120 likes | 229 Views
Higgs Sensitivity: Final Combined Results. CDF and D0 Higgs Sensitivity Committees 18 June 2003. Recent Developments. have new numbers for both l n bb (from CDF) and nn bb (from D0) with bug fixes, etc. incorporate NN enhancement to l n bb: multiply Sx0.90, Bx0.63 (C. Neu thesis)
E N D
Higgs Sensitivity:Final Combined Results CDF and D0 Higgs Sensitivity Committees 18 June 2003
Recent Developments • have new numbers for both lnbb (from CDF) and nnbb (from D0) with bug fixes, etc. • incorporate NN enhancement to lnbb: multiply Sx0.90, Bx0.63 (C. Neu thesis) • incorporates extended lepton and b tagging into lnbb (with high eta roll-off; Winer, MMP) • use improved mass resolution for lnbb (Dorigo, Scodellaro) • incorporate llbb into ZH channel • combine all channels
WH channel • extended lepton/b tagging • 10% mass resolution • NN factor applied: • 1.6xS, 1.6xB
b tagging • include efficiency out to |h|=2, but must incorporate realistic “rolloff” • SHW assumed flat efficiency out to |h|=2 • assume no degradation due to multiple interactions
Statistical methods • Two approaches, both using mass spectrum: • Bayesian - integrate likelihood, taking into account systematics by integrating them out • CLs - used by LEP 2, takes into account systematics by maximizing likelihood at zero signal and SM cross section value; frequentist limit • CLs method agrees with Bayesian for 95% CL exclusion, but find ~10% lower luminosity thresholds for discovery
ZH channel from D0 • incorporate llbb by scaling signal and background by 1.33 • uses NN for selection • sensitivity better than SHW report • significant acceptance from WH channel! Need to ensure that there is no acceptance overlap withlnbbchannel
HSG vs SHW at 115 GeV mass window: 98-130 GeV
Higgs Sensitivity Versus Mass bands are ~30% wide to account for systematics and statistical method
HSG compared with SHW bands are ~30% wide to account for systematics and statistical method