67: {\bf 16}_i \ {\underline{\bf 126}}\ {\bf 16}_j
68: \ni
69: \frac{1}{2}({S}\ {\nu^c_i \nu^c_j}
70: +{\Delta}\ {\nu_i \nu_j}) +
71: {\varphi_u'} ({u^c_i u_j} -{3} {\nu^c_i \nu_j})+
72: {\varphi_d'} ({d^c_i d_j}-{3}
73: {{\rm e}^c_i {\rm e}_j}) +\ (i\leftrightarrow j)
74: \end{array}
75: \right.
76: $$
77: %\vskip-1mm
78: \noindent In this work, we propose
79: a model of the Yukawa couplings,
80: in which all the features of
81: the minimal SO(10) theory are exploited.
82:
83: \vskip-2mm
84: \section{Beyond the Great (Supersymmetric) Desert}
85: The question of starting up
86: model building is:
87: \underline{what does the minimal supersymmetric}
88: \underline{standard model (MSSM) want from SO(10)?}
89: We get an answer by extrapolating
90: the Yukawa couplings from $T=0$ to $T=\log(M_{\sf GUT}/M_Z)/2\pi\approx 5.2$
91: (see appendix A for details). From
92: figure 1, one sees that:
93: \begin{itemize}
94: \item For $3^{rd}$ family charged fermions masses:
95: the {\em Hypothesis} of leading ${\bf \underline{10}}-$plet Yukawa
96: coupling
97: \cite{gn},
98: that gives {$y_t=y_b=y_\tau$} at $M_{\sf GUT}$ is OK.\footnote{We
99: tuned the {\em vev} ratio $\tan\beta=\langle H_u\rangle / \langle H_d\rangle \sim 55.4$
100: to get this. We use 1 loop ``running'' and $\alpha_3=0.118.$}
101:
102: \item For $2^{nd}$ family charged fermion masses: the
103: {\em Hypothesis} of leading ${\bf \underline{126}}-$plet
104: Yukawa coupling \cite{gj},
105: that gives
106: {$y_\mu=-3\times y_s$} at $M_{\sf GUT}$ is OK.
107: \end{itemize}
108:
109: \noindent This could be an accidental fact,
110: but is suggestive enough to take it seriously.
111:
112: %\vskip-2mm
113: \section{Determining Model and Parameters}
114: Now that we defined the target, the question becomes:
115: \underline{how to match MSSM and SO(10)}
116: \underline{Yukawa couplings?}
117: SO(10) can meet the MSSM needs (illustrated in previous figure)
118: after the very simple identification of the MSSM Higgs fields:
119: $H_u\approx \varphi_u$
120: and $H_d\approx \varphi_d+\varepsilon\ \varphi'_d.$
121: (Of course, the orthogonal doublets should decouple
122: from the MSSM spectrum, to maintain gauge coupling unification--
123: namely, we need a ``doublet-doublet'' splitting).
124:
125:
126:
127: This position leads us to identify the MSSM Yukawa
128: couplings in the following manner:
129: \begin{equation}
130: \left\{
131: \begin{array}{l}
132: Y_u\approx Y^{(10)} \ \ \ \ {\mbox{\em diagonal by definition}}\\
133: Y_d\approx Y^{(10)} + \epsilon\ Y^{(126)}\\
134: Y_e\approx Y^{(10)} -3\; \epsilon\ Y^{(126)}\\
135: \end{array}
136: \right.
137: \end{equation}
138: %\vskip-2mm
139: \noindent Since we know the Yukawa couplings
140: (after extrapolation at $M_{\sf GUT}$), we can deduce
141: the size of several elements of the SO(10) Yukawa matrices.
