1 / 42

Top Production at the Tevatron

Top Production at the Tevatron. Daniel Sherman Harvard/CDF. Experimental Seminar, SLAC December 7, 2006. Top. Fermilab celebrated the 10th anniversary of the discovery of the top quark last year General picture from Run I is consistent with the Standard Model

ide
Download Presentation

Top Production at the Tevatron

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. Top Production at the Tevatron Daniel Sherman Harvard/CDF Experimental Seminar, SLAC December 7, 2006

  2. Top • Fermilab celebrated the 10th anniversary of the discovery of the top quark last year • General picture from Run I is consistent with the Standard Model • A few (very) subtle hints of new physics in the top sample • Top physics is certainly interesting enough to justify a closer look…

  3. And If You Don’t Care… Top is VERY rare. (1 in 1010 collisions) BUT We’ll never find this… …without understanding all of these

  4. Outline

  5. Proton-antiproton collider Two multi-purpose detectors Collider Detector at Fermilab DØ Run I (1992-1996) √s = 1.8 TeV Integrated Luminosity 110 pb-1 Top Discovery in 1995 Run II (2001-present) √s = 1.96 TeV Collected almost 2 fb-1 so far Tevatron Complex The Fermilab Tevatron is the only place in the world to study top (for the next year)

  6. Top Production at the Tevatron • Top quarks are mostly produced (strongly) in pairs • 30% higher than in Run I • In the Standard Model, they are also produced one at a time ~7.5 pb 85% 15% σSM ~ 3pb Not Yet Observed

  7. Accelerator Performance 3 top pairs/hr 1.0 fb-1 • Tevatron is performing quite well • Nearly 2 fb-1 delivered in Run II • Typically recording 20-25 pb-1 per week (new Run I-sized dataset every month!) • 15,000 Run II top pairs per experiment • Record instantaneous luminosity (2.2 x 1032 ~ 1 top event every 10 minutes) • Shooting for 6-8 fb-1 by the end of 2008 • This talk: 700 pb-1 (with silicon)

  8. CDF II Detector Overview y x z • Silicon Tracker • |h|<2 • Drift Chamber • |h|<1 • Solenoid • Electromagnetic and Hadronic Calorimeters • Muon Chambers

  9. CDF II Detector

  10. Event Signature • Each top (should) decay to Wb, so we can sort final states based on the W decay products • Lepton+jets final states consist of 2 bottom quarks, a lepton + neutrino, and 2 light (charm) quarks • In the detector, an ideal event will be comprised of: • 4 jets (require ≥3 with ET>15 GeV) • Large missing ET (ET>20 GeV) • An energetic lepton (pT>20 GeV/c) • Essential for triggering • Top is still dominated by high-order QCD jet production with a real W • Top is distinguished by presence of heavy-flavor (mostly bottom) jets • Require jets to be b-tagged • Large gains in signal purity ~2 cm ν μ …but how do we detect b’s?

  11. b-Tagging Overview • We use two key properties of bottom quarks to “tag” them: • High semi-leptonic branching fraction (~10% per e/μ, plus cascades) • Algorithms identify soft electrons or muons inside jets • Electron tagging difficult at CDF (large conversion background) • Maximum b-jet efficiency limited by decay rates • Long lifetime (cτ~500 μm) • B hadrons will travel a macroscopic distance (several mm) before decaying • Two strategies at CDF: • Calculate heavy-flavor probability based on impact parameters of tracks • SecVtx algorithm: Explicitly reconstruct heavy-flavor decay vertices Interaction Point e/μ B D Tracking is critical JET

  12. Impact parameter resolution asymptotically approaches 25 μm Multiple scattering dominant at low pT Most of the work done by the innermost layers Entire silicon system upgraded in Run II Three-component system covering radii of 1.5 cm (LØØ), 2.5-11 cm (5-layer SVX), 20-30 cm (2-layer ISL) Silicon Tracking !LØØ, !SVXØ !LØØ, SVXØ LØØ, !SVXØ LØØ, SVXØ Intrinsic Beam Width ~30μm

  13. CDF Silicon Detector ISL SVX II LØØ

  14. Event Reconstruction I: Beamlines y x z • Starting point: ~50 tracks and average beam position & width • Measured online with SVX 30 m

