The K L   0  0 decays in KLOE Introduction  pairing Discriminant variables K L   0  0 counting : 3,4,5  ’s samples Control samples for efficiencies.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Sabino Meola Charged kaon group meeting 12 October 2006 Status of analysis.
Advertisements

Sabino Meola Charged kaon group meeting 14 December 2006 Status of analysis.
Barbara Sciascia – LNF 1 K  semileptonic BR measurement B. Sciascia 4 may 2006 KpmKSL joint meeting.
Recent Results on Radiative Kaon decays from NA48 and NA48/2. Silvia Goy López (for the NA48 and NA48/2 collaborations) Universitá degli Studi di Torino.
KLOE GM Capri May 2003 K charged status report DE/Dx development vs PiD (next talk by E.De Lucia) →K e3 studies: initial design of efficiency measurement.
Sabino Meola Charged kaon group meeting 12 October 2005 Status of analysis.
Status of the  ee analysis Mauro Raggi, LNF INFN 29 th August 2013 NA48/2 rare decay session NA62 Collaboration meeting Liverpool.
Biagio Di Micco17/07/ Radiative Phi Decays Meeting 1  Status of the work Biagio Di Micco Università degli Studi di Roma 3.
Study of the e + e   η  process at √s = 1 GeV (main systematic error in the e + e   e + e  η analysis)
14 Sept 2004 D.Dedovich Tau041 Measurement of Tau hadronic branching ratios in DELPHI experiment at LEP Dima Dedovich (Dubna) DELPHI Collaboration E.Phys.J.
Anne Dabrowski Northwestern University Collaboration Meeting 22 nd February 2005 Update Kmu3 Branching Ratio measurement A. Dabrowski, February
Measurement of the absolute BR(K  +  -  + ) : an update Patrizia de Simone KLOE Kaon meeting – 21 May 2009.
A. Dabrowski, June Ratio(ke3/pipi0) 1 Final Results Γ(Ke3)/ Γ(pipi0) Anne Dabrowski Northwestern University NA48/2 Collaboration Meeting 08 June.
Top Turns Ten March 2 nd, Measurement of the Top Quark Mass The Low Bias Template Method using Lepton + jets events Kevin Black, Meenakshi Narain.
Kevin Black Meenakshi Narain Boston University
MC Study on B°  S (Status Report) Jianchun Wang Syracuse University BTeV meeting 05/25/01.
MC Study on B°  J/  ° With J/      °     Jianchun Wang Syracuse University BTeV meeting 03/04/01.
Anne Dabrowski Northwestern University NA48/2 Semileptonics Meeting 22 nd February 2005 Update Kmu3 Branching Ratio measurement A. Dabrowski, February.
Measurement of the Branching fraction B( B  D* l ) C. Borean, G. Della Ricca G. De Nardo, D. Monorchio M. Rotondo Riunione Gruppo I – Napoli 19 Dicembre.
Outline: (1) The data sample (2) Some news on the analysis method (3) Efficiency revised (4) Background revised (5) Data: spectrum + “phi-curve”
Irakli Chakaberia Final Examination April 28, 2014.
Study of the decay   f 0 (980)    +  -  C.Bini, S.Ventura, KLOE Memo /2004 (upd. 06/2005) C.Bini, KLOE Memo /2005 (upd. 06/2005)
N  for 2012 Zhiyong Wang May, 12,2015 Charmonium group meeting 1.
Progress on BR(K L  p + p - ) using a double-tag method A. Antonelli, M. Antonelli, M. Dreucci, M. Moulson CP working group meeting, 25 Feb 2003.
W+jets and Z+jets studies at CMS Christopher S. Rogan, California Institute of Technology - HCP Evian-les-Bains Analysis Strategy Analysis Overview:
Status of KLOE real data analysis by the AMADEUS group Oton Vázquez Doce, 4 Maggio 2007.
E. De LuciaNeutral and Charged Kaon Meeting – 7 May 2007 Updates on BR(K +  π + π 0 ) E. De Lucia.
K charged meeting 10/11/03 K tracking efficiency & geometrical acceptance :  K (p K,  K )  We use the tag in the handle emisphere to have in the signal.
V.Patera – KLOE GM – Otranto – 10 June 2002 K  reconstruction status K + K - retracking features New vs Old : resolution New vs Old : efficiencies Conclusion.
Barbara Sciascia – LNF 1 Barbara Sciascia Measurement of the absolute branching ratio of K  l3 decays and of the R  e ratio Blessing meeting of the final.
Search for Electron Neutrino Appearance in MINOS Mhair Orchanian California Institute of Technology On behalf of the MINOS Collaboration DPF 2011 Meeting.
Measurement of Vus. Recent NA48 results on semileptonic and rare Kaon decays Leandar Litov, CERN On behalf of the NA48 Collaboration.
