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

Revisiting the electroweak supersymmetry from the generalized minimal supergravity

Imtiaz Khan1,2,3,*, Ali Muhammad4,5,†, Tianjun Li6,4,5,‡, and Shabbar Raza7,§

  • *Contact author: ikhanphys1993@gmail.com
  • Contact author: alimuhammad@phys.qau.edu.pk
  • Contact author: tli@mail.itp.ac.cn
  • §Contact author: shabbar.raza@fuuast.edu.pk

Phys. Rev. D 114, 035006 – Published 4 August, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/m2nv-kshl

Abstract

We explore the electroweak supersymmetry (EWSUSY) scenario within the minimal supersymmetric Standard Model under the generalized minimal supergravity (GmSUGRA) framework, given that the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon may now be consistent with the Standard Model (SM) prediction, we consider both signs of the Higgsino mass parameter, μ<0 and μ>0. A comprehensive scan of the parameter space is performed, subject to the experimental constraints from the LHC SUSY searches, Planck 2018 relic density, and LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) direct detection limits. We identify the viable regions featuring neutralino dark matter production via coannihilation with stau, chargino, stop, sbottom, and gluino, as well as through A-funnel, Higgs-resonance, and Z-resonance mechanisms. Notably, the μ<0 scenario yields a broader allowed parameter space, including for the first time sbottom-neutralino coannihilation solutions in GmSUGRA, which are absent for μ>0. While the Higgs-pole and Z-pole regions for μ>0 are largely excluded by the current LZ bounds, substantial viable regions remain for μ<0. Gluino coannihilation scenarios are strongly constrained by the current LHC data. The characteristic mass ranges of interest include sbottoms (0.7–1.3 TeV), stops (up to 1.0 TeV for μ>0 and 1.3 TeV for μ<0), staus and charginos (up to 1.5 TeV), and pseudoscalar Higgs bosons in the A funnel (0.4–1.4 TeV). Moreover, the supersymmetric contributions to the muon anomalous magnetic moment remain within a 2σ deviation from the SM prediction. And our findings suggest that significant portions of the parameter space can be probed at the future LHC SUSY searches and upcoming dark matter direct detection experiments.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (81)

