1 / 18

Observation of a State at 2463 MeV Decaying to D s * p 0 , and

Observation of a State at 2463 MeV Decaying to D s * p 0 , and Confirmation of D sJ *(2317) at CLEO Jon Urheim, U. of Minnesota CIPANP 2003, 20 May 2003. Study of D s p 0 and D s * p 0 final states Investigations of other possible final states

damita
Télécharger la présentation

Observation of a State at 2463 MeV Decaying to D s * p 0 , and

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. Observation of a State at 2463 MeV Decaying to Ds* p0, and Confirmation of DsJ*(2317) at CLEO Jon Urheim, U. of Minnesota CIPANP 2003, 20 May 2003 • Study of Dsp0 and Ds* p0 final states • Investigations of other possible final states • results as reported in CLEO Conf 03-01, hep-ex/0305017 • special acknowledgements to: Selina Li, JC Wang and also to: Dave Cinabro, Sheldon Stone

  2. Initial Look at DsJ*(2317)  Dsp0 Started out trying to confirm BaBar signal, and measure properties of this state  use 13.5 /fb from CLEO II / II.V ( ~ 15 % of BaBar sample)  use simple cuts, similar to those used in BaBar analysis  huge signal: 231 +/- 30 evts  width of Gaussian 8.4 +/- 1.3 MeV exp. resolution: 6.4 +/- 0.4 MeV  generic e+e-  qq Monte Carlo describes combinatoric background perfectly !

  3. Second Look: Dsp0 and Ds*p0 2.32 GeV Now: more restrictive selection of photons to reduce comb. backgrounds.  Signals in both channels, at nearly the same value of DM  Dsp0 mode: signal remains robust  Ds* p0 mode: 53.3 +/- 9.7 events, width matches resol’n (~ 6.5 MeV) BaBar also saw a peak here 1+ partner of 0+ DsJ*(2317) ?  are these two separate particles? 2.11 GeV Dsp0 2.46 GeV 2.32 GeV Ds* p0

  4. Possible ambiguity: Feed-down: state at 2463  Ds* p0 will generate peak at 2317 if photon unseen or ignored ! (but note that peak is smeared) Feed-up: state at 2317  Ds p0 will generate peak at 2463 if random photon makes Ds* ! (but note that peak is smeared) We try to address this in three ways: Monte Carlo simulations  use as basis for ‘unfold’ Use sidebands from the data to estimate background Study lineshapes of peaks Are there really two states ?

  5. Feed down and Feed up All possible p0 and g transitions DsJ* (2463) g DsJ* (2317) p0 p0 Ds* (2112) g Ds (1969) fp

  6. Feed down and Feed up Assume unseen g transitions small DsJ* (2463) DsJ* (2317) p0 p0 Ds* (2112) g Ds (1969) fp

  7. Feed down and Feed up case of no DsJ*(2317) (feed down) DsJ* (2463) DsJ* (2317) p0 Ds* (2112) g Ds (1969) fp

  8. Feed down and Feed up case of no DsJ*(2463) (feed up) DsJ* (2463) DsJ* (2317) p0 random Ds* (2112) g Ds (1969) fp

  9. Possible ambiguity: Feed-down: state at 2463  Ds* p0 will generate peak at 2317 if photon unseen or ignored ! (but note that peak is smeared) Feed-up: state at 2317  Ds p0 will generate peak at 2463 if random photon makes Ds* ! (but note that peak is smeared) We try to address this in three ways: Monte Carlo simulations  use as basis for ‘unfold’ Use sidebands from the data to estimate background Study lineshapes of peaks Are there really two states ?

  10. Feed up:MC Simulations Ds* (2463) Ds* p0 Signal MC Ds* (2317) Dsp0 + Random g s= 6.6 ± 0.5 MeV s= 14.9 ± 0.6 MeV • Feed-up prob is small (9%) & well modeled by MC • Feed-down effect is larger (but easier to model), and also results in similar smearing

  11. Feed up: Ds* Sidebands 2.46 GeV If there is a state at 2317 that decays to Ds p0, and can pick up random photons to mimic Ds* p0, then there should still be a peak when photons are selected that don’t form a Ds* !  Look in sidebands  Only a small excess of events in the 2463 signal region from the Ds* sidebands !  Will make this quantitative in following slide Ds* signal region Ds* side- bands

  12. Observation of DsJ*(2463) Two methods of determining feed-up from 2317 into 2463:  Use Monte Carlo-based unfolding method  Fit to Ds*-sideband subtracted DM dist’n for data Statistical signficance ~ 5.3s To check feed-down from 2463  2317  Use MC-based unfolding method  Fit Ds p0 DMto two Gaussians: wide Gaussian measures feed-down, narrow one for signal.  Two methods are consistent. ~22% of evts are feed-down

  13. Searches for other decays Limits for DsJ*(2317) decay @ 90 % CL Yield MC Effcy (%) Limit Prediction • Theory prediction for Ds*g by Bardeen, Eichten and Hill • Working on limits for DsJ*(2463) decay… **After correction for feed-down from DsJ*(2463)

  14. Observation of two states by CLEO: DsJ*(2463): decaying to Ds* p0, as expected for JP= 1+  Evidence is strong enough to claim this state exists ! DsJ*(2317): decaying to Ds p0, as expected for JP = 0+  Confirms BaBar discovery of this state Studies: Masses: [preliminary] M[DsJ*(2317)] – M[Ds] = 350.4 +/- 1.2 +/- 1.0 MeV M[DsJ*(2463)] – M[Ds*] = 351.6 +/- 1.7 +/- 1.0 MeV Widths -- [preliminary] G < 7 MeV, for both states Decays -- no other decays seen, yet… Results are compatible w/ models based on HQET and chiral symmetry, that predict 1+ & 0+ are the chiral partners of the 1- & 0- states, with same mass splitting (Bardeen et al) Summary & Conclusions

  15. Calc’n of BG-subtracted yields R0  reconstructed DsJ*(2317)Dsp0 excluding feed-down. R1  reconstructed DsJ*(2463)Ds*p0excluding feed-up. N0 # of events from fit to Dsp0 mass spectrum (DATA)160.2  18.5 N1 # of events from fit to Ds*p0 mass spectrum(DATA)53.3  9.7 F1 prob for a DsJ*(2463) w/ reconstructed Dsp0 to f/d divided by photon finding effcy (MC) 0.840 ± 0.044 F0prob. that a Ds picks up a random gto form Ds* (MC) 0.091 ± 0.007 N0 = R0 + f/d = R0 + R1 x f1 N1 = R1 + f/u = R1 + R0 x f0 R0 = 124.9  22.5 R1 = 41.9 10.7

  16. Fits to Dsp0 Mass Diff. Dist’n Fit to Single Gaussian + bg 231 +/- 30 events s = 8.4 ± 1.3 MeV Fit to Two Gaussians + bg 144 +/- 36 / 125 +/- 50 evts s = 6.4(fixed)/ 16 ± 5 MeV

  17. Search for DsJ*(xxxx)  Dsp+p-

  18. Search for DsJ*(xxxx)  Ds(*) g

More Related