Study of exclusive radiative B decays with LHCb Galina Pakhlova, (ITEP, Moscow) for LHCb collaboration Advanced Study Institute “Physics at LHC”, LHC Praha-2003,
 0  5  Outline Event selection & analysis Background rejection Efficiencies Mass spectrum Comparison data-MC Branching ratio evaluation Systematics.
Optimization of  exclusion cut for the  + and  (1520) analysis Takashi Nakano Based on Draft version of Technical Note 42.
Measurement of photons via conversion pairs with PHENIX at RHIC - Torsten Dahms - Stony Brook University HotQuarks 2006 – May 18, 2006.
Preliminary results for the BR(K S  M. Martini and S. Miscetti.
Sabino Meola Kloe meeting 10 March 2005 Status of analysis.
Dynamics of  →       F. Ambrosino T. Capussela F. Perfetto.
Barbara Sciascia July,29 th - LNF 1 Barbara Sciascia K  semileptonic decays Charged Kaon Meeting July, 29 th - LNF Single photon efficiency in KPM events.
Progress on F  with the KLOE experiment (untagged) Federico Nguyen Università Roma TRE February 27 th 2006.
1 Semileptonic physics in FOCUS D  K  0 l form factor measurement –Motivation –Method and Signals D   l form factor measurement –Motivation –Signals.
Status of the hadronic cross section (small angle) Federico Nguyen February 22 nd 2005  the 2002 data sample and available MC sets  trigger efficiency.
Preliminary Measurement of the Ke3 Form Factor f + (t) M. Antonelli, M. Dreucci, C. Gatti Introduction: Form Factor Parametrization Fitting Function and.
Status of vertex efficiency evaluation Fabio Ambrosino, Patrizia de Simone, Paolo Massarotti, Vincenzo Patera the idea is to look for events where the.
2 nd KLOE Physics Workshop A. Ferrari 1 of the K L  K S regeneration cross section: F. Ceradini, A. Ferrari, A. Passeri Universita’ di Roma Tre & INFN.
4 May 2006 First look to the Ke2 decay ● Interesting for the Ke2/k m 2 ratio ● BR(K ±  e n ) = (1.55 ±0.07)10 -5 ● Large radiative decay BR(K ±  e n.
LCWS 05 1 Experimental studies of Strong Electroweak Symmetry Breaking in gauge boson scattering and three gauge boson production P.Krstonosic Work done.
1 Measurement of the Mass of the Top Quark in Dilepton Channels at DØ Jeff Temple University of Arizona for the DØ collaboration DPF 2006.
4/12/05 -Xiaojian Zhang, 1 UIUC paper review Introduction to Bc Event selection The blind analysis The final result The systematic error.
D. LeoneNovosibirsk, , 2006Pion Form KLOE Debora Leone (IEKP – Universität Karlsruhe) for the KLOE collaboration International Workshop.
Kalanand Mishra June 29, Branching Ratio Measurements of Decays D 0  π - π + π 0, D 0  K - K + π 0 Relative to D 0  K - π + π 0 Giampiero Mancinelli,
Status report on analysis of BR(K S  p + p - p 0 ) A. Antonelli, M. Moulson, Second KLOE Physics Workshop, Otranto, June 2002.
Data vs MC … issues of the K +- group 1.Accidentals … contribution from Erika & Roberto 2.DC background.
Paolo Massarotti Kaon meeting March 2007  ±  X    X  Time measurement use neutral vertex only in order to obtain a completely independent.
M. Martemianov, ITEP, October 2003 Analysis of ratio BR(K     0 )/BR(K    ) M. Martemianov V. Kulikov Motivation Selection and cuts Trigger efficiency.
Paolo Massarotti Charged Kaon Meeting 4 may 2006 Charged kaon lifetime P. Massarotti.
LNF 12/12/06 1 F.Ambrosino-T. Capussela-F.Perfetto Update on        Dalitz plot slope Where we started from A big surprise Systematic checks.
Status of the measurement of K L lifetime - Data sample (old): ~ 440 pb -1 ( ) - MC sample: ~125 pb -1 ( mk0 stream ) Selection: standard tag (|
Parameterization of EMC response for
Status of K± p±p0 E. De Lucia.
PFA Study with Jupiter Contents : 1. Introduction 2. GLD-PFA
the charged kaon lifetime
KLOE Drift Chamber Review L.N.F. – March 9, 2001
Preliminary results on Ks  3p0 search......
KLOE General Meeting - LNF March,
Progress on Pion Form Factor at KLOE (large photon polar angle)
° status report analysis details: overview; “where we are”; plans: before finalizing result.. I.Larin 02/13/2009.
Using Single Photons for WIMP Searches at the ILC
Search for Lepton Flavour Violation in the decay  → BaBar
Presentation transcript:

