130 likes | 280 Views
Z mm Analysis Update. T. Dai, E. Diehl, D. Levin, X. Li, J. Liu, J. Purdham, R. Thun, H. Wang, Y. Wu, H. Yang, Z. Zhao, B. Zhou, J. Zhu UM ATLAS Group 10/07/2010. Integrated Luminosity calculation (Z mm ) ( m b -1 ) * :. A-G4: ~ 6.86 pb-1 + G5(2 runs) => 7.3 pb -1
E N D
Zmm Analysis Update T. Dai, E. Diehl, D. Levin, X. Li, J. Liu, J. Purdham, R. Thun, H. Wang, Y. Wu, H. Yang, Z. Zhao, B. Zhou, J. Zhu UM ATLAS Group 10/07/2010
Integrated Luminosity calculation (Zmm) (mb-1) *: • A-G4: ~ 6.86 pb-1 + G5(2 runs) => 7.3 pb-1 • - mu10_MSonly trigger largely pre-scaled, can not be used for analysis • *A-G4: Z->mm GRL from Alberto • *G5 (2 runs): Stable Beam GRL
MC Samples Zmm106047_PythiaZmumu_no_filter_r1388_r1389 (Pileup MC) ttbar 105200_T1_McAtNlo_Jimmy Ztt 106052_PythiaZtautau_r1394_r1389 (Pileup MC) W/j 107690_AlpgenJimmyWmunuNp0_pt20 107691_AlpgenJimmyWmunuNp1_pt20 107692_AlpgenJimmyWmunuNp2_pt20 107693_AlpgenJimmyWmunuNp3_pt20 107694_AlpgenJimmyWmunuNp4_pt20 107695_AlpgenJimmyWmunuNp5_pt20 107700_AlpgenJimmyWtaunuNp0_pt20 107701_AlpgenJimmyWtaunuNp1_pt20 107702_AlpgenJimmyWtaunuNp2_pt20 107703_AlpgenJimmyWtaunuNp3_pt20 107704_AlpgenJimmyWtaunuNp4_pt20 107705_AlpgenJimmyWtaunuNp5_pt20 Drell-Yan 108319_PythiaDrellYan_mumu, 107055_PythiaDrellYanLowMtautau_M10 St 108340_st_tchan_enu_McAtNlo_Jimmy 108341_st_tchan_munu_McAtNlo_Jimmy 108342_st_tchan_taunu_McAtNlo_Jimmy 108343_st_schan_enu_McAtNlo_Jimmy 108344_st_schan_munu_McAtNlo_Jimmy 108345_st_schan_taunu_McAtNlo_Jimmy 108346_st_Wt_McAtNlo_Jimmy Di-jet 105802_JF17_pythia_jet_filter _r1388_r1389 (Pileup MC)
Zmm selection Cuts • Start from WWD3PDs • GRL • PV Cut ( nTracks >=3 && |pv_z|<150 mm) • Good Muon Selection • Combined Muon, pt>15 GeV, |eta|<2.5 • Ptm(MS) > 10 GeV, (Ptm(MS) - Ptm(ID)) <15GeV • |z0 ex.PV | < 10 mm • Isolation cut: PtCone40 / Pt(m) < 0.2 • 2 Opposite Charge Good Muon • 2 Good Muon both have pt > 20 GeV • 2 Good Muon both have |h|<2.4 • 2 Good Muon both have Ptcone40/pt < 0.2 • Z Mass Cut: 66 GeV<|M(mm)|<116 GeV • Trigger Requirement • Should put trigger cut at the end • For Data, May use “L1_MU6” for Period A-D; “EF_mu10_MG” for Period E-F; “EF_mu10” for Period G • MC, use L1_MU6 (HLT Trigger may not well simulated)
Zmm Cut Flow from Data (7.3 pb-1) (Staco) • Red Color • Use suggested triggers • High Efficiency • Total • 2380 Zs
Zmm Cut Flow from Data (7.3 pb-1) (Muid) • Red Color • Use suggested triggers • High Efficiency • Total • 2476 Zs
Data Candidates/ MC Expectation (7.3 pb-1) * NNLO Cross-section for Zmm: 0.99 nb Trigger Eff correction not applied in this table
Z Mass Resolution (After Z mass Cut) (Staco) Period E s ~ 3.7GeV Period F s ~ 3.8 GeV Period G1 s ~ 2.5GeV Seems like a big improvement Ok, then next page
Z Mass Resolution (After Z mass Cut) (Staco) Period G2 s ~ 3.3GeV Period G3 s ~ 3.4 GeV Period G4 s ~ 2.5GeV Z Mass Resolution Goes back to ~3.5 GeV Level After G2
Plots: M(mm) at Pre-selection (Staco) Opposite Charge Same Sign ?? MC Deficit in Low M region, need to investigate
Plots: M(mm) of Final Z Candidates (Staco) Pt(mm) Njet(Pt>20GeV) MET dRmm)
Summary • Update Z Selection with 7.3 pb-1, observed 2400~2500 Z • Candidates, still have ~10% deficit compared to MC prediction • Suggest to move “Trigger Cuts” to the last, which may make • analysis more easier • After Collect infomation from Trigger Config, Trigger Group and • Directly compare Different interested triggers on Z Candidates, • We suggest following trigger to be used: • L1_MU6(Period A-D), EF_mu10_MG(E-F), EF_mu10(G) • More studies still to be done on these • About Z mass resolution, we really see improvement in Period • G2 compared to previous data taking period; However, the • resolution goes back to ~3.5 GeV level after Period G2