DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton1 University of Rochester Participation in CDF

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton 1

University of RochesterParticipation in

CDF


Outline

•Introduction/Group Members

•Our Operational Responsibilities

•Physics Pursuits

•W/Z Physics

•Heavy Zs

•Top Physics

•W Helicity and New physics search in Dileptons

•Top to taus


Current CDF Group Members

Arie Bodek (50%):

-Howard Budd (50%)

-Pawel DeBarbaro (10%)

-Willis Sakumoto

-Yeon Sei Chung (95%)

-Phil Yoon (4th year)

(acc. Phys., FNAL Support)

-J.-Y. Han (1st year-with MS)

-G.-B. Yu (1st year-with MS)

PI’s Senior Res. Assoc. Postdoc. Fellows Grad Students Undergrads

Kevin McFarland (75%?):

-Anthony Vaiciulis

–Gilles deLentdecker

–J. Chvojka (1st year)

–B. Kilminster(graduating)

–S. Kenezny(4th year)

–Jedong Lee (2nd year)

–B. Y. Han (2nd year)

–Chris Clark (REU)

Three sub-groups function as one on many projects, but primary hardware/physics interests align us as follows:

Paul Tipton (75%):

–Eva Halkiadakis(90%)

–Andy Hocker (90%)

–M. Coca (5th year)

–R. Eusebi (70%, 3rd year)

–Andrew Ivanov (5th year)

–Sarah Lockwitz (REU)

Color KEY:


CDFCDF effort led by Bodek, Tipton, McFarland

We are focused on: –Tests of the SM in and around the top candidate sample

–Production and decay parameters of the Top Quark

–Electroweak physics with W and Z Bosons

–Search for new W and Z Bosons

–Higgs Search

–Much experience from Run I (top discovery, heavy Z searches, etc)


Rochester’s Three Areas of Focus and Operational Responsibility

•Run 2 forward calorimeter --‘endplug’ (Bodek)

–Hadronic section a Rochester-led effort

–Constructed at FNAL with Rochester physicists and technicians doing fabrication, QA.

– Rochester in charge of test beam calibration, calibration at B0, installation, commissioning and operations.

–Fermilab responsibility -phototubes and bases

Note: A lot of Physics (e.g. W Asymmetry, W Mass, PDFs needs the plug.


CDF Plug Operations

Run 2 Problem: Degradation of both EM and Hadron Plug calorimeter response at forward plug (eta)

Investigated ->by our group using the laser monitoring system. Problem narrowed down to degradation of phototubes due to high current associated with beam.

Solution ->(a) Lower the voltage to fix the problem. (b)Correct older data using the laser information

Central-Plug Z mass constant after the application of Laser gain corrections


Rochester Silicon OperationsSecond area of Focus: Silicon Tracking

•Run 2 SVXII (Tipton) –Rochester group contributed to SVXII Ladder and Barrel fabrication

–Silicon Cooling and Interlocks

–Radiation Monitoring and Tevatron abort

–Commissioning and Operations


Rochester Silicon Operations, Cont.Second area of Focus: Silicon Tracking

•Run 2 SVXII (Tipton) –Rochester group contributed to SVXII Ladder and Barrel fabrication

–Silicon Cooling and Interlocks

–Radiation Monitoring and Tevatron abort

–Commissioning and Operations


CDF, contThird area of Focus: Level 3 Trigger/Data Hub

•Level 3 (McFarland) –Responsible for software trigger based on offline reconstruction

–Current→Run2b Bandwidth

–Input rate: 80→200 MB/sec

–Output: 20→60 MB/sec

–“Data Hub” takes accepted Level-3 events, logs them and distributes to online monitoring system

–Level-3 selections determine offline datasets after processing

–Allows CDF to find events in its firehose of a datastream


CDF Data-Taking

Run 1 luminosity

260 pb-1 delivered

~200 pb-1 recorded

Between ~67 and 130 pb used in analyses presented here

Typically run with 85-90% efficiency

Ultimately collect 4-8 fb

~190 of 225 pbgoal delivered y.t.d.


