Download
hgg cut based analysis update n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Hgg Cut based Analysis update PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Hgg Cut based Analysis update

Hgg Cut based Analysis update

116 Views Download Presentation
Download Presentation

Hgg Cut based Analysis update

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Hgg Cut based Analysisupdate Jim Branson, Chris Palmer, Marco Pieri, Matteo Sani, Sean Simon

  2. Introduction • Trying to address the guidelines for Higgs Review from Higgs conveners Oct 12th • Description of analysis • Sequential cuts plots and yields • N-1 plots and final plots for all variables • Categories • Measurement of efficiency and photon variables distributions with electrons with Z->ee • Systematic uncertainties • Sensitivity for 1fb-1 • Fermiophobic Higgs interpretation • Summary of results

  3. Description of Analysis • Main background • Born/Box (irreducible) • Gamma+Jets (reducible) • QCD (reducible) • Strategy • Remove nearly all reducible bkg • Separate into useful categories (in eta, R9, and possibly Ptgammagamma)

  4. Loose Pre-Selection • For now using all Photon HLT paths • Very small effect expected – preselection tighter than cuts • Spike Cleaning from 38X RECO • Lead pT > 30 GeV, Sublead pT > 20 GeV • 0 < |h| < 2.5 • H/E < 0.1 • Track Iso hollow DR03 < 7.0 + 0.002*pT • Ecal Iso DR03 < 8.4 + 0.012*pT • Hcal Iso DR03 < 4.4+ 0.005*pT

  5. Cut-Based Selection • Lead pT > 40 GeV, Sublead pT > 30 GeV • 0 < |h| < 1.4442 or 1.566 < |h| < 2.5 (we would like to take it out) • H/E < 0.02 • sihih < 0.01(EB) 0.028(EE) • Pixel Veto • Track Iso hollow DR04 < 1.5 + 0.001*pT • Ecal Iso DR04 < 2.0 + 0.006*pT • Hcal Iso DR04 < 2.0 + 0.0025*pT

  6. Disclaimer on sequential cuts and other plots • Sequential cuts are applied (on the two photons at the same time) • After preselection lack of MC attributed to the Gen level Filter • Ratio of filtered to unfiltered for GamJet gam + fake is 0.74 before cuts and 1 after cuts • Not measured for QCD • For now use old PTDR K-Factors for BG and constant K-factor for Higgs Signal (standard cross sections used in CMS) • Mass cut at 100 GeV is applied to account for generator level mass cut in QCD and Gamma+Jet samples

  7. Sequential Cuts Plots Cut names • 0) Preselection • 1) pT • 2) Track Iso • 3) Ecal Iso • 4) Hcal Iso • 5) sihih • 6) Pixel Veto • 7) H/E • 8) h-Gap 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

  8. Sequential Cuts - Leading Photon More leading Photon variables in Backup

  9. Lead pT

  10. Lead sihih

  11. Lead R9

  12. Sequential Cuts - Subleading Photon • More Subleading Photon variables in Backup

  13. Sublead pT

  14. Sublead sihih

  15. Sublead R9

  16. Sequential Cuts – Diphoton Variables • More Diphoton variables in Backup

  17. Sequential Cuts Mgg

  18. Sequential Cuts pTgg

  19. Sequential Cuts – Tables • Data/MC comparison 100-250 GeV Mass Range • Data/MC Comparison in 120±5 GeV window (tables for masses 105,110,115,130, and 140 in Backup) • Signal Expectation and Efficiency & Expected Background under peak at 120 GeV for ∫L=1fb-1 (tables for 110,115,130, and 140 in Backup)

  20. Data/MC Comparison • Mass Window 100-250 GeV • ∫L = 34.7 pb-1 • PTDR K-Factors

  21. Data/MC Event Yields in Mass Window 120±5 GeV for ∫L=34.7pb-1 PTDR K-Factors Tables for 110, 115, 130 and 140 in Backup Slides

