Upload
cornelius-buck-cain
View
215
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Relative Phase between Relative Phase between
Strong and EM DecaysStrong and EM Decays
at BESIII and CLEOcat BESIII and CLEOcMarco Destefanis Università degli Studi di Torino
1
on behalf of the BESIII Collaboration
Quarkonium 2013
The 9th International Workshop on Heavy Quarkonium
IHEP, Beijing, April 22-26, 2013
OverviewOverview
• BESIII experiment
• Motivation
CLEOc and SND results
• Investigated processes
• Summary
2
3
Charmonium Physics D-Physics Light Hadron Spectroscopy -Physics ...
Physics program
The BESIII Experiment @ IHEPThe BESIII Experiment @ IHEP
BEijing Spectrometer III
e+e- collisions
S tuned depending on energy
D.M. Asner et al, Physics at BES-III, arXiv:0809.1869v1 [hep-ex] (2008)
4
Beam energy:1.0-2.3 GeV
Design Luminosity:1×1033 cm-2s-1
Achieved Luminosity: 6.5×1032 cm-2s-1 @ ψ(3770) Optimum energy:
1.89 GeV Energy spread:
5.16 ×10-4
No. of bunches:93
Bunch length:1.5 cm
Total current:0.91 A
Circumference:237m
e-e+
BEPCII Storage RingsBEPCII Storage Rings
Beijing Electron-Positron Collider II
5
MDC: small cell & He gasxy= 130 mp/p = 0.5% @1GeVdE/dx = 6%
EMC: CsI crystals, 28 cm E/E = 2.5% @1 GeV z = 0.6 cm/E
TOF: T = 80 ps Barrel 110 ps Endcap
Magnet: 1T Superconducting
Muon: 9 layer RPC
Trigger: Tracks & ShowersPipelined; Latency = 2.4 msData Acquisition: Event rate = 3 kHz Thruput ~ 50 MB/s
Zero Degree Detector (ISR)
BESIII DetectorBESIII Detector
J/J/ψψ Strong and Electromagnetic Decay Strong and Electromagnetic Decay AmplitudesAmplitudes
Resonant contributionsΓJ/ψ ~ 93KeV → pQCD
pQCD: all amplitudes almost real [1,2]
QCD -> Фp ~ 10° [1]
Non-resonant continuumpQCD regime
AEM
6[1] J. Bolz and P. Kroll, WU B 95-35.[2] S.J. Brodsky, G.P. Lepage, S.F. Tuan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 59, 621 (1987).
Strong → A3g
Electromagnetic → Aγ
Non-resonant Continuum → AEM
hadrons
hadrons
hadrons
J/J/ψψ Strong and Electromagnetic Decay Strong and Electromagnetic Decay AmplitudesAmplitudes
• If both real, they must interfere (Фp ~ 0°/180°)
• On the contrary Фp ~ 90° → No interference
J/ψ → NN (½+½-) Фp = 89° ± 15° [1]; 89° ± 9°[2]
J/ψ → VP (1-0-) Фp = 106° ± 10° [3]
J/ψ → PP (0-0-) Фp = 89.6° ± 9.9° [4]
J/ψ → VV (1-1-) Фp = 138° ± 37° [4]
• Results are model dependent
• Model independent test:interference with the non resonant continuum
[1] R. Baldini, C. Bini, E. Luppi, Phys. Lett. B404, 362 (1997); R. Baldini et al., Phys. Lett. B444, 111 (1998)[2] M. Ablikim et al., Phys. Rev. D 86, 032014 (2012).[3] L. Kopke and N. Wermes, Phys. Rep. 174, 67 (1989); J. Jousset et al., Phys. Rev. D41,1389 (1990).[4] M. Suzuki et al., Phys. Rev. D60, 051501 (1999).
