1 / 31

LIB 2DHP@LHC (Myths and Reality)

FP-420. LIB 2DHP@LHC (Myths and Reality). Dec. 10 th , 2006. V.A. K hoze (IPPP, Durham). Main aims : - to quantify the mjor sources of the L umi- I ndependent B ackgrounds , -to E xclusive D iffractive Higgs P roduction at the LHC.

jerry
Download Presentation

LIB 2DHP@LHC (Myths and Reality)

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. FP-420 LIB2DHP@LHC (Myths and Reality) Dec. 10th, 2006 V.A. Khoze (IPPP, Durham) Main aims: -to quantify the mjor sources of theLumi-IndependentBackgrounds, -to Exclusive Diffractive Higgs Production at the LHC. (based on works : A. De Roeck, R. Orava and KMR, EPJC 25:391,2002 ; V. Khoze, M. Ryskin and W.J. Stirling, hep-ph/0607134; B. Cox et al. EPJC 45:401,2006; KMR:EPJC 26:229,2002;C34:327,2004 ) • CEDP- Main Advantages: • - Measure the Higgs mass via the missing mass technique (irrespectively of the • decay channel). • -H opens up(Hbb Yukawa coupling); unique signature for the MSSM Higgs sect. • -Quantum number/CPfilter/analyzer. • -Cleanness of the events in the central detectors. ☻If the potential experimental challenges are resolved, then there may be a real chance that for certain MSSM scenarios the CEDP becomes the LHC Higgsdiscovery channel !

  2. In the proton tagging mode the dominantHin principlecan be observeddirectly . • certain regions of the MSSM parameter space are especiallyproton tagging friendly (at large tan  and M , S/B ) Myths For the channel LIBs are well known and incorporated in the (DPE )MCs: Exclusive LO - production (mass-suppressed) + gg misident+ soft PP collisions. Reality The complete background calculations are still in progress (uncomfortably & unusuallylarge high-order QCD and b-quark mass effects). • About a dozen various sources : known (DKMOR, Andy, Marek) & •  admixture of |Jz|=2 production. •  NLO radiative contributions (hard blob and screened gluons) • NLLO one-loop box diagram (mass- unsuppressed, cut-nonreconstructible) •  b-quark mass effects in dijet events – (most troublesome theoretically)still incomplete • (similar problems in photon-photon collisions).

  3. KMR technology (implemented in ExHume) focus on  the same for Signal and Bgds contain Sudakov factor Tg which exponentially suppresses infrared Qt region  pQCD new CDF experimental confirmation, 2006 (Koji’s talk) S² is the prob. that the rapidity gaps survive population by secondary hadrons  soft physics; S²=0.026(LHC), S²/b² -weak dependenceonb.

  4. Good ExHume description KMR analytical results CDF preliminary outside-cone energy (Koji) (Rjj includes different sources : Centr. Inclus. + soft PP + (rad. ) tail of Centr. Exclus. + experim. smearing)

  5. effect. PP lumi (HKRSTW, work in progress).

  6. RECALL:  for forward going protonsLO QCD bgd  suppressed by Jz=0 selection rule and by colour, spin and mass resol. (M/M) –factors. forreference purps : SM Higgs (120 GeV) misidentification of outgoing gluons as b –jets may mimic production the prolific LO subprocess SM Higgs for jet polar angle cut misidentification prob. P(g/b)=0.01  B/S 0.06 (DKMOR WishList)

  7. A little bit of (theoretical) jargon Helicity amplitudes for the binary bgd processes g( g g helicities of ‘active gluons’ S – Jz=0, LO B- domint. Jz=2 (double) helicities of produced quarks • convenient to considerseparately • q-helicity conserving ampt (HCA) and q-helicity non-conserving ampt(HNCA) • do not interfere, can be treated independently, • allows to avoid double counting (in particular, on the MC stage) Symmetry argumts (BKSO-94) forJz=0 the Born HCAvanishes, (usually, HCA is the dominant helicity configuration.)  for large angles HNCA (Jz=2, HCA)

  8. in terms of the fashionable MHVrules (inspired by the behaviour in the twistor space) only (+ - ; + -) J_z=2, HCA (-+ ; -+ /+-) an advantageous property of the large angle amplitudes • allHNCA (Jz=0, Jz=2, all orders in ) are suppressed by • all HC ampts ((Jz=0, Jz=2, all orders ) are \propto  vanish at rotational invariance around q-direction (Jz=2, PP-case only) recall:we requirein order to suppress t-channel singl. in bgd processes, also acceptance of the CD..  an additional numerical smallness ( ) LOHCAvanishes in the Jz=0 case (valid only for the Born amplitude)  Jz=0 suppressionisremovedbythe presence of an additional (real/ virtual) gluon (BKSO-94)

