Anatomy of Heavy Gauge Bosons in a Left-Right Supersymmetric Model

We perform a detailed study of the various decay channels of the heavy charged and neutral gauge bosons ($W_R$ and $Z_R$ respectively) in a left-right supersymmetric (LRSUSY) framework. The decay branching ratios of the $W_R$ and $Z_R$ bosons depend significantly on the particle spectrum and composition of the SUSY states. We show several combinations of mass spectrum for the SUSY particles to facilitate the decay of these heavy gauge bosons into various combinations of final states. Finally, we choose two benchmark points and perform detailed collider simulations for these heavy gauge bosons in the context of the high energy and high luminosity run of the large hadron collider. We analyze two SUSY cascade decay channels -- mono-$W$ + $\slashed{E}_T$ and mono-$Z$ + $\slashed{E}_T$ along with the standard dilepton and dijet final states. Our results show that the existence of these heavy gauge bosons can be ascertained in the direct decay channels of dilepton and dijet whereas the other two channels will be required to establish the supersymmetric nature of this model.


Introduction
The recent discovery of the Higgs-like scalar boson at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) [1] has essentially completed the particle spectrum of the Standard Model (SM). The measured properties of this Higgs-like scalar are consistent with the minimal choice of the scalar sector as in the SM with small uncertainties while they still comfortably allow red for an extended red scalar sector. The Higgs boson, responsible for giving mass to all the SM particles § , itself has a mass which is very finely tuned in the SM framework. Thus one needs to further extend the SM with new particles or additional symmetries in order to understand the large cancellations required for the observed Higgs boson mass. There are also a number of other experimental observations which lead us to believe that the SM is only an effective low energy theory with new physics coming in at higher energies. Numerous new physics models have thus been suggested to address the shortcomings of the SM.
Left-right supersymmetric (LRSUSY) models [2] are a class of well motivated extensions of the SM as it can provide answers to a number of unresolved issues in the SM. These are actually the supersymmetric (SUSY) versions of the left-right symmetric (LRS) models [3] where the SM gauge group is extended to G 3221 = SU (3) c × SU (2) L × SU (2) R × U (1) B−L . This extended gauge symmetry facilitates the preservation of parity symmetry at high scales. The observed parity asymmetry in the SM is generated as the LR symmetry is spontaneously broken at some scale v R much above the SM symmetry breaking scale. Parity being a good symmetry in these models can potentially solve the strong CP problem [4] without introducing an additional Peccei-Quinn symmetry [5]. The gauge structure in LR models also naturally requires the presence of a right-handed neutrino which can help generate a light neutrino mass through the seesaw mechanisms [6]. SUSY models, on the other hand, provide an elegant solution to the hierarchy problem. On top of that, if R-parity is conserved, as will be the case in this paper, the lightest SUSY particle (LSP) becomes stable and can be a good dark matter (DM) candidate.
Combining the merits of both LRS and SUSY models, one gets a very attractive LRSUSY framework which warrants a careful examination as will be discussed in details in this paper.
A variety of LRSUSY models have been discussed in literature with different scalar sectors for the symmetry breaking mechanism [7,8]. The one we consider here is the minimal LRSUSY model with automatic R-partiy conservation [9] where the right-handed symmetry is broken by scalar triplets fields as they acquire non-zero vacuum expectation values (VEVs). This VEV is also responsible for generating the Majorana masses for the right-handed neutrinos which eventually will generate light neutrino masses. The spontaneous breaking of the right-handed symmetry gives rise to an additional charged gauge boson W R and a neutral gauge boson Z R whose masses are also at the same scale. The discovery of these gauge bosons could be one of the strongest indication towards the existence of left-right symmetry. Experimental searches for these heavy gauge bosons have been performed by the ATLAS and CMS collaborations in various final states with leptons, jets and/or missing transverse energy ( / E T ) which have helped § Neutrinos are massless in the SM framework. The generation of neutrino masses requires an extended framework beyond the SM (BSM) and is an important motivation for BSM scenarios. put bounds on their masses. The ATLAS search using 36.1 fb −1 of proton-proton collision data collected at a centre of mass energy of 13 TeV, sets the exclusion limit for a heavy neutral gauge boson mass M Z > 4.5 TeV [10] in the dilepton channel for the sequential standard model (SSM). The most stringent mass limit on a heavy charged gauge boson (W ), on the other hand, comes from the CMS collaboration for an integrated luminosity of 2.6 fb −1 at √ s = 13 TeV energy and is given as M W > 4.1 TeV [11] in the lepton + / E T final state for SSM. This limit, however, does not hold for our analysis as we have chosen the masses of the right-handed neutrinos to be heavier than the W R boson. Thus the lepton + / E T cross-section in the final state for W R decay will be extremely small in our case resulting in no significant bound from this channel. Another recent analysis from the ATLAS collaboration [12] gives a mass bound of M W > 3.6 TeV using 37 fb −1 integrated luminosity at 13 TeV com energy in the dijet (qq ) final state. The mass limit of 3.6 TeV was obtained by assuming a W → qq branching ratio (BR) of 75%. For our analyses, on the other hand, this BR could vary from around 50% − 90% for different benchmark points (BPs), which significantly affects the results. The heavy righthanded W R bosons decaying into a top and a bottom quark searches at √ s = 13 TeV by the CMS collaboration also provides a mass limit of M W R > 2.6 TeV [13]. This limit however is much weaker compared to the dijet decay channel. On top of this, all these experimental searches have been performed for the charged and neutral heavy gauge bosons decaying directly into SM particles. For LRSUSY models this is not true at all, since these particles can also decay into SUSY particles which eventually decay into SM particles and LSP. These new decay channels can alter their mass limits and allow for new possibilities to discover SUSY particles at the LHC.
In this paper we perform a detailed study of the heavy charged and neutral gauge bosons in a LRSUSY framework with several possible decay channels. We observe that the decay BR of the W R and Z R bosons depend significantly on the particle spectrum and composition of the SUSY particles (mainly charginos and neutralinos). We thus choose our BPs to encompass all possible compositions for charginos and neutralinos with and without mixing among the fields in the gauge basis. Several combinations of mass spectrum for the SUSY particles are also chosen to facilitate the decay of the heavy gauge bosons into various combinations of final states for a more comprehensive study of their properties. This gives us a good understanding of each interaction and how it affects the final decay BR of the heavy gauge bosons. Firstly we consider an almost pure one component LSP keeping all the squarks and sleptons to be heavier than Z R ¶ . This allows us to explore SUSY final states with only charginos and neutralinos.
Next we consider the case where the LSP is composed of a significantly mixed state of gauginos and higgsinos. Finally we allow the squarks and sleptons to be light as well, maximizing the SUSY decay BR for the heavy gauge bosons. The experimental bounds on the heavy gauge boson masses will thus change as new (SUSY) decay channels have now opened up.
The discovery prospect of SUSY particles at the LHC is severely constrained by the direct production cross-section of these particles. The production cross-section falls rapidly as the ¶ Since ZR is always heavier than WR, the squarks and sleptons are also heavier than WR.
where c stands for the charge conjugation and the numbers in brackets are their SU (3) C , SU (2) L , SU (2) R , U (1) B−L gauge quantum numbers respectively.
The minimal Higgs sector required for a consistent symmetry breaking mechanism, generation of quark and lepton masses and mixings and preservation of an unbroken R-parity symmetry is given as The SU (2) R triplet Higgs field ∆ c (1, 1, 3, −2) is responsible for breaking the SU (2) R × U (1) B−L symmetry into U (1) Y as its neutral component acquires a non-zero VEV. The coupling of this triplet field with the right-handed neutrinos generates their Majorana masses as well. Two bidoublet fields Φ a (1, 2, 2, 0) are required to generate the quark and lepton masses and mixings through Yukawa interactions. The simpler case of one bidoublet field, as will be considered in our analysis, cannot produce the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa (CKM) mixing angles. In such a scenario, the CKM mixing angles could arise from soft SUSY breaking terms [14]. For a SUSY model, an extra SU (2) R triplet field ∆ c (1, 1, 3, +2) is also required for anomaly cancellation, and two SU (2) L triplet fields ∆(1, 3, 1, 2) and ∆(1, 3, 1, −2) are needed for parity conservation. The singlet field S(1, 1, 1, 0) is required to decouple the SUSY breaking scale from the right-handed symmetry breaking scale. In absence of the singlet, the SUSY breaking scale and the righthanded symmetry breaking scale becomes equal to each other, hence the singlet S is needed in order to decouple the two scales allowing the right-handed symmetry breaking scale to be higher than the SUSY breaking scale.
The non-zero VEVs of various fields are denoted as with the hierarchy among them chosen as Here Y j l and Y j q are the lepton and quark Yukawa coupling matrices respectively while f is the Majorana Yukawa coupling matrix responsible for generating large Majorana masses for right-handed neutrinos. The transformation of various fields under parity symmetry is given Additionally the Yukawa superpotential is invariant under parity if the Yukawa coupling matrices Y j q and Y j l are Hermitian and f c = f . The up quarks, down quarks, charged leptons, neutrino Dirac and right-handed Majorana neutrino masses are given as respectively. Thus it is easy to see that two bidoublet Higgs fields are needed to generate the CKM mixings as otherwise the up-and down-type quark mass matrices would become proportional to each other. A realistic model would therefore need two bidoublet fields but for simplicity we will only consider a version with one bidoublet in the scalar spectrum. As the main focus of this paper is on the heavy gauge boson properties, having only one bidoublet does not change our results significantly.
The gauge sector of the model has an extra charged W R and a neutral Z R gauge boson.
The mass-squared matrices for the neutral gauge bosons M 2 Z in the basis (B, W 3L , W 3R ) and the charged gauge boson M 2 W in the basis (W L , W R ) are given as where v 2 = v 2 u + v 2 d = 174.1 GeV while g V , g 2 and g R are the gauge coupling constants corresponding to the U (1) B−L , SU (2) L and SU (2) R gauge groups respectively. The mass eigenstates of the heavy gauge bosons can be obtained as where cos 2 θ R = g 2 R /(g 2 R + g 2 V ). In getting these masses we have neglected the mixing between the left and right-handed charged gauge bosons and neglected terms with v 4 /v 4 R or higher. The SM gauge bosons have their usual expressions with the effective U (1) Y hypercharge cou- . The ratio of the heavy gauge boson masses can be approximately written as [2] where θ W is the Weinberg angle. This relation shows that the ratio g R /g 2 should always be larger than tan θ W .
The most general superpotential for the Higgs sector is given as where λ c = λ * , µ 1 = µ * 2 while λ 0 , M 2 , µ and µ S are all real from the conservation of parity symmetry. The Higgs potential derived from this superpotential will consist of F -terms, Dterms and soft supersymmetry-breaking terms. So we have with each of the terms being The minimization of the scalar potential proceeds as where v i are the VEVs of the neutral CP-even scalar fields (φ 0 1 , φ 0 2 , δ c 0 , δ c 0 , S). The minimization equations of the scalar potential for this model are thus given as

