new results from d0 on the w width, charge asymmetry and on gauge couplings sarah eno (u. maryland)...
TRANSCRIPT
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 1
New Results from D0 on the W width, charge asymmetry and on gauge couplings
Sarah Eno (U. Maryland)for the
D0 Collaboration
4 Sep 2009
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 2
Outline
W discovered in 1983. 26 years of W physics!How well do we know the W?
• Updated measurement of the muon charge asymmetry from W decays (4.9 fb -
1) (How is the W made?)• New limits on trilinear gauge boson couplings (0.7-1 fb-1) (How well does it
play with its siblings?)• W width (1 fb-1) (What’s its life expectancy?)
4 Sep 2009Run IIa Run IIb
D0 Detector
3Junjie Zhu
Silicon Microstrip Tracker (SMT) |η|<3 Central Fiber Tracker (CFT) |η|<2 2 T magnetic field
Liquid-argon sampling calorimetersCentral (CC) |η| < 1 and Endcap (EC)Coverage: |η| < 4.2
Muon systemDrift chambers and scintillator counters1.8 T toroids|η|<2
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 4
Data Samples
4 Sep 2009
Many, many thanks to the accelerator division!!
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 5
W
4 Sep 2009
How are W’s made?
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 6
Muon asymmetry
4 Sep 2009
u quark momentum distribution (in proton) harder than d. W+ tends to go along proton direction, the W- in the antiproton direction.
A(yW ) =dσ(W+ ) / dyW −dσ(W−) / dyW
dσ(W+ ) / dyW +dσ(W−) / dyW
Y =ln(
s⋅xa
MW
) xax
b=M 2 / s
Y =
12
ln(E + PL
E −PL
) ⇒ Y =12
ln(xa
xb
)
At Tevatron energies, for W’s 0.0017<x<1 at LO.
W rapidity
W a
sym
met
ryarXiv: 0901.0002
x
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 7
Muon asymmetry
4 Sep 2009
Since can not reconstruct pZ of the neutrino, measure muon charge asymmetry instead.*
A(η) =dσ(μ+ ) / dη−dσ(μ−) / dηdσ(μ+ ) / dη+dσ(μ−) / dη
Muon asymmetry influenced by W rapidity asymmetry but also by polarization and left-handed couplings of the W and the V-A structure of the W decay.
Cartoon stolen from CDF web site
* For a method of indirectly reconstruction the rapidity, see CDF, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 181801 (2009)
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 8
Muon asymmetry
4 Sep 2009
Muon asymmetry is more similar to W asymmetry for high PT muons from low PT W’s.
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 9
Muon charge asymmetry
4 Sep 2009
New D0 result, using 4.9 fb-1, updates previous results. Most recent published results are:
• D0: Measurement of the Muon Charge Asymmetry from W Boson Decays, Phys. Rev. D77, 011106 (2008), 0.3 fb-1
• D0: Measurement of the Electron Charge Asymmetry, Phys. Rev. Lett 101, 211801 (2008), 0.7 fb-1
• CDF: W boson charge asymetry vs W rapidity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 181801 (2009), 1 fb-1
• CDF: lepton charge asymmetry, Phys. Rev. D71, 051104, 0.17 fb-1
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 10
Selection
4 Sep 2009
ηdet < 1.6 ⇒ 594203 W → μν
1.6 < η det < 2.0 ⇒ 5950 W → μν
• an appropriate muon trigger (limited to η < 1.6 for Run IIb)
• a muon with PT > 20 GeV with η < 1.6 (Run IIb) or η < 2.0 (Run IIa)
• muon should be isolated in the tracker PTtracks < 2.5 GeV
ΔR<0.5∑
• muon should be isolated in the calorimeter ET < 2.5 GeV0.1<ΔR<0.5
∑• ET > 20 GeV
• transverse mass (MT ) > 40 GeV
• timing cuts to reject cosmics
• remove Z → μμ by vetoing events with second muon
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 11
Challenges
4 Sep 2009
• As long as they are charge independent, efficiencies, acceptances, and luminosity cancel in the ratio (frequent reversal of solenoid and toroid polarities helps)• Backgrounds can dilute asymmetry• Charge mis-identification is a potential problem that can dilute asymmetry• Need to correct for momentum smearing since asymmetry depends on muon PT
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 12
Backgrounds
4 Sep 2009
Background Run IIa Run IIb
multijet 2±0.1% 2.4±0.1%
W->τν 3±0.02% 3±0.03%
Z->μμ 2.7±0.1% 3.1±0.01%
Z->ττ 0.16±0.001% 0.18±0.002%
• Multijet background estimated using matrix method based on isolation. Background efficiency (εB(η,PT)) estimated using events with low MET (<10 GeV) and a jet with PT>10 GeV. Systematics on εB estimated by varying cuts used to reduce W contamination.• W/Z backgrounds estimated from MC (PYTHIA) normalized to NNLO cross section. Monte Carlo statistics dominant source of uncertainty.• Background fractions binned in eta and muon PT. Only 1 bin in eta for eta>1.6
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 13
Charge misidentification
4 Sep 2009
Run IIa, 3 same-sign Z’s out of 48452Run IIb, 14 same-sign Z’s out of 120417
negligibleMuon
Jet
Muon
Track
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 14
Momentum smearing
4 Sep 2009
Because of finite momentum resolution, bins in reconstructed PT contain events from other PT bins. Since the shape of this asymmetry depends on PT, correction is needed.Uncertainty determined by varying the momentum resolution within uncertainties.