7
8
J/J/ψψ Strong and Electromagnetic Decay AmplitudesStrong and Electromagnetic Decay Amplitudes
J/J/ψψ →→ NN NN
Favoured channel 3g match 3qq pairs
Without EM contribution p = n, due to isospin
EM contribution amplitudes have opposite sign, like magnetic moments
BRnn expected ~ ½ BRpp
But the BR are almost equal according to BESIII[1]:
BR(J/ψ → pp) = (2.112 ± 0.004 ± 0.027)•10-3
BR(J/ψ → nn) = (2.07 ± 0.01 ± 0.14)•10-3
Suggests 90° phase
[1] M. Ablikim et al., Phys. Rev. D 86, 032014 (2012).
A3g,A R<<1A3g A R 1
2
3
3
)/(
)/(p
g
ng
AA
AA
ppJBr
nnJBrR
9
Cross section for eCross section for e++ee---> -> ππ++ππ--ππ00
Interference of φ(1020) amplitudes @ SND experiment[1]
Shape indicates full interference path
phase ~ 180°
φ decay in agreement with PQCD
A3g and AEM are both real
[1] M.N. Achasov et al., PRD 63, 072002 (2001).
10
Phase Reconstruction @ CLEOcPhase Reconstruction @ CLEOc
φ
S. Dobbs et al., Phys. Rev. D 74, 011105 (2006).
11
Phase Reconstruction @ CLEOcPhase Reconstruction @ CLEOc
Evis = event energy
Charged π FF
S. Dobbs et al., Phys. Rev. D 74, 011105 (2006).
Was an Interference Already Seen?Was an Interference Already Seen?
e+e- → hadrons
e+e- → µ+µ-
e+e- → e+e-J.Z. Bai et al., Phys. Lett. B 355,
374-380 (1995)
Yes
without the strong contribution
12
Investigated ProcessesInvestigated Processes
Inclusive scenario: does not see anything
The phase is there, but the mean goes to 0
Interference |3| * fgf
Sum over all the final states ||3 ffg
Closure approximation 1|| ff
But orthogonal states0|3 g
If we sum over all the channels, the interference ≈ 013
Investigated ProcessesInvestigated Processes
Exclusive scenario: could see interference effects
• e+e+ -> J/ψ -> pp, nn NN
BR ~ 2.17x10-3 σcont~ 11 pb
• e+e- -> J/ψ -> ρπ VP
BR ~ 1.69% σcont~ 20 pb
• e+e- -> J/ψ -> 2(π+π-)π0
BR ~ 5.5% σcont~ 500 pb
14
15
Investigated ProcessesInvestigated Processes
Exclusive scenario: could see interference effects also on
• e+e- -> J/ψ -> π+π-
• e+e- -> J/ψ -> K+K-
• e+e- -> J/ψ -> K0K0
proposed and under study [1]
All the other channels for free
Even number of π: strong decay forbidden
-> interference must be
seen[1] H. Czyz, and J. Kühn, Phys. Rev. D80: 034035 (2009)
σcont~ 11 pb
21FF
S
10
1
W
Continuum Cross SectionContinuum Cross Section
16
σcont~ 500 pb
0
1
W
σcont~ 20 pb
6
1
W
pppppppp
ρπρπρπρπ
55ππ55ππ
V. Druzhinin et al., Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 1545 (2011) ; B. Aubert et al., Phys. Rev. D73,012005 (2006)
Phase GeneratorPhase Generator
• Event generator
• Monte-Carlo method (100000 iterations)
• Cross section evaluation at each point
• Beam spread gaussian (0.93 MeV)
• Radiative correction (simple model to be optimized)
• Max radiation 300 MeV (~20% ECM)
• Cross section:2
3217
2
2/1012][
i
risris
i
outin eCiWW
eCC
W
cBBnb
17
Simulated Yields for eSimulated Yields for e++ee---> -> pppp
continuum referenceσ ~ 11 pb
beam energy spread + radiative corrections
(to be optimized)
no corrections beam energy spread(0.93 MeV)
Δφ = 0°
Δφ = 90°
Δφ = 180°
18
Simulated Yields for pp -> Simulated Yields for pp -> µµ++µµ--
continuum referenceσ ~ 18 pb