Particle masses
In this section we calculate the masses of the particles in various sectors of our LRSUSY model.

Higgs sector
The mass-squared matrices for the charged and neutral Higgs bosons can be obtained from the scalar potential. The minimization conditions in Eqns. 15-19 will provide further constraints on the parameter in the model. The singlet (S), the bidoublet (Φ) and the right-handed triplets (∆ c and ∆ c ) can mix with each other while the left-handed triplets (∆ and ∆) get decoupled since they do not acquire any VEVs. Here we will only consider the sector consisting of the right-handed triplets, the bidoublet and the singlet as these will be important for our analysis of the heavy right-handed gauge bosons.
After electroweak symmetry breaking, the mass-squared matrix for the singly-charged Higgs where The singly-charged fields in the left-handed triplets get decoupled and is not important for our analysis. As a result they have not been included here. The 4 × 4 mass-squared matrix in Eqn. 20 can be diagonalized by the transformation U Hm m 2 Hm U Hm † = m 2 Hm,diag , where U Hm stands for the rotation matrix for the singly-charged Higgs fields. This gives two physical mass eigenstates (H ± 1 , H ± 2 ) for the charged scalar fields while the remaining two states (G ± 1 , G ± 2 ) become the massless Goldstone bosons. These massless degrees of freedom are eaten up by their corresponding gauge bosons W ± and W R respectively to give them mass.
The mass-squared matrix for the doubly-charged scalar fields is given by a 2 × 2 matrix in the basis (δ c ±± , δ c ±± ). This can be written as where It can be shown that this doubly-charged Higgs mass-squared matrix, upon diagonalization, admits a negative eigenvalue which is unphysical as it gives rise to a tachyonic state. This problem can however be solved by including the radiative corrections to the doubly-charged Higgs boson mass which makes it positive [8,9].
The CP-even neutral scalars consist of the real part of the neutral Higgs fields. The mass- The matrix elements are defined as This scalar matrix can be diagonalized by the rotation matrix Z H as Z H m 2 H Z H † = m 2 H,diag . We choose the numerical values of the parameters in such a way that the lightest component becomes the SM-like Higgs boson. We calculate the radiatively corrected Higgs mass up to two-loop for the top and stop sector as given in the Ref [8]. The theoretical error in Higgs boson mass calculation allows for a mass range of 122 − 128 GeV [15]. In our study, the lightest mass eigenstate for the CP-even Higgs boson is mostly composed of the bidoublet scalar fields. This is quite natural as the bidoublet fields are responsible for the EW symmetry breaking once they acquire non-zero VEVs at that scale.
Similarly, the imaginary component of the neutral Higgs fields produce the pseudo-scalar (CP-odd) states. Their mass-squared matrix in the gauge basis (Im[δ c 0 ], Im[δ where the elements of the above matrix are This pseudo-scalar mass-squared matrix can be diagonalized by the rotation matrix Z A as After rotating the gauge fields into mass basis, we get three physical mass eigenstates A 1 , A 2 and A 3 . The remaining two neutral states (G 0 1 , G 0 2 ) become the massless Goldstone bosons which are absorbed as the longitudinal components of the corresponding gauge bosons Z and Z R respectively.

