top quark mass
DESCRIPTION
Top quark mass. For D Ø collaboration Regina Demina University of Rochester Wine and Cheese seminar at FNAL, 07/22/05. Outline. Introduction Top quark mass measurement in Run II Matrix element method description In situ jet energy scale calibration on hadronic W-mass Sample composition - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Top quark massTop quark mass
For DØ collaborationRegina Demina
University of RochesterWine and Cheese seminar at FNAL, 07/22/05
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 2
OutlineOutline• Introduction• Top quark mass measurement in Run II
– Matrix element method description– In situ jet energy scale calibration on hadronic W-mass– Sample composition – Result – Systematics
• Tevatron combined top mass• Top quark production
– Update on cross section in l+jets channel– Search for resonance production
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 3
Top Quark Mass: Motivation
• Fundamental parameter of the Standard Model.
• Important ingredient for EW precision analyses at the quantum level:
which were initially used to indirectly determine mt.
After the top quark discovery, use precision measurements of MW and mt to constrain MH.
W Wt
b
W W
H
MW mt2 MW ln(MH)
CDF&D0RUNII
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 4
Top production Top production
At √s=1.96 TeV top is produced in pairs via quark-antiquark annihilation 85% of the time, gluon fusion accounts for 15% of ttbar production
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 5
Top Lifetime and DecayTop Lifetime and Decay
• Since the top lifetime top ~ 1/ M3
top~10 -24 secqcd ~ -1 ~10 -23 sec
• BR(tWb) – Both W’s decay via W l
• final state: llbb - DILEPTON
– One W decays via Wl
• final state: lqq bb - LEPTON+JETS
– Both W’s decay via Wqq• final state: qqqq bb ALL HADRONIC
e-e (1/81)
mu-mu (1/81)
tau-tau (1/81)
e -mu (2/81)
e -tau (2/81)
mu-tau (2/81)
e+jets (12/81)
mu+jets(12/81)
tau+jets(12/81)
jets (36/81)
the top quark does not hadronize. It decays as a free quark!
Lepton provides a good trigger, all jets are tough
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 6
Top ID in “lepton+jets” Top ID in “lepton+jets” channelchannel
• 2 b-jets • Lepton: electron or muon• Neutrino (from energy
imbalance)• 2 q’s – transform to jets of
particles• Note that these two jets
come from a decay of a particle with well measured mass – W-boson – built-in thermometer for jet energies
lWorqqW
bWt
ttpp
'
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 7
DDØ detectorØ detector• Electrons are identified as
clusters of energy in EM section of the calorimeter with tracks pointing to them
• Muons are identified as particles passing through entire detector volume and leaving track stubs in muon chambers. Track in the central tracking system (silicon+SciFi) is matched to track in muon system
• Jets are reconstructed as clusters of energy in calorimeter using cone algorithm DR<0.5
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 8
Top mass using matrix Top mass using matrix element method in Run Ielement method in Run I
• Method developed by DØ (F. Canelli, J. Estrada, G. Gutierrez) in Run I
Systematic error dominated by JES 3.3 GeV/c2
With more statistics it is possible to use additional constraint on JES based on hadronic W mass in top events – in situ calibration
Single most precise measurement of top mass in Run IMt =180.1±3.6(stat) ±4.0(syst) GeV/c2
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 9
Matrix element methodMatrix element method
• Goal: measure top quark mass• Observables: measured momenta of jets and leptons • Question: for an observed set of kinematic variables x
what is the most probable top mass • Method: start with an observed set of events of given
kinematics and find maximum of the likelihood, which provides the best measurement of top quark mass
• Our sample is a mixture of signal and background
)()1(),(),( sgn xPfmxPfmxP bkgtopttoptevt
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 10
Matrix Element MethodMatrix Element Method
Normalization depends on mt
Includes acceptance effects
probability to observe a set of kinematic variables x for a given top mass
Integrate over unknown q1,q2, y
f(q) is the probability distribution than a parton will have a momentum q
dnσ is the differential cross sectionContains matrix element squared
t
t
W(x,y) is the probability that a parton level set of variables y will be measured as a set of variables x
bq’
q
),()()();()(
1);( 2121sgn yxWqfqfdqdqmyd
mmxP t
n
tt
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 11
Transfer functions Transfer functions (parton(partonjet)jet)
• Partons (quarks produced as a result of hard collision) realize themselves as jets seen by detectors– Due to strong interaction partons turn into
parton jets– Each quark hardonizes into particles
(mostly and K’s)– Energy of these particles is absorbed by
calorimeter – Clustered into calorimeter jet using cone
algorithm• Jet energy is not exactly equal to parton