no corrections beam energy spread
Δφ = 0°
Δφ = 90°
Δφ = 180°
19
Phase SignPhase Sign
* red: Δφ = -90°
blue: Δφ = +90°Maximum differences at the 1% level
20
pppppppp
Energy Points ChoiceEnergy Points Choice
ρπρπ
55ππ
pppp
21
Maximum interference: 0°
Depends on the process
Energy Points ChoiceEnergy Points Choice
ρπρπ
55ππ
pppp
22
2 pts at low Wfix the continuumfix the slope
Maximum interference: 0°
Depends on the process
Energy Points ChoiceEnergy Points Choice
ρπρπ
55ππ
pppp
23
2 pts at low Wfix the continuumfix the slope
2 pts at deep positions
Maximum interference: 0°
Depends on the process
Energy Points ChoiceEnergy Points Choice
ρπρπ
55ππ
pppp
24
2 pts at low Wfix the continuumfix the slope
2 pts at deep positions
Maximum interference: 0°
Depends on the process
Energy Points ChoiceEnergy Points Choice
ρπρπ
55ππ
pppp
25
2 pts at low Wfix the continuumfix the slope
2 pts at deep positions 1 pt Beginning of the BW
Maximum interference: 0°
Depends on the process
Energy Points ChoiceEnergy Points Choice
What happens at 90°
Gradient calculation
The deep corresponds roughly to the maximum gradient
(σ90-σi)/σ90
i = 70i = 70
i = 100i = 100
i = 80i = 80
i = 110i = 110
26
i = i = 7070
i = 100i = 100
i = i = 8080
i = 110i = 110
pppppppp ρπρπρπρπ
Energy Points ChoiceEnergy Points Choice
3050 MeV
3060 MeV
3083 MeV
3090 MeV
3093 MeV
27
Luminosity HypothesisLuminosity Hypothesis
• 5 values of Luminosity: 8.6•1031, 1032, 2•1032,
5•1032, 1033 [cm-2s-1]
• Time: 1 day = 86400 s
• Injection efficiency = 0.8
• Reconstruction efficiencypp = 0.67ρπ = 0.385π = 0.20
• Rate = L•T•εinj•εrec • σ
Integrated Luminosity
Lint/day = L • T • εinj
6•1036, 6.9•1036,
1.4•1037, 3.5•1037,
6.9•1037 [cm-2]
28
Precision of the FitPrecision of the Fit
29
10°
90°
170°
Statistical error for:
pp circle
ρπ triangle
170°
• Lower sensitivity
(No 0°-90° and 90°-180° symmetry)
2 parameters:
φ and σcont
30
5 days Lint = 1.4x1037 [cm-2]
points: 3050,3060, 3083,3090, 3093
MeV
ℓ1 : ℓ1 : ℓ2 : ℓ2 : ℓ1
Fit resultsFit results
10°
90°
170°
Statistical error:
pp circle
ρπ triangle
Open points:
1:1:0.5:0.5:2
Very low sensitivity to Luminosity ratiosBest and simplest choice: 1:1:1:1:1
31
J/J/ψψ Scan Scan3 parameters:
φ, σcont and Bout
Points Par Inj. eff. Δφ [°] Δσ [pb] ΔBout
5 3 0.7 29.3 1.3 0.7•10-3
5 3 0.8 26.7 1.3 0.7•10-3
6 3 0.8 6.1 0.9 0.4•10-5
12 3 0.7 6.3 0.9 0.7•10-4
12 3 0.8 5.9 0.9 0.7•10-4
σcont = 11 pb Bout = 2.17•10-3
3 parameters: 3096.9 needed (1 point more with high
statistics)
Δφ = +90°pppppppp
32
J/J/ψψ Phase Phase
Energyrequested
[MeV]
Energycollected
[MeV]LLintint [pb [pb-1-1]]
3050 3046 14.0
3060 3056 14.0
3083 3086 16.5
3090 3085 14.0
3093 3088 14.0
3097 3097 79.6
33
J/J/ψψ Phase – Real Data Phase – Real Data
Ecm(GeV) 𝓛 (pb-1)3.0500 14.895±0.029
3.0600 15.056±0.030
3.0830 4.759±0.017
3.0856 17.507±0.032
3.0900 15.552±0.030
3.0930 15.249±0.030
3.0943 2.145±0.011
3.0952 1.819±0.010
Ecm(GeV) 𝓛 (pb-1)3.0958 2.161±0.011
3.0969 2.097±0.011
3.0982 2.210±0.011
3.0990 0.759±0.007
3.1015 1.164±0.010
3.1055 2.106±0.011
3.1120 1.719±0.010
3.1200 1.261±0.009
3.0969 79.6
B.X. Zhang, Luminosity measurement for J/psi phase and lineshape study.