142: The chain of deduction we follow and
143: the numerical values we obtain
144: at $M_{\sf GUT}$ are shown in this table:
145: \begin{center}
146: \begin{tabular}{|ccl|}
147: \hline
148: $y_t,y_b,y_\tau$&$ \Rightarrow$ &
149: {$Y^{(10)}_{33}\simeq 0.94 $} $\gg \epsilon\, Y^{(126)}_{33}$ \\
150: $y_\mu, y_s $&$\Rightarrow$ &
151: {$\epsilon\, Y^{(126)}_{22}\simeq 1.4\times 10^{-2}$}
152: $> Y^{(10)}_{22}$ \\
153: $y_c $&$ \Rightarrow$ & {$Y^{(10)}_{22}\simeq 1.8\times 10^{-3}$} \\
154: $V_{cb}$&$\Rightarrow$ &
155: {$\epsilon\ Y^{(126)}_{23}\simeq 2.7\times 10^{-2}$}\\
156: \hline
157: \end{tabular}
158: \end{center}
159:
160: \newpage
161: \begin{figure}[thb]
162: \vskip-5mm
163: \begin{center}
164: {{\tiny.\,\,\,}}\includegraphics[width=4.1cm,angle=270]{3rd.eps}
165: \vskip-3mm
166: \includegraphics[width=4.4cm,angle=270]{2nd.eps}
167: \end{center}
168: \vskip-6mm
169: \rightline{$\log(Q/M_Z)/2\pi\ \ \ \ \ \ $}
170: \caption{Upper panel: Running of MSSM Yukawa couplings
171: of third generation from $M_Z$ till $M_{\sf GUT}$
172: ($y_t$ is the largest at
173: $M_Z$, $y_\tau$ the smallest). Lower panel:
174: same for second generation ($y_\mu$ is
175: the largest, {$y_c$} is the smallest). (We
176: denote by $y_x$ the Yukawa coupling of the
177: particle $x,$ e.g.: $y_t$ for top, $y_c$ for charm,
178: $y_\mu$ for muon. For a given $\tan\beta,$
179: $y_x$ is computed from the mass of $x$ at $T=0.$)}
180: \vskip2mm
181: \end{figure}
182:
183: \noindent Two remarks are in order:
184: \begin{itemize}
185: \item We kept the deduction as simple as possible
186: {\em e.g.}\ we did not perform detailed diagonalizations
187: to get these numbers, which saves us from considering their
188: phases. (However, we feel that it is
189: fair to say that higher order effects, threshold and
190: non-log corrections {\em etc.}\ could make a
191: much more accurate treatment meaningless.)
192: \item The only unknown element of the $2^{nd}-3^{rd}$ family blocks
193: is {$\epsilon\ Y^{(126)}_{33}$} (though one may
194: reasonably guess that it is
195: not too far from {$\epsilon\ Y^{(126)}_{22}$}
196: or {$\epsilon\ Y^{(126)}_{23}$}).
197: \end{itemize}
198: Till here, we showed that the model is not contradicting known things...
199: \section{Neutrino Features}
200: Now we come to the fermion of the day: the neutrino.
201: In order to formulate our proposal, we will base our discussion on this
202: provocative question: \underline{what do these neutrinos want?}
203: We recapitulate the experimental situation by means
204: of the following table:
205: \begin{center}
206: \begin{tabular}{|clr|}
207: \hline
208: {$\Delta m^2_{31}$} & $[1.5,5]\times 10^{-3}$ eV$^2$ & {\sf atmospheric neutrinos} \\
209: {$\Delta m^2_{21}$} & $[2,50]\times 10^{-5}$ eV$^2$ & {\sf solar LMA \tiny (or $<2\times 10^{-7}$ eV$^2$)} \\
210: {$\theta_{23}$} & $[35^\circ,55^\circ]$ & {\sf atmospheric neutrinos} \\
211: $\theta_{13}$ & $< 10^\circ$ & {\sf CHOOZ+atm.+K2K\
212: \tiny (depends on $\Delta m^2_{31}$)} \\
213: $\theta_{12}$ & $[25^\circ,43^\circ]$ & {\sf solar neutrinos (99 \% CL)} \\
214: \hline
215: \end{tabular}
216: \end{center}
217: We will be mostly concerned with the first three items. As remarked
218: by several people (see {\em e.g.}\ \cite{fv})
219: a neutrino mass matrix with a ``dominant block''
220: is strongly suggested:
221: $$
222: {
223: \frac{{\bf M}_\nu}{\sqrt{\Delta m^2_{31}}}=
224: \frac{1}{2}\times
225: \left(
226: \begin{array}{ccc}
227: 0 & 0 & 0 \\
228: 0 & 1 & 1 \\
229: 0 & 1 & 1
230: \end{array}
231: \right)} +
232: {\cal O}\left(\theta_{13},\ \theta_{23}-\frac{\pi}{4},\
233: \sqrt{\frac{\Delta m^2_{21}}{\Delta m^2_{31}}} \right)
234: $$
235: But, due to hierarchical Yukawa couplings,
236: the seesaw does not yield this pattern {\em generically}
237: (however, see also \cite{go}).
