1 / 44

Parton Distribution Functions at the LHC - what are the issues?

Parton Distribution Functions at the LHC - what are the issues?. with Alan Martin, Dick Roberts & Robert Thorne. James Stirling (IPPP Durham) Oxford, 4 May 2004. pdfs at LHC. high precision (SM and BSM) cross section predictions require precision pdfs:  th =  pdf + …

coy
Download Presentation

Parton Distribution Functions at the LHC - what are the issues?

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. Parton Distribution Functions at the LHC- what are the issues? with Alan Martin, Dick Roberts & Robert Thorne James Stirling (IPPP Durham) Oxford, 4 May 2004 Oxford, 4 May 2004

  2. pdfs at LHC • high precision (SM and BSM) cross section predictions require precision pdfs: th = pdf + … • ‘standard candle’ processes (e.g. Z) to • check formalism • measure machine luminosity? • learning more about pdfs from LHC measurements (e.g. high-ET jets → gluon, W+/W–→ sea quarks) Oxford, 4 May 2004

  3. where X=W, Z, H, high-ET jets, … and  known • to some fixed order in pQCD and EW • in some leading logarithm approximation (LL, NLL, …) to all orders via resummation ^ QCD factorization theorem for short-distance inclusive processes now: NLO pQCD verysoon: NNLO Oxford, 4 May 2004

  4. DGLAP evolution Q. is NLO (or NNLO) DGLAP sufficient at small x? Are higher-orders ~ αSn logm x important? momentum fractions x1 and x2determined by mass and rapidity of X xdependence of f(x,Q2) determined by fit to data, Q2 dependence determined by DGLAP equations: Oxford, 4 May 2004

  5. new Full 3-loop (NNLO) DGLAP splitting functions! Moch, Vermaseren and Vogt, hep-ph/0403192, hep-ph/0404111 Oxford, 4 May 2004

  6. new comparison with existing approx. NNLO fits? (MRST, Alekhin) • Exact NNLO splitting functions are very close to approximate splitting functions (van Neerven, Vogt) based on moments & known small- and large-x behaviours… • … and therefore the corresponding pdfs are almost identical • Note: • the full NNLO pdf fit awaits calculation of the inclusive high ET jet cross section at NNLO • including NNLO (splitting & coefficient functions) gives a slight improvement in overall fit quality, and reduction in αS(MZ) from 0.119 to 0.116 Oxford, 4 May 2004

  7. summary of NNLO collider calculations • p + p → jet + X *; in progress • p + p → γ + X; in principle, subset of the jet calculation but issues regarding photon fragmentation, isolation etc • p + p → QQbar + X; requires extension of above to non-zero fermion masses • p + p → (γ*, W, Z) + X *; van Neerven et al, Harlander and Kilgore corrected (2002) • p + p → (γ*, W, Z) + X differential rapidity distribution *; Anastasiou, Dixon, Melnikov (2003) • p + p → H + X; Harlander and Kilgore, Anastasiou and Melnikov(2002-3) Note: knowledge of processes * needed for a full NNLO global parton distribution fit Oxford, 4 May 2004

  8. Who? Alekhin, CTEQ, MRST, GGK, Botje, H1, ZEUS, GRV, BFP, … http://durpdg.dur.ac.uk/hepdata/pdf.html pdfs from global fits Formalism LO, NLO, NNLO DGLAP MSbar factorisation Q02 functional form @ Q02 sea quark (a)symmetry etc. fi (x,Q2) fi (x,Q2) αS(MZ ) Data DIS (SLAC, BCDMS, NMC, E665, CCFR, H1, ZEUS, … ) Drell-Yan (E605, E772, E866, …) High ET jets (CDF, D0) W rapidity asymmetry (CDF) N dimuon (CCFR, NuTeV) etc. Oxford, 4 May 2004

  9. (MRST) parton distributions in the proton Martin, Roberts, S, Thorne Oxford, 4 May 2004

  10. examples of ‘precision’ phenomenology jet production W, Z production NNLO QCD NLO QCD Oxford, 4 May 2004

  11. Djouadi & Ferrag, hep-ph/0310209 Oxford, 4 May 2004

  12. Djouadi & Ferrag, hep-ph/0310209 Oxford, 4 May 2004

  13. pdf uncertainties encoded in parton-parton luminosity functions solid = LHC dashed = Tevatron Alekhin 2002 Oxford, 4 May 2004

  14. Note: CTEQ gluon ‘more or less’ consistent with MRST gluon Note:high-x gluon should become better determined from Run 2 Tevatron data Q. by how much? Oxford, 4 May 2004

  15. why do ‘best fit’ pdfs and errors differ? • different data sets in fit • different subselection of data • different treatment of exp. sys. errors • different choice of • tolerance to define  fi(CTEQ: Δχ2=100, Alekhin: Δχ2=1) • factorisation/renormalisation scheme/scale • Q02 • parametric form Axa(1-x)b[..] etc • αS • treatment of heavy flavours • theoretical assumptions about x→0,1 behaviour • theoretical assumptions about sea flavour symmetry • evolution and cross section codes (removable differences!) → see talks in PDF Working Group! Oxford, 4 May 2004