34
ee++ee---> -> μμ++μμ-- Phase Phase ReconstructionReconstruction2 good charged tracks:
|Rxy|<1cm, |Rz|<10cm;|cos|<0.8.
No good neutral tracks in EMC:
0<T<14 (x50 ns)
E>25MeV (|cos|<0.8), E>50 MeV (0.86<|cos|<0.92)
,charged<10o.Vertex fit to impove the momentum resolution:
2vertex<100.
Veto e+e:
Each charged track has an energy deposit in EMC;
E/p<0.25.
Veto cosmic rays:
=|Tof(+)-Tof()|<0.5
Momentum window cut:
•|p±-pthe|<3
Leptonic decay
Contributions from Aγ and AEM
35
ee++ee---> 2(-> 2(ππ++ππ--) Phase ) Phase ReconstructionReconstruction
4 good charged tracks:
|Rxy|<1cm, |Rz|<10cm.
Vertex fit to improve the momentum resolution.
Veto bkg from -conversion
(2(e+e)):
All angles between and , 10o<+<170o.
Veto events which have multi-tracks:
Minimum angle between () pairs: ()>170o.
G-Parity
Contributions from Aγ and AEM
36
ee++ee---> 2(-> 2(ππ++ππ--))ππ00 Phase Phase ReconstructionReconstruction
4 good charged tracks:
|Rxy|<1cm, |Rz|<10cm.
At least 2 good neutral tracks in EMC:
0<T<14 (x50 ns);
E>25MeV (|cos|<0.8), E>50 MeV (0.86<|cos|<0.92)
,charged<10o.
PID for each charged track:
prob()>prob(K)
Vertex fit:
2vertex<100.
3-C kinematic fit:
Loop all photons, choose the combination with the minimum 2
3C(<200).
0 selection:
|M()-0.135|<0.02 GeV/c2
9.0|E-E|
|cos|0
21decay
0
p
)(
Multi-combination from intermediate processes
Contributions from Aγ and AEM
37
2 good charged tracks:
• |Rxy| < 1 cm, |Rz| < 10 cm;
• back-to-back tracks: 178° < θ < 180°;
• p < 2 GeV/c;
• |cos| < 0.92
Analysis in Barrel + End Cap.
ppbar Events Reconstructionppbar Events Reconstruction
M. Ablikim et al., Phys. Rev. D 86, 032014 (2012).
38
ISR Radiative CorrectionsISR Radiative Corrections
Comparison of different generators
•KKMC Phase Space
•KKMC 1 + cos2θ
•ConExc
•Babayaga
ISR on/off
Check at each energy point
Reconstruction Efficiency and Systematic Errors
SummarySummary
• J/ψ decay amplitude phase: 0° (theory) but 90°
(data)
• Energy points collected: 3046, 3056, 3086, 3085,
3088
• Statistical significance enough to discriminate between different theoretical predictions
• Precision of fit → Luminosity dependence
• Analysis is ongoing
Next StepsNext Steps
• Complete the presented analysis
• Analyze more final states
• More refined ISR evaluation
39