238: Often, small values of $\theta_{23}$ are found,
239: as pointed out in \cite{bm,biswa} and as
240: illustrated here:
241: $$
242: M_D M^{-1}_R M_D=
243: \left(
244: \begin{array}{cc}
245: \epsilon & 0 \\
246: 0 & 1
247: \end{array}\right)
248: \cdot
249: \left(
250: \begin{array}{cc}
251: a & b \\
252: b & c
253: \end{array}\right)
254: \cdot
255: \left(
256: \begin{array}{cc}
257: \epsilon & 0 \\
258: 0 & 1
259: \end{array}\right)
260: $$
261: Thus, we are lead to try another mass mechanism,
262: and we welcome the fact that we have the triplet $\Delta$
263: at our disposal \cite{ms}
264: (by the way, we arrived at a common sense answer
265: to the question on ``neutrino wishes'':
266: \underline{neutrinos want to be different from the other fermions}).
267: \section{The Triplet Option}
268: We are assuming that neutrinos
269: take mass {\em mostly} from the triplet $\Delta:$
270: ${\bf M}_\nu \propto Y^{(126)}.$
271: Running back to $M_Z$ the
272: MSSM Yukawa couplings, we get a simple expression
273: for the $\nu_\mu-\nu_\tau$ block of the neutrino mass matrix:
274: \begin{equation}
275: {\bf M}_\nu \propto
276: \left(
277: \begin{array}{cc}
278: 1 & 1.7 \\
279: 1.7 & x
280: \end{array}
281: \right)
282: \label{e}
283: \end{equation}
284: (We have ``$x$'', for $Y^{(126)}_{33}$ is unknown, and also
285: because seesaw {\em might} contribute to 33-entry---see {\em e.g.}
286: \cite{anjan}). Clearly, eq.\ (\ref{e}) can underlie a
287: ``{dominant block}'', thus:
288: \vskip-4mm
289: \begin{center}
290: \fbox{{\sf $\theta_{23}$ can be large}}
291: \vskip2mm
292: \fbox{{\sf we expect a weak mass
293: hierarchy (not $m_3\gg m_2$)}}
294: \end{center}
295: These two properties correlate, as can be seen
296: in figure 2.
297: \begin{figure}
298: \begin{center}
299: \hskip13mm{\includegraphics[width=8cm]{correlation.eps}}
300: \end{center}
301: \caption{Possible values of the mass hierarchy parameter
302: $m_2^2/m_3^2$ and of the atmospheric mixing angle $\theta_{23},$
303: obtained varying the complex input parameter $x$
304: (eq.\ \protect\ref{e}). A rectangle encloses the range
305: of permitted values, estimated assuming that the lightest neutrino mass
306: $m_1$ is negligible.}
307: \end{figure}
308: To further illustrate this result
309: (assuming $m^2_3\ \simeq \Delta m^2_{31}=3\times 10^{-3}$ eV$^2$
310: and $m^2_2\ \simeq \Delta m^2_{21}$)
311: we note that:
312: \begin{center}
313: {$\bullet$} {If $\theta_{23}=45^\circ,$ then
314: $\Delta m^2_{21}{>2\times 10^{-4}}$ eV$^2$;}
315:
316: {$\bullet$} {If $\Delta m^2_{21}=5\times 10^{-5}$ eV$^2,$ then\footnote{Quite
317: tough to test experimentally,
318: since it is equivalent to $\sin^22\theta_{23}<0.97...$}
319: $\theta_{23}{<40^\circ}.$}
320: \end{center}
321:
322:
323: We conclude that the minimal SO(10) model for Yukawa coupling
324: we propose {\em is} predictive, despite (thanks to?) its simplicity.
325:
326:
327:
328: \section{Summary and Discussion}
329: {\sf
330: \noindent {$\star$}
331: We discussed an ``economical
332: embedding'' of MSSM into SO(10), in a sense that
333: all features of {${\bf \underline{126}}$-plet}
334: have been exploited, namely: we use singlet,
335: doublets {\it and} triplet $vev$'s.
