Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in D Ø
description
Transcript of Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in D Ø
Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
Horst D Wahl
Florida State University
DIS 2005
Madison
Outline
Tevatron and DOslash detector Bottomonium ϒ(1S) production High pt μ-tagged jet production conclusion
Tevatron ndash data taking
peak luminosity in 2005 above 1032 cm-2 s-1
DOslash collected gt 690 pb-1
Results shown use 150 - 300pb-1
Leading order
Flavor creation
Next to leading order
Flavor excitation
Gluon splitting
Recent developments
Beyond NLO resummation of log(ptm) terms FONLL Changes in extraction of fragmentation function from LEP data New PDFs Improved treatment of experimental inputs
(use b-jets and b-hadrons instead of b-quarks)
Open Heavy Flavor Production
Long-standing ldquodiscrepanciesrdquo between predicted and measured cross sections now resolved eg Cacciari Frixione Mangano Nason RidolfiJHEP 0407 (2004) 033
combined effects of better calculations (Fixed order (NLO)+ NLL= FONLL) relationshipdifference between e+eminusand hadron colliders different moments of FF relevant better estimate of theory errors (upward) new appreciation of issues withldquoquark-levelrdquo measurements
Total Cross sections (from CDF) ndashinclusive b cross section |ylt1| 294plusmn06plusmn62 microb hep-ex0412071
(submitted to PRD) inclusive c cross section ~50x higherPRL 91 241804 (2003)
Comments Tevatron as HF Factory 1048707The cross sections given on the previous slide imply
central (|y|lt1) brsquos at 3kHz at current luminosities ~2x this if you look out to |y|lt2 central charm at 150kHz ndash~2x1010 brsquos already seen by CDF and DOslash in Run II ndash~1x1012 charm hadrons already produced()
rArr Near infinite statistics for some measurements rArr If you can trigger
Rely heavily on muon triggers Jψ decays are golden semi-leptonic decays- rare decays with leptons
Tracks with significant bσb Missing neutrals troublesome
forget o identification all-charged decay modes
Muon Toroid
Calorimeter
Solenoid Tracking System (CFT SMT)
The DOslash Detector
ForwardPreshower detector
Silicon Tracker Fiber Tracker
Solenoid Central Preshower detector
125 cm
50cm
20cm
DOslash tracking system
DOslash - Muon detectors
Toroid magnet (19 T central 20 T forward)
Scintillation counters PDTs (central) MDTs (forward)
A-Scint
Forward Tracker (MDTs)
Shielding
Bottom BC Scint
PDTrsquosForward
Trigger Scint
Bottomonium production
Theory modeling of production Quarkonium production is window on
boundary region between perturbative and non-perturbative QCD
factorized QCD calculations to O(α3) (currently employed by Pythia)
color-singlet color-evaporation color-octet models
Recent calculations by Berger et al combining separate perturbative approaches for low and high-pt regions
Predict shape of pt distribution Absolute cross section not predicted
ϒ(1S) Production Tevatron 50 produced promptly ie at primary
vertex 50 from decay of higher mass states
(eg χb rarrϒ(1S) ) Event selection
- luminosity 1591 plusmn 103 pb-1 - di-muon pTgt3 tight Tracking and
Calorimeter isolation cut - invariant mass in 7 ndash 13 GeV
Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
Because we can The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 04 DOslash has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 18 at radics = 196 TeV
Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements
EL Berger JQiu YWang Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph0411026
VA Khoze AD Martin MG Ryskin WJ Stirling hep-ph0410020
The Analysis
Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges
0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection
Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system
pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the
Silicon Tracker
d2σ((1S))
dpt times dy
N()
L times Δpt times Δy times ε
acctimes ε
trigtimes k
dimutimes k
trktimes k
qual
=
L Luminosity kdimu
local muon reconstructiony rapidity k
trk tracking
εacc
Acceptance kqual
track quality cuts ε
trig Trigger
00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε
acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027
εtrig
070 073 082k
dimu 085 088 095
ktrk
099 099 095 k
qual 085 085 093
Efficiencieshellip
Cross section
MC Data
pt(μ)
in GeV
0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6
η(μ) φ(μ)
06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV
Data vs Monte Carlo
To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once
Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with
masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23
free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3
Background 3rd order polynomial
All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV
m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV
0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18
PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV
00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb
06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb
12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb
00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb
Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)
σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)
Pythia
Comparison with previous results
Effects of polarization
CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04
How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized
So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV
Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT
No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone
estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions
Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
Better tracking resolution ---
CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances
rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our
statistical and systematic error
rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently
feasible without killing the signal
Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting
large number of correction factors
Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve
Conclusions
ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different
rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity
Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)
μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets
originating from heavy flavor
Motivation
Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation
Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior
Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature
Problem ~1001 QCDbb
Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter
Fit to CDFqQCD calculation
CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038
Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness
-tagged Jet Cross-section
Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be
N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)
T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)
fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)
L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section
tjPVTBBbb p
Nff
L
)(
Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated
p13
p14 Analysis Summary
Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)
Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon
(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven
determination of b-fraction
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
Outline
Tevatron and DOslash detector Bottomonium ϒ(1S) production High pt μ-tagged jet production conclusion
Tevatron ndash data taking
peak luminosity in 2005 above 1032 cm-2 s-1
DOslash collected gt 690 pb-1
Results shown use 150 - 300pb-1
Leading order
Flavor creation
Next to leading order
Flavor excitation
Gluon splitting
Recent developments
Beyond NLO resummation of log(ptm) terms FONLL Changes in extraction of fragmentation function from LEP data New PDFs Improved treatment of experimental inputs
(use b-jets and b-hadrons instead of b-quarks)
Open Heavy Flavor Production
Long-standing ldquodiscrepanciesrdquo between predicted and measured cross sections now resolved eg Cacciari Frixione Mangano Nason RidolfiJHEP 0407 (2004) 033
combined effects of better calculations (Fixed order (NLO)+ NLL= FONLL) relationshipdifference between e+eminusand hadron colliders different moments of FF relevant better estimate of theory errors (upward) new appreciation of issues withldquoquark-levelrdquo measurements
Total Cross sections (from CDF) ndashinclusive b cross section |ylt1| 294plusmn06plusmn62 microb hep-ex0412071
(submitted to PRD) inclusive c cross section ~50x higherPRL 91 241804 (2003)
Comments Tevatron as HF Factory 1048707The cross sections given on the previous slide imply
central (|y|lt1) brsquos at 3kHz at current luminosities ~2x this if you look out to |y|lt2 central charm at 150kHz ndash~2x1010 brsquos already seen by CDF and DOslash in Run II ndash~1x1012 charm hadrons already produced()
rArr Near infinite statistics for some measurements rArr If you can trigger
Rely heavily on muon triggers Jψ decays are golden semi-leptonic decays- rare decays with leptons
Tracks with significant bσb Missing neutrals troublesome
forget o identification all-charged decay modes
Muon Toroid
Calorimeter
Solenoid Tracking System (CFT SMT)
The DOslash Detector
ForwardPreshower detector
Silicon Tracker Fiber Tracker
Solenoid Central Preshower detector
125 cm
50cm
20cm
DOslash tracking system
DOslash - Muon detectors
Toroid magnet (19 T central 20 T forward)
Scintillation counters PDTs (central) MDTs (forward)
A-Scint
Forward Tracker (MDTs)
Shielding
Bottom BC Scint
PDTrsquosForward
Trigger Scint
Bottomonium production
Theory modeling of production Quarkonium production is window on
boundary region between perturbative and non-perturbative QCD
factorized QCD calculations to O(α3) (currently employed by Pythia)
color-singlet color-evaporation color-octet models
Recent calculations by Berger et al combining separate perturbative approaches for low and high-pt regions
Predict shape of pt distribution Absolute cross section not predicted
ϒ(1S) Production Tevatron 50 produced promptly ie at primary
vertex 50 from decay of higher mass states
(eg χb rarrϒ(1S) ) Event selection
- luminosity 1591 plusmn 103 pb-1 - di-muon pTgt3 tight Tracking and
Calorimeter isolation cut - invariant mass in 7 ndash 13 GeV
Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
Because we can The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 04 DOslash has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 18 at radics = 196 TeV
Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements
EL Berger JQiu YWang Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph0411026
VA Khoze AD Martin MG Ryskin WJ Stirling hep-ph0410020
The Analysis
Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges
0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection
Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system
pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the
Silicon Tracker
d2σ((1S))
dpt times dy
N()
L times Δpt times Δy times ε
acctimes ε
trigtimes k
dimutimes k
trktimes k
qual
=
L Luminosity kdimu
local muon reconstructiony rapidity k
trk tracking
εacc
Acceptance kqual
track quality cuts ε
trig Trigger
00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε
acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027
εtrig
070 073 082k
dimu 085 088 095
ktrk
099 099 095 k
qual 085 085 093
Efficiencieshellip
Cross section
MC Data
pt(μ)
in GeV
0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6
η(μ) φ(μ)
06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV
Data vs Monte Carlo
To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once
Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with
masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23
free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3
Background 3rd order polynomial
All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV
m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV
0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18
PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV
00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb
06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb
12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb
00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb
Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)
σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)
Pythia
Comparison with previous results
Effects of polarization
CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04
How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized
So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV
Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT
No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone
estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions
Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
Better tracking resolution ---
CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances
rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our
statistical and systematic error
rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently
feasible without killing the signal
Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting
