road to discovery: lecture 1 sarah eno u. maryland june, 2009 1 cern-fnal hcp summer school please...
DESCRIPTION
Outline Lecture 1: Lessons from an old person, Standard Model at LHC Lecture 2: Early Exotica Lecture 3: SUSY & Higgs June, 2009CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 3TRANSCRIPT
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 1
Road to Discovery: Lecture 1Sarah Eno
U. Maryland
June, 2009
Please note that this road approaches its destination slowly, for safety reasons.
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 2
Credit where credit is dueI stole most of my slides from• Chris Hill,Beate Heinemann,Joe Incandela,Roberto
Tenchini, Andy Parker, Tommaso Lari, Silvano Tosi, Klaus Rabbertz, Kostas Kousouris, Joey Huston, J. Fernandez, Sasha Nikitenko, Saeid Paktinat, Piotr Zalewski, Barbara Clerbaux, Christian Bauer, Roberto Rossin, Alexey Drozdetskiy, Mojataba Najafabadi, Peter Richardson, Fedor Ratnikov, Valerie Halyo, Seong Chan Park (and people I’ve forgotten to mention)
• Also, note specific citations of articles
June, 2009
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 3
Outline• Lecture 1: Lessons from an old person,
Standard Model at LHC• Lecture 2: Early Exotica• Lecture 3: SUSY & Higgs
June, 2009
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 4
CMS/D0 Bias
June, 2009
I am currently a member of both the D0 and CMS collaborations, so its just easiest for me to get examples. Most of the results are similar between D0/CDF and CMS/ATLAS. I’ll try to note where major differences are expected.
(CDF and AMY in my younger days)
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 5
Discover what?
June, 2009
Questions of the standard model• What causes electroweak symmetry breaking?• Where is the higgs?• Why is it light?• Why is there so much more matter than antimatter in the universe??
Question from cosmology• Where is the dark matter particle?• What is dark energy?
And Beyond• Why do the fermions have such different masses?• Why are neutrinos so light?• Why are neutrinos not masses?• Do the forces unify at a high energy scale?
etc. etc. etc.
An exciting time, as there are so very many questions:
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 6
Discovery at the LHC*
June, 2009
Simple, right? LO description of a new particle search• think about what distinguishes your signal from background• design some variable or combination of variables (boosted decision tree, NN, etc) that maximizes the differences• cut away most of your background using some criteria that optimizes significance• estimate the remaining number of SM events (production cross section, BR, acceptance, efficiencies)• see how many pass and feed that and your estimated background to RooStat and see what you got
But of course the devil is in the details.• need to use well-understood variables in a well-understood detector for well-understood background processes
Look at past devils. Look at best guess of our own devils.
(* will concentrate on “discovery” through new particle searches in these lectures.Obviously, much important new physics can be done in B physics, QCD, etc as well.)
10 Feb 2009 Colloqium, Boston University 7
It’s been a long time…1983: Tevatron reaches 500 GeV
1985: Tevatron reaches 800 GeV
1987: First collisions in CDF
19821987
20 years!
Installing main ring dipole magnets Our lessons come from long ago. Changing times will affect these lessons.
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 8
History of Discoveries
June, 2009
c,τ
Even though we used to cross the energy frontier regularly, major discoveries come about once/decade.
b
Top and W/Z
10 Feb 2009 Colloqium, Boston University 9
CERN Z0 1983Tevatron, top, 1995
joint MD-Hopkins Mtg 109 Jan 2008
Very Different?
The SppS turned on at 1% of final instantaneous luminosity in 1983, but in the first run of a few months discovered the W with 8 events.
Z0
sps
Tevatron turned on in 1987. Top discovered 8 years later.
joint MD-Hopkins Mtg 119 Jan 2008
Actually had a lot in common• ALL properties of the signal tightly constrained by standard model •Signal shows up in multiple channels• with FIXED RELATIONSHIPS• not only does the background agree with the background prediction, but THE SIGNAL AGREES WITH THE SIGNAL PREDICTION• searches are easy (in principal) to design (optimize s/root(b), and it’s (relatively) easy to interpret the results
joint MD-Hopkins Mtg 129 Jan 2008
Z to bb
Would you believe this if it weren’t the Z?