336:
337: \vskip2.0mm
338: \noindent {$\star$}
339: The most important step in the construction: how the masses
340: of the charged fermions of the {$2^{nd}$ and $3^{rd}$}
341: generations are explained (Sects.\ 2 and 3).
342: $3^{rd}$ family unification suggests the
343: large $\tan\beta=\langle H_u\rangle / \langle H_d\rangle$
344: regime; this is not an appealing case,
345: but perhaps it is still viable
346: (incidentally, it permits us to accommodate a ``heavy'' Higgs
347: field, $m_h< 135$ GeV).
348:
349: \vskip2.0mm
350: \noindent {$\star$}
351: The {\it triplet}
352: mechanism for
353: neutrino mass generation is at least likely
354: (discussion in Sect.\ 4).
355: The correlations among
356: $({\bf M}_\nu)_{22}\leftrightarrow m_\mu, m_s,$ and
357: $({\bf M}_\nu)_{23} \leftrightarrow V_{cb}$
358: imply (eq.\ (\ref{e})):
359: \vskip-3.5mm
360: $$
361: {\theta_{23}}\in [\ 35^\circ\ ,\ 55^\circ\ ]
362: \Leftrightarrow
363: {\frac{m_2^2}{m_3^2}}\in
364: \left[\ \frac{1}{250}\ ,\ \frac{1}{3}\ \right]
365: $$
366: \vskip-1mm
367: \noindent Solar $\nu$
368: solutions with big hierarchy are disfavored, while
369: LMA fits well the scheme.
370: After the $\Delta m^2_{21}$ measurement--at
371: KamLAND?--we will get an upper bound
372: on $\theta_{23}$ (fig.\ 2 and Sect.\ 5).
373:
374: \vskip2.0mm
375: \noindent {$\star$}
376: A {pending} question is:
377: masses of $1^{st}$ family fermions (also $m_1$);
378: proton decay rate; feasibility of
379: baryogenesis-through-leptogenesis mechanism.
380: These features are strictly tied
381: among them, and require further study.}
382: \vskip5mm
383: To conclude, we stress
384: the main goals achieved: We showed that
385: it is possible to build a simple
386: model for fermion masses based on
387: supersymmetric SO(10), with renormalizable couplings only.
388: This model accounts for the masses of second and
389: third generation fermions. It has large $\theta_{23},$
390: and prefers the solar neutrino solutions with weak mass hierarchy.
391:
392: \vfill
393: \noindent{\large\bf Acknowledgments}
394: \vskip4mm
395: \noindent F.V.\ thanks the Organizers of the ``International
396: Europhysics Conference on HEP'' for the beautiful conference, and the
397: Conveners for kind invitation and discussions.
398: The work of B.B.\ is supported by the Ministry of Education, Science
399: and Sport of the Republic of Slovenia.
400: The work of G.S.\ is partially supported by EEC, under
401: the TMR contracts ERBFMRX-CT960090 and HPRN-CT-2000-00152.
402: We express our gratitude to INFN, which
403: permitted the development of the present study
404: by supporting an exchange program with the
405: International Centre for Theoretical Physics.
406:
407:
408: \appendix
409:
410: \section{1 loop renormalization group equations}
411: We assume supersymmetry, in order to comply
412: with one-step unification of gauge couplings.