large number of correction factors
Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve
Conclusions
ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different
rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity
Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)
μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets
originating from heavy flavor
Motivation
Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation
Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior
Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature
Problem ~1001 QCDbb
Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter
Fit to CDFqQCD calculation
CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038
Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness
-tagged Jet Cross-section
Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be
N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)
T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)
fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)
L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section
tjPVTBBbb p
Nff
L
)(
Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated
p13
p14 Analysis Summary
Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)
Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon
(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven
determination of b-fraction
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
Tevatron ndash data taking
peak luminosity in 2005 above 1032 cm-2 s-1
DOslash collected gt 690 pb-1
Results shown use 150 - 300pb-1
Leading order
Flavor creation
Next to leading order
Flavor excitation
Gluon splitting
Recent developments
Beyond NLO resummation of log(ptm) terms FONLL Changes in extraction of fragmentation function from LEP data New PDFs Improved treatment of experimental inputs
(use b-jets and b-hadrons instead of b-quarks)
Open Heavy Flavor Production
Long-standing ldquodiscrepanciesrdquo between predicted and measured cross sections now resolved eg Cacciari Frixione Mangano Nason RidolfiJHEP 0407 (2004) 033
combined effects of better calculations (Fixed order (NLO)+ NLL= FONLL) relationshipdifference between e+eminusand hadron colliders different moments of FF relevant better estimate of theory errors (upward) new appreciation of issues withldquoquark-levelrdquo measurements
Total Cross sections (from CDF) ndashinclusive b cross section |ylt1| 294plusmn06plusmn62 microb hep-ex0412071
(submitted to PRD) inclusive c cross section ~50x higherPRL 91 241804 (2003)
Comments Tevatron as HF Factory 1048707The cross sections given on the previous slide imply
central (|y|lt1) brsquos at 3kHz at current luminosities ~2x this if you look out to |y|lt2 central charm at 150kHz ndash~2x1010 brsquos already seen by CDF and DOslash in Run II ndash~1x1012 charm hadrons already produced()
rArr Near infinite statistics for some measurements rArr If you can trigger
Rely heavily on muon triggers Jψ decays are golden semi-leptonic decays- rare decays with leptons
Tracks with significant bσb Missing neutrals troublesome
forget o identification all-charged decay modes
Muon Toroid
Calorimeter
Solenoid Tracking System (CFT SMT)
The DOslash Detector
ForwardPreshower detector
Silicon Tracker Fiber Tracker
Solenoid Central Preshower detector
125 cm
50cm
20cm
DOslash tracking system
DOslash - Muon detectors
Toroid magnet (19 T central 20 T forward)
Scintillation counters PDTs (central) MDTs (forward)
A-Scint
Forward Tracker (MDTs)
Shielding
Bottom BC Scint
PDTrsquosForward
Trigger Scint
Bottomonium production
Theory modeling of production Quarkonium production is window on
boundary region between perturbative and non-perturbative QCD
factorized QCD calculations to O(α3) (currently employed by Pythia)
color-singlet color-evaporation color-octet models
Recent calculations by Berger et al combining separate perturbative approaches for low and high-pt regions
Predict shape of pt distribution Absolute cross section not predicted
ϒ(1S) Production Tevatron 50 produced promptly ie at primary
vertex 50 from decay of higher mass states
(eg χb rarrϒ(1S) ) Event selection
- luminosity 1591 plusmn 103 pb-1 - di-muon pTgt3 tight Tracking and
Calorimeter isolation cut - invariant mass in 7 ndash 13 GeV
Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
Because we can The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 04 DOslash has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 18 at radics = 196 TeV
Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements
EL Berger JQiu YWang Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph0411026
VA Khoze AD Martin MG Ryskin WJ Stirling hep-ph0410020
The Analysis
Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges
0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection
Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system
pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the
Silicon Tracker
d2σ((1S))
dpt times dy
N()
L times Δpt times Δy times ε
acctimes ε
trigtimes k
dimutimes k
trktimes k
qual
=
L Luminosity kdimu
local muon reconstructiony rapidity k
trk tracking
εacc
Acceptance kqual
track quality cuts ε
trig Trigger
00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε
acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027
εtrig
070 073 082k
dimu 085 088 095
ktrk
099 099 095 k
qual 085 085 093
Efficiencieshellip
Cross section
MC Data
pt(μ)
in GeV
0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6
η(μ) φ(μ)
06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV
Data vs Monte Carlo
To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once
Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with
masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23
free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3
Background 3rd order polynomial
All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV
m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV
0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18
PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV
00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb
06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb
12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb
00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb
Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)
σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)
Pythia
Comparison with previous results
Effects of polarization
CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04
How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized
So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV
Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT
No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone
estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions
Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
Better tracking resolution ---
CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances
rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our
statistical and systematic error
rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently
feasible without killing the signal
Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting
large number of correction factors
Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve
Conclusions
ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different
rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity
Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)
μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets
originating from heavy flavor
Motivation
Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation
Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior
Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature
Problem ~1001 QCDbb
Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter
Fit to CDFqQCD calculation
CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038
Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness
-tagged Jet Cross-section
Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be
N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)
T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)
fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)
L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section
tjPVTBBbb p
Nff
L
)(
Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated
p13
p14 Analysis Summary
Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)
Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon
(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven
determination of b-fraction
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
Leading order
Flavor creation
Next to leading order
Flavor excitation
Gluon splitting
Recent developments
Beyond NLO resummation of log(ptm) terms FONLL Changes in extraction of fragmentation function from LEP data New PDFs Improved treatment of experimental inputs
(use b-jets and b-hadrons instead of b-quarks)
Open Heavy Flavor Production
Long-standing ldquodiscrepanciesrdquo between predicted and measured cross sections now resolved eg Cacciari Frixione Mangano Nason RidolfiJHEP 0407 (2004) 033
combined effects of better calculations (Fixed order (NLO)+ NLL= FONLL) relationshipdifference between e+eminusand hadron colliders different moments of FF relevant better estimate of theory errors (upward) new appreciation of issues withldquoquark-levelrdquo measurements
Total Cross sections (from CDF) ndashinclusive b cross section |ylt1| 294plusmn06plusmn62 microb hep-ex0412071
(submitted to PRD) inclusive c cross section ~50x higherPRL 91 241804 (2003)
Comments Tevatron as HF Factory 1048707The cross sections given on the previous slide imply
central (|y|lt1) brsquos at 3kHz at current luminosities ~2x this if you look out to |y|lt2 central charm at 150kHz ndash~2x1010 brsquos already seen by CDF and DOslash in Run II ndash~1x1012 charm hadrons already produced()
rArr Near infinite statistics for some measurements rArr If you can trigger
Rely heavily on muon triggers Jψ decays are golden semi-leptonic decays- rare decays with leptons
Tracks with significant bσb Missing neutrals troublesome
forget o identification all-charged decay modes
Muon Toroid
Calorimeter
Solenoid Tracking System (CFT SMT)
The DOslash Detector
ForwardPreshower detector
Silicon Tracker Fiber Tracker
Solenoid Central Preshower detector
125 cm
50cm
20cm
DOslash tracking system
DOslash - Muon detectors
Toroid magnet (19 T central 20 T forward)
Scintillation counters PDTs (central) MDTs (forward)
A-Scint
Forward Tracker (MDTs)
Shielding
Bottom BC Scint
PDTrsquosForward
Trigger Scint
Bottomonium production
Theory modeling of production Quarkonium production is window on
boundary region between perturbative and non-perturbative QCD
factorized QCD calculations to O(α3) (currently employed by Pythia)
color-singlet color-evaporation color-octet models
Recent calculations by Berger et al combining separate perturbative approaches for low and high-pt regions
Predict shape of pt distribution Absolute cross section not predicted
ϒ(1S) Production Tevatron 50 produced promptly ie at primary
vertex 50 from decay of higher mass states
(eg χb rarrϒ(1S) ) Event selection
- luminosity 1591 plusmn 103 pb-1 - di-muon pTgt3 tight Tracking and
Calorimeter isolation cut - invariant mass in 7 ndash 13 GeV
Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
Because we can The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 04 DOslash has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 18 at radics = 196 TeV
Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements
EL Berger JQiu YWang Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph0411026
VA Khoze AD Martin MG Ryskin WJ Stirling hep-ph0410020
The Analysis
Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges
0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection
Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system
pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the
Silicon Tracker
d2σ((1S))
dpt times dy
N()
L times Δpt times Δy times ε
acctimes ε
trigtimes k
dimutimes k
trktimes k
qual
=
L Luminosity kdimu
local muon reconstructiony rapidity k
trk tracking
εacc
Acceptance kqual
track quality cuts ε
trig Trigger
00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε
acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027
εtrig
070 073 082k
dimu 085 088 095
ktrk
099 099 095 k
qual 085 085 093
Efficiencieshellip
Cross section
MC Data
pt(μ)
in GeV
0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6
η(μ) φ(μ)
06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV
Data vs Monte Carlo
To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once
Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with
masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23
free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3
Background 3rd order polynomial
All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV
m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV
0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18
PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV
00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb
06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb
12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb
00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb
Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)
σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)