When what you are looking for has very well defined properties, you can do remarkable things
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 13
Single top
June, 2009
CDF
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 14
Tau/charm discovery
June, 2009
When the new physics is unexpected, things are much more challenging
http://www.osti.gov/accomplishments/perl.html
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 15
tau/charm
June, 2009
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 16
“Discoveries”
June, 2009
That went away• contact interactions• pentaquarks• leptoquarks• 40 GeV top quark• zeta• Mark J events• eeγγ event
That were missed:Many interesting, apocryphal stories involving overflow bins, a frantic sorting of stacks of punch cards … stories people only discuss after much beer. (Could CLEO could have caught this before Babar?)
When looking for something that is not well predicted, it is much easier to make mistakes (missed systematic, cut tuning) or be mislead by a statistical fluctuation.
There are good reasons to be sceptical about new discoveries!
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 17
Discrepancy?
June, 2009
When we see disagreement, what can it be? * theory cross section for SM processes wrong? * theory kinematic distributions for SM processes wrong? * particle ID fake rate is wrong? * particle ID efficiency is wrong? * energy scales are wrong? * resolution is wrong?
When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth (Sherlock Holmes)
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 18
How to minimize devils
June, 2009
How can we minimize these errors:• ratios of cross sections• get efficiencies and fake rates energy scales, resolutions from data whenever possible• have a strong group tuning the MC (both theory of background production properties and detector resolution in close contact so as to not mistake one for the other.)• have many data-based methods for checking the background calculation
Most important advice to young particle hunters based on past experiments?• know your detector• know your backgrounds and ALL the sources of their uncertainties
ATLAS CMS
Magnetic field 2 T solenoid + toroid (0.5 T barrel 1 T endcap)
4 T solenoid + return yoke
Tracker Si pixels, strips + TRTσ/pT ≈ 5x10-4pT + 0.01
Si pixels, stripsσ/pT ≈ 1.5x10-4pT + 0.005
EM calorimeter Pb+LAr σ/E ≈ 10%/√E + 0.007
PbWO4 crystalsσ/E ≈ 3%/√E + 0.003
Hadronic calorimeter
Fe+scint. / Cu+LAr (10λ)σ/E ≈ 50%/√E + 0.03 GeV
Brass+scintillator (7 λ + catcher)σ/E ≈ 100%/√E + 0.05 GeV
Muon σ/pT ≈ 2% @ 50GeV to 10% @ 1TeV (ID+MS)
σ/pT ≈ 1% @ 50GeV to 10% @ 1TeV (DT/CSC+Tracker)
Trigger L1 + RoI-based HLT (L2+EF) L1+HLT (L2 + L3)
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 20June, 2009
(Nice comparison by Chris Hill)
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 21June, 2009
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 22June, 2009
No detector ever had this much material before the calorimeter. D0 had 0.3 X0
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 23June, 2009
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 24June, 2009
Before Beam: Cosmics
2 Apr 2009 "Shedding Light on Dark Matter", U. MD. 25ATLAS and CMS may be the best understood detectors ever at turn on.
Beam Splash Events
CMS
146 m
TAN
TCTV
TCTH
MBRC
TCLP• Beam with 2x109 protons dumped
onto a target (collimator)150m upstream of CMS– Sept. 7,9,10,18
• Leads to a “tsunami” wave of O(100K) muons coming down the tunnel!– A far cry from the single cosmic muon events…
2 Apr 2009 "Shedding Light on Dark Matter", U. MD. 27
CMS lights upHCAL energy ECAL energy
DT muon chamber hits
debris
Inner tracking systems kept OFF
2 Apr 2009 "Shedding Light on Dark Matter", U. MD. 28
ATLAS also lights up
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 29
Well-calibrated
June, 2009
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 30
Well-Commissioned Detectors
June, 2009
Atlas and CMS detectors commissioning data: better tuned than any large detector! (at least that I've worked on) however, even well-tuned detectors show surprises D0 Run II Z mass and MET (every body likes to show this, however D0 Run II was not a well-tuned detector)
But probably more interesting is D0 Run I Z mass (this was also a well-tuned detector)
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 31
Can still do a lot with a new detector, even with surprises
June, 2009
Peak at 86 GeV.
