The first results on direct CP-violation asymmetry measurement in K
Download
1 / 52

Evgueni Goudzovski (JINR, Dubna) CERN particle physics seminar 1 st March 2005 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 100 Views
  • Uploaded on

The first results on direct CP-violation asymmetry measurement in K ±  π ± π + π – decays from the NA48/2 experiment. Evgueni Goudzovski (JINR, Dubna) CERN particle physics seminar 1 st March 2005 on behalf of the NA48 Collaboration:

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 'Evgueni Goudzovski (JINR, Dubna) CERN particle physics seminar 1 st March 2005' - cala


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
Evgueni goudzovski jinr dubna cern particle physics seminar 1 st march 2005

The first results on direct CP-violation asymmetry measurement in K± π±π+π–decaysfrom the NA48/2 experiment

Evgueni Goudzovski

(JINR, Dubna)

CERN particle physics seminar

1st March 2005

on behalf of the NA48 Collaboration:

Cambridge, CERN, Chicago, Dubna, Edinburgh, Ferrara, Firenze, Mainz, Northwestern, Perugia, Pisa, Saclay, Siegen, Torino, Vienna


Overview
Overview measurement in K

  • Direct CP-violation in charged K3π decays;

  • NA48/2 beam, detector and data-taking;

  • NA48/2 method of CP-violation measurement;

  • Preliminary result on 2003 data.


Direct cp violation in k 3

measurement in K

Direct CP-violation in K3

BR(K±±+)=5.57%; BR(K±±00)=1.73%.

  • Matrix element:

  • Kinematic variables

|M(u,v)|2 ~ 1 + gu + hu2+ kv2

Lorentz-invariants

u = (s3-s0)/m2;

v = (s2-s1)/m2;

si = (PK-Pi)2, i=1,2,3 (3=odd );

s0 = (s1+s2+s3)/3.

  • Measured quantity sensitive to direct CP violation:

Centre of mass frame

u = 2mK∙(mK/3-Eodd)/m2;

v = 2mK∙(E1-E2)/m2.

Ag = (g+-g-)/(g++g-)≠0


Previous measurements of a g
Previous measurements of A measurement in Kg

  • ”Charged” mode K±3π±:

    • Ford et al. (1970) at BNL:Ag=(-7.0±5.3)∙10-3;

      Statistics: 3.2M K±;

    • HyperCP prelim. (2000) at FNAL:Ag=(2.2±1.5±3.7)∙10-3;

      Statistics: 390M K+, 1.6M K-;

      Systematics due to knowledge of magnetic fields;

      Published as PhD thesis W.-S.Choong LBNL-47014 Berkeley 2000;

  • ”Neutral” mode K±π±π0π0:

    • Smith et al. (1975) at CERN-PS:Ag=(1.9±12.3)∙10-3;

      Statistics: 28000 K±;

    • ISTRA+ (2004) at IHEP Protvino:Ag=(0.2±1.9)∙10-3;

      Statistics: 0.52M K±;


Theoretical expectations
Theoretical expectations measurement in K

Theoretical calculations:

L.Maiani et al.

G.D’Ambrosio

G.Isidori

G.Martinelli

E.Shabalin

A.Bel’kov

I.Scimemi

Conclusions:

  • Ag ~ 10-5:perfectly compatible with SM;

  • 3∙10-5<Ag<5∙10-5:compatible with SM, but inbad agreement with ε’/ε;

  • Ag>5∙10-5:SUSY /New Physics

  • Asymmetry in decay widthsexpected to be smaller thanin Dalitz-plot slopes(SM: ~10-6…10-7).

Experimental limits by 2005:

10-2

Ford et al. (1970)

|Ag|

HyperCP prelim. (2000)

ISTRA+ (2004) “neutral” mode

10-3

NA48/2 proposal

10-4

New

physics

10-5

SUSY

SM

10-6


Na48 2 goals and method
NA48/2 goals and method measurement in K

  • NA48/2 goals:

    • Measure slope asymmetries in both “charged” and “neutral” modes with an accuracy δAg<2∙10-4.