Pythia
Comparison with previous results
Effects of polarization
CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04
How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized
So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV
Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT
No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone
estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions
Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
Better tracking resolution ---
CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances
rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our
statistical and systematic error
rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently
feasible without killing the signal
Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting
large number of correction factors
Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve
Conclusions
ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different
rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity
Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)
μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets
originating from heavy flavor
Motivation
Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation
Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior
Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature
Problem ~1001 QCDbb
Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter
Fit to CDFqQCD calculation
CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038
Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness
-tagged Jet Cross-section
Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be
N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)
T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)
fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)
L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section
tjPVTBBbb p
Nff
L
)(
Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated
p13
p14 Analysis Summary
Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)
Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon
(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven
determination of b-fraction
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
Recent developments
Beyond NLO resummation of log(ptm) terms FONLL Changes in extraction of fragmentation function from LEP data New PDFs Improved treatment of experimental inputs
(use b-jets and b-hadrons instead of b-quarks)
Open Heavy Flavor Production
Long-standing ldquodiscrepanciesrdquo between predicted and measured cross sections now resolved eg Cacciari Frixione Mangano Nason RidolfiJHEP 0407 (2004) 033
combined effects of better calculations (Fixed order (NLO)+ NLL= FONLL) relationshipdifference between e+eminusand hadron colliders different moments of FF relevant better estimate of theory errors (upward) new appreciation of issues withldquoquark-levelrdquo measurements
Total Cross sections (from CDF) ndashinclusive b cross section |ylt1| 294plusmn06plusmn62 microb hep-ex0412071
(submitted to PRD) inclusive c cross section ~50x higherPRL 91 241804 (2003)
Comments Tevatron as HF Factory 1048707The cross sections given on the previous slide imply
central (|y|lt1) brsquos at 3kHz at current luminosities ~2x this if you look out to |y|lt2 central charm at 150kHz ndash~2x1010 brsquos already seen by CDF and DOslash in Run II ndash~1x1012 charm hadrons already produced()
rArr Near infinite statistics for some measurements rArr If you can trigger
Rely heavily on muon triggers Jψ decays are golden semi-leptonic decays- rare decays with leptons
Tracks with significant bσb Missing neutrals troublesome
forget o identification all-charged decay modes
Muon Toroid
Calorimeter
Solenoid Tracking System (CFT SMT)
The DOslash Detector
ForwardPreshower detector
Silicon Tracker Fiber Tracker
Solenoid Central Preshower detector
125 cm
50cm
20cm
DOslash tracking system
DOslash - Muon detectors
Toroid magnet (19 T central 20 T forward)
Scintillation counters PDTs (central) MDTs (forward)
A-Scint
Forward Tracker (MDTs)
Shielding
Bottom BC Scint
PDTrsquosForward
Trigger Scint
Bottomonium production
Theory modeling of production Quarkonium production is window on
boundary region between perturbative and non-perturbative QCD
factorized QCD calculations to O(α3) (currently employed by Pythia)
color-singlet color-evaporation color-octet models
Recent calculations by Berger et al combining separate perturbative approaches for low and high-pt regions
Predict shape of pt distribution Absolute cross section not predicted
ϒ(1S) Production Tevatron 50 produced promptly ie at primary
vertex 50 from decay of higher mass states
(eg χb rarrϒ(1S) ) Event selection
- luminosity 1591 plusmn 103 pb-1 - di-muon pTgt3 tight Tracking and
Calorimeter isolation cut - invariant mass in 7 ndash 13 GeV
Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
Because we can The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 04 DOslash has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 18 at radics = 196 TeV
Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements
EL Berger JQiu YWang Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph0411026
VA Khoze AD Martin MG Ryskin WJ Stirling hep-ph0410020
The Analysis
Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges
0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection
Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system
pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the
Silicon Tracker
d2σ((1S))
dpt times dy
N()
L times Δpt times Δy times ε
acctimes ε
trigtimes k
dimutimes k
trktimes k
qual
=
L Luminosity kdimu
local muon reconstructiony rapidity k
trk tracking
εacc
Acceptance kqual
track quality cuts ε
trig Trigger
00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε
acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027
εtrig
070 073 082k
dimu 085 088 095
ktrk
099 099 095 k
qual 085 085 093
Efficiencieshellip
Cross section
MC Data
pt(μ)
in GeV
0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6
η(μ) φ(μ)
06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV
Data vs Monte Carlo
To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once
Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with
masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23
free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3
Background 3rd order polynomial
All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV
m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV
0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18
PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV
00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb
06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb
12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb
00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb
Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)
σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)
Pythia
Comparison with previous results
Effects of polarization
CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04
How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized
So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV
Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT
No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone
estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions
Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
Better tracking resolution ---
CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances
rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our
statistical and systematic error
rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently
feasible without killing the signal
Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting
large number of correction factors
Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve
Conclusions
ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different
rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity
Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)
μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets
originating from heavy flavor
Motivation
Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation
Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior
Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature
Problem ~1001 QCDbb
Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter
Fit to CDFqQCD calculation
CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038
Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness
-tagged Jet Cross-section
Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be
N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)
T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)
fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)
L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section
tjPVTBBbb p
Nff
L
)(
Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated
p13
p14 Analysis Summary
Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)
Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon
(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven
determination of b-fraction
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
Open Heavy Flavor Production
Long-standing ldquodiscrepanciesrdquo between predicted and measured cross sections now resolved eg Cacciari Frixione Mangano Nason RidolfiJHEP 0407 (2004) 033
combined effects of better calculations (Fixed order (NLO)+ NLL= FONLL) relationshipdifference between e+eminusand hadron colliders different moments of FF relevant better estimate of theory errors (upward) new appreciation of issues withldquoquark-levelrdquo measurements
Total Cross sections (from CDF) ndashinclusive b cross section |ylt1| 294plusmn06plusmn62 microb hep-ex0412071
(submitted to PRD) inclusive c cross section ~50x higherPRL 91 241804 (2003)
Comments Tevatron as HF Factory 1048707The cross sections given on the previous slide imply
central (|y|lt1) brsquos at 3kHz at current luminosities ~2x this if you look out to |y|lt2 central charm at 150kHz ndash~2x1010 brsquos already seen by CDF and DOslash in Run II ndash~1x1012 charm hadrons already produced()
rArr Near infinite statistics for some measurements rArr If you can trigger
Rely heavily on muon triggers Jψ decays are golden semi-leptonic decays- rare decays with leptons
Tracks with significant bσb Missing neutrals troublesome
forget o identification all-charged decay modes
Muon Toroid
Calorimeter
Solenoid Tracking System (CFT SMT)
The DOslash Detector
ForwardPreshower detector
Silicon Tracker Fiber Tracker
Solenoid Central Preshower detector
125 cm
50cm
20cm
DOslash tracking system
DOslash - Muon detectors
Toroid magnet (19 T central 20 T forward)
Scintillation counters PDTs (central) MDTs (forward)
A-Scint
Forward Tracker (MDTs)
Shielding
Bottom BC Scint
PDTrsquosForward
Trigger Scint
Bottomonium production
Theory modeling of production Quarkonium production is window on
boundary region between perturbative and non-perturbative QCD
factorized QCD calculations to O(α3) (currently employed by Pythia)
color-singlet color-evaporation color-octet models
Recent calculations by Berger et al combining separate perturbative approaches for low and high-pt regions
Predict shape of pt distribution Absolute cross section not predicted
ϒ(1S) Production Tevatron 50 produced promptly ie at primary
vertex 50 from decay of higher mass states
(eg χb rarrϒ(1S) ) Event selection
- luminosity 1591 plusmn 103 pb-1 - di-muon pTgt3 tight Tracking and
Calorimeter isolation cut - invariant mass in 7 ndash 13 GeV
Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
Because we can The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 04 DOslash has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 18 at radics = 196 TeV
Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements
EL Berger JQiu YWang Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph0411026
VA Khoze AD Martin MG Ryskin WJ Stirling hep-ph0410020
The Analysis
Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges
0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection
Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system
pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the
Silicon Tracker
d2σ((1S))
dpt times dy
N()
L times Δpt times Δy times ε
acctimes ε
trigtimes k
dimutimes k
trktimes k
qual
=
L Luminosity kdimu
local muon reconstructiony rapidity k
trk tracking
εacc
Acceptance kqual
track quality cuts ε
trig Trigger
00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε
acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027
εtrig
070 073 082k
dimu 085 088 095
ktrk
099 099 095 k
qual 085 085 093
Efficiencieshellip
Cross section
MC Data
pt(μ)
in GeV
0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6
η(μ) φ(μ)
06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV
Data vs Monte Carlo
To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once
Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with
masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23
free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3
Background 3rd order polynomial
All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV
m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV
0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18
PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV
00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb
06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb
12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb
00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb
Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)
σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)
Pythia
Comparison with previous results
Effects of polarization
CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04
How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized
So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV
Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT
No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone
estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions
Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
Better tracking resolution ---
CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances
rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our
statistical and systematic error
rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently
feasible without killing the signal
Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting
large number of correction factors
Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve
Conclusions
ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different
rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity
Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)
μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets
originating from heavy flavor
Motivation
Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation
Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior
Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature
Problem ~1001 QCDbb
Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter
Fit to CDFqQCD calculation
CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038
Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness
-tagged Jet Cross-section
Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be
N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)
T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)
fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)
L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section
tjPVTBBbb p
Nff
L
)(
Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated
p13
p14 Analysis Summary
Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)
Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon
(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven
determination of b-fraction
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
Comments Tevatron as HF Factory 1048707The cross sections given on the previous slide imply
central (|y|lt1) brsquos at 3kHz at current luminosities ~2x this if you look out to |y|lt2 central charm at 150kHz ndash~2x1010 brsquos already seen by CDF and DOslash in Run II ndash~1x1012 charm hadrons already produced()
rArr Near infinite statistics for some measurements rArr If you can trigger
Rely heavily on muon triggers Jψ decays are golden semi-leptonic decays- rare decays with leptons
Tracks with significant bσb Missing neutrals troublesome
forget o identification all-charged decay modes
Muon Toroid
Calorimeter
Solenoid Tracking System (CFT SMT)
The DOslash Detector
ForwardPreshower detector
Silicon Tracker Fiber Tracker
Solenoid Central Preshower detector
125 cm
50cm
20cm
DOslash tracking system
DOslash - Muon detectors
Toroid magnet (19 T central 20 T forward)
Scintillation counters PDTs (central) MDTs (forward)
A-Scint
Forward Tracker (MDTs)
Shielding
Bottom BC Scint
PDTrsquosForward
Trigger Scint
Bottomonium production
Theory modeling of production Quarkonium production is window on
boundary region between perturbative and non-perturbative QCD
factorized QCD calculations to O(α3) (currently employed by Pythia)
color-singlet color-evaporation color-octet models
Recent calculations by Berger et al combining separate perturbative approaches for low and high-pt regions
Predict shape of pt distribution Absolute cross section not predicted
ϒ(1S) Production Tevatron 50 produced promptly ie at primary
vertex 50 from decay of higher mass states
(eg χb rarrϒ(1S) ) Event selection
- luminosity 1591 plusmn 103 pb-1 - di-muon pTgt3 tight Tracking and
Calorimeter isolation cut - invariant mass in 7 ndash 13 GeV
Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
Because we can The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 04 DOslash has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 18 at radics = 196 TeV
Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements
EL Berger JQiu YWang Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph0411026
VA Khoze AD Martin MG Ryskin WJ Stirling hep-ph0410020
The Analysis
Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges
0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection
Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system
pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the
Silicon Tracker
d2σ((1S))
dpt times dy
N()
L times Δpt times Δy times ε
acctimes ε
trigtimes k
dimutimes k
trktimes k
qual
=
L Luminosity kdimu
local muon reconstructiony rapidity k
trk tracking
εacc
Acceptance kqual
track quality cuts ε
trig Trigger
00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε
acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027
εtrig
070 073 082k
dimu 085 088 095
ktrk
099 099 095 k
qual 085 085 093
Efficiencieshellip
Cross section
MC Data
pt(μ)
in GeV
0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6
η(μ) φ(μ)
06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV
Data vs Monte Carlo
To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once
Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with
masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23
free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3
Background 3rd order polynomial
All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV
m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV
0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18
PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV
00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb
06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb
12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb
00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb
Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)
σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)
Pythia
Comparison with previous results
Effects of polarization
CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04
How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized
So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV
Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT
No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone
estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions
Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
Better tracking resolution ---
CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances
rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our
statistical and systematic error
rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently
feasible without killing the signal
Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting
large number of correction factors
Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve
Conclusions
ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different
rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity
Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)
μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets
originating from heavy flavor
Motivation
Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation
Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior
Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature
Problem ~1001 QCDbb
Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter
Fit to CDFqQCD calculation
CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038
Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness
-tagged Jet Cross-section
Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be
N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)
T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)
fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)
L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section
tjPVTBBbb p
Nff
L
)(
Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated
p13
p14 Analysis Summary
Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)
Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon
(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven
determination of b-fraction
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
Muon Toroid
Calorimeter
Solenoid Tracking System (CFT SMT)
The DOslash Detector
ForwardPreshower detector
Silicon Tracker Fiber Tracker
Solenoid Central Preshower detector
125 cm
50cm
20cm
DOslash tracking system
DOslash - Muon detectors
Toroid magnet (19 T central 20 T forward)
Scintillation counters PDTs (central) MDTs (forward)
A-Scint
Forward Tracker (MDTs)
Shielding
Bottom BC Scint
PDTrsquosForward
Trigger Scint
Bottomonium production
Theory modeling of production Quarkonium production is window on
boundary region between perturbative and non-perturbative QCD
factorized QCD calculations to O(α3) (currently employed by Pythia)
color-singlet color-evaporation color-octet models
Recent calculations by Berger et al combining separate perturbative approaches for low and high-pt regions
Predict shape of pt distribution Absolute cross section not predicted
ϒ(1S) Production Tevatron 50 produced promptly ie at primary
vertex 50 from decay of higher mass states
(eg χb rarrϒ(1S) ) Event selection
- luminosity 1591 plusmn 103 pb-1 - di-muon pTgt3 tight Tracking and
Calorimeter isolation cut - invariant mass in 7 ndash 13 GeV
Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
Because we can The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 04 DOslash has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 18 at radics = 196 TeV
Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements
EL Berger JQiu YWang Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph0411026
VA Khoze AD Martin MG Ryskin WJ Stirling hep-ph0410020
The Analysis
Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges
0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection
Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system
pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the
Silicon Tracker
d2σ((1S))
dpt times dy
N()
L times Δpt times Δy times ε
acctimes ε
trigtimes k
dimutimes k
trktimes k
qual
=
L Luminosity kdimu
local muon reconstructiony rapidity k
trk tracking
εacc
Acceptance kqual
track quality cuts ε
trig Trigger
00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε
acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027
εtrig
070 073 082k
dimu 085 088 095
ktrk
099 099 095 k
qual 085 085 093
Efficiencieshellip
Cross section
MC Data
pt(μ)
in GeV
0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6
η(μ) φ(μ)
06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV
Data vs Monte Carlo
To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once
Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with
masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23
free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3
Background 3rd order polynomial
All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV
m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV
0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18
PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV
00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb
06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb
12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb
00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb
Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)
σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)
Pythia
Comparison with previous results
Effects of polarization
CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04
How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized
So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV
Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT
No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone
estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions
Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
Better tracking resolution ---
CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances
rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our
statistical and systematic error
rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently
feasible without killing the signal
Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting
large number of correction factors
Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve
Conclusions
ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different
rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity
Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)
μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets
originating from heavy flavor
Motivation
Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation
Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior
Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature
Problem ~1001 QCDbb
Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter
Fit to CDFqQCD calculation
CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038
Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness
-tagged Jet Cross-section
Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be
N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)
T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)
fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)
L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section
tjPVTBBbb p
Nff
L
)(
Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated
p13
p14 Analysis Summary
Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)
Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon
(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven
determination of b-fraction
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
ForwardPreshower detector
Silicon Tracker Fiber Tracker
Solenoid Central Preshower detector
125 cm
50cm
20cm
DOslash tracking system
DOslash - Muon detectors
Toroid magnet (19 T central 20 T forward)
Scintillation counters PDTs (central) MDTs (forward)
A-Scint
Forward Tracker (MDTs)
Shielding
Bottom BC Scint
PDTrsquosForward
Trigger Scint
Bottomonium production
Theory modeling of production Quarkonium production is window on
boundary region between perturbative and non-perturbative QCD
factorized QCD calculations to O(α3) (currently employed by Pythia)
color-singlet color-evaporation color-octet models
Recent calculations by Berger et al combining separate perturbative approaches for low and high-pt regions
Predict shape of pt distribution Absolute cross section not predicted
ϒ(1S) Production Tevatron 50 produced promptly ie at primary
vertex 50 from decay of higher mass states
(eg χb rarrϒ(1S) ) Event selection
- luminosity 1591 plusmn 103 pb-1 - di-muon pTgt3 tight Tracking and
Calorimeter isolation cut - invariant mass in 7 ndash 13 GeV
Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
Because we can The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 04 DOslash has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 18 at radics = 196 TeV
Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements
EL Berger JQiu YWang Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph0411026
VA Khoze AD Martin MG Ryskin WJ Stirling hep-ph0410020
The Analysis
Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges
0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection
Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system
pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the
Silicon Tracker
d2σ((1S))
dpt times dy
N()
L times Δpt times Δy times ε
acctimes ε
trigtimes k
dimutimes k
trktimes k
qual
=
L Luminosity kdimu
local muon reconstructiony rapidity k
trk tracking
εacc
Acceptance kqual
track quality cuts ε
trig Trigger
00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε
acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027
εtrig
070 073 082k
dimu 085 088 095
ktrk
099 099 095 k
qual 085 085 093
Efficiencieshellip
Cross section
MC Data
pt(μ)
in GeV
0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6
η(μ) φ(μ)
06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV
Data vs Monte Carlo
To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once
Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with
masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23
free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3
Background 3rd order polynomial
All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV
m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV
0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18
PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV
00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb
06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb
12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb
00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb
Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)
σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)
Pythia
Comparison with previous results
Effects of polarization
CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04
How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized
So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV
Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT
No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone
estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions
Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
Better tracking resolution ---
CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances
rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our
statistical and systematic error
rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently
feasible without killing the signal
Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting
large number of correction factors
Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve
Conclusions
ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different
rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity
Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)
μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets
originating from heavy flavor
Motivation
Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation
Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior
Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature
Problem ~1001 QCDbb
Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter
Fit to CDFqQCD calculation
CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038
Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness
-tagged Jet Cross-section
Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be
N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)
T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)
fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)
L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section
tjPVTBBbb p
Nff
L
)(
Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated
p13
p14 Analysis Summary
Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)
Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon
(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven
determination of b-fraction
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
DOslash - Muon detectors
Toroid magnet (19 T central 20 T forward)
Scintillation counters PDTs (central) MDTs (forward)
A-Scint
Forward Tracker (MDTs)
Shielding
Bottom BC Scint
PDTrsquosForward
Trigger Scint
Bottomonium production
Theory modeling of production Quarkonium production is window on
boundary region between perturbative and non-perturbative QCD
factorized QCD calculations to O(α3) (currently employed by Pythia)
color-singlet color-evaporation color-octet models
Recent calculations by Berger et al combining separate perturbative approaches for low and high-pt regions
Predict shape of pt distribution Absolute cross section not predicted
ϒ(1S) Production Tevatron 50 produced promptly ie at primary
vertex 50 from decay of higher mass states
(eg χb rarrϒ(1S) ) Event selection
- luminosity 1591 plusmn 103 pb-1 - di-muon pTgt3 tight Tracking and
Calorimeter isolation cut - invariant mass in 7 ndash 13 GeV
Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
Because we can The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 04 DOslash has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 18 at radics = 196 TeV
Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements
EL Berger JQiu YWang Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph0411026
VA Khoze AD Martin MG Ryskin WJ Stirling hep-ph0410020
The Analysis
Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges
0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection
Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system
pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the
Silicon Tracker
d2σ((1S))
dpt times dy
N()
L times Δpt times Δy times ε
acctimes ε
trigtimes k
dimutimes k
trktimes k
qual
=
L Luminosity kdimu
local muon reconstructiony rapidity k
trk tracking
εacc
Acceptance kqual
track quality cuts ε
trig Trigger
00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε
acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027
εtrig
070 073 082k
dimu 085 088 095
ktrk
099 099 095 k
qual 085 085 093
Efficiencieshellip
Cross section
MC Data
pt(μ)
in GeV
0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6
η(μ) φ(μ)
06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV
Data vs Monte Carlo
To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once
Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with
masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23
free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3
Background 3rd order polynomial
All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV
m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV
0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18
PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV
00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb
06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb
12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb
00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb
Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)
σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)
Pythia
Comparison with previous results
Effects of polarization
CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04
How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized
So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV
Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT
No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone
estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions
Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
Better tracking resolution ---
CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances
rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our
statistical and systematic error
rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently
feasible without killing the signal
Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting
large number of correction factors
Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve
Conclusions
ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different
rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity
Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)
μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets
originating from heavy flavor
Motivation
Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation
Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior
Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature
Problem ~1001 QCDbb
Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter
Fit to CDFqQCD calculation
CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038
Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness
-tagged Jet Cross-section
Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be
N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)
T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)
fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)
L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section
tjPVTBBbb p
Nff
L
)(
Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated
p13
p14 Analysis Summary
Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)
Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon
(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven
determination of b-fraction
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
Bottomonium production
Theory modeling of production Quarkonium production is window on
boundary region between perturbative and non-perturbative QCD
factorized QCD calculations to O(α3) (currently employed by Pythia)
color-singlet color-evaporation color-octet models
Recent calculations by Berger et al combining separate perturbative approaches for low and high-pt regions
Predict shape of pt distribution Absolute cross section not predicted
ϒ(1S) Production Tevatron 50 produced promptly ie at primary
vertex 50 from decay of higher mass states
(eg χb rarrϒ(1S) ) Event selection
- luminosity 1591 plusmn 103 pb-1 - di-muon pTgt3 tight Tracking and
Calorimeter isolation cut - invariant mass in 7 ndash 13 GeV
Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
Because we can The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 04 DOslash has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 18 at radics = 196 TeV
Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements
EL Berger JQiu YWang Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph0411026
VA Khoze AD Martin MG Ryskin WJ Stirling hep-ph0410020
The Analysis
Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges
0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection
Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system
pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the
Silicon Tracker
d2σ((1S))
dpt times dy
N()
L times Δpt times Δy times ε
acctimes ε
trigtimes k
dimutimes k
trktimes k
qual
=
L Luminosity kdimu
local muon reconstructiony rapidity k
trk tracking
εacc
Acceptance kqual
track quality cuts ε
trig Trigger
00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε
acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027
εtrig
070 073 082k
dimu 085 088 095
ktrk
099 099 095 k
qual 085 085 093
Efficiencieshellip
Cross section
MC Data
pt(μ)
in GeV
0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6
η(μ) φ(μ)
06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV
Data vs Monte Carlo
To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once
Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with
masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23
free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3
Background 3rd order polynomial
All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV
m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV
0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18
PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV
00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb
06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb
12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb
00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb
Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)
σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)
Pythia
Comparison with previous results
Effects of polarization
CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04
How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized
So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV
Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT
No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone
estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions
Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
Better tracking resolution ---
CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances
rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our
statistical and systematic error
rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently
feasible without killing the signal
Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting
large number of correction factors
Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve
Conclusions
ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different
rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity
Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)
μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets
originating from heavy flavor
Motivation
Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation
Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior
Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature
Problem ~1001 QCDbb
Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter
Fit to CDFqQCD calculation
CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038
Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness
-tagged Jet Cross-section
Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be
N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)
T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)
fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)
L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section
tjPVTBBbb p
Nff
L
)(
Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated
p13
p14 Analysis Summary
Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)
Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon
(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven
determination of b-fraction
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
Because we can The ϒ(1S) cross-section had been measured at the Tevatron (Run I measurement by CDF) up to a rapidity of 04 DOslash has now measured this cross-section up to a rapidity of 18 at radics = 196 TeV
Measuring the ϒ(1S) production cross-section provides an ideal testing ground for our understanding of the production mechanisms of heavy quarks There is considerable interest from theorists in these kinds of measurements
EL Berger JQiu YWang Phys Rev D 71 034007 (2005) and hep-ph0411026
VA Khoze AD Martin MG Ryskin WJ Stirling hep-ph0410020
The Analysis
Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges
0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection
Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system
pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the
Silicon Tracker
d2σ((1S))
dpt times dy
N()
L times Δpt times Δy times ε
acctimes ε
trigtimes k
dimutimes k
trktimes k
qual
=
L Luminosity kdimu
local muon reconstructiony rapidity k
trk tracking
εacc
Acceptance kqual
track quality cuts ε
trig Trigger
00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε
acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027
εtrig
070 073 082k
dimu 085 088 095
ktrk
099 099 095 k
qual 085 085 093
Efficiencieshellip
Cross section
MC Data
pt(μ)
in GeV
0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6
η(μ) φ(μ)
06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV
Data vs Monte Carlo
To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once
Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with
masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23
free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3
Background 3rd order polynomial
All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV
m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV
0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18
PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV
00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb
06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb
12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb
00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb
Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)
σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)
Pythia
Comparison with previous results
Effects of polarization
CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04
How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized
So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV
Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT
No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone
estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions
Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
Better tracking resolution ---
CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances
rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our
statistical and systematic error
rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently
feasible without killing the signal
Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting
large number of correction factors
Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve
Conclusions
ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different
rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity
Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)
μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets
originating from heavy flavor
Motivation
Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation
Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior
Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature
Problem ~1001 QCDbb
Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter
Fit to CDFqQCD calculation
CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038
Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness
-tagged Jet Cross-section
Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be
N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)
T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)
fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)
L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section
tjPVTBBbb p
Nff
L
)(
Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated
p13
p14 Analysis Summary
Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)
Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon
(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven
determination of b-fraction
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
The Analysis
Goal Measuring the ϒ(1S) cross-section in the channel ϒ(1S) rarr μ+μ- as a function of pt in three rapidity ranges
0 lt | yϒ| lt 06 06 lt | yϒ | lt 12 and 12 lt | yϒ | lt 18 Sample selection
Opposite sign muons Muon have hits in all three layers of the muon system Muons are matched to a track in the central tracking system
pt (μ) gt 3 GeV and |η (μ)| lt 22 At least one isolated μ Track from central tracking system must have at least one hit in the
Silicon Tracker
d2σ((1S))
dpt times dy
N()
L times Δpt times Δy times ε
acctimes ε
trigtimes k
dimutimes k
trktimes k
qual
=
L Luminosity kdimu
local muon reconstructiony rapidity k
trk tracking
εacc
Acceptance kqual
track quality cuts ε
trig Trigger
00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε
acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027
εtrig
070 073 082k
dimu 085 088 095
ktrk
099 099 095 k
qual 085 085 093
Efficiencieshellip
Cross section
MC Data
pt(μ)
in GeV
0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6
η(μ) φ(μ)
06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV
Data vs Monte Carlo
To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once
Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with
masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23
free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3
Background 3rd order polynomial
All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV
m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV
0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18
PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV
00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb
06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb
12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb
00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb
Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)
σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)
Pythia
Comparison with previous results
Effects of polarization
CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04
How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized
So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV
Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT
No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone
estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions
Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
Better tracking resolution ---
CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances
rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our
statistical and systematic error
rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently
feasible without killing the signal
Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting
large number of correction factors
Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve
Conclusions
ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different
rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity
Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)
μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets
originating from heavy flavor
Motivation
Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation
Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior
Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature
Problem ~1001 QCDbb
Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter
Fit to CDFqQCD calculation
CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038
Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness
-tagged Jet Cross-section
Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be
N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)
T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)
fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)
L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section
tjPVTBBbb p
Nff
L
)(
Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated
p13
p14 Analysis Summary
Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)
Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon
(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven
determination of b-fraction
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
d2σ((1S))
dpt times dy
N()
L times Δpt times Δy times ε
acctimes ε
trigtimes k
dimutimes k
trktimes k
qual
=
L Luminosity kdimu
local muon reconstructiony rapidity k
trk tracking
εacc
Acceptance kqual
track quality cuts ε
trig Trigger
00 lt y lt 06 06 lt y lt 12 12 lt y lt 18ε
acc 015 - 026 019 ndash 028 020 - 027
εtrig
070 073 082k
dimu 085 088 095
ktrk
099 099 095 k
qual 085 085 093
Efficiencieshellip
Cross section
MC Data
pt(μ)
in GeV
0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6
η(μ) φ(μ)
06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV
Data vs Monte Carlo
To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once
Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with
masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23
free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3
Background 3rd order polynomial
All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV
m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV
0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18
PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV
00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb
06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb
12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb
00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb
Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)
σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)
Pythia
Comparison with previous results
Effects of polarization
CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04
How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized
So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV
Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT
No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone
estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions
Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
Better tracking resolution ---
CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances
rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our
statistical and systematic error
rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently
feasible without killing the signal
Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting
large number of correction factors
Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve
Conclusions
ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different
rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity
Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)
μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets
originating from heavy flavor
Motivation
Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation
Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior
Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature
Problem ~1001 QCDbb
Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter
Fit to CDFqQCD calculation
CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038
Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness
-tagged Jet Cross-section
Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be
N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)
T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)
fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)
L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section
tjPVTBBbb p
Nff
L
)(
Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated
p13
p14 Analysis Summary
Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)
Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon
(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven
determination of b-fraction
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
MC Data
pt(μ)
in GeV
0 5 10 15 20 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 3 6
η(μ) φ(μ)
06 lt | yϒ| lt 1290 GeV lt m(μμ) lt 98 GeV
Data vs Monte Carlo
To determine our efficiencies we only need an agreement between Monte Carlo and data within a given pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) bin and not an agreement over the whole pT(ϒ) and y(ϒ) range at once
Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with
masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23
free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3
Background 3rd order polynomial
All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV
m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV
0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18
PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV
00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb
06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb
12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb
00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb
Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)
σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)
Pythia
Comparison with previous results
Effects of polarization
CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04
How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized
So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV
Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT
No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone
estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions
Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
Better tracking resolution ---
CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances
rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our
statistical and systematic error
rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently
feasible without killing the signal
Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting
large number of correction factors
Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve
Conclusions
ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different
rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity
Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)
μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets
originating from heavy flavor
Motivation
Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation
Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior
Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature
Problem ~1001 QCDbb
Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter
Fit to CDFqQCD calculation
CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038
Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness
-tagged Jet Cross-section
Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be
N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)
T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)
fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)
L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section
tjPVTBBbb p
Nff
L
)(
Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated
p13
p14 Analysis Summary
Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)
Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon
(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven
determination of b-fraction
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
Fitting the Signal Signal 3 states (ϒ(1S) ϒ(2S) ϒ(3S)) described by Gaussians with
masses mi widths (resolution) σi weights ci (i=123) Masses mi= m1+ m i1(PDG) widths σi = σ1 bull(mim1) for i=23
free parameters in signal fit m1 σ1 c1 c2 c3
Background 3rd order polynomial
All plots 3 GeV lt pt( lt 4 GeV
m() = 9423 plusmn 0008 GeV m() = 9415plusmn 0009 GeV m() = 9403 plusmn 0013 GeV
0 lt |y | lt 06 06 lt |y | lt 12 12 lt |y | lt 18
PDG m((1S)) = 946 GeV
00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb
06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb
12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb
00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb
Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)
σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)
Pythia
Comparison with previous results
Effects of polarization
CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04
How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized
So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV
Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT
No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone
estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions
Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
Better tracking resolution ---
CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances
rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our
statistical and systematic error
rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently
feasible without killing the signal
Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting
large number of correction factors
Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve
Conclusions
ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different
rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity
Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)
μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets
originating from heavy flavor
Motivation
Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation
Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior
Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature
Problem ~1001 QCDbb
Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter
Fit to CDFqQCD calculation
CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038
Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness
-tagged Jet Cross-section
Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be
N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)
T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)
fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)
L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section
tjPVTBBbb p
Nff
L
)(
Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated
p13
p14 Analysis Summary
Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)
Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon
(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven
determination of b-fraction
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
00 lt yϒ lt 06 732 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 73 (syst) plusmn 48 (lum) pb
06 lt yϒ lt 12 762 plusmn 20 (stat) plusmn 76 (syst) plusmn 50 (lum) pb
12 lt yϒ lt 18 600 plusmn 19 (stat) plusmn 56 (syst) plusmn 39 (lum) pb
00 lt yϒ lt 18 695 plusmn 14 (stat) plusmn 68 (syst) plusmn 45 (lum) pbCDF Run I 00 lt yϒ lt 04 680 plusmn 15 (stat) plusmn 18 (syst) plusmn 26 (lum) pb
Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
Fro central y bin expect factor 111 increase in cross section from 18TeV to 196 TeV (Pythia)
σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)
Pythia
Comparison with previous results
Effects of polarization
CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04
How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized
So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV
Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT
No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone
estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions
Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
Better tracking resolution ---
CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances
rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our
statistical and systematic error
rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently
feasible without killing the signal
Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting
large number of correction factors
Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve
Conclusions
ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different
rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity
Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)
μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets
originating from heavy flavor
Motivation
Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation
Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior
Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature
Problem ~1001 QCDbb
Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter
Fit to CDFqQCD calculation
CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038
Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness
-tagged Jet Cross-section
Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be
N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)
T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)
fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)
L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section
tjPVTBBbb p
Nff
L
)(
Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated
p13
p14 Analysis Summary
Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)
Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon
(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven
determination of b-fraction
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
σ(12 lt yϒ lt 18)σ(00 lt yϒ lt 06)
Pythia
Comparison with previous results
Effects of polarization
CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04
How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized
So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV
Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT
No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone
estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions
Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
Better tracking resolution ---
CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances
rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our
statistical and systematic error
rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently
feasible without killing the signal
Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting
large number of correction factors
Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve
Conclusions
ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different
rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity
Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)
μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets
originating from heavy flavor
Motivation
Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation
Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior
Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature
Problem ~1001 QCDbb
Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter
Fit to CDFqQCD calculation
CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038
Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness
-tagged Jet Cross-section
Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be
N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)
T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)
fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)
L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section
tjPVTBBbb p
Nff
L
)(
Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated
p13
p14 Analysis Summary
Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)
Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon
(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven
determination of b-fraction
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
Effects of polarization
CDF measured ϒ(1S) polarization for |yϒ| lt 04
How can we be sure that our forward ϒ(1S) are not significantly polarized
So far there is no indication for ϒ(1S) polarization CDF measured α = -012 plusmn 022 for pT (ϒ)gt 8 GeV α = 1 (-1) hArr 100 transverse (longitudinal) polarization The vast majority of our ϒ(1S) has pT(ϒ) lt 8 GeV
Theory predicts that if there is polarization it will be at large pT
No evidence for polarization in our signal (|y| lt 18) ---- not enough data for a fit in the forward region alone
estimated the effect of ϒ(1S) polarization on our cross-section Even at α = plusmn 03 the cross-section changes by 15 or less in all pT bins same effect in all rapidity regions
Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
Better tracking resolution ---
CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances
rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our
statistical and systematic error
rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently
feasible without killing the signal
Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting
large number of correction factors
Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve
Conclusions
ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different
rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity
Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)
μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets
originating from heavy flavor
Motivation
Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation
Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior
Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature
Problem ~1001 QCDbb
Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter
Fit to CDFqQCD calculation
CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038
Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness
-tagged Jet Cross-section
Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be
N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)
T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)
fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)
L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section
tjPVTBBbb p
Nff
L
)(
Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated
p13
p14 Analysis Summary
Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)
Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon
(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven
determination of b-fraction
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
Better tracking resolution ---
CDF can separate the three ϒ resonances
rarr Variations in the fit contribute considerable both to our
statistical and systematic error
rarr We believe we have achieved the best resolution currently
feasible without killing the signal
Poor understanding of our Monte-Carlo and the resulting
large number of correction factors
Signal is right on the trigger turn-on curve
Conclusions
ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different
rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity
Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)
μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets
originating from heavy flavor
Motivation
Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation
Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior
Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature
Problem ~1001 QCDbb
Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter
Fit to CDFqQCD calculation
CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038
Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness
-tagged Jet Cross-section
Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be
N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)
T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)
fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)
L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section
tjPVTBBbb p
Nff
L
)(
Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated
p13
p14 Analysis Summary
Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)
Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon
(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven
determination of b-fraction
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
Conclusions
ϒ(1S) cross-section Presented measurement of ϒ(1S) cross section bull BR(rarrμμ) for 3 different
rapidity bins out to y(ϒ) = 18 as a function of pt(ϒ) First measurement of ϒ(1S) cross-section at radics = 196 TeV Shapes of dσdpt show very little dependence on rapidity
Normalized dσdpt is in good agreement with published results (CDF at 18TeV)
μ-tagged jet cross section Measured dσdpt in central rapidity region |y|lt05 for μ-tagged jets
originating from heavy flavor
Motivation
Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation
Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior
Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature
Problem ~1001 QCDbb
Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter
Fit to CDFqQCD calculation
CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038
Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness
-tagged Jet Cross-section
Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be
N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)
T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)
fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)
L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section
tjPVTBBbb p
Nff
L
)(
Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated
p13
p14 Analysis Summary
Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)
Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon
(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven
determination of b-fraction
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
Motivation
Under hypothesis of compositeness deviation from point-like behavior would likely manifest in third generation
Conclusion g bb may exhibit desired deviant behavior
Explore b quark dijet mass as a possible signature
Problem ~1001 QCDbb
Solutions tagging 2nd VTX tagging Impact parameter
Fit to CDFqQCD calculation
CDF PRL 82 (1999) 2038
Fact The multi-generational structure of the quark doublets requires explanation and could herald compositeness
-tagged Jet Cross-section
Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be
N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)
T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)
fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)
L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section
tjPVTBBbb p
Nff
L
)(
Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated
p13
p14 Analysis Summary
Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)
Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon
(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven
determination of b-fraction
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
-tagged Jet Cross-section
Given the simplicity of the calculation there are few likely sources of the excess seen in p13 These could conceivably be
N JES (central value) Resolution (ie smearing)
T Trigger EffPV Primary Vertex Effj Jet Eff Efffb Frac b (Pt gt 4 GeV)
fB Frac B (Pt gt 4 GeV)
L Luminositypt Pt bin widthHF HF cross-sectionbg background cross-section
tjPVTBBbb p
Nff
L
)(
Jet + (Pt gt 5 GeV) Correlated
p13
p14 Analysis Summary
Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)
Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon
(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven
determination of b-fraction
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
p14 Analysis Summary
Inclusive -tagged jet corrJCCB (05 cone jets)
Standard Jet quality cuts Standard JET Triggers Jet tagged with MEDIUM muon
(more on this later) R( jet) lt 05 |yjet| lt 05 JES 53 Long term goal was b-jet xsec Difficult due to no data-driven
determination of b-fraction
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
p14 Skimming
Start with CSG QCD skim Turn into TMBTrees (40M eventshellipon disk) Skim on Trees
Remove bad runs (CAL MET SMT CFT JET Muon) Remove events wo 2 jets Use Ariel d0root_ based package SKIM 1 1 leading jet has ~ MEDIUM (P() gt 4 GeV) SKIM 2 1 leading jet has ~ loose SVT
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
Pre Nov 03 Post Nov 03Analyzed 40460043 16301242 241588011 2vtx 1538291 646047 8922441 mu 405671 171107 234564
LuminosityJT 25 176 102 074JT 45 2831 2103 728JT 65 14105 8570 5535JT 95 28861 14314 14547JT 125 28961 14314 14647
Bad Run Removed
p14 All Data CSG Skims
Bad runs amp lumblk removed in luminosity Only bad run removed in event counts for skims Up until Run 193780 (07-JUN) V1237
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
Trigger Turn On
bull Jet Triggerbull Collinear muonbull |yjet| lt 05bull Luminosity weightedbull Statistics uncorrelated poisson
ndash(wrong of course)bull JES corrected (53)
Slope
PTurnOn t
e
EffF
1
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
tbgbgHFHFjPVT pffN L)(
EfficiencyDetail Value
TTrigger Eff 1000
PVPrimary Vertex |z| lt 50cm ge 5tracks 084 plusmn 0005
Eff (geom μ det tracking match) 037 plusmn 005
jJet Eff (jet quality cuts) 099 plusmn 001
fbg Frac background (Pt gt 4 GeV)Pt dependent
fHFFrac heavy flavor (Pt gt 4 GeV) Pt dependent
Efficiencieshellip
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
JES Definitions Required identically 2 jets
Pt(jet 3 uncor) lt 8 OR third jet doesnrsquot pass jet QC One jet contains muon the other doesnrsquot | | gt 284 Imbalance variable
Independent variable
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PPI
2
) wo()w ( tt PPI
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
μ-tagged jets also have neutrinos
rArr offset -- correction needed
Imbalance in events with 2 jets (one with one without μ) ndash find 38 offset not strongly pt dependent for pt in (75 250GeV)
Scale energies of μ-tagged jets by factor 1038
Order-randomized imbalance used to get resolution
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
) wo()w (
) wo()w (2
tt
tt
PP
PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
2
) wo()w ( tt PP
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
Energy Resolution
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
resolution
Neutrinos in μ-tagged jet resolution worse than for jets without μ
take rms of order randomized imbalance
Parameterize Fit (fig (a)) Subtract (in quadrature)
resolution for jets without μ obtain resolution for μ-tagged jets (fig (b)
Fit
N = 77 41 S = 19 01 C = 00 01
Resolution parameterization used in ldquounsmearingrdquo
2
222
CP
S
P
N
P ttt
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
)e
2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
sp
t
i
y
xx
dpdpepNy
tmti
i
t
Fitting Functions
18
02
2
12
2
)(2
0
2
1
2
)
e 2
1
(
2
2
2
1
i i
ii
tmt
ppx
x
s
j
k
pN
i
y
xx
dpdpe
y
tmti
i
j
tj
Variable Value Error
N1 762 032
k1 1690 126
N2 328 060
k2 3633 323
Variable Value Error
N 956 times 107 17 times 106
3195 0004
561 004
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
Extraction of Correction Factors
281418
96172
dof
151318
33172
dof
exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
Smeared
UnsmearedR
Unsmearing Error
-150
-100
-50
00
50
100
150
0 100 200 300 400 500
Jet Pt (GeV)
D
evia
nce
Exponential
ldquonormalrdquo
Unsmearing Error small~5 for Pt gt 100 GeV
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
Sample of jets with μ-tagged jets contains jets with μ from non-HF sources (eg K decayshellip)
Use Pythia with standard DOslash detector simulation to find HF fraction of jets tagged with muons vs (true) pt
Fit with A + B e-PtC
A = ldquoplateaurdquo B = ldquozerordquo C = ldquoturnonrdquo
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
Pythia using standard DOslash MC NLO uses NLO++ (CTEQ6L)
From Pythia find fraction of jets tagged with muons (HF only)
Multiply NLO cross-section by Pythia muon-fraction
This is effectively the NLO k factor
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-
Conc
DOslash Note and Conference note to EB025 Residual small bug in code (should have only a few percent
effect)
JES error must be reduced to use this before setting limits on new physics
- Inclusive b-quark and upsilon production in DOslash
- Outline
- Tevatron ndash data taking
- Slide 4
- Recent developments
- Open Heavy Flavor Production
- Comments Tevatron as HF Factory
- The DOslash Detector
- Slide 9
- Slide 10
- DOslash tracking system
- DOslash - Muon detectors
- Bottomonium production
- Why measure ϒ(1S) production at DOslash
- The Analysis
- Efficiencieshellip
- Data vs Monte Carlo
- Fitting the Signal
- Results dσ(ϒ(1S))dy times B(ϒ(1S) rarr micro+micro-)
- Comparison with previous results
- Effects of polarization
- Question Why is CDFs systematic error so much smaller than ours
- Conclusions
- Motivation
- m-tagged Jet Cross-section
- p14 Analysis Summary
- p14 Skimming
- p14 All Data CSG Skims
- Trigger Turn On
- Efficiencieshellip
- m JES Definitions
- Jet energy scale for μ-tagged jets
- Energy Resolution
- resolution
- Fitting Functions
- Extraction of Correction Factors
- Point by Point Unsmearing Factors
- HF fraction of μ-tagged jet sample
- Slide 39
- Conc
-