Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

C. Ciobanu, page 1 Single-top MC generator studies at CDF Workshop on Top Physics: from the Tevatron to the LHC LPSC Grenoble, October 19, 2007 Catalin.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "C. Ciobanu, page 1 Single-top MC generator studies at CDF Workshop on Top Physics: from the Tevatron to the LHC LPSC Grenoble, October 19, 2007 Catalin."— Presentation transcript:

1 C. Ciobanu, page 1 Single-top MC generator studies at CDF Workshop on Top Physics: from the Tevatron to the LHC LPSC Grenoble, October 19, 2007 Catalin Ciobanu LPNHE-Universités de Paris 6&7 / IN2P3-CNRS l Short Introduction l MadEvent vs TopReX l MadEvent vs ZTOP l MadEvent vs

2 C. Ciobanu, page 2 Single Top Production l B.W. Harris et al.: Phys. Rev. D 66, , Z. Sullivan hep-ph/ l Compatible results: Campbell et al, Phys. Rev. D 70, (2004). l N. Kidonakis, Phys.Rev. D 74, (2006) s-channel production (W*) t-channel production (Wg fusion) s 1/2 =1.96TeVNLO Cross-sections t-channel1.98±0.25 pb s-channel0.88±0.11 pb s-channel production (W*) l At the Tevatron, top quarks are: äMostly produced in pairs (7pb): å qq annihilation (85%) å gg fusion (15%) äAlso electroweak (single-top): å s-channel å t-channel  Wt associated production M top = 175 GeV/c 2

3 C. Ciobanu, page 3 LP 07 Status ANN 1 fb -1 Likelihood 1.5 fb -1 Matrix El. 1.5 fb -1 CDF Run II Preliminary Single Top Evidence at D0 Phys. Rev. Lett 98, (2007)

4 C. Ciobanu, page 4 Monte Carlo Issues l Obviously, background modeling and estimation comes first! l What about signal modeling? äAt CDF, we studied MadEvent, TopRex, and (Run I single- top analyses used Pythia signal samples) äRemarkable progress in MC generators since the beginning of Run II… äGenerous help from the MC/pheno/theory community l Test different generators vs each other: äLook at final state particle distributions: å At generation level å After parton showering (PS) å After detector simulation and reconstruction äLook at event yields

5 C. Ciobanu, page 5 t-channel samples l MadEvent, TopRex: äMix LO (initial state b-quark) and NLO (initial state gluon) samples äManually matching the two samples (a la CMS 2000/065, PRD 70, ) å Why need matching (what is different between LO and NLO)? t-channel production (Wg fusion) l Matching based on Pt(b2): äPt(b2)K use NLO events äBy definition imperfect

6 C. Ciobanu, page 6 t-channel samples l MadEvent, TopRex: äMix LO (initial state b-quark) and NLO (initial state gluon) samples äManually matching the two samples (a la CMS 2000/065, PRD 70, ) å Why need matching? t-channel production (Wg fusion) l Matching based on Pt(b2): äPt(b2)K use NLO events äBy definition imperfect

7 C. Ciobanu, page 7 t-channel samples l MadEvent, TopRex: äMix LO (initial state b-quark) and NLO (initial state gluon) samples äManually matching the two samples (a la CMS 2000/065, PRD 70, ) å Why need matching? t-channel production (Wg fusion) l Matching based on Pt(b2): äPt(b2)K use NLO events äBy definition imperfect

8 C. Ciobanu, page 8 I. MadEvent vs TopRex l Commissioned TopRex for the Tevatron l Looked at distributions of Pt and Eta of: äLepton, neutrino, b-quark from top decay, 2nd b-quark (b2), light q äOther variables providing good S/B discrimination å eg Q x  LO t-channel NLO t-channel

9 C. Ciobanu, page 9 MadEvent (red) vs TopReX (black) l Light quark (generator level) in the LO t-channel samples:

10 C. Ciobanu, page 10 MadEvent (red) vs TopReX (black) l Light quark (generator level) in NLO t-channel samples:

11 C. Ciobanu, page 11 l Top quark slightly harder in P T (and more central) in TopReX l Conclusion: t-channel samples (esp NLO) somewhat different: äNLO fraction of events is small compared to LO äLight quark more central in TopReX; top quark also, to a smaller extent MadEvent (red) vs TopReX (black)

12 C. Ciobanu, page 12 II. Comparisons to ZTOP l Also compared the MadEvent distributions against the NLO kinematic distributions (no events) given by the ZTOP program. l ZTOP gives pt and  of top and the leading jets (top was not decayed) l For the most part, shapes agree well, eg 2 nd b-jet in t-chan: l Worst agreement: Second leading light jet distributions (next page)

13 C. Ciobanu, page 13 l 2 nd leading light jet (few ME processes not included our MC) Comparisons to ZTOP l Acceptance agreement looks good:

14 C. Ciobanu, page 14 III. Comparisons to l single-top code available relatively recently – we used v3.3: äIncludes spin correlation between FS top and bottom quarks äMatching is not done by hand! äHERWIG used for PS (our default sample was MadEvent+Pythia) l Same procedure as before: äLook at final state particles and record the agreement äLook at acceptances in different jet bins

15 C. Ciobanu, page 15 MadEvent vs l Nice agreement. It can be seen that (after PS+full simulation) äIn general means lower by ~1 GeV

16 C. Ciobanu, page 16 l Very good agreement in all kinematic distributions, before and after detector simulation l For example, light quark jet in t-chan events: MadEvent vs

17 C. Ciobanu, page 17 l Reconstructed top and Q x Eta in t-channel events: MadEvent vs l Acceptances? l In the 2 jet bin the agreement is good: äs-channel: 3.43% (ME) vs 3.67% ät-channel: 2.41% (ME) vs 2.43% äAcross all jet bins – satisfactory agreement (next page)

18 C. Ciobanu, page 18 MadEvent vs MadEvent N(tight jets) Accept (%) Tight jets: Et > 20 GeV, |  | < 2.8 Require at least one b-tagged jet l Acceptances by jet bin are slightly different – esp. 3 jet bin l All jet bins together: s-chan: 9%, t-chan 4% l Understand the size of this effect on the cross section measurements for the next round – when the 3 jet bin will be included. s-ch t-ch

19 C. Ciobanu, page 19 Summary l Several generators studied for single-top samples at CDF: l MadEvent, TopRex, with manual matching for t-channel: äPhys. Rev. D, (R) (2005) l Agreement with ZTOP NLO distributions reasonably good l versus MadEvent comparisons: äVery similar distributions äSlightly different distribution of acceptance by Njet bin (especially 3jet bin) l Many thanks to the theo/pheno/MC people – Tim Stelzer, Fabio Maltoni, Scott Willenbrock, Steve Mrenna, Zack Sullivan, Sergey Slabospitsky, Stefano Frixione, Bryan Webber, and others for providing expertise and support

20 C. Ciobanu, page 20


Download ppt "C. Ciobanu, page 1 Single-top MC generator studies at CDF Workshop on Top Physics: from the Tevatron to the LHC LPSC Grenoble, October 19, 2007 Catalin."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google