  9. Classification of the backgrounds  |Jz|=2 LO production caused by non-forward going protons. HC process,suppressed by and by ≈ 0.02 * ( ) estimate  NLLO (cut non-reconstructible) HC quark box diagrams. result ≈ • dominant contribution at verylarge masses M • at M< 300 GeV stillphenomenologicallyunimportant due to a combination of small factors  appearance of thefactor consequence of supersymmetry

  10. mass-suppressed Jz=0 contribution  theoreticallymost challenging(uncomfortablylarge higher-ordereffects) • naively Born formula would give0.12  • however, various higher-order effects are essential :  running b-quark mass Single Log effects ( ) the so-called non-SudakovDouble Log effects , corrections of order (studied in FKM-97 for the case of at Jz=0 ) Guidance based on the experience with QCD effects in . •  DLeffects can be reliably summed up(FKM-97 , M. Melles, Stirling, Khoze 99-00 ). •  Complete one-loop result is known (G. Jikia et al. 96-00 ) • complete calculation of SL effects ( drastically affects the result) F=

  11. bad news:violently oscillating leading term in the DL non- Sudakov form-factor: • (≈2.5) •  DL contribution exceeds the Born term; strong dependence on the NLLO, scale, • running mass…. effects • No complete SL calculations currently available. Fq= HNC contribution rapidly decreases with increasing M Currently the best bet: : ² Fq ≈ ² with c≈1/2. Taken literally factor of two larger than the ‘naïve’ Born term. Cautiously : accuracy, not better than a factor of 5 Further theoretical efforts are needed

  12. NLO radiation accompanying hard subprocess Large-angle, hard-gluon radiation does not obey the selection rules + radiation off b-quarks potentially adominant bgd :( ) strongly exceeding the LO expectation.  only gluons with could be radiated, otherwise cancel. with screening gluon ( ).  KRS-06complete LO analytical calculation of the HC , Jz=0 in the massless limit, using MHV tecnique. Hopefully, these results can be (easily) incorporated into more sophisticated MC programmes to investigate radiative bgd in the presence of realistic expt. cuts. ,

  13. How hard should be radiation in order to override Jz=0 selection rule ? (classical infrared behaviour) as well known neglecting quark mass (a consequence of Low-Barnett-Kroll theorem, generalized to QCD ) the relative probability of the Mercedes –like qqg configuration for Jz=0 radiative bgd process becomes unusually large  final state topology- marked contrast to the Higgs-> bb (quasi-two-jet- like) events.  charged multiplicity difference between the H->bb signal and the Mercedes like bbg – bgd: for M120, N ≈7, Nrises with increasing M. hopefully, clearly pronounced 3-jet events can be eliminated by the CD,  can be useful for bgd calibration purposes. Exceptions:radiation in the beam direction;  radiation in the b- directions. could be eliminated DKMOR-02

  14. beam direction case if a gluon jet is to go unobserved outside the CD or FD ( ) • violation of the equality : (limited bythe ) contribution is smaller than the admixture of Jz=2. KRS-06 b-direction case (HCA) 0.2 ( R/0.5)² (R –separation cone size) Note :  soft radiation factorizes strongly suppressed is not a problem,  NLLO bgd numerically small  radiation from the screening gluon with pt~Qt: KMR-02 HC (Jz=2) LO ampt. ~ numerically very small  hard radiation - power suppressed

  15. Production by soft Pomeron-Pomeron collisions from DKMOR-02 (WishList) main suppression : lies within mass interval z the overall suppression factor : bb PS Background due to central inelastic production mass balance, again subprocess is stronglysuppressed produces atailon the high side of the missing mass H/bb (DKMOR-02)

  16. A.Pilkington, CERN 27th Sept.2006 What else should be done/checked? 1.New MRW(2006) diffractive pdf should be used, which are close to H1 fit B: much lower gluon density at large z (MRW fitavailable in Durham HEPDATA). 2. Appropriate value of survival factor. 3.Proper cuts on low ET. . 4. Possibility to veto the ‘Remnant Pomeron’ jets (CD extra jets, maybe T1, T2 detectors …to be studied) Risto , Marek, Andy (again difference in the topology in the final state)

  17. Not the end of the story….. in terms of Feynman graphs: Central Inelastic Soft PP- Fusion (Pomwig) Studied by KMR 02-06 formally suppressed by • In ‘theoretical jargon’ : CI - ‘kT- factorization, Soft PP – collinear factorization. • CDF inclusive diffractive dijet data – evidence of manifestation of the CI dijet production (both RunI and RunII). Preliminary estimates :We should be fine : B/S(DPE) <0.1-1. Currently, in the description of the Rjj <0.8 distr.ibution, normalization to models (Pomwig...) is fixed by the CDF data! Normalization at Rjj>0.8 (Exhume) comes from the theory.

