Context Navigation

Changes between Version 1 and Version 2 of GravitonPlusJets

Timestamp:: Apr 6, 2012, 4:33:02 PM (12 years ago)
Author:: trac
Comment:: --

Legend:

: Unmodified
: Added
: Removed
: Modified

GravitonPlusJets

-              v1
+              v2
       * '''LHC''': Pt grav = 450 GeV (minimum pt for the graviton)
       * '''Tevatron''': Pt grav = 120 GeV
       * Htjmin = L_MG ("Step function" for the massless_grav case) =&gt; '''only for the massless case'''
 (In order to analyze Pt grav &gt; 500 GeV for the LHC and Pt grav &gt; 150 for the Tevatron, we will fix a lower parameter to generate the events.)
 ====== + <em><strong><br /></strong></em> ======
+      * Htjmin = L_MG ("Step function" for the massless_grav case) => '''only for the massless case'''
+(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.)
+====== + <em>**g>[[br]]**</em> ======
 '''b) pythia_card.dat:'''
 …
       * M1_grav = 1 TeV
       * L_RS = 3 TeV
 ====== + '''''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 ~&gt;2.6TeV''''' ======
+====== + '''''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''''' ======
 Massless graviton) For both Tevatron and LHC
 …
 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.
 ====== + a) MatchChecker reports ======
 <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">
+<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">
 L_ADD = 5 TeV
 …
 [attachment:ADD_LHC_Run02_Report.pdf LHC Plots report]
 </td> </tr> <tr> <td>ADD_Tevatron_Run02</td> <td><br /></td> </tr> <tr> <td rowspan="2">L_ADD = 5 TeV
+</td> </tr> <tr> <td>ADD_Tevatron_Run02</td> <td>[[br]]</td> </tr> <tr> <td rowspan="2">L_ADD = 5 TeV
 NADD = 6
 …
 ====== + b) Comparative plots: NLO/LO & matching results ======
+|| <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> ||
+|| || ||
+|| Massless grav. model || <p>[attachment:Results_LHC_Ml.pdf LHC combined comparative plot]</p> <p> </p> ||
+|| || ||
+|| RS model || <p> </p> <p>[attachment:Results_LHC_RS.pdf LHC combined comparative plot]</p> <p> </p> ||
+||
+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> ||
+|| || ||
+|| Massless grav. model ||
+attachment:Results_LHC_Ml.pdf LHC combined comparative plot]</p> <p> </p> ||
+|| || ||
+|| RS model ||
+</p> <p>[attachment:Results_LHC_RS.pdf LHC combined comparative plot]</p> <p> </p> ||
 ====== + c) Jet Rates for the LHC samples ======
+|| <p>ADD model</p> || <p>[attachment:JetRates_ADD.pdf Jet rates]</p> ||
+|| || ||
+|| Massless grav. model || <p>[attachment:JetRates_Ml.pdf Jet rates]</p> ||
+|| || ||
+|| RS model || <p>[attachment:JetRates_RS.pdf Jet rates]</p> ||
+||
+DD model</p> || <p>[attachment:JetRates_ADD.pdf Jet rates]</p> ||
+|| || ||
+|| Massless grav. model ||
+attachment:JetRates_Ml.pdf Jet rates]</p> ||
+|| || ||
+|| RS model ||
+attachment:JetRates_RS.pdf Jet rates]</p> ||
 PS. The number of events is normalized by the total number of events of each run.
 ===== IV.2.2) Study on the shape of the curves (Pt grav) related to the mass of the graviton =====
+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.
+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}{{{
+TeV/M_{grav}
+}}} 1 TeV against L_{RS}{{{
+TeV/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.
 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).
 …
 ) 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?
 ) 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?
+) 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?
 ---
 …
 For reference, the cuts in 0911.5095 (NLO QCD corrections to G+monojet) are the following:
    * '''LHC''': PTmiss&gt;500GeV; ||\eta_j||&lt;4.5
    * '''Tevatron''': PTmiss&gt;120GeV; harder jet : Ptj&gt;150GeV with ||\eta_j||&lt;1; softer jet with PT&gt;60GeV, ||\eta_j||&lt;3.6 is vetoed.
+   * '''LHC''': PTmiss>500GeV; ||\eta_j||<4.5
+   * '''Tevatron''': PTmiss>120GeV; harder jet : Ptj>150GeV with ||\eta_j||<1; softer jet with PT>60GeV, ||\eta_j||<3.6 is vetoed.
    * mur=muf= Pt graviton
 …
 <blockquote>
+   * <p> '''For the LHC, "the jets are defined by the K_T algorithm with D=0.6, and are required to satisfy ||\eta_j||&lt;4.5 and PTj&gt;50GeV"''' </p>
+   * <p> '''For the Tevatron,"jets are defined by the K_T algorithm with D=0.7, and are required to satisfy ||\eta_j||&lt;3.6 and PTj&gt;20GeV"''' </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>
+   *
+'''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>
 </blockquote>
 …
 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.
 <strong><br /></strong>
+<strong>[[br]]**
 === VI. References ===
 …