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 15
Results
4 Sep 2009
Data sample is large enough that errors on asymmetry are smaller than spread from PDF uncertainties. Will be useful for global PDF fits and reduce PDF uncertainty on W mass and width.
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 16
Results
4 Sep 2009
For muon PT> 35 GeV.
Systematic uncertainties completely dominated by muon momentum resolution correction.
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 17
W
4 Sep 2009
How well does the W play with its siblings?
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 18
Charged triple gauge couplings
Charged Triple Gauge Couplings (TGC)Probed by WW, WZ, and Wγ production
4 Sep 2009
a(s) =a0
1+sΛ2
⎛⎝⎜
⎞⎠⎟2
•SM
• couplings that respect CP, SU(2)LxU(1)Y and EM gauge invariance
• assume equal couplings for ZWW and γWW respecting CP
all 0 except g1V =κV =1
14 parameters at LO
Λ =2 TeV
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 19
New from D0
4 Sep 2009
• using the PT spectrum of the di-jet system from recent evidence for
WW/ZW → jjlν
• combining several different previous measurements of charged
anomalous TGC (aTGC)
WW / WZ → lν jj WW→ lνlνWγ → lνγWZ→ lνll
WZ final state currently only accessible at the Tevatron.
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 20
Evidence for WW or WZ to lνjj*
4 Sep 2009
• muon ( η < 2) or electron ( η < 1.1) with PT > 20 GeV
• ET > 20 GeV
• 2 jets with PT > 20 GeV and η < 2.5
• at least 1 jet with PT > 30 GeV
• MT > 35 GeV
• Random Forest classifier with 13 kinematic variables
• (dominant) W+jets background and signal fit from
data simultaneously
σmeasured = 20.2 ± 2.5(stat) ± 3.6(sys) ± 1.2(lumi) pb
σ SM = 16.1 ± 0.9 pb (Phys. Rev. D60, 113006 (1999))
Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 161801 (2009)
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 21
Anomalous couplings
4 Sep 2009
• affect total cross section• affect kinematic distributions. The PT of the dijet system is particular sensitive.
Λ =2 TeVSU(2)LxU(1) conserving aTGC
WZ
cros
s sc
t aTG
C/SM
WW
cro
ss s
ct a
TGC/
SM
hadronic W PT
hadronic W rapidity
ΔΔ
λ
Δκ
Δκ
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 22
aTGC
4 Sep 2009
Simulation: SM events produced with PYTHIA reweighted according to generator-level PT and ΔR using MC@NLO-based weights. Anomalous couplings distributions are generated by reweighting SM predictions using fit to ratio of the (LO) HZW* generator with and without aTGC.