Sfermionic sectors
The sfermions in our model consist of the scalar superpartners of the up-and down-type quarks and charged and neutral leptons. The existence of a right-handed neutrino and hence its superpartner is guaranteed by the extended gauge symmetry in this model, which leads to all the sfermion mass-squared matrices (including sneutrinos) being 6 × 6 matrices in general.
We calculate the mass-squared matrices for the scalar down-type squarks, up-type squark, charged slepton and the sneutrino in the ( d L , d R ), ( u L , u R ), ( e L , e R ) and ( ν L , ν R ) gauge basis respectively. Thus, one can write the mass-squared matrices for the squarks as where each matrix element is itself a 3 × 3 matrix given as Here α 1 , α 2 , β 1 and β 2 represents the color indices. These 3 × 3 matrices in general can be non-diagonal with the off-diagonal elements allowing for mixing between the various flavors.
We do not consider flavor violating process in our study and hence, for simplicity, we will just consider the case where the matrices are diagonal and their elements are real.
Similarly, the slepton mass-squared matrices are given as with the matrix elements in the slepton sector being The sfermionic mass matrices namely the down-squarks, up-squarks, charged-sleptons and sneutrinos given in Eqns. 24-28 can be diagonalized by the rotation matrices U DL , U U L , U EL and U V L respectively.

Electroweakino sectors
The particle spectrum of our model allows for a large number of physical chargino and neutralino states (together referred to as electroweakinos from here on) which arise from the mixing of the charged and neutral gauginos and higgsinos respectively. Since R-parity is naturally conserved in this model, the lightest neutralino is stable and can be a good dark matter candidate. The electroweakinos are also very important for our study as the primary SUSY decay channels for the heavy gauge bosons will be into these particles, as will be seen in the next section.
The chargino mass matrix in the basis ( can be written as It is easy to see that this chargino mass matrix is asymmetric and can only be diagonalized by a bi-unitary transformation with m χc,diag = U Lm m χc U Rp † . Please note that the left-handed triplet higgsinos remain decoupled from these charginos and neutralinos due to left-handed triplet Higgs boson not acquiring any VEV. Hence we have a total of eight neutral electroweakinos which mix among each other in the gauge basis with their corresponding mass matrix as Here This matrix is diagonalized by Z f N rotation matrix as m χ,diag = Z f N m χ Z f N † . Also in this model, it is possible to get two types of doubly-charged chargino particles, one from the SU (2) L triplet and another from SU (2) R triplet sectors. These do not mix among each other, resulting in the left-handed triplets being quite massive while the right-handed doubly-charged higgsinos can remain light with a mass of   Table 1: These parameters remain fixed throughout this section. The unit of the Mass parameter is in GeV and Mass-squared is in GeV 2 .

Case-1: Single component LSP
We first identify the parameter spaces where the LSP is mostly composed of only one type of component among the neutral fermion fields in the basis given in Eqn. 30. We make sure all other SUSY particles are much heavier so that the heavy gauge bosons do not decay into these states. It can be seen from the Eqn. 7 that the mass of the neutral Z R boson always remains  [10,11,13]. As discussed earlier, we have fixed the numerical values of a number of parameters in the model which are shown in Tab. 1. Note that the large values of the right-handed Yukawa couplings f c ii in the table results in the right-handed neutrinos being heavier than the W R boson mass. Thus it is impossible for the heavy gauge bosons to decay into right-handed neutrino final states. The dominant contribution to the LSP from each fermion field is shown in the Tab. 2 and will be discussed in details below.

Benchmark points
Branching Ratio of W R , Z R into different BSM fields   Table 2: The LSP is mostly composed of only one type of component among the neutral fermion fields in the basis given in Eqn. 30. M χ i (χ i = χ 0 1,2 , χ ± 1 ) stands for the masses of the electroweakinos for these benchmark points. It is to be noted that the other parameters are fixed as in the Tab. 1.

Bino-like LSP
Let us first consider the case where the neutralino LSP is mostly composed of B. As is quite evident from the neutralino mass matrix given in Eqn. 31, a bino-type LSP would require one to choose a small value of the parameter M 1 . Choosing a positive value of M 1 though can only result in a lower bound of the bino-type LSP mass with M χ 0 1 ≥ 475 GeV. So even if we choose M 1 = 0 GeV, the lightest neutralino is around 475 GeV. This is because the off-diagonal (1,5) and (1,6) Here all of these particles primarily consist of bidoublet fields with  . Hence the branching ratios of the decay channels Z R → χ 0 1 χ 0 1 and Z R → χ ± 1 χ ± 1 are very small. The other neutralinos, charginos, squarks, sleptons and the right-handed neutrinos remain heavy in this case. As a result the heavy W R and Z R vector bosons cannot decay into any combination of electroweakinos in the final state.
Similar to the previous case, the W R and Z R bosons mostly decay into SM quarks and ) and in other channels remain almost identical as in the previous case (bino-like LSP) due to similar couplings in the respective vertices.

