1 / 36

Measurement of charm and bottom production in RHIC-PHENIX

Measurement of charm and bottom production in RHIC-PHENIX. Yuhei Morino for the PHENIX collaboration CNS, University of Tokyo JSPS DC fellow. Freeze-out. Hadron gas. Hadronization. QGP. Pre-equilibrium. 1.Introduction. RHIC is for the study of extreme hot and dense matter.

ting
Download Presentation

Measurement of charm and bottom production in RHIC-PHENIX

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. Measurement of charm and bottom production in RHIC-PHENIX Yuhei Morino for the PHENIX collaboration CNS, University of Tokyo JSPS DC fellow

  2. Freeze-out Hadron gas Hadronization QGP Pre-equilibrium 1.Introduction • RHIC is for the study of extreme hot and dense matter. • p+p, d+Au, Cu+Cu, Au+Au collision • √s = 22.4, 62, 130, 200 GeV A. • Heavy quarks (charm and bottom) are produced at only initial stage • good probe for studying property of the medium. • p+p collisions  base line study, pQCD test. • Au+Au collisions  energy loss, flow? @ hot and dense matter

  3. Heavy quark measurement at PHENIX • lepton from semileptonic decay • large branching ratio • c and b mixture K+ p- (single&di) lepton measurement is powerful tool for the study of heavy quark p+p ~ Au+Au collisions IN ADDITION At p+p (d+Au) collisions, direct measurement, e-h, e-m correlation can be used. important base line study. direct measurement • direct ID (invariant mass) • large combinatorial background

  4. PHENIX experiment • PHENIX central arm: • |h| < 0.35 • Df = 2 x p/2 • p > 0.2 GeV/c • Charged particle tracking analysis using DC and PC → p • Electron identification • Ring Imaging Cherenkov detector (RICH) • Electro- Magnetic Calorimeter (EMC) → energy E RNXP detector was installed at RUN7 improve determination of reaction plane

  5. Converter method Cocktail method Ne Electron yield converter 0.8% 0.4% 1.7% With converter Photonic W/O converter Dalitz : 0.8% X0 equivalent radiation length Non-photonic 0 Material amounts: 0 2 Measurement of non-photonic electron Inclusive electron ( g conversion, p daliz,etc and heavy quark ) Background subtraction Non-photonic electron (charm and bottom) S/N>1 @pt>2GeV/c

  6. Phys. Rev. Lett 97,252002 (2006) non-photonic electron (p+p@200GeV) • Single electrons from heavy flavor (charm/bottom) decay are measured and compared with pQCD theory • FONLL pQCD calculation agree with the data (Fixed Order plus Next to Leading Log pQCD) • scc= 567 ± 57(stat) ± 224(sys) mb

  7. FONLL: FONLL b/(b+c) FONLL c/(b+c) FONLL c/(b+c) b contribution to non-photonic electron Phys.Rev.Lett 95 122001 • FONLL: Fixed Order plus Next to Leading Log pQCD calculation • Large uncertainty on c/b crossing 3 to 9 GeV/c Measurement of be/ce is key issue.

  8. Main uncertainty of ec and eb  • production ratios (D+/D0, Ds/D0 etc) c,b separation in non-photonic electron D0e+ K-(NO PID) reconstruction Ntag = Nunlike - N like • background subtraction(unlike-like) • photonic component • jet component tagging efficiency when trigger electron is detected, conditional probability of associate hadron detectionin PHENIX acc From data From simulation (PYTHIA and EvtGen) { decay component (~85%)kinematics e jet component (~15%)

  9. c2 /ndf 21.2/22 @b/(b+c)=0.26(obtained value) (0.5~5.0GeV) c2 /ndf 18.7/22 @b/(b+c)=0.56(obtained value) (0.5~5.0GeV) • tag efficiency of • charm increases as • electron pt • tag efficiency of • data gets near bottom ec count tagging efficiency (ec,eb,edata) edata eb c2 /ndf 28.5/22 @b/(b+c)=0.42(obtained value) (0.5~5.0GeV) reconstruction signal and simulation

  10. bottom fraction in non-photonic electron • The result is consistent with FONLL

  11. electron spectra from charm and bottom be = (non-photonic) X (be/(ce+be)) PRL, 97, 252002 (2006) charm bottom

