outline
Post on 29-Jan-2016
34 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Preliminary measurement of the total cross section in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV
with the ALFA subdetector of ATLAS
Hasko Stenzel, JLU Giessenon behalf of the ATLAS Collaboration
ConfNote: http://cds.cern.ch/record/1740971
• Introduction
• Experimental setup: ALFA
• Data analysis
• Differential elastic cross section
• Theoretical prediction, fits and cross-checks
• Results for σtot
• Conclusion
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 2
Outline
The total ppX cross section is a fundamental quantity setting the scale for all interaction probabilities, it should be measured at each new collider or centre-of-mass energy. The total cross section can‘t be calculated in perturbative QCD, but still can be measured, e.g. using the Optical Theorem:
A number of bounds and constraints can be placed on σtot:
• Froissart-Martin bound: σtot doesn’t rise faster than ln2s
• Black disk limit:
• Pomeranchuk theorem:CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 3
Introduction
0Im4 teltot f
stot
el
2
1
spppp
p1 p2
p3
p4
θ 2
242
231
pt
ppppt
At the ISR a rise of the total cross section was first observed.
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 4
Rise of σtot at ISR
S.R. Amendolia et al., Phys. Lett. B 44 (1973) 119
U. Amaldi et al., Phys. Lett. B 44 (1973) 192
Would the total cross section continue to rise with ln(s) or rather ln2(s)?
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 5
Luminosity and total cross section The optical theorem can be used together with the luminosity to determine the total cross section (method used by ATLAS):
02
2
1
161
t
eltot dt
dN
L
elinel
t
el
tot NN
dtdN
0
21
16
tot
inelel NNL
If the total inelastic yield is measured simultaneously with the elastic yield, the luminosity can be eliminated:
Luminosity-dependent methodρ taken from model extrapolation
Luminosity-independent method
If the elastic and inelastic cross sections are measured separately:
elineltot ρ-independent method
Im
Re
0
tel
el
tf
tf
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 6
The differential elastic cross section At small |t| the cross section decreases exponentially
The nuclear slope parameter B increases with energy shrinkage of forward cone
At large |t| a diffractive minimum appears “the dip”, its position is energy dependent
At very large |t| the distribution follows a power law
At very small t the contribution from Coulomb interaction becomes important
D. Bernard et al., UA4 Collaboration, Phys. Lett. B 171 (1986) 142
tBedt
d
2
1
tdt
d
pt
dt
d ATLAS
range
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 7
Available measurements At the LHC first measurements were done by TOTEM:
σtot = 98.6±2.2 mb (7 TeV)σtot = 101.7±2.9 mb (8 TeV)
Measurements were performed by cosmic ray observatories at yet higher energies, using air showers and transforming proton-air cross sections into pp cross section with Glauber models.
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 8
Experimental setup: ALFA
Elastic scattering with ATLAS-ALFA
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 9
In October 2011 ALFA had the special run 191373 with β*=90m and recorded 800k good selected elastic events used for the analysis of the total cross section and the nuclear slope B.
Roman Pot detectors at 240m from IP1 approaching the beam during special runs at high β*.
The ALFA detector in a nutshell
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 10
Special overlap detectors to measure the distance between upper and lower detectors. alignment
ALFA is a scintillating fibre tracker, 10 double-sided modules with 64 fibres in uv-geometry. Resolution ~30µm.
