progress on f p with the kloe experiment untagged
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Progress on F p with the KLOE experiment (untagged)

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 20

Progress on F p with the KLOE experiment (untagged) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 55 Views
  • Uploaded on

Progress on F p with the KLOE experiment (untagged). Federico Nguyen Università Roma TRE February 27 th 2006. Outline. Present situation Selection criteria: the “small angle” analysis Particle discrimination Preliminary estimates of the background processes Conclusions.

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 ' Progress on F p with the KLOE experiment (untagged)' - chinue


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
progress on f p with the kloe experiment untagged

Progress on Fp with the KLOE experiment (untagged)

Federico Nguyen

Università Roma TRE

February 27th 2006

outline
Outline
  • Present situation
  • Selection criteria: the “small angle” analysis
  • Particle discrimination
  • Preliminary estimates of the background processes
  • Conclusions
available kloe data sets
Available KLOE data sets

in 2001, the veto of cosmic events (hardware) caused nonnegligible inefficiency in ppg events and made the measurement of mmg events not feasible, from 2002 on, this effect is taken out

kloe performances for the ppg analysis
KLOE: performances for the ppg analysis

Electromagnetic Calorimeter

Pb / Scintillating Fibres

Endcap + Barrel = 98% (4p)

Drift Chamber

4 m,3.3 mlength

90% He,10%i-C4H10

sE/E = 5.4%/E(GeV)

e+ e- e+ e-

sp/p = 0.4% (q > 45°)

srf = 150 mm , sz = 2 mm

svtx~ 3 mm, sMpp ~ 1 MeV

the whole structure is surrounded

by a superconducting coil B=0.52 T

fiducial volume

p + p -

Fiducial volume
  • 1 and only 1 vertex ( |z| < 7 cm ) connected to 2 tracks
  • each track with 50o < qtrack < 130o
  • small angle g ( qpp < 15o )

no photon tagging:

  • high statistics for ISR (~ q-2 )
  • low relative FSR contribution
  • suppressed  p+p-p0wrt the signal
  • the threshold region is not covered
benefits of the selected region

[%]

Mpp2 (GeV2)

Benefits of the selected region

sFSR-LO / sQED

sppp / sppg

in the selected region LO-FSR, and f p+p-p0 yields are small, from which the published result is based on:

KLOE result (140 pb-1 of 2001) :

Phys. Lett., B606 (2005) 12

normalization to mmg events

Normalization to mmg events

benefits from normalizing to mmg events,

in the limit of neglecting FSR effects:

Luminosity: 0.5%theory  0.3%exp., Bhabha

most of the theoretical systematic effects cancel out

statistical error
Statistical error

qpp< 15o, 50o < qp,< 130o ,DMpp2 = 0.01 GeV2

L = 240 pb-1 , e = 50% flat in s′, in both channels

contrary to the luminosity normalization, statistics is an issue, however it is a good cross check of the region intriguing because of the difference with t data

estimate performed

with PHOKHARA-4

H. Czyż et al.,

Eur.Phys.J.C39 (2005) 411

discrimination p vs e time and energy
Discrimination p vs. e: time and energy

/eseparation is performed using a particle ID function based on time and quantity and shape of the energy released in the calorimeter

pions deposit ~ 40 MeV in each plane

electrons deposit mostly in the first plane and negligible amount in the rest

time of flight: for low p valuesbpbe ~ 1

improvements wrt the published result
Improvements wrt the published result

mtrk, defined by 4-momentum conservation under the hypothesis

of 2 equal mass tracks and a g

  • improved selection
  • enlarged mtrk acceptance, from 90 MeV to 80 MeV
  • only 1/1000 of events with mmiss > 120 MeV
  • more efficient reconstruction filter: from 95% to 98.5%

mmiss, defined by the 4-momentum conservation under the

hypothesis of e+e- p+p- X

discrimination efficiencies for ppg and mmg

before particle ID

after particle ID

Discrimination efficiencies for ppg and mmg

muons or pions

electrons

z = Log Lp/Le (per track)

mtrk (MeV)

