Changes between Version 1 and Version 2 of GravitonPlusJets
 Timestamp:
 04/06/12 16:33:02 (8 years ago)
Legend:
 Unmodified
 Added
 Removed
 Modified

GravitonPlusJets
v1 v2 61 61 * '''LHC''': Pt grav = 450 GeV (minimum pt for the graviton) 62 62 * '''Tevatron''': Pt grav = 120 GeV 63 * Htjmin = L_MG ("Step function" for the massless_grav case) = >'''only for the massless case'''64 65 (In order to analyze Pt grav > 500 GeV for the LHC and Pt grav >150 for the Tevatron, we will fix a lower parameter to generate the events.)66 ====== + <em> <strong><br /></strong></em> ======63 * Htjmin = L_MG ("Step function" for the massless_grav case) => '''only for the massless case''' 64 65 (In order to analyze Pt grav > 500 GeV for the LHC and Pt grav > 150 for the Tevatron, we will fix a lower parameter to generate the events.) 66 ====== + <em>**g>[[br]]**</em> ====== 67 67 68 68 '''b) pythia_card.dat:''' … … 81 81 * M1_grav = 1 TeV 82 82 * L_RS = 3 TeV 83 ====== + '''''In the RS model, L_RS=M1_grav/x1/(k/M_Pl) (See Phys.Rev.Lett. 84, 2080 (2000)), x1 is the first root of the Bessel function of order 1, x1~=3.83. Thus from Fig.4 in 0710.3338, for M1_grav=1TeV, L_RS ~ >2.6TeV''''' ======83 ====== + '''''In the RS model, L_RS=M1_grav/x1/(k/M_Pl) (See Phys.Rev.Lett. 84, 2080 (2000)), x1 is the first root of the Bessel function of order 1, x1~=3.83. Thus from Fig.4 in 0710.3338, for M1_grav=1TeV, L_RS ~>2.6TeV''''' ====== 84 84 85 85 Massless graviton) For both Tevatron and LHC … … 98 98 First we show each matched results via its MatchChecker report. We also show here the comparative plots in which we compare (for each ADD run) the matched result with the NLO/LO result, given the K factor of normalization. 99 99 ====== + a) MatchChecker reports ====== 100 <table style="width: 561px; height: 1304px;" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0" border="1"> <tbody> <tr> <td> <strong>Model<br /></strong></td> <td><strong>Parameters<br /></strong></td> <td> '''Name of the Run''' </td> <td><strong>Plots<br /></strong></td> </tr> <tr> <td rowspan="6">ADD</td> <td rowspan="2">100 <table style="width: 561px; height: 1304px;" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0" border="1"> <tbody> <tr> <td>**g>Model[[br]]**</td> <td>**g>Parameters[[br]]**</td> <td> '''Name of the Run''' </td> <td>**g>Plots[[br]]**</td> </tr> <tr> <td rowspan="6">ADD</td> <td rowspan="2"> 101 101 102 102 L_ADD = 5 TeV … … 114 114 115 115 [attachment:ADD_LHC_Run02_Report.pdf LHC Plots report] 116 </td> </tr> <tr> <td>ADD_Tevatron_Run02</td> <td> <br /></td> </tr> <tr> <td rowspan="2">L_ADD = 5 TeV116 </td> </tr> <tr> <td>ADD_Tevatron_Run02</td> <td>[[br]]</td> </tr> <tr> <td rowspan="2">L_ADD = 5 TeV 117 117 118 118 NADD = 6 … … 160 160 ====== + b) Comparative plots: NLO/LO & matching results ====== 161 161 162  <p>ADD model</p>  <p>[attachment:Results_LHC_d2.pdf LHC Comparative plot (PtGrav) for d=2]</p> <p>[attachment:Results_LHC_d4.pdf LHC Comparative plot (PtGrav) for d=4]</p> <p>[attachment:Results_LHC_d6.pdf LHC Comparative plot (PtGrav) for d=6]</p> <p> </p> <p>[attachment:Results_LHC_ADD.pdf LHC combined comparative plot]</p>  163    164  Massless grav. model  <p>[attachment:Results_LHC_Ml.pdf LHC combined comparative plot]</p> <p> </p>  165    166  RS model  <p> </p> <p>[attachment:Results_LHC_RS.pdf LHC combined comparative plot]</p> <p> </p>  162  163 164 DD model</p>  <p>[attachment:Results_LHC_d2.pdf LHC Comparative plot (PtGrav) for d=2]</p> <p>[attachment:Results_LHC_d4.pdf LHC Comparative plot (PtGrav) for d=4]</p> <p>[attachment:Results_LHC_d6.pdf LHC Comparative plot (PtGrav) for d=6]</p> <p> </p> <p>[attachment:Results_LHC_ADD.pdf LHC combined comparative plot]</p>  165    166  Massless grav. model  167 168 attachment:Results_LHC_Ml.pdf LHC combined comparative plot]</p> <p> </p>  169    170  RS model  171 172 </p> <p>[attachment:Results_LHC_RS.pdf LHC combined comparative plot]</p> <p> </p>  167 173 ====== + c) Jet Rates for the LHC samples ====== 168 174 169  <p>ADD model</p>  <p>[attachment:JetRates_ADD.pdf