u fibresv fibres
Beam optics and properties
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 11
• Special optics high β* =90m• Small emittance 2-3µm• Small divergence ~3µrad
• Phase advance of βy=90° parallel-to-point focusing
• Phase advance of βx≈180°
y*
y*
parallel-to-point focusingydet
IP Leff
• Only one pair of colliding bunches at 7 1010 p • More pilot bunches / unpaired bunches• L≈1027/cm2/s, µ ≈0.035
good t-resolution
Hit pattern at ALFA
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 12
Hit pattern in one station, before elastic event selection. Pattern shape is caused by beam opticsLeff
y=270 mLeff
x=13 m
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 13
Data Analysis
Alignment
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 14
• Rough centering and alignment through scraping• Offsets and rotations are obtained from elastic data• Distance measurement from OD detectors • Vertical offsets wrt beam center are obtained by
assuming efficiency-corrected equal yields in upper and lower detectors
• Final vertical detector positions are related one station as reference and using optics lever arm ratios to predict the positions from inner to outer detectors
• Vertical position precision is ~80µm
Measurement of t
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 15
Measure elastic track positions at ALFA to get the scattering angle and thereby the t-spectrum dσ/dt
p=beam momentum, θ*=scattering angle
To calculate the scattering angle from the measured tracks we need the beam optics, i.e. the transport matrix elements.
In the simplest case (high β*, phase advance 90°, parallel-to-point focusing)
2*pt
*
*
2221
1211
yy
y
MM
MMy
12
*
M
yy
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 16
Different reconstruction methods • subtraction method:
• local angle method:
• local subtraction:
• lattice method:
yxu ,CA
CAu MM
uu
,12,12
*
CA
CxAxx MM ,22,22
,,*
plane horizontal
241,12
237,11
237,12
241,11
,241237
,11,237241
,11*,
SSSS
SSSSSx MMMM
xMxM
CAS ,
xx MxM 122
112
*
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 17
Event selection • first level elastic trigger• data quality cuts• apply geometrical acceptance cuts • apply elastic selection based on back-to-back
topology and background selection cut
elastic selection: y A- vs C-side background rejection
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 18
Trigger efficiency
Elastic trigger: Coincidence of A- and C-side in elastic configuration, using a local OR.
Data were also recorded with a looser trigger condition requiring any of the 8 detectors to fire: trigger efficiency = 99.96±0.01 % .
For the selected data period the DAQ life fraction was 99.7±0.01%.
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 19
Background Two ways to estimate the irreducible background under the elastic peak:
• Counting events in the anti-golden configuration (nominal method)• Reconstructing the vertex distribution in x through the lattice, where background
appears in non Gaussian tails, fraction estimated with background templates obtained from data (for systematics)
anti-golden
Arm 1
Arm 2
golden
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 20
Background
Background fraction is 0.5 ± 0.25 %dominated by halo protons
anti-goldenVertex method
CERN seminar 22.07.2012 Hasko Stenzel 21
Simulation: acceptance & unfolding • Using PYTHIA8 as elastic scattering generator• Beam transport IPRP (matrix transport / MadX PTC)• Fast detector response parameterization tuned to data
Comparison of data and MC for positions at ALFA
CERN seminar 22.07.2012 Hasko Stenzel 22
Acceptance
Acceptance is given by geometry, mostly by vertical cuts.
CERN seminar 22.07.2012 Hasko Stenzel 23
Resolution of different methods
Subtraction method has by far best resolution, dominated by beam divergence.
All other methods suffer from a poor local angle resolution.
CERN seminar 22.07.2012 Hasko Stenzel 24
Unfolding resolution effects
Transition matrix from true value of t to reconstructed value of t used as input for IDS unfolding. B. Malaescu arXiv:1105.3107
CERN seminar 22.07.2012 Hasko Stenzel 25
Impact of unfolding
Systematic uncertainty evaluated with a data-driven closure test, based on the small difference between data and MC at reconstruction level.
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 26
Reconstruction efficiency Fully data-driven method, using a tag-and-probe approach exploiting elastic back-to-back topology and high trigger efficiency.
Slightly different efficiency in the two arms material budget is different.
Arm 1 Arm 2
Efficiency εrec 0.898 0.880
Uncertainty ±0.006 ±0.009
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 27
Reconstruction efficiency
Several different topologies contribute to the inefficiency, which is mainly caused by shower developments.
4/04/14/)11(4/)02(4/34/4
4/4
NNNNNN
Nrec
Ensure ¾ events are elasticsCheck shape
Check t-independence of reconstruction efficiency.
3/4 case:2/3 of the losses
4/4
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 28
Reconstruction efficiency 2/4 case (≈30% of the losses): ensure these events are inside the acceptance and elastics (not background, e.g. from SD+Halo).
