1 / 11

Comparative Analysis of Measurement Methods in Particle Physics: Mx, LRG, and LPS

Explore the differences in measurements from the Mx, LRG, and LPS methods in particle physics. Compare predictions with Color Dipole Model, discuss CGC and FS04(sat) descriptions of F2 and xIPF2D(3), and analyze Regge factorization and Q2 dependence. Delve into Reggeon and pion contributions in diffractive processes.

armand-ryan
Télécharger la présentation

Comparative Analysis of Measurement Methods in Particle Physics: Mx, LRG, and LPS

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Discussions • Understanding the difference of the measurements from Mx, LRG and LPS methods. • DPDF and factorisation Tsukuba Japan, Apr. 23, 2006

  2. Discussion Tsukuba Japan, Apr. 23, 2006

  3. Comparison with Colour Dipole Model - II Low Q2 from ZEUS MX 98-99 (x 1./0.7) MX=30 GeV MX=20 GeV MX=11 GeV MX=6 GeV MX=3 GeV MX=1.2 GeV  Predictions of model are corrected by 1/0.7 for the MN<2.3 GeV of ZEUS MX method. DIS05, Madison, Apr. 27 – May 1

  4. Comparison with Colour Dipole Model - III High Q2 from ZEUS MX 98-99 (x 1./0.7) MX=30 GeV MX=20 GeV MX=11 GeV MX=6 GeV MX=3 GeV MX=1.2 GeV • CGC and FS04(sat) are able simultaneously to describe F2 and xIPF2D(3). • Forshaw & Shaw have not been able to find a good fit which does not invoke saturation. DIS05, Madison, Apr. 27 – May 1

  5. Discussion Tsukuba Japan, Apr. 23, 2006

  6. Discussion Tsukuba Japan, Apr. 23, 2006

  7. Discussion –H1 Q2 dependence Tsukuba Japan, Apr. 23, 2006

  8. Testing Regge factorization: Q2 dependence Tsukuba Japan, Apr. 23, 2006

  9. Testing Regge factorization:  dependence Tsukuba Japan, Apr. 23, 2006

  10. Reggeon and pion contributions in diffractive processes K. Golec-Biernat, J. Kwiecinski and A. Szczurek, Phys. Rev. D56 (1997) 3955. Tsukuba Japan, Apr. 23, 2006

  11. Comparison of LPS and MX method g*p  Xp via the exchange of a Reggeon aj. • MX method suppresses the Reggeon contributions. • Good agreement between LPS and MX method ( for MN < 2.3 GeV) except for the region of xIP > 0.01 where Reggeon contributions may dominate LPS. Discussion Tsukuba Japan, Apr. 23, 2006

More Related