X is the PT of the dijet system
* Phys. Rev. D 41, 2113 (1990)
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 23
Data: WW or WZ to lνjj
4 Sep 2009
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 24
Limits
4 Sep 2009
equal couplings (γWW=ZWW)
SU(2)LxU(1)Y
Λ =2 TeV
SU(2)LxU(1)Y
SU(2)LxU(1)Y
See arXiv:0907.4398
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 25
aTCG combining channels
4 Sep 2009
Combine limits from 4 measurements by minimizing χ 2 , for distributions for sensitive variables (shown) for each measurement simultaneously, including systematics as nuisance parameters
arXiv: 0907.4398: WZ and WW → lν jj
arXiv: 0904.0673: WW→ lνlνPhys. Rev. D 76, 111104(R) (2007): WZ→ lνll
Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 241805 (2008): Wγ
Wine & Cheese, FNAL
aTGC Limits combining channels
26
WZ→lvll
Wγ→lvγ
WW lvjj
WW→lvlv
4 Sep 2009
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 27
Uncertainties
4 Sep 2009
Systematics handled using methodology/code from W. Fisher, FERMILAB-TM-2386-E
Type I: affects only normalizationType II: can change shapes of kinematic distributions as well
Most important systematics are background cross sections and luminosity. Incorporating the systematic uncertainties degrades the limits by 30%.
aTGC Limits
28
Can be interpreted as measurements of the magnetic dipole and quadrupole moments.
4 Sep 2009 Wine & Cheese, FNAL
x2-x3 less sensitive to combined LEP results.Comparable sensitivity to an individual LEP exp.
arXiv:0907.4952
Λ =2 TeV
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 29
W
4 Sep 2009
What’s the W’s life expectancy?
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 30
W Width
4 Sep 2009
ΓW ≈ (3 + 2 fQCD )GF MW
3
6 2π(1 + δ SM ) = 2.089 ± 0.002 GeV
fQCD = 3(1 + α s (MW ) / π +1.409(α s (MW ) / π )2 + ...
(Rosner, Phys. Rev. D49, 1363 (1994) Renton: arXiv : 0804.4779(2008),
Denner: Fortsch. Phys. 41, 307 (1993))
Due to insensitivity to “Oblique” corrections, expected to agree with SM prediction almost regardless of new physics.
Current world average is : 2.050± 0.058 GeV (2.8% measurement)
Although one of the best-predicted, one of the least well-measured properties of the W.
Rosner et al.
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 31
New from D0
4 Sep 2009
New measurement with 1 fb-1 of data
• previous highest luminosity measurement from CDF (Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 071801 (2008), 0.35 fb-1
•Using same data samples, MC simulations, and much of the same methodology as recent D0 W mass measurement, arXiv:0908.0766, submitted to Phys. Rev. Lett.
4 Sep 2009 Wine & Cheese, FNAL 32
W transverse mass
MT= 2ET
eETν (1−cosΔϕ )
Mass
width
Width, to LO, is proportional to the fraction of events at high MT
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 33
W basics
4 Sep 2009
Two objects are measured in the detector: Lepton & Hadronic recoil (u). Neutrino is vector sum of lepton and recoil.
MT= 2ET
eETν (1−cosΔϕ )
≈2ETe +u||
Event Selection
4 Sep 2009 Wine & Cheese, FNAL 34
• an inclusive electron trigger
• an electron with PT > 25 GeV
• matching track with PT > 10 GeV
and an SMT hit
• shower shape consistent with electron
isolation (ER<0.4total / ER<0.2
EM ) −1 < 0.15
EEM / E total > 0.9
• η < 1.05 and not close to
module boundaries
• ET > 25 GeV
• uT < 15 GeV (avoid regions where production model has large uncertainties,
reduce affect of uT and reduce backgrounds)
• 50< MT < 200 GeV
• vertex with z < 60 cm
499,830 W's
(5272 with 100 < MT < 200 GeV)
Outline
4 Sep 2009 Wine & Cheese, FNAL 35
Need Monte Carlo simulation to predict shapes of these observables for given width hypothesis
NLO event generator : DØ uses ResBos [Balazs, Yuan; Phys ReV D56, 5558] + Photos [Barberio, Was; Comp Phys Com 79, 291] for W/Z production and decay: O(108) events
+Parameterized detector model
Detector calibrationdata
Reweighted using relativistic BW to produce W transverse mass templates
+backgrounds
binned likelihood fit • data and template normalized to same area for MT<100 GeV• fit to high MT region (MT>100 Gev) gives width
Model tested via a detailed “MC closure” test. As with mass, “blind” analysis.