energy– Particles can get out of cone– Some energy due to underlying event (and
detector noise) can get added– Detector response has its resolution
• Transfer functions W(x,y) are used to relate parton energy y to observed jet energy x
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 12
Dependence of JESDependence of JES
dependence of JES is derived on +jet data, but the overall scale is allowed to move to optimize MW
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 13
• All jets are corrected by standard DØ Jet energy scale (pT, )
• Overall JES is a free parameter in the fit – it is constrained in situ by mass of W decaying hadronically
• JES enters into transfer functions:
JES in Matrix ElementJES in Matrix Element
JES
EJES
EW
JESEEWp
j
pj
),(),,(
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 14
Normalization
e+jets μ+jets
),()()();()(
1);( 2121sgn yxWqfqfdqdqmyd
mmxP t
n
tt
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 15
Signal IntegrationSignal Integration• Set of observables – momenta of jets and leptons: x• Integrate over unknown
– Kinematic variables of initial (q1,q2) and final state partons (y: 6 x3 p) = 20 variables
– Integral contains 15 (14) -functions for e()+jets• total energy-momentum conservation: 4• angles are considered to be measured perfectly: 2x4 jet +2 lepton • Electron momentum is also considered perfectly measured, not true for muon
momentum: 1(0)– 5(6) dimensional integration is carried out by Vegas– The correspondence between parton level variables and jets is established
by transfer functions W(x,y) derived on MC• for light jets (from hadronic W decay)• for b-jets with b-hadron decaying semi-muonically• for other b-jets
• Approximations– LO matrix element– qqtt process only (no gluon fusion – 15%)
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 16
Background integrationBackground integration
• W+jets is the dominant background process• Kinematics of W+jets is used as a representation
for overall background (admixture of multijet background is a source of systematic uncertainty)– Contribution of a large number of diagrams makes
analytical calculation prohibitively complex– Use Vecbos
• Evaluate MEwjjjj in N points selected according to the transfer functions over phase space
• Pbkg- average over points
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 17
Sample compositionSample compositionLepton+jets sample
– Isolated e (PT>20GeV/c, ||<1.1)
– Isolated (PT>20GeV/c, ||<2.0) – Missing ET>20 GeV– Exactly four jets PT>20GeV/c, ||
<2.5 (jet energies corrected to particle level)
Use “low-bias” discriminant to fit sample composition – Used for ensemble testing and
normalization of the background probability.
– Final fraction of ttbar events is fit together with masse+jets +jets
# of events 70 80
Signal fraction 45±12% 29±10%
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 18
Calibration on Full MClepton+jets
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 19
calibrated calibrated
expected: 36.4%
DØ RunII Preliminary
Mt=169.5±4.4 GeV/c2
JES=1.034±0.034
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 20
Systematics summarySystematics summary
Source of uncertainty Effect on top mass (GeV/c2)
B-jet energy scale +1.32-1.25
Signal modeling (gluons rad)
0.34
Background modeling 0.32
Signal fraction +0.5-0.17
QCD contribution 0.67
MC calibration 0.38
trigger 0.08
PDF’s 0.07
Total +1.7-1.6
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 21
B-jet energy scale● Relative data/MC b/light jet energy scale ratio
•fragmentation: +-0.71 GeV/c2
different amounts of 0, different + momentum spectrum fragmentation uncertainties lead to uncertainty in b/light JES ratio
compare MC samples with different fragmentation models: Peterson fragmentation with eb=0.00191 Bowler fragmentation with rt=0.69
•calorimeter response: +0.85 -0.75 GeV/c2
uncertainties in the h/e response ratio + charged hadron energy fraction of b jets > that of light jets corresponding uncertainty in the b/light JES ratio
•Difference in pT spectrum of b-jets and jets from W-decay: 0.7 GeV/c2
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 22
Gluon radiationGluon radiation
• The effect is reduced by – Requiring four and only four jets in the final state
– High PT cut on jets
• Yet in ~20% of the events there is at least one jet that is not matched (DR(parton-jet)<0.5) to top decay products– These events are interpreted as background by ME method
• We study this systematic by examining ALPGEN ttj sample and varying its relative fraction between 0 and 30% (verified on our data by examining the fraction of events with the 5th jet)
• Final effect on top mass 0.34 GeV/c2
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 23
● W+jets modeling: +-0.32 GeV/c2
study effect of a different factorization scale for W+jets events (<pT,j>
2 instead of mW2 + SpT,j
2)
● PDF uncertainty: +-0.07 GeV/c2