Run Aug – Oct 92. Some plots from a Nov 92 talk (Madaras)
Don’t panic. Rescale the EM energy scale and move on.
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 32
Can still do a lot with a new detector
June, 2009
Run Aug – Oct 92. Some plots from a Nov 92 talk (Madaras)
W events
(MET obviously was quite useable in this brand new detector.)
3326 Jan 07
Can do a lot with new detectors•In 1983, UA1/UA2 discovered the W at 1% of design luminosity within a few months of running.• First publications by UA2 were “Production and Properties of Jets” (1982) and “Discovery of the W” (1983) •The Tevatron (with CDF only) had a small run in 1987 Run, (33 nb-1). The first search presented by CDF was a publication submitted 24 July, 1989 (http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v63/i14/p1447_1) of a search for heavy stable particles, done with 26.2 nb-1 of data. •The Tevatron (with CDF only) had another run the next year ( June 88 - June 89). The first search was a paper on the search for the top quark, submitted 13 Oct 1989 (see http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v64/i2/p142_1) •D0 first took data during the Tevatron's "Run I". 1.1 pb-1 of data was taken from August to October 1992 and was presented in November in conferences (see, for example, http://lss.fnal.gov/archive/1992/conf/Conf-92-365.pdf) (albeit with D0 showing a Z peak at 86 GeV!). Results on new particle searches (top quark search) were presented at conferences even after this early running. This run eventually accumulated 200 pb-1 of data. (Note two detectors were running at this time). The first paper was a leptoquark search.
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 34
Devils
June, 2009
Enough generalities…What will be the challenges specific to the LHC?
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 35
Lots of Backgrounds
June, 2009
Most of the backgrounds can be made small by requiring an isolated e or mu, or large MET, in the final state. (apologies for neglecting taus in all these talks)
(However, there can be large uncertainties on the remaining “QCD” background. In general, the simulation can not reliably predict these backgrounds because• fake rates from MC are generally good to within a factor 2 at best• tails of MET distribution even less reliable• need higher order QCD calculations for kinematics, which are not (all) available• due to the small fake rate, would need huge MC samples to do thisData-based background methods are required.)
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 36
Cross sections
June, 2009
process order 14 TeV(pb)
10 TeV(pb)
reference
ttbar NLO+NLL 910 430 arXiv: 0804.2800
Single top NLO 320 160
W->eν or μν NNLO 22000 15000 arXiv:0901.0002
Z NNLO 2000 1400 arXiv:0901.0002
WW NLO 112 1
WZ 48
ZZ 15
Also see arXiv:hep-ph/0611148
After lepton or large MET requirement, main backgrounds tend to be top, W, Z, dibosons
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 37
Machine Plan
June, 2009
50-300 pb-1 at 9-10 TeV
http://lhc-commissioning.web.cern.ch/lhc-commissioning/luminosity/09-10-lumi-estimate.htm
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 38
10 vs 14 TeV
June, 2009
Unfortunately, most of the studies done so far are at 14 TeV. ratio of parton luminosities plots
gg of course down more than qq
Stirling
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 39
10 TeV vs 2 TeV
June, 2009
How much luminosity do we need to beat 8 fb-1 (now 5) at the tevatron? The tevatron can probe up to sqrt(s) = 2 TeV, so its not a spent machine.
8000300
=26
O(5) events for discoveryO(8) before acceptanceO(30) fb xsec at these masses
Stirling
26
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 40
Devil 1: Measuring Luminosity
June, 2009
How many background events do we expect? Need to know luminosity • relative luminosity by rate of inelastic collisions (measured in some sort of forward detector)• absolute normalization?
