Why CP in gtt?. ?. Standard model contribution is not detectable -> If you see something it must indicate new physics! Sizeable effects possible from popular models due to the large top mass, for example: SUSY and multiple higgs doublets.
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.
Why CP in gtt?
Standard model contribution is not detectable -> If you see something it must indicate new physics!
Sizeable effects possible from popular models due to the large top mass, for example: SUSY and multiple higgs doublets.
Huge sample of tt will be available at LHC which enables precision measurements.
Model independent approach
Standard model symmetries
Topology of: pp -> tt+X
Keep lowest order operator
Use the lowest order operator to construct an effective term that can be added to the SM Lagrangian:
Chromo-Electric Dipole Moment.
Extract the Feynman rules from the effective Lagrangian and implement them as a MC generator.
Only gluon-gluon production included since it dominates at LHC (90%).
Four diagrams needed. Full tree-level matrix elements (Madgraph) used in order to maintain the spin correlation needed to see the CP violation (controlled by the parameter D5). Fragmentation by an interface to PYTHIA 6.1.
200 more SM diagrams exist to this final state, they are all sub dominant.
Theoretically, the optimal observable for D5 is given by:
That is, the cross-section introduced by the perturbation controlled by D5 divided by the unperturbed cross-section.
It is a very complicated function but serves as a benchmark for other less complicated observables. Many simple ones are found in the literature. The best one found for a real D5 is:
(One of the leptons can be replaced by a d-type quark)
The most robust and efficient way to extract the asymmetry turns out to be by pure counting:
This point was missed earlier in the investigation but does not affect the end result. The mean or a fit to the asymmetry distribution gives at most the same efficiency as pure counting.
Fast parameterised simulation of the ATLAS detector.
Complete kinematics reconstructed, both for the dilepton (analytic) and lepton+jet decay mode (3C fit).
Typical event, s-channel, including initial and final state radiation.
Details of the analysis
60% of the b-jets identified within a 0.3 cone.
Critical to identify the b-jet charge, otherwise you are blind! Rely on the kinematics to do the job. Turns out to work well.
Some improvement to the sensitivity by tagging the d-type quark using the least energetic jet (however, this is not critical).
The simple histogram mean is a good estimator of the asymmetry.
The asymmetry after 2 fb-1 of jet+lepton data.
S/N=7 for D5=6*10-18 *gs.
For one experiment at LHC after one year of low luminosity, both the dilepton and the lepton+jet channel has the potential to a 5 discovery for a chromo-electric dipole moment
The huge sample of pp -> tt+X at LHC will enable precision measurements of anomalous couplings in the top sector. The anomalous couplings may provide an unbiased and model independent window to new physics. For example new sources of CP violation.
Lorentz invariant asymmetries, like f2, are extremely robust against systematic effects, both to the instrumental and the SM contributions. For example high loop orders are needed to fake CP violating asymmetries and asymmetric detector efficiencies do not contribute.
Analysis almost complete. Remains to check the unitarity constraints and the efficiency of the optimal observable. I expect to be finished within the next two weeks.