CTEQ6M provides systematic variations of the PDFs reweight ensembles to compare CTEQ6M with its systematic variations (by default the measurement uses CTEQ5L throughout: use a LO matrix element, and for consistency with simulation)
Signal/Background Modeling
● QCD background: +-0.67 GeV/c2
Rederive calibration including QCD events from data (lepton anti-isolation) (note: sample statistics limited) can be reduced in the future
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 24
● Signal fraction: +0.50 -0.17 GeV/c2
Fitted top mass depends slightly on true signal fraction (if signal fraction is smaller than expected): => Vary signal fraction within uncertainties from topological likelihood fit - Note: ftop fit yields identical
result with factor √2 smaller uncertainties
Signal fraction
Cross check on data: cut on log10(pbkg)<-13 Ftop=31%46±6%Mtop=170.2±4.1 GeV/c2
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 25
Systematics summarySystematics summary
Source of uncertainty Effect on top mass (GeV/c2)
B-jet energy scale +1.32-1.25
Signal modeling (gluons rad)
0.34
Background modeling 0.32
Signal fraction +0.5-0.17
QCD contribution 0.67
MC calibration 0.38
trigger 0.08
PDF’s 0.07
Total +1.7-1.6
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 26
Result and cross checksResult and cross checks
• Run II top quark mass based on lepton+jets sample: Mt=169.5 ±4.4(stat+JES) +1.7
-1.6 (syst) GeV/c2
• JES contribution to (stat+JES) 3.3 GeV/c2
• Break down by lepton flavor– Mt(e+jets)=168.8 ±6.0(stat+JES) GeV/c2
– Mt(+jets)=172.3 ±9.6(stat+JES)GeV/c2
• Cross check W-mass
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 27
Summary of DSummary of DØØ M Mtt
measurementsmeasurements• Statistical
uncertainties are partially correlated for all l+jets Run II results
DØ Run II preliminary
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 28
Projection for uncertainty on Projection for uncertainty on top quark masstop quark mass
Assumptions:• only lepton+jets channel considered • statistical uncertainty normalized at
L=318 pb-1 to performance of current analyses.
• dominant JES systematic is handled ONLY via in-situ calibration making use of MW in ttbar events.
• remaining systematic uncertainties: include b-JES, signal and background modeling, etc (fully correlated between experiments) Normalized to 1.7 GeV at L=318 pb-1.
• Since most of these systematic uncertainties are of theoretical nature, assume that we can use the large data sets to constrain some of the model parameters and ultimately reduce it to 1
GeV after 8 fb-1.
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 29
Combination of Tevatron Combination of Tevatron resultsresults
JES is treated as a part of systematic uncertainty, taken out of stat error
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 30
CombinationCombination
• Mt=172.7±2.9 GeV/c2
• Stat uncertainty: 1.7GeV/c2
• Syst uncertainty: 2.4GeV/c2
• hep-ex/0507091
• Top quark Yukawa coupling to Higgs boson
• gt=Mt√2/vev=0.993±0.017
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 31
What does it do to Higgs?What does it do to Higgs?
• MH=91+45-32GeV/c2
• MH<186 GeV/c2 @95%CL
MH,GeV/c2 Mt,GeV/c2
MW
,GeV
/c2
68% CL
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 33
ttbar cross section in ttbar cross section in l+jetsl+jets with b-tagwith b-tag
• Isolated lepton – pT>20 GeV/c, |e|<1.1, ||<2.0
• Missing ET>20GeV
• Four or more jets – pT>15 GeV/c, |
=8.1+1.3-1.2(stat+syst)±0.5(lumi) pb
DØ RunII Preliminary, 363pb-1
≥4j, 1t ≥4j, 2t
Expect bkg 21.8±3.0 1.9±0.5
Observe 88 21
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 34
Cross section summaryCross section summaryDØ RunII Preliminary
pbttpp ),(
Submitted for publication Updates
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 35
ttbar resonances in ttbar resonances in l+jetsl+jets with with b-tagb-tag
• Check ttbar invariant mass for possible resonance production
DØ RunII Preliminary, 363pb-1
• Events are kinematically constrained – mT=175GeV/c2
– Leptonic and hadronic W masses
NNLOtt)=6.77±0.42
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 36
ttbar resonances in ttbar resonances in l+jetsl+jets with with b-tagb-tag
• Limit M(Z’)>680 GeV/c2 with =1.2%MZ’ at 95%CL
*R. Harris, C. Hill, S. Parke hep-ph/9911288
DØ RunII Preliminary, 363pb-1
*
Run I limit 560 GeV/c2
Run II limit 680 GeV/c2
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 37
ConclusionConclusion
• First DØ RunII top mass measurement in l+jets channel to surpass Run I precision– Mt=169.5 ±4.4(stat+JES) +1.7
-1.6 (syst) GeV/c2
• Developed method for in situ jet energy scale calibration using hadronic W-mass constraint
• Combined Tevatron top mass measurement reaches a precision of 1.7%
• ttbar production cross sections updated for l+jets channel• Invariant mass of ttbar system probed for resonance
production, exclusion limit for M(Z’)>680 GeV/c2 at 95%CL
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 39
Parton Level TestsText
07/22/05 Regina Demina, Joint Theoretical and Experimental Seminar at FNAL 40
L+jets sample composition L+jets sample composition