SU (2) R Wino-like LSP
As a consequence of the right-handed symmetry being broken above the SUSY breaking scale, one can choose different values of the soft SUSY breaking terms for the charged and the neutral components of the SU (2) R wino fields. The parameter M W R 33 can thus be adjusted to get a neutralino LSP primarily consisting of neutral SU (2) R wino (or wino-R) field. Again, in this case, due to the off-diagonal (2,4) and (2,5) where P L and P R are the left and right chiral projection operators of the fermions. As a result the branching ratio of W ± R → χ 0 1 χ ± 1 is around 29% while Z R → χ ± 1 χ ∓ 1 remains around 25% for both BP 3.b and 3.c as can be seen from Tab. 2. The branching ratios to the other Higgs bosons and/or vector bosons final state decay channels remain negligibly small as in the previous cases.

Bidoublet Higgsino-like LSP
We now consider the case where the LSP is primarily composed of the bidoublet higgsino fields. This can be achieved by choosing a relatively small value for the off-diagonal bidoublet higgsino cross-term | λ 2 v s + µ 2 | while keeping the other mass terms in the neutralino mass matrix to be quite large. As the diagonal mass terms for φ 0 1 and φ 0 2 in the m χ matrix is zero, their entire mass thus comes from the off-diagonal term mentioned above. This results in two light neutralino mass eigenstates which are almost degenerate in mass and composed of maximally mixed states of φ 0 1 and φ 0 2 while their mixing with the other states are negligibly small. Hence, both the LSP and the NLSP arise from an equal mixing (∼ 49.99%) of φ 0 1 and φ 0 2 with their masses being 649.9 GeV and 650 GeV respectively. The lightest chargino also primarily consists of bi-doublet charged fields and has a mass of 650 GeV. Our choice of parameters (the BP 4 in the Tab. 2) directly affect the tree-level and loop-level Higgs mass, we thus slightly modify the numerical value of T yq 33 to get the lightest Higgs mass of M h 1 = 125 GeV. The branching ratio of W ± R → χ 0 1 χ ± 1 and W ± R → χ 0 2 χ ± 1 become identical (9% in each channel) since their coupling strengths (∼ 0.31P L + 0.31P R ) are also equal here. This is because the composition of χ 0 1 and χ 0 2 are almost the same. The φ 0 1 φ 0 1 Z R and φ 0 2 φ 0 2 Z R terms in the gauge basis appear with equal and opposite sign couplings and as a result, in the mass basis, the Z R χ 0 1 χ 0 1 and Z R χ 0 2 χ 0 2 couplings vanish in this case. This fact can also be seen from Eqn. B.16. Hence, these are suppressed (as χ 1,2 has tiny contributions from the other neutral higgsino and gaugino fields) and the corresponding decay BRs remain negligibly small. However, the vertices have quite large couplings resulting in a sizable branching ratio of around 8% in each of these channels.

Right-handed gauge triplet Higgsino-like LSP
The right-handed triplet higgsino-like neutralino LSP can be obtained by adjusting the value of the parameter µ 2 , λ c and v s appearing in the (4,5) and the (5,4) matrix elements of the neutralino mass matrix given in Eqn. 31. We change µ 2 and λ c while keeping v s constant.
As these parameters directly affect the tree-level Higgs mass, we change loop-corrected Higgs mass by adjusting the value of the T yq 33 parameter to achieve a lightest Higgs boson mass of 125 GeV. In this case, we can get large splitting between the neutralinos χ 0 1 and χ 0 2 due to the large off-diagonal (2,4), (2,5), (4,2) and (5,2)  As χ 0 1 , χ 0 2 and χ ± 1 are all composed of right-handed triplet states, their couplings with W R are relatively large compared to other cases. The coupling strengths of W ± 47P R (see the second term of both the lines of Eqn. A.12) for the BP 5. Thus the branching ratios of W ± R → χ 0 1 χ ± 1 and W ± R → χ 0 2 χ ± 1 are almost same here and equal to around 12% each. The doubly-charged fermion being light allows an additional decay channel for W ± R → χ ∓ 1 χ ±± and gives an even larger branching ratio of 21.12% for this channel owing to the larger coupling of W ± R χ ∓ 1 χ ±± vertex as given in Eqn. A.13.
The neutral Z R boson has several possible decay modes into electroweakino final states in this case. The δ c 0 δ c 0 Z R and δ c 0 δ c 0 Z R terms in the gauge basis appear with equal and opposite sign as in the previous case. Hence the Z R χ 0 1 χ 0 1 and Z R χ 0 2 χ 0 2 couplings are again small due to cancellations in the mass basis. On the other hand, the Z R → χ 0 1 χ 0 2 channel has a large branching ratio of 33.7% due to a large coupling of ∼ 0.63P L + 0.63P R (see Eqn. B.16) in this vertex. The Z R → χ ± 1 χ ∓ 1 remains quite small at around 2%. A sizable 9.45% branching in the channel Z R → χ ∓∓ χ ±± is also obtained in this scenario.

Singlino-like LSP
The singlino-like neutralino LSP primarily consists of S field. In this case, we have adjusted µ s parameter to get the singlino-like LSP. The choice of BP 6 in the Tab. 2, gives a singlino-like LSP with a mass M χ 0 1 = 521 GeV. The other neutralinos and charginos remain very massive here and cannot be produced from the decay of the heavy gauge bosons. Since the singlino has no gauge interactions it is quite natural that the W R and Z R bosons do not decay into these states. Hence the entire decay of the heavy gauge bosons will be into SM particles in this scenario.

LSP-Type
Benchmark points   being composed of equal parts coming from the bidoublet fields and the right-handed triplet fields. The choice of parameters leading to this mixed higgsino-like LSP is given in Tab. 5. We now present a detailed discussion of each of these cases.

Combination of two of the Bino, Wino-L and Singlino
The first three benchmark points in the Tab. 3 (BPs-1,2 and 3) represents the cases with the LSP comprising of a maximal mixing of the bino and wino-L field, the bino and singlino field and the wino-L and singlino fields respectively. In each case, the next lightest neutralino is almost same as the LSP in both mass and composition. As has been discussed earlier, the heavy W R and Z R gauge bosons do not have significant couplings to either a pair of binos, wino-Ls or singlinos. Thus, even here, the decay of these heavy gauge bosons into the light neutralinos are non-existent. Thus they decay primarily into SM particles with almost no branching into BSM particles.

