Transcript 20120430_SoftQcd - University of Birmingham

Update on Diffractive Dijet
Production Search
Hardeep Bansil
University of Birmingham
SM Soft QCD Meeting
30/04/2012
Contents
•
•
•
•
•
•
Theory & Motivation
Analysis
CMS analysis & reconstructing diffractive variables
Systematics
Forward gap distributions
Next steps
2
Diffractive dijets
• Look for single diffractive events (pppX)
– Involve a rapidity gap due to colourless exchange
with vacuum quantum numbers: “pomeron”
• Search for diffraction with a hard scale set by 2
jets
– Described by diffractive PDFs + pQCD crosssections
• Previous measurements of hard diffractive
processes at HERA and Tevatron
– At Tevatron, ratio of yields of single diffractive to
inclusive dijets ≈ 1%
– Likely to be smaller than this at LHC
3
Motivation
• Understand the structure of the diffractive exchange by comparison
with predictions from electron-proton data and be able to get a
measure of FDjj
• Measure the ratio of the single diffractive to inclusive dijet events
• Gap Survival Probability – the chance of the gap between the intact
proton and diffractive system being lost due to scattering (affects
measured structure function)
– Tevatron have Gap Survival Probability of 0.1 relative to H1 predictions
– Khoze, Martin and Ryskin predict LHC to have GSP of ~ 0.03
Rescatter with p?
Comparison of Tevatron
results to H1 predictions
Gap destruction by
secondary scattering
ξ
4
Interesting variables
•
•
•
•
Calculate MX2 ≈ 2Ep·(E±pz)X  ξX = MX2 /s
Calculate zIP ≈ (E±pz)jj/(E±pz)X
Look at jet (η, ET, Mjj) and gap properties
Determine cross sections as a function of zIP
Mjj
Mx
ξX
5
Analysis
• Using L1Calo stream data10 period A and B ESDs
– Total ∫L dt = 7.22 nb-1 - calculated using online iLumiCalc tool with
L1_MBTS_2 live trigger and L1_J5 reference trigger
– Average <μ> for selected runs < 0.15
• POMWIG generator for Single Diffractive Dijets
– No rapidity gap destruction built in
– Generates QCD 22 process within diffractive system in different pT ranges
(8-17, 17-35, 35-70, 70+ GeV) for SD (system dissociating in ±z direction)
• Use PYTHIA 6 and PYTHIA 8 Dijet samples as Non Diffractive
(inclusive) Dijets
– Made in same pT ranges as Pomwig (8-17, 17-35, 35-70, 70-140 GeV)
• Anti-Kt jets with R=0.6 or R=0.4:
– Require >= 2 jets in event passing loose jet cleaning cuts
– ET Jet1,2 |η| < 4.4, ET Jet1 > 30 GeV, ET Jet2 > 20 GeV
– Jet ET & η cuts based on 2010 jet energy scale systematic and dijet analysis
• Ask for a forward gap: |ηstart| = 4.9, ΔηF ≥ 2.0
6
Gap Finding Algorithm
• Gap finding based on Soft Diffraction analysis
– Divides calorimeter into 49 rings of 0.2 in η
– Identifies calorimeter cells where energy significance (= cell energy/noise)
large enough that probability of noise cell studied in event is small
– Where no cells in ring found above ESig threshold  ring is ‘empty’
– Full details in blue box
• Determine the size of the biggest forward gap
Detector gap definition
•Calorimeter: no cell above threshold E/σ > Sth probability of noisy cell in ring smaller than 10-4
(electronic noise only, no pile-up environment),
cluster that cell came from has ET > 200 MeV
Example Single Diffractive Topology
ΔηF:3.4
|ηStart|:4.9
•Tracker: no good track above pT > 200 MeV, |η| <
2.5
Truth gap definition
•No stable particle above pT > 200 MeV
7
New Data Format
• Derived AOD format where clusters only have information for most
significant cell
– Cell sampling layer, cell significance
– Will mean no longer working directly with cells and ESDs
• Making NTUP_JETMET D3PDs from these
– Most of last 3 weeks went into getting code running over these
– Faster running time on Grid
• Currently short on statistics
(only 6M of 19M events
available across Periods A &
B due to production troubles)
8
CMS Diffractive Dijet Result
•
•
•
•
CMS-FWD-10004-PAS
Analysis based on 2.7nb-1 of low-pileup data from early 2010
Require 2 jets with pT>20 GeV, |η|<4.4 based on Particle Flow
objects above noise threshold
Require a forward gap of 1.9 units in HF
Trigger on single jets with pT>6 GeV
~
•
•
Final cross-section extracted using the variable ξ (frac. p loss of scattered proton)
Sum over E & pZ of PF particles, with MC-derived correction factor “C” = 1.45±0.05
•
Differential cross-section is determined from
a fit for the relative contribution of diffraction
(POMPYT) and non-diffraction (PYTHIA),
before gap cuts
9
Reconstructing ξ
•
Calculate Mx first using E±pz method then convert to ξ
•
Truth level: all final state particles excluding intact proton
(if there is one in event)
Reconstructed level: all caloClusters (not just above
significance thresholds)
•
•
Pomwig comparison (generator cut at ξ < 0.1) – all gap & jet cuts applied
Truth ξ v Truth ξ using E+Pz method
•
Truth ξ v Reconstructed ξ using E+Pz method
~
In MC at ~truth ~and recon level, around 97% of time see expected ξ chosen
between ξ+ or ξ- based on side where gap starts
10
Reconstructing ξ
•
Determine C by comparing MC truth & recon ξ resolution
•
Truth level: all final state particles excluding intact proton
(if there is one in event)
Reconstructed level: all caloClusters (not just above
significance thresholds)
•
•
~
Pomwig comparison (generator cut at ξ < 0.1) of ξ to truth ξ and to gap size
Truth ξ v Reconstructed ξ using E+Pz method
•
Reconstructed ξ v Reconstructed Gap Size
~
Relative correlations from plots suggest ξ is as interesting as gap size to study
11
Systematics
• Just a list at moment, not properly started!
• Jet Energy Scale and Jet Energy Resolution
– JESProvider and JERProvider software obtained for 2010 (need to set up)
• Gap Energy Scale (clusters)
• Gap Threshold Cut Uncertainty
– Gap related systematics based on Soft Diffraction analysis
•
•
•
•
•
•
MC Unfolding Uncertainty
Trigger
Tracking Uncertainty
Luminosity
Additional Material
Pile-up
• Are there others to consider?
• Focusing on the larger effects at the moment
12
L1_J5 Efficiency
•
Look at L1_J5 efficiency on a run by run basis using MinBias stream and MBTS_2
trigger to gain independent sample
–
Will make this J5 & FJ5 (FJ3 in earlier runs)
–
Account for endcaps where RoI could have formed in FCAL using Δφ < 0.4
•
Ask that jet matches to Jet RoI in central region with ΔR < 0.4
•
•
Well aware of timing issues for early runs  improvement in later runs
Use MC combined jet results  account for MC to data comparison as systematic
η dependence
from EM TR
AntiKt4 Jets
AntiKt6 Jets
AntiKt4 jets
high efficiency
compared
L1Calo Data AntiKt4 & AntiKt6 Jets
L1Calo Data AntiKt4 Jets (ET > 30 GeV)
N data
goes to
to AntiKt6 jets
N data  1
 ( ET trig )
•
Factor in to data so
•
Ignore variation in η and take correction factor only in ET
13
L1_J5 Efficiency – Data v MC
•
Pythia 6, Pythia 8 & Pomwig less affected by timing issues
– Around 30 GeV efficiencies are similar – Pythia 6 just about the best match
– MC reaches plateau faster (smaller correction factors) due to TR
Pythia 6 AntiKt4 Jets (ET > 30 GeV)
Pythia 6 AntiKt6 Jets (ET > 30 GeV)
14
Uncorrected Gap Size Distribution
POMWIG SD Jets,
PYTHIA 6 & 8 Jets
weighted relative to
luminosity of data
runs used and then
plotted against
L1Calo Data
L1Calo Data
Pomwig SD Jets
Pythia 8 Jets
Pythia 6 Jets
Drop in number of
events with ΔηF ≥ 6,
cuts into phase space
Biggest ND
contribution at
small ΔηF
•
•
Data agrees much better with Pythia distribution (best match Py 8 before ΔηF ≥ 5)
Ratio of MC to Data suggests a GSP of 0.3-0.4 in majority of bins
•
By ΔηF of 6, ξ = 10-4.5  MX = 39.4 GeV – cut out phase space for producing pair
of 20 GeV jets so get drop in events after this point
•
Dijet samples lacking statistics at higher gap sizes with new gap algorithm
– Still observe forward gaps with sizes of 4, 5, 6 in PYTHIA 6/8 but errors large
15
Differential Cross Sections
• MC samples weighted to lumi of data runs - Differential cross section
as a function of forward gap size
• Some odd bins (at larger gap sizes) due to acceptance
– Dominated by low statistics in individual samples
– Important that MC production picks out events with large gap sizes
L1Calo Data
Pomwig SD Jets
Pythia 8 Jets
Pythia 6 Jets
16
Next steps
• Get official production of data & MC samples in new format
•
•
•
•
– Estimate sizes of MC samples necessary for analysis
Continue to develop systematics
Make ξ useable in data
Look into potential backgrounds
Work out relative amounts of diffraction and non-diffraction
present in data
17
Back up slides
Meaning of E±pz
(Taken from CMS slide)
19
Acceptances
• Combined acceptances look odd due to low stats & weights
– Look at acceptances for different samples
• Where stats become small, typically get more events passing cuts at
reconstruction level rather than truth level in samples
Combined Acceptance
Weights applied to
different pT range
samples based to match
to lumi of data then
samples combined
Migrations can then
cause the acceptances
to be larger or smaller
than expected
Combined
After Weights
Pythia 8
Pomwig
Pythia 6
20
Large Acceptances?
• Where stats become small, typically get more events passing cuts at
reconstruction level rather than truth level in samples
• Two major causes affecting large acceptances at ΔηF >4 so far:
• Far more events where 2 or more truth jets seen as 1 recon jet
– Seen in all MC samples
– Put into acceptance definition that must be 2 jets in recon & truth
• Differences in gap size between recon & truth
– More often the recon gap size is larger
– Some cases where Δ(ΔηF)
small, most where Δ(ΔηF)
large – greater than 2
• Improve with larger stats
or cut out odd events
Pythia 6 Jets
ΔηF Resolution = ΔηF Truth – ΔηF Recon
21