- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

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
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Two-loop renormalization and Higgs phenomenology in the five-dimensional MSSM

Ammar Abdalgabar1,2,*, Alan S. Cornell3,4,†, Aldo Deandrea5,3,‡, Howeida M. Esmaeil6,§, and Mohammed Omer Khojali5,7,∥

  • *Contact author: amari@uhb.edu.sa
  • †Contact author: acornell@uj.ac.za
  • ‡Contact author: deandrea@ip2i.in2p3.fr
  • §Contact author: hwdmohamed@gmail.com
  • ∥Contact author: m.khojali@ip2i.in2p3.fr
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 114, 075032 – Published 29 October, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/62lc-f435

Abstract

The five-dimensional minimal supersymmetric standard model (5D MSSM) provides an attractive framework in which power-law renormalization group evolution naturally generates a sizeable trilinear stop coupling, allowing the observed Higgs boson mass to be reproduced without requiring too heavy a supersymmetric spectra. In this work we present a comprehensive two-loop analysis of the 5D MSSM, deriving the complete renormalization group equations governing the gauge, Yukawa and soft supersymmetry-breaking sectors and examining the perturbative consistency of the theory. Particular attention is given to the ultraviolet behavior of the model, where we demonstrate that the potentially dangerous leading two-loop contributions cancel as a consequence of the underlying N=2 supersymmetry, leaving a well-behaved perturbative expansion. Building upon this framework, we compute the radiatively corrected Higgs effective potential including the complete Kaluza-Klein (KK) contributions through KK resummation, and investigate the resulting implications for the Higgs sector. The phenomenological viability of the model is subsequently explored through detailed numerical studies of the Higgs boson mass, electroweak precision observables, Higgs coupling modifiers and signal strengths, allowing constraints on the compactification scale and supersymmetric parameter space to be established. We find that the inclusion of the two-loop corrections preserves the characteristic power-law behavior of the five-dimensional theory while yielding a phenomenologically viable parameter space consistent with current collider and precision measurements. Furthermore, as the KK tower provides the dominant correction to the Higgs quartic coupling, raising mh to 125 GeV, over the viable parameter space, the effective Higgs couplings remain close to their Standard Model values, showing a strong decoupling of the heavy KK modes.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (60)