    • Statistics required for this measurement: >2∙109 in “charged” mode and >108in “neutral” mode.

  • NA48/2 method:

    • Two simultaneous K+ and K- beams, superimposed in space, with narrow momentum spectra;

    • Detect asymmetry exclusively considering slopes of ratios of normalized U distributions;

    • Equalize averaged K+ and K–acceptances by frequently alternating polarities of relevant magnets.


Na48 2 experiment

54 60 66 measurement in K

PK spectra,

603GeV/c

BM

z

10 cm

200

250 m

1cm

50

100

NA48/2 experiment

magnet

K+

K+

focusing beams

K

~71011

ppp

K

Second

achromat

  • Cleaning

  • Beam spectrometer

Front-end

achromat

Quadrupole

quadruplet

Beams coincide within <1mm

all along 114m decay volume

  • Momentum

  • selection

  • Focusing

  •  sweeping

vacuum

tank

He tank

+ spectrometer

not to scale


Na48 2 narrow band beams simultaneous coaxial focused

P measurement in KK spectra,

603GeV/c

54 60 66

NA48/2 narrow-band beams: simultaneous, coaxial, focused

 Pion decay products stay in beam pipe...


Kaon beam spectrometer kabes
KAon BEam Spectrometer (KABES) measurement in K

  • 3 MICROMEGA gas chamber stations

  • measure charged beam displacement

  • within the magnetic field of the

  • second achromat

  • Measurement of kaon momentum:

    • Reconstruct K3π with a lost pion;

    • Redundancy in K3πanalysis;

    • Resolve Ke4reconstruction ambiguity.

Not used yet for

K±3± analysis


Na48 detector
NA48 detector measurement in K

  • Main detector components:

  • Magnetic spectrometer (4 DCHs):

  • redundancy  high efficiency;

  • Δp/p = 1.0% + 0.044%*p [GeV/c]

  • Hodoscope

  • fast trigger;

  • precise time measurement (150ps)

  • Liquid Krypton EM calorimeter (LKr)

  • High granularity, quasi-homogenious;

  • ΔE/E = 3.2%/√E + 9%/E + 0.42% [GeV];

  • electron/pion discrimination.

  • Hadron calorimeter, photon vetos,

  • muon veto counters

Beam pipe


L2 trigger for k data taking
L2 trigger for K measurement in Kdata-taking

  • 3-track trigger

    • K±3π± [“charged” mode]

    • Ke4, events with Dalitz decay π0e+e–

    • 4-leptonic: K±e+e–eν, K±e+e–μν, K±μ+μ–eν, K±μ+μ–μν

  • 1-track missing mass trigger: (PK-Pπ)2>mπ02

    • K±π0π0π± [“neutral” mode]

    • K±π±π0, K±π±

    • Suppress K±π±π0

  • Control triggers (downscaled)

    • Trigger efficiency measurements;

    • Many 1-track channels: K±e±ν, e±ν, π0e±ν, etc…


Data taking finished
Data taking: finished measurement in K

  • 2003run:~ 50 days

  • (only 2003 data are presented)

  • 2004run: ~ 60 days

  • Total statistics in 2 years:

  • K - + : ~4·109

  • K 0 0 : ~2·108

  • ~ 200 TB of data recorded


K 3 selection
K measurement in K3π selection

  • Simple selection:

    • Ghost track rejection;

    • Select 3-track vertex with smallest 2;

    • Track time consistency cuts;

    • Decay vertex within the decay volume;

    • Transverse momentum cut;

    • -1<U<1;

  • Only magnetic spectrometer involved

    • No muon veto, EM calo, hadron calo;

  • No significant background for this channel.


