In [10], we have studied in detail the theoretical constraints, namely the positivity of the
mass eigenstates, boundedness of the potential and positive-definiteness of the Hessian. Our
parameter choice is also compliant with the EW Precision Test (EWPT) bounds [10, 11].
These limits have been taken into account in the present paper. The second set of experi-
mental constraints comes from the relic abundance of DM as well as dedicated direct and
indirect searches for DM particles. The Planck experiment provides a DM relic density
limit of [15]:
Ω
DM
h
2
= 0.1197 ± 0.0022. (2.24)
In this work, we do not focus on the details of DM annihilation (for detailed discussions see
refs. [10–12]). However, we require that the DM candidate of the I(2+1)HDM is in agree-
ment with the upper limit from Planck (2.24) for all considered points. If relation (2.24)
is exactly satisfied, then H
1
provides 100% of the DM in the Universe. This is a case in
benchmark scenario A50 discussed in later sections [10, 11]. We also consider cases where
H
1
has a subdominant contribution and the missing relic density is to be provided by an
extension of the model. This usually happens where mass splittings between H
1
and other
inert particles are small, i.e., in the forthcoming benchmarks I5 and I10. In these two cases,
the coannihilation channels of H
1
A
i
→ Z → ff
0
are strong and reduce DM relic density
to values below the Planck value, even for very small values of Higgs-DM coupling.
Benchmark scenario A50 (for 53 GeV . m
H
1
. 73 GeV) is in agreement with the
most recent direct [16] and indirect [17] detection limits. However, for completeness, we
show a larger mass region (40 GeV . m
H
1
. 90 GeV) in our cross section plots, and
highlight the surviving regions.
For benchmarks I5 and I10, which — as mentioned — correspond to relic density
below the Planck value, detection limits should be rescaled, leading to the (relic density
dependent) limit of:
σ(m
H
1
) < σ
LUX
(m
H
1
)
Ω
Planck
Ω
H
1
. (2.25)
We ensure this limit is satisfied for all studied points. The detailed analysis of astrophysical
signals in benchmarks I5 and I10 is beyond the scope of this paper. However, for all
masses in these benchmarks, relic density is within 10%–90% of the observed relic density.
The missing relic density can be easily augmented by late-stage decays of an additional
particle. The natural candidate here for the completion of the model would be a heavy
right handed neutrino in the same vein as the scotogenic model [5], which would decay into
DM after the thermal freeze-out of DM and bring back the under-abundant DM relic into
the observed range.
Finally, we take into account collider data from LEP and the LHC (including the Higgs
total decay width [18], Higgs invisible decays [19], direct searches for additional scalars and
the Branching Ratio (BR) for h → γ γ [19]), as discussed in [10–12]. In all cases, the mass
splittings are large enough not to influence the decay widths of the weak gauge bosons,
forbidding the on-shell decays Z → H
1,2
A
1,2
and W
±
→ H
±
1,2
H
1,2
/A
1,2
.
If the Higgs-DM coupling is small enough, i.e., g
hH
1
H1
. 0.02, then both the Higgs
invisible decay BR and Higgs total decay width are in agreement with measured values.
– 7 –