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 41
Luminosity Measurement
June, 2009
10 TeV
TOTEM experiment will measure this directly, but its not a trivial measurement.
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 42
Dead Reckoning
June, 2009
10%
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 43
Underlying event
June, 2009
The first thing we will see is a few soft scatters (MB events). Generally, these are not backgrounds for our searches. However, these are useful for our search preparations, as they tell us about the UE. The UE:
• affects efficacy of isolation variables• affects MET resolution, especially for smaller values of MET• may be quicker in the beginning to measure effects from data than try to retune the MC.
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 44
Minimum Bias
June, 2009
Model expectations for chargedparticles at |η| = 0 vs. √s:
Pythia: ~ ln2(s) Phojet: ~ ln(s)
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 45June, 2009
ATLAS Track reconstruction
Properties of MB events
CMS
How will you handle the news from these analyses in your search?
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 46
Jets
June, 2009
Next we’ll see production of high pT dijets, multijets.• calibration and understanding of jets for searches• checks on PDF’s, ISR, FSR in new environment• searches for new particles decaying to dijets
This is not my generation’s QCD. Much better calculations. But, it will pay to understand them and their limits.
Jets will give us our first indication as to how well these calculations are doing at the new energy.
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 47
dijets
June, 2009
Inclusive kT cross section in 6 bins in rapidity y, D = 0.6
NLOJET++, PRL 88 122003 (2002) PR D68 094002 (2003)fastNLO, hep-ph/0609285
NLO code by NLOJET++, Z. Nagy
LHC @ 10 TeV
1 event in 300 pb-1
The LHC will be a very jetty place.
Tevatron limit
1 event in 10 pb-1
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 48
Jet Cross Section
June, 2009
A non-trivial measurement: both theory and experiment have non-negligible uncertainties.
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 49
Uncertainties
June, 2009
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 50
Theory Uncertainties
June, 2009
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 51
Jet Calibration
June, 2009
A non-trivial problem• dijet balance to check eta dependence of calibration. Runs out of statististics at high pT• photon plus jets can help towards an absolute calibration. Runs out of statistics at high pT. Non-negligible backgrounds• Z+jets can serve as a cross check at low pT.• very important for compositeness searches. Less accuracy is needed for many other searches.
Dominant: > 80%< 20% LO
Eur. Phys. J. C 53, 49-58 (2008).
CMS photon study:- Photon pT spectrum for 1/fb- Background QCD jets in blue- After photon isolation cuts- Improves S/B > 2 orders of magnitude
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 52
Calibration Challenges
June, 2009
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 53
Systematics
June, 2009
At high pT, sizeable uncertainties on JES and PDF. At low pT, sizable unsmearing correction.
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 54
Z
June, 2009
Cross section is lower than dijets and W, but it’s a very very clean channel that allows full kinematic reconstruction with low systematic errors.
• peak position can be used to check/set EM calorimeter and tracking energy scale• width of peak can be used to check/set resolutions• rate of double tags can be used to estimate lepton identification efficiencies• theory errors on cross section a few percent -> can be used to check/calibrate luminosity• balance between Z transverse momentum can be used to understand jet energy scale, resolutions, MET resolution.• can be used to understand vector boson plus jet production and other vector boson backgrounds to searches (discuss when I discuss susy searches)• usually not a significant background to searches• PROBLEM: low cross section compared to the processes you use it to study
In 300 pb-1 at 10 TeV, expect 420,000 produced per lepton flavorWith typical acceptances of 40%, we expect O(150k) events/lepton flavorZ samples from Tevatron currently at: 50k/fb-1 (with roughly 6 fb-1 on tape->300k/flavor)
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 55
Very low backgrounds
June, 2009CMS estimate for 14 TeV, 10 pb-1
14 TeV
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 56
Tag and Probe
June, 2009
How will you feed these results into your analysis?