  15. Event Reconstruction II: Primary Vertices y x z Primary Vertex 10 m 30 m • Starting point: ~50 tracks and average beam position & width • Measured online with SVX • Vertex high-quality tracks near beam, extract interaction point 30 m

  16. Event Reconstruction III: SecVtx Algorithm y x z Primary Vertex d0 • Starting point: ~50 tracks and average beam position & width • Measured online with SVX • Vertex high-quality tracks near beam, extract interaction point • Select tracks with large impact parameter that point from primary vertex to jet • Make best 2-track ‘seed’ vertex and attach all nearby tracks • Iteratively remove those with large χ2 • Decide whether or not secondary vertex is inconsistent with the primary • Tag based on significance of displacement, not L2D • Primary vertex error matters JET Secondary Vertex L2D

  17. Problem: Efficiency is sensitive to poorly-modeled detector quantities Resolution tails, primary vertex errors, etc. Solution: Derive a multiplicative “scale factor” to correct the simulated efficiency in low-pT lepton samples Complementary methods for 8-GeV electrons and muons inside jets Only need the b-fraction of lepton jets Muons: Fit μ momentum relative to the jet for the heavy-flavor fraction Electrons: Compare tag rates to control sample of conversions and apply a simple formula… Well, not that simple Calibration of b-Tagging Efficiency I b-Fraction 70% (e), 80% (μ) b-Tagged Jet (e)

  18. We measure the data-to-Monte Carlo “scale factor” to be ~0.92 ± 0.06 ±2% depending on the tagger Two years ago: 0.8 ± 0.1 Dominant systematic derived from extrapolation to top-like energies ET dependence is poorly constrained Large source of error in allb-tagged analyses (including the cross section) Calibration of b-Tagging Efficiency II Electron Sample Muon Sample

  19. Tuning the Algorithm • For multi-b event signatures (top/Higgs/SUSY), the tagged light-flavor background is typically quite small • Efficiency gains dominate purity losses • New in Run II: Try to maximize yield of doubly-tagged events • Reduce combinatorics in top lepton+jets event reconstruction (esp. for mass) • Final specs for “loose” SecVtx: • b-Tag Efficiency up 20% • Light-flavor tag rate x2.5

  20. b-Tagging Efficiency in Top Events Expect a top candidate sample 10 times larger than Run I (25 times larger for double-tags)

  21. The b-tagged lepton+jets sample gives us a lot of things to explore Where to begin? We can’t study top properties without knowing how much signal and background we have The cross section measurement is the foundation for all top physics analyses in this channel Top Physics Program W Helicity l+ Top Mass Top Lifetime W+ Top Charge Production Cross Section v p t Resonant Production b ? Production Mechanism b t p Top Spin Polarization q Non-SM Decays W- Decay Kinematics Non-Top in Lepton+Jets (Superjets) q’ |Vtb| tt+X

  22. Cross Section Calculation • The cross section is derived from the expression: • : Number of b-tagged events in data sample • : Expected number of background events • : Total integrated luminosity: 695/pb • : Acceptance (includes branching fraction): ~7% • : Event b-tagging efficiency (16-70%)

  23. Backgrounds I: W+Jets Fake Tags (Negative L2D) JET Primary Vertex L2D Secondary Vertex x y z • Background dominated by events with a real W and jets • Tags can be real heavy flavor or mis-tagged light flavor • W+Light Flavor (~40%) • Mistag rate measured with negative tags • Normalization comes from data • W+Heavy Flavor (~35%) • Contributions from Wbb, Wcc, and Wc • “Scaled” leading-order Monte Carlo • Wbb dominates double-tag background

  24. Backgrounds II: Non-W and Electroweak • Remaining background contributions are relatively small • Non-W (~15%) • W signature (lepton and or missing ET) faked • Lepton: Conversions, hadrons identified as muons, B decays, misidentified jets • Missing ET: Calorimeter resolution, incomplete detector coverage • Extrapolated from outside the W signal region • Low-Rate Electroweak Processes (~10%) • Single top, dibosons, etc. with additional jets Electron Data W Ultimately, we expect S/B of ~3 for single-tags, ~10 for double-tags

  25. Cross Section Results ≥1 Tag ≥2 Tags Best single measurement (14% error) Top “discovery” with double-tags! See Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 082004 (2006)

  26. Systematic Uncertainties • Limiting systematic uncertainty in cross section comes from data-to-simulation scale factor on the b-tag efficiency

  27. Interpreting the Cross Section ▼ • We measure 8.8 ± 1.2 pb for a top mass of 175 GeV/c2 • CDF Dilepton: 8.3 ± 1.8 pb • CDF All-Hadronic: 8.3 ± 2.1 pb • Some dependence on assumed mt • Unscientific combination favors a lower mass (~166 ± 4 GeV/c2) • Measured: 170.9 ± 2.4 GeV/c2 • Natural question: How significant is the difference between the measured cross section and theory? • Strictly speaking, not very interesting (O(1σ)) • More exciting questions: How much does the sample look like top? Can we rule out new phenomena that would inflate the cross section?