  22. Signal Yield and Efficiency @ MH = 120 GeV for ∫L=1fb-1 PTDR K-Factors Tables for 110, 115, 130 and 140 in Backup Slides

  23. N-1 Plots – Lead Photon • Mass Cut at 100 GeV applied • Lead Photon – More plots in Backup

  24. Lead pT (N-1) Signal x 100 Lead pT > 40 GeV

  25. Lead pT Signal x 100 Lead pT > 40 GeV

  26. Lead sihih (N-1) Signal x 100 sihih < 0.01(EB) 0.028(EE)

  27. Lead sihih Signal x 100 sihih < 0.01(EB) 0.028(EE)

  28. N-1 Plots – sublead photon • Mass Cut at 100 GeV applied • Sublead Photon – More plots in Backup

  29. Sublead pT (N-1) Signal x 100 Lead pT > 40 GeV

  30. Sublead pT Signal x 100 Lead pT > 40 GeV

  31. Sublead sihih (N-1) Signal x 100 sihih < 0.01(EB) 0.028(EE)

  32. Sublead sihih Signal x 100 sihih < 0.01(EB) 0.028(EE)

  33. Photon Categories • Photon Categories – More plots in Backup • We have different possibilities: • R9 (worst photon determines the diphoton category) • 2 cats: split at 0.93 • 3 cats: split at 0.90 and 0.95 • |Eta| (larger |eta| determines the diphoton category) • 2 cats split barrrel/endcap • 4 cats split 0.9, barrel/endcaps, 2.1 • Ptgammagamma • 2 cats 40 GeV • 3 cats 25 GeV and 50 GeV • From these for now show (some in backup): • 4,6,12 cat R9, eta • 4 R9.eta x 2,3 Ptgamgam

  34. All Selected Events SIGNAL x 10

  35. All Selected Events SIGNAL x 100

  36. 2 R9 x 2 Eta SIGNAL x 10

  37. Signal In Categories2R9 x 2 Eta

  38. 2 R9 x 2 Eta x 2 pTgg SIGNAL x 10

  39. 2 R9 x 2 Eta x 2 pTgg SIGNAL x 10

  40. Signal In Categories2R9 x 2 Eta x 2 pTgg Hi pTgg Lo pTgg Hi R9 Lo R9 Hi R9 Lo R9 Hi R9 Lo R9 Hi R9 Lo R9 EB EE EB EE

  41. Photon Efficiency with Z Tag and Probe • All results are (will appear) in: • CMS AN-2010/292 -- Photon Efficiency Measurements using Tag and Probe • Factorized T&P

  42. Also study photon variables for electrons with pileup as function of NVTX

  43. Background Estimate from Sidebands • For now Exponential is fit to the mass distribution • Still need to properly take out Higgs Mass hypothesis region • Statistical error from the fit used in CLs method random experiments

  44. Signal systematic error • Using for now 12.5% quoted by N. Chanon

  45. Sensitivity for 1 fb-1 REMAKE

  46. Fermiophobic Higgs • Only use information from Ptgamgam • Analysis is exactly the same as SM one • For now use 8 categories: • 2 R9 • 2 |eta| • 2 Ptgamgam • For now extrapolate/interpolate sigma/BR

  47. Fermiophobic H cross sections and BR (pb) REMAKE

  48. Looking at the data • Using 34.7 pb-1 • Fundamental disclaimer: IT MAY BE WRONG IN MANY PLACES • Need cross checking • Only have mass points at 90 and 110 GeV • Approximate signal shape at other masses • Approximate sigma and BR • For the plots use 90 GeV (optimistic) • Signal and BG syst errors included • Mass resolution error probably optimistic (Need laser corrections)

  49. Fermiophobic Higgs ExclusionVery-very preliminary REMAKE

  50. Summary • SM inclusive analysis in rather good shape • Checks on mass resolution ongoing in DPG • Will check better sensitivity and current fermiophobic 1-CL result • Should cross check with others