  16. Djouadi & Ferrag, hep-ph/0310209 Oxford, 4 May 2004

  17. MRST: Q02 = 1 GeV2,Qcut2 = 2 GeV2 xg = Axa(1–x)b(1+Cx0.5+Dx) – Exc(1-x)d • CTEQ6: Q02 = 1.69 GeV2,Qcut2 = 4 GeV2 xg = Axa(1–x)becx(1+Cx)d Oxford, 4 May 2004

  18. tensions within the global fit? • with dataset A in fit, Δχ2=1 ; with A and B in fit, Δχ2=? • ‘tensions’ between data sets arise, for example, • between DIS data sets (e.g. H and N data) • when jet and Drell-Yan data are combined with DIS data Oxford, 4 May 2004

  19. CTEQ αS(MZ) values from global analysis with Δχ2 = 1, 100 Oxford, 4 May 2004

  20. as small x data are systematically removed from the MRST global fit, the quality of the fit improves until stability is reached at around x ~0.005 (MRST hep-ph/0308087) Q. Is fixed–order DGLAP insufficient for small-x DIS data?! Δ = improvement in χ2 to remaining data / # of data points removed Oxford, 4 May 2004

  21. the stability of the small-x fit can be recovered by adding to the fit empirical contributions of the form ... with coefficients A, B found to be O(1) (and different for the NLO, NNLO fits); the starting gluon is still very negative at small x however Oxford, 4 May 2004

  22. extrapolation errors theoretical insight/guess: f ~ A x as x → 0 theoretical insight/guess: f ~ ± A x–0.5 as x → 0 Oxford, 4 May 2004

  23. ubar=dbar differences between the MRST and Alekhin u and d sea quarks near the starting scale Oxford, 4 May 2004

  24. Oxford, 4 May 2004

  25. how can LHC improve knowledge of pdfs? • test DGLAP evolution at small x by forward hard scattering processes • precision W, Z cross sections for learning more about sea quark asymmetries • improve information of high x gluon distribution? Oxford, 4 May 2004

  26. DGLAP evolution momentum fractions x1 and x2determined by mass and rapidity of X xdependence of f(x,Q2) determined by fit to data, Q2 dependence determined by DGLAP equations: Oxford, 4 May 2004

  27.  forward W, Z, dijet… production samples small x Oxford, 4 May 2004

  28. different partons 4% total error (MRST 2002) similar partons different Δχ2 σ(W) and σ(Z) : precision predictions and measurements at the LHC Oxford, 4 May 2004

  29. x1=0.006 x2=0.006 – x1=0.52 x2=0.000064 ratio close to 1 because u  u etc. (note: MRST error = ±1½%) sensitive to large-x d/u and small x u/d ratios Q. What will be the experimental precision? – – ratio of W–and W+ rapidity distributions Oxford, 4 May 2004

  30. high ET jet cross section at the LHC MRST2001E pdf error band (TeV) Q. What will be the experimental precision? Oxford, 4 May 2004

  31. summary and outlook • need a better understanding of differences between pdf sets (central values and errors): not just ‘experimental errors’ (easier) but theoretical errors too (harder). • are apparent ‘tensions’ between data sets caused by experiment or theory? • is high-precision F2 data from HERA revealing breakdown of fixed-order DGLAP? If so, what are implications for LHC? • FL ?! – direct information on the small-x gluon • the impact of a full NNLO pdf fit? Oxford, 4 May 2004

  32. summary and outlook contd. • impact on global fits of HERA jet data? (e.g. γ*g→jets) • current interest in flavour structure of sea: e.g. ubar  dbar ands  sbar (NuTeV). Can LHC provide information? (e.g. s g → W c ) • moving beyond inclusive regime – the role of unintegrated (in kT) parton distributions? • improvements expected by LHC start-up? (i.e. from theory + new HERA, Tevatron data) Oxford, 4 May 2004

  33. extra slides Oxford, 4 May 2004

  34. ±3% ±2% contours correspond to ‘ experimental’ pdf errors only; shift of prediction using CTEQ6 pdfs shows effect of ‘theoretical’ pdf errors Oxford, 4 May 2004

  35. Oxford, 4 May 2004

  36. Oxford, 4 May 2004

  37. Oxford, 4 May 2004

  38. (LO) W cross sections at the Tevatron and LHC using (NLO) partons from MRST, CTEQ and Alekhin Oxford, 4 May 2004

  39. flavour decomposition of W cross sections at hadron colliders recall that the only constraint on very small x quarks from inclusive DIS (F2ep) data is on the combination 4/9 [u+c+ubar+cbar] + 1/9 [d+s+dbar+sbar] Oxford, 4 May 2004

  40. differences between the MRST, CTEQ and Alekhin strange quarks near the starting scale Oxford, 4 May 2004

  41. the ‘conservative’ pdfs (blue lines) do not describe the very lowx DIS data not included in the fit MRST, hep-ph/0308087 Oxford, 4 May 2004

  42. the change in the NLO and NNLO gluons when DIS data with x < 0.005 are removed from the global fit MRST, hep-ph/0308087 Oxford, 4 May 2004

  43. no data in fit no data in fit comparison of the standard MRST and ‘conservative’ NNLO pdfs MRST, hep-ph/0308087 Oxford, 4 May 2004

  44. Oxford, 4 May 2004

More Related