1 / 44

Top physics

Top physics. Peter Uwer. Humboldt-Universität Berlin. Why are we interested in top-quarks ?. 1) Top-quark = heaviest elementary particle discovered so far. Questions:. Is the top-quark point-like ? Why is the top-quark so heavy ? How is the mass generated ?.

veata
Download Presentation

Top physics

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 physics Peter Uwer Humboldt-Universität Berlin

  2. Why are we interested in top-quarks ? 1) Top-quark = heaviest elementary particle discovered so far Questions: Is the top-quark point-like ? Why is the top-quark so heavy ? How is the mass generated ? Important testground for theoretical developments Many interesting phenomena/aspects Interesting per se Required for precision

  3. Why are we interested in top-quarks ? 2) Top-quarks ─ a sensitive tool to explore the electroweak symmetry breaking  Top-quark plays special role in many extensions of the Standard Model, ideal tool to search for new physics 1) + 2) Precise measurements of its properties, search for possible deviations i.e. anomalous couplings Important: precise predictions possible, only “two” input parameters: CKM matrix + top-quark mass

  4. Why are we interested in top-quarks ? 3) Top-quark mass is an important input parameter of the SM [Heinemeyer, Hollik, Stockinger, Weiglein, Zeune '12] Fundamental parameter, should be known as precise as possible !

  5. Important measurements Cross section for pair production Top quark mass measurement W-Polarisation in top decay ttH cross section ttZ cross section Single top production Spin correlations tt+Jet(s) production ttg cross section b-quark distribution in decay Top polarisation Charge asymmetry Consistency checks with theo. predictions, new physics in the tt invariant mass spectrum Consistency Standard Model Test of the V-A structure in top decay Measurement of the Yukawa coupling Measurement of the Z couplings Direct measurement of the CKM matrix element Vtb, top polarization, search for anomalous Wtb couplings Weak decay of a `free’ quark, bound on the top width and Vtb, search for anomalous couplings Search for anomalous couplings, important background Measurement of the electric charge See talks on Saturday: German Rodrigo and Aurelio Juste Sensitive to new physics tbH+ Sensitive to new physics ? new physics ?

  6. Cross section for top-quark pair production

  7. Hadronic top-quark pair production ~90% @ Tevatron, 10% @ LHC ~10% @ Tevatron, 90% @ LHC Partonic cross sections

  8. Theory status: Total cross section [Dawson, Ellis, Nason ’89, Beenakker et al ’89,’91,Bernreuther, Brandenburg, Si, PU ’04, Czakon,Mitov 08] NLO QCD: [Moch, PU 08, Cacciari, Frixone, Mangano, Nason Ridolfi 08, Kidonakis Vogt 08] Beyond NLO QCD: [Ahrens, Baernreuther, Beneke, Bonciani, Cacciari, Catani, Czakon, Ferroglia, Kidonakis, Laenen, Mangano, Mitov, Moch, Nason, Neubert, Pecjak, Ridolfi, Schwinn, Sterman, PU, Vogt, Yang…] Soft gluon resummation Threshold corrections Full scale NNLO (in)dependence High energy behaviour NNLOapprox NNLO QCD for qqtt [Baernreuther, Czakon, Mitov ‘12] feasible

  9. Recent progress: qqtt @ NNLO/NNLL [Baernreuther, Czakon, Mitov arXiv:1204.5201] Tevatron: ~3% ggtt @ NNLO is underway

  10. LHC cross section measurements [Ignacio Aracena, Moriond 2012] Consistent picture (diff. channels / diff. experiments !) Most precise measurement: Lepton + jets  6.6% rel. uncertainty

  11. Combination of measurements All results consistent with SM  6.2 % ATLAS:  8 % CMS:

  12. Aiming for precision: Beyond NNLO QCD [Beenakker et al 94, Bernreuther, Fücker, Si 06’, 07] [Hagiwara, Sumino, Yokoya 08] [Kühn, Scharf, P.U 06,07] [Kiyo,Kühn,Moch,Steinhauser,P.U. 08] “Resonance structure” from would be bound state ~1 % shift of total cross section at LHC

  13. Cross section measurements Production mechanism seems well understood Experimental goal seems feasible Severe constraint for new physics scenarios Top-quark physics = precision physics Possible applications: Use cross section to constrain `parameters´ Gluon PDF / Gluon Luminosity Top-quark mass

  14. The top-quark mass

  15. Top-quark mass measurements [Stijn Blyweert, Moriond 2012] Competitive with Tevatron

  16. Some basic facts about theory parameters …and their determination. Top-quarks don’t appear as asymptotic states (no free quarks due to confinement) Top-quark mass is “just” a parameter like as, only defined in a specific theory/model i.e. SM • renormalisation scheme dependent, only indirect determination possible through comparison (fit): theory   experiment Parameter determination relies on theory, scheme dependence encoded in theor. predictions

  17. Different mass definitions Common schemes: Pole mass scheme MS mass Chose constants minimal to cancel 1/e poles in Other schemes possible: 1S mass, PS mass,… Schemes defined in perturbation theory  conversion possible

  18. Conversion between schemes Pole mass   MS mass: Example: Important: Difference can be numerically significant [Chetyrkin,Steinhauser 99] ~10GeV Difference is formally of higher order in coupling constant NLO predictions are required for meaningful measurements

  19. Bad choices — Good choices Scheme might be ill defined beyond perturbation theory Renormalon ambiguity in pole mass Example: [Bigi, Shifman, Uraltsev, Vainshtein 94 Beneke, Braun,94 Smith, Willenbrock 97] ! “There is no pole in full QCD” Pole mass has intrinsic uncertainty of orderLQCD

  20. Template method & kinematic reconstruction Present measurements: Distribution: invariant masse of top quark decay products Rely mostly on parton shower predictions No NLO so far available (?) Main issues: Corrections due to color reconnection / non perturbative physics ( momentum reconstruction of color triplet…) Precise mass definition ? How important ?