Jet rates]</p>  170    171  Massless grav. model  <p>[attachment:JetRates_Ml.pdf Jet rates]</p>  172    173  RS model  <p>[attachment:JetRates_RS.pdf Jet rates]</p>  175  176 177 DD model</p>  <p>[attachment:JetRates_ADD.pdf Jet rates]</p>  178    179  Massless grav. model  180 181 attachment:JetRates_Ml.pdf Jet rates]</p>  182    183  RS model  184 185 attachment:JetRates_RS.pdf Jet rates]</p>  174 186 175 187 PS. The number of events is normalized by the total number of events of each run. 176 188 ===== IV.2.2) Study on the shape of the curves (Pt grav) related to the mass of the graviton ===== 177 189 178 Particularly for the RS model, we can see that the slope of the curve changes with the mass of the graviton (for example, compare RS with L_{RS}{{{3TeV/M_{grav} }}} 1 TeV against L_{RS}{{{3TeV/M_grav }}} 100 GeV). That is related to the fact we are plotting the pt of the graviton. The harder is the emission, the more inclined the curve will be. 190 Particularly for the RS model, we can see that the slope of the curve changes with the mass of the graviton (for example, compare RS with L_{RS}{{{ 191 3TeV/M_{grav} 192 }}} 1 TeV against L_{RS}{{{ 193 3TeV/M_grav 194 }}} 100 GeV). That is related to the fact we are plotting the pt of the graviton. The harder is the emission, the more inclined the curve will be. 179 195 180 196 For the RS model is easy to see, because we can control the graviton mass (considering it is an input in this case). For the ADD it is a bit harder because the graviton should be an integration of the KK states. However, we know that the mass density depends on the number of extra dimensions. Therefore, we should have a different slope for each curve given its number of extra dimensions (d=2,4,6). … … 198 214 4) Since ADD model is only an effective model, the results we get are valid only as long as the scales involved in the hard scattering process do not exceed the fundamental scale, we need to quantify the sensitivity of our prediction to the unknown UV completion of the theory. Should we do this? 199 215 200 5) Does matching can give reliable results for total cross section or not? Or just for shape/distribution? <br />It seems the total cross section after matching is definitely not the same as G+0jet's, or G+njet's. So what is the meaning of the matched total cross section?216 5) Does matching can give reliable results for total cross section or not? Or just for shape/distribution?[[br]]It seems the total cross section after matching is definitely not the same as G+0jet's, or G+njet's. So what is the meaning of the matched total cross section? 201 217 202 218  … … 208 224 For reference, the cuts in 0911.5095 (NLO QCD corrections to G+monojet) are the following: 209 225 210 * '''LHC''': PTmiss >500GeV; \eta_j<4.5211 * '''Tevatron''': PTmiss >120GeV; harder jet : Ptj>150GeV with \eta_j<1; softer jet with PT>60GeV, \eta_j<3.6 is vetoed.226 * '''LHC''': PTmiss>500GeV; \eta_j<4.5 227 * '''Tevatron''': PTmiss>120GeV; harder jet : Ptj>150GeV with \eta_j<1; softer jet with PT>60GeV, \eta_j<3.6 is vetoed. 212 228 213 229 * mur=muf= Pt graviton … … 219 235 <blockquote> 220 236 221 * <p> '''For the LHC, "the jets are defined by the K_T algorithm with D=0.6, and are required to satisfy \eta_j<4.5 and PTj>50GeV"''' </p> 222 * <p> '''For the Tevatron,"jets are defined by the K_T algorithm with D=0.7, and are required to satisfy \eta_j<3.6 and PTj>20GeV"''' </p> 237 * 238 239 '''For the LHC, "the jets are defined by the K_T algorithm with D=0.6, and are required to satisfy \eta_j<4.5 and PTj>50GeV"''' </p> 240 * 241 242 '''For the Tevatron,"jets are defined by the K_T algorithm with D=0.7, and are required to satisfy \eta_j<3.6 and PTj>20GeV"''' </p> 223 243 </blockquote> 224 244 … … 227 247 In the matching procedure, the separation between jets is defined by the xqcut and pythia's QCUT parameters. We have to set Drjj to zero in the run_card.dat. 228 248 229 <strong> <br /></strong>249 <strong>[[br]]** 230 250 === VI. References === 231 251 … … 261 281 262 282 283