Combination of Wino-R and one of the Bino, Wino-L and Singlino
The last three benchmark points in the Tab. 3 are much more interesting as the LSP here are all composed of around 50% from SU (2) R Wino which does interact quite significantly with the heavy gauge bosons. BPs 4, 5 and 6 in the Tab. 3 give a lightest neutralino LSP χ 0 1 consisting of ∼ 50% wino-R and ∼ 50% from either a Bino or wino-L or singlino field respectively. The lightest chargino χ ± 1 in BP 4 and 6 primarily consists of charged wino-R fields. Thus for these two points the decay of the W ± R → χ 0 1 χ ± 1 and W ± R → χ 0 2 χ ± 1 are quite significant with a BR around 15% and 12% respectively. The coupling strengths of the vertices W ± R χ 0 1 χ ± 1 and W ± R χ 0 2 χ ± 1 become almost equal and half of the coupling strength W ± R χ 0 1 χ ± 1 of the pure wino-R case as in the Tab. 2. These strengths become half due the changes of the mixing angles Z f N in the vertices (see Eqn. A.12) for the extra combination of Bino or wino-L or singlino fields in the LSP. As the combinations of the lightest chargino χ ± 1 remains similar as in the wino-R case as in the Tab. 2, hence the coupling strength, the Z R boson decays significantly into χ ± 1 χ ∓ 1 with a BR of around 25% here. For BP 5 its actually the second lightest chargino χ ± 2 which is coming from the charged component of the SU (2) R Wino. Also in this case, W R thus decays into χ ± 2 χ 0 1 and χ ± 2 χ 0 2 with BR of around 15% and 12% respectively while Z R boson decays into χ ± 2 χ ∓ 2 with a BR of around 25%.

Combination of Wino-R and Higgsinos of bidoublet/triplet
The only interesting cases here will be the ones where the bidoublet or SU (2) Table 4: The bidoublet or triplet higgsinos mix with the wino-R to form the lightest neutalino. BP 1 in the Tab. 4 represents the case where the bidoublet higgsinos mix with the wino-R to form the lightest neutalino χ 0 1 consisting almost 33% of each φ 0 1 , φ 0 2 and W R . In order to get the LSP with equal contributions from the two bidoublet higgsinos and the wino-R we had to make sure that all the mass terms related to these states remain small. This in turn results in two other neutralino states remaining light. The LSP χ 0 1 has a mass of 614 GeV for our chosen parameters. The next lightest neutralino χ 0 2 is mostly coming from the bi-doublet fields and has a mass of 652 GeV. The next heavier member in the neutralino spectrum χ 0 3 gets a large contribution from the wino-R field and has a mass of 714 GeV. The chargino χ ± 1 primarily consist of charged component of wino-R field whereas χ ∓ 2 consist of bi-doublet fields. They have masses in the same order as the neutralino masses as expected. Thus a number of different channels open up for the W R and Z R decay albeit with smaller branching ratios compared to the pure higgsino or pure wino-R case. However the total branching into the final state BSM particles become large since a host of new decay channels has now opened up. The largest non-SM branching ratio in the W R decay is in the W ± R → χ 0 3 χ ± 1 channel with 15.23% (much smaller than pure wino-R case with BR of 29.3%) due to the mixing suppression in the neutralino and the chargino sectors. Similarly the W ± R → χ 0 1,2 χ ± 2 channels are smaller here than the previous case as can be seen in the Tab. 4 and 2 respectively. A few other new combinations of neutralino plus chargino final states open up due to the smaller mass of the final state particles and mixing between bi-doublet and wino-R fields. We find the total branching of W R into BSM final state particles to be roughly 38.44%. Notably the W ± R → χ 0 2 χ ± 1 channel is very small since there is no direct W ± R W ∓ R Φ coupling in the gauge basis and only arises from mixings which are quite small. Similarly Z R has a number of possible decay channels including 1%, 2.1%, 21.6% and 6.4% BR in each channel respectively. The coupling strength of the vertex Z R χ ± 1 χ ± 1 is slightly smaller than the pure wino-R case due to due to mixing with higgsino states in the lightest chargino for this case.
One can adjust the parameters M W R 33 , λ c and µ 2 to get neutralino LSP which consists of neutral fermionic components wino-R and two higgsino from triplet fields. In this case, it not possible to get 33% contribution to the LSP from each of the fields due to the large off-diagonal 1 has around 90% higgsino components from the triplet and 10% from SU (2) R wino component. The decay channels for the W R and the Z R fields are given in BP2 of Tab. 4. As the χ 0 3 , χ ± 2 and χ ±± are mostly coming from the triplet sector, the corresponding decay of the heavy gauge bosons into these particles remain large. The partial decay widths (and hence the branching ratios), through are slightly smaller compared to the previous case with pure triplet higgsino LSP due to larger mixing with the SU (2) R wino.  Table 5: Combination of bidoublet and triplet higgsinos: The LSP are composed of 25% from each of the higgsino fields.

Combination of bidoublet and triplet Higgsinos
We now discuss a parameter choice where the contribution to the LSP are mainly coming from the mixing between the bi-doublet and right-handed triplet higgsino fields. In this case, we get The light doubly-charged chargino arising from the SU (2) R triplet higgsino has M χ ±± = 893 GeV.
A host of new final state decay channels for the heavy gauge bosons into these light electroweakinos are obtained here. The W ± R χ 0 i χ ∓ j and W ± R χ ∓∓ χ ± j couplings are given in Eqns. A.12, A.13 while the Z R χ 0 i χ 0 j and Z R χ ± i χ ∓ j and Z R χ ±± χ ∓∓ are presented in Eqns. B.16,B.17,B.18. These coupling strengths become smaller compared to cases with pure bidoublet or triplet higgsinos due to the mixing between them in this case. Since the gauge bosons couple more strongly with the triplets compared to the bidoublets, the branching ratio of W R into χ 0 4 χ ± 2 and χ ±± χ ± 2 are quite large of the order of 11% and 17% respectively. As stated earlier, χ 0 4 , χ ± 2 and χ ±± are mostly coming from the triplet fields. Similarly Z R decays involving χ 0 4 in the final state are much larger than the others. All the important BSM decay channels of the heavy gauge bosons for this case are given in the Tab. 5. Combining all these channels, the total branching ratios of the W R and Z R bosons into BSM final states become 49.93% and 50.54% respectively, which are larger than the scenarios with almost pure bidoublet or triplet higgsino-like LSP.