413: The renormalization group equations relevant to our analysis are:
414: $$
415: {\left\{{
416: \begin{array}{l}
417: \alpha_t' =\alpha_t [6 \alpha_t + \alpha_b -16/3 \alpha_3- 3 \alpha_2-13/9 \alpha_1] \\
418: \alpha_b' =\alpha_b [6 \alpha_b + \alpha_t+\alpha_\tau -16/3 \alpha_3- 3 \alpha_2-7/9 \alpha_1] \\
419: \alpha_\tau' =\alpha_\tau [4 \alpha_\tau + 3 \alpha_b - 3 \alpha_2-3 \alpha_1] \\[2ex]
420: \alpha_c' =\alpha_c [3 \alpha_t -16/3 \alpha_3- 3 \alpha_2-13/9 \alpha_1] \\
421: \alpha_s' =\alpha_s [3 \alpha_b+\alpha_\tau -16/3 \alpha_3- 3 \alpha_2-7/9 \alpha_1] \\
422: \alpha_\mu' =\alpha_\mu [3 \alpha_b + \alpha_\tau- 3 \alpha_2-3 \alpha_1] \\[2ex]
423: A'=-A [\alpha_t + \alpha_b]/2 \\
424: \lambda'=0\\
425: \rho'=0 \\
426: \eta'=0\\[2ex]
427: M_{ij}'=M_{ij} [ \alpha_\tau (k_{i}+k_{j})/2 + 3 \alpha_t -3 \alpha_2-\alpha_1]
428: \end{array}}
429: \right.}
430: $$
431: The symbol ' (=prime) denotes derivative
432: with respect to $T=\log (Q/M_Z)/2 \pi.$
433: We define $\alpha_x={y_x^2}/{4 \pi}$ for $x=t,b,\tau,c,s,\mu,$
434: analogously to gauge $\alpha_i$'s.
435: $A,\lambda,\eta,\rho$ are the Wolfenstein parameters.
436: $M_{ij}$ are the entries of neutrino mass matrix;
437: $k_3=1,$ and $k_2=0.$
438: $\alpha_1$ is normalized in standard
439: model fashion--not SU(5)'s.
440:
441: \newpage
442: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
443:
444: \bibitem{gfm} H.~Georgi, in Coral Gables 1975,
445: ``Theories and experiments in high energy physics'',
446: New York 1975, 329-339; H.~Fritzsch and P.~Minkowski,
447: Annals Phys.\ {\bf 93}, 193 (1975).
448: %%CITATION = APNYA,93,193;%%
449:
450: \bibitem{gsr} M. Gell-Mann {\em et al.}
451: in ``Supergravity'', Stony Brook 1979;
452: T.\ Yanagida in ``Proceeding of the workshop
453: on unified theory and baryon number in the Universe'',
454: KEK 1979; R.N.~Mohapatra and G.~Senjanovi\'c,
455: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 44} (1980) 912.
456: %%CITATION = PRLTA,44,912;%%
457:
458: \bibitem{ms} R.N.~Mohapatra and G.~Senjanovi\'c,
459: Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf D23}, 165 (1981).
460: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D23,165;%%
461:
462: \bibitem{bm} K.S.~Babu and R.N.~Mohapatra,
463: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 70} (1993) 2845
464: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9209215;%%
465:
466: \bibitem{barb} R.~Barbieri, D.V.~Nanopoulos, G.~Morchio and F.~Strocchi,
467: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 90} (1980) 91.
468: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B90,91;%%
469:
470: \bibitem{gn} H.~Georgi and D.V.~Nanopoulos,
471: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 159} (1979) 16.
472: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B159,16;%%
473:
474: \bibitem{gj} H.~Georgi and C.~Jarlskog,
475: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 86} (1979) 297.
476: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B86,297;%%
477:
478: \bibitem{fv} This remark was first done in
479: Z.G.~Berezhiani and A.~Rossi,
480: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 367} (1996) 219.
481: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9507393;%%
482: A recent discussion in F.~Vissani,
483: $9^{th}$ M.\ Grossmann meeting, Rome 2000, {\tt hep-ph/0102235.}
484: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0102235;%%
485:
486: \bibitem{biswa} B.~Brahmachari and R.N.~Mohapatra,
487: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 58} (1998) 015001.
488: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9710371;%%
489:
490: \bibitem{go} There is {\em not} a
491: ``no-go theorem'' for seesaw mechanism in SO(10). See
492: K.T.\ Mahanthappa {\em et al.,} {\tt hep-ph/0110037},
493: talk given in the session on CP violation of HEP2001, and
494: K.~Matsuda {\em et al.,} {\tt hep-ph/0108202,}
495: appeared after the conference. However, note that they find
496: solutions with pronounced hierarchy as LOW and QVO,
497: that are not expected in our model.
498: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0110037;%%
499: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0108202;%%
500:
501:
502: \bibitem{anjan} As formalized in eq.\ (17) of
503: A.S.~Joshipura and E.A.~Paschos, {\tt hep-ph/9906498}.
504: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9906498;%%
505:
506: \end{thebibliography}
507:
508: \end{document}
509:
510: