summary of the heavy flavour session joined hfl+pdf session
DESCRIPTION
Summary of the Heavy Flavour Session Joined HFL+PDF Session. Katerina Lipka (DESY). Deep Inelastic Scattering 2010 Florence. Heavy Flavour Session. HQ and QCD tests: H1 + ZEUS + CDF charmonium in ep and pp open charm and beauty in ep HQ and nucleon structure: H1+ZEUS, NOMAD - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Summary of the
Heavy Flavour Session
Joined HFL+PDF Session
Katerina Lipka (DESY)
Deep Inelastic Scattering 2010 Florence
Heavy Flavour Session
• HQ and QCD tests: H1 + ZEUS + CDF
• charmonium in ep and pp
• open charm and beauty in ep
• HQ and nucleon structure: H1+ZEUS, NOMAD
• charm and beauty structure functions
• Joined Session PDF+HF: HQ in PDF fits
• SM tests via HQ in e+e- : BaBar+ Belle
• HQ in heavy ion collisions and pp: STAR, PHENIX
• Top Quark: CDF, D0
• Cross section, mass, other properties
• First steps at the LHC: ALICE, ATLAS, CMS, LHCb
WG IV Summary 3
Charmonium: Inelastic J/ production in epTalks: M. Steder, A. Bertolin
Test QCD: Color Singlet vs Color Octet:
Cross section measurement vs pT(J/) and z=E/E
CSM NLO:
describes shape, not normalization
NRQCD (CO):
Recovers normalization
Fails to describe shape of elasticity z
s=320 GeV
WG IV Summary 4
Charmonium: J/ Polarization in epTalks: M. Steder, A. Bertolin
Additional test of the production models
Polarization parameters extracted using angular measurements
Goal: look for evidence of CO terms at HERA
Various predictions show different deficits to describe the data
Final conclusion needs higher order calculations
WG IV Summary 5
Upsilon polarization in ppT.Kuhr
transverse
longitudinal
Trend to longitudinal polarization observed
CDF disagrees with D0
Data disagree with NRQCD
J/ polarization not described by NRQCD! mc too low?
NRQCD
WG IV Summary 6
Open charm, beauty at HERAZ. Staykova, V. Aushev, M. Lysovy, P. Thompson, M. Brinkmann, P. Roloff
• c, b (+ jets) in DIS and p: powerful test of pQCD
• Structure functions F2c, F2
b : direct test of g(x)
c-, b- tagging methods:
reconstruction of charmed mesons, vertex information
different methods have orthogonal uncertainties
Factorization: (HQ) = proton structure hard ME
WG IV Summary 7
Open charm, beauty at HERAZ. Staykova, V. Aushev, M. Lysovy, P. Thompson, M. Brinkmann, P. Roloff
c, b (+ jets) in DIS and p: powerful test of pQCD
Beauty production:
b in p
Massive NLO pQCD describes the data reasonably well
WG IV Summary 8
Open charm, beauty at HERAZ. Staykova, V. Aushev, M. Lysovy, P. Thompson, M. Brinkmann, P. Roloff
c, b (+ jets) in DIS and p: powerful test of pQCD
Charm production:
Above production threshold (pT>1.5 GeV)
Massive NLO pQCD describes the data reasonably well At threshold!
NLO underestimates data below the threshold
WG IV Summary 9
Open charm, beauty at HERAK.Daum, M. Lysovy, P. Thompson, M. Brinkmann, P. Roloff
Structure functions F2c, F2
b : direct test of g(x)
),()1(1
),( 22
22 QxF
yyQxF cc
Lcccc
−+−∝ compare to NC~F2
Combined F2c:
systematic correlations
accounted for
<F2c> ~ 10%
Compared to HERAPDF1.0:
Band: 1.35<mc<1.6
5
WG IV Summary 10
HERA PDF: additional uncertainty due to variation of 1.4 < mc< 1.65 GeV
The choice of the mc influences
-the gluon PDF,
-most visible in charm PDF,
-consequences for light quarks
HERAPDF1.0 vs HERA F2c : charm mass
A. Cooper-Sarkar
WG IV Summary 11
LHC@10 TeV
What does it mean for LHCchoice of mc=1.65 raises W/Z cross-section predictions at the LHC by ~3%
More significant than other PDF uncertainties (exp. modelmodel, param..)