  1. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 716, 1 (2012).
  2. S. Chatrchyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 716, 30 (2012).
  3. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS and CMS Collaborations), Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 191803 (2015).
  4. ATLAS Collaboration, SUSY Summary Plots, November 2018, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2018-046, 2018, https://inspirehep.net/literature/1795245.
  5. A. Arbey, M. Battaglia, A. Djouadi, and F. Mahmoudi, Phys. Lett. B 720, 153 (2013).
  6. K. Kowalska and E. M. Sessolo, Phys. Rev. D 88, 075001 (2013).
  7. J. L. Feng, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 63, 351 (2013).
  8. A. Arbey, A. Deandrea, F. Mahmoudi, and A. Tarhini, Phys. Rev. D 87, 115020 (2013).
  9. F. Ambrogi, S. Kraml, S. Kulkarni, U. Laa, A. Lessa, and W. Waltenberger, Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 215 (2018).
  10. P. Slavich, S. Heinemeyer, E. Bagnaschi, H. Bahl, M. Goodsell, H. E. Haber, T. Hahn, R. Harlander, W. Hollik, G. Lee et al., Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 450 (2021).
  11. M. McGarrie and R. Russo, Phys. Rev. D 82, 035001 (2010).
  12. G. D. Kribs, A. Martin, and A. Menon, Phys. Rev. D 88, 035025 (2013).
  13. I. Antoniadis, Phys. Lett. B 246, 377 (1990).
  14. N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos, and G. R. Dvali, Phys. Lett. B 429, 263 (1998).
  15. I. Antoniadis, N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos, and G. R. Dvali, Phys. Lett. B 436, 257 (1998).
  16. D. E. Kaplan, G. D. Kribs, and M. Schmaltz, Phys. Rev. D 62, 035010 (2000).
  17. D. E. Kaplan and T. M. P. Tait, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2000) 020.
  18. R. Sundrum, Proc. Sci. TASI2022 (2024) 010 [arXiv:2306.07173].
  19. C. Branchina, V. Branchina, and F. Contino, Phys. Rev. D 108, 045007 (2023).
  20. K. R. Dienes, E. Dudas, and T. Gherghetta, Phys. Lett. B 436, 55 (1998).
  21. A. Abdalgabar, A. S. Cornell, A. Deandrea, and M. McGarrie, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2014) 158.
  22. J. Huang and J. March-Russell, arXiv:1607.08622.
  23. K. R. Dienes, E. Dudas, and T. Gherghetta, Nucl. Phys. B537, 47 (1999).
  24. R. Barbieri, L. J. Hall, and Y. Nomura, Phys. Rev. D 63, 105007 (2001).
  25. L. J. Hall and Y. Nomura, Phys. Rev. D 64, 055003 (2001).
  26. D. M. Ghilencea, H. P. Nilles, and S. Stieberger, New J. Phys. 4, 15 (2002).
  27. M. Masip, Phys. Rev. D 62, 065011 (2000).
  28. E. A. Mirabelli and M. E. Peskin, Phys. Rev. D 58, 065002 (1998).
  29. G. Belanger, D. Ghosh, R. Godbole, and S. Kulkarni, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2015) 214.
  30. H. Bahl, S. Liebler, and T. Stefaniak, Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 279 (2019).
  31. I. Antoniadis, S. Dimopoulos, A. Pomarol, and M. Quirós, Nucl. Phys. B544, 503 (1999),
  32. S. Coleman and E. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. D 7, 1888 (1973),
  33. A. Delgado, A. Pomarol, and M. Quiros, Phys. Rev. D 60, 095008 (1999).
  34. A. Hebecker and J. March-Russell, Nucl. Phys. B625, 128 (2002).
  35. M. Quiros, arXiv:hep-ph/0302189.
  36. V. Di Clemente and Y. A. Kubyshin, Nucl. Phys. B636, 115 (2002).
  37. V. Di Clemente, S. F. King, and D. A. J. Rayner, Supersymmetric Higgs bosons in a 5D orbifold model, in String Phenomenology (World Scientific, Singapore, 2003).
  38. G. Bhattacharyya, S. K. Majee, and A. Raychaudhuri, Nucl. Phys. B793, 114 (2008).
  39. M. Carena, M. Quiros, and C. E. M. Wagner, Nucl. Phys. B461, 407 (1996).
  40. G. von Gersdorff and M. Quiros, Phys. Rev. D 65, 064016 (2002).
  41. T. Hahn, S. Heinemeyer, and G. Weiglein, Nucl. Phys. B652, 229 (2003).
  42. T. Biekötter, S. Heinemeyer, and C. Muñoz, Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 504 (2018).
  43. S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, and G. Weiglein, Eur. Phys. J. C 9, 343 (1999).
  44. S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik, and G. Weiglein, Phys. Lett. B 440, 296 (1998).
  45. S. Borowka, T. Hahn, S. Heinemeyer, G. Heinrich, and W. Hollik, Eur. Phys. J. C 75, 424 (2015).
  46. H. Bahl, D. Meuser, and G. Weiglein, Eur. Phys. J. C 84, 1017 (2024).
  47. M. E. Peskin and T. Takeuchi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 964 (1990).
  48. M. E. Peskin and T. Takeuchi, Phys. Rev. D 46, 381 (1992).
  49. T. Appelquist, H. C. Cheng, and B. A. Dobrescu, Phys. Rev. D 64, 035002 (2001).
  50. G. Cacciapaglia, A. Deandrea, G. Drieu La Rochelle, and J. B. Flament, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 201802 (2014).
  51. A. Azatov, M. Toharia, and L. Zhu, Phys. Rev. D 82, 056004 (2010).
  52. M. Carena, I. Low, and C. E. M. Wagner, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2012) 060.
  53. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS and CMS Collaborations), J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2016) 045.
  54. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Nature (London) 607, 52 (2022); 612, E24 (2022).
  55. A. Tumasyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Nature (London) 607, 60 (2022); 623, E4 (2023).
  56. S. Heinemeyer et al. (LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group Collaboration), arXiv:1307.1347.
  57. A. Abdalgabar, M. O. Khojali, A. S. Cornell, G. Cacciapaglia, and A. Deandrea, Phys. Lett. B 776, 231 (2018).
  58. D. de Florian et al. (LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group Collaboration), CERN Yellow Rep. Monogr. 2, 1 (2017).
  59. ATLAS Collaboration, Combination of measurements of Higgs boson production in association with a W or Z boson in the bb¯ decay channel with the ATLAS experiment at s=13  TeV, ATLAS-CONF-2021-051, 2021, https://inspirehep.net/literature/1940371.
  60. A. M. Sirunyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2018) 185.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 114, 075032– Published 29 October, 2026
  • Received 8 September 2026
  • Accepted 1 October 2026
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