1 / 27

Gauge-boson Physics at the LHC

Gauge-boson Physics at the LHC. Hadron Collider Physics 2004 Michigan State U. Matt Dobbs Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, USA. Outline. LHC Physics Environment ATLAS and CMS Detectors Precision Gauge Boson Physics W-mass A FB and sin 2 θ W Di-bosons Triple Gauge-boson Couplings

tovi
Télécharger la présentation

Gauge-boson Physics at the LHC

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. Gauge-boson Physicsat the LHC Hadron Collider Physics 2004 Michigan State U. Matt Dobbs Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, USA

  2. Outline • LHC Physics Environment • ATLAS and CMS Detectors • Precision Gauge Boson Physics • W-mass • AFB and sin2θW • Di-bosons • Triple Gauge-boson Couplings • Tri-bosons • Challenges ahead: • Monte Carlo Tools • Experimental measurements – PDFs, energy scales, etc.

  3. 14 TeV proton-proton collisions • broad-band q & g collider, • scales →few TeV • Low L→ 2x1033/cm2/s • precision physics • High L →1034 /cm2/s (~23 interactions/crossing) 300 fb-1 in ≤ 10 years Large Hadron Collider

  4. The ATLAS Detector Inner Detector Tracking in range |h| < 2.5 Silicon Pixels, Strips & TRT EM Calorimetry Fine granularity up to |h| < 2.5 Pb/LAr Accordian Hadronic Calorimetry Barrel: Fe/Scintillating tiles Endcaps: Cu & W / LArFine Muon Spectrometer: s/pT ~ 7 % at 1 TeV Covers |h| < 2.7 Magnet 2T solenoid plus air core toroid

  5. The CMS Detector Inner Detector: Silicon pixels and strips Preshower: Lead and silicon strips EM Calorimeter: Lead Tungstate Hadron Calorimeters: Barrel & Endcap: Cu/Scintillating sheets Forward: Steel and Quartz fibre Muon Spectrometer: s/pT ~5% at 1 TeV(combined) Drift tubes, cathode strip chambers and resistive plate chambers One Magnet: 4T Solenoid

  6. W-Mass

  7. Mass(W) • electroweak fit such that MW is not the dominant error in EW fit. constrains MHiggs & consistency check (LEP2: 42 MeV, Tev RunI: 59 MeV)

  8. Measuring Mass(W) • Measured with MTRAN of Leptonic Channels • MTRAN very sensitive to detector effects vs. • PTl± very sensitive to higher order corrections PT(W)=0 Finite PT(W) + detector effects Baur, hep-ph/0304266

  9. Measuring Mass(W) • Combining channels and CMS data, expect ΔMW ≈ 15 MeV • expect improvements from using MTRAN(W)/MTRAN(Z)

  10. W-mass: Challenges • 0.03% knowledge of lepton energy scale • calibrate with 6 million Zl+l- events • tracker material to 1% • overall alignment to 1 μm • B-field knowledge to 0.1% • muon E-loss to ¼% • (CDF/D0 achieved 1% despite small Z samples) • Well constrained PDFs • active program for measuring PDFs at LHC from Day 1 • new LHC-HERA workshop • mitigate some theory errors by using W/Z ratio methods • but MC model of ppZll is further behind in some cases (no multi-photon corrections) • Zll ≠ Wlν • Theory modeling of radiative decays and recoil ATLAS: C. Marques, Lisbon

  11. The State of the Art Today • confused? a word from our sponsors…

  12. Weinberg Angle: sin2θW

  13. Measuring sin2θW with AFB Z°/γ e- θFB AntiProton Beam Proton Beam AntiProton Beam Proton Beam e+ • At the Tevatron, defining AFB is easy. • But for symmetric proton-proton beams (LHC), there is no asymmetry WRT the beams. known to NLO in EW, QCD (effects can be as large as 30%)

  14. Measuring sin2θW with AFB Z°/γ Z°/γ Valence q Sea q Proton Beam Proton Beam Sea q Valence q Proton Beam Proton Beam • Instead, we “sign” the forward direction by the l+l- boost. • Measure asymmetry in charged lepton direction WRT CMS boost direction • Asymmetry increases at high Y(l+l-)

  15. Measuring sin2θW with AFB • Statistical precision using 100 fb-1 • Performance issue: • increasing forward lepton tagging acceptance greatly improves measurement • Systematic PDF uncertainty is most challenging. ATLAS-PHYS-2000-018 CMS IN 2000/35 for comparison, Δ sin2θeff=0.00053 combining 4 LEP expts and e,μ,τ channels [CERN-EP/2001-098]

  16. Triple Gauge-bosonCouplings

  17. Probing theTriple Gauge-boson Couplings big advantage for LHC • non-abelian SU(2)L×U(1) Y gauge group (foundation of SM!)  WWγ WWZcouplings • most-general C & P conserving WWZ,WWγ vertices are specified by just 5 parameters:  model independent parameterization • Probe tool: sensitive to low energy remnants of new physics operating at a higher scale • complement to direct searches

  18. 95% C.L. for Wγ • binned max. likelihood fit to PT(V) distribution • sensitivity comes from a few events in the high PT(V) tail ATLAS

  19. TGC Limits vs. Integrated Luminosity confidence limit systematic contribution ATLAS • typically order of magnitude better than LEP/TeVa [O(.10-.20),95% C.L.] • Statistics will dominate LHC measurements (except for Δ g1) • sensitivity derived from a few events in the high PT(V) tail • Dominant systematics are theoretical: • neglected higher orders and pdf’s

  20. Limits vs. Form Factor Scale ATLAS • new form factor strategy is introduced • rather than imposing an arbitrary form factor in the model, • the limits are reported as a function of a mass scale cutoff unitarity limit expt limit unitarity limit expt limit

  21. Neutral TGC’s Z,γ Z/γ Z • no tree level neutral couplings in SM • typically 3-5 orders of magnitude improvement in limits at LHC over LEP. Zγ

  22. The State of the Art Today

  23. Tri-boson Production • sensitive to quartic gauge-boson couplings (QGC’s) van der Bij, Ghinculov hep-ph/9909409 “gold-plated” channels would require full LHC data set

  24. Tri-boson Production • pp Wγγ • σ x BR(Wl,ν) • √s > MW production threshold • σ = 1.96 fb (μ±,e± after efficiency, detector effects) • WWγγ couplings Eboli, Gonzalez-Garcia, Lietti, Phys Lett D63, 2001 ATL-PHYS 2003-051 W2GRAD (Baur, Stelzer)

  25. Conclusions • CMS & ATLAS are under construction. • LHC physics potential includes competitive precision electroweak measurements: sin2θW, mass(W) • Order of magnitude and better improvement in anomalous TGC limits  precision arena for diboson production • Challenges include: • Detector performance: lepton energy scale, forward tagging • More precise measurement of PDFs • no good prediction of LHC precision exists. • Theory: next-generation codes need QCD + QED

More Related