  12. 3 Measurement of di-electron(p+p@200GeV) p+p at √s = 200GeV p+p at √s = 200GeV • Material conversion pairs removed by analysis cut • Combinatorial background removed by mixed events • additional correlated background: • cross pairs from decays with four electrons in the final state • particles in same jet (low mass) • or back-to-back jet (high mass) • well understood from MC arXiv:0802.0050 arXiv:0802.0050

  13. e- K- e+ ne Heavy quark measurement via di-electron e+e- pair arXiv:0802.0050 heavy quark is dominant source @mee >1.1GeV

  14. Di-electron from heavy quark cocktail calculations are subtracted from data • bottom, DY,subtraction •  charm signal !! • mass extrapolation (pQCD) • rapidity extrapolation (pQCD) c dominant b dominant After Drell-Yan subtracted, fit (a*charm+b*bottom) to the data. charm and bottom cross sections from e+e- and c,be agree!

  15. total cross section of bottom total cross section of charm and bottom √s dependence of cross section with NLO pQCD agrees with data

  16. tag D0K-p+ with electron tag D0K-p+p0 decay channel reconstruct Summary of p+p@200GeV results • non-photonic electron spectra was obtained in p+p@200GeV. • data/FONLL~1.7 • be/(ce + be) has been studied in p+p collisions at √s =200GeV via e-h correlation. Cross section of bottom was obtained from electron spectra and be ratio. • b->e/c->e ~1 @ pt~3GeV/c • Cross sections of charm and bottom were obtained from di-electron in p+p collisions at √s =200GeV. • charm and bottom cross sections from e+e- and c,be agree On going issues in p+p@200GeV • Direct reconstruction in D0K-p+p0 and D0K-p+ channels. • - clear peak has been obtained. • e-m correlation

  17. 4Measurementofdi-electron(Au+Au@200GeV) arXiv:0706.3034 c ce e dominant Cocktail agrees with data points@1.2<Mee<2.8.

  18. MB 0%~ ~92% p+p ５ non-photonic electron (Au+Au@200GeV) PHENIX PRL98 173301 (2007) Heavy flavor electron compared to binary scaled p+p data (FONLL*1.71) Clear high pT suppression in central collisions

  19. Nuclear Modification Factor: RAA PHENIX PRL98 173301 (2007) Djordjevic, PLB632 81 (2006) large suppression at high pt • Radiative energy loss • does not describe!. • dead cone effect

  20. Adil & Vitev, PLB 649(2007)139 Comparison with models radiative & collisional E-loss models. • pQCD radiative E-loss with • large transport coeff.(BDMPS) • elastic pQCD + D resonances • + coalescence • upscaled pQCD elastic • alternative approaches • collisional dissociation of heavy meson • heavy baryon enhancement be/ce>~1 @ pt>~3GeV/c bottom may also lose large energy in (s)QGP

  21. PRELIMINARY minimum-bias Rapp & van Hees, PRC 71, 034907 (2005) Run-7 Run-4 V2 of non-photonic electron • large v2 has been observed charm flow new result suggest significant v2 at high pt bottom also flow? To reproduce suppression pattern & v2, small τ and/or DHQ are required (Rapp&van Hees, Moore and Teaney) h/s ~(1.3-2)/4p quantum limit

  22. 6 Summary • di-electron spectra was obtained in Au+Au@200GeV • non-photonic electron spectra was obtained in Au+Au@200GeV • large suppression pattern@high pt and large v2 was observed.  charm lose large energy loss and flow in (s)QGP. & be/ce >~ 1 @ pt>~3GeV/c (from p+p data) bottom lose large energy loss and flow in (s)QGP? • Model comparison suggests • smallτ and/or DHQ are required • η/s is very small, near quantum bound.

  23. PRELIMINARY minimum-bias p0RAA dependence on density-weighted average path length 0 – 20%: 3 < pTtrig< 6 GeV/c & 0.15 < pTasso< 1 GeV/c Rapp & van Hees, PRC 71, 034907 (2005) ? STAR Preliminary Run-7 Run-4 Outlook • more high pt v2 ? • electron –hadron correlation at Au+Au@200GeV ? • RAA dependence on path length ? • Silicon vertex detector

  24. back up

  25. Yield(1.2<mee<2.8GeV)/Ncoll • No significant centrality dependence • consistent with PYTHIA & random cc scenarios 4Measurementofdi-electron(Au+Au@200GeV) arXiv:0706.3034 c ce e dominant

  26. direct measurement: DKp, DKpp • direct ID(peak) • large combinatorial background K+ Meson D±,D0 Mass 1869(1865) GeV BR D0 --> K+p- 3.85 ± 0.10 % p- BR D0 --> K+p-p0 14.1 ± 0.10 % BR --> e+ +X 17.2(6.7) % Direct measurement of D meson

  27. D0K-p+p0 decay channel D0K-p+p0 reconstruction S.Butsyk[poster] large branching ratio(14.1%)

  28. tag D0K-p+ with electron tag reconstruct P.Shukla [poster] electron tag reduce combinatorial background • observe D0 peak • cross section of D is coming up

  29. Singnal and Background Photonic Electron • Photon Conversion Main photon source: p0 → gg In material: g → e+e- (Major contribution of photonic electron) • Dalitz decay of light neutral mesons p0 → g e+e- (Large contribution of photonic) • The other Dalitz decays are small contributions • Direct Photon (is estimated as very small contribution) • Heavy flavor electrons (the most of all non-photonic) • Weak Kaon decays Ke3: K± → p0 e±e (< 3% of non-photonic in pT > 1.0 GeV/c) • Vector Meson Decays w, , fJ → e+e-(< 2-3% of non-photonic in all pT.) Non-photonic Electron

  30. Consistency Check of Two Methods Both methods were checked each other Left top figure shows Converter/Cocktail ratio of photonic electrons Left bottom figure shows non-photon/photonic ratio

  31. Open Charm in p+p STAR vs. PHENIX PHENIX & STAR electron spectra both agree in shape with FONLL theoretical prediction Absolute scale is different by a factor of 2 31

  32. Method I • Tune cocktail to PHENIX measured hadrons • Subtract cocktail • Extract cross section in multi steps as in ppg065 • A. dsigma_ee/dy(1.1<Mee<2.5; in ideal PHENIX acceptance) This is what directly measured. Only systematic error in the data and Statistical data present. • A1. Extrapolate to 0<M<5 GeV; However, since ds/dy(1.1<M<2.5) is a very tiny fraction of dsigma/dy(0<M), I would rather not mention about it. • B. dsimga_ee/dy(1.1<Mee<2.5; |ye|<0.35)This is when two arm acceptance of PHENIX is corrected. Since the two arm nature is corrected, this is something a theorist can easily calculate.(now acceptance error is involved) • C. dsimga/dy of ccbar (now PYTHIA error is involved: kt, pdf’s and branching ratio because we go from electrons to charm) • D. sigma(ccbar) total (now add error for rapidity distribution) • In the paper we mention only A., C. and D. for simplicity • A. is calculated from the data, C. and D. are derived in the procedure explained in the next slide

  33. Method II • Tune cocktail to PHENIX measured hadrons • Subtract cocktail • Fit p0*charm + p1*bottom + drell yan • Charm cross section = 567 mb (ppg065) • Beauty cross section = 3.77 mb (Claus Jaroceck and commonly used in single electron analysis) • Drell Yan = 0.040 mb and scaled to NLO calculations from Werner Vogelsang • DY (from PYTHIA) + p0*charm +p1*bottom •     p0           9.13960e-01 ± 8.24258e-02 • p1           1.06418e+00 ± 7.13970e-01 • DY (scaling Pythia to Werner’s calculations for M>4GeV) + p0*charm +p1*bottomQ/2 •     p0           9.08741e-01 ± 8.25467e-02 •     p1           1.14892e+00 ± 7.17499e-01 Q •     p0           8.97103e-01 ± 8.25275e-02 •     p1           1.24826e+00 ± 7.17928e-01 Q*2 •     p0           9.09590e-01 ± 8.25467e-02 •     p1           1.13538e+00 ± 7.17499e-01

  34. 50% ce, be spectra # of non-photnic electron in b/(b+c)  PPG65 spectra sys error of # of non-photnic electron 100%correlation sys error of PPG65 enlarge sys error of bottom non-photonic electron (total>b) 90% C.L

  35. PYTHIA  EvtGen  PISA Produce D (B) products Decay D (B) products Simulate detector response B0 b B0 b Bs+ Bs+ bbar bbar EvtGen

  36. Unlike Cross Like Cross Unlike 4-body Cross subtraction • p0g g* e+e- e+e- Yield in 4p X External conversion removed with fV cut Foreground Background Subtracted Yield in acceptance Data: like Monte Carlo: Cross Like Cross Unlike Add all contributions from p0, h, h3p0

More Related