1) the procedure is tested

2) the event is selected if at least one of the 2 tracks is not identified to be an electron

it leads to a rejection power ~ 97%for e+ e- e+ e-events while keeping a selection efficiency> 99.8%for

e+ e- p+p-g, m+m-g events

definition of ppg and mmg events i

Mpp2 [0.37,0.42] GeV2

p+p-p0

p+ p-p0

(MC)

no man’s land

DATA

mtrk (MeV)

Definition of ppg and mmg events (I)

130 MeV < mtrkand inside the area, are ppg

mtrk < 115 MeV are mmg

( z1+ z2 ) / 2

definition of ppg and mmg events ii
Definition of ppg and mmg events (II)

Mpp2 [0.57,0.62] GeV2

( z1+ z2 ) / 2

Mpp2 [0.87,0.92] GeV2

( z1+ z2 ) / 2

mtrk (MeV)

eeg contamination @ high Mpp2

can be neglected to 1st order

mtrk (MeV)

tracking efficiencies for ppg events
Tracking efficiencies for ppg events

the agreement is on the level of 0.5-0.6%, at maximum,

preliminary

evaluated from data samples of p+p- and p+p-p0 events, and from a MC sample of p+p-g events, and compared

background for the ppg selection
Background for the ppg selection

background yields are estimated using MC distributions after the whole selection, normalized to the luminosity of the selected data sample

for data and 2 background sources:

data

dsvis/dM2 (nb/GeV2)

preliminary

MC mmg

MC p+p-p0

M2 (GeV2)

the raw ppg spectrum
The “raw” ppg spectrum
  • pion with 50o < qtrack < 130o
  • small angle g ( qpp < 15o )
  • mtrk > 130 MeV and inside the area (mtrk vs Mpp)
  • at least 1 track not to be identified as an electron

dN/dM2 (events/0.01 GeV2)

preliminary

DMpp2 = 0.01 GeV2, L = 242 pb-1

of data taken in 2002

M2 (GeV2)

background for the mmg selection
Background for the mmg selection

background yields are estimated using MC distributions after the whole selection, normalized to the luminosity of the selected data sample

for data and 2 background sources:

data

dsvis/dM2 (nb/GeV2)

preliminary

MC ppg

MC p+p-p0

M2 (GeV2)

the raw mmg spectrum
The “raw” mmg spectrum
  • muon with 50o < qtrack < 130o
  • small angle g ( qpp < 15o )
  • mtrk < 115 MeV
  • at least 1 track not to be identified as an electron

dN/dM2 (events/0.01 GeV2)

preliminary

DMpp2 = 0.01 GeV2, L = 242 pb-1

of data taken in 2002

M2 (GeV2)

conclusions and perspectives
Conclusions and perspectives
  • the extraction of Fp, from both the absolute measurement of ppg events and from the ratio of ppg to mmg events, is in an advanced state,
  • these methods have different systematics,
  • we are finalizing the estimate of the corrections and of the systematic uncertainties,
  • good control of p/m/e discrimination,
  • even on the theory side some improvements are expected

Results will come soon…

Please, stay tuned

comparison among available data sets
Comparison among available data sets

SND: Achasov et al., hep-ex/0506076

< Dampp> = (380.4  2.1 )  10-10

CMD-2, c2 = 0.3

CMD-2 EPS (‘05), c2 = 0.3

c4 pts2/ndf = 2.5 / 3

P(c2 > c4 pts2 ) = 48%

s / sKLOE - 1

SND, c2 = 1

interpolation of

KLOE 60 data points from 0.35 to 0.95 GeV2

KLOE, c2 = 0.9

Dampp (10-10 )

Mpp2 (GeV2)

  • CMD-2 (‘04) and KLOE agree @ high Mpp
  • disagreement btw KLOE and CMD-2/SND
  • around the r peak
  • fair agreement btw CMD-2 (‘04)
  • and KLOE
  • difference at about 1s btw KLOE and SND due to the r peak and above
ad