diffractive dijet production with 2010 data hardeep bansil (1), oldřich kepka (2), vlastimil kůs...
DESCRIPTION
Introduction to diffraction Total cross section in hadronic scattering experiments at 7 TeV – Total = Elastic + Diffractive + Non-diffractive (ND) – 20% elastic, 80% inelastic (diffractive + ND) Diffractive channels together – 25-30% of the σ inel – Single-diffraction (SD: pp pX) – Main process of interest – Double-diffraction (DD: pp XY) Kinematic variables – invariant mass of the dissociated system M X (M Y ) at the LHC energy spans m p +m π to approx. 1TeV – fractional momentum loss ξ X of the scattered proton ξ X = M X 2 / s [ξ Y = M Y 2 / s] Diffraction in the realm of soft QCD – Best described by phenomenological models (e.g. Regge theory) – Exchange of color singlet (Pomeron) large angular region in which no outgoing particles (soft QCD radiation) are detected rapidity gap Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 Data3 SD DD 24/04/2014TRANSCRIPT
Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 data
Hardeep Bansil(1), Oldřich Kepka(2), Vlastimil Kůs(2), Paul Newman(1), Marek
Taševský(2)
(1) University of Birmingham(2) Institute of Physics, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic
Standard Model Plenary Meeting24th April 2014
Current Status• Previously presented in SM Plenary meeting - July 2013
• CDS supporting note available since March 2014• https://cds.cern.ch/record/1670320
• (also see H. Bansil thesis)• http://cds.cern.ch/record/1696944
• Aiming for editorial board / paper
Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 Data 224/04/2014
Introduction to diffraction• Total cross section in hadronic scattering experiments at 7 TeV
– Total = Elastic + Diffractive + Non-diffractive (ND)– 20% elastic, 80% inelastic (diffractive + ND)
• Diffractive channels together – 25-30% of the σinel
– Single-diffraction (SD: pp pX) – Main process of interest– Double-diffraction (DD: pp XY)
• Kinematic variables– invariant mass of the dissociated system MX (MY)
• at the LHC energy spans mp+mπ to approx. 1TeV
– fractional momentum loss ξX of the scattered proton
ξX = MX2 / s [ξY = MY
2 / s]
• Diffraction in the realm of soft QCD– Best described by phenomenological models (e.g. Regge theory)– Exchange of color singlet (Pomeron) large angular region in which no outgoing particles
(soft QCD radiation) are detected rapidity gap
Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 Data 3
SD
DD
24/04/2014
Rapidity gaps in ATLAS detector
• Large Rapidity Gap (LRG) … Δη ~ -log10ξX … smaller ξX (MX) bigger gap– Region in η devoid of hadronic activity due to the exchange of colorless object (Pomeron)
• Detector-level LRG definition (ΔηF)– First defined by soft diffractive rapidity gaps analysis (Eur.Phys.J. C72(2012) 1926)– Biggest region in η (starting at the edge of the detector η=±4.9) absent of clusters and tracks
complying selection:– no tracks with pT>pT
cut (pTcut = 200 MeV)
– no TopoClusters; noise suppression …• (pT
cluster > 200 MeV)
• most significant cell in the cluster: Ecell/σnoise> Sthreshold
• No pile-up environment required– Pile-up could occupy the gap– Use early runs from 2010 (Period B)
Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 Data 4
ΔηF ~ 6 ↔ ξ ~ 10-4
LRG
24/04/2014
Hard diffraction• The aim
– Study single diffraction at hard scale, i.e. in high pT dijet events for first time in ATLAS
– Measure cross-section vs. gap size (ΔηF) and ξ (fractional momentum loss of intact proton)
– Independent measurement of gap survival probability in terms of both ΔηF & ξ
• Gap Survival Probability (S2)– Hard diffraction studied precisely at HERA (ep collisions). Diffractive PDFs (dPDFs) measured.
– Then Tevatron (pp collisions). Structure function ~10x smaller than HERA-based dPDFs predictions for Tevatron conditions. Explanation – rescattering of dissociated system with intact proton.
– S2 typical for hadron-hadron collisions
• What about S2 at LHC?– theoretical predictions (KMR) … S2 ~ 5-10 %
Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 Data 5
CDF data
Predictions based on HERA’s dPDFs
zIP, Momentum fraction of parton emitted by Pomeron
24/04/2014
Rescatter with p ?