Great Progress in One Year

• L1/L2/L3 rates: 18k/250/75 Hz 6k/240/30Hz ~45e30 ~15e30

• Biggest run: 1553 nb-1 (run 163064) 447 nb-1 (run 145005)

taken May 17-18th 17h w. Si. taken May 17, 11h w Si.

• Highest Init. Lum. 47.5e30 (May 17th) 20.6e30 (May 19th)

• Best store CDF int. Lum 1553 nb-1 (one run) 602 nb-1 (4 runs) (store 2555, May 17th) (Store 1332, May 17th)

• Best “CDF-week” 9.1 (pb-1)/10.3 (pb-1) 2.97 (pb-1)/3.47 (pb-1) (most pb-1 to tape) (week of May 11th) (week of May 16th)

• Best Store Efficiency 94.2% with Si (1 run) 93.2% no Si (4 runs)(May 17th, 9.1 of 10.3 pb-1) (May 16th, 506 of

543 nb-1)

Now (2003) 1 year ago (2002)


Silicon Performance

• Inclusive B lifetime with J/’sc=458±10stat. ±11syst. m (PDG: 469±4 m)

• Exclusive B+J/lifetimec=446 ±43stat. ±13syst. m (PDG: 502±5 m)

More mass plots

BsJ/18.4/pb

11 micron resolution


.B(Wee)

Candidates: 38625 in ~ 72 pb-1

Backgrounds ~ 6 % (dominated by QCD)

‡ Nucl. Phys. B359,343 (1991)

Phys.Rev. Lett. 88,201801 (2002)

·B(W·B(Wee) = 2.64) = 2.640.010.01statstat0.090.09syssys0.160.16lum lum nbnb

NNLO @ NNLO @ s=1.96 TeVs=1.96 TeV‡‡: 2.69 : 2.69 0.10 nb0.10 nb


Run 2 Measurements of We, )

MT

•B(W) = 2.70±.04stat±.19syst ±.27lum

5547 candidates in 10 pb-1 4561 candidates in 16 pb-1

W*BR(We) (nb) =

2.60±0.07stat±0.11syst ± 0.26lum

Run 1 scaled to 1.96 TeV: 2.72±0.02stat±0.09syst ±0.10lum


.B(Z0l+l-)


Backgrounds ~ 0.6 %

·B(Z·B(Z00ee) = 267ee) = 26766statstat1515syssys1616lum lum pbpb

·B(Z·B(Z00) = 246) = 24666statstat1212syssys1515lum lum pbpb‡ Nucl. Phys. B359,343 (1991)

Phys.Rev. Lett. 88,201801 (2002)


Backgrounds: ~ 0.9 %

NNLONNLO @ @ s=1.96 TeVs=1.96 TeV‡‡: 252 : 252 9 pb 9 pb

VERYCLEAN


W & Cross Sections vs. ECM

Our new measurements

NNLO


(W)

(pp(ppZ)Z) (W)(W) (Z (Z ee) ee)(pp(ppW)W) (W (W e e)) (Z)(Z)

RR =

TheoreticalTheoreticalpredictionprediction

PDGPDGSMSM

PDGPDGcombined Expcombined ExpMeasureMeasure

ExtractExtract

RR (W) [GeV](W) [GeV]

ee 9.889.880.240.24statstat0.470.47

syssys

2.292.290.060.06statstat0.100.10ss

ysys

10.6910.690.270.27statstat0.30.3

33syssys 2.112.110.050.05statstat 0.070.07syssys

e+e+ 10.5410.540.180.18statstat0.30.3

33syssys 2.152.150.040.04statstat0.070.07ss

ysys


tt Dilepton Channel: tt llbb

tt tt = 13.2 = 13.2 5.9 5.9statstat 1.5 1.5syssys 0.8 0.8lum lum pbpb

NLONLO @ @ s=1.96 TeV for s=1.96 TeV for

MMtop top = 175 GeV= 175 GeV‡‡: 6.70: 6.70+0.71+0.71 –0.88–0.88 pb pb‡ MLM

vs. ET N jets 2/

CDF Run II Preliminary

-

Run II Top Dilepton Summary Table:

