1 / 21

Lumi - spectrum impact on Top mass

Lumi - spectrum impact on Top mass. Stewart Boogert & David Miller University College London ALCPG, Top and QCD session, Victoria Thursday 29 th July 2004. Top threshold Aim: “realistic” systematic error on top mass from threshold scan Tool development Toppik (A. Hoang et al)

vina
Télécharger la présentation

Lumi - spectrum impact on Top mass

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. Lumi-spectrum impact on Top mass Stewart Boogert & David Miller University College London ALCPG, Top and QCD session, Victoria Thursday 29th July 2004

  2. Top threshold Aim: “realistic” systematic error on top mass from threshold scan Tool development Toppik (A. Hoang et al) Parameter (mt, t & s) maps Interpolation Convolution with energy loss Fitter Preliminary analysis, needs input from fellow top quark enthusiasts (who are you?) Next 20 mins • Talk outline • Luminosity spectra • Beamstrahlung and Bhabha scattering simulation • Top threshold simulation • Cross section interpolation • Threshold smearing • Fitting • Next steps • Beam spread • Beamstrahlung extraction • AFB and ppeak • Conclusion

  3. Beam energy loss • Three sources • Accelerator beam spread • Typically ~0.1% • Gaussian (?!) shape • Beamstrahlung • 0.7% at 350 GeV • 1.7% at 800 GeV • Initial state radiation • Calculable to high precision in QED • Complicates measurement of luminosity spectrum using Bhabha events

  4. Bhabha acollinearity • Monitor collision energy via Bhabha events • Acollinearity angle depends on the momentum mismatch between the beams • Kinematics • Calculate x using only scattering angles • Calorimeter energy resolution too large • Tracker/calorimeter angular resolution good enough?

  5. Simulation of luminosity spectrum • Beam simulation • Circe/Guinea-Pig (modified) • Accelerator simulation (G. White) + Beam collision simulation • E0=175 GeV, simple scaling of accelerator parameters. • Guinea-Pig • TESLA TDR parameters scaled appropriately by energy (500 350GeV) • Bhabha scattering • BHWIDE (350 GeV, >7)

  6. Top threshold simuation • Toppik (Hoang & Teubner) • Calculates R=(tt)/(+-) • Have wrapped Fortranin C++/Root for ease of use • Default parameters • mt=175 GeV • t=1.43 GeV • s(MZ) = 0.118 • Options and other parameters • NNLO, 1s mass scheme • MH=115 GeV •  = 15 GeV Example threshold from Toppik, without experimental effects

  7. Spectrum reconstruction • Reconstruction of luminosity spectrum (xm) • Reasonable agreement • Definition of xt problematic due to overlap between ISR/FSR • Mean shift <xm-xt> • 16.0510-4 • Large due to tails in xm-xt • See Luminosity spectrum talk in IPBI/IR/MDI session

  8. Top cross section interpolation • Toppik calculation slow • Interpolate • Evaluate cross section on grid • mt: 172178 GeV • s: 0.110 0.126 • t : 1.43 1.46 GeV • Interpolate cross section in 4D • Above parameters and s • Essential for convolution with energy loss and fitting problem • Direct use of toppik requires ~104 calls per fit iteration Example of mt steps s steps

  9. Interpolation grid node ((s)) mt t No problem Cross section interpolation (2) • Interpolation algorithm • Determine nearest neighbours (NN) • Linearly interpolate cross section function (s) • Problem due to maximum in cross section • Translate cross section so that maxima at same s • Linearly interpolate and translate back • Will apply same algorithm for smeared cross section ’(s) 1st 2nd

  10. Interpolation check • Check algorithm • Randomly select mt, s, t and s from within grid • Calculate toppik (toppik) and interpolated cross sections (interpol) • Right: plot of • (toppik- interpol)/ toppik • Working just fine • Bias : 0.0002 • RMS : 0.0015 << 1% (theoretical error) (toppik- interpol)/ toppik

  11. Threshold with energy loss • Fold top threshold with luminosity spectrum • p(x) – parameterisation or histogram • xi sampled from Bhabha sample (requires large number) Loss of luminosity

  12. Threshold fit • Fake threshold data (points) • True luminosity spectrum • 11 points (10 fb-1 per point) • 346<s<355 GeV • 41% efficiency (previous studies Martinez et al) • “Theoretical’’ cross section (solid line) • Generated using measured luminosity • Form usual 2 and minimise using Minuit • Correlation between top mass and strong coupling returns. 2(mt) 2(t)

  13. All parameters Free t fixed mt [GeV] mt [MeV] 174.952 0.013 -48 174.956  0.014 -44 s s 0.11627 0.00036 -0.0017 0.11639  0.00035 -0.0016 t [GeV] t [GeV] 1.417 0.018 -0.013 Fit summary • Summary of fit results • Data : mt=175 GeV, s=0.118 and t=1.43 • Shifts are between default values and fits using measured luminosity spectrum

  14. Scan strategy Number of points and luminosity per point Optimisation Simultaneous luminosity spectrum measurement Fundamental problems Is there a more efficient/consistent method to implement energy loss effects on the top threshold? Possibly, see next slides on linac energy spread and parameterisations of the luminosity spectrum Next steps • Luminosity spectrum • Different Guinea-Pig conditions • Linac energy spread • Track updates in beam-beam simulation / accelerator parameters • Analysis • Include AFB and ppeak • Top threshold event generator • Dialogue with accelerator people • Modifications of running for top threshold

  15. Accelerator beam spread • Problem in both warm and cold machines • E/Ewarm ~0.3% • E/Ecold ~0.1% • Smears out structures like the top peak (see right) • Analysis as presented will not cope with beam spread • Why: Bhabha events only sensitive to p, so xm1 • Find method to extract x>1 and apply to threshold. BS=0, 0.1, 0.2, 0.5, 1.0 %

  16. NLC beam spread shape • Beam spread different for cold/warm machines • TESLA – Gaussian shape • NLC – more complicated (see right) • Does NLC energy spread shape have impact on top mass measurements? • Clearly width and mean important • Parametrise NLC shape from accelerator simulations and scale to arbitrary mean and width

  17. Effect of energy spread • Convolute top cross section with energy spread only • Gaussian (TESLA) shape • Double peaked (NLC) shape • “Data” thresholds generated with some beam spread (true) • Then fitted with cross section convoluted with various measured energy spreads (meas)

  18. Result Systematic shifts observed mt = -48 MeV mt = -44 MeV (top width fixed) s = -0.0017 s = -0.0016 (top width fixed) Statistical errors compatible with previous analyses. Much more work to be done: Beam spread AFB and ppeak, theory input please! inclusion of ISR into top MC Different luminosity spectra! Conclusions • First analysis complete • “Realistic” (Guinea-pig) luminosity spectrum measurement • Interpolation of cross section in 4D parameter space • Cross section fitted using true and reconstructed luminosity spectra

  19. Backup slides

  20. Disadvantage • Must include ISR into top MC generation Parametrised beamstrahlung • Don’t use xm directly • Parameterise beamstrahlung f(a,b,c…) and fit for parameters. • For example CIRCE/Yokoya • Fit top threshold • Data is cross section smeared with true parameters • Theory is smeared with fit parameters • Advantage • Can extract beam spread!

  21. What about AFB and ppeak • How to include beam effects for • AFB • Similar to cross section • What about the boost (p 0) • Ppeak • Has similar problems • Interpolation? (5D) • Peak position not such a simple function of mt and s as cross section • Event generator based on toppik? • How about correlations between ptop and top

More Related