For more details, see talk by Jan Stark, FNAL Wine & Cheese, Mar. 20, 2009
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 36
Sensitivity
4 Sep 2009
1
2
3
3
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 37
Electron energy scale
4 Sep 2009
4 X0 of dead material in front of the calorimeter made understanding the scale challenging.
depth in radiation lengths (X0)
EM1
EM2
EM3
EM4
FH1
DEA
D
dE/d
X 0 (arb
itrar
y un
its)
EM1
EM2
EM3
EM4
DEA
D
eta = 0(normal incidence)
eta = 1
Same as for W mass measurement
For more details, see talk by Jan Stark, FNAL Wine & Cheese, Mar. 20, 2009
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 38
Tuning dead material on longitudinal shower shape
4 Sep 2009
EM1 EM2
EM3 EM4
Fractional energydeposits, electronswith || < 0.2
Before tuning of material model:
EM1 EM2
EM3 EM4
Fractional energydeposits, electronswith || < 0.2
After tuning of material model:
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 39
Final Scale with Z’s
4 Sep 2009
Emeasured = α x Etrue + β
Use energy spread of electrons in Z decay to constrain α and β.
α = 1.0111 ± 0.0043β = -0.404 ± 0.209 GeVcorrelation: -0.997
After having corrected for the effects of the uninstrumented material:final energy response calibration, using Z e e, the known Z mass value from LEP:
Result:
Uncertainty dominated by Z statistics
40
Selection EfficiencyNeed to carefully model any dependence of the electron identification efficiency on the PT of the electron that might sculpt the shape of the MT distribution (instead of just changing the normalization). Because of the kinematics, the PT can correlate with other kinematic quantities that affect the identification efficiency.
Electron identification efficiencies affected by:• geometry (z of primary vertex, distance from module boundary in phi and eta)• electron PT
• photon final state radiation• hadronic activity in the event
• correlated with electron PT through W decay kinematics
• scales with component parallel to electron direction (u||)
• also scales with the magnitude of the overall activity in the event (Scalar ET)
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 41
Electron ID efficiencies
4 Sep 2009
Track match efficiency versus eta and primary vertex z
Overall identification efficiency versus u|| (data versus MC)
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 42
Dependence on electron PT
4 Sep 2009
Check of dependence of shower shape efficiency on electron PT. Black data, red: fast MC. The shape of the dependence is consistent with being the same.
electron PTelectron PT
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 43
Uncertainties on efficiency
4 Sep 2009
Most important is dependence on electron PT. Determined by comparing efficiency versus PT from Z->ee events to that from fast simulation.
Compare data and MC for Zee for efficiency versus SET and electron PT and for efficiency versus eta and electron PT and look for evidence of slope. Compatible with no slope.
D0 Preliminary
Events at high transverse mass are from off-shell W’s and from high PT W’s with recoil underestimated.
4 Sep 2009 Wine & Cheese, FNAL 44
Modeling the Recoil
Transverse mass spectra from • the generator level (Red histogram), • electron energy response/resolution Included (Blue histogram),• recoil response (scale of 0.6) and resolution included (Green histogram), • MET resolution due to zerobias events included (Light blue histogram), • hadronic scale is set to 1 and also met resolution due to zerobias events included (Black histogram).
No uT cut
Modeling the recoil
4 Sep 2009 Wine & Cheese, FNAL 45
Theorist view
Cartoon version
As seen in the detector
Measured “recoil” includes ISR, Underlying event, pileup, detector noise.
4 Sep 2009 Wine & Cheese, FNAL 46
Two Recoil Methods
Overlay recoils taken from the Z data on MC W’sarXiv: 0907.3713
The recoil library method
4 Sep 2009 Wine & Cheese, FNAL 47
Recoil Library Method
PTtrue =0.4 GeV
PTtrue =10 GeV
PTtrue =29 GeV
D0 MC
D0 MC D0 MC
4 Sep 2009 Wine & Cheese, FNAL 48
Recoil Library Method
Map also includes total hadronic activity to use with electron ID dicing
4 Sep 2009 Wine & Cheese, FNAL 49
Recoil Library Method
PTmeasured =
7 GeV
Note this method has no tunable parameters
Use Bayesian method of unfolding* to produce weights that can be used when assigning a measured recoil to a bin in true boson PT
* G. D’Agostini, NIM A362, 487 (1995)
Recoil Library
4 Sep 2009 Wine & Cheese, FNAL 50
Using library without unfolding After unfolding
Recoil library uncertainties
4 Sep 2009 Wine & Cheese, FNAL 51
• Same as uncertainty from parameterized method, and much easier to implement• Uncertainty for both methods dominated by Z statistics
MC closure test
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 52
PDF Uncertainties
4 Sep 2009
20 pairs of CTEQ6.1M PDF’s“data” generated with central PDF (+pythia)MC templates created reweighting events according the 40 error PDF’s
Use method suggested by CTEQ:
ΔΓW =1
2x1.6(Γ i
+ − Γ i− )2
i=1
20
∑ where Γ is the
width determined using the ith uncertainty PDF set
Converts from 90% cl to 68% cl
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 53
Width uncertainties
4 Sep 2009
Width
4 Sep 2009 Wine & Cheese, FNAL 54
ΓW = 2.028 ± 0.038(stat) ± 0.061(sys) GeV (3.5% uncertainty)
( ± 0.072 GeV)
Systematics dominated, but systematics are dominated by Z statistics.