Selected statistics 2003
Selected statistics 2003 measurement in K

M=1.7 MeV/c2

Data-taking 2003:

1.61x109 events selected

|V|

even pion

in beam pipe



K+ : 1.03x109 events

odd pion

in beam pipe



K: 0.58x109 events

U


Measurement strategy
Measurement strategy measurement in K

|M±(u,v)|2 ~ 1 + g±u + hu2+ kv2

  • PDG:

  • Kπ+π-π±: g = -0.2154±0.0035

  • Kπ0π0π±: g = 0.652±0.031

  • |h|, |k| << |g|

  • Project onto U axis

  • Neglect asymmetry in quadratic slopes h and k

If acceptance is equal for K+ and K–,

R(u) = N+(u)/N–(u) ≈

≈n∙(1+g+u)/(1+g–u) ≈

≈n∙(1+2gAgu)

Ag can be extracted from a

linear fit to the ratio R(u)

Ag=g/2g


Acceptance cancellation
Acceptance cancellation measurement in K

  • Supersample data taking strategy:

    • achromat polarity (A) was reversed on weekly basis;

    • analyzing magnet polarity (B) was reversed on daily basis.

Example: Data taking from August 6 to September 7, 2003

Achromat –

B+

B-

B+

B-

B+

B-

Week 1

Supersample 1

12 subsamples

B+

Achromat +

B+

B-

B+

B-

B-

Week 2

B-

B-

Achromat –

B+

B-

B+

B+

Week 3

Supersample 2

12 subsamples

Achromat+

B+

B+

B-

B+

B-

B-

Week 4

B-

Achromat –

B+

Week 5

Supersample 3

4 subsamples

Achromat+

B+

B-


Supersamples 2003
Supersamples 2003 measurement in K

Statistics selected for Ag measurement, million events


Acceptance cancellation1

N( measurement in KA+B+K+)

RUS=

N(A+B-K-)

N(A+B-K+)

RUJ=

N(A+B+K-)

N(A-B+K+)

RDS=

N(A-B-K-)

N(A-B-K+)

RDJ=

N(A-B+K-)

Acceptance cancellation

within supersample

Detector left-right asymmetry cancels

in 4 ratios of K+ over K U-spectra:

Y

(same kaon deviation direction

in numerator and denominator)

X

Achromats: K+ Up

B+

Jura

Z

B

Saleve

Achromats: K+Down

  • Indeces of R’s correspond to

    • beamline polarity (U/D);

    • direction of kaon deviation in spectrometer (S/J).


More cancellations 1
More cancellations (1) measurement in K

1.Charge asymmetrydue to permanent magnetic fields

(Earth, tank magnetization) cancels integrating over azimuthal angle;

2. Cancellation ofeffects due to coupling of

charge asymmetrywith left-right asymmetry,

and effects of global time instabilities:

RU = RUS*RUJ

fit with f(u)=n∙(1+2AUu)

fit with f(u)=n∙(1+2ADu)

RD = RDS*RDJ

3. Cancellation ofbeam geometry differenceeffects:

fit with f(u)=n∙(1+2ASu)

RS = RUS*RDS

RJ = RUJ*RDJ

fit with f(u)=n∙(1+2AJu)


More cancellations 2
More cancellations (2) measurement in K

4.Maximum cancellation:

fit with f(u)=n∙(1+4∙u)

R = RUS*RUJ*RDS*RDJ

Normalization

Slope difference

The result is sensitive only to

time variation of left-right asymmetries of experimental conditions

with a time-scale of ~1 subsample

  • Relation between and asymmetry Ag:

    Δ = 2g∙Ag ≈ -0.43∙Ag

  • Goal of the experiment:δAg<2∙10-4corresponds to δ<0.9∙10-4


Beam spectra difference effect
Beam spectra difference effect measurement in K

(an example of cancellation)

Achromat reversal

reverses K+ and K–

beam spectra

K+

Systematic differences

of K+ and K–acceptance

due to beam spectra

mostly cancel in AU*AD

Systematic check:

Reweighting K+events

so as to equalise

momentum spectra

leads to negligible effect

Δ=0.03x10-4

K–

SS 3

Supersample 2

Supersample 1


Monte carlo simulation
Monte-Carlo simulation measurement in K

Due to cancellations, theanalysis does not rely on Monte-Carlo. MC is used for systematics study.