Case-III : Pure LSP and light pair of squarks
In the previous sections, the squarks and sleptons masses were larger than the W R and Z R masses so that their decays into final state squarks and sleptons were kinematically disallowed.
We now study the effect of low mass sfermions on the possible decays of the heavy gauge bosons.
In order to achieve this, we significantly decrease the values of the soft masses for the squarks and sleptons so that they are light enough for the heavy gauge bosons to decay into these particles.
The small stop squark mass will significantly affect the Higgs boson loop-corrected mass and we have to adjust the mixing parameter T yq 33 to account for this change. One has to choose a reasonably large T yq for this, resulting in the left-handed squarks becoming quite massive (more than M W R /2). The right-handed squarks though can remain light since the corrections to the right-handed squarks coming from the triplet VEV through the D-term is negative for our choice of parameters. Thus the heavy gauge bosons can decay into these right-handed squark final states.
The masses of the light up-type squarks (primarily consisting of right-handed squark fields) remain always larger than the light down-type squarks (also right-handed) for our choice of parameters due to the opposite sign contribution from the SU (2) R D-term. This term is additive for the m u R u * R term while it is subtractive for the m d R d * Also in this case, the masses of the neutralinos and chargino remain unaltered and the W R boson decay into χ 0 1 plus χ ± 1 final state remains negligibly small due the suppression in the vertex W ± R χ 0 1 χ ∓ 1 ∼ O(10 −4 ) (see Eqn. A.12). Similar to the previous case as in the Tab. 2, the W R and Z R bosons mostly decay into SM quarks and charged leptons through W ± R → qq and Z R → qq, l + l − channels. The other neutralinos, charginos, squarks, sleptons and the righthanded neutrinos remain heavy. As a result the heavy W R and Z R vector bosons cannot decay into any combination of these particles in the final state.
The left-handed wino-like LSP primarily consists of W 0 L gauge boson fields. We use similar numerical values of the parameters as in the previous case to get the lightest down-type squark with md 1 = 1 TeV. The decay width and branching of the heavy vector bosons W R and Z R into the final state squarks remain almost similar as in the previous Bino-like LSP case.
The singlino-like LSP case, we use similar values of the mass-squared parameters M 2 QL,ii and M 2 QR,ii . As ms is different for this choice of BP 6 in the Tab. 2, we take different T yq ii = 52.5 TeV (i = 1, 2, 3) to get the Higgs mass 125 GeV and lightest down-squark mass md 1 = 1 TeV. Also in this case, the decay width and branching of the heavy vector bosons W R and Z R into the final state squarks remain almost similar.
In above cases, the branching of the W R and Z R bosons into the SM particles final states decreases due to newly accessible squarks final states. Similarly for the choice of BP 3b and 3c in the Tab. 2 including alike M 2 QL,ii , M 2 QR,ii and T yq ii give almost same decay width of the heavy vector bosons W R and Z R into the final state squarks channels. Here the branching of the channels W ± R → χ 0 1 χ ± 1 and Z R → χ ± 1 χ ∓ 1 are decreased by ∼ 1% and ∼ 5% respectively.

LSP-Type
Branching Ratio of W ± R , Z R into different BSM fields for the common choice of M 2 QL,ii = M 2 QR,ii = 9.61 TeV 2 (i = 1, 2) and M 2 QL,33 = M 2 QR,33 = 9.60 TeV 2  Benchmark points Branching Ratio of W ± R , Z R into different BSM fields for collider analysis   Table 7: The branching fraction of relevant processes for these benchmark points to analyze the mono-X (X = W, Z) plus / E T and dilepton signatures through the cascade and direct decay of the heavy gauge bosons. The other input parameters and the heavy gauge bosons masses are fixed as in the previous section. and dijet final states arising from the decay of the heavy gauge bosons in our model. We consider two benchmark points (BP1 & BP2) in Tab. 7 corresponding to two distinctly different compositions for the LSP. In both of these two BPs, the electroweakino masses are taken around a TeV so that one could avoid the present constraints. The BPs are chosen such that the heavy gauge bosons have significant decay BRs into SUSY final states as they will also be used later in our analysis of SUSY decays of W R and Z R bosons.
The gauge bosons are produced via the s-channel quark-quark scattering processes. The production cross-sections of the heavy gauge boson as a function of their masses are shown in Fig. 1 for the 14 and 27 TeV center-of-mass energies at the LHC. We also list the respective production cross-sections for gauge bosons masses of M W R = 4.5 TeV and M Z R = 7.3 TeV in the Tab. 8, as those are the ones we consider extensively for our analysis. We use SARAH-4.8.6 [16,17] to get the input codes for SPheno-4.0.3 [18,19] and MadGraph-2.3.3 [20]. The SPheno software helps

