{"id":9334,"date":"2017-05-23T22:04:55","date_gmt":"2017-05-24T02:04:55","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/?p=9334"},"modified":"2017-05-24T10:43:50","modified_gmt":"2017-05-24T14:43:50","slug":"gambit","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/?p=9334","title":{"rendered":"GAMBIT"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The <a href=\"http:\/\/lhcp2017.physics.sjtu.edu.cn\/\">LHCP 2017 conference<\/a> was held this past week in Shanghai, and among the results announced there were new negative results about SUSY from <a href=\"https:\/\/twiki.cern.ch\/twiki\/bin\/view\/AtlasPublic\/SupersymmetryPublicResults#conference_notes_with_full_2015\">ATLAS<\/a> with both ATLAS and CMS now reporting for instance limits on gluino masses of around 2 TeV.  The LHC has now ruled out the existence of SUSY particles in the bulk of the mass range that will be accessible to it (recall for instance that pre-LHC, gluino mass limits were about 300 GeV or so).<\/p>\n<p>Over the years there has been an ongoing effort to produce &#8220;predictions&#8221; of SUSY particle masses, based on various sorts of assumptions and various experimental data that might be sensitive to the existence of SUSY particles. One of the main efforts of this kind has been the <a href=\"http:\/\/mastercode.web.cern.ch\/mastercode\/\">MasterCode collaboration<\/a>.  <a href=\"https:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/0808.4128\">Back in 2008<\/a> before the LHC started up, they were finding that the &#8220;best fit&#8221; for SUSY models implied a gluino at something like 600-750 GeV.  As data has come in from the LHC (and from other experiments, such as dark matter searches), they have periodically released new &#8220;best fits&#8221;, with the gluino mass moving up to stay above the increasing LHC limits.  <\/p>\n<p>I&#8217;ve been wondering how efforts like this would evolve as stronger and stronger negative results came in.  The news this evening is that they seem to be evolving into something I can&#8217;t comprehend.  I haven&#8217;t kept track of the latest MasterCode claims, but back when I was following them I had some idea what they were up to.  Tonight a large collaboration called GAMBIT released a series of papers on the arXiv, which appear to be in the same tradition of the old MasterCode fits, but with a new level of complexity.  The <a href=\"https:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/1705.07908\">overall paper<\/a> is 67 pages long and has 30 authors, and there are eight other papers of length totaling over 300 pages.  The collaboration has <a href=\"http:\/\/gambit.hepforge.org\/\">a website<\/a> with lots of other material available on it. I&#8217;ve tried poking around there, and for instance reading a <a href=\"http:\/\/live.iop-pp01.agh.sleek.net\/2017\/02\/26\/when-supercomputers-go-over-to-the-dark-side\/\">Physics World article about GAMBIT<\/a>, but I have to confess I remain baffled.<\/p>\n<p>So, the SUSY phenomenology story seems to have evolved into something very large that I can&#8217;t quite grasp anymore, perhaps a kind reader expert in this area can explain what is going on.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The LHCP 2017 conference was held this past week in Shanghai, and among the results announced there were new negative results about SUSY from ATLAS with both ATLAS and CMS now reporting for instance limits on gluino masses of around &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/?p=9334\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-9334","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9334","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=9334"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9334\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":9339,"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9334\/revisions\/9339"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=9334"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=9334"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=9334"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}