  • Based on GEANT;

  • Full detector geometry and material description;

  • Local DCH inefficiencies simulated;

  • Beam geometry and DCH alignment variations are followed;

  • Simulated statistics similar to experimental one.

Example of data/MC agreement:

Mean beams’ positions @DCH1


Systematic effects 1
Systematic effects (1) measurement in K

(1)Time variations of beam geometry

  • Beams’ non-perfect superposition, and width differences coupled to acceptance selection;

    (2)Time variations of spectrometer geometry

  • Mainly variations of chambers’ transverse alignment;

    (3)Variation of spectrometer magnetic field

  • Magnet current can not be inverted with accuracy better than 10-3;


Systematic effects 2
Systematic effects (2) measurement in K

(4)Time variations of trigger efficiency

  • Sensitivity to time-dependent local inefficiencies of DCHs and hodoscope;

    (5)Stray magnetic fields in the decay region

  • Earth field can not be inverted;

    (6)Coupling ofπ±±decay to another systematic effects;

    (7)Time variations of accidental rate.


1 beam geometry
(1): Beam geometry measurement in K

  • Geometrical acceptance is largely defined by pions undetected in the beam pipe;

  • Beams’ geometry is variable, beams’ superposition is not perfect … asymmetric acceptance;

  • Time-dependent cuts following beams’ movement are introduced.

pion in

beam pipe

“Virtual pipe” cut:

Cylinder following mean beam position measured by the spectrometer

|Rπi-<RK>|>R0 at DCH1, DCH4

<RK> = f (kaon sign, time, momentum)


Beams movement in time
Beams’ movement in time measurement in K

Beam profile @DCH1

DCH1

Y, cm

Y, cm

0.8

0.4

K

K+

0

-0.4

X, cm

X, cm

-0.8

DCH4

Y, cm

-0.8

-0.4

0.8

0.4

0

4cm relative shift

due to analyzing magnet field

X, cm

  • Typical scales:

  • Beam width: ~5mm;

  • Beam movement in time:~2mm.

X, cm


Momentum dependence of beams
Momentum dependence of beams measurement in K

DCH4

  • Upper and lower beam lines have slightly different geometric properties;

  • Effect partially cancels by achromat inversion;

  • Effect is corrected by “virtual pipe”.

A+KJ, A-KS

Y, cm

55 GeV/c

65 GeV/c

65 GeV/c

55 GeV/c

X, cm

A+KJ, A-KS

Split by analyzing

magnet field

Y, cm

Beam pipe

65 GeV/c

55 GeV/c

65 GeV/c

55 GeV/c

Beam positions

for various momenta

X, cm


Alternative to the virtual pipe not included into the analysis yet
Alternative to the “virtual pipe” measurement in K[not included into the analysis yet]

Use kaon momentum measured by the beam spectrometer (KABES):

  • Need only two detected pions to reconstruct event kinematics;

  • Low sensitivity to beam pipe acceptance;

  • Possible add events with only 2 tracks in acceptance (+60% events);

  • Gain events in high-u region: higher sensitivity to Ag


Residual systematics
Residual systematics measurement in K

The following sources were studied:

  • Time binning used to follow mean beam position;

  • Systematic shifts in measurement of mean beam position (pre-selection cuts, fitting limits);

  • Variation of beam widths in time;

  • Effect of Earth magnetic field on beam position.

    Conclusion:

  • Residual effect is <0.5·10-4.


2 spectrometer alignment
(2): Spectrometer alignment measurement in K

  • The observables AS and AJ are sensitive to time variations in spectrometer alignment; the effect does not cancel in ASJ.

  • Spectrometer transverse alignment is fine-tuned for each subsample by imposing the K+ and K- to have the same reconstructed mean invariant mass.

  • Sensitivity to DCH4 horizontal shift: M/x  1.5 keV/m.

Maximum

equivalent

horizontal shift:

~200m @DCH1

or

~120m @DCH2

or

~280m @DCH4.