Peaks observed resulting from showers in RP window and beam screen: These events are outside of acceptance and removed.
Distribution of remaining 2/4 events are fit to estimate the background contribution with BG-enhances templates.
CERN seminar 22.07.201429
Luminosity
Systematic uncertainty 2.3%
L=78.7±1.9 µb-1
Hasko Stenzel
Dedicated analysis for this low-luminosity run: Based on BCM with LUCID and vertex counting as cross-check.
Systematics:• vdM calibration 1.5%• BCM drift 0.25%• Background 0.2%• Time stability 0.7%• Consistency 1.6%
CERN seminar 22.07.201430
Beam optics
Hasko Stenzel
From the elastic data several constraints were recorded to fine-tune the transport matrix elements. These are obtained from correlations in the positions/angles:
12* My y
outer
inner
outer
inner
M
M
y
y
12
12
Lever arm ratio
y inner vs outer
x left vs right
CERN seminar 22.07.201431
Beam optics scaling factors
Hasko Stenzel
A second class of constraints is obtained from correlations of the reconstructed scattering angle using different methods. These constraints are derived using design 90m optics and indicate the amount of scaling needed in order to equalize the scattering angle measurement from different methods.
Measure the difference in reconstructed scattering angle in horizontal plane between subtraction and local angle method vs Θ*x from subtraction scaling factor R(M12/M22).
CERN seminar 22.07.201432
beam optics fit
Small correction to optics model, 3‰ to inner triplet magnet strength.
14 constraints are combined in a fit of the relevant beam optics parameters. Most important are the strengths of the inner triplet quadrupoles. Quadrupoles Q1,Q3 and Q2 were produced at different sites fit an intercalibration offset
That is the simplest but not unique solution effective optics
Hasko Stenzel
ΔkQ1Q3[‰] Beam 1 Beam 2
2.88±0.15 3.13±0.12
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 33
Differential elastic cross section
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 34
The differential elastic cross section Fully corrected t-spectra in the two arms are combined and divided by the luminosity to yield the differential elastic cross section.
A: acceptance(t)M: unfolding procedure (symbolic)N: selected eventsB: estimated backgroundεreco: reconstruction efficiencyεtrig: trigger efficiencyεDAQ: dead-time correction Lint: luminosity
int
1
L
M1
DAQtrigrecoi
ii
ii A
BN
tdt
d
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 35
Systematic uncertainties for dσ/dt • luminosity: ± 2.3%
• beam energy: ± 0.65%
• background 0.5 ± 0.25 %
• optics: quadrupole strength ± 1‰, Q5,6 -2‰ magnet mis-alignment, optics fit errors, beam transport, ALFA constraints varied by ± 1σ
• residual crossing angle ±10 <mrad
More than 500 alternative optics models were used to reconstruct the t-spectrum and calculate unfolding & acceptance corrections.
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 36
Systematic uncertainties for dσ/dt • reco. eff.: ± 0.8%• emittance: ± 10%• detector resolution: ±15%• physics model for
simulation: B=19.5 ± 1 GeV-2
• unfolding: data driven closure test
• alignment uncertainties propagated
• track reconstruction cut variation
Most important experimental systematic uncertainties: Luminosity and beam energy. Systematic shifts are included in the fit of the total cross section.
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 37
Theoretical predictions
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 38
The elastic scattering amplitude The elastic scattering amplitude is usually expressed as a sum of the nuclear amplitude and the Coulomb amplitude:
t
tGctfC )(8 2
Im
Re
0
tel
el
tf
tf 2/BttotN e
c
itf
The nuclear amplitude is the dominant contribution in the differential cross section with a term quadratic in σtot and an essentially exponential shape with slope B.
The Coulomb term is important at small t, but the Coulomb-nuclear interference term has a non-negligible contribution inside the accessible t-range.
GeV 71.0 ,t
)( 2
2
tG
2)()()(16
1 tiCN etftf
dt
d
Differential elastic cross section with
the Coulomb phase Φ.
