1. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 1 PHYS 5326 – Lecture #5 Monday, Feb. 12, 2007 Dr. Jae Yu 1.ILC News from Beijing 2.Interpretation of sin 2  W 3.sin 2  W link to Higgs

2. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 2 ILC RDR from Beijing Global Design Effort (GDE) headed by Barry Barish of CalTech completed a Reference Design Report (RDR) –Worldwide group working on ILC machine design –Defines the baseline design of the ILC and provides the cost estimate for an ILC Baseline design parameters –CMS Energy: 200 – 500GeV scannable –Total length: 31km –Luminosity: –Single interaction region two detector in push-pull mode

3. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 3 ILC RDR from Beijing Baseline cost estimate –ILC Value units to provide cost in universally understandable price Lowest reasonable price for required quality –Shared cost: $4.87B –Site specific cost: $1.78B This is the cost for tunneling, foundation, geological issues, etc –Labor cost: 13,000 Man-years –Not included in the cost estimate Engineering design, preparation cost for R&D Detectors and associated R&D Contingencies for risks Escalation (inflation)

4. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 4 ILC RDR from Beijing The next steps –Engineering design report by 2010 Should include complete design of the machine except for the site specific portion of it Refined cost estimate –Accept expression of interest (EOI) for hosting the ILC from countries from now till 2011 –Site selection process begins shortly as EOI’s collected –Construction of the machine begins 2011 or so Detector R&D and selection should complete by 2010 – 2011 time scale

5. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 5 MC to Relate R exp to R  and sin 2  W Parton Distribution Model –Correct for details of PDF model  Used CCFR data for PDF To minimize systematic effects –Model cross over from short  CC events

6. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 6 MC to Relate R exp to R  and sin 2  W Neutrino Fluxes  , e,  ,  e in the two running modes  e CC events always look short Shower length modeling –Correct for short events that look long Detector response vs energy, position, and time –Continuous testbeam running minimizes systematics

7. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 7 Thanks to the separate beam  Measure R ’s separately Use MC to simultaneously fit and to sin 2  W and m c, and sin 2  W and  sin 2  W Fit to R exp and R  exp R Sensitive to sin 2  W while R  isn’t  R  is used to extract sin 2  W and R  to control systematics  Why???

8. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 8 sin 2  W Fit to R exp and R  exp Two parameter fit for sin 2  W and    yields Syst. Error dominated since we cannot take advantage of sea quark cancellation Single parameter fit, using SM values for EW parameters (   =1)

9. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 9 NuTeV sin 2  W Uncertainties 1-Loop Electroweak Radiative Corrections based on Bardin, Dokuchaeva JINR-E2-86-2 60 (1986 ) 0.00032RLRL 0.00022 0.08  M W (GeV/c 2 ) 0.00162Total Systematic Uncertainty 0.00064Total Physics Model Systmatics 0.00011RadiativeCorrection 0.00005Non-isoscalar target 0.00014Higher Twist 0.00047CC Charm production, sea quarks 0.00063Total Experimental Systematics 0.00018Energy Measurements 0.00046Event Length 0.00039 e flux 0.00135Statistical  sin 2  W Source of Uncertainty Dominant uncertainty M t Term M higgs Term

10. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 10 NuTeV vs CCFR Uncertainty Comparisons  Technique worked!  Beamline worked!

11. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 11 Comparison of New sin 2  W Comparable precision but value smaller than other measurements 2.5  deviation!

12. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 12 SM Global Fits with New Results Without NuTeV    dof=20.5/14: P=11.4% With NuTeV    dof=29.7/15: P=1.3% Confidence level in upper M higgs limit weakens slightly. LEP EWWG: http://www.cern.ch/LEPEWWGhttp://www.cern.ch/LEPEWWG

13. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 13 Tree-level Parameters:   and sin 2  W (on-shell) Either sin 2  W (on-shell) or  0 could agree with SM but both agreeing simultaneously is unlikely

14. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 14 R  can be expressed in terms of quark couplings: Model Independent Analysis Where Paschos-Wolfenstein formula can be expressed as

15. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 15 –From two parameter fit to and Performed a fit to quark couplings (and g L and g R ) –For isoscalar target, the N couplings are Model Independent Analysis (SM: 0.3042  -2.6  deviation) (SM: 0.0301  Agreement)

16. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 16 Model Independent Analysis Difficult to explain the disagreement with SM by: Parton Distribution Function or LO vs NLO or Electroweak Radiative Correction: large M Higgs

17. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 17 R - technique is sensitive to q vs  q differences and NLO effect –Difference in valence quark and anti-quark momentum fraction Isospin symmetry assumption might not be entirely correct –Expect violation about 1% →NuTeV reduces this effect by using the ratio of and  cross sections →Reducing dependence by a factor of 3 What is the discrepancy due to (Old Physics)?

18. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 18 s vs  s quark asymmetry –s –s and s s needs to be the same but the momentum could differ A value of  s=xs -x  s ~+0.002 could shift sin 2  W by - 0.0026, explaining ½ the discrepancy (S. Davison, et. al., hep-ph/0112302) NuTeV di-  measurement shows that  s~-0.0027+/-0.0013 What is the discrepancy due to (Old Physics)? Use opposite sign di-  events to measure s and  s.

19. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 19 NLO and PDF effects –PDF, m c, Higher Twist effect, etc, are small changes Heavy vs light target PDF effect ( Kovalenko et al., hep- ph/0207158 ) –Using PDF from light target on Iron target could make up the difference  NuTeV result uses PDF extracted from CCFR (the same target) What is the discrepancy due to (Old Physics)?

20. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 20 e  s Oscillations with Large M LSND result implicate a large  m 2 (~10 — 100eV 2 ) solution for e oscillation  MiniBooNe at FNAL is running to put the nail on the coffin How would this affect NuTeV sin 2  W ? and If e  s with then Thus, MC will subtract more than it is in nature, causing measured R to be smaller and thereby increasing sin 2  W

21. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 21 Extra U(1) gauge group giving rise to interactions mediated by heavy Z’ boson (M Z’ >>M Z ) While couplings in these groups are arbitrary, E(6) gauge groups can provide mechanism for extra U(1) interaction via heavy Z’. Can give rise to gR gR but not gLgL which is strongly constrained by precision Z measurement New Physics: Interactions from Extra U(1) – Z’

22. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 22 Heavy non-SM vector boson exchange: Z’, LQ, etc –Suppressed Z (invisible) coupling –LL coupling enhanced than LR needed for NuTeV What other explanations (New Physics)? Both precision data are lower than SM

23. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 23 Propagator and coupling corrections –Small compared to the effect MSSM : Loop corrections wrong sign and small for the effect Many other attempts in progress but so far nothing seems to explain the NuTeV results –Lepto-quarks –Contact interactions with LL coupling ( NuTeV wants m Z’ ~1.2TeV, CDF/DØ: m Z’ >700GeV ) –Almost sequential Z’ with opposite coupling to What other explanations (New Physics)? Langacker et al, Rev. Mod. Phys. 64 87; Cho et al., Nucl. Phys. B531, 65; Zppenfeld and Cheung, hep-ph/9810277; Davidson et al., hep-ph/0112302

24. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 24 Linking sin 2  W with Higgs through M top vs M W One-loop correction to sin 2  W

25. Monday, Feb. 12, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 25 Homework Assignments Draw a few additional Feynman diagrams for higher order GSW corrections to -N scattering at the same order as those on pg 4 of the previous lecture –Due: One week from today, Mon., Feb. 19