3 spectrometer magnetic field
(3): Spectrometer magnetic field measurement in K

  • The observables AS and AJ are sensitive to non-perfect inversion of spectrometer magnetic field; however, the effect mostly cancels in ASJ.

  • Effective momentum scale is adjusted for each subsample by imposing reconstructed mean invariant kaon mass to be equal to PDG mass.

  • Sensitivity: M  100 keV for typical inversion precision on magnetic field integral of I/I  10-3.


Spectrometer residual systematics
Spectrometer: residual systematics measurement in K

The following sources were studied:

  • Size of time binning used to follow calibration time-dependence;

  • Systematic shift in kaon mass measurement (pre-selection cuts, fitting limits);

  • Inhomogeneity of alignment correction;

  • Misalignment hypothesis: effect of correction to drift chambers’ positions before/after magnet.

    Conclusion:

  • residual effect is <0.1·10-4.


4 trigger efficiency
(4): Trigger efficiency measurement in K

  • Trigger chain for K±3π±:

    • L1: at least 2 hodoscope hits;

    • L2: 3-track trigger (online vertex reconstruction);

  • Only the geometry-related parts of inefficiency considered (rate-dependent parts maximally separated).

10-3

cut

cut

L1 inefficiency

stable: ~ 0.7x10-3

L2 inefficiency

varies:

0.2% … 1.8%

3x10-3

cut

cut


Trigger efficiency systematics
Trigger efficiency systematics measurement in K

  • L1 inefficiency: small and stable in time

    • No correction is applied to the result;

    • Uncertainty on Δ due to statistical error of inefficiency Δ = 0.4x10-4;

  • L2 inefficiency: fluctuates in time,depends on local DCH inefficiency

    • Correction applied to U-spectrumin each subsample.

    • Resulting uncertainty due to statistical error: Δ = 0.8x10-4.


5 stray magnetic fields

measurement in K10-4

P kick(stray field)

P kick(spectrometer)

(5): Stray magnetic fields

  • Field map was directly measured and used invertex reconstruction: only residual systematics remain (Δ<10-5);

  • Coupling of stray field with the “virtual pipe” acceptance cut: drift of pions and kaon trajectories in stray field. Relatively large effects (Δ~10-4) in AS, AJcancel in ASJ.

No magnetic field

correction

Field map in decay volume: Y projection

100T

Magnetic field

corrected for


6 7 decay accidentals
(6,7): measurement in Kπ±±decay, accidentals

x10-4

x10-4

Data

Monte-Carlo

20

20

0: Nominal data;

1: No decay before DCH1;

2: No decay before DCH2;

3: No decay before DCH4.

15

15

10

10

5

5

0

0

systematic error due to±±decay:

=0.4x10-4

(conservative estimation,

limited by MC statistics)

-5

-5

systematic error due toaccidental activity:

=0.3x10-4

(conservative estimation)

-10

-10

-15

-15

-20

-20


Other second order effects
Other second-order effects measurement in K

  • Interaction of pions with the detector material

    • <0.5x10-5

  • Pion charge mis-identification

    • <<10-5

Other possible sources found to have

negligible systematic effects on asymmetry:


Example of fits supersample 1
Example of fits: supersample 1 measurement in K

2=37.5/38

AUS=(2.4±4.6)x10-4

AUJ=(-0.2±4.6)x10-4

2=50.5/38

U

U

2=35.6/38

ADS=(8.2±4.4)x10-4

2=34.8/38

ADJ=(-1.0±4.4)x10-4

U

U

2=38.1/38

=(2.3±2.2)x10-4

U


Asymmetry fits in supersamples
Asymmetry fits in supersamples measurement in K

SS2: =(-3.1±2.5)x10-4

2=29.5/38

SS0: =(0.6±2.4)x10-4

2=39.7/38

U

U

SS3: =(-2.9±3.9)x10-4

SS1: =(2.3±2.2)x10-4

2=38.1/38

2=32.9/38

U

U


Stability of the result
Stability of the result measurement in K

g x10-4

g x10-4

80

40

60

30

40

20

20

10

0

0

-20

-10

-40

-20

-60

-30

-80

-40


Time stability g vs supersample
Time-stability: measurement in Kg vs supersample

x10-4

20

Monte-Carlo describes

effects of

left-right asymmetries

and differences of

beamline properties

15

10

5

0

-5

-10

-15

-20


Result systematics
Result & systematics measurement in K

Result: Δx104

L2 trigger systematics included


Preliminary result 2003 data
Preliminary result: 2003 data measurement in K

Slope difference:

