1 / 37

Diffractive group: experimental summary

Diffractive group: experimental summary. Michele Arneodo Università del Piemonte Orientale, Novara, Italy. o) Diffractive studies at the LHC, including the Higgs o) Input/results from HERA Not an exaustive summary !. See talks by Pierre van Mechelen(*) yesterday

fawn
Télécharger la présentation

Diffractive group: experimental summary

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. Diffractive group: experimental summary Michele Arneodo Università del Piemonte Orientale, Novara, Italy o) Diffractive studies at the LHC, including the Higgs o) Input/results from HERA Not an exaustive summary ! See talks by Pierre van Mechelen(*) yesterday and by Halina Abramowicz on Tuesday ! (*) covers material by K. Borras, A. Bunyatyan, A. Panagiotou

  2. H b, W b, W Central exclusive production of the Higgs • Khoze, Martin, Ryskin hep-ph 0111078 • Central system is (to a good approx) 0++ • If you see a new particle produced exclusively with proton tags you know its quantum numbers • Proton tagging may be the discovery channel in certain regions of the MSSM • Measuring the protons means excellent mass resolution (~ GeV) irrespective of the decay products of the central system • Attractive for MH=120-250 GeV ξ: fractional momentum loss of proton – for 120 GeV Higgs, x~ 1% t: 4-momentum transfer squared at proton vertex

  3. detectors@420m How to measure the protons • At CMS: TOTEM, Roman Pots at 150 and 220m from I.P. • Excellent coverage in x and t at low luminosity optics (b*=90, 1540m) • Coverage 0.02<x<0.2 at high luminosity optics (b*=0.5m) • [K.Oesterberg, H.Niewiadomski] • At ATLAS: FP220 • Roman Pots at 220 m • Coverage similar to TOTEM at high luminosity optics [Ch. Royon] • At CMS and ATLAS: FP420 • R&D project, aim to instrument region at 420m from I.P. • 0.002<x<0.02 (high luminosity optics only) [S. Watts] Logx TOTEM - FP220 b*=0.5 FP420 xL=P’/Pbeam= 1-x Logt

  4. How to measure the protons TOTEM (or FP220 at ATLAS) FP420 • Cold region • of LHC • Too far for • L1 trigger K.Oesterberg M.Grothe Ch. Royon H. Niewiadomski A. Pilkington

  5. FP420 • R&D phase essentially over • Proposals to Atlas and CMS • imminent • Installation >2009 Replacement of cryostat @ 420m designed Moving beam pipe S. Watts

  6. FP420 S. Watts 3D Si detectors: edgeless, rad-hard Successful beam test of 3D detectorsat CERN Timing detectors to reconstruct vertex Tracking code available in ATLAS, CMS frameworks (W. Plano, X. Rouby)

  7. FP220 Acceptance Proposal to Atlas imminent Ch. Royon

  8. CMS+TOTEM: unprecedented coverage in  CMS IP T1/T2, Castor ZDC RPs@150m RPs@220m possibly detectors@420m T1 (CSC) 3.1 ≤ || ≤ 4.7 HF 3 ≤|| ≤ 5 T2 (GEM): 5.3 ≤ || ≤ 6.6 Castor5.3 ≤ || ≤ 6.6 Carry out a program of diffractive and forward physics as integral part of the routine data taking at the LHC, i.e. at nominal beam optics and up to the highest available luminosities. K.Oesterberg M.Grothe

  9. CMS+TOTEM: physics map K.Oesterberg M.Grothe Low lumi Rapidity gap selection possible HF, Castor, BSCs, T1, T2 Proton tag selection optional RPs at 220m and 420 m Diffraction is about 1/4 of tot High cross section processes “Soft” diffraction Interesting for start-up running Important for understanding pile-up High lumi No Rapidity gap selection possible Proton tag selection indispensable RPs at 220m and 420 m Central exclusive production Discovery physics: Light SM Higgs MSSM Higgs Extra dimensions Low lumi High lumi Gamma-gamma and gamma-proton interactions (QED) Forward energy flow - input to cosmics shower simulation QCD: Diffraction in presence of hard scale Low-x structure of the proton High-density regime (Color glass condensate) Diff PDFs and generalized PDFs Diffractive Drell-Yan “Prospects for diffractive and forward physics at the LHC” CERN/LHCC 2006-039/G-124, CMS Note 2007/002, TOTEM Note 06-5, Dec 2006

  10. Trigger is a major limiting factor for selecting diffractive events Background from non-diffractive events that mimic diffractive events because of protons from pile-up events

  11. CMS-TOTEM: diffractive trigger → CMS trigger thresholds for nominal LHC running too high for diffractive events → Use information of forward detectors to lower jet trigger thresholds → The CMS trigger menus now foresee a dedicated diffractive trigger stream with 1% of the total bandwidth on L1 and HLT (1 kHz and 1 Hz) NB Information from 220 detectors crucial for triggering single-sided 220m condition without and with cut on  Achievable total reduction: 10 (single-sided 220m) x 2 (jet iso) x 2 (2 jets same hemisphere as p) = 40 Much less of a problem is triggering with muons, where L1 threshold for 2-muons is 3 GeV M.Grothe

  12. 420m Efficiency 220m 420+420m 420+220m H(120 GeV) → b bbar L1 trigger threshold [GeV] CMS-TOTEM: diffractive trigger M.Grothe pp  p jj X 2-jet trigger pp  pWX 1-jet trigger no fwd detectors condition Efficiency Events per pb-1 single-arm 220m single-arm 420m L1 trigger threshold [GeV] Trigger is a major limiting factor ! Level-1: ~12% efficiency with 2-jets (ET>40GeV) & single-sided 220 m condition HLT: Jet trigger efficiency ~7% To stay within 1 Hz output rate, needs to either prescale b-tag or add 420 m detectors in trigger Additional ~10% efficiency by introducing a 1 jet & 1 (40GeV, 3GeV) trigger condition

  13. Pile-up K.Oesterberg M.Grothe M. Tasevsky A. Pilkington V. Khoze • Average number of pile-up events overlaid to any hard scatter • 7 @ 2x1033 cm-2s-1, 35 @ 1x1034 cm-2s-1 (not 20…) •  25% of these events are diffractive, i.e. have a fast proton • Example: pile-up background to diffr H  bb comes from • non-diffractive bb production, superimposed to two single- • diffractive pile-up events Eg at 2x 1033 cm-2s-1 10% probability of obtaining a fake 2-proton signature because of pile-up.

  14. Pile-up ; 12 s = M2 Can be reduced by: Requiring correlation between ξ, M from central detector and ξ, Mfrom near-beam detectors Fast timing detectors to determine if protons came from same vertex as hard scatter (TOF with 10 ps resolution !) incl QCD di-jets + PU CEP H(120) bb (jets) (from protons) K.Oesterberg M.Grothe M. Tasevsky A. Pilkington V. Khoze M(2-jets)/(Missing Mass)

  15. Pile-up • S/B for SM H  bb of order 1 • at 2 x 1033 cm-2 s-1 • S/B for MSSM H  bb as • large as 100-1000 • Pile-up significantly less severe • for H WW H bb A. Pilkington K.Oesterberg M.Grothe M. Tasevsky A. Pilkington V. Khoze

  16. Further upgrades in CMS forward region A. Bunyatyan, K. Borras

  17. HERA • Measurements of diffractive structure function F2D • QCD fits to F2D and extraction of dPDFs • How well does QCD hard-diffractive factorisation work • ie can use dPDFs to predict cross section of diffractive • production of jets or charm ? • Can we quantify rapidity gap survival probability ? • Leading neutrons and the survival probability

  18. dPDF e’ e dPDF IP dPDF b, jet b, jet p p’ Input from HERA: dPDFs p p’ IP IP p p’ • Diffractive PDF: probability to find a parton of given x in the proton under • condition that proton stays intact – sensitive to low-x partons in proton, • complementary to standard PDFs • Obtained from QCD fits to F2D data

  19. New measurements of F2D from ZEUS e’ e X IP p p’ • Three methods to select diffraction • at ZEUS: • Require a leading proton • (leading proton spectrometer, LPS) • Require a large rapidity gap (LRG) • Exploit the different shape of MX • for diffractive and non-diffractive • events (MX method) For the first time, analyse the same set of data with the three methods and try and understand the differences

  20. ZEUS MX vs LRG results ZEUS MX 99-00, ZEUS MX 99-00 (prel.), ZEUS LRG 00 (prel.) ZEUS MX 98-99 ZEUS MX 99-00 (prel.) ZEUS LRG 00 (prel.) xIPF2D(3) vs. Q2 • reasonable agreement • work on understanding remaining differences is continuing Inclusive Diffraction at HERA from the ZEUS experiment

  21. ZEUS LRG vs LPS results ZEUS LRG 00 (prel.), ZEUS LPS 00 (prel.) LPS/LRG=0.82±0.01(stat.)±0.03(sys.) independent of Q2 and β A measure of the contamination by proton dissociative events in the LRG sample e’ e X IP p About 10% normalization uncertainty of the LPS measurement not shown N Inclusive Diffraction at HERA from the ZEUS experiment

  22. ZEUS vs H1 xIP = 0.003 xIP = 0.01 ZEUS LRG 00 (prel.), H1 LRG ZEUS LRG 00 (prel.), H1 LRG H1: a(0) = 1.118 ± 0.008 +0.029-0.010 a‘ = 0.06 +0.19-0.06 ZEUS: a(0) = 1.117 ± 0.005 +0.024-0.007 a' = -0.03 ± 0.07 +0.04-0.08 • Fraction of proton dissociation events for ZEUS and H1 detectors is different • The ZEUS LRG data are normalized to the H1 LRG data Inclusive Diffraction at HERA from the ZEUS experiment

  23. H1 F2D In best regions, precision ~5% (stat), 5% (syst), 6% (norm), …well described by fit P.Newman

  24. `Fit A’ and `Fit B’ DPDFs (linear z scale) • Lack of sensitivity to • high z gluon confirmed • by dropping (high z) Cg • parameter, so gluon is a • constant at starting scale! • Fit B • c2 ~164 / 184 d.o.f. • Quarks very stable • Gluon similar at low z • Substantial change to • gluon at high z P.Newman

  25. M. Mozer QCD factorisation OK

  26. R. Wolf QCD factorisation OK

  27. jet b jet hard scattering LRG IP Digression: rapidity gap survival probability GPDs and diffractive PDFs measured at HERA cannot be used blindly at LHC or Tevatron: Extrapolation from HERA CDF data P.Newman

  28. Predictions based on rescattering assuming HERA diffractive PDFs CDF data Rapidity gap survival probability • Proton and anti-proton are large objects, unlike pointlike virtual photon • In addition to hard diffractive scattering, there may be soft • interactions among spectator partons. They fill the rapidity gap and slow • down the outgoing p,p – hence reduce the rate of diffractive events. • Quantified by rapidity gap survival probability (underlying event !) Kaidalov, Khoze, Martin, Ryskin (2000) F2D b Can we see a similar suppression at HERA by using resolved photons at Q2=0 ?

  29. QCD factorisation OK (but mainly direct g component) I. Melzer (+R. Wolf for H1)

  30. Hadron-like g QCD factorisation not OK Unexpected, not understood

  31. Leading Neutrons Kaidalov, Khoze, Martin & Ryskin have used these data to derive the rapidity gap survival probability (one pion exchange+absorption+migration) B. Schmidke

  32. Grand summary • LHC: • Diffraction/forward physics has generated several new detectors • now on the way – added value for ATLAS and CMS. • Diffractive group in CMS ! • Experimental challenges being addressed, eg trigger, pile-up • Different experiments joining forces: CMS+TOTEM, ATLAS and CMS • in FP420 • HERA: • Precious input: dPDFs, rapidity gap survival probability, GPDs, • experience in operating near-beam detectors • Wish list: • DVCS, J/psi, Y (including t dependence !) for constraining GPDs • H1+ZEUS F2D, dPDFs • Understanding of gap survival • Leading proton spectra at LHC (crucial for pile-up)

  33. RESERVE

  34. CDF: evidence for exclusive processes at Fermilab • Search for exclusive gg • 3 candidate events found • 1 (+2/-1) predicted from ExHuME MC* • background under study Same type of diagrams as for Higgs  Validation of KMR model ! D. Goulianos, V. Khoze

  35. Diffractive Structure Function:Q2 dependence ETjet ~ 100 GeV ! • Small Q2 dependence in region 100 < Q2 < 10,000 GeV2 • Pomeron evolves as the proton! D. Goulianos

  36. Diffractive Structure Function:t- dependence Fit ds/dt to a double exponential: • No diffraction dips • No Q2 dependence in slope from inclusive to Q2~104 GeV2 • Same slope over entire region of 0 < Q2 < 4,500 GeV2 across soft and hard diffraction! D. Goulianos

More Related