Dilepton searches
The major contributions to the dilepton final states from the heavy gauge bosons in this model are coming from the Z R bosons decaying into the same-flavor opposite-sign (SFOS) leptonic final states with BRs of 4.04% and 2.86% for BP1 and BP2 respectively. The charged gauge boson W R decaying into leptonic final states W ± R → lν, l = e, µ are negligibly small due to the heavier right-handed neutrinos as was discussed earlier. We thus analyze the dilepton (electron or muon) final state signals at the 14 and 27 TeV LHC to investigate the possibility of identifying possible dilepton signal from the Z R decays in this model. To cleanly identify the final state leptons we use several selection criteria for the isolated leptons. The charged lepton isolation demands that there is no other charged particle with p T > 0.5 GeV within a cone of ∆R = ∆η 2 + ∆Φ 2 < 0.5 centered on the cell associated to the charged lepton. Here p T , η and φ are the transverse momentum, pseudo-rapidity and the polar angle of charged leptons respectively. In addition, the ratio of the scalar sum of the transverse momenta of all tracks to the p T of the lepton (chosen for isolation) is less than 0.12 (0.25) for electron (muon). The event is selected with each isolated lepton (electron or muon) having transverse momentum p T larger than 30 GeV. Also the candidate electron(muon) is required to satisfy the rapidity cut |η| < 2.5. Another important variable is the dilepton (SFOS pair) invariant mass distribution M ll which will be a useful probe to search for the Z R gauge boson in this case.
Several SM processes can contribute as background for the dilepton signal arising from the decay of the Z R boson. Among them, the pp → Z/γ * → ll channels become dominant due to the presence of virtual photon mediated processes. The other processes like pp → ZZ (Z → ll, Z → νν), pp → ZW (Z → ll, W → lν), pp → W W (W → lν) and tt, t → W b also add to the SM background. Invariant mass distribution for the signal and background events are shown in The resolution, which depends on the interaction with detector(s), is parametrized as a function of p l T and η given as Exapmle for BP2: A significant contribution to the dilepton background events can also arise from the pp → jj where the jets j can fake as leptons (0.5% into electron, whereas 0.1% for muon). In fact, the jets faking leptons background for p j T > 20 GeV become larger than the pp → Z/γ * → ll events due to their large production cross-section. It could effectively be reduced by the large p j T cut on the selected background events. The signal events pp → Z R → ll though will also be affected by the same p l T cut. We have thus selected only the signal as well as the background events with p j,l T > 1 TeV. The signal region 7.2 < M ll < 7.4 TeV is used to further reduce the backgrounds and optimize the signals. In this signal region with p l T > 1 TeV, the pp → V V, tt background become almost negligible. The number of signal and background events after implementing these cuts are shown in the Tab. 9.
The expected number of the signal events for both BP1 and BP2 at the 14 TeV run of the LHC with luminosity L = 3000 fb −1 become less than unity because of the small production cross-section (see the Tab. 9). However, for the LHC run at 27 TeV with L = 3000 fb −1 , the dilepton final state channels produce a large number of signal events satisfying all the above mentioned cuts. The significance of the signal over background attains a value of 32.25 (22.59) for BP1(BP2) for the HE-LHC. Hence, one can use these results to discover/exclude the heavy Z R boson through this channel.  Table 9: The signal as well as the backgrounds are selected with p l T > 1 TeV (l = e, µ) and |η| < 2.5 to reduce the background contribution. The signal pp → Z R → ll and the background are obtained after optimization cuts 7.2 < M ll < 7.4 TeV. The dijet (jet misidentified as lepton) background are also reduced by these choice of selection p j T > 1 TeV and optimization 7.2 < M jj < 7.4 TeV.
In these searches, only the Z R → ll, (l = e, µ) decay modes have been considered. However, the Z R → τ τ can potentially enhance the signal as τ can give one lepton (electron or muon)

Dijet searches
The heavy gauge bosons Z R and W R both can decay directly into two quarks giving rise to dijet final states which we study in the context of 14 and 27 TeV LHC experiments. Experimental search for the heavy gauge boson have already been performed [12] in the dijet channel and here we follow a similar strategy. The events are selected with at least two anti-k t jets with jet cone size 0.4 which having transverse momentum p T greater than 1 TeV. Also the candidate jet is required to satisfy a pseudo-rapidity cut of |η| < 2.5. Similar to the dilepton search, the  A more stringent cut on the signal and background regions with p j T > 1.5 TeV for W R search can result in a better significance. Though this cut will reduce the signal as well as background events, the background will be affected more since the signal jets are arising from the decay of a heavy resonance and can have larger p T . If we choose the same signal region 4.2 < M jj < 4.55 TeV as before, the signal significances will attain values of 5 Table 11: Total number of events of the signal pp → Z R → jj and background with p j T > 3 TeV along with cone size 0.4 at the 14 TeV and 27 TeV run of LHC with L = 3000 fb −1 are obtained after the optimization cut 6.7 < M jj < 7.35 TeV.
In the above analysis, anti-k t jets with cone size 0.4 have been considered and the corresponding invariant mass distribution was shown in Fig. 4 for the selected events with p j T > 1 TeV and |η| < 2.5. Now if we increase the jets' cone size to 1.0, the number of events corresponding to the signal as well as the background will be increased. To show the effect, we plot same distribution in Fig. 5 for the BP1 only. The pp → W ± R → jj process is demonstrated by the purple lines whereas pp → Z R → jj process is denoted by blue lines. The solid lines correspond to events with jets' cone size 0.4 (as in the Fig. 4)      • These final states are well understood as they have already been experimentally studied in the context of dark matter searches by the ATLAS and CMS collaborations [24,25].
• We also restrict ourselves to leptonic decay channels for the SM gauge bosons as these produce relatively clean channels which are easy to identify in a hadron-rich environment like the LHC experiment. One can also encounter relatively complex cascade decays, with multiple decay chains in between, which may eventually lead to final states with multiple leptons and jets along with large missing transverse energy. As an example let us consider the following decay chains The detailed collider analysis of these channels are beyond the scope of the current paper and will not be discussed here.

Mono-X plus missing transverse energy
Events with a single W/Z boson accompanied by large missing transverse energy constitute a very clean and distinctive signature in new physics searches at the LHC. This topology has been thoroughly analyzed by both the ATLAS and CMS collaborations [24,25], mainly in the context of DM searches. In this work, we follow these search channels to probe the heavy gauge bosons for the chosen benchmark points. We present these searches for the future collider perspective, * * The large coupling of ZR with the neutralinos are due to them being triplets of SU (2)R in this case, as compared to the leptons being doublets.
assuming the LHC will operate at the com energies of √ s = 14 and 27 TeV with an integrated luminosity of 3000 fb −1 .

