1 / 40

Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in D Ø

Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in D Ø. Horst D. Wahl Florida State University DIS 2005, Madison. Outline. Tevatron and D Ø detector Bottomonium ϒ (1S) production High p t μ -tagged jet production conclusion. Tevatron – data taking.

tatum
Download Presentation

Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in D Ø

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DØ Horst D. Wahl Florida State University DIS 2005, Madison

  2. Outline • Tevatron and DØ detector • Bottomonium ϒ(1S) production • High pt μ-tagged jet production • conclusion

  3. Tevatron – data taking • peak luminosity in 2005 above 1032 cm-2 s-1 • DØ collected > 690 pb-1 • Results shown use 150 - 300pb-1

  4. Next to leading order Leading order Flavor excitation Flavor creation Gluon splitting

  5. Recent developments • Beyond NLO: resummation of log(pt/m) terms  FONLL • Changes in extraction of fragmentation function from LEP data • New PDFs • Improved treatment of experimental inputs (use b-jets and b-hadrons instead of b-quarks)

  6. Open Heavy Flavor Production • Long-standing “discrepancies” between predicted and measured cross sections now resolved; e.g. Cacciari, Frixione, Mangano, Nason, Ridolfi,JHEP 0407 (2004) 033 • combined effects of • better calculations (Fixed order (NLO)+ NLL= FONLL) • relationship/difference between e+e−and hadron colliders • different moments of FF relevant • better estimate of theory errors (upward!) • new appreciation of issues with“quark-level” measurements • Total Cross sections (from CDF): • –inclusive b cross section: |y<1| 29.4±0.6±6.2 µb hep-ex/0412071 (submitted to PRD) • inclusive c cross section: ~50x higherPRL 91, 241804 (2003)

  7. Comments: Tevatron as HF Factory • 􀂃The cross sections given on the previous slide imply • central (|y|<1) b’s at 3kHz at current luminosities • ~2x this if you look out to |y|<2 • central charm at 150kHz • –~2x1010 b’s already seen by CDF and DØ in Run II • –~1x1012 charm hadrons already produced(!) • ⇒ Near infinite statistics for some measurements • ⇒ If you can trigger... • Rely heavily on muon triggers • J/ψ decays are golden • semi-leptonic decays- • rare decays with leptons • Tracks with significant b/σb • Missing neutrals troublesome • forget o identification • all-charged decay modes

  8. The DØ Detector Muon Toroid Calorimeter Solenoid, Tracking System (CFT, SMT)

  9. DØ tracking system Silicon Tracker Fiber Tracker 125 cm h=1.6 h=3 50cm 20cm Forward Preshower detector Solenoid Central Preshower detector

  10. DØ - Muon detectors A-f Scint PDT’s Forward Trigger Scint Shielding Forward Tracker (MDTs) Bottom B/C Scint • Toroid magnet (1.9 T central, 2.0 T forward) • Scintillation counters • PDTs (central) • MDTs (forward)

  11. Bottomonium production • Theory modeling of production • Quarkonium production is window on boundary region between perturbative and non-perturbative QCD • factorized QCD calculations to O(α3) (currently employed by Pythia) • color-singlet, color-evaporation, color-octet models • Recent calculations by Berger et al. combining separate perturbative approaches for low and high-pt regions • Predict shape of pt distribution • Absolute cross section not predicted • ϒ(1S) Production @ Tevatron: • 50% produced promptly, i.e. at primary vertex • 50% from decay of higher mass states (e.g. χb →ϒ(1S) ) • Event selection • - luminosity: 159.1 ± 10.3 pb-1 • - di-muon: pT>3, tight Tracking and Calorimeter isolation cut • - invariant mass in 7 – 13 GeV

  12. Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DØ • Because we can: The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 0.4. DØ has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 1.8 at √s = 1.96 TeV • Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks. There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements: • E.L. Berger, J.Qiu, Y.Wang, Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph/0411026; • V.A. Khoze , A.D. Martin, M.G. Ryskin, W.J. Stirling, hep-ph/0410020