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 55
Fit Results
4 Sep 2009
Comparison between data and MC at best fit mass for MT, electron PT, and MET.
From electron PT spectrum: 2.012 ±0.046 GeV
From /ETspectrum: 2.058 ±0.036 GeV
D0 Preliminary D0 Preliminary
D0 Preliminary
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 56
Tail events
4 Sep 2009
Comparison between data and MC at best fit width for distributions of various kinematic variables for events with 100<MT<200 GeV
D0 Preliminary D0 Preliminary
D0 Preliminary
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 57
Comparison to previous measurements
4 Sep 2009
D0 Preliminary
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 58
Conclusions
4 Sep 2009
• New limits on anomalous triple gauge couplings from WZ/ZZ to lνjj events.• New limits combining channels on anomalous triple gauge couplings (best limits from Tevatron). • When the full 5 fb-1 is analyzed and combined, may improve on combined LEP sensitivity on aTGC.• New muon asymmetry results have errors smaller than spread due to current PDF uncertainties. When incorporated into PDF fits, should decreased error on W mass and width.• new W width measurement (3.5% precision)
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 59
Backup Slides
4 Sep 2009
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 604 Sep 2009
Interactionpoint
First active layer ofliquid argon
about3.7 X0 in between !
0.9 X0
0.3 X0 plus 1 X0 of lead
cryo walls: 1.1 X0
inner detector: 0.1 X0
4X0
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 61
Other uncertainties
4 Sep 2009
• assume uT cut makes us only sensitive to uncertainties on the non-perturbative part of the prediction, so uncertainties on W PT distribution: vary g2 within uncertainty from global fit (0.68±0.02 GeV2) (F. Landry, R. Brock, P. Nadosky, C.P. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D 67, 073016 (2003)• photon FSR: compare PHOTOS to WGRAD and ZGRAD (which includes interference at 1 photon level). Fit data with an effect to templates without.
Pierre Petroff/ Dzero CERN seminar, May 05, 2009 62
Background to W e ν
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 63
Stat Error MET, MT
4 Sep 2009
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 64
Modeling the efficiency
4 Sep 2009
• get “intrinsic” dependence on electron PT, dependency on overall event activity, and dependency on FSR from detailed GEANT-based MC, (both single electrons and Z->ee and W->eν events with overlay of real zero-bias-triggered data)• get average efficiency versus eta and vertex z, and u|| dependence from Z data (tag and probe)• correct and test with Z data
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 65
SET and electron PT correlations
4 Sep 2009
Ratio of efficiency versus electron PT to average efficiency as function of scalar ET for various bins in electron PT. The complex shape of these functions comes from kinematic correlations between electron PT and scalar ET through the recoil. High PT electrons tend to come from high PT W’s that decay so the electron is along the direction of the boost.. While the SET can be large for these events, it is not near the electron and therefore does not cause inefficiencies.
