university of rochester participation in cdf
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
University of Rochester Participation in CDF

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 25

University of Rochester Participation in CDF - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 129 Views
  • Uploaded on

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.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' University of Rochester Participation in CDF' - bowen


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
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

slide4
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%

[email protected] 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

slide17

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

[email protected] 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

ad