Δg = (-0.2±1.0stat.±0.9stat.(trig.)±0.9syst.)x10-4 =

(-0.2±1.7)x10-4

Charge asymmetry:

Ag = (0.5±2.4stat.±2.1stat.(trig.)±2.1syst.)x10-4 =

(0.5±3.8)x10-4

  • Systematic errors are conservative for preliminary result;

  • 2004 data:

    • Statistics greater than in 2003 (~2x109 events);

    • Expect smaller systematic effects (more frequent polarity alternation, better beam steering).


Comparison with other results
Comparison with other results measurement in K

Ford et al. (1970)

10-2

HyperCP prelim. (2000)

|Ag|

10-3

NA48/2 prelim.: run 2003

NA48/2 goal: runs 2003-04

10-4

New

physics

10-5

SUSY

SM

10-6


Neutral mode analysis
“Neutral” mode analysis measurement in K

K±±00

  • U reconstructed with only LKr calorimeter;

  • Statistics analyzed: 28.0x106events in 1 month of 2003 (SS1-3);

  • Statistical error with analyzed data: Ag(stat)=2.2x10-4;

  • Extrapolation to 2003+2004 data: Ag(stat)=1.3x10-4.

|v|

M=1.1 MeV/c2

g fit for SS1

2=45.3/50

=4.8x10-4

u

u

m(3), GeV/c2


Conclusions
Conclusions measurement in K

  • Preliminary NA48/2 2003 result on CP-violating charge asymmetry in K± π±π+π–:Ag = (0.5±2.4stat.±2.1stat.(trig.)±2.1syst.)x10-4

  • There is a room to decrease trigger efficiency error and systematic error;

  • 2004 statistics are another 2x109 events, and expected to have smaller systematic effects;

  • Ultimate goal: reach the precision of Ag=2x10-4.Experimental precision is better than the theoretical one.


Evgueni goudzovski jinr dubna cern particle physics seminar 1 st march 2005

Spare slides measurement in K


Theoretical predictions on a g
Theoretical predictions on A measurement in Kg


Spectrometer calibration
Spectrometer calibration measurement in K

  • Rough alignment made by interpolation between muon alignment runs [3 muon runs in 2003];

  • Fine-tuning of momenta: P’ = P∙(1+β)∙(1+qbP)

    • P0 – measured momentum;

    • P – corrected momentum;

    • q – track charge;

    • b – magnetic field sign.

  • Time-dependent corrections:

    • β– for magnetic field integral;

    • – for spectrometer misalignment.


Systematics u calculation fitting
Systematics: U calculation & fitting measurement in K

The following sources were studied:

  • Variations of fitting limits cut;

  • Use of various U definitions with different resolution properties.

    Conclusion:

  • Effect is <0.5·10-4.

Cinematic fitting routine

is being implemented


Observation of cusp effect 1
Observation of “cusp-effect” (1) measurement in K

K±±00

The charge exchange process +00is not negligible under threshold,

and interferes (destructively) with direct emission

30M events

MC: no rescattering

Data

4m+2

4m+2

1 bin = 0.00015 GeV2

M(00), GeV/c2


Observation of cusp effect 2
Observation of “cusp-effect” (2) measurement in K

K±±00

One-loop exchange: 2 = 463/149

One and two loops: 2 = 159/147

Standard Dalitz-plot

parametrization

2 = 133/139

for M(00)>80 MeV/c2

Incl. + atoms: 2 = 144/146

M(00), GeV/c2