The K L   0  0 decays in KLOE Introduction  pairing Discriminant variables K L   0  0 counting : 3,4,5  ’s samples Control samples for efficiencies Stability in the F.V. Stability in time K L   0  0 counting: summary table Efficiency evaluation Dalitz pairs Ks from regeneration K L   0  0  0 events Ratio of the B.R.

K L   0  0  selection against K L   0  0  0  decays is based on the recognition of the 2-body kinematics Modest energy resolution for  0 is further spoiled by the combinatorial of the  pairing. The  pairing efficiency has been improved from 60% to 98% taking into account not only the residuals to the  0  mass, but also the residuals to the Kaon energy and momenta, normalized to the covariance matrix The results have been obtained using as discriminant variable the ratio of the likelihood (RTL), to have 1or2  0 s from 2-body decay against the hypothesis to have 1or2  0 s without any constraint on the energy. The counting is done comparing the signal and background in a large rtl-window. Introduction

Generalized  2 function for  pairing K L   0  0  and  K L   0  0  0  T T V -1  T M  0  T I = E Ia E Ib (1-cos  I ) I=1,2,(3) T E =    E Ia (E Ib ) T Px =   P xIa (E Ib cos  I, ) T Py =   P xIa (E Ib cos  I, ) K L   0  0  0  only Covariance matrix calculated by the derivatives on respect (E I, x I, y I, z I, R K )  (E I ),  (x I ),  (y I ),  (z I ) have been parameterized as in the Simona work on the  0  0  analysis  (R K ) from the K L   +  -  0 analysis For each pairing there are 2(n(  0  values of the function : the minimum is kept Miscellanea P K 

 0 mass distribution normalized to the  2   0 mc events 3  0 - Data

Test Hypothesis : H 0 2-body kinematics - K L   0  0  event Alternative hypothesis : H 1  0 X E  i =  k /4/  i (1   (1 – D) )  i =  k (1 -  k cos(ki) ) D = 8  i  j m 2 (  0 )/ m 2 (  0 ) / (1 – cos(ji)  E  i = m 2 (  0 ) / E  j / 2. / (1 – cos(ji)  L(n  0 ) =  I exp(-(Emes  i –E  i ) 2 /   i 2 ) / (   i  (2  ) ) I=1, …2n   i parameterized always in the same way. LRatio = max(L| H 0 ) / max(L| H 1 ) -2 log(LRatio) used (RTL) For each pairing there are 2(n(  0  values of the function : the maximum is kept Miscellanea

K L   0  0 counting Tag criteria, fiducial volume : same as in the K L   analysis Track veto criteria : reject the events having tracks not associated with K S      chain Efficiency measured with K L         6  Large RTL window to work at high efficiency (0.9 for 4  sample) Monte Carlo efficiency controlled by the signal selected with the global fit Signal counting by the fit of signal+bck distribution of RTL Monte Carlo distribution scale adjusted using QCAL events for the background AND events selected by the global fit for the signal Counting controlled by the fit of signal+bck distribution of  E for events selected by global fit

