University of rochester participation in cdf
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 25

University of Rochester Participation in CDF PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 77 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

University of Rochester Participation in CDF. Outline. Introduction/Group Members Our Operational Responsibilities Physics Pursuits W/Z Physics Heavy Zs Top Physics W Helicity and New physics search in Dileptons Top to taus. Current CDF Group Members.

Download Presentation

University of Rochester Participation in CDF

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


University of rochester participation in cdf

University of RochesterParticipation inCDF

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


Outline

Outline

  • Introduction/Group Members

  • Our Operational Responsibilities

  • Physics Pursuits

    • W/Z Physics

    • Heavy Zs

    • Top Physics

      • W Helicity and New physics search in Dileptons

      • Top to taus

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


Current cdf group members

Current CDF Group Members

Three sub-groups function as one on many projects, but primary hardware/physics interests align us as follows:

Arie Bodek (50%):

-Howard Budd (50%)

-Pawel DeBarbaro (10%)

-Willis Sakumoto

-Yeon Sei Chung (95%)

-Phil Yoon (4th year)

(acc. Phys., FNAL Support)

-J.-Y. Han (1st year-with MS)

-G.-B. Yu (1st year-with MS)

  • Kevin McFarland (75%?):

    • -Anthony Vaiciulis

    • Gilles deLentdecker

    • J. Chvojka (1st year)

    • B. Kilminster(graduating)

    • S. Kenezny(4th year)

    • Jedong Lee (2nd year)

    • B. Y. Han (2nd year)

    • Chris Clark (REU)

  • Paul Tipton (75%):

    • Eva Halkiadakis(90%)

    • Andy Hocker (90%)

    • M. Coca (5th year)

    • R. Eusebi (70%, 3rd year)

    • Andrew Ivanov (5th year)

    • Sarah Lockwitz (REU)

Color KEY:

PI’s Senior Res. Assoc. Postdoc. Fellows Grad Students Undergrads

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


University of rochester participation in cdf

CDF

  • CDF effort led by Bodek, Tipton, McFarland

  • We are focused on:

    • Tests of the SM in and around the top candidate sample

    • Production and decay parameters of the Top Quark

    • Electroweak physics with W and Z Bosons

    • Search for new W and Z Bosons

    • Higgs Search

    • Much experience from Run I (top discovery, heavy Z searches, etc)

  • DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


    Rochester s three areas of focus and operational responsibility

    Rochester’s Three Areas of Focus and Operational Responsibility

    • Run 2 forward calorimeter --‘endplug’ (Bodek)

      • Hadronic section a Rochester-led effort

      • Constructed at FNAL with Rochester physicists and technicians doing fabrication, QA.

      • Rochester in charge of test beam calibration, calibration at B0, installation, commissioning and operations.

      • Fermilab responsibility -phototubes and bases

    Note: A lot of Physics (e.g. W Asymmetry, W Mass, PDFs needs the plug.

    DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


    Cdf plug operations

    CDF Plug Operations

    Run 2Problem: Degradation of both EM and Hadron Plug calorimeter response at forward plug  (eta)

    Investigated ->by our group using the laser monitoring system. Problem narrowed down to degradation of phototubes due to high current associated with beam.

    Solution->(a) Lower the voltage to fix the problem. (b)Correct older data using the laser information

    Central-Plug Z mass constant after the application of Laser gain corrections

    DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


    Rochester silicon operations

    Rochester Silicon Operations

    Second area of Focus: Silicon Tracking

    • Run 2 SVXII (Tipton)

      • Rochester group contributed to SVXII Ladder and Barrel fabrication

      • Silicon Cooling and Interlocks

      • Radiation Monitoring and Tevatron abort

      • Commissioning and Operations

    DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


    Rochester silicon operations cont

    Rochester Silicon Operations, Cont.