  13. The Analysis • Goal: • Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel • ϒ(1S) → μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges: • 0 < | yϒ| < 0.6, 0.6 < | yϒ | < 1.2 and 1.2 < | yϒ | < 1.8 • Sample selection • Opposite sign muons • Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system • Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system • pt (μ) > 3 GeV and |η (μ)| < 2.2 • At least one isolated μ • Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the Silicon Tracker

  14. Efficiencies,… N(¡) d2σ(¡(1S)) = L × Δpt × Δy × εacc× εtrig× kdimu× ktrk× kqual dpt× dy • Cross section: L Luminosity kdimu local muon reconstruction y rapidity ktrk tracking εacc Acceptance kqual track quality cuts εtrig Trigger 0.0 < y < 0.6 0.6 < y < 1.2 1.2 < y < 1.8 εacc 0.15 - 0.26 0.19 – 0.28 0.20 - 0.27 εtrig 0.70 0.73 0.82 kdimu 0.85 0.88 0.95 ktrk 0.99 0.99 0.95 kqual 0.85 0.85 0.93

  15. Data vs Monte Carlo • To determine our efficiencies, we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once . MC Data* η(μ) φ(μ) pt(μ) in GeV 0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6 0.6 < | yϒ| < 1.2 *9.0 GeV < m(μμ) < 9.8 GeV

  16. Fitting the Signal • Signal: 3 states (ϒ(1S), ϒ(2S), ϒ(3S)), described by Gaussians with masses mi, widths (resolution) σi, weights ci ,(i=1,2,3) • Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG), widths σi= σ1•(mi/m1), for i=2,3 • free parameters in signal fit: m1, σ1, c1, c2, c3 • Background: 3rd order polynomial PDG: m(¡(1S)) = 9.46 GeV m(¡) = 9.415± 0.009 GeV m(¡) = 9.403 ± 0.013 GeV m(¡) = 9.423 ± 0.008 GeV 1.2 < |y¡ | < 1.8 0.6 < |y¡ | < 1.2 0 < |y¡ | < 0.6 All plots: 3 GeV < pt(¡) < 4 GeV

  17. Results: dσ(ϒ(1S))/dy × B(ϒ(1S) → µ+µ-) 0.0 < yϒ < 0.6 732 ± 19 (stat) ± 73 (syst)± 48 (lum) pb 0.6 < yϒ < 1.2 762 ± 20 (stat) ± 76 (syst) ± 50 (lum) pb 1.2 < yϒ < 1.8 600 ± 19 (stat) ± 56 (syst) ± 39 (lum) pb 0.0 < yϒ < 1.8 695 ± 14 (stat) ± 68 (syst) ± 45 (lum) pb CDF Run I: 0.0 < yϒ < 0.4 680 ± 15 (stat) ± 18 (syst) ± 26 (lum) pb Fro central y bin, expect  factor 1.11 increase in cross section from 1.8TeV to 1.96 TeV (Pythia)

  18. Comparison with previous results σ(1.2 < yϒ < 1.8)/σ(0.0 < yϒ < 0.6) Pythia

  19. Effects of polarization • CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| < 0.4. How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized ? • So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization. • CDF measured α = -0.12 ± 0.22 for pT (ϒ)> 8 GeV • α = 1 (-1) ⇔ 100% transverse (longitudinal) polarization • The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) < 8 GeV • Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT. • No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| < 1.8); ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone. • estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section: • Even at α = ± 0.3 the cross-section changes by 15% or less in all pT bins. • same effect in all rapidity regions.

  20. Question: Why is CDF's systematic error so much smaller than ours ? • Better tracking resolution --- CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances: → Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our statistical and systematic error. → We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently feasible without killing the signal • Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting large number of correction factors. • Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve.