mono-W + / E T searches
We perform a search for the heavy charged gauge bosons W R in events where a W boson is produced through one-step cascade decay (see the Fig. 6(a)) of the chargino χ ± 1 . Here we only consider the leptonic decay channel of the W boson (W → lν, l = e, µ).
Signal event would be characterized by the presence of a high p T lepton (electron and muon) and a large / E T imbalance due to the undetected escaping neutrino and lightest neutralinos. The search strategy reported in Ref. [24], which focused on the DM searches, has been followed with suitable modifications aimed to optimize the signal significance. The event is selected with one isolated lepton (electron or muon) which having transverse momentum p T larger than 400 GeV.
The lepton isolation criteria is same as in the previous case. Also the candidate electron(muon) is required to satisfy the rapidity cut |η|   Table 14: The event selection criteria of the signal and background requires at least one lepton ( or µ) in the event, with each lepton having p l T > 400 GeV and |η| < 2.5. Total number of events of the signal and background at the 14 and 27 TeV run at LHC with L = 3000 fb −1 are obtained after the optimization cuts 0.6 < / E T < 0.9 TeV and 1.2 < / E T < 1.6 TeV. The jet faking lepton pp → jj channels also add to the background. It is found to be 22.5 and 936.2 at 14 and 27 TeV respectively for the similar optimization cuts 0.6 < / E T < 0.  to the pp → lνjj process. It is also to be noted that the jet faking lepton (assuming 0.1% to electron and 0.5% to muon [26]) pp → jj channels also give additional contribution to the background. It is found to be 22. indicate that the heavy gauge bosons could be discovered at HE-HL-LHC. Or one can exclude these parameter space if we won't get any signal at future collider. The BP2 demands that one need more high-energetic collider with high integrated luminosity to discover or exclude such region. Now in the following discussion, we will see the features of these BPs in the context of mono-Z plus / E T searches.
In this analysis, only the W → lν, (l = e, µ) decay modes have been considered. However the W → τ ν τ can also enhance the signal as tau can give one lepton (electron or muon) in the final state through its decay, e.g., τ → W ν τ , W → lν. It could be quantified as follows.
Using the same selection and optimization cuts p l T > 400 GeV, 0.6 < / E T < 0.9 TeV and 1.2 < M j, / E T T < 1.6 TeV, it is found that the number of events at 14 TeV run of the LHC with luminosity L = 3000 fb −1 is enhanced by 5.01 (0.28) for BP1 (BP2). The significance now becomes 0.60 for the BP1. Whereas the number of events for these channels go to 106.32 (6.52) for BP1 (BP2) at 27 TeV LHC and the significance corresponding BP1 and BP2 attain values of 6.48 and 0.37 respectively.
The lν final state can also come through another cascade decay process with pp → W R → tb, t → W b, W → lν. It can be seen from the BPs that the branching of the heavy charged gauge boson into the top-bottom quark final state is quite large. Also these particles are emitted almost back-to-back and remain boosted with p t,b T ∼ 2 TeV as M W R = 4.5 TeV. Hence the separation ∆R lb between the final state bottom quark and lepton (both coming from decay of the top quark) become very small. It can also be understood form the parton level distributions shown in the Fig. 9. The ∆R lb distribution of the parton level bottom quark and lepton is demonstrated in the Fig . 9(a) while the correlation plot between final state lepton transverse momentum against ∆R lb is shown in the Fig . 9(b). As the charged lepton isolation demands there is no other charged particle with p T > 0.5 GeV within a cone of ∆R < 0.5, the number of lepton events in the final state passing this criterion is extremely small. Furthermore, the selection cut of p l T > 400 GeV also significantly decrease the events at the analysis level. The isolation and selection criteria decrease the final state lepton events by ∼ 87%. The remaining number of lepton events can be identified as the purple points on the upper and right side of the black dashed lines in the Fig . 9(b). The corresponding transverse mass and missing energy distribution of these events for the BP1 (dotted purple line) and BP2 (dotted blue line) are shown in the Figs. 7 and 8 respectively. These cascade decay process pp → W + R → tb, t → W b, W → lν also add to these signal events of the pp → W + R → χ + 1 χ 0 1 , χ + 1 → W χ 0 1 , W → lν, though the enhancement in the signals remain negligible. It is also to be noted that the b-jet veto will completely reduce these events at the analysis level.

mono-Z + / E T searches
We perform a search for the heavy neutral gauge boson Z R in events where a Z boson is produced through one-step cascade decays (see the Fig. 6(b)) of the neutralino χ 0 2 . Here we assume that the Z boson decays leptonically (Z → ll, l = e, µ). These events also contain significant missing transverse energy coming from the LSP χ 0 1 . The events are selected with two same flavor opposite sign (SFOS) isolated electrons or muons with transverse momentum p T larger than 30 GeV satisfying |M ll − M Z | < 15 GeV. Here  Fig. 10. Please note that the signal events for BP1 is zero as   The SFOS lepton pair final state can also come through the cascade decay process with pp → Z R → tt, t → W b, W → lν. It can be seen from the BPs that the branching of the heavy neutral gauge boson into the pair of top quark final state is quite large (see the Tab. 7). As was already discussed in the mono-W plus / E T searches, the isolation criteria of leptons significantly wane the number of events arising from top quark decays at the detector level. Furthermore, a b-jet veto will completely remove any events in the final state and hence the enhancement in this channel remains negligible.

Summary and Conclusions
In this work, we have performed a detailed study of the heavy gauge boson decays and corresponding collider phenomenology in a minimal left-right supersymmetric model with automatic R-parity conservation. In our chosen scenario, the LR symmetry is broken in the SUSY limit, making the additional W R and Z R gauge bosons heavier than the SUSY particles. The heavy gauge bosons can thus decay into these SUSY states. We have studied the possible decay modes of the W R and Z R bosons into lighter electroweakinos and sfermions. In our initial analysis the sfermions were kept heavier than the right-handed gauge bosons so as to prevent their decay into sfermion final states. Our results show that the heavy gauge bosons decay into electroweakinos are strongly dependent on the composition of these states. We have thus considered all possibilities where the lightest neutralino (also the LSP in our model) is almost entirely composed of only single type of gaugino or higgsino state. The decay width of the heavy gauge bosons into these lighter electroweakinos become significant for the cases where the neutralino is either composed of the right-handed wino or is mostly composed of the higgsino superpartner of bidoublet or triplet scalar. We then looked at the cases where the LSP can be a mixture of various higgsino and gaugino states. Again, significantly large branching ratios for the heavy gauge We have also studied their one-step SUSY cascade decays into mono-W + / E T and mono-Z + / E T final states. These signals have already been probed experimentally in the context of dark matter searches but not been considered as possible search channels for the heavy gauge bosons.
To explore this possibility, we study the mono-X + / E T (X = W, Z) final states where the X particles decay leptonically. The leptonic final states produce relatively clean signals which are easy to identify in a hadron-rich environment like the LHC experiment. We have chosen two benchmark points -BP1 which is more suited for the mono-W + / E T search and BP2 for mono-Z + / E T analysis. We have further optimized the selection cuts in order to enhance the signal significance over the SM backgrounds.
Our study shows that the dilepton final state gives promising results for the discovery of the heavy Z R boson at the HE-LHC while the dijet channel is better suited to search for W R bosons. Even if a heavy gauge boson is seen in these channels, the SUSY nature of the model will still remain hidden. The mono-X + / E T channels, in conjunction with the dilepton and dijet channels will not only be able to tell us about the existence of these heavy gauge bosons, it can also provide significant hints towards the existence of SUSY particles. : U U e ja γ µ P R (A.11)