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 57
resolutions
June, 2009
D0
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 58
MET resolution
June, 2009
Zee MC versus data with and without d0raw2sim: Dzero
D0
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 59
Challenges
June, 2009
• limited range of electron ET’s to check detector non-linearity, disentangle offset and slope in energy scale, disentangle various terms in the resolution• lower statistics than W and top
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 60
Other di-lepton resonances
June, 2009
1 pb-13 days at 1031 at 30% efficiency
ATLAS preliminary
J/ψ
ϒ
Atlas example, after all cuts:~ 4200 (800) J/ψ (ϒ) evts per day at L = 1031
(for 30% machine x detector data taking efficiency)~ 15600 (3100) events per pb-1
tracker momentum scale, trigger performance, detector efficiency, sanity checks, …
Challenge: if not careful, distributions/efficiencies/ resolutions can be shaped by trigger biases. Needs care.
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 61
W
June, 2009
Need to understand well, since a copious source of events with leptons and METLuckily, cross section grows slower with root(s) than top cross section (another great calibration source)
Can be a good calibration source once understood
Challenges • pp is not ppbar (true for Z as well)• larger backgrounds (for top, for example), more difficult to understand• two solutions for pZ of neutrino (and louzy resolution, especially at high <n>)
In 300 pb-1 at 10 TeV, expect 4,200,000 produced per lepton flavorWith typical acceptances of 40%, we expect O(1.5M) events/lepton flavor
W+ vs W-
10 Feb 2009 Colloqium, Boston University 62
Hep-ph/9907231arXiv:0901.0002v1
More u’s than d’s in proton so W+ cross section is bigger
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 63
Heavy quarks in proton
June, 2009
Note importance ofstrange quarkuncertainty for ratio
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 64
W+ vs W-: TeVatron and LHC
June, 2009
arXiv:0812.2571
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 65
Rapidity W+
June, 2009 Huston
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School
Inclusive W’s
June, 2009 66
Ouch!
How big will the backgrounds be?
14 TeV
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 67
Inclusive W’s
June, 2009
10 TeV, 10 pb-1
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 68
Top
June, 2009
• not just a candle, a candelabra (Ken Bloom, Nebraska)• hadronic W’s -> jet energy scale• b tagging efficiency• b jet energy scale• consistency over many channels gives strong constraint (dilepton, single lepton, all hadronic, with/without b tags)• important background to many searches
Efficiency* acceptance O(20%) in leptonic channelsExpect 17K l+jets and 2k ll+jets (l=e,mu)
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 69
top
June, 2009
(J. Huston, Acta Physica Polonica B, 38, 2279)
Challenges• as with the W, in channels with leptons, reconstruction not trivial• its jetty at the LHC
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 70
Top dileptons
June, 2009
No b tagging10 pb-1
14 TeVCMS
2 iso l PT > 202 jets PT > 30
Mee, −MZ >15
MET > 30
MET > 0.6rPT
ll or MET not along -rPT
ll
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 71
Add b tagging
June, 2009
100 pb-1
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 72
semi-leptonic top
June, 2009
cms top-08-005
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 73
Single Leptons
June, 2009
mu10 pb-1No b taggingtight selection
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 74
ATLAS
June, 2009
ADD B TAGGING
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 75
Light Quark calibration
June, 2009
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 76
Calibrate using W
June, 2009
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 77
Single top
June, 2009
Cross sections (pb)
ttbar Single top ratio
Tevatron 7.60 3.94 1.9
LHC (10 TeV) 446 160 2.8
LHC (14 TeV) 910 320 2.8
240 pb @ 14 TeV 10 pb
60 pb
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 78
dibosons
June, 2009
Channel Xsect (14 TeV) (pb)
BR >1 e or mu
Events in 300 pb-1
WW 112 0.4 13k
WZ 48 .26 4k
ZZ 15 .12 0.5k
“at least 1 lepton”
WZ with 3 leptons, 350 pb-1
CERN-FNAL HCP Summer School 79
Devils
June, 2009
However, just remember that just because we can quickly use our data to see if we basically understand the major backgrounds, there can always be corners of phase space that are still incorrect in the MC. It’s in these corners that we will often be looking for our signal.