  21. Conclusions • ϒ(1S) cross-section • Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section • BR(→μμ) for 3 different rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 1.8, as a function of pt(ϒ) • First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at √s = 1.96 TeV. • Shapes of dσ/dpt show very little dependence on rapidity. • Normalized dσ/dpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 1.8TeV) • μ-tagged jet cross section: • Measured dσ/dpt in central rapidity region |y|<0.5forμ-tagged jets originating from heavy flavor

  22. Motivation Fact: The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness. Under hypothesis of compositeness, deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation. Conclusion: g  bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior. Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature. • Problem • ~100:1 QCD:bb Solutions • m tagging • 2nd VTX tagging • Impact parameter CDF: PRL 82 (1999) 2038 Fit to CDF qQCD calculation

  23. m-tagged Jet Cross-section eT Trigger Eff ePV Primary Vertex Eff ej Jet Eff emm Eff fbm Frac b  m(Pt > 4 GeV) fBm Frac B  m(Pt > 4 GeV) L Luminosity Dpt Pt bin width sHF HF cross-section sbg background cross-section • Given the simplicity of the calculation, there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13. These could conceivably be • N • m JES (central value) • Resolution (i.e. smearing) Correlated Jet + m (Pt > 5 GeV) p13

  24. p14 Analysis Summary • Inclusive m-tagged jet • corrJCCB (0.5 cone jets) • Standard Jet quality cuts, Standard JET Triggers • Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon • (more on this later) • DR(m, jet) < 0.5 • |yjet| < 0.5 • JES 5.3 • Long term goal was b-jet xsec. Difficult due to no data-driven determination of b-fraction.

  25. p14 Skimming • Start with CSG QCD skim • Turn into TMBTrees (40M events…on disk) • Skim on Trees • Remove bad runs (CAL, MET, SMT, CFT, JET, Muon) • Remove events w/o 2 jets • Use Ariel d0root_ based package • SKIM 1:  1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM m (P(m) > 4 GeV) • SKIM 2:  1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT

  26. p14 All Data: CSG Skims Bad runs & lumblk removed in luminosity. Only bad run removed in event counts for skims. Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN), V12.37.

  27. Trigger Turn On • Jet Trigger • Collinear muon • |yjet| < 0.5 • Luminosity weighted • Statistics uncorrelated poisson • (wrong, of course) • JES corrected (5.3)

  28. Efficiencies…. [0.37 ± 0.05]

  29. m JES Definitions • Required identically 2 jets • Pt(jet 3, uncor) < 8 OR third jet doesn’t pass jet QC • One jet contains muon, the other doesn’t. • | Df | > 2.84 • Imbalance variable: • Independent variable:

  30. Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets • μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos ⇒offset -- correction needed • Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with, one without μ) – find 3.8% offset, not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75, 250GeV) • Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1.038 • Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution STD JES 5.3 gives a 3.8% offset for m-tagged jets. It is independent of Pt (75-250 GeV). Maybe higher above that. Need to rebin and revisit the idea that the muon Pt may be mis-measured. Same plot when scaling the m-tagged jet energies by 3.8%.

  31. Energy Resolution

  32. resolution • Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet  resolution worse than for jets without μ • take rms of order randomized imbalance • Parameterize, Fit (fig. (a)) • Subtract (in quadrature) resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig. (b) • Fit: • N = 7.7  4.1 • S = 1.9  0.1 • C = 0.0  0.1 • Resolution parameterization used in “unsmearing”

  33. Fitting Functions

  34. Extraction of Correction Factors “normal” exponential

  35. Point by Point Unsmearing Factors “normal” Exponential Unsmearing Error small ~5% for Pt > 100 GeV

  36. HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample • Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (e.g. , K decays…) • Use Pythia with standard DØ detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt • Fit with A + B e-Pt/C • A = “plateau”, • B = “zero” • C = “turnon”

  37. Pythia using standard DØ MC. • NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L) • From Pythia, find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only). • Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction. • This is effectively the NLO k factor.

  38. Conc • DØ Note and Conference note to EB025 • Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent effect). • JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics.

More Related