‡ hep-ph/0303085(ML Mangano et al)

SSoouurrccee eeee ee ll llBackground 0.03 ±0.056 0.093 ±0.054 0.00 ±0.037 0.30 ±0.2

+ SM bkg tt 0.57 ±0.08 0.68 ±0.09 .5 ±0.2 2.8 ±0.3 Data 3 5

-

--


Using ~125pb-1

pbLumA

BNttbar )5.02.14.31.9()( ±±±=

××−

=∫ε

• Theoretical prediction: (6.7 +/- 0.5) pb

New Results for tt in the Dilepton Channel: tt llbb


Inventing New Experimental and Analysis Techniques

(1) In Run I- 0.1 fb-1. Rochester’s analysis of the W Asymmetry (Bodek,Fan) has led to the reduction on the error on the W mass from PDF uncertainties from 100 MeV down to 15 MeV. Made precision measurements of the W mass at hadron colliders possible.

-- In Run I - A new experimental technique (Bodek-Fan) to identify e+ and e- was invented for this purpose to extend the asymmetry to the forward direction. It combines extrapolation of tracks in the SVX with the position of the shower centroid in the plug calorimeter. If the centroid was shifter to one side it was an electron, if it was on the other, it was a positron,

-- In run I - This technique was also used to measure the Z and DY forward-backward asymmetry. Z - Y distributions were measured (constrains PDFs). High Mass DY-FB Asymmetry shows 2 sigma deviation from SM (possible Z’ ?).

(2) Run-II Investigating physics with 0.5-1.0 fb-1. Developing newer (Bodek,McFarland) techniques to do physics with W’s, Z’s and DY.


Run I versus Run IIRochester analyses 0.1 fm-1 vs 2 fm-1

2 fm-1

Run I analysis - Bodek/Chung

Run II analysis - McFarland/Lee


Run I versus Run IIRochester analyses 0.1 fm-1 vs 2 fm-1

Run I analyses (Z- Bodek/Liu), (W - Bodel/Fan). Run II: Using plug electrons together with SVX tracking (Rochester plug-Rocheser SVX group), MC shows definitive measurements of PDFs from W and Z y-distributions and asymmetry.)

2 fm-1, Run II analysis Bodek/McFarland/Han/Gyu

2 fm-1Run II Analysis

Bodek/Chung/Han


Constraining PDFs : (d/u) with W asymmetry;

(d+u) with y distribution for Z’s and W’s

New technique to unfold the two yw solutions to get the true W production asymmetry -being developed by Bodek, McFarland- expected errors. Shown:

Measure W decay lepton charge asymmetry - V-A has opposite asymemtry. Unkown neutrino Z momentum yields two solutions for yw Needed to

Limit theError on WMass from PDFs uncertainties

U-quark carries moremomentum than d-quark

New technique


Constraining PDFs : (d/u) with W asymmetry;

(d+u) with y distribution for Z’s and W’s

W generated y distribution for 0.5 fb-1. W has higher statistics but cannot be measured directly. Determine indirectly via decay lepton and deconvolution of the two y1 and y2 solutions with the W asymmetry for Central and Plug electrons.

Z generated y distribution for 1.5 fb-1 Z can be measured directly using Plug-Plug events (but cross section is lower than W). Provides constraints on W y distribution and on (u+d). (get d/u from W Asymmetry).

W with0.5 fb-1generated Z with 1.5 fb-1

- generated


Conclusions

• U or R continues to play an indispensable role in CDF

Documents

DOE, July 23, 2003, P.Tipton1 University of Rochester Participation in CDF