ξ
PYTHIA8 + POMWIG• PYTHIA8 non-diffractive samples
• PYTHIA8 diffractive samples can use different Pomeron flux models – influences diffractive distributions
• Comparison to default Schuler-Sjostrand• H1 DPDFs better described by
Donnachie-Landshoff model• Can test against different models
• POMWIG samples• Modified HERWIG, Based on picture to right, using H1 DPDFs • Generated over kinematic range 10-6 < ξ < 0.1 and
10-6 < |t| < 10 GeV2
Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 Data 624/04/2014
Event selection criteria• Starting with SM2010 inclusive measurement (next slide)• Good Runs List, Good primary vertex (ntracks>4), Triggers• Kinematic cuts (pT jet 1 > 30 GeV, pT jet 2 > 20 GeV, |ηjets|<4.4) , anti-kT R=0.4 or R=0.6
• Focus on 2010 Period B data adding pile-up suppression cut L = 6.75 nb-1
• need for events with 1 interaction only … no PU vertices (having ntracks>1)• removes 5% of events in period B (σ-correction factors applied)
• Going below trigger efficiency plateau for jet triggers (next slide)• improving the use of available statistics for large gaps
• Going to lower jet-pT ranges• Increases statistics, allows smaller diffractive systems to be studied larger gaps• pT jet 1 > 20 GeV, pT jet 2 > 20 GeV , |ηjets|<4.4, anti-kT R=0.4 or R=0.6
• Forward gap definition (ΔηF)• after extensive studies “hybrid” gap-definition method:• “Measurements of the total transverse energy in pseudorapidity bins in proton-proton collisions at √s with ATLAS”• η-region devoid of activity (starting at either η=-4.8 or η=+4.8)• detector-level noise cuts: tracks with pT track > 200 MeV• TopoClusters with cell significance Ecell/σnoise > Sthr (~5.5)• Corrected (truth) cross section definition: pch (n) particle > 500 (200) MeV OR pT > 200 MeV
Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 Data 724/04/2014
Trigger strategy• Start from Implementation of selection cuts and
trigger scheme from inclusive SM2010 dijet cross-section measurement
• Invariant mass spectrum successfully reproduced• presented during Inclusive Jet + Dijet Cross-Section meeting in April 2012
• However, event yields at large gaps unsatisfactory
• Optimise inclusive SM2010 measurement (OR of triggers associated with leading and sub-leading jet according to their pT, η)
– L1_J5 trigger for central jets (|η| < 2.8)
– Lower pT and forward jets triggered by L1_MBTS_1 (L1 forward jets not commissioned by then)
• Going below 99% trigger efficiency plateau (but staying above 70%) as MBTS_1 highly prescaled
• presented during Jet Trigger Signature Group Meeting in October 2012
(this allows to use jet triggers at lower pT) necessity to weight events by 1/εtrig
Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 Data 8
lower pT lower invariant mass larger gaps24/04/2014
L1_J5 (0.3<|η|<1.2)
R=0.4 jetsR=0.6 jetsFit to R=0.4Fit to R=0.6
ξproton reconstruction
Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 Data 924/04/2014
• Truth level - fractional momentum loss of scattered proton– ξproton = (3.5TeV – pZ
proton) / 3.5TeV
• Cross section measured in terms of observable ξ± – approximation to real ξ– ξ± = Σ pT e±y / √s (TopoClusters / stable particles)– ξ+ … intact proton going in the +z
direction (system X in -z dir)– ξ- … intact proton going in the -z
direction (system X in +z dir)
• Approximation performs very wellfor ξ<0.01
Pythia 8 SD
ND, SD and DD ranges
Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 Data 1024/04/2014
• Data against PYTHIA8 ND, DD and SD – all scaled to L= 6.75 nb-1
• Non diffraction dominant for ΔηF < 2, ξ± > 0.01• Then diffractive contributions become more prominent
Comparison of groups• Comparison of uncorrected cross sections between Prague and
Birmingham groups– Completely independent code bases– Minor discrepancies exist work in progress
Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 Data 1124/04/2014
Unfolding
Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 Data 1224/04/2014
• Bayesian 2D unfolding technique– RooUnfold 1.1.1– input: pT of the leading jet vs. ΔηF or ξ±
• Detector-level PYTHIA8 ND:(SD+DD) ratio “fitted” to data to get the best possible shape description in both ΔηF and ξ± distributions– ΔηF distribution: ND×0.62, (SD+DD)×0.206– ξ± distribution: ND×0.577, (SD+DD)×0.283
Performance of 2D Unfolding
Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 Data 1324/04/2014
• Comprehensive tests of unfolding performance & stability done• closure tests
• sensitivity tests to mixture of ND, SD and DD (different distribution shapes)
• convergence of iterations (χ2)
• stability against choice of binning
• ... (more information in the back-up note)
• optimum 4 iterations
*Illustration based on 1D unfolding
2D unfolding actually uses severalinputs to account for migrations
Systematic uncertainties
Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 Data 1424/04/2014
• Jet Energy Scale (JES)• Jet Energy Resolution (JER)• Jet Angular Resolution (JAR)• Jet Reconstruction Efficiency (JRE)• Jet Cleaning Efficiency (JCE)• Unfolding• Trigger efficiency • Cluster energy scale (CES)• Cell significance threshold cut (CTC) uncertainty• Tracking - negligible• Vertex requirement• Luminosity