  1. S. Dimopoulos, S. Raby, and F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. D 24, 1681 (1981); U. Amaldi, W. de Boer, and H. Furstenau, Phys. Lett. B 260, 447 (1991); J. R. Ellis, S. Kelley, and D. V. Nanopoulos, 260, 131 (1991); P. Langacker, J. Phys. G 29, 35 (2003).
  2. H. Georgi and S. L. Glashow, Phys. Rev. Lett. 28, 1494 (1972).
  3. J. C. Pati and A. Salam, Phys. Rev. D 10, 275 (1974); 11, 703(E) (1975).
  4. R. N. Mohapatra and J. C. Pati, Phys. Rev. D 11, 2558 (1975).
  5. H. Fritzsch and P. Minkowski, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 93, 193 (1975).
  6. H. Georgi, AIP Conf. Proc. 23, 575 (1975).
  7. H. Goldberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 50, 1419 (1983); 103, 099905(E) (2009); J. R. Ellis, J. S. Hagelin, D. V. Nanopoulos, K. A. Olive, and M. Srednicki, Nucl. Phys. B238, 453 (1984).
  8. For reviews, see G. Jungman, M. Kamionkowski, and K. Griest, Phys. Rep. 267, 195 (1996); K. A. Olive, arXiv:astro-ph/0301505; J. L. Feng, Ann. Phys. (Amsterdam) 315, 2 (2005); M. Drees, AIP Conf. Proc. 805, 48 (2005); J. L. Feng, Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 48, 495 (2010).
  9. 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).
  10. ATLAS Collaboration, ATLAS-CONF-2019-040, 2019.
  11. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 737 (2020).
  12. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2019), 060.
  13. CMS Collaboration, CMS PAS SUS-19-005.
  14. CMS Collaboration, CMS PAS SUS-19-006.
  15. W. Ahmed, I. Khan, T. Li, S. Raza, and W. Zhang, Phys. Lett. B 832, 137216 (2022).
  16. W. Zhang, W. Ahmed, I. Khan, T. Li, and S. Raza, Phys. Rev. D 110, 055006 (2024).
  17. I. Khan, W. Ahmed, T. Li, and S. Raza, Phys. Rev. D 109, 075051 (2024).
  18. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 051801 (2020).
  19. A. M. Sirunyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2021) 123.
  20. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 1118 (2021).
  21. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 104, 112010 (2021).
  22. A. Tumasyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 842, 137460 (2023).
  23. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2022) 104.
  24. E. Aprile et al. (XENON Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 111302 (2018).
  25. E. Aprile et al. (XENON Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 141301 (2019).
  26. C. Amole et al. (PICO Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 100, 022001 (2019).
  27. Y. Meng et al. (PandaX-4T Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 261802 (2021).
  28. J. Aalbers et al. (LZ Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 041002 (2023).
  29. J. Aalbers et al. (LZ Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 011802 (2025).
  30. Z. Huang et al. (PandaX Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 834, 137487 (2022).
  31. S. Khalil and S. Moretti, Supersymmetry Beyond Minimality: From Theory to Experiment (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2017).
  32. W. Ahmed, I. Khan, J. Li, T. Li, S. Raza, and W. Zhang, Phys. Lett. B 827, 136879 (2022).
  33. D. P. Aguillard et al. (Muon g-2 Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 101802 (2025).
  34. R. Aliberti, T. Aoyama, E. Balzani, A. Bashir, G. Benton, J. Bijnens, V. Biloshytskyi, T. Blum, D. Boito, M. Bruno et al., Phys. Rep. 1143, 1 (2025).
  35. R. K. Barman, G. Bélanger, B. Bhattacherjee, R. M. Godbole, and R. Sengupta, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 011802 (2023).
  36. I. Khan, W. Ahmed, T. Li, S. Raza, and A. Muhammad, Phys. Lett. B 869, 139844 (2025).
  37. T. Li and D. V. Nanopoulos, Phys. Lett. B 692, 121 (2010).
  38. C. Balazs, T. Li, D. V. Nanopoulos, and F. Wang, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2010) 003.
  39. T. Cheng, J. Li, T. Li, D. V. Nanopoulos, and C. Tong, Eur. Phys. J. C 73, 2322 (2013).
  40. H. Baer, F. E. Paige, S. D. Protopopescu, and X. Tata, arXiv:hep-ph/0001086.
  41. ATLAS, CDF, CMS, and D0 Collaborations, arXiv:1403.4427.
  42. G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, A. Pukhov, and R. K. Singh, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2009) 026; H. Baer, S. Kraml, S. Sekmen, and H. Summy, 03 (2008) 056.
  43. M. Cahill-Rowley, J. L. Hewett, A. Ismail, and T. G. Rizzo, Phys. Rev. D 91, 055002 (2015).
  44. M. Cahill-Rowley, J. L. Hewett, A. Ismail, and T. G. Rizzo, arXiv:1307.8444.
  45. R. L. Workman et al. (Particle Data Group), Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2022, 083C01 (2022).
  46. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS and CMS Collaborations), J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2016) 045.
  47. B. C. Allanach, A. Djouadi, J. L. Kneur, W. Porod, and P. Slavich, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2004) 044.
  48. H. Baer, M. Brhlik, D. Castano, and X. Tata, Phys. Rev. D 58, 015007 (1998).
  49. K. S. Babu and C. F. Kolda, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 228 (2000).
  50. A. Dedes, H. K. Dreiner, and U. Nierste, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 251804 (2001).
  51. J. K. Mizukoshi, X. Tata, and Y. Wang, Phys. Rev. D 66, 115003 (2002).
  52. R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 021801 (2013).
  53. Y. Amhis et al. (HFLAV Collaboration), arXiv:1207.1158.
  54. D. Asner et al. (HFLAV Collaboration), arXiv:1010.1589.
  55. N. Aghanim et al. (Planck Collaboration), Astron. Astrophys. 641, A1 (2020).
  56. B. Allanach, S. Kraml, and W. Porod, arXiv:hep-ph/0207314.
  57. G. Belanger, S. Kraml, and A. Pukhov, Phys. Rev. D 72, 015003 (2005).
  58. H. Baer, J. Ferrandis, S. Kraml, and W. Porod, Phys. Rev. D 73, 015010 (2006).
  59. K. i. Hikasa and M. Kobayashi, Phys. Rev. D 36, 724 (1987).
  60. M. Muhlleitner and E. Popenda, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2011) 095.
  61. M. Aaboud et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2017) 085.
  62. M. Aaboud et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2018) 108.
  63. M. Aaboud et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 898 (2017).
  64. M. Aaboud et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2018) 126.
  65. M. Aaboud et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 754 (2020).
  66. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 103, 112006 (2021).
  67. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 737 (2020).
  68. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2021) 174.
  69. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2021) 165.
  70. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2019) 060.
  71. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 104, 032014 (2021).
  72. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2020) 046.
  73. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2021) 093.
  74. CMS Collaboration, Phys. Rev. D 108, 012011 (2023).
  75. CMS Collaboration, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2023) 073.
  76. H. Baer, V. Barger, X. Tata, and K. Zhang, Symmetry 14, 2061 (2022).
  77. H. Baer, V. Barger, X. Tata, and K. Zhang, Symmetry 15, 548 (2023).
  78. (ATLAS Collaboration), ATL-PHYS-PUB-2021-019, University of Oklahoma, 2021.
  79. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Eur. Phys. J. C 83, 561 (2023).
  80. E. Aprile et al. (XENON Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 041003 (2023).
  81. D. S. Akerib et al. (LZ Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 101, 052002 (2020).

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation