1 / 22

Fermiophobic Higgs

Fermiophobic Higgs. Drew Baden University of Maryland Dzero Collaboration EPS 2003. Fermilab Tevatron. Chicago . Booster. CDF. DØ. Tevatron. p sou rce. Main Injector (new). Run I 1992-96 about 120 pb -1 recorded 1.8TeV cm energy 3.6 m s bunch crossing MainRing

bambi
Download Presentation

Fermiophobic Higgs

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. Fermiophobic Higgs Drew Baden University of Maryland Dzero Collaboration EPS 2003

  2. Fermilab Tevatron Chicago  Booster CDF DØ Tevatron p source Main Injector (new) • Run I 1992-96 • about 120 pb-1 recorded • 1.8TeV cm energy • 3.6ms bunch crossing • MainRing • Synchrotron injector for Tevatron • In same tunnel  • Run II 2001-… • 1.96TeV cm energy • 396ns bunch crossing • MainRing pulled, Main Injector built • $230M project • Goal: ~10,000-15,000 pb-1

  3. D Detector • Upgrades: • 2T Solenoid • >100k scint. fibers • >700k silicon strips • Muon detector improvements • Preshower added • CAL, Muon, trigger electronics • NO MAIN RING!!! Silicon tracking out to h~2 Yields

  4. Run 2 Data Taking Run I total Delivered for Physics

  5. Higgs – Current Understanding • Discovery motivation is obvious • Higgs is a central part of the Standard Model • But after discovery, the Higgs mass must be determined • MHIGGS determines decay G, and sproduction for coupling to all particles • Constraints on MHIGGS ElectroWeakWorkingGroup • Favors light higgs, 91GeV central value • M<211 GeV 1-sided 95%CL LEP direct search • M>114GeV @ 95% CL

  6. What is Fermiophobic Higgs? • Fermiophobic…means you turn off couplings to fermions • Can occur in Type-1 2-doublet Higgs models • Type-1 – one doublet couples to fermions, the other to bosons • 2 CP even neutral Higgs bosons: light h and heavy H • mixes with scalar field with angle a • coupling to fermions via • mass, as usual, and • sin(a) for H and cos(a) for h • h is therefore “fermiophobic” in the limit a→p/2 • Of course we could have a “fermiophobic” H (a→0)…but h is lighter so we look there…

  7. Fermiophobic Higgs Production h h t W*/Z* W/Z h W+ W- • Effect on Higgs production: • Eliminates gluon fusion • Biggest contribution to SM Higgs production…  • Leaving: • “Associated Production” • Virtual W*/Z* → onshell W/Z+h • WW fusion • Quark lines radiate W’s, fuse to h • ZZ fusion too small by usual EWK factor

  8. Fermiophobic Higgs Decay h w h w SM Branching Fractions • Final states: • No bb in the final state (fermiophobic!) • gg • Through W triangle loop • Dominates at low Mh • Also WWgg vertex • Suppressed by EM factors • Associated Production: • Z/W+h where h → WW/ZZ • But h →ZZ suppressed • Dominant final states are • ZWW, WWW • Physics background from ZWW, standard EWK tri-linear coupling • h → WW dominates at high Mh • LEP Combined Fermiophobic limit • Mh < 108.2 GeV @ 95% CL using h →gg mode MH< 114.4 EWWG LEP Higgs Working Group benchmark model Mh< 108.2 LHWG Note 2001-8 Hep-ex (0107035) 2001

  9. Experimental Limits • LEP Combined Fermiophobic limit • Mh < 108.2 GeV @ 95% CL using h →gg mode • LHWG Note 2001-8 and Hep-ex (0107035) 2001 • D/CDF Run1 limit 78.5 / 82.0 GeV at 95% CL • B.Abbott et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 2244 (1999 ) • F.Abe et al. Phys. Rev. D59, 092002 (1999) LEP

  10. This Talk…. • So, for this talk, present status on: • W*/Z* → W/Z h, h → WW • Look for the h → WW • Focus on final states with 2 W’s • 2 Z’s will be relatively suppressed (see previous slide) • Search for inclusive e+e-, m+m-, and em± lepton pairs + MET • The “prompt” W/Z in final state… • No requirement on any leptonic decay • W/Z*h→ W/Zgg • Look for states with 2gs • large MET and/or jets • Let the theorists foot the bill as to interpretation • Which particular “Type” etc.

  11. h → W+W-→ l+l-nn • Combine e+e- and em± sample: • Dielectron sample: 44pb-1 • em sample: 34pb-1 • Backgrounds • All dilepton channels have • Small: WW, Wg, ZZ, WZ, and top • Large: W+jet and QCD misidentification • ee also has a large background from Z → e+e- • Reduced via ee mass MET cut • W+jet dominate after, with some t’s remaining • em Dominated by QCD and W+jet

  12. Electron Sample Z sample MC • Electron ID requirements • Triggered • Isolation+EMF+Shower Shape • e = 85% (93%) efficiency for central (endcap) • Track match via C2(E/p and Df) and DCA • e=73% obtained using sample of Z → e+e- • Leading electron PT>20 GeV, 2nd electron PT>10 GeV • Reduces multijet background

  13. Muon Sample, Jets, and MET Iso(m) 1.0 MET • Muons: • ID from muon system • Isolated from jets using E(cal) and tracks • E(DR<0.4) - E(DR<0.1)<2.5GeV • SPT (in cone DR<0.5) tracks < 2.5 GeV • Reject cosmics via timing requirement • PT > 10 GeV with central track match • Jets: • Cut to eliminate hot towers, other pathologies • EMF cut • |h|<2.5 • Energy corrections, cone 0.5 • MET • Use calorimeter cells • Correct for jet energy corrections • Use 0.7cone jets for this Cal corr

  14. Event Cuts Higgs WW QCD Top W+g Z→ee W+jets Z→tt Df(l+l-) • Electrons • 2 with PT> 20 GeV • at least 1 with track match • M(e+e-) < 78 GeV to reject Z’s • MET • MET > 25 GeV and Df(jets,MET) > 0.5 • Dominant background is W+jets • Spin Correlations • W+ and W- have opposite spin projections • Tendency for charged leptons to be emitted along same direction • Require Df(leptons)<2.0

  15. e+e- Final State • Dominant background from Z → e+e- • Invariant mass cut M(e+e-)<MH/2 for limit calculation • 96% effecienty for MH=160GeV • MET from jet fluctuations reduced • Transverse mass cut MT<MH+20 GeV M(e+e-) before cuts M(e+e-) after electron selection and PT cut

  16. e+e- Result • Data after all cuts… • Monte Carlo • Pythia 6.202 + full sim/reconst. • 0.5 min bias overlay • Multijet backgrounds from data • Calculated using poor quality EM object • Efficiencies: • Backgrounds vs. Data • largest uncertainty is in W+jets and Z(ee) Df(ee) MC/Data Comparison Selection optimized for MH=160

  17. em± Final State and Results • Comparison with e+e- analysis • No Z decay background • No transverse mass cut applied • MET cut constant: MET > 20 GeV • Less QCD multi-jet background • MET and PT(m) → not aligned • All other cuts are the same • Efficiencies: • Uncertainty mostly from W+jets • Results combing e+e- and em± • Upper limit of 2-3pb @ 95%CL • Limited data…x4 being analyzed now • Need ~10fb-1 to be sensitive up to Mhiggs=160 GeV sBr(H →WW → e+e-/ em± )

  18. m+m- Final State PT(m) M(m+m-) Df(jet,MET) MET Df(m+m-) MT • 48pb-1 analyzed • 2 High PT isolated muons (|h|<2) • Same cuts as previous • M(m+m-), PT(m), MET, Df(MET,jet),MT, Df(m+m-) • MC samples from Pythia 6.202, full sim/reconst • Same as for previous study • QCD and W+jets backgrounds from data measured • using muon isolation • Normalized to Z→mm • Overall signal efficiency for Mh=160 GeV is 14.6 ± 0.6%

  19. m+m- Result • 1 Event remains • 48pb-1 data • 14.4% overall efficiency for 160 GeV Higgs • 0.32 ± 0.01 expected from backgrounds • No official upper limit on sBr yet… • Will be reporting soon on combined H → WW → e+e-, m+m-, and em± on 120pb-1

  20. H → gg + X • 52pb-1 analyzed • Photon id: • EMfraction>0.9 , Shower shape C2, isolation, PT>25 GeV, charged track veto • No jet requirements or MET cut here • “Fake” photons due to • high PTp0→gg (small opening angle) • Drell-Yan production + tracking inefficiency • jet fluctuations mimic photon (high EMfraction) • non-prompt QCD photons gg mass after all cuts

  21. H → gg + X Result Central Photons • Interesting to also consider TOPCOLOR • Technicolor extension, fermiophobic except for top quark loops • Assume Br(h → gg) = 1 • Starts to get interesting at 120 GeV! • Many assumptions…

  22. Tevatron Higgs Working Group LEP excluded at 95% C.L. • The Higgs discovery potential for Run II has been evaluated (using a parameterized fast detector simulation) • hep-ph/0010338, • Discovery at 3-5 can be made • Combine all channels, data from both D0 and CDF • Improve understanding of signal and background processes • b-tagging, resolution of Mbb • Advanced analysis techniques are vital • Results of simulations consistent with SHWG expectations • Significant luminosity required to discover Higgs at Tevatron

More Related