    Second area of Focus: Silicon Tracking

    • Run 2 SVXII (Tipton)

      • Rochester group contributed to SVXII Ladder and Barrel fabrication

      • Silicon Cooling and Interlocks

      • Radiation Monitoring and Tevatron abort

      • Commissioning and Operations

    DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


    Cdf cont

    CDF, cont

    Third area of Focus: Level 3 Trigger/Data Hub

    • Level 3 (McFarland)

      • Responsible for software trigger based on offline reconstruction

      • Current→Run2b Bandwidth

        • Input rate: 80→200 MB/sec

        • Output: 20→60 MB/sec

      • “Data Hub” takes accepted Level-3 events, logs them and distributes to online monitoring system

      • Level-3 selections determine offline datasets after processing

        • Allows CDF to find events in its firehose of a datastream

    DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


    Cdf data taking

    260 pb-1 delivered

    ~200 pb-1 recorded

    Run 1 luminosity

    CDF Data-Taking

    ~190 of 225 pb-1 goal delivered y.t.d.

    Typically run with 85-90% efficiency

    Ultimately collect 4-8 fb-1

    Between ~67 and 130 pb-1 used in analyses presented here

    DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


    Great progress in one year

    Great Progress in One Year

    1 year ago (2002)

    Now (2003)

    • L1/L2/L3 rates: 18k/250/75 Hz 6k/240/30Hz ~45e30 ~15e30

    • Biggest run: 1553 nb-1 (run 163064)447 nb-1 (run 145005)

      taken May 17-18th 17h w. Si. taken May 17, 11h w Si.

    • Highest Init. Lum. 47.5e30 (May 17th)20.6e30 (May 19th)

    • Best store CDF int. Lum1553 nb-1 (one run)602 nb-1 (4 runs)

      (store 2555, May 17th) (Store 1332, May 17th)

    • Best “CDF-week” 9.1 (pb-1)/10.3 (pb-1)2.97 (pb-1)/3.47 (pb-1)

      (most pb-1 to tape) (week of May 11th) (week of May 16th)

    • Best Store Efficiency 94.2% with Si (1 run)93.2% no Si (4 runs)

      (May 17th, 9.1 of 10.3 pb-1) (May 16th, 506 of 543 nb-1)

    DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


    Silicon performance

    Silicon Performance

    • Inclusive B lifetime with J/y’s

      ct=458±10stat. ±11syst.mm (PDG: 469±4 mm)

    • Exclusive B+J/yK+lifetime

      ct=446 ±43stat. ±13syst.mm (PDG: 502±5 mm)

    11 micron resolution

    18.4/pb

    BsJ/yf

    More mass plots

    DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


    B w e e

    .B(Wee)

    ·B(We) = 2.640.01stat0.09sys0.16lum nb

    NNLO @ s=1.96 TeV‡: 2.69  0.10 nb

    • Candidates: 38625 in ~ 72 pb-1

    • Backgrounds ~6%

      (dominated by QCD)

    ‡ Nucl. Phys. B359,343 (1991)

    Phys.Rev. Lett. 88,201801 (2002)

    DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


    Run 2 measurements of sb w e n mn

    Run 2 Measurements of sB(Wen, mn)

    s•B(Wmn) =

    2.70±.04stat±.19syst ±.27lum

    MT

    5547 candidates in 10 pb-1

    4561 candidates in 16 pb-1

    sW*BR(Wen) (nb) =

    2.60±0.07stat±0.11syst ± 0.26lum

    Run 1 scaled to 1.96 TeV: 2.72±0.02stat±0.09syst ±0.10lum

    DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


    B z 0 l l

    ·B(Z0ee) = 2676stat15sys16lum pb

    ·B(Z0mm) = 2466stat12sys15lum pb

    .B(Z0l+l-)

    VERY

    CLEAN

    • Candidates: 1830 in ~ 72 pb-1

    • Backgrounds ~0.6%

    • Candidates: 1631 in ~ 72 pb-1

    • Backgrounds: ~0.9%

    NNLO@ s=1.96 TeV‡: 252  9 pb

    ‡ Nucl. Phys. B359,343 (1991)

    Phys.Rev. Lett. 88,201801 (2002)

    DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


    W cross sections vs e cm

    W & Cross Sections vs. ECM

    Our new measurements

    NNLO

    DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


    University of rochester participation in cdf

    PDG

    combined Exp

    PDG

    SM

    Theoretical

    prediction

    Measure

    (ppW)(W  e)(Z)

    R=

    (ppZ)(W)(Z  ee)

    Extract

    G(W)

    DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


    S tt dilepton channel tt l l bb

    -

    Df vs. ET N jets 2

    /

    tt = 13.2  5.9stat  1.5sys  0.8lum pb

    NLO@ s=1.96 TeV for

    Mtop = 175 GeV‡: 6.70+0.71–0.88 pb

    -

    stt DileptonChannel: tt llbb

    Run II Top Dilepton Summary Table:

    CDF Run II Preliminary

    -

    ‡ MLM

    ‡ hep-ph/0303085(ML Mangano et al)

    DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


    New results for s tt in the dilepton channel tt l l bb

    New Results forstt in the Dilepton Channel: tt llbb

    Using ~125pb-1

    • Theoretical prediction: (6.7 +/- 0.5) pb

    DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


    Inventing new experimental and analysis techniques

    Inventing New Experimental and Analysis Techniques

    In Run I- 0.1 fb-1. Rochester’s analysis of the W Asymmetry (Bodek,Fan) has led to the reduction on the error on the W mass from PDF uncertainties from 100 MeV down to 15 MeV. Made precision measurements of the W mass at hadron colliders possible.

    -- In Run I - A new experimental technique (Bodek-Fan) to identify e+ and e- was invented for this purpose to extend the asymmetry to the forward direction. It combines extrapolation of tracks in the SVX with the position of the shower centroid in the plug calorimeter. If the centroid was shifter to one side it was an electron, if it was on the other, it was a positron,

    -- In run I - This technique was also used to measure the Z and DY forward-backward asymmetry. Z - Y distributions were measured (constrains PDFs). High Mass DY-FB Asymmetry shows 2 sigma deviation from SM (possible Z’ ?).

    (2) Run-II Investigating physics with 0.5-1.0 fb-1. Developing newer (Bodek,McFarland) techniques to do physics with W’s, Z’s and DY.

    DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


    Run i versus run ii rochester analyses 0 1 fm 1 vs 2 fm 1

    Run I versus Run IIRochester analyses 0.1 fm-1 vs 2 fm-1

    2 fm-1

    Run II analysis - McFarland/Lee

    Run I analysis - Bodek/Chung

    DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


    Run i versus run ii rochester analyses 0 1 fm 1 vs 2 fm 11

    Run I versus Run IIRochester analyses 0.1 fm-1 vs 2 fm-1

    2 fm-1, Run II analysis Bodek/McFarland/Han/Gyu

    Run I analyses (Z- Bodek/Liu), (W - Bodel/Fan). Run II: Using plug electrons together with SVX tracking (Rochester plug-Rocheser SVX group), MC shows definitive measurements of PDFs from W and Z y-distributions and asymmetry.)

    2 fm-1

    Run II Analysis Bodek/Chung/Han

    DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


    Constraining pdfs d u with w asymmetry d u with y distribution for z s and w s

    Constraining PDFs : (d/u) with W asymmetry;(d+u) with y distribution for Z’s and W’s

    Measure W decay lepton charge asymmetry - V-A has opposite asymemtry. Unkown neutrino Z momentum yields two solutions for yw

    New technique

    Needed to

    Limit the

    Error on W

    Mass from

    PDFs

    uncertainties

    New technique to unfold the two yw solutions to get the true W production asymmetry -being developed by Bodek, McFarland- expected errors. Shown:

    U-quark carries more

    momentum than d-quark

    DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


    Constraining pdfs d u with w asymmetry d u with y distribution for z s and w s1

    Constraining PDFs : (d/u) with W asymmetry;(d+u) with y distribution for Z’s and W’s

    W with

    0.5 fb-1

    generated

    Z with 1.5 fb-1 - generated

    W generated y distribution for 0.5 fb-1. W has higher statistics but cannot be measured directly. Determine indirectly via decay lepton and deconvolution of the two y1 and y2 solutions with the W asymmetry for Central and Plug electrons.

    Z generated y distribution for 1.5 fb-1 Z can be measured directly using Plug-Plug events (but cross section is lower than W). Provides constraints on W y distribution and on (u+d). (get d/u from W Asymmetry).

    DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


    Conclusions

    Conclusions

    • U or R continues to play an indispensable role in CDF

    DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton


  • Login