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 66
Width consistency tests
4 Sep 2009
D0 Preliminary D0 Preliminary D0 Preliminary
D0 Preliminary D0 Preliminary D0 Preliminary
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 67
Stability of MT fits
4 Sep 2009
D0 PreliminaryD0 Preliminary
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 68
Stability of electron PT and MET fits
4 Sep 2009
D0 PreliminaryD0 Preliminary
D0 Preliminary D0 Preliminary
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 69
Width from simple ratio
4 Sep 2009
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 70
muon PT requirement and x
4 Sep 2009
Wine & Cheese, FNAL 71
Comparison to electron
4 Sep 2009
%d0%9f%d0%be%d0%bb%d0%be%d0%b6%d0%b5%d0%bd%d0%b8%d0%b5 %d0%9f%d0%be%d1%81%d0%bb%d1%8b%20%d0%9f%d0%be
%d0%9a%d0%a3%d0%a8%d0%9d%d0%86%d0%a0%d0%95%d0%9d%d0%9a%d0%9e%20%d0%9e %d0%90 %d0%9e%d0%91%d0%9b%d0%8
%d0%9f%d1%80%d0%be%d0%b3%d1%80%d0%b0%d0%bc%d0%bc%d0%b0 %d0%a1%d1%8a%d0%b5%d0%b7%d0%b4%d0%a2%d0%b5%d1
%d1%81%d0%b8%d1%81%d1%82%d0%b5%d0%bc%d0%b0 %d0%bd%d0%b0%d0%bf%d0%be%d0%bb%d1%8c%d0%bd%d0%be%d0%b3%d0
%d0%a1%d0%b1%d0%be%d1%80%d0%bd%d0%b8%d0%ba %d0%a1%d1%8a%d0%b5%d0%b7%d0%b4%d0%a2%d0%b5%d1%80%d0%b0%d0
%d0%9a%d0%b0%d1%82%d0%b0%d0%bb%d0%be%d0%b3 %d0%9c%d0%be%d0%bb %d0%a1%d0%bf%d0%b5%d1%86 %d1%83%d0%ba%
%d0%b5 %d0%b5%d0%ba%d1%80%d0%b0%d0%bd %d0%b4%d0%be%d1%80%d0%b0%d0%bd%d0%b8%d0%ba%d0%b8 %d0%bb%d1%8e%
%d0%bf%d1%80%d0%be%d0%b5%d0%ba%d1%82%d0%b8%d1%80%d0%be%d0%b2%d0%b0%d0%bd%d0%b8%d0%b5 %d0%b2%d0%bd%d1
%d0%a8%d0%b0%d0%b1%d0%bb%d0%be%d0%bd %d0%a0%d0%9f %d0%b0%d1%81%d0%bf%d0%b8%d1%80%d0%b0%d0%bd%d1%82%d
%d0%93%d0%a3%d0%97%20%d0%93%d0%b0%d0%b7 %d0%97%d0%b0%d0%b2%d0%be%d0%b4%d1%81%d0%ba%d0%b0%d1%8f%20%d0
%d0%9c%d0%b0%d0%b3 %d0%95%d0%ba%d0%b1 %d0%a2%d0%b5%d1%85%d0%bd%d0%be%d0%bb%d0%be%d0%b3%d1%96%d1%97%2
%d0%a4%d0%93%d0%9e%d0%a1%203 %20%d0%9b%d0%b5%d1%87%d0%b5%d0%b1%d0%bd%d0%be%d0%b5%20%d0%b4%d0%b5%d0%b
%d0%a1%d0%b1%d0%be%d1%80%d0%bd%d0%b8%d0%ba%20%d0%9c%d0%b5%d0%b4 %20%d0%b7%d0%b0%d0%b2 %20%d0%b4%d0%b
%d0%a3%d1%87%d0%b5%d0%b1%d0%bd%d0%b8%d0%ba%d0%b8%20%d0%98%d0%b7%d0%b4 %d0%b2%d0%b0%20%d0%9c%d0%98%d0
%d0%93%d0%90%d0%a3%d0%97%20%20%d0%a0%d0%9f%d0%a6%20%d0%b3 %d0%a3%d0%bb%d0%b0%d0%bd %d0%a3%d0%b4%d1%8
1060204 %d0%bb%d0%b8%d1%81%d1%82%d0%be%d0%b2%d0%ba%d0%b0 %d0%bf%d0%be %d1%82%d0%b5%d0%bf%d0%bb%d0%be
%d0%a3%d1%87%d0%b5%d0%b1%d0%bd%d1%8b%d0%b9%d0%9f%d0%bb%d0%b0%d0%bd %d0%a4%d1%83%d0%bd%d0%b4%d0%9c%d0
%d0%9d%d0%b0%d0%b2%d1%87%d0%b0%d0%bb%d1%8c%d0%bd%d0%be %d0%bc%d0%b5%d1%82%d0%be%d0%b4%d0%b8%d1%87%d0