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 39
Theoretical prediction The theoretical prediction used to fit the elastic data consists of the Coulomb term, the Coulomb-Nuclear-Interference term and the dominant Nuclear term.
Proton dipole form factor
Coulomb phase
Coulomb
CNI
Nuc.
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 40
modified χ2 to account for systematics
D: data, T: theoretical prediction V: statistical covariance matrix δ: systematic shift k in t spectrum β: nuisance parameter for syst. shift k ε: t-independent normalization uncertainty (luminosity, reco efficiency)α: nuisance parameter for normalization uncertainties
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 41
Results for σtot
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 42
Fit Results
2GeV 24.073.19
mb 3.14.95
Btot
The fit includes experimental systematic uncertainties in the χ.
The fit quality is good: χ2/Ndof=7.4/16.
The fit range is set to –t[0.01,0.1] GeV2, where possible deviations from exponential form of the nuclear amplitude are expected to be small.
exp.
+sta
t.
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 43
theoretical/extrapolation uncertainties
• uncertainty in ρ = 0.14 ± 0.008 (COMPETE)
• variation of the proton electric form factor
• variation of the Coulomb phase
• in order to probe possible non-exponential contributions to the nuclear amplitude a variation of the upper end of the fit range is carried out from 0.1 0.15 GeV2 , based on theoretical considerations.
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 44
The electric form factor
New measurements from A1 using low-energy electron-proton scattering at MAMI.J.C. Bernauer et al. A1 Collaboration, arXiv:1307:6227
Largest deviation is observed between Dipole and Double-Dipolevery small impact on total cross section.
2
2
GeV 71.0 ,
t
tG
Dipole:
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 45
The Coulomb phase
Alternative parameterizations were proposed by CahnR.N. Cahn, Z. Phys. C 15 (1982) 253and by Kohara et al.(KFK)A.K. Kohara, Eur. Phys. J. C 73 (2013) 2326
Phase has a small impact on the CNI term, which is small very small impact on total cross section .
E
tBt
2ln
West and Yennie:
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 46
Fit range dependence
Nominal fit range [0.01,0.1],variation by ±0.05, as advocated by KMR V.A. Khoze et al., Eur. Phys. J. C 18 (2000) 167
Systematic uncertainty is derived from the endpoints of the fit range variation.
2GeV (extr.)17.0(exp.)19.0stat.)(14.073.19
mb (extr.)37.0(exp.)25.1stat.)(38.04.95
Btot
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 47
Cross checks (1)Comparison of different t-reconstruction methods consistent results
Using only statistical uncertainties in the fit, i.e. w/o nuisance parameters
2-GeV 05.062.19
mb 12.031.95
Btot Statistical
erroronly
Instead of unfolding the data we folded the theoretical prediction to the raw data consistent fit results
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 48
Cross checks (2)Determination of the differential elastic cross section in each independent arm: consistent, even within statistical errors.
Split the run in periods (≈20 min., 80k events) no time-structure (stat.error ≈ 0.5 mb)
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 49
Alternative models for the nuclear amplitude
• several models for the nuclear amplitude featuring a non-exponential behaviour are tested
• all models come with more parameters and are intended to be extended to larger t [0.01,0.3]
• restrict to parametric models allowing to fit the total cross section
1. fit with Ct2 term
2. fit with sqrt(t) term
3. SVN model
4. BP model
5. BSW model
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 50
Results for alternative models
Only statistical and experimental systematic uncertainties on dσ/dt are included in the profile fit. The RMS of all the models tested is in good agreement with the assigned extrapolation uncertainty of 0.4mb.
σtot [mb] Reference
Nominal 95.35 ±1.30 -
C 95.49 ±1.27 M.M.Block et al., Czech. J. Phys. 40 (1990) 164.
c 96.03 ±1.31 O.V.Selyugin, Nucl. Phys. A 922 (2014) 180.
SVM 94.90 ±1.23 A.K.Kohara et al., Eur. Phys. J. C 73 (2013) 2326.