• Procedure:• 1) Run uncertainty-adjusted analysis on MC• 2) Produce new smearing matrix & reco-MC plots• 3) Unfold uncorrected data with new smearing matrix & reco-MC• 4) Compare new unfolding to standard procedure unfolding
Uncertainty inputs from SM 2010dijet analysis used here
Inherited from soft diffractiveanalysis
Selected systematic uncertainties
Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 Data 1524/04/2014
• Jet Energy Scale (JES)• Inherited from 2010 SM dijet analysis• Split into 7 components• JES can vary as much as 15% for
components as a function of η, pT • Added in quadrature• Uncertainty range: typically 25-30%
continuously rising up to large gaps
• ΔηF, Cell significance threshold cut (CTC)• Adjust noise suppression thresholds up and
down by 10%• Uncertainty typically 15-25%
• ξ±, Cluster Energy Scale (CES)• Cluster EM energy scale in MC adjusted by
correction factors • Uncertainty typically 10-20%
Differential cross sections• Differential cross sections calculated as for ΔηF
• Nweighted accounts for trigger efficiency per data event, prescales and unfolding• Compare against POMWIG and different PYTHIA8 flux models
• Requirement of hard scale affects kinematics no rapidity gap plateau• Cross sections slightly higher for R=0.6 but maintain the same shape• For PYTHIA8, ND ~1.3x larger in first bin, SD+DD/ND fairly even for ΔηF >2.5• POMWIG ~3x larger csx than data for ΔηF>3, slightly higher for R=0.4
16
)( F
weighted
F LN
dd
R=0.6R=0.4
Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 Data 1624/04/2014
Differential cross sections• Differential cross sections calculated as for ξ±
• Nweighted accounts for trigger efficiency per data event, prescales and unfolding• Compare against POMWIG and different PYTHIA8 flux models
• Forward gap requirement of 3 units removes majority of large ξ± events• POMWIG results significantly above data, PYTHIA8 roughly equal to data csx• Could be used to determine S2
LN
dd weighted
R=0.6, no gap req.
Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 Data 1724/04/2014
R=0.6, ΔηF > 3
Differential cross sections• Differential cross sections also calculated for jet variables• Without gap requirements, data compatible with PYTHIA8 ND• After Forward gap requirement of 3 units to enhance diffraction:
• Leading jet pt: diffractive states fall away faster than ND• Leading jet η: limited statistically but shows hints of double peak structure observed
in diffractive MCs, ND shows single central peak
Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 Data 1824/04/2014
Summary• Reproduced soft diffractive & inclusive dijet cross section
measurements• New selection cuts & trigger strategy developed• Analysis of 2010 period B data in ΔηF (gap size) and ξproton
(fractional momentum loss) distributions• Good agreement between Birmingham-Prague• Supporting note in advanced stage
• Looking to request editorial board as soon as possible• Some additional studies and MC generation (NLO calculations)
planned to improve measurement, extract gap survival probability (S2)
Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 Data 1924/04/2014
BACK UP SLIDES
24/04/2014 Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 Data 20
Validation of new triggersPeriod B
Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 Data 22
Uncorrected distributions
RAW EVENTS SM2010 B New B
Gaps > 3 59 186
Gaps > 4 9 52
Agreement within 5%!
Significant grow of statistics at large gaps
24/04/2014
Diffractive dijet measurement by CMS• CMS measured diffractive contribution to dijet production at LHC
– based on L = 2.7 nb-1
– Measurement of ξ (approximates fractional momentum loss of scattered proton)– region of interest: ΔηF>1.9
• comparison to different MC models– ND (red): PYTHIA 6 & 8– SD (blue): PYTHIA 8, POMPYT, POMWIG– DD: PYTHIA 8– POWHEG for NLO comparisons
• Results– SD MCs predict more events than observed by
factor ≈5 in lowest ξ bin (S2)– data also consists of proton dissociative events
(scattered proton excited into low mass state escaping undetected into the forward region)
• Gap Survival Probability– S2 = 0.12 ± 0.05 (LO)– S2 = 0.08 ± 0.04 (NLO)
Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 Data 2324/04/2014
~
~
Phys. Rev. D 87 (2013) 012006
S2
Unfolding systematic• Method: creating “new” MC (by reweighting) describing reco-level data well• 1) Fit DataReco/MCReco by continuous function (data-MC scaled agreement doesn’t have to be perfect)• 2) Rerun MC analysis with weights from the fitting function• 3) Unfold scaled reco-MC by standard procedure• 4) Compare unfolded MC to truth MC (scaled) -> uncertainty
24/04/2014 Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 Data 24
ΔηF measurement• Soft diffractive measurement • dσ/dΔηF ~ constant over several units of rapidity plateau
Diffractive Dijet Production with 2010 Data 2524/04/2014
Soft diffraction
Diffractive plateau