Larger mc → more gluons, less charm → more light quarks → larger W
Does matter for the Luminosity measurement @ LHC !
A. Cooper-Sarkar
WG IV Summary 12
PDF Fits using HERA F2c data
A. Cooper-Sarkar
usual cuts on data Q2 > 3.5 GeV2, formalism as for HERAPDF1.0
two values of charm mass mc=1.4 GeV and mc=1.65 GeV compared
PDF Fit to charm data prefer mc=1.65 GeV
WG IV Summary 13
PDF Fits using HERA F2c data: test scheme
R. Thorne, A. Cooper-Sarkar
standard
optimal
MSTW prescription for HF treatment
Q2
Test optimal MSTW
Smoother gluon: smaller F2c compensate by smaller mc: obvious effect
Do we learn something?
HQ treatment is crucial for PDF fits
Use charm data to test different schemes @ fixed mc
WG IV Summary 14
Heavy quark production in N (NOMAD)
Statistic uncertainty 3 - 6%, Systematic uncertainty 2%
Largest charm di- data sample close to charm threshold
• most precise measurement σμμ/σCC
(E 6 GeV)
R. Petti
WG IV Summary 15
Heavy quark production in N (NOMAD)
NOMAD di- data in global PDF fits
improves the accuracy of the strange sea
and of the charm quark mass by a factor 2
(E 6 GeV)
R. Petti
Largest charm di- data sample close to charm threshold
• most precise measurement σμμ/σCC
• sensitivity to strange see at high x
WG IV Summary 16
Heavy Quarks in e+e- : test SMBaBar, Belle:
D-Measurements:
• Decay constant fDs: overlap between wave function of light and heavy quarks
BaBar: new measurement closer to Lattice QCD prediction
• Charm mixing and CP in D0, D0 : BaBar: mixing parameters closer to SM
BaBar, Belle: many channels investigated, no evidence for CP violation in D-channel
• No signal for T-violation in D0K+K-+-
B-Measurements:
• BV+V polarization: longitudinal polarization fraction is not understood
disagreement between BaBar and Belle persists
• first observation of 4-body charmless baryonic B decays
Youngjoon Kwon, D. Milanes
WG IV Summary 17
Heavy Quarks in heavy ion collisions
• STAR and PHENIX NPE result in 200GeV p+p collisions consistent
• FONLL describes data well
Test collinear factorization
Suppression or enhancement: study of quark-gluon plasma
Wei Xie, G. Odyniec, A. Sickles
WG IV Summary 18
The heaviest quark: Top cross section
Cross-section measurements:
• Test NLO QCD calculations
• Allow the extraction of top pole mass
• Sample validation for other top properties measurements
• Background for Higgs / SUSY search
Top at TEVATRON:
all hadronic
46%
Semi-leptonic
15%dileptons
G. Compostella, S. Chevalier-Thery, Sung Park, J. Adelman G. Petrillo
WG IV Summary 19
Top cross section
Different channels are combined, systematic correlations taken into account
Error systematic dominated, experimental uncertainty ~ model uncertainty
G. Compostella, S. Chevalier-Thery, Sung Park, J. Adelman G. Petrillo
WG IV Summary 20
Top pole masstt prediction depends on mt:
Measured cross section compared to (approximate) NNLO calculations:
Pole top mass can be extracted
D0 ”direct” (3.6 fb-1): mt=174.20.91.5 GeV
G. Compostella, S. Chevalier-Thery, Sung Park, J. Adelman G. Petrillo
WG IV Summary 21
Other top quark propertiesG. Compostella, S. Chevalier-Thery, Sung Park, J. Adelman G. Petrillo
WG IV Summary 22
On the way to HQ at the LHC First D-mesons at LHCb with L=110 b-1
E. Polycarpo Macedo
Charmonium @ L=160 b-1
WG IV Summary 23
On the way to HQ at the LHC
ALICE, ATLAS, CMS:
J. N. Donini, A. Rossi, R. Covarelli, T. Matsushita
K0s
900 GeVDATA
• Rich physics programm
• First understand the detector
WG IV Summary 24
Thanks to all speakers!
Those who made it to come
Those who participated via EVO
Those who agreed to spontaneously feature the talks
only 1 cancelled experimental talk
but many experts missing