BP 95.49 ±1.54 R.J.N.Phillips et al., Phys. Lett. B 46 (1973) 412. D.A.Fagundes et al.,Phys. Rev. D 88 (2013) 094019.
BSW 95.53 ±1.38 C.Bourrely et al., Eur. Phys. J. C 71 (2011) 1601.
CERN seminar 22.06.2014 Hasko Stenzel 51
Results
Energy evolution of σtot and σel
Standard model cross section measurements by ATLAS
CERN seminar 22.06.2014 Hasko Stenzel 52
Energy evolution of B
Increase of B compatible with a 2nd order polynomial in ln(s).
private compilation
Parameters from: V.A.Schegelsky and M:G: Ryskin , Phys.Rev.D 85 (2012) 0940243
CERN seminar 22.06.2014 Hasko Stenzel 53
Comparison with TOTEM
ATLAS σtot = 95.4±1.4 mb B = 19.7 ± 0.3 GeV-2
TOTEM σtot = 98.6±2.2 mb B = 19.9 ± 0.3 GeV-2
Comparison of results using the luminosity-dependent method. The luminosity uncertainty for ATLAS is ±2.3% and for TOTEM ±4%, it enters in the uncertainty of σtot with a factor 0.5.
The ATLAS measurement is 3.2 mb lower than TOTEM, the difference corresponds to 1.3 σ, assuming uncorrelated uncertainties.
CERN seminar 22.06.2014 Hasko Stenzel 54
Further derived quantities
Elastic cross section from the integrated fit-function (nuclear part)
222
16
1
cBtot
el
2
0
mb/GeV 13474tdt
d
The observed elastic cross section inside the fiducial volume:
mb 6.00.24 el
The optical point:
mb 6.07.21 observedel
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 55
The inelastic cross section
The total inelastic cross section σinel is obtained by subtraction of the elastic cross section from the total cross section.
mb 90.03.71 inel
56
Conclusion and outlookATLAS has performed a preliminary measurement of the total cross section at the LHC at √s=7 TeV from elastic scattering measured with the ALFA detector
in good agreement with previous measurements from TOTEM.
Our measurement of indicates that the black-disk limit is not reached at the LHC
We have collected in 2012 at √s=8 TeV more data with β*=90m optics and with β*=1km optics, the latter enables access to yet smaller values of t in the CNI region.During the LHC shutdown a substantial consolidation of the ALFA detector achieved (RF protection, optimized placement of Roman Pot stations), and we are looking forward to collect more elastic and diffractive data in the LHC run 2.
2-GeV 3.07.19
mb 4.14.95
Btot
005.0257.0 tot
el
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 57
Back Up
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 58
Transport matrix
2
242
231
pt
ppppt
*
*
sincossin1cos
sinsincos
yy
yLy
phase advancevertical: ψ=90° horizontal ψ=185°
ALFA IPbeam transport matrix from optical functions
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 59
Rescaling factors
Scaling factor based on the isotropy of elastic scattering, i.e. scattering angle distribution is flat in phi, density in x must be the same as in y.
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 60
Pulls of the fit to dσ/dt
Pulls of the fit with respect to the data, taking into account fitted nuisance parameters adjusting data and theory.
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 61
Results for 4 different methods
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 62
Systematic uncertainties for dσ/dt
Systematic shiftsused in the profile fit
iTiTiT kk nominal
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 63
Systematic uncertainties for dσ/dt
Systematic shiftsused in the profile fit
iTiTiT kk nominal
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 64
The t-spectrum Reconstructed t-spectrum for different methods before corrections.
Difference between methods understood as resulting from different resolutions inducing different unfolding corrections.
CERN seminar 22.07.2014 Hasko Stenzel 65
Nuisance parameters
2stat
stat
GeV 14.0
mb 38.0)(
B
tot
The nuisance parameters are expected with a mean value of 0 and an uncertainty of ±1. The statistical uncertainty of the physics parameters σtot and B are obtained from simulated pseudo-experiments:
top related