  21. Impact on current measurements Different channels and different experiments give consistent results Large effects unlikely Possible improvements of current measurements: Template method: Study additional distributions / observables Compare with NLO templates Matrix element method Matrix element method at NLO Alternative measurements ?

  22. Top quark mass from cross section Mass scheme well defined, higher orders can be included Drawback: Limited sensitivity to mt

  23. Alternative observables ? First measurement of the Running b-quark mass at high scale Compare b-quark mass measurement at LEP using 3-jet rates [Bilenky, Fuster, Rodrigo, Santarmaria] Use tt+1-jet events For details, see Adrian Irles presentation

  24. Spin correlations in top-quark pair production

  25. Top-quark spin correlations [Dharmaratna, Goldstein,’90, Bernreuther, Brandenburg,PU. 95] Parity invariance ofQCD: Top’s produced in qqtt andgg tt are essentiallyunpolarized But: Spins of top quark and antiquark are correlated [Bernreuther,Brandenburg 93, Mahlon, Parke 96, Stelzer,Willenbrock 96, Bernreuther, Brandenburg, Si, P.U. 04] Quantum mechanics: close to threshold:  Spins are parallel (qq) or anti-parallel (gg) close to threshold

  26. Why are spin correlations interesting ? You also measured the charge asymmetry…. LHC can improve a lot compared to Tevatron Sensitive test of production and decay, may put severe constrains on new physics scenarios

  27. Spin correlations: How to measure it Basic ingredients: Top quark decays before hadronization Parity violating decay t Wb f Polarisation can be studied through the angular distribution of the decay products! 

  28. Spin correlations [Parke, Mahlon ‘10] Study (azimuthal) opening angle distribution of leptons in dilepton events LHC: gg dominates Ansatz:

  29. LHC measurement [arXiv:1203.4081] Observation of spin-correlations (5.1 s)

  30. Constraining new physics [Fujfer, Kamenik, Melic, arXiv1205.0264] NLO corrections are known and found to be small

  31. Summary Tremendous progress in the recent past Top-quark physics is now precision physics Already after one year: LHC is competitive or even better than Tevatron Ideal laboratory to search for new physics

  32. Thank you for yourattention !

  33. Forward-Backward Charge Asymmetry in tt+1Jet [Dittmaier, PU, Weinzierl PRL 98:262002, ’07]

  34. Charge Asymmetry: Dependence on Pt(tt) [Kühn, Top-quark workshop, Berlin 2012]

  35. Non-perturbative corrections [Skands,Wicke ‘08] Top-quark is a colour triplet  non-perturbative effects in the reconstruction of the top momentum from colour singlet's different modeling of non-perturbative physics / colour reconnection Non-perturbative effects could result in uncertainty of the order of 500 MeV blue: pt-ordered PS green: virtuality ordered PS offset from generated mass

  36. Top-quark charge asymmetry + – – – – – – – – – – – – + + + + + + + + + + + + ─ [Berends, Gaemers, Gastmans ´73, Berends, Kleiss, Jadach, Was ´83] Compare [Kühn] Similar effect: Charge asymmetry SM: - [Kühn, Rodrigo ´98,´07,´12, Almeida, Sterman, Vogelsang 08, Bernreuther, Si ´10, Hollik, Pagani ´11 Ahrens, Ferroglia,Neubert,Pecjak, Yang ´11]

  37. Charge asymmetry: Theory predictions [Kühn, Rodrigo ´11] QCD+EW QCD QCD+EW Soft gluon resummation  Coherent picture of theoretical predictions, Theoretical uncertainties based on scale variations, possibly underestimates higher order effects (ratios!)

  38. Tevatron results [Bernreuther, Si ’12] At most 2.4 s deviation [1] CDF, arXiv:1101.0034, [2] D0, arXiv:1107.4995, [7] CDF note 10807

  39. Charge asymmetry at LHC No forward-backward asymmetry since pp is P symmetric However: t tend to follow initial q, while tb tend to follow initial qb initial state is not symmetric with respect to q,qb q tend to be more energetic should be broader w.r.t

  40. Charge asymmetry at LHC top anti-top y Effect expected to be small since qq makes only a small fraction, more important for larger mtt (Additional cuts may enhance asymmetry)

  41. CMS results [CMS-PAS-Top-11-030]

  42. ATLAS results [arXiv 1203.4211] Inclusive: Theory (MC@NLO):

  43. New physics scenarios [arXiv 1203.4211] inclusive “Z´, W’ disfavoured, some tension”

  44. Final remarks on asymmetry Discrepancy has reduced with new CDF measurement Theory is only LO, in ttj where also NLO is known, large higher-order corrections observed Charge asymmetry very sensitive to Pt(tt) LHC uncertainties are still large No conclusive picture yet Future: Improve current measurements Look into observables which can be measured at LHC and Tevatron [Aguilar Saavedra, Juste ‘12]

More Related