RTL : why? RTL  E calc Black histo : Data (4clusters) Red Histo : K L   0  0 Green Histo: Shape without K L   0  0 contribution Black histo : Data (4clusters) Red Histo : K L   0  0 Green Histo: Shape without K L   0  0 contribution Maximum of s/(b+s) max(s) Smoother behaviour of the background in the signal region

Data-MonteCarlo comparison after scaling Signal-Rich Sample Max_dist 1.2% prob 58% Qcal tagged background Max_dist 1.6% prob 13%

5cluster sample  2 = ± ±120 events Mc  =0.5x0.86  E ecal >0 required

 2 = ± ±320 events Mc  =0.77   )>0. required  2 = ± ±180 events Mc  =0.5x0.77 3cluster sample

4cluster sample  2 = ± ±360 events  =0.94(data)x0.95(mc)

Events selected by global fit RTL  E calc  2 = ± ±240 events  2 = ± ±300 events

Fiducial Volume  0  0 vs  0  0  0  events  0  0 + bck ( RTL < 10. required) distribution on the entire volume selected for the analysis Background level greater near the calorimeter Distance from the origin of the neutral vertex distribution for 30<Distance<140. blue points  0  0 + bck ( RTL < 10. required) Black histo :  0  0  0  (sample with > 4 clusters) Entries are those of the 3  0 sample, the blue points have been normalized to an equal number of events

Fiducial Volume Control : Signal counting (4  ) / 3   Signal (4-cluster sample)/ 3   in 9 (R,  not-overlapping regions of the fiducial volume 1. R<68.cm,  <-  /3. 2. R<68.cm, -  /3.<  <  /3. 3. R  / < R<111.cm,  <-  / <R<111.cm, -  /3.<  <  /  /3. 7. R>111.cm,  <-  /3. 8. R>111.cm, -  /3 <  <  /3. 9. R>111.cm,  >  /3.

Time Stability Control : Signal counting (4  ) / 3  0 Signal (4-cluster sample)/ 3   for 9 data subsamples 1. Nrun< <Nrun< <Nrun< <Nrun< <Nrun< <Nrun< <Nrun< <Nrun< Nrun>26800

K L  K S   0  0 counting N reg_gas / N kl   0  0 = 0.24  0.04 Event topology radial position of 25 cm (regeneration at the entrance of the DC) 3clust/4clust = 0.85  0.02 (see next slide) The high percentage of 3cluster events due to the “bad” position of the K S   0  0 vertices on the KL flight direction I assume for the regenerated events an extra-source of loss of clusters connected to the neutral vertex P 3reg = P 3 (1.- p loss ) 3 + P 4 (1.- p loss ) 3 p loss + P 5 (1.- p loss ) 3 p 2 loss P 4reg = P 4 (1.- p loss ) 4 + P 5 (1.- p loss ) 4 p loss P 3reg /P 4reg = 0.85 ; P 3,P 4,P 5 are the percentages for the “normal”  0  0 events. From above, I obtain: P loss = P 3reg = 0.38 P 4reg = 0.45 P 5reg = 0.05 I use the 3cluster and 4cluster events on the regeneration-peak, e.g. the events in a window 0.4 cm wide aroun 25 cm, to measure the percentages of events counted as signal in the analysis: 4-cluster events: 2500 regenerated events in the window : fit output: 525  30 (  2 =1.1) 3-cluster events: 2066 regenerated events in the window : fit output: 626  50 (  2 =1.1) The contribution to the 5cluster sample is negligible  3reg = 0.30  0.02  4reg = 0.21  clusters 0.24 x 0.38 x 0.30 N(K L   0  0 ) = 0.03 N(K L   0  0 ) 4clusters 0.24 x 0.45 x 0.21 N(K L   0  0 ) = 0.02 N(K L   0  0

Any cluster multiplicity > 2 Fit:  900 events 3cluster events Fit:  530 events Fit:  620 events

K L   0  0 counting Fit Regen Track veto Final MC from data Dalitz Final 3cluster sample 4276     cluster sample 1023    cluster sample     TOT    MC - >5cluster 140 Dalitz decays (810  30)  K L   0  0   N(K L   0  0  K L   0  0  0 ) = ( 4.48  0.11  ) 10 -3