  28. Kinematics ET • We attribute the excess in tagged events to top, but does it really look like top? • YES! • Need to be a bit more quantitative with some hypotheses… HT mTW

  29. Searches I • Is there a non-QCD production mechanism for top pairs? • No further evidence for 500 GeV/c2 resonance • Also: Detached W (“top lifetime”) hunt consistent with zero

  30. Searches II • Are we mistaking something else for top? • Dedicated searches for t’→Wq in lepton+jets using event kinematics • Exclude t’ with mass 258 GeV/c2

  31. Searches III 300 GeV/c2 stop • Are we counting events from top pairs+X? (e.g. X=H, ET) • Heavy stop pairs (→tχ0) or top partners in little Higgs (→tAH) • Sensitive to O(0.5 pb) in 1 fb-1 • The bottom line:there is no significant evidence for physics beyond the Standard Model in the top sample

  32. Aside: Top as a Calibration Sample Remember this? Forget it. • If it’s all top, double-tag statistics can be exploited to tackle systematics • σ: Requiring σ1-tag=σ2-tag constrains the tagging “scale factor” directly • 20% error reduction with 700 pb-1 (benefits all tagging analyses) • Expect to reach total precision of 12% on cross section with 1.2 fb-1 • mt: Forcing the untagged jets to the W mass constrains the jet energy scale • 40% error reduction • These approaches are becoming the standards at the Tevatron (& LHC?)

  33. LHC Top Production • Tevatron center-of-mass energies are typically insufficient to produce a top pair (350 GeV/c2) • x > ~0.2 • The 7-TeV beam at LHC can produce top at smaller values of x • Dominated by gluon fusion (90%) • Expected cross section increases by a factor of >100 gluon up down anti-up Top Accessible @ LHC Top Accessible @ Tevatron

  34. The Lepton+Jets Sample Mass of 3 leading jets (ATLAS) Top W+Jets σ(W→lν) σ(tt) mt=175 GeV/c2 • Enhancement in σ for top is larger than that for backgrounds (W+jets) • Without b-tagging, top may be visible in ~1 week at 1033 (150 pb-1) • With b-tagging, may reach a precision of 5-7% on σ (dominated by luminosity) • Combined with 2-GeV precision on mt, a stringent test of QCD (finally)

  35. Summary • The CDF Run II top physics program is in great shape, benefiting from large improvements in accelerator and detector performance and in b-tagging capabilities • We have made the world’s best measurement of the pair production cross section in the lepton+jets decay channel with 700 pb-1, and we expect the result to improve significantly in the coming months (1.2 fb-1) • More sensitive searches for new physics in the top sample will follow • The LHC will bring us to a new level of understanding top, and the last few years of Tevatron data will help us get there

  36. Backup

  37. Radiative Corrections and Global Fits

  38. Latest Higgs Results

  39. Standard Model Top Decays In the Standard Model, top pairs decay ~100% of the time as: • Signatures are distinguished by the W decay products: • All-hadronic: High yield (44% branching ratio), large QCD background • Dilepton (2 e/μ’s): High purity, low yield (5% BR) • τ channels: difficult to trigger on, reconstruct leptons • Lepton+jets(1 e/μ only): Good purity and yield (30% BR), manageable background, kinematically constrained

  40. Detector Signatures • CDF’s design allows us to perform signature-based analyses with physics objects • Jets (quarks and gluons):Clusters of tracks pointing to EM/hadronic calorimeter deposits • Electrons:Track pointing to narrow EM deposit • Muons:Track with little calorimeter energy pointing to muon “stub” • Neutrinos: Undetected → observe imbalance in transverse energy

  41. Loose-Tag Backgrounds No b-tagging systematics included

  42. Double-Tag Backgrounds No b-tagging systematics included

More Related