  18. (detailed studies in B. Cox et al. hep-ph/0505240) WW mode • No trigger problems for final states rich in higher pT leptons. • Efficiencies ~20% (including Br) if standard leptonic (and dileptonic) • trigger thresholds are applied. • Further improvements, e.g. dedicated -decay trigger. • Statistics may double if some realistic changes to leptonic trigger • thresholds are made. • Much less sensitive to the mass resolution. • Irreducible backgrounds are small and controllable. • . • Recall : theh- rate can rise by about a factor of 3.5-4 in some MSSM • models (e.g., smalleff scenario). + + ……. KRS-05 Currently : trigger situation is more optimistic.

  19. Lepton TriggerEfficiency Cox et al (e or )ATALS (e, , 2e, 2, e) M=120 GeV 8.7%20.3% M=140 GeV 12.8% 26.9% M=160 GeV 16.6%28.8% (Sandra Horwat, Bruce Mellado) Pile-Up situation is hopefully bettter  mode ● Irreducible bgds (QED) are small and controllable. ( >0.1-0.2GeV)  QCD bgd is small if g/- misidentification is < 0.02 (currently ~0.007 for-jet efficiency 0.60) Lepton trigger efficiency looks optimistic: ATLAS ((e, , 2e, 2, e) M=120 GeV 22.1% M=140 GeV 25.8% M=160 GeV 28.3%

  20. Note: normalisation of ExclDPE is dependent ! (factor of 10) .

  21. Approximate formula for the background assuming DKMRO-2002 wishlist input main uncertn. at low masses SSM/B1 at ΔM 4 GeV Four major bgd sources(~1/4 each at M≈120 GeV)  gluon-b misidentification (assumed 1% probability)  NLO 3-jet contribution Correlations, optimization -to be studied.  admixture of |Jz|=2 contribution + NNLO effects b-quark mass effects in quasi-dijet events Recall : large M situation in the MSSM is very different from the SM. HWW/ZZ - negligible; H bb/- orders of magnitude higher than in the SM

  22. Four years on M=120 GeV WishList DKMOR (2002) currently (87% signal catch ) 5.76 GeV (may be even worse, Peter et al)  30-40 GeV   2.5% (CMS fast simulation.) Marek 1.3% (ATLAS) Andy misidentification prob.P(g/b)=1% (b-tag efficiency)0.6 0.36 A.Rozanov (ATLAS) PA (Monika, Marek, Andy, Andrew..)  no Pile-Up studies

  23. MSSM Recall : large M situation in the MSSM is very different from the SM. HWW/ZZ - negligible; H bb/- orders of magnitude higher than in the SM  detailedstudies of statistical significance for the MSSM Higgs signal discovery , based on the CMS Higgs group procedure – in progress (HKRSTW, hopefully first part of 2007.. )

  24. mhmax scenario, =200 GeV, MSUSY =1000 GeV hbb M. Tasevsky et al. (preliminary)

  25. Hbb

  26. hWW smalleff scenario PRELIMINARY mh 121-123 GeV for the SM Higgs at M = 120 GeV  = 0.4 fb, at M= 140 GeV  = 1 fb

  27. Conclusion LuminosityIndependentBackgrounds to CEDP ofHbbdo not overwhelm the signal and can be put under full control especially at M> 120 GeV.  LuminosityIndependentBackgrounds to HWW &channelsare controllable and could be strongly reduced. The complete background calculation is still in progress (unusually & uncomfortably large high-order QCD effects). Further reduction can be achieved by experimental improvements, better accounting for the kinematical constraints, correlations….. Optimization, complete MC simulation- still to be done Further theoretical & experimental studies are needed

  28. (Misha’s talk) PU (a naïve theorist’s view) Overlap background: hard event (bb,WW, ...) +2 SD events in the same bunch Xing Roughly : we have to achieve reduction of in 6-7 orders: correlations between measurements in CD and RPs (1, 2, M...),  correlations inazimuthal angles, pt- cuts, use of fast timing detectors (~40-100) ( Andrew, Monika, Mike….) Nc, cuts (~100, Andy)  veto in T1, T2 detectors - Risto

  29. Known (un)knowns • The probability to misidentify a gluon as a b-jet P(g/b) and the efficiency of • tagging b. • Does the CEDP environment help ? • Mass window  M≈3  (M), any further improvement ? •  Correlations, optimisation -to be studied •  S² (S²/b²),further improvements, experimental checks. •  Triggering issues: • Electrons in the bb –trigger ? • Triggering on the bb/without RP condition at M 180 GeV ? •  Mass window MCDfrom the Central Detector only (bb,  modes) in the Rap Gap environment? • Can we do better than MCD ~20-30 GeV? Mass dependence of MCD ? • (special cases: inclusive bgds, hunting for CP-odd Higgs) •  t-acceptance in RPs

  30. BACKUP

  31. (recall also Pomwig normal. to CDF Run I Dif. Inel data (0.27-0.1) )

More Related